:00:40. > :00:47.Good afternoon, welcome to the Daily Politics. David Cameron says he will
:00:48. > :00:51.give you and me a say in our relationship with Europe. In the
:00:52. > :00:56.meantime he wants to renegotiate our membership and make the EU work
:00:57. > :01:01.better for Britain, but how is he going to do it? This morning, a
:01:02. > :01:04.group of MPs have given him a helping hand. They have published a
:01:05. > :01:09.wish list of powers they would like to see the Prime Minister claw-back?
:01:10. > :01:15.The Government thinks it can help with your energy bill. We will have
:01:16. > :01:19.the details. The return of grammar schools, getting tough on
:01:20. > :01:25.immigration and the futility of tackling inequality. Is this a true
:01:26. > :01:30.blueprint of a Boris led Britain? We will be measuring up some of the
:01:31. > :01:40.finest moustaches in Parliament, and removing them, all for a good cause.
:01:41. > :01:52.He is wasted in politics, he should be on the stage. Anyway, all of that
:01:53. > :01:59.coming up. With us for the duration, Lady of many talents, politician,
:02:00. > :02:06.writer, philosopher -- philosopher, dancing queen. It is Ann Widdecombe.
:02:07. > :02:11.Let's start with energy. The Government has begun looking at ways
:02:12. > :02:15.to cut the cost of bills. It is struggling to do so after Ed
:02:16. > :02:18.Miliband came out with his energy price freeze. David Cameron said
:02:19. > :02:25.recently he wanted to roll back on some of the green levies. They are
:02:26. > :02:31.added to our energy bills and the Government are trying to find ways
:02:32. > :02:33.to cut or remove them. Our deputy political editor has some details
:02:34. > :02:38.about what the ministers are looking at. Thank you for joining us. Only
:02:39. > :02:46.one more day with that thing under your nose. Tell us what the Prime
:02:47. > :02:52.Minister is looking at and is likely to do. It is not a done deal yet,
:02:53. > :02:56.there are different parties, different energy groups and policy.
:02:57. > :03:02.The framework is now quite clear. The biggest of these green levies,
:03:03. > :03:07.the so-called eco-scheme which gives three installation to people on low
:03:08. > :03:12.incomes, they are planning to extend it. Too implemented over a longer
:03:13. > :03:18.period of time. As a result of that, the cost on the energy company is
:03:19. > :03:24.about half, that will be quite a large saving, about ?25 off your
:03:25. > :03:30.average build. The warm homes discount will be taken out of
:03:31. > :03:33.people's energy bills and put into general taxation. They are looking
:03:34. > :03:38.at changing regulations that they can somehow reduce the fixed costs
:03:39. > :03:44.of transmitting energy around the country. The aim is to try and
:03:45. > :03:48.reduce people's bill by about ?50 annually. The Lib Dems are trying to
:03:49. > :03:53.see if they can beef up some other green schemes so overall it is
:03:54. > :03:57.carbon neutral. Is the Government trying to arrange with the energy
:03:58. > :04:01.companies that if it announces bills can come down by ?50, we will
:04:02. > :04:06.immediately see that reduction in the next bill? Yes, it is my
:04:07. > :04:12.understanding that the Government expect on the day they announced
:04:13. > :04:16.that -- this deal, they expect all the six big energy companies to
:04:17. > :04:21.publish letters to the Government making clear their intention to cut
:04:22. > :04:24.their bills. There is a lot of choreography in this and they're
:04:25. > :04:27.expecting at all to happen at the same time. The political aim of the
:04:28. > :04:32.Government is to neutralise this as an issue so they have something to
:04:33. > :04:35.say in the cost of living debate, so that when they move on to say in the
:04:36. > :04:40.cost of living debate, so that when they move onto the Chancellor's
:04:41. > :04:45.Autumn statement they can focus I understand it has been indicated to
:04:46. > :04:49.you, whereas we thought this would be part of the Chancellor's Autumn
:04:50. > :04:55.statement next Thursday, that it is going to come out before the autumn
:04:56. > :05:01.statement? That is what they hope to do. We know the Prime Minister is
:05:02. > :05:05.travelling abroad. We know time is running out ahead of the Autumn
:05:06. > :05:10.statement. They have not actually agreed this deal yet. There is a
:05:11. > :05:15.huge amount of technical information and policy they have to get right.
:05:16. > :05:20.If they can announce it in advance, they will do so. They have a
:05:21. > :05:25.strategic incentive to do so. Talk about the cost of living before the
:05:26. > :05:29.statement so on the Autumn statement itself they can stick to the big
:05:30. > :05:34.message which is, we hope things are getting better but there is more to
:05:35. > :05:36.do. It paves the way for them to make that kind of argument. Thank
:05:37. > :05:54.you very much. Is this the way the Government
:05:55. > :05:59.should be going? Is this an adequate riposte to Ed Miliband's price
:06:00. > :06:05.freeze? It is certainly a move in the right direction. If you put
:06:06. > :06:11.green levies on, the cost has to be met. It was always obvious the
:06:12. > :06:18.consumer would have to meet them. If we finally get rid of the green
:06:19. > :06:21.fixation in favour of looking at what is sensible and affordable for
:06:22. > :06:29.individuals, that has got to be a big bonus. There are more green
:06:30. > :06:37.taxes. The average bill at the moment is around 110 -?120 worth of
:06:38. > :06:43.green levies. It looks like the Lib Dems are digging their heels in.
:06:44. > :06:46.What the Conservative part of the coalition has to do is make it clear
:06:47. > :06:51.to the general public that their bills could be even lower, were it
:06:52. > :06:57.not for the antics of the junior partners in the coalition. This is a
:06:58. > :07:03.conservative Prime Minister who promised vote blue, go green. I
:07:04. > :07:07.think it was a most unnecessary emphasis in view of the economy we
:07:08. > :07:12.had inherited, in view of the uncertainty around the science of
:07:13. > :07:16.climate change. If we are taking action now, that is plenty of time
:07:17. > :07:23.for people to feel the effects of it. If the Lib Dems are stopping us
:07:24. > :07:26.taking even more action to relieve the strain on households, that is
:07:27. > :07:33.something we should all know in time for the next election. Something we
:07:34. > :07:40.all look forward to. The question for today is what have I went to
:07:41. > :07:48.police spent more than ?13,000 on in an attempt to deter crime? -- Gwent
:07:49. > :07:56.Police. 2000 specialist tripwires? 2000 and truncheons? Ten portable
:07:57. > :08:02.mini-cameras worn by local cats? Or are 50 to cut out police officers?
