:00:40. > :00:44.And afternoon and welcome to the Daily Politics. The Conservative
:00:44. > :00:49.list is considering withdrawing benefits from under 25-year-olds who
:00:49. > :00:52.are not in work, education or training. We will talk to the
:00:52. > :00:56.Treasury Minister Sajid Javid. Will the government's new scheme to
:00:56. > :01:03.underwrite billions of pounds' worth of new mortgages help house-buyers,
:01:03. > :01:07.or pump up a new house price bubble? Schoolkids will learn how to write
:01:07. > :01:12.computer code from next autumn. We will hear from two experts.
:01:12. > :01:16.And Adam has been meeting the party animals at conference and finding
:01:16. > :01:20.out whether activists go for the serious stuff or the socialising.
:01:21. > :01:32.Did you go to bed last night or this morning? Is my mother is watching, I
:01:32. > :01:37.was in bed at 12. 5am. What racy beasts. All that in the
:01:37. > :01:40.next hour. With me for the whole programme today, two Former Downing
:01:40. > :01:46.St insiders. Phil Collins worked for Tony Blair and now writes for the
:01:46. > :01:49.towns -- Times, and Sean Worth were in Britain with David Cameron and is
:01:49. > :01:52.now at the think-tank Policy Exchange. Let's start with some
:01:52. > :01:56.breaking news. In the last half-hour, the Labour leader Ed
:01:56. > :02:00.Miliband has released a letter he has written to the owner of the
:02:00. > :02:04.Daily Mail, Lord for the mayor, to complain about a Daily Mail reporter
:02:04. > :02:07.who he says got into a private memorial event held at Guy 's
:02:07. > :02:12.Hospital in London for his uncle, who died earlier this year. I am
:02:12. > :02:15.joined now by our political correspondent, who is outside the
:02:15. > :02:21.Daily Mail headquarters. What is at Miliband asking your brother made to
:02:21. > :02:24.do? He is asking the owner of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday to
:02:24. > :02:29.instigate an investigation into what happened yesterday. This was meant
:02:30. > :02:34.to be a private memorial service for the Miliband family and close
:02:34. > :02:39.colleagues of Professor Harry Keane, an eminent doctor who died recently.
:02:39. > :02:40.At that event, a reporter from the Mail on Sunday apparently
:02:40. > :02:43.At that event, a reporter from the infiltrated it and was asking
:02:44. > :02:46.members of his family about his late father and about the row over the
:02:46. > :02:51.Daily Mail story from last weekend, saying that Ralph Miliband, Ed's
:02:51. > :02:56.Rather hated Britain. Ed Miliband says this crosses a line of common
:02:56. > :03:02.decency, but he's not going to the press complaints commission about
:03:02. > :03:06.this. This comes a week before the privy Council discusses a much
:03:07. > :03:10.tougher form of press regulation, on which the Daily Mail opposes. He is
:03:10. > :03:16.saying to look for the mayor, time to put your house in order. Has the
:03:16. > :03:21.Daily Mail responded? They have not responded yet. But as you said, this
:03:21. > :03:27.only happened in the last half-hour. I am told a Labour Party official
:03:27. > :03:33.will turn up here with an official copy of the letter, but there has
:03:33. > :03:38.been no response yet. What will this meeting do in terms of looking ahead
:03:38. > :03:42.to what is now being seen as a battle between the Daily Mail and
:03:42. > :03:48.what they see as Ed Miliband and his support for strong press regulation?
:03:48. > :03:56.Ed Miliband could have decided to lower the temperature today.
:03:56. > :04:00.Instead, he has decided to increase the temperature considerably and
:04:00. > :04:05.roared on the attack to the Mail on Sunday. This comes just a week
:04:05. > :04:08.before this meeting, as I say. There are two different forms of press
:04:08. > :04:13.relations being discussed, one which the press quite liked, and a tougher
:04:13. > :04:17.one, the statutory underpinning, which they are discussing next week.
:04:17. > :04:22.The Daily Mail says that is an attack on press freedom. In its own
:04:22. > :04:25.pages, it has said that by Ed Miliband talking about the
:04:25. > :04:29.boundaries that newspapers should keep two, this was a sinister
:04:29. > :04:33.response, on the row shows that you should not allow politicians
:04:33. > :04:37.anywhere near the press. But what has actually happened today was
:04:37. > :04:43.across the political spectrum. Nick Clegg expressed sympathy for Ed
:04:43. > :04:48.Miliband and denounced the Daily Mail, saying it vilified Britain.
:04:48. > :04:51.Francis Maude said something similar. There is a possibility that
:04:51. > :04:53.the Daily Mail have shot themselves in the foot and weakened their case
:04:53. > :04:58.the Daily Mail have shot themselves for press freedom.
:04:58. > :05:02.If you hear any response from the Daily Mail while we are now, we will
:05:02. > :05:08.come back to you. Sean Worth, has the Daily Mail crossed the line in
:05:08. > :05:14.terms of sending a reporter to this private memorial gathering?
:05:14. > :05:21.Absolutely. Ed Miliband's reaction has not been about this regulation.
:05:21. > :05:25.This seems to be personal, exactly the way he responded to the initial
:05:25. > :05:29.article about his father. The prime minister and other politicians have
:05:29. > :05:33.been saying that others would react in the same way. So he was right to
:05:33. > :05:39.go after them, because on this occasion, they overstepped the mark.
:05:39. > :05:45.What do you think Lord for the mayor and the Daily Mail will do? They
:05:45. > :05:49.will probably double up. It is impossible to fathom what they are
:05:49. > :05:51.doing. I think they crossed the line before with the original article,
:05:51. > :05:57.which was a worthless piece of rubbish. Then they crossed it again
:05:57. > :06:01.when they reprinted it, alongside Ed Miliband's Right to reply. When you
:06:01. > :06:05.say rubbish, are you talking about the headline? We already knew much
:06:05. > :06:09.of the substance about Ralph Miliband in terms of his lyrical
:06:09. > :06:15.leanings. So do you think all of the article was rubbish, or the
:06:15. > :06:19.headline? The supposition that he hated Britain is nonsensical. Nobody
:06:19. > :06:22.who landed on the Normandy beaches or was in the Royal Navy has to beg
:06:22. > :06:26.for the right to be thought of as a British patriotic op Ralph Miliband
:06:26. > :06:31.did more in a day's work than any hack will ever do. So the idea that
:06:31. > :06:35.a few scattered remarks could constitute hating Britain was
:06:35. > :06:39.absurd. You said Ed Miliband's stance has not been about beefing up
:06:39. > :06:44.as revelation, but the Daily Mail see it in that way. They feel there
:06:44. > :06:49.is a battle. They have tried to link his father's views and the fact that
:06:49. > :06:55.his father influenced Ed Miliband, and what could happen with press
:06:55. > :06:59.regulation. Are they want? I agree with most of what Phil says about
:06:59. > :07:02.the original article, but Ed Miliband does write about the
:07:02. > :07:07.influence of his parents on his political views. So there are
:07:07. > :07:11.journalists that want to go into that. But you are right, when it
:07:11. > :07:21.became personal about that individual, that was wrong. It is a
:07:21. > :07:27.family thing, not about regulation. On that front, many people have
:07:27. > :07:31.sympathy with him. I suspect it will not alter the Leveson argument in
:07:31. > :07:35.the end. I think it was likely that the outcome would be to choose the
:07:35. > :07:40.cross-party consensus deal anyway, which would then lead to a stalemate
:07:40. > :07:46.with the press. I don't take that has changed.
:07:46. > :07:51.Now, time for our daily quiz. The question for today is, what new
:07:51. > :07:55.access arena was Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, spotted wearing
:07:55. > :08:00.yesterday? Was it a trilby, a cravat, a pair of glasses or a
:08:00. > :08:04.monocle? At the end of the show, Phil and Sean have the honour and
:08:04. > :08:08.privilege of giving us the correct cancer.
:08:08. > :08:13.So, the three main party conferences are over for another year. It was a
:08:13. > :08:17.busy few weeks, with all three party leaders trying to woo voters with
:08:17. > :08:19.shining new policies and positive messages. Let's look back at some of
:08:19. > :08:22.the main announcements. Wicklow messages. Let's look back at some of
:08:22. > :08:26.tried to attract as with stories of how the Lib Dems have softened the
:08:26. > :08:32.nasty Tories and promised free school meals for all infants. Ed
:08:32. > :08:36.Miliband tried to seduce us with his vow to address the cost of living
:08:36. > :08:41.crisis. He said he would build 200 as new homes each year by 2020 and
:08:41. > :08:45.freeze energy bills until March 2017. David Cameron's pitch was
:08:45. > :08:49.about sticking to the course and showing us that only the
:08:49. > :08:53.Conservatives can build a land of opportunity. He promised to make the
:08:53. > :08:57.dream of home ownership a reality for more people by bringing forward
:08:57. > :09:02.his Help To Buy mortgage guarantee scheme, now starting next week. He
:09:02. > :09:05.also pledged to clamp down on welfare claimants who refuse to
:09:05. > :09:10.work, and end the automatic entitlement housing benefit and
:09:11. > :09:14.jobseeker's allowance for under 25s. There are still over a million
:09:14. > :09:21.young people not in education, employment or training. Today, it is
:09:21. > :09:26.still possible to leave school, sign on, find a flat, start claiming
:09:26. > :09:32.housing benefit and opt for a life on benefits. Isn't it time for bold
:09:32. > :09:36.action here? We should ask, as we write our next manifesto, if that
:09:36. > :09:41.option should exist at all. Instead, we should give young people a clear
:09:41. > :09:46.and positive choice. Go to school, go to college, do an apprenticeship,
:09:46. > :09:53.get a job. But just choose the dole? We have got to offer them something
:09:53. > :09:55.better. We have been joined by the Treasury minister Sajid Javid and
:09:55. > :10:01.the Liberal Democrat MP Julian Huppert. Sajid Javid, the majority
:10:01. > :10:08.of the blunder 25 who are claiming housing benefit have dependents. How
:10:08. > :10:11.would this policy affect them? Well, David Cameron announced a high-level
:10:11. > :10:15.announcement yesterday around the direction of Conservative Lizzie,
:10:15. > :10:24.something we plan to put into our manifesto. -- Conservative policy.
:10:24. > :10:27.For under 25s, there will be two options, burning on learning. That
:10:27. > :10:32.is not just because it is the right thing to do for those individuals,
:10:32. > :10:34.but it is also right for hard-working taxpayers who are
:10:34. > :10:40.paying for these benefits. So that will affect under 25s claiming
:10:40. > :10:46.housing benefits who have children? It will affect all under 25s. You
:10:46. > :10:51.could take that argument to someone who loses their job, they are out of
:10:51. > :10:54.work temporarily. Maybe they have not signed up for a course, they
:10:54. > :11:01.lose their benefit, their family could be out on the street? There is
:11:02. > :11:10.a lot of detail to work out, because this is something we will get ready
:11:10. > :11:15.in our manifesto. There are not answers yet. People might be worried
:11:15. > :11:21.if they are in their situation, and with the fluctuating job market,
:11:21. > :11:29.people will be concerned. That is why we want to set out policy. But
:11:29. > :11:34.you don't know the detail yet 's it will also depend on a Conservative
:11:34. > :11:38.majority government, but our intention is clear. Thousands of
:11:38. > :11:43.young people slide into a life on benefits when they leave compulsory
:11:43. > :11:47.education. That is not acceptable. Julian Huppert, shouldn't there be a
:11:47. > :11:53.straightforward choice, you either find a job or get training, or you
:11:53. > :11:56.lose your benefits? It is helpful to see this message coming from the
:11:56. > :12:00.Conservatives. This is the sort of thing we have stopped from happening
:12:00. > :12:05.while we have been in government, this sort of unpleasant approach. We
:12:05. > :12:11.do need to help young people get into employment or training. But
:12:11. > :12:16.taking away the support that many of them desperately need will not help.
:12:16. > :12:19.There are too many of these people, the numbers started shooting at a
:12:19. > :12:23.decade ago when the economy was doing well. The last government let
:12:23. > :12:29.them down. We have stopped the growth. It is about providing
:12:29. > :12:35.opportunities, helping people to learn and earn, not punishing the
:12:35. > :12:38.most vulnerable. For we get onto whether you are punishing the
:12:38. > :12:42.vulnerable, do you agree that the Liberal Democrats have stopped your
:12:42. > :12:50.unpleasant, as Julian says, policy? No. This is a coalition government.
:12:50. > :12:55.We have different points of view. You could not introduce it under a
:12:55. > :13:00.coalition. If Julian represents all Lib Dems, then we couldn't. This is
:13:00. > :13:04.for our manifesto, but it sets a clear direction and builds on the
:13:04. > :13:10.reform of the welfare system under Iain Duncan Smith and our reforms
:13:10. > :13:15.under Michael Gove. But isn't the problem is that there are not enough
:13:15. > :13:19.jobs around for young people? 1 million young people unemployed, and
:13:19. > :13:26.taking away their benefit will punish them 's well, jobs are being
:13:26. > :13:30.created. But how many young people are unemployed? Youth unemployed and
:13:30. > :13:32.is falling, but it is still a problem. Part of dealing with that
:13:32. > :13:35.is falling, but it is still a issue is having a welfare system
:13:35. > :13:41.that helps people get into the world of work, but also having an
:13:41. > :13:47.education system that gives them the skills that companies want. Julian,
:13:47. > :13:51.it costs £1.2 billion a year. You yourself say there are too many
:13:51. > :13:58.young people in this situation. You need a it. B we have already stopped
:13:58. > :14:02.this from happening. This was pushed for by Conservatives in previous
:14:02. > :14:05.budgets. We discussed this and stopped it from happening. We do
:14:05. > :14:09.need to do more will stop some of that is about getting rid of some of
:14:09. > :14:13.the benefit traps. I had an autistic man who worked in my office who was
:14:13. > :14:16.only allowed to work for six hours a week because if he worked for any
:14:16. > :14:20.more, he ended up with less money. He was applying for jobs and
:14:20. > :14:22.eventually found a full-time job, but stopping him on being able to go
:14:22. > :14:26.eventually found a full-time job, to ten or 16 hours was ridiculous. I
:14:26. > :14:32.am pleased that we are getting rid to ten or 16 hours was ridiculous. I
:14:32. > :14:35.of that. It has to be about things like the Deputy Prime Minister's
:14:35. > :14:40.youth contract to help young people, rather than to hit them hard. I have
:14:40. > :14:44.taken the YMCA to see Iain Duncan Smith to talk about the people who
:14:44. > :14:49.are living in the YMCA who need help, who don't have a family to go
:14:49. > :14:53.back to. The politics of this are interesting, Sean Worth, as we see
:14:53. > :15:01.the coalition partners divert from each other? Very. You hit the nail
:15:01. > :15:11.on the head when you talked about detail. Look at something like the
:15:11. > :15:17.bedroom tax, spare room subsidy, depending on which party you are in.
:15:17. > :15:23.Human stories started to come out of that where there were anomalies.
:15:23. > :15:27.Then you see the public support starts to evaporate. So as long as
:15:27. > :15:34.the Tories do some decent work on that, so that we don't see these
:15:34. > :15:37.anomalies such as disabled people's medical rooms being brought into
:15:37. > :15:48.this, it could be some support. Do you agree? No, I think it would be a
:15:48. > :15:51.disaster. It is not the case that everyone is thinking, I will either
:15:51. > :15:56.joined McKinsey or I will go on the dole. The vast majority of people
:15:56. > :15:59.will have to go into some form of training. Where will that come
:15:59. > :16:07.from? We don't have the provision for that. Where would the money come
:16:07. > :16:14.from, Sajid Javid? Of course there will be a demand for training. And
:16:14. > :16:18.where would the money come from? As we work out the detail, I can give
:16:18. > :16:22.you more information if you invite me back. We certainly will. I just
:16:22. > :16:27.think it is interesting over this period that both the Liberal
:16:27. > :16:30.Democrats and the Conservatives, despite boasting about being
:16:30. > :16:33.fiscally disciplined, have been announcing things that will cost
:16:33. > :16:39.money. If the end result is that more people end up in work and not a
:16:40. > :16:46.life of benefits, it is good for them and good for the economy. We
:16:46. > :16:48.have costed up looking at long-term unemployment, and the coalition will
:16:48. > :16:54.look at introducing that from April next year, and it will cost £300
:16:54. > :16:58.million in the short term. We are willing to make that investment
:16:58. > :17:04.because it will help the long-term unemployed to get the help they want
:17:04. > :17:09.to get back into work. One of the great policy failures in Britain in
:17:09. > :17:13.the last 50 years has been the lack of provision for people who don't go
:17:13. > :17:18.through academic courses and on to university, and David Cameron has
:17:18. > :17:21.said he is going to fix that. This is a colossal task he has set
:17:21. > :17:26.himself, and I don't get any sense that you understand the scale. We
:17:26. > :17:30.have had a dysfunctional welfare system for many years, and the
:17:30. > :17:34.changes that Iain Duncan Smith is brought about, the introduction of
:17:34. > :17:37.universal credit and some of the other changes mentioned, they are
:17:37. > :17:41.not easy, and they might have teething issues. Added is the right
:17:41. > :17:44.direction of policy, because we can't continue to have a welfare
:17:44. > :17:47.system that denies people the right to work by giving them the wrong
:17:47. > :17:52.incentives and a budget that is out of control. Welfare spending under
:17:52. > :17:58.the previous government went up by 57%, and that is unacceptable.
:17:58. > :18:01.Thank you very much. The big theme of David Cameron's conference speech
:18:01. > :18:07.yesterday was making Britain a land of opportunity. Here he is talking
:18:07. > :18:10.about the Government's plan to underwrite new mortgages up to the
:18:10. > :18:14.value of £600,000. In a land of opportunity, we must
:18:14. > :18:17.make sure that more people are able to own a home of their own. Your
:18:17. > :18:21.make sure that more people are able home is your castle. For most young
:18:21. > :18:32.people today, their home is their landlord's. It is starting to make
:18:32. > :18:35.them wonder why they bother. They are stuck in rental accommodation
:18:35. > :18:39.when they are desperate to buy. I met a couple on Sunday, Emily and
:18:39. > :18:43.James. They both had decent jobs, but because they didn't have rich
:18:43. > :18:48.parents, they couldn't get big big enough deposit to buy a house. And
:18:48. > :18:52.let me tell you where I met them. In their new home, built in their help
:18:52. > :18:56.to buy mortgage scheme. It was still half built, but they showed me where
:18:56. > :18:59.the kitchen was going to be. Outside was rubble all over the ground, but
:18:59. > :19:04.they had already bought a lawn mower. They talked about how excited
:19:04. > :19:09.they were to be spending their first Christmas in a home of their own. My
:19:10. > :19:12.friends, that is what we are about, and the party of aspiration will
:19:12. > :19:16.finish the job on home ownership that we started.
:19:16. > :19:19.Sajid Javid is still with us. David Cameron says that this is gay to
:19:19. > :19:23.help young people buy their first home. But if you look at the figures
:19:23. > :19:29.involved, this scheme will be out of reach for many people. The average
:19:29. > :19:37.house in the UK costs £242,000, so a 95% mortgage means you would have to
:19:37. > :19:41.borrow £230,000. You would need a salary of over £57,000 to avoid
:19:41. > :19:46.that. That is beyond the reach of many, many people. This isn't a
:19:46. > :19:53.scheme just for young people. It is a scheme for everyone. That would
:19:53. > :19:58.apply to everyone. Many people in their late 30s or even 40s still
:19:58. > :20:01.haven't managed to buy a home will stop and the figure that you are
:20:01. > :20:09.using is not the average price of a first home, that would be a lot
:20:09. > :20:12.less. Everyone I have ever met aspires to own their own home. We
:20:13. > :20:17.want to help them with that. It is perfectly natural. There are
:20:17. > :20:20.millions of people out there, young and not so young, who can afford
:20:20. > :20:24.payments, and the Prime Minister gave an example in his speech, but
:20:24. > :20:28.they don't have the savings for the deposit. Ten or 15 years ago, the
:20:28. > :20:38.average deposit required was around £10,000. Today it is closer to
:20:38. > :20:42.£30,000. In the early 2000s, it would take you for five years to
:20:42. > :20:49.save that, but now it will take you 25 years. If people haven't got
:20:49. > :20:54.access to a big pot of savings or rich parents, they can't afford
:20:54. > :20:58.those homes. But because they have got the income, they can afford the
:20:58. > :21:01.mortgage repayments. I understand the thinking behind it, but I'm
:21:01. > :21:03.trying to work out who it is going to help. The sorts of people you are
:21:03. > :21:05.talking about who don't have that to help. The sorts of people you are
:21:06. > :21:09.income or help from parents, what to help. The sorts of people you are
:21:09. > :21:15.sort of salary, in your mind, does someone have to earn to benefit from
:21:15. > :21:19.this scheme, if you say my £230,000 for an average home is not the price
:21:19. > :21:22.of an average first-time home. Let's take the example the Brymon is to.
:21:22. > :21:27.of an average first-time home. Let's The two individuals -- let's take
:21:27. > :21:35.the example the Prime Minister referred to. Those two individuals
:21:35. > :21:39.had an income of £25,000 each, and they can easily afford payments even
:21:39. > :21:42.on a 95% mortgage, even once you they can easily afford payments even
:21:42. > :21:46.stress test them and allow for changes in interest rates in the
:21:46. > :21:52.future. Banks are now obligated to do that. But they don't have rich
:21:52. > :21:56.parents. And you often find that people who criticise this scheme,
:21:56. > :22:02.they have their own homes, they have rich parents, and it doesn't really
:22:02. > :22:04.touch them that much, when it does actually affect a lot of people that
:22:04. > :22:08.touch them that much, when it does don't have rich parents, but they
:22:08. > :22:12.can afford the payments. If you are trying to help first-time buyers,
:22:12. > :22:18.why does the scheme need to go up to houses worth £600,000? I didn't say
:22:18. > :22:22.it was just for first-time buyers. It is designed to help both
:22:22. > :22:27.first-time buyers and also people that wish to move up the housing
:22:27. > :22:31.ladder. That is a big leap up the housing ladder! Why aren't you
:22:31. > :22:33.focusing just on lower valued houses, or as you say, first-time
:22:33. > :22:37.buyers, since they are the ones who houses, or as you say, first-time
:22:37. > :22:42.need the leg up the ladder. As you know, throughout the United Kingdom,
:22:43. > :22:47.especially in the south-east, you will see a big differentiation in
:22:47. > :22:50.prices. If you are a family of three or four in the south-east, it might
:22:50. > :22:55.be the cost of the home that you need. But it is not just the
:22:55. > :22:58.south-east. If you look at the south-west, people have paid ten
:22:58. > :23:04.times over their average income in order to meet mortgage payments. It
:23:04. > :23:09.isn't just a south-east problem. Is it going to work or is it going to
:23:09. > :23:10.cause a housing bubble? I take some of your points, and I appreciate
:23:11. > :23:14.that this is a serious problem and of your points, and I appreciate
:23:14. > :23:18.it is difficult to find policy, but if this were a Labour scheme, you
:23:18. > :23:22.would be saying, don't these economic illiterate understand that
:23:22. > :23:27.if you just throw more money at something with constraints applied,
:23:27. > :23:35.the price will go up. Answer that question. 10% rises in London. We
:23:35. > :23:38.have a whole list here of mortgage experts, Declan Curran from home
:23:38. > :23:47.fixed direct says that it is likely to create a house price bubble. You
:23:47. > :23:55.are creating the next credit crunch. If left unchecked. If there was a
:23:55. > :23:58.capacity constraint in the market, evidence of a capacity problem, I
:23:58. > :24:04.would be concerned. What is your benchmark? Annual house construction
:24:04. > :24:09.fell to its lowest level since the 1920s under the previous government.
:24:09. > :24:14.It is up 33% since then, but it is still one third below its long-term
:24:14. > :24:17.average. If you are a housing company, and you know there might be
:24:17. > :24:22.more mortgage availability because of this scheme, it helps disperse
:24:22. > :24:26.apply, but to make sure, and to deal with that left unchecked point, we
:24:26. > :24:33.have given powers quite clearly to the Bank of England... And they are
:24:33. > :24:39.worried about it! Know they are not. We have asked them to look at it
:24:39. > :24:45.every September and report back to the government. Is that doing
:24:45. > :24:48.enough? You have to get supply moving, and there is no reason to
:24:48. > :24:53.suppose that you are going to be able to. It is more valuable for the
:24:53. > :24:59.companies to sit on the land. What has changed all that? Why will
:24:59. > :25:06.housing supply suddenly start moving? Some of the planning changes
:25:06. > :25:10.we have made... That won't revolutionise supply in the sort of
:25:10. > :25:18.numbers that you and Ed Miliband are talking about. We have to go on the
:25:18. > :25:21.facts. In the last year, there was a 49% increase in the number of units
:25:21. > :25:26.approved by local authorities, and that is a step in the right
:25:26. > :25:28.direction. Yesterday we heard from the latest PMI reports that
:25:28. > :25:33.construction is rising at its fastest level since ten years ago.
:25:33. > :25:38.It is heading in the right direction, but we need to be
:25:38. > :25:43.vigilant and stay on top of it. Is this good politics and bad
:25:44. > :25:47.economics? The key difference between this and the previous
:25:47. > :25:51.housing bubble is not just the sub-prime, and the wider policy
:25:51. > :25:55.about land release and planning reform. It is the fact that the
:25:55. > :25:59.government is in control of releasing the extra credit into the
:25:59. > :26:05.economy, and as you have just said there, and this hasn't been a big
:26:05. > :26:09.part of the message, to say that you can just turn the taps off. It was a
:26:09. > :26:16.race to the bottom by sub-prime lending by the banks. But the key
:26:16. > :26:21.difference and this is where the right needs to support these
:26:21. > :26:26.measures, the Government can intervene, turn the taps on, monitor
:26:26. > :26:31.this every year, turn it down a bit if it does heat things up too much.
:26:31. > :26:34.One of the issues is the supply issue, and we have yet to see how
:26:34. > :26:39.many homes are built over the next few years. The other issue is the
:26:39. > :26:43.taxpayer underwriting loans where people could in future default. Is
:26:44. > :26:48.that a risk that you are comfortable with, bearing in mind that we could
:26:48. > :26:50.seem ace rate of interest rates rise, not for a few years, but then
:26:50. > :26:54.seem ace rate of interest rates what happens. It is a risk the
:26:54. > :26:56.taxpayer doesn't really have, and the reason is that when we announce
:26:56. > :27:00.this next week, it is clear that it the reason is that when we announce
:27:00. > :27:09.is commercially priced, so it is priced in a way that the Government
:27:09. > :27:12.will break even on this. So there is no effective taxpayer subsidy, and
:27:12. > :27:20.that is what makes it even more powerful. Sajid Javid, thank you.
:27:20. > :27:24.Finishing the job. Britain can do better than this. A stronger economy
:27:24. > :27:31.and a better society. Three better still -- messages from three
:27:31. > :27:37.different party leaders. But can you tell which?
:27:37. > :27:44.There are some of us, Mr Chairman, who will fight and fight and fight
:27:44. > :27:49.again to save the party we love. The Britain that is going to be forged
:27:49. > :27:53.in the white heat of this revolution will be no place for restrictive
:27:53. > :27:59.practices of outdated methods on either side of industry. I have only
:27:59. > :28:11.one thing to say. You turn if you want to, but the Lady's not for
:28:11. > :28:19.turning. And you end in the grotesque chaos of a Labour council,
:28:19. > :28:24.a Labour council hiring taxis to scuttle around the city handing out
:28:24. > :28:28.redundancy notices to its own workers. We have to have our
:28:28. > :28:35.agreements in public and our disagreements in Private. This is a
:28:35. > :28:40.modern party living in an age of change. It requires a modern
:28:40. > :28:50.constitution that says what we are in terms the public and understand
:28:50. > :28:54.-- cannot misunderstand. Tony Blair, looking a little younger there. Your
:28:54. > :29:00.favourite of the three conferences this year? I thought Ed Miliband's
:29:00. > :29:05.was the best performance. I am not sure it will last is content. A bit
:29:05. > :29:13.calmer and's was solid and workmanlike, and although it will be
:29:13. > :29:21.instantly forgotten, in a sense, that was the point -- David
:29:21. > :29:33.Cameron's was solid and workmanlike. The decision to be Dell was probably
:29:33. > :29:40.the right one. -- to be dull. Is that right? You would think that the
:29:40. > :29:49.pressure would be more on David Cameron to produce more. I think the
:29:49. > :29:55.key difference this year is that normally in this kind of period in a
:29:55. > :30:00.Parliament, you would be expecting an election in May. But this is a
:30:00. > :30:06.fixed term Parliament, so you don't need to air these things. It was
:30:06. > :30:11.workmanlike because it had to set out a clear stall. Nick Clegg,
:30:12. > :30:16.exactly the same, but for policy reasons. And there was some of the
:30:16. > :30:20.theatre about the dog and all the reasons. And there was some of the
:30:20. > :30:27.rest of it. Yes, the personal stories. But Ed Miliband had a
:30:27. > :30:31.rest of it. Yes, the personal bigger problem going into the
:30:31. > :30:35.conferences, he had to do something to give him cut through, and the
:30:35. > :30:47.freezing of the energy prices policy, to some extent, did that. It
:30:47. > :30:50.has excited the attention of people who don't normally watch politics.
:30:50. > :30:56.And it is a web conference speech that does that. Most of them don't.
:30:56. > :30:59.The clips you saw were all big political moments and descriptions
:30:59. > :31:04.of major political events. My favourite was Neil Kinnock's
:31:04. > :31:08.magnificent speech. It was a really big moment. There was nothing
:31:08. > :31:09.comparable in these conferences that was sufficiently big for anyone to
:31:09. > :31:15.hang a speech on how we will was sufficiently big for anyone to
:31:15. > :31:17.remember for anyone. What about Nick Clegg? He had a confident
:31:17. > :31:21.performance. He probably thinks he Clegg? He had a confident
:31:21. > :31:25.has got over the worst. There is no serious challenge to his leadership.
:31:25. > :31:31.Maybe he felt liberated by that. Yeah, the Lib Dems I spoke to at
:31:31. > :31:36.that conference came back happy. They had had some sort of permission
:31:36. > :31:43.to go into any government in the next Parliament. Trident, they got
:31:43. > :31:48.through energy. They are not obsessed with constitutional reform
:31:48. > :31:52.in the way they were in the past. On the point about catching the
:31:52. > :31:58.imagination, Ed Miliband got all the headlines. But I was captured by the
:31:58. > :32:02.other thing he did, which was go on to the Tories' turf about small
:32:02. > :32:06.businesses. When you are an opposition leader, the way to
:32:06. > :32:10.capture attention is to be controversial, but also to be
:32:10. > :32:15.counterintuitive. To me, this was the first time I really saw him
:32:15. > :32:21.starting to work as an opposition leader. He has a personal
:32:21. > :32:28.credibility problem, so policy is the thing. The rhythm of conferences
:32:28. > :32:31.and has been interrupted. Do you think next year, they will be
:32:31. > :32:35.and has been interrupted. Do you barnstormers? Not necessarily. But
:32:35. > :32:39.they will be different, because we will then be a year from an
:32:39. > :32:44.election, and there will be a desire to be prime ministerial on the part
:32:44. > :32:49.of all three. Nick Clegg, you never used to get Liberal Democrat leaders
:32:49. > :32:53.doing prime ministerial speeches, but now you do, and they like it.
:32:53. > :32:56.There was a weird passage where he detailed a lot of things that had
:32:56. > :33:01.not happened, but would have happened, had it not been for the
:33:01. > :33:07.Liberal Democrats. It is a novelty in political rhetoric. These things
:33:07. > :33:11.have not happened, let's cheer! Now, we are going to imagine the scene.
:33:11. > :33:16.A party conference is. You are looking to have a good time. Listen
:33:16. > :33:20.to a discussion on infrastructure investment and regional growth, or
:33:20. > :33:23.check out the drinks reception and parties on the conference fringe?
:33:23. > :33:28.Adam has been finding out what kind of party animals go to Conservative
:33:28. > :33:31.Party conference. Let's get to the truth of why these
:33:32. > :33:41.people are actually here. Is it for the party, or is it really for the
:33:41. > :33:49.parties? That is an easy one, the parties. What is the best party you
:33:49. > :33:54.have into? Reception. Why was it so good? It was a great laugh. The
:33:54. > :33:59.have into? Reception. Why was it so serious stuff, but that is most
:33:59. > :34:03.important. But I love the social stuff. I will go for the parties,
:34:03. > :34:09.because they don't stage manage that. When did you go to bed last
:34:09. > :34:17.night? If my mother is watching, I was in bed at 12. 5am, I got home.
:34:17. > :34:22.That is hard-core. Go and vote. Loving the vote is. The drink is
:34:22. > :34:30.good, but the party is important, and it is the best party. The party
:34:30. > :34:39.stuff, absolutely. Yesterday, we went to one with Liam Fox. Is he a
:34:39. > :34:43.party animal? I imagine so. Which led to go party has the best
:34:44. > :34:50.parties? Obviously, the Conservatives know how to party. The
:34:50. > :34:57.Labour Party like karaoke. But we know how to do it properly! Can I
:34:57. > :35:09.put one in each? OK. I don't want to spoil the party spirit. The party,
:35:09. > :35:13.of course. You like a night out, don't you? No matter though I
:35:13. > :35:19.enjoyed the politics and the people who make up the party and seeing
:35:19. > :35:23.what's of friends. The party is first and the parties are second.
:35:23. > :35:30.What is more important, the part of political stuff all the parties?
:35:30. > :35:35.Which do you prefer? Governing. He says governing is more fun than a
:35:35. > :35:44.party. Best party was the south-west area deception last night. Prime
:35:44. > :35:48.minister Cameron turned up. You have to be pretty sad to love the
:35:48. > :35:59.Conservative Party more than a free pint, so I have to say the parties.
:35:59. > :36:08.Cheers. I had you down as a partying man? No, I am a Presbyterian. What
:36:08. > :36:13.is the latest you have been to bed this week 's I am always tucked up
:36:13. > :36:17.before mid-night. You don't have to choose, you get both at a
:36:17. > :36:21.conference. The Conservative grassroots are clearly a bunch of
:36:21. > :36:24.party animals, although more people have gone for the serious side than
:36:24. > :36:31.the frivolous side. I have got some party invites. See you later.
:36:31. > :36:36.We have not seen Adam Fleming since then! You are watching the Daily
:36:36. > :36:39.Politics, and we have been joined by viewers in Scotland, who have been
:36:39. > :36:42.Politics, and we have been joined by watching First Minister's Questions
:36:42. > :36:45.from Holyrood. Phil Collins from the Times and Sean were from the
:36:45. > :36:48.politics to enjoy with me. Did you believe the cabinet minister is when
:36:48. > :36:58.they said they didn't do the parties? I cannot believe they don't
:36:58. > :37:01.go to some. I have seen them at some. Maybe you would go to bed
:37:01. > :37:06.early if you had a media meeting in the morning. The Conservative
:37:06. > :37:09.conference is a great time to let your hair down and meet everybody,
:37:09. > :37:15.so I am not surprised the parties won over the politics. Attendants
:37:15. > :37:22.follows a political cycle. In the first few years, they go to all of
:37:22. > :37:26.them. By year four, they stop going. By year five, they don't go to
:37:26. > :37:29.anything. By then, you have got no friends in the press, so you think,
:37:29. > :37:40.I am not going to the Guardian's party. I think if the food and drink
:37:40. > :37:45.are good, it is enough. I tend not to go to parties where Liam Fox is
:37:45. > :37:50.the main attraction. I am sure that will put him off inviting you to the
:37:50. > :37:52.next one. Now, according to Education
:37:52. > :37:56.Secretary Michael Gove, one of the big things to come out of David
:37:56. > :37:57.Cameron's speech yesterday was a commitment to teaching
:37:58. > :38:02.schoolchildren in England how to write computer programmes. On next
:38:02. > :38:06.September, all five to 14-year-olds in state schools will be taught how
:38:06. > :38:09.to code as part of a number of changes to the national curriculum
:38:09. > :38:13.designed to prepare children for the modern workplace. But our school
:38:13. > :38:17.kids up for it? BBC Breakfast spoke to some of those taking part in a
:38:17. > :38:22.national event that brings young coders together. When I write a
:38:22. > :38:31.piece of code, it is exciting to see what it does and in what ways it
:38:31. > :38:38.breaks. It is exciting to imagine that you have made this to do that.
:38:38. > :38:44.I was looking on Google, and I couldn't find an episode list or
:38:44. > :38:51.website, so I thought I would make one. I am very good at web design.
:38:51. > :38:57.It was £60,000 per year on job centre! I love the confidence! I am
:38:57. > :39:00.joined now by Clive Beal, the director of educational development
:39:00. > :39:03.at raspberry pie, and Emma Mulqueeny, who set up an
:39:03. > :39:10.organisation which finds and brings together young coders, some of whom
:39:10. > :39:15.we saw in that film. Clive, we had better explain what you have got in
:39:15. > :39:21.front of us -- in front of you. Tell us about raspberry pie? It is an
:39:21. > :39:26.educational charity. We want to support young people to get them
:39:26. > :39:31.into computing and learn to code and be creative. How difficult is it? I
:39:31. > :39:35.am a bit of a Luddite, but that is partly my age. Looking at these
:39:35. > :39:41.youngsters, they are so much better. Is that worldly the case for most
:39:41. > :39:47.kids? Absolutely. I think we patronise them at an early age, but
:39:47. > :39:50.if you show them the basics, they will blow you away. Show us the
:39:50. > :39:59.basics. How much does that contraption cost? You can buy a
:39:59. > :40:03.Raspberry Pi full £30. That was one of the criteria behind it. You can
:40:03. > :40:12.buy your own computer for £20 to £30. It is a general purpose
:40:12. > :40:17.computer. We designed it to be accessible, so we have got pins on
:40:17. > :40:23.here that I can connect to the outside world. You can put in a
:40:23. > :40:29.phone charger or nest the card. We have got some programming language
:40:29. > :40:33.on here. This one is designed for eight to 14-year-olds to get them
:40:33. > :40:39.into programming. It is a visual programming language. Show us
:40:39. > :40:49.exactly what that can do, in simple terms? So I have got a little cat on
:40:49. > :40:53.the stage. If I clicked on this, he moves about, which is not that much
:40:53. > :40:59.fun, but then I can go and stick it in a loop that goes on for ever. And
:40:59. > :41:05.I can stop him from bouncing on the edge. Really easy to get into for
:41:05. > :41:11.younger children, and they love it. Is that the sort of thing that can
:41:11. > :41:16.get them going? Yes. And most of them will start with a simple
:41:16. > :41:19.programming thing like that. But actually, there are very few
:41:19. > :41:23.children that have access to this kind of stuff, because it has not
:41:23. > :41:29.been taught in schools so far, which is why what has been announced is
:41:29. > :41:38.important. The footage you should be for was filmed at the Festival of
:41:38. > :41:42.code that we ran this summer. Our youngest kids are five, and then it
:41:42. > :41:46.goes up to 18. They start with this, but once they get to grips with the
:41:46. > :41:50.basics, they quickly want to move on to building their own apps or
:41:50. > :41:51.websites, and more importantly, solving problems that they find
:41:51. > :41:58.during the day. They want to find solving problems that they find
:41:58. > :42:03.their own solutions. That is part of the fun of her grabbing. Do you
:42:03. > :42:08.think this will set school alight? B my kids are one and three, and they
:42:08. > :42:15.can both use an iPad. The three-year-old is quite good at it.
:42:15. > :42:24.You will never see your iPad again. But should it be on the curriculum?
:42:24. > :42:28.Definitely. The key thing is make it intuitive and easy, and they will
:42:28. > :42:34.run with it. The future economy will be technology led. We really are in
:42:34. > :42:39.a global race. I don't want to use that hackneyed term. You have just
:42:39. > :42:46.used it! I can't think of a better one. We have got to get these kids
:42:46. > :42:52.doing this stuff, because we need to be world leaders. Do you think it is
:42:52. > :42:58.as important as doing maths and English GCSE? It has to be on the
:42:58. > :43:02.curriculum, because there are lots of children who don't have access to
:43:02. > :43:06.computers. I wonder whether it is like any other language, whether
:43:06. > :43:12.earlier you learn it, the easier it is. There is an element of that, but
:43:12. > :43:18.it is also important to remember that your child is consuming that
:43:18. > :43:22.technology. It is like giving a child a bike, but without giving
:43:22. > :43:27.them any knowledge about how the roads work and how safe they can
:43:27. > :43:31.be. How the digital world operates is the same as giving them an iPad
:43:31. > :43:37.and expecting them to use it, but they have to understand how the
:43:37. > :43:40.digital world works. But Clive, you can't really buy one of those and
:43:40. > :43:45.use it immediate leak, you would have to be shown how to do it,
:43:45. > :43:52.wouldn't you? Or is it simpler than that? It is fairly simple, so you
:43:52. > :43:57.can plug it in and start programming from scratch. Or if you are a bit
:43:57. > :44:01.older, use a programming language like python. I think the earlier,
:44:01. > :44:04.the better, as long as you can understand logic and you like
:44:04. > :44:09.puzzles and playing, which we all do. You are not too young or too old
:44:09. > :44:13.puzzles and playing, which we all to start. Thank you for bringing in
:44:13. > :44:18.the gizmo, Raspberry Pi, and good luck with the coding. There are code
:44:18. > :44:25.clubs, aren't there? But they are voluntary stop I have tried to find
:44:25. > :44:30.one. There is not one in my area. That is the problem, but there was
:44:30. > :44:34.lots of stuff going on. Now onto UKIP. Despite leader Nigel Farage's
:44:34. > :44:39.assertions that the party opposes racism, the party is again sending
:44:39. > :44:42.off accusations of racism in its ranks will stop on this programme
:44:42. > :44:47.yesterday, Lord Heseltine described UKIP is a racist party. Here is what
:44:47. > :44:50.he said. You always have these right-wing, racist operations,
:44:50. > :44:57.pandering to the lowest common denominator in politics. That is
:44:57. > :45:02.what is happening. But when it comes to a general election, the choice
:45:02. > :45:06.will be very simple. This is where the strength of Cameron lives. Do
:45:06. > :45:12.you want Ed Miliband as prime minister, or David Cameron? Are you
:45:12. > :45:18.saying UKIP is racist? Of course. Who doubts that? The language, the
:45:18. > :45:33.rhetoric, the membership, who doubts it? That was Michael has all time,
:45:34. > :45:38.our guest yesterday. -- Michael Heseltine. And we've been joined by
:45:38. > :45:46.Amjad Bashir, who is UKIP's spokesman on small business. You
:45:46. > :45:52.have given this has been politician the chance to level these
:45:53. > :45:58.accusations against us. There was a picture in the paper of Nigel
:45:58. > :46:04.Farage, with the microphone looking like it was a Nazi moustache. We are
:46:04. > :46:09.a mainstream political party with 30,000 members. We got over 1
:46:09. > :46:14.million votes in the last elections in May. We are a serious player, and
:46:14. > :46:21.you can't treat us like this. Would you do that on the front page with
:46:21. > :46:28.David Cameron? You are now having the right to reply following what
:46:28. > :46:33.Michael Heseltine said, and he is quite a distinguished politician,
:46:33. > :46:38.albeit a formal one. Of course we would use a picture of David Cameron
:46:38. > :46:42.or Ed Miliband just the same. These standards are being applied to Nigel
:46:42. > :46:47.Farage that have always been applied to other leaders, and the question
:46:47. > :46:53.is whether he can stand up to it. We to other leaders, and the question
:46:53. > :46:58.are trying to have a serious discussion about immigration. Are
:46:58. > :47:05.you seriously suggesting that there are no racists in UKIP? Michael
:47:05. > :47:10.Heseltine said yesterday that UKIP was racist. Look at me, look at my
:47:10. > :47:17.ethnicity. Are you saying that there was racist. Look at me, look at my
:47:17. > :47:22.are no racists in UKIP? There are 30,000 members out there. These
:47:22. > :47:27.accusations are levelled by the BBC a gain and again. They are not
:47:27. > :47:32.levelled by the BBC, Michael Heseltine was our guest. Friday or
:47:32. > :47:37.members keep getting caught up in controversy? These accusations are
:47:37. > :47:44.not made up, they are based on stories that come out. They haven't
:47:44. > :47:49.come from nowhere. This is silly. We have just selected somebody to run
:47:49. > :47:55.for Orpington who is of Indonesian Muslim background. Here I am running
:47:55. > :48:03.as a potential MEP for Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire. What did you
:48:03. > :48:06.make of Godfrey Bloom? I am of Pakistani background. I have worked
:48:06. > :48:13.in this country for 50 years. Would they select me if they were racist?
:48:13. > :48:20.Is it racist to refer to foreign places as Bongo Bongo Land? The
:48:20. > :48:26.point that he made was very relevant. He was talking about
:48:26. > :48:29.foreign aid. The party distance itself from those two lines. Because
:48:29. > :48:36.foreign aid. The party distance it was racist. It is not right to
:48:36. > :48:40.dwell on that too much. He has been withdrawn the whip. He is no longer
:48:40. > :48:45.going to run for the party. That was as a result of his other comment
:48:45. > :48:49.about women, rather than Bongo Bongo Land. But you distanced yourself
:48:49. > :48:56.because it wasn't appropriate language. You are not talking about
:48:56. > :49:00.the real subject. You are saying it is very unfair that people are
:49:00. > :49:05.accusing the party of being racist. So is it racist to describe a female
:49:05. > :49:19.journalist as from some form of ethnic extraction? He is married to
:49:19. > :49:25.an Indian lady who comes from Australia. He was trying to describe
:49:25. > :49:30.the journalist. Would you describe anybody as being somebody who is of
:49:30. > :49:36.some form of ethnic extraction? This is political correctness gone mad.
:49:36. > :49:43.Allow people the latitude to go further. This is stifling the debate
:49:43. > :49:46.on racism. I am somebody who is of Pakistani background who lives in
:49:46. > :49:50.this country. I have experienced racism. Lord Heseltine hasn't
:49:50. > :49:57.this country. I have experienced experienced this. He doesn't know
:49:57. > :50:03.anything about racism. What do you say to that? Amjad Bashir is of
:50:03. > :50:08.Pakistani origin, and how can the party be racist if they have him in
:50:08. > :50:11.the party? If the party was officially racist comment he
:50:11. > :50:19.wouldn't be sitting here now, I agree with that. But you have party
:50:19. > :50:23.officials being outed as former BNP members, and Nigel Farage said, we
:50:23. > :50:33.don't have tonnes of money to do the disciplined checks. The key point
:50:33. > :50:34.for UKIP is probably learning from that complete implosion at
:50:34. > :50:38.for UKIP is probably learning from conference, that when you do become
:50:38. > :50:42.popular, you come under massive scrutiny, and your party needs to
:50:42. > :50:47.have a disciplined operation of briefing and messaging. I don't know
:50:47. > :50:53.if you have the resources to do that, but that is the key difference
:50:53. > :51:02.between UKIP and other parties. We already have 12 MEPs. So why is your
:51:02. > :51:06.discipline so poor? All these things that you mention, and I take that on
:51:06. > :51:13.board, these are things we are going to address. Because you have lost
:51:13. > :51:18.45% of your MEPs since 2009. That is not a sign of a disciplined party.
:51:18. > :51:23.It is a very disciplined party going forward. I hope to instil that
:51:23. > :51:30.discipline. I have worked hard over the last 30 years in business. Our
:51:30. > :51:34.main supporters, one of them is of Pakistani background, and was
:51:34. > :51:44.responsible for that leaflet that Michael Crick tried to expose to
:51:44. > :51:49.Godfrey, where are the Asian faces? Is it a racist party? There is a
:51:49. > :51:53.difference between being a racist party, which it is not, and Michael
:51:53. > :51:57.Heseltine did not say that, and an accusation that in a party which is
:51:57. > :52:02.part of a splinter group of smaller parties on the right, there are some
:52:02. > :52:09.people who hold racist views, and that seems an answer a bleak true. I
:52:09. > :52:17.beg to differ. We are not a party of the extreme right. We're appealing
:52:17. > :52:22.to voters across-the-board. 30% from Labour. We are gaining ground all
:52:22. > :52:26.over the North. Amjad Bashir, I have to stop it there. Thank you very
:52:26. > :52:36.much. You may think some politicians are
:52:36. > :52:43.beyond parity. Peter Brookes's cartoons have betrayed various
:52:43. > :53:47.leaders. Here is some of his work. And Peter Brookes has joined us.
:53:47. > :53:53.Sign of the Times is out today. Where'd you get the inspiration
:53:53. > :54:02.from? The politicians. The ideas come from me, and the agony comes
:54:02. > :54:07.from it. Is there agony? Yes, quite often there is, come for clock in
:54:07. > :54:11.the afternoon. There is a process to doing them, but every day is
:54:11. > :54:23.different, and everyday's news is different. What is the process? The
:54:23. > :54:34.process is listening to the Today programme. Watching the Daily
:54:34. > :54:41.Politics as Mac indeed! I do have radio and television on a lot. I get
:54:41. > :54:49.a lot of feedback from that sort of thing. And then I am thinking and
:54:49. > :55:00.trying to come to terms with what I want to say and what the target is,
:55:00. > :55:06.and putting it all together. Has a coalition government provided you
:55:06. > :55:16.with rich pickings. Has it been easier with two parties in
:55:16. > :55:22.government? Yes, because from day one of the campaign, I came up with
:55:22. > :55:35.the idea of Clegg being Cameron's fag. You can actually make that work
:55:35. > :55:38.within this format. I find that inventing things all the time, ways
:55:38. > :55:58.of humiliating Clegg by Cameron, is one of life's Rita joys for me. --
:55:58. > :56:07.one of life's great joys. And you will need a new haircut for George
:56:07. > :56:10.Osborne now. I have heard that the traditional cartoon is under
:56:10. > :56:16.pressure. Due to the joys of winged journalism. You do get a lot of
:56:16. > :56:23.cartoons appearing online in various forms, and once newspapers start to
:56:23. > :56:26.disappear, which may or may not be in the not too distant future, I
:56:26. > :56:34.hope not, but it could happen, then we will die out. Ed Miliband doesn't
:56:35. > :56:42.escape you either. I'm sure everyone has heard of Ed Miliband being
:56:42. > :56:52.compared to Wallace and Gromit. Are you laughing? Philip Larkin was once
:56:52. > :56:58.asked, weighed you get your ideas from, and he said, sheer genius.
:56:58. > :57:04.When we discuss which of us will ever be remembered by anyone, if it
:57:04. > :57:08.is not one of us, it is very definitely going to be Peter
:57:08. > :57:17.Brookes. How did Ed Miliband respond to this? I have done quite a lot of
:57:17. > :57:24.these, and apparently the people around him have talked about the
:57:24. > :57:30.fact that Wallace is a national hero and endlessly resourceful. Trying to
:57:30. > :57:37.put the spin on it! Is there a line you won't cross? That is difficult
:57:37. > :57:44.to say. It is terribly difficult to say. I can only answer that from
:57:44. > :57:51.each day's experience. Let's have a look at the final one, this is a bit
:57:52. > :57:58.different. Every cartoon isn't necessarily a
:57:58. > :58:10.laughter cartoon, and I'm dealing with a lot of serious matters. And I
:58:10. > :58:16.am, by nature, not afraid, not an interventionist. And the whole point
:58:16. > :58:25.of this cartoon was that Abu Qatada was having a gun held to his head
:58:25. > :58:32.whilst at the same time Cameron was arming, or not. Thank you very much.
:58:32. > :58:35.There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz. The
:58:35. > :58:41.question was: What new accessory was Boris Johnson spotted wearing
:58:41. > :58:46.yesterday? The answer: A new pair of glasses, which Boris described as
:58:46. > :58:53.being "a bit Elton John". We gave it away! Peter Brookes, thank you very
:58:53. > :58:57.much. That's all for today. Thanks to Phil Collins, Sean Worth and all
:58:57. > :58:59.my guests. I will be back tomorrow. Goodbye.