17/07/2014 This Week

Tonight, join This Week for the Westminster Clothes Show.

As David Cameron throws away some of his out-of-date outfits - white,

middle-aged, males - are the Tory ladies modelling

Michael Gove was out of fashion this week as David Cameron promoted

a host of women to plum Westminster jobs, but are they there

Paralympian and disability campaigner

Tanni Grey-Thompson has dressed up her argument for This Week.

The Assisted Dying Bill needs more than a make over. It needs to be

torn up completely. And in a week

when Cabinet ministers were sacked, Legendary drummer Ginger Baker

keeps on banging his sticks. I'm changing into my mankini and I'm

ready for the show. Welcome to This Week,

a week in which to be male, pale and stale means you know what it's

like to be an endangered species. Thank goodness nobody here

fits that description. Many moons ago,

an Old Etonian Oxbridge Tory grandee called Harold Macmillan culled

his Cabinet in what was dubbed This week,

an Old Etonian Oxbridge Tory grandee staged a repeat performance,

though for Call Me Dave it was more Middle-aged men were ruthlessly

dispatched and replaced with Dave's Darlings,

who sashayed up the Downing Street Turns out,

after all the cull and churn, that women are still a small Cabinet

minority, and to be male, pale and stale still beats being female

with painted nails and a ponytail. It was also the week that Call Me

Dave's arch enemy Jean-Claude "mine's a triple Cognac, high five"

Juncker became the new President Our PM has attacked him

for being unknown and unelected. And to underline his contempt,

Dave nominated as our next Commissioner someone

even more unknown and unelected than But he went to a posh Eton Group

school, then Oxbridge, reassuring the Tory old guard that,

despite all the trendy talk of diversity, where you come from still

matters more than your gender. Speaking of those who have risen

without trace, I'm joined on the sofa tonight by two long-serving

knights of the This Week sofa, neither of whom could be easily

bought-off with a political gong. Think of them as the Sir Galahad

and the "Sir, I've forgotten my homework

" of late night political chat. I speak, of course,

of #manontheleft Alan "AJ" Johnson, and #sadmanonatrain Michael

"one way ticket" Portillo. And as a special end-of-term treat,

#mollythedog. So, that was the week, but today the

world suddenly got a lot more dangerous. This plane, obviously

shot down over Ukraine, tanks, Israeli forces going into Gaza, it's

a dangerous world. I don't know that it's got a lot more dangerous. This

is a tragic event and Europeans and Americans will be interested.

Ukraine and Russia have rather dropped out of the headlines

recently, but hundreds have died there in 300 more today. I think

what is happening in Syria and what is happening in Iraq represents a

substantial danger. What is happening in Gaza is a repeat of

something which has occurred in one decade after another. The novelty of

the world today is that it is a world in which there is no influence

of American or European foreign policy. There is a vacuum. President

Obama has pretty much disappeared from the scene. Europeans can't even

decide who their Foreign Minister is going to be and they are completely

divided. The British have no foreign policy and reduce their influence on

a day by day basis. Whatever is happening, we play no part in it

whatsoever. That is the novelty. But if this Malaysian plane was brought

down by missile systems given to the Ukrainian separatists by the

Russians, which I have to say at the moment, we don't know for sure but

looks like the most likely. Over 100 people -- Dutch people were in that

plane, dead, and a number of Brits as well, huge number of EU citizens,

and Americans, too. This has the potential to be a serious foreign

policy crisis. 24 Australians, too. This plane was at over 30,000 feet,

so it is inconceivable that it was a shoulder held... It has to be a

serious piece of kit. I think the important thing is whether Putin

becomes involved in finding out what happened. He has to very quickly say

that he will give full cooperation. Just before we came on air, you

probably don't know, we just learned that he is blaming the Ukrainian

military for that. Why would they do that? The plane was leaving

Ukrainian airspace, heading south east. It doesn't sound feasible. Why

would anybody do it? The separatists probably thought it was a Ukrainian

air force plane. And Iranians plane was brought down at one time

probably by an American missile. These tragedies happen from time to

time. And I don't think they are intended by anyone. They do focus

attention for a while but whether they have long-term consequences is

a different issue. I would not visit consequences on the Russians but I

would say that Putin consequences on the Russians but I

would say has to get involved in finding out what has happened.

Now, anyone who bothered watching last week's show may have noticed we

were in Edinburgh with a live audience and bottomless

Now, loath as we are to admit it, BBC Yentobs have declared last

week's programme a triumph, and, in the spirit of flogging a dead

referendum, decided we should return to Edinburgh for a lap of honour.

So on September 11th, exactly one week before the vote takes place, we

will be packing the This Week camper van once again and heading north.

And we're looking for another Edinburgh audience.

So if you'd like to come, go to our website and tell us why

you can't think of anything better to do on a Thursday night.

Those who give the best reasons get the best seats.

Now, tomorrow sees the House of Lords discuss one of the most

controversial bills put before Parliament for some time, Lord

a bill that seeks to give terminally ill people control over the timing

It's an issue that affects every family in the land and especially

We decided to turn to disability campaigner and former

Paralympian Tanni Grey-Thompson to find out what she thinks.

It may be sunny and calm outside Westminster today, but tomorrow the

House of Lords will debate one of its most emotive and contentious

pieces of legislation. The Assisted Dying Bill would give terminally ill

patient with less than six months to live the right to administer a fatal

dose of prescribed drugs. It is a chilling prospect for disabled

people the country. I have experienced first hand what others

think of my disability. I would not want to live if I was like you. And

recently "you must have thought of killing yourself loads of times". In

their eyes, my life is not worth living. But I have had a pretty good

life, thanks to the support of friends and family. I have travelled

the world, 116 Paralympic medals and held over 30 world records. Not

everyone is so lucky. Many disabled people can feel a nuisance, a

burden, or too expensive to treat. I am worried that if Assisted Dying

Bill is introduced they will be pressurised into and in their lives.

That would be a decision they are pushed into, not one they have taken

themselves, and what kind of society wants that. If we are not careful,

legalising Assisted Dying Bill Adli to a slippery slope, the routine

killing of sick and disabled people. Some of them already think their

life is worthless. Let's not encourage them to take the next

step. And Tanni joins us now.

Welcome to the programme. Michael, do you agree that Assisted

Dying Bill is wrong? I wouldn't agree with that statement. I agree

about the danger of the bit of legislation, which is that it may

push people into thinking that they ought to offer themselves for death.

I myself absolutely demand the right to be able to die when I want to

die. And with the law as it is at the present, I would find myself in

a very difficult position, or I would put others in a difficult

position. I have a feeling I would find my way through that situation.

This is not only about the terminally ill, but also about

people who may have various syndromes, and who make a decision

that they want to end their lives. I think we ought to respect that.

Nonetheless, I think the legislation carries dangers. We have a messy

situation at the moment, where some people manage to do what they want

to do, and those who assist them manage to do it and they are not

prosecuted. It is not in the public interest to prosecute them. It is a

messy situation but I have a feeling it may be better than changing the

law. The reason is the reason that Taney Grey Thompson has given. What

do you make of the point of principle that he demands the right

to terminate his own life? It is hard because there has been so much

choice about -- talk about free choice and the right to die. It is

hard to put that into legislation. The current legislation might not be

ideal but I think it is better than the current proposal, because it

moves the line in the sand too far. People want a good death, but we get

confused between compassion and suffering and it is not as simple as

that. The debate is deeper, not one or the other. Where are you? When

the bill came out ten years ago I was against it, and I still am. I am

against the concept. I can feel the political ground shifting. Michael

mentioned locked in syndrome but this would not do anything about

people with locked in syndrome unless they were diagnosed with 183

days to live and they were of sound mind. My worry is that there is no

one saying this should go further, and there are many people who

believe locked in syndrome, people in severe pain should have the right

to choice. To me, where you send your kids, which supermarket you go

to, not the right to live or die. They are keeping quiet because they

see this as the start of a process, and that is where I think the danger

is. We talk often about the thin end of the wedge, and this is a very

thin end of a very thick wedge. If you could be convinced the right

safeguards would be in place, would you change your mind? I am not

convinced they could be put in place. You don't think it is

possible? No, because the forms would be already signed, the doctors

do not have time to assess, the NHS is under huge pressure. We also have

to think about the motives not just of those request in this, but family

members. Not every family has lovely kind, altruistic children and

parents. I think it is almost impossible to have safeguards to

make this OK. Do you add here to the slippery slope argument, that this

could lead almost to the routine demise of the seriously sick and

disabled? I will probably get hate mail for this, but look at the

abortion legislation, which was originally conceived as exceptional

circumstances, needing Doctors certificates, proving psychological

damage. But it is now an on demand service. Of course the slippery

slope argument applies, because things change over time and they can

change very rapidly. Yes, slippery slope, absolutely. Do you sense that

the argument may be slipping away from you? We had the former

Archbishop of Canterbury coming out in support of assisted dying. The

Minister for care and support last night came out and backed it. They

have not won the argument, but maybe it is skewing their way. I think

it's changed since the Bill came to the House of Lords. I think one of

the great difficulties is that a lot of this is being presented as pain

and suffering and it's the compassionate thing to do. If you

look at Washington State, 61% of people who go for assisted suicide

say it's a burden. Pain is at the bottom of the list. It's because

they're a burden on society? Their family, yes. That is a slippery

slope. Why do you think things are slipping away from your side of the

argument that Parliamentarians and influential people in the wider

country are moving over in favour of assisted dying? It's heart-breaking

individual stories. I saw several of them. You see them on television?

People with living longer but with conditions that means they are going

to be, as is often said, a burden on their families or whatever. When you

hear those first hand testimonies, it's really difficult not to feel

sympathy. That I think, along with the feeling, patient choice has

actually got something to say here, which I don't agree with, but that's

certainly the kind of drift that is coming into this debate. Because in

such cases it's monstrous to think that a husband or wife or a doctor

would be prosecuted, but actually, you know, what happens is, the cases

are assessed on a one by one basis and, on the whole, I'm not saying

always, but on the whole, cases are not brought because they are not in

the public interest. In those cases, it's understood that a person who is

in command of themselves has made a particular decision and a person

around that person who loves that person dearly feels that is the rite

thing and their right. Unfortunately, as soon as you start

to try to write that into a law, it opens up all sorts of possibilities.

You said you wanted the right to be able to choose in which you died,

but for you to be sure you get that right, don't you have to make

advance preparations because we could all be hit by something that

disables us and incapacitates us without the ability to make the

decision. First of all, you are absolutely right, secondly I

haven't, it's one of these things, like making a will, you never get

round to doing it. You have to allow for the possibility that you've

changed your mind. A friend of mine suffered for many years from motor

neurone disease, was unable to speak, his life to me seemed to

become desperate and miserable. He managed through eye recognition to

write an article for a newspaper describing what his life was like

and, to our amazement because he hadn't spoke for the previous three

years, he told us his life was full of joy, that he loved watching his

house, garden and children grow up, that his life was full of joy. Now,

if he hadn't have been able to write that down, goodness knows what he

would have written in ten years in advance when he had all his

faculties. I suspect you will win in Parliament this time around, is that

right? I think it's unlikely in the time we have left to get this

through committee but it's going to come back so this round is more

about softening public opinion. It's a battle, not the war? It will go

through the second reading because the Supreme Court said it should be

debated in Parliament, not decided in a court, so even people against

the Bill will carry it tomorrow, so that is no the test. Got the

Parliament to do it, not the courts. That is right.

Thank you. Who, according to the Westminster

grapevine, spent his first day as Chief Whipping Boy locked

in a lavatory, somewhere But fear not Mrs Gove, it was only

his career that was flushed down the Whilst you wait

for Michael to break out of the bog, and be reunited with his family,

stick with us because waiting in the wings, Beware of Mr Ginger

Baker, the greatest drummer to ever And don't forget, if you'd like to

join us in Edinburgh on September 11th, just fill out the application

form on our Interweb page? And if you have any comments

about tonight's show, we're still ignoring you on

The Twitter and The Fleecebook. Now, David says the Cabinet is

modern. There's nothing a political hack

enjoy Morse than a reshuffle, who is up, who is down, who's been shunted

sideways. We sent Isabel Hardman to find out. This is her round-up of

the week. # Got myself a crying, talking

# Sleeping walking # Living doll... #

In politics, as in fashion, it's important to plan ahead and this

week when top designer David Cameron launched his new rakes of models for

the Tory shop window, it was the Spring 2015 consumer he had in mind

-- new racks of mod es. . You now see Conservative women occupying

posts like Home Secretary, agriculture secretary, Development

Secretary, vital jobs with really good people.

It was a good week to be young, blonde and female. Less good to be

pale, male and stale. David Cameron chucked out a lot of his old stock

in the rubbish in the night in which many men, but no women were sacked.

But the way this reshuffle was briefed and the way the Mendis

appeared to make space for the women suggests that treat was lest

interested in merit and more in the message.

He's promoting people on the basis of their talent. That's the most

important thing. Let's not get too excited. The Tory shop is hardly

overstocked with women. The number of female Cabinet Ministers doubled

from three to a mighty six - wow! Labour's Shadow Minister for Women

was not impressed. I think politics has to look and sound like Britain

and when three quarters of your Cabinet are men, that leerily falls

short. The biggest shock of this week's

reshuffle was the sacking of Michael Gove as Education Secretary. He was

demoted to Chief Whip. Gove might be popular in Westminster, but Tory

polling showed the voters didn't like him, and, that the customer is

always right. He had to two.

I certainly regard it as a wrench to leave a job that I enjoyed but also

regard it as an exciting and flattering opportunity to contribute

at the heart of Government. His wife, Daily Mail columnist Sarah

Vine Tweeted her approval of a newspaper article which argued that

the reshuffle was a mess and Gove shouldn't have been moved. Funnily

enough, the column about her husband, she found as one of the

reasons to get rid of him. Ed Miliband took the opportunity to

gloat at Prime Minister's Questions. We've always said that we'll support

the Government when they do the right thing. So can I join thousands

of parents across the country in congratulating him on getting rid of

the Education Secretary. Another big change at the top was

William Hague being replaced by Philip Hammond as Foreign Secretary.

Backbenchers thought Hague had gone native at the Foreign Office and,

after maybing politics his life, he'd finally grown tired of it.

Despite appearances, Hammond is a more aggressive figure on Europe and

has already said he can vote to leave. Whilst that's gone down well

with the Conservative Party, it's hardly cheered European leaders

who's now facing the hardest Euro-sceptic Government ever.

Taking stock is an important part of running any shop. And the Lib Dems

have said now is a time to take stock of the unpopular spare room

subsidy and bedroom tax. When something isn't working, you should

fix it. That is why we want to make sure that the new rules apply to new

tenants, but to existing tenants, if they want to move and can't, it's

not unreasonable to ask them to pay the extra level. One woman who

didn't lose her job this week was Lady Butler-Sloss who stood down as

chair of the child abuse inquiry after many questioned her

establishment links. It was a mess that could easily have been avoided

but Theresa May was unrepentent. I reject entire hi any suggestion she

was not the right person to do this. She's rejected the job herself, I'm

disappointed and continue her to be someone of impeccable integrity.

So barring any mishaps, David Cameron has the shop window set for

the next election. The Labour and Liberal Democrat reshuffles are yet

to come. When it comes to next May, whose display will the voters want

to buy? And from P- her shop window in

Central London to our own shop window in Westminster, Isabel

Hardman joins us, along with Miranda Green. Do you believe Mrs Gove Tweet

add headline that said, a shabby day's work which Cameron will live

to regret? Shabby day's work, I would say the country will regret

it. The reason I say that particularly, the sacking of Michael

Gove, the sacking of Michael Gove is a signal that if you are a Martha

tries to do the right thing, courageous, taking on vested

interests, you will be fired, no point doing it. So there's no point

trying to do the right thing by the country because you are simply, all

your efforts will go on the scrapheap. That offers virtually no

future for the Government because they are no longer in the business

of trying to do the right thing. they are no longer in the business

of trying to do the right The reason I say the country will regret it. I

think it was the best Education Secretary we'd had. He'd done what

Labour Secretary of States and Conservative Secretary of States

wanted to do, described it as taking on the establishment of a group of

people who I think have done immense damage to the prospects of children

and education oaf a very long period of time and the blob's always relied

over the decades on ministers being sacked. They think if they can just

hold out and the minister goes and they can continue to do the terrible

things that that they do. They have got the scalp now. The message is,

you know, if you upset any vested interest or pressure group, you will

be fired. What kind of message is that to send? Miranda? I think

there'll be a lot of continuity in the policies that Michael Gove

started under Nicky Morgan and in fact there was a lot of continuity

between Michael Gove's policies and the policies of the Blair

Government. Indeed. They went into obeyance while Gordon Brown was

Prime Minister and Ed Balls was in the department. When Alan and

Charles Clarke was there and Ruth Kelly, they were doing quite similar

things. One of the key differences though was that they were not going

quite so fast and also they did try to make sure that the people who had

to implement these quite radical reforms, for example head teachers,

came with them under stood the policies and wanted to cooperate. I

think Michael Gove's key mistake was not, you know, we hear he has Blair

on his wall, he lives by the Blair book, he didn't learn one of the

main lessons of that era was that if you are going to turn around a big

public service, you have to get the people involved on the ground and on

your side and take them with you. I think the policy will continue

because there is a lot of aagreement in all parties about what need to be

done in schools. Assuming the education department doesn't have

Nicky Morgan for breakfast. We shall see on that. Was it really, Isabel,

down to Lynton Crosby's groups discovering he was toxic so they had

to get him out of this position this side of the election? From

conversations I've had with those involved in moving Gove, that was

the impression I got. I have some sympathy, it would be a shame for

the Conservatives working so hard on the reforms that are so important

for getting people whose parents can't afford proper education

getting them standard then if they didn't take the credit for it, they

are not able to sell that to parents. If the Government of Mr

Crosby and Mr Cameron think Mr Gove is toxic in the eyes of the voters,

why do you say he'll be the one that will be on TV and radio? Either

that's not true or it's ill logical? It's sort of not true in that he's

going to be kept on a very tight leash basically. What is your take

on this, Alan? There are various views, the headliner was Max

Hastings. One that Mrs Gove re-Tweeted? Yes. You don't sack a

minister because his wife is a feisty journalist. I think on

Michael Gove, Miranda hit the nail on the head. We have the best

generation of teachers ever in Michael Gove's words, they are

coming out of university if their droves to come and teach. Michael's

turned them all against him. I've spoken to Conservative teachers and

they are against him. Unlike what we all try to do when we are making

great reforms, he didn't make any effort to take people with him on

the one hand and he went ahead with this acad maization programme so

that now the Department for Education in an era where we are

trying to get local accountability it's centrally now controlled, free

schools and academies and he took the policy too far. I don't know yet

whether the jury is still out on whether it will lead to greater

education. Free schools are doing badly. Supposing the Tories win the

next election, is he back in a big job again, or is he now on a slow

decline? It seems likely to me that his career has peaked. I am not sure

why he has taken the job of Chief Whip. It is almost unprecedented for

a Chief Whip to have a public role. The point of the Chief Whip is to be

anonymous. It is completely contradictory. I think is slightly

underestimate. If you are a Secretary of State making big

changes, of course you will reap the whirlwind, of course the Department

and the vested interests, the trade unions will campaign against you and

make you a hate figure. But that is not the moment for the Prime

Minister to say, I will fire you. Why is Theresa May not being fired

for making enemies of the police? There are two sorts of education

minister, those who are popular and those who try to do the right thing.

They are two different sorts of people. Parents are involved in

education, not in policing. I would say the police force has lost

public, -- confidence. I would suppose that is the difference.

Highly rated overall? Much more trusted than politicians. Everybody

is. Even journalists? Broadcast journalists. You and Nick Clegg will

be glad to see the back of him. The Lib Dems also got a scalp. Perhaps.

If you believe there is all of this private polling which shows that

Michael Gove is so toxic, actually losing him is not so great for the

other parties because he might show of voters in your direction. I am

pleased that you made the point that he was following the Blairite

tradition. That the -- the division is not between Labour, conservatives

or liberal Democrats but between all of the politicians and the blob. And

the blob has been given victory by the Prime Minister. I think the one

lesson which Labour needs to take from this is that Mr Cameron is

going to do everything in his power, be as ruthless as he can be, to

demote even people we thought he -- were his friends, to win the

election. Yes, and I think he is right in not having annual

reshuffles. In a sense, he could not have promoted lots of women earlier

because the 2010 intake was much more diverse, but he could not put

them straight into office. I agree with that I would love to see these

women succeed. I would not criticise Nicky Morgan having no experience.

Let's see how she gets on. Night of the Long knives is probably the

greatest president. Mr Miliband got rid of his friends as well, also his

Chancellor, which Mr Cameron has not. And then he lost. What about

the women in the cabinet. When you look at the numbers, there are not

many. One is not a cabinet minister but someone allowed to sit in the

Cabinet, which is different. When I looked at the figures, it goes back

to the number of women in 2011. I think it was over-briefed as a

reshuffle for the women. But it doesn't matter because Downing

Street got the women on the front pages. It is a bit of an illusion.

But I do think it is progress and I think it should be celebrated,

because I think that remarks about windowdressing and why these

mediocre women are being promoted above their ability, etc... Nobody

has described Liz Truss as mediocre. In the horrible world of Twitter

there have been some unpleasant comments. The thing is, if you don't

promote people and give them the chance to shine, how can anyone

prove themselves? Also, there is a real feeling across all parties that

women have had enough and lost patience, and women are supporting

each other in different parties, saying, go for it, and that is

healthy. Your leader could not do a reshuffle to promote women. There

are very few. Ken Clarke, in his retirement interview, said the

Conservative Party should go for all women short lists. Nick Clegg has

said the same about the Lib Dems. I think this is actually quite a

moment for a push in all parties to do something about this. It is a

problem which Labour has successfully addressed. Firstly, I

have long been in favour of the Conservatives having all women short

lists, at least until the number of women... As a temporary measure,

right. I was quite struck when Patrick McLoughlin told me that he

thought the 2010 election was outstanding in terms of the most

talented generation of new politicians he had ever set eyes on.

That is true on both sides of the house. He meant that. When I lament

the departure of Michael Gove, and also Owen Paterson going, it is not

because the people coming in are not worthy of being promoted. I think

the wrong choice has been made about who is going and the reasons. I

think you can have a windowdressing focused reshuffle and also be

fortunate that the women you are promoting our incredibly impressive.

There is no doubt that the women in Cabinet deserve to be there. But I

am not sure whether that was the starting point. He may have been

casting around for women to tick boxes but found they were fantastic

anyway, in which case he is very lucky. You could ask why did it take

him so long? It has been clear for a while that there were a number of

talented Tory women. He did not want to many reshuffles, wanted to let

people do the job for four years and that is right. He sacked Damian

Green, down in the middle order batting. I was surprised. And the

significance of Dominic Grieve, which suggests there will be a

push. Is at 27 or 30 people allowed in the Cabinet? It underlies that

the Cabinet can have no purpose whatsoever. No meeting of that size

can decide anything. They had to add some extra wood to the table to take

all of them. It shows that the Tory belief in limited government is

really happening. Now, heart-throb Harry Styles

was forced to issue a statement this week, denying reports that

he's eyeing-up a solo career. The news was greeted with intense

interest here at This Week. Alan suggested Harry might consider

experimenting with Michael couldn't stop crying

into his One Direction pillow case. When you quit the band and think

you're going to be a solo superstar, Or worse, junior spokesman

in the shadow public health team. But that's exactly why we've decided

to put "knowing when to quit" He has played with dozens of famous

musicians and enjoyed a remarkable career spanning decades. No matter

what life throws at Ginger Baker, the legendary drummer keeps on

rolling, keeping time, time and again. But not everyone has such

injuries. William Hague is clearly tired of hanging out with Angelina

Jolie and announced he is leaving the Foreign Office this week and

Parliament next year. He says it is just time to go. I don't feel very

old but it is nearly 20 years since I first joined the Cabinet, nearly

40 years since I started being a political activist. How important is

knowing when to quit? Phil Scolari has had his fill of Brazil, quitting

as manager after the hosts failed to win the World Cup. Given their

humiliating Exeter, surely it is better to jump before being given

the boot. Something Elizabeth Butler Sloss agreed with. But her departure

leaves the abuse enquiry without a chair, or terms of reference. And

leaves the Home Secretary were a headache. Is it better to quit when

you are ahead or keep pushing yourself? Should some of us just

pack it in to retain some semblance of dignity? Ginger Baker is with

us. Welcome. Did you retire at one stage and you are now coming back?

You quit and you have decided not to quit. Circumstances. What are they?

Disasters. You need the money? Well, yes, I guess, one has to live. What

has it been like coming back? What? Well, what I am doing now is the

best thing I have ever done. People keep saying cream, but that was 50

years ago and what I'm doing now is far better than cream. The write-ups

we have had our extraordinary, and one of them concluded by saying, I

would rather hear more of them than another cream reunion. Which I

totally agree with. And you are enjoying playing the drums and being

in a band again. It is my band. I am not being in a

band, I am the boss. You had a band before, Ginger Baker's air force. I

had cream, too, that was my band. Everybody seems to think it was

Eric's band because he plays the guitar. We always think the one in

the front. The drama never gets the credit. Well, what we are doing now,

people want to dance to it, everything we do. So you have no

desire to quit. Well, I will go on as long as I can. Unlike these two,

who are way past it. Here's an MP. I don't speak to them, they are

crooks. You took a conscious decision to quit, didn't you? To

quit? As apolitical career. To quit one thing and go on to another. If

you feel you can do something else better, you should do so. I think it

is the quality of what you do that should be the determinant. A big

decision, because like many politicians, your whole career from

university on wood had been geared to a political career. So it is a

big wrench to quit and go in a different direction. I was fortunate

because I was first wrenched by the people, so I had no choice about it

the first time round, so I knew I could survive outside the political

sphere. The time I decided to leave, it was not a difficult

decision because I knew I could survive outside. You have not quit

politics but you have kind of quit of your own volition, quit the front

bench. If I was in a rock band I would be carrying on. But there is

also whether the audience is still there for you. Michael, similar to

William Hague, once you have held a top job and been through that, you

kind of get it out of your system. Maybe you think, what is the point

of hanging around? For me, I was only on the front bench since I came

in and being a backbencher again, it is the first time I have had a

chance to experience it and I enjoy it. Are there people who saw you in

cap next cream, and air force? Some people are old, some are young. It

is a mix. It is growing. We just did a tour and sold out everywhere. You

are on tour in Britain? Not now, no. I am on a rest period. We are going

to have a rest period, too. Ginger Baker, thank you.

That's your lot for tonight folks, and for this series.

We'll be back in September with our live audience

show in Edinburgh, and even more expert analysis on the Scottish

But we leave you tonight with another old joke.

What do you call someone who hangs around with musicians?

Nighty-night, don't let the man who taught Ginger

Dad! ..is when people don't do what they're told.