Conference Special Daily Politics

Conference Special

Similar Content

Browse content similar to Conference Special. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Welcome to the Daily Politics special. Yesterday I was in the


factory where they are making parts for our new London buses. Manchester


tells London where to go away to get off! At last, a well delivered


conference gag. So can Boris pull off being the mayor and a member of


Parliament at the same time? They are considered a plague at the


conference, says Nigel Farage, but some Tory MPs apparently want to be


infected. What conditions of any conservative UKIP deals? The scheme


has its vocal opponents in the Party but what do activists in Manchester


think about High Speed Rail? And living with the enemy - what


happened when Tony Blair's former spin doctor went to Manchester?


All that in the next hour and with us for the duration - fresh from


picking up gongs at the Emmy's in Los Angeles for the American version


picking up gongs at the Emmy's in of "house of cards" - is author,


screenwriter, and former Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party


Michael Dobbs. Before we move on to events in Manchester, let's turn to


Michael Dobbs. Before we move on to Ed Miliband and an article today in


the Daily Mail about his late father, Ralph. On Saturday the Mail


published an article about Ralph Miliband under the headline "the man


who hated Britain". Today Mr Miliband has been given space to


reply, but in an adjoining comment piece the Mail says it stands by its


original article which it has also reprinted today. Here's what Mr


Miliband had to say earlier. It is perfectly legitimate to talk about


my father's politics but when they said he hated Britain, I will not


put up with that because he loved Britain. He served in the Royal


Navy, he was a refugee who came here, he took great comfort in what


this country offered him and I am was appalled when I read that in the


Daily Mail, and they said he hated Britain, it is a lie. They have


repeated that lie today and gone further, and described my father 's


legacy as evil. The word evil is reserved for particular cases and I


was not able to let that stand and that is why I have spoken out. Ed


Miliband is clearly disturbed and he is right to be, Michael? Yes, it is


probably counter-productive as well, what is the point of accusing Ed


Miliband of effectively being a crypto Marxist and establishing a


sort of idea that he is anything other than the man he is, which is a


man still searching for what he believes in and what he stands for.


To attack a father who is no longer here to defend himself, as David


Cameron said this morning, he would be up in arms if anybody attacked


his late father. I remember the Daily Express and the Daily Mail got


into a furious row with each other when they started attacking each


other's proprietors and they eventually had to call a truce on


the whole thing. I suppose we'll have a few skeletons in our closet


the whole thing. I suppose we'll but to attack a politician might Ed


Miliband because of what his father might have written when he was 17 is


probably not the strongest of arguments. His father was a Marxist,


that has always been known, and was not a great believer in the


Parliamentary system. When then they'll does this now, it is not


attacking his father, it is attacking Ed Miliband. I really do


believe that this sort of stuff should be pushed to one side and


let's concentrate on Ed Miliband's policies. He will not be going for


lunch at the Daily Mail at any time. I'm surprised he reads the Daily


Mail. Other people have done. Let's go to Manchester now, it is time to


get a sense of the mood of the conference. Let's speak to Elizabeth


Rigby, I understand hurricane Boris made landfall last night, what has


been the impact? It is Borismania here as ever. His supporters are


saying he is trying to be loyal to David Cameron and he is setting out


his pitch for a leadership battle but not for a few years. He made a


couple of remarks on stamp duty, made a slight take about helping out


in a subtle way but the Boris show is in town and we love it. When he


says he is loyal, we believe him 100%. We wouldn't doubt that for a


minute, would we? Absolutely, he has no all teary emotive. When he basks


in the glory of standing ovations, he is thinking of no more than doing


a good job as London mayor. His mayoralty runs until 2016 but it is


interesting to hear the Prime Minister talking about it and who


knows where the Boris story will go? What is the Prime Minister up to


here? Boris has ruled out being an MP as long as he is still the mayor


of London. It will still be mayor in 2015, what is the Prime Minister


doing here? What else can the Prime Minister do, if he is asked these


questions, if he appears to say I don't want Boris anywhere near my


Parliamentary party in the Commons, it looks like somehow he sees Boris


as a threat. He has to be prime ministerial about it and say, yes, I


would welcome Boris back with open arms but his calculation is that it


is better to keep Boris away from the Parliamentary party as long as


he can. The truth is that Mr Johnson needs the Prime Minister to lose in


2015. That would open up a leadership vacancy, however I'm not


sure whether Boris has the capability to be an opposition


leader. I think he can just about all off being Prime Minister but I


think the chances for it all going horribly wrong if he were the


opposition leader, which we all know is the most difficult job in


politics, it could go horribly wrong if that were the case. Now it is the


morning after the day before, how is George Osborne's speech being


regarded? I would say the speech has been welcomed. The Tories are


clearly making their pitch as the protectors of the economy and when


we were going around the bars last night talking to senior people in


the party, they made the point that they can only win if they win on the


economy and that has to come first. George Osborne slowly but the


economy and economic fiscal discipline at the heart of the


strategy, and a few populist measures sprinkled on like fairy


dust with the fuel duty. Fairy dust in Manchester! Thank you. What do


you make of the Boris phenomenon? Is he a serious contender to replace


David Cameron? I think he has to be careful because every year we are


getting accustomed to this Boris Paxman interview on Newsnight, where


Jeremy asks the questions and Boris sits there and says, I may love


them, but he has got to start committing himself. In what way? To


say, yes, I have these ambitions and they will come a point when I want


to be a member of Parliament. He has a wonderful persona, he is


to be a member of Parliament. He has life and jollity but they are not


the characteristics people require for Prime Minister and he has to


make that transmission which will be a difficult one from being much


loved to being someone who could credibly be a national leader.


Should he break his word and stand for Parliament in 2015? Politicians


breaking their word? It would be terrifying but somehow I think he


breaking their word? It would be would survive. Now it's time for our


daily quiz. The question for today is: Which of these shoes do not


belong to Home Secretary, Theresa May. At the end of the show Michael


will give the correct answer. We can now go live to the Conservative


conference in Manchester, where we are joined by the Cabinet office


minister, Francis Maude. You have been described this week by the


Guardian as the keeper of the modernising flame and by the


Telegraph as the modernisers' moderniser. When you look at the


range of policies announced this week, including a crackdown on


welfare claimants, deporting foreign criminals before appeal, does not


that feel like the modernising project in reverse? Know,


modernisation is what the Conservative party has to do all the


time. All parties have to make themselves on temporary in tune with


what Britain is today. Some of the work I do in Government does not fit


in with the conventional view of what modernisation is but that is


what contemporary Britain requires. It requires a Government that is


committed to driving down immigration, and all parties agree


with that. We are doing it very effectively, reforming public


services, that is what contemporary Britain expects a conservative led


Government to do. What about the marriage tax break? How does that


thing modernisation in the context that the Tories have tried to set


out the Conservative party when David Cameron first became leader?


That is one of the very first things David Cameron said as leader. He


said we are going to support and David Cameron said as leader. He


recognise marriage in the tax system, and that will be the case


whether it is the marriage between a man and a woman, a woman and a


woman, or a man and a man, and it was a very modern approach to an


age-old issue. Marriage is important, it is part of the glue


that holds society together. Do you accept it is still judging one type


of relationship as superior? No, it is just saying there is a social


case for recognising marriage. It is interesting that the party doesn't


really like the big modernising policies that you have pursued. They


have driven your vote is arguably to UKIP, gay marriage and the


commitment on foreign aid. That is nothing to do with modernising.


Social attitudes have changed. 100 years ago there were plenty of


people in the Conservative party and other parties that opposed the


enfranchisement of women. Things move on, the commitment to


international development I think is one that is honourable and it is the


high road, saying that actually it is in Britain's national interest to


be the most visible proponent of eradicating global poverty as well


as serving our national interest in rooting out those places where


poverty breeds terrorism. All of this makes sense in our national


interest. leaders do. They lead. I am proud


that is a conservative led government.


public support equal marriage so we have to get this into proportion.


Lynton Crosby is brilliant, he has a great record of success in fighting


effective campaigns, disciplined, rigorous, competently run in the way


people would be entitled to expect from a Conservative party and I am a


big fan. It looks difference, with big banners everywhere, big


messages, crying down, immigration down, but when you think back to the


early conferences with clouds everywhere and the Big Society, it


has all gone, where is it? It hasn't, you are just making


pointless assertions. The truth is that we are doing difficult things


that provide the best hope for the long-term future of the country. It


is all about an optimistic outlook for the country. By doing difficult


things now that will give the best hope for people to make the best of


things now that will give the best their lives in Britain to prosper in


a competitive world and we need to get things right. That won't always


be popular. He's attracted large crowds, cheers


and standing ovations. But this politician's not a Conservative. The


UKIP leader, Nigel Farage, was working the conference fringe


yesterday. Here he his explaining his idea for UKIP deals with


individual Conservative candidates. There is not going to be a deal


between us and the Conservative Party at the next general election.


Our voters would not want it, and it would not be in our interests to put


Mr Cameron back in office when he wants to continue with membership of


the European Union. But, I am not a wholly unreasonable person. And I do


recognise that there are some people on the backbenches in the


Conservative Party, and some in the Labour Party as well. They feel, as


UKIP feel, on most of these key issues. And I think Peter bone and


Jacob Rees Mogg and Nadine Dorey 's -- Dorries have made the thought


that we could have a cooperation that takes place at local level


between UKIP associations or Tory or even Labour Party local


associations. Nigel Farage at the Conservative conference, but not


quite in it. That is the wonderful building that is Manchester town


Hall he was speaking up. UKIP clearly a big issue at the Tory


conference and we are joined by the deputy chairman, Neil Hamilton.


Welcome to the Daily Politics. Nigel Farage is making this deal to


individual constituencies. What would be the conditions of such a


deal? I think it was a bit of a teal. -- a bit of a tease. He was


putting the UKIP cat amongst the Tory pigeons. They have been


flapping around. I don't think there is a UKIP branch that would want to


do a deal with the Tories, why would we want to align ourselves to a


toxic brand? Jacob Rees Mogg's seat, I was talking to the chairman


there, and he said there was no way the party would do a deal with the


Tories to give Jacob Rees Mogg a shoo-in for the next Parliament. We


know that a national deal will not be done. Mr Raju and Mr Cameron have


made it clear. But you think there will not be any deals at a local


level -- Nigel Farage and Mr Cameron. You don't think there will


be any at constituency level? I haven't spoken to every branch


around the country, but with UKIP going up and the Tories in freefall


why we would want to arrest our skyrocketing way forward. It sounds


to me like you would be against it if they constituency wanted to do


it. I'm not saying he would try to stop it, but you would say no. Nigel


said that local constituencies are free to enter such a deal if they


wanted. Our national executive will look at each individual application


on a one by one basis and decide whether this is a sensible thing to


do or not. So you could stop the consistency from doing it if it was


so minded to? We could do that, but I think it's a pretty academic


discussion. I think it was just Nigel being naughty. I'm delighted


to be sitting next June, Neil, old friends, but I have to take issue


with you on this. You say this is an academic discussion -- next to you.


There was your lead on a public platform promising they would not do


a deal with the Tories, but on the other hand we might do deals with


the Tories. You are coming in and saying it is nonsense. Which side


actually wins? Politicians do frequently say things they do not


mean. Yesterday to reason they were saying we might be taken out of the


European Union human rights intervention, and there is no way


that they would take them out of the European human rights Convention.


You would have do leave the EU. What was the lie that Nigel Farage -- the


lie that Nigel Farage told yesterday? He didn't. Heat you said


he said something he didn't mean. He said we would consider the


partnership proposal on its merit. It sounds unlikely though. It is


unlikely. You would fight along with Jacob Rees Mogg, Nadine Dorries, you


would put UKIP people up against them? I know for certain that in the


seat of Jacob Rees Mogg, excellent man though he is, I like him along,


and he adds something to the House of Commons. On personal grounds, I


would regret his departure. But UKIP of Commons. On personal grounds, I


is now a political party, not a fringe pressure group. We are out to


win elections and we are doing it well. What is the evidence you will


win elections and we are doing it win any seats at the next general


election? If you look at the local results of May on a parliamentary


aggregate basis, we would have won several seats. We are going into


this European election campaign as the odds-on favourite to win


nationwide. We are looking to cause an earthquake in British politics


next year and change the ground rules for the 2015 general election.


It is likely the earthquake you will cause come the general election is


that you probably won't win a single seat yourself, but you will take


enough votes away from the Tories to let Ed Miliband in. I've given you


the names of half a dozen constituencies which we would have


won. General election, as you know, constituencies which we would have


as you fall them for the big parties, is very difficult. The


smaller parties, including the Lib Dems, it is much harder to get a


look in. Of course, and the first past the post election system is not


look in. Of course, and the first in the interest of the smaller


parties. I could add that in Eastleigh we had a by-election in


February where UKIP was 1500 votes short of winning it and it was the


Tories that split our vote. How many do you expect to win? I'm not going


to put a figure on it. I might underestimate the numbers. I


wouldn't want to. That is how underestimate the numbers. I


politics is, you play down expectations. Five? Ten? If you go


to the bookmakers they will give you the odds. You talked about the fox


going amongst the chickens, has the UKIP Fox been shot because of the


issue that will dominate the next general election, which is do you


want a referendum on Europe or not? At the moment there is only one


party capable of delivering that, which is the Conservative Party. We


are going to have a voter referendum long before that because I'm going


to turn the European elections into the referendum that David Cameron


has kicked into the long grass. That will be people 's opportunity. Are


you going to do this single-handed? I have a huge team working with me.


It's not really a referendum though, is it. What is it about some


of your members. We have had talk of bongo bongo land, women as sluts,


of your members. We have had talk of and now you're chief spin doctor


says that a journalist is of some form of ethnic extraction. It is


pretty desperate stuff. We don't know the background, evidently. He


was taking a message on a noisy train and could not catch the name


of the journalist that the party official was going to meet. He knew


that it was a name from the Indian subcontinent of some kind, so all he


said is what is of of ethnic extraction. Is that not a PC phrase


question what he could have said Black, Asian or more pejorative word


-- is that not a PC phrase? We all of some form ethnic extraction.


What's wrong with it? If I wanted to say, by the way, Neil Hamilton is on


the train, and I forget what he looks like and he is of some form of


ethnic extraction, I would use that for you? That is ridiculous. This is


a bad smell. I can tell you what is happening here. This is a desperate


attempt by the establishment to stop UKIP's rise in its tracks. Here is a


photograph which purports to show Nigel Farage with a Hitler


moustache. It is not a joke. He has a halo as well. This is what the


Murdoch press is doing because it's also in the Sun newspaper today.


They are desperately scared that UKIP is going to shoot the Tories's


Fox come the next election. It is not them who want to see the


European Union question you better take it up better with him -- with


him, you know him better than I do. Would you use the phrase some form


of ethnic extraction? What's wrong with it? That's caught you out.


Well, I was just letting it hang there. I am happy to take it to the


borough public opinion. You just have, on the Daily Politics. Neil


Hamilton, thank you. The blonde bombshell has hit the conference. He


admitted on TV last night that he did not know the price of milk, but


he seemed unperturbed as he received the usual adulation in the


conference hall. Good morning everybody in Manchester, great joy


to be back here. Not so long ago, my friends, and we welcome all sorts of


wonderful luminaries to City Hall, and a few months ago I welcome the


former French prime ministers. -- Prime Minister. He cruised in with


his sizeable retinue of very distinguished fellows, and he shook


hands, and we had a tete-a-tete, and he told me that he was now the mayor


of Bordeaux and he do things like that once you've been Prime


Minister. Very good idea, in my view. Joke! Joke! And he said to


accelerate the programme of house-building dramatically, and


it's time we considered allowing companies to make tax-free loans to


their employees to help them with the cost of their rent deposit. How


about that? A brainy policy, yes? Put it into the budget


considerations. Can I also ask to my friend, the Chancellor, to look at


the baleful effects of stamp duty in London, and possibly elsewhere? It


is called stamp duty for a reason, because it's stamping on the figures


-- fingers of those who are trying to climb the property ladder. The


choice of the next election is very simple. It's between the fool 's


gold of Labour gimmicks, which we all understand and have all fought


before, and a government that is willing to take tough and sensible


decisions. To cut unnecessary spending, and make the key


investments in transport and infrastructure and housing and in


our communities that will take this country forward. I know what I want.


What I want as mayor of the greatest city on earth. I think I know what


you want. Am I right? I know that we can do it. So let's go over it over


the next two years. Cut that yellow Liberal Democrat albatross from


around our necks and let it drop into the sea, by working flat out


for David Cameron as Prime Minister and outright conservative victory in


2015. Aki very much. Boris Johnson speaking this morning. In his


Conference speech yesterday, George Osborne urged Conservative party


activists to back the government's High Speed Rail plans. The


Chancellor told the conference in Manchester that HS2 would bring


"more jobs and prosperity" to Britain. But were party members


convinced? We asked Adam to find out. When we did this at the Labour


conference last week, it was 50/50. And the box fell over, and the balls


fell out. HS2, construct or cancel? We are builders, definitely. Will it


definitely happen? I don't want it but I think we need it. Construct.


It is only going to benefit a small minority of people, with such


disruption and it will not happen for 20 or 30 years, we need that


money ploughing into the economy now. Are you pro HS2? I am a


constructor. It will make a huge difference because we have capacity


constraints, we need to link the city is better. Is Boris signed up


to HS2? You would have to ask Boris. I am not a fan of trains. They


always go to one destination, don't they? It is massively overcrowded,


it is not about speed, it is about capacity and we need good


connectivity to Sheffield and Huddersfield where I live. I think


it is unnecessary and I don't think the capacity argument adds up


either. I have changed my cancel to construct. In the space of one


morning? My polling is only what other people think. I don't trust


morning? My polling is only what big projects like Concorde or the


millennium Dome, they tend not to go well. David, would you like to take


part in a Daily Politics survey? I am surprised at the moment you have


more on that side than on that side. Maybe it is stuck on a slow train.


It is a huge amount of money to be spending without the infrastructure


in the area, so cancel. Construct. It is about making the capacity


doubles. There we go, a massive majority in favour of construction.


I have to say, while a lot of people were inspired by George Osborne's


pep talk on the subject. Interesting, I didn't think there


would be such an overwhelming majority. Do you agree with them? I


am sceptical. I don't think the case has been made as well as it should


be. Goodness knows what the cost will be in ten years. The cost will


go up and up. I remember the row in the House of Lords and indeed the


House of Commons a little while ago about the west line fiasco with the


Department of Transport really being seen to be incapable. The transport


Department of Transport really being Secretary now says we have the


Olympic dream team running the project, said David Higgins and Lord


Deayton. Does that reassure you a little more? Yes, but there are


still big questions to be answered and the Government has to go the


extra mile to satisfy sceptics that this is really good value for money.


We should be sceptical, this was a project from the last Labour


Government and as a decent Tory I am always sceptical! Labour look as if


they are wobbling in terms of value for money, would you encourage Tory


MPs to back Labour if they withdraw support for HS2? The Government need


to do more explaining of the costs and making us convinced because it


does have a chequered track record, that it can deliver on budget, on


time. The problem is that supporters of HS2 say we will never build


anything in this country, there will always be scepticism about whether a


project is value for money. Like Heathrow's third runway. Why is HS2


so much more important? To quote Patrick McLoughlin, he said the


high-speed line would leave the country stronger and provide a boost


for the great cities like Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield,


Nottingham, Derby. This will create a link between the north and the


South and the people down south, he says, should stop moaning. One


conference speech is not enough. This is such a massive project, it


need selling to the hilt and I don't think we have done that yet. Now,


you never know who you're going to bump into at Tory party conference.


One minute you could be rubbing shoulders with Eric Pickles, the


next hanging out with Alastair Campbell. Yes, that's right Tony


Blair's former Director of Communication,s Alastair Campbell.


We found him enjoying the stands in the exhibition hall. So what on


earth is a former Labour spin doctor doing at the Conservative


conference? It is my first Tory conference for 20 years and I am


here to have a row with loads of Tories, and secondly to persuade


them to do a U-turn on the U-turn David Cameron did and get serious


about dealing with alcohol abuse in Britain. Why did David Cameron say


he would bring in minimum unit pricing and why has he since decided


he will not? In Scotland it is considered a more serious issue with


more worrying figures in the north. I personally support it. You will


not find many students in favourable as a nation we know it is a concern.


Are you going to get drunk tonight? Why, are you coming along? No! That


is a bad picture of Ed Miliband, he looks like desperate Dan. What is


funny is that he said a lot of the Tories were deciding which beer to


choose, and he whispered to me they were all the same. You lose your


argument when you start finger jabbing. So you are selling, you


have the Labour beer here and the Tory beer over here. Margaret


Thatcher is the God of the beer with body. ELVIS SINGS are you going to


sing with me? I'm sorry, sir, I have got to go and


do my show. Will you support me on minimum unit pricing for alcohol?


Why did Cameron say he would do it and then decide, after a Cabinet


discussion they claim... You know better than me how these things work


behind the scenes. Don't you think we have a real problem with alcohol


abuse in Britain? There are a number of areas we can try to address and


needless to say we must look carefully at some of those issues. I


have had a nice time, more importantly many people agreed with


me and I will take that back to Alcohol Concern because this is a


fight we can win. Who would have thought Alistair Campbell could find


inspiration in an Elvis song. What about this minimum alcohol pricing,


was Mr Cameron right to do a U-turn on it? Firstly I want to say that


Alistair Campbell has done a huge amount of good in terms of attention


to alcohol problems and mental illness so I am looking forward to


taking his advice when I share a platform with him at the Cheltenham


Festival in a couple of weeks. We won't be singing Elvis. Was he right


to do a U-turn? All prime ministers are allowed to try something and


change their minds. If you enter are allowed to try something and


those things with a fixed point of view, it means you cannot take the


advice that inevitably comes when these things become a matter of


public discussion. Should he have changed his mind? I think he


probably should because I don't think that was the right way of


doing it. You can explain that to Alistair Campbell in Cheltenham when


you see him. Now - they're terribly helpful


people these Conservatives. Earlier in the week they announced they'd be


extending Help To Buy then yesterday the Chancellor announced "help to


work" This is the latest scheme to get the long term unemployed back to


work here's Jo Co with all the details. Currently, if you've been


unemployed for up to a year and want to claim the dole the you have to go


on the Work Programme. This scheme provides training and help in


getting back into work. But those who are still jobless after two


years on the scheme will now face a tougher regime as a condition for


staying on benefits. Yesterday the Chancellor announced the 'Help to


Work' programme. Under the plans, the 200,000 people a year who failed


to get a job under the Work Programme will lose benefits unless


they take up one of three options. Six months of community work - such


as making meals for the elderly, cleaning up litter and graffiti or


charity work. Sign on at the JobCentre every day to search for


work or undergo intense training or rehabilitation. Refusal to do so


will result in the loss of benefits for up to three months. Let's have a


listen to what the Work and Pensions Secretary had to to say about his


plans earlier today. Today I want to tell you about those who are not


plans earlier today. Today I want to committing to their obligations of


work. Prior to the work programme we will pilot a mandatory attendance


centre where selected individuals will receive expert support and


supervision while they search and apply for jobs. That is from nine


o'clock to five o'clock, 35 hours a week for up to six months simulating


the working day. These pilots will be targeted at claimants who will


benefit from the intense support, one pilot before the Work


Programme, and one after. Alongside this, this marks the something for


-- the end of the something for nothing culture. And the Secretary


of State for Work and Pensions, Iain Duncan Smith, joins me now. Coming


up with measures to get the unemployed back to work, that has


become your life 's work so why did George Osborne make the big policy


announcement yesterday? We agreed to divide up the announcements, so I am


dealing with the stuff prior to the Work Programme, which will


eventually be enormously helpful in making sure that we don't have to


have so much work so together they make a complete package. He got the


big one, didn't he? No, I believe the big one is about us targeting


people who are looking like they are not able to get themselves ready for


work, they are struggling, before they even get to the Work


Programme, which is revolutionary. We are asking JobCentre staff to


really start looking and profiling the people in front of them so they


spend more time with the people who need help to get them ready and make


sure that in the course of that they are not also doing something else


and that is critical to making both announcements successful. As you


know better than most, it has re-stirred the bad blood stories


between you and the Chancellor, going back before the coalition.


What do you make of this claim, which seems incredible to me, in


this new book that the Chancellor regards you as thick? Well, I heard


and saw him in the last couple of days saying it is completely untrue.


Honestly, I've been in politics long enough and I've had plenty of


insults thrown at me. The Chancellor, George and me, are very


good friends and I don't think he's ever said it. If anybody believes


that kind of thing out there, that's fine, I'm in good company. Margaret


Thatcher was told he was not -- was told she was not intelligent enough


to run the country, and so was Sir Winston Churchill. I've got the


determination and drive and I will let others debate the level of


intelligence I have. So he does not need to think? -- he does not think


you are thick. I'm not too worried about it. You are putting great


emphasis on people who are long-term unemployed to sign up and go to job


centres to do a lot of things to stay at the job centres. You talked


about going from nine to five. Is that because you think a lot of


people on welfare or benefits are actually also working in the black


economy? This is not directly set for that, but we do know two things


economy? This is not directly set about this. When I go around the job


centres, and you know this because you've done a lot of work in this


area in the last few years, and often wrote about it, well in


advance of many of us, but the reality is that what happens out


there is that some people when they have left work for different issues


and problems and they fall out of the habit of work, they lose morale


and they cannot focus on it, really it is about getting them back ready


for work. But there are also some, we know that, who are out there and


deliberately playing the system. We know that, that is what the job


centre staff tell us and we have a new sanction for them. We also have


the mandatory work programme where we believe they are trying to do


something else. We found that 70% of people just disappeared off the


benefit role. This is about accommodation thing -- a combination


of things, it's about getting people not ready for work ready for work


before they fall out of the habit completely. You have been unemployed


twice before. Do you think picking up litter or serving meals to older


people help you find a job? Know, the point I am making is that the


vast majority of people who fall into unemployment are incredibly


motivated, something like 75 or 80% backing work in six months. You


don't really have to do huge amounts with them because they are out there


working and they just need a bit of assistance, not much. You then begin


working and they just need a bit of to deal with those who are a


distance from going back to work. It is this group, and they do it in


Germany now, where they profile better than we do, to look at those


who have issues and problems that are causing them to fall away from


work. It is that group who you want to get back into the practice. To


begin with, we want them to be in there if necessary, signing in, but


also working with the staff every day to look for jobs. After the work


programme, the bit about doing community work, that comes after two


more years where they might struggle. Now it's the time to get


them to do something every day that gives them a sense of purpose in


their lives. That is really what it's all about. But you have already


got this work programme, and now we have the help to work programme.


They're all manners of programmes. There are almost as many programmes


as unemployed people. It seems a lot of these programmes don't really


work. The latest figures shows that fewer than 15% of those on the work


programme have found themselves in work for at least six months. 15%.


Hold on. Remember, we don't pay any of the providers until they have


sustained a six-month outcome. That can take up to two starts to get to


six months, but the reality is, of those going back into work is a much


bigger number. There are 400,000 people now of those that they have


taken on who are backing work, far more than just a six-month outcome.


And remember, it's not just about getting them into work, the work


programme sees three quarters of those on the first tranche who have


left benefits. So it is about getting people off benefits and


getting them into work. Three quarters of those have either gone


back into work, sustained work, or have left the benefit roster. That


is a major success. Bear in mind previously that these providers who


is a major success. Bear in mind paid up front, lots of money, they


never achieved anything. This is more successful than any other


programme. You and your party always going on about the need to make it


paid to work and it should always be more benefit -- beneficial than


spending time on the dole, which is fine, why therefore have you allowed


the minimum wage under the Coalition Government to fall in real terms?


You are increasing it today, but it's only by pennies. If you really


wanted to make it worthwhile, have a proper, higher minimum wage. Most of


these people will go on to minimum wage jobs to begin with. So make it


worth their while. Pay them a decent minimum wage. Well, the reason we


have raised it is to start achieving the objective. But as we bring in


various other changes the idea is to ensure that that first entry into


work does make work pay more than being on benefits. That will happen.


The debate about the minimum wage and living wage, I am clear about


it. In my own department and with the contractors now, we paid a


living wage. This is a debate not just with us, it's about the Labour


Party. Why let it fall? We have raised the minimum wage. Not in real


terms. It was the Tories who let the minimum wage fall. In picking up the


pieces of a disastrous economy, first and foremost we have to ensure


people get back to work. As we pick the economy we might make the


changes that are necessary, but right now, honestly, the key thing


is to get jobs produced. We have over 1.4 million new private jet --


sector jobs that have been created as a result of the changes made. You


can't do everything at once. I'm not resistant to the argument, I'm


simply saying that the priority now is to get people back to work, as we


know that jobs tend to develop and you'll pay tends to go up as you


develop your skills. As you know, we can't cover everything in one


interview, and I hope you can come back and we can cover some of the


ground. Iain Duncan Smith, thank you. And with us now is Iain Duncan


Smith's opposite number, Labour's Liam Byrne. Are you, and do you


welcome a policy from the Conservatives that could finally


address the problem of long-term unemployment? Yes, if we had a


policy that we thought would do the job, we would welcome it with open


arms, but that's not where we are. Why? Because the plan we heard from


the Chancellor yesterday would only affect 2% of job seekers, and


frankly that when make much of a difference. In terms of long-term


unemployment, people who have been out of work for two years, the


Tories argue that the number of households were no member has ever


worked doubled under labour from 136,000 in June 1997 to 269,000 in


June 2010. Do you accept that? Obviously the recession had an


impact on unemployment. So, it doubled, on what they are trying to


do is alleviate the number of people who are out of work longer than two


do is alleviate the number of people years by taking these three stages?


Do you not support that? We don't think what they have put on the


table will make anywhere like enough difference. What evidence do you


have for that? Look what's happened over the last couple of weeks. They


show that 1 million people have now been failed by the work programme,


and eight out of ten people who float through the work programme


don't go on to get a steady job. Even the Chancellor of the Exchequer


does not think Iain Duncan Smith is clever enough to do his job, and


said when he came to the spending review that the DWP was failing in


its back to work programme. This is not just the arguments of Liam


Byrne, these are the arguments of the Chancellor of the Exchequer as


well. Do you welcome the fact that workless households are at record


lows, despite the fact we have continued to be in a recession until


recently? Any progress on unemployment is good news. That must


be as a result of government policy then. You have a million people out


of work long term and a million young people out of work. You have a


welfare bill that is £20 billion higher than before -- forecast.


There is no way you can look at the figures and say well done, great


job. That is why we said you need a much bigger, bolder, more radical


approach. We have said there should be a two-year limit on the amount of


time you can spend on jobseeker's allowance, and at that stage will


benefit payment should stop and you should get a job in the private


sector, and if you can't find one, we will invest in making sure their


minimum wage opportunities. You would like to go for a bigger,


bolder programme. But let's look again at the fact that the number of


workless households, which was a big issue that you made something else


-- of, is at record lows, that must have something to do with the


success in some way of the welfare reforms? The unemployment figures


speak for themselves. Just the workless households, because that's


an indicator. You cannot duck the fact, and this is the reality, is


there 1 million people who are out of work long-term, 1 million young


people out of work, and those figures aren't moving. You have a


work programme that we were promised would be the biggest back to work


programme in human history, so big you could see it from space. We now


know from the figures last year it failed 1 million people, and eight


out of ten people who go through it don't actually get a steady job. You


said after two years, and that is wrong. This is after three years.


Remember that someone is out of work for a year, then they go onto the


work programme for two years, and at that stage, after three years on


welfare eight out of ten people that stage, after three years on


don't get a steady job. That is a programme that is failing


catastrophically. What do you say to that, Michael? Would pay Labour


government spend more? You want to achieve more but spend less? We want


the welfare bill to go down completely. It is a track record of


failure here because they have not got the country back to work. The


problem is that the Labour Party goes round the country denying it


has anything to do with the economic circumstances that it left behind,


and you are the man who said that, notoriously, infamously, that there


is no money left. So how can we find anything that the Labour Party says


credible if you can achieve more and spend less? Three years ago we were


promised a welfare revolution and it was collapsed. We heard a 13 under


Labour. Is employment going up or down at the moment? I think the


statistics say it is going up? There's not enough work to go round,


and that is why... Where is the trend? Up or down? Wages have not


risen as fast as prices in the last 13 months. In my constituency, that


means that living standards are being hammered. What does the


means that living standards are government used to do to help? Give


a tax cut to millionaires while everybody else has tax and benefit


changes that means they are £820 a year worse. This is a government


that stands up the privileged few while the rest of us take a kicking.


Your proposal for a jobs guarantee scheme, can you see yourselves


Your proposal for a jobs guarantee taking away the benefits of those


who take -- do not take away a guaranteed job? Yes. There you go,


you can get a straight answer. He sounds almost like a Tory at times.


They may say there is no money around, but at this party conference


season they have been spending it around, but at this party conference


the parties like never before. Time to go, but the answer to the quiz


was which of these shoes do not belong to to reason me -- to raise a


May. -- to raise a May. YELLOW the wellies. It has to be those black


things up the top. They belong to a Conservative MP called Cheryl


Murray. The one o'clock News is starting over on BBC One o'clock


news is starting over on BBC One now. We are here very early


tomorrow, at 10:30am. You will have to get up early. David Cameron's big


speech, we will bring you live in an to get up early. David Cameron's big


interrupted tomorrow. Goodbye.


Download Subtitles