22/02/2012 Daily Politics

Good morning. This is the Daily Politics.

Today's top story: Former Defence Secretary, Liam Fox, calls for more

public spending cuts to fund tax cuts for business. As lobbying

intensifies ahead of next month's Budget, has the Chancellor got any

room for manoeuvre? Iain Duncan Smith's flagship work

experience programme for jobseekers is under pressure, as Tesco's,

Argos and Superdrug demand changes to the scheme. So is it a great

leg-up for the unemployed, or the equivalent of 'forced labour'?

It's Wednesday so it must be Prime Minister's Questions. We'll bring

you live coverage of PMQs from Noon as Ed Miliband squares up to David

Cameron. And, as Nick Clegg visits an

Olympics venue, the writer and historian, Iain Sinclair, says the

Games are a disaster for East London. We need to defend the magic

and the interest of what this area already was - a place of industrial

fossils, wild beauty and thriving All that to come before 1:00pm, and

with us for the whole programme two accomplished political performers.

In fact you could say they are the Adele and James Corden of

Westminster! Caroline Flint, the shadow energy secretary, and the

policing minister, Nick Herbert. Welcome to you both. Now, there are

still four weeks to go before the Budget but George Osborne is

probably already a bit fed up of all the demands being made on him

and the unwanted public advice from some of his own backbenchers.

Yes, the former Defence Secretary, Liam Fox, has returned to politics

with a call for business regulations to be scrapped and

further public spending reductions to pay for tax cuts Some other

Conservative backbenchers are threatening to rebel unless the

Chancellor changes plans to cut child benefit from all higher rate

tax payers The CBI says that business taxes should be cut by

�500 million to boost growth and investment. Lib Dem, David Laws,

says pension tax relief for high earners should be scrapped to pay

for raising the income tax threshold to �10,000 immediately.

And Ed Balls, the Shadow Chancellor, has also called for tax cuts

suggesting a range of options for the Chancellor to be paid for by

extra borrowing. So, Nick Herbert, will the

Chancellor listen to his former Cabinet colleague, Liam Fox? They

used to share a curry together in the Treasury. We will have to wait

and see what happens in the Budget. There is quite an important point

of difference between the various representations that have been made

for some for reductions in taxation which should be funded by changes

and reduction in public spending. And Ed Balls, who is saying let us

reduce taxation, but actually we will fund it by borrowing. It is a

fundamental difference and fundamentally wrong. Why is it

wrong? It would put at risk, confidence in our economy, and at

risk, confidence in interest rates which is important for businesses

and households with mortgages and for the prospects of returning to

sustainable growth. Caroline Flint, what do you say to that?

Government is borrowing �158 billion more based on their

planned... Over a five-year period. It is part of their plans to cut

public spending. Yes, there would be cuts in public spending but you

have to stimulate growth and jobs as well on that is why we suggested

a temporary VAT reductions. It would cost 12 billion but the

dividends would out way that with getting people spending again. But

presently people are worrying about spending and it is having an

adverse effect on the economy. A temporary VAT cuts would create the

opportunity for families to spend more. We think it is the right

thing to do. You will never agree and these are well established a

opposing positions. But Liam Fox also said it is intellectually

unsustainable to believe workplace rights should remain untouchable.

Do you agree? We are taking measures to make it easier for

businesses to hire people and some of the changes we are making to

employment tribunals are about that. So you do agree? The flexibility is

important and we are taking steps to enhance that. The do you agree?

I think I have just agreed. wanted you to say the words.

agreed. We are getting somewhere. Should the Chancellor perform a U-

turn and child benefit for higher rate tax players -- taxpayers. He

might be defeated in the Commons if he doesn't. This is about the

Budget and what the Chancellor is going to say next month. It is

never a good idea for his colleagues to predict what he is

going to say. There is this idea you start paying benefit right of

the income scale even to people who don't require it. I think in all of

the changes we have been making, we have been focused on the lowest

paid. It is one of the important reasons we are making progress from

paying tax at all. Just for clarity, in this case, you don't agree he

should do a U-turn? I certainly don't agree that he should do a U-

turn, but these are matters for the Chancellor next month. Can I say

something about this idea to create jobs, you make it easier to sack

people which seems to be the Liam Fox argument. When I talk to

businesses in my constituency, the small businesses are worried that

even if they have more export opportunities, they are afraid to

expand because they don't get support from the banks and

elsewhere. The answer isn't growing our economy by making it easier to

sack people, we need to get lending going again, so small businesses

feel confident about taking people on. It is a disgrace there are

firms in our country who could expand but cannot do so because of

the mess this Government has got us into now. We will be speaking

exclusively to Liam Fox in the Sunday politics this weekend.

Now to the story that keeps on running - the Government's plans to

reform the NHS. This afternoon the Labour Party are staging a debate

in the House of Commons, calling on ministers to publish something

called the 'risk register' - a detailed analysis of what could

potentially go wrong with the proposed changes in the health

service. So far the Government has refused to publish the information.

We can talk now to a Lib Dem MP who wants the register to be published,

Andrew George. Why is it so important to get the

register published? Is it best to go into this debate in the dark, or

have the best information available. The fact is, it is better to have

as much information as possible from Government, if you are going

to particularly give the green light to what is going to beat the

biggest reorganisation of the health service in its 63 years.

People will say it is just another excuse to block the Bill, as they

are going through legislation, it is not wise to publish all of the

information, there has to be some confidentiality? The debate around

the risk register is it you like, a bit of a sideshow. The main issue

is the legitimacy of the Bill itself and the impact it is likely

to have on the NHS and that is worth the core of the debate is.

The debate about the risk register and its publication, which the

information tribunal clearly has instructed the Department of Health

to publish, is a sideshow, but it is the information and it would be

helpful in informing the debate. you think you'll get any more

concessions on the NHS bill? have to continue to work as best as

we can to achieve concessions. The latest we are pushing for as limo

Democrats, is too constrained democratisation of the NHS through

proposed amendments in the House of Lords and it is something I am sure

will be welcome if we can achieve it. My position is, although we

have made the bill less bad, I'm not persuaded the Bill should go

through. OK, Andrew George, thanks very much. Nick Herbert, you must

be fed up with your Lib Dem coalition colleagues? They have

disrupted this Bill all the way through, caused a pause in the

legislation, numerous concessions and they still want more. Nick

Clegg is reportedly trying to get more concessions so there isn't a

revolt at his party's spring conference. What do you say to

them? I am not fed up with them and there has been a process of debate

about the health reforms. They are important in terms of the transfer

of responsibility from the bureaucracy of Primary Care Trust,

and putting that responsibility effectively in the hands of GPs

through the commissioning groups, giving patients therefore, more

control, more choice. Saving money through the reduction in

bureaucracy, �4.5 million will be saved. The direction of travel of

these reforms are right. The point is, why at this stage are your

coalition colleagues still trying to change the Bill yet again? Is

that what Nick Clegg should be doing? Is it what you would expect

him to be doing? The Government is committed in seen these reforms

through. There is a process of Parliamentary debate. There is a

debate outside, the Prime Minister met some of the principal players

last week. It is perfectly OK to have a discussion about this and

people propose amendments. What is important is we maintain the

direction of these reforms. It is important the NHS does change,

because we needed to adapt to the modern challenges and rising costs

of care. It is important we move away from the bureaucratic system

we have had in the past and give it the opportunity to save money and

give patients more control. But she judges publish the at-risk register,

-- Risk Register? No Government has published a risk register. The

previous Government didn't. Andy Burnham himself refused a Freedom

of Information Act request to publish the risk register when he

was Health Secretary. Now he is calling for it, which is

hypocritical. Blatant opportunism? We are talking about a transition

risk register which is only to do with this massive reorganisation of

the NHS, which this coalition Government has decided to embark on.

When Andy Burnham was in Government, the issue was the department will

register. But this is different. isn't. It is, that is why the

information commissioner allowed it. When Andy was in Government, the

Information Commissioner did not insist. It is a risk register about

the reorganisation of the NHS. The information commissioner has seen

it and has said there is information that is pertinent to

the debate about the changes to the NHS. That is why we have is motion

today and white the Liberal Democrats can go with this today.

And why not just publish it? It is naked political opportunism. You're

not going to get civil servants to give advice of these risk registers

which requires them to set out things like worst case scenarios if

what they think is going to happen is, it is going to be published and

used for partisan political advantage. Governments have not

published these in the past. This is about a bill, an act that will

be made by you if you had your way. The public have never heard of a

risk register before. This is a sideshow about what the debate is

about, which is the importance of these reforms to secure the NHS for

the future. Naked political opportunism! We

have never heard that on this programme.

Is the Government's work experience scheme in trouble? It was hailed as

a way to help some of our one million unemployed 16 to 24 year

olds get jobs, providing work experience whilst participants

claim Jobseeker's Allowance. But it's not quite gone to plan.

Critics have accused companies involved of using slave labour and

now some of those big stores have also expressed concerns. So what

was the big idea, Jo? It must all have seemed so simple

when the Department for Work and Pensions came up with the scheme.

So how does it work? Under the Work Experience programme, young people

on benefits are offered placements of up to two months while still

receiving Jobseeker's Allowance plus expenses. The Government says

it's a voluntary scheme and participants can pull out in the

first week without sanctions. But pulling out any later could mean

they lose their benefits. Firms who have signed up include Boots,

McDonald's and Primark. Over 34,000 people have taken up the scheme and

50% of those have stopped claiming benefits. Work and Pensions

Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, says the scheme gives participants

experience, a line for their CV and a stint in business. But not

everyone agrees. Critics say people aren't able to do work experience

in their chosen field and that big companies are profiting from free

labour. Or "slave labour". They say that the scheme isn't voluntary as

those who pull out lose their benefits. So is the scheme in

danger of failing apart? Tesco, one of the firms who backed the scheme

has announced it'll offer paid placements with a guarantee of a

job to all those people it takes on - if they do well. And Argos and

Superdrug say they're suspending their involvement pending talks

with the DWP to ensure the scheme is voluntary and benefits won't be

removed from those who leave the scheme. But Hhecalls the scheme's

critics "modern-day Luddites" and And we are joined by Anne Marie

O'Reilly, from the campaign group Boycott Workfare. We can see the

absurdity in a multi-millionaire minister calling people jobs snobs.

By at you do not normally get paid work experience but in this case

they will get jobseeker's allowance of --. They have to work on threat

of sanctions. That is after they signed up. We have been contacted

by people this week who having seen it in the headlines, have found out

for the first time it is voluntary because that is not how it is being

portrayed. Once they signed up to it, they can step away very early

without sanctions but if they stay on it for a while, there is as

sanction. Most people will think, better to be getting some work

experience, getting up in the morning, mixing with colleagues,

and sitting at home doing nothing. The opting for one week is true of

only one of the government's five schemes. Other people put people to

work on threat of sanction it... How are you going to get a job if

These schemes are designed to hold another subsidy to big business.

ASDA, McDonald's and Tesco can afford to pay wages and they are

not. The government is basically introducing an eight-week, unpaid

interviewed for jobs? 1100 people worked for Tesco on the schemes and

did not get a job from it, which is hundreds of thousands of hours.

That is unpaid work. The taxpayer is paying them. Maybe we have a

right to expect them to do something for that money. What is

wrong with that principle? Young people earning �53 a week on

jobseeker's allowance, that is �200 a month. The idea that they should

be working 30 hour weeks in order to have the bare minimum to survive

is absurd and people can see that. That is why Iain Duncan-Smith is

coming out with mad accusations because the public at large can see

this is a threat to wall of us, because it is replacing paid work

and driving down wages -- threat to all of us. But you on the

jobseeker's Allowance, �53.45 for a young person a week, that works out

at �1.50 an hour. That is not what I would regard as much experience.

That is doing things for nothing. These people would be on this

benefit anyway. The question is, should they be allowed to

voluntarily joined a scheme that gives them experience? 34,000 have

been through this scheme and over half of them have gone into work so

it has benefited them and surely that is a good thing. What on earth

is wrong with that? In terms of these people who said they have

received sanctions, 200 people have received sanctions. You have the

option of dropping out after the first week if you do not like it.

This has been a good experience for people who would otherwise be on

benefits. It is not a form of slave labour, you are confusing it with

other schemes... Why are big companies like Tesco and Argos up

in arms? Chris Grayling, the minister in charge, said that you

were running a disgraceful campaign and when Tesco said, we are not too

happy about this, he said it was a U-turn and that it was a better

offer for young people. Which bit is the right? The Tesco offer is a

good offer! It is a good thing, if not a bad thing! You do not think

it is a disgraceful campaign? a misleading campaign. It has

benefited a lot of young people with experience while they are

claiming benefits and I disagree that the public will be worried

about this. The public will see it is voluntary, it is commonsense,

and it gives something... Can I correct you? Briefly. It is

disabled people and people with terminal cancer that this

government wants to make work for free. That is not happening for

Tesco. It's is voluntary. Do you have examples of Tesco employees

people with terminal cancer under this scheme? The government is

trying to keep these figures very much under wraps. You made an

accusation. Oh I have not made an accusation at Tesco but it is

government policy. You can look a DWP policy... You must approve of

what the government is doing because it is a continuation of

Labour policies. James Purnell said in 2008 that Reggie everyone on

benefits should be forced to do something in return -- that

everyone on benefits. When I was Employment Minister we had the

scheme to get people ready for work through the JobCentre, so they

could apply for apprenticeships and training programmes, but the key

issue is about how much these schemes will lead to a job and what

you can't have, and maybe this is one of the worries of Argos and

Tesco and Primark, is this perceived as a conveyor belt of

people coming through on eight weeks cycles replacing people who

might be in full-time and part-time work and you have to be on the ball

about that. Let me put that to the minister. Of those who have been on

it, over half have gone into work so there is evidence it is

successful in giving people... into permanent jobs? Into jobs or

coming off benefits. What is a permanent job these days? There are

no figures on the government about what proportion have gone into work.

Labour, to its shame, introduce these schemes. The difference is

the coalition is rolling it out on a massive scale. Nearly 400,000

people had been referred to the work programme in the last year and

the government has yet to tell us how many have been forced into

similar unpaid work positions. It can be for up to six months which

is disgusting. You do need to give people out of work the opportunity

for work placements. The question is, what support is given to these

people on the outset and what journey will they be on? That is

why the Future Jobs Fund was very much geared to looking at companies,

both in the public and private sector, who could look at their

work force and say, we will work with the JobCentre and see if we

can get some of your people into jobs. We cannot have a conveyor

belt... EU have made that point. The Tory MP said last night that

your campaign is a lot of people waving a copy of the Socialist

Worker? Absurd! Are you a member of that party? Absolutely not. Boycott

Workfare was formed by people who have experience of these schemes

and is driven by the public who are outraged that the high street and

big companies are being propped up by people... It is not forced.

does it have a sanction attached to its then? We have to move on. Thank

you for being with us. There is an idea that David Cameron is trying

to freeze the minimum wage next month. There is all sorts of talk!

We have been discussing it for half-an-hour. Stop doing this!

come onto his programme for me to tell you what the government is

doing? Let's wait and see what the Chancellor does next month! I know

when I am not getting anywhere! Now yesterday Communities Secretary

Eric Pickles launched the Government's new community

integration strategy, a plan to help us all get along with each

other a little bit better. Lovely! It is never going to work! One of

his proposals is the concept of a Big Lunch, where neighbours sit

down together to eat a big lunch. Who would ever have thought that

Eric Pickles would come up with the idea of a big lunch? It would not

be a small lunch! If the "big society" has disappeared without

trace, why not have a big lunch? And what better way to get a big

lunch off to a good start than making sure you've all got the best

crockery on show. Something like a Daily Politics mug perhaps. You

wondered where we were going with that! So did I because I had not

seen the script before! But to get your hands on one you will have to

win our Guest the Year competition. Can you remember when this

A fair local tax is one which does not fall too heavily on any, single

# It's no secret #. Lift-off of Colombia on its first

# Looking to your heart, you will find #.

We as hostages will give our utmost support to see in this problem

finished. # Don't tell me it is not worth

# At everything I do, they do it for you #.

To be in with a chance of winning a Daily Politics mug, send your

answer to our special quiz email address. And you can see the full

terms and conditions for Guess The Year on our website.

What it is coming up to midday, so we can look at Big Ben behind me.

There she is, he is, or whatever. Prime Minister's Questions is on

the way. Nick Robinson is with me. An unusual start to PMQs. We have

grown used to starts in which tributes are paid to soldiers who

have died in Iraq, then in Afghanistan. I am told that he will

pay tribute to a Marines, the veteran, brilliant foreign

correspondent of the Sunday Times, somebody I know you knew and I

think you even hired, who died today in Syria, who so I think it

will be a moment in which the House is reminded of the horror of what

is happening in Syria, the risks that some extraordinary brave

colleagues of hours take to bring that used to the world. -- ours.

She was American by background but became very British, one of the

foremost correspondents. I think she was the foremost foreign

correspondent of her generation. Wherever there was trouble in the

world, you could be pretty sure that she was there and she

reported... She was always in the thick of it and her reporting was

superb, completely honest, no agenda at all, and full of

compassion. It is interesting that she was doing that right down to

the last minute and broadcasters... She often got to places that we

couldn't get too! People listening to Radio 4 this morning we have

heard her voice. I think it was recorded yesterday. There was an

added poignancy that hours later we learned she had died in an

explosion. Very symbolic as the eye patch that she had to wear over ten

years because she lost that when a grenade hit her in Sri Lanka, which

was just a sign... Sri Lanka, the Maghreb, Chechnya, she was there.

It is very sad, I was very sad when I heard that news today. What else

will happen? I will be amazed if Ed Miliband does not go on health.

Week after week he has made the Prime Minister looks pretty

uncomfortable on the subject. A week ago, before half-term, he was

able to get away at some of the tensions within the Tory party. I

would be surprised if he did not try to do the same for the Liberal

Democrats. What we also know it is the Liberal Democrats are having a

spring conference. They do this old fashioned thing called democracy in

the Liberal Democrats and that means the leadership cannot control

what is debated and there is already an emergency motion tabled,

it may not get chosen, calling for the Health and Social Care Bill to

get scrapped. It is the same man pushing it to push it a year ago.

One of the things that contributed to the pause. There is a petition

among at Lib Dems to scrap the Bill and there is certainly a sense that

even senior Liberal Democrats might want to water down part of the

competition clauses. I heard something very interesting

yesterday, Andrews. Nick Clegg is now telling his allies that they

are losing more activists over this issue of health than they did over

the increase in tuition fees. That is how serious the Health and

Social Care Bill is a Liberal Democrats because for them, many of

whom either work in the health service and have friends in the

health service, they have got an instinctive distrust of the

Conservatives on this issue and they don't quite get one of their

party is going along with it. instinctive rather than detailed. I

suspect even Lib Dem activists for don't really know what is in it.

absolutely. Vast numbers of people say they don't know what is in it,

around 80%. Go around the House of Commons and asked... It is about

trust. In the end, the nervousness on the Labour side, privatisation

and competition. I occasionally TVs Labour former ministers and say,

you brought in private companies -- I occasionally TVs. -- tease.

Straight to the House of Commons I am sure the whole House will wish

to join me in sending our deepest condolences to the families and

friends of senior aircraft man, Ryan Tomlin. It is clear from the

tributes paid to him, he was a determined young man with potential.

His service and sacrifice to this nation will never be forgotten.

Members of the House will have seen the talented and respected foreign

correspondents of the Sunday Times, Marie Colvin, has been killed in

the bombing in Syria. It is a desperately sad reminder of the

risks journalists take to inform the world on what is happening and

off thoughts are with her family and friends. I have had meetings

with ministerial colleagues and others, and I will have further

such meetings later today. Can I associate myself but the

Prime Minister's Commons with -- about our brave troops and the

brave journalists to report their activities as well. The Prime

Minister has said one of his main priorities is fighting crime. Then

why since the election there has been a cut in over 4,000 in the

number of frontline police officers? In South Yorkshire, the

police helicopter which was responsible for apprehending over

700 criminals last year, will be scrapped by the police minister

against the advice of the Chief Constable? How can he explain these

matters, which indicate to the public that crime will rise when it

is simply another broken promise... The Prime Minister. I on the issue

of the helicopter, there are talks under way between the South

Yorkshire Police and ACPO. I'm sure coverage will be maintained. I

would make the point recorded crime is down under this Government. And

also, if you look at the figures from her Majesty's Inspectorate of

the constabulary, they believe there will be more invisible

policing roles this march of than there were a year ago.

This Monday was meant to be a happy reunions for pupils at Alvechurch

middle school following their half- term break. But it turned out to be

a day of mourning for the school and the community because of the

news of a coach crash in France. He claimed the life of a much-loved

local teacher, Mr Peter Rippington and left many schoolchildren

seriously injured. Will the Prime Minister join me in expressing

sympathy for those affected and for those who are still in France being

treated, a swift recovery and speedy return home? I am grateful

to him for raising this desperately, desperately sad case. I know Peter

Rippington was much respected in the local community and that the

school and will be missed. Thoughts and sincere condolences I am sure

from everyone in the House will be with his constituents. I can tell

him our consular staff in France continued to provide support to

those in France. The ambassador has visited passengers in hospital and

is liaising with the local authorities and we will do

everything we can with the French authorities to get people safely

home. Mr Ed Miliband. Can I join the Prime Minister in

paying tribute to senior aircraft and an Ryan Thomson from the RAF

Regiment, who died bravely and courageously serving our country

and our thoughts are with his family and friends. We are also

thinking today about the tragic death of Marie Colvin. She was a

brave and tireless reporter across many continents and in many

difficult situations. She was an inspiration to women in her

profession. Her reports in the hours before her death showed her

works at her finest. Our thoughts today are with her family and

friends. Mr Speaker, on Monday the Prime Minister held his emergency

NHS summit. He managed to execute - - exclude the main organisations if

other following professions, the GPS, the midwives, the

psychiatrists, the physiotherapists and the radiologist's. How can he

think it is a good idea to hold a held summit which excludes the vast

majority of people who work in the NHS? What I want to do a safeguard

the NHS. We on this side of the house, we are putting more money

into the NHS. Money they are specifically, explicitly committed

to taking out. Money alone is not going to be enough. We have got to

meet the challenge of an ageing population, more expensive

treatments, more people on long- term conditions and that is why we

have to reform the NHS. My summit was about those organisations

including clinical commissioning groups up and down the country,

8,200 GP practices that want to put these reforms in place. A Ed

Miliband. So he has no answer to his ridiculous sum at which

excluded the bass majority of people who were in the medical

profession? Let's remind ourselves what the Prime Minister said just a

few short months ago during his so called listening exercise. He said

change, if it is to work should have the support of people who work

in the NHS. We have to take on nurses and doctors with us. Now he

can't even be in the same a room as the doctors and nurses! Doesn't

that tell him that he has lost the confidence of those who work in our

National Health Service? What I want to know is, when is he going

to ask a question about the substance of the reforms? He

doesn't want to ask about choice because they used to be in favour

of choice. But there won't back choice in the bill for stampede

does not want to ask a question about competition because they used

to favour competition. They used to support GPs are put in charge of

health budgets. They won't support it, even though now it is in the

bill. Why not ask a serious question? Why not incidentally, as

we are being kept here to vote at 7pm on the publication of the risk

registers, why don't it you ask a question about that? Mr Ed Miliband.

If he does not think it is a serious question about the

exclusion of the vast majority of people the work in the NHS, he

shouldn't worried... Order. The house must calm down. Tranquil and

statesmanlike is the mode for which a members should stride. Mr Ed

Miliband. We will come to the substance of this Bill. But let me

ask me -- in his question, there were people who attended the summit

and expressed the concerns about his bill, even those who were

invited to his summit. So can he tell us what changes, if any, he is

planning to make to his bill? doesn't he stop worrying about a my

diary and start worrying about his complete lack of substance? We are

going ahead with these reforms because we think it is good for

patients to have choice. We think it is good to have the involvement

of independence and voluntary sectors in the NHS. We think it is

good to have more emphasis on public health. That is why we are

doing these reforms. Let me remind him of one thing he used to believe.

He used to believe this, and this is what his health secretary said -

the private sector puts its capacity into the NHS for the

benefit of NHS patients, which I think most people in this country

will celebrate. They are committed to a 5% cap on the private sector,

which would need hospitals like the Marsden Hospital, sacking doctors,

sacking nurses and closing wards. Let me ask him again, we are here

at 7pm to vote on the risk register, are you going to ask a question

about it, or are you frightened of your own motion? It would be good

if we can preserve some Parliamentary manners. The Prime

Minister will know I am not frightened of anything. Mr Ed

Miliband. Mr Speaker, nobody lead - - believes him and nobody trusts

him on the NHS. I met with senior staff working with HIV services to

explain to me how this Bill will fragment and disrupt services. The

Health Secretary should be quiet and listen to the people who work

in the health service! If he had done some listening before... He

should calm down, Mr Speaker. They explain HIV treatments is

commissioned by one organisation, the Primary Care Trust. Under his

plans, it will be commissioned by three organisations, the national

commissioning Board, the clinical commissioning Group and the Health

and well-being board. They certainly it will damage the world

class service they provide for patients. Why won't he listened to

the people who actually know what they are talking about in the NHS?

If the Right Honourable Gentleman is opposing other organisations

that have expertise in Aids and treatment taking part in the NHS he

will be opposing the Terrence Higgins Trust, who do an enormous

amount to support her HIV. The fact is, what we can see is complete

opportunism from the party opposite. They used to back choice, backed

the independent sector, back reform. I say, you don't save the NHS by

opposing reform, you save it by delivering reform. Ed Miliband.

does not understand his own bill. Mr Speaker, let me just explain to

him the question was about the fragmentation of commissioning and

what the experts... Order. Opposition Members are becoming

over-excited. And there is a long time to go and I want to get to the

bottom of the Order Paper. Let me address the Health Secretary, I

don't think the Prime Minister wants advice from him. Let me

explain, it is about the fragmentation of commissioning. You

have got it, I am glad. Maybe then when you get up Buchan answer the

question?! Border! Keep me out of The reason he has lost... Order!

Order! I say that to the Shadow Chancellor as well. Members might

be enjoying themselves, I ask them to think what the country thinks.

Order! Of what the country things on and we conduct ourselves. He has

lost the confidence and the NHS because of the promises he made

before the election. Will he give a straight answer to the question I

asked two weeks ago, and admits he has broken his promise of no top-

down reorganisation? Any longer, I think we would have to put him on a

waiting list for care, it took so long. He asked about integration,

he asks about... Let me explain to him, caused 22 and caused 25 at

plays a specific duty on key organisations to integrate health

and social care. The Bill is all about integration. Here we are,

question five, and he still won't mention his vote on the risk

registers. I think I know why. Because I have here Labour's brief

for this afternoon's debate. There is an excellent section explaining

why you don't publish risk registers. The second argument is

particularly strong, it goes like this. Andy Burnham block the

publication of the Department of Health Risk register in September

2009. There we are, absolutely revealed as a bunch and rank

opportunists, not fit to run opposition and not fit for

Government. I will tell you what happens under the last Labour

Government, the lowest waiting times in history. A more doctors

and nurses than ever before. The high as patient satisfaction on the

NHS. I will match our record on a NHS with him any day of the week.

And the problem with this Prime Minister is he asked people to

trust him and he has betrayed that trust. The problem with this Prime

Minister is that on the NHS, he thinks he is right and everyone

else is wrong. It has become, not a symbol on how his party has changed,

but of his arrogance. I'd tell him this, this will become his poll tax.

He should listen to the public and Six questions and not a mention of

the motion may have put in front of the House tonight! To not back it

up is an absence of leadership. Members of both sides of the House

are yelling at each other. It is rude and it should stop. Let me

tell him what is actually happening in the health service under this

government. Waiting times for outpatients, down. Waiting times

for in-patients, down. Number of people waiting in total, down.

Number of people waiting for more than a year, half. Hospital

infections, down. Mixed-sex wards down by 94%. 4,000 more doctors.

1,000 more midwives and fewer managers. He talks about what

people think about this government. Let me remind him of what his

candidate said about him this week. You are not articulating a vision

or destination, you are not clearly identifying a course and no one is

following years. My problem is, you are not a leader. If I couldn't

have put it better myself. Thank you, Mr Speaker. In 2009 when the

Conservatives took control of Lancashire County Council,

fostering services were rated as unsatisfactory. Since then, their

budget has reduced by �120,000 and they are now rated as outstanding.

Would my right honourable friend join me in congratulating the

county councillor and his Conservative colleagues for not

only do more for less but doing it better as well. I certainly join my

honourable friend. Across the country you have different councils

could be with the issues of fostering and adoption and

producing very different results -- coping with the issues. I think we

need to publish these figures for we can see which councils are

getting value for money but above all, which families are really

doing the best to get those children out of care and into a

loving home. The national minimum wage has lifted millions of workers

out of poverty pay so will the Prime Minister's support hard-

working people and give a commitment today to drop and just

plans to freeze it? We support the minimum wage and we have supported

its up grading and it has an important role to play.

children of Somalia should have an expectation of a life before death.

Does not tomorrow's London conference at E opportunity to

signal to the terrorists and corrupt that we are determined to

do what we can to ensure stability and good governance in Somalia --

provide the opportunity? Given Somaliland's experience of peace

building in the region. We will be welcoming the President of

Somaliland to the conference and Somaliland has taken an important

step forward in showing that you can have better governance, better

economic progress, and they are in many ways an example to follow but

this conference is not about recognising Somaliland, it is about

trying to put in place the building blocks in the international

computer -- community and the Somalis themselves for a stronger

Somalia, and that means taking action on piracy, hostages, and to

increase funding in Mogadishu, and working with all parts of Somalia

to try to give that country, which has been more blighted by famine,

disease, terrorism and violence, and almost any other in the world,

to give that country a second chance. Given what the Prime

Minister said last week in Scotland, which he devote as much time to

facing up to the grievances that the English feel from the current

proposals of devolution as he will be giving new proposals to

Scotland? When he opened a major debate on the English question so

that members of all parts of the house can advise him on what

measures of devolution English people need if we are too big

equity with other parts of the UK - - will he opened a major debate?

have set up a West Lothian group to look at this and we need to make

sure that devolution works for everyone in the United Kingdom but

I would part company slightly because I believe the United

Kingdom has been an incredibly successful partnership between all

its members and I think that far from wanting to appeal to English

people, to nurture a grievance they feel, I want to appeal to my fellow

Englishman to say, this has been a great partnership for Scotland and

a great partnership for England. Scotland must make its choice but

we hope Scotland will choose to remain in this partnership that has

done so well for the last 300 years. Does the Prime Minister agree that

an elected mayor with more power presents a great authority for

local people, including those of us in Bristol that want more rail in

the area? I do support having elected mayors in our great cities.

It is for those cities to choose. I am encouraged by what has happened

in Liverpool. We will be having a referendum and people in Bristol

will be able to make that choice but at the same time, the

government is going through a huge act and devolution to cities in

terms of the powers and the money that we are prepared to offer them

so that they can build their own future. If you think of how Bristol

leaves Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, -- Bristol, Leeds,

Manchester. They built themselves up not from instruction from London.

On Tuesday, the Education Secretary said the Prime Minister's decision

to set up the Leveson Inquiry is having a chilling effect on freedom

of expression. Thus the Education Secretary speak for the government?

-- does the? It was right to set up the Leveson Inquiry and that is

very supported by the entire government but I do think that my

right honourable friend is making an important point, which is even

as this inquiry goes on, we want to have a vibrant press that feels it

can call the powerful to account and we don't want it... Although

sometimes one may feel some advantage to having it been chilled,

but that is not what we want. constituents will be supporting the

Chancellor's refusal yesterday to sign of the EU accounts. Does the

Prime Minister agree with me that it is totally unacceptable that for

17 years, they have failed to get orderlies to sign off on their

accounts? It wasn't just Britain that took the stand, it was the

Dutch and the Swedes as well. For too long these accounts have not

been properly dealt with and corruption has not been properly

dealt with and it is right to make this stand. Last week in Edinburgh,

the Prime Minister said there were more powers on the table for

Scotland but could not name any. A few months ago he mocked the idea

of Scotland control its own oil wealth. Can the Prime Minister at

name one power he has on his mind from this latest U-turn? I did not

think that the Scottish Nationalist Party favour devolution! I thought

they favour of separation! Yet a thing as you are offered a

referendum that gives you the chance to put that in front of the

Scottish people, you start running away -- as soon as you. Tomorrow

members of this House will have the chance to debate the importance of

cycling. The Minister for cycling has made some welcome and

announcements and Investment. There is much to do. Will the Prime

Minister commit the government to support this campaign, increase

investment in cycling and take much greater steps to promote cycling

across the country? This Times campaign is excellent. Anyone who

has got on a bicycle particularly in one of our busiest cities knows

that you are taking your life into your hands. We do need to do more

to makes life a link -- cycling safer. The government is making it

putting in money for training for children and better cycling routes

and facilities. If we want to encourage the growth in cycling we

have seen, we want to get behind campaigns like this. Since he has

been prime minister,... The company has won contracts on

the DWP alone worth 224 million. In view of the facts there are record

numbers of unemployed people and that employees of this company have

been arrested, what action is he taking to make sure that neither

vulnerable unemployed people from all the taxpayer are victims of

fraud? This is an important issue. I understand this issue dates back

two years to schemes run by the previous government... It was the

company itself that raised the issue with the relevant authorities.

There is an ongoing police investigation so it would be

inappropriate for me to comment further. The investigation needs to

be thorough and then we can take into account its findings.

Generations of young people have benefited from work experience

schemes through getting any experience of the working world.

Will the Prime Minister praised those companies who will do

everything they possibly can to encourage work experience schemes

unlike the militant hard left who would like to see people get a

handout rather than a hand up? is true, the overwhelming majority

of the country thinks that companies offering work experience

schemes to those on benefits is a good thing. It is not a compulsory

scheme, it is a scheme that young people have asked to go on and the

findings are that around half of them are getting work at the end of

these schemes. That is a far better outcome than the Future Jobs Fund

and about the 20th of the cost so we should encourage companies and

young people to expand work- experience because it gives people

the chance of seeing work and all that it involves an gives them a

better chance of getting a job. Thousands of workers right across

Lancashire in every constituency are concerned and angry about the

Eurofighter Indian contract. Earlier this week you her -- had a

meeting with the Tory MPs. When will you be arranging a meeting for

all Lancashire MPs? I am not arranging any meetings at 10

Downing Street but it is possible the Prime Minister might. I met

with a number of MPs who have BAE Systems in their constituents,

including the honourable member for Hull, so why have had many MPs come

to see me. -- so I have had. This government is committed to helping

with Thai food in every way we can and that is why I had been taking

trips right across the Middle East -- Typhoon. I often get criticised

by Labour MPs for taking BAe system on the aeroplane but I think it is

right to fly the flag for British Industry! Last week at the

breakfast table... My wife was saying how she knew the Prime

Minister wanted to deport that terrorist Abu Qatada straight away

and put the national interest first,... But she knew it was being

blocked by the Deputy Prime Minister and the Liberal Democrats.

Suddenly, our 11-year-old son Thomas asked...

LAUGHTER Foster are his Nick Clegg a goodie or a bad it? -- is Nick

Clegg a goodie or baddie? There is only so much detail I can take from

your household! In believing that I am very keen that Abu Qatada should

be deported, your wife is indeed psychic. That is exactly what I

believe. That is why the Home Secretary is working so hard with

the Jordanians to get the assurances that we need so that

this can take place and the Deputy Prime Minister family backs that

approach! -- fully backs that approach! Rents are falling in the

private rented sector, you have said, when the evidence is that

rent is rising. Will the Prime Minister now take this opportunity

to put the record straight or which he continued to blame the tenant

when the real responsibility lies with landlords charging ever higher

rent and a failure of his government's house building

programme -- which he continued to blame? Coming from a party that saw

housebuilding fall to its lowest level since the 1920s! We have put

great effort into stamping out and kicking out racism in football in

this country. When my right honourable friend brings together

the sport later today, will he assure the House he will do

everything to ensure that prejudice does not creep back into the game

and that racism stays out of football? My honourable friend is

right to raise this. It was a huge achievement, where Britain and its

football authorities and football clubs lead the world in kicking

racism Out Of Football, something that has not happened in all other

countries. Some of the recent signs are worrying. This matters so much

not just to football but to government and everyone in the

country because footballers are role-models to young people. What

people see on the football pitch, they copied when they go to learn

to play football so it is important to bring people together and make

sure we keep racism out of football for good. Can I associate myself

with the Prime Minister's condolences to the member of the

armed forces who lost his life in the last week? I am sure the Prime

Minister would like to join me in thanking the thousands of people we

serve in the reserve armed forces. However, does he agree that it is

inappropriate and unsatisfactory and perhaps even arrogant that when

constituents to serve in the reserve Marine forces in Dundee

expressed concerns about the possible closure of that attachment,

I wrote to the Ministry of Defence and they have refused to give me a

definitive answer? I thank the honourable gentleman for raising

the case of the brave man from the RAF who gave his life and all of

those who serve in Afghanistan. The Reserve forces in our country are a

huge national asset. We want to see them expanded. We have put an

billion pounds into that expansion to make sure that we can do that.

No decision has been taken on the future of Dundee. If you look

across Scotland, you will see we need more people to join the

reserves. I hope everybody will back the recruitment campaigns

because if we are going to move to an army of 80,000 regulars and

40,000 reservists, we need a cultural change will be really

respect what our reserve forces are doing -- where we really respect.

The US marshals will on Friday is caught my 65-year-old constituent

from Heathrow to a jail in Texas where he will face pressure to

plea-bargain -- if caught. Can the Prime Minister say the steps he is

taking to withdraw the expedition treaty which has been so unfair to

the likes of Gary McKinnon and now my constituent. I understand why my

honourable friend raises this. In the case of Chris tapping, he has

obviously been through a number of processes, and the Home Secretary

has thoroughly considered his case. He raised his book point more

generally of the report into the extradition arrangements, which we

are now considering. He did not call for fundamental reform. The

Home Secretary will carefully examine his findings and take into

account the views of Parliament that have been expressed in recent

debates. Balancing these arrangements is vital but it is

important that at the same time we remember why we welcome -- enter

into these treaties, which is to show respect for each other's

judicial treaties and make sure people can be tried for crimes and

Britain can benefit from that as well, so a proper and thoughtful

review must take place and this case shows why. My government

response to the unfair relationship between pub companies and their

licensees so far has been self- regulation, not statutory

regulation. On January 12th, this House voted unanimously to set up a

review panel to be agreed by the Business Select Committee to review

the implementation of self- regulation. To date there has been

absolutely no response from the government. Can the Prime Minister

tell me, is he back in the will of Parliament or the will of the pub

companies? I am a keen supporter of Britain's pubs so I will write to

the honourable gentleman and get a good answer. In his speech made in

Edinburgh last week, the Prime Minister described Scotland as a

pioneering country and a turbine hall of the Industrial Revolution.

The next revolution in this country will be in green technology and the

Green Investment Bank will be key in its promotion. Does he agree it

Edinburgh is the perfect location And the different towns and cities

and regions want to host this green investments of the investment bank.

Can I ask the Prime Minister returning to the issue of the NHS

and the Pirton and question posed by the leader of the opposition,

why has the Prime Minister broken his promise not to engage in

another top and reorganisation of the National Health Service?

What we are doing is abolishing the bureaucracy that has been holding

the NHS back. We will be cutting in this Parliament, �4.5 billion of

bureaucracy by getting rid of the primary care trusts and strategic

health authorities, all of which will be invested in patient care.

His own party's policy is saying real increases in NHS spending are

"irresponsible". We think it is responsible and that is why we are

putting the money in and they will take the money out. There have been

lot of interruptions but I am concerned about the interests of

backbenchers. Last week in Ethiopia would save the children, I saw at

first hand how malnutrition is stunting the growth of the world's

poorest children. Does the Prime Minister agreed the UK as a real

opportunity to lead the international debate which will

help the growth of the world's children and economic growth as

well. I think she is right about this. Not only because we work with

excellent organisations, Save the children, who do excellent work,

but the UK is the second largest bilateral donor into the horn of

Africa where we have seen this awful famine. Not only are we doing

our bit in terms of investment and time, but it gives us an

opportunity to lead the debate on where we need to take the

development on aid agenda next. Order. Ten-minute rule motion.

The Speaker allowed PMQs to overrun because of the interruptions and

the rowdiness during questions about the NHS. I was thinking I

wonder if the founding fathers of the NHS going back to 1848, would

have thought by 2012 it could still create such heat and light in the

House of Commons, so many years later? Ed Miliband decided to go on

that subject. It is the first pit - - fur PMQs in a row he has gone on

the NHS. -- third PMQs. As you say, most people think David

Cameron was on the run over this issue.

Diane said, I have heard nothing from David Cameron that reduces my

anxiety and the NHS reforms. This from David in Birmingham -

complete hypocrisy. David Cameron said his reforms needed the support

of health professionals but he is ignoring them because they don't

agree. Someone else said, what of those

risk registers Ed Miliband was going on about?

Martin from Wolverhampton said, Ed Miliband's questions were shallow,

the role of Government should be to lead, that means facing down

interest groups who oppose change. Someone else said, are all Ed

Miliband cares about is people the work in the NHS, not about those

who use it. I remember the days in the NHS was

not to talk about it. Except that we will ring-fence it, but it is

safe in our hands. When they said that, the polls showed they

overtook Labour and trust for a brief period. Today the gap is back

to his -- its historic whiteness. Where did it go wrong? It is a

self-inflicted wound. People do give David Cameron credit for the

reform of the NHS, which since its foundation has been seen as a

Labour issue. Margaret Thatcher said she went private because she

wanted to go to see the doctor she wanted, on the day she wanted and

the time she wanted. But then became the policy of all

governments within the NHS, rather than the private sector. The truth

is they did not think through the politics of what this Bill would

mean and how they would get it through. David Cameron is

determined not to abandon it, and as I was saying, the biggest threat

to it now comes from the grass roups -- grass roots the Lib Dem

revolt rather than the Cabinet, where everyone has decided to hold

their nose, carry on until the summer and hope something else

comes up. The danger is, if they give in to more concessions to the

Lib Dems, or Labour Peers and the House of Lords, and they whittle it

down even more, it won't be worth the candle. They have all this he

put on them for reforms for skeleton of what it was meant to

be? Not only that, what Ed Miliband argued also, a change had to have

the doctors and nurses on side, now you won't be in the same room as

them. The most interesting one which David Cameron ignored was the

complexity of commissioning. I know ministers who are worried, that in

an attempt to bite of this opposition, keep the Lib Dems happy,

they have created a more and more complex bureaucratic structure, but

far from saving cash will involve a series of disputes from different

bodies within the NHS, it is this our money to spend? Let's have a

legal challenge to it. So the challenge which is recognised by

ministers internally. The big week will be next week over the

competition. The hints given by Nick Clegg he gave today, is a week

are a listening Government. So the hint was, there may be more

concessions to come on the issue of competition. It is not just the

public understanding the detail, it is most people involved in the NHS,

we work for an organisation, we don't always understand the detail

on how they run. But the danger is things go wrong in a way that

affects patient care and then people turn round and blame the

Government. If you could escape Cabinet collective responsibility

and able to be honest with us, I bet you would say, Andrew, I wish

we had never gone down this road? On the hypothetical, I cannot

escape collective responsibility. I don't want it. The choice is

whether you think the NHS can standstill or if you have to make

changes to enable it to rise to the challenges of the ageing population,

the cost of treatment, the long- term illnesses people have. We

believe it is necessary to make these changes. It is in the context

of rising spending on the NHS, are the principal it remains care that

it is free at the point of use and extending the principles the

previous Government agreed to. people think you could have done

these changes without the need for a massive bill. We could have

picked up where Labour left off and you could have continued without

the left of the Labour Party and the unions... Then you would have

lost significant savings because removing these bureaucracies...

have created bigger bureaucracies since the NHS has been founded?

is a 4.5 billion saving. I don't think is true there is unanimous

opposition amongst the professionals in the health service.

I know from my own constituency, talking to GPs, where the ability

control services in the interest of the patience is welcomed. It was

clear from the summit, where the Prime Minister was talking to these

groups on how the changes will work. The other., Labour believed there

is a short-term advantage in jumping on this and opposing these

reforms. But, look at how they are going back on reforms from a

position the previous Government had. Backwards on health reform

where they are turning their back on education and the anti- reform

parties. It won't do them very good. Caroline Flint, we know Labour is

against this health bill, you are voting against it and so on. But

does Labour have a policy on health now? We did have a policy on health

which we still support. It involves looking at our health service and

how it changes. We still support more of the services in hospitals,

being in communities to prevent people getting ill. The key issue,

is the start of this process the Government embarked upon, a process

they promised in the manifesto they wouldn't and wasn't in the

coalition agreement. They wanted to put clinicians, the health service

workers in the front line of the discussions about the future of the

NHS. We now have a situation where, I would say it is unanimous, ensure

you will find doctors and nurses who supported - but overwhelmingly

all the institutions to represent doctors, radiologist's and nurses

and so on, say they are not happy. Why are they not happy? It could

open up our NHS to European competition law which would distort

the way we have a managed NHS which uses the private and public sector

to effect. It is different to using the private sector to get capacity

into opening it up to a free-for- all. They are saying in our

hospitals, in order to balance the books, half the beds been used for

private patients. We are hearing consultants saying, we cannot see

within the time limits we used to have, but if you go private we will

see you next week. I don't want to go back to those days. Waiting

times are falling. They are falling for in-patients and outpatients.

Waiting times for A&E are missing their targets, waiting times to get

is seen in 18 weeks are. Can I come back and get an answer to my

question? How will Labour reform the NHS? We would carry on some of

the work we were dealing in Government, which is look at ways

in which having services in our community which will better help

people prevents illnesses in the future. What else? Collaborative

network to do with cancer. One of the dangers the Government is doing

now... You on to the Government again, I am asking you about Labour

now. Our policy is supporting and managed NHS. I don't know what that

means? You have an NHS that has local accountability and we have

said we are happy to look at a more clinician input into that. We had

an NHS that it was working well, huge satisfaction and cost-

effective, when you look at some of the regimes around the world where

it is a more private sector involvement. In our country we have

something unique and precious, and which is why so many members of the

public, including those who vote Conservative are worried about what

might happen to something that is so valued within our country.

Miliband, third week in a row he has done well? Yes, this is a rich

seam for him. He is playing the Prime Minister's words back at him.

What is so damaging for David Cameron is having those words to

say we have to have the doctors and nurses onside, and now the joke,

you cannot have them in the same route. It does enormous damage to

the Prime Minister. Another break point, Frank Field, Labour

backbencher speaking up for the English. And when he did so, saying

they should be more devolution, quite a lot of Cheers. I could not

see where they were coming from, I There is a growing view that

Westminster are just has to negotiate the terms of the divorce,

but if the Scottish decide to stay in the UK but want one devolution,

that becomes as big an issue for England as for Scotland and it

cannot be one way. It is not up to the Scots alone to decide what more

devolution should mean. The rest of the United Kingdom has to have a

say as well. There are aspects which are important for us to

discuss in England. If we look at regions around the country, bit

ability for them to encourage investment -- and the ability. I am

sure places like the Yorkshire and Humberside, where I have my

constituency, we would like to look at opportunities for that... Back

to regional government. In the localism built... No... We put in a

bill to allow some of the powers that the mayor in London has in

other parts of England. This is a debate that is about England as

well. There were huge latitude over tax regimes and therefore you get

into internal tax competition, where the Scots are able to do one

thing in the north and the Midlands have no... A lot of the anger was

about MPs just below the border, in the north, who could see the new

powers and ability just a few miles away, and thought, what about us?

It is the extremities of the UK, often amongst the poorest, the

north-east, the south-west for example, where people will say, we

need more power. The West Lothian question should remain. A lot of

people will think that if there is devolution, more devolution, they

will wonder whether Scottish MPs will be voting at all on purely

English matters. It is all in debate. Only two more years to go!

We don't have to resolve its this week! Big news while we were

watching PMQs. Eric Pickles has sent me a tweet to say he wants a

cup, too. Being avuncular and friendly, Eric Pickles, we will

give you one but you have to come on the programme to get it. A are

you going to be Big Lunch? I always like a big lunch.

Just 156 days to go before the London Olympics, and preparations

for the Games are stepping up a gear. Today a mocked-up terror

attack on the London Underground is being staged as part of a massive

exercise to test security. And this morning Nick Clegg has been

visiting some of the venues for the Games. The Deputy PM said he

believed the Olympics will leave a legacy of growth and jobs for the

area. But not everyone is happy about the greatest show on earth

arriving in London. The writer Iain Sinclair has spent decades

documenting the capital city and its edgelands. He says the Olympic

development in east London has ruined one of the capital's most

magical wildernesses. Here's his The promoters of the great Olympic

schemes in the Lower Lea Valley keep stressing at every possible

occasion that this area was nothing but a waste land, when in fact it

was one of the most magical margins of London, reduced by their

activities to nothing but a toxic well than us. -- wilderness. The

special quality of this landscape is that it mixed decaying

industrialism with grunge pasture, a wild nature of orchards that

everybody was free to wander, and we are now in danger of losing all

of that for some concrete Arcadia, some computer-generated future, and

I am sad about that. One of the consequences of creating the bright

new future is the expulsion of the inconvenient old past. The people

who used to be here, living in warehouses, walking along the

marshes, cycling, fishing. They all had to make way, the whole

One of the consequences of the great Olympic development has been

the privatisation of public space and a huge growth in the apparatus

of security. We have created an area which has to be protected. So

this is the legacy that all the fuss has been about. A flat-pack

stadium, an Aquatic Centre at looks like a concrete factory, a gigantic

artwork and an enormous shopping mall. I don't think it is worth it.

I think back to that wonderful will do miss that was here before. Not a

waste land. -- wilderness. One of the most manifest, rich and

deserving parts of London, and I am sorry to lose it.

And Iain Sinclair is with us now. He painted a very poetic picture of

an area that others might have said you have romanticised and actually

it was wasteland and has now been put to better use. Being a romantic

does not disqualify you from being revolutionary. If you go back to

Wordsworth and William Blake, romanticism is just having an

enriched sense of the past and to honour the past and not to enforce

that amnesia upon it that way it's everything out to the glittering

better future. -- that wipes everything out. Are you a lone

voice? You described the number of people using the area. Locally

there is a huge support for what I say. The officials always used this

term "Waste Land" and say there was nothing there. One of the things

that was there is this list of compulsory purchases and it goes on

for page after page, hundreds and hundreds of names. That was what

was there. While we were waking that film, an old man with a dog

came to me and said, I don't know where I am, I grew up here, there

were eight different businesses where I took an apprenticeship. It

has all gone. But as you said, it is part of the decay of

industrialism and that is why perhaps it has gone. It has gone in

that sense. That world has passed and what was left was the

environment. Is that not a signal to move on? It was a signal that

this was a good territory to exploit because it was dying

industrial mixed with a rough country that nobody could see what

to do with. The awful thing is that it has been a mirror image of what

we think it is. In fact there were active boat clubs and sports

facilities, great chunks of Hackney Marshes have been turned into

concrete, there is a battle going on at the moment about a car park

taking over the marshes and a basketball court and they do not

want the tarmac there, but you have to have the tarmac for the cars.

not there, where would you have put the Olympic village? Paris.

Let's think of something within the UK! I would not have put it is.

Really we should not have gone for it. We should have learnt the

lesson of pickets lot. We got the World Athletics Championships a few

years before this and we had to give them back. We were going to

use it to exploit any we around the M25 and it did not make sense

economically so we abandoned it. Just to go back to where it is, do

you think there is a sense of regret that this Waste Land, will

do this, has gone forever? I have no regrets as well at all. It is a

wonderful iconoclastic view but it is Waste Land. Let's look at the

legacy. There are going to be 11,000 houses permanently created,

we desperately need those houses, low-cost accommodation with that,

as 10,000 jobs that will be permanently created as well. -- and

10,000 jobs. I think that is something the public will welcome.

Women look at these industrial and grimy canals -- when they look at.

They will say, this is a very good use of the land and something that

will benefit the public. We can't put it as housing because this is

extremely radioactive soil. 7500 tons of radioactive soil came out

under that stadium and is sitting in a disposal unit. This was an

area of land on dams, a small nuclear reactor... Which makes the

point, this has been a fantastic opportunity for the East End to

detoxify the area. But they can't do it! Newham Council have done a

fantastic job. They have already got 5,000 people into work, 2500

long-term unemployed, they have 300 social homes coming on, 300

affordable homes. I look at that as a mother and I want open space but

I want open space where I think my children would be safe to go into.

That isn't what it represented in terms of what you presented in your

film. You have to move on. I have been there 45 years, I have put my

children round and my grandchildren round and they have also right!

have had the final word, thank you. -- they have all thrived. Their due