06/01/2014

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:09. > :00:14.You Hello, happy new year. Unless electioneering politicians get on

:00:15. > :00:18.your nerves in which case you have 16 months of irritation to look

:00:19. > :00:22.forward to and photo shoots. The Chancellor is keen for us to know

:00:23. > :00:28.there are plenty more cuts on the way and that those on benefits can

:00:29. > :00:31.take a lot more pain. I will be asking this Treasury Minister why he

:00:32. > :00:37.wants to pick on the most vulnerable people in society? Will this

:00:38. > :00:41.brilliant plan involve us climbing out of our trenches and walking very

:00:42. > :00:46.slowly towards the enemy, Sir? How could you possibly know that, it is

:00:47. > :00:49.classified information. Has our understanding of the First World War

:00:50. > :00:52.been distorted by left-wing prejudice? The Education Secretary

:00:53. > :01:02.suggests this man might have something to do with it. I saw you

:01:03. > :01:07.talking with her? Tell me? I cannot speak about what did not occur. And

:01:08. > :01:11.the film they are saying is the most unflinching portrayal of American

:01:12. > :01:19.slavery et. We talk to its director. I don't make films for white people!

:01:20. > :01:30.I just don't! My film is about us rather than specific group of

:01:31. > :01:34.people. The political new year began today, not that it looks very

:01:35. > :01:36.different to the last one. Indeed the Chancellor of the Exchequer's

:01:37. > :01:42.promises that next year will look much the same too. He believes

:01:43. > :01:46.another ?25 billion has to be cut from public spending after the next

:01:47. > :01:52.election. About half of that from welfare. Cue Nick Clegg, leader of

:01:53. > :01:57.the party he's suppose to be governing with saying cuts like that

:01:58. > :02:06.will be a monumental mistake. Our political thor Allegra Stratton is

:02:07. > :02:10.away having given birth to a son and Emily Maitless is covering.

:02:11. > :02:17.The sound of Christmas past, the removal of the fir and tree and

:02:18. > :02:22.amidst the odd bauble or two Westminster welcomed the day they

:02:23. > :02:26.reassuringly dubbed "the most depressing of the year". A bit of a

:02:27. > :02:30.back to school feeling, washed out and defeated by the weather before

:02:31. > :02:37.it had begun. But today is not just any day, you understand, today is an

:02:38. > :02:40.historic 16 months and... Let's see, seven hours until the polls open to

:02:41. > :02:44.the general election. I point that out in case some how you failed to

:02:45. > :02:52.notice the sound of the starting gun in the mounting political rhetoric

:02:53. > :02:54.of the last 24 hours. The high-visibility Chancellor, for

:02:55. > :03:00.example, unmissable in Birmingham. He began the day with a warning of

:03:01. > :03:03.hard truths and stark figures. ?25 billion of spending cuts, he stated,

:03:04. > :03:08.would be taken in the first two years of the next parliament, nearly

:03:09. > :03:12.half of those cuts will come from one department. Welfare cannot be

:03:13. > :03:18.protected from further substantial cuts. I can tell you today that on

:03:19. > :03:21.the Treasury's current forecasts, ?12 billion of further welfare cuts

:03:22. > :03:26.are needed in the first two years of the next parliament. Yesterday the

:03:27. > :03:30.Conservatives committed to the triple-lock on pensions for the

:03:31. > :03:33.elderly, protecting the way they rise through the next parliament.

:03:34. > :03:39.This means George Osborne's cuts to welfare will have to come from

:03:40. > :03:45.elsewhere. Welfare is by far the largest departmental budget in terms

:03:46. > :03:51.of spending, a massive ?2 O2 billion of all. Of that ?63 billion is the

:03:52. > :03:56.state pension, now protected by the PM. Another ?48 billion goes to

:03:57. > :04:02.pensioners on top of the state pension, those are benefits that

:04:03. > :04:08.haven't been explicitly ring-fenced for the parliament. What is left,

:04:09. > :04:12.?29 tax credit, ?18 billion disability benefits or ?17 billion

:04:13. > :04:17.on housing. If you exclude anything that goes to pensioners you have

:04:18. > :04:20.another ?90 billion that goes to working-age people. There are lots

:04:21. > :04:24.of benefits there, you can take more child benefit away if you want. You

:04:25. > :04:30.reduce any of these things, most of that cut will hit relatively

:04:31. > :04:34.low-income people. What do the Chancellor's coalition partners make

:04:35. > :04:37.of this morning's announcement. Minutes after the speech, the new

:04:38. > :04:43.girl asked the deputy PM. Welcome, it is your first day! REPORTER: It

:04:44. > :04:48.is, and a big announcement, would you be happy then to sign up to ?12

:04:49. > :04:51.billion of welfare cuts? No, we haven't and we won't during this

:04:52. > :04:54.coalition Government. Because what we have said is that tax, for

:04:55. > :04:59.instance, has to play a role, of course it does, and tax on those,

:05:00. > :05:03.and tax, like any fair approach to tax, is asking people, particularly

:05:04. > :05:07.those with the broadest shoulders and greatest wealth to make a small

:05:08. > :05:12.additional contribution. We believe you can finish that job but do it

:05:13. > :05:15.for fairly than the ideolgically driven approach that the

:05:16. > :05:20.Conservatives appeared to set out. Come on Nick, tell us what you

:05:21. > :05:26.really think! I think that is economically and lob sided balanced,

:05:27. > :05:30.a monumental mistake... Extreme in its undertaking... Unbalanced and

:05:31. > :05:34.unfair. This might be part of the differenciation strategy, but it is

:05:35. > :05:37.already sounding turbo-charged, with friends like these, who needs an

:05:38. > :05:41.opposition? Whether or not we need cuts on that scale will depend upon

:05:42. > :05:43.whether we can get the economy growing more strongly, whether we

:05:44. > :05:47.can get young people back to work and whether he will face up to fair

:05:48. > :05:51.decisions, as we have advocated to take away the windswepter allowance

:05:52. > :05:55.from the richest pensioners, at the moment fairness steams to be the

:05:56. > :06:00.issue George Osborne is looking left, right and centre. Today was

:06:01. > :06:03.about hard truth, but maybe not the ones the Chancellor had in mind.

:06:04. > :06:08.Don't think it was just economic, today was pure politics. The

:06:09. > :06:13.Conservatives would like the next election to be 1992 all over again.

:06:14. > :06:18.An election they won in hard times. So the message today was cautious

:06:19. > :06:24.and slightly scary. We're not there yet, he's trying to say, so don't

:06:25. > :06:27.even think about throwing us out. With us now is Sajid Javid the

:06:28. > :06:32.Conservative Financial Secretary to the Treasury, also here the Shadow

:06:33. > :06:39.Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Labour's Chris Leslie. ?12 billion

:06:40. > :06:42.reckoned to be saved from the welfare benefit, which benefits will

:06:43. > :06:46.be cut? We have set out today a strategy to deal with the economy

:06:47. > :06:51.and to make sure it continues to recover. That means continuing to

:06:52. > :06:54.make some very hard decision, that is what the Chancellor set out

:06:55. > :06:57.today. The hard work of the British people is paying off, we are not

:06:58. > :07:01.going to squander those efforts and we are faced with the choice.

:07:02. > :07:05.Britain is faced with a choice. We can go back to the bad old days of

:07:06. > :07:08.more borrowing and more debt, Labour's way, or go forward and

:07:09. > :07:13.continue to have a growing economy which means dealing with the hard

:07:14. > :07:16.truths. Do you remember what my question was, come on? I want to set

:07:17. > :07:20.the context, I will of course come to your question. A very important

:07:21. > :07:24.question. We have spending cuts this year and next year, which includes

:07:25. > :07:27.welfare cuts, and what the Chancellor set out today, beyond the

:07:28. > :07:32.next election, there is a further ?25 billion of cuts, ?12 billion

:07:33. > :07:35.will be welfare cuts. The Chancellor has given suggestions today about

:07:36. > :07:39.what kind of welfare cuts we are thinking of. But we're going to have

:07:40. > :07:44.to deal with the welfare budget, as we have just seen in your piece just

:07:45. > :07:48.now, it is still the second-largest item of Government spending, we are

:07:49. > :07:52.not able to bring the budgets books back into balance. This is a very

:07:53. > :07:57.important question, which benefits do you propose to cut? What we set

:07:58. > :08:01.out today, two benefits specifically, we are going to look

:08:02. > :08:06.at housing benefits for under-25s and people in council houses that

:08:07. > :08:11.earn more than ?26,000 a year. I will come to you in a second Chris

:08:12. > :08:15.Leslie, don't worry. Housing benefit for the under-25s, if you cut that

:08:16. > :08:19.how much money will you save? It won't lead to the whole ?12 billion,

:08:20. > :08:24.that is not our strategy. How much? We set out a process today of the

:08:25. > :08:27.types of cuts we are thinking of. We are not going to write our next

:08:28. > :08:32.election manifesto right now. But what we are going to do. Give us a

:08:33. > :08:36.rough idea? It depends on how you finally set out the policy and we

:08:37. > :08:40.have not set out every detail of that particular policy. It is

:08:41. > :08:47.something we are looking at. I'm not even asking to the nearest million,

:08:48. > :08:51.the nearest billion will do? Of a total ?12 billion that can be an

:08:52. > :08:55.important component of it, I'm not suggesting for a second it adds up

:08:56. > :08:58.to the ?12 billion, nor is the Chancellor suggesting that. What we

:08:59. > :09:02.are saying is these are the kind of tough decisions we need to make. It

:09:03. > :09:06.comes to nowhere near ?12 billion, it is somewhere under ?2 isn't it?

:09:07. > :09:12.Some of the estimates we have heard today from some of the economists is

:09:13. > :09:16.around the ?2 billion. It depends on the final detail. We have begun a

:09:17. > :09:20.very important process, which confronts these hard truths. I

:09:21. > :09:24.wonder if you have thought this through properly, let me show you

:09:25. > :09:29.this piece of tape, a young woman, 22 years old, lives in west London,

:09:30. > :09:33.this is what it would mean to her, this is how she depends on the

:09:34. > :09:37.benefit you propose to cut. Let's hear it? Growing up it felt I had to

:09:38. > :09:42.grow up fast. The disagreements with like my mum and my brothers and

:09:43. > :09:46.sisters is because like I told them that I was gay. I went upstairs to

:09:47. > :09:50.my room, all my stuff was packed up in boxes and I went downstairs and I

:09:51. > :09:53.said to my mum what are you doing. She said I didn't live here. I

:09:54. > :09:58.stayed between friends of friends, you are constantly moving, you don't

:09:59. > :10:06.feel safe, you don't feel stable. I just spoke to the council again and

:10:07. > :10:13.just finally it got through to them and practically I got place in

:10:14. > :10:19.Centrepoint. So it is about ?170 per month just to live here. But housing

:10:20. > :10:24.benefit helps towards actually me having a roof over my head. It is

:10:25. > :10:29.not a lifestyle choice for us. You need it. If you don't have it then

:10:30. > :10:33.you are homeless. Right, so if you cut housing benefit for

:10:34. > :10:39.under-25-year-olds, there is no money to pay for the place in the

:10:40. > :10:44.hostel which a girl like that has. Let me tell you, first of all there

:10:45. > :10:48.are many under-25-year-olds that work, they pay taxes which make the

:10:49. > :10:53.money that helps to pay these benefits. Indeed they are. Many of

:10:54. > :10:58.them live with parents or friends. Where as people under-25 that are

:10:59. > :11:02.not working are currently entitled to housing benefit as you have seen.

:11:03. > :11:05.What we need to do to make sure people like this young lady and many

:11:06. > :11:08.others have a better standard of living is making sure we have a

:11:09. > :11:12.growing economy and the economy continues to grow. We are only going

:11:13. > :11:15.to achieve that if we keep confronting the problems facing our

:11:16. > :11:18.country. We cannot go back to the bad old ways. We have to make tough

:11:19. > :11:22.decisions and if it is not welfare it has to come from somewhere else,

:11:23. > :11:27.those are equally tough decisions. She has just to hope for the

:11:28. > :11:32.benefits of a growing economy. Has she? Let me ask you another specific

:11:33. > :11:34.question, you cut housing benefits for under-25-year-olds, does that

:11:35. > :11:38.include those who have children? We haven't set out the details of this

:11:39. > :11:41.policy, nor were we going to today. What we are showing is we are

:11:42. > :11:45.willing to deal with the hard truths facing our country. We will confront

:11:46. > :11:50.these tough decisions and make sure our economy continues to grow and

:11:51. > :11:54.the recovery is not put at risk. Chris Leslie, how many of these

:11:55. > :12:00.proposed benefit cuts, you will probably be no more specific than Mr

:12:01. > :12:04.Javid has been now. But of the ?12 billion which these guys are going

:12:05. > :12:10.to cut from the welfare budget at the next election, how much would

:12:11. > :12:16.Labour cut? You gave Sajid Javid a moment to put it into context I

:12:17. > :12:19.require that. He has dreamt up this figure for ?25 billion for four

:12:20. > :12:22.years time. A sensible Government would look at the state of the

:12:23. > :12:25.economy and make decisions based on what the economy needs. The

:12:26. > :12:29.Conservatives, George Osborne, we know they are playing politics, they

:12:30. > :12:35.plucked this ?25 billion out of the air as part of a political game to

:12:36. > :12:38.some how create dividing lines. No cuts? No, and we have gone further,

:12:39. > :12:45.to be fair than any other opposition by saying we would not borrow

:12:46. > :12:49.further in 2015/16, the only year they have done this Spending Review

:12:50. > :12:54.for day-to-day spending. But the key thing is this, yes we will have to

:12:55. > :12:57.have cuts, but they have to have fair and support growth in the

:12:58. > :13:01.economy. That will be the dividing line between the parties. Specific

:13:02. > :13:03.example of the young woman we saw there, you would not cut the

:13:04. > :13:08.benefits of someone like that? It is a very good question. I'm asking

:13:09. > :13:11.you? Housing benefit under-25s, what about people leaving care, you

:13:12. > :13:16.mentioned the case in point. What would you do about it? I think what

:13:17. > :13:20.we need to do is for the housing benefit bill, it has gone up

:13:21. > :13:24.considerably under welfare costs that have risen because people's

:13:25. > :13:27.earnings have fallen. There is a lot of people in work who get housing

:13:28. > :13:31.benefit and that bill has gone up. If we dealt with the cost of living

:13:32. > :13:34.crisis we could reduce the housing benefit. Can you make a promise to

:13:35. > :13:37.that woman and others in her position that you would not make

:13:38. > :13:41.these cuts? I don't think it would be fair to hit her even further than

:13:42. > :13:44.she has already been suffering because of the cost of living

:13:45. > :13:47.crisis. You can make her a promise? It is the difference in political

:13:48. > :13:50.value, I happen to think in society you have to stand up for those?

:13:51. > :13:55.Vulnerable. You are making a pledge? We wouldn't do the bedroom tax, you

:13:56. > :13:59.look at the list. We're not talking about the bedroom tax? These are the

:14:00. > :14:04.examples of fairness versus unfairness, we wouldn't give a tax

:14:05. > :14:10.cut to the richest ?150,000 earners, which Sajid Javid decided to do in

:14:11. > :14:15.shape, cutting it from 50p to 45p at a time when people can't get food on

:14:16. > :14:19.the table, the foodbank queue, think about people struggling to heat

:14:20. > :14:22.homes. You have a very unfair society, made more unfair because of

:14:23. > :14:25.your uncaring approach to managing the economy and the cost of living

:14:26. > :14:31.crisis which is getting worse not better. What What we have heard from

:14:32. > :14:35.Chris is exactly whey said, an inability to confront the hard

:14:36. > :14:39.truths facing our country. More spending, more borrowing and more

:14:40. > :14:43.debt. That is the only policy he has. You have neglected growth. You

:14:44. > :14:47.were asked about housing benefit, the only policy that your party

:14:48. > :14:51.currently has on housing benefit that you have committed to and

:14:52. > :14:55.include in the next manifesto is increase it to make sure people have

:14:56. > :14:58.more rooms than they need in their home. That is the only policy they

:14:59. > :15:01.have. Do you understand the point I was making when their earnings fall,

:15:02. > :15:10.of course the housing benefit rise, the cost of living has an effect on

:15:11. > :15:13.the Welfare Bill. I want to turn to the panel, there was a moment when

:15:14. > :15:21.we saw something acutely political going on, what did you think it was

:15:22. > :15:25.Chris is right it is a dividing line speech which you can like or not. It

:15:26. > :15:32.is a dividing line speech on the deficit, trying to move the agenda

:15:33. > :15:36.back from the cogs -- cost of living issues raised before Christmas to

:15:37. > :15:40.the agenda on the deficit, which is the big one. It will face all the

:15:41. > :15:43.parties with difficult decisions. Ultimately it will face Labour with

:15:44. > :15:47.difficult decisions about what to cut, because there are billions of

:15:48. > :15:52.pounds that can't be covered by tax rises unless you are assuming

:15:53. > :15:55.massive tax rises. Obviously it will mean the Conservative Party goes

:15:56. > :16:01.into the election with a difficult message as well. Your adoring fans

:16:02. > :16:07.of course know who you are, I forgot to introduce you all, Lord Fink,

:16:08. > :16:12.John McTiernan, former Labour big wig, and Linda Jack from the Liberal

:16:13. > :16:20.Democrats. When you see this marking out of terrain, how will it play, do

:16:21. > :16:24.you think? I think what you have seen today was George Osborne going

:16:25. > :16:29.too far. He is a politician who is too clever by half. He could just

:16:30. > :16:32.have stuck the figure of ?25 billion out there and said to Labour what

:16:33. > :16:35.are you going to do and watched Labour struggle with the question

:16:36. > :16:41.you asked Chris, Chris has been asked to give a Labour manifesto

:16:42. > :16:45.today, when we're 16 months away from an election, it would have been

:16:46. > :16:48.a good ploy. To say ?12 billion to come out of the welfare budget, and

:16:49. > :16:51.no answer to the question which areas do you mean. I tell you what

:16:52. > :16:56.areas he means, that budget is benefits to children, child benefit

:16:57. > :17:02.and tax credit for children, it is benefits for disabled people, or it

