:00:43. > :00:54.Politics. Is the health service safe in David Cameron's hands? We will be
:00:55. > :00:59.asking, are the Government's health targets being met? Life can be a
:01:00. > :01:03.struggle but a posh education can leave you better off in the long
:01:04. > :01:11.run. Our private schools worth the DOS? The Welsh wage war on sugar.
:01:12. > :01:15.Plaid Cymru is a fizzy drinks should be taxed. We have sent the former
:01:16. > :01:28.Children's Minister, Tim Loughton, back to his childhood.
:01:29. > :01:36.Is he meant to be running the country quest might he is showing
:01:37. > :01:40.his childlike side. With us for the duration, Anthony Seldon, master of
:01:41. > :01:47.Wellington College, all-round intellectual. We don't often have
:01:48. > :01:53.those on the show. He has recently been knighted. But that does not
:01:54. > :02:00.mean we will be calling him Sir. Anyway, welcome to the programme.
:02:01. > :02:06.Thank you for having me. First today, let us look at events in the
:02:07. > :02:11.European Parliament work yesterday Nigel Farage and his band of
:02:12. > :02:15.Eurosceptic MEPs took their seats. It was like the start of a new
:02:16. > :02:22.school term. Everyone was on their best behaviour. Eager to make good
:02:23. > :02:27.friends. Not. We have seen naked militarism with the EU flag being
:02:28. > :02:32.virtually goose-step around the yard, we have seen the European
:02:33. > :02:36.anthem, and we now, the Eurosceptics, are the progressives.
:02:37. > :02:41.These two gentleman had nothing to say today. It was the usual dull
:02:42. > :02:46.looking back to a model invented 50 years ago and we are the ones that
:02:47. > :02:51.want democracy. We want nation state. We want a global future for
:02:52. > :03:02.our countries are not to be trapped inside this museum. Thank you. What
:03:03. > :03:07.are you doing here? What I heard is the speech of the Leader of the
:03:08. > :03:10.Opposition in the House of Commons. If you want to hold back kind of
:03:11. > :03:19.speech, get elected there. What are you doing here? The reason why you
:03:20. > :03:23.are speaking here is that you have enlisted continental Europeans in
:03:24. > :03:27.your group just to be able to boast as a British citizen who wants to
:03:28. > :03:31.get out of the EU, if you want to be considered as the leader of a
:03:32. > :03:38.European political group, make speeches of a European police --
:03:39. > :03:46.political leader. Thank you. I have to say, you sound like someone from
:03:47. > :03:49.the old commonest error saying, if anybody else has a different point
:03:50. > :03:55.of view, they are mentally ill or there is something wrong with them
:03:56. > :03:59.-- from the old communist era. Across the political spectrum, there
:04:00. > :04:03.are now more Eurosceptics in this parliament than ever and many of
:04:04. > :04:07.them do not subscribe to ever closer union, they do not subscribe to the
:04:08. > :04:11.flag, they do not want a European anthem. They want a modern Europe
:04:12. > :04:19.where we can trade and cooperate together and have mutual respect. Do
:04:20. > :04:25.not worry too much about my presence because within the next five years,
:04:26. > :04:30.I will not be here. All right? Well, good to see they are getting
:04:31. > :04:35.along so well. With us from Strasbourg is the UKIP MEP Nathan
:04:36. > :04:41.Gill. Welcome. All very heated in that exchange we just saw between
:04:42. > :04:43.Nigel Farage and Mr Lamberts, is this a taste of what is to come?
:04:44. > :04:48.Without a doubt. this a taste of what is to come?
:04:49. > :04:52.Without a The third of the MEPs here in the Parliament Eurosceptic or
:04:53. > :04:59.against an ever deeper union. Already in the debates yesterday, we
:05:00. > :05:06.were there and participating and thrown they did not like it. Does
:05:07. > :05:12.that mean debate will be so polarised because you have got more
:05:13. > :05:18.parties on the extremes, whether left or right, in or out, there will
:05:19. > :05:23.be no consensus? You have hit a very good point. What we have seen
:05:24. > :05:29.already is that the three federalist parties are ready starting to form
:05:30. > :05:36.one big super party. Because they have got two thirds of the MEPs,
:05:37. > :05:40.they are starting to get their own way with practically everything.
:05:41. > :05:45.There have already been stitch ups with regards to the vice
:05:46. > :05:48.presidency. We made an agreement with the Conservatives that we would
:05:49. > :05:50.vote for their candidate and they would vote for hours. The
:05:51. > :06:00.Conservatives stabbed us in the back and they went ahead and joined with
:06:01. > :06:05.the Federalists. What we are seeing is a third of the people of Europe
:06:06. > :06:09.who voted for anti-EU, anti-federalist parties they are
:06:10. > :06:14.going to be sidelined by the other parties merging together, trying to
:06:15. > :06:20.get their agenda through. Backroom deals, politics as usual. There will
:06:21. > :06:29.be people who will pose the question to you, you're taking the Brussels
:06:30. > :06:35.Eurosceptic line and you want out. What are you doing there? I am
:06:36. > :06:40.placed with my back to the EU flag. During the opening of the
:06:41. > :06:44.Parliament, we turned our backs on the national anthem. The people who
:06:45. > :06:48.voted for us want us to come here and want us to represent them in
:06:49. > :06:52.their anti-EU, anti-federalist voice. We do not want to be a part
:06:53. > :06:57.of this. We have to come here to remind the MEPs and the commission
:06:58. > :07:01.that there is a huge chunk of the British electorate who do not want
:07:02. > :07:06.this. That is our job. That is what we are going to do. Nigel Farage
:07:07. > :07:10.made the bold prediction he will not be there in five years time. Do you
:07:11. > :07:16.think he is confident of achieving it? Absolutely. I do not think any
:07:17. > :07:21.of us will be here in five years time because Britain will be out of
:07:22. > :07:27.the EU. If you really want a free and fair referendum, the only way is
:07:28. > :07:30.to vote UKIP. But UKIP MEPs elected next year so that we can be the
:07:31. > :07:42.balance of power and we can make sure whoever is in of --government,
:07:43. > :07:47.we can do that. Have you made any friends? We have made friends within
:07:48. > :07:53.our group but everyone else's avoiding us. What is your reaction,
:07:54. > :07:59.Anthony Seldon? I said politics as usual, but actually it has changed.
:08:00. > :08:06.I think Europe has changed. Europe is being driven towards an ever
:08:07. > :08:10.closer union and people in Britain and across Europe are Belling. Many
:08:11. > :08:18.people want a halfway house and maybe that is what the renegotiation
:08:19. > :08:23.can achieve -- are rebelling. It is appropriate with the Great War
:08:24. > :08:27.centenary coming up. There were two horrific world wars last century.
