:00:37. > :00:41.Good afternoon and welcome to the Daily Politics. Work and Pensions
:00:42. > :00:44.Secretary Iain Duncan Smith faces MPs as he tries to explain why the
:00:45. > :00:50.Government's flagship welfare reform has been knocked off course.
:00:51. > :00:54.Christmas has come early to Westminster - MPs are to get an 11%
:00:55. > :00:59.pay rise - have they really been that well-behaved?
:01:00. > :01:04.Abuse in Britain's care homes - can the system cope with financial and
:01:05. > :01:08.demographic pressures? And Parliamentarians prepare to make
:01:09. > :01:09.their tribute to Nelson Mandela - we'll hear how he inspired British
:01:10. > :01:20.politicians. All that in the next hour. And with
:01:21. > :01:22.us for the first half of the programme today is Lawrence
:01:23. > :01:28.Tomlinson, entrepreneur-in-residence at the Department for Business,
:01:29. > :01:34.Innovation and Skills. Every department should have one. Welcome
:01:35. > :01:36.to the programme, Lawrence. Thank you.
:01:37. > :01:39.This afternoon, the Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith
:01:40. > :01:42.will be appearing before a committee of MPs to answer questions about the
:01:43. > :01:45.implementation of the flagship universal credit scheme. The new
:01:46. > :01:49.benefit, which replaces six separate payments, is being gradually rolled
:01:50. > :01:52.out. But last week his department admitted that not quite everybody
:01:53. > :01:58.will have been transferred onto the new scheme by the planned 2017
:01:59. > :02:01.deadline. That seems quite a change from what he said just three months
:02:02. > :02:05.ago when he insisted that all was fine. Here he is speaking in the
:02:06. > :02:15.Commons, and then again in an interview from last week.
:02:16. > :02:22.Unlike the previous Government, who went and crashed one IT programme
:02:23. > :02:26.after another, no Government minister ever intervened to change
:02:27. > :02:32.them early so they delivered on time. We are not doing that. I have
:02:33. > :02:38.taken action on this particular programme. This programme will
:02:39. > :02:43.deliver on time and in budget. Universal credit, the plan that we
:02:44. > :02:47.are putting forward, expanding from the Pathfinder and rolling out, it
:02:48. > :02:50.will essentially be complete and rolling out, it will essentially be
:02:51. > :02:59.complete under that plan by 2017. We may take a little longer on those
:03:00. > :03:02.who are already in ESA with no work requirement on them, because they
:03:03. > :03:08.are very vulnerable and we may want to take a bit more time with them.
:03:09. > :03:11.They need to be processed and dealt with carefully.
:03:12. > :03:13.And with us now is the Shadow Employment Minister, Stephen Timms
:03:14. > :03:19.and the Conservative MP Kwasi Kwarteng, who is on the work and
:03:20. > :03:26.pensions select committee. Welcome, both. Kwasi Kwarteng, on
:03:27. > :03:30.time, in budget, those words will come back to haunt Iain Duncan
:03:31. > :03:37.Smith. In September, he said the scheme was still on-time and on
:03:38. > :03:41.budget, is not. A man was brought in who did very well at the Olympics,
:03:42. > :03:49.he suggested that we should take more time, and the reason we are
:03:50. > :03:53.doing that is, as I understand, people who are very vulnerable will
:03:54. > :03:57.be exposed to any mistakes made. It is much better that the programme
:03:58. > :04:02.should be done more slowly and that we get it right than that we should
:04:03. > :04:07.rush out and get things wrong. At the end of the day, it will be very
:04:08. > :04:14.vulnerable people affected and harmed. How much longer? I'm not
:04:15. > :04:20.entirely sure how much longer it will take. Iain Duncan Smith has not
:04:21. > :04:24.put a date on it, 2017 will not be the final date. It is fine for the
:04:25. > :04:28.opposition to jump up and down and say there has been a delay, but the
:04:29. > :04:32.Government is right in saying it is important to get it right than
:04:33. > :04:37.Herriot and get it wrong. I think there might be a personal reason why
:04:38. > :04:42.Iain Duncan Smith has said there would be no delay, while the rest of
:04:43. > :04:48.us have seen there would be and now we can see it. It is a shambles.
:04:49. > :04:52.Ministers fail to grasp the scale of the project. Public Accounts
:04:53. > :04:56.Committee made that point. And they fail to decide exactly what they
:04:57. > :05:00.wanted to build, and started building the IT before they made the
:05:01. > :05:06.decision. Some of the key decisions have not been made. They need to
:05:07. > :05:12.work out now what exactly this system is going to be, then to build
:05:13. > :05:17.the IT to deliver it. It is easy to lose sight of the big picture,
:05:18. > :05:24.universal credit is much better than anything Labour had. But it has to
:05:25. > :05:30.work. Of course. We had a period of chronic worklessness, people on
:05:31. > :05:35.benefits over ten years in the last Government, this is a much more
:05:36. > :05:40.effective and more simple way of getting benefits to people who need
:05:41. > :05:46.it most. Labour do not, I understand, oppose the principle.
:05:47. > :05:49.You support the broad idea? We have always thought the principle was
:05:50. > :05:56.very sensible, but it has been delayed until after the general
:05:57. > :06:01.election. The the risk is that it could be delayed longer. We need
:06:02. > :06:04.action to get it back on track. We have agreed between the two Mark Roe
:06:05. > :06:12.of you that you are in favour of universal credit. -- between the two
:06:13. > :06:17.of you. Did Iain Duncan Smith bury his head in the sand when, if we are
:06:18. > :06:23.to believe Labour, they knew it was coming off the tracks? I think it is
:06:24. > :06:28.rich for Labour to complain about the implementation, for 13 years
:06:29. > :06:33.their operating system was inefficient and did not incentivise
:06:34. > :06:39.people to get a job stop we are all here now, realising it will not be
:06:40. > :06:44.online by 2017. Is it because it was too big a challenge for the civil
:06:45. > :06:51.servants meant to be putting it in motion? You don't even know what you
:06:52. > :06:55.will be putting into action? The initial green paper said it would
:06:56. > :07:01.not be a major IT project, that was a ridiculous claim. I think that is
:07:02. > :07:06.fair, it was a huge IT project with teething problems. We had this with
:07:07. > :07:12.the NHS in the last Government, ?113 billion was wasted. How much has
:07:13. > :07:17.been wasted on this? There are conflicting reports, the Public
:07:18. > :07:26.health committee said ?140 million, we dispute that. It is likely to go
:07:27. > :07:30.up. The suggestion is that ?300 million could be written off so far.
:07:31. > :07:34.It looks as though they will build two different systems now, the
:07:35. > :07:39.Francis Maude system and the Iain Duncan Smith system. Goodness knows
:07:40. > :07:45.how much that will cost. Will there be two schemes running alongside
:07:46. > :07:53.each other? Two IT systems, but both will be used. The money has not all
:07:54. > :07:57.been written off. The public health committee did not write it all.
