:00:40. > :00:42.Afternoon, folks - welcome to The Daily Politics. Do you want to pay
:00:42. > :00:45.less for your energy? The Government wants you to, and this
:00:45. > :00:48.afternoon the Energy Secretary, Ed Davey, will unveil proposals which
:00:48. > :00:56.he hopes will simplify the system and reduce the complexity and price
:00:56. > :00:59.of energy deals. Countryside calling - if you can
:00:59. > :01:04.get a signal. We'll be quizzing the Environment Secretary, Owen
:01:04. > :01:07.Paterson, on rural concerns. How happy are you? The Government's
:01:07. > :01:12.first ever survey about Britain's well-being has been published, and
:01:12. > :01:16.believe it or not, we're a pretty cheeful lot.
:01:16. > :01:20.And from happiness to the bustle of Westminster. Yes, our
:01:20. > :01:23.parliamentarians are a busy lot - but would they ever job share?
:01:23. > :01:32.Believe it or not, one MP thinks it's exactly what they should be
:01:32. > :01:35.All that in the next hour. And with us for the duration today is the
:01:35. > :01:39.former editor of Country Life magazine Clive Aslet. Welcome to
:01:39. > :01:41.the programme. Now first this morning, let's talk about the
:01:41. > :01:46.Tories' new communications guru, the Australian strategist who
:01:46. > :01:48.helped Boris win office for a second term, Lynton Crosby. Because
:01:48. > :01:52.the former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party Lord Ashcroft
:01:52. > :01:55.has this morning being offering Mr Crosby some advice. Our political
:01:56. > :02:05.correspondent Carole Walker has more details. Carole - what advice
:02:05. > :02:09.has Lord Ashcroft offered? Well, we need to remember first of all, Jo,
:02:09. > :02:16.that Lord Ashcroft starts this advice by pointing out that he
:02:16. > :02:23.argued against having Lynton Crosby brought in to Conservative Central
:02:23. > :02:27.Office. Lord Ashcroft is concerned too much on the core vote. Lord
:02:28. > :02:32.Ashcroft is saying that it is very important pour the party to reach
:02:32. > :02:36.out, not just to consolidate, not to rely on Ed Miliband winning it
:02:36. > :02:40.for the Tories, not to write off the Liberal Democrats. And he goes
:02:40. > :02:45.on also to give some rather pointed advice at the end. You will
:02:45. > :02:49.remember that once the adviser becomes the story, he says, that is
:02:49. > :02:52.not a good thing. That is a reference to the fact that Lynton
:02:52. > :02:56.Crosby has already appeared on the front page of the Mail on Sunday,
:02:57. > :03:00.with allegations that he swore about Muslims during the election
:03:00. > :03:03.campaign for Boris Johnson, something which Mr Crosby says he
:03:03. > :03:08.does not recall. But he is a controversial figure, and Lord
:03:08. > :03:14.Ashcroft is clearly not entirely enthusiastic about his return to
:03:14. > :03:20.the Conservative fold. Do you think this advice will actually be taken?
:03:20. > :03:25.It is interesting. I think Lynton Crosby brings a particular skill,
:03:25. > :03:30.let's say, to election campaigns. He was in charge in 2005, when
:03:30. > :03:35.Michael Howard was the Tory leader, when he was accused of dog whistle
:03:35. > :03:40.politics, talking a lot about immigration, in the thought that
:03:40. > :03:45.this might play on people's fears. At the time he said it was an
:03:45. > :03:48.important issue, but I think Lynton Crosby will bring something of a
:03:48. > :03:54.focus to the Conservative Party campaign, but he is somebody who is
:03:54. > :03:58.known for his focus on some call Conservative principles. There will
:03:58. > :04:03.be others around him who will be arguing that the party needs to do
:04:03. > :04:07.much more to open up, to modernise, to reach out. And I think that is
:04:07. > :04:11.are likely to be a point of tension come the next general election
:04:11. > :04:16.campaign, especially as we do not yet know exactly how it is going to
:04:16. > :04:20.work out between him, George Osborne, who is in overall control,
:04:20. > :04:29.Grant Shapps, the party chairman, and several other senior characters
:04:29. > :04:33.who will be involved in this campaign. With us now is Tim
:04:33. > :04:38.Montgomerie, the editor of Conservative Home. Do you welcome
:04:38. > :04:44.this? I do, very much. This is a man with a lot of experience in
:04:44. > :04:48.Australia and London, a man who knows how campaigns are run. There
:04:48. > :04:54.are a lot of journalists who run campaigns, but Lynton Crosby's
:04:54. > :04:57.opinion is that those are not the ideal people to run campaigns. He
:04:57. > :05:01.chooses two or three big themes and makes sure the party focuses on
:05:01. > :05:07.them, which is usually the secret of winning elections. What about
:05:07. > :05:13.Number Ten Downing Street, is everybody behind this the Pope went
:05:13. > :05:17.-- this appointment? I did not know, but I think this is something David
:05:17. > :05:19.Cameron and George Osborne have wanted for quite some time. It was
:05:19. > :05:24.George Osborne initially who suggested that Lynton Crosby should
:05:24. > :05:29.go and help Boris Johnson, when he was first running for the Mayor of
:05:29. > :05:34.London. There is an important point made by Lord Ashcroft, which is
:05:34. > :05:38.that surely, to win the next election, you have got to look
:05:38. > :05:41.beyond the call vote. That is Lynton Crosby's talent, but is it
:05:41. > :05:45.going to limit the success of the Tory party if he does not look
:05:45. > :05:50.beyond that? People have misunderstood a lot of his
:05:50. > :05:55.qualities. Yes, Lynton Crosby has certain views, which might be more
:05:55. > :05:59.on the traditional side of politics, but that is not his main quality.
:05:59. > :06:04.What he has been recruited for is to run a campaign, to focus on the
:06:04. > :06:07.things that matter, to be disciplined. I do not think the
:06:07. > :06:13.Tories will suddenly revert to the kind of campaign that Michael
:06:13. > :06:18.Howard had in 2005. Actually, Lynton Crosby had quite little to
:06:18. > :06:22.do with that, he joined it just nine months before the election.
:06:22. > :06:26.All the campaign themes had largely been decided by Michael Howard.
:06:26. > :06:29.What Lynton Crosby will do will be to do a better job of making sure
:06:29. > :06:33.that the David Cameron message, which is not going to be
:06:33. > :06:37.revolutionised, is properly communicated to voters. This is
:06:37. > :06:42.incredibly good news for the Conservative Party. What about Lord
:06:42. > :06:48.Ashcroft, is he still a powerful figure? Absolutely. I have to say
:06:49. > :06:52.that partly because he is my proprietor. But one huge advantage
:06:52. > :06:56.which Michael Ashcroft brings is that he is a seasoned campaigner,
:06:56. > :06:59.but he also conducts some of the biggest opinion polls in British
:06:59. > :07:04.politics. He is more knowledgeable about what the average British
:07:04. > :07:08.voter is thinking than most people. When he says something, it is not
:07:08. > :07:11.just one businessman thinking aloud, it is very much grounded in an
:07:11. > :07:15.awful lot of market research. there could be some tension between
:07:15. > :07:20.the two men, and one thing Lord Ashcroft said was that he wanted to
:07:20. > :07:24.avoid a repeat of 2010, when the campaign was run by a range of
:07:24. > :07:33.people. You will still have Grant Shapps, George Osborne, Lord
:07:33. > :07:38.Ashcroft, Lynton Crosby... He says, there are as many ex-Lib Dem voters
:07:38. > :07:43.who might vote Tory as there are Tories who might switch to UKIP -
:07:43. > :07:49.do you agree with that? Yes, that is what the market research says.
