:00:00. > :00:42.Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:43. > :00:45.The new boss of High Speed two says he wants a more ambitious scheme,
:00:46. > :00:48.with work on the project accelerated, so the north of England
:00:49. > :00:51.can feel the economic benefits sooner.
:00:52. > :00:55.Labour look as if they're backing the project, but are calling for
:00:56. > :00:58.more savings to be made to the ?50 billion scheme.
:00:59. > :01:03.I've taken over Jo Coburg's big board today. I'm not trying to take
:01:04. > :01:06.her job. Just explaining how the government's creating lots of them.
:01:07. > :01:09.European Union foreign ministers are meeting today, to decide what kinds
:01:10. > :01:15.of sanctions to impose on Russia, in the way of Crimea's overwhelming
:01:16. > :01:20.decision to break away from Ukraine. And, is this man worth ?300,000 a
:01:21. > :01:27.week? Ed Balls thinks so. But, do you?
:01:28. > :01:35.All that in the next hour. And, with us for the first half of the
:01:36. > :01:38.programme today is the Mayor of Liverpool, Joe Anderson. Welcome.
:01:39. > :01:42.Now, first today, let's talk about Liverpool because, when Joe was last
:01:43. > :01:46.on the programme in November, he was telling us how he was trying to
:01:47. > :01:51.engage the public in how to cut the council's budget. Joe has to make
:01:52. > :01:55.?156 million worth of savings, over three years. Joe launched an APP,
:01:56. > :02:02.asking Liverpudlians where they would like the cuts made. -- an app.
:02:03. > :02:06.So, how did it go? Yes, we have had a lot of people
:02:07. > :02:14.interested, probably about 8000 people participating, a good return.
:02:15. > :02:21.Only about 80 people completed it, some give up half way. It was a
:02:22. > :02:27.useful means. When you say useful, how is it proving to be useful? 80
:02:28. > :02:30.people completed the task. How many came up with the requisite amount of
:02:31. > :02:34.cuts? More important was getting people
:02:35. > :02:40.used to the fact we have to make these cuts. We did get some useful
:02:41. > :02:49.comments about how to do things differently. But, really emotional,
:02:50. > :02:55.not anywhere where we need. But it was useful to engage people. To get
:02:56. > :03:00.their ideas. But as important, to let them know the challenges. They
:03:01. > :03:04.know how hard it is to make those sorts of cuts. But does it have any
:03:05. > :03:07.impact on your decision making, if the idea was to make those sorts of
:03:08. > :03:09.cuts. But does it have any impact on your decision-making, if the idea
:03:10. > :03:21.was abused to ask them for solutions? In fairness, most were
:03:22. > :03:26.emotional, they didn't make any revealing changes. We got a lot of
:03:27. > :03:34.credit for doing it. A lot of plaudits for making that information
:03:35. > :03:46.available. Prioritising children's spending, but your budget is cutting
:03:47. > :03:52.61% of its budget, so this was a central issue. People participating
:03:53. > :04:00.took a large chunk out of adult's care. They did actually take large
:04:01. > :04:06.chunks out of them. You didn't agree with that? We did to an extent, we
:04:07. > :04:13.have had to take 25% out of those services, our mandatory services.
:04:14. > :04:20.Which you have to provide. We have taken 50% out of our discretionary
:04:21. > :04:24.services, libraries... In fairness, the vast majority of people who
:04:25. > :04:29.participated didn't want any cuts at all. Do you think the findings say
:04:30. > :04:34.more about perceptions as to how and where counsel spends money, and what
:04:35. > :04:43.they want is it not spent on your wages and staff, or corporate
:04:44. > :04:48.services? We put -- we do people a disservice, people do understand the
:04:49. > :04:57.challenges we face. We have also explained only ?180 million out of
:04:58. > :05:02.the ?1.2 billion we spend comes from council tax. People understand 76%
:05:03. > :05:07.of the money we spend comes from central government grants. If they
:05:08. > :05:13.take 51% of that away, they know our challenge is how to manage that
:05:14. > :05:19.budget. They are not stupid. People are quite wise and understanding, if
:05:20. > :05:24.you provide that information. Have you cut as much as you can from
:05:25. > :05:32.staff cuts Gracnar costs, so you could use those wages to put into
:05:33. > :05:41.other things? Last year, we took 176, ?176 million. The next three
:05:42. > :05:47.years, it will be ?153 million. A 58% cut. We have lost 1600 jobs. We
:05:48. > :05:54.will be reducing libraries are 50%. Leisure centres closing. Reducing
:05:55. > :06:03.children's centres, youth services, voluntary sector services cuts,
:06:04. > :06:09.violence, teenage pregnancy. This is a result of the government reduction
:06:10. > :06:14.in grant given to us. What about you generating more income? We are doing
:06:15. > :06:23.that, investing in working with the private sector. We have spent ?60
:06:24. > :06:26.million, borrowing money, to invest, because we get cheaper rates, to
:06:27. > :06:33.build a new convention centre, to support our exhibition Centre and
:06:34. > :06:47.our arena. 300 jobs are being created. We are using investment to
:06:48. > :06:51.help sustain the city. Would you do the simulator again? We would, it is
:06:52. > :06:54.important to keep that contact with the public.
:06:55. > :07:00.Now it's time for our daily quiz. As Joe well knows, Liverpool was the
:07:01. > :07:03.European City of Culture in 2008, and holds the Guinness Book of
:07:04. > :07:07.Records title for being the Capital of Pop Music. But which of these
:07:08. > :07:08.musical acts is not from Liverpool? Atomic Kitten.
:07:09. > :07:12.Elbow. Cast.
:07:13. > :07:19.Gerry and the Pacemakers? A little later, Joe will hopefully
:07:20. > :07:23.give us the correct answer! Now to the second of our Celebrity
:07:24. > :07:26.Big Boards. I use that term loosely. Last week, Liberal Democrat MP Tim
:07:27. > :07:32.Farron told us about his party's plans to raise the personal tax
:07:33. > :07:35.allowance. Well, today it's the turn of Conservative Party chairman Grant
:07:36. > :07:40.Shapps, who has this message on jobs.
