:00:00. > :00:09.Tonight on This Week, as political drama Borgen comes to an end, the
:00:10. > :00:10.real Danish Prime Minister steals the flashlight at Mandela's memorial
:00:11. > :00:16.by taking a selfie. But why are there not more
:00:17. > :00:20.Brigitte's or Helle's among the worlds' leaders? Ann Summers' boss,
:00:21. > :00:29.Jacqueline Gold, isn't one to compromise. I will be telling you
:00:30. > :00:32.why it is about time more women got on top.
:00:33. > :00:35.At Westminster, it all goes quiet as David Cameron and Ed Miliband agree
:00:36. > :00:43.over MPs' pay. The Spectator's first lady, Isabel Hardman, dons her
:00:44. > :00:47.festive jumper. It is cold up there in those Scandinavian countries, but
:00:48. > :00:51.not as cold as the Westminster backbenchers, where MPs are getting
:00:52. > :00:53.frosty with party leaders over plans for a pay rise.
:00:54. > :00:57.And is it inappropriate to take a selfie at a funeral, even if you are
:00:58. > :01:04.the world's leading man? Singer and songwriter Kate Nash will be
:01:05. > :01:16.behaving badly. Please, Brigette, stay in my life.
:01:17. > :01:23.Evenin' all. Welcome to This Week, a week dominated, of course, by the
:01:24. > :01:27.death of Nelson Mandela. You could tell this was an event of historic
:01:28. > :01:30.significance by the fact we were bumped off air immediately it
:01:31. > :01:33.happened, the BBC schedulers rightly realising this show is not anyone's
:01:34. > :01:39.port of call for events of historic significance, indeed for anything of
:01:40. > :01:43.any kind of significance. The airwaves have been thick with
:01:44. > :01:46.tributes to the great man. But who would have thought that, even in
:01:47. > :01:49.death, he had the power to free Britain's most famous political
:01:50. > :01:52.prisoner, a man held under self-imposed house arrest on his own
:01:53. > :01:57.MacRobben Island for many a long year. Yes, only the magic of Mandela
:01:58. > :02:01.could inspire Gordon Brown to escape his remote prison and make the long
:02:02. > :02:04.trek to freedom and the House of Commons, to give us the benefit of
:02:05. > :02:07.his wisdom, as young MPs scratched their heads and nudged older
:02:08. > :02:15.colleagues asking who was this strange Gordiba figure from the
:02:16. > :02:22.tribe of Kirkaldy? What a tribute to Mandela! Can I suggest one more? At
:02:23. > :02:25.the height of the anti-apartheid movement cricket pitches were dug up
:02:26. > :02:30.wherever South Africa was playing to enforce the sporting boycott. So
:02:31. > :02:32.it's only fitting we mark the old man's passing by digging up the
:02:33. > :02:38.wicket in Perth, Australia, where the next Test is about to begin in a
:02:39. > :02:44.couple of hours. It's the only chance we have of not being
:02:45. > :02:47.humiliated for a third time. Speaking of those who can't tell
:02:48. > :02:51.their googlies from their balls - sorry that should read bails - I'm
:02:52. > :02:55.joined on the sofa tonight by two men who love themselves more than
:02:56. > :02:58.they love their country. Think of them as the Keith Vaz and Keith
:02:59. > :03:03.Vajazzle of late night political chat. I speak, of course, of
:03:04. > :03:11.#manontheleft Alan "AJ" Johnson and #sadmanonatrain Michael "Chatanooga"
:03:12. > :03:19.Portillo. Moment of the week? My moment of the
:03:20. > :03:24.week is the week made out of a moment, the week that has been
:03:25. > :03:28.devoted to Mandela on the airwaves. I met Mandela and I think he was the
:03:29. > :03:32.most admirable person I ever met, but I think even when Nelson Mandela
:03:33. > :03:41.dies there is a need for journalists to maintain a sense of proportion. I
:03:42. > :03:47.thought all sense of proportion was lost, not only in the amount of time
:03:48. > :03:50.devoted to interviewing anybody who could claim to have met Nelson
:03:51. > :03:55.Mandela, or to have been in the same room, but I also thought there was a
:03:56. > :03:58.lack of objectivity, which is an absolute requirement in journalism.
:03:59. > :04:03.There was more than one side of the man to be reported. I thought the
:04:04. > :04:07.journalism verged on hysteria. I hate it when there is a kind of
:04:08. > :04:13.little correctness and only one view is available. And the BBC sending
:04:14. > :04:20.planeloads of journalists to South Africa was a symptom of that. Not
:04:21. > :04:26.us! I could not even get to Southend. And I don't think it
:04:27. > :04:32.actually does the memory any good to indulge in hyperbole, rather than
:04:33. > :04:38.accurate reporting. Putting that aside, did you like the coverage?
:04:39. > :04:45.No. Did you think Mandela was more memorable than Allen, the most
:04:46. > :04:49.memorable person you ever met? Yes, although his book is one of the most
:04:50. > :04:55.memorable I have read for a long time. Had we not been bumped last
:04:56. > :04:58.week, my moment would have been an accolade to the government because
:04:59. > :05:04.they insisted local authorities support children in care up to the
:05:05. > :05:08.age of 21. Children in care are kicked out of care far too early. As
:05:09. > :05:12.we were bumped off, I will give an accolade to the government, because
:05:13. > :05:16.I think what they did at the G8 on trying to make to mention and
:05:17. > :05:24.researching dementia was an excellent way to use a G8 summit.
:05:25. > :05:29.And getting medical expertise behind it. Absolutely. If you look at the
:05:30. > :05:33.money dedicated to important medical research, neuroscience gets a
:05:34. > :05:39.fraction of that. Your moments of the week fall into irrelevance
:05:40. > :05:44.compared to mine, when we learned that this programme is the highest
:05:45. > :05:50.trending programme on Twitter. What is Twitter? No idea, but somebody
:05:51. > :05:54.told me it was important. Now, a few weeks ago we introduced a
:05:55. > :05:57.horrified world to the Twelfie, where tired and emotional This Week
:05:58. > :05:59.viewers tweeted pictures of themselves watching the show, with
:06:00. > :06:04.the photographic evidence edited together for our end credits. Now,
:06:05. > :06:07.flogging dead horses is still not illegal so we're bringing it back
:06:08. > :06:13.next week for a festive Twelfie Night of Christmas. We're giving you
:06:14. > :06:18.a full seven days' notice get your tinsel out for the boys and get
:06:19. > :06:23.ready to tweet us. Extra points for Blue Nun in shot.
:06:24. > :06:26.Now, as the great and the good, and Tony Blair, convened in South Africa
:06:27. > :06:31.this week for Mandela's memorial service, one thing stood out, where
:06:32. > :06:34.were all the women? Sure there were plenty of political wags but what
:06:35. > :06:37.about political leaders? The Danish Prime Minister was the front page
:06:38. > :06:40.exception that proved the rule, with call-me-Dave reduced to
:06:41. > :06:45.photo-bombing her selfie just so he could be seen with a woman leader.
:06:46. > :06:48.So why are there so few women in politics and public life? We turned
:06:49. > :07:06.to top business woman Jacqueline Gold. This is her take of the week.
:07:07. > :07:12.As the chief executive of Ann Summers, I believe I have a very
:07:13. > :07:15.good idea of what women want. We do not need more men who think they
:07:16. > :07:26.know what women want. We need more women in top positions.
:07:27. > :07:33.We are always hearing about politicians trying to win over the
:07:34. > :07:39.female vote. Sorry, boys, and sadly it is mainly boys in politics, but
:07:40. > :07:43.you have to earn it. Many people think David Cameron has a problem
:07:44. > :07:47.with women, but I think all politicians have a problem
:07:48. > :07:50.connecting with women. It is about engaging with women, about
:07:51. > :08:05.connecting and addressing the right issues that really matter to women.
:08:06. > :08:11.And the issues I am talking about our child care, education, and what
:08:12. > :08:16.about equal pay? This is a subject that is really important to women. I
:08:17. > :08:20.find it shocking that on average women are paid ?5,000 less than
:08:21. > :08:25.their male counterparts who are doing exactly the same job. Maybe if
:08:26. > :08:29.there were more women in government this would be an issue that would be
:08:30. > :08:38.addressed and very high up on their agenda.
:08:39. > :08:45.50% of the directors on my board are women, and that is not because they
:08:46. > :08:51.are women, it is because I only pick the best people for the job. The
:08:52. > :08:55.government only have four women in the Cabinet, and possibly are
:08:56. > :08:58.missing out on some great talent. Instinctively, I do not want
:08:59. > :09:02.government to get involved in business but I would like to see
:09:03. > :09:07.targets for businesses to get more women onto boards. I would also like
:09:08. > :09:11.naming and shaming of those companies who are not paying women
:09:12. > :09:13.the same as men for doing exactly the same job.
:09:14. > :09:16.And from her store in Westfield Stratford to our own little store of
:09:17. > :09:32.battery-operated toys in the heart of Westminster, Jacqueline Gold
:09:33. > :09:36.joins us now. It is the 21st-century, we have made so much
:09:37. > :09:44.progress in so many areas over the past 150 is, so why is it still a
:09:45. > :09:49.man's world? There are a few reasons. First of all, and business
:09:50. > :09:55.level there is a failure to really sees some fantastic talent from
:09:56. > :09:59.women right in front of their eyes. I think women play down their
:10:00. > :10:06.success themselves, and there is an issue around lack of confidence and
:10:07. > :10:10.self belief. I think also society is limiting beliefs on women's
:10:11. > :10:16.potential. I think it is a big issue. In what way is a business
:10:17. > :10:20.better or different run partly by women, by men and women together,
:10:21. > :10:32.roughly call, as opposed to a male dominated business? On my own board,
:10:33. > :10:37.I have 50% men, 50% women. It is not a quote. No, it is because I pick
:10:38. > :10:41.the best people for the job. This is what surprises me about boards,
:10:42. > :10:46.especially in retail. I was speaking to somebody the other day who has
:10:47. > :10:50.five department stores. Their market is essentially women and they do not
:10:51. > :10:57.have one woman on their board. It is ludicrous. But what difference does
:10:58. > :11:01.it make, in your view, to have a mix of men and women running the
:11:02. > :11:07.company? How does it change the company for the better? I think you
:11:08. > :11:12.have to have a balance. An empathy with your customers. For me, that is
:11:13. > :11:16.common sense. What difference do you think it would make if we had a lot
:11:17. > :11:22.more women in politics? I think it would make a huge difference. I
:11:23. > :11:28.think it would change the culture. I watch Prime Minister 's questions
:11:29. > :11:34.and that whole culture, I think, is very unappealing. It is very
:11:35. > :11:40.unappealing for female voters, and I would imagine for women wanting to
:11:41. > :11:44.go into politics. I think there would be more issues on the agenda
:11:45. > :11:52.that relate to women, such as childcare, tax relief, unequal pay,
:11:53. > :11:58.pay equality. Just more female voices. Absolutely. Does gender
:11:59. > :12:01.matter in politics? Is it a problem that women are not better
:12:02. > :12:08.represented in parliament and government? Yes. I was in favour,
:12:09. > :12:11.when I was running for leadership of the Conservative Party, of taking
:12:12. > :12:16.all sorts of measures to make sure we increased representation of women
:12:17. > :12:21.among Conservative MPs. Labour Party have a ready done that. Would you
:12:22. > :12:28.have gone as far as Labour went, in having all-female selection list? It
:12:29. > :12:32.is a long time since this happened, but at the time I refused to rule
:12:33. > :12:36.that out. One person on the last day of the vote for the leadership
:12:37. > :12:41.said, I cannot vote for you if you will not rule out all women short
:12:42. > :12:46.lists, and I lost by one vote. Possibly I lost because of that. It
:12:47. > :12:52.is the women to blame! That being said, I hoped that having got more
:12:53. > :12:55.women into parliament we could remove any special measures. I
:12:56. > :12:59.thought women were not putting themselves forward because they had
:13:00. > :13:01.so little chance of being selected. I hoped that once we got into the
:13:02. > :13:07.habit of selecting women it would take care of itself. I would say a
:13:08. > :13:11.couple of things, and one is not to underestimate how many women have
:13:12. > :13:14.been very successful in politics. Margaret Thatcher, Theresa May,
:13:15. > :13:21.Barbara Castle, Yvette Cooper, there are a lot of important women. That
:13:22. > :13:26.is one hand I have needed so far. And I have two. You have to struggle
:13:27. > :13:33.with this further. It is not that women have not got near the top of
:13:34. > :13:35.politics. Lots of women have and yet these issues have not been
:13:36. > :13:39.resolved, so something else needs to be done. The other thing you said in
:13:40. > :13:44.your film was that you would like to see targets for boards. One thing
:13:45. > :13:48.that struck me recently is that many of our problems recently have been
:13:49. > :13:51.caused by boards on which there were unqualified people who were put
:13:52. > :13:56.there for any number of reasons, some of them diversity reasons. I am
:13:57. > :14:04.loathe to see people going on boards unless, as you say of yours, they
:14:05. > :14:09.happen to be the best qualified. You did not do it for diversity reasons.
:14:10. > :14:13.I am against quotas, for the reasons you are saying. Firstly, nobody
:14:14. > :14:17.wants to be the token woman on the board anyway, and secondly, for the
:14:18. > :14:22.very reason that you are saying. But I think we should recognise
:14:23. > :14:27.companies that do it well. There needs to be a change of culture at
:14:28. > :14:33.the top. And actually a change of culture, I was going to say, in
:14:34. > :14:39.schools. We need to do something about women building self-esteem.
:14:40. > :14:44.People don't don't like quotas. Sometimes if you don't have a quota,
:14:45. > :14:48.you can't make the breakthrough. No, I thought Jacqueline's film was spot
:14:49. > :14:53.on, particularly in terms of the pay gap. We thought this would be solved
:14:54. > :14:57.by the end of the 70s, it is still going on. We took positive action,
:14:58. > :15:01.as Michael said. There was an interesting story there of Michael
:15:02. > :15:06.losing by one vote. We took positive action. I'm not saying that
:15:07. > :15:16.everything is perfect in our party. 50% of our Cabinet are women. You
:15:17. > :15:21.don't now... We do now because we changed the law... Blair was more
:15:22. > :15:28.popular with women voters as a result. Critical Mass. A Critical
:15:29. > :15:32.Mass comes that talent we see on our frontbench. In business it's amazing
:15:33. > :15:37.how many FTSE 100 companies in this country have not one single woman on
:15:38. > :15:43.the board. It's not a case of quote... It's a case of an all-male
:15:44. > :15:48.domain. It has taken a long time to breakthrough. You might be right,
:15:49. > :15:54.eventually something needs to give. In other countries, in Scandinavian
:15:55. > :16:02.countries... They have done that. They have done quotas and it worked.
