:00:22. > :00:28.Doctor Who, join This Week for some political time travel. Ed Miliband
:00:28. > :00:38.tries to regenerate his party's policy on welfare. Union Lord, Bob
:00:38. > :00:39.
:00:39. > :00:41.Crow takes a sonic screwdriver to the Labour leader's plans. I think
:00:41. > :00:43.Ed Miliband's proposals should be exterminated.
:00:44. > :00:47.If only time travel were available to politicians, maybe they'd do
:00:47. > :00:52.things differently. The Guardian's Nick Watt raids the Doctor Who
:00:52. > :01:01.dressing up box. Who on earth would fall for yet
:01:01. > :01:04.another tabloid sting? Politicians, that's who.
:01:04. > :01:07.And nobody actually knows the Doctor's real name, yet, thanks to
:01:07. > :01:11.Hollywood star Michael Douglas we seem to know everything else in the
:01:11. > :01:21.known universe. Actress and comedian Katy Brand is
:01:21. > :01:21.
:01:21. > :01:24.the soul of This Week discretion. Don't worry, Andrew, what goes on in
:01:24. > :01:31.the studio stays in the studio. Forget looking for a woman Doctor
:01:31. > :01:35.Who. Isn't it time for a more mature Scotsman to get the role? Reverse
:01:35. > :01:37.the polarity of the neutron flow! Evenin' all. Welcome to the
:01:37. > :01:40.All-Party This Week Group for the Consumption of Blue Nun, once
:01:40. > :01:46.described by David Cameron as "the next big scandal waiting to happen",
:01:46. > :01:48.a slur we live down to almost every Thursday evening. But we find
:01:48. > :01:51.ourselves tonight playing second fiddle in the fiddling stakes to yet
:01:51. > :01:54.another tawdry tale of unprincipled politicians on the take, allegedly,
:01:54. > :01:57.with an MP and three Lords caught on camera this week, their snouts in
:01:57. > :02:00.the lobbying trough, allegedly, and the reputation of Parliament as a
:02:00. > :02:10.self-interested cabal of political prostitutes never more apt, not so
:02:10. > :02:10.
:02:10. > :02:12.allegedly. As always in such matters, Downing Street has sprung
:02:12. > :02:15.into total inaction and announced a statutory register of officially
:02:15. > :02:18.sanctioned influence purchasers, which will be a huge boon to those
:02:18. > :02:21.on the take, because henceforth when politicians are approached by a
:02:21. > :02:24.pretty young thing offering loads of money and a beach front condo in
:02:24. > :02:34.Fiji, they'll be able to check if she really is a lobbyist by
:02:34. > :02:37.consulting the register. And if she's not on it, chances are she's
:02:37. > :02:40.from The Sunday Times, though given the number of times they've fallen
:02:40. > :02:43.for the same sting over the past 20 years, it's one of the great
:02:43. > :02:50.mysteries of modern politics that our politicians haven't worked that
:02:50. > :02:53.out already. The words "total numpties" come to mind. Speaking of
:02:53. > :02:56.those whose opinions could never be bought, because they're entirely
:02:56. > :03:03.worthless, I'm joined on the sofa tonight by two men whose off-screen
:03:03. > :03:07.relationship is a matter of intense speculation. I think of them as the
:03:07. > :03:10.Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones of late night political chat.
:03:10. > :03:12.I speak, of course, of #manontheleft Alan "AJ" Johnson, and, fresh off
:03:12. > :03:22.the 5.34 from Auchenshuggle, #sadmanonatrain Michael "choo choo"
:03:22. > :03:30.
:03:30. > :03:33.Portillo. Michael, your moment of the week? Gay marriage has been
:03:33. > :03:37.passed by majorities in the House of Commons and the Lords, and the
:03:37. > :03:41.Church of England has accept that that is the will of Parliament and
:03:41. > :03:44.that is the end of the Church of England campaign. It is a good
:03:44. > :03:48.moment to reflect on the fact that whilst this has been presented as an
:03:48. > :03:52.issue that has caused problems for David Cameron and splits in the
:03:52. > :03:56.Conservative party, the problems are really with the Church of England
:03:56. > :04:02.and the Catholic church, who do not know how to deal with the issue of
:04:02. > :04:07.homosexuality and gay priest 's, and gay bishops and so. That is where
:04:07. > :04:10.the division is, and the churches are haemorrhaging membership like
:04:10. > :04:16.water disappearing from a bath. They do not have any way of dealing with
:04:16. > :04:20.the problem. The country as a whole has taken it in its stride. I think
:04:20. > :04:25.the country has. In that old-fashioned way, Parliament has
:04:25. > :04:33.voted. The majorities have been achieved in both houses. End of
:04:33. > :04:36.issue. Over. Mr Cameron taint -- came to the Commons on Monday to
:04:36. > :04:41.make a statement about Syria. I think the decision in the previous
:04:41. > :04:44.week was the wrong decision, to lift the arms embargo. I might be wrong
:04:44. > :04:48.about this but I thought I detected some tension between him and the
:04:48. > :04:53.Foreign Secretary. It is unusual for a Prime Minister to be talking about
:04:53. > :05:00.something that the Foreign Secretary carried off the previous week, and
:05:00. > :05:04.to not even mention the Foreign Secretary. Richard have been his
:05:04. > :05:12.triumph. The second thing is the atmosphere on his own backbenchers,
:05:12. > :05:16.which was very sombre. 80 Tory back rectors have signed up to say that
:05:16. > :05:23.if there is the decision to arm Syria, there is a recall of
:05:23. > :05:26.Parliament. -- backbenchers. He is in trouble with his backbenchers.
:05:26. > :05:29.may come back to that. For the moment...
:05:29. > :05:32.Now, I've a little secret for you. Come closer. While we've been
:05:32. > :05:35.off-air, old Choo Choo has had a rather special birthday. I know,
:05:35. > :05:39.it's hard to believe, judging by the stiffness of tonight's quiff, but
:05:39. > :05:42.he's getting on a bit and finally hit the big 60. So imagine his
:05:42. > :05:45.horror that in the very week he qualifies for some discounted perks,
:05:45. > :05:50.Ed Balls has threatened to start taking them away, starting with the
:05:50. > :05:56.winter fuel allowance. But who says Michael's new platinum senior
:05:56. > :06:01.railcard won't be next? And he wasn't the only one left angry by
:06:01. > :06:03.this attack on the well-off elderly. So, as a very special gift to the
:06:03. > :06:13.birthday boy, here's a kindred spirit, RMT union leader Bob Crow,
:06:13. > :06:34.
:06:34. > :06:38.announced two major concerns, to cap for high earners that the fuel
:06:38. > :06:44.benefits will be stopped, and child benefit would be cut as well. I
:06:44. > :06:46.think that is completely wrong. I think people pay into a tax and
:06:46. > :06:51.National Insurance system and at the end of it they take the benefits
:06:51. > :06:54.they have paid in for. If people believe they are that well off that
:06:54. > :06:58.they cannot afford the benefits, they can give it to a charity, or
:06:58. > :07:01.not pick up the benefit. Once you bring in a net at a certain rate
:07:01. > :07:06.that you do not get it, the danger will be that they will bring it
:07:06. > :07:13.lower and lower and it will capture other groups of workers and they
:07:13. > :07:19.will not get the state in a fit either. -- they will not get the
:07:19. > :07:23.state benefit. I believe in universal benefits on the basis that
:07:23. > :07:28.you know what you are going to get. The National Health Service, whether
:07:28. > :07:33.a poor borate prints, you get the same treatment. The National Health
:07:33. > :07:37.Service, along with state benefits, should be the same for everyone. You
:07:37. > :07:40.pay into them when you work and you reap them when you do not. Once you
:07:40. > :07:45.start to alter that, you will see different abilities of people
:07:45. > :07:49.getting different benefits. It will mean a move towards purely means
:07:49. > :07:54.tested funding and benefits for people, and I think that is a --
:07:54. > :07:58.wrong for working men and women. It is the strong helping the week, that
:07:58. > :08:05.is what the benefit system was based on, and that is something I continue
:08:06. > :08:10.to argue for. My message to the Labour Party leadership is that they
:08:10. > :08:15.should stop what they are doing, cutting. The three parties are doing
:08:15. > :08:20.the same, trying to out cut each other, with disastrous consequences
:08:20. > :08:24.for working men and women. As far as I am concerned, it would be the end
:08:24. > :08:34.of universal benefits if Labour get into power and they go down the same
:08:34. > :08:37.
:08:37. > :08:40.route as the Tories and Liberals over the last five years.
:08:40. > :08:45.Bob Crow, from the massive redevelopment of the King's Cross
:08:45. > :08:52.stationary in north London to our little studio in Westminster which
:08:52. > :08:56.needs redevelopment. Welcome to the programme. Alan Johnson, is Mr
:08:56. > :09:02.Miliband right or wrong to begin it rode in the principle of
:09:02. > :09:08.universality? He is right to live in the world of 2000 and 18. We had a
:09:08. > :09:12.discussion many moons ago about this, and I agree with the principle
:09:12. > :09:16.of universal payments, this social solidarity. But you cannot retract
:09:16. > :09:21.from the fact that if he was going to reintroduce child benefit for the
:09:22. > :09:26.well-off, it would be �2.3 billion. He has to get the balance between
:09:26. > :09:30.living standards, growth and deficit reduction. What Ed Balls and Ed
:09:30. > :09:36.Miliband were doing was to live in that world, not to fantasise about
:09:36. > :09:40.it, but to live in it in a realistic way. What do you say to that? Would
:09:40. > :09:45.it be sensible for Labour to go into the next election campaign pledging
:09:46. > :09:52.to spend over �2 billion to reinstate child benefit for the
:09:52. > :09:58.wealthy? It is where you start. Why don't they look at Amazon and
:09:58. > :10:02.Vodafone and the company is not paying tax, without starting here? I
:10:02. > :10:06.do not think it is a lot of money. That means every train driver in
:10:06. > :10:11.Britain will have their benefits cut. I do not believe they are
:10:11. > :10:16.massively highly paid for what they do. And once you start interfering,
:10:16. > :10:20.the reality will be at the end of the day, tax people more if need be.
