:00:41. > :00:44.Daily Politics. A welfare cap limiting households to �26,000 a
:00:44. > :00:48.year in benefit payments is being introduced across Britain from
:00:48. > :00:53.today. The Welfare Secretary says the measure will encourage people
:00:53. > :00:56.back to work. But campaigners fear it doesn't take into account the
:00:56. > :01:00.high cost of housing in some areas, and will hit large families
:01:00. > :01:04.particularly hard. Tory activists complain they're not
:01:04. > :01:10.respected by the leadership. We'll be asking have the political parties
:01:10. > :01:16.forgotten their grass roots. Is media coverage of women too
:01:16. > :01:26.titillating for today's tastes? And is this man value for money? MPs
:01:26. > :01:27.
:01:27. > :01:30.will be scrutinising the Prince's All that in the next hour and with
:01:31. > :01:35.us for the first half of the programme today is the Green MP -
:01:35. > :01:39.she also used to be the party's leader - Caroline Lucas. Welcome to
:01:39. > :01:42.the programme. First today, let's start with airports and Mayor of
:01:42. > :01:51.London Boris Johnson who has been setting out his vision for the
:01:51. > :01:55.future of London's airports this morning. As well as his pet project
:01:55. > :01:58.for a hub in the outer Thames Estuary - dubbed Boris Island - the
:01:58. > :02:02.Mayor has also endorsed Lord Foster's plan for a new hub airport
:02:02. > :02:04.on the Isle of Grain in Kent or a major expansion of Stansted Airport.
:02:05. > :02:07.He branded anyone who supports Heathrow expansion "quite simply
:02:08. > :02:15.crackers" and said the Heathrow area should instead be re-developed with
:02:15. > :02:20.new houses. What do you think about that idea? Is it worth spending �15
:02:20. > :02:23.billion to buy Heathrow and turn it into another London borough?
:02:23. > :02:27.certainly need more housing but I am not convinced this is the best way
:02:27. > :02:31.to do it. You can't keep up with Boris, every two moment he has an
:02:31. > :02:37.idea of where he would like another airport. The bottom line is, as the
:02:37. > :02:40.government knows, they do recognise that aviation growth has to be
:02:40. > :02:45.constrained. We need to learn to live within the capacity it has got,
:02:45. > :02:52.naked better. For environmental reasons and the -- make it better.
:02:52. > :03:00.For environmental reasons that have been probed strongly in recent
:03:00. > :03:03.months... Business leaders have said we are at full capacity pretty well
:03:03. > :03:08.at Heathrow and without any expansion, the economy, particularly
:03:08. > :03:13.in London and the South East, will be really damaged. That is what they
:03:13. > :03:19.are saying in Schiphol, in Paris, it is the same message, that we are
:03:19. > :03:23.going to lose out or other countries will lose out. If you add together
:03:23. > :03:27.the capacity of all of the London airports, it is far above of what
:03:27. > :03:32.other respective capitals can come up with in other European countries.
:03:32. > :03:34.Already we have more capacity. The same argument, if we don't expand
:03:34. > :03:40.then business will go to France or Amsterdam, that is what they are
:03:40. > :03:44.being told. The bottom line is if we are serious about climate change, we
:03:44. > :03:51.know that aviation accounts for 12% of climate change emissions in
:03:51. > :03:56.Britain. If we carry on unconstrained, it could rise to 30%
:03:56. > :04:02.by 50 -- by 2050. If people want to use a third of our greenhouse gas
:04:02. > :04:10.budget on aviation, it would mean there is little left for other of
:04:10. > :04:15.business. The WWF are working with more and more businesses saying they
:04:15. > :04:19.could be more efficient through videoconferencing and so forth, not
:04:19. > :04:25.every business but there is a lot of capacity. The figures do not support
:04:25. > :04:33.your argument that we are at full capacity, he throw is already full,
:04:34. > :04:37.running at 99% of committed traffic -- Heathrow is already full. All
:04:37. > :04:42.major airports in the South East will be full by 2030, it is sticking
:04:42. > :04:46.your head in the sand to say we must not expand further. I think it is
:04:46. > :04:50.sticking your head in the sand to say we can go on expanding ad
:04:50. > :04:55.infinitum where we live on a planet with very constrained resources over
:04:55. > :05:00.whether it is land or emissions. If you add up the capacity we have
:05:00. > :05:04.throughout London and the different airports, it is more than in Paris
:05:04. > :05:08.and Amsterdam. It means we are in a good position. Let's learn to use it
:05:08. > :05:12.more effectively and that might mean substituting trains, more
:05:12. > :05:15.videoconferencing, using the capacity that is there for long
:05:15. > :05:20.distance aviation that can't be replaced by Eurostar or similar.
:05:20. > :05:24.Let's learn to use the capacity more effectively and let's also have
:05:24. > :05:30.prices that reflect the true cost of flying. As long as you can go from
:05:30. > :05:35.one end of Europe to the other for �20 on a cut-price flights... It is
:05:35. > :05:41.hard to say... It is not surprising people will do that. Those prices do
:05:41. > :05:46.not reflect the full cost of those flights. But Heathrow, it is
:05:46. > :05:50.Heathrow that has to compete with Frankfurt and Schiphol and Paris. We
:05:50. > :05:54.know already that there are now direct flights to the second cities
:05:54. > :05:59.of some of the emerging countries, you can't get them from Heathrow so
:05:59. > :06:07.people are flying to Frankfurt via Paris, it is a loss of hard income
:06:07. > :06:11.for people here. I disagree with that. It is true.I think you could
:06:11. > :06:13.be using the capacity on all London airports more effectively so you're
:06:14. > :06:20.not concentrating solely on Heathrow. From the tourism aspect,
:06:20. > :06:25.more money goes out with tourists flying out than comes from people
:06:25. > :06:29.flying in. The economic arguments are massively overstated. There are
:06:29. > :06:32.constraints and aviation is ready difficult area cos no one likes to
:06:32. > :06:37.begin the message that you can't expand infinitely, but it is the
:06:37. > :06:41.case that if you want a liveable climate into the future, if you want
:06:41. > :06:44.a decent countryside without the amount of noise and stress caused by
:06:44. > :06:50.ever-increasing aviation, at some point you have to say stop and we
:06:50. > :07:00.need to decide where that is. month, Caroline Lucas got a ticking
:07:00. > :07:03.
:07:03. > :07:07.off during a debate in Parliament. She was holding up Page three of the
:07:07. > :07:11.Sun. You might be surprised then to learn that it was her t-shirt,
:07:11. > :07:14.rather than the half naked models on the inner pages of the red top that
:07:14. > :07:17.caught the eye of the chair during the session. But it's not just Page
:07:17. > :07:20.three that women's groups and our guest, Caroline Lucas, are concerned
:07:20. > :07:22.about but more widespread sexism in the media. Attention grabbing
:07:22. > :07:32.headlines are what newspapers are all about, but are women being
:07:32. > :07:34.
:07:34. > :07:38.routinely portrayed by the media in For women like me who work in the
:07:38. > :07:44.media, you want to be remembered for what you say and not just how you
:07:44. > :07:50.look. Although clearly, that is also important. A group of women's
:07:50. > :07:55.organisations has looked into the issue and focused the lens on a --
:07:55. > :08:00.11 national newspapers and how they portrayed women in daily coverage.
:08:00. > :08:04.They found widespread sexism and one charity has a particular concern.
:08:04. > :08:10.found, particularly in the coverage of violence against women, commonly
:08:10. > :08:13.it would be placed next to advertisements for the sex industry
:08:13. > :08:17.or for film and mainstream entertainment and culture that was
:08:17. > :08:21.showing violence against women as part of entertainment. You had a
:08:21. > :08:27.juxtaposition of a Sirius issue of violence against women alongside a
:08:27. > :08:34.glamorous and titillating side of violence against women -- age
:08:34. > :08:39.exhibition of a serious issue. We don't think it is a directly
:08:39. > :08:46.causative link but our media reflects and creates our views and
:08:46. > :08:52.standards in society. I honestly do not believe that the manner in which
:08:52. > :08:57.women are represented in the media could cause them any physicality. If
:08:57. > :09:01.women were concerned about what was likely to happen to them, they
:09:01. > :09:08.should look to the video world of pornography, and let's deal with
:09:08. > :09:14.that. Never far from the spotlight, the Sun newspaper's Page 3 as long
:09:14. > :09:22.and good campaigners who regard it as an acceptable daily dose of --
:09:22. > :09:30.unacceptable daily Joe -- dose of objectification. A campaign was
:09:30. > :09:34.recently taken into the chamber. Order. Can I tell the honourable
:09:34. > :09:39.member that there is a standard of dress that members must comply with
:09:39. > :09:49.and can I ask the honourable member to address that and put a jacket on,
:09:49. > :09:52.
:09:52. > :10:02.please. I will of course comply with your ruling but it does strike me
:10:02. > :10:06.as... You can get copies of the sun in this place. I admire Caroline
:10:06. > :10:10.Lucas but it is more hot air. To a majority of people in this country
:10:10. > :10:16.it is not offensive and may even bring some joy. By being a member of
:10:16. > :10:20.the Green party, you are by nature, a killjoy. Clare Short stood up in
:10:20. > :10:25.the 80s and try to make it illegal and had thousands of letters of
:10:25. > :10:30.support. 12 were from women who had page three mentioned to them while
:10:30. > :10:34.they were being raped, and yet the Sun called her a killjoy and told
:10:34. > :10:39.her she was jealous. It is not harmless fun. Accusations of sexism
:10:39. > :10:42.are not just limited to the print press, the cost media can also cause
:10:42. > :10:47.offence. BBC sports presenter John Inverdale apologised after saying
:10:47. > :10:52.that this year's women's Wimbledon champion Arion Bartoli was never
:10:52. > :10:59.going to be a looker, a comment that proved a turnoff for hundreds of
:10:59. > :11:05.viewers -- Marion Bartoli. The former deputy editor of the Sun and
:11:05. > :11:11.the new -- News of the world, Neil Wallace, is with us. Let's take the
:11:11. > :11:16.report that found systemic sexism in 11 daily newspapers, are you
:11:16. > :11:23.surprised? Not really, the people who commissioned the report went
:11:23. > :11:29.looking for something to sustain their argument. I think the media in
:11:29. > :11:35.this country is what it is. It has always been like that. I don't think
:11:35. > :11:41.it is any more or any less. I think people are desperately trying to
:11:41. > :11:44.sustain a hollow argument. It is a hollow argument here? I don't think
:11:44. > :11:49.it is and the kind of reaction I have had, since having that debate
:11:49. > :11:52.which wasn't just about Page three but sexism in the media, the sort of
:11:52. > :11:57.response has been overwhelming from people who say they want a spotlight
:11:57. > :12:01.put on this. We are not talking about censorship, we are saying that
:12:01. > :12:07.when you come to Page 3 of the sun, why should that be in people 's
:12:07. > :12:15.workplaces, in cafes and on tube trains and buses where kids can see
:12:15. > :12:19.it. There are some fascinating testimony is from people on our
:12:19. > :12:22.website. A father who went to a hairdressers and Page 3 is in front
:12:22. > :12:26.of them. It is the normalising effect was that if you want to find
:12:26. > :12:31.that kind of image, go and find it but don't put it in front of
:12:31. > :12:35.everybody. Can I just say, it must be wonderful that in Brighton at the
:12:35. > :12:41.moment, things are so perfect that the MP spends her time in this sort
:12:41. > :12:46.of gesture politics. I would love to come back on that. The absolute
:12:46. > :12:56.nonsense of her in the chamber, can I tell you what I really think dot.
:12:56. > :13:03.
:13:03. > :13:07.if she had stood up with a T-shirt that said no more FGM, far more
:13:07. > :13:14.respect if she had stood up wearing a T shirt that illustrated the fact
:13:14. > :13:20.there are 1.2 million offences of domestic violence in this country.
:13:20. > :13:24.Can I come back on those? I would have far more respect if she had
:13:24. > :13:31.stood up and took about video pornography, sex slavery. -- and
:13:31. > :13:38.talked about. To ban Page 3 it is gesture politics. You don't think it
:13:38. > :13:41.is important? I don't. The idea of why I am picking up on this subject,
:13:41. > :13:47.it is because of interest in Brighton. A number of women groups
:13:47. > :13:53.have come to meet about working together. I am absolutely opposed to
:13:53. > :14:00.FGM and I do work on that. didn't you demonstrate about that?
:14:00. > :14:03.You were not going to get the coverage. It was gesture politics.
:14:03. > :14:08.It is absolutely not gesture politics and I work on all of those
:14:08. > :14:12.other issues. You challenged me about violence against women and I
:14:12. > :14:16.am horrified of violence against women. I am horrified of the fact
:14:16. > :14:20.that 60,000 women were raped in this country, I am horrified that the
:14:20. > :14:23.NSPCC says one in two boys and one in three girls thinks there are
:14:23. > :14:30.occasions when it is OK to hit a partner or to force them to have
:14:30. > :14:33.sex. The daily drip drip object of occasion of women creates a culture
:14:33. > :14:39.where those attitudes are more likely to happen. It is not just me
:14:39. > :14:43.saying that, there are government report saying that, UN reports. If
:14:43. > :14:47.you think violence happens in a vacuum, I think you are very wrong.
:14:47. > :14:55.Of course it doesn't. What I am concerned about is the blatant
:14:55. > :15:02.gesture politics of you standing up like that. It got us talking about
:15:02. > :15:08.the issue, didn't it? Media sexism. The government alone accepts there
:15:08. > :15:14.are 30,000 children in this country under the age of ten who are at
:15:14. > :15:24.danger from the most severe form of FGM. Don't just dismiss it. We are
:15:24. > :15:24.
