:00:44. > :00:50.Morning, fetes. This is the Sunday Politics. Seeing leaders, two
:00:50. > :00:54.legacies. What can Mrs Thatcher and Mr Blair teach their parties today?
:00:54. > :01:00.As Maggie exits stage right, we will ask the Tory chairman whether
:01:00. > :01:03.his party will ever win an outright majority again. And after Tony
:01:03. > :01:08.Blair's warning that Labour risk becoming a party of protest, not
:01:08. > :01:12.power, we are joined by former Home Secretary John Reid for his verdict.
:01:12. > :01:17.How will history judge the battle between Mrs Thatcher and the
:01:17. > :01:20.unions? And what is their role in Britain today? The TUC secretary,
:01:20. > :01:23.Frances O'Grady, and former trade minister Digby Jones go head-to-
:01:23. > :01:26.head. In the capital, Transport for
:01:26. > :01:36.London is considering giving the green light to scrapping the use of
:01:36. > :01:41.
:01:41. > :01:44.cash on the buses by the end of All that and the journalistic
:01:44. > :01:51.equivalent of flying pickets. We have got Comrades Watt, Oakeshott
:01:51. > :01:55.and Ganesh tweeting throughout the programme.
:01:55. > :02:00.So, the controversies around Mrs Thatcher's death go on, with the
:02:00. > :02:04.focus today on the funeral arrangements. John Prescott, in the
:02:05. > :02:08.Sunday Mirror, calls for the field to be privatised rather than any of
:02:08. > :02:17.the cost to be met by the public purse. One poll this morning says
:02:17. > :02:21.just about 60% of voters agree with him. Are we being churlish, arguing
:02:21. > :02:27.about the cost of the funeral, or, at a time of austerity, should we
:02:27. > :02:32.keep an eye on the cost? reported cost, I have seen a number
:02:32. > :02:36.of figures, but 10 million seems to be the most commonly used one. It
:02:36. > :02:41.is grossly inflated. I spoke to Frances Maude, who has been
:02:41. > :02:48.organising the arrangements, and he denied that it is anything like
:02:48. > :02:52.that amount. Any idea what it would be? I don't know. The family are
:02:52. > :02:56.contributing something. He pointed out that it is unusual. It is
:02:56. > :03:01.normal for the state to pick up the bill for the funeral of a former
:03:01. > :03:05.Prime Minister. It is absolutely right. We don't have anything on
:03:05. > :03:11.this scale. But she was an exceptional leader, simply in
:03:11. > :03:16.longevity. She served a long time, 10 years. Also, I have been struck
:03:16. > :03:20.by how few Labour politicians had been prepared to go on record and
:03:20. > :03:25.criticise that. I'm not surprised to see John Prescott coming out and
:03:25. > :03:31.doing that. But there are not many others. On that basis, I suppose we
:03:31. > :03:34.had better start saving up for Tony Blair's funeral. He won as many
:03:35. > :03:41.elections. Whether he changed the canter to the same extent is more
:03:41. > :03:46.doubtful. -- the country. People who did not like Margaret Thatcher
:03:46. > :03:51.still don't like it, and those who adored her still do. Attitudes to
:03:51. > :03:57.the funeral will fall along that axis. What I find weird about John
:03:57. > :04:00.Prescott's hostility is if he feels that much animus towards Margaret
:04:00. > :04:07.Thatcher, how does he feel about being part of a government that
:04:07. > :04:10.does not undo her reforms? He is either a hypocrite or showing how
:04:10. > :04:16.out-of-touch she was when he was Deputy Prime Minister. The reason
:04:16. > :04:20.we are having this deal is because there was a consensus. These plans
:04:20. > :04:25.were drawn up under the last government. The reason we are
:04:25. > :04:33.having this being able is because there is a political consensus. --
:04:33. > :04:38.this funeral. For him to say it is Tory propaganda is misleading.
:04:38. > :04:43.learn a lot on the Sunday Politics! Anyway, with all eyes on Margaret
:04:43. > :04:48.Thatcher and her legacy, you may not have noted that Ed Miliband is
:04:48. > :04:55.doing well. Labour's lead has grown this week. David's departure has
:04:55. > :05:00.drawn a line under the Miliband Brothers soap opera. And he was
:05:00. > :05:06.lauded for his performance in commemorating Mrs T. But his
:05:06. > :05:09.party's old guard has criticised him. Now David Blunkett. It is what
:05:09. > :05:15.Mr Miliband had to say about the former Prime Minister's
:05:15. > :05:20.intervention. Tony Blair has always got important things to say. He is
:05:20. > :05:26.always the first to recognise that political parties meet him off --
:05:26. > :05:31.move forwards. On immigration, for example, I think we made mistakes
:05:31. > :05:36.in office. I do at the weekend to defend what we did in the past. We
:05:36. > :05:42.have got to -- I don't think we can defend what we did in the past. I
:05:42. > :05:47.think the Labour Party is moving on and moving forward. Ed Miliband,
:05:47. > :05:53.having a coffee. We are joined to discuss that by the former minister,
:05:53. > :05:59.John Reid. What is the single most important lesson Ed Miliband can
:05:59. > :06:04.learn from Margaret Thatcher? think he can learn not only from
:06:04. > :06:09.Margaret Thatcher, but from Tony Blair, and most successful
:06:09. > :06:19.politicians, that you have to move from being a voice of protest to
:06:19. > :06:19.
:06:19. > :06:25.offering solutions. So, do you go along with what Mr Blair has said,
:06:25. > :06:29.that for the moment, he and his party are still a voice of protest?
:06:29. > :06:34.Firstly, I don't go along with your caricature of that as criticism. It
:06:34. > :06:40.is not. It is advice. That is what colleagues do. We advise each other.
:06:40. > :06:47.Ed Miliband has performed the first feature very well. He has made
:06:47. > :06:50.Labour a good opposition. What he now has to do it to set out the
:06:50. > :06:54.direction of a future Labour government on questions like the
:06:54. > :06:58.economy, housing, and so on. There are signs that it is beginning to
:06:58. > :07:01.happen. The important thing is to recognise that as you move from the
:07:01. > :07:05.politics of opposition to the politics of a potential government,
:07:05. > :07:10.that you have to be offering solutions and not just criticising
:07:10. > :07:14.the status quo. Mr Miliband says the centre ground is moving left.
:07:14. > :07:18.He is there evidence for that? don't know. You have to ask Ed
:07:18. > :07:23.Miliband that. I don't think the centre ground is necessarily moving
:07:23. > :07:27.left. What is happening is what happened under Mrs Thatcher. There
:07:27. > :07:31.were some things that needed revolutionary change, but since she
:07:31. > :07:35.didn't believe in society, she didn't believe you have to balance
:07:35. > :07:41.the change with social justice. That is why the idea that Mr Blair
:07:41. > :07:45.was somehow the legacy of Thatcher is fantasy, and certainly partly
:07:45. > :07:52.misleading. The idea that the Thatcher government would have
:07:52. > :07:57.brought in the New Deal for the young, a sure start for children,
:07:57. > :08:03.similar qualities for homosexuals, or the Irish peace process, that
:08:03. > :08:11.his fantasy. You did not roll back a number of the very major things
:08:11. > :08:16.she did. That is the point I was going to make. A dynamic economy is
:08:16. > :08:20.central to any modern society. Public services have to offer the
:08:20. > :08:27.choice that was being a foot in the private sector. Many more working
:08:27. > :08:34.people were becoming more affluent. They wanted more power and choice.
:08:34. > :08:39.Those are the lessons that we carried through, but we balanced it
:08:39. > :08:45.with social justice. Unlike Mrs Thatcher, we believe we have mutual
:08:45. > :08:51.obligations. Let me come back to Ed Miliband. He says he can be a
:08:51. > :08:54.transformational leader, like Mrs T. Where is the evidence for that?
