:00:43. > :00:47.Good afternoon. Welcome to the Daily Politics. How do you stop a
:00:47. > :00:52.sudden influx of immigrants from Bulgaria and Romania? The
:00:52. > :00:56.Government sthis it can do it by impose -- thinks it can do it by
:00:56. > :01:01.imposing tougher rules on benefits. The catch - British citizens may be
:01:01. > :01:06.affected too. Surprise, surprise, Tory right-wingers call on David
:01:06. > :01:10.Cameron to cut taxes in the Budget later this month. She's the only
:01:10. > :01:17.female Prime Minister Britain has ever had, but should Mrs Thatcher
:01:17. > :01:21.get a statue in her home town of Grantham? Labour say yes, the
:01:21. > :01:26.Tories say, no. We have found MPs with a cause -
:01:26. > :01:31.they get what they want in the end but sometimes through more
:01:31. > :01:36.inventive means. All that in the next hour, ve. With us for the
:01:36. > :01:41.first half of the programme is Jude Kelly, the artistic director of the
:01:42. > :01:47.Southbank Centre in London. She sat on the board of the Cultural
:01:47. > :01:51.Olympiad for the Olympic Games. Welcome to the programme. Thank you.
:01:51. > :01:55.This week, the Southbank Centre is hosting the Women of the World
:01:55. > :01:59.festival, which promises live music, comedy and passionate debate. A big
:01:59. > :02:02.title - what is it all about? celebrating what women have
:02:02. > :02:06.achieved in this country and across the world. It is posing the
:02:06. > :02:10.questions about what is stopping their potential being fully
:02:10. > :02:18.realised. So the celebration is the festival side of it. It's all kind
:02:18. > :02:22.of women from astronauts, women in the British Army, sports women,
:02:22. > :02:28.including Gillingham lady's football team. Do you have a vested
:02:28. > :02:34.interest in that? Just to cheer them on. It is to show the range of
:02:34. > :02:39.skills, expertise and commitments women are making in civil society
:02:39. > :02:43.and domestic questions. What are we doing about girls' education across
:02:43. > :02:46.the world? What are we doing about women in public life? There's been
:02:46. > :02:51.a report showing that women's progress is not as fast as it
:02:51. > :02:57.should be. Why do you think it is not as fast as it should be in the
:02:57. > :03:03.UK? There's still a combination of women themselves putting barrier
:03:03. > :03:08.into their own progress on the grounds they feel that maybe they
:03:08. > :03:13.cannot do it all, maybe not have the work-life balance. Sometimes
:03:13. > :03:17.they feel dismayed and pushed back. They don't have the same networking
:03:18. > :03:21.systems the men have yet. There are some very obvious attitudes that
:03:21. > :03:25.still prevail. You would be surprised, but they do prevail
:03:25. > :03:30.about what is suitable for women and what is suitable for men.
:03:30. > :03:34.woman, in a position like yours, to you promote women enough in your
:03:34. > :03:40.own mind? Do you recruit enough women who are of merit to do the
:03:40. > :03:46.job? I do. I know I do. At the Southbank Centre, we're a huge
:03:46. > :03:49.emplayer in terms of the arts. We have staggeringly good women and
:03:50. > :03:54.good men, I should stress. On merit is correct. I also think that, as a
:03:54. > :03:58.woman, I can spot a woman's potential. I can spot when they are
:03:58. > :04:07.self-doubting. If you hear a story about yourself often enough that
:04:07. > :04:13.women cannot do things, it is easy to internalise that and say, "I can
:04:13. > :04:21.do it." I am trying to say "ambition" is not a dirty woman for
:04:21. > :04:27.a woman. Are you a feminist as well? It is one of the posed posed
:04:27. > :04:32.- can a woman wear high heels? think that a feminist can really do
:04:32. > :04:35.anything they want to. I don't think there's a rule book. There is
:04:35. > :04:40.not a rule book about what feminists should or shouldn't be
:04:40. > :04:44.like or look like. What feminists are, are people who believe in
:04:44. > :04:48.equality for women. It is as simple as that. You have to believe that
:04:48. > :04:54.women are entitled to an equal share of what is available in the
:04:54. > :05:03.world to realise their potential. That is not the same as saying men
:05:03. > :05:07.and women are identical in every way. In fact, I was watching the
:05:07. > :05:11.other day a wonderful documentary about the West Indian cricket team
:05:11. > :05:17.and looking at how they had really set out to demonstrate that the
:05:17. > :05:21.notion of racism in sport, ie, who could achieve and who couldn't was
:05:21. > :05:26.something that eventually white and black together came around to say,
:05:26. > :05:29.this has to change. I am keen that men should support their wives,
:05:29. > :05:35.their daughters to have equal opportunities. You have a lot of
:05:35. > :05:38.men at this festival too? We have men at this too. Absolutely, yes!
:05:38. > :05:41.Grantham was home to Britain's first and only woman Prime Minister,
:05:41. > :05:47.Margaret Thatcher. We will have more on her later in the programme.
:05:47. > :05:52.What are the female first can be attributed to the town? Was it home
:05:52. > :05:56.to the first women to be a firefighter, a brain surgeon, an
:05:56. > :06:03.astronaut, or a police officer? An interesting question. We will
:06:03. > :06:06.give you the correct answer at the end of the show. What price
:06:06. > :06:11.culture? The Arts Council distributed �310 million of
:06:11. > :06:16.taxpayers' money in 2012 and 2013, slashed by �40 million on the
:06:16. > :06:22.previous financial year. Should arts be subsidised at all? This is
:06:22. > :06:32.at a time public services are being cut? Our guest of the day thinks so.
:06:32. > :06:32.
:06:32. > :06:39.But Philip Booth from the institute of artistic affairs begs to differ.
:06:39. > :06:44.London's South Bank - vibrant art to satisfy our cultural yearnings.
:06:44. > :06:49.It comes at a price. Whether we like it or not.
:06:49. > :06:55.Those who wish to cut Government funding of the arts are branded
:06:55. > :06:59.fill stiens or ignorant. Culture is supposed to broaden the mind, yet
:06:59. > :07:06.it appears some people are incapable of holding a rational
:07:06. > :07:10.argument. Before 1946 the Government's funding of the arts
:07:10. > :07:15.took off. England's rich tradition developed funding. Art had to
:07:15. > :07:18.appeal to the people rather than to the Government or bureaucrats N the
:07:18. > :07:26.16th century, British theatre developed a public acclaim,
:07:26. > :07:34.precisely because it had to appeal to the public.
:07:34. > :07:38.In his day Shakes-Drayton was commercially successful and pop --
:07:38. > :07:43.Shakespeare was commercially success and popular.
