19/06/2014 Daily Politics

is still indicating that any military

The Obama administration has shown signs of frustrations with Iraq's

Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki, senior Republican Senate toe John

McCain has gone further, he has called on him to stand down, we are

joined by a Tory MP and a Kurd by origin, whose family fled Iraq when

he was nine, welcome. There was a lot of talk in PMQs that

Mr Maliki has to build an inclusive Government. He has to bring more

people in, and reach out. It is all too late for that. They are killing

each other. I think it is right for you to be sceptical, he has had

eight years to try and bring everyone together and said, instead

he hasn't been divisive, sectarian, which has led to the situation we

find ourselves in today, because ISIS is actually a relatively small

group of extremists, terrorist criminals, but they are effectively

being able to operate because some of the Sunni tribes were so fed up

for being disenfranchised by Baghdad, that they got to a police

where they would rather have evil people round than Nouri Al-Maliki.

In Baghdad yesterday of all the political leaders. It is right for

David Cameron and President Obama to say that they have too great an

inclusive government. It sounds like you were talking about Islington

council but you are not, it is Baghdad. It is over for that. Why

would suggest that what Mr Cameron says is irrelevant. Even what Mr

Obama says, it does not matter too much. The man he is worried about

was President Rouhani. He is a Rand's man. -- Iran. And the site

and beside him is the head of the rainy and Revolutionary guard with a

couple of brigades behind him. That is what matters. I suspect that Iran

does not want to see Iraq Nay have secured Kirkuk, they have secured

their area, they don't need additional help. That is what he was

calling for This maybe one voice. This is the official representative

of the Kurdish army. My view is we mustn't take sides. It is not for

us... It is up to the Iraqi political leadership to come

together. They have plenty of weapon, they have bought lots of

weapons. Maliki spent several billion dollars buying weapons. They

are all with ISIS now If they come together, Shia, Sunni and Kurd. If

they don't, then the situation could be dire. What is your view on this?

My view is that the viability of Iraq as a single state, if after

eight years it can't hold three elections, we reason back to the

situation pre-Saddam, that in order for that state to exist to be

stable, it has to have a dictatorship of the most ruthless

kind. That is an extraordinarily depressing view, I must say I have

very little confidence that this sort of political reconciliation

will happen, I think it is very dangerous to take sides, not just

because you are taking sides internally, we didn't do that for

Syria, and if you are seen to do it in Iraq, it becomes hugely

difficult. I think the whole Middle East, no-one is talking about

Israel-Palestine at the moment. It is not the big issue. It is not. We

are dealing with huge humanitarian consequences in Lebanon and that

region. It's a big day for Ed Miliband,

he'll be hoping to switch the focus from his poll ratings to

Labour's policies. This morning he's been setting out

how the party thinks it's going to solve one of

its biggest challenges ahead of the election - how to offer something

different from the Conservatives but Yes, Ed Miliband is continuing to

lay his policy paving, smoothing his Sensitive to accusations that Labour

are the party of public spending, he's keen to

show he doesn't think the streets lined with gold, promising 'big

changes not big spending'. To start with they'll pull up out

of work benefits for 18-21 year olds, replacing it with

a means-tested allowance that takes into account their parents' income -

but they'll only be entitled to it Labour claim this could save

the government ?65 They're also planning to add some

extra slabs to the contributory principle in the benefits system -

the idea that the more you put in, the more you should get out.

Labour is promising to increase the contributory JSA - that's

the amount people are automatically entitled to if they have been

working - by around ?20-30 They'll fund this by increasing

the number of years you have to work before you can claim it -

from 2 to five years. Here's what he had to say

about it a short while ago. How many times have I heard people

say, I have paid into the system but one that time came and are really

needed help, I did not get anything back.

one that time came and are really needed help, I did not Rewarding

contributions were, in fact, a key in support of the Beveridge report.

And it is a key intuition from the British people of what a welfare

state would look like. But the principle has been forgotten by

governments of both parties. And we're joined now by Labour's

shadow work and pensions minister Stephen Timms,

and by Esther McVey, she's Welcome to both of you. We have been

poring over his Apostles this morning. Why are they so, the gated?

The proposals have been endorsed by Ed Miliband. Let's start with IPPR,

because our viewers will not know what that is. It is a Labour

inclined think tank? Yes. And they had come forward with some good

prose Ozil is, about the high levels of youth unemployment. -- proposals.

At the moment, unemployment was less than it was at the time of the

election and youth employment is 100,000 higher than it was at the

time of the election. Current policies are clearly not solving the

problem. We need a new approach and I think the IPPR puzzle is a big

change in the way we look after young people, keeping them in

training until they have a decent level of skills. You are shaking

your head. Youth unemployment is not higher than it was? That is the

wrong way round. It is nearly 100,000 less than it was. It is

falling consecutively. And the rates for 60 and 70... NEET rates are at

the lowest since records began, the lowest since 2005. It is a reversal

of what you have heard there. Youth employment is lower than at the

elections. People will find that out. There is youth unemployment, we

are agreed on that. Much too high. And what you were saying is that if

you are between 18 and 21, you will not get your benefit if you do not

take training? You will not get the allowance. You will get a youth

allowance and that will be conditional on you, if you are not

yet at level three, being in training. Is that a platform? It is

a level or Brad Sheppard. So unless you have some qualifications

already, you will not get this new welfare payment unless you are

prepared to get the qualifications? But if you have these qualifications

but no job, you will still get the payment? You will be on GSA. If you

have those levels of skills, or you have been in work for a year, you

will be on adult benefits. You will have to look at everybody to

determine the level of skill before they determine whether they will get

the payments? To determine what help they need in order to decide how

best to operate. And then you have to means test it? We will means test

as we do for younger people and as we do for people in higher education

at the moment. It will be means tested on the basis of parental

income. How much is that going to cost? The net cost is captivated by

IPPR as a saving of ?65 million. We will be spending more on support for

young people in further education but less on jobseeker's allowance.

Let me get this right, if you are between 18 and 21, you are now going

to have to be means tested, and you are going to have to be tested on

what your qualifications are, and depending on the qualifications, you

will then maybe get some money from the government if you take some

training? Depending on the support you need, that will depend on the

support you get. Are you saying that is not complicated? Anything can be

presented as being promulgated. This is. The reality is that there will

be a number of years were there will not be extra money to be spent so we

have to restructure within the system. And what IPPR has come up

with is a good way of doing that. A lot of this was floated last year

and you run away from it. What happened to your simpler policy to

young people? You said, if you cannot get a job, we will give you a

job but take that job or you will lose your benefits. What happens to

that? That is still in place. The job guarantee proposition, if you

have been out of work for a year, job guarantee proposition, if you

have been out of we will guarantee you the offer of a job and you will

need to take it once the offer has been made. Why not leave it there?

Cos we think we need to do more to support under 21 is to make sure

they have the skills. Why not offer them a skills arrangement? Why not

say, either take training or jobs, and we will guarantee you can have

one or the other, or you do not get benefits? We're saying to unemployed

young people, not in a job, that we will support you to get the skills

you need. We will also, after 12 months out of work, there will be

the offer under the compulsory job guarantee. What is the government

doing for these people? Obviously, a lot, because on employment has come

down. Looking at the statistics on the records from the 1960s onwards,

what they have found is really important is that the UK keeps young

people close to the labour market, whether it is jobseeker's

allowance, or whatever, from there you determine what support they

need. Is allowance, or whatever, from there

you determine it a trainee ships? That is if you have not got an NVQ

in maths or English. But we still have a lot of people who are

unemployed. What are you doing about that? We are working with business

and young individuals to see whether it is more employability skills that

people need. Not everybody needs to go through an academic route. But he

is not saying that either. They are. They are insisting it is an A-level

standard. Or an apprenticeship. Some people need to get a job with the

tactical application to see how they get career progression through that

job. What we're seeing is that providing work experience is

something that Labour was so profoundly against and that in

itself has had a huge impact. So why do we still have 900,000 people not

in education, employment or training? It has gone down to about

860,000. Near enough. I've rented it up.

training? It has gone down to about 860,000. Near enough. I've If you

take out those in full-time education, it goes down to 560,000,

so... But the NEETs does not include university students. How many of

them are there? Nearly 300,000. We have to work with them, which is why

we're doing a lot of pilots. How do we engage with young children who

have never engaged their school career? How can we say that they

will be at this level in three years? How can we engage them and

give them employability skills? How can we get them up in the morning.

It is such a long journey to get them employed and then, through

work, you will say, I would like to learn more and have more skills. I'd

get the principle. The other thing you have done to comment on this is

that if you have been in work for a longer period of time, and you are

made redundant or you lose your lose your job, -- lose your job, you

will get a higher unemployment benefits. If somebody has worked for

four years and they lose their job through no fault of their own, white

should they get less unemployment benefit than someone who has worked

for five years? If you have paid in for two years and lose your job, we

think if you are paying in for longer you should see the benefit

and the calculation... Again, you have made it complicated and I would

suggest a bit unfair. I don't think it is any more complicated than the

current system. What we want do is reward people who have paid in for a

lengthy period o time. Fife years is a good period to go for. I would

suggest that most people who this will affect will have not a clue

what this means for them. I think that is, I am not sure that is true,

because they will have a clue. You were going to say it was true! I

don't think they will understand the complexities of it and the theory

behind it and the contribution of the national insurance contribution,

and all that. They will certainly understand it when they turn up to

pick up a Giro to get their benefit and find they are not entitled, they

will certainly understand it if they are a young person who find they get

no money or they have to go on a course. What makes me slightly

anxious is that a lot of these young people who are the NEETs, you are

playing catch up. These people have not in school got some of the soft

skills about... But teaching them soft skills when they are turned off

at 17 and 18, is not a substitute for some of the preparation for life

skills that our schools are not measured against and if they are not

measured against doing it, then they don't deliver. I don't want to lose

you both but we have to move on to, stick with us, don't go away,

because I am sticking with Labour. Former Labour cab neat minister

occasionally known as the prince of darkness, he is always known as the

Prince of darkness Peter Mandelson was asked about Ed Miliband when he

appeared on Newsnight last night. I think we could say his answer wasn't

exactly helpful. What Ed is trying to do is approach politics in a

different way from the way in which Tony Blair and Knowle approached it.

Do you think it is working? It may well work, I would say to you. May?

I think he has confused the party's message to business, I think that

what he needs to do is to embrace that model of a market based

economy, where we are supported business success, but where we also

want to see a socially inclusive society, with principles of social

justice, where we are creating opportunities for people, and

leaning against inequalities in society, in everything we do. How he

has muddled the message? He places a great deal of emphasis on the last

of those position, the social justice, the fairness, the leaning

against inequality, that is right for a Labour leader to do so.

Not resoundingly supportive and when asked Lord mannedlen son didn't say

whether he thought Ed Miliband was the best possible leader, merely he

was the leader you have, stating obviously the truth there. Do you

think he is the best possible leader the party can have? He is. I was one

of the first people to nominate him as leader of the party, I do think

she the best leader he could have. I think he is doing a difficult job. I

agree with Peter about that. We are having to deal with and some very

difficult problem, the fact the average household is ?1600 a year

worse Ofcom paired with the election at a time when there isn't going to

be much public money round for the next few years. If the public was

convinced about that in opposition that is a message you could use to

bolster your support, it seems to be working in the opposite direction,

the truth is no Dott the Government will argue -- no doubt the

Government will argue, Labour is struggling to get a message across

that is going to appeal to voters. One message is clear is there isn't

a great deal of confidence in the parties that are represented in

Parliament at the moment. The Government part toirs the

opposition. That sounds like an excuse We have a big job, all of us

have a big job to do, the outcome of the next election will be determined

by voters' judgment about who has the most compelling apps to deal

with the problems like the cost of living crisis we are facing.

Interestingly, the party, Labour is doing better than the leader, and

has done pretty consistently. That is a problem and a shame, you might

argue for the Labour Party, that you have managed to get yourselves a

message as a party, but your leader is just not gaining traction. Ed is

responsible for the party's me sarntion Ed has led us to this point

-- message. They don't credit him with that We have a lot of work to

do, I am enkaurnled by the overall poll rating but we have to do

better. Today's announce it is an important part. What are his selling

points? What he is doing is repositioning the party for a period

when we have a time of austerity, when everybody is worse off than

they were in the past. Positioning is a sort of Westminster speak, if

you like, it is jar develop for u I understand what you are saying, but

what are his strengths for the voting public? Name me a couple of

his real strengths as leader? I think one of his strengths is

correctly identifying the cost Offalying crisis as the big issue

that is facing the country at the moment. I think the speech he made

at the Labour Party conference talking about the need for a more

responsible capitalism. That was a far sighted speech. I think his

announcement about the energy price freeze which no-one else suggested

was a very shrewd judgment. Those are policies. The big judgments is

his big strength. And people may or may not like those policies, but

what about him? If you are comparing him to Tony Blair and Gordon Brown,

is he better leader than them? He is operating in a different environment

from Tony Blair. If you take them in isolation as three leaders is he

better? I think what Ed is very successfully doing is making sound

judgments about the state of the country at the moment, and our

future direction, that is what I want the leader of our party to be

doing. So why do the ratings not match up? They are going down. If

you look at the European elections it is clear there is a low degree of

confidence in all the parties in Parliament. We want to address that.

Is it still true Eden Hazard been talked about in senior Tory circles

that Ed Miliband is your secret weapon in the election? At this

rate, when you are giving us the polling figures that is true. Where

I would look at it. I don't discuss it, I am discussing what I have to

do, I could give you an example in welfare, Ed Miliband and the Labour

Party has voted against every welfare change that we have done,

whether it is the overall benefits cap, everything, so they didn't watt

to do everything, they come up with an announcement which confuses the

system and saves a tiny amount of money. If I looked at what I thought

the announcement was about, it was about taking over 100,000 people off

the welfare count, because you are putting them on a traineeship, so it

is smoke and mirrors politics, not dealing with the situation. That is

what people have thought about Ed Miliband, he, it is all smoke and

mirror, you are not dealing with the core issues of the day but they will

put them on a different benefit which is off the claimant count.

Things obviously like energy prices, Labour did get traction with that,

but hang on a second, I must... It was the worse thing they could have

done, the whole of their price fell and they had to buy gas two years

ahead. Disaster for them. Your views on Ed Miliband as a leader? I think

he is not getting his message of his individual strengths and I do think

he has some strengths. What are they? I think they are honesty, I

think they are intelligence, I think he's thoughtful, and... Are your

priced the poll ratings are poor? I am... Partly surprised less

surprised because I somehow, he has never quite managed to be himself,

and create that identity with the public. I think one of the problems,

because a lot of the policy stuff is coming together and I think coming a

bit more coherent. When you cut Peter Mandelson off in his prime, he

was about to say it is the economic message, the, the how you create

that new sort of fairness, within a zero growth economy, not a score

growth, but public spending constraints. Which maybe would

probably have to stick to as well. And they have never managed to shake

off the unfair, I think, perception and Ed hasn't managed to do it,

no-one has managed to do it that Labour was to blame for the whole of

the economic crisis worldwide. Let us leave it there. Thank you. Than

do you two of you. You leave us at this stage. Whatever happened to

Lord's reform? You may remember it was a big deal in the first part of

this Parliament until the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives had

a big -- bit of a falling out. Giles has been catching up.

There have been serious attempts to reform the House of Lords for as

long as the oldest living peer who is 94 has been alive. Every attempt

has stumbled and bowed to failure or achieved a tinkering of the ermine

lined edged only. In 1997 Labour outlined with some Liberal Democrat

input the removal of most of the hereditary peer, leaving the life

peer, roles created in 1958, but apart from the Parliament Act of

1911 and these two milestones the story of Lord's reform is one of

failure and fudging. There was one man in this Parliament who thought

that was a record he could break. When you bear in mind that there are

four times as many members of the held who are over the age of 90 than

under the age of 40. House of Lords when over half are over the age of

70, you get the measure of the challenge of how much we need to

pull thefrom the 19th century into the 21st century.

In As we know, Nick Clegg's plan and dragged everyone involved down. The

real problem with Lords reform is that it is like an obstacle course

and there's a lot of obstacles. All of the parties agree they should be

reformed, and they put that in their manifestoes, but they could not

agree how much and what kind, and when they tried it, it did not work.

Then there's the problem that some of the Lords do not agree with their

own parties on reform and the Lords do not tend to vote for their own

demise. Turkeys do not fold for Christmas. Add to that, you cannot

prove that nobody cares but he can prove that lots of people care more

about other things. And one more thing... The House of Lords question

can wear people out. It is a Bermuda Triangle. Every generation, people

go into it and some never reappear. They come out battered and bruised.

They vowed never to do it again. Not everyone has, and for some, a fire

for an elected house has not died. everyone has, and for some, a fire

for an elected house has It is just the biggest offenders of the Lords

tend to be Lords. If you get my drift. This is one turkey that I

want you to know will be voting for Christmas at every possible

opportunity. One Lord thinks the big opportunity is the public replacing

the house. Perhaps suggesting amendments online or citizens juries

looking at proposed legislation. The end of the road is that we will be

able to abolish the House of Lords altogether and replace it with those

sorts of legislative improvements by the public, to use the public's

expertise and experience rather than a bunch of people like me who get

appointed for life, which is indefensible. The House of Commons

voted with clarity about the principle that it should be elected.

Now the difficulty is the detail. Ask somebody from Parliament, a

parliamentarian in the Commons or in the Lords, and everyone has a

different opinion about the detail. That is the tricky bit. But there is

more than that that is tricky. The Lords has a utilitarian purpose,

analysing legislation line by line. It contains people of white

expertise and no particular burning tribal loyalty. Yes, many of them

are old and there are hundreds of them, and all the parties keep

adding more, but one the -- 1p says he can give reasons for why it will

stay put. It is a unreformable, aside from the Grand Slam, and it

fulfils a utilitarian function. And it adds to, I think, the panache of

the British constitution. And the tourists love it. Who could want

more? The tourists love it? I will talk to my guests in a moment but

I'm going to welcome viewers in Scotland, who have been watching

first ministers questions. We are joined by one of the UKIP peers, who

used to be the party's leader. Is it unreformable? I do not think it is

unreformable. I think it is and probably should be unelectable.

Because there is this conflation between reform and election. I think

that every time you have proposals for an elected house, and Nick Clegg

was on that clip saying it was because everyone was old and had to

be thrown out, there are ways of dealing with old people which are

different from saying that we should have a bicameral system with two

elected houses. Because two elected houses in the UK, I think, would not

add to the quality of government, but caused terrible gridlock.

Malcolm Pearson, that is the will of the House of Commons, to have some

sort of elected chamber. When you come down to it, it is not, because

the House of Commons, in the end, does not want a second chamber which

is more powerful, undermining the present sovereignty of the House of

Commons. I feel that growing public disdain for the political class is

not caused by the House of Lords, so much as by the feeling that their

votes does not really count any more. And that comes, in part, from

our present system, first past the post, where only 60% of the

electorate bothered to vote and only 40% of those elect the government.

The government on the day is on 24%. I would start at the other end. This

is not UKIP policy, and we do not have a policy on this as far as I

know. I would start at the other end with the House of Commons. In fact,

if you read a debate that UKIP had in the Lords, lead by Lord

Willoughby, we suggested that the House of Commons should be reduced

only to matters of truly national interest. You not think the House of

Lords should be reduced? All the rest should be local with more

referendums. You not think the House of Lords should be smaller? It has

been stuffed full of party people. All the parties are doing it. The

Lib Dems have 98 and they will put more in. That is hardly going to

engage people with the process. And going back to your original

question, can you reform the house two act sullenly. -- can you reform

the house? Absolutely. But no one will agree how. Well, small steps.

We got a Private Members' Bill through. There is an agenda for

change about reducing the size of the house, having a retirement age.

But it is getting bigger. It is not the government's agenda for change.

Within the house itself... And cutting out those who misbehave?

Yes. Why have a Private Members' Bill to do just that. Let's talk

about representation. Three UKIP peers, is that enough? Know,

obviously. Why do you deserve more? Since he became Prime Minister,

David Cameron has put in 160 peers. Why does UKIP deserve more? At the

moment, we have three. And you had to 3.2% of the vote. The policy of

David Cameron and David Clegg -- Nick Clegg to make appointments to

the Lords, reflecting the votes cast that the previous general election,

was clearly idiotic. One of the strengths of the House of Lords is

that it does not reflect the composition of the House of Commons.

Even so... Does UKIP deserve that? Absolutely agree with Malcolm. It

was idiotic. It would have meant that we had BNP members, 16 members

of the BNP in the House of Lords... If they hadn't commented the

coalition agreement. It was barking. Keep asking questions, to which

parties that contested the last general election though the rules

apply? I think it is important that the House of Lords is not a mini me

of the House of Commons, reflecting the political balance. Very quickly,

because we're running out of time. We got 27% of the vote in the NASA

national -- last national elections. We have 0.0% of the amount in the

Lords. I have friends who say they fought UKIP. I think David Cameron

should join us. Who? Give you extra time. No names. Am I surprised? Is

that what that look says. Speaking of barking... What makes

for a good MP? A local man or woman, born and

bred who knows the name of every Or a bright young thing, hand-picked

by the party high command and Well, research published yesterday

showed more and more candidates have links to

Westminster, leading to familiar warnings that all MPs will end up

looking and sounding the same. At most elections, there's

a competition to shrug off that image and demonstrate

your local credentials. Have a look at this poor candidate

doing his best in last year's And the man

being given a hard time by our Adam Do you know which favourites soap

opera was filmed in this constituency? I do not know. I know

that Ernie, the fastest Notman of the West was set here. Benny Hill is

from Eastleigh. That is me being a politician and avoiding the

question. I'm very proud of that. Howard is way. It was filmed in

Camberwell. As you say, it is not typical of here. Good information.

Thank you. Which soap opera character nowadays do you think you

are most like? As a person? Think I am probably... Bet Lynch in

Coronation Street. Behind the pub, serving pints. The ordinary people

of Eastleigh. Is that a good? That is rubbish. Don't use that. And we

would never dream of using it. And the man

being given a hard time by our Adam there was John O'Farrell, the author

and former Labour candidate. Was it a disadvantage not having

local roots in that by-election? It was. I had a three-week campaign. It

was a very difficult time. The public forum, they would ask me

about the gravel pits and it might have been a trick question. Daihatsu

sometimes try and make up policy on the hoof. He would have some Labour

want Pazzini a phone message and saying that they were against the

gravel pits. And they had a local councillor who knew the schools and

the area well, and that counts for something. They played up that they

were the local guy and you were parachuted in from the big smoke.

Yes, indeed, although I was selected by the local party and was a local

candidate against me. I've stood in my hometown against the reason me

and that has stood as a parachuted in candidate. And in the first one,

I came third and in the second I came fourth. As a scientific

experiment... It must've been an easier campaign in Maidenhead. When

people ask you about the nonexistent gravel pit, you could tell them that

did not have one. Also, I did not get lost going around in the car.

And you bump into people you used to know and you end up canvassing the

school bully. Is he going to give me a dead leg for being tall? But you

were different from the people that are chosen because there is a

identikit now from both parties. They have usually come from

Oxbridge, straight into a think tank like the IPPR commodity policy

exchange, and they become a special adviser and then a seat is chosen

for them, and they begin to sound and look, and almost say the same

things as well. This is a problem. We have too many identikit

politicians. But when you say a seat is chosen, it is a local parties

that have a responsibility to say, actually, these candidates may not

look like my idea of an MP. This is true in the Conservative Party were

lots of women will choose a man, and think it is encouraging that the

Labour Party has a majority of candidates, but I think and take

your point, but having people from different jobs, and if you wanted a

local person, why not a headteacher, for example, who knows

the community? But they will be taking a pay cut to become an MP.

Would you try again? I do not think that will try again for an

unwinnable seat because I have done that and they do not think you want

to be an MP. You would not like it? Part of me would, but I'm quite

enjoying being a writer and coming on to talk to you with no

responsible 80s. You do not have a microchip in your brain!

Do you think you would have told of the party line? I have been told ill

-- I have been called a loose but loyal Canon. I would like the Labour

Party to win the next will not stand, to be honest. Maybe the

constituencies should dig in their heels and resist those at the Labour

high command and Tory Central office are trying to impose? Often, they

can send signals. They can, and they can speak to the Labour Party and

union leaders, and encourage them to vote for particular candidates. We

want candidates who have a certain amount of Bruce Buck, and our

hard-working. That is more important than where they live, or who they

work for. I think I would like to get a good spread of candidates, but

really we want good politicians improving the image of politicians

in this country. You worried about the kind of singing this -- sameness

of the younger generation? The nickname of, and that cannot even

remember his real name, the Tory who won in Newark, we call Tim Mr

generic because he seemed, he seemed like a generic Tory candidate.

Knowing what you are talking about is tremendously important, and that

is something being something other than politics, now, I am not in a

good place to talk about this, because I was elected very very

young, but I was temperature first constituency I fought was Enoch

Powell's constituency, it was lovely because my dads was a dentist. -- my

dad was a dentist. But there, because Enoch Powell was such a

figure and the Labour Party had hopeless sort of organise,

organisation, I was chose bane woman member of the GMC told me, who we

need is a gimmick. And you were the gimmick. I was a 22-year-old

gimmick. On that shock news, we have to move on. Thank you, thanks John.

It is the news Westminster has been waiting for for day, forget Iraq,

the economy, what politicians and hacks really wanted to know was who

was going to be the new chairman of the Health Select Committee? After a

knife-edge vote the winner was announced yesterday in what can only

be described as a moment of high drama. In years to come people will

say I was there. This is how events unfolded.

Dr Sarah wall stop was elected -- Wollaston was elected chair with 226

votes. The other candidate in that round was Dr Philip Lee, who

received 195 votes. The NHS touches people's lives a million times every

36 hours. It is the most extraordinary achievement and the

most extraordinary challenge, the new Chief Executive of NHS England

has called on everyone within the NHS to think like a patient, and act

like a taxpayer. I think that the role of the Select Committee is to

ask those challenging questions, on behalf of patients and taxpayer's,

so this most cherished institution can continue to be there for all of

our constituents when they need it the most and thank you. --

taxpayers. I know as she the knowledge and the wisdom to be a

very good chair of the Health Select Committee and I wish her all the

very best. Gracious in defeat there Philip Lee and Sarah Wollaston join

us now, you are delighted Absolutely delighted. Are you spoken to Jeremy

Hunt? Yes he sent me a nice text, that was kind of him. Rumour as you

will know of people saying to backbench Conservatives don't vote

for Sarah, she is too much of a Maverick, too independent minds,

what do you say to that? What I hope to bring to this, I have had 24

years front line expense and I hope to be able to bring that experience

to the committee. My view is you have no business chairing any Select

Committee unless you are prepared to ask challenging question, in a

constructive way. But your pitch was you will be independent minded, you

won't be in the pocket of the Government, of the day, or the

medical profession. I am proud to be a Conservative. I make no bones

about that, the point is when you are in a Select Committee role, I

think that you should leave your tribal party politics behind because

you are there to do a job on behalf of patients and taxpayers, you are

holding health bodies to account. NHS England, the GMC, the regulators

and understanding how the system work, having worked within it, I

think gives you an advantage because you understand when people are not

being straight with you apart from anything else. Did you get a lot of

support from Labour MPs? I had support from across the house. I was

ahead in all the rounds, so I think it, it wasn't as naive edge as

perhaps it might be portrayed. It adds to the drama, you have been

very critical at times of the government's health policy and the

reforms and the Andrew Lansley reform, that is true isn't it? It

was constructive criticism, part of the initial outing of the bill and

make no bones about it, I had some concern, but you are not doing orjob

if you don't bring the concerns forward. I think the bill was better

after the pause to listen. Unless you express those concerns you are

not doing your job properly. You said someone had tossed a grenade

That was a miscoat. You obviously felt it wasn't the right way

certainly to go about reforming the NHS in terms of those reforms and

the upheaval. My view was that you can reorganise it, the NHS has been

reorganised so many time, when I used to teach, I gave up teaching

them the struckchur of the NHS because I knew it would have changed

by the time they qualified. Any major reorganisation risks if you

take your eye off the ball, there are many aspects to the reform I

welcome, I felt some of its aims could have been achieved in other

way, and it was my role, I think, to put some of those points forward. I

hope I put them forward in a constructive way, that would be the

way I think you should tackle these things. Do you welcome this

appointment, sorry election? Like her, you know to be elected as the

Speaker you couldn't do it on party vote. It is very, it gives you a

strength and authority, having been elected as she was and she is a

perfect example of what we were talking about before, which is

someone who has got a solid career behind them and brings that to

Parliament and works from that expertise. Let us look at the

current state of the Health Service, particularly about funding. How

worried are you about all the reports relating to the current

funding gap within the NHS, ?2 billion is the figure put round?

This is something the committee has been looking at. We are in our fifth

year of near flat funding of the NHS. That would be the case whoever

was in power. I remember the challenge being set out before I

entered Parliament, so this is a long running issue, we spent nearly

?110 billion on health but what we must be clear about is we get the

best value and address things like safety agenda, how we get the

structural changes... What the committee has found up to now is

that a lot of those have been been achieved through wage restraint, and

they haven't been sufficiently achieved with the sort of major

shift we need have in more prevention work in the NHS and have

people treated closer to home so they don't need to be in hospital in

the fist place. That will take a long time, that is the way I am sure

politics argue, but that will take time, how would you deal with the

funding gap now? That heavy lifting hasn't been done. One of the jobs

for the is Select Committee is holding those institutions to

account, saying how are we making them happen? You may have heard of

the Better Care fund, a shift into primary care and through social, how

we get care in the community, but unless we see that money putting in

place changes that people people don't have to go into hospital in

the first place, the system will be under enormous pressure. Should the

health budget be ring-fenced again? We spend about 9.4% of GDP on

health. Whoever is in power we are unlikely to see that significantly

change. What I would like to see is more ring-fencing within social care

budget, because what happens there has knock on effects on the Health

Service. Thank you. Right we are getting news of a

security alert in Westminster. A device has been found in the main

visitor centre, in Westminster Hall, near Westminster Hall the oldest

part of Parliament. Going back to medieval times with the beautiful

wooden ceiling there, MPs sit there as well as in the Commons chamber,

parts of the Westminster, the Palace of Westminster are being cleared,

the police are saying this is not a drill, this is real, but we don't

know whether that device is of importance or not. It is disrupting

things at the moment, we will keep you across that. Now, Mr Paxman has

left Newsnight and we are only on for a mere six hours a day, six days

a week, many politicians feel they don't have enough tough questions at

them, come on in. They are resorting to go in radio phone in shows so the

public can bombard them with questions on housing to whether they

have a onesie, Boris Johnson and Nick Clegg have their regular slots

on radio now Harriet Harman said she will have a go. We will talk to her

in a moment. That security alert allowing, it will have to be on the

phone. Let us look at how the politicians have got on so far.

It is Boris here from Islington, I want to ask you, when are you going

to get all those Government ministers out of their OK Olympo-s

and on to public transport. -- limos. He is not on the line. No, he

recorded it earlier. We want the opportunity to express a point of

view on behalf... I am grateful for that Bob. There is a table to be sat

round, by you and your team. We can't do it while you put a gun to

our head. When did you last buy underwear from

marks and Spencers because they have posted poor trading figures as you

may be aware. The trouble with Twitter the instantness of it is, I

think, too many twits might make a (BLEEP).

You said I forgot my anniversary and I ask you to hold that thought. We

have had a special cake and I must thank the Cake Store based in

Sydenham. The first time you appeared the final question was do

you own a onesie, you replied yes. This is to celebrate our first, you

will wish we never started this. There you are in your onesie, and I

wonder if I could ask you to cut the cake. Can Nick Clegg eat a bacon

sandwich and how will it work on the radio? One bite. I will try. Very

good! Didn't his mother tell him never to

speak but mouth full. We had hoped to be joined by Harriet Harman who

was going to the third of our national politicians to get their

own radio show but she has been detained in the Palace of

Westminster because of that security alert, so, it is down to you to talk

about this! Would you like to have your own radio show? I am not sure I

would like to have it now, because you are on television as well,

because everyone can watch you and see you. It is all done on

webcameras I used to love doing radio, because you couldn't be seen,

you got more time to talk, a little more length about things and even

when I was a minister and you had to do the Today programme at 7.30 in

the morning, it could be a dressing gown in the radio car job. You can't

do it on in sort of stuff now. Why do you think they want to do it? Why

do they think... ? I think partly they want to cut out the middle man.

They do. That is why we are against it Absolutely, I can see that. We

are Luddites when it comes to this I can see that. Back to Ed Miliband

and the sort of press that he gets. But equally, to have, to be able to

connect directly with individuals, which you can do on a phone in, I

think is sort of gold dust, it is high risk, because you can get it

very wrong. You get asked questions like have you got a onesie, what is

the answer? Me? ! God forbid! All right. Let us. I like you selected

that one from the list of questions. The other was can you eat a bacon

sandwich? That is it for today. Our thanks to our guest, the one clock

news is starting on BBC One now, but listen carefully, I am back tonight

for This Week with Michael Portillo, Diane Abbott and guests, and the

star of The Killing. Maybe she will wear one of her famous jumpers. This

is the bit we are not on BBC One because of something happening in

Brazil. We are on BBC Two after Newsnight.

See you then. Goodbye.