:07:58. > :08:04.Francis Maude thinks you should go to the beginning and start again. If
:08:05. > :08:09.that was the case, it would sound like a shambles, if you had to go
:08:10. > :08:17.back to the drawing board and start again. I think the want about by
:08:18. > :08:24.extension will be used in the final delivery. IT projects are difficult
:08:25. > :08:28.for government, is that the same in the private sector, or is their
:08:29. > :08:33.advice the private sector could give in terms of procurement and finding
:08:34. > :08:38.the right companies to set up? I don't know, but it is good to see
:08:39. > :08:42.two politicians generally agree on about the right direction. I am from
:08:43. > :08:45.the private sector and have worked in Government in business,
:08:46. > :08:51.innovation and skills for a period of time. People in those departments
:08:52. > :08:54.work incredibly hard to implement these systems, I am sure the DWP
:08:55. > :09:00.will be doing the same and will hopefully get to the end of it. Who
:09:01. > :09:06.is to blame? Should Iain Duncan Smith take personal responsibility?
:09:07. > :09:08.I don't think so. I think there was a problem with the implementation of
:09:09. > :09:15.the IT, there were operational issues. And how Shippey has been
:09:16. > :09:22.brought in as an independent person with good operational experience. We
:09:23. > :09:25.warned about these problems three years ago. Iain Duncan Smith
:09:26. > :09:31.emphasised in his response how much he was personally supervising the
:09:32. > :09:36.project. He was warned it would take much longer than he said, he ignored
:09:37. > :09:44.the warnings, he should take responsibility. How should he take
:09:45. > :09:49.responsibility? In my view, he should be considering his position.
:09:50. > :09:52.That is ridiculous. It is customary for Shadow Ministers to say the
:09:53. > :09:59.minister should resign, of course he should not. It is the right scheme
:10:00. > :10:03.going in the right direction, incentivising people to go into
:10:04. > :10:09.work. Howard Shipley has said that they need to take their time to make
:10:10. > :10:19.sure it goes on the right direction. Two we are calling for cross-party
:10:20. > :10:22.talks. How would they achieve this plan getting online? That would seem
:10:23. > :10:27.to imply that the government does not want to get it online, when they
:10:28. > :10:33.do. There has been too much secrecy over the last few years, a refusal
:10:34. > :10:41.to own up to what is going, a good news culture. We need openness, we
:10:42. > :10:46.need to be able to see what is going on and a target, which we are
:10:47. > :10:50.confident will be delivered. Of course we need transparency. That is
:10:51. > :10:54.why the Secretary of State is appearing before a committee this
:10:55. > :10:57.afternoon, we will be asking questions and there will be
:10:58. > :11:04.openness. We would like to knows that questions you have post, why it
:11:05. > :11:10.has taken as long as it has, when he thinks the scheme can be delivered
:11:11. > :11:14.fully by. It struck us as strange that the announcements came out that
:11:15. > :11:21.the deadline would be almost on the day of the Autumn Statement, was
:11:22. > :11:27.that a case of bearing bad news? As you know, there are lots of
:11:28. > :11:32.conflicting issues with timing. A big issue as a flagship government
:11:33. > :11:38.programme missing its deadline. We have two and a half weeks to
:11:39. > :11:45.Christmas, it is probably a good time. The NHS Labour write-off could
:11:46. > :11:50.be ?10 billion. We all hoped lessons had been learned, sadly they have
:11:51. > :11:57.not. The old mistakes and words have been repeated. The value is almost
:11:58. > :12:03.more than 100 times the value that has been suggested we should write
:12:04. > :12:09.off in this case. Kwasi Kwarteng and Stephen Timms, thank you. Something
:12:10. > :12:13.a little different now. Time for our daily quiz. Ed Balls is learning to
:12:14. > :12:15.play the piano. And yesterday, after answering some tricky questions from
:12:16. > :12:19.the media following the Autumn Statement, he performed in his first
:12:20. > :12:22.public recital. So what did he play? Was it Chopsticks, Der Dichter
:12:23. > :12:25.Spricht by Schumann, Angels by Robbie Williams - Ed Miliband's
:12:26. > :12:33.favourite song - or The Hills are Alive from the Sound of Music? We'll
:12:34. > :12:37.give you the correct answer at the end of the show.
:12:38. > :12:46.Now, want to be a wildly successful racing driving entrepreneur like our
:12:47. > :12:50.guest of the day? Here's how. When he's not hot desk in the
:12:51. > :12:57.business department one day a week, Lawrence Tomlinson will be found
:12:58. > :13:02.here at his factory in Yorkshire. I did not realise there was no oil in
:13:03. > :13:10.there. Is he coming from Spain to test it? Is that a reverse gear?
:13:11. > :13:16.His company makes sports cars, export them, runs a championship
:13:17. > :13:20.with them and Lawrence races them. Would be drive that he has two make
:13:21. > :13:25.sure that car is winning every single race, I suppose you could
:13:26. > :13:34.say, is phenomenal. Does he ever lose his temper? I have seen it on a
:13:35. > :13:41.few occasions, luckily never at me. This is Lawrence's own car. You
:13:42. > :13:46.could have won for just ?68,000. Oh, and there is an 18 month waiting
:13:47. > :13:51.list. If cars are his passion, here is his mission, a chain of 36 care
:13:52. > :13:56.homes. Have you heard about Lawrence Tomlinson, the owner?
:13:57. > :14:01.I know his name and I have met him once. He was very sharp, very quick
:14:02. > :14:07.and out, but he was very nice. He spoke. That he was like a whirlwind.
:14:08. > :14:12.Lawrence does not just run these places, he has another firm building
:14:13. > :14:18.them for other people and yet another providing software for them.
:14:19. > :14:24.All from fairly humble beginnings. When he was 24, his parents had a
:14:25. > :14:27.care home adapted from a large, existing property. Somebody came to
:14:28. > :14:32.buy it, Lawrence looked up the deal and even though he was working in an
:14:33. > :14:36.engineering job he said, I can see value in that. So instead of a
:14:37. > :14:39.third-party buying the home, Laurence bought both that home and
:14:40. > :14:46.the home of the person trying to buy it, which got him into care, he has
:14:47. > :14:50.never looked since. What got into the headlines was his investigation
:14:51. > :14:54.into RBS. He accused one of their divisions of forcing customers out
:14:55. > :14:58.of business so the bank could buy their assets at bargain basement
:14:59. > :15:03.prices. Some were surprised by the strident tone of the report. Let's
:15:04. > :15:09.ask his boss. Is there a danger that all those qualities that make a
:15:10. > :15:11.great businessman make him a live wire in the Whitehall Government
:15:12. > :15:15.world? I'm not making a character
:15:16. > :15:20.assessment, I don't know him very well. I have seen his work, it is
:15:21. > :15:27.sufficiently disturbing that I have passed it on to the regulators and
:15:28. > :15:32.as them to follow up. I know the bank taking this very seriously.
