:00:10. > :00:15.We We find News Corporation covered up a cover-up of its law breaking.
:00:15. > :00:19.Its most senior executives misled Parliament and the two men at the
:00:19. > :00:29.top, Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch who were in charge of the
:00:29. > :00:56.
:00:56. > :01:01.Good afternoon. Welcome to the Daily Politics.
:01:01. > :01:06.In a scathing report into the News of the World hacking scandal, MPs
:01:06. > :01:11.accuse Rupert Murdoch of being not fit to run a major international
:01:11. > :01:13.corporation. The Culture Media and Sport Committee says the Head of
:01:13. > :01:17.News international acted in wilful blindness and criticised the
:01:17. > :01:23.company of huge failings of corporate governance. We will have
:01:23. > :01:33.the latest. I see a risk that City Hall will be recaptured by a bunch
:01:33. > :01:37.
:01:37. > :01:44.of semi reformed trot skiists and car hating, newt fancying, tax
:01:44. > :01:48.dodging banker dodging hypocrites. We will be talking to the man
:01:48. > :01:52.himself. Dragged to the Commons yesterday to
:01:52. > :01:57.defend Jeremy Hunt made Dave an angry. We will be asking if the
:01:57. > :02:02.Culture Secretary is is safe or not? Was he good or bad? 15 years
:02:02. > :02:07.after he came to power, your verdict on Tony Blair.
:02:07. > :02:16.He started off well and with good intentions, but ended up not very
:02:16. > :02:21.good at all. Well, all thea in the next -- that
:02:21. > :02:25.in the next hour. With us is Charles Clarke, he was in charge of
:02:25. > :02:30.the Department of Education. Welcome to the programme.
:02:30. > :02:33.Let's look at the report from the Culture Media and Sport Committee.
:02:33. > :02:37.Members of the committee read out a pre-prepared statement a few
:02:37. > :02:43.minutes ago. Here is what the chairman had to say.
:02:43. > :02:48.The committee went on to conclude, but only by a majority vote that
:02:48. > :02:54.whilst there was no definitive evidence to prove whether or not
:02:54. > :02:59.James Murdoch was aware of the For Neville e-mail or indeed other
:02:59. > :03:05.evidence which indicated that phone hacking was more widespread, the
:03:05. > :03:10.committee was astonished that he did not seek to see the evidence on
:03:10. > :03:15.which the decision to pay the settlement to the Gordon Taylor
:03:15. > :03:20.case was based. The committee also went on, again to conclude by a
:03:20. > :03:24.majority vote that corporately the News of the World and News
:03:24. > :03:28.International had misled the committee about the true extent and
:03:28. > :03:34.nature of the investigations that they claimed to have carried out in
:03:34. > :03:43.relation to phone hacking. And that they had failed to disclose
:03:43. > :03:47.documents which would have revealed the truth. As a result of these
:03:47. > :03:54.various attempts to mislead the committee, the report that we
:03:54. > :03:59.published in 2010 was not based on a fully accurate picture. Well,
:03:59. > :04:02.that was the Chairman of that committee and the BBC's deputy
:04:02. > :04:05.political editor, James Landale is here. It is a devastating report,
:04:05. > :04:10.particularly it seems having just seen the headlines for Rupert
:04:10. > :04:16.Murdoch himself, where they state that he is not a fit person to
:04:16. > :04:19.exercise the stewardship of an international company? The expect
:04:19. > :04:23.expectation would be that the focus would be on James Murdoch and his
:04:23. > :04:26.role in the whole affair and criticism of former News
:04:26. > :04:29.International executives and that criticism is there. The bombshell
:04:29. > :04:34.statement of opinion by the committee saying that Rupert
:04:34. > :04:38.Murdoch himself is not fit to run a company is out of the blue. And the
:04:38. > :04:42.political political significance of that is huge. Let me explain why -
:04:42. > :04:49.the committee was not unanimous on this. It was partisan. The Labour
:04:49. > :04:52.MPs voted for it. The Conservative MPs apart the chairman voted
:04:52. > :04:55.against it. The Liberal Democrat swung it in the right way by voting
:04:55. > :04:59.with the Labour MPs and in the statement that is the members of
:04:59. > :05:03.the committee have just made, those partisan differences have been in
:05:03. > :05:07.full show and I think the political risk and danger for the Government
:05:07. > :05:11.now is that you will have images of Conservative MPs saying, "We did
:05:11. > :05:16.not agree with the statement that Rupert Murdoch was not a fit and
:05:16. > :05:20.proper person to run a company." And that's a darning for -- danger
:05:20. > :05:23.for the Conservatives. This will go to a vote in the House of Commons
:05:23. > :05:30.whether or not to endorse this report. The four Tory members of
:05:30. > :05:35.this committee have not endorsed this this report.
:05:35. > :05:40.What about in terms of the Murdochs and their global empire. How big of
:05:40. > :05:44.a hit and how much of an impact will it have on that? Well, a huge
:05:44. > :05:49.reputational impact, the mother of Parliament asserting this. This
:05:49. > :05:53.will have headlines across the world. This will be hugely damaging
:05:53. > :05:58.for them in terms of the reputation, but what does it mean in the short-
:05:58. > :06:01.term? Ofcom are investigating whether or not Rupert Murdoch is a
:06:01. > :06:05.fit and proper person to hold all the shares in BSkyB. Ofcom said
:06:05. > :06:08.they have noted the report this morning. Let's wait and see what
:06:08. > :06:12.their judgement is. And Harriet Harman was the person
:06:12. > :06:18.who said that broadcasting licence should be taken away. Do you agree
:06:18. > :06:24.with that now we have had that report in in terms of how the
:06:24. > :06:28.committee felt? I agree with James about the political implications
:06:28. > :06:31.and I have felt for a long time that Rupert Murdoch was not a fit
:06:31. > :06:35.and proper person because of the way his papers were being run. But
:06:35. > :06:39.the formal definition, "Fit and proper person is one that is a
:06:39. > :06:43.legal definition and has to go through proper legal assessment. I
:06:43. > :06:46.haven't studied the full report of the committee, but I think the
:06:46. > :06:52.Ofcom process has to work its way through.
