09/09/2014 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 09/09/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Good afternoon, and welcome to the Daily Politics.


The three pro-union parties bury their differences to offer Scotland


a new timetable for more powers for the Scottish Parliament - but will


it be enough to halt the apparent momentum behind the Yes campaign?


Free schools, academies, specialist schools, technical colleges.


There's an array of different schools on offer


in England these days - but will they drive up standards or


Baby boomers have more than enough money to fund their retirement


according to new research - so is it time to cut their benefits?


The South Yorkshire Police Commissioner will tell a Commons


committee why he won't resign over the Rotherham child abuse scandal.


What's happened to the champions of accountable policing?


All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole of the programme


today is the former Conservative Cabinet Minister Kenneth Baker.


First this afternoon, as we've got a former Conservative


Party chairman with us, let's turn to the party's fortunes.


A poll by Lord Ashcroft yesterday put Labour seven points ahead -


though other recent polls have shown a narrower lead.


Why is it that Labour has a strong lead in one poll and is still ahead


this most others, when according to the Conservatives, and the


Government in general, the economy is recovering? Well, I am not


worried about the existing polls because when the election approaches


as we discovered in Scotland they get closer and they will get closer


when the main factor of the next general election will be


Presidential between Cameron and Miliband. You are relying on the


personality of the leadership. If the polls close, I put it to you


that Labour still on paper, because of all the reasons that have been


set out, because of boundaries and the way the election process is


carried out, Labour still wins To be even we have to be nine points


ahead. That was 2010 on polling day, we didn't get through the boundary


change bill, which is a mistake, so we have a huge disadvantage, but


there are other factors coming in to bear on the election, not least


Scotland. It is a different constitutional world we will live


in, either way, whether they go yes or no, there is a huge change


heading up for Britain. What about issues where the Conservatives and


many Conservative MPs feel that they are being challenged by UK


Independence Party. The issue of immigration for example? UKIP, the


interesting analysis of UKIP support is the basic support of UKIP comes


from the old British working class. They are the core of UKIP votes. And


that will affect Labour seats as well as Conservative seats, it is


not only a down side for the Conservative, it is a down side also


for Labour. This is why Miliband is so concerned, he is quiet about it.


I will bring breaking news to you and we will get your response which


is that David Cameron, the Prime Minister, Ed Miliband the Leader of


the Labour Party have agreed to cancel their weekly Question Time,


Prime Minister's Questions clash, to travel to Scotland. Now, what do you


say to that? That is very good of them. It shows how worried they are.


There is no doubt that it is neck and neck in Scotland now, and they


have the great advantage, in this referendum of having the best thing


to vote for. It is much better to be saying yes, yes, yes to something


than no, no, no. And some, one of the first big victory in the


question, the question should have within do you want to stay in the


United Kingdom? That is the answer to yes. The actual question of the


referendum is do you want to have a free Scotland, yes. No is on the


back foot. Has the become clear in the last few days. What impact will


it have, seeing both David Cameron, Ed Miliband and in fact Nick Clegg,


all three main UK party leaders will be in Scotland. They won't appear


Tottenham together for obvious reason, do you think that will have


a major impact on the tightening of the polls. It is intensify concern


of those who want no, and the undecided, it is the undecided now,


the people who have de Vrijjed are 50-50. You have 14, 15% undecided.


You have to go for those, the fact the three leading political figures


are going to Scotland to show their concern will be helpful. Do you


think that David Cameron as the leader of the Tory party, as well as


being Prime Minister, will actually put off potential voters in Scotland


on the issue of independence, as many people have said, which is why


he has been relatively low-key in this campaign, and they have allowed


Gordon Brown, a former Labour Prime Minister to take the lead with this


latest offer. It is basically the Labour vote you are going for, that


is why Brian was there yesterday. Miliband is going tomorrow. They are


doing that because it the Labour vote that is undecided. You see,


what is interesting about this, the Labour Party went for a Scottish


Parliament to diffuse Scottish nationalism and it failed. The


Conservatives didn't support it at the time Agreed. They are now in the


position of being worried by it. If the Scot Nates win and they go yes


the Labour Party in Scotland will be on the retreat. Will David Cameron


survive? Well, that is very interesting, will he resign or not?


Yes or no? It is not as simple as that. There is a precedent when


George III lost the colonies he didn't abdicate but his Prime


Minister offered to resign, and the king didn't accept it. So the Queen


may not accept the resignation if it the made. Should he? That is a


personal decision for him, but the Queen may not accept it, because who


does she ask to be the Prime Minister? Who forms the Government?


They may lead to a immediate general election. We will continue talking


about the question of independence in Scotland, we will come back to


this issue that David Cameron and Ed Miliband won't appear at Prime


Minister's Questions. It is not being cancelled. William Hague and


Harriet Harman will face each other, so David Cameron and Ed Miliband


will join Nick Clegg up in Scotland. I think we can talk to our political


editor Nick Robinson. This is a dramatic news, isn't it, out of


Westminster, if we are going to have all three party leaders in Scotland.


Does this smack of panic? It does, it reveals really, the grow of


anxiety there is among Westminster party leaders that Scotland is about


to vote, not just to go her own way but to break up the United Kingdom


to end Britain as we know it. Now, the decision was taken, I am told by


David Cameron and Ed Miliband when they met to discuss the Scottish


referendum, straight after the Commons statement on the NATO


summit, yesterday afternoon. But, for people who think, well, so what,


it is like missing a day in the office, it is more important than


that, one of the question constitutional duties of a Prime


Minister is to face questions in the House of Commons. One of the key


duties of the leader of the opposition to lead that questioning,


for them to voluntarily give that up in agreement with Nick Clegg, the


Leader of the Labour Party, in order to head to Scotland, is pretty


dramatic, and shows just how concerned they are. They are not


going to appear together which perhaps isn't all together


surprising, what what message are they each going to give to Scottish


voter, will they differ in that sense? It is the message in their


joint statement, we want you to stay. This is modelled, I think, on


what was used by pro Canadian campaigner, in the Quebec


referendum. Remember, those of you that know this, what happened in


Quebec just as in Scotland the yes side pulled ahead, there was a panic


that Canada might be broken up and one of the things that is said to


have pulled that back, in a very very narrow victory in that


referendum, for the no campaign, is the statement coming from the rest


of Canada, in this case, the rest of the UK, that we want you to stay.


That is why, for example, you are seeing Ed Miliband saying that the


saltire would be raised in Liverpool, along with the lead other


the City Council. That is why it will be flown over Downing Street


later today, that is why there will be an encouragement by all the


political party, their members and supporters and no doubt to people


who run Town Halls throughout England, Wales and Northern Ireland,


fly the flag to show you want Scotland to stay. And this of course


after headlines today, saying Gordon Brown, a former Prime Minister, was


going to save the union and save the day. Yes, in a sense what was vital


for them about yesterday, is the fight back was led by a Scot, in


Scotland, and by Labour, so some people thought than Gordon Brown had


stolen the Tories's thunder or a government announcement, it wasn't


as simple as that, the unionist parties have been talking with each


forefor a long time. What was true is that Gordon Brown said "I am the


guy who can do this now." And David Cameron is seen as too English and


too Tory. Ed Miliband's trust ratings in the latest polls are as


bad as David Cameron's which is remarkable, given he the Leader of


the Labour Party, Alistair Darling got a bloody nose from Alex Salmond


and therefore the view was this must be seen and seen to be a Labour


initiative, did, could you count number of times they told you it was


a Labour initiative ged in virtually every sentence but it had been


co-ordinated with all the parties behind the scenes. It was Gordon


Brown as we have been hearing from our political end to who set out a


timetable to deliver more powers for Scotland the event of a no vote in


next weeks referendum. It was better together's responsibility to polls


suggesting that support for the two camps is neck and neck. The poll


which has yes one point ahead of no, once undecideds are. A new poll was


released today. Gordon Brown's timetable endorsed by the three main


parties would seal work beginning on new legislation the day after the


referendum. By the end of October, a command paper would be published by


the Government setting out the proposals and a White Paper would be


published by the end of November. Finally, there would be draft


legislation by the end of January, what mared next week Scotland is set


to gain new powers under the 2012 Scotland Act. From 2016 Holyrood


will have the power to vary income tax by ten pence and borrow more


money. The Scottish Government will have power over air gun,


drink-driving and speeding limits. At the moment, the party's differ on


what further power should be given to Scotland. The Conservatives says


Holyrood should have full income tax powers. Labour would volcanic ash


Ritz and the Liberal Democrats who want a more federal UK, would give


Scotland further control over taxation including inher tanth tans


tax and income tax. We are hoping to be joined by Blair McDougall of the


better together campaign and we are joined by Angus report son. Welcome.


Let us get your response to this dramatic news. David Cameron and Ed


Miliband are travelling to Scotland, they are going to try and say to


Scottish voters, stay with the union. Yes, you can literally smell


the panic here on College Green as the Westminster establishment is


going into meltdown, really important for you viewers elsewhere


in the UK, to hear the numbers because they haven't been told them


yet, that support for yes is up six, support for no is down six and we


are seeing a projected turn out of 84% in the referendum, which is


tremendously good news for yes. Now what we are seeing in Scotland, is


the panicked reaction with the three London-based parties, rewarming an


announcement on minimal further devolution, which, as I understand


it, is only going to give the Scottish Parliament and Government


control of only 30% of Scottish tax revenue, as opposed to independence


and 100%, and all the -- all ready that proposal is falling apart today


in Scotland, so I guess what is happening is that the three UK


leaders are realising they have to get involved and do something, I


suppose one of the good things that might come out of it is David


Cameron might find a backbone when he is in Scotland and debate Alex


Salmond. You have heard it here first! Let us take up the general


thrust which is there the panic, that seems to be fairly clear, they


are throwing the kitchen sink at this, which could pressuredown,


because there is still a significant number of undecided and don't knows


in Scotland, you have the former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown,


who is taking the lead on bringing forward this timetable. We have


heard the other three party leaders are going to be in Scotland. You are


under an awful lot of pressure, because what you are promising is


going to take longer to deliver to Scotland than what is being offered


by the better together campaign. They will be able to offer more


powers, a version of Home Rule says Gordon Brown ahead of your 2016


timetable. Did you say the pressure is on the yes campaign? The pressure


is on the no campaign. It is tight Their support is down and there is a


huge transfer of people not just from undecided. People from no,


today, one of the most significant business leaders in Scotland, Ian


Gordon, who was head of the Defence Industry Association has declared he


has moved from no to yes. He is not alone, there are people all over


Scotland deciding. That is why it is panic stations.


Let's put that to Blair McDougall, who is joining us from Glasgow. Are


you panicked? This is extraordinary. The reason Angus is so upset, and


can I say, it is great to see him at Westminster, good to see that he can


travel down here to be on television, even if he could not go


to Westminster to vote on the bedroom tax. We want more powers in


Scotland, but without the huge economic risks of separation. We can


now see that despite them saying for 2.5 years, every time concerns were


raised about jobs, or about the NHS, they told us we were scaremongering,


but we can see in the real reaction of the markets, where ?2.3 billion


was taken off the price of Scottish companies yesterday. These things


are real. Yes, we are giving greater clarity, greater guarantees to


people about what they will get with a no vote, but what that does, along


with the reaction from the market, is that it exposes the fact that


there are no guarantees from the other side whatsoever. So why do you


need David Cameron and Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband to rescue your


campaign? That is not the case at all, we have been doing this for


months, talking about the powers that will be coming to the Scottish


Parliament. There has been a clear consensus about bringing more


welfare powers to Scotland. What we are seeing is the parties coming


together and throwing their full authority behind it, because this is


where people are making up their mind. The other side cannot even


tell us what currency we would use. We, on the other hand, want to give


voters absolute clarity. I can hear Angus laughing down the line, but


maybe he can stop laughing and tell us why he did not come down to vote


against the bedroom tax. Under the current settlement, does the


Scottish Government have complete control over how to run, and how


much money to spend on, the NHS in Scotland? It is a hand-me-down


budget from Westminster. It is determined by how much money is


transferred... You asked me a question, if you will allow me to


finish... One of the great advantages with a yes vote is that


we will be in charge of 100% of Scotland's budget. Even with this


latest plan, the anti-Independence parties do not trust the government


of Parliament Scotland to determine more than 30% of Scotland's budget.


On the bedroom tax, it is important to clarify, when there was a


substantive vote on it, I voted against it, and Labour MPs


abstained, I am sorry. I will interrupt this little argument


between yourselves, I want to get back to the question about the NHS,


because you do have power over policy on the NHS. You can choose


how much of the block grant to spend on the NHS, you can increase income


tax to a limited extent. If you wanted to put more money into the


NHS, you could. So I put it to you that you are putting up a strawman,


saying to Scottish voters that the NHS in Scotland is under threat


without Independence - that is not true. The keyword you used was


limited, which is exactly correct. If you will let me answer, again...


You are not answering my question. You have not given me a chance. What


is correct to say is that Scotland's budget is handed down


from Westminster, and with a yes vote, we will change all of that.


But is why so many people around Scotland are saying the best way to


protect it, as opposed to the privatisation route being pursued


down here, is a yes vote. These are the reasons why the no campaign is


totally rattled, they have lost the initiative, they are going to lose


the referendum. Who does have control over the NHS in Scotland,


Blair McDougall? We do. We have 100% control over the NHS, which means we


can protect the budget for the NHS in Scotland. That is a precise quote


from the manifesto which Angus wrote in 2011 for the Scottish Parliament


elections. This is a scare story they have concocted. The interesting


thing is, firstly, the SNP government themselves are overseeing


a massive increase in private provision in the NHS in Scotland.


This is total hypocrisy from them, to cover up the fact that they know


that the real threat to the NHS in Scotland is the huge ?6 billion of


additional cuts, over and above UK cuts, which have been identified by


the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Why in this latest offer that we are


hearing about does the no campaign say, we will pledge to protect the


NHS in Scotland from further austerity, if Scotland has 100%


control? Well, the tax powers which are within this often means that


Scotland can make decisions about public spending. What percentage of


Scotland's budget? The SNP government has chosen not to spend


money on health. This is the ridiculous side of the SNP, who have


a terrible record on health in Scotland, and who are trying to


blame the government down south. Blair, what percentage of


Scotland's budget will be determined by the Scottish Parliament, the


Scottish Government, under your campaign's proposals, is it more or


less than 30%, simple question? We have set out the plans in terms of


giving more powers to Scotland. There are disagreements on the


details, for example, do we go on three quarters of income tax, or do


we do 100% of income tax? For you, that will be enough reason to break


up a 300-year-old union. The only tax power you really want to bring


to Scotland I know is a power to bring a massive tax cut to the


wealthiest companies in Scotland. You talk about simple questions,


last night, Alex Salmond could not tell us how much that huge tax cut


for the richest companies in Scotland would cost, so maybe you


could answer that question? You will have to ask him on another


occasion. Thank you both very much. So, people in Scotland seem to be


tied on the future of their country, but what about the


English? Ed Miliband was in Liverpool today, encouraging the


people in England to urge Scots to reject independence, raising the


sole tyre over Liverpool Town Hall, and asking other councils to follow


suit. We want people in cities, towns and villages across the United


Kingdom to fly the Scottish flag, because we want to send a clear


message to the people of Scotland, please stay with us, because we


believe we are strong together. And we are starting here in Liverpool,


to send the message that we can achieve equality and social justice


together. We are now joined by two English men


with differing views on how Scotland should vote, the historian Tom


Holland, who is urging people in Scotland to vote no. Simon Jenkins


thinks they should vote yes to independence. Why has it taken this


poll, 11 days before the referendum, for the rest of the UK to wake up to


the prospect of the break-up of the union? Well, I think people have


been aware of the risks. Myself and fellow historian Dan Snow wrote a


letter six months ago, and we have spent the last months getting


assorted celebrities, all kinds of people, to sign it. Since we put


that up, we have been having more and more people from across England,


Wales and Northern Ireland putting their signatures to it, because


ultimately, what matters is that when people to wake up, there is a


framework for them to express their emotions of admiration for the


Scottish people, and let them know that we in the rest of the united


into want those bonds of citizenship to be maintained. So this is


demonstrating big love, if you like, for Scotland. Do you think that


emotional connection has been missing? I think there is a kind of


awkwardness about expressing Patria to some, perhaps, and expressing the


idea of Britishness. We are an uptight people, that is the


stereotype. But I think the time has come where we have to make it


absolutely clear, it is up to the Scots to decide whether they go, but


it would be terrible for them to go thinking that the rest of the United


Kingdom did not care. What is your view, it is everyone's union, isn't


it, it will affect everyone? I do not disagree, I would be sorry to


see Scotland go, as I would be sorry to see Wales go, but I do not think


it is as big an issue as it has begun to seem. If I was a Scot, I


would think, this has gone on long enough, there is no such thing as


full independence any more, the days of these big confederations are


over, all of Europe is breaking up, in a sense, that time has come. I


think we all need to calm down a bit, it has got completely


hysterical. I do not think it would make a big difference either to the


Scots or the English, but if I was a Scotsman, I think I would say,


enough is enough of this relationship. Are you going to


profess your emotional connection? I married a Scot, our three children


went to Scottish universities. That neither of the last two are quite


right. The real solution is a federal solution for the whole of


the United Kingdom, that is how you keep this lot together. Either a


solution of a completely independent Scotland, or a devo max Scotland,


does not really answer it. That is exactly why I am so keen for the


Scots to stay, because the union has not been a frozen entity, it has


continuously evolved, as before them the kingdoms of Scotland and England


evolved. I think the traditions and values and ideals which the Scots


have brought to Britain, to this great merging of traditions, is


precisely is what has made Britain such a great nation. Looking at the


optimism which is on display in Scotland at the moment, what I am


hoping is that the Scots will vote to stay with us and channel that


optimism for the good of everyone in this kingdom. Why in your mind is


independence better for the Scots? I think the days when you had these


comp located confederacy is, like the European Union, they are over.


Small, countries now want to be independent. Small is beautiful.


Small countries do better than bigger countries, it is in control


at. Luxembourg does better than France. But leave that to one side.


-- incontrovertible. Sovereignty is clearly desperately wanted by at


least half of Scots. I do not think it is a bad thing, self-government,


we want to detach ourselves from the European Union, to a certain


extent. People believe in governing themselves nowadays, they are grown


up, they are mature. They do not want to be told what to do by the


English. I think it is a sensible decision, and we should not get so


excited about it. There are quite a number of people who would actually


like to see Scotland go independent, they do not want to see promises of,


we will protect your NHS from cuts, what about the NHS in England, what


about all of these other promises? The Scots are being offered


everything, and the English will feel, hang on, why are we doing


this? I think that is very much a minority. Is it? I think a


substantial minority would like Scotland to stay. I think also one


of the risks of Scotland going independent, and as you say, people


in England are suddenly waking up to this, and there is a mood of alarm,


and of pain, and I think that when people are reject it, that is when


attitudes tend to freeze. I suspect that the one person who will benefit


from this will be England's Alex Salmond, who is clearly Nigel


Farage. Do you think the 2015 general election, if there is a


victory for the yes vote, will have to be postponed? I do not think it


would be. I think there is a possibility of having a general


election before Christmas if there is a yes vote, because there is a


huge constitutional model. The welfare benefits of Scotland with


English money. That is not a fair situation. The English feel this


very strongly. What is going to happen in Northern Ireland, what is


going to happen in Wales? You are playing with the whole constitution


of our country, which could be the subject of a general election.


Whoever wins that election would have to years. If we do not have an


early general election, the coalition government would have to


do part of the planning, then another government might come in in


May and change a lot of it. I have no doubt that a yes vote would be


pretty disastrous, constitutionally. Both in Scotland and in the rest of


the United Kingdom, which is one of the major reasons I hope they will


vote no. But beyond that, more than any of these issues, this is not


ultimately I think about finance or economics, ultimately, this is about


identity, and whether those of us in this country will be able to


continue to be simultaneously English or Scottish or Welsh or


Northern Ireland and British, or have those identities diced up and


demarcated? What do you say about identity, Simon Jenkins, because you


have attended lots of independence and debates? I think you have got to


get a grip on the single fact, which is that Scotland, Wales and Northern


Ireland have been dreadfully badly run by England for the past 25


years, they really have been badly run. Have they not done well to some


extent, financially? Yes, they have. They are literally


old-fashioned dependencies. There is no reason why Scotland should not be


as rich as Denmark. Why shouldn't Wales be poorer than the rest of


Britain when it used to be richer than the rest of Britain? These are


not successes. I think an independent Scotland would be a


pretty terrible place for ten years, but after that it would be a very


exciting place. This is like a kind of 1950s prep school teacher, saying


having a cold shower would be good for you. Sometimes it is good for


you, it is patronising to say it is not. Those days are over. Let me


come back to the celebrity support, because many people might think it


is rather patronising, so what about getting ordinary people, if you feel


they are so passionate, to support the campaign? That is what they did


in Quebec, and they said it tipped the balance in favour of staying


together, rather than independence. The sway of the luminaries we have


got, 200 people says something about how strongly everyone in Britain


feels. But I also think that the reason I am here is because I


organised that letter, the reason that attention is being fixed on


that letter and we are getting signatures from across Britain is


because the celebrities blazed the cause. The only reason we wrote it


is we want more and more people to go to the website and sign up to it.


You are a better historian and home fission. I would say one thing, in


praise of you, you were positive about the virtue of hanging


together. That has been missing from the no campaign, it has been on the


back foot, exaggerating the difficulty, what you wanted somebody


to say from the beginning, look, we love you, we want you with us and we


like that sort of thing, that is why the three leaders are going to


Scotland, they are injecting pops it I have. . The point about Scotland,


Scotland economically, is the richest part of the country, after


London and the south-east. Do you want to answer that briefly.


Any figures can be countermanded. I am sure the Government would say


that. Simon Jenkins and Tom Holland thank you.


Next, whether it's a free school, faith school or foundation school,


they all come in different shapes and sizes.


It means there's a long list of confusing education lingo


for parents and pupils to get their heads around.


And across England there's a relatively new breed of schools


called University Technical Colleges - the brainchild of our guest


These aren't toy tool, they are the real thing. At industry standard


they are normally found on the factory floor, so this might not


look like your average school, and it isn't. This is a rare specimen, a


UTC or University Technical College.


University Technical College are secondary schools for


14-19-year-old, they are taxpayer funded, flee to go to and they are


not selective. They teach the main academic subjects but the emphasis


is on practical and technical learning, and they are different


from other schools because they have to be sponsored by university, with


backing from businesses too. So no prizes for guessing which


London employer is supporting royal Greenwich UTC. Yes, that is right.


Transport for London. Mike Sharp is the principle here and admits they


need to work hard to get the school noticed by parents We have advert


fire, we have our face on the backs of bus, we send out mail shots, we


get media coverage, once the message gets out, people can look round and


see what we do, then it is relatively easy to sell it. You have


to get them here first. 17 new University Technical College s


opened this September. That means there are 30 across England and it


is expected 57 will be opened by 2016. Parents and pupils already


have to pick their way through a long and at times confusing list of


choice, University Technical College s are the latest kids on the


education block, there is other free schools and state schools of course.


Then there is academy, faith schools and grammar school, plus special


school, Community Schools, and foundation schools, not forgetting


private school, city technical colleges and studio schools For me


there were lots I could have gone to, since I wanted to become a civil


engineer this had the courses most schools wouldn't do. I wanted to


study architecture in my future, because the school does BTEC


construction, not many do that so I decided to come here. Keeping a


close eye on University Technical College is the Tory peer Lord Lucas,


the editor of the Good Schools Guide be so few UCTs how much diversity


are they providing Not much. There ought to be 1,000 of them. Give them


time. It is right to build them slowly otherwise you make too many


mistakes, if you start with a find and how they work and build that


good practise, it is easier to make something that works well. The


principle at royal Greenwich says ambitions here are high, with two of


its pupils applying to Cambridge. But University Technical College s


still have some way to go, before they become a mainstream choice for


parents and pupils. And we're joined now by Fiona Miller


of Comprehensive Future and Lord Baker, whose University Technical


Colleges were featured in that 30 of them in England at the moment,


but given we have such a shortage of engineers, and scientist, wouldn't


we be better teaching those subjects, in all schools? Well, all


schools do take science for example, but to do the engineering you, the


equipment for that college is ?1 million. No school could that. This


that school for two days a week the youngsters are making and designing


things with their hands on a long Walker working day from 8.30 to


five. The other time is spent doing GCSE subjects, we should have had


them 50 years ago. We had them in 1945 and they were closed by


snobbery, in the last four years we Magged to get it off the grouped. To


create approvals for 57 new schools in four years, is a record. Do you


agree there is a real demand for specialist schools like this,


because we have such an acute shortage of those skill, and they


are not taught in the same way in comprehensive state schools? I think


there is a very urgent need to address the fact that vocational


high quality skills training has been the Cinderella of the education


system for too long. Putting them into separate institution, I am not


convince. Why? How do you know they will be in the areas where you need


them? How can you put a school into that where there is a shortage of


places and you take pupils ousmt my concern about this whole situation


we are this is we have so many different types of schools set up,


governs in different way, managed in different ways. It is part of a


whole to meet the need there is. We place them where there is a need.


Local ploughiers come to us, in Scarborough for example, or right


over the country, in Leeds, man chest e Liverpool and in the


south-west, in Plymouth and a town like Newton Abbot. They say we can't


employ y youngster, they are not employable. Our record... Not by the


choice of a child who might want to do engineering? So therefore it is


driven by the demands of the economy, I agree with you, but that


is the biggest problem facing the country, the skills mismatch. That


is a massive shortage of skills. The English education system has failed.


It is a waste of talent... But it is a disgrace. Go for 1,000 University


Technical College s. Or offer a broader curriculum They can't do it


with the intensity we do. All I am saying there needs to be a planned a


pro proven so you can offer this to pupils where ever they are. We have


had the binary approach where it has been a disaster. Can I ask one thing


about the standards and you can talk about what you are so pleased about.


Standard are important, one can argue about the shortages and


filling a need. Standards are important. There have been three


inspections so far of the college, which have produced two grade three


and an inadequate one. Are you disappointed? Those are the first


round. I am disappointed. What we found, what that found is, we found


a huge improvement in maths, they deal with numbers all the time. From


what? A very poor standard. They are measured when they come in, we get


high results in math. We get 100% in the technical subjects, what is


difficult for us is English, because the English education is very bad.


Does that worry you? That is not true, because almost 80% of English


schools are judged outstanding.le but I think this goes to the heart


of the point your film referred to about the different types of


schools, who holds them to can't, I don't know, but I think they are


contracted to Government... I want to move on. The record we are, which


many don't have is when we have levers at 16 or 18, no-one is so far


joined the ranks of the unemployed. There has been no... This is all our


school, all our schools that have had levers so far. The other local


schools in Greenwich can't say that. The other schools across the country


can't say that. One of the things you have accepted that standards are


improving in state schools, I put it to you it is improveling because


there is more competition in the say it sec store, there is a wider


choice, particularly in urban areas and that has pushed up standards in


all of those schools but particularly in what one would call


the local comprehensive. There is more accountability, it has helped


to raise standards, Ofsted, the performance tables no doubt about


it. And other schools. Sp Teaching has got better, that is what we


need. Why has it got better? Under Governments, they have put emphasis.


Choice, choice. Choice has been increased on a massive scale. The


emphasis has been put on recruiting good people into teaching, the


quality of leadership, I have been a school governor for 20 year, is


higher than when my children first started school. It's a combination


of lots of different factor, you can't leave to it the market on its


own. One final pointor, go back Scotland, one of the things people


in Scotland look at what goes on in England and the drift to


privatisation which is what I fear... That is a different subject.


. Are you calling for the dismantling of schools that are, not


all of them but some faith schools and many of the academies, no, so


what you are saying... Particularly on behalf of parents you have


different schools with different admissions criteria. If you think


that the English education is doing so well, why are there are 750,000


young people, boys and girls who are unemployed at this moment in time


who have gone through 11 years of free education. That is a scandal.


It needs to improve. But that doesn't mean it isn't improving.


750,000! You should be representing your Government. 50,000... It is a


disgrace. UTCs are doing something about it. Final word there.


Is there such a thing as "over-saving"?


Yes, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, which has


released new research today, carried out in England, saying that many


couples born in the 1940s have more money than they need to maintain


IFS Director Paul Johnson is in our Westminster studio and can


What do you mean about oversaving? What we have done is try and look at


how much money people need in retirement, in order to be as


well-off as they were on average over their working lives, what, what


we find a lot of people, possibly by accident have ended up with more


money than they need to maintain that, they may not see it as


oversaving. They want want a better standard of living than they


previously had. It means they could have saved is less an been better


off while they were working. Do you think that the Government has


prioritised the needs of the older generation, policy wise, over those


of the younger generation? If you do look at what the Government has done


over the last four year, they have protected pensioner benefits, and


they have not protected benefits for younger people, tax rises have


largely hit people of younger ages, at a time when pensioner incomes


have nor the first time gone up to the average and a bit above it for


those below pension age, so there has been some protection of


pensioners, yes. It is strange to shear someone like yourself saying


pensioners have too much money. Does it matter? Good for them if they do.


What difference does it make? There is two things, first we should


celebrate what has been amazing change over the last three decades,


back in 1980, pensioners were very very much poorer than the rest of


the population, if you were old, there was a good chance you would be


poor, pensioner incomes are less than that of everyone else. It is a


triumph of social policy in many respects, in terms of whether it


matters, there is potentially an intergenerational problem here. One


reasons pensioner are well-off they got generous state pension, some of


them, generous occupational pensions, some of them. They have


done well in the housing market, some of them. The next generation


will do less well in those areas. Here to discuss are Cari Rosen,


editor of the website Gransnet and Angus Hanton, co-founder of


the Intergenerational Foundation. We have just heard, pensioners, over


saving, they are well off, they have been, to some extent, prioritised by


government policy, do you agree? Not necessarily. I think people are


grabbing the headline and running with it, but I think we have to


realise that the study is 1600 couples, and there are 12 million


pensioners in this country, so it is not representative of all of them,


by any means. But the baby boomers generation have had it relatively


easy, haven't they, in terms of many of them will perhaps have made a


reasonable amount of money on their property, they will have had


pensions either through their work or private pensions that have done


better than you would get now, despite changes coming. They have


not have to pay for university Jewish in and so on - do you agree


with that? Absolutely. -- University tuition. If you look at the tail end


of the baby boomers, like myself, it is a very different thing


altogether. So, yes, many people have done well, but it is the same


generation who are the first generation who, in retirement, for


whom it will be the norm to be living alone, Chas a massive


financial impact. Living alone, and living a lot longer, so they will


need more money for retirement. These people have got the windfall


benefit of their particular circumstances, the benefit of house


price increases, which is a straight transfer from the younger generation


to the older generation, whether they went all whether they give away


a large part of their life's earnings in getting a mortgage and


paying for that. So, what has happened is that the younger


generation are being asked to pay twice, to save for their own


generation, but also to pay for the older generation's pensions because


so many of these pensions are underfunded, and it is just not


fair. It is not fair, particularly after the recession we have just


had? And that is not something that anyone on our site would dispute.


But these people we are talking about, they have worked hard, paid


taxes and paid national insurance, and now, in


taxes and paid national insurance, looking after their grandchildren,


so their children can go back to work, so they are still contributing


to society. People are forgetting, ?7 billion a year in child care is


saved by an army of grandparents. You are getting that the wrong way


around. It is great that they are finding this private solution to


childcare, but it is because of a public failure, because both people


in the couple are having to work very hard. A lot of them would


prefer to be with their children. Absolutely. Don't you think policy


now should be redirected towards the younger generation, if the figures


speak for themselves, many people now in retirement have got enough


money for it? The evidence is that nobody wants to see their children


and grandchildren suffer at the expense of their own well-being. So,


should policy be redirect it? It is not as simple as that. We are an


ageing population, with more and more people claiming pension. If we


drive them all to Pena rhe, then the state would be in even more hot


water. The whole problem is the way the tax burden falls, which falls


very heavily on earned income. Young people going into work are paying


income tax, national insurance, student debt in many cases, almost


50% tax. By contrast, the older generation, whose wealth is in


pensions and housing, pay very little tax on rental income or on


pensions, for example. The fundamental thing we need to do is


we need to review all government policies, in terms of


intergenerational fairness. Do you accept that the Government has


shielded to some extent the older generation, cynics would say because


a lot of older people vote Tory? Well, basically, I agree with him.


And I think as Mr Johnson was saying earlier, there has been quite a big


shift to the elderly over the last 15 years, and the present generation


of pensioners will not be replicated in the future. The future is much


smaller pensions. This is why these baby boomers are the lucky


generation. If you get the Mail on Sunday, it has 12 - 15 pages


advertising cruises. The people who go on cruises are mainly older


middle age people. Young families with several children to not go on


cruises. What about universal benefits, you agree with the Lib


Dems, who say they would take the free TV licence away? Yes, it is


absurd that I should get a free TV licence. But means testing benefits,


it has been shown, costs more than the amount you would save. And there


are many people who rely on those benefits who would proud to claim.


That was the argument used on prescription charges, when they were


introduced. The exception was given for the elderly, it can be done.


Would you say that if you were still an elected politician with a


constituency? I would, but you are quite right, this is a headache for


any politician to say this. Lots of Tory MPs have said they would agree


with that after the election. Yes, and it is good to look at universal


benefits, which are an fair on the younger generation at a moment, but


that is a relatively small amount of money, compared to the pensions


issue. It is an important signal. But I wonder if you are right that


they are a lucky generation, or haven't we, and I am a baby boomer


as well, taken from the young? Is there not a change that we are not


just being lucky, but we are making our own luck by taking from the


younger generation? I will let that question hang.


Directly elected police and crime commissioners were supposed to make


the police accountable, but the Police Commissioner for South


Yorkshire does not want to be hold accountable for what happened under


his watch in Rotherham. Before becoming Police Commissioner, Shaun


Wright was the councillor with responsibility for children's


services at a time when hundreds of girls in the town were being


sexually abused. This afternoon, he appears before the Home Affairs


Select Committee to explain why he will not resign. Here is defending


himself last month. I do not think any of this was my direct fault.


What I take is collective responsibility. When you are a


member of a 63 person council, you take collective responsibility. And


I took my responsibility as part of that organisation. And I have moved


on and taken lessons from that experience and transferred those


into another organisation, South Yorkshire Police, and I am happy to


stand proudly on my record over the last couple of years as a police and


crime commissioner for South Yorkshire. I am joined now by former


Home Office Minister Damian Green and the Labour MP John Mann, and


they are both outside Parliament. First of all, John Mann, should


Shaun Wright resign? Yes, today. He should have resigned before.


Frankly, this demonstrates how unsuited he is to the job. Damian


Green? I completely agree. He is not doing himself any good, not doing


the post any good, and most of all, not doing the people in South


Yorkshire any good. If he was head of children's services at a time


when these disgraceful things were happening, then he clearly has more


than collective responsibility, he has some individual responsibility.


You have both said categorically that he should resign, but can he be


sacked? No, because, and this is an important point of principle, he is


an elected politician, just like John and me. Just as if he or I say


something unpopular, it is not for a Minister of the government to say,


no, you can no longer be an MP. If you are elected in a constituency,


then you should be chucked out by that constituency, unless you commit


a serious crime. He has done more perhaps than just done something


people do not like, over Cameron, Theresa May, many people have called


for him to resign, Sheffield council has passed a vote of no confidence


in him - should he not be sacked? As I say, because he is elected, the


only way you can be sacked if you have committed a criminal offence,


and that applies to elected people across the board. He should go. The


fact that all of the party leaders, I do not know anyone apart from


Shaun Wright who says Shaun Wright should survive. Frankly, I hope he


has a tough time in front of the select committee this afternoon. He


may well do. John Mann, that is democracy, isn't it, we have to wait


until there is another election? Well, it is not good democracy when


you have politicians running the local police, and they cannot be


recalled. If he does not resign, I would call on the Home Secretary to


take over South Yorkshire Police and force him out that way. It is


unsustainable for him to remain. He is a barrier to that police force


doing what they should have done many years ago, which is to get


their acts together and get these sex offenders arrested and put in


front of the courts. Even if he does resign, is it not likely that any


kind of by-election would seek a turnout similar to the one held in


the West Midlands in the summer, with just a 10% turnout, so again,


no mandate? No, I think the government ought to get rid of these


ridiculous positions, and Shaun Wright demonstrates why they were


always an absurdity. They will not do that. It needs legislation to get


rid of them. In the meanwhile, he should be going anyway, he should do


the decent thing. Damian Green, it is a ridiculous idea in the first


place, they should go anyway? Well, it is not a ridiculous idea, because


you always need somebody to hold the police accountable. It used to be


police authorities, who were completely invisible. Nobody knew


who was holding the police to account, and very often nobody was.


The fact that you have got one man behaving very badly, as he is in


this instance, does not alter the basic point which is that having a


public figure who is democratically accountable, subject to public


Russia, is a better and more accountable system of police


governance than we had before. It is not for the police and crime


commissioner to decide how South Yorkshire Police deals with child


abuse cases, that is for the chief constable. John Mann, therefore, is


it not the position itself, it is the paucity of talent within, in


this case, Labour? He is clearly unsuited to the job. But these


positions, who would want them? That is part of the problem. Having


elected politicians trying to run the police force is an absurdity,


Shaun Wright demonstrates that. He was hardly known by anybody. But he


was selected by Labour? Where John is wrong, he said, who would want to


do this? But quite a lot of ex-Labour ministers, including Tony


Lloyd, good, serious people on the Labour side have become a lease and


crime commissioners. There will always be some ex-politician wanting


to grab the job, we all know that. That does not mean it is a good


idea. Damian Green, you obviously still believe that they are worth


continuing, even though there is so little support for them? Yes,


because I have seen, I suspect more than John, the good work which is


being done by PCCs from all political backgrounds, particularly


in terms of violence against women and children. They have brought much


more openness into the way police forces can connect with their local


community. Do you agree? I was never a great fan of the Police


Commissioners, but police services are also responsible to the Home


Secretary, who has very considerable powers. But he could not use them in


this particular case. There should have been some provision in the


legislation for the Home Secretary to intervene in special


circumstances, that would have been the best thing, but it was never


thought of. But this man is totally shameless, his reputation is


ruined, he will be ineffective in his job, and he should behave


sensibly, but he is not going to do that. We have just got a few seconds


- what question should Shaun Wright be asked? What did he know, when did


he know it and what did he do about it and why isn't he resigning now?


Thank you all of our guests, and particularly to our guest of the


day, Ken Baker. One o'clock news is starting over on BBC One. I will be


back tomorrow with Andrew with by ministers questions, although not


with David Cameron and Ed Miliband. or to stay part of


the United Kingdom? The BBC's online coverage will keep


you up to date with every development with live streaming


of the key moments, expert opinions


Download Subtitles