:00:11. > :00:16.$:/STARTFEED. In 2013, one political programme transformed the
:00:16. > :00:19.coverage of politics in the British isles. This week, we take you on a
:00:19. > :00:23.Great British train journey as the Prime Minister heads to north
:00:23. > :00:27.Africa and commits more forces to the fight against the Islamist
:00:27. > :00:31.threat. Where will the journey end? Former Security Minister, Admiral
:00:31. > :00:35.Lord West knows the region and the threat better than most. This is a
:00:35. > :00:45.highly dangerous and complex area and David Cameron should be very
:00:45. > :00:51.wary of going full steam ahead. The Government unveils the next
:00:51. > :00:57.stage of high speed rail. But it will cost over �30 billion and take
:00:57. > :01:02.over 20 years to complete. Journalist and commentator Mary-Ann
:01:02. > :01:09.Sieghart casts her eye over the table. I can't help thinking
:01:09. > :01:18.there's a bit of toy bashing going on here, you know, his train's
:01:18. > :01:24.bigger than my one. And the drama of politics, as House of Cards
:01:24. > :01:31.causes a locomotion. We are joined by the star of Hit play This House,
:01:31. > :01:41.actor Phil Daniels. Set in 1974 when you could tell the difference
:01:41. > :01:52.
:01:52. > :01:56.Evening all. This is Molly the dog. Blue Peter have one, why can't we?
:01:56. > :01:58.A hearty warm welcome to This Week! Unless, that is, you happen to be
:01:58. > :02:01.Romanian or Bulgarian and considering a move to Broken
:02:01. > :02:09.Britain and becoming a regular This Week drinker. In which case, we
:02:09. > :02:12.urge you to save your Megabus fare and your dignity and your liver.
:02:12. > :02:15.Please think again because we're not the people you think we are,
:02:15. > :02:21.here in Broken Britain. We're a nation of few laughs, terrible TV,
:02:21. > :02:24.as you can see, and even fewer good men. A nation where Chancellors
:02:24. > :02:27.dine in secret with Rupert Murdoch and the poor dive for breadcrumbs
:02:27. > :02:31.in the bins behind Tesco where even old nags fear to shop, lest they
:02:31. > :02:34.end up in the burgers. Where David Cameron - he's our PM you know -
:02:34. > :02:42.would sooner visit Libya and Algeria than a food bank in his own
:02:42. > :02:45.constituency. And where we still allow Nick Clegg to call himself
:02:45. > :02:47.Deputy Prime Minister, and a man of integrity despite admitting his
:02:47. > :02:50.political principles won't prevent him preaching equality for the rest
:02:50. > :02:54.of us. And an expensive private education for the Cleggettes, the
:02:54. > :02:58.little darlings. What's that, you say, my East European migrant
:02:58. > :03:02.friends!? You've never heard of Intergrity Clegg.!? Well most folk
:03:02. > :03:06.haven't! Sounds like you Romanians and Bulgarians will fit right in.
:03:06. > :03:09.Don't forget to pick up a few crates of the old Blue Nun at duty
:03:09. > :03:13.free, and we'll see you after the show. Speaking of damn good reasons
:03:13. > :03:16.to emigrate, I'm joined on the sofa tonight by two men who most of us
:03:16. > :03:19.would like to see blasted into orbit - the Iranian Space Monkeys
:03:19. > :03:20.of late night political chat. I speak, of course, of #spinthebottle
:03:20. > :03:30.Alastair Campbell. And #sadmanonatrain Michael 'choo choo'
:03:30. > :03:33.
:03:33. > :03:37.Michael, your moment of the week? Hillary Clinton retired as
:03:37. > :03:40.Secretary of State this week. did. Although her age is against
:03:40. > :03:44.her, she would be a highly credible candidate for the presidency.
:03:44. > :03:49.to beat. She has absolute recognition, not only across the
:03:49. > :03:56.United States but across the world of course. The Republicans are in a
:03:56. > :04:03.terrible mess. So are all the other democratic candidates if she runs?
:04:03. > :04:08.Absolutely. They could succeed by having their first woman President
:04:08. > :04:12.after having their first black President. The publication of the
:04:12. > :04:16.Education Select Committee report because I think Mr Michael Gove is
:04:16. > :04:25.slowly but surely being found out. I thought it would be going to see
:04:25. > :04:30.the cast of Borgen? I'll come on to that later.
:04:30. > :04:33.I seriously think Gove's big success is to be described
:04:33. > :04:38.constantly as a success by right- wing commentators, I think he's a
:04:38. > :04:42.disaster. You hope, you wish?! listened, Andrew, he's a disaster.
:04:42. > :04:46.I don't know about you, but we thought Timbuktu only existed in
:04:46. > :04:56.the Mr Men books, so imagine our surprise when we discovered it's a
:04:56. > :04:59.real place and that there are Islamist militants offer operating.
:04:59. > :05:02.The Government's worried so it's sending troops to support the
:05:03. > :05:07.military campaign to make the place fit for democracy or at least fit
:05:07. > :05:12.for our kind of dictator. It's a far cry from Mr Tickle having a
:05:12. > :05:18.Barney with Mr Bump. We asked our Admiral Alan West to get out the
:05:18. > :05:22.maps and give us his take of the week.
:05:22. > :05:26.A Security Minister in the last Government, I was all too aware of
:05:26. > :05:30.the threat from Islamic fundamentalists here in north
:05:30. > :05:34.Africa. I was warning four years ago of the
:05:34. > :05:41.security implications in this relatively ungoverned part of the
:05:41. > :05:47.world with risks to Europe, the region and Britain. These warnings
:05:47. > :05:50.of concern were not acted upon because the Al-Qaeda threats from
:05:50. > :05:56.Afghanistan, Pakistan and subsequently Yemen seemed more
:05:56. > :05:59.immediate. So when earlier this month French troops intervened
:05:59. > :06:07.against extremists in Mali and British hostages were caught up in
:06:07. > :06:10.an attack on a refinery in Algeria, which us -- I was not in the least
:06:10. > :06:13.surprised. I'm surprised by how much on the front foot David
:06:13. > :06:18.Cameron has been in this crisis. His initial reaction to support the
:06:18. > :06:23.French was good, but he seems to have got carried away and is far
:06:23. > :06:26.too eager to get further involved. Do we really need to send 350
:06:26. > :06:30.troops to teach French-speaking Malian troops how to fight?
:06:30. > :06:35.The Government needs to set out a very clear explanation of our
:06:35. > :06:39.strategy, the limits of our intervention. Where does it stop?
:06:39. > :06:47.It's always very easy to get increasingly entangled, but
:06:47. > :06:51.extremely difficult to get out. Just look at what happened in
:06:51. > :06:57.Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. Now, this is no Vietnam yet, but I'm
:06:57. > :07:01.very worried that we are ging to see Mission Creek -- going to see.
:07:01. > :07:04.I'm aware it's fantastic for Cameron's image to strut the
:07:04. > :07:06.international stage, meeting with African leaders to discuss
:07:06. > :07:11.international security and declaring he'll fight against
:07:11. > :07:17.terrorism. But I urge him not to play on people's fear. It is wrong
:07:17. > :07:22.to suggest that the terrorists in Mali pose an exste stential threat
:07:22. > :07:27.to us in Britain. Thst a rag tag coalition of dissidents, criminal
:07:27. > :07:33.gangsters, who're not on the one sole overall command. Let's leave
:07:33. > :07:38.it to the French with our indirect support to sort out this problem in
:07:38. > :07:45.what was one of their colonies. After all, we simply cannot afford
:07:45. > :07:49.to get embroiled in more operations overseas. Despite talk of
:07:49. > :07:53.ringfencing defence, there is no doubt that the Defence Forces of
:07:53. > :07:57.this country have been cut too far and are unable to conduct all the
:07:57. > :08:03.operations that Governments would seem to wish them to conduct.
:08:03. > :08:09.So take a step back, Mr Cameron, because Timbuktu is not our highest
:08:09. > :08:14.priority. Alan joins us now from his bunker
:08:14. > :08:20.in Westminster to our little bunker in Westminster. Welcome. Thank you.
:08:20. > :08:25.Michael, what has Timbuktu got to do with us? 99.9% of Brits couldn't
:08:25. > :08:29.even find it on a map? I rather agree with that and I agree with
:08:29. > :08:35.Alan as well. I saw why we supported the French but I did not
:08:35. > :08:40.imagine that would imply we'd send 350 troops. I agree with Alan that
:08:40. > :08:44.trying to teach people to speak French, it's hard to imagine how
:08:44. > :08:47.the soldiers will do it. I'm afraid I go even further and I said it I
:08:47. > :08:52.think in the last couple of weeks, but the British Government's policy
:08:52. > :08:57.of knocking over dictators all over the map creates the voids in which
:08:57. > :09:00.Al-Qaeda flourishes. What is happening in Mali is at least
:09:00. > :09:03.partially a consequence of having knocked over the dictator in Libya.
:09:03. > :09:06.What's happening in Syria leads me to believe that it should not be
:09:06. > :09:10.our policy to knock over the dictator because we don't know what
:09:10. > :09:16.disaster will follow. We have created a void in Iraq and Iraq
:09:16. > :09:20.used too keep Iran in check so that that has all gone to pot. We are
:09:20. > :09:25.about to leave Afghanistan in a very unstable situation. Oh, and
:09:25. > :09:29.just for good measure, Egypt, we have destabilised as well.
:09:29. > :09:32.would you respond to that, Alastair? Was the Arab Spring a
:09:32. > :09:37.complete waste of time then and do we have no interest in the values
:09:37. > :09:43.and the politics and do we believe in democracy? Also, when Alan said
:09:43. > :09:51.- I thought it was interesting take on the whole thing - when he said
:09:51. > :09:54.David Cameron should stand up now and say when all this would end. He
:09:54. > :09:58.doesn't know when it will end so he should say that. If we say we
:09:58. > :10:02.support the French in trying to deal with what they do consider to
:10:02. > :10:05.be a serious threat, then I think that has to mean something other
:10:05. > :10:09.than just standing up in the House of Commons and saying we support
:10:09. > :10:12.what you are doing. I do by the way believe in democracy, but can you
:10:12. > :10:17.give me an example of where it's broken out? I'm saying do we
:10:17. > :10:21.believe in the Arab Spring. You are suggesting we have created a vacuum
:10:21. > :10:26.in Egypt. Do we just want dictators all over the Middle East? The Arab
:10:26. > :10:31.Spring is a slogan. We all signed up to it be, you but what have been
:10:31. > :10:36.the consequences of it. Well, I've made the point. You have made a
:10:36. > :10:44.serious accusation against the Prime Minister. Why would the Prime
:10:44. > :10:50.Minister quote play on -- "Play on people's fears and play on the Al-
:10:50. > :10:54.Qaeda threat?"? He's not been clear on what it's about. Maybe he's
:10:54. > :11:00.using it for some other purpose and I'm not sure what it is. It's clear
:11:00. > :11:05.to me that Al-Qaeda's fractured. AQP f L which was in Afghanistan,
:11:05. > :11:09.got driven out of there and then was in the Fatah, was taken out. We
:11:09. > :11:13.have managed to start stopping money going to them and managed to
:11:13. > :11:18.start dog stuff to stop... He was on the brink of taking over money?