:17:03. > :17:06.is housing benefit. ?12 billion ?1,000 a year. Most of it goes to

:17:07. > :17:10.old people? They have excluded that, they have said there is ?110 billion

:17:11. > :17:15.you can't touch. You have a small amount of money. I do not believe

:17:16. > :17:18.that George Osborne is going to go into an election actually with the

:17:19. > :17:23.kind of cuts that you would have to have to make ?12 billion from

:17:24. > :17:27.welfare. Unelectable, that is what a party would be, unelectable if they

:17:28. > :17:30.took the money from disabled people. Isn't the purpose of setting out the

:17:31. > :17:33.figure looked at stragically that Labour will also have to answer the

:17:34. > :17:39.question of how it is going to respond to that sort of figure. That

:17:40. > :17:43.is just taking the budget books from the OBR and reading out what the

:17:44. > :17:46.figure is. Labour will also have to have some response to that? The

:17:47. > :17:50.thing that intrigues me about the current situation is, you have a

:17:51. > :17:54.coalition Government which gives the Government of the day a large

:17:55. > :17:57.working majority in parliament, yet whenever a hard question comes up

:17:58. > :18:02.they say what will would Labour do, I tell you the answer, let Labour

:18:03. > :18:06.form a minority Government, you can't say I'm the Government. On the

:18:07. > :18:11.question of the coalition Government isn't it very bizarre indeed when

:18:12. > :18:13.the Deputy Prime Minister says the Chancellor of the Exchequer is

:18:14. > :18:19.talking rubbish? To be honest it is a long time I have said I agree with

:18:20. > :18:23.Nick but today I do. He has at last got back to what our core values are

:18:24. > :18:27.as Liberal Democrats when we say no-one should be enslaved by

:18:28. > :18:32.poverty, ignorance or conformity. The clip you just played, I would

:18:33. > :18:36.have expected a difference response from you. That young woman to live

:18:37. > :18:39.in those conditions, I have an 18-year-old foster daughter you are

:18:40. > :18:42.going to take her housing benefit away from you. You are hitting the

:18:43. > :18:47.most vulnerable when they are most vulnerable and you are doing no cost

:18:48. > :18:53.analysis, I never see any cost benefit analysis of what you

:18:54. > :18:55.propose. Ultimately, this is what the election will be about, clearly

:18:56. > :18:59.you are correct both of you that the Conservative Party has to be very

:19:00. > :19:03.careful as an answer about fairness, it does have to answer what the

:19:04. > :19:06.point of doing it is otherwise all people will see is cuts. That is a

:19:07. > :19:09.big electoral challenge for the Conservative Party. For the Liberal

:19:10. > :19:13.Democrats and Labour the figure remains ?25 billion, it has to be

:19:14. > :19:17.filled. Why does it remain. Where did that figure come from? Unless

:19:18. > :19:20.you decide to put up a lot of taxes? Unless the Liberal Democrats will go

:19:21. > :19:25.into the election saying that the deficit totals they have agreed to

:19:26. > :19:29.they don't agree any more. There was a report last week from the BMJ

:19:30. > :19:34.about the cost of malnutrition, children going into hospital with

:19:35. > :19:37.malnutrition, if you look at the cost benefit. That is what I'm

:19:38. > :19:41.saying, you can't look at the cuts without the consequences. If you

:19:42. > :19:46.start to look at how you make cuts sensible. The Liberal Democrats

:19:47. > :19:53.agreed to deficit totals and now the Government. Sorry Nick Clegg and

:19:54. > :19:58.Danny Alexander agreed! The Liberal Democrats have signed up. We are a

:19:59. > :20:01.democratic party, wait until our conference makes a decision on our

:20:02. > :20:04.manifesto. You are not speaking for the Liberal Democrats then. They are

:20:05. > :20:09.not either, because we don't have a decision come through the

:20:10. > :20:13.conference. We are democratic as a party. I think it would be hard for

:20:14. > :20:17.the Liberal Democrats, we now have a disagreement on this, it would be

:20:18. > :20:22.hard for them to walk away from the figures they agreed to. Those

:20:23. > :20:25.figures imply ?25 billion, perhaps the Labour Party will have slightly

:20:26. > :20:29.easier deficit terms, Chris says we don't know the exact figure, we know

:20:30. > :20:32.it will be many billions of pounds. The question will be for all the

:20:33. > :20:36.parties, I agree. The Conservative Party will have to have a response.

:20:37. > :20:39.How are they going to fill that? I would love it if it was not a

:20:40. > :20:43.difficulty for anyone that is not realistic. The problem you have got,

:20:44. > :20:46.and you have articulated it well, the problem is ordinary people

:20:47. > :20:54.seeing this see a Government that says they will take ?12 billion out

:20:55. > :21:01.of a specific set of benefits, but as has a minister that can't name a

:21:02. > :21:05.single benefit he will reduce. If we are having hard decisions let's have

:21:06. > :21:11.hard information. There is something else, I thought you chaps weren't

:21:12. > :21:13.going to take part in this conversation. There is something

:21:14. > :21:16.else, if George Osborne is right and the economy is starting to get

:21:17. > :21:21.better people are going to start feel and see the changes, the

:21:22. > :21:26.benefits perhaps. In those circumstances can you continue to

:21:27. > :21:30.talk as effectively about the need for cuts? Clearly obviously if the

:21:31. > :21:35.Conservative Party is going to run a "Britain's on the right track don't

:21:36. > :21:38.turn back election", you don't want to be at the point where people

:21:39. > :21:41.think you have reached the end of the track, you have to be saying

:21:42. > :21:44.there is a lot of work to do, that was what he was doing. I think the

:21:45. > :21:47.Conservative Party will have to effectively explain to home how

:21:48. > :21:53.deficit reduction will improve their living standards. That is a hard

:21:54. > :21:56.argument. They will have to link the argument about living standards to

:21:57. > :22:00.deficit. You are not persuading him sitting next to you? I think you

:22:01. > :22:05.have currently got the National Health Service going through its

:22:06. > :22:08.tightest spending constraints in the history of the National Health

:22:09. > :22:14.Service, the tightest spending restraints on any health service

:22:15. > :22:17.anywhere in the world over four or five years and you are going to then

:22:18. > :22:21.do it again for the next five years. It is unbelievable. It is

:22:22. > :22:24.unbelievable, most people with a brain can see something is going to

:22:25. > :22:30.give. You can't take the money from the kids, you can't take the money

:22:31. > :22:34.from the pensioners and people from disabilities. Even broadly, very,

:22:35. > :22:38.very vaguely outline it, I honestly don't understand it. I will have to

:22:39. > :22:44.stop you all there if I may. Thank you. Coming up:

:22:45. > :22:54.I don't want to survive. I want to live. The Prime Minister of Iraq was

:22:55. > :23:00.begging the people of Fallujah today to drive out the fors that have

:23:01. > :23:05.captured the town. Well he might, the cost of a town of so many

:23:06. > :23:08.American lives and lose it to an Al-Qaeda affiliate risks asking the

:23:09. > :23:16.question of what the whole war was for. Late 2004, ferocious urban

:23:17. > :23:21.warfare on the streets of Fallujah, plane troops trying to flush --

:23:22. > :23:27.American troops trying to flush out Al-Qaeda troops hiding inside. Ten

:23:28. > :23:31.years on and Fallujah once more out of control, Islamic militants taking

:23:32. > :23:37.over Government buildings, defying Baghdad. Has Al-Qaeda returned to

:23:38. > :23:42.its old stomping ground. Has the war in Syria some how fanned the flames

:23:43. > :23:46.of Iraq's burning sectarian embers. It is certainly the way the

:23:47. > :23:51.Government in Baghdad would like to see it. One of the main arguments to

:23:52. > :23:58.use is these areas have become, they use the word "infested" by elements

:23:59. > :24:03.from Al-Qaeda groups and fighters who are foreigner, even from outside

:24:04. > :24:09.Iraq. They want to clean them, clear that area from these fighters.

:24:10. > :24:13.Fallujah and Ramadi sit on Baghdad's western doorstep, behind them the

:24:14. > :24:22.vast empty province of Anbar stretching to the Syrian border,

:24:23. > :24:30.where another war is now almost three Years' old. Sunni militants

:24:31. > :24:33.battling against insurgents. Both countries having proclaimed

:24:34. > :24:38.allegance to Al-Qaeda. The Islamic state of Iraq and Syria, whose very

:24:39. > :24:41.name suggests a common purpose. It is tempting, perhaps, to see the two

:24:42. > :24:46.countries as two fronts in a bigger war. Tempting but probably

:24:47. > :24:51.misleading too. We see that Al-Qaeda and radical Jihadists are exploiting

:24:52. > :24:58.one popular alienation, both in Syria and Iraq to the absence of

:24:59. > :25:01.Government. And then three, an increased heightened sectarianism

:25:02. > :25:06.across the whole region. There may well be one organisation exploiting

:25:07. > :25:10.two distinct battlefields and finding similarities in each. But

:25:11. > :25:13.they are, at the moment, two separate conflicts, one driven by

:25:14. > :25:16.the incompetence and repression of the Government in Damascus, the

:25:17. > :25:20.other driven by the incompetence and repression of the Government in

:25:21. > :25:26.Baghdad. It could have been different, three years ago Iraq's

:25:27. > :25:31.Sunni minority deified Al-Qaeda and voted in parliamentary elections.

:25:32. > :25:34.Political participation, they hoped, might improve their lot, in a

:25:35. > :25:38.country now dominated by Shia politicians. But it didn't happen.

:25:39. > :25:44.Two years later amid mounting grievances there were protests on

:25:45. > :25:50.the streets of Ramadi Anbar's capital. Eventually broken up in a

:25:51. > :25:53.heavihanded Government operation. A crisis some say of the Prime

:25:54. > :25:57.Minister's own making. This is almost the ideal scenario for

:25:58. > :26:00.Al-Qaeda, recruiting small numbers of people but not being whole

:26:01. > :26:08.heartedly rejected by a wider population that voted in 2010, had

:26:09. > :26:11.that investment in the ballot box squadered by an Iraqi Government now

:26:12. > :26:19.running the election campaign for April 2014 on a very sectarian

:26:20. > :26:26.basis. And against a backdrop of extreme violence. This was the scene

:26:27. > :26:29.in Diala province three days ago, another massive car bomb, almost

:26:30. > :26:37.9,000 people were killed in Iraq last year, the deadliest since 2008.

:26:38. > :26:41.The Prime Minister, urging the people of Fallujah to expel the

:26:42. > :26:46.terrorists. But not everyone here is Al-Qaeda. There are plenty of local

:26:47. > :26:51.tribesmen equally willing to take on the Government. It is a messy three

:26:52. > :26:58.or four-way fight. With overwhelming fire power, the army will probably

:26:59. > :27:03.win, but at what cost? Here we are, 2014, the centinary of the outbreak

:27:04. > :27:08.of the First World War, all sorts of commemorative events are planned,

:27:09. > :27:11.amid much controversy about what is the appropriate tone to mark a

:27:12. > :27:16.catastrophe that took vast numbers of lives and turned out not to be a

:27:17. > :27:20.war to end wars. The Education Secretary, a man who can't see a

:27:21. > :27:26.sacred cow without ordering up the truck from the nearest abattoir

:27:27. > :27:30.added his tuppence in, inevitably the Daily Mail. He argued that apart

:27:31. > :27:35.from a pointless slaughter it had been a just war. This great

:27:36. > :27:39.blood-letting cost millions of lives, reshaped the societies of

:27:40. > :27:43.Europe, promoted revolution, enfranchised those previously denied

:27:44. > :27:48.the vote, and tragically sowed the seeds of future war. According to

:27:49. > :27:52.the Education Secretary, our understanding of the war is filtered

:27:53. > :28:01.through a series of predominantly left-wing prejudices about loins led

:28:02. > :28:07.by donkeys. Field Marshall Hague has formulated a tactical plan to ensure

:28:08. > :28:10.final victory in the feel. Would this brilliant plan involve us

:28:11. > :28:16.climbing out of our trenches and walking very slowly towards the

:28:17. > :28:20.enemy. How could you How could you know that it is classified. It is

:28:21. > :28:25.the same plan we used last time and 17-times before that. Michael Gove

:28:26. > :28:32.says this portrayal presents the war as a misbegotten shambles, a series

:28:33. > :28:38.of catastrophic mistakes perpetrated by an out-of-touch elite. He claims

:28:39. > :28:45.World War I was plainly a just war. In which the Germans' pitiless

:28:46. > :28:51.approach and expansionist war aims justified Britain's involvement.

:28:52. > :28:54.Enter Tristram Hunt and Labour's schools' spokesman, he claimed the

:28:55. > :29:00.Government is using what should be a moment for national reflection and

:29:01. > :29:06.respectful debate to rewrite the historical record and sow political

:29:07. > :29:10.division. History, Churchill is supposed to have said, is written by

:29:11. > :29:18.the victors, the outcome of the war may not be in doubt, but what it

:29:19. > :29:23.meant still is. With us now is Professor Richard Evans from

:29:24. > :29:29.Cambridge University, a man singled out by Michael Gove for particular

:29:30. > :29:35.reproach. And in Toronto TWEF Margaret Macmillan, author of The

:29:36. > :29:42.War That Ended Peace. Do you think that Michael Gove is right to say we

:29:43. > :29:48.see the war through a particular set of preconceptions, "loins led by

:29:49. > :29:53.donkeys" and the like? I don't, I think he has said this a lot and a

:29:54. > :29:56.lot of people have argued it. Quite frankly there are many ways of

:29:57. > :30:00.seeing the war. One of the things we should be doing a hundred years

:30:01. > :30:05.later is looking in the round, not arguing about one particular view of

:30:06. > :30:10.the war. It wasn't entirely a war led by donkeys, the generals were

:30:11. > :30:13.trying hard to deal with new technology and strong edge to

:30:14. > :30:18.defensive war. They learned as the war game on, but they debt -- war

:30:19. > :30:24.went on but didn't have the technology to make successful

:30:25. > :30:35.attacks. We need more nuance and we need 100 years later to talk without

:30:36. > :30:41.these polemics. Do you think the nuance and lack sophisticated

:30:42. > :30:45.arguments you are talking about has been lost? It has been lost, we have

:30:46. > :30:49.tended to argue about the First World War in a very nationalistic

:30:50. > :30:54.way. I think surely 100 years later we should be looking at something

:30:55. > :31:00.that was a catastrophe that hit the whole of Europe, hit the world as

:31:01. > :31:04.well and hit, you know, it wasn't just a European war. I speak as a

:31:05. > :31:08.Canadian. This is something that we feel quite strongly about. I do

:31:09. > :31:12.think it is a time to be able to pull back. Instead of arguing about

:31:13. > :31:15.which nation was right and which was wrong and who was responsible, I

:31:16. > :31:19.really would like to see more discussion of what that war meant.

:31:20. > :31:22.What did it mean for European society, how did it happen, why did

:31:23. > :31:26.Europe fight it in that particular way. It seems to me there are all

:31:27. > :31:29.sorts of interesting questions, and there is nothing wrong with debating

:31:30. > :31:33.interpretations. This is what we should be doing, but what I really

:31:34. > :31:38.don't like is the idea we should only be looking at the war in one

:31:39. > :31:42.way. That there is only one correct interpretation of the war. The

:31:43. > :31:50.Education Secretary singled you out by name as one of the perpetrators

:31:51. > :31:55.of the left-wing or orthodoxy about the war, how did you feel about

:31:56. > :31:57.that? It is always like to have enemies like Michael Gove because

:31:58. > :32:04.he's usually wrong about historical matters. The point I would like to

:32:05. > :32:09.make is there is nothing left-wing about saying lions led by donkeys,

:32:10. > :32:16.the phrase about the troops in the First World War, that phrase was

:32:17. > :32:20.created by Alan Clarke, a Tory MP, a maverick right-winger. You accept it

:32:21. > :32:25.is not the total picture No it is not. It is not even the total

:32:26. > :32:29.picture of military leadership? No it isn't. Margaret is right in

:32:30. > :32:34.saying they simply could not cope with the new technology. Barbedwire,

:32:35. > :32:38.and the machine gun, turned the tables on attack, which had been

:32:39. > :32:43.favoured in 19th century wars and put it all on the side of defence.

:32:44. > :32:48.It wasn't until the 1918 when the tank was developed that was reversed

:32:49. > :32:54.and the allied armies could advance. What about the point that Michael

:32:55. > :32:57.Gove makes that this was a "just war", that is the phrase he uses?

:32:58. > :33:06.You can't really say that until 1918. Britain's principal ally was

:33:07. > :33:10.Tsar of Russia, despotism that put Germany into the shade, it is not

:33:11. > :33:13.until Russia withdraws from the war and the Americans come in everything

:33:14. > :33:18.changes. It seems to me legitimate enough to argue that Britain and

:33:19. > :33:23.France were fighting for democracy and liberal values. What is your

:33:24. > :33:26.view about this idea of the "just war" Margaret Macmillan? Well,

:33:27. > :33:33.people always feel that what they are doing is just. But I'm rather

:33:34. > :33:36.reluctant to accept the view that the war was about promoting a

:33:37. > :33:41.liberal international order. Most people who fought on all sides felt

:33:42. > :33:44.they were fighting to defend their homelands, their families and

:33:45. > :33:47.friends. I'm not sure they were fighting for a great vision, that

:33:48. > :33:52.came later. The politicians provided the visions. But I do think we need

:33:53. > :33:54.to remember that people at the time felt they were fighting for

:33:55. > :33:58.something. We don't have to agree with them. But we're not also I

:33:59. > :34:01.think in the position of sitting there saying you are completely

:34:02. > :34:05.wrong. We are not marking their cards, are we. We shouldn't be

:34:06. > :34:09.saying you got it right, you got it wrong, at this stage we should be

:34:10. > :34:14.trying to understand how the war happened, and how this very

:34:15. > :34:20.prosperous continent created this awful mess. The intervention by the

:34:21. > :34:24.Education Secretary is of a piece with interventions by other

:34:25. > :34:28.politicians who looking to this complicated question which is

:34:29. > :34:32.precisely how do we commemorate this event? Is it helpful do you think to

:34:33. > :34:38.have politicians wading in like this? Well it is not always helpful,

:34:39. > :34:41.is it? I think the politicians will have very strong views of what they

:34:42. > :34:44.want to do. I think it is something that belongs to all of us. I think

:34:45. > :34:48.the politicians are entitled to their views, but I think we also, as

:34:49. > :34:53.the public, should have our views. I'm not saying historians are the

:34:54. > :34:56.only people who should describe the war either. It is something we

:34:57. > :35:00.should be all talking about. What is your feeling about these political

:35:01. > :35:04.interventions? I think they are unhelpful. We don't want politicians

:35:05. > :35:07.to tell us what we should be feeling about the war or how we should

:35:08. > :35:12.commemorate it. I actually think the Government has got it more or less

:35:13. > :35:17.right in giving the freedom, funding, to people locally, to

:35:18. > :35:23.institutions, to all kinds of groups to commemorate the war in the way

:35:24. > :35:26.they want to. If you look at the Welsh Government for example it is,

:35:27. > :35:30.it has plan to commemorate the war, it includes honouring not only the

:35:31. > :35:39.troops who fought so bravely but also the conscientious objectors. It

:35:40. > :35:42.has schools' visits to Germany, the royal Fusiliers museum is having a

:35:43. > :35:46.collaboration with German institutions to commemorate the

:35:47. > :35:49.Christmas truce. It should be an educational experience. We need to

:35:50. > :35:53.teach people about the reasons why war happens, to try to avoid it

:35:54. > :35:58.happening again. Thank you both very much indeed. Ever since that

:35:59. > :36:03.unfortunate Romanian young man took a new year flight from Transylvenia,

:36:04. > :36:07.only to be met on his arrival by, horror of horrors, Keith Vaz, there

:36:08. > :36:15.has been intense speculation about whether the prove sighed tsunami of

:36:16. > :36:23.benefit scroungers and migrants was a figment Nigel Farage's

:36:24. > :36:28.imagination. There are some people coming and tonight we meet some of

:36:29. > :36:39.them in their Transylvanian home town of Cluj Napoca. I want to go to

:36:40. > :36:50.the UK because I want to find a better job. The change in the

:36:51. > :36:57.regulations regarding work permits will make a fewing -- huge

:36:58. > :37:03.difference. It is easier to find a job than here. You can do just more

:37:04. > :37:08.than wait tables in a restaurant. You can finally do something related

:37:09. > :37:15.to your study, you can make a contribution to the English society.

:37:16. > :37:21.I'm working five years in hotel reception. I'm really pleased with

:37:22. > :37:28.my work, I like my work. I like to work with people every day. But I'm

:37:29. > :37:34.not so satisfied by the material part. I think that we are not

:37:35. > :37:42.appreciated financially as well as we should be. Over the next few

:37:43. > :37:49.weeks I plan to do a very thorough research to analyse the market, the

:37:50. > :37:55.job market in the UK and I will have a look at what's going on with

:37:56. > :38:01.journalism and communications and PR and I'm looking phwoar internships

:38:02. > :38:07.at various institutions and corporations. I will also be

:38:08. > :38:17.contacting people I know in the UK hoping to land a job. We're going to

:38:18. > :38:26.the employment agency. There we will find a big database about the jobs

:38:27. > :38:32.across Europe. I want to go to the UK because here in Romania

:38:33. > :38:38.everything goes on family relationships. The manager is the

:38:39. > :38:52.father the director is the son. If you don't have a kind of family like

:38:53. > :38:58.that you can't find a job. I have read a lot of articles recently in

:38:59. > :39:06.the English newspapers, in the tabloids especially about this fear

:39:07. > :39:11.in dealing with an exodus of Romanians. They are concerned about

:39:12. > :39:17.flooding the job market, and I think most of these facts are quite

:39:18. > :39:20.overblown. Me and my friends share a common view on what is happening

:39:21. > :39:25.with migration, we all think that most of the Romanians will come back

:39:26. > :39:31.and just go there to get some skills and then they are probably going to

:39:32. > :39:35.head back. I think there is no need to worry about that part of the

:39:36. > :39:40.population that will go there to exploit the welfare, because that's

:39:41. > :39:48.like 10% of the population, maybe even less than that. The other

:39:49. > :39:56.percentage is very well equipped and very well skilled. I'm certain some

:39:57. > :40:00.people will go, for benefits, because there are people who like to

:40:01. > :40:04.take advantage everywhere. But this is not what the main population who

:40:05. > :40:09.emigrate will go specifically for that. Some will, some will go to get

:40:10. > :40:15.a good job, to get their studies finished or advanced or they will

:40:16. > :40:20.return or find a job there. I have my own concerns about travelling to

:40:21. > :40:25.the UK, of course, I know jobs, especially the high end jobs are

:40:26. > :40:28.very competitive and there is also the bias that you have to take into

:40:29. > :40:36.account because you are going to be competing with you know people froms

:40:37. > :40:50.native population. You have to be perfect, you have to be outstanding.

:40:51. > :41:02.I never have been there. I don't know what I will find, but I hope

:41:03. > :41:06.that I will like it. And we will be returning to those Romanian job

:41:07. > :41:10.seekers to find out how they fare after they arrive in the UK in the

:41:11. > :41:14.weeks ahead. One of the most hot low-anticipated films of the last

:41:15. > :41:18.many months opens this week. Twelve Years A Slave is widely tipped for

:41:19. > :41:21.Oscar glory and has been called the finest film to have been made about

:41:22. > :41:32.slavery in the states. It is all the more powerful for being based on a

:41:33. > :41:40.true story. The director, skean Steve McQueen is an artist who has

:41:41. > :41:46.just won the Turner Prize. Steve McQueen is a film director whose

:41:47. > :41:50.tract record dictates he will never compromise his vision. His new

:41:51. > :41:55.movie, Twelve Years A Slave, is based very firmly on the true story

:41:56. > :41:59.of Solomon Northup, a free man, kidnapped and sold into slavery. It

:42:00. > :42:04.is a story of how he kept his humanity in the face of the most

:42:05. > :42:12.unspeakable relentless cruelty. I don't want to survive, I want to

:42:13. > :42:16.live. My wife is a historian and said why not look into firsthand

:42:17. > :42:21.accounts of slavery. We did, she found this book called Twelve Years

:42:22. > :42:26.A Slave. It was amazing, every single page was a revelation. I

:42:27. > :42:31.closed the book and I was very angry with myself. I was angry with myself

:42:32. > :42:37.because I thought how did I not know this book. I realised nobody I knew,

:42:38. > :42:43.knew the book, I knew I had to make it into a movie. I got this from

:42:44. > :42:51.mistress Shaw, she won't grant me no soap to clean with. I stink so much

:42:52. > :42:55.I make myself gag. The film was a fantastic combination of intense

:42:56. > :43:00.moments, there is intense cruelty but also intense beauty in it as

:43:01. > :43:04.well? When people for example say to me how can you shoot something so

:43:05. > :43:09.horrific but beautiful. Because that's life. If you go to Louisiana,

:43:10. > :43:19.it is one of the most beautiful places you have been so. Shaun was

:43:20. > :43:24.on camera and wanted a dark Len, I can't put my filter on to life, life

:43:25. > :43:31.is perverse. Under the circumstances he is a slave owner, you lucksate in

:43:32. > :43:36.his favour. I survive, I will not fall into despair. It was tragic,

:43:37. > :43:41.Chiwetel Ejiofor was the job, he had a stature and presence to him, there

:43:42. > :43:47.is a nobility, and humanity, which is most important, less nobility

:43:48. > :43:52.more humanity. Within the environment of a situation which was

:43:53. > :43:58.unhumane, he had to hold on to that. My back is thick with scars for

:43:59. > :44:01.protesting my freedom. I was reading one of the articles of black writers

:44:02. > :44:05.saying he's not going to watch this film because race films are made for

:44:06. > :44:10.liberal white film-goers because they will end up feeling guilty and

:44:11. > :44:19.that is the purpose of them? I don't make films for white people! I just

:44:20. > :44:24.don't! It is like saying you know I don't need anyone to verify my

:44:25. > :44:30.existence, I make films or I make art because I'm alive and I'm an

:44:31. > :44:34.artist and I want to make things, I'm an entertainer, absolutely no

:44:35. > :44:40.two ways about it, you can't escape that. My film is about us, rather

:44:41. > :44:44.than specific groups of people. You know it is just the American tale

:44:45. > :44:50.but it is a global tale absolutely. You are no better than prized

:44:51. > :44:54.livestock. Chiwetel Ejiofor has to do so much without words, playing

:44:55. > :44:59.that character, particularly when he has to whip Patsy, how do you

:45:00. > :45:04.separate the acting from the natural distress of doing something like

:45:05. > :45:08.that? You don't. You cannot. But that's part of actually getting to

:45:09. > :45:17.some kind of truth within filming. The fact that we shot it in one take

:45:18. > :45:21.shows the tension there, that is why you get that performance, you ramp

:45:22. > :45:26.it up and we have to do it now. You talk to the actor already previously

:45:27. > :45:31.and in rehearsals, it is like a 100m sprint, you train four years to run

:45:32. > :45:37.for ten seconds, that is what it is about. You have to do it now. Steve

:45:38. > :45:43.McQueen doesn't shy away from tough subjects, Hunger, his first feature

:45:44. > :45:48.dealt with Bobby Sands, the Provisional IRA prisoner who died on

:45:49. > :45:58.the 5th of May in 1991 after 66 days on hunger strike. For me what was

:45:59. > :46:02.important about the film it was something swept under the carpet. At

:46:03. > :46:05.that time and even now it is the most important political event to

:46:06. > :46:09.happen in Britain at that time for 27 years. Ten men died through

:46:10. > :46:13.starvation in British prison cells. When the film came out a dialogue a

:46:14. > :46:17.conversation occurred about the troubles. So the movie at that point

:46:18. > :46:20.for me wasn't important, what was important was the dialogue. Certain

:46:21. > :46:24.things were said, people admitted to certain things that were never

:46:25. > :46:29.admitted to. The British establishment admitted to atrocities

:46:30. > :46:32.that occurred in H-blocks, that was the first time that has before

:46:33. > :46:39.happened, a dialogue occurred. That is the power of art in a way that it

:46:40. > :46:43.can actually, the simple thing it can do is just talk about what is

:46:44. > :46:47.going on now, where we are at and hopefully where we can possibly go

:46:48. > :46:51.in the future. Steve McQueen is already being garlanded for Twelve

:46:52. > :46:59.Years A Slave, but if he wins the Oscar, he will be the first black

:47:00. > :47:02.director to take the statue. If you win the Oscar is the pressure on you

:47:03. > :47:06.to take the Hollywood money or do you want to maintain their

:47:07. > :47:09.independence? I'm not a Hollywood money, if I was interested in money,

:47:10. > :47:13.you know if I was interested in money I would be somewhere else I

:47:14. > :47:16.wouldn't be here. That doesn't interest me. All I wanted to do, I

:47:17. > :47:19.wanted two things out of my life as far as money was concerned, I wanted

:47:20. > :47:29.to have shelter and I wanted to be able to buy any book I wanted, that

:47:30. > :47:34.was t I have those, that's enough. There is very definitely a Team

:47:35. > :47:39.Queenzieburn, Michael Fassbender has starred in each of his three films,

:47:40. > :47:46.he works with the same director of photography Shaun Bobbit every time?

:47:47. > :47:53.It is my band, we come together and make an album. Michael is Jagger,

:47:54. > :47:58.Shaun is the drummer, and you know, Charley Watts! You're Keith

:47:59. > :48:04.Richards? I have to be. Everyone wants to be Keith, I'm sorry, I'm

:48:05. > :48:08.Keith, yeah. That's it for tonight. Just before we go, a couple of

:48:09. > :48:13.tomorrow morning's front pages at least. The Times has news that many

:48:14. > :48:17.Tories are very fed up with George Osborne over the ?12 billion planned

:48:18. > :48:22.in welfare cuts. And the Guardian has the same story on its front

:48:23. > :48:28.page, the outrage of people being allies of Iain Duncan Smith, it also

:48:29. > :48:31.has a picture of Simon Hoggart, the parliamentary sketch writer whose

:48:32. > :48:36.death was announced today. Much more tomorrow, until then, good night.