:00:00. > :00:11.Party conferences in the run up to a general election usually lack edge,
:00:12. > :00:22.they are dull, stage managed affairs. But you know what? Times
:00:23. > :00:25.right now are far from usual. Here at the Conservative conference,
:00:26. > :00:29.the familiar fight against Labour is on. But David Cameron tells us that
:00:30. > :00:34.is not his only concern. I have a double battle on my hands, I have to
:00:35. > :00:38.win a blue-red fight against Labour, which is about growing with our
:00:39. > :00:42.economy and dealing with the deficit. But I also have to win back
:00:43. > :00:46.people who have left my party. We ask if rebellion is in the air and
:00:47. > :00:51.if we are seeing a slow decline of the old parties in Britain.
:00:52. > :01:07.We go to Hong Kong where maybe something similar is going on.
:01:08. > :01:11.Welcome to Birmingham, lots of Conservative blue this week, and
:01:12. > :01:18.early blues for the party this weekend, today it seems to have
:01:19. > :01:24.cheered up. 219 days until the next general
:01:25. > :01:35.election. But they will go by in a flash. Time for a self-respecting
:01:36. > :01:38.political party to rally round the leader and suppress any hint of
:01:39. > :01:42.self-doubt. The Conservatives, needless to say, are a
:01:43. > :01:46.self-respecting political party. I'm trying to get a grip on how the
:01:47. > :01:50.conference is going? Everyone is feeling enthusiastic for next year.
:01:51. > :01:53.Some really positive news coming out today, I hope the public are
:01:54. > :01:57.listening. I think we have more chance now than we have ever had
:01:58. > :02:01.before to put a good Conservative Government in next year. It was
:02:02. > :02:07.better than I was expecting. Really? Absolutely. What were you expecting?
:02:08. > :02:11.Slightly gloomy and I don't feel gloomy any more. I can't lie, there
:02:12. > :02:18.wasn't a single dissenter among those I spoke to on and off
:02:19. > :02:22.microphone. If success for a political party requires the members
:02:23. > :02:25.to have self-belief, even perhaps when the polling evidence is a bit
:02:26. > :02:30.ambiguous, then the Conservatives are obviously having a very
:02:31. > :02:34.successful event so far. But the truth is, this conference is
:02:35. > :02:39.occurring at a very strange time. Not only is a lot going on in the
:02:40. > :02:43.world, the country is at war, but the divisions within the right of
:02:44. > :02:47.politics in the UK are more intense than they have been for many years.
:02:48. > :02:52.Seasons observers of these events recognise that something is
:02:53. > :02:57.different this year. This is very, very unusual, it is basically a
:02:58. > :03:01.four-way run in which one of the parties probably won't win any seats
:03:02. > :03:06.but may influence 100 seats, you know. One of the parties will be
:03:07. > :03:10.trying to prop up the haemorrhage, namely the liberal party because of
:03:11. > :03:15.the post-tuition fees issue, and the other two parties trying to fight in
:03:16. > :03:20.the current. There are no linear routes to victory in this. Well, it
:03:21. > :03:25.really makes or breaks the mood, so really makes or breaks the mood, so
:03:26. > :03:30.here. We will hear what he has to say in a moment. First Allegra is
:03:31. > :03:38.with me. There is a sort of happy party out there, but anxious as
:03:39. > :03:44.well? It is jolly a febrile. It is not so much the hunt for the red
:03:45. > :03:49.under the bed it is the purple under the bed. You had Mark Reckless who
:03:50. > :03:52.defected on Saturday and there is the question of who is next. I don't
:03:53. > :03:56.think they are stupid enough to be here, they would be lynched. There
:03:57. > :04:00.are people looking towards the south coast, and the constituencies where
:04:01. > :04:05.there is large UKIP component. People have spoken to the MPs and
:04:06. > :04:10.said is it you that's next, they have sworn know. No. I have spoken
:04:11. > :04:14.to those people and their friends and they swear it is not them. When
:04:15. > :04:20.Mark Reckless defected he was denying to the last moment. Also
:04:21. > :04:24.UKIP are keen, the choreography is very important, the idea you would
:04:25. > :04:29.purpose announce it just before the Prime Minister's speech, so the
:04:30. > :04:32.maximum pain. I do think it is beginning to backfire, where you
:04:33. > :04:36.once upon a time might have had a Tory Party that this week was
:04:37. > :04:41.flirting with UKIP's ideas, I get the sense they are thinking we will
:04:42. > :04:45.fight you and hard. The by-election that Reckless has triggered in
:04:46. > :04:49.Rochester, the Tories will put everything into that. You might have
:04:50. > :04:53.a situation where they lose Clacton, and UKIP will be riding high, the
:04:54. > :04:58.Tories have loads of money, if they put everything into it and it is a
:04:59. > :05:03.different seat and Mark Reckless is very different from Douglas
:05:04. > :05:11.Carswell, he doesn't have as much personal follow, you can see a
:05:12. > :05:14.status where they keep that and stop the UKIP bandwagon. I sat down with
:05:15. > :05:21.the Prime Minister this morning to speak about the political divisions,
:05:22. > :05:25.but we started on the pressing foreign policy question,
:05:26. > :05:28.intervention in Iraq. Looking at the interventions of the last decade,
:05:29. > :05:32.Iraq, Sierra Leone, Libya, Afghanistan. What is the success
:05:33. > :05:38.rate, what sort of hit rate are we getting? You have what to look at
:05:39. > :05:42.each individual case. The ones where I have been particularly involved I
:05:43. > :05:45.am happy to defend. Afghanistan, not something I started but something I
:05:46. > :05:48.have been involved in finishing, we will leave that country in a better
:05:49. > :05:52.state than we found it. Where I think we will be drawing the wrong
:05:53. > :05:55.lesson is we thought that the difficulties with these
:05:56. > :05:59.interventions meant that Britain should some how turn entirely away
:06:00. > :06:03.from the world. The reason why we have sometimes to get involved is
:06:04. > :06:08.that otherwise these issues come and bite us here back at home. It was
:06:09. > :06:13.terrorism on the streets of Britain that caused us to be involved in
:06:14. > :06:20.Afghanistan. The same, I would say, applies in the case of Iraq today.