:08:03. > :08:09.At the end of the show, Ann will give us the correct answer. That is
:08:10. > :08:21.interesting, isn't it? I think I know. Keep it to yourself. I will, I
:08:22. > :08:28.might be wrong. W.W.M.D.N, any idea what it stands for? It is, what
:08:29. > :08:33.would Maggie do now? It seems to be a question increasingly asked by
:08:34. > :08:38.conservative on questions on Europe, tax and education. Last night the
:08:39. > :08:43.question was raised by Boris Johnson. In a speech guaranteed to
:08:44. > :08:47.ruffle feathers in Downing Street, Boris bemoaned the UK's lack of
:08:48. > :08:52.social mobility and says Maggie would have tackled that by bringing
:08:53. > :08:59.back grammar schools. Where she here now, I hope she would make wider use
:09:00. > :09:02.of that most powerful utensil of academic improvement. And that is
:09:03. > :09:11.academic competition between children themselves. Is that an
:09:12. > :09:16.unthinkable thing to say? Is it? It is not. I remember sitting in a
:09:17. > :09:20.meeting of the Tory Shadow on team and listening with disbelief to a
:09:21. > :09:24.convert -- a conversation where everyone agreed it would be madness
:09:25. > :09:28.to bring back the grammar schools. I happen to know most of the people in
:09:29. > :09:33.that room were about to make use, as parents, of some of the most
:09:34. > :09:39.viciously selective schools in the country. I maybe wrong, but I hope
:09:40. > :09:42.she would find a way use that device and help children everywhere
:09:43. > :09:50.overcome their background. Even if I am wrong, I feel she would direct
:09:51. > :09:56.maternal and terrifying devotion upon Michael Gove and everything he
:09:57. > :10:03.does. Boris Johnson, never boring. Is he right on grammar schools? Yes,
:10:04. > :10:08.he is 100% right. In the days when we had grammar schools all over the
:10:09. > :10:12.country, there was no problem about the number of state school pupils
:10:13. > :10:17.who got into Oxbridge. Grammar schools used to compete very
:10:18. > :10:20.successfully. Since the abolition of grammar schools, parents feel, and I
:10:21. > :10:24.know this because I represented a constituency which had grammar
:10:25. > :10:29.schools and they used to fight like lions if ever there was a suggestion
:10:30. > :10:33.that a political party would do away with grammar schools. Parents want
:10:34. > :10:37.their children to get on, if they cannot afford to buy that, they want
:10:38. > :10:42.the state to supply the same standard of excellence. Did David
:10:43. > :10:44.Cameron must calculate the difficulty of bringing his party
:10:45. > :10:49.with him when he decided not to bring back grammar schools? I think
:10:50. > :10:57.he understood he was not in tune with the rest of the party. He was
:10:58. > :11:01.trying to be practical. Of course, he was right that he could not
:11:02. > :11:04.reinstate grammar schools all over the country. But he should have
:11:05. > :11:08.said, where a local authority wants to build a new grammar school, we
:11:09. > :11:13.will go along with that. That was the crucial step he missed. He said
:11:14. > :11:17.when he became leader that old grammar school policy had been a
:11:18. > :11:22.chain around our necks. What he wrong? Totally. Grammar schools
:11:23. > :11:28.allow children from modest backgrounds to be able to get out of
:11:29. > :11:35.that and get on, if they are able. But there will not be a reversal of
:11:36. > :11:38.that policy? I do not want David Cameron to blandly say, we will
:11:39. > :11:43.introduce grammar schools in every town. I want him to say, whether
:11:44. > :11:49.local authorities want to introduce grammar schools, we will not stand
:11:50. > :11:53.in their way. Let's have a look at Boris and the motivation for the
:11:54. > :11:57.speech. Always entertaining, but some of the things he said were
:11:58. > :12:04.deliberately provocative. Were they just cheap, easy remarks? He is
:12:05. > :12:09.saying things that a lot of politicians would not dare to say.
:12:10. > :12:13.Effectively, what he said in that speech was, there are some very
:12:14. > :12:19.clever people. Most of the population fall in between them and
:12:20. > :12:22.the very stupid people. And those who are academically challenged,
:12:23. > :12:27.will not find it as easy to get on as a very bright people. I cannot
:12:28. > :12:32.see what he said that the rest of us could not have worked out at the age
:12:33. > :12:39.of about eight or nine. What has he said that is so remarkable? On that
:12:40. > :12:43.point, that clip we showed where he said he sat around the table with
:12:44. > :12:47.the Shadow Tory education team where they were solemnly declaring you
:12:48. > :12:52.could not possibly continue with grammar schools, yet there they were
:12:53. > :12:59.sending their children to body called viciously selective schools.
:13:00. > :13:03.Is he right? Yes, but it also happens with Labour cabinets. They
:13:04. > :13:08.send their children to public schools, they move and send them to
:13:09. > :13:13.the best schools in the country. If you are Tony Blair, you send them
:13:14. > :13:16.across London to a chosen school. I do not think there is anything
:13:17. > :13:23.unique about that particular set of ministers. But it shows a level of
:13:24. > :13:28.hypocrisy? It shows a level of we liked one thing, but we are going to
:13:29. > :13:33.do another because it is the best thing for our children. He is right
:13:34. > :13:36.about Margaret Thatcher, because one of her big initiatives was to
:13:37. > :13:39.introduce the assisted places scheme meaning children from poorer
:13:40. > :13:47.backgrounds could go to independent schools. We will leave it there.
:13:48. > :13:52.David Cameron wants to give you a say on our membership of the
:13:53. > :13:56.European Union. Not before he has attempted to renegotiate that
:13:57. > :14:00.membership. What should he be trying to change? This morning a group of
:14:01. > :14:06.MPs calling themselves the Fresh Start Group have published
:14:07. > :14:15.the group's plans are set out in what they have called a mandate for
:14:16. > :14:20.reform. It argues the status quo in Britain's relationship for the EU is
:14:21. > :14:24.no longer an option. There is backing for the call to limit
:14:25. > :14:30.benefits for EU migrants. Member states must be able to decide who
:14:31. > :14:34.can access their welfare. The reach of the EU and its institutions
:14:35. > :14:39.should be scaled back. Reference in the EE treaties for an ever closer
:14:40. > :14:43.union should be removed. In one area there is a call for greater
:14:44. > :14:48.co-operation. There should be a new legal safeguard to inhibit any
:14:49. > :14:55.measure for a legal safeguard for the single market. Member states
:14:56. > :15:00.should we gain complete control of social and employment law. The UK
:15:01. > :15:03.should opt out of all policing and criminal justice rules. The
:15:04. > :15:06.fisheries policy should be regionalised and control of
:15:07. > :15:11.territorial waters should be returned to their member states.