:15:24. > :15:28.not talking about bad. We have done the story about the link between
:15:28. > :15:32.newspaper coverage and what Caroline caused is tripping effect, you
:15:32. > :15:37.support campaigns against violence against women, but if we are looking
:15:37. > :15:40.at this issue particularly, do you accept they could be a link between
:15:40. > :15:47.the overtly sexualisation and portrayal of women in that way and
:15:47. > :15:53.the violence against them? I think that, in this society, we have film,
:15:53. > :15:58.the BBC... Do you think the coverage... That is what the report
:15:58. > :16:02.found, the you say there is no link, that it is overblown? I do not
:16:02. > :16:10.believe that there is a provable link between some images of women in
:16:10. > :16:14.some newspapers and the idea of violence against women. Why?I have
:16:14. > :16:18.never seen evidence that stacked up, apart from vested interest
:16:18. > :16:22.groups. I do not think the government's own report as a vested
:16:22. > :16:26.interest, but I find it very interesting that back in the days of
:16:26. > :16:31.Clare Short, she was told she was stupid and jealous, and the argument
:16:31. > :16:34.has gone on, and it is interesting to see how he will not engage on the
:16:34. > :16:44.issue. The issue now is you are saying that it is not a priority,
:16:44. > :16:46.there are more important things. There are many other important
:16:46. > :16:49.things, and I am campaigning on those, this is one issue that was
:16:49. > :16:53.picked up, but I want you to focus on this issue. The reason that he
:16:53. > :16:57.will not is because you cannot sit there and say that, in a culture
:16:57. > :17:03.where you have more and more images of object of five women, normalising
:17:03. > :17:06.women, young kids who see Page three every day, and you are saying there
:17:06. > :17:09.is absolutely no connection between that and discrimination and violence
:17:09. > :17:19.against women, and if you are saying that, you are in a complete
:17:19. > :17:21.
:17:21. > :17:28.minority. Sex does sell newspapers, those stories... Sex sells films,
:17:28. > :17:33.adverts... You accept that, that is what newspapers are about. No! You
:17:34. > :17:39.cannot say that is what newspapers are about. All newspapers, like all
:17:39. > :17:43.television channels, our balances of things. One element appears in some
:17:43. > :17:46.newspapers that is a glamorised image. Turn to the City pages, for
:17:46. > :17:51.instance, of the Guardian and the times on this Sunday times, and you
:17:51. > :17:56.will see pictures of pretty women. I do not see where there is a problem
:17:56. > :18:01.with pictures of pretty men or women. At the beginning of that film
:18:01. > :18:04.I said I wanted to be remembered more for what I say than how I look,
:18:04. > :18:12.but you want to look your best when you are in a medium like television.
:18:12. > :18:16.Of course you too, but that is a different argument. We are arguing
:18:16. > :18:25.about whether it is appropriate to have in a newspaper kids that can
:18:25. > :18:30.get hold of and see. People choose to buy them. That is not to do with
:18:30. > :18:36.choice, because when you go and see a guy reading page three, when you
:18:36. > :18:41.go into a workplace, it is the ubiquity of this, you do not have a
:18:41. > :18:47.choice not to look at it because it is in your face. I am going to have
:18:47. > :18:53.to finish it there, Neil Wallis, you will be on again, no doubt.
:18:53. > :18:57.From today, a �26,000 benefit cap is being introduced in England,
:18:58. > :19:02.Scotland and Wales. The policy is not only expected to save millions
:19:02. > :19:05.of pounds every year but is also believed to be a vote winner. So how
:19:05. > :19:11.will it work in practice? Couples and single parents will receive no
:19:11. > :19:15.more than �500 per week, while individuals will be limited to �350
:19:15. > :19:20.per week. The cap is set to reflect the average working household
:19:20. > :19:23.income. The benefits cap applies to people receiving jobseeker's
:19:23. > :19:27.allowance, child benefit, child tax credits, housing benefits and other
:19:27. > :19:31.key support from the government. You are exempt if you received
:19:31. > :19:34.disability living allowance or working tax credits. The Government
:19:34. > :19:40.says the changes will encourage people to get back into work and
:19:40. > :19:44.hopes that the cap will save about �110 million per year, but critics
:19:44. > :19:48.say could does not take into account the higher cost of housing in some
:19:48. > :19:54.areas and will hit large families particularly hard. I am joined now
:19:54. > :19:59.by Conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi, welcome to the programme. How do you
:19:59. > :20:05.know this policy is going to get people back into work? This is about
:20:05. > :20:10.fairness, and you are right to say that there is a discretionary amount
:20:10. > :20:14.where councils can give more money for housing. At the moment, overall,
:20:14. > :20:20.there is a saving there. It is not a big saving, is it? When you think of
:20:20. > :20:26.the bill over the welfare bill, you are saving peanuts. Housing benefit
:20:26. > :20:34.is about 23 billion, but it is about fairness. Why should an out of work
:20:34. > :20:38.working age couple get more than �35,000 gross? You would have to win
:20:38. > :20:42.�35,000, if you were working, to get the same as if you were on benefits.
:20:43. > :20:47.That is simply unfair, and that is why we are introducing this. How do
:20:47. > :20:50.you know the policy will get people back into work? Because that is what
:20:50. > :20:56.the policy is based on, that is the premise, that if we put a cap of
:20:56. > :21:01.�26,000, we will get more people into work. It is not just this
:21:01. > :21:04.policy. It is the whole package, looking at universal credit, which
:21:04. > :21:09.is coming in, and that will mean nobody going back to work will have
:21:09. > :21:14.that sort of cliff edge where the benefits outweigh the going back to
:21:14. > :21:19.work. That is important. With this cap as well, you will hopefully
:21:19. > :21:23.begin to see a nudge in behaviour, people thinking, do you know what?
:21:23. > :21:29.It is better off looking for work, going to work than claiming
:21:29. > :21:33.benefits. Plus, the reality is, your viewers watching this, �35,000 a
:21:34. > :21:38.year as a family, why should your neighbour gets �35,000 for not
:21:38. > :21:41.working at all? The current system is just not there, it is unfair for
:21:41. > :21:45.families who are working very hard to support their families without
:21:46. > :21:50.benefits. Up the whole edifice this is built on is completely flawed,
:21:50. > :21:54.because the Government was saying �26,000 is the average earnings, and
:21:54. > :21:59.that is what they related to. If you look at average income, the working
:21:59. > :22:03.families are able, those earning around �26,000, they could also be
:22:03. > :22:06.getting housing benefit, they could be getting housing benefit, child
:22:06. > :22:10.benefit, and they could be getting rather more. So this idea that there
:22:10. > :22:14.are many out of work families who are raking it in, compared to
:22:15. > :22:19.working families, is simply wrong. The new statesman, and I will quote
:22:19. > :22:23.it, it says exactly the same thing, that actually there aren't that many
:22:23. > :22:29.out of work families who are doing better than those in work. At the
:22:29. > :22:36.moment there is already a situation where if you are in work, workplace.
:22:36. > :22:43.That great impartial publication! If you allow me to speak, you might get
:22:43. > :22:46.an answer. If you are working 24 hours, but we knew you are exempt
:22:47. > :22:52.from this cap. Below that, you are right. If you are a single person
:22:52. > :22:57.working 16 hours... So it will hit working families, too. And element
:22:57. > :23:02.will hit, but you can go up to 24-hour is, that is the idea, to get
:23:02. > :23:05.you to do more work. The private sector has created 1.3 million jobs,
:23:05. > :23:12.we have lost half a million from the public sector, but there are jobs
:23:12. > :23:17.out there to go after... There are five people after every one job,
:23:17. > :23:22.what are the other four meant to do?! If they happen to have bigger
:23:22. > :23:29.families... There is no money tree... Could you answer my
:23:29. > :23:33.question? Look at what is happening in the economy... All I would say to
:23:33. > :23:37.you is, at the moment, there are more jobs, more people in work than
:23:37. > :23:41.there have ever been before. That is a good thing, but we need to do more
:23:41. > :23:46.to grow the economy further. There is no money tree, tell me where you
:23:46. > :23:51.are going to find the money. There is a reality that most voters like
:23:51. > :23:55.this policy, they do think there is intrinsic and fairness and that
:23:55. > :23:58.actually �26,000 is enough for people to live on. Perhaps with the
:23:58. > :24:03.exception of London and the south-east, where housing is
:24:03. > :24:07.expensive, people like this policy. Well, unfortunately, I think this
:24:07. > :24:11.government is trying to appeal to people's less good instincts, in the
:24:11. > :24:15.sense that they are trying to whip up the sense that people are ripping
:24:15. > :24:18.off the system. If you look at some of the figures about what people
:24:18. > :24:25.think, for example the number of people fiddling the system, lots of
:24:25. > :24:30.people think it must be about 30%, but in fact it is 0.7%. Nadhim
:24:30. > :24:33.Zahawi admitted the saving will not be that important from a perception
:24:33. > :24:38.and symbolic importance that people feel that the system is treating
:24:38. > :24:41.everyone fairly. If we had Fairfax, they would have a better chance of
:24:41. > :24:46.doing that, and I come back to the initial point, which is if you look
:24:46. > :24:51.at the working family on 26,000, they can still be getting more money
:24:51. > :24:55.from housing benefit and more money from child credit and so on, so the
:24:55. > :25:00.figures are not comparing like with like. That is wrong. Secondly, we
:25:00. > :25:05.should get away from this idea that you need to penalised people. We
:25:05. > :25:10.know that people, if they have got four children or more, are going to
:25:10. > :25:20.be very hurt by this. Caroline will agree with Labour, they want to make
:25:20. > :25:25.
:25:25. > :25:30.hard-working people need a voice, we give them that voice. Credit costume
:25:30. > :25:37.or in the end? If you look at what local authorities have said about
:25:37. > :25:41.housing. -- could it cost you more in the end? There may not be many
:25:41. > :25:48.with five or more children, but they will be pushed into poverty, and
:25:48. > :25:53.that will bump up your costs. are 56,000 households, roughly,
:25:53. > :25:58.about 80,000 individuals, 190,000 children, in London it is 49% of
:25:58. > :26:03.London homes that are affected by this. Around the country, I think in
:26:03. > :26:07.my area in the West Midlands is about 7%. So let's see how this
:26:07. > :26:13.works. It is an important message, it is direction of travel, part of a
:26:13. > :26:20.package of making work pay, making work the right way forward for
:26:20. > :26:25.people when they are making choices. The welfare bill is join or must, by
:26:25. > :26:30.anyone's standard... You say that, but a lot of it is going on housing
:26:30. > :26:34.benefit, can I make the point that it is not going into the pockets of
:26:34. > :26:40.feckless people? Rents are so high, that is why housing benefit is high.
:26:40. > :26:46.I would put a cap on rent increases. Distort the rental market? Caroline,
:26:46. > :26:51.you are flip-flopping all over the place. It is not fair to push more
:26:51. > :26:56.people into poverty! Before you go, would you like it to be lower than
:26:56. > :27:00.�26,000? If this works, would you like it to be brought down further?
:27:00. > :27:04.Let's see if it works. The important thing is to make sure that it is
:27:04. > :27:08.fair... Would you say it would be something you would bring down
:27:08. > :27:15.further? I think people on benefits should never get more than the
:27:15. > :27:21.average income. They very rarely do... It is about living within your
:27:21. > :27:27.means... All right, that is enough, no more money trees, Nadhim Zahawi,
:27:27. > :27:33.thank you. Our guest of the day, Caroline Lucas, is the MP for
:27:33. > :27:37.Brighton. The council is controlled by the Green Party. But is
:27:37. > :27:41.Brighton's green dream turning sour? We are joined now by Lucinda Adam,
:27:41. > :27:45.who has been following events in Brighton, but today she is in
:27:45. > :27:49.Tunbridge Wells, just to confuse you. Welcome to the programme. I was
:27:49. > :27:53.in Brighton a few weeks ago, I saw the rubbish all over the streets
:27:53. > :27:58.because of the strike, and there has been a reprieve, but are they going
:27:58. > :28:00.to go on strike again? There is no clearer sign of trouble at a got
:28:00. > :28:05.cancelled and piles of rubbish in the streets, and the seagulls have
:28:05. > :28:08.been having a field day. This all started because the Green Party,
:28:08. > :28:12.which has a minority leadership of the Council, plans to change the
:28:12. > :28:18.allowances on overtime paid to staff. The GMB says that some refuse
:28:18. > :28:22.collectors will be left �4000 worse off. Negotiations failed and they
:28:22. > :28:25.strike began. But what it revealed, more than disagreement between the
:28:26. > :28:30.council and the union, is the extent of growing division between Green
:28:30. > :28:34.councillors. Many sided with the striking workers, and even Caroline
:28:34. > :28:39.Lucas was at the picket line pledging her support. Green Party
:28:39. > :28:42.members sent an open letter to their leader calling for his resignation.
:28:42. > :28:45.They say he is going against the democratic decisions of members of
:28:45. > :28:50.the party and bringing the party into disrepute. Some even attempted
:28:50. > :28:54.to get Labour councillors to join forces with them at a recent AGM in
:28:54. > :28:59.an attempt to oust him as leader. But Labour capitalised by leading
:28:59. > :29:03.the request to the media. He has fought off calls to resign so far,
:29:03. > :29:08.but his problems are not over. As you said, fresh negotiations begin
:29:08. > :29:11.today to try to find a new pay settlement for refuge workers. But
:29:11. > :29:16.GMB leaders have warned that the boats are on a knife edge and
:29:16. > :29:19.another strike could be imminent within weeks if not been as agreed.
:29:19. > :29:24.Thank you very much. Let's pick up on some of those
:29:24. > :29:29.points. If we look at the strike, you were on the picket line, the
:29:29. > :29:33.Green Party is divided. The images of rubbish strewn on the streets of
:29:33. > :29:39.Brighton looked absolutely terrible, doing nothing at all for
:29:39. > :29:42.your image as a confident runner of local government. Well, nobody wants
:29:42. > :29:46.a bin strike, and you are quite right that it did look awful.
:29:46. > :29:50.Unfortunately, the Greens are not the only administration where there
:29:50. > :29:53.have been bin strikes, there have been under all the administrations
:29:53. > :29:59.in Brighton and hope. One of the reasons that the problem happened
:29:59. > :30:01.just now was, as your reporter said, we are under a legal obligation to
:30:01. > :30:05.get the quality is legislation properly imposed. At the moment it
:30:05. > :30:09.is open to challenge because the amount of allowances that the bin
:30:09. > :30:14.men have been getting has been more than many women in comparable jobs.
:30:14. > :30:18.So we had a legal imperative to be able to equalise the allowances.
:30:18. > :30:21.Ideally, of course, what we would want would be to bring the women up
:30:21. > :30:24.to the level of the allowances of the binman. Let me explain this,
:30:24. > :30:30.because it is important. I would love to have had the money to do
:30:30. > :30:34.that. We had a proposal to other parties in the council to say, let's
:30:34. > :30:44.raise council tax, and Labour sided with the Conservatives, not to raise
:30:44. > :30:49.
:30:49. > :30:52.council tax. Ism is as if it is said you have no more money, it was
:30:52. > :30:57.a redistribution of the money you had which ended up with bin workers
:30:57. > :31:02.getting �4000 less. That's not right, we have a living wage policy
:31:02. > :31:06.and I am proud of that. We have a policy whereby there is a ten to one
:31:06. > :31:11.ratio between the highest paid and the lowest paid. The Chief Executive
:31:11. > :31:16.took a pay cut and the lowest paid people took a pay rise. But the
:31:16. > :31:20.Greens have mishandled it? We have not. There is a legacy issue which
:31:20. > :31:24.should have been sorted out under the last administration. We are
:31:24. > :31:28.under the threat of legal action in October which could mean if we don't
:31:28. > :31:32.get equality is legislation in place, the council itself could be
:31:32. > :31:37.liable for millions of pounds. Nobody wants to see that so we are
:31:37. > :31:43.trying to find a way in a difficult financial situation, to find more
:31:43. > :31:49.money. Why is the Green party split, with challenges even to the
:31:49. > :31:53.council leader, splits in the Green party that resulted in labour being
:31:53. > :31:59.asked to come on, who said to sort out your own problem. It like naive
:31:59. > :32:03.politics. I think that was naive politics will stop one person has
:32:03. > :32:07.held their hands up and apologised and said it is naive. I would be the
:32:07. > :32:10.first person to say it has been really unhelpful to the Greens in
:32:10. > :32:15.Brighton, it has been very public and it is not a pretty sight. What
:32:15. > :32:19.we are doing is coming together, working to find the best possible
:32:19. > :32:22.resolution so we can meet equality is legislation, to which we are
:32:22. > :32:27.deeply committed, and ensure people are not losing �4000 from their
:32:27. > :32:32.allowances, because that is not right either. We are trying to sort
:32:32. > :32:40.it out when previous legislation have left us with that. Leaving you
:32:40. > :32:44.bombed rubble to Labour taking over? -- leaving you vulnerable.
:32:44. > :32:47.Labour are second but I am confident that I am able to demonstrate the
:32:47. > :32:54.effectiveness of a Green MP in Westminster. Why have recycling
:32:54. > :32:59.rates robbed? I wasn't aware that they had dropped. The Brighton
:32:59. > :33:04.evening Argus said they had come down from 32%, to 26%. The overall
:33:04. > :33:08.percentage of waste produced has gone down. We are trying to bring in
:33:08. > :33:12.food waste collection, the other parties have not supported that and
:33:12. > :33:16.we have not got the money from the EU that we needed. We want to put in
:33:16. > :33:19.place food waste because it is a massive amount of the waste produced
:33:19. > :33:25.in the city. We haven't got the green light for the money but it is
:33:25. > :33:29.a big priority. Thank you for being our guest of the day.
:33:29. > :33:32.You could be forgiven for thinking that the only thing happening this
:33:32. > :33:36.week is the imminent arrival of a new Windsor, but Parliament is busy
:33:36. > :33:39.tying up a lot of loose ends before the summer break. So, let's take a
:33:39. > :33:42.look at what else is going on this week.
:33:42. > :33:45.Today, Margaret Hodge is taking aim at the tax affairs of Prince Charles
:33:45. > :33:48.- the Public Accounts Committee is scrutinising the accounts of the
:33:48. > :33:51.Duchy of Cornwall. Eric Pickles is launching a new Conservative Party
:33:51. > :33:55.group to try and widen the party's appeal among working class and
:33:55. > :33:57.ethnic minority voters. Meanwhile 40 Conservative MPs in some of the most
:33:57. > :34:04.marginal seats are launching their strategy for the 2015 general
:34:04. > :34:08.election. Tomorrow, the Trident Alternatives Review will be
:34:08. > :34:12.published ahead of a debate on Wednesday. Also, the Government is
:34:12. > :34:18.expected to publish its legislation on the lobbying industry. Wednesday
:34:18. > :34:21.sees the last PMQs before the summer recess. Unemployment figures come
:34:21. > :34:25.out in the morning as well as the Office for Budget Responsibility's
:34:25. > :34:32.latest report on the public finances. The House of Commons rises
:34:32. > :34:38.for recess on Thursday, returning on second September. The Lords will sit
:34:38. > :34:47.until 30th July. And joining us now from a sunny College Green are The
:34:47. > :34:49.Spectator's Isabel Hardman and from The Times, Laura Pitel. Laura, an
:34:49. > :34:53.interesting story about Samantha Cameron pushing her husband to take
:34:53. > :34:59.a more robust stance in Syria after seeing the suffering their first
:34:59. > :35:02.hand. How much impact do you think she has had? I don't think anybody
:35:02. > :35:07.would be surprised by the fact that a Prime Minister listens to his wife
:35:07. > :35:12.at home. What is interesting is she is seen as more normal and a lot
:35:12. > :35:16.cooler than David Cameron. Tim Montgomery in the Times had an
:35:16. > :35:23.interesting line, she said if the story is not on six music, I am not
:35:23. > :35:26.interested. So she is interested, she went to Syria and was touched by
:35:26. > :35:31.what happened. I don't think we should overestimate her role. He has
:35:31. > :35:35.a whole host of national-security adviser is telling him what to think
:35:35. > :35:38.on this. And let's not get carried away with the idea that Samantha
:35:38. > :35:44.Cameron is the epitome of normal, she is the daughter of a baroness
:35:44. > :35:49.after all. Isabel Hardman, you may not be surprised but should people
:35:49. > :35:52.be worried if there is some sort of influence going on at home? I think
:35:52. > :35:55.it is quite normal for a spouse to listen to people in their
:35:55. > :36:01.households, it would be odd if David Cameron did not this on. But he has
:36:01. > :36:05.many other advisers who we will also listen to and give more weight to.
:36:05. > :36:08.Tory MPs will be worried about any attempt to rush into intervening in
:36:08. > :36:12.Syria for that the Prime Minister seems to have cooled on that but if
:36:12. > :36:15.anything happens on the summary says, Britain has to take a decision
:36:15. > :36:22.without insulting parliament. Many Tories MPs leave this could trigger
:36:22. > :36:25.the leadership challenge to David Cameron. It is well-known that the
:36:25. > :36:29.coalition is divided on the issue of Trident but how far do you think the
:36:29. > :36:34.Liberal Democrats will get with the argument that Britain no longer
:36:34. > :36:37.faces a threat that requires round-the-clock deterrent. We have a
:36:37. > :36:46.story saying that the review into Trident alternatives report argues
:36:46. > :36:49.that the Lib Dems think we should not go for like for like
:36:49. > :36:55.replacements but producing half the number of submarines. The Tories
:36:55. > :36:58.have it back on this, saying it would be irresponsible. After the
:36:58. > :37:02.election in 2015, the Lib Dems will not be a power on their own but we
:37:02. > :37:05.might have another hung parliament. The big questions is will the Lib
:37:05. > :37:11.Dems make is non-negotiable, saying they will not replace it and will
:37:11. > :37:15.not team up with anybody who will? Will it be a red line in the sand?
:37:15. > :37:19.Philip Hammond has said the Lib Dem proposals would be a step that note
:37:19. > :37:23.responsible government could take. The Lib Dems need to show it has not
:37:23. > :37:27.just been an exercise they have been sent away to keep them busy and no
:37:27. > :37:30.one is going to pay attention, they want to show it is a responsible
:37:30. > :37:36.alternative and even if it is rejected, it has been paid due
:37:36. > :37:42.attention. The proposals for a register are out this week after
:37:42. > :37:47.many years of looking at this issue. Does it tackle the potential
:37:47. > :37:51.conflict of interests of lobbyists having too much influence?
:37:51. > :37:54.remains to be seen, some in the industry say it is not because it
:37:54. > :37:57.leaves out the area of in-house lobbyists. It leaves out the area of
:37:57. > :38:00.in-house lobbyists. It will only force people who are outside
:38:00. > :38:06.lobbyists to declare their clients. If you are the communications firm
:38:06. > :38:12.in-house, let's say a big oil or media company, you don't have to
:38:12. > :38:17.declare your interest so it is a huge hole that has been left open.
:38:17. > :38:20.The role of Lynton Crosby and his links of tobacco has come to the
:38:20. > :38:26.fork so David Cameron will need to be seen to be taken action -- has
:38:26. > :38:32.come to the fore. Who will be in charge over the summary says since
:38:32. > :38:35.Nick Clegg and David Cameron are both aware at the same time? I don't
:38:35. > :38:40.think being on holiday as Prime Minister is the sort of holiday that
:38:40. > :38:45.any of us would recognise. He does have a phone and staff with him,
:38:45. > :38:51.bodyguards following him around on the beach. Don't they have nominated
:38:51. > :38:56.person to be in charge when they are away? Quite a few people will be
:38:56. > :39:03.hoping it is not Oliver N because when he is left in charge strange
:39:03. > :39:08.things seem to happen. Theresa May weight -- may hope it is heard given
:39:08. > :39:12.the leadership ambitions she seems to have been showing. I forgot what
:39:12. > :39:18.the protocol is if you have the Prime Minister and the deputy away.
:39:18. > :39:21.No one knows! I wouldn't actually bank on it. Thank you both.
:39:21. > :39:24.With the next election fast approaching, the latest blow has
:39:24. > :39:27.been struck this morning in the battle for the future direction of
:39:27. > :39:30.the Conservative Party. 40 Conservative MPs representing the
:39:30. > :39:38.party's most marginal seats have published 40 policy ideas to attract
:39:38. > :39:42.swing voters. And as luck would have it, one of the authors is on our
:39:42. > :39:51.panel today - James Morris, welcome. We're also joined by the Labour MP
:39:51. > :39:56.Gisela Stuart and the Liberal Democrat Malcolm Bruce. It is a very
:39:56. > :40:02.glossy report, especially when I looked it on screen. How did you
:40:02. > :40:06.pull together these policies? groups represents the 40 held
:40:06. > :40:12.Conservative marginals. We wanted 40 contributions because it is quite
:40:12. > :40:16.neat. The book demonstrates the creativity and energy of those 40
:40:16. > :40:20.marginal members of Parliament. Lots of practical ideas for the future of
:40:20. > :40:26.the Conservative party. Was it an act of desperation because you are
:40:26. > :40:32.so worried about UKIP? Not at all. There are ideas about how we tackle
:40:32. > :40:37.the growing problems of mental illness in Britain, access to
:40:37. > :40:40.psychological therapies, lots about improving the enterprise agenda.
:40:40. > :40:44.Stuff about driving forward the localism agenda by giving people a
:40:44. > :40:48.much better and stronger community right to challenge. They are
:40:48. > :40:54.practical ideas for the future of the country. Nothing you could
:40:54. > :40:57.disagree with, is there? There are some interesting ones. As I was
:40:57. > :41:03.reading stuff about immigration, what you intend to do with single
:41:03. > :41:07.mothers, capping university places for foreign students, I thought
:41:08. > :41:12.Nigel Farage does not have to win places because his policies are
:41:12. > :41:21.being incorporated in the next Conservative manifesto. Welfare is
:41:21. > :41:24.the top priority, welfare reform is a popular. The idea around teenage
:41:24. > :41:27.pregnancy is still a big issue, there are very high rates in
:41:27. > :41:32.comparison to European partners. I think we should look at it, I know
:41:32. > :41:35.it is controversial but it needs to be looked at. The interesting thing
:41:35. > :41:41.is you are in government foot up if this was of a party in opposition,
:41:41. > :41:45.if a group of Labour MPs had done this, I would say there is a real
:41:45. > :41:50.fight for the next manifesto, but three years into a government in the
:41:50. > :41:55.first term of a government, for 40 MPs to issue their own manifesto is
:41:55. > :41:59.extraordinary. This book demonstrates that the Conservative
:41:59. > :42:05.Parliamentary party is leading the battle of ideas. The Labour Party is
:42:05. > :42:13.completely intellectually redundant, these ideas are for the future of
:42:13. > :42:15.the country. Malcolm Bruce, do you sign up to these ideas? I think it
:42:15. > :42:20.is against what a Conservative government if it was in majority
:42:20. > :42:23.would be do, what being anchored to the centre ground by the Liberal
:42:23. > :42:26.Democrats. It is an invitation to realise what the Tory party really
:42:26. > :42:32.want to do. Some of it is not growing as, it is up to them how
:42:32. > :42:37.they win their seats. You disagree with policies on improving the
:42:37. > :42:40.approach to mental health? There are policies that are sensible and some
:42:40. > :42:46.that are clearly not thought through. It is like reactions on the
:42:46. > :42:49.doorstep duplicate people. These are your coalition partners? They are
:42:49. > :42:53.not, they are the Conservative party who wish to lead the country on
:42:53. > :42:58.their own next time. The top 30 are exempt from universities and what
:42:58. > :43:04.happens if you are at 31? This is an attack on universities who may have
:43:04. > :43:08.the best courses, it is elitist, how do you define it? It has those rings
:43:08. > :43:16.of picking and mixing the things that you will pander, dog whistle
:43:16. > :43:19.like... There are arguments about this immigration policy, there are a
:43:20. > :43:22.lot of universities that are running courses which have no value and they
:43:22. > :43:27.are attracting overseas students to get the numbers up. It is something
:43:27. > :43:30.we should look at. In this book, it is directly in the centre ground, in
:43:30. > :43:35.the mainstream, it has a balance of ideas about the future of the
:43:35. > :43:41.country, looking at improving health care and services and the lives of
:43:41. > :43:44.children and young people. Why have you felt the need to do it? You are
:43:44. > :43:49.in government, you are obviously not getting your message across to the
:43:49. > :43:55.Prime Minister, or he is ignoring you. He has written a foreword to
:43:55. > :43:59.the book. This is the 40 most marginal seat in the battle ground
:43:59. > :44:02.offering 40 ideas to be taken forward by the Conservative party.
:44:02. > :44:10.Does it worry you question but what about the marginal seats you will
:44:10. > :44:16.have with conservatives it could be a challenge? I have had an even more
:44:16. > :44:20.marginal seat for a longer time than he had. A one term MP, now here for
:44:20. > :44:27.the fifth term. The way you'd track the people on the ground is not by
:44:27. > :44:30.saying, this is my alternative. If I was a voter, I would say, there is a
:44:30. > :44:36.Conservative government and an alternative group of the 40s you are
:44:36. > :44:40.trying to offer an alternative menu. This is not an alternative group.
:44:40. > :44:45.You win the most marginal by saying that as a local representative, you
:44:45. > :44:50.may offer something extra but you have to be part of the party. You
:44:50. > :44:53.are welcome to what you're doing it may help us. This is not some other
:44:53. > :44:58.group, it is a group of not intellectually dead Conservative
:44:58. > :45:08.members of Parliament. There is a huge range of ideas in the
:45:08. > :45:12.
:45:12. > :45:19.Conservative arty. We are leading the debate. You cannot get away with
:45:19. > :45:23.saying, I am an MBNA marginal seat, I have a different agenda from the
:45:23. > :45:31.Prime Minister. He said these were interesting ideas that not everyone
:45:31. > :45:40.would agree with, he had no choice. These mainstream ideas that the
:45:40. > :45:46.government are building one. We look forward to getting your party's not
:45:46. > :45:50.alternative manifesto! Now, last week Ed Miliband announced plans to
:45:50. > :45:53.reform his party's relationship with trade union members, and later this
:45:53. > :45:58.week Conservative Grassroots members are meeting to discuss improving
:45:58. > :46:01.relationships with their party leadership. As Parliament goes into
:46:01. > :46:04.recession, how happy are party members with their political
:46:04. > :46:08.chieftains? I'm joined from College Green by Conrad Landin from Left
:46:08. > :46:13.Futures, Gareth Epps from the Liberal Democrat Social Liberal
:46:13. > :46:18.Forum, and Bob Woollard of Conservative Grassroots. Let's start
:46:18. > :46:22.with you, Bob, are you happy with the leadership? It is not a question
:46:22. > :46:26.of being happy with the leadership, there are a range of matters that I
:46:26. > :46:31.am happy with, and a range of matters that I and countless
:46:31. > :46:37.hundreds and thousands of Conservative members and loyal
:46:37. > :46:41.activists are not happy with. ones? If you take same-sex marriage,
:46:41. > :46:46.the bill is going through its final stages in the House of Lords today,
:46:46. > :46:53.and there was no mandate for that, no manifesto commitment, no Green
:46:53. > :46:57.paper, no White Paper. No mandate. If you take other issues, HS2, for
:46:57. > :47:00.instance, overseas aid, a number of this use where the leadership do not
:47:00. > :47:07.seem to be listening to their grassroots. And what has happened as
:47:07. > :47:13.a result? What has happened to the grassroots? They have gone, many of
:47:13. > :47:20.them have torn up their membership cards and are either sitting on the
:47:20. > :47:25.hands or have gone to UKIP. What about the Labour position on
:47:25. > :47:29.austerity? That's supported by the grassroots? I think what a lot of
:47:29. > :47:34.Labour grassroots members want to see is a proper alternative to
:47:34. > :47:38.austerities. I do not think it is enough to say that posterity is
:47:38. > :47:43.going to far, too fast. We need to be saying, as Ed Balls has been
:47:43. > :47:47.saying in some cases, that posterity is crippling the British economy, it
:47:47. > :47:51.is losing people jobs, but at the same time as that, we have not been
:47:51. > :47:56.proposing what we will do in said, so we need to be saying what we will
:47:56. > :47:58.do instead, we need to be saying that we will embark on a massive
:47:58. > :48:03.programme of council house building. We need to be proposing
:48:03. > :48:11.things like nationalising the railways, if we need to make cuts,
:48:11. > :48:14.we should be cutting trident, which is wasting billions of money which
:48:15. > :48:19.could be invested in things that are actually useful for the economy,
:48:19. > :48:27.such as green energy and re-nationalising the railways,
:48:27. > :48:33.things that will create jobs but will not be wasted in their impact.
:48:33. > :48:37.Is Ed Miliband a good leader? think he is a good leader... Just
:48:37. > :48:41.not doing any of the things you say. We are having an open discussion in
:48:41. > :48:45.the Labour Party at the moment about a lot of these things. We need to
:48:45. > :48:55.come to a King collusion more quickly than we have so far, but I
:48:55. > :48:57.
:48:57. > :49:01.think we are genuinely making progress. -- a conclusion. I am
:49:01. > :49:06.going to stop you there, because I want to move on to Gareth Epps, what
:49:06. > :49:10.about you? What do you think of Nick Clegg? Has he done enough in
:49:10. > :49:13.coalition? He has been working hard, and we have achieved some
:49:13. > :49:18.significant things, not least lifting people out of paying income
:49:18. > :49:22.tax altogether, but he has got a very tough job and has made it clear
:49:22. > :49:27.that our party, which is a centre-left party, is something he
:49:27. > :49:30.wants to lead from the centre-right, and as we look forward to 2015, we
:49:30. > :49:34.have got a big dilemma on our hands in terms of how we tackle the future
:49:34. > :49:38.debate on the economy, and in particular we had a policy motion
:49:38. > :49:41.that was unveiled over the weekend, came from Nick Clegg and Danny
:49:41. > :49:47.Alexander, which effectively looks as though it is going to be
:49:47. > :49:51.committing us to all spawn's view, and that is not is what Liberal
:49:51. > :49:55.Democrat on the streets or people who have worked hard to ensure our
:49:55. > :50:00.57 MPs got elected in 2010 are going to be able to stomach very easily.
:50:00. > :50:04.Would you rather see Vince Cable leading the party? I do not think it
:50:04. > :50:11.is about personalities. I think at this stage it is about the policies
:50:11. > :50:15.and visions. Nick has achieved a great deal as leader of the party,
:50:15. > :50:23.where some of us are quite concerned is that he seems not to want to
:50:23. > :50:26.route the party in the way that we have always done in liberal values.
:50:26. > :50:29.He seems to be wanting us to follow the centre ground and to be tied in
:50:29. > :50:32.2015, for the next Parliament, to the decisions we have made in
:50:32. > :50:36.coalition with the Conservatives in the last Parliament. Just as I think
:50:36. > :50:39.the Conservatives would find it strange to be tied to Liberal
:50:39. > :50:45.Democrat commitments in 2015, I do not think the Liberal Democrats can
:50:45. > :50:48.do the same and follow the economic George Osborne. We have to have a
:50:48. > :50:53.distinct approach, and that was the approach that Vince Cable
:50:53. > :50:56.articulated so well in 2010. Do you think UKIP are going to make great
:50:56. > :51:02.games at the expense of the Conservatives in terms of not just
:51:02. > :51:07.grassroots members but seats? think they probably will at the
:51:07. > :51:11.European elections. But we have got to really get back, in the
:51:11. > :51:15.Conservative Party, in my opinion, get back to what ordinary people
:51:15. > :51:19.want, what ordinary people are feeling. You know, people are fed up
:51:19. > :51:24.to the back teeth of politicians who say one thing when is an election
:51:24. > :51:29.coming up and do another when they get into power. So this is switching
:51:29. > :51:33.people off totally. Will give Nigel Farage one thing, in particular he
:51:33. > :51:37.is a straight talking type of chap, and we need a much more straight
:51:37. > :51:41.talking, we need to speak from the heart, take people with us, take
:51:41. > :51:47.people along with us. That is what is not happening at the moment on a
:51:47. > :51:51.range of issues. Do you both agree on that point? There is a challenge
:51:51. > :51:58.coming for all the parties, and I see it quite differently to some of
:51:58. > :52:02.the voices... Briefly!I think the Labour Party needs to be offering a
:52:02. > :52:07.more modern vision. I think we need to be at the forefront of campaigns
:52:07. > :52:10.such as for equal marriage, but we also need to be shown... The Labour
:52:10. > :52:14.leadership needs to show they have nothing to fear from openers and
:52:14. > :52:22.debate and from grassroots voices being heard. Is a challenge for all
:52:22. > :52:24.three, and the world has changed. The fact that we are talking about
:52:24. > :52:28.equal marriage legislation is something that none of us would have
:52:28. > :52:31.thought would have been possible ten years ago. Political parties do need
:52:31. > :52:36.to remember that they need to be doing that straight talking and be
:52:36. > :52:39.honest with the electorate. Thank you, gentlemen, very interesting,
:52:39. > :52:42.thank you for coming onto the programme.
:52:42. > :52:46.All of them seem to be unhappy with the leadership in one way or
:52:46. > :52:51.another, not listening to them, the Conservatives said that the
:52:51. > :52:55.grassroot numbers have gone for ever. Ed Miliband has nothing to
:52:55. > :52:59.fear by being open. And that is why I think the recognition that all the
:52:59. > :53:05.major political parties have to become broad movements again, where
:53:05. > :53:09.your grassroots actually not just your members. But can you get any
:53:09. > :53:13.new members with what Ed Miliband is suggesting? My grassroots are not
:53:13. > :53:18.all male and white. I thought it was very interesting that those three
:53:18. > :53:21.examples of speaking for the grassroots. My grassroots are
:53:21. > :53:25.hundreds of people who deliver leaflets, and probably only a third
:53:25. > :53:28.of them will be card-carrying Labour Party members. You engage them in
:53:28. > :53:31.the political process and ask them genuine questions. I am doing
:53:31. > :53:36.something on welfare where I am waiting for responses because I
:53:36. > :53:42.really want to know. The Liberal Democrat there, Malcolm Bruce,
:53:42. > :53:49.saying they are a centre-left, not a centre-right party. Something sounds
:53:49. > :53:55.wrong for him... The party is a liberal party which is broadly
:53:55. > :53:59.centrist. The fact is, if you look recently, an interesting article in
:53:59. > :54:04.the Economist, showing that young people are fundamentally socially
:54:04. > :54:08.and economic li liberal, and our job is to make them vote Liberal. You
:54:08. > :54:13.cannot run away from the facts, nobody likes austerity. We have to
:54:13. > :54:16.do things that nobody came into politics wanting to do, and I think
:54:16. > :54:19.the electorate get it. The debate should be how you do it as fairly as
:54:20. > :54:23.possible, and that is what the debate about the parties will be,
:54:23. > :54:28.rather than trying to pretend you can ignore the background and do
:54:28. > :54:33.something you will never deliver in government. Very briefly, we heard a
:54:33. > :54:36.lot beforehand, but you have lost quite a lot of grassroots for ever.
:54:36. > :54:41.I do not necessarily agree with that. My sense of talking to the
:54:41. > :54:45.grassroots in my constituency is that they are encouraged by the fact
:54:45. > :54:49.that this Government is focusing on these use of ordinary people,
:54:49. > :54:57.Welfare Reform Act off He says you are not listening, HS2, gay
:54:57. > :55:01.marriage. These are things which are of central concern is to ordinary
:55:01. > :55:05.voters in my constituency. Margaret Hodge and the Public Accounts
:55:05. > :55:12.Committee have a new target in their sights, fresh from attacking the
:55:12. > :55:15.likes of Google, Amazon and Apple, the committee turns its attention to
:55:15. > :55:19.Prince Charles. His chief adviser, William Nye will be asked to explain
:55:19. > :55:25.why the Prince pays income tax on the money he receives from the Duchy
:55:25. > :55:30.of Cornwall, but no corporation tax. The cabin is -- the campaigning
:55:30. > :55:34.organisation Republic wrote to Margaret Hodge asking her to
:55:34. > :55:39.investigate his affairs. Why are Prince Charles's tax affairs a
:55:39. > :55:43.problem? He pays income tax. Duchy of Cornwall is the issue, not
:55:43. > :55:46.Prince Charles as an individual. This is one of the excuses they have
:55:46. > :55:50.tried to make, suggesting there is no distinction. There is a
:55:50. > :55:56.distinction, the Duchy is a major commercial property empire, it makes
:55:56. > :56:00.millions of pounds every year of profit on, you know, trading in the
:56:00. > :56:04.property market and pays not a single penny of corporation tax. In
:56:04. > :56:08.this day and age, and people are very upset about this issue, Google
:56:08. > :56:12.and Amazon and Starbucks, there are serious questions to ask about why
:56:13. > :56:17.that is. We will get onto that comparison, but public funding for
:56:17. > :56:20.the Prince of Wales fell by 50% in the last financial year, and the
:56:20. > :56:23.income he receives from the Duchy enables him to be largely
:56:23. > :56:33.self-funded, and he also pays the household expenses of William and
:56:33. > :56:34.
:56:34. > :56:37.Kate, a pretty good deal for the taxpayer. No, the funding did not
:56:37. > :56:40.fall at all. All is that happened is that some of the costs were shifted
:56:40. > :56:43.onto the Commonwealth countries. We do not owe him any money at all,
:56:43. > :56:46.he's not be head of state, so we are not getting a good deal. There is a
:56:46. > :56:50.fundamental point of principle, attack should be applied equally to
:56:50. > :56:55.everybody, and there is no justification for the Duchy of
:56:55. > :56:59.Cornwall not to be paying it. All of their excuses have been taken apart
:56:59. > :57:02.by experts, and they carry on trying to twist and turn and get out of
:57:02. > :57:07.paying corporation tax on multi-million pound profits. Thank
:57:07. > :57:13.you very much indeed. Do you think it is fair to compare, as was done
:57:13. > :57:16.there, the Duchy of Cornwall to Starbucks and Amazon? No, I don't
:57:16. > :57:19.think it is. Talking about a personal attack on Prince Charles,
:57:20. > :57:25.no Woody would be suggesting that Prince Charles and his organisations
:57:25. > :57:29.are not doing great work in Britain. -- nobody. It is probably right that
:57:29. > :57:32.we live in an age of transparency, and it is legitimate that the Public
:57:32. > :57:40.Accounts Committee looks at the details of this, but I do not think
:57:40. > :57:44.any Woody -- anybody would be suggesting Prince Charles is
:57:44. > :57:49.avoiding paying tax. But should he be paying corporation tax from the
:57:49. > :57:53.estate, not him personally? He pays income tax on the money he makes, I
:57:53. > :57:57.suppose you could argue that he would be being taxed twice. He would
:57:57. > :58:00.be able to offset one against the other. That is what the Public
:58:00. > :58:03.Accounts Committee are looking into. I do not think I could comment
:58:04. > :58:08.other than it is good it should be investigated. He should be paying
:58:08. > :58:12.his fair contribution, whether in income tax or corporation tax. A few
:58:12. > :58:15.years ago, the Queen did not pay any tax, now she does, and we are moving
:58:15. > :58:19.into a situation where it is expected that the Royals should pay
:58:19. > :58:24.their fair share. I agree that this is the Duchy of Cornwall, not Amazon
:58:24. > :58:27.or Google, this is a domestic business. The only issue is whether
:58:27. > :58:31.it should be managed on behalf of the role family or in a way that is
:58:31. > :58:36.just fair and just to the public sector and to the Royal Family to do
:58:36. > :58:40.the job they have to. transparency, they have to be just
:58:40. > :58:46.as transparent as every videos, so it is a good move. It is a shame he
:58:46. > :58:50.is not going to appear before the committee. I do not think he is