:06:52. > :06:55.Briefly before you go, James, you know, the report concludes that
:06:55. > :07:02.Rupert Murdoch turned a blind eye and exhibited wilful blindness
:07:02. > :07:07.about what was going on in his companies. That That goes far in
:07:08. > :07:11.saying, "They misled Parliament" but not quite in terms of the
:07:11. > :07:15.individuals, corporate misleading, but not Rupert and James misleading
:07:15. > :07:19.Parliament, is that right? There are definitions about how you
:07:19. > :07:22.mislead Parliament and various former News International
:07:22. > :07:25.executives have been accused of misleading Parliament over bits of
:07:25. > :07:30.evidence they gave. What the committee found it harder to do is
:07:30. > :07:34.pin it precisely on James Murdoch and say, "Did he actually mislead
:07:34. > :07:39.Parliament?" But corporately they conclude that yes, Parliament was
:07:39. > :07:43.not told everything that they knew as corporately was going on.
:07:43. > :07:49.James Landale, thank you very much. It is time to look at another of
:07:49. > :07:54.the candidates for London mayor and today, it is the turn of Boris
:07:54. > :07:59.Johnson. Here are the things he is promising in his manifesto. He says
:07:59. > :08:03.he will cut waste and City Hall. He pledges to create 200,000 jobs over
:08:03. > :08:08.four years and promises to have 1,000 more police on the beat.
:08:08. > :08:13.Boris Johnson claims he will reduce Tube delays by 30% by 2015 and says
:08:13. > :08:16.he will invested �221 million into transforming local high streets and
:08:16. > :08:22.supporting small businesses and Boris argues that his contacts will
:08:22. > :08:29.allow him to secure a better deal for London from Number Ten. Mr
:08:29. > :08:34.Johnson had an eventful campaign so Last night, we became the first TV
:08:34. > :08:38.crew allowed into the inner sanctum of Boris HQ
:08:38. > :08:41.Tonight, Boris Johnson is importing a campaigning technique from the
:08:41. > :08:46.United States that effectively allows him to have a Town Hall
:08:46. > :08:53.meeting by telephone with 50,000 Londoners all at the same time.
:08:53. > :08:58.If you would like to ask a question, press star three and we have 1500
:08:58. > :09:02.people queued up. Along with his campaign brain from Australia, he
:09:02. > :09:07.took calls for an hour. I am actually a daily cyclist. I
:09:07. > :09:11.love cycling. I am passionately believe in it. I want to see it
:09:11. > :09:15.expanded. All done in a style we have grown
:09:15. > :09:25.used to since he launched his bid for re-election.
:09:25. > :09:25.
:09:25. > :09:35.I see a risk that City Hall will be reformed by car hating newt
:09:35. > :09:39.
:09:39. > :09:46.fancying tax dodging banker bashing hypocrites and bendy bus fetishists.
:09:46. > :09:55.A row that culminated after that debate on a London radio station
:09:55. > :09:59.with Boris launching an ex- employeetive filled -- expleattive
:09:59. > :10:05.tirade in a lift. You have got to get this on the air.
:10:05. > :10:09.Stuff Donovan. (BLEEP) What has Boris got against us journalists?
:10:09. > :10:16.How much is a loaf of bread? It depends what you are buying, but
:10:16. > :10:22.I got one yesterday, �1.49. It sounds about right
:10:22. > :10:29.right. How much is a pint of beer? Whether he is on the phone, on the
:10:29. > :10:36.stump or on the TV, he has always Let's hope he gives me an easier
:10:36. > :10:40.ride then. He is campaigning in Bexley Bexleyheath and and joins me
:10:40. > :10:44.now. Can we get a reaction from you? We have had this devastating
:10:44. > :10:47.report from the Select Committee of MPs, the most devastating bit is
:10:47. > :10:50.saying that Rupert Murdoch is not a fit person to exercise the
:10:50. > :10:55.stewardship of a major international company, do you
:10:55. > :11:01.agree? Well, I I haven't had the benefit
:11:01. > :11:05.of seeing that, report, Jo, but if I digested your report correctly,
:11:05. > :11:09.it is a divided opinion. Let's study it.
:11:09. > :11:13.You don't back the report, even though it is divided, you don't
:11:13. > :11:19.back that headline that he is no longer a fit and proper person to
:11:19. > :11:23.run that company? Well, don't forget, I'm here out in
:11:23. > :11:29.Bexley where I'm running to be Mayor of London and getting my
:11:29. > :11:33.message out to the people of the city about what I can offer and the
:11:33. > :11:35.plans I have and it is not number one on the list of people's
:11:35. > :11:40.concerns here today. I can see a queue developing behind
:11:40. > :11:43.you. What about the queues at Heathrow. It seems there has been
:11:43. > :11:48.an emergency meeting, and what are you doing about it because the
:11:48. > :11:52.images look terrible? Well, as I've said to the Home Office and the UK
:11:52. > :11:55.BA this is something that does affect Britain's international
:11:55. > :12:00.image. We have got to make sure that we process passengers through
:12:00. > :12:05.immigration more speedily and we've got the Olympics coming up. I know
:12:05. > :12:12.that the Home Secretary takes this seriously and the UK BA will be
:12:12. > :12:16.getting on top of it, but it is vital that we do so. It is
:12:16. > :12:20.indispensable that we have the aviation capacity at Heathrow to
:12:20. > :12:25.deal with the economic growth that we all want to see and one the
:12:25. > :12:31.pitches I'm making to the people of London if I may try and move it on
:12:31. > :12:36.to the mayoral election is that I believe I am best placed to get the
:12:36. > :12:41.funding that we need for this city, to invest in creating 200,000 jobs
:12:41. > :12:46.which are funded in housing, transport, regeneration and also to
:12:46. > :12:50.keep that funding coming from Government. I'm here in Bexley
:12:50. > :12:53.where we have been able, go on... That is your pitch. Let me return
:12:53. > :12:56.because you said yourself what happens at Heathrow is very
:12:56. > :12:59.important for London and the Olympics. What does the Home Office
:12:59. > :13:05.need to do? They cut border staff, was that wrong?