:08:54. > :08:58.can't give any evidence until he is in government. Until Margaret
:08:58. > :09:05.Thatcher was in government, she was a joke. She had formidable
:09:05. > :09:09.qualities. Do you feel he could be a transformer -- transformational
:09:09. > :09:16.leader? He has to be able to apply the values that the Labour Party
:09:16. > :09:21.have always held central to what they are doing. This is why he is
:09:21. > :09:24.right and Tony Blair is right. You have to update your policy, but
:09:24. > :09:30.remember that constant renewal is essential part of what Blair
:09:30. > :09:37.believed in. What has he done that would make he -- us believe he is a
:09:37. > :09:41.transformational leader? You can't do it in opposition. You can only
:09:41. > :09:45.judge, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, as other great
:09:45. > :09:50.leaders have shown. Mr Blair said in this article, which you are
:09:50. > :09:54.calling advice, his advice is, quote, don't tack to the right on
:09:54. > :10:02.immigration and don't attack to the left on tax and spend. That is
:10:02. > :10:07.pretty much what Mr Miller -- Mr Miliband is doing. I am not sure he
:10:07. > :10:11.is hacking to the right. What he is saying is that we didn't tackle
:10:11. > :10:18.immigration the way we should have done. I agree with that. That is
:10:19. > :10:22.because the Treasury insisted that having a free throw -- flow of
:10:22. > :10:28.Labour... I was inside the government are doing that we had to
:10:28. > :10:34.her some kind of control over immigration. -- arguing. I said
:10:34. > :10:40.that it's not a racist to discuss immigration and I was attacked.
:10:40. > :10:45.Whether it is right or wrong, that is what he is doing. I absolutely
:10:45. > :10:50.can't test that. There is nothing to the right by saying you have to
:10:50. > :10:56.be planned and reasonable in immigration. Some people said that
:10:56. > :11:02.in power, that is what your party did, say it was right-wing
:11:02. > :11:07.criticism. If Mr Miliband does not accept some of this advice that you
:11:07. > :11:12.have been giving him, it does risk becoming just a repository of
:11:12. > :11:16.protest, not a party of government. Yes, but I think Ed Miliband is
:11:16. > :11:20.astute enough to recognise that. The other piece of advice that will
:11:20. > :11:25.reinforce that realisation on his part is that every Labour leader
:11:25. > :11:31.has been attacked from the left because they have refused to say,
:11:31. > :11:35.yes, we will restore the status quo, including people like Neil Kinnock.
:11:35. > :11:40.All those years ago, he was attacked by the left because he
:11:41. > :11:44.said we will not restore education as it was before. You have to be
:11:44. > :11:48.transformative. But that does not mean to say you have to shift to
:11:48. > :11:54.the right. You have to balance radical change with social
:11:54. > :12:02.responsibility. But Mr Miliband's attack is that the left is doing
:12:02. > :12:08.what it wants. I'm not sure that it's true. For instance, last week,
:12:08. > :12:12.Liam Byrne was suggesting that we should re establish the value of
:12:12. > :12:18.the welfare state that links your benefits to your contributions.
:12:18. > :12:22.That is pretty radical. Ironically, it is by re establishing some of
:12:22. > :12:26.the older principles, taking the old values, and putting them in the
:12:27. > :12:32.modern setting. On housing, the Conservative policy is bad on
:12:32. > :12:38.housing. It will create a property bubble. The idea that you don't
:12:38. > :12:42.build any houses but that you help people increase demand with the
:12:42. > :12:47.presence apply, I think Labour ought to be asking why is it that
:12:47. > :12:54.housing benefit has exploded? -- present supplier. Is it because of
:12:54. > :12:58.a shortage of houses? If you build houses, you fulfil an economic and
:12:58. > :13:02.social need. His Ed Miliband the next Prime Minister of this
:13:02. > :13:08.country? If you believe the polls at the moment, there's a good
:13:08. > :13:14.chance. We know what the polls say. The first task has been
:13:14. > :13:24.accomplished. Labour, under his leadership, has avoided fracture
:13:24. > :13:32.
:13:32. > :13:37.Thank you for being with us. What about the Tories? They didn't
:13:37. > :13:40.just lose their most successful leader of modern times. It was also
:13:40. > :13:45.the 21st anniversary of the last time the Conservatives won a
:13:45. > :13:48.general election. That was in 1992, for those of you who can't do
:13:48. > :13:53.arithmetic. What lessons can be learned from the woman they will
:13:53. > :13:55.commemorate this week? The death of Margaret Thatcher has
:13:55. > :14:00.brought about a period of reflection in British politics, not
:14:00. > :14:04.least in the party she once led. The Iron Lady had a reputation for
:14:04. > :14:08.following her own come -- convictions. She was, famously, not
:14:08. > :14:15.for turning. But her successors have been criticised for a number
:14:15. > :14:18.of policy U-turn so. The debate over her legacy has turned into
:14:18. > :14:22.soul-searching about Tory strategy. Her electoral success was built in
:14:22. > :14:30.no small part on the votes of striding folk from ordinary
:14:31. > :14:35.backgrounds. Critics say the party's failure to come up with an
:14:35. > :14:40.attractive offer for strivers in 2010 was the main reason the Tories
:14:40. > :14:45.failed to win a majority. With two years until the next election, it
:14:45. > :14:51.is down to Grant Shapps to find a way to sell the Tory brand that Mrs
:14:51. > :15:01.Thatcher once made popular. And Grant Shapps joins me now for
:15:01. > :15:09.
:15:09. > :15:13.Are you a Thatcherite? I probably am. I was brought up under the
:15:13. > :15:18.Thatcher government and she inspired me into public service.
:15:18. > :15:22.year chairman of a Thatcherite party? That I am chairman of a
:15:22. > :15:27.party which had Margaret Thatcher as its Prime Minister. We are also
:15:27. > :15:31.a John Major party and a Disraeli party. We have a long history.
:15:31. > :15:37.is like saying everyone who has been your leader, you are that
:15:37. > :15:41.party. You know what I mean. So answer the question. To the truth
:15:41. > :15:46.is, as he pointed out, it is a lot of years ago and things move on and
:15:46. > :15:51.change. You asked me if I am a Thatcherite and I probably am.
:15:51. > :15:56.are the Thatcherite chairman of a non- Thatcherite party? I think it
:15:56. > :16:00.is silly. It is a fairly meaningless distinction. I am the
:16:00. > :16:05.chairman of the Conservative Party, one of whom's greatest leaders was
:16:05. > :16:09.Margaret Thatcher. Supporters and enemies agree Margaret Thatcher was
:16:09. > :16:14.a conviction politician. Can you honestly claim the same about David
:16:14. > :16:19.Cameron? Yes, absolutely. If you are cut one of the things Margaret
:16:19. > :16:23.Thatcher is most remembered for, it is getting the rebate in Europe. Is
:16:23. > :16:27.saved billions of pounds. What has David Cameron done? He has gone to
:16:27. > :16:32.Europe and said no to an EU treaty and he has got the first of a cut
:16:32. > :16:36.in the European budget that there has ever been in European history.
:16:36. > :16:40.Here is a man on conviction. That little cut in the Budget is up
:16:40. > :16:47.there with the rebate? It is only a little cut in the Budget but we are
:16:47. > :16:52.already saving hundreds of millions. She saved 75 %. That is one example.
:16:52. > :16:56.Let me give you another one. Again, Europe, we have a Prime Minister
:16:56. > :17:00.has gone to Europe and said, we will have an in out referendum on a
:17:00. > :17:04.reformed Europe. That is a pretty big move that Margaret Thatcher was
:17:04. > :17:09.not able to offer. He has not delivered that yet because he needs
:17:09. > :17:16.to win an election. The Lady famously said she was not for
:17:16. > :17:21.turning but David Cameron has made about 25 U-turns. Sometimes you
:17:21. > :17:25.find situations where you want to change direction or adapt direction
:17:25. > :17:28.but on the fundamentals of the things we believe in, building an
:17:28. > :17:32.economy where everyone can work hard and if you do you get on in
:17:32. > :17:40.life, those other things wet David Cameron has been absolutely clear
:17:40. > :17:44.about from the outset. And he has done it. He has things which
:17:44. > :17:49.Margaret Thatcher did not suffer. One is we have no money and
:17:49. > :17:54.secondly we do not have a majority. We had a large majority with
:17:54. > :17:58.Margaret Thatcher. I would say David Cameron has done a tremendous
:17:58. > :18:02.amount in being very radical, sorting out things like long-term
:18:02. > :18:06.care which even other governments with large majorities were not able
:18:06. > :18:13.to do. Let me run these words that Norman Tebbit had to say in the
:18:13. > :18:17.House of Lords. I must say, as her Party Chairman, I found my life was
:18:17. > :18:26.made much easier by my understanding of the certainties of
:18:26. > :18:33.her beliefs. I was never asked by her to commission a focus group.
:18:33. > :18:38.LAUGHTER. Do you commission focus groups?
