:00:00. > :00:00.For the last year now - the story has been
:00:00. > :00:12.Have the Dutch just decided to stand in the way?
:00:13. > :00:16.in but the exit polls say the current Prime Minister
:00:17. > :00:26.Gabriel Gatehouse is in the Hague for us.
:00:27. > :00:30.No win for Geert Wilders but no doubt either he has shifted the
:00:31. > :00:32.terms of the political debate here in the Netherlands.
:00:33. > :00:34.Also tonight, the National Insurance rise is shoved firmly
:00:35. > :00:38.The Chancellor has back tracked on last week's big budget measure.
:00:39. > :00:40.Is it time to announce taxes - and budgets -
:00:41. > :00:48.Is it just the fashion or something more going on?
:00:49. > :00:50.The number of over 65s getting married is way up.
:00:51. > :00:59.We talked about it a lot and I think I had always said I don't want this
:01:00. > :01:00.ever to be a practical decision, it's got to be an emotional
:01:01. > :01:02.decision. We'll ask this agony aunt
:01:03. > :01:12.if it is to be recommended. The Dutch people have
:01:13. > :01:25.spoken and the answer is. Well, it's easier to say
:01:26. > :01:27.what the answer is not. Not good for the populist anti-EU
:01:28. > :01:31.anti immigrant Geert Wilders. He's up a little on last time,
:01:32. > :01:33.but well below his hopes. If you believe the exit polls,
:01:34. > :01:38.the Labour party there is facing wipe out, losing three quarters
:01:39. > :01:43.of its seats. Some of those, incidentally, to the
:01:44. > :01:46.green left. Not great for traditional parties
:01:47. > :01:48.generally - they are down. But the centre right party that
:01:49. > :01:52.did lead, still leads. So the Prime Minister Mark Rutte
:01:53. > :01:55.will have the first chance to build Let's talk to Gabriel Gatehouse -
:01:56. > :01:59.you might have seen his reports on the Dutch campaign
:02:00. > :02:07.trail, he's in the Hague. Give us your initial reaction to
:02:08. > :02:12.what we are hearing tonight? Well you cannot put any other spin on
:02:13. > :02:15.this other than it must be very disappointing for Geert Wilders. If
:02:16. > :02:19.you believe the polls and who does that these days, but if you had you
:02:20. > :02:23.might have expected him to have done twice as well as it looks like he
:02:24. > :02:28.has. It looks like he has got about 12 and a half percent of the vote
:02:29. > :02:34.giving him 19 seats, up four on before. The Prime Minister looks
:02:35. > :02:38.like he's getting 31, that is down ten but enough for him to have a
:02:39. > :02:41.first stab at forming a coalition. He will need at least three other
:02:42. > :02:45.parties to come in with him to do that and he has already said he will
:02:46. > :02:51.not work with Geert Wilders. The other big headline of the night as
:02:52. > :02:55.you mentioned is the wipe-out of the traditional Labour Party, losing
:02:56. > :03:01.three quarters of their seats, worst result in their history. Some of the
:03:02. > :03:09.smaller parties have done quite well by contrast, Democrats 66, the sort
:03:10. > :03:15.of Lib Dems, are up and so quite a diffuse landscape here. A lot of
:03:16. > :03:21.divisions, where does this leave the Netherlands for the next few years?
:03:22. > :03:23.There are two ways of looking at it, the Prime Minister told Newsnight
:03:24. > :03:28.last night that the Netherlands would not be the next domino to fall
:03:29. > :03:32.to populism and in one sense it hasn't. In the other sense the Prime
:03:33. > :03:40.Minister fought this campaign squarely on Geert Wilders Australia
:03:41. > :03:43.ground, telling Dutch people of immigrant backgrounds that unless
:03:44. > :03:49.they behaved normally they could get lost. His handling of the Turkey
:03:50. > :03:53.crisis, much of that in part to do with the perception that he was seen
:03:54. > :03:57.as weak on Dutch identity and immigration and Geert Wilders was
:03:58. > :04:01.seen as strong. I think overall we can see a definite shift in Dutch
:04:02. > :04:03.politics to the right. Thank you very much Gabriel.
:04:04. > :04:05.Well, the Dutch election had really been watched
:04:06. > :04:08.as the first stop this year, in the grand tour of national
:04:09. > :04:10.elections that are pitching traditional politics
:04:11. > :04:17.against less conventional challengers.
:04:18. > :04:24.Populist politics has dominated the headlines for the last year. It had
:04:25. > :04:29.a good run. But 2017 was always seen as the year that would determine its
:04:30. > :04:35.long-term fate. So where does populism go now? You might think
:04:36. > :04:38.there are three broad scenarios. Number one populism has its brief
:04:39. > :04:46.moment and then just fades into the background. After all it has come
:04:47. > :04:51.and gone before. In France in the 60s huge waves were made, the
:04:52. > :04:56.shopkeeper fed up at his sometimes seen as far right, he supported the
:04:57. > :05:02.Socialists in later years. His movement fizzled out. In the 2000
:05:03. > :05:07.and anti-globalisation movement disrupted World Trade Organisation
:05:08. > :05:14.business. Its hero stood in the French presidential election of 2007
:05:15. > :05:17.but only got 1% of the vote. The second scenario is that the populist
:05:18. > :05:21.outsiders become a permanent fixture. Either in government as in
:05:22. > :05:27.the case of President Trump or as the official opposition. Certainly
:05:28. > :05:30.populism is seen as part of the furniture in countries like Russia
:05:31. > :05:35.and Turkey where it dominates government. But what about in the
:05:36. > :05:39.West? Are such parties able to displace the centre left with an
:05:40. > :05:43.appeal to blue-collar voters? Some sign of that in the Netherlands.
:05:44. > :05:50.There is a third scenario, the populist parties disappear but their
:05:51. > :05:54.influence lives on. Brexit means Brexit and we are going to make a
:05:55. > :05:59.success of it. One theory about Theresa May is that she is trying to
:06:00. > :06:04.co-opt just enough of the populist programme to fend off the populist
:06:05. > :06:06.parties. In the Netherlands it may be that Mark Rutte has kept the
:06:07. > :06:11.populists at bay by doing just that. Marietje Schaake is a Dutch MEP
:06:12. > :06:14.for the Democrats 66 Party. They are the only "progressive
:06:15. > :06:16.party", in her words, to finish in the top four,
:06:17. > :06:28.according to those exit polls. Good evening to you, it's a
:06:29. > :06:35.complicated picture tonight, who do you see as the winners and who do
:06:36. > :06:38.you see as the losers? Well it is complicated but there is also a lot
:06:39. > :06:42.of reason to celebrate. I think we see a clear again for those parties
:06:43. > :06:48.like my own who have had an unequivocal progressive agenda, to
:06:49. > :06:51.look beyond our borders, the European cooperation and really
:06:52. > :06:55.stand firmly against the Nationalists who certainly did not
:06:56. > :07:00.do as well as they may have hoped or others may have feared. But one
:07:01. > :07:03.reason is potentially the Nationalists did not do as well as
:07:04. > :07:06.they had hoped is that Mark Rutte made a pitch to the people and said
:07:07. > :07:09.I can give you that if that is what you want and it seems to have
:07:10. > :07:17.stabilised his position to some large degree. Well we have seen the
:07:18. > :07:20.Prime Minister but also the Christian Democrats increasingly in
:07:21. > :07:24.the days leading up to the election moving to the right and seeing more
:07:25. > :07:29.and more what would be extreme things a couple of years ago towards
:07:30. > :07:34.immigrants, more Nationalists bowls like singing the national anthem
:07:35. > :07:38.standing up which was a proposal from the Christian Democrats. That
:07:39. > :07:45.is not the course we have chosen as the Democrats 66 and I am encouraged
:07:46. > :07:50.to see there is a lot of support for this other narrative, international
:07:51. > :07:54.media have been looking at Geert Wilders but there is a strong other
:07:55. > :07:58.story to be told tonight. The progressive parties with an
:07:59. > :08:03.open-minded open economy open society agenda have won tonight.
:08:04. > :08:07.That is interesting because what you are seeing is the centre-left
:08:08. > :08:11.squeezed out, they are squeezed out between these two big forces of if
:08:12. > :08:16.you like populist right-wing and progressive liberalism as you would
:08:17. > :08:23.describe it and the two sides of Dutch society are now polarising
:08:24. > :08:27.around two different positions. Indeed there is polarisation between
:08:28. > :08:32.conservative and progressive I would say. There is a couple of parties on
:08:33. > :08:36.each side and I think the story of the Labour Party is more one of a
:08:37. > :08:40.four year-long coalition with the party they said they would never
:08:41. > :08:43.govern with in the previous campaign. I think that has been a
:08:44. > :08:46.big disappointment for their constituents. Marietje Schaake,
:08:47. > :08:48.thank you for your time. Catherine De Vries is a Professor
:08:49. > :08:59.of Politics at University of Essex. But works here and studies the whole
:09:00. > :09:01.of European politics. It's a fascinating picture because first
:09:02. > :09:05.thing is the traditional parties have not done very well and the
:09:06. > :09:10.outside parties have done quite well. I think that is a phenomenon
:09:11. > :09:13.we are seeing in many West European or European political systems
:09:14. > :09:17.overall that actually this is maybe not even the story about the
:09:18. > :09:21.strength of populists but the weakness of mainstream politics. But
:09:22. > :09:26.not a good night for Geert Wilders, would you say this is one of those
:09:27. > :09:30.where it stops the populist bandwagon in its tracks? You have to
:09:31. > :09:33.be careful making those kind of sweeping arguments but I think Geert
:09:34. > :09:38.Wilders was expecting more from tonight. I think the people who
:09:39. > :09:43.follow Dutch politics closely, it was clear this election campaign he
:09:44. > :09:48.has not been able to cater towards this anti-immigrant, anti-EU feeling
:09:49. > :09:51.as successful as he has in the past. And now he has an election result
:09:52. > :09:56.which is very similar to some of those he has had in previous years.
