:00:44. > :00:49.Good afternoon and welcome to the Daily Politics. The European Court
:00:49. > :00:53.of Human Rights has ruled that British Airways was wrong to ban a
:00:53. > :00:59.worker wanted to wear a cross. Are the rights of Christians at work
:00:59. > :01:02.being respected? Sorry I am late, it has been a terrible day!
:01:02. > :01:06.Prime Minister is back on our television scenes, and so is the
:01:06. > :01:10.old complaint, that it is the mandarins who run Whitehall. We
:01:10. > :01:13.will ask a former minister if it is true. We were once one of the
:01:13. > :01:18.world's great exporting nations, but do we make anything, and does
:01:18. > :01:21.it matter? And we are expecting a rare sighting of the lesser spotted
:01:21. > :01:27.Gordon Brown bird in Westminster this afternoon, keep your eyes
:01:27. > :01:31.peeled, what should former prime ministers do?
:01:31. > :01:34.All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole programme today is
:01:34. > :01:40.broadcaster and Labour peer Joan Bakewell. Welcome to the programme.
:01:40. > :01:44.Thank you. Let's start with the ruling by the ECHR about the right
:01:44. > :01:49.of workers to express religious beliefs at work. Four people
:01:49. > :01:53.claimed they had been discriminated against, only one has won, Nadia
:01:53. > :01:58.Eweida, the BA employees sent home for wearing a cross. The other
:01:58. > :02:01.three lost their cases, including the nurse who wore a cross outside
:02:01. > :02:06.a uniform. The court ruled that there were legitimate health and
:02:06. > :02:09.safety reasons in her case. The other two cases involved people who
:02:09. > :02:14.refused to perform some of their duties because they said they were
:02:14. > :02:17.not compatible with their religious beliefs. Gary McFarlane was a
:02:17. > :02:21.councillor with Relate, who refused to offer sex therapy to same-sex
:02:21. > :02:27.couples. He explained why he felt it was the right thing to do.
:02:27. > :02:32.sex therapy, you are required to diagnose people's sexual problems
:02:32. > :02:36.and write a treatment plan and work with them for six months to a year,
:02:36. > :02:42.helping them to actually improve their sex life, improve the way
:02:42. > :02:47.they do their sexual activity. For me to do that in a same-sex
:02:47. > :02:52.relationship creates a conflict with what I understand my Christian
:02:52. > :02:56.faith and the Bible has to say. Gary McFarlane there. He lost his
:02:56. > :03:00.case, but do you think his religious rights were infringed?
:03:00. > :03:06.All these cases are very separate and very interesting. I feel that
:03:06. > :03:10.he had taken employment in a job and are taking certain obligations
:03:10. > :03:15.that are laid down by law, that you must treat all people equally. When
:03:15. > :03:19.he found that he could not do that, then his position as a Christian
:03:19. > :03:22.was threatened and he was in the wrong job. You think they can ever
:03:22. > :03:26.be an exception in those cases where people say, because he went
:03:26. > :03:30.on to explain, I do not think I could have given the right advice,
:03:30. > :03:34.but I would have referred them to a colleague? If you have a job in
:03:34. > :03:38.which all people are meant to be treated equally, and it states that
:03:38. > :03:42.both in law and the employers setting out of the job, you have to
:03:42. > :03:46.comply with that. Isn't that obvious? I think that applies to
:03:46. > :03:51.all sorts of jobs in which you undertake to carry out obligations
:03:51. > :03:55.that are put upon you by the state. So I think the two lost the
:03:55. > :03:59.Employment Appeals are quite right. I am delighted that Nadia Eweida is
:03:59. > :04:04.allowed to wear a crucifix. How stupid were British Airways to say
:04:04. > :04:07.she should not! She had been wearing on under their clothes, but
:04:07. > :04:13.this was bought of their corporate image, they wanted to standardise,
:04:13. > :04:18.but the court found against British Airways' claim in this case. You
:04:18. > :04:22.see that as a victory? Yes, a victory for common sense. Are they
:04:22. > :04:26.go into stop Sikhs wearing turbans? I don't think we want to do that in
:04:26. > :04:30.this country, we believe in religious tolerance, and it is
:04:30. > :04:34.perfectly right that should be allowed to wear it. The nurse, why
:04:34. > :04:39.couldn't she not wear her cross underneath a uniform in the same
:04:39. > :04:45.way? They cited health and safety. It might be held and safety go in
:04:45. > :04:49.party, I do not understand the risk of the issue, but she had been
:04:49. > :04:54.offered the chance to wear a cross on her lapel, and she turned that
:04:54. > :04:58.down. Clearly a negotiation had not resolved the situation, which it
:04:58. > :05:03.should have done. Do you think employers have too much discretion
:05:03. > :05:05.to set parameters as to what people have a right to do in terms of
:05:05. > :05:10.expressing their religious beliefs? Apparently those parameters are
:05:10. > :05:13.quite wide. I do not have enough experience about how people run
:05:13. > :05:18.into religious problems. I would have thought employers are more
:05:18. > :05:21.tolerant generally, certainly in terms of uniform, and when I was
:05:21. > :05:25.younger, that was an absolute thing, you wore the uniform or you were
:05:25. > :05:33.out. I think people are probably more tolerant now, and I think most
:05:33. > :05:37.employers want to be good employers, that is a target for them. It is
:05:37. > :05:41.what they are told to do, be good employers, and that means meeting
:05:41. > :05:45.the request of our employees as much as we can. These cases were
:05:45. > :05:50.taken to the European Court. Does the law needs to change gear, or
:05:50. > :05:54.was it, in most of those cases, a vote for common sense? People just
:05:54. > :05:58.need to be sensible, don't they? It is not worth going to court over
:05:58. > :06:02.somebody wearing a crucifix. If they really believe that wearing a
:06:02. > :06:06.crucifix, and I am told it is not necessarily the expression of their
:06:06. > :06:10.religion, they are not required by the religion to wear a crucifix,
:06:10. > :06:14.their beliefs are very important to them, and if you're believes are
:06:14. > :06:21.very important and devout, then you should not be taking on a job that
:06:21. > :06:27.compromises them. That is what fate Something a little different, does
:06:27. > :06:30.is bring back memories? Sorry I am late! It has been a terrible day.
:06:31. > :06:37.Any particular reason? You have read about the Cabinet split and
:06:37. > :06:40.see what happened to the FTSE and the pound and the inflation
:06:40. > :06:45.forecasts and the rising unemployment figures? How many
:06:45. > :06:50.particular reasons do you want?! This Lancaster House conference is
:06:50. > :06:55.turning into a catastrophe. It was your idea. If you become President
:06:55. > :07:02.of Europe in the biggest financial crisis for 80 years... With respect,
:07:02. > :07:06.there is no such title as President of Europe. You are so pedantic!
:07:06. > :07:11.Don't you just love it? Yes Prime Minister is back on our TV screens.