:18:38. > :18:44.sometimes do but not on the behest of anyone. I think it is important
:18:44. > :18:46.to understand the way policies are impacting. My best focus group of
:18:46. > :18:50.all is sitting in my own constituency surgery, talking to
:18:50. > :18:54.people who come in and talking about what goes on in their lives
:18:54. > :18:59.so I can work on their behalf. There are MPs doing that all the
:18:59. > :19:04.time. You do not need sophisticated modelling to understand. So why did
:19:04. > :19:08.you do them? We want a country where people can get on in life and
:19:08. > :19:12.work hard. You do not need focus groups to do that. Let me give you
:19:12. > :19:17.one example. I will have somebody coming into my surgery saying they
:19:17. > :19:20.have to spend an hour and a half sat in front of a JobCentre Plus
:19:20. > :19:24.computer to work out if they work those extra few hours a week will
:19:24. > :19:29.they be better off or worse off? We are changing policies to make that
:19:29. > :19:33.an absolute certainty for them. If you work you will be better off
:19:33. > :19:37.witches great. What I want to know is if that message is getting
:19:37. > :19:41.through, whether people know about it and they are able to act on it
:19:41. > :19:46.and they are able to accept the job because they understand that the
:19:47. > :19:50.JobCentre Plus is not required. If you want to work it will always pay.
:19:50. > :19:55.Of course there is a way for polling but not in the way you
:19:55. > :19:59.might think. We do not spent time obsessing about the polls. We are
:19:59. > :20:04.governing for the long term in the nation's interest in what you might
:20:04. > :20:09.call a Thatcherite way. Thatcher saw herself as anti-
:20:09. > :20:12.establishment. By no stretch of the imagination could you see Mr
:20:12. > :20:17.Cameron as anti- establishment. think first of all on Thatcher that
:20:17. > :20:21.that is absolutely true. She said, it does not matter who you are, way
:20:21. > :20:28.you come from, we are not interested in that. If you work
:20:28. > :20:32.hard and get on, we will succeed. She broke many glass ceilings. The
:20:32. > :20:36.way David Cameron and us as a government are pursuing that goal
:20:36. > :20:40.is by ensuring that in this country you are not trapped in a situation
:20:40. > :20:44.where if you work hard, you're not necessarily better off. This week
:20:45. > :20:49.we have those caps coming in on welfare. That means no one on
:20:49. > :20:55.welfare will earn more than the average family in work. That is a
:20:55. > :20:59.way of carrying on that legacy. legacy that is left -- yet to brush
:20:59. > :21:03.off on David Cameron, let me show you these polling figures for who
:21:03. > :21:08.we think is the greatest Prime Minister. Mrs Thatcher ahead of
:21:08. > :21:13.Winston Churchill. Tony Blair getting 10 %, David Cameron is only
:21:13. > :21:16.an zero %. Even Gordon Brown got 2%. I remember polls like this during
:21:17. > :21:19.the Thatcher time in government when that would have been reversed
:21:20. > :21:25.around the other way. The great thing about Thatcher and one thing
:21:25. > :21:29.we can all learn from hat, regardless of whether we agreed
:21:29. > :21:33.with her or not, she is someone who looked to the long term and the
:21:33. > :21:37.interest of the nation, not to the short term and the interests of one
:21:37. > :21:42.political party or another. I do not put much stock in opinion polls
:21:42. > :21:47.like this. What is of interest is reforming the country in the long
:21:47. > :21:50.term, helping people to work, by their first house, get a job. These
:21:50. > :21:54.are things which will reform the country, not a short-term
:21:54. > :21:58.popularity contest. The differences, the people who want these things to
:21:58. > :22:03.happen, they felt Margaret Thatcher was on their side. They do not feel
:22:03. > :22:09.you on their side. Let me show you another poll which should cause you
:22:09. > :22:16.some concern. This is among C1 voters, aspiring people on modest
:22:16. > :22:22.incomes. You got 52 % of the vote in 1992. In 2010 you only got 39 %
:22:22. > :22:26.of these people. Today you are even lower. We could spend this entire
:22:26. > :22:32.programme looking at opinion polls. At you do not think that is
:22:32. > :22:38.instructive? If I had my own iPad here and connected to the screen.
:22:38. > :22:42.Let me correct myself, that is not a poll, it is the election results.
:22:42. > :22:45.If I had the ability to display graphics are that I could show you
:22:45. > :22:51.made pulse and mid- results from the middle of parliaments during
:22:51. > :22:56.which Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister... But that is the 2010
:22:56. > :23:02.election, that is an actual result expat let me show you that I could
:23:02. > :23:08.show you bar chart which showed you how a government suffered far
:23:08. > :23:12.greater unpopularity than this one. One of the finest comments was
:23:12. > :23:16.Connor Burns, the Conservative MP reports that he had gone to tell
:23:16. > :23:20.Thatcher about the current status quo, the political scene at the
:23:20. > :23:24.moment and said we are 10 points behind. She said that is not nearly
:23:24. > :23:27.far enough behind to win the next election. You can look at all these
:23:27. > :23:31.different stacks until the cows come home. The only thing that
:23:32. > :23:35.matters is have we done things in the interests of the British people.
:23:35. > :23:39.If you are somebody on the minimum wage in this country and you have
:23:39. > :23:44.seen the amount of tax you have to pay has been halved by this
:23:44. > :23:48.Conservative-led government, you know we are on your side. You also
:23:48. > :23:54.talk about aspiration. The blunt truth is your government is
:23:54. > :24:00.penalising strivers. The moment they reached a taxable income, they
:24:00. > :24:04.face a marginal rate of 42 %. Mrs Thatcher thought 40 % was for the
:24:04. > :24:07.rich, not the strivers and you are taxing the strivers. We live in
:24:08. > :24:14.difficult times and we have to do everything possible to make the
:24:14. > :24:21.books balance. We have cut a third of the book so far. I met an
:24:21. > :24:27.occupational therapist, she said to me, the great thing now is I can
:24:27. > :24:34.earn �9,500 without paying any tax at all, up from �6,500 when we came
:24:34. > :24:40.to power. She knows it is headed for �10,000. People who are getting
:24:40. > :24:45.that kind of cut in their income tax is absolutely critical in their
:24:45. > :24:50.ability to go about their daily lives. We are absolutely on the
:24:50. > :24:54.sides of the strivers. You have a high marginal rate to show it.
:24:54. > :24:59.me come on to welfare reforms. Mick Philpott, the chap who is in jail
:24:59. > :25:04.for setting fire to his children, exactly what role do the welfare
:25:05. > :25:10.state playing his actions? person most responsible for his
:25:10. > :25:14.actions is him. So the welfare state played no role if he is
:25:14. > :25:17.entirely responsible? Secondly, no one can deny that having 17
:25:17. > :25:22.children and not needing to work can only be possible if there is a
:25:22. > :25:29.welfare state that allows that are used to go on. Does it make you
:25:29. > :25:35.more likely to set fire to your house? No. What role did it played?
:25:35. > :25:40.In it means you can be unproductive and have ever more children to be
:25:40. > :25:46.able to have an income of �100,000 and live without working. A Usain
:25:46. > :25:50.because of the welfare state - that are you saying, it may allow people
:25:50. > :25:56.to wallow in idleness and have these kids batter mix them
:25:56. > :26:02.potential child killers? No, and I think you are trying to set up a
:26:02. > :26:05.false debate. George Osborne said it. The welfare system should be
:26:05. > :26:09.there to look after the most vulnerable people and support them
:26:09. > :26:13.with a safety net when they fall on difficult times. What it should not
:26:13. > :26:18.do is to track people in the welfare dependency from which they
:26:19. > :26:23.cannot escape. That is wrong. It is wrong for individuals and wrong for
:26:23. > :26:28.the nation. Every family in Britain is having to pay five grant to
:26:28. > :26:32.support the welfare budget. We need to sort it out, we are sorting it
:26:32. > :26:37.out and a case which indicates somebody was able to have 17
:26:37. > :26:43.children and an income of something like �100,000 as a result, is an
:26:43. > :26:48.extreme case but it demonstrates something that is wrong. One of the
:26:48. > :26:53.reforms is what you call the scrapping of the spare room subsidy
:26:53. > :27:00.and you say it -- and other people call the bedroom tax. You say your
:27:00. > :27:04.boys share a bedroom but you have a four bedroomed house and they are
:27:04. > :27:11.sharing by a choice. You are implying that you sharing rooms is
:27:11. > :27:15.like people in small houses having to share rooms. I am making the
:27:15. > :27:23.point that a lot of kids a share rooms. There is nothing more to
:27:23. > :27:28.read into it than that. You used it in terms of the welfare reforms.
:27:28. > :27:33.a throwaway remark, less. There are one million bedrooms in this
:27:33. > :27:39.country, social homes, where the taxpayer is paying for the ruins
:27:39. > :27:43.not to be in use. Would it not be better to tackle some of the four
:27:43. > :27:51.or 5 million people on housing waiting list to live in some of
:27:51. > :27:56.those rooms? Is that not a better use? By eight my calculation you
:27:56. > :28:01.have two spare rooms. Is one of them for Michael Green? Grant
:28:01. > :28:06.Shapps, thank you for joining us. Margaret Thatcher regarded some of
:28:06. > :28:10.the union barons who challenged her as the enemy within. She saw Arthur
:28:10. > :28:16.Scargill as a big threat to have holed in power, as big as
:28:16. > :28:21.Argentina's General Galtieri. She thought Mr Scargill had no plans
:28:21. > :28:25.for negotiations. He had to be beaten outright or she would be
:28:25. > :28:29.finished. It is a conflict which still resonates as today's unions
:28:29. > :28:34.clash with the Government over cuts. We will debate baton a moment but
:28:34. > :28:39.first, here is Giles Dilnot on the unions past, present and future.
:28:39. > :28:45.Ed Hall is handy with a needle and thread. In his south London shed
:28:45. > :28:49.bedecked with coloured cloth and the paraphernalia of Arts and Craft,
:28:49. > :28:56.who works at his latest trades union banner for unite. The
:28:56. > :29:01.attention he stitches into his work, you suspect he hopes any victory of
:29:01. > :29:05.the workers will come under the banner of his latest creations. Now
:29:05. > :29:10.he has his own perspective. liberty of the working class is the
:29:10. > :29:14.action of the workers. It is up to the workers to change society. I do
:29:14. > :29:18.think there are some issues when organised labour should be able to
:29:18. > :29:21.say to the government, if you do not do what we are saying, and we
:29:21. > :29:25.have had our arguments with you, and are you continue with it, we
:29:25. > :29:32.will try and bring you down. That was the union view in the seventies
:29:32. > :29:36.that Mrs Thatcher wanted to defeat. She saw them as over-mighty,
:29:36. > :29:40.dictating to Downing Street, bringing the country to a halt. Her
:29:40. > :29:44.government used a mix of legislation and controversial - a
:29:44. > :29:48.controversial strong-arm confrontation to curb union power.
:29:48. > :29:54.Today, union membership is far lower than its 1979 heyday but
:29:54. > :29:58.still, over 6 million people are within the TUC. But opinion in the
:29:58. > :30:01.movement are divided between what past tells you about how you get
:30:01. > :30:06.the best deal for your members and take a political position on
:30:06. > :30:10.today's austerity. I think we are all living with the aftermath of
:30:10. > :30:13.Mrs Thatcher's attack on the unions and what it has done to people
:30:13. > :30:17.since. There is no doubt that many union leaders learned from that
:30:17. > :30:21.period that they thought the lesson was you can never win. Therefore,
:30:21. > :30:26.if you cannot win, it is all about trying to be moderate and hope you
:30:26. > :30:30.can peacefully persuade people. If that is all you do, you can go home
:30:30. > :30:34.thinking we have won the argument but you do not change nothing.
:30:34. > :30:38.Unions have been debating whether to unite against the government in
:30:38. > :30:42.its policies but others say there are sophisticated ways of
:30:42. > :30:45.protesting and some keep the public on side. Unions are looking at
:30:45. > :30:49.different things at a smart strike which affects the government or the
:30:49. > :30:54.council but does not affect the ordinary people and service users.
:30:54. > :30:57.They also looking at building coalitions with community groups. I
:30:57. > :31:01.think unions have to do both. They have to look at industrial action
:31:01. > :31:06.where it needs to happen but also different strategies and ways of
:31:06. > :31:10.making the argument. It is down to what unions are for, workplace
:31:10. > :31:13.representation or something bigger? It is the unions in Britain now who
:31:13. > :31:17.represent the real opposition. It is the unions to represent your
:31:17. > :31:20.position in terms of economic alternatives, arguing for a strong
:31:20. > :31:26.welfare state and arguing for a different economy. Is that their
:31:26. > :31:30.job? Yes, it has to be our job if nobody else is fulfilling it.
:31:30. > :31:40.will reflect that is what general elections, not general secretary
:31:40. > :31:56.
:31:56. > :32:00.Frances O'Grady, do you accept that, looking back, that by 1979, the
:32:01. > :32:07.unions were too big, and no matter who won the election, they would be
:32:07. > :32:13.taken down? We can argue about the 1970s. But it was Britain's most
:32:13. > :32:18.equal decade. What followed, you can draw a direct line between
:32:18. > :32:23.Margaret Thatcher's policies of demonising the unions, but also
:32:23. > :32:27.deregulating the banks, neutralising the building-society
:32:27. > :32:31.is and selling off council homes without replacing them. You can
:32:31. > :32:38.draw a line between that and the mess we are living with today.
:32:38. > :32:44.Digby Jones. She didn't answer the question. In
:32:45. > :32:49.1979, this country was in such a mess because four or five
:32:49. > :32:55.undemocratically elected people decided, on behalf of the whole
:32:55. > :33:00.nation, and when you had a Labour Chancellor saying in his Budget, I
:33:00. > :33:06.will cut one penny off off the basic rate of income tax if four
:33:06. > :33:11.union leaders agree to a pay rise limit, who on earth was running the
:33:11. > :33:15.country? What I find sad about all these demonstrations and refusals
:33:15. > :33:19.to answer the question is that those who were around at the time
:33:20. > :33:24.realise that it was not actually Margaret Thatcher that brought the
:33:24. > :33:29.unions into a proper place in society. It actually was Britain.
:33:29. > :33:33.The average, skilled, working man or Britain in my home town of
:33:33. > :33:37.Birmingham was told, you will join a union or you will not have a job.
:33:37. > :33:46.If you are going to vote against what we want, we will beat you up.
:33:46. > :33:54.That is no way to run a society. Let me see if I can get some
:33:54. > :34:01.quicker answers! I think these can be answered by either Yes, No What
:34:01. > :34:08.don't know. Was Margaret Thatcher right to answer secret ballots?
:34:08. > :34:13.Unions are democratic organisations. Yes or no! I would like an
:34:13. > :34:19.opportunity to talk about what is happening now, and not just what
:34:19. > :34:23.what -- was happening in the past. Unions are democratic organisations.
:34:23. > :34:28.Was she right to end the closed shop? Our members will decide.
:34:28. > :34:38.Nobody took anybody out on strike without there being strong support.
:34:38. > :34:39.
:34:39. > :34:42.It is art that insulting to suggest otherwise. -- is it insulting.
:34:42. > :34:47.Democratic organisations are not interested in reviving the battles
:34:47. > :34:53.of the 1970s but sorting out the mess we have had as a result of the
:34:53. > :34:57.unions being marginalised in society. We had huge support for
:34:57. > :35:01.the public sector pensions strike in 2011. Two-thirds of the public
:35:01. > :35:07.supported us. Eight in 10 young people. Something is very wrong in
:35:07. > :35:14.Britain today. Diverting the debate into the 1970s will not help us.
:35:14. > :35:19.was training to -- trying to establish your attitude, but I
:35:19. > :35:23.failed. Unions have lost power since 1979, no question. The
:35:23. > :35:28.consequence has been that there has been a big move in this country
:35:28. > :35:33.from a share of wealth going to profits at the expense of wages.
:35:33. > :35:43.Wages are a smaller percentage of GDP than before. The companies are
:35:43. > :35:49.not spending profits. Statistically, you are right. But of course,
:35:49. > :35:59.there's one great example where profit and shareholders have
:35:59. > :36:00.
:36:00. > :36:04.suffered. Does our bankers. -- of those our bankers. Secondly...
:36:04. > :36:10.wages have fallen, and that is one of the reasons why we are still in
:36:10. > :36:15.recession. I don't think the real wage falling is one of the reasons
:36:15. > :36:20.for recession. Because of the enhanced profit in the business, I
:36:20. > :36:26.think you are right. Frances O'Grady is doing herself down. If
:36:26. > :36:29.you look in the private sector today, essence of partnership
:36:29. > :36:34.between good quality trade unions and business is brilliant. It is an
:36:34. > :36:44.example for Europe. Look at JCB, Rolls Royce. They are unionised
:36:44. > :36:45.