:09:57. > :10:02.I think this is, he put the bar very high for himself and did not meet
:10:03. > :10:07.it. Where does that kind of populism go? You could think it is a fad, you
:10:08. > :10:12.could think it is a fixture, which would you think? Not to be too
:10:13. > :10:16.academic but we think there are three ways to deal with populists,
:10:17. > :10:21.one is to ignore, that seems to have not been a very successful strategy
:10:22. > :10:26.in Western Europe for a long time. The second is to co-opt and that is
:10:27. > :10:34.something Marietje Schaake was just talking about, taking firm positions
:10:35. > :10:40.in the Turkish row we saw and anti-immigrant. I think some people
:10:41. > :10:45.have suggested that has helped Mark Rutte in the election campaign. The
:10:46. > :10:51.third is to choose an attacking position. Take them on. Take them on
:10:52. > :10:55.and that is something the green left has done much more successfully than
:10:56. > :11:00.Democrats 66. A millennial 31-year-old party leader has done
:11:01. > :11:06.exceptionally well and gained 12 seats. It does set an interesting
:11:07. > :11:09.tone for the French and German elections, that a more positive,
:11:10. > :11:17.pro-Europe, pro-immigration stamps could perhaps help weather the
:11:18. > :11:21.populist rise. A big story in Europe and the same in France, the
:11:22. > :11:26.centre-left, the mainstream left, it's not going to make the top three
:11:27. > :11:31.in France, it's been terribly badly damaged here, what is going on? One
:11:32. > :11:36.interesting element is we think of social Democratic party, the Labour
:11:37. > :11:41.Party label to be toxic, the story of the last year is social Democrats
:11:42. > :11:46.not doing well. But one politician putting that into perspective is
:11:47. > :11:53.Martin Shilts doing very well in Germany. Thank you very much
:11:54. > :11:56.Catherine De Vries. Well, Philip Hammond's
:11:57. > :11:58.budget didn't last a week. He backtracked on his increase
:11:59. > :12:00.in National Insurance for the self-employed today,
:12:01. > :12:02.under pressure from colleagues. Some are saying the Brexiteers
:12:03. > :12:16.were out to get him What is your take on what happened
:12:17. > :12:22.today? It was each immolating U-turn from the canceller -- it was a
:12:23. > :12:31.humiliating U-turn for the Chancellor. Philip Hammond believes
:12:32. > :12:34.he and the Prime Minister are equally culpable. In the first place
:12:35. > :12:38.he originally wanted a budget that was not going to spend any more or
:12:39. > :12:42.raise any more and he buckled on both. The second thing is number ten
:12:43. > :12:46.had full notice of this rise in national insurance for the
:12:47. > :12:50.self-employed. But I'm hearing the sound of recriminations from within
:12:51. > :12:53.the Treasury, finger-pointing at officials and ministers from the
:12:54. > :12:56.George Osborne era who said the manifesto was dealt with in
:12:57. > :13:01.legislation after the election where they said they would not be raising
:13:02. > :13:06.national insurance for the employed. It was silent on the self-employed
:13:07. > :13:10.hence the problem. But this budget U-turn comes at a moment when the
:13:11. > :13:11.challenges are really mounting for this government. So here is my film
:13:12. > :13:28.looking at those. How easy life can seem in the cocoon
:13:29. > :13:35.of a honeymoon. Goodwill carried along by the gentle sea breeze and
:13:36. > :13:39.not a dark cloud on the horizon. And then there is the return home to
:13:40. > :13:44.reality and a whole host of obstacles. In one of the fastest
:13:45. > :13:49.U-turns in recent budget history Philip Hammond today announced he
:13:50. > :13:52.was abandoning a rise in national insurance contributions for the
:13:53. > :13:57.self-employed. It's a huge clock up which comes from a number of things,
:13:58. > :14:01.firstly it comes from what seems to be a failure to even look at the
:14:02. > :14:06.Conservative manifesto of not even two years ago. I think that is
:14:07. > :14:10.explained not by casualness our lack of work, I think what explains that
:14:11. > :14:21.is that Theresa May and her team do not think of the 2015 manifesto as
:14:22. > :14:23.the manifesto. Just a few short weeks ago the path ahead seemed
:14:24. > :14:25.clear for Theresa May after the Tories defeated Labour in the
:14:26. > :14:27.Copeland by-election. Now her government is heading obstacles.
:14:28. > :14:31.Sometimes down to their own mistakes and sometimes down to the historic
:14:32. > :14:33.challenge of negotiating Britain's exit from the EU and what that means
:14:34. > :14:48.for all parts of the UK. The man charged with running Brexit
:14:49. > :14:53.is sometimes charged with well, not quite doing his homework and today
:14:54. > :14:57.David Davis admitted that he had not carried out a study into the
:14:58. > :15:02.economic impact of a cliff edge Brexit. If you mean in my time, no.
:15:03. > :15:07.I was shocked that he was so complacent that he was prescribing
:15:08. > :15:11.that we should have no deal rather than a bad deal, the government
:15:12. > :15:17.haven't done any work on the economy, people's jobs, investments,
:15:18. > :15:21.what livelihoods would be. I think it is incredibly irresponsible. One
:15:22. > :15:26.leading Brexiteer thought David Davies had been perfectly sensible.
:15:27. > :15:29.If for some reason with new government is coming through in the
:15:30. > :15:34.major EU countries there is a view that they want to be punitive and is
:15:35. > :15:44.not a relationship I want to have with a trade environment. And rather
:15:45. > :15:46.work with them in the WTO framework which clear and everyone signs up
:15:47. > :15:49.to. And there's always another obstacle just around the corner. The
:15:50. > :15:53.SNP are using Brexit to demand a second independence referendum. One
:15:54. > :15:59.Unionist says the Prime Minister isn't helping the UK case. In
:16:00. > :16:03.Westminster they are comparing the present Prime Minister with Margaret
:16:04. > :16:06.Thatcher is a favourable comparison. In Scotland when they compare the
:16:07. > :16:09.present Prime Minister with Margaret Hodge it is the opposite because of
:16:10. > :16:13.course Margaret Thatcher was universally disliked in Scotland.
:16:14. > :16:18.Anyone who resembles Margaret Thatcher, even to the smallest
:16:19. > :16:23.extent, is not going to go down well with the majority of people in
:16:24. > :16:26.Scotland. One veteran of Gordon Brown's Downing Street believes
:16:27. > :16:30.Theresa May is now discovering the true challenge of being a Prime
:16:31. > :17:09.Minister. I think the honeymoon is coming to an end
:17:10. > :17:13.because the easy part of a Brexit dominated government for her was
:17:14. > :17:15.always going to be the run-up to the triggering of Article 50 moment. The
:17:16. > :17:18.minute Article 50 is triggered this when the hard work begins, making
:17:19. > :17:20.decisions about who you will annoy, who you will favour, which business
:17:21. > :17:23.you will say yes to, or no to, whether you are hard rig ht soft
:17:24. > :17:26.left, whether the Tory party will be more annoyed by your choices. That
:17:27. > :17:29.will be her problem from now and you'd better get used to it because
:17:30. > :17:31.this is the territory she will be in for a long time. Her unusually
:17:32. > :17:34.lengthy honeymoon will soon be a distant memory for Theresa must hope
:17:35. > :17:36.that her capacity for hard work will ensure that she faces a smooth road
:17:37. > :17:39.ahead. Nick Watt will be back with us in a moment she must hope that
:17:40. > :17:42.her capacity for hard work will ensure that she faces a smooth road
:17:43. > :17:43.ahead. Nick Watt will be back with us in a moment.
:17:44. > :17:45.Let's talk a bit more about tax and the national
:17:46. > :17:48.One thing that almost every tax expert thinks,
:17:49. > :17:50.is that Phillip Hammond was on to something,
:17:51. > :17:53.in arguing that we need to sort out the lower tax
:17:54. > :17:56.Firstly, it loses the government revenue, it's not fair that rich
:17:57. > :17:58.self-employed people pay less tax than poorer workers.
:17:59. > :18:01.And it encourages employers to sack workers, and take them
:18:02. > :18:04.So how come something seen as sensible has been mishandled
:18:05. > :18:08.Maybe we shouldn't have a Budget where things are sprung
:18:09. > :18:11.I'm joined by Conservative MP David Morris, who's the prime
:18:12. > :18:12.minister's 'Ambassador for the Self-Employed'.
:18:13. > :18:16.And Jill Rutter from the Institute for Government, who's worked on tax
:18:17. > :18:18.policy in the Treasury and Number 10.
:18:19. > :18:21.Djourou should we just get rid of the budget, have a debate before
:18:22. > :18:24.anything and then not this problem. We should have fewer budgets and
:18:25. > :18:27.Philip Hammond has agreed to that by abolishing the spring budget, this
:18:28. > :18:30.one will be his last, he might be relieved about that. And he did less
:18:31. > :18:32.in this one, a good move. Still that ancient process where the budget is
:18:33. > :18:36.shrouded in secrecy and there's very little consultation on the measures,
:18:37. > :18:39.chancellors have rabbits that they announce Djourou, should we just get
:18:40. > :18:41.rid of the budget, have the debate before anything and then not this
:18:42. > :18:43.problem. We should have fewer budgets and Philip Hammond has
:18:44. > :18:46.agreed to that by abolishing the spring budget, this one will be his
:18:47. > :18:49.last, he might be relieved about that. And he did less in this one, a
:18:50. > :18:51.good move. Still that ancient process where the budget is shrouded
:18:52. > :18:53.in secrecy and there's very little consultation on the measures,
:18:54. > :18:55.chancellors have rabbits that explosions happen sooner and sooner
:18:56. > :18:57.so actually lasting a week was better than George Osborne's last
:18:58. > :18:59.spring budget when he was reversing by question Time, the day after they
:19:00. > :19:02.should ask themselves, chancellors, whether they are well served by
:19:03. > :19:08.this. So on taxi would say, here is a direction this, we need to work
:19:09. > :19:16.out a facing? Philip Hammond trailed in the Autumn Statement that he was
:19:17. > :19:23.going to consult on to look at the issue. So they laid the groundwork
:19:24. > :19:27.for doing a serious review exposing the evidence base, building
:19:28. > :19:30.consensus and laying the groundwork for some long-term reforms. Instead
:19:31. > :19:34.they decided the rabbit had to be let out of the hatch early in the
:19:35. > :19:39.budget, whether at the last minute to pay for social care, who knows.
