:00:05. > :00:09.This week on the Politics Show: Vince Cable offers sympathy to the
:00:09. > :00:12.St Paul's protesters and threatens tough action on executive pay.
:00:12. > :00:16.But what about the economy? The Business Secretary tells us his
:00:16. > :00:19.plan for growth, and we get the Shadow Chancellor's verdict.
:00:19. > :00:23.And are Government plans to take child benefit from higher rate
:00:23. > :00:33.taxpayers fair? We hear from the Tory backbench women who want the
:00:33. > :00:34.
:00:34. > :00:39.policy changed. In London this week, the Government
:00:39. > :00:44.is allowing X service personnel to jump the queue for housing.
:00:44. > :00:54.And the promise to get rid of the rough sleeping in 2012. What might
:00:54. > :00:55.
:00:55. > :01:03.And joining me today, Polly Toynbee from The Guardian, and Paul Waugh
:01:03. > :01:05.from the Politics Home website. Welcome to you both. But first the
:01:05. > :01:08.news, with Tim Willcox. Good afternoon. Italy's president
:01:08. > :01:11.has begun consultations on forming a new government following the
:01:11. > :01:15.resignation of Silvio Berlusconi. He is likely to be succeeded by the
:01:15. > :01:17.economist, Mario Monti. The new government's main task will be to
:01:17. > :01:22.implement a strict austerity plan aimed at tackling Italy's massive
:01:22. > :01:25.debt crisis. Christian Fraser reports.
:01:25. > :01:29.A warning that this report contains flash photography.
:01:29. > :01:34.A bright new day in the politics and a prime minister-in-waiting was
:01:34. > :01:38.on his way to church. Mario Monti maintains a low profile but his
:01:38. > :01:42.mood reflects the new-found optimism that many of his
:01:42. > :01:47.countrymen share. Meanwhile, a procession of party leaders have
:01:47. > :01:50.been arriving at the Presidential Palace. 86-year-old Giorgio
:01:50. > :01:54.Napolitano is working his way through a gruelling schedule of
:01:54. > :02:03.meetings, trying to secure a working majority for the new
:02:03. > :02:10.interim government. TRANSLATION: Today is a day of
:02:10. > :02:15.national liberation. The country was in the hands of an egotistical
:02:15. > :02:19.man, said Antonio. He used institutions for his own good. And
:02:19. > :02:23.how many shared that view? Last night Silvio Berlusconi arrived at
:02:23. > :02:28.the Palace to the whistles of the mob. He will be the last leader
:02:28. > :02:32.consulted today. Berlusconi says they will back Mario Monti but he
:02:32. > :02:37.has warned that he can and will pull the plug when every he chooses.
:02:37. > :02:41.In other words, the ex-Prime Minister may have left the stage,
:02:41. > :02:44.but he still wields considerable power from the wings.
:02:44. > :02:47.Syria has called for an emergency Arab summit to discuss the unrest
:02:47. > :02:49.in the country. Today has seen large pro-government demonstrations
:02:49. > :02:54.in Damascus following the Arab League's decision to suspend
:02:54. > :02:57.Syria's membership over its crackdown on protestors.
:02:57. > :03:00.The Queen has led ceremonies to mark Remembrance Sunday, laying a
:03:00. > :03:03.wreath at the Cenotaph in central London. A two-minute silence was
:03:03. > :03:06.observed across the UK and at British military bases around the
:03:06. > :03:16.world, to remember those who have lost their lives in armed conflict.
:03:16. > :03:17.
:03:17. > :03:27.Ben Ando reports. Gathered to remember the glorious
:03:27. > :03:29.
:03:29. > :03:39.dead. And to reflect on their ultimate sacrifice. At 11am, the
:03:39. > :04:00.
:04:00. > :04:03.hour the guns fell silent 93 years In uniform... In thought... In the
:04:03. > :04:13.capital and in cities, towns and villages around the United Kingdom
:04:13. > :04:26.
:04:26. > :04:35.And after two minutes precisely, the Last Post, an end to the
:04:35. > :04:40.silence. And a queue for the laying of the reefs as the nation
:04:40. > :04:46.remembers so many have died so that many more might live. -- of the
:04:46. > :04:53.reeds. Your next news is that 6pm.
:04:53. > :04:55.The people have spoken. Well, a handful of them have. And they've
:04:55. > :04:57.effectively seen off two democratically elected prime-
:04:57. > :05:01.ministers in a week. Given the straight choice between honouring
:05:01. > :05:05.the will of the people and doing what is needed to keep the eurozone
:05:05. > :05:09.intact, it's clear where the key decision makers in Brussels stand.
:05:09. > :05:16.Paul, it has been extraordinary, hasn't it? First Papandreou and now
:05:16. > :05:23.Berlusconi gone? The people who have really dictated this timetable
:05:23. > :05:29.are the bond traders. Because elections are messy and they take
:05:29. > :05:33.time. The markets don't have time. And the Arab Spring has marked the
:05:33. > :05:40.beginning of the toppling of all these dodgy regimes. I have a bit
:05:40. > :05:45.of a problem - with the people decide. We will see. He Polly, what
:05:45. > :05:50.do you think? I think we have to look with great suspicion at these
:05:50. > :05:54.technocratic government. Everybody is political and people above
:05:54. > :06:02.politics are always on the side of the banks and the markets. It is
:06:02. > :06:06.the default position. There is no technocratic left? Not really. If
:06:07. > :06:11.people asked and a say, I am not very political, it nearly always
:06:11. > :06:14.turns out there on the right. People who declare themselves as
:06:14. > :06:20.political tend to be on the left. So we should be well aware that
:06:20. > :06:25.this is the markets in place, whether it is Mario Monti or the
:06:25. > :06:29.new government in Greece, this is a right wing movement. They will be
:06:29. > :06:33.for extreme austerity and for screwing down the poorest, and it
:06:33. > :06:41.will be very hard on those countries. Thank you to both before
:06:41. > :06:44.the moment. -- to both of you. Now, as we've been hearing, things
:06:44. > :06:47.are little rocky on the economic front, and not just in Greece and
:06:47. > :06:50.Italy but here in Britain, too. With economic growth increasingly
:06:50. > :06:53.microscopic, it falls to Business Secretary Vince Cable to come up
:06:53. > :06:56.with a plan to get things moving again. We'll hear from him in a
:06:56. > :06:59.moment, but first, here's a reminder of the stormy weather
:06:59. > :07:06.ahead. Vince Cable built his reputation on
:07:06. > :07:12.a gift for forecasting the economic weather. There was a gloomy outlook.
:07:12. > :07:17.We now face a crisis which is the economic equivalent of war. It has
:07:17. > :07:20.proven right. An economic hurricane blew away the Greek Prime Minister
:07:20. > :07:27.and this week, the high pressure got too much of Silvio Berlusconi,
:07:27. > :07:31.who was forced to announce his resignation as Italy borrowing
:07:31. > :07:37.costs soared to new and dangerous heights. But what about domestic
:07:37. > :07:43.conditions? The Business Secretary is responsible for growth and
:07:43. > :07:48.strategy. But the predictions for 2011 and are just not 0.7 and 0.6%
:07:48. > :07:52.for 2012. Even though the Autumn Statement is coming up on the
:07:52. > :07:57.horizon in November, there is little chance of sunshine short
:07:57. > :08:02.term. Earlier this week, Vince Cable said large-scale tax cuts and
:08:02. > :08:06.big increases in public spending are not under consideration. It is
:08:06. > :08:15.one thing predicting things. But governments are expected to make
:08:15. > :08:19.the weather, too. Mince cable has to make sure we can look forward to
:08:19. > :08:22.a brighter days. -- Vince Cable. Well, yesterday I met Vince Cable
:08:22. > :08:26.in his Twickenham constituency. I began by asking his just how
:08:26. > :08:31.serious the current crisis is. There is a serious problem and it
:08:31. > :08:35.is not just a British problem. Primarily, the crisis is centred on
:08:35. > :08:38.Europe at the moment, but it is serious. The eurozone is in
:08:38. > :08:41.difficulties and the United States is finding it difficult to make
:08:42. > :08:47.headway in terms of sensible decision-making, and this affects
:08:47. > :08:51.us. Of course, we have got our inherited problems. Not just the
:08:51. > :08:55.deficit, which is difficult enough, but all the problems with over-
:08:55. > :09:02.dependence on housing and the excessive debt of households. So it
:09:02. > :09:07.is difficult. And you talk about this crisis, and yet if you are an
:09:07. > :09:16.FTSE director and you have seen your pay go up by 49%, it must look
:09:16. > :09:20.like a very different landscape? Yes, and I think that is what
:09:20. > :09:24.causes so much public anger and indignation and the protests.
:09:24. > :09:29.you have sympathy with the protesters? I have sympathy with
:09:29. > :09:32.the feelings behind it. Some of the recommendations are not helpful but
:09:32. > :09:38.that is not the. Margaret. It does reflect a small number of people
:09:38. > :09:43.doing very well in the crisis. There are numbers of people who
:09:43. > :09:47.played no part in causing the crisis and to have been hurt. One
:09:47. > :09:51.thing I have done is to set up a review into executive pay and how
:09:51. > :09:57.that can be reformed, and how shareholders can exert more
:09:57. > :10:03.influence over the companies they own. We have also set up a process
:10:03. > :10:07.of looking at a long-term strategy, said business has to look at the
:10:07. > :10:13.long term and not just respond to short-term crisis. When you say
:10:13. > :10:19.action, what? Legislation? That might be necessary. Do you think it
:10:19. > :10:23.will be? Possibly. So there is legislation in the new year to deal
:10:24. > :10:29.with executive pay? That is quite possible. We have a consultation
:10:29. > :10:36.and if it is necessary, we will introduce it. How would it work?
:10:36. > :10:39.There are many different ways of strengthening the role of
:10:39. > :10:43.shareholders in companies, because what has happened in the past is
:10:43. > :10:49.that most big companies are owned by pension funds and insurance
:10:50. > :10:54.companies. It is getting those institutions to be active and
:10:54. > :10:58.socially responsible as shareholders. It that could be
:10:58. > :11:02.reforms they can undertake themselves and might require
:11:02. > :11:06.pressure from the side of legislative reform. Is this a
:11:06. > :11:11.warning shot? I certainly think they should be conscious of the
:11:11. > :11:15.impact this is having on the rest of the public. Most British
:11:15. > :11:19.companies are well run with good management, properly paid. But the
:11:19. > :11:24.underlying problem, which evidence has already demonstrated, is that
:11:24. > :11:28.pay has far outstripped the performance of companies and there
:11:28. > :11:32.is no justification for that. go to the other end of the scale
:11:32. > :11:37.and talk about the up grading of benefits. We have had high
:11:37. > :11:41.inflation, over 5%, this year. Should benefits go up by that
:11:41. > :11:46.amount? We would certainly want to protect the most vulnerable in
:11:46. > :11:54.society. And that is why one of the first acts of the new government
:11:54. > :11:57.was to lock in the pension levels for state pensioners. We do believe
:11:57. > :12:01.that the most vulnerable people in society should be protected in
:12:01. > :12:05.these very difficult conditions. That is not quite the answer to my
:12:05. > :12:12.question. Do you believe benefits should go up with inflation?
:12:12. > :12:16.course they will. No doubt? doubt. Of course they should be
:12:16. > :12:20.indexed and that is fully understood. There are issues about
:12:20. > :12:24.timing and detail that will be clarified. But the principle is
:12:24. > :12:29.absolutely clear, but the Government will protect benefits
:12:29. > :12:34.from inflation. Issues of timing and detailed - what does that mean?
:12:34. > :12:38.We will have to see what comes out of the autumn quarter. I am not
:12:38. > :12:42.making policy up on the hoof. You will have to wait and see what the
:12:42. > :12:48.Chancellor says. But the Government is committed to protecting those
:12:48. > :12:53.who are most vulnerable in society through state benefits and pensions.
:12:53. > :12:58.But for example, if you have a low- paid worker flatlining and their
:12:58. > :13:03.pay has not gone up, if you increase benefits by 5.2%, the gap
:13:03. > :13:07.between a worker and a non-work is narrowing. It becomes more
:13:07. > :13:10.advantageous to stay on benefits? The response to that problem is to
:13:10. > :13:16.lift the low-paid workers out of tax, and it is what we are
:13:16. > :13:20.committed to doing as a coalition government. The Lib Dem policy was
:13:20. > :13:24.getting it up to 10,000 and we are committed to doing that step-by-
:13:24. > :13:28.step, and that is the way in which you help the low-paid workers.
:13:28. > :13:34.Let's go to where we started. You talked about the problems in the
:13:34. > :13:38.eurozone at the moment. Seal borrowing costs in France rise
:13:38. > :13:43.quite steeply, how concerned are you that France is next? We are
:13:43. > :13:47.talking about something that is fairly remote in this fairly
:13:47. > :13:51.negative scenario, but the position in the eurozone is very difficult.
:13:51. > :13:55.How well do you think the eurozone has acquitted itself in delivering?