:11:18. > :11:22.That's the leadership, the central control. What ULB did, he saw there
:11:22. > :11:27.were groups, he pulled them together with one message. It's a
:11:27. > :11:30.franchise. He franchised it out. We've shattered the leadership
:11:31. > :11:35.really. Al-Qaeda in Yemen is now very dangerous and they've done
:11:35. > :11:40.things like the underpants bomber and the Maghreb is dangerous but
:11:40. > :11:45.it's not an exstential threat, not the same sort of threat as a
:11:45. > :11:49.centralised and controlled as Al- Qaeda was. It's wrong to pretend it
:11:49. > :11:53.is. It doesn't mean it's not dangerous. I think he was saying
:11:53. > :11:58.that it's seriously dangerous and therefore we have a strategic
:11:58. > :12:02.interest in being part of a response to it. It's right that we
:12:02. > :12:07.should support the French but wait and see how the dice lie. We are
:12:07. > :12:11.still in the middle of an operation. The French have taken Timbuktu and
:12:11. > :12:15.we need to see now what is the situation on the ground, the
:12:16. > :12:21.African Union are bringing in troops, let's see what we are going
:12:21. > :12:25.to do. He moved very quickly to say we are going to send people to
:12:25. > :12:29.train them. A lesson we might draw from Algeria, which is the opposite
:12:29. > :12:33.lesson of what has been drawn because people have been critical
:12:33. > :12:36.of them in drawing the terrorist. They have extremely well organised
:12:36. > :12:38.forces capable of dealing lethal blows with terrorists and actually
:12:39. > :12:42.seem to be able to keep the terrorist threat very much under
:12:42. > :12:46.control. Therefore, the general strategy of trying to train up
:12:47. > :12:52.local troops so that they are able to suppress Al-Qaeda locally is an
:12:52. > :12:59.absolutely sound strategy. I happen to think that apparently Alan does
:12:59. > :13:03.too. The British high command is clearly dismayed of taking on a new
:13:03. > :13:10.commitment at a time of substantial job losses and cuts in defence
:13:10. > :13:15.spending. What can they do?, the chiefs of staff? I thought it was
:13:15. > :13:19.interesting to see Philip Hammond come out with the increased
:13:19. > :13:24.spending cuts announcements. The agreement was that post-2015, there
:13:24. > :13:28.would be a 1% increase in the defence budget. What's been agreed
:13:29. > :13:35.by the Treasury is a 1% increase in the procurement budget. That means
:13:35. > :13:39.it's less than 0.5%. And also from 2016. I don't believe he's resolved
:13:39. > :13:43.the financial problem. There's not enough, I'm afraid, being sent on
:13:43. > :13:46.defence. I think we are standing into danger as a nation if we get
:13:46. > :13:53.involved without money being spent. The politicians in this country on
:13:53. > :13:56.the left and the right have a habit of taking this country either to
:13:56. > :14:01.war or into major military engagement on peacetime budgets? Mr
:14:01. > :14:04.Blair did it five times, Mr Cameron's now done it twice?
:14:04. > :14:09.don't think any of them do it lightly. I don't think David
:14:09. > :14:12.Cameron's doing this lightly. if they want to do it, they should
:14:12. > :14:16.increase defence spending? They should and David Cameron's played
:14:16. > :14:20.fast and loose with the defence. The way he used to attack Gordon
:14:20. > :14:24.Brown over lack of equipment and play politics with it, what he
:14:24. > :14:27.hasn't done is set out a strategy plan, all the threats that he
:14:27. > :14:33.believes to be real and then if you like, put together the Armed Forces
:14:33. > :14:35.that could deal with the threats. He hasn't done that. He was right
:14:35. > :14:39.to criticise Labour for not increasing the defence budget even
:14:39. > :14:44.though you kept on deploying the forces. My criticism would be he's
:14:44. > :14:54.doing the same? I don't think he was right. We did increase the
:14:54. > :15:00.
:15:00. > :15:06.This is 1987. It fell to �26 billion by 2002. By 2009... It was
:15:06. > :15:11.the Cold War. The Cold War had ended in 1989. My point is...