:08:28. > :08:31.The EU at its best as a way of bringing people together. The hope
:08:32. > :08:36.of many people and my hope is to find a renegotiation whereby there
:08:37. > :08:42.is a pan-European union, but it is not as ever closer federalist union
:08:43. > :08:57.that continental countries have been driving towards. Thank you.
:08:58. > :09:01.I will be getting straight down to the currency exchange! Now it is
:09:02. > :09:04.time for our daily quiz. Which subject is taught at Wellington
:09:05. > :09:11.College as part of its super curriculum? Hairdressing, how to be
:09:12. > :09:15.Prime Minister, happiness or Basic car mechanics? At the end of the
:09:16. > :09:21.show, I am sure Anthony will give us the correct answer. You think he
:09:22. > :09:26.will now! Private school, is it worth the
:09:27. > :09:31.money? The Social Market Foundation has been crunching the numbers to
:09:32. > :09:35.find out what it is worth. The report argues that children who
:09:36. > :09:39.attend private schools are more likely to get good A-levels, go to
:09:40. > :09:44.the most selective universities and get the top degrees. So far, so
:09:45. > :09:48.obvious. But the think tank reckons they know how much it is all worth.
:09:49. > :09:54.They argued that between the ages of 26 and 42, someone who went to an
:09:55. > :10:00.independent school will earn on average nearly ?194,000 more than
:10:01. > :10:05.someone who went to a state school. But what about other factors like a
:10:06. > :10:08.pupil's family background? Well, the think tank reckons that even when
:10:09. > :10:13.the other factors are taken into account, there is still a wage
:10:14. > :10:17.premium of nearly ?58,000. The report goes on to look at the value
:10:18. > :10:25.of the proposed open access scheme set up by the education charity The
:10:26. > :10:30.Sutton Trust. Independent school places are available on merit with
:10:31. > :10:33.parents playing a sliding scale of fees according to their means --
:10:34. > :10:36.parents paying. The Social Market Foundation estimates that if you
:10:37. > :10:42.apply the scheme to the country's top 100 schools, it will cost the
:10:43. > :10:47.government ?215 million. It would more than double the proportion of
:10:48. > :10:51.children coming from the bottom 40% of household incomes. The number of
:10:52. > :10:52.children coming from the top 10% of household incomes would roughly
:10:53. > :11:02.half. Andrew. Thanks. Bailey Bram peel --
:11:03. > :11:06.a Labour MP Ian Austin joins us. Actually, when you drill down into
:11:07. > :11:12.the figures, taking out cognitive ability and family background, the
:11:13. > :11:17.premium is only ?57,000 for going to a private school which is less than
:11:18. > :11:23.two years fees at an expensive boarding school. This would suggest
:11:24. > :11:29.it is not much great value. Well, you can cut figures up in different
:11:30. > :11:35.ways, Andrew. What is the wrong with the way I have cut it up? I think
:11:36. > :11:42.parents are very savvy. A lot of parents are choosing to send their
:11:43. > :11:45.children to independent schools, they do not have a lot of money. I
:11:46. > :11:51.do not think they would want to do it if it was not representing value
:11:52. > :11:54.for money. They could be doing it for social reasons, contacts the
:11:55. > :11:58.kids will make in later life but my point is that when you drill
:11:59. > :12:05.down... They have gone for this figure of almost 200,000, but if you
:12:06. > :12:07.take like-for-like ability and take out the importance of family
:12:08. > :12:13.background which still matters in this country, it is only about
:12:14. > :12:17.?60,000 and I would suggest you are not getting value for money. We
:12:18. > :12:23.could debate the figures. There is a much wider story here which is the
:12:24. > :12:28.continued unfairness in Britain in life prospects between those who
:12:29. > :12:33.come from the bottom quartile and those who attended dependent
:12:34. > :12:40.schools. Britain as a show is surely divided country in the developed
:12:41. > :12:47.world and that divide is static or indeed growing -- Britain is a
:12:48. > :12:52.socially divided country. I would like to go further than The Sutton
:12:53. > :12:57.Trust. Is there a huge premium? The key point is one you made in your
:12:58. > :13:03.film a few years ago is that 7% of pupils go to these schools but they
:13:04. > :13:07.occupy half of the jobs in so many professions. Our boardrooms,
:13:08. > :13:12.newsrooms, they are increasingly populated not by the brightest but
:13:13. > :13:18.by the most expensively educated. It is much worse in terms of social
:13:19. > :13:23.mobility. That is what the reporters about. That is the central issue. As
:13:24. > :13:30.a country, we can no longer afford not to exploit all of the talents
:13:31. > :13:36.and that is what we have to address. What do you make of the open access
:13:37. > :13:42.scheme? I think it is brilliant. I think it should be introduced. Would
:13:43. > :13:46.you go along with it? I would go much further. We cannot have the
:13:47. > :13:53.21st-century like the 20th century where you have 7% in independent
:13:54. > :13:57.schools and 92%... The best skate -- state schools are superb. But there
:13:58. > :14:03.is still a massive divide and I think we should go for radical
:14:04. > :14:08.solutions. We should not go for incremental is which is what the
:14:09. > :14:16.political parties are offering. What would you do? They Sutton Trust says
:14:17. > :14:21.that the top 100 days schools, entry should be open to ability and if you
:14:22. > :14:26.are very poor, the government will pay all of your fees. If you are
:14:27. > :14:30.moderately rich, it will pay some. If you are very rich, you have to
:14:31. > :14:35.pay it all. How will you go further than that? I would say the bottom
:14:36. > :14:39.25% socioeconomically in Britain go to not just the top private schools
:14:40. > :14:43.but the top state schools also. Grammar schools we know are very
:14:44. > :14:51.heavily dominated by the middle classes. It is so unfair. There are
:14:52. > :14:55.only 180 left. We have taken them out of all the poor areas. All of
:14:56. > :14:59.the grammar schools in inner cities do not exist. There are great state
:15:00. > :15:04.schools which are not grammar schools. I would reserve a quarter
:15:05. > :15:07.of places that these schools and at independent schools from those in
:15:08. > :15:12.the bottom socioeconomics section of society. I would go much further by
:15:13. > :15:16.having independent schools all starting academies, by state schools
:15:17. > :15:28.emulating the best features. What do you make of that? The situation of
:15:29. > :15:34.education in our country is critical. It is the only way we will
:15:35. > :15:41.prosper in this century. We are lagging behind with basic skills. I
:15:42. > :15:47.think we should set a target in our country. I think every school should
:15:48. > :15:55.be capable of getting 70%, 80% of kids getting five eight grades to C
:15:56. > :16:02.grades. We need more technical colleges. In Germany, they have
:16:03. > :16:07.three times as many apprentices as we do. The number of young
:16:08. > :16:11.apprentices is actually falling. Here is a question... If you make
:16:12. > :16:17.all these private schools open to ability rather than money, where are
:16:18. > :16:31.the rich, thick, posh kids going to go? The brightest ones will go on to
:16:32. > :16:36.independent schools. I am talking about the thick ones! When you leave
:16:37. > :16:42.your media career, it is a fantastic opportunity for you to make schools
:16:43. > :16:52.for the toffs. You think I am going to spend the last part of my life
:16:53. > :17:00.watching thick, posh kids. That will not happen. You should come to the
:17:01. > :17:08.open Academy and implement policies you were talking about in your film
:17:09. > :17:12.a years ago. Andrew, you would be a great head. You would be terrifying
:17:13. > :17:15.for the kids. The serious point is that none of the political parties
:17:16. > :17:19.are fundamentally addressing what Ian and I are talking about, which
:17:20. > :17:25.is the squandering of the talent of the vast number of young people, or
:17:26. > :17:31.the fact that many of them are getting just an education in GCSEs.
