:00:44. > :00:47.Politics. AstraZeneca rejects what Pfizer says is its last offer to
:00:48. > :00:49.splash its cash on its British rival, but will shareholders be able
:00:50. > :00:58.to resist the offer? family doctors in the driving seat,
:00:59. > :01:06.but will they be as good at running the health service as keeping us
:01:07. > :01:09.healthy? Ed Miliband says the minimum wage should be linked to
:01:10. > :01:11.average earnings, but what should the link bait?
:01:12. > :01:17.average earnings, but what should insist UKIP, the party is accused of
:01:18. > :01:23.harbouring homophobes and bigots and racists, but are the other parties
:01:24. > :01:27.any better? All that in the next hour, and with
:01:28. > :01:37.this for the first half of the programme today is the chair of the
:01:38. > :01:40.Royal Court of GPs, Maureen Baker. Let's start with the proposed
:01:41. > :01:46.takeover of AstraZeneca by its US rival, Pfizer. This morning the
:01:47. > :01:50.board of AstraZeneca has rejected what is described as a final offer
:01:51. > :01:55.that values the business at ?69 billion. Does that mean is this the
:01:56. > :02:01.end of the affair? Let's speak to Simon Jack, does it mean the end of
:02:02. > :02:06.the affair? Very probably yes, Jo. The shares have fallen very sharply,
:02:07. > :02:11.down about 13%, and that tells us most people think the deal is dead
:02:12. > :02:16.in the water. As you say, they offered ?55 per share, and it seems
:02:17. > :02:19.they got pretty close on price, because previous offers were
:02:20. > :02:22.described as woefully undervalued. This was just inadequate, so a
:02:23. > :02:27.little bit more might have got the board to talk to them, that it would
:02:28. > :02:32.be very unusual now for a company to come back, having said this was a
:02:33. > :02:36.final offer, to come back with more. The takeover panel would take a dim
:02:37. > :02:39.view of that. One possibility which remains is that shareholders who
:02:40. > :02:43.have seen that share price fall and are looking at a price which is
:02:44. > :02:47.about 25% lower than they were being offered by Pfizer have a week to
:02:48. > :02:54.think, do you know what? Maybe this is not such a bad a day after all.
:02:55. > :02:59.Imagine that they do reconsider the proposal, ultimately it is for the
:03:00. > :03:03.shareholders to decide. What is the analysis of Labour saying they would
:03:04. > :03:06.block the takeover if they were to win the next election and if they
:03:07. > :03:11.felt the deal was not in the country's best interest? Is that
:03:12. > :03:16.significant? I am not sure it is, because in the conversations I have
:03:17. > :03:20.had, that has not come up since Ed Miliband mentioned it. It could be
:03:21. > :03:25.the shareholders' fault, they do not tend to think politically, and it
:03:26. > :03:30.maybe it should have been on their agenda, but I do not expect it will
:03:31. > :03:33.make any short-term difference. What impact will it have on other
:03:34. > :03:37.businesses trying to take over British companies and, in terms of
:03:38. > :03:42.using Vince Cable's words, being open for business as a country? One
:03:43. > :03:46.thing that will be interesting is to see where the debate goes on the
:03:47. > :03:50.public interest test, because there was talk of introducing an extra
:03:51. > :03:54.limb to that public interest test. We already have it for national
:03:55. > :03:58.security, media plurality and competition. But if you were added
:03:59. > :04:02.to something like scientific jobs or key industries, he would have to go
:04:03. > :04:06.to the European Commission to get them to agree to it. That would be
:04:07. > :04:10.quite an interesting prospect, to see them deciding what the UK
:04:11. > :04:13.thought its own national interest was. It would allow some
:04:14. > :04:17.Eurosceptics to make mischief, but it won't make any short-term
:04:18. > :04:22.difference. In your mind, Maureen, should politicians intervene in
:04:23. > :04:27.cases where companies are trying to take over British companies? It does
:04:28. > :04:33.seem to me that if there is a legitimate interest in the country,
:04:34. > :04:37.and for the sake of the good of the population, that we have a
:04:38. > :04:41.particular industry or number of industries, then that seems
:04:42. > :04:47.reasonable, that politicians could take up on that. What about the
:04:48. > :04:51.public interest test? This phrase has been used particularly by
:04:52. > :04:54.Labour. If you were worried about a foreign company taking over a
:04:55. > :05:02.company here, what would you want included in that test? Well, the...
:05:03. > :05:06.Again, the difficulty is in the definition, isn't it? If we take the
:05:07. > :05:12.AstraZeneca case, this country has got a very considerable scientific
:05:13. > :05:16.and research infrastructure that provides a lot of jobs, brings a lot
:05:17. > :05:23.of income into the country, and it also helps support as being a good
:05:24. > :05:26.place to study. So there is a lot of ramifications in having a good
:05:27. > :05:32.scientific and research base, and therefore developments that
:05:33. > :05:35.undermine that space, I would think they do have a public interest
:05:36. > :05:40.ramifications. Will you be pleased if the deal is dead in the water?
:05:41. > :05:46.Personally, I will be. I think it is better for us to have UK-based big
:05:47. > :05:50.pharmaceutical companies. What about the issue of investment? Because
:05:51. > :05:54.that is what other politicians and business people will say that a
:05:55. > :06:01.company like AstraZeneca needs an awful lot of investment and money to
:06:02. > :06:06.continue developing drugs. Yes, and again this is a question for
:06:07. > :06:11.politicians, from whatever party - how can they best support UK
:06:12. > :06:18.business, UK interests? And therefore there should be ways in
:06:19. > :06:23.which governments can help support investment in key industries. OK,
:06:24. > :06:27.let's leave it there. Here on the Daily Politics we like to ask the
:06:28. > :06:32.difficult questions. How do you solve a problem like Maria? At what
:06:33. > :06:38.point does a pond become a lake? What was the best thing before
:06:39. > :06:42.sliced bread? But one question's answer has eluded us, what is the
:06:43. > :06:46.structure of the new NHS? Giles is here to help us understand.
:06:47. > :06:50.All of us have a sense of the health service, and most of us at some
:06:51. > :06:54.point we'll use it, which is why our governments, including the
:06:55. > :06:58.coalition, are careful to be seen to cherish it. But this Government has
:06:59. > :07:02.been keen to radically change the NHS. To some, it is a real
:07:03. > :07:09.revolution. To others, the destruction of the service before
:07:10. > :07:14.your eyes. But the idea had one very big focus - the Secretary of State
:07:15. > :07:17.wanted doctors in charge. Up until September 2012, Andrew Lansley,
:07:18. > :07:21.architect of the reforms and driver of them in government, looked hard
:07:22. > :07:25.at the NHS and diagnosed a Beijing case of bureaucracy, and it was that
:07:26. > :07:34.bad. Inclinations delivering the best care. -- it was that stopping
:07:35. > :07:38.clinicians. He wanted to put money into the hands of GPs. The problem
:07:39. > :07:43.for Andrew Lansley was the reforms were watered down in the face of
:07:44. > :07:47.opposition, consultation and eventually political surgery. Jeremy
:07:48. > :07:49.Hunt scrubbed up as the Secretary of State for help after the
:07:50. > :07:54.blood-letting of a reshuffle, and the new system he presides over is
:07:55. > :07:59.far more complex than the original idea. It is based on around 200
:08:00. > :08:05.clinical commissioning groups, CCGs, spending around 65 billion of
:08:06. > :08:12.the NHS's 100 billion budget. These are made up of GPs, nurses, hospital
:08:13. > :08:15.input and the public, who go shopping in approved marketplaces
:08:16. > :08:24.for health services, but there are all sorts of bodies. They all help,
:08:25. > :08:29.advice or check the whole process. The reforms are very complicated,
:08:30. > :08:31.and a lot of people are having to learn new roles and
:08:32. > :08:34.responsibilities. Specialised commissioning turned out to be more
:08:35. > :08:39.complicated than people thought. We have just seen in the last few weeks
:08:40. > :08:43.the new chief executive of NHS England beginning to change the way
:08:44. > :08:46.that the commissioning for GPs services works, trying to get CCGs
:08:47. > :08:51.more on the page to help work out the best way to deliver primary
:08:52. > :08:54.care. Now, I could explain the system further, because it is
:08:55. > :09:01.usually complex, but it is GPs we are focusing on today, because the
:09:02. > :09:05.primary carers are still commissioned and paid for by NHS
:09:06. > :09:09.England, a body that was going to be smaller and more nimble but is
:09:10. > :09:13.actually still vast. Doctors do very well out of this arrangement. GPs
:09:14. > :09:19.are still, in many ways, at the heart of the system, but as bodies
:09:20. > :09:23.learn a new ways they interact, either GPs have complained too much
:09:24. > :09:25.is expected of them or other clinicians have said doctors simply
:09:26. > :09:30.do not have the monopoly on expertise. In government, there is a
:09:31. > :09:35.feeling it has become like a reverse doctor joke. Minister, Minister, I
:09:36. > :09:39.feel like an overworked cash! Sorry, doctor, you will just have to handle
:09:40. > :09:44.the change. Who better to discuss the NHS with
:09:45. > :09:49.us than our guest of the day, who has been a GP since 1985? It does
:09:50. > :09:54.look hideously complicated when demonstrated in that way, Maureen,
:09:55. > :09:58.GPs are now in the driving seat, in so far as the NHS in England, 66% of
:09:59. > :10:03.money is channelled through these new local health authorities, the
:10:04. > :10:09.commissioning care groups. Are you the ones that we should hold to
:10:10. > :10:13.account if it goes wrong? Well, GPs are the people to hold to account
:10:14. > :10:18.for the part of that for which they are responsible, so even issues of
:10:19. > :10:22.the 66 billion, there are large chunks of that money that are not
:10:23. > :10:29.negotiable, that come out as a tranche. And basically GPs and CCGs
:10:30. > :10:36.then get to try to do the best with what is left. So it is all a bit
:10:37. > :10:40.misleading. You have demonstrated how complicated it looks. It is at
:10:41. > :10:44.least as complicated as it looks! But an awful lot of money you are
:10:45. > :10:48.being entrusted with, a very large chunk of money that you are
:10:49. > :10:54.responsible for - if it goes wrong, GPs should be carrying the can. CCGs
:10:55. > :10:59.are comprised of GPs and others, and they are the statutory body, without
:11:00. > :11:02.their having been any choice in that. That is the way the
:11:03. > :11:06.regulations had worked. Would you rather not have had the
:11:07. > :11:10.responsibility? We would rather not, but having got it, my colleagues are
:11:11. > :11:14.trying to do the best they can in the system we now have. How
:11:15. > :11:18.reassured can we be by your comments? You are interested with
:11:19. > :11:21.the money, how do we know you will spend it wisely if you were
:11:22. > :11:28.reluctant to take on the responsibility? Indeed, but it was
:11:29. > :11:33.not a matter over which there was choice, so having been given the
:11:34. > :11:38.responsibility. In the interests of patients and the public, colleagues
:11:39. > :11:42.in CCGs are doing their best, and actually at the end of the first
:11:43. > :11:48.year, it does appear that, by and large, they are doing a pretty good
:11:49. > :11:53.job. Very few CCGs have gone into deficit, for instance, as opposed
:11:54. > :11:58.to, you know, many other parts of the NHS in other sectors. So they
:11:59. > :12:02.are doing a good job with the job they have been given. NHS spending
:12:03. > :12:07.per head is said to reduce by 9% per year, what should the NHS stop
:12:08. > :12:16.doing? The NHS needs to stop spending its money downstream, at
:12:17. > :12:23.the last end. Meaning? Meaning we spend too much money in the acute
:12:24. > :12:29.sector, where people don't want to be, where we are doing unnecessary
:12:30. > :12:34.interventions. We need to be much more downstream with the money, and
:12:35. > :12:39.use the money more appropriately across health economies. When you
:12:40. > :12:44.say acute, what do you mean, in the acute section? The acute sector is
:12:45. > :12:50.mainly hospitals and district General... So too much is being
:12:51. > :12:53.spent on hospitals? Too much on hospitals, but basically, if we are
:12:54. > :12:59.able to use the money better, we should be able to have better
:13:00. > :13:03.services for patients at or near home, and have less people in
:13:04. > :13:07.hospital for shorter times, therefore meaning they need less
:13:08. > :13:12.money. But when it comes to hospitals, part of the reason is
:13:13. > :13:17.that people are going to A, looking at another area of the NHS,
:13:18. > :13:22.because they cannot get appointments with their GP easily or when they
:13:23. > :13:27.want them. In fact, a few things there. The evidence shows that the
:13:28. > :13:34.pressure in A department is largely due to people being very
:13:35. > :13:38.ill, turning up, often in ambulances, and not being able to
:13:39. > :13:44.flow through the hospital. But there is a significant proportion as a
:13:45. > :13:51.result of, it is a weekend, there is no GP. Well, in fact, there are out
:13:52. > :13:56.of hours GPs... Not widespread. Every area in the country does have
:13:57. > :14:00.a GP out of hours service. There are a whole number of reasons about it
:14:01. > :14:04.not being well understood, people do not know the best way to go, it is
:14:05. > :14:10.too complicated, but putting that aside, there is a proportion which,
:14:11. > :14:15.by the way, has not changed over the last ten or 15 years, of patients
:14:16. > :14:22.who will go to A because they feel it is more convenient. But in terms
:14:23. > :14:28.of whether that is because of the acute pressure in A departments,
:14:29. > :14:31.no, it isn't. Let's have a look at the Labour promise to get an
:14:32. > :14:37.appointment at your GP within 48 hours. Do you support that? We
:14:38. > :14:40.support the aspiration. Getting back to this business people not being
:14:41. > :14:44.able to get an appointment, we believe it is really important that
:14:45. > :14:52.people have the access to the skills of their GP in that practice when
:14:53. > :14:58.they need. However, the... We have, in the last five years, in general
:14:59. > :15:03.practice, had a significant decrease in funding in actual terms, in cash,
:15:04. > :15:08.against a context of an increasing number of appointments delivered,
:15:09. > :15:17.and the demand for that. And the service is spread incredibly thin.
:15:18. > :15:21.GP's salary could give, they earn an average of ?105,000 per year, 600
:15:22. > :15:31.are on more than ?200,000 per year, a very big salary, just by general
:15:32. > :15:35.comparison. You could give on that. These are average salaries for
:15:36. > :15:41.partners. There are others who are not partners. The Royal College of
:15:42. > :15:49.GPs opposed the pledge by Prime Minister is to see surgeries open
:15:50. > :15:54.8am until 8pm and at weekends. We do not have enough GPs actually. Even
:15:55. > :15:59.the salaries you were talking about, GPs are leaving the service, they
:16:00. > :16:04.are going abroad, going into other careers. The biggest constraint in
:16:05. > :16:10.terms of delivering GP appointments is the number of GPs, and support
:16:11. > :16:19.staff in surgeries. That is the biggest problem which is why we do
:16:20. > :16:23.not believe a 48 hour access pledge can be achieved.
:16:24. > :16:29.Is it a headline, guaranteeing appointments? The Sun people it
:16:30. > :16:31.would seem like a legitimate aspiration.
:16:32. > :16:38.It can't be achieved with the resources we have. You want more
:16:39. > :16:45.money? We want more staff. That does need to come with more money. It is
:16:46. > :16:50.not just salaries, it is what sits beneath that.
:16:51. > :16:51.Well, one, potentially controversial,
:16:52. > :16:55.way to cut costs would be to get people to pay to visit the GP.
:16:56. > :16:57.Our correspondent, Hugh Schofield, joins me now
:16:58. > :17:02.from Paris where a form of GP charging is firmly established.
:17:03. > :17:11.Talk us through the system operating in Paris?
:17:12. > :17:18.It is, as you say, a system where you bring out the cheque book to see
:17:19. > :17:24.the doctor. It is a generous system but this is not free at the point of
:17:25. > :17:28.access. I have a local GP I can go and see pretty much any day, he will
:17:29. > :17:40.even come and visit me at home. Every time he does, I write out a
:17:41. > :17:49.cheque. 23 euros for a visit to his office. ?18. I will then get all of
:17:50. > :17:59.that back, except one or two euros, which is to deter those who want to
:18:00. > :18:04.go willy-nilly. It is an insurance system, compulsory insurance
:18:05. > :18:06.system, which means you pay up and you get back.
:18:07. > :18:17.What are the benefits of that social insurance system? The benefits to
:18:18. > :18:19.you and the system there? Does it make it more efficient and
:18:20. > :18:25.cost-effective? I am not sure about cost effective.
:18:26. > :18:30.It certainly makes it efficient. The odd thing about the French system,
:18:31. > :18:36.bethink Britain is being this liberal, free market-based economy.
:18:37. > :18:42.Whereas France is more socialist. In fact, in the health system, it is
:18:43. > :18:48.the reverse. In Britain, we have the NHS set up straight after the war,
:18:49. > :18:54.with socialistic ideology behind it, free provision at the point of
:18:55. > :19:00.access. In France, we have a liberal system. You can set up as a doctor
:19:01. > :19:05.and as long as you are approved and authenticated, you will then be able
:19:06. > :19:13.to charge and get the money back, you will be part of the system.
:19:14. > :19:18.There are plenty of doctors, private individuals operating as doctors,
:19:19. > :19:24.surgeons, specialists. The French love specialists. A lot of people
:19:25. > :19:29.will bypass their GP and go to a specialist, endocrinology, brain
:19:30. > :19:34.problems. Because it is so generous, we have got to a point where it is
:19:35. > :19:36.not affordable. The prospect of raiding expenditure in is
:19:37. > :19:51.politically sensitive. -- reigning. Thomas Cawston is from the think
:19:52. > :20:06.tank Reform, and has authored How would it work? Many health
:20:07. > :20:11.systems are facing a challenge of finding more money to meet growing
:20:12. > :20:18.demand in health care. Around the world, many systems use charges as a
:20:19. > :20:24.supplement for the taxpayer. There are charges for prescription,
:20:25. > :20:32.optometry, dentistry, in the NHS, long-term care.
:20:33. > :20:38.It is a big difference, to put your money directly before the GP.
:20:39. > :20:42.In France, you pay and get your money back eventually.
:20:43. > :20:51.Is that what you are suggesting, you pay into a system, and claim it
:20:52. > :20:56.back, for your appointment? All options should be on the table.
:20:57. > :21:01.We need to find ways of getting money quickly with the least change
:21:02. > :21:06.to the system. You talked about how you need more
:21:07. > :21:11.money, and we talked about salaries as one way of looking at it. What
:21:12. > :21:15.about if you were to charge every patient who came through your door?
:21:16. > :21:22.We would be very concerned. We believe it would strengthen health
:21:23. > :21:26.inequalities. We already struggle, those people with the greatest
:21:27. > :21:29.health needs have the poorest provision. It did Jews and other
:21:30. > :21:38.barrier which would make matters worse. -- it would introduce. A
:21:39. > :21:43.large proportion of people who are on the incomes, they do not paper
:21:44. > :21:48.sketch and chargers. We are familiar with seeing people who are not on
:21:49. > :21:53.benefits but they are struggling on low incomes. You give them a
:21:54. > :22:00.prescription, and they will say there are a fewer items -- there are
:22:01. > :22:12.only one or two items they can afford.
:22:13. > :22:19.Do you reject it? Yes. You do not think it is palatable. Not
:22:20. > :22:26.palatable. What do you say to the idea, which is the obvious question,
:22:27. > :22:33.that the poorest, and healthiest people, they would suffer. Many
:22:34. > :22:38.people find it hard to see a GP at the weekends, in the evenings, there
:22:39. > :22:46.are already barriers to access. If you are on a low income, if you are
:22:47. > :22:55.on work shifts, it would cost you more to see your GP. What about that
:22:56. > :23:01.in response? If you open yourself up as a GP surgery, people would lose
:23:02. > :23:09.less having to take a morning of work.
:23:10. > :23:14.Contracted hours are already 8am until 6:30 pm.. Many practices to
:23:15. > :23:20.open more hours than that. Those hours outside, even though you say
:23:21. > :23:30.you can see a GP, it is not that easy. Would it work? If you are open
:23:31. > :23:35.until nine pm., at weekends, those people would be able to see you at
:23:36. > :23:43.less of a cost to them. If we had enough staff, then, yes, we could
:23:44. > :23:49.and we would want to have more extended and convenient hours for
:23:50. > :23:54.patients. Where you have got enough resources, it doesn't do anyone any
:23:55. > :24:02.good. It destabilises the service. Isn't it a bright product -- isn't
:24:03. > :24:09.it a by-product that everybody would go to accident and emergency? We
:24:10. > :24:16.want to use other forms of health care, pharmacists, going online.
:24:17. > :24:24.People to take care of themselves more.
:24:25. > :24:31.What about the idea of self-medicating? People do see their
:24:32. > :24:34.pharmacist for minor ailments. Pharmacists have terrific skills.
:24:35. > :24:39.They are highly trained professionals in the system. We talk
:24:40. > :24:44.about making the most of the resources we have already got, then
:24:45. > :24:48.definitely pharmacists, community pharmacists have a big role. The
:24:49. > :24:55.days of free at the point of use, the old style of taxing people to
:24:56. > :25:00.pay to cover the NHS, that is fast running out of steam? Bearing in
:25:01. > :25:06.mind some people say we are looking at a ?30 billion deficit in the NHS.
:25:07. > :25:12.It is a question of what we are prepared to pay. In France, they pay
:25:13. > :25:20.11.7% of their GDP in health care. In the UK, we pay 9.4% of our GDP.
:25:21. > :25:23.These are decisions the citizens need to make, about what they are
:25:24. > :25:31.willing to pay, and in what ways they are willing to pay. If we spend
:25:32. > :25:38.more as a proportion of GDP, would that be a more effective way?
:25:39. > :25:43.Remember, the last ten years, health funding doubled in real terms.
:25:44. > :25:49.Parliament has been fenced that budget. We have seen cuts to the
:25:50. > :25:54.police force, local government, services which individuals need as
:25:55. > :26:01.much as health care. Going forward, there is still a challenge with
:26:02. > :26:06.rising demand. To ask the taxpayer to continually fund the NHS, we need
:26:07. > :26:13.to look at other ways. That has to be considered right now. If doctors
:26:14. > :26:35.can encourage patients to use other services. Here is a reminder of what
:26:36. > :26:43.happened with the last elections. A very happy New Year 2009.
:26:44. > :26:46.The UK is in recession for the first time since 1991.
:26:47. > :26:50.An implement has risen above 2 million.
:26:51. > :26:57.The biggest rise in the dole queue since records began.
:26:58. > :27:00.Jobs should not be lost needlessly. The interest rate has been cut once
:27:01. > :27:15.again and is at an all-time low. Lots of people are suffering through
:27:16. > :27:19.lack of money at this moment, why should MPs get away with it will
:27:20. > :27:24.stop I rarely meet anyone who wants to be a member of Parliament.
:27:25. > :27:31.Things have been done which may be feel ashamed to be a member of
:27:32. > :27:35.Parliament. This morning, the Communities
:27:36. > :27:39.Secretary resigned from the cabinet following yesterday 's announcement
:27:40. > :27:42.the Children's Minister is standing down, the Minister for the Cabinet
:27:43. > :27:45.Office is leaving, the Home Secretary is resigning. Why doesn't
:27:46. > :27:49.the prime Minister accepts his ability to command his cabinet has
:27:50. > :27:54.simply disappeared? James Purnell, he is resigning from
:27:55. > :28:05.the government in order to force a leadership ballot.
:28:06. > :28:15.This time, we have come second. We are very pleased. The Labour
:28:16. > :28:23.Party have come third, behind UKIP. Nick Griffin from the BNP.
:28:24. > :28:27.Two BNP MEPs have been elected, or the other parties have been
:28:28. > :28:34.condemning this, and blaming themselves.
:28:35. > :28:36.A reminder of the 2009 European elections.