:15:11. > :15:16.no, you increased it by less than 1% a year. Even though you were
:15:16. > :15:20.going to war all that time. I do not believe the campaign that David
:15:20. > :15:24.Cameron ran against Gordon Brown was justified or fair. At a time
:15:24. > :15:29.when Gordon Brown was... My point is Mr Cameron's doing the same
:15:29. > :15:32.thing. First of all, we went into two major theatres of war under
:15:32. > :15:38.Labour. We were in Iraq and Afghanistan simultaneously with
:15:38. > :15:41.thousands of troops in each and it was unsustainable. Yes, I believe
:15:41. > :15:44.there is an inconsistency between the Prime Minister's position and
:15:44. > :15:50.his defence spending. More than that, the defence budget, in my
:15:50. > :15:57.view, is full of a load of junk. It is full of nuclear weapons which
:15:57. > :16:02.are of no use to us and aircraft carriers of which we don't have a
:16:02. > :16:10.surface fleet... He likes the carriers! For the moment, we don't
:16:10. > :16:16.have any aircraft either! No. I guess the danger here is after Mali
:16:16. > :16:24.where? If Al-Qaeda has dispersed, you close it down in one place, it
:16:24. > :16:29.will pop up in the Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Syria? That is why I
:16:29. > :16:35.identified it four years ago as being a dangerous area. It moves
:16:35. > :16:38.into the Western Sahara. There are drug routes. There's drugs, arms
:16:38. > :16:44.smuggling, tobacco and all sorts of other smuggling. That whole region
:16:44. > :16:49.is a nightmare. As was said earlier, the Arab Spring, or the Arab
:16:49. > :16:56.Awakening, is a mixed blessing. Al- Qaeda were very slow, they didn't
:16:56. > :17:01.know it was coming, but we have been slower in working out our
:17:01. > :17:06.strategy. Very briefly, how do you think this will pan out? I don't
:17:06. > :17:09.think we know. Alan talked about the whole drugs business. That is
:17:09. > :17:12.something elsewhere we have a strategic interest. Where it will
:17:12. > :17:16.pan out is unclear, not least because these franchises you call
:17:16. > :17:22.them, they are going to pick and choose their targets very carefully
:17:22. > :17:28.and we have to be... We can't go everywhere. David Cameron will not
:17:28. > :17:34.go between the 450 he's committed to Mali. There will be another Mali
:17:34. > :17:37.next year. Thank you. Alan West, thank you.
:17:37. > :17:41.Now, people are up in arms because the Government thinks only one
:17:41. > :17:44.teacher is needed to control a room full of hyperactive toddlers. Well,
:17:44. > :17:49.we think nursery care is a doddle compared to controlling these two
:17:49. > :17:51.on a Thursday night. Alastair, shush, just for once!
:17:51. > :17:54.Michael, put it away, nobody's interested.
:17:54. > :17:56.And even though the This Week staff-to-children ratio is far too
:17:56. > :17:59.high, we're prepared to go even further because waiting in the
:17:59. > :18:02.wings, star of the smash-hit play This House, actor Phil Daniels is
:18:02. > :18:05.here to talk about the appeal of political drama.
:18:05. > :18:09.And for those who always feel the need to be center-stage, remember
:18:09. > :18:14.there's plenty of room to forget your best lines on The Twitter, The
:18:14. > :18:17.Fleecebook, and the good old black- and-white Interweb.
:18:17. > :18:21.Now we know This Week isn't Michael's only paid gig - we have
:18:21. > :18:26.to share him out occasionally - and there's not a lot to go round these
:18:26. > :18:30.days. When he's not taking up the double seat in our studio, he can
:18:30. > :18:32.usually be found taking up a double seat on the 2.38 stopper train from
:18:32. > :18:36.Swindon to Chipping Sodbury on a Sunday afternoon. Ah, the high
:18:36. > :18:39.life(!) Do people actually watch that stuff!?
:18:39. > :18:42.Anyway, he'll be glad to know that, once the high-speed rail network is
:18:42. > :18:50.built, he'll be able to go further and faster than he's ever been
:18:50. > :18:53.before. Choo choo! What's that you say? He'll have to
:18:53. > :18:55.wait at least 20 years! Oh well, never mind.
:18:55. > :19:05.This week we turned to #sadwomanonatrain - that's Mary Ann
:19:05. > :19:17.
:19:17. > :19:21.Sieghart to you and me - for her It's normally a certain sad man
:19:21. > :19:25.squished on to a This Week sofa who gets to go careering around the
:19:25. > :19:35.world on great railway journeys. He doesn't get to drive a train like
:19:35. > :19:37.
:19:37. > :19:43.this! It's been all about how marvellous Britain's railways are
:19:43. > :19:47.this week, or how they will be if we bang in another �35 billion quid.
:19:47. > :19:52.There's been a lot of talks about how the benefits will outweigh the
:19:52. > :19:57.costs. There is a bit of toy envy in there, you know, his train set
:19:57. > :20:01.is bigger than mine! I think it's vital for Britain if we are going
:20:01. > :20:05.to succeed in the global race. Other countries have high-speed
:20:05. > :20:14.rail networks. We need to have them, too. I get some big names in the
:20:14. > :20:20.back of my cab. Don't believe me? See! They look comfortable. So is
:20:20. > :20:24.the opposition. They are happy to sit back and enjoy the ride towards
:20:24. > :20:29.high-speed rail. We are 100% behind this project. We want to see it
:20:30. > :20:34.built. We will continue to offer cross-party support. This route
:20:35. > :20:38.plunges through rural Britain, rural Staffordshire and should use
:20:38. > :20:46.existing transport corridors. It blights the environment, homes and
:20:46. > :20:49.lives. Oh, I do hope that economic growth arrives faster than High
:20:49. > :20:55.Speed Two! The coalition express suffered a bout of rail rage this
:20:55. > :20:57.week. In fact, it led to a decoupling of the carriages as Lib
:20:57. > :21:00.Dems voted against Government legislation and boundary changes.
:21:00. > :21:04.The bill was in the coalition agreement, but the Lib Dems reneged
:21:04. > :21:08.on it because they were cross with the Tories for dropping House of
:21:08. > :21:12.Lords reform. Actually, the Tories had never promised Lords reform.