:07:43. > :07:47.Is state-funding the only option now? The Globe does not receive
:07:47. > :07:54.state funding and its ticket prices are no higher than those of the
:07:55. > :07:58.Royal Shake peers Company. The Gilbert hall, the Fitwilliam - the
:07:58. > :08:04.list of cultural institutions which to which this age gave rise without
:08:04. > :08:09.Government support is endless. In contrast, what does the Arts
:08:09. > :08:14.Council do for us? It centralises state funding. 50% of its money is
:08:15. > :08:19.spent in London. 3% in the eastern region of England. 3% in the East
:08:19. > :08:23.Midlands and 5% in the North-East. It spends about as much on
:08:23. > :08:28.administration as it does on these three regions of England put
:08:28. > :08:34.together. After much-resisted cuts, the Arts Council will have nearly
:08:34. > :08:39.one employee for every �1 million given out in tpwrapbtds. In 2008,
:08:39. > :08:43.the Arts Council had 50 communication officers, no wonder
:08:43. > :08:50.it is such a good advocate. The state cries out for private funding
:08:50. > :08:54.and raises costs. Would it not be a sign of a less fill stien nation if
:08:54. > :08:57.those who consumed the arts had a more active interest in their
:08:57. > :09:01.support? Can the arts survive without state funding? Not if it
:09:01. > :09:06.wants to reach as many people as possible with the rich programme
:09:06. > :09:11.which has made Britain famous. I do agree with the last point, that
:09:11. > :09:16.those who consume the arts, some of them, if they have the ability,
:09:16. > :09:22.could be greater in terms of their fill lan introduce pi. We have at
:09:22. > :09:25.the end of our society some very rich people, for whom the patronage
:09:25. > :09:31.of the arts is not a normal activity like in the States. I
:09:31. > :09:35.would not recommend what they do in the States, which is basically...
:09:35. > :09:38.The theatres, certainly in London seem to be packed most nights.
:09:38. > :09:43.There are a lot of people willing to pay. Why don't people at the
:09:43. > :09:49.better end off end of the scale give more of their income to the
:09:49. > :09:56.arts? I think the habit, which did support a lot of the 17th, 18th and
:09:56. > :10:00.19th century work, the habit has not been - it has not got into the
:10:00. > :10:05.blood stream in the British culture, in the way it does in America. The
:10:05. > :10:10.downside of America is if their national endowment scheme starts to
:10:10. > :10:14.fall, as it has by billions, or if people are short of cash, which
:10:14. > :10:19.they are, actually it fractures and collapses. The American mod sl a
:10:19. > :10:29.very poor one to use -- model is a very poor one to use. The UK has
:10:29. > :10:29.
:10:29. > :10:34.one of the most sophisticated and arts structures in the world. The
:10:34. > :10:43.amount of cash generates is enormous. Can taxpayers afford it?
:10:43. > :10:49.I think they can. 25p a week from each taxpayer goes on the arts.
:10:49. > :10:55.There are free museums, free galleries. Had he filmed yesterday,
:10:55. > :11:00.thousands of people were coming for the Restless Noise Festival, which
:11:00. > :11:04.for �25 for a weekend gives them classes, workshops, debates,
:11:04. > :11:08.concerts, films, et cetera. A lot of those people could never afford
:11:08. > :11:14.premium price tickets or tickets at any price. This is about extending
:11:14. > :11:20.the value of the arts for the many, not the few. We don't want
:11:20. > :11:24.education for the few, we don't want arts for the few. Jude Kelly
:11:24. > :11:28.says taxpayers can afford to subsidise the arts and should
:11:28. > :11:32.continue to do so because of the money that is generated as a result.
:11:32. > :11:36.Well, this is not a matter of affordability. It is a matter of
:11:36. > :11:40.what is the best way to finance the arts, whether they should be
:11:40. > :11:44.financed through taxation and through, if you like, bureaucratic
:11:44. > :11:49.control of the arts industry, or whether they should be financed by
:11:49. > :11:54.those who consume the arts, those who wish to contribute to the arts.
:11:54. > :11:59.There is evidence which suggests when you get taxpayer financing of
:11:59. > :12:04.the arts it raises the cost-base. It does not raise opportunities for
:12:04. > :12:08.people to attend the arts at all. It crowds out private funding,
:12:08. > :12:12.which is low in this country. Without state funding, it would
:12:12. > :12:16.collapse. We would not have the range of arts we have. For example,
:12:16. > :12:20.we might go back to the environment which existed in the UK before the
:12:20. > :12:29.Arts Council started to hugely increase Government funding on the
:12:29. > :12:34.arts, in 1946. I don't see that as a cultural desert at all. You would
:12:34. > :12:39.end up without all the theatres, all the ballet companies. You would
:12:39. > :12:46.not have any of the art output, which is so produce livic around
:12:46. > :12:52.the country. These companies are doing work
:12:52. > :12:57.which could not be paid for by those giving money. Those who love
:12:57. > :13:01.the arts, let's take Wagner. People will go and pay a fortune for it,
:13:01. > :13:05.because that is what they do with their money. You want to say that
:13:05. > :13:11.opera is as form, as in Italy when it started, should be there for
:13:11. > :13:14.everyone. I don't think the only way subsidy should be there for the
:13:14. > :13:18.arts - I think the arts looks at what we believe civil society
:13:18. > :13:23.should be about, that is not just a trickle down from above. Civil
:13:23. > :13:27.society should not be captured by the state. Arts and culture should
:13:27. > :13:33.be embedded within civil society, rather than provided to civil
:13:33. > :13:37.society by the state. In Italy, you talk about state funding and opera
:13:37. > :13:41.available to everybody. If you look at those institutions which are
:13:41. > :13:48.most heavily reliant on state funding, they are no more
:13:48. > :13:52.accessible to the ordinary individual on average earnings to
:13:52. > :13:56.those individuals. At the Southbank Centre we reach millions of people.
:13:56. > :13:59.Millions of whom are on low incomes. They could not afford it and they
:14:00. > :14:08.would not be able to be included as well. If you said, unless you are
:14:08. > :14:12.interested you could not do that. As in Shakespeare's day.
:14:12. > :14:17.That's not true T monarchy was the state at the time. It is not true.
:14:17. > :14:21.You two, I know, could talk about this for hours. Thank you for doing
:14:21. > :14:26.the film. Tens of thousands of police officers voted for the right
:14:26. > :14:30.to take industrial action. 45,000 of the Police Federation members
:14:30. > :14:34.voted yes. 10,000 voted no. The measure was defeated as the
:14:34. > :14:39.federation needs a majority of members to vote in favour for a
:14:39. > :14:42.change of the law. More than half didn't take part in the vote. As
:14:42. > :14:46.servants of the Crown, policemen don't have the right to strike. In
:14:46. > :14:51.a moment, we will be joined by Damian Green. First let's speak to
:14:51. > :15:01.the chair of the Police Federation. There just wasn't enough support
:15:01. > :15:06.
:15:06. > :15:09.amongst your members. Not enough It sends a clear message to
:15:09. > :15:13.Government that 81% of the people who voted, over a third of police
:15:13. > :15:17.officers in England and Wales, wish to seek the right for industrial
:15:17. > :15:20.action. Now they're concerned, they're very angry and disappointed
:15:20. > :15:25.at what this Government is doing to the Police Service. What about all
:15:25. > :15:29.the people who didn't come and vote? They obviously disagree.
:15:29. > :15:32.that's not necessarily the case. I didn't wish to comment on why
:15:32. > :15:37.people haven't voted but the significant number - if you compare
:15:37. > :15:39.that to the relation of Police and Crime Commissioners election, 34%
:15:40. > :15:42.of police officers are extremely annoyed about what the Government
:15:42. > :15:47.are doing and we need to engage and I think the Government needs to
:15:47. > :15:50.take a clear message of what this actually means. We will ask, we are
:15:50. > :15:54.going to ask the Government in a moment. I come back to the numbers
:15:54. > :15:57.that didn't vote. Why do you think they didn't? Well, it was my job to
:15:57. > :16:01.make sure that officers up and down the country in the months that led
:16:01. > :16:06.up to the ballot taking place were provided with sufficient detail and
:16:06. > :16:09.that took all different formats, from video recordings, to messages,
:16:09. > :16:13.to e-mails, to literature, so that when they cast their vote they did
:16:13. > :16:16.so from an informed position. That was very, very important because it
:16:16. > :16:21.is of such significant importance. Right. I come back to this point
:16:21. > :16:25.again. They felt they - they didn't feel strongly enough that they do
:16:25. > :16:28.want the right to strike or don't feel strongly enough about the
:16:28. > :16:33.Government's reforms, unlike the rest of the members who did which
:16:33. > :16:37.means off divided federation or members of the federation. Well, we
:16:37. > :16:39.have an awful lot of officers who feel very strongly about what's
:16:39. > :16:44.happening to the Police Service. I do think the Government need to
:16:44. > :16:50.take heed of that message. Thank you.
