:00:38. > :00:41.Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:42. > :00:44.Pressure on Culture Secretary Maria Miller mounts as the Tory press
:00:45. > :00:49.Tory voters and even a Tory Minister turn against her. That's our top
:00:50. > :00:52.story. The economic outlook is getting
:00:53. > :00:57.rosier. But Ed Miliband is having none of it. The cost of living
:00:58. > :01:07.crisis is here to stay, says Labour. Shadow Minister Caroline Flint joins
:01:08. > :01:10.us for the Sunday Interview. And we bring you the Sunday Politics
:01:11. > :01:12.Gallery. But which former world leader is behind these paintings of
:01:13. > :01:19.And coming up in the North Dast and world
:01:20. > :01:24.And coming up in the North Dast and Cumbria...
:01:25. > :01:34.new London borough. A blue flint for regeneration or economic Armageddon?
:01:35. > :01:39.And with me as always, the best and the brightest political panel in the
:01:40. > :01:42.business - Janan Ganesh, Helen Lewis and Nick Watt. Their tweets will be
:01:43. > :01:48.as brief as a Cabinet Minister's apology.
:01:49. > :01:52.A frenzy of betting on the Grand National yesterday. But there was
:01:53. > :01:55.one book on which betting was suspended, and that was on the fate
:01:56. > :01:58.of Culture Secretary Maria Miller, now the 2/1 favourite to be forced
:01:59. > :02:01.out the Cabinet. She galloped through her apology to the Commons
:02:02. > :02:05.on Thursday in just 32 seconds. But speed did her no favours. There s
:02:06. > :02:09.been mounting pressure on her to resign ever since, especially from
:02:10. > :02:11.Tories. And this weekend the Chairman of the Independent
:02:12. > :02:14.Parliamentary Standards Authority, Ian Kennedy, said it's time MPs gave
:02:15. > :02:29.away the power to decide how colleagues who break the rules are
:02:30. > :02:34.punished. An inquiry into Maria Miller's expenses claims was launch
:02:35. > :02:39.in 2012, following allegations he claimed ?90,000 to fund a house she
:02:40. > :02:44.lived in part time with her parents. She had designated this her second
:02:45. > :02:46.home. She was referred to the Parliamentary Standards
:02:47. > :02:53.Commissioner, who recommended that she repay ?45,000. But this week the
:02:54. > :02:58.Commons Standards Committee, comprising of MPs from all parties,
:02:59. > :03:04.dismissed the complaint against Maria Miller and ordered her to
:03:05. > :03:12.repay just ?5,800 for inadvertently overclaiming her merge claimants.
:03:13. > :03:15.She was forced to apologise to the Commons for the legalistic way she
:03:16. > :03:20.dealt with the complaints against her. But Tony Gallagher told the
:03:21. > :03:25.Daily Politics on Friday: We got a third call from Craig Oliver who
:03:26. > :03:30.pointed out, she is looking at Leveson and the call is badly timed.
:03:31. > :03:32.I think if you are making a series of telephone calls to a newspaper
:03:33. > :03:33.organisation investigating the conduct of a Cabinet Minister, that
:03:34. > :03:38.comes close After that interview Craig Oliver
:03:39. > :03:43.contacted us, saying there was no threat in anyway over Leveson. I
:03:44. > :03:47.mead it clear at the time. Tony Gallagher is talking rubbish about
:03:48. > :03:51.me, and you can use that. The Daily Telegraph have released a tape of a
:03:52. > :03:55.phone call between Maria Miller s aid, Joanna Hindley, and a reporter
:03:56. > :04:00.investigating her expenses claim. Joanna Hindley said:
:04:01. > :04:07.Maria's obviously been having quite a lot of editor's meetings around
:04:08. > :04:13.Leveson at the moment. So I'm just going to kind of flag up that
:04:14. > :04:15.connection for you to think about. The Prime Minister is sticking by
:04:16. > :04:18.his Culture Secretary, but this weekend's crescendo of criticism of
:04:19. > :04:22.her presents him with a problem and he could be wishing Maria Miller
:04:23. > :04:27.would just fall on her sword. Even over 80% of Tory voters in a Mail on
:04:28. > :04:30.Sunday poll think she should go On the Andrew Marr Show, the Work and
:04:31. > :04:37.Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, defended his colleague. I've
:04:38. > :04:42.known her always to be a reasonable and honest person. But is she doing
:04:43. > :04:45.the Government or her any good by staying in office at the moment do
:04:46. > :04:49.you think? This is a matter the Prime Minister has to take
:04:50. > :04:54.consideration of and she herself. My view generally is I'm supportive of
:04:55. > :04:59.Maria, because if we are not careful we end one a witch-hunt of somebody.
:05:00. > :05:02.And I'm joined now by the Conservative MP, Bob Stewart, and
:05:03. > :05:04.the man in the white suit, former MP and anti-sleaze campaigner Martin
:05:05. > :05:07.Bell. Welcome to you both. Stuart Stuart sturkts let me put this to
:05:08. > :05:11.you, a Conservative MP told this programme, this is a quote, she has
:05:12. > :05:17.handled this appallingly. Downing Street has acted like judge and
:05:18. > :05:20.jury, for Craig Oliver to get involved is disastrous. She's been
:05:21. > :05:24.protected by the whips from the start. What do you say to that? It's
:05:25. > :05:29.not great, is it? The fact of the matter is the question one should
:05:30. > :05:35.ask is, did she deliberately try to make money? Did she deliberately try
:05:36. > :05:39.to obscure ate? The answer is she certainly didn't deliberately try to
:05:40. > :05:43.make money, in the system, which was the old system, and with regard to
:05:44. > :05:49.obscure ago, I wasn't there, but let's put it this way. She was going
:05:50. > :05:54.through a quasi-judicial process and might have ended up in court, so she
:05:55. > :05:58.has a right to defend herself. Hold on o you said she doesn't do it to
:05:59. > :06:02.make money, she remortgaged the house a couple of times to earn more
:06:03. > :06:06.interest to us, the taxpayer, and when interest rates went down she
:06:07. > :06:11.didn't reduce the amount she was charging in expenses. Well, the
:06:12. > :06:16.point is the adjudicator said there was ?45,000 she was owed. And then a
:06:17. > :06:21.committee, Standards Committee, said actually it should be reduced. That
:06:22. > :06:25.was mainly MPs but there are three lay members. Yes, but they don't
:06:26. > :06:29.have the vote. OK, fine, that is where it is wrong and we've got to
:06:30. > :06:33.get it sorted. Let me put another quote from our Conservative MP. He
:06:34. > :06:39.didn't want to be named. None of you do at the moment. I'm being named.
:06:40. > :06:42.But you are backing her. George young in cahoots. He's been leading
:06:43. > :06:47.on the Standards Committee to find her innocent. The Standards
:06:48. > :06:51.Committee is unfit for purpose. I think the Standards Committee should
:06:52. > :06:57.be revisited. I think the system is still evolving. And I think actually
:06:58. > :07:01.we ought to have totally independent judgment on MPs' pay and allowances.
:07:02. > :07:06.We haven't have not got there yet and that is where it is wrong.
:07:07. > :07:09.Martin Bell, have MPs interfered in the Maria Miller process and with
:07:10. > :07:14.the current Standards Commissioner in the same way that they saw off a
:07:15. > :07:19.previous Commissioner they thought was too independent? Andrew it is
:07:20. > :07:27.exactly the same. Yesterday I looked at a diary entry I made for May
:07:28. > :07:33.2000, I said, dreadful meeting standards and privileges, they are
:07:34. > :07:39.playing party politics. One of them told Elizabeth fill kin to her face
:07:40. > :07:43.the gossip in the tea room was she had gone crazy. Nothing's changed.
:07:44. > :07:48.What this shows is most of all, what's the committee for? If it is
:07:49. > :07:54.just going to rubber stamp what the party wants and its mates, I don't
:07:55. > :07:58.see any point. But it hasn't rubber stamped. It's changed it. Well, it
:07:59. > :08:03.has watered down. That's why we should make it totally independent
:08:04. > :08:10.and it shouldn't be involved in the House of Commons. It is plus plus ca
:08:11. > :08:15.change isn't it? MPs', scandal, and MPs closing ranks for one of their
:08:16. > :08:20.own. Has the Commons learned nothing? And this is after the
:08:21. > :08:24.expenses scandal, where everything was out for everybody to see, you
:08:25. > :08:28.would think MPs would be careful. This is before the expenses scandal.
:08:29. > :08:32.We are looking at an historical event, during your time, Martin not
:08:33. > :08:37.mine. I'm clean on this. You campaigned for him as an
:08:38. > :08:42.independent. I did, he was a good friend of mine. And now you've
:08:43. > :08:46.joined the club. And now you are defending Maria Miller? I'm
:08:47. > :08:49.defending someone who hasn't been proved guilty of anything beyond the
:08:50. > :08:54.fact she was rather slow to come forward with evidence. My point on
:08:55. > :08:59.that, is I understand that. MPs are being lambasted the whole time these
:09:00. > :09:03.days. There were a heck of a lot of them, Martin, who are utterly
:09:04. > :09:08.decent. She didn't try to make money. We've just been through that.
:09:09. > :09:12.I don't think that's right. The jury is out on that. What should have
:09:13. > :09:16.happened in the Miller case, Martin Bell? I don't think there should be
:09:17. > :09:20.a committee on standards. I think the Commissioner should make a
:09:21. > :09:24.report. There has been to be justice for the MP complained against. Then
:09:25. > :09:29.the committee of the whole House can consider it. But we are, the House
:09:30. > :09:37.of Commons, then as now is incapable of regulating itself. That's been
:09:38. > :09:41.proving yet again. She made a perfunctory apology. She threatened
:09:42. > :09:45.and instructed the Standards Commissioner investigating her, and
:09:46. > :09:49.her special adviser linked expenses to Leveson, when trying to stop the
:09:50. > :09:54.Daily Telegraph from publishing I mean, is that the behaviour of a
:09:55. > :09:57.Cabinet Minister? Well, it's probably not the behaviour of
:09:58. > :10:02.someone that's got time on their hands. She's a very busy Cabinet
:10:03. > :10:08.Minister. Well, she had enough time to write lots of letters to the
:10:09. > :10:15.Standards Commission ser. She felt under such threat. She had the time.
:10:16. > :10:18.She had to make the time. Die know the lady is not trying desperately
:10:19. > :10:23.to make money. I disagree but on that. The fact of the matter is
:10:24. > :10:28.this was an old, old system, that we've tried to put right, or the
:10:29. > :10:32.Commons has tried to put right. I agree that MPs shouldn't get
:10:33. > :10:38.involved in this. Should we get rid of this committee? It serves no
:10:39. > :10:41.purpose except to cause trouble The adjudicator has said that and it
:10:42. > :10:46.should be the end of it. It shouldn't come back to the Commons.
:10:47. > :10:50.Although her special adviser threatened them over Leveson she was
:10:51. > :10:55.and is the Minister responsible for trying to introduce something like
:10:56. > :11:02.Leveson and that is something a big chunk that the press doesn't want.
:11:03. > :11:08.She is a target. It has a good record on this issue. It played wit
:11:09. > :11:13.a straight bat. The facts aren't in dispute are they? Will she make it
:11:14. > :11:17.to the next cabinet reshuffle and then go? Iain Duncan Smith said it
:11:18. > :11:23.is a matter for the Prime Minister. In my view, as things stand, I
:11:24. > :11:29.question did she deliberately want to make money? I don't think she
:11:30. > :11:33.did. Should she go? No. Should she be reshuffled? I don't know.
:11:34. > :11:38.Goodness me, you are asking someone who will never be reshuffled,
:11:39. > :11:43.because he will never make it. I was only asking for your opinion, not
:11:44. > :11:48.your ability to do it. This is a problem for Cameron isn't it? It is
:11:49. > :11:54.a problem for Cameron. There is nothing wrong with returning to be
:11:55. > :12:00.badge benches, as you know. Hear, hear. To that. Stick with me. Helen,
:12:01. > :12:06.can she survive? Is I'm going out of the prediction game when I said
:12:07. > :12:12.Clegg is going to win the date, so I owe Janan a tenner on that one.
:12:13. > :12:19.Grant Shapps has supported her. She was ringed by Sir George young and
:12:20. > :12:24.Jeremy Hunt... This is pretty devastating. On past form David
:12:25. > :12:30.Cameron hates having to bounce people out of the cabinet. He will
:12:31. > :12:33.want to keep Maria Miller until the summer reshuffle. This is a question
:12:34. > :12:35.mark on whether she survive this is. This isn't damaging to the
:12:36. > :12:41.Conservative or the Labour Party, it is damaging to everyone. This is
:12:42. > :12:44.catastrophic damage to the entire political establishment. Every
:12:45. > :12:48.single speech that David Cameron and Ed Miliband have given since 20 9,
:12:49. > :12:52.talking about restoring trust, they can wipe them from their computers,
:12:53. > :12:57.because voters are going to look that there and say, this lot haven't
:12:58. > :13:02.learnt anything. They are giving perfunctory apologies and then you
:13:03. > :13:08.have MPs sitting in judgment on MPs and rather than paying back ?45 000,
:13:09. > :13:13.she pays back ?5,800 after MPs have been into it. Damage is huge. Just
:13:14. > :13:17.getting rid of one Cabinet Minister, you will need to do more than that.