:16:03. > :16:09.Jacqueline mentioned schools. It it is alleged that because children are
:16:10. > :16:15.accessing pornography, I wonder whether through your shops you are
:16:16. > :16:21.stereotyping women as sexual objects and whether that plays a part in the
:16:22. > :16:27.way women are viewed. I'm surprised to hear you say that? It's a
:16:28. > :16:32.question. The last 30 years of my career has been about empower women
:16:33. > :16:37.not sexualising them. When I became involved, 30 years ago, you couldn't
:16:38. > :16:42.buy sexy underwear in the high street like you can today. It's more
:16:43. > :16:48.about empowering. For me, this is about equality. I don't... I really
:16:49. > :16:53.can't see the connection there. Why don't you go into politics? With my
:16:54. > :16:57.colourful career Andrew, I've been in politics all my life, I can
:16:58. > :17:03.assure you. Are quite colourful, only their shirts, mind you. If you
:17:04. > :17:08.are very colourful, you can survive in politics. Boris is pretty
:17:09. > :17:17.colourful, he survives in politics. If your colour is... One of my
:17:18. > :17:21.redcressors, in Kingston Chelsea my redcressor was Alan Clarke, he was
:17:22. > :17:26.asked if he had skeletons in his cupboard. He said, "cup boards
:17:27. > :17:28.full." We need to move on. Thank you for being with us. It's very
:17:29. > :17:36.interesting. Now it's late and you're probably
:17:37. > :17:39.wide-awake and wide-eyed, it's the ketamine that does it, but with the
:17:40. > :17:43.Government announcing a review of 'legal highs', our days could soon
:17:44. > :17:46.be numbered. So enjoy us before we get recategorised because waiting in
:17:47. > :17:49.the wings, singer, songwriter and actress Kate Nash is here to discuss
:17:50. > :18:03.modern manners. Did I mention we're now the number one TV show trending
:18:04. > :18:08.on Twitter? Did I? Well, stick that in your pipe and smoke it, Strictly.
:18:09. > :18:11.See what all the fuss is about on the Twitter and the Fleecebook and
:18:12. > :18:13.the good old missionary position interweb. Now, as we hurtle towards
:18:14. > :18:17.Christmas, like an out-of-control yule log flume, the early presents
:18:18. > :18:19.hit us thick and fast. This week we were treated to the leaders'
:18:20. > :18:24.Christmas cards. David Cameron's advisers chose to recreate an Athena
:18:25. > :18:26.poster from 1985. Ed Miliband's advisers thought 'nothing quite says
:18:27. > :18:32.Christmas' like the Labour Party conference. Whilst Nick Clegg's
:18:33. > :18:35.advisers are fooling nobody with their ludicrous claim his children
:18:36. > :18:38.were responsible for his card's festive graffiti everyone knows the
:18:39. > :18:44.first thing any normal kid draws are a pair of black-rimmed spectacles
:18:45. > :18:47.and a Hitler moustache! Well, we thought we should make our own and
:18:48. > :18:49.so asked Isobel Hardman from the Spectator, here's her round-up of
:18:50. > :19:05.the week. It's the biggest political decision
:19:06. > :19:09.of the year, forget your spare room subsidies or your autumn statements,
:19:10. > :19:14.most of us have, the burning question in Westminster this week
:19:15. > :19:24.is... What on earth am I going to do with all my Christmas cards?
:19:25. > :19:30.Camerons the Cleggs and the mill bands have all done theirs. We will
:19:31. > :19:34.have to forgive our political leaders from being naff, it's
:19:35. > :19:38.Christmas after all, which is why at this festive time of year, I like to
:19:39. > :19:45.spare a thought for the poor and the needy. Yes, you're poor MP,
:19:46. > :19:51.struggling to get by on a mere ?66,000 a year! Mr Speaker, does the
:19:52. > :19:55.Prime Minister agree with me that given the crisis ordinary families
:19:56. > :19:59.are facing in their living standards, MPs should not be awarded
:20:00. > :20:05.a pay rise many times above inflation in 2015? I do agree. It
:20:06. > :20:09.would be wrong for MPs to get a big pay rise at the time of public
:20:10. > :20:13.sector pay restraint. All three party leaders agree on that. Last
:20:14. > :20:18.Christmas Tory backbenchers might have savaged Cameron over an issue
:20:19. > :20:24.like pay, I get the impression that the MPs' relation with his MPs are
:20:25. > :20:27.beginning to thaw. His MPs seem to be blaming all three party
:20:28. > :20:30.leadersers rather than just him. They are annoyed that senior
:20:31. > :20:37.politicians don't quite understand how tough it is being a backbencher.
:20:38. > :20:42.Cameron has been trying really hard, inviting his MPs round for more
:20:43. > :20:49.bacon butties and evening drink events than the average backbench
:20:50. > :21:03.expense budget can stretch to. We haven't seen the Balls' Christmas
:21:04. > :21:08.card yet. The Tories love Ed Ball as flop, they see him as an asset to
:21:09. > :21:12.the party. He is at it again, heckling again. We learnt something
:21:13. > :21:21.last week, he can dish it out, he can't take it. There we are. Oh... I
:21:22. > :21:27.tell you what's going down, his career is going down. That is what
:21:28. > :21:37.is going down. Did you hear that, Ed, that is the sound of the world's
:21:38. > :21:45.tinest piano playing. -- tiniest. Some in his party agree with the
:21:46. > :21:49.Tories, Ed Balls isn't helping make Labour electable again. Even E em's
:21:50. > :21:55.team realise the Shadow Chancellor is a nightmare. The Labour leaders
:21:56. > :21:58.real nightmare would be sacking the Shadow Chancellor, he wouldn't get a
:21:59. > :22:03.Christmas card from Balls if he did that. People are betting on you not
:22:04. > :22:06.being in the job? That is the nature of politics. They are betting on
:22:07. > :22:11.David Cameron, George Osborne, Ed Miliband. It's the way it is. The
:22:12. > :22:16.thing is, the reason why you ask me these questions you want me to be
:22:17. > :22:25.bothered. Frankly, I couldn't give a toss. The I couldn't give a toss.