:16:50. > :16:53.Damian Green is here now. Not enough people came out to vote in
:16:53. > :16:55.this particular ballot. But the strength of feeling as Steve
:16:55. > :16:58.Williams described must be worrying for the Government, particularly
:16:58. > :17:03.for a Tory-led Government? I am conscious of the strength of
:17:03. > :17:07.feeling which is what you would expect at a time where we have had
:17:07. > :17:12.to keep pay down, we have had to reform pensions and so on. But it's
:17:12. > :17:15.hugely encouraging that two thirds of police officers don't even want
:17:15. > :17:18.to contemplate the right to strike. That's very sensible, they do an
:17:18. > :17:22.important job. They're doing it successfully, crime is down 10% in
:17:22. > :17:26.the first two years of this Government. We can take this as a
:17:26. > :17:30.step to move forward with the sensible talks we have to have.
:17:30. > :17:34.That doesn't mean those people who decided not to vote doesn't mean
:17:34. > :17:39.they're supporting your reforms if the Police Federation is right. You
:17:39. > :17:43.have got a significant number of police officers, 45,000 who wanted
:17:43. > :17:45.to seek the trite strike. That's -- the right to strike. That's a
:17:45. > :17:49.dramatic move by those police officers for the first time in this
:17:49. > :17:53.country, even if the others stayed at home and are unhappy still about
:17:53. > :17:56.what you are doing. Some of the others actively voted against. I
:17:56. > :18:03.think the issue of the right to strike has been put to bed. The
:18:03. > :18:07.police... Is that it now? It seems to be so. They've had this ballot
:18:07. > :18:12.and the Police Federation sensibly set a 50% hurdle that they needed
:18:12. > :18:14.half the membership to vote yes to proceed with negotiations. I I
:18:14. > :18:17.think that's sensible. Trade unions should perhaps take some lessons
:18:17. > :18:22.from that. How would you characterise relationships between
:18:22. > :18:28.the government and police? They're fragile because of all the
:18:28. > :18:33.necessary measures swre had to take. The police budget is �14 billion a
:18:33. > :18:38.year. A time where we have to be tough on the public finances, the
:18:38. > :18:40.police have had to take their share. You still see them as the last
:18:40. > :18:45.unreformed public service as someone said about the police?
:18:45. > :18:49.someone, but not me said that. don't believe that? Precisely
:18:49. > :18:51.because we have been embarking on huge reforms. Not just to pay and
:18:51. > :18:57.pensions, which is what obviously the officers themselves are
:18:57. > :19:00.concerned on, but introduced the College of Policing, Police and
:19:00. > :19:02.Crime Commissioners, we are introducing the National Crime
:19:02. > :19:06.Agency, so big reforms that allow the police to get better at their
:19:06. > :19:09.very vital job. As I say, they are doing it well at the moment. The
:19:09. > :19:13.figures show that crime is coming down. You have said relations are
:19:13. > :19:17.fragile. What are you doing to improve those relations? Talking in
:19:17. > :19:21.practical terms on a regular basis to the Police Federation and to
:19:21. > :19:25.other ranks, but also making it easier for the police to do the job
:19:25. > :19:28.they all join up to do, stripping away the bureaucracy, stopping some
:19:28. > :19:32.of the unnecessary form-filling. Thousands of them don't understand
:19:32. > :19:36.it, clearly, otherwise they wouldn't have voted in this
:19:36. > :19:39.election. It's not so much they don't understand, they understand
:19:39. > :19:43.perfectly what's going on. They don't like it. Nobody is happy...
:19:43. > :19:47.You haven't brought them on board is what I am saying. Nobody is
:19:47. > :19:50.unhappy when they have a two-year pay freeze or pensions have to be
:19:50. > :19:55.reformed. That's not surprising. What's significant about the result
:19:55. > :19:57.is that even with all of those necessary pressures, two thirds of
:19:58. > :20:02.the Police Federation members decided they didn't even want to
:20:02. > :20:06.negotiate about the right to strike. I think we can draw a line here and
:20:06. > :20:09.say let's go forward. The reforms are making police better in this
:20:10. > :20:13.country. We can have sensible talks with the Police Federation. Do you
:20:13. > :20:18.think the reforms are the right way to go in terms of the police?
:20:18. > :20:23.just thinking that the critical thing for a lay person like myself
:20:23. > :20:31.and the public is that you arrive at a police force who are motivated,
:20:31. > :20:35.vocational, committed, and progressive. The last thing you
:20:35. > :20:39.want is a hard done by feeling amongst police who, whether they
:20:39. > :20:42.strike or not, might feel that they're undervalued by us and we
:20:42. > :20:46.only have the Government to value them. We can't personally value
:20:47. > :20:51.them. I think the thing I most feel about this is that it's not a
:20:51. > :20:53.debate that's included, even though the voting for police Commissioners
:20:53. > :20:57.was something that came into being, I don't think that the public,
:20:57. > :21:00.generally, feel they're involved in this debate in a way they
:21:00. > :21:09.understand clearly enough. That would worry me. They are our police
:21:09. > :21:12.force. What do you say to that? What's important is everyone
:21:12. > :21:14.recognises the police themselves and the public and that we are
:21:14. > :21:20.trying to increase the professionalism of the police,
:21:20. > :21:23.that's why we have the College of Policing and also introducing much
:21:23. > :21:27.more transparency so things that really worry the public,
:21:27. > :21:30.Hillsborough, some of the scandals like that, are seen clearly to be
:21:30. > :21:36.things in the past that couldn't happen now and won't happen in the
:21:36. > :21:46.future. That's the aim. You were a former immigration Minister, we are
:21:46. > :21:47.
:21:47. > :21:50.going to talk about immigration in the next thing, can I ask you what
:21:50. > :21:53.would you like to see, new measures brought in to try and curb the
:21:53. > :21:56.rights of Bulgarians and Romanians who will come later this year?
:21:56. > :22:00.other Ministers are doing is making very sure that people can't come to
:22:00. > :22:05.this country, whether they come from the EU or elsewhere, to
:22:05. > :22:08.exploit either the benefits system or our free at the point of use
:22:08. > :22:11.National Health Service, that's what really annoys people. Will
:22:11. > :22:15.British citizens be affected? the work's being done. I am not
:22:15. > :22:19.involved with the detailed work. Are you worried about that? That is
:22:19. > :22:22.the quid pro quo, is British citizens may be affected, too.
:22:23. > :22:26.People want to see a National Health Service that is not an
:22:26. > :22:29.international health service. They want to see a benefits system that
:22:29. > :22:34.pays benefits to disadvantaged people or elderly people who
:22:34. > :22:37.deserve them in this country. But which can't be exploited by people
:22:37. > :22:40.coming here for that very purpose and that I know is the thrust of
:22:40. > :22:45.the work going on in Government now. Don't forget, overall immigration
:22:45. > :22:48.numbers are coming down. The pledge we made at the election was to
:22:48. > :22:56.bring it down to tens of thousands. It's down by more than a quarter.
