17/04/2012 Daily Politics


17/04/2012

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 17/04/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Good afternoon and welcome to the Daily Politics. Grannies, pasties,

:00:43.:00:45.

charities and conservatories - George Osborne's Budget has turned

:00:45.:00:51.

into a nightmare for the coalition. Do the Government have an economic

:00:51.:00:59.

story that doesn't end in tax? And monkey business or a way to

:00:59.:01:02.

reinvigorate local democracy? We'll discuss what directly elected

:01:02.:01:05.

mayors would mean for the cities about to hold a referendum on

:01:05.:01:08.

introducing them. Nato forces are preparing to

:01:08.:01:10.

withdraw from Afghanistan - even amidst continuing attacks from the

:01:11.:01:17.

Taliban. Has our involvement there threatened the stability of the

:01:17.:01:19.

whole region? And it's not been a great couple of

:01:19.:01:23.

weeks for the Government - so do they suffer from a lack of big

:01:23.:01:26.

political beasts? I'll be asking a man who was perhaps the original

:01:26.:01:30.

big beast. All that and more in the next hour.

:01:30.:01:33.

And here he is, Lord Heseltine, with us for the whole programme

:01:33.:01:40.

today. Welcome. If you have any thoughts or comments on anything

:01:40.:01:42.

we're discussing then you can send them to us [email protected],

:01:43.:01:52.

or tweet your comments using the Let's start with the eurozone.

:01:52.:01:55.

Fears are growing that Spain may need a big bail-out as the cost of

:01:56.:01:58.

government borrowing on ten-year bonds has hit over 6% for the first

:01:59.:02:01.

time this year. The figure brings Spain closer to the 7% borrowing

:02:02.:02:05.

cost that was seen as the tipping point for Greece and Ireland. But

:02:05.:02:09.

with a �1 trillion euro economy, many are asking if Spain would, in

:02:09.:02:12.

fact, be too big to save. Markets analyst, Louise Cooper, joins us

:02:12.:02:20.

now. Thank you. Can those bond yields be brought down in any

:02:20.:02:28.

realistic hope? Well... We have had massive amounts of ECB buying of

:02:28.:02:32.

bombs, the peripheral country bonds. One could say that the bonds may be

:02:32.:02:38.

hired it wasn't for the ECB buying. Today, Spanish borrowing costs have

:02:38.:02:45.

come down. The 10 years Spanish bond got up to over 6%, today it is

:02:45.:02:51.

about 5.9%. We have had a bit of a rally. If it was really crunch time,

:02:51.:02:57.

it would be more like seven, 7.5%. We are not at crunch time. That is

:02:57.:03:01.

the most important thing to say, for the time being. How worried

:03:01.:03:06.

should we be? Even if we are not at crunch time, it sounds like we are

:03:06.:03:10.

perilously close. We are getting close. The Spanish government tried

:03:11.:03:18.

to sell short dated Dec today. When -- short-dated debt. When

:03:19.:03:24.

government has problems financing bills, they sell short dated dead.

:03:24.:03:29.

They have had to pay double the interest rate that they were paying

:03:29.:03:34.

only a month ago -- short-dated debt. Spain's test comes on

:03:34.:03:38.

Thursday when they have to issue 10 year debt, let's see how the

:03:38.:03:41.

auction goes. The government has said it is committed to making

:03:42.:03:46.

major budget cuts, even though it admits it is in a recession. Is

:03:46.:03:49.

that going to convince the financial markets that Spain can

:03:49.:03:54.

reach its targets? The key is growth, like in the UK. Spain is

:03:54.:04:00.

expected to contract about 1.7% this year. My view is that

:04:00.:04:04.

austerity, which is what they are imposing, will make the growth

:04:04.:04:10.

forecast difficult. As you start to see, in the second quarter, gross

:04:10.:04:14.

numbers weakening, you get to see economists start revisiting the

:04:14.:04:19.

budget figures, the deficit numbers. What I fear is come late summer,

:04:19.:04:24.

when we have seven quarter GDP, when the slowdown in the economy is

:04:24.:04:29.

really becoming apparent thanks to fiscal austerity, you start to see

:04:29.:04:33.

economists take red pens to the government's financial position,

:04:33.:04:38.

and that is when it could all fall apart, in a really dramatic way.

:04:38.:04:45.

it falls apart and Spain goes, does have the euro go as well?

:04:45.:04:50.

problem for Spain is bailing out Greece, Portugal and Ireland, they

:04:50.:04:55.

are pretty small economies. Spain is not. Spain is almost, not quite,

:04:55.:05:00.

but almost too big to solve, too big to bail out. The latest news we

:05:00.:05:04.

have from the bail-out funds is they are not large enough. The

:05:04.:05:08.

permanent bail-out fund has not been implemented. It is not quite

:05:08.:05:12.

Italy in terms of the size of the country, but it is a significantly

:05:12.:05:18.

bigger challenge than Greece, Portugal and Ireland. Don't forget,

:05:18.:05:25.

we have a property crisis in Spain, possibly just as big as Ireland. It

:05:25.:05:30.

hasn't really blown up yet, but it will do. Thank you very much.

:05:30.:05:34.

Michael Heseltine, it sounds as if the pressure on Spain is going to

:05:34.:05:38.

be extremely difficult to reduce, or diminish in the coming months.

:05:38.:05:43.

Some people have said that the murders and could kill the patient.

:05:43.:05:49.

Do you see it in those apocalyptic terms -- of the medicine could kill

:05:49.:05:55.

the patient. I think that this analysis we have just heard has

:05:55.:05:59.

been current and well articulated now, for a very significant period

:05:59.:06:05.

of time. Of course, there is a lot in it. You can't possibly say, you

:06:05.:06:11.

are wrong. This is a crisis. The last thing that the people who

:06:11.:06:17.

created the euro wanted. But against this, you have to balance

:06:17.:06:22.

the determination of France and Germany to hold the thing together.

:06:22.:06:28.

Is that determination not pointless? People have made even

:06:28.:06:33.

more dramatic forecasts than you are implying. The argument that you

:06:33.:06:37.

don't hear so much is the catastrophic effect on Germany of

:06:38.:06:46.

the euro going. What has happened with the euro phenomenon, it has

:06:47.:06:52.

had a very significant devaluation. If you were to go back to the

:06:52.:06:56.

Deutschmark in some form, there would be a significant appreciation

:06:56.:07:00.

in the German currency and a very serious threat to their export

:07:00.:07:05.

markets. You have the vision of Europe, which is vital to them, but

:07:05.:07:11.

you also have the economic freer of the consequences of the euro going.

:07:11.:07:15.

Just before we go on, I think I have to ask you to turn off your

:07:15.:07:22.

phone. They say you can hear it in the gallery. It is turned off.

:07:22.:07:26.

will try again. Maybe if it is further away from the microphone,

:07:26.:07:34.

it won't vibrate. You have two situations, neither of which are

:07:34.:07:39.

desirable. In the meantime, the question arises, how much money

:07:39.:07:43.

should the European Central Bank, or other economies, be putting into

:07:43.:07:47.

what some people describe as a failed project? People who are

:07:47.:07:52.

putting the money in in the main don't regard it as a failed project.

:07:52.:07:56.

You are putting a eurosceptic view. If you're sitting on the continent,

:07:56.:08:04.

you would see this as a vision born of the war processes that have

:08:04.:08:09.

wrecked Europe so often. They are going to cling on to this. Britain

:08:09.:08:13.

has this very difficult approach, where we were never convinced, we

:08:13.:08:17.

didn't want to join, we had to join because circumstances overwhelmed

:08:17.:08:23.

us. And we have been on the touchline ever since. The moment

:08:23.:08:28.

anything goes wrong, all of the headlines scream euro crisis, euro

:08:28.:08:32.

collapse, euro over. They are not the same headlines on the continent

:08:32.:08:36.

of Europe. You don't think Britain should still join the euro, or do

:08:36.:08:43.

you? I think we will. My guess is it will survive, and in the future,

:08:43.:08:51.

not this week, or next year, we will do so. The whole process of

:08:51.:08:55.

