:00:40. > :00:45.Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics. It's been confirmed
:00:46. > :00:49.in the last couple of hours that Bob Crow, the Secretary Gerneral of the
:00:50. > :00:55.RMT, has died. We'll bring you the latest reaction Labour are calling
:00:56. > :00:59.it the hospital closure clause. We'll ask whether it's right for the
:01:00. > :01:04.Government to be given more powers to shut down hospitals. There has
:01:05. > :01:07.not been a totally fair and honest election since 2006, according to
:01:08. > :01:14.one returning officer, and postal votes are to blame. So, should they
:01:15. > :01:16.be banned? And is the dogs going to the dogs? We'll speak to one MP
:01:17. > :01:29.lamenting its demise. All that in the next hour. And with
:01:30. > :01:39.us for the whole programme today is broadcaster and publisher Iain Dale.
:01:40. > :01:43.Welcome to the show. First, the sad news that Bob Crow, the Secretary
:01:44. > :01:47.General of the RMT, died in the early hours of this morning at the
:01:48. > :01:49.age of 52. Tributes have been coming in from across the political
:01:50. > :01:53.spectrum. Here's a flavour of what's been said. No, we will go to that in
:01:54. > :01:58.a moment. We can speak to our political correspondent, Chris
:01:59. > :02:05.Mason. He was a larger than life character. He certainly fought for
:02:06. > :02:11.his members, didn't he? He was a huge character in public life. He
:02:12. > :02:26.was a campaigner for his members. When you look at statistics in
:02:27. > :02:30.London, when you look at salaries, he started -- he was undoubtedly
:02:31. > :02:36.successful in campaigning for members. For critics, he was a relic
:02:37. > :02:41.from a previous era - a socialist dinosaur. He regularly ground London
:02:42. > :02:48.to a halt with strikes on the London underground. We saw that a matter of
:02:49. > :02:52.weeks ago. People from across the political spectrum recognised his
:02:53. > :02:56.power and influence and recognised he was perhaps the most influential
:02:57. > :03:01.and well-known trade unionist in the country and perhaps the most
:03:02. > :03:05.well-known socialist. He was always willing to go into battle with his
:03:06. > :03:11.members and those who wanted to take him on. Here is a little excerpt of
:03:12. > :03:17.an interview he did with Andrew Neil on the Sunday Politics a couple of
:03:18. > :03:29.weeks ago. Why do you run for London mayor? That has not come up yet. You
:03:30. > :03:35.are not ruling it out? Sky I am not ruling out your job on The Politics
:03:36. > :03:47.Show. You have got to put your feet up. I'm worried about your health as
:03:48. > :03:51.well. Shall we go on strike first? If you had my wages, you might not
:03:52. > :03:57.be able to afford to be on the beach. Nice to see you. He gave as
:03:58. > :04:02.good has he got. The interview touching on the fact he was a very
:04:03. > :04:09.successful negotiator. Undeniably, he was very successful. His critics
:04:10. > :04:14.acknowledge that. Plenty said that in private, when he was in the
:04:15. > :04:19.negotiations, he was a more subtle and thoughtful man than the
:04:20. > :04:24.caricature sometimes portrayed him. Here was a guy who had worked in the
:04:25. > :04:30.railways and then in trade unionism all his life. He started working on
:04:31. > :04:35.the row ways since the age of 16. He got into a dispute with his manager
:04:36. > :04:41.since the age of 19. He climbed his way up the union of row in men, as
:04:42. > :04:46.it was then. That merged with the Maritime union and became the RMT.
:04:47. > :04:52.He became its leader at 52 years old. He was due to be attending the
:04:53. > :05:00.meeting of the TUC yesterday. They were getting together and he called
:05:01. > :05:04.in sick. He had been expected to attend today. When those at that
:05:05. > :05:08.meeting had discovered what had happened overnight, his passing in
:05:09. > :05:14.the night, that meeting immediately was suspended. A very big gap left
:05:15. > :05:18.in the trade union world. From the perspective of the RMT, he is a very
:05:19. > :05:21.difficult man to replace. With me now is Mick Whelan, who is the
:05:22. > :05:27.General Secretary of ASLEF and the Labour MP, Jeremy Corbyn. It must
:05:28. > :05:31.have come as a terrible shock. I do not think we have yet come to terms
:05:32. > :05:39.with it. It has been an awful morning. We are concerned for his
:05:40. > :05:46.family. He was incredibly proud of his family. Looking at him, you are
:05:47. > :05:52.a friend as well as a work colleague, how would you describe
:05:53. > :05:57.him? Behind the cameras, he was a force. He was larger than life in
:05:58. > :06:02.personality. You cannot get to be general secretary of the RMT and run
:06:03. > :06:06.an organisation like that. We deal with pensions and all the things
:06:07. > :06:15.that when we are arguing from the other side of the table, we have not
:06:16. > :06:20.experienced. He was a very public figure, wasn't he? He could stand up
:06:21. > :06:26.soapbox style and talk like a firebrand. There were union
:06:27. > :06:34.meetings, campaign meetings, disputes, all kinds of thing will
:06:35. > :06:38.stop I used to give out leaflets for the nationalisation of the row ways
:06:39. > :06:42.with him. It is amazing all these people coming in from the Chilterns
:06:43. > :06:53.in nurse soothsaying, thank you very much, it is very kind of you. -- in
:06:54. > :06:59.their suits saying. He was likened to the great Harry Bridges. They
:07:00. > :07:08.loved him. Bob was an intellectual man. He was extremely well read. He
:07:09. > :07:13.was and extremely well-informed and a caring individual. There was an
:07:14. > :07:17.awful lot of depth to Bob. That is why he became general secretary.
:07:18. > :07:24.Running a union is not just in front of the cameras, it is a whole lot of
:07:25. > :07:29.other administrative things. Bob did all that very well. Let's get a
:07:30. > :07:35.flavour of some of the tributes we have received this morning in
:07:36. > :07:39.response to the death of Bob Crow. We may have disagreed on certain
:07:40. > :07:44.aspects of what he would have liked to have seen happen to the railways
:07:45. > :07:48.but both of us wanted to see the overall benefits of the railways and
:07:49. > :07:54.recognised it very important role that they can play. In certain
:07:55. > :07:59.areas, he was a supporter of various other things. Very shocked, very
:08:00. > :08:07.sad. 52 is too young to be taken away from a family. This is the
:08:08. > :08:11.death of a fighter. He was a proud trade unionist. Trade unionists were
:08:12. > :08:17.proud of him. I am sad to hear of the loss. A lot of people will be
:08:18. > :08:21.grieving today. RMT members loved him. He represented their
:08:22. > :08:29.interests. He worked himself into the ground. He was a committed row
:08:30. > :08:37.when man. He was committed to a decent railway service. --
:08:38. > :08:45.railwaymen. He built the union. This is a tragic loss for all of us.
