03/04/2014

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:09. > :00:14.tonight This Week presents the Westminster Muppet Show. Cameron and

:00:15. > :00:22.Miliband trade insults at the dispatch box, calling one another a

:00:23. > :00:26.dunce, and a Muppet. Why didn't we think of that? While Nick Clegg and

:00:27. > :00:28.Nigel Farage conduct their own Statler and Waldorf sideshow. This

:00:29. > :00:36.Week's own Fozzie Bear, otherwise known as Quentin Letts, heckles them

:00:37. > :00:43.all in return. Normally they are in the margins, but this week they were

:00:44. > :00:46.centrestage, Nick and Nigel. I said Muppets, not puppets.

:00:47. > :00:49.Are there too many Miss and Mr Piggies across the UK, and will

:00:50. > :00:53.telling them to eat seven portions of fruit and veg a day help? Great

:00:54. > :01:03.Gonzo journalist Rachel Johnson is famous, rich and hungry. Miss Piggy

:01:04. > :01:06.might look rich, but it is the poor who are porky in today's Britain.

:01:07. > :01:09.And Miss Piggy is rarely seen without her make-up, but are women

:01:10. > :01:12.under too much pressure to look good, on and off camera?

:01:13. > :01:21.Broadcasting icon Angela Rippon cleanses, tones and moisturises. The

:01:22. > :01:34.only person I take fashion advice from is Michael.

:01:35. > :01:40.Evenin' all. Welcome to This Week, a week when, as Nick and Nige shook

:01:41. > :01:43.no-one about with their in-out, hokey-kokey debate on Europe, a

:01:44. > :01:50.Saharan chickpeasouper snuck up and annexed much of London and the

:01:51. > :01:53.South. And I don't remember being offered a referendum on that.

:01:54. > :01:57.Indeed, unlike the good people of Crimea, we weren't even given a

:01:58. > :02:00.rigged vote. Mind you, becoming a desert has its advantages. Diane

:02:01. > :02:03.won't have to spend yet another Easter recess on a Caribbean beach

:02:04. > :02:08.now that Hackney Marshes resembles a tropical lagoon. Just as it was

:02:09. > :02:13.running out of steam, Michael will be able to expand his choo-choo

:02:14. > :02:16.franchise to camel trains. Funny Business Secretary, Vince the Cable,

:02:17. > :02:21.is mounting an export drive to sell sand to the Saudis. If he prices it

:02:22. > :02:24.as low as he did the Royal Mail, it'll probably be snapped up by the

:02:25. > :02:29.dune-load. And the sandstorm was the perfect cover for burying bad news.

:02:30. > :02:32.While the rest of us struggled to see or breathe, Culture Secretary

:02:33. > :02:35.Maria Miller snuck out a 31-second apology for being less than helpful

:02:36. > :02:38.with Commons officials investigating her expenses, which only proves she

:02:39. > :02:46.can be economical with the time as well as the actuality. Speaking of

:02:47. > :02:49.nails in the coffin of public disolusionment, I'm joined on the

:02:50. > :02:53.sofa tonight by two portions of your five-a-day. Think of them as the

:02:54. > :02:57.fruit and the veg of late night political chat. I speak of course of

:02:58. > :03:00.#sadmanonatrain, Michael "choo choo" Portillo, and back by no public

:03:01. > :03:21.demand whatsoever, #baffled, Diane Abbott. Your moment? Well, following

:03:22. > :03:24.Sir Michael Wilshaw's announcement that he believes there should be

:03:25. > :03:31.more rigour in nursery schools and playgroups, which I think is a

:03:32. > :03:34.well-intentioned policy, the fact is that children from disadvantaged

:03:35. > :03:40.backgrounds by the time they get to primary school are 19 months behind

:03:41. > :03:44.the brightest children. They arrive at school with very limited

:03:45. > :03:47.vocabularies and find it almost impossible to catch up. So I think

:03:48. > :03:55.this initiative is much more valuable than anything at the top

:03:56. > :03:59.end. Because you get in early. Yes. It is a statist intervention,

:04:00. > :04:03.absolutely replacing the family where the family is not working. I

:04:04. > :04:08.was shocked that one of the organisations representing nurseries

:04:09. > :04:11.said children should be allowed to play and develop creativity, as

:04:12. > :04:18.though you can develop creativity if you have a minimal vocabulary. The

:04:19. > :04:21.French elections at the weekend. There were disturbing things, like

:04:22. > :04:27.the National Front doing well and the Socialists losing 150 towns. But

:04:28. > :04:33.in Paris they elected their first female mayor, and that was my moment

:04:34. > :04:36.of the week. Their first female mayor who is Spanish, and the new

:04:37. > :04:47.Prime Minister of France is Spanish as well. Sort of an aristocrat, a

:04:48. > :04:50.gentleman. Thank you. We shall see how it goes, with interest.

:04:51. > :04:53.Now, we like to think we're a healthy bunch here on This Week.

:04:54. > :04:56.Diane was previously Labour's spokeswoman on public health and

:04:57. > :05:00.Michael's certainly a pink smoothie. And given that there must be at

:05:01. > :05:03.least five grapes in a bottle of blue nun, we're operating well

:05:04. > :05:05.within the current guidelines on what constitutes a healthy diet. But

:05:06. > :05:09.when academics claimed this week that we should be eating at least

:05:10. > :05:13.seven portions of fruit and veg a day, we were worried. So we sent

:05:14. > :05:16.Mail on Sunday columnist Rachel Johnson down to the greengrocers to

:05:17. > :05:32.stock up. This is her take of the week.

:05:33. > :05:39.I am about to go and do my weekly shop at the local greengrocers,

:05:40. > :05:45.where I am like a kid in a candy shop. I liked a bit of roughage.

:05:46. > :05:50.Like most women in Notting Hill, I eat so much leafy green stuff that

:05:51. > :05:56.my body is probably photosynthesise in as I speak. But my recent

:05:57. > :06:00.experience of spending time with families who live below the bread

:06:01. > :06:05.line for Sport Relief, serious face, was a complete revelation for me. I

:06:06. > :06:10.did not see a green vegetable for days. The first thing I have eaten

:06:11. > :06:18.is that less Sagna that in this chilly. You can't afford the fruit

:06:19. > :06:29.of the veg. It's all frozen or out of the tin. That is a leak. So my

:06:30. > :06:33.first reaction, on hearing that academics have suggested we should

:06:34. > :06:37.be eating seven, or even more portions of fruit and vegetables

:06:38. > :06:41.every day was, they must be having a laugh. It is hard enough for people

:06:42. > :06:52.on a tight budget to manage five a day, let alone increase it. The

:06:53. > :06:56.truth is, public health messages aren't getting through. In the

:06:57. > :07:00.houses I stayed in, they either couldn't or wouldn't eat fresh fruit

:07:01. > :07:06.and vegetables. In the food bank I visited, there was no fresh fruit

:07:07. > :07:11.and -- fruit and veg but a lorry load of sliced white bread and loads

:07:12. > :07:17.of cans. The root causes of obesity are poverty and ignorance. If you've

:07:18. > :07:22.got no money, it's impossible to eat healthily. It takes a lot of money

:07:23. > :07:27.to be skinny. This country is becoming like America, where the

:07:28. > :07:33.poor are fat and the rich are thin. It's going to cost time and money

:07:34. > :07:37.but unless Nanny gets a grip on our nation of consumers, poor old

:07:38. > :07:43.Britain is going in one direction, undernourished but super-sized.

:07:44. > :07:46.And from Andrea's Fine Fruit Vegetables in Chelsea to our own

:07:47. > :07:53.little collection of apples and pears here in the heart of

:07:54. > :08:00.Westminster, Rachel, welcome back. Diane, do you agree that the root

:08:01. > :08:04.causes of obesity are poverty and ignorance? But also the kind of

:08:05. > :08:09.heavy marketing of really unhealthy food at people. I agree with you

:08:10. > :08:16.that the messages aren't getting through. And what it requires is up

:08:17. > :08:21.extreme measures. If you take smoking, the most successful thing

:08:22. > :08:24.about smoking was banning it in bars and ending advertising. We need

:08:25. > :08:27.similar measures with food, because the messages do not get through to

:08:28. > :08:38.the people who should be hearing them. We banned smoking in bars and

:08:39. > :08:41.public places. And junk food advertising on children's TV, which

:08:42. > :08:45.has already happened. In Canada, they banned it completely and the

:08:46. > :08:54.amount of calories children are eating in Quebec has plummeted since

:08:55. > :08:58.they stopped advertising fast food. And you ban it online. They have

:08:59. > :09:05.too, because the market is so fractured. You stop the companies

:09:06. > :09:08.that are manufacturing that junk from using websites attractive to

:09:09. > :09:13.children to try to market it. That is how you stop it. They have these

:09:14. > :09:19.websites which children think our games but they are actually selling

:09:20. > :09:23.them junk. The thing about that the city is that it is costing the

:09:24. > :09:28.health service million -- billions. It leads to diabetes, hypertension,

:09:29. > :09:35.cancer, and the drugs for that alone are 10% of the NHS budget. So,

:09:36. > :09:40.Michael, it is the fault of the people providing it. Personal

:09:41. > :09:43.responsible T plays a big part. Rachel identified poverty and

:09:44. > :09:49.ignorance, so ignorance as to be tackled. If ignorance is a cause,

:09:50. > :09:52.then the government telling people what the right thing to do is must

:09:53. > :09:56.be the right thing to do. It may take time for that to come through.

:09:57. > :10:02.Interestingly, you also put your finger on the lack of availability

:10:03. > :10:09.in certain districts of proper food. You mean fresh produce? In areas of

:10:10. > :10:11.Chicago, for example, there has been a kind of revolution. There were

:10:12. > :10:16.shops where you could not buy anything fresh, but someone took the

:10:17. > :10:20.experiment of setting up shops where you could buy fresh food. They have

:10:21. > :10:23.spread through the poor ghetto neighbourhoods and that enables

:10:24. > :10:30.people to come more educated. You also made an assumption that eating

:10:31. > :10:36.fresh food is more expensive. I'm not sure that's right. A lot of

:10:37. > :10:42.processed food is pretty expensive. To follow up on that, were there no

:10:43. > :10:47.Greens in the family that you were with because they couldn't afford

:10:48. > :10:53.them, or they didn't care? It was a combination of lots of things. It is