:13:05. > :13:09.Well, I don't know the details of the operational management of the
:13:09. > :13:13.UK BA. Business over the last four years, the international business
:13:13. > :13:19.community and people in the City made the point to me that they want
:13:19. > :13:22.to see Heathrow putting on a better face to the world. I think Terminal
:13:22. > :13:26.5 has been a great success, but more work needs to be done and
:13:26. > :13:31.clearly, there is a problem that needs to be cracked at the moment.
:13:31. > :13:35.But, you know, if I may humbly suggest to you, I have got two days
:13:35. > :13:40.to go until a critical mayoral election and it is vital for this
:13:40. > :13:45.city and what I was going to say is I do think that I'm the right
:13:45. > :13:49.candidate to deliver the investment for the economic health of London.
:13:50. > :13:55.Here in Bexley and what I was going to say crime is down by 19%. That's
:13:55. > :13:58.an extraordinary thing to have done in tough times. We've got more
:13:58. > :14:04.police out on the street, about 1,000 more than there were when I
:14:04. > :14:06.was elected and what we're doing now, we're putting 2,000 into the
:14:07. > :14:11.safer neighbourhood teams to drive down crime.
:14:11. > :14:15.Let's talk about transport since we were talking about Heathrow. You
:14:15. > :14:18.promised that you would negotiate a no strike deal with the unions, but
:14:19. > :14:22.there have been more strikes. Why have you failed on that? Well,
:14:22. > :14:27.actually if you look at what has happened, we have taken some
:14:27. > :14:36.strikes though the numbers of union members taking part in the strikes
:14:36. > :14:39.has fallen. But still more strikes under you? What we had to do was in
:14:39. > :14:42.institute some quite difficult reforms of the Tube to take some
:14:42. > :14:47.cost out and move the system forward and my pledge to Londoners
:14:47. > :14:51.and therefore, there were strikes which I am afraid we had to tough
:14:51. > :14:54.out and get on with and we did go ahead with the reforms and my
:14:54. > :14:56.message to Londoners is we will continue with that programme of
:14:56. > :15:02.reform and improvement and investment.
:15:02. > :15:06.But no chance of a no deal strike? In the next four years, to
:15:06. > :15:11.modernise and automate the Tube, I think that's what Londoners want to
:15:11. > :15:15.see. I don't think they want to be left behind by Paris or Singapore
:15:15. > :15:17.and we can go forward with that in a way that I don't think other
:15:18. > :15:21.candidates could. Boris, do you accept that
:15:21. > :15:24.introducing driverless trains is going to lead to more strikes and
:15:24. > :15:28.strikes are not what Londoners want. You didn't get a no strike deal.
:15:28. > :15:32.You haven't talked to union leaders. There were 20 Tube strikes during
:15:32. > :15:37.your four years and 16 under Ken, do you think your problem is you
:15:37. > :15:46.don't negotiate successfully in order nor does Transport for London
:15:46. > :15:50.No, on the contrary. What we have had to do is institute some
:15:50. > :15:54.difficult reforms that were necessary that I'm afraid Ken
:15:54. > :15:58.Livingstone totally failed to grip. We have done that and we will go
:15:58. > :16:03.forward. I think actually you say there will be industrial problems
:16:03. > :16:08.as a result of this, I think that hard working members of London
:16:08. > :16:12.Underground staff look at these plans, they see the potential for
:16:12. > :16:17.investment in the Tube network and recognise that if you modernise,
:16:17. > :16:21.you expand the network, you get trains moving faster through the
:16:21. > :16:27.tunnels, you increase capacity and actually improve the service and
:16:27. > :16:33.you are able to employ more people. All right, let's talk... Common-
:16:33. > :16:36.sense people see the advantage of that. There may be some anti- union
:16:36. > :16:40.barons who resist it but I think they need to recognise the
:16:40. > :16:50.advantages of what we are proposing. What about the cost? What about the
:16:50. > :16:53.buss? Ken Livingstone promised to take the price of a single oyster
:16:53. > :16:59.bus journey back to 2010 prices. Are you worried about the costs?
:16:59. > :17:03.Yes. That's why we have not only kept every concession that
:17:03. > :17:08.currently exists, we are extending it now to apprentices, people
:17:08. > :17:11.who're in our expanding apprenticeship schemes and also
:17:11. > :17:15.maintaining the 24-hour freedom pass for everybody over 60. What
:17:15. > :17:20.I'm doing is getting Londoners off the age escalator that Labour put
:17:20. > :17:25.them on so that as soon as you turn 60, man or woman in this city, you
:17:25. > :17:29.will get a 24-hour freedom pass. Further more, we'll now negotiate
:17:29. > :17:32.with the Train Operating Companies so that the freedom pass, the 24-
:17:32. > :17:37.hour freedom pass works on the trains as well.
:17:37. > :17:44.Why have you introduced the most expensive bus in the world, the new
:17:44. > :17:49.Routemaster, costing �11 million? Well, that's I'm afraid complete
:17:49. > :17:54.nonsense. What is? The opposition know it's not true. Let me explain.
:17:54. > :18:01.Is it not the most expensive bus in the world? No. Almost? No, none of
:18:01. > :18:06.these new buses are, no. None of them cost any more than the current
:18:06. > :18:12.hybrid bus. Once you factor in the fuel efficiency, it saves about
:18:12. > :18:16.�8,000 a year, they come in cheaper. They are a wonderful machine. The
:18:16. > :18:20.house for Londoners is simple - do they want to go forward with a new
:18:20. > :18:25.bus that is incredibly fuel efficient that has far less
:18:25. > :18:29.emissions, that is clean, green, that has cutting edge British
:18:29. > :18:35.technology that's built in this country, delivers British jobs and
:18:35. > :18:40.the hop-on hop-off platform that was wrongly taken away or do they
:18:40. > :18:44.want a bendy bus blocking the traffic which lost every year
:18:44. > :18:47.almost �8 million in fare evasion and was known as the free bus. If
:18:47. > :18:52.they want to go back in that direction I would like to know. But
:18:52. > :18:56.that's not what they are Delling me. The Sunday Telegraph claims a Lord
:18:56. > :19:00.Ashcroft poll claims 4% of black voters identified were
:19:00. > :19:05.Conservatives. What is your message to black voters?
:19:05. > :19:09.My message is the same that I give to all Londoners. I believe there's
:19:09. > :19:14.a difference between me and the former Mayor, Ken Livingstone, and
:19:14. > :19:17.that is I'm a Mayor who unites or tries his absolute best to unite
:19:17. > :19:21.this City and bring people together. I don't look at Londoners as
:19:21. > :19:26.divided up into this or that section or group. I don't try to
:19:26. > :19:29.play one group off against another. I'm here to unite the city. There's
:19:29. > :19:32.a specific criticism that your manifesto fails to mention black
:19:32. > :19:38.voters other than in the context of crime. Do you accept that?
:19:38. > :19:43.No, that's not true. No. Jo, if you had taken the trouble... Well, I've
:19:43. > :19:46.got it here. You haven't got the whole thing. Hang on.
:19:46. > :19:50.Overrepresented both as perpetrators and victims of crime
:19:50. > :19:55.with a disproportionate number of black people affected by serious
:19:55. > :19:58.youth violence. 86% of gang members are of black Caribbean ethnic
:19:58. > :20:02.minority. That is painting them in a negative light. Do you accept
:20:02. > :20:06.that? No, there's plenty of other stuff in this manifesto, the full
:20:06. > :20:11.version of which is here now, which discusses what we are going to do
:20:11. > :20:19.for all communities in London. I really commend the whole document
:20:19. > :20:23.to you. By the way, just back on policing, I'm very proud to say
:20:23. > :20:26.that under me in this Mayorality, we have more black officers in the
:20:26. > :20:31.Met, we are going to go on with that programme and make it possible
:20:31. > :20:36.for people to enter later in their careers so that we have a police
:20:36. > :20:39.force, Police Service that better reflects London and therefore
:20:39. > :20:43.carries the trust of the overwhelming majority. Boris
:20:43. > :20:49.Johnson, is David Cameron a vote winner for you or a vote loser?
:20:49. > :20:52.I think people - I'm sure all sorts of people win me votes or lose me
:20:52. > :20:56.votes but... What about the Prime Minister, the leader of the
:20:56. > :21:01.Conservative Party, is he a vote winner or loser? Obviously a vote
:21:01. > :21:05.winner. This is something that is... Is he? This is something that will
:21:05. > :21:08.be decided on my programme for improving this City and taking
:21:08. > :21:14.London forward. Not the Conservative... When they look at
:21:14. > :21:19.what we've done and what we are offering in modernising our
:21:19. > :21:24.transport network, to investing 200,000 jobs, in delivering a 10%
:21:24. > :21:29.cut in council tax. Yes. But Boris... Council tax by the way
:21:29. > :21:33.which went up by �96 4 for a band B under Ken Livingstone. I think
:21:33. > :21:36.people at this election can see a very, very clear difference between
:21:36. > :21:41.our programme, my programme, what we are offering for Londoners over
:21:41. > :21:45.the next four years and the programme there. That is the choice,
:21:45. > :21:52.between going forward or going backwards. All right, but has the
:21:52. > :21:56.Conservative-led Government been a drag on your polling? The proof of
:21:56. > :22:00.that particular pudding will be in the eating in less than two days'
:22:00. > :22:04.time. I know that for everybody I talk to on the streets of London, I
:22:04. > :22:10.hope that people are listening to what we've got to say about taking
:22:11. > :22:14.our City forward, about building a great future for London through
:22:14. > :22:16.transport investment, housing and regeneration. People say, am I
:22:16. > :22:19.different from the Conservative Party, am I different from the
:22:19. > :22:23.Government, you know, to get to the heart of your question, and the
:22:23. > :22:27.answer is yes, in the sense that I will go into bat for London, I will
:22:27. > :22:31.go in to fight for London budgets. I don't care if plaster comes off
:22:31. > :22:37.the ceeling in the Treasury, provided we get the funding that we
:22:37. > :22:40.need -- ceiling. Only in the last couple of weeks, we got �...
:22:40. > :22:44.going to have to stop you... Another �90 million for policing
:22:44. > :22:47.and I'm going to fight for London. Thank you very much.