:19:40. > :19:48.What they have done is set back the cause for serious reform for the
:19:49. > :19:51.rest of this before that the Prime Minister had said at this review by
:19:52. > :19:53.Matthew Taylor's bringing in Tony Blair's former head of policy to
:19:54. > :19:55.look at the issue. So they laid the groundwork for doing a serious
:19:56. > :19:57.review exposing the evidence base, building consensus and laying the
:19:58. > :20:00.groundwork for some long-term reforms. Instead they decided the
:20:01. > :20:03.rabbit had to be let out of the hatch early in the budget, whether
:20:04. > :20:05.at the last minute to pay for social care, who knows. What they have done
:20:06. > :20:08.is set back the cause for serious reform for the rest of this
:20:09. > :20:10.Parliament. It's off the cards David, you wanted this. Before this
:20:11. > :20:13.was a good idea. When I was Minister for the self-employed, I had been an
:20:14. > :20:16.MP for 20 years and one problem for the self-employed is how they sort
:20:17. > :20:19.out their pensions. I'm still having problems, I was at college in 1983,
:20:20. > :20:22.this is how complicated it is. What we saw today was a better deal than
:20:23. > :20:24.what we saw yesterday because it is actually... You supported the budget
:20:25. > :20:27.and know you support the U-turn? Minister for the self-employed, I
:20:28. > :20:29.had been an MP for 20 years and one problem for the self-employed is how
:20:30. > :20:31.they sort out their pensions. I'm still having problems, I was at
:20:32. > :20:34.college in 1983, this is how complicated it is. What we saw today
:20:35. > :20:37.was a better deal than what we saw yesterday because it is actually...
:20:38. > :20:40.You supported the budget and now you support the I thought it was a good
:20:41. > :20:42.deal because we are trying to harmonise the self-employed. I
:20:43. > :20:45.floated this idea two years ago saying let's get rid of class toyou
:20:46. > :20:47.put money into it and get nothing from it's complicated that it is
:20:48. > :20:49.unfair for Rich self-employed people to pay less tax than poorer workers?
:20:50. > :20:52.That is what we've got now. Everything is on class four.
:20:53. > :20:55.Yesterday, you agree that it is unfair for rich self-employed people
:20:56. > :20:57.to pay less tax than poorer workers? That is what we've got now.
:20:58. > :21:01.Everything is on class four. The profits of the 40,000 that on. Mayo
:21:02. > :21:04.suggest that the real problem was the manifesto commitment. We can
:21:05. > :21:08.blame the budget process but it was the manifesto high on. Mayo suggest
:21:09. > :21:15.that the real problem was the manifesto commitment. We can blame
:21:16. > :21:17.the budget process but it was the manifesto they had made such a
:21:18. > :21:21.radical and firm commitment in the manifesto to doing nothing. Everyone
:21:22. > :21:26.who the time that the only people they were binding with themselves so
:21:27. > :21:28.to take the law to do that seemed said at the time that the only
:21:29. > :21:35.people they were binding with themselves so to take the law to do
:21:36. > :21:41.that seemed strange the grid. You had no announcement planned for the
:21:42. > :21:44.day, what shall we do, say they will be attacks, that's easy, we won't do
:21:45. > :21:51.that anyway. Which is the cavalier way we go about it. -- they will be
:21:52. > :21:57.taxed. This was talked about when you before the election. What got
:21:58. > :22:03.them was the pledge not to touch national insurance ever! In the
:22:04. > :22:07.budget of 2015, Sajid Javid has announced this although it's gone
:22:08. > :22:09.under the radar, now we've actually got a better deal for the
:22:10. > :22:16.self-employed. They are now paying the same as everyone, getting a tax
:22:17. > :22:23.break because they are not paying ?145 in the class tos. The good news
:22:24. > :22:28.was let out early, the abolition of class two. The bad news about class
:22:29. > :22:33.four came later. You'd had the good news already, it's all bad news. We
:22:34. > :22:37.need to do much more strategic approach, thinking in advance what
:22:38. > :22:40.you wanted to do over the life of a parliament. Theresa May said
:22:41. > :22:44.something interesting in the two and a half hours she ran for the
:22:45. > :22:50.leadership before Andrea Leadsom withdrew. She said, we need to have
:22:51. > :22:54.a serious conversation about how we pay for the state. And because she
:22:55. > :22:59.became Prime Minister within two and a half days we lost that
:23:00. > :23:05.conversation. Do you want that conversation David? We are having it
:23:06. > :23:10.already. We did have the consultation before... Your party
:23:11. > :23:15.keeps making rash promises like we won't touch any taxes and in
:23:16. > :23:18.government it has to constrain itself! If you think about what
:23:19. > :23:29.happened in the general election that's just gone we did talk about
:23:30. > :23:34.abolishing Class 2s. And people in classical can get maternity pay
:23:35. > :23:39.which was one of my ideas. Stay with us, if you would. You both.
