:00:37. > :00:40.Afternoon folks, welcome to the Daily Politics. Sinn Fein Leader
:00:41. > :00:43.Gerry Adams remains in police custody following his arrest in
:00:44. > :00:48.connection with one of the most notorious murders of the Troubles.
:00:49. > :00:52.Mr Adams denies any involvement. Sinn Fein says the arrest is
:00:53. > :00:56.politically motivated. The DUP says no-one should be above the law. We
:00:57. > :01:01.speak to one of the architects of Northern Ireland's peace process -
:01:02. > :01:05.former first minister David Trimble. Pfizer, the US drug giant that makes
:01:06. > :01:11.Viagra, wants to buy our second biggest pharmaceutical company
:01:12. > :01:13.AstraZeneca. But would such a take-over be good or bad for
:01:14. > :01:18.Britain? Business Secretary.
:01:19. > :01:21.David Cameron launches his party's local election campaign. But why is
:01:22. > :01:26.he still talking about Europe? local election campaign. But why is
:01:27. > :01:34.And egg on his face! Is Nigel Farage now part of the political big
:01:35. > :01:38.league? All that in the next hour. And with
:01:39. > :01:41.us for the duration, two all round good eggs. They are Isabel Hardman
:01:42. > :01:45.of the Spectator and John McTernan, former political adviser to Tony
:01:46. > :01:49.Blair. Welcome to you both. Let's start with the latest on the arrest
:01:50. > :01:53.of Gerry Adams. The Sinn Fein leader has spent a second night in custody
:01:54. > :01:56.at a police station in Northern Ireland after being arrested in
:01:57. > :01:59.connection with the murder of Jean McConville during The Troubles. Mrs
:02:00. > :02:06.McConville, a mother of ten, was dragged from her house in 1972 by an
:02:07. > :02:09.IRA squad and later executed. Mr Adams denies any involvement in the
:02:10. > :02:13.crime. Last night, Mrs McConville's daughter, Helen McKendry, told
:02:14. > :02:22.Newsnight that she did "not fear the IRA any more" and was "ready to name
:02:23. > :02:30.names". Here she is, speaking to Newsnight's Kirsty Wark. Today, your
:02:31. > :02:33.brother Michael said that he knows the identity of the people that came
:02:34. > :02:39.to the house that night and took your mother, that he will not say
:02:40. > :02:47.for fear of being shot by the IRA. Do you share those fears? No. That
:02:48. > :02:51.fear left me a long time ago. I do not fear the IRA any more. I would
:02:52. > :02:58.happily give names I know to the police. Have you been asked for the
:02:59. > :03:04.names? I have spoken to the police, but they did not interview the
:03:05. > :03:08.family. You were not in the house that night, you were at the shops.
:03:09. > :03:11.When you came back, your brothers and sisters told you who were there,
:03:12. > :03:17.so you have a full picture of who was there? Yes. You don't feel fear
:03:18. > :03:24.for your life about speaking to us about this? No. They have done so
:03:25. > :03:27.much to me already in the last 42 years. What are they going to do,
:03:28. > :03:30.put a bullet in my head? Well, they know where I live.
:03:31. > :03:33.Joining me now is David Trimble, former First Minister of Northern
:03:34. > :03:37.Ireland and former leader of the Ulster Unionist Party. He was also a
:03:38. > :03:43.key player in the peace process and he now sits in the House of Lords.
:03:44. > :03:52.Was none of this sort of thing ever covered in the peace process? We did
:03:53. > :03:56.discuss what to do. There was a consensus that we would not have a
:03:57. > :04:01.truth and reconciliation process. Like in South Africa. Yes, because
:04:02. > :04:07.it did not work there. With this sort of situation, we did make a
:04:08. > :04:12.significant concession to paramilitaries through an early
:04:13. > :04:17.release programme. But we agreed that there would not be an amnesty.
:04:18. > :04:23.It was made clear from the outset that if evidence came to the police
:04:24. > :04:28.about crimes committed before 1998, the police would investigate in the
:04:29. > :04:32.normal way, as they have been doing. Over the years, there has been a
:04:33. > :04:38.steady stream of cases relating to those events where there has been
:04:39. > :04:42.evidence against people. They have gone to court and made convictions.
:04:43. > :04:46.People have served up to two years, which is how the early release
:04:47. > :04:53.scheme operates. In this case, the normal legal process should happen.
:04:54. > :04:57.It was inevitable, once the Boston tapes came into the public domain,
:04:58. > :05:02.in view of the allegations contained in them, whether they are accurate
:05:03. > :05:07.or not, that Mr Adams would be questioned. He effectively
:05:08. > :05:09.recognised that earlier this week come when he said he would
:05:10. > :05:16.voluntarily go to the police station. Is there a danger that this
:05:17. > :05:22.will derail the peace process? What is disturbing is the way some people
:05:23. > :05:25.are posturing about this. I am very disappointed in the line taken by
:05:26. > :05:29.the deputy first minister, Martin McGuinness. He has spoken to the
:05:30. > :05:35.prime minister. He has been playing to the gallery bike criticising the
:05:36. > :05:38.police. The police are doing their job. As deputy first minister, he
:05:39. > :05:45.has an obligation to support the police. He says the PSNI is duty
:05:46. > :05:50.bound to energetically pursue every investigation and encourages them to
:05:51. > :05:53.do so. But he then says some investigations are pursued more
:05:54. > :05:59.vigorously than others. That is what I mean by playing to the gallery. He
:06:00. > :06:07.said his formal bid about supporting the police, but then undermined
:06:08. > :06:10.them. If any complaint could be made, you could suggest that the
:06:11. > :06:15.police have actually moved slowly and deliberately, which is not a bad
:06:16. > :06:18.thing in this case. Is it a sign of the gravity of the situation that
:06:19. > :06:23.the prime minister found it necessary to speak to Mr McGuinness?
