:00:35. > :00:40.Afternoon folks, welcome to the Daily Politics. It never rains but
:00:41. > :00:43.it pours. With more bad weather on the way, the Government is also
:00:44. > :00:46.braced for more political headwinds. Railway lines are down, severe flood
:00:47. > :00:53.warnings in place and people evacuated from their homes. No one
:00:54. > :00:56.expects the Prime Minister to be able to control the weather. But
:00:57. > :00:59.critics say the Government response been too little too late. We'll have
:01:00. > :01:05.the latest. Does David Cameron have a women
:01:06. > :01:09.problem? Ed Miliband thinks so. The Prime Minister said he would lead
:01:10. > :01:11.the way on equality - but female voters, and MPs, seem to be
:01:12. > :01:15.deserting the party. Science and the media - itt's never
:01:16. > :01:20.been an easy relationship, but is it getting worse? We'll be joined by
:01:21. > :01:23.the Government's former chief scientific adviser. And does being a
:01:24. > :01:29.fan of Coronation Street make you more likely to vote Labour? Does a
:01:30. > :01:32.passion for sci-fi make you a Lib Dem? We'll be looking at what
:01:33. > :01:39.people's TV habits tell us about their voting preferences.
:01:40. > :01:45.All that in the next hour. And with us for the whole programme today is
:01:46. > :01:48.Bob May, a former chief scientific adviser to the Government and a
:01:49. > :01:51.former president of the Royal Society. He is now a fellow of
:01:52. > :01:58.Merton College, Oxford, and also sits as a cross bench peer in the
:01:59. > :02:01.House of Lords. Welcome. In an age old British tradition,
:02:02. > :02:05.we're going to start by talking about the weather. Heavy rain is set
:02:06. > :02:10.to continue to batter large parts of the country, in particular the south
:02:11. > :02:14.of England. Yesterday the storm damaged the railway at Dawlish after
:02:15. > :02:21.a part of the sea wall collapsed and left the tracks suspended in
:02:22. > :02:25.mid-air. It's a vital route to the South West, and Network Rail says it
:02:26. > :02:28.could take at least six weeks to repair, although work can't even
:02:29. > :02:32.begin until the weather improves. The Somerset Levels could also be
:02:33. > :02:35.hit - there are two severe flood warnings in place signifying a
:02:36. > :02:38.danger to life. Many flood-hit homes have already been evacuated, and
:02:39. > :02:45.further rainfall raises the prospect of more residents having to leave
:02:46. > :02:49.their houses. Environment Secretary Owen Paterson was meant to be making
:02:50. > :02:55.a statement to MPs, but he had to go into hospital yesterday for an
:02:56. > :02:58.operation on a detached retina. So, for now, the Communities Secretary,
:02:59. > :03:01.Eric Pickles, has assumed responsibility. Here's what he had
:03:02. > :03:11.to say in the Commons a short while ago.
:03:12. > :03:15.In the short term I can announce the Government will provide an
:03:16. > :03:21.additional ?130 million for emergency repairs and maintenance.
:03:22. > :03:26.?30 million in the current year, and ?100 million next year. This will
:03:27. > :03:32.cover costs incurred during the current emergency response and
:03:33. > :03:38.recovery, as well as the essential repairs to ensure that defences are
:03:39. > :03:42.maintained. Emergency work and repairs started in December.
:03:43. > :03:48.However, the full picture of the damage caused to the flood defences,
:03:49. > :03:53.has not emerged and the weather conditions have proved to be so
:03:54. > :03:57.savage. The Government will therefore carry out a rapid review
:03:58. > :04:02.of the additional work needed to restore our flood defences and
:04:03. > :04:10.maintain them. That was Eric Pickles. More on that
:04:11. > :04:15.as the programme goes on. What do you make of the Government response?
:04:16. > :04:19.I think it is appropriate. It might have been better if some of these
:04:20. > :04:23.precautions about preparing flood defences had been done earlier
:04:24. > :04:31.because it is clear we are headed in a direction where it will be more of
:04:32. > :04:36.a threat. There seems to be a real division of opinion between the
:04:37. > :04:39.experts here in London, the Environment Agency and other
:04:40. > :04:45.quangos, and experts on the ground in Somerset. They wanted dredging
:04:46. > :04:52.all along and there has not been treasuring. -- dredging. It would
:04:53. > :05:03.not have stopped the flooding but it may have drained away more quickly.
:05:04. > :05:07.I would include dredging in flood control. You think it was a flood
:05:08. > :05:14.control to stop the dredging -- a mistake? Yes. There is clearly a
:05:15. > :05:20.rift between the Environment Agency and the Government. We should simply
:05:21. > :05:27.be doing both. We should be dredging but we should be preparing barrier
:05:28. > :05:33.defences. That becomes even more important because we are building
:05:34. > :05:40.more homes on flood plains. Yes. You say you will -- we will face more of
:05:41. > :05:44.this. Politicians say endlessly because of global warming, climate
:05:45. > :05:52.change, we will see more of this. Where is the scientific evidence? Go
:05:53. > :06:00.back 100 years to recognising that the more post-industrial burning
:06:01. > :06:04.fossil fuels, we burn 1 million years worth of carbon each year, it
:06:05. > :06:10.thickens the greenhouse blanket and that causes warming. Warming, in a
:06:11. > :06:15.sense, is energy. There is more energy in the weather system. You
:06:16. > :06:22.cannot attribute any single episode to global warming. There have always
:06:23. > :06:26.been extreme events. There is a wonderful blog I came across the
:06:27. > :06:34.other day, an American, who pointed out the fact that Barry Bond broke
:06:35. > :06:40.Babe Ruth's record for the season and he was found to be on steroids.
:06:41. > :06:45.This blog said, you could not attribute any single home run to his
:06:46. > :06:50.being on steroids, but you can attribute the fact that he broke
:06:51. > :06:54.Babe Ruth's record to the fact he broke -- took steroids. What we have
:06:55. > :07:03.got now is whether on steroids. The latest report says that there
:07:04. > :07:09.continues to be a lack of evidence and low confidence regarding the
:07:10. > :07:18.magnitude and frequency of floods on a global scale. That is right. There
:07:19. > :07:22.is uncertainty about the magnitude. But the overall fact that the world
:07:23. > :07:29.is warming is not in doubt. That is not what I am arguing about. What
:07:30. > :07:35.I'm trying to find out is where the scientific evidence is. For
:07:36. > :07:40.example, the -- this leads to more extreme weather. Hurricanes and
:07:41. > :07:47.tornadoes are very low levels compared to historic records.