:07:41. > :07:45.Ed Miliband and the Labour Party have tried to attack the long-term
:07:46. > :07:52.economic plan by claiming it would lead to the disappearance of a
:07:53. > :07:57.million jobs. But it is wrong. By backing small business and reducing
:07:58. > :08:03.taxes, this government has helped our economy to create more jobs than
:08:04. > :08:07.before. There are now a record-breaking 30 million people
:08:08. > :08:12.working in Britain. More women than ever in work. Recovery is helping
:08:13. > :08:18.more regions in the UK with new jobs bringing up. The majority of these
:08:19. > :08:24.jobs are full-time. In the last year, nine out of ten have gone to
:08:25. > :08:28.British citizens. This is what the budget on Wednesday will be all
:08:29. > :08:33.about, cementing in the recovery. Sticking with the long-term economic
:08:34. > :08:37.plan, and making sure the whole country feels the benefit. 25
:08:38. > :08:41.million hardworking people will get a tax cut next month, and the
:08:42. > :08:47.minimum wage will rise to ?6.50 later this year.
:08:48. > :08:56.How did I do? Brilliant performance, Grant. Come and sit down.
:08:57. > :09:01.You say that it million people are working in Britain. How many of the
:09:02. > :09:10.jobs being created under your time... Well done! How many of those
:09:11. > :09:16.jobs are part-time? Can we still not hear you, back with you in a moment.
:09:17. > :09:21.The government says it is creating jobs for the whole country, is that
:09:22. > :09:30.true in Liverpool? That is not true, 8% of the jobs are being created in
:09:31. > :09:35.the south. I do not buy into that. -- 80%. We have lost 1600 jobs in
:09:36. > :09:42.the public sector. But we are creating jobs. 1200 jobs recently
:09:43. > :09:54.announced. A lot of that is round things we are doing. The government
:09:55. > :09:58.has negotiated with us. We wish we had more opportunity. It is not as
:09:59. > :10:02.simple, that government is creating these jobs. There are things that
:10:03. > :10:10.are good which the government is doing but we need more. Governments
:10:11. > :10:15.do not create jobs. You may argue those jobs have been created because
:10:16. > :10:20.of government policy. Specifically at the jobs which have been
:10:21. > :10:24.created, 1600 jobs lost in the public sector. We hear from you how
:10:25. > :10:29.that has been made up in the private sector, but not in the North West.
:10:30. > :10:37.You asked and the jobs are full-time? The answer is three
:10:38. > :10:42.quarters since 2010. Nine out of ten have gone to British people. It is
:10:43. > :10:47.the case that fresh implement has been created everywhere. It is a
:10:48. > :10:54.contrast from what was predicted. We have worked together on all sorts of
:10:55. > :11:00.things. It is the case that Liverpool has got the city deal
:11:01. > :11:06.undergoing a big regeneration. The fact people are in jobs means that
:11:07. > :11:14.is security for people and their families. The opposite to what was
:11:15. > :11:19.predicted by the Labour Party. For every public sector job loss, three
:11:20. > :11:29.times as many private ones have been created. But is it even? In the
:11:30. > :11:38.North West, and in London, there is a two tiered jobs scene. In the
:11:39. > :11:56.North West, up by 20 4000, 200 and 3000 in the East. Nothing is
:11:57. > :12:01.happening in the same way. Price Waterhouse says their busiest
:12:02. > :12:12.officers are in the Midlands and the North where there is more activity.
:12:13. > :12:19.There is a lot of activity up there, and you are seeing more people, a
:12:20. > :12:24.net increase. The fact there are more people in work means your city
:12:25. > :12:28.has the chance to regenerate. And a government prepared to work on
:12:29. > :12:31.things like the city deal giving proper choice over how money is
:12:32. > :12:41.spent locally. That helps people locally. Is that your experience?
:12:42. > :12:47.Have you got the power? You say you don't have as much power as you
:12:48. > :12:53.would like to spend the money? City deal was a Labour concept, by the
:12:54. > :13:00.way. But, I am glad, the reality is I am glad the Conservative Party is
:13:01. > :13:08.working with cities like Liverpool. In reality, it is a small fraction
:13:09. > :13:20.of what is needed. 95 -- 95% of tax, car tax, VAT, and so on, what
:13:21. > :13:27.we argued for is more than that. If you look at European cities, that is
:13:28. > :13:35.the case. We could do so much more if we were given the opportunities
:13:36. > :13:39.to do it. Why did you let people in Liverpool... You are all about
:13:40. > :13:44.decentralising, supposedly, but you were let somebody who knows best how
:13:45. > :13:54.to run his city, he would argue, let him do it? We have the city deal.
:13:55. > :13:59.You have said that. With business rate attention, half of business
:14:00. > :14:06.rates stay locally. We have a lot more apprenticeships, doubled the
:14:07. > :14:11.numbers. More people in work. Of course not everything is perfect. We
:14:12. > :14:14.are working in the right direction. The long-term economic plan is
:14:15. > :14:23.working to give families security that they never would have had. What
:14:24. > :14:29.about part-time workers? Lots of polls show that people want to work
:14:30. > :14:36.more hours. It is very insecure, in fact. Again, we want to work with
:14:37. > :14:45.the government to reduce a welfare to work programme. Discussing with
:14:46. > :14:46.Whitehall how to do that. Zero hours contracts and part-time work is not
:14:47. > :14:58.secure. The Prime Minister said a question
:14:59. > :15:07.Time last week, he compared with the inn is own constituency, compared to
:15:08. > :15:13.Liverpool. Liverpool has council tax income that equates to ?180 million
:15:14. > :15:19.a year. West Oxfordshire Council, 135 will impound more a year in
:15:20. > :15:25.council tax they get the mass. Just let me finish the point. It is
:15:26. > :15:27.ignorant of senior politicians to say Liverpool get equal the same
:15:28. > :15:38.amount as West Oxfordshire. We don't. We would have 135... Let him
:15:39. > :15:43.answer. What Liverpool does get is a lot more money per head of
:15:44. > :15:48.population given to it through central Government than an area like
:15:49. > :15:53.West Oxfordshire. There's a lot of agreement between us, you might be
:15:54. > :15:56.surprised to hear this, and with the zero hour contracts, it is
:15:57. > :16:00.unforgivable exclude people from taking on other jobs. On one hand,
:16:01. > :16:05.people are being told you must not get any work this week, but you
:16:06. > :16:08.can't work anybody else. That's completely wrong and we will do that
:16:09. > :16:16.abuse. There has not been an increase in zero our contracts from
:16:17. > :16:23.the previous administration. Let me just return, he batted out into the
:16:24. > :16:26.long grass. The ?135 million West Oxfordshire is better off than
:16:27. > :16:29.Liverpool, because they have the highest level of council tax paid to
:16:30. > :16:34.them because they have quite well off people living in higher band
:16:35. > :16:38.properties in Liverpool. 17 times more people in band F paid council
:16:39. > :16:44.tax than in Liverpool. We have 17 times more... You have made that
:16:45. > :16:50.point and then we must move on. Let's be clear. The fact of the
:16:51. > :16:54.matter is, in the areas which get the least support from Government,
:16:55. > :17:01.public areas like West Oxfordshire, they may get ?250 support a year,
:17:02. > :17:05.but areas like yours public in ?1000 per head. And going to leave that
:17:06. > :17:10.there. Very briefly, before we move on, why is productivity so low? We
:17:11. > :17:16.have seen an interesting recovery to the recession. Unemployment went as
:17:17. > :17:21.high as it went. The question is about productivity. We've ended up
:17:22. > :17:24.with more people in work. What has happened in that process, people
:17:25. > :17:30.have been prepared to accept a job, maybe over time, it had some
:17:31. > :17:34.surprising impact on productivity full for the good news is, a lot
:17:35. > :17:38.more people are in work, but you are absolutely right, we need to make
:17:39. > :17:43.sure long-term productivity is high to secure the future of the country.
:17:44. > :17:49.The economic indicators are not great. How much spare capacity is
:17:50. > :17:56.left in the economy? One thing I can say... Does it worry you you have a
:17:57. > :17:59.bigger structural deficit? There are figures coming out today in terms of
:18:00. > :18:03.the production of the economy, things like supplies indexes, more
:18:04. > :18:08.positive economic news today is I think the economy is recovering. I
:18:09. > :18:12.don't think we are there yet. That's why we want to make sure... But
:18:13. > :18:17.trade figures were terrible, weren't they? We have cut the deficit,
:18:18. > :18:21.created jobs, let's give the keys back to the people who crashed the
:18:22. > :18:26.car in the first place. But that doesn't say what you're going to do.
:18:27. > :18:29.You are here a lot more this week. I understand that. We will hear more
:18:30. > :18:33.about it on Wednesday. Now, High Speed Two has a new boss. He's
:18:34. > :18:36.called Sir David Higgins and he's been doing a round of media
:18:37. > :18:39.interviews this morning. Sir David, who previously ran the Olympic
:18:40. > :18:43.Delivery Authority, wants HS2 to go further in its first phase and he
:18:44. > :18:46.wants the job done more quickly so that the economic benefits are felt
:18:47. > :18:50.sooner in the North of England. Here's what he had to say a little
:18:51. > :18:54.earlier on BBC Breakfast. The most important thing I've done is look at
:18:55. > :18:58.the first phase, that's London to Birmingham, and extensively review
:18:59. > :19:03.that cost and then look at scope. Really important to get scope right.
:19:04. > :19:07.All my experience on major projects, if you do that properly, so the
:19:08. > :19:09.decision on the High Speed One link, on Euston, doing it properly, and
:19:10. > :19:13.then potentially getting that kick-start of going to Crewe six
:19:14. > :19:16.years earlier, that's all a case of saving money by getting scope right
:19:17. > :19:20.at the start. How much will be saved? Well, the contingency is ?7.4
:19:21. > :19:25.billion in Phase one which is a lot of money. It might sound a lot of
:19:26. > :19:28.money but you can spend that if you waste it, so time is money. We could
:19:29. > :19:32.lose time in the legislative programme. We don't know the full
:19:33. > :19:36.extent of when that will be finished but that could also cost money. And
:19:37. > :19:41.with us now is the Conservative MP and former Cabinet Minister, Cheryl
:19:42. > :19:44.Gillan. She is opposed to HS2. We're also joined by Labour's Shadow
:19:45. > :19:52.Transport Secretary Mary Creagh. And Grant Shapps is still here. Let's
:19:53. > :19:58.come back to you, he wants to speed up the HS2 product so the benefits
:19:59. > :20:08.will be felt in the North of England more quickly. Is he right? I think
:20:09. > :20:13.so. People like, who was fought vigorously and got a good deal for
:20:14. > :20:18.her constituencies, like Cheryl Cole we need to decide is the future
:20:19. > :20:22.bright and head of us and we don't allow our children to benefit from
:20:23. > :20:25.it? We haven't built the railway line since the Victorian era. I
:20:26. > :20:30.think doing it faster is a good idea. You have lost this battle,
:20:31. > :20:35.because now we have labour sounding more positive about it than they
:20:36. > :20:39.were. The Government is pushing this for the you're not going to get your
:20:40. > :20:43.way. No, I think if we had a budget stimulator as they have in
:20:44. > :20:47.Liverpool, I think people would vote against HS2. I don't think there is
:20:48. > :20:53.universal support for this project at all. What is interesting today,
:20:54. > :20:56.after four years, two governments and four transport secretaries, we
:20:57. > :21:00.still haven't got the answer. David Higgins is just come in with eight
:21:01. > :21:05.weeks of studying this project and decided that he has got the golden
:21:06. > :21:09.answers. I think this project has been doomed from the start. I think
:21:10. > :21:14.it has been run badly, and I think now we are touching -- clutching at
:21:15. > :21:19.straws. The price will go up and up. We don't know that. That is your
:21:20. > :21:24.prediction. You could start to the West Coast and east coast when they
:21:25. > :21:27.were built. Is that Labour's fault? Ed Balls, when he said we're not
:21:28. > :21:31.going to hand over a blank cheque, he seemed to beat rowing back from
:21:32. > :21:34.Labour's can image to the project which led to the uncertainty which
:21:35. > :21:39.David Higgins said will ultimately lead to higher costs. I think the
:21:40. > :21:45.delay has been caused by this Parliament. Channel messed -- Cheryl
:21:46. > :21:51.mentioned the four transport secretaries. They published some of
:21:52. > :21:56.the assessment strongly, which led to a delay. What we have seen today,
:21:57. > :22:02.it's a very positive report, a thorough report, and Sir David talks
:22:03. > :22:05.about the environmental and emotional and financial impacts of
:22:06. > :22:09.HS2 and it's important we remember that, but it's also important, we
:22:10. > :22:15.have built Crossrail, a Labour Government. That took forever. East
:22:16. > :22:21.West London, North London, a ?6 billion upgrade. ?6 million spent a
:22:22. > :22:28.dreading. We've not had anything north of Watford. OK for them is
:22:29. > :22:32.Labour behind it fully? No more criticising? You ask really behind
:22:33. > :22:38.this deal? We will vote in favour of this. We will keep an eye on it to
:22:39. > :22:45.make sure the costs are kept low, and we link it with a connectivity
:22:46. > :22:52.in the North, looking at Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Hull. And looking
:22:53. > :22:56.at how to maximise the benefits of that phase two links. How fed up
:22:57. > :22:59.where Labour leaders in the North when they heard Ed Balls saying,
:23:00. > :23:06.actually we have got doubts about this? I think he was right to say
:23:07. > :23:13.there is no blank cheque. But, for me, there has to be a genuine
:23:14. > :23:16.enthusiasm for this. Politicians of both sides, progressive politicians,
:23:17. > :23:21.who talk about the need to rebalance the economy, let's remember that
:23:22. > :23:24.phrase, it's not just rhetoric full we have to do something about it for
:23:25. > :23:28.the one way to do that is by making sure cities in the north are
:23:29. > :23:33.connected to each other and to the south. In Liverpool, we are
:23:34. > :23:37.investing ?150 million in a super port, where we will bring in lots of
:23:38. > :23:40.freight from the Middle East, and we need to get it out, so it's
:23:41. > :23:47.important to connect Liverpool the east coast of the country. I agree
:23:48. > :23:51.with that. We do that. I agree with that entirely. He came to see me a
:23:52. > :23:57.few weeks ago, David Higgins, and said, why don't you start this in
:23:58. > :24:01.the North? If you're going to rebalance the economy north-south,
:24:02. > :24:07.and I'm sure Mary and Grant Wood group this if you would listen, you
:24:08. > :24:11.should start this in the North and get connectivity across the
:24:12. > :24:16.Pennines. You would reduce the likelihood that the economy being
:24:17. > :24:19.sucked down into London, by this Birmingham London face. You would
:24:20. > :24:23.wait for the Howard Davies review to see with the airport capacity is
:24:24. > :24:27.going to be in the south, and get that connectivity that Sir David is
:24:28. > :24:34.waiting for. Why can't you build north to south and son of South to
:24:35. > :24:38.North? He said the city of crew should be built first and I think
:24:39. > :24:43.that's a good idea. I do just want to say, I'm very grateful because
:24:44. > :24:48.there was a time at the conference, Mary was a difficult position when
:24:49. > :24:51.Ed Balls turning against it, and Joe and his Labour colleagues came down
:24:52. > :24:57.from many different cities and made it clear this is not acceptable.
:24:58. > :24:59.High-speed rail is required and can only be done with cross-party
:25:00. > :25:04.agreement and I think the cross-party spirit that council
:25:05. > :25:08.leaders showed is very important. You have got the agreement but is it
:25:09. > :25:15.going to be passed before the next election? I think the bill continues
:25:16. > :25:19.through. So there is delay, isn't there? We are practically in the
:25:20. > :25:23.fifth year of this Government and that still waiting for the bill, a
:25:24. > :25:28.proper process. Just to be clear, it would be easier... They can petition
:25:29. > :25:31.Parliament and have their say for the committee of MPs can look at
:25:32. > :25:36.those petitions and I think that's right that due process is followed
:25:37. > :25:39.but I want to correct something. The Government statement has just come
:25:40. > :25:52.out and they have just said any extension or fast building to Crewe
:25:53. > :25:55.would be phased two. This is a risk you introduced by dropping it in
:25:56. > :25:57.half. By dropping it in half. Only console taking on half the project
:25:58. > :26:04.you have built a delay into this project. Let a grant answer. Just
:26:05. > :26:11.very quickly. During the parliament we have enabling legislation. The
:26:12. > :26:18.biggest thing is to be absolutely clear from the north side Labour is
:26:19. > :26:22.fully behind it. We have said that. And Ed Balls no longer going to
:26:23. > :26:26.block this project. In terms of a delay, what does that mean to you?
:26:27. > :26:29.Let me just say, the enabling legislation was a little cover a
:26:30. > :26:33.bill to make sure the Government had some coverage for the money was
:26:34. > :26:39.spending. The hybrid Bill and Parliamentary process is really
:26:40. > :26:42.important and, to get the process up to Crewe you have to have an
:26:43. > :26:45.environmental statement and if you wanted to do it in this bill, it
:26:46. > :26:48.would be wrong, so what the Government ought to do, if they're
:26:49. > :26:54.going to listen to David Higgins, they should suspend the bill, look
:26:55. > :27:03.at including Crewe or started in the north and think carefully about how
:27:04. > :27:06.it's going to connect down. Some politics is getting played here. On
:27:07. > :27:13.the finance issue, it's going to cost over 35 years, just roughly
:27:14. > :27:19.over ?1 billion a year. The UK has to invest in infrastructure in
:27:20. > :27:26.transport like other cities around the world. It's coming online in
:27:27. > :27:31.2033. My point is, what the report says today, we have got to get on
:27:32. > :27:34.with it, starting the North, that's what I'm interested in. That's what
:27:35. > :27:39.Northern leaders are interested in. And that's what we hope both parties
:27:40. > :27:44.can agree before now and the general election that they are committed to
:27:45. > :27:51.this and it will happen. Let's say ?50 billion, if it goes beyond that,
:27:52. > :27:55.what will you do? We are confident, we have delivered an Olympics, an
:27:56. > :28:00.enormous project on time, Crossrail coming through on time into budget,
:28:01. > :28:04.there's no reason, this country is very capable of delivering projects
:28:05. > :28:09.on time, to budget, and a bit ahead of budget full we have to make
:28:10. > :28:12.decisions. Do we think our brighter future is in the future or do we
:28:13. > :28:17.think it's basically all over and were no longer going to build
:28:18. > :28:21.infrastructure? In the last 15 years alone, we've had twice as many
:28:22. > :28:26.journeys going on. Let's look at that. We need to build some
:28:27. > :28:31.railways. The capacity problem will not go away and will only get worse
:28:32. > :28:36.particularly if this is not built. And particularly for voters in the
:28:37. > :28:42.south-east, he's busy concerned about, they will not understand how
:28:43. > :28:46.the transport priority is to spend ?50 billion on something which is
:28:47. > :28:51.going to ease some of the commuter congestion coming into Euston,
:28:52. > :28:54.because that is, in fact, one of the least congested lines coming into
:28:55. > :28:57.London. Commuters in the south-east, if you're going to free up the
:28:58. > :29:00.economy and put investment into infrastructure, they should look at
:29:01. > :29:07.the lines I come in from the south of the country. They are a major
:29:08. > :29:12.problem for people. And we're going to be left, the Labour Party is in
:29:13. > :29:15.pole position to play politics with this project in the run-up to the
:29:16. > :29:21.election and then they can deliver for the North and leave us dangling
:29:22. > :29:24.in the South. That may happen. It's worth remembering, although this is
:29:25. > :29:28.a big investment, three times as much will be spent on rail in the
:29:29. > :29:35.next Parliament as on High Speed two, so there's still lots of
:29:36. > :29:39.investment. OK let's leave it there. Now we're going to find out the
:29:40. > :29:44.answer to the quiz. Can you render which one is not from Liverpool?