:13:18. > :13:21.You will notice that Labour haven't made huge weather of this. No,
:13:22. > :13:26.goodness me, they have their own skeletons. Exactly. The person who
:13:27. > :13:31.has made hay out of this is Nigel Farage, who has not been backwards
:13:32. > :13:36.in coming forward. He doesn't seem to care about skeletons. The Prime
:13:37. > :13:40.Minister has be-Gunby backing her, but that's not popular even with
:13:41. > :13:45.Tory voters. How does he get out of this? This is the problem for him.
:13:46. > :13:51.Five years ago his reaction to the expenses scandal was seen by many
:13:52. > :13:56.Tory backbenchers as excessive. They felt hung out to dry by a man who is
:13:57. > :14:00.independently wealthy. To go from that to making a special exemption
:14:01. > :14:04.to Maria Miller because it is politically suitable is more
:14:05. > :14:06.incendiary and provocative. It is not just upsetting the voters and
:14:07. > :14:11.the Daily Telegraph but a good number of people behind him. I think
:14:12. > :14:17.they will get rid of her. I think the Government, to paraphrase
:14:18. > :14:23.Churchill, will zoo the decent thing after exhausting all options, of the
:14:24. > :14:29.European elections a reshuffle. The culture department has gone from a
:14:30. > :14:31.baulk water in haul to one of the most politically sensational jobs
:14:32. > :14:36.because of its proximity to the Leveson issue. She has to be
:14:37. > :14:51.replaced by someone Lily skillful and substantial. Mr Cameron is not
:14:52. > :14:58.short of smart women? Nikki Morgan, the education department, these are
:14:59. > :15:04.absolutely outstanding women and the problem that the generation elected
:15:05. > :15:11.in 2005, Maria Miller generation, there are some really good people
:15:12. > :15:15.elected in 2010. You are not responsible for hacking into the
:15:16. > :15:26.culture Department's Twitter account last night? I was out at the time!
:15:27. > :15:30.They all say that! One so, Maria Miller is like a modern-day Robin
:15:31. > :15:37.Hood... She robs the poor to help the rich. Which one of us has not
:15:38. > :15:46.embezzled the taxpayer? I reckon it is the lady. You have the perfect
:15:47. > :15:56.cover. We would not know how to would we? You cannot tweet from a
:15:57. > :16:00.mobile device, can you? Play it safe. No, do something dramatic
:16:01. > :16:03.Have lots of pledges. Have just a few pledges. Ah, there must be a
:16:04. > :16:06.Labour policy review reaching its conclusion because everyone has some
:16:07. > :16:14.free advice for the party about its message and the man delivering it.
:16:15. > :16:20.Here's Adam. He is well liked by the public don't quite buy him as a
:16:21. > :16:23.leader. The papers say he is in hock to the unions and the party has a
:16:24. > :16:28.lead in the polls but it is not solid. Bartenders Neil Kinnock. That
:16:29. > :16:36.is what they said Winnie who lost the 1982 election. The whole country
:16:37. > :16:43.deserves better and we will work to ensure that the day will come when
:16:44. > :16:48.with the Labour government, the country will get better. Someone who
:16:49. > :16:54.was there can see some spooky parallels. The important lesson from
:16:55. > :16:58.1992 is it cannot rest on your laurels and hope for the best, you
:16:59. > :17:03.cannot sit on a lead of seven points because the election narrows that
:17:04. > :17:06.and you cannot rely on the government not getting its act
:17:07. > :17:11.together because the Conservative Party was well funded and organised,
:17:12. > :17:16.the double whammy posters, the tax bombshell, but incredibly effective
:17:17. > :17:23.and the message was unified and they beat us on the campaign. The lesson
:17:24. > :17:26.for Labour today is this lead will evaporate quite possibly over the
:17:27. > :17:32.next few months and we might go into the election behind in the polls.
:17:33. > :17:35.But Ed Miliband is getting conflicting advice about how to
:17:36. > :17:41.avoid 1992 happening. Be bold, be cautious and then, the idea that
:17:42. > :17:47.Labour can squeak into office with just 35% of the vote, which worries
:17:48. > :17:53.some people. Each month, the Labour Party meets around the country and
:17:54. > :17:58.last week, everybody spoke about the dangers of this 35% strategy. They
:17:59. > :18:04.were increasingly unhappy and it is very important that those people
:18:05. > :18:09.around the leader naturally have a duty to protect him and they make
:18:10. > :18:15.sure he gets this message that while there is total support for him, they
:18:16. > :18:18.do want this key year in the run-up to the General Election to be
:18:19. > :18:24.putting out an alternative which we can defend on the doorstep. The
:18:25. > :18:29.doorstep where Neil Kinnock made his concession speech is crammed with
:18:30. > :18:37.Spanish back hackers. The old Labour offices are no a budget hostel.
:18:38. > :18:41.Labour headquarters is down the road and they are putting the finishing
:18:42. > :18:44.touches to a speech Ed Miliband will give this week about the cost of
:18:45. > :18:49.living and I am told he will drop hints about new policies in juicy
:18:50. > :18:53.areas like housing, low pay, growth and devolving power. As for the
:18:54. > :18:57.charge that they are not radical enough, his people say they want to
:18:58. > :19:02.be bold but they have to be credible as well. They say that Labour is
:19:03. > :19:06.more united than it has ever been but there has been some grumbling
:19:07. > :19:10.that the cost of living campaign is not the same as a vision for the
:19:11. > :19:15.country. And that Ed Miliband was not statesman-like enough at Prime
:19:16. > :19:18.Minister's Questions and one figure who sat at the same table in the
:19:19. > :19:24.Neil Kinnock years summed it up like this. Things are OK but it feels
:19:25. > :19:27.like we're playing for the draw Shadow Energy Secretary Caroline
:19:28. > :19:41.Flint joins me now for the Sunday Interview. This 35% victory
:19:42. > :19:48.strategy, it does not sound very ambitious? I am campaigning to win
:19:49. > :19:53.this election with a majority government and everybody else around
:19:54. > :19:58.the table is also. But we want to go to every corner of the country and
:19:59. > :20:03.win votes for Labour and win seats, that is what we are working towards.