:08:46. > :08:48.Tributes from both Labour and Conservative politicians. There are
:08:49. > :08:53.commuters who feel that actually the union and Bob Crow had them over a
:08:54. > :09:02.barrel, if you like, when it came to disputes and strike action. If you
:09:03. > :09:08.had a dispute they would like to have Bob Crow on their side. Is he
:09:09. > :09:18.the greatest trade union leader in Britain? He was a tenacious fighter.
:09:19. > :09:23.He was very difficult to interview. If you tried to sort of ask any
:09:24. > :09:28.smart ask questions or tried to provoke a confrontation, he would
:09:29. > :09:33.run rings around you. He had a twinkle in his voice. He had a good
:09:34. > :09:38.sense of humour. I think he will be missed, not just by people on the
:09:39. > :09:43.left but people on the right like a good adverse three. What about being
:09:44. > :09:51.sensitive to criticism? -- adversarial. In terms of the public,
:09:52. > :09:56.when he was out and about, what was the response? People loved to talk
:09:57. > :10:05.to him. He had a wonderful sense of humour. He was famous for his
:10:06. > :10:13.compassion. He was not, as sometimes put trade, the flat cap and whip it
:10:14. > :10:18.typical trade union leader. He sometimes did it to set himself up.
:10:19. > :10:23.I famously was at a conference with him in Paris. I said, why do you do
:10:24. > :10:28.it? I know you are well read and well briefed. If you go back to
:10:29. > :10:32.London and ask them to name three trade union leaders, if they do not
:10:33. > :10:38.name me in the first two, they cannot name a third. The union was
:10:39. > :10:44.not actually latterly part of the Labour movement. He felt that
:10:45. > :10:48.connection had gone some time ago. Union and the Labour Party parted
:10:49. > :10:54.quite a long time ago. Bob had various political interests. He was
:10:55. > :10:58.a communist and supported the Socialist Labour Party. He also
:10:59. > :11:06.supported Labour candidates and Labour MPs. He came to an event in
:11:07. > :11:11.Islington last summer and gave us a bottle of Cuban rum! That was
:11:12. > :11:18.enjoyed by all. He was far more pragmatic politically than a lot of
:11:19. > :11:27.people thought. He knew all about alliances. Was there a bit of bluff
:11:28. > :11:31.and bluster? He was not a traditional left-winger. He was a
:11:32. > :11:38.devout Eurosceptic. He wanted there to be a left wing all tenanted to
:11:39. > :11:48.UKIP. He was quite anti immigration. -- all eternity of two UKIP. He
:11:49. > :11:59.stood up for women's rights and cleaners rights. On Europe, the
:12:00. > :12:03.point you making quite right. He wanted a Europe where there was
:12:04. > :12:07.public ownership. I would not put him in the duke it Eurosceptic mould
:12:08. > :12:18.at all. It was a different sort of Europe. -- put him in the
:12:19. > :12:26.Eurosceptic mould at all. He must be the B of other trade union leaders.
:12:27. > :12:31.His membership went up. -- he must be the envy. Trade union membership
:12:32. > :12:36.is going up. We are in a period of time where it is increasing. It may
:12:37. > :12:41.not go back to the heady days of the 70s but it is moving in that
:12:42. > :12:45.direction. He was very good at promoting the ideals of the trade
:12:46. > :12:51.union movement and the politics of it. That attracted a lot of people
:12:52. > :12:58.in this day and age. Was Boris frightened of Bob Crow? It would
:12:59. > :13:05.have been quite interesting to have a webcam. He will be difficult to
:13:06. > :13:12.replace. He has left a legacy. People need to make sure that legacy
:13:13. > :13:16.lives and grows but there is no other Bob Crow. People who stand up
:13:17. > :13:19.for others get remembered. The Government's Care Bill is back in
:13:20. > :13:23.Parliament today. And it's not without controversy. Health
:13:24. > :13:26.Secretary Jeremy Hunt has inserted a clause which would give officials
:13:27. > :13:28.greater powers to close hospital Accident and Emergency Departments
:13:29. > :13:31.and other services. This morning, there were protests outside
:13:32. > :13:36.Parliament, attacking what many have called the hospital closure clause.
:13:37. > :13:39.Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham has warned that the plans will send
:13:40. > :13:44.a chill through every community in the country. However, the Government
:13:45. > :13:51.argues health services would be delivered best if reorganised over a
:13:52. > :14:01.wider area. Andy Burnham joins me now, along with the Conservative MP,
:14:02. > :14:05.Dr Phillip Lee. Clause hundred 19, whatever you call it, the clause
:14:06. > :14:09.that has caused so much controversy would only affect hospitals that are
:14:10. > :14:16.in the trust 's special administrator process. That is
:14:17. > :14:21.right, isn't it? At the moment no hospitals are in special
:14:22. > :14:26.Administration. Any trust could be. Lewisham had a successful trust,
:14:27. > :14:29.financially and clinically. It found itself wrapped up in a
:14:30. > :14:33.reconfiguration that had the Health Secretary saying we are going to
:14:34. > :14:36.take your accident and emergency department way. The Secretary of
:14:37. > :14:40.State was taken all the way to the High Court. He misused the powers of
:14:41. > :14:46.the last Labour government. The right thing to have done would be to
:14:47. > :14:52.back off gracefully and respect the court 's decision. He rushed forward
:14:53. > :14:55.these rules and is arrogantly expecting parliament to rubber-stamp
:14:56. > :15:00.them today. He must be stopped because no hospital in England will
:15:01. > :15:09.be safe from top-down closure if it goes through. You have used that
:15:10. > :15:14.example, which was very potent. Trusts are in financial difficulty
:15:15. > :15:17.all over the country. They will not necessarily go into that
:15:18. > :15:25.Administration. In terms of what you have would have done, how would you
:15:26. > :15:28.have dealt with it? That is a really important question. What we have
:15:29. > :15:32.taking place in south-east London before the last election was a very
:15:33. > :15:36.traditional, detailed consultation. It was going through the stages of
:15:37. > :15:43.local consultation, engagement with the help bodies on the council. That
:15:44. > :15:48.got derailed as the election was complete. The Government basically
:15:49. > :15:53.put it all into a moratorium on change, as they said. That made the
:15:54. > :15:56.problems worse. Then it had to come forward with this brutal
:15:57. > :15:58.Administration process to try and rammed through changes. They got it
:15:59. > :16:09.completely wrong. What would you have done if you had
:16:10. > :16:13.a trust losing ?1 million a week? The plans we put through were for a
:16:14. > :16:18.trust which had got into difficulty. The ability to get a new management
:16:19. > :16:24.team in quickly to keep the services going. It was never intended as a
:16:25. > :16:28.vehicle for the service change, the service reconfiguration. That is
:16:29. > :16:31.where this government has got themselves into difficulty. They
:16:32. > :16:50.tried to create an entirely new way of making changes to hospitals,
:16:51. > :16:52.excluding the voice of local people and driving these changes through.
:16:53. > :16:55.That is where they are wrong. What people will not understand and I do
:16:56. > :16:58.not understand, why would you take services and use it to plug the gap
:16:59. > :17:02.in another part of the trust which is doing badly? To make a decision
:17:03. > :17:08.on one hospital has an impact on another. Across the country,
:17:09. > :17:11.different services are offered on different sites. All this is
:17:12. > :17:17.essentially doing is if you're going to make a decision in extremist,
:17:18. > :17:21.this has only happened twice, it makes sense to me would also take
:17:22. > :17:26.into consideration the wider health economy. Why would you not close a
:17:27. > :17:30.failing hospital? Why would you take the good parts of another one to
:17:31. > :17:33.plug that gap? That does not make sense when you look at it on the
:17:34. > :17:40.face of it and probably will would not people in that area. It is
:17:41. > :17:43.geographical. If you are going to say we will concentrate on one
:17:44. > :17:49.hospital, we will forget that if it is not working, you leave an area
:17:50. > :17:54.not properly catered for. If you're trying to make a decision for a
:17:55. > :17:58.region, not a district, you have to take into consideration more than
:17:59. > :18:02.one hospital. Are you saying that no services should be closed. But in
:18:03. > :18:06.that situation you have to look at the whole area and see how the
:18:07. > :18:11.services are spanned across a geographical borough, constituency
:18:12. > :18:15.or trust. You say it is about the services and the people, surely that
:18:16. > :18:19.is the best way to look at it, to have a map where you say I can move
:18:20. > :18:28.that A service and that stroke unit and that will better serve the
:18:29. > :18:32.whole population? You are right. I made precisely those kind of changes
:18:33. > :18:40.before the last election. London used to have 12/ units. I reduced
:18:41. > :18:44.the number 28. We were advised that would improve patient safety and
:18:45. > :18:48.would improve lives. The clinical case should always drive these
:18:49. > :18:54.changes. Unless there is a clinical case for change, more lives saved,
:18:55. > :18:59.disability reduced, in denim I viewed these changes should not go
:19:00. > :19:03.ahead. -- then in my view, these changes should not go ahead.
:19:04. > :19:08.Management should not be calling the shots. This is all about trusts
:19:09. > :19:12.which are failing. If you have got a hospital which is failing, that is
:19:13. > :19:19.potentially costing lives. You cannot have a longer period of
:19:20. > :19:22.consultation. In ideal terms, you want to make a decision quickly
:19:23. > :19:28.because you are dealing with morbidity and mortality. You are
:19:29. > :19:31.dealing with patients here. There is a broader discussion about
:19:32. > :19:35.reconfiguration which Andy and I have engaged in both within the
:19:36. > :19:40.chamber and without. Looking at this legislation as I understand it, you
:19:41. > :19:43.need to have the ability to make decisions with respect to local
:19:44. > :19:51.commissioners who all have a say under this legislation. You need to
:19:52. > :19:55.make decisions swiftly. Isn't it a case and I have had endless
:19:56. > :20:01.politicians on here saying nobody campaigns for hospital closures, it
:20:02. > :20:05.is such a difficult emotive subject, it will always be hard to close
:20:06. > :20:09.services which is why the Secretary of State feels that there has to be
:20:10. > :20:15.some power that overrides local concerns. There are people who feel
:20:16. > :20:21.we should take the politics out of the NHS and I have never understood
:20:22. > :20:25.this argument because the NHS spends billions of pounds every year and
:20:26. > :20:27.there needs to be political accountability for that and for
:20:28. > :20:32.hospital closures. Andy Berner knows what it is like to close hospitals,
:20:33. > :20:37.he had to do it when he was Health Secretary. -- Andy Burnham. I think
:20:38. > :20:41.some of the language you are using is a emotional but if you are in
:20:42. > :20:46.power you will be in the same position. We did make closures to
:20:47. > :20:50.hospitals. I am not coming here saying never make any changes to
:20:51. > :20:54.hospitals but there is a right way to do things and a wrong way. The
:20:55. > :21:00.right ways to give local people a voice, put information before them,
:21:01. > :21:10.have a clinical case for change. But they will never close a hospital.
:21:11. > :21:13.Did she just slap you? ! How when we are saying localism is the thing we
:21:14. > :21:19.want and people wanting a greater say, how can we be justifying that
:21:20. > :21:23.we from London can impose from communities solutions top-down? When
:21:24. > :21:27.you conduct a consultation, you will never get local people saying this
:21:28. > :21:34.is a magnificent idea, let's close our hospital. You are wrong. We had
:21:35. > :21:37.a case in Manchester about maternity and children's services. The art
:21:38. > :21:42.that was put to people that it was say 50 lives a year. The government
:21:43. > :21:47.made that argument to people. There was a big debate and carried it
:21:48. > :21:53.forward. But they will not close our hospital. That was part of a
:21:54. > :21:57.hospital. Are there some that should be closed? Clearly politics is
:21:58. > :22:01.involved, a lot of money is being spent on the National Health
:22:02. > :22:04.Service. When there is a difficulty about consulting local people there
:22:05. > :22:10.is not a forum for 750,000 people to have their say and that is the type
:22:11. > :22:14.of population you need to support in a key hospital. You could see the
:22:15. > :22:18.need for having fewer hospitals. I want to see that because of the
:22:19. > :22:25.outcomes. As Andy has already mentioned, reconfiguring stroke
:22:26. > :22:32.services in London has already saved lives. Where I would slightly
:22:33. > :22:36.disagree in terms of party politics, I am persuaded that unless there is
:22:37. > :22:39.cross-party agreement where those acute hospitals should be cited, I
:22:40. > :22:44.do not think we will progress to what we all want which is a better
:22:45. > :22:49.health service. This is the problem. There needs to be more cross-party
:22:50. > :22:53.agreement. This clause actually damages that potential. It is about
:22:54. > :22:56.imposing solutions on communities rather than working with them. I
:22:57. > :23:02.think it is setting back the cause of making necessary clinical changes
:23:03. > :23:07.to the way hospitals are provided, rather than building a case for
:23:08. > :23:10.consensus around change. We will have to leave it there. Thank you
:23:11. > :23:13.very much. Now, should postal voting be
:23:14. > :23:16.scrapped for all but those who genuinely need it? Following a File
:23:17. > :23:20.on Four investigation, one MP thinks so. Conservative Andrew Stephenson
:23:21. > :23:24.has called for postal voting to be drastically scaled back, because he
:23:25. > :23:27.thinks it's marred by "real fraud". Since 2001, anyone on the electoral
:23:28. > :23:31.roll has been able to apply for a postal ballot. But, because voting
:23:32. > :23:37.takes place in people's homes, the Electoral Commission say there is an
:23:38. > :23:40.increased risk of fraud. In January they expressed concern about 16
:23:41. > :23:46.council areas in England, including Mr Stephenson's area of Pendle in
:23:47. > :23:50.Lancashire. Calls for the Government to re-think the postal voting system
:23:51. > :23:54.have been backed up by a judge, Richard Mawley, and a returning
:23:55. > :23:57.officer, Ray Morgan. Mr Morgan says he hasn't seen an election since
:23:58. > :24:04.2006 that was "totally fair and honest". But the Government have no
:24:05. > :24:07.plans to change the current system. Cabinet office minister Greg Clark
:24:08. > :24:10.says the number of cases of abuse in the postal voting system remain
:24:11. > :24:18."relatively small" with "the vast majority of people using it in a
:24:19. > :24:26.law-abiding way". I'm joined now by Andrew Stephenson and Tom Hawthorn
:24:27. > :24:31.from the Electoral Commission. Andrew Stephenson, postal voting is
:24:32. > :24:36.encouraging people to vote. When turnout is falling, wouldn't it be
:24:37. > :24:42.crazy to get rid of it? In my area of Pendle we have seen concerns for
:24:43. > :24:47.about ten years ever since postal voting was opened up to anyone who
:24:48. > :24:51.wanted to vote by post as a lifestyle choice, really. I am
:24:52. > :24:55.perfectly happy for people who need a postal vote, who are away on
:24:56. > :25:00.holiday, in firm or serving in the Army, perfectly happy for them to
:25:01. > :25:08.have one. But in areas like mine, what you're seeing is a widespread
:25:09. > :25:13.perception of fraud. Is widespread? We have conflicting evidence which
:25:14. > :25:17.says it is relatively small-scale. You're punishing the bulk of the
:25:18. > :25:23.electorate for fraud which could be limited. I think we have to maximise
:25:24. > :25:27.voter turnout. The Electoral Commission have to make sure it is
:25:28. > :25:32.an accessible process for people. In Pendle we have seen in two or three
:25:33. > :25:36.wards, and across the country, we have the Electoral Commission
:25:37. > :25:44.identifying 16 local authorities, I think it is the tip of the iceberg.
:25:45. > :25:47.There is a perception that is undermining confidence in the
:25:48. > :25:51.electoral system. I think the perception of the problem is as
:25:52. > :25:55.damaging as a problem itself. It is stopping some people from casting
:25:56. > :26:00.their ballots because they no longer have confidence in the system.
:26:01. > :26:04.Richard Mawley has said he came across 14 different ways the postal
:26:05. > :26:10.ballots could be manipulated, that is indefensible, isn't it? I think
:26:11. > :26:15.the important thing to recognise is some of those relate back to
:26:16. > :26:23.elections in 2004 and since then a lot has changed. We realise putting
:26:24. > :26:28.in place a more open system without security checks might be a mistake
:26:29. > :26:33.so now people have to provide identifiers which have to be
:26:34. > :26:37.checked. It is shocking that you said you did not think there had
:26:38. > :26:41.been a truly honest election, that will be a great shock to people that
:26:42. > :26:46.you are talking about more recent cases or alleged cases of fraud. The
:26:47. > :26:51.problem is, if it happens in people's homes, how can you
:26:52. > :26:54.safeguard against it? I think it is difficult to safeguard in every
:26:55. > :26:58.single instance but the thing to make clear is every single police
:26:59. > :27:01.force across the country has a dedicated officer who understands
:27:02. > :27:07.electoral law and processes, who will investigate allegations which
:27:08. > :27:11.get raised. They will bring people to justice and people have been sent
:27:12. > :27:16.to prison for electoral fraud. It is a serious crime. Isn't that a better
:27:17. > :27:26.way to approach it rather than trying to ban it? They trebled
:27:27. > :27:31.between 2001 and 2005. In 2010, almost 7 million postal votes were
:27:32. > :27:36.issued. That is a lot of postal votes. You would risk them not
:27:37. > :27:40.voting rather than tackle the problem at source. I welcome the
:27:41. > :27:46.steps taken by the Electoral Commission, I welcome the steps
:27:47. > :27:51.taken on individual legislation. We have had some interesting proposals
:27:52. > :27:55.on ID being required at polling stations. I think the elephant in
:27:56. > :28:00.the room remains on demand postal voting that is wide open to abuse.
:28:01. > :28:05.Do you think it should stay on demand bearing in mind it has only
:28:06. > :28:08.started fairly recently? I think until the whole system of voting in
:28:09. > :28:14.this country is changed, it probably needs to. Why don't we modernise the
:28:15. > :28:19.system so we do not all have to vote on one day? Why don't we vote over
:28:20. > :28:23.four or five days? Then we would not have to have postal votes. We all
:28:24. > :28:27.work in a different way than we did 30 or 40 years ago. You cannot go
:28:28. > :28:33.back to just having one if you are on holiday, most people work away
:28:34. > :28:38.from home for a lot of time now. In some by-elections, 30% of the votes
:28:39. > :28:48.cast are postal votes. It is quite clear that a lot of those are
:28:49. > :28:53.fraudulent votes. Is it a problem -- is it a case of being a problem in
:28:54. > :28:59.certain areas? We know that a lot of people have expressed genuinely held
:29:00. > :29:04.concerns that electoral fraud is more of the problem in certain South
:29:05. > :29:08.Asian communities. We have not seen enough evidence to back that up. It
:29:09. > :29:11.is come to back that up. It is a consecrated picture. We are doing
:29:12. > :29:14.more research this year with academics in some specific
:29:15. > :29:17.communities where there have been allegations of electoral fraud to
:29:18. > :29:22.understand what is going on there so the returning officers and the
:29:23. > :29:28.police can look at what voters who might be more vulnerable. How many
:29:29. > :29:35.cases do you know of? This is the thing, it is hard to prosecute and
:29:36. > :29:39.it is people from every community. In my area we have had certain wards
:29:40. > :29:43.where we have seen lots of anecdotal evidence, we have seen people
:29:44. > :29:48.turning up at polling stations with 50 or 60 ballot papers to hand in on
:29:49. > :29:52.polling day. There are clearly serious questions to be answered
:29:53. > :29:56.here. But we do need to look properly at how we can encourage
:29:57. > :30:00.turnout. Should we go for weekend voting voting over more than one
:30:01. > :30:05.day? I think there is a real issue we need to address but simply at the
:30:06. > :30:09.moment, I have no confidence in the current postal voting system. In
:30:10. > :30:13.terms of things you could do, what is most likely to change, do you
:30:14. > :30:24.think between now and if not the next election, the one after that?
:30:25. > :30:27.There has been evidence that liberalising the voting process
:30:28. > :30:33.could improve convenience. There is no evidence it would improve
:30:34. > :30:37.turnout. It would be costly as well. Schools would have to close for more
:30:38. > :30:43.than one day. Most countries vote on a Sunday. Something to think about.
:30:44. > :30:47.European and American officials are meeting in London today to discuss
:30:48. > :30:50.which sanctions can be imposed on Russia in the wake of the crisis in
:30:51. > :30:53.Ukraine. Under discussion are visa bans, travel restrictions and asset
:30:54. > :30:58.freezes, although President Putin will be exempt from any
:30:59. > :31:00.restrictions. The sanctions will be imposed if Russia refuses to engage
:31:01. > :31:03.diplomatically with the new Ukrainian government and any
:31:04. > :31:05.decision will be made after the Crimean referendum, which Western
:31:06. > :31:10.leaders have branded as illegitimate.
:31:11. > :31:14.At a news conference in Russia this morning, the ousted Ukrainian
:31:15. > :31:15.President Viktor Yanukovych described the new Ukrainian
:31:16. > :31:31.authorities as a gang of fascists. That I remain not only the only
:31:32. > :31:36.legitimate president of Ukraine but I am also the military commander of
:31:37. > :31:41.Ukraine. I never stopped my authority. As soon as the
:31:42. > :31:47.circumstances allow me, I am sure it will not be long and I will be back
:31:48. > :31:55.in here. I say that the elections in Ukraine that were announced to take
:31:56. > :31:59.place on 25th of May by those who take their power in Ukraine, they
:32:00. > :32:05.are not legitimate and they are not legal. With me now is the London
:32:06. > :32:11.Bureau chief of the Voice of Russia, Dmitry Linnik. How is the conflict
:32:12. > :32:18.being seen by Russians? Do they think they are on the verge of war
:32:19. > :32:25.with Ukraine? The emotions are running high, obviously. The
:32:26. > :32:30.strength of the links between Russia and Ukraine, between Russians and
:32:31. > :32:34.Ukrainians, goes back centuries. It is essentially one nation that is
:32:35. > :32:42.separated sometime in the 13th century. We joined a game in the
:32:43. > :32:48.17th. You cannot imagine the strength of feeling about this. Are
:32:49. > :32:54.they angry about what is going on and what happened to pick 2 yen or
:32:55. > :33:02.are they wanting to see Vladimir Putin seems strong against the West?
:33:03. > :33:13.Putin has been strong on a few occasions. That cannot probably be
:33:14. > :33:19.denied. As for support for President Yanukovitch, I do not think you will
:33:20. > :33:27.see a lot of that. Do the Crimean support the idea of a referendum?
:33:28. > :33:35.160 years ago there was a war with Russia over Ukraine, not with
:33:36. > :33:39.Crimea. Crimea is and has been predominantly Russian despite the 20
:33:40. > :33:45.years of Ukrainian independence and the whole procedure of signing
:33:46. > :33:51.Crimea over to Ukraine has not really been accepted by the Russian
:33:52. > :33:58.people. They never really accepted that idea. Is it a case of taking
:33:59. > :34:04.back what was ours? In the minds of the Russian people and the Crimean
:34:05. > :34:09.people. There must be families that are split and divided. How is that
:34:10. > :34:17.impacted on Russian sentiment and individual families and people? --
:34:18. > :34:24.impacting. There is a much maligned phrase by President Putin about it
:34:25. > :34:28.being a political tragedy. That is what is meant when 25 million people
:34:29. > :34:35.found themselves outside of the country they lived in. They found
:34:36. > :34:42.them abroad. A lot of people in Ukraine would like closer ties with
:34:43. > :34:49.Europe and not with Russia. Ukraine is not united. Do you see it
:34:50. > :34:55.splitting? I hope it does not. The way things are going in Kiev, it may
:34:56. > :35:04.well be at some point in some form, at least it will be a struggle as a
:35:05. > :35:08.single country. At the heart of this is Russia 's total disregard for
:35:09. > :35:12.international borders. It is quite clear that the troops in Crimea are
:35:13. > :35:16.Russian, even though they seem ashamed to show their badges. If
:35:17. > :35:22.Russia had a case to annex Crimea, which is what is going on, surely
:35:23. > :35:28.they should have gone to the United Nations and used established
:35:29. > :35:33.international procedures to do that. Russia might go to the United
:35:34. > :35:42.Nations. It is a bit late now, isn't it? If you talk about punishing
:35:43. > :35:47.Russia, there will be no dialogue. Barack Obama has already said he
:35:48. > :35:54.understands the concerns of Russia. I am not sure he does. I have yet to
:35:55. > :35:58.see any evidence of Russian speaking people in Ukraine being abused or
:35:59. > :36:02.beaten up. If that was happening, I would be the first to say the
:36:03. > :36:08.Russians have a legitimate area of interest. That has not happened. We
:36:09. > :36:12.are referring to what has happened in Kiev as a revolution. But entails
:36:13. > :36:19.the emergence of a different country. Crimea, not Russia, does
:36:20. > :36:25.not want to be part of that country. Do they have a right to their own
:36:26. > :36:35.revolution? They should have their referendum. -- own referendum.
:36:36. > :36:43.Organising it within ten days, we all know what kind of referendum it
:36:44. > :36:46.will be. We all know that about the election in Ukraine scheduled for
:36:47. > :36:51.20th of May. One part of the country, the western part, hold sway
:36:52. > :36:57.over the entire government and Parliament. If people vote in a
:36:58. > :37:00.certain way in the election, a majority vote in a certain way in
:37:01. > :37:06.the election, a majority votes 1-way... You are doubting the
:37:07. > :37:11.validity of the Crimean referendum, Russia doubts... If there was a
:37:12. > :37:15.referendum in three months' time, you could understand that being
:37:16. > :37:21.quite valid but not within ten days. You cannot organise a referendum
:37:22. > :37:29.like that. It is impossible. We go back to at least 1992, 1993, when
:37:30. > :37:37.the wishes of Crimean people were expressed quite clearly. That is why
:37:38. > :37:44.Crimea is an autonomous republic. What about giving the Chechens vote?
:37:45. > :37:52.You would be surprised, Putin and unity with Russia would probably get
:37:53. > :38:01.90%. Not because people are oppressed or anything. I am sure we
:38:02. > :38:08.would all like to see the results of that. It looks as if sanctions will
:38:09. > :38:13.be imposed. Would Russia care? We are talking about contracting the G8
:38:14. > :38:18.to D7 and that will make it even less relevant. Travel bans,
:38:19. > :38:25.investment, OK, some Russians will suffer but so will the city of
:38:26. > :38:39.London, I suppose. You are talking about gas in a longer term. Russia,
:38:40. > :38:44.5%, 6% of Russia 's export revenue comes from gas. We are talking
:38:45. > :38:49.geopolitics. Barack Obama said it is not about that but it is. Tomorrow,
:38:50. > :38:53.we will have an interview with the Ukrainian ambassador to the UK.
:38:54. > :38:58.Forget the Oscars, the Emmys or the Booker Prize. Here, in Westminster,
:38:59. > :39:01.there's another awards ceremony that's got everyone talking, the
:39:02. > :39:03.Political Book Awards. It's a big business from biographies to
:39:04. > :39:06.fiction, although those two categories sometimes might have more
:39:07. > :39:08.in common than they should. But what makes a good political book? Here's
:39:09. > :39:22.David. All human life can be found on the
:39:23. > :39:29.shelves at Waterstones. If you are a political junkie, there is plenty
:39:30. > :39:34.here to feed to your habit. This brings you the benefit of the wisdom
:39:35. > :39:39.of great writers, thinkers and even MPs on politics. What makes a truly
:39:40. > :39:44.great political books and out from the rest? There are all sorts of
:39:45. > :39:47.things you might want to look for. Telling you about things you know or
:39:48. > :39:52.introducing you to something different. You might want it to
:39:53. > :39:55.guide you. When I first became A Minister, I read a book by Gerald
:39:56. > :40:01.Kaufmann on how to become A Minister. It was sort of the
:40:02. > :40:07.handbook that you used. That is the kind of book the professionals read.
:40:08. > :40:11.What do they really get up to behind closed doors? You know what they
:40:12. > :40:19.said about the Harold Wilson Cabinet. They were all too busy
:40:20. > :40:24.listening to the arguments array -- because they were busy writing that
:40:25. > :40:28.own diaries. They contain the frank expressions of opinion of a
:40:29. > :40:33.particular time. Who thwarted you in the cabinet? Who can you not trust
:40:34. > :40:37.over a piece of legislation you are trying to pilot through? Who is the
:40:38. > :40:42.rising star in the party who is sporting your ambitions? What about
:40:43. > :40:48.the authors, usually politicians, who want to dish the dirt on their
:40:49. > :40:55.rivals? Fun? Are they the best books? There are a few political
:40:56. > :40:58.biographies that are more about self-justification and settling
:40:59. > :41:05.scores than they are really about eliminating anything for anyone. In
:41:06. > :41:09.those cases, I just wish you had kept these things to yourself. We
:41:10. > :41:16.can all think about people like Crossman, Clark and Machiavelli, but
:41:17. > :41:24.how does the Chandra stack up these days? There is a greater requirement
:41:25. > :41:30.for research. So much is on the internets. It is much easier to
:41:31. > :41:35.retrieve information. You get more detail. Now is as good a time as
:41:36. > :41:41.any. We're in a strained in. We are in a government. In terms of
:41:42. > :41:50.questions, we are looking at British identity with the Scottish
:41:51. > :41:57.referendum. These issues can all be addressed. We live in interesting
:41:58. > :42:00.times. Chances are something someone is writing today will become a
:42:01. > :42:03.political classic of tomorrow. And joining me now is the Conservative
:42:04. > :42:12.peer and novelist, who has a book up for an award, Michael Dobbs. Second
:42:13. > :42:20.year of the political book awards. How important is it that a
:42:21. > :42:27.competition like this exists? A lot of people think it is dusty and very
:42:28. > :42:33.boring. We wanted to celebrate it. It is not just about great works of
:42:34. > :42:37.biography or autobiography. It is political fiction. I think it is
:42:38. > :42:42.very underrated. If you look back over the years to some of the great
:42:43. > :42:49.political writers, Disraeli wrote novels. Douglas Hurd wrote some
:42:50. > :42:54.outstanding novels. I do not think people appreciate this enough. Do
:42:55. > :42:58.enough people read them? They may be very good books but it is about
:42:59. > :43:06.accessibility to a wider audience. How do you make political fiction
:43:07. > :43:10.reach a wider audience? Introduce Michael Dobbs! I want to endorse
:43:11. > :43:16.everything that Ian says about this. He does. He is creating a bigger
:43:17. > :43:21.interest. We all have to bang a drum occasionally. We are all far too
:43:22. > :43:27.busy to do that. We left it with and die on the vine at times. The whole
:43:28. > :43:34.point about political fiction is that people think it is about
:43:35. > :43:41.politics. -- we let it with and die. It is about people and relationships
:43:42. > :43:45.and what drives us. When you think about Westminster in that sense, you
:43:46. > :43:49.realise it forms a better and more colourful backdrop for a great piece
:43:50. > :43:55.of writing than any other circumstance. It does not have to be
:43:56. > :43:59.fiction. Real politics can sometimes make quite an interesting read in
:44:00. > :44:07.terms of relationships and policies if you like in certain areas. Are
:44:08. > :44:11.you talking about Damian McBride? That is one of the books up for the
:44:12. > :44:19.main award. I published it so I have an interest in it. Anyone who has
:44:20. > :44:23.read it, it reads like the drama. There are literally jaw-dropping
:44:24. > :44:28.moments on every page. It is not a dry, political autobiography. There
:44:29. > :44:33.are many more examples like that. Rather like the diaries of Alan
:44:34. > :44:37.Clark. They should never have been written because they were
:44:38. > :44:43.disgraceful, outrageous. They were great to read! You talk about books
:44:44. > :44:48.gathering dust on the shelves but there are a lot of dry, political
:44:49. > :44:53.books. Jacqui Smith said, this idea that actually everyone is thinking
:44:54. > :44:57.about their memoirs. Everyone is thinking about self-justification
:44:58. > :45:03.and where they fit in the historical legacy. Use a dry, political tomes.
:45:04. > :45:07.A lot of people would consider them dry, political tomes. Most
:45:08. > :45:10.politicians have experienced something interesting in their
:45:11. > :45:13.careers. If they have not they should never have gone into
:45:14. > :45:19.politics. It is good when they write them down. When I get offered
:45:20. > :45:22.political autobiographies, I am writing this for my grandchildren,
:45:23. > :45:29.it is said. You are also writing it to get your side of the story into
:45:30. > :45:35.history. It is about putting, why I was right!
:45:36. > :45:43.I think it was Norman Tebbit who said I wish the biographies would
:45:44. > :45:51.concentrate on the lies which were told at the time rather than those
:45:52. > :45:57.they wished but were. It is a work of fiction about yourself. So many
:45:58. > :46:00.books were written about Tony Blair and Gordon Brown and there is a
:46:01. > :46:05.feeling that in a lot of those books they did not tell us anything we did
:46:06. > :46:11.not know already. I absolutely disagree. If you read all of them,
:46:12. > :46:15.and unfortunately I have! You will find something new in every single
:46:16. > :46:19.book. You do not even need to look that hard. It is very rare that
:46:20. > :46:25.someone writes an absolute turkey of a book. There is usually something
:46:26. > :46:30.to come out of them somewhere. What do you look for in a good political
:46:31. > :46:35.book? I look for inspiration, ambition and an element of
:46:36. > :46:41.wickedness which is essential for a great political career. The least
:46:42. > :46:47.said about Peter Mandelson's oil graffiti! Moving swiftly on, thank
:46:48. > :46:50.you. -- Just who does the Conservative Party represent?
:46:51. > :46:53.A recent survey asked voters what they thought of David Cameron and
:46:54. > :46:57.the most common description people chose was "posh and out of touch",
:46:58. > :46:59.while 51% of voters believe that "the Conservative Party only
:47:00. > :47:03.represents the interests of the rich". But one Conservative MP is
:47:04. > :47:07.determined to re-brand his party into the party of the workers.
:47:08. > :47:10.Robert Halfon is calling for a "radical change in the very nature
:47:11. > :47:14.of the party" so that it represents what he calls white van
:47:15. > :47:17.conservatives. He believes they should stand up for public sector
:47:18. > :47:21.workers with a strengthened minimum wage and the introduction of a
:47:22. > :47:24.living wage. Mr Halfon, who's a member of Prospect union, says the
:47:25. > :47:28.Conservative Party should call itself the Workers' Party, and swap
:47:29. > :47:31.its logo from a tree to a ladder to represent what he claims is the the
:47:32. > :47:36."moral mission that has always provided the foundation of
:47:37. > :47:45.Conservative values." Robert Halfon is with us now along with the Labour
:47:46. > :47:50.MP Ian Lavery. Welcome to you both. Robert Halfon first of all, your
:47:51. > :47:54.leader is seen as posh and out of touch. 51% of people think your
:47:55. > :47:59.party only cares about the rich. Best of luck for your trial to get
:48:00. > :48:06.it to a worker 's party. Actually, I think the government are doing a lot
:48:07. > :48:14.to ensure we do represent the people. We have taken money out of
:48:15. > :48:18.income tax, we have helped with fuel duty and extending right to buy. Why
:48:19. > :48:24.did 51% think you only care about the rich? If we are the part of
:48:25. > :48:29.hard-working people, that is why I think long-term we should change our
:48:30. > :48:33.name to Workers' Party and have the symbol of a ladder because we have
:48:34. > :48:39.always been about helping people into work. You brought issues like
:48:40. > :48:42.petrol duty to the fore but the Conservatives are committed to
:48:43. > :48:47.shrinking the public sector, they froze the pale public sector
:48:48. > :48:54.workers, they cut the 50% -- 50p top rate of tax. But we have increased
:48:55. > :49:01.apprenticeships, we have increased jobs by 1.5 million, we have cut tax
:49:02. > :49:04.for lower earners. We have cut taxes for 25 million lower earners. We are
:49:05. > :49:10.extending right to buy so people though incomes can buy their own
:49:11. > :49:14.home. People might say it is people on middle incomes who can benefit
:49:15. > :49:20.from that. Ian Lavery, what you make of Robert Halfon's attempt to
:49:21. > :49:22.rebrand the party? Fire macro I think it is laughable. To think the
:49:23. > :49:29.Conservative Party would change their motto to a ladder and call
:49:30. > :49:35.themselves the workers party. It is an absolute joke. They are quite
:49:36. > :49:42.simply not a workers' party. I'm not sure what the ladder seems to
:49:43. > :49:45.indicate. The fact that Robert insulted tens of thousands of my
:49:46. > :49:49.constituents in the north-east region two weeks ago, for daring to
:49:50. > :49:59.come to London to watch a football game, castigate them for being
:50:00. > :50:05.soccer hooligans. That is what they think of working class people. Is
:50:06. > :50:09.Labour still the party of the workers when all we hear from Ed
:50:10. > :50:16.Miliband is about the squeezed middle. John Cruddas whose leading
:50:17. > :50:22.Labour's policy review a couple of years ago, was that Labour targeted
:50:23. > :50:25.a mythical Middle England. We have taken the working class for granted
:50:26. > :50:32.and many of them now are seeking solace in UKIP. I hope the manifesto
:50:33. > :50:36.would give some great ideas, some ideas which are quite different from
:50:37. > :50:41.what the Tories are looking at at this moment in time, which would
:50:42. > :50:45.encourage these voters back. We lost 5 million voters at the last
:50:46. > :50:49.election. The job of Ed Miliband and the Labour Party is to encourage
:50:50. > :50:54.those voters back to the party. The only way to do that is with
:50:55. > :50:58.manifesto pledges which affect hard-working ordinary people. We
:50:59. > :51:04.have got to get rid of food bank Britain, zero hours and
:51:05. > :51:09.underemployment. How will you attract those working class voters?
:51:10. > :51:12.The problem with the Labour Party is they used to be the workers party
:51:13. > :51:17.but now they have become the party of the safety net. What the
:51:18. > :51:21.Conservative Party and the Conservative led coalition has done
:51:22. > :51:26.is give people ladder is. If you want to work, they help you into
:51:27. > :51:29.work. If you are working, they give you better schools, they increased
:51:30. > :51:34.apprenticeships, they cut your taxes specifically if you are lower
:51:35. > :51:37.earners. They do not keep people on dependence. We are about aspiration
:51:38. > :51:43.and they are about the safety net. That is the big difference. Do you
:51:44. > :51:50.think the Tories have lost their white van man appeal? To an extent I
:51:51. > :51:58.think so. If you think back to the 1980s when workers' conservative, if
:51:59. > :52:01.you can call it that -- workers' conservatism, if you think back to
:52:02. > :52:06.the 1980s, who was it who gave the working class people a chance to buy
:52:07. > :52:14.their homes or buy shares? I could go on. That was a long time ago. I
:52:15. > :52:17.think that has changed now in that the Conservative Party is considered
:52:18. > :52:25.to be for the rich. You have five out of the six people drafting the
:52:26. > :52:30.next Tory manifesto having been to Eton. And they are all men. How was
:52:31. > :52:36.that allowed to happen? Nick De Bois is going around the media saying the
:52:37. > :52:41.40p tax threshold should be raised. It allows the Labour Party to paint
:52:42. > :52:46.the Tories as the party which is trying to help the better off
:52:47. > :52:50.people. In reality, we have said we want a decent increase in the
:52:51. > :53:01.minimum wage, we have frozen fuel duty and council tax. The national
:53:02. > :53:05.living wage... Will Labour support the living wage through all
:53:06. > :53:08.industries and the public sector? I think it is something that should be
:53:09. > :53:15.a minimum demand as far as I am concerned. How happy are you, you
:53:16. > :53:20.talked about the number of people at the top of the Conservative Party at
:53:21. > :53:24.Eton, or who went to Eton, they are not still there, but what about the
:53:25. > :53:29.Labour front bench? They also part of the elite, the Metropolitan elite
:53:30. > :53:35.many of them, and political careerists, do they have anything in
:53:36. > :53:40.common with your constituents? I think where people are educated has
:53:41. > :53:48.little to do with it. So Eton jives... You have not heard me
:53:49. > :53:57.criticise anyone from the Burlington club. It is policy is not people as
:53:58. > :54:00.far as I am concerned, not where you were educated. The other macro what
:54:01. > :54:09.people want to know is that we are on their side. Howl worried are you
:54:10. > :54:18.both of you by UKIP? You made those remarks and you said they made the
:54:19. > :54:23.-- you said they did the Conservative Party a favour. Many
:54:24. > :54:30.UKIP voters are people who are Eurosceptic and I am Eurosceptic. We
:54:31. > :54:38.have to address the concerns on issues like immigration. It is a
:54:39. > :54:42.complete myth that many of the UKIP voters and supporters are
:54:43. > :54:47.disgruntled conservatives, they are all leaving Labour. Especially in
:54:48. > :54:54.the north. That is a myth. The people who are leaving political
:54:55. > :54:58.parties to join UKIP are mainly from the Conservative Party, not the
:54:59. > :55:04.Labour Party. Of course we have got to focus on UKIP. The voice of
:55:05. > :55:09.complacency there. Now do you enjoy a flutter? I
:55:10. > :55:13.personally prefer popping down to the bookies to place my accumulator,
:55:14. > :55:18.none of this online betting. Whether it's the dogs or the horses the UK
:55:19. > :55:21.has a long history of racing. Ian Lavery thinks more needs to be done
:55:22. > :55:24.to encourage young people to be interested in the dogs. Here's his
:55:25. > :55:43.soapbox. This is Newcastle greyhound track.
:55:44. > :55:47.It is a thriving greyhound track with five meetings per week.
:55:48. > :55:52.Unfortunately, that is not the case for other greyhound tracks in the
:55:53. > :55:57.UK. Greyhound racing was first legally staged in the UK in 1926 in
:55:58. > :56:04.Manchester. It proved an instant hit. Particularly with the working
:56:05. > :56:07.classes and there were crowds of up to 50,000 people. Working men would
:56:08. > :56:13.go to the track straight from work to place a bet. But in the 1960s,
:56:14. > :56:17.when off-course betting shops were legalised, people did not have to
:56:18. > :56:22.visit a track to have a flutter. That is not the case now with the
:56:23. > :56:28.Internet. I have been involved in greyhound racing for 30 years, just
:56:29. > :56:34.before the miners' strike. I have had some fast dogs, some not so fast
:56:35. > :56:38.dogs and some slow ones. I currently have seven dogs which are racing.
:56:39. > :56:44.The number of stadiums has dropped from 80 to 25 in England over the
:56:45. > :56:49.past 25 years. Portsmouth, Reading and Milton Keynes have all closed
:56:50. > :56:56.following a fall in profits. Greyhound racing has gone from the
:56:57. > :56:59.third to fourth most obtained spectator sport after football,
:57:00. > :57:06.horse racing and rugby. The sites are owned by property developers and
:57:07. > :57:11.earmarked for homes. The average age for a greyhound trainer is 65 years
:57:12. > :57:14.of age. We have to make sure to make sure we have a sustainable future is
:57:15. > :57:19.to encourage young people into the sport. We need apprentices who are
:57:20. > :57:25.paid a decent wage, a living wage, these other who make sure these
:57:26. > :57:28.wonderful animals are run so well on the track at every meeting.
:57:29. > :57:34.Greyhound racing employs thousands of people and with ?2.5 billion
:57:35. > :57:39.raised at races each year, it generates huge sums for the
:57:40. > :57:43.Exchequer. We need to make sure this magnificent sport flourishes well
:57:44. > :57:48.into the future and gives as much pleasure to thousands of spectators
:57:49. > :57:53.as it has two me. Should we be encouraging young people to bet?
:57:54. > :57:57.That is not what I have been saying. They want to be involved in
:57:58. > :58:03.this wonderful sport, evolved with animals, have a decent job. Giving
:58:04. > :58:06.young people proper apprenticeships with an education and scale and
:58:07. > :58:12.talent, that is what I would be advocating. What about the dogs
:58:13. > :58:17.themselves? You do hear stories that once they're racing days are over
:58:18. > :58:20.they are not very well treated. I have had countless dogs. I
:58:21. > :58:24.understand there have been welfare problems and I would not try to
:58:25. > :58:28.dismiss that but there is a lot of good work going on behind the scenes
:58:29. > :58:32.with various trusts which are re-homing dogs and making sure they
:58:33. > :58:37.have got a fantastic life when their career is finished on the track. The
:58:38. > :58:41.dogs I have had have all had a fantastic life after they have
:58:42. > :58:47.finished racing. That is the sort of thing we need to be concentrating
:58:48. > :58:54.on. Thank you very much. Thanks to our guests. There were a lot of
:58:55. > :58:59.them. Thank you particular you, Iain Dale. The one o'clock news is
:59:00. > :59:03.starting now. I will be back tomorrow. Goodbye.