We store cookies on your device to make sure we give you the best experience on this website. I'm fine with this - Turn cookies off
Switch to an accessible version of this website which is easier to read. (requires cookies)

Call Clegg 27th March

March 27, 2014 2:47 PM
Originally published by UK Liberal Democrats

Watch this episode of Call Clegg. Today Nick gives his reaction to last night's Europe debate with Nigel Farage.

Transcript

This is LBC 97.3 Call Clegg, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg takes your calls with Nick Ferrari at Breakfast 0845 6060973, tweet at lbc973, text 84850. Leading Britain's conversation. This is "Call Clegg" on LBC.

NC: It's 9 o'clock, on Thursday 27 March and that means it's time for Call Clegg with me, Nick Clegg here on LBC 97.3 and I am taking your questions, as ever, for the next half hour so do get in touch. You can call on 0845 6060973, you can email at nickclegg@lbc.co.uk and of course you can watch on lbc.co.uk. So let's go to the first caller and that is Mike. Mike in Ealing. Hello Mike.

M: Oh hello Mr Clegg.

NC: Hello.

M: I was interested in the debate last night when you made a very strong point it appeared about the population of Romania and Bulgaria. I thought I'd trawl the internet to find out what the truth was. The official census in Romania and in Bulgaria goes back to 2011 and it shows 27.5 million between. So on the face of it you've got a good point there. But when you research beyond that to try and get an up to date statement it goes beyond 29 million. So my question to you is, how far did you go in your research to come up with a figure?

NC: Well I did exactly what you did which is the census figures on those people who now live in Romania and Bulgaria. That was my point. Look my point was a simple one which is immigration is an issue which a lot of people are rightly concerned about. But I just think it's important to have that debate precisely because it's such a difficult one, because it provokes so many anxieties based on some facts rather some wild allegations. And to suggest that 29 million Bulgarians and Romanians are going to move into to the United Kingdom, or even more as Nigel Farage then went on to say last night. That over 400 million will come to this country, it's I mean to put politely, that is just totally implausible. Not least when as I, as you have just confirmed, there are less 29 million people according to official statistics living in Romania and Bulgaria at the moment. So yes, let's have the debate about the freedom of movement by the way and that freedom of movement is something that 1.5 million Brits enjoy who live elsewhere in the European Union. 2 million people from elsewhere in the European Union have come into our country since 2004. Half of them have gone back home. So look there's a lot of people moving around and we need to think through how we tighten up the rules to make sure there are no abuses, the loopholes are boarded up, they can't just come here and claim benefits. But the point I was making was a simple one of don't add to the anxieties by scaremongering using suggestions that are simple not going to materialise. The idea that 29 million Romanians and Bulgarians are going to flood Britain is simply not going to happen.

NF: A quick response from you Mike?

M: Well he didn't answer the question did he? I simply asked him where he got the figure from. In his return ...

NF: Well he told you. With respect he did say. He did.

NC: I told him. I did say to you Mike.

NF: Go ahead Mr Clegg.

NC: No I did say to you Mike. I did exactly what you yourself have established which is the official census.

M: Which it is over 29 million as Mr Farage said.

NC: No he said in his leaflets which I was referring to, that's 29 million Bulgarians and Romanians might move to the United Kingdom. Given that the official census in those two countries as you have yourself rightly identified shows that there aren't even 29 million Romanians and Bulgarians presently living in Romania and Bulgaria, it's just a fanciful claim to make which is only designed to scare people. And I think yes, let's get on top of the issue of immigration but let's do it in a way which is firm and sensible, not based on wild suggestions that millions and millions and millions of people are going to come to this country who simply are not going to do that.

NF: Okay let's stop trading numbers. Thank you Mike. Next call Mr Clegg?

NC: Yes, Kim in Bristol. Hello Kim?

K: Hello Nick. Well done for last night. I think you actually piped the post on Mr Farage. But my question for you is, are you going to make use of Nigel Farage's political alignment with Putin when he said that Europe had blood on its hands, as Nigel Farage, as Europe provoked him, Putin into saying what he said and that Ukrainians had died as a result of their desire for democracy and closer relations with the EU?

NC: Well look I was ... it came right at the end of the debate so we couldn't debate it further. But I wasn't surprised that Nigel Farage doesn't agree with me. I was extraordinarily surprised if not shocked that he agrees with Vladimir Putin. And to somehow suggest that because of Nigel Farage's loathing of the European Union that is the reason why Ukrainian protestors sought to reclaim their own freedom and their own country on the streets of Kiev, I just think it's really insulting to those people who in Kiev were simply standing up for values that we should share and support of democracy, of autonomy, of them being able to determine their own fate. And for Nigel Farage to side with Vladimir Putin, well he'll have to explain why he did that. I was really ...

K: Yeah, shocked.

NC: ... I was astounded he did so.

K: I know, absolutely awful you know. And to think that we should have somebody like him stand on political stages with the likes of you and Ed Miliband and David Cameron I certainly would like to see him stand on political forums and debates.

NF: Alright Kim, thank you. Briefly and lastly on this Deputy Prime Minister. Was it naivety then or stupidity from Mr Farage with that remark last night?

NC: You'll need to ask him and no doubt it will come up in the debate next week. But my view is that it shows quite how extreme people can be, like Nigel Farage, when their loathing of the European Union becomes so all consuming that they even end up siding with Vladimir Putin in order to make their point. And so to suggest that somehow it's the European Union's fault that the Ukrainian people rose up, as many did on the streets of Kiev, against their government seeking to claim greater democracy, greater freedom, I just think is such a perverse way of looking at things. And I personally think that what Vladimir Putin has done and what the Russian's have done, in effect annexing another country in the heart of Europe or part of another country is simply unacceptable in this day and age. And of course the only reason we're able to seek to exert any influence, and it's difficult enough as it is, on Vladimir Putin is because we can act with the clout of being part of the economic super power is the European Union upon which of course Russia depends a lot. So look this, as on so many other issues, I see very, very differently to Nigel Farage. But it was in many ways the most striking, if not shocking new kind of revelation that came to light in yesterday's debate.

NF: Kim, the caller there, Mr Clegg, calls it for you. I have to say LBC poll called it against you. 67 per cent plays 33 and YouGov for the Sun called it 57 per cent for Farage, 36 per cent for Nick Clegg. Did you lose last night?

NC: Well clearly a lot of people didn't agree with me. But look doesn't entirely surprise, this is a marathon not a sprint. You know for years and years and years, you've had these, this misinformation, these deeply misleading facts put about by people like Nigel Farage, unchallenged. Of course I'm not going to be able to reverse that in one hour. But I hugely enjoyed it and the fact that I was able to speak directly to people, whether they agreed with me or not and by the way I fully anticipate there are plenty of people who would disagree with me before the debate, during the debate and after the debate. But at least I can put the other side of the story which has gone missing for so very long. I am just not prepared simply because it might not be popular with some people to keep quiet any longer given that I think there is so much at stake. There are millions of jobs at stake, there is our ... there's the safety of our streets at stake. And so look as I say a marathon not a sprint. The first debate was had. I thought by the way Nick, I thought you did a great job in making sure ...

NF: Thank you Sir.

NC: ... the contestants kept the contest ...

NF: Thank you.

NC: ... fairly clean and straightforward and I'm looking forward to the next one.

NF: Alright Mr Clegg, let's move ... Thank you for that. Let's move to the next call.

NC: Danny, Danny in Ealing. Hello Danny.

D: Yeah, Hi.

NC: Hi.

D: Hello, good morning Mr Clegg.

NC: Morning.

D: What is the Liberal Democrats take on the new Sharia Law that may be introduced for making the Wills compliant to Sharia Law?

NF: Just to make sure the listeners heard that. Danny stay on the line. What is Mr Clegg your view on the idea of British solicitors drafting Sharia compliant wills as part of English Law? Mr Clegg?

NC: There's going to be no change in English Law as such. But of course Wills are matters for people to draw up themselves. But there is no question of us changing legislation because the law needs to apply evenly to everybody including when it comes to how you draw up wills. But, of course, what you put in your will, and whether you choose to make your own will Sharia compliant, you know, if you are of the Muslim faith that is in a sense up to you. But, we're not changing the law as a Government, or as a Parliament, because I think it's really important that the law is, if you like, neutral and applied to everybody regardless of their faith of their community.

NF: Quick response, Danny.

D: Well, I think a production of Sharia law is not compatible with a secular democracy that we live in, and it would affect the freedom of thought, freedom of women, freedom of the same sex marriages and everything else. This could be a snowball that's going downhill, which will collect momentum, and soon enough, because the election is around the corner, you will have a fraction of the community lobbying the ministers and their councillors in order for this to be accepted. And, once accepted it is going to be very difficult to pick it out of the British system.

NF: Let's here lastly, Mr Clegg, on this.

NC: Well, I've made it very clear to Danny, that's not what is happening, so I hear Danny's concerns, and I also share the concern as an old fashioned liberal. The law should be there applied to everybody in the same way, everybody should be equal before the law. We shouldn't be creating carve outs or exceptions to this community or to that community. Your people's own faith is something that in a sense the Government shouldn't in any way be trying to second guess. How people draw up their wills is a matter for them, but the way in which the law is drafted by Parliament shouldn't be, and here I completely agree with Danny, shouldn't be drafted to make exceptions for this community or that community. Because, the moment you do that, of course, the very concept of the law, that everyone is equal before the law, is eroded, and that is a bad thing.

NF: We move on, thanks Danny, move on to the next call, Mr Clegg.

NC: Peter in Slough, hello Peter.

P: Yes, good morning, Mr Clegg.

NC: Morning.

P: I retired fairly recently on a comfortable pension. However, the house that I bought for my family 20 years ago for £600,000 is probably now worth about £2m. Now, if I have to pay a 1% duty or tax, a mansion tax on that property that will probably absorb between a third and a half of my pension and I would therefore have to sell the house. Do you think that's fair?

NC: Well, of course, if your property is worth £2m you won't pay anything, not under our plans, not a single penny. Because, we're not saying…

NF: Well, the way property prices are going up it will probably be worth £2.5m by the time we finish this conversation, but go ahead.

NC: So, under the plans we've got for what's been dubbed 'the mansion tax,' the taxation for very high value properties, you wouldn't pay anything at £2m, you'd only pay 1% of the value over £2m, so anything up to £2m is entirely free of that. But, can I just say to you, Peter, at the moment, of course, people pay taxes on the value of their properties, it's called council tax. The odd thing about our council tax system is that someone can be living in a family home, I don't know, in Lewisham, and they can be paying the same council tax as an Oligarch can be paying on a £5m palace in the middle of London. Because, in a sense, you have these different bands up to roughly £700,000 and then that's it, and all we're saying, and I think most people would accept that that's right, it cannot be fair that a family living in a family home in Lewisham, is paying the same council tax as someone who is living in a £5m palace in the middle of Kensington. So, what we're saying in effect is, that surely we should address that anomaly in the council tax system, and make sure that very high value properties are at least reflected in the way in which we pay taxes on properties, just as much as lower value properties are.

NF: Quick response from you, Peter.

P: Yes, I'm delighted to hear your answer to the question, because the popular belief is that the tax will be paid on the total value of the property and not the excess.

NC: No, it's the excess above £2m.

P: And, if you want people to vote for you it's very important you get that message out.

NF: Well, I think he has, Peter, thank you. In fairness, I have to say, the Deputy Prime Minister definitely nailed that one so thank you for your call. I have to turn to some emails if I could, Mr Clegg. Kate in Norfolk: 'You definitely won last night, congratulations. But, when it comes to debates for the General Election, who are you going to put in the Chancellor's debate alongside Ed Balls and George Osborne? Will it be Danny Alexander or Vince Cable?' asks Kate.

NC: Well, we'll obviously have to decide on that but of course Danny Alexander is the Liberal Democrat Treasury Minister, he has presided as Chief Secretary to the Treasury over probably the biggest transformation of our public finances in a generation. At the same time, of course, Vince is an outstanding Secretary of State dealing with business issues. So, I'll get back to Kate on that, but she makes a wider point, by the way.

NF: So, who's it going to be, sorry I'm confused, so it will be Danny?

NC: No, I have not yet decided, and we will decide that nearer the time. But, one point that Kate makes…

NF: What makes the decision for you, how will you make that decision, Mr Clegg?

NC: Well, I'll make that decision and then we'll talk about it on the programme.

NF: But, what will inform you to make the decision, how will Vince pip Danny, or Danny pip Vince?

NC: Look, we're all grown-ups we'll talk about it with each other, but we'll decide nearer the time. But, the point Kate makes is an interesting one, which is she's already looking forward to those debates at the General Election time. And, I do think that actually last night, regardless of whether you think, you know, Nigel Farage is better than I, or vice versa, or whether you think we should or shouldn't pay in the European Union, I actually think what it showed was the value of just having politicians with different points of view, battling out in front of people so people can make up their own minds. And, you know, both Ed Miliband and I have now said that we would sign up to the way in which the leaders' debates were held at the last General Election. The Conservatives are dragging their feet, I really don't think they should do that for much longer, because people want to have these debates, they want to hear directly from people, they want to hear the differences, they want to be able to compare and contrast. And, you know, I think it frankly is pretty odd that both David Cameron and Ed Miliband have chosen not to debate this major issue, whether we should be in or out of the European Union. But, at least in the run up to the next General Election I hope they will both find a bit more guts to actually step up to the plate and have a proper public debate.

NF: What has the Prime Minister said to you about this debate, either today or before it?

NC: We haven't talked about it much, because at the end of the day he…

NF: You must have talked about it a bit, something like this, gosh you two chaps you're always in the rose garden, getting on in a famous fashion, he must have said something.

NC: Is that the way you think it works, Nick, oh dear.

NF: He must have said something, he must have said, Nick have you gone stark raving mad?

NC: The naivety of youth if you think that's the way it works. He knows my view, which is I think the debates were a success last time, I think people liked being able to make up their own minds by hearing what the different Party Leaders think about various issues. I think people, again regardless of their views about who was up, who was down, you know, who was right, who was wrong, they liked to see that debate yesterday, and…

NF: But, did he think you were bonkers for doing it?

NC: Honestly, it was my decision, and it's not really for David Cameron to second guess what I think. But, I do think it's extraordinary that he and Ed Miliband basically don't dain to debate the European issue when it's clearly an important one which lots of people, and I think the debate last night showed that, lots of people are really engaged in. And, it's perhaps a sign of the times that the two largest Parties in British politics, the Labour and the Conservative Parties, are now so, sort of, tied up in their own knots on Europe they're not even prepared to talk in clear, unambiguous terms about what they believe on this all important issue.

NF: It's Call Clegg so we go to the next caller, who is it, Mr Clegg.

NC: Christian in South Croydon. Hello Christian.

C: Hi, hi, good morning, Mr Clegg.

NC: Hello.

C: My question is, I would take it that you regard yourself as a prudent politician and as such if you want Britain to join Europe why aren't you pushing for a referendum. Let me just make this point, if you're running a business, multi million pound business, surely you would not join up, or link up, with any other company without knowing what the terms and conditions are of the contract. And, I think you more than Mr Farage, should be pushing for a referendum, why aren't you pushing for a referendum?

NF: Alright, Christian, thank you.

NC: Well, Christian, two points. Firstly, of course, we are part of Europe, and we have been part of the European community and the European Union since the early seventies, so it's not a question about whether we join it or not, we have been part of it now for a very long time. The second question then is, on what basis do you have a referendum? Because, it's not about whether you join or not, we've been part of the European community and now the European Union since the early 1970s. And, my answer is, which is something that we've now guaranteed in law, is that you Christian, and indeed anybody else who is listening today, will get a say in a referendum the next time you are being asked to give up powers to the European Union because the rules of the European Union are going to change?

And, by the way, the rules of the European Union they change very regularly, and that's been my view for years and years and years, and that's why Nick Ferrari raised this last night. Back in 2008 I was campaigning for a referendum, because at that time we were discussing how we ratify a new set of rules, it was called the Lisbon Treaty at the time. And, I felt then, and I still feel now, that when we're asked to ratify these new rules, when new things are asked of us as a country, that shouldn't happen over your head, Christian, it should be through a referendum.

So, look, we're part of it already, so it's not a question about having a referendum on that issue. But, it is a question of having a referendum, you know, the next time the rules change, and new things are asked of us as a country.

NF: Christian thank you, the next call, Deputy Prime Minister.

NC: Lee in Bexley Heath. Hello Lee.

L: Good morning Nick.

NC: Morning

L: And, good morning Nick.

NF: Morning Lee.

L: Yes, I would like to talk about the teachers' strike. I phoned up yesterday and actually spoke to you for a bit, Nick…

NF: I remember.

L: …regarding supporting the teachers. The question I want to put to you, Mr Clegg, is why do you think it's alright to continually pile more work on the people, without extra pay, and then to cut their pension, why do you think that that would be alright and that they'd say, that's alright, we don't mind, kind of a thing?

NC: Well, look, I think if you listen to the National Union of Teachers, the main objection they have is to a change that we're introducing which allows Head Teachers to basically reward particularly good teachers with a bit of extra pay, whilst making sure that of course, you know, other teachers are not penalised and they've got their pay bands and they go up in their pay bands. But, if they're at the top of their pay bands, and they're very good teachers, the Head Teacher can reward them a bit of extra. And, I think many people, whether you're in the public sector or the private sector, you know, accept that teaching is such an important thing, how good teachers are in the classroom, that giving the Head Teachers that flexibility - which, by the way, they might not want to take up, some Head Teachers might not want to take it up - but it's nonetheless a reasonable thing to do. And, that's what we have sought to do, and okay the National Union of Teachers don't agree with that, but I think many, many parents actually think that saying that Head Teachers should have the freedom to reward good teachers is a reasonable step to take.

L: Right, can I give you an example?

NC: sure.

L: Because, my wife works in a school as a teaching assistant. Now, when she started ten years ago, her job was do a bit, like help with a bit of reading, clean the paint pots out - she works in a primary school. She now has to take kids out, she's acting like a teacher. She doesn't get a dinner break, she has to work through it because there just isn't enough time, and now she's starting to bring stuff home because there isn't enough time to do it in school. She's on £12,000 a year, she hasn't had a pay rise in five years, now how do you think that that's fair? And, a classic example, Nick you did an extra show last night didn't you?

NF: Me, I did yes, this Nick, yes.

L: Did you get paid for that?

NF: You better believe it.

L: So, you don't work for nothing do you?

NF: You're right, sir.

L: But, you expect teachers…

NF: Back to the Deputy Prime Minister now.

L: But, you expect the teachers and the teaching assistants to work for nothing, take all this extra work on and get nothing in return, and then you wonder why they strike.

NC: Sure.

NF: Mr Clegg.

NC: Yes, Lee, I mean, look I am a huge, huge admirer and fan of our teachers across the country, they do on the whole not only an extremely good job, an unbelievably important one.

NF: Not quite answering it Mr Clegg.

NC: No, let me speak.

NF: Okay, go ahead.

NC: Now, Lee, you talked about your wife who is working incredibly hard, working very long hours, on £12,000, that is not a great deal of money. By the way, she will at least though benefit from the fact that she won't have to pay any tax on the first £10,500 that she earns as of next April because of the kind of things I've been introducing in Government. But, here's the point, Lee, what this dispute is about is not are teachers working hard or not, I think everybody recognises that teachers work extraordinarily hard and do on the whole an exceptionally good job. All we're saying is that Head Teachers should have the freedom, where they want, to reward those teachers who they think are doing an especially good job.

NF: Let's move to another question. Lee, thank you. On the emails, this one comes in from Jeremy in Hertfordshire: 'Is it right that girls and women can stock up on the morning after pill under new NHS guidance?' I think actually it's the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidance, but the point is there anyway. Stocking up on the morning after pill, Mr Clegg.

NC: I have to say to you I am absolutely appalled, and in fact really quite angry on behalf of many, many women across the country about this suggestion that giving a woman the right to buy a morning after pill will somehow automatically lead to more promiscuous behaviour. I think it's demeaning, I think it's patronising, I think it's sexist, you know, it's quite astonishing. You know, women don't take the morning after pill lightly, it's not just something you casually do. But, to say to a woman she cannot have the right, in case she has unprotected sex, and just in case, in case, to have the morning after pill available to her, and to say, oh no you can't possibly have that right because we, whoever is we, the Government, society or whichever newspaper columnist is pontificating about this, think you'll suddenly become terribly promiscuous. I think it's an absolute insult to women across the country.

NF: Have you told Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary, this because he's rather worried about it?

NC: Well, I haven't spoken to him about it, but I fundamentally disagree with anyone who says…

NF: Well, he's expressed concern, you will be aware of this, Mr Clegg.

NC: Well, I believe the experts, who have quite clearly said, that providing the morning after pill, and indeed other forms of contraception, the evidence is very, very clear, it doesn't lead to more promiscuous behaviour. It does, however, help prevent unwanted pregnancies. But, I just think this is lifting a lid on a really fundamental difference in attitude towards women. Women shouldn't be told, we're not going to give you the freedom to buy something from a chemist because you think you might need it, because otherwise we don't trust how you will behave sexually. I mean, it's a sort of Victorian [inaudible 00:26:01], it's a sort of Medieval approach to women, and that's why I am as angry as I am on behalf of women that that is the attitude that is now being reflected in a lot of the debate on this issue this morning.

NF: Healthy debate then to come with Mr Hunt then I would suggest, Mr Clegg?

NC: Well, I can't have made my views more clear.

NF: You couldn't, just lastly on this, are you aware that the guidance also says that girls under 16 can avail themselves of these pills, your reaction to that?

NC: Well, there's a longstanding issue about the point at which doctors and other medical professionals, you know, have got to encourage 16 year olds, and of course anyone younger than that, to speak to their parents, and that's what they must do whenever they possibly can. But, at the end of the day, when you're faced with the reality of a teenager who is in trouble, you as a medical expert want to help them, right. And, I think for us to sort of decree that they can or they can't help someone, at the end of the day, that's not going to alter the fact that that 16 year old is in trouble…

NF: Under 16 year old, Mr Clegg, I have to repeat, under 16, you're happy with that?

NC: I do not want to see teenagers, I don't want to see anybody if at all possible, suffer unwanted pregnancies, I don't want to see the very high rates we've had in the past in this country of unwanted pregnancies for very young individuals. But, the way to deal with that is to make sure that we go with the evidence, and the evidence is very clear, is that if you provide people with information, with education, if you empower them with that information, if you make contraception available to them on a responsible basis, that's the way that we stop unwanted pregnancy. Not by resorting to really outdated attitudes towards women.

NF: Alright, we've time for one more question, Deputy Prime Minister.

NC: Ron in Haslemere, hello Ron.

R: Good morning, Mr Clegg. Mr Clegg, I've got to be honest I'm not a fan of yours.

NC: Oh dear.

R: Yes, and after watching last night's programme and listening to you this morning, it's just reinforced my perception of you.

NF: Can I move you to a question, he's got a thick skin I know.

NC: That's a good start, Ron.

R: Right, two quick questions, if that's alright with you. Firstly, Mr Farage is saying that 29m Rumanians and Bulgarians have the right, have the right to come to Britain, not that they will as you were trying to make out this morning. You know, please respect the intelligence of the British public. That's number one. Number two, last night you said, as far as you're concerned you aren't going to let it happen, you know, you are not going to let Mr Farage…well actually, Mr Farage speaks for a lot of British people. You are not going to let it happen. How are you not going to let the will of the British people happen then?

NC: Let what happen?

NF: When you say 'not happen' do you mean the referendum Ron?

R: Nick, last night all the way through the programme Mr Clegg was saying about Mr Farage, what Mr Farage wants…

NF: Taking Britain out, I'm sorry, it's only for time reasons, Ron excuse me, taking Britain out of Europe, I understand what you're saying, Mr Clegg.

NC: Well, I clearly don't agree with you, Ron, I disagree with you as strongly as you disagree with me. I don't think taking us out of the world's largest economy would be good for the millions of jobs that are linked to our position in the single market. I don't think it would help us pursue criminals who cross borders. I don't think it would help us deal with climate change. I think it would make us less relevant in the world, more isolated. Of course I disagree with you, Ron, that's why we had the debate. I think we should remain in, so that's no surprise.

On the first issue, listen, you talk about the facts, you know, you heard it for yourself. Nigel Farage said, or instance, on this claim that I've heard cited over and over again, unchallenged for years, that 75% of our laws are made in Europe. And, when asked by Nick Ferrari, where did you get that fact, he said, well basically I came up with it. And, I was then able to say, no the facts as proved by the House of Commons is not 75, it's 7%.

So, look, I know it was quite a fact heavy debate, but it's quite important because I think so many misleading facts have been bandied about, and I think it's right to try and get the facts. And then, Ron, you can I can disagree, but at least we can disagree on the basis of the facts, rather than on the basis of a lot of the myths, and misinformed facts which have been peddled for a very long time.

NF: And, a final email, Ted in Sidcup: 'Mr Clegg, I understand that you and your boys are Arsenal fans, so am I. Do you agree Wenger must go?'

NC: Oh, Ted, I'm sighing with sorrow, the game on Saturday was I think for any Arsenal fan was heart-breaking to watch. Look I remain an Arsene Wenger fan, you know, he's…

NF: That's him done for then, sorry do go on, Mr Clegg.

NC: Thank you very much.

NF: Do go on Mr Clegg, I don't know how that came out.

NC: Look, we're missing some of our most creative attacking players at the moment, and I just think it's important that we stick with the manager because he's had a great season so far, it's gone a bit wonky recently, but I actually think we can finish off the season really strongly.

NF: Thank you again for last night, thank you again for today, I look forward to seeing you again, Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, with Call Clegg. Thank you for that. You're listening to LBC.