:28:37. > :28:38.But which parties will prosper this time round?
:28:39. > :28:41.Well, amongst the parties putting up candidates is the
:28:42. > :28:51.I'm joined by one of their number, Danny Lambert.
:28:52. > :28:57.You wrote, parties promising to do things for others is not my idea of
:28:58. > :29:03.politics, so I am not making any promises to do anything for anyone.
:29:04. > :29:08.What is the point of standing? We are a Democratic party, one of the
:29:09. > :29:16.most democratic organisations in the world. Because we have no leaders.
:29:17. > :29:19.In a real democracy, we hold all socially relevant information should
:29:20. > :29:25.be available to everybody. The more people taking part in the democratic
:29:26. > :29:29.process, the more chance you have of getting the best result. So how did
:29:30. > :29:31.they decide you should come on the programme today and not another
:29:32. > :29:38.colleague? I am on the list. You are not the
:29:39. > :29:42.leader. We don't have leaders. Leaders need followers, and
:29:43. > :29:46.followers do not know where they are going. If you are a prospective
:29:47. > :29:51.voter looking at policies you may have, why would they vote for you?
:29:52. > :29:59.You would be voting for yourself. We hold that the National industrial --
:30:00. > :30:05.natural industrial resources of this planet belong to everybody. All
:30:06. > :30:08.production is socially carried out, so it should be socially
:30:09. > :30:19.administered in the interests of the whole community.
:30:20. > :30:24.their real identities as human beings, when they abandon these
:30:25. > :30:31.periods identities of colour, nationalism, all this nonsense that
:30:32. > :30:35.only exist in our imagination. -- these spurious. Now, in a family
:30:36. > :30:38.that functions, if it is to be a real family, the ethic, the
:30:39. > :30:43.socialist principle, is followed, from each according to ability, to
:30:44. > :30:47.each according to need. The great thing about having a common identity
:30:48. > :30:51.with a common interest is that you cannot abuse or exploit or oppress
:30:52. > :30:57.those you have identified with. All you can do is cooperate, we are so
:30:58. > :31:02.much better when we go operate than when we compete. I dispute some of
:31:03. > :31:07.your views about human nature, you say that some people might choose to
:31:08. > :31:11.drive a bus or train, or become a scientist. What if the doctors and
:31:12. > :31:17.engineers decide they only want to work a few hours a week? Well, I
:31:18. > :31:21.mean... The thing is, we have been listening to all these problems that
:31:22. > :31:26.face... Let me finish, you know, with the health service, funding,
:31:27. > :31:31.and the problem with our society, because it is a commercial society,
:31:32. > :31:34.we are so busy taking care of business, we don't have time to take
:31:35. > :31:38.care of ourselves. William Morris pointed out it is more expensive to
:31:39. > :31:42.sell something than it is to make. If we had a society where production
:31:43. > :31:49.was only carried out to meet human need, we wouldn't need all the
:31:50. > :31:55.banking, insurance, taxation, advertising, the military-industrial
:31:56. > :34:00.complex... But it hasn't worked, has it? That form of socialism has never
:34:01. > :34:05.worked. Well, you The problem is he's not going to put a figure on
:34:06. > :34:13.it, he is going to take a percentage of other peopleearnings. What about
:34:14. > :34:19.those people on the minimum wage? If he finds a way to explain it, it
:34:20. > :34:24.could be quite powerful. Lots of people feel their wages have lagged
:34:25. > :34:30.behind inflation. Do you think this will be popular
:34:31. > :34:39.with voters, not just ahead of the European elections, but in general?
:34:40. > :34:56.I am not sure how much traction it will have with people. It does fit
:34:57. > :35:06.in with Ed Miliband's message. We want a decent minimum. Maybe a
:35:07. > :35:20.stronger message would be ensuring proper enforcement to stop employers
:35:21. > :35:31.illegally paying exploitative wages. To get people back into work. I am
:35:32. > :35:34.not sure it is a big offer in the way Ed Miliband says.
:35:35. > :35:41.And what about the UKIP bandwagon? And what about the UKIP
:35:42. > :35:47.UKIP is appealing to two different type of voters, the core UKIP
:35:48. > :35:51.support who feel enthusiastically politicians of all types can let
:35:52. > :35:56.them down and Nigel Farage is their man. This kind of person will not be
:35:57. > :35:58.swayed by him getting attacked on LBC or the BBC or mainstream
:35:59. > :36:03.broadcasters. That plays into the broadcasters. That plays into
:36:04. > :36:09.feeling that they are a bunch of renegades. What Nigel Farage has
:36:10. > :36:15.managed to do recently is broaden his appeal beyond that group, to
:36:16. > :36:22.people who might be otherwise be floating voters. Those people might
:36:23. > :36:28.look at what he has said, at the coverage in the newspapers, there
:36:29. > :36:35.will be readers thinking of voting UKIP but they may think, you know
:36:36. > :36:46.what, he is still too dangerous for me.
:36:47. > :36:50.parties, if they were minded to exploit this further ahead of the
:36:51. > :36:55.European elections, this will only come into play looking ahead to the
:36:56. > :36:59.general election? I think they would have loved this particular row to
:37:00. > :37:06.happen two weeks ago, I think he is right about the floating voters. I
:37:07. > :37:12.think it will energise the main party machines to get the vote out.
:37:13. > :37:16.There are postal votes, of course, they have already gone in. I
:37:17. > :37:22.personally love the romance of the ballot box, I'm not being sarcastic,
:37:23. > :37:27.but a lot of people do not. So they have posted in their vote, and a lot
:37:28. > :37:31.of people may have chosen UKIP, if they have organised their postal
:37:32. > :37:36.voting campaign well. That will have made no difference at all. Thank you
:37:37. > :37:39.to both of you, have a good week, enjoy the elections.
:37:40. > :38:55.As we were hearing, UKIP leader Nigel Farage has had to fend
:38:56. > :38:59.Let's take a look at what some Conservatives have been up to.
:39:00. > :39:01.In February, a councillor had to apologise
:39:02. > :39:04.after using racist language in an interview on BBC radio Bristol.
