06/01/2013 The Andrew Marr Show

Good morning and Happy New Year. Happy? We're supposed to be in

penitential mood - detoxing, laying off the booze and pies. You can't

open a paper or magazine without some revoltingly fit-looking person

smirking back with their diet plan or exercise regime, Which we'll all

follow for about a day. We make new year resolutions but for almost all

of us the real resolution is to be irresolute, yet again. Joining me

today for our review of the Sunday newspapers - the impressionist Rory

Bremner, worryingly tiggerish looking and about to try his hand

as a quiz show host, plus the Sun columnist Jane Moore and the

Guardian's Westminster watcher, Nick Watt. My main guest this

morning is the Prime Minister and if he is looking for some cheap

popularity, he might start by simply abolishing January, but I

don't suppose that's likely. However, that theme of weaning

ourselves off over-consumption, getting fit again, even de-toxing,

is roughly what the Coalition's theme has been from the start and

still is. But is it working? Are we really getting fitter as a country?

Or are we still our lardy old selves? 2013 promises little or no

economic recovery, high unemployment and political rhetoric,

some of it quite nasty, about who's to blame. David Cameron is known as

an optimist. He announces today he hopes to stay Prime Minister until

2020 and tomorrow he and Nick Clegg will be talking about the second

half of the Parliament, With Ukip snapping at his heels and the

economists groaning. He gives us an exclusive preview a little later on.

"Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of

imagination." No, not Cameron, of course, but Oscar Wilde. He gets

into today's show sideways, because my other guest is Rupert Everett,

who's acted in the works of Oscar Wilde and now he plays Wilde, the

man. He's proved himself a witty and acerbic writer too: his memoirs

are a treat. He's here to talk about that forthcoming West End

role, and we've been behind the scenes to see him in rehearsal.

to have spent my life holding language up to the light, how can I

say to her - I love my children so much, I cannot write. All that

coming up after the news with Naga Munchetty. Protesters have attacked

police during a third night of trouble in Belfast. Shots were

reportedly fired at officers and a 38-year-old man was arrested on

suspicion of attempted murder. The violence flared last month after

counsellingors decided to put limb it's on when to fly the flag above

City Hall. Nationalists want the flag to be removed completely but

unionists say it is part of their identity.

Cars were set alight and bricks, fireworks and golf balls thrown at

police lines. It was the third consecutive night of violence in

east Belfast. The trouble started earlier in the day, as loyalists

made their way home from a protest at City Hall, which has been taking

place every Saturday since councillors voted to limit the

number of days on which the Union Flag can be flown above the

building. Smoke canisters were thrown at the police and rioters

pushed off the road with water cannon. Rioters claim troubled

started when they were attacked by nationalists en route. Instead of

the police going to the aggressors, they went to the easy route and

towards the protesters. Instead of trying to push the republicans back,

they went into the unionist community and pushed them up the

road, and that's how this whole 2005, up to 1,200 people died

needlessly at Stafford Hospital. The victims of neglect or

substandard care. Case included patients dying after falling when

they were left unattended. Others were denied food and drink. Some

were so dehydrated, they drank the water from flower vases. According

to the Sunday Telegraph, the results of the public inquiry will

deliver a damning verdict on the entire NHS.

It says the Chairman, Robert Francis QC will describe a culture

of fear in which pressure is piled on staff to put the demands of

managers before the needs of patients. The newspaper report

claims it'll call for greater regulation of NHS management and a

everhaul of training for nurses and health assistants. The public

inquiry's report is expected any day. A spokesman for the Department

of Health said any comments on its findings were pure speculation.

David Cameron has insisted there will be no ue turn on changes toll

child benefit payments for higher turners which come into effect

tomorrow -- no U-turn on changes to child benefit.

Families where one parent earns more than �50,000 have until

midnight tonight to opt out of child benefit or face a higher

income tax bill. Bushfires on Tasmania have destroyed many homes.

Much of Australia is suffering a heatwave with Hobart in Tasmania

reaching a record 41. The wildfires are the most destructive to hit the

country since the Black Sunday disaster in 2008.

The Syrian President, Bashar Al- Assad, is expected to make a speech

later this morning, about the uprising against his rule in which

around 60,000 people have been killed. Syria's official news

agency announced the speech would take place but didn't give any

other details. President hasn't made any other public comment since

mid-November. That's all from me for now. I will be back with the

headlines just before 10.00am. Many thanks. Now to the front pages

as usual. Two papers carry basically the same story. The

Sunday Telegraph and the Sunday Times about that terrible Stafford

Hospital scandal. A huge report coming up, and major

changes to the NHS. That's the Sunday Telegraph. The Sunday Times

says some of the hospitals - hospitals who fail to own up to

problems might even be closed. It suggests there is going to be a new

duty of candour. That can't catch on more widely.