:07:11. > :07:16.The new series starts at 9pm on UKTV gold. Set your buttons on the
:07:17. > :07:20.TV. But is the Yes Minister culture back in Whitehall, too? Steve
:07:20. > :07:23.Hilton has been telling students in his new job in California that the
:07:23. > :07:29.Government is run by paper shuffling mandarins, rather than
:07:29. > :07:33.ministers. Yesterday Gus O'Donnell, who retired as head of the Civil
:07:33. > :07:37.Service in 2011, accused ministers of attacking the civil service to
:07:37. > :07:41.deflect attention from their own failings. Nick Herbert was, until
:07:41. > :07:47.September last year, a Home Office minister. His Yes Prime Minister,
:07:47. > :07:52.laughing away as you were, is it comedy wall documentary? As far as
:07:52. > :07:56.any minister is concerned, it is an essential training manual. Like all
:07:56. > :08:00.the best parodies, it is rooted in a real truth, which is that the
:08:00. > :08:04.system can be very resistant to change. I do not think it is any
:08:04. > :08:08.longer fit for purpose. I think it is quite wrong for Gus O'Donnell to
:08:08. > :08:14.say this is just the current government halfway through its term,
:08:14. > :08:18.saying this. Actually, yesterday Tony Blair, who after all has been
:08:18. > :08:25.out of office for some time, said that the Civil Service was
:08:25. > :08:29.hopelessly bureaucratic and no longer fit for purpose. There are a
:08:29. > :08:35.range of voices on all sides of politics was saying that times have
:08:35. > :08:39.changed and we need a system, which is the case that I make, the
:08:39. > :08:44.ability to bring people in, good people. There is a ring of steel
:08:44. > :08:47.around the Civil Service. It is a monopoly. You are not allowed to
:08:47. > :08:53.get external policy advice, you're not allowed external advisers, and
:08:53. > :08:56.it would be much healthier, as in other public services, healthcare,
:08:56. > :09:01.schools and everything else, you open up services and make them
:09:01. > :09:05.stronger. So you are proposing the end of the Victorian principles of
:09:05. > :09:09.a civil service. You do not want to have that neutrality in the way
:09:09. > :09:13.that we have had for generations, that separation between the
:09:13. > :09:19.political and the Civil Service. You are right that that model is
:09:19. > :09:22.well over 150 years old. Should it end? In its current form. I am not
:09:22. > :09:27.suggesting that we jump straight to the US model of administration
:09:27. > :09:30.changes with every president, because we have, unlike the US, a
:09:30. > :09:34.different system. They have separation of powers. But I think
:09:34. > :09:38.we could do more to bring good people in, and there are other
:09:38. > :09:41.systems with parliamentary documentaries like ours, Australia,
:09:41. > :09:45.Canada, where ministers have more advisers and are able to draw on
:09:45. > :09:50.people with expertise and from within the Civil Service who work
:09:50. > :09:54.more directly for ministers to get things done. I'm going to bring
:09:54. > :09:57.Joan Bakewell in in just a minute, but you are saying you want to be
:09:57. > :10:02.able to bring more advisers, the whole point of your party's pledge
:10:02. > :10:07.was to end the culture of sofa government where unaccountable spin
:10:07. > :10:12.doctors, whether Alastair Campbell Damian McBride, make-up policies,
:10:12. > :10:17.not to meet the National Industry - - national interest but for party
:10:17. > :10:22.political reasons. I have no time for that kind of spin doctor, I
:10:22. > :10:27.never wanted one myself. Policy advisers, people of expertise. I
:10:27. > :10:30.would not want to see more spin doctors. I think there is a need to
:10:30. > :10:34.have some communications in modern government, but what this is about
:10:34. > :10:38.is can we bring in the brightest and the best? Look at the West
:10:38. > :10:43.Coast mainline debacle, it cost tens of millions of pounds because
:10:43. > :10:49.of a failure... You could say it was as a result of cuts to the
:10:49. > :10:53.Civil Service. That is not what the internal report said. What do you
:10:53. > :10:58.say, first of all, to the end of the way we run government? I think
:10:58. > :11:01.Mandarin is a good word. We want wise people who are being in a
:11:01. > :11:05.position for a long time to know a great deal. There may be
:11:05. > :11:09.shortcomings, I can see that maybe so, the thing being stuck up with
:11:09. > :11:12.bureaucracy, but bringing in outside experts means bringing in
:11:12. > :11:17.your people, people who are going to be at your beck and call,
:11:17. > :11:20.telling you what you want to know. I think that the neutrality of the
:11:20. > :11:27.civil service has to be defended at all costs. It is a gold-plated
:11:27. > :11:32.ideal that must not be sacrificed for party political interest. Look
:11:32. > :11:36.at the mess in America! One government goes out, they bring in
:11:36. > :11:40.a whole new set of people who do not know their way around. The
:11:40. > :11:45.Civil Service, as Yes Minister shows, civil servants know their
:11:45. > :11:50.way around. They know how the system runs, and very often young
:11:50. > :11:54.ministers do need guidance. Well, actually, the US system does not
:11:54. > :12:00.all change, the key positions do. I'm not arguing for that model, but
:12:01. > :12:05.greater ability to bring people in. What about politicising that? He
:12:05. > :12:08.would just bring your own people in. You think the public mind about the
:12:08. > :12:11.fact that ministers might are people working for them to share
:12:11. > :12:16.their views? You think they might mind about the effective
:12:16. > :12:20.government? If you make pledges and say you will reform health, schools,
:12:20. > :12:25.the police or whatever you promised, what the public want is for you to
:12:25. > :12:29.be able to deliver that. Today... Michael Gove and Iain Duncan Smith
:12:29. > :12:34.say they are doing well with their reforms in the current system, and
:12:34. > :12:38.all that you are doing, to answer the accusation of Gus O'Donnell, is
:12:38. > :12:42.to say that a workman blames his tools and the ministers are not of
:12:42. > :12:45.a high enough quality to use the guidance of the Civil Service and
:12:45. > :12:48.pushed through their reforms. is a problem with our political
:12:48. > :12:53.system which includes the problem of professionalisation of politics,
:12:53. > :12:57.too. I do not think this is just a problem of the civil service, but
:12:57. > :13:00.this morning on the programme I made for the Today programme, Lord
:13:00. > :13:04.O'Donnell, the former Cabinet Secretary, made what I thought was
:13:04. > :13:07.an astonishing claim when he said that the first job of the Civil
:13:07. > :13:11.Service was to challenge ministers. There is a role to challenge,
:13:11. > :13:15.because that is healthy, but surely the first job is to help the
:13:15. > :13:21.government get its policies through. Which policies have been blocked,
:13:21. > :13:25.do you think? I'm not sure it is a question of blockage. They can be
:13:25. > :13:27.resistance, and I encountered some of that when I was at the Home
:13:27. > :13:31.Office and the Ministry of Justice. Other teams were good, but the
:13:31. > :13:35.random nature of it was frustrating. As a minister, you're accountable
:13:35. > :13:40.for everything, but you do not control any of the people who work
:13:40. > :13:43.for you. They work for the -- they work for the permanent secretary.