:07:49. > :07:51.Surely disillusioned Lib Dem voters would be voting Labour? A lot of
:07:51. > :07:55.the opinion polling suggests that there are a lot of voters waiting
:07:55. > :08:02.to see whether the economic medicine but dish government is
:08:02. > :08:05.dispensing will work. -- that this government is dispensing. We have a
:08:05. > :08:09.character of the person inclined to vote Lib Dem, but the trick for
:08:09. > :08:12.this government is, if it succeeds economically, which will be Lord
:08:12. > :08:19.Ashcroft's main message, the competent delivery of economic
:08:19. > :08:22.progress, then we can begin to get voters from all of the main parties.
:08:22. > :08:25.Do you think the Government and the Conservatives particularly have
:08:25. > :08:30.focused too much on deficit reduction, and that beyond that,
:08:30. > :08:35.has not really spelt out clearly enough to voters what a
:08:35. > :08:39.Conservative-led government will do? This is one of the difficulties
:08:39. > :08:48.of coalition. In terms of the core vote, you might think it was rather
:08:48. > :08:53.a good idea. Certainly, we might be seeing that one of the big ideas of
:08:53. > :09:03.the last election is now rather unravelling, the idea of the ablest
:09:03. > :09:07.
:09:07. > :09:11.candidates. -- A-list candidates. Even though the idea was to make
:09:11. > :09:15.the party look a bit more like the country at large. Yes, but I think
:09:15. > :09:24.it has left some people wondering who they are. I think that list has
:09:24. > :09:27.been mixed. Many of the most talented new members of the intake
:09:27. > :09:31.are the kind of people but give me hope in the future of the
:09:31. > :09:34.Conservative Party. They are incredibly talented. Perhaps the
:09:34. > :09:38.media have spotlighted some of the most controversial figures. But the
:09:38. > :09:41.talent is there for the future. The combination of David Cameron
:09:41. > :09:45.pushing more diversity and the membership pushing back a little
:09:45. > :09:49.bit, and insisting that only the cream of that list should be
:09:49. > :09:53.selected, has produced one of the most exciting Tory intakes in a
:09:53. > :09:57.generation. Do you agree with Lord Ashcroft that Ed Miliband could be
:09:57. > :10:02.as much of an electoral liability as Gordon Brown? That is difficult
:10:02. > :10:06.to say at this moment. One thing the Conservative strategists need
:10:06. > :10:11.to be careful about is not to demonise Ed Miliband. That is what
:10:11. > :10:13.Barack Obama did to Mitt Romney, and it is the reason why Mitt
:10:13. > :10:19.Romney won the first presidential debate, and made the race closer
:10:19. > :10:23.than it might have been, because he showed up and -- at that debate and
:10:23. > :10:27.was not the caricature he had been made out to be. If Ed Miliband
:10:27. > :10:31.turns up at that first debate and confounds how the Conservatives
:10:31. > :10:34.have presented him, that is dangerous. Michael Ashcroft's
:10:34. > :10:38.General point that we have to win the next general election with a
:10:38. > :10:42.positive case has to be right. what about when he says, the Tories
:10:42. > :10:46.need to keep the loyalists, win back the detractors and win over
:10:46. > :10:52.those who are only considering the party, well, that is everybody. It
:10:52. > :10:56.does not take an electoral genius to work that out. The difference is
:10:56. > :11:02.that Lord Ashcroft has found out exactly what those different groups
:11:02. > :11:09.are thinking. That is where the genius, if you like, comes in. But
:11:09. > :11:14.I don't think anybody is alert any illusions. To win the next election,
:11:14. > :11:18.it is going to take almost a miracle, because they could not win
:11:18. > :11:23.the last one under almost perfect electoral conditions. It will need
:11:23. > :11:26.all of the best brains in the party to work together. When you say, you
:11:26. > :11:30.rather welcome the idea of concentrating on the core vote,
:11:30. > :11:37.what are some of the things you would like to see? What would you
:11:37. > :11:41.say to David Cameron and George Osborne? I think voters would like
:11:41. > :11:43.to hear a very robust stance on Europe, I think they would be
:11:43. > :11:48.worried by the noises which have been coming out about planning, for
:11:48. > :11:51.example, which is something which is close to people's hearts. It is
:11:51. > :11:56.not necessarily to do with is a lot of money, but I think it would
:11:56. > :11:59.worry a lot of people. I think there is a feeling that it is very
:11:59. > :12:04.difficult for people who have worked hard and put their children
:12:04. > :12:06.through private school, for example, to get them into university. People
:12:06. > :12:12.would feel this is discriminating against the very people the Tories
:12:12. > :12:16.should be standing up for. wanted to ask another question --
:12:16. > :12:21.you wanted me to ask another question, didn't you? But I am not
:12:21. > :12:24.going to. Last month,. Stood up at PMQs and pledged to do something
:12:24. > :12:30.about energy pricing. His announcement knocked rather a lot
:12:30. > :12:40.of people, including his own Energy Secretary, for six. The saga was
:12:40. > :12:41.
:12:41. > :12:44.completely -- was quickly dubbed combi-shambles. Last year the Prime
:12:44. > :12:48.Minister promised faithfully that he would take action to help people
:12:48. > :12:52.reduce their energy bills - can he tell the country how it is going?
:12:52. > :12:55.We have encouraged people to switch, which is one of the best ways to
:12:55. > :12:58.get your bills down, and like animals, which I am sure he will
:12:58. > :13:01.welcome, that we will be legislating so that energy
:13:01. > :13:05.companies have to give the lowest tariff to their customers,
:13:05. > :13:09.something Labour did not do in 13 years, even though the leader of
:13:09. > :13:13.the Labour Party actually could have done, because he had the job.
:13:13. > :13:17.So, how are the Department of Energy and the regular going to
:13:17. > :13:20.deliver on this pledge? The Lib Dem Energy Secretary will use an
:13:20. > :13:23.appearance before the Commons Select Committee to lay out his
:13:23. > :13:26.thinking on reforming tariff structures this afternoon. Instead
:13:26. > :13:31.of hundreds of different tariffs currently offered by energy
:13:31. > :13:35.suppliers, each company is expected to be allowed only four. Customers
:13:35. > :13:39.will be expected to be put on the cheapest rate for them. This,
:13:39. > :13:43.believes the Government, will meet the Prime Minister's pledge for
:13:43. > :13:48.them to have to give the lowest tariff. But will this put a hold to
:13:48. > :13:52.rising energy prices, or which just remove competition, and mean some
:13:52. > :13:59.people on the best deals end up paying more? I am joined now by the
:13:59. > :14:04.Shadow Energy Secretary, Caroline Flint, as well as by Richard Lloyd.
:14:04. > :14:08.Richard, this is what you have been waiting for - are you pleased? It
:14:08. > :14:11.is part of what we have been waiting for, and it would be good
:14:12. > :14:16.news for most consumers, who currently sit on terrible, old,
:14:16. > :14:20.outdated, expensive tariffs, and are not moving around in the market.
:14:20. > :14:23.One in 10 people say they find the energy market clear enough to
:14:23. > :14:28.navigate around, but for the vast majority of people, who do not
:14:28. > :14:32.switch, sitting on expensive and outdated tariffs, being put by
:14:32. > :14:36.default on the best tariff would be good news. The question is, will
:14:36. > :14:39.that tariff Beechy, will it be affordable, will it be fair? Most
:14:40. > :14:45.consumers think what is going on in the energy market is completely
:14:45. > :14:49.under transparent. Are the generators selling power to the
:14:49. > :14:53.retailers at a price which has been rigged? They will have to do a lot
:14:54. > :14:59.more. How do you understand it is going to work? One envisages the
:14:59. > :15:02.idea that we are all on the lowest across, pretty well all on the same
:15:02. > :15:06.tariff - how can you guarantee that we will be paying less, if I am
:15:06. > :15:12.already on a pretty good deal, because I have been online and done
:15:12. > :15:18.my research? For people like you, there may be no gain. But for most
:15:18. > :15:22.people, who currently sit on these high-cost, and competitive tariffs,
:15:22. > :15:27.the impact on the new, default tariff, should save them some money
:15:27. > :15:30.in the short term. But they will stay with the same supplier. What
:15:30. > :15:32.this will not guarantee is that they can get the best deal in the
:15:33. > :15:36.market. The Government need to make it easier for people to switch from
:15:36. > :15:40.one supplier to another, to put competitive pressure on the
:15:40. > :15:43.suppliers. That will keep the default price down. In theory, it
:15:44. > :15:48.should work, but the backdrop is one of rising wholesale energy
:15:48. > :15:53.costs, with government policy costs adding to bills, so the general
:15:53. > :16:03.trend will probably still be prices going up. Caroline Flint, the
:16:03. > :16:05.
:16:05. > :16:09.Government have pulled this off, The proposals, which there should
:16:09. > :16:12.be four tariffs. If you're buying gas, you have four tariffs,
:16:12. > :16:16.variable, fixed rate and maybe a green one as well and you can
:16:16. > :16:19.choose what else you want to do. The truth is with each of those
:16:19. > :16:24.there is one price. You can be on the cheapest but not the best deal.
:16:24. > :16:29.We've been saying, before we even get to the price setting at tariff
:16:29. > :16:32.stage, we have to make sure the market is competitive so we are
:16:32. > :16:37.sure that the tariffs we're being asked to choose are the fairest
:16:37. > :16:39.ones. What with last week and the all the talk and debate about how
:16:39. > :16:43.wholesale prices were allegedly being rigged, there's a concern
:16:43. > :16:46.about whether we're getting the best deal. This doesn't take us
:16:46. > :16:50.further forward because the Government has nothing to say about
:16:50. > :16:54.the energy market. It's a bit unfair to say it's not taking us
:16:54. > :17:02.forward. This is the start. This will simplify the tariff system.
:17:02. > :17:05.You welcome that obviously. Ofgem's proposals are one that's we support
:17:05. > :17:08.to simplify it. When David Cameron said we're going to force the
:17:08. > :17:12.energy companies to put people on the cheapest tariff. The truth is
:17:12. > :17:17.that's the one that is online. We know many older people aren't
:17:17. > :17:23.online because they can't engage with that technology. Is that true,
:17:23. > :17:29.Caroline is saying that you may get the cheapest tariff but not the
:17:29. > :17:35.best deal. Surely the cheapest is the best deal. It depends on
:17:35. > :17:41.whether you want to fix your tariff or go with a standard variable rate.
:17:41. > :17:44.It will be like the mortgage market. The simplicity and the ability for
:17:44. > :17:48.consumers to shop around that will keep prices in check. It remains to
:17:48. > :17:52.be seen whether the Government is going to go far enough to make it
:17:52. > :17:56.easy for customers to tell, at a glance, what is the cheapest price
:17:56. > :17:59.between suppliers as well as being put on the default cheapest tariff
:17:59. > :18:02.with the existing supplier. could have done this when you were
:18:02. > :18:06.in power. Ed Miliband could have done this. It is possible. At the
:18:06. > :18:10.time when David Cameron stood up in the Commons, we all thought, he's
:18:11. > :18:14.misspoken, but he's proved actually, to some extent, that you can
:18:14. > :18:19.achieve this. You can simplify the tariffs and perhaps get the price
:18:19. > :18:22.down for a lot more people. Labour didn't do that. Actually he hasn't,
:18:22. > :18:26.from what I understand, achieved what he said in the House of
:18:26. > :18:31.Commons, a few weeks ago. Basically, simplyifying the tariffs, everybody
:18:31. > :18:36.agrees with. That at the points in which the tariffs are set, if we're
:18:36. > :18:39.not convinced it's done in the most competitive way, then even though
:18:40. > :18:42.you may choose a tariff - let's be clear about this, within the
:18:43. > :18:47.tariffs there will only be one choice - it is the cheapest, but
:18:47. > :18:50.it's the only tariff. That's the trick that Cameron is trying to put
:18:50. > :18:55.across today. It doesn't assure the public that the way the market
:18:55. > :18:58.works and we did go into the last general election, saying the market
:18:58. > :19:02.needed reforming. What's your response to today's announce snplt
:19:02. > :19:06.I think the energy crisis has been predicted for such a long time,
:19:06. > :19:12.it's a shame we're in this position and it's taken so long to sort it
:19:12. > :19:16.out. As a consumer, simplicity will be a very good thing because it is
:19:16. > :19:21.baffling. The proposals seem to have come from Ofgem. They have
:19:21. > :19:24.brought the idea forward. You want to abolish Ofgem. Part of the
:19:24. > :19:29.proposal they put forward and other things they've done in the last
:19:29. > :19:32.year is catching up on the job they should have done some years ago. We
:19:33. > :19:39.do not believe, looking at last week for example, they were on the
:19:39. > :19:43.case in terms of concerns about the way wholesale prices were being
:19:43. > :19:47.fixed. It's also why we believe, actually, we should have a new
:19:47. > :19:51.regulator with the powers that when wholesale prices fall that is
:19:52. > :19:55.forced on the energy companies to pass on to bill payers. Do you
:19:55. > :19:59.agree? Whatever the regulate oris called, whatever it is about, it
:20:00. > :20:05.should be a consumer champion, in a market where we're completely
:20:05. > :20:09.outpowered by the energy giants. Has jom receive -- Ofgem failed in
:20:09. > :20:12.that? We're not pleased they've done everything they can for the
:20:12. > :20:16.consumer. They're starting to flex some muscle. Whatever it's called,
:20:16. > :20:20.it needs to be a pro-consumer watchdog on the side of the koust
:20:20. > :20:26.mer facing up to these energy giants. You'll have to sack
:20:26. > :20:31.hundreds of energy experts pay them off and they'll get rehired under a
:20:31. > :20:35.new regulator, why not just reform? I think everyone we agree that the
:20:35. > :20:40.esteem of this sector that it's very important to us as consumers
:20:40. > :20:43.but the economy as well has never been as such a low ebb. We think
:20:43. > :20:46.there has to be radical change, including an Energy Bill that
:20:46. > :20:50.introduces more competition, but also a tough new Energywatch dog
:20:50. > :20:55.that can command the confidence of the public and if that means change,
:20:55. > :21:01.that means change and we need to do that. More competition, more
:21:01. > :21:04.companies, mortarives, we go round in a circle to a SIStive that will
:21:04. > :21:08.be complicated. -- system that is complicated. We're acknowledging
:21:08. > :21:12.that the liberalised market isn't working, not working in the
:21:12. > :21:16.interest of consumers. I think the watchdog that scrutinises the way
:21:16. > :21:21.these rules are put into place and enforces them will need to be very,
:21:21. > :21:25.very tough on suppliers that have a track record of doing their best to
:21:25. > :21:29.confuse consumers, avoid them getting on the best price. How this
:21:29. > :21:33.is done is as important as the announcement We have six companies
:21:33. > :21:36.that dominate 99% of the market. None of the others can get in in
:21:36. > :21:41.the way it's structured at the moment. They generate energy, sell
:21:41. > :21:44.it to themselves and then on to us. You didn't get anywhere with it
:21:44. > :21:49.either. We went into the last election saying that had to change
:21:49. > :21:52.and we needed a different pool. There was a popular survey, three
:21:52. > :21:57.quarters said they believed, 74% of people thought energy companies
:21:57. > :22:00.should be stripped of the power to set prices entirely are Ofgem
:22:00. > :22:04.taking on the responsibility instead. Would you agree to that?
