:00:41. > :00:44.Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:45. > :00:49.A senior Tory Party treasurer quits, after the Sunday Times says he
:00:49. > :00:54.offered access to David Cameron in return for cash donations. We'll
:00:54. > :01:01.put the claims to the Tory Party's Deputy Chairman, in our Top Story.
:01:01. > :01:03.How did George Osborne's big day go so wrong? We hear worries from the
:01:03. > :01:07.Tory backbenches about the granny tax Budget.
:01:07. > :01:09.And, how long will this man make political hay out of the
:01:09. > :01:16.coalition's budget woes, before attention turns to Labour's own
:01:16. > :01:25.economic credibility problem? Well, not long actually. We'll be testing
:01:25. > :01:29.Ed Balls, on that in the Sunday And our political panel of the best
:01:29. > :01:38.and the brightest, here to deliver their Budget verdict, look at The
:01:38. > :01:44.Week Ahead. And tweet selflessly An allegation of sexual assault is
:01:44. > :01:51.made every three days in London by patients using London's mental
:01:51. > :01:54.health services, why is it so All that coming up over the next
:01:54. > :01:57.hour. But first, the news, with Adam Parsons.
:01:57. > :02:00.The Conservative Party's chief fundraiser has resigned, after he
:02:00. > :02:05.was secretly filmed offering access to the Prime Minister, in exchange
:02:05. > :02:08.for a substantial donation. Peter Cruddas made the remarks to
:02:08. > :02:11.undercover reporters from the Sunday Times. In the last hour,
:02:11. > :02:21.David Cameron said the way Mr Cruddas behaved was "totally
:02:21. > :02:27.
:02:27. > :02:34.unacceptable". Mike Sergeant reports. �200,000. This led to the
:02:34. > :02:39.swift read in -- swift resignation of Peter Cruddas, it appeared to
:02:39. > :02:43.show him offering access to the heart of government. We will listen
:02:43. > :02:47.to you and we will put it into the policy committee at Number Ten.
:02:47. > :02:53.said he deeply regretted what he called his bluster, and said there
:02:53. > :02:58.was no question of donors influencing policy. What happened
:02:58. > :03:03.is completely unacceptable, this is not the way we look -- we raise
:03:03. > :03:08.money in the Conservative Party. It is quite right Peter Cruddas has
:03:08. > :03:11.resigned. Drawing a line under these headlines may not be easy
:03:11. > :03:20.with questions remaining about which donors may have been
:03:20. > :03:23.entertained by David Cameron. have been for Denner -- dinner in
:03:23. > :03:28.the Prime Minister's private apartment. Labour wants a full list
:03:28. > :03:33.of any donors who may have tried to influence policy committees.
:03:33. > :03:39.idea that policy is for sale is grotesque. I think that David
:03:39. > :03:48.Cameron is going to have to publish the list of policies that have been
:03:48. > :03:52.sent from these dinners, sent to this Cameron Committee. The Liberal
:03:52. > :03:58.Democrats say talks will begin soon on reforming the party system. Yet
:03:58. > :04:02.another attempt to reduce the role of big money in politics.
:04:02. > :04:07.The BBC has learned that relatives of the 17 people, allegedly killed
:04:08. > :04:10.compensation. Afghan officials and tribal elders told the BBC that
:04:10. > :04:13.families were paid $46,000 per person killed, and 10,000 dollars
:04:13. > :04:17.per person injured. The families have been told that some witnesses
:04:17. > :04:20.would be flown to the US, to give evidence against US Army Staff
:04:20. > :04:24.Sergeant Robert Bales, who was charged with 17 counts of murder on
:04:25. > :04:27.Friday. The prospect of strike by petrol
:04:27. > :04:31.tanker drivers has prompted the government to announce that
:04:31. > :04:34.soldiers are to be trained to take over their roles in the event of
:04:34. > :04:39.industrial action. The results of a strike ballot of 2,000 members of
:04:39. > :04:42.the Unite trade union are expected tomorrow.
:04:42. > :04:45.The former world darts champion, Jocky Wilson, has died at the age
:04:45. > :04:49.of 62, after suffering from a lung condition. Wilson dominated the
:04:49. > :04:56.world of darts in the 1980s, winning the world title twice, and
:04:57. > :05:03.was British champion four times. That's it. There's more news here
:05:03. > :05:06.on BBC One, at 6.35pm this evening. So, the Tory Party's top bagman,
:05:06. > :05:09.Peter Cruddas, resigned in the early hours of this morning, after
:05:10. > :05:13.The Sunday Times revealed that he offered wealthy lobbyists access to
:05:13. > :05:18.David Cameron and George Osborne, in return for large cash donations
:05:18. > :05:23.to Tory Party funds. Serious stuff. I'm joined by Michael Fallon,
:05:23. > :05:28.Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party.
:05:28. > :05:33.Four access to the Prime Minister, his wife and the Chancellor, and
:05:33. > :05:38.the opportunity to raise issues with the Downing Street policy unit,
:05:38. > :05:42.or for donations. How long has this been going on? He was wrong to
:05:42. > :05:47.boast that it could happen, it is unacceptable anyone should have
:05:47. > :05:51.special access to the Prime Minister. That hasn't happened. We
:05:51. > :05:59.have made it absolutely clear we will look at any of the evidence
:05:59. > :06:03.the Sunday Times has and see if our rules have to be tightened further.
:06:03. > :06:08.But big donors to get the chance of to dine with the Prime Minister and
:06:08. > :06:12.Chancellor. They meet ministers, I am sure they will seek Ed Balls,
:06:12. > :06:17.but the big change now, what we have changed since the Labour
:06:17. > :06:24.government, is any meeting with a minister it is not only recorded
:06:24. > :06:31.but published. A big donor to the Tory Party can dine with the Prime
:06:31. > :06:37.Minister in his private quarters, can that the public? Yes, lists are
:06:37. > :06:41.published of guests at Chequers. Every minister has had to publish
:06:41. > :06:46.who they have had meetings with. That is a huge step forward from
:06:46. > :06:50.the days when Bernie Ecclestone gave the Labour Party �1 million,
:06:50. > :06:55.got the rules on a Formula One tobacco sponsorship changed. We
:06:55. > :06:59.have claimed that up. We hear her that the location of Downton Abbey
:06:59. > :07:09.is one of the venues for this kind of dinner. Ed Miliband was wrong
:07:09. > :07:13.