:07:48. > :07:50.Historic records fluctuate. The basic trajectory is clear. That does
:07:51. > :07:59.not mean you can make predictions moment to moment. The IPCC
:08:00. > :08:06.recognises this. It says it has low confidence. We are always told not
:08:07. > :08:11.to use one month. January has been one of the wettest ever on record.
:08:12. > :08:20.If you take the months from January -- from October to January, 1915 was
:08:21. > :08:26.worse. 1661. Where they caused by global warming? No. Weather is
:08:27. > :08:31.weather. Home runs our home runs. The analogy I gave is a good one.
:08:32. > :08:37.Some people hit more home runs than others. People on steroids do
:08:38. > :08:42.better. There is more energy in the system and you get more extreme
:08:43. > :08:45.events. Now, let's stick with this story
:08:46. > :08:48.because there's an ongoing political row about the floods and whether or
:08:49. > :08:52.not the Government has been sufficient. In particular, there are
:08:53. > :08:55.conflicting claims from government and opposition about how much is
:08:56. > :08:58.being spent on flood defences. David Cameron and Ed Miliband clashed
:08:59. > :09:07.during PMQs yesterday - here's what they said.
:09:08. > :09:12.Let me answer very directly the issue about flooding. This
:09:13. > :09:16.government has spent 2.4 billion over this four-year period, which is
:09:17. > :09:23.more than the ?2.2 billion spent under the previous comment. A
:09:24. > :09:26.further ?100 million will be made available to fund essential flood
:09:27. > :09:31.repairs and maintenance in the next year. I can confirm that is new
:09:32. > :09:34.money that would protect more houses and help our country more with
:09:35. > :09:40.floods, and we will continue to do what is right.
:09:41. > :09:44.Mr Speaker, I have got to say that the investment by the Government has
:09:45. > :09:51.fallen during this period and not risen. But the reality is that the
:09:52. > :09:54.scale of challenge we face from climate change and floods demands
:09:55. > :09:57.that we have it combines a look at the investment required.
:09:58. > :10:04.Competing claims at Prime Minister's Questions? Whatever next. Yesterday
:10:05. > :10:09.I put it to Francis Maude that the Government was spending about 100
:10:10. > :10:13.million less during the lifetime of this Parliament. And it would fall
:10:14. > :10:18.by 100 million. He said local authorities were spending more. I
:10:19. > :10:22.said that central government could not take the credit. That is where
:10:23. > :10:25.we left it. Well, to talk us through the numbers we're joined by Will
:10:26. > :10:27.Moy, director of Full Fact, an organisation which examines how
:10:28. > :10:34.politicians and the media use statistics.
:10:35. > :10:37.Mark our card? What David Cameron was doing yesterday was comparing
:10:38. > :10:41.for the first four years of this government with the last four years
:10:42. > :10:46.of the previous government. The numbers he gave war, on the face of
:10:47. > :10:54.it, the right ones. But when you take inflation into account,
:10:55. > :11:01.actually there was a slight real term dip. He was comparing the first
:11:02. > :11:07.four years of this government. That is really significant. The first
:11:08. > :11:12.year of this government was still on Labour's spending plans. It was the
:11:13. > :11:17.largest year of spending in the last ten years. Ed Miliband has a problem
:11:18. > :11:20.with that. He wants to compare the Labour spending period with the
:11:21. > :11:25.coalition spending plan period, which began after they came into
:11:26. > :11:29.office. If you do that, you see a more significant fall in real terms.
:11:30. > :11:36.Shouldn't politicians always be held to account, to use real term
:11:37. > :11:41.figures? In other words, spending after you take account of inflation.
:11:42. > :11:47.We know that since the financial crash, inflation in this country has
:11:48. > :11:52.been pretty high. At times it has reached 5%. Simply saying that I am
:11:53. > :12:06.spending ?1 and you only spent 90p five years ago, tells us nothing? I
:12:07. > :12:08.couldn't agree more. What about the claim of Francis Maude yesterday
:12:09. > :12:14.that local governments were spending more? There is a new scheme that
:12:15. > :12:18.started in 2011 called partnership funding. That is trying to get
:12:19. > :12:24.people other than central government spending more on flood invention and
:12:25. > :12:30.floods protection. That is raising about 148 million. It is relatively
:12:31. > :12:33.small compare the two overall flood spending but it is bringing in money
:12:34. > :12:39.from local authorities and utility companies. Compare to that, I think
:12:40. > :12:42.in the four years previously, there was something like ?30 million of
:12:43. > :12:50.external spending. There has been a rise. The Prime Minister has
:12:51. > :12:54.announced another 100 million for this in the context of an overall
:12:55. > :13:00.budget of 2 billion. Does that make much of a difference? It turns out
:13:01. > :13:06.that half an hour ago Eric Pickles gave a new version of those numbers
:13:07. > :13:10.in the House of Commons. What we found out was that as well as the
:13:11. > :13:14.100 million the Prime Minister told us about yesterday, we are getting
:13:15. > :13:19.30 million more to be spent in this financial year. That, as I say,
:13:20. > :13:25.makes all the difference. There was a real terms fall either side of the
:13:26. > :13:34.election. If you add in that 30 million, it becomes a flat drop.
:13:35. > :13:39.Your viewers are sitting at home in their lounge watching their
:13:40. > :13:41.television with their feet in flood water, the thing to take away is
:13:42. > :13:48.that you are talking small differences. The largest difference
:13:49. > :13:52.you can get as if you take Ed Miliband's spending review period
:13:53. > :13:57.and adjusted to inflation, there is a 10% drop from Labour to the
:13:58. > :13:59.coalition. Here we are seeing that ?30 million makes a difference
:14:00. > :14:08.between a tiny rise and a fairly tiny fall. Overall it is flat. The
:14:09. > :14:15.issue is not just how much is being spent it is how much you spend it.