:06:21. > :06:22.One of the things I brought was the National Security Council that
:06:23. > :06:25.brings together the domestic concerns about security and
:06:26. > :06:30.terrorism with foreign policy. That is the prism through which we should
:06:31. > :06:35.see these things. The one that was purely, purely yours was Libya. Do
:06:36. > :06:39.you think, looking at Libya, that we left that country having ousted
:06:40. > :06:44.Gadaffi, we left in a better state than it was? We left it in a better
:06:45. > :06:47.state in that we enabled the Libyan people to do something they wanted
:06:48. > :06:52.to do, which was to get rid of Gadaffi. But you have to go back to
:06:53. > :07:01.why did we intervene? We were facing a situation where there was going to
:07:02. > :07:06.be a humanitarian catastrophe. Gadaffi was bearing down and
:07:07. > :07:12.threatening to kill the people like rats. We intervened and that led to
:07:13. > :07:17.the end of Gadaffi. The state of Libya today is not good, I accept
:07:18. > :07:24.that. Our responsibility was to help the Libyan people in their hour of
:07:25. > :07:28.need, we did that. We now need them to lead and sort out proper
:07:29. > :07:35.governance of their country. If you said to the population of Britain
:07:36. > :07:39.that the current effort in Iraq and the Syria and Iraq, if that is as
:07:40. > :07:42.successful as it was in Libya I would be a happy Prime Minister and
:07:43. > :07:46.say we were right to get involved? Of course not. These are two
:07:47. > :07:51.different situations. In Iraq and Syria today we see a terrorist
:07:52. > :07:57.organisation that has taken control effectively of a state that has huge
:07:58. > :08:02.amounts of munitions and oil, huge amounts of money, and it has already
:08:03. > :08:05.been carrying out terrorist plots and trying to carry out terrorist
:08:06. > :08:09.plots in Britain. This is a direct threat to us. There isn't really a
:08:10. > :08:15.walk on by option, even if we want it to. Have we got a strategy in
:08:16. > :08:21.Syria? Yes, we do. A strategy that isn't we hope the Free Syrian Army
:08:22. > :08:26.will come back from nowhere and strike Assad? It starts with action
:08:27. > :08:31.at home, in terms of keeping our own people safe, stopping people from
:08:32. > :08:34.travelling, making sure our antiterrorism laws are as strong as
:08:35. > :08:37.they can be. It involves working with other countries and partners in
:08:38. > :08:42.the region, building up local forces so they can take on ISIL. Some
:08:43. > :08:46.people say it can't be a strategy if all you are doing in Iraq or Syria
:08:47. > :08:51.is air strikes, because where are the boots on the ground, which I
:08:52. > :08:55.would argue it is better, isn't it, if the boots on the ground are local
:08:56. > :09:00.boots on the ground, even though that may take more time. But there
:09:01. > :09:05.aren't local boots on the ground and not enough of them. If anything the
:09:06. > :09:11.Sunnis are uniting around ISIS? In Iraq there is the Iraqi security
:09:12. > :09:15.force. It is a joke, we spent years building them up and they fled at
:09:16. > :09:20.the first sign of fighting? At the end of the day the only way you can
:09:21. > :09:23.make these countries safe is by those countries themselves taking
:09:24. > :09:28.responsibility for their governance and security. As Ban Ki-Moon said a
:09:29. > :09:32.missile can kill a terrorist, in the end it is only good governance that
:09:33. > :09:35.can kill terrorism. Iraq and Syria need the same thing, which is
:09:36. > :09:38.functioning Government that backs the whole of the country, with
:09:39. > :09:41.functioning Armed Forces backed by the whole of the country. You may
:09:42. > :09:46.that is immpossibly difficult to deliver. What is the strategy for
:09:47. > :09:49.delivering that? I'm not sure it is in our power to deliver functioning
:09:50. > :09:54.Government to Syria and Iraq, any more than Libya? It is in our power
:09:55. > :09:58.to help train up Iraqi security forces and that needs to happen. It
:09:59. > :10:01.is in our power to help train up Kurdish forces and that is in our
:10:02. > :10:05.power, and in Syria we are, with the Americans, helping to build up the
:10:06. > :10:10.Syrian national opposition, who should provide a counter point to
:10:11. > :10:14.the unacceptable inlegitimate regime. In time I believe there will
:10:15. > :10:17.be a transition from that regime to one that can better represent the
:10:18. > :10:20.whole country. If you are saying this is difficult, yes, it will take
:10:21. > :10:24.time, yes, absolutely. There are lots of ways in which it can go
:10:25. > :10:28.wrong, of course. But the threat to our country as such, that actually
:10:29. > :10:32.even though it is complicated, difficult and needs a comprehensive
:10:33. > :10:36.plan is not a reason to walk away. Let's go on to domestic politics, it
:10:37. > :10:41.is an interesting time, I wonder whether you think that the greatest
:10:42. > :10:49.divisions in British politics at the moment are within the right between,
:10:50. > :10:55.if you like, anti-Europe, anti-immigration, sometimes rather
:10:56. > :10:59.anti-business, antiforeign intervention, anti-overseas aid,
:11:00. > :11:03.wing of the right, many in your party. One might think it is more
:11:04. > :11:07.the Financial Times right-wing, which is more pro-Europe and
:11:08. > :11:10.pro-business, it has a lot of Conservative values but nowhere
:11:11. > :11:16.near? I don't see it like that. I would say the divide is still on the
:11:17. > :11:19.centre right and right, you have parties and people who believe you
:11:20. > :11:23.grow an economy through free enterprise. You have to tackle
:11:24. > :11:25.problems like deficits. You do need to control immigration, our
:11:26. > :11:30.relationship with Europe needs to change. We need to a dress the
:11:31. > :11:33.things in the modern -- address the things in the modern world that
:11:34. > :11:40.leave people feeling uncertain in a globalised world. That is a centre
:11:41. > :11:46.right approach, when you compare it with the centre left approach which
:11:47. > :11:51.doesn't care much about the deficit and is very for Europe, and very
:11:52. > :11:55.poor in its support for free enterprise and business and making
:11:56. > :11:57.anti-business noises. I have a double battle on my hands. I have to
:11:58. > :12:01.win a double battle on my hands. I have to
:12:02. > :12:04.which is about growing our economy, dealing with our deficit, taking on
:12:05. > :12:09.the problems, but I also have to win back a people who have left my party
:12:10. > :12:12.the problems, but I also have to win who are concerned and worried about
:12:13. > :12:15.the pressures in our modern world. I have to reassure them. I absolutely
:12:16. > :12:19.do get the problems of uncontrolled immigration. I do want to change our
:12:20. > :12:23.relationship with Europe, I want to build a sense of national pride that
:12:24. > :12:28.this country can be a success again in this modern world. I think it is
:12:29. > :12:32.often about those divisions on the right, as you put t I would say a
:12:33. > :12:35.lot of them are about reassurance and understanding, and going back to
:12:36. > :12:38.your values about what makes you tick, rather than a fundamental
:12:39. > :12:45.division which is what we have with Labour. The basic dilemma facing you
:12:46. > :12:52.is a bit to the right to win the UKIP voters ore tack left to win the
:12:53. > :12:56.centre ground. The argument is move to the right you still don't win any
:12:57. > :13:01.UKIP voters, they will just ask for more, move to the left and you can
:13:02. > :13:07.win a lot of centrist voters, how do you see that dynamic, you don't
:13:08. > :13:10.recognise the dilemma? The left-right terms have had relevance
:13:11. > :13:13.in the past. I don't feel that at the moment. I feel it is much more
:13:14. > :13:19.about trying to get across our economic plan for Britain is not
:13:20. > :13:22.actually from the pages of the Financial Times, just dry and dusty
:13:23. > :13:28.economic, it is actually a plan to make sure people can feel if I work
:13:29. > :13:33.hard I can get a job and buy my own house, my kids will get decent
:13:34. > :13:35.schooling. The problem is people can feel disconnected from economic
:13:36. > :13:39.success and we have to reconnect them. That is not actually just
:13:40. > :13:42.about policies, it is about what is in here, it is about explaining we
:13:43. > :13:45.need your aspirations and we can deliver them. That is not a left or
:13:46. > :13:50.right thing. I think part of the potential problem you have then,
:13:51. > :13:53.trying if you like to ride both these horses on the wings of your
:13:54. > :13:57.party at the same time is that people are left a little bit
:13:58. > :14:01.confused as to whether the real David Cameron is one who was talking
:14:02. > :14:06.about green issues in opposition, and was trying to modernise the Tory
:14:07. > :14:09.Party, or the one who is now banging on about Europe having said he
:14:10. > :14:15.wasn't going to do that. There might be a lack of clarity to where you
:14:16. > :14:17.are heart is? I have been party leader for eight years, Prime
:14:18. > :14:21.Minister for four, people get a clear idea. I don't see the two
:14:22. > :14:25.things in contradiction. People are worried is this country going to
:14:26. > :14:29.deliver for me, is there a good job for my child, a good school place,
:14:30. > :14:35.and is there going to be a clean and safe environment? Are we going to be
:14:36. > :14:38.a country that keeps our promises to the poorest in the world does
:14:39. > :14:42.Britain mean something to the world. I think a modern and compassionate
:14:43. > :14:47.Conservative can appeal to all of those. People have had long enough
:14:48. > :14:52.to work out what I'm for. I had an argument that if I asked you
:14:53. > :14:57.specific questions about particular interesting litmus test about
:14:58. > :14:59.whether you are a moderniser or Conservative or socially
:15:00. > :15:03.Conservative person whether you would give a clear argument. Let me
:15:04. > :15:09.try. Children at school, should they primarily be taught when they are
:15:10. > :15:13.doing weight about kilograms or caught about pound and ounces and
:15:14. > :15:17.stones? I think I would still go for pounds and ounces. Would you? Yes I
:15:18. > :15:25.do. What about this one, you are in a public park. Rather like miles and
:15:26. > :15:31.pints. You are in a public park, two men, recently married are kissing
:15:32. > :15:35.each other. Is that sweet or is that mildly inappropriate? That's fine. I
:15:36. > :15:39.have been very clear about this, this is where I do, as it were,
:15:40. > :15:42.marry traditional and modern values. I believe in the family and
:15:43. > :15:46.marriage. It is such great institution I think men should be
:15:47. > :15:52.able to marry each other and women marry each other. And kiss each
:15:53. > :15:59.other in public if they want? I kiss my wife in public I don't see why
:16:00. > :16:01.you can't kiss your husband in public. We are get to go the heart
:16:02. > :16:04.of it. You are a pharmaceutical company, based in Britain, competing
:16:05. > :16:09.on the world stage, you have two candidates for a mid-level job, one
:16:10. > :16:13.is a British one who is OK, the other is Latvian, graduate who is
:16:14. > :16:20.really, really good, which one would you like that pharmacompany to
:16:21. > :16:22.employ? I want to make sure the pharmaceutical company has good
:16:23. > :16:26.British people to employ. In the end they have to chose. This is where I
:16:27. > :16:30.think the answer to immigration is education and welfare as well as
:16:31. > :16:35.border controls. I will summarise, you have given us one Conservative
:16:36. > :16:38.answer, pounds and ounces, one modernising answer, gays kissing in
:16:39. > :16:43.public, and the other sitting on the fence? Not really, I would rather a
:16:44. > :16:50.pharmaceutical company. I'm no clearer about which side of the
:16:51. > :16:54.fence you are on. The Carswelles and Recklesses don't believe you are one
:16:55. > :17:03.of them, you will never deliver? I'm not sure, there are lots of things I
:17:04. > :17:09.disagree with about Douglas Carswell. I want the company to
:17:10. > :17:14.employ British people that is a clear answer. If they had the chance
:17:15. > :17:17.between an OK Brit and good Latvian you would say take the British
:17:18. > :17:21.candidate? It is up to them what they would do. I want them to employ
:17:22. > :17:25.British people, and I want British people adequately trained, with a
:17:26. > :17:31.welfare system that supports them into work to take the jobs. We are
:17:32. > :17:34.having great success with this, 1. 8 million more jobs in Britain, the
:17:35. > :17:38.majority going to British people. It is only when we fix education and
:17:39. > :17:43.welfare we will have the problem cracked. I wonder if you are in
:17:44. > :17:47.danger. It is a problem for you? That was a pretty clear set of
:17:48. > :17:53.answers, if you love each other get married, when I bake a cake I do it
:17:54. > :17:57.in pounds and ounces, I want British people employed. I said you would
:17:58. > :18:01.give straight answers, but you were on both sides of the argument? I was
:18:02. > :18:07.explaining myself, the politics is about definition. People don't quite
:18:08. > :18:12.know if you are Mr Moderniser, Mr Centrist, going for the Labour
:18:13. > :18:15.voters? They have had four years of modern, compassionate Conservatism,
:18:16. > :18:19.that is how I describe it. No-one would agree with every bit. Some
:18:20. > :18:23.people say I like what you say about cutting tax, but I don't agree with
:18:24. > :18:29.you about gay marriage, and some people say I love HS 2, I think it
:18:30. > :18:32.is absolutely brilliant, but you shouldn't be changing the planning
:18:33. > :18:36.system. You have to present what you believe in and say to people come
:18:37. > :18:39.with me and I can deliver these things. No-one will like the whole
:18:40. > :18:43.package but you should be consistent. I know you don't see it
:18:44. > :18:48.this way, when you are trying to hold the party together, and there
:18:49. > :18:51.are disparate wings in your party, quite a long way apart. Does the
:18:52. > :18:56.fact that you have that situation and you are managing a Government, a
:18:57. > :19:00.bit like John Major had to, does it make it very difficult to be
:19:01. > :19:10.strategic and to think things through? Because unone of -- one of
:19:11. > :19:13.the criticisms of your style of Government is you are shooting from
:19:14. > :19:17.the hip, and you are great at putting out fires but there are a
:19:18. > :19:20.lot of fires? I would say party and political management is important,
:19:21. > :19:25.and parties are broad church, it is a team, you try and take with you.