:22:04. > :22:08.Yes, I suppose that would be a very good idea if it reflected the
:22:08. > :22:12.wholesale price. I would like to know that the cost of the renewable
:22:12. > :22:18.obligations which are put on. People get very upset about the
:22:18. > :22:21.cost of renewables. We've talked endlessly about that being more
:22:21. > :22:25.transparent. Are you expecting an announcement on that as well?
:22:25. > :22:27.They're all over the shop on renewables with the Energy Minister
:22:27. > :22:32.anti-renewables and the Secretary of State in favour of them.
:22:32. > :22:36.terms of the bills, people don't know, do they? People don't. I
:22:36. > :22:40.think it's true that the suppliers should be forced to do much more to
:22:40. > :22:44.complain what is driving costs here. As Caroline said we've had
:22:44. > :22:48.speculation that it's been a rigged market. There's a lot of Government
:22:48. > :22:53.policy that's passed through to our bills. People don't know about that.
:22:53. > :22:56.There are two things that need to happen - one, the suppliers need to
:22:56. > :23:00.tell us in plain English, what we're paying for. Secondly, we need
:23:00. > :23:04.some confidence that the price we're paying is fair. That's why
:23:04. > :23:08.we've been saying to Number Ten, look, don't just move on how many
:23:08. > :23:11.tariffs are available, but you have to reassure consumers that the
:23:11. > :23:16.default price you're paying will be fair. That means you have to have
:23:16. > :23:21.an urgent review of what ends up in our bill. Thank you.
:23:21. > :23:31.To the countryside, ah, idyllic and wonderful. Or is it? Adam went to
:23:31. > :23:35.find out. About a fifth of the UK lives in
:23:35. > :23:39.areas like this, the village of Marnhull in rural Dorset. Most
:23:39. > :23:43.places in this part of the world have got some kind of link with
:23:43. > :23:47.Thomas Hardy. This place has got a really good one, because it's where
:23:47. > :23:53.Tess of the D'Urbervilles was born and bred. Let's go and find out
:23:53. > :23:57.what issues affect modern life in the countryside. They didn't dot
:23:57. > :24:04.milking like this in Tess's day. At Home Farm the big worry is the
:24:04. > :24:08.price of a pint. The price of this per litre would be 86p. The price
:24:08. > :24:13.of this is �1. This is very readily falling out of the sky at the
:24:13. > :24:17.moment and this takes a huge amount of production. The supermarkets
:24:17. > :24:21.obviously can use this as a loss leader. I think people perhaps
:24:21. > :24:25.don't understand quite the amount of work and effort that goes into
:24:25. > :24:31.producing milk. Back down in the village, I've found another problem,
:24:31. > :24:36.hello? Hello? Yes, that's right, the mobile phone signal here is
:24:36. > :24:42.absolutely rubbish. And that's priority number one for this Dorset
:24:42. > :24:46.resident, who's the new head of the Countryside Alliance. I used to be
:24:46. > :24:51.a soldier. I say half joking, you get a better signal in Helmand.
:24:51. > :24:56.That is really now unacceptable as is the lack of provision for rural
:24:56. > :24:59.broad band. The Government has a good rural Broadband going, but it
:24:59. > :25:02.needs speeding up and refining. Rural Broadband is key to rural
:25:02. > :25:06.business in the way that rural businesses work. The internet gives
:25:06. > :25:09.you so many opportunities that we haven't had before. One business
:25:09. > :25:15.here that doesn't need the internet is the Robin Hill Stores, run by
:25:15. > :25:20.husband and wife team Bob and Sue. So, what's on the minds of their
:25:20. > :25:24.regulars? It's the bus services, they're cutting them completely to
:25:24. > :25:28.certain areas, ie Salisbury, Dorchester and Yeovil. A lot of
:25:28. > :25:33.people rely on the bus services for a day out. While Sue is concerned
:25:33. > :25:37.about the dwindling number of Post Office services, they're asked to
:25:37. > :25:42.provide. For us, personally, that means that comes off our bottom
:25:42. > :25:45.line. We're paid on a commission basis. So the Government taking all
:25:45. > :25:51.these services or potentially taking the service as way from us
:25:51. > :25:55.means a cut in pay. That makes it difficult to sustain our store.
:25:55. > :25:59.Although there's one thing that several shoppers told me they were
:26:00. > :26:04.buying into - David Cameron's idea of the Big Society. People are
:26:04. > :26:09.willing to help themselves because it's not anonymous. We all know
:26:09. > :26:14.each other. We are small rb -- a small enough community that we can
:26:14. > :26:18.do things for each other. Often people lay blame when there's a lot
:26:18. > :26:24.they can do themselves. No amount of community spirit can solve the
:26:24. > :26:28.other problem gripping the village, sky high petrol prices. Marnhull
:26:28. > :26:32.might seem fairly well to do and the street names aren't run of the
:26:32. > :26:38.mill, but the issues you find here, you'll find nearly ever where in
:26:38. > :26:42.the countryside. And with us now is the Secretary of
:26:42. > :26:45.State for the environment and rural affairs Owen Paterson. Welcome to
:26:45. > :26:48.the Daily Politics. Is the countryside neglected? Absolutely
:26:48. > :26:51.not. For the first time in years, we've got ministers looking after
:26:51. > :26:56.the countryside, who all come from the countryside and really
:26:56. > :26:59.understand it. It will take time, but we've set up a lot of
:26:59. > :27:04.arrangements so we can work closely with the countryside. One of the
:27:04. > :27:08.first things I did was launch a big paiper in Cumbria making a complete
:27:08. > :27:10.commitment that Government policy would be countryside proofed, so
:27:10. > :27:17.countryside policies come through us to people who really understand
:27:17. > :27:21.it. I was born in the countryside. I've lived there all my life. I've
:27:21. > :27:25.represented north Shropshire for 15 years. Big statement. Big promise,
:27:25. > :27:29.are you convinced? We heard the problems, lack of Broadband,
:27:29. > :27:34.stopping rural business, lack of affordable housing. Well, it's
:27:34. > :27:38.great that Mr Paterson is so committed, but I think it's coming
:27:38. > :27:41.from a history which has not been so countryside friendly perhaps. A
:27:42. > :27:46.lot of people in the countryside for the reasons that you said feel
:27:46. > :27:50.rather neglected. I think it's not just ministers, though ministers
:27:50. > :27:54.have not always had such understanding, it's civil servants
:27:54. > :27:58.who tend to come from the south- east and think it's a nuisance.
:27:58. > :28:01.What is the raw deal about, what are they most upset about? There's
:28:01. > :28:05.a combination of things which aren't necessarily in the control
:28:05. > :28:08.of the Government, for example, high fuel prices make a very
:28:08. > :28:12.significant difference in the countryside because there's not
:28:12. > :28:15.much alternative. There are things which can be done, badgers is on
:28:15. > :28:21.hold. We mustn't talk about it I understand. Course you can, talk
:28:21. > :28:26.about whatever you like. But milk prices and for example, the state
:28:26. > :28:28.of trees, that is very tragic and people feel those things very
:28:28. > :28:34.strongly. Do you think the Government responded adequately or
:28:34. > :28:40.was it not a priority? I think they have responded quite well recently,
:28:40. > :28:44.but I think that the issue is that for example, when the Forestry
:28:44. > :28:48.Commission was under discussion a year ago, it wasn't very well
:28:48. > :28:52.handled. The -- they did the wrong thing. It wouldn't have mattered if
:28:52. > :28:59.the forest had been sold because the own irship isn't the issue.
:28:59. > :29:01.It's whether -- ownership isn't the issue. It's whether you have access.
