:00:08. > :00:11.As celebrity royal couple Chris and Gwyneth fall off their marriage
:00:12. > :00:23.throne, This Week takes a look at who wants to rule the political
:00:24. > :00:31.world. King of TV history, David Starkey, assesses the quality of
:00:32. > :00:37.leadership on offer. Forget Coldplay. I will be telling you why
:00:38. > :00:44.our current crop of political leaders are a cup of cold sick.
:00:45. > :00:48.As crown princes Nick and Nigel are given the chance to dress up as
:00:49. > :00:58.kings, the BBC's very own court jester, Laura Kuenssburg bows down
:00:59. > :01:03.to no-one. There was a conscious coupling between Nick and Nigel, who
:01:04. > :01:07.clashed over Europe and immigration. It was certainly the TV debate of
:01:08. > :01:12.the week, but was it a big fat turn-off?
:01:13. > :01:17.And the world's biggest short actor, Warwick Davies, was certainly born
:01:18. > :01:25.to rule the This Week studio. So is it time to stop typecasting? My
:01:26. > :01:29.agent did not tell me I would be taking part in the political
:01:30. > :01:31.pantomime. This Week, I love you, but is it
:01:32. > :01:42.time for us to consciously uncouple? Evenin' all. Welcome to This Week, a
:01:43. > :01:45.week when a new morning-after pill was unveiled, provoking howls of
:01:46. > :01:52.outrage from the usual party poopers that it would only lead to even more
:01:53. > :01:55.promiscuity among the young. Frankly teenagers didn't stand a chance
:01:56. > :01:58.because chemists were cleared out by mid-morning as adults rushed to snap
:01:59. > :02:01.up a morning-after pill they thought might help them forget the
:02:02. > :02:07.night-before debate between Nick and Nige. Yes, as sordid spectacles go,
:02:08. > :02:11.this was "conspicuous uncoupling" at its best, upstaging Gwyneth and
:02:12. > :02:14.Chris in the process, with the Lib Dem and UKIP leader lobbing fake
:02:15. > :02:22.hand grenades at each other from their respective fantasy worlds of
:02:23. > :02:24.Europhiles and Europhobes. It's been quite a week for conspicuous
:02:25. > :02:27.uncoupling here in Westminster, with Ed Balls helpfully explaining that
:02:28. > :02:31.the reason for his leader's poor Budget response was because Red Ed
:02:32. > :02:36.had been misled about what would be in the Budget by Twitter. Thanks a
:02:37. > :02:41.lot, Ed, Balls, that is. Really helpful. And Boy George Osborne
:02:42. > :02:47.uncoupled from himself with an out of body experience in which he
:02:48. > :02:50.thought he was a bingo caller. I don't think he fooled anybody. If
:02:51. > :02:54.you think that's weird just be glad you're not the Labour leader. 41% in
:02:55. > :02:58.a YouGov Buzzfeed poll thought Mr Miliband was weird. But he was also
:02:59. > :03:01.seen as the most honest party leader, Mr Clegg the most dishonest.
:03:02. > :03:05.We could have saved Buzzfeed quite a bit of money if they'd spoken to us
:03:06. > :03:09.first. Speaking of an odd couple who are barely conscious, I'm joined on
:03:10. > :03:12.the sofa tonight by a two-man band who make a terrible racket. Think of
:03:13. > :03:16.them as the Coldplay and Cold Pot Noodle of late night political chat.
:03:17. > :03:25.I speak, of course, of #manontheleft Alan "AJ" Johnson and
:03:26. > :03:30.#sadmanonatrain Michael Portillo. Your moment of the week? More
:03:31. > :03:35.developments at the Metropolitan Police. A couple of weeks ago Diane
:03:36. > :03:38.Abbott picked as her moment of the week the revelations that being
:03:39. > :03:43.quarry into the Stephen Lawrence murder had been hampered apparently
:03:44. > :03:48.by police corruption. Then it emerged that the files relating to
:03:49. > :03:54.corruption had been shredded in 2003. It now emerges that there were
:03:55. > :04:02.17 different investigations, and they were brought together in one
:04:03. > :04:05.operation, which found there was a network of corrupt officers at the
:04:06. > :04:09.heart of the Metropolitan Police. But the rate of hope in all of this
:04:10. > :04:15.is that whereas all the information that was destroyed in 2003 was
:04:16. > :04:18.thought to be lost forever, it may be that this second operation which
:04:19. > :04:22.was, as I understand it, one that brought the others together, may
:04:23. > :04:26.have duplicated some of that material. So it may yet be that some
:04:27. > :04:32.of the people who have been acting corruptly can be brought to justice.
:04:33. > :04:37.Doesn't it look more and more like the Chicago police in the 1930s? It
:04:38. > :04:41.is too rhythmically disappointing and it absolutely has to be sorted
:04:42. > :04:46.out. I hope that Bernard Hogan-Howe, the commissioner, will
:04:47. > :04:53.be able to sort it out. His back is against the wall, too. Like the
:04:54. > :04:58.police of the 80s. Mine has to be investment of Siemens in the fair
:04:59. > :05:03.city I represent, a big investment. The windy city. They are bringing
:05:04. > :05:07.over blade manufacturing from Denmark, wonderful news for a city
:05:08. > :05:12.that has not had good news since the fishing industry collapsed. The one
:05:13. > :05:18.that I complain about is the Number Ten media machine had it as the
:05:19. > :05:22.headline on their press release that Siemens react to George Osborne's
:05:23. > :05:30.Budget. This has been six years and they have been looking at 110
:05:31. > :05:34.different locations. It is Siemens and associated British ports, so not
:05:35. > :05:38.just a foreign investment. Now here on This Week, we take great
:05:39. > :05:41.pride in being the BBC's number one flagship current affairs programme.
:05:42. > :05:44.Current affairs. But every now and then, we're more than happy to
:05:45. > :05:47.dredge up any old piece of Westminster gossip, dust it down,
:05:48. > :05:51.spruce it up, find a location from a movie that came out four years ago,
:05:52. > :05:54.and try to pass it off as contemporary political analysis.
:05:55. > :05:57.Which is exactly what we've done this week, or rather what historian
:05:58. > :06:00.David Starkey has done on our behalf. Actually it's much better
:06:01. > :06:28.than it sounds. Here's his take of the week.
:06:29. > :06:37.Feel you have seen this before? Well, you have, in the King 's
:06:38. > :06:42.speech. In the film, this room is the consulting room of the Doctor,
:06:43. > :06:47.the strangely and speech therapist, who enables George VI to overcome
:06:48. > :06:54.his terrible stammer, to rally the British people in the Second World
:06:55. > :06:57.War. Well, rumours this week that another George is also seeking out
:06:58. > :07:03.expensive Harley Street speech therapists. It is Chancellor George
:07:04. > :07:14.Osborne, who is trying to learn to drop his H, and get a lot of bottle,
:07:15. > :07:22.just like Tony Blair. It says it all, really, doesn't it? Whatever he
:07:23. > :07:27.sounds like, there are few people with too clever by half more clearly
:07:28. > :07:31.written on their forehead than George Osborne. Even when he gets
:07:32. > :07:37.the policy right, like pension reform, he perverts it by putting
:07:38. > :07:43.the politics in front of the policy. Just like Gordon Brown at
:07:44. > :07:48.his very worst. He targets different groups of people to buy off with
:07:49. > :07:57.giveaways. In this case, I suppose, me, the grey vote. Andy Young Ed
:07:58. > :08:03.Miliband's appeal is no more robust. There is a poll this week that shows
:08:04. > :08:10.that four out of ten Britons think that he is a bit weird. I am only
:08:11. > :08:15.surprised that is not more. Even the Shadow Cabinet are leaking like mad
:08:16. > :08:20.that he is surrounded by a clique. Apparently, the Labour strategy is
:08:21. > :08:25.to win with only 35% of the poll, ignoring middle England and relying
:08:26. > :08:28.instead on the core vote and disillusioned Lib Dems. How
:08:29. > :08:47.contemptible. And how dangerous. In the film, the doctor, the brash
:08:48. > :08:52.Australian, succeeds by liberating King George from the stifling
:08:53. > :08:59.formality of his British courtiers. Instead, our politicians, whose
:09:00. > :09:04.lives are as a moat and exotic as 1930s Buckingham Palace, have
:09:05. > :09:08.abandoned any discernible pursuit of the national interest. -- as
:09:09. > :09:13.remote. No wonder most people are disengaged from politics. They are
:09:14. > :09:17.right to be so. And from his consulting room at 33
:09:18. > :09:19.Portland Place to our own little consulting room here in the heart of
:09:20. > :09:37.Westminster, welcome back, Your Majesty. Hand. I would not go that
:09:38. > :09:40.far. You usually go further. Do you think David is being harsh on
:09:41. > :09:46.today's generation of politicians? Yellow macro I do, and I think his
:09:47. > :09:50.example were not particularly good. I think the announcement on pensions
:09:51. > :09:53.in the budget was the boldest stroke from a Chancellor of the Exchequer
:09:54. > :09:58.since the abolition of exchange controls in 1979 by Geoffrey Howe. I
:09:59. > :10:02.certainly think it was George Osborne's finest hour. It is true
:10:03. > :10:05.that it benefits a part of the electorate who are there to be won
:10:06. > :10:09.over but that has been evident for decades, that these people could be
:10:10. > :10:13.won over by a change to the very unfair rules that oblige pensioners
:10:14. > :10:18.of a certain age to take out an annuity. But it has taken George
:10:19. > :10:21.Osborne to blow away the cobwebs at the Treasury. I remember Treasury
:10:22. > :10:26.civil servants telling Chancellor this could not be done. He has done
:10:27. > :10:31.it, and it is a very bold stroke and he deserves credit for it. And
:10:32. > :10:36.broadly speaking, I think the coalition set itself an ambition to
:10:37. > :10:39.reform the economy. It has taken longer than the coalition hoped it
:10:40. > :10:44.would because we did not get growth back as fast as we hoped, but
:10:45. > :10:49.nonetheless, the deficit is falling. On present projections, it will turn
:10:50. > :10:55.into a surplus. I am sorry, but all of this is tedious, utterly tedious.
