:00:07. > :00:09.Make or break on migration: EU nations are saying no
:00:10. > :00:12.to the Prime Minister's plan to cut the numbers coming to Britain.
:00:13. > :00:19.How does he get out of that one? This evening an ICM poll puts
:00:20. > :00:24.It's immigration that the public wants to see movement on. Tonight an
:00:25. > :00:27.ICM poll puts support for Britain leaving the EU
:00:28. > :00:30.neck and neck with staying in, and it suggests the Government
:00:31. > :00:32.must get substantial Where are they now? We talk
:00:33. > :00:39.to the family in the first of our series on those who've
:00:40. > :00:43.endured the most perilous of journeys this year. We don't
:00:44. > :00:49.understand the darchingers of the sea. We just put our foot and there
:00:50. > :00:52.on the boat. And the lady with the iron shoulder
:00:53. > :00:54.pads. Steve Smith looks ahead
:00:55. > :01:03.to tomorrow's sale of some Do you have your eye on anything? I
:01:04. > :01:07.do have my eye, in fact I've put in a bid. I'm certainly not going to
:01:08. > :01:11.tell you what it is. Would I be right thinking it's this kind of
:01:12. > :01:18.shape, maybe with a handle on the top. You swine. You swine.
:01:19. > :01:23.We're in the countdown to the crunch.
:01:24. > :01:25.Thursday is the day when David Cameron gets
:01:26. > :01:28.the attention of EU leaders sitting down in one room together.
:01:29. > :01:30.A few hours only, some of that over dinner.
:01:31. > :01:33.But a chance to present his case for a different relationship
:01:34. > :01:38.Now most of it is not going to be difficult.
:01:39. > :01:41.Some of it verges on the banal - a clear commitment to boost
:01:42. > :01:43.competitiveness and productivity, for example.
:01:44. > :01:47.I doubt anyone will argue with that as an objective.
:01:48. > :01:50.But we have to keep coming back to one item causing a headache -
:01:51. > :01:54.the four-year rule: Mr Cameron's idea for getting immigration down
:01:55. > :01:58.is to stop migrants getting in-work benefits for their first
:01:59. > :02:03.The answer from much the EU has been "no".
:02:04. > :02:21.Archive: They carry no arms, but hack saws and destroy no enemies but
:02:22. > :02:24.the artificial barriers. A 50s protest aimed at getting rid of
:02:25. > :02:29.European borders. Today these frolics have given way to something
:02:30. > :02:32.more like fury. David Cameron has had to renegotiate Britain's
:02:33. > :02:36.relationship with the EU. Behind the scenes, the Prime Minister's
:02:37. > :02:40.officials talk about the four EU negotiation demands as four baskets.
:02:41. > :02:44.You may even be able to repeat these off by heart now - an opt out from
:02:45. > :02:49.ever closer union with the rest of the EU. That the EU is a
:02:50. > :02:53.multicurrency union and a group national veto for parliaments. It's
:02:54. > :02:57.the fourth basket that's most empty, immigration. The Prime Minister has
:02:58. > :03:01.acknowledged that other European countries don't support the
:03:02. > :03:04.four-year ban on tax credits. He's openly asking for something else
:03:05. > :03:08.inside. What to put in the fourth and final basket? There are two
:03:09. > :03:12.ideas doing the rounds. The first is the idea an emergency brake and that
:03:13. > :03:17.does what it says on the tin. If levels of immigration to Britain
:03:18. > :03:21.from Europe got to unsustainably high levels, then a brake would be
:03:22. > :03:24.pulled and it would stop. The other idea more aggressively pursued by
:03:25. > :03:28.Downing Street is the idea of a residency test. This would see the
:03:29. > :03:32.four-year ban on tax credits that's proved so hard to get, flipped on
:03:33. > :03:36.its head. Instead both EU migrants and British citizens would have to
:03:37. > :03:39.prove they've been in the country for more than four years before they
:03:40. > :03:43.got their tax credits. There are problems with both these ideas.
:03:44. > :03:47.The problem with the emergency brake is that the commission would decide
:03:48. > :03:51.what constitutes a surge of immigration and the brake could be
:03:52. > :03:57.pulled. So the UK Government isn't super happy with that. The residency
:03:58. > :04:02.test idea, the problem is that Brits returning home from elsewhere in the
:04:03. > :04:06.EU would also have to wait for four years before they could get
:04:07. > :04:10.benefits. Brits who hadn't been anywhere would get a leg up from the
:04:11. > :04:15.benefits system. The last idea is that Brits from the ages of 18 to 22
:04:16. > :04:20.years old would also have to wait four years just like EU migrants.