:13:43. > :13:48.What other work of life would you accept accountability for people
:13:48. > :13:52.who do not work for you? You are elected by the people to be the
:13:52. > :13:56.government of the day, but the civil servants are the servants of
:13:56. > :14:00.the public, throughout their career, and that is what they have
:14:00. > :14:04.dedicated their lives do. They build up expertise, they know their
:14:04. > :14:08.way around, and young ministers come in eager for change, and
:14:08. > :14:11.perhaps rather clumsy as they begin to know the job, a good and wise
:14:11. > :14:15.civil servant will show them the way round so that they understand
:14:15. > :14:20.how to implement their policy. Should they be allowed to frustrate
:14:20. > :14:23.the agenda? It is a trade-off, isn't it? That is why it is so
:14:23. > :14:27.humorous when we see it, but there's nothing to stop them
:14:27. > :14:34.bringing in other people to advise, the place is full of political
:14:34. > :14:38.advisers... It absolutely is, there are limits, they are not allowed to
:14:38. > :14:42.go for outside advice. People outside may not see papers, that is
:14:42. > :14:46.the whole point, it is a monopoly. It is not just about blocking
:14:46. > :14:50.policy, it is about the capability of the Civil Service. This morning,
:14:50. > :14:53.a very eminent former Permanent Secretary said that he did not
:14:53. > :14:56.think that the Civil Service was fully fit for purpose because it
:14:56. > :15:00.does not have the skills which today's commissioning civil
:15:00. > :15:04.service... I think that is a problem, and that is why we have
:15:04. > :15:08.got to have a more fluid system where good people can go in and out
:15:08. > :15:11.of an administration, and we do not have that at the moment. There are
:15:11. > :15:16.really good people in Whitehall, and I make no personal criticism. I
:15:16. > :15:20.get on very well with the ones I worked with, many were of a high
:15:20. > :15:25.calibre, but when you encounter a team which is not right, which does
:15:25. > :15:29.not have the capability... would not throw out the good.
:15:29. > :15:33.can we bring in the brightest and best? Unless you have made your
:15:33. > :15:43.career in the civil service or are willing to be employed full-time,
:15:43. > :15:48.
:15:48. > :15:53.Very briefly, the Home Secretary has announced the starting salary
:15:53. > :16:01.for police constables will be capped to �19,000. Are they are
:16:01. > :16:06.overpaid? Those already in roles will not be affected. It was
:16:06. > :16:11.recommended by an independent review. It said, in order for
:16:11. > :16:18.police officers to move faster up the pay scale, there should be a
:16:18. > :16:27.lower starting point. Overall, you do not lose as a police officer
:16:27. > :16:35.match OBR for Korea. It is part of the reform of pay and conditions to
:16:35. > :16:39.make Remuneration better. -- match over your career. Old friends, sat
:16:39. > :16:42.on their park bench like bookends. So sang Simon & Garfunkel. But much
:16:42. > :16:44.about old age has changed since they penned that song for their
:16:44. > :16:46.1968 album, Bookends. Life expectancy has risen dramatically
:16:46. > :16:56.and today's pensioners can expect to enjoy a long retirement in
:16:56. > :17:01.
:17:01. > :17:05.From reporter to plain old porter. I have come to the airport to meet
:17:05. > :17:09.these people for Nottinghamshire. Though a lifelong friends and
:17:09. > :17:15.living off generous occupational pensions. They are heading off for
:17:15. > :17:19.two weeks to South Africa. What better way to get into a holiday
:17:20. > :17:25.mood and talking about the politics of pensioners? David Willetts says
:17:25. > :17:32.the amount of wealth in the UK in the form of housing is 2.1 trillion
:17:32. > :17:39.pounds. Those over 65 own 800 billion - more than a third. We are
:17:39. > :17:46.comfortably off. That is because we have saved for our retirement. I
:17:46. > :17:52.think, as our age group, we are fortunate we were born at the right
:17:52. > :17:56.time. Gerald and Jim do not feel loaded. But we have taken a pay cut
:17:56. > :18:00.because our investments - our savings - have gone down. You
:18:00. > :18:04.cannot find anywhere to put your money because you don't get
:18:04. > :18:10.interest of your savings. What about the top-up benefits that go
:18:10. > :18:20.to pensioners regardless of income? Winter Fuel Allowance, TV licences
:18:20. > :18:20.
:18:20. > :18:26.and the bus pass. About �130 a month for electricity and oil. �200
:18:26. > :18:31.does help, definitely. What if someone said, did you spend your
:18:31. > :18:38.Winter Fuel Allowance going to South Africa? Definitely not.
:18:38. > :18:43.it went on the bills. We have saved for a holiday separately to the
:18:43. > :18:49.Winter Fuel Allowance. However, not all pensioners us jetting off to
:18:49. > :18:55.Johannesburg. Officials -- official figures showed those over 65 he did
:18:55. > :19:02.not go on holiday Atul was 41%. Many said it was because they were
:19:02. > :19:07.not well enough. Does that surprise you? It does. That is a shame. We
:19:07. > :19:13.think of ourselves as an average pensioner. We are fortunate to be
:19:13. > :19:19.able to go for one decent holiday. We also have a few weekends away.
:19:19. > :19:25.As a child, have we did not have holidays. They could not afford it.
:19:25. > :19:32.We were born at the right time. We have put away and it has paid off
:19:32. > :19:37.for us. It is time to wave them off. I forgot to ask them about adult
:19:37. > :19:45.social care and the fact I will not retire as early as they did and
:19:45. > :19:48.loads of other things. Maybe I will save that for when they get back.
:19:48. > :19:51.Our guest of the day, Joan Bakewell, acted as a Voice of Older people
:19:51. > :19:54.under the last Government. We're also joined by David Willetts, who
:19:54. > :19:57.is the Universities Minister, but is also the author of The Pinch, a
:19:57. > :20:02.book about how the baby boomer generation have ended up with more
:20:02. > :20:07.than their fair share. They have ended up with it surely by lack -
:20:07. > :20:12.timing. As the lady in the film said, just an accident of birth.
:20:12. > :20:16.People were buying houses when prices were low. Then house prices
:20:16. > :20:22.shot up. Then there was high inflation which eroded the burden
:20:22. > :20:29.of their mortgage. The group by particularly focus on in my book,
:20:30. > :20:36.who have done particularly well, are the 45 to 65 age group. There
:20:36. > :20:40.are those over 65 who are enjoying final-salary pension schemes.
:20:40. > :20:45.feel they should be allowed to do that and enjoy their retirement?
