:00:41. > :00:45.Good afternoon. Welcome to the Daily Politics. The boss of Network
:00:45. > :00:50.Rail is on track to get a bonus worth a third of a million pounds.
:00:50. > :00:54.The Transport Secretary says she will vote against it, but can't
:00:54. > :00:57.block T Labour says she can, but who is right? The MoD's billions of
:00:58. > :01:01.pounds in the red. The Government wants to start buying arms off the
:01:01. > :01:05.peg instead of made to measure, but what does that mean for the
:01:05. > :01:13.hundreds of thousands employed in our arms industry?
:01:13. > :01:19.Is too much subsidy being paid to erect wind wur tines. -- wind
:01:19. > :01:26.turbines? And what can the Cabinet learn from
:01:26. > :01:28.reading Dickens? We celebrate the buy centenary of the great author's
:01:28. > :01:34.birth. With us for the first-half of the
:01:34. > :01:37.programme today is the outgoing of the president of the girl schools
:01:37. > :01:41.association, Dr Helen Wright. We will begin with education because
:01:41. > :01:44.over the weekend the new Chief Inspector of Schools, Sir Michael
:01:44. > :01:47.Wilshaw, a former headteacher has criticised the standard of
:01:48. > :01:53.leadership in some schools. He said heads in more than 5,000 schools
:01:53. > :01:57.are not up to standard and and bear responsibility for high high levels
:01:57. > :02:00.of poor teaching. Do you agree it is down to leadership and that that
:02:00. > :02:04.leadership flow frs the headteachers? I think leadership is
:02:04. > :02:08.very important, indeed. Sir Michael Wilshaw isn't talk being my school
:02:08. > :02:11.where the leadership is outstanding! Nor is he talking
:02:11. > :02:16.about the leadership in schools, many of the hundreds and thousands
:02:16. > :02:20.of schools of heads who I meet often... Because he is talking
:02:20. > :02:24.about the heads of state schools? Heads in state schools as well.
:02:24. > :02:27.Many are doing exceptional jobs in challenging and difficult
:02:27. > :02:31.circumstances, underfunded and a lot of bureaucracy. He is right
:02:31. > :02:37.that leadership in schools is terribly important and that's
:02:37. > :02:41.leadership at all levels because that is what the of sed figures are
:02:41. > :02:44.with -- Ofsted figures are about and we need to pull together.
:02:44. > :02:47.Leaders do need to have ambition for their young people in their
:02:47. > :02:50.schools. Do you think the headteachers are key? That's all
:02:50. > :02:54.the rhetoric that we have been getting over the last few years. If
:02:54. > :02:58.you have a fantastic headteacher, the rest will fall into place?
:02:58. > :03:03.Partly, that's true. Heads are important, but leadership
:03:03. > :03:07.throughout the school is important as well. Heads are responsible for
:03:07. > :03:14.appointing people and without a good governing body and without
:03:14. > :03:18.people attracted to the schools and without a supportive framework in
:03:18. > :03:22.the country. Are headteachers in the independent
:03:22. > :03:29.sector better and more successful than in the State sector? They have
:03:29. > :03:32.more freedom and that matters. Freedom and and autonomy are
:03:32. > :03:36.important. If you have children in front of you, you know you
:03:36. > :03:38.understand their background, their needs, you are able to invest in
:03:38. > :03:43.them more and that matters significantly.
:03:43. > :03:46.Does that mean an independent school should play a bigger role in
:03:46. > :03:50.taking over or helping in the State sector? Well, it is very
:03:50. > :03:54.interesting that question. I went into education to be able to make a
:03:54. > :03:57.difference to the country and and to beyond. I can't thing of a
:03:57. > :04:03.single independent school which doesn't have strong partnerships...
:04:03. > :04:05.But that's not the same as taking them over. They could do more
:04:05. > :04:11.successful independent schools to help the State sector and schools
:04:11. > :04:16.that are struggling? I am not sure they could do a lot more.
:04:16. > :04:20.From a leadership point of view? There is a lot of pressure from the
:04:20. > :04:24.Government for Independent schools to sponsor academies. The most
:04:24. > :04:29.successful partnerships are those built up over time. It is important
:04:29. > :04:36.to build that up. We have seen before Government funded
:04:36. > :04:40.initiatives like State school, independent school partnerships.
:04:40. > :04:43.Would you like to sponsor an academy? We have looked at that. I
:04:43. > :04:46.am going to be moving on from my school in a while so it is the
:04:46. > :04:52.wrong time to do that. People need to be at the right stage within
:04:52. > :04:56.their school and you need to have a need in the area. You don't want to
:04:56. > :05:00.be turning up at a nearby school saying, "We are here to sponsor
:05:00. > :05:05.you." How is that going to help anybody.
:05:05. > :05:08.I presume there would be a two-way street. People feel there is a
:05:08. > :05:12.reluctance when the opportunity is there, I don't think that would be
:05:12. > :05:15.a good thing? I don't think there is a reluctance. So many
:05:15. > :05:18.independent schools are very, very involved in their local communities
:05:18. > :05:21.and quite right too. Would a headteacher from an
:05:21. > :05:26.independent school to be able to have the right schools to run or
:05:27. > :05:30.help run a large inner city mixed comprehensive? I don't see why not.
:05:30. > :05:35.Leadership is leadership. And children are children. And And as
:05:35. > :05:39.long as we have a concerted effort to move together, it will work.
:05:40. > :05:44.For something different. It is time for our daily quiz and the question
:05:44. > :05:54.for today is what ale has been banned from a House of Commons bar?
:05:54. > :05:59.
:05:59. > :06:02.It is on the grounds that it is At the end of the show, we will
:06:02. > :06:06.give you the answer. It is bonus season, but all is not well for
:06:06. > :06:11.some of Britain's senior managers. Last week Stephen Hester bowed to
:06:11. > :06:15.pressure and and waived his bonus of nearly �1 million in shares.
:06:15. > :06:20.Tomorrow, Labour are holding a debate on bank bonuses and are
:06:20. > :06:29.hoping the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats will back a tax
:06:29. > :06:33.on the payouts. Network rail made changes to the bonus scheme so
:06:34. > :06:39.bosses would only get 60% of their solicitorry rather than -- salary
:06:39. > :06:45.rather than 100. This would see their Chief Executive receiving
:06:45. > :06:50.�340,000. It faces prosecutions over two
:06:50. > :06:53.fatal accidents. Can ministers stop this privately owned company which
:06:53. > :06:57.does receive direct and indirect Government subsidy from awarding
:06:57. > :07:00.bonuses. On the Sunday Politics, the Transport Secretary they
:07:00. > :07:06.couldn't. I won't be able to stop it going
:07:06. > :07:10.through. The Government structure means I can go and vote against t
:07:10. > :07:16.but the problem we have got is that won't necessarily change the result.
:07:16. > :07:21.The other problem we've got is that the members can vote against the
:07:21. > :07:24.bonus package, but their vote is only advisory.
:07:24. > :07:30.Well, Labour say Justine Greening is wrong and the Government can
:07:30. > :07:34.block the payouts. Joining us now is rail expert,
:07:34. > :07:39.Christian Wolmar. Who is right? Can the Government block the payout?
:07:40. > :07:45.is more complicated. Network Rail is a very strange beastie. It is
:07:45. > :07:51.basically, it doesn't have any owners. It is controlled by 100 so-
:07:51. > :07:55.called members of which Justine Greening is just one so if Justine
:07:55. > :07:59.Greening does manage to get everybody to vote against it, all
:07:59. > :08:02.the members, then possibly they would block it, but on the other
:08:02. > :08:06.hand the membership is only advisory so it is very complicated.
