:00:38. > :00:39.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:40. > :00:41.Yesterday, the Prime Minister caused a kerfuffle with his comments
:00:42. > :00:49.about a 'bunch of migrants' in Calais.
:00:50. > :00:51.Overnight the Government's announced a ?10 million plan to help more
:00:52. > :00:54.unaccompanied Syrian child refugees, but is under pressure to spell out
:00:55. > :00:58.exactly how many extra children will come to Britain.
:00:59. > :01:01.Fresh from a court ruling against the so-called 'bedroom tax',
:01:02. > :01:03.the Government suffers another defeat in the House of Lords
:01:04. > :01:10.When they're not voting against the Government,
:01:11. > :01:13.peers have also been wondering why they get such a bad press.
:01:14. > :01:16.Do we all think they're ermine-clad champagne swillers with their snouts
:01:17. > :01:32.It's one small step for man. One giant leap for mankind.
:01:33. > :01:37.most conspiracy theories aren't true - because people can't
:01:38. > :01:46.All that in the next hour, and joining us as our co-conspirator
:01:47. > :01:49.for the whole of the programme is our guest of the day Radek
:01:50. > :01:53.He used to be the Foreign Minister of Poland,and most recently
:01:54. > :01:57.he was Marshal of the Sejm in the Polish Parliament.
:01:58. > :01:59.Which means he was roughly Warsaw's answer to speaker John Bercow.
:02:00. > :02:09.First today let's talk about the Government's announcement
:02:10. > :02:12.overnight that Britain is to accept more children who've become
:02:13. > :02:14.separated from their families while fleeing the conflict in Syria
:02:15. > :02:22.If you've picked up some of this morning's papers that might not be
:02:23. > :02:32.Here for example is the front page of today's Mail with the headline:
:02:33. > :02:35.'PM: Why we must not take three thousand migrant children'.
:02:36. > :02:38.That figure of 3,000 has come from the charity Save the Children,
:02:39. > :02:41.who say that's how many children are alone and potentially in danger
:02:42. > :02:47.Well, last night the Government said it will work with
:02:48. > :02:53.United Nations High Commission for Refugees on a new initiative
:02:54. > :02:55.to resettle unaccompanied refugee children from conflict regions such
:02:56. > :03:01.And the Government says it will create a new fund of up to ?10
:03:02. > :03:03.million to support the needs of vulnerable refugee and migrant
:03:04. > :03:07.But it's not clear just how many more children the UK
:03:08. > :03:20.Our political correspondent, Vicki Young can hopefully clear
:03:21. > :03:32.Do we have any idea what the Government policy is? The Government
:03:33. > :03:38.are not putting a number on it, because they say they will take the
:03:39. > :03:44.advice of the aid agencies to identify the vulnerable children. If
:03:45. > :03:49.we look at the ?10 million fund, the Home Office minister said that money
:03:50. > :03:59.is partly to identify these vulnerable children. Then the Monday
:04:00. > :04:03.eye is used to -- money is used to reconnect them with their families.
:04:04. > :04:08.They will identify the children as vulnerable and try and establish, do
:04:09. > :04:13.you have a mother, a father, a grandparent in the UK or any other
:04:14. > :04:21.European country. If they do, they will try and get them back together.
:04:22. > :04:25.But also the money will be used for schooling, housing and possibly
:04:26. > :04:28.legal costs. But the Government are still sticking to what they said,
:04:29. > :04:33.they prefer to keep families together, but they want to take
:04:34. > :04:38.people from the camps in the region and not to bring in a policy that
:04:39. > :04:42.would act as a magnet for people to make this journey. I spoke to one
:04:43. > :04:48.Labour politician, who said they thought it was a bit of a muddle,
:04:49. > :04:52.because the Government was divided and there had been squabbling inside
:04:53. > :04:57.the Government. Has there been an indication of that. The question is
:04:58. > :05:00.whether it is above the 20,000 they have already agreed to settle. That
:05:01. > :05:04.is what was unclear. When you question ministers, they don't want
:05:05. > :05:11.to say it will be, because that is still unresolved and they have
:05:12. > :05:15.agreed they will take 20,000 Syrian refugees from the camps in the
:05:16. > :05:18.region in the next five year. But we can't know whether the more
:05:19. > :05:23.vulnerable children will be included. At the end of the day it
:05:24. > :05:27.is local authorities that will deal with the resettlement of children
:05:28. > :05:31.and they said the, the Local Government Association, what we are
:05:32. > :05:36.talking about is 16 and 17-year-old young men, boys and teenagers,
:05:37. > :05:41.they're the main numbers when we talk about vulnerable children,
:05:42. > :05:45.rather than toddlers and some of pictures we have seen from the
:05:46. > :05:48.camps, I asked the minister are you still saying you won't take people
:05:49. > :05:53.from the camps. They are waiting for a court case about whether they will
:05:54. > :05:58.have to take people from there and resettle them in the UK This
:05:59. > :06:04.announcement came from political pressure. Doo country like Britain
:06:05. > :06:11.and Poland have a duty to take uncompanied children and migrants?
:06:12. > :06:17.First for disclosure I was a refugee in this country at the time of the
:06:18. > :06:22.imposition of marshal law. I went back and became a friendly voice
:06:23. > :06:26.towards Britain. It is a generous country. You can look at this policy
:06:27. > :06:31.as a sort of investment in the future. Syria will one day be
:06:32. > :06:36.hopefully a peaceful country and some of these people will go back
:06:37. > :06:41.and will know British culture and be friendly to Britain. I also think
:06:42. > :06:47.British policy on this is sophisticated. You're taking people
:06:48. > :06:53.who are screened, who you will know something about. From the camps? On
:06:54. > :06:58.the continent of Europe we have a different order of magnitude problem
:06:59. > :07:01.of people who have come in and whose identifies and whose even countries
:07:02. > :07:08.of origin are difficult to establish. Should Britain be taking
:07:09. > :07:13.some of those people from Europe? I believe if every country in Europe
:07:14. > :07:19.made a commitment similar to Britain's we would be getting ahold
:07:20. > :07:22.of the problem. What we need to do and this what is the European
:07:23. > :07:27.Commission and the president of European Commission has appealed to
:07:28. > :07:35.do, we need a proper management of the external border of the Schengen
:07:36. > :07:40.group. Only then will we size up the size of problem. As the Schengen
:07:41. > :07:45.group, we are entitled to control who comes in. So you support the
:07:46. > :07:52.idea of individual governments erecting national borders. No, on
:07:53. > :07:57.the contrary to preserve the freedom of movement within Europe. It has
:07:58. > :08:01.gone. We need to establish the external perimeter that works. Who
:08:02. > :08:06.is to blame for the failure to come up with a comprehensive strategy to
:08:07. > :08:11.deal with this crisis? Well this is a classic case of establishing a
:08:12. > :08:17.system that benefits its members, like the eurozone, like Schengen. As
:08:18. > :08:23.long as every member enforces the rules. It only takes one member to
:08:24. > :08:33.break the rules for the system to be under strain. In both cases it is
:08:34. > :08:37.the came country. We need to go from a system of voluntary enforcement of
:08:38. > :08:44.the rules to a system where the rules are applied in the eurozone
:08:45. > :08:48.and the Schengen group. But unbelievable pressure on the borders
:08:49. > :08:54.of the countries that have faced the bruntd, in Greece and Italy. That is
:08:55. > :09:02.why we need a European border guard to come to the help of states under
:09:03. > :09:06.pressure. Poland and Finland have the longest external land bored. It
:09:07. > :09:13.would be in Poland's interest to call on the European border guards.
:09:14. > :09:17.Our border guards could help other countries. The Prime Minister
:09:18. > :09:24.described people in the camps as a bunch of migrants was the tone and
:09:25. > :09:30.language pejorative? Look, it's... Everyone of us have occasionally an
:09:31. > :09:43.unguarded moment. I think the British policy on this is helpful.
:09:44. > :09:46.Thank you. We have James Brokenshire, the Home Office
:09:47. > :09:51.minister. Let's try and find out what the Government policy is on
:09:52. > :09:57.refugees. Are we going to take in uncompanied refugee children? What
:09:58. > :10:04.we have announced today as you are probably aware is work that we will
:10:05. > :10:10.do with the UN to identify those who are orphan and separated and how we
:10:11. > :10:14.may see those children coming to the UK as a result where the UN
:10:15. > :10:17.identifies those vulnerable children and exceptional cases where they
:10:18. > :10:21.judge that is appropriate. Recognising that in the majority of
:10:22. > :10:24.cases they say that children are better to stay in the region where
:10:25. > :10:29.there is family and those connections and what is in the best
:10:30. > :10:34.interests of the children. Can you clarify what you mean by the region.
:10:35. > :10:38.Are we talking about uncompanied children who have made it into
:10:39. > :10:42.Europe or those in the middle eastern camps. There are two things.
:10:43. > :10:48.I want to be clear. There are two elements. The first is the work with
:10:49. > :10:52.the UNHCR on areas of conflict. So outside of Europe and seeing where
:10:53. > :10:56.they have identified and advise us as the experts that there are
:10:57. > :11:01.vulnerable children who are in need and could benefit from coming to the
:11:02. > :11:07.UK and how we can facilitate that. That is over and above the existing
:11:08. > :11:11.commitment of 20,000 where we have seen around a thousand come to if UK
:11:12. > :11:17.before Christmas, around half of which were children. In addition we
:11:18. > :11:22.have provided a ?10 million fund that is aimed at supporting children
:11:23. > :11:27.within Europe. That maybe on things like shelter and counselling and
:11:28. > :11:32.medical things. But it is also to create systems, better systems, in
:11:33. > :11:37.place, to see that children are reunited with family elsewhere in
:11:38. > :11:40.Europe, building on existing regulations, the Dublin regulations,
:11:41. > :11:48.where EU countries can return people if they should have made an asylum
:11:49. > :11:53.claim in the first country and if there are people with connections
:11:54. > :11:58.they can be reunified. Are we going to accept refugee children who are
:11:59. > :12:04.uncompanied, who are already in the European Union. Is the United
:12:05. > :12:07.Kingdom going to do that? Under our Dublin regulations we have done that
:12:08. > :12:13.and we will continue to do that. It is ma mechanism. How many? I can't
:12:14. > :12:17.give you the numbers, because it is a question of establishing a family
:12:18. > :12:23.connection within the UK in the first place, a parent, a sibling,
:12:24. > :12:28.some close family member F you claim asylum in an EU country first and
:12:29. > :12:32.can show that link to another EU country then under the Dublin
:12:33. > :12:37.regulations you can go to that country to be reunified. So you're
:12:38. > :12:40.telling me you can't Thame us how many -- tell us how many uncompanied
:12:41. > :12:46.refugee children we have taken in and you won't tell me how many we
:12:47. > :12:54.are planning to take in? What I can tell you up to the year until
:12:55. > :12:57.September we had about 2,600 unaccompanied asylum seeking
:12:58. > :13:04.children in the UK. What I can't tell you... From the rest of Europe
:13:05. > :13:08.or not? That Would be from those who established in the UK and made that
:13:09. > :13:13.claim here. The probability is the majority would have come from Europe
:13:14. > :13:20.and it that is 2,600 that we are already processing and dealing with.
:13:21. > :13:27.How many of those are here? Those 2,600 are in this country who have
:13:28. > :13:31.made those claims and are unaccompanied asylum seeking
:13:32. > :13:41.children and are being processed and dealt with by local authorities. If
:13:42. > :13:45.we identified another 3,000 refugee children, uncompanied, who had close
:13:46. > :13:51.relations in Britain and were already in the EU, would we take
:13:52. > :13:55.them in? I think it's, from the indications we have, it is, it will
:13:56. > :13:58.be establishing that family connection and the numbers are
:13:59. > :14:03.relatively small to date. Because you have to show that you have got a
:14:04. > :14:07.family member who is here already. The reason it is done on this basis
:14:08. > :14:12.is to make request sure you don't make the situation worse and we are
:14:13. > :14:17.seeing children put out in advance to get family resettlement and the
:14:18. > :14:24.way people traffickers will exploit this. It is rather that you have to
:14:25. > :14:31.see that family person who is here already and if you're claiming
:14:32. > :14:36.asylum in another country you can be reconnected. It sounds light you
:14:37. > :14:41.want to make it as slow and complicated as possible. No, the ?10
:14:42. > :14:45.million that we have announceled is about getting better systems and
:14:46. > :14:49.providing support into country like Italy and Greece to see you can
:14:50. > :14:54.actually have better processing of claims. Some viewers may think
:14:55. > :15:00.instead of talking accuse systems, you should be talking about young
:15:01. > :15:06.lives that are in real danger to traffickers, drug dealers and
:15:07. > :15:09.abusers and this country should show some humanity and take 3 thousand
:15:10. > :15:15.uncompanied children. We are showing humanity by the work under our
:15:16. > :15:20.resettlement scheme, a thousand people, half were children. That is
:15:21. > :15:25.from the Middle East. I'm talking about in Europe. And dealing with
:15:26. > :15:28.the claims we have here and the ?10 million fund is about providing
:15:29. > :15:35.support to those children in most need and see they're getting the
:15:36. > :15:39.medical and the counselling, the accommodation support. As long as
:15:40. > :15:45.they don't come here? As I have said, we are playing our role
:15:46. > :15:48.clearly in supporting Europe on rescuing people and seeing that
:15:49. > :15:52.where there are reunion claims that are established that we are
:15:53. > :15:55.fulfilling our obligations to help children and our focus is doing this
:15:56. > :16:00.right. Not making the situation worse. Having the interest of the
:16:01. > :16:07.children at the forefronts and how our work as a UK we can be proud in
:16:08. > :16:09.helping thousands of children fleeing the war and doing it in the
:16:10. > :16:14.right way. Thank you. The question for today
:16:15. > :16:18.is all about motorcycle Our guest of the day has taken one
:16:19. > :16:27.well-known British politician Was it - a) Diane Abbott,
:16:28. > :16:32.b) Boris Johnson c) Jeremy Corbyn,
:16:33. > :16:38.or d) Nigel Farage? At the end of the show we'll give
:16:39. > :16:48.you the correct answer. The Government was defeated
:16:49. > :16:51.in the House of Lords again last night over plans to cut
:16:52. > :16:53.the benefits of people It's the second time this week,
:16:54. > :16:57.and it's just the latest in a series of defeats in the upper chamber over
:16:58. > :17:00.the Government's welfare reforms. Making work pay -
:17:01. > :17:04.that was the Conservative's mantra In last year's Autumn Statement,
:17:05. > :17:07.George Osborne reaffirmed the Government intends to make ?12
:17:08. > :17:13.billion worth of savings Currently going through the House
:17:14. > :17:18.of Lords is the Welfare Reform The Conservatives don't
:17:19. > :17:22.have a majority in the upper house On Monday, they were defeated over
:17:23. > :17:28.plans to redefine child poverty. Ministers had wanted to get rid
:17:29. > :17:31.of income measurements and use other indicators such as unemployment
:17:32. > :17:35.and low educational attainment. And yesterday the Government also
:17:36. > :17:41.lost a vote on plans to reduce the Employment Support Allowance
:17:42. > :17:45.by ?30 a week to encourage some Ministers also agreed to exempt some
:17:46. > :17:52.families from plans to limit Universal Credit benefits
:17:53. > :17:56.to only two children. Also yesterday, the Court of Appeal
:17:57. > :18:00.ruled against the Government over the spare room subsidy,
:18:01. > :18:03.or "bedroom tax". The legislation means families
:18:04. > :18:07.deemed to have too much living space would lose a proportion
:18:08. > :18:10.of their benefits, the idea being that it would free up
:18:11. > :18:14.housing for more tenants. However the court found that it
:18:15. > :18:19.discriminated against a domestic violence victim and the family
:18:20. > :18:22.of a disabled teenager, and the ruling could have
:18:23. > :18:24.implications for others Ministers have said
:18:25. > :18:30.they will appeal. In the Commons earlier this mornnig
:18:31. > :18:33.the Shadow Secretary of State asked an urgent question
:18:34. > :18:36.on the court ruling. We know there are people
:18:37. > :18:38.who need extra support. That's why we are providing
:18:39. > :18:41.local authorities with Discretionary Housing
:18:42. > :18:44.Payment funding. Local authorities are best placed
:18:45. > :18:46.to assess people's needs in their area, and
:18:47. > :18:48.identify where extra We have increased the amount
:18:49. > :18:54.of Discretionary Housing Payment available, and on top
:18:55. > :18:57.of the 560 million since 2011, we are providing an extra
:18:58. > :19:00.870 million over The people involved
:19:01. > :19:06.in these cases are receiving Discretionary Housing
:19:07. > :19:08.Payments, that is precisely why we have Discretionary
:19:09. > :19:10.Housing Payments, Mr Speaker, this ruling
:19:11. > :19:15.was on two specific grounds. However, can the Minister
:19:16. > :19:17.confirm that the bedroom He talks of Discretionary
:19:18. > :19:23.Housing Payments. His own government report admitted -
:19:24. > :19:28.dumped before Christmas - that 75% of victims do not receive
:19:29. > :19:32.DHP, three quarters of those hit by the bedroom tax are
:19:33. > :19:36.cutting back on food. Well, we're joined now by the Shadow
:19:37. > :19:48.Work and Pensions Secretary Owen Smith, and by the Conservative
:19:49. > :19:51.MP Chris Philp, he's a member And we did ask to speak
:19:52. > :19:55.to a minister from the Department of Work and Pensions but no
:19:56. > :20:06.offer was forthcoming. Chris Philp, the Court of Appeal has
:20:07. > :20:11.ruled against you in a case of a single parent who is subject to such
:20:12. > :20:17.domestic abuse that she had to install a secure panic room in her
:20:18. > :20:22.house, and also the case of a teenager with acute mental and
:20:23. > :20:27.physical disabilities. Why would you appeal against that ruling involving
:20:28. > :20:31.cases like that? Most people with disabilities are exempted from the
:20:32. > :20:34.removal of the spare room subsidy. A very small above cases, like the two
:20:35. > :20:40.you mention, have slipped through the cracks, and that is what the DHP
:20:41. > :20:44.is there to sort out. Both cases have been receiving discretionary
:20:45. > :20:49.housing payments. Take the case of the disabled grandson, he lost ?14
:20:50. > :20:52.per week when the subsidy was removed, but got given it back by
:20:53. > :20:59.the discretionary housing payment, leaving him where he started. So the
:21:00. > :21:01.system is working. The DHP is making up for those small mother of cases
:21:02. > :21:06.that have slipped through the cracks. Many people might wonder,
:21:07. > :21:12.when it involves such terrible cases, like a woman who was raped,
:21:13. > :21:18.beaten, needed a panic room, and a family with a mental and physically
:21:19. > :21:21.disabled teenager, they needed a spare room for overnight carers.
:21:22. > :21:25.That's what they were asking for. Does that need to be discretionary?
:21:26. > :21:30.Surely in a welfare state, that should be automatic. It's completely
:21:31. > :21:34.reasonable they should have the money available and it's been made
:21:35. > :21:43.available by the Housing fund. I think there are 231 out of the
:21:44. > :21:49.initial 8000, now 500,000 cases, in terms of the domestic violence
:21:50. > :21:54.cases. The cases that are very serious are getting the money. They
:21:55. > :21:58.are not, unfortunately. The truth is that the government produced their
:21:59. > :22:04.own evaluation of the bedroom tax, coming out just before Christmas. It
:22:05. > :22:07.says that categorically, 75% of the 450,000 families affected by the
:22:08. > :22:13.bedroom tax, don't get any discretionary housing payments. In
:22:14. > :22:19.this instance, Paul Rutherford and his family were lucky enough, and
:22:20. > :22:24.the other person, whose identity we don't know, a rape victim, were
:22:25. > :22:28.lucky enough to get these payments. However, in the first instance, Paul
:22:29. > :22:33.Rutherford's family were refused. They appealed and got it, but it
:22:34. > :22:36.wasn't about the money they were losing, the ?14, which would have
:22:37. > :22:39.been a lot of money, it was about the principle. They were brave
:22:40. > :22:47.enough to go through with this. I have met this family, a loving and
:22:48. > :22:49.lovely couple, looking after 15-year-old Warren, and it's
:22:50. > :22:56.extraordinary the government are going to be Supreme Court to appeal
:22:57. > :23:03.this. It's indefensible. The rules are unclear on discretionary
:23:04. > :23:07.payments. They are only paid in arrears, and they only cover part of
:23:08. > :23:10.the costs and sometimes they have to reapply. Some of these families,
:23:11. > :23:15.don't they have enough to worry about without going through this as
:23:16. > :23:21.well? In the case of Mr Rutherford, it covered all the ?14. The
:23:22. > :23:25.discretionary housing fund, its ?870 million this Parliament, enough to
:23:26. > :23:28.take care of 200,000 people like Mr Rutherford. There are plenty who can
:23:29. > :23:34.be helped out. The principle of the subsidy is right. 500,000 people
:23:35. > :23:38.were receiving extra money for rooms they were not using, which doesn't
:23:39. > :23:41.apply for people receiving housing benefit in the private sector. It's
:23:42. > :23:44.a point of fairness, why should people in public housing get a
:23:45. > :23:49.better deal than those in private housing. And where people occupy
:23:50. > :23:53.flats and houses that are too big, when we have families in overcrowded
:23:54. > :23:57.accommodation, it makes sense to move people around, so that families
:23:58. > :24:00.who need extra rooms can have them. Around 15,000 people so far have
:24:01. > :24:09.moved into small accommodation because they didn't need a larger
:24:10. > :24:17.flat. The government is saving about ?1 million per day in payments as a
:24:18. > :24:26.result, that could pay for 18,000 nurses. If it were true, that might
:24:27. > :24:30.be the case. But Chris can't tell you this, if the Minister were here,
:24:31. > :24:35.they would be able to tell you that only 5% of people have been moved.
:24:36. > :24:38.The truth is there are not sufficient flats and one-bedroom
:24:39. > :24:42.houses for people to move to. We now have the problem of local hot
:24:43. > :24:46.authorities with too many two and three-bedroom houses. The
:24:47. > :24:50.fundamental question is, it's not the matter of pounds, shillings and
:24:51. > :24:54.pence, they are relatively small amounts of money, but it's the moral
:24:55. > :24:58.question of discriminating against people who are doing a service to
:24:59. > :25:02.the country, looking after relatives who might be a burden on the state
:25:03. > :25:08.otherwise, and it's a complete red herring, and a total short term lack
:25:09. > :25:11.of efficiency to punish these people and diminish their ability to look
:25:12. > :25:14.after their relatives. You are dealing with some of the most
:25:15. > :25:17.vulnerable people in the country with the greatest needs. Why not
:25:18. > :25:24.make life a bit more simple for them? It's very hard to write
:25:25. > :25:27.legislation in Westminster that covers every single individual
:25:28. > :25:33.circumstance. Just scrap it, get rid of it. About 0.1% of cases slip
:25:34. > :25:36.through the net and they are being taken care of by discretionary
:25:37. > :25:46.housing payments. Such is the cases we have discussed. The payments were
:25:47. > :25:51.automatic beforehand, and now it's something to worry about. There is
:25:52. > :25:58.always the fear you will not go through this discretionary process.
:25:59. > :26:03.We heaping extra concern on people who already have their hands full
:26:04. > :26:08.with human problems? The alternative is to scrap it entirely, as Owen
:26:09. > :26:12.Smith is suggesting. That would then mean people in public housing are
:26:13. > :26:15.getting a better deal than those in private housing, which is unfair,
:26:16. > :26:19.and it would mean a number of people who don't need to live in larger
:26:20. > :26:22.houses are living in those larger houses and flats. I think this is
:26:23. > :26:26.the most effective way of dealing with a significant problem. I
:26:27. > :26:30.completely accept Mr Rutherford should receive this money, the
:26:31. > :26:33.difference between us is the mechanism for transmitting the
:26:34. > :26:38.money. I think the discretionary housing payment system is the best
:26:39. > :26:41.way of doing that. Chris, the court ruled yesterday that this is
:26:42. > :26:45.illegal. The Court of Appeal said that not only is this wrong, it's
:26:46. > :26:49.illegal and discrimination. If they are still getting the money, but
:26:50. > :26:53.through a different mechanism, which we can agree or disagree is a weaker
:26:54. > :26:57.mechanism or more fraught with difficulty, but if they are still
:26:58. > :27:00.getting the money they would be entitled to under the previous
:27:01. > :27:04.housing benefit system, why would it be illegal? Because it's
:27:05. > :27:14.disseminated. That's the point they made. -- because it's Scrivener 83.
:27:15. > :27:22.Chris said all disabled people are exempted. That isn't true. The very
:27:23. > :27:26.case brought before the court was against disabled adults. Disabled
:27:27. > :27:36.children are not exempt. That's discriminatory and that's why it's
:27:37. > :27:40.illegal. If I'm looking after a disabled adult, then I still qualify
:27:41. > :27:46.for the housing benefit. That's right. Looking after a disabled
:27:47. > :27:52.child, why would you make that distinction? The presumption when
:27:53. > :27:56.the rules were written a couple of years ago, is that the parents would
:27:57. > :28:01.look after a disabled child, and you wouldn't need the room for a carer.
:28:02. > :28:06.In this case the disability was so severe room for a carer was needed.
:28:07. > :28:11.Looking back at the whole scheme, it's encouraging people to go into
:28:12. > :28:14.work. As a result of this reform and other welfare reforms, hundreds of
:28:15. > :28:19.thousands of people in the last five years have moved off welfare and
:28:20. > :28:23.into work. It saves the taxpayer money, and more importantly, it
:28:24. > :28:26.gives people a way out of poverty. Let the finish on two general
:28:27. > :28:32.questions. First of all for Chris Philp. As I see from the government
:28:33. > :28:37.figures, they are still looking for ?12 billion of welfare cuts by 2020.
:28:38. > :28:41.Can you give us an idea of where that money will come from? The
:28:42. > :28:45.welfare Bill currently going through Parliament, and it had its report
:28:46. > :28:50.stage in the House of Lords yesterday, will find 70% of that ?12
:28:51. > :28:55.billion of savings. For example, by introducing a welfare cap, so you
:28:56. > :29:01.can't get more than ?23,000 per year in London... That doesn't give you
:29:02. > :29:04.very much. It's an enormous bill. It freezes benefits for people not
:29:05. > :29:10.disabled in the next four years. Will this reduced 12 billion? It
:29:11. > :29:13.will produce 70% of it. More importantly, we are getting people
:29:14. > :29:17.off welfare and into work. Figures out last week showed we have record
:29:18. > :29:20.employment in this country. Unemployment is down to a 10-year
:29:21. > :29:26.low, so getting people off welfare and into work is important. One more
:29:27. > :29:30.question. Has Labour given up on welfare reform? Could you give us an
:29:31. > :29:36.example of where Labour would reform welfare? Can I start by answering
:29:37. > :29:45.Chris's question? We don't have time. Some of the money will be from
:29:46. > :29:50.taking money away from working families. For billion pounds will
:29:51. > :29:54.come away from working families. You are against the 12 billion cuts.
:29:55. > :29:59.Could you give an example of a major welfare reform Labour would make? I
:30:00. > :30:02.wouldn't offer the corporate welfare to Google that the government is
:30:03. > :30:07.offering. That's not the answer to my question. So you have given up on
:30:08. > :30:12.welfare reform? The bottom line is, we should not engage in a Dutch
:30:13. > :30:15.auction with big government on the deal for poor families like the
:30:16. > :30:25.Rutherford Coral. I'm not interested in engaging in that conversation. In
:30:26. > :30:26.four years' time, what will welfare reform that lacklustre market will
:30:27. > :30:31.look very different in the Labour. To its critics, the new conservative
:30:32. > :30:34.government in Warsaw is transforming Poland into a nationalist,
:30:35. > :30:35.anti-Western, A series of reforms to the country's
:30:36. > :30:39.courts and media have even provoked It seems like there's a protest
:30:40. > :30:47.in Poland pretty much every weekend. Last Saturday, it was about
:30:48. > :30:49.the government's plans The weekend before,
:30:50. > :30:54.it was about an overhaul of media regulations, which saw loads
:30:55. > :30:56.of staff at the state And before Christmas,
:30:57. > :31:01.protesters were hopping mad about changes to the
:31:02. > :31:03.Constitutional Court. It follows last year's elections,
:31:04. > :31:07.when the coalition led by the centrist Civic Platform
:31:08. > :31:12.was replaced by Law and Justice - right-wing, Eurosceptic,
:31:13. > :31:13.and popular with Catholic voters The party is chaired
:31:14. > :31:21.by the former Prime Minister, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, with the new PM,
:31:22. > :31:27.Beata Szydlo, there to provide She was hauled to the European
:31:28. > :31:31.Parliament in Strasbourg last week It's different reforms
:31:32. > :31:34.to what many countries, many governments, did, or usually do
:31:35. > :31:37.when they get into power. But here they did it very quickly,
:31:38. > :31:41.and many reforms at the same time, which gives the impression that this
:31:42. > :31:45.party is kind of taking a firmer grip of the institutions and state
:31:46. > :31:51.than the new government usually do. The leader of Law and Justice's
:31:52. > :31:54.MEPs, told me that his party was just redressing the balance
:31:55. > :31:58.from the last government. The European Union is facing
:31:59. > :32:02.challenges by Schengen, immigration, the euro,
:32:03. > :32:07.Brexit, Greece. So I think that what the majority
:32:08. > :32:20.who should take decisions on the Polish constitution
:32:21. > :32:26.are called, whether it is a simple majority or qualified majority -
:32:27. > :32:29.come on, this is not really a big That's not how it's seen
:32:30. > :32:33.by officials at the European Commission, who are using new powers
:32:34. > :32:36.to investigate whether Poland The Poles could lose their voting
:32:37. > :32:42.rights at EU summits as a result. David Cameron's MEPs are allies
:32:43. > :32:49.with Law and Justice, and he's cosied up to the PM as part
:32:50. > :32:52.of his renegotiation. He needs her, but she's not signed
:32:53. > :32:56.up to his plans to limit benefits Could that possibly be why we have
:32:57. > :33:07.just announced we will be sending 1,000 British troops to Poland
:33:08. > :33:10.to help them stand up friendly next-door neighbour,
:33:11. > :33:14.Russia? We're joined now by the Conservative
:33:15. > :33:16.MP Daniel Kawczynski. He was born in Poland,
:33:17. > :33:19.and our guest of the day was a minister belonging
:33:20. > :33:21.to the party that was defeated by Law and Justice at last
:33:22. > :33:33.year's Polish elections. And we welcome viewers in Scotland
:33:34. > :33:37.at this point. The Government is accused of attempting a political
:33:38. > :33:43.takeover of the constitutional court in Poland. So no wonder the EU is
:33:44. > :33:49.investigating them? Well, I think it is important for politicians like
:33:50. > :33:57.myself to engage with the Polish people in the United Kingdom, there
:33:58. > :34:02.are over 800,000 Poles living here. Their view is it is too early to
:34:03. > :34:08.assess this government and they think the law and justice party is
:34:09. > :34:14.trying to recalibrate the court, because it was very top heavy.
:34:15. > :34:19.Parliament's dismissed five elected judges. It is illegal. Well my
:34:20. > :34:24.understanding is they have referred themselves to the Council of Europe
:34:25. > :34:29.and the Venice commission is investigating this. And an outcome
:34:30. > :34:35.of their report will be published next month. I'm interested to know
:34:36. > :34:39.what the results will be and I think at that juncture it will be
:34:40. > :34:45.appropriate to publish when we know what they come up. Isn't this a
:34:46. > :34:49.redressing of the balance of law and justice Party, they have got rid of
:34:50. > :34:55.people who are opponents, icht was stacked with supporters of your
:34:56. > :35:00.government. Well law and justice won a democratic election with 38% of
:35:01. > :35:06.the vote. They have a six member majority in Parliament and they're
:35:07. > :35:11.entitled to rule. What they're not entitled to do in my view is to
:35:12. > :35:18.change the rules. In your previous item we had the British system of
:35:19. > :35:21.judicial review of legislation and in Poland the constitutional court
:35:22. > :35:27.does that. We were in power for eight years, so a number of
:35:28. > :35:33.appointments came up, just as in the US Supreme Court, past majorities do
:35:34. > :35:37.matter. If you paralyse the constitutional court, then that is
:35:38. > :35:43.serious. Also having a small majority doesn't entitle you I think
:35:44. > :35:47.in the British system to purge all the managers and journalists of BBC
:35:48. > :35:54.or to change the rules of selection in the civil service and to
:35:55. > :36:01.politicalise them. But I agree the Venice commission is the right body
:36:02. > :36:07.to pronounce on this, because the EU peer review process is a new one and
:36:08. > :36:11.untested. Is this what is going on, purging in the media, dismantling
:36:12. > :36:16.the civil service, challenging the rule of law, that is what the
:36:17. > :36:21.government is doing there? No, I think it is important to recognise
:36:22. > :36:26.that this is the first time that any political party has received a
:36:27. > :36:29.majority of its own within the Polish Parliament. That is the first
:36:30. > :36:34.time it has happened since the fall of communism and the law and justice
:36:35. > :36:38.party have the presidency and won the presidency and the Parliamentary
:36:39. > :36:43.elections. So this is the first time under any political party is in a
:36:44. > :36:47.position to make more substantial constitutional changes. Are they
:36:48. > :36:53.though illegal and a challenge to democracy? The Government has given
:36:54. > :36:58.itself the power to hire and fire the heads of public TV and Europe.
:36:59. > :37:02.Europe says that is unacceptable in a genuine democracy. I think again
:37:03. > :37:08.talking with the Polish people in London, I think there is a concern
:37:09. > :37:12.or what has been conveyed to me by members of the Polish communities is
:37:13. > :37:17.there a concern about this sheer scale of foreign control of the
:37:18. > :37:24.Polish media and there are real tensions and worries about that and
:37:25. > :37:30.the law and justice party is seeking to address that. We both want what
:37:31. > :37:36.is best for Poland, if something is being done unconstitutional, then
:37:37. > :37:41.the Venice convention can ajute Kate. You don't agree with the EU
:37:42. > :37:50.investigating and the Prime Minister being called to the EU to be give
:37:51. > :37:56.given a dressing down. There is a concern about some of language being
:37:57. > :38:02.used by people like Martin Schultz that is considered to be defamatory
:38:03. > :38:07.to Poland. It is a country that until recently had no freedom at
:38:08. > :38:13.all. When it comes to European institutions trying to dictate the
:38:14. > :38:17.will of a democratic government, of course issues of concern are raised.
:38:18. > :38:29.Should the EU just back off Poland and this new government and there
:38:30. > :38:34.were claims that she return a hero. There was out thes as to similar --
:38:35. > :38:40.doubts as to similar actions by the government of Hungary. But we are a
:38:41. > :38:47.family of democratic nations and peer review is a mechanism we use in
:38:48. > :38:51.the eurozone, we look at one another's budgets and we are
:38:52. > :38:57.entitled to look at one another's institutions and behaviour. And
:38:58. > :39:02.maintaining democratic standards is an important part of what it means
:39:03. > :39:08.to be a part of European Union. Is it fair that Poland has used the
:39:09. > :39:14.UK's EU renegotiation as leverage for UK troops to come to Poland to
:39:15. > :39:18.beef up the military presence there and deter Russian aggression? That
:39:19. > :39:26.is something I challenged the Prime Minister on on the floor of the
:39:27. > :39:29.House a few weeks ago. I am very prosupporting Poland, being the only
:39:30. > :39:32.British member of Parliament born in Poe land. I challenged the Prime
:39:33. > :39:38.Minister on this, because it is worrying for me if Poland is trying
:39:39. > :39:43.to conflate its security issues with our own renegotiation with the EU
:39:44. > :39:51.and much as I understand their wish and desire to have a permanent NATO
:39:52. > :39:57.base east of Warsaw to show the Russians that we are serious about
:39:58. > :40:03.protecting Poland, I don't believe the issues should be conflated. That
:40:04. > :40:06.is for discussion within NATO and not the renegotiation. I said that
:40:07. > :40:10.strongly to the Prime Minister. Thank you.
:40:11. > :40:13.David Cameron was due to head to Sweden and Denmark this week
:40:14. > :40:16.to talk to his opposite numbers about his plans to renegotiate
:40:17. > :40:19.But yesterday, Downing Street announced that the trip
:40:20. > :40:21.has been cancelled - instead, the Prime Minister
:40:22. > :40:23.is off to Brussels to meet European Commission President
:40:24. > :40:27.It's been interpreted as a sign that the PM has had to make
:40:28. > :40:30.a last-ditch appeal to Mr Juncker, who isn't exactly his best friend,
:40:31. > :40:33.in the hopes of striking a renegotiation deal ahead of next
:40:34. > :40:48.Well, our Brussels correspondent Ben Wright can tell us more.
:40:49. > :40:59.Are these talks in some difficulty, or is this just part of normal give
:41:00. > :41:02.and take in the build up to a deal? Well part of cunning choreography
:41:03. > :41:07.that allows Downing Street to say in the teeth of great opposition they
:41:08. > :41:13.wrestled a great victory for Britain? I don't think so. It is
:41:14. > :41:19.difficult to work out why the trip to Scandinavia was abandoned in
:41:20. > :41:23.favour of a trip to Brussels to see Jean-Claude Juncker. No 10 said it
:41:24. > :41:31.is not a panic move and officials are not speculating here. We know on
:41:32. > :41:40.across the four baskets that David Cameron is basing hiss renegotiation
:41:41. > :41:45.there are difficulties. Particularly the benefits and migration issue. A
:41:46. > :41:49.deal has not been done. Officials in the European council are trying to
:41:50. > :41:53.come up with a set of draft conclusions to send around European
:41:54. > :42:00.capitals at the start of next week. That will trigger two and a half
:42:01. > :42:05.weeks of very public negotiation and haggling ahead of council meeting
:42:06. > :42:09.here in three weeks time. It gets going in earnest next week and then
:42:10. > :42:12.we will have a better idea about what is on the table and what David
:42:13. > :42:27.Cameron has managed to get. Thank you.
:42:28. > :42:35.Radek Sikorsky, what would you accept on migration. There are
:42:36. > :42:40.complicated issues and the new government is trying to introduce in
:42:41. > :42:44.Poland universal child benefit, that is very expensive and this
:42:45. > :42:54.discussion about whether some people will not go to work and take care of
:42:55. > :42:59.the children. But first, I think we should remember that the 800,000 or
:43:00. > :43:03.so Polish people who live here have come here to work. Not to claim
:43:04. > :43:08.benefit. But we are talking about in work benefit, until they're working
:43:09. > :43:12.they may be getting in work benefits the government wants to restrict it,
:43:13. > :43:18.I'm trying to determine, given Poland has a major say in this, what
:43:19. > :43:25.you would regard as a reasonable restriction? What would be
:43:26. > :43:31.reasonable would be for Britain to make its welfare system more
:43:32. > :43:39.European. If you Neil, Andrew, lost your job and came to Poland to seek
:43:40. > :43:42.for a job, we couldn't give you housing or unemployment benefit from
:43:43. > :43:47.day one. You would have had to have a job. Many people will say we were
:43:48. > :43:53.the first welfare state, why should we have to change our state, to suit
:43:54. > :44:00.European standards. You're welcome to do so. But don't complain it is
:44:01. > :44:04.costly, because it is. Ours is more focussed on people who have made the
:44:05. > :44:09.contributions and... You know wir not going to change our welfare
:44:10. > :44:14.state anywhere enough in time in time for a renegotiation. So is it
:44:15. > :44:19.possible? I think you can and you may change it, provided it is done
:44:20. > :44:21.possible? I think you can and you in a nondiscriminatory fashion. It
:44:22. > :44:26.won't be done before the referendum. By the time of referendum, you will
:44:27. > :44:30.also not change European treaties, all you will get from Europe in the
:44:31. > :44:34.process of this is the political agreement to do the kinds of thing
:44:35. > :44:40.that David Cameron needs to persuade the British people to vote yes. I
:44:41. > :44:48.think we should give him what we can within the treaty. The backdrop to
:44:49. > :44:51.the referendum, and it is causing Downing Street concern, because they
:44:52. > :44:57.don't like what the backdrop could be, the EU is in real trouble, it is
:44:58. > :45:02.in crisis over the migrant issue. The French Prime Minister said that
:45:03. > :45:05.the EU is in grave danger. Why should Britain stay in an unstugs in
:45:06. > :45:17.grave danger? Why should Britain add to those
:45:18. > :45:22.European woes? It's a self-inflicted problem. When Europe and some of the
:45:23. > :45:27.member states of weekend, Britain could lead Europe on issues such as
:45:28. > :45:32.foreign policy, defence, single market, services. Europe is learning
:45:33. > :45:37.for British leadership. By having this referendum you are depriving
:45:38. > :45:41.yourself the authority. That's the Foreign Office language. The fact is
:45:42. > :45:46.Britain can't give leadership on these issues, not a member of the
:45:47. > :45:54.euro or Schengen. Your Polish colleague has said that Schengen
:45:55. > :46:00.could face collapse, and everything that has been tried on the European
:46:01. > :46:06.migrant crisis has failed. So far 414 have been reallocated. Europe
:46:07. > :46:11.did seem to be in a real mess, as this referendum takes place in this
:46:12. > :46:15.country. And that's why we don't need Britain leaving, and adding to
:46:16. > :46:23.the problems. I don't think it would be in Britain's interests. Half a
:46:24. > :46:29.millennium of British policy was to prevent the continent uniting to the
:46:30. > :46:32.exclusion of the United Kingdom. The consequences for Scotland, Ireland,
:46:33. > :46:38.Ulster, would be severe. We need to stick together. Is the back in its
:46:39. > :46:41.worst crisis? There is an accumulation of crisis and we need
:46:42. > :46:42.to resolve it through leadership, and we need leadership from Britain
:46:43. > :46:44.also. Is the House of Lords
:46:45. > :46:46.being systematically undermined That was a view expressed
:46:47. > :46:50.in the Upper Chamber last night, as peers said the public
:46:51. > :46:55.were being given a distorted view of them as ermine-clad champagne
:46:56. > :46:56.swiggers with their The world is changing,
:46:57. > :47:07.our circumstances are changing. We are being systematically
:47:08. > :47:12.undermined and ridiculed. Some of it is our own fault,
:47:13. > :47:15.but I do think most of it is not, and we have to be prepared
:47:16. > :47:19.to fight our own corner. And nobody will pay any
:47:20. > :47:22.attention to us if we don't. Caricatures abound -
:47:23. > :47:25.ermine clads, swilling champagne, swanning around your lordships'
:47:26. > :47:30.house at the taxpayer's expense. That might sell newspapers,
:47:31. > :47:32.but it doesn't give any A highly distorted
:47:33. > :47:37.myth is relentlessly peddled of everyone
:47:38. > :47:40.with their snouts in the trough, greedily pocketing ?300
:47:41. > :47:45.a day for turning up. We're joined now by the peer
:47:46. > :47:48.who called the debate, Robin Hodgson, who wants to see
:47:49. > :47:59.the House of Lords do more How? Most large organisations and
:48:00. > :48:05.companies have what they call a rapid rebuttal unit to deal with
:48:06. > :48:10.issues of fact. Not about political bias, that's completely different,
:48:11. > :48:13.but about real events that are misreported and extorted. There is
:48:14. > :48:18.already a press office already for the House of Lords. It's a very good
:48:19. > :48:24.press office, but it is not as proactive as it is reactive. We put
:48:25. > :48:27.out a very sensible piece of research, and they do spend late in
:48:28. > :48:31.publicising and ensuring that you and others know about it. But they
:48:32. > :48:35.are not empowered to deal with stories that break. Are they not
:48:36. > :48:41.empowered? Details of the House of Lords press office are there online
:48:42. > :48:45.to help journalists, covering the House of Lords and the works of the
:48:46. > :48:51.Lords and committees. Surely that could incorporate what you want. It
:48:52. > :48:55.might be in the writing, but it is not in the facts. The reality is
:48:56. > :49:01.that stories are left to run, and are not corrected. I emphasise these
:49:02. > :49:04.are stories about fact, not political activity, which is a
:49:05. > :49:09.different matter. Rather than the Lords investing more resources into
:49:10. > :49:13.self-promotion, which is what you're talking about. I'm not, it's not
:49:14. > :49:18.self promotion at all. It's about making sure we have the accurate
:49:19. > :49:20.facts. It's not self-promotion and it's important it shouldn't be self
:49:21. > :49:25.promotion. It's about making sure the real facts of what the house
:49:26. > :49:28.does are reported. Why don't you club together with your own money
:49:29. > :49:33.and establish this instead of expecting the taxpayer to pay for
:49:34. > :49:37.it? I'm not sure any organisation in the country expects its own members
:49:38. > :49:42.to pay for a rebuttal unit. But you have a press office, which you don't
:49:43. > :49:46.think does its job, so you want this unit, you get ?300 per day, each
:49:47. > :49:50.chip in the ?50, and you have a rebuttal unit. We could do it for
:49:51. > :49:58.you! I'm sure you would do very well. We would do it for less! Have
:49:59. > :50:03.there been complaints about the quality of champagne? There has
:50:04. > :50:11.never been a complaint about that. There was a headline, a tizz about
:50:12. > :50:17.fizz. That was written by the Economist, not our headline.
:50:18. > :50:21.Wouldn't it be better to make sure your debates more topical, for
:50:22. > :50:28.example. If you are worried about positive media attention for peers?
:50:29. > :50:31.We have a range of topical debates. Who decides if they are topical? I'm
:50:32. > :50:35.not suggesting we should promote political activities. These are
:50:36. > :50:40.about things like champagne, that picture behind you will appear once
:50:41. > :50:44.in at State opening. The rest of the time we are wearing suits, like I am
:50:45. > :50:56.now, and that's how we work. But you don't publish that, it's too
:50:57. > :51:01.one-sided. There is a genuine problem with the Lords, and I speak
:51:02. > :51:04.as a former speaker, of not so much information being correct, and
:51:05. > :51:07.individual members don't have the resources to take people to court,
:51:08. > :51:12.to publicise things and correct the information. It's in the public
:51:13. > :51:15.interest for information about public institutions to be correct,
:51:16. > :51:21.and it's not enough to rely on individual members, and you need
:51:22. > :51:26.such a rebuttal. What about recruitment? Is it not in your role,
:51:27. > :51:30.you were a speaker, but the leader of the house should be doing this
:51:31. > :51:34.sort of thing for you? I have three jobs already. It's obviously a very
:51:35. > :51:40.popular job. We dissed want to see the colour of your money. I want one
:51:41. > :51:43.of those roads. -- one of those ermine clad robes.
:51:44. > :51:45.Now who thinks the moon landing was faked?
:51:46. > :51:52.That JoCo is part of a secretive order running the country?
:51:53. > :51:58.Well, some of the most popular conspiracy theories have taken a bit
:51:59. > :52:01.of a knock this week, thanks to new research from one
:52:02. > :52:04.academic at Oxford University who's come up with an equation that
:52:05. > :52:06.suggests that many conspiracies, if they existed, would unravel.
:52:07. > :52:17.It's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.
:52:18. > :52:25.OK, so this is probably the best-known conspiracy theory,
:52:26. > :52:28.that Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were not actually here on the moon.
:52:29. > :52:31.In fact, they were in a high-tech studio, not dissimilar to this one.
:52:32. > :52:34.Because I'm not actually on the moon.
:52:35. > :52:38.Which is a shame because I had wanted to plant a flag.
:52:39. > :52:42.But space is a popular frontier when it comes to a conspiracy,
:52:43. > :52:45.especially when space seems to come to you.
:52:46. > :52:48.We have all heard of Roswell and Area 51, and what may or may not
:52:49. > :52:54.In fact, such are the numbers of people interested in this stuff,
:52:55. > :52:57.that David Cameron spotted a gap in the market.
:52:58. > :53:00.During the 2010 election campaign, he pledged more government
:53:01. > :53:04.The truth, and the votes, are out there.
:53:05. > :53:08.MUSIC: Jailhouse Rock by Elvis Presley.
:53:09. > :53:11.Another conspiracy magnet is this guy, the suggestion being that
:53:12. > :53:16.For a start, lots of people say they've seen him
:53:17. > :53:21.On the flipside, there's a theory that Paul McCartney,
:53:22. > :53:25.who appears to be alive and kicking, is in fact, dead.
:53:26. > :53:28.The claim is he died in the 1960s and was replaced by a look
:53:29. > :53:32.The proof - well, have you ever tried playing
:53:33. > :53:46.There are plenty of conspiracy theories relating to politicians.
:53:47. > :53:51.the assassination of John F Kennedy.
:53:52. > :53:53.But there was another one about a more modern day President,
:53:54. > :53:56.that Barack Obama wasn't actually born in the USA,
:53:57. > :54:02.He ended up dramatically proving the so-called birthers wrong
:54:03. > :54:10.Why he didn't do it when everyone else was asking for it,
:54:11. > :54:16.There are those who say one of the biggest conspiracies
:54:17. > :54:19.of all is right here in the seat of power.
:54:20. > :54:21.That those in charge are part of an extraterrestrial,
:54:22. > :54:22.shape-shifting reptilian-humanoid elite.
:54:23. > :54:27.DAVID CAMERON VOICEOVER: The aspersion you are trying
:54:28. > :54:43.to cast, I think, is completely ridiculous.
:54:44. > :54:50.Tony Gosling is a journalist who investigates conspiracy theories.
:54:51. > :54:53.Conspiracy theories would involve so many people, that it would be
:54:54. > :55:01.impossible to keep them secret overtime. David Grimes, who has done
:55:02. > :55:05.the research, is a physicist, really good at that stuff, but he's not a
:55:06. > :55:10.social scientist and I don't think he's looked at the background of how
:55:11. > :55:13.conspiracy theories are being used. Since the JFK assassination you
:55:14. > :55:18.mentioned, the New York Times in the 80s did a Freedom of information
:55:19. > :55:21.request and they found the word conspiracy theory, and the concept
:55:22. > :55:25.of it, was a weaponised term they could use in order to put down
:55:26. > :55:30.criticism of the Warren commission, that was investigating Kennedy's
:55:31. > :55:34.death. Our jobs as journalists is to sort the wheat from the chaff, not
:55:35. > :55:39.to mix them up, which is what they want to do. Our job is also to
:55:40. > :55:44.establish facts, and we do that by people coming forward. If the JFK
:55:45. > :55:49.assassination was a conspiracy, or the landing on the moon was a
:55:50. > :55:52.conspiracy, so many people would have been involved, that somebody at
:55:53. > :55:57.some stage would have spoken to people like you or me, but it's
:55:58. > :56:02.never happened in any credible way. Not necessarily with JFK, because
:56:03. > :56:09.the FBI and CIA are involved, spies and detectives. And they don't leak?
:56:10. > :56:16.The whole part of their job is to keep secrets. That's part of the
:56:17. > :56:22.job. How do we know about the 12 assassination attempts against Fidel
:56:23. > :56:25.Castro? One of the reasons we have seen a big increase in conspiracy
:56:26. > :56:29.theories recently, partly the Internet, and also we have seen
:56:30. > :56:33.things like chemical trails, and I would dismiss these things, but it's
:56:34. > :56:37.partly the government's mental-health cut. I think there are
:56:38. > :56:43.a lot of problems out there for people who are looking to something
:56:44. > :56:46.to latch onto and see it as a conspiracy. Things like the
:56:47. > :56:58.Bo-lieving club running the country, that's not a conspiracy, that's
:56:59. > :57:06.happening. -- the Bullingdon club. Cecil Rhodes was in that club. What
:57:07. > :57:12.real conspiracy do you believe in? What's the biggest conspiracy that
:57:13. > :57:14.you think might be true? The Edward Snowden revelations about the
:57:15. > :57:20.security services are really good. Here in Bristol, perhaps it's a bit
:57:21. > :57:24.different to London, but we love conspiracies. All of the best seem
:57:25. > :57:31.to come out of fear. What's the biggest you believe to be true with
:57:32. > :57:34.evidence? All the biggest stories have started as conspiracy theories,
:57:35. > :57:38.and then it's a wrestle the see if they get out into the public. My
:57:39. > :57:50.favourite is the builder Berg conference, the conferences started
:57:51. > :57:55.by a former SS officer in 1960s. This is the oil barons and financial
:57:56. > :57:58.managers of the world meeting together to select our politicians
:57:59. > :58:08.will stop I think nowadays elections are not about policies, but more
:58:09. > :58:11.about psychological warfare. Bilderberg selects our politicians?
:58:12. > :58:15.We should have a word with them about doing a better job.
:58:16. > :58:18.There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
:58:19. > :58:20.Which well-known British politician has been taken for a ride
:58:21. > :58:24.Was it - a) Diane Abbott, b) Boris Johnson
:58:25. > :58:26.c) Jeremy Corbyn, or d) Nigel Farage?
:58:27. > :58:30.So Radek what's the correct answer?
:58:31. > :58:43.It was Boris. Why? Because we are friends. Where did you go? We were
:58:44. > :58:48.going round my constituency in Poland, where I thought that for
:58:49. > :58:50.once, I would be the star. We went into the main square. It was a
:58:51. > :58:51.conspiracy! That's all for today,
:58:52. > :58:53.thanks to our guests. The one o'clock news is starting
:58:54. > :58:56.over on BBC One now. I'll be back at 11:45pm
:58:57. > :58:58.tonight for This Week, where I'll be joined by Labour MP
:58:59. > :59:01.Caroline Flint This is the FA Cup,
:59:02. > :59:03.and anything can happen. The FA Cup fourth round.
:59:04. > :59:14.It's a stunner!