:10:54. > :10:57.a complex issue. It is about time as well as money. Vegetables, as you

:10:58. > :11:00.know, when you go to the fridge and CM aubergine, and then you see

:11:01. > :11:04.something that is quick and you can put in the microwave, you are not

:11:05. > :11:09.going to start preparing the aubergine. Very often, they don't

:11:10. > :11:14.know how to cook. Show them a vegetable and they are not sure what

:11:15. > :11:18.to do with it. I did not find that. It was a sort of lassitude. Which

:11:19. > :11:23.doubles, they have to be fresh coming have to keep them, repair

:11:24. > :11:27.them, cook them, which requires a certain degree of knowledge about

:11:28. > :11:32.cooking and the preparation of food. It is much easier to buy a microwave

:11:33. > :11:37.meal. They were buying them for ?1, putting them in the microwave. If

:11:38. > :11:44.you went to a shop, it would be more expensive to buy one vegetable, like

:11:45. > :11:47.a Swede was ?3. Was that in Chelsea? Not in Chelsea, in Deptford

:11:48. > :11:55.high Street. That was their budget for a day. You are talking about the

:11:56. > :11:59.nanny state, my libertarian friend, and for me when it comes to

:12:00. > :12:02.children's health, if you have to choose between the nanny state or

:12:03. > :12:07.the Pontius pilot state, where you wash hands, I choose the nanny

:12:08. > :12:14.state. Let's look at the nanny state and what it should do. What

:12:15. > :12:19.government advice has actually worked? It has always got to be a

:12:20. > :12:27.mix of things. But what advice has worked? Advice on its own doesn't

:12:28. > :12:34.work. Five a day hasn't worked. I think, of the years of advice about

:12:35. > :12:36.smoking, it had some impact. I agree that interventions that banned

:12:37. > :12:39.smoking in certain places have been important moments along the way, but

:12:40. > :12:47.information probably did have an impact. In the end, we made seat

:12:48. > :12:51.belts compulsory. We made wearing helmets on motorbikes compulsory.

:12:52. > :12:56.That was government intervention. And we banned smoking in public

:12:57. > :13:00.places. Despite the brouhaha about it, I suspect a referendum now would

:13:01. > :13:07.out with a vast majority wanting to stay where we are. In the end, it

:13:08. > :13:15.was not really a device that had much effect, it was direct

:13:16. > :13:20.intervention. Diane has reached four banning things straightaway. It is

:13:21. > :13:24.because I'm a socialist and you are a libertarian. I am not a

:13:25. > :13:29.libertarian. What I said earlier about education, I believed in the

:13:30. > :13:34.state intervening where families have failed, so I am not that much

:13:35. > :13:37.available Terry and in this case. I think you could reach for seeing how

:13:38. > :13:42.the government, with companies, could drive technological change.

:13:43. > :13:48.You could have a tasty fizzy drink with no sugar in it. There is more

:13:49. > :13:53.profit made out of heavily adulterated food. Clearly,

:13:54. > :13:58.government advise that you should not take this drink which has got 24

:13:59. > :14:07.teaspoons of sugar in it, that would be good advice. But for years and

:14:08. > :14:11.years, governments on both sides of the Atlantic have said we should

:14:12. > :14:15.follow a food pyramid which was heavy with carbohydrates at the

:14:16. > :14:18.base, and small with protein at the top, and nearly all the new medical

:14:19. > :14:27.advice coming out suggests that is wrong.

:14:28. > :14:33.We should be eating ex exclusively a plant based diet. Spend our entire

:14:34. > :14:38.day chewing our kelp fritters or whatever it is. It has upgraded the

:14:39. > :14:43.importance of protein in the diet. There was nothing mentioned about

:14:44. > :14:48.protein. Protein is very expensive as well. If you go to a food bank,

:14:49. > :14:53.as a family, you are allowed one protein item, per week, per family.

:14:54. > :14:57.That is one tin of tuna. You cannot eat healthily on a very low budget.

:14:58. > :15:01.The problem is processed food and snacks. You are right. You can't

:15:02. > :15:05.walk down a street without half a dozen opportunities to eat. When I

:15:06. > :15:10.was a child the only snack you could get was a hamburger, that was a big

:15:11. > :15:16.deal. I think nanny has to get a grip. She should tax sugar. Of the

:15:17. > :15:18.she should subsidise vegetables. Vegetables should be available in

:15:19. > :15:23.food banks. Perhaps the Government should think about issuing foot

:15:24. > :15:28.stamps which are exclusively for fresh produce. In America food

:15:29. > :15:34.stamps are fratd traded for God knows what, but exclusively for

:15:35. > :15:38.fruit and veg. The Government took on the tobacco industry on both

:15:39. > :15:42.sides of the Atlantic. Over time it won the major battles it fought. Is

:15:43. > :15:46.it time, as I think Diane and Rachel are suggesting, is it time to take

:15:47. > :15:52.on the food industry? It's time to move forward. I don't think I would

:15:53. > :15:59.go far as either Rachel and Diane as reaching for the word "banning." We

:16:00. > :16:08.didn't ban anything. Diane wanted to ban. Upstream measures. You used the

:16:09. > :16:14.word ban. I was teaseing you. When you have children, they watch

:16:15. > :16:20.advertising. Then they clamour... Why don't you ban it outright? The

:16:21. > :16:24.habit starts in childhood. If children are accustomed to healthy

:16:25. > :16:32.diet. That is why school dinners are so important. It's like cigarettes.

:16:33. > :16:37.My child at seven would run home from school telling me about the

:16:38. > :16:41.evils of smoking. She need to run home and talk about the evils of

:16:42. > :16:48.sugar. I don't agree with Michael. We should take on big sugar. It's

:16:49. > :16:55.poisoning all of us. It's a bloody health time bomb, excuse my

:16:56. > :17:02.language. It's late. Kids looking at Cuppy Delight ads on the TV will pay

:17:03. > :17:10.the price. We will leave it there. As I said, it's late. Thank you,

:17:11. > :17:13.Rachel. Now, it's late, Tory MP Mark Menzies on a Brazilian fact-finding

:17:14. > :17:20.mission late! That is how late it is. So drink up your dregs of Blue

:17:21. > :17:23.Nun - before the Welsh decide to ban it. Because waiting in the wings,

:17:24. > :17:26.broadcasting legend Angela Rippon is here to discuss whether society puts

:17:27. > :17:33.too much pressure on women to always look their best. And, if you'd like

:17:34. > :17:36.to test our ability to ignore all your tedious complaints - bring it,

:17:37. > :17:41.on The Twitter, The Fleecebook and the Interweb. Now, of course,

:17:42. > :17:45.sometimes we do get it very wrong on this programme - for which we always

:17:46. > :18:01.offer a fulsome apology - April Fool! Ha ha! What? That was Tuesday.

:18:02. > :18:05.Still, it was better than Michael's prank last year when he took us off

:18:06. > :18:09.air by turning all the studio clocks forward an extra hour. Yep, none of

:18:10. > :18:12.you lot even noticed. Anyway, to celebrate the joys of spring and

:18:13. > :18:15.healthy living, we sent the Daily Mail's Quentin Letts down to the

:18:16. > :18:23.Chelsea Physic Garden for his round up of the week at Westminster.

:18:24. > :18:26.# In an English country garden... # Hello there. The clocks have

:18:27. > :18:32.changed, spring in the air, along with some of that Saharan smog dust

:18:33. > :18:38.and I can get on with planting my seven a day of vegetables. What was

:18:39. > :18:54.that? Also time to keep an eye on the Westminster wildlife.

:18:55. > :19:00.Head Gardiner, George Osborne, is in rude health these days now that the

:19:01. > :19:04.green shoots of the economy have started to grow. We are digging for

:19:05. > :19:11.Britain though to fight our way to full employment. That's our George,

:19:12. > :19:20.isn't it, he is a bardser in, an optimist, they are always glass half

:19:21. > :19:24.full types. -- Gardiner. Full employment is quite a phrase. What

:19:25. > :19:28.do you mean? What we mean by full employment, this is the best place

:19:29. > :19:32.in the world to create a job. Best place in the world to get a job. We

:19:33. > :19:39.are saying we want to have the highest employment rate of the

:19:40. > :19:47.world's largest economies. Details, details, Robinson you impertinent

:19:48. > :19:55.man, get back to your sproutings. Whoops - sorry about that! Labour is

:19:56. > :20:01.scrambling around in the debt trying to resow the economic agenda worried

:20:02. > :20:07.the Conservatives are nibbling into their juicy poll lead. Oh, get out

:20:08. > :20:12.of here! There was a palpable sense of relief in the Labour hot house

:20:13. > :20:15.this week when the National Audit Office produced a report saying the

:20:16. > :20:18.Government undersold the Royal Mail. This has given the opposition a

:20:19. > :20:28.chance to try to dead-head that fading bloom, Vince Cable. Vince!

:20:29. > :20:35.The truth is, this has been a first-class disaster for the

:20:36. > :20:38.taxpayer and those he once he referred to gamblers are laughing

:20:39. > :20:42.all the way to the bank. The least he could do today is apologise. The

:20:43. > :20:47.conclusion the report reached was that we had successfully achieved

:20:48. > :20:52.our objectives, it's an important one. What has happened under this

:20:53. > :20:56.Government is we've taken a loss-making public enterprise and

:20:57. > :21:02.turned into a highly successful, respected public company. At Prime

:21:03. > :21:07.Minister's Questions, that sage Ed Miliband said the Government had

:21:08. > :21:13.lost a mint on the Royal Mail sale. Prime Minister, David Cameron, said

:21:14. > :21:17.that time would prove him right, sorry about the puns no, worse than

:21:18. > :21:22.the desperate behaviour at Prime Minister's Questions. It's basic

:21:23. > :21:28.maths, Mr Speaker, not so much the wolf of Wall Street, more the dunce

:21:29. > :21:32.of Downing Street. I will take a lecture from almost anyone in the

:21:33. > :21:35.country about the sale of Royal Mail, but not from the two Muppets

:21:36. > :21:55.who advised the last Chancellor. Forget Muppets, Westminster had a

:21:56. > :22:02.mole problem. An independent Scotland could keep a pound after

:22:03. > :22:14.all in exchange for nuclear subs remaining. Oi! Oi! Oi! There was a

:22:15. > :22:21.sort of civil war between Tory and Lib Dem moles over the Government's

:22:22. > :22:31.position of the future of on shore wind farms, mole on mole. Gotta. The

:22:32. > :22:37.BBC tried to find an alternative source of wind power another hour of

:22:38. > :22:40.the Nick and Nige show. Let's govern ourselves again, stand tall. You

:22:41. > :22:45.isolate Britain, a Billy no mates Britain. It would be course it would

:22:46. > :22:49.be Billy no jobs, Britain. Billy no influence Britain. The debate

:22:50. > :22:55.between the two men was a much more prickly affair. They were fighting

:22:56. > :23:02.over immigration and Vladimir Putin. They got at at each other like chin

:23:03. > :23:07.chill yas trapped in a box. 200 people dieing in Syria, being killed

:23:08. > :23:12.in Syria every single day, Nigel Farage says he admires, he admires

:23:13. > :23:18.the way that Vladimir Putin has played, as if it's a game. I don't

:23:19. > :23:25.admire Putin. I said he outth witted and out classed you all over Syria.

:23:26. > :23:30.You did say you admired him. The question was, which current world

:23:31. > :23:36.leader do you admire, as an operator, I would Putin. . The

:23:37. > :23:41.result, immediate opinion polls gave it to Nigel Farage by two-thirds.

:23:42. > :23:42.Nick Clegg, given his recent weedy standing I reckon he will be pretty

:23:43. > :23:55.happy with a third. Is is is's quite enough gardening.

:23:56. > :23:59.I'm exhausted after that Clegg/Farage debate. What a week it

:24:00. > :24:04.has been. Hello, you two, are you coming to join me for a kcuppa,

:24:05. > :24:09.would you like that? I think we deserve it, don't you? Shall we be

:24:10. > :24:19.really naughty and have one of our seven a day? There they are. I think

:24:20. > :24:24.that pink one looks really healthy. No animals were harmed in the making

:24:25. > :24:28.of that film. Miranda is with us. What did Nick Clegg get out of these

:24:29. > :24:32.two debates? Well, I think that although last night didn't go so

:24:33. > :24:39.well, it was still the right thing to do. It was a gutsy thing to do. I

:24:40. > :24:43.think that will be recognise by the audience to whom Nick Clegg was

:24:44. > :24:47.talking because the thing about these debates is that Farage and

:24:48. > :24:52.Clegg are never going to agree on anything that they were discussing.

:24:53. > :24:59.In that sense, it became clear last night, slightly less the first one,

:25:00. > :25:04.it is a bit of a dialogue of the deaf. About those who are seriously

:25:05. > :25:06.concerned about what would happen if Britain sleepwalks towards leaving

:25:07. > :25:10.the EU, they will be pleased he stuck up for those arguments, I

:25:11. > :25:14.think. Most of us, you think, what he got out of it was that most of us

:25:15. > :25:20.think he is a gutsy loser? I think it was an honourable defeat.

:25:21. > :25:27.Sometimes, you have - Sounds like the Scottish football team? Well...

:25:28. > :25:31.I think Clegg made the right call despite everything. It has given him

:25:32. > :25:37.quite a lot of exposure. It has promoted Farage, but the victim of

:25:38. > :25:43.Farage getting so much publicity is not Clegg, so much Askam Ron.

:25:44. > :25:48.Yesterday, was quite an interesting Question Time, PMQs, if you hunt in

:25:49. > :25:52.today's papers you can't find any coverage about PMQs, it is still

:25:53. > :25:56.about Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage. About the debate. It cemented Mr

:25:57. > :26:00.Farage in the eyes of the nation. Twice he has had prime-time

:26:01. > :26:04.television. Not to himself, but shared with only one other

:26:05. > :26:11.politician. It has made him a national figure? He was... He was

:26:12. > :26:15.something of a national figure. This cemented it? Yeah. You might argue -

:26:16. > :26:22.I wouldn't argue - it's all to the good. Our best chance of winning out

:26:23. > :26:26.right is for UKIP to attack the Tory vote. The pollsters will tell you

:26:27. > :26:31.that. I don't think Clegg completely lost. I think he made important

:26:32. > :26:35.points. There will be people that will be glad that he took it to

:26:36. > :26:40.UKIP. Even if on the night Farage is the winner, I think Clegg benefits

:26:41. > :26:44.from it. Mr Clegg's position on Europe any different from Mr

:26:45. > :26:49.Miliband's position on Europe? I think that Nick Clegg believes very

:26:50. > :26:52.strongly in the European Union as - Doesn't Mr Miliband? I don't know. I

:26:53. > :27:07.don't know if he does in the same way. He does. He has not been. He

:27:08. > :27:12.wouldn't. In fact he is much... If the politics changed surely he would

:27:13. > :27:16.want. Clegg is bullish on the need for European reform. You can't...

:27:17. > :27:21.That complicates the message at the moment. You have to come out as the

:27:22. > :27:27.most pro. How concerned should Mr Cameron be be about Mr Farage's

:27:28. > :27:31.success? Very. As Diane says, that is the way that the Conservatives

:27:32. > :27:35.will lose if the Conservatives do lose. Tory MPs are terrified.

:27:36. > :27:41.Absolutely terrified, I'm there every day. They are terrified of

:27:42. > :27:45.UKIP. Farage, Mr Farage is a kind of new phenomenon in British politics.

:27:46. > :27:51.Because he is a populist, we had these before. He is a mainstream

:27:52. > :27:55.populist. Yeah. He is antiwar. Interesting he took an antiwar line

:27:56. > :27:58.against the Lib Dems, that is a clever thing to do. He is

:27:59. > :28:05.anti-establishment, he claims to be. He is obviously anti-Europe. He is

:28:06. > :28:09.anti-, and he was arguing last night that immigration is OK if you're

:28:10. > :28:13.rich. It's the poor that get hit by immigration. How do you combat that?

:28:14. > :28:17.Look, I think it's really healthy to have all this out in the open

:28:18. > :28:21.because there is no doubt that his message, I profoundly disagree with

:28:22. > :28:27.it on Europe, on immigration, on Britain's place in the world and on

:28:28. > :28:31.engagement verses isolationism, it has enormous resonance, it is a a

:28:32. > :28:34.huge challenge to the political establishment actually that the

:28:35. > :28:39.arguments will be lost by default unless we take him on. The word on

:28:40. > :28:43.the street is that the Tories will combat Farage by going for him

:28:44. > :28:48.personally. Allegedly there is more than enough. I think, in a way the

:28:49. > :28:52.public has discounted that Farage might be dodgy in a lot of areas.

:28:53. > :28:56.That might not help them. This may not be a Tory problem. Auto lot of

:28:57. > :29:02.lines he takes, that I read out, they will have some appeal to

:29:03. > :29:07.lukewarm Labour supporters? They will have some appeal. The people he

:29:08. > :29:10.is an electoral problem for is the Tories much he can take vote of us.

:29:11. > :29:16.He will win in places where we pile up votes anyway. He will not take

:29:17. > :29:24.votes off us in London. Right, Royal Mail, we need to move on.

:29:25. > :29:32.Do you agree that the sale of Royal Mail was a lousy deal? Not

:29:33. > :29:37.necessarily. I think it was a tricky thing to pick the level at which you

:29:38. > :29:40.could guarantee success. One of the key things they say they've achieved

:29:41. > :29:47.is to make sure the investors who are now he and are those who will

:29:48. > :29:51.stay long-term. You have a lack of symmetry, because you fear much more

:29:52. > :29:55.that you will not be able to sell the shares, and then you fear you

:29:56. > :30:00.will sell them too cheaply. It would be a catastrophe for a government to

:30:01. > :30:04.not sell the shares, so it aims low. Also, the people advising you are

:30:05. > :30:10.obviously interested in buying the shares, which is a problem. I don't

:30:11. > :30:13.think Royal Mail has been very different from many privatisations.

:30:14. > :30:19.It is a long time, so people don't the member that most were sold too

:30:20. > :30:22.cheaply. Also, I think there is a lack of expertise in the government.

:30:23. > :30:26.They were doing major privatisations every year at one time and they got

:30:27. > :30:31.good at it but now there is no expertise, no corporate knowledge.

:30:32. > :30:42.They were not a little under priced, which I could understand, but the

:30:43. > :30:48.taxpayer lost ?740 million. Up to ?1.5 billion. That is not marginal.

:30:49. > :30:51.You can never get the price right. That is not the issue. You either

:30:52. > :30:57.overprice, or you under price and you lose money, as happened here.

:30:58. > :31:03.Surely, the worst thing was that there were 16 preferred bidders who

:31:04. > :31:05.were given preferred status, given more shares than others because they

:31:06. > :31:12.were meant to be long-term shareholders. And 50%, they flipped

:31:13. > :31:23.into macro weeks. They conned the government. - -- they flipped into

:31:24. > :31:33.macro weeks. They go on being the same. According to Vince Cable, the

:31:34. > :31:36.hedge fund is not involve any more. Ed Miliband pics themes that

:31:37. > :31:44.resonate. He did it with the energy price freeze, Royal Mail, student

:31:45. > :31:50.tuition fees. So why is there such unhappiness on the Labour

:31:51. > :32:01.backbenches? First of all, you are always fretful in opposition. But

:32:02. > :32:08.the Labour leader back up significantly again. We are nervy. I

:32:09. > :32:14.think the Budget bounce is over. People would like to see a bigger

:32:15. > :32:17.majority. The response to the budget was quite weak. The whole business

:32:18. > :32:25.about the energy price freeze has withered on the vine. No, it is

:32:26. > :32:30.hugely popular. You don't care. I wasn't going to say that. I think

:32:31. > :32:32.the Fox has been shot because the government has found ways to get

:32:33. > :32:35.some of the bills down and many companies will freeze the bills

:32:36. > :32:41.themselves. This team has gone out of that. Maria Miller made this

:32:42. > :32:48.apology today. What did you make of it? Completely inadequate, given the

:32:49. > :32:53.strong language used about Perl. It is not just the misdemeanour over

:32:54. > :33:01.expenses but the idea that she was trying to block investigation. It

:33:02. > :33:06.looks extremely bad. The Independent Commission, her report was that

:33:07. > :33:10.?54,000 in expenses should be paid back. But when it comes before other

:33:11. > :33:16.MPs, the trade union fellowship, that is kicked aside. It is like the

:33:17. > :33:20.expenses scandal never happened. I don't know whether they are a trade

:33:21. > :33:26.union fellowship because some of the opposition would like to see Maria

:33:27. > :33:31.Miller in trouble. But I do think that for a Cabinet minister to be

:33:32. > :33:35.involved in noncooperation, blocking an enquiry, is a very serious

:33:36. > :33:39.matter. For a frontbencher to have to make an apology to the House of

:33:40. > :33:44.Commons is a very difficult matter. I think it is pretty much

:33:45. > :33:47.unsustainable, I would have thought. It is the lead story in tomorrow's

:33:48. > :33:51.Times. Now, when This Week first signed an

:33:52. > :33:54.exclusive contract with Michael Portillo, hopes were not high. Who'd

:33:55. > :33:57.want to hear the bitter ramblings of a former Defence Secretary who

:33:58. > :34:01.thought the SAS was the military wing of the Tory party? A man who

:34:02. > :34:04.dared to win, and then lost to Stephen Twigg, making poor Stephen's

:34:05. > :34:09.eyeballs roll right back in the process. But with Diane it was

:34:10. > :34:12.different. We always knew someone who's managed to avoid power as

:34:13. > :34:18.successfully as Diane has must be able to speak truth to it on the

:34:19. > :34:22.This Week sofa. And with that in mind, we cast our eye over the

:34:23. > :34:23.week's news and put the unreasonable expectations placed on women in this

:34:24. > :34:45.week's Spotlight. Feminist groups claimed a male scalp

:34:46. > :34:49.this week with the closure of a lads magazine, but do declining magazine

:34:50. > :34:56.sales mean we've turned a corner in the way women are portrayed? A pop

:34:57. > :34:59.singer thinks so, criticising an airbrushed picture of herself. We

:35:00. > :35:06.don't all have to look perfect, she claimed. And Emma Watson certainly

:35:07. > :35:11.thinks we have a dangerously unhealthy attitude to the female

:35:12. > :35:15.image. She tweeted a picture showing the vast amounts of make up she

:35:16. > :35:21.needs just to look good for the world's press. Maybe it won't be

:35:22. > :35:25.long before we see her no make up selfie, with female celebs and

:35:26. > :35:31.civilians posting such pictures to raise money for charity. But is it

:35:32. > :35:36.depressing that women without make up are seen as radical or brave? So

:35:37. > :35:42.how much does society still judge women especially by their looks? And

:35:43. > :35:48.is it a sad fact that women in the public eye often feel pressure to be

:35:49. > :35:56.easy on the eye? We are joined by Angela Rippon. As David Frost would

:35:57. > :36:01.have said, what a joy. Thank you. Through your career, have you

:36:02. > :36:06.noticed, have we become less or more obsessed with how women in the

:36:07. > :36:12.public eye appear? I don't think really there's much difference. It's

:36:13. > :36:16.very interesting. Why do we wear make up to start with? Presumably

:36:17. > :36:20.because we want to make the most of ourselves and feel good about

:36:21. > :36:24.ourselves. It is interesting that we are having this discussion about

:36:25. > :36:30.women wearing make up when two men in the studio are wearing make-up.

:36:31. > :36:35.Michael wears his all the time. If you go back in history to the 17th

:36:36. > :36:42.century, men wore as much make up as women, if not more. In my career, I

:36:43. > :36:50.have been on television for 48 years, I can look back to my

:36:51. > :36:54.mother's generation. Women would not go out without wearing a hat, and

:36:55. > :36:59.Norwood men. There have always been attitude towards the way people

:37:00. > :37:04.look. I don't know that it is worse now than before. If anything, it

:37:05. > :37:11.might be better because you can make up your own mind whether you want to

:37:12. > :37:15.be somebody - and I know Diane is shaking her head and will disagree

:37:16. > :37:20.but I don't care - I think you can make a choice now as to whether you

:37:21. > :37:26.wear make up or not. That is the big thing. But I think young women are

:37:27. > :37:32.under more pressure than ever, and younger, to be more sexualised, to

:37:33. > :37:37.be perfect. That is why we have more plastic surgery in this country than

:37:38. > :37:42.any European country. I had a young woman in Hackney who died a few

:37:43. > :37:46.years ago because she went to have silicone injected into her bottom.

:37:47. > :37:52.Young women are under more pressure. And the rise and rise of those

:37:53. > :37:55.magazines. But perhaps they are doing it because the technology

:37:56. > :38:01.allows them to do it. The rise of the celebrity magazine and some of

:38:02. > :38:09.the newspaper online websites. Back on the Daily Mail again! When Emma

:38:10. > :38:14.Watson says there is an unhealthy obsession about how women look, you

:38:15. > :38:18.don't think it is new. I think there has always been an obsession with

:38:19. > :38:23.members of the human race to want to look their best. If they discover

:38:24. > :38:28.they can look nicer by wearing make up, that is what they want to do.

:38:29. > :38:34.The emphasis on perfection, the perfect figure, the perfect skin,

:38:35. > :38:38.the perfect look. That is so difficult. And the technology makes

:38:39. > :38:44.it possible on print or online but almost impossible in real life. So

:38:45. > :38:49.many of those photographs are airbrushed. I think there is a lot

:38:50. > :38:54.of pressure on young people but I also think we are being patronising

:38:55. > :38:59.to young people. Many young women, yes, they want the perfect bust,

:39:00. > :39:04.face, bottom or whatever. So do young men nowadays. The greatest

:39:05. > :39:10.increase in plastic surgery in this country has been among men, in terms

:39:11. > :39:15.of the percentage of people having plastic surgery. It has risen from a

:39:16. > :39:21.small base to quite a lot. But young girls can make that choice. There

:39:22. > :39:24.was a paradox that at the beginning of the show we were talking about

:39:25. > :39:28.obesity and now we are talking about the obsession with looking good. Two

:39:29. > :39:33.different things are happening in society. One has never seen so many

:39:34. > :39:37.people who do not give a dam about how they look, how they dress, their

:39:38. > :39:42.figure and so on. But with young women, the rise in self-harm,

:39:43. > :39:47.anorexia, universal that 40 years ago. That is to do with being

:39:48. > :39:50.obsessed with how you look. And most depressingly, in some parts of

:39:51. > :39:57.society, the way they are more and more abused by men, boyfriends,

:39:58. > :40:03.contemporaries. You think it was different in Victorian times? You

:40:04. > :40:13.just didn't know about it. It was different in the 1980s and 1990s. If

:40:14. > :40:19.there is a premium on youth in this country, is that the reason why

:40:20. > :40:23.there are always arguments, particularly at the BBC, about

:40:24. > :40:27.whereas older men continue in front of the camera there are few older

:40:28. > :40:33.women? No, I don't think that has anything to do with it at all. If

:40:34. > :40:37.you want women who are older, of my age, my generation, who have the age

:40:38. > :40:41.and experience in television, you have to go back to the beginning and

:40:42. > :40:45.say that when I was reading the news, when Sue Lawley and Anna Ford

:40:46. > :40:50.were around, Esther Rantzen, Gloria Hunniford, there was only ever a

:40:51. > :40:55.handful of women 30 years ago. The names that I have mentioned, we were

:40:56. > :40:59.the handful. If you want women now in their 60s with age and

:41:00. > :41:04.experience, you only have that tiny pool to choose from. If you look at

:41:05. > :41:08.all of the young women in television now in their 30s and 40s, there are

:41:09. > :41:12.dozens of them, in front of the camera, behind the camera. And they

:41:13. > :41:17.are going to be there all the way to the end of their careers. We do not

:41:18. > :41:22.have the equivalent of Barbara Walters, a mainstream TV presenter

:41:23. > :41:33.into her 70s, still doing mainstream programmes. We don't want you to

:41:34. > :41:37.work until you are 82, Andrew. I work on mainstream programmes and so

:41:38. > :41:49.does Gloria. She is in her 70s and I am 69. And you think that many of

:41:50. > :41:53.the women now in television, there are more opportunities, but they

:41:54. > :42:00.will continue? Of course, because everyone of them is there on merit.

:42:01. > :42:04.There is not an area of television now that doesn't have a woman

:42:05. > :42:08.playing a leading role, whether in politics, economics, science, sport,

:42:09. > :42:13.whatever. They are all they're doing a brilliant job and they will not be

:42:14. > :42:22.got rid of. What about the woman who got sacked, and proved it in court,

:42:23. > :42:27.because she aged? Maybe it was. There was a man who tried to do it

:42:28. > :42:33.as well but I think he lost. Having said it was ages, it was proved it

:42:34. > :42:35.was something entirely different. Before you scream about age, you

:42:36. > :42:42.have to think there might be other reasons. You are doing some work

:42:43. > :42:48.with outsiders. I co-chair a committee set up by the Prime

:42:49. > :42:51.Minister. My committee is creating dementia friendly communities

:42:52. > :42:54.throughout the country, and I also spearhead the work we are doing

:42:55. > :42:59.getting dementia awareness into schools, to create a dementia

:43:00. > :43:03.friendly generation alongside dementia friendly communities, so

:43:04. > :43:09.people with dementia can live well with the condition within the

:43:10. > :43:16.community. And a brand-new programme called amazing Grays. These are

:43:17. > :43:20.people in their 60s who are well champions, Olympians, top of the

:43:21. > :43:26.class in what they do, who take on challengers from young people in

:43:27. > :43:28.their 20s and 30s, and do not write off the 60-year-olds. They are

:43:29. > :43:30.surprisingly brilliant at what they do. Thank you.

:43:31. > :43:33.That's your lot for tonight folks, but not for us, because it's

:43:34. > :43:36.Gentleman's Agreement night at LouLou's. And, just like Vince,

:43:37. > :43:39.we're off to stuff taxpayers' money into the G-string of lap-dancing

:43:40. > :43:43.spivs and gamblers, and claim we've not been made to look like a fool.

:43:44. > :43:47.But we leave you tonight with, what else, but a This Week gag about the

:43:48. > :43:49.16th century English reformation and the historic rejection of papal

:43:50. > :43:54.authority in all matters ecclesiastical. Nighty-night, don't

:43:55. > :44:16.let Her Majesty bite. # Comeback

:44:17. > :44:28.# Baby, comeback # I won't you please come back?

:44:29. > :44:33.# Oh, won't you please come back # Baby, come back. #