11/11/2013 Daily Politics

Afternoon, folks, welcome to the Daily Politics.

The dominance of a private-school educated elite in the "upper

echelons" of public life in Britain is "truly shocking", says John

Major. Who could the former Prime Minister be talking about?

Will the Government's "Help to Buy" scheme give young people the leg up

they need? A month on from its launch, the Government hales it a

success - but could it create launch, the Government hales it a

All that in the next hour. With us for the whole programme today is

Professor Michael Clarke of the Royal United Services Institute -

welcome to the programme. First this morning, the Prime

Minister is due to attend the Commonwealth Heads of Government

Meeting in Sri Lanka later this week, but he is coming under

pressure to boycott it because of the country's poor human rights

record. Last week the Canadian prime minister pulled out of the biennial

get-together of Commonwealth leaders and at the weekend, the Indian prime

minister followed suit. Yesterday the Foreign Secretary, William

Hague, defended David Cameron's decision to travel to Columbo. If we

were to stay away from this meeting in true Lankan next week, it would

damage the Commonwealth without changing things positively in Sri

Lanka. We need to be Office Minister Kerry MacCarthy. We

asked for a Foreign Office minister to come on the programme but no one

was available. Thank you for joining us. Why shouldn't David Cameron go?

If you look at Sri Lanka's human rights record, particularly to the

closing stages of the war which ended in 2009, it is absolutely

shocking. When it was agreed that the summit would be held in 2013,

that was strictly on the understanding that Sri Lanka would

make real efforts to address their human rights record in the interim

period and they simply haven't done so. In terms of when they have been

challenged on these issues, they have denied that anything has been

going on. You look at the Canadian prime minister, he said he will not

attend, as has the Indian Prime Minister. We are asking David

Cameron to do the same. Do you agree?

danger is what will be an impressing summit in any case, if Cameron goes

and the Indians and Canadians are not there, it will be a running sore

in the am and what for years to come. Not as bad as Rhodesia but may

be heading in that direction. If David Cameron boycott the Heads of

Government Meeting, how will that change human rights intra- Lankan?

-- in Sri Lanka. Our concern is that it will present a face to the world

that everything is right. He said he will be taken to some of the

troubled spots but we know that in the past, Conservative MPs have come

back with glowing accounts but have not been shown the real horrors. The

foreign office will have briefed David Cameron and if he is there, he

can make much stronger representations as the head of

government than by not going. He should have been doing this for the

entire length of 2013. should have been doing this for the

example to the Commonwealth on your human rights record. They have not

done anything and David Cameron has not used the period to put pressure

on them either. He has left it far too late. What do you think on the

issue of influence? Would it be in a better place to make a stand now,

even if it is late in the day, by going, than by sending a junior

minister? Yes, the Sri Lankan government has got to understand

that they beat the Tamil tigers and now they have been suppressing the

Tamil people. They say there have been atrocities on both sides. There

is a very big Tamil minority and that has an impact. Although this

summit is going to be a bit of a mess, it is probably better on

balance to make the points that need to be made now so they can be

followed up later. to be made now so they can be

dog can -- gets forgotten about. Generally the issue has not made a

headline is more than a couple of times and the same fate will happen

again if he does not go. It is important to keep it on the

international agenda and that is where things like the Channel 4

films that was shown last week, it was absolutely shocking in some of

its content, it is important to do that. We need an international

independent enquiry into what has happened in Sri Lanka. They set up

their own internal enquiry which frankly was... Nothing has come of

it, it was a bit of a figleaf. Do you think Sri Lanka should be in the

Commonwealth? It is important that we use Commonwealth membership to

enforce what should be shared values. We would not be calling for

Sri Lanka to leave the Commonwealth, we want them to address human rights

abuses. There are other we want them to address human rights

were committed? It would be a reasonable first step because the

media is awash with stories, some true and some not. It needs to be

pot and some not. It needs to be buttoned out. -- bottomed out. The

government has got to understand that the world will not turn away

from this. Does it think it can get away with it? It does. They are

saying we will suppress this for once and for all, we have beaten the

Tamils and we will deal with the ethnic problem for the pit is also a

problem for southern India. Now it's time for our daily quiz.

They seem to be they seem to be pushy in what I

would call a pseudo- genocidal policy.

The question for today is, what has Conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi had to

apologise for? Was it claiming Conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi had to

have his duck house re-decorated? At the end of the show Michael will

give us the correct answer. You wait for months, sometimes years

for him to make a public statement - and then two come along in quick

succession. I speak, of course, of the latest missive from former prime

minister, John Major. Last month he had a go at the Government's record

on cost of living. On Friday he addressed a Conservative Party

association in Norfolk. Our correspondent, Gary O'Donohoe,

wasn't there - but he's spoken to people who were - and joins us now.

What did Sir John have to say for himself? Essentially he had a go

about the state of social mobility in the country and he said it was

truly maddening that the country was still run by what he described as

the private school educated elite and the well-heeled middle class.

the private school educated elite you doesn't think it is here. He

also continues some of those themes -- he doesn't think it is here. He

talks about the cripplingly low interest rate that pensioners are

getting. He suggested interest rates ought to be raised so that

pensioners get some returns on their savings. I think he would argue, and

people have been arguing that he has not been silent, he has been saying

these things at various points up and down the country. And perhaps

there is a sense in which he is making these things more public. I

was told that there was not unhappiness on his part, that there

were reporters present on Friday. It does sound a little bit

orchestrated, he is not going to give that sort of speech, laden with

political points, unless it is going to be reported. What do you think he

is up to be reported. What do you think he

fault. The difficulty is that when you start using phrases like private

school educated elite, it sort of feeds into a narrative of criticism

that is already out feeds into a narrative of criticism

of David Cameron and the people surrounding him and his Cabinet. It

is not surprising, I don't think he would find it also -- all that

surprising that it is regarded as a bit of blue on blue criticism as

well. As the election approaches, former prime ministers believe they

have some wisdom to impart. He doesn't forget that he pulled the

iron out of the fire in 1992 and he won a Commons majority against all

the odds in that election. He thinks it is still possible for the Tories

to do that if they stop squabbling. it is still possible for the Tories

privately educated? I couldn't agree more and I gave a speech at one of

the country's leading public schools. It is not just politics, it

is the BBC, it is banking, it is journalism. It is every sphere. What

we are doing is inhibiting us as a country to compete on the global

stage. Because we are drawing our expertise and our talent from a

narrow pool of 7% of the country. What and who is to blame? There is

no one particular person or measure, this is something which has

been happening over a long period of time. I think the removal of grammar

schools by the Labour Party and the destruction of them, almost, and to

a degree, our lack of wanting to readopt the grammar school model. I

came from a readopt the grammar school model. I

conflicting evidence in how much grammar schools helped but the main

-- main point made by John Major is it is their fault. The accept that?

I don't. -- do you accept that? Under Labour, if you take

education, labour narrowed the gap slightly in schools. They should

have done more. It did but its long-term work is hard to shift. It

depends on changes in society, it depends on people coming through

schools, getting into universities and colleges. It all takes time. In

13 years you can put down mercifully that wasn't incremented.

I wish he had. No evidence that it increases social mobility.

Scandinavian countries have come brands of education, they don't

select at 11. They have a very different model over also it is

wrong to use that as an example. Also under Labour, the gap between

the rich and the poor grew massively and that certainly doesn't help

social mobility. If that hadn't have happened, maybe there would have

been more improvement in terms of social mobility. One of John

Major's main points is that it is very difficult for anybody... I

don't even believe Margaret Thatcher would make it to where she did. It

is very difficult for anybody from the background that I came from and

he came from, to look at industries like banking, journalism, the arts,

the BBC, politics, and see a like banking, journalism, the arts,

the people who are in those positions are picking like-minded,

similar people. Undoubtedly, people with wealth and power tend to pass

it on, they pass it onto their children. So, it is incredibly

important to have routes through into the professions, as well as in

wider society, and you do have to break up some of the closed shops.

