02/07/2013

:00:39. > :00:42.government leaders meet in Manchester today for their annual

:00:42. > :00:47.shindig, and their leader thinks the way the government allocates and

:00:47. > :00:50.spends taxpayers' money is a load of rubbish. In fact, Sir Merrick

:00:50. > :00:55.Cockell thinks the current system should be completely overhauled, and

:00:55. > :01:04.he wants the PM to create a brand new department. We'll be talking to

:01:04. > :01:10.him later. Should adverts like these be banned?

:01:10. > :01:13.You tell us how much you want, how long you wanted for, we tell you how

:01:13. > :01:18.much it will cost. The Government says it wants to do something about

:01:18. > :01:24.payday loans, but does it know what? The man rumoured to want David

:01:24. > :01:28.Cameron's job tell us why big profits are brilliant. I think

:01:29. > :01:32.politicians need to celebrate when businesses, small and large, are

:01:32. > :01:36.making big profits. The bigger the profits, the more we should cheer.

:01:36. > :01:40.And we'll be serving up some fast food as we put three MPs to the

:01:40. > :01:44.burger test. All that in the next hour, and we'll

:01:44. > :01:46.even be putting MPs and burgers to the test. And with us for the whole

:01:46. > :01:49.programme today is former Home Secretary, former Education

:01:49. > :01:53.Secretary and former Work and Pensions Secretary -Labour MP David

:01:53. > :01:59.Blunkett. You could say he's a jack of all trades. Anyway, welcome to

:01:59. > :02:07.the Daily Politics. And welcome to First this morning, lets talk about

:02:07. > :02:12.Labour. Your dog, Cosby. How concerned are you about the goings

:02:12. > :02:17.on over the candidate selection process? I think the Labour Party

:02:17. > :02:21.have taken the right step by having an investigation. I hope the

:02:21. > :02:27.executive committee will deal with it decisively. It is 20 years since

:02:27. > :02:31.the late John Smith, then leader of the party, change the rules, so it

:02:31. > :02:35.was one member one vote. Previously, we had a collegiate system and the

:02:35. > :02:41.trade unions had a big chunk of the vote and the membership were pretty

:02:41. > :02:46.well squeezed out. All of that change. Now we have to make sure

:02:46. > :02:51.that when it is one member, they are a legitimate member. It wasn't

:02:51. > :02:57.correct, allegations that Unite have been buying for people to join the

:02:57. > :03:04.Labour Party? I don't know. It is not in our rules that other people

:03:04. > :03:08.can pay your fee and therefore join you up. You have to apply, be

:03:09. > :03:15.approved and pay the admittance the. That is how it should be. We have to

:03:15. > :03:20.make sure that those rules apply. Are Unite two influential and

:03:21. > :03:26.powerful in today's Labour Party? Trade unions, since the formation of

:03:26. > :03:29.the Labour Party, have been crucial to funding and broadening the input

:03:29. > :03:34.and the activity, because they represent very large numbers. When

:03:34. > :03:39.they are affiliated, members pay an affiliation fee, which they can opt

:03:39. > :03:44.out of if they want. We have to make sure their rings winces positive,

:03:45. > :03:52.not negative. Is it positive at the moment, where there are allegations

:03:52. > :03:57.of rigging entry? You have to reach them out in whatever party. We have

:03:57. > :04:01.had all sorts with the Lib Dems and Tories as well. It is not throwing

:04:01. > :04:06.stones at glasshouses. We have a bigger problem, because trade unions

:04:06. > :04:12.have amalgamated and much larger -- much larger. The influence is bound

:04:12. > :04:15.to be greater. With the trade unions, we need to say that it is in

:04:15. > :04:21.no one peers best interest to have this kind of row and the sort of

:04:21. > :04:26.allegations going on under the surface. As part of the clearing up,

:04:26. > :04:31.do you think the internal report into Falkirk, which is sitting on Ed

:04:31. > :04:37.Miliband's desk, should be published? I would. Just be as

:04:37. > :04:42.transparent as possible with a clear focus, if that is needed. There was

:04:42. > :04:50.intervention, the Scottish part of our party dealt with this

:04:50. > :04:55.decisively, as it should be. worry is that the public see Unite

:04:55. > :04:58.as backing Ed Miliband, personally, that he needs Unite because of the

:04:58. > :05:04.funding and because many people believe he was put there by them. Is

:05:04. > :05:10.that dangerous? He was not put there by Unite. The trade union

:05:11. > :05:14.movement's vote up their members was very decisively... Public

:05:14. > :05:21.perception. Perception matters, I would be daft to suggest it does

:05:21. > :05:25.not. We can't have a go at the vested interests of the Tory party

:05:25. > :05:31.if we don't clear our own house. That is a fact of life. We have done

:05:31. > :05:35.over the years, and must do now. McCluskey has called for Blairite

:05:35. > :05:41.members of the Shadow Cabinet to be sacked. How frustration --

:05:41. > :05:45.frustrating was that for you? frustrating for Ed Miliband. It is

:05:45. > :05:52.not his role to be talking about Shadow Cabinet members in that way,

:05:52. > :05:56.and we don't go -- don't want to go back to diversions of this sort. We

:05:56. > :06:01.are broad church, we should be able to welcome, engage with and have a

:06:01. > :06:05.proper dialogue with a whole range of people and we should not be

:06:05. > :06:11.afraid of ideas and policy. At the moment, we are frayed. The idea of

:06:11. > :06:16.looking to the future and being radical, it will then be the party

:06:16. > :06:18.of the graveyard, nobody wants that. Len McCluskey claiming that the

:06:18. > :06:28.Blairites, as he calls them, will lose Labour the next election

:06:28. > :06:33.because they are adopting austerity lite. They are not a proper

:06:33. > :06:38.alternative to the coalition. interesting article this week said

:06:38. > :06:43.that that misses the point altogether. The issue is people

:06:43. > :06:49.being convinced they can trust us, that we have a clear direction not

:06:49. > :06:54.purely based on whether the next billion pounds here or there makes

:06:54. > :06:58.socialism. When I was a very young councillor in Sheffield, back in the

:06:58. > :07:02.old many days, this shows how old I am, we have the most enormous

:07:02. > :07:08.arguments in the first two years about an extra penny, and old penny,

:07:08. > :07:12.on the rates, as though socialism would be brought about by increasing

:07:12. > :07:16.spending in that way. It didn't, it wasn't, it can't be. We need ideas

:07:16. > :07:24.that don't cost a lot, that are radical. Perspectives on the Laois

:07:24. > :07:30.and ship during government -- on the relationships between government and

:07:30. > :07:33.the people. And local government, which you will deal with in a

:07:33. > :07:43.moment, has a role not just as an institution but in mobilising people

:07:43. > :07:44.

:07:44. > :07:49.to delivering services. If you look at the polls, which are narrowing

:07:49. > :07:54.despite the difficulties with the economy, a five point lead, you

:07:54. > :08:01.could argue, is negligible at this stage in a Parliamentary term. Whose

:08:01. > :08:08.fault is that? 5% to 10%, depending on which Sunday newspaper poll you

:08:08. > :08:13.read. But it had been consistently around 10%, it is now sliding.

:08:13. > :08:19.you have a big presentation, as the government did on the Spending

:08:19. > :08:25.Review, and the chief secretary saying how much they would spend...

:08:25. > :08:32.Much of it was about cuts. Here is the contradiction. People don't like

:08:32. > :08:35.the idea of not being able to afford social care or decent health.

:08:35. > :08:40.Labour not doing better? People quite like the idea of government

:08:40. > :08:44.cuts. We have to have a perspective which actually deals with that

:08:44. > :08:48.elephant trap, that is what it is. The government is constantly setting

:08:48. > :08:53.traps for us. We have to avoid stepping into them whilst remaining

:08:53. > :08:59.focused entirely on a radical perspective for the future. My view

:08:59. > :09:04.is we need to reach out to people and say, we will not pretend that

:09:04. > :09:08.this will do everything for you we will help you, alongside you, doing

:09:09. > :09:13.things in your life. The fair chance, Ed Miliband talked about

:09:13. > :09:18.that last year. Giving people the ability to earn a decent league and

:09:18. > :09:21.look after family and the wider community. Let's move on to a policy

:09:22. > :09:26.area which you will know plenty about in your role as the former

:09:26. > :09:31.Home Secretary, stop and search powers. Theresa May says they should

:09:31. > :09:41.be used more carefully, and the figures that only one in ten only

:09:41. > :09:44.

:09:44. > :09:50.lead to an and arrest. They have reduced stop and search, because it

:09:50. > :09:57.needs to be intelligence led and focused. It had got out of hand.

:09:57. > :10:00.They had already confined it. You need stop and search. Do you

:10:00. > :10:05.remember -- Drummer Lee Rigby was killed by people carrying weapons,

:10:05. > :10:08.if they'd been stopped and searched it would not have led to his death.

:10:08. > :10:15.Those are the real dilemmas that a Home Secretary has to deal with when

:10:15. > :10:19.making a gesture about Civil Liberties. If there had been better

:10:19. > :10:24.intelligence, or perhaps the intelligence had been acted on, that

:10:24. > :10:28.might have prevented the tragedy as well? Exactly, which is why

:10:28. > :10:32.intelligence led, well thought through and properly implemented

:10:32. > :10:37.with the support of local communities, because without that

:10:37. > :10:40.the police are left exposed. Thank you. Something slightly different.

:10:40. > :10:43.Now it's time for our daily quiz. The question for today is which

:10:43. > :10:46.world leader, alleged to be a dictator, said yesterday that he'd

:10:46. > :10:48.vote for David Cameron if he could? Was it Kim Jong-un of North Korea,

:10:48. > :10:50.Nursultan Nazarbayev from Kazakhstan, Teodoro Obiang Nguema

:10:50. > :11:00.Mbasogo from Equatorial Guinea, or Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow of

:11:00. > :11:15.

:11:15. > :11:19.Turkmenistan? I can't quite pronounce that last one! I can spell

:11:19. > :11:21.it because it is written, I cannot pronounce it! At the end of the

:11:21. > :11:23.show, David will give us the correct answer.

:11:23. > :11:25.Now, council leaders from across England are gathering in Manchester

:11:25. > :11:29.today for Local Government Association conference, the biggest

:11:29. > :11:32.event on the local government calendar. Council bosses meet

:11:32. > :11:38.following the 10% cut to local government funding announced in last

:11:38. > :11:41.week's Spending Review. This cut comes on top of the 33% real terms

:11:41. > :11:49.reduction in council funding which is being made from 2011/12 to

:11:49. > :11:54.2014/15. The LGA believes the current funding model is inefficient

:11:54. > :11:57.and unsustainable. They want the Government to create a single

:11:57. > :11:59.England Office by merging six government departments - Communities

:11:59. > :12:09.and Local Government, Transport, Environment, Energy, Culture, Media

:12:09. > :12:10.

:12:10. > :12:15.and Sport, and relevant parts of the Home Office. The LGA say this would

:12:15. > :12:18.give English local authorities better representation in government.

:12:18. > :12:20.They also want to scrap the Barnett formula, which calculates public

:12:20. > :12:23.spending for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, as they say the

:12:23. > :12:31.three nations have endured proportionally less severe cuts in

:12:31. > :12:41.public spending than England. Well, joining me from Salford is the chair

:12:41. > :12:44.of the LGA, Sir Merrick Cockell. Welcome to the programme. Why do you

:12:44. > :12:51.say the current funding model is unsustainable? Just because it is

:12:51. > :12:55.being cut? You have clearly said there will be less money, tempers

:12:55. > :13:00.sensing a year cut. We just can't carry like that, the idea that we

:13:00. > :13:04.could become more efficient and share services to deal with the

:13:04. > :13:09.problem is not realistic. We have to look at how public services

:13:09. > :13:13.overall, those provided not only by local government and national

:13:13. > :13:17.government and its agencies, we need to look at the whole picture and

:13:17. > :13:22.find a way of spending that money more effectively and also looking at

:13:22. > :13:26.the democracy, reconnecting people to the democratic process at a local

:13:26. > :13:32.level. People vote for MPs but they vote for local government

:13:32. > :13:38.councillors. We think that more trust is shown in local government.

:13:38. > :13:43.We have a rising satisfaction rate which the Chancellor referred to

:13:43. > :13:48.last week, even though we are making substantial savings and some cuts.

:13:49. > :13:53.But you have said yourself the money needs to be spent more effectively,

:13:53. > :13:57.so not necessarily more money, just spent more wisely, which suggests

:13:57. > :14:02.there is still waste, or it is being used for purposes which are no

:14:02. > :14:08.longer relevant? But the waste is not simply in the local government

:14:08. > :14:12.area. We are the most efficient bit of public services, we are told that

:14:12. > :14:17.endlessly by government. A lot of it is, frankly, badly spent by

:14:17. > :14:22.Whitehall, by the system, by having a multitude of different competing

:14:22. > :14:27.forces. We need to focus the money on areas and spend it wisely.

:14:27. > :14:32.Government letting go, trusting areas to make the right decisions,

:14:32. > :14:35.including taxation, the level of council tax and all those areas, and

:14:35. > :14:41.being held accountable and responsible at a local level, we

:14:41. > :14:45.think this is the way ahead. You draw more value from public money.

:14:45. > :14:49.Rather than thinking one part can cut another and it will have no

:14:49. > :14:52.effect. Is this the backlash, pointing the figure at central

:14:52. > :14:59.government and say they are wasting money that you could spend better?

:14:59. > :15:04.For instance, would you like them to say you can put council tax up?