:39:05. > :39:07.In March a councillor in Enfield was suspended after posting alleged
:39:08. > :39:11.And only last week, another of their candidates in Enfield was revealed
:39:12. > :39:14.to have had a previous suspended prison sentence for benefit fraud.
:39:15. > :39:17.And Lib Dems haven't been much better at staying out of trouble.
:39:18. > :39:19.In March, one of their councillors was convicted
:39:20. > :39:22.of racially aggravated assault, after telling a migrant barman to
:39:23. > :39:26.Also in March, a councillor in Somerset was given
:39:27. > :39:29.a community sentence, after stealing over ?1,200 from his local
:39:30. > :39:33.And this is what some Labour politicians have been up to.
:39:34. > :39:36.In January, two Labour councillors in Luton were suspended
:39:37. > :39:39.by the party for allegedly posting racist comments on Facebook.
:39:40. > :39:41.And five Labour councillors in Middlesborough resigned
:39:42. > :39:45.from the party earlier this month, citing issues with the selection
:39:46. > :39:49.Even the Greens aren't immune from this.
:39:50. > :39:53.In 2011, a candidate in Ilford was suspended
:39:54. > :40:00.In 2012, a Green Party councillor in Norwich was jailed for arson.
:40:01. > :40:08.And, last year, a Green candidate in Blackheath was
:40:09. > :40:10.criticised after posting offensive comments on Twitter, following
:40:11. > :40:13.So, are the mainstream media unfairly
:40:14. > :40:15.singling out UKIP candidates for criticism, with the established
:40:16. > :40:19.Or, has the balance been about right?
:40:20. > :40:22.I'm joined now for the rest of the programme by Conservative MP
:40:23. > :40:25.Tim Loughton, Liberal Democrat Tom Brake, Labour's David Lammy,
:40:26. > :40:45.Having listened to that list of offences, a counsellor in Enfield
:40:46. > :40:53.for the Conservatives, suspended. Another candidate accused of benefit
:40:54. > :40:57.fraud. Is it a case UKIP is worse than the other parties?
:40:58. > :41:01.All parties are made up of ordinary people, and there are unsavoury
:41:02. > :41:06.people in them. The important thing is what the parties do about them.
:41:07. > :41:16.In all those cases, we acted resolutely with those people. With
:41:17. > :41:19.UKIP, now, they are much more a national force, a prospect of
:41:20. > :41:26.scoring well in the forthcoming elections, they are being put under
:41:27. > :41:30.scrutiny. Not just individual members but senior people are
:41:31. > :41:35.standing for election, and Nigel Farage actually saying some
:41:36. > :41:41.unsavoury things, which are deeply worrying. Which is the worst party?
:41:42. > :41:45.Recent evidence has shown that they are. You would deny using some of
:41:46. > :41:53.the language David Cameron has used about UKIP, fruitcakes, loony,
:41:54. > :41:59.closet racists, cranks, there are plenty of those within Tory ranks.
:42:00. > :42:06.That terminology is not useful. We need to make sure people who are
:42:07. > :42:11.tempted to vote UKIP, come back or state in the Conservative fold. It
:42:12. > :42:15.is the people who run these parties making these offensive comments that
:42:16. > :42:22.we need to target, including Nigel Farage.
:42:23. > :42:27.Ed Miliband said the comments about Romanians amounted to a racist slur.
:42:28. > :42:34.He refused to call Nigel Farage a racist directly.
:42:35. > :42:38.Doesn't that make him a racist? Let us be clear. My parents arrived here
:42:39. > :42:42.as immigrants. I remember a context in which some people said, you don't
:42:43. > :42:48.want these people living next to you. That was racist. What Nigel
:42:49. > :42:52.Farage said at the weekend is racist. I am clear, he is a racist.
:42:53. > :42:57.Ed Miliband should be brave enough to say he is a racist.
:42:58. > :43:01.It is not helpful to get into a pedantic discussion of the
:43:02. > :43:07.difference between racial slur and racism. He is leader of a national
:43:08. > :43:11.party. He should not be slurring whole communities, Romanians who
:43:12. > :43:16.come to this country, describing them as bandits. It is deeply nasty,
:43:17. > :43:22.the sort of thing we have seen in Europe, in times of recession and
:43:23. > :43:28.depression. We must take that kind of slur extremely seriously.
:43:29. > :43:34.Do you agree he a racist? I agree with David, the difference between
:43:35. > :43:39.Nigel Farage and the other cases in the other parties, Nigel Farage is
:43:40. > :43:43.the leader of the party. The head of their party, so when he says
:43:44. > :43:48.something, it does represent the wider views of the party. I think he
:43:49. > :43:51.was right to apologise for what he said about the Romanians but the
:43:52. > :43:57.problem is the written apology he has provided simply reinforces what
:43:58. > :44:03.he had to say about Romanians and their criminal activities. A strange
:44:04. > :44:06.apology. UKIP claims that all of the other
:44:07. > :44:13.parties have exactly the same sort of problem.
:44:14. > :44:16.Do you accept that? I accept in one particular instance, you quoted a
:44:17. > :44:21.Liberal Democrat, the immediate action we took was to withdraw his
:44:22. > :44:28.membership. UKIP have taken action as well about their candidates.
:44:29. > :44:32.You cannot imagine Nick Clegg or David Cameron saying the sorts of
:44:33. > :44:38.things Nigel Farage said on air. For everyone to hear.
:44:39. > :44:45.I do not want to dismiss the 2.5 million people that voted UKIP last
:44:46. > :44:51.time, as racist. But it is clear that UKIP are revelling in some of
:44:52. > :44:55.this stuff. They are stirring up those who are, rightly, discontented
:44:56. > :45:00.with Britain. A look at the political parties and feel, they
:45:01. > :45:05.leave us cold. They are stirring that up with a degree of prejudice,
:45:06. > :45:11.and racism. That is in their electoral interests. Are they saying
:45:12. > :45:19.what people generally think is the case.