:23:40. > :23:41.Nick Watt is still with us - there's been more movement
:23:42. > :23:52.Allegations hurting the Conservatives. 12 police forces have
:23:53. > :23:58.asked charges to be considered concerning expenses. This relates to
:23:59. > :24:03.the long running saga exposed by Channel 4 News that the Tories
:24:04. > :24:06.inappropriately used facilities funded at a national level to
:24:07. > :24:12.campaign locally. The biggest examples being those bus tours
:24:13. > :24:16.around marginal constituencies. Car McCartney, one Tory MP being
:24:17. > :24:22.investigated wrote to the party chairman, furious. I've learned this
:24:23. > :24:25.evening that Tory MPs are giving an ultimatum to the Tory chairman, is a
:24:26. > :24:30.Patrick McLoughlin, saying sort this out by the end of the week. Write to
:24:31. > :24:35.the electoral commission. Say it is your fault, pay a fine of ?20,000
:24:36. > :24:42.and if you don't will go on strike. I'm not quite sure what going on
:24:43. > :24:45.strike will mean. David, you have some history of this because the
:24:46. > :24:52.battle bus visited your seed when you were fighting the election. You
:24:53. > :24:56.were investigated -- your seat. It was a carbon copy, the Lancashire
:24:57. > :25:02.Police interviewed me and saw fit to take it no further. They haven't
:25:03. > :25:08.gone to this CBS? There were reports on BBC Two two weeks ago that there
:25:09. > :25:12.is nothing further to be answered. Did the party let you down? Did they
:25:13. > :25:18.say that the battle bus was a national expense and you will find?
:25:19. > :25:22.Yes, we all got the same e-mail from Mark Clark at the time, he was
:25:23. > :25:29.behind the battle bus project and he said it was a national spend. You
:25:30. > :25:33.all had a sincere belief, that's the claim, essentially, that you were
:25:34. > :25:37.cleared for this spending. I honestly believe not one member of
:25:38. > :25:43.Parliament is guilty of anything. But the party is guilty of something
:25:44. > :25:47.because it misinformed you. The Labour Party, the Lib Dems, Ukip,
:25:48. > :25:52.everyone had the same kind of project going on. In fact the Tories
:25:53. > :25:54.were late in the day to do this kind of project because the Liberal
:25:55. > :26:01.Democrats have been doing it for generations. One problem that the
:26:02. > :26:06.Tories had was that you had few activists. On the ground, the
:26:07. > :26:11.membership is not what it was. Using battle buses and ferrying people
:26:12. > :26:17.around was a big part of the Tory campaign. In your seat wasn't that
:26:18. > :26:23.the case? No. My case was straightforward. We did not want the
:26:24. > :26:27.battle bus. That was said from day one. We were instructed to have the
:26:28. > :26:32.battle bus, it was the same as everyone else, which is what the
:26:33. > :26:37.parties do. They told you, you will take the battle bus, it's coming on
:26:38. > :26:42.Tuesday... We were told it was a national spend, nothing more
:26:43. > :26:45.sinister, deeper, or clandestinely. David, thank you for staying on and
:26:46. > :26:53.clarifying that. Thank you. Are you someone who likes
:26:54. > :26:56.collecting data on yourself - monitoring your sleep,
:26:57. > :26:57.footsteps, heart rate? I mean seriously doing that, not
:26:58. > :27:00.just the first few days of January? Well, we are potentially
:27:01. > :27:03.on the cusp of something big - a chance not just for us to measure
:27:04. > :27:06.everything we do, For companies, the benefits
:27:07. > :27:09.are clear - but what Our technology editor David Grossman
:27:10. > :27:12.looks at whether we should set limits on how much data companies
:27:13. > :27:15.can gather about their workers. Clocking up the steps
:27:16. > :27:19.on the way to the office. Along with other workers
:27:20. > :27:21.at their firm, Beate and Rebecca And there are prizes for who can
:27:22. > :27:27.rack up the most impressive numbers. I kind of think of myself
:27:28. > :27:30.as being quite fit and healthy. But it's only really when I started
:27:31. > :27:33.using it that I realised I didn't actually do that many steps
:27:34. > :27:36.on a daily basis, so I think it's I've really enjoyed that,
:27:37. > :27:40.knowing how many I'm doing and thinking about improving
:27:41. > :27:41.it every day. This is my personal
:27:42. > :27:43.individual dashboard. But isn't there a something perhaps
:27:44. > :27:50.a bit creepy about sharing this sort Are you at all worried that it blurs
:27:51. > :27:57.the line between your job So for those of us that doesn't
:27:58. > :28:05.want to partake you don't And for the rest of us that do it
:28:06. > :28:09.just adds a little bit The company says it's
:28:10. > :28:13.all about getting a healthier The data the devices
:28:14. > :28:17.generate is very much You have to take into context
:28:18. > :28:24.that the wearable device itself is optional so not everybody
:28:25. > :28:27.will use them and of course some people may give
:28:28. > :28:29.them to their husbands, their wives, their children,
:28:30. > :28:31.so you have to be careful. But we get high-level
:28:32. > :28:33.anonymised data, but not Well it can help tell you how
:28:34. > :28:40.many people are engaging with the wearable device
:28:41. > :28:42.in the first place. And it might give you some broad
:28:43. > :28:44.identification of sort of the levels of activity,
:28:45. > :28:47.maybe in certain departments, certain groups of people,
:28:48. > :28:49.you might be able to find But it won't be at
:28:50. > :28:52.an individual level. Wearable tech at work
:28:53. > :29:00.is a growing trend. According to analysis by ABI
:29:01. > :29:02.research, companies gave out 200 million wearable devices
:29:03. > :29:04.to employees last year. They predict that will rise
:29:05. > :29:08.to 500 million a year by 2021. The rise of wearable technology
