05/09/2012 Newsnight


With Jeremy Paxman. Why is there so much child poverty in working families? Economist Larry Summers speaks. New evidence of melting Arctic ice.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 05/09/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Britain in 2012 a country so expensive that even when parents do


work, their children can still go without. Politicians talk of hard


working Britain, but what is it like when your parents have to work


too hard. My dad works two jobs. But I don't get to see him much,


when he's off he does carpets, I feel left out, because I really


love my dad. We ask the former Labour


communications director, who has just launched a Save the Children


campaign in this country, a single mother, the Education Committee


chair, and the man from the at this tank founded by Iain Duncan Smith.


They are back from the beaches, so it is time for the eurocrisis to


resume. Tomorrow the head of the European Central Bank hopes to stop


the anxiety. What does the man who was President Obama's chief


financial adviser think he has to say. Come to that, how does he rate


George Osborne? Also tonight, Newsnight uncovers


new evidence suggesting melting Arctic ice will have a dramatic


effect on our climate. Is now the time to kick back, relax, and learn


to love cloudy Augusts. The summer area of ice has already gone down


from eight to four million square kilometres, as it collapses we will


lose another four million. Four million square kilometres is about


1% of the surface area of the earth. The new leader of the Green Party,


and a prominent climate change sceptic, are both here.


You have heard of Save the Children, you may have given to one of their


appeals, to help suffering children overseas. Yet now, for the first


time, this affluent society's charity, is running a campaign


about deprived children in this country. Their conclusions are


troubling. They say that in the poorest households, nearly two


thirds of parents say they have cut back on food. Over a quarter have


gone without meals, and a fifth say their children have gone without


new shoes, when they have needed them. We are going to talk about


why it is happening, and what we maybe can do about it. First, we


ought to hear from some children themselves, all of them in families


struggling in the downturn. I'm Andrew, I'm 12 years old. I


like to be a marine biologist. I want to be people that go around


the world discovering art facts of Diana And Actaeon saurs, an


archaeologist, a scientist and a professional football player --


dinosaurs, and an archaeologist, a scientist and a professional


football player, I can't be all three, I will be too fired. Once we


were playing football on a field, and there was a gang on there with


a gun. We heard shots fired. The park, a lad got killed outside


there, and was dumped on our street. I had to witness him trying to be


revived. Snails. Another brick. volunteer in a youth project, and


we come up here and dig out all the weeds. We got rid of 12 tonnes of


rubbish. We plant flowers. We are making it so it is like a nature


trail, you can go down and pick berries, and look at the nice


flowers. We were struggling to pay bills, and me dad lost his job, and


his contract, so they were struggling, we had to live with our


nan for a bit. And then my dad got another job, two jobs, and started


working with that. Me mum helped as well. Me mum, she will miss out on


a new pair of shoes, to get us uniforms, or a bit more expensive


stuff, clothes and that. Or she will get a cheaper type of food to


feed us. When she can't afford to get and pay bills, she will get


dead stressed and be worried about it. Found a worm. Hey there little


guy. He's trying to eat my finger. My dad works, two jobs. Four nights,


two nights, two days. But I don't really get to see him much, because


when he's off, he does carpet, and I feel left out, because I really


love my dad. REPORTER: Would you I'm 13 years old. I'm 12, my name


is Precious. I would like to be either a medical doctor, or an


economist. I like maths, and I'm good with my numbers. I either want


to be a lawyer, or study medicine. I like my free school meals because


they are good, and they help. Even though I'm happy for it. Sometimes


the food is costly, which is not even nice, there might be a


sandwich which is �1.80, and you only have �2 on your dinner ticket,


you won't have anything to buy anything else. Sometimes it fills


me up, sometimes it doesn't. chips fill you up, they are cheaper,


if you were to go to a supermarket and buy a pack of fruit or


something, which I don't tend to do, they are more expensive. I like


strawberries, I like mangos and pomegranates. Say there was one


mango for �1, you may think to yourself, what is the point of


buying that one mango, and you can have a pack of chips that will fill


you up even more. We normally do a cake stall to raise money for us.


We make fairy cakes. You you get extra money so you can spend it on


stuff you like. We normally do it with our youth groups too. That's


not funny! We just want to show other children on the road that


there is more to do than wasting your time being silly on the road,


creating gangs. School uniform is very expensive. My school uniform


costs �380 just for me. That wasn't including any of my white T-shirts,


my school shoes, my bag or anything, just main stuff like the jumper and


the blazer and the skirt. My school uniform was really expensive, it


was twice as much as her's. I only got one blazer, because I had to


get a big-sized blazer to last me quite long. We are privileged, when


you look across the road to the other houses, which are more posh.


Then, on our house some people may judge it from the outside, they


might say on the outside it looks bad, on the inside it is actually


nice. We have never been all together on holiday. We went to


Brighton. But we didn't stay there, I am eight years old. I like street


dance. I want to be a dancer. Mummy doesn't have enough money to buy


clothes sometimes. I get clothes off other people. Clothes that


haven't been used, and some clothes that they have worn. I got to baton


swirling, swimming and brownies, I like all of them. Mummy knows one


of the brownie leaders, and the brownie leader says she doesn't


have to pay for the badges. If I won lods loads of money, I would


buy loads of presents for my friends for their birthdays, and


buy loads and loads and loads and loads of presents for mummy on her


birthday. Sometimes I like to go out for a meal, but I know mum


doesn't have enough money. She has to spend loads of money on food.


She feeds us before her, because she wants to make us happy. She


gives us nice things, and doesn't eat her breakfast. She's hungry.


My mum always says to me, even universities cost that much, I will


still go, even if it costs millions of poupbtdz, I will still go. She


wants me to go to university, I do too. I I want to go to university,


because education means a better life. I want to go to university. I


do want to, because we're struggling to pay the bills. It's


like �10,000. I have been saving up quite a bit of money from birthdays


and things like that. So I have got a head start of getting to


university. Well, before we talk about some of the issues in that


film. Our political correspondent is here. To explain how many


children we are talking about, and what we actually mean by children


living in poverty. David. You might think it is an easy thing


to measure child poverty, and you might point to factors like someone


not having anywhere to live, being undernourished, having inadequate


clothing. That is certainly the measures that were used by 19th


century social campaigner, and mercifully, on those measure, there


is ininfinitely less poverty in Britain than there was 200 years


ago. Job done. Well, not so fast, in recent decades, policy makers


and campaigner, have settled on a different measure, relative poverty.


How well off someone is in relation to everyone else. The most common


measure of child poverty, favoured by the last Government, is the


number of children living in households whose income is less


than 60% of median, or middle income. In 2011, that was �419 a


week. The Labour Government set a target of eliminating child poverty


by 2020. And by 2010, they enshrined that in law. And here's


the good news. Child poverty has fallen, in the past few years. Most


markedly in 2010/2011, that is not because poorer families have got


richer, but everyone else has been getting poorer quicker. Leading to


a reduction in the median income, from �432 a week, to �419. The Work


and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, has described this as


perverse, that when times are good we get more poor people, and when


times are bad we get fewer. He notes that by this way of thinking,


the simplest way of reducing child poverty, is to collapse the economy.


The criticism of the Labour years is that ministers fixated on an


abitary line, and they spent billions on moving people from a


few pound under the line, to a few pounds over it, without tackling


the causes of poverty right at the bottom. Like unemployment, family


breakdown, and addiction. The current Government says it is


absolutely committed to tackling child poverty, it is just we have


to get a whole lot better at measuring it. With us is Justin


Forsyth, the chief executive of Save the Children, and former


adviser to Gordon Brown and Tony Blair. Tracey Nugent, a lone parent


from Glasgow. The Conservative MP, Graham Stuart, chair of the


Education Select Committee, and Christian Guy, from the Centre for


Social Justice, founded by the welfare secretary, Iain Duncan


Smith. What is it like to bring up a child who is not only poor, but


aware of the circumstances? intensifies the stress, which would


then intensify his stress. He was originally, for a long, long time,


Adam was my carer, because I couldn't handle the issues I was


having to deal with. And now, that I'm out earning, I think a lot of


people think, they have on the rose tinted glasses, thinking I'm OK now.


Not taking into consideration the amount of debts that we accrued.


That we are now paying back. are no better off, despite the fact


you are working? No. Mentally, my mental health, and the fact that


I'm getting up and going out to work every morning, that is


absolutely fantastic. However, when I come home at night, the same


financial issues are still sitting there. I'm very, very aware, over


the fact, that if I'm not dealing with them properly, it will have a


knock-on effect to my child, who is then going to adopt those


behaviours, and perhaps think it is OK not to earn a great wage, not to


follow their ambition, and not to better themselves. He's growing up


in a world which he sees shiny, glistening attractive things


daingled in front of him all the time? Absolutely. The area we come


from, there are very few lone parents, they are women. In the


area we have, people have a mum and dad, two or three bedroom, a front


door, back door garden. Adam and I are currently sharing a bedroom. My


kitchen is in the living room. The only reason we can heat our house


at this minute, because I got a grant. Are you aware that there are


fewer people living in poverty in this country than there were, does


it feel like that to you? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. I


come from a background where my mum and dad instilled in me that you


must have a very good and strong work ethic. Unfortunately, because


of the circumstances that I'm in, and I can't claw myself out of,


he's going to think that's OK. you surprised when you started


looking into this situation, in this country? I think we were


surprised. Because I think what we have heard from children, and


parents, and we saw in your films, is so many children aren't only


eating properly or getting a winter coat, but the stress that goes with


that. That took us most by surprise. What is happening to families, as


Tracey as said, is a combination of factors that have come together.


High energy prices are a big factor, unemployment, cuts in benefits,


high food prices, there is that perfect storm, that is really


affecting families, that is what makes it really hard. What people


don't realise, because they have this caricature in their head, that


most people that are poor in families are undeserving, they are


drug addicts and dropouts, but actually 61% of families are


actually working, where children are poor. They are striving to get


out of poverty, and they need a bit of a helping hand. Is there a


solution? I think there is, it doesn't cost the earth either. One


of the biggest factor, and Tracey knows this full well, is childcare.


It is a huge factor, actually being able to afford to go into work, and


earn an income. That saves the Government money if you are in work.


So the taxpayer pays this? What we have had is a cut in childcare


support for the poorest families, it is a tiny investment. You would


help a million children, with a �400 million investment. That would


help then get them into work and would mean less benefits and save


money longer term. Does that make sense to you? About childcare or


the general debate. The solution? On childcare I think there is a


major problem with childcare, I'm not convinced that more tax-payers'


money to subsidise the inflated costs of childcare is quite the


answer. There are things we can do with childcare to flood the market,


make it easier to train as registered child minders, look at


wrap-around school childcare. By flooding the market will child


cautious we will reduce the childcare costs, and Government


shouldn't keep subsidising that. Childcare is one part of the


problem. You must be scandalised by this, when you hear the moving


stories of the children, talking about what it is like, they have


got working parents, who have been told get a job and you can get


yourselves out of poverty, and it isn't happening. They are full of


dreams and aspirations and hopes and ambitions, I don't know whether


they will be realised, I hope they are? I do too, we have been at the,


CSJ, all over the country listening to families like these. The


interesting thing tonight is what we see as a an aspiration, hope and


belief in the power of work, even though it is difficult, work is


still what people pursue. What is the alternative to work if you want


to lift yourself out of poverty and be self-reliant. There is no


alternative. It is tough right now, but work is the surest route out of


poverty. There is no doubt about that. Do you agree with that?


Absolutely. The other thing we saw in the film, from Precious and


others, is the power of education, the recognition of the need to get


a good education to earn the money. We are in an ever-more competitive


global economy, we know we are losing jobs every day at the


unskilled level. So the message, which I'm delighted to see had got


through to the children there, that needs to go to parents, is that you


might have been able to leave school without much on the way of


qualifications and skills, get a good job, support a family, have a


rich and fulfiling life. This generation, increasingly, isn't


able to do so. Getting education right, making sure that the 42%


last year of children who took GCSEs, 42% of them didn't get five


good GCSEs including English and math, which we know triggers a move


on to education or employment. are you going to do about it?


have to intervene early, there is cross-party agreement on this.


Perhaps what happened, and it was understandable, part of the times,


but huge amounts of money were thrown in the direction, by the


last Government, I don't think, they would accept in many ways,


that the long-term routes weren't tackled as effectively as we would


like. Now this Government has commissioned Graham allen, a Labour


MP, and Frank Field, in this area, looking at early intervention, and


the causes of poverty. And the Early Years Intervention will be


set up hopefully soon, and look at getting the evidence on the right


interventions to support. The Government is doing things like


extending free nursery education to two-year-olds, trying to make sure


that the children, who all too often from poor families, arrive at


school is and they are not able to learn, they are not school-ready,


and their confidence is knocked. And children who are born poor end


up not getting the qualifications. These problems reinforce each other.


Work is a key way out of poverty, we all agree. Not for those kids?


It is if their parents get a chance to work and they get a decent


income. Part of the problem is they go to work without a decent income.


Also, in terms it of getting the more earnings, the more benefits


they lose. We have to skew the system, we have to pay for more


childcare. We have a mix of prokblems. They reinforce each


other. If you are at home, and the energy prices are high, you put


their children to bed and they do it in bed. They are so cold. You


send their friends home because you can't afford to have them round to


cook them a meal. These kids get much less chance at school, they


don't succeed at school, they don't get your educational benefits.


have to make work pay, we have to reform benefit, which is happening.


The Universal Credit is an aim to make sure you don't get this


disproportionate loss, when you do more hours, so many people would


get a job and find themselves worse off. You know about this? I think


what a lot of people are forgetting, I'm going to work and paying


national insurance and tax, I should be, therefore, entitled to


support, to get my child looked after properly. But the other issue


is, as well, once they hit first year in Scotland, there no


childcare provision at all. Which leaves the children, at a


vulnerable age, to become latch-key kids. That is not acceptable.


really important to recognise that, whilst Universal Credit, perhaps is


far from perfect, what the Government is doing is making sure


work does pay. The new system will prevent many more of these cases. I


think right now we have a broken benefits system, and work doesn't


reward, and people on benefits are penalised by taking work, that is


perverse. But the universal benefits system has been a long


time in gestation, and will take a long time to get properly grounded.


Those children, those 8, 10, 12, 13, 14-year-old children, living in


poverty, in this country, making calculation about what they can


afford to eat on their called free school lunch, and having a chip


because it fills them up. As opposed to fruit. Those children,


they are not going to be rescued, are they? They will be, because the


new system will help their parents to make sure that work pays them.


Interestingly you mentioned the point, let me finish the point. The


interesting point about how we measure poverty in this country is


a big debate, we heard it in the clip earlier. It is madness how the


measure is set. What we see, under the previous Government, for


example, �150 billion on tax credits, for a 1%age point


reduction in the -- 1% point reduction in the poverty. You were


part that have team, and it didn't work? It did work, we lifted a


million out of poverty. I actually support the Universal Credit, I'm


here as Save the Children, not the previous Government. I think you


have to put money into it. You have an extra �3 billion secured in


difficult times. If we put some more money towards childcare, we


could help a million children. Part of the problem with the Universal


Credit, as it is being set up, and we don't know exactly how it will


work yet. As you earn more and you begin to bring money in you will


lose your benefits. That is the opposite of what it is about, it is


about keeping more of your benefits, which is the �3 billion. On


childcare they are adding an extra �300 million into childcare and


more will receive it. At the moment you have to work 16 hours a week to


get childcare cover. If this is the case, why so many people like


Tracey and those in the film? have a broken system now, the


benefit coming to an area near you, will help. In the boom years, not


the post-recession time, the children in the most severe poverty,


under the last Government, increased in number. That's not all


just to do with failure of policy. There has been a change in the


labour market and increasing challenges there. We have to get


the long-term conditions right. I think the Government is moving in


the right direction. People at home might be saying, the poor you have


always with you, there are always going to be poor people, but what


is the consequence of children failing to see their aspirations


realised, their dreams realised. The sense that you can't do. What


happens? It is tragic. And the social cost is appalling, in this


country, in an economy, that is relatively still very prosperous,


it is completely wrong and an inJews at this. How we measure that


poverty is really important. Take the tax credit point, I'm not


making a party political point, that �150 billion that went in for


the 1% reduk. How would the money have been used, it would have been


important to give it to the charities and get ahead of the


family breakdown, reform the welfare system and drugs and


alcohol. So many of those things make a difference to how much


poverty people are in. We will long-term make more difference than


anything else. Tracey, how do you keep a sense of dream and ambition


and aspiration? Adam does that for me. He bolsters everything that


goes on in my life. If it wasn't for his attitude, then I don't


think I would have returned to work. The thing is, with children, they


are there, they will support each other, without doubt. When you


become an adult, it becomes political, and it is just, the


wrong people are picked on, in my point of view. It is easy to take


it from people that are already down, to kick them while they are


down, it is easier that way. The people who don't vote any more, I


don't really wonder why that is now. It is because they don't feel as


though they are getting anything back at all. I did work before I


had ar Adam, and it was mental health issues that me dig my own


hole, that I haven't been able to get back out of financially. Now,


what I did was, I flitted from the Jobcentre to the Benefits Agency,


the Department of Work and Pensions. And nothing happened, I went to One


Parent Family in Scotland, within a year, I had a job. Why haven't the


Government adopted a more holistic method to deal with all these


issues, that is my question. Thank you very much. The summer


holiday is over, time for the next installment of the disaster story


that is the European single currency.


Tomorrow, and I'm sorry if this sounds familiar, we will hear how


the European Central Bank will save the euro, or possibly not. The fate


of the currency is one of the subjects to be tackled in a elect


tue at the London Stock Exchange, by one of the most respected


economists in the world, Larry Summers, Bill Clinton's Treasury


Secretary, and Barack Obama's Chief Economic Advisor.


It is not hard to see why Barack Obama wanted Larry Summers at his


side, at a time that he called a time of great peril for America.


Summers is used to being close to power, he was economic advise Tory


Ronald Regan in the 1980, and back in the White House a decade later,


with Bill Clinton. He rows through the ranks, and many say his zeal in


the US financial markets helped paved the way for the crisis.


Summers went back to acedemia, as President of Harvard, just in time


to get caught up in one of the early disputes about who really


came up with the idea for Facebook. I don't think you are in any


position to make that call. I was the US Treasury Secretary, I'm in


some position to make that call. Hollywood's take on the Facebook


story portrayed Summers as dismissive, and most of all,


arrogant. He said pretty accurate. The courts are at your disposelia,


anything else I can do for you? The Republicans now have the


economic record of Obama, and those, like Summers, who advised him, in


their cross hairs. American growth, at 2%, may look rosy, compared with


Britain's double-dip recession, but unemployment lies at more than 8%.


Only one President has ever been re-elected with jobless figures


like. That A little earlier I spoke to Larry


Summers, from his current lair, at Harvard. It is yet another decision


day for the euro tomorrow, what is the minimum that needs to be heard?


I think there needs to be a very clear statement that what needs to


be done will be done to ensure the continued availability of finance,


particularly to pain and Italy. There needs to be a clear


commitment on the part of the ECB to do what is necessary there needs


to be a political recognition from the nations of northern Europe,


that failure is not an option. that has been the requirement from


the start of this crisis, hasn't it, to restore confidence, and make


people believe that Governments, if necessary, the European Central


Bank, and the rest, will save this currency, will do whatever it takes.


And time after time they have failed to instill confidence. Do


you think it's been well managed, this crisis? This is surely not


going to be a happy chapter in international monetary history. I


have often compared this to the Vietnam War. During the Vietnam War


in the United States, American policy makers always did what was


necessary to avoid immediate collapse, and never did what was


necessary to offer a prospect of a long-running solution. And


eventually, the policy collapsed around this. Let me ask you,


honestly, do you believe in a year's time, there will still be 17


members of the eurozone? There can't be any guarantees, we don't


know what will happen in Greece. We don't know what political


conditions are going to permit, in northern Europe. We don't know what


will happen with respect to uncertain banking systems. But I


think there is a proper judgment that, having made the momentous


commitment to the euro, the right path forward is to try to live with


it and do what's necessary to make it work. If the euro were to


collapse, how big a deal would that be for the world economy? In ways


that that are more negative than has been true historically, and in


ways that are larger than is true for some decade now. The fate of


the global economy over the next several years, rests heavily with


Europe. Europe doesn't have the capacity to be the propulsion, that


creates a rapid global expansion. But Europe does have the capacity


to be the shock that brings the global economy to a screeching halt.


It is the reason why so much of economic and financial diplomacy


has centered, including the active involvement of the President of the


United States, on Europe over the last year.


You mentioned the President of the United States, when asked about his


own handling of the economy, and what grade he would give himself.


He said he would give himself an "incomplete" grade. What would you


give him? I think that's right. I think there was a real prospect of


a situation like the US Great Depression, in 2009. If you looked


at what happened when the President came into office, employment was


falling more rapidly, GDP was falling more rapidly, stock prices


were falling more rapidly. All of it, exports, world trade was


falling more rapidly all of it was falling more rapidly than in the


fall of 1929, and yet, for all the problems we have had a very


different path. With nothing like the kind of complete collapse of


the economy that the US saw after 1929. That's because of what the


President did. What grade would you give George Osborne for his


management of the economy? Economic performance has been considerably


better in the United States over the last several years than it has


been in the United Kingdom. And I believe that relates centrally to a


strategic choice, the United States made that, that the British


authorities did not make. That was the strategic choice to pursue a


strategy of fiscal expansion in the short run, to grow the economy,


followed by a commitment to long run fiscal consolidation. In


contrast, in Britain, it has been all fiscal consolidation, all the


time, and I think it is something that history will not look back on


kindly. Sounds to me as if you were giving him something like a D minus


in terms of grades? As we pass the mid-term exam, there is real cause


for concern about failure. Given what is happening in the British


economy. It's life, Jim, but not as we know


it, as Dr Spock never said. The evidence of what is already


happening to the Arctic, subjects is may be too late to do anything


about climate change. We will just have to adapt, big time. It is more


than this year's awful summer, because scientists have told


Newsnight, that the disappearance of Arctic ice, is effectively


doubling mankind's contribution to global warming, which rather raises


the question of why we should bother. Not driving to the shops


any more. We will be discussing that with Peter Lilley, who has


written a new report, which can be summarised as Don't Panic, and the


leader of the Green Party in a few moments. We have known for some


time that the Arctic ice is melting at a rapid rate. New figures we


have been given, subjects the impact of that melt is doubling


mankind's contribution to climate change. Now, when we first saw


these beautiful shots of earth from space, curtesy of the Apollo as


trau not, it triggered the green -- astronauts, it triggered the green


movement. But that view has changed. This is what the Arctic looked like


in the summer of 1979, and this is what it looked like in 2007, half


of the ice had gone. One of Britain's leading ice scientists


predict all of the ice could be gone at the North Pole, in summer,


within a few years. Well this year there has been another big melt,


they are still a few days away from the official minimum.


Professor Peter Wadhams has spent the summer on the Arctic ice, using


lasers and rob robot submarines to get a picture of what is left. He


has also taken part in a BBC Two documentary series, broadcast next


month, called Operation Iceberg. On an area, twice the size of


Manhatten, where he had to dodge the odd polar bear. He has seen for


himself the dramatic decline in sea ice. 30 years ago, then there was


typically about eight million square kilometres of ice, left in


the Arctic in the summer. And by 2007, five years ago, that had had


halved, it had gone down to four million. This year it has gone down


below that, and heading for oblivion. And the ice is also


getting thinner. The volume of ice at the pole, naturally goes up in


the winter and down in the summer. It has been declining over the last


30 years. It is now at the lowest level since records began.


Estimates that the North Pole could be ice-free in summer in a few


years, contrasts with the official view of the Met Office. That the


Arctic will not be completely free of ice before the summers of 2030.


But it's the effect of losing all that white ice, that matters.


The polar icecap acts as a giant parasol, reflecting sunlight back


into the atmosphere, in what is known as the albedo effect. 30


years ago, the ice looked like this. The Arctic ice covered 2% of the


earth's surface, reflecting most of the sun's ray. But half of that ice


has now gone. And open water absorbs far more of the sun's


energy. Professor Wadhams told us, parts of


the Arctic Ocean are now as warm in summer, as the North Sea in winter.


Over that 1% of the surface of the earth, you are replacing a bright


surface, which reflects nearly all the radiation falling on it, by a


dark surface, which absorbs nearly all. The difference, the extra


radiation that is absorbed, from our calculation, the equivalent of


20 years of additional carbon dioxide, being added by man. If his


calculation are correct, that means, over recent decades, the melting


icecap has put as much heat into the system as all the C067892 we


have generated at that time. If the ice continues to decline at the


current rate, it could play a bigger role than greenhouse gases.


Professored Wadhams suggests there are uncertainties, cloud cover over


the Arctic could change, and help reflect back some of the sun's


radiation. But then, another greenhouse gas, me tain, currently


trapped in the Arctic methane, currently trapped in the Arctic,


could be released and make matters worse. What does it mean for us?


could end up with more of the kind of weather that deluged so much of


June and July. As the ice melts, this pumps a lot of heat into the


lower atmosphere. That has an important effect on the jetstream,


and the storm track that impinges on Europe, and changes the weather


time scales. Some studies suggest there is increased wet summers over


the UK as the ice melts. Other suggests the winter weather could


be more snowy and cold, due to the ice decline. It all raises


questions, for both sides of the debate about how best to respond to


the changing climate. Do we need another new Manhatten project,


ambitious engineering skeefpls, such as mirrors in space, or


artificial seeding of clouds to keep the panel cool. Does it


reinforce calls to save the Arctic, by cutting carbon emissions.


The very question we want to discuss with Natalie Bennett, the


new leader of the Green Party, and Peter Lilley, who has written a


robust rebuttal on the stern committee findings. If that


analysis is correct, about what has happened to the Arctic, and what


the consequence is. There is precious little point in making any


of the adjustments to our lifestyle that you in the Green Party seem to


be suggesting? Not at all. We can still make a big impact in cutting


carbon emissions. And we can also act in ways that make society


better and stronger. We can invest in the future of our society, we


must do it now. We just saw the figures in terms of the ice melt,


we need to act and now. If the effect of the melting icecap, or


melted icecap, is, as is suggested, that will make dam


Damn all difference? -- damn all difference? Let's wait, we want to


bring industries and farming back to Britain. That is entirely


another point to climate change? need to shorten the supply chain to


use less fossil fuels, so no carbon emissions. If the damage is already


done, what is the point? We can reduce the further damage if we act


now and immediate low. We need to do that. I was told to come on the


programme and not discuss the science, to take the UN inter-


governmental panel on climate change assessment as a correct pro-


jex on what the likely trends were going to be -- projection on what


the likely trends were going to be. You presented something that


purports to be new evidence, which contains something new, it is not


peer reviewed by a well known alarmist, and bun come, compared


with the IPCC. The IPCC's prediction is this they say sea ice


is predicted to shrink in the Arctic and Antarctic, and in all


scenario, in some projections, the late summer ice disappears almost


entirely by the latter part of the 21st century. They present a graph


of all the different projections, none of them shows it melting


before the year 2070, on a regular basis in the summer. It used to


melt in other times n the 1930s it was warmer in the Antarctic. We


have a contentious piece of filming. It is the BBC's policy, not to


broadcast anyone who thinks the IPCC is excessive. You do think


climate change is happening? I do, I want to work on the IPCC science,


not something concocted by the BBC, in an alarmist fashion, which is


not peer reviewed. We're not sufficiently co-ordinated to manage


to concoct something like that? did, it just had. It was a report


printed by the science editor, who -- presented by a science editor


who interviewed someone who probably knows more than three of


us. You know better than him? know what the IPCC says, and I


think their assessment of the science is better than Professor


Wadhams, who is a well known alarmist. We know that consistently,


all of the indicators of climate change, or global warning, have


moved much faster than scientists predicted. Everything has been at


the upper end of projection, or on the projections. The fact is,


really, Mr Lilley, what you represent, are the last throws of a


dying argument. The -- gros of a dying argument. The geological


Association of America, last year, entitled its conference, as being


about the anthropist scene, we have created a new geological era.


is no dispute about the two of you with weather anything is change


anything the climate. What needs to be done or what can be done?


think we need to project forward, what is likely to happen, on the


basis of the best scientific evidence. And the IPCC provides


that, not so much BBC person, a bit like. That then work out the


economics, and only do things where the costs are less than the benefit.


That is what we ought to be doing. I have assessed the Stern Report,


and looked at that, it says even on the worst scenario that depict, if


we take the action that he proposes, the costs will exceed the benefits


for the first century. We are talking of doing something where


any returns are going to accrue to people more than a century hence.


Should we be going that, the Green Party may think so. Do you want us


all to stop flying in the Green Party now? No, we don't want you to


start crying. That is not what Stern proposes,


let as be sensible, you are being unfair to the Green Party. What we


would like to do is relocalise our industries, bring farming back into


the UK. Stop flying peas from Peru and beans from Kenya. We want jobs,


we want to bring industries back into the UK. All very much positive


for the UK, and are good to reducing the carbon emissions at


the same time. We can insulate people's homes, so people have


warmer and more comfortable homes and and lower fuel bills. You think


its benefits way outweigh the costs? We can bring a more healthy


life. Timing is key here? Let's look at the situation of the green


business. The green economy now accounts for about 9% of the


British economy. That is about the same as the finance industries. 5%


growth rate every year, year on year. A third of the growth in the


UK, last year, came from the green industries. What do you say to


that? Let's, if we spend lots on supsidies, we will get a growth in


those subsidised industries, at the expense ift other countries paying


taxes. If you spent a lot of money building wind turbines, you will


get employment in erecting them. You will get less employment in


erecting gas turbines that are more efficient, because you are not


producing those. Let's leave it there. I do want to resent the idea


we should impoverish the people of keenia and Peru, by stopping


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Jeremy Paxman.

Why is there so much child poverty in working families? Economist Larry Summers speaks.

New evidence of melting Arctic ice.

Download Subtitles