:07:13. > :07:16.when he said... Look, meetings between the Prime Minister and
:07:16. > :07:20.businessmen are published quarterly. There is transparency now when
:07:20. > :07:26.there wasn't before. There is something called a leaders' group
:07:26. > :07:30.in your party, if you donate �50,000, you get access to leading
:07:30. > :07:34.figures from the Prime Minister down. Are these meetings
:07:34. > :07:40.documented? If meetings with ministers are documented and
:07:40. > :07:45.published. The Prime Minister? a businessman, yes that is
:07:45. > :07:50.published quarterly. For all political parties, they have
:07:50. > :07:56.dinners. Businessmen have meetings with ministers or the Prime Minster,
:07:56. > :08:05.that is published quarterly. All political parties meet businessmen,
:08:05. > :08:10.charities. Are these dinners, with major donors of the Tory Party, are
:08:10. > :08:13.they in the public domain? David Cameron is the first Prime Minister
:08:13. > :08:22.who has published lists of those who have been to stay with him at
:08:22. > :08:27.Chequers, who have had his was pitilessly -- hospitality. It is a
:08:28. > :08:36.matter of public record. If you are the deputy chair then, but you have
:08:36. > :08:40.never met the party's third biggest donor, and this chief fundraiser?
:08:40. > :08:45.Up I don't meet all of the donors. Donors don't have access to
:08:45. > :08:51.everybody at the top of the Tory Party. Peter Cruddas is a
:08:51. > :08:56.relatively new treasurer. He made a mistake. He has accepted that, he
:08:56. > :09:04.has resigned. We are looking at our rules and will tighten them up if
:09:04. > :09:08.necessary. I'm still not clear if I go see these names of donors. If
:09:08. > :09:13.you give us the details of how to find it, we will put it on our
:09:13. > :09:16.website. It wasn't supposed to be like this. After weeks of briefing
:09:16. > :09:19.and leaking, George Osborne's Budget should have been a carefully
:09:19. > :09:22.calibrated piece of political theatre. As it turned out, the
:09:22. > :09:25.combination of a controversial tax cut, and a measure quickly dubbed
:09:25. > :09:28.the "granny tax", delivered the worst press the coalition has
:09:28. > :09:34.received since its formation a little under two years ago. So, how
:09:34. > :09:37.did that happen? Giles Dilnot reports.
:09:37. > :09:40.Chancellor George Osborne clearly didn't anticipate the red box he
:09:40. > :09:45.was holding contained, amongst many measures, a political stink bomb.
:09:45. > :09:49.Had he, he might have held it even further from him. But now, the so-
:09:49. > :09:52.called "granny tax" has left a bad smell that's lingering. Why didn't
:09:52. > :10:00.a man with the reputation as a superb political strategist not see
:10:01. > :10:05.it coming? All roads lead to George Osborne.
:10:05. > :10:10.He is involved in every aspect of government policy and Tory decision
:10:10. > :10:14.making. And he is only a man capable of working 24 hours, seven
:10:14. > :10:17.days a week, they are not enough hours in the day for someone to
:10:17. > :10:22.undertake all the jobs he did. And he took his eye off the ball, I
:10:22. > :10:27.think. It is a balanced budget, but clearly there have been leaks, and
:10:28. > :10:33.those parts which haven't been beat will be very newsworthy. That is
:10:33. > :10:36.politics and news. Every Budget has its down side but in the helter-
:10:36. > :10:41.skelter of getting a budget for growth and jobs, something was lost
:10:41. > :10:44.in the detail. Over time, we will simplify the tax system for
:10:44. > :10:47.pensioners... Perhaps, trying to explain it better than what
:10:47. > :10:51.appeared to be disguising it, might have helped. It's left to
:10:51. > :10:56.backbenchers this weekend to have to reassure their older voters.
:10:56. > :11:00.None of us yesterday saw that coming. This morning, to wake up to
:11:00. > :11:04.that was a shock for everybody. Certainly for me. I have had some
:11:04. > :11:11.angry people on the phone this morning and had to deal with them.
:11:12. > :11:15.I hope they are happier now. perception is such, pensioners are
:11:15. > :11:22.going to be barely a king about this for quite a while and I would
:11:22. > :11:26.have preferred him to get the money from reduced public spending than
:11:26. > :11:30.raise this niggling amount of tax on pensioners. In Conservative-held
:11:30. > :11:34.Croydon Central, there's been a market for 730 years. And, when it
:11:34. > :11:42.comes to money, customers have a gut instinct for how good or bad
:11:42. > :11:46.something feels. All of the Conservative MPs we have
:11:46. > :11:50.spoken to have been at pains to point out this tax exemption is and
:11:50. > :11:56.stealing from your granny, that helping the highest paid with a tax
:11:56. > :12:01.cut isn't just gifts too rich friends. But it's a perception
:12:01. > :12:06.problem, the juxtaposition of these two items has caused bad news
:12:06. > :12:10.headlines, which can hurt in marginal seats and cost votes.
:12:10. > :12:14.I have actually voted Tory all my life and I decided, in view of what
:12:14. > :12:20.they have done in this Budget, I will have to look for an
:12:20. > :12:25.alternative. They always seem to do it to the poorer people. The people
:12:25. > :12:31.with less money. Pensioners. Disabled people. Which I think is
:12:31. > :12:35.unfair. I think it is a bit harsh. As well as this pensioner's tax, it
:12:35. > :12:38.is not good. I voted for this government and I feel betrayed.
:12:38. > :12:42.There's no general election tomorrow, but people here will help
:12:42. > :12:46.choose a London Mayor soon. And may lose sympathy with any party that
:12:46. > :12:54.gives an appearance of standing above their ordinary concerns.
:12:54. > :13:00.Michael Fallon is still with me. Justified to the 700,000 people who
:13:00. > :13:05.will retire next year, why they will be �323 worse off because of
:13:05. > :13:11.this Budget? No Budget is popular with everybody. We are lifting 24
:13:11. > :13:17.million people, raising their tax allowance, taking two million
:13:17. > :13:21.people out of tax altogether. Increasing the... Let me finish.