:06:24. > :06:28.I can't comment on that. I don't know what was in the prime
:06:29. > :06:30.Minster's mind when he did that. So I will not speculate. I'm not
:06:31. > :06:36.surprised that there was a conversation. Whether it came
:06:37. > :06:41.about, whose initiative it came about on, we do not know. Are you
:06:42. > :06:50.worried about this? No. I don't think any body should be. The
:06:51. > :06:55.process we put in place is in the agreement. That is what is happening
:06:56. > :07:00.here. It is not new. It has been happening since 1998, and it should
:07:01. > :07:03.continue. To start changing those arrangements now because a
:07:04. > :07:07.high-profile person is involved, that is interfering with the legal
:07:08. > :07:15.process for political reasons. Is there a danger that this will give a
:07:16. > :07:19.new lease of life to the IRA? Well, it would be what we call the
:07:20. > :07:25.republican dissidents. It would not affect what we used to call the
:07:26. > :07:33.mainstream IRA? One of the ironies of this is that the interviews were
:07:34. > :07:36.with people closer to the dissident IRA than the mainstream IRA. Just
:07:37. > :07:43.let the police investigation take its course. John McTernan, what do
:07:44. > :07:48.you make of this? It shows in a way that Sinn Fein have come a normal
:07:49. > :07:52.political party. Gerry Adams is not above the law. He is being
:07:53. > :07:57.investigated, the process is going correct me. It shows the maturing of
:07:58. > :08:03.the police service in Northern Ireland. There is lots of what we
:08:04. > :08:07.call stakeholder management going on here, but in the end, the police are
:08:08. > :08:13.investigating one of the most shocking of all of the murders from
:08:14. > :08:16.the Troubles. And it is right to do that. The people of Northern Ireland
:08:17. > :08:21.voted for the Good Friday agreement because they wanted the rule of law
:08:22. > :08:25.established. It is also a reminder of the fragility of the situation in
:08:26. > :08:28.Northern Ireland still, only a few weeks after we have the state
:08:29. > :08:32.banquet with Martin McGuinness at Windsor Castle. We still have
:08:33. > :08:38.tension when something like this happens. Unlike Martin McGuinness,
:08:39. > :08:45.who has effectively admitted he was part of the IRA, Gerry Adams,
:08:46. > :08:53.although he has often been described as chief of the Belfast Brigade of
:08:54. > :08:57.the IRA, he has always denied any involvement. He said he supported
:08:58. > :09:03.the IRA, but denied involvement with it. This creates a huge credibility
:09:04. > :09:09.problem with Mr Adams, because I do not know anybody who believes what
:09:10. > :09:15.he says on this issue is true. You mean that people do not believe he
:09:16. > :09:20.was not a member of the IRA? Indeed. Is that a consensus view in Northern
:09:21. > :09:27.Ireland? It pretty well is. If there is anybody who believes him, I wish
:09:28. > :09:35.they would let us know. No legal action has been taken about it by Mr
:09:36. > :09:39.Adams. Well, that is normal. They sometimes get solicitors to send a
:09:40. > :09:46.letter, but they are never followed up. Where do we go from here? He has
:09:47. > :09:50.been arrested but not charged, and the police are investigating. If he
:09:51. > :09:53.was charged and this became a huge, high profile legal case, would the
:09:54. > :10:01.Northern Ireland political process survive it? Oh, yes. I disagree with
:10:02. > :10:05.Isabel on this. I don't regard the situation in Northern Ireland is
:10:06. > :10:10.fragile. I think it is stable. It has had its ups and downs. A lot of
:10:11. > :10:15.them were on my watch, and we got through most of them. But it is
:10:16. > :10:20.stable now. The only thing on the horizon that could cause a problem
:10:21. > :10:24.with stability is actually your folk, and the referendum in
:10:25. > :10:28.Scotland. That is interesting. Are you saying that because if Scotland
:10:29. > :10:31.was to vote for independence, the main historic link in the United
:10:32. > :10:37.Kingdom between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK is a Scottish
:10:38. > :10:42.link? And that if Scotland goes, that would be one of the links with
:10:43. > :10:46.the United Kingdom gone? No, I am thinking in terms that if the
:10:47. > :10:51.referendum in Scotland goes with what I regard as the wrong result,
:10:52. > :10:56.that will change the political context for Northern Ireland and
:10:57. > :11:03.that would cause strains. How would it change it? In that what until now
:11:04. > :11:10.has been a nonissue in Northern Ireland, there is a provision for a
:11:11. > :11:18.referendum in Northern Ireland, but that has not been treated since
:11:19. > :11:23.before 1998 and has subsequently been a nonissue because it was clear
:11:24. > :11:31.that a majority would want to stay with the UK. So what would then be
:11:32. > :11:38.the significance of a Scottish vote for independence? What was a
:11:39. > :11:46.nonissue with then become a major issue. Do you agree? I think that is
:11:47. > :11:49.right. There are two points. One is that if the United Kingdom were to
:11:50. > :11:55.start to be broken up, it opens the question about how far that
:11:56. > :11:59.unravels. Secondly, if absolutists in one country see absolutists in
:12:00. > :12:05.another country, they say, now it is our turn. There are a handful of
:12:06. > :12:09.people now think that uniting Ireland is the solution, they could
:12:10. > :12:14.be a vocal minority and the SNP have shown how you can push that. This is
:12:15. > :12:18.so important. It is not discussed particularly down here, but when you
:12:19. > :12:21.talk about the impact on the rest of the union, it tends to be Wales we
:12:22. > :12:25.discuss rather than Northern Ireland, as you say, it would become
:12:26. > :12:29.a live issue in Northern Ireland where previously, it has been a
:12:30. > :12:32.closed question. We shall see. Yesterday on the programme, we
:12:33. > :12:35.covered the launch of Labour's campaign for the local and European
:12:36. > :12:38.elections later this month. This morning, it's the turn of the
:12:39. > :12:41.Conservatives to launch their local elections campaign. Having said
:12:42. > :12:43.that, it feels like more of a European election relaunch after
:12:44. > :12:51.being distracted by UKIP's advance in the polls. The prime minister has
:12:52. > :12:54.said only the Conservatives can deliver a referendum on Britain's
:12:55. > :13:04.membership of the European Union and that he should be judged on his
:13:05. > :13:08.record of "standing up" to Brussels. Again, another big "local" issue.
:13:09. > :13:11.The Conservatives have been trying to counter the growing support of
:13:12. > :13:14.UKIP and Nigel Farage, as they currently stand third place in the
:13:15. > :13:21.polls. Here's what the prime minister had to say this morning in
:13:22. > :13:26.the West-Midlands. I have a track record of delivery, and believe me,
:13:27. > :13:32.whatever it takes, I will deliver that in-out referendum . Labour will
:13:33. > :13:37.not. UKIP can't. I will. Earlier this week, I made clear that I would
:13:38. > :13:44.not lead a government that either could not or did not deliver an
:13:45. > :13:48.in-out referendum. Let me be clear. The British people need to have
:13:49. > :13:54.their say on our membership of the EU. For me, this is a fundamental
:13:55. > :13:57.principle, and I would not be prime minister of a government unless we
:13:58. > :14:02.could carry out our pledge of an in-out referendum. The British
:14:03. > :14:06.people deserve their say, and I will make sure they get it.
:14:07. > :14:09.We can speak now to Vice Chairman of the Conservative Party, Bob Neill,
:14:10. > :14:20.who's at the launch in Newcastle-Under-Lyme. Welcome to the
:14:21. > :14:24.programme. Since this was the launch of your local election campaign, why
:14:25. > :14:29.is the Prime Minister banging on about Europe? Good afternoon,
:14:30. > :14:32.Andrew. It is all part of an entirely consistent message, that we
:14:33. > :14:42.are the only party with a plan on all of the issues and that delivers
:14:43. > :14:44.on it, on local issues in local Government and on Europe. We have
:14:45. > :14:49.shown consistently that we have a plan, which is critical, and we are
:14:50. > :14:54.showing that what we are doing with the economy, in local councils and
:14:55. > :14:59.in Europe, that we deliver as well. What has it to do with emptying the
:15:00. > :15:03.rubbish and keeping streets clean? The connection is twofold. Firstly,
:15:04. > :15:09.the election happened to be on the same day. That is a simple fact. You
:15:10. > :15:15.have already had your European launch. This is the local one. Yes,
:15:16. > :15:18.and we are pointing out that we deliver at all levels of
:15:19. > :15:22.Government. We have delivered in turning round the economy from the
:15:23. > :15:28.mess we inherited from Labour. We have Conservative councils up and
:15:29. > :15:31.down the country delivering lower council tax and better value for
:15:32. > :15:37.money with front line services and we are standing up for our interest
:15:38. > :15:43.in Europe, all of which is part of the same consistent picture. Is it
:15:44. > :15:48.because people are worried that David Cameron cannot be trusted on
:15:49. > :15:54.the European election? You and your party are running scared of UKIP.