:36:45. > :36:51.places. But there's a fabulous sense of partnership. I think...
:36:51. > :36:56.Let me bring in Frances O'Grady. The majority of people now believe
:36:56. > :37:03.that the balance of power has swung too far in favour of employers. We
:37:03. > :37:06.know that the growing inequality that we saw go up under Thatcher
:37:06. > :37:12.and is increasing massively to day was one of the key causes of the
:37:12. > :37:18.crash. There's too much wealth at the top and not enough for ordinary
:37:18. > :37:23.people. We need a different kind of economy to move forward. Even the
:37:23. > :37:32.Christian Democrats in Germany now accept a wage is need to rise, that
:37:32. > :37:37.collective bargaining needs to spread. -- that wages need to rise.
:37:37. > :37:43.Even people like Digby Jones must be joined us in arguing for an
:37:43. > :37:49.industrial policy for growth. you to both of you for joining me.
:37:49. > :37:53.You're watching the Sunday Politics. Coming up in 20 minutes, we will be
:37:53. > :38:03.looking at the week ahead with our political panel. Until then, the
:38:03. > :38:06.Hello and welcome to the London part of the show. Coming up later
:38:07. > :38:11.in the programme: London's transport chiefs are
:38:11. > :38:14.looking to scrap the use of cash on the buses. Is it a reform too far?
:38:14. > :38:17.Joining us for the programme are Teresa Pearce, Labour MP for Erith
:38:17. > :38:22.and Thamesmead, and Paul Burstow, Liberal Democrat MP for Sutton and
:38:22. > :38:27.Cheam. Welcome to you both. First off, the story that has
:38:27. > :38:30.dominated all others, of course - the death of Margaret Thatcher.
:38:30. > :38:35.We've heard the fulsome tributes to Lady Thatcher's achievements, and
:38:35. > :38:39.indeed the dissenting voices. But what I'd like to do is look at how
:38:39. > :38:41.some of her ideas and policies play today, and what she would have made
:38:41. > :38:47.of multicultural London had she still been the occupant of number
:38:47. > :38:50.10. We are joined by the man who represents, in part, Lady
:38:50. > :39:00.Thatcher's old seat for Finchley - Mike Freer, Conservative MP for
:39:00. > :39:01.
:39:01. > :39:06.Finchley and Golders Green. It is Bob Carr's commence a few
:39:06. > :39:12.days ago - he thought that Margaret Thatcher was racist. Did that make
:39:12. > :39:16.any sense to you? Totally wrong. If you look at her record in Finchley,
:39:16. > :39:22.she was the first that I know of that embrace the Jewish community.
:39:22. > :39:29.She also, from an early stage, founded an Anglo Indian Association.
:39:29. > :39:32.From an early stage, she was by no means racist. She completely
:39:33. > :39:38.embrace anybody. She was not bothered about background. It was
:39:38. > :39:44.what she had -- they had to offer. When he spoke of her warning that
:39:44. > :39:48.Sydney should not be allowed to become like Fiji, that is not the
:39:48. > :39:54.person you recognise? Note. It is difficult to take things that were
:39:54. > :40:00.said many years ago and apply them today. Most important, what she was
:40:00. > :40:06.saying is that she fought hard for integration. There's a difference
:40:06. > :40:10.between communities being isolated in a city of being fully integrated.
:40:10. > :40:17.That is what she was trying to warn against. She was keen on
:40:17. > :40:24.integration. At the moment, we are wrestling between myth, a geography
:40:24. > :40:31.and hatred. What she inclusive? You are a man who is out, day and proud.
:40:31. > :40:39.Yes there was a leader who brought in Clause 28. How do you reconcile
:40:39. > :40:44.that? I think she was badly advised. I was never one of the inner circle,
:40:44. > :40:48.never a close confidant. But my take on her in the Conservative
:40:48. > :40:53.Party was that she took a libertarian view to sexuality. She
:40:53. > :40:57.didn't care what people did in their homes. The whole issue on
:40:57. > :41:02.Section 28, I think she was badly advised. Looking back, things were
:41:03. > :41:07.different. I can't explain it. But I know, personally, that she had no
:41:07. > :41:13.hang-ups about people's sexuality. You have an anecdote that I would
:41:13. > :41:17.love to come suit. But let's talk to both of you as well. If she
:41:17. > :41:22.walked through London today, would she be a happy Prime Minister?
:41:22. > :41:26.she lived in London up to the end of her days, so clearly she knew
:41:26. > :41:29.what London was like. I would be interested to see what she makes of
:41:29. > :41:38.London now. I would be interested to see how she gets on with the
:41:38. > :41:43.Mayor of London. The Battle of the Blondes! A lovely way of putting it.
:41:44. > :41:51.She was not a lady who like to share a stage. And yet we have a
:41:51. > :41:57.mayor who, regarded, does not like to share a stage. The -- we could
:41:57. > :42:03.argue. She also swept away democratic government for London
:42:03. > :42:06.for a decade. What there are people who never supported Ken Livingstone,
:42:06. > :42:10.and I didn't, the idea that you get rid of their opponents by
:42:10. > :42:14.abolishing them was not really the act of a democratic leader. It was
:42:14. > :42:19.not good for London in terms of having democratic Co ordination of
:42:19. > :42:24.import and services. There's an argument that she was a great
:42:24. > :42:30.friend of London. Others say, bits of it, but not the whole of it. She
:42:30. > :42:35.liked the Square Mile but the rest she could have taken or left.
:42:35. > :42:40.is wrong. She supported suburban London. She was a London MP. She
:42:40. > :42:44.was proud of London being a world city. How do you feel when you see
:42:44. > :42:48.bits of London, Brixton, for example, on the day of the
:42:48. > :42:53.announcement of her death, street parties going on? We hear that
:42:53. > :42:58.during the funeral, part of the city may do the same thing. What is
:42:58. > :43:06.your feeling about that? I was brought up to know that you had
:43:06. > :43:10.your differences in life, but when you put the -- when a person passes,
:43:10. > :43:14.you put the differences to one side. People should know better. If they
:43:14. > :43:19.want to have a street party and argue the case, they should do it
:43:19. > :43:25.after the funeral. To do it now is childish. Actually, it says more
:43:25. > :43:30.about them than Mrs Thatcher's legacy. I did say that you have a
:43:30. > :43:35.lovely anecdote. You do your surgery between bomb-proof glass,
:43:35. > :43:42.which is a throwback to her time. Her surgeries where every three
:43:42. > :43:45.weeks, at least. It didn't matter what was going on, even the middle
:43:45. > :43:50.of the Falklands conflict, has surgery is carried on. During the
:43:50. > :43:56.threats from the IRA, we had a mortar attack on the office. We
:43:56. > :44:00.have bomb-proof glass, a remnant of her time. For a time, she could not
:44:00. > :44:05.have her surgery in her office. She had to have it in local houses.
:44:05. > :44:08.People forget that. A fascinating insight.
:44:08. > :44:11.It's all change on the buses with plans to scrap the use of cash by
:44:11. > :44:13.the end of 2013. That's the confidential proposal from
:44:13. > :44:23.Transport for London, discovered by this programme. So is it fair?
:44:23. > :44:36.
:44:36. > :44:43.Slow to use and expensive. That is the problem with using cash on the
:44:43. > :44:49.buses. The proposal, to end it. is also proposed that the sale of
:44:49. > :44:56.cash tickets on bus be stopped at a suitable time in 2013. As the bus
:44:56. > :45:02.system is modernised, cash is used less and less. It now accounts for
:45:02. > :45:08.1.5 % of journeys. It may not sound like much but it is 24 million bus
:45:08. > :45:12.journeys a year. As it costs twice the amount of an oyster card, you
:45:12. > :45:19.can bet those are probably times when people have a good reason for
:45:19. > :45:23.using cash. Labour think it would be at a bad idea for getting rid of
:45:23. > :45:28.cash or together. If you are waiting at 2 o'clock in the morning
:45:28. > :45:33.for a night bus and oyster cadres empty, you may want to use cash so
:45:33. > :45:36.you can get home. There may be few times you need to use cash but they
:45:36. > :45:42.may be crucial. Transport for London should think about taking
:45:42. > :45:46.this facility away, particularly on the night buses. The accord and to
:45:46. > :45:51.Transport for London's watchdog, because so few people use cash, it
:45:51. > :45:54.is questionable about whether you would be speeding things up at all.
:45:54. > :45:58.If you take away cash and you had people who could not pay and did
:45:58. > :46:03.not have the right card, you would probably end up with buses being
:46:03. > :46:08.delayed more with having arguments with the driver over what kind of
:46:08. > :46:14.card you did or did not have than actually just being able to pay
:46:14. > :46:19.cash and get on with your journey. As yet, TfL has not consulted the
:46:19. > :46:23.public on the plan. While transport authorities might be keen,
:46:23. > :46:27.Londoners are likely to have a mixed response. I have been caught
:46:27. > :46:32.out sometimes if by oyster has run out and there is no other way of
:46:32. > :46:35.paying now. Normally I pop to a newsagents beforehand so if people
:46:35. > :46:39.plan ahead it would not be a problem. It would not affect me
:46:39. > :46:44.because I have an oyster card and most people do. It is not good news
:46:44. > :46:48.for people who want to pay by cash so I think it is bad news. It may
:46:48. > :46:51.well be that spending cash on the buses will be history.
:46:51. > :46:59.Joining me is Managing Director of Surface Transport at Transport for
:46:59. > :47:06.London, Leon Daniels. Is this happening or not? Just to be clear,
:47:06. > :47:09.we have made no decision on this. It is part of a long-term plan.
:47:09. > :47:15.thought you would say that. It is because of our digging around we
:47:15. > :47:20.have found this. It is proposed that the sale of cash tickets on
:47:20. > :47:24.buses be stopped at a suitable time in 2013, with another line
:47:24. > :47:29.suggesting there Mayor takes that up. That sounds like a
:47:29. > :47:33.recommendation to me. We have not yet made any decision. There are
:47:33. > :47:37.eight months left, when will you get round to it? What we will do is
:47:37. > :47:43.follow the market. We are down to 1% of our bus passengers paying
:47:43. > :47:47.cash. So you are going to do it? what I am saying is, we are
:47:47. > :47:51.watching the market. As the number of customers who pay cash
:47:51. > :47:54.diminishes it will not be worth collecting cash any more. You have
:47:54. > :47:59.eight months to make a decision, you are talking about the fact you
:47:59. > :48:04.have not made a consultation yet, you have already told made you feel
:48:05. > :48:10.the market is driving you to this decision, just be clear about it.
:48:10. > :48:15.We are watching the market and see how many people pay cash. When too
:48:15. > :48:20.few pay it we will come to it. what is too few? 1% of our
:48:20. > :48:23.customers pay cash. That is an insignificant number of people. We
:48:23. > :48:29.are getting to the position where the cost of collecting the cash is
:48:29. > :48:32.greater than the value of it. The public is overwhelming --
:48:32. > :48:37.overwhelmingly using the oyster card. It seems that sophistry way
:48:37. > :48:40.you say we have to get a point where it is too low and then you
:48:40. > :48:44.say it is too low already. What about the concerns that have been
:48:44. > :48:47.raised in the film, you have young people, women in particular, who
:48:47. > :48:51.may go out in the evening, they may be caught out, they need to get
:48:51. > :48:57.home, they need to get on a bus, places are closed, they cannot get
:48:57. > :49:01.their hands on an oyster card, will the buses leave them stranded?
:49:01. > :49:04.vulnerable people are left behind on our bus network. We have to
:49:04. > :49:09.raise a distinction between the people who were trying to avoid
:49:09. > :49:12.paying at people who were generally in a difficult situation.
:49:12. > :49:20.Vulnerable people are never left stranded. You're telling me a
:49:20. > :49:27.bustard - at a bus driver will have to determine policy in his cab on
:49:28. > :49:33.the hoof with a bus full of people. He has to do that every day. What
:49:33. > :49:38.is most important is nearly everybody who it uses the transport
:49:38. > :49:43.network is using a pre-paid card. We only have a very small number of
:49:43. > :49:48.cash passengers. The small number of cash passengers do still use the
:49:48. > :49:51.buses. Let's stay with the scenario we are talking about, are you
:49:51. > :49:55.honestly say in this is the best way to run a network, even though
:49:55. > :49:59.it will provoke rows on the bus where people are arguing their case,
:49:59. > :50:05.where people are getting angry on the bus because they want to get
:50:05. > :50:10.home, this is a tinderbox you are creating and the lack of taking
:50:10. > :50:17.cash will be the smart - the spark that likes it. The London Bus
:50:17. > :50:21.Network runs at a loss. There is �4 million which makes up the
:50:21. > :50:25.difference of what the passengers pay and the cost of running the
:50:25. > :50:31.network. Last time I checked passengers did not want to pay more
:50:31. > :50:34.and people did not want to pay more tax. It cost �15 million to collect
:50:35. > :50:39.cash. With that money there are lots of other things you can do
:50:39. > :50:44.with the London Bus Network. I know you have not asked Londoners, have
:50:44. > :50:49.you asked Transport Police whether they are happy with your plans?
:50:49. > :50:53.is not a case of whether people are happy. There is no date, there is
:50:53. > :50:57.no plan to do this. As we come to the point when we think this will
:50:57. > :51:02.be a good idea, we will consult widely with all the stakeholders
:51:02. > :51:06.including the police and passengers. Has Boris Johnson told you what to
:51:06. > :51:13.do? The Mayor is waiting for us to make a recommendation. Paul Burstow,
:51:13. > :51:17.what would you make of this? I am interested in whether that document
:51:17. > :51:24.is one that Transport for London accept is part of their thought
:51:24. > :51:28.process. It is. It is a document we wrote. Say it 2013 was the year you
:51:28. > :51:32.were thinking about doing this in? When we rate the document that was
:51:32. > :51:38.the year we were thinking about. There is not a drop-dead date. If
:51:38. > :51:43.it is not done by 31st December, there is no penalty attached to it.
:51:43. > :51:48.My concern is 1% of what. It is a very large number of individuals
:51:48. > :51:52.who are potentially affected by this. And also, let's not forget
:51:52. > :51:56.there are people who do not live in London who want to travel in London,
:51:56. > :52:00.they do not have access necessarily to oyster cards when they come in,
:52:00. > :52:05.what are they meant to do? exactly, people who come from
:52:05. > :52:11.further out in Kent who do not have the oyster system, if you live in a
:52:11. > :52:14.small visit -- village where there is no post office or shop to get
:52:14. > :52:19.your oyster card charged up, at the moment, if you pay by oyster,
:52:19. > :52:22.you're single fare is quite low. If you pay by cash it is considerably
:52:22. > :52:29.higher so there must be a reason Orin need for people to do that.
:52:29. > :52:33.What about people who come from out of town? Tough luck? Every main
:52:33. > :52:37.line station in London allows you to buy a ticket to London terminals
:52:37. > :52:42.or zone one. If you buy a ticket to zone one you have unlimited travel
:52:42. > :52:46.on the bus or underground network from London. Anyone who travels in
:52:46. > :52:50.from Kent has a chance to buy a ticket. Not in my local station, it
:52:50. > :52:53.does not have a ticket machine. Thank you.
:52:53. > :52:56.Tomorrow, four London boroughs will be the first places in the country
:52:56. > :52:59.to see the government's new �26,000 a year cap in benefits introduced.
:52:59. > :53:01.Designed so that no family on benefits receives more in welfare
:53:01. > :53:06.than the average working family earns, the policy is overwhelmingly
:53:06. > :53:15.popular with voters. But when it becomes a reality this week, is
:53:15. > :53:18.that still going to be the case? Sarah Burns is head of one of the
:53:18. > :53:24.households which will find their benefits capped starting from
:53:24. > :53:29.tomorrow. She makes it -- she thinks it makes great sense in
:53:29. > :53:34.theory. I think it is unfair if people are given money where the
:53:34. > :53:38.average person cannot afford to live. But in practice, she says it
:53:38. > :53:42.is very different. As a mother of three, she lived in a two-bedroom
:53:42. > :53:47.council flat where all three of her kids were forced to share a bedroom.
:53:47. > :53:54.They suggested giving a private property. However, in accepting
:53:54. > :54:00.that, my rent went from �90 a week to �260 a week. Because the rent at
:54:00. > :54:06.this new property is so high, Sarah currently gets �26,000 per annum or
:54:06. > :54:10.�500 a week. From tomorrow, things get much tougher. Over half of her
:54:10. > :54:15.benefit goes to the landlord. After other benefits are taken into
:54:15. > :54:20.account she has been told to expect a cut of �90 a week, meaning she
:54:20. > :54:24.will have to raise three kids on �100 a week. I will not be able to
:54:24. > :54:30.replace school uniforms or pay for them to do school trips. I will not
:54:30. > :54:34.be able to replace shoes. It really is that dire. Sarah has asked to
:54:34. > :54:39.move from this house. The main thing is I feel I have been placed
:54:39. > :54:43.in this position under false pretences more or less. Now, when
:54:43. > :54:48.the situation has become so untenable nobody wants to help me.
:54:48. > :54:53.No one is saying this is easy for anybody. But what is important is
:54:53. > :54:58.we give support to people at Sarah so they can find accommodation they
:54:58. > :55:01.can afford and also get back into work. But also reflect that the
:55:01. > :55:08.welfare bill is being picked up by people earning low wages so that
:55:08. > :55:16.tax will pay for these benefits. These taxi him in favour.
:55:16. > :55:20.�26,000 a year cap is a popular policy. A lot of people think it is
:55:20. > :55:26.fair so it proves very popular. but when the reality is raising
:55:26. > :55:30.three kids on �100 a week, will public opinion shift?
:55:30. > :55:35.Teresa Pearce, what will happen when this is introduced? We are
:55:35. > :55:39.looking at the wrong answer to the wrong question. To cap benefits,
:55:39. > :55:43.fair enough. We do not want a massive benefits bill. We do not
:55:43. > :55:48.want people in work who cannot afford rents that people out of
:55:48. > :55:52.work can. All of those arguments, we understand them. The problem
:55:52. > :55:56.here is sky high rents in London for sub-standard housing a lot of
:55:56. > :56:01.the time. This money does not go into the pockets of these people.
:56:02. > :56:04.It goes into landlords. We need to look at some sort of rent control
:56:04. > :56:09.Ora massive housebuilding project where people have somewhere decent
:56:09. > :56:13.to live that does not cost a fortune. Whenever the public are
:56:13. > :56:18.asked if they are for or against this, 80 % said they were
:56:18. > :56:21.absolutely behind the changes. Are you perhaps out of step? No, what
:56:21. > :56:27.we are doing is asking the whole country, do you think it is right
:56:27. > :56:30.that people have �26,000 a year or more on benefits? For most of the
:56:30. > :56:34.country that is an eye-watering amount of money because rents in
:56:34. > :56:38.other places are not as high. It is a London problem. It is a small
:56:38. > :56:43.number of people affected but for those families, those children will
:56:43. > :56:48.have to move schools. Paul, I know you have three children, could you
:56:48. > :56:53.hand on heart deal with �100 a week and bring those children up. I do
:56:53. > :56:57.not think I would. I would say in my constituency, the average income
:56:57. > :57:02.of a family is �26,000 a year and those are people who are working.
:57:02. > :57:05.In those situations, how can I look on them -- how can I look them in
:57:05. > :57:14.the face and says someone relying on benefits should get more than
:57:14. > :57:19.them? A lot of people will say he - - Paul Burstow cannot raise three
:57:19. > :57:25.children of �100 a week. It I had said the other, you would challenge
:57:25. > :57:30.me to prove it. But it is not a game. Absolutely it is not a game
:57:30. > :57:33.but people are my constituency are living on incomes of �27,000 a year.
:57:33. > :57:38.They expect us to do the best for them, as people who are paying
:57:38. > :57:43.taxes to support other people on benefits. This cap is one of a
:57:43. > :57:46.number of measures. Housing has a part to play in this. The last
:57:46. > :57:54.Labour government had a lamentable record when it came to house
:57:54. > :57:57.building. They are tragic stories, are you prepared for them? Their
:57:57. > :58:02.tragic stories of people who are trying to make ends meet through
:58:02. > :58:06.working. We are trying to support them. People will be �600 at a year
:58:06. > :58:16.better off because of the tax change. We will leave there. It is
:58:16. > :58:18.
:58:18. > :58:23.time to look at the rest of the political news in 60 seconds.
:58:23. > :58:30.Fact, all and Greece deposits, so called fatbergs, will be collected
:58:30. > :58:34.and turned into a green energy which will power homes and a water
:58:34. > :58:42.plant. Transport Secretary Stephen Hammond
:58:42. > :58:45.has questioned the use of back-seat translator's saying some unfairly
:58:45. > :58:49.help people to pass their driving test.
:58:49. > :58:54.Harrow council is considering giving their tenants up to �20,000
:58:54. > :58:58.to move abroad. They say the offer is in its early stages and would be
:58:58. > :59:01.for those already considering leaving the country.
:59:01. > :59:06.Figures have revealed that a increasing number of hospitals are
:59:06. > :59:14.running at over 85 % occupancy, raising concerns about their
:59:14. > :59:21.ability to maintain expect cab. 25 London hospital trusts expect --
:59:21. > :59:26.exceeded this level. Up from the previous year.
:59:26. > :59:32.So we have heard that hospitals are getting more overcrowded. They are
:59:32. > :59:35.feeling the strain. Paul Burstow, I am interested here where you stand.
:59:35. > :59:39.You supported the government with their policy when you were in the
:59:39. > :59:44.department at when you left you started campaigning for your own
:59:44. > :59:48.local servers? What I have consistently done as a minister and
:59:48. > :59:54.since leaving the Department of Health is opposed local proposals
:59:54. > :59:59.to close A&E departments in south London because they are not based
:59:59. > :00:05.on good evidence. Is it about having your cake and eating it?
:00:05. > :00:09.it is about standing up for Mike insistence -- my constituents.
:00:09. > :00:13.you worried about the trouble that is coming down the line? I think
:00:13. > :00:17.these figures need to be looked at in terms of some of the proposals
:00:17. > :00:27.for closing A&E departments in London. They do show that the Aga
:00:27. > :00:37.
:00:37. > :00:40.you can do more out on the We need to look at where people are
:00:40. > :00:45.in hospital. Will there are people should be at home that a care
:00:45. > :00:55.package. -- elderly people. There are people in hospital who should
:00:55. > :01:03.
:01:03. > :01:12.be at home and that I'm afraid we In a moment, we will look ahead to
:01:12. > :01:16.the big stories that have dominated politics. First, the news.
:01:16. > :01:20.The London School of Economics has accused the BBC of endangering its
:01:20. > :01:23.students by sending a crew with them took North Korea to film an
:01:24. > :01:27.undercover documentary. The LSE said the students were not told
:01:27. > :01:33.enough to give their informed consent and that the filming could
:01:33. > :01:40.do serious damage to its reputation for academic integrity. The BBC
:01:40. > :01:44.disputes the accusations and insists the programme will go ahead.
:01:44. > :01:49.The Panorama team filmed undercover for eight days last month,
:01:49. > :01:54.travelling on estate organised tour. But the LSE believes that by posing
:01:54. > :01:59.as its students, they put the entire group in danger. The LSE has
:01:59. > :02:03.accused the BBC of using lies and deception from the outset. It said
:02:03. > :02:07.it had no prior knowledge of the trip and that now the BBC is
:02:07. > :02:11.unwilling to take responsibility for endangering its students. The
:02:11. > :02:17.BBC says the students were told twice that a journalist would be
:02:17. > :02:20.travelling with them. It warned of the risk of arrest and detention.
:02:20. > :02:25.But the journalist John Sweeney acknowledges they were not told
:02:25. > :02:30.there was an under keep -- undercover team of three filming a
:02:30. > :02:35.documentary. We told them enough, but not so much as two in peril
:02:35. > :02:41.them if something went bad. Nothing went bad. We got away with it. It
:02:41. > :02:47.was preposterous. But the students helped us, and the majority are
:02:47. > :02:51.happy for the documentary to go ahead. As an LSE graduate, I find
:02:51. > :03:00.it extraordinary that an institution that police in three
:03:00. > :03:06.fought should call for a documentary not to air. -- that
:03:06. > :03:11.encourages a free thought. John Kerry is visiting Tokyo are in
:03:11. > :03:14.his latest attempt to build pressure on North Korea. As he
:03:14. > :03:18.arrived, Japan said the two countries should send a strong
:03:18. > :03:22.message to North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons programmes.
:03:22. > :03:24.Anti-missile systems have been stationed around Tokyo in
:03:24. > :03:28.anticipation of a North Korean missile launch.