:22:47. > :22:51.Charles Clarke, there is this strange situation that Boris
:22:51. > :22:54.Johnson, who wants to be the next Mayor, and carry on his reign in
:22:54. > :22:58.London is more popular than the Conservative Party and Ken
:22:58. > :23:01.Livingstone, Labour's candidate is less popular. Did you think that it
:23:01. > :23:04.was the right decision to keep Ken Livingstone as the candidate?
:23:04. > :23:08.I've never rated Ken and I wouldn't have done it in those circumstances.
:23:08. > :23:12.You are right about the overall politics, Labour will do very well
:23:12. > :23:15.in London on Thursday in the Greater London elections and I hope
:23:15. > :23:18.will take control of the Greater London Assembly. No doubt Boris is
:23:18. > :23:22.running ahead of the Conservatives and Ken running behind Labour. That
:23:22. > :23:26.may narrow towards polling day, we'll see. It will be a close call.
:23:26. > :23:30.You must have been watching the campaigning? Yes. What did you
:23:30. > :23:34.think of Ken Livingstone's campaign? I'm not a fan of him...
:23:34. > :23:37.No, but? I think that... The polls aren't that far away though, are
:23:37. > :23:42.they? No, they are quite close. What Ken's great strength is and
:23:42. > :23:46.has always been, is transporting London from the conJess bion charge
:23:46. > :23:50.zones and the other issue, he's genuinely committed to improving
:23:50. > :23:53.transport and he has a much stronger record than Boris Johnson
:23:53. > :23:57.on that. On policing he's had a strong record when Mayor. I worked
:23:57. > :24:01.with him as Home Secretary to bring the neighbourhood policing into
:24:01. > :24:04.London. Boris Johnson has made it his business to smash up the
:24:04. > :24:08.Metropolitan Police by getting rid of its leadership which is
:24:08. > :24:13.scandalous. Unfortunately, the other things around Ken, other this
:24:13. > :24:16.than the two pluses, transport and policing, take attention away from
:24:16. > :24:20.his good points. Do you think another Labour candidate may have
:24:20. > :24:24.had a better chance of winning? Depends who it was. Tessa Jowell?
:24:24. > :24:28.Not talking about individual candidates and I don't have anybody
:24:28. > :24:32.in mind. If you think Ken Livingstone is the best candidate
:24:32. > :24:42.for Labour, no. Other people might have done better, but if you ask me
:24:42. > :24:47.
:24:47. > :24:49.plashs you don't know, it depends how it will work out -- particulars.
:24:49. > :24:54.If you don't know your unity authority from your county council,
:24:54. > :24:58.or if your maths is a little Rusty and you are not up to speed on your
:24:58. > :25:02.wholes or halves or thirds, fear not, fresh from following Boris
:25:02. > :25:06.around London, we send Adam to the south coast.
:25:06. > :25:10.Meet Colin, street cleaning is one of the services provided by Gosport
:25:10. > :25:16.Borough Council. This year, half of their councillors are being elected.
:25:16. > :25:22.But the exciting sounding discovery centre around the corn iris run by
:25:22. > :25:26.a higher power, Hampshire County Council -- corner. Not until next
:25:26. > :25:29.year. Across the fairly windy harbour is Portsmouth which is a
:25:29. > :25:33.unitary authority which means there's only a single tier of local
:25:33. > :25:38.government. This week, they are electing a third of their
:25:38. > :25:43.councillors? Clear? It isn't on the Gosport ferry where hardly anyone
:25:43. > :25:47.seems to know their thirds from their halves from their wholes. Do
:25:47. > :25:52.you know how in councillors are being elected on this election?
:25:52. > :25:56.haven't got a clue. Do you know what proportion? No. About half
:25:56. > :26:02.probably. Correct answer! That's something thousand. The was that a
:26:02. > :26:07.guess though? Yes. Is your council a unitary authority or a district
:26:08. > :26:11.council? I believe it's a County Council. Not entirely 100% sure.
:26:11. > :26:18.don't know what decisions have to be made at county level and which
:26:18. > :26:21.are made at district council level and I guess some of those I would
:26:21. > :26:27.guess right and some would be wrong and I guess most people are like
:26:27. > :26:32.that. Why have we arrived at a system that's so complicated?
:26:32. > :26:36.are different needs in rural and urban areas. Secondly, if an urban
:26:36. > :26:40.and rural area changes, because things change and towns grow up.
:26:40. > :26:43.Throw politics into that and the desire to reform a system in your
:26:43. > :26:46.particular direction if you are in control nationally and you can see
:26:46. > :26:49.there will be regular reorganisation for Local Government.
:26:49. > :26:53.Next stop Portsmouth's famous Spinnaker tower, to find out which
:26:53. > :26:56.parties are on the up and which might be heading down. There are a
:26:56. > :27:00.number of ways of working that out. First, you could look at what
:27:00. > :27:06.happened last time these seats were contested back in 2008. Then, the
:27:06. > :27:11.Tories had a net gain of 194 councillors, Labour has a bad time
:27:12. > :27:15.with a net loss of 210 while the Liberal Democrats had a net gain of
:27:15. > :27:19.14. What about the number of councils the parties control
:27:19. > :27:23.outright? The authorities up for grabs this week, the Tories have 52.
:27:23. > :27:27.Labour have 38. The Liberal Democrats control seven. You could
:27:27. > :27:32.look at what the party's share of the vote would have been in the
:27:32. > :27:37.local elections had been national ones. In 2011, the Tories were on
:27:37. > :27:41.38%, Labour were on 37%, the Liberal Democrats were on 16% fpltz
:27:41. > :27:44.And, because there are so many facts and figures, it means the
:27:45. > :27:48.parties can use results from one part of the country to give a
:27:48. > :27:51.distorted view of how they've done overall in the elections across
:27:51. > :27:55.England. It's going to be a busy night! With
:27:55. > :28:00.us now is the Local Government expert Tony Travers from the London
:28:00. > :28:03.School of Economics. Take us through first of all the different
:28:03. > :28:06.types of council, you know, that people will be voting for,
:28:06. > :28:09.councillors that they'll be voting for, because not many people
:28:09. > :28:13.understand the differences? heard earlier about London where
:28:13. > :28:18.there's the Mayor and Assembly. In Scotland and Wales, all the
:28:18. > :28:21.authorities are up, all unitary authorities, and in the rest of
:28:21. > :28:25.England, we have a third of people voting in the big cities and some
:28:25. > :28:30.smaller towns and cities, then in some of the smaller districts,
:28:30. > :28:33.either all out or a third voting, there are some parts of the the
:28:33. > :28:37.country in England without elections and in Northern Ireland.
:28:37. > :28:42.For the whole of Scotland and Wales, large pars of urban England, people
:28:42. > :28:45.are voting. The last time the seats were up was in? 2008, except in
:28:45. > :28:50.Scotland where it's 2007. Let's look at the state of the different
:28:50. > :28:53.parties. How well do Labour need to do? There's been a lot of
:28:53. > :28:56.expectation management and they talk about 356. That doesn't sound
:28:56. > :29:01.like an awful lot to me in terms of gains? If you look at when the
:29:01. > :29:08.elections were last fought in 2008, Labour was in terrible trouble.
:29:08. > :29:12.They were the equivalent vote share of that day, it was 23-24%. One of
:29:12. > :29:16.their lowest? They are now up to 40. If they don't do as well in the
:29:16. > :29:20.votes as the polls, there's a swing against the Conservatives. The
:29:20. > :29:24.Liberal Democrats will do worse than that. If you add it together,
:29:24. > :29:29.Labour probably I think are going to do better than 300. They would
:29:29. > :29:34.say a lower number. 600 or 700 gains for Labour is somewhere in
:29:34. > :29:38.the range between an average and a good performance. A good
:29:38. > :29:41.performance would need to be up between 60 and 700? On the basis of
:29:41. > :29:44.the current polls and where we are starting from and the mess the
:29:44. > :29:49.Government's been in, add that together and I think that they'd
:29:49. > :29:52.want to be winning 60 or 700 seats. What about the Liberal Democrats?
:29:52. > :29:56.Last year all right not the same seats, but last year they had a
:29:56. > :30:00.very bad night in terms of local election results. Is it going to be
:30:01. > :30:03.as bad or is the bar so low it's got to come up? Compared with last
:30:03. > :30:08.year, it's almost certainly going to be better for the Liberal
:30:08. > :30:11.Democrats. There are fewer seats that are vulnerable this year and
:30:12. > :30:14.anyway, the Conservatives were in a rather weaker position this year
:30:14. > :30:17.than last. The Liberal Democrats probably no worse. Relatively they
:30:18. > :30:21.are a bit closer if not slightly better for the Liberal Democrats.
:30:21. > :30:25.Of course, the Liberal Democrats are still like everybody else going
:30:25. > :30:29.back to 2008 as a starting point, this is complicated, I'm sorry.
:30:29. > :30:32.But attend of it, the Liberal Democrats will not do as badly as
:30:32. > :30:35.they did last year even if they lose a few seats. Because the
:30:35. > :30:39.Conservative also take a bigger hit because they did surprisingly well
:30:39. > :30:43.last year? Yes, because of the dynamics of Conservative Liberal
:30:43. > :30:46.Democrat marginal seats and when the Liberals fall back, it helps
:30:46. > :30:50.the Conservatives do better. question that you are always asking
:30:50. > :30:53.in local elections but particularly perhaps in this sort of stage, we
:30:53. > :30:59.asked Boris Johnson the same question - how much do people vote
:30:59. > :31:04.on local issues? Does it vary across the UK or will the
:31:04. > :31:13.Conservatives on the doorstep find it difficult because of the hoo-hah
:31:13. > :31:17.It works like that, not only in Britain. It is worth remembering in
:31:17. > :31:23.a sense the further West you go and north you go in Britain, you get
:31:23. > :31:27.more and more independence and politics that is removed from the
:31:27. > :31:30.Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat struggle, but generally
:31:30. > :31:33.Conservative problems at the national level with affect the
:31:33. > :31:37.Conservatives in Plymouth o the Conservatives in Southampton.
:31:37. > :31:41.How well do you think Labour will do in the local elections across
:31:41. > :31:45.England? You said you think they will do well in the assembly
:31:45. > :31:49.elections in London and we don't know any of the results, but the
:31:49. > :31:53.mayoral contest is harder to predict? I don't put a
:31:53. > :31:58.quantification on seats, but Labour will do well in England. I think we
:31:58. > :32:02.will do well in Wales. What about Glasgow? I think we will
:32:02. > :32:07.have a a difficulty hanging on. Alex Salmond and the SNP are in a
:32:07. > :32:12.strong position in Scotland and we will be doing well to hold Glasgow.
:32:12. > :32:16.It will come down to the coverage, won't it, London and Glasgow, they
:32:16. > :32:22.could be the big headline stories and that will mitigate gains that
:32:22. > :32:29.Labour might make? It reminds me when Ken Baker was chairman of the
:32:29. > :32:32.Conservative Party, Labour did well during Mrs Thatcher's premiership.
