:00:23. > :00:28.I wanted to talk about protecting older people.
:00:29. > :00:33.The Conservative plan to confiscate assets pound for pound from elderly
:00:34. > :00:39.people to pay for their social care is the worst and stupid public
:00:40. > :00:43.policy proposal of recent years, and the nastiest too, in effect, if not
:00:44. > :00:48.in intention. It cannot be allowed to be implemented in its current
:00:49. > :00:55.form. The Prime Minister is effectively proposing a 100%
:00:56. > :00:59.inheritance tax on assets over ?100,000 for those unlucky enough to
:01:00. > :01:06.develop a debilitating, long-term condition that requires domiciliary
:01:07. > :01:11.care, such as dementia or acute arthritis, for instance. Every ?1
:01:12. > :01:15.spent on care for these and fortunate people will be claimed
:01:16. > :01:20.back from either, at the time they receive it, or from their estate
:01:21. > :01:26.when they die. Now, most policies that intrude on personal finances
:01:27. > :01:30.concern tens of pounds, such as insurance tax rises, for instance,
:01:31. > :01:35.or hundreds of pounds at most, such as Ukip's excellent proposals to cut
:01:36. > :01:40.the cost of living, saving households ?400 a year by taking
:01:41. > :01:45.taxes off domestic energy and other measures. But this Tory death tax is
:01:46. > :01:50.in an altogether different league. It could involve taking tens of
:01:51. > :01:55.thousands or even hundreds of thousands of pounds out of someone's
:01:56. > :02:00.estate, if they have been an lucky enough to suffer an extended,
:02:01. > :02:04.debilitating condition later life. Damian Green seems to feel he is
:02:05. > :02:09.qualified to tell people how much is reasonable for them to pass on to
:02:10. > :02:12.their children, but the financial exposure the Tories are leaving
:02:13. > :02:18.millions of elderly people is not reasonable at all. In fact, this is
:02:19. > :02:22.a Russian roulette approach to paying for social care, and the
:02:23. > :02:27.abrogation of government responsibility. It makes a mockery
:02:28. > :02:31.of the claims of Mrs May and Nick Ahad advisors to be running a
:02:32. > :02:37.communitarian Conservative administration. Just consider
:02:38. > :02:41.typical house prices in parts of the country, particularly but not
:02:42. > :02:48.exclusively in southern England. In Dagenham, for example, average house
:02:49. > :02:56.prices are too good ?95,000. In Thurrock, ?338,000. In Ramsgate,
:02:57. > :02:59.210,000. In Epping, more than ?500,000. Homeowners requiring
:03:00. > :03:04.domiciliary social care are typically people who have paid off
:03:05. > :03:07.their mortgages and therefore owed all or nearly all of the value of
:03:08. > :03:14.the house, so in these ordinary Ingolstadt was that I have listed,
:03:15. > :03:18.anything from 110,000-400,000 will be exposed to the Tory death tax.
:03:19. > :03:23.The Prime Minister seems to wish to avoid scrutiny on heavyweight
:03:24. > :03:28.political programmes in this election. She went on the One Show
:03:29. > :03:32.recently. If she sticks to this policy, her next appearance should
:03:33. > :03:36.be on Total Wipe-out, because that is what she is planning to do to the
:03:37. > :03:41.estates of many elderly people. The Conservatives have created a cult of
:03:42. > :03:45.the leader under Mrs May, but if they persist with this policy in its
:03:46. > :03:49.current form, they will soon find out that this is not North Korea.
:03:50. > :03:54.The British public free thinkers who do not take kindly to being treated
:03:55. > :04:06.like fools. Older voters in particular are not going to
:04:07. > :04:08.brainwashed into voting for Kim Yong-may and against their own
:04:09. > :04:12.interest in such a scale. It is often said that when there is weak
:04:13. > :04:15.opposition, the danger of bad government escalates, and that is
:04:16. > :04:19.what we are seeing with the Tory death tax. Mrs May's Tories think
:04:20. > :04:23.they can do what they like. This policy is not just a dementia tax,
:04:24. > :04:27.it is effectively a tax on all forms of debilitating disease and
:04:28. > :04:33.infirmity that need an elderly person to need social care.
