:00:22. > :00:27.are ringing out for This Week. # You can ring my bell
:00:27. > :00:32.# Ring my bell... # As the nation bid a final farewell to Maggie, the
:00:32. > :00:36.bells of Westminster fell silent out of respect. Journalist and
:00:36. > :00:40.commentator Andrew Rawnsley was there.
:00:40. > :00:47.David Cameron says we are all Thatcherites now. Are we? The lady
:00:47. > :00:51.may have been laid to rest, but the arguments still resonate loudly. As
:00:51. > :00:57.attention turns to present day politics, we ask whether Ed
:00:57. > :01:04.Miliband rings anybody's bell. Labour insider and blogger Dan
:01:04. > :01:08.Hodges thinks Ding Dong it's its election prospects are dead. If the
:01:08. > :01:11.Labour Leadership think the route to leadership is Number Ten, they
:01:12. > :01:17.are about to drop one almighty clanger. With protesters on the
:01:17. > :01:27.streets, what are the rules of decorum when it comes to political
:01:27. > :01:33.discourse? Etiquette expert and how clean is your house woman join us.
:01:33. > :01:43.We shouldn't take any nonsense from you this evening. Be warned! This
:01:43. > :01:47.
:01:47. > :01:49.Evening all. Welcome to This Week. broadcasting live and direct from
:01:49. > :01:52.our new studios in downtown Pyongyang, having smuggled
:01:52. > :01:54.ourselves into North Korea this week by attaching ourselves to an
:01:54. > :01:58.unsuspecting tour party of BBC middle managers keen to learn how
:01:58. > :02:00.to suck up to the new boss of a one-party state. We claimed to be
:02:00. > :02:10.respected journalists with an improbable desire to make serious
:02:10. > :02:11.
:02:11. > :02:14.political television. Amazingly, we got away with it... So far. But if
:02:14. > :02:17.we are rumbled by the regime, which given our brain-washing and regular
:02:17. > :02:19.strip searches, Michael seems quite excited by that - an isolated
:02:19. > :02:22.northern Gulag where human dignity barely exists, and the winds rattle
:02:22. > :02:25.eerily through the empty vending machines and creative minds of an
:02:25. > :02:35.entire generation. But that's only if the North Koreans insist on
:02:35. > :02:42.
:02:42. > :02:46.sending us to the BBC's media city, And I don't think that's going to
:02:46. > :02:47.happen. The North Koreans may be cruel, but they are not entirely
:02:47. > :02:51.heartless. Speaking of those who are living in denial and clueless
:02:51. > :02:53.about the outside world, I'm joined on the sofa tonight by two of
:02:53. > :02:55.Westminster's most unstable, unreliable regimes. Think of them
:02:55. > :02:58.as the North Korea and the North Circular of late-night political
:02:58. > :03:08.chat. I speak, of course, of #wheredidmyseatgo, Jacqui Smith,
:03:08. > :03:17.
:03:18. > :03:23.and #sadmanonatrain, Michael choo Welcome to you both. Michael, you
:03:23. > :03:27.were at the funeral. What is your memory? It was a remarkable event.
:03:27. > :03:32.But George Osborne shed a tear, I shed one myself. When I did, I
:03:32. > :03:36.thought back to a moment when Margaret Thatcher had resigned, a
:03:36. > :03:41.number of junior ministers were invited to Downing Street for a
:03:41. > :03:45.farewell lunch and we got a bit sniffy while there. We came out of
:03:45. > :03:49.the room where we'd been having lunch and Denis said "I don't know
:03:49. > :03:55.what you are all crying about, we are not dead, you know" which was a
:03:55. > :03:58.typical remark, and I thought, perhaps that's now a fact that they
:03:58. > :04:02.are both dead, we have their permission to shed a tear. Jacqui
:04:02. > :04:07.Smith? I was happy for it to go ahead in the way that it did. Ben
:04:07. > :04:16.we got to yesterday, I was happy not to watch it. I was a bit cross,
:04:16. > :04:19.however, despite being... Even as a spectacle? I did a days' work.All
:04:19. > :04:23.that beautiful BBC camera work? Sounds like it was well received
:04:23. > :04:27.and well covered. I thought David Cameron was wrong to take the
:04:27. > :04:31.opportunity of the day of the funeral to do that, we are all
:04:32. > :04:35.Thatcherites now line when actually what it was about was almost a
:04:35. > :04:41.state funeral for somebody who had played an important role.
:04:42. > :04:46.didn't watch it in protest? To Mr Cameron seeming to politicise it
:04:46. > :04:50.because he did in a way, didn't he? When everybody had I think
:04:50. > :04:55.responded pretty well in the weak in the run-up, I thought that was
:04:55. > :04:58.wrong to do that. We'll send you the DVD. Very nice pictures and
:04:58. > :05:02.music! Ed Miliband was praised last week for a well judged speech in
:05:02. > :05:09.the Commons following the death of Margaret Thatcher. With an election
:05:09. > :05:13.only two years away, he'd no doubt prefer to be praised for his
:05:13. > :05:20.political strategy. There are plenty who say he could do better.
:05:20. > :05:30.The past week saw a succession of previous leaders drifting to the
:05:30. > :05:30.
:05:30. > :05:40.left. He is Ed not doing as well as he thinks he is? We asked Telegraph
:05:40. > :05:45.
:05:45. > :05:52.insider Dan Hodges for his take of # Weird science
:05:52. > :05:56.# Weird science... # Before she set her sites on
:05:56. > :06:01.Westminster, Margaret Thatcher was a chemist and, if you believe in
:06:01. > :06:05.another popular Thatcher myth, invented Mr Whipy ice-cream. She
:06:05. > :06:08.knew the right ingredients for bringing her party repeated
:06:08. > :06:12.electoral success. Ed Miliband, in contrast, and
:06:12. > :06:15.struggling with his political chemistry, I've been a member of
:06:15. > :06:18.the Labour Party for the best part of 0 years and I can tell you if he
:06:18. > :06:23.carries on with the strategy of moving to the left on a range of
:06:23. > :06:33.issues from the tkphoi welfare, then there's a miniscule chance of
:06:33. > :06:38.
:06:38. > :06:43.him making it to Downing Street -- the Ed's been having a tough time
:06:43. > :06:48.of it. Labour's opinion poll ratings you you, his personal
:06:48. > :06:53.ratings have shown a Lis I think the lack of this, political
:06:53. > :06:57.magnetism and Tony Blair, and a succession of former Labour Cabinet
:06:57. > :07:01.Ministers have been lining up to conduct a scathing peer review for
:07:01. > :07:04.reform of his electoral success. Take welfare. Ed's opposition to a
:07:04. > :07:11.benefits cap and failure to back the Government on welfare sanctions.
:07:11. > :07:20.A policy supported by most of the electorate is at best naive and at
:07:20. > :07:22.worst has the potential to... Blow up in his face.
:07:22. > :07:26.Then this's the economy. Most voters think our economic problems
:07:26. > :07:31.are the product of excessive spending and excessive debt.
:07:31. > :07:35.Labour should be looking for ways of turning down the spending tap,
:07:35. > :07:39.not ramping things up. The biggest danger for Labour is
:07:39. > :07:45.that despite all of this, Ed Miliband still doesn't recognise
:07:45. > :07:50.there's any dangers, hence what his inner circle call the 35% strategy.
:07:50. > :07:57.They plan to take the votes Labour won in 2010, mix in votes from
:07:57. > :08:01.disaffected Lib Dems and bingo. Ed's in Number Ten. That's no your
:08:01. > :08:05.eco moment, just some very weird science.
:08:05. > :08:08.So it's time to drop the fancy electoral experiments and start
:08:08. > :08:17.moving the Labour Party back towards the political centre where
:08:17. > :08:23.elections are won. Come on, Ed! It's not this!
:08:23. > :08:27.Reminds me of the days when I used to do Tomorrow's World. Dan Hodges
:08:27. > :08:32.joins us now in our academy in Westminster. Welcome to the
:08:32. > :08:38.programme. Can I clarify something, Dan. Am I right in saying you don't
:08:38. > :08:41.think Mr Miliband's going to win in 2015? Well, I mean I don't think
:08:41. > :08:44.it's likely, if I had to bet. I would bet on a Conservative
:08:44. > :08:48.majority at the moment. If you look at where Labour is in the opinion
:08:48. > :08:53.polls at the moment, the lead just isn't big enough. I think you are
:08:53. > :08:57.starting to see the Tories gradually starting to lock down
:08:57. > :09:02.some quite important policy areas such as Europe and welfare.
:09:02. > :09:07.Obviously, the real killer is Labour is still just nowhere on the
:09:07. > :09:10.park on the economy. I think Labour on the economy now is getting
:09:10. > :09:16.itself into the sort of position that Labour got itself into defence
:09:16. > :09:20.in the early 80s, tth it's getting that serious now for Labour. Do you
:09:20. > :09:24.share Dan's concerns? I share concern Haas the lead we have at
:09:24. > :09:27.the moment isn't sufficient to get us to a position where we'll win.
:09:27. > :09:33.So I'm not one of those people that says we can sit back. Where I
:09:33. > :09:38.differ with Dan is I think that nor do I think is Ed Miliband. There
:09:38. > :09:42.are some things you said in the piece I agree with and some that I
:09:42. > :09:47.don't. I think you were harsh on Ed Miliband's position with respect to
:09:47. > :09:50.welfare. Before Christmas, I wrote a piece that made me fall out with
:09:50. > :09:56.some members of my party when I made the proint Dan made which is
:09:56. > :10:01.that we need to nail it down in order to be successful -- point. We
:10:01. > :10:04.do now have a policy with a jobs guarantee that includes sanctions
:10:04. > :10:09.if you don't take a job after a time. That was an important step
:10:09. > :10:15.forward. What is the period of time? Two years.So you can be on
:10:15. > :10:19.welfare for two years before the sanction hits? The argument being
:10:19. > :10:22.that the prior thing you need to do is to create more jobs. No-one
:10:23. > :10:27.would disagree with that. Is that enough of a welfare policy to get
:10:27. > :10:32.you back on the rails? No, I think welfare is now a disaster area for
:10:32. > :10:37.the Labour Party frankly. I take on board what Jacqui Smith says but
:10:37. > :10:41.Labour's got itself into the position where its official Labour
:10:41. > :10:51.Party policy is to increase benefits but freeze public sector
:10:51. > :10:54.wages. That's an incomprehensible position for any political party.
