07/07/2014 Daily Politics


07/07/2014

Jo Coburn is joined by a panel of MPs to look ahead to the week's political events, including the public sector strikes on Thursday. Plus all the other political news and debate.


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.

Jo Coburn is joined by a panel of MPs to look ahead to the week's political events, including the public sector strikes on Thursday. There will also be all the other political news, interviews and debate.


Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS