:00:27. > :00:34.Good afternoon. Welcome to The Daily Politics. The contagion in
:00:34. > :00:36.the eurozone continues to spread. Italy's cost of borrowing source to
:00:36. > :00:39.record levels. Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi faces losing a
:00:39. > :00:42.vote in the Italian parliament this afternoon. We will bring you the
:00:42. > :00:48.latest. Back home, is the career of Home
:00:48. > :00:51.Secretary, Theresa May, in jeopardy. Jed she told the Commons that
:00:51. > :00:56.immigration officials acted without her authority when they lifted
:00:56. > :00:58.controls for non-European nationals. Today she is grilled by the select
:00:58. > :01:03.commity. The Government's ambitious plans
:01:03. > :01:06.for a �32 billion high-speed rail link between London and Birmingham
:01:06. > :01:16.are dammed with faint praise in a report published today. We will
:01:16. > :01:19.
:01:19. > :01:24.debate the pros and the cons of these ambitious plans.
:01:24. > :01:30.Our Trade Minister, Lord Digby Jones is with us.
:01:30. > :01:34.The yield on Italian bonds reach the 6.6% yesterday. Not a good omen.
:01:34. > :01:39.The mark of Berlusconi. This yield is the interest they pay on money
:01:39. > :01:47.that they borrow, called the yield, it reached today, I think, this
:01:47. > :01:53.morning, 6.74%, it is the highest level that these yields have been
:01:53. > :02:00.at since Italy joined the euro. Italy has debts of, let me get it
:02:00. > :02:05.right, 1.9 trillion euro, almost 2 trillion euros. As a huge economy,
:02:05. > :02:09.that dwarfs Greece, and it has more bonds that any country in the world,
:02:09. > :02:15.other than America and Japan. That is a lot of dent to service. It is
:02:15. > :02:21.thought to be too big for the other eurocountries to bail out if it
:02:21. > :02:25.goes pear-shaped. If Italy goes down it could be catastrophic. The
:02:25. > :02:28.Chancellor, George Osborne, called on colleagues to be clear about
:02:28. > :02:33.their intention at the next big meeting. The eurozone needs to show
:02:33. > :02:35.the world it can stand behind its currency. We can't wait upon
:02:35. > :02:39.developments in Athens and Rome. We have to make progress here in
:02:39. > :02:42.Brussels. If we don't, that will continue to have a very damaging
:02:42. > :02:45.effect on the entire European economy, including the British
:02:45. > :02:49.economy, and certainly speaking as the British Finance Minister, the
:02:49. > :02:53.best possible boost the British economy could have this autumn
:02:53. > :02:57.would be a resolution of the eurozone crisis. That was the
:02:57. > :03:01.Chancellor, George Osborne, the political situation in Italy is
:03:01. > :03:05.also deteriorating. The future of Italian Prime Minister, Silvio
:03:05. > :03:08.Berlusconi, looks in doubt, with support ebbing away at home. He
:03:08. > :03:13.faces losing a vote in the Italian parliament this afternoon, bringing
:03:13. > :03:18.yet more political uncertainty to the eurozone. Let's get the latest
:03:18. > :03:23.from our correspondent in Rome. Is it inevitable now that
:03:23. > :03:27.Berlusconi will go? Not if you listen to Mr Berlusconi himself.
:03:27. > :03:31.He's all over the Italian media this morning, talking about
:03:31. > :03:37.fighting on. All weekend he says that he has the number, he has a
:03:37. > :03:41.majority, he is going forward, he's not going anywhere. There is
:03:41. > :03:45.speculation that there have been just two many defections from his
:03:45. > :03:49.side of the House, and that he really maybe in trouble. What we
:03:49. > :03:53.will see in the afternoon is a vote on a budget measure, important that
:03:53. > :03:56.it goes ahead. The opposition may not try to vote it down, the
:03:56. > :03:59.opposition may abstain. We should get a good sense of whether Mr
:03:59. > :04:03.Berlusconi is right, whether he really does have the numbers he
:04:03. > :04:08.needs to continue to govern Italy. If doesn't, then you might expect a
:04:08. > :04:12.confidence motion within days from the opposition, and then it would
:04:12. > :04:16.seem possible that Mr Berlusconi would go down to humiliating defeat,
:04:16. > :04:20.if he didn't resign beforehand. It is all to be played for in the
:04:20. > :04:23.hours ahead. Economically, is it hitting home that actually Italy's
:04:23. > :04:30.detects are so big, that the rest of Europe wouldn't be able to bail
:04:30. > :04:35.them out any way? I think the analysts, the thinkers, the
:04:35. > :04:38.politicians, and many people of that ilk are acutely aware, and
:04:39. > :04:45.desperately worried when you speak to any politician about the way
:04:45. > :04:51.ahead for Italy at the moment, on the streets people aren't just
:04:51. > :04:54.quite as wired into the intricacies of the bond markets. Ordinary
:04:54. > :04:57.people on the street feel the economy is seizing up, there are
:04:57. > :05:01.fewer opportunities, life is getting harder. If you say to them,
:05:01. > :05:08.do you believe this country is on course for something like Greece,
:05:08. > :05:13.they tend to think, surely not. This country is rich, just two big
:05:13. > :05:17.to be badly managed into that - too big to be badly managed into that
:05:17. > :05:20.sort of situation. Digby Jones, I put it to you, getting rid of Mr
:05:20. > :05:23.Berlusconi, it may be a necessary condition for moving forward, but
:05:23. > :05:26.it is anything but a sufficient condition? Absolutely right. It
:05:26. > :05:30.will kick the can down the road. But at the end of the day, the
:05:30. > :05:34.western democracies have got to understand that for years we have
:05:34. > :05:38.all paid ourselves money we have never earned. And if you stop a guy
:05:39. > :05:43.on the street, in Italy or outside St Paul's, they will all blame the
:05:43. > :05:48.bankers. This is different to that. The 2008 recession you can blame
:05:48. > :05:53.the bankers for that, you could, a lot of other reasons too, this is
:05:53. > :05:55.about actually the other way round, the bankers have plugged the gap
:05:55. > :05:59.for years, so democratic politicians can say to people, you
:05:59. > :06:03.can have lots and lots of prizes and we are not making the money.
:06:03. > :06:07.Italy has its private savings profile fine, it is not a prove lig
:06:07. > :06:12.gate nation personally, people save, what it is, is they have paid
:06:12. > :06:17.themselves money they have never earned as a nation. Only Zimbabwe
:06:17. > :06:21.has had a lower growth profile, on an average over ten years, than
:06:21. > :06:25.Italy. It has not grown. At home f the income coming in isn't
:06:25. > :06:28.sufficient for your credit card, your overdraft and mortgage, you go
:06:28. > :06:31.bust. In business, if you are not selling enough, and you have lots
:06:31. > :06:36.of debt, you go bust. Countries are no different. What you have is
:06:36. > :06:39.Italy's growth over ten years has been very, very poor, their debt,
:06:39. > :06:44.their public spending, their pensions, health, education, their
:06:44. > :06:47.roads, has been high, gap, plug it with debt. Suddenly, everybody
:06:48. > :06:51.around Europe is going, can't afford all this, and there is no
:06:51. > :06:55.growth profile to get them out of it. No politician, elected instead
:06:55. > :07:00.of Berlusconi will give them an answer other tharpbgs pay your tax,
:07:00. > :07:04.because payment of tax is a voluntary event in Italy. So pay
:07:04. > :07:07.your tax, and sorry, you can't retire at 55, you will have to pay
:07:07. > :07:17.more in all you do, and you will have less. Same in Greece, same in
:07:17. > :07:24.France. I have to say, same in Britain. That is your issue.
:07:24. > :07:28.problem I suggest in Italy, before Berlusconi, in 50 years Italy had
:07:28. > :07:31.49 different prime ministers, that is hardly a recipe for financial
:07:32. > :07:37.stability. And they are now talking of putting in, not an elected
:07:37. > :07:42.politician, but Mr Monti, a technocrat, a euopean commissioner,
:07:42. > :07:46.he will have no democratic legitimacy, there will be
:07:46. > :07:50.demonstrations on the street. Isn't it heading at some stage for a
:07:50. > :07:54.default? Historically, that is why Italy has said we will join the
:07:54. > :07:59.euro in the morning, we don't mind taking rules and regulations from
:07:59. > :08:02.Brussels, we don't intend to comply. Why? Deep in their souls, they know
:08:02. > :08:06.they don't have prime ministers who have ever led their nation. Having
:08:06. > :08:11.a technocrat, I would submit, is going to make no difference, at the
:08:11. > :08:14.end of the day they will go on the street and stop it happening.
:08:14. > :08:17.Therefore, whether you manage it within the euro, or whether you
:08:17. > :08:21.come out of the euro, there will, and I think you are right, there
:08:21. > :08:24.will be a form of default. You can't afford it pay the debt back.
:08:24. > :08:29.The fundamental problem, given the sums of money we are talking about,
:08:29. > :08:34.next year the Italians have 300 billion of their euros of debt
:08:34. > :08:44.comes to maturity, they can only pay that back by borrowing another
:08:44. > :08:44.
:08:44. > :08:49.300 billion. It is a bit like a popbzcy scheme the Italian
:08:49. > :08:55.Government - popbz did I scheme the Italian Government, and there is -
:08:55. > :08:59.Ponzi scheme the Italian Government, and no nation or group of nations
:08:59. > :09:04.can pay them out? No European leader will say, vote for me, I
:09:04. > :09:09.will close your libraries, and give the money to Italy. Turkeys don't
:09:09. > :09:14.vote for Christmas, that is why there will be a default, because
:09:14. > :09:18.there isn't enough money to bail them out. The IMF has been sent to
:09:18. > :09:22.Rome to monitor Mr Berlusconi's behaviour, I'm told a few women's
:09:22. > :09:26.groups will have to monitor his behaviour too.
:09:26. > :09:30.They will take their place in the queue. It is the daily quiz,
:09:30. > :09:36.sticking with yuerpbgs the question for today is which basic food stuff
:09:36. > :09:43.has the EU announced must have the ingredients listed on the packaging.
:09:43. > :09:49.Peanut, eggs, honey or potatoes. At the end of the show, Digby will
:09:49. > :09:59.give us the right answer. What is the ingredient of an egg,
:09:59. > :10:04.
:10:04. > :10:08.but an egg, how many committees him, it might have been a trick
:10:08. > :10:15.question. There is a joke on the Internet at the expense of Theresa
:10:15. > :10:22.May, it is knock, knock. Who's there? Come in.
:10:22. > :10:27.Miss May is under fire after it was revealed that border controls were
:10:27. > :10:31.waved on non-nationals. Yesterday she revealed they were acting
:10:32. > :10:36.without her knowledge, then we extended a scheme that was only
:10:36. > :10:41.intended to apply to non-EU passport holders. I didn't given my
:10:41. > :10:46.authorisation to any of these decision, indeed, I told officials
:10:46. > :10:49.explicitly that the pilot was to go no further than we agreed. As a
:10:49. > :10:52.result of these unauthorised actions, we will never know how
:10:52. > :10:56.many people entered the country who should have been prevented from
:10:56. > :11:00.doing so after being flagged by the warnings index. That was May, in
:11:00. > :11:05.just under half an hour, the Home Secretary will face another
:11:05. > :11:10.grilling. This time from MPs on the Home Affairs Select Committee. I'm
:11:10. > :11:13.joined now by our correspondent. How hard a time will she get?
:11:13. > :11:17.would be Home Secretary, first you have to go through that in the
:11:17. > :11:19.House of Commons. There was one moment where she simply didn't seem
:11:19. > :11:23.sure where her pilot was being applied across the country. You
:11:23. > :11:27.look at your diary for the next day and think things can only get
:11:27. > :11:31.better, and you see you have the Home Affairs Select Committee with
:11:31. > :11:35.Keith Vaz, that will be a joy. No, of course it won't be eezy, the
:11:35. > :11:38.opposition are looking at this - easy, the opposition are looking at
:11:38. > :11:42.the simple response, it was the officials that done it, I didn't
:11:42. > :11:48.know. The obvious response from the opposition is why didn't you know.
:11:48. > :11:52.We can accept you were ignorant, how can you be ignorant and
:11:52. > :11:56.competent at the same time. To prove it doesn't rain but pour on
:11:56. > :12:01.the Home Office tower, the UK borders agency are facing legal
:12:01. > :12:05.action from a kpwroup of language schools who said they were wrongly
:12:05. > :12:08.included on a list of groups banned from bringing people into the
:12:08. > :12:12.country. She will come under political pressure today, I have
:12:12. > :12:17.been shown a memo sent by the head of UK BA, last week it was sent, I
:12:17. > :12:20.got to see it this morning. It says any relaxation from the rules will
:12:20. > :12:26.need his personal authority, his personal authorisation. I can tell
:12:26. > :12:31.you this, she is in trouble now for relaxations, if come Christmas time
:12:31. > :12:36.we have queues of two, three, four hours time at immigration control,
:12:36. > :12:41.she will be in trouble for that. Just briefly, adding to her woe, in
:12:41. > :12:44.political terms, how dangerous is it for her? As long as she can
:12:44. > :12:48.stick to this line, that actually it wasn't something she knew about,
:12:48. > :12:52.that cannot be eroded. Frankly, as long as she puts up a little bit
:12:52. > :12:56.more of a tough and convincing performance in the select committee
:12:56. > :13:00.than maybe she did at points yesterday. Maybe if she can take a
:13:00. > :13:05.more substantive look at the questions and not engage wholly in
:13:05. > :13:08.the Labour bashing, which certainly didn't get the hackles up, but the
:13:08. > :13:12.confidence of some Labour backbenchers yesterday, she should
:13:12. > :13:15.be fine. She has the Prime Minister's backing. We need more
:13:15. > :13:18.fact before we have a dead duck Home Secretary on our hands. There
:13:18. > :13:22.will be plenty of people in journalism and the opposition
:13:22. > :13:24.trying to find out damaging things. We are joined by Alp Mehmet, a
:13:25. > :13:30.former British ambassador, before that an immigration official
:13:30. > :13:33.himself. He's now the vice chairman of Migration Watch. Welcome to the
:13:33. > :13:37.programme. There seem to be rather big basic contradictions in what
:13:37. > :13:41.Theresa May has said, and then what seems to have come out of leaked
:13:41. > :13:48.document from the border agency. She said that this was a pilot
:13:48. > :13:51.scheme, except it applied to every single port and airport, she then
:13:51. > :13:54.said that there was strict instruction that is the pilot was
:13:54. > :13:59.to go no further in terms of relaxation than European passport
:13:59. > :14:03.holders, but the document says that actually senior managers could give
:14:04. > :14:08.further measures at local ports and airports, they could go further
:14:08. > :14:14.than she actually said. It was done for more risk-based assessments on
:14:14. > :14:18.security, but the instruction on the document says it is to prevent
:14:18. > :14:22.the excessive queuing to beat the summer traffic. What will people
:14:22. > :14:28.make, it is hugely embarrassing? is hugely embarrassing for Theresa
:14:28. > :14:30.May, shy will be the first to be the first to acknowledge. That I
:14:30. > :14:34.was an immigration officer 30 years ago. Queues at ports is nothing UN
:14:34. > :14:38.the pressure to get people through the ports quickly was happening in
:14:38. > :14:43.the 1970s and 1980s, that is something always going on. I
:14:43. > :14:46.personally would not exaggerate the problem here. Which problem?
:14:47. > :14:52.problem of the fact that a lot of people may have got in who didn't
:14:52. > :14:55.get in. The fact is, we're not interested in children, we're not
:14:55. > :15:00.interested in groups, we are not interested in a lot of people that
:15:00. > :15:03.take up time. Now, I'm not suggesting we should do away with
:15:03. > :15:07.controls, on the contrary, controls should remain there, if that means
:15:07. > :15:13.people going through the controls more slowly, then so be it. But,
:15:13. > :15:16.I'm not sure that this is as much of a problem as is being made out.
:15:16. > :15:21.Except, as our correspondent said there, this is about what she knew
:15:21. > :15:25.in her competence, isn't it. It seems to me she didn't know how
:15:25. > :15:29.widespread the pilot was, sheer she herself in the Commons said, I
:15:29. > :15:31.don't know - she herself in the Commons said I don't know how many
:15:31. > :15:36.terrorist suspects and illegal immigrants have entered the public.
:15:36. > :15:40.That won't reassure the public? won't. What I'm saying is whatever
:15:40. > :15:44.the instructions were, and whatever the civil servants took upon
:15:44. > :15:47.themselves to do, common sense should have prevailed. Those, they
:15:47. > :15:54.had suspicions about, should not have been allowed to go through it.
:15:54. > :15:56.I'm pretty sure that didn't happen, frankly. Really, just based on
:15:56. > :15:59.experience? Based on experience, no immigration official would let
:15:59. > :16:01.people through that they had serious concerns about. Would they
:16:01. > :16:06.be able to tell if they weren't even looking at the passports of
:16:06. > :16:09.some of these people? Well, of course you can tell, experience
:16:09. > :16:12.tells you the sort of people that you will be interested in from
:16:12. > :16:16.their movements, from the answers that they give. But you are blaming
:16:16. > :16:20.staff a little bit like May and border officials and saying it is
:16:20. > :16:24.down to them and they should have discretion, and no political
:16:24. > :16:27.message was coming through. These leaked documents seem to suggest
:16:27. > :16:33.that there was an instruction from on high, that not only said it
:16:33. > :16:36.should apply to European passport holders, that it shouldn't just be
:16:36. > :16:39.limited, but people should make up their own minds, and they could
:16:39. > :16:43.take the measures themselves, if that was a political instruction,
:16:43. > :16:50.surely they were carrying them out? What I'm saying is whatever
:16:50. > :16:53.instructions went out, the actual controls should not have been
:16:53. > :16:56.compromised, I don't believe it is compromised to the extent it is
:16:56. > :16:59.suggested. In terms of business, we have been told it is drag on
:16:59. > :17:04.business, lots of business people don't like Heathrow, they would
:17:04. > :17:07.like to come through quicker than they do. You can see the competing
:17:07. > :17:13.priorities here, if they were trying to reduce queue the over
:17:13. > :17:17.summer months? I wouldn't put the business issue that high in terms
:17:17. > :17:21.of want ago more efficient Heathrow, any more than a tourist or you and
:17:21. > :17:24.I. With business it is the granting of visas beforehand, it is the all
:17:24. > :17:29.security check that is take ages to get somebody from India into your
:17:29. > :17:34.business in Britain. That's the issue for business. The issue at
:17:34. > :17:37.Heathrow is a much wider issue from letting people in and looking at
:17:37. > :17:43.the passport. The problem with Heathrow is it is not fit for
:17:43. > :17:48.purpose in the 21st century. much danger do you believe she's
:17:48. > :17:52.in? I'm with these two gentlemen. I reckon if nobody points the finger
:17:52. > :17:56.at the fact she knew, and if we see heads roll at the top of the Civil
:17:56. > :17:59.Service, for want of a better word, I think she's fine. I do worry when
:17:59. > :18:06.I heard the words, "she has the complete backing of the Prime
:18:06. > :18:11.Minister", that's like confidence in a football manager. I believe
:18:11. > :18:17.she's doing a good job in many areas, she can't have the causal
:18:17. > :18:23.link. Do civil servants always listen to their ministers? No.
:18:23. > :18:28.I see, so we're all agreed on that! I was the minister and I say no. He
:18:28. > :18:32.have the civil servant and he says yes. Who is telling the truth?
:18:32. > :18:39.remember one civil servant saying to me, you go in and say that, and
:18:39. > :18:43.you're on your own. The Home Office has a pretty terrible reputation,
:18:43. > :18:47.all home secretaries fear what is going on. Going back to the UK
:18:47. > :18:51.Border Agency, they have been pill lorryed and knocked about over the
:18:51. > :18:56.last few years, we ought to look at what is happened to them under the
:18:56. > :18:59.previous administration, mostly that does take and need a close
:18:59. > :19:06.look. Will it make it more difficult for cuts to be carried
:19:06. > :19:10.out at the border agencies? Definitely. I wish politicians
:19:10. > :19:15.would talk about cuts meaning fewer people. They don't mean work hard
:19:15. > :19:18.with fewer people, they mean work more cleverly. Use your existing or
:19:18. > :19:23.less resource, think about how you use it and work for cleverly. Don't
:19:23. > :19:25.just cut money, that means fewer people, but we're going to try to
:19:25. > :19:29.do the same thing in the same way. The result is what you have seen
:19:29. > :19:35.today. I vouch that was what he was telling us when he was a minister.
:19:35. > :19:40.I used to constantly say, work more cleverly. Don't just try to put
:19:40. > :19:44.people there. That will be the mantra.
:19:44. > :19:47.Try getting through JFK without an American passport!
:19:47. > :19:51.To some it is a white elephant which will spoil the countryside
:19:51. > :19:57.and eat up tax-payers' money, to others it is the green alternative
:19:57. > :20:02.to air travel, which will cat plult our antiquated public transport
:20:02. > :20:08.system into the 21st century and provide an economic bust. It will
:20:08. > :20:12.still eat up a lot of tax-payers' money. This morning plans for a new
:20:12. > :20:16.high-speed network between London and Birmingham, have won the
:20:16. > :20:19.lukewarm support of the transport committee. Tell us more.
:20:19. > :20:25.All aboard, because the Transport Select Committee says there is a
:20:26. > :20:31.good case for the line known as HS2, the �32 billion scheme, which will
:20:31. > :20:34.link London and the Midlands on a new network, with speeds of up to
:20:34. > :20:39.250 miles an hour, with plans to extend it to the north. The group
:20:39. > :20:43.of MPs said it is obvious the economic impacts of high-speed rail
:20:43. > :20:47.can vary and are not easily predicted, and HS2 could be the
:20:47. > :20:52.catalyst for these benefits. They accepted the proposed route is
:20:52. > :20:56.likely to have substantial impacts on those living along it, and it is
:20:56. > :20:59.unfortunate, it crosses the Chilterns, the Tory heartland and
:20:59. > :21:02.an area of outstanding national beauty. There could be adverse
:21:03. > :21:10.consequences for local communities. It is very necessary to consider
:21:10. > :21:17.those as well. It is wrong to cast gate as nimbus people who are
:21:17. > :21:21.simply expressing legitimate concerns about their local areas.
:21:21. > :21:25.The committee says the Government should commit to extending it to
:21:25. > :21:32.Leeds and Manchester before firmly committing the route. And building
:21:32. > :21:37.a network between north to south should be a priority.
:21:37. > :21:42.I'm joined by Andrea Leadsom, her constituently will be affected by
:21:42. > :21:48.the proposed route. Welcome. This is a pretty milk and water
:21:48. > :21:52.endorsement from these MPs. Yes. And I think rightly too. Where I am
:21:52. > :21:55.on this is that I think it is an excellent thing to have it built. I
:21:55. > :22:05.think it should be committed to leads and Manchester and glass go,
:22:05. > :22:09.and go to the country, and go to parliamently people on the plan.
:22:09. > :22:12.Make sure people will understand you will cut out slots at airports
:22:12. > :22:19.and cut out air pollution and grow economies on the route. Three big
:22:19. > :22:23.problems, it is not cost, firstly, let no-one in Birmingham think this
:22:23. > :22:29.will really bust the Birmingham economy. It will make Birmingham
:22:29. > :22:33.the most northern suburb of London. Why is that a big thing? It is not.
:22:33. > :22:37.Why do you want to spend all that moneyen to? You have to get more
:22:37. > :22:42.money and structure into the nation than we have. If you go on to Leeds
:22:42. > :22:49.and Manchester and grow a high- speed network network you will take
:22:49. > :22:53.people off motorways and aircraft. It is �32 billion, that only gets
:22:53. > :22:57.you to Birmingham? Right, second point, this is where this lady and
:22:57. > :23:01.I might find common ground. I cannot understand why, if you have
:23:01. > :23:06.a pollution corridor already there, called the M40 and the Chiltern
:23:06. > :23:10.line, why don't you build this, and yes, if someone says it costs more
:23:10. > :23:14.money to iron out the curves and put the tunnels in, so be it, spend
:23:14. > :23:18.the money. Don't go and rape a load of virgin countryside to do this,
:23:18. > :23:21.that is the important thing. Hold on, I don't want a monolougue. I
:23:21. > :23:27.would like to bring in our other guest. You are against it whatever
:23:27. > :23:32.the route is? I am. If it went via Wales would you be in favour of it?
:23:32. > :23:37.No, when you look at what the transport select committee is
:23:37. > :23:39.saying, they are concluding it is a good thing, but all the points
:23:39. > :23:45.suggest the conclusion should be a bad thing. They said the business
:23:45. > :23:48.space is spurious because it is based on time-saving on a train,
:23:48. > :23:51.they said there is no environmental case. They said the length of time
:23:51. > :23:55.it will take to build the thing is a non-starter, 20 years, there is
:23:55. > :24:00.no commitment beyond the Midlands at this point in time. The
:24:00. > :24:05.conclusion I draw from the report is they shouldn't be supporting it.
:24:05. > :24:10.If you have your way we will end up the only major European country of
:24:10. > :24:15.any size without a high-speed network? It is not true, our Inter
:24:15. > :24:21.City 125s are high-speed. Not if you travel in Spain and France?
:24:21. > :24:26.you look at their situation if you go off the high-speed network, you
:24:26. > :24:29.are on to slow train services. In the UK, our Inter City 125s, when
:24:29. > :24:33.you bear in mind the small geographic area we have, they
:24:33. > :24:38.servant purpose of getting us between cities very fast. We are
:24:38. > :24:43.talking �32 billion, that exclude the spur to Heathrow, and having to
:24:43. > :24:47.build a new underground. If you are bringing in 2,000 more people into
:24:47. > :24:50.Euston, the Victorian line can't cope now, led alone those
:24:50. > :24:54.increasing numbers. The costs are a tiny proportion of the reality of
:24:54. > :24:58.building this thing. I did a trip to Birmingham a couple
:24:58. > :25:02.of weeks ago, it took an hour and 20 minutes. People knock British
:25:02. > :25:05.trains, it was a perfect trip, an hour and 20 minutes, it was
:25:05. > :25:10.relaxing, I had Wi-Fi, somebody brought me a cup of coffee, I got
:25:10. > :25:14.some work done. I do it a lot. don't we, instead of spending �32
:25:14. > :25:17.billion, which you and I know will be �60 billion at the end of the
:25:17. > :25:23.day, just to get to Birmingham. Take a fraction of that money and
:25:23. > :25:27.improve the existing line? I think. Make it an hour instead of an hour
:25:27. > :25:32.and 20 minutes. There is only so much you can do an engineer would
:25:32. > :25:35.tell us, with existing lines, and you can only get it down to a
:25:35. > :25:38.certain speed, or up to a certain speed because of the he can listing
:25:38. > :25:42.line. What I'm saying, for a fraction of the money, you could
:25:42. > :25:45.actually do so much by building something in the same corridor.
:25:45. > :25:49.That is something that they don't seem to have thought about. They
:25:49. > :25:54.haven't, they have rejected it? Quite. Why? Because they think it
:25:54. > :25:59.will cost more in the end, because it is not a corridor to city and a
:25:59. > :26:03.high-speed line. They say costs are tie tight. Nobody flies to
:26:03. > :26:08.Birmingham already, the only real gains are if Manchester and Leeds
:26:08. > :26:12.and up to Scotland. But you don't save anything on pollution in that,
:26:12. > :26:16.every slot that Heathrow gives up for Glasgow and Edinburgh, there
:26:16. > :26:26.are few domestic flights out of Heathrow now, will go to new lines,
:26:26. > :26:28.to Shanghai, and quango dong, and Rio, there is no - Qandong, Rio.
:26:28. > :26:32.Nobody pretends there is an environmental argument now. There
:26:32. > :26:38.is a key point, if you are determined to go high-speed, the
:26:38. > :26:42.environmental impact is far greater than if you did to 160-180mph,
:26:42. > :26:47.which is faster than we already V if you lock at a combination of
:26:47. > :26:50.sorting out pinch points and improving speed on existing trains,
:26:50. > :26:54.and potentially adding another line part of the way, perhaps as far as
:26:54. > :26:58.the Midlands, so you can then free up the existing West Coast Mainline,
:26:58. > :27:03.to go to the northern cities, with a much better service there, it
:27:03. > :27:07.would be a far cheaper thing. The key thing is, if you go with high-
:27:07. > :27:14.speed rail you are not sorting out anything in 2026, we can't wait
:27:14. > :27:16.until then. I broke the story in the Sunday Times about CrossRail in
:27:16. > :27:22.1986, it is now 2011, they are still trying to build it. In your
:27:22. > :27:25.heart of hearts, do you think the high-speed rail network will ever
:27:25. > :27:31.be built? Do you want to phone a friend. We haven't got time?
:27:31. > :27:34.think it will. Do you, what about you? Funnily enough, given where we
:27:34. > :27:37.both come from, I don't think it won't. I'm beginning to think that
:27:37. > :27:41.too, and I always thought it would. I'm more in favour too.
:27:41. > :27:46.Thank you for being with us. There is time to find out the
:27:46. > :27:50.answer to the quiz, the answer was which basic food stuff has the EU
:27:50. > :27:55.announced might have the ingredients listed on the package,
:27:55. > :28:02.is the peanuts, eggs, honey or potatoes. I didn't know about this
:28:02. > :28:08.until I sat down. I opened a packet of peanuts the other day, on the
:28:08. > :28:17.back of t I said on the back of it, it says the ingredients, may
:28:17. > :28:22.contain nuts, on that basis nuts. You're wrong, it is honey. What
:28:22. > :28:25.else is there. They have pollen on their feet, and it may be GM pollen,
:28:25. > :28:31.that is the problem. That is exactly right.
:28:31. > :28:35.sovereign debt crisis and this is what Europe has to worry about. All
:28:35. > :28:39.right, thanks to all our guests, especially to Digby Jones for being
:28:39. > :28:42.our guest of the day. We will be here tomorrow with all the big