:00:45. > :00:50.Politics. As David Cameron got itself into a pickle about Europe?
:00:50. > :00:54.He has promised a referendum in 2017 but many in his party wanted sooner.
:00:54. > :00:58.News this morning that the prime Minister has rounded on senior
:00:58. > :01:02.Conservatives to call for Britain to leave the youth. We are asking if he
:01:02. > :01:08.has lost control of his party. And it is not just days having a spot of
:01:08. > :01:12.bother at the top. Messrs Miliband and Clegg are feeling the heat, too.
:01:12. > :01:16.Is the NHS being privatised by the back door? We will be talking to
:01:16. > :01:22.Britain top GP. And they are out, Chris Huhne and
:01:22. > :01:30.Vicky Pryce are released from prison.
:01:30. > :01:33.Dash Britain's top GP. With us for the first half of the
:01:33. > :01:37.programme is the chair of the Royal College of GPs, clear Gerada.
:01:37. > :01:40.Welcome to the programme. First, two severely disabled men are at the
:01:40. > :01:45.court of appeal today in an attempt to change the law governing the
:01:45. > :01:49.right to die. One of them is Paul Lamb, whose paralysis means that he
:01:49. > :01:52.is physically incapable of ending his life. He wants a doctor to be
:01:52. > :01:56.allowed to help him. If you were in a position and he asked you to help
:01:56. > :02:02.them, what would you do? At the moment, it is against the law so
:02:02. > :02:05.I've would not be able to help them. It is a difficult subject, very
:02:05. > :02:09.emotive, with arguments on both sides. On the one hand, state
:02:09. > :02:13.sanctioned death is difficult to think about but on the other hand,
:02:13. > :02:19.we have this sad case of somebody who clearly understands and wants to
:02:19. > :02:25.die. As the representative of 40,000 GPs, we are debating this at the
:02:25. > :02:30.moment. We are debating whether medical bodies should have a view at
:02:30. > :02:35.all and whether we should trump the man on the omnibus. Just like the
:02:35. > :02:39.rest of the country, we're torn. Some want it, and some do not. It is
:02:39. > :02:44.a difficult issue. But you are put in that position quite often.
:02:44. > :02:48.Although you say that it is against the law, and it is against them for
:02:48. > :02:53.a GP to actually help someone to die that position, but there is a grey
:02:53. > :02:59.area. Somebody is in such pain and doctors must have been asked up
:02:59. > :03:03.until now, could they give more pain relief, would they be able to give
:03:04. > :03:09.more pills, perhaps, in the knowledge, even though it is never
:03:09. > :03:18.said, that that person may then try to take one life. And yes, it is
:03:18. > :03:22.very difficult. -- take their own life. It is very difficult to
:03:23. > :03:27.predict when someone will die. Why would try to relieve someone's pain
:03:27. > :03:32.and do everything I can to palliative against it. Whether would
:03:32. > :03:40.deliberately invent -- inject someone with drugs that and you
:03:40. > :03:45.would kill them is going through to fire. Even the GPs holding someone's
:03:45. > :03:49.hand. Who should be responsible for changing the law? Should the
:03:49. > :03:52.Parliament who makes the decision? think it should be Parliament.
:03:52. > :03:56.Parliament should take the views of their constituents and discuss it in
:03:56. > :04:02.Parliament. If it does happen, then doctors are going to have to shape
:04:02. > :04:07.the governance. Let abortion, it should not be doctors who determine
:04:07. > :04:13.it. -- like abortion. Should they not have more of a say given they
:04:13. > :04:17.are on the frontline? I do not think we should have more of a sake. We
:04:17. > :04:20.should have more to say on how it should happen, if it happens, but on
:04:20. > :04:26.a personal level, we should not have any more of a saving you or the lady
:04:26. > :04:34.that made me up. My view should not trump your view or the man on the
:04:34. > :04:36.Clapham omnibus. Now it is time for our daily quiz. Today's question is,
:04:36. > :04:40.which MP would win a House of Commons fight? According to a poll
:04:40. > :04:47.Commons fight? According to a poll out this weekend. Is it David
:04:47. > :04:50.Cameron, Theresa May, Ed Balls or Cameron, Theresa May, Ed Balls or
:04:50. > :04:54.Jacob Rees-Mogg? And we will find out the answer at the end of the
:04:54. > :04:59.show. You will be pleased to know that is not one for you. Spare a
:04:59. > :05:03.thought for David Cameron. The Prime Minister has gone to America to talk
:05:03. > :05:06.to President Obama about a trade deal between the United States and
:05:06. > :05:09.the European Union. While he is out of the country, his party had taken
:05:09. > :05:14.the opportunity to behave like naughty schoolchildren and have a
:05:14. > :05:18.fight. Over what? Europe, of course. David Cameron thought counties party
:05:18. > :05:24.down when he pledged to hold an in-out referendum on Europe in 2017.
:05:24. > :05:28.But it was not enough. -- thought he had calmed his party down. Now he is
:05:28. > :05:32.in a spot of bother keeping his class in order as more and more
:05:32. > :05:35.backbenchers talk about Britain's future in the EU. There will be a
:05:35. > :05:38.vote on Wednesday after some Tory MPs tabled an amendment which
:05:38. > :05:43.criticises the Queen's Speech for not including any bill paving the
:05:43. > :05:46.way to a referendum. And it is not just the usual troublemakers at the
:05:46. > :05:50.back of the classroom making all the noise. The Education Secretary,
:05:50. > :05:54.Michael Gove, and Defence Secretary, Philip Hammond, have
:05:54. > :05:59.packed up, saying that they would opt to leave the EU if they render
:05:59. > :06:04.random was held. -- is a referendum was held. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson
:06:04. > :06:09.says that David Cameron must make clear that Britain is ready to walk
:06:09. > :06:13.away unless the relationship with Europe is reformed. And with UKIP
:06:13. > :06:17.buoyed by their success in local elections, and can David Cameron get
:06:17. > :06:21.control of the classroom? Gary O'Donoghue gives us the latest. He
:06:21. > :06:24.is certainly trying to get control of the situation because he has
:06:24. > :06:27.bitten back at senior Tories who said that they would leave the EU if
:06:27. > :06:34.there was a referendum tomorrow. Yes. He has accused them of throwing
:06:34. > :06:38.in the towel. Essentially saying that they do not believe that he
:06:38. > :06:41.could get a negotiated settlement. He has had a swipe at Lord Lawson,
:06:41. > :06:46.the former Chancellor, and his own Cabinet members, Michael Gove and
:06:46. > :06:51.Philip Hammond, saying that there is not a referendum tomorrow, so it is
:06:51. > :06:55.a hypothetical question. The application of that, what is the
:06:55. > :06:59.first rule of being a politician? Don't answer hypothetical questions.
:06:59. > :07:03.He then goes onto say there be be a referendum if they win the next
:07:03. > :07:06.general election. That is a way of saying that if you keep squabbling
:07:06. > :07:10.in public over the tactics, then the public is not going to vote for a
:07:10. > :07:14.divided party. There is a certain amount of irritation coming from the
:07:14. > :07:21.Prime Minister. And also, of course, he faces the prospect on
:07:21. > :07:25.Wednesday they thought in the Parliament by the on this most
:07:25. > :07:29.polite amendment you will ever get. Tory backbenchers saying that they
:07:30. > :07:33.regret the absence of a Referendum Bill in the Queen's Speech, please
:07:33. > :07:41.may we have one. He is having to allow his ministers to abstain on
:07:41. > :07:44.that for fear of resignations. And backbenchers are having a free rein
:07:44. > :07:48.to vote with the amendment. It is interesting spin from Downing Street
:07:48. > :07:51.this morning, talking about putting the best face on it as they possibly
:07:51. > :07:59.can. The Prime Ministers apparently pleased that the spotlight is being
:07:59. > :08:04.shone on his promise for a referendum, albeit in 2020. And as
:08:04. > :08:07.he really intensely relaxed about the amendment? -- is he really. It
:08:07. > :08:13.is inevitable. He knows it was coming down the line. He will argue
:08:13. > :08:17.that this is a position of the Conservative party, so that is how
:08:17. > :08:21.they can justify allowing the backbenchers to do what they like.
:08:21. > :08:23.But they are in a coalition government, and it is not the policy
:08:23. > :08:26.of the coalition government, therefore his ministers cannot vote
:08:26. > :08:31.for this thing, so they will have two abstain or vote with the
:08:31. > :08:36.government. In a sense, the arguments are out to that extent,
:08:36. > :08:40.but exquisite for the time being. The problem is that the Conservative
:08:40. > :08:47.party is a pretty Euro-sceptic party in Parliament. We know that. This is
:08:47. > :08:50.not a Civil War, but it certainly feels like it.
:08:50. > :08:56.Without is the Conservative MP, Peter Bone, one of the MPs who has
:08:56. > :09:03.tabled the amendment. Emma Reynolds, the Shadow Europe Minister, and you
:09:03. > :09:08.could later, Nigel Farage, also join me. The amendment that we have put
:09:08. > :09:12.down, regretting that there has been no EU referendum, is the Prime
:09:12. > :09:15.Minister 's policy. In America, I'm sure he is toasting what we have
:09:15. > :09:20.done and I'm sure if he was not in America he would be supporting the
:09:20. > :09:23.amendment. So we have a bizarre situation where backbenchers are
:09:23. > :09:25.voting against the government's legislative agenda as it stands
:09:26. > :09:30.because that is in effect what you're going to do. You think he
:09:31. > :09:36.will be delighted? Even for the BBC, and know they are so roll Europe,
:09:36. > :09:40.how you can possibly come to that conclusion... We will be voting for
:09:41. > :09:44.the Queen's Speech. What we're saying... But not as it stands. You
:09:44. > :09:48.want to amend it. We are regretting there is no EU Referendum Bill, and
:09:48. > :09:51.the reason there is not is because the Liberal Democrats are blocking
:09:51. > :09:55.it in the coalition. They are such a minority party, smaller than Nigel's
:09:55. > :10:01.party. Why take any interest? Because they are part in the
:10:01. > :10:04.government? -- part of the government. Malcolm Rifkind say you
:10:04. > :10:09.are undermining the prime Minister's authority. -- says you are
:10:09. > :10:13.undermining. We will see on the vote whether people vote for the
:10:13. > :10:17.amendment or not. But you're going to lose. How could you possibly come
:10:17. > :10:21.to that conclusion? Through the numbers. What is going to happen is
:10:21. > :10:24.that most conservative members of Parliament will vote for it. Do you
:10:24. > :10:26.know that? I hope. By the time we get to Wednesday, I hope that
:10:26. > :10:31.ministers will be allowed to vote for it because it will be strange
:10:31. > :10:35.not to vote for Conservative party policies. Are the Labour Party
:10:35. > :10:39.really going to vote against it and tell everyone in the country
:10:39. > :10:43.that... Well, they have said they are. They are are telling everyone
:10:43. > :10:45.in the country that they are against the EU referendum. If they do that,
:10:45. > :10:53.good news for me and the Conservatives, and good news for
:10:53. > :10:58.Nigel. But it would be political suicide. What are you going to do?
:10:58. > :11:03.What Peter bone has been doing for the last two years. We have been
:11:03. > :11:07.very clear in consistent. We do not want to have a referendum now and we
:11:07. > :11:10.also think that promising one in four Mac years will create great
:11:10. > :11:12.economic uncertainty and a time when people are worried about living
:11:12. > :11:16.standards in the economy. To be clear, they will vote against the
:11:16. > :11:22.amendment? It beggars belief that the Prime Minister, the leader of
:11:22. > :11:27.the government, is also -- is almost encouraging, and relaxed, about is
:11:27. > :11:34.MPs voting against his government. You know that they are going to vote
:11:34. > :11:38.for the amendment. Three Labour MPs. A small handful. We shall see on
:11:38. > :11:41.Wednesday. The vast majority of Labour MPs... Are going to vote
:11:41. > :11:48.against the referendum? They are going to. Why will come back to you.
:11:48. > :11:53.You cannot win. I will tell you after the vote. -- I will come back
:11:53. > :11:56.to you. Every member of Parliament will have two face his constituents
:11:56. > :11:59.and say that he had voted for against the bill and do not think
:11:59. > :12:03.there are many MPs in Parliament who want to vote against an EU
:12:03. > :12:09.Referendum Bill. The point is that David Cameron has promised a
:12:09. > :12:12.referendum in 2017 if the Tories win the election and if they win it
:12:13. > :12:15.outright. Did you not trusted the pro-Minister? I Trust the Prime
:12:15. > :12:22.Minister. Why do we need the amendment? This helps them achieve
:12:22. > :12:28.their policy. We are seeing the government should bring forward the
:12:28. > :12:32.bill. To go down a Private Members' Bill route is well and good, but
:12:32. > :12:35.this should not be done by private members. The problem is that the
:12:35. > :12:41.public do not believe the Prime Minister. What this amendment is
:12:41. > :12:45.seeking to do is to try to bind his hand, may trip that he cannot go
:12:45. > :12:49.back on the decision if he wins the election. What is happening in
:12:49. > :12:54.Westminster really is quite small bear compared to the big European
:12:54. > :12:58.debate. I think the dam is broken. Last week, in the wake of the local
:12:58. > :13:03.election results, we saw three former chancellors of the exchequer
:13:03. > :13:05.and one former Shadow Chancellor saying that the economic costs of
:13:05. > :13:10.being in the US I'd weigh any potential benefit. That is a
:13:10. > :13:14.seachange in the debate. Do you agree with the Prime Minister in his
:13:15. > :13:22.criticism of those senior Tories who have said that the position of the
:13:22. > :13:25.negotiation is hopeless? I have not seen that criticism. We have just
:13:25. > :13:29.heard that the Prime Minister has said they are throwing in the towel
:13:29. > :13:32.too early, people like Michael Portillo, Nigel Lawson and others,
:13:32. > :13:38.who say that the point of renegotiation is not going to get
:13:38. > :13:44.him anywhere. In the towel too early? My view years ago was that we
:13:44. > :13:47.should try to re-negotiate and get it into a free-trade deal. I think
:13:47. > :13:54.that is now bound to fail. So you agree with Nigel Lawson two
:13:54. > :13:59.absolutely. There are two parties now, many people who believe we
:13:59. > :14:03.should come out of Europe. Many people in the Conservative party and
:14:03. > :14:08.many people in UKIP. If we could harness the two parties. What about
:14:08. > :14:12.that? The problem is this. The Portillo's criticism of Cameron was
:14:12. > :14:21.stinging but he doubted the sincerity. If you want to
:14:21. > :14:25.re-negotiate membership of the European Union, you have two invoke
:14:25. > :14:32.Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. It is the only mechanism that exists to
:14:32. > :14:35.get powers back to this country. As far as working with sitting members
:14:35. > :14:41.of Parliament advocating is leading the EU, and there are Conservatives
:14:42. > :14:46.and Labour people that advocate that position, I am open-minded on a seat
:14:46. > :14:50.by seat basis to talk to people about cooperation. And are you?
:14:50. > :14:55.take support from anyone. It is ridiculous when you have this
:14:55. > :14:59.terrific vote in the last local election for Conservatives, who
:14:59. > :15:03.argue go -- who are Euro-sceptic, and UKIP, Euro-sceptic. If we could
:15:03. > :15:07.harness those forces, we would be moving the Europe debate forward
:15:07. > :15:12.enormously. Is it happening? with David Cameron as leader. We
:15:12. > :15:16.would not contemplate it. Is it happening on an individual basis?
:15:16. > :15:19.no doubt there are Tory is a stations saying that the law was
:15:19. > :15:23.changed two years ago and there is a provision now that one candidate
:15:23. > :15:26.could have the endorsement of two political parties on the ballot
:15:26. > :15:31.paper, and there are associations out there that want this, I
:15:31. > :15:36.believe? Were? I think we're going to have to wait for that. Hang on,
:15:36. > :15:41.you said very clearly. If I have a confidential conversation with
:15:41. > :15:44.people, I'll leave that they are. The pace of the debate is moving
:15:44. > :15:49.very quickly. I think we will have one of those seats very soon.
:15:49. > :15:57.talking one or two, or are we talking ten? We're not talking lots.
:15:57. > :15:59.To be honest, there are only about 20 members of the entire House of
:15:59. > :16:03.Commons who believe that Britain should leave the European Union. The
:16:03. > :16:09.rest till think, somehow, we can re-negotiate. If the number goes up,
:16:09. > :16:13.and would be delighted, maybe they are all hiding. There are a lot of
:16:13. > :16:18.members who believe that but may not have broken cover. That flies
:16:18. > :16:22.against the idea that a vast number of Tory MPs are either secretly or
:16:22. > :16:24.publicly wanting Britain to pull out right now. I never had any
:16:24. > :16:32.discussions with Nigel about running as a joint candidate or anything
:16:32. > :16:35.like that, but I'm no that the vast bulk of conservative members of
:16:35. > :16:43.Parliament think it unlikely that the re-negotiation is going to work.
:16:43. > :16:48.Therefore, they will vote for the EU. You don't trust the Prime
:16:48. > :16:51.Minister and you don't trust him in the promise of renegotiation? Let me
:16:51. > :16:59.say in his Europe speech he was deliberately vague about what he
:16:59. > :17:03.meant by renegotiation. How. Labour Party take about vague. Ed Miliband
:17:03. > :17:07.on Saturday gave a speech, you should read some of the peaches.
:17:07. > :17:11.didn't understand it. Ed Miliband was clear on Saturday that the
:17:11. > :17:16.Labour Party is a pro-European party but a pro-reform party. We want to
:17:16. > :17:20.see reform of the EU. We want that see greater oversight of national
:17:20. > :17:24.parties. We want to abolish the Strasbourg seat of the European
:17:24. > :17:28.Parliament. We want to see a growth commissioner within the European
:17:28. > :17:38.Commission focussing on jobs in growth. Do you support, do you
:17:38. > :17:38.
:17:38. > :17:44.support David Cameron's position then? I said we are in favour of
:17:44. > :17:47.reforming the EU from the inside and that we are against this arbitrary
:17:47. > :17:54.promise of a four-year period in which you have great economic
:17:54. > :17:58.uncertainty and a ref dim at the end. Does Labour rule out promising
:17:58. > :18:05.a referendum? We are not in favour of a referendum now and not in
:18:05. > :18:08.favour of a referendum at an arbitrary point in the future. We
:18:09. > :18:11.would have a referendum if there were a transfer of power from
:18:11. > :18:15.Westminster. That's in law, we know that. That's going to happen any
:18:15. > :18:21.way. Do you think on a scale of one to ten that Labour will prom pis
:18:21. > :18:25.some sort of referendum in the run up to the election? -- promise some
:18:25. > :18:33.sort of referendum in the run up to the election? The Miliband speech is
:18:33. > :18:40.going to make it easier for us to get Labour votes. I'm so pleased I'm
:18:40. > :18:49.a GP and not a politician. We debate things in a different way. Sometimes
:18:49. > :18:53.I think we're going back to a nostalgic past. My sones is we're
:18:53. > :18:59.far better part -- sense is that we are better part of a larger club
:18:59. > :19:03.rather than being isolated as Little Britain. But good luck to you all.
:19:03. > :19:09.Want our democracy back. If this club was democratic there might be
:19:09. > :19:13.arguments for it. But it clearly isn't. We may need to sort out of
:19:13. > :19:17.the irritating issues such as the 40-hour European time directive but
:19:17. > :19:24.the idea that we can go backwards an be Little Britain in the world of
:19:24. > :19:28.globalisation is nonsense. I don't want to end on obsessing about
:19:28. > :19:32.Europe but let's end it there. Thank you to the three of you. Who could
:19:32. > :19:36.forget the rum pus over the Government's reform of the NHS in
:19:36. > :19:46.England. Doctors foaming at the mouth, apparently Romola Garai, the
:19:46. > :19:47.
:19:47. > :19:53.Lib Dems feeling queasy and the GPs are meant to create more competition
:19:53. > :19:57.between different providers of health care. Critics like our guest
:19:57. > :20:00.claim it's privatisation by the back of the surgery door. But is it?
:20:00. > :20:05.Here's Adam to complain what's been happening.
:20:05. > :20:09.John's come for a hearing test but not at a hospital at his local
:20:09. > :20:13.Specsavers. Could the NHS learn a thing or two from places like this?
:20:13. > :20:17.Definitely. It's something the High Street opticians has been doing
:20:17. > :20:22.since 2006. It's free at the point of use. It's free at the point of
:20:22. > :20:25.delivery. You would come along and have your hearing aids fitted here
:20:25. > :20:29.as you would in the hospital. The difference is you come into the
:20:29. > :20:32.local community to have that qualified service performed.
:20:32. > :20:35.Involving organisations that aren't necessarily part of the NHS was a
:20:35. > :20:40.big part of the Government's changes to the Health Service in England.
:20:40. > :20:44.They've given more power to groups of GPs to buy services for their
:20:44. > :20:48.patients. We all know how controversial that's been. The
:20:48. > :20:52.latest row focussed on some paperwork called section 75, the
:20:52. > :20:57.part of the legislation that talks about competition. People like
:20:57. > :21:00.Professor Lindsay Davies from the faculty of public health are worried
:21:00. > :21:05.that the way it's written GPs will have to put everything out to
:21:05. > :21:09.tender. We do think competition has a role to play in services. It does
:21:09. > :21:14.test things. It does make sure that providers are doing the best they
:21:14. > :21:18.can and we're getting best value. But this takes it far too far.
:21:18. > :21:21.Majority in the House of Lords felt the same way. They tried to have the
:21:21. > :21:24.regulations rewritten earlier this year. But the Commons changed them
:21:24. > :21:28.back and now it's the law. Supporters of the Government say
:21:28. > :21:32.there's been a whole lot of scaremongering. I think a lot of
:21:32. > :21:37.people have used it as a reason to talk about privatisation of the NHS.
:21:37. > :21:42.It's not about privatisation. It's about encouraging people to think
:21:42. > :21:47.more about different services, pleurality of provision and whether
:21:47. > :21:52.patients are getting the best value and quality and whether taxpayers
:21:52. > :21:56.money is being used wilesly. patients might start seeing a
:21:56. > :21:59.difference soon. From last Mott changes to the NHS have been rolled
:21:59. > :22:05.out to every area England which means a doctor near you is wondering
:22:05. > :22:09.whether a company like Specsavers could be doing even more.
:22:09. > :22:13.With us is the Conservative MP Chris Scidmore who serves on the Health
:22:13. > :22:18.Select Committee. Thanks for joining us. Does the bill force new clinical
:22:18. > :22:22.commissioning groups to put all services out to tender. No, not at
:22:22. > :22:26.all. One of the issues that we've had is there's a lot of
:22:26. > :22:31.scaremongering. These rules, section 75, is only an extension of what was
:22:31. > :22:35.in place for existing PCTs from 2006 onwards. All we're doing is creating
:22:35. > :22:40.a level playing field and making sure all health providers have this
:22:40. > :22:45.obligation. How you see it? You're wrong. It isn't an extension. It was
:22:45. > :22:49.guidance before. Now it's enshrined in law. I don't think particularly
:22:49. > :22:52.discussing section 75 will interest many people. What does interest is
:22:52. > :22:58.the issue about have we got privatisation through the back door.
:22:58. > :23:01.The last word on that clip tells us we have. The word was "company". If
:23:02. > :23:06.you take privatisation as moving state resources into the full profit
:23:06. > :23:10.or not for profit sector that is privatisation. The debate before has
:23:10. > :23:14.been, as in this clip, if you don't pay for it, therefore it isn't
:23:14. > :23:18.privatisation. It is. It's removing resource that's currently belong in
:23:18. > :23:22.the state sector into the for-profit. The profits that
:23:22. > :23:28.Specsavers make or Harmony make will not go back into the state, they
:23:28. > :23:33.will go into shareholders. That's the definition of privatisation.
:23:33. > :23:38.Ever since Ken Clarke purchase the provider split people have bandied
:23:38. > :23:43.around privatisation. The NHS is still. There it's taxpayer funded
:23:43. > :23:47.and it works in the best interests of patients. The specific question
:23:47. > :23:51.which does that mean that those service that's are put out, that is
:23:51. > :23:54.extended, it is enshrined in law that it will happen more and more
:23:54. > :24:01.which is why people think it's privatisation. We've had a situation
:24:01. > :24:06.where doctors are able to do private practice in terms of a long time.
:24:06. > :24:10.Not alongside their NHS practice. No? Not at all. You can't have a
:24:10. > :24:14.hospital doctor seeing a patient in an NHS hospital and charging that
:24:14. > :24:18.patient. You can now, with the change in the regulations. Can you
:24:18. > :24:22.earn up to 49%. You have never been allowed to do that. GPs have never
:24:22. > :24:28.been allowed to earn more than 10% of our income through private work.
:24:29. > :24:33.. This is an historic issue. Centres opened up services and patients like
:24:33. > :24:38.them. About the quality of services? There are an argument which says
:24:38. > :24:42.does the patient care about how it's provided, who is providing it? They
:24:42. > :24:49.are not paying it when they access the service itself and if it's of
:24:49. > :24:53.high quality, does it mat sneer does mat -- Does it matter?We know
:24:53. > :24:57.that competition and markets increase costs. It reduces choice
:24:57. > :25:00.because you get smaller organisations being swallowed up.
:25:00. > :25:03.You reduce trust because you don't know whether the service you're
:25:03. > :25:07.offered is something you need. In the end, we all lose, the taxpayer
:25:07. > :25:12.loses because in the end I have more cost an the individual will lose.
:25:12. > :25:17.It's not going to be a big bang. It's going to be tae very slow burn.
:25:17. > :25:21.-- it's going to be a very slow burn. You haven't seen the end of
:25:22. > :25:26.the NHS on April 1, 2013, but we've seen the end of the NHS being part
:25:26. > :25:30.of a system that plans and delivers care within a state system. Do you
:25:30. > :25:33.not think that there's time to change? That there's a lot of waste?
:25:34. > :25:38.No, there isn't. We've been bandied about, there's waste in every
:25:38. > :25:43.system. If you look at the biggest health market in the world which is
:25:43. > :25:48.the States, it has the double whammy of the worst health outcomes at the
:25:48. > :25:52.great greatest cost. We have an ageing population. Competition isn't
:25:52. > :25:56.the way of dealing with that. provides innovation. The monopoly at
:25:56. > :25:59.the moment... There is no evidence that if you privatise you increase
:25:59. > :26:05.innovation. There's no evidence. Privatisation won't make people
:26:05. > :26:09.younger. It's not privatisation, the P word that you're bandying around.
:26:09. > :26:19.It's when you take an entire service out into the private sector, like
:26:19. > :26:20.
:26:20. > :26:24.with the railways. How is differing -- delivering hearing aids in
:26:24. > :26:27.Specsavers not the same? It's like glasses being taken out. It's
:26:27. > :26:32.delivered better services. We have remember NHS glasses and look at the
:26:32. > :26:40.quality now. Once you have opened up a playerality of service and the
:26:40. > :26:44.cost of -- plurality of service and the cost. I'm sure Specsavers do an
:26:44. > :26:49.excellent job. The question is what is your definition of privatisation.
:26:49. > :26:54.Mine is removing state resources, ie my taxpayers money and putting it
:26:54. > :27:02.into a for-profit or not for profit organisation why I or the NHS cannot
:27:02. > :27:07.determine how that money is spent. There's no evidence that it doesn't
:27:07. > :27:11.care. Opening it up to new providers which did start under Labour, under
:27:12. > :27:15.Tony Blair. Due disagree with it them snow I say a scourge on both
:27:15. > :27:19.their houses. What has happened is the dismantling of an incredibly
:27:19. > :27:24.effective service, the National Health Service, with a thousand cuts
:27:24. > :27:28.and it has been going on and this current one is, I suspect, the final
:27:28. > :27:32.explosion. Let's talk about access. You don't agree in terms of what is
:27:32. > :27:36.privatedisation and what isn't. Let's look at, we've talked about
:27:36. > :27:40.quality and there isn't conclusive evidence. What about access. Taking
:27:40. > :27:45.the example of Specsavers, things on the High Street make it easier for
:27:45. > :27:49.people to access these sorts of things? Yes of course. There's a --
:27:49. > :27:53.as a GPs surgery we're on the High Street. You don't necessarily need a
:27:53. > :27:59.private service. Of course we need time prove access. My argument is
:27:59. > :28:04.there is no evidence whatsoever that competition improves the outcome for
:28:04. > :28:08.patients in the end. What do you say to that? What evidence is there?
:28:08. > :28:12.Going round looking at the new GP clinical commissioning grooms and
:28:12. > :28:16.looking at the excitement that -- groups and looking at the excitement
:28:16. > :28:21.that GPs have to be able to innovate and make decisions on behalf of
:28:21. > :28:25.their patients. It's notlet first time -- not the first time. I was
:28:25. > :28:29.chair of an organisation in the late 9-0s in south London. We've had lots
:28:29. > :28:33.of opportunities to hold our own budget. On the whole GPs prefer to
:28:33. > :28:36.be in the consulting room seeing patients. On the Queen's Speech,
:28:36. > :28:39.while we have you here, what about Government's plans to ask doctors to
:28:39. > :28:44.check the immigration status of patients because that's the
:28:44. > :28:48.implication of what's suggested. Right. As I said over the weekend, I
:28:48. > :28:52.don't think doctors should be the borders agency. And they shouldn't
:28:52. > :28:56.be the new tax collectors in receiving money from patients who we
:28:56. > :29:00.deem or have been deemed as not being entight tolled free health
:29:00. > :29:06.care. This is something I've campaigned in Parliament on. I'm
:29:06. > :29:10.happy about this. It's a small A money, but lots of people... Should
:29:10. > :29:14.GPs make those decisions or ask those questions? I think, we either
:29:14. > :29:18.have a situation where we have some sort of unit in the department which
:29:18. > :29:21.actually might pool resources. There is an issue of duplication. The
:29:21. > :29:25.Government will review and look at the options, which is the right
:29:25. > :29:30.thing to do. It may well, we don't know what the scants of the problem
:29:30. > :29:35.is, we -- extent of the problem is. We have looked at estimates from one
:29:35. > :29:39.million to one billion. We don't know. I worry we're trading the same
:29:39. > :29:45.anecdotes and when you look at the problem it's a very small proportion
:29:45. > :29:51.of NHS spend. Probably less than 1%. Thigh for coming in. -- thank you
:29:51. > :29:56.for coming in. Now let's have a quick look at the week ahead. Later
:29:56. > :30:00.today, President Obama welcomes David Cameron to the White House,
:30:00. > :30:03.expect Europe and Syria to be on the agenda. MPs will debate the Queen's
:30:03. > :30:08.Speech this week. And as we've been hearing, expect a vote on Wednesday
:30:08. > :30:11.on the lack of an EU referendum. It's the Police Federation annual
:30:11. > :30:16.conference. That will probably mean Theresa May will turn up and get
:30:16. > :30:19.heckled. On Thursday, it's the ballot of Private Members' Bills,
:30:19. > :30:23.well joining us from College Green now is Andrew Pierce from the Daily
:30:23. > :30:26.Mail and Kate Devlin from the Herald. Welcome to both of you.
:30:26. > :30:32.Andrew Pierce, David Cameron is hitting back at those senior Tory
:30:32. > :30:34.MPs who say renegotiation is hopeless. You can't make it up with
:30:34. > :30:39.the Conservative Party. David Cameron was the leader who thought
:30:39. > :30:44.he would bury the issue of Europe as a divisive factor in his party. It
:30:44. > :30:49.looks like it may bury him. I've been talking to MPs who you wouldn't
:30:49. > :30:55.expect to necessarily be supporting this motion this week, regretting
:30:55. > :30:59.the absence of any Europe in the Queen's Speech. On the left of the
:30:59. > :31:02.party, they say it's simple we have to pull out of Europe unless there's
:31:02. > :31:06.a massive renegotiation. It's up and running now. I don't think Cameron
:31:06. > :31:10.can put the Jeanie back in the can put the Jeanie back in the
:31:10. > :31:18.bottle. Do you agree? How is it going to look on Wednesday when
:31:18. > :31:20.you've got 100 or so or more, if Andrew Pierce is right, voting
:31:20. > :31:30.Andrew Pierce is right, voting Andrew Pierce is right, voting
:31:30. > :31:35.
:31:35. > :31:38.will look bad. Downing Street have had a number of these rebellions in
:31:38. > :31:44.recent years and there are signs that they are starting to get that
:31:44. > :31:50.and managing them. -- they are starting to get better at managing
:31:50. > :31:54.them. Saying that they are free to vote against it frees David
:31:54. > :31:59.Cameron. It means he will not have to sack people after the vote as he
:31:59. > :32:04.had in the past. That said, those who will vote for the amendment are
:32:04. > :32:10.surprised that Downing Street is surprised that the Euro-sceptics are
:32:10. > :32:13.still pushing this issue. There has to be something with the take a step
:32:13. > :32:19.back and try to decide how they are going to deal with these things over
:32:19. > :32:23.the long-term. How do you deal with it? The thing is, it is the prime
:32:23. > :32:28.Minister's fault. Before the Queen's Speech she talked about putting
:32:28. > :32:34.something in the speech about Europe and then he backed off. He has been
:32:34. > :32:38.sending out conflicting signals. And he has to get his backbenchers a --
:32:38. > :32:41.in opportunity to sound off. They have a problem with UKIP and it is
:32:41. > :32:45.not just about UKIP. Tories think the relationship with the European
:32:45. > :32:49.Union is not fit for purpose and they want out unless they can be a
:32:49. > :32:54.major re-negotiation. There is one advantage for Cameron in this latest
:32:54. > :32:57.bout of infighting. At least the Tories can say that they are the
:32:57. > :33:01.only party that will give the referendum, unlike Labour and the
:33:01. > :33:08.Lib Dems who are implacably opposed. What about the public? Is
:33:08. > :33:11.there this fear of obsessing about Europe at Westminster? Yes. The Tory
:33:12. > :33:17.leadership says that they are trying to appeal to lots of different
:33:17. > :33:20.people and that they have to try to remember that. So while they are
:33:20. > :33:25.appeasing backbenchers, they had to appeal to normal people up and down
:33:25. > :33:30.the country, some of whom are feeling the same way as the Tory
:33:30. > :33:35.rebels, that they want some kind of in-out referendum. But a significant
:33:35. > :33:39.proportion of them are baffled that the Tory party appears to be turning
:33:39. > :33:48.itself -- tearing itself apart again over this. But they are very good at
:33:48. > :33:54.it! The art experts. We have just had Nigel Farage on the programme,
:33:54. > :33:56.saying that there are discussions going on between number of Tory
:33:56. > :34:02.associations and UKIP in terms of a shared platform. Are you hearing
:34:02. > :34:04.that? Absolutely. I'll was thought that it would happen if they did
:34:04. > :34:07.well in the County Council elections. Almost certainly in my
:34:07. > :34:14.view they will win the European elections next year. I'm no many
:34:14. > :34:20.Tories who are going to vote for UKIP. There will be situations where
:34:20. > :34:23.Nigel Farage Wilmot put out a candidate. David Cameron is quick to
:34:24. > :34:27.have to get serious about this and talk to a man he has dismissed as a
:34:27. > :34:30.nutcase. Thank you both. Enjoy the rest of the week.
:34:30. > :34:33.Joining us for the rest of the programme are three very normal
:34:33. > :34:43.people, former deputy leader, Mark Crick Beckett -- former Labour
:34:43. > :34:44.
:34:44. > :34:48.deputy leader, Margaret Beckett, Lord Forsyth and Charles Kennedy.
:34:48. > :34:54.Let's move on. Two members of the Cabinet has said that they will vote
:34:54. > :34:57.to quit the European referendum -- European Union if there was a
:34:57. > :35:02.referendum tomorrow. Would you add your voice to that? I would want us
:35:02. > :35:05.out if there was a vote, not because we are leaving the EU, but because
:35:05. > :35:09.they are leaving us. They are going down the path of further economic
:35:09. > :35:13.integration and that will not make Europe competitive. You can see the
:35:13. > :35:17.misery being caused in countries like Spain where youth unemployment
:35:17. > :35:22.is that 60%. The Archbishop warns today of civil unrest. We cannot go
:35:22. > :35:25.down that track. We need to see our future in the global economy and be
:35:25. > :35:31.free to determine our borders and laws. Do you think that Nigel Lawson
:35:31. > :35:34.was right to say that re-negotiation is pointless? Yes.And David Cameron
:35:34. > :35:38.says you are throwing in the towel too early and undermining his
:35:38. > :35:43.position. I think there is confusion here. If we say that we're Article
:35:43. > :35:49.50 of the treaty to leave the union and renegotiate our position, I
:35:49. > :35:53.think that is credible. The idea that you could get the whole of the
:35:53. > :35:56.rest of Europe to do a special deal for written, many of them would have
:35:56. > :36:01.to have their own referendums to achieve it. They would not want
:36:01. > :36:04.their own particular changes to the club. I think it is wrong. To use an
:36:04. > :36:08.analogy, I think David Cameron thinks he can persuade the golf club
:36:08. > :36:11.to play tennis. His negotiating position is impossible, because he
:36:11. > :36:18.is saying that if he does not succeed, they will continue to play
:36:18. > :36:21.golf. He has not said what he would do if he did not succeed. He said
:36:22. > :36:28.that in the event of not being successful, he would still campaign
:36:28. > :36:36.to remain in the EU. Do you Trust him to deliver on his promise of the
:36:36. > :36:43.referendum in 2017? -- to deliver a referendum in 2017. The Trust him to
:36:43. > :36:49.deliver? I do. -- do you Trust him to deliver. Why does the need to be
:36:49. > :36:58.an amendment by Tory backbenchers to get it enshrined in law? That is a
:36:59. > :37:02.separate question. What is happening here is that Tory backbenchers are
:37:02. > :37:07.frustrated that the British people are not being given the opportunity
:37:07. > :37:11.to have a vote on whether not we should remain in the EU. But they
:37:11. > :37:14.are in 2017. That is a long way away. That is a long period of
:37:14. > :37:19.uncertainty, and also it depends upon the Conservatives winning the
:37:19. > :37:24.next election. We need to get back some of those people that are voting
:37:24. > :37:29.for UKIP, you're going to win the next election. So you are completely
:37:29. > :37:32.persuaded that there should now be a referendum, or at least a mandate
:37:32. > :37:36.referendum which would guide any future negotiations for David
:37:36. > :37:39.Cameron? I think there should be an in-out referendum under think the
:37:39. > :37:45.Prime Minister should be getting himself around Europe now, trying to
:37:45. > :37:49.get a deal for us if we leave. lost control of the party over
:37:49. > :37:54.Europe? Not at all.It sounds like it listening to you. He's got it
:37:54. > :37:58.wrong in terms of promising a referendum in 2017 and the
:37:58. > :38:01.backbenchers are right to try to table an amendment because they do
:38:01. > :38:07.not Trust them to deliver a referendum in 2017. He seems to have
:38:07. > :38:09.lost control. I am one of these old-fashioned people who think the
:38:09. > :38:17.executive should take note of what Parliament thinks and not the other
:38:17. > :38:22.way around. Is it difficult at this point, should Ed Miliband be ruling
:38:22. > :38:30.out any referendum on Europe at this point? At this point, yes. I think
:38:30. > :38:34.issued and he is, because there are huge problems in our economy and
:38:34. > :38:37.leaving Europe is not going to help to solve those problems. What the
:38:37. > :38:42.government should be trying to deal with is getting growth and doing
:38:42. > :38:45.something to bring in more jobs. The minute we start saying that we are
:38:45. > :38:49.going to leave the European Union, there are literally millions of jobs
:38:49. > :38:52.in this country at stake. When I was Secretary of State for trade and
:38:52. > :38:58.industry, the Japanese motor industry, in one voice, was
:38:58. > :39:02.absolutely clear. They were clear that if we leave Europe, they will
:39:02. > :39:05.leave the UK. But by not stating whether there should be a
:39:05. > :39:09.referendum, why not give people the chance to say yes or no? That would
:39:09. > :39:15.create certainty? We are the only party you are a gay people the
:39:15. > :39:18.chance to say yes or no. For my part... You campaigned for people to
:39:18. > :39:23.leave. I did. Let me draw your attention to the fact that there
:39:23. > :39:26.were some differences. For example, we still had strong ties with the
:39:26. > :39:36.Commonwealth. We still have a different relationship with Asda.
:39:36. > :39:37.
:39:37. > :39:41.All that has gone. -- EFTA. So Labour should not promise a
:39:41. > :39:46.referendum now or in the run-up to the election? We will have to take a
:39:46. > :39:51.decision then. My heart sinks at the thought that we should commit
:39:51. > :39:54.ourselves as an incoming government to the first priority of engaging in
:39:54. > :39:58.a wholesale diversion of a referendum on Europe. We should be
:39:58. > :40:04.doing concentrating on turning the economy around. What do you say to
:40:04. > :40:07.that? I think marketers write about the importance of the economy and
:40:07. > :40:12.jobs but the idea that we will not have access to European markets and
:40:13. > :40:18.we could not have a free train -- free trade agreement, is just
:40:18. > :40:21.wrong. Did not that.Our future lies with South America and China, the
:40:21. > :40:27.growth parts of the world that we need to be able to sell our goods
:40:27. > :40:37.and services to. Our -- we are being completely hamstrung by regulation
:40:37. > :40:46.
:40:46. > :40:50.and controversy. Our wiki Mac no. are we? No. The British civil
:40:50. > :40:54.service has a panoply of things that they want to add on to this bill,
:40:54. > :40:57.and the addict on the back of the European initiative, and then they
:40:57. > :41:01.blame Brussels. Successive governments have been guilty of
:41:01. > :41:07.this. As far as we are hamstrung, a lot of this is home-grown and has
:41:07. > :41:12.not just come from the continent. But you fought election -- you
:41:12. > :41:17.fought in the lection, and the Clegg attacks Gordon Brown for not giving
:41:17. > :41:21.people the referendum. -- fought and collection. The Liberals are holding
:41:21. > :41:26.the Prime Minister hostage to prevent him from delivering what you
:41:26. > :41:33.stood for delivering an in-out referendum. If he is a hostage, it
:41:33. > :41:37.is at his own making. But you would not support this. We have always
:41:37. > :41:41.said, have a referendum if you have a treaty change, or further proposed
:41:42. > :41:44.change. And that is agreed. But the Liberal Democrats are, according to
:41:45. > :41:52.the Conservative leadership, holding the government to account,
:41:52. > :41:57.preventing them mentioning it in the Queen's Speech. Oh dear. 60 Liberal
:41:57. > :42:00.Democrats in the House of Commons holding the conservative
:42:00. > :42:03.establishment hostage? The Prime Minister in the Tower of London?
:42:03. > :42:06.What nonsense. The reason Cameron is in trouble is his first big
:42:06. > :42:12.strategic mistake during the Tory readership campaign, to pacify the
:42:12. > :42:20.David Davis Euro-sceptics, which he did not need to do, as it turned
:42:20. > :42:22.out, he gave this guarantee which has left the Tories isolated. In the
:42:22. > :42:29.European Parliament, they are isolated, along with right-wing
:42:29. > :42:34.individuals, and of mainstream thinking. What has changed is that
:42:34. > :42:39.they were handing out leaflets asking people to demand an in-out
:42:39. > :42:42.referendum, during your petitioning, what has changed since then and
:42:42. > :42:45.now? What has changed is that we have a coalition government and
:42:45. > :42:51.secondly we have three years of an agreed position that government,
:42:51. > :42:58.these are the Europe. In the government's position, the coalition
:42:59. > :43:02.government's position is not to favour an in-out referendum now.
:43:02. > :43:05.That is what David Cameron thinks and says and that is what Nick Clegg
:43:05. > :43:09.thinks and says. You were saying that they are not telling the
:43:09. > :43:14.truth? They speak with one voice as does William Hague. You cannot deny
:43:14. > :43:18.that. Is Michael Portillo right when he implies that David Cameron is
:43:18. > :43:22.faking Euroscepticism? I think he is Euro-sceptic. He is trying to keep
:43:22. > :43:25.the core mission together and he has been put in a position by the
:43:25. > :43:29.Liberals to renege on their promise at the general election and proved
:43:29. > :43:34.between coalition country. Why are they not promising a referendum
:43:34. > :43:37.now? We're not reneging on anything, nothing whatsoever. We entered into
:43:37. > :43:41.a coalition government and I was a sceptic on that issue. But we
:43:41. > :43:44.entered into it. We published an agreement and the agreement on
:43:44. > :43:49.Europe was the position that the government are following. Nobody has
:43:50. > :43:53.reneged on anybody. The only people reneging on the 100 or so, and we
:43:53. > :43:58.will see how many tomorrow night, the Tory backbenchers who will not
:43:58. > :44:02.tour the line of their leader. People like you, are pouring
:44:02. > :44:05.paraffin on the Tory fire. The Tory Euro-sceptics do not trust David
:44:05. > :44:09.Cameron to deliver. That is what it comes down to and that is what they
:44:09. > :44:13.should be voting on tomorrow. That is what they are saying, we're not
:44:13. > :44:20.sure we like this guy and we do not trust him. Do you trust David
:44:20. > :44:22.Cameron? Of course they do. -- of course I do but I think he has to
:44:22. > :44:27.choose between keeping Nick Clegg happy and giving the country what it
:44:27. > :44:36.once. All political parties are campaigning on this. The UKIP result
:44:36. > :44:41.shows... There was a quote from David Cameron a few hours ago.
:44:41. > :44:44.Accusing his colleagues of throwing in the towel too early.
:44:44. > :44:48.annoyances with his own party. about the case for re-negotiation?
:44:48. > :44:52.Would've thought the Lib Dems would be part of a government that is
:44:52. > :44:56.going to try to repatriate these powers. You happy about that?
:44:56. > :44:58.not have any difficulties with that. We have argued for years that you
:44:58. > :45:07.want a Europe that is more decentralised and that is both that
:45:07. > :45:11.the rubble, not in the European use of the word, but in the North
:45:11. > :45:16.American sense. -- that is more federal. More power devolved from
:45:16. > :45:22.the centre to the regions and nations of Europe. Tories should not
:45:22. > :45:27.have a problem with that. When the Prime Minister made his speech, Nick
:45:27. > :45:30.Clegg offered to translate it from double Dutch into English. And he
:45:30. > :45:37.made it absolutely clear that he was not supporting the prime Minster's
:45:37. > :45:41.line of re-negotiation. They all wanted the top job and they got it
:45:41. > :45:45.but it's not always a bed of roses. # knew you were trouble when you
:45:45. > :45:50.walked in # on you now
:45:50. > :45:55.# took me to places I'd never been # you put me down
:45:55. > :46:00.# knew you were trouble when you walked in
:46:00. > :46:10.# on you now # took me to places I'd never been
:46:10. > :46:21.
:46:21. > :46:24.# I'm lying on the cold hard ground Yes, gazing through the prism of the
:46:24. > :46:28.weekend press you'd be forgiven for thinking they're all on shaky
:46:28. > :46:32.ground. Let's start with Ed Miliband, Margaret Beckett. You
:46:32. > :46:37.backed him when he was running for the Labour leadership, are you
:46:37. > :46:41.pleased with how he and it's turned out. Yes, very.Are people not? Why
:46:41. > :46:46.are the polls saying he is holding back the party? He's had a terrible
:46:46. > :46:50.press from day one. There might be a reason for that? Yes, one reason
:46:50. > :46:55.that nobody ever talks about, the greatest sin in politics is to do
:46:56. > :46:59.what none of the political commentators expected. No
:46:59. > :47:03.commentators expected him to win and he did. They were insulted. With the
:47:03. > :47:08.help of the reasons, that was the only reason. It was a technical win,
:47:08. > :47:12.if you like. They can say what they like, but none of them expected it.
:47:12. > :47:16.They were taken by surprise and they didn't like it because they assumed
:47:17. > :47:21.that David was going to win. It was a foregone conclusion. Hasn't he won
:47:21. > :47:26.them over? He is winning them over. He? Yes, he's already improving in
:47:26. > :47:30.the polls. At a very, very slow rate. I mean the party... Let's not
:47:30. > :47:34.exaggerate it. In terms of personal approval ratings, he's gone up
:47:34. > :47:37.according to the polls one point since he game leader. Bearing in
:47:37. > :47:42.mind what we've been discussing over Europe and the economy, one might
:47:42. > :47:45.have thought he'd have improved his ratings considerably more. I think
:47:45. > :47:49.considering the scale of the defeat that we had at the last election the
:47:49. > :47:52.fact that he's held the party together. The party is, I think I'm
:47:52. > :47:59.right in saying, certainly as united, more united certainly than
:47:59. > :48:09.the Tory party, possibly than the liberals. Ed himself is doing
:48:09. > :48:09.
:48:09. > :48:13.extremely well. In my opinion, and bear in mind I've watched more Prime
:48:13. > :48:17.Ministers Question Times from the chamber than any of the rest of you,
:48:17. > :48:21.I think Ed is consistently winning where the leader of the Opposition
:48:21. > :48:25.is never supposed to win. The cards are always stacked against you.
:48:25. > :48:28.that important in terms of public perception? It's important in the
:48:28. > :48:32.House and in the end, it gradually feeds through into public
:48:32. > :48:37.perception. He had a mountain to climb. He's doing extremely well. He
:48:37. > :48:42.is taking nothing for granted. Some of the party grandees don't agree,
:48:42. > :48:47.Peter Mandelson is one of them, not a fan of one-nation Labour. We've
:48:47. > :48:51.heard from Lord Sainsbury, "Mr Average". He said that about all
:48:51. > :48:55.three of them, all three of the party leaders. My impression is, I
:48:55. > :48:59.was surprised because I like David Sainsbury he was a good Science
:48:59. > :49:03.Minister, as I would judge. I have a lot of respect for him. I thought,
:49:03. > :49:07.why on earth has he suddenly decided to make this statement. From what I
:49:07. > :49:10.can make out, he has a book coming out and he gave an interview about
:49:10. > :49:13.the book. Was the journalist interested in the book? Possibly not
:49:13. > :49:19.as much as he was in getting him to say something about the leadership.
:49:19. > :49:24.It's not even a secret at all. David Sainsbury supported David Miliband
:49:24. > :49:28.and was disappointed he didn't get the leadership. Charles Kennedy, we
:49:28. > :49:34.heard Michael Gove perhaps mischieviously accusing Nick
:49:34. > :49:38.Clegg... Characteristically.Your word, showing a bit of leg over the
:49:38. > :49:43.child care policy. It is a bit strange, is it not, for Nick Clegg
:49:43. > :49:48.to have come out at the 11th hour with his disagreement over what is a
:49:48. > :49:52.crucial part of child care reforms? I wasn't party to the maccination
:49:52. > :49:56.that's led up to this. They've been discussing this for months.
:49:56. > :50:00.component of a Queen's Speech I haven't been in Government, both
:50:00. > :50:04.colleagues here have. These processes take months and months
:50:04. > :50:08.before they actually reach the printed page that's put in front of
:50:08. > :50:12.the sovereign. So it is surprising as to what went wrong at the
:50:12. > :50:16.crossroads. It is, I don't know the answer to that. I can only assume,
:50:17. > :50:20.this is an interPrio takes that the -- interpretation, that the detail
:50:20. > :50:23.as oppose to theed principle, of what was agreed, when that was
:50:23. > :50:28.fleshed out by the Conservative Cabinet minister responsible, that's
:50:28. > :50:32.when the alarm bells started ringing in camp Clegg. That's my assumption.
:50:32. > :50:37.Do you reject the assertion that there is challenge going on
:50:37. > :50:41.behind-the-scenes in terms of his leadership? Or any talk or rumour
:50:41. > :50:45.about it? I'm not a good source because given that I trusted people
:50:45. > :50:50.myself a number of years ago in these matters, that was a great
:50:50. > :50:55.mistake on my part. But from the outside looking in, I would think
:50:55. > :51:03.there is no truth in this. I think it is Michael trying to kick up a
:51:03. > :51:07.bit of sand to deflect attention from the on ongoing embroils of the
:51:07. > :51:11.Conservative leadership. I think it is a bit of mischief. If there were
:51:11. > :51:16.any truth in it, and I don't think that there is, my advice to the
:51:16. > :51:21.chaps would be send for the men in white coats. I see. The speculation
:51:21. > :51:24.is that you do know is that Vince Cable would be the man to replace
:51:24. > :51:28.Nick Clegg. And even he himself has said if the opportunity arose it
:51:28. > :51:32.would be something that he'd consider. Do you think there is some
:51:32. > :51:38.truth to Vince Cable perhaps beginning to put feelers out for a
:51:38. > :51:44.replacement? I don't think so, no. I feel a bit bruised because my name's
:51:44. > :51:50.not been mentioned at all. We can reveal, I'm hearing in my ear.
:51:50. > :51:54.get a cheap free hit for tomorrow, can I disspell the notion that I
:51:54. > :51:59.have in any way been approached. I am above the battle. Would you like
:51:59. > :52:07.Vince to replace anybodying? No, I don't want nb to replace anybodying.
:52:08. > :52:17.We have a -- Nick Clegg, we have a liberal as the Deputy Prime
:52:17. > :52:20.Minister. Unless we need our heads examined don't rock the boat.
:52:21. > :52:28.firmly in the House of Lords. king across the water. David Cameron
:52:29. > :52:33.wasn't in the picture, who would be your ideal person? I'm not going to
:52:33. > :52:36.answer that question. Why not?It would get me in great trouble. I
:52:36. > :52:39.will say that the reason Ed Miliband is in difficulty is because he has
:52:39. > :52:45.not acknowledged the economic shambles that Labour were
:52:45. > :52:48.responsible for. Have to leave it there. We hear Chris Huhne, which we
:52:48. > :52:53.said earlier, and his wife Vicky Pryce have been released from prison
:52:53. > :52:58.this morning half their convictions this year for perverting the course
:52:58. > :53:06.of justice. Here are the pictures of the vans taking them home. Chris,
:53:06. > :53:10.where are you and where is Mr Huhne? Can you hear me? Can he hear me?
:53:10. > :53:19.There's Chris Huhne. We can see pictures here. Chris Huhne might be
:53:19. > :53:26.about to make a statement. Let's see if he's going to say something.
:53:26. > :53:32.calm down everybody, all right. OK? I've got a simple thing to say and
:53:32. > :53:37.I'm not going to saying in more after that. So please you know, calm
:53:37. > :53:43.down everybody. All right? First of all, thank you very much for coming.
:53:43. > :53:47.I would just like to say once again, as you know from the night that I
:53:47. > :53:53.was sentenced, I said that I was very sorry for what I'd done. It has
:53:53. > :53:57.been a humbling and sobering experience. I'd like to thank all of
:53:57. > :54:03.those who have written to me, hundreds of letters that I've had
:54:03. > :54:07.and all my family and friends who've stood by me. And I would also just
:54:07. > :54:15.remind you that I've served only part of my sentence and therefore
:54:15. > :54:19.it's not appropriate to say more. I'd now like to get on, get back to
:54:19. > :54:23.home and continue with my life. Thank you for coming.
:54:23. > :54:29.REPORTER: Has prison been good for you?
:54:29. > :54:33.We can see pictures of Chris Huhne and his partner trying to move away
:54:33. > :54:36.from the cameras, who have been following him to get a statement as
:54:36. > :54:40.he has arrived back having been released from prison. He said there
:54:40. > :54:45.himself that there are strict conditions, because he didn't serve
:54:45. > :54:49.the full term. As a result of that, he can't say any more at the moment.
:54:49. > :54:53.I think he'll be lucky if he thinks the press will leave him alone at
:54:53. > :54:57.any time and the same for Vicky Pryce. She was also released this
:54:57. > :55:01.morning. She said she would return to work as an conmiffed. Charles
:55:01. > :55:05.Kennedy, it's going to be difficult for Chris Huhne to return to
:55:05. > :55:09.anything in public life. Is that ruled out all together?
:55:09. > :55:15.necessarily. Chris is a very robust, both very robust characters and very
:55:15. > :55:18.good people as a matter of fact. Strong social conscience about them
:55:18. > :55:23.and very, very intelligent and successful in their respective
:55:23. > :55:27.fields. I do slightly question and this is not a partisan point at all,
:55:27. > :55:31.but the price that they've paid, which is a heavy one for what was
:55:31. > :55:36.the offence... But they did plead guilty to perverting the course of
:55:36. > :55:40.justice. I'm not denying that, if you allow me to complete the
:55:40. > :55:45.thought. Yes, they have to pay a heavy price and they have done
:55:45. > :55:49.so.ive wonder from the point of view of society would their talents not
:55:49. > :55:54.have been better placed instead of being detained, as it were for a
:55:54. > :55:58.couple of months, actually be sent into under privileged schools to do
:55:58. > :56:01.some practical good over that period as well. I'm not saying they should
:56:02. > :56:05.get special treatment, but I think it raises a serious question of a
:56:05. > :56:10.penal policy. Do you say to that? Has it just been a waste of money in
:56:10. > :56:13.that sense and it could have been their time and punishment,if you
:56:13. > :56:20.like, could have been done in a more effective way? It's an interesting
:56:20. > :56:25.thought. My impression has been from fairly early on in this case, the
:56:25. > :56:29.courts themselves and the legal profession take this whole issue and
:56:29. > :56:36.this case incredibly seriously, far more seriously probably I'm afraid
:56:36. > :56:39.than any of us do. For them, the gravity of what was done is probably
:56:40. > :56:44.much greater than most people among the public would think and so I
:56:44. > :56:47.think it was, it's not really any point in considering whether it
:56:47. > :56:51.might have been better handled a different way because it never would
:56:51. > :56:55.have been. Do you think it was the best way to treat them, bearing in
:56:55. > :57:01.mind what they did and the fact that Chris Huhne pleaded guiltedy to
:57:01. > :57:05.perverting the course of justice and it is a serious offence? There was a
:57:05. > :57:08.Scottish judge used to say perverting the course of justice is
:57:08. > :57:12.worse than murder because it's murdering justice, which is a rather
:57:12. > :57:15.extreme position. I feel very sorry for both of them actually. I don't
:57:15. > :57:20.know Chris particularly well. I do know Vicky Pryce. They've paid a
:57:20. > :57:26.very high price indeed for something that was clearly wrong and I just
:57:26. > :57:30.wish them the best. And they clearly have to build their careers. I think
:57:30. > :57:35.what happened to their familiuals horrendous. People may say they
:57:35. > :57:40.brought it upon themselves. They will. But anyone with the slightest
:57:40. > :57:45.amount of human empathy and read the e-mails and watched that and not
:57:45. > :57:50.felt sympathy. Today he's behaved with great dignity as she has. I
:57:50. > :57:54.think the press should leave them alone. I felt particularly sorry for
:57:54. > :57:58.Vicky Pryce, if you've ever seen a notice about speeding, it says who
:57:58. > :58:01.was driving the car? You don't get another form unless you have said
:58:01. > :58:06.someone else is driving the car. He had already done something which put
:58:06. > :58:09.his whole career in jeopardy by the time she was asked to put her
:58:09. > :58:15.signature on the form. Do you think the Liberal Democrats will hope that
:58:15. > :58:20.Chris Huhne will quietly disappear into obscurity? No, I don't see an
:58:20. > :58:23.elecheed future for him. No, just generally that he would just...
:58:23. > :58:27.think Chris is the kind of individual, whatever he does next,
:58:27. > :58:31.he'll produce ideas. They will feed their way into our policy making
:58:31. > :58:36.process, I'm quite sure. Just very quickly, we had a question about
:58:36. > :58:41.which MP would win a fight according to a poll. Any ideas? David Cameron,
:58:41. > :58:45.Theresa May, Ed Balls, Jacob Rees-Mogg. I know it was bizarre. It
:58:45. > :58:48.was Ed Balls. This kind of fight, not a political fight. I can see the
:58:48. > :58:51.confusion there. That's all for today. Thanks to our guests. We will
:58:51. > :58:54.have to tell them about the quiz. The one o'clock news is starting on