:04:21. > :04:23.Ways around these problems are being explored inside Government.
:04:24. > :04:27.18-year-olds who stand to lose out, at the moment, could inherit their
:04:28. > :04:31.parents national insurance numbers and to avoid hitting people who live
:04:32. > :04:35.abroad, like armed service personnel, it could be that you'd
:04:36. > :04:39.only need to show you had lived in the UK for four out of every ten
:04:40. > :04:45.years. This afternoon, at an event in Westminster, Tory MPs de-- Tory
:04:46. > :04:49.MPs debated what reforms David Cameron must bring back from Europe.
:04:50. > :04:54.I don't mind in-work benefits for people who are working. It's out of
:04:55. > :04:59.work benefits that concern people. Undoubtedly immigration as such is
:05:00. > :05:02.the biggest issue on the doorstep. I don't equate the in-work benefits
:05:03. > :05:05.with immigration. I don't think that stops immigrants coming in, if they
:05:06. > :05:08.know that they're going to get in-work benefits. I don't think
:05:09. > :05:11.that's the draw. The fact that we have one of the fastest growing
:05:12. > :05:14.economies in the West, there are plenty of jobs around, that's
:05:15. > :05:22.drawing immigrants in, not the benefits. But for others the tax
:05:23. > :05:25.credit demand doesn't go far enough The renegotiation will not provide
:05:26. > :05:28.the fundamental change that the Prime Minister promised. It's not
:05:29. > :05:33.going to bring powers back. It's certainly not going to take back
:05:34. > :05:36.control. This evening an ICM poll, conducted by the vote leave
:05:37. > :05:41.campaign, suggests support for leaving Europe is rising, asking
:05:42. > :05:45.people if they will vote to stay or leave should freedom of movement
:05:46. > :05:49.rules stay the same, 40% said they would vote to stay, but 45% said
:05:50. > :05:52.rules stay the same, 40% said they they'll vote to leave. 40 years
:05:53. > :05:55.after signing up, we're now negotiating a different deal,
:05:56. > :05:59.controlling immigration, not trade, has become the biggest issue. David
:06:00. > :06:06.Cameron's job is to get as much into that fourth basket as other EU
:06:07. > :06:07.leaders will let him. We were commenting on that Thatcher
:06:08. > :06:11.sweater. More on her clothes later. In a moment, we'll hear two views
:06:12. > :06:13.from within the Tory Party but first, let's get a perspective
:06:14. > :06:18.from one of the countries he has to Sven Miksa is the chair of that
:06:19. > :06:22.country's foreign affairs We believe equal treatment of EU
:06:23. > :06:27.citizens irrespective of which passport
:06:28. > :06:30.they carry, is a very important, I would say,
:06:31. > :06:33.fundamental and to pull Just as free movement of people
:06:34. > :06:38.and free movement of labour. So I think that while we are
:06:39. > :06:41.interested in the UK staying a member of the European Union,
:06:42. > :06:44.this is an extremely If you had to choose
:06:45. > :07:01.Britain out of the EU or, Reneging on this
:07:02. > :07:03.important principle, would you renege on the principle
:07:04. > :07:06.or would you see Britain It is only fair that taxpayers,
:07:07. > :07:12.people who work and pay taxes would also be eligible
:07:13. > :07:15.to all the benefits. If the UK benefit system is overly
:07:16. > :07:18.generous, then the UK Government should very seriously
:07:19. > :07:28.consider reforming it. But I think workers,
:07:29. > :07:31.irrespective of whether they have been born in the UK
:07:32. > :07:34.or carry other EU member states passports, should be eligible
:07:35. > :07:43.to similar benefits. Now, it's clear
:07:44. > :07:47.the PM has a problem. Let's imagine we are sitting
:07:48. > :07:52.round a table advising him. There would be different
:07:53. > :07:55.pieces of advice coming from within his own party,
:07:56. > :07:58.and we've a range of two Tory MPs Here in the studio, eurosceptic
:07:59. > :08:03.Jacob Rees-Mogg, who is on the European Scrutiny Committee,
:08:04. > :08:05.and from Westminster, the more pro-European MP
:08:06. > :08:17.Neil Carmichael, who is the chair Good evening to you both. Imagine
:08:18. > :08:21.the Prime Minister was sitting here, he's got this problem, what would
:08:22. > :08:25.your advice be on this migration issue? I would certainly talk about
:08:26. > :08:28.the residency test as a key part of this. I'd acknowledge we need to
:08:29. > :08:33.control immigration. But actually, it's about Britain taking control
:08:34. > :08:37.itself of its own borders by making the necessary changes through
:08:38. > :08:41.modifying our welfare payment system, as Allan Johnson was
:08:42. > :08:44.referring to yesterday, very sensibly and looking at the
:08:45. > :08:50.residency test in a serious way. When you say residency test, do you
:08:51. > :08:55.mean, look, no-one who's been living here, whether a British passport or
:08:56. > :08:59.Estonian passport gets tax credits until they've been here four years?
:09:00. > :09:02.That doesn't cross this principle that Estonians and British passport
:09:03. > :09:06.holders get different treatment? It does mean that essentially. I think
:09:07. > :09:10.that brings us to the point, there are quite a lot of Britons who live
:09:11. > :09:14.outside Britain and in the European Union. They would have to qualify
:09:15. > :09:18.for a residency test in those terms. We would have to negotiate a way
:09:19. > :09:21.around dealing with, for example, members of the armed forces and
:09:22. > :09:27.others. The key point is to make sure that we are focussed on what we
:09:28. > :09:30.want to acheer, which is a sense -- achieve, which is a sensible
:09:31. > :09:35.reduction of those coming in simply to benefit from welfare payments.
:09:36. > :09:40.What about the idea of converting the plan for the four-year plan into
:09:41. > :09:45.a residency test so that some Brits wouldn't actually get the benefits,
:09:46. > :09:49.do you think that works? I think it's superficially attractive. The
:09:50. > :09:53.problem is that it takes away fundamental rights from people who
:09:54. > :09:57.might have lived here and worked here for 30 years, go abroad for a
:09:58. > :10:02.couple of years because of a posting with their company, you might go off
:10:03. > :10:07.to the BBC's correspondent in Washington and now you're not
:10:08. > :10:11.entitled to benefits having paid if for decades. There isn't a
:10:12. > :10:15.fundamental equality between a British citizen and a foreign
:10:16. > :10:18.citizen. They're a different nature. You're accepting that citizens
:10:19. > :10:24.across Europe should be equal? No, I'm not. I'm saying they're
:10:25. > :10:28.different. We've dealt with that proposal. We're sitting round the
:10:29. > :10:32.table, David Cameron is there, what is your advice? My proposal to him
:10:33. > :10:35.would be to go further and to say that the free movement of people
:10:36. > :10:40.does not work in the British interest, that the European Union is
:10:41. > :10:44.incapable of dealing with a migration crisis across Europe. We
:10:45. > :10:49.took in 183,000 economic migrants from the European Union last year.
:10:50. > :10:53.And that is too many. Therefore we should have the same controls on
:10:54. > :10:57.Europe as on the rest of the world. I see no reason why it's easier to
:10:58. > :11:00.come here from Bulgaria than from India. There should be equality
:11:01. > :11:06.across the world of immigration to the United Kingdom. We're in the
:11:07. > :11:11.meeting with the PM, what do you say to that one? I think the problem
:11:12. > :11:15.with Jacob's proposals is that they affect the activity of business. Of
:11:16. > :11:18.course, business really does need to make sure that labour can move from
:11:19. > :11:22.one place to another. We need expertise. The best way of dealing
:11:23. > :11:27.with that movement is recognising that we ourselves have
:11:28. > :11:31.responsibilities to make sure our skills and education systems provide
:11:32. > :11:35.the labour that we need. That's the remit that I have as chairman of the
:11:36. > :11:38.education Select Committee. It's relevant to this debate because it's
:11:39. > :11:43.critical that we have the kind of labour that we need. I think the
:11:44. > :11:49.other big problem with Jacob's proposal is that it effectively does
:11:50. > :11:52.mean that people who are not here, but who've left Britain and are
:11:53. > :11:57.living in the European Union would actually be badly affected too. Can
:11:58. > :12:00.I not give another problem with the proposal, which is that the
:12:01. > :12:04.Europeans would tell us to get lost. Oh, would they? Would they? The
:12:05. > :12:08.European Union is suffering from a collapse in confidence in the euro
:12:09. > :12:12.and has had to bail out lots of countries. It's suffering from
:12:13. > :12:18.absolute crisis of migration across the European Union and has managed
:12:19. > :12:22.to relocate 184 out of 160,000 people. Then the UK says we're going
:12:23. > :12:26.to leave, we give them ?12 billion a year. We're crucially important to
:12:27. > :12:30.the EU, we just don't want to be signed up to everything. We're not
:12:31. > :12:33.in the euro. We shouldn't be in free movement. We can get labourerers
:12:34. > :12:37.from all over the world. They don't need to be from Europe. Do you think
:12:38. > :12:41.the rest of Europe would go along with that plan if we called their
:12:42. > :12:46.bluff on it? I do think we have to bear in mind there are another 27
:12:47. > :12:50.nation states involved in this. We do have some issues not least, what
:12:51. > :12:57.are we going to do if we left the European Union? And Jacob's looked
:12:58. > :13:01.at the Norwegian solution, almost - I've never looked at the Norwegian
:13:02. > :13:06.solution. He's talking about the 10 billion or so that we pay. The
:13:07. > :13:09.Norwegians pay the equivalent for not being in the European Union at
:13:10. > :13:13.all. That's something we have got to think about. If we wanted to trade
:13:14. > :13:17.with the European Union we would effectively have to pay but have
:13:18. > :13:20.little or no influence of the way the European Union worked. 20
:13:21. > :13:25.seconds each on a third idea, which is David Cameron says OK, I can't
:13:26. > :13:30.get the agreement with the Europeans on the migration issue, I'll give in
:13:31. > :13:34.on that one. How bad would that be? He went into the negotiation asking
:13:35. > :13:37.for nothing, if he got less than nothing, the negotiation will be a
:13:38. > :13:41.complete waste of time. Do you think he can come back and say I'm getting
:13:42. > :13:45.three out of four, my other things will probably be given, I can't get
:13:46. > :13:48.this one, but it's enough. He has got three out of four and that's
:13:49. > :13:52.very secure. He needs to make sure that we do actually get some sort of
:13:53. > :13:57.arrangement about immigration and that is about making changes
:13:58. > :14:00.domestically and encouraging European partners to accept that we
:14:01. > :14:03.need to change. Thank you both very much.
:14:04. > :14:05.Aside from featuring in the UK's EU renegotiation,
:14:06. > :14:08.migration has been THE issue of 2015.
:14:09. > :14:11.Every country in Europe has been affected by it.
:14:12. > :14:14.Whatever opinion we might have of the appropriate response,
:14:15. > :14:17.we have all undoubtedly been affected by some of the pictures
:14:18. > :14:20.of migrants making their hazardous journeys to this continent,
:14:21. > :14:25.Well, this week, as we head to Christmas, we are going to visit
:14:26. > :14:29.some of the characters who feature in three famous photos of the year.
:14:30. > :14:31.Katie Razzall meets the faces of the migrant crisis.
:14:32. > :15:06.I mean, that face, so much agony and emotion in that face.
:15:07. > :15:23.So many migrants have made the treacherous journey by sea from
:15:24. > :15:28.Turkey to Greece. As individuals, most pass almost unnoticed, but one
:15:29. > :15:32.came to symbolise the agony of many. His family survived the journey,
:15:33. > :16:28.just, as people in boats around them drowned.
:16:29. > :16:47.We begin to cry. The water is into the boat and up this moment we feel
:16:48. > :16:58.it is dangerous of death. Death of the sea. But God with us, we begin
:16:59. > :17:33.to cry and pray to God to save us and save our kids.
:17:34. > :17:45.Until now, we cannot sleep, and also the kids cannot sleep alone. They
:17:46. > :17:55.say Timmy, mummy I am frightened and I want to sleep with you. This fear
:17:56. > :18:01.is very terrible and it is hard. They now live in Germany. One family
:18:02. > :18:04.to a room, waiting to find out if their asylum claims succeeds. A
:18:05. > :18:09.million refugees have moved to the country this year. When the picture
:18:10. > :18:13.went round the world, because others on their dinky Assyrian, it was
:18:14. > :18:19.assumed they were. They are Iraqis, teacher and a mechanic who had lived
:18:20. > :18:20.a comfortable life in Baghdad. What happened, why did you have to leave
:18:21. > :18:53.Iraq? Nobody helped me. I am crying all
:18:54. > :19:07.night. Please, anyone help me, they want to kill... When I remember,
:19:08. > :19:19.this moment is destroying me and destroying my life. For that, I sell
:19:20. > :19:29.everything to save my children. For that, I am here. To save my kids and
:19:30. > :19:33.to save my life. After the trials of the last months, the children love
:19:34. > :19:36.going to school. Germany is recruiting thousands more teachers
:19:37. > :19:43.to provide intense language classes for migrants. It is very difficult,
:19:44. > :19:52.it is a grudge. We want to complete education for their kids and they
:19:53. > :19:54.must learn German and it is a new culture, new people, I knew
:19:55. > :20:15.everything. I took the family to their first
:20:16. > :20:21.Christmas market, the German tradition. But attitudes to refugees
:20:22. > :20:23.apparently hardening here, I wanted to know if they had felt any
:20:24. > :21:20.backlash? We are happy now, we are safe from
:21:21. > :21:27.the sea and from the fear. But everything is new for us. Hopes of a
:21:28. > :21:32.new life are tinged with fear that their claim will be refused and they
:21:33. > :21:34.will be sent back to Iraq. And always in the background, the memory
:21:35. > :22:31.of their journey and that photo. We will have two more stories of
:22:32. > :22:34.migrant experiences this year, during the week.
:22:35. > :22:36.The Paris climate change talks - COP21 to give them their technical
:22:37. > :22:39.name - came to a conclusion over the weekend.
:22:40. > :22:41.A big moment obviously, that there was an agreement.
:22:42. > :22:43.Remember, being a UN forum, agreement means everybody
:22:44. > :22:47.Think of the range of quarrelsome countries there, from the US
:22:48. > :22:51.The very big nations to Pacific islands that you didn't even
:22:52. > :22:55.So, yes, it was an achievement, but did Paris meet the Flash Gordon
:22:56. > :23:01.Countries agreed on the objective of keeping temperatures rising by no
:23:02. > :23:04.more than 1.5 or two degrees, but their combined promises
:23:05. > :23:08.on actions to reduce emissions will probably not
:23:09. > :23:13.This is not even a case of constructive ambiguity,
:23:14. > :23:15.which is often necessary to get people together.
:23:16. > :23:19.This was a constructive contradiction.
:23:20. > :23:22.So having had a chance to sleep on it, what view should those
:23:23. > :23:25.who worry about climate change take - glass half full,
:23:26. > :23:33.of the Labour government's Climate Change Act, and the writer
:23:34. > :23:39.and environmental campaigner George Monbiot.
:23:40. > :23:45.Good evening. We asked you to bring something to show and tell which
:23:46. > :23:50.give you grounds for optimism and something to show and tell which
:23:51. > :23:56.perhaps less optimism. What did you want to show others?
:23:57. > :24:06.a chart. And the chart shows that share price of Peabody. There it is.
:24:07. > :24:13.This is showing the steady decline of the share price of Peabody. Also,
:24:14. > :24:16.just today it dropped a further 10% in its share price. The reason I
:24:17. > :24:22.chose this, Paris was all about the message it sends out to the rest of
:24:23. > :24:29.the world, that we are serious about tackling climate change and coal is
:24:30. > :24:33.going to go. Doesn't it show commodity collapse? It is
:24:34. > :24:38.significant because it reduces their lobbying power and reduces their
:24:39. > :24:44.hold over politicians. The politics of Parishad change from Copenhagen
:24:45. > :24:50.and we should have hope because politics is changing. How will it
:24:51. > :24:55.look in a couple of years? There are a load of reasons why it might be
:24:56. > :24:59.falling. I am delighted. I want to see the coal companies go down.
:25:00. > :25:06.Whether they will stay down and it will come up again. George, what are
:25:07. > :25:12.you going to show others? This is a more systemic view, when it comes.
:25:13. > :25:18.This comes from the Paris .org website. It is the black line which
:25:19. > :25:25.is what we have been doing. Carbon emissions from 1990, going up. They
:25:26. > :25:29.have been growing. Then the green line, which is what happens if
:25:30. > :25:34.everybody who brought their promise to Paris, fulfils it and doing it.
:25:35. > :25:39.Then they carry on going up. Then the red line is what would be
:25:40. > :25:46.required if we were to get down to 22 degrees. It is falling off a
:25:47. > :25:52.cliff. If we were 1.5 degrees, which is what they said they wanted, go
:25:53. > :25:57.halfway along the green line and you will see a white line intercepting
:25:58. > :26:03.it. That is the cliff edge with which it would have to fall on a
:26:04. > :26:09.vertical drop. It has done nothing, basically? That is a legitimate
:26:10. > :26:15.chart to put up. It is challenging. It is not impossible to decarbonise
:26:16. > :26:20.the economy. It is easier because of the technologies we will rely on
:26:21. > :26:25.coming down in price. If we had taken the attitude of it is too
:26:26. > :26:30.difficult is so let's not have made any progress. That would have been a
:26:31. > :26:34.downward spiral. We have all these countries coming together to say,
:26:35. > :26:39.this is what we can do and we will put effort into it. We will come
:26:40. > :26:47.back to it year after year. Those are the words crucial to you? Yes,
:26:48. > :26:51.the coming back which is built into the legal text. I would love to
:26:52. > :26:58.believe this. I so want it to be true. But the problem is it is so
:26:59. > :27:06.unambitious, what has been agreed. There is so much hype about it,
:27:07. > :27:08.somebody saying it is a great global deal and they are all applauding
:27:09. > :27:16.themselves and slapping each other on the back. The problem is, if we
:27:17. > :27:21.go round telling ourselves, we have sorted it out, it could undermine
:27:22. > :27:26.the ambition. No difficult decisions were taken, it was promises of
:27:27. > :27:34.difficult decisions? 31 pages of text. The worst-case scenario is we
:27:35. > :27:44.got a page with no text in it. 30 articles of legal text. 2018, we
:27:45. > :27:49.will seek the first review. The first review, but what about the
:27:50. > :27:52.percentage cut by then? A single international piece of paper will
:27:53. > :27:56.not solve climate change, but this is a massive step forward because it
:27:57. > :27:59.signals everyone is on the same page and taking it seriously for the
:28:00. > :28:04.first time and that is worth celebrating. Is there a way
:28:05. > :28:07.international progress is achieved, and that is you get together and
:28:08. > :28:13.agree nothing but it looks like you have agreed. Nixon goes to China and
:28:14. > :28:18.they have agreed there is one China, Taiwan is part of China but they
:28:19. > :28:24.cannot agree if it is Taiwan or China which is the proper China. But
:28:25. > :28:29.having something to agree on, then you move on with the momentum? That
:28:30. > :28:36.was the appropriate approach in 1995 at the first UN climate summit. We
:28:37. > :28:40.are now in a state of emergency. We have a climate crisis which has
:28:41. > :28:46.begun. 1 degrees of global warming already. Things are going to custard
:28:47. > :28:52.left, right and centre because of climate change. We need drastic
:28:53. > :28:56.action. It has got past the time of creating the right framework where
:28:57. > :29:01.we cannot actually do very much, but creates a momentum towards maybe
:29:02. > :29:09.doing something in the future. We have DC drastic action taking place
:29:10. > :29:13.now. We do, but let's not percent Raqqa pretend it will happen right
:29:14. > :29:20.now. It took generations to get rid of slavery. We have technology cost
:29:21. > :29:29.cuts coming down and the demise of the fossil fuel happening. We don't
:29:30. > :29:33.have the time. Remember the words of JFK, we do this not because it is
:29:34. > :29:40.easy, but it is difficult. There are things were using to get the graph
:29:41. > :29:45.down and that is what I'm looking forward to, human ingenuity and
:29:46. > :29:47.politics aligned, we will get there. I hope you are right, I wish I could
:29:48. > :29:51.believe it. Thank you very much. It was about 18 months ago,
:29:52. > :29:54.that an obscure French economist suddenly exploded into
:29:55. > :29:55.global consciousness. Thomas Piketty had written a lengthy
:29:56. > :29:58.book called Capital. It sold millions, arguing that
:29:59. > :30:06.people who have wealth are getting ever wealthier, their capital
:30:07. > :30:10.accumulating yet more capital more quickly than that
:30:11. > :30:12.of ordinary mortals. It struck a nerve and in certain
:30:13. > :30:14.circles, conversation about inequality became
:30:15. > :30:16.a dinner party staple. Well, since then the spotlight
:30:17. > :30:18.on Professor Piketty has faded a little, but he is on the panel
:30:19. > :30:21.of advisors to John McDonnell As he was speaking at UCL in London
:30:22. > :30:26.today, I took the chance to meet up and asked whether his argument
:30:27. > :30:28.still stood after criticisms made First of all I would really
:30:29. > :30:35.like to thank the Financial Times for all the free
:30:36. > :30:37.publicity they have given They seem to be very confused
:30:38. > :30:42.because they started to criticise the book very strongly and then
:30:43. > :30:45.gave me the Best Business Book That being said, it's pretty clear
:30:46. > :30:53.if you look at any billionaire rankings in the world
:30:54. > :30:55.including those published by the Financial Times,
:30:56. > :30:59.that people at the top of the list have been doing
:31:00. > :31:02.better than the middle class and the bottom, including
:31:03. > :31:04.in this country, In a way, if your case was right
:31:05. > :31:09.that capital keeps you rich and allows you to kind
:31:10. > :31:11.of govern the world, it's interesting that
:31:12. > :31:15.there's so much change It's interesting, Forbes
:31:16. > :31:19.have studied their own In 1984, less than half
:31:20. > :31:25.of people were self-made. So people are coming
:31:26. > :31:31.from nowhere into Which is basically
:31:32. > :31:36.a contradiction of the book? In the 19th century,
:31:37. > :31:47.if you made a fortune in a business during the French revolution,
:31:48. > :31:49.the parents were rich, so you always have
:31:50. > :31:51.mobility at the top. A more objective way
:31:52. > :31:55.to look at this is, it's OK to have rich people,
:31:56. > :31:58.people in the middle and people at the bottom, as long as all these
:31:59. > :32:01.groups with the mobility between them are rising,
:32:02. > :32:04.more or less at the same speed. The problem is, this
:32:05. > :32:09.isn't what you see But the average wealth at the very
:32:10. > :32:21.top, taking into account the fact some people have come down,
:32:22. > :32:23.some people have gone up, the average wealth at the top has
:32:24. > :32:26.been rising three to four times faster than the size
:32:27. > :32:28.of the world economy. I thought your case was that this
:32:29. > :32:31.rich lot, they managed to entrench their position
:32:32. > :32:32.because they've But the mobility
:32:33. > :32:39.is really important. If there's mobility
:32:40. > :32:41.about who is in that top league, then your case is much less
:32:42. > :32:44.interesting than the book suggested, Let's take the case
:32:45. > :32:52.of the early billionaires, They have mobility,
:32:53. > :32:55.but then their position can be more entrenched in the sense
:32:56. > :32:58.of their ability to Why is it there is no
:32:59. > :33:02.progressive taxation I think part of the explanation,
:33:03. > :33:05.is the influence of Mark Zuckerberg gives 99%
:33:06. > :33:09.of his shares to a foundation. If you want to call it
:33:10. > :33:16.philanthropy giving, I think it's important that
:33:17. > :33:19.you don't keep control. He might be controlling
:33:20. > :33:21.it to give away. I control which charities
:33:22. > :33:29.I give my money to, I don't have a foundation,
:33:30. > :33:31.but I would like to think I make the decision rather
:33:32. > :33:34.than just giving it to someone. We have to be serious
:33:35. > :33:36.about what is public interest In many countries in order to call
:33:37. > :33:43.this giving to a public interest and charities,
:33:44. > :33:45.then you must lose any control If you are chairman of the board,
:33:46. > :33:54.if your wife is on the board, if your family is
:33:55. > :33:56.on the board, is this Bill Gates, not
:33:57. > :34:02.philanthropy, the Gates Foundation, trying to
:34:03. > :34:04.cure polio, malaria? I think it would be much more
:34:05. > :34:07.convincing if he gave away power. I think we are being very naive
:34:08. > :34:10.about the ideas that we don't need taxation, we just need to wait
:34:11. > :34:13.for billionaires to give some Philanthropy is fine,
:34:14. > :34:19.it's very useful. If it came instead of
:34:20. > :34:27.taxation, if you have people who don't pay tax,
:34:28. > :34:31.like Facebook, it's basically pays no tax, then you say, it's not
:34:32. > :34:38.a problem because I will set up my own system, my
:34:39. > :34:40.own education system and you will see it
:34:41. > :34:42.will work very well. I think this is
:34:43. > :34:44.the end of democracy. I need to ask you about
:34:45. > :34:47.Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, because you are on the Council
:34:48. > :34:49.of economic advisers to John Have you met him, have you actually
:34:50. > :34:54.sat as a council and spoken to him? Would you vote for Jeremy Corbyn
:34:55. > :35:07.and John McDonnell? If I had voting rights in Britain,
:35:08. > :35:10.yes, certainly I would vote The history of the Labour Party
:35:11. > :35:14.in Britain, of course has been marked by the huge failure
:35:15. > :35:16.of Tony Blair, in particular with the Iraq war,
:35:17. > :35:23.which has been a disaster. Tony Blair to care a lot more
:35:24. > :35:27.about social policy, trying to be something
:35:28. > :35:30.with the rest of Europe. It would have been much more
:35:31. > :35:32.clever than go to war. What advice do you give him
:35:33. > :35:35.on income tax and wealth You would put a wealth tax
:35:36. > :35:47.here obviously, that is central What sort of income tax
:35:48. > :35:51.rates would you like? It's not to create some
:35:52. > :35:53.brand-new tax, it is to start from the existing tax and make
:35:54. > :35:55.it more progressive. I see what is important
:35:56. > :35:58.is to reduce the tax rate for the lower property owners
:35:59. > :36:01.and this has to be financed by an increase in higher
:36:02. > :36:02.property values. A lot of people think
:36:03. > :36:06.that would be sensible to change the council tax
:36:07. > :36:08.because it is capped. That's not the end
:36:09. > :36:13.of your view so is it? Come on, you want
:36:14. > :36:14.a much higher income I think making real,
:36:15. > :36:19.progressive tax net wealth and moderate net wealth starting
:36:20. > :36:23.from the existing tax would be This is something for
:36:24. > :36:28.which you don't need the UN or the European Union
:36:29. > :36:41.to agree with this. I'm told the full 25-minute version
:36:42. > :36:44.of that interview will be up on you cube.
:36:45. > :36:47.-- YouTube. She was the Iron Lady,
:36:48. > :36:49.but under those shoulder pads of steel, Mrs Thatcher
:36:50. > :36:51.was a woman who took Her frocks have been at the centre
:36:52. > :36:57.of an unseemly tug of war of late, with reports that the V was too
:36:58. > :37:01.snooty to put them on show - And it's claimed that
:37:02. > :37:04.Lady Thatcher's own family has been divided over what should become
:37:05. > :37:07.of her effects. But some 150 of her outfits
:37:08. > :37:10.and accessories are going on sale Our man scratching his head
:37:11. > :37:15.and inadvertently buying a handbag For Mrs Thatcher, like Oscar Wilde
:37:16. > :37:22.before her, nothing stole Going under the hammer,
:37:23. > :37:42.several of Mrs Thatcher's clutches and pocketbooks,
:37:43. > :37:46.plus all this... # Bobbles, bangles, hear
:37:47. > :37:52.how they jing-a-ling #. Right from the beginning
:37:53. > :37:58.she understood the power of an amazing suit and also
:37:59. > :38:01.of really bright colour. What we've got here is a number
:38:02. > :38:04.of examples of those things. She really did provide a template
:38:05. > :38:07.for the modern political You look at some of the suits
:38:08. > :38:13.and you can imagine Hillary Clinton, dare I say it, or Nicola Sturgeon
:38:14. > :38:19.working a similar look. The Lady's old ministerial
:38:20. > :38:22.red box is perhaps conservatively estimated
:38:23. > :38:25.at up to ?5,000. Her bits of luggage contain
:38:26. > :38:30.multitudes, for some. She would have a copy
:38:31. > :38:33.of the 1944 Employment Act, for example, which she would
:38:34. > :38:38.take out at regular She would have books
:38:39. > :38:44.by Milton Freedman and Adam Smith and people like that
:38:45. > :38:47.which she'd quote from. After the Brighton bomb,
:38:48. > :38:50.she always kept a torch in her handbag, because
:38:51. > :38:53.she remembered how all the lights had gone out
:38:54. > :38:56.at that terrible moment. If it ever happened again,
:38:57. > :38:59.she wanted to be able to see These are little things
:39:00. > :39:04.that one doesn't automatically equate with a normal
:39:05. > :39:16.woman and her handbag. I think here you really see
:39:17. > :39:29.Thatcher's sense of theatre She wore this when she
:39:30. > :39:35.was meeting Gorbachev. She's really dressing for the stage,
:39:36. > :39:39.wearing a Russian-style hat and Russian echoes
:39:40. > :39:42.there on the collar Funny enough, one of the things
:39:43. > :39:47.she always made me think about was the dichotomy that
:39:48. > :39:50.Queen Elizabeth I would play with, herself as a woman
:39:51. > :39:56.and use her feminine wiles, on the other
:39:57. > :39:59.hand, she would refer to herself as a Prince and in a way,
:40:00. > :40:02.what Margaret Thatcher was doing sartorially was what she was doing
:40:03. > :40:05.politically, to have her cake To use her powers as a woman,
:40:06. > :40:10.but also to co-opt the powers More shoulder pads
:40:11. > :40:14.than the Super Bowl. And it's all very
:40:15. > :40:18.historic, in its way. But who'd want a piece
:40:19. > :40:21.of this in the house? I do have my eye, in fact,
:40:22. > :40:27.I've put in a bid. I'm certainly not going to tell
:40:28. > :40:30.you what it is, otherwise other people might bid for it and think
:40:31. > :40:32.it's an attractive thing Would I be right in thinking it's
:40:33. > :40:42.this kind of shape We might bid it up by a few
:40:43. > :41:01.bob, but you're OK. Steve Smith. There I wonder how much
:41:02. > :41:02.a pair of Tony Blair's shoes would get.
:41:03. > :41:06.Tomorrow is not only the big Thatcher sale at Christies,
:41:07. > :41:10.look out for British astronaut, Tim Peake, who'll be taking off