:32:32. > :32:37.I think that is what the Conservatives are going to do in
:32:37. > :32:45.reverse, they will do badly and Labour will do well across the
:32:45. > :32:50.country, but the London mayor and what happens in Glasgow will be the
:32:50. > :32:55.big issues. Did you pay attention to council
:32:55. > :32:59.elections? Of course. Local elections and opinion polls and by-
:32:59. > :33:03.elections are generally speaking a referendum on the party in power as
:33:03. > :33:07.to what is going on. I say generally speaking because there
:33:08. > :33:11.are local factors and you have got to look at that in politics as
:33:11. > :33:14.opposed a general election which is a choice between two parties to
:33:14. > :33:17.form a Government. You have to look at it and you should look at it..
:33:17. > :33:20.Tony Travers, thank you. David Cameron was meant to spend
:33:20. > :33:25.yesterday afternoon in Milton Keynes campaigning for Thursday's
:33:26. > :33:30.local elections. Instead, Speaker Bercow dragged the Prime Minister
:33:30. > :33:39.to the Commons Chamber to answer questions about Jeremy Hunt, his
:33:40. > :33:43.Culture Secretary. It was a stormy In every respect with regard to the
:33:43. > :33:48.News Corporation bid, the Culture Secretary asked for independent
:33:48. > :33:52.advice and acted on it. He was not required to ask or or to follow
:33:52. > :33:56.such advice, but he did so. He acted fairly and impartially and in
:33:56. > :34:00.line with the advice of his Permanent Secretary. The Prime
:34:00. > :34:04.Minister is defending the indefensible and he knows it.
:34:04. > :34:08.Protecting the Culture Secretary's job while up and down the country,
:34:08. > :34:12.hundreds of thousands are losing theirs. And we all know why - the
:34:12. > :34:16.special adviser had to go to protect the Culture Secretary. The
:34:16. > :34:21.Culture Secretary has to stay to protect the Prime Minister. The
:34:21. > :34:31.Prime Minister has shown today he is incapable of doing his duty. Too
:34:31. > :34:31.
:34:31. > :34:37.close to a powerful few. Out-of- touch with everyone else. I'm not
:34:37. > :34:43.belilg this issue. It is not as serious as the eurozone and the
:34:43. > :34:47.debt that we have to focus on. Let me say this, endlessly questioning
:34:47. > :34:51.the integrity of someone when you don't have the evidence is bad
:34:51. > :34:55.judgement, rotten politics and plain wrong. We have learned
:34:55. > :35:00.something about the Labour leader today and I think it is something
:35:00. > :35:04.he will regret. Why is the Secretary of State for
:35:04. > :35:11.culture getting better employment rights than the rest of the workers
:35:11. > :35:15.in Britain? Is it it possiblely he knows
:35:15. > :35:19.because he knows whenever the Culture Secretary is in the firing
:35:19. > :35:25.line that it prevents the bullets hitting him, the Prime Minister?
:35:25. > :35:31.Well, the honourable gentleman has the right at any time to take his
:35:31. > :35:38.pension and I advice him to do so. Ooo, you might say.
:35:38. > :35:43.You don't think he should have done... It is a trivial remark. He
:35:43. > :35:46.is rude. I am not defending him. He can defend himself. But to deal
:35:47. > :35:50.with Denis's point which was a serious point by that trivial
:35:50. > :35:53.little remark, take the tablets or whatever, these remarks come out, I
:35:53. > :35:57.think it was pathetic of the Prime Minister.
:35:57. > :36:01.Not prime ministerial? Well, he was angry, of course.
:36:01. > :36:05.There is no juchtion no justification at all.
:36:05. > :36:10.Haven't you felt like losing it when you are standing up? A big
:36:10. > :36:14.issue for Prime Ministers at Prime Minister's Questions, you get angry
:36:14. > :36:18.for things that are said in the chamber, but you have got to
:36:18. > :36:20.control yourself and if you don't, you're gone and David Cameron lost
:36:20. > :36:24.control of himself there. You think he did.
:36:24. > :36:28.Has in your mind, Jeremy Hunt, done wrong in terms of breaching the
:36:28. > :36:34.Ministerial Code? I believe so on the basis of what I have seen. The
:36:34. > :36:39.rule that I've always thought was essential, the special adviser
:36:39. > :36:43.speaks on behalf of the principal and it is in this case too and
:36:43. > :36:47.Jeremy Hunt should be taken responsibility rather thang asking
:36:47. > :36:52.a -- than asking a special adviser to walk the plank. The Ministerial
:36:52. > :37:00.Code is clear that the minister does take responsibility, are you
:37:00. > :37:06.saying how much advice that advisers work wheel to joule --
:37:06. > :37:15.cheek to joule with their advisers? Everybody who talks to a special
:37:15. > :37:17.add virer -- adviser believes they are talking on behalf of the
:37:17. > :37:25.minister. I am certain in the special adviser's communication,
:37:25. > :37:29.with all the other people, just like Adam verity for Liam Fox. The
:37:29. > :37:34.minister has to take responsibility. I don't understand why the Prime
:37:34. > :37:38.Minister has not referred this to the person who is supposed judge
:37:38. > :37:43.the Ministerial Code. Well, he said, in justification,
:37:43. > :37:46.that he might do that once Jeremy Hunt has given evidence to the
:37:46. > :37:49.Leveson Inquiry. Many people argued your point that he is not the
:37:49. > :37:55.independent adviser on the Ministerial Code and said so
:37:55. > :38:00.himself? What has the Leveson Inquiry got to do with any of this?