European isation, we have resisted and failed at every turn. If you

:08:55.:08:59.

look at the history of it, we were asked to lead it and we refused, at

:08:59.:09:06.

the Messina conference, we said no. We thought we could compete, we are

:09:06.:09:11.

what, pray -- we would create the European Free Trade Area. That has

:09:11.:09:14.

been absorbed by the European Community. Every time we have had

:09:14.:09:18.

these arguments, it has always turned out to be unworkable from

:09:18.:09:23.

our point of view. The big problem suggested by Louise Cooper is this

:09:23.:09:27.

lack of growth. How can there be lack of growth in an economy like

:09:27.:09:32.

Spain's, when they are carrying out, a bit like Greece and Ireland,

:09:32.:09:37.

severe austerity. But look at the UK. We are carrying out massive

:09:37.:09:42.

austerity. Not to the same extent. But it is still big and the growth

:09:42.:09:46.

rates are very small. But we are not in the euro. So you could argue,

:09:46.:09:49.

we have the ability to devalue the currency, which is what we have

:09:49.:09:56.

done, and it hasn't seriously helped, yet. We have massive

:09:56.:10:04.

indebtedness in this country, as parts of the eurozone. And yet, the

:10:04.:10:08.

same sort of escape hatch, the devaluation process, which is what

:10:08.:10:14.

people say Spain should do, hasn't really help us. We will talk about

:10:14.:10:22.

the budget shortly. Before that, it's time for our quiz. The

:10:22.:10:24.

question for today is, which biscuit has Boris Johnson compared

:10:24.:10:27.

himself to? Was it Jammie Dodger, a custard cream, a chocolate

:10:27.:10:31.

digestive or a bourbon biscuit? At the end of the show, Michael will

:10:31.:10:35.

give us the correct answer. This one's just for fun - no prizes, I'm

:10:35.:10:37.

afraid. Now, George Osborne delivered his

:10:38.:10:41.

Budget nearly four weeks ago, but it seems to have caused no end of

:10:41.:10:45.

trouble over the last month. Indeed, the Budget has become a bit of a

:10:46.:10:51.

nightmare for the Government. Yesterday, the Prime Minister

:10:52.:10:54.

signalled a partial climb-down over plans for what's been dubbed a

:10:54.:11:01.

charity tax. The Budget proposed a cap on tax reliefs, including those

:11:01.:11:04.

on charitable donations, at �50,000 or 25% of a person's income,

:11:04.:11:08.

whichever is highest. But the PM said yesterday these plans could be

:11:08.:11:10.

altered following a consultation. The Prime Minister has also

:11:10.:11:14.

intervened on the so-called conservatory tax. He's blocked the

:11:14.:11:15.

compulsory elements of the Government's green deal, which

:11:16.:11:18.

would have forced homeowners to make their homes more energy

:11:18.:11:21.

efficient if they were carrying out home improvements, such as building

:11:21.:11:25.

an extension. All this comes after the damaging rows about the so-

:11:25.:11:29.

called granny tax - the move to end some tax reliefs for pensioners -

:11:29.:11:32.

and the so-called pasty tax, which arose from a desire to close the

:11:32.:11:37.

VAT loophole on hot takeaway food. Well, the issue of charitable tax

:11:37.:11:45.

relief was the subject of sharp exchanges in the Commons yesterday.

:11:45.:11:49.

Many charities, including the Suffolk foundation, estimate that

:11:49.:11:54.

this cap on tax reliefs will lead to a 20% reduction in their

:11:54.:11:57.

charitable donations. I wonder if the Chief Secretary could tell us

:11:57.:12:01.

whether or not he would consider exempting charitable donations to

:12:01.:12:05.

UK charities. It would be comparatively inexpensive and would

:12:06.:12:10.

be terribly important to the charitable sector. I think it is

:12:10.:12:14.

important for the house to be clear as to what is being proposed. What

:12:14.:12:20.

we are proposing is a limit on the currently uncapped tax reliefs, a

:12:20.:12:25.

limit at �50,000, or a court of someone's income, whichever is the

:12:25.:12:30.

higher. -- a quarter. Someone who is earning �10 million a year can

:12:30.:12:34.

still receive tax relief on donations of �2.5 million to

:12:34.:12:40.

charity each and every year. But as I say, we are going to talk to

:12:40.:12:44.

philanthropists and charities about this. Those discussions are going

:12:44.:12:51.

on. It is being reported that the government are doing a U-turn and

:12:51.:12:54.

perhaps we may get clarification from the Secretary, if he is

:12:54.:12:58.

bothering to listen to anything this afternoon, of whether there is

:12:58.:13:05.

a U-turn. Can the Chief Secretary confirmed that there is a U-turn on

:13:05.:13:07.

the charity's tax relief? The government doesn't seem to know

:13:07.:13:10.

what is going on, the Prime Minister doesn't seem to know what

:13:10.:13:13.

is going on and we have no clarification in the House this

:13:13.:13:17.

afternoon. In the studio with me now are the

:13:17.:13:19.

Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Rachel Reeves - we saw

:13:19.:13:22.

her talking just there - and the Conservative MP, Harriet Baldwin.

:13:22.:13:25.

Lord Heseltine is still with, us of course. Can I start with you,

:13:26.:13:31.

Harriet Baldwin? It looks as if we are in for a series of U-turns.

:13:31.:13:35.

Let's start with the charity tax relief, the hint is it is going to

:13:35.:13:39.

be altered, they are going to have this consultation, so they are

:13:39.:13:43.

going to back down? It was always in the Red Book that these measures

:13:43.:13:48.

would be out for consultation. They are due to come into force for 2013.

:13:48.:13:53.

I think everyone wants to really encourage philanthropy. I think the

:13:53.:13:57.

point that the Chancellor is trying to make with these limits is, is it

:13:57.:14:01.

right for a philanthropist to be able to pay zero tax in any given

:14:01.:14:07.

year? Why, when the rest of us play the PAYE and it goes to general

:14:07.:14:11.

taxation, should it be a special case for someone who is very rich

:14:11.:14:15.

to build a wing of the Royal Opera House in their men, and not pay any

:14:15.:14:21.

tax that year, subsidised by the rest of us -- in their name. Do you

:14:21.:14:26.

think the cap is going to be moved? There were remarks about modelling

:14:26.:14:29.

this on the American approach. I think it is incredibly important

:14:29.:14:33.

that in this consultation that was announced at the time of the Budget,

:14:33.:14:37.

that all the charities that benefit from the generous philanthropists

:14:37.:14:42.

in this country continue to have the reassurance... But they are not

:14:42.:14:47.

reassured, they have come out one after the other.... The tax breaks

:14:47.:14:51.

we will continue to give them. I think there has been a certain

:14:51.:15:00.

amount of exaggeration. We are You can still give �1 million to

:15:00.:15:06.

charity if you make four million pounds. Don't you need to have a

:15:06.:15:10.

consultation before the policy is announced and the savings are

:15:10.:15:13.

scored in the Budget? It is a shambolic way to make policy. You

:15:13.:15:17.

have got a government that announced something in the Budget

:15:17.:15:20.

because they are trying to look at ways to raise money, because they

:15:20.:15:27.

have given a �40,000 tax cut to millionaires. They are trying to

:15:27.:15:30.

make up the difference but they have done it in a way that

:15:30.:15:34.

penalises older people, who are losing their tax allowance, and

:15:34.:15:37.

penalising charities. Do you support the principle of clamping

:15:37.:15:45.

down on tax reliefs? Absolute belief. Including charitable

:15:45.:15:52.

donations. -- absolutely. We cut down on tax avoidance to the tune

:15:52.:15:55.

of CoP million pounds. The tax avoidance measures in this Budget

:15:55.:16:05.
:16:05.:16:07.