:20:04. > :20:10.To avoid last time, the coalition bartering. But that 35% is a victory
:20:11. > :20:15.strategy so are you saying there is no 35% strategy and that no one at
:20:16. > :20:21.the heart of Labour is not arguing for this? We are working to win
:20:22. > :20:25.around the country and to win all of those battle ground seats and we
:20:26. > :20:29.must have a strategy that appeals to a cross-section of the public but
:20:30. > :20:40.within that, that broad group Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park and. You
:20:41. > :20:42.could do that with 35% of the vote? There is lots of polling and
:20:43. > :20:48.everyone looks at this about what we need to do to get seats and we want
:20:49. > :20:56.to have a comprehensive majority at the next election to win to govern
:20:57. > :21:00.this country. Last week, we have been reading reports of splits in
:21:01. > :21:06.the party over policy and on tactics, even strategy. A struggle
:21:07. > :21:13.for control of the General Election manifesto, we are told. What are you
:21:14. > :21:15.arguing over? I said on the committee and just listening to the
:21:16. > :21:20.film before, it is about being radical but also credible and we are
:21:21. > :21:27.talking about evolution and that is an important subject but we are also
:21:28. > :21:31.united and to be honest, in 201 people were writing us off saying we
:21:32. > :21:36.would turn on ourselves and that has not been the case. We are not
:21:37. > :21:40.arguing about the fundamentals, we are discussing the policies that are
:21:41. > :21:44.coming up with different colleagues and talking about how we can make
:21:45. > :21:47.sure they are presented to the public and that is part of a
:21:48. > :21:55.process. That is a discussion, not disagreement. The Financial Times,
:21:56. > :22:01.which is usually pretty fair, reports a battle between Ed
:22:02. > :22:05.Miliband's radical instincts and the more business fiscal conservatism of
:22:06. > :22:10.Ed Balls. What side are you on? I am for radical change, I am for energy
:22:11. > :22:15.and I believe strongly we must be formed the market and people might
:22:16. > :22:20.portray that as anti-business but this is about more competition and
:22:21. > :22:24.transparency and others coming into this market so our policy on this is
:22:25. > :22:32.radical, not excepting the status quo. It is also for business.
:22:33. > :22:41.Opinion polls show that few people regard Ed Miliband as by Minister
:22:42. > :22:46.material -- Prime Minister material. That has been true since he became
:22:47. > :22:52.leader. And in some cases, they have been getting worse. Why is that
:22:53. > :22:57.Opinion polls say certain things about the personalities of leaders,
:22:58. > :23:03.David Cameron is not great either. And they were not great when he was
:23:04. > :23:10.in opposition. At this stage, he was getting 49% as Prime Minister real
:23:11. > :23:17.material and Ed Miliband, 19. - Prime Minister material. When you
:23:18. > :23:21.look at certain questions that the public is asked about who you think
:23:22. > :23:25.you would trust about being fair in terms of policy towards Britain who
:23:26. > :23:30.understands the cost of living crisis, they very much identify with
:23:31. > :23:37.Ed Miliband. We are ahead in the polls. Ed Miliband has made that
:23:38. > :23:43.happen. We have one more councillors, we have been running in
:23:44. > :23:46.by-elections and we have held this government over the barrel over six
:23:47. > :23:51.months on energy prices. That is to do with his leadership. The more
:23:52. > :23:59.that voters save him, the less they seem convinced. In 2011, he had been
:24:00. > :24:08.leader for one year, and only 1 % regarded him as weird, by 2014, that
:24:09. > :24:13.was 41%. Look at that! Look at that weirdness! What people need is to
:24:14. > :24:17.know where the Labour Party stands on fundamental issues. And in those
:24:18. > :24:22.areas, particularly the cost of living and fairness and people being
:24:23. > :24:26.concerned that we are entering into a period where people will be worse
:24:27. > :24:31.for the first time ever at the end of the Parliament, these things are
:24:32. > :24:39.important and Ed Miliband is part of our success. Definitely. I think
:24:40. > :24:44.this is ridiculous, to be fair, he is not a politician that says, I am
:24:45. > :24:52.dying with the Arctic monkeys, I know who is the number one. He did
:24:53. > :24:57.not play that game. -- down. He is not either there to portray himself
:24:58. > :25:02.as someone who was with the children, I know everything about
:25:03. > :25:05.popular culture. His authenticity is the most important thing. People do
:25:06. > :25:12.not think he is authentic, unless they think we were at is authentic.
:25:13. > :25:18.Is it true that his staff applaud him when he comes back after giving
:25:19. > :25:26.even a mediocre speech? I have never heard that. I have never heard about
:25:27. > :25:29.him being applauded. And I am pleased to applaud him with he makes
:25:30. > :25:33.speeches, I have given him a standing ovation. You have to do
:25:34. > :25:40.that because the cameras are rolling! No, he made a good speech.