:10:20. > :10:25.If they are reaping more money, a fair tax system. They have already
:10:25. > :10:30.lowered the tax rate for the highest from 50% down to 45%. Now you are
:10:30. > :10:36.going to middle as -- burners, working-class people, who will fall
:10:36. > :10:41.into that line. And it will dip and dip and get worse and worse. Even if
:10:41. > :10:46.you got Google and Amazon to pay more tax, would you use it to
:10:46. > :10:52.reinstate child benefit for higher earners? Let them pay more tax. The
:10:52. > :10:57.more you earn, the more you pay. You pay tax and by civilisation. Not
:10:57. > :11:03.saying to people on 37,000, it is going to stop. How much tax should
:11:03. > :11:07.somebody on 40,000 a year paid? Chancellor would have to work out
:11:07. > :11:11.what is coming in and going out. If you raise tax for the higher
:11:11. > :11:16.earners, whether they get it in child benefit or any other form of
:11:17. > :11:21.money, they have two pay higher tax on it. What you will see is people
:11:21. > :11:31.saying, surely National Insurance is an insurance policy. It was set up
:11:31. > :11:33.
:11:34. > :11:36.so that those people who could afford it, as an insurance policy.
:11:36. > :11:38.You say to somebody, because you earn a lot of money, you cannot
:11:39. > :11:42.really claim the insurance back, because you have enough to pay if
:11:42. > :11:46.you lose your suitcase. Surely the more we pay in and the more you
:11:46. > :11:50.earn, the more you pay and redistribute the wealth. What do you
:11:50. > :11:57.say to the point that if the better off do not have a stake in the
:11:57. > :12:01.services provided, they will not care about the standard? That was
:12:01. > :12:04.the apartment for imposing it in the first race. As far as the winter
:12:04. > :12:09.fuel payments is concerned, that has not been eroded at the moment. Child
:12:09. > :12:15.benefit has gone. The point about winter fuel payments and child
:12:15. > :12:20.benefit is that they are not taxed. It is not taxable income. I do not
:12:20. > :12:24.know - when I was shadow chancellor I looked at this dash I know why we
:12:24. > :12:31.do not include it as taxable income, because politicians are scared of
:12:31. > :12:34.increasing taxes, but the point that Bob Crow makes is about income tax.
:12:34. > :12:38.The �200 winter fuel payments is not taxed and neither is child benefit.
:12:38. > :12:44.If you brought it into the tax system, you could have a universal
:12:44. > :12:47.system. You would roughly get your 2.3 billion. You would have a
:12:47. > :12:51.bureaucracy that gave out benefits with one hand and another
:12:51. > :12:58.bureaucracy that took them back with the other in the form of tax.
:12:58. > :13:04.is what you do anyway, in a sense. Is this good news or bad news for
:13:04. > :13:09.the Tories, that the Labour Party seems to be moving on the issue of
:13:09. > :13:12.welfare and universality? Both, quite honestly. It is bad news for
:13:12. > :13:18.the Tories in the sense that Labour looks less idiotic than it did a
:13:18. > :13:21.week ago. It is good news for the Tories in the sense that it is very
:13:21. > :13:24.difficult for Labour to talk about how cruel or oppressive the
:13:24. > :13:30.coalition is being when Labour has now moved a number of its policies
:13:30. > :13:34.in line with the government's policies. I think Alan is absolutely
:13:34. > :13:39.right that the Labour Party has moved to a position of greater
:13:39. > :13:42.realism. I was in this position as Shadow Chancellor. Whatever the
:13:42. > :13:45.government does is credible. Whatever the government does becomes
:13:45. > :13:48.the new reality. The opposition is always left in the position of
:13:48. > :13:53.looking incredible because it has not yet matched what the government
:13:53. > :13:56.has done. This is all silly and away because if Labour got into
:13:56. > :14:00.government everything would be different. Over a period of time
:14:00. > :14:03.they would rearrange the money as they thought right. But the game
:14:03. > :14:08.that the press always play with the opposition is, where would you find
:14:08. > :14:13.this 2.3 billion? You are expected to identify a series of cuts that
:14:13. > :14:16.would exactly make up this sum of money. It is a silly game, but it is
:14:16. > :14:24.a game from which oppositions do very badly and their credibility
:14:24. > :14:29.suffers a lot. Part of will Labour's problem when their own polling shows
:14:29. > :14:34.that they are not trusted on tax and spending. The public thinks they
:14:34. > :14:37.spent too much and that they are synonymous with tax. I don't quite
:14:37. > :14:41.understand how they make themselves more electable by going into the
:14:41. > :14:46.next election calling for more tax and more spend? No doubt they are
:14:46. > :14:52.going to keep the 50% reduction to 45. Alan's point... Higher than it
:14:52. > :14:55.was under Labour. Ed Balls in the speech said he put it at 50%.
:14:55. > :15:00.23409 said that for sure after the next election, he said if he was in
:15:00. > :15:04.power tomorrow he'd put it up to 50, but he's been a little bit more
:15:04. > :15:10.opaque. We'll wait and see. The jury's out on that one, in my view.
:15:11. > :15:14.It becomes the tax, as Alan said, they get wary of it. When people
:15:14. > :15:20.want to cut the tax for the rich people, people don't have a problem
:15:20. > :15:25.with that. People at the bottom of the scale, �37,000 is not a lot of
:15:25. > :15:30.money, it will take out most craftsmen and bishop who'd have to
:15:30. > :15:33.pay more as a result of it. People have seen an attack taking place on
:15:33. > :15:38.them over the last five to six years and that continuing under Labour as
:15:38. > :15:42.well. I think Bob does make a very valuable point that we are moving
:15:42. > :15:48.away from the contributory system. This is a real problem for the
:15:48. > :15:51.signal it sends to society. What it's saying is, there's no point you
:15:51. > :15:54.making any effort because at the end of the day if you have managed to
:15:54. > :16:01.save any money for yourself, we'll rake everything back from your
:16:01. > :16:04.benefits. The idea of having contributory benefits and child
:16:04. > :16:07.benefit which originated as the tax allowance which is why it's not a
:16:07. > :16:12.taxable benefit, the point of that was that if you provided more for
:16:12. > :16:15.yourself, these things would not be clawed back. We are sending a really
:16:15. > :16:19.terrible signal of discouraging people from being thrifty. There is
:16:20. > :16:25.a sense here in Labour bending to the way it's seen public opinion
:16:25. > :16:31.going, the welfare reforms whether you like them or not are popular
:16:31. > :16:36.with voters. People do think that Labour spent too much, they still
:16:36. > :16:40.don't trust Labour on the economy, even less than they trust the
:16:40. > :16:46.Government whose economic record is less than stellar. There is this
:16:46. > :16:49.repositioning which is being public opinion-led. No. The closer we got
:16:49. > :16:55.to 2015, the more the speeches are necessary to stop living in 2010 and
:16:55. > :16:59.start living in 2015. Mr Miliband told us the universal principle was
:16:59. > :17:03.the foundation of a fair society, the foundation, not that it's a good
:17:03. > :17:07.thing or we could change our mind, but at the moment I like it, the
:17:07. > :17:12.foundation now. Michael's right about oppositions. Oppositions do
:17:12. > :17:16.U-turns all the time. Look BAbling to what the Conservatives said about
:17:16. > :17:20.the national minimum wage or to about tuition fees, oppositions say
:17:20. > :17:24.all kinds of things when they are opposing things. Didn't say tuition
:17:24. > :17:27.fees were the foundation of a modern society? But we are not getting rid
:17:27. > :17:34.of all universal payments. We are talking about the top rate and we
:17:34. > :17:40.are talking about 2. 3 billion. That's eye-watering. Child benefit,
:17:40. > :17:43.you are not talking about top rate taxpayers. We have been told over
:17:43. > :17:49.the last 15 years that the state can't afford to give people
:17:49. > :17:54.pensions. Therefore you have got to save, you have got to have
:17:54. > :17:57.occupational pensions, then someone saves all their life out their own
:17:57. > :18:01.money rather than spend it, when they are retired they are told you
:18:01. > :18:07.are going to reap the benefits you are going to have, totally wrong and
:18:07. > :18:11.unfair. With have to move on. Thank you. It may be late, but don't even
:18:11. > :18:17.think of going to bed. This time last week, our Prime Minister call
:18:17. > :18:21.me ravy Davy was still having it large on a podium in Ibiza, without
:18:21. > :18:26.any hope whatsoever from Gideon's marching powder. The very least you
:18:26. > :18:30.can do is stay up late with us tonight. Katie Brand is here to talk
:18:30. > :18:34.about the need for discretion. For those who insist on sharing your
:18:34. > :18:39.inner most thoughts and with almost no quality control at all, you will
:18:39. > :18:44.find brain dumps galore on the Twitter, Fleecebook and goad old
:18:44. > :18:48.interweb. There is an old saying that the Shadow Cabinet never ever
:18:48. > :18:56.uses, two Eds are better than one. BOOM.
:18:56. > :19:01.Has this week proved the doubters wrong? Are messer Ed Miliband and
:19:01. > :19:04.Balls coming to terms with things? Are they finally ready to take the
:19:04. > :19:08.so-called difficult decisions that politicians are forever patting
:19:08. > :19:18.themselves on the back about? We are not so sure. We turn to the
:19:18. > :19:18.
:19:18. > :19:23.guardians for their thoughts and this roundup of the political week.
:19:24. > :19:33.What a gorgeous day. I think I'd better make the most of this rare
:19:34. > :19:44.
:19:44. > :19:54.sunshine and tend to a sadly Well, it seems I'm not the only
:19:54. > :20:01.
:20:01. > :20:05.member of the village who needs to Yes, you would have thought our MPs
:20:05. > :20:08.and peers would have learned by now that when a friendly young person
:20:08. > :20:13.laughs at their jokes and offers them a wad of cash, they are
:20:13. > :20:18.probably a journalist. Not so for three noble Lords and one honourable
:20:18. > :20:21.member who have inflicted immense damage on Parliament and reinforced
:20:21. > :20:26.the view that some members of the governing elite believe there's one
:20:26. > :20:32.rule for them and another for more modest people such as us
:20:32. > :20:36.bee-keepers. We are working flat out to cross the
:20:36. > :20:39.Is and dot the Ts on this legislation dealing with the
:20:39. > :20:43.influence of nonpolitical parties as far as lobbying is concerned and
:20:43. > :20:53.also in terms of support for campaigns at a constituency level
:20:53. > :20:59.and we'll publish the proposals very shortly.
:20:59. > :21:04.You wait ages for a set piece speech and then two come along at once.
:21:04. > :21:09.At least it's given me more time to keep these beauties happy. Elements
:21:09. > :21:13.of the Labour tribe will be less happy as the two Eds move the party
:21:13. > :21:17.away from attacking cuts to accepting most of them. We'll
:21:17. > :21:22.inherit a substantial deficit, we'll have to govern with much less money
:21:22. > :21:26.around, we'll need to show an iron discipline. It was meant to be Ed
:21:27. > :21:31.Miliband's week, but David Cameron ran rings around him after the
:21:31. > :21:35.Labour Leader declined to acknowledge that the party has now
:21:35. > :21:39.quietly shelved its opposition to the child benefit changes.
:21:39. > :21:45.I know I've been the one on holiday in Ibiza, but they've been the ones
:21:45. > :21:49.taking, how can I put it, Mr Speaker, policy altering substances
:21:49. > :21:58.as last week they were in fave of child benefit, now they are against
:21:58. > :22:01.With a hive of Labour activity, Ed Miliband struck back when he
:22:01. > :22:05.announced plans for a three-year ceiling on some elements of welfare
:22:05. > :22:11.spending. The Next Labour Government will have less money to spend. If we
:22:11. > :22:16.are going to turn our economy around, protect our NHS and build a
:22:16. > :22:22.stronger country, we'll have to be laser focussed on every single pound
:22:22. > :22:25.we spend. Social security spending vital as it
:22:25. > :22:29.is cannot be exempt from that discipline.
:22:29. > :22:34.Labour is hoping to restore its economic credibility by showing that
:22:34. > :22:39.it too is prepared to take tough decisions to drive down the deficit.
:22:39. > :22:43.But does its reluctance to spell out in full the consequences of its
:22:43. > :22:53.decision show that Labour has still not quite moved away from a belief
:22:53. > :23:03.
:23:03. > :23:08.that in the end spending is always There was rare yueventy among it's
:23:08. > :23:13.squabbling parties when peers turned out in large numbers to defeat an
:23:13. > :23:18.attempt to kill the bill equalising same sex marriage. Many peers have
:23:18. > :23:22.real problems with this, but they were even more concerned by an
:23:22. > :23:27.attempt by one of their number to try and destroy the Bill just two
:23:27. > :23:32.weeks after MPs gave it their overwhelming approval.
:23:32. > :23:36.Gay men and women have waited for far too long to have the same rights
:23:36. > :23:41.as straight married couples. It's the process by which this Bill has
:23:41. > :23:45.been handled is inappropriate and has left the country divided,
:23:45. > :23:49.bewildered and puzzled. I fear for the future of family life if this
:23:50. > :23:53.Bill is pass and I should certainly vote for the aid mendment. People
:23:53. > :23:58.who've been life long Conservatives and have been the people who
:23:58. > :24:03.actually did the work on the voluntary basis for the party are
:24:03. > :24:06.simply tearing up their membership cards.
:24:06. > :24:12.Little did David Cameron realise that he'd stir up a swarm on this
:24:12. > :24:17.one. He had hoped to reach out to centre ground voters but has ended
:24:17. > :24:21.up alienating vast numbers of traditionalists. Nigel Farage will
:24:21. > :24:25.be chuckling all the way to the ballot box.
:24:25. > :24:30.The Prime Minister doesn't just have a problem with his own party. Nick
:24:30. > :24:34.Clegg showed the coalition is now reduced to hand-to-hand combat when
:24:34. > :24:38.he vetoed Tory plans on childcare. A sting in the tail from the coalition
:24:38. > :24:48.partners. Now, I think it's time to enjoy the
:24:48. > :24:53.
:24:53. > :24:59.Our very own little honey there, Nick Watt. And Miranda Green is here
:24:59. > :25:04.too. Good evening.How serious are these Stigs? I think the problem is
:25:04. > :25:08.the country's hasn't recovered from the trauma of the expenses scandal
:25:08. > :25:11.so you have to deal with some of the smaller opportunities to clean up
:25:11. > :25:15.Parliament, otherwise it looks as though you just don't care. Even
:25:15. > :25:21.though it's the case that there aren't exactly protesters demanding
:25:21. > :25:24.a lobbyist register, you know, "when do we want it now" et cetera...
:25:24. > :25:28.don't think that's going to happen. It's not, but you have to take
:25:28. > :25:31.seriously the idea that the country's lost faith in Parliament
:25:31. > :25:36.as an honest place. No doubt about that. The problem is that I don't
:25:36. > :25:41.understand how a register helps? It's beside the point. First of all,
:25:41. > :25:45.it's perfectly clear that things of which these people are accused would
:25:45. > :25:49.be offensive. They would be against the rules and they would probably
:25:49. > :25:55.certainly lead to expulsion and possibly suspension from Parliament
:25:55. > :25:58.and so on. It's clear that the clues are already in place. Secondly --
:25:58. > :26:04.rules are already in place. These people were all caught by a sting,
:26:04. > :26:07.in other words there wasn't a real lobbyist at all. Journalists posing.
:26:07. > :26:10.Drait creating the register has nothing to do with what has just
:26:10. > :26:15.happened. As you said at the beginning, if you create the
:26:15. > :26:20.register, you simply allow people to identify more easily those who are
:26:20. > :26:25.genuine lobbyists and journalists. Now a fundamental point - all
:26:25. > :26:29.politics rests upon lobbying. The principal rooms are lobbies, the
:26:29. > :26:31.reason they exist is to allow the public to come into Parliament and
:26:32. > :26:36.visit their Members of Parliament and they meet them in a place called
:26:36. > :26:39.a lobby, which is the origin of the term and the interchange between
:26:40. > :26:43.people who have interests which need to be considered or even protected
:26:43. > :26:47.by Parliament and the people in Parliament is fundamental to the
:26:47. > :26:51.democratic process. Since time in memorial to smooth the interface
:26:51. > :26:54.between the public and the different vested interests and the Members of
:26:54. > :26:59.Parliament, there have been people who undertake lobbying and lobbying
:26:59. > :27:08.can be a very respectable thing. Without lobbying, politics wouldn't
:27:08. > :27:14.function. Thank you for that! Very good. I agree.Political science
:27:14. > :27:19.there. You will get an O-level in it, oh, you don't get those any
:27:19. > :27:25.more. I made a joke that you would think by now politicians would work
:27:25. > :27:28.out of a lobby offering you money is a journal itself. However, it maub
:27:28. > :27:32.just suggests it's a widespread practice because if it wasn't
:27:32. > :27:38.happening a lot, then the politicians would say, that's
:27:38. > :27:44.unusual, they are offering me money, better be careful here. So is it
:27:44. > :27:48.happening a lot? It's never happened to me in my 16 years. You have never
:27:48. > :27:52.been approached by a lobbyist? been approached by a lobbyist
:27:52. > :27:57.saying, if I give you this money will you raise this question. I went
:27:57. > :28:01.to an event, Diabeties UK, a very good event it was as well, and they
:28:01. > :28:06.were lobbying and drawing my attention to some points. Is it
:28:06. > :28:10.happening or is it just journalists? The difficulty for the Bath is what
:28:10. > :28:14.Cameron promised and what he said about this being the next great
:28:14. > :28:18.scandal and a register of lob Iain Duncan Smiths. I can't get excited
:28:18. > :28:22.about a register of lobbyists because no lobbyist was involve and
:28:22. > :28:25.the register of lobbyists Act would have done nothing to change that
:28:25. > :28:30.sting. It's about arm airians not breaking the bloody rules of
:28:30. > :28:35.Parliament. Well, it is, but there is also a transparency issue, that's
:28:35. > :28:38.what the register is supposed to be about. You are right, charities
:28:38. > :28:44.lobby on their pet projects and policy all the time, but everyone
:28:44. > :28:48.knows what they want and they are perfectly open about it. The concern
:28:49. > :28:55.about the intermediaries is some act for different clients and it can be
:28:55. > :29:00.shadowy, so there is a desire to... It will make Leveson look like a
:29:00. > :29:05.picnic if you try to decide what is a lobbyist. Alan's put his finger
:29:05. > :29:09.on, people like Diabeties UK, they are lobbyists. I should think there
:29:09. > :29:15.will be thousands of them. They don't necessarily use lobbying
:29:15. > :29:20.companies, they would lobby themselves. Every big company has a
:29:20. > :29:26.Department of Affairs which is essentially the lobbying. There is
:29:26. > :29:31.the venal and corrupt but in politics, when this happens, Mr
:29:31. > :29:35.Mercer, whatever, he'll still be an MP for another two year, it seems
:29:35. > :29:39.almost impossible to get rid of anybody from the Lord's, some have
:29:39. > :29:43.gone to jail and they are back in the Lords. People think you look
:29:44. > :29:48.after yourselves? That does need to be addressed, particularly in the
:29:48. > :29:52.Lords. We could have made progress on that, except we were looking to
:29:52. > :29:56.make the Lords more democratic and I supported that. There was the Lord
:29:56. > :30:01.Steel Bill looking to do that. Maybe we'll return to that because there
:30:01. > :30:06.was wide support for that. Very difficult to do it in the Commons
:30:06. > :30:11.where you are by very chug of the fact you are elected you aranceable
:30:11. > :30:15.to constituents and there's a lot of difficulty in differentiating
:30:15. > :30:18.between your constituents who want yew out because you have done
:30:18. > :30:28.something wrong and those who don't like the judgment you have taken
:30:28. > :30:29.
:30:29. > :30:33.whether on gay marriages or whatever. We should revisit the idea
:30:33. > :30:38.of rooting out the bad barons. have the headline already. The
:30:38. > :30:42.policy follows! It is outrageous that people can continue sitting in
:30:42. > :30:48.the House of Lords. And the coalition is going to add another 50
:30:48. > :30:51.of them. While it has been impossible to change the Lords,
:30:51. > :30:59.unfortunately governments have had to stuff them with their own people
:30:59. > :31:02.to make the Parliamentary process work to deliver their commitments.
:31:02. > :31:06.There was cross-party consensus on reducing the size of the Lords. They
:31:06. > :31:11.got it down to 450 and now it has shot up again and we have lost all
:31:11. > :31:17.of the gains we made. Nick Clegg speaking of the coalition, got his
:31:17. > :31:21.way childcare reform. Yes, he did. It is one of these coalition
:31:21. > :31:26.problems where they should have had the argument much earlier. It is
:31:26. > :31:30.embarrassing for it to have got to this stage. I think it is the right
:31:30. > :31:33.decision. It is a very bad policy. If the conservative side of the
:31:33. > :31:38.coalition want to go ahead with it, they can put it in their manifesto
:31:38. > :31:41.and see if parents will vote for the chance that their child is the one
:31:41. > :31:47.at the back of the class choking on an apple with nobody noticing
:31:47. > :31:50.because there are too many toddlers running around at the same time.
:31:50. > :31:57.While we were fair, there was the appalling event in Woolwich. What
:31:57. > :32:02.are your thoughts? It was appalling. The one thing I raised about this
:32:02. > :32:08.was the communications data Bill. Not as a knee-jerk reaction, for
:32:09. > :32:13.goodness sake. We have been talking about this since 2008. The coalition
:32:13. > :32:16.agreed to put forward a draft bill in the Queen 's speech last year. A
:32:16. > :32:20.very good cross-party committee suggested amendments to it that said
:32:20. > :32:27.that legislation was necessary, and it vanishes from the Queens speech.
:32:27. > :32:31.This is serious stuff. The nature of coalition politics. You would think,
:32:31. > :32:39.knowing there is such a gap in the ability of security forces to track
:32:39. > :32:44.these people, but it would be a matter of consensus. Michael.
:32:44. > :32:47.things stood out for me, one was the women who intervened at the time of
:32:47. > :32:53.the murder with extraordinary courage. And then apparently in two
:32:53. > :33:02.cases they quietly went home. And after a few days, the dignity of the
:33:02. > :33:06.family, who said that he would not have wished anybody to be harmed,
:33:06. > :33:11.because by that time, there were a lot of incidents being committed
:33:11. > :33:17.against Muslim people and institutions. I spoke to Jim Murphy
:33:17. > :33:20.on the Sunday politics last weekend, shadow defence secretary, and he
:33:21. > :33:24.spoke quite kindly towards the idea of what the critics call the
:33:24. > :33:30.snooper's charter. The Conservatives want it and Labour is leading that
:33:31. > :33:38.way as well. Is this another cause of coalition tension, because the
:33:38. > :33:41.Lib Dems are stopping it? It is a serious point of tension. This idea
:33:41. > :33:46.of potential excessive intrusiveness, and being too willing
:33:46. > :33:50.to believe what the security forces or police say they need, this is a
:33:50. > :33:53.hot button issue for Lib Dem activist and it is very delicate
:33:54. > :34:01.phonic leg. But I agree that this is a very serious issue and they should
:34:01. > :34:06.look at what is genuinely needed. Let's apply the common sense from
:34:06. > :34:12.our last discussion. The suspects were well-known to security forces
:34:12. > :34:18.anyway. And radicalised at college, which is the most awful thing about
:34:18. > :34:21.it. Thank you for being with us. Now, we like to think we're an open
:34:21. > :34:25.book here on This Week, rather than an open wound, as our sinister BBC
:34:25. > :34:27.handlers would have you believe. And to prove our point, I can tonight
:34:27. > :34:34.exclusively reveal that my invitation to the Bilderberg slumber
:34:34. > :34:37.party in Watford has somehow got lost in the post. Alan can
:34:37. > :34:43.exclusively reveal that he's stopped receiving death threats from a
:34:43. > :34:46.certain Ms Diane Abbott of Hackney. The restraining order helped. And
:34:46. > :34:50.Michael will exclusively reveal to everyone in the green room after the
:34:50. > :34:56.show, and after a couple of glasses of the blue stuff, his very latest
:34:56. > :34:59.chest tattoo. Think tribal leader meets sailor boy, apparently. So, in
:35:00. > :35:03.the spirit of full disclosure - good name for an autobiography - we
:35:03. > :35:13.thought it was time to reveal all and put discretion in this week's
:35:13. > :35:26.
:35:26. > :35:32.Coronation and in that time she has not just been the head of state, but
:35:32. > :35:35.the soul of discretion, unlike those in Westminster, yet again, with an
:35:35. > :35:45.MP and three piers being less than discreet about their personal
:35:45. > :36:01.
:36:01. > :36:05.Khan, urged parents to stop giving their kids and unfair advantage, but
:36:05. > :36:09.failed to declare that his daughters were employed in companies he had a
:36:09. > :36:14.stake in. For those in the public eye, where do you draw the line
:36:14. > :36:17.between revealing too much or too little information? Sometimes a
:36:17. > :36:20.revelation can highlight an important issue, whether it be
:36:20. > :36:25.Michael Douglas' slip of the tongue about sexually transmitted disease,
:36:25. > :36:32.or Stephen Fry's candid admission of attempted suicide and mental
:36:32. > :36:38.illness. I took a huge number of pills and a huge amount of vodka and
:36:38. > :36:43.the mixture made my body convulse and I broke for ribs. Perhaps the
:36:43. > :36:53.therapist was my couch is the best ways of all, a safe space where
:36:53. > :36:58.
:36:58. > :37:06.anyone can be as indiscreet as they has you on the therapist's couch
:37:06. > :37:16.telling secrets. Yes. The idea is basically that it is famous women
:37:16. > :37:19.throughout history being played by a huge number of comic actors in an
:37:19. > :37:25.imagined therapist's chair. It has gone down well and everyone is
:37:25. > :37:29.pleased with it. At one end of the spectrum, this week we had Michael
:37:29. > :37:32.Douglas telling us more than we would ever really want to know. At
:37:32. > :37:40.the other end, you have the Queen, who has never given an interview in
:37:40. > :37:46.60 years. Yes.The Queen does not have to give interviews. Most people
:37:46. > :37:51.in public life do have to do something. I guess if you look at
:37:51. > :37:59.the dissemination of information as leveraged for power, there is no
:37:59. > :38:03.need for the Queen to have two give or receive. She does not have to
:38:03. > :38:07.gossip, does not have to maintain power in her own environment,
:38:07. > :38:11.because she is the Queen. She does not need to get Charles over and say
:38:11. > :38:17.that Kate said Camilla was ugly. She does not have to broker power,
:38:17. > :38:20.because she is the Queen. As you go further down the ranks, people start
:38:20. > :38:25.to use information and that is when people become indiscreet, because
:38:25. > :38:30.you can gain power over people. indiscretion become part of the
:38:30. > :38:35.modern cult of celebrity? One element of celebrity, as we have
:38:35. > :38:41.seen with Michael Douglas, is to be indiscreet. Michael Douglas is a
:38:41. > :38:46.list, Hollywood royalty. He does not have to give out information like
:38:46. > :38:49.that. If you set what he has done against what Angelina Jolie did, she
:38:49. > :38:55.actually gained more power and prestige and respect by giving an
:38:55. > :38:59.equally intimate account of some medical procedure. With Michael
:38:59. > :39:05.Douglas, it seems to have slightly backfired. I certainly do not want
:39:05. > :39:10.to be a fly on the wall in their bedroom. That would be very
:39:10. > :39:16.indiscreet! Do you think indiscretion is something we live
:39:16. > :39:21.with more because of celebrity culture? I think that is right, but
:39:21. > :39:25.I think sexism has been applied to Michael Douglas. I do not see why
:39:25. > :39:28.Angelina Jolie is praised for what she said and Michael Douglas is in
:39:28. > :39:34.some way condemned for what he said. They are both about things that
:39:34. > :39:40.happened. I don't know if anyone condemned Michael Douglas, apart
:39:40. > :39:47.from possibly Catherine Zito Jones. The rather snotty way that Andrew
:39:47. > :39:50.has introduced the thing this evening. Michael Douglas, having
:39:50. > :39:55.apparently said this, when it got into the public domain he said, no,
:39:55. > :39:59.I did not say it, I have been misreported. I have heard that
:39:59. > :40:05.before. And then the who did the interview released the tape and what
:40:05. > :40:09.he said was exactly what he said. That is why we would all put
:40:09. > :40:16.Angelina Jolie in a different category from the Michael Douglas.
:40:16. > :40:22.All I am saying is that if the idea is that we are going to help the
:40:22. > :40:25.poor to understand that if we have these medical problems we should be
:40:25. > :40:28.honest about them, if we are going to educate people about things that
:40:28. > :40:32.can go wrong in life, Michael Douglas has helped us to do that. On
:40:32. > :40:35.the subject of the Queen, the great thing about the Queen is that you
:40:35. > :40:39.might think somebody who has been discreet for 60 years is very dull.
:40:39. > :40:46.The magnificent thing about the Queen, who I have met on a couple of
:40:46. > :40:52.occasions, is that she... Not that you want to name drop, as I said to
:40:52. > :41:02.the Queen last week! It is remarkable that somebody who is not
:41:02. > :41:03.
:41:03. > :41:10.dial has managed for 60 years not to get into trouble. Just one second.
:41:10. > :41:17.The whole issue... If you are a public figure, you have to give
:41:17. > :41:21.interviews. Exact lead. Celebrity culture is driven by a 24-7 News,
:41:21. > :41:25.magazines full of this gossip. If you give interviews, you will
:41:25. > :41:34.eventually make an indiscretion. Green macro it is no longer chip
:41:34. > :41:38.paper. It is on the internet forever. You want to be very careful
:41:38. > :41:44.about what you say. You do wonder why public figures do not engage the
:41:44. > :41:49.brain before speaking. James Karin made a speech about not giving
:41:49. > :41:55.people a leg up and it turns out his kids are working in his company. --
:41:55. > :41:58.James Karin. Maybe he has never met them before. Maybe it was a surprise
:41:58. > :42:05.to him. That did seem an extraordinary oversight on his
:42:05. > :42:12.part. Is it right that it is in your contract that every week we have to
:42:12. > :42:19.mention your memoirs. It is in my contract, yes, and you have two say
:42:19. > :42:22.it is available in all good book shops. You wrote very movingly and
:42:22. > :42:28.fascinatingly about your family. Did you ever think that was indiscreet?
:42:28. > :42:33.It is a good point. It is a long time ago. It finishes when I am 18.
:42:33. > :42:36.It is when you write recent events that you take that risk. Also, if
:42:36. > :42:42.you are opening up that part of your life, are you fair game for the
:42:42. > :42:47.whole of your life? I hope not. is a weak argument. There were
:42:47. > :42:55.journalists saying at the levels and enquiry that people love to use
:42:55. > :43:02.their family when they want to. us something indiscreet. I will tell
:43:02. > :43:05.you afterwards, but that is about the Queen. Tell Michael. I will be
:43:05. > :43:07.surprised. That's your lot for tonight, folks.
:43:07. > :43:10.But not for us, because it's swivel-eyed loons night at Annabel's
:43:10. > :43:13.and Michael's promised to man the tombola. First prize, a signed photo
:43:13. > :43:18.of former PM John Major. Second prize, two signed photos of former
:43:18. > :43:21.PM John Major. Third prize, three signed photos... Oh, you get the
:43:21. > :43:24.idea. But we leave you tonight with Labour's latest proposals on
:43:24. > :43:26.welfare. After the Prime Minister claimed Ed Miliband had been taking
:43:26. > :43:32.policy-altering substances, Labour released a special policy video to