07/07/2014 Daily Politics


07/07/2014

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 07/07/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Good afternoon and welcome to the Daily Politics.

:00:36.:00:37.

The Home Secretary is to announce a wide ranging inquiry

:00:38.:00:39.

into allegations of a cover-up of child abuse at the Home Office

:00:40.:00:42.

Teachers, council workers and NHS staff will walk out on Thursday.

:00:43.:00:52.

Does the law need changing to make striking more difficult?

:00:53.:00:58.

It's the EU's newest member but it's already falling out

:00:59.:01:00.

We ask Croatians whether joining the club was really worth it?

:01:01.:01:06.

It did the Tour de France arguably better than the French.

:01:07.:01:11.

Is it time for "God's own County" to become "God's own country?"

:01:12.:01:19.

All that coming up in the next hour, but let's start this morning with

:01:20.:01:22.

the story that's dominating the agenda here

:01:23.:01:24.

That's claims of a cover-up of allegations of child abuse

:01:25.:01:29.

levelled against political figures more than 20 years ago.

:01:30.:01:35.

In the 1980s, Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens passed

:01:36.:01:37.

on information about alleged child abusers operating in Westminster to

:01:38.:01:47.

the then Home Secretary, Leon Britten, who says he handed over

:01:48.:01:49.

No criminal charges or prosecutions were ever brought but last year

:01:50.:01:54.

a Home Office review of information about organised child sex abuse

:01:55.:01:58.

found that whilst "credible" elements of the dossier with a

:01:59.:02:00.

"realistic potential" for investigation were sent to police

:02:01.:02:10.

and prosecutors, other elements were not kept - 114 files were missing,

:02:11.:02:13.

destroyed or simply "not found" but the review did lead to four historic

:02:14.:02:18.

called for a "Hillsborough-style" public inquiry into the handling

:02:19.:02:23.

of the abuse claims and Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has called

:02:24.:02:30.

for an "over-arching" and "comprehensive" investigation.

:02:31.:02:31.

afternoon Teresa May is expected to announce that a senior legal figure

:02:32.:02:37.

will re-examine last year's report and that there will be a new review

:02:38.:02:43.

of public bodies' duty of care towards children.

:02:44.:02:45.

look like the end of this story - yesterday former Cabinet member Lord

:02:46.:02:52.

Tebbitt raised the possibility of a political cover-up in the 1980s.

:02:53.:03:01.

At that time, I think most people would have thought that the

:03:02.:03:11.

establishment, the system, was to be protected. And if a few things had

:03:12.:03:16.

gone wrong here and there, that it was more important to protect the

:03:17.:03:20.

system than to delve too far into them. Now that view, I think, was

:03:21.:03:28.

wrong then and it is spectacularly shown to have been wrong because the

:03:29.:03:33.

abuses have grown. Do you think there was a political cover-up 30

:03:34.:03:37.

years ago? I think there may well have been. But it was almost

:03:38.:03:40.

unconscious. It was the thing that people did at time. You didn't talk

:03:41.:03:45.

about these things? You didn't talk about those sort of things.

:03:46.:03:48.

Let's talk to our Political Correspondent, Robin Brant.

:03:49.:03:52.

Picking up on the comments from Lord Tebbit, how damning are they? The

:03:53.:03:59.

suggestion of a cover-up, unconsciously or not? From a man who

:04:00.:04:02.

was there at the time and at the heart of government, they were

:04:03.:04:05.

incendiary, and that no doubt increased the pressure on the Home

:04:06.:04:10.

Secretary, and that is how we get to today wearing three hours time she

:04:11.:04:13.

will come to Parliament and give quite a detailed explanation. Not

:04:14.:04:18.

just of this review of the review, which is essentially a rerun of the

:04:19.:04:21.

internal investigation they had last year which are detailed just now. He

:04:22.:04:27.

will name the QC who will be leading that. That is about ensuring the

:04:28.:04:30.

process of last year when they looked at the paperwork and what was

:04:31.:04:34.

done with regard to the initial investigation some 30 years before,

:04:35.:04:39.

that that remains valid and sound. We will get more detail and the

:04:40.:04:44.

detail will be crucial today on this wider, overarching independent

:04:45.:04:46.

enquiry which will look at how institutions dealt with abuses and

:04:47.:04:53.

allegations of abuse across the whole of the public sector. The BBC,

:04:54.:04:56.

the NHS, and also now, government departments. Are you suggesting

:04:57.:05:01.

Theresa May and the government have been bounced into this because there

:05:02.:05:05.

was so little publicity surrounding the initial Home Office review of

:05:06.:05:10.

the historic allegations? I will say this. This is very close to what the

:05:11.:05:14.

Labour Party and Yvette Cooper have been calling for for some time. The

:05:15.:05:19.

MP who has led much of the investigation into what Cyril Smith

:05:20.:05:26.

did or did not do, he once a Hillsborough style public enquiry.

:05:27.:05:28.

This will not be a public enquiry, but we hear evidence that it could

:05:29.:05:33.

call evidence and call for it in public and that is very close to

:05:34.:05:37.

what the Labour Party has wanted. Interestingly, it looks like Nick

:05:38.:05:40.

Clegg did not get the memo -- the memo. Senior figures in government

:05:41.:05:45.

have talked about overarching enquiries, independence, strength,

:05:46.:05:49.

and the prime minister talking about no stone unturned but Nick Clegg

:05:50.:05:52.

this morning, asked about a public enquiry, he said it would just be

:05:53.:05:56.

another enquiry. Quite dismissive, and his onus was on the police

:05:57.:05:59.

investigations, of which there are numerous.

:06:00.:06:01.

With me now is the Shadow Home Office Minister, Diana Johnson.

:06:02.:06:06.

Welcome to the programme. You are calling for this overarching enquiry

:06:07.:06:11.

to look at institutions like the government, the BBC, the NHS and

:06:12.:06:15.

that will just take years. People want answers now, if there are

:06:16.:06:19.

answers to be had. Yvette Cooper has been calling for this type of

:06:20.:06:22.

investigation for the last 18 months and it is to draw together the

:06:23.:06:25.

recommendations from all of the different enquiries taking place at

:06:26.:06:30.

the moment. We have already had the NHS one Jimmy Savile and there is

:06:31.:06:35.

the BBC One June and it is to draw together the recommendations to have

:06:36.:06:39.

child protection experts leading this so we can find a way forward.

:06:40.:06:44.

So you are not looking specifically at allegations made in the 1980s in

:06:45.:06:49.

this so-called dossier or bundle of papers handed to the Home Secretary

:06:50.:06:54.

then. You don't want to look back, you are looking forward? Because of

:06:55.:06:57.

the revelations about what happened in the Home Office, we think that

:06:58.:07:02.

has to be investigated. What revelations? We're talking about

:07:03.:07:07.

over 100 files being missing, and what happened to the dossier

:07:08.:07:11.

presented to the Home Secretary. We want to have an investigation into

:07:12.:07:15.

that, but we now think it is wider than that. We want to find out what

:07:16.:07:19.

was happening in Whitehall, and what the police and prosecuting

:07:20.:07:21.

authorities did with the allegations, because we know, don't

:07:22.:07:24.

we, that to come forward and make allegations that you have been

:07:25.:07:27.

abused is very difficult and if those victims have come forward,

:07:28.:07:31.

they deserve to have their allegations dealt with properly and

:07:32.:07:34.

investigated, so it is to bring together what has happened over the

:07:35.:07:37.

weekend with the revelations in the Home Office, but also the wider view

:07:38.:07:41.

about what is happening in institutions like the BBC and the

:07:42.:07:46.