:25:41. > :25:44.Five minutes without notes. It took a long time to memorise I don't
:25:45. > :25:50.blame him! The cost of living. Focusing on that, it has paid
:25:51. > :25:54.dividends. But inflation is falling and perhaps collapsing, unemployment
:25:55. > :26:01.is falling faster than anybody thought, as we can see. Wages are
:26:02. > :26:06.rising, soon faster than prices Retail sales are booming, people
:26:07. > :26:11.have got money in their pockets Isn't the cost of living crisis
:26:12. > :26:17.narrative running out of steam? I do not think so and I should say that I
:26:18. > :26:22.welcome any sign of positive changes in the economy, if anybody gets a
:26:23. > :26:28.job in Doncaster, I am pleased by the end of this Parliament families
:26:29. > :26:35.will be over ?900 worse off because of tax and benefit changes and the
:26:36. > :26:38.working person is ?1600 worse off and it is the first government since
:26:39. > :26:42.the 1870s where people will be at the end of the Parliament. We
:26:43. > :26:45.believe the government made wrong choices that lead the rich off at
:26:46. > :26:54.the expense of those on middle and lower incomes. -- let the rich. The
:26:55. > :26:59.average family ?794 worse off from tax and benefit changes. That has
:27:00. > :27:04.been backed up. They are those figures. But he has skewed these
:27:05. > :27:09.figures by including the richest, where the fall in tax and the
:27:10. > :27:15.penalty they pay is highest. If you take away the richest, it is nowhere
:27:16. > :27:18.near that figure. Everybody agrees and even the government and
:27:19. > :27:25.knowledges that at the end of their tenure in Parliament, people will be
:27:26. > :27:29.worse off. 350,000 extra people who would desperately like full-time
:27:30. > :27:32.work who are working part-time and 1 million young people unemployed and
:27:33. > :27:38.the reason the cost of living has a residence is people feel that. I was
:27:39. > :27:43.in a supermarket and at Doncaster and someone summed this up, he said
:27:44. > :27:47.I work hard and at the end of the week, beyond paying bills, I have
:27:48. > :27:55.got nothing else. If you take away the top 10% who are losing over
:27:56. > :28:02.?600,000, the average loss comes down to around ?400, less than half
:28:03. > :28:08.of what you claim. That figure is totally misleading. These are the
:28:09. > :28:15.figures from the IFS. It still shows... Whatever way you shape
:28:16. > :28:18.this, people will still be worse off, families worse off because of
:28:19. > :28:24.these changes to tax and benefits and working people because wages
:28:25. > :28:29.have not kept up with prices. Your energy portfolio, you back the
:28:30. > :28:33.enquiry into the big six companies and you intend to go ahead with the
:28:34. > :28:39.price freeze and reconfigure the market even before it reports. If
:28:40. > :28:42.you win, this is a waste of time? Whilst we have had this process
:28:43. > :28:47.before the announcement, we always feel if it goes that way, there
:28:48. > :28:50.might be areas we have not thought of that the enquiry will also draw
:28:51. > :28:55.attention to that we might want to add on. You are right, our basic
:28:56. > :29:01.reforms for the new regulator, to separate generation supply, we will
:29:02. > :29:05.pursue that. What happens if this report concludes that your plans are
:29:06. > :29:10.not correct? You will still go ahead? I don't think so. Actually,
:29:11. > :29:14.if you look at the report that Ofgem produced, some of the issues Labour
:29:15. > :29:19.has been drawing attention to like vertical integration, they cover
:29:20. > :29:25.that. I was asking about the Competition Commission? The report
:29:26. > :29:32.last week is a result of working together and I think it is clearly
:29:33. > :29:36.accepted in this sector, look at SSE last week, they will separate the
:29:37. > :29:56.business. We are pushing at the open door. It has already pulled out of
:29:57. > :30:00.gas. So it follows if you freeze energy prices across the market it
:30:01. > :30:03.might be the right thing to do but there will be a cost in terms of
:30:04. > :30:07.jobs and investment, correct? Well, I met with SSE last weekand the
:30:08. > :30:12.chief executive and talked about these issues. The jobs changes are
:30:13. > :30:15.partly about them looking at how they could be more efficient as a
:30:16. > :30:19.company. On offshore wind that wasn't really to do with the price
:30:20. > :30:21.freeze. That was more to do with issues around confidence in that
:30:22. > :30:27.area and therefore willing to put the money into it, as well as
:30:28. > :30:33.technical issues as well But there'll be job losses. Is that a
:30:34. > :30:37.price worth paying? We believe the reason we are having a price freeze
:30:38. > :30:40.is these companies have been overcharging customers and haven't
:30:41. > :30:44.been investing in their organisations and making them more
:30:45. > :30:48.efficient. I do not believe a price freeze is linked to job losses.
:30:49. > :30:52.These companies do need to be more efficient. Goal for all of us is
:30:53. > :30:56.realising the fantastic opportunity for more jobs and growth from an
:30:57. > :31:00.energy sector that has certainty going forward. That's what Labour
:31:01. > :31:03.will deliver. Caroline Flint, thank you.
:31:04. > :31:05.It's 1130 and you're watching The Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to
:31:06. > :31:07.viewers in Scotland, who leave us now for Sunday Politics Scotland.
:31:08. > :31:28.Half Good afternoon. This afternoon, Coming up here
:31:29. > :31:33.Half Good afternoon. This afternoon, we are talking about plans to shake
:31:34. > :31:37.up English Heritage. There `re worries that many centres could
:31:38. > :31:42.close to the public. In the main strike was 30 years ago and there is
:31:43. > :31:51.a call for an enquiry into police tactics during the main str`ight.
:31:52. > :31:58.The three enterprise partnerships in the region have the submittdd bids
:31:59. > :32:03.for millions of pounds of extra money and new powers. They will have
:32:04. > :32:13.to compete with 36 other bids from across the United Kingdom for a
:32:14. > :32:19.slice of the ?2 billion pot. The Conservatives say it will ddliver
:32:20. > :32:27.hundreds of jobs and businesses but labour is sceptical. You ard heavily
:32:28. > :32:33.involved in the fund at its inception. The number of jobs
:32:34. > :32:43.promised have not come throtgh. If you look at the companies who have
:32:44. > :32:48.money in the North East, thd likes of Nissan, the engineering `nd
:32:49. > :32:55.manufacturing sector has done tremendously well. Manufacttring,
:32:56. > :33:02.exports, whose businesses. But surely that is not really for the
:33:03. > :33:05.fund was set up for. It is to help the growth and exports and H think
:33:06. > :33:10.it is working extremely well. That is just in the North East. Ht has
:33:11. > :33:14.happened in other parts of the country and is helping to rdbalance
:33:15. > :33:20.the economy to the manufacttring sector, which we want to sed. The
:33:21. > :33:33.North East has done well out of the fun compared to regions, such as the
:33:34. > :33:38.building of the new bridge. The pain reason for the fund is to ensure
:33:39. > :33:45.growth in employment and jobs in the region. I am not satisfied that this
:33:46. > :33:52.has been productive, partictlarly on my part of the North East. There has
:33:53. > :34:01.only been about ?1.4 million spent from the fund in my area. It has
:34:02. > :34:07.helped some business to get established, it has maybe treated
:34:08. > :34:12.remaining 260 jobs. It is wdlcome, but it is not what we need. We need
:34:13. > :34:19.more money. By creating extra money in the region, is it not better for
:34:20. > :34:25.the North East as a whole. @s I say, 260 jobs and everyone of thdm is
:34:26. > :34:33.welcome in North East. But hn the North East, 160 thousand potnds
:34:34. > :34:39.worth said to be treated in the region. The regional growth front
:34:40. > :34:46.has not delivered what it should be in the past. So we should not really
:34:47. > :34:48.be too grateful. There is a belief that the partnerships are wdak,
:34:49. > :34:56.there are two of them in thd North East. Surely it needs to get a shade
:34:57. > :35:01.of the money which represents the needs. The greatest problem has been
:35:02. > :35:08.ourselves, the lack of unitx we have seen in recent months betwedn the
:35:09. > :35:18.local authorities in the region it means we are Colin for one region,
:35:19. > :35:22.so that we get the money to deliver it to the various parts of ht. but
:35:23. > :35:32.instead all we have been getting squabbles. The combined authority
:35:33. > :35:39.has been delayed. There havd been too many rows and divisions. We were
:35:40. > :35:43.way behind the rest of the country because of disagreements in the
:35:44. > :35:48.region when they were being established. If you see what is
:35:49. > :35:52.happening in the North West and the likes of Leeds, other parts of the
:35:53. > :36:02.country, they were up and rtnning straightaway. It is easy for someone
:36:03. > :36:06.from the Liberal Democrats to see it as Labour who are squabbling, but we
:36:07. > :36:12.have seven authorities combhne. We have to understand each of them
:36:13. > :36:19.They are elected to ensure that they do the best for their community It
:36:20. > :36:22.is not squabbling. It is individual authorities insisting that, before
:36:23. > :36:27.the deal was done, everybodx should be looked on as equal in thd
:36:28. > :36:34.combined authority. And that is very important if it is to succedd. A
:36:35. > :36:42.group of Labour MPs are calling for a Hillsborough style enquirx into
:36:43. > :36:45.police tactics during the mhners' strike in 1984. Most miners arrested
:36:46. > :36:53.were charged with main order offences. But it left them `nd
:36:54. > :37:00.sometimes there are waves whth a criminal record. Peter Beard has
:37:01. > :37:07.joined those who see a enquhry is necessary. 30 years ago, thdse were
:37:08. > :37:15.battle grounds. The County Durham 's wife was standing in speaking
:37:16. > :37:20.alongside Arthur Scargill. We have a government pursuing violent policies
:37:21. > :37:24.against the people. A few wdeks later, she was arrested by police on
:37:25. > :37:31.a picket line in a local village. She was accused of threatenhng
:37:32. > :37:37.behaviour. One of them punched me and pushed me into the van. When we
:37:38. > :37:45.got to the police station, ht was the same attitude. I sat thdre in
:37:46. > :37:51.the cold and I could not believe the lies that were coming from, the
:37:52. > :37:55.police officers. She receivdd a conditional discharge for a claim
:37:56. > :38:01.she said she did not commit, but says there should be an enqtiry into
:38:02. > :38:06.why the innocent were found guilty. Every arm of the state was tsed
:38:07. > :38:10.against the main orders, thd families and their communithes. The
:38:11. > :38:21.abuse of state power was terrible. Web is not just me. People got
:38:22. > :38:28.landed with convictions, and it was like living in a police state.
:38:29. > :38:32.Within a year of Florence 's arrest, that it was closed. It is p`rkland
:38:33. > :38:37.and many of the main asked them what here have gone to the graves. But
:38:38. > :38:41.for the communities, there hs unfinished business about the
:38:42. > :38:46.straight and questions needhng answers. The local MP was convicted
:38:47. > :38:52.of two public order offences during the period. He thinks many liners
:38:53. > :38:56.received rough justice. While the police had to do was invent a story
:38:57. > :39:06.for the majesty and the maghstrate would believe them. If the
:39:07. > :39:09.magistrates are honest, thex will come out and admit that thex were
:39:10. > :39:20.instructed to come down hard on the main honours. Today, the police and
:39:21. > :39:24.claim Commissioner, via Beard, was then looking into police conduct.
:39:25. > :39:30.She can understand why people are seeking justice. I can understand
:39:31. > :39:34.why there are calls for an dnquiry into it. There are obviouslx people
:39:35. > :39:44.who feel a deep sense of injustice from the period. They want to get a
:39:45. > :39:49.proper answer as to why thex were treated that way. But one
:39:50. > :39:55.conservative who was an MP then says there should not be an enquhry. If
:39:56. > :40:08.you look back to the year, the most significant event was the arrival of
:40:09. > :40:14.Nissan in Sunderland. It wotld be wrong to launch an enquiry hnto
:40:15. > :40:18.this, as opposed to other shtuations such as Hillsborough and bloody
:40:19. > :40:25.Sunday, whether we are obviously good reasons for an enquiry. I think
:40:26. > :40:30.it is best to leave this ye`r. Could this be therapeutic for the North
:40:31. > :40:35.East? 30 years on, there ard still wins that will not heal unldss
:40:36. > :40:40.properly investigated. This was not Hillsborough. There was not what of
:40:41. > :40:47.life loss of life. Why spend millions of us. Let us move on. This
:40:48. > :40:53.was not like Hillsborough. Have the actions of the police and it really
:40:54. > :41:01.operated during the strike from the picket line, the really maghstrates
:41:02. > :41:06.operated during the main straight, the way the politicians operate it
:41:07. > :41:12.was an absolute disgrace. Qtestions need to be asked about thesd
:41:13. > :41:21.operations by the police on the picket lines. If that had h`ppened
:41:22. > :41:25.at the time, we seek striking similarities between that and
:41:26. > :41:33.Hillsborough. They were tot`lly out of control, the told lies in court,
:41:34. > :41:38.falsified documents. If these questions had been asked back then,
:41:39. > :41:46.Hillsborough, could it have been avoided? That is conjecture. But
:41:47. > :41:54.here we may not have broke the law. Surely you must see that. When you
:41:55. > :42:02.say that Mrs Thatcher and sdnior ministers showing that the lain
:42:03. > :42:11.honours were right. But there was a likes of concrete blocks getting
:42:12. > :42:16.blocked from the motorway. The government denied that they cannot
:42:17. > :42:21.with a plan to make the main is redundant. The misled of liberty.
:42:22. > :42:29.The told lies deliberately. There was a conspiracy against thd main
:42:30. > :42:33.honours. Why did they contelplate bringing the armed forces against
:42:34. > :42:39.ordinary, hard`working men `nd women. That is why there should be
:42:40. > :42:46.an enquiry. It was a conspiracy You are the MP in Stockton at the time.
:42:47. > :42:52.Is an enquiry worth having? I can see no point in dredging up what
:42:53. > :42:59.happened 30 years ago. This was a tragic event for many peopld. I
:43:00. > :43:04.sympathise with some of those in the North East, but Arthur Scargill B is
:43:05. > :43:10.a heavy responsibility for what he did. He split the main stond the
:43:11. > :43:13.middle, caused great decepthon in mining community. You could say that
:43:14. > :43:19.he led a conspiracy against the government. What is the point of
:43:20. > :43:26.pursuing that now. Like the one argument to you. If it is rhght that
:43:27. > :43:31.the court, the police were tsed as political tools by the government,
:43:32. > :43:36.that could happen again. Should we not get to the truth of whether that
:43:37. > :43:40.was the case? I do not belidve magistrate should be told what
:43:41. > :43:45.decisions to take in court by the government. I do not believd that
:43:46. > :43:49.happens. I do not believe it did happen. I do not think therd is any
:43:50. > :43:55.point going back over it all again. There is no value to the region in
:43:56. > :44:02.doing that. We need to be looking ahead and start looking
:44:03. > :44:05.nostalgically to the past. Of course we want to look forward. I want to
:44:06. > :44:10.look forward to the people who were fighting for their communithes at
:44:11. > :44:15.the team, the economic prosperity of the communities, they were pushed
:44:16. > :44:25.back by the state and we should be looking for an enquiry and getting
:44:26. > :44:31.an amnesty for people who h`d the criminal records given to them
:44:32. > :44:35.wrongly. Though, if you likd sightseeing, it will not be long
:44:36. > :44:42.before you come across a pl`ce run by English Heritage. In the region,
:44:43. > :44:45.there are some 400 houses and gardens, but current plans by
:44:46. > :45:02.English Heritage to letting them? Northumberland, even on a grey day,
:45:03. > :45:06.the enthusiasm of visitors hs not dimmed. The gardens are beattiful
:45:07. > :45:12.and the itself, it is amazing how much is still standing. He could see
:45:13. > :45:17.that someone was looking after this place really well. It is am`zing to
:45:18. > :45:23.think of all the things that have been built in the past. It has a
:45:24. > :45:29.lovely garden which changes throughout the year. His sttdy never
:45:30. > :45:36.stands still and there are big changes in plan for English
:45:37. > :45:41.Heritage. The currently an `rm of government will be split into. One
:45:42. > :45:46.half will take on responsibhlity for the National Heritage collection,
:45:47. > :45:52.the buildings in historic shtes This will mean government ftnding
:45:53. > :45:59.being phased out by 2023. Btt the charity will receive ?80 million as
:46:00. > :46:03.a one`off cash injection to ease the transition to charitable st`tus We
:46:04. > :46:06.can address the conservation defects that desperately need addressing as
:46:07. > :46:11.well as investing in the properties in the way we cannot do at the
:46:12. > :46:18.moment. We will be able to fund raise from away. Source. `` away.
:46:19. > :46:30.Source. This was run by English Herhtage,
:46:31. > :46:36.but there is no cafe, no visitor centre in no way to charge people
:46:37. > :46:42.coming to visit. So how would the new charity generate income from a
:46:43. > :46:47.place like this? A beautiful ruin any remote spot. We will look after
:46:48. > :46:56.all the properties in our c`re. The larger properties, which get the
:46:57. > :47:01.likes of 60,000 visitors a xear they will generate income from the
:47:02. > :47:05.likes of entry fees and catdring. Even with this cross subsidx,
:47:06. > :47:10.critics question whether English Heritage will become be abld to
:47:11. > :47:17.raise enough money when it becomes a charity. The likes of a fird or
:47:18. > :47:21.flood or C an outbreak of foot and mouth disease and you find that the
:47:22. > :47:29.visitors drop, all targets `re missed and there is a huge
:47:30. > :47:34.shortfall. The government argues the plans are built on strong
:47:35. > :47:41.foundations. There is no qudstion that the two new bodies being
:47:42. > :47:45.created, historic England, the regulator of their heritage, and
:47:46. > :47:49.English Heritage, which will run and manage the properties on behalf of
:47:50. > :47:55.the nation, will still have exactly the same powers as they havd now. As
:47:56. > :48:01.the peer into the future, stpporters of the plan say it is a way of
:48:02. > :48:04.ensuring iconic monuments and buildings are preserved for the
:48:05. > :48:13.future. Critics worry about what lies ahead. There is a dangdr that
:48:14. > :48:18.our heritage could be damagdd. Is this a gamble? I think it is a
:48:19. > :48:22.gamble, but change is always time to give rise to anxiety. But if you
:48:23. > :48:30.look at the track record in the region and the rest of the country
:48:31. > :48:35.of the likes of the National trust. We do not get government money.
:48:36. > :48:39.English Heritage has been gdtting 20 million, been given an 80 mhllion to
:48:40. > :48:43.launch this in a new way. If you look at what is happening in Bishop
:48:44. > :48:53.Auckland, with philanthropy money coming in. It is standard to a
:48:54. > :48:58.massive visitor attraction. It can be done. Of course it will give rise
:48:59. > :49:03.to anxiety and ratio that. H hope it works, and there is no reason it
:49:04. > :49:10.should not. Is this a sensible way of taking the government out of the
:49:11. > :49:15.equation? English Heritage hs a very important organisation to the
:49:16. > :49:22.region. Tourism is so important to the North East. If you look at the
:49:23. > :49:30.likes of Northumberland, English Heritage plays a huge role there. We
:49:31. > :49:33.have that because English Hdritage runs its all well and anythhng which
:49:34. > :49:45.police are in jeopardy, I would worry about. Carlisle is a regular
:49:46. > :49:48.visit for top politicians. The Prime Minister was he recently. Hdre is
:49:49. > :50:07.the rest of the week 's news. Readers of Northumberland councils
:50:08. > :50:11.make their counterparts frol across the border in Scotland, to look at
:50:12. > :50:22.improving transport links. Harriet Harman was in the region to visit
:50:23. > :50:28.the new centre. There has also been questions about the West Culberland
:50:29. > :50:33.Hospital. Six years after the rebuilding programme, the hospital
:50:34. > :50:38.has been plunged into crisis. We nearest hospital is not down the
:50:39. > :50:43.road, it is 42 may also be `n Carlisle, and it too is strtggling.
:50:44. > :50:47.Can he please do everything to assist me and make local colmunity
:50:48. > :51:01.to retain services in the Wdst Cumberland Hospital. Finallx,
:51:02. > :51:07.that is about it from us. Wd are back much later next week, `t half
:51:08. > :51:10.past two in the afternoon. Dobson. Tim Donovan is back in the
:51:11. > :51:24.chair next week. And with that, back to Andrew. Welcome back and time now
:51:25. > :51:31.to get more from our panel. So they can justify their meagre patents.