:29:45. > :29:53.Elbow. I think they are from Manchester. They are. Thank you very
:29:54. > :29:57.much to the guests. Well done. Now, let's take a look at the coming
:29:58. > :30:01.Westminster week. We kick off the week with a reception in Number Ten.
:30:02. > :30:05.The PM is hosting one for Sports Relief Fundraisers. On Tuesday don't
:30:06. > :30:08.forget to set a reminder in your diaries. It marks six months exactly
:30:09. > :30:11.to the Scottish Referendum. Then, get ready for the fiscal event of
:30:12. > :30:15.the year. That's right, folks, it's The Budget. Will the Chancellor be
:30:16. > :30:17.pulling rabbits out of the hat? The Public Accounts Select Committee
:30:18. > :30:21.holds a session on Personal Independence Payments on Thursday
:30:22. > :30:22.And on Friday, it's day one of the Scottish Labour Party conference in
:30:23. > :30:37.Perth. Joining me now to discuss the week
:30:38. > :30:51.is Rafael Behr of the New Statesman. And Isabel Hardman of the Spectator.
:30:52. > :31:00.It is a great Westminster set piece. Ultimately, George Osborne has a
:31:01. > :31:05.dilemma, there is a much money, he needs people still do think there is
:31:06. > :31:09.more work to be done, we can't trust the Labour Party. It is a year
:31:10. > :31:14.before the election so he wouldn't mind people thinking things are
:31:15. > :31:19.going well and there may be some treats for him. He has two navigate
:31:20. > :31:25.that path. Labour, their dilemma is they don't want to look as if they
:31:26. > :31:29.wish things were worse. If they can see the economy is picking up, then
:31:30. > :31:45.why would you have a Labour government? The issue on raising the
:31:46. > :31:50.40% tax rate. There is some momentum. George Osborne has
:31:51. > :31:57.indicated it is an aspiration to be in that tax bracket. He was trying
:31:58. > :32:06.to say people are more likely to see the case for smaller government
:32:07. > :32:18.wants they understand a higher tax rate -- the case for a lower tax
:32:19. > :32:24.government. He believes the low paid Nimes -- need more help. If more
:32:25. > :32:33.people are paying in that 40p tax bracket than before? It is important
:32:34. > :32:37.for them to support their core constituency, every party has two.
:32:38. > :32:44.In of terms the way wealth and reward are distributed, the core
:32:45. > :32:49.constituency isn't big enough to deliver a Conservative majority. He
:32:50. > :32:52.has two reach out to those people whose pockets RMT. They are
:32:53. > :33:06.sensitive to the charge that the Tories look after their rich friends
:33:07. > :33:11.-- whose pockets are empty. So we have seen the campaign on the bingo
:33:12. > :33:20.tax is perfect for a good front page of the Sun newspaper.
:33:21. > :33:23.On the issue of leadership and replacing David Cameron after the
:33:24. > :33:34.election, is there a campaign to stop Boris being his successor?
:33:35. > :33:36.There is a very strange campaign. There is a leadership contest.
:33:37. > :33:45.People are working themselves up into a state. Boris was gaining more
:33:46. > :33:55.traction with Conservative MPs. George Osborne's group worked harder
:33:56. > :34:00.so Boris panicked, sending agents to arrange meetings with them. They are
:34:01. > :34:03.setting a bad example to backbenchers who are obsessed with
:34:04. > :34:10.this anyway. To see people at the top becoming delirious with the idea
:34:11. > :34:12.of a leadership contest. Some Conservative MPs without a high
:34:13. > :34:22.profile want to get on with their job, and they are astonished. When
:34:23. > :34:33.people are at the heart of it seemed to be abetting this process, they
:34:34. > :34:44.are tearing their hair out. Labour love this. It means the conserved --
:34:45. > :34:47.it means the conversation has been diverted.
:34:48. > :34:51.Let us turn to Ukraine, is there anything realistically that can be
:34:52. > :34:56.done by the EU before the Crimea is pulled back into Russia?
:34:57. > :35:02.Are the sanctions that the EU is working on, are they enough to
:35:03. > :35:12.challenge Putin, or are they a token? And are we doing it at a cost
:35:13. > :35:17.to ourselves. Many of those sanctions, these restrictions, asset
:35:18. > :35:24.freezing, one of those will have any impact? At some level, there will be
:35:25. > :35:30.some bone fide catalysts in Moscow who don't like this. Russian foreign
:35:31. > :35:35.policy has said at a strategic level, talking about annexing a
:35:36. > :35:39.territory of another country. If you go into that kind of business in
:35:40. > :35:48.foreign policy, you would sweat over Visa restrictions. You have taken a
:35:49. > :35:57.catfish Western countries are more interested in the supply of energy
:35:58. > :36:03.-- give have taken a strategy that. So far, it looks like it is coming
:36:04. > :36:09.off. You suspect he will get to keep Crimea, and redraw the boundaries.
:36:10. > :36:15.There will be hand ringing in the West but not much more than that.
:36:16. > :36:18.And we're joined now for the rest of the programme by the Conservative MP
:36:19. > :36:21.Jesse Norman. The Labour MP Catherine McKinnell. And by the
:36:22. > :36:24.Liberal Democrat MP Nick Harvey. Welcome to you all.
:36:25. > :36:28.Now, let's kick off with the Budget. But first, here's George Osborne on
:36:29. > :36:33.the Andrew Marr Show yesterday. I am in no tax Conservative, I want
:36:34. > :36:38.our working people on all of these incomes to keep more of their income
:36:39. > :36:42.tax-free. You can only begin to do something like this if you have got
:36:43. > :36:48.a grip on public finances, if your economy is growing, if you are
:36:49. > :36:53.creating jobs. This is because we have been able to do these things
:36:54. > :36:59.that we can afford this increase. Why is he doing more to help people
:37:00. > :37:09.who have either slipped into the 40% tax bracket? It is misconceived.
:37:10. > :37:15.Most people have done better in the past few years. It is right for the
:37:16. > :37:20.Chancellor to focus on the area where most attention is needed, the
:37:21. > :37:26.well-being of the least well off. Why is there a campaign from the
:37:27. > :37:30.likes of prominent peers and backbenchers? Is it they don't
:37:31. > :37:37.understand the message that people are better off? Or do they feel
:37:38. > :37:46.there is a narrative going awry for the Conservatives? What is happening
:37:47. > :37:52.is that they want future clarity to be brought to this issue as with
:37:53. > :37:57.national insurance, personal allowance. A direction of travel as
:37:58. > :38:04.regards thresholds or marginal tax rates. The key point is we are
:38:05. > :38:10.broke. It is easy to think because mortgage rates have stayed no,
:38:11. > :38:15.economic problems have been sold. We are rashly halfway through the
:38:16. > :38:26.process. The idea we can write large cheques. All raising thresholds. It
:38:27. > :38:31.looks as if the threshold will go up a little but not as much as
:38:32. > :38:37.inflation. Those people are already doing incredibly well through the
:38:38. > :38:47.personal allowance. It would be another seven years of austerity,
:38:48. > :38:51.and probably beyond. I do not think voters are ready for this. Whoever
:38:52. > :38:56.wins the election, the reality is there is an awful long way to go to
:38:57. > :39:02.get the deficit under control. Even then, there is the hangover, we will
:39:03. > :39:07.have debts to pay off from the years of deficit. Although the economy is
:39:08. > :39:11.improving, it will be quite a challenge for the next government to
:39:12. > :39:15.explain why austerity will have two continue. It was easy to explain
:39:16. > :39:21.that while the economy was on the floor. As it picks up, it will be a
:39:22. > :39:28.subtle argument as to why austerity will continue for more. Do you agree
:39:29. > :39:33.another ?12 billion of cuts to welfare will also be necessary? No,
:39:34. > :39:37.that is one where you could do it but not one I would choose. You
:39:38. > :39:46.could look at taxes across the board. And hope the economy will
:39:47. > :39:51.approve -- improve. Do you accept austerity stays, the Chancellor has
:39:52. > :39:54.followed the right path. We have had growth returning, and the
:39:55. > :40:00.indicators, some of them are pretty good? He is following the right
:40:01. > :40:04.approach. We have had three years of a flat-lining economy which has set
:40:05. > :40:09.the country back. The people paying the price that are ordinary people
:40:10. > :40:17.who are working and are still not able to make meet. The choice --
:40:18. > :40:22.childcare costs have gone up 30%. People are struggling with energy
:40:23. > :40:26.bills. It sounds complacent to talk about this being something people
:40:27. > :40:32.have to accept and live with, when this is an opportunity for George
:40:33. > :40:39.Osborne to do something about it. To help those people. What would Labour
:40:40. > :40:43.do at this point? We would introduce the 10p starting rate of tax, so
:40:44. > :40:49.when people come into the tax system, it intensifies as them to
:40:50. > :40:55.increase their income. And raising the threshold? We are not disputing
:40:56. > :41:02.that. This is an additional measure. We have said it would be
:41:03. > :41:07.funded with a tax on mansions. We wouldn't bring in this antiquated
:41:08. > :41:17.marriage tax which will benefit 84% of men and only a third of actual
:41:18. > :41:22.married couples? -- married couples. It shows the argument is not
:41:23. > :41:27.working. More is being done to people on low incomes than any
:41:28. > :41:34.government. The tax-exempt personal allowance will go up to ?10,000. 2.7
:41:35. > :41:39.million people will not pay tax at all after April, 25 million will
:41:40. > :41:44.have received a tax benefit. I can't see why that could be an
:41:45. > :41:49.objectionable policy. And the people above that? Arguably people have
:41:50. > :41:57.been helped at that level. People just above that are being hit by the
:41:58. > :42:06.cost of living issues. They say they are eating into wedges which haven't
:42:07. > :42:15.kept up. What about them? Those people are included in the 24
:42:16. > :42:20.million. The thing is, if you hadn't had the combination of policies at
:42:21. > :42:24.the moment, if taxation had gone up with inflation, those above the 40%
:42:25. > :42:33.rate would be giving -- would be receiving twice the amount. It is
:42:34. > :42:40.fairer to do it this way. If things are as bad, why is consumer spending
:42:41. > :42:45.on its way up? Responding to that, speaking of fair, this government
:42:46. > :42:48.brought down the 50p tax rate, giving a ?3 billion tax cut to the
:42:49. > :42:55.highest earning people in the country. Explain my consumer
:42:56. > :43:03.spending is up? If we have got less money and there is a cost of living
:43:04. > :43:08.crisis. The economy is starting to recover, we are seeing those signs.
:43:09. > :43:16.It doesn't mean ordinary people are feeling better off. Why are they
:43:17. > :43:20.spending more money? From a clear poll this weekend showing it doesn't
:43:21. > :43:25.matter how great times George Osmond says this, people are not better
:43:26. > :43:29.off. And in your constituency? People are beginning to get the
:43:30. > :43:35.benefit of a couple of years of wages going up slightly. Certainly
:43:36. > :43:41.that. Combine that with the income tax-free threshold which has been a
:43:42. > :43:50.tax cut for 24 million people, taking 2.7 million out of tax
:43:51. > :43:54.altogether. All of that has given people a little bit of breathing
:43:55. > :43:59.space. But everybody is still finding it difficult and will for
:44:00. > :44:04.some time. Isn't the worry that what is happening is a return to a
:44:05. > :44:11.recovery led by that consumer spending, trade figures were pretty
:44:12. > :44:16.bad. House prices are going up in central London and outer areas, not
:44:17. > :44:25.elsewhere. We are returning to the very conditions that led us into the
:44:26. > :44:29.problems we had in 2008? You want a balanced recovery across all parts.
:44:30. > :44:34.We're not getting it. Not yet because there is a lag in industrial
:44:35. > :44:41.investment and overseas sales. The difficulty is, who would not want to
:44:42. > :44:46.have some form of growth, and in the High Street it is a valuable
:44:47. > :44:50.contributor to this. The difficulty is, reports that the Financial Times
:44:51. > :44:57.think there is little spare capacity, means we could be left
:44:58. > :44:58.with a bigger structural deficit, even if growth continues, which will
:44:59. > :45:12.put plans to ruin. The truth of the matter, it's really
:45:13. > :45:15.contested of theory. It is being run in the past. I don't think there's
:45:16. > :45:19.any reason to suggest it will be wrong in the future. -- it has been
:45:20. > :45:24.wrong in the past. Where will the Lib Dem fingerprints be on this
:45:25. > :45:29.budget? We are keen to continue the flagship Lib Dem policy from 2010,
:45:30. > :45:33.pushing up the threshold. We are confident we'll get up to 10,000 we
:45:34. > :45:38.started out making our objective but by the end of Parliament, we want to
:45:39. > :45:41.get up to 10,500. Let's leave it there. Ministers from across the
:45:42. > :45:43.European Union are expected to agree further sanctions against Russia,
:45:44. > :45:48.after a referendum in Crimea backed a split from Ukraine. 97% of voters
:45:49. > :45:53.in the region where pro-Russian forces are in control are said to
:45:54. > :45:56.have supported joining Russia. But the referendum is being condemned as
:45:57. > :46:00.illegal by the Government in Kiev, as well as by the EU and the US.