:17:32. > :17:34.They are not getting a rich, all-round education. They are not
:17:35. > :17:38.getting the technical education or matching sufficiently what kids have
:17:39. > :17:44.to offer to what the country needs. We need a really radical rethink,
:17:45. > :17:52.the kind of Jim Callaghan great education debate again. If it is all
:17:53. > :17:56.right to open the top 100 independent schools, to access by
:17:57. > :18:01.ability, which means people will have to be tested before they can
:18:02. > :18:04.go. It will still only affect a pretty small number of people... If
:18:05. > :18:06.you think that is right, why would you not just bring back grammar
:18:07. > :18:14.schools? I want to see excellence you not just bring back grammar
:18:15. > :18:18.schools? I want to see in the state sector. People from ordinary
:18:19. > :18:22.backgrounds getting access to independent schools. I think we
:18:23. > :18:26.should have a commission on education. Let's get rid of the
:18:27. > :18:31.political argy-bargy and set some clear priorities as a country, some
:18:32. > :18:34.long-term goals. Let's transform education and educate British
:18:35. > :18:38.youngsters and British people so we can prosper as a country in the 21st
:18:39. > :18:45.century. There is no more urgent priority than mess. Have the
:18:46. > :18:52.political parties let the country down? Yes. Education Secretary are
:18:53. > :18:57.here for two or three years. They arrived next to nothing, they make
:18:58. > :19:04.little difference and then they go. The answer about grammar schools --
:19:05. > :19:08.to the question about grammar schools, selection at 11 is too
:19:09. > :19:11.early. Countries with the best education systems have comprehensive
:19:12. > :19:16.but streams within their schools for the very bright and technical and so
:19:17. > :19:23.on. When you select kids to go to independent schools, we have run out
:19:24. > :19:27.of time. We will have to leave it there. I am looking forward to your
:19:28. > :19:31.career as a head teacher. You will be on the front row.
:19:32. > :19:33.Well, the former Children's Minister, Tim Loughton,
:19:34. > :19:35.has today produced a report for the national charity, 4Children,
:19:36. > :19:39.A child at heart, we sent Tim to his favourite
:19:40. > :20:03.Childhood is an adventure and there are aspects of modern life which
:20:04. > :20:06.would make it even more exciting. With that excitement goes
:20:07. > :20:11.challenges, the challenges of 24-hour social media, peer pressure
:20:12. > :20:16.to fit in and achieve or just be cool and the sexualisation of
:20:17. > :20:22.childhood as well. Recent reports revealed that out of every 30
:20:23. > :20:25.16-year-olds, ten will have seen parents divorce, three will have a
:20:26. > :20:29.serious mental health problem and eight will have experienced serious
:20:30. > :20:33.physical violence. Over the last ten years, the number of children with
:20:34. > :20:41.sexually transmitted diseases dashed children Dash has more than doubled.
:20:42. > :20:50.-- sexually transmitted diseases, children, has more than doubled.
:20:51. > :20:54.There has been lawlessness and riots. Kids lucky enough to be
:20:55. > :20:56.brought up by two married parents have the very best start in life and
:20:57. > :21:19.the distinct advantage. The state needs to support marriage
:21:20. > :21:24.by enabling promoting family life, not by supplanting it. The influence
:21:25. > :21:29.of the anti-smacking brigade, the obesity police and excessive CRB
:21:30. > :21:32.checks have led many mums and dads to question their own role and
:21:33. > :21:37.ability to parenting in the first place. The state should be stepping
:21:38. > :21:42.in with relationship support if things get sticky amongst families.
:21:43. > :21:47.If older kids get off the rails, the state must be there to support at an
:21:48. > :21:54.early stage before the family slipped into crisis. Here we go,
:21:55. > :21:58.one, two, three! If parents split, we need to make sure that children
:21:59. > :22:02.are absolutely put first and dads do not get frozen out of their
:22:03. > :22:07.relationship. Sometimes that may involve the courts. In many cases,
:22:08. > :22:14.we need to make sure that children centres and schools are not becoming
:22:15. > :22:15.to mother centric. Children need their parents. The state, which
:22:16. > :22:18.usually makes for a lousy parent would need to enable and support
:22:19. > :22:20.mums and that's to do the very best job they can, the hardest, but the
:22:21. > :22:24.best job in the world. And king of the zip wire, Tim
:22:25. > :22:37.Loughton joins us now. I want danger money next time. There
:22:38. > :22:42.was a contradiction in what you are saying. On the one hand he
:22:43. > :22:45.criticised the nanny state for paternalistic regulation but on the
:22:46. > :22:50.other hand you want the state to be involved in terms of promoting
:22:51. > :22:54.marriage. Surely that is the nanny state as well. Married couples and
:22:55. > :22:57.families they bring up the most independent. They tend to do a
:22:58. > :23:03.better job. That is not about denigrating people who tried to do
:23:04. > :23:07.the very difficult job of bringing up kids. We have got to the stage
:23:08. > :23:12.with good parents have to second-guess that they are supposed
:23:13. > :23:15.to do is to be seen as good parents by the
:23:16. > :23:18.to do is to be seen as good parents brigade, you're living in fear if
:23:19. > :23:23.you give your kids the wrong food, you are going to have a knock on the
:23:24. > :23:28.door. Other parents had advocated responsibility to the state. I think
:23:29. > :23:31.we have got to recalibrate the balance between what parents should
:23:32. > :23:35.be doing and everything starts at home and what the state should be
:23:36. > :23:39.doing when things start to go wrong. Did you want the state to be more
:23:40. > :23:46.involved? You would like them to step in with help. Do you want them
:23:47. > :23:51.to draw back? I want the state to be there to support, not to supplant,
:23:52. > :23:54.parents. When things do go wrong and they need advice and help, they can
:23:55. > :23:58.be signposted in the right direction and get that support from the state.
:23:59. > :24:01.We need to trust and give confidence back to parents that they are the
:24:02. > :24:05.ones primarily responsible for bringing up children. It is not all
:24:06. > :24:10.down to schools, the social workers or the doctors. Parents are the most
:24:11. > :24:15.important people. Do you agree with Tim about marriage? Somehow, in a
:24:16. > :24:26.married household, it provides a more stable home than any other.
:24:27. > :24:28.Yes. Evidence would tend to suggest that. Not every child will have
:24:29. > :24:31.that. A lot of marriages are breaking down. I think children,
:24:32. > :24:35.above all, need love. They need stability. They also need frontiers
:24:36. > :24:39.and clear boundaries. They need the steadiness and continuity of a
:24:40. > :24:43.loving home. I certainly agree that the home is much more important than
:24:44. > :24:48.the school in giving a child a sense of self worth and stability and a
:24:49. > :24:56.sense of identity as to who they are. They need that continuity. Are
:24:57. > :25:01.two parents better than one? Is that the same for same-sex couples?
:25:02. > :25:05.Absolutely. If you are a five-year-old child at home with two
:25:06. > :25:09.parents, there is a one in ten chance they will split up if they
:25:10. > :25:12.are married parents but a one in three chance they will split up if
:25:13. > :25:15.they are not married. I am not trying to being alive is parents who
:25:16. > :25:19.are not lucky enough to be in that position, I am just trying to say
:25:20. > :25:25.the very best start in life are kids is when that child has the love and
:25:26. > :25:30.intention -- and attention and involvement of both parents. White
:25:31. > :25:40.agree also heard about the herd mentality leading to the riots. --
:25:41. > :25:44.you also heard. Where were the parents when there were 13-year-olds
:25:45. > :25:49.and 14-year-olds smashing their way into shops in the middle of the
:25:50. > :25:54.night? Those kids need to take responsibility. We need to make sure
:25:55. > :25:59.the police are doing their job. Why were parents allowing them to be out
:26:00. > :26:02.in the first place question if parents cannot exercise authority,
:26:03. > :26:06.that is when the state can help give them the support for single parents.
:26:07. > :26:10.The impact of technology on children, something I worry about
:26:11. > :26:16.all the time and lots of my peer group, in terms of screen time, time
:26:17. > :26:23.on computers, is it a good or bad thing? It is both. It is an amazing,
:26:24. > :26:30.liberating joy for young people to experience the whole world and
:26:31. > :26:33.universe on screen and the collectivity between young people
:26:34. > :26:43.everywhere. It also can be an incredible evil. Clearly, as we
:26:44. > :26:48.know, with predators. It can be a distraction from reading books,
:26:49. > :26:52.sitting down with family and talking over males with brothers and
:26:53. > :26:58.sisters. It is both. It is neutral. We had to teach how to use it,
:26:59. > :27:04.rather than be used by it. ) you are prepared to embrace it. Would you
:27:05. > :27:11.like to see more of it used educationally? -- you are prepared
:27:12. > :27:15.to embrace it. Compare computer games to the drudgery in some
:27:16. > :27:20.classrooms, if we could use those approaches to animate and excite
:27:21. > :27:26.young people, in a good way that opens up their minds and
:27:27. > :27:30.understandings, that is fabulous. It has led to people not just spending
:27:31. > :27:35.too much time at the screen but an over sexualisation of children. Sky
:27:36. > :27:40.that is a big challenge. We have lots of programmes about how we
:27:41. > :27:55.avoid children having access to adult material on the internet.
:27:56. > :28:03.Actually, social media and sexting, that should not be happening. People
:28:04. > :28:07.have been driven to self harm and, in some cases, suicide. We need to
:28:08. > :28:16.tell kids that social media is a great tool but it needs to be used
:28:17. > :28:20.responsibly because it can be dangerous. Are you shocked by the
:28:21. > :28:24.scale of what has been revealed through investigations like Jimmy
:28:25. > :28:36.Savile, Cyril Smith? We could go on and on. Who could not be shocked?
:28:37. > :28:45.Even the most hard-nosed child protection official could not have
:28:46. > :28:49.been affected. Some of the stuff that has been coming out is deeply
:28:50. > :29:00.troubling. The problem I have, all the good work this Gutman has been
:29:01. > :29:02.doing on child protection, really improving the safeguarding of
:29:03. > :29:12.children, there are historic cases which are coming up weekly. They
:29:13. > :29:18.need to get to the bottom of it. Was there a cover-up? Should people
:29:19. > :29:22.still be brought to justice? To make sure from those lessons that we get
:29:23. > :29:25.it child protection policy in 2014 which is fit for purpose for our
:29:26. > :29:27.kids in a technological age which is fit for purpose for our
:29:28. > :29:35.kids in a technological and is being properly followed. Education has
:29:36. > :29:40.also been part of some of these investigations. Of course. There
:29:41. > :29:48.have been some appalling cases of abuse of power over helpless
:29:49. > :29:53.children. We have to move on. We have to ensure that nothing like
:29:54. > :29:58.that is happening today and that schools have the best possible
:29:59. > :30:03.systems in place. It is about respecting people and helping them
:30:04. > :30:07.to respect themselves, which is the point about sexting. It is about how
:30:08. > :30:11.neutral digitalisation is. It can be a great force for good and evil.
:30:12. > :30:18.Schools and parents need to do more to educate young people and to use
:30:19. > :30:23.it well. PMQs was a feisty affair yesterday. There was a
:30:24. > :30:29.statistician's dream exchange. Or not. Look at this. Can he tell us
:30:30. > :30:32.whether the number of people having to wait more than the guaranteed two
:30:33. > :30:38.months for cancer treatment has got better? The number of people being
:30:39. > :30:43.treated for cancer has gone up by 50% and we are meeting the kid
:30:44. > :30:49.waiting time target, particularly the waiting time target for accident
:30:50. > :30:52.and emergency. -- the key waiting time targets. We introduced for the
:30:53. > :30:59.first time ever a Cancer Drugs Fund which is treating 50,000 people. The
:31:00. > :31:03.in the four years since the reorganisation, have the number of
:31:04. > :31:08.people waiting more than the guaranteed four hours in A got
:31:09. > :31:13.better or worse? The average waiting time when the shadow Secretary of
:31:14. > :31:17.State was Secretary of State was 77 minutes. Under this government, it
:31:18. > :31:23.is 30 minutes. He asked me to defend my record over the last four years.
:31:24. > :31:31.I will. There are 7000 more doctors, 4000 more nurses, over 1000
:31:32. > :31:35.more midwives. We are treating over 1 million more patients a year.
:31:36. > :31:41.Before his reorganisation, the number of people waiting more than
:31:42. > :31:51.four hours was 353 and after his reorganisation it has risen to
:31:52. > :31:54.939,000 -- 353,000. In million more patients treated, a Cancer Drugs
:31:55. > :31:58.Fund for the first time, more doctors, more nurses, more
:31:59. > :32:00.midwives, more people being treated. And it is official, the best NHS in
:32:01. > :32:08.the world. That was yesterday. And it is official, the best NHS in
:32:09. > :32:11.like ships passing in the night. The Leader of the Opposition gave one
:32:12. > :32:16.set of statistics and the Prime Minister replied with a different
:32:17. > :32:20.set of statistics using different parameters. Richard Murray, director
:32:21. > :32:25.of policy at The King's Fund. Let us see if he can shed light on it. What
:32:26. > :32:32.are best metrics by which to judge the performance of the health
:32:33. > :32:35.service? There are a number. The key ones are those in the NHS
:32:36. > :32:41.Constitution and those were debated yesterday around waiting time in
:32:42. > :32:45.accident and emergency, waiting time for routine operations, and waiting
:32:46. > :32:48.times for cancer. These are processed targets, about how long
:32:49. > :32:53.you wait. We would also like to know about how well people are treated
:32:54. > :32:58.but the data is not available. In terms of waiting times, in the
:32:59. > :33:05.round, how is the health service performing? Are things getting
:33:06. > :33:09.better or worse? Until quite recently, performance was holding up
:33:10. > :33:13.well, particular considering the health service has had no real term
:33:14. > :33:16.increase in funding since 2010. It was looking pretty good. What we
:33:17. > :33:22.have seen now are the beginnings of cracks in the service. A has had a
:33:23. > :33:25.very difficult spring which is unusual. Normally spring is the time
:33:26. > :33:31.it does quite well. We have seen the 18 week target for hip replacements
:33:32. > :33:34.and how long people wait for cataracts and routine operations,
:33:35. > :33:38.that was broken in February and March. It has just been caught back
:33:39. > :33:42.now. The waiting time for cancer as well was broken for the first time.
:33:43. > :33:48.But only just. None of these are catastrophic. Quite marginal. If you
:33:49. > :33:52.add them up, they begin to be more significant. A number of cracks
:33:53. > :33:55.across the system. Each one on its own probably isn't that great. The
:33:56. > :34:02.elephant in the room is the money. The money seems to be deteriorating.
:34:03. > :34:07.But that was not discussed yesterday. Thank you very much. With
:34:08. > :34:11.us now is the Health Minister, Dan Poulter, and the Shadow Health
:34:12. > :34:16.Secretary, Andy Burnham. Welcome. Andy Burnham, let me come to you
:34:17. > :34:21.first. Labour is very critical of the Government's handling of the
:34:22. > :34:26.health service. What is the most important fact you can give us that
:34:27. > :34:33.sums up your case that things are getting a lot worse? A is the
:34:34. > :34:37.barometer of the whole health and care system. If there is a problem
:34:38. > :34:42.anywhere in the system, in social care or general practice, in the
:34:43. > :34:48.end, it tells in pressure in A We are coming up to the point soon, in
:34:49. > :34:51.a couple of weeks, when hospital A will have missed the
:34:52. > :34:57.Government's own target for a whole year put up could you remind us what
:34:58. > :35:01.the target is. They lowered it. The use to be 98% of patients would be
:35:02. > :35:06.seen within four hours. The current government lowered it to 95. They
:35:07. > :35:12.had an argument for doing it. They are not even hitting the lowered
:35:13. > :35:16.target. The A target is the barometer and it is telling us that
:35:17. > :35:20.there are severe storms ahead for the NHS. As Richard Murray said, the
:35:21. > :35:26.cracks are appearing under the Government is not getting a grip on
:35:27. > :35:35.it. What do you say to that? The health service has faced challenges,
:35:36. > :35:41.and -- an ageing population. Would you answer his point? We have not
:35:42. > :35:46.got all day. We have a lot of patients getting older, we have
:35:47. > :35:51.increasing patient demand of the NHS, the health service is bearing
:35:52. > :35:54.up and treating people very well. We have very good patient outcomes and
:35:55. > :35:58.people are experiencing very good standards of care. In terms of
:35:59. > :36:02.looking at a tee, it is the case there is a direct comparison the
:36:03. > :36:05.public can make between how a conservative led government is
:36:06. > :36:10.delivering A services compared to a Welsh administration in Wales. In
:36:11. > :36:13.this country, we have found we are making sure 95% of patients are
:36:14. > :36:20.being treated on the whole in a timely manner. In Wales... Hold on.
:36:21. > :36:24.Forgive me. The Prime Minister talks about Wales every week and I am sure
:36:25. > :36:27.at some stage we will come back to Wales. Let us stick with what you
:36:28. > :36:34.are responsible for. Are you telling us you are hitting your 95% target
:36:35. > :36:43.of 95% of people who go to A being seen in under four hours? We have
:36:44. > :36:51.been doing that consistently. We haven't. We had a difficult winter
:36:52. > :36:58.the winter before. Sometimes A can have difficulties. Let me bring in
:36:59. > :37:02.Andy Burnham. That is not right what the minister said. They have hit the
:37:03. > :37:11.target is some weeks but the NHS as a whole has listed in recent weeks.
:37:12. > :37:16.Hospital iron tees, the A target as a whole includes walk-in centres,
:37:17. > :37:24.if you look at hospital A, they have not hit the Government's target
:37:25. > :37:33.for 15 league 50 weeks. The minister did not answer that -- for 50 weeks.
:37:34. > :37:40.What is your answer? We have trying to look for a crisis in A I am my
:37:41. > :37:40.doctor and I still work in the NHS and I know the
:37:41. > :37:46.doctor and I still work in the NHS and I know NHS is coping very well.
:37:47. > :37:50.This is beginning to get a little bit like Prime Minister's Questions.
:37:51. > :37:54.Andy Burnham is making points and you are answering with different
:37:55. > :38:01.points that are not germane to the point he has made. Let us confront
:38:02. > :38:05.this. In hospital A, have you failed to meet your target for a
:38:06. > :38:11.long time now? It is not the case we are struggling to meet the target.
:38:12. > :38:16.You cannot look at A in isolation. Is to use me, minister I am looking
:38:17. > :38:21.at it in isolation and I am asking you one more time. Have you failed
:38:22. > :38:29.to meet your A hospital target for a long time? There are some weeks
:38:30. > :38:34.when hospitals fail to meet targets. Consistently, we have been meeting
:38:35. > :38:41.targets broadly. We will have to move on. Andy Burnham's response. It
:38:42. > :38:48.is just not true. They have been missing the target in hospital A
:38:49. > :38:52.for nearly a year. The question is a while? Nobody wants this trading
:38:53. > :38:57.statistics. What is happening to people's real experience of the
:38:58. > :39:02.NHS? People are finding it harder to get GP appointments. They do not
:39:03. > :39:07.have support in the home anymore. That is what is driving people to
:39:08. > :39:11.A in greater numbers. The reason why the system is under such
:39:12. > :39:15.pressure is because people cannot be discharged home from hospital
:39:16. > :39:21.because the social care has been cut. This is mismanagement of the
:39:22. > :39:27.NHS on a pretty grand scale. It all goes back to the reorganisation they
:39:28. > :39:31.said they would never have. No top-down reorganisation, remember?
:39:32. > :39:35.It through the NHS into chaos when it most needed stability. The NHS
:39:36. > :39:41.has been going downhill on their watch. This is what Ed Miliband
:39:42. > :39:46.pointed out yesterday. You say that, Andy Burnham, and it is clear that
:39:47. > :39:52.you can see some cracks developing, but the latest report from the fund
:39:53. > :39:58.says that despite no real rise in spending, on key performance
:39:59. > :40:02.measures, the NHS has provided services to a growing population and
:40:03. > :40:09.maintain the quality of these services. Things may not be as good
:40:10. > :40:14.as they should be, but according to The King's Fund, it is not a crisis.
:40:15. > :40:19.Not yet, anyway. What I said was that the NHS has been going downhill
:40:20. > :40:23.on their watch. I think the figures will tell you that. Let us look at
:40:24. > :40:26.the overall figure. Public satisfaction was around 70% when we
:40:27. > :40:33.left government. It is around 60% today. The service is heading in the
:40:34. > :40:36.wrong direction. That is what people's experience is telling us.
:40:37. > :40:43.Crucially, Ed Miliband laid out a series of issues yesterday. Cancer
:40:44. > :40:46.treatment, people are now waiting longer to start cancer treatment.
:40:47. > :40:51.The government has missed for the first time as Richard Murray said
:40:52. > :40:59.its cancer target. All right. He needs to have a say now, Ian Poulter
:41:00. > :41:03.-- Dan Poulter. What matters is patient experience. Over the last
:41:04. > :41:08.four years, there are 35,000 more people being treated for cancer than
:41:09. > :41:11.before. 50,000 people now have access to cancer drugs they would
:41:12. > :41:15.not have had under the previous government. These are things that
:41:16. > :41:19.are improving the care and changing the lives of patients. We have
:41:20. > :41:23.introduced a friends and family test to get direct feedback on the
:41:24. > :41:27.quality of care they receive helping to improve services. As The King's
:41:28. > :41:31.Fund said, yes, there are always going to be pressures on the NHS,
:41:32. > :41:37.but the quality of care and patient experience remains good. The Labour
:41:38. > :41:44.Party are grasping at straws. The King's Labour that there is a
:41:45. > :41:49.crisis. It says the quality of the service has been maintained, but it
:41:50. > :41:54.goes on to say it is deeply pessimistic about 2015-16 when you
:41:55. > :42:00.will run out of money. It says there is a risk... It does not agree there
:42:01. > :42:04.is a crisis now, but it sees a crisis coming. Andy Burnham is a
:42:05. > :42:10.professional politician. I work as a doctor and I see the quality of care
:42:11. > :42:14.being delivered. What is your point about 2015? Are we going to have the
:42:15. > :42:18.money in the system to deliver the care? Every year during this
:42:19. > :42:23.Parliament, we have made ?4 billion worth of efficiency savings, not
:42:24. > :42:38.cuts, to free up more money. Can I come into this? Yes. The minister...
:42:39. > :42:42.All right. Andy Burnham, can the league I don't see you can complain
:42:43. > :42:50.about not having your site and I don't thing you can complain. He has
:42:51. > :42:55.done a good job of moving the goalposts. The Government will not
:42:56. > :43:00.answer about the main indicators. I know what it is like on the walls.
:43:01. > :43:04.The Prime Minister did this yesterday. He did not answer one of
:43:05. > :43:10.Ed Miliband's questions. That is what Dan Poulter is doing. The
:43:11. > :43:20.reason the money is such a problem is because... Hang on. There is no
:43:21. > :43:24.point both of you talking. Let Andy Burnham finishes pointers. The
:43:25. > :43:29.reason the money is such a problem is because the Government has frozen
:43:30. > :43:35.the NHS will stop from within that, they have wasted ?3 billion on a
:43:36. > :43:41.reorganisation that nobody wanted. They have given 6-figure payoffs to
:43:42. > :43:45.managers who have since been re-employed in the NHS. The money
:43:46. > :43:50.has come from general practice and mental health and it has put the NHS
:43:51. > :43:56.in a dangerous position. We are way over but for fairness sake, your
:43:57. > :44:02.final point, briefly. I work in the NHS and I see patients receiving
:44:03. > :44:06.good care thanks to as trusting doctors and nurses and we have made
:44:07. > :44:10.efficiency savings and it has meant more money has been freed up for
:44:11. > :44:14.patient care by reducing administrators. We have 14,000 more
:44:15. > :44:19.clinical staff delivering care. It is wrong for Labour to look at
:44:20. > :44:23.trying to grasp at straws and create a crisis. The Conservative run NHS
:44:24. > :44:28.in England delivers much better cared... I did say briefly. You are
:44:29. > :44:33.now taking advantage. Andy Burnham, Dan Poulter, we will have to leave
:44:34. > :44:37.it. It was better than the exchange in PMQs, I thought.
:44:38. > :44:40.Last week we were told we should ban fizzy drinks from the dinner table.
:44:41. > :44:44.Health professionals say they should be banned from schools. In Wales,
:44:45. > :44:49.Plaid Cymru say they will campaign for a tax on fizzy drinks when
:44:50. > :44:54.eventually the Welsh Assembly gets tax-raising powers. Joining us is
:44:55. > :44:58.Hwyell Williams, Plaid Cymru's Westminster health spokesman, and
:44:59. > :45:00.Gavin Partington, from the British soft drink 's Association. Hwyell
:45:01. > :45:08.Williams, are you not just jumping on the latest dietary public enemy
:45:09. > :45:13.number one bandwagon? No. We published this last year and have
:45:14. > :45:16.followed it up with careful studies as to the potential effects. Also
:45:17. > :45:21.what we could do with any money raised. It's been a policy we have
:45:22. > :45:26.had for some time and I'm glad to see others are agreeing with us.
:45:27. > :45:30.What would you do with the money? We'd like to employ more doctors in
:45:31. > :45:35.Wales. We have a crisis in general practice and hospital doctors for
:45:36. > :45:39.that matter, so we would use the money specifically to employ more
:45:40. > :45:43.doctors. It's true at the moment isn't it that we have had so much
:45:44. > :45:47.publicity that sugar is public enemy number one, particularly for
:45:48. > :45:50.children, all the fruit and fizzy drinks really are doing substantial
:45:51. > :45:56.damage? We have to make a deaf Rennes shakes here Jo between the
:45:57. > :46:01.facts -- differentiation between the facts and the campaigning. Obesity
:46:02. > :46:05.is a complicated problem stemming from a whole range of factors and
:46:06. > :46:09.cannot be attributed to one predict, let alone one ingredient like sugar.
:46:10. > :46:14.The fact of the matter is, if you look at the international experience
:46:15. > :46:18.where tax on soft drinks has been trying to stay in France, where
:46:19. > :46:21.sales dipped initially, subsequent increases have increased by 6% in
:46:22. > :46:26.the first four months, so it's not clear to me that a tax on soft
:46:27. > :46:30.drinks would either be fair or would have the desired effect that Mr
:46:31. > :46:35.Williams says he wishes to see. Do you accept that sugar contributes
:46:36. > :46:41.though to childhood obesity? I accept that sugar, along with other
:46:42. > :46:45.factors contribute to obesity, including the lack of exercise, the
:46:46. > :46:51.fact we sit behind computer desks and don't get enough sport, these
:46:52. > :46:57.are all facts and we should look at it realistically. To just pick out
:46:58. > :47:03.soft drinks is unfair. Really it's not going to tackle the possible.
:47:04. > :47:10.It's gesture politics I'm afraid. Do you agree soft drinks, people don't
:47:11. > :47:16.realise how much sugar exists in fruit juices on a daily basis?
:47:17. > :47:22.Increasingly because there is a lot of publicity around this, and we
:47:23. > :47:26.have led the way in providing a range of options that allow
:47:27. > :47:30.consumers to make the choice for their diet which is proper, if
:47:31. > :47:33.there's clear labelling on the product, you are free to choose, but
:47:34. > :47:37.to demonise one product isn't going to solve the problem. There is no
:47:38. > :47:42.point in demonising sugar, we used to have a thing about saturated fat,
:47:43. > :47:47.you cannot just attribute it to one ingredient? Well, sugar is one of
:47:48. > :47:54.the things. High fat consumption is another. The effect is undeniable.
:47:55. > :47:59.The figures show that about 28% of children in Wales and 15 obese are
:48:00. > :48:03.overweight. The actual effect of all of this is to be seen in every
:48:04. > :48:07.school playground in Wales. So I think whatever we can do, and public
:48:08. > :48:11.education is one of them certainly I think we have seen fat as another,
:48:12. > :48:16.sugar is a specific thing that we can look at and we should be doing
:48:17. > :48:22.it. Thank you both very much. Anthony, tax, fizzy soft drinks or
:48:23. > :48:26.not? Linking your last two items, why is the NHS going up so much,
:48:27. > :48:29.because people are not looking after themselves properly, they are eating
:48:30. > :48:35.and drinking the wrong things, they are not taking enough per size, we
:48:36. > :48:40.should be really, it's a national illness service, we need far more
:48:41. > :48:43.focus from Government in educating young people and parents and
:48:44. > :48:47.everybody to live well. Would you tax them? If necessary, absolutely,
:48:48. > :48:54.yes. Now, hands up if you like to write a
:48:55. > :48:59.biography about David Cameron? No. Our guest of the day is writing
:49:00. > :49:02.about him. In fact, he's writing an official biography of Mr Cameron
:49:03. > :49:06.which means he gets exclusive access to the Prime Minister, his family
:49:07. > :49:11.and frindzth friends I guess. We are join bid former star of the Sunday
:49:12. > :49:16.Politics who's writing an unofficial biography of David Cameron which
:49:17. > :49:20.means she dozen get the same access but can be as horrible as she likes
:49:21. > :49:24.about hill. Why are you writing a biography about David Cameron?
:49:25. > :49:30.There's only been one real biography of David Cameron so far, that was
:49:31. > :49:35.written very well in 2007 when David Cameron had only just become Leader
:49:36. > :49:40.of the Opposition. Who wrote that? Francis Elle yous and James Hanning.
:49:41. > :49:46.They did a great job, but lots has happened in David Cameron's life
:49:47. > :49:53.since then so the time is right for a new one. Do you agree? I think
:49:54. > :49:57.Isabel is going to write a great book. She's a great journalist. Do
:49:58. > :50:01.you think her book will be better? It will be different. For one thing,
:50:02. > :50:07.it's just a study of what happened when he's Prime Minister, so my book
:50:08. > :50:11.begins where Brown at Ten finished, when the door at Number Ten closes
:50:12. > :50:15.and the Prime Minister goes off and it will finish with the general
:50:16. > :50:20.election. So you won't be doing all the boring stuff? No, it won't be.
:50:21. > :50:23.It starts when he becomes Prime Minister, that's principally what
:50:24. > :50:26.interests me. It's not official, it's inside because this is I think
:50:27. > :50:31.the fifth of these books I've done in a row. He's given you an
:50:32. > :50:35.interview, hasn't he? People are talking to me because they are
:50:36. > :50:38.making a judgment. I've written these previous four books on Prime
:50:39. > :50:42.Ministers and they'll make a judgment but I'm trying to write as
:50:43. > :50:47.a historian, trying to stand back and think, in 30 years' time, how
:50:48. > :50:51.will we view him, what do we think about the Thatcher Government and
:50:52. > :50:56.what was being said in 1983 after her first Government, do we know
:50:57. > :51:00.much more now? It's valuable. I bet you are not getting an interview?
:51:01. > :51:06.Well, I think our books will be very different. My book is with Lord
:51:07. > :51:10.Ashcroft, the Conservative peer. A supporter of David Cameron - not!
:51:11. > :51:14.Whatever his personal view and I'm not privy the detail on that, you
:51:15. > :51:19.only have to see his polling to see how impartial he is, whether it's
:51:20. > :51:24.Lord Ashcroft talking about David Cameron or Ed Miliband or negligent.
:51:25. > :51:30.You don't know what Lord Ashcroft thinks about David Cameron? My brief
:51:31. > :51:34.is to write an objective biography and they'll be two different books,
:51:35. > :51:40.his starts when they enter Number Ten, mine with Lord Ashcroft starts
:51:41. > :51:43.at the beginning. His book is often referred to as authorised. That is
:51:44. > :51:46.not the case, as far as I understand, from Number Ten. I don't
:51:47. > :51:49.think you are really claiming that. He may get some access to David
:51:50. > :51:56.Cameron, I'm not sure that's been decided. You are getting access s,
:51:57. > :52:00.aren't you? It isn't an authorised version, authorised means that... I
:52:01. > :52:06.know what it means. Yes. I asked you, are you getting access to David
:52:07. > :52:10.Cameron? Am I getting access... You know everything. I don't know the
:52:11. > :52:12.answer to my question. I spoke to Downing Street about this this
:52:13. > :52:16.morning and I can answer the question which is, it's not clear.
:52:17. > :52:22.They were very unclear about it at this stage so he may or neonatal.
:52:23. > :52:27.I'm still quite early in this book. It'ser in mall that I get access to
:52:28. > :52:34.Prime Ministers and people around them -- it's normal.
:52:35. > :52:39.He's going to write a book from his entire life, he's an extraordinary
:52:40. > :52:47.human being, love or loathe him, he's a phenomenal politician.
:52:48. > :52:56.But he didn't win the election? But look at what he's done since. He's
:52:57. > :52:59.an extraordinary person, a well-informed biography will have a
:53:00. > :53:05.great market. Is he a phenomenal person? Lord Ashcroft and I think
:53:06. > :53:15.it's too early to judge. The French revolution! He wrote
:53:16. > :53:19.recently that history would be kinder to his contemporaries. On the
:53:20. > :53:22.radio you were supportive of David Cameron. We are reserving judgment
:53:23. > :53:26.at the moment, there is a lot of research to be done before drawing a
:53:27. > :53:32.conclusion. When is yours out? Post-election. And your?s
:53:33. > :53:37.Post-election. That's a waste of time. We need them before. The
:53:38. > :53:42.outcome of the election will make a difference.
:53:43. > :53:44.Political cartoons often highlight the inadequacies of politicians and
:53:45. > :53:48.provide a sideways look at current affairs. During the First World War,
:53:49. > :53:52.they had a much more important purpose in mind sattising and
:53:53. > :53:57.be-Dunking the German threat was an important tool in raising spirits in
:53:58. > :54:01.Blighty. A new series of cartoons has been released which looks at the
:54:02. > :54:02.run-up to war a century ago and they have been penned by some familiar
:54:03. > :54:52.names. Steve Bell, the Forwardian
:54:53. > :54:57.cartoonist joins me now. Welcome to the programme. We have just seen
:54:58. > :55:03.those, we may be able to show some original World War I cartoons which
:55:04. > :55:04.answer the question - how do their compare, today's and
:55:05. > :55:06.answer the question - how do their compare, today's the ones done at
:55:07. > :55:10.the time? The ones done today weren't done in the heat of the
:55:11. > :55:15.moment while it was all happen, they were done with a hundred years of
:55:16. > :55:19.reflection. But I suppose I can only think about the one I did which was
:55:20. > :55:24.done I think more or less in the same way, I had a much longer
:55:25. > :55:28.deadline so was able to take more time to finish it off. Essentially,
:55:29. > :55:33.the principle was the same, getting the idea, summing up a situation or
:55:34. > :55:39.a moment, in my case, the moment of the assassination. Do you think a
:55:40. > :55:51.lot's changed in your trade? Yes and no. In essentials it hasn't because
:55:52. > :55:57.it's making seasons out of politics through a visual medium. The nuts
:55:58. > :56:03.and bolts of politics has changed lots. I don't know if you had a BBC
:56:04. > :56:08.100 years ago. None of this existed so it's all changed there. But I
:56:09. > :56:12.think the press was far more important, so in a sense, there
:56:13. > :56:18.seemed to be more slots for cartoonists then. Seems to be more
:56:19. > :56:24.papers are closing so there seems to be less slots but I think it's
:56:25. > :56:27.booming elsewhere in other media. As you say, many cartoons were at the
:56:28. > :56:32.for front of bolstering the war effort, if you like, the war
:56:33. > :56:37.campaign. Do we still see that image today or is it the exact opposite,
:56:38. > :56:42.is it more antiwar than bolstering effort, if you think of recent
:56:43. > :56:48.conflicts? We don't find many Steve Bells who are supporting the Iraq
:56:49. > :56:52.war or Afghanistan and cartoons are so brilliant, aren't they, at
:56:53. > :56:56.lightening what the politicians are not saying to us and using the
:56:57. > :57:01.visual medium to appeal to a different part of the brain. So most
:57:02. > :57:05.cartoonists tend to be critical, rather than supporters. The idea of
:57:06. > :57:10.an official Government cartoonist would be really bizarre, you know,
:57:11. > :57:16.on the NHS, you know, a cartoonist saying what a great job the
:57:17. > :57:23.Government NHS policy is - unhikely. Your cartoon depicts the
:57:24. > :57:29.assassination of Archduck Ferdinand, do you think people know what the
:57:30. > :57:33.image means? -- Afterth archDuke? The particularity of it is
:57:34. > :57:38.horrifying. The actual what happened and what was said at the time of the
:57:39. > :57:40.assassination, it was horrible, people were killed. Politically,
:57:41. > :57:44.they people were killed. Politically,
:57:45. > :57:48.and all the rest of it, it's easy to take the Mickey out of that, but as
:57:49. > :57:54.something happens, it take the Mickey out of that, but as
:57:55. > :57:57.and arresting. The significance ballooned and swelled and that's the
:57:58. > :58:02.thing about the day-to-day thing, the thing that's been on the BBC,
:58:03. > :58:07.into how this apparent hi small act blew up into a major thing. It was
:58:08. > :58:12.the spark. Anthony, do you think teaching children about the events
:58:13. > :58:16.leading up to World War I, including the assassination should be
:58:17. > :58:19.compulsory? Oh, absolutely. It's our world and the lessons of what
:58:20. > :58:24.happened there are so profound and the late radioture and the cartoons
:58:25. > :58:31.and the painting -- literature. It's magnificent. And tragic. Time for
:58:32. > :58:36.the answer to our quiz: Which subject is taught at Wellington
:58:37. > :58:44.College? Air dressing, how to be Prime Minister, happiness or basic
:58:45. > :58:50.car mechanics. Steve Bell thinks it's... What do you think? Happiness
:58:51. > :58:57.for well-being. That's it. I'll be back on BBC One tonight with This
:58:58. > :59:01.Week. Portillo, Abbott, Green. Bye!