:15:12. > :15:16.There should also be a new red card system to allow national parliaments
:15:17. > :15:19.to block proposed EU rules. The Prime Minister heads to a summit
:15:20. > :15:26.today on Eastern European cooperation. He might be hoping for
:15:27. > :15:32.a bit of that in his renegotiation. Our correspondent is there. Is there
:15:33. > :15:36.any talk of a reaction to his attempts in his campaign to try and
:15:37. > :15:44.renegotiate Britain's relationship with the rest of the EU? People are
:15:45. > :15:49.mostly aware of what was said yesterday, cracking down on welfare
:15:50. > :15:53.tourism, the idea of having a discussion about the impact of
:15:54. > :15:57.freedom of movement within the European Union. I have heard a
:15:58. > :16:01.couple of comments about that. People understand the need to make
:16:02. > :16:05.sure that people do not abuse the system. What a reappraisal of the
:16:06. > :16:11.entire philosophical principle of freedom of movement, that will be a
:16:12. > :16:16.tougher nut to crack. The Prime Minister will raise the issue this
:16:17. > :16:19.evening. He has to be careful. This is a summit about Eastern Europe and
:16:20. > :16:24.he does not want to sound like a broken record. He will say that we
:16:25. > :16:28.support enlargement, a broader rather than deeper European Union,
:16:29. > :16:33.but within the context of other poorer countries coming in, there
:16:34. > :16:39.has to be a proper policy to enable people to move between one country
:16:40. > :16:41.and another. This is not a summit particularly lending itself to what
:16:42. > :16:48.David Cameron would like to talk about. On the other issues of
:16:49. > :16:56.renegotiating powers, will you have an opportunity to raise that? I
:16:57. > :17:02.doubt it will be done in any significant degree, no. This is a
:17:03. > :17:07.long-term process. He will start to set things out, particularly on the
:17:08. > :17:12.issue of free movement. He knows this is difficult territory. He is
:17:13. > :17:15.caught between the minimum that many of his backbenchers would be
:17:16. > :17:21.prepared to accept, and the maximum that many other people in Europe may
:17:22. > :17:24.be prepared to offer. It may be a difficult process. It is only just
:17:25. > :17:31.beginning. This is one of a series of summits. I do not think that this
:17:32. > :17:36.is the specific time to go into all that detail, because other people
:17:37. > :17:41.would simply switch off. He has to make a show for his domestic
:17:42. > :17:48.audience. The leadership make much of Angela Merkel's listening mode.
:17:49. > :17:56.What about her social Democrat colleagues in coalition? Are they
:17:57. > :18:00.cooler on the idea? Yes, they are. Angela Merkel clearly wants to help
:18:01. > :18:05.David Cameron. She does not want Britain to leave the European Union.
:18:06. > :18:11.If he can -- she can help them, she will do that. If you look across the
:18:12. > :18:17.spectrum of German politics, most of the main parties are in favour of
:18:18. > :18:21.the EU. If you said to the average social Democrat in Germany, what
:18:22. > :18:27.about giving Germany control over social and employment policy? What
:18:28. > :18:31.about reassessing the entire principle of freedom of movement?
:18:32. > :18:38.They will say, not on your Nelly. That is a big problem. This new
:18:39. > :18:45.coalition government in Germany, still led by Angela Merkel, but with
:18:46. > :18:50.a strong element in it which is more pro-European and less inclined to do
:18:51. > :18:53.David Cameron a favour. With us now is Andrea Leadsom - one of those
:18:54. > :18:57.Conservative MPs who leads the Fresh Start Group - and Claude Moraes, a
:18:58. > :19:02.Labour Member of the European Parliament.
:19:03. > :19:09.Andrea Leadsom, let me come to you first, let me try to flesh out the
:19:10. > :19:16.strategy, is it your intention that Britain should renegotiate these
:19:17. > :19:19.powers for itself, or that all of the members of the European Union
:19:20. > :19:28.should have these powers repatriated? This mandate is about
:19:29. > :19:32.making the EU globally competitive. Obviously Britain wants a better
:19:33. > :19:35.deal. In getting a better deal it creates a better, stronger, more
:19:36. > :19:41.flexible, more democratically accountable European Union. That is
:19:42. > :19:46.what all Europeans want. What is the answer to my question? We are not
:19:47. > :19:52.just trying to get a better deal for Britain. The EU has a crisis of
:19:53. > :19:56.competitiveness. It is going nowhere. This is about trying to
:19:57. > :20:02.take leadership, to focus on getting a better deal for the EU. If there
:20:03. > :20:09.really is not an appetite for repatriation across the EU on this
:20:10. > :20:16.scale, would it still be Britain's intention to repatriate on this
:20:17. > :20:21.scale unilaterally? You see, this is not about repatriation. This is
:20:22. > :20:24.about reform of the EU. Under the headings of global competitiveness,
:20:25. > :20:31.urging the EU to do more to negotiate free-trade. Your questions
:20:32. > :20:36.are not the right ones. That may be because you cannot answer them. Not
:20:37. > :20:42.at all. I'm happy to answer your questions. This is about reform of
:20:43. > :20:45.the EU on the headings of creating greater global competitiveness, more
:20:46. > :20:52.flexibility and far greater democratic accountability. It's
:20:53. > :20:56.repatriating control over social and employment policy, it is opting out
:20:57. > :21:09.from policing and Criminal Justice Act it is taking back the CAP. They
:21:10. > :21:17.are all repatriation. It looks like repatriation. The point is that the
:21:18. > :21:25.EU share of global trade is in steep decline. I know all that. The EU
:21:26. > :21:31.needs to focus on how it can become globally competitive. Supposing the
:21:32. > :21:36.rest of the EU doesn't share your analysis. It may agree that it is
:21:37. > :21:40.becoming less competitive, but it does not think this is the way to go
:21:41. > :21:48.to make it more competitive, would it be Britain's intention to demand
:21:49. > :21:57.and take back these powers? We cannot do that unilaterally. That is
:21:58. > :22:04.what I am trying to find out. The fresh group of spent a lot of time
:22:05. > :22:08.travelling to Europe. European taxpayers and voters are keen on
:22:09. > :22:17.reform. What is the answer to my question? Do we proceed unilaterally
:22:18. > :22:24.if we cannot get a European majority for this, or don't we? The answer is
:22:25. > :22:28.that we will continue to propose EU reform. And in the event that we get
:22:29. > :22:37.nowhere, I suspect the people in 2017, will make their decision. What
:22:38. > :22:43.we cannot do is to remain in the EU. I see your questions are not the
:22:44. > :22:48.right ones, because we cannot simply unilaterally change all sorts of
:22:49. > :22:56.things. Let me try one more time. If the European Union generally says
:22:57. > :23:00.there is no broad appetite to go this far down the repatriation rued
:23:01. > :23:04.the way Britain wants to go, so do not count us in, will Britain
:23:05. > :23:09.attempt to repatriate these powers for itself? I'm not saying just walk
:23:10. > :23:17.out, will be attempts to repatriate these powers? We cannot. We cannot
:23:18. > :23:23.do it. This is a mandate for the reform of the EU. Not Britain's
:23:24. > :23:30.relationship with the EU. Would we don't go and say that Britain may
:23:31. > :23:34.not want to repay your -- and say, you may not want to repatriate these
:23:35. > :23:41.powers, but we want to? We cannot do that? We can do that. Unless all of
:23:42. > :23:48.Europe signed up to this, we cannot repatriate. The whole premise is
:23:49. > :23:53.wrong. This is not take it or leave it. This is several different areas,
:23:54. > :24:01.looking how to create a more successful European Union. Is Labour
:24:02. > :24:07.interested in repatriating powers? No, we are interested in reform.
:24:08. > :24:11.That is very different. This needs unanimity in many areas are majority
:24:12. > :24:19.in some areas. To be fair to Andrea, some of this document we would agree
:24:20. > :24:24.with. Some of it we would not agree with. It is a reform document. But
:24:25. > :24:35.it is not a negotiation in terms of a unilateral negotiation. Reform is
:24:36. > :24:38.an honest position. What reform is, is that you make your case with the
:24:39. > :24:43.rest of the members of the European Union. If you go to a referendum you
:24:44. > :24:49.make the case for Europe. You argue that case with the British public.
:24:50. > :24:56.You negotiate with your European partners. You do not make a
:24:57. > :25:00.unilateral case. Pretending to the British public that when you need
:25:01. > :25:04.unanimity, you don't. You did ask the right questions. We may go into
:25:05. > :25:09.a referendum sink to the British people, we can get these things,
:25:10. > :25:13.when in fact we cannot get them. The track record so far is that our
:25:14. > :25:26.European partners are saying, we're indifferent to this. I need to ask
:25:27. > :25:29.you another question. If it is the Labour approach that you want an
:25:30. > :25:33.overarching reform of the European Union, then you will have to get
:25:34. > :25:38.everybody to the table. That will take years. There is no prospect of
:25:39. > :25:43.that kind of reform this decade. That is happening right now. That is
:25:44. > :25:49.happening on the CAP right now. You have rolled your eyes on this many
:25:50. > :25:54.times. You are doing it now. Let me just tell you, and before you start
:25:55. > :26:01.as well, and, we started CAP reform. The point is we do it right
:26:02. > :26:07.now. You have to do it with your partners. One of the dangers of this
:26:08. > :26:10.is that -- is that if you misrepresent reform, you cannot do
:26:11. > :26:17.it with your partners. I resurrect death -- represent London. You have
:26:18. > :26:25.to work with your partners. We know all that. Can we just keep clear
:26:26. > :26:30.heads? There are only two ways that you can get this sort of reform. One
:26:31. > :26:36.is if everybody does agree. It would be a jolly good thing for the EU of
:26:37. > :26:40.that was the way. Second thing, new treaty, opt outs for Britain. I
:26:41. > :26:46.would say those are unlikely. Let us assume something did, this. This is
:26:47. > :26:51.crucial. That in 2017, Cameron comes to the country and says, I have got
:26:52. > :26:54.you a new deal. We will know what the scenario is for staying in.
:26:55. > :26:58.Nobody is telling us what the scenario is telling us what the
:26:59. > :27:05.scenarios for coming out. There is no work being done on other trading
:27:06. > :27:12.relations would be etc. I want an evenhanded referendum. I put it to
:27:13. > :27:18.you, Andrea Leadsom, there is no prospect of all of Europe agreeing
:27:19. > :27:24.to all of this by 2017? And I would completely disagree with you there.
:27:25. > :27:30.In fact, on various trips to European capitals, there is a huge
:27:31. > :27:33.appetite across the EU for reform. This is a set of very logically
:27:34. > :27:43.argued, carefully we searched reform ideas. There is support from some
:27:44. > :27:50.countries for some reforms. You definitely need a mechanism by which
:27:51. > :27:53.the EU can be prominently reformed. To get that, Andrea, you have to
:27:54. > :27:59.engage in Europe. This kind of exercise, if I could say, the way we
:28:00. > :28:05.are disengaging, is not helping us do what you are saying in this
:28:06. > :28:11.document. These kinds of reformers want us to engage in Europe and
:28:12. > :28:17.reform that way. That is the honest way to do it. To do it within the
:28:18. > :28:19.structures we have got now and to be honest with the British people about
:28:20. > :28:26.how we have got now and to be honest with the British people about how
:28:27. > :28:36.we're reforming... When you need unanimity and majority... What one
:28:37. > :28:43.policy could you get a majority on? There are all sorts of non-treaty
:28:44. > :28:51.reforms proposed. Getting out of Strasbourg, you need a treaty
:28:52. > :28:57.change. Structural fund reform, to fundamentally change structural
:28:58. > :29:00.fund, to change free movement of labour, some member states could
:29:01. > :29:06.have their own decisions about how to treat access to benefits. For
:29:07. > :29:10.example, those things could be done without unanimity. But what I really
:29:11. > :29:14.want to say here is there it is now a unique moment in history for
:29:15. > :29:17.reform. That is because of the eurozone crisis. The compulsion for
:29:18. > :29:22.eurozone member states to go towards greater fiscal union, means they
:29:23. > :29:28.need things to change. It is not really a question of can we achieve
:29:29. > :29:34.reform? It will be a case of what we can achieve and by when. It is for
:29:35. > :29:39.every member of this country to make their own decision. But the point
:29:40. > :29:46.is, there is a unique opportunity for reform and Europe is up for
:29:47. > :29:51.reform. We will see. If I had 100 quid for every time a politician
:29:52. > :29:58.told me Europe was up for reform, we could be doing this from Barbados!