:20:46. > :20:50.They have saved. They have built up a final salary pension scheme. One
:20:50. > :20:54.disaster in the last 20 years has been the collapse of pensions. This
:20:54. > :21:01.very week, the coalition has brought forward some big reforms
:21:01. > :21:07.which will encourage people to save. What is your problem with the 45 to
:21:07. > :21:11.65 group? What should be done to redress the balance? We need to
:21:11. > :21:15.insure you for a fair deal to the a regeneration. My worry is that
:21:15. > :21:21.we're not doing enough to support the younger generation. I think a
:21:21. > :21:26.lot of parents and grandparents do want to help their kids and grand
:21:26. > :21:29.kids. I want to have a contact between the generations. And
:21:29. > :21:35.interesting question to ask those people going off on holiday would
:21:35. > :21:38.be, by helping children with the cost of their first house? Are you
:21:38. > :21:48.providing childcare to grunge kid so your son or daughter kangaroo up
:21:48. > :21:57.to work? -- your grand kids, so your son or daughter can go out to
:21:57. > :22:02.work? Benefits are being capped or cut and there are very generous
:22:03. > :22:08.pension allowances. We have kept to our pledge. Is it the right thing
:22:08. > :22:14.to do? It is. When you have made a specific pledge in an election, you
:22:14. > :22:20.must stick to it. I would add a further point. Interest rates are
:22:20. > :22:23.very low at the moment. One of the results of this is there are many
:22:23. > :22:30.pensioners with modest savings who are finding they are getting very
:22:30. > :22:36.little income from personal savings. Are you concerned about the future
:22:36. > :22:39.for the younger generation? I am. I have grandchildren who are victims
:22:40. > :22:45.to all the things that have been mentioned. My generation is helping
:22:45. > :22:48.them out in as far as they're able. We are about for the next 10 years
:22:48. > :22:53.to engage in a hole reassessment of how we deal with an ageing
:22:53. > :22:58.population because everyone is going to be ageing. We need to know
:22:58. > :23:03.how they will be able to live a decent retirement. Some of us have
:23:03. > :23:11.been enormously fortunate, I am one of them, in having property that
:23:11. > :23:20.was cheaper and aborted and is now fallible. Those of us who have so -
:23:20. > :23:27.- and brought it and is now valuable. I should say that old
:23:27. > :23:34.people are not a uniform type of person. They do billions of pounds
:23:34. > :23:40.of caring. They do the caring for their grandchildren. That allows
:23:40. > :23:46.their children to go out to work. They care for each other which
:23:46. > :23:51.saves on the carers budget and they share -- care in the community.
:23:51. > :23:55.lot of that is an costive. If you look at the figures in the final
:23:55. > :24:01.salary pension schemes, they retired earlier than younger
:24:01. > :24:05.generations will be able. They will have to pay in more, work longer
:24:05. > :24:12.and get out less. There are retired people with a huge amount of
:24:12. > :24:18.political clout who have none means tested benefits. In terms of social
:24:18. > :24:22.mobility, there is very little to help young people improve their
:24:23. > :24:27.situation, buy a house, unless parents help them. I am someone who
:24:27. > :24:31.does believe that the fuel allowance should be means tested.
:24:31. > :24:35.No question that he should be added to income and taxed. And means
:24:35. > :24:40.tested in that way. What can the Government do to help social
:24:40. > :24:45.mobility? Colleagues of mine say they were never be able to get onto
:24:45. > :24:51.the housing ladder in the way that some of my other colleagues can.
:24:51. > :24:56.That is one of the big changes. For the Government, it is a matter of
:24:56. > :25:00.making it easier for people to get started with their mortgage. Our
:25:00. > :25:05.funding for lending scheme may at last be beginning to open up the
:25:05. > :25:09.mortgage market which collapsed in the financial crisis. Something
:25:09. > :25:16.which older generations can do, when there is a proposal for
:25:16. > :25:23.housing in our area, when you see people in any housing development
:25:23. > :25:30.that will turn up and protest. It is a delicate issue. If you turn up
:25:30. > :25:36.and protest every time they raise a proposal, that makes it much
:25:36. > :25:39.tougher for the younger generation. Our attitudes need to change.
:25:39. > :25:48.think that new housing which preaches green belt rules should
:25:48. > :25:52.not be embarked upon until all the Brown housing available has been
:25:52. > :25:56.exploited. That will not damage the countryside. This is where we need
:25:56. > :26:02.reforms. Sometimes, the brownfield sites in cities are where kids kick
:26:02. > :26:05.around a football. We have to get the balance right. One of the
:26:05. > :26:12.priorities is to get more housebuilding. That is one of the
:26:12. > :26:16.best single things we can do. is a powerful, political group.
:26:16. > :26:22.They use that boys because they have the time to do so and use it
:26:22. > :26:29.very effectively. People who live in the country can afford it. They
:26:29. > :26:34.are not necessary old age pensioners. They mean -- may be
:26:34. > :26:37.thrusting and dynamic executives. The reason the Tories make this
:26:37. > :26:42.pledged to not change universal benefits is because they know very
:26:42. > :26:47.well that old people vote. For some reason, a higher proportion of old
:26:47. > :26:53.people vote and they will be punished. Particularly the bus pass,
:26:53. > :26:59.which is cherished by old people. That is the truce. They are a
:26:59. > :27:04.powerful, political voice. -- the truth. Of course, everybody. You
:27:04. > :27:10.need to take account of the views of everyone. Are you giving too
:27:10. > :27:19.much to the voice of the older generation? We are increasing their
:27:19. > :27:25.pension age. It will not affect me! It is happening as we speak. The
:27:25. > :27:30.pension age is already rising for women. We are finally, after years
:27:30. > :27:34.of frustration, tackling the problem of long-term care and the
:27:34. > :27:40.costs involved. It is signalling that people will have to make a
:27:40. > :27:47.contribution from their own savings to long-term care. We will wait for
:27:47. > :27:51.you to implement till marked. was in the coalition's mid-term
:27:51. > :27:55.report. Sorting out the financing of long-term care and the issue
:27:56. > :28:01.that the pension age was too low, given we enjoyed extra years of
:28:01. > :28:07.life expectancy. It will be harder and more expensive. People are
:28:07. > :28:13.going to have to work harder and longer. That is good news because
:28:13. > :28:21.we are living longer. The period of retirement will be as long as ever.
:28:21. > :28:27.You cannot have the extra years receiving a pension. It is a major
:28:27. > :28:30.social change. The scale of it, no one has really begun to appreciate.
:28:30. > :28:33.His Master's Voice has been a fixture on the British High Street
:28:33. > :28:36.for over 90 years. Last night, the firm went into administration. It
:28:36. > :28:39.follows the collapse of the photography firm Jessop and it is
:28:39. > :28:42.the most recent of a long line of retailers that have fallen victim
:28:42. > :28:50.to the economic downturn. Let's have a reminder of HMV's
:28:50. > :29:00.illustrious history. This record was made in 1905. I'm going to play
:29:00. > :29:23.
:29:23. > :29:29.to you a few bars on an instrument Shadow Business Secretary Chuka
:29:29. > :29:36.Umunna is here with us now, reminiscing about HMV, did you go?