But to clampdown on tax reliefs? Clampdown on tax avoidance, but

:16:07.:16:11.

giving money to Macmillan Nurses, the National Trust for hospices is

:16:11.:16:15.

very different from avoiding taxes. We should be encouraging people who

:16:15.:16:20.

want to give money to importance charities that do important work.

:16:20.:16:23.

If the government go-ahead with their proposals, the losers are not

:16:23.:16:27.

going to be multi-millionaires. The losers are going to be the

:16:27.:16:31.

charities and the vulnerable people, whether you have cancer and rely on

:16:31.:16:35.

Macmillan nurses, people in the developing world who rely on the

:16:35.:16:40.

help of Oxfam. When Ed Miliband was Minister for the third sector, he

:16:40.:16:44.

said tax breaks could boost charities by up to �600 million.

:16:44.:16:48.

You say you want to clamp down on that, but he was encouraging people

:16:48.:16:52.

to use them. There is a big difference between tax avoidance by

:16:52.:16:57.

converting income into capital, by moving tax from one year to another,

:16:57.:17:01.

by setting offshore accounts. That is different from giving to

:17:01.:17:05.

charities, and the Government have got very muddled in their thinking.

:17:05.:17:09.

You have been criticised from almost every quarter over this

:17:09.:17:14.

policy. It is really important that the message gets across that giving

:17:14.:17:18.

to charity is exactly what we want to encourage, and there are

:17:18.:17:21.

generous tax breaks for that. They are not fully used by the wide

:17:21.:17:25.

majority of the population. Let's make sure that everyone is giving a

:17:25.:17:29.

lot to charity, but for those who want to use the charitable tax

:17:29.:17:32.

break to reduce their income tax, they are effectively being

:17:32.:17:36.

subsidised by everyone else and not contributing to general taxation.

:17:36.:17:40.

How has the Government handled this from its message point of view? It

:17:40.:17:47.

seems to have got rather lost in terms of policy. Yes, I think that

:17:47.:17:52.

is probably fair. It is inevitable, because what the Government is

:17:52.:17:58.

doing, amongst many other very good things in the Budget, is to attack

:17:58.:18:02.

tax evasion. We are all in favour of that. But this is tax avoidance,

:18:02.:18:09.

of course, which they are saying is perfectly legal. Well, the problem

:18:09.:18:13.

is that there is a very difficult area, and the real problem in this

:18:13.:18:17.

case is that nobody knows who the people are the one taking advantage

:18:17.:18:23.

of this, and no-one knows which charities are going to suffer.

:18:23.:18:26.

Therefore, the charity world blows up. There is no evidence that they

:18:27.:18:32.

are going to suffer. They might! But there is no evidence for it

:18:32.:18:36.

because we do not have the facts. There is evidence, because the

:18:36.:18:41.

Government have put the savings in the Budget. But they have not put

:18:41.:18:46.

in, I am sorry, figures showing which charities are going to suffer.

:18:46.:18:51.

In the Budget debate yesterday... Don't talk over each other. They

:18:51.:18:56.

said there will be savings in the proposals they have introduced.

:18:56.:19:00.

What they have not said is who is going to suffer from the savings.

:19:00.:19:04.

It flies in the face of the Government's big push for the Big

:19:04.:19:07.

Society, where it expected and encouraged people and individuals

:19:07.:19:11.

to play that part in terms of support because they do not want

:19:11.:19:15.

the state to do any more. It is a confused message. There are still

:19:15.:19:18.

very generous tax breaks for giving to charity. I would not want people

:19:18.:19:22.

to think they have articulated savings in terms of tax revenues,

:19:22.:19:25.

because that assumes every generous person will not give to charity if

:19:25.:19:31.

they do not get a tax break. �100 million, the government is saying,

:19:31.:19:36.

charities will lose out. Macmillan, hospices, Oxfam says it will cost

:19:36.:19:41.

them dearly. But they do not know, that is the point. The conservatory

:19:41.:19:45.

tax, it looks as if it has been dropped. I do not think it was ever

:19:45.:19:50.

a real threat. It was agreed in the coalition, the Liberal Democrats

:19:51.:19:54.

wanted it to be compulsory that people would be made to take on

:19:54.:19:58.

energy measures if they were fixing their boiler. Another U-turn.

:19:58.:20:01.

have never seen any substantive proposals on his. I understand

:20:01.:20:05.

there was a consultation picked up by the Daily Mail. The Green deal

:20:05.:20:15.

is a very good policy idea, where you can invest and save, pay for it

:20:15.:20:18.

through the savings on your energy bills. The granny tax, should there

:20:18.:20:23.

be a U-turn? The 24 million people who are on low or average earnings

:20:23.:20:27.

in this country to benefit from the fact that we have greatly increased,

:20:27.:20:31.

the largest increases in the personal allowance that we have

:20:31.:20:36.

ever had in history, those people ought to be strewing palm fronds of

:20:36.:20:42.

happiness, but of course what you do hear about is the fact that

:20:42.:20:47.

there is a freezing of the allowance that people... Was it

:20:48.:20:54.

right to target pensioners? I think that we recognised the fact that,

:20:54.:20:58.

in increasing the personal allowance for 24 million people,

:20:58.:21:02.

that it is right to think about civil find that and bringing

:21:02.:21:09.

everyone's tax allowance into line. -- symbol of fine. 4.4 million

:21:09.:21:12.

pensioners will be worse off, and you call it simplification? These

:21:12.:21:16.

are people who have made sacrifices in their working lives, they have

:21:16.:21:19.

put things aside for retirement, and the government will take money

:21:19.:21:25.

from them. You're not looking at the whole picture, because the

:21:25.:21:29.

state pension has been greatly strengthened. It is going up in

:21:29.:21:32.

line with inflation. Higher than the proposals we inherited from

:21:32.:21:37.

Labour, which was for average earnings. Was it a good idea?

:21:37.:21:43.

depends entirely on what the actual losses for people whose income is

:21:43.:21:47.

up at low levels, and as we have just turned, many of them have been

:21:47.:21:52.

compensated in other ways. Politically, though. Well, look,

:21:52.:21:55.

George Osborne is a very courageous Chancellor. He has a nightmare on

:21:55.:22:00.

his hands, an absolute nightmare, and everybody says, good old George,

:22:00.:22:05.

you are doing the tough things, you are absolutely right, but every

:22:05.:22:09.

proposal you make is wrong. The Labour Party, who created the mess,

:22:09.:22:14.

are having a field day, say, we would not have done this. As you

:22:14.:22:18.

said earlier... I am sorry, my own view is that you have to see what

:22:18.:22:23.

George did in his Budget. He kept his nerve, he cut corporation tax

:22:24.:22:28.

to get companies investing, he raised the thresholds for a very

:22:28.:22:32.

significant number of poorer people, and these are the bigger issues.

:22:32.:22:38.

There's one generalisation that I can make. The popular budgets are

:22:38.:22:44.

the ones that are failures. The unpopular ones are the ones, in

:22:44.:22:47.

retrospect, which are seen as good. Would you accept the government has

:22:47.:22:53.

failed to get a positive message across on his budget? To be frank,

:22:53.:22:57.

I have never known a government, in mid- term, that does not have a

:22:57.:23:04.

message crisis. From its own side. No, you say, sorry, you save from

:23:04.:23:08.

its own side, but look at its own side, analyse the motives of the

:23:08.:23:13.

people behind the government. They are not a collective group of

:23:13.:23:17.

people all saying whoopee! They are all sorts of pressure groups,

:23:17.:23:20.

subdivisions, and they are people with their own agendas. It always

:23:20.:23:25.

was like that in midterm. Do you think the message needs to move

:23:25.:23:30.

more onto the subject of growth and away from austerity and tax? All we

:23:30.:23:34.

have talked about in this is tax. When people get their pay cheques

:23:34.:23:37.

this month in April, and they benefit from the higher personal

:23:37.:23:41.

tax rates, when next year they get another higher personal tax rates,

:23:41.:23:44.

he will see people realising they have been given more money in their

:23:44.:23:49.

pockets to spend on more things, and that is important. It will

:23:49.:23:52.

transform the legacy of the Budget could Stimac it is entirely

:23:52.:23:56.

disingenuous. The Institute of Fiscal Studies show that the

:23:56.:24:00.

average family will be �511 worth of as a result of all the changes,

:24:00.:24:08.

including the tax allowance. The Ernst and Young ITEM Club yesterday

:24:08.:24:12.

forecast that the economy is going to grow by 0.4% this year, half the

:24:12.:24:15.

growth we saw last year. Nothing in his Budget will help get young

:24:15.:24:19.

people back to work, and that is what we desperately need. On the

:24:19.:24:23.

issue of sluggish growth, what can the Government to, Michael

:24:23.:24:29.

Heseltine, to win the argument? It has tried to come off austerity and

:24:29.:24:34.

go to growth. They should just call back Liam Byrne and say, what did

:24:34.:24:38.

you mean when you said to the incoming colleague, there is no

:24:38.:24:44.

money left? What he meant was any government would have had to cuts,

:24:44.:24:48.

and cuts are unpopular, and we have got to face it, there is no choice.

:24:48.:24:54.

But growth has to be the key surely, as you said for Spain. I agree with

:24:54.:25:00.

you, and I tell you that when the 2015 election comes, this

:25:00.:25:03.

government will be re-elected, either as a coalition was a Tory

:25:03.:25:07.

government, because growth will have been restored. That is what is

:25:07.:25:12.

going to happen. The forecast says 2 million people will still be

:25:12.:25:18.

unemployed, that will be the legacy. So 600,000 less than now! Thank you

:25:18.:25:21.

both for coming in. Dr Home Secretary is due to make a

:25:21.:25:25.

statement later today in the Commons Updating MPs and government

:25:25.:25:29.

efforts to deport Abu Qatada. The European Court of Human Rights has

:25:29.:25:32.

so far blocked efforts from the UK government to deport the

:25:32.:25:36.

controversial Muslim cleric. Norman Smith joins us from Parliament with

:25:36.:25:41.

the latest. What can we expect if we know what Theresa May might say?

:25:41.:25:46.

The Home Office are giving no clear guidance before and, and my

:25:46.:25:49.

expectation is that Theresa May will be able to tell MPs that there

:25:50.:25:53.

are now assurances from the Jordanians which will allow the

:25:53.:25:57.

government to begin the process of trying to deport Abu Qatada. The

:25:57.:26:00.

language I am hearing is that very good progress has been made in

:26:00.:26:05.

talks with the Jordanians. Similarly, Keith Vaz, chairman of

:26:05.:26:08.

the Home Affairs Select Committee, says he has spoken to the

:26:08.:26:11.

Jordanians and they have given assurances that they wanted. It

:26:11.:26:15.

seems to be politically implausible that Theresa May would come to the

:26:15.:26:19.

Commons and say, I have failed, I have not got these assurances, bad

:26:19.:26:23.

news, Abu Qatada will have to stay. That would be the political

:26:23.:26:26.

equivalent of wandering up the M1 in the wrong direction. I think she

:26:26.:26:30.

will come and say, we have got the assurances, we can move to deport

:26:30.:26:35.

Abu Qatada. Does that mean he is going on a plane at the end of the

:26:35.:26:37.

week, warned that he can be held in custody between now and when he

:26:37.:26:43.

does get deported? Bluntly, it means nothing is happening any time

:26:43.:26:46.

soon on the deportation. The sequence of events is this. The

:26:46.:26:50.

government will present its case to the Special Immigration Appeals

:26:50.:26:53.

Commission. His lawyers might then challenge that. That would go to

:26:53.:26:57.

the High Court, the Supreme Court, and then all the way up to the

:26:57.:27:01.

European Court, which could be months down the line. Deportation

:27:01.:27:05.

could still be many, many months away, but crucially, as I

:27:05.:27:09.

understand it, it is possible if the government believes it has a

:27:09.:27:13.

strong case, they could ask for Abu Qatada to be sent back to jail, and

:27:13.:27:17.

that could happen much more swiftly. It is possible that although you

:27:17.:27:21.

may not be deported, he could actually be behind bars much sooner.

:27:21.:27:25.

What about plans by the government to reform the European Court of

:27:25.:27:29.

Human Rights? The reports today are saying that those plans, the

:27:29.:27:32.

Government was quite gung-ho about what it would be able to do, are

:27:32.:27:37.

actually going to be watered down. What are you keirin? Talking to

:27:37.:27:40.

those around Kenneth Clarke, they have a very different

:27:40.:27:43.

interpretation of what is going to happen. Ken Clarke has a meeting

:27:43.:27:47.

with 47 members of the European Council on Thursday to hammer out a

:27:47.:27:50.

deal on reform of the European Court. What they are saying is that

:27:50.:27:54.

the signs are very encouraging and they are quietly confident that

:27:54.:27:57.

they are going to get some sort of deal. One big caveat that we have

:27:57.:28:02.

to end their here is that to get any deal, you have to get the

:28:02.:28:06.

agreement of all 47 members, which seems to me to be nigh-on close to

:28:07.:28:10.

Mission impossible. It is an extraordinarily difficult task to

:28:10.:28:14.

get that sort of agreement. But for what it is worth, Ken Clarke's

:28:14.:28:18.

people are saying that they are confident they can get some sort of

:28:18.:28:23.

a deal. A well, we are joined now by Conservative MP Dominic Raab,

:28:23.:28:29.

who worked as a lawyer and advised their EU before becoming an MP. Are

:28:29.:28:33.

you here in optimistic noises as well coming out of the Ministry of

:28:33.:28:36.

Justice? Are they right to be thinking something is going to

:28:36.:28:40.

happen? Because everything I have seen has said none of those

:28:40.:28:42.

proposals are going to go through in terms of restricting the scope

:28:42.:28:46.

of the European Court. First of all, I think the government is

:28:46.:28:50.

absolutely right to the other front foot, bringing a modest, sensible,

:28:50.:28:55.

moderate reforms to the Strasbourg court so that it intervenes a

:28:55.:28:58.

little bit less, so that it focuses on the most serious violations. Now,

:28:59.:29:03.

look, we have not started the conference, the negotiating text,

:29:03.:29:10.

as I remember from my time, gets bandied around. He will clip was

:29:10.:29:13.

far too sceptical about the prospects for consensus. Look at

:29:13.:29:17.

the declaration as to which had quite a strong resolution on

:29:17.:29:21.

deportation cases. There are two things to look out for. Will it

:29:21.:29:25.

reform Strasbourg so we have an amendment that spells out what the

:29:25.:29:29.

margin of appreciation is? A bit more respect when the Supreme Court,

:29:29.:29:33.

like in the Abu Qatada case, has already looked at the issue.

:29:33.:29:37.

Secondly, a screening mechanism so that Strasbourg is focused on the

:29:37.:29:40.

really serious abuses of human rights. They are saying that is not

:29:40.:29:44.

what is going to happen. Then maybe a little bit more edging... Who is

:29:44.:29:50.

they? Well, the commentators, but also sources who have been working

:29:50.:29:53.

on this, and they obviously take a keen interest, and they are worried

:29:54.:29:56.

you are going to get words and rhetoric but there will not be

:29:56.:29:59.

anything written down which says, we are going to limit the number of

:29:59.:30:04.

cases, we are going to reduce the caseload. Argos sources and others?

:30:04.:30:10.

Probably! I don't know, I have seen some of the texts flying around.

:30:10.:30:15.

You are optimistic. Look, I don't know what the negotiations will

:30:15.:30:19.

produce. I have spelt out to you the two benchmarks for success.

:30:19.:30:23.

They have cross-party support. The bill of Rights Commission support

:30:23.:30:27.

it. Let's see whether they are delivered. Do you agree with that?

:30:27.:30:31.

There is a case for reform, do you agree that there should be reform

:30:31.:30:41.
:30:41.:30:44.

of the European Court of Human I will go along with that.

:30:44.:30:51.

don't have to! I have huge sympathy for Teresa May. She is a tough,

:30:51.:30:55.

articulate Home Secretary. I would guess she is spitting blood in that

:30:55.:31:00.

department. If I was in her position, I would be certain way.

:31:00.:31:05.

What I would be -- I certainly would be. The French ignored this

:31:05.:31:09.

position in deporting someone the other day. How can the French do it,

:31:09.:31:15.

and we can't? Can countries actually be in breach of the rules

:31:15.:31:20.

that govern human rights and get away with it in that sense?

:31:20.:31:25.

Italians are doing it as well. I think we are very close. Let's take

:31:25.:31:29.

the Abu Qatada case. This was not about torture fundamentally but

:31:29.:31:33.

about saying Britain was responsible for the Judea and

:31:33.:31:42.

justice system. What I think the government must now do, Teresa May

:31:42.:31:46.

has gone out of the way to provide assurances on that. I think were at

:31:46.:31:50.

the point where we need to be moving swiftly to deportation.

:31:50.:31:54.

Given the way we implement international law in this country,

:31:54.:32:02.

I think we could do so. The Supreme Court has upheld the deportation.

:32:02.:32:05.

Is there a risk of going so far along the line that you can end up

:32:05.:32:09.

tearing up the treaty that enshrines human rights in law? That

:32:09.:32:13.

is what people will be worried about. They are right to be worried

:32:13.:32:16.

and one has to remember that the reason this treaty exists is

:32:16.:32:20.

because it was designed in the 1940s, quite apart from the

:32:20.:32:25.

European Community, in order to give a beacon of hope to the people

:32:25.:32:29.

subjected to the Russian domination, that there was a rule of law and a

:32:29.:32:35.

code of behaviour, and we signed up to it. I remember being confronted

:32:35.:32:38.

as a secretary of state, do you want to give that up? Of course,

:32:38.:32:43.

you don't, because we are a great liberal democracy. But the process

:32:43.:32:52.

is out of control. Personally, if I was Teresa May, I would say if the

:32:52.:32:56.

French can do it, why can't I? are calling for a breach of the

:32:56.:33:01.

very treaty which you say must be upheld. You are in a difficult

:33:01.:33:06.

position, is it a breach? Is this what the treaty is all about? And

:33:06.:33:10.

you will say the judges say it is. I realise the weakness of my

:33:10.:33:15.

position in a court of law. In the position of Teresa May, and the

:33:15.:33:18.

Home Secretary, and a democratically elected government,

:33:18.:33:23.

I think there's a point at which you can say, no, I'm sorry, this is

:33:23.:33:27.

not what we have signed it certainly wasn't what we signed up

:33:27.:33:31.

to. When we signed up to the European Court of Human Rights,

:33:31.:33:37.

none of these issues of asylum and caused by terrorism existed.

:33:37.:33:42.

whole agenda changed? Yes. support what Dominic Raab said the

:33:42.:33:47.

government is doing, without any fear of losing... My guess is if

:33:47.:33:51.

you put it to the British people want a referendum, heaven forbid,

:33:51.:33:57.

but if you did, there would be virtual unanimity. Thank you.

:33:57.:34:01.

Research out this week says the powers that'll be handed to elected

:34:01.:34:03.

mayors aren't clear enough and should be extended beyond city

:34:03.:34:06.

boundaries. The Warwick Commission report comes just weeks before

:34:06.:34:09.

people in ten English cities will vote on whether to switch from a

:34:09.:34:12.

council leader and cabinet system to a directly elected mayor running

:34:12.:34:14.

their councils. Our reporter, Susana Mendonsa, has been to

:34:14.:34:24.
:34:24.:34:26.

Birmingham to find out what people They're setting off for cities

:34:26.:34:29.

where council leaders are in the driving seat, but elected mayor

:34:29.:34:39.
:34:39.:34:44.

might be taking the wheel soon. I think it is a fantastic idea and

:34:44.:34:49.

it improves things. I think it works well in London but I don't

:34:49.:34:54.

know about anywhere else. snapshot of opinion from Birmingham.

:34:54.:34:57.

This city, along with Bradford, Bristol, and Coventry, is holding a

:34:57.:35:00.

referendum next month on whether to switch to a directly elected mayor.

:35:00.:35:03.

Doncaster's the odd one out, where there's a referendum to scrap the

:35:03.:35:05.

existing mayor. Leeds, Manchester and Nottingham will also be asking

:35:05.:35:07.

whether voters want an elected mayor, as will Newcastle-upon-Tyne,

:35:07.:35:10.

Sheffield and Wakefield. But Birmingham's the first on that list.

:35:10.:35:13.

So I've come to the city's Jewellery Quarter. The clock up

:35:13.:35:16.

there commemorates Joseph Chamberlain who, as a former "non-

:35:16.:35:18.

elected" mayor of Birmingham, used his position back in the 19th

:35:18.:35:22.

century to clean up the slums and put Birmingham on the map. And some

:35:22.:35:27.

here think a directly elected mayor could raise the city's profile.

:35:27.:35:31.

These days, it's commissions like this that do that. Toye, Kenning

:35:31.:35:34.

and Spencer is one of only three firms making official medals for

:35:34.:35:37.

the Queen's Diamond Jubilee. It didn't need an elected mayor to win

:35:37.:35:43.

that contract, but could one help? Companies like this can't stand

:35:43.:35:46.

still, they know they have to win new orders, they have to go

:35:46.:35:50.

overseas, they have to have profile behind them to promote what they

:35:50.:35:54.

are doing. A mayor will come in with authority, 600,000 Brummies

:35:54.:35:59.

having elected them, with clarity, with powers from London, with the

:35:59.:36:02.

ability to go and punch above our weight on a very fiercely

:36:02.:36:06.

competitive market. What about the accountability behind council house

:36:06.:36:09.

doors? A report from the Warwick Commission this week says that's an

:36:09.:36:15.

issue of concern. It is always the case that if you give people enough

:36:15.:36:19.

powers... Lord Acton said power corrupts and absolute power

:36:19.:36:23.

corrupts absolutely. There is always a danger you can have an

:36:23.:36:26.

individual who does that kind of thing. That is why it is important

:36:26.:36:31.

we recognise what scrutiny systems we have in terms of accountability,

:36:31.:36:34.

and also try to ensure that the electorate is absolutely clear

:36:34.:36:37.

about who they are voting for. one knows what powers the mayors

:36:37.:36:40.

will have yet, although transport might top the list. On a tram ride

:36:40.:36:47.

into the Black Country, I hear why that could be a bad news. We're

:36:47.:36:49.

standing on a tramway going off to Wolverhampton from Birmingham,

:36:49.:36:56.

which actually covers three district councils. It covers

:36:56.:36:58.

Birmingham, it covers Sandwell, it covers Wolverhampton and therefore

:36:58.:37:00.

there's a need to coordinate transport right the way across

:37:00.:37:03.

those three administrative boundaries. And would a mayor not

:37:03.:37:07.

do that? What we're saying is the challenge for the city mayor is how

:37:07.:37:10.

do you do that, when he's only got a mandate just for Birmingham.

:37:10.:37:13.

cities like Liverpool and Salford have already decide to hop on board

:37:13.:37:17.

- they'll elect their mayors next month. The rest will let the public

:37:17.:37:21.

decide whether they should head in the same direction.

:37:21.:37:24.

Joining us now from Bristol is the Liberal Democrat leader of the City

:37:24.:37:27.

Council, Barbara Janke, and with us here in the studio still is Lord

:37:27.:37:34.

Heseltine, who is a strong advocate of elected mayors. Let me come to

:37:34.:37:38.

you, Barbara Janke. What is wrong with giving everyone in Bristol a

:37:38.:37:42.

say over who leads the city? Nothing at all, except that when I

:37:43.:37:46.

speak to people in my area particularly, they don't know what

:37:46.:37:49.

they are voting for. They don't know what the powers are going to

:37:49.:37:52.

be, they don't know what the cost is going to be and they don't

:37:52.:37:57.

really see how it is going to work. As your interviewee said, with

:37:57.:38:01.

Bristol having the mayor, and the whole of the travel to work area

:38:01.:38:05.

being outside that jurisdiction. just sounds like they don't have

:38:05.:38:08.

the information to make that decision. They could, if given that

:38:08.:38:16.

information, think it could be a great figurehead for Bristol.

:38:16.:38:19.

400,000 for an election and referendum, a mayor's office on the

:38:19.:38:23.

scale that we have in London, powers that are actually

:38:23.:38:27.

unspecified, seems to me to be something that people should

:38:27.:38:31.

rightly question. And I believe that there is a bit of a feeling

:38:31.:38:35.

that people are being blackmailed, being told that they won't be

:38:35.:38:39.

listened to by Downing Street. I don't see how that could be

:38:39.:38:44.

possibly right. And somehow that they won't have any say and they

:38:44.:38:48.

won't get any powers. I would not have that any government can be

:38:48.:38:51.

discriminate three in that way. But this is the kind of impression we

:38:51.:38:54.

are getting from government ministers. Let's look at the cost.

:38:54.:38:58.

What is the advantage of holding a costly referendum and having

:38:58.:39:03.

another costly election for a mayor several months later, to elect

:39:03.:39:06.

somebody who people don't seem to know what they're going to do, and

:39:06.:39:12.

they might not be any good. Bristol's case, they have had six

:39:13.:39:17.

leaders in 10 years. I can tell you that is a formula for disaster. But

:39:17.:39:20.

it is much wider than that. We are talking about the monopoly of

:39:20.:39:25.

London. Over my lifetime, I have seen more and more power taken away

:39:25.:39:29.

from the great English cities, and centralised in London. Where London

:39:30.:39:32.

makes the decisions. These councillors think they are in

:39:32.:39:37.

charge, they are not. The ministry of transport, housing, education,

:39:37.:39:42.

they are the people who make the real decisions. There is no other

:39:42.:39:47.

economy like us in the world that allows this monopolistic approach.

:39:47.:39:53.

They have all got directly elected people that are identified locally,

:39:53.:39:56.

that are powerful. If you really want to understand the argument,

:39:56.:40:01.

just look what has happened in this country with Boris Johnson and Alex

:40:01.:40:05.

Salmond. Our great English cities are being squeezed out of pressure

:40:05.:40:13.

by these two giant politicians at either end of the country. Michael

:40:13.:40:16.

Heseltine says council leaders are not really in charge of their

:40:16.:40:20.

cities, with respect, people don't know who you are, you don't have

:40:20.:40:25.

the profile that a figurehead would have. People say that and I am not

:40:25.:40:28.

going to comment on my personal position. I would say that as far

:40:28.:40:32.

as we are concerned in Bristol, we have very good international links.

:40:32.:40:35.

We have just been shortlisted for the green capital with Frankfurt

:40:36.:40:41.

and Copenhagen. Equally, as Lord Heseltine says, power has been in

:40:41.:40:44.

the centre in this country for so long, that we don't really believe

:40:44.:40:49.

that the government are going to give powers away at all. But surely

:40:49.:40:53.

this would be a start. If you accept that London dominates, which

:40:53.:41:00.

it does, why not give Bristol the chance to punch above its weight?

:41:00.:41:04.

Because we want the powers. We have been saying for a long time, we

:41:04.:41:08.

want the powers. It is immaterial, putting a figurehead over a

:41:09.:41:12.

situation where central government makes all the decisions. We would

:41:12.:41:16.

like the government to put its money where its mouth is. You have

:41:16.:41:20.

just conceded the case. You said, we don't believe that the

:41:20.:41:24.

government will give us the powers. Alex Salmond and Boris Johnson

:41:24.:41:28.

don't believe that at all. They are determined that they will get

:41:28.:41:32.

powers from London. And the problem with people in your position, it is

:41:32.:41:36.

not a personal attack, is that you have given him. You have accepted

:41:36.:41:41.

the status quo. What people like me want is to have directly elected

:41:41.:41:45.

leaders in those great cities, who thumped the table and say, we will

:41:45.:41:51.

not tolerate this dominance from London any more. That is all it is,

:41:51.:41:58.

thumping the table. Barbara is saying that they once the powers

:41:58.:42:04.

listed. I am sorry, what she is saying is we don't believe we will

:42:04.:42:08.

get them. I want people who are determined to get them. What powers

:42:08.:42:13.

should they be given? This will be an evolving process and the

:42:13.:42:16.

ministers for cities it is discussing with the cities, what

:42:16.:42:21.

powers they want. He is saying, what powers do you want and they

:42:21.:42:24.

are coming forward with ideas. They will get the first tranche and it

:42:24.:42:30.

will build. What powers would you like? What we have asked for for a

:42:30.:42:33.

long time his strategic powers over transport, to be able to raise

:42:33.:42:36.

money to fund transport schemes like the other great European

:42:36.:42:41.

cities, like in the United States. To be able to raise money in bonds,

:42:41.:42:47.

to look at what we can do in terms of revenue raising. 80% of all

:42:47.:42:50.

taxation in the city goes to central government. We say if we

:42:50.:42:53.

are allowed to keep more of our taxation, we could be self-

:42:53.:42:57.

sufficient. Successive governments have talked about this and this

:42:58.:43:06.

But to compare with Alex Salmond who is the Secretary of State for

:43:06.:43:09.

Scotland seems completely absurd. As far as the mayoral referendum is

:43:09.:43:14.

concerned, 40% turnout is what they get, which is no different from

:43:14.:43:19.

local government elections in Bristol. Those are valid points.

:43:19.:43:23.

First of all, what is the evidence, outside of London, places like

:43:23.:43:30.

Hartlepool and Middlesbrough, I any better off with elected mayors? --

:43:30.:43:34.

are any better off. They haven't been through the process of getting

:43:34.:43:38.

more power. The elected mayors of today haven't got sufficient power,

:43:38.:43:42.

in my view, but the government is committed to reversing that process

:43:42.:43:46.

and devolving power. You have to have someone to fight for it, and

:43:46.:43:52.

secondly, a method of administering that power, which doesn't exist in

:43:52.:43:57.

the present local arrangements, which are branch offices of the

:43:57.:44:01.

central government spending departments. Hartlepool and

:44:01.:44:04.

Middlesbrough have got mayors, they have been thumping the table and

:44:04.:44:08.

they haven't got those powers, which is perhaps why we hear

:44:08.:44:12.

scepticism from someone like Barbara Janke. I can't answer for

:44:12.:44:15.

what the last Labour government did in devolving powers. I can only

:44:15.:44:20.

tell you what this government is committed to do. As I made the

:44:20.:44:23.

recommendations on which the policy was built... You want the

:44:23.:44:27.

government to give those powers? am convinced, you have to go back

:44:27.:44:31.

to the position where these great cities mattered in the way in which

:44:31.:44:35.

this country is run. London was not always this great dominant centre.

:44:35.:44:40.

Barbara Janke, thank you for joining us.

:44:40.:44:44.

Next, Afghanistan. Yesterday, Taliban militants launched several

:44:44.:44:47.

attacks across the country as part of a spring offensive, showing they

:44:47.:44:51.

are still a powerful force. Militants attacked a number of

:44:51.:44:55.

sites including the Afghan Parliament. The NATO building and a

:44:55.:44:58.

number of foreign embassies. President Hamid Karzai of

:44:58.:45:02.

Afghanistan blamed a failure of NATO's intelligence services for

:45:02.:45:07.

the attacks. Officials say 51 people died in the fighting.

:45:07.:45:10.

This morning, Australia announced it will pull most its troops out of

:45:10.:45:13.

Afghanistan a year earlier than planned, in 2013. American and

:45:13.:45:20.

British troops are due to withdraw in 2014. What is the future for

:45:20.:45:24.

Afghanistan and its volatile neighbour, Pakistan? I am joined by

:45:24.:45:28.

Ahmed Rashid, it respected author about the region, who has a new

:45:28.:45:34.

book, and Douglas Alexander, Shadow Foreign Secretary. We saw this

:45:34.:45:39.

spring offensive from the Taliban. Does that really showed that not

:45:39.:45:42.

much progress has been made and the Taliban are just sitting and

:45:42.:45:50.

waiting for the withdrawals we have It shows a lot of things, including

:45:50.:45:54.

the lack of intelligence that NATO and US forces have had about the

:45:54.:45:58.

Taliban. They output so many defence mechanisms between the

:45:58.:46:03.

Pakistan border and Kabul, and yet 30 or 40 Taliban were able to come

:46:03.:46:08.

in with suicide best and all that. It shows an enormous weakness of

:46:08.:46:11.

intelligence and military capability by both the US and

:46:11.:46:16.

Afghan forces. But the other side of the picture is, remember the

:46:16.:46:20.

Taliban are in talks with the American's right now? They are

:46:20.:46:24.

temporarily suspended, but there has been a lot of dissent from

:46:24.:46:28.

Taliban commanders on the ground, saying, why are we talking to them

:46:28.:46:33.

when we are about to leave? We should be preparing for victory. So

:46:33.:46:36.

this attack was meant to impress their own commanders that they are

:46:36.:46:40.

still fighting. So the confidence is there, and they are basically

:46:41.:46:44.

confident that the Afghan army is not ready to take over and probably

:46:44.:46:48.

will not be when British and American forces withdraw by the end

:46:48.:46:55.

of 2014. I think they are very confident. I think the American and

:46:55.:46:57.

NATO assessment that we are winning and that somehow the Taliban are

:46:57.:47:02.

being depleted is completely wrong. What do you say to that, Douglas

:47:02.:47:05.

Alexander? Under Labour and his government, there is a feeling that

:47:05.:47:10.

our troops are out there, that we can win it, if you want to use that

:47:10.:47:14.

simplistic term, and when we pull- out, we will be able to hand over

:47:14.:47:18.

to a relatively stable Afghan army and police force. That does not

:47:18.:47:22.

sound like it is achievable. I have a great deal of sympathy with what

:47:22.:47:26.

we have heard. My concern is that we have an end date for NATO forces

:47:26.:47:31.

to transition out, but we have not got an end state, which is judged

:47:31.:47:35.

to be sustainable. They have said they will build up Afghan forces,

:47:35.:47:39.

but my conviction is that only politics can be the bridge between

:47:39.:47:42.

where Afghanistan is today and where it needs to be, and that is

:47:42.:47:46.

why, as well as ensuring that Afghan forces are built up and

:47:46.:47:50.

running for military draw down, there needs to be a much greater

:47:50.:47:53.

effort by the international community to ensure both an

:47:53.:47:57.

inclusive political settlement, with Al-Qaeda out and the tribes

:47:57.:48:01.

within, and a great deal of thought given to how we can bring in

:48:01.:48:04.

regional neighbours, countries like Pakistan and China, even countries

:48:04.:48:10.

like Iran. Because that is the basis on which you could have a

:48:10.:48:13.

more sustainable future for Afghanistan. Is that really

:48:13.:48:17.

credible, bringing in people like Pakistan? The West has struggled to

:48:17.:48:20.

have any sort of stable relationship with Pakistan in terms

:48:20.:48:24.

of dealing with the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan and

:48:24.:48:28.

dealing with the Taliban, who many people say that Pakistan supports.

:48:28.:48:33.

The reality is that border, in many areas, does not exist. The line

:48:33.:48:37.

involves people living on one side of the border and farming on the

:48:37.:48:40.

other. One of the challenges is to betray the Pakistani leadership

:48:40.:48:44.

that the existential threat to Pakistan is not India but the

:48:44.:48:48.

insurgency within its own borders and potentially from outside its

:48:48.:48:52.

borders within Afghanistan. doesn't Pakistan say that it needs

:48:52.:48:56.

to have a relationship with what they see as the future government,

:48:56.:49:01.

the Taliban in Afghanistan? That is the long game it is plain, which

:49:01.:49:04.

means that there is no real chance of getting Pakistan onside when

:49:04.:49:09.

they are thinking ahead to who they might be dealing with after 2014.

:49:09.:49:13.

The Pakistan military, Bridge conducts the country's foreign

:49:13.:49:17.

policy, is very key that negotiations are successful between

:49:17.:49:22.

the Americans, the Taliban, Hamid Karzai and the Taliban. If those

:49:22.:49:26.

negotiations are successful, they would be some element of sharing

:49:26.:49:32.

power in Kabul between Taliban and Hamid Karzai. Before 2014, after

:49:32.:49:36.

2014, such negotiations might take longer than 2014, but if it happens,

:49:36.:49:41.

Pakistan can live without. That is the endgame. Pakistan's endgame is

:49:41.:49:46.

not to bring the Taliban back to power. Pakistan is faced with its

:49:46.:49:50.

own Taliban insurgency, and it does not want to deal with a rabbit

:49:50.:49:55.

Taliban government in Kabul. A sharing of power between the

:49:55.:49:58.

present Afghan government and the Taliban is the best outlook. But

:49:58.:50:02.

frankly, the problem is that the Americans are not taking the talks

:50:02.:50:06.

seriously. What you think the Americans should be doing? The next

:50:06.:50:10.

main date is going to be the NATO summit which takes place in May. I

:50:10.:50:14.

think we do not just want to see a Status of forces Agreement, an

:50:14.:50:18.

agreement in terms of the funding of the Afghan military, or indeed a

:50:19.:50:22.

timetable for military transition. We need to see a serious engagement

:50:22.:50:26.

with the regional players and the Taliban. We need the diplomatic

:50:26.:50:30.

efforts to match the military sacrifice. The real problem has

:50:30.:50:33.

been that President Obama has not put his foot down. There are huge

:50:33.:50:37.

divisions between the Defence Department and the State Department,

:50:37.:50:41.

the US military saying that they want to push ahead and continue

:50:41.:50:45.

fighting indefinitely until the last militant is dead. State is

:50:45.:50:49.

saying that we should be talking to the Taliban, and we have not seen

:50:49.:50:53.

assertive American leadership in going ahead. Obama and Hillary

:50:53.:50:57.

Clinton support talks, but they have not put their weight behind it.

:50:57.:51:00.

Why do you think that is? Is it because they have decided they are

:51:00.:51:04.

going to withdraw and wash their hands of it? I do not think the

:51:04.:51:08.

Americans can wash their hands of Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda may be

:51:08.:51:13.

defeated, but there are still enough extremists around in that

:51:13.:51:18.

region to worry both Europe and the Americans. Michael Heseltine, in

:51:18.:51:22.

terms of his end date, to pick up on what Douglas Alexander said, to

:51:22.:51:26.

think it has just given the Taliban a date to wait for and then move

:51:26.:51:35.

in? If you were sitting in the senior counsels of the Taliban,

:51:35.:51:39.

that is what you would think. It is the only conclusion you could come

:51:39.:51:43.

to. So you would not agree to British troops withdrawn at the end

:51:43.:51:47.

of 2014. I would not have agreed to put them in in the first place. I

:51:47.:51:50.

do not understand, I cannot understand how the mission creep

:51:50.:51:58.

took place. I think it was 100% defensible of the Americans to go

:51:58.:52:05.

in, to get Bin Laden. But that was a very limited objective, highly

:52:05.:52:10.

justifiable. But what they are doing, trying to turn one of the

:52:10.:52:18.

most difficult states in the world into a civilised democracy, I just

:52:18.:52:23.

find extraordinary. And it is not going to work, you know. You are

:52:23.:52:27.

damned if you stay and you are damned if you go. And on that note,

:52:27.:52:31.

thank you very much to both of you for coming in. Before we move on,

:52:31.:52:37.

son used to say that Abu Qatada has been arrested, the Muslim cleric we

:52:37.:52:41.

have been hearing about. We are going to hear from Theresa May this

:52:41.:52:44.

afternoon, but he has been arrested in the meantime. It has not been a

:52:45.:52:47.

great couple of weeks for government in presentational terms.

:52:47.:52:50.

Some are blaming their woes of a lack of political prowess in

:52:51.:52:54.

Cabinet. Where are the big beasts that characterised previous

:52:54.:52:57.

government? A reminder of some of the talent and trouble they brought

:52:57.:53:07.
:53:07.:53:13.

I have resigned from the Cabinet. I will make a full statement later

:53:13.:53:23.
:53:23.:53:29.

That conflict of loyalty has become all too great. I know longer

:53:29.:53:32.

believe it is possible to resolve that conflict from within his

:53:32.:53:42.
:53:42.:53:58.

That is what I'm going to negotiate for, and that the conference to

:53:59.:54:08.
:54:09.:54:15.

support me in that task! -- and I Here, Gordon. It is not often I get

:54:15.:54:23.

a chance to give you something for Smiles all round, I wonder what it

:54:23.:54:27.

was really like behind the scenes. Joining is now his chief political

:54:27.:54:31.

commentator of the Express, what is a big beast in political terms?

:54:31.:54:36.

Well, I think a big beast is someone who has his own... It is

:54:36.:54:42.

usually a him, but Mo Mowlam was the last female babies. Somebody or

:54:42.:54:48.

has self-confidence, a ability to attract a following but by

:54:48.:54:52.

definition is not the party leader. But if you ask what are the

:54:52.:54:57.

consequences should this person walk out in a straw or turn hostile

:54:57.:55:00.

and the consequences of big, that is a big beast, at which point I

:55:00.:55:05.

think Lord Heseltine might be eliminate us on his definition.

:55:05.:55:10.

you agree with that? I think every generation produces their big

:55:10.:55:16.

beasts in that respect. Really? Not at the time? We are not described

:55:16.:55:22.

as a big political beast? Ken Clarke is still described as one. I

:55:22.:55:26.

have the highest regard for Ken. He is at the end of his political

:55:26.:55:34.

career. He certainly is a big beast by any standards. The great problem

:55:34.:55:38.

is that you do not see your contemporaries as big beasts.

:55:38.:55:45.

don't? No, you don't, and I certainly, having served with

:55:45.:55:51.

different generations, I do not remember ever being in tow or of

:55:51.:55:56.

any of my colleagues. Maybe people were in awe of you. I remember at

:55:56.:56:01.

the time, he did have quite a lot of Conservative MPs whose primary

:56:01.:56:05.

loyalty was probably to you, rather than the leader of the party. I am

:56:05.:56:10.

thinking of Michael Mates and Peter Temple-Morris, who saw you as their

:56:10.:56:14.

contemporaries. You had a following as a result. I certainly had a

:56:14.:56:18.

following, but plenty of people in the House of Commons today have

:56:18.:56:22.

followings. I'm not close enough, but I know it to be the case. You

:56:22.:56:25.

constantly read about them in the papers, the ones that the press go

:56:25.:56:31.

to. Do you think the government is a big beast free? I know that you

:56:31.:56:35.

look at it retrospectively, but as an observer, apart from Ken Clarke,

:56:35.:56:42.

who will be known as a big beast of this government? Well, in my own

:56:42.:56:45.

party terms, David Cameron will be seen as the man who brought the

:56:45.:56:48.

Tories back out of the cold. I think George Osborne could well be

:56:48.:56:53.

seen as an outstanding Chancellor of the Exchequer. I think William

:56:53.:56:57.

Hague is highly regarded. I say William Hague could be regarded as

:56:57.:57:01.

a big beast. He is closer to it, but I think I am right in saying

:57:01.:57:06.

that he is no longer seen as being on the ladder up. No, indeed.

:57:06.:57:11.

has got to the top of his ladder, and you have to get to the top of

:57:11.:57:15.

your ladder to be a big beast. I think you have to have the

:57:15.:57:19.

capacity or potential to cause trouble, and I think William Hague

:57:19.:57:24.

is 100% ile loyal to David Cameron. If I had to pick a big beast in the

:57:24.:57:29.

Tory party, you would have to look at David Davis, who is outside the

:57:29.:57:33.

Cabinet. But then you are talking about troublemakers. Do you need to

:57:33.:57:38.

have to have a big personality, somebody with that charisma, if you

:57:38.:57:42.

like, rather than perhaps a political leader? There are not

:57:42.:57:46.

many of those in the current government. They are not many in

:57:46.:57:49.

politics in general, partly because the status of the leader in

:57:50.:57:55.

relation to the front bench has skewed a lot in a last 20 years, so

:57:55.:57:58.

we have become more presidential. It is hard for anyone in the

:57:58.:58:05.

Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet to have that. Go back in 1979 when Margaret

:58:05.:58:09.

Thatcher was elected. Now, basically, their senior team were

:58:09.:58:13.

Ted Heath's government. They had been there for four years, big

:58:13.:58:19.

names. They were. By any standards, Quentin Hailsham, Willie Whitelaw,

:58:19.:58:27.

Geoffrey Howe, Peter Carrington were big beasts, but the government,

:58:27.:58:31.

after 18 months, was absolutely at the bottom of the opinion poll

:58:31.:58:35.

ratings. I'm not sure about the correlation between the two. We

:58:35.:58:38.

have only got seconds left, the biscuits that Boris Johnson

:58:39.:58:43.

compared himself to, do you know what it is? No idea. Chocolate

:58:43.:58:47.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS