:00:14. > :00:17.$:/STARTFEED. Tonight, join This Week for the
:00:18. > :00:25.Great British political menu. For starters, we are serving up, what
:00:25. > :00:28.else, horsemeat, with all the trimmings,. Jay Rayner gives his
:00:28. > :00:32.review. If the supermarkets are going to make a dog's dinner,
:00:32. > :00:37.perhaps it's time for the Government to take the reigns.
:00:37. > :00:41.For the main course, we are feeding the squeezed middle. Jane Moore is
:00:41. > :00:47.adding extra salt. As the coalition's shaky marriage heads
:00:47. > :00:51.towards the rocks of a by-election, I'll be speed dating a selection of
:00:51. > :00:55.galloping gourmets. Who will be my Valentine? Is political pudding
:00:55. > :01:02.going out of fashion with men in the spotlight feeling the pressure
:01:02. > :01:07.to look good, pop sensation Lamar flexes his muscles. You don't get
:01:07. > :01:11.these from nothing. Men should take pride in their appearance, just
:01:11. > :01:14.like Andrew. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the This Week
:01:14. > :01:19.kitchen! Evening all. Welcome to This Week
:01:19. > :01:24.where you find us here under starters orders, champing at the
:01:24. > :01:28.bit with long faces all round. Despite the revelation that call me
:01:28. > :01:32.Dave and Rebekah's horse has rocked up in Black Beauty pudding, when it
:01:32. > :01:35.comes to looking a script gift horse in the mouth, we like to
:01:35. > :01:40.think we have standards higher than Becher's Brook. Yet we are faced
:01:40. > :01:43.with a hurdle that's impossible to clear, namely avoiding the stampede
:01:43. > :01:48.of Shergar burger puns being trotted out around the press
:01:48. > :01:51.paddock and our week began so promisingly dear viewers. As we
:01:52. > :01:56.lounged around the This Week production office twiddling our
:01:56. > :02:01.thumbs and fiddling our expenses, the only dead horse we plan to flog
:02:01. > :02:06.tonight was sparkling, German and blue. But Azhar old MacMillan once
:02:06. > :02:15.said, eventing dear boys. And now we are forced to shut the stable
:02:15. > :02:25.door. How can we go on after all this after the puns have already
:02:25. > :02:27.
:02:27. > :02:33.bolted? So all we can offer you is our lack of originality is a
:02:34. > :02:38.hygiene guarantee of our own. The programme you are about to consume
:02:38. > :02:41.contains no contamination from either horse, pork, Donny or
:02:41. > :02:45.Newsnight and that's a promise worth making. Speaking of show
:02:45. > :02:51.ponies, heading for the glue factory, I'm joined on the sew
:02:51. > :02:57.phaetonite by two of Westminster's most valuable studs, the Joan
:02:57. > :03:01.Collins and Oliver Tobias of the late-night political chat. I speak
:03:01. > :03:09.of Jacqui Smith and Michael Portillo. Your moment of the week?
:03:09. > :03:16.Gary walk waug was paid at least �500,000 to be got rid of -- Gary
:03:17. > :03:20.Walker. He was made to sign a gagging order. It was an Orwellian
:03:20. > :03:25.situation. The National Health Service is causing the deaths of
:03:25. > :03:33.patients and it's paying off with masses of taxpayers' money, people
:03:33. > :03:36.to two away and say they've found fault with the system, and my quiz
:03:36. > :03:40.question for the night is, is there anything that would shame the Head
:03:40. > :03:43.of The National Health Service into resigning? Is there anything that
:03:43. > :03:47.will shame the Government into firing this man? Interesting. Good
:03:47. > :03:53.stuff. Your moment of the week? There's been dancing on the streets
:03:53. > :03:58.of Westminster and around the world today as part of the one billion -
:03:58. > :04:01.it's not you two - but still time, as part of the one billion rising
:04:01. > :04:06.campaign. One billion relates to the one billion women likely to be
:04:07. > :04:11.raped or beaten in their lives and this is a campaign where today
:04:11. > :04:15.women and the men who want to support them got out on the streets,
:04:15. > :04:21.danced and protested. It's a good example of a modern campaign.
:04:21. > :04:25.Although in the UK it's been led by Stella Creasey, Shadow Home Office
:04:25. > :04:30.Minister, it's cross party and non- party, it uses celebrities and
:04:30. > :04:34.social media to spread the word, it's part of a really exciting
:04:34. > :04:39.burgeoning new young feminist movement as well, so a very good
:04:39. > :04:42.campaign, one I hope for which there'll be a lot of support.
:04:42. > :04:46.will go on I suspect. Horsemeat passed off as beef is an issue that
:04:46. > :04:50.is not going away. With each day, there's another of Michael's ready
:04:50. > :04:54.meals recalled from the shelves. If it carries on like this, he's going
:04:54. > :05:00.to waste away. What is to be done and who should take responsibility?
:05:00. > :05:10.Who better to ask than food writer Jay Rayner. This is his take of the
:05:10. > :05:20.