:03:28. > :03:32.Details have been published for the funeral service for Lady Thatcher,
:03:32. > :03:37.to be held at St Paul's Cathedral. That is going to happen on
:03:37. > :03:41.Wednesday. She requested the service should include music by
:03:42. > :03:45.English composers and will contain some of her favourite hymns,
:03:45. > :03:49.reflecting her patriotism and her upbringing as a meat despite the
:03:49. > :03:54.Methodist. Firefighters have managed to
:03:54. > :03:58.contain a fire London. The blaze started early this morning in the
:03:58. > :04:01.tropical house. Firefighters were able to rescue two crocodiles and
:04:01. > :04:11.an officer, but some animals have died.
:04:11. > :04:14.
:04:14. > :04:18.That is all the news for now. There So, the debate about Margaret
:04:18. > :04:21.Thatcher's legacy and how the country will say goodbye reaches a
:04:21. > :04:27.conclusion on Wednesday, when her funeral takes place. Before we
:04:27. > :04:32.discuss that, we wanted to take a break, to show you this clip from
:04:32. > :04:39.YouTube showing her responding to, what shall we call it, an unusual
:04:40. > :04:45.request from a Swedish journalist in 1995.
:04:45. > :04:51.All the people I interviewed, I ask them to do something for me. It is
:04:51. > :04:55.to jump in the air. I would not dream of doing that. Why should I?
:04:55. > :05:01.I see no significance of making a jump up in the air. I make leaps
:05:01. > :05:08.forward, not little jumps in studious. Mikhail Gorbachev did it.
:05:08. > :05:13.You amaze me. What must he have thought of free society if that is
:05:13. > :05:20.what they ask you to do? It shows another side of the human being.
:05:20. > :05:26.shows that you want to be thought of as more popular. I don't have to
:05:27. > :05:36.say that to prove it. This has been my whole life. It is just a gimmick.
:05:37. > :05:39.
:05:39. > :05:43.No! No, no, no, to coin a phrase. That was indeed a phrase. Nick,
:05:43. > :05:48.that was, in a sense, Margaret Thatcher. No nonsense, I am not
:05:48. > :05:55.doing it. I don't care about popularity. If that is her legacy,
:05:55. > :06:03.it is difficult for today's focus group politicians. Indeed. It is an
:06:03. > :06:08.error when -- Deraa went politicians did not care what
:06:08. > :06:13.people thought. What does the death of Lady Thatcher Meifod David
:06:13. > :06:17.Cameron? It is a blessing in that it means he lead a party of
:06:17. > :06:22.somebody who changed the world. It is also a burden. One of the
:06:22. > :06:26.burdens is he is going to measure up against her. It is interesting
:06:26. > :06:31.to talk to senior Conservatives who say, how does he compare? And they
:06:31. > :06:35.are generally pretty scathing. I spoke to one Conservative he said
:06:35. > :06:39.the real difference was, from Margaret Thatcher, 1% of her
:06:39. > :06:49.ambition was to go to Downing Street, and 99% was what she did
:06:49. > :06:54.when she got there. Would David Cameron, 99% of his ambition is to
:06:54. > :07:01.get to Downing Street. -- for David Cameron. And he would have dreamt,
:07:01. > :07:07.wouldn't he? He would have aimed for a halfway house. Boris would
:07:07. > :07:13.have jumped. British public life did quite well this week. There are
:07:13. > :07:17.always going to be tasters reactions, but they seemed to come
:07:17. > :07:20.from fifth-rate comedians and protesters. The mainstream Left,
:07:20. > :07:29.would impress of Parliament, the reaction was actually quite
:07:29. > :07:39.sensitive. -- weather in press or parliament. A good example was Ed
:07:39. > :07:43.
:07:43. > :07:48.Miliband. As a fifth-rate comedian, Isabel, what do you say? I was
:07:48. > :07:53.impressed by the tenor of the tributes from Labour critics. I
:07:53. > :08:00.thought it was a good week for Ed Miliband, until the intervention by
:08:00. > :08:06.Tony Blair. Until then, it was a positive week for him. I was trying
:08:06. > :08:10.to get to what is the Tory legacy. Let's go to Ed Miliband. This is
:08:10. > :08:14.how he handled the commemoration of Margaret Thatcher in the Commons.
:08:14. > :08:18.You can disagree with Margaret Thatcher, but it is important to
:08:18. > :08:23.understand the kind of political leader she was. What was unusual
:08:23. > :08:29.was that she sought to be rooted in people's daily lives, but she also
:08:29. > :08:33.believed ideology mattered. Not for her the contempt sometimes heat on
:08:33. > :08:39.ideas and new thinking in political life. Well she never would have
:08:39. > :08:45.claims to be an intellectual, she believed and showed that ideas
:08:45. > :08:51.matter in politics. It is fascinating how everybody positions
:08:51. > :08:58.themselves in relation to her. It is 2013. She entered Parliament 50
:08:58. > :09:02.years ago, I think. The way I read that when Mr Miliband is implicitly
:09:03. > :09:07.saying, look, Margaret Thatcher moved the centre to the right, and
:09:07. > :09:13.that was based on ideas. I am going to move the centre to the left for
:09:13. > :09:17.based on my ideas. That is exactly what he is saying. The difference
:09:17. > :09:22.is that historical trends were on Margaret Thatcher's favour in the
:09:22. > :09:27.1970s and 1980s. Is it obvious that trains are now in the favour of the
:09:27. > :09:32.left? The two big trains are a lack of fiscal resources in the West and
:09:32. > :09:41.intense competition from China and the East. Do you conclude from that
:09:41. > :09:51.that we will move towards a more pro estate future? This is why Tony
:09:51. > :09:55.Blair is so nervous about Ed Miliband. In his article, Tony
:09:55. > :10:01.Blair made a point that yes, Ed Miliband was making comparisons
:10:01. > :10:06.with Margaret Thatcher, but the question is, are you interested in
:10:06. > :10:13.the right ideas? You would have thought that the overall mood would
:10:13. > :10:20.have moved to the left after the banking crisis, when rich banks and
:10:20. > :10:26.bankers screwed everything up. Yet John Reid and Tony Blair seemed to
:10:26. > :10:30.think it is not. Ed Miliband seems to suggest it is. There has been a
:10:30. > :10:35.real tension there for Labour MPs, which has been bubbling below the
:10:35. > :10:39.surface. It surprises me that it has not come out before. It has
:10:39. > :10:44.been brought to a head by the welfare debate. Blair should the
:10:44. > :10:49.party position itself on the extent to which people should be cutting
:10:49. > :10:52.back on the welfare state? -- where should the party doesn't itself.
:10:52. > :11:00.Labour has been worried that it is on the wrong side of the opinion
:11:00. > :11:04.polls on that. They did not want to be on the wrong side of Mrs
:11:04. > :11:09.Thatcher's death either. Yeah, it would have been two consecutive
:11:09. > :11:12.weeks when they were on the wrong side. I think Ed Miliband's
:11:12. > :11:16.comments were quite sincere. I think he would have liked to have
:11:16. > :11:20.gone further in his praise. As a conviction politician, he
:11:20. > :11:25.identified with her. More to the point, he acknowledged that some of
:11:25. > :11:34.her convictions were right. The 1970s was an omnishambles.
:11:34. > :11:42.Something has happened. Why are so many people saying these things
:11:42. > :11:46.now? It is interesting that you mention welfare. Talk to Labour
:11:46. > :11:51.people on the streets, they say, we are getting absolutely slaughtered
:11:51. > :11:56.on welfare. We seem to be in the wrong place. There are nerves in
:11:56. > :12:06.the party on that. Mr Miliband is doing well, but one of his rising
:12:06. > :12:11.
:12:11. > :12:16.stars, Chuka Umanna, there his pages. -- his page is. He says
:12:16. > :12:20.either he or somebody close to him has gone into his page and put in a
:12:20. > :12:27.comparison between him and President Obama. It is always a
:12:27. > :12:34.cover up. Suggesting it was a member of his own staff or Dutch
:12:34. > :12:41.journalists are misbehaving was an error. -- that journalists. I don't
:12:41. > :12:44.think there's anything wrong with people modifying their own pages.
:12:44. > :12:51.The problem for him is that he should have come clean about it.
:12:51. > :12:57.What is wrong with being ambitious? I agree that this is not great. But
:12:57. > :13:03.if he did it, it was when he was in his late twenties. Chuka Umanna is
:13:03. > :13:07.one of the most serious people in the Labour Party. None of it really
:13:07. > :13:14.matters. He is one of the great hopes for the Labour Party, he
:13:14. > :13:19.really is. It is no bad thing for him. Good to change the subject for