:29:59. > :30:10.What happens if they are not up for reform? You made that point already.
:30:11. > :30:15.We have now added in stereo! Yesterday David Cameron said, it is
:30:16. > :30:21.something I am not fully capable of myself. He was talking about growing
:30:22. > :30:26.a moustache. He said the chamber was full of members who were suddenly
:30:27. > :30:30.resembling bandits. Why, you might ask? For the past month men around
:30:31. > :30:36.the world have been growing or attempting to grow some fine plumage
:30:37. > :30:41.on their upper lip for the charity Movember. In a moment we will be
:30:42. > :30:44.meeting three of them. But first we sent Adam Fleming to meet some of
:30:45. > :31:03.Westminster's finest moustaches. I am glad it does not show all that
:31:04. > :31:08.much. I actually do not like it, but it is for a good cause. My father
:31:09. > :31:12.died of prostate cancers though I do what I can to ensure other people do
:31:13. > :31:25.not suffer from this dreadful disease.
:31:26. > :31:30.You have actually been on the Daily Politics with your moustache, was a
:31:31. > :31:36.different being on the programme with a moustache? Having a moustache
:31:37. > :31:44.changes your life, especially going on television. You get so many
:31:45. > :31:46.interesting comments on Twitter. Someone said I looked like a 1970s
:31:47. > :32:07.pawn star. I tried growing a real moustache
:32:08. > :32:12.once, it did not work but I was determined to do something dramatic.
:32:13. > :32:17.I have raised over ?500 for prostate cancer just by tweeting that I would
:32:18. > :32:22.wear a false moustache. Mr Speaker was very kind. He gave me some very
:32:23. > :32:29.odd looks. I think I will wear better off now. Did that hurt? Not
:32:30. > :32:41.really, no. What an image. With that is now a
:32:42. > :32:45.trio of moustaches and their owners. Conservative MP George
:32:46. > :32:53.Freeman, John Woodcock and Roger Williams. We have gone across the
:32:54. > :33:01.parties. John, do you think uses your moustache? I have been told,
:33:02. > :33:08.almost universally know. My wife is watching today, making sure it comes
:33:09. > :33:13.off. She is absolutely repulsed by. You get grudging admiration from
:33:14. > :33:21.male friends. Not from the ladies. Absolutely. What about responses for
:33:22. > :33:29.you? I have tried many styles, this is the most successful. I do get
:33:30. > :33:33.admiration. I am pleased to say we have our viewers from Scotland
:33:34. > :33:38.joining us. At least they will not miss out on this wonderful display
:33:39. > :33:43.of moustaches. George, what about your question yesterday, you raised
:33:44. > :33:47.it with the Prime Minister? It is a great campaign, but there is a very
:33:48. > :33:55.important point. Prostate cancer is a silent killer. Movember has done
:33:56. > :34:00.something extraordinary. This is now the world's biggest prostate charity
:34:01. > :34:05.and my question was highlighting the change, the power of social media
:34:06. > :34:10.and I have a ten minute rule Bill honoured this week. It is a big
:34:11. > :34:16.revolution in medicine and the NHS have got to adapt to it. Is it still
:34:17. > :34:22.a taboo talking about prostate cancer? We are still trying to alter
:34:23. > :34:26.the culture that men have in talking about problems with their
:34:27. > :34:31.waterworks. Particularly going to doctors and talking about these
:34:32. > :34:38.issues. My advice is, go to your doctor, it might save your life. It
:34:39. > :34:43.is nice to see Movember now linking with mental health. Men are not good
:34:44. > :34:49.about talking about it. Has it actually raised awareness? That is
:34:50. > :34:53.the extraordinary thing about this charity, it has such a high profile
:34:54. > :34:57.and people see it all around the country. They may not start an
:34:58. > :35:02.explicit conversation about prostate cancer, but it has opened things up.
:35:03. > :35:08.I have learned so much more this month about it. This is one of the
:35:09. > :35:15.areas where the girls are ahead of us. This year I organised a virtual
:35:16. > :35:19.wall of support and got a lot of support from Parliamentary female
:35:20. > :35:23.colleagues. Women have been better at talking about their health care
:35:24. > :35:30.with each other, and many to catch up. Ann, what do you think of the
:35:31. > :35:41.campaign and the moustaches? Off with them! Ann is not a fan of
:35:42. > :35:49.facial hair at all. I am keeping mine until the end of the month.
:35:50. > :35:54.Have you done it before? I have done it quite a lot of times, but I was
:35:55. > :36:01.looking forward to a proper shave today, but I guess we are not having
:36:02. > :36:05.that and it is a disappointment. I am a Movember virgin. But I can
:36:06. > :36:13.would urge everyone, you can go to the website and donate every -- and
:36:14. > :36:17.donate now into December. Thank you very much. I think we will see a
:36:18. > :36:21.couple of you later on. Stage two and until the end of the show
:36:22. > :36:28.because Roger and John will be back, we have a little surprise in store.
:36:29. > :36:35.It will be interesting. I saw the Barbara's hand and it was
:36:36. > :36:48.shaking. Now, recent scandals such as the
:36:49. > :36:56.blacklisting of construction workers, LIBOR ringing and the midst
:36:57. > :36:59.NHS Foundation Trust as -- Mid Staffordshire foundation trust has
:37:00. > :37:08.shocked us all. A group of experts have urged the Government to give
:37:09. > :37:12.people confidence to speak out. One member of the Commissioners Gary
:37:13. > :37:16.Walker, the former chief executive of a Lincolnshire hospital and he
:37:17. > :37:20.spoke out about the culture of what he called sheer bullying in the NHS
:37:21. > :37:27.in an appearance before the Health Select Committee this year. In
:37:28. > :37:32.essence, there was clearly a lot of pressure to deliver the targets. It
:37:33. > :37:42.was a case of, this is going to reflect on me as an individual. At
:37:43. > :37:47.the same time, I am asking for help. This sort of situation escalates as
:37:48. > :37:55.we go through this. As the hospitals become awful, more threats are made.
