26/02/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 26/02/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



"a profound economic shock" on the UK.


So says George Osborne on a trip to China.


But is this just the latest episode of Project Fear?


Yesterday we were told just over 250,000 EU migrants came to the UK


So why did over twice that number register to work here?


You need to be good at sitting in small chairs and playing


on swings - but do education secretaries make any difference


How a new Labour Leader and a big decision on Trident has


re-invigorated the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.


All that in the next hour and with us for the duration today,


two columnists united by their opposition to Trident -


but not much else - Zoe Williams of the Guardian


and Peter Hitchens of the Mail on Sunday.


First this afternoon - what's the true level of immigration


Yesterday the Office for National Statistics told us that


in the year to September last year 257,000 EU migrants entered


but over the same period more than twice as many EU migrants


630,000 in fact, registered to work in this country


by applying for National Insurance numbers.


There is a clear discrepancy and it is a discrepancy


numbers issued that's become increasingly visible over


So, are the official migration figures significantly


underestimating the real level of immigration?


We don't know because it is hard it get all the facts and figures.


Let's talk to Jonathan Portes of the National Institute


for Economic and Social Research who has been looking into this


Jonathan, let's begin - explain to us what is going on here? Well, the


office for national statistics measures the immigration figures by


a random sample of people coming into the country. He asks people who


are coming in - are you planning to stay here for more than a year?


That's the official international definition of what an immigrant is.


Those figures have by in large served us well for most of the past


few decades but what I noticed and you pointed out, it is an increasing


discrepancy between those numbers and the numbers of people who, once


they are here, register for a National Insurance number, which is


what you need to do if you want to take a job, pay tax, pay National


Insurance or claim benefits. Now there are good reasons for the


discrepancy. We have known about them for a long time, in particular,


if you are only here for a few months but still want to work work,


you would register for a National Insurance number but you wouldn't


officially be an immigrant but the discrepancy is large and has grown


by a huge amount over the past couple of years and particularly


apparent for European Union nationals. Something is going on and


we don't know why. Let's come on to the information we would need to get


to understand these figures in a minute. Let me put a general


principle to you first - would most people not think that issuing


National Insurance numbers - even broken down by nationality, which


local authority is giving them - wouldn't that be a more accurate


measure of people coming to this country, to works than a passenger


survey at airports, which we understand was underweighted for


airports like Stansted and Luton and others, where many were coming in


from Eastern Europe You can use the two surveys for different things. I


use the National Insurance data numbers myself to analyse the labour


market impact because it seems to me to be a good measure of people


coming here to work. But lots come here for reasons other than work.


They may not be picked up by the national Ince insurance


registration. In particular, children would be absent entirely


from that. Equally people who come here as students who might need a


National Insurance number for some reasons, for a few months or


seasonal workers, they are not immigrants and shupted be counted as


so, so are rightly excluded. Both measures tell us something useful.


-- they shouldn't be counted. We need to understand what the


differences are. And in particular, has the survey, which on the whole,


which has worked well in the past, has it suddenly stopped working


well. What information have you been trying - to be able to drill down


into this discrepancy, you have been trying 20 get some more information,


I think in particular from the HRMC. What is it you have been looking for


and have you managed to get it? Well, what happened was, of course,


the Prime Minister made some very dodgy, frankly assertions about the


number of EU migrants who claim benefits. He based that on this


data. People who register for National Insurance numbers and


subsequently went on to claim benefits. I asked HMRC and the DWC


-- if you know how many are claiming benefits, obviously you know, it is


the same computer system, how many are paying tax, how many are paying


National Insurance and so on, which of course would give us a much


better idea of how many people had stayed on in the country for any


length of time, how many of these National Insurance numbers were


still active as people in the labour market. First the HRMC on the orders


of the Treasury said we can't tell you that information because it


might prejudice the Prime Minister's renegotiation, somehow. Excuse me,


let me interpret you - the reason they gave was - if we knew the facts


it might prejudice the renegotiation? Yes, that is the


reason they gave. Were you not surprised by that? I was shocked.


Since the end of the renegotiation, I, of course, have asked again and


the reason now is - well, it would cost a few thousand, a couple of


thousand quid or so, and we think that's too much money to spend on


producing this sort of data. Before I bring our guests in, let me ask


you this, since you have not been able to get the data that would


allow you to do your job properly. What is your guess, if I can put it


that way, as to the best explanation for the discrepancy between the high


figure on National Insurance numbers, and the lower figure on


actual migrants being clocked as they come into the country? I


genuinely don't know. I have been ring round some of my other


colleagues in the research community over the last couple of days to see


if they have any good explanations. They don't know either. My guess,


for what it is worth, is the survey data probably is somewhat


understating recent levels of migration. On the other hand, it is


probably also true that possibly more people arecoming here from the


European Union on a short-term basis. So it is probably a bit of


both but I wouldn't want it put any numbers on t which is why we really


need the Government to release this data -- numbers on


need the Government to release this data, it is there on the computer


system. Whichever side you are on, on the Brexit debate or indeed on


free movement of workers and immigration, and as you know my


research show that is free movement and immigration has been very good


for the UK, I think it is a good thing, but whichever side of the


debate you are on, people outing to be properlily informed and the


Government ought to be forced to disclose this data. Stay with us, I


will bring the guests N if you are inclined to conspiracy theories,


this would give you a field day. -- -- guests N I look at it like


council tax. They know the British passenger research were low and they


have known it for a long time but a Government that says they will use a


different data set is the Government that gets hit with the negative


headlines. So why do you think the insurance numbers we are giving out


for people to work are twice as big as the numbers we are registering to


come in? Well I'm certainly not going to say, if Jonathan Portas


doesn't know, I know. There must be people the British passenger survey


results have been low. It has always been said. 2-1 is a big discrepancy.


As onthan was saying, ever since people looked at this there has been


some kind of discrepancy but it has been growing and growing and it is


now 2-1. Rather large. The figures I saw over a five-year period t comes


in, using EU 1 million coming n verses 2.5 million NI numbers. That


is crazy. Of course I'm interested but can I tell you why it is? No I


can't. I claim it is as Hitchens' law, all political statistics are


fiddled as a matter of course and the old bikini effect observed in


the Soviet Union, statistics are more interesting for what they


conceal than reveal and we obviously have a Government which has two


different agendas, one, to pretend to be doing something about mass


immigration and others who encourage it because economic policy relies on


T which it does it is creating a will he-page credit-funded economy.


That's what it wants to have. It wants large scale immigration but it


needs to manipulate us into believing it is against. Are you


claiming the Government knows a lot more people are coming in. Well you


do. The National Insurance figures are knowledge, which the airport


passenger figures are speculation. They are factual. The National


Insurance They are factual. The National


people who could be coming here to work for a short time. So they say.


While the official migration figures, of the year, is the


internationally recognised definition of a migrant. It is a bit


like a difference between the classic crime figures which we no


longer collect and the British Crime Survey which is an opinion poll. One


is soiled fact, the other is a mass of politically-influenced


speculation. It is easy to see why - why do we need it ask why the


Government doesn't want people to know how high the level of


immigration S Is it your contention that they have been deliberately


understating it by a huge margin, knowing all the time their figures


are wrong? Is that what you are saying Is South Karolina saying,


when you find a turtle on the fence post, you know it didn't get there


by accident, perhaps it is not deliberate. When did they last say


that there? Quite recently. Plenty of reasons to do so. Back to


Jonathan Portas. If we did a bit of crowd sourcing and could raise a


couple of thousands of pounds, could we give that to the Government to


give us the figures we need? I think they would say, you know, that's not


how it works. I mean, I think they will eventually have to release more


data, but unfortunately we are in this period when, you know, they


have been publishing bits and snipts of it. They published a few more


bits and snippets last Friday, at the same time the Government


released its white paper on the renegotiation. But we need to be


able to seat underlying data, the tables, all the rest which would


actually give us this information. -- see the underlying data. I think


Peter is exaggerating, I don't think it is a maligned conspiracy to


conceal things from the British public but I do think the Government


is deliberately holding back on releasing information that would


undermine the story. I didn't say the words "malign" or "conspiracy."


People do actually get together privately to pursue purposes they


wish to conceal from everybody else. You may call it a conspiracy in the


hope of dismissing it and make us think of hushed conversations by


people wearing Guy Fawkes' hats but people do that and this he do it in


Government. Whether it is malign or not, I would say it was, you may not


think so. But be careful with the language you use to dismiss honest


sceptical about Government obfuscation.


We are here at the Daily Politics, interested in the fact, they


intrigue us. It is the basis of the questions we ask. If there is


anything we can do to help in your pursuit of these important facts,


Now it's time for our daily quiz. today.


The question for today is: which of these political parties


has neither of our guests been a member of?


At the end of the show Peter and Zoe will give us the correct answer.


They'll fess up and tells us which ones they have been members of and


which one they haven't. I know the reason. -- I know the answer.


Now, we've seen some Johnny-come-latelies won


round to the cause but there's a party that's been


campaigning for a British exit from the EU for more than 20 years


So, as Britain decides how to vote in June's referendum,


UKIP are meeting in Llandudno this weekend to ready


But the party's Scottish MEP, David Coburn, already knows what big


issue he'll be campaigning on - toasters.


Yes, Mr Coburn has complained that EU rules meant his toaster


was under-powered: "Mine's on full boost and my bread's


(That was a Scottish expression for pale."


My old toaster seemed to be powered by the Torness nuclear reactor


and this one is powered by some kind of EU windmill."


Yes, Andrew, two old faces popped up in new jobs.


Diane James MEP for South East England and William Dartmouth MEP


for the South West were this week appointed as Deputy Chairmen,


replacing the former Conservative MP turned UKIP candidate Neil Hamilton


who earlier this year missed out on becoming UKIP's candidate


The theory is she got burnt because she's following in


the footsteps of UKIP's only Westminster MP, Douglas Carswell,


which is to support the Vote Leave campaign in the European referendum


rather than the Leave.EU campaign and Grassroots Out,


which are being bankrolled by UKIP's big donor,


Someone else who became toast this week is John Atkinson,


in Carmarthen West because of a long-running row about how


the party selects people to stand in the elections


Some other high-profile Eurosceptics have appeared.


Now that Boris Johnson and Michael Gove are campainging


have they taken a slice out of the attention usually


I hope for your sake that Jo Co was not watching! LAUGHTER


And we're joined now from Stoke by UKIP's deputy leader,


Why is it that Nigel Farage seemed to turn on anybody that he sees as a


threat? If you are referring to Suzanne


Evans and Neil Hamilton being removed, we may declare, they are


both standing in the elections, they will both have a huge role to play


after May the 6th. Hopefully from within those respective assemblies.


Neil from within the Welsh assembly, I believe that he will be elected,


and hopefully Suzanne will be elected to the London assembly. We


need people who are able to campaign full-time, Diane James and William


Dartmouth are taking over roles particularly to look at security and


deal with the issues of trade. Hold on, Ukip did not come into existence


to have people on the Welsh of the London assembly is, you came into


existence to take Britain out of the European Union. You have now got a


chance to do that, with a referendum. Why would assemblies


take precedence over your resonant that the? Ukip was created to take


on the European Union but we are no longer a pressure group that is


simply there to push other political parties and we are no longer single


issue. -- why would assemblies take precedence over your raison d'etre?


We have people elected in all four quarters of the kingdom, we are


unique in that way in political parties there. That matters more


whether you win or lose? No, listen, look, of course, the primary goal is


to get us out of the European Union, equally, as a fully fledged


political party, we will be concentrating on those elections as


well. You say that you seem to waste energy on personal score settling,


internal feuds, moving people around, joining organisations now


that are so complicated that even people like me, who are paid to keep


across it, cannot even keep track of all of the different names. You only


have 17 weeks, which one are you in? What you mean? Am I him


grassroots... Which one? Are you in the People's public of Judaea or the


Judaea and is People's front(!) Ukip MEPs have made it clear that we are


backing grassroots out but when the designation is given, then we will


support the same campaign. What I want to appeal, to full glee, is


this, but personalities aside, come together, let's have one unified


Leave campaign. Then why has your leader sacked... People who have


gone to the other side...? INAUDIBLE She has sacked... He does not like


vote leaves, that is the truth. The truth is, Suzanne is standing in the


London assembly election, writing the manifesto, and we need people


who can work full time to campaign on the referendum. Look, Andrew,


Andrew, Andrew, Suzanne... Let me finish, Suzanne and kneel,


hopefully, we'll be able to campaign on the referendum issue after Mavis


is, when they are both elected to their assemblies, they will have


huge part to play in the future of Ukip, beyond being elected to the


assemblies. -- Suzanne and Neil. Is there also talk of suspending


Douglas Carswell, you're only MP, over his support for votes leave?


That is the first I have heard of it. But it this way, it is something


I will certainly be opposing, and it is the first I have heard of it,


this will not be happening. Period. Now that Michael Gove and Boris


Johnson seem to have signed up for votes leave, doesn't that mean that


is likely to be the organisation that the electoral commission will


choose as the official voice, the group that gets the money to


campaign to leave the European Union? It is a big boost, but at the


same time, the electoral commission will look at which organisation is


most cross party, Grassroots Out has people from all walks, it has people


from Ukip, labour, like Kate Hoey, even George Galloway, from respect.


I think it is up in the air, but we want the same thing, all of us. We


all want to leave the European Union. Campaigns are not


contradictory, they are, entry. I hope that personalities can be put


aside. -- Bayard complimentary. -- they are, the mentoring. The Prime


Minister appears to put the case under half of all of those you want


to stay in the EU, he puts the case for remain. Who puts the case for


leave on that same programme? Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage? I would be


amazed if there is a head-to-head debate... I'm not even talking


head-to-head, I mean one after another. And Question Time audience,


David Dimbleby, David Cameron giving the case for staying; who will then


follow to give the case to leave? Boris Johnson, or Nigel Farage? I


think that is a decision that Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage will have


to look at. Who would you prefer? I would prefer to put it out to


internal polling, who is most popular with different parts of


society and communities. I do not know who can appeal to the most


white section of people, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage, I will take


you ever can be most popular. The Chancellor is on a trade mission,


this is what he had to say to the BBC buzz political editor, about the


economic danger of withdrawing from the EU. -- BBC's political editor.


I think the global economy is facing more risk and more uncertainty


at any point since the financial crisis in 2008.


So this would be the very worse time for Britain to take the enormous


economic gamble of leaving the European Union.


You have seen the value of the pound fall and it reminds us all that this


This is about people's jobs and their livelihoods


And in my judgment, as Chancellor, leaving the EU would represent


a profound economic shock for our country, for all of us


and I'm doing to do everything I can to prevent that happening.


The Chancellor, in China, does it not concern you, that's not a single


major economic partner to this country, of the biggest economies in


the world, wants us to leave the European Union? Not one of them. I


am more concerned about my own country, I am more concerned about


the kind of country that I will hand onto my child... They are our


trading partners. Who will we trade with? Actually, if we left the


European Union, we could sign free-trade deals with these


countries all over the world, we do not have a seat on the World Trade


Organisation, the EU signs things on our behalf, and it is not proven


very good. INAUDIBLE All of the other 19 to 20... Of


them, that we trade with and export, we import, they are our economic


partners, not one of them wants us to leave the EU, is that


significant... Are wasted testing that if we left


the European Union they would cease to trade with us, -- are we


suggesting. We the fifth largest economy in the world, I am more


interested by what the British people will say, them by what


leaders of other countries will say. This is about Britain and our


future, I believe we will be more free, more democratic, stronger, and


outside of the European Union. Angular joining us. Between now and


June 23, we will get the opportunity to speak several more times, I know


that you will look forward to that. Peter, does it matter that there is


all of these different out groups and they seem to be squabbling among


themselves? Is it just... Is it just inside the Beltway, that view of


things? Of course it matters, they will do each other damage, they have


already done each other damage, it is laughable, it makes people think


these people are not serious, it is a grave danger to the campaign that


they act like this, it is a sign that they do not have true unity, as


opposed out campaign has begun to include quite large numbers of


important people do do not believe that Britain should leave the


European Union, Dick Italy Boris Johnson and now Michael Howard.


Neither of them want that, they want to put themselves at the head of the


out campaign so they can turn it into a second referendum campaign.


-- particularly Boris Johnson and now Michael Howard. Semi-other


people, in economic terms, this has never been an economic question, --


so many other people. This is a political project, it own leaders


have always understood it has economic downside, particularly the


euro, it is always had political priorities, the only country in


Europe in which the European Union is discussed as an economic issue.


It is a political issue whether we are to be a self-governing country


or not. The division, the almost total inability of large numbers of


people to even see this makes a serious debate very nearly


impossible. In recent years, if you listened to the speeches of George


Osborne or David Cameron, you got a constant stream of Euroscepticism.


Sometimes quite virulent Euroscepticism. Doesn't that


undermine the credibility when it comes on to television now, and


suddenly he becomes the great Europhile? It does, there is a lot


of addiction coming on, surprising to hear a lot of people suddenly


saying we are the fifth largest economy in the world, when they have


spent five years saying how broke we are. -- there is a lot of


contradiction coming on. What is it, either we are a Goliath all we are


David. The other, they have kind of marshalled and levied this


Euroscepticism, it is a crowd pleasing thing. Just to prove how


plucky they are. With no real sense of following it through. Now they


are in the difficult position of making what is not even an economic


argument, it is a purely fiscal argument. We will be rich if we do


this, and poorer if we do that. That will not set on fire anybody's


heart. There is a very profound philosophical difference between the


kind of little Englander, wanting everything being back to the way


that it was, no immigration, a return to British greatness, which


is... Why do you call that little Englander, if it is a return to


greatness, surely it is the reverse of that...! Sorry, I did not mean to


be dismissive. No, I do get tired of that... That term... It is in a


talented, but I did not mean it is to be pejorative. In the hedge fund


vision, Lena, five eyes, allied with America. Free trade. Nothing about


going back to the way that things America. Free trade. Nothing about


work, nothing about putting the working man at the centre of


everything. -- leaner. All about rabbit free markets. Full. . --


raided free markets. -- rabid. You will still be under the control of


the WTO, and all others interfering, the European Union is an old


problem, to some extent, globalism has now taken over a lot of the


things it used to do. We will move on now, because it is also


springtime to the greens today. They're holding their shindig


in Harrogate from where we're joined Wildie Green Party the campaigning


strongly to keep us in the European Union? We will be calling for us to


remain in the EU. -- will the Green Party. We are really gearing up at


the conference in Harrogate but we also focusing the election campaign,


we saw membership more than treble, 1.1 million votes in the general


election, more votes in every general election we have had


previously added together! Now we are focusing on the referendum but


also focusing on turning the green surge into green seats in the London


assembly, the Wales assembly and the council elections up and down the


country. White is the party united behind you in wanting to stay in the


European Union, do you have your own Eurosceptic wing?


-- is the party united behind you in wanting to stay


in the European Union, do you have your own


In Bournemouth we had a call for a strong bold Remain campaign, about


95% supported that. Of course, like everybody, everybody has people who


have different views, in the Green Party it is easier to accommodate


that and understand it. We understand people can express their


own views honestly and faithfully, expressing their principled and


their values. And we do not have any problem with that. You have lost one


of your most prominent members to the other side, why is Jenny Jones


taking a different view from you? Jenny has taken a position for


decades, and as I said, I have no problem with that, but what we are


saying is the Green Party is, we breathe European air, it does not


stop at the borders! We have the waters, the seas... I thought that


most of the wind of this country comes in the Atlantic! It does not


blow in from France, it is North Atlantic air of! That is why it is


so fresh A We need to get clean air, clean


seas. We celebrate the free movement of people in the EU. And the free


movement of air apparently. Work cooperatively, freely. I think if


you look at the other side, they seem very keen it talk about fish


and seem to act like they think fish have passports and stop at borders.


They are not our fish. They are fish stocks that have to be managed


sustainably for the future for everybody and that's how we have to


work, cooperatively, internationally, for the good of the


future. Do you think anybody is going tloisen to you. Aren't you


losing members to Mr Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party now? - -- is going to


listen to you? Very much not. We are seeing retention. You are losing


members. Well members move around after elections. A number of your


members have moved to Mr Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party. Well, we are


seeing real success in elections. Two county councillors elected in


elections in Dorset and over in Shropshire. Other only 3% in the


poll. And just this morning... You are 3%. Well, I think what you will


see is, we got 1.1 million votes in the general election. That was then,


you are now down to 3% Accumulatively, together. We have a


situation now where up and down the country and in London and Wales,


these are, propartial ate election, like the Westminster elections


should be. These are ex-wills that we can win, grow, we can win our


first members on the Wales Assembly and grow the number of councillors


up and down the country. Looking for directiveness on this. We won a bye


election overnight. We are growing, developing in local communities


where people really want a new broom sweeping through. People are fed up,


particularly with one party states but also with councils where there


are real two-party dish, bash, Bosch politics. People want new ideas,


ideas for the future, initiatives. I'm not sure, Bishop, bash or bosch


are running in this referendum but if you are the new broom. We have


seen a lot of that already. Let me ask a question - why is it that the


BNP - a party I thought no longer existed - why did they manage it


raise more money in the last quarter of 2015 than the Green Party? I


think the Green Party, we don't have millionaire or multimillionaire


hedge funds towards us. Neither does the BNP. In the general election, a


huge amount of money was raised through crowdfunding. People giving


us ?5 or ?10. I'm seeing that starting up again. They didn't in


the last few months Where we can elect more grooeps on to councils


and our first Greens on the Welsh Assembly and grow our London


Assembly representation. Thank you for joining us.


You'll need to know your times tables, be good at sitting on small


chairs and make sure you're not caught out in a spelling test.


What other qualifications do you need if you want to be


Could you be responsible for the hopes and dreams of every


pupil and parent out there and still keep teachers happy?


So, you want to be Secretary of State for Education?


Local authorities ran education and universities very


So, the thought that a Secretary of State for Education,


in the early '90s was actually running education,


Well, traditional trade union antagonism to any forward change


in the education field was not unfamiliar to me, not least


because I had been a teacher but I was surprised


that they were not enthused, as clearly and as quickly


I had absolutely no idea what floor my office


was on and I had to go back to the security guard and say,


"I'm terribly sorry, I'm the new Secretary of State,


I have no idea where my office is, any chance you can come


None of us were macho women and all of us tried to run a more


conciliatory department and all of us knew that if we didn't


be careful, the word around Whitehall would be that the women


I view it as one of the best posts in Government


because you can do quite a lot and you can influence things


Jill Rutter is a former senior civil servant and now


She says Secretary of State for Education is a job that's


Secretary of State for Education is one of the roles that has changed


30 years ago, it was a pretty hands-off department,


operated by issuing circulars to local authorities


Since the invention of the National Curriculum


in the late '80s, things have really started to change.


We saw that and then we saw things like David Blunkett's literacy hour


and then from 2010 we have seen a mass move towards academies


Now the Department of Education has a direct relationship with large


numbers of schools and it is trying to get a grip


Lord Baker, who launched the National Curriculum,


says education hasn't always had far-sighted Secretaries of State.


There is a picture gallery in the Department of Education


of all the Secretaries of State for Education since the war


and there are two lines now and I've known all of them except two


and some of them have been birds of passage,


there for a few months, there for a couple of years,


having little interest or effect, making sure the boat doesn't sink


under them and protecting their backsides, as it,


And others have been very good, since.


One of those regarded as a big reformer says he was confident


I used to joke that I'd get some satisfaction in my dotage,


drinking a nice glass of red wine and reflecting back that


although people may not remember who it was that had done it,


there were things that were going to still be there,


working well, transforming the lives of young people and I'm looking


Reform is impossible for any Government,


Some of whom aren't your allies, but you need them.


The thing that I used to have to say to fellow ministers,


frankly, who used to say - well can't you do something about...


I mean the fact is, no minister can be in every classroom.


The person that is in every classroom is a teacher


and so you have to have a well-motivated, really well-trained


Alan Johnson agreed but found it wasn't the teachers


The biggest problem we had wasn't with that, it's what to teach.


Everyone tells you they want this in the curriculum,


they want that in the curriculum and particularly, you know


the nostalgaists, who want what was in their curriculum in


1944, "We should resuscitate it", and the school day would have


to last for 25 hours to get even half of what people wanted


Once you started that, you need schools, which you don't


We were saying that - here is what we are about,


here is why we have a common purpose and these are the things


which we think we can do together, to deliver what you want,


which is your school doing better and children in your school


achieving and that sense of hearts and minds and winning


If we had said - here's an injunction, they just weren't going


In Ken Clarke's day, the civil servants urged him


They didn't think I was getting into schools enough.


I won't say which of my predecessors...


Ted Short it was, they said, "Oh he used to go seven or eight


I wondered what on earth Ted thought he had been doing in seven or eight


I also strongly suspected that they wanted to get me out


of the office and stop me doing things.


And just send me around doing the pictures for the local paper


and the handshakes with the headteachers and,


But Ed Balls found he caused enough mischief when he was in schools.


I'm afraid I'm responsible for rather more extra school discos


I always use to say to the kids - do you think you need more discos?


Massive roars of approval and the headteacher would sit


there and think - my goodness, why did we invite this guy?


Charles Clarke liked being invited to do the job.


He didn't much like being asked to move on.


I had been President of the National Union of Students.


I had first come into working in national politics


for Neil Kinnock when he was Jim Callaghan's Shadow Secretary


I believed and believe that good education policy is the core


I was very sad when Tony Blair asked me to move.


In fact, I had an argument about it at that time when he was offering me


the role of Home Secretary because I felt it was such


Estelle Morris thought the same and famously stood down as Secretary


of State, having been a successful Schools Minister.


If I'm honest with myself, if I'm really honest with myself,


as much and I just don't think I'm as good at it


I'm not having second best in a post as important as this.


I wanted to spend much more time on the business in the department


And there are two bits of Secretary of State.


You have got to run your department, which I think I did quite -


I think I could do but there is another bit and it is crucial


and it doesn't exist in the Minister of State,


you have to manage politics across Whitehall.


Estelle Morris was excellent at the job and I was really sad


that - and this applies too often to really good people -


that her confidence was knocked when she was Secretary of State.


You do need enormous confidence which sometimes


If you can get the balance right without being an absolute prig


on the one hand and being afraid you are not doing a good job


on the other, that's the balance you are always trying to seek.


It seems a job ensuring the good teaching of lessons to children


can often teach those doing it lessons about politics.


Our Giles on the Secretary of State for Education. Who has been the most


effective in recent years, do you think? It infuriates me this


conversation, they talk about it as if they are making political


decisions. The current Secretary of State for Education has absolutely


changed the early years curriculum and made schools' lives a nightmare.


Morale is really low among teachers. Five-year-olds are being told they


are failures, routinely and we kind of have these object truce air diet


conversations about whether you want to be across Whitehall or across the


department. I asked you who was the most effective in recent years?


Clearly not the current one in your view. Effective sno sn who has had


the most effect. Tony Crossland in 1965 by abillionishing selection.


And another one and two vandals. All the rest have been failing to repair


the damage they Z Estelle Morris, terribly nice person and all the


rest, David Blunkett atrociously he set into law that you could open no


new selective schools in the state system, he should possibly join


them. They have all been effective. You don't like any of them. No,


education in this, state education in this country is a colossal dises


aer. We have had four sets of statistics in reports this week


showing the teachings of maths has declined. That children from poor


homes can get nowhere in our society. This is all the result of


the same thing, the destruction of selection. It is the result of


people being Secretary of State who have never been teachers. It is


particularly pronounced in recent years. They literally have no


expertise at all. They do not listen to any of the people who have done


the work on it and sprinkle in completely ignorant policies which


change peoples lives. They have too much control. Once you have got rid


of the principle that good schools could govern themselves, which was


quite possible in a selective system, and you have endless


interference of national curriculums and centralisation. Well... And


nationalisation which is what the academy system involves, total


central control of the schools, it's catastrophic, the meddling in


schools by ministers in Whitehall, will not put schools right. You have


to create conditions in which good schools can thrive and flourish and


that means academic selection. It is infuriating to agree with 50% of


what you say and disagree violently with the other 50% I absolutely


agree. The problem s the expertise is in the wrong hand. It is being


centralised. It is the arrogance of Government ministers thinking they


can run something they do not understand. Why would someone on the


left like you favour a system which supports the rich? I don't support


the current system. I have been complaining for it. Why are you in


favour of the fairer system? I'm in the? Why not, it was much better


than before. Actually it wasn't better for the poor. If you look at


counties where grammar schools are still in operation, pupils on free


school meals do worse. If you look kaent, it serves the poor very much


worse than neighbouring counties. That's bus they are a tiny besieged


rump. So, we have evidence of the system that you laud, and because


the evidence doesn't suit you. In Northern Ireland which retains a


selective system the prospect for poor children, particularly of


getting to University rch better than they are on the mainland I


don't understand why your data has to take precedence over mine. Better


data. Remember the days when the Campaign


for Nuclear Disarmament could get thousands and thousands


of people on to the streets? Well, it's happening


again this weekend. CND reckon their anti-trident march


planned for London tomorrow will be And it's back to the drawing board


for the artist who provided many of the period's


most striking images, I could have gone to an exhibition


about gardens at the Royal Academy, instead, I have come clean the real


War Museum, to see work of Paul Kennard, you may not know the name,


but surely you know his famous version of this eye Constable. This


is when cruise missiles were coming to Britain, the idea was that they


would circulate around the countryside, and as the Tories said,


in Parliament, don't worry about them, they will melt into the


countryside! Originally I had a lot more bits, skeletons hanging out the


window, but with montage, if you put into much, it reduces it. There was


a colour one done as a postcard, and it was in a lot of shops. I heard a


lot about Americans buying it and sending it back to Texas! In Peter's


eyes, he and I do the same thing. You going to a gallery these days,


you stop thinking, your art is about adoration, much more, that is


becoming more and more so with the art market, the mass prices, and so


I want to show that you can make art that talks to society. That is what


it did in the past, that is why did, and that is what a lot of arts did


in the past. People wanted to get the news from the art. You can still


do that, in this situation. -- that is what Goya did. This was make the


Labour Party in the early 1980s. People went to get the news,


almost from the art. You can still do that


in a gallery situation. So this picture was made


for the Labour Party in the early 1980s and they were


unilateral at the time. And they wanted to use a very strong


image to show that we could actually get rid of nuclear weapons


and that's what I came up with. You can see the Labour Party


logo there and then, hopefully, this has become relevant


again as we are talking about the possibility of getting


rid of nuclear weapons. Has Labour asked


you for a new poster? But the current


Labour Leader is fan. He does paint.


I don't know if you knew. No, I didn't.


He does do some painting himself. He is very into culture.


Is he any good? And Peter's been involved in picking


new images for the placards that are to be used at this weekend's


anti-Trident march which CND reckon is going to be the biggest


since the '80s. STUDIO: Joining us now, Labour MP,


former defence minister, John speller. Welcome to the programme.


Saturday is to be the national campaign day to support remaining in


the European Union, for Labour, Jeremy Corbyn... Is going to speak


at a CN deal... Does that suggest to you that abolishing nuclear weapons


is more important to him than staying in the EU? -- John Spellar.


The rally, where he is appearing, with the leaders of the SNP, Plaid


Cymru, and the greens, it is not necessarily the best use of time. --


CND. Apart from the EU, I would say that the issue of weekend deaths in


hospitals, where David Cameron this week put out some quite spurious


figures, that should be the main focus of political campaigning this


weekend, rather than trying to overturn a policy which was agreed


after a very full discussion in the Labour Party, we ran it in the


manifesto in the general election. Your party is now led by a man who


has been a unilateral nuclear disarmament board his entire life,


entirely convinced on this issue, it believes that increasing numbers of


people who have joined the Labour Party take that position as well. It


is only natural, surely, that he would want to campaign to make that


party policy. Actually, we do not just select one person and adopt all


of his views, otherwise we would abolish party conference! Is not


asking for that to happen, he believes there is a growing tide of


unilateral and nuclear disarmament in his own party, that he agrees


with and would like to encourage because he thinks he can make it


policy. I don't know if you saw the conference of the GMB, Major


affiliated union of the Labour Party, that took place this week,


there was a very strong feeling from the organised working class,


represented by that union, that very much we should stick with current


policy. Rankin, that David Cameron should get on with it and call a


vote in the House of Commons and we should be ordering the new


submarines. That was party policy hammered out. -- frankly, that David


Cameron should get on with it. I remember being involved in many of


them. Perhaps now you are a different party. On the programme


yesterday we looked at recent polling, on the attitudes of the


members of your party, a huge influx, only 40% of your members now


were members when Ed Miliband became leader in 2010. How money people?


This may well be a different and new party. Voters have not changed. New


party, new policy. Voters have not changed, the manifesto we presented


less than one year ago, has not changed. Labour members of


Parliament, Tom Watson, the deputy leader, he pointed it out, very


strongly, yesterday. They voted on that, and we will be, many of us


will be voting for that. When David Cameron finally puts it before the


House of Commons. Indeed, if anything, since the policy was drawn


up, international situation has become more precarious. The invasion


of Crimea, and also, Russia revamping its nuclear arsenal. Emily


Formby says that she would like a proper debate inside the party, when


she says that, on the future of Trident, you have already made up


your mind? The party has made up its mind, we had a debate, we have a


full and extensive debate will stop -- Emily Thornberry. That was


reaffirmed, by the way, at last year 's party conference, after the


election of Jeremy Corbyn. That Reay reaffirmed that we support the


maintenance of the continuous at sea deterrence. -- that reaffirmed. Why


is your Shadow Defence Secretary having a proper debate? -- full and


extensive debate. We had a full debate, perhaps she did not like the


outcome. The outcome... Firstly, it is the perfectly logical outcome in


defence terms, and also it is the outcome supported by the British


people, again, as you talk about opinion, as every opinion poll


shows, really. You said you would resign the Labour whip, if the party


came out against... I did not. What is your position? My position is as


it has been at times in your clips beginning earlier, you pointed out


there were times that Labour was a unilateralist party, and indeed that


did not do us much good with the electorate, with the era where the


public decisively rejected us. I fought my corner then, and indeed,


we turned around party policy, and not coincidentally, the public then


decided that if we were trusted with the security of the country, then


they would trust us. If they don't think that, then they want. Why


should I want to walk away from a party, that I had been a member of


for the best part of 50 years? Because you don't agree with


them...? Policies change, at one stage, one side is on top, another


stage, another side is on top. Now the other side is on top and you are


kvetching. I fought my corner in the party, and opinion in the party


turned around, and we won. The electorate followed that. I'm not


one of these people, on the fringe, Socialist workers party, now I am to


the right of politics... As you know, I have had the same position


all the way through. Yes, and here you are, belonging to a party which


became Blairite, and Blairism has gone now, the Blairite party in this


country now is the Tory party, and you and the rest of the people in


the Labour Party have been left behind by that. Now you are in a


party led by somebody like Jeremy Corbyn, you are still Blairite, you


have a choice, sit there and moan, or go and join the Tories. That is


where you plainly belong! Aditya Lily... Particularly... You sound


like a member of Momentum. You are using that as if it is an insult.


Socialist workers, and the Alliance for work as liberty and all of that.


We have been on that route, interestingly enough, the bite back


publication has just republished Jon Golding's book, which outlines those


battles. Winning those battles... The point, at some point, you have


got to stop talking about the membership of the party with this


scorn and disdain, whatever you think of them, whatever you, the


Parliamentary party think of them, they are your party, you cannot come


on television and talk about them as if they are lunatics! You are not


understanding what the party is. I do very much so, I remember the


Labour Party -- are you a member of the Labour Party? Yes, for three


months. I was a member when I was 15, and I left because of people


like you. -- was a member when I was 15 and I left because of people like


you. I have been a member for decades and decades. You could not


even join the party when Ed Miliband was the leader. In the Cold War,


which is now so long ago... Starting again... We were on the same side,


why do you continue to support their weapon designed for the Cold War and


design for a superpower when the Cold War is over and we are not a


superpower, there is a busy should between Trident and no Trident, a


modest nuclear deterrent, much smaller, it is the one that you


constantly seek to obscure the assistance of. In coalition, the Lib


Dems tried to come up with alternatives, they had the Trident


alternative review, and the most cost effective way, continuous at


sea deterrence for Trident. John Spellar, thank you very much


rejoining us. -- thank you very much for joining


us. Well, you haven't got


to wait until 23rd June. Here's Ellie with a round up


of the rest of the week's political Three strikes and you are a junior


doctor, there will be more industrial action and they announced


they are seeking a judicial view of government plans to impose new


contract on them. The 11th hour agreement was found in the fiscal


framework of the Scotland Bill, the next Scottish Government will have


full control of income tax. The number of people sleeping rough in


England has increased 30% in a year, rising to over 3500 people. The


Prime Minister address Jeremy Corbyn's appearance at PMQs,


advising him to: put on a proper suit, do up your tie, sing the


national anthem. He later told reporters that David Cameron was


jealous of his jacket(!) from one side Tory icon to Donald Trump, in


the race of the Republican presidential nomination. Winning a


third in a row. It is a lot of fun up here, I have got to tell you.


George Bush senior possibly was, but he was not giving anything away.


There are, I did not say EU referendum once. Wait a minute...!


Important debate in Texas last night, I stayed up to watch it. The


answer to the quiz, now, the question was, which of these


political parties has none of our guests been a member of? The answer


is... Women's equality party. I have not been a member of the women's


equality party. There was only 3000 of us, though socialists, we did not


call ourselves a party, as crazy as we were! No more time to walk down


memory lane. 1pm news beginning on BBC One, I will be back on BBC One,


on Sunday, with Sunday politics, Michael Howard will be joining us,


he is now campaigning to leave Europe. Former Conservative Party


head. I hope MUSIC: Close To You


by the Carpenters


Download Subtitles