:46:01. > :46:05.Here's the Foreign Secretary, William Hague, speaking a little
:46:06. > :46:08.earlier today. What to look to Russia to do is to enter into a
:46:09. > :46:11.diplomatic process and framework that brings Russians, the Russian
:46:12. > :46:16.leaders, into direct contact and negotiation with Ukrainian leaders.
:46:17. > :46:21.That is what we have been pressing for over the last two weeks. It can
:46:22. > :46:25.be provided through an international contact or co-ordination group,
:46:26. > :46:37.supported by many other countries. We are all ready to do that. And, of
:46:38. > :46:40.course, they need to take their own steps to de-escalate the situation
:46:41. > :46:42.that Russia's actions, including proceeding with the referendum
:46:43. > :46:45.yesterday, other acts of provocation, the presence on the
:46:46. > :46:55.border of large numbers of Russian troops, they haven't done anything
:46:56. > :46:58.to de-escalate so far. It looks as if Crimea will be reabsorbed into
:46:59. > :47:05.Russia before the EU has time to agree on sanctions. Yes, it probably
:47:06. > :47:09.does, and, Vladimir Putin, having gone out on a limb this far now, I
:47:10. > :47:13.don't think any sanctions taken by the EU or anybody else is going to
:47:14. > :47:17.change his mind. However, I think it's worth the EU and the Americans
:47:18. > :47:23.and the international community dressing ahead with some sanctions
:47:24. > :47:26.in order, please, to get him to stop Crimea and not encroach into
:47:27. > :47:31.mainland Ukraine. Is that your fear, it won't stop Crimea? If you look at
:47:32. > :47:37.the whole way he set it up on the pretext it's to defend Russian
:47:38. > :47:43.speakers inside Ukraine, you look at the exclusion zone, and wonder
:47:44. > :47:50.whether he will go further in? I desperately hope he won't. He
:47:51. > :47:53.certainly made a point and served himself well doing this, but there
:47:54. > :47:58.is a clear danger of going further, and therefore, it's worthwhile
:47:59. > :48:01.taking some action to prevent that. Although, it looks as if it will
:48:02. > :48:08.have little impact, these restrictions, travel bans, freezing
:48:09. > :48:13.certain people 's assets. Would Labour go for economic sanctions?
:48:14. > :48:20.Well, we have said this can't go unpunished, ignored. Everyone agrees
:48:21. > :48:24.with that. Russia are a hugely fast-growing economy, but part of an
:48:25. > :48:31.international economic community, and they sit in the G8, and Douglas
:48:32. > :48:36.Alexander says we should push them to exclude them from that group.
:48:37. > :48:42.That is unlikely to have much impact. Economic sanctions as well.
:48:43. > :48:47.What economic sanctions? To make them understand the consequences.
:48:48. > :48:56.Which ones? The Foreign Minister is today are discussing the Visa
:48:57. > :48:59.restrictions, and travel restrictions and freezing assets. I
:49:00. > :49:05.think those, in themselves, will have an impact economically on the
:49:06. > :49:09.people impacted, but ultimately, I think they are discussing it today
:49:10. > :49:13.and it's important we don't turn a blind eye. I don't think there will
:49:14. > :49:19.be a turn a blind eye situation, not the dramatically, at William Hague
:49:20. > :49:22.has said we will continue efforts to make a diplomatic breakthrough. What
:49:23. > :49:26.does that mean? We're not to reverse what happened in Crimea. They're not
:49:27. > :49:31.going to do the referendum again, are they? No, but there could
:49:32. > :49:34.potentially be a coming together and a conference which allows a better
:49:35. > :49:39.understanding of both sides and their positions, and it could lead
:49:40. > :49:43.to some benefits. Let's be clear, there's not a lot of options on the
:49:44. > :49:49.table. One option slightly underestimated, it's easy to think
:49:50. > :49:55.travel Visa restrictions are inconvenient, but that large numbers
:49:56. > :50:01.of senior Russian oligarchs who live in this country, who have assets,
:50:02. > :50:17.and asset freezes, the impact of foreign exchange markets... That
:50:18. > :50:20.would have an impact, of course. The price of the ruble dropping, but
:50:21. > :50:24.it's recovered. It wouldn't be a result of what the EU might do. What
:50:25. > :50:29.will it fundamentally change about what has happened critic Mark Crimea
:50:30. > :50:37.is common to all intents and purposes, going to be part of
:50:38. > :50:40.Russia. --? The question at this point is to arrest that situation
:50:41. > :50:44.and see if some more lawful arrangement can be brought to the
:50:45. > :50:54.situation of the Ukraine and, therefore, and they should be
:50:55. > :50:58.allowed to develop. What about Ukraine's response? I've interviewed
:50:59. > :51:00.the ambassador and a diplomat in London, and wasn't going to give
:51:01. > :51:04.away any trade secrets, but the indication is, publicly, they will
:51:05. > :51:10.never accept Crimea going back to Russia. Ukraine, building up its
:51:11. > :51:14.military in the east part of the country, they say it's up to
:51:15. > :51:18.readiness, soon, so how worried are you there may take some military
:51:19. > :51:22.action? I believe don't think they will. I have seen the interim Prime
:51:23. > :51:26.Minister speaking in the media about this. I think he realises the scale
:51:27. > :51:31.of what he is tangling with. It's highly unlikely that they will do
:51:32. > :51:34.that. I suppose you can't rule it out entirely. I don't think they
:51:35. > :51:39.will accept in principle Crimea going to Russia, but in practice,
:51:40. > :51:44.it's difficult to stop it. What the Russians care about their naval
:51:45. > :51:47.bases. This is their attitude towards Syria, the only
:51:48. > :51:54.Mediterranean base. The critical thing for them is Sevastopol, which
:51:55. > :51:58.has governed the Russian action. They're not going to take notice of
:51:59. > :52:03.sanctions we are talking about, but actually, they might do if the whole
:52:04. > :52:06.international community got together to stop them going further because I
:52:07. > :52:12.haven't fully got the same strategic interest going further that they had
:52:13. > :52:16.in securing this naval base. Do you think there should be an acceptance
:52:17. > :52:21.that Britain's role and influence in the world has changed and is
:52:22. > :52:26.diminishing in terms of what it can do to affect these things? Perhaps
:52:27. > :52:28.not helped by the vote on a motion in Syria? I think it's very
:52:29. > :52:35.important that Britain continues to play a role, as we have been doing
:52:36. > :52:40.in speaking up on behalf of the rule of law, the international dialogue.