:13:21. > :13:26.Increasing the pension by over 5% this year. The biggest cash
:13:26. > :13:32.increase ever in the pension. When we are protecting all pensioners,
:13:32. > :13:37.whether they are better off or not, from prices, increases in earnings,
:13:37. > :13:42.it is not unreasonable to ask the better-off pensioners to know
:13:42. > :13:48.longer expect an increase in their higher allowance after April next
:13:49. > :13:55.year. The average increase will be around �80 a year. People are still
:13:55. > :14:01.�323 worse off. This is linked to Owen pen -- took inflation, the
:14:01. > :14:07.increase. This is a bad time to retire under this coalition. You
:14:07. > :14:12.lose �323 a year. You will not qualify for the new pension
:14:12. > :14:17.guaranteeing �140 a week which doesn't come in, until 2016. Your
:14:17. > :14:22.message is, don't retire under this government. That is not right. The
:14:22. > :14:26.new pension is coming in. We are the first government ever to give
:14:26. > :14:32.pensioners a guarantee that the pension each year will rise by the
:14:32. > :14:36.hire of prices, earnings or 2.5%. That has given them the biggest
:14:36. > :14:43.increase they have ever had. In addition, they keep their free
:14:43. > :14:47.benefits, TV licence, but travel, free prescriptions. Pensioners
:14:47. > :14:54.understand that their children, their grandchildren, R Strudwick at
:14:54. > :15:04.the moment, trying to make ends meet. We are helping 23 million
:15:04. > :15:05.
:15:05. > :15:13.The government claims it will cost �100 million, cutting the top rate
:15:13. > :15:20.tax. Enormously uncertain estimates, agreed? No, because the claim we
:15:20. > :15:23.made is verified by the Independent office of budget responsibility.
:15:23. > :15:27.That office of budget responsibility said these are
:15:27. > :15:33.uncertain estimates. The also said it is a reasonable estimate. The
:15:33. > :15:39.direct cost is 100 million but we will get five times that back in
:15:39. > :15:46.things Labour never did by clamping down on stamp duty evasion and
:15:46. > :15:54.making sure the rich pay more. five times figure, it only comes to
:15:54. > :16:02.500 million because you assume there will only hundred million be
:16:02. > :16:06.100 million better off. There is no way you're measures will result in
:16:06. > :16:11.the rich paying more, they could be paying a lot less. These are big
:16:11. > :16:19.measures. There was a big increase in stamp duty, we are capping tax
:16:19. > :16:23.reliefs, we want the rich to pay more. The top rate of 50p didn't
:16:23. > :16:27.bring in the income it was supposed to bring in and there was a lot of
:16:27. > :16:32.evasion. This is the first government to crack down on evasion.
:16:32. > :16:37.They will only pay more if you're 100 million figure it is right. Why
:16:37. > :16:44.is a Tory lead government, which speaks for Middle Britain, allowing
:16:44. > :16:49.more and more people to be trapped into the 40p tax band? Over 3
:16:49. > :16:55.million when you came into power, over 5 million by the next general
:16:55. > :17:04.election - why? People will be earning more. The you are cutting
:17:04. > :17:08.the bound. No, that is not true. You are reducing the band. Yes.
:17:08. > :17:15.said no. Overall, it will be growing as the economy grows. We
:17:15. > :17:22.have to watch the effect of moving to the top band, but this Budget
:17:22. > :17:26.improves incentives at the bottom, those on the 20p band. Most people
:17:26. > :17:32.are at the bottom. Most people pay the bottom rate of tax. You are
:17:32. > :17:37.talking about the top 15%. I accept there is a problem when they move
:17:37. > :17:42.across the line, but we believe in cutting taxes. Just not if you are
:17:42. > :17:47.in the middle. Who has benefited most from the
:17:47. > :17:55.George Osborne budget, politically it looks like Labour, but will that
:17:55. > :18:05.turn into a transformation of the party's economic reputation? Labour
:18:05. > :18:06.
:18:06. > :18:10.laid into the Budget would relish this week. The Chancellor is not
:18:10. > :18:18.Robin hoard, he is the Sheriff of Nottingham. As for jobs and growth,
:18:18. > :18:22.he could not give a Friar Tuck. party has a wider problem. The
:18:22. > :18:31.public still blames Labour more than the Coalition for the current
:18:31. > :18:40.spending cuts. Going into the Budget, Ed Miliband and Ed balls
:18:40. > :18:44.trailed the Tories in the balls. There is still some way to go in
:18:44. > :18:54.restoring Labour's reputation on the economy. The shadow chancellor
:18:54. > :18:55.
:18:55. > :18:59.Ed Balls joins me now for the Sunday interview. You have been
:18:59. > :19:04.trooping round the TV studios since the Budget saying the Court of the
:19:04. > :19:10.50 pence rate will cost the Treasury �3 billion. You know as
:19:10. > :19:19.well as I do that is not true. it is completely true. It is in
:19:19. > :19:25.page 51 of the HMRC report. Face- saver 300,000 legitimate top rate
:19:25. > :19:30.payers will be given a tax cut, they get �40,000. They say they
:19:30. > :19:35.believe that if you cut taxes by 3 billion for those taxpayers, or the
:19:35. > :19:41.people currently avoiding tax will pay �2.9 billion, people from the
:19:41. > :19:46.Cayman Islands or whatever, that is your net figure. That latter is
:19:46. > :19:53.highly uncertain but it is a fact the legitimate talked -- top rate
:19:53. > :19:59.taxpayer will get a tax cut. the cost to the Treasury is not 3
:19:59. > :20:05.billion, it is accepted that when you change up and down the rate of
:20:05. > :20:11.tax, it changes people's behaviour. There is an argument of how much.
:20:11. > :20:16.For you to be right, you assume zero behaviour. What I said was, in
:20:16. > :20:21.the days after, the legitimate taxpayers currently paying tax are
:20:21. > :20:29.given, according to this report, a tax cut of �3 billion. The
:20:29. > :20:34.government hopes that is offset by this big behavioural effect. The
:20:34. > :20:40.behavioural effect is uncertain, as you just said to Michael Fallon.
