20/02/2012 Daily Politics

Good afternoon and welcome to the Daily Politics. Half term is over

and it's back to work we go. The Prime Minister and his Health

Secretary, Andrew Lansley, are heading to Downing Street. In an

hour's time, they are hosting a health summit. So why haven't they

invited the main doctors and nurses groups?

What about British manufacturing? We have heard it's been on its

uppers for so long you'd be forgiven for thinking there is

hardly any of it left! But is it actually doing rather well?

Should head-teachers allow kids to go off on holiday during term-time?

At the moment they have got some discretion. But the government

doesn't like the effect it has on overall attendance rates.

And a new Sun rises over Wapping. But will Rupert Murdoch's new paper

receive a warm welcome here at Westminster?

All that in the next hour. With us this afternoon is Nikki

King, managing director of Isuzu Trucks. Welcome. If you have any

thoughts or comments on anything we are discussing, you can send them

Let's start with Ed Balls and yesterday's call from Labour for

big tax cuts in next month's Budget. We are imposing an austerity which

is self-defeating. There is a big problem in growth in jobs. The

government has borrowed 158 million more than they planned. George

Osborne says there is nothing he can do. I say it is complacent and

irresponsible and he should act. Let's debate how we can act. I have

proposed a temporary VAT Act. The Lib Dems say raise personal

allowance. David Davies says cut personal gains tax. We need

stimulus to get jobs back. It is the only way to get the deficit

down. Nikki King, do you agree? Is it time for tax cuts? Is a good

time to raise the tax threshold at the bottom end? If this was wartime,

the media and the opposition would be shot because there is a lot of

good news. Why is it not coming through them? You said you have had

a good deal and that business is booming for you but why is that not

filtering through? The trucks industry is the first industry to

go into recession and normally the first to start coming out because

when the high street is quiet, nobody buys trucks any more. We are

in the middle of February and we have done 60% of our sales target

for the year already! Everybody I talked to is having a reasonably

good time. Why is that not see it should be no national figures that

show that growth is flat lining -- why is that not coming up in

national figures? Why it is the economy not showing that those

times? Retail was 0.9% up in January. There are signs of growth

in the market. Why are we not celebrating that. There are green

shoots of stock do you think -- green shoots. Do you think that you

need to stimulate the economy, do you not think it would boost

consumer demand? No, confidence will boost consumer demand.

Confidence will boost businesses to grow and employed people. We need

to know green shoots are coming, there is light at the end of the

tunnel, and it is not coming out in the media. Would any tax cuts help

your business? No. Sorry. Fair enough!

David Cameron and Andrew Lansley are holding a summit today at

Downing Street in a bid to get the Health and Social Care Bill off

It's a select meeting. The chairs of the emerging GP-led

commissioning groups have been invited. But organisations like the

BMA and Royal College of Nursing won't be there. And critics say

there is not much point having a health summit without the doctors

and nurses. But groups like the BMA oppose the plans to give GPs and

other clinicians more responsibility for spending the

budget in England and increasing competition, saying the bill still

presents unacceptable risks to the NHS.

But are they too late? The 151 Primary Care Trusts, which are

losing control of the NHS budget to GPs under the plans, have already

been merged. And the ten Strategic Health Authorities, which

effectively kept an eye on the system, have also joined forces to

create four super-hubs. However, research published this morning by

the London School of Economics suggests that forcing NHS hospitals

to compete with one another can A little earlier this morning,

before he headed off towards today's summit, the Health Minister

Simon Burns explained why some groups have been invited and some

have not. This is an ongoing series of meetings that the Prime Minister

and the Department of Health have had across the last 20 months with

interest groups, with people who work in the health service, and to

have a meeting with those who are constructively taking part and

helping to implement the modernisation programme.

Norman Smith joins us now from Downing Street. Are we hearing

there are not any plans to meet the groups that have not been invited

today? Apparently nothing has been pencilled into the Prime Minister's

diary in terms of possible meetings with those health groups that are

critical in terms of reform. Number 10 seems to think these groups are

by no means representative of all doctors and nurses and that their

influence is perhaps exaggerated. Secondly, there is perhaps a view

that the time for whether to go ahead with reviews his past. The

aim now is to speak to the groups who will carry out the

implementation of the reforms. It looks a bit like slamming the door

in the bunker and waiting for the storm to pass but my sense is, the

government hoped to convey the idea that a sizable number of health

professionals do support the reforms and thereby get the public

on board, because if we are honest, most people do not understand the

nitty-gritty of all of the different health boards, clinical

senatess, etc, and most people will probably form their views by seeing

what they GP does and there are no stars, so the health professionals

in that context are critical to winning the argument -- what then

nurses do. The debate really just need to get this through in

whatever form and moved on? reminds me of polar explorers

heading south. They have gone so far that it doesn't matter how

bleak the way ahead is, they have to press on. It is to late to go

back and push Andrew Lansley down a crevasse. They have to soldier on

with him. The light at the end of the tunnel for them is that they

hope once the reforms are in place, by and large life will continue as

normal, people will not notice the NHS having radically changed and

people will forget. The danger is, if things do go wrong, if there are

difficulties because perhaps of reduced funding, people will say,

that is all because of government reforms. Although the hope is

people with and it is OK, it is possible things will go wrong and

they will blame it on these government reforms. Norman Smith,

thank you. With us now is Dr Jacky Davis, a

consultant radiologist, who is a founder member of Keep Our NHS

Public. And the Conservative MP for Ipswich, Dr Dan Poulter, who still

works as a medical practitioner from time to time. Will come to

both of you. Do you know how many clinical commissioning groups are

supposed to have replaced PC TVs and are up and running? -- PCTs.

Three-quarters of the country will be putting doctors and health care

professionals in charge of running the NHS, which is a good thing.

There is good evidence from Cumbria that this works, that it improves

patient care, and that is what these reforms are about. Do you

think it was a cock-up? Not inviting the main groups that

represent doctors, midwives and nurses? The people that engage with

reforms... What about the BMA and Royal College of Nursing? The BMA

opposed the formation of the NHS in the first place and every

consecutive government... I am a member of the BMA. What about the

PR aspect of having a health summit and not inviting health

professionals? They were consulted over an 18 month period. Some of

those groups have come out in outright opposition to the Health

Bill, that is their right, but the vast majority of doctors, all the

people engaged in these reforms and wanting to improve patient care and

work with the government are represented today. You have heard

the case there and also from Simon Burns. We are such a long way down

the line. The process is almost complete in terms of commissioning

groups being set up. It is time to go along with it, isn't it?

argument that GPs have formed commissioning groups and therefore

support the Health Bill is like saying that people going into a

lifeboat is supporting a ship sinking. Most people did not have

any choice. To interpret that as if they support it. And to argue that

you are in a mess and to justify going further with that mess is

nonsensical. This can be stopped. This can be reconfigured. It is

important that it is stopped. To argue that we have to go on because

we are in a mess is inappropriate. Do you think Bickleigh Nichols

groups should be stopped or GP commissioning? -- do you think the

clinical groups? A lot of GPs are already doing commissioning. I know

GPs in Cumbria and they do that very well. The legislation has to

be stopped because it does not do what it says on the 10th.

Cumbria, GPs are running services and it is that model that the

government wants to run out and that does not happen elsewhere in

the country. We need to put the best people who could act in the

best interest of the patients in charge of the service. That will

free up �5 billion that is listed in bureaucracy. I think it is

disingenuous to say the reforms are a mess. The principles... A be

legislation is a mess. I am not sure people are saying all of the

reforms are a mess but you must accept that there difficulty,

because the government even cannot get people to agree to it -- there

is difficulties. We need a service that puts money into patient care,

that reduces bureaucracy, that have doctors and nurses running the

services, and that we have a health service commission from the

community and focuses on preventive health care, and the focus of

funding is on delivering... Do you agree with the principles as they

are being set out? Which the legislation aside. -- put the

legislation as side. His Cumbria a good role model? This Bill does not

do what it says it is going to do. This argument will put power in the

hands of GPs. 90% of doctors are against this because they see their

GPs are being set up to fail. 20 billion in cuts will be made. The

other reason they are being set up to fail is that in London the

commissioning process has already been handed over to private

companies in London, for example to a company who has put in put into

this Health Bill. GPs have not been consulted about this, bringing in

private companies to support them doing commissioning and that

support will constitute an awful lot of the commissioning process so

the idea GPs will be doing this is simply wrong. The use of private

companies in the NHS is actually under legislation by the previous

Labour government that has allowed this to happen. We are in a

situation where the Labour Party has accepted that private

healthcare companies, where they can been added to improve patient

care, actually can bring value to the NHS... Just one more point.

What the real discussion, one minute you are saying Cumbria is a

good thing, the next you say it is a bad thing, and it is

fundamentally a good thing because doctors and nurses are the best

people placed to actually understand the needs of their

patients and the best people to provide quality patient care.

are looking at this from the outside. Does it sound like it is

something the government should be embarking on? As a Lehmanns, all I

can say is procrastination is a dangerous thing -- Lehman. We all

know the NHS has to change. Treatment is getting more expensive,

we are living longer and something has to be done. Anything that makes

it carers start to run the NHS is good. My experience of the NHS is

that the worst thing is government interference and it has lost its

humanity. Top-down. It is time we brought humanity down back into the

NHS. Their two. I will have to leave it there. -- thank you.