:08:06. > :08:12.We have just had copy come down about what the Government is going
:08:12. > :08:17.to do. It is going to announce proposals to improve Geoff earnance
:08:17. > :08:21.at Network Rail. Will that improve things? It has been having
:08:21. > :08:27.discussions for over a year. It was supposed to come out with a paper
:08:27. > :08:33.about the corporate governors, this was Labour's mistake, when Network
:08:33. > :08:37.Rail was created back in 2003 I think it was, it should have been
:08:37. > :08:42.nationalised. It should have just been a Government owned company.
:08:42. > :08:47.Instead they created this funny company limited by guarantee which
:08:47. > :08:50.basically is out of control. It has nobody to actually stop it from
:08:51. > :08:55.doing things. It doesn't have any shareholders and supposedly the
:08:55. > :08:59.members are supposed to control t but they are a very weak body and
:08:59. > :09:05.ineffective. It really is a law on to itself.
:09:05. > :09:07.Except won't it be under political pressure? If the Secretary of State
:09:07. > :09:11.rocks up on Friday and votes against this package, then surely
:09:11. > :09:14.that is going to make it difficult for them to go ahead? Now, the
:09:14. > :09:19.politics is something different. Yes, I suspect that if Justine
:09:19. > :09:24.Greening turns up to this meeting, although she is one member out of
:09:24. > :09:27.100, I suspect she will swing a lot of people behind her and also
:09:27. > :09:32.Network Rail directors are going to look at this and think the last
:09:32. > :09:36.thing in the world we want to do is make the Government angry which
:09:36. > :09:39.gives Network Rail around �4 billion a year in subsidy. So
:09:39. > :09:44.politically, she might manage to have more influence than legally
:09:44. > :09:48.she has. In terms of putting someone on the
:09:48. > :09:51.remuneration committee, would that change things? Network Rail put out
:09:51. > :09:58.a statement saying that wouldn't change things either, the director
:09:58. > :10:01.wouldn't have a a veto there? would help in terms of influence,
:10:01. > :10:06.but the key point is that the Government is desperate for Network
:10:06. > :10:11.Rail debt which is over �20 billion not to come on to its own accounts
:10:11. > :10:16.and that's why Labour created this strange beast of a company limited
:10:16. > :10:20.by guarantee so if they tried to influence, if the Government tried
:10:20. > :10:24.to influence Network Rail too strongly and say determine the
:10:24. > :10:31.incentive programme then Network Rail would become a Government-
:10:31. > :10:36.owned company and the �20 billion would add to George Osborne's
:10:36. > :10:39.problem. They have to influence it behind the scenes without actually
:10:39. > :10:44.ordering Network Rail to do anything because if they did that,
:10:44. > :10:48.it would come on to their books and that's not what they want.
:10:48. > :10:56.Maria Eagle, the Shadow Transport Secretary is here. Influence is the
:10:56. > :11:01.way to go here. Influence is important. But the articles of
:11:01. > :11:04.association which I have I have got here are clear. They say clearly
:11:05. > :11:08.that the Secretary of State has to give prior written consent to any
:11:08. > :11:12.changes to the incentive arrangements. That means she can
:11:12. > :11:16.stop this if she wishes to. She can appoint a director to the
:11:16. > :11:19.remuneration committee and that would give more influence as well.
:11:19. > :11:23.Let's go back to the original quote. It is any changes to the bonus
:11:23. > :11:25.scheme or the pay package. At the moment what Network Rail said in
:11:25. > :11:30.their statement, there are no changes in that. If they were
:11:31. > :11:34.introducing a new system, then she would be able to veto it? This is
:11:34. > :11:39.pedantic. They are proposing a change to the annual bonus and and
:11:39. > :11:46.they are proposing a change to the length of the long-term bonus.
:11:46. > :11:50.What's the change? They are cutting the bonus to 60% of salary over a
:11:50. > :11:53.five year period. All their five years salary paid again after five
:11:53. > :11:56.years. This is a change to the current arrangements and it is
:11:56. > :11:59.wrong of Justine Greening to say she can't have any influence on
:11:59. > :12:03.this. She can. Well, she doesn't say she can't
:12:03. > :12:08.have any influence, by hoping against on Friday, she is hoping to
:12:08. > :12:11.have influence. She can do more. She has to give prior written
:12:11. > :12:15.consent for the arrangements to go ahead. It is straightforward. She
:12:15. > :12:19.needs to use the influence she has, the influence that she has has
:12:19. > :12:22.there the articles of association. She started out last week, you know,
:12:22. > :12:26.saying she couldn't do anything. Now, she is saying she can go along
:12:26. > :12:30.to the meeting and vote, but it won't have any impact, I am
:12:30. > :12:34.starting to wonder if she wants to have an impact. She can veto the
:12:35. > :12:38.bonuses and she should. If she could veto, surely, Justine
:12:38. > :12:42.Greening would. There is no advantage for her not to do that.
:12:42. > :12:49.If she had the power to do so surely she would use it, it would
:12:49. > :12:53.be something politically she would gain credit for, the the Department
:12:53. > :12:57.of Transport are firm saying she can't. If she did order Network
:12:57. > :13:00.Rail to do and the consequence was they came a company on whose debts
:13:00. > :13:05.balance sheet that came back to the public finances is that something
:13:05. > :13:09.you would like to see? She has to give I prior written consent for
:13:09. > :13:11.the changes. It doesn't pet the debt on the books if she were to do
:13:11. > :13:19.that. The arrangements are clear in the articles of association. The
:13:19. > :13:25.question is why doesn't she want to, she wants to talk tough, but not do
:13:25. > :13:30.anything. She can do something. She will vote against on Friday. If
:13:30. > :13:34.she decide the bonus payment doesn't go ahead? I will be happy,
:13:34. > :13:37.but the reality is the Secretary of State has more of an influence than
:13:37. > :13:41.she is she is letting on and she needs to use.
:13:41. > :13:44.What about the level? What would you like to see at Network Rail?
:13:44. > :13:49.Network Rail has been criticised for failing to meet its licence
:13:49. > :13:54.conditions. Its performance is deteriorating. Passengers are
:13:55. > :13:57.seeing their fares go up by 11% this year, 13% next year, I don't
:13:57. > :14:03.think it is appropriate... doesn't have control over the
:14:03. > :14:07.fares? No, that's the Government. I don't think it is appropriate for
:14:07. > :14:11.an organisation like Network Rail which has been criticised by its
:14:11. > :14:15.regulator to take bonus and they should refuse them if they are
:14:15. > :14:18.offered them, but Justine Greening should take a lead and should stop
:14:18. > :14:21.this going ahead. Should it be nationalised? Well, we
:14:21. > :14:25.are having a look at the structure of the rail industry. It is not
:14:25. > :14:31.just Network Rail, it is the way in way the railways interact and the
:14:31. > :14:34.way in which the system works. It has a a lot of built in
:14:34. > :14:37.inefficiency and we will come out with a view of that, but I have
:14:37. > :14:43.ruled nothing in and I have ruled nothing out.
:14:43. > :14:46.You said you were in support of a director on the committee. These
:14:46. > :14:50.are building blocks to ensure politically and technically that
:14:50. > :14:55.this bonus may not go ahead? don't think that it should go ahead
:14:55. > :15:01.and if Justine Greening puts a stop to it, I would say well done to her.
:15:01. > :15:05.We have to ask why is it she is talking tough, but not using the
:15:05. > :15:09.powers she has got. Do you think now there is a shift
:15:09. > :15:13.and it is the right right shift as far as people being awarded
:15:13. > :15:21.bonuses? The Government says it should only be awarded for success,
:15:21. > :15:24.I think a lot of this discussion is about the size of bonuses, and
:15:24. > :15:28.whilst we want to be able to take the brightest and best to take
:15:28. > :15:32.Network Rail out of its difficult situation, we have to accept and it
:15:32. > :15:35.is right to accept that if people are tasks to do something, they
:15:35. > :15:41.should perform at be held to account. What lesson otherwise are
:15:41. > :15:45.we giving how younger generations? Thank you. In a time of austerity,
:15:45. > :15:49.should we buy the best military equipment or the cheapest? Or
:15:49. > :15:53.should our priority to beat to protect jobs by pine British? It is
:15:53. > :16:00.a question the government have been looking at, and they have concluded
:16:00. > :16:04.that value for the taxpayer for comes first. It could mean more
:16:04. > :16:07.foreign arms. For years, overspending at the MoD and
:16:07. > :16:12.disastrous procurement projects, over-budget and years behind
:16:12. > :16:16.schedule, have dogged ministers. Now the coalition government has
:16:16. > :16:18.adopted a zero-tolerance approach to the defence industries. In a
:16:18. > :16:23.white paper on the future of defence spending, ministers have
:16:23. > :16:26.laid down the law. Peter Luff, the Minister for Defence Support, have
:16:26. > :16:31.said MoD purchases will be decided through open competition in the
:16:31. > :16:34.domestic and global market, buying off the shelf where appropriate. We
:16:34. > :16:38.will look first for products that are proven.
:16:38. > :16:42.For many, that means buying American, or even French, aircraft
:16:42. > :16:48.that are already flying, ships and submarines already afloat, and
:16:48. > :16:52.armoured vehicles already in use in other countries. Latin would be
:16:52. > :16:55.even without the need to invest in expensive prototypes. More worrying
:16:55. > :17:00.for those in Britain's arms industry, the white paper states,
:17:00. > :17:03.the MoD does not consider wider employment, industrial or economic
:17:03. > :17:09.factors in its value for money assessments. The sector's support
:17:09. > :17:14.300,000 jobs, many highly skilled, but with a �38 billion black hole
:17:14. > :17:18.in defence spending, by the most cost-effective materiel has become
:17:18. > :17:20.not just desirable but a necessity. Last week there was much anguish
:17:20. > :17:25.amongst MPs that the Indian government had favoured a French
:17:26. > :17:31.jet over Typhoon, but if we cannot guarantee to buy our own kit in a
:17:31. > :17:36.future, can we expect other countries to do so? Carole Walker
:17:36. > :17:40.has got two MPs are concerned about this in Central lobby.
:17:40. > :17:44.Defence procurement has been a thorny issue for successive
:17:44. > :17:49.governments with projects inevitably running way over budget
:17:49. > :17:52.and the way over that time limit, and I'm joined now by Bernard
:17:52. > :17:57.Jenkin, former Shadow Defence Secretary, and Alison Seabeck, who
:17:57. > :18:03.speaks on these issues for the Labour Party. Bernard, given the
:18:03. > :18:07.fact that there is a �38 billion black hole in the defence budget,
:18:07. > :18:11.surely it makes sense for the government to try to save money by
:18:11. > :18:14.buying off the shelf. Well, I think this defence white paper has got
:18:14. > :18:17.much more to do with reforming the whole system of procurement, and
:18:17. > :18:22.there is a big tussle going on inside the Ministry of Defence
:18:22. > :18:25.between those who are defending what they have done at justifying
:18:25. > :18:29.vested interests, and those were trying to reform the system. I do
:18:29. > :18:32.not think this white paper resolves that complex, but they are
:18:32. > :18:35.important pointers, particularly the engagement with small and
:18:36. > :18:40.medium-sized enterprises in the defence sector, because that is
:18:40. > :18:44.where the gene innovations are. If we are going to do it on 2% of GDP
:18:44. > :18:48.or less, those are the innovations we need. Do you think it is right
:18:48. > :18:53.for the government to signal a move much closer towards buying off the
:18:53. > :18:57.shelf when it is feasible? What does that mean? Certainly, you can
:18:57. > :19:01.buy body armour off the shelf, but you cannot procure those really big
:19:01. > :19:05.projects off the shelf, the ones that are vital to our nation's
:19:05. > :19:09.security, and that is where the overspend is and delays happen. I
:19:09. > :19:13.do not think this white paper really looks at how you overcome
:19:13. > :19:19.some of those... Then it is quite right, these are inherited problems
:19:19. > :19:23.that have gone through successive governments. Your government left a
:19:23. > :19:27.�38 billion black hole! I would take issue with that figure. Nobody
:19:27. > :19:30.has explained that. Let's actually have a look at how we take this
:19:30. > :19:36.forward, how we improve the contracting process to tighten us
:19:36. > :19:41.up. This document does not do it. We want more, and there is, I
:19:41. > :19:45.understand, another paper coming. The deputy penance Secretary gave
:19:45. > :19:50.the Defence Select Committee that figure. -- Permanent Secretary.
:19:50. > :19:54.Before we get bogged down in that, isn't the big danger here that if
:19:54. > :19:58.the Government looks to try and save a bit of money by buying more
:19:58. > :20:03.of defence equipment off the shelf, then there is going to be an impact
:20:03. > :20:06.on jobs and on long-term skills base in the country? Well, what the
:20:06. > :20:09.skills base depends upon his investment the government makes in
:20:09. > :20:15.defence R&D, and they are attempting to halt the decline that
:20:15. > :20:20.we have seen over recent decades. If the government is going to take
:20:20. > :20:24.a strategic view about maintaining onshore defence industry capability,
:20:24. > :20:28.their investment in R&D ensures the long-term competitiveness and
:20:28. > :20:32.competitive advantages of our industry. But yes, you are right.
:20:32. > :20:36.If you're going to open up the system to competition, you might
:20:37. > :20:41.finish up by more foreign kit, and indeed that might not be a bad
:20:41. > :20:46.thing. Except... The main thing is to get the big Brimes out of the
:20:46. > :20:50.way, the prime contract has. There are very few, they operate in the
:20:50. > :20:53.manner of a cartel or oligopoly, not in the legal sense, but they
:20:53. > :20:57.are so big that they dominate the market, and the government has got
:20:57. > :21:02.to have the in-house skills to bypass those big integrated systems
:21:02. > :21:06.people. Isn't there a danger, if we look at what happened with the
:21:06. > :21:10.Indian spying jets from the French instead of choosing the British,
:21:10. > :21:14.isn't there a need for the British government at least to show some
:21:14. > :21:18.faith in its own defence industry by buying British when it can?
:21:18. > :21:21.These companies are largely global. They can go anywhere. You are right
:21:21. > :21:26.that the British government does need to show exactly where they
:21:26. > :21:29.want to go in the future in terms of our equipment procurement.
:21:29. > :21:31.Industry have not got that certainty, and they need it, at
:21:31. > :21:36.last they have not got it, they are going to think twice about
:21:37. > :21:40.investing in the UK, and that is not good for futures bills. Very
:21:40. > :21:46.briefly on that point, Bernard. key thing is for the government to
:21:46. > :21:49.invest in R&B and engage with SMEs, not just the big prime contractor
:21:49. > :21:53.has, and that is the way to maintain our defence industry base,
:21:54. > :22:00.which is, after all, one of our great national asset. That is it
:22:00. > :22:03.for now from Westminster. How best to educate our children?
:22:03. > :22:08.The received wisdom is that boys are better educated in co-
:22:08. > :22:11.educational schools and girls do better in single-sex establishments,
:22:11. > :22:15.so do you sacrifice the education of girls to improve outcomes for
:22:15. > :22:20.boys, or is the received wisdom just wrong? I attended an all-girls
:22:20. > :22:29.school, make your own judgments about that!
:22:29. > :22:32.This has won a good schools guide awards, 96% Get good GCSEs, a good
:22:32. > :22:36.place to send your kids if you live in the Twickenham area and if they
:22:36. > :22:38.are girls. If you're a parent with children of a certain age, he will
:22:38. > :22:43.be painfully familiar with the sheer and stop trying to get them
:22:43. > :22:48.into the best school possible. Now, for some people, that might be a
:22:48. > :22:52.single-sex school, but the problem is finding one. According to the
:22:52. > :22:58.Department for Education, there are more than 3,300 state secondary
:22:58. > :23:02.schools in England, but just 165 are all boys, and only 219 are all
:23:02. > :23:08.girls. Interestingly, of the schools with the best A-level
:23:08. > :23:12.results in 2011, 17 out of the top 25 were single-sex. There are many
:23:12. > :23:17.reasons why single-sex schools work, and why we have positive results
:23:17. > :23:22.here. They do not have the distractions of boys, and they are
:23:22. > :23:26.able to grow in confidence. It is OK to be good at academic subjects
:23:26. > :23:31.here, I know it is in many mixed schools as well, but it is OK here,
:23:31. > :23:38.and that means girls are happy to get better and progress very well.
:23:38. > :23:42.Which is why schools like this have a lot of fans. The research that we
:23:42. > :23:45.did a few years ago looking at a value-added scores showed that
:23:45. > :23:51.girls who were in comprehensive girls-only schools made more
:23:51. > :23:54.progress between the ages of 11 and 16 and girls who were in
:23:54. > :23:58.comprehensive co-educational schools. Particularly interesting
:23:58. > :24:02.was the fact that the girls at the bottom of the range made the
:24:02. > :24:07.biggest bully, they make the most progress between 11 and 16. --
:24:07. > :24:13.biggest league. Or is also made a bit more progress when they were in
:24:13. > :24:16.single-sex schools. -- always. But it was not that noticeable. So what
:24:16. > :24:19.is not to like about single-sex schools? Some experts point out
:24:19. > :24:25.that they tend be raised in affluent areas which might skew the
:24:25. > :24:29.results are a bit. Also, what if you cannot get in? Parents will
:24:29. > :24:35.choose girls schools for their daughters but co-educational for
:24:35. > :24:39.their sons. You just cannot square that circle. So you end up with
:24:39. > :24:44.individual choices adding up to pay social outcome which is not
:24:44. > :24:50.desirable. But if you do want to go back to the good old days, you
:24:50. > :24:53.might have to go back to the good old days of council knows best.
:24:53. > :24:57.Arguably, if he wants to maintain single-sex schools, he would have
:24:57. > :25:03.to go back to a system where LEAs had a degree of planning and
:25:03. > :25:06.oversight are able to say, we have so many girls places, and we have
:25:06. > :25:10.to match that for boys. Whether that would be popular with parents
:25:10. > :25:14.of politicians, I do not know. could probably hazard a guess,
:25:14. > :25:18.though. Parents like single-sex schools, but they also like Joyce.
:25:18. > :25:23.Giving them both could be the tricky bit.
:25:23. > :25:27.Her guest of the day, Helen Wright, is president of the Girls' School
:25:27. > :25:30.Association. Clearly, we know where you stand when it comes to single-
:25:30. > :25:34.sex education, you are a fan. Absolutely, yes. Nothing has
:25:34. > :25:38.changed your mind on that. Absolutely not. I have a son as
:25:38. > :25:42.well as two daughters, and I was single-sex education for him. In
:25:42. > :25:45.the teenage years, it is most effective, because that is the time
:25:45. > :25:50.when you are coming to terms with your agenda, and I think you need a
:25:50. > :25:53.strong space at that point to be able to do that. It is interesting
:25:53. > :25:58.from one of the contributors to says the research has shown that it
:25:58. > :26:02.is advantageous for girls, either in the state or independent sector,
:26:02. > :26:06.but not necessarily for boys. Why do you think that is? Do not think
:26:06. > :26:10.there is evidence to say that girls have a calming effect even in those
:26:10. > :26:15.teenage years when they may be a distraction? All of this research
:26:15. > :26:19.is slightly dubious, actually. It is very hard to say that there is
:26:19. > :26:23.one single direction that a school should take. What you need to do is
:26:23. > :26:29.go back to basics and look at schools themselves and go into a
:26:29. > :26:33.boys' school, of which they are not very many, going two goals schools,
:26:33. > :26:37.and see the effect that being in that environment is having. -- go
:26:37. > :26:42.into girls' schools. There is a difficulty in terms of planning and
:26:42. > :26:46.what sort of system we have. If you have a state system controlled by
:26:46. > :26:50.local education authorities, parents want girls in single-sex
:26:50. > :26:54.schools, you cannot square the circle. You can have a choice,
:26:54. > :26:58.though, and it would be interesting to find out why parents think that
:26:58. > :27:03.boys should be in co-educational schools, because I think that we
:27:03. > :27:06.still have a big hangover in our thinking about the past and what
:27:06. > :27:12.girls' schools and boys' schools used to be like. We really need to
:27:12. > :27:15.shed that. We need to say that we need a space for girls to the girls,
:27:15. > :27:19.particularly in those teenage years, when they are learning who they are.
:27:19. > :27:23.Even if that choice is unevenly distributed, because if you leave
:27:23. > :27:27.it open, you may not get the choice you want as parents, the schools
:27:27. > :27:30.may not be available in your area. The more successful boys' schools
:27:30. > :27:35.are, the more successful girls' schools are, the more parents will
:27:35. > :27:38.want to choose them. Looking ahead to the future, should there be a
:27:38. > :27:43.directive which says, let's look at single-sex education in the state
:27:43. > :27:47.sector? Absolutely, it is exactly the right way to move forward,
:27:47. > :27:51.because pounds to not often have that choice. As a result, that
:27:51. > :27:56.leads to compromises for education. These are wonderful places,
:27:57. > :28:01.fabulous places to be. Girls can grow up and develop that confidence,
:28:01. > :28:04.the carriage, and take a much wider range of subjects, free of
:28:05. > :28:08.stereotypes and prejudices, ditto in boys' schools, and we should be
:28:08. > :28:13.able to see that, place more emphasis on that in our education
:28:13. > :28:17.system. Do you think it will happen? It will have I had anything
:28:17. > :28:21.to do with it! We were let you have the last word on that! Goodbye,
:28:21. > :28:24.thank you for being our guest. Last week we saw a minister quits
:28:24. > :28:27.the Cabinet after being charged with perverting the course of
:28:27. > :28:31.justice and a minor reshuffle. What can we look forward to this week?
:28:31. > :28:34.In a moment I will be joined by two journalists to look into the
:28:34. > :28:38.crystal ball. First, a summary of what we know is in the political
:28:38. > :28:43.diary. On Tuesday, Labour will use their opposition date in an attempt
:28:43. > :28:48.to keep the spotlight on bankers' bonuses. They want to reintroduce
:28:48. > :28:53.the bank bonus tax and end bonuses based on what they call one-way bet.
:28:53. > :28:57.One day later, the Health and Social Care Bill faces the report
:28:57. > :29:02.stage in the Lords. The government has attempted to pre-empt further
:29:02. > :29:06.criticism by offering concessions. Peers may press for more changes.
:29:06. > :29:10.And on Friday, as he will have heard on Sunday politics, transport
:29:10. > :29:15.secretary Justine Greening says she will be attending the Network Rail
:29:15. > :29:19.AGM to vote against plans to reward their chief executive with a
:29:19. > :29:23.�340,000 bonus. Well, to talk about those things and what will be a
:29:23. > :29:29.busy political week, and joined by Andy McSmith on the Independent and
:29:29. > :29:33.Melissa Kite, contributing editor to the Spectator. Let's picked up
:29:33. > :29:38.on the Health and Social Care Bill, how dangerous is this what David
:29:38. > :29:42.Cameron? It is not looking good. It has been a terrible muddle. I do
:29:42. > :29:47.not know why they got into this in the first place. Were they ambushed
:29:47. > :29:51.by Andrew Lansley? I think so, he is an old trouper who will have
:29:51. > :29:55.been senior to Cameron years ago in Tory Central Office, and he
:29:55. > :29:58.probably said, I have got this great idea that shaking up the
:29:58. > :30:03.health service, he will have told him that Tony Blair regretted not
:30:03. > :30:09.doing it straight away, but it is a real dog's breakfast, and hardly
:30:09. > :30:13.anybody in the NHS is in favour of it. Even politically, some Tory MPs
:30:13. > :30:18.and said it is a difficult one to sell to constituents, and even Mark
:30:18. > :30:25.Field MP yesterday said that Andrew Lansley failed to articulate what
:30:25. > :30:31.the Bill is trying to achieve. Not And then you see in the Daily
:30:31. > :30:35.Mirror that 6,000 nurse jobs to go. People are thinking why are they
:30:35. > :30:39.spending �1.8 billion reorganising the place and sacking nurses.
:30:39. > :30:45.can't stop it now, can you? No, you can't. I think David Cameron must
:30:45. > :30:51.be thinking how on earth did I get into this? It is one of those
:30:51. > :30:54.reforms that it is a kind of messy compromise. They really wanted to
:30:54. > :31:02.do something radical, a lot of Tories want to do something radical
:31:02. > :31:07.with the Health Service. That is political - a political hot pay
:31:07. > :31:13.Tayto, they don't dare what they want which is more competition.
:31:13. > :31:17.They got together this Bill which is a compromise anyway. It is messy
:31:17. > :31:22.anyway way. They have got loads of amendments
:31:22. > :31:27.to be made. If it does go, it will be such a
:31:27. > :31:32.sort of, you know, a hotchpotch that it won't have any effect at
:31:32. > :31:35.all. So ss, you know -- it is, you know, in a sense a waste of
:31:35. > :31:39.political energy. What will it mean in term of David
:31:39. > :31:43.Cameron's claim that the NHS is safe in our hands, you know, he did
:31:43. > :31:47.a lot of work to convince people that as far as the Conservative
:31:47. > :31:52.Party was concerned he was a great supporter and is a great supporter
:31:52. > :31:58.of the NHS? Yes, well it doesn't help, does it? A suspicion is
:31:58. > :32:01.getting around that perhaps the purpose of this is to get more
:32:01. > :32:05.competition into the NHS. That's where a lot of the
:32:05. > :32:09.controversy is. Yes. People fear the idea that the Health Service is
:32:09. > :32:14.going to be given over to profit motive and end up having to pay for
:32:14. > :32:19.it. It is an old nightmare. As I say, I find it surprising they ever
:32:19. > :32:24.walked into this. They must be wishing they left it alone.
:32:24. > :32:31.Do you think on Friday when Justine Greening votes against this
:32:32. > :32:35.remuneration that Network Rail will say, "All right, we won't go
:32:35. > :32:39.ahead"? She is hoping it will shame them into.
:32:39. > :32:41.A bit like the Stephen Hester bonus when Labour said they were going to
:32:41. > :32:47.have a vote on it in the House of Commons.
:32:47. > :32:51.It is talking tough, but can anything be done? In a sense does
:32:51. > :32:54.David Cameron want to play a double game here? Does he want to talk
:32:54. > :32:58.tough on bonuses and have Justine Greening go to the meeting and make
:32:58. > :33:02.it sound like they are cross about it and they don't want it to happen
:33:03. > :33:07.because they know they can't do anything about it unless he
:33:07. > :33:13.voluntarily offers not to take it which would be a good compromise.
:33:13. > :33:17.Does David Cameron really want a massive war on bonuses? Is the
:33:17. > :33:20.political mileage in this? Is there a danger that in the end, you find
:33:20. > :33:24.yourself on the wrong side of the argument, the City are getting
:33:24. > :33:28.worried and suspicious about how much Government interference there
:33:28. > :33:32.is going to be, but the public mood is very much with this? I can't see
:33:32. > :33:35.what there is in it for the Government if Justine Greening
:33:35. > :33:38.doesn't get her way. People think they are able to stop this and
:33:38. > :33:44.there is an argument going on across the way in the Commons about
:33:44. > :33:47.whether they can or they they can't and as of the time I left the
:33:47. > :33:50.building, Labour seemed to be winning the argument. It looks as
:33:50. > :33:55.if they could stop it if they wanted.
:33:55. > :34:00.Maybe they were hoping that it would look like they tried. "sorry,
:34:00. > :34:06.we did try, but we couldn't do anything.". The fact is they are
:34:06. > :34:11.not on the right side of the argument. Public opinion is very
:34:11. > :34:17.anti-certain types of bonuses. It is not everybody's bonuses, but
:34:17. > :34:19.certain people including those whose organisations are heavily
:34:19. > :34:22.State funded. That's the problem. There we must
:34:22. > :34:27.leave it. Thank you very much. There has been violence this
:34:27. > :34:31.morning in the Syrian city of Homs. 25 people have been reported killed
:34:31. > :34:35.and many more injured as Government troops shelled the town. This This
:34:35. > :34:41.follows the violence when opposition groups said over 200
:34:41. > :34:45.civilians were killed in the city. On Saturday China and Russia
:34:45. > :34:50.blocked a UN resolution calling for President Assad to step down. We
:34:51. > :34:56.are joined by our correspondent, Jim Muir, because they blocked the
:34:56. > :34:59.resolution, does that mean there is an end to the diplomatic channels
:34:59. > :35:03.here in terms of what they can do in terms of putting pressure on
:35:03. > :35:11.Syria? Well, it hasn't ground to a complete halt. People are looking
:35:11. > :35:14.for ways at exerting pressure. The Arab League are meeting on Saturday.
:35:15. > :35:19.William Hague has said that there will be -- they will be working
:35:19. > :35:24.with the Arab League to push forward the Arab League's peace
:35:25. > :35:30.plan which was at the centre of that resolution. The Russian
:35:30. > :35:36.Foreign Minister Foreign Minister was unrepentant about that veto. He
:35:36. > :35:40.will be seeing President Assad and he is taking with him the
:35:40. > :35:46.equivalent the head of the CIA, they want to push the political
:35:46. > :35:50.process forward to get quicker reforms going and and to sponsor
:35:50. > :35:55.some kind of dialogue. Both those things are not realistic because
:35:55. > :35:57.the Russians don't have clout with the Syrian opposition. They are a
:35:57. > :36:02.dirty word with the opposition at the moment along with the Chinese
:36:02. > :36:08.because of that veto and they are not really in a position now to
:36:08. > :36:11.talk about dialogue or some kind of talks between the two sides. So it
:36:12. > :36:15.is very hard at this stage to see a way forward diplomatically. The
:36:15. > :36:20.West will be trying to squeeze more with sanctions, economic sanctions
:36:20. > :36:25.by the EU, trying to get the Arabs also to tighten up their sanctions
:36:25. > :36:30.against the regime. Perhaps working with the Arab League to take
:36:30. > :36:33.diplomatic moves like throwing Syrian ambassadors out, all of
:36:33. > :36:40.which ups the pressure, but it is not a breakthrough and it won't
:36:40. > :36:42.break the ear of President Assad who rejected that peace plan plan
:36:42. > :36:46.because it requires him to step aside.
:36:46. > :36:50.On the ground, the violence is intensifying. Is there any hope of
:36:50. > :36:55.a pause in the fighting in order to allow humanitarian aid to get
:36:55. > :37:00.through? Well, not at the moment. I mean
:37:00. > :37:04.they both seem to be going hell for leather. After the veto at the UN
:37:05. > :37:11.both sides said that the only solution was to crack ahead on the
:37:11. > :37:13.ground. The Government basically through its Government -- through
:37:13. > :37:18.its Government newspaper talked about stability. President Assad is
:37:18. > :37:21.believed to have told visiting allies from Lebanon that the cost
:37:21. > :37:24.of not doing anything was a lot higher than the cost of being
:37:24. > :37:34.decisive. So he seems to have decided that that it is time to
:37:34. > :37:34.
:37:34. > :37:40.wipe out these pockets of resistance where the Free Syrian
:37:40. > :37:45.Army to try and stifle those pockets of defiance in places like
:37:45. > :37:49.Hops. The free -- Homs, the Free Syrian Army said the only way to
:37:49. > :37:52.get rid of this regime was by force and they intended to step up their
:37:52. > :38:00.activities. There has been a rash of attacks and clashes, not just
:38:00. > :38:03.Homs, but also a town in the west and a number of places. Both sides
:38:03. > :38:09.seem to be bent on clashing at the moment.
:38:09. > :38:19.Jim Muir. Thank you very much. I am joined by four MPs. The
:38:19. > :38:24.
:38:24. > :38:27.Conservative Conor Burns, and a representative from Plaid Cymru.
:38:27. > :38:30.Duncan Hames, it has been ruled out military action. Is that something
:38:30. > :38:33.you agree with? We have been clear of the importance of working
:38:33. > :38:37.through that through the United Nations under this Government and
:38:37. > :38:42.that's difficult at the moment and I think a coalition Government was
:38:42. > :38:46.was doing the right thing in supporting the Arab League backed
:38:46. > :38:48.resolution, but we must look to other measures we can use to keep
:38:48. > :38:52.the pressure up on the Syrian regime.
:38:52. > :38:54.But in the meantime the violence is intensifying, we are going to have
:38:54. > :38:57.a statement this afternoon from William Hague, the Foreign
:38:57. > :39:04.Secretary, I mean it just seems there isn't much you can do unless
:39:04. > :39:09.there is some action taken. Well, you could say that, but I am
:39:10. > :39:14.disappointed about the resolution failing. The UN process is becoming
:39:14. > :39:20.a busted flush. I do hope that there are as we speak speak dip
:39:20. > :39:24.plaitic efforts being -- diplomatic efforts being made, but as you say,
:39:24. > :39:28.people are being killed, but I have to make make one point and I don't
:39:28. > :39:32.agree with Russia's veto, but they made it on the basis that regime
:39:32. > :39:36.change is unlawful at international law. Time was when we respected
:39:36. > :39:41.international law actually and it is unlawful, but I would hope that
:39:41. > :39:47.the way forward in this particular way is to support African countries
:39:47. > :39:52.in the main, support their efforts, support the Moroccan resolution and
:39:52. > :39:56.see if diplomatic avenues can bear fruit.
:39:56. > :39:59.Do you think there can be a solution in Syria? We need to go
:39:59. > :40:04.back to the point about the United Nations. If the international
:40:04. > :40:08.community is to make sure it has legitimacy, decisions like the one
:40:08. > :40:13.taken with China and Russia, not supporting it puts the
:40:13. > :40:19.international community in a very difficult position and what needs
:40:19. > :40:24.to happen is continued pressure on Russia and China to take a stand...
:40:24. > :40:27.Are you going to to change their minds? It has been a year. The
:40:28. > :40:31.first attempt was made by Britain and France and other countries to
:40:31. > :40:35.have a resolution failed. The sanctions are an important step,
:40:35. > :40:38.but around 7,000 people have been killed and Russia and China need to
:40:39. > :40:44.step up and take responsibility and the international community needs
:40:44. > :40:52.to keep the pressure. The second thing is around avoiding unilateral
:40:52. > :40:56.action by countries within the Arab League, if the UN doesn't take
:40:56. > :41:00.concerted action together, there is a greater risk of not having a
:41:00. > :41:05.common voice voice and regional instability, but military action
:41:05. > :41:11.should be a last resort and in this situation with Syria strategically
:41:11. > :41:14.in a position where it can destabilise the region... Isn't
:41:14. > :41:18.that the difficulty? What we are talk being is a bigger problem and
:41:18. > :41:22.that is Iran, of course? Seen very much as Syria's sponsor? The whole
:41:22. > :41:27.situation is depressing and what I find worrying about it, not just in
:41:27. > :41:31.the case of Syria, but going forward. Here we have China, one of
:41:31. > :41:35.the emerging great powers and on a simple question like this, where
:41:35. > :41:40.you have a president murdering his own people under licence, China is
:41:40. > :41:43.not prepared to step up. There must be an Arab solution to this. We are
:41:43. > :41:47.talking about our friendships and ties of history with that part of
:41:47. > :41:52.the world, it is time for the Arab League to step up to this problem.
:41:52. > :41:56.Because the consequences of Syria going into civil war with Israel
:41:56. > :42:00.next to them, with the problem of Iran, attempt to go acquire a
:42:01. > :42:05.nuclear weapon is too frightening to contemplate.
:42:05. > :42:15.We will hear the statement at 3.30pm
:42:15. > :42:17.
:42:17. > :42:23.Ed Ed Davey has barely got his feet under his recycled desk. 100 MPs
:42:23. > :42:33.are written to David Cameron demand that the Government cut subsidies
:42:33. > :42:36.
:42:36. > :42:40.for for for windfarms. Mr Davey has been on a visit with Nick Clegg
:42:40. > :42:44.this morning where the two Lib Dems have been making clear, they are
:42:44. > :42:51.behind green energy. Now, Conor Burns, did you sign that
:42:51. > :42:56.letter? I didn't. I am a Parliamentary private secretary so
:42:56. > :43:02.I can't. We have a pro proposal for a windfarm in Bournemouth and it is
:43:02. > :43:06.ten miles off the coast. Over 100 meters high, red flashing light. We
:43:06. > :43:11.are concerned about it and because it is over ten miles away from
:43:11. > :43:15.shore, local authorities, members of Parliament, had no impact on it
:43:15. > :43:21.at all. I think what the letter is making clear, we are not against
:43:21. > :43:25.the idea of renewables of course in the insecure world we live in, we
:43:25. > :43:28.must have a diversity of energy supply. I feel we are in the grip
:43:29. > :43:32.of a fashionable consensus here and the opportunity of a new Secretary
:43:32. > :43:38.of State to have a look at it again is one worth taking.
:43:38. > :43:41.Because you don't think he will be as tough as Chris Huhne? He will be
:43:42. > :43:48.more pragmatic. You sense there is an opportunity
:43:48. > :43:52.for you and your colleagues to do a land grab? There is an opportunity.
:43:52. > :43:55.If you are subsidising something, you think it is the write thing to
:43:55. > :44:02.do. It is a question of putting them under scrutiny financial and
:44:02. > :44:05.every other way. Will Ed Davey give in? These
:44:05. > :44:10.subsidies are important to get costs down so we can benefit from
:44:10. > :44:14.lower costs. The Government had set out its intentions to look to
:44:14. > :44:17.reduce these supports and there is a review taking place at the moment
:44:17. > :44:23.which the Government will be in a position to make a decision on
:44:23. > :44:27.shortly. Because of the success in expanding this sector, costs are
:44:27. > :44:32.coming down that nainls the sub -- enables the subsidy to fall, but
:44:32. > :44:37.gives us a more diverse range of sources of energy for our country
:44:37. > :44:41.which must be a good thing. But should they be getting a huge
:44:41. > :44:46.slice of the cake? Can we really afford to give that level of
:44:46. > :44:51.subsidy to something that only provided 7% of electricity? How big
:44:51. > :44:58.of the slice of the cake was it? It was �10 on your energy bill that
:44:58. > :45:02.went towards subsidy for onshore and off shore wind combined. This
:45:02. > :45:06.is about supporting a small sector starting out, get its costs down,
:45:06. > :45:11.so it can be a contributor to our energy needs in the future and if
:45:11. > :45:16.that means we are not stuck on the oil price hook and if if that means
:45:16. > :45:20.we are not at risk of things going on in the Middle East then that
:45:20. > :45:25.surely must be a good way to get bills down for energy bill payers
:45:25. > :45:30.in the future. Does Labour agree that we should be
:45:30. > :45:34.looking at the level of subsidy? People resent the amount that comes
:45:34. > :45:44.on their bills that goes because it is not that transparent anyway,
:45:44. > :45:47.that goes to subsidise green We need innovation, and that is an
:45:48. > :45:51.important part of the debate. At the beginning of these phases, it
:45:51. > :45:58.is important to provide support, but they will become more self-
:45:58. > :46:02.sufficient. These 100 MPs Boro signature signals a broader point
:46:02. > :46:06.about their attitude towards the green economy. It actually
:46:06. > :46:11.undermines what David Cameron said before the election. The greenest
:46:11. > :46:14.government ever. In reality, if you have got 100 MPs who are not
:46:14. > :46:19.subscribing to these efforts, it shows a lack of commitment to
:46:19. > :46:23.having a greener economy and, you know, a Green government. I think
:46:23. > :46:26.it is very much the case that they have taken advantage of Chris
:46:26. > :46:31.Huhne's resignation, and it is an attempt to undermine Ed Davey
:46:31. > :46:35.before he has got his feet under the desk. That is not acceptable,
:46:35. > :46:41.and the Conservatives are basically coming back with a vengeance, the
:46:41. > :46:46.right of the Conservatives. That is a very predictable accusation. It
:46:46. > :46:49.is about having a dialogue. That is what it looks like. David Cameron
:46:49. > :46:52.said it would be the greenest government ever, and you are now
:46:52. > :46:56.calling on the government to back down. We are calling on the
:46:56. > :47:01.government to have a think about this. I took a delegation of MPs to
:47:01. > :47:06.talk to Chris Ruane about a wind farm in Dorset. We talk about
:47:06. > :47:12.empowering local communities. -- boom-boom. There are quite a lot of
:47:12. > :47:15.stories about local opinion being overridden by wind farms. They are
:47:15. > :47:19.10,000 jobs in the sector, and it could be eight times that many. At
:47:19. > :47:23.the moment, we really need to support industries that are
:47:23. > :47:27.providing new jobs, and one of the good things announced today was the
:47:27. > :47:31.intention that more and more of the supply chain for wind power should
:47:31. > :47:35.be supporting UK jobs and businesses, giving people
:47:35. > :47:38.livelihoods here in the UK. I can totally agree with that. I saw
:47:39. > :47:42.German turbines in a British offshore territory in the Falklands.
:47:42. > :47:45.Ridiculous. We should be getting the manufacture of this into
:47:45. > :47:49.Britain, we should be innovating and bringing it to market ourselves.
:47:49. > :47:54.You have always been talking about empowering local communities.
:47:54. > :47:57.Surely it is wrong that the will of local people, when there is an
:47:57. > :48:01.inappropriate proposal, can be overridden in the policy planning
:48:01. > :48:04.framework. I agree with that, and in Wales we have a situation where
:48:04. > :48:07.if a plant is more than 50 megawatts, it is taken a part of
:48:07. > :48:11.our hands completely and dealt with at an official level any department
:48:12. > :48:16.down here. That cannot be right. On the larger point, discussing
:48:16. > :48:21.renewables, nobody has mentioned the fact that I do not think we are
:48:21. > :48:25.doing enough with waveband sea power. When you look at the
:48:25. > :48:28.percentage of energy that New Zealand gathers from the sea,
:48:28. > :48:32.totally clean, you know, to my way of thinking that is where we should
:48:32. > :48:37.be doing the research. So the emphasis could be shifted anyway,
:48:37. > :48:41.but there is also a statistic that says for every job created in the
:48:41. > :48:46.UK renewable energy sector, 3.7 jobs are lost because of the extra
:48:46. > :48:49.cost in creating those jobs. What you say to that? I do not recognise
:48:49. > :48:52.that at all. It was a fairly reputable report which suggested
:48:52. > :48:57.that it means more jobs are lost elsewhere in order to create the
:48:57. > :49:01.jobs you have talked about in the renewable energy sector. I have not
:49:02. > :49:05.seen that report, I do not recognise it. I see new jobs in my
:49:05. > :49:09.constituency and right across the country because people are being
:49:09. > :49:13.employed to help improve people's energy efficiency, and the Green
:49:13. > :49:17.deal is going to do even more on that. On where the subsidies go,
:49:17. > :49:19.the coalition government has increased subsidies for the
:49:19. > :49:23.offshore marine renewables, wave and tidal, that we have been
:49:23. > :49:28.hearing about, because they need that support, because they are
:49:28. > :49:34.early-stage technologies. Hundreds of jobs in renewables in mid-Wales,
:49:34. > :49:38.hundreds presently and they are increasing. Nick Clegg, the DPM, on
:49:38. > :49:42.that visit defending green measures. Acting the future of the British
:49:42. > :49:46.economy and the world economy has to be a green one. -- I think. It
:49:46. > :49:50.is the only way we can create jobs for the future in a sustainable way.
:49:50. > :49:53.You know, I think there is nothing inconsistent about doing the right
:49:53. > :49:58.thing for the plant at the right thing for jobs and growth today,
:49:58. > :50:02.and that is what innovations like this, why they are so important,
:50:02. > :50:05.because they show you can create jobs, create affordable homes and
:50:05. > :50:09.create affordable homes which are cheaper to heat and the many homes
:50:09. > :50:14.which people live in right now. Well, Conor Burns, you have got a
:50:14. > :50:17.battle on your hands, are you going to get anywhere with this?
:50:17. > :50:21.pragmatism of government will allow a serious conversation on this, and
:50:21. > :50:24.the other thing to remember, Jo, is that we're all getting e-mails and
:50:24. > :50:29.letters from people in a very cold spell at the moment, struggling to
:50:29. > :50:34.pay their heating bills. You can do a lot of this stuff, and you can
:50:34. > :50:37.pile costs on at the time of great growth. In a time of difficulty,
:50:37. > :50:40.some of the electorate are struggling, and anything that puts
:50:40. > :50:46.extra pressure on them, it is probably not the right time to do
:50:46. > :50:49.it. In view of the subsidy, let's hope they get it right, because in
:50:49. > :50:55.regard to the solar energy, an absolute start breakfast, defeated
:50:55. > :51:02.in the courts, a complete mess. They are appealing, I think. Yes,
:51:02. > :51:06.OK, well, 101 tory MPs wrote to the Prime Minister about wind turbines,
:51:06. > :51:09.102 have put pen to paper on another issue, this time edging
:51:09. > :51:13.David Cameron to take back a series of criminal justice powers from
:51:13. > :51:15.Brussels. The backbenchers do not want to see the European Courts of
:51:15. > :51:19.Justice being given permanent control over British law and order
:51:19. > :51:25.when it comes to things like handing over suspects do other EU
:51:25. > :51:28.states. Duncan Hames, yet again, there are Tory Euro-sceptics who
:51:28. > :51:32.want to claw back powers, and that was a promise given to them. Are
:51:32. > :51:36.you worried? I am not worried, but I'm surprised that some of the
:51:36. > :51:41.targets of this particular letter. The European arrest warrant, which
:51:41. > :51:45.in some cases is a sledgehammer to crack a nut, in others it is a very
:51:45. > :51:52.valuable crime-fighting tool for the British police. It was first
:51:52. > :51:58.used in Britain have to arrest a Portuguese man who murdered his
:51:58. > :52:02.fiancee. Her family are still among my constituents. Just nine months
:52:02. > :52:05.later, at he was apprehended in Spain, he was convicted in a
:52:05. > :52:09.Bristol court and given a life sentence and jailed for the murder.
:52:09. > :52:12.Now, those people that want to see as being tough on Europe are going
:52:12. > :52:18.to have to take care to make sure that we do not stop being tough on
:52:18. > :52:22.crime. Do you support this measure being put forward by these MPs?
:52:23. > :52:26.spoke before Christmas on this matter in a house. The primary duty
:52:26. > :52:29.that any government, after defending the country, has to its
:52:29. > :52:33.citizens is the maintenance of law and order and criminal justice, one
:52:33. > :52:36.of the few things that only the state can do. We are now in a
:52:36. > :52:40.situation under the European arrest warrant where British citizens can
:52:40. > :52:45.be extradited to other European countries to face charges that they
:52:45. > :52:47.would not face at home for the same offence. I think that is wrong. I
:52:47. > :52:52.think we should be co-operating inter-governmental the across
:52:52. > :52:54.Europe, we should be co-operating between police forces, but the idea
:52:54. > :52:59.that our criminal justice system and police authorities should be
:52:59. > :53:06.subject to external control other than from the UK citizens, elected
:53:06. > :53:10.and appointed, to me, this is simply wrong. This is not new in
:53:10. > :53:14.one sense, so why do you think will make any headway with it? Because a
:53:14. > :53:17.whole raft of new proposals are coming forward. The debate before
:53:17. > :53:20.Christmas, there was cross-party senses, even from the left of the
:53:20. > :53:26.Labour Party, saying we need to look again at the European arrest
:53:26. > :53:29.warrant. Do you agree with that? We have to focus on my operation is
:53:29. > :53:34.necessary in an era of organised crime that transcends boundaries
:53:34. > :53:38.and borders, so it is bizarre that Conservative MPs have decided to go
:53:38. > :53:42.down this route. We need to look at where there is a need for co-
:53:42. > :53:47.operation, including on the arrest warrant, and more widely around
:53:47. > :53:50.policing and security issues. And as I say, once again, there is a
:53:50. > :53:55.hidden agenda here with Conservative MPs flexing their
:53:55. > :54:01.muscles, telling David Cameron that he needs to take on board their
:54:01. > :54:05.anti-European angle, and any excuse to pick on the European Union and
:54:05. > :54:09.think about how points can be stored and how there could be a
:54:09. > :54:13.wedge driven between the pro Europeans and the anti-Europeans is
:54:13. > :54:17.being brought home. This is another example of it. It has very little
:54:17. > :54:20.to do with crime, and if they are serious about tackling crime, there
:54:21. > :54:25.would be more co-operation, not less. I went to Brussels a few
:54:25. > :54:28.weeks ago, and one of the problems we have, when we scrutinise
:54:28. > :54:33.European regulations, it is too late. We should be getting in at
:54:33. > :54:36.the very beginning. Isn't that the whole point about David Cameron's
:54:36. > :54:40.promise? It is difficult to repatriate these things. I am
:54:40. > :54:42.talking about looking for. There are issues with the European
:54:42. > :54:47.restaurant, I would accept that, but hitherto it has not been
:54:47. > :54:51.misused, it seems to me. -- European arrest warrant. But with
:54:51. > :54:54.regard to current applications, when we get a Westminster, it is
:54:54. > :54:58.too late, the horse has bought it. We should be getting in at the
:54:58. > :55:06.beginning so that if changes are necessary, they can be argued for
:55:07. > :55:09.in good time. OK, thank you. The country may be experiencing hard
:55:09. > :55:14.times, culture secretary Jeremy Hunt has great expectations for
:55:14. > :55:17.2012. Anybody got the clues yet? Not only is it the next year, it is
:55:17. > :55:20.the 200th anniversary of Charles Dickens. Jeremy Hunt wants to get
:55:20. > :55:23.his Cabinet colleagues in the mood to celebrate one of our greatest
:55:23. > :55:28.writers, so when they meet at Downing Street tomorrow, he will be
:55:28. > :55:32.handling at a carefully chosen not all two, but will it go down well
:55:33. > :55:37.or cause a dickens of a row? We have got some of the books here.
:55:37. > :55:40.Nick Clegg might not like his gift, he is going to get a copy of Oliver
:55:40. > :55:45.Twist, either because Mr Clegg is responsible for social
:55:45. > :55:50.responsibility or, as I suspect, many are saying that their hero is
:55:50. > :55:56.constantly asking for more! Chancellor George Osborne gets e-
:55:56. > :56:06.book, perhaps reflecting rivalries with Paris over the future of the
:56:06. > :56:08.
:56:08. > :56:13.City of London. -- A Tale Of Two Cities. Justine Greening will get
:56:13. > :56:17.Dombey And Son, which features the male line which was considered high
:56:17. > :56:21.speed. Which one would you have? am glad that Nick Clegg is going to
:56:21. > :56:27.get the opportunity to be as informal, sir, all that was, I
:56:27. > :56:32.would happily take that from him. - - asking for more. Is this a wise
:56:32. > :56:35.strategy by Jeremy Hunt? Dickens was very prescient, talking about
:56:35. > :56:41.corruption within Parliament, corruption within the authorities,
:56:41. > :56:46.but also he was saying that we are being ruled by Old Etonians.
:56:46. > :56:49.the class for point in there! The first book by Dickens that I read
:56:49. > :56:53.was Nicholas Nicol be, and there has been a row about when you
:56:53. > :57:00.should start reading them. To have any expert as vice? As early as
:57:00. > :57:07.possible. -- do you have any expert advice? They are so many different
:57:07. > :57:11.ways of familiarising yourself with the stories, and I have very fond
:57:11. > :57:15.memories of reading Oliver Twist and watching the different versions,
:57:15. > :57:20.so I think as early as possible. They will not have any time to read
:57:20. > :57:24.these books, is this part of their ministerial brief? Or to be done in
:57:24. > :57:30.their free time crust Mark I hope they do, I think it is a wonderful
:57:30. > :57:35.initiative, but mine would be David Copperfield. My favourite character
:57:35. > :57:39.is in that, there is a lesson for modern politics... There seems to
:57:39. > :57:43.be a lesson for modern politics in all of them! If expenditure exceeds
:57:43. > :57:47.income, and happiness, misery. He embodied the idea of the last
:57:47. > :57:50.government that something might turn up. A David Cameron is being
:57:50. > :57:55.given hard times on Great Expectations, both ends of the
:57:55. > :57:59.scale. When he refers to David Copperfield, I was met to read
:57:59. > :58:05.during the summer break at school, and I forgot to start it until the
:58:05. > :58:09.week before. I never got it going! Just time before we go to find out
:58:09. > :58:14.the answer to our quiz. What Taylor has been banned from the House of
:58:14. > :58:19.Commons bar on the ground that it is expensive to women? Was it
:58:19. > :58:25.dangle very, Cornish Knocker, Top Totty or Kilt Lifter? Top Totty!
:58:25. > :58:29.You knew that quickly enough, well done! That is all for today. We
:58:29. > :58:34.know where you spend your time, not reading Charles Dickens's novels!