:05:20. > :05:25.If ever there was a scandal designed for the self-satisfied
:05:25. > :05:28.chatter of the British middle classes, it's that involving the
:05:28. > :05:34.discovery of horsemeat in cheap ready meals. The argument will be
:05:34. > :05:38.familiar, anybody buying overly cheap food gets what they deserve.
:05:38. > :05:44.We should all abandon the supermarkets in favour of
:05:44. > :05:47.independent shops like this one. In a perfect world, that rhetoric
:05:47. > :05:51.would apply. Consumers have a responsibility for what they buy
:05:51. > :05:55.and what they eat, but in an age of austerity with wages falling and
:05:55. > :06:01.prices rising, food is one of the few things that people can cut back
:06:01. > :06:05.on. Consumers cannot be blamed for shopping in the value ranges. The
:06:05. > :06:10.blame lies elsewhere. The supermarkets must take some
:06:10. > :06:17.responsibility. The sheer economic might of these corporates is
:06:17. > :06:23.dangerous. They made this scandal all but inevitable by using their
:06:23. > :06:28.huge buyer power by forcing the suppliers to cut corners. There is
:06:28. > :06:38.a real economic incenti to pass horse off as its mooing cousin. A
:06:38. > :06:38.
:06:38. > :06:42.couple of rib-eyes, please. -- incentive. A proper corporate
:06:42. > :06:47.social responsibility must come. In effect, they are custodians of our
:06:47. > :06:57.food supply chain, but it's a task in which they've failed dismally,
:06:57. > :07:07.
:07:07. > :07:11.they must be called to account. Can Thank you very much. There's a
:07:11. > :07:17.problem with regulation of the food industry. I don't think it's
:07:17. > :07:20.coincidence that this scandal comes off the back of major cuts to the
:07:20. > :07:22.organisations like the Food Standards Agency. I find it galing
:07:22. > :07:26.that the Government should have been using the Food Standards
:07:26. > :07:32.Agency as a political shield to take the flak while it gets to
:07:32. > :07:37.grips with the crisis. If this scandal proves anything,
:07:37. > :07:40.it's that these agencies need more powers, not fewer, not something
:07:40. > :07:43.this Government supports. If the supermarkets will not police
:07:43. > :07:53.themselves with sufficient riggour, the state will have to do it for
:07:53. > :07:55.
:07:55. > :08:01.them. Consumer trust depends upon -- rigour.
:08:01. > :08:05.Welcome to the programme. Are the supermarkets fundamentally holding
:08:05. > :08:09.the responsibility here? They're the ones who label the food and
:08:09. > :08:14.they haven't done enough testing as to make sure the labels they put on
:08:14. > :08:19.is accurate? Ie been speaking to a number of producers, it's one of
:08:19. > :08:23.the things I do, they've all been saying to me for a long time that
:08:23. > :08:25.the incredible tight detail, the tight crush on margins that the big
:08:25. > :08:29.supermarkets enforce upon their producers was going to lead to
:08:29. > :08:35.something or other. None of them foresaw that it would be horsemeat
:08:35. > :08:39.instead of beef but they said it was absolutely inevitable. When
:08:39. > :08:43.margins are cut that thin and when you are threatened with delisting
:08:43. > :08:46.from the big companies, things will happen and they've said it's simply
:08:46. > :08:52.a consequence. When I buy a Hamburger that says beef on the
:08:52. > :08:56.label and it turns out to be in some cases 100% horse instead, is
:08:56. > :08:59.my first port of call of blame the supermarket for misselling?
:09:00. > :09:04.Obviously the retailer is responsible for what they've done.
:09:04. > :09:09.There is a wider responsibility I think for the way various
:09:09. > :09:15.Governments over 20 years, 25 years have allowed that market to develop.
:09:15. > :09:19.You can go back to the early 90s when supermarkets expanded. They
:09:19. > :09:22.ended up with the big ring road businesses and became dominant in
:09:22. > :09:26.the food market. It's the economic mechanism which has resulted in
:09:26. > :09:29.this so there is a role for Government and regulation and for
:09:29. > :09:33.the supermarkets. I think the big companies should be paying in to a
:09:33. > :09:38.central body who police them. The supermarkets have to take
:09:38. > :09:42.responsibility, but in the end it's the job of Government to keep them
:09:42. > :09:45.isn't it, the Government should have the back spot of regulation
:09:45. > :09:50.that makes sure the supermarkets are doing what they should be doing
:09:50. > :09:55.and that hasn't happened? One step back. I think British supermarkets
:09:55. > :09:59.are superb. I think we get high quality food at good prices,
:09:59. > :10:03.although the market's dominated by supermarkets there's intense
:10:03. > :10:07.competition between them. When I travel abroad I'm struck by what an
:10:07. > :10:10.amazing variety of products there are in the supermarkets. The basic
:10:10. > :10:15.problem with Britain today is that you can have little chance of
:10:15. > :10:20.ending up in handcuffs. We need more people in handcuffs, we need
:10:20. > :10:25.Chief Executives of supermarkets in theory knowing they'll be arrested,
:10:26. > :10:29.they should be responsible for the supermarkets. They should know what
:10:29. > :10:35.is going on. It isn't the point of this programme at the moment, but
:10:35. > :10:45.you can't end up in handcuffs for fixing interest rates or not
:10:45. > :10:46.
:10:46. > :10:48.looking after patients in hospitals. People are not going to take
:10:48. > :10:52.seriously their responsibilities if they believe they are never going
:10:52. > :10:55.to be held accountable for anything. I don't believe creating more
:10:55. > :11:00.inspectors of supermarkets is going to solve the problem. There are
:11:00. > :11:06.people already responsible, make their truly responsible. It's funny,
:11:06. > :11:13.there used to be 1700 inspectors employed by the FSA, now there are
:11:13. > :11:16.800 and we have a scandal. The FSA, they hadn't been testing for
:11:16. > :11:22.horsemeat since 2003? But you have Trading Standard and Environmental
:11:22. > :11:27.Health officers doing spot checks. We have seen massive cuts in
:11:27. > :11:33.budgets, 32%. Nobody in the business predicted this was going
:11:33. > :11:40.to happen. It is clearly a mess and one of these things... This is not
:11:40. > :11:46.ever yet, there'll be a new thing coming out in the next few days.
:11:46. > :11:55.Has Labour been right to be scaremongering on this? So far it's
:11:56. > :12:01.a food labelling story, not a food safety story? Mary Creagh has been
:12:01. > :12:07.active in stark contrast to... In the Select Committee today they
:12:07. > :12:13.said the Government should be... Chaired by Anne Mackintosh, the
:12:13. > :12:18.Tory MP... Yes and they'd been flat-footed. You had Owen Paterson
:12:18. > :12:21.saying he'd eat a Findus lasagne, but you have the Minister for Food
:12:22. > :12:26.saying... Unless somebody told him what it was! But the minister
:12:26. > :12:30.saying these should be returned to the shop where you bought them from.
:12:30. > :12:34.That's a confused message. You need to get to the bottom of it as soon
:12:34. > :12:40.as possible, you need to tell the public what they need to know and
:12:40. > :12:44.the Government need to get a grip. Do you think they've known? You've
:12:44. > :12:47.got Owen Paterson standing there before going into that EU meeting
:12:47. > :12:53.yesterday saying there were going to be more raids coming forward, we
:12:53. > :12:57.think, although I don't really know. He sounds very, very flat-footed.
:12:57. > :13:00.So much food regulation these days isn't done by national Government
:13:00. > :13:04.now, it's European? But the national Governments have the
:13:04. > :13:12.choice whether to fund the enforcement bodies. I do in one
:13:12. > :13:16.regard agree with Michael. I'm not on principle against supermarkets,
:13:16. > :13:22.they have been advantageous to food health in Britain, but they have
:13:22. > :13:25.too much control of too much of the market.
:13:25. > :13:33.Food scares are a nightmare for politicians aren't they? They are
:13:33. > :13:37.and this is a prime example. Every scandal, they are so foolish to
:13:37. > :13:42.give reassurances, they are urged by the Civil Service to give
:13:42. > :13:45.reassurances and it's bonkers. You can't at one moment say it's
:13:45. > :13:49.criminal activity which indeed it is and say there's nothing scary
:13:49. > :13:54.about it. If it's a criminal activity you have no idea where
:13:54. > :13:57.this stuff is coming from or what's been done to it. Why don't you
:13:57. > :14:03.bring in the police? This is a scandal, because it's so come pleck,
:14:03. > :14:05.people have chosen their targets, so some people who don't like our
:14:05. > :14:09.European partners plumped for Romania despite the fact that it
:14:09. > :14:14.was Ireland that pointed out the problem to us in the first place.
:14:14. > :14:18.Some people who have a thing against supermarkets have chosen to
:14:18. > :14:22.focus on supermarkets, I'm not saying you, Jay. Some people who
:14:22. > :14:25.are concerned about quangos have chosen to focus on the FSA despite
:14:25. > :14:32.the fact this Government took some of their powers back into
:14:33. > :14:36.Government at the point at which they... Back into DEFRA? Exactly.
:14:36. > :14:41.A lot of reasonably well off broadcasters are saying we need to
:14:41. > :14:46.go back to the local butchers, see meat raw again and all the rest of
:14:46. > :14:53.it. This is driven by chicks and for a lot of not well off people,
:14:53. > :14:57.they are north-wested to buy those things -- forced to buy those
:14:57. > :14:59.things? All those culpable, you have the enforcement agencies, the
:15:00. > :15:04.investment companies, the Government and supermarkets, right
:15:04. > :15:07.down the bottom I think I'm going to put the people who've been
:15:07. > :15:11.buying the stuff as culpable, and in fact I wouldn't put them on
:15:11. > :15:15.theley. Those consumers are in tight economic circumstances. They
:15:15. > :15:21.went and bought either brands or from retailers that they had every
:15:21. > :15:26.right to trust and they've been let down. Do you normally think that
:15:26. > :15:30.instant mass produced food is cheaper? It's all about economies
:15:30. > :15:34.of scale. When you break down some of the deals and what goes into
:15:34. > :15:40.this stuff, it's terrifying they've managed to get it at that priesz.