:15:33. > :15:36.Their business theory that Lawrence only took action against RBS because
:15:37. > :15:40.he is an aggrieved customer angry with the bank because they made him
:15:41. > :15:44.feel like a loser -- there is a theory that. Let's discuss that
:15:45. > :15:48.controversial report Lawrence Tomlinson wrote about the banks'
:15:49. > :15:51.treatment of small business. We asked for an interview with RBS, who
:15:52. > :15:55.bore the brunt of Lawrence's criticism. They didn't want to talk
:15:56. > :16:27.to us this morning but they did give us this statement:
:16:28. > :16:35.we are joined by the city analyst, Louise Cooper. First of all, where
:16:36. > :16:41.is your evidence? My evidence is in the dossier of evidence that I
:16:42. > :16:48.compiled in the report. Isn't it anecdotal? No, we have done a lot of
:16:49. > :16:54.analysis, we probably had 200 cases that we looked at, distilled into
:16:55. > :17:02.the first report. Isn't it the case that the treatment by the turnaround
:17:03. > :17:05.divisions, the departments that deal with customers in difficulty, it is
:17:06. > :17:09.no wonder that many of them ended up going out of business, it is a fact
:17:10. > :17:14.of business life and they would do anything to say their businesses are
:17:15. > :17:18.fine. I would agree entirely on that point but these are businesses that
:17:19. > :17:23.we looked at, people we spoke to who were not in that position. Had that
:17:24. > :17:29.been the case, or had it been the case that this was happening between
:17:30. > :17:32.2008 and 2010, when the bank was in turmoil and we bailed the bank out,
:17:33. > :17:38.I would have certainly accepted that. But these are cases that are
:17:39. > :17:42.different from those you described. What was your reaction? It was a
:17:43. > :17:45.very serious allegation, to say that firms who were in good health were
:17:46. > :17:51.deliberately being put on life support, which would benefit the
:17:52. > :17:55.bank itself. If you look at the statistics from the insolvency
:17:56. > :18:00.service, you could actually argue, almost the entire opposite. That in
:18:01. > :18:04.fact, banks have been very restrained and highly tolerant of
:18:05. > :18:09.business is in trouble. If you look at the corporate liquidation,
:18:10. > :18:15.companies that have been wound down, in 2002, before the crisis, there
:18:16. > :18:21.was over 16,000 corporate liquidation is. If you look at every
:18:22. > :18:23.year since the crisis, only one year where the number has been
:18:24. > :18:28.significantly more than that. If you look at compulsory liquidations,
:18:29. > :18:40.where companies are forced to go bust, that is actually now lower. In
:18:41. > :18:45.2011, 503. 2012, 421. The actual statistics paint a very different
:18:46. > :18:50.picture. Why does your report not follow the line of statistics? That
:18:51. > :19:00.is interesting, those are overall statistics for the banking industry.
:19:01. > :19:03.If you look at RBS geology, only 6% of there's a meeting in London on
:19:04. > :19:10.if you think that less than one in ten are coming back into normal
:19:11. > :19:16.banking from GRG, that is really interesting.
:19:17. > :19:21.When capital is cheap and easy and there is a lot about, the line for
:19:22. > :19:26.when a company is viable is a generous to the Company, because
:19:27. > :19:33.money is cheap. Money may be cheap now but it is not plentiful. Banks
:19:34. > :19:37.almost went bust, they need to rebuild their balance sheets.
:19:38. > :19:42.Capital is no longer everywhere. Capital is very restrained.
:19:43. > :19:46.Therefore banks have to react to be in bar and they are in. The
:19:47. > :19:53.complaint has been that they are not lending to small businesses. RBS
:19:54. > :19:55.were lending 55 billion to companies, they are now lending 38
:19:56. > :20:00.billion, so they have shrunk that tremendously. They have shrunk the
:20:01. > :20:05.whole of their Labour, it is a much smaller than it ever was. They have
:20:06. > :20:11.reduced the balance sheet by 900 billion. They have gone from 55 to
:20:12. > :20:15.38. These are businesses that were viable, clearly viable and were sent
:20:16. > :20:23.down a road... That is what the report says. Who knows, none of us
:20:24. > :20:28.are fortune-tellers. I am happy to have made a judgement on some of
:20:29. > :20:34.these cases. I had 200 cases that I put into the report. Since then I
:20:35. > :20:41.have had another, roughly 300 cases. I am looking at 500 cases. Of which
:20:42. > :20:48.I reject a lot. I just can't believe that this isn't systematic. In the
:20:49. > :20:53.report, and this is what I am asking RBS to investigate... And they are
:20:54. > :20:58.going to. They couldn't ignore an allegation of that seriousness. They
:20:59. > :21:06.have instructed Clifford Chance and people who have seen the report and
:21:07. > :21:10.the evidence are also shocked. One of the accusations made in the film
:21:11. > :21:13.was about your nation ship with RBS and whether that should have been
:21:14. > :21:17.declared. -- your relationship or the pew do not have declared that
:21:18. > :21:30.RBS had given you a big overdraft and you were in dispute? -- should
:21:31. > :21:34.you not have declared? Everybody who came to me asked to be an because
:21:35. > :21:41.they are so frightened of what they say is happening in GRG. Should you
:21:42. > :21:46.have disclosed it to Vince Cable? It was clear to Vince Cable and the
:21:47. > :21:53.department, when I started this job, that that was the case. This
:21:54. > :21:58.dispute I have is absolutely irrelevant. I wish it was another
:21:59. > :22:05.bank that I was speaking about, not one I have an ongoing relationship
:22:06. > :22:08.with. The relationship to banks from the public is hardly good and a lot
:22:09. > :22:13.of people will say it is totally credible. They could believe that
:22:14. > :22:17.those practices were going on. Businesses will anecdotally have
:22:18. > :22:22.strong evidence to say not only were we not lend to, they will not even
:22:23. > :22:30.answer phone calls. Why are you so sceptical? Banker bashing is a
:22:31. > :22:35.terribly popular pastime for all classes of our society. It is not
:22:36. > :22:39.that I am sceptical. I am sure there will be some appallingly bad cases
:22:40. > :22:42.and that makes me very unhappy. My concern is that we have anecdotal
:22:43. > :22:50.evidence only, and you are turning that into a trend. Which I can't
:22:51. > :22:57.quite get there. 450 cases don't follow a trend? Is that
:22:58. > :23:02.realistically true? The second thing is none of us are fortune-tellers.
