Andrew Neil and Marie Ashby with the latest political news, interviews and debate. Andrew is joined by the communities secretary Eric Pickles to discuss growth and regulation.
Browse content similar to 13/05/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Here, is it about time the government decided how we fund
adults social care? And as an independent review starting to MPs'
Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2001 seconds
pay, what do you think they are Hello, I'm at Marie Ashby with the
stories for the East Midlands. My guests are the shadow health
minister Liz Kendall, the Labour MP for Leicester West, and the
Conservative MP for Erewash, Jessica Lee. Later, as an
independent panel tries to work out what we should pay MPs, we asked
some of you what you think they are worth. And if you think MPs get
worse treatment from the media these days, think again.
First, the vexed question of how we fund care for the elderly.
According to latest forecasts, the number of people over 85 will
double by 2030, but despite growing pressure from charities, councils
and pensioners' groups, the Queen's speech failed to address the issue
of funding. Jessica Lee, how much more time do you need to come up
with the answer to this? I think there has been some good progress
on this under a coalition government. It was one of the first
reports commissioned by the coalition. We need to look at this
issue. It is an issue that has been brushed under the carpet for too
long. So on people say that is still happening because you are not
addressing funding, the most fundamental part of this. I do not
accept that. I think it is right that we now have a situation where
there is an opportunity for pre- legislative scrutiny by people with
so much to offer - expertise, interest groups and so on. It is
now the time to have that conversation so that we can all
contribute and get the situation right. You keep scrutinising. How
much more time does that take before we can talk about the gritty
issue of funding. A I don't accept there has been a delay. This is the
biggest overhaul for 60 years on social care. It is crucial that we
get it spot on. We need to not cross the issue. -- Roche the issue.
It has been a priority in the coalition government to get to
grips with this and we know it is going to be a cross party piece of
work and I am sure the parties will work together to come up with a
long-term solution. She says it is a priority. That is not true. In
2010, David Cameron and Nick Clegg promised to legislate in this
Parliament on a future legal framework for adult social care and
a financial social framework. That has been broken. This issue is
really too urgent and too important to kick into the long grass. You
may remember Labour put forward proposals for changing the way care
services are provided and funded just before the last election. We
tried to get cross-party agreement, we did not succeed. We are
determined to try again now. Elm -- Ed Miliband called for cross-party
talks. We are determined to play a full part in that. One newspaper
reported this week that you are pulling out of cross-party talks.
Absolutely not true. Absolutely not true. We initiated the talks, we
are in the talks and are pushing for progress on the talks.
leading member of the Dilnot Commission, Lord Warner, has said
it is time to take it out of the hands of people like yourself and
Andrew Lansley and make it the responsibility of David Cameron,
the shadow chancellor, Ed Miliband, George Osborne and Ed Balls. He
says it is the only way to get it sorted out. One need have the
leaders of the parties, as well as the people involved in the health
teams involved. -- we need. We have been asking for that from the
government and I hope they respond to that request. We will have to
find a new way to fund care in future. That means the Treasury has
got to be involved. And it is time the Prime Minister got involved,
isn't it? The Prime Minister has raised this issue on many occasions.
It has been a priority. Not the funding. All politicians feel
really strongly about it. We all have families and know the
consequences of elderly relatives. We are all going to be there one
day! Precisely. It is now urgent and I think it was not dealt with
historically but I am pleased now... We tried, just before the election.
I think there is now or will. the Dilnot Commission suggested a
way out of this last year. It said there should be a cap of �35,000 on
the amount anyone should pay towards their social care before
the state picks up the bill. What is wrong with that? The entire
point of getting the Dilnot report was to review it. We now have that
opportunity. All parties need to get together at... This is talking
about funding but the bill is only about services. It is not about
funding. The only thing in the Queen's Speech was a draft Bill on
how services are provided, not funded. That really is not a point
here. We all know the reality of this is it is not only services and
how they are provided but how it is funded. I am not -- I am confident
that that will be featured in a huge way in the cross-party
discussions. Dilnot also recommended nobody should pay
anything towards their care in an old people's home if they have less
than �100,000. Some people would say that is too generous already.
