I am very clear, and I will say this bluntly: Brexit has caused more harm than good.
Prime Minister, welcome to the Today programme.
You said that people can't wait forever for change in your speech on this stage. So why, in that speech, did you set out a whole series of major changes — a national care service, a closer relationship with Europe, changing our voting system — none of which can happen for years?
Well, it's a good question. I made that comment when I was talking about the removal of VAT off people's electricity bills on Thursday, and what we will do to cap bus fares across England for the whole of 2027. So those are moves that will help people in the short term, but I don't think Britain can be fixed in the short term. I have made the argument that we've been on the wrong path for a long time. We broke up the essentials. We sold them off. People in this country are paying higher prices for transport, for energy, for housing than they are in other countries. And it will take time to fix those services and to get them under stronger public control and therefore, as I did with the bus services in Greater Manchester, use that public control to bring public benefit in the form of lower fares and lower bills. So that can't be done overnight, nor can social care be fixed overnight. Hence a 10-year plan for Britain coming later this year.
Let's go through some of the changes, starting with that big one on social care. Why hit pensioners, not the wealthiest, in your first big policy announcement?
This is about helping pensioners. Pensioners currently are at risk of paying ruinous care costs. And I know this, and my family has got very direct experience of the social care system. You can be somebody with a basic state pension and a little modest extra income, and you can then be means tested and have to pay care costs. So sometimes people just look at the money without looking at the wider support we give older people. And I believe we've got to look at that bigger picture. It cannot be right going forward from here that we treat dementia very differently from cancer. This affects so many families. We need a system that, in my view, works to NHS principles. And if we did that, it would be to support pensioners in a more enhanced way than we are currently doing. At the moment, you...
I'm asking you how you pay for that, because you've set out that ambition repeatedly. What's new is you've now told us how you want to pay for it, and you're wanting to pay for it by scrapping the triple lock, by scrapping the guarantee to pensioners.
That's not quite right. So, I've said that we will make an adjustment to the triple lock. Now, you might say that sounds like clever politician speak, but let me just...
Forgive me. I do think it's clever.
I know you would think that. But if I could just explain, it keeps the three elements in play. So those three elements being prices, earnings and 2.5%. And the current triple lock works on the basis every year, whichever is highest, that's what the pension goes up by. And what that is doing is it's taking it up quite quickly, and by 2030 it will be a record level. The adjustment that I'm suggesting is that earnings should be considered over a longer time frame, over the years, not every year, and then that would maintain the pension, but it wouldn't put us in the position that the triple lock has us in at this moment of time. I will honour it for this parliament for sure, and it's been a really important way of making sure the state pension reflects and is in touch with the rising prosperity that we have in the wider country.
But let's put it simply. The clever people behind the scenes who brief us after speeches like your speech say this will save £15 billion a year eventually. That's £15 billion that would have been going to pensioners, which is why I ask you: why are you taking money from pensioners and not, as Sharon Graham of the union would say, take it from the wealthy? Don't take it from pensioners.
Well, pensioners are paying, as I say, huge care costs, and I think it's a very big move to support older people to say you will have peace of mind in your later life. You will...
You say it's a deal. Forgive me for interrupting, but you say effectively it's a deal. You get something new, but we have to take something back a bit.
It's a first big move to enable the introduction of a national care service. It's a very significant decision. Every predecessor in the role that I am in has not grasped this nettle. I am ripping the plaster off. I am going to fix social care. I will not leave office without doing it. And yes, you are absolutely right to ask about older people, but they will get peace of mind and more ability to protect their homes and savings in the system that I'm describing.
Let me just check what you mean by that. You see, because you've talked about a free national care service, free at the point of use, but can we be clear that is if you get care in your own home, if you go into a residential home like your dad did, for example, you'll still pay your bed and board, won't you? You still might end up selling your family house to pay the bills, which are what, £50,000 to £100,000. They could be more.
You will have to pay for your bed and board, and that is going to be the case. It's the case in Scotland or other countries that have gone down this path. It's the care that we are talking about. But here's the point, Nick. I think if we had a proper preventative social care service in this country that was operated on a whole person basis, we would have a much higher standard of social care in people's homes. The reason why my dad had to go into a care home, since you asked about it, is because the threadbare social care system we have, which operates in 15-minute windows delivering quite a basic level of care, could not cope when my dad's care needs progressed, and my mum then couldn't cope with the chaos that was happening around those 15-minute care visits. So that's the honest answer as to why that system doesn't work. If you do what I want to do, which is provide a much higher standard whole person care in people's homes, genuinely I think you could do what most families would want to do, which is to keep people in their own home for all of their lives.
You've been very clear. You've been honest about it, as you said you would be, which is people who move into a residential home, they still face the risk of losing their home to pay those bills. Can we deal with a crisis that's facing people now this winter? The boss of EDF, the big energy firm, has been talking to the BBC, and he says this winter we face another energy crisis. Is that how you see it as prime minister? This is an energy crisis, and because the war with Iran is going on and we don't know when it will end, it's an energy crisis we've all got to prepare to live with for potentially many months.
I don't think that is an overstatement, to be honest. When I look at the prices at the pump at this moment in time, if we include diesel and petrol within that, this is very challenging, isn't it, for people who are filling up today. When we look at energy prices in the home, difficult too. As I said, I'm doing what I can, reducing or removing, I should say, VAT off bills, but it is very difficult indeed, and it's why the Middle East situation needs to command a lot of our attention. I met the president of the United States last week. We spoke about this situation. Reopening the Strait of Hormuz is an urgent international priority. We've got to work at all of these things. The main driver of that crisis is beyond our control, but we can contribute to solving that situation. And that is what I've been doing as prime minister.
And you're going to have to look at giving people more help because you proclaimed from this stage that you were cutting VAT off electricity bills, as you've just said. Now, you'll know the numbers. That saves people around £4 off their energy bill. But prices are going up by £60 a year tomorrow. They're due to go up. That's the forecast. Another £276. So your VAT cut's already been wiped out. Will you look at further help?
I agree that it's not going to meet all of those pressures, but it is something. It's better to have done it than not to have done it. I could have come in in July and said wait till the budget, but I didn't. I acted, and therefore the money is freed up from Thursday. People will see VAT come off their bills then. And obviously we have a budget coming, and we're considering all of these issues. People can see that there isn't huge room for manoeuvre within the public finances, and we won't take risks with people's mortgages like a previous prime minister and government did. But you're looking at fuel duty, for example, which is due to go up. That can give people breathing space, that can take the pressure off. And might I just say as well, Nick, alongside that, cost of living is one thing, but the cost of business, the cost of running a business, is another, and we're looking at that issue as well.
Now, if there's an energy crisis, as you've conceded, there's another crisis at the moment globally: a borrowing crisis. The global markets are demanding more to lend countries money than they have for, what, 20 years or so. But Britain has a particular problem. It costs more for the Treasury here to borrow money than it costs Greece, than it costs Italy, than it costs France. Why didn't you say something in this big speech today to try and say to the global markets, 'We've got this under control. We're going to cut spending. We aren't going to borrow as much in the future'?