:14:16. > :14:21.That is always true. You say that we are not doing enough, but enough of
:14:22. > :14:28.this money is not going on flood defences? That is my opinion,
:14:29. > :14:36.rightly or wrongly. Is it expensive to build flood defences? I do not
:14:37. > :14:41.know so much about that. I am not an expert. We have looked at the
:14:42. > :14:54.numbers on spending but not what you do about flooding. I would say it
:14:55. > :14:57.is. Thanks for coming in. Now it's time for our daily quiz.
:14:58. > :15:01.The question for today is, which of these is the odd one out? Downtown
:15:02. > :15:04.Abbey. Peter Kay's Phoenix Nights. Have I Got News for You. Or The
:15:05. > :15:08.Daily Politics? We'll give you the answer at the end of the show, and
:15:09. > :15:13.talking a bit more about the significance of those programmes.
:15:14. > :15:16.Londoners are facing a second day of travel disruption as the 48 hour
:15:17. > :15:23.Tube strike continues in a dispute over ticket office closures and job
:15:24. > :15:26.losses. Talks between the RMT and TSSA unions and Tube bosses are
:15:27. > :15:29.scheduled take place tomorrow, but the government is now considering
:15:30. > :15:41.declaring the London Underground an essential service in order to curb
:15:42. > :15:44.the threat of future strikes. But even though it might feel like
:15:45. > :15:48.walk outs are more common than they used to be, the opposite is in fact
:15:49. > :15:54.true. Under Edward Heath's government in 1972, almost 24
:15:55. > :15:58.million days were lost to strikes. That's the equivalent of the entire
:15:59. > :16:03.workforce at the time having one strike day that year. The number of
:16:04. > :16:07.disputes remained high under the Thatcher government during the 80s,
:16:08. > :16:18.with the worst year being 1984, when more than 27 million days were lost.
:16:19. > :16:21.The arrival of the 1990s, and John Major's government saw a massive
:16:22. > :16:35.drop off in the number of strikes, with just 6.5 million days lost
:16:36. > :16:37.throughout the entire decade. The numbers remained similarly low
:16:38. > :16:41.throughout the noughties, with the number of days a year lost averaging
:16:42. > :16:53.well under 700,000 right up until the end of 2013. Meanwhile, trade
:16:54. > :17:02.union membership has fallen dramatically since the 1970s. At its
:17:03. > :17:07.height, union membership was more than 13 million in 1979 when
:17:08. > :17:11.Margaret Thatcher came to power. Today that figure has halved, with
:17:12. > :17:23.less than 6.5 million trade union members, representing less than one
:17:24. > :17:27.in four workers. But is it too easy for unions to
:17:28. > :17:30.call a strike with turnouts of less than 50%, meaning the majority of
:17:31. > :17:38.union members may not have voted in favour of a strike? To discuss that
:17:39. > :17:41.I'm joined by Conservative MP Dominic Raab and Labour MP and
:17:42. > :17:52.member of the RMT parliamentary group, Jeremy Corbyn.
:17:53. > :17:57.You have seen the strike figures. Free societies do have strikes every
:17:58. > :18:03.now and then. But it is hardly a major problem in Britain any more.
:18:04. > :18:08.In 2011, we had the worst number of strike days lost for over 20 years.
:18:09. > :18:13.I would agree with you in general... It is still peanuts
:18:14. > :18:20.compared to the 1970s. We macro I'm not sure if you look at the damage
:18:21. > :18:26.to the economy every day. -- I am not sure. The right to strike is
:18:27. > :18:30.part of our tradition but it is not a license to wreak havoc. The
:18:31. > :18:37.minority of the unions are trying to achieve that. If you think the trade
:18:38. > :18:40.unions are militant, is the management puzzle and job to stand
:18:41. > :18:46.up to them? It is not the job to bring in new rules for a problem
:18:47. > :18:50.that is specific and not nationwide. We have been there with Bob Crow
:18:51. > :18:56.many times before. He negotiates, and then, the 11th hour, he engages
:18:57. > :19:03.in militant brinkmanship one he doesn't get exactly what he wants.
:19:04. > :19:10.He wins! He is good for his workers. In terms of RMT and DTS S A, they
:19:11. > :19:13.have got less than a third of their own union members supporting them.
:19:14. > :19:21.You have got a militant minority wreaking havoc. I don't see many
:19:22. > :19:31.people on the picket line. Intimidation goes on. Do you have
:19:32. > :19:37.evidence? Where? Where is the evidence? Let me answer the
:19:38. > :19:46.question. One of the problems is they don't not split up industrial
:19:47. > :19:49.relations and keep the data on employment. There is anecdotal
:19:50. > :19:56.evidence but we don't have any statistics. One other problem. What
:19:57. > :20:01.we need to do is to say to Bob Crow, call off the strike. The problem for
:20:02. > :20:05.Labour is that since 2010, through their central office and local
:20:06. > :20:09.associations, they have received ?442,000 from these unions. It
:20:10. > :20:14.strengthens the perception that Labour is in hock to the unions.
:20:15. > :20:20.Let's stick to the issue of whether the law should be changed. Surely it
:20:21. > :20:24.is relevant. Our viewers will decide. What do you say to this,
:20:25. > :20:29.that we can't have strikes that are called on a low turnout with only a
:20:30. > :20:34.majority of people voting for them? There seems to be an obsession with
:20:35. > :20:40.personalising this around Bob Crow. That is odd. Why don't we address
:20:41. > :20:47.the issue. Namely, the loss of 1000 jobs, the close of the ticket
:20:48. > :20:52.offices. Union members were asked to ballot on the issue. It was
:20:53. > :20:56.available to all. It is monitored by an independent office and the result
:20:57. > :21:00.was obtained. The union had the power to call out its members on
:21:01. > :21:03.strike. It went through the negotiations, they did not succeed
:21:04. > :21:11.in bringing about a resolution, and the strike has been called. It is
:21:12. > :21:15.within the law to strike. The point is, he is saying the law should be
:21:16. > :21:20.changed so there should be a minimum threshold. Fewer than one in four
:21:21. > :21:29.Tube workers have voted to be on strike. He is saying there should be
:21:30. > :21:34.a threshold, where 50% of members have to vote before it is
:21:35. > :21:46.legitimate. There are no threshold on other elections. The mayor was
:21:47. > :21:55.elected on a 40% turnout. 38. None of us achieve 50% of our electorate.