:20:40. > :20:47.The money may come in. The there is one, so there for your 3 billion
:20:47. > :20:54.figure it is nonsense. It may be 2.5, it may be two. It is not my
:20:54. > :21:01.figure. The 3 billion figure next year it is the HMRC figure of the
:21:01. > :21:09.static cost. The static cost? they say other people paying tax
:21:09. > :21:13.may cough up. If it is such a good idea and you think the behavioural
:21:13. > :21:21.implications are zero. I didn't say that. What stop Jews from
:21:21. > :21:24.introducing a top rate tax on income on the super-rich? The thing
:21:24. > :21:29.which happened was the global financial crisis which opened up
:21:29. > :21:36.the deficit. Taxes have to go up and they were done in a fair way,
:21:36. > :21:41.including the top rate, which the government admitted was �3 billion.
:21:41. > :21:45.Why didn't you take it up? I would rather every tax rate was lower if
:21:45. > :21:50.we could afford it but it depends on your priorities. At a time when
:21:50. > :21:57.you have got to get the deficit down and the government is raising
:21:57. > :22:05.taxes, the middle class paying more tax, while the Tories gambling that
:22:05. > :22:10.a �3 billion tax cut to existing taxpayers will reap revenues?
:22:10. > :22:19.Filthy rich when you work in labour - why didn't you introduce a tax on
:22:19. > :22:28.the higher rate? People on higher incomes, incomers were going up, we
:22:28. > :22:37.raised stamp duty. We did it in the global financial crisis. You did it
:22:37. > :22:42.at the end of government, you were in power for years! Tax going up
:22:42. > :22:47.needs to be done in a fair way. The judgment was it was not the right
:22:47. > :22:55.thing to do at the time, then the world changed. You identified the
:22:55. > :23:05.problem when you were a minister. This is what you said. You said,
:23:05. > :23:12.
:23:12. > :23:17.It is why it is very important to make sure on all the things you do,
:23:17. > :23:22.on financial regulation, on taxation, you do things in a way
:23:22. > :23:26.which does not undermine Britain's reputation in the world. The way in
:23:26. > :23:31.which David Cameron announced to the Daily Mail the stripping of
:23:31. > :23:35.Fred Goodwin's Night Hawk, the right decision, but that sent a
:23:35. > :23:39.terrible signal around the world. You were talking about not putting
:23:39. > :23:44.up salaries too much. You are saying they are very mobile people,
:23:44. > :23:50.and now you are saying that there is no behavioural impact when you
:23:50. > :23:56.put up taxes. I never said that. That is what you said. There at me
:23:56. > :24:01.say it again - There is a �3 billion tax cut to the richest
:24:01. > :24:11.300,000, 10,000 each on average. How much behavioural effect will
:24:11. > :24:13.
:24:13. > :24:20.be? If it is zero, the net cost is 3 billion. The danger is the cost
:24:20. > :24:26.will be billions of pounds, which could have been used, if they
:24:26. > :24:28.haven't done this now, not to have the tax rise, which as you said is
:24:28. > :24:35.on middle and lower income pensioners. This is about
:24:35. > :24:42.priorities. Do you think this is a priority now when pensioners are
:24:42. > :24:47.being hit? The depends how much it costs. Exactly. It might not be
:24:47. > :24:54.your 3 billion but let's move on. Due to this Budget, the number of
:24:54. > :25:00.taxpayers paying 40p in the pound will reach 5 million by 2014, up
:25:00. > :25:06.from 3.7 now. It incorporates a lot of the squeeze to middle. How much
:25:06. > :25:11.should somebody burn before they start on the 40p? I don't think
:25:11. > :25:18.Michael Fallon really explain what is going on. A what should the 40
:25:18. > :25:24.pence band be? The 40 pence band that Labour will set out in our
:25:24. > :25:29.manifesto, we have set out for the hour tax rates and I will not pick
:25:29. > :25:33.out one in particular here three years out when I don't know the
:25:33. > :25:38.economic circumstances. So you don't know when the squeeze Middle
:25:38. > :25:42.should move into the higher tax band? I am worried when people are
:25:42. > :25:48.moving into that at �50,000 when they are about to lose their child
:25:48. > :25:53.benefit. Families who will lose potentially 50% of their disposable
:25:53. > :26:02.income because George Osborne has told them they are rich. Let's move
:26:02. > :26:12.on to pensions, you put great stock on the wisdom of the IFS. They
:26:12. > :26:15.
:26:15. > :26:20.You have been scaremongering, haven't you? You have been
:26:20. > :26:26.frightening pensioners. What that quote does not reveal his it is
:26:26. > :26:33.actually the person who is currently in their late 50s, early
:26:33. > :26:37.60s, who lose five times more. They lose of the �300 a year because
:26:37. > :26:42.their lances removed entirely. I think people looked at the budget
:26:42. > :26:47.and said to George Osborne, why do you think pensioners should be hit
:26:47. > :26:52.in this way now? In few are poor pensioner, you are not affected.
:26:52. > :26:57.Most pensioners don't pay tax. you are a well-off pensioner, it
:26:57. > :27:04.doesn't affect you either. Even if you are an existing pensioner, it
:27:04. > :27:07.is only about �83 a year. You can agree or disagree but you have been
:27:07. > :27:13.scaring people and it is not threatening to ordinary pensioners
:27:13. > :27:20.at the moment. New pensioners, about to be pensioners, will be hit
:27:20. > :27:27.by �300. Existing pensioners will be hit by an average of about �83
:27:27. > :27:34.the year. He you're the man who put pensions or by 75p, you are part of
:27:34. > :27:39.the team who did it. I will admit my mistakes. Will George Osborne?
:27:40. > :27:44.The 75p was colossal mistake but we have much bigger real-terms
:27:44. > :27:51.increases in the pensions. The government is this assembling the
:27:51. > :27:55.pensions. They are cutting pensioners' incomes, and when the
:27:55. > :28:01.top rate tax has been cut for the richest, why are families and
:28:01. > :28:04.pensioners paying the price? government's case is that long-term
:28:04. > :28:12.interest rates are the best measure of monetary and fiscal policy
:28:12. > :28:22.credibility, do you agree? No, I don't. Why did you say this in
:28:22. > :28:26.