NHS. Do you know what is happening? When you talk about the allegations

:07:47.:07:49.

and evidence put forward by witnesses, what substantive

:07:50.:07:52.

allegations are you talking about? The Home Office carried out a review

:07:53.:07:57.

as to what was done in the 1980s was handled properly and it said,

:07:58.:08:03.

broadly that it was that any criminal leads were handed on to the

:08:04.:08:07.

police. So have you got new evidence? Are there substantive

:08:08.:08:12.

allegations you want to look at? What we know is that the review was

:08:13.:08:16.

held last year, and it was not reported what was found. It's only

:08:17.:08:20.

that now we hear hundreds of files have gone missing. That is the

:08:21.:08:24.

problem. We don't know. That is why we need the wider review of what

:08:25.:08:27.

happened in Whitehall and what happened with the police and the

:08:28.:08:31.

prosecuting authorities in the 80s and 90s. Do you have evidence to say

:08:32.:08:37.

there was something going on? You are obviously dismissing the review

:08:38.:08:39.

and you don't feel it will achieve what it's supposed to, because you

:08:40.:08:43.

know there is other evidence that has not been unearthed? Clearly an

:08:44.:08:48.

MP in the 1980s presented a dossier to the Home Secretary at that time

:08:49.:08:51.

with allegations. There are further allegations that my colleagues have

:08:52.:08:59.

made, accusations of allegations that have improperly investigated so

:09:00.:09:01.

we think it's important they are investigated at this time. You think

:09:02.:09:06.

there has been a cover-up? I think that's the problem. The public are

:09:07.:09:09.

listening to this happening and hearing about files going missing

:09:10.:09:15.

and listening to what MPs are saying about allegations that haven't been

:09:16.:09:20.

investigated properly. Will you get to the bottom of it with an

:09:21.:09:23.

enquiry? You people aren't swearing an oath and can't hear the evidence

:09:24.:09:27.

in public, how do we get to the truth? We need to wait and see what

:09:28.:09:31.

Theresa May will say about the enquiry, but we would like to see

:09:32.:09:34.

evidence given in public and we would like to see led by child

:09:35.:09:37.

protection experts. We think the public deserves to know what

:09:38.:09:41.

happened in the 1980s and 1990s, and with some of these institutions, the

:09:42.:09:44.

recommendations coming out of the various are being implemented. I

:09:45.:09:49.

would say to you, under this Home Secretary, child protection laws

:09:50.:09:52.

have been weakened. There are 10,000 people convicted of sexual assaults

:09:53.:09:55.

on children who are not barred from working with children and the public

:09:56.:09:59.

will want to know about that and will want an explanation about it.

:10:00.:10:19.

Now, not long to go now until the summer recess begins.

:10:20.:10:21.

Here's what's happening this week though.

:10:22.:10:23.

Today the Chancellor and Foreign Secretary are

:10:24.:10:25.

They'll have meetings with Narendra Modi,

:10:26.:10:27.

On Tuesday it's thought the the Intelligence and Security Committee

:10:28.:10:31.

will publish their report into the Woolwich murder of Lee Rigby.

:10:32.:10:34.

And it's the Local Government Association conference in

:10:35.:10:36.

Bournemouth, where Iain Duncan Smith and Eric Pickles will be speaking.

:10:37.:10:38.

On Wednesday the Lords Communications committee

:10:39.:10:40.

hears evidence from Facebook and Twitter on internet trolling

:10:41.:10:42.

as part of their ongoing inquiry into social media.

:10:43.:10:44.

And on Thursday there's industrial action by members of several unions.

:10:45.:10:47.

It's thought that over a million council staff, health

:10:48.:10:49.

workers, teachers, civil servants and firefighters go out on strike.

:10:50.:10:51.

Also on Thursday, MPs will debate plans to transfer more

:10:52.:10:54.

David Cameron could face a backbench rebellion as some of

:10:55.:11:03.

his MPs want to continue to opt out of the European arrest warrant.

:11:04.:11:06.

To discuss the week ahead in more detail I can speak now to the

:11:07.:11:09.

Financial Times Deputy Political Editor, Beth Rigby and Christopher

:11:10.:11:12.

Welcome to both of you. Beth Rigby, first of all, how difficult is the

:11:13.:11:23.

strike this week for Labour? It is difficult, because obviously the

:11:24.:11:26.

Tories will use this as a way of saying that Labour are in the hands

:11:27.:11:29.

of the unions and we are the ones trying to change strike clause for

:11:30.:11:33.

the benefit of the people, not the unions. But the Lib Dems and Labour

:11:34.:11:39.

are aligned on this. They don't want to change strike clause. Francis

:11:40.:11:43.

Maude and the Conservatives are saying they would want a 50%

:11:44.:11:51.

majority to have a strike and there is nothing going to happen in terms

:11:52.:11:53.

of strike clause before the election. This is about a Tory

:11:54.:11:59.

manifesto promise, and this is about differentiating against the Labour

:12:00.:12:01.

Party and putting them in a difficult position with all the

:12:02.:12:05.

parents and commuters facing a very hassled Thursday. As always, we

:12:06.:12:11.

hope, and we will do so again, we will ask Labour to condemn the

:12:12.:12:15.

strike and they will find a form of words to say neither one thing nor

:12:16.:12:18.

the other. Or do you think of something different this time? It's

:12:19.:12:22.

hard for the Labour Party because they will be seen to criticise

:12:23.:12:26.

striking union people although they rely on lots of their funds from

:12:27.:12:32.

there. The whole policy area sits in the Department of Vince cable, not

:12:33.:12:37.

really for, although he is in charge of negotiating with public sector

:12:38.:12:42.

workers over pay and pension. We were talking about the issue of

:12:43.:12:46.

strike clause, so we were talking about a manifesto issue for the next

:12:47.:12:50.

election. Nothing will happen until there is a Conservative government

:12:51.:12:54.

with a majority. No doubt manifestoes will see that included,

:12:55.:12:58.

and in the Tory manifesto certainly, but public sector workers have had

:12:59.:13:02.

pay restraint and pay freezes since 2010 and we are going to talk about

:13:03.:13:06.

the prospect of pay restraint, so will it have any impact on changing

:13:07.:13:10.

government policy by continuing with strikes like this? I don't think

:13:11.:13:17.

striking will change government policy. And I think also, the other

:13:18.:13:21.

point to make about this, although there is a lot of play in the Tory

:13:22.:13:27.

camp about strike clause, the Vince cable argument would be that we have

:13:28.:13:31.

the best industrial relations in 30 years, with the fewest strike days

:13:32.:13:36.

in 30 years, and why, therefore, agitate the unions further? As you

:13:37.:13:40.

have said, they have taken a lot of pain in terms of pay restraint and

:13:41.:13:43.

they should be allowed to strike. That would be the Liberal Democrat

:13:44.:13:49.

view. Moving the so-called snoopers charter, new emergency laws in

:13:50.:13:54.

response to the murder of Lee Rigby. Will they get cross-party support?

:13:55.:13:59.

There was a slight confusion here. The snoopers charter, which is

:14:00.:14:03.

different altogether, and the response to the European Court of

:14:04.:14:06.

Justice ruling which said that the current wave in which the security

:14:07.:14:11.

services harvest data breaks various human rights laws, there is,

:14:12.:14:15.

agreement between the Conservatives, Labour and the Lib

:14:16.:14:18.

Dems about the kind of data that they can harvest to comply with the

:14:19.:14:24.

April ruling in the European Court of Justice. Separate that is the row

:14:25.:14:30.

about the snoopers charter. Essentially it is about what the

:14:31.:14:33.

security services can look at. There's a difference between the

:14:34.:14:35.

letter and the address on the envelope. Currently you can look at

:14:36.:14:40.

the address and see who was talking that they cannot see what is inside

:14:41.:14:43.

the letter. The Conservatives are trying to push further on that and

:14:44.:14:46.

the Lib Dems are also saying no further with Labour. That part of it

:14:47.:14:52.

will go into the election, but the immediate part is the emergency

:14:53.:14:55.

legislation required to comply with the ECJ ruling in April. In order to

:14:56.:15:02.

comply, what will the new laws do different to what exists now? What

:15:03.:15:05.

will they enable security services to do? Data Bill. The point of this

:15:06.:15:13.

is that they are not trying to extend the laws. What they are

:15:14.:15:16.

trying to do is keep what we've already got which is basically that

:15:17.:15:21.

you can monitor e-mails, et cetera, phone calls, and so on. What the

:15:22.:15:27.

debate now is about is how does the Government and the Security Services

:15:28.:15:34.

retain what they already do while also complying with what the

:15:35.:15:37.

European court said. That's the debate. Any idea that this is going

:15:38.:15:43.

to be extended to cover the commune cases bill and snoopers charter is

:15:44.:15:46.

not going to happen. All they are trying to do is work out a way to

:15:47.:15:52.

carry on what they are doing, great cross party agreement and comply

:15:53.:15:57.

with Europe. I think today's story is a Liberal Democrat and Labour

:15:58.:16:02.

bringing a shot across the bows saying we'll go this far but not

:16:03.:16:05.

further. There'll be some emergency powers coming shortly. They'll have

:16:06.:16:08.

to do something to comply with April. So far we have not complied

:16:09.:16:12.

but we'll have to do something to do so. Thank you both very much. It

:16:13.:16:17.

started with six. Now there are 28. With more members in the pipeline.

:16:18.:16:22.

The European Union has expanded a pace in recent years, but with some

:16:23.:16:25.

of the original founding members struggling, what makes other

:16:26.:16:29.

countries want to join the club? Adam Fleming has visited Croatia,

:16:30.:16:35.

the EU's newest member, and he found the honeymoon's not laked long. A

:16:36.:16:39.

year ago the amphitheatre was full of Croatians celebrating EU

:16:40.:16:43.

membership. After 30 years on the waiting list. -- not lasted long. I

:16:44.:16:48.

visited last week and the mood was different. Do you know what today

:16:49.:16:56.

is? What today is. What? First anniversary of joining the EU. Yes,

:16:57.:16:59.

the first year that we've joined the European Union. It was a big,

:17:00.:17:06.

interesting thing for us and we have referendum for that. Do you think

:17:07.:17:09.

anyone will be celebrating... I don't think so. Why not? I don't

:17:10.:17:13.

think one year is a big deal. This is a town that's 3,000 years old so

:17:14.:17:17.

one year is not a lot for us. A year in Europe hasn't done a lot to help

:17:18.:17:22.

Croatia's tank in the economy. It's entered its sixth year in recession.

:17:23.:17:27.

Unemployment is the third highest in the EU and half of young people

:17:28.:17:31.

can't find work. So let's head to the university. You didn't

:17:32.:17:35.

celebrate? No. You didn't crack open a beer? We crack open a beer every

:17:36.:17:39.

day, but not because of the accession to the EU. Fair enough.

:17:40.:17:44.

Why is it not that big a deal? I thought it was quite an historic

:17:45.:17:48.

moment? It was an historic moment but not much has chained and people

:17:49.:17:52.

do not have a reason to celebrate. The economy is still on the decline

:17:53.:17:55.

and nothing's changed for the regular people, maybe for the

:17:56.:18:00.

politicians, but that's about it. And their Professor is like a

:18:01.:18:05.

growing number of Croatians, a Euro-sceptic. There was a lot of

:18:06.:18:23.

Capitol, you know, investments and so forth. The EU is not taking care

:18:24.:18:29.

of things properly. So does anyone care about this

:18:30.:18:34.

anniversary? Finally, I found some people who're celebrating. It's the

:18:35.:18:38.

family that own this vineyard, because they received some of the

:18:39.:18:42.

money Brussels gave Croatia for EU membership.

:18:43.:18:48.

It paid for this new bottling plant which will help them produce better

:18:49.:18:52.

quality wine and boost their profits. Over the next few years,

:18:53.:18:57.

there's another 11 billion euros on the way to help Croatia compete. We

:18:58.:19:13.

now have the possibility to compete. It means we just have a view of what

:19:14.:19:19.

is our future. And joining the EU has forced the

:19:20.:19:23.

country to bring all sorts of sectors up to European standards,

:19:24.:19:26.

from the sewage system to the judiciary. It's just that lots of

:19:27.:19:30.

people here don't seem to appreciate all that when their economy is

:19:31.:19:35.

withering on the vine. We are joined by Labour's former

:19:36.:19:40.

Europe Minister, Chris Bryant, and the Conservative backbencher,

:19:41.:19:42.

Stewart Jackson. Welcome both of you.

:19:43.:19:46.

Chris Bryant first of all, you were Europe Minister in a Government

:19:47.:19:49.

which championed EU enlargement. Would you say it's been a resounding

:19:50.:19:54.

success? You put the word resounding in front as if it's unqualified. A

:19:55.:20:00.

success? Largely, yes, because for a start it means you can tackles in

:20:01.:20:03.

some countries the very unfair state aid that used to make it impossible

:20:04.:20:07.

for British businesses to do business elsewhere in Europe and

:20:08.:20:09.

that wouldn't have happened without accession to the EU. Secondly,

:20:10.:20:15.

you've seen British people be able to exercise their rights to travel

:20:16.:20:20.

and work in those other countries and thirdly, we are beginning to be

:20:21.:20:25.

able to tackment some historic levels of...ion there have been in

:20:26.:20:30.

countries like Croatia. But let's not just limit it to Croatia where

:20:31.:20:36.

people haven't seen the benefits yet to joining the EU. But there was a

:20:37.:20:41.

major economic crisis across the whole of in particular southern

:20:42.:20:44.

Europe. But let's look at the southern Europe, the difference

:20:45.:20:48.

between southern European countries, the head trainian countries and

:20:49.:20:53.

Ireland -- Mediterranean countries. Has it been a success to join

:20:54.:20:57.

together economies that were vastly tink and couldn't meet properly

:20:58.:21:00.

which is what is in part led to the Euro-sceptic argument taking place?

:21:01.:21:09.

Yes, I think it has. -- vastly different. Spain and Greece were

:21:10.:21:14.

both southern countries, but both dictatorships. Portugal was as well,

:21:15.:21:19.

in my lifetime. Bringing peace, guaranteeing peace in the Balkans

:21:20.:21:23.

for instance is a very parenth important part of what the UU has

:21:24.:21:27.

been able to do. Still six candidate countries in the EU, Albania joined

:21:28.:21:33.

last week. Iceland's probably, if they have put it on ice, as it were,

:21:34.:21:38.

their prospect of joining the European Union, but it's been good,

:21:39.:21:42.

yes. Why hasn't it been successful in your eyes? Chris can't do what he

:21:43.:21:48.

should do and which the party he he represents needs to do, to apologise

:21:49.:21:52.

for a deliberate policy of mass migration. Done that five times on

:21:53.:21:56.

this prasmt. I can do it all again if you want. 13-15,000 people from

:21:57.:22:03.

Eastern European countries out by a factor of 75. During that time, in a

:22:04.:22:10.

growing economy, they failed to reform welfare. But you accept there

:22:11.:22:22.

wasn't a deluge of immigrants from Romania, as talked about by

:22:23.:22:26.

colleagues of yours and UKIP? What we have to look at is this urban

:22:27.:22:31.

myth that people who come to work from the European Union are

:22:32.:22:36.

necessarily all contributing in terms of their taxes and are a

:22:37.:22:39.

benefit to the UK economy. There's no evidence for that, no academic

:22:40.:22:44.

evidence whatsoever. Quite the opposite. The migration advisory

:22:45.:22:48.

committee in 2011 found that unless you are a single person on B average

:22:49.:22:53.

income you were a net drain on the UK Exchequer.

:22:54.:23:02.

What about the fact that in getting the countries to join the EU, you

:23:03.:23:06.

expand the area to try to keep the peace, if you like, right across the

:23:07.:23:14.

area? My constituents never had the chancevote for nation-building. I

:23:15.:23:17.

think it's wonderful that tyrannical despots are not in charge of

:23:18.:23:22.

Portugal and Greece, but that'slet not what they voted on in 197540

:23:23.:23:28.

years ago almost. They voted on the Common market. That's not true.

:23:29.:23:32.

Actually the introductory speech to the Bill that brought the accession

:23:33.:23:38.

into the European Union in 1972 by Geoffrey Howe made clear it was

:23:39.:23:43.

about political union as well. ALL SPEAK AT ONCE

:23:44.:23:50.

Can I just answer the charge that I've never apologised. It's

:23:51.:23:55.

undoubtedly true that Labour, we in Government did get things wrong when

:23:56.:23:59.

every political party in the UK was in favour of the countries joining

:24:00.:24:08.

the EU U, there wasn't even a vote on them joining. The one thing I

:24:09.:24:12.

think we did wrong was, we should have done the same as France,

:24:13.:24:18.

Germany, Italy and Spain, been more pro-European and said that there

:24:19.:24:22.

would be transitional controls for five or serven years. Inevitably,

:24:23.:24:27.

when we were one of only three countries that didn't have

:24:28.:24:30.

transzisal controls, it meant the people that came to the UK was

:24:31.:24:34.

dramatically higher than anticipated. Economically you could

:24:35.:24:38.

argue it's been a disaster too? I don't think it has. You don't think

:24:39.:24:44.

it has? They have had one of the deepest recessions ever? I don't

:24:45.:24:51.

think that's been because of the EU or the Euro and indeed Spain would

:24:52.:24:57.

argue much of the prosperity... It used to be when I was young and

:24:58.:25:00.

brought up and lived in Spain as a child, it was one of the poorest

:25:01.:25:05.

countries. That's dramatically changed. There are significant

:25:06.:25:09.

problems that need to be dealt with. A new country will be joining in

:25:10.:25:13.

January next year. All those who predicted the collapse of the euro

:25:14.:25:16.

and the European Union are just shouting. At what cost though,

:25:17.:25:22.

Chris? The idea of ever closer union, you've smashed the economies

:25:23.:25:29.

of Greece, Portugal, of Spain and Italy. To, nonsense. A success

:25:30.:25:39.

story? Poland and Ukraine. When Poland joined the European Union,

:25:40.:25:44.

they had the same GDP. Poland's is three times larger than the Ukraine.

:25:45.:25:54.

It's an success story? Some parts have had successes. We shoulder the

:25:55.:26:00.

burden of immigration when pockets of the country are under stress. The

:26:01.:26:06.

largest number of nationals, it's the UK. You may have very eloquent

:26:07.:26:13.

arguments to make, put those to the people in the referendum. Do you

:26:14.:26:16.

want Britain to leave the European Union? Well, it's irrelevant what I

:26:17.:26:21.

think. But do you? Do you want Britain to leave? It's important

:26:22.:26:25.

what... Do you want Britain to leave? It's irrelevant what 45

:26:26.:26:31.

million people think. I'm on public record as a backbencher of

:26:32.:26:34.

campaigning for us to leave the European Union. Fine. It's a

:26:35.:26:39.

legitimate position. It's cutting off Britain's economic nose to spite

:26:40.:26:44.

our face I think. The party, as a party, should have a position where

:26:45.:26:47.

it trusts the people and has a referendum and it may be moving in

:26:48.:26:51.

that trekkion. Thank you both very much. Teachers, council workers,

:26:52.:26:54.

civil servants and health workers are going out on strike on Thursday.

:26:55.:27:00.

Pay is at the top of the agenda with below inflation pay increases having

:27:01.:27:04.

been imposed for the last four years. On yesterday's Sunday

:27:05.:27:07.

Politics, the Business Minister, Matthew Hancock, debated and rights

:27:08.:27:12.

and wrongs of the strike with the EU C secretary Frances O'Grady. What

:27:13.:27:16.

really sticks in the throat is the idea that money can be found to give

:27:17.:27:20.

tax cuts to billionaires, to millionaires and to big

:27:21.:27:24.

corporations, but it can't be found to help, for example, half a million

:27:25.:27:31.

workers in local government, dinner ladies, school workers, lollipop men

:27:32.:27:35.

and women earning less than the living wage. Would a public sector

:27:36.:27:40.

worker ever get a real increase in their pay under a Conservative

:27:41.:27:44.

Government? We certainly hope to have the books balanced in the intro

:27:45.:27:49.

by 2018. So not before then? Well, that is when we hope to be able to

:27:50.:27:57.

be in surplus. So no real pay increase for public sector workers

:27:58.:28:04.

before 2018? Interestingly, this isn't just about the Conservatives

:28:05.:28:08.

and the Liberal Democrats, you know. The Labour Party leadership's said

:28:09.:28:11.

it's a test to their credibility that they support the squeeze on

:28:12.:28:15.

public sector pay. Matt Hancock there. We are joined

:28:16.:28:18.

for the rest of the programme by the Conservative MP, Charlotte Lesley,

:28:19.:28:21.

the Shadow Wales secretary Owen Smith and by the Liberal Democrat,

:28:22.:28:25.

Jeremy Browne, welcome to all of you. Picking up on what Matt Hancock

:28:26.:28:29.

said there, no real pay rises for public sector workers until 2018, no

:28:30.:28:34.

real terms pay rises, that's after four years of public sector pay

:28:35.:28:38.

being frozen or at below inflation rates. Is he right? Do you agree?

:28:39.:28:43.

Yes. But that's not to say it's not really tough for people working in

:28:44.:28:47.

the public sector. My concern about the strikes is, obvious it parents

:28:48.:28:53.

and children will lose out, but for professions like teaching who're

:28:54.:28:56.

trying to raise the image of teaching, with a small minority of

:28:57.:29:00.

teachers voting for the strikes, I'm concerned it further erodes the

:29:01.:29:03.

professional status of teaching and professes like that. I think the

:29:04.:29:08.

form of striking laws needs looking at again, not only for the people

:29:09.:29:12.

affected by the strikes but for the professes striking themselves to

:29:13.:29:14.

make sure it's representative of what the majority of the people

:29:15.:29:19.

want. But you agree it shouldn't be until 2018 or even later do you

:29:20.:29:23.

think, before there is a real terms rise for public sector workers?

:29:24.:29:26.

Don't forget the massive challenge we are facing. Our debt is still

:29:27.:29:30.

going up, the deficit is going down, but the debt is still going up. If

:29:31.:29:35.

we can afford it, brilliant. It's about priorities isn't it. But you

:29:36.:29:40.

don't think they deserve a pay rise or it's not affordable until that

:29:41.:29:44.

point? It's not affordable until that point, but future pay rises

:29:45.:29:48.

need to be dealt with after we stabilise our economy. Do you agree

:29:49.:29:53.

with that. Public sector pay has been frozen until now. Would you

:29:54.:29:59.

like to see public sector... We don't know because we need to see

:30:00.:30:03.

what the books are like if and when we win the next election. We'll

:30:04.:30:08.

stick to the spending plans during the first year. I would like to see

:30:09.:30:13.

pay increases, absolutely. Pay has been frozen for far too long. They

:30:14.:30:17.

are right to be worrying about pensions, pay and the way in which

:30:18.:30:23.

earnings are outstripped by inflation, so I understand the

:30:24.:30:26.

decision they are taking to strike. Do you support it? We are getting a

:30:27.:30:37.

division between the Tories and Labour other public sector workers

:30:38.:30:41.

public sector units. For the Tories to be suggesting that we need to

:30:42.:30:45.

make it even harder for people to exercise their right to strike

:30:46.:30:48.

another example of division and something we should wholly oppose.

:30:49.:30:53.

But you support the strike, not just the right to strike, on the basis it

:30:54.:31:00.

has been so tough on pay? I do. I think it's legitimate for them to

:31:01.:31:03.

voice their concern about the nature of their jobs and how long people

:31:04.:31:06.

will have to work and how much they are earning. They are entirely

:31:07.:31:11.

legitimate. It is problematic that the current rhetoric in this

:31:12.:31:14.

country, in the media and in the Tory party in particular is about

:31:15.:31:18.

delegitimising what we should be protecting as a fundamental right,

:31:19.:31:22.

to withdraw one's labour. I think it's understandable. Are the Liberal

:31:23.:31:27.

Democrats behind the idea of extending public sector pay

:31:28.:31:29.

restraint beyond the next election question I think whoever wins the

:31:30.:31:33.

next election, there will have to be public 's sector restraint. It's not

:31:34.:31:37.

deserving the money, it's whether we can afford the salaries. In the

:31:38.:31:41.

Labour government we got to the position where we were borrowing

:31:42.:31:45.

?430 million every single day, and it's not affordable. The reason we

:31:46.:31:49.

don't have high unemployment like they do in places like France is

:31:50.:31:53.

because we have had public sector pay restraint. If we don't have

:31:54.:31:56.

that, we would have to pay the salaries by sacking people, but we

:31:57.:31:59.

cannot magic money that doesn't exist because we had a massive

:32:00.:32:05.

deficit. So you want to continue until 2018 with that pay restraint?

:32:06.:32:09.

If you or anyone else can tell us how we can fund this salary

:32:10.:32:16.

increases and get the deficit and dashed down at the same time, I'm

:32:17.:32:19.

all ears. It's just a fact of life, what you can afford. It is a fact of

:32:20.:32:24.

life we are still borrowing about ?260 million per day, so we have the

:32:25.:32:27.

deficit down and were making good progress, but we are still living

:32:28.:32:33.

way beyond our means as a country. Any politician's say they can double

:32:34.:32:38.

everybody's pay, and Labour tried that. Labour almost bankrupted the

:32:39.:32:46.

country. That is rewriting history. As ever. We all know it's a

:32:47.:32:53.

nonsense. We know we had 36 quotas -- quarters of growth under the last

:32:54.:32:57.

Labour government and then there was an international financial crisis

:32:58.:33:00.

that led to crisis in the banks and the last Labour government decided

:33:01.:33:03.

to shore up the banks in order to stop savers and pensions and

:33:04.:33:08.

everybody from losing money. You were borrowing more money. You are

:33:09.:33:14.

borrowing more money now yourself. It's going to be ?75 billion. You

:33:15.:33:19.

fail. Both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats by calling the pay

:33:20.:33:24.

restraint until 2018 will feed into the crisis, because we know that

:33:25.:33:27.

wages have stayed lower than inflation for years and will

:33:28.:33:33.

continue to do so. Going back before the last election, with Labour in

:33:34.:33:36.

government, lots of private sector employees in my constituency would

:33:37.:33:40.

say they had lost 20% of their income. 18% of their money. We have

:33:41.:33:46.

to work out how to do it. We are the make staff redundant or some people

:33:47.:33:50.

go part-time or we freeze pay, but you cannot carrying on pretending

:33:51.:33:53.

you have got money when you don't have it. Should it be Liberal

:33:54.:34:01.

Democrat policy to do that? Going onto the strike clause, you said you

:34:02.:34:04.

would like to see it change, but if we look at MPs and how they are

:34:05.:34:08.

elected in terms of turnout, you were elected on 38% of 68% turnout,

:34:09.:34:13.

so on the whole, it was 26% of the electorate. That is about the same

:34:14.:34:18.

as the number of people who voted for strike action, so how can you

:34:19.:34:21.

call for a higher bar for the unions and keep the same for MPs? If not

:34:22.:34:26.

more than 50% of people vote you can't have no MP, but you need to

:34:27.:34:30.

get the turnout. I think it's testament to politics being out of

:34:31.:34:34.

touch with reality that people don't turn out. But I'm concerned about

:34:35.:34:38.

the legitimacy of strike action. If you look at many doctors, members of

:34:39.:34:43.

the BMA, they would not vote to take action, and it's the same with

:34:44.:34:47.

teachers. If a majority of teachers want to strike, I support their

:34:48.:34:51.

right to be able to do that, but what I'm concerned about is that a

:34:52.:34:54.

minority are creating an impression of the teaching profession which is

:34:55.:34:58.

perhaps not shared by the majority. It's not double standards as an MP,

:34:59.:35:07.

for you to say I can be elected on 26% of the electorate, but other

:35:08.:35:10.

groups cannot vote for strike action unless they have a higher bar?

:35:11.:35:14.

There's a difference between electing an individual choice and

:35:15.:35:19.

electing her positive action against the negative action. Not in

:35:20.:35:26.

principle. Think that's right. -- I don't think that's right. People are

:35:27.:35:29.

members of the union because they need protection they are not always

:35:30.:35:32.

happy with the action the union takes, so you should empower the

:35:33.:35:36.

majority. Why should a small number of union hold the rest of the union

:35:37.:35:40.

or their to ransom? Because it is democracy. It's precisely what you

:35:41.:35:46.

just described. The Tories and the Liberals are running the country

:35:47.:35:49.

with fewer than 35% of the Democratic electorate of the

:35:50.:35:56.

country. You are describing a threshold of 50% but its OK to run

:35:57.:36:01.

the country with less than 35 question but it's a total compared

:36:02.:36:04.

with the others from majority not voting for any action. The principle

:36:05.:36:10.

is that you are seeking to impose on the union is democratic and it's

:36:11.:36:13.

about trying to preclude strikes in public services. Where do you stand

:36:14.:36:18.

on this, Jeremy? Should the bar be raised? Should there be a higher

:36:19.:36:22.

turnout required for union members? I have difficulties with that

:36:23.:36:25.

because of the reasons just said. We could look at some reforms. I'm

:36:26.:36:29.

open-minded to the period between a ballot taking place and the strike

:36:30.:36:32.

happening changing. People might feel that a long period is no longer

:36:33.:36:38.

reflective of the views when they cast a vote. I think putting the

:36:39.:36:41.

threshold in places difficult. I wouldn't go on strike if I was a

:36:42.:36:45.

teacher on Thursday. But you wouldn't change the law either? The

:36:46.:36:49.

unions have to use their power responsibly and we live way beyond

:36:50.:36:55.

our means as a country, and they have an obligation to teach children

:36:56.:36:58.

and an obligation to the parents whose children go to the school, and

:36:59.:37:02.

I think a lot of professional teachers will feel uncomfortable

:37:03.:37:04.

about that strike. Let's leave it there.

:37:05.:37:07.

Now, a little later than usual, it's time for our quiz,

:37:08.:37:10.

and as you're probably aware the Chancellor and Foreign Secretary are

:37:11.:37:12.

And as a former Foreign Office Minister Jeremy,

:37:13.:37:16.

will know just how important it is to ingratiate yourself with

:37:17.:37:22.

the locals. Here is Jeremy on such a trip to China in 2011.

:37:23.:37:27.

So our question for today is - what animal should William Hague be

:37:28.:37:34.

At the end of the show, Jeremy and the rest of the panel will hopefully

:37:35.:37:48.

How many times have we use that picture of you with the panda? Every

:37:49.:37:58.

time I have been the programme. It is the best photo of me though.

:37:59.:38:01.

The perennial row over communications surveillance has

:38:02.:38:03.

The government looks set to introduce new legislation to require

:38:04.:38:07.

the retention of certain data, such where and when you have been

:38:08.:38:09.

using your smartphone or accessing emails, but not the content

:38:10.:38:12.

The new laws are required after the European Court of Justice

:38:13.:38:18.

Charlotte Leslie, what exactly is the government proposing to do? It

:38:19.:38:47.

is looking again at the existing rules to make sure they can govern

:38:48.:38:50.

as they need and comply with the judgement of the European Court of

:38:51.:38:53.

Justice Cross because they don't at the moment? No, they don't. We live

:38:54.:38:58.

in an ever-changing world and the security threats change all the

:38:59.:39:02.

time. It's about a balance between protecting civil liberties from

:39:03.:39:06.

government and from terrorists who have bad intentions against us. They

:39:07.:39:11.

are looking to reshape it. There are no firm proposals on the table but

:39:12.:39:15.

they want to rejig it so we can gather the data we need, which is

:39:16.:39:20.

surveillance over e-mails and phone calls. Is there anything for people

:39:21.:39:27.

to be worried about? Your party gets worried about the sort of things on

:39:28.:39:29.

civil liberties, but nothing will dramatically change, will it, as

:39:30.:39:36.

long as they comply, that will be protected? I sound like I'm

:39:37.:39:41.

answering indirectly, and maybe I am, but I'm trying to be honest. All

:39:42.:39:46.

politicians, virtually everyone watching the programme realises

:39:47.:39:50.

there is some balance to be struck between security and Civil Liberties

:39:51.:39:54.

and very few people are at one end or the other. They sit somewhere in

:39:55.:39:59.

between. It is nine years since the bombs in London and people are

:40:00.:40:37.

mindful about national security and they are right to be. But the

:40:38.:40:49.

Liberal Democrats have an instinct as a party that the government, the

:40:50.:40:52.

state, works for us as people and not the other way around and we have

:40:53.:40:53.

a strong emotional attachment to Civil Liberties. When we are faced

:40:54.:40:54.

with these questions we are concerned about security and Civil

:40:55.:40:55.

Liberties but we tend to be particularly aware of any Civil

:40:56.:40:55.

Liberties implications or any legislation. We are keen to protect

:40:56.:40:55.

Liberties implications or any people 's freedom to communicate

:40:56.:40:56.

without unfair interference. But people 's liberal -- Civil Liberties

:40:57.:40:56.

are not really being challenged? Or are they? We are not closed minded,

:40:57.:41:00.

but we have to get the balance right. We tried to introduce ID

:41:01.:41:07.

cards, so there's nothing Labour won support when it comes to

:41:08.:41:11.

surveillance? I don't think that is true -- and won't support. There is

:41:12.:41:17.

a balance to be struck. We know that, but what is the balance?

:41:18.:41:36.

Should you be able to look at the content of phone calls, messages,

:41:37.:41:42.

Internet, whoever they are? Not those just on a suspect list. It

:41:43.:41:46.

sometimes feels like we are dancing on the head of the pin. When you

:41:47.:41:55.

look at the Edward Snowden files and what is arguably being looked at,

:41:56.:42:02.

and when you look at what private companies currently know about our

:42:03.:42:12.

lives because of what we allow them to do in terms of tracking data. We

:42:13.:42:29.

need to look at what the right level of intrusion is. I don't we should

:42:30.:42:39.

go any further than what is proposed now. I think Labour is asking for a

:42:40.:42:44.

simple debate because these are not straight for answers questions. --

:42:45.:42:48.

record. Do we not need increased surveillance powers to track people

:42:49.:42:54.

going to fight in Iraq? There is an issue about the power the state has

:42:55.:42:59.

two monitor 6 million people in the UK, regardless of what you've done

:43:00.:43:10.

or whether you have a track record. The Security service has always had

:43:11.:43:23.

an ability to track individuals and we should be careful. Would you

:43:24.:43:26.

support blanket powers in this time of national security worries? You do

:43:27.:43:29.

have to look at the detail about this, and this is about lives we are

:43:30.:43:31.

protecting. It's easy to sit in a studio and get excited about Civil

:43:32.:43:35.

Liberties, but we have the Berwick against the protection of lives. --

:43:36.:43:37.

Berwick against. While we were on David Cameron has been asked about

:43:38.:43:39.

the situation with the allegations of child abuse at Whitehall. I am

:43:40.:43:42.

determined we will leave no stone unturned to find out the truth about

:43:43.:43:46.

what happened. That is vital, and it is also vital that we learn the

:43:47.:43:50.

lessons right across the board from these things that have gone wrong,

:43:51.:43:53.

and it's also important that the police feel that they can go

:43:54.:43:58.

wherever the evidence leads and make all the appropriate arrangements.

:43:59.:44:05.

Three things need to happen, robust enquiries they get to the truth.

:44:06.:44:09.

Police investigations that pursue the guilty and find out what has

:44:10.:44:12.

happened. And proper lessons learned so we make sure that these things

:44:13.:44:16.

cannot happen again. That is what will happen under my government. We

:44:17.:44:20.

have a statement from the Home Secretary, Theresa May, in a few

:44:21.:44:22.

hours time. So say the leaders of medical

:44:23.:44:32.

Royal Colleges, two non-executive directors of

:44:33.:44:34.

NHS England and patient groups. They are calling

:44:35.:44:37.

for a radical rethink of what the NHS offers, or more money to

:44:38.:44:39.

sustain the current service. One

:44:40.:44:41.

of the signatories to that letter is Chris Hopson who represents NHS

:44:42.:44:43.

foundation trusts and joins me now. What are you calling for exactly? A

:44:44.:44:53.

national debate. A taxpayer funded NHS is a great system in that it is

:44:54.:44:57.

equitable and provides fantastic outcomes, but you get what you pay

:44:58.:45:02.

for, and the NHS is basically going through 45 years of financial

:45:03.:45:06.

squeeze, the biggest and longest squeezing its financial history --

:45:07.:45:11.

four or five. We are doing 1 million more on the same money that we did

:45:12.:45:15.

before, but if you look forward over the next five years, and I thought

:45:16.:45:21.

the debate about the strikes brought this out, we still have quite a long

:45:22.:45:23.

way to go to eliminate the budget deficit, so there is a real question

:45:24.:45:27.

about how we should fund the NHS and what level of service can we get.

:45:28.:45:33.

That's a debate we feel strongly needs to be had. With the British

:45:34.:45:40.

public and politicians as well. Is the NHS creaking at the seams? There

:45:41.:45:46.

is no doubt about that. If you look at the increases in demand. At a

:45:47.:45:50.

hospital hast week, we were talking about a 7. 5 increase in terms of

:45:51.:45:56.

the number of patients admitting to A compared to last year. Like it

:45:57.:45:59.

or not ex-we have an iller population and a population which

:46:00.:46:02.

effectively therefore needs more care and that, you know, we

:46:03.:46:07.

therefore kind of need to pay for it. If you get what you pay for, a

:46:08.:46:12.

4% increase, it's very difficult for the NHS to carry on meeting that

:46:13.:46:17.

demand on effectively flat cash. What would you like to see? You say

:46:18.:46:21.

flat cash, would you like to see a real terms increase in NHS spending,

:46:22.:46:27.

a much bigger real terms increase than has been claimed by the

:46:28.:46:30.

Government, would you like to see the taxpayer help fund it in terms

:46:31.:46:34.

of payments to GPs or social insurance schemes, or should the NHS

:46:35.:46:38.

cut down on what it offers? Well, so for me to be frank, I don't think

:46:39.:46:43.

it's for us to really say... But you must have a view? The thing we have

:46:44.:46:47.

a view on is the fact that we need a national debate about this because

:46:48.:46:53.

effectively that's the point about a tax-funded paying system. Clearly

:46:54.:46:57.

all of us in the Health Service would like to be a significant

:46:58.:47:00.

increase in the resources we have available but we elect our

:47:01.:47:03.

politicians to set those limits in terms of spending but crucially, we

:47:04.:47:07.

think it's really important that the patients, the taxpayers, should also

:47:08.:47:11.

have a part in that debate. If I'm honest, what we are concerned about

:47:12.:47:14.

is, we are going into a general election where there's a bit of a

:47:15.:47:18.

track record of all of our political parties wanting to demonstrate their

:47:19.:47:22.

fiscal recollect dued but on the other hand not being able to spell

:47:23.:47:26.

out the consequences and I think there's a really interesting

:47:27.:47:29.

question about whether, if you want to eliminate the budget deficit over

:47:30.:47:32.

the next Parliament, you can continue to maintain the NHS

:47:33.:47:37.

ringfence. OK. So sorry, to maintain the ringfence? So what we are saying

:47:38.:47:43.

is, if you look at all the expert predictions going forward, there is

:47:44.:47:47.

a ?30 billion gap for the NHS by 2020 but that assumes that the NHS

:47:48.:47:50.

ringfence remains in place and what we are saying is that I think if you

:47:51.:47:54.

want to eliminate the budget deficit over the next Parliament which I

:47:55.:47:58.

suspect all of the political parties want to do, it's, to be frank, very

:47:59.:48:01.

difficult to even keep the ringfence in place so we need a debate which

:48:02.:48:06.

is what level of service do we want for what level of funding. Thank you

:48:07.:48:10.

very much. How much more money would you put

:48:11.:48:13.

into the NHS to keep it at the level it is And should it have more cash?

:48:14.:48:21.

It's not going to be sustain sod say the experts? We need to look at the

:48:22.:48:25.

cash we can possibly afford to spend on it. This is a question that all

:48:26.:48:28.

polices have known we are going to have the face, we have huge increase

:48:29.:48:36.

in demand and we can't pay for it under the political football. We

:48:37.:48:41.

need a cross party debate because whoever wins the election, they are

:48:42.:48:45.

going to be holding the hot potato of the timebomb that won't be able

:48:46.:48:50.

to cope with demand. We all need for our own political interests and for

:48:51.:48:53.

the public most of all to work out how we are going to fund the thing.

:48:54.:49:01.

Was that top down policy a winner from Andrew Lansley? It's a

:49:02.:49:05.

short-term cost for long-term savings, so how much of a success it

:49:06.:49:10.

is we'll be able to say in five, seven, ten years. You wanted a frank

:49:11.:49:16.

debate, but what is your view about how to sustain the NHS? Increase the

:49:17.:49:20.

spending or cut what is on offer? There are so many things involved. I

:49:21.:49:24.

think look at what we are offering to see what we are doing, so yes we

:49:25.:49:29.

might look at what we offer. GPs have spoken to me about charging for

:49:30.:49:32.

missed a I pointments for example. How do you feel about that? I think

:49:33.:49:36.

perhaps it would be interesting to pilot it. We also need to encourage

:49:37.:49:42.

all of us, our generations are very stoic, they say sorry for taking up

:49:43.:49:47.

your time when we are half dying, we tend to go when we have a sore

:49:48.:49:51.

throat and say, I need pills. We also need to look at hour own

:49:52.:49:57.

responsibility towards it. What would you do about the funding

:49:58.:50:02.

of the NHS? There's a bit of a conspiracy by politicians of all

:50:03.:50:08.

parties. The NHS in its existing form is sustainable indefinitely - I

:50:09.:50:11.

don't think it is. They are kidding the population? Without putting more

:50:12.:50:19.

money in, I was going to say? Labour more than doubled spending on the

:50:20.:50:23.

NHS in real terms, aploughing for inflation even. All the polls said

:50:24.:50:28.

people were satisfied -- allowing for inflation even. We are still

:50:29.:50:34.

talking now about money for health, stillish eyes of new illnesses --

:50:35.:50:39.

issues of new illnesses. I don't think anyone believes if Labour win

:50:40.:50:42.

the next election all the problems will be solved in health. The

:50:43.:50:45.

problem we have as a country, we have protected the health budget, so

:50:46.:50:49.

other areas like the police have been cut. How much of an increase in

:50:50.:50:53.

the health budget? Very small. Negligible? But every other

:50:54.:50:58.

department's had a real terms decrease, so health's stood still.

:50:59.:51:04.

But what would you do? Would you make it a priority and put more

:51:05.:51:08.

money into the Health Service or cut the service it offers? It's not

:51:09.:51:13.

plausible to cut the service. People's expect aces of health care

:51:14.:51:17.

are rising rightly. We need thefind sources of revenue. Social insurance

:51:18.:51:21.

scheme? My personal view is that it is not going to be affordable. If we

:51:22.:51:25.

are going to keep it going for years, Labour could keep it going

:51:26.:51:30.

for a few years. I'm talking about when I'm retired... We'll keep it

:51:31.:51:34.

going forever, Jeremy. The NHS will be safe under Labour. Labour have

:51:35.:51:39.

left behind a country virtually bankrupt, they do it every time. We

:51:40.:51:43.

have to be able to think about how we are going to afford commitment.

:51:44.:51:47.

What we can't do is keep spenting money until it runs out every single

:51:48.:51:55.

time like Labour do in Government. We need to look after the ageing

:51:56.:51:59.

population. So how do you keep it going in the way we expect the NHS

:52:00.:52:03.

to continue? The first thing you wouldn't do is start from where we

:52:04.:52:14.

are which is spending. That is more of the dividing rule nonsense. Doing

:52:15.:52:19.

a disservice to any realistic debate. Let's come on to that in a

:52:20.:52:28.

moment. You should be more worried about the fact that your records are

:52:29.:52:33.

worse on cancer services. ALL SPEAK AT ONCE

:52:34.:52:46.

We'll come on to that. How will Labour fund the NHS? We'll continue

:52:47.:52:50.

to fund the NHS through taxpayer funding, just as we always supported

:52:51.:52:56.

it. There's a ?30 million back hole. When Labour came to power in 1997,

:52:57.:53:00.

we were spending far less than the European average. These questions

:53:01.:53:04.

were being asked then, Labour invested in the NHS, boosting

:53:05.:53:10.

spending from around ?40 billion to around ?112 billion when we left

:53:11.:53:14.

office. That was sensible investment in the future of this country and

:53:15.:53:17.

we'll need, no doubt, to invest in the NHS in years to come because

:53:18.:53:22.

it's implausible. So you will increase spending? I think it

:53:23.:53:26.

implausible, health inflation we all know runs very, very high. A higher

:53:27.:53:32.

indeed. It's implausible for anyone to suggest that we won't need to

:53:33.:53:36.

spend more on health in the future. We are all talking about something

:53:37.:53:48.

else. Hang on. Be angry for your own constituents because 62-day waiting

:53:49.:53:53.

time for cancer sufferers in your constituency is at 80%, the Welsh

:53:54.:53:59.

average is 93%. How do you take the Party Politics

:54:00.:54:06.

out? We have to be honest about it. If things are wrong in my

:54:07.:54:08.

constituency, you know what, that's bad too. But do we hear about it?

:54:09.:54:13.

The Government always turns to Wales because it sees it as a weakness in

:54:14.:54:18.

its eyes? I've been critical of my Government in not getting rid of

:54:19.:54:22.

David nilologison but we've got to be honest about what's going on, yes

:54:23.:54:26.

bad stuff happens. Be honest about your Trust? There is bad stuff

:54:27.:54:29.

happening in my Trust and I've been very open about that. We have got to

:54:30.:54:34.

be honest where things are wrong, listen to the doctors because with

:54:35.:54:39.

if edon't, there'll be no NHS -- if we don't, there'll be no NHS.

:54:40.:54:46.

You might have noticed the Tour de France became the tour de-Yorkshire

:54:47.:54:49.

over the weekend, fantastic it looked too. They cycled over ill

:54:50.:54:55.

chill moor though not by at the and it's not God's county's first

:54:56.:55:01.

sporting success. There was more medals won in 2012 Olympics than

:55:02.:55:05.

Spain, Brazil and South Africa. If Yorkshire was a country, it would

:55:06.:55:12.

have come 12th. So should Yorkshire push for independence? Yorkshire

:55:13.:55:16.

humour may be, but to big up the county, let's speak to Smith from

:55:17.:55:27.

Mike's -- speak to Mike Smith from Mike's Carpets? We should work off

:55:28.:55:34.

the back of the Tour de France and let people know what Yorkshire is

:55:35.:55:37.

like. There are millions of people who've never seen Yorkshire before

:55:38.:55:39.

and the tour US industry now is going to be booming. I think we

:55:40.:55:40.

should be slightly autonomous, not totally separated from the rest of

:55:41.:55:43.

the country, but a little better. We shouldn't have a King or Queen of

:55:44.:55:49.

Yorkshire, although, if I'm asked I would consider of course, but we

:55:50.:55:53.

should be autonomous and more independent in finances and Local

:55:54.:55:57.

Governments and all that, certainly we are the most beautiful county and

:55:58.:56:02.

we should be more autonomous. The Tourist Board should get you on

:56:03.:56:08.

their panel. What do you mean by slightly autonomous because Regional

:56:09.:56:11.

Assemblies was an idea floated by the last Government but everyone

:56:12.:56:18.

rejected it? In terms of finance, being a Yorkshireman of course, we

:56:19.:56:22.

should be more in charge of our own money. Not total financial

:56:23.:56:29.

separation, but now we have got the Tour de France from Yorkshire, and

:56:30.:56:34.

we should run off the back of that and be more in charge of our own

:56:35.:56:38.

finance in terms of tax concessions for the business people in the Dales

:56:39.:56:43.

and North Yorkshire, they have had a bad time the last 20 years with

:56:44.:56:46.

foot-and-mouth and the recession and everything and they are doing OK

:56:47.:56:50.

again and they want to do better. Thank you very much. Owen Smith,

:56:51.:56:54.

everybody talks about holding more power. Oppositions talk about it and

:56:55.:56:57.

the Government have been talking about it. In the end, people don't

:56:58.:57:00.

want to have regional Governments and assemblies and new structures

:57:01.:57:05.

put in place, to they? I don't think you are right. I think Scotland and

:57:06.:57:10.

Wales. They voted for it? Irrespective of Regional Assemblies,

:57:11.:57:14.

they didn't, because they were insufficiently powerful and people

:57:15.:57:17.

saw that they were just talking shops. If you had real powers, and

:57:18.:57:22.

we are proposing real powers, we think Mike's on to something, that's

:57:23.:57:26.

a good idea for Yorkshire. Briefly, Michael Heseltine suggested ?70

:57:27.:57:29.

billion for his regeneration of cities, you are talking about ?10

:57:30.:57:33.

billion, it's a drop in the ocean in terms of his vision? Show me the

:57:34.:57:37.

money, it doesn't grow on trees. It's about making money from it

:57:38.:57:40.

isn't it? Having responsibility for themselves tends to work well. In

:57:41.:57:44.

Bristol we have an elected mayor, it's going well. Let us leave it

:57:45.:57:47.

there. Just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.

:57:48.:57:52.

Earlier, we showed you this picture, again of Jeremy Browne on a visit to

:57:53.:58:03.

China. We wanted to know, what animal should he be pictured

:58:04.:58:09.

cuddling up to? An elephant, Bengal tiger, lemur or Indian crested

:58:10.:58:15.

porcupine? Which animal should William Hague be cuddling up to

:58:16.:58:20.

Definitely the tiger. Ben gal tiger anybody? What do you think?

:58:21.:58:26.

Elephant. Indian elephant. Actually, it's the Ben gal tiger because it's

:58:27.:58:32.

the national symbol of India. I bet you are glad it was the panda for

:58:33.:58:38.

you, less ferocious. Yes, less frightening than a Bengal tiger.

:58:39.:58:43.

Elephants are very wise. William Hague was Home Secretary and I was

:58:44.:58:46.

Foreign Minister so it would reflect him. Very loyal you are, very loyal!

:58:47.:58:50.

Thank you to all of you, particularly to our MP guests, the

:58:51.:58:55.

panel. The One o'clock news is starting on BBC One and I'm back at

:58:56.:58:57.

noon tomorrow. starting on BBC One and I'm back at

:58:58.:58:57.

noon Bye.

:58:58.:59:00.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS