14/06/2012 Daily Politics


14/06/2012

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 14/06/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics. We've had Gordon,

:00:42.:00:45.

we've had Tony, we've had John. We've even had Nick, in case you

:00:45.:00:49.

didn't notice. Today, it's Dave's turn in the witness box at the

:00:49.:00:51.

Leveson Inquiry. The Prime Minster's apparently had a day's

:00:51.:00:54.

coaching from lawyers to prep for the event, which might explain why

:00:54.:01:00.

so far this morning it's been pretty tedious. The PM's giving

:01:00.:01:10.

evidence as I speak and will do for the rest of the day. This is what

:01:10.:01:15.

he had to say. This is idea that somehow the Conservative Party and

:01:15.:01:20.

News International got together and said, "You give us your support and

:01:20.:01:28.

we'll waive through this merger .". It's nonsense. Back in the real

:01:28.:01:34.

world, Spain's 100 billionn euro bail out is already in crisis as

:01:34.:01:37.

bond yields in Madrid this morning hit an unsustainable 7%. A

:01:37.:01:42.

snooper's charter or a crucial tool in the fight against crime? We'll

:01:42.:01:45.

be looking at the Government's new surveillance plans. And who tickles

:01:45.:01:54.

your fancy? Balls or Osborne. We let the balls decide. I wouldn't

:01:54.:01:59.

trust Ed Balls as far as I can throw me and I don't like Osborne

:01:59.:02:04.

either. Fairly conclusive. Happy All that in the next hour and with

:02:04.:02:06.

us for the duration is the businesswoman and FT columnist,

:02:07.:02:10.

Heather McGregor. People on this programme. Welcome. Now, first this

:02:10.:02:12.

morning, let's talk about the crisis in Europe, because this

:02:13.:02:15.

morning Spanish borrowing costs, under the euro, rose to a record

:02:15.:02:25.
:02:25.:02:28.

high. That's dispute the Europeans agreed to a 100 billion euro The

:02:28.:02:38.
:02:38.:02:44.

yield on benchmark 10-year bonds hit 7%.. Bail out of the banks.

:02:44.:02:47.

This was true of Ireland and Portugal and in Greece as well at

:02:47.:02:53.

7%. This news came as moody's cut Spain's credit rating. It's now

:02:53.:02:57.

just one notch above junk. That explains why they are having to pay

:02:57.:03:04.

over 7%. It seems even 100 billion bail out now, it doesn't last 24

:03:04.:03:09.

hours? No. This is the inevitable result of fiscal union, without

:03:09.:03:13.

political union. Does this mean we'll get political union? This is

:03:13.:03:16.

the first step towards the United States of Europe. It's not time to.

:03:16.:03:21.

That may be the road we are going and people in the eurozone and even

:03:21.:03:24.

our own Government even talk that that is the direction we'll have to

:03:24.:03:29.

go in, but this crisis is today. have a strong European Central Bank.

:03:29.:03:35.

What they will do or they'll have to do, is step in, just as Alistair

:03:35.:03:40.

Darling had to save the Royal Bank of Scotland. It's completely

:03:40.:03:44.

unsustainable. 7% is a huge rate for a Government to have to pay.

:03:44.:03:50.

But, you say the strong mechanism, but the ECB by law is not allowed

:03:50.:03:54.

to by government debt in the primary market. It can't buy the

:03:54.:04:00.

bonds. It's confineed by lots of rules. Those rules can be changed

:04:00.:04:04.

quite quickly. They can't be changed that quickly. Isn't it the

:04:04.:04:07.

situation, that when you look at this, you look at the election

:04:07.:04:10.

coming up in Greece, which could have some very strange results, you

:04:10.:04:16.

see what has happened in Spain this morning, what we haven't reported

:04:16.:04:23.

is the Italians had to pay over 5% for three-year bonds. It looks like

:04:23.:04:27.

they are losing control. We are missing the point. The point here,

:04:27.:04:32.

there but for the grace of God go we. We, we talk about austerity and

:04:32.:04:36.

how we have it under control. Actually we are still spending more

:04:37.:04:40.

money than the previous Government and borrowing more than we said.

:04:40.:04:45.

understand that. We, at the moment, are simply going to be caught up in

:04:45.:04:51.

the backwash. We are not the story. We could be one of the victims. We

:04:51.:04:56.

could be collateral damage. Indeed, if it all goes bellyup. My concern

:04:56.:05:01.

this morning, with the events in Greece, Spain and Italy, the

:05:01.:05:05.

European elite that controls the eurozone it seems to have lost

:05:05.:05:09.

control. It's almost like they are rabbits stuck in the headlight.

:05:09.:05:12.

They need to wake up and smell the coffee. If you see what the

:05:12.:05:18.

Americans did with Tarp, some similar scheme needs to be put in

:05:18.:05:22.

place in Europe. It will come more quickly than we realise. That would

:05:22.:05:26.

require a banking union. Yes. the eurozone to agree and a new

:05:26.:05:33.

treaty. In the meantime, Spain burns. That will make them get off

:05:33.:05:37.

their backsides a lot more quickly. May be they will be burnt by the

:05:37.:05:46.

time we get there. What a horrible thought. Well, Mr Cameron is still

:05:46.:05:48.

giving evidence at the Leveson Inquiry this morning. The Prime

:05:48.:05:51.

Minister described the inquiry as a cathartic opportunity to sort out

:05:51.:05:54.

the relationship between the press, politicians and the police. At the

:05:54.:05:57.

beginning of the morning, Mr Cameron began by explaining why he

:05:57.:05:59.

believed politicians haven't been successful in sorting out the

:05:59.:06:06.

problems before. Because the relationship has been too close, as

:06:06.:06:12.

I put it, the politicians and the press haven't spent enough time

:06:12.:06:17.

discussing and sorting out the regulatory system under which the

:06:17.:06:22.

press exist. We need to fix that and I thought Ed Miliband put this

:06:22.:06:26.

quite well. He identified another risk, which is it's quite difficult

:06:26.:06:31.

for the politician to sort out on their own the regulatory situation

:06:31.:06:36.

the press face, because we are clearly - we are an interested

:06:36.:06:41.

party. If we just steamed ahead and said, "We'll regulate in this or

:06:41.:06:47.

that way." Then the press would have an argument to say, "Hold on,

:06:47.:06:50.

you are beneficiaries and we need independence." That's part of what

:06:50.:06:56.

this investigation is about. Prime Minister then went on to

:06:56.:06:59.

address allegatons that there had been some sort of deal between the

:06:59.:07:06.

Conservatives and the press. don't accept that. On the idea of

:07:06.:07:08.

overdeals, this idea that somehow the Conservative Party and News

:07:08.:07:13.

International got together and said, "If you give us your support and

:07:13.:07:17.

we'll waive through this merger." We didn't even know about that at

:07:17.:07:20.

that stage. The idea of that is nonsense and you've heard that from

:07:20.:07:24.

lots of people in front of this inquiry. I also don't believe in

:07:24.:07:30.

this theory that there was a sort of nod and a wink and some sort of

:07:30.:07:35.

covert agreement. Of course, I wanted to win over newspapers and

:07:35.:07:38.

other journalists, editors, priorors and broadcasters. I worked

:07:38.:07:41.

hard, because I wanted to communicate what the Conservative

:07:41.:07:43.

Party and my leadership could bring to the country. I made those

:07:43.:07:53.

arguments, but I didn't do it on the basis of saying, "For all this,

:07:53.:07:57.

I'll give you a better time on this policy." There are plenty examples

:07:57.:08:01.

of policies which I believe in, that the people who are backing me,

:08:01.:08:05.

didn't believe in. However, he explained why he felt he needed to

:08:05.:08:12.

spend more time quoting certain parts of the media. I did

:08:12.:08:17.

progressively realise over 2006 and 2007, that it's very difficult in -

:08:17.:08:24.

if you are running a political part -- party and trying to create

:08:24.:08:29.

momentum, it's difficult if you don't have what I would call the

:08:29.:08:34.

different bits of the family behind you. You need the MPs and MEPs and

:08:34.:08:38.

councillors and members and you also need the parts of the of the

:08:38.:08:44.

press that should be sort of getting behind you. I had this

:08:44.:08:49.

situation where some quite conservative parts of the press, I

:08:49.:08:54.

wasn't getting much backing from them and I was struggling frankly a

:08:54.:09:01.

bit to get the message across. So, I put in a lot of work already, but

:09:01.:09:05.

maybe I'll put in some more work. He's got his work cut out. With us

:09:05.:09:08.

now is the Tory Chairman of the Culture Select Committee, John

:09:08.:09:13.

Whittingdale, and the former Labour Culture Secretary, Ben Bradshaw.

:09:13.:09:17.

There is some juicy bits to come, I suspect. His relationship with

:09:17.:09:20.

remembering brooks and so on. Have we learnt anything this morning?

:09:20.:09:25.

From what I've seen, David Cameron has given the answers very much I

:09:25.:09:29.

would have expected. There is no revelation? Is there anything today

:09:29.:09:32.

that you didn't know before? There is nothing that I was surprised to

:09:32.:09:35.

hear from him. I thought there were a couple of interesting points.

:09:35.:09:39.

Firstly, in the clip you played about the transactional

:09:39.:09:42.

relationship with the Murdochs, he took a deep intake of breath and

:09:42.:09:47.

then said there was no deal. He said in that sentence, he wasn't

:09:47.:09:51.

aware that Murdoch wanted to take full control of BSkyB, which I find

:09:51.:09:54.

surprising. This is the biggest media issue out there before the

:09:54.:09:57.

election and after. Secondly, he also said that he didn't think

:09:57.:10:03.

there was a case, as I understand, I didn't hear the exact parts, for

:10:03.:10:05.

re-examining cross-media ownership. That is a bit disappointing and a

:10:05.:10:09.

different position from the one taken by Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband.

:10:09.:10:12.

Are you surprised that the Prime Minister didn't realise that Rupert

:10:12.:10:18.

Murdoch wanted all of BSkyB? Well, I am not surprised in that the

:10:18.:10:22.

actual details of the bid he might not have been familiar with. He's

:10:22.:10:25.

saying the principal he didn't even know that Mr Murdoch wanted the 60%

:10:25.:10:30.

that he didn't have. I would - I follow the media. I would have

:10:30.:10:33.

guessed it would be something that Rupert Murdoch would like, because

:10:33.:10:36.

BSkyB generates a huge amount of money. What Ben Bradshaw is saying

:10:37.:10:41.

that the Prime Minister's claiming he didn't know that Rupert Murdoch

:10:41.:10:46.

wanted all of BSkyB. Is that credible? If it was after the bid

:10:46.:10:52.

had actual ln been announced. this was before the bid. Then I'm

:10:52.:10:58.

not surprised. No? You didn't know ironing? We all knew. No, I didn't.

:10:58.:11:02.

Because it was the biggest story around. They delayed the

:11:02.:11:05.

application until after the election. I knew it was likely they

:11:05.:11:08.

would want it, because it's a hugely successful country that

:11:09.:11:13.

generates billions of profit. The fact that the bid hadn't been there.

:11:13.:11:18.

You did know? I didn't know. I would have guessed. I didn't know.

:11:18.:11:23.

All right. In a sense, there's not a lot happening here. What we have

:11:23.:11:27.

learned is that David Cameron set out when he became leader not to

:11:27.:11:32.

woo the Murdoch press, not to do what Tony Blair and Gordon Brown

:11:32.:11:37.

had done, but by summer 2007 it was sticky and he had no friends, so he

:11:37.:11:42.

decided to woo them the way they had done. I think probably even to

:11:42.:11:48.

have more meetings. I can't remember the exact figure, 17, 11,

:11:48.:11:51.

ten and that's without the informal social gathers that the Prime

:11:51.:11:53.

Minister had to acknowledge he hadn't included all of in his

:11:54.:12:00.

evidence. He went back on what he intended to do. He said to me in

:12:01.:12:05.

2005, he wasn't going to go the route of Blair and Brown, but then

:12:05.:12:08.

he did. I think the fact that meetings took place, doesn't

:12:08.:12:11.

necessarily mean he was going cap in hand in the way that perhaps

:12:11.:12:15.

others have. However, I think it's a fact of life that any leader of a

:12:15.:12:19.

political party has to deal with the most important media

:12:19.:12:23.

organisations. Yeah. That was the biggest. Of course. In every

:12:23.:12:27.

democracy in the world political leaders deal with the media and if

:12:27.:12:29.

there are press proprietors as there are in America and in France

:12:29.:12:36.

and Germany, you deal with them. But is it necessary to be as

:12:36.:12:41.

incestious with them as ours have been? Starting with Mr Blair?

:12:41.:12:44.

think the number of meetings, the frequency of meetings came as

:12:44.:12:48.

something of a surprise to me. I think David Cameron himself has

:12:48.:12:51.

said that actually that relationships had become too close

:12:51.:12:54.

and that is one of the reasons why Lord Justice Leveson was asked to

:12:54.:12:59.

conduct the inquiry. Everybody was at it. That is the truth? Yes.

:12:59.:13:04.

Except the Lib Dems, because nobody cared. Yes. I have said before, as

:13:05.:13:09.

Jeremy Hunt's predecessor what changed massively was that media

:13:09.:13:13.

policy was subcontracted to the Murdochs, not just on this bid, but

:13:13.:13:18.

free-to-air and cricket on TV and regional TV news. Every single

:13:18.:13:21.

issues that James Murdoch attacked me for doing, the Tories reversed

:13:21.:13:27.

when he were in Government. were the political arm of the

:13:27.:13:33.

Murdoch media? Me? The Conservative Party. I'm not saying that. It's

:13:33.:13:38.

the accusation that Mr Bradshaw is making. It's nonsense. It's the

:13:38.:13:42.

case that generally the outlook of the Murdoch organisation, which was

:13:42.:13:46.

promarket, it was deregulatory, was very similar to that of the

:13:46.:13:49.

Conservative Party, so it wasn't that surprising that when we

:13:49.:13:53.

adopted policies, which were much more promarket and deregulatory,

:13:53.:13:58.

that those would be supported by the Murdoch organisation. As I said

:13:58.:14:03.

before, but because you were in short trousers you denied knowledge,

:14:03.:14:09.

the 2003 Labour communication act was the most deregulatory act in

:14:09.:14:12.

modern British telecoms history and passed under your government.

:14:12.:14:17.

you asked me, I've looked in it and it was a mistake. I welcome the

:14:17.:14:21.

fact that Ed Miliband is talking about the need for tighter rules on

:14:21.:14:24.

cross-media ownership and the amount of the media that one single

:14:24.:14:28.

person it allowed to own. If you take the position that the

:14:28.:14:34.

Conservatives were overfriendly, oversupportive of some Murdoch

:14:34.:14:38.

media positions, that criticism would absolutely be true as well of

:14:38.:14:43.

the Blair government around the year 2000? Wouldn't that be fair?

:14:43.:14:47.

Except, that the takeover of BSkyB, if it had happened, was in a

:14:47.:14:50.

completely different order. Every other media organisation opposed it,

:14:50.:14:55.

because they thought and they worried it would mean total

:14:55.:14:58.

dominance and the ability to cross- subsidise and the multimedia

:14:58.:15:02.

platforms. I understand that. only reason it didn't go through

:15:02.:15:08.

was because of Milly Dowler. agree with all of that. Why was it

:15:08.:15:11.

possible for Rupert Murdoch to mount a bid for all of BSkyB in the

:15:11.:15:21.
:15:21.:15:23.

That was possible because of the act that I think was a mistake.

:15:23.:15:27.

2003 Labour act? We would have preferred that bid to the

:15:27.:15:30.

Competition Commission, as would Vince Cable have done -- we would

:15:30.:15:35.

have referred. The policy changed when Jeremy Hunt took over. Follow

:15:35.:15:40.

the policy. If you want to see what has happened, follow the policy.

:15:40.:15:44.

understand there is some text coming out with the Prime Minister

:15:44.:15:49.

and Rebekah Brooks, former chief executive, have you got it there?

:15:49.:15:53.

This is about the relationship and how close they came, we already

:15:53.:15:56.

heard from the Prime Minister about admitting you could still have

:15:56.:15:59.

friends in organisations and be able to keep enough distance to

:15:59.:16:05.

make decisions impartially. This is where they started to see more of

:16:05.:16:13.

each other because the Brooks family moved nearby. She has moved

:16:13.:16:21.

into Charlie Brooks' s house, it is near where we live, there is talks

:16:21.:16:24.

about country suppers where they discussed, yes, but seriously, this

:16:24.:16:29.

is a text. I understand the issue with the Times, let's discuss over

:16:29.:16:34.

country supper soon. On the party, it was because I had asked a number

:16:34.:16:39.

of people to post the endorsement. Sam was wonderful... It is all too

:16:39.:16:45.

cosy, isn't it? Cosy country suppers. The fact that the Prime

:16:45.:16:48.

Minister is friends with a leading executive from News International

:16:48.:16:52.

is not a matter of shame in his cell. The fact that he has country

:16:52.:16:55.

suppers seems perfectly understandable. When this media

:16:55.:16:59.

organisation is lobbying like mad to get permission for the biggest

:16:59.:17:04.

media takeover in British history? That is a separate matter which was

:17:04.:17:09.

clearly not something he suggested discussing over a country supper.

:17:09.:17:13.

We know it was discussed over a country Christmas supper. We know

:17:14.:17:17.

that the subject was raised. David Cameron was clear that it was a

:17:17.:17:20.

matter which was quasi judicial in the hands of the Business Secretary

:17:20.:17:24.

and was out of his control. The fact that David Cameron was friends

:17:25.:17:29.

with Rebekah Brooks, as was Gordon Brown for a time, as was Tony Blair,

:17:29.:17:37.

is not in itself something which would immediately -- which we

:17:37.:17:41.

should immediately criticised them for. Is it appropriate for that

:17:41.:17:45.

level of access? Robert Jay has read out a text message from

:17:45.:17:50.

Rebekah Brooks, 2009, pre- election, I am so rooting for you tomorrow,

:17:51.:17:55.

not just as a personal friend but because professionally, we are both

:17:55.:17:58.

in this together. It does give a sense that they were working on the

:17:58.:18:03.

same side with the same aims. fact that Rebekah Brooks and a

:18:03.:18:05.

newspapers were backing the Conservative Party in the last

:18:05.:18:10.

election is on the record. issue is that the media group

:18:10.:18:15.

backing the party is one thing, but a media group backing your party,

:18:15.:18:21.

and once a major business favour, is something entirely different. --

:18:21.:18:26.

and wants. Any sensible politician would surely keep their distance.

:18:26.:18:32.

It only becomes wrong if the two island. The policy changed.

:18:32.:18:39.

policy did not change. -- becomes wrong if the two are linked.

:18:39.:18:41.

recommendation was to refer the bid to the Competition Commission, he

:18:41.:18:46.

did not do it. Jeremy Hunt bent over backwards to do James

:18:46.:18:50.

Murdoch's bidding in not referring it. It would have delayed the bid

:18:50.:18:56.

by a year and cost News Corp millions. Jeremy Hunt did that.

:18:56.:18:59.

Jeremy Hunt was required by the law when he received that

:18:59.:19:03.

recommendation, to have a period which alternative suggestions could

:19:03.:19:09.

be made. During which a special adviser provided a back channel.

:19:09.:19:14.

followed the code to the letter. David Cameron: I think it means we

:19:14.:19:20.

were friends, we were going to be pushing the same political agenda.

:19:20.:19:24.

I suspect most of our viewers watching think that both of their

:19:24.:19:27.

parties got far too close to the Murdoch organisation? I think most

:19:27.:19:32.

of the viewers thought that anyway. They may not have known the extent.

:19:32.:19:37.

They may not. I am not sure we needed such a massive inquiry at

:19:37.:19:42.

such a massive public expense, in order to get to the extent of it. I

:19:42.:19:45.

have no idea why the Leveson inquiry was set up. I have long

:19:46.:19:49.

since forgotten. All I believe now is that he must have set it up as

:19:49.:19:56.

some kind of distracting activity. That didn't work, did it? That is a

:19:56.:20:01.

great political judgment! Some sort of cabaret to fill up newspaper

:20:01.:20:05.

columns and time, in order to get away from the real problem, that we

:20:05.:20:08.

in business believe that the government is not pursuing an

:20:08.:20:12.

agenda for growth. That is what I want to see. Frankly, if I wanted

:20:12.:20:17.

this kind of distracting activity, I would load fridge manger on to my

:20:17.:20:27.
:20:27.:20:34.

I remind you that Spanish bond yields hit 7%. Thank you.

:20:34.:20:38.

We are going to do more of this! Things got heated in the Commons in

:20:38.:20:42.

the debate over Jeremy Hunt's handling of the BSkyB. Mr Hunt

:20:42.:20:45.

survive the ordeal but it was all hands on deck for the Conservative

:20:45.:20:50.

Party, he even called back one MP from his honeymoon to ensure they

:20:50.:21:00.
:21:00.:21:01.

Either he didn't know what he was doing when his special adviser was

:21:01.:21:06.

overstepping the mark, and that was a breach of the code, or as people

:21:06.:21:10.

think more likely, he did know what he was doing when Adam Smith was

:21:10.:21:14.

overstepping the mark, and that, too, would have been a breach of

:21:14.:21:19.

the code. Whichever way you look at it, there has been a clear breach

:21:19.:21:24.

of the ministerial code. First of all, the disgraceful allegation

:21:24.:21:29.

that I deliberately misled Parliament. In response to a

:21:29.:21:33.

question... Well, do you want to hear what I'm going to say about it,

:21:33.:21:40.

because you call to the debate. If you want to hear the facts... In

:21:40.:21:47.

response to a question on 3rd March 2011, I stated that I had published

:21:47.:21:51.

correspondence between myself and News Corp. In answer to those

:21:51.:21:55.

questions, I referred back to that statement. If there was any

:21:55.:21:57.

misunderstanding about the extent to which I was publishing

:21:57.:22:02.

correspondents, it was addressed as long ago as last September. What

:22:02.:22:05.

the minister just referred to was his reply on 7th September when he

:22:05.:22:09.

said it was for reasons for cost he was not able to provide anything

:22:10.:22:14.

more. How much would it have cost him to remember he had sent a memo

:22:14.:22:17.

to the Prime Minister on the matter, or to have checked his own mobile

:22:17.:22:21.

phone for the text messages he sent to James Murdoch. He has lied to

:22:21.:22:31.
:22:31.:22:33.