:15:04. > :15:07.are talking about overall public services in a particular area, which

:15:08. > :15:12.is most public services, universal services, that people experience day

:15:12. > :15:19.in, day out. We have people who could be held accountable for the

:15:19. > :15:23.range of local public services. We are saying, trust them. The

:15:23. > :15:27.government -- we are making the savings we have been required to do,

:15:27. > :15:30.we have balanced budgets and making savings. There is a way through

:15:30. > :15:36.this. We have worked with the government on its community budgets.

:15:36. > :15:41.What happened last week will may have been missed by many, it was a

:15:41. > :15:44.game changer. We have had cooperation with the Department of

:15:44. > :15:49.Health in looking at adult care and health costs and saying, actually,

:15:49. > :15:53.by joining that up, we can save money. Frankly, we look after people

:15:53. > :15:56.better when they are in their homes, in early intervention, rather

:15:56. > :16:05.than letting them get into hospital, which costs a lot and is bad for

:16:05. > :16:08.them. The Government is running local government badly? The

:16:08. > :16:13.Government shouldn't be running local government, because we are

:16:13. > :16:16.local government. It should not be for Ministers to tell us, as they

:16:16. > :16:21.have done today, that we should simply be sharing more services, and

:16:21. > :16:25.that would deal with the problem. This isn't an ask of this

:16:25. > :16:30.Government. This is putting matters for the, particularly English

:16:30. > :16:34.matters, where is England in devolution, where are the powers

:16:34. > :16:38.given to other parts of the United Kingdom. That's at the core of that.

:16:38. > :16:42.We should trust local areas. David, what's your reaction, do you agree

:16:42. > :16:48.it is time now for central Government to let go? They always

:16:49. > :16:54.say they are going to but they never do. We all say it in theory but then

:16:54. > :16:59.get central ieftzed mad when we are in. Why does that happen?There must

:16:59. > :17:04.be a Sod's law somewhere that instead of recognising that we've

:17:04. > :17:10.got enough on our plates from the centre, we want to interfere. The

:17:10. > :17:16.classic is, as just described, and incidentally I agree with a great

:17:16. > :17:22.deal of what's been said from a Conservative councillor, is that we

:17:22. > :17:25.say let's have a cap on the local council tax. Now, there is no

:17:25. > :17:32.logical reason for that. It doesn't affect the economy. It should be

:17:32. > :17:38.down to local people, but we think we are able to make a big gesture -

:17:38. > :17:41.this Government thinks it is able to make a business gesture, and frozen

:17:41. > :17:45.the council tax, but it will make it even more difficult for local

:17:46. > :17:49.government to balance the books. We encourage privatisation, both

:17:49. > :17:52.parties have encouraged local government to outsource. What's

:17:52. > :17:56.happened now of course is those contracts are bound in for years and

:17:56. > :17:59.years and the cuts that are being made, and they are absolutely eye

:17:59. > :18:03.watering have to take place on that bit of local government that's still

:18:03. > :18:09.left in local hands. You were the leader of a council weren't you?

:18:09. > :18:13.Yes, for seven years, and it wasn't as bad as it is now. It is

:18:13. > :18:16.interesting for your viewers to know this is much, much worse for local

:18:16. > :18:21.people and local services and those trying to run local government than

:18:21. > :18:24.it was in the 1980s. We have the local government Minister on

:18:24. > :18:29.regularly saying more can be cut and more efficiencies made. One of the

:18:29. > :18:31.suggestions you've made, Sir Merrick Cockell, is abolishing six

:18:31. > :18:35.Government departments to improve representation in Government. How

:18:35. > :18:39.would that work? It is a logical consequence of the English question

:18:39. > :18:42.I was talking about. If England is going to have a solution to the

:18:42. > :18:47.powers that have been given to Scotland, Wales and Northern

:18:47. > :18:50.Ireland, then I think, we think, and this is cross-party, across the

:18:50. > :18:55.local government sector, that that is trusting areas, not single

:18:55. > :19:01.councils but areas working together. If Government backs that, and says

:19:01. > :19:06.we are going to pass far more decision taking to a local level and

:19:06. > :19:10.let those be accountable, you don't need the enormous structure of

:19:10. > :19:14.different departments, all with permanent secretaries and budgets

:19:14. > :19:21.being signed off from Whitehall to our neighbours in those

:19:21. > :19:25.single-absolutely o budgets. -- in those single-silo budgets. To get

:19:25. > :19:31.rid of six Government departments, including parts of the Home Office,

:19:31. > :19:35.to serve what Sir Merrick Cockell is saying? If they carry on demolishing

:19:35. > :19:41.the Civil Service and the role of government in general we might just

:19:41. > :19:44.get there by attrition. I can't envisage the Home Office being

:19:44. > :19:48.lumped together with Communities and Local Government or culture, media

:19:48. > :19:52.and support. I would put the Home Office back with the Department of

:19:52. > :19:58.Justice, which is where it was when I was Home Secretary. I would look

:19:58. > :20:03.to human resource, accountancy and policy and research being

:20:03. > :20:07.amalgamated between deficits. -- between departments. The Local

:20:07. > :20:11.Government Association have hit on a really important debate here.

:20:11. > :20:15.Practise what you preach. They are preaching that local government

:20:15. > :20:19.should not only link up inside the local authority but between local

:20:19. > :20:26.authorities I think a bit of example from central Government wouldn't be

:20:26. > :20:28.amiss. Sir Merrick Cockell, if you think back to Jen John Prescott ran

:20:28. > :20:33.that super-department, Secretary of State for the environment, transport

:20:33. > :20:38.and the regions, it was that a golden era for success in local

:20:38. > :20:41.government? No, it wasn't. I'm not suggesting that we have a super

:20:41. > :20:44.Government department. I'm suggesting that power is transferred

:20:44. > :20:51.from the centre to a variety of local levels and from the local

:20:51. > :20:56.level down to people. If you do that, you don't need that great

:20:56. > :21:01.rigmarole created in a Victorian era, and it is already bust.

:21:01. > :21:10.anyone listening to your proposal s? Proposals? Has given Eric Pickles

:21:10. > :21:15.give an response? These are carefully thought through

:21:15. > :21:21.cross-party policies. But has they? He is here tomorrow. I am looking

:21:21. > :21:27.forward to having a round table discussion. Give him a meagre salad

:21:27. > :21:32.for his lunch. I'm about too have an Eccles cake. Enjoy the conference,

:21:32. > :21:36.Sir Merrick Cockell, thank you. Payday lending was the subject of a

:21:36. > :21:38.summit led by Consumer Minister Jo Swinson yesterday. Among other

:21:38. > :21:40.suggestions for regulating the �2 billion industry some have advocated

:21:40. > :21:49.curbing advertising for these companies. Adverts possibly like

:21:49. > :21:53.this one: Explain the Wonga.com sliders. That's how we, you tell us

:21:53. > :22:00.how much you want, how much you want it for and we tell you how much it

:22:00. > :22:10.is going to covments You think it is important to give people control.

:22:10. > :22:10.

:22:10. > :22:15.See, it is now her turn on the music player. Turn it off! Wonga.com,

:22:16. > :22:18.straight-talking money. See, adverts on the programme too. With me to

:22:18. > :22:23.discuss this are Labour MP Stella Creasy and payday lender Julio

:22:23. > :22:28.Martino in Newcastle. Welcome to both of you. Is limiting the

:22:28. > :22:31.advertising on pay day lending enough? No. And frankly it is a

:22:31. > :22:34.little bit ridiculous, because it is like saying as long as these

:22:34. > :22:39.companies haven't discovered the internet or mobile phone

:22:39. > :22:43.advertising, and anybody watching this programme using iPlayer will

:22:43. > :22:50.tell you these adverts are everywhere. We need to cap the cost

:22:50. > :22:55.of credit. It stops these loans being so tox nick the first place.

:22:55. > :23:00.would be in favour of capping the cost of credit. I would like to know

:23:00. > :23:05.where that limit would be. I suspect my business would fall much below

:23:05. > :23:15.the barrier, maybe it wouldn't, but it is a broad idea. I'm not against

:23:15. > :23:19.

:23:20. > :23:24.it. What's your APR?296%. APR is a complicated formula. However, that

:23:24. > :23:31.is I think lower than most other companies in the country. You say

:23:31. > :23:38.it's a complicated formula but some people will make a sharp intake of

:23:38. > :23:47.breath. I want to borrow �90. How much time do I have to pay that back

:23:47. > :23:52.and when does the 296% kick in? borrow �90 and you pay me back

:23:52. > :23:58.�10020 days later. In an annual percentage rate that's around 130%.

:23:58. > :24:03.APR is a calculation designed to calculate mortgages, very long term

:24:03. > :24:10.loans. Over a year, the percentage rate would work out as around

:24:10. > :24:17.something like 130%. But over 28 days you pay back �10 if you borrow

:24:17. > :24:21.�90. Put like, that Stella Creasy, you are shaking your head, does it

:24:21. > :24:27.perform a legitimate function, particularly for people who cannot

:24:27. > :24:33.go to their high street bank and have a cash flow problem and need to

:24:33. > :24:36.plug that gap? Not everybody who borrows from pay day lenders gets

:24:36. > :24:44.into financial difficulties but enough of them do that there is a

:24:44. > :24:47.problem. Julio's model only works when people pay back on time. A

:24:47. > :24:52.third of people have to keep rolling over, because they can't afford to

:24:52. > :24:58.pay it back at the end of the month. Most other countries have capped. In

:24:58. > :25:02.Japan the cap is 15%. They have a pay day lending industry, so

:25:02. > :25:06.companies still make money. Ethey have lower levels of illegal lending

:25:06. > :25:11.and they have lower levels of personal debt. It's a win-win for

:25:11. > :25:20.everyone. Is that 15% APR?That's set in partnership with the industry

:25:20. > :25:28.and consumer groups. I worked out today that on �90, 20% APR, after 20

:25:28. > :25:35.days someone will pay me 1. 26 psmtdsly lend �90, and at 20% my

:25:35. > :25:38.profit would be 1. . 26. I promised you I worked that out. If I'm wrong

:25:38. > :25:42.I'm perfectly happy to admit I'm wrong, but I don't think I can make

:25:43. > :25:47.my loan any cheaper, and I promise you this, without actually not

:25:47. > :25:51.making enough of a profit. Is that really the case that you wouldn't

:25:51. > :25:57.make enough profit? You said you agree with a cap. Where would you

:25:57. > :26:02.have that cap set? I couldn't possibly suggest. I think and I'm

:26:02. > :26:09.willing to be corrected, I'm among the cheapest of pay day lend ers in

:26:09. > :26:16.the country. I would ask that... Wonga's current APR is around

:26:16. > :26:22.5,000%. Between 296 and 5,000%, although it's a bad calculation

:26:22. > :26:31.there is a massive gulf. For example if you borrowed the same terms with

:26:31. > :26:40.one of these bigger pay day lenders would would be paying back �1229

:26:40. > :26:44.after -- paying back �129. I am willing to sit down and agree a cap.

:26:44. > :26:48.The banks would have to be involved presumably. This is one of the

:26:48. > :26:52.problems, because yesterday the Government refused to talk even

:26:52. > :26:56.about capping, even though it works in most other countries, there

:26:56. > :27:01.wasn't anybody else in the room apart from Martin Lewis who is able

:27:01. > :27:06.to raise the issue. I'm pleased to hear a pay day lender saying that

:27:06. > :27:09.capping is a good idea. That cap in Japan was set in partnership with

:27:10. > :27:13.the industry and consumers based on the Japanese credit market. What's

:27:13. > :27:16.frustrating to me is we know this is what makes the most difference.

:27:16. > :27:19.There are now 5 million people borrowing in this way and it is

:27:19. > :27:24.going to get worse in the next couple of months. Why the Government

:27:24. > :27:29.can't even talk about such an effective solution sin excusable

:27:29. > :27:33.when people are suffering. Let's talk about your clients. Who are the

:27:33. > :27:39.sort of people that come to you? They are people that can't can get

:27:39. > :27:42.credit cards, on the whole. People that can't getover drafts. Maybe

:27:42. > :27:47.they are students that made a mistake 15 years ago or defaulted on

:27:47. > :27:52.a mobile phone bill. They can't get credit anywhere else. Because I run

:27:52. > :27:57.a personal service, I meet all my customers face to face. I know all

:27:57. > :28:00.of them by name. Do you turn any of them down because they are too

:28:00. > :28:07.vulnerable and have no chance of paying that money back? Yes, because

:28:07. > :28:11.I can't make money. We don't lend to people on benefits. That would be

:28:11. > :28:16.crazy and wrong. If people are in work and get a tax credit, yes we

:28:16. > :28:22.will lend to them. Generally if someone is earning less than �1,000

:28:22. > :28:28.a month we will not lend. We want 60 days of bank statements. We turn

:28:28. > :28:33.away either on the phone, we don't do loans over the phones, people who

:28:33. > :28:40.can't pay us back. Put like that... This is a different payday loan

:28:40. > :28:46.system to the ones we are talking about. This gentleman wouldn't be on

:28:46. > :28:49.actually if he hadn't got a good defence of what he was trying to do.

:28:49. > :28:54.Let's not beat about the bush. Stella should have been at the

:28:54. > :29:00.meeting yesterday. A colleague of mind from Sheffield Central has a

:29:00. > :29:04.private member's bill. We nearly got this right six years ago. The most

:29:04. > :29:07.important thing is we need a cap on the cost of credit. We need that in

:29:07. > :29:12.legislation, we are going to keep campaigning for a cap on the cost of

:29:12. > :29:18.credit. When so many are struggling to not do the one thing that makes

:29:18. > :29:25.these loans affordable, Julio you are not eptive of the industry. The

:29:25. > :29:28.OFT research tells us that there are widespread malpractices. Poor

:29:28. > :29:34.affordability tests, the marketing techniques, pushing people to

:29:34. > :29:40.borrow. One company doesn't make the entire industry acceptable.