:29:02. > :29:06.Those people should have been looking after the trees and these
:29:06. > :29:10.problems. That's the accusation that you've taken away the
:29:10. > :29:14.expertise from within DEFRA itself and that has contributed to the
:29:14. > :29:20.problem with ash die back. We put more money back into research on
:29:20. > :29:24.trees, but... I've only been there for two months. I know. If you look
:29:24. > :29:29.at the last few years, the trend has been the other way. Do you
:29:29. > :29:32.accept that? I've said publicically and I'll say it again, we have to
:29:32. > :29:36.completely change our attitude to trees in the forestry. We have to
:29:36. > :29:43.renew our whole policy because we know there are a number of very
:29:43. > :29:48.dangerous tree diseases out there. There's the larch tree disease and
:29:48. > :29:53.in the chestnuts. The Americans lots billions of chestnut trees.
:29:53. > :29:57.I'm not sure we can treat plant and tree products as a free, tradable
:29:57. > :30:02.commodity any more. We send seedlings to Holland and bring them
:30:02. > :30:06.back and plapbtd them here. I'm prepared for a radical look at how
:30:06. > :30:10.we handle our forestry and tree environment and the trade in those
:30:10. > :30:13.materials, which up to now, have been free. To go back to the point
:30:13. > :30:16.about people in the countryside and feeling that they have perhaps been
:30:16. > :30:26.neglected in the past. Government do things about the lack of
:30:26. > :30:29.
:30:29. > :30:33.Broadband, the lack of public Having represented a rural area for
:30:33. > :30:37.15 years, one of the biggest problems I had was getting across
:30:37. > :30:42.to her but ministers, and civil servants... I would entirely agree
:30:42. > :30:47.with somebody who was on that kick just then - our rural broadband is
:30:47. > :30:51.absolutely fundamental. Improving that catapults every kind of rural
:30:51. > :30:55.activity, on a level playing field with people in the cities. It is
:30:55. > :31:01.not just businesses, it is about delivering health services, and
:31:01. > :31:08.also elderly people, who can be isolated. The first week I got in I
:31:08. > :31:13.went to Cumbria to launch a major initiative on broadband. We are
:31:13. > :31:17.spending half a billion pounds on broadband. The other comment,
:31:17. > :31:21.regarding the mobile phones, it does help to have a minister like
:31:21. > :31:31.me who is completely exasperated by the dire quality of our mobile
:31:31. > :31:31.
:31:31. > :31:35.phone networks. I have had meetings with Maria Miller and Eric Pickles,
:31:35. > :31:39.we are quite determined to get this right. We are working extremely
:31:39. > :31:42.hard on it. But it does help to have ministers who have a gut
:31:42. > :31:48.feeling for this, who know how exasperated people are in the
:31:48. > :31:52.countryside. One thing about housing is the possible need to
:31:52. > :31:56.have big estates and high rise blocks, what about that in the
:31:56. > :32:00.countryside? I think actually in the countryside, it is often a case
:32:00. > :32:05.of quite small units, which can be difficult to get through planning.
:32:05. > :32:11.Quite often, once they have got through planning, the need has
:32:11. > :32:13.actually gone away, because people have moved. So, I think small is
:32:13. > :32:18.beautiful in the countryside, in terms of affordable housing. I
:32:18. > :32:21.think that is what is needed, rather than big estates. What do
:32:22. > :32:24.you think about the framework on planning from the Government?
:32:24. > :32:29.don't think it will make much difference to the issue I have just
:32:29. > :32:32.been speaking about, but I think it will make a big difference to the
:32:32. > :32:36.big infrastructure projects, which are not what people want.
:32:36. > :32:40.planning, we have allowed local people to come forward with local
:32:40. > :32:46.plans. I am clear, we cannot freeze the countryside, there has to be
:32:46. > :32:49.development. That affects our youngest people, just getting on
:32:49. > :32:52.the jobs ladder, who need affordable housing. I think we have
:32:52. > :32:58.done a great thing for the countryside, allowing development
:32:58. > :33:03.which is in tune with locals people's views and needs. Except,
:33:03. > :33:07.of course, there will be a case where central government can say,
:33:07. > :33:11.certain authorities are blocking plans, and you will be able to ride
:33:11. > :33:15.roughshod over those authorities. No, because the concept gives real
:33:15. > :33:20.power to local councillors. It comes up from the bottom. We have
:33:20. > :33:24.seen it already, it is working. of your targets was the radical
:33:24. > :33:27.reform of the agricultural policy in Europe - how can you hope to get
:33:27. > :33:32.that, including the fisheries policies? It is just not going to
:33:33. > :33:37.happen, Tony Blair tried it, how are you going to succeed? It is a
:33:37. > :33:42.long shot, because I am one of 27, which is one of the problems. You
:33:42. > :33:46.mentioned the fisheries policy - I came up with a fisheries policy
:33:46. > :33:51.when I was in opposition, to establish national local control.
:33:51. > :33:58.We have a coalition policy of reform of the CAP. The minister in
:33:58. > :34:02.charge has gone a long way, on one of the most contentious issues,
:34:02. > :34:08.which is the problem of discards, good, healthy fish being thrown
:34:08. > :34:13.away. Richard has done a fantastic job in our negotiations. It is
:34:13. > :34:16.complicated, it has been to the council, and it is now going to the
:34:16. > :34:21.European Parliament. We are looking to get a ban, which would be really
:34:21. > :34:25.good.. But you have set yourself that the eurozone could effectively
:34:25. > :34:31.create that inner core, then Britain would be permanently on the
:34:31. > :34:35.outside, permanently out voted on these issues. Well, actually, if
:34:35. > :34:41.you look at what Richard has done on the CAP, by working with like-
:34:41. > :34:47.minded allies, major progress has been made. It does not go as far as
:34:47. > :34:53.some of us would like, but it is a stark. Has the government policy on
:34:53. > :34:58.onshore wind farms changed? I do not to energy policy. You do in
:34:58. > :35:01.terms of the impact on the rural economy - has it changed? No. John
:35:01. > :35:05.Hayes has been clear that he is going to deliver a certain amount
:35:05. > :35:08.of policy for wind farms. I have been clear that there are
:35:08. > :35:14.appropriate places for certain kinds of energy and inappropriate
:35:14. > :35:23.places. It is horses for courses. In my part of the world, it is a
:35:23. > :35:27.stupid place to build wind farms, because of the trees. If there is
:35:27. > :35:32.no wind in your constituency, why are EDF in talks with Shropshire
:35:32. > :35:36.council over the possible placing of eight turbines? And you should
:35:36. > :35:39.see the number of letters I am getting at the moment opposing the
:35:39. > :35:44.establishment of even pipelines linking up possible wind farms
:35:44. > :35:49.which may be built in Wales. It is all hypothetical. People get
:35:49. > :35:53.absolutely incandescent about wind turbines, it is almost the thing
:35:53. > :35:56.which people feel most passionate about. But the windy places tend to
:35:56. > :36:03.be on the top of hills, and they tend to be the most beautiful parts
:36:03. > :36:07.of the countryside. I think what John Hayes said was that there was
:36:07. > :36:15.enough capacity to meet the target which has been set, but he has also
:36:15. > :36:18.quite rightly picked up. Made by Clive Aslet that building turbines
:36:18. > :36:23.in inappropriate places causes massive opposition, because these
:36:23. > :36:27.turbines do not generate much power. Wide end did Peter Lilley saying a
:36:27. > :36:36.secret report that he believed the Chancellor privately regretted all
:36:36. > :36:40.of the green commitments which had been made? -- why then? I cannot
:36:40. > :36:45.speak for what Peter Lilley said. I was hopefully last week, supporting
:36:45. > :36:49.British food. All I can say is, I do not to energy policy... But you
:36:49. > :36:55.to do the impact of it on the rural economy. Yes, and there have been
:36:55. > :36:59.quite clear that it is horses for courses. Some form of hydro power
:36:59. > :37:04.may be appropriate, as long as it works with the grain of nature and
:37:04. > :37:08.does not destroy fish stocks. But in inland counties, it is
:37:08. > :37:11.impossible to exaggerate the anger that there is at inappropriate
:37:11. > :37:17.installations of turbines, where there is not enough wind to justify
:37:17. > :37:21.it. Should the subsidies continue for onshore wind? I am not keen on
:37:21. > :37:28.subsidising anything. If these technologies are able to, they
:37:28. > :37:36.should stand on their own. I do the impact on the rural economy and
:37:36. > :37:41.environment. I think it is incredible that the renewable
:37:41. > :37:47.obligations mean that we import woodchip and logs with Bach on in
:37:47. > :37:51.order to put them into biomass power stations. What has been done
:37:51. > :37:56.to inspect that material to make sure it is not carrying treat
:37:56. > :38:02.diseases, I wonder? This was highlighted by Defra last year.