The Observer has a story about benefit curbs.

And the Mail on Sunday, a story about the minister incharged of the

increases on rail prices spending �80,000 a year on a limo to work.

Rory Bremner, Jane Moore and Nick Watt. Thank you for coming. In Nick,

Watt. Thank you for coming. In Nick, politics.

I thought I'd pick up on that story on Sunday Telegraph. Cameron - I

want it lead country until 2020. Report on what he said in a New

Year's interview. It is interesting because the general assumption that

David Cameron would want to fight David Cameron would want to fight

David Cameron would want to fight the next election, win it and go

and go around 2018. And in his interview he talks about what he

wants to do. He cites schools reforms and Iain Duncan Smith's

benefit reforms and you slightly wonder - does this feel like Tony

Blair, who of course was not going to do a Margaret Thatcher, who was

going to leave after two terms and stayed on and stayed on too long.

But what is interesting is, read the small print - are you going to

stay on for a full Parliament after 2020? Then he hesitates. Look, I

want to fight the next election, win the next election and serve.

Not necessarily bad news for platinum-haired blonde tufty in

City Hall. If I If I put it this way - if I said Bashar Al-Assad

wanted to serve to 2020. You look at the papers, it is Belfast, and

Argentine wanted reclaim the Falklands. Have I been asleep for

20 years? This is a story in the Sunday Times talking about the

relaunch. The better he says the coalition has done, the Morocco the

backbenches answer in pant mine form - oh, no, it isn't. The

elephant in the room is the economy which they said was the one purpose

of the coalition coming together. It is 12th night now and it is

beginning to look like a triple dip recession. The IMF said this week -

for every cut that Government makes in Government spending, it is not

an equiff loss of output much it is three times that. I think they have

got figures wrong there. And the idea that this is all working, as

Cameron said in his new year's message. And we got a Christmas

message from him saying - we are on the right track. That's far from

proven. Jane? As ever, the Government obviously is trying to

make all of these changes, etc and doing lots of stirring speeches.

But some things do remain the same and it's the implementation stupid

- as ever. They have a great idea. I'm all for this child benefit cut

for the upper echelons of earners. I think it's a good idea. I think

we have to start making cults. I'm absolutely fine with it, but the

umplmentation, as ever, was appalling. -- implementation. I got

a letter. I had to read it three times. Finally understood they were

asking me to call this number to opt-out, which I then Zbut given

this unique reference number, I ring this number. I took take

minutes to get through. It is a busy day. I get through. Then they

say - what is your child benefit number? I say - I don't know, it is

in this, my office's chaos but I have a unique reference number.

That's no good. It is on the letter but no good. I then have to call

them back and wait geb. On it goes. Why -- wait again.

They must have cross-pollination, saying - we think you must earn

more than �60,000, we are opting you out, call this number if you

disagree. You know why it is such a mess? The original tension when

George Osborne outlined this at the Tory conference in 2010, the

original intention was now it would never happen. The idea is by now,

the economy would be picking up and he would be able to say - you know

I was going to do this terribly awful thing, well we don't need to

because the economy is picking up, but it hasn't worked. The toxic

politics seem to be this oddity, where you have a family with one

person staying at home to look after the person, �50,000, they get

hit. If you have two people earning more of, that they don't get hit.

It is a great idea, I think, in principle, but they don't do that

joined-up thinking, and think all the way down to the bottom. It is

horrendously complicated, the benefit thing, beware the march of

IDS when you get into the details. A lot of benefits aren't for people

who work but in work and helping them.

-- who don't work. They are already trying to cut it before it has come,

in the Universial Credit. Apparently people who receive

Universial Credit, will impact on the tax allowance they have. It is

giving with one hand and taking away with another. It is incredibly

complicated. It was complicated before they started. Now it is

hitting nurse and policemen and public sector workers. It is

hitting them harder as anyone else, that 1% cut in real terms. It

wasn't anticipated. Ni, you have the sort of programme for the

Conservatives -- Nick. You have the programme emerging. Rory was saying

the general election is with us. And it is interesting, how do they

fight it, as the coalition? Of course not. The Conservatives need

to fight it as the Conservatives. The assumption is because the only

only Tory voices we hear, other than David Cameron, and George

Osborne and George Osborne are the folk on the 1922 Commtitee.