:23:03. > :23:08.We cannot predict the future. Making a decision as to whether a business
:23:09. > :23:12.is viable or not is very difficult. They will sometimes get it wrong,
:23:13. > :23:18.there will sometimes get it right. Nobody from the outside can say, it
:23:19. > :23:21.is viable, it is not viable. The easiest thing, I am happy to sit
:23:22. > :23:25.down in a room with Louise and show her the evidence, and she will be
:23:26. > :23:32.truly shocked about what has been going on, in fact. You can go and do
:23:33. > :23:39.that at a time convenient to both of you. How have civil servants
:23:40. > :23:43.responded to your report? The civil servants have seen the main body of
:23:44. > :23:48.the evidence and are appalled by what has been happening. They have
:23:49. > :23:54.been very supportive. Thank you very much.
:23:55. > :23:57.There is a meeting in London on Wednesday, bringing together experts
:23:58. > :24:00.from the worlds largest economies to focus on the growing problem of
:24:01. > :24:03.dementia. The incurable condition is one that's putting increasing
:24:04. > :24:07.pressure on care homes - in terms of capacity but also the quality of
:24:08. > :24:10.care. That was an issue brought into sharp focus by a Panorama programme,
:24:11. > :24:14.broadcast in 2011, which exposed terrible abuse in Winterbourne View
:24:15. > :24:17.private hospital. Let's take a look at a clip from that disturbing
:24:18. > :24:18.programme now, which contains footage some viewers may find
:24:19. > :24:30.upsetting. This is a residential hospital. It
:24:31. > :24:38.is supposed to care for adults with learning difficulties. People unable
:24:39. > :24:44.to care for themselves. But Panorama has been undercover, and found
:24:45. > :24:57.systematic abuse. Patients suffering. Staff out of control.
:24:58. > :25:07.Away from their families, these were patients without a voice.
:25:08. > :25:11.Disturbing footage indeed. Here with me now is Caroline
:25:12. > :25:15.Abrahams from Age UK, the former Care Minister and Lib Dem MP Paul
:25:16. > :25:21.Burstow, and Lawrence Tomlinson is still with us - his company runs
:25:22. > :25:25.more than 50 care homes. We will make the distinction between the
:25:26. > :25:30.footage from a private hospital as opposed to a care home, as you
:25:31. > :25:34.brought up with me. The film showed abuse by carers in the hospital
:25:35. > :25:38.rather than elderly care homes. Generally, for all of us who will
:25:39. > :25:41.have to rely on monitors, being cared for later in life, out of
:25:42. > :25:46.their own home, it is a worry isn't it? It is a huge worry. The
:25:47. > :25:51.landscape going forward is particularly worrying. There is
:25:52. > :25:57.about a three-year time to build new facilities so even if we started to
:25:58. > :26:00.date, two built these facilities for people with dementia, you are
:26:01. > :26:06.talking a big time delay -- if we started today, to build these
:26:07. > :26:09.facilities. You are talking three years from deciding to build a care
:26:10. > :26:15.home, from having one care home operating. How big a problem will
:26:16. > :26:20.that be? It is right that there is that time lag but there is a bigger
:26:21. > :26:24.issue, a societal one. There is a structural lag in society in terms
:26:25. > :26:28.of ageing. We are about 20 years behind where ageing really is.
:26:29. > :26:32.People are living much longer and that doesn't mean we will need more,
:26:33. > :26:33.but different sorts of care institutions in the future. -- that
:26:34. > :26:47.doesn't mean. -- that does mean. The -- we have care in people's
:26:48. > :26:55.homes care homes, and some facilities do enough but we are --
:26:56. > :26:59.need to see more. We get cases from time to time that we would look into
:27:00. > :27:04.and investigate fully. Which is what you would expect to do. We give
:27:05. > :27:08.everyone that works for me, 2000 people, give them all an iPhone,
:27:09. > :27:13.they have a button and they can contact me directly if they think
:27:14. > :27:15.there is something going wrong. We would be encouraging whistle-blowing
:27:16. > :27:20.and we have fantastic staff and great training. It is very difficult
:27:21. > :27:25.in the current financial environment, with local authorities.
:27:26. > :27:30.I am dealing with 152 local authorities, it is never easy. That
:27:31. > :27:34.is the point, finances are important. If you are talking about
:27:35. > :27:37.the number of care homes and people being paid a reasonable salary to do
:27:38. > :27:44.a very difficult job, is that part of the problem in terms of cases of
:27:45. > :27:48.neglect and abuse? It is probably the biggest problem. The inspector
:27:49. > :27:52.has just done a report on care homes and found there was an association
:27:53. > :27:58.between turnover of staff and incidence of neglect. If you have an
:27:59. > :28:03.unstable staff because people can't really afford to be there, you're
:28:04. > :28:07.going to get problems. How widespread is it? When you see that
:28:08. > :28:13.sort of footage, it is very disturbing. Is it rare, or is it
:28:14. > :28:19.quite widespread? The same report I refer to found that one in ten care
:28:20. > :28:23.homes have an issue they need to address, but not like that, that was
:28:24. > :28:27.a horrible and graphic situation. But patients not being given enough
:28:28. > :28:31.help to eat and drink, that is unfortunately quite a lot more
:28:32. > :28:36.common. You are interesting local authorities at a time when their
:28:37. > :28:39.budgets have been cut, a lot of them are taking money out of social care
:28:40. > :28:46.budgets, that is the government's fault Test
:28:47. > :28:52.this is a sector that is very much the orphan when it comes to how care
:28:53. > :28:56.is looked at in this country. It has a stigma around it. But there are
:28:57. > :29:01.good care homes and we don't focus enough on the good, we tend to just
:29:02. > :29:06.report the bad. You said they are good because you have training and
:29:07. > :29:08.are paying them a reasonable wage. It starts with physical environment
:29:09. > :29:13.that people are working in and designing it to be fit for purpose.
:29:14. > :29:17.Investment is key in the sector going forward. We have to create an
:29:18. > :29:23.environment where people want to leave hospital, not be pushing
:29:24. > :29:34.people out of hospital. I am doing some work with them -- with DEMOS
:29:35. > :29:37.and we want to make sure we close the gap between the perception of
:29:38. > :29:40.people who work in the sector and those who have erect experience
:29:41. > :29:45.because family members are already in, who think care in care homes is
:29:46. > :29:53.better -- who have direct experience. We want to make them
:29:54. > :29:57.more like homes. We make sure they are genuinely hub is in the
:29:58. > :30:00.community, where services are provided to not just those living
:30:01. > :30:03.there but others in the community. And also they have greater
:30:04. > :30:08.involvement in the community through voluntary work. Would that bring
:30:09. > :30:13.down the number of cases of abuse and neglect? I think it would.
:30:14. > :30:19.Everybody knows it is closed environments where abuse can thrive,
:30:20. > :30:21.where anything can be going on and nobody can see. The more ordinary
:30:22. > :30:26.members of the public going in and out, the better. If something is
:30:27. > :30:31.going wrong, it is more likely to be picked up early. How important is
:30:32. > :30:40.the inspection regime, in terms of keeping control of what is going on
:30:41. > :30:45.in care homes? We should not relying on CQC. We have internal audits, the
:30:46. > :30:50.way we look at other quality, then we have external people looking at
:30:51. > :30:56.our quality before CQC come in. CQC is important, and they are picking
:30:57. > :31:04.up at the end. Should it be a tougher regime of inspection? It
:31:05. > :31:08.will be tougher, there can be potential criminal prosecution. One
:31:09. > :31:14.of those is ranking the level of homes in tables? There will be a
:31:15. > :31:21.return to the star rating system which the Labour Party scrapped full
:31:22. > :31:26.stop -- scrapped. Does that improve the standard of care home? People
:31:27. > :31:30.are understanding more through social media that they can vet where
:31:31. > :31:37.they want to go. The one line, look at the reports. If you are looking
:31:38. > :31:45.at placing someone, understand it. Is the Government spending enough?
:31:46. > :31:49.Whether it is the Government or the local authority, there needs to be a
:31:50. > :31:53.linking between quality and outcome and the amount they pay, not just a
:31:54. > :32:00.flat rate. That needs to change across the UK. What about staff?
:32:01. > :32:05.What do you think should change in terms of staff recruitment into care
:32:06. > :32:10.homes? Reign we have to pay people more to do one important than
:32:11. > :32:17.stressful job. At least a living wage, I think. I think many staff
:32:18. > :32:21.are on minimum wage, which is why we have high staff turnover. People in
:32:22. > :32:24.charge of the homes are crucial. We know the leadership of an
:32:25. > :32:29.institution is important, when places have not done very well and
:32:30. > :32:34.suddenly get better it is usually because someone good has gone to run
:32:35. > :32:38.the home. Would you be happy to put your elderly relatives in a care
:32:39. > :32:45.home? That is why I am doing this, to hope that if I have to do that it
:32:46. > :32:49.would be good quality. It is the right case for people to be
:32:50. > :32:53.sometimes, but I would like more options for supported care Housing
:32:54. > :32:59.in between, not just at home or in a care home, lots of stages in
:33:00. > :33:02.between. With more and more people going to become old over the next
:33:03. > :33:10.ten or 20 years, do you honestly think the problem will only get
:33:11. > :33:15.worse, not better? The government needs to put more money into social
:33:16. > :33:22.care. There are signs of hope. Most older people can stay at home for
:33:23. > :33:27.longer with the right support. I have got to say goodbye, it has
:33:28. > :33:29.already got to that point in the programme. Thank you, Lawrence
:33:30. > :33:32.Tomlinson. ?NEWLINE Now, normal parliamentary business has been set
:33:33. > :33:36.aside this afternoon as MPs and peers gather to pay tribute to
:33:37. > :33:41.Nelson Mandela - Giles has two of those MPs with him in central lobby.
:33:42. > :33:44.Yes, if they finish early they might squeeze a bit of business to the
:33:45. > :33:51.house today, but most of the time will begin to these tributes to
:33:52. > :34:00.Nelson Mandela. I am joined by the Conservative -- a Conservative MP
:34:01. > :34:02.and a Labour MP. Many people are acknowledging the iconic status of
:34:03. > :34:06.Nelson Mandela and his achievements, but not everybody is
:34:07. > :34:14.that well-informed of the history of what happened. Not lost on you? No,
:34:15. > :34:19.I grew up in Ghana in West Africa, the first sub-Saharan Africa and
:34:20. > :34:23.country to get independence, so I was very conscious of the struggle
:34:24. > :34:27.for self-government across the continent of Africa. Looking back,
:34:28. > :34:32.the crowning achievement of Nelson Mandela is political, pulling his
:34:33. > :34:38.country from the brink of what was a deeply divided racial situation. It
:34:39. > :34:43.could have gone into civil war at that time, were it not for him. What
:34:44. > :34:49.is remarkable is how we exercised moral authority in order to achieve
:34:50. > :34:53.those ends. Our pathway was defeated through persuasion and
:34:54. > :34:59.reconciliation, rather than violence. With everybody standing up
:35:00. > :35:03.to speak, sometimes there is a competition to out to be chipper in
:35:04. > :35:09.eloquence, is it important that MPs steer clear of beatify the man? He
:35:10. > :35:14.was not a saint, he was never happy with people describing him as a
:35:15. > :35:19.saint. You would not describe him as a saint, but he is an iconic leader,
:35:20. > :35:23.you can't take that away from him and you would not want to. He has
:35:24. > :35:28.done more for politicians and democracy across the world, to
:35:29. > :35:33.inspire people, than anybody else during my whole life, certainly.
:35:34. > :35:38.When I was in school, we knew about Nelson Mandela. When I had my first
:35:39. > :35:44.Civics prize in the sixth form it was to do with the liberation
:35:45. > :35:51.struggles of Africa. I was active in anti-apartheid. You met him? Indeed,
:35:52. > :35:54.when he came here to meet various people including the Parliamentary
:35:55. > :35:59.Labour Party, he and Winnie Mandela came. I was fortunate enough to be
:36:00. > :36:05.very close to them. The men all crowded around Nelson Mandela, I
:36:06. > :36:09.went to speak to Winnie. Which is odd, because he preferred to be
:36:10. > :36:13.surrounded by women, he was very charming. That is part of his
:36:14. > :36:18.reputation, he said he was not a saint! But she was at that time a
:36:19. > :36:24.great inspiration to women. We should just explain, it is protocol
:36:25. > :36:32.with you? I am a member of the Government, but the protocol reasons
:36:33. > :36:35.I am not speaking. Why are you not? I have not put in to speak, I think
:36:36. > :36:40.there are more important voices than mine. I was one of the foot soldiers
:36:41. > :36:43.of the anti-apartheid movement, and although it matters hugely to me and
:36:44. > :36:53.I shall listen to others, I mean not be contributing. It is interesting
:36:54. > :36:56.in a world of 24-hour news to remind ourselves that in 1991 Nelson was
:36:57. > :37:03.released from prison, the world 's television cameras were on him and
:37:04. > :37:06.the BBC interrupted its coverage to show that. We got a record number of
:37:07. > :37:10.complaints because it disrupted antiques road show.
:37:11. > :37:14.Now, let's look at what's happening this week. As we discussed earlier,
:37:15. > :37:17.the Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith gives evidence to the
:37:18. > :37:18.Commons Work and Pensions Select Committee.
:37:19. > :37:21.Tomorrow, the Prime Minister will be among many leaders attending a
:37:22. > :37:26.memorial service for Nelson Mandela in Soweto ahead of next Sunday's
:37:27. > :37:30.funeral. On Wednesday, as usual we have PMQs - and the big question is
:37:31. > :37:33.will Nick Clegg and Harriet Harman be back as stand-ins?
:37:34. > :37:38.On Thursday, George Osborne gives evidence to the Treasury Select
:37:39. > :37:40.Committee on the Autumn Statement. Also on Thursday, Parliament's
:37:41. > :37:47.expenses watchdog, IPSA, is expected to announce an 11% increase to MPs'
:37:48. > :37:51.salaries from 2015. I'm joined now by Tamara Cohen from
:37:52. > :38:00.The Daily Mail and Rafael Behr from the New Statesman. Welcome to you
:38:01. > :38:07.both. Let's start with that news about IPSA proposing the 11%
:38:08. > :38:11.increase. What happens now? It is really difficult for all three party
:38:12. > :38:15.leaders, they all want to see the cost of politics going down not up.
:38:16. > :38:21.The reason that we have IPSA, the independent body looking at MPs'
:38:22. > :38:30.pay, is because they've betrayed the public ours trust in the expenses
:38:31. > :38:36.scandal. Soak for this whopping 11% increase to be recommended, there is
:38:37. > :38:41.nothing that can really be done. But this is just catch up, it is because
:38:42. > :38:48.they have resisted pay increases under the old system in the past
:38:49. > :38:52.that the figure is 11%? Yes, and I am one of the tiny, weird minority
:38:53. > :38:58.of people who feels a bit sorry for MPs on this. In the run-up to the
:38:59. > :39:01.expenses scandal, MPs were given to understand that they could
:39:02. > :39:04.discreetly fill their boots from expenses because was politically
:39:05. > :39:09.impossible for them to award themselves a pay rise. That was
:39:10. > :39:13.compensation. They were then busted doing much, so now it has become
:39:14. > :39:18.impossible for them to give themselves a pay rise because of the
:39:19. > :39:23.expenses scandal. Either way, they are stuck. They can't come out and
:39:24. > :39:26.say that, frankly, people are doing difficult and stressful jobs in the
:39:27. > :39:32.private sector getting paid more than us, because most people in the
:39:33. > :39:37.country get paid less. At some stage, this has to change. Someone
:39:38. > :39:42.has to be able to say, we value this job very highly, it is very
:39:43. > :39:49.difficult and we want high-calibre people. It is not clear how you do
:39:50. > :39:55.that so it does not look like politicians with their noses in the
:39:56. > :40:01.ground. In the trough, probably, but we get your sentiment. Looking at
:40:02. > :40:06.the universal credit system, it will not be quite on-time, nor on budget.
:40:07. > :40:11.Where does this leave Iain Duncan Smith? It is disappointing for the
:40:12. > :40:21.Conservatives, they wanted to go into the next election than saying
:40:22. > :40:26.they have delivered this most ambitious things since the 1940s.
:40:27. > :40:31.Iain Duncan Smith will be making the point to MPs this afternoon that the
:40:32. > :40:35.lessons of previous computer scandals such as the tax credits one
:40:36. > :40:39.a few years back is that it is better to slow down the pace and
:40:40. > :40:44.make sure you get it right. He is saying that I delaying the
:40:45. > :40:52.implementation until 2017 of the least, everyone will be on the
:40:53. > :40:55.scheme and it will be a success. But we have had somebody's saying that
:40:56. > :41:01.Iain Duncan Smith should consider his position? Labour will be keen to
:41:02. > :41:05.pin serious blame, they have been playing catch up on the whole
:41:06. > :41:14.welfare gender. It is tricky for Iain Duncan Smith, this was the one
:41:15. > :41:18.big thing he promised to do. Other conservatives such as George Osborne
:41:19. > :41:23.thought it might not work, the public want to hear that welfare
:41:24. > :41:27.spending is coming down and our job as conservatives is to swing the axe
:41:28. > :41:32.into the benefits budget, not get bogged down in the project. Some
:41:33. > :41:42.people say they are not sure that IDS has the mouse or capability to
:41:43. > :41:46.carry it out. -- has the nous or capability. A powerful Parliamentary
:41:47. > :41:51.committee says he has wasted the best part of ?420 million, so at
:41:52. > :41:58.what point does he take responsibility? Thank you very much.
:41:59. > :42:01.. I'm joined for the rest of the
:42:02. > :42:04.programme by three MPs: the Conservative, Mark Field, Labour's
:42:05. > :42:11.John Woodcock and the Lib Dem Tom Brake. The first question for them
:42:12. > :42:14.is - do they deserve a pay rise? Not just these three MPs - but all MPs.
:42:15. > :42:17.The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority who decide on
:42:18. > :42:23.these things think so - an ELEVEN percent pay rise in fact. -- and 11%
:42:24. > :42:26.pay rise in fact, to be introduced in 2015. But leading politicians of
:42:27. > :42:29.all parties have queued up to condemn the pay award - including
:42:30. > :42:32.Danny Alexander on yesterday's Marr show.
:42:33. > :42:35.I think most people will find it utterly incomprehensible that at a
:42:36. > :42:42.time of pay restraint in the public sector, further squeezes on
:42:43. > :42:46.Government spending, that Ibsen should recommend that. I think it
:42:47. > :42:51.will be highly inappropriate for MPs to get such a big pay rise when
:42:52. > :42:56.public sector workers are seeing their prices capped at 1%. I have
:42:57. > :43:02.said in the past that I would not accept it. What can you do about it
:43:03. > :43:06.as a Government? IPSA is independent, we have made a
:43:07. > :43:10.submission to them that it would not be appropriate at a time of wider
:43:11. > :43:17.public service restraints to go forward.
:43:18. > :43:22.Tom Brake, is it a good thing? No, I think Danny is right. At a time when
:43:23. > :43:28.the public sector is under very strike -- very tight pay restraints,
:43:29. > :43:32.it would be the wrong time for MPs to get an increase. It is always the
:43:33. > :43:38.wrong time, even when times were good, which is why the 11 cents I
:43:39. > :43:45.look so high. Times are bad, which is why now is the bad time. A
:43:46. > :43:51.decision has not taken. This would happen in the next parliament and
:43:52. > :43:57.would be subject to a review. Would Ed Miliband go into 2015 saying they
:43:58. > :44:03.would change the law and there will not be an 11th % pay rise? Ed
:44:04. > :44:07.Miliband has been clear that this should not happen. There is never a
:44:08. > :44:11.right time to do this but there is most definitely a wrong one. We have
:44:12. > :44:20.to look around and understand just how much people are struggling. All
:44:21. > :44:23.of us as a group of people, as Members of Parliament, as a
:44:24. > :44:27.legislative body of government we have to take some responsibility for
:44:28. > :44:29.what has happened to the country. People in the country are
:44:30. > :44:36.struggling, businesses are struggling, this is not the time to
:44:37. > :44:41.do something like this. Can you do anything about it or is it just
:44:42. > :44:45.empty rhetoric? Most of your constituent would expect you to say
:44:46. > :44:52.it is not right, but can you stop it? I think it is right that pay
:44:53. > :44:56.remuneration was taken out of the hands of MPs, but I think it is
:44:57. > :45:02.really important that it is a listen to what the country is saying and
:45:03. > :45:07.act on this. -- really important that IPSA listen. The truth is that
:45:08. > :45:11.IPSA have listened and in the last few months have come back with a
:45:12. > :45:15.cost neutral package. They have said they would strip away some more of
:45:16. > :45:20.the pension rights that MPs have, get rid of some of the allowances,
:45:21. > :45:24.the idea being to make it more transparent and tried to get what we
:45:25. > :45:28.should have had before the scandal in 2009, a little bit more on the
:45:29. > :45:32.headline salary and to take away some of these benefits. No doubt I
:45:33. > :45:41.would accept it. We have an independent body. If you want to
:45:42. > :45:45.undermine IPSA, the whole idea is to draw a line under the scandals of
:45:46. > :45:49.the past. There are many MPs with very large capital games, there
:45:50. > :45:52.would have to be a police investigation into what happened
:45:53. > :45:56.with expenses, which was conveniently done away with when we
:45:57. > :46:00.went down this route. Danny Alexander 's earlier comment, you in
:46:01. > :46:06.government have an opportunity to keep the cost of politics down, you
:46:07. > :46:11.failing to do so. You have added 170 people to the House of Lords and the
:46:12. > :46:16.last election, page ?300 per day expenses, no questions. We have the
:46:17. > :46:21.largest cohort of special advisers, 92, with a 16% rise and that cost
:46:22. > :46:25.over last year. I think it behoves you to get your own house in order
:46:26. > :46:33.with that element of the cost of politics before putting pressure on
:46:34. > :46:38.an independent body. Thank you for pointing that out, I don't think it
:46:39. > :46:47.is the Liberal Democrats who can be accused of this. It is not just you.
:46:48. > :46:50.We wanted a reform of the House of Lords and if that had gone ahead,
:46:51. > :46:56.the cost of politics would have gone down. It is right, the number of
:46:57. > :47:00.peers has gone up, exponentially, I take your point that that is not
:47:01. > :47:04.what you wanted. Are there other areas where you could cap the cost
:47:05. > :47:08.of politics, or reduce it in some ways? With special advisers, there
:47:09. > :47:12.was a pledge to bring down the number of special advisers but it
:47:13. > :47:17.has gone through the roof, as always happens when a new party gets into
:47:18. > :47:21.government. We can still press on the issue of House of Lords reform.
:47:22. > :47:28.The particular proposal in relation to what IPSA is bringing forward is
:47:29. > :47:34.cost neutral. The increase in MPs' salaries would be offset against the
:47:35. > :47:37.reduction in expenses. If they listen to the public in four or five
:47:38. > :47:41.months, this idea that they are going ahead in some sort of ivory
:47:42. > :47:46.tower is completely wrong. You have to accept that 11%, when we have had
:47:47. > :47:49.public sector pay freezes over the last few years, wages have been
:47:50. > :47:54.continually squeezed and most people will say, it is not just a question
:47:55. > :47:59.that you don't deserve it, but just as a comparative with other
:48:00. > :48:04.salaries. It is part and parcel of stripping away elements... The truth
:48:05. > :48:07.is that IPSA came up with this proposal and said we want to
:48:08. > :48:13.benchmark this against other professions, and we will go to the
:48:14. > :48:16.lowest possible figure. Isn't it the same as a headmistress of a London
:48:17. > :48:23.school in the south-east, a police chief? There are lots professions
:48:24. > :48:27.for whom you could make a case ought to be paid differently, but that is
:48:28. > :48:32.never treated in isolation. If you look at public sector workers, who
:48:33. > :48:36.are going through pension changes, they don't see the government coming
:48:37. > :48:42.along and saying, you have got to take care of your pension so here is
:48:43. > :48:46.a whopping salary increase. What you have not answered is IPSA itself,
:48:47. > :48:49.you brought in this new system. The whole point is it was supposed to be
:48:50. > :48:57.independent and now you are bringing down your own system. I am not
:48:58. > :49:01.bringing it down. IPSA have not yet taken a decision, it will be posted
:49:02. > :49:06.thousands 15, it is possible they may come forward with something
:49:07. > :49:09.which is difficult -- it will be post 2015 and it is possible they
:49:10. > :49:18.may come forward with something different. We can't return the
:49:19. > :49:22.money, so we would be left in a position, anyone serving in the 2015
:49:23. > :49:26.Parliament, about what we would do with the increase that they had
:49:27. > :49:34.given us. How much would you lie to be paid? -- like to be paid? I want
:49:35. > :49:42.to see what happens in that review. I think IPSA did a good job of
:49:43. > :49:45.looking at comparators but we are in a extremely difficult financial
:49:46. > :49:49.position as a country. The public sector is not only facing pay
:49:50. > :49:54.increases, but the sorts of things that MPs might be losing in terms of
:49:55. > :49:57.pension rights and expenses are things that people in other areas of
:49:58. > :50:05.work are also losing, so we can't sell it to them on that basis. It
:50:06. > :50:10.goes back to your initial point, there is never going to be a good
:50:11. > :50:17.time to do this. None of it will come into play in this Parliament so
:50:18. > :50:21.the voters will have a say. The benchmarking suggested, and Tom
:50:22. > :50:25.knows this, that MPs should be paid between 74 and 86,000. They came out
:50:26. > :50:28.with the lowest possible figure on the basis that they thought there
:50:29. > :50:32.would be a public backlash. I think they have tried to make this as cost
:50:33. > :50:36.neutral as possible so therefore, let's run with it.
:50:37. > :50:40.Talking about mental health has always been difficult for the last
:50:41. > :50:44.week, one of our guests, John Woodcock, revealed he suffered from
:50:45. > :50:48.depression. That followed last year's debate on mental health in
:50:49. > :50:51.the House of Commons in which a number of MPs revealed their own
:50:52. > :50:59.experience on mental illness. In 1996, I suffered from quite a deep
:51:00. > :51:02.depression. It was related to work issues and other things going on in
:51:03. > :51:07.my life at the moment. That is the first time I have spoken... Some
:51:08. > :51:12.people in my family do not know what I am going to say. Because like a
:51:13. > :51:18.lot of men, you try to deal with it yourself. You don't talk to people.
:51:19. > :51:22.I just hope you realise what I am saying is very difficult for me now.
:51:23. > :51:28.I did not make the decision until I put my notes down, to do it. It is
:51:29. > :51:33.hard, because you don't realise first of all, it creeps up on you
:51:34. > :51:40.very slowly. We are also in politics designed to think that somehow, if
:51:41. > :51:44.you admit fault or fail to, -- failure, you're going to be looked
:51:45. > :51:50.upon in a disparaging way in terms of the electorate but also your
:51:51. > :51:58.peers. I am delighted to say that I have been a practising fruitcake for
:51:59. > :52:05.31 years. It was 13 years ago, at St John's woodchip station, and I
:52:06. > :52:10.remember it vividly, that I was visited by obsessive can disorder --
:52:11. > :52:16.St John's would tube station. It has played a fairly significant part in
:52:17. > :52:20.my life. On occasions it is manageable on on occasions it comes
:52:21. > :52:29.quite difficult, it takes you to some dark places. MPs speaking
:52:30. > :52:35.bravely and openly. Tell us about depression, why you decided to speak
:52:36. > :52:39.out about it publicly. I have been through a stranger, I fell off a
:52:40. > :52:43.ladder, I banged my head, I had a period where I was not able to do
:52:44. > :52:48.much at all. It has been a slow recovery and I still don't have the
:52:49. > :52:52.energy to do what I am -- I want. When I am exhausted I get really
:52:53. > :52:57.low. It took me a while to recognise it. It was actually my wife who
:52:58. > :53:03.said, I think you are depressed. My first reaction was, we are not going
:53:04. > :53:11.there. But then I thought, I can do something about this. It was
:53:12. > :53:15.actually Kevin Jones, Charles and Alistair Campbell, who have spoken
:53:16. > :53:19.out about this brilliantly, who made me think, that as someone in front
:53:20. > :53:25.line politics, I could do this privately. And because of the
:53:26. > :53:29.opportunity they gave me to be able to do something about this by
:53:30. > :53:33.speaking out themselves, I thought, shouldn't I make it public. That is
:53:34. > :53:40.what I decided to do last week. Has it helped? I am glad that I spoke
:53:41. > :53:46.about it. The reaction has been extraordinary. Really amazing. I
:53:47. > :53:52.have had so much goodwill, it has been lovely. But actually, I have
:53:53. > :53:55.had many constituents and others talking to me and saying, they have
:53:56. > :54:01.suffered with problems over the years. Some of them have not been
:54:02. > :54:05.able to get help. Some people saying, now I might get help, which
:54:06. > :54:11.is amazing. One woman spoke to me at the weekend and she said, she had
:54:12. > :54:17.had a bout of very severe mental health problems. She ended up
:54:18. > :54:25.hospitalised. Her mother had said, you need to keep this quiet, don't
:54:26. > :54:29.tell your brother. I think if people like Alistair and Kevin can speak
:54:30. > :54:33.out, it can hopefully change people's perceptions and people can
:54:34. > :54:39.think of it like a physical illness, which is ultimately what we need to
:54:40. > :54:43.get to. There is a stigma, people are embarrassed about it. My father
:54:44. > :54:47.also suffered from mental illness, nobody did want to talk about it or
:54:48. > :54:50.face up to it. Do you think standing up in the House of Commons like
:54:51. > :54:56.that, it is quite a brave thing to do? Will people think less of these
:54:57. > :55:00.people? Dare I say, the more people who do it, the less the stigma will
:55:01. > :55:10.attach. I think it has always been the case that mental health has been
:55:11. > :55:19.this type of area. I want to give more money to it. Even in my own
:55:20. > :55:22.case, I have not suffered from mental health problems but there
:55:23. > :55:26.have been episodes in life, I can think of two, the first was the
:55:27. > :55:31.death of my father and the other in my private life, when I probably
:55:32. > :55:35.was, for a matter of months, feeling so low, thought I could not get out
:55:36. > :55:39.of bed in the morning, this sort of thing. One of the things come in
:55:40. > :55:42.Parliament and in many other workplaces, I hope there is more
:55:43. > :55:46.support and encouragement for people who go through those phases. It is
:55:47. > :55:49.different from a long-term, permanent mental health issue but a
:55:50. > :55:54.lot of us have these short episodes as well. Do you think it is
:55:55. > :56:00.difficult in politics to admit that actually, you do have these low
:56:01. > :56:06.periods, even if it is not a constant illness? It is hard for
:56:07. > :56:09.politicians to admit. It is hard for politicians, partly because the job
:56:10. > :56:14.is so intense and there are stressful occasions. The workload is
:56:15. > :56:18.there a demanding but there are lots of other professions and careers
:56:19. > :56:21.where people are in the same place. I think the more people who talk
:56:22. > :56:25.about it, and recognise that this is not exceptional, this is not
:56:26. > :56:29.something many people will be experiencing in their lives, it is
:56:30. > :56:32.something we need to be aware of and something that employers in
:56:33. > :56:37.particular have a responsible to, to ensure that they can adapt to
:56:38. > :56:42.situations where either they are perhaps recruiting somebody as a
:56:43. > :56:45.mental health problem, or someone during the course of their working
:56:46. > :56:52.life suffers from a problem where the employer has to make
:56:53. > :56:58.adjustments. Thank you. Time to find out the answer to our daily quiz.
:56:59. > :57:00.The question was, what did Ed Balls play at his first piano recital
:57:01. > :57:04.yesterday? Was it Chopsticks, Der Dichter Spricht by Schumann, Angels
:57:05. > :57:12.by Robbie Williams or The Hills Are Alive from the Sound of Music? So
:57:13. > :57:17.what's the correct answer? I was going to say, it should be Angels if
:57:18. > :57:26.he was going to try and keep in with his leader. I suspect it might be
:57:27. > :57:33.the sound of music. Schumann. Well done, it was not the sound of the
:57:34. > :57:37.zip. -- not the sound of music. The Sound of Music is the one that makes
:57:38. > :57:46.him cry. We have a clip of him playing.
:57:47. > :57:58.I think that could be a, B, C or D! You're absolutely right. I think he
:57:59. > :58:03.needed to practice that as much as his Autumn Statement speech. You
:58:04. > :58:10.need to defend Ed Balls here. Not about the piano performance. On the
:58:11. > :58:13.day of the Autumn Statement... All through the Autumn Statement,
:58:14. > :58:18.identikit great deal was actually added to the sum of human knowledge.
:58:19. > :58:24.-- I don't think a great deal. In terms of a Parliamentary show from
:58:25. > :58:29.members of Parliament as a whole, we did not do ourselves proud and we
:58:30. > :58:38.need to do better. Were all of the Tory MPs which to go for Ed Balls?
:58:39. > :58:43.-- whipped. I wasn't there. I think it is great that Ed Balls is taking
:58:44. > :58:46.up the piano at his age. I have a five and a half -year-old son and a
:58:47. > :58:52.two-year-old daughter who are both more proficient than I am. You have
:58:53. > :58:55.got to start learning! Thank you for being our guests. The one o'clock
:58:56. > :58:58.News is on BBC One. Have a great afternoon.