:10:56. > :10:59.Who is this man who has come to be rude to us? Isn't it time you were
:11:00. > :11:04.shaken up a bit out of this dreary complacency, because in the world
:11:05. > :11:09.outside this studio and Westminster, the kind of thing you are saying has
:11:10. > :11:14.absolutely no resonance at all? I agree with you, it seems the move
:11:15. > :11:19.was sensible, but coming from George Osborne it loses any kind of moral
:11:20. > :11:26.authority. He is seen simply as a wheeler dealer, the bingo player,
:11:27. > :11:30.the gambler. Again, as we know, this is a very narrow section of appeal
:11:31. > :11:37.to the Tory Homebase, the only group among whom they have a comfortable
:11:38. > :11:41.lead, the elderly. Later we are dealing with typecasting, and you
:11:42. > :11:44.are typecasting George Osborne, saying that because the decision
:11:45. > :11:47.comes from him it must be narrow politicking. You are not allowing
:11:48. > :11:55.for the possibility that he has developed. I am a historian. You
:11:56. > :12:00.used to be. This transforms your view of George Osborne. You may now
:12:01. > :12:08.speak. George Osborne's entire behaviour has been that of a rather
:12:09. > :12:15.narrow, mean-spirited strategist. The silliest kind of tactician. The
:12:16. > :12:20.shallowest kind of tactician. Why, if you are right, are we seeing
:12:21. > :12:26.rapidly declining turnouts in elections? Why are we seeing the
:12:27. > :12:34.rise of UKIP? Why are we seeing this erosion of the political basis. What
:12:35. > :12:41.is your view, Alan? Is David being too tough on today's generation of
:12:42. > :12:46.politicians? I think he is. They would say that, wouldn't they? I
:12:47. > :12:51.have only existed in this current era. I would love to throw rocks at
:12:52. > :12:57.George Osborne, but the question is, is there a modern politician, of
:12:58. > :13:03.the last 20 years, who you would approve of? No. I really do think,
:13:04. > :13:08.and the electorate seems to agree with me, it is striking going on a
:13:09. > :13:11.programme like Question Time how profoundly unpopular politicians
:13:12. > :13:16.are, how what they say is treated with contempt and not taken
:13:17. > :13:23.seriously. For the sake of the next couple of minutes, let's assume you
:13:24. > :13:29.are right. Why Armand politicians so inadequate? -- why our modern
:13:30. > :13:33.politicians so inadequate? They tend to go to their core vote. There has
:13:34. > :13:39.been a remarkable fragmentation of politics. Class waste politics has
:13:40. > :13:45.gone and you are getting variance of Ken Livingstone's rainbow coalitions
:13:46. > :13:48.of one sort or another, in which politicians are trying to target
:13:49. > :13:53.groups and put them together. You have two parties, the Lib Dems and
:13:54. > :13:58.UKIP, which are more or less, you can trace them. There are tiny
:13:59. > :14:03.patches on the electoral map. What is striking is the absence of any
:14:04. > :14:06.politician who can articulate an argument that appeals broadly, that
:14:07. > :14:13.has any kind of national dimensional. This seems to me to be
:14:14. > :14:21.utterly fundamental. I don't entirely disagree. One of the things
:14:22. > :14:25.that has gone wrong is that politicians are tending to respond
:14:26. > :14:29.to the wrong audience. The audience to which they are responding is the
:14:30. > :14:35.24-hour media, the many channels, and that requires a constant
:14:36. > :14:38.response several times a day, and you cannot possibly have things well
:14:39. > :14:44.thought out if you are responding several times a day. The public,
:14:45. > :14:47.beyond the media, I think once much broader brush stuff. It wants a
:14:48. > :14:52.sense of direction, the destination to which it is being led. I think we
:14:53. > :14:58.are going through a difficult phase in which politicians are addressing
:14:59. > :15:02.the wrong people. In this respect, George Osborne is on the side of
:15:03. > :15:07.virtue. He speaks very rarely and when he has something to say, he
:15:08. > :15:11.says it. The Prime Minister is more guilty of speaking on a daily basis.
:15:12. > :15:15.Maybe it is easier for the Chancellor told his tongue over a
:15:16. > :15:23.long period. Does Mr Miliband come across as a bit weird? The polls say
:15:24. > :15:28.he comes across as a bit weird. Anyone from his kind of background,
:15:29. > :15:32.who looks what they are... The thing about him, and my strong advice to
:15:33. > :15:37.him is not to try to act as someone he is not. If you act as someone you
:15:38. > :15:40.are, someone very interested in ideas, who has read a lot of
:15:41. > :15:44.philosophy, brought up in a political household, you are going
:15:45. > :15:48.to be like that. But the public have more intelligence than just to
:15:49. > :15:52.decide who is going to win the next election based on the fact that he
:15:53. > :15:56.looks a bit leaky. They are more intelligent than that. They make
:15:57. > :16:00.decisions on a much wider group of criteria.
:16:01. > :16:08.Do most generations feel that way? The whole way our politics are
:16:09. > :16:12.going, this fragmentation of the major political parties, this sense
:16:13. > :16:17.of everyone of our political leaders - you mentioned Miliband looking a
:16:18. > :16:22.bit geeky. Each one of our political leaders is a Spitting Image puppet
:16:23. > :16:26.of what you think an extreme of the Tory Party might look like Old
:16:27. > :16:35.Etonian. What an extreme of Labour might look like, radical, Marxist,
:16:36. > :16:39.North London intellectual. Clegg, half-Dutch banker-father. Each one -
:16:40. > :16:43.none of them seem to me to break out of that mould. This is what is
:16:44. > :16:48.striking with Osborne, desperately apparently trying to have
:16:49. > :16:53.anti-elocution lessons because he looks like... You sure that is true?
:16:54. > :16:58.In the film I very carefully said it is rumoured that, the rumour is
:16:59. > :17:03.quite powerful, but let's assume that he's not. Is it not true,
:17:04. > :17:07.though, that we never really know who a leader is if people are real
:17:08. > :17:11.leadership material until they become leader? Until it is too late.
:17:12. > :17:16.Somebody it seems to me like Cameron, who thought it was going to
:17:17. > :17:19.be terribly easy and he and Osborne bought so completely into the
:17:20. > :17:27.previous Labour Government's package, their passionate support
:17:28. > :17:34.for green, NHS and found themselves so wrong-footed by the situation in
:17:35. > :17:39.which they inherited in 2010. I would argue as wrong-footed as badly
:17:40. > :17:42.as Clegg was. They both found themselves doing the opposite of
:17:43. > :17:48.what they said they were going to do. You have only got to think from
:17:49. > :17:52.the shift of the greenest Government... Let's not - we have
:17:53. > :17:57.heard enough of George for the night! Or indeed me! That is also
:17:58. > :18:01.true. We have run out of time. Obviously too much of a good
:18:02. > :18:05.thing(!) Now it's late, so prop up your
:18:06. > :18:09.eyelids with a Blue Nun pillow - because waiting in the wings - actor
:18:10. > :18:11.Warwick Davies is here to discuss the perils of being typecast - and
:18:12. > :18:15.how to avoid them. And remember - if you have any
:18:16. > :18:19.opinions about tonight's show, you can keep them to yourself and retain
:18:20. > :18:22.your dignity - or share them with the world and embarrass yourself on
:18:23. > :18:25.The Twitter, The Fleecebook and The Interweb.
:18:26. > :18:29.Now, what's coming up next? Oh yes, the round-up of the week. I'm sorry,
:18:30. > :18:33.I'm afraid we're all at sixes and sevens this week thanks to the news
:18:34. > :18:36.that MPs have backed plans to decriminalise licence fee dodgers.
:18:37. > :18:41.Auntie Beeb has warned that it might lead to even more viewers refusing
:18:42. > :18:45.to stump up their hard-earned cash. I mean it's not as if people would
:18:46. > :18:50.willingly pay to watch this drivel we put out week after week! We know
:18:51. > :18:53.we need to win back your trust. Which is why we've sent Newsnight's
:18:54. > :18:55.Laura Kuenssberg to hunt down the This Week viewer, whoever he or she
:18:56. > :19:16.may be. Things are feeling shaky here at BBC
:19:17. > :19:21.Towers. MPs have decided they don't want to lock up licence fee dodgers
:19:22. > :19:25.anymore, so the BBC needs to get better attracting down people who
:19:26. > :19:31.watch top-quality programmes in secret. So you, yes you, the This
:19:32. > :19:37.Week viewer, I'm coming to find you, wherever you are.
:19:38. > :19:55.# Someone's watching # Tell me who's watching me? #
:19:56. > :19:59.Null The public lovers it when they crackdown on welfare. Surely that
:20:00. > :20:04.couldn't be why MPs voted this week to put a lid on the Bill? Our
:20:05. > :20:09.welfare cap ensures that never again can the cost spiral out of control
:20:10. > :20:13.and the incentives become so distorted that it pays not to work.
:20:14. > :20:17.From now on, any Government wanting to spend more on welfare will have
:20:18. > :20:21.to be honest with the public. Labour will make different and fairer
:20:22. > :20:26.choices to get the social security bill under control and tackle the
:20:27. > :20:30.root causes of rising spending. On that basis, we will support this
:20:31. > :20:38.motion. # I always feel like
:20:39. > :20:43.# Somebody's watching me. # Don't be surprised if Red Ed joined
:20:44. > :20:47.in, too. He has to show us he can be in control of the Budget if he was
:20:48. > :20:55.in charge. He managed to take most of his obedient sorts along, too.
:20:56. > :21:02.Who did that leave? Social security, people's lives should not be made a
:21:03. > :21:08.matter of short-term political positioning. Not sure that was the
:21:09. > :21:14.This Week viewer. Damn! Where has the This Week viewer gone? Carry on.
:21:15. > :21:18.After the Budget, David Cameron seems to feel so bold he's even
:21:19. > :21:22.brought back his idea of letting more of the wealthy off inheritance
:21:23. > :21:26.tax. Surely, he is not trying to tempt those Tory types who are
:21:27. > :21:35.having dark thoughts about going to UKIP?
:21:36. > :21:40.# She's watching the Detectives... # Perhaps his confidence explains why
:21:41. > :21:45.normal service was resumed at PMQs. The sides clashed over those
:21:46. > :21:49.dastardly energy firms. Week after week he denounced Labour's call for
:21:50. > :21:54.an energy price freeze to help families and businesses. But now
:21:55. > :22:00.apparently he supports the price freeze. Can he explain why a price
:22:01. > :22:03.freeze was wrong six months ago, but it is the right thing to do today?
:22:04. > :22:08.What we have done is reduce the costs of energy charges so that
:22:09. > :22:13.companies are able to cut their bills. 24 hours on, though, they are
:22:14. > :22:19.both happy once more to slam the companies again. Ofgem is proposing
:22:20. > :22:25.a tough but sensible course of action, a full market investigation
:22:26. > :22:30.reference. This would be undertaken by the new competition and markets
:22:31. > :22:33.authority, which has the robust powers required to investigate the
:22:34. > :22:49.market and take the action that is needed to strengthen competition.
:22:50. > :22:55.The great thing of course about the licence fee is you don't just get
:22:56. > :23:00.TV, you get radio thrown into the bargain, too. Maybe that's why Nick
:23:01. > :23:05.and Nige decided to start their own show. Dave said he wouldn't watch
:23:06. > :23:09.the political punch-up, yeah, right, there is always catch-up! What I
:23:10. > :23:14.wondered if Nige would be brave enough to say you know what, I agree
:23:15. > :23:22.with Nick? This is a leaflet that Nigel Farage's party distributed in
:23:23. > :23:28.the recent Eastleigh by-election. It says 29 million Romanians and
:23:29. > :23:32.Bulgarians may come to this country. There aren't 29 million living in
:23:33. > :23:36.Romania and Bulgaria. I'm not claiming 29 million people have the
:23:37. > :23:41.right to come to Britain. Yes, you did. I'm claiming 485 million people
:23:42. > :23:46.have the total unconditional right to come to this country if they want
:23:47. > :23:51.to. Neither of them made a huge clanger, but is this just the start
:23:52. > :23:57.of some weird modern pantomime? Who really wants to pay their licence
:23:58. > :24:03.fee just for that? # I always feel like
:24:04. > :24:11.# Somebody's watching me. # If the This Week viewer is desperate
:24:12. > :24:14.for a re-run... Proposals were made to the Environment Secretary about
:24:15. > :24:20.an amendment to the Hunting Act which would help upland farmers deal
:24:21. > :24:23.with the problem of fox... That letter has been received and is
:24:24. > :24:27.being considered, but I regret to say I don't think there will be
:24:28. > :24:35.Government agreement. They might be coming after your licence fee, but
:24:36. > :24:41.those cuddly foxes are safe. Oh, you are the This Week viewer? Can I come
:24:42. > :24:50.in? It looks safer in there than out here in Westminster!
:24:51. > :24:53.Many programmes would give their left arm to have a viewer like that.
:24:54. > :24:59.And also to have Miranda. Welcome back. What did you make of the
:25:00. > :25:03.debate? I loved it. It was fantastic. That is not what I meant!
:25:04. > :25:08.How did it go for your glorious leader? I thought he did really
:25:09. > :25:11.well. That is not what the polls say? Apart from anything else, he
:25:12. > :25:17.did really well to challenge Farage to the debate and hold it and that
:25:18. > :25:21.instant poll was very, very interesting and I think incredibly
:25:22. > :25:28.positive for two reasons. Number one, a man who has literally been
:25:29. > :25:51.burned in effigies in the streets with sub voted for socialism... I
:25:52. > :25:56.did think it was really... It means there will be... This is
:25:57. > :26:01.immigration. Two most electorally toxic issues and he got 36% of the
:26:02. > :26:08.general public backing. Amazing. What do you say to that? I agree
:26:09. > :26:13.with Miranda. Ah! Clegg did the right thing to challenge him.
:26:14. > :26:19.Getting a 36% rating is pretty good. I think to get 36% rating when most
:26:20. > :26:23.people are not enthusiastic about the EU is pretty good. I also think
:26:24. > :26:28.it was very good for Farage, for him to get a 53% rating. Do you? To be
:26:29. > :26:32.plastered all over the newspapers this morning, this is good for him.
:26:33. > :26:36.Of course, he's building up to an election in which he may have, the
:26:37. > :26:41.European election, in which he may have a good result. What is your
:26:42. > :26:48.view? I understand Nick did very well for those people who were not
:26:49. > :26:52.in that poll that YouGov did. Most people I spoke to thought he did
:26:53. > :26:55.very well. If it hadn't been Nick, he would have wiped with the floor
:26:56. > :26:59.with him. Given that some of the polling about Nigel Farage is quite
:27:00. > :27:06.interesting about how what people think about him. Yes. Given that -
:27:07. > :27:09.I'm a pro-European, there is a very good pro-European argument that has
:27:10. > :27:13.not been made for a long time. It was good to get an hour's prime-time
:27:14. > :27:17.viewing. It had the benefit of the people taking straight positions.
:27:18. > :27:22.Yes. You had a clear choice before you. The political risk for Mr
:27:23. > :27:28.Clegg, I would suggest, is that having made the Lib Dems clearly the
:27:29. > :27:32.party that's most enthusiastic about Europe, if he then comes fourth or
:27:33. > :27:37.fifth in the European elections - and he will come one or the other -
:27:38. > :27:40.it is a bit of a blow for him? Well, I mean, I think it is relatively
:27:41. > :27:46.inevitable, I have to say. This is... Relatively inevitable? Yes.
:27:47. > :27:51.They are either inevitable or they are not? They can tonight! Very
:27:52. > :27:56.well. We will allow that. Almost unique! It is just as well David
:27:57. > :28:03.Starkey has gone! You are right. For Clegg, personally, and for the Lib
:28:04. > :28:10.Dems, this is part of a much harder, longer journey back from disaster. I
:28:11. > :28:15.think it is wonderful to have... You need to be rehabilitated, really. It
:28:16. > :28:19.is wonderful to have someone say, I love the EU and to have someone else
:28:20. > :28:23.say I want to leave the European Union. On the whole, people's
:28:24. > :28:26.positions are so wishy washy. We will have a renegotiation and then
:28:27. > :28:33.we will have a referendum and I will recommend people to vote to stay in.
:28:34. > :28:39.Let's move on. The energy companies being referred to the Competition
:28:40. > :28:48.Commission. Can there be any doubt that this has only happened because
:28:49. > :28:53.Ed Miliband made the running on freezing prices at the last
:28:54. > :28:57.conference? The fox has been shot. Miliband was doing terribly well
:28:58. > :29:00.last October. He ran with it for two months. The combination of the t
:29:01. > :29:03.Government pulling away some of the "green" taxes, the fact that some of
:29:04. > :29:06.the companies are coming forward and saying they are going to freeze
:29:07. > :29:10.prices until 2016, there is nothing left for Ed Miliband to say. He
:29:11. > :29:15.produced this particular idea too early and he has given the
:29:16. > :29:18.Government time to get rid of it. I wish David Starkey was back here.
:29:19. > :29:24.That is precisely the kind of politics that is about dividing
:29:25. > :29:28.people up and I mean, give the guy credit for a Leader of the
:29:29. > :29:32.Opposition to be making the weather on energy, something he believed in.
:29:33. > :29:40.He didn't calculate it in the sense of let's bring it up two months
:29:41. > :29:43.before the general election. Absolutely right, he... He didn't
:29:44. > :29:50.calculate it. Why has the fox been shot? You could see this sending it
:29:51. > :29:54.to the Monopolies Commission, you are kicking - not you personally,
:29:55. > :29:58.the Government is kicking it into the long grass. Labour is still
:29:59. > :30:01.saying very well, we will support this referral, but let's freeze the
:30:02. > :30:06.prices while the referral is going on?
:30:07. > :30:13.One of the companies has said it will freeze until 2016 anyway. I
:30:14. > :30:17.expect by the time we get to the election and the government has
:30:18. > :30:21.withdrawn enough of the green taxes, that is the position it will be. The
:30:22. > :30:24.government is not going to allow Ed Miliband to go into the election
:30:25. > :30:30.saying he will freeze prices and have it mean anything. You have to
:30:31. > :30:36.give credit where it is due to Ed Miliband for spotting something
:30:37. > :30:49.about which people were very angry. That is a market where 95% is
:30:50. > :30:56.controlled by... People were genuinely angry about their bills. I
:30:57. > :31:00.am. They only did not become more angry because the winter was mild.
:31:01. > :31:07.If it had been really cold, the anger would have been palpable.
:31:08. > :31:11.Absolutely. Nobody has acted quickly enough on this. It was under Labour
:31:12. > :31:17.that that situation was allowed to develop. It is good that it has been
:31:18. > :31:23.tackled now. The coalition could have referred it a long while ago.
:31:24. > :31:29.Why is Ed Miliband supporting a cap on welfare? Which he mentioned in
:31:30. > :31:34.June 2013. I support him on this. This is not like the 1% last year,
:31:35. > :31:40.which we opposed. This is saying there is this huge part of our Bill
:31:41. > :31:46.that is annually managed expenditure, which is a tautology.
:31:47. > :31:50.It is not managed at all. This huge swathes of money parliament has no
:31:51. > :31:57.control over. Not only is it not going to be capped but it is rising
:31:58. > :32:03.from 120 billion, up to 100 and -- 127 billion. When I was at the WP, I
:32:04. > :32:07.had this bit of money, the departmental expenditure limit, and
:32:08. > :32:15.this huge swathes of billions that was not managed at all. So he is
:32:16. > :32:20.right to cap it? Absolutely. One important thing which came out in
:32:21. > :32:24.the debate was that for the first time in our history this huge
:32:25. > :32:28.swathes of money, annually managed expenditure, which there is no
:32:29. > :32:36.control over, is now bigger than the departmental expenditure limit. 51%
:32:37. > :32:40.to 49%. The first time in the history of this country. If the cap
:32:41. > :32:44.had been on in 2010, George Osborne would have come back to increase it
:32:45. > :32:50.about four times. That is what happens, you have to come back to
:32:51. > :32:53.Parliament. It is an example of what happens sometimes in politics,
:32:54. > :33:01.Labour has been dragged onto the Conservative ground, just as it was
:33:02. > :33:05.over the 40% rate of tax. Just as the Conservatives were dragged on
:33:06. > :33:08.too Labour ground over other things. This has been the most immense
:33:09. > :33:15.change in public opinion on welfare, and I think it is extraordinary to
:33:16. > :33:22.see a Labour party voting for a welfare cap. Are the Lib Dems
:33:23. > :33:27.comfortable with the cap? Comfortable with this bit, yes, but
:33:28. > :33:35.welfare reform generally is a more difficult topic for them and their
:33:36. > :33:38.voters. We have had tautology. I think it is time to move on. Because
:33:39. > :33:40.authors are annoyed. Now, authors are annoyed, writers
:33:41. > :33:44.are annoyed, Jeffrey Archer's annoyed. But ever since the
:33:45. > :33:47.Injustice Secretary, Chris Grayling, banned prisoners from receiving
:33:48. > :33:52.books, hardened criminals have been celebrating. Because the message is
:33:53. > :33:56.clear, cruel and unusual punishment packages will no longer be tolerated
:33:57. > :33:59.in British jails and no inmate will ever face the literary equivalent of
:34:00. > :34:09.breaking rocks in the hot noon-day sun. I give you, Michael Portillo -
:34:10. > :34:18.The Future of the Right, by Michael Gove, a long-and-best-forgotten work
:34:19. > :34:22.of pure fantasy from 1995. Selling for ?35 on Amazon, with one online
:34:23. > :34:33.review describing Michael as "a gorgeous honey pot, and the hottest
:34:34. > :34:36.babe in politics". That, thanks to Mr Grayling, will now never put a
:34:37. > :34:43.prisoner's rehabilitation at risk ever again. So how did said man
:34:44. > :34:48.manage so successfully to avoid his political destiny, and rehabilitate
:34:49. > :34:51.himself? We decided to find out and put being typecast in this week's
:34:52. > :35:06.Spotlight, which contains some flash photography.
:35:07. > :35:15.He has been a robot, a wizard and now Warwick Davis's the juice type
:35:16. > :35:18.theatre company is giving shorter actors the chance to play new roles
:35:19. > :35:27.and change perceptions in the process. But is everyone else
:35:28. > :35:30.getting typecast these days? Do Tories really think that the air and
:35:31. > :35:35.bingo is what matters to working-class folk, or that George
:35:36. > :35:41.Osborne's photo opportunity in a bingo hall could repair the damage?
:35:42. > :35:47.Nigel Farage certainly wants to stop UKIP being typecast as a party of
:35:48. > :35:50.fruitcakes and loonies, obsessed with the EU and immigration. I got
:35:51. > :35:54.into politics because I felt the career political class of
:35:55. > :35:58.Westminster had given away my birthright, our ability to govern
:35:59. > :36:04.our own country, and I'm on a mission to get it back. As Caroline
:36:05. > :36:08.Lucas goes on trial, if the Greens to want to be typecast as tree
:36:09. > :36:11.hugging hippies, maybe blocking fracking trucks whilst singing we
:36:12. > :36:18.shall not be moved is not a great idea. So, our politicians are easily
:36:19. > :36:27.typecast. Will it ever stop, or is it up to individuals to break the
:36:28. > :36:33.mould and take on new roles? Warwick Davies joins us now. Welcome to this
:36:34. > :36:37.week. Good to see you. Is typecasting something that goes with
:36:38. > :36:41.the territory, or can you do something about it? I am starting to
:36:42. > :36:46.do something about it with my new venture. I have been acting since I
:36:47. > :36:50.was 11. The reason I got interacting was because of my height. There was
:36:51. > :36:55.a radio commercial in which they were looking for actors for Star
:36:56. > :37:00.Wars. I went to the audition and I was be the right height for the job.
:37:01. > :37:06.So I accept that for the first part of my career it was all about my
:37:07. > :37:10.height. So I don't think typecasting is always negative. At times it can
:37:11. > :37:17.be something that certainly started my career. When you become
:37:18. > :37:23.successful it is less of an issue, I guess. Absolutely. More recently,
:37:24. > :37:29.the opportunities I am offered are more about who I am, as opposed to
:37:30. > :37:34.my height. For example, a role in Doctor Who last year. The character
:37:35. > :37:42.was not written as a short character. He just happens to be
:37:43. > :37:44.that way. So it is interesting when producers and directors can see
:37:45. > :37:50.beyond the physical look of somebody. I would have bought one of
:37:51. > :37:58.the motivations behind the red used height theatre company -- reduced
:37:59. > :38:00.height theatre company, is that it allows you and your colleagues to
:38:01. > :38:07.play roles that would not otherwise be available. Absolutely. It is
:38:08. > :38:12.celebrating acting ability over physical type. Yes, it allows us,
:38:13. > :38:17.certainly in the play we are doing at the moment, to play Vickers,
:38:18. > :38:25.escaped prisoners, actresses, maids, all sorts of things. Do you think
:38:26. > :38:30.that producers, directors, writers, they play it too safe and can be
:38:31. > :38:34.cowardly when it comes to casting? Absolutely. There is a belief that
:38:35. > :38:39.there has to be an explanation of why this character in this
:38:40. > :38:44.particular piece is disabled or different. Instead of just, let's
:38:45. > :38:48.get on with their story. Black actors suffered this some years ago,
:38:49. > :38:53.where every time you had a black actor the story had to be about race
:38:54. > :38:58.is somehow. We are beyond that now, aren't we? In future it would be
:38:59. > :39:02.lovely to see short and disabled actors in pieces that did not have
:39:03. > :39:07.to deal with issues surrounding that disability. Have you turned down
:39:08. > :39:14.roles because you thought it was too much typecasting? I have done in the
:39:15. > :39:19.past, not the surly because of the typecasting but because the
:39:20. > :39:24.character did not find resolution. -- not necessarily. There was a part
:39:25. > :39:28.where I played a clown in a circus. It was an interesting story but the
:39:29. > :39:32.character had a chip on his shoulder and there was no resolution to it. I
:39:33. > :39:41.felt I could not see the merit in doing it. We typecast politicians,
:39:42. > :39:44.don't we? There was resonance in something that you said a moment
:39:45. > :39:50.ago, which is that the typecast can be used by the victim for his own
:39:51. > :39:55.benefit. I was typecast originally as being a mad right winger. But
:39:56. > :39:59.actually, it was useful to me because I wanted to be recognised as
:40:00. > :40:02.something, I wanted people to know who I was. If you are put in a
:40:03. > :40:09.pigeonhole it can be useful early on. My goodness, after a while it
:40:10. > :40:15.becomes a dam nuisance. Once the pigeonhole has been built, changing
:40:16. > :40:20.it is really very difficult. Typecasting is a shorthand in
:40:21. > :40:27.politics. The polls say Ed Miliband is weird, and David Cameron and the
:40:28. > :40:33.Bollington boys, say Labour. But I don't think the public go along with
:40:34. > :40:39.it. They hate the stereotyping of the old Etonian 's or whatever. They
:40:40. > :40:43.want to make up their own mind. To bring a politician from central
:40:44. > :40:46.casting 20 or 30 years ago, particularly in the Conservative
:40:47. > :40:52.Party, they had to be a certainly will. They had to have a certain
:40:53. > :40:56.background. Actually, now, Parliament is much more diverse and
:40:57. > :41:03.perhaps typecasting is not as prevalent in politics as it was. Do
:41:04. > :41:08.you think that is true in acting? Absolutely. I think we are fighting
:41:09. > :41:13.ourselves with the play against a stigma that exists, that there is a
:41:14. > :41:19.belief that a short actor can't attain greatness, perhaps. Somehow,
:41:20. > :41:27.the performance may be inferior as a result. It certainly isn't. The
:41:28. > :41:31.reviews are amazing. Where is it on? Richmond at the moment and then we
:41:32. > :41:37.moved to high Wycombe, Derby, Manchester, Cardiff, on tour until
:41:38. > :41:43.the 10th of May. Are you changing the plays as you go along? At the
:41:44. > :41:46.end of the tour perhaps we will do a straight play or a musical or
:41:47. > :41:51.something else. The key to it is that there is no reference to our
:41:52. > :41:59.size, no jokes related to our height. We ignore all of that. And
:42:00. > :42:05.you are in control. Absolutely. And the audiences are lapping it up?
:42:06. > :42:09.Absolutely. It is liberating for asked but the audiences are enjoying
:42:10. > :42:13.it. The key thing is that they say they forget we are short on stage
:42:14. > :42:22.after about a minute. We have also scales down the set. Have you got
:42:23. > :42:25.more TV coming up? I start a series in April on ITV, a travel show with
:42:26. > :42:33.me championing the great British holiday. That sounds a bit
:42:34. > :42:36.dangerous. Thank you. That's your lot for tonight, folks,
:42:37. > :42:39.but not for us, because following Michael Gove's spontaneous rendition
:42:40. > :42:43.of Wham Rap this morning for BBC School Report, his posse are now
:42:44. > :42:47.booked for a live performance at Lou Lou's. The irony of a song
:42:48. > :42:52.celebrating a life on benefits somehow passing the Education
:42:53. > :42:54.Secretary right by. But we leave you tonight with a true Westminster
:42:55. > :42:57.legend. Tradition dictates ageing Labour politicians are referred to
:42:58. > :43:00.as "veterans", whilst Tories prefer the term "grandee", something that
:43:01. > :43:05.annoyed and amused Tony Benn in equal measure. I suppose it's only
:43:06. > :43:08.fair that, just this once, we put things right. Nighty-night, don't
:43:09. > :43:12.let the old Labour grandee bite.