I am not sure if everyone correctly heard the allegation that was made

:22:33.:22:37.

by the honourable member. As I understood it, he accused Mike

:22:37.:22:41.

right honourable friend of lying to Parliament. My understanding was

:22:41.:22:47.

that that was unparliamentary language which should be withdrawn.

:22:47.:22:55.

What I say to the... Members can shout as loudly or as long as they

:22:55.:23:00.

like, and it doesn't make any sense, it won't make any difference. I am

:23:00.:23:05.

simply saying that on advice that I have taken, nothing disorderly has

:23:05.:23:10.

occurred. It may be orderly to accuse my right honourable friend

:23:10.:23:14.

of being a liar, would it be orderly to accuse the front bench

:23:14.:23:20.

opposite of being the most sanctimonious, hypocritical humbug

:23:20.:23:25.

sin recent political memory. their credit, the Liberal Democrats

:23:25.:23:28.

have decided they cannot go along with the Prime Minister's cynical

:23:28.:23:33.

charade, good for them. But Mr Speaker, I struggled to see why

:23:33.:23:36.

they should not join us in the lobby for the vote tonight. They

:23:36.:23:41.

should be in the lobby with us, upholding the integrity of the

:23:41.:23:45.

ministerial code. The house is well aware that this is not a decision

:23:45.:23:49.

for the house. It is a decision for the Prime Minister. He has made

:23:49.:23:57.

that decision. This is, therefore, a political ruse by the Labour

:23:57.:24:06.

Party, whose behaviour on these issues is frankly appalling.

:24:06.:24:09.

Well, as you may have realised, the Lib Dems did not back Labour's call

:24:10.:24:13.

for an inquiry into Jeremy Hunt's behaviour, they abstained. The

:24:13.:24:17.

government still had enough to win the vote with a majority of 38. We

:24:17.:24:20.

are joined by one of the MPs you saw in the film, the Liberal

:24:21.:24:24.

Democrat Don Foster, who speaks for the party on matters cultural.

:24:24.:24:30.

Let's read -- beat about the thing which led to uproar in the House,

:24:30.:24:33.

Labour's Chris Bryant accusing Jeremy Hunt of lying -- speak about.

:24:33.:24:38.

Was it fair that it was allowed by Speaker Bercow? My view is not, I

:24:38.:24:41.

think it brings the house into disrepute to have that sort of

:24:41.:24:44.

language. I understand why the Speaker said what he said, he said

:24:44.:24:48.

he had had some advice that it was going to be OK in those particular

:24:48.:24:52.

circumstances. I don't want it to happen. It is almost irrelevant.

:24:52.:24:56.

The substance of the debate was a situation where Liberal Democrats

:24:56.:25:00.

were very clear we were not going to support the Prime Minister's

:25:00.:25:06.

decision not to refer Jeremy Hunt to the independent adviser. We

:25:06.:25:11.

believe, and questions remain to be answered, that the public want

:25:11.:25:15.

answers to. You have already made clear that you're happy with the

:25:15.:25:19.

way Jeremy Hunt dealt with the bid. Absolutely right. Is it that you

:25:19.:25:22.

are unhappy with the way he handled, or perhaps should have taken more

:25:22.:25:26.

responsibility for the behaviour of his special adviser? Or is it the

:25:26.:25:29.

accusation that he misled Parliament? I think all of the

:25:29.:25:32.

questions that were being raised from the Labour benches were

:25:32.:25:36.

legitimate questions to raise, and they are the ones that I think we,

:25:36.:25:41.

and the public, one to have wants us to. But not just because the

:25:41.:25:45.

Prime Minister says I am satisfied, the public wants to have the

:25:45.:25:49.

independent adviser look at the issue so it can have confidence in

:25:49.:25:54.

the outcome. How angry are your colleagues with first novel, the

:25:54.:25:59.

Liberal Democrats and Speaker Bercow? -- first of all. We are a

:25:59.:26:02.

bit disappointed in the Liberal Democrats. I think Jeremy Hunt give

:26:02.:26:05.

a good account and answered the questions. We expect in a coalition

:26:05.:26:09.

that all members should reach a collective view and support it.

:26:09.:26:13.

This was not an issue of collective responsibility. The Prime Minister

:26:13.:26:18.

did not even consult the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, before

:26:18.:26:22.

he made his announcement. So it wasn't collective... This is not a

:26:22.:26:26.

collective decision-making so there is no collective responsibility.

:26:26.:26:29.

terms of the substance, that is not really what Liberal Democrats were

:26:29.:26:33.

unhappy with. What they are unhappy about is that David Cameron did not

:26:33.:26:37.

consult the Liberal Democrats in terms of the decision? Nick Clegg

:26:37.:26:41.

made absolutely clear a long time ago that if questions remained

:26:41.:26:44.

following Jeremy Hunt's appearance at Leveson, those question should

:26:44.:26:48.

be fully addressed. And if they were about the ministerial code,

:26:48.:26:52.

that should have been done by the independent adviser. That is what

:26:52.:26:55.

the Prime Minister decided not to do. Nick Clegg was clear he doesn't

:26:55.:26:59.

endorse that decision as Prime Minister. You got what you deserve?

:26:59.:27:03.

In my view in a coalition, if the Prime Minister reaches a decision,

:27:03.:27:07.

we expect the supporters of the government to back that decision. I

:27:07.:27:11.

do think that there is some disappointment and some anger. And

:27:11.:27:16.

it may have reverberations for some of the folks to come. There is a

:27:16.:27:19.

lot of unhappiness about Lords reform and it may be that my

:27:20.:27:23.

colleagues think, perhaps they may feel it is something they don't

:27:23.:27:28.

have the same compulsion to vote for. Have you spoken to those who

:27:28.:27:35.

have expressed that view? We have. House of Lords reform was in the

:27:35.:27:39.

Conservative manifesto and Liberal Democrat manifesto. It is part of

:27:39.:27:42.

the agreement that we address this issue and is totally separate from

:27:42.:27:46.

an issue that was a decision made entirely by the Prime Minister, not

:27:46.:27:49.

even with consultation with the Deputy Prime Minister. You have now

:27:49.:27:53.

been warned, are you worried about the repercussions that may now make

:27:53.:27:58.

policy decisions difficult? Frankly, I am not. Because when the

:27:58.:28:02.

Conservative Party members sit down and reflect on this, they will

:28:02.:28:05.

realise that two opposing political parties came together in a

:28:05.:28:09.

coalition to sort out the economic mess. We didn't say we were going

:28:09.:28:12.

to love each other through the process but we will get on and work

:28:12.:28:16.

together to deal with the issues that we agreed to deal with. This

:28:16.:28:19.

isn't making coalition politics looking good, if we now have

:28:19.:28:23.

threats from Tory MPs, saying that we may not back you over policies

:28:23.:28:26.

that were agreed in the manifesto? It has always been the case that

:28:26.:28:31.

there are issues which still divide us. We worked together on the big

:28:31.:28:36.

issues but there will always be occasions where there will put

:28:36.:28:41.

people on one side of the fence or the other who are unhappy with the

:28:41.:28:46.

decision reached. Can I ask you about one issue of substance?

:28:46.:28:50.

Jeremy Hunt saying I have publish all the documents. What do you take

:28:50.:28:54.

that to mean? I think what he made clear was that he published all the

:28:54.:28:58.

documents which he felt were relevant at the time. That isn't

:28:58.:29:02.

what he said. And which he was aware of. Part of the problem was

:29:02.:29:06.

the extent of the Communication taking place between the special

:29:06.:29:09.

adviser and News Corp was not something he was aware of, and it

:29:09.:29:14.

became apparent later. He did in the memo of his own expressing

:29:14.:29:19.

concern about Vince Cable's handling of the BSkyB bid. That was

:29:19.:29:24.

before he was given responsibility. He was specifically asked a

:29:24.:29:28.

question about that in the House of Commons. He denied he had made

:29:28.:29:33.

representations when Vince Cable had responsibility. We know that is

:29:33.:29:37.

not true because he had written a strongly worded memo to the Prime

:29:37.:29:43.

Minister. The second issue was the one you drew attention to, that he

:29:43.:29:49.

claimed he had published the communications. He admitted he may

:29:49.:29:52.

have inadvertently misled Parliament on those counts. If that

:29:52.:29:56.

is the case, you have be come back and apologised and acknowledge it,

:29:56.:30:00.

as soon as you realise, and he didn't.

:30:00.:30:04.

We are about to move on to some other issues. We welcome the was

:30:04.:30:08.

from Scotland, who have been watching First Minister's Questions

:30:08.:30:12.

live from Holy Rood. You're now with The Daily Politics in London.

:30:12.:30:17.

We get more details of Rebekah Brooks's text messages to David

:30:17.:30:22.

Cameron, before his conference breach in 2009. I am so rooting for

:30:22.:30:27.

you tomorrow -- conference speech. Not just as proud friend but

:30:27.:30:30.

because professionally, we are definitely in this together. Speech

:30:30.:30:37.

of your life, yes he can. She was chief executive of News

:30:37.:30:40.

International at the time. I don't think we will be hearing we are all

:30:40.:30:43.

in this together again from the Prime Minister very soon. Is Big

:30:43.:30:46.

Brother watching you? How would you feel about the police and

:30:46.:30:49.

intelligence services having access to the details of your internet

:30:49.:30:56.

use? For the record, I thank the Cat Protection League website very

:30:56.:30:59.

informative indeed -- I find. There are proposals which the government

:30:59.:31:09.
:31:09.:31:09.

says they will help in the fight Local authorities wouldn't have the

:31:09.:31:14.

new powers. The police could track e-mails, websites and mobiles.

:31:14.:31:17.

They'll be able to reveal such details as the time of

:31:17.:31:21.

communications, sender, recipient and location. Basically, the when,

:31:21.:31:25.

who and where of their enquiries. It will remain the case they will

:31:25.:31:33.

not be allowed to access the content of e-mails, texts and

:31:33.:31:36.

mobiles without a warrant from the Home Secretary. This is all about

:31:36.:31:40.

making sure that the police and security services can continue to

:31:40.:31:44.

catch criminals and stop terrorists. At the moment, what they are able

:31:44.:31:49.

to do is get access to what is called communications data, and

:31:49.:31:53.

that's The Who, when and where of telephone calls. They have access

:31:53.:31:58.

to that. The police have used it in 95% of serious organised crime

:31:58.:32:01.

investigations and security services have used it in every

:32:02.:32:04.

counter-terrorism investigation and this is used by the police as

:32:04.:32:09.

evidence to prosecute criminals and put them behind bars. In the new

:32:10.:32:13.

world, people communicate differently. They are no longer

:32:14.:32:18.

using mobiles, but the internet, so we want to update the ability of

:32:18.:32:22.

the services to have access to the data. It's not about the content or

:32:22.:32:26.

reading people's e-mails or listening to their calls. This is

:32:26.:32:30.

purely about the communications, which is the information about who,

:32:30.:32:34.

when and where made the communications and as I say, it's

:32:34.:32:37.

about ensuring we can catch criminals and stop terrorists.

:32:37.:32:42.

was the Home Secretary. We are joined by one of her many ministers,

:32:42.:32:44.

James Brokenshire and the Conservative MP, David Davis, who

:32:44.:32:49.

is not one of her ministers. Welcome to both you. The Home

:32:49.:32:54.

Secretary says she needs this to fight crime. She is wrong. Look, if

:32:54.:32:58.

you are a burglar and you are captured and convicted on the basis

:32:58.:33:01.

of evidence found in his house of stolen materials, that happens

:33:01.:33:06.

quite a lot, it doesn't mean the next door neighbour should have his

:33:06.:33:10.

house searched without a warrant, which is the logic of this. There

:33:10.:33:16.

are of course, important times when the State needs access to where you

:33:16.:33:20.

are, what your e-mails are to and from, but it's really important

:33:20.:33:23.

they should get a judge to issue the warrant, as he would to search

:33:23.:33:27.

a house. Why don't you? Well, to take David's point on, this is

:33:28.:33:31.

actually about nuts and bolts policing, on the ensuring that the

:33:31.:33:35.

police are able to know who is communicating with whom. As they do

:33:35.:33:41.

at the moment, that's with mobiles and fixed lines and also on some of

:33:41.:33:46.

the internet traffic. That is not with warrants at the moment. If you

:33:46.:33:49.

are seeking to gain the information on what you are saying yes, that is

:33:49.:33:53.

warranted, but there is oversight with the interception of

:33:53.:33:56.

communications and ensuring that any decisions are made, they are

:33:56.:34:01.

made at a level to give that. you were to tap my phone, do you

:34:01.:34:06.

need a warrant? If it's a wire, listening, yes, it is, because of

:34:06.:34:09.

the intrusive nature. If you want to know where I'm going on the

:34:09.:34:13.

internet, shouldn't you need a warrant? It's a different level of

:34:13.:34:18.

intrusion and therefore it is a separate system that we have for

:34:18.:34:21.

this, with a senior officer making that decision and it has to be

:34:21.:34:26.

based on the fact that it's an investigation of crime, it to be

:34:26.:34:30.

for the protection of life and that system itself is overseen by a

:34:30.:34:33.

Commissioner, so it's not that there aren't safeguards, there are.

:34:33.:34:39.

It's a different type of system. You have one police officer giving

:34:39.:34:42.

permission to another police officer and that's not satisfying.

:34:42.:34:45.

How many commissioners are there? One of the things that we are

:34:45.:34:50.

looking at, as part of the Bill, is the strength of that. The point of

:34:50.:34:56.

this question is this - if 2010, the last year for which there were

:34:56.:35:02.

numbers, there were 5 50,000 accesss. That's a lot of feed files

:35:02.:35:04.

and gangsters, but also it's almost impossible to oversee something

:35:04.:35:08.

like that and it's so big, because there isn't a restraint, there

:35:08.:35:14.

isn't a judge saying, "I'm sorry, no that's too far. It's not

:35:14.:35:20.

relevant." But the point that David makes and the number was 550,000

:35:20.:35:25.

last year, but that isn't individuals. If you look at an

:35:25.:35:30.

inquiry it may generate 1,000 requests. There are 18 million

:35:30.:35:33.

individual phone subscriptions and around 129 billion texts each year,

:35:33.:35:38.

so what we are saying is as we live our lives online increasingly, so

:35:38.:35:41.

do the criminals and therefore Aztec knollgy changes we need to

:35:42.:35:48.

reflect that in the tools available to the police to be able to police.

:35:48.:35:54.

The FBI in a country six times as big of us have 14,000 equivalent

:35:54.:35:59.

applications in the same year. That is how much we overuse this already.

:35:59.:36:03.

Secondly, other countries, Germany, the Czech Republic, they tried to

:36:03.:36:06.

introduce even the old system, before e-mails and it was struck

:36:06.:36:09.

down by their courts, because it was such an intrusion on privacy.

:36:09.:36:15.

Where you are, who you are calling, and in fact to a very large extent

:36:15.:36:21.

where you are all day is given. It's excessive. It shouldn't be

:36:21.:36:26.

that the State should interfere and intrude., as was said by David

:36:26.:36:29.

Cameron and the Shadow Home Secretary and the Shadow Attorney

:36:29.:36:32.

General when this was Government policy under Labour and we were the

:36:32.:36:40.

opposition. Firstly, what guarantee do I have that you are not reading

:36:40.:36:48.

my e-mail? Well, a number of things. The law itself provides that under

:36:48.:36:51.

our draft bill that nothing constitutes that interception. That

:36:51.:36:54.

would be an offence and nothing we are doing in the proposals

:36:54.:36:58.

published today do that. But the government can break the law. So

:36:58.:37:02.

what is the guarantee? If you have access to my e-mails, so that you

:37:02.:37:06.

know where I'm sending and to whom I'm sending, how can I be sure you

:37:06.:37:11.

are not reading it as well? Well, let me just clarify on the fact

:37:11.:37:14.

that it isn't Government that would be holding that information. It

:37:14.:37:18.

would be the individual phone and communications providers. Therefore,

:37:18.:37:24.

there are safeguards in place around that, that the data is

:37:24.:37:27.

protected under, to ensure that's held securely and separately

:37:27.:37:31.

requests have to comply and be based on the fact it's solving

:37:31.:37:37.

crime and protecting life. Let me get this right, my safeguard is

:37:37.:37:42.

Google? No, it's not. You just said it was. That's right. The safeguard

:37:42.:37:45.

is the law that is there, and the commissioners that operate around

:37:45.:37:51.

this and the fact that they will be doing further audits and

:37:51.:37:54.

examinations of that work. Ultimately if you break the law,

:37:54.:37:59.

it's criminal. To misuse that information. You can send someone

:37:59.:38:07.

to prison. Secondly, could I now give you a list of browsers on the

:38:07.:38:11.

internet which I'm sure most criminals will get to, which will

:38:11.:38:14.

scramble my I SP address and make it impossible for you to find out

:38:14.:38:21.

who I am and who I'm sending it to or should I give you a range of

:38:21.:38:26.

apps called VPNs, which you can't break? Actually, Andrew, you make

:38:26.:38:30.

the case very clearly as to why the Government needs to change. All the

:38:30.:38:37.

bad guys will use this. The point is that 95% of the organised crime

:38:37.:38:41.

cases have a communications data element there. That capacity is

:38:41.:38:47.

there. Let's pick one, 7/7, and we are talking about terrorism. They

:38:47.:38:53.

used phones. Of course, we can track down where they were, but

:38:53.:38:57.

they were pre-paid and cash bought. The ones that drug dealers use.

:38:57.:39:03.

can do the same with e-mails. You hack somebody's WiFi or go to a

:39:03.:39:08.

cafe and use a created e-mail identity. No contact. The ways

:39:08.:39:13.

around this are Legion. The people who will be caught by this are the

:39:13.:39:19.

incompetent and innocent. I'll give you the final word, and what do you

:39:19.:39:27.

make of this? It's like looking at Jeremy mustn't on the previous clip.

:39:27.:39:32.

That bad? I think it's the greatest privilege. I grew up believing it

:39:32.:39:35.

was the greatest privilege to represent their country in

:39:35.:39:37.

Parliament and their constituents in Parliament and I look at things

:39:37.:39:42.

like that and I think, they live in a parallel universe. I'm out there

:39:42.:39:46.

sweating to pieces, paying 50% tax and creating jobs, which is more

:39:46.:39:50.

than anybody in the chamber has done and most of them haven't had a

:39:50.:39:55.

commercial job to be honest, including the Prime Minister.

:39:55.:40:01.

that bit, but I'm at a loss as to what this has to do with e-mails.

:40:01.:40:04.

You've lost me. Straight to the Prime Minister on e-mails. I bet

:40:04.:40:09.

you he changes his mind about this kind of thing when he reads acres

:40:09.:40:14.

of print about his texts with Rebekah Brooks. It's possible.

:40:15.:40:20.

are they there. He may say, of course, "If all mine have been out

:40:20.:40:25.

there, so can injures." Do we not have better things to do with our

:40:25.:40:30.

time in all seriousness? The Leveson and this thing, we need to

:40:30.:40:33.

pursue an agenda for jobs and growth and none of that seems to me

:40:33.:40:37.

to be happening. The final word to you. I appreciate it. If you

:40:38.:40:42.

promise not to read my e-mails. are not reading those. Ultimately.

:40:42.:40:47.

Do you promise? I do personally, I won't be reading your e-mails.

:40:47.:40:52.

You've been privatised into somebody else? I'm only teasing you.

:40:53.:40:57.

Make the final point. This does matter and I absolutely hear the

:40:57.:41:01.

points about liberty and freedom, that's why many draft that we

:41:01.:41:04.

published today has significant safeguards in it, but ultimately,

:41:04.:41:07.

doing nothing is not an option, because the ability for the police

:41:07.:41:11.

to do the ordinary stuff about bringing bad guys to justice will

:41:11.:41:16.

be eroded unless we take action. Where are we in the process on

:41:16.:41:25.

this? A long way to go? Briefly. Draft published today. Oversight by

:41:25.:41:28.

a joint committee of the House of Commons and the House of Lords.

:41:28.:41:32.

That is expected to report back at the end of the year. Are the

:41:32.:41:42.
:41:42.:41:45.

Scottish viewers covered by this? It's a UK-wide. It's a UK-wide

:41:45.:41:47.

publication. Thank you very much. How to solve youth unemployment.

:41:47.:41:53.

It's something the Government's keen to tackle. A report from the

:41:53.:41:58.

CBI shows that many firms think school and colleague leavers lack

:41:58.:42:02.

the skills. Our guest runs a scheme and we have been to see it in

:42:02.:42:12.
:42:12.:42:15.

action. A college, some students and a direct link to business.

:42:15.:42:21.

Heather. This course at Oldham College is one of 130 so-called

:42:22.:42:25.

career academies around the country to teach people the skills they

:42:25.:42:31.

need. You did something really well there, which is that you shook my

:42:31.:42:36.

hand properly. Everybody looked me in the eye. Each student gets to to

:42:36.:42:40.

an internship with a local business and some will get jobs out of it.

:42:40.:42:43.

For 19-year-old Lynne it's opened the door to higher education,

:42:43.:42:48.

something no-one in her family's ever done. If I went to this class

:42:48.:42:52.

I didn't think I would go to university. I thought to finish the

:42:52.:42:57.

course and do something extra or get a job, but I thought why not?

:42:57.:43:01.

You go to university and get the experience and now I have the work

:43:01.:43:06.

experience, so there's no way that when I get out of uniy I go and get

:43:06.:43:14.

a job, because I will have the experience. This is one of the

:43:14.:43:16.

hardest-hit areas. Oldham has some of the highest numbers across the

:43:17.:43:21.

country of young people claiming jobseeker's allowance. Outside this

:43:21.:43:27.

job centre, I meet one young bricklayer who has been out of work.

:43:27.:43:31.

I'm not looking for work as much, because I see it as a waste of time,

:43:31.:43:35.

but the work is through agencies, where they could phone you one day

:43:35.:43:39.

and then you are not in for four. It's nothing proper. It's not

:43:39.:43:44.

strong how it used to be. They can get rid of you. More than 2.5

:43:44.:43:47.

million people are out of work in the first three months of this year.

