12/01/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 12/01/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


Thousands of junior doctors go on strike across England


in their dispute over a new contract despite a last-minute plea


from the Prime Minister to call off the action.


At least ten people are dead, following another suspected suicide


We'll have the latest. likely that the so-called


MPs debate the Housing Bill - which ministers say will help


thousands of young people get on the housing ladder.


Labour say the plan could benefit foreign investors


And should England have an official national anthem?


All that in the next hour and with us for the whole


of the programme today is the Times columnist,


First, let's get the latest on the bomb attack in Istanbul.


We can talk to our correspondent there,


I can tell you that the Foreign Secretary, Philip


Hammond, said the explosion in Istanbul hit a tourist area of the


city. They are currently seeking to verify if any British nationals are


involved and we will -- and they will update the House of Commons if


there is more news in the next hour. Can you give us the latest? This is


where a few hours earlier the Windows of building surrounded me


were rattled. A number of tourists, including German tourists, according


to the news agency, were killed. It is not believed at this point in


time that British tourists were among those killed. We are still


waiting for full information. The Turkish president has condemned this


attack. Nobody then has yet actually claimed


responsibility. These are officials in Turkey. It is not that many


months after Ankara suffered the bomb attack which killed up to 100


people. I think 97 people were killed in Ankara. That was carried


out by Isis. No one is in doubt about that. This is a much smaller


attack. There is speculation this is another kind of Islamist, or


somebody freelancing. It could be Isis. They are under a lot of


pressure was they have lost territory in Iraq and Syria. The


Turkish authorities, after tolerating Isis for a long time have


now thrown themselves into the fight against the so-called Islamic State.


Though getting reports that Turkish authorities are trying to organise a


new offensive with some of the proxy groups they help to run and fund


inside Syria. It would not be surprising to learn that might have


consequences here in Turkey. Do think Turkey will have more of these


sorts of attacks, even though we do not know for sure who is behind this


one? Turkey is playing a very complex game. As Paul said, they


have backed Islamic State in the past and they are now against it.


They are backing Islamist who are against President Assad in Syria.


There is no shortage of people who might be inspired to attack Turkey


for a whole variety of reasons on the grounds that my enemy's enemy is


sometimes my friend, sometimes my enemy's enemy is my enemy. They


occupy a very key geographical position in terms of their border


with Syria, their relationship, a bad one with Kurds and Kurdish


fighters also on their border, who had been seen as being helpful to


the coalition in terms of fighting Islamic State. They have been seen


to be helpful. Turkey is a Nato member. This is extremely alarming.


Under the president Turkey has become more Islamist. They are


supporting Islamist in Syria and they are an Islamist regime. The


fact they may have been targeted by Islamist 's does not alter the fact


that the West is in alliance with a regime which is fundamentally not


friendly to it. Also, of course, we have these very distressing stories.


Irish or they are happening right across Syria, of series and towns


where people are literally starving to death. -- I am sure they are


happening. It is a dreadful humanitarian catastrophe. If one


wants to end the dreadful humanitarian catastrophe of Syria,


one has two remove the Islamic Republic


one has two remove the Islamic over the whole series of


What has David Cameron said every child needs?


Thousands of junior doctors across England are striking today,


in the latest stage of their dispute with the Government over


Doctors are providing emergency cover, but around 4,000


routine treatments have been postponed.


The Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, spoke briefly to journalists


Do your proposals threaten the future of the NHS?


Is there enough money to create a 24/7 NHS?


What is your message to junior doctors?


And our assistant political editor, Norman Smith, is outside


St Thomas's Hospital in Central London.


The first strike in 40 years for junior doctors, how has it come to


this? A good question. It has been going on for years, since 2012. The


difficulty is simply this. Both sides seem to be talking past each


other. They are not on the same page. The Government said, we have a


manifest a mandate to introduce a 24-hour NHS. This is what the


changes are about. Junior doctors say, we're already working 24-hour


NHS. The problem at the weekends is not junior doctors, it is


consultants. The Government is saying, OK, we are making you a very


good payoff. We are increasing a paid by 11%. 75% of junior doctors,


they say, will be better off. The BMA says absolutely not. Junior


doctors will lose something like 30% of their pay. You get the sense that


both sides are nowhere near reaching any sort of deal. They have been to


ACAS and no deal has been reached. More strikes are planned. The factor


that will break this dispute is not the merits of the arguments on


either side but public opinion. If public opinion sways heavily one


side or the other, I suspect that will determine the outcome of this


dispute. That, in your mind, will implement government strategy. --


influence. Jeremy Hunt has been criticised for mishandling this


dispute. What is the strategy today by the Government? The strategy


today is kind of to hide under the table and say nothing. We saw from


Jeremy had they do not want to have their faces plastered on the


television screen. Roughly basic logic would suggest if you have a


politician and a junior doctor on the television screen at the same


time, he would use in the bars with? Probably the junior doctor. Maybe we


put doctors up on a pedestal and maybe the public is becoming jaded


about all of this because they would rather like a 24-hour NHS. They


would like to feel confident about going into hospital at the weekend.


They are suffering pretty tough times. Junior doctors are getting


11%, say the Government. There is a view in government circles that if


these disputes go on and we do move to the third set of strikes that


will involve accident and emergency departments and maybe public opinion


will shift and the BMA will find itself out on a limb. That will


slightly define conventional logic. Normally we assume sympathy would


lie with the doctors, but make -- but maybe not if this drags on.


Let's talk now to our correspondent, Phil Mackie, who's outside


the Sandwell hospital in West Bromwich.


How under pressure are services there? Extremely so. They have


declared a level for incident within this draft. That means they are


really struggling to discharge patients will they have had


exceptional demand. They have too many people in and they cannot get


them out in time. They have declared a level for incident. They have


asked the striking junior doctors to come back in. The junior doctors


have not left the picket line and they are continuing to protest and


getting a lot of support from people driving by. What they have said if


their understanding of the strike agreement would be they would go


back in for a level five incident, which. Level four is something they


would experience slightly more often and it is something they have known


about, they say, in terms of trust management for some time and they


are not going in. There are junior doctors providing emergency cover,


as they ordinarily would do. One of the people striking here today said


this was essentially exactly the same situation as it was over


Christmas and New Year at this hospital and management, they say,


did not choose to declare a level for incident on that occasion.


Clearly the stakes are high and it seems to be escalating, and maybe we


will see that across the country. At the moment, polls show there are


high levels of public support. Do you have any evidence of that


waning? I have not seen anything myself. It is very difficult in a


hospital circumstance. People are coming and going. Even members of


the public probably visiting a relative or have their own need to


be in the hospital and they tend to be quite sympathetic. A lady passed


me half an hour ago with an arm in a sling. She was due in Tamara and she


said if it had been today, she would not have minded because she is


giving the junior doctors full backing. You get lots of cars coming


past, beeping their horns and waving in support. There is no scientific


way of working this out. The survey that suggests that two thirds of


people behind the doctors broadly and unscientific leave that is about


what I would think is the case here standing in West Bromwich. Thank you


very much. And I'm joined now by


the Conservative MP and member of the Health Select Committee,


Dr James Davies, and by Dr Tom Dolphin, a member


of the BMA's Consultants Committee and a former chair of their


Junior Doctors Committee. And I should say that


no Health Minister was Obviously, following the line of


hiding beneath the table when it comes to this, as our correspondent


says. Let's pick up the incident in Sandwell at the hospital, where they


have declared a level for incident. Does that make you feel bad? Nobody


wanted to take strike action today but we have been forced into it by


the Government. With incidents like they declared in Sandwell, there is


a process for getting junior doctors back into the hostel if there is a


major incident. That was a significant, unpredicted event that


would occur. That is the term that was used at the time. If there is a


major incident, junior doctors will flood back into the hospital, let's


be clear about this. Not at this level. Doctors across the country --


hospitals across the country have been running at these levels for a


long time. It is nothing new. Nothing has changed today. There is


no difference between this and what happened over the Christmas


holidays. How has the Government let this come to a situation where we


have junior doctors for the first time in 40 years ago forming support


by the doctors who returned the strike ballot in favour of the


strike, are all wrong? I think they have been misled. I am a BMA member


and GP is my background. It is something I had a very open mind


over as the issue blew up really. Looking into the fine detail of it,


I have to say that the Government has addressed the vast majority of


the concerns that have been put forward. Right. But to admit they


have not addressed all of them. There are some issues over Saturday


pay, in particular. The Government is looking about bringing about a


seven-day NHS. This is where discussions are needed. I think


strike action is a step too far in the circumstances. Have you been


misled by the BMA? Have you been misled by anyone? The Government is


trying to put across its position. We cannot mislead junior doctors.


They are bright and intelligent people. The applet evidence in front


of them and 98% have rejected the offer as unsafe. Isn't that just


behind -- like hiding behind an excuse? There are a lot of junior


doctors and it seems that junior doctors think the hours they are


being asked to work will be more restrictive and the safeguards are


not robust enough. They are protecting the future of doctors


working practices. Do you add me to the governor has not addressed back


key issue? -- the Government has not addressed back key issue. Also, the


number of nights on call consecutively. It is about the


safeguards. They don't trust the Government to


hold by their claim that hours will be restricted but there are no


safeguards to restrict it. One of the concerns was fines were being


removed from hospitals... So no incentive there... But Government's


latest proposals do address that in terms of fines being levied and put


into a part and underseen by a guardian who will use that for


educational purposes and managing of the interests of junior doctors. So,


in the end, the Government has met pretty well every single concern by


June area doctors and it is a negotiation and there hasn't been


any compromise by June area doctors in this negotiation. -- by junior


doctors. We have moved a significant distance from starting position. We


are keen to negotiate. In what way have you moved? As far as I can see


you haven't at all With we are very keen to be negotiate. There was to


be a strike in December. We went back to asas, we didn't want to


strike. There was no movement from the Government side from the


discussions in ACAS. They don't address the safety issues. Since the


strike mandate went ahead, there have been changes, though, haven't


there? There has been an offer by the Government, certain sli on pay


and doctors keep saying it is not about pay. So today, what is it that


the Government can offer you that would mean you wouldn't strike in


future weeks? It is a complex contract. I can't boil it down N


generality it has to be a safe contract. -- in generality. That


doesn't have doctors' hours increasing again. Again That's


nebulus. But what they are putting on the table doesn't gar be a tee


the hours will be safe and that they won't increase again. -- guarantee.


When you look at the detail of how what is on paper will be enforced,


there is nothing to give it teeth. That's what worries us. Principally,


should doctors be going on strike? Let's leave the whys and wherefors.


They have a right to strike. Personally I believe doctors should


not go on strike, ever. Whatever the circumstances, however much pressure


they are put under? Medicine is a vocation. They should not be


behaving that they are unionised workers. The BMA... Why not? Because


they are responsible for patient safety. The word "safety" is used


the whole time. I'm prepared to believe the Government has been bone


headed and bad and a hopeless negotiate o. Let's assume that's the


case. It is still the case that, you know, the doctors are saying it is


all about safety. This is really, this really sticks in the crew


because whether or not this -- craw. Whether or not the sandwell thing is


manufactured or no. You cannot have doctors taking strike without


imperilling patients. At the least putting them at disadvantage. At


wost xree miesing safety. -- at worst, compromising safety. Doctors


may vo a good point over safety but -- may have a good point. But


ultimately they are the -- may have a good point. But


that's letting the the hook because they are relying on


the fact that doctors will feel so the fact that doctors will feel so


bad. What is more important, patient lives or sticking the Government


bad. What is more important, patient The arrangement we have made are to


keep patients safe today and The arrangement we have made are to


safe in the long term. Today The arrangement we have made are to


colleagues of mine and other senior doctors covering to make sure urgent


patients get seen. If people are worried are stick, they should go to


hospital, they will get the care they need. What about the


Government. The Government should be concerned about patient safety, or


any future strike, where there may not be any emergency cover. Has


Jeremy Hunt handled this well? The riesh u is about a new contract to


improve patient safety. I'm talking about the language used, about the


breakdown of trust. Has has Jeremy Hunt handled that well? I think he


has done all he can from what I have seen. I think that there are


underlying issue and I know this from having worked from ape last


year as a doctor in temples how doctors and the medical protesting


feel. -- in terms of how doctors and the medical profession feel, in


terms of their work and values, that we go out of our way to prove how


hard the medical profession does work and they are valued. The


reality is there is a brain drain of junior doctors. The Health Select


Committee has said that junior doctors are leaving because they


don't think there is a few fewer for them here. That's what I'm talking B


I don't think it is about this contract per se. That issue was in


place prior to this and it has, to some extent framed the whole debate.


What about accusations that it is being exploited, this strike by more


militant tendencies? Do you think it has been hijacked? I don't think


think so. We have a clear mandate. 98% of junior doctors supported the


ak. The -- this action. The entire profession shined the action. --


supported the action. The Government's plans for more


affordable housing - and a new right to buy for housing


association tenants - are being debated in


the House of Commons today. Ministers say the schemes


will benefit thousands of young people looking to get


on the housing ladder. Labour say it could benefit foreign


investors and buy-to-let landlords The Conservatives want to get


building and put more people onto the housing ladder,


a key pledge in their manifesto, and they hope to have


1 million new homes by 2020. Under the proposals,


starter homes would be sold to first time buyers under 40 at a discount


of at least 20% on properties worth There would be an an obligation


for all planning authorities to build more new homes


and expensive council houses It will be easier to build


on brownfield sites and housing association tenants will be given


the right to buy their homes. There will be measures to ensure


those in social housing on higher incomes pay more in rent


and councils will be given the power to blacklist or even


ban rogue landlords. The plan was outlined


by George Osborne in his spending Today, we set out our bold plan


to back families who aspire First, I'm doubling


the housing budget. And we will deliver,


with Government help, 400,000 affordable new homes


by the end of the decade. And "affordable" means not just


affordable to rent but affordable That is the biggest house-building


programme by any government We've been joined by Labour's Shadow


Housing Minister John Healey and the Conservative


MP, Chris Philps. And I should say that no government


minister was available This bill broadens the definition of


affordable housing to include starter homes costing up to ?450,000


in London. How can a property costing 17 times the average UK


salary be classed, in anyone's mind as "affordable"? The point is the


maximum price is ?450,000. The hope is there will be many homes to buy


much less than that and the 20% discount is itself a welcome step. I


would also say, with Government schemes like help to buy, young


first-time buyers can now borrow up to 95% of that homes' value. Is that


responsible after the crash? It is. It helps people on to the housing


ladder, and realise their dream. 95%. The deposit is only ?22,000 h


these are affordable. Getting people on the ladder is a good step. You


say up to ?450,000. You hope would be lower. How much lower? What would


you say is affordable? It depends on people's personal circumstances and


income and whether there is one or two earners in the household. Let's


not forget, outside London, which is of course 80% or 85 of the country


it is up to ?250,000. These are welcome steps to help young first


time buyers get on to the housing ladder. I accept there is a massive


difference between London and south-east and other parts of the


country but starter homes will be sold at a 20% discount to first time


buyers under the age of 40 but according to the housing charity,


Shelter, by 2020, someone trying to buy a starter home in London will


need an annual Sal riff ?77,000 and a deposit of ?98,000. When you say


it has to be "affordable" and depends on people's incomes. It is


only for the rich. I don't accept the analysis. You don't accept that?


No, they ignore the help to buy scheme. The deposit isn't that much,


it is lower, ?22,500. And they ignore the fact that many people are


couples, you look at the household income, not individual income. And


thirdly it ignores the fact that ?450,000 is maximum. I would expect


many developers, particularly housing associations, who are


increasingly building houses to rent will have units in London far less


than ?450,000. This is a positive step. It'll help some, even if it


seems on the face of it, expensive for a lot of people. We back the


principle of starter homes but we want them to work for ordinary


people on ordinary incomes and work better which is why we tabled an


amendment to make them more affordable to people on modest


incomes. There is a massive gap between affordable homes, and what


Chris is talking about. Fist, you set what is affordable as a sensible


limit. And secondly, this was our argument, if the takss payer is


putting public -- taxpayer. Into discounts, that should stay on the


shelf and help future first time buyers to keep the price downs. Let


me help you on the figures. Croydon, yu average starter home would be


area dour average would be ?300,000. You need an income of ?64,000. You


still need help with your deposit. The point about starter homes taken


in their own terms, is they will be a huge letdown for many young people


and ordinary families that want to be able to buy their first home will


be thwarted by the terms of the scheme. You are not saying not do


anything. The problem with your analysis is people will think - is


Labour not going to do anything to help people on starter homes? This


is a big discount at 20%, it will help a group of people and London


isn't the only place we are talking about. If this was a scheme that


worked better, along the lines we have been proposing and I hope the


Lords will take a look at, alongside the increase in the affordable homes


to rent and buy that are in place at the moment but will get choked off


by the provision for this bill, then we will be looking at a sensible


housing policy which starts to meet the need for new homes of all types


all across the country. That won't happen as a result of the bill we


are discussing this afternoon in the Commons. Housing has long been a


massive problem for governments over the decades. We are not getting to


the point where it looks as if, finally, the parties have decided


something has to be done. Do you think these policies will make an


enormous amount of difference to people who literally will not be


able to afford to buy their own home and is it desirable for them to?


Well, something has to be done. I think this is something that should


not be done. I think it is the wrong policy. It seems to me that this


bill is very much driven by ideology, the ideology that says -


home-ownership good, renting, council ownership, bad. Now I agree,


home-ownership is good t has many advantages. Those who can afford a


buy their own homes should be allowed and encouraged to do so. I'm


in favour of that. But the bottom line is the reason we have social


housing or council housing is that there are unfortune outly many


people and -- unfortunately many people and will always be will, many


people who can't afford to get on to the housing ladder. What worries me


about this bill is that it is all about home-ownership. Not a


comprehensive housing strategy for ever, including those who can and


can't afford to buy. -- for everybody. To be clear this, bill


will be the death nail that of genuine affordable housing to rent


and buy independent experts say over the next five years we are set to


lose 180,000. It started with Labour, far fewer council homes


under Labour, too. Directly as a result of the bill, before


Parliament at the moment. But isn't it true that there will be far fewer


council homes and social housing available? No, I don't accept that.


Under five years of Government Government we built more --


Conservative Government, we built more than the previous Labour


Government. Is that the case? It is. Hang on, let me answer the question.


Eight out of ten of those new council homes built in the last five


years were commissioned by Labour, funded by Labour when I was the


Labour Housing Minister. You inherited a programme you started


and now you have stopped it. Do you support that programme, Chris? In


your mind, talking about support that programme, Chris? In


is it right, should there be more council homes and social housing?


is it right, should there be more thereby who are social housing and a


focus on council thereby who are social housing and a


Government and Mayor thereby who are social housing and a


homes over the last five years, and that should continue. One of the


problems we have in the country is we are not building enough


problems we have in the country is before we start arguing about social


who are starter homes, we need to build who are homes,


who are starter homes, we need to the heart of the bill is a plan to


build more homes on brow field loan to alleviate the problems we are


talking about. -- brownfield land. 86% of our fellow citizens aspire to


own their own home 86% of our fellow citizens aspire to


helps them realise that dream. Not all, 86% want to own their own


homes. But it is about reality. What I'm saying is you wouldn't quite


answer whether you there there should be more focus on council


homes and social housing. What about the private rental sector? You say


it is desirable people aspire to own their own homes. It is easy for


people who have their own homes to say people


people who have their own homes to affordable rental sector but what is


The sector is on its own already renting sector? Force for


The sector is on its own already burgeoning. People cannot


The sector is on its own already buy. That is precisely the problem.


It is a buy. That is precisely the problem.


attempts to address, partly by buy. That is precisely the problem.


building more homes and secondly by making home ownership more


accessible with things like starter homes. The local Government


Association revealed 475,000 homes have been given planning permission.


That is an all-time record. You must say the Government has done


something right there. There are permissions in place. We want to see


the builders building those homes. Above all, as I said earlier, we


have to have Above all, as I said earlier, we


which are genuinely affordable to rent and buy. The extreme emphasis


on starter homes which will be beyond the reach of many young


people, simple, exclusive emphasis, which is political and not good


housing policy. It is not good economic. It will prove, in my view,


to be bad politics as well. It is shutting out the range of housing


need we need across the board. Uses plea -- view simply would not be


able to support the bill. I do not think it well. In no way does this


attack affordable homes to rent. Also starter homes. Over the last


ten or 20 years, affordable homes have mostly been defined as homes to


rent, rather than homes to buy. It adds in homes to buy to the


affordable mix. That is a good thing. Can I ask you about something


hours, the PLP meeting last month? What is the timetable for neighbour


having policy on Trident? The principal place where Labour Party


policy is made is a Labour Party conference. That seems to be the


timescale the review will need to work to. It will be a strategic


security and defence review, which is right. Trident Bob be a part of


that. It is about Britain's DM security in the world. -- will be a


part. You do not think there will be a decision before the autumn? That


is my understanding. It is the briefing we had. The country needs


that sort of debate. Our nuclear capability is a part of that. Is


your understanding them not be any changes to the way that policies


actually devised? No change in the way Labour makes its party policy?


No, the way the Labour Party makes its policy is finalised and done...


That will not change? At the Labour Party conference. You asked about


the meeting of Labour MPs last night but this is a really important


review. It is important for the Labour Party are really important


for Britain that we take that proper review, which is about our long-term


security and our long-term role in the world. Our nuclear capability


needs to be a part of that. I am strongly behind de-escalation and


disarmament but I am not the unilateralist. This is a debate this


country has to have, especially with the escalating costs of Trident.


How can we stop young British Muslims becoming radicalised


In his speech to the Conservative Party conference last autumn,


David Cameron said he wanted an end to what he called the "passive


In our country, there are some children who spend several hours


Let me be clear, there is nothing wrong with


children learning about their faith, whether it is in a madrassa,


a Sunday school, or a Jewish yeshiva.


But in some madrassas, we have children


being taught that they should not mix with people of other religions.


Being beaten, swallowing conspiracy theories about Jewish people.


These children should be having their


minds opened and their minds broadened, not having their heads


filled with poison and their hearts filled with hate.


If an institution is teaching children intensively,


whatever its religion, we will, like any other school,


make it register so it can be inspected.


And be in no doubt, if you are teaching intolerance,


This afternoon, the Home Affairs Select Committee will take evidence


on this issue from a number of people,


including the Secretary of the Bradford Council for Mosques,


Do you agree with the Prime Minister that there is a problem in the first


place? We agree there are problems within the Muslim community but


radicalisation, as the Prime Minister is setting out in his


speech basically we have evidence of that. No evidence at all? No


evidence that radicalisation is taking place in mosques. What have


you done to investigate? Since the consultation paper came out, we have


visited 14 councils for mosques across the country, in particular in


the north. We find there is already safeguarding and policies in place,


working with the local authority and the counterterrorism bill that is


all ready in place that does look at that. I put to you it is not


working. It is saying headlines of young people on almost a daily,


weekly basis, they are being radicalised and they are being drawn


to make a journey to war-torn Syria. The most infamous example is the


three teenage girls. Do you at Mick has not worked? We admit there is a


problem. -- at admit it has not worked. It is not in a mosque, a


madrassa, a church or a synagogue. Family setting, elsewhere, community


settings, college campuses. What do you say in response to that


evidence? There is a problem with language that is what we mean by


radicalisation and extremism. If by radicalisation in you mean


recruiting people to the jihad. Major sources of this are on social


media. If you think that radicalisation in terms of jihadi


recruitment is something which is nurtured by a kind of toxic mix of


ideas, then it becomes something very different. I think personally,


and effective counter radicalisation, counter extremist


strategy, must have two crucial elements. Yet has to be accepted


that some of the ideas in the Islamic, religious precepts and


values, themselves form the sea in which the toxic ideas swim. It does


not mean all Muslims subscribe to them but it is a genuine and


legitimate interpretation of the faith, as expounded by Isla Mikel


authorities over the world. I think we, in this country, must aid and


give every encouragement to Muslim reformers, who wish to make


theological reform. That is the first thing. Secondly, the Prime


Minister alluded to the fact that we must address the ideas that form a


grievance culture. If young people believe their culture, faith and


community is under attack from a conspiracy of the West, or a


conspiracy of Jews, of whom I am one, then it is not surprising they


are vulnerable to jihadi recruitment. In my view, Western


politicians should stand up and address these myths and lies about


the West, about Jews, that are being told, in order that Muslims who are


growing up can see, or can begin to understand, that what they are being


fed by whoever it is, is not true. Do you accent they are not


countering enough of the ideology or radicalisation that may not be


actually occurring in madrassas or mosques elsewhere? The reason is the


prevent strategy is not working. It is marginalising and isolating


communities. There are other ways of engaging with the communities and


working with them. At this moment in time, there is no consultation


taking place with the community is what the Government should do to


tackle this from within the community. For people like me, my


organisation, and other councils in northern England. You say it is not


being counted effectively. Yes. On that basis, what would be wrong with


registering and inspecting them? Nothing is wrong with regulation.


Nothing wrong if it means protecting safeguarding. What we are against,


that this particular piece of document, or consultation, prefers


to prevent 19 times, if not more. It is linked to be terrorism and


extremism bill, rather than falling at Ofsted and the Department for


Education, like all schools. You would be in favour of them being


these out of school settings, being registered, inspected and monitored.


Would that be view results? It is structural tinkering. There may be a


case for that. The problematic issue is one of concept. We're not talking


the right language. The majority discourse is kind of going around


the edges of this. They are not collectively facing up to the things


I have been talking about, which is the ideas that nurture or make these


young people vulnerable to really bad guys. Those bad ideas are not


being identified. How would you deal with it? Banning orders on


nonviolent extremists or closing mosques, is this the way to go about


it? It depends how you define extremism. I am troubled by the


it? It depends how you define The Government seems to believe that


highly Conservative religious ideas are themselves problematic was some


it is not problematic, are themselves problematic was some


bought religious community to isolate itself in the sense it has


cultural practices which set it aside from the mainstream and where


have I which may not accord with liberal ideas. The problem only


comes when the community wants to do harm to other people. Should there


be a bar on alleged extremists working with children and other


honourable people? Threats to close mosques that are found this is where


the problem would be, to be espousing these radical ideas are


not doing enough to them. What else would you suggest in terms of being


able to counter these ideas and this sort of radicalisation in


able to counter these ideas and this family? Where we are at the moment,


my generation was very much part of the British society we felt very


inclusive. I am third, fourth generation now, and I have British


values, if we know what the term British values means. That is a


debate for another day. I could have Muslim, or faith, Jewish, Christian


values, and still have my allegiance to Queen and country. The


values, and still have my allegiance needs to be very


values, and still have my allegiance What does British values mean? There


values, and still have my allegiance is a value and and --


values, and still have my allegiance identity. We also have family


values, faith values, and other values as well. The two can fit hand


in hand together. I am values as well. The two can fit hand


made. I think he values as well. The two can fit hand


generalising. That is not the case. We do some great work


generalising. That is not the case. Bradford with councils for mosques.


We work with faith communities, the Jewish communities. We were here


with the Christian Muslim Forum last night. There is a great deal of work


that goes on. I think the governor needs to the crowd. The whole kind


of funding issue has resulted in inclusion, cohesion policy is not


working, and other has all been stripped of cash.


Over the past few months, a row has been rumbling


over, of all things, the exact composition


Just before Christmas, the Department for Education held


a consultation, which prompted 50,000 people to sign an online


petition demanding that women and feminism be put firmly


Last night, the argument reached the Commons.


Removing feminism from the curriculum is entirely


incongruous with the claims of the Prime Minister,


across the Despatch Box at PMQs, to myself, only weeks ago,


So, as it is, A-level politics covers other ideologies


which include sex and gender, gender equality, patriarchy and it


covers a knowledge of core ideas, doctrines and theories of feminist


thoughts, traditions and distinctive features but when the Government


announced plans to revise politics A-level curriculum this section had


As had the ideologies of nationalism and multiculturalism.


As he is there, I would like to know the status of these


The supposed compensation for feminism axing was include


a section on pressure groups, so at best, on a generous


interpretation, feminism survives here in a reference to suffragists


and suffragettes as an example of pressure groups.


A lot of lateral thinking and mental gymnastics needed there.


As is recently mentioned in the other place, feminism can


also be studied within other A-levels.


For example, under the reformed sociology A-level students must


Exam boards are responsible for setting the detailed


content of qualifications in their specifications and schools


are free to decide which figures they teach about


And following the consultation on the politics A-level,


exam boards are making changes to the final content to respond


ordable rental sector but what is going done in the bill for private


renting sector? Force for to the concerns raised


and we will publish our response shortly but I can assure


the honourable member that the final politics A-level will give


all students the opportunity And I should say that no


Education Minister was available We heard the idea would be part of


the core syllabus. I'm none the wiser. I looked a at it again today.


This stuff gets drip fed through buzzfeed. We heard over Christmas


there might be a climbdown. He said it there in the Commons. He was


asked to give a list and an explicit commitment that feminism will remain


and be reinstated. He has kind of said wait and see. It looked as if


the Government has U-turned. I don't know if it is a full U-turn. If so,


I'm glad it has happened. We need the detail of what has happened. It


took two 17-year-old girls to make this happen, actually. I suppose if


two 17-year-old girl guides, the Government knows it is in trouble.


But yes, despite the two 7-year-old girls, I don't think they are


correct and I think it is all rather silly. I think it is a category


error. As I understand t the proposal is to add feminism to


Conservative titch, socialism and Liberalism as categories. You don't


think it is worthy of that? I think it is a category error. Conserve


civil, Liberalism and socialism are broad movement of political thought


which reflect the way that people in contrasting views order the world.


Feck nichl like otherisms, like racism is a were test movement on


behalf of a set of people who feel they are not properly represented in


various ways. A set of people, you mean 50% of the population. Yes,


that's right but still acting as a protest group as indeed this


particular initiative is, because it is all to do with the fact there


aren't enough women. In other words, there has to be a certain quota of


women. An ideological pressure group politics. That clip you showed was


me reading out what was in the old syllabus. It was there and has been


deleted. What about the substantial point being put, it is arguable it


shouldn't be there in the first place. It doesn't merit the same


categorisation as the big political movements? On Antony Gidden's


definition, the advancement of women's struggles. I think those


things, I don't want agenda-blind curriculum. I think the struggles -


the to vote was fought for. We knead to be aware of that. They are linked


to, unlike otherisms, it is not anary fairy thing. Women are 50% as


Jo says, we cannot delete them from the syllabus. When I heard Will hear


the words I don't want a "gender-blind" curriculum. I want to


reach for the sick bag. This is pressure group politics. One can say


I don't want a curriculum that is blind to... The minister can see


they have made some serious mistakes. 29% of MPs are women. My


respect for ministers exceeds no-one's but nevertheless I do think


occasionally even Conservative ministers run frightened for


politically correct pressure groups. Or they believe it. Isn't there a


case to be made that gender politics hasn't been solved in that sense or


that the form of women hasn't been assured... For sure it is a


reasonable argument. I'm not saying for a amendment it shouldn't be


covered in the curriculum. I'm talking about the fact that this


whole movement seems to be prompted by the idea that there aren't enough


women being mentioned, which I think is a worse sort of tokenism and that


feminism should be elevated to being the same category as socialism,


conservatism or Liberalism, which I think is just a category error. Is


it that point? The core syllabus has a selection of key political things.


Out of 17, only one woman. Meaning 94% were male. Who would you like to


see on that syllabus? Simone, Duvoiva. And Americans who wrote


about suburban housewives, something I can identify with, o to some


extent. I could furnish them with a long list. Why only one out of 17.


It is part of a trend. We had 0 out of 63 composers. It is looking at


the wrong end of the at the same time. We can argue about names It is


negating... As you say, there must be 50% of the population so, yes...


Do they not have a valuable contribution? Maybe there wasn't


more than one? I don't know. Start with the principle that the numbers


are inherently unfair or unjust... In both occasions, the music


syllabus and politics, in each case, both it took my constituents,


17-year-old girls to do emanufacture petitions, and the latest one, has


done the one on the feminism syllabus. There were 50,000


signatures. It is a new type of politics where governments can cave


in. Are we all feminists now? Are we all feminists? You and I are sitting


here in a television studio... Three women. A good ratio. To that extent,


feminism has won. What is the complaint? Thank you on that.


Ask someone English what their national anthem


But actually that's the British National Anthem.


The Scots and Welsh have their own anthems but officially


Various tunes have been tried, but now an MP is asking his


the Steinway and look up his best patriotic tunes.


Given its power to inspire, it's no surprise music is used often


to sell, reinforce or create an idea.


Certain tunes speak of shared values and pride in being part of that


tricky to define concept - "the nation".


Some melodies even get to become a national anthem but England


doesn't have one, not one all to itself.


There's some obvious options, and some of them HAVE been used


as an English national anthem but none has been THE anthem.


Now you might be thinking, wait a minim!


Well, one MP has proposed Parliament looks at finding one.


Land of Hope and Glory will be a great anthem.


So, we could see one of those traditional


favourites but we could also see something new coming through.


With David Bowie's demise, what about, We Could Be Heroes?


That could be a great theme tune for Britain.


Alternatively, maybe, somebody will come up


Fan fastic what does an anthem? Anthem -- fantastic Boyce Truss.


Something to get people up. If it is insip I had it doesn't work.


Something to get people up. If it is the problem, our National Anthem


gets branded a bit of a dirge Yes because it was played ape sung


badly. When it was written it would have been sung and played at


probably twice the speed it does now and people would have stood up in


the pub and sung it and ensqloe joyed it. Toby Perkins wants to have


a competition about what it should be. Do you have a suggestion? I have


one thing I think people might be able to get behind.


Not quite an army but certainly Dads, there's a small group who're


campaigning for their choice, and they aren't shy about it either.


We are getting people singing on the streets web we are going past. We


had one restaurant when everyone stood up and applauded us. There is


great support out there. It is about time England was able to celebrate


being English, at sporting events. Let the Scots and Welsh celebrate


theirs and we come at the end and God Save The Queen.


So if your feet any time really are walking upon England's mountain


(not entirely sure where that is by the way) spare a thought


if you're English for what really says England isn't God


Save the Queen spreads harmony avoids discord,


Toby Perkins has joined us in the studio


and we've also been joined by Olympic silver medallist


Kriss Akabusi, who won many medals in the 400m hurdles


Is this what we are talking about to you on your the doorstep on


constituency? A light-hearted film but S the truth is we do need a new


settlement for England. Seen the devolution for England and Wales. I


have struck by this at the Rugby World Cup, the Welsh were singing


their anthem, we are being represented by England but singing


the British anthem. The problems with the union, Scots and Welsh see


others and England thinking of ourselves as synonymous. This is a


part of that. What would you change it to? Jerusalem is my choice but


the key thing about the bill is to have a national consultation.


the key thing about the bill is to what about you,


the key thing about the bill is to saviourioured your Commonwealth


medals more if it had been Land of Hope And Glory rather than good save


the Queen? It would have worked but the National Anthem is a unifying


factor, all under the umbrella. Whatever God you serve, you have


Queen and country and the National Anthem and Union Jack says something


to me. It is much more than the words, it is a unifying force, it is


the idea that 6 million people, I am one, not the only one and I live


under the umbrella. -- 60 million. What about the consultation, would


you go for anything else under under the English anthem? Well, listening


to Toby, and every night as a young man, it was played on it the V


screens and I grew up thinking England and Great Britain are


synonymous, I understand the clamour for England having its own place. Do


you like the tune? Doesn't do a great deal for me, but the fact it


it is the National Anthem. It is clear from Toby that this enterprise


to change to Jerusalem or whatever is part of a drive to build up


English nationalism. I think that is a really rep prehencible things.


Wales and Scotland have? It is not good. It is not good. We have a we


are a union nighted king do. I agree can Kriss, the National Anthem sung


at sporting events is not a team song. It is the declaration by the


England team or whoever the sports people are that they have an


allegiance to the crown, an allegiance than something bigger,


called England, the UK which binds us altogether. Jeremy Corbyn hasn't


put you up to this? He hasn't. But it is wrong, if we are competing as


England we should be England. When Kriss and people who follow him


represent Britain, it should be skop God Save the Queen. I would sing you


out but my voice isn't good enough. There's just time before we go


to find out the answer to our quiz. What has David Cameron


said every child needs? I wish it was D but it is D, a tiger


Thanks to Melanie and all my guests. pussycat.


I'll be back at 11:30am tomorrow with Andrew for live coverage


Celebrate a country 4,000 years in the making. China begins here.


Let your New Year start with a bang and visit an explosive new China.


Download Subtitles