:29:36. > :29:42.I use Dubai vinyl at HMV, yes, one of the places I used to shock --
:29:42. > :29:46.shop. It is a sad day. It is one of those issues that has cut through
:29:46. > :29:49.with everybody, because everybody remembers going to HMB,
:29:49. > :29:52.particularly at Christmas. It is one in a long list of major
:29:52. > :29:57.retailers who have gone into administration over the last 12
:29:57. > :30:03.months. But isn't it a sign of the times that the business itself was
:30:03. > :30:06.outmoded, that it is not the way we shop? I also used to go to a HMB,
:30:07. > :30:13.but I have not done recently, and that is what is happening to
:30:13. > :30:15.businesses will not be able to keep up. -- HMV. No doubt the economic
:30:15. > :30:21.downturn, and I would argue that the government has precipitated
:30:21. > :30:25.some of these things happening, but undoubtedly the changing shape of
:30:25. > :30:30.the market place has had an effect, too. In some senses, we are victims
:30:30. > :30:33.of our own success, because we have one of the most innovative retail
:30:33. > :30:36.sectors in the world, the third largest internet market in the
:30:36. > :30:42.world, and if you are not in the vanguard of these new ways of
:30:42. > :30:46.selling products, integrating... Are lot of the talk is about multi-
:30:46. > :30:50.channel ways of operating in retail, integrating what you sell online
:30:50. > :30:56.with the shop front, and if you are not doing that, you will run into
:30:56. > :31:00.difficulties. The challenge for us now is to make sure that we have a
:31:00. > :31:04.sector specific industrial strategy for the retail sector... To save
:31:04. > :31:08.companies like HMV, when you have just outlined that people are
:31:08. > :31:13.downloading music, aren't they? When was the last time you went
:31:13. > :31:18.into HMV? I did actually go into the one on archer Street during the
:31:18. > :31:23.Christmas period, but I had not been very often. -- Oxford Street.
:31:23. > :31:27.I did not buy anything, actually. You are right, I am not suggesting
:31:27. > :31:32.that we would prop up industries which are sticking to old ways of
:31:32. > :31:36.working, and I do not think retail is, but we have got to look at how
:31:36. > :31:40.we can help them succeed. For example, we have to make sure that
:31:40. > :31:44.we quickly speed up the complete transformation of our digital
:31:44. > :31:48.infrastructure so that we have got high-speed broadband, because
:31:48. > :31:51.smaller businesses he was seeking to break into new markets, if they
:31:51. > :31:58.cannot use the technology to do that, we are on to a hiding to
:31:58. > :32:02.nothing. Secondly, we have got to ensure we have got the skills for
:32:02. > :32:05.people to develop. That is in addition to ensuring we have a
:32:05. > :32:09.level playing field in terms of tax. I was going to ask you about that,
:32:09. > :32:13.the issue of tax has caught the politicians alike, that some big
:32:13. > :32:18.companies are not paying corporation tax. Has that had
:32:18. > :32:23.anything to do with the demise of HMV? No. In this particular
:32:23. > :32:27.instance, HMV not keeping pace with the Times, and by the way we are
:32:27. > :32:32.talking as if it is dead... Absolutely, they are trying to find
:32:32. > :32:35.a buyer. We would hope to see as many of the stores bought up as
:32:35. > :32:41.possible, but I think what it does is it affects the playing field,
:32:41. > :32:43.doesn't it? For online retailers to pay their fair share, it is
:32:43. > :32:49.impossible to compete on a level playing field, we know we are
:32:49. > :32:53.talking about multinational retailers, Amazon, who many people
:32:53. > :33:00.say are not paying their fair share of tax. Are you sad? I have still
:33:00. > :33:05.got a few HMV discs, a little wind- up gramophone, I play sentimental
:33:05. > :33:11.records. Third a down the food chain is the high street. HMV
:33:11. > :33:16.itself was aged chain, so it was quite an important change in a town.
:33:16. > :33:20.What matters is the local high street of independent shops, and
:33:20. > :33:24.the government appointed Mary Portas, and she brought out a
:33:24. > :33:29.report... They gave out some small amounts of money, she isolated 10
:33:29. > :33:32.towns that deserved help, including Stockport, my home town. It was a
:33:32. > :33:38.gesture towards trying to save the high street, which needs more
:33:38. > :33:42.attention. Two really important things. Retail is our biggest
:33:42. > :33:47.private-sector employer. It gives a lot of young people their first job,
:33:47. > :33:52.employing 40% of our working teenagers. You are going to cut the
:33:52. > :33:59.off, I can talk very long! You have made a good case, thank you.
:33:59. > :34:05.Yesterday saw a coalition exposed on the floor of the house. The
:34:05. > :34:09.Lords were debating an amendment which would delay the change in the
:34:09. > :34:12.number of MPs until after the next election. When the change was
:34:12. > :34:16.included in the coalition agreement, it is key to the Conservatives'
:34:16. > :34:20.hopes of winning an overall majority, but after Lords reform
:34:20. > :34:24.was dropped because of a Tory position, Nick Clegg withdrew his
:34:24. > :34:28.party's support for the changes. Yesterday Lib Dem peers voted with
:34:28. > :34:32.Labour to delay implementation of the boundary changes and scupper
:34:33. > :34:40.David Cameron's plans. Here is a flavour of the debate, with Lord
:34:40. > :34:44.Hart explaining his reasons for The continuing uncertainty about
:34:44. > :34:49.boundaries is having a chilling effect on selections, planning and
:34:49. > :34:52.the distribution of resources. He is also inevitably going to be a
:34:52. > :34:56.source of concern and distraction for sitting MPs who should
:34:56. > :35:00.otherwise be focusing on their central role of representing the
:35:00. > :35:05.people who elect them. Achieving a conclusion and stopping the
:35:05. > :35:09.boundary review process will also save significant amounts of public
:35:09. > :35:15.money being wasted on the process which appears to be doomed.
:35:15. > :35:19.have we got into this mess? Why are we faced with this problem? The
:35:19. > :35:22.answer is because the Deputy Prime Minister is cross. He is cross that
:35:22. > :35:28.his Bill, which was not properly thought through, and despite
:35:28. > :35:34.repeated warnings, it crashed on landing in the other place.
:35:34. > :35:38.truth is that this is solely because the Deputy Prime Minister
:35:38. > :35:45.did not get his way on Lords reform. And now he wants to exact a little
:35:45. > :35:49.retribution. It is nothing less than a great political sulk. My
:35:49. > :35:54.party has always considered the need to reduce the number of MPs
:35:54. > :35:58.and the complex issues such as greater devolution and
:35:58. > :36:03.decentralisation. And the reform of your Lordships House. My Lords, not
:36:03. > :36:09.all my noble friends behind me will agree on some key aspects of Lords
:36:09. > :36:13.reform, but we all want to see an effective second chamber, able to
:36:14. > :36:19.hold the government of any party to account. Everybody who votes for
:36:19. > :36:23.this amendment is determining that the unfairness that is recognised
:36:23. > :36:27.and published and generally accepted, that that unfairness will
:36:27. > :36:32.be maintained, and not wholly maintained, by the way, but is an
:36:32. > :36:36.elected House will then determine that the voters in those
:36:36. > :36:40.constituencies that some votes will would be worth more than others,
:36:40. > :36:44.and the unfairness that existed in the 2010 election, actually, this
:36:44. > :36:49.House will ensure by voting for this amendment that it is actually
:36:49. > :36:57.even worse next time. What we are doing if we pass his bill into law
:36:57. > :37:01.is to set fire to the electoral map of Great Britain, to all the
:37:01. > :37:04.constituency loyalties and personal loyalties that have been
:37:04. > :37:08.incorporated within it, and to pledge ourselves to do the same
:37:09. > :37:17.thing again at every single election for all eternity, and that
:37:17. > :37:21.is why I hope the amendment will be Miraculously, the Conservative peer
:37:21. > :37:26.and former cabinet minister Michael Forsyth this year, as is Chris red
:37:26. > :37:30.knot of the Liberal Democrats. -- is here. After yesterday, how do
:37:30. > :37:34.you feel about your colleagues in the Lords? Well, not just in the
:37:34. > :37:39.Lords, I feel they cannot be trusted. We made a deal with them,
:37:39. > :37:42.I had to vote for the AV referendum, which I was totally opposed to. The
:37:42. > :37:46.Prime Minister missed the future of the Conservative Party. The deal
:37:46. > :37:49.with the leader of the Liberal Party was that in return they would
:37:49. > :37:54.support the changes so that we have a fair voting system in the
:37:54. > :37:57.constituencies, and now they have grenade done that because the
:37:57. > :38:01.Deputy Prime Minister failed to produce a bill which the House of
:38:01. > :38:06.Commons was even prepared to a latter-day off. Where do you think
:38:06. > :38:10.the coalition stands after this? Well, what does it mean when
:38:10. > :38:13.liberal ministers go through the lobbies and vote against a
:38:13. > :38:17.government of which they are members? I assume that if one of
:38:17. > :38:20.the Liberal ministers had voted to support the government, he would
:38:20. > :38:24.have been sacked by Nick Clegg, which would have been the first
:38:24. > :38:28.time in history that a minister would be sacked for supporting his
:38:28. > :38:32.own government. Is that true? not a fair analogy. No minister
:38:32. > :38:37.would have been sacked for voting with the government? It is not fair
:38:37. > :38:42.to suggest that. The Liberal Democrats make clear that we had a
:38:42. > :38:45.difference on this issue. Coalitions do not end when the two
:38:45. > :38:48.parties who work together on some things, the economic packages we
:38:48. > :38:52.have had to put through, and we have avoided the difficulties of
:38:52. > :38:57.countries like Spain and Greece. We have disagreed on boundaries and
:38:57. > :38:59.Lords reform. We wanted Lords reform, and if we had that, we
:38:59. > :39:05.would have at reform of constituency boundaries. If we
:39:05. > :39:08.could not have one, we will not have the other. But you are not
:39:08. > :39:12.disagreed with the principal, Nick Clegg is in favour of equalising
:39:12. > :39:16.boundaries, so you are taking revenge. We do want to see more
:39:16. > :39:24.equal boundaries, but at the last election it took 33,000 votes to
:39:24. > :39:28.elect a Labour MP, 35,000 to elect a Conservative MP, and 120,000 to
:39:29. > :39:32.elect a Lib Dem MP, so why don't we talk about that? We have had the
:39:32. > :39:38.debate on PR, which you resoundingly lost, and you ended
:39:38. > :39:43.into an agreement with us which you have now ratted on. I know that
:39:43. > :39:47.Nick Clegg is cross, but he is now double cross against the Prime
:39:48. > :39:54.Minister. When a partner cheats on another, that marks the end of the
:39:54. > :39:57.marriage. Oh, no, you can have negotiation. Perhaps the Liberals
:39:57. > :40:01.can think again and be as good as their word when the matter goes to
:40:01. > :40:04.the House of Commons, but it is absolutely unacceptable that we
:40:04. > :40:07.have been asked by the Prime Minister to vote for fixed-term
:40:07. > :40:11.parliaments, the AV referendum, a range of stuff which frankly we do
:40:11. > :40:15.not like, and we have been urged to do this on the basis that it is
:40:15. > :40:19.essential to get fair voting so that the Conservatives have a fair
:40:19. > :40:22.chance at the next election. If I can intervene, you put your finger
:40:22. > :40:26.on it when you said the deal was that they would vote for Lords
:40:26. > :40:31.reform, but the bill for Lords reform was so poor... That was not
:40:31. > :40:34.the deal. The deal was that we would deliver AV and they would
:40:34. > :40:38.vote for their constituencies. then you would bring in Lords
:40:39. > :40:44.reform. It was the failure to do that... Look at the coalition
:40:44. > :40:48.agreement. It says we would bring forward... Proposals. We would set
:40:48. > :40:52.up a committee to bring forward proposals. Nick Clegg was on the
:40:52. > :40:56.Today programme repeating the same line, he said we had a manifesto
:40:56. > :41:00.commitment to launch reform. We did not, the commitment was to seek
:41:00. > :41:05.consensus on Lords reform, which there was not. But it was about a
:41:05. > :41:09.wholly or mainly elected House, you are talking semantics here, haven't
:41:09. > :41:14.the Liberal Democrats got a point when they are talking about trust?
:41:14. > :41:23.On Lords reform, they feel you broker a deal, too. They feel
:41:23. > :41:26.exactly the same way. The speech was very explicit in 2010 after
:41:26. > :41:29.there would be a proposal brought forward for an elected House of
:41:29. > :41:33.Lords using proportional representation, and the reason why
:41:33. > :41:36.David Cameron sack some people when they voted against reform, he knew
:41:36. > :41:40.perfectly well that if the Conservative Party could not
:41:40. > :41:45.deliver Lords reform, the Lib Dems would not deliver boundary reform.
:41:46. > :41:50.There we have it, he is arguing that it was right that Conservative
:41:50. > :41:53.PPSs should have voted against a botched law reform, but it is OK
:41:53. > :41:58.for liberal ministers to vote against the government and still
:41:58. > :42:04.keep their jobs. Should they be sacked? It is not government policy,
:42:04. > :42:09.it was the two parties the green... Of policy is where they both agree.
:42:09. > :42:12.He says that you did have an agreement. We disagreed on
:42:12. > :42:17.boundaries, and with good reason, because we did not think it right
:42:17. > :42:21.to reduce the number of MPs and make government more par-four
:42:21. > :42:25.unless we also reformed the House of Lords and increased the
:42:25. > :42:29.legitimacy of the House of Lords. - - more powerful. Should the Prime
:42:29. > :42:32.Minister the sacking Lib Dem ministers? We have always had the
:42:32. > :42:35.principle of collective responsibility, you stay in
:42:35. > :42:40.government and support the government. If you do not agree
:42:40. > :42:43.with what it has done, you resign or get fired. What are we to make
:42:43. > :42:47.of this? What happened last night in the House of Lords was the sort
:42:47. > :42:52.to amend a bill which had been agreed by the House of Commons,
:42:52. > :42:55.which was an act of parliament, to defer the boundary changes. All the
:42:55. > :42:59.Lib Dems all voted for that legislation, which would have
:42:59. > :43:03.provided for their voting. Last night we had liberal ministers
:43:03. > :43:08.going through the lobbies, voting against the government, that is the
:43:08. > :43:12.end of collective responsibility. await developments. I wait to see
:43:12. > :43:15.which ministers will resign and which will be sacked. He is this
:43:15. > :43:20.why, because of relations in the Lords, while Lord Strathclyde
:43:20. > :43:28.stepped down? He would need to ask him, but it was reported he was fed
:43:28. > :43:31.up... He reported it himself! not blame him. As a Conservative, I
:43:31. > :43:34.am expected to go and vote for things that I do not particularly
:43:34. > :43:38.like because they are part of the coalition agreement. Why does that
:43:38. > :43:43.not apply to the Liberals and the Liberal Front Bench? It is
:43:43. > :43:46.outrageous. What do you say to those accusations? This is very
:43:46. > :43:52.serious from his side, it sounds as if the coalition is pretty well
:43:52. > :43:55.over. My noble friend here, if I may call and that, as we would if
:43:55. > :44:00.we were in the House of Lords, he takes the view that coalition is
:44:00. > :44:04.about doing what the largest party says. It is not simply about doing
:44:04. > :44:08.that, the coalition is about where you agree, and we try to agree a
:44:08. > :44:12.comprehensive package on Lords reform, Commons reform. Of the
:44:12. > :44:17.Conservative members in the Commons could not deliver on Lords reform.
:44:17. > :44:21.We are not talking about Lords reform. Where do we go from here?
:44:21. > :44:25.This is over, as far as the boundary review? The Commons will
:44:25. > :44:31.have to decide. By the way, there is a really important in which has
:44:31. > :44:36.been lost, and that is these matters, these Boundary Commission
:44:36. > :44:43.matters should not be a matter of division between parties and
:44:43. > :44:46.subject to changes in order to gain particular party advantage.
:44:46. > :44:49.this not party politically motivated? Are you denying that
:44:50. > :44:55.that would give an advantage potentially to the Conservatives in
:44:55. > :44:59.the way that you are accusing him? I am not, but when I was Secretary
:44:59. > :45:02.of State for Scotland, a report destroyed my constituency. It never
:45:02. > :45:07.occurred to me for a millisecond not to do it, because the
:45:07. > :45:11.convention is, on boundary matters, he wore his support the Commission.
:45:11. > :45:21.Here, the Liberals, for their own advantage, are undermining our
:45:21. > :45:24.
:45:24. > :45:27.I would like to be a fly on the wall at your next meeting. At the
:45:27. > :45:30.Queen's Coronation 60 years ago, the souvenirs were almost entirely
:45:30. > :45:33.British made. But, while Elizabeth II has been on the throne, British
:45:33. > :45:35.manufacturing has been in decline. Many of the great names of British
:45:35. > :45:38.industry are in foreign hands, or have disappeared altogether. For
:45:38. > :45:41.more than 20 years, journalist Nick Comfort has been covering that
:45:41. > :45:46.decline and the political decisions which he believes failed to stop it.
:45:46. > :45:50.He has written a book on the slow death of British industry. He will
:45:50. > :45:56.join us in the studio in a moment. First, here's his take on that
:45:56. > :46:00.story. Let us visit one of the British Motor Corporation's huge
:46:00. > :46:05.machine shops and see the kind of equipment that is being used for
:46:05. > :46:10.the production of engine parts. Britain share was around a quarter.
:46:10. > :46:18.There was talk of a new Elizabethan age of British economic and
:46:18. > :46:24.technological achievement. Britain was about to launch the first jet
:46:24. > :46:34.airliner. By now open Calder Hall, Britain's first atomic power
:46:34. > :46:37.
:46:37. > :46:42.station. She was on the verge of being first -- the first. Her
:46:42. > :46:49.factories are working flat out producing or materials demanding a
:46:49. > :46:52.society on the verge of prosperity after rationing and the war. One
:46:52. > :46:57.third of the population was employed in manufacturing.
:46:57. > :47:01.Unemployment was negligible. 60 years on, the picture is
:47:01. > :47:05.unrecognisable. Most industries have disappeared. Those of our
:47:05. > :47:10.competitors have flourished. British household names for thrive
:47:10. > :47:16.under foreign ownership. We have lost most of our export markets.
:47:16. > :47:20.Many kids had to be imported. Manufacturing now only accounts for
:47:20. > :47:23.12% of the national income and employs fewer than 3 million
:47:23. > :47:26.workers. Nicholas Comfort is here now. We're also joined by Philip
:47:26. > :47:33.Booth, an economist and former adviser to the Bank of England, who
:47:33. > :47:38.is now at the Institute for Economic Affairs. What happened to
:47:38. > :47:42.British manufacturing? The after the war, you had bad decisions on
:47:43. > :47:48.investment and over-powerful unions. He had strikes which led to
:47:48. > :47:51.headquarters of Ford and Vauxhall living to Germany. You had a
:47:51. > :47:55.situation where investment banks are at encouraging firms to believe
:47:55. > :48:01.all they need to do is be fattened up and sold to foreign companies.
:48:01. > :48:04.Has this been a natural and necessary decline in some parts of
:48:04. > :48:09.manufacturing to make us more competitive or should we try to
:48:09. > :48:13.rebuild it? There has been a natural decline in many respects.
:48:13. > :48:18.The proportion of natural -- national income is not very
:48:18. > :48:25.different from France or the United States. What about during BAT's
:48:25. > :48:33.question marks at the same time, what has happened -- what about
:48:33. > :48:37.during the 1980s? In the 1980s, manufacturing did decline. Now we
:48:37. > :48:43.export about �50 billion worth of financial and legal services. With
:48:43. > :48:49.that we import manufactured goods. That is what trading economies do.
:48:49. > :48:55.They're not all the same. Haven't we just adapted? Does it matter if
:48:55. > :48:59.it is 12% or 10%? A lot of that 12% is owned by foreign companies and a
:48:59. > :49:03.lot of our major plants are just one decision not to invest away
:49:03. > :49:08.from being moved somewhere else. You have a situation where Jaguar
:49:08. > :49:15.landowner is owned by an Indian company. It will start producing in
:49:15. > :49:25.China. How long will it produce in Britain? 70% of the owning --
:49:25. > :49:27.
:49:27. > :49:32.earnings of the FTSE 100 companies, come from abroad. If companies want
:49:32. > :49:38.to accumulate assets, we have a low level of saving. That is a problem
:49:38. > :49:43.but a different problem from that of the decline in manufacturing.
:49:43. > :49:48.You are saying this is the generation in which you grew up.
:49:48. > :49:53.had a great empire and the great industrial base. After the war, a
:49:53. > :49:58.lot of that was destroyed. All of the other countries got better at
:49:58. > :50:05.doing things than we did. Cotton was manufactured in India and
:50:05. > :50:09.stared at Lancashire. There was inevitable decline in our base.
:50:10. > :50:14.Two-thirds of our economy is service industry. That is a
:50:14. > :50:20.tremendously high risk balance in fact. Do you think that is what we
:50:20. > :50:23.do best? A lot of that is not essential in the basic need of the
:50:23. > :50:27.country's survival. It is wonderful that we have marvellous
:50:27. > :50:31.hairdressing and restaurants and tourism. It is not the bedrock of
:50:31. > :50:38.the existence of an economy. You have to make something people want
:50:38. > :50:44.that is nuts and bolts. We are not doing enough of that. You can make
:50:44. > :50:54.services in trade - as Reckitt and trade. It is not a risk to have a
:50:54. > :51:01.higher level. -- services and trade. They had a lot of financial and
:51:01. > :51:11.banking services and legal services. Banking services is a small aspect
:51:11. > :51:13.
:51:13. > :51:18.was up look how Honourable shipbuilding was! -- a small aspect.
:51:18. > :51:22.The should we be picking sectors that we back as the Government?
:51:22. > :51:26.Governments have had a bad record. Government set-up British Leyland
:51:26. > :51:30.and backed the aircraft industry after the war to the exclusion of
:51:30. > :51:35.everything else. It needs industry to have ownership in this country
:51:35. > :51:39.of critical mass. It also needs the banks to do what they do for the
:51:39. > :51:44.German firms. That is lend them money of back them to do what they
:51:44. > :51:48.do well and go on doing it, not just backing them up for sale.
:51:48. > :51:53.You're talking about let them do what they do and doing it well. Can
:51:53. > :52:01.they do it before to the? Is a cost-effective? There is no reason
:52:01. > :52:07.why it should not be. -- we afford to do that. ICI gave up the post --
:52:07. > :52:16.the ghost. British Leyland imploded. We do not have the new companies
:52:16. > :52:19.coming up. There are industries that are doing well. The luxury end
:52:19. > :52:28.of manufacturing does pretty well. Should and would be backing that
:52:28. > :52:33.more to help it grow the economy? - - should we not? A horizontal
:52:33. > :52:36.policy provides the best condition for all businesses to thrive. Not
:52:36. > :52:41.high in manufacturing or particular service industries and back those.
:52:41. > :52:45.We should have a government policy of low regulation and taxes which
:52:45. > :52:51.allows all businesses to thrive and as the economy to specialise and
:52:51. > :52:56.trade in the way that is appropriate. The bedrock of that
:52:56. > :52:59.his training - training in the IT skills in which we show some skill.
:52:59. > :53:04.Also medical research and things that will be needed to support an
:53:04. > :53:14.ageing population. We're good at medicine research and that is where
:53:14. > :53:20.it should be funded. His opponents used to joke that he never have
:53:20. > :53:23.left the bunker. For some, that joke has continued 2.5 years after
:53:23. > :53:26.he left Downing Street but not the House of Commons. But, today,
:53:26. > :53:29.Gordon Brown makes a rare appearance as a backbench MP in a
:53:29. > :53:32.debate on the future of two factories in Fife. The former Prime
:53:32. > :53:35.Minister has spoken just three times so far since losing the
:53:35. > :53:37.election - most memorably during a debate calling for the withdrawal
:53:37. > :53:40.of News Corporation's bid to take over broadcaster BSkyB. I rise in
:53:40. > :53:45.this debate, not to speak about myself, but to speak for those who
:53:45. > :53:52.cannot defend themselves. For the grieving families about brave war
:53:52. > :53:57.dead, courageous survivors of 7/7 come out for the outraged victims
:53:57. > :54:01.of crime and most recently and perhaps most of all victims of the
:54:01. > :54:06.violation of the rights of a missing and murdered child. Many
:54:06. > :54:11.holy innocent men, women and children who, at their darkest hour
:54:11. > :54:16.- at the most vulnerable moment in allies - with no love and know
:54:16. > :54:21.where to turn, found they are properly private lives, private
:54:21. > :54:24.losses, private solaced treated as property of News International -
:54:24. > :54:29.their private most innermost feelings and private is bought and
:54:29. > :54:32.sold by News International for commercial gain. So, what do you do
:54:32. > :54:35.as a former Prime Minister? Once that famous door closes behind you
:54:35. > :54:38.for the last time, how do create a new role for yourself? Joining me
:54:38. > :54:44.now to deliver his words of wisdom is Quentin Letts, sketch writer at
:54:44. > :54:49.the Daily Mail. It is difficult, isn't it? You have led the nation
:54:49. > :54:54.and held the role as Prime Minister and then what? You go back into
:54:54. > :54:57.Parliament and devote herself to public service. There is a
:54:57. > :55:02.possibility that prime ministers are there for their greater own
:55:02. > :55:07.personal glory. Look at history! James Callaghan did eight years in
:55:07. > :55:13.the House of Commons after leaving Number 10. Good for him! Mrs
:55:13. > :55:18.Thatcher did come in. She looked like a shock victim but she sat on
:55:18. > :55:23.the bench just below the gangway. Tony Blair could not be fact so
:55:23. > :55:28.he's scuppered as soon as possible. John Major made some powerful
:55:28. > :55:32.speeches from the backbenches. Where has Gordon Brown been? He has
:55:32. > :55:36.stayed. What do you do it as a former Prime Minister when the new
:55:36. > :55:40.leader is standing there. You do not want to undermine them. We do
:55:40. > :55:47.not want to intimidate them in the sense that you have done the job
:55:47. > :55:57.before. Is it better to stay and be seen but not heard? You could
:55:57. > :55:59.
:55:59. > :56:03.support the new leader. He turns up today, for the first time in... It
:56:03. > :56:13.is the first time since 20th November 11. He has been scooting
:56:13. > :56:17.
:56:17. > :56:24.around the world, making speeches. -- since November, 2011. Do you
:56:24. > :56:28.think it is justifiable? It is tough. If you have held a position
:56:28. > :56:33.of high international importance and domestic significance and then
:56:33. > :56:38.it is just wiped out. I think the internal crisis of such a fall from
:56:38. > :56:44.grace must be catastrophic. If you lost your column, what would you
:56:44. > :56:47.do? I'm giving one of them up. That is more incumbent on a Prime
:56:47. > :56:51.Minister to showed that his or her power arose not from personal
:56:51. > :56:57.brilliance but from the House of Commons. That is where you gain
:56:57. > :57:03.your power. Edward Heath was not exactly helpful, was he? He still
:57:03. > :57:08.applied himself. He was very grumpy as well. He earned his chips.
:57:08. > :57:13.Somehow he respected the body that had given him his power. Winston
:57:13. > :57:17.Churchill stayed in has a Commons until 1964. The do think Gordon
:57:17. > :57:24.Brown should have said more since he lost the job as Prime Minister?
:57:24. > :57:28.-- do you think? You have to accept there is a personal crisis for each
:57:28. > :57:35.individual and they will find individual solutions. It maybe he
:57:35. > :57:41.is coming back in a timely way to make comments. If the country is
:57:42. > :57:49.going to war, if we have a big international crisis, a Prime
:57:49. > :57:54.Minister brings unparalleled experience to that. We have heard
:57:54. > :58:00.from Alistair Darling as a former Chancellor. Do they have things to
:58:00. > :58:07.say that are helpful? I happen to think his finite analysis of the
:58:07. > :58:13.economic situation was correct. does turn up. He does. You say that
:58:13. > :58:17.Tony Blair stepped down immediately pulled up is that more dignified?
:58:17. > :58:21.There is a separate matter. It's useful for the country to know what
:58:21. > :58:29.is going on with personal money. If they are in Parliament, they have
:58:29. > :58:34.to declare income. With Tony Blair, we do not get that. That is a pity.
:58:34. > :58:39.Can I cite the example of ex- president Carter? He has fulfilled
:58:39. > :58:44.many important jobs since being President. People say he is a much
:58:44. > :58:52.more successful ex-president man he was as President. I am afraid we
:58:52. > :58:56.have to end it there. I hope Gordon Brown was listening. Thank you to