:45:20. > :45:23.I think this has been bad things, if you look back over the past few
:45:24. > :45:29.months and years, you will see a conscious creation of this
:45:30. > :45:33.difference. Of using migration, free movement, as a way of attacking the
:45:34. > :45:39.European Union. What this has done for the lives of a lot of people on
:45:40. > :45:47.the ground has made them profoundly uncomfortable, and fearful of their
:45:48. > :45:58.place in the UK. That is not just restricted to these instances.
:45:59. > :46:02.If you look at this, it isn't just UKIP, we have seen this with other
:46:03. > :46:09.political parties. When they start using this, you begin to get... You
:46:10. > :46:13.are talking about the Conservatives? Other parties as well. You see a
:46:14. > :46:24.legitimisation on the ground of people feeling, somehow, this sort
:46:25. > :46:29.of activity and language... The go home fans around London telling
:46:30. > :46:34.illegal immigrants to go home, is there such a difference?
:46:35. > :46:42.That was about people who are not supposed to be in this country. Not
:46:43. > :46:46.about immigrants per se. To go back to your point, no other party leader
:46:47. > :46:54.has had to take out a full-page advert in a national paper to say
:46:55. > :46:59.they are not racist. The mistake we are making is to move away from the
:47:00. > :47:04.crucial issues. Local council services, who is best able to
:47:05. > :47:07.provide those. Rest able at an EU level to fight for Britain in the
:47:08. > :47:15.European Union. It is not UKIP. UKIP are on course
:47:16. > :47:22.to top the European poll, most polls seem to say that. On the basis of
:47:23. > :47:28.that, what has gone wrong? Why is UKIP doing so much better?
:47:29. > :47:31.We have to wait for the results. If people want representatives to fight
:47:32. > :47:38.them in the European Parliament and achieve change, reform, Liberal
:47:39. > :47:45.Democrats will do that. UKIP do not take part in most of the votes, are
:47:46. > :47:48.mainly absent, have not voted for some job creation measures. Do not
:47:49. > :47:54.invest your vote in them if you think they are going to deliver
:47:55. > :47:58.reform. Even your party has lost some
:47:59. > :48:05.support. You haven't made headway hoped for.
:48:06. > :48:09.Some of that to UKIP. It is true we haven't made headway. But the polls
:48:10. > :48:13.are looking quite good for us in a number of seats. I would agree in
:48:14. > :48:18.terms of the issues we have discussed during this campaign, a
:48:19. > :48:24.lot of them which are relevant to European level, financial
:48:25. > :48:29.regulation, job creation, have not been on the table at all because the
:48:30. > :48:33.whole agenda has been captured by one political party. It is a real
:48:34. > :48:37.shame we haven't discussed the issues that really matter at
:48:38. > :48:51.European level. That's also what people will be voting for. But UKIP
:48:52. > :48:56.do not participate. They often vote against.
:48:57. > :48:59.Regular viewers will know that we've commissioned a series of polls
:49:00. > :49:02.of voters in England, getting their impressions of the parties ahead
:49:03. > :49:05.The polls mimic the techniques used by parties,
:49:06. > :49:08.of segmenting the electorate into distinct groups, which can be
:49:09. > :49:12.Each respondent was asked the same series of questions
:49:13. > :49:15.about the values of each of the main political parties.
:49:16. > :49:18.The poll suggests that the public see the Tories as tough
:49:19. > :49:21.and capable, with well over half saying they are "willing to take
:49:22. > :49:32.And 44% saying they are "competent and capable",
:49:33. > :49:36.But less than a quarter think Cameron's party
:49:37. > :49:41.The good news for Ed Miliband is that people see them as
:49:42. > :49:44.well-intentioned, and standing for normal folk, with the highest number
:49:45. > :49:47.saying that Labour "wants to help ordinary people get on in life."
:49:48. > :49:52.And the majority saying, "its heart is in the right place."
:49:53. > :49:55.But there's trouble at the top for the red camp,
:49:56. > :49:59.with less than a third saying the party "has a good team of leaders."
:50:00. > :50:02.The Lib Dems are also all heart, according to this survey.
:50:03. > :50:06.But only around a fifth think they are up to the job.
:50:07. > :50:10.And there is a trust problem, with even fewer saying Clegg's
:50:11. > :50:22.Nigel Farage's popular touch means that 35% say he is on their side.
:50:23. > :50:26.But the party may be divisive with less than a quarter saying UKIP
:50:27. > :50:31.And again, only 23% say that UKIP is "competent and capable."
:50:32. > :50:38.And Lawrence Stellings of Populus joins me now.
:50:39. > :50:45.Let us talk about those polls, what are the headlines?
:50:46. > :50:49.A picture of two different halves. The Conservatives have a good score
:50:50. > :50:53.for the hard measures. Good team leaders, competent, capable, taking
:50:54. > :50:59.the right decisions. Labour have done well on the softer
:51:00. > :51:05.measures, fairness, understanding concerns, sharing normal people's
:51:06. > :51:11.views. Are you surprised by those results?
:51:12. > :51:15.Not to a huge extent. Labour spent a lot of time talking about the cost
:51:16. > :51:19.of living crisis, building one nation. The Conservatives, as the
:51:20. > :51:25.government party, it is easier to be seen as a party that is good at
:51:26. > :51:32.governing, making tough decisions. When we talked to ordinary voters,
:51:33. > :51:37.there was evidence Labour do enjoy an advantage as well.
:51:38. > :51:46.What are the different segments of the electorate saying?
:51:47. > :51:58.Traditional Conservative voters have given UKIP excellent scores. We see
:51:59. > :52:04.the same with hard-pressed anxiety, a group of voters who have struggled
:52:05. > :52:10.with the economy, feel left out they are giving UKIP good schools.
:52:11. > :52:15.But people like the cosmopolitan critics, traditionally Liberal
:52:16. > :52:22.Democrats, labour, younger and more urban, they have given tough scores.
:52:23. > :52:27.And the largest group sitting in the middle, the swing voters, their vote
:52:28. > :52:32.is split between the parties. With a year to the election, it is
:52:33. > :52:42.interesting this group cannot make up their mind.