:15:55. > :15:58.Not that all. Any mature political party accepts the reality that
:15:59. > :16:02.people want consistent performance across the board. We are pointing
:16:03. > :16:06.out and making a very strong case that we have always delivered on
:16:07. > :16:09.what we have promised. We have delivered on what we said when we
:16:10. > :16:13.said we would turn around the economy and bring down the deficit,
:16:14. > :16:17.which we are doing. We are delivering at a local level with
:16:18. > :16:20.these elections. And also the veto on the European Treaty. We are
:16:21. > :16:25.keeping out of the bail-out and we will deliver on the referendum
:16:26. > :16:30.promise as well. It is all part of a party which keeps its word and
:16:31. > :16:34.delivers. What is your policy for local Government? We have been very
:16:35. > :16:38.clear that we have returned powers to local authorities. We have done
:16:39. > :16:43.that through the localism act that I was involved with as a minister and
:16:44. > :16:47.we have done that through reforms to the local Government finance system.
:16:48. > :16:51.You have done that. What is your policy going forward? The policy
:16:52. > :16:56.going forward is to continue to deliver those powers. We have
:16:57. > :16:59.reforms around planning and business rates reforms. We are giving local
:17:00. > :17:03.authorities more discretion to spend money in a way that is not dictated
:17:04. > :17:09.by Whitehall, as with the previous Government, but according to their
:17:10. > :17:13.priorities. We are highlighting how Conservative councils like
:17:14. > :17:16.Westminster, Chelsea and Hammersmith, by merging their
:17:17. > :17:22.back-office functions, can deliver more efficient services at a lower
:17:23. > :17:25.cost. That is both a plan and a good example of delivering the plan. If
:17:26. > :17:30.you are so good at delivering your promises and plans, why have you not
:17:31. > :17:37.got all councils to introduce weekly bin collections? Is that Brussels's
:17:38. > :17:40.fault? Don't be silly! Precisely because we said part of our scheme
:17:41. > :17:45.is giving local authorities more discretion. They would choose how
:17:46. > :17:49.they deliver the services at a local level. What is important is that we
:17:50. > :17:54.have given councils the opportunity through grants to be able if they
:17:55. > :17:57.wished to return to a weekly bin collection without having any
:17:58. > :18:03.financial penalties, as was the case under the previous regime. It is
:18:04. > :18:10.their call, which we don't believe in, dictating from the centre, just
:18:11. > :18:14.as we don't believe Brussels should dictate from the centre. But you are
:18:15. > :18:17.dictating from the centre on council tax. Central Government has very
:18:18. > :18:25.strict rules about the council tax freeze. I think you are being badly
:18:26. > :18:33.served by your research. That never happens, I can assure you! Let me
:18:34. > :18:37.tell you now that there are no rules in relation to the council tax
:18:38. > :18:41.freeze. A grant is made available to local authorities that they can take
:18:42. > :18:45.if they wish, enabling them to freeze council tax. Any authority
:18:46. > :18:49.wanting to increase the council tax by more than 2%, by a central
:18:50. > :18:55.Government mandate have to put their plans to a local referendum. Yes. So
:18:56. > :19:01.what we have done... You are telling them what to do. That is simply
:19:02. > :19:04.wrong. You may be thinking back to the old days when the previous
:19:05. > :19:12.Government used to cap the increases and Jen -- John Prescott used to say
:19:13. > :19:16.how much they could put their council tax up by. We are saying
:19:17. > :19:22.that if you want to put it up above the certain level, you have to ask
:19:23. > :19:28.the voters. That is not thus dictating. Yes, it is. If you
:19:29. > :19:33.believe so strongly in devolution, why not leave it to the council is
:19:34. > :19:36.to determine that? Perhaps you have missed the point. Devolution does
:19:37. > :19:40.not stop at the door to the town hall. It is about giving power back
:19:41. > :19:44.to the communities, and the communities are the residents in
:19:45. > :19:51.that area. How many seats are you going to lose? If I was a pundit,
:19:52. > :19:58.then I would be doing a pundit's job. We are defending seats from
:19:59. > :20:01.where we were four years ago at the same time as a general election. We
:20:02. > :20:04.will have to see how that comes through in the polls. I am here with
:20:05. > :20:08.the message that we have a very strong case to take to the
:20:09. > :20:11.electorate and I believe we will get that across very well. We are
:20:12. > :20:16.running out of time but don't go away. Stay with us. Let me bring in
:20:17. > :20:25.the pundits. I am glad you are not taking their job, but I think you
:20:26. > :20:27.did for a minute. What do you make of the local election launch,
:20:28. > :20:29.Conservatives? It is interesting that they are not trying any
:20:30. > :20:33.expectation management. Last year they were briefing that 750 seats
:20:34. > :20:36.could be lost by the Tories but this year they are talking about
:20:37. > :20:40.retaining seats, and privately they have said they want to win in Tower
:20:41. > :20:44.Hamlets and places like that. Much more upbeat than last year. They
:20:45. > :20:53.have obviously had lots of sugar in their tea! If I was facing the loss
:20:54. > :20:58.of 500 seats and issues in London, I would be talking about the European
:20:59. > :21:06.issues, too. Is that what they face? They will be whitewashed in
:21:07. > :21:08.London. And Tower Hamlets, yes, there are seats there, thanks to the
:21:09. > :21:13.corporation that changed the social mix there, but there is not a
:21:14. > :21:18.majority there for them. The Tory candidate will come a long way
:21:19. > :21:22.behind the Labour and independent candidates. It will be a very bad
:21:23. > :21:27.day for the Tory party across the country because the European
:21:28. > :21:30.election vote will bring up the turnout in local elections. There
:21:31. > :21:37.are lots of angry votes looking for a home out there. Wipe-out in
:21:38. > :21:43.London, what do you say to that? I have been on the doorsteps of London
:21:44. > :21:47.a great deal and I have found that electors are rather more discerning
:21:48. > :21:51.and they do make a distinction between what they feel about
:21:52. > :21:54.policies at one level and at a local level. We have seen in the past that
:21:55. > :22:00.people have voted differently in different elections in London. In my
:22:01. > :22:04.experience, where we have good authorities doing a good job, we
:22:05. > :22:07.have every reason to work hard to keep those seats. I think you will
:22:08. > :22:12.find that across the country you will not get uniform patterns of
:22:13. > :22:16.movement. I think it is very unwise to make sweeping predictions. Local
:22:17. > :22:20.factors play much more in these issues than people think. Briefly,
:22:21. > :22:25.since the pro-minister has raised it, you are vice-chairman of the
:22:26. > :22:32.Conservative Party, if as the polls suggesting at the moment, you come a
:22:33. > :22:35.poor third in the European elections, a very poor third
:22:36. > :22:43.according to the polls, does the Tory party then revert to headless
:22:44. > :22:47.chicken mode? No, Andrew, I think you will agree that the opinion poll
:22:48. > :22:52.that really matters... You always say that. Every politician says
:22:53. > :22:56.that. It does not make for constructive politics, does it? I am
:22:57. > :23:00.confident that we have a strong message and my job is to go out and
:23:01. > :23:05.help the Prime Minister and the rest of my team get that message across.
:23:06. > :23:10.Thank you for being with us today. My pleasure. It is time for the
:23:11. > :23:13.daily quiz. We have talked about the rise of UKIP this week and we have
:23:14. > :23:17.had confirmation that Nigel Farage is on the way to becoming a proper
:23:18. > :23:22.mainstream grown-up politician. Yes, somebody threw an egg at him on
:23:23. > :23:26.the campaign Trail! The man who threw the egg in Nottingham said his
:23:27. > :23:30.name was Fred. He told reporters that he did not agree with you get
:23:31. > :23:35.policies, which we could have worked out. He said he saw the men outside
:23:36. > :23:40.the time hall ten minutes ago, went to Tesco and bought some eggs. --
:23:41. > :23:49.the town hall. The Tesco share price does need help these days! And who
:23:50. > :23:54.said the political process is dead? And given everything I have just
:23:55. > :23:58.said, which of these politician is the odd one out? John Prescott,
:23:59. > :24:04.David Cameron, Nigel Farage, Peter Mandelson? At the end of the show,
:24:05. > :24:12.we will get the correct answer. Don't tell us now. Have you any
:24:13. > :24:16.idea? I think so. Not just pretty faces! The Conservative peer Michael
:24:17. > :24:19.Heseltine says the Government should have greater powers to intervene
:24:20. > :24:24.when British companies are the target of foreign take-over bids. He
:24:25. > :24:28.was speaking to the BBC this morning as the drug company AstraZeneca, a
:24:29. > :24:32.largely British company based here, has been targeted by a largely
:24:33. > :24:37.American pharmaceutical giant called Pfizer. It is run by Scots men
:24:38. > :24:41.actually. Michael Heseltine also advises the Prime Minister on
:24:42. > :24:45.business and economic matters and expressed reservations about the
:24:46. > :24:49.deal and the potential impact on Britain's science base. This morning
:24:50. > :24:54.Pfizer up to the bid to ?50 per share, some in cash and some in
:24:55. > :24:59.shares in what would be the new combine the company. He wrote a
:25:00. > :25:04.letter to the pro-minister saying it would go ahead with AstraZeneca's
:25:05. > :25:10.planned research and development based in Cambridge. -- they wrote a
:25:11. > :25:14.letter to the Prime Minister. And they would also retain manufacturing
:25:15. > :25:18.facilities in Macclesfield. The Prime Minister was asked about the
:25:19. > :25:22.bid this morning. British jobs, British science, British
:25:23. > :25:26.inventiveness, British research and development. We are seeing a revival
:25:27. > :25:30.in those things and I want to see that go further. AstraZeneca has a
:25:31. > :25:34.fantastic role in the British economy. You see that in the jobs it
:25:35. > :25:37.has created, investments it has made, medicines it has delivered and
:25:38. > :25:43.we should be proud of that. Of course decision on any merger is a
:25:44. > :25:47.decision for the two companies and their shareholders. My job is to
:25:48. > :25:50.protect the United Kingdom's interests. I want to see great sign
:25:51. > :25:57.here in Britain, great medicines delivered, great jobs in these
:25:58. > :26:00.here in Britain, great medicines industries in Britain. -- great
:26:01. > :26:05.science here in Britain. And that is why we have sought reassurances from
:26:06. > :26:12.Pfizer if a deal goes ahead. That was the Prime Minister at the local
:26:13. > :26:20.elections campaign! Chuka Umunna joins us now. If you were in power
:26:21. > :26:24.now, how would you handle the take-over bid? I think first of all
:26:25. > :26:28.there is an issue with the way the whole take-over regime operates.
:26:29. > :26:32.Once everybody hops on the take-over bus or train, it inexorably tends to
:26:33. > :26:36.move to a destination that is completion of the deal. I think we
:26:37. > :26:40.need more grit in the machine so that the directors in particular
:26:41. > :26:45.when they are making recommendations to shareholders in these situations
:26:46. > :26:49.of a target company, have more confidence in taking the long-term
:26:50. > :26:52.view. I think the thing that has alarmed people about the Pfizer
:26:53. > :26:58.potential take-over of AstraZeneca is its record and whether or not
:26:59. > :27:02.this is actually looking with a view to long-term investment. Pfizer has
:27:03. > :27:09.made a series of acquisitions. Warner-Lambert in the US, one in
:27:10. > :27:12.Sweden, another in 2009, when they took over those companies,
:27:13. > :27:16.essentially took out what they wanted, let people shut down
:27:17. > :27:23.research and development. We saw Pfizer do that in Kent, in Sandwich
:27:24. > :27:26.in 2011. That does not fill us with confidence that they will take the
:27:27. > :27:31.long-term view and I have concerns that this is being driven by tax
:27:32. > :27:36.rather than looking at a long-term growth and element of the UK
:27:37. > :27:40.pharmaceutical sector, which is our priority. That is an interesting
:27:41. > :27:44.analysis of the situation but what would you do? First of all I am not
:27:45. > :27:48.going to criticise the Government for seeking assurances. We need to
:27:49. > :27:51.see the assurances. Where I am critical of the Government is I
:27:52. > :27:55.don't think they have equally engaged with the AstraZeneca board
:27:56. > :28:02.as they have with the Pfizer board. I am interrupting you... You have
:28:03. > :28:05.asked me what I would do. I did not ask what the criticism of the
:28:06. > :28:10.Government is. I am happy to come onto that. What would you do? One
:28:11. > :28:14.thing we would implement in this type of situation, not just this
:28:15. > :28:17.deal but all deals, would be to ensure that those looking at this
:28:18. > :28:22.and decided on the deal are those that are long-term investors. We are
:28:23. > :28:26.in and offer period right now. We would stop short-term speculators
:28:27. > :28:28.coming in and stop them being able to vote on this kind of transaction
:28:29. > :28:33.because they are not taking a long-term view of the company.
:28:34. > :28:37.Secondly, going to the point that I was making about how the different
:28:38. > :28:45.actors involved in a take-over tend to take it to the destination. We
:28:46. > :28:52.need to know what arrangements there are for those advising on the deal.
:28:53. > :28:58.Advisers if this goes ahead could make ?140 million in fees. We want
:28:59. > :29:02.to make sure they are receiving awards based on the quality of their
:29:03. > :29:07.advice is not on getting it to the destination. But none of that deals
:29:08. > :29:13.with the central issue of whether this should go ahead or not. Never
:29:14. > :29:17.mind the fees. Should it go ahead or not? I am not persuaded at the
:29:18. > :29:21.moment that this is in the best interest of the UK plc. I have been
:29:22. > :29:25.clearer about that. I am not convinced that they are looking at a
:29:26. > :29:29.big investment in the UK pharmaceuticals industry. I am not
:29:30. > :29:32.sure this is a long-term proposition. It is looking
:29:33. > :29:39.increasingly like it is being driven by tax. That is not necessarily a
:29:40. > :29:43.completely bad thing. A tax haven in this country. What is not to like
:29:44. > :29:48.about that? This goes to the heart of the issue. Do you look at the
:29:49. > :29:53.short-term view of the immediate return for Vics Jacko or a long-term
:29:54. > :30:00.view at what the Exchequer can receive over a period of time? --
:30:01. > :30:05.return for the Exchequer. Do we want to be a global pawn in a tax playing
:30:06. > :30:10.game? Do we want that to be the primary rationale? They have said
:30:11. > :30:15.they will proceed with things in Cambridge. They have made promises
:30:16. > :30:26.before. I am just saying that we learned the hard way with the
:30:27. > :30:29.Cadbury transaction. They say they will base their headquarters in the
:30:30. > :30:34.UK for most of their European operations and some of their
:30:35. > :30:40.global. They will proceed with substantial investment. If they
:30:41. > :30:43.could convince you, why would that not be good enough? Because it still
:30:44. > :30:47.seems to me that they had of the beast is still in the US. That is
:30:48. > :30:51.where the senior management will be. They are refusing to give firm
:30:52. > :30:56.guarantees. It will still have its rhymer relisting in the US in New
:30:57. > :31:01.York -- the primary listing. The only reason they are having the UK
:31:02. > :31:04.holding company here of the new entity that would be formed if the
:31:05. > :31:09.transaction goes ahead is purely for tax reasons. Do we really want to be
:31:10. > :31:13.in a club like Bermuda and the Cayman Islands? Surely we want
:31:14. > :31:18.people to invest in British companies because they want to grow
:31:19. > :31:28.them. You can name some successful takeovers. Let's say everything you
:31:29. > :31:33.have just said is true and that the arguments were convincing. You
:31:34. > :31:37.should stop this takeover. Well, I am not in the business of making
:31:38. > :31:41.threats. It follows from what you are saying. You have got to be
:31:42. > :31:51.responsible. Pfizer has until the 26th of May two putting a firm
:31:52. > :31:54.offer. AstraZeneca have knocked them back for two reasons, firstly
:31:55. > :31:59.because of price and secondly because they have referred to the
:32:00. > :32:03.tax inversions struck that they will put in. -- the tax structure. I'm
:32:04. > :32:08.sure they are worried about the reputational consequences for one of
:32:09. > :32:11.the jewels in the crown of our British industry is being used for
:32:12. > :32:18.tax planning purposes. Let's see what happens by the 26th of May. But
:32:19. > :32:22.if a Labour government came to power, would you reserve powers to
:32:23. > :32:28.stop this sort of takeovers? There are currently reserve hours. Would
:32:29. > :32:32.you use them? This is something we are looking at and have been looking
:32:33. > :32:35.at for a long time. You call AstraZeneca a jewel in the British
:32:36. > :32:41.crown. But its share price was languishing until this date came
:32:42. > :32:56.along. This pipeline of new products is witty much empty. That is wrong.
:32:57. > :33:03.The share price is around 40. They have made reforms which have helped
:33:04. > :33:07.transform the company. They have got decent products in the pipeline. In
:33:08. > :33:12.particular, if you look at diabetes prevention drugs, and Cancer
:33:13. > :33:16.research for lung and breast cancer and also stroke prevention, you are
:33:17. > :33:22.looking at one of the companies that could potentially find a cure to fan
:33:23. > :33:28.cancer in the future. But Pfizer has the same expertise, indeed more so
:33:29. > :33:38.in oncology, which is one of the reasons they want to merge. Pfizer
:33:39. > :33:42.does not invest in R It does not have the same commitment as you have
:33:43. > :33:51.at Astra. It invests more. No, it doesn't. The turnover of AstraZeneca
:33:52. > :33:56.is much smaller. That is true, but 18.9% of the turnover of AstraZeneca
:33:57. > :34:01.is invested in R, which is a really good thing. They are taking a
:34:02. > :34:08.long-term view in that company, whereas if you look at Pfizer, for
:34:09. > :34:11.God's sake, they shut down the plant at Sandwich which had been there
:34:12. > :34:17.since the 1950s and had been world beating and the vote of Viagra --
:34:18. > :34:22.developed Viagra. They shut it down altogether in 2011. That is why I
:34:23. > :34:29.have worries about this. In absolute numbers, you accept that Randy and
:34:30. > :34:36.-- Pfizer invest more in R? It is a bigger company, but in percentage
:34:37. > :34:41.terms, it invests less. Less than GlaxoSmithKline, our biggest
:34:42. > :34:43.company. What do you make of this? The interest that politicians are
:34:44. > :34:46.taking in this is fascinating, because neither the
:34:47. > :34:48.taking in this is fascinating, nor Labour regard this as just a
:34:49. > :34:53.transaction between companies. nor Labour regard this as just a
:34:54. > :34:58.reassurances on the UK's science race, but I wonder whether the focus
:34:59. > :35:02.of all additions in deals like this is actually on making the UK as
:35:03. > :35:05.attractive a place for research and development so that this clinical
:35:06. > :35:11.trials that Pfizer and AstraZeneca are involved in can continue, so
:35:12. > :35:17.that it is not just about taxes, but the logician 's do not have anything
:35:18. > :35:20.to do with the takeover bids -- politicians can focus on making it
:35:21. > :35:30.an attractive climate to carry that out. I think a major drugs company
:35:31. > :35:33.is more important than a chocolate company. There are a lot of reasons
:35:34. > :35:39.why politicians should care about this. In a sense, what you are
:35:40. > :35:42.seeing Labour and the Tories edging towards is, is there a coherent
:35:43. > :35:47.account of economic patriotic as where you can say it is in the
:35:48. > :35:50.national interest and act decisively? It is very good for
:35:51. > :35:55.Britain that we get capital from around the world that wants to
:35:56. > :36:00.invest in us. It said Jaguar and has given us the biggest car industry we
:36:01. > :36:06.have ever had. What we cannot have is a kind of intellectual asset
:36:07. > :36:10.stripping. There must be something in AstraZeneca that Pfizer want,
:36:11. > :36:15.otherwise they would not be paying over the odds for it or trying to
:36:16. > :36:20.get it. It is happening all over the world. It is a cost saving merger.
:36:21. > :36:25.Because of the big hits on pharmaceuticals that have come and
:36:26. > :36:30.gone, the whole industry worldwide is having to cut its costs . But if
:36:31. > :36:35.they like the company so much, they could move their entire headquarters
:36:36. > :36:39.over here. The real worrying thing is, because of the way the tax
:36:40. > :36:42.system operates in the US, with this tax inversions regime where if you
:36:43. > :36:47.have a merged entity, so long as more than 20% of the shares lie
:36:48. > :36:51.outside the US, you can basically have a domicile wherever. We could
:36:52. > :36:57.see the same thing that is happening to Astra happening to other
:36:58. > :37:01.high-tech companies. We need to think about what the consequences of
:37:02. > :37:06.that could be. Ultimately, I am interested in ensuring we grow our
:37:07. > :37:11.industrial base and bang the drum for British business. This is a
:37:12. > :37:14.world beating company. Thank you. Firefighters in England and Wales
:37:15. > :37:17.have begun strike action today as part of their long-running dispute
:37:18. > :37:20.with the government about pensions. The five-hour walk-out began just
:37:21. > :37:23.over half an hour ago, and there'll be more strikes over the bank
:37:24. > :37:30.holiday weekend. Let's speak now to Sean Starbuck, from the Fire
:37:31. > :37:38.Brigades Union. Why a holiday weekend to choose a strike? You been
:37:39. > :37:43.trying to avoid strike action for three years. We have been discussing
:37:44. > :37:50.possible improvements in the government proposals. We set the
:37:51. > :37:55.government a limit to say we needed to get some proposals from them by
:37:56. > :37:58.the 24th of April. They have in considering proposals and discussing
:37:59. > :38:02.it with us since the 3rd of January, the last time we took strike action.
:38:03. > :38:06.They have been sitting on the proposals and have not gone forward.
:38:07. > :38:10.So it is not about the bank holiday weekend, that is just a coincidence.
:38:11. > :38:15.It is about having a workable pension scheme for firefighters.
:38:16. > :38:20.Because it is a pension scheme and is complicated, in a nutshell for
:38:21. > :38:28.our viewers, what is your main objection to what is being proposed?
:38:29. > :38:32.In one word, it is unworkable. They expect firefighters to work until
:38:33. > :38:36.they are 60. This is firefighters riding the red trucks until they are
:38:37. > :38:41.60, not working in back-office jobs. They have got no evidence to say
:38:42. > :38:44.that firefighters can work until they are 60. We took part in a
:38:45. > :38:49.review which proves otherwise and says that without protecting
:38:50. > :38:52.existing members, ie keeping them in a scheme with a lower pension age,
:38:53. > :38:55.we will be faced with a lot of firefighters who are being faced
:38:56. > :39:02.with dismissal just for getting older. The national employers have
:39:03. > :39:07.said that is what is on the cards. This is a situation where they want
:39:08. > :39:12.to maintain the discretion to get rid of firefighters. They plucked 60
:39:13. > :39:18.out of the air. They could have easily plugged 73 or 92. There is no
:39:19. > :39:22.evidence to say that firefighters can work to 60 in the numbers that
:39:23. > :39:28.they say they can. According to the government, under the new pension
:39:29. > :39:33.scheme, a firefighter who earns ?29,000 will be able to retire at
:39:34. > :39:38.the age of 60, as you say. They will get a ?19,000 a year pension, rising
:39:39. > :39:41.to ?26,000 when you include the state pension. It would be the
:39:42. > :39:47.equivalent of a private pension pot worth over half ?1 million, and if
:39:48. > :39:50.it was try that, you would have to contribute twice as much. I would
:39:51. > :39:54.suggest most people watching this show that that is a fairly good
:39:55. > :40:00.deal. It sounds a good deal when you lay it out like that, but with a
:40:01. > :40:04.normal pension age of 60, if you can't get there, it might as well be
:40:05. > :40:13.a normal pension age of 80 or whatever. In reality, the review
:40:14. > :40:17.said that 66% of current firefighters will not maintain their
:40:18. > :40:23.fitness until they are 60. So plan B comes into operation. Firefighters
:40:24. > :40:28.already paid for thousand pounds a year in contributions out of a
:40:29. > :40:32.salary of ?29,000. If they cannot reach 60, if they have to go at 55
:40:33. > :40:38.rather than be sacked under capability, these people will get
:40:39. > :40:44.their pension reduced by around 47%. So instead of getting something like
:40:45. > :40:50.19% in the best case scenario, they are looking at about ?9,000. That is
:40:51. > :40:55.not as generous as they like to portray, and this is the reality. It
:40:56. > :40:59.is not cloud cuckoo land of every firefighter working until they are
:41:00. > :41:04.60. This is actually what will happen. Firefighters are saying, let
:41:05. > :41:08.us mitigate the impact of the normal pension age increase. We have the
:41:09. > :41:14.discussing that for 17 weeks. We know there was a league to letter to
:41:15. > :41:18.fire authorities which says that Brandon Lewis is sitting on improved
:41:19. > :41:22.proposals, but he would rather we walk out of the door than give us
:41:23. > :41:26.these proposals. Our message is clear. Give us the proposals and let
:41:27. > :41:30.us discuss them. Then we will not have strikes in the fire service. We
:41:31. > :41:34.have to end it there. The FBU action is one of a number of
:41:35. > :41:37.recent strikes. This week, there's been a tube strike in London, with
:41:38. > :41:41.another scheduled to start on Monday, and last month teachers
:41:42. > :41:46.walked out over pay and workload pressures. Well, we've got our
:41:47. > :41:49.finger on the pulse here at the Daily Politics, and we've been
:41:50. > :41:52.working with the polling firm Populus to bring you the latest
:41:53. > :41:56.information on what people think about key issues. They've been
:41:57. > :41:59.working on something called "voter segmentation" which breaks the
:42:00. > :42:10.electorate down according to their values. Apparently, you do have
:42:11. > :42:13.values. What have we been asking this week? Yes, you guessed it -
:42:14. > :42:17.they asked people about their views on industrial action. 54% said they
:42:18. > :42:20.had a little or no sympathy for London Underground workers striking
:42:21. > :42:24.over plans to close ticket offices. 35% had some or a lot. 54% said they
:42:25. > :42:27.had little or no sympathy for teachers striking over pay and
:42:28. > :42:31.workload pressures. 40% had some or a lot. However, 41% said they had
:42:32. > :42:34.little or no sympathy for firefighters striking over plans to
:42:35. > :42:42.increase their retirement and changes to their pensions. 52% said
:42:43. > :42:46.they had some or a lot of sympathy. When asked about their views on
:42:47. > :42:53.whether trade unions have too much power in Britain today, 30% agreed,
:42:54. > :42:57.with 31% disagreeing. 48% said they agreed that the public has more to
:42:58. > :43:00.fear from the conduct of big business than the actions of trade
:43:01. > :43:06.unions these days, with 13% disagreeing. To steer us through
:43:07. > :43:16.this, we're joined by Rick Nye from Populus. What are the headlines
:43:17. > :43:19.overall? The headline overall is the kind of reputational challenge that
:43:20. > :43:24.big business has in this country. When you have got figures like that,
:43:25. > :43:27.half of the population, including 31% of people who currently say they
:43:28. > :43:31.will vote Conservative at the next general election, said the public
:43:32. > :43:35.has more to fear from big business than from trade unions. So you
:43:36. > :43:39.understand white Chuka Umunna comes on your programme and talks the way
:43:40. > :43:41.he does about the proposed Pfizer takeover of AstraZeneca. Isn't it
:43:42. > :43:48.inevitable that people would be more worried about big business? If it
:43:49. > :43:52.was 30 years ago in the 1970s, the polls showed that people were more
:43:53. > :43:56.worried about the unions than big business. The unions are now a lot
:43:57. > :44:01.less powerful than they were 30 years ago. Big business is at least
:44:02. > :44:04.if not more powerful than before, so naturally they would be more
:44:05. > :44:09.worried. Some of it is definitely a function of power . When you ask
:44:10. > :44:13.people whether they think the strikes are a legitimate weapon if
:44:14. > :44:18.there has been a ballot and a majority who voted have voted for a
:44:19. > :44:23.strike, people agree with that, even people in Tory voting segments. So
:44:24. > :44:25.the idea of trying to restrict it to a turnout threshold is not
:44:26. > :44:30.necessarily the easy win that some conservative politicians seem to
:44:31. > :44:34.think. Certainly, people have sympathy, particularly in a tight
:44:35. > :44:38.economic climate when people are thinking about their own pay and
:44:39. > :44:41.conditions, and they certainly have sympathy when they are firefighters
:44:42. > :44:44.who save lives. On your market segmentation of the different kinds
:44:45. > :44:51.of groups that you have divided society into, what are the distinct
:44:52. > :44:55.attitudes towards unions in those groups? Not surprisingly, at the end
:44:56. > :45:00.where you find it cosmopolitan critics, there is overwhelming
:45:01. > :45:04.sympathy for almost all strike action in every manifestation. At
:45:05. > :45:08.the other end among the grumpy old men, you find the least sympathy for
:45:09. > :45:15.unions. But even in the middle among the people who are most directly
:45:16. > :45:18.impacted, there is ridges dual sympathy -- residual sympathy for
:45:19. > :45:21.people being able to exercise their right to strike if it is done
:45:22. > :45:27.democratically. It is fascinating how much sympathy there is for
:45:28. > :45:31.teachers striking, who may not have articulated the reasons for their
:45:32. > :45:34.strike. So far as I could work out recently, it was more about the fact
:45:35. > :45:43.that they do not like Michael Gove than anything else. But perhaps the
:45:44. > :45:46.public do not like him either. The attitude to the trades unions is
:45:47. > :45:52.interesting. They get more sympathy now because they are not as
:45:53. > :45:56.important as they used to be. I think Margaret Thatcher is Ed
:45:57. > :46:00.Miliband's greatest assistant. Having reformed the trade unions and
:46:01. > :46:04.subjected them to the proper rule of law, you can't make them into
:46:05. > :46:08.bogeyman anymore. Where as you can with big business. You can. Ed
:46:09. > :46:15.touched on this when he said there is good and bad capital. You can
:46:16. > :46:19.laugh about it. But people are in favour of the market economy, a
:46:20. > :46:24.growing economy, where we all share in the prosperity, but people do bad
:46:25. > :46:32.things and don't seem to be held to account. That can sway populism for
:46:33. > :46:35.Nigel Farage but there is the populism of the left being
:46:36. > :46:39.articulated by Ed Miliband at the moment. You cannot turn Len
:46:40. > :46:46.McCluskey into a bogeyman anymore and that is good for him. And with
:46:47. > :46:50.the Westminster bubble, we think it is a bad thing that edge talks about
:46:51. > :46:58.what he would do to business, but that could poll quite well. -- Ed
:46:59. > :47:04.talks. But he did not go as far as Michael Heseltine, who called for
:47:05. > :47:08.reserve powers for the Government this morning. Chuka Umunna would not
:47:09. > :47:16.go that far. The logic of everything he said would suggest that but he
:47:17. > :47:22.didn't. Why? I think Chuka Umunna would be in office like Peter
:47:23. > :47:26.Mandelson. The big promoter of British interest. It was interesting
:47:27. > :47:30.that he came back to the national interest again and again. He will be
:47:31. > :47:34.cautious. He is not a Government minister. He has been cautious in
:47:35. > :47:38.this take-over. He cannot stop or reflect this and he will use this as
:47:39. > :47:44.a way to mount a critique, and from that he will make a policy, this is
:47:45. > :47:54.what I will do. He certainly gave a critique this morning. When we get
:47:55. > :47:59.strikes, demands come to introduce laws to restrict the ability of
:48:00. > :48:05.central services to strike. Do we have attitudes to that? We did not
:48:06. > :48:10.ask that this time. It is suggested in the results. Half of people have
:48:11. > :48:13.some if not a lot of sympathy for the Fire Brigade in their industrial
:48:14. > :48:17.dispute which does not suggest to me that they think it should be banned.
:48:18. > :48:22.People don't understand what they are striking over, but they do think
:48:23. > :48:25.people have a right to strike. The more admirable your profession, the
:48:26. > :48:33.more sympathy people will have regardless of the cause. Try nurses!
:48:34. > :48:36.Let's leave it there. In the latest of our award-winning series on
:48:37. > :48:43.political thinkers, our guest of the day, former adviser to Tony Blair,
:48:44. > :48:44.has chosen Machiavelli. You can draw your own conclusions from that! This
:48:45. > :49:15.is Giles Dilnot. Ah! When it comes to political
:49:16. > :49:21.philosophers, not many have their name used in everyday speech that
:49:22. > :49:26.one does. Machiavellian. Cleverly deceitful and unscrupulous. It is
:49:27. > :49:30.dark and sinister, isn't it? I am going to meet one strategist and as
:49:31. > :49:33.he describes it recovering spin doctor who thinks that Machiavelli
:49:34. > :49:42.is about much more than just an adjective. John, good to see you.
:49:43. > :49:47.Let's get a table. What I really love is that you have brought your
:49:48. > :49:52.well thumbed University copy of The Prints by Machiavelli. Why do you
:49:53. > :49:56.like this guy? It is the best book about politics because it is written
:49:57. > :50:00.by a practitioner. Machiavelli was at the top politics for 50 years. He
:50:01. > :50:04.writes about the challenges we have to face and what to do about them. I
:50:05. > :50:09.would advise Prime Ministers across the world that we have the same
:50:10. > :50:14.issues to face up to and this is a handbook for us. He is the
:50:15. > :50:17.insider's insider. It is the only book I would give to young people
:50:18. > :50:22.about politics today. That is remarkable for a book that is 500
:50:23. > :50:26.years old. But I want to give you and everyone else a sense of
:50:27. > :50:38.Machiavelli's time and place and I have just the place to take you.
:50:39. > :50:44.To give you a bit of atmosphere we have brought you to London's oldest
:50:45. > :50:49.Catholic Church for Italians and it is Italy we are talking about. Not a
:50:50. > :50:53.country at the time but a landmass ruled by warring city states.
:50:54. > :50:58.Machiavelli writes his book in the context of this. What is he saying?