:21:12. > :21:16.They had only promised to set up a committee to bring forward
:21:16. > :21:20.proposals on it, which is what they did and no more. The unelected
:21:20. > :21:23.House is seeking to frustrate the previously expressed will of this
:21:23. > :21:27.Parliament, not a previous Parliament, to deny fairness and
:21:27. > :21:34.equality in the franchise. Speaker, the Liberals have
:21:34. > :21:37.exchanged their legendary sandals for flip-flops. I agreed to the
:21:37. > :21:43.boundary changes, but in the knowledge that the rest of that
:21:43. > :21:47.agreement acted as a counter-weight, mainly in my mind through Lords
:21:47. > :21:52.reform. All aboard! The Government's embarked on a new
:21:52. > :21:55.destination this week and no-one is sure where it is. All the signs
:21:55. > :22:01.point to Timbuktu. David Cameron's initial offer of a couple of
:22:01. > :22:06.transport planes to help the French in Mali has already escalated to
:22:06. > :22:10.surveillance aircraft, a roll-on roll-off ferry, 350 trainers and a
:22:10. > :22:14.military protection force. At this rate, half the Army will be there
:22:14. > :22:18.by the end of the year! What is the exit strategy? It is very easy to
:22:18. > :22:24.get drawn into these things, but not always clear what the endgame
:22:24. > :22:29.and what the exit strategy is and indeed what does the endgame look
:22:29. > :22:35.like? France has made it clear it envisages a short intervention to
:22:35. > :22:39.stabilise the situation on the ground. Nick Clegg's been at the
:22:39. > :22:44.end of some awkward questioning this week as it turns out that when
:22:44. > :22:54.it comes to his children's education he is happy to pay for an
:22:54. > :22:54.
:22:54. > :22:59.upgrade and his older son may end up at private school. Even a Labour
:22:59. > :23:02.Prime Minister sent his children private! But it's become much more
:23:02. > :23:05.politically toxic and now we have a Conservative Prime Minister with
:23:05. > :23:09.children at state schools. The general feeling is that if
:23:09. > :23:16.politicians are going to run our public services, they ought to use
:23:16. > :23:19.them, too! I hope people would respect that our instinct is like
:23:19. > :23:23.any parent to do the best... Difficult to swallow when cou come
:23:23. > :23:27.out with such big statements -- you come out with such big statements
:23:27. > :23:30.about the corrosiveness on society? When we make a decision, that will
:23:30. > :23:34.be the subject of public commentary and criticism and so on. I hope
:23:34. > :23:38.most people would accept that we want to protect the privacy of an
:23:38. > :23:43.11-year-old boy and make a decision that we think is best for our son.
:23:43. > :23:46.OK. Some of my passengers are always grumbling. On the benches
:23:46. > :23:50.behind David Cameron a lot of them are cross that the Lib Dems have
:23:50. > :23:54.grabbed some of their plum seats. They are also worried the Tory
:23:54. > :23:59.train will hit the buffers at the next general election. This week,
:23:59. > :24:03.we heard that a young charismatic backbencher called Adam Afriye was
:24:03. > :24:07.in the early stages of planning a leadership challenge. He hotly
:24:07. > :24:14.denies he is planning anything, but having been a shadow Minister
:24:14. > :24:20.before 2010, he must sure I'll be disappointed that he is still
:24:20. > :24:24.sitting in cattle class! Can the Prime Minister confirm that traces
:24:24. > :24:30.of stocking horse have been found in the Conservative Party food
:24:30. > :24:34.chain? I had somewhere in my briefing, I had some very
:24:34. > :24:38.complicated information about the danger of particular drugs for
:24:38. > :24:47.horses entering the food chain and I have to say he threw me
:24:47. > :24:51.completely with that pivot! after this week, Cameron and his
:24:51. > :25:00.team are certainly going to have to work hard and get on to win the
:25:00. > :25:10.next election. Plots or no plots, the economy is heading for a triple
:25:10. > :25:14.
:25:14. > :25:16.dip. So, it is not full steam ahead, is it? More like signal failure!
:25:16. > :25:22.That was Mary Ann Sieghart at the wonderful Buckinghamshire Railway
:25:22. > :25:29.Centre near Aylesbury. We are joined by Miranda Green. Michael,
:25:29. > :25:34.the nation is gathered around its TV sets expectant, waiting for the
:25:34. > :25:39.oracle to speak, so what does choo- choo say about HS2? I say that
:25:39. > :25:45.Britain in the 19th Century led the world in railways and that today we
:25:45. > :25:49.are 30 to 40 years behind France, Spain and China. I just don't see
:25:49. > :25:52.why the British could possibly believe that while every other
:25:52. > :25:57.developed and developing country is going for high-speed rail that we
:25:57. > :26:05.could somehow sidestep it. I don't see how we can. Choo-choo says yes?
:26:06. > :26:09.I do. You are nodding? I echo that view. I'm a big supporter of HS2.
:26:09. > :26:15.The debate was MP after MP talking about how this related to their
:26:15. > :26:25.green fields, to their homes, to their buildings. It is not what MPs
:26:25. > :26:26.
:26:26. > :26:30.are for, is it? I thought there were two horrible bits of NINBYism
:26:30. > :26:35.this week, the Cumbria thing and HS2 where the Tories say we can't
:26:35. > :26:39.have it because it will go near our constituencies. We need high-speed
:26:39. > :26:42.trains. Michael is right. It is not just European countries, in Asia,
:26:42. > :26:47.Chinese, you are talking about countries that are light years
:26:47. > :26:56.ahead of us. As you said, even if it does go ahead, we will be gone
:26:56. > :27:02.by the time it is there! Is it a hat-trick here of HS2 support?
:27:02. > :27:12.I'm with choo-choo, too! I'm glad you can say that! I do agree it is
:27:12. > :27:16.a really bad example also of small politics. Why does it need - it
:27:16. > :27:19.takes 20 years to build. It will probably take ten years for the
:27:19. > :27:23.planning permissions to get through and there will be another 20 years
:27:23. > :27:28.of construction? I can't imagine why it takes that long! Although,
:27:28. > :27:31.what we normally do with railways, we have a parliamentary bill, a
:27:31. > :27:34.private bill, and they do take quite a long time. We built the
:27:34. > :27:38.Channel Tunnel faster than that. We built the link down to the Channel
:27:38. > :27:45.Tunnel faster than that. The link to the Channel Tunnel took a long
:27:45. > :27:49.while. I don't think it took 20 years. Look at the relatively short
:27:49. > :27:52.period of time that the whole Olympics infrastructure was put
:27:52. > :27:57.together. It can be done, if there is a national will for it. As we
:27:57. > :28:00.have seen tonight, and it is true in Parliament as well, there is an
:28:00. > :28:04.all-party consensus. There are rebels on each side. Overall
:28:04. > :28:12.Parliament - so it should be able to get on with it. It will be very
:28:12. > :28:18.difficult when you get these dots of what will be NIMBYism and these
:28:18. > :28:22.bogus arguments where - Miranda is right. If there is an agreed
:28:22. > :28:26.strategic interest, they should be allowed to get on and build it.
:28:26. > :28:29.is not just on this particular rail issue. There was a really
:28:29. > :28:34.interesting report this week from the LSE, from the growth commission,
:28:34. > :28:37.which is people on both sides of the current debate about how we
:28:37. > :28:41.handle the economy in the search for growth saying our political
:28:41. > :28:50.system often gets in the way of these big decisions which have to
:28:50. > :28:54.be taken over several decades. me come to boundary changes. Do you
:28:54. > :29:04.think you would see a day when the Lib Dems voted to preserve rotten
:29:04. > :29:08.
:29:08. > :29:14.$:/STARTFEED. My own feeling about this is that it's a very small
:29:14. > :29:20.storm in an SW1 tea cup. I'm not sure that anyone cares very much
:29:20. > :29:25.about this, nor did they care about Lord's reform - I'll whisper it
:29:25. > :29:33.just amongst us - but this is old news. In the summer we knew the
:29:33. > :29:39.deal broke down. AV referendum, the Lib Dems in return for House of
:29:39. > :29:42.Lords reform. You got the AV referendum, the Tories'
:29:42. > :29:45.backbenchers reneged on House of Lords reform. When I looked at the
:29:45. > :29:50.agreement, it didn't seem to be linked to boundary changes? I think
:29:50. > :29:56.if you are going to reform one part of Parliament, and going to reform
:29:56. > :30:03.the other, Commons and Lord's together, it's a package. The
:30:03. > :30:05.coalition afreement agreement broke down. Reform of the House of Lords
:30:06. > :30:10.is a very big issue and there wasn't a satisfactory answer to it.
:30:10. > :30:20.The Bill was a peace of rubbish, I'm afraid. Reform in the House of
:30:20. > :30:21.
:30:21. > :30:27.Commons is about equalising sides of the boundaries and stopping the
:30:27. > :30:30.- I mean we are so massively overrepresented - by the way, I
:30:30. > :30:36.agree with David Davies, the Conservative MP who says he ought
:30:36. > :30:41.to be shrinking the size of the Government. And that wasn't part of
:30:41. > :30:45.the reform. Alastair, the Tories had, partly because of the
:30:46. > :30:51.electoral map, even with boundary changes, a mountain to climb in
:30:51. > :30:56.2015 to get an overall majority. Without the boundary changes, the
:30:56. > :30:59.mountain becomes a sheer cliff? becomes a lot more difficult and,
:30:59. > :31:03.let's be honest, Miranda, that's what the Liberal Democrats knew and
:31:03. > :31:07.that's ultimately why they did it. I think within the coalition,
:31:07. > :31:11.particularly at this stage, I think that you can have the coalition
:31:11. > :31:14.agreement, but there's always going to be a bit of room for dirty
:31:14. > :31:21.politics as well, and that was part of that. David Cameron should have
:31:21. > :31:29.seen it coming, to be frank. It's pure real politics. In the Tory
:31:29. > :31:33.interests, surely, to give the Liberal Democrats their reform. I'm
:31:33. > :31:36.speaking purely on hard-power politics? That's the way the Prime
:31:36. > :31:39.Minister was headed. He was recommending to the House of
:31:39. > :31:42.Commons the most deplorable Bill for the reform for the House of
:31:42. > :31:50.Lords because he wanted this reform of the House of Commons so very
:31:50. > :31:56.very much. To which the man on the street says who cares. Quite.
:31:56. > :32:01.another 100 peers in there. point is, all of this broke down
:32:01. > :32:05.amidst extreme ill-feeling over the summer and it got really nasty and
:32:05. > :32:10.that's passed. All this coverage this week about outrage and disgust,
:32:10. > :32:14.I think that's gone now actually and we've moved on to other things.
:32:14. > :32:19.Michael, we know who the next leader of the Conservative Party
:32:19. > :32:26.will be, the MP for Windsor, great story on Sunday, slam dunk, job
:32:26. > :32:36.done! Amazing! Unfortunately what we now know is who will not be the
:32:36. > :32:41.leader of the Conservative Party. It's very bad news for him. I put
:32:41. > :32:49.the phone lines in but I didn't stand. I don't know how I got that
:32:49. > :32:53.one wrong! Loose connection there I think.
:32:53. > :33:01.think he's on a Michael Portillo route to the Tory leadership?
:33:01. > :33:05.least! Possibly even worse. It must have been put there by his enemies.
:33:05. > :33:09.David Cameron's been unpopular with his backbenchers for a while. The
:33:09. > :33:12.referendum core was popular with the backbenchers, so why would you
:33:12. > :33:17.run it on the weekend after that? Maybe because the referendum wasn't
:33:17. > :33:20.going to ever buy them off. There was a group that just don't like
:33:20. > :33:28.him and they want him out. They want to be careful what they wish
:33:28. > :33:34.for. What do you make of Mr Clegg's choice of school? It's pretty clear
:33:35. > :33:38.he's aiming to get - Mr Campbell is tuting there - they did nothing but
:33:38. > :33:43.private schools. Certainly didn't send my kids to them. Is it
:33:43. > :33:48.anybody's business? It's unavoidibly people's business. It
:33:48. > :33:53.has become so. What I think's interesting about this is that he
:33:53. > :33:58.answered the question at all actually. People are interested and
:33:58. > :34:04.it is sad that an 11-year-old boy should become the focus of the
:34:04. > :34:07.media storm. It's every family's own business what they choose to do.
:34:07. > :34:12.On the other hand, I went to the same school as Nick Clegg but, you
:34:12. > :34:16.know, if you look at what's happened... Westminster? Yes, I
:34:16. > :34:23.went to Westminster myself. If you look at what's happened to London
:34:23. > :34:29.schools, they've improved immesurably and I would desperately
:34:29. > :34:36.like not to send my own children to private schools and if everybody
:34:36. > :34:41.participated in the school system, it would be good. You have to
:34:41. > :34:44.respect every parent's right to do what they think is best for their
:34:44. > :34:49.child quite seriously, but I think it's very sad. I think Clegg is
:34:49. > :34:55.right when he said it's corrosive. The development and the flourishing
:34:55. > :34:59.of the strong private sector is corrosive and he's leader and he
:34:59. > :35:07.should take that on. I don't buy the idea that if you are a public
:35:08. > :35:13.figure. It's not crazy at all. An xmpl of the private schools. --
:35:13. > :35:16.example. Unfortunately, politicians like Nick Clegg and many of his
:35:16. > :35:24.predecessors destroyed what was good in the state system and now
:35:24. > :35:28.they have the hypocrisy to not send their children to a comprehensive
:35:28. > :35:31.school. The idea that mandatory drug testing in the work place
:35:32. > :35:37.hasn't gone down well in the This Week production office. Alastair's
:35:37. > :35:41.fine of course, it's obvious to our viewers that he hasn't had anything
:35:41. > :35:46.performance-enhancing in years but Michael's looking worried, all the
:35:46. > :35:49.little blue pills beginning with the letter V and I'm not talking
:35:50. > :35:54.about vitamins. It's certainly adding to the drama here on This
:35:54. > :36:00.Week. That's why we have decided to ask why people are so interested in
:36:00. > :36:07.fiction rather than fact and to put political dramas in This Week's
:36:07. > :36:12.spotlight. Voters may find real life Westminster a turn yauch, but
:36:12. > :36:19.viewers seem to disagree -- turnoff. Please don't insult my intelligence
:36:19. > :36:24.by acting as if you are all so naive that you don't know how this
:36:24. > :36:30.works. Everybody in this room has bent the rules to get in here. You
:36:30. > :36:39.don't get in this room without bending the rules. Whether it's the
:36:39. > :36:44.subtitled intrigue of the Danish Parliament in Borgen... Or the
:36:44. > :36:50.smash hit play This House set in the Parliamentary whip's Office of
:36:50. > :36:55.the 70s, audiences can't get enough of political dramas. With $100
:36:55. > :36:58.million being spent on the new American version of House of cards,
:36:58. > :37:03.the demand for fictional intrigue seems to know no financial limit.
:37:03. > :37:09.Do you understand how you are to behave... And if I don't play
:37:09. > :37:16.along? We'll clear you from the herd and watch you die in the
:37:16. > :37:20.wilderness. Maybe that's why the rich and handsome are looking more
:37:20. > :37:27.like a fantasy leader than a genuinely fantastic leader.
:37:27. > :37:31.We are joined by Phil Daniels. You are starring in a play based in the
:37:31. > :37:35.Whip's Office in the Commons in the 70s. I would suggest this is not
:37:35. > :37:41.promising material and Yotel it's been a hit? Well, it seems that
:37:41. > :37:44.everybody's very, very keen on it and, I mean, the audience, we've
:37:44. > :37:49.got the Government whips, the Government benches, the opposition
:37:49. > :37:53.benches and the audience sit in the benches. Like part of it? Yes and
:37:53. > :37:57.we make lots of noise, us politicians, and the whip's offices
:37:57. > :38:02.are in the middle. It's an interesting period and it's an
:38:02. > :38:09.historical period and people are interested. When it was offered to
:38:09. > :38:16.you, did you think that you wanted to do the electrification of the
:38:16. > :38:22.Soviet opera as well? Did it strike you as... I felt that I read the
:38:22. > :38:28.script and I felt James Graham wrote it as a young writer and what
:38:28. > :38:32.a great script. It did it for you? Yes. I understand the political
:38:32. > :38:36.establishment or part of it has been traipsing across the river to
:38:36. > :38:43.see you? John Bercow, the speaker has been there? Yes, I shouted at
:38:43. > :38:47.him one night. In the audience? I think Shirley Williams has seen
:38:47. > :38:52.it, Malcolm Rifkind. Heseltine might have come, but someone says
:38:52. > :38:57.put a sock in it Heseltine in the play and I thought I heard a seat
:38:57. > :39:02.flip and someone leave. That would be too good to be true. It's
:39:02. > :39:06.interesting, Phil, that the play, which I'm sure will be made into a
:39:06. > :39:12.TV series at some stage, we have had Yes Prime Minister being
:39:12. > :39:20.relaunched, Borgen and this one coming in the United States based
:39:20. > :39:24.on the British House of Cards, they rate really well, yet engagement in
:39:24. > :39:30.Party Politics does not rate well these days. It's a conundrum?
:39:30. > :39:34.an odd one. Our play being about, you know, I think in the 70s, it
:39:34. > :39:44.was much more interesting because there was the Government that had
:39:44. > :39:44.
:39:44. > :39:49.no majority. So there was interesting things going on. That's
:39:49. > :39:55.why James Graham wrote the play and got the idea for it because it's a
:39:55. > :39:59.good paradi. In the Blair period, there was The Thick Of It, plays,
:39:59. > :40:03.the Queen, the Kosovo stuff. We are living in an era where stuff gets
:40:03. > :40:08.done instantly and it's maybe the more historic, the more reflective
:40:08. > :40:14.stuff you are talking about twos down better. People love to know
:40:14. > :40:18.the inside track. There was Absence of War, a play about Neil Kinnock.
:40:18. > :40:25.People love to know what it's like on the inside and these plays are
:40:25. > :40:32.pretty good at that. Chris Mullins Diaries was a terrific play.
:40:32. > :40:37.have Ben in Denmark and met the cast of Borgen. I'm not sure the
:40:37. > :40:42.ratings are enormous. Unbelievable in Denmark, everybody is watching
:40:42. > :40:46.it. I can see that. They have a strong cult following. Do you think
:40:46. > :40:51.that it's got anything to do, at all, with the fact it's all about
:40:51. > :40:56.working a coalition and that we are in a coalition, unusually? No, I
:40:56. > :40:59.don't think it is. I interviewed the Prime Minister character and
:40:59. > :41:03.also Casper, the spin doctor. He said, and I think he's right, that
:41:03. > :41:06.the success of the killing and Borgen is down to the fact that
:41:06. > :41:13.they've taken traditional storylines where you normally see
:41:13. > :41:17.men in the lead. So police movies, hugely a man, top politicians, it's
:41:17. > :41:23.usually a man, they have two very strong women characters. So I think
:41:23. > :41:28.that's it. Partly and quality will out. It's a wonderful drama,
:41:28. > :41:35.beautifully written. Your play could be made into a TV series,
:41:35. > :41:41.couldn't it? Easily, yes. Are you still packing them in? Yes and
:41:41. > :41:45.moving to the Olivier Theatre. We have gone into the main one.
:41:45. > :41:51.you surprised that there is huge interest in this? I mean the last
:41:51. > :41:58.election was very closely fought, yet ethen then the turnout was 63%?
:41:58. > :42:03.I remember turnouts in the 80s. remember the events in the 70s that
:42:03. > :42:06.your play is about. So I'm not surprised. But I think people are
:42:06. > :42:14.bored with what they see on the outside but are fascinated to have
:42:14. > :42:19.the thing turned inside out to see what is underneath. The day-to-day
:42:20. > :42:27.media politics, people find that a turnoff and they want more depth.
:42:27. > :42:31.It's a macho culture in the whips and I wonder whether that's changed.
:42:31. > :42:41.The whip's offices have lots of women in them. They've changed.
:42:41. > :42:42.
:42:42. > :42:52.Anne Taylor was and is the only whip. Malcolm Tucker is obviously
:42:52. > :42:53.
:42:53. > :42:59.an exact fax illly of you, Alastair, is that correct -- faximilie.
:42:59. > :43:04.met him a few times. We had a charity swearoff to see who could
:43:04. > :43:10.get the most F words in a minute and we didn't realise it was being
:43:10. > :43:16.beamed into the creche downstairs so it was bad! Thank you very much,
:43:16. > :43:21.Phil. That's your lot tonight folks. We are off to Lulu Eastonite, the
:43:21. > :43:26.new an that bell's, don't you know, but posher and more expensive. We
:43:26. > :43:30.have been banned ever since Michael talked about David Cameron's
:43:30. > :43:34.generational struggle and attempted a detangle with the cloak room
:43:34. > :43:40.attendant. We leave you with one of politics' most improbable stories,
:43:40. > :43:46.two ordinary kids fooling around on the back seat of CBS News. Nightie-
:43:46. > :43:48.night, don't let the President give you a love bite. Publicly say thank
:43:48. > :43:52.you because I think Hillary Clinton will go down as within of the
:43:52. > :43:56.finest Secretary of States we've had. It's been a great
:43:56. > :44:04.collaboration over the last four years. I'm going to miss her. I
:44:04. > :44:08.wish you were sticking around. But she has logged so many miles, I
:44:08. > :44:12.can't begrudge her to take it easy for a little bit, but I want the