:52:43. > :52:50.Looking at polls in general, basing to be rather erratic, two have put
:52:51. > :52:55.the Tories ahead, one has put UKIP third, whereas the majority had put
:52:56. > :53:00.UKIP at the top or second, with Labour just behind. What is going on
:53:01. > :53:05.here? The European election is very difficult to call, most people do
:53:06. > :53:08.not vote, and my colleagues, you have to try to conduct polls for
:53:09. > :53:12.people who do not know what the European elections are about, when
:53:13. > :53:16.they are, or how the voting system works. There is an awful lot of
:53:17. > :53:22.interpretation to do for those polls. Thank you very much, we are
:53:23. > :53:25.joined now by Tim Aker of UKIP. Before we come to you, the
:53:26. > :53:29.information we have just been looking at, the verdict from this
:53:30. > :53:38.poll is broadly, Labour, nice people, badly led, a fair summary?
:53:39. > :53:42.No, because the verdict is... The verdict is actually that we are on
:53:43. > :53:46.the side of ordinary people. I have said that, but leadership is down.
:53:47. > :53:51.One in five young people are unemployed, we are on their side. 4
:53:52. > :53:58.million people renting in Britain, Ed was talking about rent. 5 million
:53:59. > :54:01.people on low wages, Ed was talking about them, we are on their side.
:54:02. > :54:08.That has got to be good. I grant you, that is good, but that is the
:54:09. > :54:12.problem for you, you seem like the nasty party still. I would not go
:54:13. > :54:17.that far. There is an issue of perceptions being on your side, but
:54:18. > :54:19.what is really encouraging is you need to show leadership and
:54:20. > :54:23.competence, and you need the right plan to make sure that those people,
:54:24. > :54:32.whether you are on their side or not, going in right direction. All
:54:33. > :54:35.these polls showed that, actually, people have agreed that we have done
:54:36. > :54:39.the right thing and got the right team leading the country. That is
:54:40. > :54:44.what leadership in politics is all about. It is always the case for
:54:45. > :54:49.opposition that, out with of an election, it is hard to get the
:54:50. > :54:55.visibility that you want, particularly for shadow members of
:54:56. > :54:59.the Cabinet. As we get closer, and we are seeing now week after week
:55:00. > :55:03.new announcements, and you see members of the Shadow Cabinet
:55:04. > :55:09.getting that in, people start to focus. And your ratings come down!
:55:10. > :55:13.For you, it doesn't make great reading, only a fifth consider it
:55:14. > :55:18.you confidence or trust you to keep your promises. If you look at our
:55:19. > :55:22.score in terms of representing ordinary people, if you look at the
:55:23. > :55:26.score in terms of covering the whole of the country, actually, we have
:55:27. > :55:30.got quite high poll ratings, slightly ahead of the Conservative
:55:31. > :55:34.Party. We can take some comfort there. I think there are some
:55:35. > :55:38.strange things there. The Conservative Party does well in
:55:39. > :55:40.terms of being able to take our decisions, and of course we have
:55:41. > :55:47.shared with those decisions but our poll rating seems to be lower. I am
:55:48. > :55:51.not reading too much into that. You would if they were better! Tim Aker,
:55:52. > :55:57.broadly, UKIP seem to have combined the worst attributes of both the Lib
:55:58. > :56:01.Dems and the Tories, divisive and unrepresentative, incompetent and
:56:02. > :56:05.incapable. And leading in the polls! That last segment, I found that
:56:06. > :56:10.outrageous. You should all be the same, sniping. Your election
:56:11. > :56:14.campaign does not even mentioned the EU, the fact that you are signed up
:56:15. > :56:18.to the whole project, that you will not give us a referendum. For the
:56:19. > :56:24.Liberal Democrats to say anything to do with trust after tuition fees, we
:56:25. > :56:28.know exactly where you stand, the public knows. Nick Clegg got
:56:29. > :56:32.trounced in those debates. We are actually talking to people about the
:56:33. > :56:36.issues that they care about, and in some areas where people are hard
:56:37. > :56:40.pressed, feeling the pain, they are coming to us and not to Labour.
:56:41. > :56:45.David Lammy says Nigel Farage is racist, what do you say to that?
:56:46. > :56:52.Absolute nonsense. How is he not racist with relation to Romanians?
:56:53. > :56:59.We have got a problem with an open door to the other 27 countries of
:57:00. > :57:06.the European Union union. Why is it OK for an open door for Nigel
:57:07. > :57:11.Farage's wife, but not for the Romanian that comes here? We are
:57:12. > :57:17.talking about criminals. Do you want an open door to criminals?! Criminal
:57:18. > :57:21.gangs? Absolutely not! We have said that we want a system like
:57:22. > :57:25.Australia, where they decide who comes in and who doesn't. You are
:57:26. > :57:31.happy for an open door, and for Labour to say anything about
:57:32. > :57:35.immigration is atrocious. Should we call back the thousands of Brits in
:57:36. > :57:39.Spain at the moment? Should we call them back to this country? The Brits
:57:40. > :57:44.in France, come back to Britain, should we be doing that? Why don't
:57:45. > :57:49.we have a sensible relationship? That is a matter for the French
:57:50. > :57:54.government. What is the difference, in your mind, between the group of
:57:55. > :58:02.Romanians and a group of Germans? Nigel clarified its today, it is a
:58:03. > :58:08.matter... No, we are not racist. We are not racist, but 92% of cash
:58:09. > :58:12.machines... This would be a foreign land if Labour took over, where was
:58:13. > :58:18.all the criticism then. What is the difference between the
:58:19. > :58:22.remaining is moving in... The quote is about a group of Romanian men
:58:23. > :58:28.moving in, it is about community spirit. The rates of immigration
:58:29. > :58:31.over the past ten years, over the past ten years have seen communities
:58:32. > :58:35.change, and people are concerned about that. Why do you think
:58:36. > :58:43.immigration has overtaken the economy as the number one issue?
:58:44. > :58:49.Would you like a group of Ukrainian tent are moving in? I don't judge
:58:50. > :58:50.them! Thank you for joining us. The one o'clock news is starting an BBC
:58:51. > :59:10.One, I will be back tomorrow, bye. A new era blooms
:59:11. > :59:14.at the RHS Chelsea Flower Show, with a fresh crop of exciting
:59:15. > :59:18.young designers.