:38:02. > :38:07.set up this task force shortly after I came into a look at how we
:38:07. > :38:12.handle all plant and tree materials. I think part of his investigation
:38:12. > :38:16.will be looking at biomass. I am looking at a major and radical
:38:16. > :38:19.change at the way we handle all plant and tree products. Thank you
:38:20. > :38:22.very much for coming onto the programme. Well, according to the
:38:22. > :38:24.Government's first report on the quality of our lives, which
:38:25. > :38:28.incidentally is out today, people in rural areas shouldn't be
:38:28. > :38:30.whinging at all. The report found that the lives of people in rural
:38:31. > :38:34.Britain was significantly better than those who live in urban areas.
:38:34. > :38:38.Women tend to be happier than men. And people over 60 also tend to be
:38:38. > :38:40.happier. Oh, and if you live in the Outer Hebridies, Orkney or Shetland,
:38:40. > :38:43.you've apparently got life taped. Anyway, the man charged with
:38:43. > :38:47.overseeing the report is the former Cabinet Secretary Gus, now Lord,
:38:47. > :38:54.O'Donnell. I spoke to him earlier this morning and I began by asking
:38:54. > :38:58.him how happiness was measured. Well, happiness is something
:38:58. > :39:04.subjective, it is how you feel. We asked people how they were feeling,
:39:04. > :39:08.but it is not the only aspect of wellbeing. It is one aspect. We
:39:08. > :39:11.also want to measure people's life- expectancy, their health, aspects
:39:11. > :39:16.of basically whether they are having a good lie for not.
:39:16. > :39:20.obvious response is, in these straitened times, is this not just
:39:20. > :39:25.a waste of money? For somebody to say, if you have a job, you will be
:39:25. > :39:31.happier than if you are unemployed? Yes, but we measure success by the
:39:31. > :39:36.change in GDP - how stupid is that? Actually, in this downturn, GDP has
:39:36. > :39:40.fallen quite a lot, but employment has stayed quite high, so the
:39:40. > :39:45.impact on wellbeing is not as much as if you just looked at the GDP
:39:45. > :39:48.numbers. How can the Government make us feel happier, what policies
:39:48. > :39:52.can they passed? First of all, it can understand what it is that
:39:52. > :39:57.makes people feel better. In a sense, this is feeding back, we
:39:57. > :40:01.need to understand what it is that the public are unhappy about, what
:40:01. > :40:04.is really bad for their lives. For example, we know from all this
:40:04. > :40:08.research that commuting is something that people really
:40:08. > :40:13.dislike. There are things we can do about trying to emphasise and
:40:13. > :40:17.improve the quality of commuting. There are things like in macro
:40:17. > :40:25.policy thinking about different kinds of policies - how do you pick
:40:25. > :40:32.that one which keeps most people in jobs? Does this not also sound a
:40:32. > :40:37.bit statist? Do people want the Government to decide about their
:40:37. > :40:41.well-being? It is definitely not that. We are giving you the power.
:40:41. > :40:45.So far, the Government has been saying, here are the services we
:40:45. > :40:50.are going to deliver to you. But actually, we want to find out from
:40:50. > :40:53.you what really makes a difference. For example, in health services, we
:40:53. > :40:56.know that car parking charges really matter to people in
:40:56. > :41:02.hospitals. So, not just improving the quality of the Health Service,
:41:02. > :41:06.but all the ancillary things around it. You could argue that George
:41:06. > :41:12.Osborne's economic policy has been designed to satisfy the credit
:41:12. > :41:16.rating agencies - do you think that used to narrow? Well, the policy I
:41:16. > :41:19.hope is not being designed about credit rating agencies. That is
:41:19. > :41:24.what we hear from the Government all the time, that it is about
:41:24. > :41:28.having good credit, keeping interests -- interest rates low.
:41:28. > :41:33.Well, the credit rating agencies have not exactly got a fantastic
:41:33. > :41:37.record in this process, so I do not agree with that. We saw America had
:41:37. > :41:41.its credit rating dropped and its interest rates did not move at all.
:41:41. > :41:45.It is absolutely right that we try our best to maintain a good credit
:41:45. > :41:50.rating, but it is not the goal of policy. That should be trying to
:41:50. > :41:54.maximise will be in, it should have -- it should be about a recovery
:41:54. > :41:57.which is employment which, which gets us back on track and learnt
:41:57. > :42:01.the lessons of the financial crisis. The Civil Service will not be
:42:01. > :42:04.feeling very happy at the moment, with 1,000 jobs going in the
:42:04. > :42:08.Department of education - what would you say to them but that this
:42:08. > :42:11.process has been going on, the Civil Service has been at the
:42:11. > :42:15.forefront of contributing to the deficit reduction process. This has
:42:15. > :42:21.been tough. We do have the smallest Civil Service since the Second
:42:21. > :42:25.World War and the numbers are going down, as we improve efficiency.
:42:25. > :42:28.remaining ones are aware that they did not cause this problem, but
:42:28. > :42:31.they are playing their part to contribute towards it. I think
:42:31. > :42:34.they're doing a fantastic job. If you think of the fact that there
:42:34. > :42:38.was a lot less money, and they are improving services, what I would
:42:38. > :42:43.say to them is, this is a time when you have got the opportunity to
:42:43. > :42:48.innovate. Yes, there is no money, so we need to work incredibly hard,
:42:48. > :42:51.innovatively, with new ideas, to make sure that people who really
:42:51. > :42:56.depend on public services are not adversely affected by deficit-
:42:56. > :43:01.reduction. Do you agree, then, that the civil service is being
:43:01. > :43:06.undervalued? Massively undervalued. I am just about to go off to
:43:06. > :43:10.Singapore. I wish that our civil servants were paid in the same way
:43:10. > :43:13.that they are in Singapore, which is closer to market rates.
:43:13. > :43:17.Certainly I think our civil servants are undervalued. But when
:43:17. > :43:24.times are tight, a pink sepals servants know that we need to play
:43:24. > :43:30.our part. We are all in this together. -- I think that civil
:43:31. > :43:35.servants know that... But it is not just about jobs being lost, it is
:43:35. > :43:38.about rhetoric coming from government, saying that the Civil
:43:38. > :43:41.Service needs to harness the buccaneering spirit of war, the
:43:41. > :43:46.enemies of enterprise speech, characterising the Civil Service as
:43:46. > :43:50.a block on progress - are they being demonised? What I would say
:43:50. > :43:56.is, and the challenge I put back to the Prime Minister when he used
:43:56. > :43:59.that phrase was to say, OK, let's do this, so I set up something
:43:59. > :44:03.called I would take challenge, asking all businesses to tell us
:44:03. > :44:07.what red tape they wanted us to get rid of, and we will now push goes
:44:07. > :44:10.through, and we will see who of the block to this. Hopefully a lot will
:44:10. > :44:14.come from this. If it doesn't, it is either because businesses have
:44:14. > :44:20.not told us what is wrong, or it has been decided but the chicken
:44:20. > :44:24.that these are not the things to do. -- it has been decided politically
:44:24. > :44:31.that these are not the right things to do. I think David Cameron is
:44:31. > :44:34.trying to say, look, the past is not necessarily a good guide to the
:44:34. > :44:38.future. We need to be innovative, we need to take risks, we need a
:44:38. > :44:42.culture which says, if something goes wrong, that is fine. In the
:44:42. > :44:48.private sector, you try 10 projects, if six of them succeed, you are
:44:48. > :44:51.doing well. In the Civil Service, if we have four failures, we would
:44:51. > :44:55.have four hearings before the Public Accounts Committee. How many
:44:55. > :44:59.times have we talk about the Olympics and the success of the
:44:59. > :45:03.Olympics, and gone back to analyse the lessons of success as opposed
:45:03. > :45:07.to the lessons of failure?. Should the Cabinet Secretary be defending
:45:07. > :45:11.the civil-service more edge that he has a very difficult job. There is
:45:11. > :45:14.no-one better than me to say that because I was in it for six years.
:45:14. > :45:19.But you were not pleased about the enemies of enterprise speech, were
:45:19. > :45:24.you? No, I was not because I did not think it was true. Where things
:45:24. > :45:27.are true, and where the Civil Service can be faulted, is where in
:45:27. > :45:31.the past we have stuck with, this is the way we have always done it,
:45:31. > :45:35.it is the safe way of doing things. What I am trying to do, and my
:45:35. > :45:40.successors, is to change that mindset, to say, actually,
:45:40. > :45:44.innovation is fine, we will accept your failure, and let's hope the
:45:44. > :45:54.whole system will get into that mood of celebrating success and
:45:54. > :45:56.
:45:56. > :45:59.learning from failure. Are you a I am. I have complete control over
:45:59. > :46:03.the allocation of my time at the moment. I spend a lot of time on
:46:04. > :46:07.exercise, outside. We know that matters a lot. Better than working
:46:07. > :46:12.in Government? I can come on the TV and say what I really think, which
:46:12. > :46:17.was a freedom I didn't have before. Yes, and is that liberating? It is,
:46:18. > :46:21.yes. I'm enjoying it. You see, the joys of being able to come on the
:46:21. > :46:25.Daily Politics. You've got that pleasure, of course, we have the
:46:25. > :46:29.pleasure of you. Do you think these things are worthwhile, a well being
:46:29. > :46:33.commission, a report into trying to allow Government to find out what
:46:33. > :46:38.makes people happy? As soon as you put something like well being into
:46:38. > :46:42.a report it looks ridiculous. It's easy to make fun of it. It's an
:46:42. > :46:46.idea that is rather good that David Cameron has come up with. But
:46:46. > :46:50.perhaps not as well communicated as it might have been rather like the
:46:50. > :46:54.Big Society. It's particularly important now, at a time when a lot
:46:54. > :46:57.of people feel trapped in a somewhat negative economic
:46:57. > :47:05.environment that we look at the things which actually do make
:47:05. > :47:08.people happy. Are you happy? happy. But I think that people are
:47:08. > :47:13.temperamentally happy or not. is the problem with the survey,
:47:13. > :47:16.you're either suss peptible to it or not. That's true. But it's
:47:16. > :47:19.interesting that people are on the whole happier in the countryside.
:47:19. > :47:22.They have less money on the whole. They have a lot of things they have
:47:22. > :47:27.to deal with. They feel part of a community and that's very important
:47:27. > :47:32.to people and also, the fact that, the point that Gus O'Donnell made
:47:32. > :47:35.that if you have control over your time, that's also very helpful.
:47:35. > :47:41.These things don't necessarily cost very much or may not be to do with
:47:41. > :47:44.money at all. Exactly what he said. Now here's a thought - should MPs
:47:44. > :47:48.job share? One MP think it's would be a rather good idea and is
:47:48. > :47:51.suggesting it to the House of Commons as I speak. Gyles spent the
:47:51. > :47:58.morning getting to the bottom of it. We live in a modern world. Plenty
:47:58. > :48:01.of people work parttime, but would it work for MPs? Well, there is a
:48:01. > :48:05.rule going through -- before MPs. There is a suggestion it might
:48:05. > :48:09.happen, at least a sensible debate about it. With me are two MPs,
:48:09. > :48:14.tpwhun favour and one, I think it's fair to say, who isn't. Meg, why is
:48:14. > :48:18.this not a daft idea? In other parts of any business people can
:48:18. > :48:21.choose to job share. You get two for the price of one, two people
:48:21. > :48:27.committed to working how to make that job work well together and
:48:27. > :48:30.balancing it with the rest of their lives. I am assuming you would have
:48:30. > :48:34.to be honest enough to say to the electorate, you would have to be
:48:34. > :48:38.elected as a job share, not oh, I fancy taking Time Out and bringing
:48:38. > :48:42.someone else in. Absolutely. Because of the nature of the job,
:48:42. > :48:47.you stand for election as a job share, complaining how you would
:48:47. > :48:51.share it, would you split it by days of the week, by topics and ho
:48:51. > :48:55.-- how to handle votes on difficult issues. In parts of the country I
:48:55. > :48:59.think the electorate would go for it. You once described this as
:48:59. > :49:03.bonkers. Why? Is this April fool's days? This is a crack pot idea.
:49:03. > :49:08.This is further demeaning Parliament. The job doesn't lend
:49:08. > :49:12.itself to job share. In a time when we're looking to have less elected
:49:12. > :49:16.Parliamentarians to have double the number by job sharing is crazy.
:49:16. > :49:22.Madness. You know it wouldn't be double because only a few would go
:49:22. > :49:26.for it. Do your staff know what's in your in tray, do your staff know
:49:26. > :49:30.what you're covering, why couldn't someone else know as well? At a
:49:30. > :49:35.time when we have less people voting than ever, to put two people
:49:35. > :49:38.forward and to say for a five-year period you're going to job share,
:49:38. > :49:44.how would you decide who would do what part of the job? I mean I want
:49:44. > :49:49.to see us woking longer hours at Westminster not less hours. I think
:49:49. > :49:54.the trend, enough is enough and to job share is the end. It's a
:49:54. > :49:59.peculiar idea in that you could think the same way about certain
:49:59. > :50:02.issues. On most issues people vote on the whip. In seven years in
:50:02. > :50:07.Parliament, there have been three, four occasions when there have been
:50:07. > :50:10.free votes on difficult issues, you would have to explain how you would
:50:10. > :50:13.decide thatened you get only one vote. You talk about doubling the
:50:13. > :50:17.numbers and cost, but you'd have two people sharing one office and
:50:17. > :50:21.one set of resources. There wouldn't be additional cost. What
:50:21. > :50:28.if one of you misbehaved? I think you'd have to again have a way of
:50:28. > :50:32.dealing with. It you would have to - I think two rational, sensible,
:50:32. > :50:36.professional people could sort it out. Job shares head of planning in
:50:36. > :50:41.a London borough. These are difficult jobs. You're shaking your
:50:41. > :50:48.head. We've all got big egos and for two people over five years not
:50:48. > :50:52.to change and not to fall out, this would be like a reality TV show.
:50:52. > :50:56.One of your colleagues stepped downforceing a by-election recently
:50:56. > :51:00.because they wanted to spend more time with their family. I'm not
:51:00. > :51:06.going to comment on a former colleague. They said they felt the
:51:06. > :51:09.pressure of family. Oh, for goodness sake. I think, you say for
:51:09. > :51:13.goodness sake, I had a flood of e- mails from women saying, you know
:51:13. > :51:17.if we want more real people in Parliament who understand and
:51:17. > :51:22.juggle real life, let's face it when we are in Westminster -
:51:22. > :51:29.isn't that sort of job. It could be. It's demeaning it. You are going to
:51:29. > :51:33.carry this on for a while. Just, do you think it could happen? It could.
:51:33. > :51:38.The option needs to be open. It would be a great thing. Prove it.
:51:38. > :51:43.I've got a bit of online research to do any way. Hand back to the
:51:43. > :51:48.studio. From college gene, from Gyles on his mobile and from David,
:51:48. > :51:52.back to you in the studio. OMG, she made it look too easy. I
:51:52. > :51:57.might be out of a job. Well done. Why couldn't there be a job share
:51:57. > :52:00.at Westminster? MPs should be able to manage that? It's difficult
:52:00. > :52:06.having a coalition between two parties and the idea of mini
:52:06. > :52:10.coalitions beggars belief. Why? There are so many other jobs that
:52:10. > :52:16.you could job share. Once you get over the initial how would it work,
:52:16. > :52:19.why wouldn't it agree? You would have to have complete agreement on
:52:19. > :52:24.every subject, which isn't possible. Because of the character of MPs
:52:24. > :52:27.people wouldn't agree. Yes. would need continuity. They would
:52:27. > :52:31.vote on the same issues at different times and they could vote
:52:31. > :52:35.different ways. No hands up for job sharing. Not for me. That hasn't
:52:35. > :52:42.passed in the studio. Now according to the Government's happiness
:52:42. > :52:44.survey, which we were talking about, money hasn't necessarily -- doesn't
:52:44. > :52:49.necessarily make you happy. With more of the super rich coming to
:52:49. > :52:53.live in the UK, you might have to watch out for a miserable mogul
:52:53. > :52:57.coming to live near you. The Mayor of London says we should welcome
:52:57. > :53:01.the rich and powerful with open arms, arguing that the more open
:53:01. > :53:07.our society to they and powerful the more dynamic and prosperous our
:53:07. > :53:11.economy will become, which was a major theme in his speech to the
:53:11. > :53:15.CBI yesterday. You should never underestimate the protean ability
:53:16. > :53:22.to find markets around the world. I never tire of telling you, you
:53:22. > :53:27.export bicycles to Holland, mosquito repellant to Brazil, TV
:53:27. > :53:30.antennas to Korea, tea to China, rice to India, Piers Morgan to
:53:30. > :53:35.America... LAUGHTER
:53:35. > :53:40.Not just cake to France, but I discovered the other day, we sell
:53:40. > :53:50.lavender perfume and lavender oil grown from south London lavender to
:53:50. > :53:50.
:53:50. > :53:54.France. Parfum deBromley. If we can sell that, my friends, we can sell
:53:54. > :53:59.anything, can't we? That is the achievement and the result of the
:53:59. > :54:07.imagination of British business. Ever since London was founded in
:54:07. > :54:11.48AD by a bunch of pushy Italian immigrants, London has benefited
:54:11. > :54:16.from the consciousness that we are a great global city and we will win,
:54:16. > :54:20.if we think global and open ourselves to the worldment Boris
:54:20. > :54:25.Johnson, never knowingly understated. Joining us now is a
:54:25. > :54:34.person who co-incidentally has written about -- a book about
:54:34. > :54:41.autocrats. Cysta Freeland. How did such a small group of people take
:54:41. > :54:45.such a large part of the pie? one hand globalisation, the
:54:45. > :54:49.technology revolution, this really profound change is making it
:54:49. > :54:53.possible for people to earn bigger fortunes than ever before and to
:54:53. > :54:56.earn them very, very quickly. At the same time, we're seeing mill
:54:56. > :55:00.low class hollowed out. That's the big economic shift that we're
:55:00. > :55:04.seeing and all trying to come to terms with. What's caused that? I
:55:04. > :55:06.suppose generally there was a feeling that the middle class
:55:07. > :55:13.extended post-war, slowly but surely, more people became better
:55:13. > :55:19.off. You're now talking about the very, very top 0.1% talking off
:55:19. > :55:23.from the rest. Shooting off even as we're seeing median wages in --
:55:23. > :55:27.wages stagnate. Economists talk about this, British economists talk
:55:27. > :55:33.about the rise of the lovely and the Laosy jobs. It's this two-speed
:55:33. > :55:36.world. It really is. I think it's very intuitive. On the one hand
:55:36. > :55:41.globalisation. If you're running a business, producing something that
:55:41. > :55:48.is able to really take off, you can sell to the whole world instead of
:55:48. > :55:51.just to your country. We heard Boris Johnson talking about parfum
:55:51. > :55:55.de Bromley. Can you sell into a global market. If you're a winner
:55:55. > :56:00.in a field, that's great. Then the technology revolution, exact lit
:56:00. > :56:04.same thing, that first of all, for superstars like Lady GaGa she can
:56:04. > :56:08.sing to a global audience and not just a local one. If you were
:56:08. > :56:12.running, think about Facebook, one of the huge companies of our time,
:56:13. > :56:15.do you know how many people work there? No. Fewer than 5,000.
:56:15. > :56:19.Because technology has made that happen. It's a technology company
:56:19. > :56:25.and worth billions. You mentioned Lady GaGa and Facebook, Google, who
:56:25. > :56:33.else are we talking about? Who is a Plutocrat? The technology guys,
:56:33. > :56:38.finance, absolutely, and then the emerging markets, ultra-well airs,
:56:38. > :56:41.the -- Ultra-billionaires. He would say come on in. Is it the case that
:56:41. > :56:44.these Plutocrats pay lower tax than their cleaners. That was the
:56:44. > :56:51.rhetoric used by British politicians. It's a bit of rhetoric
:56:51. > :56:57.that you are hearing around the world. Wairn Buffet has been
:56:57. > :57:02.talking about his secretary pays taxes at a higher rate than he does
:57:03. > :57:06.and Mitt Romney had to disclose his tax returns, 14% effective tax rate.
:57:06. > :57:09.That's remarkable. In your view of the world and all the Plutocrats
:57:09. > :57:14.you know, do you think it's true this argument that money trickles
:57:14. > :57:19.down from the top that the reason we must welcome the uberrich is
:57:20. > :57:25.that they'll spend money and we'll benefit? Is that true? I think we
:57:25. > :57:28.will benefit but it's causing social afrpbgs at the same time. I
:57:28. > :57:33.wrote a book called the Edwardian country house. That's when the idea
:57:33. > :57:36.of the Plutocrat really first arose. I'm amazed that the world is
:57:36. > :57:42.reverting to what it was at the beginning of the Twentieth Century.
:57:42. > :57:46.Do you welcome it? No, I think these extremes of wealth are very
:57:46. > :57:49.disconcerting and it's not the British way. When I left university
:57:49. > :57:53.people had a spectrum of jobs they might choose and everybody would
:57:53. > :57:56.roughly live the same sort of life. That's no longer the case. It
:57:56. > :58:01.affects the choice my children make, for example. There are jobs up
:58:01. > :58:05.there and others down there. Can I jump in? Of course. The Edwardian
:58:05. > :58:10.comparison is fascinating and right on. What's so interesting is this
:58:10. > :58:14.has happened to us before. It happened in the 19th century when
:58:15. > :58:18.you had the Industrial Revolution, very similar actually, you know,
:58:18. > :58:23.huge turbulent economic change, some people doing extremely well.
:58:23. > :58:28.Some people did really badly. Whu think about it, it required this
:58:28. > :58:30.tremendous social and political accommodation. Two world wars, a
:58:30. > :58:34.Great Depression, Communist Revolutions in Russia and in China.
:58:34. > :58:38.It's a very big thing. And in response, we invented what is
:58:38. > :58:42.effectively modern society, right, the Wem fair state didn't exist
:58:42. > :58:46.before that. -- welfare. The conclusion of my book is really to
:58:46. > :58:51.point out to all of us, we are living in a similarly turbulent