:00:00. > :00:09.The Prime Minister isn't panicking, oh, no. A matter of a few weeks
:00:10. > :00:12.before the expected arrival of an unknown number of eastern European
:00:13. > :00:17.migrants to work, he's introducing restrictions on the welfare benefits
:00:18. > :00:24.they'll be entitled to. Is David Cameron scapegoating foreigners for
:00:25. > :00:28.political gain? The Bulgarian ambassador thinks some politicians
:00:29. > :00:34.and the media are doing so. We pay a fortune for energy and then
:00:35. > :00:39.let it leak away. Why has the Government plan for a Green Deal
:00:40. > :00:42.fallen on its face. You can install the energy efficiency measures with
:00:43. > :00:46.the Green Deal loans and the result is that your bill doesn't go down at
:00:47. > :00:51.all. The reason being that you're making all these loan repayments.
:00:52. > :00:55.Kicked to death and set o on fire after false rumours he was a
:00:56. > :00:59.paedophile. We talk to the sister of the man who died at the hands of mob
:01:00. > :01:04.justice. We talk to the boss of Coca-Cola
:01:05. > :01:06.about whether his drink shouldn't be taxed and taxed again to save the
:01:07. > :01:20.nation from a health crisis. All the political parties
:01:21. > :01:24.underestimated how strongly public feeling was running on immigration
:01:25. > :01:26.from Eastern Europe. With the imminent lifting of restrictions on
:01:27. > :01:34.people wanting to come here from Romain why and Bulgaria -- Romania
:01:35. > :01:37.and Bulgaria to work it was perhaps inevitable that the Government would
:01:38. > :01:43.announce ape new policy. -- a new policy. When a European Commissioner
:01:44. > :01:47.starts using words like "nasty" to describe attitudes here, he may reap
:01:48. > :01:52.a political diffident. Jim Read reports.
:01:53. > :01:55.Market day in Northampton, and among the veggies and fresh fruit
:01:56. > :02:06.different voices from different parts of Europe. My mother just come
:02:07. > :02:10.to visit me. Latvians shopping for Christmas cards, Bulgarians serving
:02:11. > :02:15.burgers. Immigration from Central Europe has really changed. Market
:02:16. > :02:20.towns like this. One in six people in Northampton were born outside the
:02:21. > :02:24.UK, a figure that's doubled in the last ten years. Polish is now the
:02:25. > :02:29.second most spoken language in the whole county. Market traders here
:02:30. > :02:36.like the extra business. Many have real reservations about immigration.
:02:37. > :02:42.Definitely put pressure on services. Especially the education sector and
:02:43. > :02:46.hospitals. But, I think, in essence, they do bring something to the
:02:47. > :02:49.community. It's brought a lot more people to the town. At the same
:02:50. > :02:53.time, it's also brought a lot more crime to the town. One good thing
:02:54. > :02:57.about them all is that they do tend to use the market, so it's keeping
:02:58. > :03:03.the market going. They tend to like shopping on markets. In 2004, Tony
:03:04. > :03:07.Blair had the option to impose transitional controls, locking
:03:08. > :03:12.eastern Europeans out of the labour market for seven years. He decided
:03:13. > :03:16.against it, that, the Prime Minister said today, was a monumental
:03:17. > :03:20.mistake, now our labour market rules must be tightened. To anyone, not
:03:21. > :03:23.just Romanians or Bulgarians, to anyone in other European Union
:03:24. > :03:29.countries, thinking of coming to Britain because it's easier to claim
:03:30. > :03:31.benefits, Housing Benefit or unemployment benefit, I think it's
:03:32. > :03:36.important to send a clear message out that is not the case. The new
:03:37. > :03:39.plans: EU migrants will get no out of work benefits for the first three
:03:40. > :03:44.months they're in the country. Payments will be stopped after six
:03:45. > :03:47.months, unless the claimant has a genuine chance of getting a job.
:03:48. > :03:50.Migrants will not be able to claim Housing Benefit immediately and
:03:51. > :03:57.those caught begging or sleeping rough will be deported with no
:03:58. > :04:02.return within a year. On wellingborough Road, a short walk
:04:03. > :04:08.from the town centre, Polish deaessens and Romanian supermarkets.
:04:09. > :04:11.David Cameron's plan to tighten welfare rules was met with derision
:04:12. > :04:16.by the European Commission today. The UK, it says, risks looking like
:04:17. > :04:22.the nasty man of Europe. Free movement is not negotiable as long
:04:23. > :04:32.as you are member of the union, as long as you are member of the single
:04:33. > :04:36.market. I cannot understand on one hand, I don't understand the
:04:37. > :04:43.political logic, you see, because Great Britain has always and
:04:44. > :04:52.continues to be a big promoter of enlargement. In an office niche is
:04:53. > :04:57.Paul -- nearby, is Paul. He came from Latvia in 2001 to start his own
:04:58. > :05:00.employment agency, bringing workers from Eastern Europe. I talk to many
:05:01. > :05:04.people, you know and what people say is that this system, benefit system
:05:05. > :05:11.is very generous. I would say even over generous, you know. I came to
:05:12. > :05:16.instances when people come from abroad and they don't really work.
:05:17. > :05:22.The thing is, it's not something what they made up. They just
:05:23. > :05:26.following example. There are plenty of examples around here. Examples of
:05:27. > :05:31.what, British workers? Yeah, claiming benefits, you know, I think
:05:32. > :05:35.the cause is there, not in immigrants coming and claiming
:05:36. > :05:40.benefits. We shouldn't give them these examples. At the local
:05:41. > :05:45.Romanian supermarket, these cash ears have a visa to work in this
:05:46. > :05:49.country, in 35 days, labour market rules will be relaxed, opening up
:05:50. > :05:54.the jobs market to all 28 million citizens of both Romania and
:05:55. > :05:56.Bulgaria. A series of polls over the last week, have shown significant
:05:57. > :06:00.levels of public opposition to that change. But the manager here is
:06:01. > :06:05.angry at any suggestion more migrants will flock over just to
:06:06. > :06:09.claim benefits. I can see on the street or in my shop plenty of
:06:10. > :06:14.English people which are not working. So I can't pretend that all
:06:15. > :06:18.Romanian are good or all Romanian are the best or something like that.
:06:19. > :06:24.No. There are people which don't want to work, they're coming here to
:06:25. > :06:28.steal or claim benefit. But they already came. The debate about the
:06:29. > :06:33.impact of Romanian and Bulgarian migration is still raging. The Prime
:06:34. > :06:36.Minister today wouldn't name even a rough number for the amount of
:06:37. > :06:42.workers he expects to arrive in January. Estimates range from 16,000
:06:43. > :06:46.right up to 50,000 in the first year. Today's welfare restrictions
:06:47. > :06:51.really amount to tinkering with the rules. In the longer term, David
:06:52. > :06:54.Cameron wants more control over immigration policy, maybe even the
:06:55. > :06:58.ability to block migration, if numbers break a set level. That,
:06:59. > :07:04.though, will need agreement at EU level and that will be far more
:07:05. > :07:08.difficult. Well Konstantin Dimitrov is the
:07:09. > :07:13.Bulgarian ambassador to the UK. Nigel Mills is the Conservative MP
:07:14. > :07:18.and he moved an amendment to the Government bill requiring controls
:07:19. > :07:21.from the immigration from the two countries remain in force until
:07:22. > :07:24.2018. Has David Cameron gone far enough today? The measures he
:07:25. > :07:27.announced were a welcome step in the right direction. There's been a lot
:07:28. > :07:32.of concern that our welfare system is easier to access for recently
:07:33. > :07:37.arrived migrants than other European ones. I don't think he's tackled all
:07:38. > :07:43.the issues. Not gone far enough? No, not yet. Think the controls will put
:07:44. > :07:47.anybody Ofcoming from Bulgaria -- anybody coming from Bulgaria to
:07:48. > :07:53.Britain? Not necessarily, except for the announcement that the access to
:07:54. > :07:57.the social welfare system will be additionally tightened, something
:07:58. > :08:00.which Bulgarians are pretty well aware because of our information
:08:01. > :08:05.campaign. Will have pretty little effect? That won't be of factor
:08:06. > :08:10.because what I would like to explain is the following thing: Right now,
:08:11. > :08:17.most of the work permits are for which people from Bulgaria apply are
:08:18. > :08:22.approved. Those who have come here to work have usually done so, even
:08:23. > :08:29.though under this restriction regime, so the first of January will
:08:30. > :08:32.not bring about a change in terms of the accessibility of the labour
:08:33. > :08:38.market, which has nothing to do with the issue of the access to the
:08:39. > :08:41.welfare system. Do you have any idea of what numbers we're talking about?
:08:42. > :08:44.The Government won't give us a number. There are some... Do you
:08:45. > :08:47.number of eastern European migrants what you're talking about? There are
:08:48. > :08:52.independent estimates which say somewhere up to 70,000 a year for
:08:53. > :08:59.the first five years, so an average maybe 50,000 a year for five years,
:09:00. > :09:03.a quarter of a million. I think when there were no restrictions on Poland
:09:04. > :09:07.and the other A 8 far more people came than were expected. Do you have
:09:08. > :09:11.any idea what you're talking about? Well, we only say the following
:09:12. > :09:17.thing, because we've been pressed all the time about predictions. We
:09:18. > :09:20.cannot predict. We're not crystal ball gazers, however this year
:09:21. > :09:25.between 8,000 to 10,000 Bulgarians came to work legally in the UK. We
:09:26. > :09:30.don't see any prerequisite for a rise in this annual trend next year.
:09:31. > :09:35.That's what I can say. So, it's all clear as mud, isn't it? You're
:09:36. > :09:41.talking 250,000 over five years. You're talking a figure of perhaps o
:09:42. > :09:45.10,000 or something. For next year. This is just trying to extrapolate
:09:46. > :09:54.the experience of this year until next because as I say, we cannot see
:09:55. > :09:57.prerequisites for qualitative change for enlargement of the
:09:58. > :10:01.attractiveness of your country. Those numbers aren't that far
:10:02. > :10:07.aparts, if you add in the Romanians to the Bulgarians, I suspect there
:10:08. > :10:09.must be something like 30,000 on those numbers, within the range
:10:10. > :10:14.we're talking about. Do you worry, when you hear a European
:10:15. > :10:19.Commissioner talking about Britain as being seen as the nasty country?
:10:20. > :10:24.I think we'd rather be seen as the tough country than nasty. I'm not
:10:25. > :10:30.sure, I don't think we want to be the soft touch where people can come
:10:31. > :10:35.- You'd rather be nasty than a soft touch? Yes. I wouldn't choose nasty
:10:36. > :10:41.as the the description. Choose? Tough, but fair. There's no reason
:10:42. > :10:46.why we should be more attractive than France or Germany to people.
:10:47. > :10:50.Ambassador, would you like to explain to our viewers why it is
:10:51. > :10:54.they should pay their taxes in order that your citizens should be
:10:55. > :10:58.entitled to benefits here? Well, I'm afraid that this is not the right
:10:59. > :11:01.way to present the situation. That's the question I'm asking, though.
:11:02. > :11:05.That is right, may I just respond to you in a slightly different manner.
:11:06. > :11:10.Most of those who come here are young people and they are single,
:11:11. > :11:16.not married between 15 and 35. They come to work. A low percentage of
:11:17. > :11:21.their income comes from your social benefit system. They earn their
:11:22. > :11:25.daily bread by working. They may all have noble intentions, but
:11:26. > :11:28.misfortune happens to all of us. That is true. Can you explain to our
:11:29. > :11:33.viewers why they should pay their taxles in order that your citizens
:11:34. > :11:38.can be helped if they get into need here? Well, they pay their taxes,
:11:39. > :11:42.but also, our citizens working in the UK are paying their taxes in
:11:43. > :11:48.your country as well. So they're not free riders in their majority. There
:11:49. > :11:54.is something in that argument, isn't there? That is what statistics says.
:11:55. > :11:58.You should look at it... Let's stay off statistics shall we? The first
:11:59. > :12:03.18 top countries, whose citizens have access to your Social Security
:12:04. > :12:09.system? That is something we should respect, I would suggest. This isn't
:12:10. > :12:15.going to happen any way, is it? These restrictions? The EU won't
:12:16. > :12:20.allow it to happen. That would be an interesting challenge, if Parliament
:12:21. > :12:25.said that deal we signed nearly ten years ago - You can't be a member of
:12:26. > :12:29.a club and then decide you want to obey some rules and some you don't.
:12:30. > :12:33.We can find lots of examples from nearly every country in the union
:12:34. > :12:38.that has done exactly that. You really think that the EU will allow
:12:39. > :12:43.this to happen? Well, I suspect the EU won't be very keen on this
:12:44. > :12:45.happening. But the point is if we in Parliament say this is not in our
:12:46. > :12:48.national interest now to lift these restrictions at this time, we need
:12:49. > :12:51.them in place, while we're recovering from the terrible
:12:52. > :12:55.recession we had, that should be a powerful message, if that's what we
:12:56. > :12:59.think is our national interest. I think some of the measures the Prime
:13:00. > :13:03.Minister announced today, the Home Secretary admitted earlier may well
:13:04. > :13:08.not be with favour in the European Commission either. I don't think
:13:09. > :13:14.it's entirely unusual for nations - You've been a European politician.
:13:15. > :13:20.For a short period of time, yes. Outside the statute of limb
:13:21. > :13:23.stations. Yes. Do you think it's feasible that these restrictions
:13:24. > :13:27.could be introduced unilaterally in one member state? We have to study
:13:28. > :13:32.very carefully the political intentions in Mr Cameron's article.
:13:33. > :13:35.They are yet to be transformed into concrete legislative or
:13:36. > :13:38.administrative acts. Then we will say what is permissible under if the
:13:39. > :13:43.European Union legislation and what is not. The commission will also
:13:44. > :13:50.have its say. That is the right answer, as we speak, hours after Mr
:13:51. > :13:56.Cameron's article came to our attention. Thank you both very much.
:13:57. > :14:08.Coming up: # Living on a prayer #
:14:09. > :14:12.Now if you were offered the chance to make substantial savings on your
:14:13. > :14:15.Energy Bill, without having to spend any money up front, you'd do it,
:14:16. > :14:20.wouldn't you? Actually, you probably wouldn't. Ing that the irresistible
:14:21. > :14:23.conclusion from the underwhelming number of people who signed up to
:14:24. > :14:28.the Government's Green Deal. No less a figure than Nick Clegg described
:14:29. > :14:31.it as one of the most important achievements of any Government, but
:14:32. > :14:34.barely a thousand households have signed up for it and where the
:14:35. > :14:40.scheme was meant to save households money, it's ended up saving them
:14:41. > :14:43.nothing much at all. As Andy Verity found out, all the political
:14:44. > :14:51.uncertainty about green levies threatens thousands of jobs.
:14:52. > :14:59.It was billed as the largest and most ambitious home-improvement
:15:00. > :15:03.programme since the Second World War, not to mention the most
:15:04. > :15:06.comprehensive energy saving plan in the world. Deja vu anyone?
:15:07. > :15:11.Households are facing high fuel bills. We have to do something. What
:15:12. > :15:15.we are doing is highlighting the Green Deal for the most ambitious
:15:16. > :15:21.projects of any Government has launched in a long time. The Green
:15:22. > :15:26.Deal went live 11 months ago. It's starting to look like a party no-one
:15:27. > :15:31.wants to go to. Amid the fury about bills, households are still blowing
:15:32. > :15:36.?140 a year heating the open air in old, badly insulated houses. What if
:15:37. > :15:40.they could borrow money to get insulation and make the repayments
:15:41. > :15:44.out of savings on their bill? Enter the Green Deal, what's that? It's a
:15:45. > :15:48.revolutionary programme according to the Government which lets you do
:15:49. > :15:53.your loft, wall inhalation, new boiler and pay nothing for it up
:15:54. > :15:58.front. The rule is that the energy efficiency measures will pay for
:15:59. > :16:02.themselves over 25 years in savings on your bills, so you won't have to
:16:03. > :16:06.pay anything. It sounds like the ideal deal, doesn't it, in these
:16:07. > :16:11.times of high Energy Bills? So why have so few people taken it up?
:16:12. > :16:14.Ahead of its launch in January, the Government projected that 130,000
:16:15. > :16:20.Green Deals would get signed this year. The minister responsible Greg
:16:21. > :16:24.Barker said in March that he wouldn't be sleeping if less than
:16:25. > :16:28.10,000 signed up. 11 months in just over 1,000 people are signed up to
:16:29. > :16:35.the scheme, around 1% of what was expected. Of those, just 219 have
:16:36. > :16:40.had the work done. I think, to date, this has been a tragic and
:16:41. > :16:44.embarrassing failure. Consumers are crying out for help with Energy
:16:45. > :16:49.Bills. Here is the policy to deliver it, yet nobody is taking it up. What
:16:50. > :16:53.intrigues me about the Green Deal is that although barely a thousand
:16:54. > :16:56.people have signed up to it, more tan 100,000 have had their
:16:57. > :17:00.assessments done. Why aren't they following through? There seems to be
:17:01. > :17:08.a blockage in the Green Deal pipeline.
:17:09. > :17:14.What is it? Mike Walker, himself an energy assessor, thought his cold
:17:15. > :17:19.Victorian walls could use a bit of warming up. He invited a Green Deal
:17:20. > :17:24.assessor to his home and wasn't exactly impressed. Even with the
:17:25. > :17:29.basic bit of knowledge, you can tell that this is solid brick. It does
:17:30. > :17:33.not contain a cavity. How? Because you have a long section of brick and
:17:34. > :17:39.a short section of brick, it means that the bricks are laid like that,
:17:40. > :17:46.so it's solid all the way through. There is no cavity. Following the
:17:47. > :17:51.first assessment, the first recommendation they came up with was
:17:52. > :18:01.would you like cavity wall insulation? Well, we don't have
:18:02. > :18:06.cavity walls, so... I'm sorry. The EPC showed, yes, they've actually
:18:07. > :18:11.recorded it as cavity walls. We don't have them. He got another
:18:12. > :18:16.assessment. And another with a different firm. And another and
:18:17. > :18:22.another, all of wrong. After his sixth wrong assessment, he gave up
:18:23. > :18:26.in despair. The last attempt at the EPC, they failed to pick up on the
:18:27. > :18:33.fact that we have a wood burning stove. An energy assessor missed
:18:34. > :18:37.that? Yes. It's not just incompetent assessors and a complicated process.
:18:38. > :18:41.Research today shows how little the Green Deal saves you. Take a typical
:18:42. > :18:48.household dual fuel bill, ?1400 a year. The insulation would bring
:18:49. > :18:52.your bill down to ?1220. But the repayments on the loan at 8%
:18:53. > :18:55.interest would bump it up to where it was, saving you nothing. If
:18:56. > :19:02.instead, the loans were interest free, repayments would be far
:19:03. > :19:06.smaller, you'd save ?130 -- ?136 a year. The problem is what consumers
:19:07. > :19:10.are offered in terms of the product. You can go through the hassle of
:19:11. > :19:13.installing these measures with the loans provided and the result is
:19:14. > :19:17.your bill doesn't go down at all. The reason being that you're making
:19:18. > :19:20.all these loan repayments. That negates the bill savings you could
:19:21. > :19:25.achieve. By underwriting the cost of loans they could slash the interest
:19:26. > :19:29.rate to 0%, which would make savings of over ?130 available to
:19:30. > :19:34.households. Energy firms and insulation providers set up a
:19:35. > :19:39.finance company to arrange the loans with 24 had 4 -- ?244 million to
:19:40. > :19:44.lend. So far it's lent less than ?6 million. When they are being sold,
:19:45. > :19:50.they are working as intended. People are able to borrow loans of ?5,000
:19:51. > :19:54.at an APR of 8% and the whole thing is working well. We can service the
:19:55. > :19:58.plan so on and so forth. That bit is working. But it will take time to
:19:59. > :20:02.grow. Here's the problem, if you have equity in your home, you can
:20:03. > :20:06.top up your mortgage and get a cheaper loan to do the work. If
:20:07. > :20:09.you're poor you might want it because you can't get a loan
:20:10. > :20:13.elsewhere, but you're probably eligible for free help. And if
:20:14. > :20:17.you're in the middle, you won't see a saving on your bill any way. The
:20:18. > :20:22.man who was Energy Secretary when the deal was announced, it was
:20:23. > :20:28.always obvious home buyers needed a bigger incentive to do their walls
:20:29. > :20:32.and lofts, Stamp Duty relief. But the Treasury blocked it. The
:20:33. > :20:36.essential problem has been the Treasury's reluctance and
:20:37. > :20:40.particularly George Osborne's reluctant to -- reluctance to have
:20:41. > :20:45.any sort of incentive to make it happen. I just don't understand it,
:20:46. > :20:49.because ideologically he's perfectly prepared, for example, to introduce
:20:50. > :20:54.tax relief to help with gas fracking, but he's not prepared to
:20:55. > :21:00.introduce a tax relief or Stamp Duty relief to help with energy saving.
:21:01. > :21:03.Construction firms had agreed to provide the Green Deal, invested
:21:04. > :21:06.heavily before the launch and retrained fitters to do the solid
:21:07. > :21:09.wall insulation the Government wanted. With the failure of the
:21:10. > :21:16.deal, one big player, Carillionment OK Councilion, Had to -- Carillion
:21:17. > :21:20.had to let a thousand workers go. Now the energy company obligation is
:21:21. > :21:23.a problem. Energy companies, in many senses quite understandably are
:21:24. > :21:25.waiting and seeing what the Chancellor's is going to say in his
:21:26. > :21:30.Autumn Statement about this. Therefore, they're not looking to
:21:31. > :21:34.commit to new contracts, to commit to energy efficiency insulations in
:21:35. > :21:37.the new year. Now we're hearing stories of companies cancelling
:21:38. > :21:42.existing contracts. People have been gearing up to deliver for several
:21:43. > :21:44.months now significant numbers of insulations that are being pulled.
:21:45. > :21:50.People are going to lose their jobs on the back of it. With parties
:21:51. > :21:54.competing for the bill payer's vote, the Government's public doubts about
:21:55. > :21:59.green levies are leaving the companies involved to put plans on
:22:00. > :22:02.hold. They hope the uncertainty will end with the Autumn Statement.
:22:03. > :22:06.Thousands of jobs depend on it. Greg Barker is the climate change
:22:07. > :22:09.minister. Now you said in March, you wouldn't be sleeping at night if
:22:10. > :22:12.there weren't 10,000 people signed up to this by the end of the year.
:22:13. > :22:19.Would you like some sleeping pills? No, I tell you what is slightly
:22:20. > :22:24.misleading about that film is it's focussed exclusively on finance,
:22:25. > :22:27.which we identified at the start of the Green Deal as the biggest
:22:28. > :22:32.barrier to people putting in insulation measures. The fact is,
:22:33. > :22:36.which they did mention in your film, over 100,000 people have had a Green
:22:37. > :22:40.Deal assessment and contrary to what your reporter found, I'm not
:22:41. > :22:46.doubting that some of them haven't been perfect or troublesome, but
:22:47. > :22:50.actually, our evidence is that the overwhelming majority of the people,
:22:51. > :22:54.that 100,000 or more, who've had an assessment are not only really
:22:55. > :22:58.pleased with their assessment, they are taking action to put in the
:22:59. > :23:02.measures recommended. Would you tell me, is the measure of success, for
:23:03. > :23:06.me as an Energy Minister and climate change minister, is the measure of
:23:07. > :23:10.success - how many finance plans I sell? Or is it how many energy
:23:11. > :23:14.efficiency improvements are actually installed in homes? You judged it
:23:15. > :23:18.yourself, 10,000 by the end of this year and you wouldn't be sleeping at
:23:19. > :23:23.night if it was less than that. Yeah, but what I didn't reckon with
:23:24. > :23:28.- I'm not satisfied with a thousand, of course I'm not. Tell us how many
:23:29. > :23:32.Green Deal insulations there have been? We reckon something in the
:23:33. > :23:38.region of 80,000 measures have been installed. How many houses have had
:23:39. > :23:46.a Green Deal insulation? We reckon that something in the region of
:23:47. > :23:51.80,000... 80,000? Let me explain it to you. Your piece focussed
:23:52. > :23:53.exclusively on the people taking up Green Deal finance. In the
:23:54. > :23:57.long-term, that's going to be really important because we know that being
:23:58. > :24:02.able to afford these measures is a barrier to people putting them in.
:24:03. > :24:07.Let me finish. But the first 100,000 or so people who have had a Green
:24:08. > :24:12.Deal assessment, over 80% have said that they've already put in measures
:24:13. > :24:17.or they're currently putting in measure or they intend to. What you
:24:18. > :24:21.mean, then is that 80,000 people have had their homeles modified in
:24:22. > :24:25.-- homes modified in some way. You don't mean they've had a Green Deal
:24:26. > :24:30.insulation. Because the total number of them is 219. No, you're talking
:24:31. > :24:34.about finance. You're confusing the method of payment - Green Deal seems
:24:35. > :24:39.to be clearly about finance. No, there's more to it than finance. The
:24:40. > :24:43.Green Deal is first about having a Green Deal assessment, where someone
:24:44. > :24:47.spends several hours in your home, sits down around the kitchen table
:24:48. > :24:51.and takes you through the measures that will help you cut your Energy
:24:52. > :24:56.Bill. That is proving really popular. 100,000 people have had
:24:57. > :25:01.their homes assessed? More than that now. It was over 100,000 in October.
:25:02. > :25:05.You say about 80,000 have done something to the house as a
:25:06. > :25:11.consequence. We know that over 80% of the people who have been assessed
:25:12. > :25:14.have told us that they have either already installed measures or
:25:15. > :25:18.they're going to install measure or they're installing measures. Not
:25:19. > :25:22.taking up your finance arrangements? Correct. So there's something wrong
:25:23. > :25:27.with them, isn't there? No, there is not something wrong with them. If
:25:28. > :25:32.someone offers you free money, what do you do? It's not free money.
:25:33. > :25:37.Exactly. It's 8% interest. It is. Which is very expensive. It's not
:25:38. > :25:41.very expensive. Could you find 20-year finance anywhere on the High
:25:42. > :25:44.Street at 8%? Have you taken out a Green Deal financial arrangement?
:25:45. > :25:49.No, I haven't because I've already improved my home. But the fact, but
:25:50. > :25:52.Jeremy, you asked me about the finance. Could you get 8% for 20
:25:53. > :25:56.years anywhere on the High Street? Well, all I can say is that the
:25:57. > :26:00.total number of people who have done so is 219, isn't that correct? Over
:26:01. > :26:06.a thousand people are now in the system. Thousand people - -- a
:26:07. > :26:11.thousand people. Now 100,000 to 1,000? No, again you're confused.
:26:12. > :26:16.I'm not. You're confusing financing - 100,000 people have had their
:26:17. > :26:20.homes looked at. That's common ground between us. You say 80% have
:26:21. > :26:25.installed measures. A thousand people have signed up to the Green
:26:26. > :26:32.Deal financial arrangement, is that correct? That's correct. 219 have
:26:33. > :26:43.completed, is that correct? It was a couple of months ago. 219. 219! This
:26:44. > :26:48.is a failure. No, this is a really bizarre way of looking at it. If I
:26:49. > :26:53.was selling cars and actually, 100,000 cars had gone out of the
:26:54. > :26:56.showroom, but we'd only sold a thousand on finance plans, would you
:26:57. > :27:00.say that's a failure of selling cars? No, you'd say you're not
:27:01. > :27:06.selling many finance plans. If I held it as the biggest programme of
:27:07. > :27:09.housing improvement since the Second World War, and I expected 10,000
:27:10. > :27:13.people to be on it by the end of the year, I think I might consider I'd
:27:14. > :27:17.failed. Firstly, it's a 20-year programme. What we're doing is
:27:18. > :27:20.something that no-one's tried before. It's a completely novel
:27:21. > :27:24.market. There are a number of improvements that we need to make.
:27:25. > :27:28.Let's be clear, I'm not saying the Green Deal is perfect. I'm not
:27:29. > :27:33.saying we have to come forward with further improvements now that we're
:27:34. > :27:37.live and we're listening carefully to what the spliep chain are telling
:27:38. > :27:41.us -- supply chain are telling us. Some may seem technical and small
:27:42. > :27:44.adjustments, but in fact they make a big difference to the way in which
:27:45. > :27:48.it works. For example, people will be able to do a Green Deal in a day.
:27:49. > :27:53.At the moment, it takes a couple of visits. That's holding it back. Come
:27:54. > :27:59.the new year, they'll be able to do a Green Deal in a day. We're looking
:28:00. > :28:04.at ways in which we can cut through some of the paperwork to make it
:28:05. > :28:08.ease whier for people to get a Green Deal. There are certainly things we
:28:09. > :28:11.can do to improve it. Over time, next year, you're going to see an
:28:12. > :28:14.increasing number of people coming into the market to offer the Green
:28:15. > :28:17.Deal. The reality is the supply chain, the people offering the Green
:28:18. > :28:21.Deal, particularly the big six energy companies, have been very
:28:22. > :28:25.cautious to offer this product. But they're going to step up their game.
:28:26. > :28:28.What's really important, what the game changer is going to be is next
:28:29. > :28:33.year, we're going to start offering it street by street on a community
:28:34. > :28:36.basis, on an area basis. We've had a really good response to our
:28:37. > :28:40.community programme. When we start offering Green Deal on a street by
:28:41. > :28:45.street, that's when you get the real take up. Due draft it so badly? Why
:28:46. > :28:50.did we draft it so badly? I don't think we did draft it badly. You're
:28:51. > :28:53.having to make huge changes to it? Which huge changes? The whole street
:28:54. > :28:58.idea you've mentioned, which seems to me or many people - That wasn't
:28:59. > :29:02.in the drafting, that's simply that comes in the next phase. That
:29:03. > :29:06.doesn't change any drafting. We are running the competition, we've had
:29:07. > :29:11.the applications in. We've been overwhelmed by positive response
:29:12. > :29:17.from big metropolitan councils up and down the country - Manchester,
:29:18. > :29:22.Leeds, Birmingham, Bristol, keen to participate and offer it on a street
:29:23. > :29:25.by street basis. I've always said it's the area-based rollout of the
:29:26. > :29:28.deal that's really going to put rockets underneath it. I think
:29:29. > :29:32.that's right. That's when the finance is going to be important.
:29:33. > :29:37.What we want to do now is take the subsidised offer that eco over a
:29:38. > :29:42.quarter of a million homes have had that this year. We want to marry it
:29:43. > :29:46.with the Green Deal. You get a much more joined up offer. It should have
:29:47. > :29:50.been joined up in the first place, shouldn't it? Rome wasn't built in a
:29:51. > :29:55.day and this is a novel product. The important thing is we are improving
:29:56. > :29:59.it as we go. We will be announcing more incentives as Chris said. I
:30:00. > :30:02.have a lot of respect for Chris Huhne. We work together very well,
:30:03. > :30:07.but he's wrong. George Osborne has given us ?200 million. We haven't
:30:08. > :30:11.deployed that money yet. Come next year, we will see steady growth in
:30:12. > :30:14.the Green Deal, which is a 20-year programme, don't write it off yet.
:30:15. > :30:18.Minister, thank you. Now, two men will be sentenced
:30:19. > :30:22.tomorrow for their part in a horrible example of mob justice.
:30:23. > :30:27.Their victim was a disabled man, whom neighbours became convinced was
:30:28. > :30:30.a paedophile. He wasn't. But that didn't save him from being beaten
:30:31. > :30:33.unconscious and then set on fire. There are two separate
:30:34. > :30:40.investigations going on into the case now. Jon Kay has more in a
:30:41. > :30:45.report which some viewers may find disturbing.
:30:46. > :30:49.He was such a clever guy. He was very funny. He was a good brother.
:30:50. > :31:00.He was very kind. He was a good uncle. He really made our life so
:31:01. > :31:11.fun for us. We cared about him so much. Maneesha remembering her
:31:12. > :31:16.younger brother Bijan Ebrahimi. He came to Britain as a refugee from
:31:17. > :31:20.Iran a decade ago. He believed he would be safer here. But this
:31:21. > :31:25.summer, he was kicked to death and his body set on fire because
:31:26. > :31:35.neighbours wrongly thought he was a paedophile. Losing someone is really
:31:36. > :31:41.difficult to come to terms with, but losing someone in such a way, it's
:31:42. > :31:48.unimaginable for us to come to terms with that. You never, ever thought
:31:49. > :31:54.that anyone can do such a barbaric act. He lived alone on a Council
:31:55. > :32:00.estate on the outskirts of Bristol. His garden was his pride and joy.
:32:01. > :32:06.But four months on, his home is abandoned. There's little to
:32:07. > :32:12.indicate what happened here. Avon and Somerset Police say the rumours
:32:13. > :32:17.that became rife here this summer were completely untrue. Officers
:32:18. > :32:22.have told me that Bijan Ebrahimi was not a paedophile, that an entirely
:32:23. > :32:27.innocent man was murdered. So for his family, the question is: How
:32:28. > :32:31.could things have got so out of control? With them out of the
:32:32. > :32:40.country at the time, what could have been done to protect him? Lee James,
:32:41. > :32:45.who lived just a couple of doors away, has admitted murdering Bijan
:32:46. > :32:49.Ebrahimi. Another neighbour, Stephen Norley, has admitted assisting James
:32:50. > :32:58.in setting the body on fire. They will be sentenced tomorrow. A CCTV
:32:59. > :33:03.camera caught the pair that night. Bijan's body was dragged to a piece
:33:04. > :33:13.of grass 100 yards from his home and then set alight. He wasn't a
:33:14. > :33:17.paedophile. He made life, losing him so difficult to come to terms of
:33:18. > :33:24.losing him in such ape way. And then having that allegation, which is
:33:25. > :33:28.completely untrue. It seems the paedophile rumours started because
:33:29. > :33:33.Bijan Ebrahimi had been taking photos on the estate. His family
:33:34. > :33:37.says he'd been told by the authorities to gather evidence of
:33:38. > :33:45.harassment, because he was trying to get re-housed. The council is now
:33:46. > :33:51.carrying out its own investigation. He was just a one-off thing. Over
:33:52. > :34:00.the years, he was subjected to these incidents. Thi was motivating these
:34:01. > :34:08.incidents? Was it racial? Based on his disability? Why was he being
:34:09. > :34:12.picked on? Both. Just because, I think he felt they was different
:34:13. > :34:21.that they picked on him. Ittuals a hate crime. -- it was a hate crime,
:34:22. > :34:26.obviously. You can feel it. It was a hate crime. A couple of days before
:34:27. > :34:31.Bijan Ebrahimi was murdered, there was a disturbance outside his home.
:34:32. > :34:37.He was taken away by police. He came back to his flat the following day,
:34:38. > :34:42.having been released without charge. But given the tensions here, and the
:34:43. > :34:46.fact that his relatives were all abroad, his family feel he should
:34:47. > :34:58.not have been allowed to return home. 48 hours later, he was dead.
:34:59. > :35:01.The IPCC are now looking at the way Bijan's was dealt with in the days
:35:02. > :35:06.before he died. We can't prejudge that. What do you want answers to
:35:07. > :35:15.when that investigation report finally comes out? We want to know
:35:16. > :35:18.that, we want to find out what happened to Bijan's in the last few
:35:19. > :35:23.days, as I said, he made so many calls. We want to know what calls he
:35:24. > :35:31.made. We want to know why, if he asked for help, why they didn't give
:35:32. > :35:36.him the help that he deserved. The Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset
:35:37. > :35:41.Police has already said that collectively the agencies and
:35:42. > :35:49.authorities failed your brother. When you heard that, what was your
:35:50. > :35:56.reaction? When you heard the word "we failed him"? Disappointed,
:35:57. > :36:02.frustrated and sad. How could someone like him or anyone else,
:36:03. > :36:12.could be failed by so many agencies, not one, two, so many people that
:36:13. > :36:17.were involved. I wish they can coordinate with each other better,
:36:18. > :36:23.in a better way that no-one goes through this failure again and
:36:24. > :36:31.no-one be subjected to this sort of tragic way of being murdered. Do you
:36:32. > :36:36.feel failed as a family by what has happened to your brother? Yes. We
:36:37. > :36:44.are failed by the system. We feel so strongly about it. We are so
:36:45. > :36:53.disappointed. We feel so let down by the police and other agencies. We
:36:54. > :36:57.would like to know why. That report from Jon Kay. Now the murky world of
:36:58. > :37:01.Falkirk politics. You might recall the original short list of Labour
:37:02. > :37:04.candidates to fight the general election in that seat was mired in
:37:05. > :37:09.controversy over claims that the party's main donor, the union,
:37:10. > :37:13.Unite, had tried to fix the choice of candidate by packing the
:37:14. > :37:18.constituency with its members. One as yet unpublished inquiry late
:37:19. > :37:21.irand a -- later and a new short list will be announced tomorrow. One
:37:22. > :37:25.name is notably absent from the list, that of the whistle-blower who
:37:26. > :37:29.made the original allegations against unite and the only local
:37:30. > :37:34.candidate in the constituency. Chris Mason can tell us more. What's
:37:35. > :37:37.happened? The woman in question Linda Gowe is the original
:37:38. > :37:41.whistle-blower. There's been a protest to draw up a short list of
:37:42. > :37:48.Labour candidates to replace Eric Joyce, who is sitting down after the
:37:49. > :37:52.dust up in a House of Commons bar. Newsnight approached Linda Gowe
:37:53. > :37:56.tonight, she was surprised to see us and not entirely delighted but
:37:57. > :38:00.confirmed that she hasn't made the final short list of three. Why has
:38:01. > :38:05.that happened? She was pretty spiky in an interview in the Herald
:38:06. > :38:07.newspaper about the protest, about this unpublished report about what
:38:08. > :38:12.went on, saying it should be published. What are Labour saying?
:38:13. > :38:15.They're saying it's a load of nonsense to suggest this was a
:38:16. > :38:20.stitch up and that she's been sat on and punished in any way. There was
:38:21. > :38:24.an open process with five senior figures selecting this final short
:38:25. > :38:27.list. That was honest and transparent. There hasn't been, as I
:38:28. > :38:33.say, any sort of sense of aI stitch-up. Why does this matter,
:38:34. > :38:38.subsection 42 of a local spat? Why should we care? It's still running
:38:39. > :38:42.as a septic sore for Labour. They're looking at how they fund themselves
:38:43. > :38:48.with the trades unions. We haven't heard the last of this, I suspect. .
:38:49. > :38:52.Now, had a fizzy drink today? Did you enjoy the vast quaunts of sugar
:38:53. > :38:56.you gulped down? The quickest glance down the High Street will tell you
:38:57. > :39:00.how horribly obese much of the population has become. And doctors
:39:01. > :39:04.are increasingly saying that sugary drinks are a main reason and that
:39:05. > :39:08.they ought, like cigarettes, to be taxed to put people off buying them.
:39:09. > :39:13.It's an idea the drinks manufacturers hate. But campaigners
:39:14. > :39:18.say that also echoes the smoking debate. Look what the tobacco
:39:19. > :39:22.companies said and did. The appeal of fizzy drinks is
:39:23. > :39:26.obvious enough, an instant pleasure that's supposed to perk you up. But
:39:27. > :39:31.the active ingrowedient is old fashioned sugar, lots of it. A
:39:32. > :39:35.single can of cola can contain the equivalent of up to nine tea spoons
:39:36. > :39:40.full of the stuff. As doctors came to real aisles that cigarettes did
:39:41. > :39:44.not, as their makers claimed, make you healthy, they're now worrying
:39:45. > :39:48.about fizzy drinks. One of the biggest problems facing the Western
:39:49. > :39:54.world at the moment is the obesity crisis. Added sugar has no
:39:55. > :39:58.nutritional value whatsoever. The body does not require any
:39:59. > :40:02.carbohydrate from added sugar, despite the fact that the industry
:40:03. > :40:06.markets these products as being full of energy. Believe me, it's energy
:40:07. > :40:10.you don't want. It's energy you are don't need. So we know the
:40:11. > :40:14.consumption of just one sugary drink, typical of a can of coal ya,
:40:15. > :40:19.increases the risk of type two diabetes about 22%, independent of
:40:20. > :40:26.body weight. This study was published from Imperial College
:40:27. > :40:30.rere-- research. Believe me, type two diabetes is a condition you do
:40:31. > :40:34.not want to get if you can avoid it. It is entirely preventible. This
:40:35. > :40:38.condition is associated with heart attacks, strokes, kidney disease,
:40:39. > :40:44.blindness, amputation, increased risk of depression, increased risk
:40:45. > :40:48.of Alzheimer's and incooessing the risk of many cancers. Coca-Cola is
:40:49. > :40:53.introducing a new smaller can for the UK. Does it demonstrate a new
:40:54. > :41:01.commitment to tackling obesity or just a cleverer way to sell sugar?
:41:02. > :41:06.James Quincey is the president of Coca-Cola Europe. What good does
:41:07. > :41:11.Coca-Cola do you physically? I think Coca-Cola, as the introduction said,
:41:12. > :41:16.does have some sugar in it. It is energy. Is it a necessity? No, it's
:41:17. > :41:21.not. Millions of people enjoy it as part of their diet across the UK.
:41:22. > :41:24.Does have some sugar in it, you say. It does. Why don't you say
:41:25. > :41:31.specifically how much sugar there is in this can, for example? I think if
:41:32. > :41:36.you find, if you turn... You have a percentage on there. Yes right here
:41:37. > :41:42.on the front it quite clearly calls out the amount of sugar in this can
:41:43. > :41:48.of coke, 35 grams, which is six tea spoons of sugar, which is about the
:41:49. > :41:53.same amount of calories as a cappuccino or half a croissant.
:41:54. > :41:56.We're saying look, the information is here. We want to promote and make
:41:57. > :42:00.sure people know. If people know that they go to the cinema and get a
:42:01. > :42:04.small one and there are big ones here too, if you get a jug of coke
:42:05. > :42:10.like this, do you think people have any idea how much sugar is in it?
:42:11. > :42:20.Maybe they don't. Do you know what it is? Look at this. 23 sachets of
:42:21. > :42:24.sugar in that single containers. That is a staggering amount of
:42:25. > :42:27.sugar, isn't it? That is why we're very focussed as one of the things
:42:28. > :42:31.we're doing on getting the information out there. We're not
:42:32. > :42:36.trying to hide the information behind what's in hay Coca-Cola
:42:37. > :42:43.classic. But there's zero sugar in a coke zero. But the classic here,
:42:44. > :42:49.there's 44 packets of sugar in this one. 44! Indeed there are. I think
:42:50. > :42:52.what we're saying is look, we want to make sure that people have the
:42:53. > :42:56.information available to them so that they can make the choices and
:42:57. > :43:00.if they don't want the big one, then fine, clearly that is not one that's
:43:01. > :43:02.going to be for everyone. We want to make sure the information is
:43:03. > :43:06.available. We want to make sure there's more availability of more
:43:07. > :43:09.choices, whether it's smaller packages, as you had in your
:43:10. > :43:13.intro... Whether it's 23 in something this size or 44 in
:43:14. > :43:17.something this size, each of which is to be consumed in one single
:43:18. > :43:21.sitting at the cinema, this is staggering, isn't it? Look, I think
:43:22. > :43:26.we do need to recognise that things need to change. Bigger cups need to
:43:27. > :43:29.come down. I don't think we are talking that the world can't change
:43:30. > :43:33.and the world doesn't need to move on. What it comes back to is we
:43:34. > :43:38.recognise that the, we need to play our part in helping to fix this very
:43:39. > :43:41.important issue of obesity. It's something that's come about from us
:43:42. > :43:45.taking in too manical Rhyls and not burning them off with CAC tit. Many
:43:46. > :43:53.things too many calories and not burning
:43:54. > :43:57.them off can activity. We're increasing choices of the small
:43:58. > :44:01.cans, helping people manage their calories, promoting the zero calorie
:44:02. > :44:06.options, if people are having trouble. You accept your role in the
:44:07. > :44:10.obesity epidemic do you? I think as a contributor of calories into the
:44:11. > :44:13.British diet, of course we must. Soft drinks, all soft drinks
:44:14. > :44:17.together contribute 2% of the calories. It's a part of it.
:44:18. > :44:21.Therefore we need to accept our role and we do. That's why we want to
:44:22. > :44:25.focus on actions that we believe will help bring this crisis under
:44:26. > :44:30.control. What you're doing very similar to what the tobacco
:44:31. > :44:34.companies did when, after the link with cancer had been established,
:44:35. > :44:38.started then trying to get us all to smoke light cigarettes, as opposed
:44:39. > :44:41.to saying don't have any of them? I think there's a very clear
:44:42. > :44:44.distinction between tobacco and anything to do with food and drink.
:44:45. > :44:50.Because in the end, there's no amount of tobacco that's good for
:44:51. > :44:53.you. It directly causes some of the diseases. With food and drink,
:44:54. > :44:58.anything in moderation can work within your lifestyle. Unwave -- one
:44:59. > :45:02.of these packets in a cup of tea during the course of a day, maybe
:45:03. > :45:08.even two, but 23 in the smallest container at the cinema? The reality
:45:09. > :45:12.people aren't drinking those - and I think what we need to focus on, if
:45:13. > :45:14.we're trying to solve obesity it's about information. If you have the
:45:15. > :45:17.information and you decide or whoever decides not to have it,
:45:18. > :45:21.absolutely fine, what we're here to do is get the information into
:45:22. > :45:25.people's hands, help them make the choices that fit their lifestyle,
:45:26. > :45:30.their choices during a week, and also, get out there and try to
:45:31. > :45:33.promote activity with some NGO partners to try and help the other
:45:34. > :45:37.side of the equation and burn off some of those calories. When you
:45:38. > :45:42.look out there, has anyone actually solved the crisis? Sometimes we look
:45:43. > :45:48.at things and say, well, what will work? But sometimes we have to look
:45:49. > :45:51.at things that has happened. There's an approach started in France, moved
:45:52. > :45:54.across Europe is now spreading across the world, where they've
:45:55. > :46:00.brought down childhood obesity by 20%. It's not by taking some eye
:46:01. > :46:05.catching or simple measures, they did a number of things bringing in
:46:06. > :46:09.private companies, health companies, local government, communities and
:46:10. > :46:17.brought down childhood obesity by 20%. Very much. Tomorrow morning's
:46:18. > :46:22.front pages: I only have one here: It's the Times - it says that David
:46:23. > :46:26.Cameron has decided that cigarettes are going to be sold in plain
:46:27. > :46:32.packages before the next general election. Now, this was a position
:46:33. > :46:39.which the Conservatives, up to now, had rejected. Chris Mason is still
:46:40. > :46:43.here. So, quite dramatic, isn't it? Yes, something of a U-turn on a
:46:44. > :46:48.U-turn. The Government went cold on this idea about six months ago. Now
:46:49. > :46:51.they're having a review about it, an open mind about the outcome. There
:46:52. > :46:55.will be time to legislate after that review in the spring, if it's
:46:56. > :46:59.something they want to role with. It would appear they have gone from a
:47:00. > :47:02.position of being cold, to being warmer towards it. It's a second
:47:03. > :47:05.example in a couple of days of them being seen to stand up to big
:47:06. > :47:08.business after the payday loan stuff, which is interesting.
:47:09. > :47:13.Thank you. That's all from us tonight. In case you missed it,
:47:14. > :47:16.Prince William has been all over the media, after appearing with a couple
:47:17. > :47:28.of Popstars supporting a charity for homeless young people.
:47:29. > :47:32.# Oohhh, living on a prayer # As you saw, he didn't have time to
:47:33. > :47:37.perform much himself, but at the flash of the Newsnight petty cash
:47:38. > :47:39.box, his reticence vanish. We are short of time, but better late than
:47:40. > :47:43.never.