:15:40. > :15:47.It does scare me. There's this great myth that the poor are time
:15:47. > :15:51.rich and cash poor. But actually, often, they are time poor and cash
:15:51. > :15:55.rich, they don't have the time to do these things and the cost-of-
:15:55. > :16:00.living is enormous and the proportion of their income. We talk
:16:00. > :16:05.about how small a proportion of income, 10-11% food is, not if you
:16:05. > :16:10.are on a low income, suddenly it's 30 or 40%. It's unlikely that this
:16:10. > :16:20.will change our eating habits very much? We are still going to buy
:16:20. > :16:25.modern lifestyles and we'll still go for this stuff? We are seeing
:16:25. > :16:33.change, consumer power is calling big businesses to account, like we
:16:33. > :16:36.saw in Starbucks. You have electronics companies like Amazon
:16:36. > :16:46.producing in dodgy factories. You will see consumer pressure to the
:16:46. > :16:49.
:16:49. > :16:57.supermarkets to clean up their act. It's late. Crimewatch Update late,
:16:57. > :17:03.damn you Kirsty Young, damn you BBC schedule yulers. But stick with us.
:17:03. > :17:07.As if this studio wasn't drop dead gorgeous enough, waiting in the
:17:07. > :17:13.wings is Lemar, to talking about the pressure on men to look good.
:17:14. > :17:21.And for those of you who want to avoid any form of "internet
:17:21. > :17:27.grooming", we do ignore all your desperate pleas for attention on
:17:27. > :17:30.the Fleecebook, the Twitter and our website. It wouldn't be right if I
:17:30. > :17:36.didn't wish you a happy Valentine's Day, so I take it upon myself to
:17:36. > :17:42.fill the gaps in your personal life. We are a romantic lot here on This
:17:42. > :17:48.Week. Honestly. It is hard to get Michael to sit on his side of the
:17:48. > :17:55.sofa sometimes. But it hadn't been all kisses and cuddles at
:17:55. > :18:05.Westminster. The Sun's Jane Moore did get a date tonight. This is her
:18:05. > :18:14.
:18:14. > :18:17.So it's Valentine's Day, when romantic and commercially minded
:18:17. > :18:20.couples squeeze themselves into restaurants all over the country
:18:20. > :18:24.too show their love for one another. Still I suppose we all need
:18:24. > :18:30.something to celebrate. What with Ed Miliband pointing out that we're
:18:30. > :18:36.all worse off... People are working harder than ever before. But for
:18:36. > :18:41.far too many, wages are falling and prices are rising, and they feel
:18:41. > :18:47.worse off, not better off. there is one thing I'm not willing
:18:47. > :18:51.to compromise on. Also I don't really want to miss out on the
:18:51. > :19:00.national "lurve"-a-thon either, so I thought I would try a spot of
:19:00. > :19:07.speed dating. I'm so hungry I could eat a horse. Starter, prawn
:19:07. > :19:15.mayonnaise. Main course, rib-eye steak and a side-saddle. Dessert
:19:15. > :19:19.Red Rum Baba? I hope my first date is more appealing. I know I said I
:19:19. > :19:28.wanted a stable relationship but this isn't quite the Italian
:19:28. > :19:36.stallion I had in mind. Now Tesco and Findus lasagne is off
:19:36. > :19:41.the menu for most, the horsemeat crisis deepens daily. It has become
:19:41. > :19:49.a nightmare for David Cameron. Prime Minister is rightly shocked
:19:49. > :19:56.that many products contain 100% horse. Does it -- that if tested
:19:56. > :20:01.many of his answers may be 100 bull? I really think we've got to
:20:01. > :20:11.get a grip of this rather than make a joke about it. But they are so
:20:11. > :20:13.
:20:13. > :20:18.tempting. A horse walks into a bar... Time for my next date.
:20:18. > :20:22.From man you were to mature. I know I like an older man but I reckon
:20:22. > :20:26.his hip goes out more than he does. Still, maybe he will benefit from
:20:26. > :20:30.the Government's plans to finance some care for the elderly. One in
:20:30. > :20:35.ten of us will spend more than �100,000 on our social care costs.
:20:35. > :20:39.By putting a cap in the limit on how much anyone has to pay, we will
:20:39. > :20:47.make it possible for people to plan much earlier in their life. First
:20:47. > :20:52.their child benefit was cut, then the marriage tax postponed, now the
:20:52. > :20:58.inheritance tax pledge abandoned. Little wonder that the Tory middle
:20:58. > :21:01.classes are feeling slightly hard done by. Some feel that by paying
:21:01. > :21:06.inheritance tax they've already paid the cost of their old care and
:21:06. > :21:10.now they are being singled out to pay the cost for others. Time for
:21:10. > :21:20.my next date. Let's hope it's an improvement shall we? Hop it,
:21:20. > :21:24.granddad. Hello, I don't suppose you get out
:21:24. > :21:30.much do you! As Chris Huhne wishes he could turn back the clock, no,
:21:30. > :21:34.hang on a mint, maybe not. He awaits his fate, which may be a
:21:34. > :21:42.custodial sentence. In his former constituency of Eastleigh, a host
:21:42. > :21:47.of suddenly concerned politicians are jockeying for position speed
:21:47. > :21:50.dating potential voters. It must be a crucial by-election. You have to
:21:50. > :21:55.show that you can hold on to seats like this in the south of England.
:21:56. > :22:00.If you cannot, your prospects for the elections are pretty poor.
:22:00. > :22:04.confident we will hold on the this seat but not because I say so but
:22:04. > :22:09.because the people of Eastleigh like the fact that's Liberal
:22:09. > :22:12.Democrats who've been cutting council tax. I've seen a few by-
:22:12. > :22:18.elections in my time and nothing settles until all the candidates
:22:18. > :22:22.are there. We know from the opinion polls that we are ahead or we are
:22:22. > :22:27.just lightly behind, so I think there's a lot to find for. Labour
:22:27. > :22:33.is here to set out our one-nation alternative and to give people a
:22:33. > :22:42.way of sending a real protest to the G There is this huge issue of
:22:42. > :22:48.Romanian and Bulgarian entry next year in unlimited numbers. Jobs and
:22:49. > :22:54.house itting are real issues here. A rocky patch in the coalition's
:22:54. > :22:58.uneasy marriage. I know you are not supposed to talk
:22:58. > :23:03.about politics or religion on a first date but I've messed up on
:23:03. > :23:09.the politics already, so I might as well go for broke. So, are you a
:23:09. > :23:18.believer? Hang on, are you sure you're looking for a relationship?
:23:18. > :23:23.That's a big a shock as the Pope resigning from Vatican City to join
:23:23. > :23:32.Vatican United. Is that right? You're jogging -- you're joking,
:23:32. > :23:40.the Pope? Oh, my God. Oh, I'm so shocked. He has been such a short
:23:40. > :23:44.time with us. Meanwhile Rupert Murdoch has tweeted that he's
:23:44. > :23:49.considering putting page 3 out to grass. Mind you, as he's been
:23:49. > :23:53.saying that in private for the past decade at least, it is a bit of an
:23:53. > :24:03.old horse chestnut, so I wouldn't hold your breath. Time for my last
:24:03. > :24:05.
:24:05. > :24:15.day. Maybe topless isn't so bad after
:24:15. > :24:15.
:24:15. > :24:20.all! Cheers. They really blew the extras budget
:24:20. > :24:24.on that one. That was Jane Moore, with special thanks to Miles of "My
:24:24. > :24:28.Cheeky Butler". I must remind you that you can find a full list of
:24:28. > :24:34.all the candidates standing in the Eastleigh by-election on the BBC
:24:34. > :24:41.News website. We have to do that, so I've done it.
:24:41. > :24:47.Michael, can the Tories still hope to win the next election if living
:24:47. > :24:52.standards in 2015 are lower than 2010? Yes. Government can win
:24:52. > :24:57.elections in all sorts of circumstances. I fleb the 1980
:24:57. > :25:01.winning an election with 3 million unemployed. It depends crucially on
:25:01. > :25:05.whether people believe that the opposition is ready to take over,
:25:05. > :25:13.which is why Ed Miliband's appearance today is quite
:25:13. > :25:18.interesting. Mr Miliband, he is going to ask the Reagan question
:25:18. > :25:25.used so effectively in 1980. He said, are you better off than you
:25:25. > :25:32.were in 1976? Mr Miliband will say, are you better off now than in
:25:32. > :25:36.2010? Mr Reagan wasn't in power in 1976 but Mr Miliband was in 2010.
:25:36. > :25:38.That's part of the reason why he's not only put in place some headline
:25:38. > :25:45.policies that illustrate the economic approach to he wants to
:25:45. > :25:48.take, but to put in place with the 10p tax rate a policy that says we
:25:48. > :25:51.got it wrong in Government and this is one of the ways in which we are
:25:51. > :25:57.going to demonstrate that we've learnt that lesson. Do you think
:25:57. > :26:02.that on the scrapping of the 10p tax rate, he said, quote, that was
:26:02. > :26:08.a mistake made by Gordon Brown. Will the voters give him credit for
:26:08. > :26:11.track his old boss? That is the problem of course with trashing
:26:11. > :26:15.your record in Government and continuously apologising for your
:26:15. > :26:22.record in Government. To be fair Gordon Brown himself has said he
:26:22. > :26:28.was wrong about that decision. bet Gordon is really comfortable
:26:28. > :26:35.about the way Ed Miliband said that today. I hope there were no mobile
:26:35. > :26:37.phones lying around. I suspect he will hope Labour wins the next
:26:37. > :26:42.election. It is a tactical thing. It is much more important what's
:26:42. > :26:48.happened under the coalition, which has been under a lot of Lib Dem
:26:48. > :26:53.pressure, to lift the threshold at which people pay tax to �10,000. If
:26:53. > :26:57.you make a 10p tax rate, Miliband said today it was worth �2 a week,
:26:57. > :27:03.but once you've taken off the effect on benefits and so on it is
:27:03. > :27:09.probably 66p. It is nothing. week? A week. It is a �1,000 band
:27:09. > :27:14.at the moment on which the 10p will... That's assuming the mansion
:27:15. > :27:21.tax gets you �2 billion. I've seen estimates that suggest you will be
:27:21. > :27:28.lucky to get �1 billion. To be fair about the �2 billion, those are
:27:28. > :27:32.figures that are based on IFS figures. I think they might be
:27:32. > :27:38.based on the Lib Dems. That should give you confidence. That's the
:27:38. > :27:42.other point about this, this is the adoption of a policy the Lib Dems
:27:42. > :27:48.have promoted. The 10p tax rate, if you increase the rate at which you
:27:48. > :27:54.pay tax, you benefit those people at the bottom. If you reintroduce a
:27:54. > :28:01.10p tax rate you benefit 25 million basic rate taxpayers as well.
:28:01. > :28:05.Except those on the very high. everyone who is paying income tax
:28:05. > :28:12.benefits as well: Isn't the reason Ed Miliband said it today is that
:28:12. > :28:21.he fierce it is going to be done in a budget? Therefore it is also...
:28:21. > :28:29.It is one of the reasons why Gordon Brown wanted rid of it. To make a
:28:29. > :28:33.real difference, tour create a 10p tax rate between 9,500 and up to
:28:33. > :28:38.12,000, the total cost is �7 billion. That would make a
:28:38. > :28:43.difference but there is no mansion tax, unless you want to kill the
:28:43. > :28:50.housing market in Britain altogether, that is ever going to
:28:50. > :28:55.make �7 billion. The 10p is a �1,000 band today. And raises
:28:55. > :29:00.nothing. 67P as Michael says. it makes a very important point for
:29:00. > :29:03.all taxpayers and reinforces the argument that Ed Miliband is making.
:29:03. > :29:08.An echo of Barack Obama, that the difference a Labour Government
:29:08. > :29:12.would take is to build the economy from the middle. But that whole
:29:12. > :29:18.squeezed middle is not only the people who are suffering gurks
:29:18. > :29:23.people who will provide the everyone us to grow. Put aside the
:29:23. > :29:29.detail. Having interviewed Ed Balls today the details are sketchy.
:29:29. > :29:33.Looction at the direction of the travel. Tax the -- location of the
:29:33. > :29:38.direction of travel. Use the proceeds to cut the tax of the rest.
:29:38. > :29:42.Does that still have potency in the 21st century? I suspect so, as
:29:42. > :29:46.there are many more people who regard themselves as poor as rich.
:29:46. > :29:52.However, the introduction of a wealth tax, which is what it is, is
:29:52. > :29:56.a major step. It breaks with all press den, except that we have been
:29:56. > :30:02.before in a situation where you tax people on their assets who may not
:30:02. > :30:07.have any income. It generally ends badly, because among the people who
:30:07. > :30:11.own these �2 million houses are people who are retired and have no
:30:11. > :30:17.income. They are asset rich and income poor. Thefpblts will be
:30:17. > :30:21.driven from their houses. They will be driven from their houses.
:30:21. > :30:25.other policy is social care and the inheritance tax. Do the
:30:25. > :30:33.Government's proposals broadly make sense or not? Well, they broadly
:30:33. > :30:37.make sense in as much as they are the model that Andrew Dilnot
:30:37. > :30:41.brought forward in terms of the look he took at this. They make
:30:41. > :30:44.sense because this is an enormously important area that needs to be
:30:44. > :30:48.solved for the long term. The difficulty with them is that while
:30:48. > :30:54.they make sense in five years' time they don't solve today's problems.
:30:54. > :31:01.They of course in setting the cap at �57,000 set it considerably
:31:01. > :31:11.higher than Dilnot profd, therefore impact on fewer people. -- proposed,
:31:11. > :31:18.
:31:18. > :31:23.therefore impact on fewer people. $:/STARTFEED. It's potty. They are
:31:23. > :31:26.introducing a thing which will penalise everybody by restricting
:31:26. > :31:32.the threshold on inheritance tax. So everybody knows they are going
:31:32. > :31:37.to be poorer and none of the people who benefit know it will be them
:31:37. > :31:42.who benefit. Everybody knows this is about protecting the legacies
:31:42. > :31:46.passing from well off people to their well off children. It seems
:31:46. > :31:53.ludicrous when we are in a period of austerity to expand ways of
:31:53. > :31:59.expanding the welfare state. Isn't the source of this the tuition
:31:59. > :32:05.fees? The Tories made a promise at the last election in 2007 to raise
:32:05. > :32:10.the inheritance tax threshold to �1 million. They are cutting that in
:32:10. > :32:16.real terms. For those who voted Tory for that... The irony is that
:32:16. > :32:22.that was the promise that stopped Gordon at the election. It's huge.
:32:22. > :32:31.Just as the Lib Dem's fees was. And this is too? And all for nothing,
:32:31. > :32:34.for a policy that doesn't make any sense. Final question to you, jack
:32:34. > :32:40.quay -- Jacqui. How should Labour fight this. He's the one-nation
:32:40. > :32:49.Labour guy so he needs to show well in places like that -- show he can
:32:49. > :32:54.do well in places like that. He could let the Tories in because of
:32:54. > :32:58.the Lib Dem votes? It's about trying to get back to the pre-1977
:32:58. > :33:04.situation when we say we could win in the south. What about his
:33:04. > :33:07.dilemma? The better he does has got to be the expense of Lib Dem
:33:07. > :33:11.defectors. The more Lib Dem defectors, the more likely the Tory
:33:11. > :33:14.also win? I think in the long run the most important thing is for him
:33:14. > :33:18.to show that Labour with him in leadership is in a position where
:33:18. > :33:23.it could gain the sort of votes in the south where it would be
:33:23. > :33:27.necessary... So if he only comes a half decent third, that's good
:33:27. > :33:32.enough even if it means giving the seat to the Tories? You can't back
:33:32. > :33:36.off on the basis that you might at some point in the future want Lib
:33:36. > :33:41.Dem support because he wants to win a majority and the only way you can
:33:42. > :33:45.do that is if you are going to get decent votes in places like
:33:45. > :33:51.Eastleigh. According to highly reputable
:33:51. > :33:55.research which we found on the Internet, faced with a choice of
:33:55. > :33:59.candidates for president, more often than not, Americans choose
:33:59. > :34:06.the tallest. They also historically tend to go for the heavier. For the
:34:06. > :34:12.Republicans looking for a winner for 2016, the obvious one is Chris
:34:12. > :34:18.Christie of new Jersey. Why is he getting so much grief for packing
:34:18. > :34:28.the political pounds? All 300 plus of them? We decided it was time to
:34:28. > :34:36.
:34:36. > :34:41.weigh up this issue and put male body image in this week's Spotlight.
:34:41. > :34:47.Whether it's A listers or politicians, there is strict image
:34:47. > :34:52.guidelines and pressure to look the part. Although fashionable facial
:34:52. > :34:58.hair was the accessory on the red carpet, in Westminster, the lack's
:34:58. > :35:03.never gone down well. Chris Christie is feeling the brunt
:35:03. > :35:10.of an image conscious society with questions raised over what he's too
:35:10. > :35:14.fat to be president. Maybe that's why call me Dave's been stepping up
:35:15. > :35:19.his exercise regime and revealing this week he got a �7 conditional
:35:19. > :35:25.500 discount from his personal trainer. Nick Clegg claiming he's
:35:25. > :35:30.finally off the ciggies and there's been accusations that Harold
:35:30. > :35:40.Wilson's pipe has been airbrushed from BBC screens to give him a
:35:40. > :35:42.
:35:42. > :35:46.Take it from me and I know a lot about male style, if looking good
:35:46. > :35:53.is key to popularity, maybe a bit of Lamar's swagger is what
:35:53. > :35:58.politicians need to impress the voting public.
:35:58. > :36:02.I'm delighted to say we are joined by Lamar. Welcome to This Week. You
:36:02. > :36:08.are looking good obviously. Obviously we are too! Obviously,
:36:08. > :36:12.yes. Obviously. How much pressure are you under as a man to stay
:36:12. > :36:17.looking sharp? I don't know if pressure is the right word, but you
:36:17. > :36:23.have to stay conscious of your appearance, especially in a day and
:36:23. > :36:29.age where Twitter is massive, the spwe net is, it's a very digital
:36:29. > :36:36.age -- Internet. There are lots of uncharitable people out there?
:36:36. > :36:42.a bad picture lasts a lifetime these days. People in your position,
:36:42. > :36:49.more often than not you have been judging looks rather than music?
:36:49. > :36:55.They go hand in hand, you know. It's a very visual age we live in.
:36:55. > :36:59.Suppose you put on a few pounds, grew a straggly beard, would that
:36:59. > :37:03.affect your career? Would the record company say, what's
:37:03. > :37:07.happening?: luckily on this album I'm the record company so no-one
:37:07. > :37:13.can tell me anything. What would you say to yourself? Get it in gear,
:37:13. > :37:17.come on, look at the way you look, come on! So it would matter?
:37:17. > :37:20.depends on the motivation, as long as the motivation's right. If you
:37:20. > :37:24.are staying healthy because people are picking on you, maybe not, but
:37:24. > :37:29.if it's because you want to look good, you don't like what you see
:37:29. > :37:34.or you would rather you wore something different, why not.
:37:34. > :37:40.Governor Christie too fat to be President? He may be. I think there
:37:40. > :37:43.was a President who was his weight but the concern the voters have is,
:37:43. > :37:48.will this man last the presidential term because nowadays, so little
:37:48. > :37:52.consideration is given to choosing the Vice-President. The Vice-
:37:52. > :37:55.President is chosen for all sorts of reasons that have nothing to do
:37:55. > :38:02.with their suitability to become President if something goes wrong.
:38:02. > :38:06.You worry, are you going to get a Sarah Palin who ran for the
:38:06. > :38:16.Republicans four or five years ago? So you must worry. People are
:38:16. > :38:21.always poking fun at Eric Pickles. Sometimes cruelly. He's got a way
:38:21. > :38:25.of using his weight to his advantage? Yes, he is funny like
:38:25. > :38:30.Chris Christie was there. The idea that I am going to be sympathetic
:38:30. > :38:36.to a bunch of men moaning about the fact that they are getting judged
:38:36. > :38:40.on their appearance is a little bit difficult for me. Like you even
:38:40. > :38:46.repeating that point. You guys have to get over yourselves and get on
:38:46. > :38:49.with it. The thing that often gets people is that politicians are,
:38:49. > :38:53.particularly Government ministers and oppositions, are always
:38:53. > :39:00.lecturing us on health and what we should be eating. Smoking - when
:39:00. > :39:06.you look at them - they are not the healthiest themselves are they?
:39:06. > :39:10.think it takes all sorts, if you are in the public eye inevitably if
:39:10. > :39:15.you are waking up seeing images of you that you don't particularly
:39:16. > :39:20.like, you are going to make an effort in whatever way to improve
:39:20. > :39:27.that. Whether it affects your ability to do your job, I don't
:39:27. > :39:32.know... What's this thing about the Holyrood stars, and you --
:39:32. > :39:37.Hollywood stars, and you yourself, like when I asked George Clooney at
:39:37. > :39:41.a party myself and Ben Affleck as well. I'm not a name-dropper, but I
:39:41. > :39:46.said, I'll see you tomorrow and Thursday. What's this thing about
:39:46. > :39:53.beards? They are all wearing them at the moment, aren't they? They
:39:53. > :39:58.are, yes. I wish I could grow a bit more but my genetics don't allow me.
:39:58. > :40:04.This is as good as it gets. Beards have always been a no-no in
:40:04. > :40:09.politics, haven't they, in modern times? Yes, although we showed a
:40:09. > :40:19.few there. David Blunkett maybe for special reasons but Robin Cook,
:40:19. > :40:20.
:40:20. > :40:26.Alistair Darling, there are some. Things go through phases, don't
:40:26. > :40:32.they. They all got rid of their beards. Perhaps led by Ben Affleck
:40:32. > :40:37.and Lamar, who knows, perhaps we might see more. An incredible
:40:37. > :40:41.amount of work to be done on them, they are sculpted. They are works
:40:41. > :40:44.of art. They are. When you look back at British political history
:40:45. > :40:49.was there ever a time when the three party leaders were just as
:40:49. > :40:53.fit looking as they are now? They are all quite young men, very, very
:40:53. > :41:00.presentable, they've got good firks, they make an issue of their health,
:41:00. > :41:04.it's a sign of the times, isn't it -- good figures. Men in the public
:41:04. > :41:09.eye now, are they not really just having to endure this kind of
:41:09. > :41:19.judgment which women in the public eye have always had to endure?
:41:19. > :41:20.
:41:20. > :41:25.I think so. Because it's such a digital age and one pictures
:41:25. > :41:33.travels -- picture travels quickly and one picture lasts a long time,
:41:33. > :41:39.people are conscious of their image. BBC Parliament's running footage
:41:39. > :41:48.about the Harold Wilson years, there were pictures of Harold
:41:48. > :41:52.MacMillan and Mr Douglas-Hulme, looks do seem to matter more now
:41:52. > :41:56.than they do now. Is that the television age? I'm not sure if
:41:56. > :42:01.they do, but if they do, it's Lamar's point that we live in this
:42:01. > :42:08.television age where you have to make an impact very quickly on the
:42:08. > :42:12.television in photographs and if you can't do that, you... Harold
:42:12. > :42:17.Wilson was the man who came into our living room through the
:42:17. > :42:23.television screen and it wasn't good looks. It was the Yorkshire
:42:23. > :42:31.accent, the first TV Prime Minister. Why the Tories picked Heath because
:42:31. > :42:38.they tried to match it. What are you up to? Promoting an album
:42:38. > :42:43.called Invincible. I'm just having a really good time celebrating my
:42:43. > :42:45.fifth album so it's great. Stay off the chips! There you go, I'm
:42:46. > :42:49.trying! That is your lot for tonight. It's
:42:49. > :42:54.not for us though, because with the devastating news that Roman
:42:54. > :43:04.wrestling is to be dropped from the Olympics, Michael's wiping away the
:43:04. > :43:07.
:43:07. > :43:14.tears and wiping on the baby oil for one last time. We leave you
:43:14. > :43:24.tonight with a glorious moment from this week's PMQs, speaker Bercow
:43:24. > :43:24.
:43:24. > :43:29.doing his very, very, very, very best... Thank you, Mr Speaker.
:43:29. > :43:39.Schools... Sorry, Mr Speaker, the opposition don't want... Very
:43:39. > :43:43.