:28:26. > :28:30.I made that speech in 2003. In a normal economy, that is true. As
:28:30. > :28:37.you know, when you get into a liquidity trap, when you have the
:28:37. > :28:41.kind of Japan or 1930s problems we have at the moment, when the
:28:41. > :28:46.government is resorting to quantitative easing, the interest
:28:46. > :28:52.rate becomes sticky. You can't go any lower but it is reflecting the
:28:52. > :28:59.weak state of the economy. I read the whole of your speech in 2004
:28:59. > :29:04.and you put no caviar at at all on that. He boasted about how our
:29:04. > :29:10.long-term rates were lower than Germany's for a period. And what
:29:10. > :29:17.were they at the time? Have you changed your mind? At the time,
:29:17. > :29:20.rates were at about 5%. If I had known we were about to be facing
:29:20. > :29:24.this global financial crisis, I would have made a difference beach.
:29:24. > :29:29.Governments around the world might have taken different decisions, so
:29:29. > :29:33.you are right to say in hindsight we didn't see this catastrophe. My
:29:33. > :29:37.argument with Dutch-born is he doesn't even understand it now.
:29:37. > :29:42.That is why he is not seeing these low-interest rates are the product
:29:43. > :29:47.of an economy not growing, stagnating. People wonder if you
:29:47. > :29:51.have learnt any lessons about spending because you spend more in
:29:51. > :29:57.the boom years and you want to spend more now as we are teetering
:29:57. > :30:02.on stagnation. Part of the problem is that George Osborne is spending
:30:03. > :30:07.more on unemployment. Wouldn't it be better on spending money into
:30:07. > :30:11.getting young people backing to work? The global financial crisis
:30:11. > :30:16.did not happen because... Is there any time when you would not spend
:30:16. > :30:23.more? When I was the Secretary of State for Education after the
:30:23. > :30:26.global financial crisis, I set out a billion pounds of spending cuts
:30:26. > :30:29.which Michael Gove attacked me for. If we were back in the good times
:30:29. > :30:33.again, would you still increase spending by more than the growth
:30:33. > :30:39.rate of the economy? That depends upon the priorities facing the
:30:39. > :30:46.country. People will look at a education system, transport
:30:46. > :30:50.system... So you would? At in some areas you would but in other areas
:30:50. > :30:56.you would spend less. What do you say to some Labour people who said
:30:56. > :31:00.to me, Ed Balls is a great shadow minister, he should definitely be
:31:00. > :31:10.in the shadow cabinet but he is tainted by being at the centre of
:31:10. > :31:14.
:31:14. > :31:21.The opinion poll in the Daily Mail puts me ahead of George Osborne in
:31:21. > :31:24.public confidence at this stage of the economic and political cycle.
:31:24. > :31:29.There was one in the Evening Standard a few days ago. It is not
:31:29. > :31:33.about polls but whether you make the right arguments and people
:31:33. > :31:40.think you are tough enough to make the right decisions. For pensions,
:31:40. > :31:45.families and jobs, we have better arguments than George Osborne. In
:31:45. > :31:51.January, up I said in a fair way, stick to the public sector pay
:31:51. > :31:55.restraint, that was tough and the right thing to do. Different
:31:55. > :32:01.priorities for George Osborne. approaching 12.30. You're watching
:32:01. > :32:05.the Sunday Politics. Coming up in 20 minutes: I'll be looking at the
:32:05. > :32:15.week ahead with our political panel. Until then, the Sunday Politics
:32:15. > :32:23.
:32:23. > :32:28.Hello and welcome from us. In the capital, an allegation of sexual
:32:28. > :32:31.assault is made every three days involving patients using London's
:32:31. > :32:36.mental health services. We he claims not enough is being done to
:32:36. > :32:46.protect them. With us for the duration, David
:32:46. > :32:49.
:32:49. > :32:56.Lambie, MP for Tottenham. And Conservative MP for Chelsea Greg
:32:56. > :33:00.Hands. . The mayor of London is an
:33:00. > :33:05.effective champion for the city he runs so well. We will work with him
:33:05. > :33:09.on plans this summer to go on investing in London Transport,
:33:09. > :33:15.lengthening commuter trains, extending the Underground and
:33:15. > :33:19.exploring new river crossings in east London. The blocks of Norway's
:33:19. > :33:24.from the Chancellor over what he is doing for London. What does it add
:33:24. > :33:31.up to? The is a very good Budget for
:33:31. > :33:37.London, good for business and jobs and tax payers. The 3 million
:33:37. > :33:42.taxpayers in London will be getting a tax cut. 97,000 Londoners will be
:33:42. > :33:51.taken entirely out of the income tax system. A very good Budget for
:33:51. > :33:56.London. It is a good budget -- Budget for some, but not for
:33:56. > :34:03.pensioners, not for the unemployed, there was very little for them. And
:34:03. > :34:07.I think people will recognise, yes, the personal allowance is good news.
:34:08. > :34:13.But if you see inflation going up, the cost of living going up, travel
:34:13. > :34:18.fares going up, this is a bad Budget. The background is in
:34:18. > :34:24.dealing with Labour's appalling economic legacy which has a massive
:34:24. > :34:30.impact on the Londoners. The worst Budget deficit in the G20, the
:34:30. > :34:37.deepest recession since the 1930s. This Budget should be seen in
:34:37. > :34:43.context. Fiscally neutral, as well. I have got to say that is wearing
:34:43. > :34:48.thin. Boris made eight interventions to get that tax
:34:48. > :34:56.reduced from 50% for the very richest Londoners, to 45%. He has
:34:56. > :35:04.made no intervention on tax credits, the NHS, unemployment. We see where
:35:05. > :35:09.his priorities are. Why is he taking fares up by 44%? The problem
:35:09. > :35:18.is Ken Livingstone is not credible on fares or on anything, nobody
:35:18. > :35:27.trusts him. Going back to the 50% - - 50p tax rate. It is important
:35:27. > :35:35.that London is competitive. And London has had a higher rate of top
:35:35. > :35:40.tax rate. We have to compete as an open, international city. Was Boris
:35:40. > :35:45.Johnson right, he kept on saying, bring this tax break down. So was
:35:45. > :35:50.he right? And number of voices are calling for the 50 pence rate to be
:35:50. > :35:56.brought down, Boris was one of them. He recognises London needs to be
:35:56. > :36:00.competitive. Boris also intervened on making sure there is funding for
:36:00. > :36:05.infrastructure in London. Another big announcement George Osborne
:36:05. > :36:13.made on Wednesday. Extra money for the Enterprise Zone, extra money
:36:13. > :36:20.for cycling. There is �80 million, money is tight, that money has been
:36:20. > :36:30.found, public Bunny, to unlock private money in the east end. If
:36:30. > :36:32.
:36:32. > :36:37.focusing on jobs and growth -- public money. We have real poverty
:36:37. > :36:43.in north east London. Nothing in this Budget, no interventions from
:36:43. > :36:48.the london mayor. And stamp duty going up on these properties?
:36:48. > :36:53.is a good thing. To spend your effort on reducing a tax for the
:36:53. > :37:02.very richest seems to me to be bizarre, when Londoners are facing
:37:02. > :37:07.rising inflation. The Institute of Fiscal Studies has said all this.
:37:07. > :37:14.That is not valid. Actually, it is 3 million plunders getting a tax
:37:14. > :37:20.cut, due to the increase in personal allows up to �9,200. That
:37:20. > :37:29.is the big news in this Budget for London. Pensioners know they will
:37:29. > :37:32.be a lot poorer. We have learnt an allegation of rape or sexual
:37:32. > :37:36.assault involving patients using mental health services in the
:37:36. > :37:41.capital is made every three days. Those involved are victims and
:37:41. > :37:45.perpetrators. Mental health charities say this is likely to be
:37:45. > :37:49.an underestimate. Genevieve Butler suffered from
:37:49. > :37:55.serious mental health problems, she was admitted to Gordon Hospital in
:37:55. > :37:59.her mid-twenties. She was sexually assaulted and physically assaulted
:37:59. > :38:08.while at the hospital, by other patients. I know remarkably little
:38:08. > :38:16.about it, because when I was told about it by my daughter, I thought,
:38:16. > :38:22.I thought she was potty. And politely disbelieved her. It was
:38:22. > :38:26.only later that I realised it was actually true. Genevieve went on to
:38:26. > :38:31.kill herself, jumping from a 4th floor walkway in another London
:38:31. > :38:35.hospital. I think it is fair to say the Gordon Hospital was the origin
:38:35. > :38:41.of her suicidal thoughts. approached the trust which runs the
:38:41. > :38:47.hospital but they declined to comment. Sunday politics has learnt
:38:47. > :38:50.similar allegations of abuse are far from uncommon. We have obtained
:38:50. > :38:55.figures from nine mental health trusts. In the last four years,
:38:55. > :39:04.they have been 500 allegations of sexual assault. The trust says it
:39:04. > :39:12.knows of at least over 100 allegations actually happened. Only
:39:12. > :39:17.two cases resulted in prosecution. Particularly if people have a
:39:17. > :39:22.history of psychiatric issues, may be learning disabilities, it is
:39:22. > :39:26.tougher for their voices to be heard and for the CPS to believe
:39:26. > :39:31.they have a solid case which will stand up if it comes to court.
:39:31. > :39:35.Problems commonly cited for low conviction rates may also mean the
:39:35. > :39:42.victims of abuse involving mental health patients do not come forward.
:39:42. > :39:46.There may be many more cases than reported. All sorts of things like
:39:46. > :39:50.shame and guilt. People may feel was possible for the actions of
:39:50. > :39:54.others. They may be embarrassed. A difficult hurdle to get over it in
:39:55. > :39:59.talking to someone. That is true with sexual abuse issues anyway
:39:59. > :40:04.even outside of institutional settings. Doubly difficult if you
:40:04. > :40:08.are going through a psychiatric crisis. Could a lack of data be
:40:08. > :40:13.symptomatic of a culture where complaints by patients are not
:40:13. > :40:19.taken seriously? In a case of Genevieve Butler, although her case
:40:19. > :40:22.has been looked at by officials and NHS management, it has not been to
:40:22. > :40:29.the family satisfaction. They have been asking for an independent
:40:29. > :40:36.investigation. They are acting with total impunity at the moment. And I
:40:36. > :40:41.think that if we want an NHS that we can rely on, we have got to
:40:41. > :40:47.speak out, and make those NHS managers properly accountable.
:40:47. > :40:50.Order, order. The health service was big news this week as the NHS
:40:50. > :40:53.Bill finally passed through Parliament. What impact will it
:40:53. > :40:59.have on this issue of accountability? But other parts of
:40:59. > :41:04.the NHS, mental health will now be offered to more private providers,
:41:04. > :41:09.bad news for some. The issue is to do with multiple providers coming
:41:10. > :41:14.in, many of whom are going to have a commercial imperative as well as
:41:14. > :41:20.a health imperative. And so the likelihood of transparency is going
:41:20. > :41:24.to be much reduced. Professionals however moral and ethical they
:41:24. > :41:28.might be barred going to have organisations which have got
:41:28. > :41:32.particular views about how they are going to move forward. It will be
:41:32. > :41:37.much more in the interests of these organisations to keep things in
:41:37. > :41:47.House and not to be open about serious problems. The Department of
:41:47. > :42:18.
:42:18. > :42:23.Joining me, the chief executive of the charity, mine. -- Mind. Are
:42:23. > :42:27.those figures is a prize it to you? It is extremely concerning there is
:42:27. > :42:31.such a high level of numbers being reported. It is incredibly
:42:31. > :42:35.important for people who are extremely vulnerable, to be in a
:42:35. > :42:42.place where they can be treated. They can only be treated if they
:42:42. > :42:47.feel safe. Any number above zero is a number too high. I think it is
:42:47. > :42:52.worth recognising trusts have done a lot of work. But we don't seem to
:42:52. > :42:58.be seen these figures on a routine and regular basis, and that would
:42:58. > :43:03.help to understand the scale of the problem. Publicised? So we can
:43:03. > :43:08.tell? Do think they should routinely publish? Yes, it would
:43:08. > :43:16.make a lot of sense for these figures to be me -- to be made
:43:16. > :43:22.readily available, so that patients and their families can be confident
:43:22. > :43:26.that their loved ones are being treated in a safe area. Would you
:43:26. > :43:31.accept that this was happening more and more? Is there any evidence for
:43:31. > :43:36.that? Is this an increase? I can only speak about what is happening
:43:36. > :43:41.in our trust. From the information, there hasn't been an increase in
:43:41. > :43:45.recent years. What has changed his hour reporting structures have
:43:45. > :43:50.changed significantly. We have encouraged a culture within the
:43:50. > :43:53.organisation whereby staff are encouraged to report instances
:43:53. > :43:59.which are properly investigated. If that happens in all other mental
:43:59. > :44:09.health trusts across the country. I would gigawatt Paul has said, to
:44:09. > :44:11.