:22:56. > :23:01.Thank you very much. There have been rumours for weeks
:23:01. > :23:04.but it seems the Government have finally decided to introduce curbs
:23:04. > :23:07.on benefits for migrants. It's thought any changes will need to
:23:07. > :23:10.apply to Brits, as well. What are they suggesting?
:23:10. > :23:12.Government sources have confirmed that Ministers are examining
:23:12. > :23:16.options to restrict the amount of free healthcare the NHS provides
:23:16. > :23:20.for immigrants. This could include a crackdown on
:23:20. > :23:24.charging to ensure non-resident citizens pay for their NHS
:23:24. > :23:29.treatment. Ministers are also considering
:23:29. > :23:33.extending the what bitual residency test so migrants might have to wait
:23:33. > :23:36.six months or a year before being granted residency and therefore
:23:36. > :23:40.hospital care or other benefits. Cabinet sources have also confirmed
:23:40. > :23:44.that the Government is looking at encouraging local councils to give
:23:44. > :23:47.priority on housing waiting lists to local families ahead of any
:23:47. > :23:51.outsiders. Government sources have said Ministers are prepared to
:23:51. > :23:55.introduce across the board curbs on benefits for migrants in the near
:23:55. > :23:58.future, which is expected to be before the Queen's Speech in May.
:23:59. > :24:02.All these measures will, the Government hopes, bring the UK in
:24:02. > :24:08.line with policies in other European member states, already
:24:08. > :24:12.deemed legal by the European Court of Justice. I am joined by the
:24:12. > :24:15.Labour MP Frank Field who co-chairs a cross-party parliamentary group
:24:15. > :24:18.on balanced migration and by the Conservative MP Stewart Jackson. Is
:24:18. > :24:22.Britain a soft touch for immigrants? Well, potentially yes,
:24:22. > :24:26.it is. Actually, the disappointing thing is that the Government had
:24:26. > :24:31.the opportunity many months ago to look at these issues and also to
:24:31. > :24:34.look at the issues that arose from my ten-minute rule Bill in October
:24:34. > :24:39.which was about the disapplication of the free movement directive
:24:39. > :24:41.which would have copied some of of the things happening in Spain, and
:24:41. > :24:45.it is important also to recognise that the free movement directive is
:24:45. > :24:48.not a tablet of stone, it's a flexible legal document and
:24:48. > :24:58.ministers should have been working on this months, if not years ago.
:24:58. > :24:59.
:24:59. > :25:01.Isn't the truth that they have been working on this? This hasn't come
:25:01. > :25:04.about just as a result of the Eastleigh by-election. That may
:25:04. > :25:06.have given the issue some oxygen, but Ministers have been looking at
:25:06. > :25:09.what rights immigrants will have later this year in terms of access
:25:09. > :25:12.to benefits? Could have followed me - we have been pressing the
:25:12. > :25:16.government over the last two years on a number of fronts. First of all,
:25:16. > :25:20.on health. In July last year, the Secretary of State, Jeremy Hunt,
:25:20. > :25:24.agreed that our health service should should kraez to be a
:25:24. > :25:29.national one and be an international one -- cease. He said
:25:29. > :25:32.nothing to do with me, governor, we have a group, they've made this now
:25:32. > :25:36.legal. I thought a Secretary of State's job was to stop those sorts
:25:36. > :25:39.of things happening. Also over the last two years, we have been
:25:39. > :25:45.lobbying the Government about access to social, what many people
:25:45. > :25:49.call council housing. Again, saying you don't - local authorities don't
:25:49. > :25:52.tell you to whom they're giving housing to. We are suggesting it
:25:52. > :25:58.should be to British citizens. If you haven't actually registered as
:25:58. > :26:02.a British citizen, should you be getting council council... Don't
:26:02. > :26:06.local authorities already have some of those powers that you can favour
:26:06. > :26:10.residents or locals over others? They can do but Government refuses
:26:11. > :26:15.to actually make it mandatory and refuses to collect accurate data on
:26:15. > :26:19.both those fronts. Both on health, and on housing. Of course, there is
:26:19. > :26:23.a much bigger issue, and our welfare and health services are
:26:24. > :26:28.similar to Britain in 1940. We have no defences. If you look, for
:26:28. > :26:33.example, we changed our welfare state from one which started out
:26:33. > :26:37.you had to contribute to one, if you prove low income you have it
:26:38. > :26:41.and that's the problem of us defending welfare against movement
:26:41. > :26:44.of Labour in Europe. Why has the Government been reluctant to tackle
:26:44. > :26:49.this, bearing in mind they've had this target which they're getting
:26:49. > :26:52.closer to of reducing immigration to tens of thousands, wouldn't this
:26:52. > :26:55.have fitted, even though it is obviously within the EU and they
:26:55. > :27:00.can't stop the movement of people, even if they wanted to, why hasn't
:27:01. > :27:05.the Government grasped this issue? There's been a lack of political
:27:05. > :27:12.will, frankly. They are beholden to lawyers who say you can't do it
:27:12. > :27:15.because it will fall foul. Does it fall foul? I understood there were
:27:15. > :27:18.powers for the National Health Service, obviously not on accident
:27:18. > :27:22.and emergency grounds but on general grounds they don't have to
:27:22. > :27:26.do this without some sort of pay up front and the same with local
:27:26. > :27:29.councils. The thing is let's take a chance on it, because if we
:27:29. > :27:35.actually invoke the caveat in the free movement directive on public
:27:35. > :27:38.good, public security, public health, it will take 18 months to
:27:38. > :27:44.get to the European Court of justice to be tested. Is this being
:27:44. > :27:49.blown out of proportion? We don't have figures for the numbers of
:27:49. > :27:52.Bulgarians and Romanians... We do. We don't know exactly. Swre had
:27:52. > :27:57.Government -- we have had Government Ministers saying it's
:27:57. > :28:00.impossible to collect data and why scaremonger. The Government's own
:28:00. > :28:03.data shows there is 150,000 Romanians and Bulgarians here
:28:03. > :28:06.already claiming to be self- employed. The Government doesn't
:28:07. > :28:10.know where they are. Doesn't know whether they are self-employed,
:28:10. > :28:14.doesn't know whether they're claiming benefits. This is what I
:28:14. > :28:18.mean when I said earlier there are no defences. What we have seen in
:28:19. > :28:24.our welfare state is moved from one where you had to prove contribution,
:28:24. > :28:29.to one where you get it if you can prove need. There is no defence in
:28:29. > :28:33.European law against that, because as anybody - any Brit can turn up
:28:33. > :28:37.in those circumstances, we have to offer the same services to people
:28:37. > :28:41.who actually come to this country. We have to be robust as they are in
:28:41. > :28:46.Spain where they have a registration scheme. They're using
:28:46. > :28:50.the free movement directive to the enth degree and we have to do that
:28:50. > :28:53.to protect public services and our employment market. What about
:28:53. > :28:57.changes that will affect British citizens and their rights to claim?
:28:57. > :29:02.Are you not worried about that? don't think they have quite the
:29:02. > :29:07.same impab on the jobs -- impact on the jobs market. The fact that we
:29:07. > :29:17.had unplanned an unrestriked EU my -- unrestricted EU migration has
:29:17. > :29:19.
:29:19. > :29:22.contributed to the embedding of welfare dependency and unskilled
:29:22. > :29:24.people being on benefits, rather than in work. I think that needs to
:29:24. > :29:27.be looked at holistically as inissue that we are going to have
:29:27. > :29:29.again with Romanians and Bulgarians if we are not careful. Is this
:29:29. > :29:31.something you are worried about? Yes, I hope we don't get to the
:29:31. > :29:35.stage where Romanians and Bulgarians stand in for a sort of
:29:35. > :29:39.catch-all phrase that means they're bad, because that quickly becomes
:29:39. > :29:45.racism. You are talking about specific policies that suggest
:29:45. > :29:48.people can actually - can come here and claim benefits. Broadly
:29:48. > :29:53.speaking, I think that I am completely with you on the fact
:29:53. > :29:57.that - I remember with Barking, how much we suddenly realised there was
:29:57. > :30:00.a wake-up call where you thought that if people in Barking cannot
:30:00. > :30:03.plan for their family's future and don't know what economic
:30:03. > :30:13.possibilities their children can have, this is going to produce
:30:13. > :30:14.
:30:14. > :30:17.massive chaos in terms of social integration. Labour didn't deal
:30:17. > :30:22.with it at the time. I hope we will make a clear statement that we want
:30:22. > :30:25.to move welfare from one where you prove need to one where you have to
:30:25. > :30:29.prove contribution. That's what we actually set out to have and
:30:29. > :30:32.without any approval of the electorate at all, we have changed
:30:32. > :30:42.welfare from the contributory basis, to if you can prove need, you get
:30:42. > :30:48.
:30:48. > :30:52.There's no evidence that the leadership of the Labour Party -
:30:52. > :30:57.that the Leader of the Labour Party is at all committed, authentically
:30:57. > :31:06.to these issues. Frank has taken the right attitude and given the
:31:06. > :31:12.right cause. I don't trust Labour on migration. Are you confident?
:31:12. > :31:18.am saying what my position over the decades has been on this.
:31:18. > :31:22.Labour leadership? First of all, the threat now of a mass migration
:31:22. > :31:25.from Bulgaria and Romania gives the Government the opportunity to
:31:25. > :31:31.change the nature of our welfare state. Similarly, it is a challenge
:31:31. > :31:36.to the Labour side about whether in fact they want to see a welfare
:31:36. > :31:42.state based on contributions that people build it up by their own
:31:42. > :31:49.residency or whether we continue as we have since 1979 of giving out
:31:49. > :31:53.welfare if you can prove need. not holding my breath. You have
:31:53. > :31:57.been consistently on line, but I think you are right - welfare is an
:31:57. > :32:00.issue we need to look at. I have to say the Prime Minister down needs
:32:00. > :32:06.to look at this because it is a political imperative for my party
:32:06. > :32:11.too. Thank you both very much. There's a bitter row brewing in
:32:11. > :32:14.Grantham about plans for a statue of the town's most famous daughter
:32:14. > :32:18.- Baroness Thatcher. Visit today and you will see little sign of the
:32:18. > :32:25.former Prime Minister, just a small plaque on her father's grocer's
:32:25. > :32:31.shop and a display in the local museum. The council voted for plans
:32:31. > :32:41.for a new statue on Friday. Labour voted for it and the Tory majority
:32:41. > :32:46.
:32:46. > :32:51.against. Confused? We are. We asked for an interview. We are joined by
:32:51. > :32:56.Ray Wootten. We have planned in place, but with Baroness Thatcher
:32:56. > :32:59.being 87, we hope she lives a much longer time. Do you think it is
:32:59. > :33:07.unseemingly to be discussing these kind of things while she is still
:33:07. > :33:12.alive? We do. We have plans in place, but they are confidential at
:33:12. > :33:19.the moment. You cannot give us guidance about what you are
:33:19. > :33:21.considering? As much as I want to, I can't. Why do you think the issue
:33:22. > :33:26.of Margaret Thatcher is controversial for you? What I was
:33:26. > :33:33.pleased about was to hear that Labour did actually admire Margaret
:33:33. > :33:36.Thatcher. They did support all her views and, clearly, she actually
:33:37. > :33:45.put the great back into Great Britain. Are you sure Labour
:33:45. > :33:48.supported all her views? I am sure they don't all of them. Some of the
:33:48. > :33:53.Labour councillors said should a statue come to Grantham the best
:33:53. > :33:59.thing for that statue would be to crush it up and fill the potholes
:33:59. > :34:04.in, which I think is quite disgraceful. We will ask Labour to
:34:04. > :34:08.give us their views about Margaret Thatcher on another occasion. It
:34:08. > :34:12.will seem strange that Labour are promoting this idea. They think it
:34:12. > :34:17.will be good for tourism? With the county council elections coming up,
:34:17. > :34:22.this is a move by the local Labour leader to gain publicity for
:34:22. > :34:26.herself. You think it is playing politics then? I do. We had the
:34:26. > :34:31.budget meeting on Friday. They made an amendment, knowing we would have
:34:31. > :34:36.to oppose it and we are putting our own amendment before that to carry
:34:36. > :34:40.on doing the research to see what we could do in the event that day
:34:40. > :34:46.does come. We all hope that Baroness Thatcher lives a long,
:34:46. > :34:50.long life. Thank you. Jude Kelly - a statue in her home town? I am all
:34:50. > :34:53.for women in public life being recognised N terms of who has
:34:53. > :34:59.written history and who is known to have existed, I think Margaret
:34:59. > :35:03.Thatcher has earned her place. I am not very keen on public statues
:35:03. > :35:10.because pigeons land on them. My thought is, I wonder what artist
:35:10. > :35:14.would get to do this statue. I thought Tracey Emem because she is
:35:14. > :35:19.a Conservative supporter. I think wasing of the angel of the north
:35:19. > :35:25.and can you have a Margaret Thatcher of Grantham of that scale?
:35:25. > :35:31.What scale would it need to be to be a tourist interest. What would
:35:31. > :35:37.be a fitting tribute to Margaret Thatcher? I don't know, I was going
:35:37. > :35:42.to say a digital game. A digital game. I would be intrigued to know
:35:42. > :35:47.your ideas for that one! I don't know. I know that public statues
:35:48. > :35:53.have a short life. Eric Morecambe, there he is in Morecambe bay, and
:35:53. > :36:03.God bless him, I don't think it attracts the tourists, it is for
:36:03. > :36:08.
:36:08. > :36:14.them to sit and eat their sandwiches under and go, Who is
:36:14. > :36:19.this again? I just want to think that actually women in public life
:36:19. > :36:23.need to be spoken of. Whatever we thought of their views, I think she
:36:23. > :36:27.was a very, very dominant figure, not just in this country but across
:36:27. > :36:32.the world. We will be left with the thought of Margaret Thatcher and a
:36:32. > :36:36.digital game then. I will try and invent it for the creative
:36:36. > :36:39.industries. Last week, politics was dominated by the Eastleigh by-
:36:40. > :36:43.election. Let's look at the Westminster in-tray for the week
:36:43. > :36:48.ahead. Later today the Justice and Security Bill, including bills for
:36:48. > :36:51.secret courts will be debated. Also today Liam Byrne launch's Labour's
:36:52. > :36:54.campaign against the so-called bedroom tax at a press conference
:36:54. > :36:59.in Hull. On Tuesday, the Health Select Committee hears evidence
:36:59. > :37:03.from David Nicholson on the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust
:37:03. > :37:09.public inquiry. Several MPs have signed a motion calling for Mr
:37:09. > :37:12.Nicholson to resign from his post, giving his previous role as chief
:37:12. > :37:15.executive of West Midlands strategic health authority. On
:37:15. > :37:19.Wednesday Ed Miliband will attempt to address voter concerns on
:37:19. > :37:24.immigration ahead of a speech by the Shadow Home Secretary, Yvette
:37:24. > :37:28.Cooper, on Thursday. Also on Thursday, the Bank of England's
:37:28. > :37:34.monetary committee gives the latest decision on UK interest rates. It
:37:34. > :37:40.is the fourth anniversary of rates reaching the low of 0.5%. On Friday,
:37:40. > :37:44.the Lib Dem's spring conference begins, with a rally of the party
:37:44. > :37:50.favourite. Joining me is George Parker and the Independent's Oliver
:37:50. > :37:53.Wright. Welcome to you both. Oliver Wright, do you think these measures
:37:53. > :37:57.being discussed by the Government to curb immigration from Bulgaria
:37:57. > :38:00.and Romania will work? I think there's some significant problems
:38:00. > :38:04.that the Government have got. If you look at the stories around
:38:04. > :38:08.yesterday about how they were going to curb the use of the NHS, it
:38:08. > :38:11.leads to the question of how on earth will you do that? Will you
:38:11. > :38:16.turn doctors into policemen? Questioning the entitlement of
:38:16. > :38:19.these people as they come in with a broken leg or whatever it might be?
:38:19. > :38:24.I suspect medical leaders would not be entirely happy with that.
:38:24. > :38:29.Clearly the symbolism is important. I think the practical nature of how
:38:29. > :38:33.you actually either curtail benefits or curtail intitlement
:38:33. > :38:38.will be tricky for the Government. What is interesting is some of the
:38:38. > :38:41.things being talked about have been given oxygen since the Eastleigh
:38:41. > :38:45.by-election, because immigration was deemed a big issue. Are many of
:38:45. > :38:50.these measures in place and not used by local councils and the NHS?
:38:50. > :38:55.There's an element of. That it was interesting to see David Cameron
:38:55. > :38:58.saying the party would not lure too much the right and then we've had
:38:58. > :39:03.stories about Britain tightening up the rules on benefit claimants. Yes,
:39:03. > :39:07.it is true. A lot of the things they are talking about in this
:39:07. > :39:12.Cabinet sub committee about restricting the pull factors are
:39:12. > :39:15.things that councils, EU rules allow for, which have not been
:39:16. > :39:20.implemented. The danger for the Government is introducing a raft of
:39:20. > :39:26.new regulations which make it harder for British people to claim
:39:26. > :39:30.benefits and taxes for the benefit of stopping a few Romanians and
:39:30. > :39:35.Bulgarians. Like ID cards all over again. We know how that ended.
:39:35. > :39:41.that issue then, how much do you think Brits may be affected by
:39:41. > :39:43.attempted changes, if they are legally allowed? If you take the
:39:43. > :39:50.NHS issue, the department this morning is very much playing down
:39:50. > :39:56.the idea of ID cards. That was around for a while. Most people who
:39:56. > :40:00.went down that particular line have been urging caution. A, it would
:40:00. > :40:06.cost a huge amount of money. One thing they don't have is money. It
:40:06. > :40:11.would reach the same kind of opposition. If people say we have
:40:11. > :40:16.an entitlement card for the NHS does that lead on to an ID card?
:40:16. > :40:22.All these rules don't just apply to Bulgarian and Romanian, they would
:40:22. > :40:25.have to apply to French, German, Spanish. A lot of people on the
:40:25. > :40:29.Costa Del Sol have free access to the Spanish health service. The
:40:29. > :40:32.European Court of Justice will uphold the rules on the movement of
:40:32. > :40:38.people across the European Union. They have to be careful about how
:40:38. > :40:43.they approach this. What about the bedroom tax? Is it a tax? It's not
:40:43. > :40:45.a tax. It is more withdraw the benefits. Labour will make a
:40:45. > :40:50.campaign about this with some justification. They will point out
:40:50. > :40:54.that people who will lose their benefits if they have a spare room
:40:54. > :40:58.are meant to be encouraged to be moing into a smaller place and end
:40:58. > :41:01.the problem of underoccupancy. There are not the available smaller
:41:01. > :41:05.homes for them to move into, which one of the reasons the Government
:41:05. > :41:09.has put �500 million worth of savings. You can see why Labour are
:41:09. > :41:12.making a campaign about this. Ultimately the Conservative Party,
:41:12. > :41:17.under the coalition party, will say if you don't get the money for this,
:41:17. > :41:21.where will you get it from? Go you think it will be an effective
:41:21. > :41:25.way of saving money and cutting the welfare bill? They are talking
:41:25. > :41:29.about saving �500 million. The reason they are doing that is they
:41:29. > :41:34.know people will not move out of houses with a spare room because
:41:34. > :41:38.theer houses and flats are not available to them. George Osborne
:41:38. > :41:41.desperately needs the money off. Politically it is damaging to the
:41:41. > :41:46.Government. Ed Miliband has been successful. We are all talking
:41:46. > :41:50.about a bedroom tax, as you rightly point out, it is not a tax. Labour
:41:50. > :41:54.have a whole series of campaigns in the run-up to April. Remember in
:41:54. > :41:59.April we get the 1% updating in benefits. We get the maximum amount
:41:59. > :42:04.you can claim. You get the hoal councils are going to lose money in
:42:04. > :42:08.the amount they can pay in council tax benefit. There is a whole thing
:42:08. > :42:13.coming down the track, not to mention the beginning of universal
:42:13. > :42:19.credit, which could make life uncomfortable for the Government.
:42:19. > :42:24.It starts to sound to some people in Middle England, targeting voters.
:42:24. > :42:29.It plays well with traditional Labour voters. Thank you very much.
:42:29. > :42:39.Joining me for the rest of the programme we have the Tory MP Glenn
:42:39. > :42:44.
:42:44. > :42:48.Glenn Glenn, -- John Glenn, Steve Reed and Tom Brake. It is a
:42:48. > :42:53.question of... Are they achievable? Are they affordable at this point
:42:53. > :42:58.in time? It would be irresponsible to say yes... It would be
:42:58. > :43:01.irresponsible, did you say? If you cannot see how they would stimulate
:43:01. > :43:04.the economy quickly enough to avoid interest rates going up. If the
:43:04. > :43:07.markets are not confident that interest rates, interest rates
:43:07. > :43:10.could go up and you will have problems with mortgages and the
:43:10. > :43:15.integrity of the Government's economic policy would be in
:43:15. > :43:21.question. There's no growth or very little over the past year. So, why
:43:21. > :43:25.not as people in your party are saying, well, let's try tax cuts?
:43:26. > :43:31.Because they have to be funded. If you make that move on tax cuts, you
:43:31. > :43:40.also have to have further cuts elsewhere to justify that. You have
:43:40. > :43:43.got to gain a political census across -- consensus across...
:43:43. > :43:47.don't think George Osborne should do anything? That is not what I
:43:47. > :43:51.said. In terms of tax cuts? should try. Which ones? Where he
:43:51. > :43:55.can see it will have the maximum stimulus on the economy. Where
:43:55. > :43:59.would you like to see them? I would like to see further ones to
:43:59. > :44:02.corporation tax. We need to see more investment in jobs. Do you
:44:02. > :44:07.agree with that? Of course the Government is implementing a tax
:44:07. > :44:11.cut on the first April. If you are a millionaire you will get on
:44:11. > :44:15.average �100,000 back in a tax cut, while they are increasing taxes on
:44:15. > :44:19.ordinary people with things like the increase on VAT. Would you
:44:19. > :44:24.agree with corporation tax - a cut in it? At the moment there's not
:44:24. > :44:27.enough to fund the services we need. I think we need to look at growth
:44:27. > :44:31.and from that growth deriver further revenues to fund things
:44:31. > :44:36.like tax cuts and investments. Labour does want and has been
:44:36. > :44:41.proposing tax cuts or would like to see a cut in VAT. We would like to
:44:41. > :44:45.see a national insurance holiday. They want to spend money. One thing
:44:45. > :44:48.Labour has proposed is a mansion tax on properties worth over �2
:44:48. > :44:52.million in order to fund the reintroduction of the 10p rate of
:44:52. > :45:02.tax, so people on lower incomes are paying less. That seems a fair way
:45:02. > :45:10.
:45:10. > :45:14.The Labour Party are late on board, so to speak. If there are going to
:45:14. > :45:16.be - going to be scope for tax cuts, what I would like to see is the
:45:16. > :45:20.Government making yet more progress on delivering what we want to see
:45:20. > :45:24.in terms of a fairer society and that is increasing the tax
:45:24. > :45:28.thresholds so people on low and middle incomes - definitely going
:45:28. > :45:31.to hit the �10,000 threshold by 2015. That's an area where the
:45:31. > :45:34.Government can and should make progress and what that will mean,
:45:34. > :45:37.because this is money going to people on low and middle incomes
:45:37. > :45:41.it's money they're going to spend. We need people to spend money. They
:45:41. > :45:45.will spend it on the basics and that is what we need at this time.
:45:45. > :45:48.It will be a useful stimulus to the economy if you spend money raising
:45:48. > :45:52.the threshold, taking more people out of tax? I think it's a policy
:45:53. > :45:56.that I have always been relaxed about and the coalition is moving
:45:56. > :46:01.towards the aspiration to move up to �10,000. The question is will it
:46:01. > :46:05.encourage the investment decisions in jobs? The reality is that it's
:46:05. > :46:10.easy to make political points around the rich paying more tax,
:46:10. > :46:13.but the reality is that people need to make investment decisions in
:46:14. > :46:23.businesses and if they're not making investment in jobs and in
:46:24. > :46:26.
:46:26. > :46:32.growth, then it's a sort of pryic victory when it's not going to have
:46:32. > :46:36.an kphebgt as -- affect, as a whole. We need to look at what is we are
:46:36. > :46:39.doing already. For instance, the investment in infrastructure.
:46:40. > :46:44.not working in terms of growth. 55,000 jobs are going to come on
:46:44. > :46:47.the back of Crossrail, we need to move forward with things like High
:46:47. > :46:52.Speed 2 to ensure that investment happens. It's Africa. We need that.
:46:52. > :46:56.-- it's infrastructure. We need that. Will you back Labour's
:46:56. > :47:00.proposal now for a mansion tax on properties worth �2 million.
:47:00. > :47:04.need to see what they say. But in practice we have been very clear
:47:04. > :47:09.this may well be a Liberal Democrat commitment in a Liberal Democrat
:47:09. > :47:13.manifesto in 2015. I am not going to sign up to what Labour - we have
:47:13. > :47:18.to see what they've got to say. For them to come on on board now is
:47:18. > :47:21.very late in the day. You came forward with a mansion tax policy.
:47:21. > :47:27.Labour are now putting it forward. There will be a vote. Which way
:47:27. > :47:30.will you vote? Let's wait and see precisely what they say. I think we
:47:30. > :47:33.are going to get another one of those apology videos from Nick
:47:33. > :47:36.Clegg when the Liberals don't vote for something that was in the
:47:36. > :47:40.manifesto. The reality is of course you are in coalition, you can't
:47:40. > :47:43.have everything you want. That's a pragmatic relationship of --
:47:43. > :47:46.reality of coalition. You know that. Are you happy that reports are
:47:46. > :47:50.saying nearly a quarter of those due to be affected by the so-called
:47:50. > :47:53.bedroom tax will be single parents? Well, I think it's very regrettable
:47:53. > :47:58.that we have got to take these tough decisions. The reality is we
:47:58. > :48:02.did inherit a massive amount of debt. You can't pay off debt
:48:02. > :48:08.quickly when you are income isn't rising. Should single parents take
:48:08. > :48:13.on that burden. There is a lot of discretion of how - all taxes are
:48:13. > :48:16.levied and all savings are saved and the reality is that local
:48:16. > :48:24.councils will make some of these decisions and there is a fund
:48:24. > :48:27.available to help those that are most vulnerable. Let's move on.
:48:27. > :48:30.Now yesterday the Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling, raised the prospect
:48:30. > :48:33.of a British exit from the European Convention on Human Rights. He
:48:33. > :48:35.stressed that change had to happen but when asked by the BBC's John
:48:35. > :48:39.Pienaar whether the Tories might pull out of the Convention
:48:39. > :48:41.altogether, Mr Grayling said that he had not ruled anything in or out.
:48:41. > :48:43.Here's a flavour of what he had to say.
:48:43. > :48:46.Well, I'm absolutely certain we will go into the next election with
:48:46. > :48:49.a plan for change. I think all of us agree that the current framework
:48:49. > :48:54.for human rights law in the UK is not what we would want it to be.
:48:54. > :49:01.Ironically f you look at the original convention in the 1940s
:49:01. > :49:07.and 50s, when Stalin was in power and people were sent to gulags
:49:07. > :49:12.without trial. Over 50 years, it's moved away from that. That was
:49:12. > :49:15.Chris Grayling. Should Britain pull out of the ECHR? Absolutely, I
:49:15. > :49:18.think many people across the country are fed up with the
:49:18. > :49:21.perverse decisions that come as a consequence of that. I have never
:49:21. > :49:25.understood why this is sometimes portrayed as a lurch to the right.
:49:25. > :49:29.I don't see why it's beyond British parliament to make decisions about
:49:29. > :49:33.human rights and how things work in our country. It seems that we are
:49:33. > :49:38.capable as a parliament of doing that. I think that what Chris is
:49:38. > :49:42.pursuing is a sensible way forward. What do you think? I don't agree
:49:42. > :49:48.with him nor I am sure does Kenneth Clarke. The convention has brought
:49:48. > :49:52.lots of benefits to the UK in terms of protecting press freedoms,
:49:52. > :49:55.providing access to pensions for widows and widowers. Actually it
:49:55. > :50:01.has made a positive contribution. Now I am not say thrg's no scope
:50:01. > :50:04.for -- there's no scope for reform. There are a lot of cases held in a
:50:04. > :50:14.backlog that we could process more quickly. The act and the convention
:50:14. > :50:15.
:50:15. > :50:19.has been of benefit to the UK. For to us come out of it and join only
:50:19. > :50:24.bell only - would be a mistake. What the Tories aren't doing us is
:50:24. > :50:34.telling us what they would replace it with. What do they want to lose?
:50:34. > :50:34.
:50:34. > :50:38.The convention prevents the Government ears dropping on
:50:38. > :50:41.citizens -- Eavesdropping on citizens. No way different
:50:41. > :50:44.hierarchy of things can be resolved. We need to have more control at
:50:44. > :50:47.domestic level. It's all very well saying these things can be reformed.
:50:47. > :50:51.They haven't been reformed and time and time again people in this
:50:52. > :50:55.country are frustrated that laws they hope are actually made in
:50:55. > :50:57.Westminster by their elected representatives, we have little
:50:57. > :51:01.authority over. What do you say about those frustrations people
:51:01. > :51:07.feel? They're not telling us. They're not telling us... What
:51:07. > :51:11.about frustrations? One of the benefits of the HRA decisions,
:51:11. > :51:14.instead of being taken by British judges in British courts, will be
:51:14. > :51:20.taken by European judges in Strasbourg. Is that what the Tories
:51:20. > :51:24.want to do, hand more power to kwrorp. -- to Europe? We need to
:51:24. > :51:28.have control in Westminster. We need to have British politicians
:51:28. > :51:33.making rules about what we see as important in terms of human rights,
:51:33. > :51:39.what hierarchy they actually take... The convention was the product of
:51:39. > :51:44.British diplomacy. Time has moved on, rather a lot since then. We
:51:44. > :51:48.need reform urgently. convention has really to show that
:51:48. > :51:51.- that the British don't always take the right decisions. Access to
:51:52. > :51:54.pensions for widows and widowers that's come as a result of the
:51:54. > :51:58.European convention has been of great benefit to British citizens.
:51:58. > :52:08.We need to take that into account. Nothing would prevent us from doing
:52:08. > :52:10.that ourselves either. Right. So amongst the advice, analysis, and
:52:10. > :52:12.criticisms for the political parties post-Eastleigh one thing
:52:12. > :52:16.seems to affect them all. The seemingly all pervasive view that
:52:16. > :52:18.they are indeed all the same. It's not a new thought, and perhaps
:52:18. > :52:21.explains why political rebels have always attracted attention. One
:52:21. > :52:24.Westminster website has drawn up a list of this parliaments rebels but
:52:24. > :52:34.as in-house bad boy Giles Dilnot has been discovering the new rebels
:52:34. > :52:40.
:52:40. > :52:50.actually play within the rules. From long before the invention of
:52:50. > :53:03.
:53:03. > :53:06.the internal come the -- combustion engine Politics has had rebels.
:53:06. > :53:09.People who like to drive straight through convention and leave tyre
:53:09. > :53:11.marks on the best laid plans of Government, so Politics.co.uk
:53:11. > :53:21.compiling a list celebrating a current crop of feisty folk might
:53:21. > :53:30.not rev your motor but there IS a difference $:/ENDFEED..
:53:30. > :53:34.One thing I quite strongly recept is being skaoeub -- resent is being
:53:34. > :53:38.described as a rebel. I am elected by the good people to be a member
:53:38. > :53:42.of parliament, not a member of the Government. And certainly not
:53:42. > :53:46.elected to be a Patsy for the whips office for front bench. I would
:53:46. > :53:51.call myself an independent-minded loyalist. I am sure it's going to
:53:51. > :53:56.be carved in me somewhere when I die. You have to stand up for
:53:56. > :53:59.things and there's ways of going about it. I have made a nuisance of
:53:59. > :54:02.myself from time to time. But I have tried to do it in a
:54:02. > :54:10.constructive way. Whether it's Carswell gearing up
:54:11. > :54:16.with a number of issues, on fuel and 10p tax, Creasy rolling with
:54:16. > :54:20.payday loans or Field, Goldsmith and Clarke carving their own way
:54:20. > :54:24.through traffic, is it all principle or is that ego to them
:54:24. > :54:30.all? There isn't an ego but I have always been a politician who does
:54:30. > :54:33.say it as it is. It's been my strength. It's also been my
:54:33. > :54:36.weakness because when I was part of the collective Ministerial team
:54:37. > :54:41.there were times when I probably said things I shouldn't have done.
:54:41. > :54:45.But get used to this, because we may see much more of it.
:54:45. > :54:50.Politicians are realising now they look back at the 2010 election
:54:50. > :54:55.where we saw unpredictable results, part of the reason was MPs are
:54:55. > :54:59.becoming better at selling themselves rather than the party.
:54:59. > :55:05.Leather rosettes, biker gang cabinet anyone? Giles enjoyed that
:55:05. > :55:09.too much I think. So, have you ever rebelled? I have only only been
:55:09. > :55:13.there a few weeks! Are you going to be a rebel with a cause? We have to
:55:13. > :55:18.wait and see what issues come up. We have a party system for a reason.
:55:18. > :55:22.People need to know what they're voting for when they put X next to
:55:22. > :55:25.your name. Most don't know who we are individually, they know the
:55:25. > :55:30.party label and know policies they're voting for and that's
:55:30. > :55:33.helpful. Have you rebelled? I can't say I am a known rebel within the
:55:33. > :55:36.Lib Dems, but the advantage of the Liberal Democrats is we are a
:55:36. > :55:40.relatively small part, I suppose, compared to the other two. On the
:55:40. > :55:45.whole, our views coincide so I think naturally we are less
:55:45. > :55:47.rebellious. I suppose we have had to fight on many fronts for many
:55:47. > :55:52.years and that binds us together more effectively perhaps than the
:55:52. > :55:56.other two parties. Lots of rebels and they would argue with a great
:55:56. > :56:05.cause. I think you need to draw a distension between a rebel and
:56:05. > :56:09.being an effective campaigner -- distinction. You have understood
:56:09. > :56:14.the film obviously completely. Well done. Is this the beginning of the
:56:14. > :56:18.end for party politics and discipline that now campaigns are
:56:18. > :56:22.taking on a life of their own and the 2010 intake are proving that?
:56:22. > :56:26.To some degree, it's about emphasis. If you asked Douglas Carswell if he
:56:26. > :56:30.was going to stand at the next election as an independent he would
:56:30. > :56:35.quickly say no. At the end of the day there is lots more in common
:56:35. > :56:38.than not. So, whilst he has very clear views that sometimes are at
:56:38. > :56:43.odds with the Government, he still wants to stand as a Conservative.
:56:43. > :56:48.There is also an issue about safe seats and marginal seats. There are
:56:48. > :56:52.times when those, we will find out closer to the election, are going
:56:52. > :56:55.to tpoeut for that -- fight for that seat and views in that
:56:55. > :56:58.constituency, whether or not it's anything to do with their party
:56:58. > :57:01.line. That's true and issues on which individual members of
:57:01. > :57:08.parliament take a different view. Is that a good thing, will it
:57:08. > :57:12.inspire people to be more independently-minded? We don't want
:57:12. > :57:17.people who are stereo types. The backbench business committee, a new
:57:17. > :57:21.innovation, is something that has enabled Robert Halfon for instance,
:57:21. > :57:25.and others to push heard on an agenda -- hard on an agenda which
:57:25. > :57:31.perhaps past governments wouldn't have allowed time to do. Are you
:57:31. > :57:34.into campaigns as opposed to sticking to the political line.
:57:34. > :57:37.are elected by constituents to represent that constituency and
:57:37. > :57:41.every constituency is different. For instance, Croydon North which I
:57:41. > :57:45.represent, big problem in the riots a year-and-a-half ago. Hundreds of
:57:45. > :57:48.people hadn't had compensation despite being promised it. I have
:57:48. > :57:52.to stand and want to stand full square with those people to fight
:57:52. > :57:55.for their rights. That's a constituency issue. It isn't
:57:55. > :58:00.necessarily against your party, is it? The key thing there is I am
:58:00. > :58:04.fighting for the people that elected me. All right. Rebels, not
:58:04. > :58:14.rebels with or without a cause! Time before we go to find out the
:58:14. > :58:15.
:58:15. > :58:21.answer to our quiz. What other female first can
:58:21. > :58:26.Grantham lay claim to. The first woman to be a firefighter, brain
:58:26. > :58:31.surgeon, astronaut or police officer? Have a go. Police officer.
:58:31. > :58:35.Astronaut. Police officer. You are going too sky high there! You have
:58:35. > :58:40.it right. Congratulations. There are no prizes, I have to tell you.
:58:40. > :58:46.You can come on again! Now that's it for today. Thank you to our