:21:56. > :22:02.There is an underlying issue that is not addressed. It ought to get more
:22:03. > :22:06.attention, both from economists and politicians. The issue in this
:22:07. > :22:13.strike is automation and IT, brilliant advances that bridges lots
:22:14. > :22:24.of good things, have made it possible to run the underground with
:22:25. > :22:33.at least 1000 fewer people. Machine doesn't deal with drunken attackers
:22:34. > :22:41.at night. When it was pointed out to the Chancellor that many of these
:22:42. > :22:44.issues are IT and so on, and are destroying jobs and critic
:22:45. > :22:48.problems, he said, but of course, they are creating jobs. The point
:22:49. > :22:57.is, they are destroying more jobs than they create. Do you want to
:22:58. > :23:03.stop change? I would like to see more academic work on the
:23:04. > :23:10.implications of this. They are not discussed. I'm not sure that's
:23:11. > :23:16.true. Economically, only history, IT revolution has created more jobs. If
:23:17. > :23:19.I just go back to Jeremy's point about MPs and councillors not having
:23:20. > :23:25.a threshold, when we are elected, everybody affected by the vote gets
:23:26. > :23:31.a chance to vote. When RMT going to strike action, 8 million Londoners
:23:32. > :23:36.don't get to vote. It is wrong that you have got a militant minority
:23:37. > :23:40.able to inflict damage on the overwhelming number of Londoners.
:23:41. > :23:48.Let's get back to re-enter -- reality. Let's have a referendum on
:23:49. > :23:53.closing that it offices. If you want a comparison, we should do a
:23:54. > :24:00.referendum on strike action. Why? Let us go back to reality. The
:24:01. > :24:11.changes proposed involve no compulsory redundancies, enclosure
:24:12. > :24:16.of ticket offices. -- the closure. A lot of the people will be redeployed
:24:17. > :24:19.to be on the forecourts and platforms, to be a more helpful
:24:20. > :24:28.presence that they are behind thick glass. 100,000 people use the ticket
:24:29. > :24:36.offices every day. It is 3% of transactions, but a lot are for help
:24:37. > :24:42.and advice. But look, also, at ticket offices at the major
:24:43. > :24:46.stations. There is always a large number of people trying to use them,
:24:47. > :24:48.particularly visitors to London whose first language is not English,
:24:49. > :24:54.people with disabilities, many people. People on the concourses
:24:55. > :25:00.will help them. I understand there is a change in the ticket process.
:25:01. > :25:03.All the unions recognised that technology comes. They recognise the
:25:04. > :25:08.need for 24-hour working. That is going to take cost and staff. Take
:25:09. > :25:12.out the ticket offices and the information source, no guarantees of
:25:13. > :25:15.the number of people on the stations overnight, and I just wonder if
:25:16. > :25:20.these ticket offices are going to be replaced by some retail outlet and
:25:21. > :25:28.we then have a rather less well staffed station and we go back to
:25:29. > :25:33.the days of attacks in stations. What do you say to that? These are
:25:34. > :25:42.all reasonable points. They are the bread and butter of local politics.
:25:43. > :25:50.The mayor was against the closure of ticket offices. Try and change it
:25:51. > :25:54.through the democratic process. What is going on here is when they don't
:25:55. > :25:57.get their own way, the unions don't negotiate all reason, they say, we
:25:58. > :26:02.will have a strike that inflict massive damage of the economy.
:26:03. > :26:11.Actually, if we have a reform to prevent a right to strike, three to
:26:12. > :26:15.one the public are in favour. What with the safeguard become in your
:26:16. > :26:22.mind? I would not abolish the to strike. That is what you are
:26:23. > :26:27.proposing. What are you proposing? In the transport services, we would
:26:28. > :26:31.say you can't strike unless you can carry out majority of your members.
:26:32. > :26:35.Then it is legitimate. We are talking about a safeguard for the
:26:36. > :26:40.majority of hard-working Londoners. In New York they have destruction on
:26:41. > :26:44.the right to strike in public services. It hasn't stopped strikes.
:26:45. > :26:50.At the end of the day, stop being so obsessed about Bob Crow! Why don't
:26:51. > :26:57.you meet him? He is a nice chap. I have met him. Can I point out to you
:26:58. > :27:02.that on this seat yesterday, the Cabinet Minister Francis Maude gave
:27:03. > :27:09.short shrift to the idea of a minimum turnout requirement. The
:27:10. > :27:11.government is looking at designating the underground as an essential
:27:12. > :27:22.service, restricted the right strike. -- restricting the right to
:27:23. > :27:28.strike. You say the technological change has destroyed more jobs than
:27:29. > :27:31.it has created. Yet this country has gone through massive technological
:27:32. > :27:36.change in the person eyes-macro past 30 or 40 years and more people are
:27:37. > :27:42.employed than ever before. -- in the past 30 or 40 years. The issue goes
:27:43. > :27:47.beyond what we are talking about two. There is a good article in the
:27:48. > :27:54.current issue of the New York review of books which points out that the
:27:55. > :28:03.increasing ratio of the wealth of the top few percent to the people
:28:04. > :28:08.toward the bottom of the spectrum increases and increases. That is
:28:09. > :28:14.also a corollary of job destruction. It is a complicated economic issue
:28:15. > :28:19.that has received very, very little attention. Well, you have brought it
:28:20. > :28:26.two hours today. Gentlemen, thank you.