:44:11. > :44:16.ensure our hospital wards are safe -- I would echo what. What
:44:16. > :44:22.difficulties are faced here, about being able to prove an allegation
:44:22. > :44:26.is true? Is it the suggestion, or is it the case that many
:44:26. > :44:33.allegations may not be, or there is a presumption they might not be, it
:44:33. > :44:37.is a complex area. In the past, there were times when it was
:44:37. > :44:42.presumed if a patient was unwell and made an allegation, that
:44:42. > :44:48.allegation was probably not made on fact. There has been a shift and we
:44:48. > :44:54.now take allegations seriously no matter the condition of the patient.
:44:54. > :44:57.It will be investigated and reported. Many trusts have employed
:44:57. > :45:03.police liaison officers in conjunction with the Metropolitan
:45:03. > :45:07.Police. Police officers working in- patient units to actually meet the
:45:07. > :45:13.patients very quickly and investigate allegations promptly.
:45:13. > :45:16.That has seen big benefits. that been going far enough? The
:45:16. > :45:26.criminal justice system and police are dealing with these issues. Is
:45:26. > :45:32.
:45:32. > :45:36.that been done more sensitively and It is proving difficult, and a
:45:37. > :45:40.greater degree of understanding is important. We know that when people
:45:40. > :45:45.with mental health problem report as a victim of crime, they are much
:45:45. > :45:53.less likely to be taken seriously and believed. The criminal justice
:45:53. > :45:56.system is taking this more have moved far enough to be able to
:45:56. > :46:06.make sure prosecutions can probably take place. Have you got the
:46:06. > :46:11.guidance and support from the NHS on how to deal with it? There is a
:46:11. > :46:18.lot of pressure from the NHS. There is a requirement we report these
:46:18. > :46:22.when it happens. We know NHS London had a backlog of such things until
:46:23. > :46:27.recently so perhaps were not learning the lessons quickly enough.
:46:27. > :46:32.That was the case but things have improved significantly. Now there
:46:32. > :46:37.are strict timescales and we need to submit comprehensive report to
:46:37. > :46:43.NHS London for them to look at and consider. If those reports are not
:46:43. > :46:46.up to scratch, we are told so and we investigate. You will not have
:46:46. > :46:50.been aware of the detail and we can't compare these figures with
:46:50. > :46:56.the previous years, but does it raise concerns the you about the
:46:56. > :47:03.safety of people receiving help either in institutions or in the
:47:03. > :47:06.community? I think it does raise concerns. Can recommend Sunday
:47:06. > :47:13.politics for doing the investigation because this is an
:47:13. > :47:18.area which is not in the public eye as much as it should be. I happen
:47:18. > :47:23.to know West London Trust, where I represent in Fulham, is introducing
:47:23. > :47:33.reforms and it is looking at things. That is to be welcome, so I think
:47:33. > :47:37.
:47:37. > :47:42.it needs to be taken seriously. Your mental health trust?
:47:42. > :47:45.economically pressed times, you do see more mental health, and it
:47:45. > :47:49.remains in our country the Cinderella service without the
:47:49. > :47:55.focus and without the investment needed. Some of what we are seeing
:47:55. > :47:59.here is quite old health stock, certainly that is the case in my
:47:59. > :48:03.part of London, where you don't quite have the appropriate
:48:03. > :48:09.facilities so that people can feel private and comfortable in this
:48:09. > :48:17.therapeutic environment. Thank you for coming in. What else has been
:48:17. > :48:22.happening in the City this week? He was a round of in 60 seconds. --
:48:22. > :48:27.here is a round-up. The race for City Hall started this
:48:27. > :48:32.week with all the main candidate out and about across town on the
:48:32. > :48:38.first lap of the election campaign. Outer London is the potential motor
:48:38. > :48:42.of the economy. There are hundreds of thousands of businesses here.
:48:42. > :48:46.it can be a clear choice. We have someone like myself with a long-
:48:47. > :48:51.term commitment as opposed to someone else who was using it as a
:48:51. > :48:56.stepping-stone to being the leader of the Tory party. I don't want
:48:56. > :49:01.that, I want to do what is right London. I want to talk about the
:49:01. > :49:05.policies that will make London a much better place. It is important
:49:05. > :49:09.there are a lot of candidates, and particularly the Green Party
:49:09. > :49:16.because we discuss things that have long-term consequences for London
:49:16. > :49:24.and everybody living here. Opinion polls show Boris Johnson leading
:49:24. > :49:30.Ken Livingstone by eight percentage points.
:49:30. > :49:33.David Lambie very closely involved with Ken Livingstone's campaigned -
:49:33. > :49:39.do you think claims about his own tax arrangements have damaged him?
:49:39. > :49:43.A lot of the last few weeks has been dominated by Celia coming from
:49:43. > :49:51.the Conservative team. I suspect over the next six weeks, Londoners
:49:51. > :49:55.will be concentrating hard on the issues, on crime, mainstream things.
:49:55. > :50:00.Will you attribute claims to how Boris Johnson appears to have
:50:00. > :50:10.pulled away again in the polls? suspect the polls will be up-and-
:50:10. > :50:16.
:50:16. > :50:21.down. Most Londoners would say this is close. He should not have been
:50:21. > :50:26.taking checks and banking them on his behalf. We should not be having
:50:26. > :50:32.a conversation about Ken Livingstone's tax. We should be
:50:32. > :50:36.talking about why Londoners are paying high fares, crime, policing.
:50:37. > :50:40.Why are you having conversations and the prime minister talking
:50:40. > :50:45.about personal tax arrangements? is saying one thing and doing
:50:45. > :50:49.another. Ken Livingstone over the years has attacked aggressive tax
:50:50. > :50:58.avoidance, yet that is precisely what he has been doing by setting
:50:58. > :51:03.up this company to channel his earnings to avoid paying income tax.