:13:55. > :13:59.They have not acquitted themselves very well in recent months because
:13:59. > :14:02.they have been consistently behind the game. But I think the positive
:14:02. > :14:06.outcome of what has happened is that they do now understand what
:14:06. > :14:11.they have to do, the key elements are being put in place, and the
:14:11. > :14:16.question is whether they will be strong enough to get on top of this
:14:16. > :14:23.and turn the eurozone around. about this idea that there will be
:14:23. > :14:27.a eurozone group of key nations and this outer ring, where Britain has
:14:27. > :14:33.next to absolutely no in Florence? We would certainly not want this to
:14:33. > :14:38.happen. We would want Britain to be fully embedded in the decision-
:14:38. > :14:42.making in the single market, which is actually the core organisation,
:14:42. > :14:46.as far as we are concerned. We have to strengthen it. We certainly do
:14:46. > :14:51.not want a situation to revolve where we are excluded from
:14:51. > :14:57.decision-making. And would bear need to be treaty negotiations to
:14:57. > :15:02.make that happen? - Matt Wood there need to be? Are there no power as
:15:02. > :15:06.you would like to see repatriated? There is a major crisis hanging
:15:06. > :15:10.around and they have to sort out the eurozone problem. Having a
:15:10. > :15:15.debate on which powers are conducted at European level or
:15:15. > :15:19.British level is utterly irrelevant to the crisis we face. So 81
:15:19. > :15:26.Conservatives have utterly irrelevant views on that? It is not
:15:26. > :15:30.relevant to the practical policy issues we face. If it is battered
:15:30. > :15:34.back and forth over the last decade... It seems to have animated
:15:34. > :15:38.a large number of your colleagues? It would be helpful if we focused
:15:38. > :15:43.on the issues to sort out the eurozone crisis. That is what we
:15:43. > :15:47.have to focus on her and I hope my colleagues have those priorities.
:15:47. > :15:57.In the midst of these problems, what role of the European Central
:15:57. > :16:06.
:16:06. > :16:09.Bank? Should it be helping sort out We discovered in 2008 in our own
:16:09. > :16:15.country that you need to have a strong central bank that can do
:16:15. > :16:20.that. They need that at European level and that is one of the issues.
:16:20. > :16:25.Are you frustrated by Angela Merkel's stance on this? It is not
:16:25. > :16:28.for me to be frustrated because we are not members of the Eurozone,
:16:28. > :16:33.but in addition to the disciplines that the southern Europeans are
:16:33. > :16:40.going to have to adopt, the Germans will have to play their role in
:16:40. > :16:44.supporting the Eurozone, making absolutely sure that the relevant
:16:44. > :16:51.countries are supported with adequate liquidity. Will the
:16:51. > :16:56.Germans do that? I know that they must. I do not want to go back over
:16:56. > :17:01.the arguments of the 2010 election, but effectively were saying that if
:17:01. > :17:04.you cut too far too fast it will damage the economy. He brought in
:17:04. > :17:09.the austerity package but everything you said prior to that
:17:09. > :17:14.election seems to have come true, were your right then? I was right
:17:14. > :17:19.and what I said on behalf of the Liberal Democrats is that you need
:17:19. > :17:24.to have a balance. On the one hand, if you have fiscal contraction
:17:24. > :17:29.which is too severe, you damage growth. If you do not do it fast
:17:29. > :17:33.enough, the risk precipitating the loss of confidence in the markets.
:17:33. > :17:37.It is about getting the balance right and in the difficult
:17:37. > :17:42.circumstances in which we entered government it was imperative that
:17:42. > :17:47.we establish confidence. We have done that and the UK has been
:17:47. > :17:53.rewarded with very low borrowing costs and interest rates. In that
:17:53. > :17:57.sense the policy has succeeded, but we also need to emphasise growth,
:17:57. > :18:03.and that is partly about giving a stimulus, which we are getting
:18:03. > :18:09.through monetary policy. I was arguing for QE some months ago.
:18:09. > :18:15.that Plan B? No, part of plan is to use monetary policy to stimulate
:18:15. > :18:18.demand. We also need to look at the longer term question of how we
:18:18. > :18:25.balance the economy to get proper growth, which is my job in
:18:25. > :18:28.government, that is about exports and manufacturers, supporting
:18:28. > :18:33.apprenticeships and technology centres, supply chains, changing
:18:33. > :18:38.the way we look at government procurement. That is how we will
:18:38. > :18:47.get sustainable growth. When you heard Tom Watson described James
:18:47. > :18:52.Murdoch as a Mafia boss, dig you have sympathy with him? -- a dig
:18:52. > :18:57.you have sympathy. I am just getting on with my job. This has
:18:58. > :19:05.become a legal issue, the courts will sort out the issues of the
:19:05. > :19:10.hacking scandal. Did you find it amusing? Tom Watson has a good turn
:19:10. > :19:15.of phrase. Let's leave it at that. I am not making any further comment.
:19:15. > :19:19.The Vince Cable, thank you very much.
:19:20. > :19:23.Believe it or not, there was some good news about the UK economy last
:19:23. > :19:26.week when the cost of government borrowing fell as a cost of
:19:26. > :19:32.investors viewing the UK government gilts is a safe haven in the euro
:19:32. > :19:37.crisis. Earlier Rice spoke to the shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, and I
:19:37. > :19:41.began by asking him if he accepted that this was evidence that the
:19:41. > :19:46.Government's debt reduction strategy was working. It is a funny
:19:46. > :19:52.kind of haven to Levin When you have unemployment rising to his 17
:19:52. > :19:57.year high. There is no doubt that Britain, America, Germany, not
:19:57. > :20:01.being in the core of the euro going wrong are not seeing the higher
:20:01. > :20:05.default premiums in the interest rates, but the reason why interest
:20:05. > :20:10.rates are historically low in Britain is not good news -- is not
:20:10. > :20:14.good news. This is because our short term interest rates are
:20:14. > :20:19.expected to stay low because our economy is flat lining,
:20:19. > :20:23.unemployment is rising and there is no prospect of the Bank of England
:20:23. > :20:27.changing course. The Government says we are no safe haven because
:20:27. > :20:31.of these interest rates, but most experts will Likud that and say
:20:31. > :20:36.that it is spin from a government trying to divert attention from
:20:36. > :20:41.their policies and what they have done. Standard and Poor's, one of
:20:41. > :20:46.the world's leading credit agencies has given us a warning that our
:20:46. > :20:52.triple-A rating could come under downward pressure if the
:20:52. > :20:56.Government's commitment to fiscal consolidation falters. Whether the
:20:56. > :21:00.credit agencies lead the debate or follow is something we need to
:21:00. > :21:05.decide. Going back to August, the US had a downgrade from a ratings
:21:05. > :21:10.agency. On your argument, their long-term rating should have gone
:21:10. > :21:15.up, but it fell. This is because people said the American economy
:21:15. > :21:20.will not grow. If Britain has a prolonged period of stagnation, the
:21:20. > :21:25.Government should change course on the deficit. The idea that they are
:21:26. > :21:30.still not doing so, using this safe haven argument is laughable. One
:21:30. > :21:35.year ago the spin from the government was that our plan will
:21:35. > :21:39.work can the private sector will deliver growth. We are now in a
:21:39. > :21:43.position where David Cameron, George Osborne, Nick Clegg, are
:21:43. > :21:50.trying to tell people that however bad it is, 80 is the Eurozone
:21:50. > :21:55.crisis. It is important that the BBC do not fall for this argument.
:21:55. > :21:59.I used in the Eurozone crisis is having no impact? Off-course side
:21:59. > :22:07.did not say that. I warned a year ago that if there is a global
:22:07. > :22:11.hurricane you should not undermine the foundations of your house. --
:22:11. > :22:18.of course it is. The Government has made things worse because our
:22:18. > :22:22.slowdown happen before the Eurozone crisis. We have bigger rises in
:22:22. > :22:26.unemployment and we're weaker and less able to withstand this latest
:22:26. > :22:33.crisis because of what the Government has done. Our exports to
:22:33. > :22:38.the euro area have gone up by 17 %. Consumers and businesses are losing
:22:38. > :22:42.conference -- confidence and been hit by this rapid contraction in
:22:42. > :22:48.fiscal policy. They are in difficulty and the longer this goes
:22:48. > :22:53.on, the bigger the pain will be. have heard from Vince Cable
:22:53. > :22:57.speaking about the need to get growth into the UK economy. We read
:22:57. > :23:01.in the papers that there may be �50 billion worth of investments
:23:01. > :23:08.brought forward for infrastructure products like roads. Do you welcome
:23:08. > :23:14.that? If it is true, I welcome it. Your first question to Vince Cable
:23:14. > :23:19.was, this is the equivalent of a war in the economy. That is quite
:23:19. > :23:23.right but after the Second World War we took many more years to
:23:23. > :23:29.repay a higher level of debt. The Government are trying to do this in
:23:29. > :23:33.one stage, and it is flat lining growth. We set out of five point
:23:33. > :23:38.plan which is more balanced. If it is the case that the government is
:23:39. > :23:44.now adopting one of those points, by bringing forward infrastructure
:23:44. > :23:49.investment, good. But it has got to be real and have a stimulus for the
:23:49. > :23:57.economy. George Osborne is saying that the �50 billion will come from
:23:57. > :24:02.private investment. I just want to ask you bite your plan. How much
:24:02. > :24:07.will you growth plan cost? We have been clear that one of the elements
:24:07. > :24:13.would be a temporary cut in VAT. For how long? If we did that for
:24:13. > :24:18.one year it would cost �20 billion. Do you think it should be for one
:24:18. > :24:22.year or five years? It all depends how long it takes this recovery to
:24:22. > :24:28.get moving. I think we could get the recovery moving over the next
:24:28. > :24:32.year. One year ago we had a recovery and falling unemployment
:24:32. > :24:39.before Vince Cable ignored the Liberal Democrat manifesto and the
:24:39. > :24:45.Government decided that my I want to stick with your plans.
:24:45. > :24:50.billion in VAT, how much will the rest of it cost? The second part
:24:50. > :24:55.will raise �2 billion from bank bonuses to spend on 100,000 jobs
:24:55. > :25:02.from -- for housing and young people. That obviously pays for
:25:02. > :25:08.itself. Small companies will boost job creation and take on employees.
:25:08. > :25:13.We have also said cut VAT for one year, for repairs and maintenance,
:25:13. > :25:17.to get help for small companies. People think that might cost half a
:25:17. > :25:23.billion pounds, but if you get more growth and jobs, aid we pay for
:25:23. > :25:28.itself. Finally, bring forward public investment projects. You
:25:28. > :25:34.cannot have these that do not effect borrowing. George Osborne is
:25:34. > :25:40.saying 50 billion, up but that is deeply irresponsible. You have got
:25:40. > :25:45.to hold into account. We need Labour's plan for jobs and growth.
:25:45. > :25:49.On executive pay, Vince Cable is speaking about introducing
:25:49. > :25:54.legislation in the new year. Will you be backing him? If he brings
:25:54. > :26:00.forward legislation we will look at it. I thought Vince Cable was
:26:00. > :26:04.deeply confused about the past and the future. We introduced in
:26:04. > :26:10.government legislation which says that every person being paid more
:26:10. > :26:15.than �1 million, their pay and bonus should be made public. The
:26:15. > :26:25.government had refused to use that legislation. He could use that
:26:25. > :26:28.
:26:28. > :26:32.legislation now. Why does he not act? He cannot sit there and say, I
:26:32. > :26:39.have got a problem, and then prevaricate about action, on
:26:39. > :26:45.executive pay, abide by and bonuses, about jobs and pay. We do not want
:26:45. > :26:50.these confused interviews, we need action. We need to get the deficit
:26:50. > :26:57.down. From the interview today, I did not see any sign of leadership
:26:57. > :27:02.action, just excuses. Polly, what do you make of the move by Vince
:27:02. > :27:08.Cable to deal with executive pay, speaking about legislation in the
:27:08. > :27:11.new year? Very interesting. As Ed Balls says you could start by using
:27:11. > :27:15.the legislation that is there are ready to make things more
:27:15. > :27:21.transparent, Batam not sure that transparency does anything because
:27:21. > :27:30.we know they have earned these grotesque 49 % increases. I do not
:27:30. > :27:33.know until we see the legislation. The problem is that the shale
:27:34. > :27:41.holders -- the problem is that the shareholders are sitting on each
:27:41. > :27:47.other committees. They have got the power and they could be voting
:27:47. > :27:51.against bonuses, but it does not happen. Paul Waugh, interesting to
:27:51. > :27:55.see Vince Cable linking the issue of executive pay with the
:27:55. > :28:02.protesters at St Paul's, offering sympathy, I have sympathy for what
:28:02. > :28:06.they're doing is not your proposals. You could have got in any week of
:28:06. > :28:12.any year, for the last decade, protesters that would want to go
:28:12. > :28:19.outside St Paul's Cathedral and say that there is a crisis in
:28:19. > :28:24.capitalism? This is because the 99 % feel that the 1% has caused this
:28:24. > :28:33.crisis. If you buy into that, people on the steps of St Paul's
:28:33. > :28:37.will get some air play, but I do not believe that Vince Cable's has
:28:37. > :28:44.converted -- that Vince Cable has converted to direct action, nor has
:28:44. > :28:50.David Cameron. Let's be honest, pension funds are the ones that
:28:50. > :28:55.will be the most active about this. Polly, what do you make of the
:28:55. > :29:00.political reaction there has been to the St Paul's demonstration?
:29:00. > :29:05.is fascinating. They have had an incredible impact in three weeks.
:29:05. > :29:08.They have got the Archbishop of Canterbury to write an article in
:29:08. > :29:13.the Financial Times calling for a Robin Hood tax. He would not have
:29:13. > :29:19.done it without them. It has focused attention on the Church of
:29:19. > :29:25.England, no longer the Conservative Party at prayer, but to the left.
:29:25. > :29:30.The reason it has been so effective, the great drama that is going on is
:29:30. > :29:35.what Vince Cable calls the war had there. Everyone knows this
:29:35. > :29:41.appalling cloud is coming our way. There is alarm about crisis in
:29:41. > :29:46.capitalism. At the end of the month, George Osborne will set out his
:29:46. > :29:49.financial statement. Do you believe that in terms of growth strategy
:29:49. > :29:53.we're hearing the government speak about growth more, but maybe there
:29:53. > :29:59.is not that much difference now between Labour and the coalition on
:29:59. > :30:03.the issue of cause? What is curious is the way that this Chancellor, I
:30:03. > :30:09.deeply political Chancellor, is using Gordon Brown's style policies
:30:09. > :30:14.to promote this idea of credit easing. It is a classic Gordon
:30:14. > :30:18.Brown idea. Similarly we have the idea that you get more private
:30:18. > :30:25.sector bondholders to promote investment in infrastructure. The
:30:25. > :30:29.sound politically sensible, so that is why he is going to do them. He
:30:29. > :30:36.will try and get lots of plaudits from stealing Labour's clothes when
:30:36. > :30:40.he stands up in the House later this month. The real battle will be
:30:40. > :30:45.over who gets the blame for the sluggish growth we will injured
:30:45. > :30:55.during the next few years. The Government is building up the alibi
:30:55. > :31:00.
:31:00. > :31:03.Will be growth strategy roar like a lion or squeak like a mouse? Well,
:31:03. > :31:07.if private industry were going to invest in these things they would
:31:07. > :31:13.have done so by now. Large companies are sitting on very large
:31:13. > :31:18.sums of money, afraid to invest. We need to make them let go of the
:31:18. > :31:28.money but I do not see any signs of the Government winning to be that
:31:28. > :31:28.
:31:28. > :31:34.imaginative. And also, if he really wanted to, he could be storming
:31:34. > :31:38.around the world saying, we need to do something about this. There is
:31:38. > :31:42.not much leadership here, and I am not a great fan of Gordon Brown,
:31:42. > :31:47.but the one thing he did was get people together to make a decision
:31:47. > :31:53.right now, and we need that more than ever. But Cameron and George
:31:53. > :31:56.Osborne, not at all. Thank you so much for being with us here on the
:31:56. > :31:59.Politics Show. Still to come on the programme,
:31:59. > :32:02.unless you're watching in Scotland, why the Government's plan to take
:32:02. > :32:09.away child benefit from high earners could spell trouble on the
:32:09. > :32:13.backbenches. But first, the Politics Show where you are.
:32:13. > :32:19.Hello from the London part of the Politics Show, where we are looking
:32:19. > :32:23.at two issues, not necessarily related. Why the Government is
:32:23. > :32:31.giving more priority to ex-military who want council houses.
:32:31. > :32:36.But before that, it is the hope of City Hall that the streets will not
:32:36. > :32:41.be too scarred by the sight of homeless sleepers on the streets.
:32:41. > :32:47.Are there any new solutions out there?
:32:47. > :32:50.20 years ago, Cardboard City was perhaps London's most embarrassing
:32:50. > :32:55.landmark. These days, rough sleeping is much less common, but
:32:55. > :33:01.the mayor has promised that by the end of next year, it will be a
:33:01. > :33:05.thing of the past. The first thing is, nobody should live on the
:33:05. > :33:11.streets and in the 21st century, it is a scandal that some call the
:33:11. > :33:16.street their home. The second thing is, no matter what a preventative
:33:16. > :33:21.work you do, some will end up on the street. But they should only
:33:21. > :33:25.spend every second night on the street. Throughout the day, the
:33:25. > :33:29.street rescue team have been given a list of people sleeping rough,
:33:29. > :33:34.either by those working in charities or members of the public.
:33:34. > :33:37.We are walking around Tower Hamlets and we have a list of eight or nine
:33:37. > :33:41.people who need seeing. We are going to try and find them and take
:33:41. > :33:46.them to a harbour where they will receive an assessment of their
:33:46. > :33:51.needs, with the aim of having them within some sort of stable a good
:33:51. > :33:59.up -- accommodation within 24 hours. How much information are you going
:33:59. > :34:05.off? We have literally come in and we were told he was in front of the
:34:05. > :34:08.tube station beneath the scaffolding. -- Tube station.
:34:08. > :34:13.of the work done is trying to reconnect what sleepers with where
:34:13. > :34:17.they come from, on the basis that this gives them the best chance of
:34:17. > :34:22.stable housing. The team find a rough sleeper from Luton but he
:34:22. > :34:26.does not want their help. The days centre are offering all sorts of
:34:26. > :34:31.options for him, saying, we could do this for you, that for you,
:34:31. > :34:35.which is the wrong message, because the reality is, if his local
:34:35. > :34:40.connection is outside of London, the best option is go to where he
:34:40. > :34:45.is eligible to get services. It is a better place for him to be off
:34:45. > :34:48.the street and get services. But he is classically resisting. But if he
:34:48. > :34:53.does not want to go back to Luton and he has here in London because
:34:53. > :34:57.he does not want to be there, doesn't it make sense to try and
:34:57. > :35:01.sort something out for him in London? He has obviously got a GP
:35:01. > :35:04.and other connections back in Luton. He may well have a family there. I
:35:04. > :35:08.would say that living on the streets is dangerous and it would
:35:08. > :35:16.be better to relocate in a planned way. If you want to live in London,
:35:16. > :35:20.that is fine, but do it in a proper way. A real difficulty comes in
:35:20. > :35:24.reconnecting people who come from a foreign country. The majority
:35:24. > :35:29.sleeper on the streets of foreign nationals, and that is a new, very
:35:29. > :35:35.recent phenomenon. Is the solution to that getting them to go back
:35:35. > :35:40.home? There are a number of options. If you are a foreign national
:35:40. > :35:45.sleeping rough, firstly, you need to get into work. Secondly, you
:35:45. > :35:48.probably need to go back home to be reconnected with home, where there
:35:48. > :35:55.is help and support to help you rebuild your life. But not
:35:55. > :36:02.everybody wants to go Room. We arrived at the No Second Night Out
:36:02. > :36:07.Cup and we met Stephen, who said he had arrived shortly before. I don't
:36:07. > :36:15.want to go back there where I was. Do you think you will? To see my
:36:15. > :36:21.family, maybe, but to live, at no. Why is that? Because there is
:36:21. > :36:26.nothing down there. I was living there on the street. They are
:36:26. > :36:30.trying to abolish rough sleeping in London? But the way they are going
:36:30. > :36:35.about it is twisted. They are coming up to people and saying, get
:36:35. > :36:44.out. People have no way to go. I have been offered a coach ticket to
:36:44. > :36:48.go anywhere I want. I could get a coach to Spain if I was from there,
:36:48. > :36:54.because the government in London, rather than me leave London and be
:36:54. > :37:00.the problem of somebody else, I want to stay here. Rough sleeping
:37:00. > :37:05.may not be popular with Londoners, but many are simply not excepting
:37:05. > :37:11.the Mayor of London's help, so it could be difficult to achieve.
:37:11. > :37:15.We are joined by a John Bird, the founder of Big Issue. And Richard
:37:15. > :37:20.Blakeway. How are they getting on at City Hall with the rough
:37:20. > :37:24.sleeping problem? I look at it rather differently, because I saw
:37:24. > :37:28.what the Blair administration did. I think the real problem is, how do
:37:28. > :37:33.you actually get homelessness out of people? What has happened over
:37:33. > :37:39.the past 20 years is, what you have done is you have got the ball out
:37:39. > :37:43.of damp, wet homelessness into indoor homelessness. There are
:37:43. > :37:49.still many who are being removed from the streets over the decades
:37:49. > :37:53.who are in social housing, and they are not reconnected. None of the
:37:53. > :37:57.problems that caused them to be homeless have been addressed. And
:37:57. > :38:02.there is a real problem around that. And can complete the understand
:38:02. > :38:07.rough sleeping, and I was a rough sleeper 50 years ago. It was the
:38:07. > :38:12.most horrible thing. I commend the mayor, let's move people on. I
:38:12. > :38:18.would not let people sleep rough. We need to engage with the law. It
:38:18. > :38:24.is a terrible, terrible thing to do. What about the thing on numbers?
:38:24. > :38:30.Are the numbers increasing? Everybody is saying that. Big Issue,
:38:30. > :38:35.if you go to our centres, it is all over London. There is an increase
:38:35. > :38:39.of people coming to us and stories of people resorting to sofa surfing
:38:39. > :38:49.and those sorts of things. So we are getting the effects of the
:38:49. > :38:49.
:38:49. > :38:53.economic downturn. But with vigour to -- with regard to a policy of
:38:53. > :38:59.changing, we have to do something about our rough sleepers, but it
:38:59. > :39:05.will be difficult. This is a policy you have to supervise. How do you
:39:05. > :39:08.think it is going? I think we are making a lot of progress. You can
:39:08. > :39:13.see real achievement that people are spending less time on the
:39:13. > :39:18.street, particularly new arrivals. Half of people spend only one night
:39:18. > :39:26.on the street. And we are also having success in reducing the
:39:26. > :39:30.number of long-term rough sleepers. We identified a car what of 205
:39:30. > :39:35.people who have spent at least five years sleeping rough, some of whom
:39:35. > :39:39.have spent 40 years sleeping rough, and that number has been reduced by
:39:39. > :39:45.three quarters. So we are having real success. With the amount of
:39:45. > :39:49.time people are spending, do you recognise that? Yes. You cannot
:39:49. > :39:53.live through 1991 and see thousands of people sleeping rough and not
:39:53. > :39:58.breathe a sigh of relief and best yourself, because we are now in
:39:58. > :40:02.small figures. But I still think we are having a real problem with our
:40:02. > :40:07.home as provision in London. It is not necessarily about getting
:40:07. > :40:13.people are out of homelessness. The exit strategy is still really in
:40:13. > :40:19.crisis. We are having people in warehouses and that is where the
:40:19. > :40:24.men needs to be working. You say we need to move them on. Where?
:40:24. > :40:29.men need to be getting tough with the national government. -- the
:40:29. > :40:32.mayor needs to be getting tough. You need to deal with the mental
:40:32. > :40:37.health and social problems, because that young lad does not want to go
:40:37. > :40:43.back to Kent. I know why. Because Kent is full of all the problems
:40:43. > :40:48.that have made him home as. Richard Blakeway, you suggest one of the
:40:48. > :40:56.best options is for people to go home, go back. But John says,
:40:56. > :41:06.people do not want to. Detention that you want to get them away from
:41:06. > :41:10.London because it is not a good place for them, that is not working.
:41:10. > :41:14.It is not a good place to sleep rough anywhere in the country. The
:41:14. > :41:19.vast majority of people are being reconnected in London, but clearly,
:41:19. > :41:24.if they are not from London and not entitled to local services, the
:41:24. > :41:28.right thing to do is get them reconnected to where they can
:41:28. > :41:34.actually get services. What happens to those who do not want to go
:41:34. > :41:44.back? You have got to help them access services, and it is an
:41:44. > :41:44.
:41:45. > :41:48.important point... Match in London or? -- back in London or... Well,
:41:49. > :41:53.possibly housing where they are entitled to it through their local
:41:53. > :41:57.authority. The critical point John is making, and I agree with it, is
:41:57. > :42:01.that just because you were sleeping rough does not mean you are
:42:01. > :42:06.homeless. There is a big issue around health and one thing the
:42:06. > :42:10.mayor has been doing, because we have got �34 million from the
:42:10. > :42:17.Government to tackle this issue, is to put some of that money to help
:42:17. > :42:21.with health services. It was 8 million? 8 million. They have just
:42:21. > :42:26.transferred it and made you responsible? It is a tiny bit,
:42:26. > :42:30.isn't it? There is about a million a year extra, and also we have been
:42:30. > :42:34.able to work with services to change the focus of some of them,
:42:34. > :42:38.so they do a job which is more important. We have been able to
:42:38. > :42:42.tackle some of the things like mental-health and drug and alcohol
:42:42. > :42:48.addiction as well, so people can rebuild their lives. It is not just
:42:48. > :42:52.about housing. Do you think there is always a political imperative to
:42:52. > :42:57.do something about this with something like the Olympics coming?
:42:57. > :43:03.Yes. If I were the mayor, I would want people to come to London and
:43:03. > :43:07.have a good experience, and people sleeping in doors is not a good
:43:07. > :43:11.experience. But this is not a cynical act. It is a long-term act
:43:11. > :43:16.about how we make homeless energy, the energy of the homeless sector,
:43:16. > :43:22.work properly. We need a proper audit and we need to be knowing
:43:22. > :43:25.what is out there in London. What works and what doesn't. And that, I
:43:25. > :43:30.think the mayor need to put at the top of the list. We need to know
:43:30. > :43:35.who is there, who can help, who can tackle the middle health problems
:43:35. > :43:40.that 70% of people have. When we talk about the people we are
:43:40. > :43:43.thinking about, are there still a lot of ex-service personnel who,
:43:43. > :43:51.after being discharged from the Armed Forces, cannot put their
:43:51. > :43:57.lives together? There were. 70% of the people who helped restart Big
:43:57. > :44:02.Issue had made service background. There are places for people to go,
:44:02. > :44:08.but the real problem is that those people who are stuck need to be
:44:08. > :44:13.moved out of homelessness. I keep being repetitious. Move them out of
:44:13. > :44:19.homelessness, do not wear house them. They re briefly, will rough
:44:19. > :44:24.sleepers be off the Street of the capital by 2012? We have got every
:44:24. > :44:30.chance of reaching our goal by 2012. Nobody should call the street their
:44:30. > :44:33.home in the 21st century. Thank you so much.
:44:33. > :44:37.Ex-servicemen and women are many of those who end up on the street.
:44:37. > :44:42.Should they be given special treatment in terms of housing? In
:44:42. > :44:45.fact, councils can give them priority now, but not many do. We
:44:45. > :44:52.have learned the Government will soon give authorities more guidance,
:44:52. > :44:56.as they put it, on how they can push servicemen and women up the
:44:56. > :45:00.queue. But it could change by not very much.
:45:00. > :45:04.The men and women in the Armed Forces adjusting back to live in
:45:04. > :45:08.London can find it difficult, especially when it comes to housing.
:45:08. > :45:14.But this week, the Housing Minister confirmed that Government was
:45:14. > :45:18.drawing up plans to help. We will send out fresh guidance to councils
:45:19. > :45:23.to simply say, if you have people returning from the military --
:45:23. > :45:26.returning from the military who need housing in your area, they
:45:26. > :45:31.have to be properly prioritised. A problem in the past has been that
:45:31. > :45:35.people sometimes say, we have been a wear for a long time and the
:45:35. > :45:39.council is telling us we do not have a connection. That is not
:45:39. > :45:43.acceptable. We will remove that and I will ask councils to prioritise
:45:43. > :45:53.people in the military, because of course they have been a wear, and
:45:53. > :45:54.
:45:54. > :45:58.Councils also have discretionary powers that allow them to
:45:58. > :46:02.prioritise people such as ex- service families. We asked all
:46:02. > :46:08.councils in London if they give priority to the armed forces are
:46:08. > :46:13.veterans and their housing waiting lists or housing allocations. Of
:46:13. > :46:17.the 28 that got back to us, seven said they did. 21 confirmed that
:46:17. > :46:22.they did not, and of those, a living said they were considering
:46:22. > :46:27.reviewing this policy. Not everyone signs up to moving the ex-military
:46:27. > :46:32.up the queue. Getting additional priority does not mean you are more
:46:32. > :46:37.likely to get a home because there is not enough around at the moment
:46:37. > :46:42.because successive governments have not built any homes. This could all
:46:42. > :46:46.be solved if we build more affordable housing. One solution,
:46:46. > :46:50.perhaps, last month the mayor of Newham wrote to the Queen on behalf
:46:51. > :46:56.of the five Olympic boroughs asking for her support in putting and
:46:57. > :47:02.families at the top of the list for the athletes' housing after the
:47:02. > :47:06.2012 games. But with such a short following housing and with many
:47:06. > :47:11.disadvantaged groups jockeying for position and the housing list, will
:47:11. > :47:15.the situation be made any easier if ex-service families are giving up -
:47:15. > :47:20.- are given a better starting point on the list?
:47:20. > :47:28.Joining me now is Richard Cornelius from Barnet council and Lynda
:47:28. > :47:34.Stevens from Haig Homes, who deals with ex servicemen.
:47:34. > :47:39.How does it working Barnett? We had the opportunity to rearrange our
:47:39. > :47:43.housing policy so it reflected what we wanted to do and to help people
:47:43. > :47:48.we needed to help. We have got rid of our housing less so we're
:47:48. > :47:55.dealing with people live. Ex- servicemen, we're helping them
:47:55. > :48:01.before we help others. How does it work, who are they below? You have
:48:01. > :48:06.statutory responsibilities? Exactly. If someone has been beaten up in
:48:06. > :48:11.their home, they take priority, but right at the top, ex-servicemen
:48:11. > :48:16.take priority. Do they have to have had a local connection with the
:48:16. > :48:20.area? They have to have had gained the borough for six months before
:48:21. > :48:25.they enlisted. So very much local people who have a history of being
:48:25. > :48:33.local before the spent time in the military? Yes, because with the
:48:33. > :48:39.housing stock we have got we cannot have the whole force coming to us.
:48:39. > :48:43.Should local authorities have to do this? I believe they should. It is
:48:43. > :48:50.guidance issued by the Government, not a statutory requirement that
:48:50. > :48:54.they should prioritise the military people. The military person has, I
:48:54. > :48:59.would describe as real disadvantages, they are not in one
:48:59. > :49:07.place while they are serving, there moved around the country. They will
:49:07. > :49:10.build up connections and a number of places. They are not used to
:49:10. > :49:17.challenging, and if they are going into the local authorities and
:49:17. > :49:22.seeking help with housing, local authorities run almost a tree I
:49:22. > :49:26.system in dealing with homelessness applications. When the officer says
:49:26. > :49:32.to the service person, no, that is an authority figure speaking to
:49:32. > :49:37.them. Do you have any expectation at all that this will be statutory
:49:37. > :49:41.guidance, that this will persuade 20 authorities in London to do
:49:41. > :49:46.something different to? I do not think they will unless they really
:49:46. > :49:51.want to. The only reason they might not is because there is a limit to
:49:51. > :49:56.housing. We have heard a representative of Shelters saying
:49:56. > :50:01.that we do not want to get involved in whose needs are greatest, but
:50:01. > :50:05.there is a lot of need in London? Of course there is. People coming
:50:05. > :50:08.out of the military are often looking for short-term solutions.
:50:08. > :50:13.When they leave the services there are leaving their homes, their
:50:13. > :50:19.families, their jobs. Should this be something that the armed forces
:50:19. > :50:24.are doing rather than adding this burden to local authorities?
:50:24. > :50:27.armed forces have cared for them when they have been serving. They
:50:27. > :50:32.do provide a tremendous amount of advice and guidance for the service
:50:32. > :50:39.lever. They cannot keep people in the military quarter to be fair to
:50:39. > :50:45.them. Someone will say, why do you let the military jump-off your cue,
:50:45. > :50:50.a lot of people need that housing? Exactly, but it is important that
:50:50. > :50:55.we help these people back into society and into work. It is
:50:55. > :51:01.important that we help these people improve their lifestyle. You must
:51:01. > :51:06.have a lot of people that want to do that in Barnet? In what respect?
:51:06. > :51:10.A lot of people want integrated housing. Exactly, but the waiting
:51:10. > :51:14.list that we had was not functioning, aged just brought
:51:14. > :51:20.names, it was not a real thing, whereas now we are dealing with
:51:20. > :51:23.demand live. A lot of people will not understand that because you
:51:23. > :51:28.move around everywhere, people do not want to go back to where they
:51:28. > :51:32.were born, they want to settle where there are job opportunities?
:51:32. > :51:37.Many of them have families, their children are in local schools,
:51:37. > :51:43.their partners Arran local work, and that is their base and where
:51:43. > :51:49.they want to remain. It is not ticks -- it is not unexpected for
:51:49. > :51:53.any one of us to want to build that life. When a person is based in any
:51:53. > :52:03.area, they are actually building the their local connection there.
:52:03. > :52:04.
:52:04. > :52:07.Thank you very much. That is all we You may remember when Gordon Brown
:52:07. > :52:13.was Prime Minister he caused himself and his party quite a
:52:13. > :52:16.headache by his decision to scrap the 10 pence tax rate. So could
:52:16. > :52:19.David Cameron and George Osborne face their own 10 pence tax moment
:52:19. > :52:23.over plans to take away child benefit from higher rate tax-
:52:23. > :52:26.payers? Some on the Tory backbenches think so. Here's Giles
:52:27. > :52:32.Dilnot. And there's shoes for Betty and a
:52:32. > :52:35.suit for George. I'm not made of money. Family Allowance, which
:52:35. > :52:43.became Child Benefit in 1977, was a post-war welfare benefit paid to
:52:43. > :52:47.all, regardless of wealth. Wait a minute. I have just read a piece
:52:47. > :52:52.about family allowances. We can get ten shillings a week for our three.
:52:52. > :52:55.We would never get that. Oh, yes, you will. Imagine what they would
:52:55. > :53:01.have made of today's figures of �20.30 a week for the eldest and
:53:01. > :53:03.�13.40 for each additional child. That's what the Bennett family from
:53:03. > :53:11.Guildford, dad Daniel and mum Andrea, get for their children
:53:11. > :53:17.Ollie, Daisy and Lucy. �188 every four weeks. A total of �2,444 a
:53:17. > :53:18.year. But supporting nearly 8 million of the nation's children,
:53:19. > :53:24.however wealthy their parents, however wealthy their parents,
:53:24. > :53:27.costs the state about �12 billion a year. A fact which gave a cash-
:53:27. > :53:32.strapped new Chancellor a 2.4 billion savings opportunity last
:53:32. > :53:34.billion savings opportunity last year. We have got to be tough but
:53:34. > :53:40.fair, and that is why we will withdraw child benefit from
:53:40. > :53:43.households with a higher rate tax payer. When the debts left by
:53:43. > :53:53.Labour threaten our economy, when our welfare costs are out of
:53:53. > :53:53.
:53:53. > :53:56.It wasn't long before Daniel, a sales director at a small printing
:53:56. > :53:59.firm, who had already taken two voluntary pay cuts for the good of
:53:59. > :54:08.the firm, noticed as sole breadwinner, on 48,000, he was well
:54:09. > :54:14.over the 42,475 higher rate tax threshold. In January 2013, their
:54:14. > :54:17.child benefit would be gone and he asked himself what that would mean.
:54:17. > :54:26.I was sitting doing some monthly calculations, literally on the back
:54:26. > :54:30.of an envelope. I worked out that what was going out of the bank
:54:30. > :54:34.account each month did not add up to the same amount as the salary.
:54:34. > :54:36.Had I known that this was what they were going to do before I voted, I
:54:36. > :54:39.wouldn't have voted Conservative. That's just the sort of comment
:54:39. > :54:42.that's had backbench Conservatives also doing the number crunching.
:54:42. > :54:52.Despite the plus of being in favour of the theory, and the savings,
:54:52. > :54:52.
:54:52. > :54:56.there's still minuses. Just last weekend I had a couple, and see me
:54:56. > :55:01.who are very cross because they are a single income household and they
:55:01. > :55:07.will not get child benefit any more, but their income is literally just
:55:07. > :55:12.over the threshold whereas their next-door neighbours two incomes,
:55:12. > :55:18.just under the tax rate threshold and they will still get it. My
:55:18. > :55:22.constituents are saying this is not being fairly applied. At the point
:55:22. > :55:26.where you start paying higher rate tax you are not in the wealthiest
:55:26. > :55:32.bracket. I have concerns that we do not dissuade people from taking
:55:32. > :55:36.that pay rise, from doing that extra are's work, would suddenly
:55:36. > :55:40.puts them into the higher rate tax band and means they lose all their
:55:40. > :55:44.child benefit. Families who actually want to stay at home, the
:55:44. > :55:50.mum wants to look after their children, that is what tided when
:55:50. > :55:56.my children were little. If you want to stay at home, that is fine,
:55:56. > :56:03.and if you want to go to work, great. But we need to stay the
:56:03. > :56:07.party of the family. The government will need to put primary
:56:07. > :56:09.legislation in place to make the savings they want and they do have
:56:09. > :56:13.options to tackle these points, particularly the single versus
:56:13. > :56:17.household income issue, and that "cliff edge". Both of those things
:56:17. > :56:21.could be addressed by integrating the current system with child tax
:56:21. > :56:27.credits because they are assessed relative to family income and they
:56:27. > :56:31.involve a gradual withdrawal of child benefit. One of the things
:56:31. > :56:37.that the Government could consider in terms of the people on the cliff
:56:37. > :56:44.edges may be delaying debate on which this happens, giving people a
:56:44. > :56:47.chance to sort out their finances, giving them another pay rise.
:56:47. > :56:50.Things may be a bit better. Resolution Foundation, a think-tank
:56:50. > :56:53.who've been following the Bennetts and others on low to middle incomes,
:56:53. > :57:03.think 35,000 families maybe in the same boat. People for whom watching
:57:03. > :57:08.every penny has its cost. We do, from time to time, it is the root
:57:08. > :57:13.cause of the potential argument. Then it starts to have an effect on
:57:13. > :57:19.the tone of the whole house, because we are arguing about �10
:57:19. > :57:24.year, �5 there. I know myself that if I am worrying about money, I
:57:24. > :57:34.cannot dedicate my attention to the children, because they can pick up
:57:34. > :57:40.
:57:40. > :57:42.that something is bothering me. It affects the whole mood of the house.
:57:42. > :57:45.As the Bennetts and others await the government's detailed plans,
:57:45. > :57:51.there is, one supposes, a small financial bright spot. Some things
:57:51. > :57:54.cost nothing. And that's it for this week. We'll
:57:54. > :57:57.leave you now with images of a man who dominated Italian politics for