:37:56. > :38:00.In the context of the culture of the NHS where you cannot speak out
:38:01. > :38:05.without fear of actions being taken towards you, you certainly cannot
:38:06. > :38:11.fail to hit the targets without threats being made to you. That was
:38:12. > :38:15.Gary Walker and he joins us in the studio. Give us a brief summary
:38:16. > :38:21.about what happened with your experiences as a whistle-blower? In
:38:22. > :38:27.2009 I blew the whistle on patient safety concerns. As a result of
:38:28. > :38:33.that, a number of events happened in terms of victimising and bullying
:38:34. > :38:38.me. Who was doing that? People above me, health authorities and others.
:38:39. > :38:43.They did not like that you had pulled back a cover to see what was
:38:44. > :38:48.going on? It was exposing things that would make it difficult for
:38:49. > :38:53.them in their roles. As we have seen from the Commissioners report today,
:38:54. > :38:56.people are more concerned with protecting the reputations of
:38:57. > :39:00.organisations and that can be at the expense of whistle-blowers. What had
:39:01. > :39:09.you attempted to do before you became a whistle-blower? In terms of
:39:10. > :39:13.leading up to that. Most whistle-blowers raise a concern, no
:39:14. > :39:19.one listens to them. They raise at a second time and no one listens to
:39:20. > :39:24.them. Most give up at that point. You went public, what then happened
:39:25. > :39:31.to you? I was then dismissed for some other reasons which we probably
:39:32. > :39:34.cannot go into. Then there was an arrangement made where the NHS paid
:39:35. > :39:40.hundreds of thousands of pounds buying my silence. I agreed to sign
:39:41. > :39:46.that compromise deal, as it was called at the time, because I owed
:39:47. > :39:50.money. Then about one year later, when the Francis Report came out and
:39:51. > :39:57.the Prime Minister got on the podium and said, no one was to blame. I
:39:58. > :40:02.thought, I know that is not the case. And so I decided to break my
:40:03. > :40:07.gagging order. It was a risk and I was threatened with being sued. As
:40:08. > :40:12.you saw in the clip, I had to appear in front of the Parliamentary select
:40:13. > :40:18.committee. Their verdict, which came out last month, was it was wrong of
:40:19. > :40:22.the NHS to threaten to sue me. Is it your opinion they went to these
:40:23. > :40:27.lengths against you, not just a close you down, but to intimidate
:40:28. > :40:32.any prospective whistle-blowers? I think the culture in the NHS, from
:40:33. > :40:39.what we have seen in Mid Staffordshire, the Francis Report,
:40:40. > :40:42.surveys over the years, staff are typically frightened to speak out.
:40:43. > :40:48.There have been various campaigns this year from various magazines to
:40:49. > :40:53.get staff to speak out. Jeremy Hunt has gone on record to say he wants
:40:54. > :41:00.to change the culture and has written to all organisations to say,
:41:01. > :41:05.you cannot gag anybody any more. In what way with these
:41:06. > :41:09.recommendations... What are the most important one that would, in your
:41:10. > :41:13.opinion, make a difference for someone in your position a couple of
:41:14. > :41:19.beers ago? If they had been implemented at the time, what
:41:20. > :41:25.difference would it have made? The report sets out a code. It is not an
:41:26. > :41:27.internal code of conduct, it is a code of practice we are hoping the
:41:28. > :41:34.Government will adopt and will become legally binding. It is a
:41:35. > :41:37.series of actions and organisation must take to prove they are open and
:41:38. > :41:43.honest in encouraging staff to speak out. Then they would have to report
:41:44. > :41:47.that publicly, what concerns were raised and action taken. If they
:41:48. > :41:53.were not doing that, we are recommending that regulators
:41:54. > :41:59.intervene and potentially take away their license to practice. If you
:42:00. > :42:02.are a hospital, should you be providing care if you cannot prove
:42:03. > :42:08.that you are encouraging people to is they -- to speak up about safety?
:42:09. > :42:15.Would it have stopped you from being fired? It would have made an open
:42:16. > :42:19.and transparent culture. I think it probably would have meant there was
:42:20. > :42:23.some honesty in the system, rather than people trying to cover their
:42:24. > :42:29.own backs. Ann, where are you on this? I think it is very important
:42:30. > :42:34.that people are allowed to complain internally. If people complain
:42:35. > :42:38.internally and are ignored, they should all be able to complain
:42:39. > :42:43.without sanction to the regulator concern. If they are still ignored,
:42:44. > :42:48.I think it is a question for them if they want to go public. Certainly,
:42:49. > :42:56.there should never be a bribe involved. A gagging arrangement is
:42:57. > :43:02.often a bribe. The problem is, if you say no more, a lot of very
:43:03. > :43:05.innocent people may go on suffering. The National Audit Office looked up
:43:06. > :43:09.all of these gagging orders and said there were thousands. There were so
:43:10. > :43:14.many that they could not look at all of them. We know historically that
:43:15. > :43:22.Lott has been covered up, but we do not know what is in that. Will the
:43:23. > :43:26.Government accept your code? We have had indications this is welcome. The
:43:27. > :43:34.level that the Government are interested in, it is not a wholesale
:43:35. > :43:38.change of the law. The law just needs tightening up and we are
:43:39. > :43:44.making recommendations about that. You need to go back to the basic
:43:45. > :43:48.problem. The basic problem is when a whistle-blower blows the whistle, it
:43:49. > :43:52.becomes all about the whistle-blower's actions and
:43:53. > :43:57.conduct. Did they do it in good faith? Even when you get to court,
:43:58. > :44:02.the question is all about the law of how the whistle-blower acted. Even
:44:03. > :44:07.the tribunal is not interested in what it was actually about. The
:44:08. > :44:14.corruption, the wrongdoing, whatever it is. This code is saying, this is
:44:15. > :44:19.the responsibility of organisations. If you are a Board of Directors, it
:44:20. > :44:24.is your responsibility to make sure your organisation is being open and
:44:25. > :44:30.honest. If there is a whistle-blower out there in the NHS now, before
:44:31. > :44:34.this code has come in, wondering what to do. Would the NHS treat them
:44:35. > :44:40.now any differently from the way they treated you? There is probably
:44:41. > :44:47.a good chance of that on the basis of the publicity. But it should be
:44:48. > :44:51.as a matter of course. I think it probably depends what they are
:44:52. > :44:55.raising concerns about. If they are raising concerns which are likely to
:44:56. > :45:00.reflect badly on the board of an organisation, they might find it is
:45:01. > :45:07.not necessarily in their interest and they may need to blow the
:45:08. > :45:10.whistle to an outside regulator. It is an interesting story and we are
:45:11. > :45:15.going to keep an eye on this. Thank you for explaining. Tomorrow, Nick
:45:16. > :45:17.Clegg is expected to put some more flesh on the bones of the
:45:18. > :45:21.Government's plans to increase the flexibility of parental leave. It's
:45:22. > :45:25.an aim of all the main parties - it was in the original Coalition
:45:26. > :45:33.Agreement - but so far the actual details have been a bit sketchy.