:51:03. > :51:08.You said about overseas companies, this is paying a lesser rate
:51:08. > :51:14.through the corporation. It is tax avoidance. He has attacked people
:51:14. > :51:18.for avoiding tax, very clearly, yet he himself has run his own affairs
:51:18. > :51:25.to avoid paying income tax and instead booking it through a
:51:25. > :51:28.company. I think he continues to have serious questions to answer. I
:51:28. > :51:38.think Ken Livingstone will continue to have very serious questions to
:51:38. > :51:43.answer. I said this is a side issue. The issue is Boris taking 250,000
:51:44. > :51:48.from the Telegraph. Let's get back to what London has care about,
:51:48. > :51:56.which is rising inflation, about whether it is right to spend your
:51:56. > :52:02.effort on a 50% cut for the richest. About crime, about what Boris...
:52:02. > :52:07.I'm afraid we are running out of time. Thank you to both of you. You
:52:07. > :52:17.can C-list of everyone who has been declared so far, but now back to
:52:17. > :52:21.
:52:21. > :52:27.Andrew. A looming strike, who cares if the
:52:27. > :52:35.MPs are rough on their break this week, there are juicy issues to
:52:35. > :52:40.savour in the week ahead. Isabel, political journalist of the year,
:52:40. > :52:46.which I know you got after you started appearing on this programme.
:52:46. > :52:52.Where does this cash for access story go? That is clearly dire for
:52:52. > :52:57.the Tories. Peter Cruddas sounds like a barrow boy. A few weeks ago,
:52:57. > :53:01.Nick Clegg launched a new bid to sort out party funding no one took
:53:01. > :53:09.any notice, but there is a process under way and I think that will be
:53:09. > :53:17.taken a lot more seriously. We had cash for higher, cash for
:53:17. > :53:22.amendments, Peers, cash in secret from the Labour donor Mr Abrams,
:53:22. > :53:27.and now we have got this, which is huge. It is bad all round, isn't
:53:27. > :53:32.it? Absolutely, and it raises questions for both sides on party
:53:32. > :53:37.funding. What is interesting with this one is the emotional intensity
:53:37. > :53:42.when you can see the bigger picture. That will spread on YouTube in a
:53:42. > :53:47.way that it won't in other areas. am still interested to know if the
:53:47. > :53:54.names of these dinners are really published, are you? The response
:53:54. > :53:59.was ambiguous as it went on. The problem is not a lack of will, it
:53:59. > :54:04.is that they genuinely can't agree what to do about it. In November,
:54:04. > :54:09.Sir Christopher Kelly suggested state support for the parties, and
:54:09. > :54:14.even the Lib Dems thought that was a bad idea. Let's move on to the
:54:14. > :54:19.Budget because we are short of time today. The worst headlines any
:54:19. > :54:25.Chancellor has had in recent memory, bad again this week, and the polls
:54:25. > :54:29.giving him a hit as well. What happened to this great political
:54:29. > :54:32.tactician called George Osborne? has been a tactical failure, and he
:54:32. > :54:38.could have made the case for getting more money out of
:54:38. > :54:44.pensioners and it would have worked but he didn't. Not only would
:54:44. > :54:50.independent experts have backed him, but many pensioners have kids and
:54:50. > :54:58.they would have backed him. The idea is you take a hit now so you
:54:58. > :55:04.don't take the hit closer to 2015. A There is more mileage in this for
:55:04. > :55:09.Labour, isn't there? Absolutely, but I agree first of all that this
:55:09. > :55:12.is the government that is prepared to take tough decisions and there
:55:12. > :55:15.is a real question about pensions in this country. They are
:55:15. > :55:21.completely unaffordable and it would have been a bold decision to
:55:21. > :55:29.say we need to have a conversation about pensioners but let's not
:55:29. > :55:33.present it as an over- simplification. By existing
:55:33. > :55:38.pensioners, they lose but it is just a little bit and they are not
:55:38. > :55:43.the poorest. The actual loss for individual pensioners is pretty
:55:43. > :55:47.negligible. Many don't pay tax at all and the saving for the
:55:47. > :55:52.government is something like 3 billion. I think this was a
:55:52. > :55:57.presentational failure rather than an economic political failure.
:55:57. > :56:02.King back, what do you think people will say? We are in the heat of the
:56:02. > :56:08.moment and we get wrapped up on things like the granny tax, none of
:56:08. > :56:14.which may be playing. What do you think we will be talking about?
:56:14. > :56:18.this the Budget we will remember for growth, or will we remember it
:56:18. > :56:22.for the 45p tax cut? There are some questions Labour should be asking -
:56:22. > :56:27.the issue is not just about whether we can get growth back but what
:56:27. > :56:32.type of growth will we get back? Ed Balls presided over time when it
:56:32. > :56:37.was growth that was just City-based, not for people in the middle, just
:56:37. > :56:42.at the top, and how well they do things differently? Let's move on
:56:42. > :56:47.to the final thing we are talking about, it looks like the tanker
:56:47. > :56:53.drivers will be voting to go on strike tomorrow. Is this government,
:56:53. > :56:57.whose members are entirely on bloodied in industrial disputes -
:56:57. > :57:04.the winter of discontent is as far back for them as the general strike
:57:04. > :57:08.- are they capable of taking on powerful union? They have trained
:57:08. > :57:12.up 400 army personnel to make sure there are no queues at petrol
:57:12. > :57:16.forecourts and the contingency planning has been meticulous. There
:57:16. > :57:19.was some internal debate about whether to publicise this plant of
:57:20. > :57:25.bringing in the army because they don't want to prompt panic-buying
:57:25. > :57:32.but I don't think this will descend into scenes of chaos. Will they run
:57:32. > :57:40.at the Sir -- the first signs of gunfire? They do have memories of
:57:40. > :57:45.the fuel protests in 2000 and they have done that repertory work.
:57:45. > :57:48.Labour will be asked if they backed this strike. At absolutely, and
:57:49. > :57:55.there is a question about whether we will see a series of strikes
:57:56. > :58:00.going ahead, is this going to set a precedent about what will happen in
:58:00. > :58:06.the future? If you show any sign of weakness, they hold the government
:58:06. > :58:11.in contempt. Let's talk about it next weekend, if we can make it to
:58:11. > :58:17.the studio. That is all for this week. Jo Coburn will be back