:29:40. > :29:45.banks are trying to take my account away. In two years I have had to

:29:45. > :29:53.change my account twice. HSBC will fund rams dens and people like that

:29:53. > :29:59.but not give me a bank account. I won't around in a bit. Good luck.

:29:59. > :30:03.We nearly cracked it six years ago, we then had the global meltdown. We

:30:03. > :30:07.nearly got a scheme where you would get 25% credit backed by the

:30:07. > :30:14.Government. If that had gone through it would've been an entirely

:30:14. > :30:17.different ball game. Thank you. Big business gets a pretty press a

:30:17. > :30:20.lot of the time - think of recent stories about corporate tax

:30:20. > :30:22.avoidance. But should we really complain when companies make big

:30:22. > :30:25.profits? One MP, Adam Afriyie, says that we should celebrate when firms

:30:25. > :30:35.do well, and that we should be teaching business skills in schools

:30:35. > :30:38.

:30:38. > :30:44.as the best way to improve social mobility. Here's why.

:30:44. > :30:54.This is my area. I guess you'd call it my patch. This is Pekan in

:30:54. > :30:54.

:30:54. > :31:00.south-east London, where I grew up. -- this is Peckham. I went to school

:31:00. > :31:05.here. I had a good start in life, I got an education. By trial and error

:31:05. > :31:10.and, yes, I made some mistakes, I then made my way into business. I

:31:10. > :31:14.want every young person to recognise their business skills early. It is a

:31:14. > :31:18.great chance to take control of your life and determine your own

:31:18. > :31:22.direction and, more than that, it is a great opportunity for social

:31:22. > :31:28.mobility, to improve your chances in life.

:31:28. > :31:34.Geographically, Peckham is not that far from the City of London. And nor

:31:34. > :31:39.should it be in terms of opportunity for our young people. They should be

:31:39. > :31:44.inspired and passionate about doing business in the UK, whether that be

:31:44. > :31:48.in manufacturing, retail, banking or technology. We need them to grow

:31:48. > :31:56.successful and profitable British businesses. Why? Because enterprise

:31:56. > :32:01.and competition are the only way we will get Britain back on its feet.

:32:01. > :32:05.We love it when small businesses like this are doing well, but I

:32:05. > :32:10.think politicians need to celebrate one businesses, small and large, are

:32:10. > :32:14.making big profits. The bigger the profits, the more we should cheer.

:32:14. > :32:23.It is creating jobs, putting money in people 's pockets and creating a

:32:23. > :32:28.greater level of social mobility for the next generation.

:32:28. > :32:33.I'm on the side of business, because I come from a tough background in

:32:33. > :32:37.Peckham. I made the journey from social housing whilst starting my

:32:37. > :32:43.business and working hard. I know that business is a force for good.

:32:43. > :32:46.Now I am in Westminster and for the sake of today's disadvantaged kids,

:32:46. > :32:55.I want everyone else to celebrate what business can bring to the

:32:55. > :32:59.country. That was an amazing shot at the end of that piece. Adam Afriyie

:32:59. > :33:05.a is here now. Should education really be about learning about

:33:05. > :33:09.business skills? I don't think the core curriculum, no, that

:33:09. > :33:13.organisations like Young Enterprise and allow children to set up a

:33:13. > :33:16.business and workout about whether they are chewed to being an

:33:16. > :33:21.entrepreneur leading it, or somebody who supports it as an accountant or

:33:21. > :33:25.product designer. One of the great ways you can control your life is if

:33:25. > :33:30.you start a business. You can make your own way in life. If you do

:33:30. > :33:35.well, profits are made, you decorate your house and employ people, you

:33:35. > :33:41.invest more in that business. Governments do not bring economic

:33:41. > :33:45.growth, businesses do. widespread is Young enterprise in

:33:45. > :33:50.schools. Should it be brought in, particularly, perhaps, for

:33:50. > :33:55.A-levels, that people should have that experience in school? I think

:33:55. > :34:00.everyone must recognise the importance that business can bring.

:34:00. > :34:05.Young Enterprise is a charitable organisation spread across the

:34:05. > :34:09.country, and the wider they can promote, the better. You say the

:34:09. > :34:15.bigger the profits, the more we should cheer... I knew that would

:34:16. > :34:19.make you cringe! But I just think that people will think about the

:34:19. > :34:24.banking crisis, we allow these institutions to make more and more

:34:24. > :34:34.profits, and look what happened. need a competitive market, lots of

:34:34. > :34:35.

:34:35. > :34:38.businesses competing in order to make a profit. Why can't it be just

:34:38. > :34:45.making some money and being a success? Because the bigger the

:34:45. > :34:49.profits, the more tax goes to the Exchequer, the more money is

:34:49. > :34:54.reinvested to create more jobs and the greater levels of social

:34:54. > :34:57.mobility. If you are business with a very busy job market, you cannot

:34:57. > :35:05.discriminate on terms of background or heritage, you have to take the

:35:05. > :35:10.best person. The exact opposite, David Blunkett, that Ed Miliband has

:35:10. > :35:15.been saying when talking about predators and irresponsible

:35:15. > :35:18.capitalism? You would go out of business if you don't make a profit.

:35:18. > :35:24.It is the small businesses that seem to be paying the tax, they pay

:35:24. > :35:31.corporation tax, and Amazon and now, we discover, Apple and all these

:35:31. > :35:35.others do not. You'd be surprised about this and add a scale, but Adam

:35:35. > :35:40.and Gordon Brown have a lot in common. Gordon Brown was really in

:35:40. > :35:45.the drastic about getting enterprise into the curriculum -- you may be

:35:45. > :35:50.surprised, and Adam might scowl. When they give youngsters �10 and

:35:50. > :36:00.say, see what you can make on that, I think it is really interesting.

:36:00. > :36:07.

:36:07. > :36:13.Big, big, big profits depend on who you are making a profit from.

:36:13. > :36:17.Doesn't that limit the profit? to manageable proportions. The

:36:17. > :36:22.problem with using the tax system is that businesses go on strike. I

:36:22. > :36:28.wrote a paper about this at University God knows how long ago.

:36:28. > :36:33.The politicians need to say that if there are tax loopholes and people

:36:33. > :36:43.are not paying the right amount of tax legally, it is for politicians

:36:43. > :36:45.

:36:45. > :36:48.and governments to put that right? We should be speaking on behalf of

:36:48. > :36:52.working and acting on behalf of the public.

:36:52. > :36:59.Incidentally, money management and dealing with these matters has been

:36:59. > :37:02.agreed as part of the new citizenship curriculum. We now need

:37:02. > :37:08.to encourage economic sand enterprise. But perhaps, as Adam

:37:08. > :37:17.says, politicians have not cheered enough about big business and big

:37:17. > :37:21.profits? We got into an era where my only the ship were criticised very

:37:21. > :37:27.heavily, were they not, as Tony Blair, Peter Mandelson and the like

:37:27. > :37:32.would say. Adam has done very well from his background. People do well

:37:33. > :37:37.in all sorts of other ways than making a big profit, but there is

:37:37. > :37:43.nothing wrong with a profit, if it has been made ethically and we get

:37:43. > :37:47.our hands on a bit of it. profits, big organisations. Coming

:37:47. > :37:53.back to the financial crisis, that was one of the biggest problems,

:37:53. > :37:57.they were too big to fail. The Professor of business and risk that

:37:57. > :38:03.we had the pleasure of meeting talked about big corporations being

:38:03. > :38:06.inherently unstable, that small is beautiful. There is something in

:38:06. > :38:11.that, but you can have big businesses in competition with each

:38:11. > :38:19.other. The failure of the banking system was systemic where there was

:38:19. > :38:24.not enough competition in the market. I am not a fan of bullying

:38:24. > :38:27.or overpowering. There is nothing worse than a private monopoly. The

:38:27. > :38:33.challenge is not how big a businesses, but whether the market

:38:33. > :38:37.is in competition and innovation is taking place. The point I wanted to

:38:37. > :38:41.make is that this is not just about economic growth or tax to the

:38:41. > :38:44.Exchequer, it is about social mobility. As people get into

:38:44. > :38:50.business they can make their way through the social strata, as well

:38:50. > :38:56.as economic. You think that is more successful? What about the idea of

:38:56. > :39:01.companies running schools for profit? This has just come up. I am

:39:01. > :39:05.not sure if it is a policy commitment at the moment. If it

:39:05. > :39:10.would bring about better school standards, of course it is a good

:39:10. > :39:20.idea, but I think the Jewry is out at the moment. Berry is no evidence

:39:20. > :39:20.

:39:20. > :39:24.that it does. -- there is no evidence that it does. We seem to

:39:25. > :39:31.think that everything in Sweden works really well and everything

:39:31. > :39:39.else works badly, it is bunkum. I was education secretary for four

:39:39. > :39:44.years. We can reform and modernise without people creaming off. When is

:39:45. > :39:51.profit reinvestment when you just call it a surplus? They're all sorts

:39:51. > :39:59.of ways of cutting the cake, than being ideological. -- there are all

:39:59. > :40:05.sorts of ways. What would you do if you offered a pay rise? Book a

:40:06. > :40:10.holiday, or say this? MPs are public servants paid by taxpayers, and I

:40:10. > :40:16.think it would be impossible to explain to the public why MPs should

:40:16. > :40:21.be treated at this time so very differently to their constituents.

:40:21. > :40:26.Everybody remembers the expenses scandal, an independent body was set

:40:26. > :40:31.up so that MPs had nothing to do with it at all. I think that the

:40:31. > :40:34.cost of politics in this country is too high. When we are cutting public

:40:34. > :40:42.sector pay, when the private sector is coming under huge pressure, this

:40:42. > :40:47.is barking mad. If ever I needed to be persuaded that IPSA was out of

:40:47. > :40:53.touch, it would be now. I think everybody will understand the wider

:40:54. > :40:58.context and the attitude of the people, which I think will be very

:40:58. > :41:05.hostile if the political class puts its own interest first.

:41:05. > :41:12.Joining us to discuss the public reaction to a proposed �10,000 pay

:41:12. > :41:20.rise is the pollster, Andrew Hawkins, from ComRos. Should MPs get

:41:20. > :41:26.�10,000 more? Not immediately. I am in a better position than many,

:41:26. > :41:35.because I write and so on. The common-sense view, in my opinion,

:41:35. > :41:43.would be to agree that for IPSA to put forward their proposal... I was

:41:43. > :41:51.just about to say... Sorry.And say, but, we can't possibly implemented

:41:51. > :41:57.now or in 2015, because there is a public sector pay cap. But why not

:41:57. > :42:01.consider in 2016, 2017, this could be phased-in? People can despise

:42:01. > :42:07.us, they can believe we don't do a days work, but in comparison with

:42:07. > :42:16.the head of a school with 13 weeks holiday or, for that matter, those

:42:16. > :42:21.working in the civil service, it is an absolute nonsense. Andrew, should

:42:21. > :42:27.they be paid more now? It does not take Mystic Meg to seek that this

:42:27. > :42:31.will be an explosive issue over the next few weeks. We did a big study

:42:31. > :42:35.for IPSA in the middle of last year, asking the public what they thought

:42:35. > :42:43.about how much MPs were paid. The range of knowledge about what MPs

:42:43. > :42:50.are paid is colossal, ranging from under �20,000 to more than

:42:50. > :42:55.�150,000. The averages �88,000, that is what people think they are paid.

:42:55. > :43:01.Backbenchers are paid �66,000. People think they should be paid

:43:01. > :43:06.�55,000. IPSA is proposing that within the region of expectation for

:43:06. > :43:13.a lot of people, the problem is that the expenses scandal still looms

:43:13. > :43:18.very large and public consciousness. I am not here to defend whether MPs

:43:18. > :43:23.should get a pay rise, but for years there has never been a good time to

:43:23. > :43:29.pay MPs more, and some might have argued that was the reason, in part,

:43:29. > :43:34.that the expenses scandal came about. It needs tackling. But at a

:43:34. > :43:39.time when we are meant to be in this together, is this the right moment?

:43:39. > :43:44.Maybe there are better times. the job of an MPB compared to a

:43:44. > :43:49.headteacher, a police constable, somebody in the civil service? Is

:43:49. > :43:54.that the range you would put the job of an MP together? That is what the

:43:54. > :44:00.public expect the comparison to be. When you line up MPs alongside some

:44:00. > :44:06.mother public sector workers, the pay is broadly comparable. I am not

:44:06. > :44:13.here to defend the pay levels of MPs, but when you look at their

:44:13. > :44:16.overall lifestyle, you have to ask whether the pay is commensurate with

:44:16. > :44:22.the hassle of the job, the job insecurity. It is a tough, tough

:44:22. > :44:27.job. The other question is whether money motivates the sort of people

:44:27. > :44:30.who go into politics. Does money motivates, or will it be a

:44:30. > :44:39.disincentive in the next five or ten years if the paid stays broadly the

:44:39. > :44:45.same? A third of those who came in in 2010 were earning �30,000 more

:44:45. > :44:50.than the current backbencher's salary. It's never was an incentive

:44:50. > :44:54.all those years ago when I entered. We need to reward people sensibly,

:44:54. > :45:00.demand a great deal of them, expect them to be ethical and then hold

:45:00. > :45:05.them to account. If you have been a Cabinet minister and you drop back

:45:05. > :45:08.to a backbencher's salary, we should not expect you to leave Parliament.

:45:08. > :45:12.You should be able to be there, bringing some experience and

:45:12. > :45:16.knowledge and, hopefully, learning some of the lessons you have learned

:45:16. > :45:23.rather than getting out. At the moment, the system almost says, get

:45:23. > :45:26.out. Part of the challenge is there's been a call for MPs to do

:45:26. > :45:31.fewer outside jobs as well. If we are consistent in our approach to

:45:31. > :45:34.this, we ought to be replacing the income we don't want them to have

:45:34. > :45:38.from outside interests by paying them properly, but that is clearly

:45:38. > :45:42.going to come with a high political price. Maybe the answer is to ease

:45:42. > :45:47.off on the restrictions on outside earnings and maybe that would ease

:45:47. > :45:54.the pressure to put pay up. Would you prefer that or would it be

:45:54. > :45:58.better to pay them 9 90,000 and say no outside interest interests

:45:58. > :46:03.fine. For young people coming in, they can't do the outside stuff.

:46:03. > :46:09.It's the old couragers who've the experience and the added value. I

:46:09. > :46:13.would in favour of, in due course, paying a decent rate for the job.

:46:13. > :46:18.Don't poke a stick into a tiger's cage. That's what's happened at the

:46:18. > :46:23.moment, because we are Prime Minister in hysteria. In 2009 we

:46:23. > :46:28.were and we are running around like headless chickens all again. We love

:46:28. > :46:30.that. Thank you very much. In last week's Spending Review,

:46:31. > :46:34.George Osborne announced a series of changes to welfare rules. Claimants

:46:34. > :46:36.who can't speak English will have to attend classes or see their benefits

:46:36. > :46:40.cut. Pensioners living in warm countries will lose their winter

:46:40. > :46:46.fuel payments. And then there was this on jobseeker's allowance.

:46:46. > :46:50.we are going to introduce a new seven-day wait before people can

:46:50. > :46:55.claim their benefits. Those first few days should be spent look for

:46:55. > :46:58.work, not looking to sign on. After George Osborne's statement, Ed

:46:58. > :47:04.Balls, the Shadow Chancellor, was asked by Andrew what Labour would do

:47:04. > :47:09.about the proposal. Here's what he had to say. We need to look at the

:47:09. > :47:13.detail obviously. On the welfare things, I think English language for

:47:13. > :47:17.incoming migrants definitely. I think for the Sendai, we have it

:47:17. > :47:25.three days at the moment. Seven-day, is it going to be a blank cheque for

:47:25. > :47:27.Wonga? Let's look at the detail. If it works and saves money, fine.

:47:27. > :47:29.This somewhat supportive stance of Labour's has led to heated

:47:29. > :47:32.discussion on Twitter. The Independent's Owen Jones sent a

:47:32. > :47:35.message out on the twittersphere: "Ed Balls refusing to condemn the

:47:35. > :47:37.Tories imposing a further wait on claiming benefits a policy that

:47:37. > :47:40.benefits only loans sharks and food banks." Prompting Labour's Simon

:47:40. > :47:45.Danczuk to respond: "No, it will benefit tax payers as well." "Good

:47:45. > :47:49.grief," was Owen's retort. Simon Danczuk felt the wrath of Twitter

:47:49. > :47:52.types afterwards, so we thought the best course of action was to get

:47:52. > :48:01.them in a room to thrash it out. Joining me now are Owen Jones and

:48:02. > :48:06.Simon Danczuk. Welcome to you both. If Ed Balls has said the measures

:48:06. > :48:10.will save money, or if it is proven it will save money, he is

:48:10. > :48:15.supportive, what's wrong with that? Well, it is a tiny fraction that

:48:15. > :48:19.will save the the. The average wait for people waiting for benefits is

:48:19. > :48:24.already over three weeks. These are people who pay in all their lives -

:48:24. > :48:28.binmen, nurses, teachers, who lose their jobs and get no benefits

:48:28. > :48:33.whatsoever. As a civilised society I would hope we would have a situation

:48:33. > :48:38.where when people lose their jobs they get those benefits. Otherwise

:48:38. > :48:41.500,000 people are already dependent on food banks in the seventh richest

:48:41. > :48:46.country on earth. Charities say that's because of the delays to

:48:46. > :48:51.benefit payments. And it will benefit legal loan sharks, which 1

:48:51. > :48:55.million families now depend on. The idea of the Labour Party not

:48:55. > :48:59.sticking up for people thrown out of work and have scrabbling around to

:48:59. > :49:04.support their families without support from the state is grotesque.

:49:04. > :49:09.There is no doubt that welfare has limitations, hate to be limitation

:49:09. > :49:13.as. We have to build self reliance among people. That's important.

:49:13. > :49:16.What's also important is to say we are where we are, because this is

:49:16. > :49:20.what the Government's doing. We are coming to 2015 and if we have a

:49:20. > :49:23.Labour Government this policy will be many place. What Owen does is

:49:23. > :49:28.speak about the benefits of being on benefits. What I want to do is speak

:49:29. > :49:31.about the benefits of getting people into work. That has what the Labour

:49:31. > :49:36.Party has to do. It is what the Labour Party is about. It's the

:49:36. > :49:42.party of work. It is about building self reline, getting people into

:49:42. > :49:47.employment. The Tories have failed miserably to turn the economy around

:49:47. > :49:53.over the last three years. Labour will change that. It is about

:49:53. > :50:03.providing a jobs guarantee to get people into employment. Simon as

:50:03. > :50:05.

:50:05. > :50:11.ever caricature caricatures me. Housing benefit is now up to �23

:50:11. > :50:15.billion, subsidising landlords charging rip-off rents, because

:50:15. > :50:19.previous Government, Labour included... I readily accept the

:50:19. > :50:22.housing benefit bill is out of control. There are a lot of

:50:22. > :50:26.accidental landlords, people who've properties that are in negative

:50:26. > :50:30.equity and they are renting them out. You can't just bring everybody

:50:30. > :50:35.together. You have an idealistic view of the world I don't.The

:50:35. > :50:44.problem is you sound like a 1980s alternative comedian. It is

:50:44. > :50:49.hilarious in many respects but taking on the mantle of Ben Elton...

:50:49. > :50:53.You sound like a Tory MP. The grotesque sight of a Labour MP

:50:53. > :50:57.scuttling around TV studios to back Tory attacks on some of the poorest

:50:57. > :51:02.people in society. What is it supposed to be about? It is

:51:02. > :51:06.priority. And the priority has to be creating jobs for people, creating

:51:06. > :51:12.wealth and jobs. David Blunkett, who is right in this debate? I'm just

:51:12. > :51:18.glad I'm on the other side of the table! Don't worry, I will protect

:51:18. > :51:23.you Die have my dog. Deep breath. If people are entitled to redundancy

:51:23. > :51:26.payments, there isn't an immediate crises for them. If they are not,

:51:26. > :51:32.for everyone made redundant has the right to one week's additional pay

:51:32. > :51:35.on top of the pay that they had end and were entitled to? And we then

:51:35. > :51:40.change the system so that we actually go for flexibility. We are

:51:40. > :51:44.in a labour market now where people are in and out of work. They may

:51:44. > :51:48.have a job for six months, be out of work for six weeks and back in

:51:48. > :51:54.again. Do you agree with George Osborne extending it from three to

:51:54. > :51:59.seven days? I don't agree with the way he's done it. It was an elephant

:51:59. > :52:03.trap thrown up to cause the kind of row where Owen and my good friend

:52:03. > :52:07.Simon could actually fight it out in the corridor, and the world wouldn't

:52:07. > :52:11.be any better for it. Is it true to say these policies, including this

:52:11. > :52:16.one from three to seven days for benefit payments, is popular with

:52:16. > :52:20.Labour voters? There was a poll in January that showed the more people

:52:20. > :52:24.were aware of the reality of social security the less likely they were

:52:24. > :52:29.to support Government attacks. You talk to Simon about self reliance,

:52:29. > :52:35.as he puts it. Most people living in poverty in this country are in work.

:52:35. > :52:41.In a country where many people choose between heating hair home or

:52:41. > :52:48.feeding their kids, it is easy for Simon to say, he is in the top 5% of

:52:48. > :52:52.earners. This ewill never suffer as a result of these policies.

:52:52. > :52:57.Conservatives are just keen to push people into poverty. I won't take

:52:57. > :53:01.lectures from somebody like Owen who has had a privileged background, a

:53:01. > :53:08.privileged education which compares very well to the one I experienced.

:53:08. > :53:12.I went from a comprehensive school to University, I'm proud of that.

:53:12. > :53:16.You lived in one of the poshest parts of Stockport. No I didn't!The

:53:16. > :53:20.reality is that people like Owen have an idealistic view of the

:53:20. > :53:24.world. If his manifesto is keen and enthusiastic, stand for election and

:53:24. > :53:26.ask the electorate to vote for you. The reality is, never mind the

:53:26. > :53:31.opinion polling, because that shows a majority of people are concerned

:53:31. > :53:36.about how the welfare state is run. But the polling will show he will

:53:36. > :53:41.lose the election. Gentlemen, I have to stop it there, but the two of you

:53:41. > :53:44.can carry on outside, as well as on Twitter. Thank you.

:53:44. > :53:47.Now, before Mr Osborne announced his Spending Review last week, he

:53:47. > :53:50.released this picture of himself, hard at work and eating a burger.

:53:50. > :53:53.But his "man of the people" image took something of a battering when

:53:53. > :53:57.it was revealed that it was a "posh burger" costing �9.70. Is this a

:53:57. > :54:01.fair jibe, or don't we give a burger? We've got Giles down on

:54:01. > :54:06.College Green with three MPs. He's putting their taste buds to the test

:54:06. > :54:09.to see whether posh is best. Jo, this is the real meat of politics.

:54:09. > :54:14.We are going to do some testing the, so we've got three different types

:54:14. > :54:17.of processed meat, and some burg bankers. The MPs, sorry folks, you

:54:17. > :54:24.can turn around. The reason they are fairing the other way is because

:54:24. > :54:28.they tonight know which burger is which. I want you to rattle through

:54:28. > :54:34.this. Take the number one, take a chunks and tell us what you think.

:54:34. > :54:42.Get the feel of it. Experimental television. I haven't tasted this, I

:54:42. > :54:51.don't know what it tastes like. What do you think? Big! A bit too big.

:54:51. > :54:55.Too much? Yes. Horrible. Interesting. Number two.

:54:55. > :55:00.They did ask me earlier, can you guarantee they are not horse? I'm

:55:00. > :55:09.not sure we can guarantee what's in any of our burgers these days.

:55:09. > :55:16.That's my type of burger. A bit dry. You used to run a restaurant and

:55:16. > :55:26.apparently burgers are big sellers. The last one. Why do they always put

:55:26. > :55:31.this in it? I have no idea. That's the best of the lot. By a long way.

:55:31. > :55:36.Peter, you like this one, why do you like that? That's the type I

:55:36. > :55:41.normally eat. That's like a Mackie D. He might be right. You said that

:55:41. > :55:47.was the best of the lot. Why is it the best? Really juicy, lots of

:55:47. > :55:52.flavour. I would agree. It is a nice burg banker. Number three gets the

:55:52. > :55:57.vote. Which do you think is the most expensive? That one.And you are

:55:57. > :56:02.absolutely right. Why do you think that is the most expensive? It is

:56:02. > :56:06.the biggest. Just on size? I think it is good quality beef. There is an

:56:06. > :56:13.ingredient in there. Can you tell what it is? Horse?Possibly. I

:56:13. > :56:23.wouldn't be able to tell. But no is seafood. That's a beef and...

:56:23. > :56:26.

:56:26. > :56:31.Lobster. That retails at around? �20. This one you liked most of you

:56:31. > :56:38.is the one the Chancellor had. Your Byron burger. That's why I didn't

:56:38. > :56:48.like it! No prizes for guessing, don't say on television where that

:56:48. > :56:50.

:56:50. > :56:54.came from, a large multinational. They make the buns in Lancashire.

:56:54. > :57:04.which case you liked the bun but not the burger? It wasn't bad.Are you

:57:04. > :57:08.burger eaters? Yes. Yes. Only home-made ones. Get that! The big

:57:08. > :57:13.best seller you ever had? Restaurants can make their own,

:57:13. > :57:17.because people like them. They really do. When George was

:57:17. > :57:22.photographed with the burger that you don't like, was it a bit of a

:57:23. > :57:28.stunt? Did at this time backfire a bit? Yes. I don't care what burger

:57:28. > :57:32.he eats, he is doing a good job. Mrs Bone's rest rarncts when she had

:57:32. > :57:41.one, with she wouldn't have done those. It wasn't a restaurant, it

:57:41. > :57:48.was a tea room. Actually I'm being a bit posh. It was a caff! Shall we

:57:48. > :57:53.know more about what MPs eat? Keep ate secret? Transparency. It is what

:57:53. > :57:59.this negotiation Governments believes in. The hard politics done

:57:59. > :58:04.on the day with meat thrown in. You won't believe how many people behind

:58:04. > :58:08.the scenes are waiting to polish these off. Do you like burgers?

:58:08. > :58:12.really. That was short and sweet. Moving on from burgers and what

:58:12. > :58:17.George Osborne eats before a Spending Review. The answer to our

:58:17. > :58:23.quiz. I'm not going through all these names again.

:58:23. > :58:32.Which world leader and dictator said he would vote for David Cameron?

:58:32. > :58:38.The guy from North Korea, Kazakhstan, or New Guinea, or the

:58:38. > :58:48.one from Turkmenistan I presume it was where David Cameron was being

:58:48. > :58:48.

:58:48. > :58:51.hosted. It was Kazakhstan. That's it for today. That's all for today.