Relations between the West and Iran seem to be getting worse and worse.

Last week President Ahmadinejad showed off the latest developments

in Iran's nuclear programme, and yesterday the country's oil

ministry announced it was stopping shipments to Britain and France

ahead of new sanctions which were scheduled to come into force in

July. But today in the Commons, MPs will discuss a motion calling for

the government to rule out the use of force against Iran and reduce

tensions by redoubling diplomatic Our correspondent is in the House

of Commons, with two MPs who will be taking part in the debate.

That's right. That debate kicks off in a few hours' time. I'm joined by

two of the protagonists. First of all, John Baron, can I just ask you,

can you give me an example of a time when sanctions without the

threat of military force actually work? What we do know with regards

to Iran is that the policy of the West, of sanctions and sabre-

rattling, has clearly failed. These are yesterday's policies. Iran is

not going to give up its nuclear programme, it is about time we

accepted that. What my motion does is actually to say, let's take off

the table the use of force, which everybody says would be a disaster,

let's reduce tensions, bring us back from the brink of war, and

redouble our diplomatic efforts. Military intervention should always

be the last resort, and we have not reached all other avenues yet.

your time as Defence Secretary, Bob Ainsworth, what is it that makes

you believe that the threat of military action is even credible?

agree with the overwhelming majority of what John Baron said,

we really do need to avoid a military outcome to this crisis. It

is how you do that. The naive notion that some kind of CND-minded

approach, dealing with someone like Iran, actually helps, I think is

exactly wrong. What is naive is pursuing a policy which is clearly

failing. What women -- what we must do is to realise that we must

better engage with Iran. We are keeping on the table the option of

force, and this is illogical. We are pursuing a policy which

everybody accepts would be a disaster, against a country that

chooses to ignore it, and yet the policy Haydn's tensions and reduces

the chances of a diplomatic, peaceful outcome. It is a complete

nonsense. Isn't it really all about Israel, you want sanctions to be

given time to work so that Israel does not act unilaterally, and you

want them to know that Britain and America will actually support them,

so they will not have to go it alone - is that fair? Well, I

believe we should offer Iran implicit recognition of its

regional superpower status, we should do what Nixon did in the

1960s and 1970s, with China, and actually accept the might of China.

We should accept that we created this regional superpower in Iran,

through our misguided war in Iraq, which fundamentally altered the

balance of power in the region. We need to accept that it is a

regional superpower, offer this new relationship and try to reduce

tensions that way, which, at the end of the day, would be in

Israel's best interests. Ainsworth, do you accept that one

day Iran will have nuclear weapons? An awful lot of people have tried

to do exactly what John says, Jack Straw had real initiatives with

Iran, Barack Obama has reached out the open hand. We are dealing with

a religious dictatorship there. It is more worried about its own

people than anything else, and it is behaving in very strange ways.

They are not ready to assume the role that we all know they are

capable of assuming, and we all want them to assume, which is as a

very important part of the international community. But with

the kind of regime they have got in place, they are never going to do

that. This is a paranoid police state, with the panoply of

religious Islam as a disguise to that basic fact. Thank you both

very much indeed for that. As you can see, a very complex question,

for which there would seem to be no easy answers, and no consensus in

the House of Commons, for the moment. That debate taking place

later this afternoon. Recent statistics about British

manufacturing show that some parts have been hit by the recession, but

other areas, such as car production, are growing well. Are government

efforts to rebalance the economy towards manufacturing what

businesses actually need? We visited a company and Rochdale.

There is an idea that British manufacturing is somehow in

terminal decline, from world leader to life-support in 30 years. Like

all legends, there is a spark of truth, some firms have gone to the

wall, people have lost jobs, certain products we once made and

sold to the world are now made to the rest of the world, and we buy.

But it is not the whole story. Parts of UK manufacturing are very

far from ready to lie down and expire. Granada Material Handling

have been building lifting equipment for about 30 years, but

whilst everyone was going through a recession, they branched out,

taking something of a risk, into the niche market of making lifting

equipment for offshore wind farms. And it seems that British

manufacturing is not really dying, but those that are small, able to

adapt, are the best equipped to survive. The figures tend to hide

this evolution, but signs of improvement are there. According to

the Office of National Statistics, manufacturing output fell by. Take

coffee in the last quarter of last year, however, it bounced back in

December, increasing by a 1%. -- fell by 0.8% in the last quarter.

The key to rebalancing the economy would seem to be exports. The worst

part was October, November, when businesses really battened down the

hatches, mainly because they were worried about the eurozone. Now,

there are tentative signs that the storm cloud is moving away. Granada,

and companies like them, are keen to explore new markets, design new

products, and above all, feel positive. They are the best hope

for UK manufacturing. Can the state help foster that? There's a lot of

businesses out there which are looking to government to help them

get over the hurdle of diversifying, getting into new industries. There

is also an area of lethargy in British manufacturing - you have to

get out there and, to a certain extent, do-it-yourself. There is

plenty of work out there, you have just got to go and get it, it is

out there. The question that should be rattling politicians is, is the

help they are actually offering what firms actually need? Is the

government responding quickly enough in a rapidly changing

economic landscape? So, is the Government doing the right thing

for British business, to rebalance the economy? We are joined by the

head of Isuzu Trucks UK, Nikki King, and we are also joined by a former

science minister, from the last Labour government, Lord Drayson,

who now runs his own company. How much help should the Government

give to manufacturing? The state needs to recognise that

manufacturing has to go a lot faster, to compensate for the

shrinking public sector, and the shrinking financial sector. We

already have a strong manufacturing sector, but it needs to do even

better. Should it be doing so more on its own, that's the point? Does

it come back to the question about picking winners, which has always

been dangerous, for the Government, to say, we're going to invest in

this car manufacturer, it is going to create such and such a number of

jobs. No government should pick winners, but the Government should

be identifying, what other things which are stopping growth, and what

can government do to remove those? One of the most important right now

is the need for investment. We have an opportunity to capitalise on the

strong growth which we are seeing in certain sectors, but it is being

held back by a lack of finance. That finance is needed to invest in

reedack, to invest in plants, which the companies need. The banks are

not providing enough financed a manufacturing business. This needs

to be addressed quite urgently. Do you agree with that, that the

investment should come in some form or another from the government, if

the banks are not going to provide it? Yes, absolutely, I think the

government ought to be offering guarantees at least to businesses.

It is a big issue not just in manufacturing, but overall call for

-- but overall. It is a fact of life that the banks are not lending

money. But how do you pick those businesses? It is such a dangerous

game, isn't it, for governments? think we should have a balanced

economy, we should be helping everybody. There's strong signs of

lots of people starting small businesses, it is an overall

situation, but the Government has to grasp. But should we go for the

export-led recovery? Absolutely, we know where the growth opportunities

are, we know that countries like Brazil and China are growing fast,

and we have a good idea of what those countries want, so we can

look at the sectors which the UK has real competitive advantage in,

and say, if we invest in those sectors, provide the investment

that is needed, those sectors can win for us. I agree with the

principle, but having dealt for many years with the country 6,000

miles away, I know that to grow businesses overseas takes a long

time. It is a long-term strategy. You do not just suddenly get up one

morning and say, I'm going to sell to Brazil. You have to develop

links, partnerships, trust, all of these things. It takes a bit longer

than just having a weak pound for a while. But the Government can also

do things in small ways, which make a big difference. In my sector,

high-performance engineering, motor sport, the UK leads the world, but

we have a real shortage in skilled engineers, particularly systems

engineers. Where do you get them from? So, we need more people

studying these subjects at university. Frankly, the

universities need to be directed by the Government to put on the

courses that industry needs. We have this tragedy of youth

unemployment at the moment. I graduated during a recession in the

1980s, I know what it is like. I was lucky enough to study advanced

manufacturing, and I have had a successful career. We do not train

enough people in Advanced Manufacturing Technologies, and not

enough young people know that there are really good job opportunities

for them in these areas. But it comes back to the issue of

investment, doesn't it? Yes, and again, it is long-term investment.

So, is it still the key to the recovery? It is not necessarily

about spending more money, it is sometimes about shifting resources

from one area to another. For example, that could mean

identifying those courses, in pharmaceuticals, another great

success story for UK manufacturing, there is a shortage of

pharmacologists. So, universities need to train more, there are jobs

for those people. Thank you both very much. So, we're back from

recess, and we have got a packed week ahead. In a moment I will be

joined by two of the brightest and best from Fleet Street. First, we

can take a look at what we can expect this week. European finance

ministers are meeting today to discuss the bail-out Greece needs

to stave off bankruptcy. Some have doubted whether the deal will be

enough to keep the country in the euro. On Wednesday, Labour are

holding an opposition day debate on the NHS reforms. The debate will

centre on the publication of the NHS Risk Register & Report. And

following the news that News International will be publishing a

Sun on Sunday, we have found out that it will be published this

Sunday. I think you can just see the sun over their shoulder. Let's

get a little response to the news, first of all, from Craig Woodhouse.

The timing is interesting, for the launch of this new newspaper?

it was only Friday when Rupert Murdoch said there would be a Sun

on Sunday very soon, I don't think anybody thought that would mean a

week on Sunday. But it has certainly centre bars around Fleet

Street, at a time when we're feeling battered and bruised. -- it

has certainly sent a buzz around Fleet Street. I have to say, I

thought it was a bit cheeky on the part of Rupert Murdoch, just when

some senior journalists are being investigated by the police, he

comes in and announces, Right, far from hiding away, we're going to

come up with something special, which we were not expecting. You

have to hand it to him, amazing. is not holding back. Let's talk

about the health reforms. You have written today, Jackie Ashley, that

the bill is no longer really functioning, because it has had the

guts ripped out of it. But we have heard that there are more than 200

new commissioning groups in England, these reforms are happening anyway,

aren't they? They are, but I would argue it is not too late to stop it.

There is a sense of, we have made a mess of it, but we're going to

carry on and make a worse mess of it. That is a great pity, I think.

There are too many doctors, and lots of other people, who should be

coming to this summit today, one not. If it is going to work, you

have to carry the medical profession with you. That's not to

mention the patients, who do not seem to have a voice in this.

They spent so long in opposition trying to convince people that the

NHS would be safe in Tory hands and Labour have quite rightly jumped on

this and every day with a negative headline is another day the voters

will think, can we trust the Tories with the NHS? That could be fatal

for the next election. Labour think they're on top of this issue and

gaining ground but there are problems from the Liberal Democrats

still. Simon Hughes effectively said that Andrew Lansley should go

and the Lib Dems have their conference coming up where there

will be calls to vote against part of the bill. Last year's Liberal

Democrats' spring conference was dominated by this issue, it would

surely Williams leading the charge, and I think we will get even more

on this issue, but it seems to beat the All wrong way round to

reshuffle Andrew Lansley after the Bill has been passed. Andrew

Lansley should be reshuffled right now and somebody else can at least

explain it better and except some of the amendments passed in the

Lords and make this Bill a lot better. Moving on to their health

of Ed Miliband's leadership. This seems to be Ed Balls's pre-Budget

salvo on tax cuts. Economics aside, is this a clever wheeze in terms of

trying to allow himself to the Tory Right and Lib Dems of raising the

tax threshold at the same time? thought Ed Balls's intervention was

fascinating. A lot of what he has already been saying he freshened up,

and then allied with the Lib Dem call for the �10,000 income tax

threshold. The question is, with people see him already have such a

political animal and say, this is Ed Balls using politics but would

it be good for the economy? What do you think? With heat and George

Osborne to go for these tax cuts -- will he tempt George Osborne?

will be difficult for George Osborne to do nothing because the

argument everybody has put to him is without tax cuts, there will be

no growth. Growth is the big worry. The Tory Right are calling for the

50 pence tax rate to come down well made that and the Lib Dems are

calling for more help from the bottom but I would be surprised if

he did not do something. Thank you. Joining us for the next half hour

or so to look forward to the political week is our panel of MPs,

the Liberal Democrat, John Pugh. Labour's Theresa Pearce and the

Conservative, Gavin Barwell. Welcome. On this call for early tax

cuts, what do you think? The Tory party have always called for tax

cuts. Unfunded tax cuts are not the right way to go. If we were to put

Borodin up even further, that could have serious consequences for

interest rates but I think there is a case if we can find a way of

making changes to the tax system or other savings or a tax cut to help

the economy and personally, my opinion is the priority should be

those in work on middle and low incomes. Which bit of good balls's

proposals -- Ed Balls? Would you target it directly? The coalition

agreement has a clear commitment... Not now. The problem is Ed Balls is

making these suggestions were that any idea of how they will be paid

for. -- without any idea. Yes, tax cuts are not desirable if you have

to borrow more. Labour's five point plan has been set out a number of

times. We should be looking at VAT and collecting tax that is due.

Rangers Football Club 040 it million pounds in tax. That is what

we should be doing -- �48 million. Would you be happy to increase

borrowing in order to have tax cuts? No, I don't think we should

be increasing borrowing. You have a Labour MP who does not think there

should be increased borrowing. Where would you make the cut

squares that the Chancellor would have to look at how to arrange

things. Whether there are changes to make him the tax system to make

it their wrath. I want to see people on low to middle income has

given a helping hand -- make it Sarah. We don't know if George

Osborne has the head room to make any of these changes. It is

certainly highly desirable that he does because it will boost consumer

demand. Because you think all austerity measures have gone too

far? Economics is an art and George Osborne is good at that. He needs

to make the relevant adjustments in the right way. We don't need to be

too bothered about loss of face, we need to get it right. But you agree

with Nick Clegg that raising threshold now...? That is crucial.

It is the one lever you can push which will have a definite effect

on demand and will feed through into growth. What about mansion

tax? I think we should look at that. The research on that is very poor.

I think it would be highly desirable, to. Let's move to Greece.

Eurozone finance ministers are meeting today and the big question

is whether or not to authorise a second bailout for Greece worth 130

billion euros. The deal follows months of wrangling, with the Greek

parliament agreeing to ever tougher austerity measures and private

holders of Greek debt effectively being forced to accept a 70% write-

down. On the Sunday Politics yesterday, the Greek Minister for

International Economic Relations, Constantine Papadopoulos, told

Andrew Neil that Greece was committed to achieving its debt

targets but it involved making major sacrifices. It has come to

the crunch and don't underestimate what we did under the first

memorandum. A lot of things were done but a lot more needs to be

done. There is so much to do, it would be unrealistic to expect

things to happen in a matter of two years. If it wasn't for the

pressure from the financial markets, what we are aiming for would

normally take something like five or ten years. That is how ambitious

the programme Mears. But we are forced to do it in a much shorter

space of time. The pain on the Greek economy. Do you trust the

Greeks to make these reforms? sceptical about happy endings. I

think it is quite likely that Greece will drop out of the

eurozone and there needs to be a mechanism for doing that without

damaging the other members. Greece is a drama between austerity and

democracy. Austerity being demanded by the world and the people not

have the with what they need to do. Because they don't think they will

ever be competitive again? Because they are in between a rock and hard

place. Should they stay or go? is a really difficult question and

it needs to be a problem for the whole of the eurozone. There needs

to be collective responsibility. I don't think the Germans are playing

a long as they should do. My concern, it is like a giant game of

gender. You pull one bit out and everything falls down. The eurozone

is totally important to the UK recovery so it is something we need

to look at carefully. It is a single currency. We have collective

responsibility. It sounds like you would rather Greece stays in the

eurozone. I don't think there is a simple answer, that is the problem.

The least worst option is what we are looking at now. Is it in terms

of Britain? George Osborne has made a lot of the fact that our fortunes

have been as a result of what has gone on in the eurozone? Labour

disagrees with that to some extent. Would it make a big difference if

Greece went? The best option for the UK is a resolution.

resolution is the bail-out. seems to me that the other members

of the eurozone have dragged their feet about whether they are willing

to provide the money because they are not convinced about the Greek's

government's ability to repay. I was not in favour of Britain

joining the single currency. I think the there is a problem with

people having different interest rates with the same currency but it

has to stop dragging on. There are elections coming up in April and

that is the problem. Are you happy that Britain has contributed to the

bail-out? We don't know that yet. The IMF is there to help countries,

not the currency. But there is a grey area. Are you in principle

happy with that? I think it is right for the IMF to help countries

that are in need of assistance. The first responsibility has to be with

the eurozone, the he's ECB, I think -- and the ECB. You are looking at

potentially a 20% fall in living standards for degrees, twice what

this country went through in the Great Depression -- in Greece. I

think Parliament will want to look at... This is politically

unbelievable in the UK context. Ruling out joining the euro ever?

don't think it is on the distant horizon at the moment. I think that

eurozone needs to spend a fair amount of time sorting itself out.

The ground rules are not there. Or working effectively. Time to move

Now according to at least one newspaper this weekend, the

Education Secretary Michael Gove is planning to ban parents in England

from taking their children out of school during term time to go on

holiday. At the moment, head- teachers have some discretion in

this area and often let families sneak off for a couple of weeks.

But ministers don't like the effect this all has on overall attendance

rates. Russell Hobby, General Secretary of the National

Association of Head Teachers, joins us now from Brighton. What do you

think of the idea from Michael Gove? Although I sympathise with

people in a holiday crisis, education is more precious so I do

think we need to do something serious to limit term-time holidays.

A child has about 10 days a year off sick leave. If they take

another 10 days off on holiday they have lost another 10 days of

education and that is very hard to get back. Should it be that Dick

tapped? Should it be up to head teachers themselves to make that

decision was map we need to be very clear that it is not acceptable and

I think it is a social issue rather than the choice of head teachers.

There are what occasions where for important reasons, such as service

personnel coming back, where you might want to grant that but there

needs to be a general realisation that you take holidays in the

holiday period. Parents would argue that we know that costs rocket in

the school holidays and it seems to be extremely unfair and you may be

talking about depriving some families off a break of any sort

for the sake of a few days. Does it really have that much impact on

their learning? Not two days but when it becomes a persistent habit

and there of families that persistently take their holidays

during term-time, including skiing trips and that sort of thing. Then

I think we need to stop that. you not think it is ironic when the

government is advocating free schools, free to put forward their

own curriculum, so shouldn't they be free to decide whether they

allow children to go on holiday in term time? They should be free to

decide when their holiday periods should be and there is a lot to be

done in terms of looking at the structure of our holidays. It's

different areas had holidays at different times, that would even it

out. If we had more holidays for shorter durations, that would take

the pressure off the summer holiday, and I think that is what we should

do. Russell Hobby, stay with us. That is interesting. Is it time to

shake up the system and say, let's have holidays at different times?

Parents want holidays at predictable times. I used to be a

teacher and head teachers put downward pressure on parents who

want to take holidays when the schools do not want them to. This

has happened for a long time. But there are extenuating circumstances

and there is the schizophrenia in Michael's attitude. At one stage he

says head teachers need discretion, and then he is ending discretion in

a sense. That seems wholly inconsistent. You can't just into

be when you want to. That is the point. We have to see the detail.

There is an inconsistency here, isn't there? As Russell said, there

is a problem with some families persistently taking children out of

school. I imagine the Secretary of State is trying to send a clear

message that it is not acceptable. We have already got the clear

message, it has been around for generations. The effect on

education is marginal, to be absolutely frank. The discretion of

Head Teachers is an important aspect of the education system.

am a parent, so I have sympathy, in terms of the cost of holidays. Just

a couple of days is marginal, but you will know, if you look at the

figures, within a families, there are some families for whom it is

much more than a couple of days. you agree with the idea of a ban?

No, I think it should be up to individual schools and head

teachers. Although educationally it may not have a huge effect, I think

it has a subliminal effect on children, about respecting the

rules of the school. I think it is important for them to learn to

respect teachers. This is why head teachers in general are very severe

on this. But they do allow it, don't they? Well, they have to, in

certain circumstances. I do not know how much effect it might have

on lessons, on making sure that everybody is keeping up... If there

were an absolute ban, do we expect that the attendance officer will be

going round to people's houses? I don't think these things have been

thought through. Do you think he should drop the idea? I want to see

the detail first, but I think we are not talking about a ban, we're

talking about headteachers... I think we are. Well, my

understanding was that it would actually be unauthorised absence.

Well, that is a ban, effectively. think there is an issue in terms of

pupil attendance at schools, so I think Secretary of State is right

to look at the issue. What about this issue of changing the holidays,

this idea that we have so many weeks over the summer, is that

practical, should the holidays be rearranged? I think if holidays

were shorter, more spread out, it would be better, but what I would

not want to see is different schools having different holiday

periods, because some families have children at different schools, and

that would be a nightmare. Yes, would it not be very difficult to

administrate that idea of having a whole range of holidays, it would

have to be consistent across the country, wouldn't it? It would have

to become law within a local authority area. That would be the

main thing, particularly if you have got one child at primary, and

another at secondary. Beyond that, there is room for some variation

across the country, I think. Members of parliament have just had

a recess which is timed to fit in with the school holidays, for those

who have got children. So, the News Of The World is dead, long live the

Sun on Sunday. But with police investigations and golfing the

operations of the newspaper, can the new publication restore

fortunes and reputations? Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair's former

Director of Communications, thinks the new Sun on Sunday might

struggle. I think it is fair to make the case that the closure of

the News Of The World came at a moment of panic. I don't know the

extent to which the proper preparation for the launch of a new

Sunday title has been done. If it has been put together in a rush,

then I suspect it will not be a success. In any event, they cannot

assume that the daily Sun readers will automatically by the paper on

a Sunday, and nor can they assume that former News of the World

readers will automatically buy this one. I am joined now by the

spokesman for the Hacked Off campaign. I think the question is

not whether there is another Sunday paper, good luck to any new entrant

into the Sunday market, it is a free market, and Mr Murdoch is

entitled to publish a paper in this country, the question is whether

the standards will be improved, whether or not News International,

and the Sun in particular, has understood what is acceptable and

what is not. It is not clear that that's the case, judging from

recent events. Saying that, we have had all the revelations, it has

been extremely expensive and embarrassing, the News Of The World

closed, we have got the Leveson Inquiry - do you not have the faith

that they will have learnt lessons from it? I'm fairly confident that

they will not hack phones, but there is more to it than that. News

International titles, not just the News of the World, were mentioned

in the evidence of industrial scale data mining by many of the national

newspapers, which was uncovered around 2002. News International, in

their evidence to the Leveson Inquiry, have not accepted what the

Information Commissioner says, that that was unlawful activity, the

procuring of that information - mobile phone numbers, friends and

family numbers, accessing vehicle registration numbers at the DVLA -

they have not accepted that it was unlawful. So it is not clear that

News International have yet understood the difference between

lawful and ethical conduct as journalists and unlawful or

unethical conduct. And it is the same with the police inquiry.

Nobody is arguing that sources should be protected when they're

whistle blowers, but there was a huge difference between a public

official who was a whistleblower, and someone in the police force

who's paid a retainer of �10,000 a year to systematically give

information to a newspaper. Surely the test will be public opinion,

whether people buy the paper or not. At has never been an effective test

of whether the secret news- gathering methods used by

newspapers are lawful, because of the News Of The World -- because we

now know what was going on at the News of the World. I don't think

anybody is arguing that if people buy it, anything goes. No, we need

to make sure that not only the content, which I'm sure will be as

edgy as the Sun, and there is nothing wrong with that, complies

with the code, but at the same time, that News International

demonstrates that it has understood what being ethical means. Will you

buy the paper? Actually, I do buy papers which are personally

disagree with, to educate myself. So, yes, I will see what it is like.

What about in your area, John Pugh, will people be buying it? I am from

the Lancashire area, and very few people by the Sun at all. But I

would like to see Merga producing a newspaper which is a heck of a lot

better than the Sun has been. you think people will buy it in

your area? There is very little chance, given the history of the

Sun and Hillsborough. Do you welcome this new publication?

scandal we have had, and the Leveson Inquiry, have opened up

some very important issues, but the tabloid newspapers are a very

important part of the political process, in terms of holding the

politicians to account, and I think at its best, the Sun can be a

strong voice for hard-working people. Incidentally, this is not

just an issue for News International. But the point is,

there will be no great test of whether or not they have learned

those lessons. That's right. It is not a new newspaper we need, it is

a new culture. The culture of any newspaper comes from the top, and

it remains to be seen whether that has changed. So, has it come too

early, do you think? I think it has, and this is not a new newspaper,

really, it is just an extra edition of the Sun, on a Sunday. Alastair

Campbell alluded to the fact that newspapers running six days a week

are not always successful, so, why launch it now? That is a commercial

decision for News International, it is a free market. But the test is

whether or not we see an improvement in journalistic

standards. I think it is important, this cannot be just about News

International producing another version of the News Of The World. I

think there would be deep distaste from the public if that happens. If,

on the other hand, it emerges as something completely different, a

better newspaper, then I think people will appreciate that. Do you

have faith that the Press Complaints commission, with its new

head, will be more effective? particularly, no. We will have to

see. I think there is a widespread cynicism on this, about self-

regulation in general. I think we will just have to see what happens.

But the ball is in the newspapers' court. People said the Press

Complaints commission did not do the job it was supposed to do

effectively - will it be any different this time? I am cynical

about that, I think we need something completely independent of

the press. As the public, we are regulators, if you do not like a

newspaper, do not buy it. We all have a part to play in this.

Whitney Houston died, how many extra editions were put on that

morning. We buy things which are salacious and unpleasant, and we

have to look to ourselves, we get the press we deserve some times.

The press are now in the media spotlight themselves, and it is the

media who will keep them honest. Are you going to buy it on Sunday?

No, I will probably look at their online content. That's cheating! I

do not know how much it will cost. Will you buy it? I doubt it, it

will probably be behind a firewall. I do not buy Sunday newspapers,

life is too short. Why not? They fill the house, and I never get

round to reading them. You said you hoped it would be a success - do

you think it will be? I think the Sun and the News Of The World, at

their best, performed a very important role. They broke some

important stories, as well as the very and six -- as well as the

unacceptable things which went on. So in that sense, I hope it is a

success, yes. But do you think with the Leveson Inquiry going on, has

the whole story moved on, will people forget about this? You would

hope that the Leveson Inquiry will set a new standard for journalism.

It might not be for another year or so. It needs to be a change in

culture, and that culture comes from the top. But a new newspaper,

something which keeps journalists in work, I welcome it. Thank you