:29:09. > :29:11.obviously offers fantastic insights for companies,
:29:12. > :29:16.but at what cost? Just how much of our personal
:29:17. > :29:20.information should we be invited to share with employers in the name
:29:21. > :29:30.of efficiency and health? For example, there is no doubt that
:29:31. > :29:33.well rested workers perform But does that mean we should
:29:34. > :29:39.allow employers to keep an eye on our shut-eye,
:29:40. > :29:41.just because the technology There may be a case for,
:29:42. > :29:44.say, airline pilots, According to one pressure
:29:45. > :29:48.group we are in danger of trading our souls in return
:29:49. > :29:54.for a few flashy trinkets. Well in the case of wearables
:29:55. > :29:57.I think employers are now starting to say, oh,
:29:58. > :30:03.no, no, no, we will give you this wearable and you'll get free gym
:30:04. > :30:06.membership, or we'll help reduce your health care insurance
:30:07. > :30:09.costs or, if you lose this much weight or you get this much sleep
:30:10. > :30:11.we will provide you Employers are going to be
:30:12. > :30:14.quite savvy at trying to encourage employees to think
:30:15. > :30:17.they are going to get Actually long term the benefit
:30:18. > :30:22.does go to the employer, Because for all those benefits
:30:23. > :30:27.that the employee is going to get they are also going to be under
:30:28. > :30:30.a level of surveillance that many will see as completely inappropriate
:30:31. > :30:32.and a breach of their private lives and their private selves
:30:33. > :30:34.within the workplace. But this kind of technology
:30:35. > :30:36.is rather old hat. It's just the start
:30:37. > :30:40.of what's possible. Add a microphone, add Bluetooth
:30:41. > :30:42.proximity sensors and employers will be able to plot a map
:30:43. > :30:45.of how their employees Humanised describes itself
:30:46. > :30:51.as a people analytics company. They use smart ID badges
:30:52. > :30:54.which record who an employee is talking to and in
:30:55. > :30:56.what tone of voice. It allows employers
:30:57. > :31:00.to see the human network on which their organisation
:31:01. > :31:02.is running, with some We don't share individual
:31:03. > :31:07.data with companies. We don't track the amount of times
:31:08. > :31:12.you go to the bathroom. But the idea is if you don't
:31:13. > :31:17.want to participate you can even choose to wear a fake badge,
:31:18. > :31:20.one doesn't collect any data. And we think that's important,
:31:21. > :31:23.right, because at a high level, if you force employees
:31:24. > :31:26.to try to wear this sort of thing, if you're able to track where people
:31:27. > :31:29.go, any benefit you get from this technology would be dwarfed
:31:30. > :31:31.by the negative reaction people We are very much at the beginning
:31:32. > :31:39.of what's possible. So far the law in this area has not
:31:40. > :31:43.got much further than some rather Even those at the cutting-edge
:31:44. > :31:47.of workplace monitoring think We absolutely need more
:31:48. > :31:55.regulation around this space. Technology in general tends
:31:56. > :31:58.to outpace regulation But this technology has
:31:59. > :32:03.been coming along now for a while and there are obviously
:32:04. > :32:06.benefits both to individuals as well as companies,
:32:07. > :32:08.but we need to make sure that we protect individual privacy
:32:09. > :32:12.moving forward because again, if we don't do that people
:32:13. > :32:14.will start doing the wrong thing with this and again that
:32:15. > :32:20.will of course be terrible for the individuals involved
:32:21. > :32:24.but also, even just from an industry perspective, that will affect us
:32:25. > :32:26.moving forward as well, if there are people
:32:27. > :32:32.operating in the wrong way. Employee monitoring has been around
:32:33. > :32:42.as long as paid work itself. Well, I think it's
:32:43. > :32:54.something foreign. What has changed is how
:32:55. > :32:56.cheap and all pervasive Now the only limits are ones
:32:57. > :33:09.we choose as a society to set. Tonight, it's David Goodhart
:33:10. > :33:17.of the think tank Policy Exchange and author of the new book The Road
:33:18. > :33:20.to Somewhere: The Populist Revolt In the five years to 2014,
:33:21. > :35:42.the Office for National Statistics has revealed there was a dramatic
:35:43. > :35:45.increase in the number of over At most other ages, marriage
:35:46. > :35:51.rates have generally The actual numbers of
:35:52. > :35:59.pensionable people getting married are still quite low -
:36:00. > :36:02.but the upward trend is striking. And I saw you and I
:36:03. > :36:11.thought aaaahhhh! And I walked over to say
:36:12. > :36:23.hello to you and you'd And things were never
:36:24. > :36:34.the same again afterwards. Being married is the
:36:35. > :36:37.biggest commitment It's the most public
:36:38. > :36:40.and private thing Sometimes getting married
:36:41. > :36:46.makes sense through shared assets and pensions
:36:47. > :36:49.and things like that. I had always said that
:36:50. > :36:53.I didn't want it to be a practical decision, but more
:36:54. > :36:55.of an emotional decision. Jane Falkingham is the Director
:36:56. > :37:08.of the ESRC Centre for Population Change she joins us
:37:09. > :37:10.from Southampton and Virginia Ironside is a journalist,
:37:11. > :37:19.author and agony aunt Good evening to you both, let's
:37:20. > :37:24.start on why these rates have gone up, what do you think has been
:37:25. > :37:30.driving at Jane Falkingham? If you think about people aged over 65,
:37:31. > :37:36.they were born in the 1940s and 1950s and these are the first
:37:37. > :37:38.cohorts who have undergone large proportions are undergoing
:37:39. > :37:43.divorcees. So they may well have got divorced in their 40s and 50s and
:37:44. > :37:49.have been available to get married again in their 60s. Of course.
:37:50. > :37:53.Virginia I have heard there is a technology thing going on, dating
:37:54. > :37:58.apps are not just for the young and older people use them as well, is
:37:59. > :38:03.that part of what is going on? Yes, but dating is different to getting
:38:04. > :38:07.married. Yes but you have to start somewhere. I don't know why they
:38:08. > :38:12.can't just hang out together, beat together, why do they have to get
:38:13. > :38:17.married? Marriage seems so strange for a generation that was young in
:38:18. > :38:22.the 60s, that believed in living together, that thought of marriage
:38:23. > :38:25.is just a bit of paper. Do you know people of the later age group who
:38:26. > :38:31.are getting married and do you know others who are cohabiting or playing
:38:32. > :38:36.around? I know people who are together and have been together for
:38:37. > :38:40.a long time in their old age but have not married. And I know a
:38:41. > :38:45.couple who are married but lived in separate homes. I think that's an
:38:46. > :38:48.odd thing because neither of them want to give up their
:38:49. > :38:52.self-sufficiency, they only want to see each other at certain times so
:38:53. > :38:56.why they want to actually get married I don't know. Because it
:38:57. > :39:05.also raises incredible difficulties with the children, wills, who gets
:39:06. > :39:09.what and when. The other thing that has happened is different attitudes
:39:10. > :39:15.to the independence of women which must play a big part in all of this
:39:16. > :39:18.right? Yes, women are far more economically independent than they
:39:19. > :39:22.were in the past and particularly this cohort, again this will be the
:39:23. > :39:26.first generation of women retiring with pensions in their own right and
:39:27. > :39:30.they will be economically independent so I am also somewhat
:39:31. > :39:37.surprised we are seeing this rise in marriage rates. But it is from a low
:39:38. > :39:40.base and we have more people available to be married. Life
:39:41. > :39:45.expectancy has also gone up so obviously, you may think of yourself
:39:46. > :39:51.when you reach 65 as much younger than people thought when it was 30
:39:52. > :39:56.or 40 years ago. Yes, a 65-year-old woman has about another 25 years. Do
:39:57. > :40:03.you think loneliness has a lot to do with it? I think that's quite
:40:04. > :40:07.tricky, again, I did look at the data earlier today and most of these
:40:08. > :40:16.marriages are taking place of people who are fairly, around 65-74 and
:40:17. > :40:20.actually that age group are still fairly socially active. It's a
:40:21. > :40:25.little bit later on in old age where you might expect loneliness to kick
:40:26. > :40:30.in and social isolation due to people not being able to physically
:40:31. > :40:35.get out and about. Virginia you do not seem that keen on this new
:40:36. > :40:41.fashion! But it is isolation in much later life as Jane has just said and
:40:42. > :40:45.maybe this is a way of protecting yourself? Again but you don't have
:40:46. > :40:52.to marry. Marion does bring with it a lot of knots which need untied.
:40:53. > :41:02.What is bothering you? What I am talking about is the will aspect and
:41:03. > :41:05.when there are two lots of children, two people get married. One is
:41:06. > :41:09.living in the family home, the other one dies, it is a nightmare and that
:41:10. > :41:16.is something I think a lot of people don't think about. You have got the
:41:17. > :41:20.families in the background. Yes, exactly, interestingly I think Jane
:41:21. > :41:25.might agree that it was men of over 65 who got more married than women
:41:26. > :41:30.and I can sort of see that, they might want a housekeeper. Jane, one
:41:31. > :41:34.other thing, what are the trends on divorce amongst older people? Often
:41:35. > :41:39.when children have maybe left home or go on on to lead adult lives you
:41:40. > :41:46.are left spending quite a long time together? That's right, divorce
:41:47. > :41:50.rates are rising fairly rapidly in later life, there is this new group
:41:51. > :41:53.called the Silver splitters and we have done work at the centre where
:41:54. > :41:58.we were looking at the impact of divorce in later life on the
:41:59. > :42:04.relationships between adult children and their parents. Actually we found
:42:05. > :42:09.that people who were getting divorced post-60, adult children may
:42:10. > :42:14.be in their 40s, may even have grandchildren, and it was the adult
:42:15. > :42:19.children who were very annoyed that their parents were getting divorced.
:42:20. > :42:22.Even at that age. A fascinating topic, thank you both very much.
:42:23. > :42:38.I will be back tomorrow, but until then have a very good night.
:42:39. > :42:45.19 Celsius in London today but things are about to turn cooler and
:42:46. > :42:46.for the weekend wetter and windier. For Thursday a band of