:28:27. > :28:30.Now, the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition, both of them men,
:28:31. > :28:33.clashed yesterday over whether the government had done enough to
:28:34. > :28:35.promote women in politics. As one parliamentary sketch writer
:28:36. > :28:38.observed, we were treated to the spectacle of a party dominated by
:28:39. > :28:42.men mocking a party even more dominated by men for being dominated
:28:43. > :28:46.by men. In a moment this man, that's me, will be joined by two women to
:28:47. > :28:48.discuss this issue. But first let's listen to what the men had to say
:28:49. > :28:53.yesterday. Look at the all-male front bench
:28:54. > :28:57.before us. He says he wants to represent the whole country. Mr
:28:58. > :29:01.Speaker, I guess they didn't let women into the Burlington club,
:29:02. > :29:05.either. There we go. He said a third of his ministers would be women. He
:29:06. > :29:13.is nowhere near meeting the target. Half of the women here have resigned
:29:14. > :29:18.or been sacked. In his Cabinet, get this, in his Cabinet, there are as
:29:19. > :29:25.many men who went to it in Westminster as women. -- to eat in
:29:26. > :29:32.or Westminster. Is it his fault that the Conservative party has a fault
:29:33. > :29:37.with women? Here are the figures. Of the full members of the Cabinet who
:29:38. > :29:45.are conservatives, 24%, a quarter, are women. Not enough. I want to see
:29:46. > :29:51.it grow. Of the front bench, the ministers, 20% are women. That is
:29:52. > :29:55.below what I want to achieve in 33%. We are making progress and we will
:29:56. > :29:58.make more progress. With me now is the Conservative MP, Mary Macleod,
:29:59. > :30:01.and the Labour MP, Emily Thornberry, who is also the Shadow Attorney
:30:02. > :30:05.General You're watching the Daily Politics - and we've been joined by
:30:06. > :30:07.viewers in Scotland who have been watching First Minister's Questions
:30:08. > :30:10.from Holyrood. Why does the Conservative Party have such a
:30:11. > :30:15.problem with women? I don't think the Conservative Party has a problem
:30:16. > :30:24.with women. Until Labour can say they have got a female leader, they
:30:25. > :30:32.can start pointing. Labour would say that over half of their MPs are
:30:33. > :30:45.women. Only 48 of your MPs are. They have got 169 men and 80 six women.
:30:46. > :30:52.You have got 48 women out of 256. Out of a cabinet of 22, you have got
:30:53. > :30:58.for women. What is your problem? The Prime Minister has said we need to
:30:59. > :31:02.do more. The reason the cabinet is as it is is that in the last
:31:03. > :31:10.election, prior to that, we only had 17 women as female MPs. It would be
:31:11. > :31:13.quite nice if they promoted women writing to Cabinet, but
:31:14. > :31:21.realistically we make our way up the ladder. 56% of female Conservative
:31:22. > :31:27.MPs have got a role in government in some form. At this rate it will be
:31:28. > :31:32.the next century before we meet -- you reach equality. The Prime
:31:33. > :31:37.Minister has said we have more to do. That is like saying it is
:31:38. > :31:43.raining in February. But this will not happen in your lifetime? I do
:31:44. > :31:49.not agree. I think it will change. He has committed to 30% of female
:31:50. > :31:52.ministers by 2015. Before the last election he did a co-led to the
:31:53. > :31:58.public to say we need more women in Parliament. We need a more diverse
:31:59. > :32:02.Parliament. Parliament has to be representative of the country. That
:32:03. > :32:10.is why we increased from 17 women to 49 women. That is progress. Has
:32:11. > :32:15.Labour cracked the equality issue in terms of representation or have you
:32:16. > :32:24.got a lot more to do? Half of your Shadow Cabinet is female. You are
:32:25. > :32:29.quite right, by the way, it is 86 women and 169 men, so it is not 50,
:32:30. > :32:37.50. You still have got some ground to make up? Yes, we have got 30
:32:38. > :32:44.something percent of women MPs, and nearly have the Shadow Cabinet. I
:32:45. > :32:50.was giving you more credit than you deserved! On our side yesterday we
:32:51. > :32:59.had lots of women on our front benches. We moved people around. To
:33:00. > :33:08.make the point! They normally sit on the front bench. That is the Shadow
:33:09. > :33:17.Cabinet. We put them all together with if you men in the middle. We
:33:18. > :33:21.reorganised it. It was accurate. Let's look at this picture. I should
:33:22. > :33:28.welcome our viewers from Scotland who have joined us. We are talking
:33:29. > :33:33.about women or lack of in Parliament. On the Tory side. That
:33:34. > :33:41.is the Conservative front bench we are looking at. It is clearly
:33:42. > :33:46.embarrassing that you are all men sitting there, even the few women
:33:47. > :33:49.that you have or not there. And it is a disaster of party management
:33:50. > :33:52.because we knew in advance this was going to come of it and yet you
:33:53. > :34:02.still could not but a token woman on the bench. We do not have token
:34:03. > :34:09.women. Do not do them a disservice. If you pan out, the women sit on the
:34:10. > :34:15.Prime Minister's side and there are not any women on the other side. In
:34:16. > :34:20.terms of perception, it is not good to have a front bench full of men.
:34:21. > :34:27.That is something I hope will change in the future. There are women
:34:28. > :34:32.behind. That is quite unusual. Normally Theresa May will be there,
:34:33. > :34:42.Maria Miller Theresa Villiers, Justine Greening. There are women
:34:43. > :34:46.behind. I'm not making an excuse on this. I say, just as the Prime
:34:47. > :34:52.Minister says, there is more to be done. The Labour Party have more to
:34:53. > :34:57.do. This is why I set up the all-party group for women in
:34:58. > :35:03.Parliament. We are doing an inquiry into why we don't have enough women
:35:04. > :35:07.in any the parties. Labour has a plan. At least we have a plan and it
:35:08. > :35:13.will work. The plan we have is working in that we have nearly 40%.
:35:14. > :35:22.You have positive discrimination. I don't believe in positive
:35:23. > :35:34.discrimination. You have to do something about it. Let me speak.
:35:35. > :35:37.Let me talk about one thing. The Prime Minister and the Chancellor of
:35:38. > :35:43.the Exchequer, the two most powerful people in government, have private
:35:44. > :35:47.parliamentary secretaries. They are always there informally with the
:35:48. > :35:51.parameter and the Chancellor. Of the six which they have had, they have
:35:52. > :35:56.only ever had one woman. That says to me that they do not know how to
:35:57. > :36:07.listen to women and they are not interested. They are off the radar.
:36:08. > :36:21.Has Ed Miliband got a woman? Yes, Karen Black. Try not listening to
:36:22. > :36:27.Karen Black! Many of your women are not going to contest the next
:36:28. > :36:32.election? Yes but Labour will have women it would not contest the next
:36:33. > :36:37.election. They have more women so they can afford to lose more. I am
:36:38. > :36:43.slightly surprised by this but it does not seem to be affecting how
:36:44. > :36:50.people vote. Your lead among women is smaller than disease among men,
:36:51. > :36:57.according to the latest poll. You have got a 3% lead among women and a
:36:58. > :37:00.6% lead among men. Are you sure? We are normally well ahead when it
:37:01. > :37:09.comes to women. I don't know where you got your facts today! It is
:37:10. > :37:18.YouGov. A reputable polling organisation. Normally we are ahead.
:37:19. > :37:25.It could have been done by men! We will leave it there.
:37:26. > :37:29.We didn't get on to science but the representation of women is even
:37:30. > :37:31.worse than politics. It is getting better.
:37:32. > :37:42.Today is the UN sponsored international day of zero tolerance
:37:43. > :37:44.to female genital mutilation. The Government wants to find out the
:37:45. > :37:50.full scale of the problem in Britain. This morning, ministers
:37:51. > :37:58.have said NHS hospitals will have to provide information on patients who
:37:59. > :38:03.suffer are at risk of suffering. Here is Vicky Young on College
:38:04. > :38:08.Green. The practice has been illegal here
:38:09. > :38:12.in Britain for almost 30 years. There has not been a single
:38:13. > :38:15.prosecution. Campaigners are hoping to change that. They feel their
:38:16. > :38:24.voice has been heard a little bit more. People about this now. Lynne
:38:25. > :38:28.Featherstone, the international development minister is here. And
:38:29. > :38:34.I'm joined by a victim. What is the Government role? Is a massive role.
:38:35. > :38:40.In the last 18 months we have gone from 0260. This morning we had
:38:41. > :38:46.government meetings. Every department is contributing. The DPP
:38:47. > :38:52.believes we are near prosecutions. Health, for the first time if you
:38:53. > :38:58.have had female genital mutilation, it will be recorded. DFID, we have
:38:59. > :39:04.just contracted a consortium to support a global campaign against
:39:05. > :39:09.female genital mutilation. We have 20,000 girls at risk every year
:39:10. > :39:12.intrinsically connected to the countries of origin. You are
:39:13. > :39:23.incredibly young when it happens to you? Yes, I was seven. Those at risk
:39:24. > :39:25.our primary school aged children. It is about adults coming forward and
:39:26. > :39:31.looking to prevent it as opposed to waiting to children that my four
:39:32. > :39:36.children to speak up. It is now time to break the cycle. I think we will
:39:37. > :39:41.be doing that. Whose role is it which begat on behalf of those
:39:42. > :39:46.girls? I think it is everybody. We have been talking about this for the
:39:47. > :39:51.last 30 years as a cultural issue. We're now talking about it as a form
:39:52. > :39:55.of violence against women and girls. It is not about having conversations
:39:56. > :40:00.with those that are practising or affected. They are disempowered and
:40:01. > :40:04.disengaged at times. It is about those who have the privilege to
:40:05. > :40:09.speak up. I was immensely privileged to have access to education and to
:40:10. > :40:13.become empowered. When we start of this work in Bristol six years ago,
:40:14. > :40:21.we had six goals. Now we have more than 100. -- six girls. For a lot of
:40:22. > :40:25.African families this is the norm, isn't it? That is the interesting
:40:26. > :40:32.thing. Part of the programme is about research into what works, what
:40:33. > :40:35.is the evidence base? Different things work in different countries.
:40:36. > :40:39.Behaviour changes what you are really after. I have just returned
:40:40. > :40:49.from Burkina Faso. You need leadership. Politicians, cultural
:40:50. > :40:53.leaders, religious leaders. The communities. Everybody needs to work
:40:54. > :40:58.together on a programme of change and recognise the harm that is done.
:40:59. > :41:02.This is not some benign rites of passage. This is extremely harmful,
:41:03. > :41:07.dangerous and can result in death. Have politicians been too scared to
:41:08. > :41:13.speak out because of cultural sensitivity? There has been before
:41:14. > :41:17.but thanks to Lynne Featherstone there has been great attraction in
:41:18. > :41:21.the conversation. It is about leadership. We have finally got
:41:22. > :41:29.leadership. Would prosecution make any difference? Prosecution gives
:41:30. > :41:33.justice to the survivor. It will show the fact that people are
:41:34. > :41:42.looking out for this crime would essentially it is about present --
:41:43. > :41:50.preventing it. Legislation also makes it a criminal act. For me when
:41:51. > :41:55.people talk about prosecution, ultimately chose the failure of
:41:56. > :42:02.those charged with safeguarding. Do you think have a role? Everybody has
:42:03. > :42:06.a role. As this cross government meeting this morning, everybody was
:42:07. > :42:11.putting forward ideas of how to move this further forward. The Department
:42:12. > :42:17.for Education is fully engaged. Statutory guidance on safeguarding
:42:18. > :42:20.will make a huge difference. Also, information being provided to
:42:21. > :42:25.teachers. They do not always feel comfortable enough to deal with what
:42:26. > :42:30.is in front of them. I should mention the NSPCC helpline. That is
:42:31. > :42:36.showing wonderful results. A lot of professionals are using it to find
:42:37. > :42:40.out what they do. Also, prevention. Families are phoning to say, I think
:42:41. > :42:44.this is going to happen. Prevention is better. A lot of this is about
:42:45. > :42:53.women in these families. Mothers speaking out? This. But they were
:42:54. > :42:57.not speak out until there is a safe space provided for them. In October
:42:58. > :43:00.last year we organised a visit by Lynne Featherstone to meet some
:43:01. > :43:05.women in Bristol last year. Those women had never spoken about the
:43:06. > :43:10.issue. We provided a safe space for people to listen to them. To show
:43:11. > :43:18.them that we are standing with them. There is help out there.
:43:19. > :43:21.Thank you very much. The feeling that things really are changing. The
:43:22. > :43:30.aim to eradicate this practice within a generation.
:43:31. > :43:34.Thank you. While we have been on air the Bank of England have announced
:43:35. > :43:38.that interest rates are staying at 0.5%. It will continue with
:43:39. > :43:44.quantitative easing of printing money electronically. The Federal
:43:45. > :43:47.reserve in America reining back. Communities Secretary Eric Pickles
:43:48. > :43:52.has just finished making a statement to MPs in the House of Commons about
:43:53. > :43:57.the flood crisis. He has moved into the central lobby to speak to the
:43:58. > :44:03.Daily Politics. Welcome to the programme. People in the Somerset
:44:04. > :44:08.Levels have been underwater now for a day after day after day. Why has
:44:09. > :44:14.it taken a visit by Prince Charles to get the Government of its
:44:15. > :44:20.backside? We responded to requests from Somerset immediately they were
:44:21. > :44:25.made. We have been working very closely with the County Council. We
:44:26. > :44:29.have certainly not been dragging our feet. Except that nothing seems to
:44:30. > :44:35.help the plight of the people in Somerset? Nothing will substantially
:44:36. > :44:40.help the people of the Somerset Levels until the water starts to go
:44:41. > :44:45.down. We have at our disposal in enormous numbers of high volume
:44:46. > :44:49.pumps which can take the water out. But it needs to be able to go
:44:50. > :44:55.somewhere. There is no point in pumping water into more water. Is it
:44:56. > :45:00.now the Government position that it was a mistake to follow the advice
:45:01. > :45:09.of the Environment Agency and stop dredging in the Somerset Levels?
:45:10. > :45:16.Back. Several years ago. I am not seeking blame. -- that was stopped
:45:17. > :45:21.several years ago. Given that the levels are largely artificial, and
:45:22. > :45:29.when they would put together for Charles the first it was intended
:45:30. > :45:34.they should be dredged. Was it a mistake for the Environment Agency
:45:35. > :45:41.to stop the dredging? It doesn't seem to have worked for them too
:45:42. > :45:49.well. If you just want me to chase the word, I will chase the word. I'm
:45:50. > :45:54.trying to give the Environment Agency credit for what they have
:45:55. > :46:01.done elsewhere. There could be a time when we want to apportion
:46:02. > :46:07.blame. I just think the important thing is to get on with the job, try
:46:08. > :46:15.to get the levels down, offer some detection, look towards some
:46:16. > :46:21.long-term maintenance and repair, do something. The Prime Minister has
:46:22. > :46:23.announced another 100 million in spending for flood defences. You
:46:24. > :46:34.have announced another 30 million today. Given the millions of homes
:46:35. > :46:39.that are now in flood lanes -- flood plains, and scientists saying we can
:46:40. > :46:47.inspect more of this weather, is that just a drop in a flood? ?100
:46:48. > :46:51.million goes a long way. It is 100 million next year and 30 million
:46:52. > :46:57.this year. I was looking up the figures for building on a flood
:46:58. > :47:02.plain and they are at a record low. They are the lowest they have been
:47:03. > :47:11.since records began. When experts object to houses on the flood plain,
:47:12. > :47:21.from what I can see it was something like 99.3% rejection rates. Do you
:47:22. > :47:26.still claim you are spending more in flood defences in real terms than
:47:27. > :47:30.before? There hasn't been a huge inflation over the last ten years.
:47:31. > :47:40.The Labour Party spent ?2.7 billion in the last five years, and we will
:47:41. > :47:48.spend ?3.1 billion. That is money terms, not real terms. In real
:47:49. > :47:55.terms, it is less. I would not accept that. You are a noted
:47:56. > :48:02.economist. There has been an increase in inflation from 2009
:48:03. > :48:08.until now that would account for such a big difference. If you apply
:48:09. > :48:16.the GDP deflator to the original 2.7, you find it is a lot more than
:48:17. > :48:22.3.1. The 2.7 was actually an enhanced figure after the 2007
:48:23. > :48:27.floods. What we are looking for is an emergency supply. Frankly, if you
:48:28. > :48:35.are down in the levels listening to this, you are not going to care. The
:48:36. > :48:41.people in the Levels, there is not thousands of them, it is small
:48:42. > :48:47.number. It doesn't make their pain any less. What can they hope to get,
:48:48. > :48:52.either from local government, which you, in the end, oversee, or from
:48:53. > :49:00.central government to help them recover? There is a whole load of
:49:01. > :49:05.stuff we will do. It will be much easier to get larger sums of money
:49:06. > :49:10.to local authorities and local authorities will have that much more
:49:11. > :49:13.confidence. Sedgemoor district council will have more confidence in
:49:14. > :49:22.terms of spending that money. At it will be a combination -- it will be
:49:23. > :49:26.a combination of local authorities, and of course more we have got to
:49:27. > :49:32.recognise that a lot of economic activity has been disrupted. Will
:49:33. > :49:37.the government, not you personally, will you make sure that insurance
:49:38. > :49:44.companies are speedy in meeting the legitimate claims from the people
:49:45. > :49:50.who have suffered damage? I have had a discussion with the insurance
:49:51. > :49:54.companies. That would be our endeavour. It would certainly be our
:49:55. > :49:59.endeavour to make sure local authorities, where they have had to
:50:00. > :50:07.pay out, that we will pay them quickly. Thanks for coming so
:50:08. > :50:11.quickly. We appreciate it. It is literally water under the bridge by
:50:12. > :50:17.now. It is incomprehensible that they should have decided to stop
:50:18. > :50:20.dredging. It is common sense. But it became Environment Agency policy.
:50:21. > :50:32.Some people suspect the agency's policy was to return this bit of
:50:33. > :50:41.land to Martians. -- marshland. I think there will be a lot of
:50:42. > :50:44.questions asked. Is Blue Monday is the most
:50:45. > :50:49.depressing day of the year? Is aspirin linked to cancer? Is a glass
:50:50. > :50:53.of red wine a day good for you? There's plenty of science reporting
:50:54. > :50:57.in the media every day. As a general rule, if there's a question in there
:50:58. > :51:01.you can take it with a pinch of salt. Who knows, that might turn out
:51:02. > :51:14.to be a miracle cure, too. So is there a problem with the way science
:51:15. > :51:19.is reported? Here's David. The Royal pharmaceutical Society in London.
:51:20. > :51:24.Its museum exhibits some of science's greatest and not so great
:51:25. > :51:27.moments. If there is one group of people we believe, it is scientists.
:51:28. > :51:33.They deal in fact, not fiction, evidence, not opinion. But there's a
:51:34. > :51:36.problem. Their views come to us through the media, and they
:51:37. > :51:40.sometimes have a vested interest for their funding. Can we really believe
:51:41. > :51:44.everything we read about science? Very little of science is actually a
:51:45. > :51:49.game changer. If you read in the media that this new discovery is
:51:50. > :51:51.doing to change the world, it is probably not going to change the
:51:52. > :51:57.world. If you read a new discovery in a scientific paper that is going
:51:58. > :52:02.to lead to a medicine, it may do, but it is going to be down the line.
:52:03. > :52:06.Does it matter if the media get overstimulated? For most of the
:52:07. > :52:11.time, people see things like red wine is good for you or bad for you
:52:12. > :52:15.and we'll take it with a pinch of salt and it doesn't make too much
:52:16. > :52:20.impact. When it is the big stuff and we are asked whether we should use a
:52:21. > :52:23.technology or whether we should be using animals in research,
:52:24. > :52:27.whatever, we really need to have the evidence and the guided by the
:52:28. > :52:31.correct information rather than scaremongering or somebody who has
:52:32. > :52:38.got an agenda. That said, even eminent scientists admit that body
:52:39. > :52:46.stories are not always -- dodgy stories are not always the fault of
:52:47. > :52:51.the media. Scientists, if they don't publish two papers per year, that is
:52:52. > :52:55.it, they are out. If you get to October and you have only published
:52:56. > :52:59.one, the pressure on you if not to be dishonest then at least to be
:53:00. > :53:03.careless is almost unavoidable. You are more or less forced into it.
:53:04. > :53:08.Under those circumstances, I can't blame them. Sometimes, we
:53:09. > :53:19.journalists are Sakurai slick scientific spin doctors. --
:53:20. > :53:22.suckered. A decent journalist wouldn't simply report the press
:53:23. > :53:28.release from Conservative Central office. He would look into it and
:53:29. > :53:31.ask awkward questions. I see that in my own field, genetics. The media
:53:32. > :53:37.are just hopelessly ready to swallow the idea that there is a gene for
:53:38. > :53:44.happiness, edging for depression, for high intelligence. It is not
:53:45. > :53:49.like that. So how can you tell when a science story passes the litmus
:53:50. > :53:57.Test? According to my sources, if it is too good to be true, it is. With
:53:58. > :54:04.us now is the environment correspondent from the Telegraph.
:54:05. > :54:15.How would you categorise the current state of science reporting? Gosh,
:54:16. > :54:20.not bad. I use science in my job. There are a good core of
:54:21. > :54:24.journalists, some old like me, some younger, who really do try to get to
:54:25. > :54:31.grips with the facts and spend a lot of time in the area. I think we are
:54:32. > :54:35.better than most countries. What would you say? I would endorse
:54:36. > :54:42.that. 20 years each in Australia, the US and here, I have seen that
:54:43. > :54:47.all of them have some superb people and some not so good people. In
:54:48. > :54:53.general, the people here are very good. There is one thing that does,
:54:54. > :54:57.on the other hand, which I think it is understandable but very
:54:58. > :55:03.unfortunate, is a muddled sense that you have to present the other side
:55:04. > :55:17.of almost every issue. The other side make -- might be some crackpot
:55:18. > :55:26.but this tendency on something... Give us an example. I can give you
:55:27. > :55:32.lots of examples on climate change! To give just one example from the
:55:33. > :55:37.BBC, it had a big event years ago when it had Al Gore over to give a
:55:38. > :55:42.lecture. He showed his movie. Maybe it was a bit over the top. May be!
:55:43. > :55:51.You could have got some good people too busy at a sense -- to present
:55:52. > :56:00.some of the uncertainties. Instead, they reached for the extreme, a
:56:01. > :56:05.complete charlatan. You say that. Not the BBC, you say that. I'm
:56:06. > :56:13.prepared to carry that through. On balance, we do in accident job. Part
:56:14. > :56:17.of the problem, and it is not so much the environment, but in the
:56:18. > :56:22.medical sphere, you can pick up a paper almost every day and find this
:56:23. > :56:27.causes cancer, and in two days later, the same thing is good for
:56:28. > :56:31.cancer. There is such contradictory reporting of medical matters. I
:56:32. > :56:39.know. I don't do that. It is not my field. If I can take up what Bob has
:56:40. > :56:43.just said, it is important to see both sides of the story. It really
:56:44. > :56:49.is important to give different voices. We have a similar view on
:56:50. > :56:55.climate change, different from yours. But the consensus can build
:56:56. > :56:59.up. On climate change, I can remember a guy who was forced out of
:57:00. > :57:08.the Met Office for saying it has changed. In 1979, I rang a man with
:57:09. > :57:15.both now well. -- we both know him well. He said humans can be
:57:16. > :57:18.responsible for climate change. Scientists themselves like to spin
:57:19. > :57:25.stories. They've always got their eyes on new research. They only talk
:57:26. > :57:33.about things they think they can get money for. Not necessarily. My own
:57:34. > :57:36.life is not on that basis. It is a great opportunity to be doing
:57:37. > :57:41.something unfashionable but overturns an applecart. If you went
:57:42. > :57:48.to say now, I want some money because I want to check if this
:57:49. > :57:53.17-year-old hiatus in Britain rising is real or not, you wouldn't get the
:57:54. > :57:57.money. You wouldn't give me the money because it is not my
:57:58. > :58:06.specialty. I think somebody would get the money. The trouble is, there
:58:07. > :58:17.are very few scientists doing research. That is a problem for me.
:58:18. > :58:23.There are examples... I was just going to mention Wakefield. We have
:58:24. > :58:27.run out of time, I'm afraid. Now it's time to find out the answer
:58:28. > :58:31.to our quiz. The question was, which one of these is the odd one out?
:58:32. > :58:33.Downton Abbey, Phoenix Nights, Have I Got News for You, or The Daily
:58:34. > :58:37.Politics? To
:58:38. > :58:45.it is the Daily Politics because all of the others were named as
:58:46. > :58:48.indicators of how you will vote. The Daily Politics, we are watched by
:58:49. > :58:51.everybody. That's all for today. Thanks to our
:58:52. > :58:56.guests. The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now. I will
:58:57. > :59:10.be back tomorrow on BBC One. Bye bye. I'll be on
:59:11. > :59:15.It's a war every day. It is a cut-throat business out there.
:59:16. > :59:20.Put it like this, I'm certainly not going to go bust, anyway!