:43:47.:43:51.

Just over one million were young people. The north-west was the

:43:51.:43:57.

region with the highest percentage of 16 to 24-year-olds out of work.

:43:57.:44:03.

But this Oldham factory has 15 vabg siz it can't fill. -- vacancies it

:44:03.:44:10.

can't fill. She puts in a number of different notes. It takes it into

:44:10.:44:15.

the machine. The finance director, who is mentoring this student, set

:44:15.:44:18.

the Government -- said the Government has to work with

:44:18.:44:22.

businesses. It's important to talk to the employers and understanding

:44:22.:44:26.

the employers' needs and making sure that the colleges and

:44:26.:44:30.

universities deliver what the employers really want. Would that

:44:30.:44:36.

do enough to get young people into jobs? The minister for employment,

:44:36.:44:41.

Chris Grayling is with us now. Governments have tried many things

:44:41.:44:44.

to deal with unemployment and particularly youth unemployment.

:44:44.:44:47.

Why will the Government's latest scheme work better than the others

:44:47.:44:57.
:44:57.:44:58.

Two parts, the first is through the work programme. We have stepped

:44:58.:45:02.

back and created a black box approach. We are saying to the

:45:02.:45:07.

organisations involved, you do what works, we won't seek to set

:45:07.:45:10.

parameters but will only pay you when you are successful. The aim is

:45:10.:45:14.

to allow the most successful approaches to flourish. Alongside

:45:14.:45:19.

that what we are trying to do, and what the project we have seen it

:45:19.:45:22.

does so well, is we are trying to get people into the workplace

:45:22.:45:26.

through our work experience scheme and the support we are providing

:45:26.:45:29.

with these contracts. Very often a person coming out of university

:45:29.:45:31.

without previous experience is up against someone five or six years

:45:32.:45:35.

older, has come from another country, maybe more experienced and

:45:35.:45:38.

more qualified and the employer is tempted to go for the more

:45:38.:45:42.

experienced person. If we can get them into the workplace, the

:45:42.:45:45.

employer starts to build a workplace and says, they are pretty

:45:45.:45:52.

good, I will keep them. -- starts to build eight impression.

:45:52.:45:57.

problem might be that the majority of the jobs were created in the

:45:57.:45:59.

public sector. The jobs that are being created under new government

:45:59.:46:06.

schemes, are the permanent jobs? Are they full-time jobs? We are not

:46:06.:46:09.

trying to create artificial jobs. What is the evidence that it will

:46:09.:46:14.

work? My goal, if you look at a young person coming out of school,

:46:14.:46:18.

college or university, are we better off putting them in a six-

:46:18.:46:21.

month placement which has nothing beyond that, in a part of the

:46:21.:46:25.

economy where there isn't going to be a lot of growth in the future,

:46:25.:46:29.

all the better trying to get them into a private sector employer,

:46:29.:46:32.

with an apprenticeship, in the hope it builds a career for them. What

:46:32.:46:37.

is your view on that? I applaud the idea that people should have an

:46:37.:46:40.

opportunity to go into the workplace and the career academy

:46:40.:46:47.

scheme, which I chair in the UK, that is what we set out to do.

:46:47.:46:52.

People come into our scheme and we help them by giving them a mentor

:46:52.:46:55.

and a six week paid employment opportunity. That is the important

:46:55.:47:00.

bit, it is paid. The fact that it is paid is very important. The

:47:00.:47:03.

people on the whole are in parts of the country where it is very

:47:03.:47:08.

difficult. More importantly, it is being there, on their CV, when they

:47:08.:47:11.

leave school or university, they have already been in the workplace.

:47:11.:47:15.

We find that people become more employable and raise their

:47:15.:47:20.

aspirations. Do they get jobs? do. We have put 4,000 people

:47:20.:47:24.

through the skin, they -- we have spent something like �8 million

:47:24.:47:28.

with almost no government help whatsoever. -- through the scheme.

:47:28.:47:33.

We have done all this, I have never been invited into the DWP to talk

:47:33.:47:37.

about the scheme. Very kindly the minister said before we came on air

:47:37.:47:41.

that he would come and visit us, and this -- we are delighted.

:47:41.:47:45.

this is working, surely this is the model you should be looking at,

:47:45.:47:50.

even if you want to say you want to step back. With all due respect, it

:47:50.:47:58.

Stop we pay for success but we don't so, you must do it this way.

:47:58.:48:02.

If an organisation has a good way of supporting people back to work,

:48:02.:48:08.

the door is open to help young people get back into the workplace.

:48:08.:48:11.

Why is unemployment so high for young people? One of the things

:48:11.:48:15.

that tends not to be spotted is that if you cut the number of

:48:15.:48:19.

people want Jobseeker's Allowance and benefits overall, it has fallen

:48:19.:48:24.

over the last two years. Claimant count figures, the reforms are

:48:24.:48:28.

moving from one benefit to the other. You would think there are

:48:28.:48:32.

jobs hanging on trees by the way you are talking. Why isn't

:48:32.:48:35.

unemployment coming down specifically in large numbers?

:48:35.:48:38.

are going through a difficult economic time. So there are no jobs,

:48:38.:48:45.

that is not what -- that is what I It is not true that there are no

:48:45.:48:51.

jobs. In Oldham, they could not fill 15 jobs. That is the other

:48:51.:48:56.

side, there are jobs. Young people are not qualified properly. Yes.

:48:56.:49:00.

Graduates are unemployed in large numbers as well, who you might say

:49:01.:49:04.

are qualified educationally. They have not had enough work place

:49:04.:49:08.

experience. In a different scheme were I take ethnic-minority

:49:08.:49:14.

graduates straight into university, we have to equip them with

:49:14.:49:18.

workplace skills. That is crucial for the bit you talk to employers,

:49:18.:49:21.

it is often not about, do I have somebody who knows how to operate

:49:21.:49:25.

the machinery or the software, it is actually somebody who is not yet

:49:25.:49:28.

fully geared up or experienced in the workplace. That is what

:49:28.:49:32.

employers are looking for. If you can get them into the workplace,

:49:32.:49:36.

they start to build those skills. If you are taking them from 16 to

:49:36.:49:43.

24, would you say that university it is not the great panacea, that

:49:43.:49:47.

going to get a job after school might be better. Is that the sort

:49:47.:49:54.

of thing you might guide people to do? So 62% of the young people who

:49:54.:49:58.

have been through our programme go into higher education. At least

:49:58.:50:03.

half of them, they are the first person in their family to go to

:50:03.:50:07.

university. What I would say, it is a not-for-profit scheme, the

:50:07.:50:10.

government largely out source is what it does to profit

:50:10.:50:15.

organisations. We are a charity. We get private sector employers like

:50:16.:50:20.

me to provide other private-sector employers, like my clients, to come

:50:20.:50:25.

together and work with schools and colleges to deliver this programme.

:50:25.:50:28.

On the manners, on the, I can't be bothered to get up and no one, do

:50:28.:50:33.

you find that? Getting people to go to work every day is a real problem.

:50:33.:50:38.

The you have found that? We teach them. This idea of a lost

:50:38.:50:42.

generation, is that exaggerated or really true? It is partially

:50:42.:50:46.

exaggerated. If you look at young people have become unemployed, most

:50:46.:50:50.

come off benefits within three months. There is a called young

:50:50.:50:54.

people who are struggling, not getting to work. We have to do

:50:54.:50:59.

everything we can to help them. I don't want to countenance a lost

:50:59.:51:03.

generation because we want to make sure that does not happen.

:51:03.:51:10.

Spare a thought for Ed Balls, who only wants to be loved. R. The

:51:10.:51:13.

Shadow Chancellor has apparently spent thousands of pounds on

:51:14.:51:19.

private polling on an effort to find out if voters like him. Ed, we

:51:19.:51:23.

could have saved a lot of money. One call and we could have told you.

:51:23.:51:27.

Anyway, it is sweet and we thought we would help him out. We thought

:51:27.:51:32.

we would ask what people thought of the Chancellor, too.

:51:32.:51:36.

We have come to Spitalfields Market, a stone's throw from the City of

:51:36.:51:40.

London, to find out if people prefer a George Osborne or Ed Balls.

:51:40.:51:43.

There will be voting with these, which I suppose for balance we

:51:43.:51:49.

should call coloured spheres. both irritates me. Also irritates

:51:49.:51:55.

me an awful lot more than was born. Very positive. -- Ed Balls

:51:55.:52:00.

irritates me an awful lot more. Balls has got it. What has he got?

:52:00.:52:05.

He is not looking like Mr Bean and doing a whirling dervish act.

:52:05.:52:10.

don't like Osborne for by just don't like him. But you are a Tory

:52:10.:52:16.

voter? Yes. He doesn't make the right choices, the economy is not

:52:16.:52:19.

growing. A what do you like about George Osborne? I know more about

:52:19.:52:27.

him, Ed Balls doesn't seem as visible. It has to be... What do

:52:27.:52:31.

you think it is about him? People do have quite a strong reaction to

:52:31.:52:38.

him. I have heard on the grapevine that he can be a bit belligerent.

:52:38.:52:44.

Osborne. Why? I don't trust Ed Balls. I wouldn't trust Ed Balls as

:52:44.:52:47.

far as I could throw him. And I don't like Osborne either. It is

:52:48.:52:57.
:52:58.:52:59.

not much of a choice. Ed Balls is BLEEP. Osborne is a gap Les BLEEP.

:52:59.:53:06.

This guy. He is less of a BLEEP. have never heard so much bad

:53:06.:53:10.

language during -- doing one of these things were but I am amazed

:53:10.:53:13.

how many people can't pick either, but it is looking pretty evenly

:53:13.:53:17.

matched. Coming up for lunchtime, who would you rather have lunch

:53:17.:53:22.

with? Definitely Ed Balls. He would be entertaining. Why would you talk

:53:22.:53:31.

about? Current affairs. Ed Balls looks the more rich. Really?

:53:31.:53:34.

Because he is fatter so I feel like he has more money to feed himself.

:53:35.:53:40.

A appearances can be deceiving. ? George Osborne is loaded. Who

:53:40.:53:43.

would you rather be stuck on a desert island with out of those

:53:43.:53:51.

two? Who are they? Who would you rather share a flat with? Why?

:53:51.:53:55.

is better looking. Who would you rather your daughter came home

:53:55.:54:01.

with? Ed Balls, I suppose. He would make the better boy friend, George

:54:01.:54:07.

Osborne or Ed Balls? Oh... For most of the morning, it was neck and

:54:07.:54:11.

neck but in the last few minutes, George Osborne has just snuck into

:54:11.:54:14.

the lead. The fact is, for most people, it was like choosing

:54:14.:54:20.

between a poke in the eye or a kick in the teeth.

:54:20.:54:27.

Adam's vocabulary has been much expanded. It is an educational life

:54:27.:54:35.

that the BBC. We have succeeded where he failed. Claire Perry, we

:54:35.:54:40.

are told, she has got a tattoo dedicated to George Osborne. Steady

:54:40.:54:45.

on. She won't tell us where it is. And we are not going to ask,

:54:45.:54:48.

because we are frightened of the answer. Why should we love Ed

:54:48.:54:54.

Balls? Here's a good bloke. Even the press lobby, they say they

:54:54.:54:58.

enjoy spending time with him. He is good to have a drink with. I agree

:54:58.:55:03.

with that. He is a good laugh, he cooks well. He has not cooked for

:55:03.:55:09.

me. I'll have a word, see if he can invite you round. He is good

:55:09.:55:15.

company? Yes. Why should we love George Osborne. Equally, he is a

:55:15.:55:20.

great guy. He runs a very good team, trying to make these incredibly

:55:20.:55:24.

tough decisions. Who wants to go into politics to be popular? It is

:55:24.:55:28.

a nightmare. People think I spent my entire life swearing and cursing

:55:28.:55:31.

because this is what they read in the papers. No, they just watch it

:55:31.:55:35.

on a Daily Politics. If you ask people about Labour's policy, half

:55:35.:55:40.

of them have not got a clue. All of this is based on images and sound

:55:40.:55:44.

bites and what the media says. When we tried to dig behind it, these

:55:44.:55:50.

public images have nothing to do with it. Can George Osborne cook?

:55:50.:55:56.

Yes, he can. And he hires women. hires women? As a stay at home

:55:56.:56:00.

housewife, he gave me my big break into politics. What is his best

:56:01.:56:07.

dish? I can't possibly tell you. Because you don't know. The fact is

:56:07.:56:12.

that neither is that popular. It maybe something about being

:56:12.:56:16.

Chancellor, or Shadow Chancellor, they are both jobs designed to make

:56:16.:56:21.

enemies, aren't they? Yes, it is a tough economic time, people are

:56:22.:56:26.

really struggling. I think they blame all politicians for the mess

:56:26.:56:30.

that they think the country is in. And we will have the fight about

:56:30.:56:35.

who is really to blame. My stop them blame you, to be fair. Could

:56:35.:56:42.

you leave him alone? -- most of them blame you, to be fair. It is a

:56:42.:56:48.

tough time. It is. In the House of Commons in particular, the culture

:56:49.:56:53.

is to knock spots off each other. That doesn't show people in a very

:56:53.:56:59.

positive light. They both have a problem, people who know them say

:56:59.:57:02.

they have a much better image privately than they do with the

:57:02.:57:09.

public, which I think is true of both of them. You judge people on

:57:09.:57:13.

the teams they get together, and George and Ed have loyal and good

:57:13.:57:17.

team around them. Ultimately, you judge people on who they get to

:57:17.:57:20.

work with over the years. And how they treat people around them. I

:57:20.:57:27.

think both of them to a regional -- do a reasonable -- both of them do

:57:27.:57:37.
:57:37.:57:37.

They are obviously concerned about their public image, or Ed Balls is.

:57:38.:57:43.

What do they need to be to be more likeable to the public? Why do you

:57:43.:57:50.

have to be likeable? They want to be. I have met them both and I

:57:50.:57:54.

would quite happily, and have done, spent time with them both. The

:57:54.:57:57.

thing I think they have in common, I find they are both incredibly

:57:57.:58:03.

clever. You would back me up on that. Personally, I think clever is

:58:03.:58:12.

Go think they should spend too much time worrying about being likeable

:58:12.:58:16.

-- I don't think they should. They should be more serious. If they

:58:16.:58:20.

started talking about playing computer games, I don't think

:58:20.:58:24.

people will be that fast. If he was my son sitting there muttering, I

:58:24.:58:28.

would tell him to shut up and he would not get his Nintendo for a

:58:28.:58:33.

week. It is annoying, irritating, juvenile behaviour and the House of

:58:33.:58:40.

Commons could do with more of a serious approach. Right... Thank

:58:40.:58:46.

you for getting into the spirit of a non-partisan discussion. That is

:58:46.:58:51.

it for today, with a core of our guests. The One o'clock News is

:58:51.:58:55.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS