:00:39. > :00:43.Daily Politics. The government says 16-year-olds should be sitting
:00:43. > :00:47.tougher GCSEs with less coursework and more end-of-year exams. So, is
:00:47. > :00:51.it back to the old O-levels? Should women inherit peerages even
:00:51. > :00:54.if they have older brothers? We'll meet the Conservative MP who thinks
:00:54. > :00:58.they should. Ann Widdecombe will be with us,
:00:58. > :01:04.looking back at her time in politics and on Strictly Come Dancing, as she
:01:04. > :01:13.publishes the book of her life. And, House of Cards gets the
:01:13. > :01:22.American treatment with Kevin Spacey.
:01:22. > :01:26.You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.
:01:26. > :01:29.All that in the next hour. With us for the whole programme today is
:01:29. > :01:32.Lord Dobbs, the Conservative peer and the best-selling author of House
:01:32. > :01:36.of Cards. So, lots to look forward to. But first, Michael Dobbs, what
:01:36. > :01:42.do you make of the modern Tory Party?
:01:42. > :01:48.I am rather excited by it. They are going through a wonderful period.
:01:48. > :01:53.Those of us who can remember what mid-term is always like. We have
:01:53. > :01:59.lots of new ideas coming out, we will be discussing education today.
:01:59. > :02:04.Some serious issues, like Syria, one issue I get hot under the collar
:02:04. > :02:14.about. An economy which appears to be turning possibly.
:02:14. > :02:14.
:02:14. > :02:19.Do not mention those green shoots. And the opposition in government...
:02:19. > :02:22.Did you have reservations at the beginning? Were you always a fan of
:02:22. > :02:27.David Cameron? I have always been a fan,
:02:27. > :02:31.personally. He once taught me how to use my credit card to scrape the ice
:02:31. > :02:35.from my windscreen. What about as leader of the party and Prime
:02:35. > :02:43.Minister? Look at the polls, he is still the
:02:43. > :02:47.most popular of the leaders. I remember, in the mid-19 80s. 356
:02:47. > :02:51.economists wrote to the Times, saying, Maggie Thatcher hasn't the
:02:51. > :02:55.slightest idea to run the economy. She got it right, they got it
:02:55. > :03:00.wrong. Leaders always come under pressure.
:03:00. > :03:03.Is he Thatcherite enough for you? I would like him to be leader of a
:03:03. > :03:08.Conservative government which he does not have the ability to do at
:03:08. > :03:13.the moment. I am plugging for a majority conservatives in the next
:03:13. > :03:18.government. What is your sense of the new intake
:03:18. > :03:25.of backbenchers and their relationship with him?
:03:25. > :03:28.It is quite fraught at times. On the other hand, everybody says that the
:03:28. > :03:33.new intake of backbenchers particularly the Conservatives, one
:03:33. > :03:38.of the best intakes of a generation. There is a lots of talent bubbling
:03:38. > :03:43.away wanting to get out. It causes problems for him. He is facing a
:03:43. > :03:50.reshuffle. How can he disappointed even more people? That is the stuff
:03:50. > :03:53.of leadership, the job he has to What should he do about the rise of
:03:53. > :04:00.UKIP? He should get on with the policy he
:04:00. > :04:05.set out, renegotiating that European deal, and fundamentally. I am
:04:05. > :04:10.sceptical about Europe. It is right he should give it the best possible
:04:10. > :04:15.shot of renegotiating that usually important deal. You don't think it
:04:15. > :04:18.is a lost cause? Absolutely not, it would undermine UKIP just like that.
:04:18. > :04:22.Now it's time for our daily quiz. Who has Communities Secretary Eric
:04:22. > :04:25.Pickles said that we mustn't upset? Is it: a) Liberal Democrats.
:04:25. > :04:29.B) Dustmen. C) Germans.
:04:29. > :04:35.Or d) Hedgehogs? At the end of the show, Michael will
:04:35. > :04:37.It's being dubbed the biggest exam shake-up in a generation, with
:04:37. > :04:43.Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, calling today for
:04:44. > :04:47.something more rigorous than the current system of GCSEs. There is a
:04:47. > :04:50.statement to the House of Commons in a few moments' time. But what
:04:50. > :04:54.changes are expected to take place, and how will the exam change
:04:54. > :04:59.practically? We know that the Department for Education will be
:04:59. > :05:02.consulting with Ofqual on a new grading system. The current A* to G
:05:03. > :05:08.system could be replaced with a mark between one to eight. Eight being
:05:08. > :05:14.the highest. Coursework will be largely abolished in favour of
:05:14. > :05:18.end-of-year exams. In English, pupils will be expected
:05:18. > :05:21.to read whole plays and not just sections of them.
:05:21. > :05:24.English will also see more poetry and the 19th century novel.
:05:25. > :05:27.Mathematics will see tougher algebra and more statistics.
:05:27. > :05:32.While foreign languages will require a better understanding of grammar
:05:32. > :05:38.and translations. The first course is expected to
:05:38. > :05:41.start in September 2015, with the first exams to be sat in 2017.
:05:41. > :05:47.And, despite previous talk of it being called an I-level, the new
:05:47. > :05:56.exam will still be called the GCSE. This was the Education Minister Liz
:05:56. > :06:02.Truss earlier today. What we are doing in the new GCSE is
:06:02. > :06:05.we want more long questions, more opportunity for students to think,
:06:06. > :06:09.more key numeracy and literacy skills so pupils are better prepared
:06:09. > :06:11.for the world of work. With us now is the former Schools
:06:11. > :06:16.Minister Nick Gibb. Labour's Shadow Schools Minister Kevin Brennan. And
:06:16. > :06:21.the General Secretary of the NUT, Christine Blower.
:06:21. > :06:27.Welcome to all of you. Nick Gibb, these sound like the O-levels I did.
:06:27. > :06:34.There is a similarity but this is an all ability exam. What they are
:06:34. > :06:38.designed to do, these reforms, is to equip school leavers with the
:06:38. > :06:41.ability to face the global job market in the future, with young
:06:41. > :06:48.people from very high performing countries like Finland, parts of
:06:48. > :06:53.China. If we want to equip our young people they need to be able to write
:06:53. > :06:58.essays, to apply their mathematical knowledge in an unpredictable way.
:06:58. > :07:01.And also to become fluent in mathematics. That is what these new
:07:01. > :07:07.exams are designed to achieve. And none of that was being tested or
:07:07. > :07:13.taught? They were piecemeal, bite sized
:07:13. > :07:18.exams. There was a culture of resits where people were entered for exam
:07:18. > :07:24.exam. Between the age of 15-17, we were the most examined nation in the
:07:24. > :07:30.world because of this culture. And controlled assessment absorbed
:07:30. > :07:34.teaching time in schools but not delivering actual education.
:07:34. > :07:37.One of the biggest criticisms is having an end of year exam was a
:07:37. > :07:43.linear way of testing the achievement and performance of
:07:43. > :07:47.pupils, hence the introduction of coursework. All that seems to happen
:07:47. > :07:52.is a hamster wheel of changes in education where one system is
:07:52. > :07:57.replaced by another, then it reverts to the original system.
:07:57. > :08:00.There is an ideological debate in education. Over two decades, this
:08:00. > :08:07.country has drifted down international league tables. This is
:08:07. > :08:11.a way of testing what children have learned. Children are used to taking
:08:11. > :08:15.exams at the end of the first three years so they shouldn't be under
:08:15. > :08:20.more stress if they have practised them by the time they come to year
:08:20. > :08:25.Do you accept the claim that the system and the performance of the
:08:25. > :08:30.country has drifted as a result of GCSEs based on coursework weather
:08:30. > :08:36.wasn't enough rigour, according to Nick Gibb?
:08:36. > :08:42.It is clear in recent years we have not improved our performance,
:08:42. > :08:49.according to OECD figures. The government has been criticised
:08:49. > :08:54.heavily of misinterpreting those statistics. This is Michael Gove
:08:54. > :09:02.with his fourth we sit at the exam question! First he wanted O-levels
:09:02. > :09:07.to come back, then we had about I levels. Now, we have what seem
:09:07. > :09:12.perhaps like O-levels but somehow for everybody. What is wrong with
:09:12. > :09:19.this reform is, instead of making a reasonable reform, there is a good
:09:19. > :09:24.case for reforms of GCSE. Because of the ideological battle which Nick
:09:24. > :09:28.admitted, rather than evidence -based changes, they have swept a
:09:28. > :09:32.lot of good things like coursework in some subjects which can be
:09:32. > :09:40.valuable. It is wrong to assess people solely on what they do in a
:09:40. > :09:48.two and a half hour exam at the end of two years. If there is a fault in
:09:48. > :09:56.assessment, let us not sweep it away for ideological reasons.
:09:56. > :10:02.Quoting one commentator, some countries are storming ahead. We are
:10:02. > :10:06.in a global race. We have fallen dramatically down the league tables.
:10:06. > :10:10.What is your view to these reforms from the teaching perspective? Is it
:10:10. > :10:15.something which will be welcomed if there is more rigour as the
:10:15. > :10:20.Conservatives are claiming? If, what has been child is what will be
:10:20. > :10:24.announced today, it won't generally be welcomed. What we mustn't do
:10:24. > :10:28.today is undermined and demean the things which young people hitherto
:10:28. > :10:33.have achieved. They have been working very hard these GCSEs and
:10:33. > :10:37.just because more people were able to pass them does not mean they were
:10:37. > :10:41.being dumbed down. Teachers are working hard, young people are
:10:41. > :10:51.working hard. To sweep away all coursework on the basis, yes, there
:10:51. > :10:53.
:10:53. > :10:55.was a problem last year, but the Welsh government took the sensible
:10:55. > :10:59.decision they would regrade children so they actually got what they
:10:59. > :11:02.really deserved. In this country, we did not do that. Let us come back to
:11:02. > :11:08.the point teachers and pupils working very hard, do you challenge
:11:08. > :11:13.the assertion GCSEs have become too easy? With coursework, it was too
:11:13. > :11:18.piecemeal, somehow there wasn't a system recognised internationally or
:11:18. > :11:23.by businesses that our children in England weren't doing tough enough
:11:23. > :11:30.work in exams? I do challenge that. Also because of the work being done
:11:30. > :11:36.in Canada which has successful provinces. With so many students
:11:36. > :11:39.doing remarkably well over a period of years. Teachers got very good at
:11:39. > :11:43.teaching GCSEs. There is a discussion to be had about the
:11:43. > :11:49.balance between coursework and final exams. I am not saying there should
:11:49. > :11:55.never be a review of exams. The fact we are sweeping that away, we only
:11:55. > :11:58.have a final exam for every subject doesn't seem to treat this with the
:11:58. > :12:04.seriousness it deserves. Actually, we need to look at what is in the
:12:04. > :12:09.syllabus and how best to examine These changes would be coming in, in
:12:09. > :12:14.England. One of the points raised by the Education Select Committee is
:12:14. > :12:20.the worry, fear and regrets about having three different systems for
:12:20. > :12:24.England, Northern Ireland and Wales, how can that be a good thing? It is
:12:24. > :12:30.a consequence of devolution. It is a bad thing if Wales does not accept
:12:30. > :12:36.it means to do something about GCSEs. It is falling down the league
:12:36. > :12:40.tables even faster than this country. Michael Gove has given up
:12:40. > :12:47.too easily on having an exam in England, Wales and Northern Ireland,
:12:47. > :12:52.to be sat by all. Just because there is some disagreement, he says, I am
:12:52. > :12:57.cutting away from the rest of the UK. Extremely petulant and a
:12:57. > :13:01.divisive thing to do. Why not seriously have discussions about how
:13:02. > :13:06.best to keep a GCSE across the country 's even if Wales wants to
:13:06. > :13:12.keep it more modular than England. Is it a good thing to sweep away
:13:12. > :13:17.everything that has gone before, in terms of GCSEs and coursework? For a
:13:17. > :13:27.single exam which would fit in with other parts of the United Kingdom?
:13:27. > :13:30.
:13:30. > :13:35.My son last year had to go through and enjoy the GCSE fiasco. I do not
:13:35. > :13:40.get the complacency. He had a lot of coursework which was entirely
:13:40. > :13:44.unnecessary. I do get a problem, I do have a problem with all of these
:13:44. > :13:48.systems being run for the teachers, the ministers to be able to say,
:13:48. > :13:53.look how we are going up the league table, which is what Labour did a
:13:54. > :13:58.year after year, promising education, education, education. It
:13:58. > :14:04.did not deliver. We needed a new way to look at things. I, as a parent,
:14:04. > :14:11.find it very difficult when I see teaching trade unions whose slogans
:14:11. > :14:15.are, putting teachers first. As a parent... That is not a slogan of
:14:15. > :14:21.our union. Teachers should be putting pupils first, not
:14:21. > :14:25.themselves. Teachers should be putting education first so we have a
:14:25. > :14:28.service working very well come to make sure what we have is educated
:14:28. > :14:34.citizens who come through the service and who have something
:14:34. > :14:39.worthwhile. The issue is not what is best teachers but what is best for
:14:39. > :14:45.the education service. To simply say a linear exam at the end of two
:14:45. > :14:50.years is best for everyone in all circumstances is not answer. What is
:14:50. > :14:56.best for pupils. Is a single exam the best way? I think they will be
:14:56. > :15:00.making progress. I despair of teachers because politicians have
:15:00. > :15:04.changed the system time after time. Not all parents with a Greek
:15:04. > :15:10.sweeping away coursework is a good thing. Many parents will be
:15:10. > :15:16.concerned their children will only be tested on how they perform after
:15:16. > :15:21.two years without there being any leeway for the work they have done.
:15:21. > :15:29.A Labour government, would it reversed these changes? We haven't
:15:29. > :15:34.had a good look at the AF changes. On GCSEs, we will have to look. We
:15:34. > :15:44.don't want to reverse things. This is a consultation. We will look
:15:44. > :15:52.
:15:52. > :15:57.carefully at the detail. It has been There is disagreement in the best
:15:57. > :16:06.way to test people's. You are talking about competition on a
:16:06. > :16:12.global stage. Are you obsessed with international league tables? It may
:16:12. > :16:16.not be preparing pupils for the job market. Will doing more poetry and
:16:16. > :16:23.having an exam - will it help young people get better jobs at the end
:16:23. > :16:27.of it? The CBI says 42% of its membership are concerned about the
:16:27. > :16:31.skills of school leavers and graduates coming into firms. It is
:16:31. > :16:36.about improving essay writing skills and making sure young people
:16:37. > :16:42.can understand how the mass applies to problems. At the moment, with
:16:42. > :16:47.GCSE maths, it is very clear which formula to apply. We want there to
:16:47. > :16:51.be a problem where they have to work out which maths applies to it.
:16:51. > :16:56.It will equip young people very well for the international jobs
:16:56. > :17:00.market. Combine that the changes we are making to be competing exam,
:17:00. > :17:06.Syrian people will learn about programming and not simply using a
:17:06. > :17:10.spreadsheet. Some of that I am very happy to support. We will support
:17:10. > :17:17.the IT changes. In fact, the CBI this morning has said these changes
:17:17. > :17:23.will not do what it was said they would do. What they have suggested
:17:23. > :17:27.is we need to look much more about what the role of high-stakes exams
:17:27. > :17:33.at 16 is in a world where the participation what everyone that
:17:33. > :17:37.has been raised to 18. It is no longer a school leaving point. The
:17:38. > :17:45.need to reach a consensus about the best way forward and pilot it
:17:45. > :17:51.properly. No exam form ever works unless you try it out first.
:17:51. > :17:56.will the teachers cope with the changes? Is it enough time? Is it
:17:56. > :18:00.practical to change the system that automatically? There is a great
:18:00. > :18:04.deal of change being proposed in that time frame and nothing in the
:18:04. > :18:10.way of a pilot. Talking Rugby increasing participation and age,
:18:10. > :18:16.that is very significant. -- talking about the increasing
:18:16. > :18:21.participation age. Which will one young people to remain in education
:18:21. > :18:26.for longer than 16. -- we all want. We did think there is a problem
:18:26. > :18:30.with this. We agreed that any government should consult with the
:18:30. > :18:34.profession and look at having the very best exam system we can have.
:18:34. > :18:39.We do not believe that what is likely to come out today is tending
:18:39. > :18:42.in that direction. Now, a new book, The Body Economic: Why Austerity
:18:42. > :18:45.Kills, argues that across the world there is clear evidence austerity
:18:45. > :18:53.measures introduced in response to the financial crisis have harmed
:18:53. > :18:55.our physical and mental health. According to research by the book's
:18:55. > :18:57.authors, David Stuckler and Sanjay Basu, there was an increase of
:18:57. > :19:00.4,750 suicides above the statistical trend during the
:19:00. > :19:10.recession in America, and around 1,000 extra suicides in the UK in
:19:10. > :19:14.
:19:14. > :19:20.And for each suicide case, there are an estimated ten attempts and
:19:20. > :19:24.up to 1,000 extra cases of depression. The authors argue that
:19:24. > :19:30.the effect of austerity measures in the UK since 2010 is evident in
:19:30. > :19:37.homelessness rates. They say 10,000 families have been made homeless.
:19:37. > :19:40.But the most extreme examples they give concern Greece. They argue
:19:40. > :19:43.cuts in HIV-prevention budgets have coincided with a 200% increase in
:19:43. > :19:48.the virus in Greece, driven by a sharp rise in intravenous drug use
:19:48. > :19:50.by unemployed young people. The authors contrast Greece with
:19:50. > :19:56.Iceland, which saw a collapse of its banking system but protected
:19:56. > :19:59.social spending. And they say that not only are anti-austerity
:19:59. > :20:02.measures good for the health of a nation, but actually good for its
:20:02. > :20:11.economy, pointing to Iceland's growth of 3% in 2012 compared to
:20:11. > :20:13.0.2% in UK. I'm now joined by one of the authors of The Body Economic,
:20:13. > :20:23.David Stuckler, and the Director General of the Institute of
:20:23. > :20:32.Economic Affairs, Mark Littlewood. Where does the UK fit into the
:20:32. > :20:37.crease, Iceland spectrum? We have been looking at how economic
:20:37. > :20:41.hardship and unemployment and poverty come decked, poses risks to
:20:41. > :20:51.health. When politicians respond with deep cuts, that can be turned
:20:51. > :20:51.
:20:51. > :20:59.into epidemics. Receipt early- warning signs come such as a rise
:20:59. > :21:03.in suicides. -- receipt early warning signs, such as a rise in
:21:03. > :21:08.suicides. Is it your contention that austerity measures undertaken
:21:08. > :21:13.by the coalition government have actually killed people? What we are
:21:13. > :21:19.seeing in cases such as Greece, effective prevention programmes
:21:19. > :21:23.have been slashed and leading to a return of malaria has prevention
:21:24. > :21:28.programmes were cut and HIV programmes slashed? In the UK, we
:21:28. > :21:34.have seen cases where there has been an increase in homelessness
:21:34. > :21:39.rates, coinciding with cuts to social housing budgets. We have
:21:39. > :21:45.heard recently that has caught some people to end their lives rather
:21:45. > :21:49.than leave homes they have been living in for 20 years. It is eight
:21:49. > :21:52.too high a price to pay for individual well-being. I'm sure he
:21:52. > :21:56.is right. If we could find a mechanism where we could ever live
:21:56. > :22:00.beyond our means, we would be happier and healthier. We could
:22:00. > :22:05.build many more hospitals, if we were willing to add even more to
:22:05. > :22:11.the budget deficit of �123 billion a year. It is very difficult to say
:22:11. > :22:15.whether austerity works. In United Kingdom, it has not been tried. We
:22:15. > :22:19.are adding �600 billion to the national debt to the cause of this
:22:19. > :22:25.Parliament. �10,000 for every man, woman and child will be spent by
:22:25. > :22:33.George Osborne. Where we have seen what is sometimes described as
:22:33. > :22:39.austerity, it is in fact fairly substantial spending and it has
:22:39. > :22:44.been pitiful. Growth has been flatlining. Spending vast sums of
:22:44. > :22:54.money we do not have does not seem to be doing the trick. What you say
:22:54. > :22:57.
:22:57. > :23:06.to that? It is crystal clear that the punches with the deepest cuts -
:23:06. > :23:15.- be can choose with the deepest cuts, have had the best recovery.
:23:15. > :23:22.The UK economy has flat lined. has been very similar in the UK and
:23:22. > :23:32.the US. What you mean by posterity? Are you talking about cutting
:23:32. > :23:32.
:23:32. > :23:38.government spending? -- what do you Mistakes were made in the lead-up
:23:38. > :23:44.to the crisis. You must save him the good times and spend in the bad.
:23:44. > :23:53.One example comes from collective history. In the post war period,
:23:53. > :23:59.the Government founded the welfare state. It did not break the bank.
:23:59. > :24:02.The debt fell by half. Virtually every Western country has suffered
:24:02. > :24:07.because of the financial crash. There are enormous differences
:24:07. > :24:12.between the position we found ourselves in after World War II.
:24:12. > :24:22.Getting itself heavily in debt to defeat not season seems a price
:24:22. > :24:25.
:24:25. > :24:32.worth paying and it was sensible to do. -- Naziism. In Iceland, the
:24:32. > :24:39.banking crisis was a huge one-off job. Underlying Iceland was a
:24:39. > :24:43.stable situation. Underline Greece was a nightmare. A wise man once
:24:43. > :24:49.said, when the tide goes out, you see who is women with no clothes on.
:24:49. > :24:54.The Greeks had no clothes on and the Icelandic were not. There is no
:24:54. > :24:58.comparison between Greece and Iceland. Iceland has its own
:24:58. > :25:02.currency and Greece does not. Greece were denied the tools it
:25:03. > :25:08.needed. Do you accept that the arguments over whether austerity is
:25:08. > :25:14.the right policy to pursue - do you accept that cuts in public spending
:25:14. > :25:19.to result in reducing the well- being of the country's individuals?
:25:19. > :25:23.In Greece, where there have been extreme cuts, it has resulted in an
:25:23. > :25:32.increase in suicides and depression and this has happened albeit to a
:25:32. > :25:42.lesser extent. It depends what companies the Kurds. I am in favour
:25:42. > :25:43.
:25:43. > :25:48.of the government taxing a lot less. -- the Kurds. We must not spend
:25:48. > :25:53.more year on year than we bringing in tax receipts. That is dangerous
:25:53. > :25:56.and immoral. We are spending on ourselves today, our health care
:25:56. > :26:01.and social security costs and sending the bill to our
:26:01. > :26:08.grandchildren to pick up. Doesn't that Ben result in a situation you
:26:08. > :26:17.are describing - economic collapse? -- the end result. It is about
:26:17. > :26:22.illogical argument and sound data. -- ideological argument. The fiscal
:26:23. > :26:32.multiply, the effect on government spending on health is changing. We
:26:33. > :26:33.
:26:33. > :26:39.have one of the biggest Malta pliers. -- multipliers. If it were
:26:39. > :26:48.the drugs trial, it would have been discontinued. Now with the
:26:48. > :26:52.epidemics in Greece, it will cost more. I hear what you're saying
:26:52. > :26:57.about Greece but I think you are confusing the difference between a
:26:57. > :27:02.bit of surgery, which is often necessary, and total amputation.
:27:02. > :27:11.Total amputation is life-changing. You think it has been wrong in
:27:11. > :27:16.Greece. It has been a nightmare. Almost criminal. The UK has a
:27:16. > :27:26.political choice in how to respond. Posterity has not stimulated
:27:26. > :27:27.
:27:27. > :27:32.recovery. It is causing harm. -- austerity has not stimulated
:27:32. > :27:42.recovery. A generation has been left behind. About the cats being
:27:42. > :27:42.
:27:42. > :27:52.in the wrong place, what about the amount the work and pentathlons --
:27:52. > :28:02.work and pensions paid? With the cats, the deficits continued to
:28:02. > :28:03.
:28:03. > :28:06.They are trying to stamp out fraud. We are looking at about 1% per
:28:06. > :28:10.annum. George Osborne thinks we should spend �600 billion of money
:28:10. > :28:16.we do not have over the course of this Parliament. Do you think
:28:16. > :28:21.things will get better if we spend 700, �800 billion that we do not
:28:21. > :28:25.have? I do not understand where the limits on that come from. It all
:28:25. > :28:27.sounds a bit Downton Abbey. But a real political battle is starting
:28:27. > :28:30.up over whether aristocratic daughters should have the same
:28:30. > :28:33.rights as sons when it comes to inheriting the estate. Mary Macleod
:28:33. > :28:36.worked for the Queen before becoming a Conservative MP. She's
:28:36. > :28:39.calling for a new law to scrap rules which state that younger
:28:39. > :28:49.brothers are given automatic preference over older sisters. In a
:28:49. > :29:15.
:29:15. > :29:19.moment, we'll talk to Mary. But, Viewers of Downton Abbey may
:29:19. > :29:24.remember the story of the Earl of Grantham who cannot leave his
:29:24. > :29:28.estate and title to his eldest daughter. Some may think it is
:29:28. > :29:37.depicting a quaint and historic era but that is still the situation
:29:37. > :29:43.today. The time is right to do something about it. Currently, in
:29:43. > :29:48.most hereditary peerages, there is no preference cognitive
:29:48. > :29:54.primogeniture. That means the first born son will inherit the title and
:29:54. > :29:59.the state. Give them are no more sons, the title could go to someone
:29:59. > :30:03.who does not even live in Great Britain. The aristocracy is now
:30:03. > :30:07.well behind the monarchy on this issue. The Queen was able to
:30:07. > :30:12.inherit the throne in the absence of a brother. If the Duke and
:30:12. > :30:22.Duchess of Cambridge have a bail, she will be able to be Queen
:30:22. > :30:33.
:30:33. > :30:35.evening she has a younger brother. integral role in our country and we
:30:35. > :30:37.want everyone to fulfil their potential.
:30:37. > :30:47.That beautiful building was the National Trust's Ham House, in
:30:47. > :30:49.
:30:49. > :30:52.Surrey. Mary Macleod is with us now. And with her is Charles Mosley, the
:30:52. > :30:59.former editor-in-chief of Burke's Peerage. What you make of that
:30:59. > :31:04.suggestion? It is bogus league egalitarian,
:31:04. > :31:07.trying to slot an interest group, the females, into a privilege which
:31:07. > :31:13.is currently the privilege of another interest group, the males.
:31:13. > :31:17.There is nothing wrong with that provided you say that is what it is.
:31:17. > :31:24.Are you being dishonest, Mary Macleod? That is the most outrageous
:31:24. > :31:27.thing I have heard. We make up half the population and it seems
:31:27. > :31:34.ridiculous in the 21st-century we do not value women as much as we do
:31:34. > :31:40.men. Don't you value women as much as men? I have been married twice,
:31:40. > :31:45.if that isn't an example. We will let that be a measure for you.
:31:45. > :31:55.the aristocracy, daughters of the nobility get better treatment
:31:55. > :31:55.
:31:55. > :31:59.whereas the younger sons do not. you saying this bill does not cover
:31:59. > :32:09.enough of the complexity of what happens in terms of aristocracy and
:32:09. > :32:14.titles. Excellently put, it doesn't cover the issue of baronet who
:32:14. > :32:22.outnumber the peers. Surely this suggestion is a good start. If she
:32:22. > :32:26.wants to make women, give them a leg up in terms of title, she should go
:32:26. > :32:33.for the bigger group of baronet. would be happy to include the
:32:33. > :32:42.baronet within that as well. This is not a leg up but fairness and
:32:42. > :32:48.equality. I feel, nowadays, when you have more than 50% of girls
:32:49. > :32:53.graduating from university, and doing better at schools, let us have
:32:53. > :32:59.equality, saying it is the first born who inherited it is. Society
:32:59. > :33:05.has moved on. If the monarchy can do it, the Queen is way ahead by
:33:05. > :33:11.allowing the Crown succession bill to go through. It is out of touch
:33:11. > :33:16.discrimination and you are backing it. My objection is the poor old
:33:16. > :33:22.younger sons and daughters get the short end of the stick, age
:33:22. > :33:31.discrimination is just as wicked. But surely you are using that as an
:33:31. > :33:39.excuse to mask what is an equal and unfair. Life is unequal and unfair.
:33:39. > :33:45.Ladies should angle also for peerages then. Michael Dobson?
:33:45. > :33:53.conservative, did I mention that? You are welcome to mention it again.
:33:53. > :33:58.At the heart of that is not equality, equal opportunity, you
:33:58. > :34:05.cannot discriminate against people. If you have a hereditary system, I
:34:05. > :34:10.think it is impossible nowadays to justify it, to have only one sex and
:34:10. > :34:16.not the other. There are real practical problems. If you have
:34:16. > :34:20.brought up your family, your daughters and sons, to say when I
:34:20. > :34:27.die, this is how it is going to be, the life they have become accustomed
:34:27. > :34:35.to come it is difficult to change it. There are practical problems. In
:34:35. > :34:40.principle it must surely change in the 21st-century. This affects only
:34:40. > :34:47.if you people but symbolically it is something we need to address. It is
:34:47. > :34:57.saying nowadays we should have men and women with equal opportunity to
:34:57. > :34:58.
:34:58. > :35:03.succeed, and at work. Or abolish hereditary peers, all of them.
:35:03. > :35:08.peerages to the whole population. Make every female a duchess, every
:35:08. > :35:12.mail a duke. You are using the Gallup Terry and argument in a bogus
:35:12. > :35:17.way to try to prevent something which appears to be fairly natural
:35:17. > :35:21.and inoffensive. Equality is the most pernicious inheritors of the
:35:21. > :35:27.French Revolution. In practice, it inhibits freedom and the liberty
:35:27. > :35:33.which is its brother. We are talking equal opportunity rather than
:35:33. > :35:39.equality. Where do you start your opportunity? Whether you are black,
:35:39. > :35:43.white, gay or straight, a man or a woman. That is where you start, at
:35:43. > :35:47.birth. What about the practical difficulties raised by Michael
:35:47. > :35:55.Dobson, being raised to expect a title, then all of that is taken
:35:55. > :35:58.away with you -- from you. There are ways to open the bill to make it
:35:58. > :36:08.voluntary for this generation. Then it would change for the next
:36:08. > :36:08.
:36:08. > :36:12.generation. To make it easier in transition. You will find the
:36:12. > :36:17.majority of peers will support this, they feel it is time for
:36:17. > :36:21.change and we should not discriminate. It is not just titles,
:36:21. > :36:27.but complex property laws. There is an expectation as you said if you
:36:27. > :36:31.have been brought up to inherit an estate and it is taken away.
:36:31. > :36:39.Wouldn't that every -- wouldn't that happen every time you make a new
:36:39. > :36:43.law. The principle has to be clear. Whether we get there right now or
:36:43. > :36:51.whether we phase it in is an issue we should discuss. If the bill going
:36:51. > :36:57.to get anywhere? Private members bills don't often get anywhere. But
:36:57. > :37:03.actually not. It is something we can fight for behind the scenes. It is
:37:03. > :37:09.something I feel personally about strongly. It is something I can try
:37:09. > :37:13.to persuade as many people as possible to support. But not you?
:37:13. > :37:19.Not me. I can give you technical advice but purely on a business
:37:20. > :37:22.basis. She has been a government minister,
:37:22. > :37:26.a novelist, and a celebrity ballroom dancer. She has tangled with Michael
:37:26. > :37:31.Howard, and tangoed with Craig Revel Horwood. The Daily Telegraph's
:37:31. > :37:34.expenses investigators described her as a "saint" among members. But that
:37:34. > :37:39.didn't stop her starring with the baddies in an episode of Doctor Who.
:37:39. > :37:49.I wonder what Ann Widdecombe found to write about in her new book? In a
:37:49. > :38:01.
:38:01. > :38:05.moment, we'll ask her. But, first, What does something of the night
:38:05. > :38:09.mean? I don't think I will elaborate on that.
:38:09. > :38:19.He has formally proposed a policeman should approach a junk and blog and
:38:19. > :38:36.
:38:36. > :38:46.demand a �100 fine. Correction-macro published the story of her life:
:38:46. > :38:48.
:38:48. > :38:54.Strictly Ann. The book starts with your early life
:38:54. > :38:58.in Singapore. Very sheltered, no TV, no sex education, nobody got
:38:58. > :39:05.divorced. How much of your later political beliefs were forged in
:39:05. > :39:10.those early years? I think very few people find their
:39:10. > :39:14.political beliefs based on their life experience. The reason I chose
:39:14. > :39:20.conservatism over socialism was precisely because I believed in the
:39:20. > :39:26.individual over the state. And I hated what in those days wasn't some
:39:26. > :39:31.muddle about the tone -- centre ground, it was out and out
:39:31. > :39:36.socialism. You never dabbled in any ideas of socialism? I was never
:39:36. > :39:40.attracted by it, I always believed in the individual right to grow.
:39:40. > :39:48.What about religion in terms of affecting your political life, it is
:39:48. > :39:54.a huge part of the book. The parable of the good Samaritan, he was a
:39:54. > :39:59.businessman, a successful guy. He put it at the disposal of the man
:39:59. > :40:04.who needed it. You complain about the lack of Scripture in schools,
:40:04. > :40:10.you oppose women priests. How did it affect your political career, in
:40:10. > :40:14.terms of the ministerial jobs you did and didn't get? I was pensions
:40:14. > :40:18.minister and prisons minister, highly complex posts. I can't say
:40:18. > :40:27.that influenced any of them. Would becoming Health Secretary have been
:40:27. > :40:33.difficult? I could not have taken on the role of licensing abortion
:40:33. > :40:40.clinics, so I would have had a difficulty with that.
:40:40. > :40:43.You wanted to be a politician all your adult life. That is right, I
:40:43. > :40:51.developed political ambitions very early, but did not get into
:40:51. > :40:56.parliament until I was 39. What did you do before? I began by marketing
:40:56. > :41:01.with Unilever. I went to London University where I looked after
:41:01. > :41:05.buildings and medical equipment. there too many special advisers when
:41:05. > :41:11.in Westminster? I wouldn't say there are too many now. But if the trend
:41:11. > :41:15.were to grow, my answer would be yes. When you have ministers who are
:41:15. > :41:18.themselves special advisers and little in between being advised by
:41:18. > :41:24.special advisers who have come straight from the research
:41:24. > :41:31.departments of their party HQ, you have a problem.
:41:31. > :41:36.Having been an MP... Constituency selection panels will look at
:41:36. > :41:41.anybody up to the age of 45 but it would be a healthier system if they
:41:41. > :41:47.said we will not look at anybody below the age of 45. By that age,
:41:47. > :41:53.you have experience, and outside world. You have some independence.
:41:53. > :41:57.What is very important for MPs is to be independent to themselves.
:41:57. > :42:04.said you admired the young new intake. Surely that is a good
:42:04. > :42:10.thing, not full of old fuddy-duddies. Winston Churchill
:42:10. > :42:13.became an MP at the great age of 20. There are exceptions to every rule.
:42:13. > :42:23.We are talking about a balance which has shifted nowadays to the younger
:42:23. > :42:28.
:42:28. > :42:31.generation. Where do you stand in terms of the leadership? The MPs
:42:31. > :42:38.reduced the list to two people and I knew I simply didn't have sufficient
:42:38. > :42:44.support. I did have some. I suspect, if you ask people about Ann
:42:44. > :42:48.Widdecombe, they would remember the something of the night description,
:42:48. > :42:58.and Strictly Come Dancing. With that oppress you? That would not depress
:42:58. > :43:03.
:43:03. > :43:11.me at all. I had to address it for the first time for the sake of the
:43:11. > :43:17.book. Margaret Thatcher, she would never have won the next election in
:43:17. > :43:27.1992. Undeniably, we secured ourselves that election. I would say
:43:27. > :43:32.ideally I wish we had lost 1992. Would you have like to see Ann
:43:32. > :43:35.Widdecombe stand for the election? do not think she would have won. The
:43:36. > :43:41.Tory party is strange. We elect leaders not because of who they are
:43:41. > :43:46.but because of who they are not. Maggie was not Ted Heath. We made
:43:46. > :43:52.sure we would not elect Ken Clarke or Michael Heseltine. Which is why
:43:52. > :43:59.we have had the range of leaders we have had. It would be good to vote
:43:59. > :44:04.for candidates positively. Wasn't John Major the perfect antidote to
:44:04. > :44:08.Maggie Thatcher? He was a very underestimated Prime Minister. The
:44:08. > :44:13.problem was everyone expected him to do what Thatcher was doing without
:44:13. > :44:20.the majority. At one point, no majority at all. You are saying you
:44:20. > :44:23.would rather have lost the 1992 election? We had to go through the
:44:23. > :44:28.ERM disaster which damaged us irrevocably. If Labour had gone
:44:28. > :44:34.through that it would have damaged them. Do you agree with that?
:44:34. > :44:41.wrong to win the 1992 election? was a point put to me before the
:44:41. > :44:46.1992 election campaign. Seeing the future and not liking it. As a
:44:46. > :44:51.political activist and a personal friend of John Major, I could not
:44:51. > :44:55.support that. I have to say the historians will look at it and say,
:44:55. > :45:01.it did change the course of British politics, not necessarily in the way
:45:01. > :45:07.the Conservatives wanted. Before the election, I would have said we
:45:07. > :45:17.wanted to win, I was euphoric when we won. I desperately wanted to win
:45:17. > :45:28.
:45:28. > :45:36.What we your tactics on Strictly? Just having fun. Would you ever do
:45:36. > :45:41.that? Maybe you have been asked. wife said she would shoot me be for
:45:41. > :45:49.ever letting me go on to that programme. There are many gorgeous
:45:49. > :45:56.women on there. I do not have the moral rigour that Ann Widdecombe
:45:56. > :45:58.has. There are worse things you can do. There is the book. Are the
:45:58. > :46:00.Government monitoring your e-mails, Facebook and Google searches? Well,
:46:00. > :46:04.quite possibly but, according to William Hague, the data-gathering
:46:04. > :46:07.centre GCHQ are not doing it illegally. The Foreign Secretary
:46:07. > :46:11.gave a statement to MPs yesterday in which he denied UK spies were
:46:11. > :46:21.using their partnership with the United States to get around UK law.
:46:21. > :46:25.
:46:25. > :46:29.It has been suggested that GCHQ uses our partnership with the
:46:29. > :46:34.United States to get around UK law, obtaining information they cannot
:46:34. > :46:38.legally obtained in the United Kingdom. I wish to be clear this
:46:38. > :46:43.accusation is baseless. Any data obtained by us from the United
:46:44. > :46:48.States involving UK nationals is subject to proper UK statutory
:46:48. > :46:51.controls and safeguards. They quote back the words of that Foreign
:46:52. > :46:55.Secretary in a BBC interview yesterday when he stated, if you
:46:55. > :46:59.are a law-abiding citizen of this country going about your business
:46:59. > :47:02.and your personal life, you have nothing to fear. Nothing to fear
:47:02. > :47:08.about the British state or intelligence agencies listening to
:47:08. > :47:14.the contents of your phone calls or anything like that. This assertion
:47:14. > :47:19.however assumes that the state is either incapable of error or
:47:19. > :47:23.incapable of advert and or inadvertent wrongdoing. On the
:47:23. > :47:32.point of sharing intelligence by the G C H Q, Camber find sexy
:47:32. > :47:37.clarify where the United Kingdom provides occasional intelligence --
:47:37. > :47:45.can the Secretary of State clarify whether of the United Kingdom
:47:45. > :47:49.provides occasional intelligence? cannot comment. How does the United
:47:49. > :47:55.States used materials gathered from network and service providers and
:47:55. > :48:00.offer it rather than having sought from them in a way that makes
:48:01. > :48:07.authorisation extremely difficult? I am so sorry, Mr Speaker, I was
:48:07. > :48:13.getting up to leave the chamber. are sorry the honourable lady is
:48:13. > :48:20.taking Halle that we will hear from her on other occasions. -- her
:48:20. > :48:26.leave but we will hear from her. Joining me is an Taylor. Just
:48:26. > :48:33.before I come to you, can politicians and spy agencies be
:48:33. > :48:40.entrusted not to misuse our personal data? The problems with
:48:40. > :48:44.the whole Iraq war showed that the intelligence agencies have to be
:48:44. > :48:49.willing to answer questions. We cannot give them a blank cheque to
:48:49. > :48:56.go and do as they, in their own view, feels they are doing.
:48:56. > :49:00.they being given a blank cheque? Technology is advancing beyond all
:49:00. > :49:05.of the political normals and operational regulations we give
:49:05. > :49:10.them. That is a constant battle to keep up-to-date. What do you think
:49:10. > :49:16.about the whistle Blower? Is a hero has he harmed the cause of national
:49:16. > :49:21.security? Probably a bit of both. We need to get a sense of
:49:21. > :49:27.perspective. There is a balance to be struck between privacy and
:49:27. > :49:31.security. The agencies, as far as we have no, have kept within the
:49:31. > :49:39.law. They cannot have a blank cheque. Commissioners look at
:49:39. > :49:49.warrant issued. They can go into a great deal of depth. Part of the
:49:49. > :49:50.
:49:50. > :49:55.problem is that we hype these things up. We say every individual
:49:55. > :50:00.is threatened. Collecting and analysing intelligence and using it
:50:00. > :50:05.properly is very difficult. There is a massive amount of information.
:50:05. > :50:10.It is honing in on the things that are relevant. I think we need co-
:50:10. > :50:13.operation with other countries. You need checks and balances. What
:50:13. > :50:17.Michael says is correct. Part of the real problem is keeping ahead
:50:17. > :50:22.of the game from those who want to do us harm and coping with the
:50:22. > :50:26.changes in technology and information that is out there.
:50:26. > :50:30.you worry about foreign spy agencies trawling through data?
:50:30. > :50:33.course. We all need to be concerned about that and have firewalls
:50:33. > :50:39.wherever possible. That does not mean you do not co-operate with
:50:39. > :50:45.other people. The point that David Blunkett raised, in your clip, is
:50:45. > :50:49.the most significant. If we are offered intelligence about British
:50:49. > :50:54.nationals, by a third party, then how do authorisations actually
:50:54. > :51:00.apply? That shows you how you have got to keep changing things in
:51:00. > :51:04.order to keep up-to-date? In terms of individuals, our supermarkets -
:51:04. > :51:10.hour credit card agencies - have far more information on us than
:51:10. > :51:14.anyone else? Haven't we just given up our right to privacy because of
:51:14. > :51:19.Facebook and all of these sites where people are handing over their
:51:19. > :51:24.personal details, financial, private? Why be surprised when spy
:51:24. > :51:33.agencies are trawling through a data? We are all told them up risks
:51:33. > :51:40.on the internet. Both of us -- most of us use the internet in a shallow
:51:40. > :51:47.way and do not take provisions that we should use. There is a balance.
:51:47. > :51:57.The balance I would suggest witches from time to time. Just supposing
:51:57. > :52:01.
:52:02. > :52:09.tomorrow, there was another nine/11. -- 9/11. In which, it was said, why
:52:09. > :52:13.I went the agencies following these guys? -- in Woolwich. Now people
:52:13. > :52:17.complain that somebody might be looking at somebody. We need checks
:52:17. > :52:21.and balances but we cannot stop the agencies from doing their jobs
:52:21. > :52:25.because that is protecting us. Intelligence agencies and the
:52:25. > :52:29.regulator must not be run by headline writers on newspapers who
:52:29. > :52:36.will see the worst in everything and will demand that life is
:52:36. > :52:43.perfect. Life very rarely is perfect. Let's talk about scrutiny.
:52:43. > :52:49.You have said they need to be laws governing privacy. Is the committee
:52:49. > :52:54.of MPs really equipped to scrutinise organisations like GCHQ?
:52:54. > :53:00.Yes, organisations like GCHQ and MI5 and MI6 have had to come to
:53:01. > :53:06.terms with the bat they have got a responsibility to Parliament. --
:53:06. > :53:12.with the fact. It was said that beforehand they would hardly give
:53:12. > :53:14.their name and number. That approach has gone. I think the
:53:14. > :53:20.Intelligence and Security Committee has become more proactive and far
:53:20. > :53:23.more able to keep the agencies on their toes. Now for the dark arts
:53:23. > :53:27.of politics. And our guest today, Michael Dobbs, has seen plenty of
:53:27. > :53:30.that. He was with Margaret Thatcher when she took her first steps into
:53:30. > :53:33.Downing Street as Prime Minister. He was there again with John Major
:53:33. > :53:36.when he was kicked out. In between he got bombed in Brighton and
:53:36. > :53:44.banished from Chequers after a row with Maggie. He ran plenty of
:53:44. > :53:46.election campaigns and cracked any number of heads together. It was
:53:46. > :53:52.one of those behind-the-scenes political careers that, it was once
:53:52. > :53:55.said, in Latin America would have got him shot. And in a quiet moment
:53:56. > :53:58.on holiday by the swimming pool, he thought he would have a go at
:53:59. > :54:02.putting all that experience into a novel. The result was House of
:54:02. > :54:04.Cards. It was a great success, it got turned into a memorable TV
:54:05. > :54:14.series and it has recently been remade by Kevin Spacey and
:54:15. > :54:21.
:54:21. > :54:28.Garrett Walker, to ride like him? No. Do I believe in him? That is
:54:28. > :54:35.beside the point. -- Dubai like him? Look at that winning smile and
:54:35. > :54:39.trusting eyes. After 22 years in Congress, I can smell the way the
:54:39. > :54:45.wind is blowing. It is now out on DVD. Ann Taylor, a former chief
:54:45. > :54:52.whip, of course, is still with us. The brutality of politics. Is it
:54:52. > :54:59.still as dirty today as it was in your day? I think just banned in
:54:59. > :55:06.many ways. Anne macro was a whip in the extraordinary days of the
:55:06. > :55:10.collapse of the James Callaghan government. Heady days!With all
:55:10. > :55:15.these allegations of sleaze, it is worth reminding ourselves that
:55:15. > :55:19.Labour MPs and Tories put their lives at risk. They got out of
:55:19. > :55:24.their sick beds and came to vote for what they believed in. But
:55:24. > :55:32.ignited Jimmy a passion for politics and the values of politics.
:55:32. > :55:36.-- that ignited in me a passion. The heady days, you say, of the
:55:36. > :55:41.1970s and having to get people to turn up for votes otherwise the
:55:41. > :55:49.Government may have collapsed. Later on, during the 80s and 90s,
:55:49. > :55:53.do you think the dark arts - the spin - what has been ducked with
:55:53. > :55:57.Lord Mandelson being the Prince of darkness, did that takeover? I do
:55:57. > :56:02.not think he ever got near the Whips Office. We would not let him
:56:02. > :56:08.and he would not take any notice anyway. That did not matter.
:56:08. > :56:13.Politics has changed. It was a team event, a team-building exercise all
:56:13. > :56:17.the time in those days. You felt you were part of something. One
:56:17. > :56:21.thing which has happened in the House of Commons is that people do
:56:21. > :56:25.not know each other and feel as much a part of that team. That has
:56:25. > :56:28.changed things in all parties. Recent figures about the number of
:56:28. > :56:33.people who have rebelled in the last three years, or in the last
:56:33. > :56:37.three years of the Labour government, show a great
:56:37. > :56:46.independence. Perhaps it also shows less communication between the top
:56:46. > :56:52.and the grassroots -- the grass roots. You are once dubbed the
:56:52. > :56:58.baby-faced assassin. Is it about MPs becoming more independent or
:56:58. > :57:02.have whips lost the power to impose the will of the leadership? A bit
:57:02. > :57:06.of each. In the days of the Callaghan government, the Thatcher
:57:06. > :57:14.government, politics was black and white. There were fundamental
:57:14. > :57:19.issues on a tribal basis. Everybody, you said trade unions, and everyone
:57:19. > :57:26.knew which side of the fence used baton. Issues are now much more
:57:26. > :57:30.complex. Environment and green issues. They are issues which need
:57:30. > :57:34.to be debated much more and do not allow for the sort of very
:57:34. > :57:39.straightforward decisions which politicians came to in those days.
:57:39. > :57:45.Do you think it is a good thing? MPs are not as predictable as the
:57:45. > :57:49.party line. I'm a great believer in politics being a team game. That
:57:49. > :57:53.should have plenty of room for independent souls. The best
:57:53. > :57:59.politicians know what it is they want and are willing to make
:57:59. > :58:06.sacrifices for it. They do not win on ill-discipline or the gears. I
:58:06. > :58:10.can remember going back to the 1970s, people thought it they'd
:58:10. > :58:15.vote against the Government, the Labour government is rubbish, vote
:58:15. > :58:23.for me. They lost. Hard lines will do what people want to see is
:58:23. > :58:29.people who are able to deliver. You do not live at as an individual. It
:58:30. > :58:33.might make you feel good but you do not deliver. There's just time
:58:33. > :58:36.before we go to find out the answer to our quiz. The question was: Who
:58:36. > :58:40.has Communities Secretary Eric Pickles said we mustn't upset? Is
:58:40. > :58:50.it: Liberal Democrats? Dustmen? Germans? Or hedgehogs? It has to be