Dilnot was trying to get a balance between enabling people not to face
catastrophic costs, where they end up losing their home, but also
making sure people on lower incomes actually benefit from this, too. It
was a balance we have warmly welcomed. Dilnot is the best chance
we have had been a very long time to try and get an agreement. I am
involved in those cross-party talks and we are playing a full part. I
want to see David Cameron and George Osborne committing to
funding. It is an issue that needs to be discussed. Thank you. After
the controversy over MPs' expenses, Independent Parliamentary Standards
Authority is gritting its teeth and looking into it MPs' pay. We have
been to Ashby the la Zouch to see if you think MPs are good value for
the �65,000 they get now. It is a lot but they have got a lot of
responsibility, and they make a lot of decisions that make -- that
affect everybody, so I don't think it is too much. A lot of people and
that - doctors - and if you want the right people in the right job,
they should have reasonable amount of paid. When you compare them to
nurses, it is far too much. Look at their pay a dense C E Os of
corporations. You could say they are not paid enough. -- against.
they have an increased rate of pay, they will not have to rely on
expenses as they do at a moment. They have got a tough job on their
hands, so I think it is reasonable. Whatever you pay them, they will
get criticised for stopped they are paid far too much for what they do
for the country, which is nothing. A nice raised eyebrow at the end.
What do you say to that last lady who thinks you get far too much
already? A we do get a very good salary. We get paid over �65,000 a
year, and when you think that the average salary is �26,000 a year, I
do not want to see MPs... Would you be prepared to take less? Yes.
lot of people think �65,000 is not actually a lot of money for the
responsibility that you have. Does that come as a pleasant surprise?
think the whole issue of pay is not now in our hands and is now so and
so that -- subject to Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
to review, which makes it much more comfortable than having regular
debates in the House of Commons. It is interesting that a man who said
if you get a decent salary you do not have to rely on expenses - that
was a polite way of putting it, wasn't it? People from all
backgrounds have to have a chance of becoming an MP so if you are
living four days a week in London, as I do and those of us do, you
need a proper system so that it is not only the very wealthy you can
have has sent their praises. Jessica is right - this needs to be
decided independently - but MPs need to be showing restraint. --
not only be very wealthy who can have second houses. One of the
ideas that the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
is looking at is the state giving you a flat in London if you need
one and she would be able to live there rent-free. No scope for abuse
there, either, is there? As long as any system we have is transparent
and clear, that is fine. Accommodation and bills are
available on the Internet now. I am pleased there is a public
consultation. I think it is going to be interesting to see what
people come back with of what they say they would be most comfortable
with. We will leave it to the independent authorities. They can
tell us and we will get on with it. After the expenses scandal, the
2010 intake feel that the less responsibility we have all this
issue - and it must go to an independent body - the better.
you did say that you are prepared to take less. How much less would
you be prepared to take? -- lives. We end a very good salary. How much
would you take a dip of? I have not bought of the exact amount. We are
on a very good salary and I do not think we should be getting any more.
We need to show restraint, just as everyone else is. It has been
reported that the Governor wants to francs civil servants by ability.
Why not apply that to MPs? -- government wants to took rate.
There are some MPs to spend a lot of time in the chamber, others who
do a lot of constituency work... it fair that those people get more
if they are seen to be doing more? They do their job in different ways.
That is one thing I have really noticed as being a new MP. I think
the main thing is as long as you are accountable to the electorate,
you can answer all those questions and are accountable for your time
and responsibilities, that is the most import thing. Not analysing
ability and priorities. How many hours do you both put in?
relentless number. A have you added it up? No. It is every day. Well,
it should be every day, shouldn't it? With the responsibilities that
go with the job, you do not switch- off. It is not as angry voters to
get and a politicians' skint - satirists can make their lives
miserable, to, nobody more so than the 18th century cartoonist James
Gillray. Robin Powell has been to exhibition at his work at the
Nottingham Contemporary, and soon found there are many parallels to
be drawn between now and then. James Gillray was, and surely still
is, our greatest caricaturist. Such was his fame that the most avid
collectors of his work included the great and the good he so
mercilessly lampooned. So, what is it about his work that makes him so
special? The visionary qualities of his composition is extraordinary.