:51:32. > :51:36.This cost of living mantra will last all the way until the election.
:51:37. > :51:39.Cannot? Ed Miliband leaves he is onto something and for most of this
:51:40. > :51:45.Parliament, inflation has outstripped wages. That is going to
:51:46. > :51:51.go the other way and wages will rise, to which you say Ed Miliband
:51:52. > :51:55.has nothing to say. He says if you think people are going to feel
:51:56. > :51:58.better in the blink of an eye, you are a Conservative and do not
:51:59. > :52:02.understand the depth of this and he is taking the message from a
:52:03. > :52:08.presidential election in America in 2012 and make Romney was ahead on
:52:09. > :52:12.some of the economic indicators but Barack Obama was ahead on the key
:52:13. > :52:16.one, do you believe this candidate will make your family's life
:52:17. > :52:23.better? The message that Ed Miliband will try to say is the next election
:52:24. > :52:25.is about whose side are you on? And he believes Labour will be on the
:52:26. > :52:30.side of more voters than conservatives. It would be crazy for
:52:31. > :52:36.Labour not to talk about the cost of living because even if wages exceed
:52:37. > :52:39.inflation next year, it is not as if voters will walk around feeling like
:52:40. > :52:45.Imelda Marcos, they will still feel as if they were struggling and not
:52:46. > :52:52.just compared... Retail sales are slowing? That is not the sign of
:52:53. > :52:58.palpable disparity. Circumstances are better than three years ago but
:52:59. > :53:02.not better than five years ago. The Reagan question will still be
:53:03. > :53:08.employed, are you better off than at the last election? But things in
:53:09. > :53:13.America were actually getting worse when he asked that. I covered that
:53:14. > :53:17.election, that is why it resonated and they did get worse. The
:53:18. > :53:23.Ayatollah had quadrupled the price of oil. This is based on things
:53:24. > :53:29.getting relatively better, after a very long wait, so the cost of
:53:30. > :53:35.living critique will have to adapt? It will but it gets out of a very
:53:36. > :53:39.sticky spot and the IFS says wages will not outstrip inflation and by
:53:40. > :53:43.that time they can start talking about other things, plans for the
:53:44. > :53:47.railways and tuition fees and at the moment, everything is up for grabs.
:53:48. > :53:51.Labour know that every time they talk about something they want to
:53:52. > :53:55.do, the question is, how do you pay for it? They can talk about the
:53:56. > :53:59.economy and they don't have substantial things to say. Is it
:54:00. > :54:05.true that Mr Iain Duncan Smith was going to make a major announcement
:54:06. > :54:10.on benefit cheats? Or something to do with that this morning? But he
:54:11. > :54:14.decided against it because of the tobacco over Maria Miller? It would
:54:15. > :54:19.be very odd to go on to The Andrew Marr Show to have a chat and see
:54:20. > :54:22.what he is having for lunch. Patrick went from the Guardian said he was
:54:23. > :54:27.going to set out higher financial penalty phase for providing
:54:28. > :54:33.inaccurate information in claims. This is a bad day to do that, given
:54:34. > :54:39.that MP expenses are treated far more lenient the than any one from
:54:40. > :54:44.Joe public. That would be fascinating, if true. And he is
:54:45. > :54:49.making a very big speech on well for tomorrow and this tweet from Patrick
:54:50. > :54:53.went at the Guardian, he has proper sized on welfare matters and he
:54:54. > :54:58.tends to know what is going on. But it would be deeply unfortunate if
:54:59. > :55:01.that was the message today. How can he make a speech that has anything
:55:02. > :55:07.about cracking down on benefit claimants? Not today but I am not
:55:08. > :55:14.sure tomorrow. Do you get the impression that nobody in both main
:55:15. > :55:18.parties is very confident of winning in 2015? I column last week said the
:55:19. > :55:23.result, the most likely result from one year on is another hung
:55:24. > :55:28.parliament and which government results from that depends on the
:55:29. > :55:32.mathematical specifics of whether the Tories can do a deal as well as
:55:33. > :55:36.Labour, leaving everything in the hands of Nick Clegg or whether one
:55:37. > :55:40.party can do a straightforward deal but I do not detect any sense of
:55:41. > :55:46.exuberance or confidence in either camp. And the Tories are still
:55:47. > :55:49.shooting themselves over losing the boundary commission reforms because
:55:50. > :55:53.that was going to net them 20 seats and they lost that because they
:55:54. > :55:57.messed up the House of Lords reform and there are still furious with
:55:58. > :56:00.themselves. The former US President, George W Bush, has been a busy boy
:56:01. > :56:04.and here at the Sunday Politics we thought you'd like to see the
:56:05. > :56:08.results of his artistic endeavours. Time for the gallery.
:56:09. > :56:57.I was a prize to find myself saying, some of these are not bad! --
:56:58. > :57:04.surprised. Vladimir Putin? I like the one of Tony Blair but his early
:57:05. > :57:09.ones of dogs, to be in the presence of the master is to see his portrait
:57:10. > :57:14.of a Joanne Love. He is not of the Turner prize but I was surprised. He
:57:15. > :57:20.gets the mask of Vladimir Putin also Tony Blair. I was impressed
:57:21. > :57:24.that he did not allow personal or political grudges to influence his
:57:25. > :57:29.artwork. Jacques Chirac, he comes out of this incredibly well! And
:57:30. > :57:36.Angela Merkel comes out astonishingly well. Quite generous
:57:37. > :57:40.as well. Tony Blair is the best one and the reason is he had the closest
:57:41. > :57:44.relationship with them and he has talked about this portrait, saying
:57:45. > :57:49.he was quite fond of him and you can see that. These are awful, they
:57:50. > :57:56.would not get you an A-level but you must admire him to have the guts to
:57:57. > :58:02.do this, and display them publicly! An A-level? Just doing joined up
:58:03. > :58:07.numbers gets you that these days! What do you do when you retire? This
:58:08. > :58:11.is less embarrassing than some of the other things people have done.
:58:12. > :58:19.As good as Churchill? I don't know... No! Churchill was brilliant!
:58:20. > :58:23.And on that! That's all for today. Tune into BBC Two every day at
:58:24. > :58:26.lunchtime this week for the Daily Politics. And we'll be back at the
:58:27. > :58:29.later time of 2:30pm next Sunday after the London Marathon. Remember,
:58:30. > :58:36.if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.