:00:13. > :00:17.David Cameron will tomorrow promise a referendum on Europe, if the
:00:17. > :00:21.Tories win the next election. He plans to renegotiate terms with
:00:21. > :00:25.Europe, then ask the people if they want to be in or out. Our political
:00:25. > :00:29.editor has been given a preview. I've got the details of the pledges
:00:29. > :00:32.the Prime Minister will make tomorrow, and the stark language he
:00:33. > :00:36.will use. Also tonight, Britain has a proud
:00:36. > :00:40.military past, but does it have a feeble military future. Our
:00:41. > :00:44.ambition has always been great, but as the biggest single round of job
:00:45. > :00:50.losses to the Armed Forces is announced, are we now dangerously
:00:50. > :00:54.overstreched. If the world looks in ten or 20 years time as insecure as
:00:54. > :00:57.it does today, it may be a risk that comes home to bite you. Is it
:00:57. > :01:03.time we stopped the soaring rhetoric on defence and helping the
:01:03. > :01:07.world, and admit, we can't. And this: Well done. What women want,
:01:07. > :01:11.in the midst of a recession, and why they are usually the hardest
:01:11. > :01:15.hit. I would love to be able to give my
:01:16. > :01:19.daughter everything her friends have. It just makes me feel a bad
:01:19. > :01:25.parent, it makes me feel a failure in some ways.
:01:25. > :01:32.And, the superchef, Raymond Blanc, on why we should dig our heels in,
:01:32. > :01:41.and keep eating mackerel. In terms of nutrition, it has the best
:01:41. > :01:44.nutrition that you can possibly have.
:01:44. > :01:48.Hello, good evening. This programme has been told that first thing
:01:48. > :01:53.tomorrow, in a heavily-anticipated speech, the Prime Minister will
:01:53. > :01:57.offer a referendum on Europe, if the Conservatives win the 2015
:01:57. > :02:02.election. The Tories will set out a manifesto pledge to ask the British
:02:02. > :02:06.people for a mandate, to renegotiate a new settlement on
:02:06. > :02:10.European powers. It could then be taken to an in or out referendum.
:02:10. > :02:14.The details of the speech are being coming through to us -- have been
:02:14. > :02:16.coming through to us in the last minutes. We will ask a former
:02:16. > :02:19.European Prime Minister his thoughts on what we are about to
:02:19. > :02:25.hear in a moment. First Allegra Stratton joins us now.
:02:25. > :02:30.Tell us all, what are you hearing? First off, he kills the idea of a
:02:30. > :02:34.referendum now, as "a false choice", you need to renegotiate a
:02:34. > :02:38.referendum on the status quo out would be a false choice. The speech
:02:38. > :02:44.has plenty of rhetoric for both sides. It is forcefully euro-
:02:44. > :02:50.sceptic in place, but there is a lot of pro-European and flour rid
:02:50. > :02:53.praise. What are the politics? opposition say that having this
:02:53. > :02:56.referendum Britain sleepwalks towards the exit of Europe, because
:02:56. > :03:00.if renegotiation is not successful and not enough is brought back,
:03:00. > :03:05.people will say they will go out any way. David Cameron turns that
:03:05. > :03:08.language back on its opponents and says, opinion in this country is
:03:09. > :03:11.such that if you don't do something about it anger will rise, we need
:03:11. > :03:17.to put this question to the public and deal with it. The sleepwalking
:03:17. > :03:20.to the exit is the charge he lays at the door of opponents.
:03:20. > :03:25.Presumably concessions now to backbenchers? The most striking
:03:25. > :03:30.thing about the speech, besides rhetoric, is the quote here. What
:03:30. > :03:34.the euro-sceptics wanted was some binding legislation, such as any
:03:34. > :03:37.complexion of Government in 2015 would have to go in to the next few
:03:37. > :03:43.years pledging a referendum. He hasn't gone for binding legislation,
:03:43. > :03:46.but it is this idea that he would put through draft legislation
:03:46. > :03:52.towards the end of parliament, and if Conservatives are in Government
:03:52. > :03:55.they would act quickly and the referendum in the first half,
:03:55. > :03:59.2017/18. It is more than we expected, but I'm not sure it is
:03:59. > :04:02.far enough. On the home front, will they be happy with that? There is
:04:02. > :04:06.language that we have seen tonight that will make happy, let's
:04:06. > :04:09.remember there are euro-sceptics in his own cabinet, there is language
:04:09. > :04:14.for them. But then it is clear that the Prime Minister feels, and the
:04:14. > :04:19.next quote coming up, is that once he has got renegotiation, he will
:04:19. > :04:24.want that argue for an "in" vote. The language he then uses is very
:04:24. > :04:30.forcefully pro-European. Take us through that? The key things is,
:04:30. > :04:33."over the coming months and years, I will not rest until the debate is
:04:33. > :04:41.won. For the future of my country. For the success of the European
:04:41. > :04:45.Union, and the prosperity of the generations to come ". Some said it
:04:45. > :04:50.was Churchillian in the words. will he say tomorrow? He will give
:04:50. > :04:55.us five principles, which includes the European Union moving on
:04:55. > :04:59.fairness, demonstration commitment to fairness and they are lofty and
:04:59. > :05:02.vague. He has avoided giving, what some people hoped, a scorecard, a
:05:02. > :05:05.check list of things he would bring back, if he can't bring them back,
:05:05. > :05:09.whether he has been successful or not. Instead, he has given us
:05:09. > :05:12.something, that could, in the fullness of time, end up being all
:05:12. > :05:20.things to all men. Fascinating stuff. We will get reaction to all
:05:20. > :05:24.that straight away. We can put that to the Tory MP George Eustace in a
:05:24. > :05:31.moment. We speak now to the former Prime Minister of Belgium, and
:05:31. > :05:36.currently an MEP. Good to have you on the programme, Mr Verhofstatt.
:05:36. > :05:44.We understand tomorrow that a Conservative Government would set
:05:44. > :05:49.an "in", "out "referendum on Europe after 2015, your response?
:05:49. > :05:53.basic idea of Mr Cameron that he wants to renegotiate individually
:05:53. > :05:58.the position of Britain inside the EU. I can tell you that it is
:05:58. > :06:00.impossible to have an inhe have stable renegotiation of the British
:06:00. > :06:05.position. Why? Because that would be the end of the European Union.
:06:05. > :06:08.If you start to give an individual status to every member-state, to
:06:08. > :06:14.the 27 member states of the union, that should be the end of the union,
:06:14. > :06:18.and the end of the single market. Because then the French could say,
:06:18. > :06:22.I want also something, and a status with no competition rules, because
:06:22. > :06:27.I don't like the competition rules. The Germans could say, we want a
:06:27. > :06:31.single market, but not for services. We like more a single market only
:06:31. > :06:36.in goods. So you see, that an individual renegotiation in the
:06:36. > :06:40.coming years of an individual country, for an individual status,
:06:40. > :06:43.is quite impossible. What shall happen is that after the next
:06:43. > :06:47.election in 2014, European elections, we shall see a
:06:47. > :06:50.collective renegotiation, because we need a more integrated Europe,
:06:50. > :06:54.and then Britain can choose, and the British population can choose,
:06:54. > :06:58.if they want to stay in or they want to get out. What you are
:06:58. > :07:03.saying, essentially, is everyone will be talking about renegotiation,
:07:03. > :07:06.not that Cameron can't, but that everybody will? Well, everybody
:07:07. > :07:12.knows that we need a more integrated Europe, certainly also
:07:12. > :07:18.to have a sustainable monetary union, a sustainable single
:07:18. > :07:21.currency. Everybody agrees to have after 2015 a debate on a more
:07:21. > :07:28.integrated Europe. What Mr Cameron is looking for is something quite
:07:28. > :07:30.different. My impression is that he is looking for what I call a
:07:30. > :07:33.second-class membership of the European Union. And a second-class
:07:33. > :07:38.membership is a bad thing for the interests of Great Britain. Because,
:07:38. > :07:41.as you know, it is like a little bit the status of Norway, and
:07:41. > :07:46.Switzerland. Countries who are paying for the European Union, but
:07:46. > :07:49.have no say in the European Union. And I think that's bad, bad and
:07:49. > :07:55.certainly not in the interests of the British industry and the
:07:55. > :08:02.British economy. Does that worry you now, do you think it will lead
:08:02. > :08:07.to a British exit? It is a very dangerous game that he is playing.
:08:07. > :08:11.At an individual renegotiation that is not possible, everybody knows
:08:11. > :08:18.that, because otherwise you have 27 member-states who are asking for
:08:18. > :08:23.that. What we can see is that he is sleepwalking to the door of a real
:08:23. > :08:29.exit of Great Britain. And I think that should be a very bad thing. As
:08:29. > :08:36.we know, 50% of the exports of the British economy are going to the
:08:36. > :08:40.continent. More than �158 billion pounds, that is the figure.
:08:40. > :08:45.What position should European leaders take now, when they hear
:08:45. > :08:52.these words, should they be helping him to stay in, helping him to
:08:52. > :08:56.renegotiate, or helping him to win a referendum? Or none of those?
:08:56. > :09:00.don't know, a referendum on what? Because he's, first of all, saying
:09:00. > :09:03.he wants to renegotiate the position, and then he shall have a
:09:03. > :09:06.referendum. It is like Lord Heseltine has said, we don't know
:09:06. > :09:10.what it is about. We don't know what even the question of the
:09:10. > :09:16.referendum shall be. Isn't it in Europe's interest to try to help
:09:16. > :09:25.him to renegotiate? What we need to do is to have a collective debate
:09:25. > :09:29.on this. A common debate on this, after or in 2015, how we can
:09:29. > :09:34.integrate more of Europe, how we can reform the European Union. How
:09:34. > :09:38.we can manage the single currency. How we can better combat and fight
:09:38. > :09:41.the crisis. But that is a totally different story than what is
:09:41. > :09:45.happening now. Let's be honest, what he's doing for the moment is
:09:45. > :09:50.to try to solve his problems that he has internally in the
:09:50. > :09:54.Conservative Party. Because he has a number of people in favour of
:09:54. > :09:57.Europe, and on the other hand he has euro-sceptics under the
:09:57. > :10:00.pressure of UKIP. The best way to understand what is happening now,
:10:00. > :10:03.the best way to understand what is happening is to listen to the
:10:03. > :10:09.American friends of Great Britain, they don't understand it.
:10:09. > :10:12.From the European perspective, if he comes and says we need to
:10:12. > :10:18.renegotiate the emergency break for financial services, or repatriation
:10:18. > :10:22.of powers for the Working Time Directive, or policing opt-out,
:10:22. > :10:29.will European leaders be at all prepared to listen to that, or will
:10:29. > :10:33.they say no, no, no? I think they shall say no. And they shall say a
:10:33. > :10:39.second thing, Mr Cameron wait a little bit, come back in 2015, when
:10:39. > :10:42.we shall negotiate a new basic Europe, going in the direction of
:10:42. > :10:45.more integrated Europe, then you ask the British people if they are
:10:45. > :10:50.in favour origins. Very good to talk to you. Guy
:10:50. > :10:56.Verhofstadt, thank you. As we mentioned we have George Eustace,
:10:56. > :10:59.Conservative MP, who fronts a group of MPs campaigning for the new UK-
:10:59. > :11:02.EU relationship. First your response to this, you heard very
:11:02. > :11:06.clearly from a former Belgian Prime Minister, that there is no chance
:11:06. > :11:09.of a renegotiation, it takes you straight to in or out? I don't
:11:09. > :11:13.agree with that. We needed a much more mature debate about this. It
:11:13. > :11:17.is really not acceptable for other countries to say we refuse to talk
:11:17. > :11:20.to Britain, we are going to put our head in the hands, or even engage
:11:20. > :11:24.on these issues. His point is if Britain does it everyone else will?
:11:24. > :11:28.And we want them all to, there will be a new treaty, I think, towards
:11:28. > :11:31.the end of 2014, 2015. When every country in Europe will be talking
:11:31. > :11:36.about how to sort this mess out. How do we make the European Union
:11:36. > :11:39.fit for purpose in the 21st sent treatment those trapped in the euro
:11:39. > :11:43.it may involve deeper integration and co-ordination of tax policies.
:11:43. > :11:46.For those of us outside we may take powers back. We need a grown-up
:11:46. > :11:50.debate about that, and not get into the idea that we won't even talk
:11:50. > :11:53.about it. Let's get back to square one, we now know that tomorrow
:11:53. > :11:58.morning, roughly 8.15, or whatever. We are going to have a commitment
:11:58. > :12:05.from a Conservative Prime Minister, to a referendum, should that have a
:12:05. > :12:11.red line around it for any future coalition? Look, David Cameron will
:12:11. > :12:14.tomorrow set out a Conservative view. A commitment for the next
:12:14. > :12:18.parliament, what a Conservative Government would do. I'm very clear
:12:18. > :12:22.on that. Is it something you would put a red line around, saying under
:12:22. > :12:29.no circumstances can that be given away or compromised? I would, but
:12:29. > :12:37.we're going format turt next time. Getting into what -- for maturity
:12:37. > :12:41.next time. Getting into what might happen, we want what can be
:12:41. > :12:44.renegotiated in the next election. You could be in the same position
:12:44. > :12:47.and he would have to decide whether that was something he absolutely
:12:47. > :12:52.pledged to do, straight down from the manifesto, or whether that was
:12:52. > :12:56.something that reemerged in a coalition manifesto, that was
:12:56. > :13:01.watered down? It's possible. This is the first coalition Government
:13:01. > :13:03.this country has had for many years. The reality is we need people, it
:13:03. > :13:09.might entertain other parties at the moment, to really focus their
:13:09. > :13:12.mind and think if you do want a resettlement with Europe and a
:13:12. > :13:16.referendum, you have to get behind David Cameron and support what he
:13:16. > :13:19.says tomorrow. It was starkly laid out from Guy Verhofstadt, this idea
:13:19. > :13:23.that the whole of Europe will be renegotiated, maybe there are lots
:13:23. > :13:27.of things that lots of countries have to renegotiate, would that be
:13:27. > :13:32.enough? I think it is absolutely fine. It is what we want to see.
:13:32. > :13:36.There are other countries that have problems with aspects of European
:13:36. > :13:41.policy. Germany is in graech of many of the home affairs directives
:13:41. > :13:45.at the moment, and the data retention directive, they want to
:13:45. > :13:50.get rid of that. Let's have a grown-up discussion about bits we
:13:50. > :13:54.want to get rid of. There is no problem with that. You heard the
:13:54. > :13:57.no-no-no from Brussels, a second ago, if that is the end result, if
:13:57. > :13:59.throughout all the months and effort of renegotiation that
:14:00. > :14:04.doesn't happen, would you change your position on EU membership and
:14:04. > :14:08.say, sorry, it's time for out? will see what happens. But I don't
:14:09. > :14:14.think we should tolerate that kind of no-no-no attitude. You have
:14:14. > :14:17.heard the views of one Belgian MEP, there are many others. A former
:14:17. > :14:20.Prime Minister, a leader. Tomorrow you will hear the views of a
:14:21. > :14:23.current British Prime Minister, and one of the major countries in the
:14:23. > :14:26.European Union, it is our European Union as much as anyone else's, we
:14:26. > :14:31.shouldn't be afraid to advance our views about the future and what
:14:31. > :14:34.should be done about its failures. Unless it confronts its failures it
:14:34. > :14:38.doesn't have a future. At a time when the Government is talking
:14:38. > :14:42.about the urgent need for growth, he will commit us to five years of
:14:42. > :14:47.instability, with major trading partners? I don't agree with that.
:14:47. > :14:51.People say this about the euro debate, there was uncertainty that
:14:51. > :14:54.Britain didn't want to join the euro, and all the Japanese and
:14:54. > :14:58.American investors would leave t didn't happen. It is not true.
:14:58. > :15:05.There are many businesses who would like to see Paris come back on
:15:05. > :15:10.things like employment and social policy which would improve our
:15:10. > :15:16.competitiveness. You heard your no- no-no was not welcomed or tolerated
:15:16. > :15:19.here. Do you care if Britain leaves the EU? It is a very bad thing for
:15:19. > :15:24.the European Union. It is a very bad thing for the single market.
:15:24. > :15:27.But it is certainly a very bad thing for Great Britain itself. As
:15:27. > :15:32.I already indicated, the interest of Great Britain is to be inside
:15:32. > :15:37.the single market, and inside the European Union. And may fear is
:15:37. > :15:41.that what Mr Cameron is doing now, is creating uncertainty for years
:15:41. > :15:46.and for years. In this important position of the British economy
:15:46. > :15:49.inside the European Union. All this, for what? In fact, I hear it very
:15:49. > :15:53.well, it is a political game, it is a game inside the Conservative
:15:53. > :15:55.Party. If you vote for us, then you can have a referendum. So that's
:15:55. > :15:58.clear enough. It is a political game, not in the interests of the
:15:58. > :16:00.country, I think. Very interesting to hear from both
:16:00. > :16:05.of you. Thank you very much.
:16:05. > :16:10.There is no avoiding war, it can only be postponed to the advantage
:16:10. > :16:14.of others, wrote Machiavelli, a ruler presumably untroubled by a
:16:14. > :16:19.third round of defence spending cuts. Just hours after the Prime
:16:19. > :16:23.Minister warned of a new front of Islamist Tory terror, he announced
:16:23. > :16:29.what will ultimately bring the avoidance of war, or strategic
:16:29. > :16:34.defence, cuts to army numbers. The Government believes the numbers of
:16:34. > :16:39.5,300 soldiers to lose their jobs as it plans to reduce the army by a
:16:39. > :16:46.fifth. How will Britain, who likes to see itself in the vanguard of
:16:46. > :16:50.defence, see itself. The rhetoric of liberalal interventionism
:16:51. > :16:56.falling victim to dwindling resources. Draw-downs and
:16:56. > :17:02.mobilisations would come as no surprise to the old war horses, who
:17:02. > :17:05.stare down Whitehall, war, economic depression were well understood to
:17:05. > :17:09.them. Today's bugetry battlefield is different. The cuts are
:17:09. > :17:13.happening at a time of considerable global instability, and there is
:17:13. > :17:17.precious little left to trim. What I think many of us are
:17:17. > :17:23.concerned about is with the significant reduction of the
:17:23. > :17:27.regular army from 10 2,000 down to 28,000, although mitigated by
:17:27. > :17:33.30,000, if we can get them, trained and recruited reservists, that
:17:33. > :17:36.might be all right. It does carry a fair degree of risk. If the world
:17:36. > :17:41.looks in 10-20 years time as insecure as it does today, it may
:17:41. > :17:46.be a risk that comes home to bite us. After Waterloo the army was cut
:17:46. > :17:50.back drastically, to less than half the 82,000 that represents the
:17:50. > :17:56.Government's new target. But you have to go back to the Crimea in
:17:56. > :18:00.the 1850s to find the last time the army of that size. Then old
:18:01. > :18:04.soldiers could be pensioned off without ceremony. But the cut of
:18:04. > :18:08.5,300, announced today, will require many compulsory
:18:08. > :18:13.redundancies. And these days, that requires careful political
:18:13. > :18:18.management. Whilst we need to make up to 5,300
:18:18. > :18:22.army personnel redundant, the programme will not adversely affect
:18:22. > :18:27.operations in Afghanistan. As with previous tranches, there are a
:18:27. > :18:31.number of important exclusions from the programme. Critically, those
:18:31. > :18:36.preparing for, deployed on or recovering from operations on the
:18:36. > :18:39.18th of June will be exempt from this tranche. But the Commons
:18:39. > :18:42.announcement has triggered attacks from the opposition. This is really
:18:42. > :18:46.difficult news for the members of the British army and their families,
:18:46. > :18:51.a really dark day for them, the fact that some will be sacked, who
:18:51. > :18:56.don't volunteer for redundancy. I think it hasn't been handled probr
:18:56. > :19:00.properly there is a promise that the -- properly. There is a promise
:19:00. > :19:03.that the gap will be filled with reservist, we support the idea of
:19:03. > :19:06.reservists, the idea that business is ready to employ that number of
:19:06. > :19:09.reservists and allow them to be released for military service in a
:19:09. > :19:13.way that will be demanded in the future, isn't really prepared yet.
:19:13. > :19:17.The MoD may have been at pains to point out those patrolling
:19:17. > :19:22.Afghanistan won't be sacked, but there are unanswered questions
:19:22. > :19:26.about just how soon after their return they might become eligible
:19:26. > :19:30.for compulsory redundancy? And the effect, in units where people have
:19:30. > :19:36.been risking their lives is not good.
:19:36. > :19:39.I think there is a real resentment amongst those soldiers, that now
:19:39. > :19:43.they find themselves having done all of this time, put in all of
:19:43. > :19:47.this risk to their own lives, suddenly finding redundancies being
:19:47. > :19:51.foisted upon them. Their own regiments, regiments that have
:19:51. > :19:54.fought bravely for the last several years, being disbanded. I think
:19:54. > :20:00.that is quite a hard and difficult pill to swallow. All three services
:20:00. > :20:06.are being cut, but the army, by most. And the desire to reduce
:20:06. > :20:10.compulsory redundancies has fed critical skills shortages.
:20:10. > :20:14.Intelligence corps linguists and interrogators are 55% below
:20:14. > :20:19.strength. Electronic warfare operators, 45%. And drone pilots
:20:19. > :20:25.45% too. But compulsory sackings will still
:20:25. > :20:29.be necessary, and that's hit morale. It is a major leadership challenge,
:20:29. > :20:34.and the current chief of the general staff and his subordinates,
:20:34. > :20:38.will have to manage very kairlly the morale of the army -- carefully
:20:38. > :20:41.the morale of the army of today, to make sure it stays focused and with
:20:41. > :20:48.its job in hand and maintain high morale. On the frontline in
:20:48. > :20:50.Afghanistan, this won't be a problem, until we drew from there,
:20:50. > :20:54.-- withdrew from there, because people are clear of the job they
:20:55. > :20:58.are doing. But at home people will be wondering if they will be in the
:20:58. > :21:02.next redundancy pool and will the job last. There is a challenge
:21:02. > :21:05.there. Is the Government entering into new commitments at a time of
:21:05. > :21:10.deep defence cuts. Downing Street and the MoD insist they don't want
:21:10. > :21:16.to send large numbers of combat troops, or fighter aircraft to Mali,
:21:16. > :21:19.let alone place like Syria. But if that is the case, it does beg the
:21:19. > :21:24.question, whether announcements such as yesterday's, of a new
:21:24. > :21:28.strategic approach in North Africa, really amount to all that much. In
:21:28. > :21:32.the past too there were Governments that tried to steer clear of
:21:32. > :21:35.foreign entanglements, but time and again events frustrated their
:21:35. > :21:38.calculation. For the current cuts to be made without risk, Britain
:21:38. > :21:48.would have to step back from military intervention overseas, for
:21:48. > :21:49.
:21:49. > :21:53.many years to come. Joining me now are General Sir Mike Jackson, Lord
:21:53. > :21:58.West, Security Minister under the last Government, and the
:21:58. > :22:04.Conservative MP Penny Mordant, who is a Navy reservist and sits on the
:22:04. > :22:07.Commons Select Committee. Is a smaller army a worse army?
:22:07. > :22:11.necessarily, the question I would ask, it was raised at the end of
:22:11. > :22:15.the clip you showed, is the language used by the Prime Minister,
:22:15. > :22:17.this interventionist language, a bit spooky, rather like Tony Blair
:22:17. > :22:20.really, it doesn't sit well with the pressure there is on the
:22:20. > :22:25.defence budget. One would have thought after the Strategic Defence
:22:25. > :22:28.and Security Review, in 2010, when a lot of us warned that there was
:22:28. > :22:31.no allowance for strategic shock, we then had the Arab awakening, or
:22:32. > :22:37.spring, whatever you want to call it, immediately the Prime Minister
:22:37. > :22:40.got us involved in Libya, with all of the pressures it had, a tiny
:22:40. > :22:42.operation, you would have thought the National Security Council and
:22:42. > :22:47.Prime Minister would have said, we need to review this. Instead we
:22:47. > :22:53.have just had another �1.3 billion worth of cuts. Surely you can't
:22:53. > :22:56.talk the talk, and walk the walk, unless you are spending the money.
:22:56. > :22:59.How does the Government reconcile that, this talk of a generational
:22:59. > :23:05.struggle with Islamist terrorists, which David Cameron made just
:23:05. > :23:09.yesterday, and then these cuts? think one thing that is forgotten
:23:09. > :23:12.in this debate, is it is not only the headlines that you see in
:23:12. > :23:16.Afghanistan and what happens in North Africa, it is also the day-
:23:16. > :23:23.to-day work the Armed Forces do. I'm sure Lord West would agree,
:23:23. > :23:28.keeping our trade in the sea open. We desperately need to maintain
:23:28. > :23:32.those capabilities. We don't need it to be smaller, then? We have to
:23:32. > :23:36.retain investment in. There but would have been crazy is to carry
:23:36. > :23:39.on with the defence budget that was massively oversubscribed, and not
:23:39. > :23:43.balance the books and come up with radical ways of how we can get
:23:43. > :23:46.better value out of the defence budget. Reservists is one way of
:23:46. > :23:50.doing that. We will have to maintain spending. The Prime
:23:50. > :23:54.Minister said yesterday, and we have been doing this, is putting
:23:54. > :23:59.money into actually preventing crises from happening. The books
:23:59. > :24:04.aren't balanced, are they? They are, when we came into office. Force
:24:04. > :24:08.2020 needs a 1% increase from 2015, and the Treasury have only allowed
:24:08. > :24:12.a 1% increase in procurement budget? When we came into power,
:24:12. > :24:16.and you take the overspend on programmes and the fiscal reality
:24:16. > :24:20.added in, the deficit was �74 billion, that is on the figures, we
:24:20. > :24:24.have to close that gap. The people that get short changed if we don't
:24:24. > :24:30.do that, are the Armed Forces. We short change them in kit, and we
:24:30. > :24:33.short change them in training. General Sir Mike Jackson, if the
:24:33. > :24:37.army is 82,000, are there things it cannot do with that number. What
:24:37. > :24:42.does it rule out? I don't think it rules out anything, it is how the
:24:42. > :24:46.army is structured. I would wish to actually stand back a little from
:24:46. > :24:54.the ding-dong over this amount of money and that. There are strategic
:24:54. > :24:59.choices here. Modern day politics is largely about consumption, today.
:24:59. > :25:03.I understand that. It is the stuff of day-to-day politics. But, and I
:25:04. > :25:09.think the Prime Minister has flagged this up. We are looking at
:25:09. > :25:14.not only the last decade, but arguably problems over the next
:25:14. > :25:21.decade or two. I think when you look at it in that way, it probably
:25:21. > :25:25.is time to just step back, not a billion pound here and there but to
:25:25. > :25:31.step back and, perhaps, revisit that strategic review, which was
:25:32. > :25:35.done, what, two and a bit years ago. I'm not sure that the balance is
:25:35. > :25:38.there. That's what I said t needs to be
:25:38. > :25:42.reviewed. Interestingly, he talks about the generational thing
:25:42. > :25:46.against terrorism, when I took over as Security Minister in 2007, you
:25:46. > :25:51.filmed me, the BBC, and I said, this is a generational campaign,
:25:51. > :25:54.this will go on for 30 years, and so he knew the, we knew the sort of
:25:54. > :25:57.investment that was needed. You are always going to be out of date,
:25:57. > :26:00.with something like a defence budget, you can't possibly know the
:26:00. > :26:03.wars you will be fighting? whole point of the defence budget
:26:04. > :26:09.is to make sure we have a spectrum of capablities to meet the
:26:09. > :26:12.unexpected. That's it, the only thing we have consistently had with
:26:12. > :26:17.our defence strategy is we have failed to predict the next threat.
:26:17. > :26:20.And that is a very sensible basis on which to go forward. Quite, I
:26:20. > :26:25.criticise the SDSR for not being strategic enough, but when people
:26:25. > :26:30.want to go and reopen the SDSL, what they are saying is they want
:26:30. > :26:34.to reevaluate the budget. I'm sorry you have to get the horse and cart
:26:34. > :26:39.in the right order. What we have to do is get more out of the budget,
:26:39. > :26:43.and ask questions like, how do we afford future surface fleet. Maybe
:26:43. > :26:47.the questions we should be asking now, is that our rhetoric is wrong,
:26:47. > :26:51.we shouldn't think of ourselves as this interventionist power that has
:26:51. > :26:55.to save the world? That is a strategic political choice as to
:26:55. > :26:59.whether we think in those terms or not. Maybe the public would like
:26:59. > :27:03.that now, maybe that is what they want, ten years of not being
:27:03. > :27:06.interventionist? If one looks at our little global village, actually
:27:06. > :27:12.that stability around the world is very important to our country. We
:27:12. > :27:15.are the fifth-richest country in the world, we run all world
:27:15. > :27:21.shipping from the this country, we need that stability in the world.
:27:21. > :27:26.The Americans are retraench trenching, they are pivoting
:27:26. > :27:30.towards the Pacific. There is much more we could be doing. We need to
:27:30. > :27:35.think much more long-term about how we afford our future capabilities.
:27:36. > :27:40.Lord West is right, if you look at how much of our fuel comes by sea,
:27:40. > :27:45.90% of everything in the viewers' living room will have come to this
:27:45. > :27:48.country by sea. David Cameron once called himself a liberal
:27:48. > :27:51.Conservative, he didn't want to be convening necessarily in the
:27:51. > :27:55.affairs of the world. Now, there is more the language of Blair, he
:27:55. > :27:58.sounds as if he's more committed to the rest of the world? You are
:27:58. > :28:02.putting this almost in party political terms. Cameron speaks
:28:02. > :28:07.like Blair, we should get away from this. That is not party political
:28:07. > :28:11.is it? It might just be that strategic circumstances hold
:28:11. > :28:16.whichever Government is in power. And you have to come to terms with
:28:16. > :28:18.those strategic circumstances. need to be investing in
:28:18. > :28:23.capabilities that prevent stuff from happening, as well as enabling
:28:23. > :28:27.us to respond where we want to. One of my criticisms of the SDSR is it
:28:27. > :28:30.cut our carrier capability. When the carriers come back into
:28:30. > :28:34.Portsmouth, that will be a massive deterrent to things happening, as
:28:34. > :28:39.well as helping us to respond to conflict and humanitarian
:28:39. > :28:44.situations. It is the need to meet the unexpective, that is the thing,
:28:44. > :28:47.none of us can predict, the thing that happens tomorrow is something
:28:48. > :28:51.none of us predicted. Bill Clinton, out one day on the campaign trail
:28:51. > :28:55.is reported to have boasted about the 20 million or so jobs he
:28:55. > :29:00.created when he was heckled by a middle-aged woman in the crowd, who,
:29:00. > :29:03.the story goes, "yes Mr President and I have three of them". The tale
:29:04. > :29:08.illustrates a well-trodden truth, women often have the worst paid
:29:08. > :29:12.jobs in the economy, and are often the carers too. Tonight we look at
:29:12. > :29:16.the real picture behind the downturn on what was predicted to
:29:16. > :29:20.be the women's recession, and has how much has come to past. We will
:29:21. > :29:28.look at the broader picture in a moment. First we visited St
:29:28. > :29:34.Leonards. Sun lit before snowfall, St
:29:34. > :29:38.Leonards presents a grand face to the world, prosperous even. But
:29:38. > :29:43.appearances deceive. The seasonal nature of employment along the East
:29:43. > :29:50.Sussex coast means that this time of year the list of jobless is even
:29:50. > :29:54.longer than usual. Paula Charlesworth moved to St Leonards
:29:54. > :29:58.after her husband died. She describes herself as desperate to
:29:58. > :30:04.work, but with a young daughter to bring up she needs a job that fits
:30:04. > :30:08.with school hours. In the meantime, she volunteers five days a week at
:30:09. > :30:14.this mental health charity. I would love to go out to earn money,
:30:14. > :30:20.because I want to come off benefits, but the jobs round here, you either
:30:20. > :30:24.have to work late nights or weekends, as you are a lone parent
:30:24. > :30:28.what do you do with a child under the age of 15. Weekends are the
:30:28. > :30:38.only time I get to spend quality time with my daughter, I don't want
:30:38. > :30:39.
:30:39. > :30:45.to work weekends. Paula relies on her widowed parents
:30:45. > :30:49.pension to bring up 12-year-old Jocelyn. Money is a struggle, and
:30:49. > :30:53.she has felt the rise in fuel and heating bills. I would love to give
:30:53. > :30:57.my daughter everything her friends have, I can't. Most of what both of
:30:57. > :31:01.us wear is charity clothes. I can't afford to go to the shops and buy
:31:01. > :31:07.her stuff when she grows out of them. She is only 12, she is
:31:07. > :31:12.growing all the time. It just makes me feel a bad parent, it makes me
:31:12. > :31:19.feel a failure in some ways. It sounds silly, I know. But I cannot
:31:19. > :31:24.provide for her the way I would like to. How to provide for their
:31:24. > :31:28.babies is on the minds of these young mum, living at a support unit
:31:28. > :31:33.in Milton Keynes. They stay here for up to two years, the idea is
:31:33. > :31:36.for them to live independently. But while they all want to work, they
:31:36. > :31:40.know they are facing a difficult economy.
:31:40. > :31:44.I want to start youth work, so, obviously, I have to work to get
:31:44. > :31:47.the job that I want. But if I was just to go out and try to get any
:31:47. > :31:52.job, it is so difficult at the moment. My partner is trying to
:31:52. > :31:56.work, and it is impossible. didn't plan to have a baby, but now
:31:56. > :32:00.having a baby it has changed my life, and you work for her, and you
:32:00. > :32:03.don't just want to rely on the benefits to provide for her, then
:32:03. > :32:09.you can't provide for yourself either. You want to be able to do
:32:09. > :32:16.it for yourself. Rather than rely on other people.
:32:16. > :32:21.Of the �18.9 billion cuts announce in the coalition Government's
:32:21. > :32:26.Emergency Budget in 2010, �13.2 billion comes from women's incomes,
:32:26. > :32:31.while �5.7 billion, 30%, is taken from men's incomes. Meaning women
:32:31. > :32:35.are being hit by austerity measures twice as hard.
:32:35. > :32:41.The mums unit is run by one of the largest housing associations in the
:32:41. > :32:48.country. It finds that many of its female tenants, in particular, are
:32:48. > :32:53.fearful. Women represent two thirds of low-paid workers, they are
:32:53. > :32:58.juggling, quite a lot of them, low- paid work, with childcare, some of
:32:58. > :33:03.them are caring for other dependants, and I think that
:33:03. > :33:07.combination of how to look after the kids, how to manage the money,
:33:07. > :33:10.how to perhaps juggle other responsibilities in terms of
:33:11. > :33:16.parents, or other people that they are caring for, means they are
:33:16. > :33:22.particularly badly hit. But it is an impact felt by both
:33:22. > :33:28.sexes. A few years ago we were told the downturn would create a
:33:28. > :33:32."woman's" recession, the vice-like combination of cuts in public
:33:32. > :33:37.sector jobs, and spending cuts generally, would affect women the
:33:37. > :33:41.most. As the economy has bumped along the bottom, a slightly
:33:41. > :33:44.different picture has emerged, there is some areas where men are
:33:44. > :33:49.worse off. More women are employed by the public sector, so they are
:33:49. > :33:53.hit by both pay freezes and job cuts. But, the first industries to
:33:53. > :34:00.contract in the recession, financial and construction, are
:34:00. > :34:03.male-dominated, and they remain depressed. Labour figures for last
:34:03. > :34:10.July to September suggest that of those working part-time, men are
:34:10. > :34:14.more likely than women to want to work extra hours. Around 35% of
:34:14. > :34:21.male part-timers said they would like to work more hours, compared
:34:21. > :34:25.to 21% of part-time female workers. For both sexes, underemployment sup,
:34:25. > :34:31.when the economic downturn started five years ago, those figures stood
:34:31. > :34:35.at 25% of male part-timers, and 16% of part-time female workers. Right
:34:35. > :34:40.across the board men tend to do worse, this hasn't changed during
:34:40. > :34:46.the recession and the austerity period. Men have higher
:34:46. > :34:49.unemployment, they have higher inactivity rates, they face more
:34:49. > :34:54.redundancies, on all these indicators, women do slightly
:34:54. > :34:58.better than men. But outside the labour market, women who make up
:34:58. > :35:06.two thirds of the lowest paid, and make greater use of public services,
:35:06. > :35:11.stand to lose more. Figures from the TUC show that by 2016/17, the
:35:11. > :35:17.highest 10% of earners will lose services that are worth 2.5% of
:35:17. > :35:21.their income. But the bottom 10% will lose the equivalent of almost
:35:21. > :35:26.32% of their income. A far greater impact.
:35:26. > :35:30.It is very hard for low earners, who are disproportionately affected
:35:30. > :35:34.by those sorts of reductions in income, people are already having
:35:34. > :35:38.to make choices between whether they spend their money on food, or
:35:38. > :35:42.whether they put the heating on. For Paula, as for many on the
:35:43. > :35:48.lowest incomes, it is a time of uncertainty and fear for the future.
:35:48. > :35:52.In the absence of a job, she will carry on volunteering. I want to
:35:52. > :35:57.get off benefit, I want to be able to pay my way. I always have done,
:35:57. > :36:03.ever since I left school. I like working. So being here gives me
:36:03. > :36:07.that joy back, it makes me feel useful, and I like being useful.
:36:07. > :36:16.Some views in the film. With me is Ceri Goddard, the chief executive
:36:16. > :36:21.of Women rights Organisation, the Fawcett Society, and Margo James, a
:36:21. > :36:25.Conservative MP who was until recently the vice-chair forwomen in
:36:25. > :36:29.her party. Broadly, women have been hit harder because they have lost
:36:29. > :36:33.more from public sector jobs? I think that women are
:36:33. > :36:39.overrepresented in the public sector, and also among low-paid
:36:39. > :36:45.work as well. So, and the fact that they are more reliant on benefits
:36:45. > :36:48.than men. I think it does potentially give rise to a cocktail
:36:48. > :36:52.of disadvantage for women. That's absolutely true, which the
:36:53. > :36:56.Government have tried their best to mitigate, but it is the structural
:36:56. > :37:00.problems going back decades, really. It is interesting, because you say
:37:00. > :37:04.they have tried to mitigate, it is things like the welfare cut, the
:37:04. > :37:10.benefits cuts, that are hitting women at a time when certainly the
:37:10. > :37:14.Conservatives can't afford to lose them? The trouble is, the
:37:14. > :37:18.Department of Work and Pension, benefits and pensions, make up a
:37:18. > :37:22.third of all Government spending, so if we are to restore the balance
:37:22. > :37:26.in the economy between the public and the private sector, and get the
:37:26. > :37:30.finances back under some control, and reduce the deficit, we have to
:37:30. > :37:34.cut money from where it is spent. It is spent in large quantities on
:37:34. > :37:38.the welfare and benefits system. Ceri Goddard, would you disagree
:37:39. > :37:42.with any of that? I would certainly disagree with the point that the
:37:42. > :37:47.Government is doing its utmost to mitigate the situation of women. I
:37:47. > :37:50.think that we need to be clear, everybody agrees the deficit needs
:37:50. > :37:55.to be reduce, but it is a political choice that the austerity approach
:37:55. > :38:01.is to take 80% from cuts and 20% from taxes. It has been well known
:38:01. > :38:05.in prior to the Comprehensive Spending Review, that would
:38:05. > :38:14.massively disproportionately impact women. The last financial statement
:38:14. > :38:17.said over 8% of 80% of cuts comes from women's pockets. We are not
:38:17. > :38:22.seeing a clear Government strategy to mitigate that. This is not a
:38:22. > :38:25.structure here for decades, this is an additional inequality created by
:38:25. > :38:28.the austerity approach. This is something the Government has to
:38:28. > :38:33.solve, this is not the labour market itself, or women having to
:38:33. > :38:36.be more flexible, for example? I think it is a combination of both.
:38:36. > :38:41.We had preexisting economies in the labour market and the economy
:38:41. > :38:45.before the recession, women were in more low-paid jobs and earned less.
:38:46. > :38:48.Because of that we were forced -- we in the Fawcett Society and
:38:48. > :38:52.campaigners were concerned in considering the deficit the
:38:53. > :38:56.Government policies didn't make the situation worse unnecessarily. So,
:38:56. > :39:00.of course, Government policy is critical, and Government also needs
:39:00. > :39:03.it take a lead in terms of how gender-sensitive its policies are.
:39:03. > :39:07.But also businesses themselves, and the private sector, need to do more.
:39:07. > :39:10.Currently the Government policy is to, for the private sector to pick
:39:10. > :39:14.up these lost jobs from the public sector. If that's going to be the
:39:14. > :39:17.case, are they going to tackle the fact that the private sector pay
:39:17. > :39:21.gap is twice the public sector. guess you could say if they are
:39:21. > :39:28.going to pick up those jobs, and that hasn't happened to the extent
:39:28. > :39:32.it was meant to, do women have to be more accepting, for example, of
:39:32. > :39:36.the overtime? That was a very string statistic that came out, not
:39:36. > :39:41.surprise -- interesting statistic that came out, not surprising, when
:39:41. > :39:45.women were asked, because they are carers with homes and families to
:39:45. > :39:48.run more often to say no to overtime, does that have to change?
:39:48. > :39:51.There are more part-time jobs in the economy, which suit a lot of
:39:51. > :39:56.women from. Your film only 25% of the women who were working part-
:39:56. > :40:00.time actually wanted to work more hours. As you say, it's a good way
:40:00. > :40:04.of balancing caring responsibilities with work, being
:40:04. > :40:07.able to work part-time if you want to. And fewer men want to work
:40:07. > :40:10.part-time? Fewer machine want to work part-time. I think it is
:40:10. > :40:14.important -- men want to work part- time. It is important to remember
:40:14. > :40:17.on a positive note that there are over a million new jobs in the
:40:17. > :40:21.private sector created in the last two years. We have record numbers
:40:21. > :40:26.of women in employment as a result of that. I think the part-time
:40:26. > :40:30.point is really interesting, actually. On the one hand you have
:40:30. > :40:34.a lot more single mothers, as we were looking at in the film, who
:40:34. > :40:36.are looking for more part-time work, but they are finding less of that,
:40:36. > :40:39.because those part-time positions are being cut from the public
:40:39. > :40:45.sector, there are less of them in the private sector. Yes, we can
:40:45. > :40:48.focus on the 75% of women who want part-time work, but there is a
:40:48. > :40:53.massive increase in women's underemployment. In women who want
:40:53. > :40:58.to work more than part-time, but can't. Let's not forget the 25-year
:40:58. > :41:01.high in women's unemployment. Over a million women who want to work at
:41:01. > :41:06.all, part-time or full-time, who cannot get a job. That has
:41:06. > :41:13.increased 14% since 2010. The unemployment rate for men has gone
:41:13. > :41:18.down 3%, it is not accurate. Very briefly? Briefly, we have 250,000
:41:18. > :41:25.more women in work since 2010. That's because there is more women
:41:25. > :41:28.coming of age. I think that is a positive note on which to end.
:41:28. > :41:31.Just to tell you, we will have more on David Cameron's Europe speech in
:41:31. > :41:37.a moment. That is coming up with Allegra
:41:37. > :41:39.Stratton. If the mackerel had held on to its
:41:39. > :41:45.ancient name, scomberomorus commerson, it is doubtful anyone
:41:46. > :41:51.would have got their tongues round ordering it enough -- to order it
:41:51. > :41:55.enough for the fish to be in peril, the fish may be spurned again when
:41:55. > :42:05.it became the latest endangered species on the Marine Conservation
:42:05. > :42:08.
:42:08. > :42:12.Society list. This is not only one of the most elegantly formed but
:42:12. > :42:17.beautifully coloured fishes taken out of the sea we have. Mrs Beeton
:42:17. > :42:21.loved mackerel, and it is a huge part of the diet on these islands.
:42:21. > :42:26.If you had mackerel tonight, that heartburn you are feeling may be
:42:26. > :42:29.guilt, yes, guilt, because the little Big Mack is under threat.
:42:29. > :42:32.people fish the way they are at the moment the stock will be
:42:32. > :42:36.unsustainable in the future. The stock is downwards, although it is
:42:36. > :42:40.currently at a sustainable level. That is all very well, the trouble
:42:40. > :42:45.is no-one has told the fish. They weren't finished, they have just
:42:45. > :42:53.gone away for a bit. So says a chef with two Michelen stars to his
:42:53. > :43:00.credit. There is huge shoals of mackerel, we have swum right up to
:43:00. > :43:02.the islands because there is better food. For food, they don't know the
:43:02. > :43:09.customs between Great Britain and Iceland, they don't know, they just
:43:09. > :43:14.want better food. If it had a transparent silvery hue, the flesh
:43:14. > :43:20.is good, if it is red about the head, it is steal.
:43:20. > :43:24.# I want some seafood mamma They know their fish and seafood at
:43:24. > :43:28.this wet fish shop here in North London. You know they are running
:43:28. > :43:33.out of mackerel, there aren't enough? We heard about it. But what
:43:33. > :43:37.are we going to do about it. Eatless of it? To eat less?, no we
:43:37. > :43:43.love it, we can't eat less, it is wonderful. I remember a year ago
:43:43. > :43:49.everyone was telling us to eat mackerel because it wasn't
:43:49. > :43:53.endangered, I felt duped. The "man" has deceived us again? Is that what
:43:53. > :44:00.you are saying? It would appear so, something like that. First, take
:44:00. > :44:03.your fish, all nice and ethical and line-caught from an in-shore boat,
:44:03. > :44:09.says this fishmonger. I spoke to a few suppliers, they said if you
:44:09. > :44:12.stick to the old method of line fishing, there is not a problem,
:44:12. > :44:16.small in-shore boats, buying it off them it is not a problem. There is
:44:16. > :44:21.loads of mackerel about. It is the big boats that are taking scoops of
:44:21. > :44:25.mackerel out of the sea. voracity of this fish is very great,
:44:25. > :44:30.from their immense numbers they are bold in attacking objects of which
:44:30. > :44:35.they might otherwise be expected to have a wholesome dread. There are
:44:35. > :44:39.loads of recipes of mackerel in 189th century cook books, it wanes
:44:39. > :44:43.in popularity again in the 20th century, when you look at books
:44:43. > :44:47.from the 1950s or 1960, it doesn't appear in them often. Partly, I
:44:47. > :44:51.think, because it has never been a really posh fish, it is not really
:44:51. > :44:55.used on dining tables. Mackerel was no longer catch of the day, because
:44:55. > :45:00.it also got a reputation as a dirty fish. In the summer they tend to
:45:00. > :45:04.come loser in shore, and some people associate the coming in
:45:04. > :45:09.shore of the mackerel with sewage pipes and things like that. They
:45:09. > :45:13.have nothing to do with sewage pipes. They live on the cleanest
:45:13. > :45:17.plankton, and small fishes and occasionally small squid. A dirty
:45:18. > :45:26.fish, our man in the whites won't have it. That is a terrible
:45:26. > :45:29.expression. Whoever said that is very unfair, very particularly to
:45:29. > :45:33.mackerel, it is the most magnificent fish for a number of
:45:33. > :45:43.reasons. It is nutritious to eat, the best nutritional values you can
:45:43. > :45:50.possibly have. In fact, this humble fish has been
:45:50. > :45:54.macking it on the supper tables and supermarkets, sales were up 11%,
:45:54. > :46:00.the advice now is easy on the favourite fish, or it could be the
:46:00. > :46:05.one that got away. Death impayers the vivid splendor of its colours,
:46:05. > :46:15.but it -- impairs its vivid shrend dor but doesn't entirely impede
:46:15. > :46:52.
:46:52. > :46:56.them. We are going through the You're back, what else do we know
:46:56. > :47:00.about this, how is it going down? He has had good headlines from
:47:00. > :47:03.different papers across the political divide. The 2017 figures
:47:03. > :47:06.arrived at because it is the first two-and-a-half years of the
:47:06. > :47:10.parliament. It took a long time in coming this speech. Do you think he
:47:10. > :47:13.had to harden it up because of that? I think when it nearly came
:47:13. > :47:16.out and didn't, they were quite confident that it would answer some
:47:16. > :47:19.of the questions that have been raised. I don't think it has been
:47:19. > :47:23.refined, I think it is just that they knew it would get the
:47:23. > :47:27.reception it has got, so far, but tomorrow is the real thing on day
:47:27. > :47:30.two. Will anyone mind that you are getting reaction, from Brussels and
:47:30. > :47:35.Europe already, saying no way you can start renegotiating? They will
:47:35. > :47:38.assume that. As we said earlier, he has set out five principle that is
:47:38. > :47:42.are sufficiently vague, that if it turns out he's banging his head
:47:42. > :47:46.against a brick wall he has the get out he will need. Thank you very
:47:46. > :47:51.much. You might have seen the picture of Beyonce on some of the
:47:51. > :47:58.palmers. One President, one megastar and the biggest day in the
:47:58. > :48:02.American political calendar. For some, the Beyonce singing star
:48:02. > :48:06.spaingled banner was the pinnacle, for others it was a fudge. It is
:48:06. > :48:13.reported the acoustics being what it was, and the crowd being what it
:48:13. > :48:23.was, she might have mimed the song. We will let you decide.
:48:23. > :48:23.