:04:34. > :04:40.Every extra week they live will lead to a further loss of equity and what
:04:41. > :04:44.they can hang onto their children. This will undoubtedly lead to an
:04:45. > :04:50.extra psychological toll on people already with disease. At the extreme
:04:51. > :04:55.end of the spectrum it's likely to make some elderly people feel
:04:56. > :05:05.regretful to still be alive. The Tory policy will also pour some
:05:06. > :05:13.specific knowledge -- anomalies and consequences... What happens, for
:05:14. > :05:18.instance, if a grown-up child is sharing the house but working
:05:19. > :05:25.full-time? Does the house gets sold immediately on the death of the
:05:26. > :05:30.elderly person? If so, that would render someone homeless just as they
:05:31. > :05:36.have lost a parent, or if not, it will lead to anomalies and sculpture
:05:37. > :05:40.of the avoidance. If this scheme is implemented in its present form, it
:05:41. > :05:44.will create a whole new tax avoidance industry, with elderly
:05:45. > :05:49.people piling intellect to release schemes and being given incentives
:05:50. > :05:53.to go on spending sprees to get the remaining value of their assets down
:05:54. > :05:57.under ?100,000. The message from government would be, don't be
:05:58. > :06:03.successful, and don't be financially responsible either. Another even
:06:04. > :06:08.more serious perverse outcome could be that people who need social care
:06:09. > :06:14.refused to accept it and try and model through in order to preserve
:06:15. > :06:19.their estate. With the inevitable result they suffer far more falls
:06:20. > :06:22.and other accidents around the home, which then necessitate long and
:06:23. > :06:29.expensive hospital stays or even bring about their premature death.
:06:30. > :06:32.This is a devastating death tax dreamt up on the back of an envelope
:06:33. > :06:38.and apparently winging its way to the Tory manifesto without
:06:39. > :06:41.consultation with expert opinion, the Cabinet or even the ministers in
:06:42. > :06:48.charge of the policy area in government. It doesn't have to be
:06:49. > :06:52.this way, word governments to make better and different choices on
:06:53. > :06:55.public spending. What is needed first is an immediate and
:06:56. > :07:00.substantial injection of money into the social care system. Because Ukip
:07:01. > :07:08.is prepared to cut unjustified public spending on the Barnett
:07:09. > :07:13.formula, HS2 and overseas aid, we are able to offer just such a
:07:14. > :07:19.financial boost, and will do so when we set out our manifesto on
:07:20. > :07:22.Wednesday. But longer term, we also need an agreed way forward for
:07:23. > :07:28.social care to ensure that risk is fairly pooled and builds our fairly
:07:29. > :07:33.paid. Possible solutions range from a national care service, as set out
:07:34. > :07:36.by Andy Burnham some years ago, to insurance policies and products that
:07:37. > :07:42.people can be encouraged to invest in. The Andy Burnham route may have
:07:43. > :07:46.something to commend it if the public could be assured the
:07:47. > :07:50.resources of a national care service funded out of tax revenue could be
:07:51. > :07:54.protected against freeloading, for instance by new arrivals from other
:07:55. > :07:59.countries. I'm afraid that hurdle would not be cleared if Labour were
:08:00. > :08:03.in government, because Labour has a reputation for being generous to a
:08:04. > :08:09.fault with other people's money. Were I in the shoes of the Tories
:08:10. > :08:14.today, the first thing I would do would be to recognise that Denis
:08:15. > :08:19.Healey's law of holes is now in play. For the uninitiated, I should
:08:20. > :08:26.explain this law is very concise and simply state in regard to a hole,
:08:27. > :08:31.when you are in one, stop digging. Declaring financial war and millions
:08:32. > :08:36.of retired people who spent working life being responsible and building
:08:37. > :08:40.up assets does not amount to compassionate conservatism. It
:08:41. > :08:44.amounts betrayal. So I offer this advice to team Teresa Lu. Why don't
:08:45. > :08:51.you at least offer people a meaningful choice? That is after all
:08:52. > :08:57.what conservatism used to be about. So why not give people an option of
:08:58. > :09:02.chipping in to a voluntary social care costs insurance system run by
:09:03. > :09:07.government from say the age of 50? If people pay in and then need care,
:09:08. > :09:12.they are covered and should not be charged a penny. If, however, they
:09:13. > :09:16.have chosen not to pay in, then at least you would have the semblance
:09:17. > :09:20.of an argument for reclaim the costs from estates after death. If you did
:09:21. > :09:23.this, you could even claim to be adding to your manifesto proposal
:09:24. > :09:32.rather than abounding in it altogether. -- abandoning it.
:09:33. > :09:36.Therefore sparing the blushes of Tarquin without proper stress
:09:37. > :09:41.testing or scrutiny. One could tell from the demeanour of Tory ministers
:09:42. > :09:47.sent out to bat for this policy on the political programmes yesterday,
:09:48. > :09:50.that they knew they were on a loser. So far the conservative newspapers
:09:51. > :09:54.have not really got stuck into the policy with full figure. The ones
:09:55. > :10:01.that care about their readers will do so this week. Because it is an
:10:02. > :10:06.unforgivable attack on the -- responsible and hard-working people.
:10:07. > :10:12.My message to all those who may be hit by the Tory policy but would
:10:13. > :10:16.never eat vote for Jeremy Corbyn's Labour, is simple. Ask yourself what
:10:17. > :10:23.has been the best way to influence the Conservative Party's behaviour
:10:24. > :10:27.and policies in the recent past? And the answer is obvious. By voting
:10:28. > :10:32.Ukip, or at least threatening to vote Ukip, look how it worked on
:10:33. > :10:37.Brexit, look how it is working on grammar schools. So if I were in
:10:38. > :10:40.your shoes, I would tell Tory campaigners on the doorstep that you
:10:41. > :10:47.are going to vote Ukip for a common-sense and fairer approach.
:10:48. > :10:51.And if you do that, there is a strong possibility this policy will
:10:52. > :10:56.be ditched altogether, or at least greatly modified by the end of the
:10:57. > :11:00.week. I want to turn briefly to the second leg of the Tory attack on the
:11:01. > :11:05.elderly, on the issue of winter fuel allowance. The Conservatives tell us
:11:06. > :11:09.they will means tested but will not say at what income level people will
:11:10. > :11:14.lose it. Pensioners can be forgiven for suspecting that vast majority of
:11:15. > :11:19.them would no longer be eligible. The Tories have claimed to be making
:11:20. > :11:23.a principled case against Universalism in this area. And for
:11:24. > :11:31.replacing it with an assessment of need. So how come the very next day
:11:32. > :11:34.after unveiling the plan, the Prime Minister was helping Ruth Davidson
:11:35. > :11:39.to launch a Scottish Tory manifesto that placed to keep the allowance
:11:40. > :11:43.for all pensioners north of the border. --? This is yet another
:11:44. > :11:46.example of the English and indeed the wells being treated as
:11:47. > :11:52.second-class citizens within the UK. There is simply no good reason why a
:11:53. > :11:58.millionaire pensioner in Edinburgh should receive an allowance of up to
:11:59. > :12:04.?300 million -- three to pay full interview will, while pensioners on
:12:05. > :12:07.modest incomes in Essex get nothing. It is the Barnett formula which
:12:08. > :12:13.leads to public spending in Scotland being ?1700 per head higher than it
:12:14. > :12:17.is in England. That is what is behind this. It is another
:12:18. > :12:21.vindication of the Ukip policy of dumping that formula and replacing
:12:22. > :12:27.it with a needs -based funding system instead. So Mrs May's social
:12:28. > :12:33.care plan is not conservative and her winter fuel allowance is not a
:12:34. > :12:37.humanist. Apart from that, I'm sure everything is going fine on the
:12:38. > :12:44.Conservative and Unionist campaign. Thank you.
:12:45. > :12:51.Any questions. Does it matter if you win your seat or your party wins
:12:52. > :12:55.anything at all? I think you may be referring to the point Paul Nuttall
:12:56. > :12:58.made on the television yesterday, which was simply that Ukip has shown
:12:59. > :13:04.it is able to influence the course of politics in Britain without MPs.
:13:05. > :13:10.And indeed one could say that under the current first past the post
:13:11. > :13:13.system, it is proved to date easier for Ukip to get the United Kingdom
:13:14. > :13:18.out of the European Union than it has together MPs elected to the
:13:19. > :13:22.House of Commons. But we hope to change that in this election. We are
:13:23. > :13:27.not expecting an across the board level of voting to match that of
:13:28. > :13:32.2015, but we do believe we are very much more successfully targeting the
:13:33. > :13:38.areas where we are very strong without actually specifying the
:13:39. > :13:43.ranking of are target seats. Do you think comments like that are
:13:44. > :13:48.helpful in terms of getting the vote out? That it doesn't matter
:13:49. > :13:52.necessarily if you have no MPs? I wouldn't say it doesn't matter. It
:13:53. > :13:55.is this the better for Ukip to be represented in the House of Commons
:13:56. > :13:59.as well as to command the support of hundreds of thousands of millions of
:14:00. > :14:04.people as well. We're just making the point that one of the key ways
:14:05. > :14:07.that we have worked in recent years has been frankly to scare the
:14:08. > :14:12.Conservative Party in particular when they step out of line too
:14:13. > :14:18.badly. And that is why I am inviting older people who get knocked up this
:14:19. > :14:22.week by Conservative campaigners, if enough of you say, we are thinking
:14:23. > :14:28.of voting Ukip over this policy, I don't see it lasting beyond next
:14:29. > :14:35.weekend. Harry, you seem amused.
:14:36. > :14:41.Do you have any reaction to the news that the Commonwealth are sending
:14:42. > :14:49.election monitors from Australia and Mauritius to oversee the election?
:14:50. > :14:53.Is that something you welcome? I think our electoral system has a lot
:14:54. > :14:58.of problems around postal voting on demand in some areas. In some
:14:59. > :15:03.inner-city areas I think there have been problems in the past with
:15:04. > :15:06.intimidation of voters. And I think the Electoral Commission have
:15:07. > :15:11.recognised that certain features of the way elections are run,
:15:12. > :15:13.particularly in inner-city areas, are pretty disgraceful. I think
:15:14. > :15:20.there is no room for complacency at all. And if we have visitors from
:15:21. > :15:25.other countries to have a look and monitor, I think that is quite
:15:26. > :15:29.welcome. It doesn't necessarily mean that their own democratic systems
:15:30. > :15:34.are above criticism. I think it is perfectly welcome. Let's have as
:15:35. > :15:48.many eyes on how things are done as possible. Yeah. Go on.
:15:49. > :15:59.If former leader of the Lib Dems was on the radio this morning, waffling
:16:00. > :16:06.on for about half an hour and taking up so much space that he was even
:16:07. > :16:21.cutting his own throat in hand... It was waffle. It is typical of the
:16:22. > :16:25.BBC. They keep pushing the Lib Dems all the time.
:16:26. > :16:28.As you know, I have had some criticisms of the BBC over recent
:16:29. > :16:32.years. We have got a policy of scrapping the licence fee. But I
:16:33. > :16:37.think during an election, they are quite entitled to put on politicians
:16:38. > :16:43.of lots of different parties. And I don't particularly see that
:16:44. > :16:47.increased exposure of Nick Clegg to the masses is going to harm the
:16:48. > :16:53.prospects of Ukip or indeed any other party at all. I think it is a
:16:54. > :16:55.great democratic festival, a general election, so the more Nick Clegg,
:16:56. > :16:59.the better. Anyone else?
:17:00. > :17:32.Thank you very much then. Thanks. The 2017 general election is upon
:17:33. > :17:33.us. Everyday BBC Parliament will have the key speeches from the