Actually there are new centre- ground Tory MPs in the 2020 group

who have come up with suggestions. - talking about abolishing

retirement age, extending school day and paying higher benefits to

people in the north. These are, they would argue, centre-ground

issues, the areas where you win the election and what David Cameron

would like, is if we talk to these people, we focus on these people,

rather than the old guard in the 1922... Your body language is so

much like Cameron. You were channelling him. I spend far too

much time in his country. And Blair - although he has been doing very

well. �16 million they are saying in the papers today. And Peter

Mandelson is learning for him middle aeft peace envoy. Have you

ever known the middle aeft more peaceful? That's working. -- Middle

East. Gay bishops If you wanted to an tag

nice both gay people and women, by this latest thing, I think they

thought they would make it slightly better and say - OK, we voted

against having women bishops but you can have gay men being bishops

so long as they remain celibate. That offends both women and gay men.

It seems to me - I don't know who it coming up with this stuff. But

it is driving people away, as if you needed to drive more people

away from the church. They have got themselves into the more

extraordinary position. They are saying, they are saying it gay men,

you can have your cake but you can't eat it. Although Jeremy Hunt

is saying you can't have cake at all, with sugar and stuff. But I

think as an exercise in - or a PR in appealing to people and being a

broad, open church, the way they have behaved in the last three or

four months, no wonder Rowan Williams, he is probably relieved

to be going. He said - AS ROWAN WILLIAMS: you have a lot of

explaining to do ! IT LOOKS RIDICULOUS ABOUT ABOUT

Holding the Anglican community The Independent on Sunday have done

an investigation. I did all of my Christmas shopping online, I was

not so smug when it failed to turn up... I had a marvellous moment

when, you notice it is not when you were out, it is something for you -

we have not bother to bring it for you in the first place - went to

the Post Office, got back, there was another note through the door

from someone trying to deliver a parcel. It says we are shopping

more online, and 225,000 parcels per day were failing to reach

people. There are piles of Amazon Box is piling up in post offices,

and I felt sorry for them because they were buried. There is one

company that if you don't pick up the parcel you have to pay a

fortune. My partner is Australian and she gets a lot of parcels, and

the bills go up and up. We need some regulation on that. Let's talk

about this jargon, implementing Dilnot. Yes, he thinks an elderly

person should not have to pay more than �35,000... To stop them

selling their houses. Exactly, now George Osborne wants to raise the

cap to �75,000. He said he simply can't afford the cap at �35,000.

The politics in this is that the coalition will announce it tomorrow

when they announced their mid-term revealed as that will show that

this is not just about ticking a list of achievements, it is about

saying we are rejuvenated, we have got new ideas, we will do tangible

things in the second half of this Parliament. We are running out of

times so what we need to crack on. There is a comedian story because

you are doing a quiz show. starts tomorrow, but it is a

daytime thing, like pass-the-parcel with questions. There has been a

bandwagon thing going since the Channel 4 big fat quiz. The they're

rude jokes about the royal family. Yes, but of course that was going

to happen, it was aimed at that sort of audience. The Daily Mail

has an article about it, but in the Sunday Telegraph it is addressing

this thing about whether there is too much laddish comedy around.

There is a picture of Miranda, almost the antithesis. I think

there is an argument there are too many panel shows because they are

easy to commission. The producer of Blackadder, Spitting Image, as an

experiment he put three Women on with Alan Davies on QI. He said it

was the rudest show they have ever done. I would not knock comedians.

We don't get it because we are not the age group they are aiming out.

I have some twentysomethings and they think they are fantastic.

for some quick ones. I love the story. I realised I am getting

older because my dentist has told me I am no longer allowed to eat

toffee, ice circle things in the Radio Times, and I have a yearning

to look around my childhood home. I am not alone - Anthony Hopkins has

dropped into his old house in Port Talbot, and this young couple

living there, he knocked on the door and asked to look around. They

had a charming couple of ours with him. It is obviously mid-life

crisis behaviour but I think it is lovely and now they are hoping he

might buy it. There is a wonderful museum just outside Cardiff cold

fire - and they have a row of houses, each one represents a

-- called Fagash. This story is about Hillary Clinton, and it looks

like she has worked far too hard a Secretary of State so maybe she

could come back. Much has been abroad, all round the world in the

last four years so Bill Clinton has had the happiest four years of his

life. Maybe she has. That was great, thank you. The weather has been a

great, but at least the downpour has briefly stopped for the arrival

of new year. The only briefly, perhaps. Let's get the weather

The rain may have gone on holiday for some people, but things can

change. Today we are looking at a lot of cloud around, a mild day and

some fog patches as well. Rain working from Northern Ireland into

western areas of Scotland this afternoon, and the air will have a

lot more moisture in it across southern Wales. For most of England

and Wales, extensive cloud around, limited sunny spells to the east of

the high ground and you could get some drizzle just about anywhere

today. The weather is very mild for the time of year. Overnight tonight,

further outbreaks of rain pushing into Scotland from Northern Ireland.

For England and Wales, another cloudy night with more drizzle to

the self- especially. Exceptionally mild, 8-10 degrees for the low

temperature tonight. Foreign England and Wales it is another

cloudy day tomorrow, with temperatures on the mild side once

again. A mild start to the new working week, but as a band of rain

clears the British Isles by Tuesday, we will see a drop in temperature,

and this trend may well continue into next weekend, which means for

some people of the weather might The very public disgrace of Oscar

Wilde was only the beginning of the great writer's private disasters.

His health was broken by two miserable years in Reading Gaol, he

was to spend the rest of his life in exile, separated from his

beloved children. David Hare's play The Judas Kiss focuses on Oscar's

downfall and final years. It stars that fine actor Rupert Everett who

describes Oscar Wilde as his personal Jesus. I'm going to be

talking to Rupert in a moment but first an exclusive look at

rehearsals of the play ahead of its West End opening. Here, Oscar is

devastated when his wife vetoes any contact with his sons until he cuts

all ties with Bosie - the lover who proved so fatal to Wilde. It is all

bribery. I sat with them, I played with them in a nursery for years,

before the theatre, after the theatre, hurrying home to see my

children. Even after I'd left dark streets to smear my mark against

meant in the rough dark, every night I came back and told my

children stories. Fairies, and monsters, and enchanted lands. The

nursery was my home, not my bedroom. Now she uses the children like they

are in again, moving pieces forward and back. The animal let it cubs

come here, I can't speak. I am going to faint looking at my

club, I can hear a phone call from the York there saying I am speaking

too fast. Everybody seems to be enthusing about this already, so a

second chance for the play really? Firstly it is a really marvellous

play, and sometimes they go well and sometimes they don't. It is a

great part for me in one sense. I adore Oscar Wilde and I understand

the part very well so it suits me very well. It is a great part.

critics seem to be very excited about it. You do have a slightly

Oscar Wilde... Your nose and parts of the eyes. He was a much heavier

man, but there was something about him in you in terms of your

features. Funnily enough I think I have changed physically doing this

play because when you try to get fat, you get fat. It is a great

play and I think Oscar Wilde is an immensely charming, fascinating,

funny character. David has written a character like a potboiler, a

melodrama, and it is very touching and sad. It feels quite

contemporary because it is about celebrity and scandal and being

caught in the eye of the storm. The first part of the play is about the

great mystery, Oscar Wilde could have got out of London in time to

avoid being arrested, but he couldn't be bothered to, almost?

is one of the great scenes. No one can quite figure out what happened

in the hotel that afternoon when it looked like he had a chance to

leave. He was being pulled in two directions, one by his best friend

and ex-lover who wanted him to flee England, and on the other side his

lover of the Douglas, who wants him to stay and face the music. In the

end, David Hare thinks it is because Bosie said if you stay we

can meet this evening and have dinner so he said, OK then, I will

stake! He doesn't know what to do, so he doesn't move. It is a

brilliantly imagined scene. The second act is about why he ever

went back to the sporting maniacal boyfriend in the first place. --

plotting. You have called him your Personal Jesus. What is it about

Oscar Wilde - clearly the wit, but also the self sacrifice? As a gay

person, he is in one sense the beginning of the gay movement in

public. Before Wilde, a woman would never have spoken about

homosexuality. Words to describe it were like path thick, inverted. He

gave homosexuality its profile rarely, and from that moment on the

gay movement started so I find him a kind of Jesus figure in a way. He

fills me with the same compassion that Jesus fools other people with.

You have been a strong Catholic at times, we have gone to Lords in the

past. I am not a Catholic. You were raised as one. I spent years trying

to get away from it, but my father was Catholic so I did take him to

Lords, yes. -- Lourdes. Neurone memoirs are full of fine writing,

but pretty unflinching about some of your co-stars at times. Madonna

was not very flattered. No, but I thought that was a very loving

chapter so obviously I was out of sync. It was said by some of the

critics the she wishes she would go full-time into writing. Any chance

of that, professionally? I really loved were writing has taken my

life, and I definitely want to go on doing it. I want to try and

write screenplays for myself to be in. There is an Oscar Wilde one in

fact, isn't there? I am trying to get my Oscar Wilde one off the

ground. I love writing, I love history and reading stories of

people who were there at the time from Samuel Pepys on words. From

researching Oscar Wilde, the people who write about him, Frank Harris,

it is riveting reading people's versions of the time. I would like

to write another memoir and a novel hopefully. You live in an

extraordinary world, some of the time, of celebrity and stardom. For

a while you did. If you had been in a couple of films that had failed,

would you have seen it so clearly, do you think? He in my career much

more has happened to me through failure than success. Failure it is

the manure that one grows out of, in a way. Every time my career has

failed I have been forced to do something new and experience

something new. I moved to Europe after my career in England failed,

You talk about your love of history. One great success was skaf parade

skaes a end. I thought it was a great television drama -- Parade's

End. He had the most splendid beard.

Let's look at you. You treat these south country swines with the

contempt they deserve. I thought you would be buried in their muck

for so long. Well, our father wanted - his idea was if you were a

pimp you were to go to hell on clean money, whatever it took. No

good making a will, I was to see to it. I won't be a penny for me. I

won't take his money. You usually forgive a fellow who shoots himself.

I have been lucky. Tom Stoppard wrote it. It is beautifully-written.

About the English not saying so much. It is interesting how much

lips are buttoned and zipped. a great story of the build-up of

the end of England, really. And 100 years, you know, ago. I hope you

get the money for your own film. Hard at the moment with these huge

blockbusters, getting all the - hogging the limelight? Small films

are the hardest things now really to make. Either very small is good.

If you can make a film for �60,000 you are in with a good chance. It

is either that or �300 million. There doesn't seem to be an in

between. I hope there is an in between for you, Rupert Everett.

Thank you for joining us. Back to business, in a big way, in politics

this week. The Coalition's midterm review comes out tomorrow, child

benefit changes come into force. The Commons' votes on capping

benefit increases on Tuesday and in any spare moments the Prime

Minister is presumably busy drafting a speech on Europe which

is promised latest this month and could redefine our relation with

the EU for a generation. David Cameron is with me now. Good

morning. Happy new year. And to you. I say "happy", but we are going to

have another year probably of little or no growth. Well, it is a

tough economic environment we are. In the last growth figures were

encouraging. We were growing at 1% in the third quarter of last year.

But we have a tough year ahead. I think the good aspect of what is

happening is that there are more people in work. We have seen a

really good picture on jobs. You know, million new private sector

jobs over the last two years. That means actually - even taking into

account the decline in public sector employment, which would have

happened whoever was in Government because cuts had to be made. There

are more people in work, more women in work and unemployment has been

falling. Unemployment still stubbornly high and youth

unemployment particularly, around 1 million, still worrying? Yes, much

too high but recent figures had youth unemployment coming down. The

number of young people in work went up over the last year. We've got

some serious programmes to address both long-term unemployment and

youth unemployment. We need it make sure they are working as well as

they possibly can. But what needs to happen, if we stand back andlike

at the big picture of the British economy, we need a rebalancing. We

need a rebalancing, a bigger, private sector. Growth spread more

evenly around the country. Not reliant on finance, but we need

manufacturing, export pro,duction, hi-tech industries. And there are

good signs that is taking place -- production.

Last year more new companies set up than at any time in recent history.

With that picture there are good signs but it is hard work and hard

going. Look around Europe, you can see we are not alone in faces these

challenges. Thinking of the hard work. Top of your list of worries,

perhaps losing the AAA status? That would be a big blow to the

Coalition. Top of the worries is making sure you have credibility to

the deficit reduction programme. We inherited a situation. If you lose

the AAA status that suggests you have lost credibility. I think most

important is are you able it maintain and pay your debts at a

low rate of interest. That's key. Interest rates in Britain are at a

key low. Do I hear you suggesting the triple A rating isn't as

important as you used to say it was? Ratings you have are hugely

important. I wouldn't deny that but the real test is what are the

interest rates the rest of the world is demanding in order to own

your debt. Our interest rates are extremely low. The lowest they have

been really for centuries. The key thing this year is to try to make

sure those interest rates are passed on properly to the

businesses and to the home-owners. I want to Mick sure you know that

young couples who are working are able it get the first flat or house.

-- make sure. To get go and we need to build more houses. We are

squarely on the side of people who work hard, who want to do the right

thing. We want it back aspiration in Britain because that's how we

will win in the global race. -- we want to back. We may see inflation

going up? We will have to see what happens. Recently it has come down.

The rise in inflation post-2010 is one of the things that made the

economy more difficult. We are trying to freeze the council tax.

You have brought in a new Bank of England governor to get inflation

into the economy. First of all, Mervyn King, the existing governor

has done a good job.'S great public servant. In Mark Carney we have the

world's leading candidate as a Central Bank governor. I'm looking

forward to working with him. rock bottom rates can't carry on,

can they? It'll depend on the Bank of England. These rates are set

independently. But, you know, right now Britain needs low interest

rates. We need businesses to get out and invest and people to get on

the housing ladder. We want it maintain a situation where low

interest rates are possible. -- we want to maintain. You can only keep

rates low if you have a credible strategy for getting on top of

deficit and debt and this is' what the Government's fiscal policy,

where we have taken difficult decisions, that has enabled the key

interest rates to continue. Let's come to the removal of child

benefit for people over �50,000 a year, which comes in tonight. We

heard Jane Moore earlier saying what an incredibly complicated and

mind-dazing series of forms people have to go through. But beyond that,

a lot of your own supporters, a lot of Conservative MPs, don't really

understand the fairness of having two families where you have one

couple, a spouse staying at home to look after the children, hold

together a traditional family because the other person is getting

�50,000. They lose their child benefit. A lot of money for that

family. And another family, where they are both working, they may be

earning �85,000 together, they don't. That just seems unfair.

Let's start with the overall point about fairness. The truth is, you

cannot deal with the deficit. with that. I will. But you cannot

deal with the deficit by taking more in tax from the richest,

although we are. Nor can you deal with the deficit by combating

welfare, fraud evasion and excessive welfare at the bottom.

You need it make sure everyone is making their contribution. So

taking away child benefit -- you need to make sure. Taking away

child benefit for those earning over �60,000, only the top 15% of

the country. I'm not saying they are rich but it is right they

should make a contribution. Traditional families where they are

far from rich. I am enot saying they are, but this will raise �2

billion. If we don't raise that �2 billion from that group of people,

the better-off 215% in the country. We need to find somewhere is.

there anything that can be done about that apparent misjudgment.

The only way to address that would be to have a means-testing system

to means test every family in the country. I don't want to introduce

that which is why we opted for the relatively straightforward, if you

or your partner earns over �60,000, you shouldn't be getting child

benefit. Is anything that can be done? The only way you can do that

is by taking away more child benefit from more people. I don't

want to do that. Do you accept, if it is justice, it is rough justice.

We have addressed the cliff edge. The original proposal is that there

is a cut-off point. But there is now a point between �50,000 and

�60,000, if you earn between those areas, you go into the self-

assessment system and get assessed. 85% of families that get child

benefit will receive it in the same way they do now. Fair? It is

interesting, you know... A lot of people are still going to look at

those two different families, one doing what many Conservatives would

regard as the right thing, one member of the family staying at

home to look after the children while the other goes out to work,

and they are being penalised while another family where they are both

going out to work and earning much more money aren't and a will the

see that as fund enmentally unfair. I think people see it as fair if

there is someone in the household earning �60,000 you don't get child

benefit. I suppose the most vivid piece of economic rhetoric from the

coalition over the last few months has been the business of somebody

going out to work, a striver, looking around and seeing the

curtains down, in the next-door house with a skiever. And that is

how you have very much sold the welfare benefit cap that the

Commons will vote on on truce. -- skiver. I don't accept that. Your

Chancellor and most others have talked about it that way. We have

made three separate decisions that you canling, if you like. That is

people in the -- that you can link. That is people on out of work

benefits, there will be a 1% increase. No more for that and for

that for tax credits a 1% increase. Those are all right decisions. We

need to control public sector pay to keep that under control with a

1% cap. We need to limit the growth of welfare payments overall and

that must include the welfare system. For those out of work, it

is right that their incomes aren't going up faster than people in work.

Do you accept that this 1% cap, 60% of the people that it affects are

hard-working people who's blinds are up in the morning, whose

curtains are open and are going out to do jobs neither you or I would

relish. The changes will affect 100% of people on tax credits. I

don't like taking money away from anybody but we inherited a massive

Budget deficit, one of the biggest in the world. We have to get on top

of that in order to maintain the low interest rates our economy

needs. We have paid down one- quarter of the deficit in the last

two-and-a-half years. We are on the right track, the right road. We

have made progress down that road but there is a lot further to go.

We need to control welfare spend bug it is true to say that it is

also... -- spending but it is true to say. I want it make it clear. In

your view, the vast majority of people who will be hit are not

scroungers or work shy. People affected by the 1% public sentor

pay cap, those are people who work hard, who do vital jobs. But let me

put it this way: the Labour Party agree with the 1% increase for

public sector pay but they don't agree with the 1% cap on welfare.

So they are effectively saying... don't want to get into Labour

policies. It is an odd argument, to say people out of work, their

incomes, should be going up faster than people in work. We don't think

that's right which is why we put in place this 1% cap. Everyone will

have to think about how they voted for, that on Tuesday. Let me turn

to another big promise this month, your speech on Europe.

Would it be such a great disaster for us to leave the EU and simply

have a trading relationship with it? Boris Johnson suggested it

wouldn't be a terrible thing. don't think it would be right for

Britain. My policy and approach is to determine, absolutely and simply

by the national interest. -- is determined. What is right for

Britain and people in work, British business and the future of our

country. If we left the European Union altogether... There are all

sorts of regulations and rules that you dislike and we would be free to

grow. The key point is that 50% of our trade is with the European

Union. At the moment, because we are in this single market and we

have a seat at the table of the single market, we help write the

rules. If we were outside the EU altogether, we would still be

trading with these countries, of course we would, but we would have

no say over the rules into the market into which we sell. Trading

itself would go on. Of course it would. There is a lot of

scaremongering on all sides of this debate. Of course the trading would

go on. Norway trades actively with all of the European Union including

Britain but Norway has to obey all the rules of the single market and

pays a fee for trading into the single market but has in say over

the rules. So instead, as what Mr Von Rompey has said, you want it

cherry bit. We don't want this bit or that and we want to repatriot

certain powers. And the problem you have, you need every other member

of the EU to agreement it is not going to happen. It is difficult

and it is possible. Two reasons Y. First of all, already in Europe

there are some things that different countries are involved in,

where others are not. We are not involved in the single currency,

the euro. We are not going to join the euro. As long as I'm Prime

Minister we'll have the pound not the euro. We are not involved in

the shengin no borders agreement. We want to maintain our borders, we

think it is good for immigration control. A second, vital point wh,

is happening in Europe is massive change being driven by the

existence of the euro. The countries of the euro have to

change to make their currency work. They need to integrate more and

make changes to their systems. of your critics, including Boris

Johnson say it is immoral to encourage them to do something

which politically is going to be disastrous. I am not encouraging

them but they recognised they have to do this. There isn't a single

currency in the world that doesn't have bank union and forms of fiscal

union. They need to change. What that means is they are changing the

nature of the organisation to which we belong. We are perfectly

entitled and enabled, because they need changes to ask for changes

If you don't get some of the repatriation of powers that you

want, you will stop them from changing in the way that they need

to change? I think it is a perfectly acceptable argument to

say that as you need to make your changes, there are changes Britain

would like to make as well, and we would like to be part of the single

market... Hang on, people told me it was never possible to make

changes in this relationship and I have already managed to get us out

of the bail-out power, where we were spending British taxpayers'

money bailing out other countries. Let's try to get a sense of what

you would like that new relationship to be. They are not

going to give a whole speech. They are not going to ask that, but for

instance we would be better off out of the working time directive.

Already we have limited its impact. Would you like to be outside of it?

Been my view it should never have been introduced in the first place

because it is affecting things like the way we run hospitals rather

than simply about business and trade and the single market. In

order to put you off, because I can see we are going to cherry-pick

through now... Yes, we are! Let me try to, because you mentioned

yourself immigration and shengin, is there any way people inside the

EU could be limited? We have a process under way called the

balance of competences review, where the public can be involved in

this as much as they like, going through areas asking the balance of

arguments. What is right at the European level? What is right at

the national level? Are you trying to send me to sleep? Be it means

that if you want to make an argument that there are things we

do better at the national level... I am asking if you think there is

any chance of limiting people's movement inside the EU. Clearly one

of the key reasons for being a member of the European Union is the

movement of services, goods and people. There are restrictions

already on the movement of people if you have an emergency for

instance. Should we look good arguments about whether it should

be harder for people to come to Britain and claim benefits? Yes,

frankly, we should. The common fisheries policy, my last one.

have got to make a speech, we have this balance of competences review,

but all of these areas should be carefully looked at. If you look at

the her rear of fish, already massive changes taking place. Let's

look at the arguments on either side. This is clearly going to be a

complicated negotiation. Once you have got things you want to

repatriate, you then go into what will be a very complicated and long

negotiation. Is your position that there should be no referendum for

the British people until the process is complete? Basically

there is going to be a large negotiation in Europe. Their

results ready. When I became Prime Minister, people said to me don't

worry, you will not have any treaty changes in Europe. I think we have

already had three, one of those we have vetoed, and two others, one of

which we have accepted. A lot of people want a straight forward been

allowed to vote on Europe. If it is going to have to wait for this kind

of negotiation on competences, we could be talking about the no vote

for five years yet, possibly 10. That will not happen. I will set

this out clearly in the middle of January, but people should be in no

doubt that the Conservatives will be offering at the next election a

real choice and a way of giving consent. There will actually be a

referendum option in front of the British people in 2015? I want to

leave something for my speech in the middle of January, but it will

be clearly set out then. You will be standing shoulder to shoulder

with Nick Clegg tomorrow, talking about the second half of this

government, and you have a lot of things you will want to talk about

them. However, before too long, you will have to be saying don't vote

for this man in his party, vote for me because you want a Conservative

government returned with a majority, and you have said you still want to

be prime minister in 2020 - is that right? I want to win a Conservative

majority and that is exactly what I have said. And stay as prime

minister in 2020? Up yes, as is also set out in the interview in

the Sunday Telegraph. Very interesting proposals from a group

of Conservative MPs in the centre of the party, and they include for

instance having lower benefits for the North of England, and the

Midlands, where the cost of living is lower. Is that the kind of thing

you relish? That is not government policy. It is an idea, I am

interested in your response. Before we even get the 2015 election, we

have the second half of this Parliament and tomorrow you will

see a coalition government with a full tank of gas. We have travelled

a long way down the road, but there is more to do, and we have a packed

agenda which is concerned with how we build roads in Britain, how the

economy keeps moving, how we pay for care for the elderly, big

things that will equip the country for the next decade. And you will

be funding a new scheme for long- term care for the elderly, albeit

not at the level some people hope? The point that was made earlier on

the sofa by Nick Watt, this is a mass of people with more and more

people suffering from dementia were they going to long-term care and

they are catastrophic costs that lead them to have to sell their

homes to pay for the care. It is right to put the cat on this so

people can insure against catastrophic loss. He can confirm

that you will be implementing and funding this. We will take action

to deal with those costs so there is a packed agenda, and we will

continue with getting the deficit down, controlling immigration,

reforming welfare. Let me turn to a couple of issues abroad. Argentina,

rattling aggressively about the Falklands. Are you clear the

Falklands mistake will not be happening again? I get regular

reports on this issue because I want to know that our defences are

strong, our resolve is strong. would fight to keep this island?

For course, and this is keen that we have fast jets stationed there

and troops. He even with our problems of a shrunken maybe we

have the resources? It gives me the opportunity to make the point that

at �35 billion a year, we still have one of the top five defence

budget in the world and we are equipping our armed services in an

effective way. The no lot of the papers today they are talking about

Abu Qatada and our inability to deport him. Will you be finding a

way of getting him out, changing the more? The did get Abu Hamza

deported to the US, and I am determined Abu Qatada and other

cases like that, we will be able to get then deported. There have been

a few cases of being able to deport people, and they can carry out

their appeal, but afterwards it will happen and we will be looking

closely at this to see what more we can do. President Assad will be

making a speech later today, it has been suggested by Mike Jackson we

could be involved in some military action around the borders in a

humanitarian sense in Syria. What is your message to President Bashar

al-Assad? He should go. He has a phenomenal amount of blood on his

hands. I met some of the victims when I went to the refugee camp on

the Jordanian border and the stories they told me were shocking,

about how they had been bombed and shot and sometimes even stabbed out

of their villages and homes. On the humanitarian side, Britain is the

second largest donor in terms of humanitarian help, but we are

working to do more to work with the opposition inside and outside Syria

to speed up the transition and get rid of this illegitimate regime and

give Syria a fresh chance. Thank you. Now the news headlines. The

prime minister has defended changes to child benefit. From tomorrow,

has told with someone earning more than �50,000 a year will lose some

of their benefits and it will be withdrawn altogether from people

earning more than �60,000. David Cameron said they were the top 15%

of earners and said it was necessary to bring down the deficit.

Protesters have attacked police during a third night of trouble in

Belfast. Shots were fired at officers and at 38 year-old man was

arrested on suspicion of attempted murder. The violence flared last

month after councillors decided to put limits on when they would fly

the Union flag above City Hall. Nationalists want the flag to be

removed completely, but unionists say it is part of their identity.

Back to Andrew in a moment, but first let's look at what is coming

up after the show. In the week the Pope called for a

new economic model to counter inequality and selfishness - is he

right to condemn capitalism? More virgin births - as geneticists come

closer to creating artificial sperm, can children be born without

fathers? The Prime Minister is still with me and we are joined by

Rupert Everett and Rory Bremner. You are still hated by a lot of

Conservatives about gay marriage and so on. I happen to believe it

is right. Not just as David Cameron, I believe as a Conservative

marriage is a great institution and it should be available for gay

people as well. He had said in the past you don't want to see gay

people mimicking straight couples. I am not the right person to talk

to about this because I am like the Prime Minister, I can't stand

marriage. Everything about marriage and loth. It doesn't change what

happens in church. This is where we haven't explained it. This is what

the state sanctions, as it were. lot of people still think figures

will be forced into this. The if you are going to go after gay

people, these are two people saying they want to make a lifelong

commitment and that is one of the firm long-standing commitments -

why go after that? D you regret using fruit cake and closet racists

terms for UKIP? In prime minister you have to get used to the fact

that in the middle of a parliament you will get people going off in

all sorts of directions. They are not fruitcakes, are they? They are

some pretty odd people, we won't go into that. If that is all we have