:45:34. > :45:37.That's something that concerns small businesses - and some Tory MPs - who
:45:38. > :45:41.worry that ministers may go too far in allowing mums and dads to switch
:45:42. > :45:45.between who stays home, and who goes back to work in the early months of
:45:46. > :45:47.their children's lives. It's a balance which is dividing opinion
:45:48. > :45:52.among the Coalition's backbench troops, as David Thompson has been
:45:53. > :45:56.finding out. To modern dads, to modern party
:45:57. > :46:01.leaders committed to giving both parents time off to look after their
:46:02. > :46:05.newborns. It is called flexible parental leave but it is causing a
:46:06. > :46:14.bit of a catfight over what it should mean. Oh, dear. I have heard
:46:15. > :46:19.so much about Lib Dem hobbyhorses. I think this may be another. The
:46:20. > :46:24.Liberal Democrats tend to be a little more progressive in the
:46:25. > :46:29.things they want to achieve. Maternity leave can be shared
:46:30. > :46:33.already. But ministers want to make it easier and start earlier in
:46:34. > :46:37.England, Scotland and Wales. What worries some Tory MPs is that the
:46:38. > :46:43.details will not be set in stone until after the bill is passed. The
:46:44. > :46:48.notice period given to employers may be reduced from 12 weeks to eight
:46:49. > :46:57.weeks. It concerns me that the minister is left with the power to
:46:58. > :47:04.define the time that may be allowed in this respect. That would happen
:47:05. > :47:10.at a later stage without the matter having primary legislation and going
:47:11. > :47:13.towards the house. The Government was advised to scrap parental leave
:47:14. > :47:19.altogether at one point. The idea came from a venture capitalist. It
:47:20. > :47:27.was dropped from his final report, however, but small businesses
:47:28. > :47:34.worried. Sometimes -- firms are struggling to take on staff. You
:47:35. > :47:39.need to be in a position to recruit a new member of staff. If somebody
:47:40. > :47:43.goes off for two months and comes back, you have do think about
:47:44. > :47:47.filling the vacancy twice, maybe even three times. That can be a
:47:48. > :47:53.heavy burden on a small business. Lib Dems think there are concerns
:47:54. > :47:59.may be misplaced. Small businesses are more flexible than any other
:48:00. > :48:02.businesses I know. They have always allowed for their individual
:48:03. > :48:07.employees, for their own particular circumstances, to be taken into
:48:08. > :48:13.account. And who knows? May be in the end Lib Dem and Tory MPs will be
:48:14. > :48:17.able to play nicely over this. I think we are talking about
:48:18. > :48:21.relatively fine details now. I know there will be discussions. We have
:48:22. > :48:26.managed to come through stormier waters than this, I can assure you.
:48:27. > :48:31.I think we will come up with something that every party can
:48:32. > :48:36.cohere around. At the moment, on flexible parental leave, some
:48:37. > :48:39.politicians are pulling in different directions. I'm joined now by Ros
:48:40. > :48:46.Bragg from Maternity Action. Welcome. And Ann Widdecombe is still
:48:47. > :48:53.with us. Do you think it is a good idea? Not if it goes to those
:48:54. > :48:57.extremes, no. Consider the employer. He has got somebody who is
:48:58. > :49:02.pregnant. She wants a year off in maternity leave. He has already got
:49:03. > :49:07.to recruit some videos, train them and, just as they are becoming an
:49:08. > :49:14.asset, he has to lay them off. -- recruit someone else. It is equally
:49:15. > :49:19.manageable if she says she is going off for six months and the husband
:49:20. > :49:23.is taking over for six months. But there is a problem if you
:49:24. > :49:29.continually chop and change. The employer never knows where he is.
:49:30. > :49:33.This is going to hinder the position of young women at work. If I was an
:49:34. > :49:37.employer faced with this legislation, I would employ people
:49:38. > :49:43.who are unlikely to ask to exercise it. They may argue that his
:49:44. > :49:46.short-sighted. What do you say to the point that shared parental leave
:49:47. > :49:54.in practice may be all right, but the practice -- the principle
:49:55. > :49:59.doesn't work? It is important that fathers and mothers have the chance
:50:00. > :50:06.to be primary carers, but also for employers to see both men and women
:50:07. > :50:09.taking extended work breaks. The suggestion we will see parents
:50:10. > :50:12.chopping and changing is a little bit exaggerated. As an organisation
:50:13. > :50:17.providing advice to parents, it would be unusual for parents to be
:50:18. > :50:22.looking for a model of leaf of that kind. In our discussions with the
:50:23. > :50:26.Government, we understood that it is in the right of the employer to
:50:27. > :50:29.reject an application for a lead if they are not happy with leave being
:50:30. > :50:34.taken in multiple breaks. It is a little misleading. Do you not like
:50:35. > :50:38.the idea of the ability to have that flexibility of perhaps mother
:50:39. > :50:45.staying at home for a while, and then the father? For the vast
:50:46. > :50:49.majority of parents, the current model provides for most of their
:50:50. > :50:55.needs. There are some families for whom this would be extremely useful.
:50:56. > :50:59.For employers to be able to have somebody back to help of the
:51:00. > :51:02.Christmas rush, for example, that is a useful option. If you have a
:51:03. > :51:06.father who can only get time off on the workplace is quiet, or chooses
:51:07. > :51:13.to take time off when the workplace is quiet, that is helpful. Isn't
:51:14. > :51:22.that just a consequence of modern life? People are juggling things
:51:23. > :51:25.much more. It is more progressive. Nick Clegg said it would be a
:51:26. > :51:30.Edwardian not to go down that route. I don't agree with that. Employers
:51:31. > :51:34.value stability and predict ability because they can make plans. If
:51:35. > :51:39.there is to be no chopping and changing, we don't need anything
:51:40. > :51:43.very new. The idea that this is to make extremely flexible so you can
:51:44. > :51:48.do that. It is not just one person. The employer may have six people
:51:49. > :51:52.wanting to swap their maternity and paternity arrangements. It seems to
:51:53. > :51:58.me to be a recipe for chaos. And it is Edwardian to be against chaos? I
:51:59. > :52:02.think the chaos has been overstated. Whenever there are
:52:03. > :52:09.suggested changes to parental leave, certain groups complain about it.
:52:10. > :52:12.For us, it is a matter of the Government is living up to the
:52:13. > :52:18.commitment it has given to be able to make family friendly arrangement
:52:19. > :52:23.in the UK. They complain because they have got a genuine concern.
:52:24. > :52:27.They are supposed to be running a business, making profits, taking on
:52:28. > :52:32.new employees, doing their bit for Britain. And Britain just makes
:52:33. > :52:35.their work arrangements chaotic. If you look around Europe, there are
:52:36. > :52:42.plenty of other businesses who have been running successfully. What
:52:43. > :52:46.about the issue of gender equality? The fact that a lot of business say
:52:47. > :52:48.they lose women who are extremely effective in the workplace, because
:52:49. > :52:56.they don't think it is family friendly enough? There are already
:52:57. > :53:02.arrangements that say you can go off for a year and still come back.
:53:03. > :53:07.There are arrangements that say that you can elect paternity leave
:53:08. > :53:12.instead. The question is how often you want those changes to be made
:53:13. > :53:15.and the degree of stability that employers can rely upon. If you know
:53:16. > :53:19.somebody is going off for a year, you know what you have to do. If it
:53:20. > :53:24.is three months and then another month, and then another month, then
:53:25. > :53:28.they change their minds again, that is where the chaos comes in. If you
:53:29. > :53:33.have a multiple number of mothers in the workforce, that's just compounds
:53:34. > :53:39.the problem. Gender equality, I am sick to the back teeth of these
:53:40. > :53:43.cliches. There is gender equality because the man can be the house
:53:44. > :53:49.husband if he wants to be. There is gender equality. What about some
:53:50. > :53:54.good business for Britain? There is gender equality. There is no need to
:53:55. > :54:02.extend this any further because men still have the opportunity to take
:54:03. > :54:07.parental leave? I think the shared parental leave proposals are quite
:54:08. > :54:11.use. In the direction of encouraging fathers to take leave. They fall far
:54:12. > :54:14.short of what is possible. I think the German model is an excellent
:54:15. > :54:19.model. Fathers take two months leave or more. The family get an
:54:20. > :54:26.additional two months of paid leave. In Germany, the take-up of
:54:27. > :54:32.leaf from fathers jumped to 30%. And Germany has not gone down the pan,
:54:33. > :54:36.has it? Use a productivity in Germany has not gone down the pan,
:54:37. > :54:47.they have their problems as well. I think what you will find is that the
:54:48. > :54:50.take-up of that is not so enormous. If this becomes, just like maternity
:54:51. > :54:56.leave when it came in, people did not rush to take a year off, it is
:54:57. > :55:00.something that grows over time. Employers would not be complaining
:55:01. > :55:05.if they did not have some reason. It does not sound as if there is going
:55:06. > :55:12.to be that much take-up. In a way, couldn't you let it grow
:55:13. > :55:19.organically? If there was a real clamour for it, fine but there
:55:20. > :55:21.isn't. Somewhere between 2% and 8% of fathers will take up the shared
:55:22. > :55:24.parental leave, according to the Government. It is quite worrying
:55:25. > :55:29.they're not putting in place the measures that would encourage
:55:30. > :55:33.further take-up. Should we just take a step backwards instead of making a
:55:34. > :55:38.move towards gender equality in the workplace? I don't think so. What
:55:39. > :55:45.about the issue as far as the Tory party is concerned about being a
:55:46. > :55:50.modernising party? Here we go again! Will this make them look as if there
:55:51. > :55:55.are going backwards if they renege on this? No. It will make them look
:55:56. > :55:59.as if they are exercising some common sense. People are worried
:56:00. > :56:02.about their energy bills, the cost of living, they are worried about if
:56:03. > :56:07.they can relax on the issue of job security. They are worried about how
:56:08. > :56:15.to afford Christmas. And in future, we say, mum and dad, you can just
:56:16. > :56:21.swap childcare. It is irrelevant. A final word from you? The
:56:22. > :56:25.Conservatives did commit in the manifesto to make in the UK the most
:56:26. > :56:28.family friendly country in Europe. It would be surprising if they walk
:56:29. > :56:33.backwards on this one. Thank you very much. We're walking backwards
:56:34. > :56:37.for Christmas. There's just time before we go to find out the answer
:56:38. > :56:40.to our quiz. The question was what have Gwent Police spent more than
:56:41. > :56:55.?13,000 on in an attempt to deter crime?
:56:56. > :57:01.I think it is a toss-up between the cats and the police officers,
:57:02. > :57:07.because they are the most ludicrous. I am going for the cats.
:57:08. > :57:12.The cats would have been right. But it was the cutout police officers. I
:57:13. > :57:19.saw one in a petrol station that it was quite lifelike. If I was going
:57:20. > :57:22.to rob the petrol station, within five seconds I would have realised
:57:23. > :57:27.it was a cardboard cutout and therefore not in danger. You may
:57:28. > :57:31.remember earlier, we were joined by three MPs who have been growing
:57:32. > :57:35.moustaches for charity. Well, two of them - John Woodcock and Roger
:57:36. > :57:39.Williams - have come back. And, in an exclusive for the Daily Politics,
:57:40. > :57:43.they have agreed to have their moustaches shaved off a couple of
:57:44. > :57:52.days early. To do the honours, we have Al from Pall Mall Barbers. I
:57:53. > :58:01.hope you have got a steady hand. Yes, I have. Start removing those
:58:02. > :58:09.moustaches. Here we go. It is goodbye to the
:58:10. > :58:16.moustache. It should be a cut-throat razor! We have to find out, John,
:58:17. > :58:29.how it feels to have lost that bit of hair on your upper lip, when it
:58:30. > :58:35.finally disappears. Don't just do half of mine! Finish it! Lets do
:58:36. > :58:45.Roger quickly and we can come back to it. While we see that, thanks to
:58:46. > :58:48.all of our guests. The One O'Clock News is starting over on BBC One
:58:49. > :58:51.now. I'll be on This Week tonight with Rory Bremner, Martin Sorrell,
:58:52. > :58:55.John Pienaar, Michael Portillo, Diane Abbott and Miranda Green. And
:58:56. > :58:59.I'll be here at noon tomorrow with all the big political stories of the
:59:00. > :59:05.day. Do join me then. Bye-bye.