:22:26. > :22:29.Iain Duncan Smith looked like the Grinch who stole Christmas this week
:22:30. > :22:34.as he batted away criticism of his welfare aforms and the hi-tech IT
:22:35. > :22:36.system needed to deal with. It Iain Duncan Smith does have a solution to
:22:37. > :22:43.his universal credit nightmare. As well as getting very grumpy indeed
:22:44. > :22:51.with anyone who cite sizes it he can confuse people by using strange
:22:52. > :22:55.jargon such as yob potting, and front loading. We have had to sit
:22:56. > :22:59.for some time while a lot of bogus nonsense has been talked about huge
:23:00. > :23:02.levels of additional writoffs. This note in the front of you absolutely
:23:03. > :23:08.finishes that and ends it. Within the time scales and within budget we
:23:09. > :23:12.are delivering a universal credit solution. Is all about children.
:23:13. > :23:16.This year the deputy PM got his children to make their Christmas
:23:17. > :23:21.card using an iPod, it's how like Lib Dem party policy is drawn up
:23:22. > :23:26.these days. It's the sort of encouragement that Ofsted says our
:23:27. > :23:29.children need. This week they demanded that seven-year-olds in
:23:30. > :23:36.England take compulsory tests. This doesn't really look like me. Greater
:23:37. > :23:42.accountability, more assessment is delivering better outcomes. If we
:23:43. > :23:45.have any ambition to join the top performing nations, we have to do
:23:46. > :23:49.the same. Goodwill to all men did break out in the Commons on Monday
:23:50. > :23:54.during parliamentary tributes to Nelson Mandela. The Commons is
:23:55. > :23:58.always at its best on these occasions the three party leaders
:23:59. > :24:02.put on a very good performance. It was the glos of Christmas past,
:24:03. > :24:05.Gordon Brown who put on the best show. The one and first great
:24:06. > :24:10.achievement of Nelson Mandela, what made him this great architect of a
:24:11. > :24:15.free South Africa, was this burning belief that everyone, every man and
:24:16. > :24:22.woman was equal. Everyone born to be free. Everyone created, not with a
:24:23. > :24:26.destiny to be in poverty, but created to have dignity in life. The
:24:27. > :24:31.three party leaders headed to South Africa for the tribute to the former
:24:32. > :24:35.President. The greater and the good rubbed shoulders together, a little
:24:36. > :24:40.too closely, some thought. The Prime Minister argued that it was only
:24:41. > :24:44.polite to join in when asked by Neil Kinnock's daughter in law, the
:24:45. > :24:46.Danish PM, she can always air brush him out of the photo. It's nowhere
:24:47. > :25:01.near as good as my picture! Ah, Miranda, welcome. Thank Thank
:25:02. > :25:09.you. , why is MPs pay still such a mess? Because there are only two...
:25:10. > :25:14.There are only two ways of settling MPs pay, it ourns out in the end
:25:15. > :25:17.there is only one way. The two ways appear to be, MPs vote for it or you
:25:18. > :25:20.have an independent committee. When you have an independent committee
:25:21. > :25:24.and the public doesn't like the result, indeed the political leaders
:25:25. > :25:30.don't like the result, it turns out that the MPs will go out to vote to
:25:31. > :25:38.vote down the recommendation of the independent committee. In the
:25:39. > :25:41.current circumstances when you cannot find any group of public
:25:42. > :25:47.sector workers, many of which could make a good argument to say we have
:25:48. > :25:52.fallen behind, we need to catchup, and they have not got a chance in
:25:53. > :25:55.hell. There is no no case for MPs to be an exception in those
:25:56. > :26:00.circumstances. According to IPSA there would be no extra money
:26:01. > :26:05.because they there would be savings from MPs' pensionses, their payments
:26:06. > :26:10.would be cut back, the resettlement schemes which MPs get when they lose
:26:11. > :26:17.seats, that would be cut back. IPSA claims overall it's a wash, it won't
:26:18. > :26:21.cost us a penny more. I was a trade union negotiator. Can you make these
:26:22. > :26:25.arguments. You are looking for the biggest increase you can get. You
:26:26. > :26:30.can make all kinds of arguments, it's the headline figure. Lots of
:26:31. > :26:33.public sector workers, teachers, senior scientists working for the
:26:34. > :26:38.Government can make a good argument. They haven't got a chance. We have
:26:39. > :26:43.1% cap on the poorest and most vulnerable in welfare. Can you not
:26:44. > :26:53.put your pay up by 12%, I make it 12% from ?66,000 to ?74,000 in those
:26:54. > :26:56.circumstances. The leaders of both front benches, Mr Clegg as well, are
:26:57. > :27:02.all saying this is outrageous, terrible it will not happen, we will
:27:03. > :27:05.stop it, nothing off the table, even threatening IPSA, the Prime
:27:06. > :27:09.Minister's very existence. On the backbenches, they want it? Of course
:27:10. > :27:15.they do, absolutely. They are not getting ministerial salaries on
:27:16. > :27:19.backbenches as well. And, some of... Not independently wealthy some of
:27:20. > :27:22.them, are they? Indeed. Some of them have described the decision that
:27:23. > :27:27.they made to go into politics and take quite a big cut if they were in
:27:28. > :27:34.well-paid positions, some of them in the public sector, Sarah Walston,
:27:35. > :27:39.who was a GP, it's less remuneration for a MP than a GP. Less being a
:27:40. > :27:44.trade union leader. Yeah. This IPSA argument that it actually, you know,
:27:45. > :27:47.it flat if you take into account the pension, it's too complicated for
:27:48. > :27:53.the public to understand. You cannot go out there with a headline saying
:27:54. > :27:56.- 11%, 12% rise. It's not just public sector pay freezes, in the
:27:57. > :28:02.private-sector a lot of people haven't had a pay rise at all
:28:03. > :28:09.either. Private-sector pay is bearing rising by 0.5%, even less.
:28:10. > :28:14.How will it end? It will end with it being got rid of. It won't happen It
:28:15. > :28:18.absolutely won't happen. What mug do you have to be to do any job for the
:28:19. > :28:24.Government. Kennedy is working for IPSA. He does a lot of serious work.
:28:25. > :28:27.He looks into the figures, asked to be independent. Comes up with a
:28:28. > :28:32.recommendation and the Prime Minister threatens to abolish him.
:28:33. > :28:40.Which mug would work for the Government? IPSA was set up
:28:41. > :28:44.independently, they were set up to look at this problem of where you
:28:45. > :28:48.establish MPs pay and put a mechanism of how it is increased in
:28:49. > :28:52.the future. His mechanism for that, average earnings, is right, how we
:28:53. > :28:59.get to the first stage. And when exactly, not now. When is the time
:29:00. > :29:04.to do it. We are agreed on that. We got bumped last week about Nelson
:29:05. > :29:10.Mandela's death we wanted to ask you about Ed Balls, for three
:29:11. > :29:20.nanoseconds you did his job? More than three nanoseconds.
:29:21. > :29:29.You had been Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Is there any possibility
:29:30. > :29:38.that Mr Miliband might remove Ed balls? No possibility whatsoever,
:29:39. > :29:45.and neither should he. That Autumn Statement, and I replied to one in
:29:46. > :29:49.autumn 2010. The only have two compare it with what has happened
:29:50. > :29:52.and you will see that this is no great success. The Autumn Statement
:29:53. > :29:56.is really for a Chancellor to stand up and preen and look smug. No
:29:57. > :30:02.matter the circumstances, they will do that. It is a terribly difficult
:30:03. > :30:09.act. You get the thing a few seconds before, heavily redacted. So he will
:30:10. > :30:17.be Shadow Chancellor going into the 2015 election? You would need more
:30:18. > :30:23.than Ed Miliband has to remove him. I don't know. He stabbed his brother
:30:24. > :30:31.in the back. That was brave, risky, but this could be fatal. I think
:30:32. > :30:37.that having Ed balls there is a disaster, frankly, for the Labour
:30:38. > :30:46.Party going into the election. They think he is one of their biggest
:30:47. > :30:50.assets. David Cameron tries hard to mention him as often as he possibly
:30:51. > :30:53.can, and it is because everyone remembers him being Gordon Brown's
:30:54. > :30:57.henchmen. It allows them to repeat the line of, Labour got us into this
:30:58. > :31:05.mess and we are clearing up the disaster they left. We should recall
:31:06. > :31:10.how Ed Miliband got into the mess of having to appoint him. That is very
:31:11. > :31:20.true. Thank you very much. Have you still got that primer? I have got
:31:21. > :31:29.loads because I got loads as soon as I make that joke. I could lend you
:31:30. > :31:32.one. When James Callaghan became Chancellor of the Exchequer, he went
:31:33. > :31:40.to Oxford to do a course on economics. They get everything
:31:41. > :31:48.wrong. I could have told you that, and I am cheap. We will talk
:31:49. > :31:57.afterwards. Adam Smith went to his university. At the same time! He
:31:58. > :32:03.came after me. Universal credit, do you think it is still going to
:32:04. > :32:09.happen? Yes, by dribs and drabs, I think it will eventually happen.
:32:10. > :32:19.Iain Duncan Smith has been very brave. So many people have wanted to
:32:20. > :32:25.do this. Including me. You have to give him credit for trying. The
:32:26. > :32:30.business over the information technology systems, the impairments,
:32:31. > :32:36.writing off ?40 million of code, this is the story repeated year
:32:37. > :32:42.after year in government. With both parties in power. Of course, it is
:32:43. > :32:46.nothing to do with politicians. I think it is to do with the inability
:32:47. > :32:52.of civil service managers to specify the system that they want, so the
:32:53. > :32:58.waste occurs, but it is scandalous. You also have the example on the
:32:59. > :33:02.other side of the Atlantic. Any policy overhaul, the minute you
:33:03. > :33:05.here, we are going to have a magnificent IT system which will
:33:06. > :33:13.bring the nation together, you start to panic. If you are going to try
:33:14. > :33:18.it, do not make grand claims. Simplification of the system is a
:33:19. > :33:22.noble objective but it is crazy to make these are statements that you
:33:23. > :33:28.are going to do so many people on it. 450,000 by now, it was going to
:33:29. > :33:33.be. This is more sensible than what came out from the Labour front
:33:34. > :33:41.bench. For Labour to criticise IT cock ups is like Satan complaining
:33:42. > :33:45.about sins. Except that when we had IT cock ups, there were people like
:33:46. > :33:52.Iain Duncan Smith to point it out. I want an honest answer. Do you think
:33:53. > :33:56.Nick Clegg's children independently drew the antlers and the beard on
:33:57. > :34:02.their parents, or were they told to buy a spin doctor? If I tell you
:34:03. > :34:08.that my two-year-old is better with the iPad than I am, I believe they
:34:09. > :34:14.did it. That was a much clever answer than any of us had
:34:15. > :34:21.anticipated. I thought she would say, that is a good question, but
:34:22. > :34:28.she answered it, in her way! In my way! I think it was the kids, yes. I
:34:29. > :34:31.want to see you do it later. Now, if the Danish Prime Minister went to
:34:32. > :34:34.the memorial of the world's greatest statesman and took a selfie with
:34:35. > :34:37.Barack Obama, would it be bad manners? And if she then took her
:34:38. > :34:39.memory stick and memory-of-a-lifetime into the
:34:40. > :34:42.Copenhagen branch of Snurrrpy Snurrrps and airbrushed out the
:34:43. > :34:46.gurning face of our own Prime Minister who'd managed to force his
:34:47. > :34:51.way into the picture, would it be bad form? We're not sure. That's why
:34:52. > :35:06.we've decided to put modern manners in this week's Spotlight.
:35:07. > :35:13.# I got too drunk at the Christmas party. #
:35:14. > :35:18.Girls can be gross and barred, so says Kate Nash, talking about her
:35:19. > :35:23.new film, the powder room. Our bad manners always a bad thing? The
:35:24. > :35:30.Ofsted chief Inspector claims some schools must do better, but also
:35:31. > :35:32.must behave better. It is a culture of casual acceptance of low-level
:35:33. > :35:39.disruption and poor attitudes to learning. With a lack of manners and
:35:40. > :35:42.discipline affecting results, he once unannounced behavioural
:35:43. > :35:46.inspections put in place. Maybe someone should have been inspecting
:35:47. > :35:52.David Cameron and Barack Obama at Nelson Mandela's Memorial. They were
:35:53. > :35:56.criticised for taking a selfie with the Danish prime minister. But Mr
:35:57. > :36:02.Cameron argued it was perfectly appropriate. When a member of the
:36:03. > :36:06.Kinnock family asked me for a photograph, I thought it right to
:36:07. > :36:12.say yes. He is not the only one getting grief, with the memorial
:36:13. > :36:17.crowd showing distaste for South African President Jacob Zuma. The
:36:18. > :36:20.cameras caught plenty of chip chat during the eulogies. So is there
:36:21. > :36:26.anything wrong with some bad manners? Are they a bit of harm --
:36:27. > :36:36.harmless fun, or potentially damaging and disrespectful?
:36:37. > :36:44.Kate Nash joins us. Welcome. Thank you for the intro. Your new movie is
:36:45. > :36:49.getting rave reviews. Is it a celebration of bad manners? It is a
:36:50. > :36:52.celebration of friendship. There are some bad manners. There are things
:36:53. > :36:57.that go wrong, things that a lot of people get up to which happen in the
:36:58. > :37:02.movie. But really it is about having a quarter life crisis, and
:37:03. > :37:09.realising, actually, that does not satisfy you, and about friendship
:37:10. > :37:13.prevailing. Do you think in this day that young women are still expected
:37:14. > :37:17.to have better manners than young men? Yes, I do. If you look at the
:37:18. > :37:23.way badly behaved men are portrayed in the media and badly behaved
:37:24. > :37:28.women, it is three different. Men are considered rock stars and women
:37:29. > :37:33.are train wrecks. There was a time not that long ago when young women
:37:34. > :37:38.were better behaved, better mannered than men of the equivalent age. But
:37:39. > :37:41.you see a lot of behaviour in the streets on a Saturday and Friday
:37:42. > :37:48.nights now that suggests they are as bad as each other. I suppose you do.
:37:49. > :37:52.Which means there is no restraint on the end, because the women used to
:37:53. > :37:56.be the restraint on the men when they get out of line. It was the
:37:57. > :38:03.women who said, stop doing that, but that has gone if women are behaving
:38:04. > :38:06.the same way. I do not know if it is women's responsibility to control
:38:07. > :38:10.men and tell them how to behave. I think most able know you cannot
:38:11. > :38:13.actually control someone and if you tell someone not to behave in one
:38:14. > :38:17.way they will do it behind your back. I think clearly there are
:38:18. > :38:22.problems with binge drinking and violence, and they need to be
:38:23. > :38:29.addressed. They used to be male monopolies but they are not any
:38:30. > :38:35.more. I guess. I do not think it is a question of manners. When I meet
:38:36. > :38:39.young people, I find incredibly well mannered, no different to kids when
:38:40. > :38:42.I was young. I do not think there has been a collapse in manners.
:38:43. > :38:47.There has been a collapse in manners. There has been changing
:38:48. > :38:52.lifestyles, and one of them, is that instead of just men getting
:38:53. > :38:55.legless, it is men and women. There are certain things we need to
:38:56. > :39:00.address which are being missed, which are to do with education being
:39:01. > :39:08.inspiring and interesting for young people, rather than just about
:39:09. > :39:13.purely passing tests and pressure. I was in a skate park the other day
:39:14. > :39:16.and there was this kid who I met who I had seen a couple of times. He is
:39:17. > :39:20.a really sweet boy. He got kicked out of school because he got into a
:39:21. > :39:26.fight, so obviously he is a bit of a troublemaker. But he is a
:39:27. > :39:31.good-hearted boy, nice to everyone there. He goes there to skate. I saw
:39:32. > :39:36.this trailer documentary recently about the South skate park which is
:39:37. > :39:40.being shut down. Things like that are redeemed poor and for young
:39:41. > :39:44.people to have places to express themselves. That is real culture
:39:45. > :39:55.that has been created in a genuine way. Let me real you back in from
:39:56. > :39:59.the skate park. Is that mine? It is now. Unless it has my lipstick on
:40:00. > :40:07.it. The picture from South Africa of the Danish prime minister taking the
:40:08. > :40:11.selfie at Mandela's Memorial. Was that bad manners? What I find weird
:40:12. > :40:17.is that we are having a discussion about the selfie on this programme.
:40:18. > :40:25.That is the most disturbing part for me. Selfie is in the dictionary, I
:40:26. > :40:28.think. Was it bad manners? I would not take a selfie at a memorial
:40:29. > :40:34.service, especially if I was a president or prime minister. I
:40:35. > :40:38.cannot appreciate the context entirely. For example, lots of
:40:39. > :40:43.people are singing at a memorial service, because it was partly a
:40:44. > :40:46.celebration. It clearly does not have the sombre atmosphere of a
:40:47. > :40:53.funeral in a church in this country. I think the three who took the
:40:54. > :40:56.selfie might have figured out that, back in their home countries, we
:40:57. > :40:59.would not have the benefit of the context as they appreciated it, and
:41:00. > :41:06.it might be a pretty bad hostage to fortune. Thank God for the Danish
:41:07. > :41:09.prime minister. I thought it was great. The person who would have
:41:10. > :41:13.smiled the most would have been Nelson Mandela. It was a memorial
:41:14. > :41:17.service, they were sitting around for long periods, people were
:41:18. > :41:27.singing and dancing, and they took a selfie. A selfie? Why? Stop taking
:41:28. > :41:33.them, everyone. It was a photo of three people. They could have got
:41:34. > :41:36.someone else to take it. The key is in the words selfie. You take it
:41:37. > :41:45.yourself. The number is not the issue. What did you make of Michael
:41:46. > :41:48.Wilshaw's point, Alan, being interested in education, that what
:41:49. > :41:53.we see is casual indiscipline, sloppy culture, noisy corridors,
:41:54. > :41:57.children answering back, teachers confusing friendliness with
:41:58. > :42:04.familiarity. That is what you see in bad schools. That is the kind of
:42:05. > :42:08.behaviour that can be transformed just by leadership, by a headteacher
:42:09. > :42:14.who will not tolerate that, and that permeates down to the rest of the
:42:15. > :42:17.staff. I entirely agree. If you used the argument of the well-behaved
:42:18. > :42:21.kids in the class that the other kids are hampering their life
:42:22. > :42:28.chances, do you think that carries anyway? Can you invoke peer
:42:29. > :42:32.pressure? You can. What impressed me was the number of kids who behaved,
:42:33. > :42:39.who were resentful at the attention paid to those who did not. It does
:42:40. > :42:42.disrupt class, but as a general proposition, is it not fair to say
:42:43. > :42:49.that kids today are at least as polite and well mannered as previous
:42:50. > :42:56.generations? I guess every generation has its own problems, and
:42:57. > :42:59.we obviously saw a few years ago, with the riots, that there are a lot
:43:00. > :43:04.of unhappy people. Whether you can figure out exactly why that happened
:43:05. > :43:09.does not really matter. What matters is that it did happen and so there
:43:10. > :43:16.is some kind of unhappiness. And I think you have to work with, like,
:43:17. > :43:21.engaging young people. It is not about rewarding the bad kids, it is
:43:22. > :43:25.about inspiring them and trying to encourage them. If they are not
:43:26. > :43:30.succeeding at academic things, encourage them vocationally and
:43:31. > :43:34.creatively. The best way for the young to be inspired is not to watch
:43:35. > :43:36.this programme because it brings you down. Good luck with the movie. It
:43:37. > :43:39.is going great. That's your lot for tonight, folks.
:43:40. > :43:43.But not for us. We're off to Annabel's to celebrate the fact that
:43:44. > :43:49.we're the top trending TV show on Twitter. Oh, did I already mention
:43:50. > :43:51.that? Did I? Did I? Nighty-night, don't let our bloated sense of
:43:52. > :44:12.self-importance bite. # We are the champions, my friends
:44:13. > :44:16.# And we will keep on fighting until the end
:44:17. > :44:24.# We are the champions # We are the champions
:44:25. > :44:26.# No time for losers # Because we are the champions of
:44:27. > :44:34.the world. #