:50:59. > :51:03.He has been at the centre of power for 15 years in Florence. The Medici
:51:04. > :51:08.get power. He gets accused, tortured and exiled to the family farm and he
:51:09. > :51:14.wants to get to the centre of power is he writes a job application
:51:15. > :51:18.called The Prince. The book describes what Florence and Italy
:51:19. > :51:23.needs, a strong leader. Someone to be feared and not loved. Love passes
:51:24. > :51:28.but fear never passes. A leader who understands ruthlessness, acting
:51:29. > :51:33.decisively or doing nothing and not being caught in the middle. And it
:51:34. > :51:38.is telling that the Catholic Church banned the book. Nobody likes it. I
:51:39. > :51:42.don't think anybody likes it because for insiders, he has told the
:51:43. > :51:48.truth, spills the beans. And outsiders say, is that how power
:51:49. > :51:51.operates? No wonder it gets banned. Oxford University also points out
:51:52. > :51:56.that Machiavelli gets a bad press as much from people misreading him or
:51:57. > :52:01.not reading him enough. From the outset, Machiavelli was understood
:52:02. > :52:09.through the stereotypes of militias, vicious, sneaky, Italian
:52:10. > :52:15.poison. There were many attacks on Machiavelli. They were what people
:52:16. > :52:23.had read, not the works themselves. In other works, notably his
:52:24. > :52:26.discourses on living, what we find is a theorist of Republican
:52:27. > :52:35.institutions and values, in which people have their voice. In which
:52:36. > :52:37.institutions can strain the rule. And these popular Republican
:52:38. > :52:44.institutions are what give the state its greatness. I think Machiavelli
:52:45. > :52:49.would be proud of us because we are obviously and clearly at the heart
:52:50. > :52:53.of power in the UK. You say he is relevant. How does he work behind
:52:54. > :52:59.that door? Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair, the two most important
:53:00. > :53:03.post-war Prime Ministers, both had senior advisers are updating
:53:04. > :53:08.Machiavelli. They both agree with me that you can apply Machiavelli to
:53:09. > :53:13.modern politics. He talks about using violence. How does that work?
:53:14. > :53:17.Machiavelli is very clear. Leaders will need to use violence but they
:53:18. > :53:21.should not do it themselves. They should have somebody who does it for
:53:22. > :53:24.them. When I was Tony Blair's enforcer, he once said to me that
:53:25. > :53:32.people would complain that I was roughing up the back benches too
:53:33. > :53:36.much. You just have to break one of their legs, not both! Speaking of
:53:37. > :53:45.violence, shall we go and play a video game? OK, finish what you
:53:46. > :53:50.started. That is what I wanted you to see, Machiavelli in a video
:53:51. > :53:55.ordering assassinations against the Borders. This man is part of our
:53:56. > :54:06.modern culture. Yes, but it is not just in video games. There is the
:54:07. > :54:11.Machiavelli stage name and clothing brand that Tupac setup after reading
:54:12. > :54:15.him in prison. This guy has jumped cultures. He fascinates us because
:54:16. > :54:20.he is full of contradictions. He wants to wage war to create peace.
:54:21. > :54:25.He wants a strong leader to defend democracy. He is a guy who says that
:54:26. > :54:30.we should use violence and the lower means of politics to achieve a good
:54:31. > :54:35.society. We will be talking about him for centuries. Do you want to
:54:36. > :54:37.have a go? The good thing is that you can break both of their legs. To
:54:38. > :54:52.the left. Oh! Right, Machiavelli. The Prince was
:54:53. > :54:56.basically a job application for him. He wanted to work for a bunch
:54:57. > :55:02.of over powerful bankers called the Medici. Is that a good basis for
:55:03. > :55:09.philosophy? It was a job application to get back into a citystate that he
:55:10. > :55:11.loved, and to promote good Government in that citystate. The
:55:12. > :55:15.thing about his book, he says in the end that high ideals sometimes
:55:16. > :55:18.require very low means. That is the contradiction at the heart of the
:55:19. > :55:24.book and that is why we love and hate him today. I don't think it was
:55:25. > :55:31.published until after his death. It wasn't and you can understand why.
:55:32. > :55:35.Do you think that he would ever have thought that in the 21st century in
:55:36. > :55:40.a television studio that we would be talking about his book? He might
:55:41. > :55:43.have thought that, in a funny way, because he refers to authorities. He
:55:44. > :55:48.goes back all the time and tell stories of the Caesars, which are as
:55:49. > :55:51.real to him as the Italian wars between the cities. He senses the
:55:52. > :55:57.scope of history behind him and I think he could have imagined that.
:55:58. > :55:59.He could have imagined a contribution to literature. He might
:56:00. > :56:05.have thought it would be a discussion in a library not a
:56:06. > :56:10.television studio. I understand that. The problem for supporters of
:56:11. > :56:14.Machiavelli is that he has had a bad rap. The word Machiavellian, you
:56:15. > :56:21.don't use that to describe somebody you like, at least not outside the
:56:22. > :56:25.world of the spin doctor. He has. It was said in the package that people
:56:26. > :56:28.don't read Machiavelli. Sometimes they read what you said about him
:56:29. > :56:32.but more often they just hear the use of the word and contribute the
:56:33. > :56:39.dark arts to him. It is a very readable book. And to be so old, so
:56:40. > :56:44.short, so concise and still alive today, it is a great book. Are you a
:56:45. > :56:48.fan? There is an interesting squeamishness about him which is
:56:49. > :56:54.shown in the tension between the new politics that opposition leaders
:56:55. > :57:01.talk about and then the practical politics that they employ! There is
:57:02. > :57:06.that stuff about knife crime and I am sure Machiavelli would have
:57:07. > :57:09.recommended the same behaviour. Did you stop breaking both legs after
:57:10. > :57:22.Tony Blair asked YouTube? I was never breaking legs. -- Tony Blair
:57:23. > :57:26.asked you to? They said you were more foul-mouthed than Malcolm
:57:27. > :57:32.Tucker. I have never found you like that. Maybe Machiavelli... The point
:57:33. > :57:36.in politics in the end, in modern politics, is to be feared or
:57:37. > :57:39.respected. You don't have to commit violence, you just have to have the
:57:40. > :57:48.reputation of being able to commit violence. Well! Let's find out the
:57:49. > :57:53.answer to the quiz. The question was about being egged. John Prescott,
:57:54. > :57:58.David Cameron, Nigel Farage or Peter Mandelson. What is the answer? Peter
:57:59. > :58:02.Mandelson, isn't it, because he was covered in green lumpy custard and
:58:03. > :58:09.the others were egged? That is it. And you thought that, too? That
:58:10. > :58:13.image of him in the horrible green. Are we inevitably heading towards
:58:14. > :58:19.European elections with UKIP a clear victor, Labour not a great second
:58:20. > :58:23.and the Tories a bad third? That is what it is looking like. They are
:58:24. > :58:27.setting the terms of the debate and they will have to be derailed by
:58:28. > :58:31.other parties. There is also the Labour panic about whether they have
:58:32. > :58:36.dealt with UKIP properly. There will be a fascinating aftermath. We will
:58:37. > :58:39.be dealing with it on the Daily Politics. Thank you for joining us
:58:40. > :58:44.now. The One O'Clock News is beginning on BBC One now. I will be
:58:45. > :58:49.back on BBC One on Sunday with the Sunday Politics, to be joined by the
:58:50. > :58:52.Conservative Party chairman Grant Shapps and we will be talking about
:58:53. > :58:57.UKIP. I hope you can join me then. Goodbye.