:10:55. > :11:00.Dan doesn't think Labour can win, but you don't think David Cameron
:11:00. > :11:03.is going to win an outright majority either. Can you both with
:11:03. > :11:08.right? It's the curious position at the moment that there are good
:11:08. > :11:12.argument force thinking both parties can't win. The Liberal
:11:12. > :11:16.Democrats are also absolutely doomed. My argument is that no
:11:16. > :11:22.party in office increases its share of the vote and the Conservatives,
:11:22. > :11:27.37% of the vote, is not enough to get a majority. Anthony Eden was
:11:27. > :11:33.the last to do it.En There's no reason to think there would be a
:11:33. > :11:40.coalition. So the Conservatives appear to be doomed. In normal
:11:40. > :11:44.circumstances, you can't increase your vote. And no growth?And the
:11:44. > :11:46.debt increases. However, I am very familiar with what Dan says and I
:11:46. > :11:50.think he makes some very good points. I'm familiar with it
:11:50. > :11:53.because I've seen it from the other side. I was there when William
:11:53. > :11:58.Hague in particular pursued this core vote policy, this defeatist
:11:58. > :12:02.policy of only going for people who're already Conservatives and
:12:02. > :12:05.thinking, well, you know, I'm going to lose the election, but at least
:12:05. > :12:10.I'll hold on to a particular ramp of the vote and at least I'll have
:12:10. > :12:16.the support of my newspapers. The one thing Dan leaves out is that
:12:16. > :12:23.whereas 37% is not good enough for the Conservatives, 35% is almost
:12:23. > :12:32.good enough for Labour because of the way... Because it got Mr Blair
:12:32. > :12:36.a majority in 2005? 37.So 36 probably. Jacqui Smith, a lot of
:12:36. > :12:40.your Blairite colleagues have been criticising the lack of policy many
:12:40. > :12:43.Miliband has. Is it really policy that worries them or do they think
:12:43. > :12:48.that really Mr Miliband just doesn't have it. There was a poll
:12:48. > :12:55.in the Standard today, the MORI poll, Labour's ahead in the polls
:12:55. > :13:00.in terms of percentage of the vote, but 66% of those asked didn't
:13:01. > :13:04.believe Mr Miliband was ready to rule the country. Only 24% did.
:13:04. > :13:07.me be positive and optimistic. That's a better position than he
:13:07. > :13:12.was in two years ago. That wasn't two years ago. We need to go
:13:12. > :13:15.through a variety of stages to get yourself into power. You need to
:13:15. > :13:20.prove that you can oppose. I think Ed's done that. Secondly, you need
:13:20. > :13:24.to get people to listen to you again and it feels to me, when
:13:24. > :13:27.knocking on doors, that people are willing to listen. And then, and of
:13:27. > :13:31.course this is a problem, you can't go into a general election solely
:13:31. > :13:34.on a critique of the existing Government. People vote at a
:13:34. > :13:39.general election for the future, not in protest about what's
:13:39. > :13:44.happening at the moment and yes, the next stage is to make sure that
:13:44. > :13:48.some of the broad themes Ed has fleshed out are then turned into
:13:48. > :13:53.policy. That's what policy review is about. Is the problem the lack
:13:53. > :14:03.of a defying policy a set of policies yet, or, as this poll
:14:03. > :14:15.
:14:15. > :14:20.British people a particularly clear vision of what he wants to do. He
:14:20. > :14:25.seems to be taking the Labour Party back to a policy agenda they
:14:25. > :14:29.rejected decisively in the 1980s. As we've seen again tonight there is an
:14:29. > :14:34.Independent splash tomorrow saying Labour is going to spend more than
:14:34. > :14:39.the Tories and the strategy is going to be to spend more than the Tories
:14:39. > :14:44.in the next election. Now that's being shot down decisively. This is
:14:44. > :14:50.what happens when you let a policy vacuum develop. You always advised
:14:50. > :14:55.Mr Cameron on this programme to go into the 2010 election very
:14:55. > :15:00.policy-light. Yes, I did. After all, he was fighting Gordon Brown after
:15:00. > :15:05.13 years of Labour Government, and what he needed to do was to get the
:15:05. > :15:10.sense of the party right. And the sense of the party was to be on the
:15:10. > :15:18.centre ground. But isn't it Government that lose elections? It
:15:18. > :15:23.is not oppositions that win. 1992 gives the lie to that. In 1992 we as
:15:23. > :15:28.the Labour Party faced an extremely unpopular Government but we didn't
:15:28. > :15:32.have a programme in place. You had a policy to put tax up! Yes, and in
:15:32. > :15:36.many ways we didn't have a programme that gave that centre ground that
:15:36. > :15:40.Dan is right to identify. I think the crucial thing about this moment
:15:41. > :15:46.which Dan has put his finger on is that David Cameron at the moment is
:15:46. > :15:53.learning. He is moving in the right direction for his party. If anything
:15:53. > :15:56.Miliband is unlearning, or whatever the expression is. I do take the
:15:57. > :16:01.view that the Tories are very likely to lose, but that view is being
:16:01. > :16:04.shaken, because I do think the Tories at the moment are moving in
:16:04. > :16:13.the right direction and Labour is moving in the wrong direction. It is
:16:13. > :16:19.not just that Ed Miliband is not associated with the ancien regime of
:16:19. > :16:26.Gordon Brown but so is Ed Balls. Two people are associated with with the
:16:26. > :16:33.by-gone age. Should he move Mr Balls before the election? I don't think
:16:33. > :16:38.he should. It is policy through the policy review and the apologies
:16:38. > :16:41.which have grated on me for what the last Government did to move yourself
:16:41. > :16:45.on. It is not simply about the people. You can move that forward
:16:45. > :16:50.but only if you have a programme that responds to what Tony Blair was
:16:50. > :16:54.talking about last week, and that is the new questions. Have you got
:16:54. > :17:03.answers to the new questions and the new challenges? Not simply, can you
:17:03. > :17:12.represent and be a repository for people's anger? Dan, is it not one
:17:12. > :17:16.but two Eds? Is one Ed too many? think if Ed Miliband moved Ed Balls
:17:16. > :17:20.he would fall into the trap. The second Ed balls moved the Tories
:17:20. > :17:29.will be saying right, there is only one person in the Labour Party
:17:29. > :17:34.associated with the previous regime and that is Ed Miliband. The Tories
:17:34. > :17:37.wouldn't like Alistair Darling? I'm not sure about that. I am!I think
:17:37. > :17:43.the idea of running against the guy who was Chancellor last time is
:17:43. > :17:47.something they would quite enjoy when it came to it. Tories lying to
:17:47. > :17:53.me? Who would have thunk it? Dan, thank you.
:17:53. > :18:00.Now, it is late, Babestation late, and you have no doubt had a skinful
:18:00. > :18:04.of the old German nectar and are blubbing like a big old Boy Georgy,
:18:04. > :18:08.Osborne that is. Waiting in the wings a woman with standards who
:18:09. > :18:14.likes to see things properly. So clearly out of place on this show!
:18:14. > :18:19.Kim Woodburn is going to talk about decorum in life and politics. You
:18:19. > :18:26.know where you can find no evidence whatsoever of respectful behaviour?
:18:26. > :18:36.That's right, Michael's dressling room. But -- Michael's dressing
:18:36. > :18:37.
:18:37. > :18:44.room, but also on Twitter, Facebook and the Interweb.
:18:44. > :18:46.Now, we always knew it would be a huge moment. The death of Britain's
:18:46. > :18:49.first female and longest-serving Prime Minister of modern times
:18:49. > :18:52.revived many memories, and brought back to life the old political
:18:52. > :18:56.battle lines of the '80s. "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead" crashed the
:18:56. > :18:59.charts, but Big Ben fell silent on the morning of the funeral. And in
:18:59. > :19:02.the end, in London at least, few protesters turned out as her coffin
:19:02. > :19:05.made its journey through the heart of the capital to St Paul's. So we
:19:05. > :19:08.sent The Observer's Andrew Rawnsley down to the heart of London's old
:19:08. > :19:18.East End, to the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, where Big Ben was actually
:19:18. > :19:19.
:19:19. > :19:25.cast. This is his roundup of the political week. Ask not for whom the
:19:25. > :19:29.bell tolls, or in this case didn't toll, as one of the many ceremonial
:19:29. > :19:33.moments for the funeral of Margaret Thatcher, Big Ben, which was cast at
:19:33. > :19:42.this work shop, was silenced at 10 o'clock yesterday morning. That's
:19:42. > :19:52.the first time the Great Clock has been deliberately stopped the death
:19:52. > :19:54.
:19:54. > :19:58.of Winston Churchill. I was in St Paul's, I wanted to be an eyewitness
:19:58. > :20:04.to the spectacle revolving around a very important historical figure is.
:20:04. > :20:10.As former Prime Ministers took their places, I couldn't help wondering
:20:10. > :20:15.what would be bubbling if their heads. Dare Ed Miliband or David
:20:15. > :20:20.Cameron treatment of winning three elections in a row? Tony Blair did
:20:20. > :20:25.emulate her hat-trick. I suspect he wouldn't mind a send-off like this.
:20:25. > :20:31.The occasion had its ironies. . She was a Prime Minister often jaggedly
:20:31. > :20:38.at odds with the established church, yet she was hymned away by the most
:20:38. > :20:42.senior prelates in the land and celestial choristers. She was a
:20:42. > :20:48.Prime Minister ardent for a small estate. Yet here was the state
:20:48. > :20:53.turned out in its full pomp to perform the rituals that we British
:20:53. > :20:58.do rather well. The Bishop of London, a rare churchman, because he
:20:58. > :21:05.is won who Mrs T liked, gave the address, including in it one of her
:21:05. > :21:13.signature phrases. After the storm of a life lived in the heat of
:21:13. > :21:21.political controversy, there is a great calm. Today the remains of the
:21:21. > :21:27.real Margaret Hilda Thatcher are here at her funeral service, lying
:21:27. > :21:33.here she is one of us, subject to the common destiny of all human
:21:33. > :21:38.beings. The Bishop was right of course, we are all mortal, the bell
:21:38. > :21:43.does toll for us all. But he was also wrong. Even in death, and she
:21:43. > :21:48.would probably relish this, Mrs Thatcher continued to generate red
:21:48. > :21:53.hot controversy. David Cameron says we are all Thatcherites now. I think
:21:53. > :21:59.not, Prime Minister. There are communities who deeply feel that too
:21:59. > :22:06.little respect has been paid to their feelings, that she and her
:22:06. > :22:11.successors were and are a destructive enemy. One cruel wag
:22:11. > :22:16.suggested that the Chancellor's eyes were watering at the thought of
:22:16. > :22:21.having to pay the �10 million bill for the funeral. Founded in the 16th
:22:21. > :22:25.century, this is Britain's oldest manufacturing company. Survived the
:22:25. > :22:30.Great Fire of London, world wars, even the coalition. With
:22:30. > :22:33.unemployment turning upwards again, now even the International Monetary
:22:33. > :22:40.Fund is saying that George Osborne has overdone the squeeze and is
:22:40. > :22:44.playing with fire. That's a bit hypocritical coming from the IMF who
:22:44. > :22:50.originally pressed austerity on everyone. But it was nevertheless
:22:50. > :22:55.painful to a Chancellor to hear this. There are a few countries
:22:55. > :23:02.where we think there is enough fiscal space to go further. One
:23:02. > :23:07.example is the UK, where we think that in the face of very weak
:23:07. > :23:13.private demand it may be time to consider an adjustment. One of the
:23:13. > :23:16.interesting things about Mrs Thatcher is that while she did lead
:23:16. > :23:19.a privatisation revolution by ringing the bell on a lot of
:23:19. > :23:23.nationalised industries, she didn't fundamentally shave back the size of
:23:24. > :23:28.Government. A proportion of national wealth consumed by the welfare state
:23:28. > :23:35.is pretty much the same when she left office as it was when she
:23:35. > :23:39.arrived there. Her heirs thi they can do what she couldn't- a slew of
:23:39. > :23:44.benefit changes are beginning to bite right now. . Including the
:23:44. > :23:51.introduction of a cap on the total amount of benefit any one household
:23:52. > :23:58.can claim. It is about ensuring that people in work and out of work have
:23:58. > :24:01.the same choices. The benefit cap is set at 500 a week. It forces people
:24:01. > :24:06.into temporary accommodation which drive it's up costs, not reduces
:24:06. > :24:09.them. One of the coalition's bright ideas for lifting the economy is to
:24:09. > :24:13.loosen the planning laws. The trouble is a lot of Tory MPs are all
:24:13. > :24:19.in favour of new building just so long as it is nowhere near them.
:24:19. > :24:25.They've forced Ministers to do that thing which Mrs T so hated, U-turn.
:24:25. > :24:31.We will bring forward a revised approach on the contentious question
:24:31. > :24:38.of permitted development rights for home extension when the Bill returns
:24:38. > :24:41.to the Lords. This has caused a great deal of grief to my District
:24:41. > :24:46.Council and to many across the country. I'm afraid we are not going
:24:46. > :24:51.to believe what he says at that dispatch box until we see nit black
:24:51. > :24:56.and white. What would Mrs Thatcher have thought of that? Love her or
:24:56. > :25:06.loathe her, she did think she sold people her council houses. This lot
:25:06. > :25:09.
:25:09. > :25:15.can't even agree the rules on where you can build a conservatory.
:25:15. > :25:22.Andrew Rawnsley there. Time to move on from the Thatcher
:25:22. > :25:26.funeral and so on. We've done enough of that for now. Now the news. Bad
:25:26. > :25:33.unemployment figures. Even the IMF is turning its back on austerity.
:25:33. > :25:37.Maybe we know why the Chancellor was really crying. The IMF has put
:25:37. > :25:40.itself in an absurd position. The United Kingdom has the highest
:25:40. > :25:45.deficit in the European Union. It is heading towards 100% national debt
:25:45. > :25:49.as a proportion of GDP. I simply don't know what the IMF is talking
:25:49. > :25:53.about. The British Government has to deal with real markets and the real
:25:53. > :25:57.markets are lending the British Government money at 2%. They are
:25:57. > :26:04.lending to the Spanish and the Italians 5%. The difference between
:26:04. > :26:07.one and the another is a sustainable situation and a catastrophe. The IMF
:26:07. > :26:10.can pontificate but politicians have to deal with reality. If they shift
:26:10. > :26:14.from the austerity policy and the Liberal Democrats and the
:26:14. > :26:18.Conservatives understand this, the markets will punish them. I notice
:26:18. > :26:25.that all Governments and parties when institutions like the IMF and
:26:25. > :26:28.the OECD back you, you big them up. When they don't, you dismiss them.
:26:28. > :26:31.There's a certain amount of that. There were times, certainly at the
:26:31. > :26:34.beginning, when there was international support for the
:26:34. > :26:39.austerity programme that the Government was undertaking. But the
:26:39. > :26:44.point is it has changed. What the Government said the austerity
:26:44. > :26:49.programme would do has failed to be delivered. Private sector jobs have
:26:49. > :26:55.not come in to fill the gap left by public sector jobs. I think you will
:26:55. > :27:00.find that bit has worked, that there's been no growth. There's been
:27:00. > :27:04.more private sector jobs than public sector jobs. There is has been.
:27:04. > :27:11.Business investment, which was supposed to be a significant part...
:27:11. > :27:16.After a run of good figures. Yes, but unemployment is still higher now
:27:16. > :27:20.than in 2010. Unemployment is higher as well. Business investment isn't
:27:20. > :27:24.rising as much as it should be. Exports are falling. What was
:27:24. > :27:28.expected? The fact that austerity was going to help us to pay down
:27:28. > :27:31.debt has also failed, because we find ourselves in a position where
:27:31. > :27:37.because of economic failure the Government is having to borrow more
:27:37. > :27:41.than they planned to. And at the same time we see a big... And so the
:27:41. > :27:46.answer is more borrowing? The Government having borrowed more than
:27:46. > :27:52.it planned is to borrow more? The answer is to have a more coherent
:27:52. > :27:59.approach. Than to have a growth in infrastructure Bill which has let's
:27:59. > :28:03.bill big conservatories in it which you can't then deliver. You have to
:28:03. > :28:13.be coherent to convince the British people that we are not going to
:28:13. > :28:14.
:28:14. > :28:19.become spin, Italy or Heaven forbid Cyprus. Of course you do. Can I
:28:20. > :28:23.bring in Miranda? It seems to me to be shown by the facts. They may be
:28:23. > :28:25.right to hang on in there and it will come right, but as of now it
:28:25. > :28:31.hasn't worked by the Government's on standards. The Liberal Democrats
:28:31. > :28:36.signed up to this when the coalition was formed. At the time I couldn't
:28:36. > :28:46.help feeling that their heart wasn't quite in it. They must be getting
:28:46. > :28:47.
:28:47. > :28:53.real nervous necessarilyies now. knellies now. As Michael said, they
:28:53. > :28:58.have been rather good figures. In fact there's been a lot of interest
:28:58. > :29:03.as to how that has been achieved. But now we know that unfortunately
:29:03. > :29:08.unemployment is going up. I think it is a moment for reflection. Having
:29:08. > :29:14.said that, I also think that Michael is absolutely right to talk about
:29:14. > :29:18.necessity. It is not about whether your heart's in it but what's
:29:18. > :29:25.necessary. You were talking about welfare reform. All of these areas
:29:25. > :29:33.of policy which are about the fiscal attitude, which is what the IMF is
:29:33. > :29:43.starting to talk about, it is about what's necessary, not what you want
:29:43. > :29:52.
:29:52. > :29:57.it? We have seen rebellions in the Lord's on reform already. I think
:29:57. > :30:00.though, on this particular issue, in a sense, the Labour Party's got
:30:00. > :30:04.itself in such a mess as it gives the Liberal Democrats a bit of
:30:04. > :30:09.cover. I think there is a lot of nervousness about the welfare
:30:09. > :30:14.reform package as we go forward in case there are more cuts that then
:30:14. > :30:17.bring such a conspicuous suffering that it brings the whole project
:30:17. > :30:22.into disrepute. So you have got a coalition then
:30:22. > :30:26.which is getting nervous about both the course of the economic policy
:30:27. > :30:32.and of a key part of that in budget control welfare? Well, I think
:30:32. > :30:36.there are two things at stake here. First of all, the whole coalition
:30:36. > :30:41.programme was to provide stability and then to turn around the economy.
:30:41. > :30:46.Clearly, whether the economy is turned around or not is the success
:30:46. > :30:50.or failure on which the whole thing will be judged. On the other hand,
:30:50. > :30:53.because of the squeeze on public spending, they've had to tackle
:30:53. > :30:57.long-term problems, some of which are extremely difficult like
:30:57. > :31:01.reforming a welfare state. You can have stability of the graveyard?
:31:01. > :31:05.You can indeed. Jacqui, let's assume for the next
:31:05. > :31:09.minute that you are right on your analysis, Michael's wrong. Why's
:31:09. > :31:14.your party finding it so difficult to convince the British people that
:31:14. > :31:19.you are right? Because this goes back to what I
:31:19. > :31:23.said earlier. You need, first of all, to oppose effectively, but you
:31:23. > :31:26.don't win an election and don't win people round on the basis of
:31:26. > :31:30.opposition. We have a reasonable lead in the polls it's fair to say,
:31:30. > :31:33.but which need to get ourselves into a position where we have an
:31:33. > :31:37.alternative programme. People, when they vote, choose between
:31:37. > :31:42.Governments, they don't solely vote at general election to make a
:31:42. > :31:46.protest. When building more conservatories is the key plank of
:31:46. > :31:52.the Government's growth strategy, it's getting pretty close to
:31:52. > :31:56.desperate? It's not a key plank of the Government's policy. This is
:31:56. > :32:01.co-fn's triumph. Cameron is leading a Government that was voted for by
:32:01. > :32:04.60% of the population -- Cameron. And he's instigating austerity
:32:04. > :32:08.measures almost equivalent to Margaret Thatcher's. Welfare
:32:08. > :32:12.reforms that she would never have dreamt of. Education reforms that
:32:12. > :32:16.she never touched and health reforms she never touched. He's
:32:16. > :32:20.doing that, leading a coalition Government. He would never have had
:32:20. > :32:25.permission from the media to do these reforms if he were leading a
:32:25. > :32:31.minority Conservative Government. And stupid blinkered Tories think
:32:31. > :32:37.that he is constrained in what it can do in coalition. Actually, he's
:32:37. > :32:42.been liberated to do vastly more than he could ever achieve by lead
:32:42. > :32:47.ago minority. Your party's given him cover to go further? How would
:32:47. > :32:55.you like to sell that at the Liberal conference? Exactly. That
:32:55. > :32:59.will not... ALL SPEAK AT ONCEThat will not be a junior coalition
:32:59. > :33:07.party sales pitch, I can assure you, particularly on the Health Service.
:33:07. > :33:12.Can I ask you about this terrible bombing in Boston, as a former Home
:33:12. > :33:16.Secretary? In these circumstances, is it scarier when you don't know
:33:16. > :33:20.who is behind it? I was lucky that the terrorist attacks that I had
:33:20. > :33:24.responsibility for were largely foiled, but that point at which you
:33:24. > :33:27.don't know who is responsible, whether or not this is the
:33:28. > :33:32.beginning of a potential series of attacks, and we saw a bit of that
:33:32. > :33:34.this week, didn't we, with the thought that there might be a link
:33:34. > :33:39.between the ricin letter sent to the President and the Boston
:33:39. > :33:44.bombings which it appears that there isn't. That lack of knowledge,
:33:44. > :33:49.you are right, is a very uncertain period. But what you also see very
:33:49. > :33:52.quickly, it's kicking in, is the expertise of those who're
:33:52. > :33:58.investigating. And whilst, for my taste, it's been a little leaky, I
:33:58. > :34:02.have to say in terms of we think we've got this, we've got these, on
:34:02. > :34:07.the whole, I suspect this is an extremely rigorous investigation
:34:07. > :34:11.which I certainly hope will bear fruit pretty quickly. The longer it
:34:11. > :34:17.goes on, the incidents of speculation, we don't know, but the
:34:17. > :34:21.more it looks has the makings of a home-grown event, rather than an
:34:21. > :34:25.international terrorist event. Would you agree? I think that's
:34:25. > :34:29.right, but the people in the stais have been careful not to speculate
:34:29. > :34:36.on that -- States. There is of course a record in the US. In fact,
:34:36. > :34:38.there is a greater record of home- grown terrorist attacks,
:34:38. > :34:43.international terrorism. Pictures have been published tonight by the
:34:43. > :34:47.FBI on possible suspects and they are up on the web. Miranda, good to
:34:47. > :34:53.see you again. Thank you very much. You go and work out how to sell
:34:53. > :34:57.that. Some work to be done.In Glasgow this week your conference
:34:57. > :35:01.isn't it? Yes.Despite what the BBC handlers think, we know how to
:35:01. > :35:06.behave here on This Week. We are vaguely aware of where the line is
:35:06. > :35:11.drawn. If we fall over it on occasion, we blame the Blue None,
:35:11. > :35:16.it's not our fault. If Molly makes a mess, I have to clear it up, if
:35:16. > :35:21.Jacqui makes a mess, she clears it up, if Michael makes a mess, his
:35:21. > :35:25.loyal man servant Fabio will always be on hand to scrub away the stains
:35:25. > :35:28.and dispose of any incriminating evidence. Oh, yes, he's a lovely
:35:28. > :35:38.chap. After all, these phone lines didn't just uninstall themselves
:35:38. > :35:46.
:35:46. > :35:51.did they, did they, did they?! behave in life and politics so. We
:35:51. > :35:57.have decorum none too soon on This Week's spotlight.
:35:57. > :36:01.Big Ben may have fallen silent, but on the day of Margaret Thatcher's
:36:01. > :36:07.funeral, there were those who still felt the need to celebrate, rather
:36:07. > :36:13.than commiserate. Maggie, Maggie, magistrateyy, dead,
:36:14. > :36:19.dead, dead. How should people behave? What is beyond the pail?
:36:19. > :36:24.Should protests be curtailed. Tiian Abbott criticised the extravagance
:36:25. > :36:31.of this week's funeral. There is just no prose dent. It's a breach
:36:31. > :36:38.of protocol and it's going to cost �10 million. Who decides where
:36:38. > :36:44.freedom of speech ends and bad manners begin? Non-believers around
:36:44. > :36:49.the world were ready to chastise Pop Idol Justin Bieber for his ill-
:36:49. > :36:54.judged comments after visiting Anne Frank's how, but are we more ready
:36:55. > :36:58.to forgive the naive indiscretions of the young? Maybe not if they
:36:59. > :37:03.dare to involve politics and are only 17. Paris proun's resignation
:37:03. > :37:09.as Kent's youth crime commissioner proved it's hard to live down any
:37:09. > :37:14.lapse in the rules of Twitter etiquette. So what is and is not
:37:14. > :37:20.acceptable behaviour -- Paris Brown. For those of us old if not wise
:37:20. > :37:26.enough to know better. That's me picking the bar tab up
:37:26. > :37:31.again! Kim Woodburn, welcome to the programme. What did you make of
:37:31. > :37:36.those who protested at the funeral on Wednesday? Anyone that has any
:37:36. > :37:40.protest at a funeral is absolutely gross. You don't take a protest to
:37:41. > :37:44.a funeral. You respect, you respect, you respect. But it was a public
:37:44. > :37:48.funeral, it wasn't a private bun. It was going through the heart of
:37:48. > :37:53.the capital. It was being paid for in part by the British taxpayer, so
:37:54. > :37:59.I guess in a free society, provided it's tone with a certain restraint
:37:59. > :38:05.that doesn't intrude on the family, protesters are not entirely out of
:38:05. > :38:11.order? At a funeral it certainly is. It doesn't belong at a funeral.
:38:11. > :38:16.Totally wrong. Somebody has died. But it was the funeral of, not the
:38:16. > :38:21.Head of State, which is non- political, it was the funeral of a
:38:21. > :38:24.Prime Minister. By definition, Prime Ministers are political and
:38:24. > :38:30.no Prime Minister's always had the support of all the country, people
:38:30. > :38:34.will have different views? We live in a democracy, you can hate and
:38:34. > :38:38.love something, but you voice your opinion but you don't parade around
:38:38. > :38:43.a funeral. That's not fair. You are spoiling the enjoyment of people
:38:43. > :38:46.that liked Margaret Thatcher and wanted to see her buried in a
:38:46. > :38:50.polite, dignified way. So the people unhappy about this funeral
:38:50. > :38:55.and the manner of it should have stay add I way? Of course. You
:38:55. > :39:01.think have your say but don't go to a funeral and spoil it for others.
:39:01. > :39:10.If you liked Maggie Thatcher and disliked her, what right do the
:39:10. > :39:16.people that disliked her have to spoil it for the people that liked
:39:16. > :39:19.her. It was done in a dignified way because the security was second to
:39:19. > :39:24.none. They were on a hiding to nothing if they started nothing,
:39:24. > :39:30.they knew that. What did you think of the proprotest? The protest that
:39:30. > :39:37.involved people turning their backs silently was in my opinion
:39:37. > :39:42.legitimate and quite decorous. On the whole I would agree with Kim
:39:42. > :39:48.that you don't protest, the point you make is right, it was a funeral
:39:48. > :39:53.that �10 million worth of pwhick money was spent on. -- public money.
:39:53. > :39:58.It may include the salaries of the police who would have already have
:39:59. > :40:01.been on duty, but it was a lot of money. But the point is, it was a
:40:01. > :40:07.public funeral. I don't think it was right to chant for some of the
:40:07. > :40:12.reasons that Kim suggested and incidentally, I thought the Ding
:40:12. > :40:17.Dong The Witch Is Dead campaign was misogynist at best and pretty
:40:17. > :40:22.offensive actually, so that I think definitely went too far. But it was
:40:22. > :40:25.a woman who, by design, created strong feelings. It isn't the case
:40:25. > :40:34.that everybody in the country supported her. People did have
:40:34. > :40:37.strong feelings and if it was possible to do it in a decorous way,
:40:37. > :40:42.I think... Don't you think that's childish? You go all that way there
:40:42. > :40:50.because you are going to turn your back, stupid prats, what is going
:40:50. > :40:54.on, I'm an adult, I must turn my back, you big prannies. What's a
:40:54. > :40:58.prany? Don't ask!People chose to go all the way there to stand by
:40:58. > :41:03.the side of the street and hold banners and things like that,
:41:03. > :41:09.that's fine, they felt strongly about it. It's not. If I dislike
:41:09. > :41:14.somebody... If I dislike them so much, I don't go near them. People
:41:15. > :41:18.travelled there and held "I love Maggie" flowers. A nice sentiment
:41:18. > :41:27."I love Maggie" they belonged at the funeral, but not this nonsense
:41:27. > :41:33.with the banners turning their backs. Turning your back, it seems
:41:33. > :41:38.to me, is a quietly respectful way to say, actually, no, I don't, this
:41:38. > :41:41.isn't the whole... Why are you standing at her funeral?! Because
:41:41. > :41:47.otherwise, all you would have seen would have been crowds of people.
:41:47. > :41:53.You digitally turned your back, didn't you? I suppose I did, yes.
:41:53. > :41:58.Why did you watch a woman you couldn't stomach? Yoint watch it,
:41:58. > :42:03.that's the point. If I couldn't stand somebody, I wouldn't bother
:42:03. > :42:08.getting on a bus to go to that woman's funeral. You are just being
:42:08. > :42:12.an absolute dope. You look silly and you are silly. Anything useful
:42:12. > :42:15.to add to this? I thought there was a net increase in British decorum
:42:15. > :42:19.this week, I thought there was a reaction against the people
:42:19. > :42:24.protesting in the days leading up to the funeral. One of the reasons
:42:24. > :42:29.why very few people protested I think is that the immediate tkwra's
:42:29. > :42:35.given more kofpbl than the small number of protests merited, people
:42:35. > :42:42.were shocked by it and the protesters backed off -- media
:42:42. > :42:48.given more coverage than the small number of protests merited. British
:42:48. > :42:52.decency ruled the day I think. we showing more decorum these days
:42:52. > :43:00.or descending into barbarians? Descending into barbarians, of
:43:00. > :43:03.course we are. Oh, Kim!Oh, come along now. That chant of Ding Dong
:43:03. > :43:06.The Witch Is Dead is horrid. Have you ever thought about this? Some
:43:07. > :43:10.idiots have young children at home watching them behave like this.
:43:10. > :43:14.It's appalling, you know, they've got children, Thai got brothers,
:43:14. > :43:19.sisters, mums, dads, watching them behave like that at a funeral,
:43:19. > :43:24.should be ashamed of themselves. have run out of time. We like
:43:24. > :43:31.strong opinion at this time of night, helps keep us awake. It's
:43:31. > :43:36.salt of the earth night at Annabels and we'll crowd down the piano for
:43:36. > :43:42.a knees up with George Osborne, the favourite East End boy. People may
:43:42. > :43:49.be mocking his Newark sent, but wait until you hear his rendition