:00:36. > :00:38.Afternoon folks - Welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:39. > :00:41.Immigration is front and centre of the referendum campaign today
:00:42. > :00:44.as new figures show net migration to the UK rises to the second
:00:45. > :00:55.Leave campaigners say it shows that "immigration is out of control".
:00:56. > :00:58.Those who want us to remain in the EU warn against the creation
:00:59. > :01:04.The Government says it's considering far-reaching changes
:01:05. > :01:07.to pension rules as a means of saving the UK's steel industry.
:01:08. > :01:13.Salford's new Mayor says the Government's welfare reforms
:01:14. > :01:15.are having a detrimental impact on vulnerable people in his area.
:01:16. > :01:23.And, can this woman save us from alien invasion?
:01:24. > :01:31.We reveal the sci-fi cameo of Scotland's First Minister.
:01:32. > :01:34.All that in the next hour and with us for the whole programme
:01:35. > :01:36.today is the former Work and Pensions Secretary
:01:37. > :01:40.Now, if Iain was still doing that job he'd probably be far too busy
:01:41. > :01:45.But, in case you were unaware, Iain rather spectacularly relieved
:01:46. > :01:48.himself of the burden of public office which means he's now free
:01:49. > :01:50.to devote all his efforts to the referendum campaign
:01:51. > :01:53.and appear on little programmes like this one.
:01:54. > :02:02.As we come on air the Business Secretary Sajid Javid is making
:02:03. > :02:05.a statement to the House of Commons about the future of
:02:06. > :02:08.Ministers have been considering changes
:02:09. > :02:11.to pensions benefits in order to cut the liabilities
:02:12. > :02:16.of the old British Steel pension fund which is now owned by Tata.
:02:17. > :02:19.It's thought the size of the pension deficit has been a major
:02:20. > :02:24.deterrent to potential buyers of the steel business.
:02:25. > :02:27.One of the options is to switch the rate that the pensions keep pace
:02:28. > :02:32.with prices from the higher RPI measure to the lower CPI measure.
:02:33. > :02:34.Former Lib Dem pensions minister, Steve Webb, had this warning
:02:35. > :02:36.about the wider implications for other pensioners
:02:37. > :02:46.It's not the use of the lower Consumer Prices Index
:02:47. > :02:48.that's really the issue - it's a perfectly good
:02:49. > :02:52.It's more that the steelworkers had a right, in their scheme,
:02:53. > :02:55.to a higher measure of inflation and once you take away the principle
:02:56. > :02:58.that the rights you have already built up can be taken away,
:02:59. > :03:02.That's really the issue, rather than how we measure inflation.
:03:03. > :03:08.You worked with Steve Webb in the work and pensions department, and he
:03:09. > :03:12.is something of an expert on pensions. So he knows what he's
:03:13. > :03:17.talking about. He does. I enjoyed working with him. Good colleague. Is
:03:18. > :03:21.he right about the dangerous precedent which would be set? I have
:03:22. > :03:28.not seen what the government is proposing. I would say that there is
:03:29. > :03:33.an element in what Steve said this morning, which is a concern, which
:03:34. > :03:37.is... I can understand the need to find some sort of solution to the
:03:38. > :03:43.steel industry problem. And to get those debts down. But there is just
:03:44. > :03:47.an element he is talking about, once you start one exception, then all of
:03:48. > :03:50.a sudden you get a line-up of exceptions. They say if it is OK to
:03:51. > :03:55.the steel industry, then what about us? And because there is a huge
:03:56. > :04:00.deficit out there, and this is a huge problem overhanging a lot of
:04:01. > :04:07.industries... Do you agree with him? It may not work. I don't know how
:04:08. > :04:10.they will ring fence or isolate this as a single issue problem. If they
:04:11. > :04:14.are doing that and they have found a way I am happy to listen, but I'm
:04:15. > :04:20.not sure that is what is happening. If the government can unilaterally
:04:21. > :04:23.change the terms of a scheme for those who are working and those who
:04:24. > :04:27.have retired in the steel industry, so they have worked all of their
:04:28. > :04:31.lives, they are nearly 80, they have their pensions, then what would
:04:32. > :04:36.there be to stop the government from doing it to other industries? That
:04:37. > :04:39.is the bit I want to be certain about... When you operate pensions
:04:40. > :04:44.you operate for future pensions and existing pensions. The existing ones
:04:45. > :04:47.are vulnerable. They are the ones that have no ability to change their
:04:48. > :04:51.circumstances because they are fixed, the income is fixed, so if it
:04:52. > :05:00.falls to magically, something happens to it, their lifelines
:05:01. > :05:03.cannot be replaced. I came here this morning to hear that this is a
:05:04. > :05:09.proposal. I haven't seen the proposition. Would you say that
:05:10. > :05:14.would be dangerous? I would be concerned until I am satisfied that
:05:15. > :05:17.what they are proposing to do is singular and isn't extendable
:05:18. > :05:21.across-the-board, the more people who line-up to do it. In other
:05:22. > :05:23.words, if this is a short-term measure to get stability in that
:05:24. > :05:29.particular industry then it may be worth looking at. What can it be
:05:30. > :05:34.that is short-term and singular that then could not be cited as an
:05:35. > :05:39.example that other industries could do? I can see the dilemma for the
:05:40. > :05:49.government in terms of wanting to find a buyer. With changing -- would
:05:50. > :05:53.it completely change things? I don't know. People are in bits saying this
:05:54. > :05:57.cannot happen until this happens. You have to find out the real bottom
:05:58. > :06:00.line. Is this a reality, or is it possible to do it without changing
:06:01. > :06:08.anything? I don't know because I'm not close enough to it. The pensions
:06:09. > :06:13.system, the deficits and the issues, it is all a complex thing so we have
:06:14. > :06:16.to tread carefully. Short-term measures can often have long-term
:06:17. > :06:22.consequences. These things, invariably, have to be sorted out. I
:06:23. > :06:27.recognise the need for speed. Do you think the government is desperate
:06:28. > :06:30.about it? I think so, because they want to protect the industry, there
:06:31. > :06:34.are lots of jobs to think about, and livelihoods at stake. It is about
:06:35. > :06:38.getting the balance right. I am open to persuasion on this one. But I
:06:39. > :06:42.would like to know what kind of protections are in place, like
:06:43. > :06:44.Steve. We will bring you the latest on what Sajid Javid has said when we
:06:45. > :06:45.get it. The question for today is how
:06:46. > :06:49.did our guest Iain Duncan Smith Was it a) invented by
:06:50. > :06:56.Clive Woodward during his school b) given to him by fellow students
:06:57. > :07:00.at Merchant Navy college in Wales, c) dreamt up by his
:07:01. > :07:02.old army colleagues, or d) thought up by Conservative
:07:03. > :07:05.press officer Mike Penning to help At the end of the show IDS will give
:07:06. > :07:20.us the correct answer. Will he?
:07:21. > :07:25.I hope so. I thought it was something else. This is the worst
:07:26. > :07:29.quiz I've ever seen, those are his initials. I thought it was the sun
:07:30. > :07:33.newspaper. Immigration, let's talk about immigration.
:07:34. > :07:34.Immigration moves front and centre of the EU
:07:35. > :07:36.referendum campaign today, with the Office of National
:07:37. > :07:38.Statistics releasing the last tranche of migration data
:07:39. > :07:42.And the figures show that, in 2015, net inward migration reached
:07:43. > :07:48.Immigration moves front and centre of the EU
:07:49. > :07:50.referendum campaign today, with the Office of National
:07:51. > :07:52.Statistics releasing the last tranche of migration data
:07:53. > :08:01.The numbers show a marked increase in the number of migrants coming
:08:02. > :08:12.With net migration at 333,000 in the year to December 20 15. That is up
:08:13. > :08:14.by 20,000 from the previous year. And of particular note will be
:08:15. > :08:27.the number of migrants from the EU. Net numbers now stand at 184,000, up
:08:28. > :08:31.by 10,000 from the previous year. The figures also show a record
:08:32. > :08:41.number of people emigrating for work, a record 8000, with 58% having
:08:42. > :08:45.a definite job to go to. The ONS has provided more details on the number
:08:46. > :08:53.of National Insurance numbers issued to EU nationals. 630,000 in the year
:08:54. > :08:56.to March. And the ONS also released new projections of England's
:08:57. > :08:58.population which shows the country set for a surge of more than 4
:08:59. > :09:00.million by 2024. Immigration is set to account
:09:01. > :09:03.for almost half that growth, which will see London
:09:04. > :09:14.pass the 10 million mark for the first time
:09:15. > :09:16.between 2017 and 2018. The projections, which do not
:09:17. > :09:18.include Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland,
:09:19. > :09:19.suggest some inner cities However some areas in northern
:09:20. > :09:23.England are expected to see their populations fall,
:09:24. > :09:26.with the largest expected to be in Barrow-in-Furness in Cumbria,
:09:27. > :09:28.which could drop by 4.3%. This morning, Immigration Minister
:09:29. > :09:30.James Brokenshire had this to say: I'm not going to pretend that these
:09:31. > :09:33.figures today aren't disappointing. It underlines the challenge
:09:34. > :09:35.that we continue to face, but we remain committed to reducing
:09:36. > :09:38.net migration to the long-term What isn't the answer,
:09:39. > :09:41.as some may suggest today, That would wreck the economy,
:09:42. > :09:47.threaten jobs, virtually be equivalent to throwing the baby out
:09:48. > :09:50.with the bath water. We need to continue the reforms
:09:51. > :09:54.to reduce net migration from outside of Europe, which still maintains
:09:55. > :09:57.the majority, but also to follow through on the Prime Minister's
:09:58. > :09:59.renegotiation to deal with those factors that act
:10:00. > :10:02.as a draw to the UK, such as benefits, and seeing
:10:03. > :10:06.that work always pays. We're joined now by former
:10:07. > :10:19.Labour Home Secretary Jacqui Smith. Welcome to the programme. For how
:10:20. > :10:28.long can we continue to bring in a net rise of 330,000 migrants? It
:10:29. > :10:32.depends on the extent to which we believe those people are
:10:33. > :10:37.contributing to our net economy. I think they almost certainly are at
:10:38. > :10:41.the moment. But quite often it is those macroeconomic figures which
:10:42. > :10:46.are important, but how they feel about their work, how they feel
:10:47. > :10:50.about the welfare system... Sure, but are you saying there is no
:10:51. > :10:58.problem as long as they are contributing? I'm not saying there
:10:59. > :11:03.is no problem. For how long can we do it? I understand people are
:11:04. > :11:07.concerned about the levels. My opinion on the debate is that I
:11:08. > :11:15.don't believe that promising a person A. Respect is that leaving
:11:16. > :11:17.the EU will give us a chance to control migration in a way we
:11:18. > :11:30.haven't been able to before is the answer. -- a person thinking about
:11:31. > :11:37.leaving the EU. What is important is that we are able to ensure people
:11:38. > :11:40.have jobs, that they feel confident about public services... It is also
:11:41. > :11:45.quite important for our viewers that you answer the question. Is it too
:11:46. > :11:50.big, or is it not too big that we have a net migration of almost
:11:51. > :11:55.300,000 per year? As long as we can provide the public services for
:11:56. > :11:58.people. Quite often migrants are contributing to those services. If
:11:59. > :12:02.we can ensure people have decent work, if we can have a welfare
:12:03. > :12:07.system that is fair to everybody, into which people contribute, that,
:12:08. > :12:12.rather more than a crude number, or a crude cap which this government
:12:13. > :12:18.has consistently failed to meet, other more important issues. So it
:12:19. > :12:23.is not an issue? What we have seen in the failure to meet the cat... I
:12:24. > :12:28.am asking for your view, we will get the government in a moment. There
:12:29. > :12:32.are people in this country who feel that... Who feel concerned about
:12:33. > :12:36.their work, who feel concerned about whether or not there are too many
:12:37. > :12:43.people here. What I am clear about is if we are to respond to these
:12:44. > :12:46.concerns, we are much better doing it alongside our European partners
:12:47. > :12:51.in a way that will enable us to have sensible controls in place. Also,
:12:52. > :12:55.immigration is an issue brought about by massive international
:12:56. > :12:59.changes, economic and geopolitical forces. We are much more likely to
:13:00. > :13:03.be able to respond to those if we are in a strong relationship with
:13:04. > :13:07.our European Union colleagues. If we left the European Union, this idea
:13:08. > :13:14.that we would be able to propose controls over immigration, is a
:13:15. > :13:19.false thing. I didn't ask you about Europe, but you brought it up. Being
:13:20. > :13:23.outside the European Union, it doesn't necessarily give us better
:13:24. > :13:28.control of the numbers coming here. I don't see how that could possibly
:13:29. > :13:34.be the case. If you have a border with 500 million people open, in
:13:35. > :13:37.other words people coming in self select, you cannot stop people. Even
:13:38. > :13:43.if they have a criminal record you cannot say no unless they pose an
:13:44. > :13:46.immediate threat. So people come here, what ever four, jobs,
:13:47. > :13:52.whatever, they come here self select. The Bank of England made it
:13:53. > :13:57.clear that the migration from the European Union is by and large
:13:58. > :14:03.looking for low skill low wage jobs. That puts pressure on people in the
:14:04. > :14:08.UK looking for those jobs already. I think there is an extra 1.4 million
:14:09. > :14:13.people who have come in on short term, up to 52 weeks, and they put a
:14:14. > :14:17.huge downward pressure on salaries and wages. The economy is growing,
:14:18. > :14:22.British unemployment is very low by international standards now. The
:14:23. > :14:29.economy, relatively successful convert to the rest of Europe, would
:14:30. > :14:32.seem to need this extra labour to continue to succeed. I don't agree
:14:33. > :14:37.with that. There is always a requirement for certain skills. If
:14:38. > :14:42.you have a controlled set of borders than what you do is look for the
:14:43. > :14:47.skills that are necessary. The biggest problem the UK economy faces
:14:48. > :14:50.a certain skills like engineering, software engineering, all of those
:14:51. > :14:55.areas, you would like to be able to say people who do that can come
:14:56. > :14:59.because it would improve the productivity of the economy. What we
:15:00. > :15:03.don't need is large numbers of self select people, competing for low
:15:04. > :15:06.income jobs, because there are still plenty of people in Britain capable
:15:07. > :15:08.of doing those jobs and they simply get priced out of the market. That
:15:09. > :15:16.is a fact of life. We're all worried about people whose
:15:17. > :15:20.pay and jobs are being undermined. You will Work and Pensions Secretary
:15:21. > :15:22.and, frankly, if you'd been that worried, you could've improved
:15:23. > :15:29.enforcement of minimum wage legislation. That is a total red
:15:30. > :15:34.herring. There is no way that workers in this country are going to
:15:35. > :15:37.be better off from leaving the EU, with the risk that that poses to
:15:38. > :15:41.their jobs, to the prices of the goods that they buy. And
:15:42. > :15:45.incidentally, if we're talking about whether or not our borders are
:15:46. > :15:49.secure, how can it be a better way to control immigration to
:15:50. > :15:53.effectively, as we would have to if we left the EU, repatriate our
:15:54. > :15:56.border to the UK, rather than being able to carry out the border checks
:15:57. > :16:04.that we are able to carry out in France? Let me come back to this
:16:05. > :16:07.issue of the minimum wage. What do you say to Jacqui Smith's argument
:16:08. > :16:10.that if the minimum wage was properly implemented and enforced,
:16:11. > :16:14.that would reduce the numbers coming? It simply wouldn't reduce
:16:15. > :16:18.the numbers by any noticeable degree. There has been a huge
:16:19. > :16:21.increase enforcement in the last six years, and about the Coalition
:16:22. > :16:25.Government and the current government, and you can go on doing
:16:26. > :16:29.that and of course you should but this is to miss the whole point. You
:16:30. > :16:33.have an open border with the European Union and the vast majority
:16:34. > :16:41.of people coming in from the EU are not coming in to do illegal levels
:16:42. > :16:46.of work. They're coming in mostly to do legal jobs. I am in east London
:16:47. > :16:50.MP. When Neil Nick Park was being built and I travelled around, I used
:16:51. > :16:54.to meet in the job centre is plenty of people who were plumbers and
:16:55. > :16:58.electricians and they couldn't get work on the Olympic Park because
:16:59. > :17:03.they were undercut by people coming in, hot bedding in bedsits, staying
:17:04. > :17:06.for about seven or eight or nine months. They were undercut because
:17:07. > :17:09.they didn't have those family cost that they had and they could take
:17:10. > :17:12.lower salaries and then they would go back to where they came from and
:17:13. > :17:17.come back a few months later. That is the problem. In that case, why is
:17:18. > :17:20.it that there are senior people in the Leave campaign making proposals
:17:21. > :17:24.such as, we should maintain free movement of people in western
:17:25. > :17:29.Europe? How would it be possible to in the Schengen system? There are
:17:30. > :17:34.people making promises... I have no idea who you are talking about.
:17:35. > :17:38.Senior people in the Leave campaign have suggested that you might want
:17:39. > :17:44.to have free movement within Western Europe. Who suggested that? I don't
:17:45. > :17:48.know precisely. That is not the position of the Leave campaign at
:17:49. > :17:51.all. There have also been people who have suggested that there might be
:17:52. > :17:54.the possibility of opening up more widely to people coming from
:17:55. > :18:00.Commonwealth countries. All of those things have been positive... Hang
:18:01. > :18:04.on. The debate is, do you control the level of migration and the
:18:05. > :18:08.quality of that migration? Here, I'm saying to you, if there are software
:18:09. > :18:11.engineers in India who want to come to jobs that need software
:18:12. > :18:16.engineers, then the Government looks at the balance of that and says,
:18:17. > :18:20."We'll take them". That is or it possible with the integration system
:18:21. > :18:24.at the moment. The second highest net migration figure since records
:18:25. > :18:28.began at the moment and the reality is, it is self selective. We have a
:18:29. > :18:32.vast number of people coming in from the EU, mostly doing low-paid jobs,
:18:33. > :18:35.which means you have to tighten right up on the skilled areas of
:18:36. > :18:40.work which you may want coming from young software engineers who would
:18:41. > :18:44.actually add productivity. So it is the case that you would want to
:18:45. > :18:48.increase immigration from outside the EU? I want to have controlled
:18:49. > :18:52.immigration. An elected government that has a proposal from migration
:18:53. > :18:56.system to limit to tens of thousands has to control its borders. If they
:18:57. > :18:59.do that and are elected on that, the public that the next general
:19:00. > :19:06.election will say, "You did or didn't achieve that, I want you out
:19:07. > :19:08.or I want you to stay". You need to answer a few questions about how you
:19:09. > :19:15.would implement your immigration policy. Questions like... I'm asking
:19:16. > :19:22.the questions. I'd like to ask you a question. You say we all want
:19:23. > :19:26.controlled immigration, so if we stay in the EU, how would you
:19:27. > :19:30.control it? Firstly, I actually think some of the reforms that David
:19:31. > :19:33.Cameron has the go she hated around the welfare system are right. I
:19:34. > :19:37.think it's right if people come to this country that they should make a
:19:38. > :19:42.contribution before they receive welfare benefits. All the research
:19:43. > :19:46.suggests that will make almost no difference at all, in particular
:19:47. > :19:53.when you add in the rise in the minimum wage That's part of the
:19:54. > :19:56.reason why I think they're significant macroeconomic benefits
:19:57. > :20:00.from migration into this country but what there also are our considerable
:20:01. > :20:06.concerns amongst individuals about their pay levels. You said, we all
:20:07. > :20:11.want to control immigration. I assume you include yourself so I'm
:20:12. > :20:15.asking you, if we remain in the EU, how would you control immigration
:20:16. > :20:20.from the EU? I think our immigration is better controlled by having
:20:21. > :20:24.border controls in France, which, of course, was negotiated by David
:20:25. > :20:27.Blunkett, because of our close relationship with our European
:20:28. > :20:34.colleagues. It was everything to do with the EU. It's a bilateral
:20:35. > :20:39.arrangement. The Home Office minister in France said, "We would
:20:40. > :20:43.keep that even if Britain left, because it suits our purposes".
:20:44. > :20:46.Having worked closely on the Justice and home affairs council, and is
:20:47. > :20:50.David Blunkett has said, I really do not believe we would have got that
:20:51. > :20:54.agreement had we not be working alongside our European colleagues.
:20:55. > :20:59.You accepted a bilateral treaty, not an EU treaty? I believe it has come
:21:00. > :21:08.about because... Legally, it is not an EU treaty, correct? It is
:21:09. > :21:13.bilateral. Iain Duncan Smith... No, no, I'm going to ask Iain Duncan
:21:14. > :21:16.Smith question now. You've been part of the government, until recently,
:21:17. > :21:20.that for six years has promised to get net migration below 100,000 and,
:21:21. > :21:24.this, you've spectacularly fails to do that and part of the blame you
:21:25. > :21:29.give is because you can't control numbers coming from the EU. But you
:21:30. > :21:33.can control numbers coming from outside the EU and even when you
:21:34. > :21:38.take none you, net migration in the last year was almost 150,000. So
:21:39. > :21:45.even if you stopped everybody coming from the EU, you would still be 50%
:21:46. > :21:49.above your target. Why? Because we need to take more action to reduce
:21:50. > :21:55.net migration. If you have a plan to cut migration by tens of thousands,
:21:56. > :21:58.we are missing that. If you look at Australia and other countries, they
:21:59. > :22:03.have points systems, where they say certain skills come in and the rest
:22:04. > :22:09.don't. That is what you have to do. You said that if we took in fewer
:22:10. > :22:13.from the EU, you would have control. We are probably taking more with the
:22:14. > :22:17.right skills from outside the EU. I said your overall migration policy
:22:18. > :22:21.is then set for what the skills that you need in the UK to improve that
:22:22. > :22:26.but the net number that come in versus those who believe would
:22:27. > :22:33.actually fall. That is the purpose. You set yourself a target and you
:22:34. > :22:37.achieve that target. Would it be 100,000? The policy that we set
:22:38. > :22:41.ourselves, I am a believer in. If you have a manifesto pledge, you
:22:42. > :22:45.stick to it. You never this economy, at its current growth rate and job
:22:46. > :22:49.generation, which is more than the rest of the eurozone put together,
:22:50. > :22:55.could not survive if we only had immigration at 100,000. Our policy
:22:56. > :22:59.at the last election is to have... I know that your policy, it doesn't
:23:00. > :23:06.make it right. The British people voted for that. Shouldn't you just
:23:07. > :23:12.drop the promise? I believe if you got a promise, you stick to it. We
:23:13. > :23:16.have to leave it there. Sorry. We've had an affair out in on that. Jacqui
:23:17. > :23:26.Smith, thank you for being with us. But we're not leaving the debate.
:23:27. > :23:28.Tonight sees the first referendum TV debate -
:23:29. > :23:30.it's in Glasgow and is being hosted by Victoria Derbyshire
:23:31. > :23:33.in front of a live audience of 18 to 29 year-olds.
:23:34. > :23:35.Our reporter Christian Fraser is at the venue in Glasgow.
:23:36. > :23:40.That's right. We're on the banks of the Clyde. The crew are stored
:23:41. > :23:43.tightening up all the bolts and making the final preparations and
:23:44. > :23:48.another spotlight, former First Minister Alex Salmond, who is very
:23:49. > :23:51.much in the Remain camp. Alongside him, Alan Johnson's labour, Liam
:23:52. > :23:56.Fox, the former Defence Secretary, from Conservatives. He is backing
:23:57. > :24:00.the Leave campaign and next to him will be Diane Jones, one of the four
:24:01. > :24:04.Ukip MEPs but it is the audience that is the most fascinating. We
:24:05. > :24:07.don't often hear the views and thoughts of a young audience and you
:24:08. > :24:12.will see the title behind the stage, "How should I go?" That is because
:24:13. > :24:16.they're still, unbelievably, a lot of undecided voters in the 18
:24:17. > :24:20.29-year-old age-group and it is crucial, particularly to the Remain
:24:21. > :24:23.camp, that they get that vote out because polls tell us about 50% of
:24:24. > :24:26.young people will vote but more people vote the older they get, so
:24:27. > :24:31.these young people could be crucial to the Remain camp. Interesting
:24:32. > :24:36.views, we are likely to get. I don't think they will be focusing, as you
:24:37. > :24:40.are, on migration or procurement law in Europe. They want to know about
:24:41. > :24:43.jobs, universities, how Brexit might affect their opportunities within
:24:44. > :24:47.Europe, where they may go to find work later in their lives. Since
:24:48. > :24:51.we're in Scotland, let's broadly talk about the polls here. They seem
:24:52. > :24:55.to be leaving quite firmly towards remain. Nobody here is going to take
:24:56. > :25:00.anything for granted because we've had the independence vote, a general
:25:01. > :25:03.election, the important elections at the beginning of May, so nobody can
:25:04. > :25:08.really guess what turnout might be. Will it be as high as we expect it
:25:09. > :25:13.to be or are people just tired of going to the ballot box?
:25:14. > :25:14.Thanks for that. We look forward to it.
:25:15. > :25:17.Well, one of the key issues in the referendum debate
:25:18. > :25:21.Those on the Leave side suggest we can easily negotiate a free trade
:25:22. > :25:24.agreement with the EU and be free to negotiate with other
:25:25. > :25:26.emerging economies in the Far East and Latin America.
:25:27. > :25:29.Those arguing to remain, however, suggest that being in the EU gives
:25:30. > :25:31.us preferential access to a market of 500 million people.
:25:32. > :25:35.One of those is Miriam Gonzalez Durantez -
:25:36. > :25:39.She is, of course, the wife of former
:25:40. > :25:43.But she is also a lawyer who specialises in free
:25:44. > :25:54.Welcome to the programme. Iain Duncan Smith, first of all, in terms
:25:55. > :25:58.of trade with countries like the US and China, what would be so
:25:59. > :26:04.dramatically different if we left the EU? First of all, you would
:26:05. > :26:11.carry on trading with them. We have a trade balance which is pretty much
:26:12. > :26:15.in balance with the United States. We want to get on and try and make
:26:16. > :26:17.trade deals with countries which have free trade deals, like
:26:18. > :26:21.Australia made with the United States, which took about two years
:26:22. > :26:25.to sort out, and the same goes with countries we've had historic ties
:26:26. > :26:29.with like India and Japan, so what we would want to do is get on and
:26:30. > :26:33.start that process. We do trade with countries like the US and China. So
:26:34. > :26:39.the EU doesn't stop the UK doing that. Nobody ever said it stops it.
:26:40. > :26:43.Just to clarify. The point is we want to make that trade even easier
:26:44. > :26:50.and it is taking forever for the EU to get what I think is a bad trade
:26:51. > :26:54.deal in TTIP with the United States, which I am not in favour of. How
:26:55. > :27:00.much quicker do think it would be and how much would it increase by?
:27:01. > :27:03.I'm not sure how much it would increase by but I think it would
:27:04. > :27:07.increase trade to top the reality is that you will increase your trade if
:27:08. > :27:13.those barriers, whatever barriers they are, come down. How high are
:27:14. > :27:20.they at the moment? They average about 1.5 percentage top I think one
:27:21. > :27:23.presented the average. In some areas it is five percentage top the
:27:24. > :27:28.question you are asking is almost an irrelevance. It is not a relevant.
:27:29. > :27:32.It is not relevant to find out how much more trade we would have if we
:27:33. > :27:38.left the EU. It is a very relevant question. -- it is not irrelevant.
:27:39. > :27:42.Some people have said would be a golden age of trade and I want to
:27:43. > :27:46.know how much more. It depends on how you get your free trade deal but
:27:47. > :27:49.the fact of life in all free trade deals that exist between countries
:27:50. > :27:56.show significant increases in their trade. Australia was one. There is
:27:57. > :28:01.no overarching court. They have no barriers on either side. What would
:28:02. > :28:04.be the problem? We would be free to make trade agreements, individual
:28:05. > :28:06.trade agreements, and it actually would improve with these other
:28:07. > :28:11.countries, some of whom we can't trade with the tall at the moment
:28:12. > :28:14.individually. You are making, if I may, both of you are making a series
:28:15. > :28:20.of assumptions that are little bit wishful thinking. The UK visitor can
:28:21. > :28:23.continue trading but it will continue trading under very
:28:24. > :28:31.different terms. The EU and the UK within the EU is currently protected
:28:32. > :28:34.by a wide network of agreements that have been concluded or are in
:28:35. > :28:37.negotiations and they offer preferential treatment to British
:28:38. > :28:44.companies, wherever they are going. That would go. It can be
:28:45. > :28:48.renegotiated but that would go. So that's thinking of, we are going to
:28:49. > :28:55.be able to trade more, if you want better terms than we have right now,
:28:56. > :29:02.it it is an incredibly complex situation. Renegotiation... There is
:29:03. > :29:07.one of the agreements here so you can see what it is. This is one of
:29:08. > :29:12.the simple agreements. There are many more which are much more
:29:13. > :29:17.complicated. You would need to renegotiate 30 to 50 of these. Let
:29:18. > :29:23.me say, by the way, that I have been a trade negotiator in my past life
:29:24. > :29:28.and in bilateral negotiations. They are not really British trade because
:29:29. > :29:33.shooters here in the government. How long does it take to negotiate
:29:34. > :29:40.something like that? Things are getting more and more complicated
:29:41. > :29:43.right now, partly because of fears that the UK exports mostly services
:29:44. > :29:49.and for services, you need to negotiate later for financial
:29:50. > :29:54.services. Five years, beginning to end, is a reasonable time. Five
:29:55. > :29:58.years for every single trade agreement? Would you be perpetual
:29:59. > :30:02.that? I have been an industry and I have negotiated contract and trade
:30:03. > :30:08.deals with countries abroad so I have to tell you something very
:30:09. > :30:12.simple. The reason why you have this stack of papers is because in the
:30:13. > :30:16.EU, all these different nations require, in the course of those
:30:17. > :30:21.negotiations, incredible limitations on what happens. For example, the
:30:22. > :30:24.TTIP negotiation, one of the areas they Rowling about, is whether
:30:25. > :30:28.America can call their feta cheese feta cheese or whether the rights
:30:29. > :30:32.have the -- whether the Greeks have the right to call it feta cheese.
:30:33. > :30:36.You have a simpler process if it is dealing with one country. The second
:30:37. > :30:40.thing is, any external trade deals that the EU has made, legally, it is
:30:41. > :30:46.up to the country they made the deal with to decide whether it supplies
:30:47. > :30:50.that trade deal to the UK or not. If that country says, "I am content
:30:51. > :30:53.that we will continue to trade on this terms with the UK," then that
:30:54. > :30:58.trade deal stands. That is legally the case.
:30:59. > :31:05.I have negotiated with you, for example, you are offering me 500
:31:06. > :31:09.million customers, and now I am offering to you 67 million
:31:10. > :31:14.customers. This is in breach of contract. It is up to them... Of
:31:15. > :31:20.course it is up to them... I let you speak earlier... It is up to them to
:31:21. > :31:24.decide if they are going to apply them or not. I wouldn't be
:31:25. > :31:29.surprised. They would be mad not to open it. Isn't it the will of the
:31:30. > :31:39.other countries, and the fact we don't know? Put those two words
:31:40. > :31:44.aside, then you get down to the concrete point, these nations want
:31:45. > :31:48.to deal with us as we want to deal with them. But they will want a
:31:49. > :31:52.preferential deal... The first and in point is you would already have a
:31:53. > :31:56.trade deal. When you speak to these countries you say you are content,
:31:57. > :32:01.if that is what we want to do as a government, to stay with the deal as
:32:02. > :32:06.we have it now. Are you content? If they say yes, finds asked to carry,
:32:07. > :32:12.then we do. -- the first concrete point is. We don't have a trade deal
:32:13. > :32:16.with the US after 30 years. It doesn't have a decent trade deal
:32:17. > :32:21.with India, one of our biggest and oldest friends. -- it doesn't have a
:32:22. > :32:24.trade deal with the US after 30 years. We would have to do a deal
:32:25. > :32:30.with them individually. It is about control. Leave are saying the UK
:32:31. > :32:34.would control those the gauche orations. They would choose who they
:32:35. > :32:39.would like to negotiate with and their terms would also be done on a
:32:40. > :32:43.preferential basis. That would be the advantage of the out of the year
:32:44. > :32:48.as a block. I know that this seems to be the whole Brexit debate,
:32:49. > :32:54.control of everything. It is, isn't it? It is difficult to control it
:32:55. > :33:03.completely. It doesn't work like that. This is about a trade between
:33:04. > :33:07.your control for every bit, and what you get with 500 million customers
:33:08. > :33:11.that you have when you negotiate. It is out of the question that the UK
:33:12. > :33:15.would be able to get the same terms. If it is offering 67 million
:33:16. > :33:23.customers, if it is offering 5 million customers. Would it be
:33:24. > :33:26.impossible? Very difficult. I won't ask you to do the negotiations. We
:33:27. > :33:31.have that clear. LAUGHTER
:33:32. > :33:37.When I was in business, you argue for those things. The point is, this
:33:38. > :33:43.idea that all of this stuff means you cannot do it... Sleep, years ago
:33:44. > :33:48.we would not have wanted to do it, it is just too difficult. --
:33:49. > :33:57.honestly, years ago. We have got to get our own agreements for Britain,
:33:58. > :34:01.and that must be better. Bilateral agreements are my bread-and-butter.
:34:02. > :34:08.There are no negotiations in the government who have free trade
:34:09. > :34:13.deals. Important negotiate is... With respect, they are bad at it. 30
:34:14. > :34:19.years are discussing a trade deal with the US and they still don't
:34:20. > :34:23.have it... How about Joe Hart? I don't think that is pretty good. --
:34:24. > :34:30.Doha. You could join other countries,
:34:31. > :34:38.Iceland, Norway, literature and Steyn, you would have access to
:34:39. > :34:46.their trade deals, as well -- Liechtenstein. It could be lots of
:34:47. > :34:50.different other models like that one. I don't accept the whole
:34:51. > :34:54.internal market, or not, because that includes freedom of movement?
:34:55. > :34:59.And the different thing is an agreement with third parties. That
:35:00. > :35:02.issue is still on the table. We have to leave it. Thank you. If you do
:35:03. > :35:07.ever end up working for him, do tell us.
:35:08. > :35:18.Lots of trees died in that, I hope it was worth it. We have offered
:35:19. > :35:22.politicians from all parties to take the soapboxes.
:35:23. > :35:24.So to start off the series, here's Conservative MP -
:35:25. > :35:27.and former policing minister - Nick Herbert on why you should
:35:28. > :35:44.The Conservatives took Britain into the single market
:35:45. > :35:53.That's given us the best of both worlds, and being outside Europe's
:35:54. > :35:56.passport-free area means we control our borders.
:35:57. > :35:58.Thanks to the Prime Minister's new deal, Britain is exempt
:35:59. > :36:00.from ever-closer union, so we'll never be part
:36:01. > :36:03.I'm proud of our record of rebuilding our economy,
:36:04. > :36:13.creating 2.4 million jobs and restoring stability.
:36:14. > :36:15.But we mustn't put our economic security at risk
:36:16. > :36:17.by turning our backs on our largest trading partner.
:36:18. > :36:20.A vote to leave is a vote for risk and uncertainty,
:36:21. > :36:22.affecting jobs, prices and mortgage payments for families.
:36:23. > :36:24.Independent experts warn that Britain could take a serious
:36:25. > :36:26.economic hit by leaving, meaning less funding for public
:36:27. > :36:32.The cost would be equivalent to ?4,300 for every
:36:33. > :36:35.Families can't afford to pay this price.
:36:36. > :36:56.That's why Britain is stronger, safer and better off in the EU.
:36:57. > :36:59.So that was Nick Herbert making the Conservative 'remain' case.
:37:00. > :37:01.But as you might have noticed, not everyone in the Conservative
:37:02. > :37:04.party agrees - Nusrat Ghani MP explains why she'll be voting
:37:05. > :37:26.On June 23rd, Britain has a chance to vote for a bold, positive future,
:37:27. > :37:32.as an independent country in control of its own destiny.
:37:33. > :37:35.I am proud that our nation stands tall in the world.
:37:36. > :37:38.We have the world's fifth biggest economy and the fourth
:37:39. > :37:43.We have a chance to liberate our economy from a declining corner
:37:44. > :37:48.of the world and spread our wings to the whole globe.
:37:49. > :37:50.Today, business regulation is dictated by the EU's unelected
:37:51. > :37:57.Their red tape costs our economy billions every year and it's small
:37:58. > :38:03.If we take back control of our democracy, we can set
:38:04. > :38:07.sensible rules to suit Britain, not Brussels.
:38:08. > :38:10.We can then do our own trade deals, worldwide, to bring
:38:11. > :38:14.We can take back control of our borders and decide
:38:15. > :38:20.on the skills and expertise needed to help our country flourish.
:38:21. > :38:23.We get a lousy deal for our membership fee of ?350 million
:38:24. > :38:29.Let's get it back and spend it on our priorities.
:38:30. > :38:32.Let's get back control of our country.
:38:33. > :38:47.Nusrat Ghani making the Conservative case for Leave.
:38:48. > :38:51.Both those films are available on our twitter feed.
:38:52. > :38:54.And we've done films with all the main parties
:38:55. > :38:57.which we will be playing in the run-up to the referendum.
:38:58. > :39:00.We asked Nick Herbert if he would come in and debate his
:39:01. > :39:02.arguments with Iain Duncan Smith, but Mr Herbert wants to avoid
:39:03. > :39:09.But we do have former Conservative MP Laura Sandys who is campaigning
:39:10. > :39:22.I am glad you are not frightened to come on. Welcomer long. David
:39:23. > :39:26.Cameron's former blue skies thinker worked with him at number ten claims
:39:27. > :39:34.the PM is a closet Brexiteer. He would have liked to have left. Do
:39:35. > :39:39.you believe him? I don't. I think the longer the Prime Minister has
:39:40. > :39:42.been in his post he has actually seen really the true opportunities
:39:43. > :39:46.Europe offers us from a power point of view. If you talk to ministers
:39:47. > :39:52.they see the letter which we have, and don't believe we are a victim of
:39:53. > :40:02.Europe, and that we are actually a true and leading partner. If you
:40:03. > :40:06.read the whole quote from Steve Hilton, actually, as Prime Minister,
:40:07. > :40:10.David Cameron has changed his view, that you can be an ideological
:40:11. > :40:14.backbencher, like yourself, then it is easy to be a League campaign. But
:40:15. > :40:24.when you are in power you are looking at the interests of the
:40:25. > :40:32.whole country. -- Leave. I decided a while ago. As power kept slipping I
:40:33. > :40:35.changed my mind. I said we would end up with a final decision which is,
:40:36. > :40:40.can you stay or can you leave because you will see more powers go.
:40:41. > :40:44.More and more the treaties convinced me this was the case. Coming back to
:40:45. > :40:48.the PM, we don't have an idea, I don't have a window into his soul.
:40:49. > :40:52.Buddy you see what still Hilton is saying, can you believe that
:40:53. > :40:58.becoming Prime Minister changes your perspective? -- but can you see.
:40:59. > :41:02.Being in government changed my perspective. If I was edging towards
:41:03. > :41:06.Lees, being in government, dealing with the people in Brussels, it
:41:07. > :41:13.would make me want to leave as fast as possible. -- Leave. The amount of
:41:14. > :41:15.times we were in fact it because we disagreed over social policy, and
:41:16. > :41:20.they are trying to take control of social policy, I thought if anything
:41:21. > :41:24.tells you you want to get out it would make me want to go the other
:41:25. > :41:29.way dealing with them. The majority of Cabinet ministers want to stay
:41:30. > :41:33.in. They had a different experience. You say that but a lot of Cabinet
:41:34. > :41:35.ministers have tempered their opinions because of collective
:41:36. > :41:39.responsibility, even though they were allowed to choose as they
:41:40. > :41:44.wanted. We are moving into the last stage of this. We need to look at
:41:45. > :41:49.the vision of the country. Churchill had his concentric circles where the
:41:50. > :41:52.UK was positioned on the continent of Europe with an extraordinary
:41:53. > :41:58.relationship with the US, and also with our links to the Commonwealth.
:41:59. > :42:01.When the last conversation about trade happened, we offered the
:42:02. > :42:06.Commonwealth preferential treatment into the EU market and that's why
:42:07. > :42:11.the Commonwealth want us to stay in because we are their platform. We
:42:12. > :42:15.have got this extraordinary position. To lose one of the legs of
:42:16. > :42:19.the three legged stool seems crazy at this particular moment. You said
:42:20. > :42:24.we are coming to the closing weeks of this debate. The vitriol has been
:42:25. > :42:29.quite amazing in terms of levels of abuse that have been chucked by both
:42:30. > :42:35.sides at both sides. You called the Chancellor Pinocchio. Boris Johnson
:42:36. > :42:38.called... Have you forgotten? The PM said Penny Morden was absolutely
:42:39. > :42:46.wrong about Turkey. Are you surprised at the level of vitriol?
:42:47. > :42:51.It is politics. Within one party? You cannot have a debate without
:42:52. > :42:56.passions rising. It is the most important vote people will make as
:42:57. > :42:59.to the destiny of your country. You will have bits and pieces. The key
:43:00. > :43:05.thing is getting down to the reality and the facts about what are you
:43:06. > :43:08.voting about. My view is that the Remain site have talked about the
:43:09. > :43:18.economy, marketplace... I don't know of any other place in the world that
:43:19. > :43:22.has a marketplace decided upon by so many bureaucrats. I have a second
:43:23. > :43:26.point. If you talk to people in Europe this is not about the
:43:27. > :43:30.marketplace. This is about their overarching dream to have this
:43:31. > :43:36.federal state called Europe. Can we let Laura respond. I don't
:43:37. > :43:40.understand about this Europe holding us back. Belgium sold more to India
:43:41. > :43:44.than the UK. Germany sells to countries our Foreign Office can
:43:45. > :43:47.hardly even spell. When you start to look at this it is about this
:43:48. > :43:52.country but it is also about the things we need to do within this
:43:53. > :43:56.country. We need up skill, not worry about migrants coming in and taking
:43:57. > :43:59.low skilled jobs, we should be making sure our domestic citizens
:44:00. > :44:06.have much better skills. We should be looking at trade and making sure
:44:07. > :44:09.we are trading around the world. But the EU is not holding us back. What
:44:10. > :44:17.it is is it is one of the platforms of which I am not embarrassed to be
:44:18. > :44:22.a member of. Let me ask Iain Duncan Smith about the fact there are
:44:23. > :44:25.reports of 50 different people willing to sign up to a
:44:26. > :44:30.no-confidence vote in David Cameron. Are you one of them, do you know
:44:31. > :44:34.about it? This is not the Prime Minister, this is about whether we
:44:35. > :44:40.stay in the EU or not. We have another for Magri years to govern.
:44:41. > :44:43.You have a vote, if the vote to leave, which I hope it will be, then
:44:44. > :44:49.the government has to operate on the basis that we have to now leave. --
:44:50. > :44:55.if the vote is to leave. So you know nothing about this. I don't. What
:44:56. > :44:59.would you say to your colleagues on the list? Not bothered. The
:45:00. > :45:03.government will have to operate on the basis of the result. If the
:45:04. > :45:09.British people say leave them the PM has to get on and get us out. But
:45:10. > :45:11.this is the risk of having a divided party. It is a risk, isn't it? If
:45:12. > :45:21.there are names ready to sign up. 70% of Conservative MPs are not that
:45:22. > :45:26.interested in the E word. What they're looking for on the 24th is a
:45:27. > :45:30.strong agenda talking about social inclusion, talking about the
:45:31. > :45:34.domestic issues. We're all forced to have a view about Europe as some
:45:35. > :45:38.sort of polemic state and actually, ultimately, I think that we have a
:45:39. > :45:42.very strong agenda without the E word mentioned whatever, following
:45:43. > :45:46.on from this referendum. We've all got to kiss and make up. You should
:45:47. > :45:54.vote to leave a menu will never have to mention the E word again. -- and
:45:55. > :46:00.then you will never have to. Why does Belgium export more to India? I
:46:01. > :46:04.don't know why it does. Because Antwerp is the diamond capital of
:46:05. > :46:09.the world and 70% Belgium's exports to India are diamonds. It doesn't
:46:10. > :46:13.actually create a lot of jobs manufacturing industry. But the
:46:14. > :46:20.point is that the EU is not holding them back. It is a false figure
:46:21. > :46:22.because it is diamonds. It's like many of the propaganda figures we
:46:23. > :46:24.get from both sides of this debate. A new report conducted
:46:25. > :46:27.by Salford City Council claims that benefits sanctions are plunging
:46:28. > :46:29.the poor and desperate The city's new mayor,
:46:30. > :46:31.Labour's Paul Dennett, says some local people
:46:32. > :46:34.are struggling to afford food, heating and essential costs,
:46:35. > :46:36.and the problem is particularly Mr Dennett joins us
:46:37. > :46:48.now from Salford. Welcome to the programme. What are
:46:49. > :46:51.the main findings? What are your main concerns as a result of this
:46:52. > :46:55.report and what you've found in Salford? Our main findings are that
:46:56. > :47:00.the vulnerable people in the city especially being impacted by
:47:01. > :47:04.conditionality and benefit sanctions, so people with mental
:47:05. > :47:07.health issues, people with learning difficulties, lone parents, young
:47:08. > :47:11.people and disabled people are especially being impacted by benefit
:47:12. > :47:16.sanctions and conditionality regimes from the DWP. And have the reforms
:47:17. > :47:20.that this government introduced, both the Coalition, and is
:47:21. > :47:26.continuing to do so, as that made things worse? In my opinion, it
:47:27. > :47:29.absolutely has made things worse. We've created an industry almost
:47:30. > :47:31.around unemployment, where people are struggling to make ends meet but
:47:32. > :47:36.also struggling with the labour market. The jobs these people are
:47:37. > :47:40.acquiring are part-time, low paid jobs to top they're in and out of
:47:41. > :47:43.work and the DWP aren't really interested in trying to understand
:47:44. > :47:46.what's going on in the labour market in terms of that labour market churn
:47:47. > :47:51.and the consequences of that for people's lies within our city. Ian
:47:52. > :47:55.Duncan Smith, you were responsible for many of these changes. What do
:47:56. > :47:59.you say to Paul Dummett? It is not the picture I see across the country
:48:00. > :48:04.and what you will find is that universal credit is rolled out to be
:48:05. > :48:09.employed. The point about universal credit you don't just go into a
:48:10. > :48:12.low-paid job and then leave the job centre. You now stay with the job
:48:13. > :48:15.adviser who knocks you find better income and gets you want a higher
:48:16. > :48:19.salary, longer hours and a more permanent job. That is what is
:48:20. > :48:23.happening. As regards the disability benefit side of things, the reality
:48:24. > :48:27.is that if you were on disability benefits, you are not sanctioned. In
:48:28. > :48:31.actual fact, you can work but you are not forced to work. That is part
:48:32. > :48:36.of the deal. Those benefits have all risen and we've put extra money
:48:37. > :48:39.down, over ?350 million went out to local councils to help sort their
:48:40. > :48:45.problems out over housing and getting families to move and change.
:48:46. > :48:49.There has been a huge amount of assistance to local authorities to
:48:50. > :48:52.get the focus down to them, to help them get those jobs and get those
:48:53. > :48:56.people back to work and that is what has been going on. What do you say?
:48:57. > :49:00.In my opinion, there hasn't been huge amount of assistance to local
:49:01. > :49:02.authorities. What we're actually seeing is people falling through
:49:03. > :49:06.welfare safety net, so people basically falling out of the benefit
:49:07. > :49:12.system together, relying on friends and family to make ends meet. They
:49:13. > :49:14.are potentially existing in the informal economy. There is a
:49:15. > :49:21.fundamental problem here with the Government's statistics. We don't
:49:22. > :49:24.manufacture the statistics. The ONS but the statistics together and they
:49:25. > :49:27.are done independently. What we've seen is that poverty levels have
:49:28. > :49:31.fallen and we've seen the levels of people's income rise as they get
:49:32. > :49:36.back into work. That is not perfect, there is more to do. But in Salford
:49:37. > :49:41.there has been a huge rise in referrals to the Salford central
:49:42. > :49:45.food bank. 62% made by people who had had their benefits stopped. The
:49:46. > :49:49.whole point about this, and this is what we said at the time, there is a
:49:50. > :49:53.contract and they sign that contract on arrival at the job centre. Most
:49:54. > :49:57.people recognise that if you are in receipt of benefits, you are
:49:58. > :50:00.required and expected, at that time, to be looking for work and you are
:50:01. > :50:04.meant to do everything you can to find work and take those jobs that
:50:05. > :50:07.are available. People are not sanctioned simply because the job
:50:08. > :50:11.centre dislikes them, they are sanctioned only after a series of
:50:12. > :50:14.warnings and checks that say, if you don't change what you are doing and
:50:15. > :50:18.don't get on and do the job you are meant to be doing, which is finding
:50:19. > :50:21.work, then you will be sanctioned. Most of the public accept, in all
:50:22. > :50:25.the polling, that this is a contract. We want you to find work,
:50:26. > :50:29.we will support you with money, but you are supposed to seek work. But
:50:30. > :50:33.according to the DWP, more than half of the claimants sanctioned between
:50:34. > :50:39.April 20 14th and March 2015 had mental health problems, either
:50:40. > :50:42.caused or worsened by sanctions. The department has always said that as
:50:43. > :50:45.soon as anybody is able to demonstrate that they have a
:50:46. > :50:48.sickness or illness or a mental health problem, they are immediately
:50:49. > :50:51.taken across to the employment support allowance and they get an
:50:52. > :50:55.application to get onto that, where they will not be sanctioned and will
:50:56. > :50:58.be in the support group. The vast majority of those do. And not saying
:50:59. > :51:01.the system is perfect and people aren't going to fall through it but
:51:02. > :51:04.the system is meant to pick people up and get them through and local
:51:05. > :51:08.authorities, working closely with the DWP, are actually doing that.
:51:09. > :51:12.The number of sanctions has fallen over the last two years. Are
:51:13. > :51:17.sanctions falling in numbers in your area? According to the Government,
:51:18. > :51:20.the sanctions are falling, so the official statistics suggest that,
:51:21. > :51:24.but the reality is, they are falling out of the system so we are not
:51:25. > :51:27.capturing the data. I don't know what Iain Duncan Smith is talking
:51:28. > :51:31.about because we've got young people with dyslexia unable to complete
:51:32. > :51:37.diaries sanctioned. 31-year-old in the city with severe mental health
:51:38. > :51:40.issues sanctioned. 60-year-old lady on TSA failed her work capability
:51:41. > :51:45.assessment, taken at a benefits and reliant upon our system. This is on
:51:46. > :51:49.top of local governor cuts. 171 million has been taken out of our
:51:50. > :51:54.budget in 2010, 46% of our budget taken away from us. This is what the
:51:55. > :51:57.government would consider as non-statutory so we get no penny
:51:58. > :52:01.whatsoever through the revenue support grant to deliver these
:52:02. > :52:04.services in our city so we have to work with partners in our city to
:52:05. > :52:09.try and tackle what is a really Draconian and punitive system here.
:52:10. > :52:14.The examples Paul Dummett gives, it would seem to me, are quite
:52:15. > :52:17.concerning. Any example of something that is not working is always a
:52:18. > :52:21.concern but the point I'm saying is, you can always, in every system,
:52:22. > :52:24.find injury jewel cases where things are wrong and if those are raised,
:52:25. > :52:29.they have to be dealt with individually. When the government
:52:30. > :52:32.came in, the levels of unemployment was staggeringly high in places like
:52:33. > :52:36.Salford and getting people back to work is the single first thing you
:52:37. > :52:39.have to do to get them to be able to control their lives and get the
:52:40. > :52:43.right level of income. The budget for welfare when we walked in the
:52:44. > :52:47.door had risen by 60% on the period before and unemployment was high and
:52:48. > :52:51.child poverty had risen. These figures have come down. Not
:52:52. > :52:54.everything is absolutely perfect. There will always be individual
:52:55. > :52:57.cases. But the reality is that the system as it is now is more likely
:52:58. > :53:01.to help people get back into work and assist them when they are in
:53:02. > :53:04.work and it was before. And the work capability assessment that he speaks
:53:05. > :53:08.about was introduced by the Labour government at the time because they
:53:09. > :53:11.said this would help. I want to change it and perform it, which is
:53:12. > :53:14.one of the things I wanted to do before I left, but it will be
:53:15. > :53:21.reformed because a doesn't function exactly as it should. Thank you. We
:53:22. > :53:26.have to leave it there. I assume people can read this report online.
:53:27. > :53:31.Yes, absolutely, they can. Thank you for being with us.
:53:32. > :53:35.Now, it seems the end of the world is nigh. Have we got a hole in our
:53:36. > :53:39.roof? It's time to talk
:53:40. > :53:41.terrifying alien invasions Award-winning crime writer
:53:42. > :53:44.Val McDermid has written a Radio 4 adaption of John Wyndham's classic
:53:45. > :53:48.1953 sci-fi novel Dangerous It stars Tamsin Greig, Paul Higgins
:53:49. > :53:59.and a rather special guest. Every day, I check whether there's
:54:00. > :54:06.anything on the radio. This is the Scottish
:54:07. > :54:08.Broadcasting Commission. And now, a message
:54:09. > :54:13.from the First Minister. We are proud today that we have
:54:14. > :54:16.restored radio broadcasting Standing here on the Castle
:54:17. > :54:22.Esplanade, I want to say that your government has not lost
:54:23. > :54:26.sight of the need to fight back against those
:54:27. > :54:32.who would destroy us. That was First Minister Nicola
:54:33. > :54:47.Sturgeon starring as herself, and with us now to tell us
:54:48. > :54:50.about the play is its writer, Val McDermid, live
:54:51. > :54:58.from our Edinburgh studio. Welcome to the programme. Why did
:54:59. > :55:01.you decide to adopt this novel? I've always been a fan of John Wyndham
:55:02. > :55:05.and have enjoyed his works as I was a teenager. It seemed to me that,
:55:06. > :55:08.unlike a lot of sci-fi, it stands up well to the passage of time because
:55:09. > :55:11.what he concentrated on was character and how people behave
:55:12. > :55:16.under pressure and stress and that doesn't change when circumstances
:55:17. > :55:20.change. So you've been able to adapt it with modern day scary stories or
:55:21. > :55:25.scenarios that could come upon us now? Yes. I think when the book was
:55:26. > :55:28.written, there was a limited understanding of climate science and
:55:29. > :55:31.what would happen in circumstances like this but now we have a much
:55:32. > :55:36.greater understanding of what would happen if the icecaps melted, if the
:55:37. > :55:43.sea waters rise, and that allowed me to write, I suppose, a more
:55:44. > :55:47.apocalyptic vision. Yes, I'm sure it is apocalyptic. As we've just played
:55:48. > :55:51.for the audience, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon playing herself. How
:55:52. > :55:57.did that come about? In the initial book, the protagonist escaped to
:55:58. > :56:01.Cornwall but an expert I spoke to said that Cornwall wouldn't be there
:56:02. > :56:04.any more, most of England wouldn't be there any more, but Scotland
:56:05. > :56:08.would lose its population centres but most of the Highlands would
:56:09. > :56:12.still be there. So it seems to me to be the case that if civil government
:56:13. > :56:15.lasted anywhere, it would probably last in Scotland, so I thought I
:56:16. > :56:20.would ask the First Minister - nothing ventured, nothing gained.
:56:21. > :56:25.What did you do, write her a note and say, "Would you lie to play a
:56:26. > :56:30.part in this adaptation"? I sent her an e-mail which said, "I've written
:56:31. > :56:34.this script - do you fancy doing it?" I centre the script so she
:56:35. > :56:40.could see she was getting into anything controversial and she said
:56:41. > :56:44.yes. She trusted you, clearly. It does sound very dramatic - Cornwall
:56:45. > :56:48.disappearing, maybe parts of Scotland to. When can we hear the
:56:49. > :56:52.first instalment? The first instalment goes out on Radio 4 on
:56:53. > :56:54.Saturday afternoon and then next week the second instalment will go
:56:55. > :56:59.out and that is the instalment that features the First Minister. That
:57:00. > :57:05.was good, promoting a head. Should we be very scared? Very scared, yes.
:57:06. > :57:10.Thanks. Stay with us. Are you going to be listening? For a minute, I
:57:11. > :57:13.actually thought this was going to be one of those government
:57:14. > :57:18.programmes saying, "If you leave the EU, this is going to happen," so I
:57:19. > :57:22.was about to say, "Oh, my goodness, has the Government now said another
:57:23. > :57:28.plague is upon us"? But I'm glad it is fiction. Val McDermid, I have to
:57:29. > :57:32.congratulate you. I hope there isn't anything about the repeat in union
:57:33. > :57:35.in this script anywhere. I don't think there is. We wouldn't have
:57:36. > :57:38.been allowed to broadcast it if it was. We had to postpone broadcast
:57:39. > :57:43.anyway until after the Scottish elections. Compliance said that it
:57:44. > :57:47.gives the impression that Nicola Sturgeon would still be First
:57:48. > :57:53.Minister. So even you have had to be careful with your politics!
:57:54. > :57:58.You got that right! You would have been safe. Thanks
:57:59. > :58:01.very much for joining us and good luck. Thank you.
:58:02. > :58:05.There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
:58:06. > :58:07.The question was, how did our guest Iain Duncan Smith
:58:08. > :58:13.They are your initials, I take your point, Andrew.
:58:14. > :58:15.Was it a) invented by Clive Woodward during his school
:58:16. > :58:19.b) given to him by fellow students at Merchant Navy college in Wales,
:58:20. > :58:21.c) dreamt up by his old army colleagues,
:58:22. > :58:24.or d) thought up by conservative press officer Mike Penning to help
:58:25. > :58:29.I don't know any of those but I think the press office. It is the
:58:30. > :58:33.initials and it is the press office but it is the fact that Iain Duncan
:58:34. > :58:38.Smith became known as IDS. It was supposed to give you a profile.
:58:39. > :58:43.She doesn't get out much these days! These things excite her! Thanks
:58:44. > :58:48.Barry much to all our guests, even those with the initials IDS.
:58:49. > :58:50.I will be on This Week tonight with Michael Portillo,
:58:51. > :58:53.Jess Phillips, Nick Clegg, Helen Lewis, Brian Blessed
:58:54. > :58:56.and Francis Boulle from Made in Chelsea, and I'll be here at noon
:58:57. > :58:59.tomorrow with all the big political stories of the day -