Can I just say, this is not just any particular party, this is across all

parties. But do you not think John Major was having a go, looking at

George Osborne, David Cameron and to select sent Nick Clegg? I think the

problem at the top of all of the parties is that we do have a small

group of people at the top who are all from a very similar background.

In terms of grammar school education, you think it was this

great key to success for education, you think it was this

ultimately, the structural problem is the global boom of the 1980s and

1990s, and you would think that where a global boom is more

prevalent, that it would create more social mobility, but it tends not

to, because it is the middle-class people who can use market forces

more easily than others. Looking at Scandinavia, is it not the case that

everybody, or a vast majority, go to the same schools, and therefore,

that equalises their opportunities? It is only here in Britain where we

have this flourishing private education, which does not help

narrow the gap? In Scandinavia, you are talking about countries with a

much smaller population, where the government in that country can

identify and meet the needs of that population, because it is wealthier,

in a far more effective way than we can do with 65 million people in the

UK. can do with 65 million people in the

the UK, it is very difficult to go back to the drawing board and turn

it upside down and start again. Is that why we have seen so much focus

on state education from politicians, because they are trying to turn that

7% of the population going to private schools and

disproportionately represented at Russell group universities... ? That

is not the only issue. Vocational education is incredible --

incredibly important, other routes into success are also important. But

selecting at 11 makes it worse, because you are just tracking them

from an early age. The kids with middle-class parents will just have

more tuition when they are at primary school. But you cannot stop

people doing that. You can't, but it is the state's job to make sure that

all children frustrates me that 50% of them come

from the private school set, but as we are the BBC, we want the very

best. Fundamental problem is that we have to raise up state education to

become trouble with that from the private sector. Do you think it is

comparable yet? No, I do not, and I do not understand why not. When you

going to a private school, apart from the structure of the buildings

and the infrastructure, then what is taught is the same curriculum that

we have in our state schools. Now, we have social problems, and in

Germany, people reflect what they are taught more than they reflect

their parenting. In the UK, children reflect their parenting more than

their schooling. I think we need to step up to the plate and make

schooling much more influential on the life of a child and drive up

school standards. I would like to bring up a point which you made

about the BBC, because I get loads have by virtue of their parents and

their background and their connections. Do you think the

Government is actually going to do anything about social mobility? They

can do a certain amount, they can influence it, but ultimately, it

seems to me that social mobility is created by bigger factors, like the

way the economy works. Governments cannot create social mobility. The

Labour Party tried but it did not make much difference. Our armed

forces, particularly those who have been wounded or killed in the

service of their country, are very much in our thoughts today. What was

once a commemoration of people who fought in two world wars has now

become a reflection on the conflicts of a more recent era. But how good

are we at turning our tribute 's into practical support for Britain's

servicemen and women? David Thompson reports.

servicemen and women? David Thompson -- permanently maintained costume at

-- permanently maintained? It is called the military covenant. The

concept goes back to Elizabethan times, but had no basis in law,

until this government introduced the Armed Forces Covenant, which

includes things like reducing council tax for those on active

service, and doubling welfare grants for families. There are now also

community and corporate covenants so that private sector employers can do

their bit as well. But does it go far enough? Very sadly, we still

have people serving in our Armed Forces getting discriminated against

in society. Clearly, that is appalling. We have got to look at

how appalling. We have got to look at

our country. While public support for the Armed Forces may be at an

all-time high now, that might not always be the case. My concern is,

will that supports decline as we see the withdrawal from Afghanistan, and

the media spotlight fading, when actually, the needs of that group of

people, and the support they are going to be calling on from

donations and from organisations like the Royal British Legion, will

begin to Newington be on the increase? But for all of the good

intentions and warm words, is the covenant actually something tangible

to those at the sharp end? If you are a soldier on the front line in

Afghanistan, clearly that is not going to be at the forefront of your

mind. But it does matter to our Armed Forces, that they are being

properly looked after, that the covenant

nation's gratitude to the Armed Forces is not in doubt. But what

really counts is how we show it in the weeks, months and years to come.

Michael Clarke is still with us. As the public's attitude changed

towards the Armed Forces? Yes, I think it has. The public is behind

those on the front line, but I think now they are much more sceptical

about the military establishment as a whole, and politics behind it.

There is a sense in which Iraq and Afghanistan have been regarded as

campaigns which the public do not like very much, but they support the

boys and girls who are having to do it. It is the wooden and batted

effect, troops coming home in coffins, and everybody is very

respectful, but it makes the troops into victims of government policy,

and the troops themselves are not happy about that. They do not want

to be seen as victims. They are instruments

to be seen as victims. They are vast swathes of the population did

not know about or did not care about? Absolutely, and at the

moment, I think it is unprecedented. I have heard it said that the public

have never been more sentimental about our Armed Forces than they are

now. On the other hand, we should not assume that it is some sort of

sporting event. They have got to understand that these are national

interests, for good or bad, which are being pursued. The danger is

that the glamour and the sentiment which goes into thinking about the

Armed Forces takes the public away from what is it that they are

fighting about? Interestingly, there is this difference between the

personal and the political. What about once people have left the

service, or finished their tour of duty, and go back into normal

civilian life or digit is more than people think it should be, more

difficult than most of us realise. lifetime will start to suffer some

sort of battle stress. That will come out in all sorts of different

ways. How does that manifested itself? It might just make somebody

more difficult to live with, might make them more morose, it might give

them other problems. It depends on the individual. Some people give up

their lives, some people give up normal at either the rest of their

lives, with injuries, but everybody gives up a little bit of their

sanity when they are on operation. What about the covenant which was

being spoken about there, coming back and wanting to buy a home, or

just get another job, how hard is that? It varies. The services are

now doing a lot more to ease that transition into civilian life. They

are making a lot more benefits available, and trying to give people

a lot more training. Having served in the forces,

a lot more training. Having served been in garrison in Germany 20 years

ago, say, having served in a war makes that transition more difficult

than most of us might think. Thank you very much. Now, the trial is

continuing of the former News International chief executive

Rebekah Brooks and the Prime Minister's former communications

chief Andy Coulson. Both face charges which they deny arising from

the phone hacking affair. Our correspondent is outside the Old

Bailey. What can you tell us? Day 11 of the proceedings this morning, and

Rebekah Brooks arrived by taxi with her husband Charlie, and Andy

Coulson arrived later, on his own, by foot. Those are three of the

eight defendants on trial. Focus this morning from the prosecution

has very much been on a story which appeared in the News of

has very much been on a story which on the phone of a friend, Sally

Anderson, in the autumn of 2005, in which he related very intimate

details, white emotional. The jury heard him speaking. These messages

were hacked by Glenn Mulcaire, the convicted phone hacker, who was

working for the News of the World, and they will add to found -- they

were later found on tapes in his house. David Blunkett says to Sally

Anderson, a close friend, they are all being absolutely vile. I am

really sorry. Someone is destroying both of our lives at this moment in

time. It is absolutely vile. Whoever it is, I hope they rot in hell. In a

second take, and if there are any children close by, he said, I do not

know who has done this, but they are real bustards, he said in his

distinctive Yorkshire accent. He real bustards, he said in his

some of the notebooks which belonged to Glenn Mulcaire, the phone hacker,

detailing these messages left to Sally Anderson, and in the top

left-hand corner, as he did throughout all of his notebooks, he

left a selection of names referring to the person who tasked him, in

this case, Ian, meaning Ian Edmondson . all the people deny the

charges. The Newspaper editors and

politicians look to be at loggerheads over the regulation of

the press. The Privy Council brought into force a Royal Charter on press

regulation - but so far most national newspapers are refusing to

have anything to do with it. But yesterday on the Sunday Politics

programme, the Deputy Labour Leader, Harriet Harman, suggested that a

deal could yet be done with the new regulator being set up by the

newspaper industry. have turned people's lives upside

down, and the press have said, we will to sort things out and leave it

to us, they have sorted things out and a few years later they have

slipped back. This recognisable check it once every six years and

say, yes, you have got an independent system and it has

remained independent, and therefore that is to guarantee that things

will not slip back. That was deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman.

Joining us now, two of Fleet Street's finest come out of the

rain. Welcome to the programme. What do you make of Harriet Harman's

comments, this softening of the line? It is interesting, the battle

over press regulation that we saw during believe is an enquiry. --

Turin be Leveson enquiry. could run, and they may not try,

after a certain period of time, may not enforce the Royal Charter in its

current state? That is what Harriet Harman seem to be suggestion and she

has opened a can of worms. Hacked Off said it would be and come --

said it would be incompatible. I imagine the remarks would be

welcomed by most of the newspaper groups is a bit of an olive branch,

that the government doesn't want to drive through more changes and

statute -- sorry, that Labour does not want to. And that they will have

a sit down and talk about how this might work in the future. A vicar

camera is at risk of being criticised for not doing what he

promised to do -- David Cameron is criticised for not doing what he

parties and if it falls short, they will not be happy. It will take a

long time to short out under think we are some way from seeing the

final version. What is John Major up to? Talking about

final version. What is John Major up worms, lobbying in grenades and the

more like. Deliberately so? Apparently not, apparently being the

keyword. One of the key points of this speech the private constituency

dinner in Norfolk at the weekend was that we should carry out our battles

behind closed doors within the Conservative Party. We shouldn't

have these sorts of fights in public, as happened when he was

prime minister, there was constant infighting played out on television

and in the newspapers. He is saying it did not work then and it will not

work now. Low and behold his remarks were leaked to the Telegraph and

they are were leaked to the Telegraph and

Number ten? Public -- publicly they will be saying he is allowed to

intervene but what are they really thinking? It is interesting, they

know they have to appeal to the blue-collar, Aspar and working-class

voters, the sort of people who got John Major into Downing Street in

1992 -- aspirational. They will be conscious that there is probably

something in what John Major says and they need to reach out to new

groups of voters. What danger is the NHS crisis? Potentially cute but

however, they are prepared for it. In August -- potentially huge. The

government set out ?250 million to get through the winter because they

were anticipating a huge demand on the NHS. It is not helped that

Labour are pushing the NHS. It is not helped that

the Conservatives. Number ten are aware of it, worried about it but

they are prepared for it. They are hoping that they will be able to get

through the winter without some crisis exploding. Are you surprised

by the level of political involvement in an issue which is

supposed to run itself separate of political involvement? David Cameron

spent so long before the last election trying to neutralise it as

a political issue. To some extent he did. Absolutely but since then it

has been a different story. We have had NHS reforms which has caused a

coalition problem as well as a public one for David Cameron and he

could be in for a long, hard winter if there are A problems. Thank you

very much. It's a month since the Government

rolled out its controversial "Help to Buy" scheme, which guarantees

mortgages of up to 95% of the value of a property for those who can

afford the repayments but can't afford a large deposit. The

afford the repayments but can't Adam Shaw. Welcome to the programme.

How easy is it to find affordable housing in this country? Not very,

is what you will hear from a lot of people. As part of the programme we

asked its asked Mori to conduct a survey of just over 1000 adults,

asking them how much they spend on their housing and 31%, about a

third, said they spent around a third of their disposable income on

mortgage or rent. That is not just a number, it is very significant. If

you talk to organisations like the Joseph Rowntree foundation, they say

at precisely that point, housing becomes unaffordable. If you are

spending that much, you can't afford other basic needs. We speak to

people in the programme, people in employment who run out of food by

the end of the week, because they have no extra spare cash.

the end of the week, because they important to look at prices but also

to look at affordability. If you go out into the country, a lot of

people feel this is just unaffordable. On that issue, that is

why the government has been so proud of what it is calling a success with

Help to Buy, is it helping? This is a big question and not for a humble

reporter to give you the answer. I can give you the evidence so other

people can judge. Since it started, construction starts have gone up 6%.

There is little evidence that I can see it is because of Help to Buy,

but it certainly happened at that time. There are new figures about

the second round of Help to Buy, it shows people are interested now,

even more than in the first round. A lot of people say it could have the

opposite effect. Because if you are encouraging people, enabling people

to take out encouraging people, enabling people

time, you have encouraged the bonds of people to take it -- bunch of

people to take debt that they can afford now but not in the future. If

it is pushing up housing starts and prices, what you might be doing is

moving the affordability of homes, not closer to poorer people but

further away, because you are boosting demand without being able

to get supply up quickly enough. Joining me now are three people who

want to become MPs, God help them. Clarence Mitchell, who will be

fighting the Brighton Pavilion seat for the Conservatives, Rowenna

Davies, who is contesting Southampton Itchen for Labour and

Maajid Nawaz who will be the Lib Dem candidate in Hampstead Kilburn.

Welcome to the programme. Clarence Mitchell, what are the risks of this

fuelling another credit bust? We believe it is all about empowering

hard-working people to get onto believe it is all about empowering

independence and self-reliance and the aspiration in being able to own

their own home. We have heard the figures are working, Help to Buy is

delivering. Some 2000 access and is is in principle, three other than

?65 million in mortgage applications being processed -- 2000 accidents --

acceptances. I applaud the Conservatives for wanting to deal

with the housing crisis in this country. I don't think it is up to

the scale of the problem because of the housing supply shortage that we

have. At the moment, only ten of these deals have gone through. There

is a real problem that it will cause a housing bubble. The bubble was the

cause of a crash in the first place and that is exactly what we want to

avoid. Do and that is exactly what we want to

East when inflation is much higher foot I can't afford a home in London

and I am renting in London. The two problems are that house prices are

too high, and that what happens as a result is that rent prices are too

high. If you help people to buy, you increase the price of houses and

that means that more people cannot buy. We have to increase the supply

of housing. This government has built 190,000 new houses at Danny

Alexander has announced in the next Parliament, 3 billion will be

injected to build new houses. The other is to help people to buy

houses. The boy like me and most of us who can't afford houses in

London. This is the jilted generation -- people like me and

most of us who can't afford. Would you say it is a problem if all you

do is help people to pump up their mortgages, but you don't create

is the exact cause of the crisis. For generations, owning your own

home on a mortgage has been a great British aspiration, it gives people

hope for the future, it gives them an asset which increases in value.

Assets are increases in in the south-east but in some parts the

valuations have crashed. The rising economy, driven by the construction

sector, building new homes, will ultimately lead to a stability in

the market where there is more affordability. The crisis has been

decades in the making, it has not just happened during this

Parliament. One of my best is to get to the bottom of this while making

it affordable for people to buy homes. One of the ways suggested in

preventing a housing boom and bubble is for interest rates to go up

should they go up next year? If you raise them it has a knock-on effect

on people's mortgages and it can slow down

on people's mortgages and it can clearing up the mess of the last 13

years of economic mismanagement. Interest rates are independently set

but they should stay as low as possible for as long as possible, to

enable more people to have more money. Should they stay as low as

possible? The answer is to build more houses. Everyone is agreed but

it is the rate at which they are going to be built. The financial

policy committee is going to monitor this situation. We cannot renew this

policy until they give the green light for it. That is another safety

against the crisis. A quarter of people are trading up, they are not

first-time buyers, should those be the people you are helping, too?

Whelping the majority who it seems first-time buyers,

Whelping the majority who it seems available to people buying homes --

who are buying homes worth ?600,000. I home worth over half a million is

very unlikely to be bought by a hard-working family in this

country. Should it be valued up to ?600,000, it is a substantial amount

of money. In the south-east houses are overinflated in their value and

I think the solution is to drastically increase supply for

housing. Are the right people being help? People will say it is a bribe

to say, we will help you buy your home, vote Conservative or Lib Dem.

This is about helping young individuals who want to have their

own home and they can now make it possible because we can make the

deposit basis affordable. The safeguard is the financial policy

committee which will be monitoring to avoid that type of scenario and

it cannot be renewed until they give the go-ahead.

it cannot be renewed until they give and emergency units. Last week,

senior consultants said A departments were facing what may be

our worst winter yet. How big an issue is the NHS with your

constituents? It is huge. We have got Kilburn High Road which has, I

would say, a disproportionate amount of people who rely on the social

services. We have got a heavy immigrant population there. I have

used those clinics myself, I have depended on them. So they should not

have closed? No, I agree with the chair of the Association, who said,

the problem was, when the primary care trust areas were carved up,

these walk-in clinics were allocated arbitrarily in accordance with those

areas. What should have happened instead was

areas. What should have happened it was a mistake to close them? In

individual cases, I am sure there were good reasons why it happened.

Of course there is a need for people to have good quality A care. We

accept that. But there were some concerns about educational services

in some cases. But essentially, the Conservatives are working with NHS

England to make sure that services are tailored to the needs of the

local community. ?3.8 billion is being put towards a fund to join up

health and care services properly. Walk-in centres may be part of the

answer, that they are not a one size fits all solution. Family GPs and

pharmacists all play their part. Do you accept that Labour must take

response of validity for those GP contracts, which means there

response of validity for those GP contract which they had signed? We

are going to look at those contracts. But with these walk-in

centres being shut, one quarter of those people who would have gone to

those centres are going to end up in A The Conservatives will say that

perhaps there is educational services, but when I am in

Southampton, people say, I try and go to my GP, but I cannot get an

appointment, which is why those walk-in centres are so crucial. That

is why we want to expand the role of GPs, along with pharmacists. I have

tried to phone the GP in the morning, you are given a 15 minute

slot to make an appointment, and obviously, the phone is off the hook

constantly. GPs need to be incentivised to provide online,

telephone and flexible hours and service, but those contracts need to

be service, but those contracts need to

winter coming, but what about the problem at the other end of the

scale, which is that people are not being discharged properly, because

there is nowhere to discharge them to come particularly old people, and

this is clogging up the system in A? All of this needs to be looked

at. I have read the conclusions in this research, and also some of the

GP advice, and on the whole, I think it is sensible. I would encourage

the ministers to take a serious look at that and implement some of the

solutions, because they are quite sensible. Andy Burnham has said that

what we really need is the proper integration of health and social

care, and I think the parties need to get around the table and say, we

need a consensus on joining up the system. I think there is

need a consensus on joining up the indication from Labour not that they

do not like... ? My understanding, from speaking to Andy Burnham, is

that once particular contracts come to an end, they will not be renewed.

It is not like a full-scale dismantling of the system. What do

you say to people when you are speaking to them, why did we have

this top-down reorganisation, we did not vote for it? One of the few

policy areas which was ring fenced in terms of funding was the NHS. The

NHS is safe in Conservative hands. Have you seen the targets, have you

seen the waiting time lists, homely people are waiting in A? Process

and bureaucracy and some of the layers of management need to be

dealt with. We put patient care at the heart of everything we do.

dealt with. We put patient care at solution going forward? That would

be helpful. The problem is the confusion that these reforms have

caused. A lot of these walk-in clinics do not know what is going to

be happened to them. -- happening. Walk-in clinics are an important

area, but they are not a one size fits all solution. There are 650 of

them, and my guests will hope to join this prestigious grouping,

members of Parliament. But their path to power is not always smooth

as shown in Falkirk. So, how do you get selected? The process of

becoming an MP is a long one. Everybody must do battle with others

from their own party to get selected in the first place. In the

Conservatives under Liberal Democrats, you have to go through an

assessment process in order to get onto a centrally

elected by local party members, where the endorsement of a union

could improve your chances of success. But it is no guarantee.

Rowenna Davis, how did you get selected? By working really hard.

The selection process is essentially a two-month public interview. I got

on my bike and cycled around two Labour Party member after Labour

Party member, sat in their homes and listened to their hopes and their

fears, talked about what I believed in and stood for, went back and

wrote handwritten letters to them, hours and hours of campaigning in

the rain, until you build up to this massive hustings, where you have a

huge public debate and an election for the candidate in question. It

was a fantastic day, it is a really good example of old-fashioned

democracy more on that day. We have the highest turnout of any selection

democracy more on that day. We have constituents and to the

association. The associations are hypercritical about the people they

are going to have representing them in Parliament. It is absolutely

proper that you do come through this scrap to get there. I did my

Parliamentary assessment board back in 2009, and here I am, nearly six

years later, having gone through this process, and still standing.

You clearly all want it very badly, which is something, but how much

does it cost? For me, the only thing was the transport, knocking on every

single member's door. My constituency is the narrowest

marginal in the country. I had to knock on every member's door. First

time around, I failed. They selected somebody who then took a job

somewhere else and had to move out of the area, and I went for it

again. of the area, and I went for it

interests. They are not bedazzled by Star TV quality. And that is

something to be proud of. Because you have all got a public profile in

one way or another, so did that help, in some way? It is a help and

a hindrance. Every constituency wants a star, somebody who will

shine out, who will go on The Daily Politics and speak for them.

Indeed. But at the same time it can be a hindrance, because we know

there is a huge amount of suspicion in politics at the moment, and

stereotypes and suspicions about whether you have been centrally

parachuted in. You have to work very hard to say, no, actually, it is

just me and my bike. I would agree with that. Yes, in my case, Brighton

has got a media economy, it is a with that. Yes, in my case, Brighton

you are not in it for yourself. And Labour got into a mess in Falkirk.

Yes, and that proves that machine politics does not work. What works

is going door-to-door and earning the trust people individually. It is

quite interesting how far the Labour Party has gone in the wake of

Falkirk to change the way these processes are run. Introducing an

open primary for London is a massive thing. That is for the mayoralty,

and for some Parliamentary seats as well. What has happened to open

primary is? That was hailed as the great hope of politics and it has

gone. It has not gone, we have had Hampstead and things like that, it

was never going to completely take over. It is ultimately down to the

individual associations to run their contest the way they see fit. And

powers that be, that you get outspoken views wanted yes, the

powers that he can speak for themselves, but some associations

feel it is the right way forward, giving them a wider mandate, but

others are happy to stick to the traditional route, which is an

internal special general meeting, which votes on the candidates. In

terms of the people putting themselves forward, Conservative MP

Douglas Carswell said a tiny clique of people are entering politics, and

the Liberal Democrats are struggling particularly to get that range if

you like of ethnic minority candidates and women, so do you

agree with him? A lot more can be done, but here I am. I hope

hopefully I will be the first parliamentarian to speak fluent

Arabic, a lot is changing. parliamentarian to speak fluent

Politics quiz, and what has he had to apologise for, can you remember?

I cannot remember the exact amount, but well done for getting that

right. Are you worried about the thought of expenses rearing its ugly

head again? When I get a stable, I will worry about it. I think MPs

realise that there was a period when things were done within the rules

but for the wrong reasons, in the sense that they felt they were not

properly compensated. The way to go is what Sarah did, she paid for

everything herself, and hats to her for that. Thank you to all of my

guests today. I will be here again tomorrow. Bye-bye.