They are so real and we imagine the events of last week, great mock
epics. They mix words with images. This not among cartoonists says
that for many in his profession, especially political caricaturist,
Gillray remains a source of inspiration. -- Nottingham a
cartoonist. He invented all the devices used today and people like
Steve Bell often pay homage to him. Gillray actually received a pension
from the Tory party at the height of his career and there are plenty
of works lampooning the Tories' rivals, the Wigs, particularly
their leader. But Gillray also likes to poke fun at the Tory
leader, as well. Here, he is seen mock-heroic be riding roughshod
over the democratic process. It is probably fair to say Gillray
himself did not have much time for politicians in general, regardless
of their party label. What is very noticeable is that the issues
Gillray explores are very similar to those in the news today. EU have
Napoleon here a parent in a n nightmare to Admiral Nelson -- you
have a Napoleon appearing in it and nightmare. In some way, we can see
this sentiment in some of the cartoons of the Euro-sceptic press
today. For me, the most fascinating part of the exhibition is this - it
tells the story of an alliance that a merged in 18 a six. It is a
coalition between the Tories and the Wigs. -- 1806. To paraphrase
the Prime Minister of the day, everyone must share the pain that
to do good for the country. We are all in this together. If it is any
consolation to the leaders of today's coalition, their
counterparts 200 years ago suffered far more ridicule than they do.
This is my particular favourite and it spookily mirrors the current
political climate, almost to a tee. We have the chance of the Exchequer
spewing torrents of new taxes down on to the populace. And the
politicians here gobbling up the new taxes. The hair powder tax, the
son of tax - a bit like a granny tax and a pasty tax today. If you
are feeling overtaxed yourself, the good news is that it in --
admission to the exhibition is free. It looks very good and when you see
some of those cartoons, you can't help but think that some
politicians get off lightly these days. Well, he was the master of
the art and as we saw from the film, he has been copied so many times
since. It was pretty Bootle -- brittle times then. Some would
argue it is still the same. Gillray was particularly fierce but some
cartoonists still go for the jugular. Does that make you wince?
There was a brilliant one by Steve Bell in the Guardian this week of
the Queen during the Queen's Speech, saying, "at my government will
achieve growth by making my subjects easier to sack," say it is
not as the pictures but the words and sometimes they we beat
encapsulate what people are thinking. -- really encapsulate.
There is the humorous tinge but it always comes with a sharp edge.
they dose so far sometimes that it is too far? David Cameron is not
too keen on how he is but raged, with his eyes bulging and his head
squeezed in at a condom. -- portrayed. I think as we have seen,
the long history of this art will carry on. You say it was worse then.
But now with the internet and Twitter, it is much more of a
constant 24/7 environment we work in, and that can be as brutal.
think about this -- the days of South Today. When you are satirised
on national TV, haven't you arrived? - that the days of
Spitting Image. What the best humorists do is pick a personal
characteristic and there may exaggerate it. You need to keep
your floors hidden! Now a round-up of the political stories in the
A newer residents formed a human chain around the hospital as the
part of their campaign to save its A&E department. -- new-look
residents. Off-duty police officers
demonstrated their anger in London over budget cuts and Benson changes.
They get another opportunity from Tuesday, when the Police Federation
holds its annual conference. -- pension changes. No other public
service is being cut back to the extent the police is full stock the
Labour majority in Derby will announce next week whether it is
going ahead with the velodrome project. It has to decide if it is
too late to pull out. A Leicester man is fuming after
failing to outsmart no-smoking rules introduced by the City's
former MP Patricia he would. He uses a battery-powered plastic
cigarette which any dispensers nicotine, but staff at Air leading
pub chain ordered him to use it outside. -- Patricia Hewitt.
Liz, you represent Patricia Hewitt's old constituency Vostok if
someone is exhaling steam from a battery operated cigarette, it is
not the same as smoking one. It is not. Three cheers to him for trying
to give up smoking, which is really hard. If you are a member of bar
staff working in a busy pub, it can be hard to tell what might be a
real cigarette and an electronic cigarette. My thoughts are with him,
wishing him on with giving up smoking, but I understand why it is
sometimes difficult for hard- pressed bar staff. Did they go too
far forcing him outside? It sounds like there was a misunderstanding
in what was happening. I think it is up to the bar staff and the
managers to take their view about what is right for them and the
people that visit their establishments. He is see it is
difficult to distinguish between a real cigarette and an electronic
one. We all join him in wishing him the best. Never give up giving up.
They are very difficult to tell. They look really realistic. It
Andrew Neil and Marie Ashby with the latest political news, interviews and debate. Andrew is joined by the communities secretary Eric Pickles to discuss growth and regulation, plus he speaks to the Labour MP, Chris Bryant about the latest from the Leveson Inquiry and hears how two leading economists would get Britain's economy growing.