:00:37. > :00:38.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:39. > :00:40.As the polls tighten, there's been an escalation
:00:41. > :00:44.of hostilities in the EU referendum battle, with both sides moving
:00:45. > :00:51.The Leave campaign says the UK faces a "triple whammy of woe" if it
:00:52. > :00:59.The Remain campaign says they're conning the British public.
:01:00. > :01:03.The temperature in the campaign just keeps on rising.
:01:04. > :01:06.Government plans for how the state, police and spies access our personal
:01:07. > :01:10.But is the Bill vital for our national security
:01:11. > :01:16.or an unnecessary intrusion on personal freedom?
:01:17. > :01:18.David Cameron has called for an all-out assault on poverty
:01:19. > :01:21.and says he wants to create a true meritocracy.
:01:22. > :01:27.I'll be discussing the European issue that everyone should be
:01:28. > :01:38.talking about it no-one is, farm subsidies.
:01:39. > :01:41.All that in the next hour, and with me for the whole
:01:42. > :01:44.of the programme today, the Conservative MP Mark Field
:01:45. > :01:58.Almost matching ties! That is the only thing that is matching!
:01:59. > :02:01.First today, in the last half hour Vote Leave have been outlining some
:02:02. > :02:03.of their key economic arguments for leaving the EU.
:02:04. > :02:05.Speaking at an event in Stratford-upon-Avon,
:02:06. > :02:08.Boris Johnson says Britain will be "forced to hand over even
:02:09. > :02:18.more money" if voters opt to stay in the EU.
:02:19. > :02:24.And that the economy was Leave's only argument.
:02:25. > :02:30.They want to say that we are selling democracy, because that is what we
:02:31. > :02:36.believe them, and they say they are selling economic 's. They think they
:02:37. > :02:41.have the stronger hand there. That is basically because on their side
:02:42. > :02:46.of the argument they totally get that we are winning all the
:02:47. > :02:50.Democratic points. If you look at what is going on in our country and
:02:51. > :02:56.around the EU, the European Commission is unelected and there is
:02:57. > :02:59.concern about the way that operates, the European Parliament... Does
:03:00. > :03:01.anybody know the name of their Euro MP?
:03:02. > :03:04.Well, the Prime Minister has also been out and about this morning.
:03:05. > :03:06.He joined leading figures from the left of British politics,
:03:07. > :03:08.Labour's Harriet Harman, Lib Dem leader Tim Farron and
:03:09. > :03:14.And the Prime Minister took aim at the Leave campaign
:03:15. > :03:29.They are performing an economic con trick on the British people, and we
:03:30. > :03:34.are calling time on it. We publish the full extent of this, comedy
:03:35. > :03:38.dossier we publish outlines the various and often contradictory
:03:39. > :03:42.positions that they have held on the economy. Those that want us to leave
:03:43. > :03:46.want to leave the single market. We don't know what terms of access they
:03:47. > :03:51.will get instead, the dossier shows they lurch from one idea to another.
:03:52. > :03:56.First they said we should be like Norway, then Canada, then Albania,
:03:57. > :03:57.then America, and they have taken us from Iceland to the Isle of Man and
:03:58. > :03:59.Morocco and Moldova. This morning's crossfire comes
:04:00. > :04:01.after an extraordinarily personal attack on leading figures
:04:02. > :04:04.in the Leave campaign by the former Here he is on The Andrew
:04:05. > :04:08.Marr Show yesterday. I do find it very difficult
:04:09. > :04:11.to understand how Boris can justify the ?350 million that he has
:04:12. > :04:15.on his battle bus, that he and Michael Gove have
:04:16. > :04:19.defended time and again. You know, I know, the IFS knows,
:04:20. > :04:23.everyone knows, Boris knows, that the real net amount
:04:24. > :04:26.that we send to Europe The concept that the people running
:04:27. > :04:32.the Brexit campaign would care for the National Health Service
:04:33. > :04:35.is a rather odd one. I seem to remember Michael Gove
:04:36. > :04:38.wanted to privatise it, Boris wanted to charge people
:04:39. > :04:41.for using it and Iain Duncan Smith The NHS is about as safe as them
:04:42. > :04:47.as a pet hamster would be Last night on the Westminster Hour
:04:48. > :04:54.on Radio 4, the Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, who is voting
:04:55. > :04:56.to leave the EU, hit What we have had today were a bitter
:04:57. > :05:04.ramblings of a vengeful man. But he's the man who took us
:05:05. > :05:07.into the exchange rate mechanism, destroyed hundreds of thousands
:05:08. > :05:11.of jobs, had people evicted from their homes and led
:05:12. > :05:15.to the destruction of businesses for the sake of his
:05:16. > :05:18.failed European policy. And now he says things that are both
:05:19. > :05:24.hypocritical and untrue How magnanimous Boris was in saying
:05:25. > :05:28.we should rise above it. I'm going to sling the mud straight
:05:29. > :05:31.back at Sir John Major, the Knight of the Garter who ought
:05:32. > :05:43.to know how to behave better. Amidst that, John Major unleashed a
:05:44. > :05:49.torrent of vitriol yesterday at tempted campaigners -- Leave
:05:50. > :05:54.campaigners, especially saying that leaving the NHS in decades would be
:05:55. > :05:58.like leaving a pet hamster with a hungry python. There are a lot of
:05:59. > :06:03.descriptions that have been going on, I fear we will see more. I have
:06:04. > :06:09.long team a believer in what Ronald Reagan once said, he would speak ill
:06:10. > :06:15.of no other fellow Conservative, and I think that applies to Douglas, as
:06:16. > :06:21.far as I am concerned. You are in a diminishing group. It is aborted to
:06:22. > :06:25.play the ball and not the man. There are some important issues. Everyone
:06:26. > :06:30.would agree this is more important than any single general election,
:06:31. > :06:36.the most important vote we have had in our lifetime to date. John Major
:06:37. > :06:40.of all people have the most provocation, given the difficulties
:06:41. > :06:46.he faced as Prime Minister, the frustration boiled over yesterday.
:06:47. > :06:52.Was he justified? I would not have made it personal. There were strong
:06:53. > :07:00.emotional argument. I disagree with Boris Johnson, it is not just about
:07:01. > :07:06.economics, the interests of the UK have to be considered, we played an
:07:07. > :07:11.important part in rebuilding Europe, which seemed as broken as the middle
:07:12. > :07:17.east is today, we have friends and as, and there is interest matter as
:07:18. > :07:22.well. The message coming in loud and clear is they desperately want the
:07:23. > :07:26.UK to stay in and play its part in reforming it. How worried are you
:07:27. > :07:33.that the Tory party is tearing itself apart? I would prefer to look
:07:34. > :07:39.at the issues. Like a lot of MPs, I am worried, partly because amongst
:07:40. > :07:44.the backbenches we have a cordial relationship, I have been good
:07:45. > :07:48.humoured, a lot of joshing, but what we see from the prominent figures is
:07:49. > :07:56.something that is upsetting many of us. Our activists across the
:07:57. > :08:00.country, I feel for Dan Watkins, our candidate in tooting, how he must be
:08:01. > :08:05.feeling, trying to make the case for the party, when these arguments take
:08:06. > :08:10.place. Jacob Rees-Mogg as a backbencher, he has been mudslinging
:08:11. > :08:13.as well. Let's look at this other than through the prism of the
:08:14. > :08:17.internal dynamics of the Tory party. We have seen some strident negative
:08:18. > :08:21.language coming out of Downing Street. The Prime Minister talked
:08:22. > :08:28.about a bomb under the British economy. The Leave campaign has
:08:29. > :08:33.outlined an optimistic alternative. Because we are outlining an up the
:08:34. > :08:38.alternative, with five pledges about how we can make things better, we
:08:39. > :08:45.are beginning to win the argument. Warning about 76 million Turks is
:08:46. > :08:49.positive and optimistic? It is the truth. If you have pressure on the
:08:50. > :08:55.public services at the moment... How many Turks have passports at the
:08:56. > :09:01.moment? 7 million. I am just throwing that out. 80 million people
:09:02. > :09:09.will soon have the right to settle here if they join the EU. The risks
:09:10. > :09:13.of Remain are many. One is that we will have unrestricted migration. We
:09:14. > :09:19.already have 450 million people with a legal right to settle here. At an
:09:20. > :09:24.extra 80 million people... They don't have the right to settle here.
:09:25. > :09:29.The onus is on the Remain campaign to explain the risks. There are
:09:30. > :09:35.risks that we see on our shores in the last few days. What if the
:09:36. > :09:41.answer to having hundreds of Albanians coming onto our shores? We
:09:42. > :09:45.signed up to a lot of international conventions that nothing to do with
:09:46. > :09:52.the EU. The notion we can get rid of people, secure our borders and make
:09:53. > :09:55.them safe, is a fallacy. The Turkish thing, I have always had my doubts
:09:56. > :10:01.about whether Turkey should join the EU, many Turkish politicians are
:10:02. > :10:05.less keen on it than they were five or ten years ago, but it would be
:10:06. > :10:10.vetoed first by the Greeks and Cypriots and French and Germans. Why
:10:11. > :10:14.are we spending 2 billion preparing for red? One of the risks of
:10:15. > :10:20.remaining is that Turkey joins and we have to pay more. That is the
:10:21. > :10:27.risk. I don't think we can afford it. Let's talk about the NHS. The
:10:28. > :10:30.claim made by John Major, he pointed out that Michael Gove wanted to
:10:31. > :10:35.privatise it, response to charge people for using it, Iain Duncan
:10:36. > :10:42.Smith wanted social insurance. How would you manage it? I have defended
:10:43. > :10:48.the local NHS in four elections, I have earned the right to be heard.
:10:49. > :10:52.It is vital. If we vote to leave, we could spend an extra 100 million
:10:53. > :11:04.every week. If the Government decides. We both know that whether
:11:05. > :11:08.it is seven, eight or 10 billion a year we will save by not being in
:11:09. > :11:14.the EU, it is a minuscule amount in terms of a Budget of ?900 billion a
:11:15. > :11:18.year. We are already overspending, living beyond our means, we will
:11:19. > :11:22.borrow 75, ?80 billion this year. The notion that this money will go
:11:23. > :11:32.straight into the health service is a myth. That is the claim, the ?350
:11:33. > :11:35.million. Let's be clear, it is a gross figure, around half of that
:11:36. > :11:39.comes back in terms of rebate, and there are pots of money and payments
:11:40. > :11:45.that go to things like agriculture. If I let you ?50 and you give me ?25
:11:46. > :11:53.back, I have given you ?25 of. We give a gross contribution. If you
:11:54. > :11:57.look at the net contribution, we suggest that 5.2 billion, 100
:11:58. > :12:03.million per week, should go on the NHS, 2 billion on taking the 80 off
:12:04. > :12:11.fuel bills. That is money we are giving to Brussels. Improving the
:12:12. > :12:15.NHS and taking money off fuel. He may be against the money for the
:12:16. > :12:23.NHS, but we are in favour of it. We have heard about VAT on fuel. Ed
:12:24. > :12:28.Miliband two years ago. These are the populist quickfire so-called
:12:29. > :12:33.solutions. There was an EU directive that means we cannot do anything
:12:34. > :12:38.about it. If we vote to leave, we can, we can remove VAT from fuel by
:12:39. > :12:46.voting to leave. The EU directive prevents us from doing that. The
:12:47. > :12:50.bigger concern I have... The idea that we will remove ourselves from
:12:51. > :12:56.the single market, I speak to businesses, they are very worried.
:12:57. > :13:02.Maybe they struggle to pay their fuel bills. I know why Leave went
:13:03. > :13:06.down that path, because it is the only way in which you can square the
:13:07. > :13:11.circle for immigration, but it is a very serious prospect, the idea that
:13:12. > :13:16.we remove ourselves from the trade deals. The single market is one of
:13:17. > :13:21.the greatest successes that the EU has, 500 million people. It is not
:13:22. > :13:26.succeeding. More work will have to be done. Part of the reform that
:13:27. > :13:28.goes forward is to make sure it is rolled out for public services as
:13:29. > :13:31.well. We will discuss this further. The question for today is,
:13:32. > :13:35.who of the following is not related Is it a) Boris Johnson,
:13:36. > :13:40.b) Harriet Harman, c) At the end of the show,
:13:41. > :13:49.Mark or Douglas will give Neither of us are related,
:13:50. > :14:00.incidentally! Have you checked? Government plans to overhaul
:14:01. > :14:02.the laws governing how the state, police and spies can access
:14:03. > :14:04.communications and other forms of data head back
:14:05. > :14:06.to the Commons this afternoon. The Investigatory Powers Bill
:14:07. > :14:10.is the last big piece of legislation The Bill, championed
:14:11. > :14:16.by the Home Secretary Theresa May, aims to give new powers
:14:17. > :14:18.to the police and security services, particularly
:14:19. > :14:20.around the bulk collection It also wants to give the system
:14:21. > :14:25.more oversight by setting up a commission made up
:14:26. > :14:29.of senior judges. One of these judges will have
:14:30. > :14:32.the power to approve or decline warrants for the most-intrusive
:14:33. > :14:35.investigations, like hacking The privacy safeguards in the Bill
:14:36. > :14:41.were boosted earlier this year after it was criticised
:14:42. > :14:44.by three committees of MPs. After the changes, the authorities
:14:45. > :14:47.will only be able to access people's internet records when it's
:14:48. > :14:51."necessary and proportionate" One of the most-controversial
:14:52. > :14:57.aspects is a clause that requires phone and internet companies to keep
:14:58. > :15:01.a record of the websites visited by every citizen for 12 months,
:15:02. > :15:05.which could then be viewed The Shadow Home Secretary Andy
:15:06. > :15:12.Burnham set out six areas of concern on behalf of Labour,
:15:13. > :15:15.but the party then abstained on the Bill when it was
:15:16. > :15:18.last in the Commons. And last week, a report
:15:19. > :15:20.by the Joint Committee on Human Rights, chaired
:15:21. > :15:23.by Labour's Harriet Harman, said the new powers would not be not
:15:24. > :15:27."inherently incompatible" with privacy rights, as long
:15:28. > :15:46.as certain safeguards were met. We are joined by Keir Starmer. The
:15:47. > :15:49.last time this Bill was in the Commons, Labour abstained. What
:15:50. > :15:53.about this time? We have been clear from the start that a new law is
:15:54. > :15:56.needed to update the powers but also because after the Snowdon
:15:57. > :16:00.revelations, it's very important that the powers being exercised are
:16:01. > :16:03.on the face of a statute with proper safeguards but it's got to be the
:16:04. > :16:07.right Bill. We have consistently made demands of the Government to
:16:08. > :16:11.improve the safeguards and we have been working over the last month,
:16:12. > :16:15.two months in the Bill committee to achieve the safeguards. In fairness
:16:16. > :16:20.to the Government they have met our demand in a number of key concerns,
:16:21. > :16:29.so there is going to be a review of the bulk powers, the wide powers,
:16:30. > :16:32.carried out by David Unston QC. The Government's conceded on that. Does
:16:33. > :16:36.that mean Labour will support the Bill? There are six outstanding
:16:37. > :16:40.issues. There were six before so when you say there's been movement?
:16:41. > :16:45.One is split into two but they are basically the same issues we have
:16:46. > :16:53.been clear on. OK. They include for example the Trade Union Who engage
:16:54. > :16:58.in activity shouldn't be spied on and the Government are with us in
:16:59. > :17:01.principle on that. The debate this afternoon will be critical. On
:17:02. > :17:05.Internet connection records, we have been clear there must be a
:17:06. > :17:11.seriousness of offence before there must be access so we have had a
:17:12. > :17:15.consistent set of demands and also want an overarching privacy clause
:17:16. > :17:21.so that every time a decision is made under the Act, privacy is seen
:17:22. > :17:26.as a key consideration. Do you consider this bulk use of data or
:17:27. > :17:30.surveillance as an intrusion into one's privacy? Yes, it is, the
:17:31. > :17:33.question is whether it can be justified. It's an important right
:17:34. > :17:38.but it's not an absolute right. Exactly. The question is, is any
:17:39. > :17:44.invasion necessary and is it proportionate? On that key question
:17:45. > :17:49.is it necessary, that's why we have demanded a review so the operational
:17:50. > :17:53.case can be looked at and a view taken on whether the powers are
:17:54. > :17:57.there and are needed. The bulk powers have always been there to a
:17:58. > :18:01.certain extent though? The vast majority have but this is the first
:18:02. > :18:06.time Parliament's had chances to look at them. Before Snowdon, we
:18:07. > :18:10.didn't know anything about these powers, so this is an important
:18:11. > :18:14.moment because post-Snowdon, we have to decide, do we put them on the
:18:15. > :18:18.statute book with safeguards or use the old regime, vague powers without
:18:19. > :18:25.safeguards and I think we need to look guard. I prefer to see
:18:26. > :18:28.something codified, there is too much confusion about the legislation
:18:29. > :18:33.that can potentially apply. We shouldn't be naive about this. The
:18:34. > :18:38.truth of the matter is, this is going to need constant updating. The
:18:39. > :18:43.idea you can future proof a Bill and not come back to it, I don't think
:18:44. > :18:46.that would be great. That is why the privacy clauses are there and we
:18:47. > :18:49.have been arguing so hard that the Home Secretary must give on this.
:18:50. > :18:53.However things change in the future, privacy is always a key
:18:54. > :18:56.consideration. That's fundamental. Do you accept the Government has
:18:57. > :18:59.been dragged to this point a bit? When it started out, and we have
:19:00. > :19:03.been doing interviews about this Bill for quite some time, that
:19:04. > :19:08.actually a lot of what they were asking really was more than just an
:19:09. > :19:13.invasion, intrusion in privacy, in some cases would be counted as
:19:14. > :19:18.almost illegal? In fairness, I was on the intelligence and community
:19:19. > :19:24.panel so we were aware of what was disclosed by Snowdon and I think
:19:25. > :19:28.that was a real scene-setter and changer and in part because global
:19:29. > :19:34.communication service providers, the Googles of this world, they of
:19:35. > :19:37.course had a cosy relationship with Governments and Security Services
:19:38. > :19:41.across the world and they now demand global protocols. That I think is
:19:42. > :19:46.one of the things that is going to emerge here. The one concern I have
:19:47. > :19:49.is around encryption. The Government's talked about the idea
:19:50. > :19:55.of trying to weaken tripping to radio fill and that will be
:19:56. > :19:59.difficult to do. Are you happy at the moment with the way the balance
:20:00. > :20:03.is between the Security Services? Keir makes some really important
:20:04. > :20:06.points. There are people out there, and every conversation about this
:20:07. > :20:10.has to start in recognition, there are people who wish us ill and it's
:20:11. > :20:15.right that the state can in effect snoop, the question is who zwroefr
:20:16. > :20:20.sees the people overseeing this -- oversees the people. I've tabled an
:20:21. > :20:23.amendment so that the commissioner is approved by Parliament. If the
:20:24. > :20:29.Government accepts that, I he vote for the legislation, if they won't,
:20:30. > :20:32.I vent. Is that a good idea? I think the oversight is critically
:20:33. > :20:37.important. I've seen this both sides of the argument, I spent 20 years as
:20:38. > :20:43.a human rights lawyer. I then spent five years as the Director of Public
:20:44. > :20:47.Prosecution working with the intelligence Security Committee.
:20:48. > :20:52.Oversight by judicial commissioners is important. Will you support my
:20:53. > :20:55.amendment? I'll support yours if you support mine? The Prime Minister's
:20:56. > :21:04.involvement is needed in that, there is a need for an independence of
:21:05. > :21:07.appointment so in principlee. How they're appointed is critically
:21:08. > :21:12.important 679 this is a real chance to get it right. The ball is in the
:21:13. > :21:18.Government's court now. Do you think we are going to need judges in this
:21:19. > :21:25.area? Are you saying they are not any there? An elite... Would you
:21:26. > :21:30.trust the Home Secretary to do it then? If they are accountable to
:21:31. > :21:35.Parliament. If Parliament has a confirmation hearing and can say no
:21:36. > :21:38.to one... You would say no judges? I like the idea of having judges but I
:21:39. > :21:45.think the House of Commons should have the ultimate ability to say no.
:21:46. > :21:50.One of the complaints was there are so many of these requests that
:21:51. > :21:54.actually how much time is going to be given by the person? This is a
:21:55. > :21:58.very important issue. We are pressing hard. I've said close
:21:59. > :22:01.scrutiny. The judges have got to see the material before the Secretary of
:22:02. > :22:05.State or the Foreign Secretary and they've got to exercise close
:22:06. > :22:08.scrutiny and they've got to grapple with the substance, not just the
:22:09. > :22:12.process. That's one of my demands for this afternoon so watch the
:22:13. > :22:15.debate. And you won't support it without that? We have been clear
:22:16. > :22:19.what our demands are, it's really for the Government now. We know
:22:20. > :22:23.where they stand on this. If we are going to move to a scloeser
:22:24. > :22:26.scrutiny, more substance than process, that would be a very
:22:27. > :22:31.significant move. The Government are taking this seriously. So so they
:22:32. > :22:35.will give in? They will. Unusually you have the Home Secretary herself
:22:36. > :22:39.who will be there. As opposed to a junior minister. That is a
:22:40. > :22:43.reflection of how important they look upon these issues. You said
:22:44. > :22:49.about the seriousness of the offence, what counts in your mind as
:22:50. > :22:52.serious enough to warrant that? Usually we measure seriousness by
:22:53. > :22:57.the length of prison sentence, whether bit six months two years,
:22:58. > :23:02.three years, on this occasion we need to be more subtle. Groups are
:23:03. > :23:08.anxious that the powers should be there if cases that concern them in
:23:09. > :23:13.stalking. It's a subtle exercise. The point we are making is, if you
:23:14. > :23:16.are going to use Internet connection records, you have got to be sure
:23:17. > :23:22.it's not content an you have to make sure it's a serious enough case, not
:23:23. > :23:27.just any case. This must never be used to get people for re'tilly
:23:28. > :23:32.minor offences. Which was the complaint by local authorities? Yes.
:23:33. > :23:36.Low level offences ought to be out. That will have to be clear in the
:23:37. > :23:37.wording then. Lots to discuss this afternoon and tomorrow.
:23:38. > :23:40.In the run-up to the referendum, we've offered politicians
:23:41. > :23:44.from all the main parties the chance to take to their soapboxes and make
:23:45. > :23:47.short films on the case for either Remain or Leave.
:23:48. > :23:50.Before the half-term recess we heard the Conservative cases
:23:51. > :23:54.Today it's the turn of Ukip and the SNP.
:23:55. > :23:57.In a moment we'll hear from the SNP's Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh,
:23:58. > :24:03.But first here's our guest of the day, Douglas Carswell,
:24:04. > :24:14.with his film on the case for leaving the EU.
:24:15. > :24:19.Every week we hand over ?350 million to Brussels.
:24:20. > :24:22.That is enough to build more than 50 NHS hospitals a year.
:24:23. > :24:26.Imagine what we could do with that money if we voted to leave the EU.
:24:27. > :24:30.We would have more schools, health care and public services.
:24:31. > :24:33.Being in the EU means we lose control, not just over our money,
:24:34. > :24:39.Over 500 million EU citizens have an automatic right
:24:40. > :24:43.Our Government is powerless to decide how many people come in.
:24:44. > :24:47.Let's vote Leave to take back control of our borders.
:24:48. > :24:52.We discover the people we elect don't answer to us, they stop
:24:53. > :24:56.being on our side, they do what they are told by Brussels.
:24:57. > :25:01.The EU is failing, it can't control its borders,
:25:02. > :25:04.manage its currency, it could not handle the debt crisis.
:25:05. > :25:07.Remaining is the high-risk thing to do.
:25:08. > :25:21.Vote Leave, it is the safest thing for our country.
:25:22. > :25:26.We'll pick Douglas' brains more in just a moment.
:25:27. > :25:30.But first, here's the SNP MP, Tasmina Sheikh, making the case
:25:31. > :25:48.Scotland's membership of the EU has been beneficial
:25:49. > :25:50.in building a safer, stronger society, a more prosperous
:25:51. > :26:00.For the last 60 years the EU has played a key role in building
:26:01. > :26:07.Our direct access to this huge market of 500 million people
:26:08. > :26:10.is good for our economy, for inward investment and for
:26:11. > :26:16.European laws guarantee Scottish workers' rights.
:26:17. > :26:20.They protect our entitlement to have paid holidays and ensure
:26:21. > :26:23.all workers, men and women, part-time and agency,
:26:24. > :26:28.The Tories want to turn back the clock on progressive
:26:29. > :26:37.We know Michael Gove feels the EU has acted as a handbrake
:26:38. > :26:40.on the plans of the current UK Government, and that is why we must
:26:41. > :26:42.do everything we can to retain our membership.
:26:43. > :26:46.I want a Europe that supports economic growth
:26:47. > :26:49.and champions human rights, and which promotes solidarity
:26:50. > :27:04.and the social contract which exists between states and their citizens.
:27:05. > :27:12.And Tasmina joins us now in the studio.
:27:13. > :27:19.You said in your film there that you want to protect workers' rights. Why
:27:20. > :27:22.do we have to remain in the EU to protect workers' rights? Because
:27:23. > :27:27.that's been the foundation of the protection for many years. Which
:27:28. > :27:31.ones? If you look at the contrary position where if we leave the EU
:27:32. > :27:35.where we might be left, that is in a position where the Conservative
:27:36. > :27:38.Party who's in Government have unfettered control over workers'
:27:39. > :27:41.rights and the Trade Union Bill is one example of that where we have
:27:42. > :27:45.seen the erosion of the rights and the erosion of Trade Unions and
:27:46. > :27:48.their works. The rights are in relation to paternity, maternity pay
:27:49. > :27:54.and protected in relation to discrimination in the baulk place.
:27:55. > :27:57.You say they would go? We have had enough indications from the way the
:27:58. > :28:01.Tory Government have been behaving even since I've been elected that
:28:02. > :28:04.that is highly likely. What guarantees can you give workers
:28:05. > :28:09.that their rights will not disappear if the UK leaves the E Snitch
:28:10. > :28:12.Because their rights were introduced by an elected British Government.
:28:13. > :28:16.I'm not advocate for the Labour Party but it was a Labour Party in
:28:17. > :28:20.1999 that introduced a national minimum wage, a Labour Government
:28:21. > :28:24.that introduced maternity cover, maternity rights are higher in the
:28:25. > :28:27.UK than the EU. Would they be protected? Could a Government roll
:28:28. > :28:33.back the rights? I don't think they would. Would is not the same as
:28:34. > :28:37.could. Could they unravel some of those protections for employers?
:28:38. > :28:43.It's the European Union. At the moment that I would say is
:28:44. > :28:46.frustrating the rights of workers. Big corporations frustrate the
:28:47. > :28:50.ability of workers in the EU to enjoy the sort of rights they enjoy
:28:51. > :28:54.in the UK today. It's the EU that is run in the interests of big
:28:55. > :29:00.corporate vested interests, not working people. Right but
:29:01. > :29:03.Euro-sceptics often cite burdensome EU regulation as something they want
:29:04. > :29:09.to get rid of so what would you like to see? If we left all regulations,
:29:10. > :29:15.it would become British... All of them. So what are you worried about?
:29:16. > :29:20.I asked that question to Government ministers in the despatch box in the
:29:21. > :29:22.run-up to where we are now, I said that because specifically Michael
:29:23. > :29:27.Gove has been prevented from doing things he'd like to because of EU
:29:28. > :29:30.legislation and I asked what specific piece of legislation are
:29:31. > :29:37.you referring to and they have been unable to provide me with an answer.
:29:38. > :29:43.This speaks to the debate in which we find ourselves, rhetoric in fear
:29:44. > :29:46.mongering statistics. You are talking about VAT. In terms of your
:29:47. > :29:49.voting record, you voted consistently over a long time to
:29:50. > :29:55.increase VAT in our national Parliament. That is simply not the
:29:56. > :30:00.case. I believe in lower taxes. Have you voted on that issue? Have you
:30:01. > :30:06.voted against or for I should say increases in VAT? I voted to reduce
:30:07. > :30:11.tax. On VAT? No, I want to reduce VAT and I voted in the three
:30:12. > :30:16.previous budgets for measures that would reduce the tax. You voted all
:30:17. > :30:20.the way up to 20%, you voted to increase. Would you like to see
:30:21. > :30:25.higher or lower rates of migration to the UK?
:30:26. > :30:35.This debate has plummeted to the depths of negative rhetoric. Would
:30:36. > :30:40.you like to see higher or lower? If we can see that immigration
:30:41. > :30:50.contributes, it is a good thing. You happy? Looking at migration in and
:30:51. > :30:55.out, 2.6 people have come in and 2.2 million have left. Of the migrants
:30:56. > :31:00.that are here and Roger booting, they contribute ?55 per second. This
:31:01. > :31:03.nonsense they are a drain on the economy needs to be dealt with, we
:31:04. > :31:10.need to look at the positive effects. They are welcome in
:31:11. > :31:13.Scotland. This has descended in England to a debate about
:31:14. > :31:19.immigration, because the statistics in Scotland are different. Let's
:31:20. > :31:24.talk about the numbers. Are the numbers the critical part of the
:31:25. > :31:30.debate on immigration? It is to do with control. 500 million people
:31:31. > :31:38.have a legal right to come here, 2.5 million came here in the last four
:31:39. > :31:43.years. It is right we have control. Does it mean bringing down the
:31:44. > :31:47.numbers? The risk of remaining is we have no control. If we vote to
:31:48. > :31:50.leave, we can elect a Government that can tell us how much we are
:31:51. > :31:57.going to reduce immigration by. People have said David Cameron would
:31:58. > :32:01.reduce immigration, but no Government can do that unless we
:32:02. > :32:05.vote to leave. Which is higher, those from outside the EU or those
:32:06. > :32:11.from within the EU? If we had an Australian points -based system...
:32:12. > :32:17.But there are more people coming from outside the EU at the moment.
:32:18. > :32:23.And that is every year since we joined the EU. We cannot control
:32:24. > :32:28.migration unless we have -- change the legal right... Would you bring
:32:29. > :32:35.the numbers down to tens of thousands? Yes. So the numbers are
:32:36. > :32:40.important? Michael Gove says it is about control, not numbers. You have
:32:41. > :32:46.said you would like the numbers to come down. That is my personal view,
:32:47. > :32:51.there are others. We could have a meaningful discussion if the MPs
:32:52. > :32:56.could have the choice. Would supporters on the Leave side wanted
:32:57. > :33:01.the numbers come down? A points -based system. The Cattrall is
:33:02. > :33:06.important, why should the UK not control's they could still have
:33:07. > :33:10.migrants coming to this country, but they could decide who comes and how
:33:11. > :33:16.many. A fundamental tenet of being part of the EU is free movement of
:33:17. > :33:21.people. The suggestion that 500 million people will come to the UK,
:33:22. > :33:25.and not if they have heard some of the arguments in this debate, they
:33:26. > :33:30.would not want to set them but in this country... Many millions are
:33:31. > :33:34.coming. What about those here who want to go abroad in the EU, learn
:33:35. > :33:39.and study and engage and have business there? You don't need to be
:33:40. > :33:45.in a political union. It is a two-way street. One of the worst
:33:46. > :33:48.things is Ukip's involvement, whether it is Nigel Farage talking
:33:49. > :33:53.about increased six attacks on women, following his general
:33:54. > :33:58.election debate performance when he talks about HIV-positive patients
:33:59. > :34:04.being a drain on the NHS. This does not help anyone. Do you agree with
:34:05. > :34:11.Nigel Farage that the number of six attacks on women would go up if we
:34:12. > :34:17.stay? I will not get drawn on that. There is a positive test is that if
:34:18. > :34:19.we vote to leave, we can have an Australian style points system. I
:34:20. > :34:26.don't want to get involved in anything beyond that, but when
:34:27. > :34:28.people come here, they should make a positive contribution, but we should
:34:29. > :34:34.have the right to control who comes here. That may ask something,
:34:35. > :34:39.stories today that a number of Remain MPs who would be a majority
:34:40. > :34:45.would vote to state within this ingle market, so Parliament would
:34:46. > :34:51.trump the vote on the referendum, and Britain would still be exposed
:34:52. > :34:55.to free movement of people. Would you support that, that Parliament
:34:56. > :34:59.would have a vote to stay within the single market, even if the UK votes
:35:00. > :35:04.to leave the EU? The single market is of critical importance to our
:35:05. > :35:09.businesses. It is not just about being in a big trade organisation,
:35:10. > :35:18.it is having similar regulation. But what about the Parliament? Part of
:35:19. > :35:25.the uncertainty, if we vote to get out of the EU on the 23rd of June,
:35:26. > :35:32.Article 50 will be invoked. Then, a process of negotiation, a minimum of
:35:33. > :35:37.two years, takes place between us and the EU. The truth is, at the end
:35:38. > :35:41.of that, it would be for the Government of the day to bring back
:35:42. > :35:49.to parliament a deal. That deal is not satisfactory, it is beholden
:35:50. > :35:56.upon members of Parliament, if they feel strongly, to throw out that
:35:57. > :36:01.deal. The Remain side are not accepting the result of the
:36:02. > :36:06.referendum? I am not saying that, but we have to negotiate for the
:36:07. > :36:11.interest in the decades to come. We have got to leave this discussion.
:36:12. > :36:14.We would need to leave, but not on any terms. That is interesting, we
:36:15. > :36:16.might be able to pick that up later. Now, there's been a lot
:36:17. > :36:19.of discussion in the EU referendum campaign about money -
:36:20. > :36:22.how much do we pay to the EU One of the tangible benefits
:36:23. > :36:26.is the subsidies for farming, but the environmentalist and writer -
:36:27. > :36:29.and reluctant EU remainer - George Monbiot argues that might not
:36:30. > :36:32.be the best use of the funds. # Old McDonald had
:36:33. > :36:42.a farm, E-I-E-I-O. # And on the farm he had some cows,
:36:43. > :36:46.E-I-E-I-O. # With a moo moo here,
:36:47. > :36:51.a moo moo there, cattle everywhere. Why is it the biggest item in the EU
:36:52. > :36:56.budget is scarcely mentioned I am talking about farm subsidies,
:36:57. > :37:03.55 billion euros a year that the European Union
:37:04. > :37:09.doles out to landowners. The more land you own,
:37:10. > :37:15.the more money you receive. It is daylight robbery,
:37:16. > :37:21.the rest of us are being taxed to subsidise the richest
:37:22. > :37:24.people in the land. # When those cows got out of line,
:37:25. > :37:34.served them medium rare. Subsidy rules insist you must
:37:35. > :37:39.destroy trees and other wildlife # With a moo moo here,
:37:40. > :37:47.a moo moo there. There is no limit to the subsidies
:37:48. > :37:53.you can get for owning land. Some landowners use their
:37:54. > :37:56.Social Security to buy The benefits for people who need
:37:57. > :38:03.them to make ends meet, # Old McDonald had
:38:04. > :38:12.a farm, E-I-E-I-O. At the very least, subsidies
:38:13. > :38:15.for landowners should be capped at the same level
:38:16. > :38:21.as benefits for everyone else. I think I am going to vote to remain
:38:22. > :38:25.in the EU on 23rd June, but if we do stay, let's demand
:38:26. > :38:28.that it stops robbing the poor And we've also been joined
:38:29. > :38:36.by another George, George Eustice, the farming minister
:38:37. > :38:48.who is campaigning to leave the EU. I won't model them up, I promise!
:38:49. > :38:56.Can you get the reform you want while still being in the EU? It is a
:38:57. > :38:58.good question. On this issue, the EU has been unresponsive and
:38:59. > :39:02.unaccountable, it is hard to get them to listen. It is not big
:39:03. > :39:09.European Commission at fault, there has been a deal, a dodgy deal,
:39:10. > :39:14.between France and Britain and Germany, France says, we want the
:39:15. > :39:18.biggest budget possible, and Britain has said, we want no cap on the
:39:19. > :39:24.individual contribution. Why are you staying in? It is not just about
:39:25. > :39:31.agriculture, there are lots of other issues. It is dishonest to say,
:39:32. > :39:36.because I am a Remain campaigner, I should pretend that everything about
:39:37. > :39:41.the EU is good. Is that the only reason you are leaving, to do with
:39:42. > :39:45.farming? We would be better off taking back control across the
:39:46. > :39:49.piece, but I spent two and half years wrestling with the regulations
:39:50. > :39:53.that George has talked about, and you cannot get proper reform in the
:39:54. > :39:58.EU, you have 28 governments with different political persuasions,
:39:59. > :40:04.with different agricultural sectors, structures, the fundamental idea of
:40:05. > :40:10.a pan-European legal system governing agriculture is flawed. We
:40:11. > :40:17.need to put in place our own policy that we can get behind. It is
:40:18. > :40:22.context, you need the flexibility to do things differently. What about
:40:23. > :40:26.the subsidies farmers would lose? We would still support farming at the
:40:27. > :40:31.same level. Would you be able to guarantee that level of money? If we
:40:32. > :40:37.stopped sending ?350 million a week to Brussels... Let's talk about the
:40:38. > :40:42.net figures. We would have more than enough money to fund an agricultural
:40:43. > :40:49.policy. If the priority was farming and agriculture. And the environment
:40:50. > :40:54.and animal welfare. We are spending over 3 billion a year on farming,
:40:55. > :41:04.recycled through the EU. It is paid for owning land. We are facing a
:41:05. > :41:07.shortfall, in the NHS into 3 billion, we are going to give it to
:41:08. > :41:12.landowners instead of dealing with the shortfall in the NHS? Nobody
:41:13. > :41:18.will stand for that. The only reason the system exists is we can say,
:41:19. > :41:24.that is Brussels' business. We would deliver environmental objectives.
:41:25. > :41:30.Which ones? It helps to safeguard our security of food, I am in favour
:41:31. > :41:34.of looking at some of the models they have in Canada, so farmers can
:41:35. > :41:41.invest. You could put in place a suite of different environmental
:41:42. > :41:46.schemes to have watercourses protected, we can do it better than
:41:47. > :41:52.the system we have now. This is the stuff that you have tried to scrap,
:41:53. > :41:57.I have seen the speeches you have given, where you have said, we will
:41:58. > :42:02.tear down the regulations, big and issues that you have to meet as a
:42:03. > :42:05.farmer to get this money. Just as the ordinary recipients of benefits
:42:06. > :42:10.have had their conditions racked up until it is extremely difficult to
:42:11. > :42:14.survive on Social Security, under your watch farmers have had their
:42:15. > :42:18.conditions reduced. So we are giving away the money for nothing. Even
:42:19. > :42:23.when farmers are stripping the soil off the land, contributing to
:42:24. > :42:28.floods, wiping out these and songbirds, they are still getting
:42:29. > :42:32.their subsidy. When we judge you on your record, we find a different
:42:33. > :42:36.picture. We need to have clarity about what this regulation and
:42:37. > :42:42.enforce it properly, not the system we have now, and buttresses to of
:42:43. > :42:48.rushed justice. Can you deny those claims? Definitely. We have ?3
:42:49. > :42:53.billion over five years going into environmental stewardship. We would
:42:54. > :42:58.retain that activity that promotes the development of habitat. What
:42:59. > :43:00.about claims that farmers have contributed to flooding, because
:43:01. > :43:05.they did not have the money or support to do anything else? It is
:43:06. > :43:12.because the common agricultural policy is so bonkers. I oppose it. I
:43:13. > :43:20.have never heard you make a public statement saying, this is what is
:43:21. > :43:24.wrong. We have... Rules say do can only have 100 trees per hectare to
:43:25. > :43:30.make it eligible, but then there are rules about the maximum dose of a
:43:31. > :43:34.tree. Let's talk about the subsidy issue. If it is going to landowners,
:43:35. > :43:39.why should they continue to be subsidised by taxpayers here or
:43:40. > :43:48.anywhere in the EU if farmers are not getting the money? In future,...
:43:49. > :43:53.Now. It is not right. It is true there are large landowners who are
:43:54. > :43:58.not often farming, some of them receiving payments of over half ?1
:43:59. > :44:02.million a year,... You guarantee they would not get that? We would
:44:03. > :44:07.change the system, so farmers could manage risk, and you reward farmers
:44:08. > :44:15.for doing genuine work for the environment. Does that not sound
:44:16. > :44:18.like it would solve one of your complaints, that wealthy landowners
:44:19. > :44:22.would not get a subsidy to fly and land their helicopters? Would you
:44:23. > :44:27.cap the level of subsidies that any one person could get at the same
:44:28. > :44:33.level as ordinary recipients of benefit? I would not go for it that
:44:34. > :44:37.way, because some of the best work we do is be higher-level Stuart
:44:38. > :44:45.ship, we are investing in habitats. I would not... It would not be a
:44:46. > :44:48.subsidy, it would be a payment for ecosystem services, for work to
:44:49. > :44:54.improve water quality, promote habitat. Farming is unique, it is
:44:55. > :44:57.intertwined with our natural landscape and environment, that is
:44:58. > :45:00.why it is different and you need public support for those public
:45:01. > :45:06.goods, which you cannot reward in the marketplace. We need a farming
:45:07. > :45:11.industry. It would be an improvement, if we could trust him
:45:12. > :45:16.that that is what we would end up with, but everything we have heard
:45:17. > :45:19.from him is reduced, bridges, reduce, let's get these things out
:45:20. > :45:22.of the way, they are stifling enterprise. Spirit rushing, you call
:45:23. > :45:36.them. Why should we trust you? They don't work. They are spirit
:45:37. > :45:39.crushing because they prevent the farmers who, you seem to regard
:45:40. > :45:46.yourself as being solely in charge of helping, they prevent them from
:45:47. > :45:50.ripping up the hedgerows. Forced to do things the wrong way. If we
:45:51. > :45:54.warrant a coherent environmental policy, we have to take control. We
:45:55. > :45:58.can't just abdicate responsibility. We have things to fall back on at
:45:59. > :46:01.the moment. We have abdicated responsibility. Take back control,
:46:02. > :46:05.we take back responsibility. George and George, thank you very much. I'm
:46:06. > :46:06.sure you've got a great future together you two, in some sort of
:46:07. > :46:08.double act! As the campaign enters the final
:46:09. > :46:11.furlong, Andrew is going to be interviewing leading figures
:46:12. > :46:15.from each side of the campaign in the coming days, starting
:46:16. > :46:18.tonight at 7.30 on BBC One with the Shadow Foreign Secretary
:46:19. > :46:21.Hilary Benn for Remain, followed on Wednesday
:46:22. > :46:24.by Chancellor George Osborne, and then it's the turn of Leave
:46:25. > :46:27.campaigners Nigel Farage You might not have realised it
:46:28. > :46:35.but there are plenty of other political happenings this week other
:46:36. > :46:39.than arguing about the EU. Though there is of course,
:46:40. > :46:43.more of that too. As we've already heard,
:46:44. > :46:46.the Investigatory Powers Bill enters Report Stage today -
:46:47. > :46:49.giving MPs the chance to suggest On Tuesday, the Queen will open
:46:50. > :46:55.the fifth Welsh Assembly and the Prime Minister
:46:56. > :46:57.and Nigel Farage will appear on ITV to make their opposing cases
:46:58. > :47:01.as to whether the UK should stay On Wednesday Jeremy Corbyn
:47:02. > :47:06.and David Cameron will duke it out in the first PMQs after recessand
:47:07. > :47:09.the owner of failed retail chain BHS will give evidence to the Business
:47:10. > :47:11.Committee. On Thursday, former
:47:12. > :47:14.Foreign Secretary William Hague will give a speech on the balance
:47:15. > :47:16.between national security and personal privacy whilst
:47:17. > :47:20.political and business leaders gather in Dresden for this year's
:47:21. > :47:23.secretive Bilderberg meeting. Finally on Friday, it's the deadline
:47:24. > :47:26.for submissions to the Shami Charkrabati Inquiry,
:47:27. > :47:28.Labour's internal investigation into anti-semtism and Islamophobia
:47:29. > :47:33.amongst its members. We're joined now by Kevin Schofield
:47:34. > :47:49.of Politics Home and Anoosh David Cameron and Nigel Farage, are
:47:50. > :47:53.you going to be sitting on the edge of your sofa for that programme?
:47:54. > :47:59.I'll be on my sofa, maybe not on the edge. Good to know! Should be an
:48:00. > :48:03.interesting clash. Obviously they are not going head-to-head but I
:48:04. > :48:08.think David Cameron would have been reasonably pleased with how he got
:48:09. > :48:13.on on Sky News last week and he'll be looking for a fresh challenge and
:48:14. > :48:17.obviously Mr Farage, this is his big, big moment to set out his case
:48:18. > :48:26.for Brexit. Of course, with Nigel Farage, there's always the chance he
:48:27. > :48:32.would say something incendiary which could send the Volt Leave camp off
:48:33. > :48:36.course. Are they so much in full flow on this that they'll just do it
:48:37. > :48:40.off the hoof? Nigel Farage will be on the hoof because he's not
:48:41. > :48:45.afilliated to the vote Leave campaign at all. ITV booked him to
:48:46. > :48:49.be on this particular debate. So I think they said it was a stitch-up,
:48:50. > :48:54.so I think Nigel Farage is just going to go rogue. You've seen the
:48:55. > :48:57.comments he's made today about the risk of increased sex attacks from
:48:58. > :49:01.migrants, I mean what more does he have in the locker to bring out
:49:02. > :49:04.tomorrow, who knows! What about the blue on blue, since there's been a
:49:05. > :49:10.lot of that about in the last few days and both sides I suppose, to be
:49:11. > :49:15.fair, are plunging to new depths. John Major clearly had three wet bix
:49:16. > :49:21.if not more for breakfast yesterday. How damaging do you think it is now
:49:22. > :49:30.that David Cameron is sharing a Platt form with Natalie Bennett and
:49:31. > :49:33.Tim Farron? You see him sharing a platform with opposing party
:49:34. > :49:37.leaders, so logically you thinked say they are all on one side for
:49:38. > :49:41.this particular issue, but when you have Jeremy Corbyn refusing to stand
:49:42. > :49:48.alongside David Cameron, it throws the Remain campaign in a bit of
:49:49. > :49:55.confusion. There was an eye-opener, Natalie Bennett had a pop at the
:49:56. > :50:01.media for turning the EU referendum campaign into a Tory leadership
:50:02. > :50:08.campaign. It's Tory MPs who're doing that, not people like ourselves
:50:09. > :50:12.writing about it. But is it the case Anoosh that there is a feeling of
:50:13. > :50:16.planning for June 24th now, rather than referendum night itself?
:50:17. > :50:21.Absolutely. The story now is that even if David Cameron and the Remain
:50:22. > :50:25.campaign win, all the Tory MPs, people are citing 30 or 40 MP who is
:50:26. > :50:29.want to get rid of Cameron so it will be a challenge for him either
:50:30. > :50:39.way. If he wins, he'll be torn between perhaps trying to do some
:50:40. > :50:43.reconciliation reshuffle where he promotes Brexiters who've been
:50:44. > :50:47.tipped for this, but also giving Michael Gove and Boris Johnson more
:50:48. > :50:49.power in the Cabinet. That could equally scupper David Cameron's
:50:50. > :50:54.power as well because people who've been loyal to him during this might
:50:55. > :50:59.find that odd and a bit jarring. What about the story of the majority
:51:00. > :51:03.of MPs voting to stay in the single market if the UK does vote to leave
:51:04. > :51:07.the EU, what do you make of that story, Kevin? It's a great story is
:51:08. > :51:12.the first thing to say. I would be astonished if they were to go ahead
:51:13. > :51:17.with it. People are going to vote on 23rd June knowing full well what
:51:18. > :51:20.Brexit is going to mean. No-one will go into the booth not knowing the
:51:21. > :51:25.consequences of leaving or staying. It would appear that if the MPs are
:51:26. > :51:29.trying to defy the will of the people by trying to see us in the
:51:30. > :51:33.single market if people vote for Brexit, it would look really, really
:51:34. > :51:37.bad. Trust for public and MPs has been low and it would take a further
:51:38. > :51:38.nose dive if that were to happen. Thank you both of you.
:51:39. > :51:44.A row has broken out in the Tory party and no, it's not even
:51:45. > :51:49.But whether people should have to declare on their job applications
:51:50. > :51:52.whether they went to private school or not.
:51:53. > :51:54.The Government thinks this could improve social mobility
:51:55. > :51:56.and opportunities for state educated pupils but Tory peer,
:51:57. > :51:59.and provost of Eton College, Lord Waldegrave threatened
:52:00. > :52:04.Earlier this year, the Prime Minister said that
:52:05. > :52:11.improving life chances was a central mission of his Government.
:52:12. > :52:16.I believe in self-reliance and personal responsibility. I think
:52:17. > :52:21.it's absolutely correct, but we have to recognise that this alone is not
:52:22. > :52:25.enough. When it comes to people and poverty, the rising tide doesn't
:52:26. > :52:29.lift all boats, so if we want to transform life chances, we have got
:52:30. > :52:37.to go much, much deeper. We need a more social approach. One
:52:38. > :52:41.where we develop a richer picture at how social problems combined, how
:52:42. > :52:44.they reinforce each other, how they manifest themselves throughout
:52:45. > :52:45.someone's life and how the opportunity gap gets generated as a
:52:46. > :52:47.result. Joining me now is the journalist
:52:48. > :52:50.James Bloodworth who has just written a new book called
:52:51. > :52:57.The Myth of Meritocracy. Doesn't exist? Not at if moment I
:52:58. > :53:01.don't think. I thought David Cameron delivered a very good speech. We
:53:02. > :53:06.need to look at social class in the way we look at other issues around
:53:07. > :53:10.identity and the disadvantages they bring about. There are lots of
:53:11. > :53:13.campaigns at the moment to get more women into board rooms, to get more
:53:14. > :53:18.minorities into board rooms, those are very good. But class has to some
:53:19. > :53:20.extent dropped off the agenda. What about the suggestion for
:53:21. > :53:24.professional recruitment in terms of having to state whether you went to
:53:25. > :53:29.a state comprehensive school or a private school, is that fair? Yes, I
:53:30. > :53:36.think so. I mean, I think that, you know, Eton kind of privileges
:53:37. > :53:40.children of parents that have money so we should look to address the
:53:41. > :53:45.balance. You already put the school you went to on your CV. People could
:53:46. > :53:49.always look it up if they were that interested? Yes. I don't think it
:53:50. > :53:52.will make a huge difference but I don't think it's something to be
:53:53. > :53:57.frightened of, to state that that was a fee-paying school or a
:53:58. > :54:03.comprehensive school. The balance has to be redressed doesn't it,
:54:04. > :54:09.Douglas Carswell so obviously it must be fair to state your school?
:54:10. > :54:12.I've looked at CVs in the past, looked at universities and jobs they
:54:13. > :54:19.had done, I wasn't really interested in their school. Doesn't advantage
:54:20. > :54:28.get built in at school level? There is a small, smug, self-perpetuating
:54:29. > :54:33.Elise, Davos perhaps, and back the Remain campaign. We do need reform
:54:34. > :54:37.though and we need to break that cartel. That is one of the reasons
:54:38. > :54:40.why I left my own party and stood in a by-election and believed we need
:54:41. > :54:47.far-reaching political change. Are these things important. You went to
:54:48. > :54:52.a grammar school? I did. You both succeeded. Do you think it needs to
:54:53. > :54:56.be that explicit, I went to a state school and please therefore take
:54:57. > :55:03.that into account? I worry about it being too explicit. My mother was
:55:04. > :55:07.the daughter of a doctor and that was held against her when she came
:55:08. > :55:12.to the West, so I worry we are going down a particular route. There is a
:55:13. > :55:16.genuine issue about social mobility which has clearly gone backwards in
:55:17. > :55:21.the last 20-30 years here in the UK and I think you are right about
:55:22. > :55:26.meritocracy, one of the dangers is that people think there is no sense
:55:27. > :55:31.of Leave whatsoever. I believe in making money and whatever success
:55:32. > :55:35.I've had, we are in a merry tock radiocy and that brings with it some
:55:36. > :55:42.dangers. It's crude to have a statistic about which school you
:55:43. > :55:45.went to, increditly dangerous. I think it's more paying lip service
:55:46. > :55:50.to the society than making a huge difference. I think if Cameron was
:55:51. > :55:54.serious about it, he'd look at reducing the gap between rich and
:55:55. > :55:59.poor. Universities - if you look at the expansion of universities over
:56:00. > :56:05.the last 15 years, many more poorer working class children or teenagers
:56:06. > :56:09.go to university, but the proportion of the best universities has gone
:56:10. > :56:13.down so we need to look at the university system. Post-graduate
:56:14. > :56:22.education, you can't get a loan for that, you have to go to the bank. In
:56:23. > :56:33.economic terms, there is an injustice. The FTSE has companies
:56:34. > :56:37.earning 150 times what the FTSE was. We need far-reaching change. What's
:56:38. > :56:41.made that happen, what has increased that equality? A small Click of
:56:42. > :56:44.people decide public policy, partly, I hate to bring it back to the
:56:45. > :56:48.Europe question, but partly through Brussels, the sort of people lining
:56:49. > :56:51.up to back the Remain campaign and they have rigged the economy so
:56:52. > :57:00.rent-seeking interests re-Prince of Wale. There is a broader issue about
:57:01. > :57:05.the impact of global issues, there is a genuine concern. I often say
:57:06. > :57:10.myself that it seems now that the rules of global capitalism seem
:57:11. > :57:14.to... Rent-seeking Click? ! Middle class Tory voting people, dare I
:57:15. > :57:18.say. In the Remain campaign. 20 years ago would have said they are
:57:19. > :57:25.the winners, now they are amongst the losers. The middle classes are
:57:26. > :57:28.being locked out. Journalism for example, 43% of newspaper columnists
:57:29. > :57:34.went to private school, locking out middle class as well. Big state
:57:35. > :57:40.subsidies. State subsidies also for farming. We need the welfare system
:57:41. > :57:47.to help people who need help. Must the welloff though lose out for the
:57:48. > :57:51.disadvantaged to succeed? To some extent in financial terms yes, I
:57:52. > :57:54.think so. I don't think private schools should have charitable
:57:55. > :57:59.status for one thing. So you could say that is people losing out. A
:58:00. > :58:03.huge amount of work... Do they all do that though to earn the
:58:04. > :58:07.charitable status There is a massive amount of work and sponsors. I think
:58:08. > :58:12.that money would be better used in... That's... There is an argument
:58:13. > :58:18.to be had there. We have to bring class back on to the agenda in the
:58:19. > :58:22.way we understand disadvantage is accrued from identity. There are
:58:23. > :58:26.more ethnic minorities elected in Parliament, also more people who
:58:27. > :58:28.went to public schools, we are going backwards in that respect. Thank you
:58:29. > :58:29.very much. There's just time before we go to
:58:30. > :58:33.find out the answer to our quiz. The question was; which of
:58:34. > :58:49.the following is not related How do you know that then? It's
:58:50. > :58:53.Nigel. The others are related to William and Anne. Although they are
:58:54. > :58:55.distant relations. Douglas Carswell got it right. Thank you to our
:58:56. > :59:05.guests of the day. Thank you. Mr Reginald Keys?
:59:06. > :59:08.We're from Army notification. About your brother.
:59:09. > :59:14.He's been shot dead. 'one man's mission for justice
:59:15. > :59:17.for his son.'