:19:26. > :19:27.That is an important part of politics. I would challenge the idea
:19:28. > :19:31.this Government hasn't been strategic. When it comes to getting
:19:32. > :19:35.the deficit down, long-term strategic decision, reforming the
:19:36. > :19:39.pensions system, reforming welfare and our schools. Often things that
:19:40. > :19:45.have been quite unpopular in the short-term, long-term strategic
:19:46. > :19:48.changes for our country. I mentioned HS 2, fabulously unpopular with some
:19:49. > :19:53.in our country, but I think undoubtedly the right thing to have
:19:54. > :19:56.modern infrastructure. In politics you have to make decision, sometimes
:19:57. > :20:00.you can't go ahead in the way you want to and all the rest of it. I
:20:01. > :20:07.would say this Government has been very long-term and strategic. Rachel
:20:08. > :20:10.Sylvester, the Times columnists describes how Theresa May was going
:20:11. > :20:15.to make a statement in the Commons but told to make it on the Radio 4
:20:16. > :20:19.programme because otherwise we would lose the next three hours, as an
:20:20. > :20:22.awful way of doing Government. I don't know if it is the real
:20:23. > :20:27.description? It doesn't ring any bells. It would be terrible if
:20:28. > :20:34.someone said that? It is if you are saying every day in modern politics
:20:35. > :20:37.you are fighting battle of handling the media and answering questions.
:20:38. > :20:42.Yes you are. I said I wanted to run a country not a 24-hour television
:20:43. > :20:45.channel. You are trying to handle that tough but keeping your eye on
:20:46. > :20:49.the long-term horizon, I would argue when it comes to the big decisions
:20:50. > :20:54.about the future of the country that is what we have done. I often walk
:20:55. > :20:58.into the Cabinet Room and I look at the chair where Churchill said in
:20:59. > :21:05.May 1940, and the famous five days in May when Britain had to decide to
:21:06. > :21:10.fight on or give in, today it wouldn't be five minutes before you
:21:11. > :21:15.were outside wanting the interim decision from the cabinet. Life in
:21:16. > :21:18.modern politics with a news cycle that does last half an hour puts
:21:19. > :21:22.additional pressure on it, you have to deal with those things but keep
:21:23. > :21:26.your eyes on the prize. Thank you very much Prime Minister. Thank you.
:21:27. > :21:32.Some debate over whether the Prime Minister was wearing a purple
:21:33. > :21:40.UKIP-coloured tie, it might have been taken as a blue. A quote that
:21:41. > :21:45.Cameron says his economics doesn't come from the FT, and the phone is
:21:46. > :21:49.abuzz with insulted reader. In Hong Kong the business of
:21:50. > :21:55.politics is handled different, it is not much politics in public, more
:21:56. > :21:59.place for business. The leader of Hong Kong is called a chief
:22:00. > :22:02.executive. Since the British left in 1997 the chief executive is elected
:22:03. > :22:11.by a committee of a few hundred people. There has long been a
:22:12. > :22:15.promise that change will come, but Beijing will pick the candidates. It
:22:16. > :22:24.is like you can have any colour you like as long as it is black. The
:22:25. > :22:30.protests resulting from the decisions could be the greatest
:22:31. > :22:34.since Tiananmen Square. The occupation of central Hong Kong
:22:35. > :22:41.is growing. Early this evening there was talk of 100,000, as work finshes
:22:42. > :22:44.the numbers swell each night. With two days public holiday coming up
:22:45. > :22:49.later this week, concerns are building about a possible
:22:50. > :22:53.confrontation. There is definitely a big, big worry, the last thing
:22:54. > :22:59.Beijing and Hong Kong wants. But there is a fear that some activists
:23:00. > :23:05.may well like to push the situation to that extent, in order to get
:23:06. > :23:10.through their objectives. That is the danger, because that's the whole
:23:11. > :23:15.stability of Hong Kong. The whole image of Hong Kong and China at
:23:16. > :23:20.stake. So I think that Beijing is really worried about that. And
:23:21. > :23:24.that's the last thing that the Beijing leadership wants. The
:23:25. > :23:26.authorities are in a corner, faced with protests, many of which
:23:27. > :23:43.unauthorised, they have little choice but to deploy. When they
:23:44. > :23:47.dowsed activists with teargas yesterday it escalated things, and
:23:48. > :23:50.the umbrellas they used to shield themselves was a symbol of the
:23:51. > :23:58.movement. The danger of this, and there is a good probability of this
:23:59. > :24:01.is the Chinese leader, who is a very muscular leader, he asserts himself
:24:02. > :24:06.very strongly, he will see what happened at the weekend as a threat
:24:07. > :24:12.to the first of the two systems, the Chinese system. We can't allow this
:24:13. > :24:16.to happen on Chinese sovereign territory because it might give
:24:17. > :24:20.other people ideas within mainland China, the Hong Kong disease as it
:24:21. > :24:24.is called would spread, therefore you would get a toughening of the
:24:25. > :24:28.official line in Hong Kong, that will mean even more polarisation and
:24:29. > :24:33.things will not get any better. What this boils down to is a trial of
:24:34. > :24:36.strength over how Hong Kong's new chief executive or leader will be
:24:37. > :24:42.elected. Beijing has agreed that everyone will get a vote on that in
:24:43. > :24:48.2017. But from a list of candidates chosen by a committee, something the
:24:49. > :24:53.protesters oppose. Some people have criticised Beijing and said it has
:24:54. > :24:58.gone back on its word. I'm not so sure about that. I think what the
:24:59. > :25:03.central Government or technically the legislature in Beijing has come
:25:04. > :25:08.out with on various occasions since 1990 has been consistent with the
:25:09. > :25:11.original intention. This was the President's idea in the 1980s, you
:25:12. > :25:17.need someone you can trust running Hong Kong and that involves some
:25:18. > :25:23.sort of screening process for the position of chief executive. China
:25:24. > :25:27.ever sensitive about its image in the world must now deal with a
:25:28. > :25:35.fiercesome problem. These protests are assuming a mass character, but
:25:36. > :25:38.among the demonstrators are activists with hardened views
:25:39. > :25:43.likened to the type of power exercised in Beijing. It brings to
:25:44. > :25:46.mind Tiananmen Square, but also the protests that brought down the
:25:47. > :25:50.Government of Ukraine. Tonight the police are largely absent from the
:25:51. > :25:54.centre of Hong Kong, and protesters control swathes of the financial
:25:55. > :26:01.district. The atmosphere is peaceful and even public transport has come
:26:02. > :26:09.to a halt. But this will alarm party leaders in Beijing, for it is a
:26:10. > :26:14.brazen challenge to their system. It is coming up to 6.00am in Hong Kong,
:26:15. > :26:18.we can briefly chat to Johnson Yeung, one of the organisers behind
:26:19. > :26:21.the Occupy Central movement. Thank you very much for joining us. Tell
:26:22. > :26:25.us what level of support do you think your group has, your movement
:26:26. > :26:35.has among the population in Hong Kong? Well, I believe that there are
:26:36. > :26:40.more than 15,000, I mean 500,000 people who marched on the streets
:26:41. > :26:46.and they still stand firm on their stronghold. I believe it creates
:26:47. > :26:52.great pressure on the Government and Beijing. They have to decide to
:26:53. > :26:59.withdraw their rifle police from the streets and reorganise their own
:27:00. > :27:05.strategies. So this movement is stunning for me now. I never
:27:06. > :27:11.believed or anticipated Hong Kong people are so firm on fighting for
:27:12. > :27:17.democracy, even when the police shoot teargas or pepper spray or
:27:18. > :27:22.even use weapons to hurt them. So I believe this will create a huge
:27:23. > :27:33.political tension to the Government to decide whether they should listen
:27:34. > :27:40.to the people fighting for democracies. Where does this end?
:27:41. > :27:49.Because of course they are not going to give in very easily, how long do
:27:50. > :27:53.you go on with the protests? Well, I believe the supporting force of the
:27:54. > :28:06.Hong Kong people to this movement is still growing. On Saturday there
:28:07. > :28:12.were about 50,000 people on the street, there are more than 150,000
:28:13. > :28:21.people on the streets. Also the movement has spread. On Saturday
:28:22. > :28:27.there was only Occupy Central in the commercial centre in Hong Kong, but
:28:28. > :28:34.right now they expanded to the bay and even across the harbour to
:28:35. > :28:41.another urban area. So the force is expanding and I believe this will
:28:42. > :28:46.create more pressure on them so we have hoped that there is hope for
:28:47. > :28:51.the Government to compromise and listen to the demands of the people.
:28:52. > :28:56.Thank you very much, we will try to stay in touch with you to keep
:28:57. > :29:00.abreast of the story. Back to events here at the
:29:01. > :29:04.Conservative Party Conference. In terms of policy the big topic of the
:29:05. > :29:11.day has been welfare and how to cut it. We look at what George Osborne
:29:12. > :29:13.had to say. It is the last Conservative
:29:14. > :29:19.conference before the general election next year. The Tories need
:29:20. > :29:27.to propose some big cash-saving measures, so they have turned to a
:29:28. > :29:31.rather familiar stories of savings. Working age benefits in Britain will
:29:32. > :29:35.have to be frozen for two years. This is the choice Britain needs to
:29:36. > :29:41.take to protect our economic stability and to secure a better
:29:42. > :29:45.future. The fairest way to reduce welfare bills is to make sure that
:29:46. > :29:53.benefits are not rising faster than the wages of the tax-payers who are
:29:54. > :29:57.paying for them. I can't recall him saying anything about freezing the
:29:58. > :30:01.cost of living for two years. So that's going to have a real knock-on
:30:02. > :30:06.effect, because obviously if the cost of living carries on rising.
:30:07. > :30:11.And the benefits have been frozen. Then the majority of the country
:30:12. > :30:15.will end up in a worse position than they are, so in reality I don't
:30:16. > :30:19.think he will be helping them at all. The starting point is the
:30:20. > :30:25.coalition have set themselves a target of cutting the definite by
:30:26. > :30:30.?37 billion by 2018/19. It told us it wants to cut the first ?12
:30:31. > :30:35.billion by cutting spending on benefits. They got the detail today.
:30:36. > :30:39.The freeze will take ?3 billion off the benefit bill, but it comes after
:30:40. > :30:45.other benefit cuts have been implemented. In to 10 the coalition
:30:46. > :30:48.decided that working age benefits should not move at retail price
:30:49. > :30:52.inflation but the lower consumer price inflation rate. In 2012 they
:30:53. > :30:57.overrode the decision and squeezed the growth rate for benefits down to
:30:58. > :31:02.1% a year for three years. Why have the Conservatives gone for the
:31:03. > :31:07.working age benefits bill again? One of the most important reasons is the
:31:08. > :31:12.party would have calculated it is not a popular form of spending. When
:31:13. > :31:15.people think of benefits they think of unemployment, media depictions
:31:16. > :31:20.like Shameness and Benefits Street, filmed on this street in Birmingham.
:31:21. > :31:23.In truth, most people affected by the cuts don't live in places like
:31:24. > :31:28.this. If I was looking for people who would be affected by the working
:31:29. > :31:31.age benefits squeeze I would come somewhere like here, anywhere with a
:31:32. > :31:38.lot of people. Back in 2012 last time there was a big squeeze in a
:31:39. > :31:42.similar way, the IFS estimated 9. 5 million families would be affected
:31:43. > :31:48.by the change. Seven million with people in work, and 2. 5 million
:31:49. > :31:51.where no-one was employed. There is a perception that there is one group
:31:52. > :31:55.that funds the been fits and another who lives off it. It is much more
:31:56. > :31:59.complicated. There is a growing number of people in work receiving
:32:00. > :32:03.state support, primarily driven by low pay and getting stuck there, and
:32:04. > :32:05.high-cost housing. The state is bailing these people out all the
:32:06. > :32:10.time. We have to deal with those root causes rather than seeking to
:32:11. > :32:13.cut, cut, cut from the working age population. A wide swathe of
:32:14. > :32:19.households is being affected, but there is one group that isn't. What
:32:20. > :32:23.we have heard today is consistent with what has been done over the
:32:24. > :32:27.last five years in particularly in terms of benefit changes and tax
:32:28. > :32:30.changes. The old have been fully protected whilst the young, those of
:32:31. > :32:37.working age, particularly young people of working age have continued
:32:38. > :32:44.to lose significantly. Why aren't incomes for working age families
:32:45. > :32:49.falling in the period up to 2012, but for retired households they
:32:50. > :32:53.rose. They are pursuing a policy of we are all in it together and you
:32:54. > :32:59.cannot exclude the pensioners who are so far protected. Why do they do
:33:00. > :33:03.it? There are votes in this, and we are months away from a general
:33:04. > :33:08.election. Benefit cuts aren't so much about unemployed and employed,
:33:09. > :33:16.the bigger divide is between the young and old. Our economics
:33:17. > :33:20.correspondent is with me, Duncan Weldon, put all the welfare cuts
:33:21. > :33:22.into the context of the fiscal challenge facing the next
:33:23. > :33:25.Government, particularly a Conservative Government? George
:33:26. > :33:28.Osborne was speaking about the budget deficit, the fiscal situation
:33:29. > :33:34.today, and he had good news and bad news. The good news, half the
:33:35. > :33:37.deficit has been eliminate, and the bad news the other half has to be
:33:38. > :33:42.eliminated in the next parliament. To put numbers on it, George Osborne
:33:43. > :33:51.is looking at a ?25 billion hole to plug under his parts. ?25 billion,
:33:52. > :33:56.welfare cuts is ?3 billion, he wants to ?12 billion of welfare cuts, ?3
:33:57. > :34:01.billion, only a quarter, all that pain and only a quarter he's looking
:34:02. > :34:05.for next parliament. Can he hope that economic growth, it has taken
:34:06. > :34:10.off to some very substantial degree, can he hope that will release him
:34:11. > :34:15.from the constraints? That is always the hope. As the growth comes back
:34:16. > :34:17.the budget deficit looks after itself. Growth is strong and
:34:18. > :34:24.employment is strong. Inflation is low, what is missing is wage growth.
:34:25. > :34:28.Because wage growth is missing that means income tax receipts are
:34:29. > :34:32.missing too. Looking at the recent figures it is pretty much flat year
:34:33. > :34:36.on year, spending is in line with where they want it to be but tax
:34:37. > :34:40.revenues not so much. There is no money coming in even though they
:34:41. > :34:45.have growth that is the issue. Thank you very much indeed. For a
:34:46. > :34:52.while the Sunday mirror thought it was boss of Fleet Street taking a
:34:53. > :34:57.ministerial scalp at the start of the Conservative Party Conference.
:34:58. > :35:05.There was the issue of texting photos to what he thought was a
:35:06. > :35:09.young party worker. Many think the scandal is from the newspaper rather
:35:10. > :35:17.than the party itself. It is entrapment and the question that the
:35:18. > :35:21.public interest was nailed on. Thirdly the journalists used
:35:22. > :35:28.pictures of two women who had not given their permission for the
:35:29. > :35:31.pictures to be used in this way. Steve can tell us more in London.
:35:32. > :35:36.Give us the where we are on this story as of now? What we know as of
:35:37. > :35:39.this evening is that the story was initially offered as a complete
:35:40. > :35:43.package, in other words the investigation had been done, the
:35:44. > :35:49.subterfuge enacted and the wicked pictures of the MP, of the minister
:35:50. > :35:59.were found, it was initially offered to the Sun and the Mail on Sunday,
:36:00. > :36:12.both turning it down and the Mirror picked it up. Why did they do that?
:36:13. > :36:28.The Telegraph has been criticised in the past by. The Press Complaints
:36:29. > :36:31.Commission about similar issues. The likelihood is that IPSO, the new
:36:32. > :36:36.independent press standards organisation which has taken over,
:36:37. > :36:41.if you like from the PCC, will follow the similar line. As things
:36:42. > :36:44.stand it looks pretty likely unless their evidence is very strong that
:36:45. > :36:51.IPSO will fight against the Mirror for having done it. Steve, what can
:36:52. > :36:59.you tell us about who the reporter was, the freelance reporter? I can
:37:00. > :37:10.tell you that Sophie Whittams the Twitter character, the 20-something
:37:11. > :37:19.Tory PR girl, #team 2015. Was Alex whittam working for the website
:37:20. > :37:23.order, order. There was a comment that they were looking forward if
:37:24. > :37:28.Evan was wearing a tie on the first night on Newsnight. What that will
:37:29. > :37:33.mean to him I'm not sure. The Mirror have issued a statement saying they
:37:34. > :37:41.stand by the story, there was clearly public interest. They are
:37:42. > :37:46.acknowledging that some of the pictures used by Alex Wickham,
:37:47. > :37:49.belonged to real people and not posed by model, therefore they are
:37:50. > :37:55.doing something to fix that. If you want to see the story of one of the
:37:56. > :37:59.women whose pictures were used without their permission you can
:38:00. > :38:06.read it in the Sunday Mirror. Thank you very much indeed. I'm joined
:38:07. > :38:17.here in Birmingham by Jim Waterson the deputy editor of Buzzfeed in the
:38:18. > :38:22.UK, and John Whitingdale. Good evening, the role of Buzzfeed in
:38:23. > :38:27.uncovering what this journalist had done in terms of defusing various
:38:28. > :38:31.MPs or attempting to was pretty good. Tell us what you guys did?
:38:32. > :38:35.What it was is this story was out there and there were many defences
:38:36. > :38:41.for it. We looked back at the account that was used to uncover and
:38:42. > :38:48.to encourage the MPs to send pictures. It is worth noting the MPs
:38:49. > :38:52.didn't need that much encouragement, particularly the one who was caught
:38:53. > :38:56.out, he engaged willingly. We looked back at the account that had been
:38:57. > :39:04.deleted and tell how the story came out. You can trace deleted tweets?
:39:05. > :39:09.Yes, even though it had been deleted nothing on-line is delighted. Leted.
:39:10. > :39:17.We want to know the technique she was using to try to entrap these
:39:18. > :39:21.guys? Some were approached over pictures of a Jack Russell, they
:39:22. > :39:33.would say it was a beautiful picture and in the hopes that it would be
:39:34. > :39:39.taken in. So Brooks Newmark was flattered and that got him. Who sent
:39:40. > :39:44.the first saucy picture? My understanding is Brooks who said he
:39:45. > :39:47.has no-one to blame but himself, didn't much encouragement to start
:39:48. > :39:52.sending the pictures. Do you think he should have gone, in your view?
:39:53. > :39:55.He has no-one to blame, he takes responsibility and certainly he was
:39:56. > :39:59.sending pictures of things he shouldn't have been to people on
:40:00. > :40:03.Twitter. Do you think he should have gone? The problem would have been,
:40:04. > :40:09.you and I know the way politics operates. If he hadn't this entire
:40:10. > :40:13.conference would have been dominated by the with question about his
:40:14. > :40:15.survival. He probably put the interests of the Conservative Party
:40:16. > :40:19.first, recognising the story was as big as it was. Having said that
:40:20. > :40:24.there are very serious questions, which have been raised about the
:40:25. > :40:29.tactics used. Let's just, does somebody have to go for doing
:40:30. > :40:34.something that isn't illegal, she wasn't under age or she wasn't
:40:35. > :40:38.unwilling. He wasn't posting the pictures out to women who didn't
:40:39. > :40:44.want to. Apparently it is a guy who appears to be having an affair or
:40:45. > :40:48.trying to have an affair. Is that a resigning issue, that will exclude
:40:49. > :40:52.an awful lot of people? That is a matter for Brooks, and he has been
:40:53. > :40:55.very up front and said right from the start he has behaved like an
:40:56. > :41:00.idiot. I don't think any of us would disagree with that. I think he did
:41:01. > :41:03.decide that in the interests of the party he wanted us to have a good
:41:04. > :41:07.conference and it shouldn't be the issue. Let's talk about the paper
:41:08. > :41:12.what do you think about that? I think the Mirror have to justify why
:41:13. > :41:16.this was in the public interest. On the face of it they employed tactics
:41:17. > :41:20.in breach of the rules. Both the fact that it appears to have been a
:41:21. > :41:25.fishing exercise and a number of MPs were targeted. And secondly that it
:41:26. > :41:29.was clearly entrapment. The fact that two other newspapers, who have
:41:30. > :41:33.never previously shown much reticence in publishing stories of
:41:34. > :41:37.this kind, had decided not to run it, does I think raise serious
:41:38. > :41:43.questions. It is a matter for the new regulator. How how old is that
:41:44. > :41:48.OK regulator? It is the first big test of them. This is a bigger
:41:49. > :41:51.issue, a bigger matter to determine than perhaps they would have chosen.
:41:52. > :41:56.But it will be a test. Are they ready to take it on? That is a
:41:57. > :42:00.question which you have to put to Alan Moses, he's doing a fringe
:42:01. > :42:03.meeting with me tomorrow morning. I hope so, they said they are in place
:42:04. > :42:06.and said they will be more independent, they will be tougher,
:42:07. > :42:10.we wait to see how they will determine the case. How did it go
:42:11. > :42:13.down with your readers? There is enormous global interest in the
:42:14. > :42:19.story. We have been getting traffic from all over the world. I think
:42:20. > :42:23.people both love the original story and as we are worrying about how it
:42:24. > :42:31.came about it is still the story of the conference and a story that
:42:32. > :42:36.people want to know more about. Over the decade and centuries, there
:42:37. > :42:40.have, just occasionally, been a few great realignments in British
:42:41. > :42:44.politics, moments when the coalition of supporters that make up the
:42:45. > :42:52.political parties shift and fracture, on an issue that becomes
:42:53. > :42:57.so divisive that it transforms the landscape of politics from then on.
:42:58. > :43:02.We offer then a new party, but a new approach to politics. Most recently
:43:03. > :43:09.the break-away SDP, led by the infamous gang of four, nearly beat
:43:10. > :43:14.Labour in the popular votes in 1983, there by guarnteeing a major victory
:43:15. > :43:18.for Margaret Thatcher. In the early 1900s, the rise of Labour helped
:43:19. > :43:20.drain support away from the old liberal party, and transformed
:43:21. > :43:25.politics for the rest of the century. In both of these cases the
:43:26. > :43:30.left's vote was split and the right's united. It can happen the
:43:31. > :43:34.other way. Joseph Chamberlain, the great son of Birmingham, where the
:43:35. > :43:40.Tories meet today, split the Conservatives over tarrif reform in
:43:41. > :43:47.the early part of the last century, and guaranteed his party's
:43:48. > :43:52.irrelevance for the next century. The Corn Laws split the
:43:53. > :43:57.Conservatives in half and helped consign them to opposition for a
:43:58. > :44:01.decade. Today the right vote is once again split, the issue is Europe.
:44:02. > :44:07.The question has to be whether the rise of UKIP is a mere flash in the
:44:08. > :44:13.pan, a blip soon forgotten, or another moment where party support
:44:14. > :44:18.does fracture irreconcilely, and in the ensuing mess British politics is
:44:19. > :44:26.transformed for a long time to come. We have the assistant editor of the
:44:27. > :44:29.Spectator, a former editor of the Telegraph, and a columnist for the
:44:30. > :44:33.Times. Charles, do you think the right in British politics at the
:44:34. > :44:37.moment is falling apart? I think the real history of what is happening
:44:38. > :44:40.now is the right has grown stronger, particularly on the issue of Europe.
:44:41. > :44:44.If you look over 30 years it is stronger and stronger, because it
:44:45. > :44:48.moves up from the bottom, it is a genuine popular movement. It is
:44:49. > :44:52.resisted by the establishment. This keeps coming to a head whenever
:44:53. > :44:56.there is an electoral or referendum question, because the establishment
:44:57. > :45:02.wishes to evade it and the wide opinion, which is to have the issue,
:45:03. > :45:05.I noticed Matthew's paper this morning said the question of Europe
:45:06. > :45:08.can wait. That is classic establishment view of the matter.
:45:09. > :45:12.That wouldn't be the view of the people who care about the subject.
:45:13. > :45:15.The reassignment and the event is simply the right asserting itself a
:45:16. > :45:20.bit more and saying what it really thinks and that is the end of it? It
:45:21. > :45:23.is not hard right or sectarian right, it is the Conservative Party
:45:24. > :45:30.as opposed to the leadership has become a euro-sceptic party. Now
:45:31. > :45:35.Matthew, you wrote a piece suggesting really that David Cameron
:45:36. > :45:39.could let those UKIP defectors go and the party would be better off
:45:40. > :45:44.without them. The departure of Mark Reckless the air in the room got a
:45:45. > :45:48.great deal fresher. There are two or three more who ought to go, I hope
:45:49. > :45:52.they will, they should be pushed if they don't go. I don't agree with
:45:53. > :45:55.Charles, it is true that the right is flexing its muscle, but the
:45:56. > :45:59.Conservative Party always had a hard right. On the whole in the past it
:46:00. > :46:05.has learned to resist them, it needs to do that this time. What is the
:46:06. > :46:10.view in the hierarchy of the Conservative Party about where this
:46:11. > :46:14.is all going? I think within the hierarchy there is a desire to shut
:46:15. > :46:19.it down, to tell those people perhaps your views aren't welcome in
:46:20. > :46:25.the party and maybe you would be more comfortable in UKIP and good
:46:26. > :46:30.rid dense. They don't want any more defections because it is hugely
:46:31. > :46:32.important to them. Some of those backbenchers feel pushed by the
:46:33. > :46:39.establishment ignoring, which is what Charles was saying. David
:46:40. > :46:43.Cameron isn't particularly go at listening to backbenchers, and he
:46:44. > :46:49.gives the impression they are I idiots. I'm puzzled by Matthew on
:46:50. > :46:52.this subject, surely it is a major issue of policy on the future of the
:46:53. > :46:59.country, it is a European issue that really matters. It is not weird
:47:00. > :47:04.sectarian matters, it is of first importance. Obviously people get
:47:05. > :47:11.frustrated if their leadership is reluctant to talk about T We were at
:47:12. > :47:15.a point in the 1980s, the SDP came along and you had Margaret Thatcher
:47:16. > :47:21.for a decade. She was electorally getting 45% of the vote. Are we at
:47:22. > :47:27.the point that we have the danger that the right splits and you get a
:47:28. > :47:32.left-wing Government. The left seems very united, the claps of the Lib
:47:33. > :47:37.Dems means the left has one party? It would be a splinter rather than a
:47:38. > :47:42.split. The greater danger is the Conservative Party moves sharply to
:47:43. > :47:48.the right in order to stop the splinter and ends up losing a lot of
:47:49. > :47:51.votes from those who might otherwise see themselves as Conservatives. It
:47:52. > :47:55.will lead to a split in the Conservative Party. I noticed in
:47:56. > :47:59.conversations I have been having with euro-sceptic ministers who
:48:00. > :48:03.started to say after 2015 if the hard write in the parties starts to
:48:04. > :48:07.agitate and we have lost the election, they don't want to be part
:48:08. > :48:11.of that group any more. They want to move away either to send the guys
:48:12. > :48:13.out of the party or form their own, not liberal
:48:14. > :48:17.out of the party or form their own, view as a more sensible party. There
:48:18. > :48:21.is a sense of frustration on both sides, there is
:48:22. > :48:24.is a sense of frustration on both opening up, not in the next few
:48:25. > :48:29.months but possibly the next few years, with more voices calling for
:48:30. > :48:33.a bigger split. Charles you would like a coalition or pact between
:48:34. > :48:39.UKIP and the Conservative Party? It doesn't look at all probable. Some
:48:40. > :48:42.people in the Conservative Party are more distant from UKIP than the
:48:43. > :48:46.Labour Party? With Keneth Clarke heaving are the Government, there is
:48:47. > :48:49.no strong Europhile at the top of the Government. The shift over the
:48:50. > :48:55.years. You are bringing it back to Europe? I do think fundamentally, it
:48:56. > :48:58.is two things, Europe and the feeling of disaffection of people
:48:59. > :49:03.who don't see themselves at the top of society. That is why UKIP has an
:49:04. > :49:15.appeal to Labour voters as well. You haven't mentioned immigration? It is
:49:16. > :49:18.related to the immigration question. A lot of UKIP people are very
:49:19. > :49:22.unreasonable, but the fundamental issues are very important issues.
:49:23. > :49:28.The sense they are being suppressed is extremely damaging for politics.
:49:29. > :49:31.It would be a sad day for the Tory Party if Keneth Clarke couldn't
:49:32. > :49:36.really be thought of as any more a Conservative. Wouldn't it? They
:49:37. > :49:39.would be losing a very large chunk of their centrist support, if Keneth
:49:40. > :49:44.Clarke is told he's not welcome where does it leave the Conservative
:49:45. > :49:50.Party? It is the case on both sides of the party, the important thing if
:49:51. > :49:54.they want to continue to win votes rather than splitting into fragments
:49:55. > :49:58.so the left always wins. They need to unite and find out how to do
:49:59. > :50:02.that. There is a party management issue, both sides don't feel they
:50:03. > :50:06.are getting on but don't feel united by the leadership. What was the
:50:07. > :50:12.advice to sensible people to the Labour Party when it looked in
:50:13. > :50:18.danger of lurching to the left. There was a sense of the hard right
:50:19. > :50:22.of the Labour Party going in there. The advice was to take no notice and
:50:23. > :50:28.stay in the centre. I would give the same advice to the Conservative
:50:29. > :50:32.Party now? There is an issue of bad faith here people are told by the
:50:33. > :50:36.Conservative leadership there are answers on Europe and the
:50:37. > :50:42.Conservatives are a euro-sceptic party. But when people try to put
:50:43. > :50:50.flesh on the bones they are accused of being bad people. There will be a
:50:51. > :50:57.reign dumb? Reverend come. Referendum. There is, but it is not
:50:58. > :51:03.a good idea to go in and not say where you stand on things. There is
:51:04. > :51:06.an odd neutrality. The debate hasn't been resolved here, we look forward
:51:07. > :51:11.to it continuing and maybe it will be resolved before long. Gentleman
:51:12. > :51:16.thank you. That is it for tonight. Last week in his conference speech
:51:17. > :51:22.Ed Miliband used the word "together" 51 times. Today George Osborne
:51:23. > :51:28.unveiled his political philosophy in one word, see if you can spot it.
:51:29. > :51:35.Good night. Choose life. Choose jobs. Choose a career. Choose a
:51:36. > :51:40.family. Choose prosperity. Choose washing machines, cars, compact disc
:51:41. > :51:44.players and electrical tin openers. Choose security, choose prosperity.
:51:45. > :51:50.Choose good health. Choose David Cameron, choose the Conservatives.
:51:51. > :51:51.Choose fixed interest mortgage repayment, choose a starter home,
:51:52. > :51:59.choose your friends.