:52:41. > :52:46.That's not the question I asked. Do you think the votes, like the one
:52:47. > :52:49.about Syria, but Labour post, do you think that diminishes people 's view
:52:50. > :52:53.of Britain as a foreign power or not? I am answering the question
:52:54. > :52:59.because we have a very important diplomatic role to play. And I think
:53:00. > :53:02.we are playing that in these circumstances, and giving an
:53:03. > :53:08.important voice to the international rule of law and the economic and
:53:09. > :53:12.political consequences that may flow from an abuse of that. I think
:53:13. > :53:16.Britain needs to stand shoulder to shoulder with our international
:53:17. > :53:26.allies in order to give a very strong unified voice that says we
:53:27. > :53:33.won't stand by and allow this to go and responded to, and allow Ukraine
:53:34. > :53:37.to be alone in this issue. And I think we play an important role
:53:38. > :53:43.within the G8, and within the UN Security Council, so I think, you
:53:44. > :53:47.know, the stereo vote was a different matter, a particular
:53:48. > :53:54.circumstance, -- Syria vote, and that was a particular conflict which
:53:55. > :53:57.was very difficult. This is a different circumstance. And again,
:53:58. > :54:01.one Britain plays an important tip article role at present in, and it
:54:02. > :54:07.will continue. OK, let's leave it you. Is anyone worth ?300,000 a
:54:08. > :54:10.week? Well, according to Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls, footballers
:54:11. > :54:14.like Wayne Rooney might be, but the same can't be said for bankers.
:54:15. > :54:17.Here's a bit of what he had to say on Pienaar's Politics yesterday. I
:54:18. > :54:21.guess there's only one Wayne Rooney and he plays for Manchester United
:54:22. > :54:24.and he could go anywhere in the world and maybe that is genuine
:54:25. > :54:28.talent getting paid. And somebody who has a great idea like Steve Jobs
:54:29. > :54:32.and invents an iPhone, and they get sold all around the world, in the
:54:33. > :54:35.end we can't say we'll cut you off at some point. On the other hand,
:54:36. > :54:39.we've got all these bankers, and here Vince is right, bankers all
:54:40. > :54:44.getting paid... The guy from the Co-op before he stood down, ?3.5
:54:45. > :54:48.million salary. When they get asked, why do you get paid millions of
:54:49. > :54:51.pounds, they say because anybody else does and therefore, we have to
:54:52. > :54:55.too. Maybe people should say let's stop this merry-go-round going round
:54:56. > :55:03.and get back to a bit of rationality. That is Ed Balls
:55:04. > :55:08.talking about a move. Is he worth ?3000 a week? I don't have a view on
:55:09. > :55:10.that. He operates in a competitive market and there are many people
:55:11. > :55:16.operating in the financial sector who don't. My only desire on this
:55:17. > :55:22.would be that the premiership, the FA and the players, did more for
:55:23. > :55:26.non-league and grassroots football because, actually, teams like
:55:27. > :55:28.Hereford United, my team, are absolutely broke, and a tiny
:55:29. > :55:35.fraction of Wayne Rooney's salary would keep them out of trouble. The
:55:36. > :55:42.same as two other clubs across the country. Ed Balls says he's worth
:55:43. > :55:45.it. Is he? I think in the context of the bankers bonuses, I think you can
:55:46. > :55:49.understand why it's pretty galling for people out there who are
:55:50. > :55:53.struggling. But why should Wayne Rooney be paid ?300,000? Bankers are
:55:54. > :56:00.still failing to land a small and create jobs. But, you know, I think
:56:01. > :56:06.you can compare him to international artists, musicians, they are unique
:56:07. > :56:14.individuals that are unique to give. And I think, the market dictates
:56:15. > :56:18.what is paid and what is worth. The market is the market and if Wayne
:56:19. > :56:22.Rooney is worth ?300,000 a week in the mind of Ed Balls, bankers should
:56:23. > :56:26.be allowed to earn as much as they like as well? Manchester United kill
:56:27. > :56:31.you think is worth that. Accommodation at what they can get
:56:32. > :56:37.in television money and six, show they want to pay him that otherwise
:56:38. > :56:41.a continental club could sign him. As far as the bankers are concerned,
:56:42. > :56:46.it's different, because it's not a competitive market. They are taking
:56:47. > :56:49.everybody is money, and we haven't really got that much control over
:56:50. > :56:55.what they're doing with it. I think footballers, by the finish, they are
:56:56. > :56:59.a free, and the bankers are not regulated as well as they should be.
:57:00. > :57:04.Vince Cable says he doesn't understand why anybody needs to earn
:57:05. > :57:07.?1 million salary. Is he right? The general rule is always the same, if
:57:08. > :57:10.someone is built something with nothing existed before in a
:57:11. > :57:14.competitive environment, then they should be entitled to take the
:57:15. > :57:21.benefits of what they have created, and if they have sat in a
:57:22. > :57:24.franchise, and they are in a big bank with little challenge in the
:57:25. > :57:30.big markets, you should ask question about that. I think, whilst Vince
:57:31. > :57:34.Cable says that, he did vote through the tax cut for the highest earners
:57:35. > :57:43.and the millionaires to boost their incomes, rather than pay more in tax
:57:44. > :57:47.to bring down the deficit. I think we've taken with a pinch of salt, as
:57:48. > :57:53.well. Our MPs are humble bunch. They don't need to blow their own
:57:54. > :57:54.trumpets, apart from Jesse, last week at the Parliamentary variety
:57:55. > :58:24.show. Maybe you should give up the day
:58:25. > :58:29.job? I wouldn't say I was so great, but thank you for that. Did you
:58:30. > :58:32.enjoy that? It's one of the most wonderful things I've ever done,
:58:33. > :58:39.pick up a trumpet at the age of 41 and start playing it. I started very
:58:40. > :58:43.late. It gives rise to all these mad jokes, but actually, it's a
:58:44. > :58:46.wonderful thing and I would encourage anybody to do it. Good for
:58:47. > :58:51.you. That's all for today. Thanks to our guests. I would back tomorrow. I
:58:52. > :58:53.buy.