:38:00. > :38:04.Justice Leveson appears to be doing a good job, but it has nothing to
:38:04. > :38:07.do with the conduct of the minister and the conduct of the special add
:38:07. > :38:10.vieer. Should the Prime Minister have been hauled to the House when
:38:10. > :38:14.we have had a statement from Jeremy Hunt and the urgent question
:38:14. > :38:19.arguably didn't ask anything new and did we learn anything new?
:38:19. > :38:22.didn't learn much new. It used to be a convention if the Leader of
:38:22. > :38:25.the Opposition put down a question to the Prime Minister, that the
:38:25. > :38:29.Prime Minister would have to come. And that was an important
:38:29. > :38:37.convention over many years. It It doesn't happen very often?
:38:37. > :38:41.happens rarely and that's why why David Cameron said he thought Ed
:38:41. > :38:46.Miliband got it wrong. David Cameron's decision not to refer the
:38:46. > :38:50.case is something worthy of explaining to the House and Ed
:38:50. > :38:53.Miliband was right to bring him to the House and I am glad the Speaker
:38:53. > :38:57.agreed. So he was called to the House and
:38:57. > :39:00.we heard his angry tone. It is clear David Cameron wants to hold
:39:00. > :39:04.on to Jeremy Hunt and you will remember instances where Prime
:39:04. > :39:11.Ministers want to hold on to their ministers. He is clearly defending
:39:11. > :39:21.him. How risky do you think that Strategic Rail Authority Strategic
:39:21. > :39:22.
:39:22. > :39:27.Rail Authority -- strategy is? That's the case of bringing an
:39:27. > :39:31.independent adjudicator. I think it does want to -- he does want to
:39:31. > :39:34.keep Jeremy Hunt. There is a Ministerial Code and it has to be
:39:34. > :39:39.acknowledged and the Prime Minister isn't acknowledging that and that's
:39:40. > :39:47.a risky course for the Prime Minister.
:39:47. > :39:52.We have the local elections and Jeremy Hunt won't give evidence to
:39:52. > :39:57.the Leveson Inquiry million mid-May, do you think the excitement might
:39:57. > :40:02.have dampdnd down -- dampened down and the media maybe off the the
:40:02. > :40:07.scent? The media may go off the scent, but the moment that Leveson
:40:07. > :40:11.comes around again, the media will be on the scent and it will
:40:11. > :40:17.continue the issue over a period of time than would be the case. It is
:40:17. > :40:21.political misjudged, but it is ethically misjunld. The --
:40:21. > :40:24.misjudged. The think about the Ministerial Code, it is supposed to
:40:24. > :40:28.hold ministers to code. We have established an independent process
:40:28. > :40:33.with a senior civil servant to adjudicate whether this is or is
:40:33. > :40:38.not the case. By not taking the opportunity to refer it there,
:40:38. > :40:43.David Cameron is bringing it all on his own shoulders and I think
:40:43. > :40:48.that's a foolish thing, indeed to It will go on inevitably as many of
:40:48. > :40:54.these stories do. As we have been discussing, MPs on the culture
:40:54. > :40:58.committee have been holding a press conference. At heart of the inquiry
:40:58. > :41:01.has been the question of what executives at Rupert Murdoch's News
:41:01. > :41:05.International knew about hacking and when the committee said that
:41:05. > :41:09.the newspaper and its parent company had shown huge failings of
:41:09. > :41:13.corporate governance. They said there was no definitive evidence
:41:13. > :41:17.that James Murdoch, who ran the UK newspaper division, had misled
:41:17. > :41:20.Parliament over what he knew and when, but the report said it was
:41:20. > :41:26.simply astonishing that he and father, Rupert Murdoch, had not
:41:26. > :41:32.realised the extent of hacking take place. James Murdoch was described
:41:32. > :41:35.as showing, "Wilful ignorance about the wrongdoing." The most most
:41:35. > :41:40.damning judgement was reserved for Rupert Murdoch in a series of
:41:40. > :41:43.decisions which split the committee along along party lines in comments
:41:43. > :41:47.disowned by the Conservative members, the report said that
:41:47. > :41:51.Rupert Murdoch was not a fit person to run a company like the
:41:51. > :41:56.broadcaster BSkyB. Some of the of the findings divided the committee.
:41:56. > :42:00.Let's hear the differing views Everybody in the world knows is who
:42:00. > :42:06.responsible for the wrongdoing at News Corp, Rupert Murdoch. More
:42:06. > :42:11.than any individual alive, he is to blame. Morally, the deeds are are
:42:11. > :42:19.his. Paid the piper and he called the tune. It is his company, his
:42:19. > :42:24.culture, his people, his business, his failures, his lies, his crimes,
:42:24. > :42:29.the price of profits and his power. No Conservative member on this
:42:29. > :42:32.committee with a vote was able to recommend the report itself to the
:42:32. > :42:36.House and and every one of us, while we shared different views
:42:36. > :42:40.about the culpability of News Corporation and the degree of
:42:40. > :42:44.culpability of James Murdoch in particular, none of us were able to
:42:44. > :42:47.support the report and we all voted against it. That will mean it will
:42:48. > :42:53.be correctly seen as a partisan report and we've lost a very great
:42:53. > :42:58.deal of its credibility which is an enormous shame. The issue on which
:42:58. > :43:02.no Conservative member felt they could support the report itself was
:43:02. > :43:08.the line put in the middle of the report that said that Mr Rupert
:43:08. > :43:11.Murdoch is not a fit person to run an international company.
:43:11. > :43:15.The Conservative member talking about the report.
:43:15. > :43:19.We are joined by Steve Hewlett and we maybe joined by committee
:43:19. > :43:23.members as soon as they come out of their press conference, but it is
:43:23. > :43:26.going on and it is taking longer than compted and it is -- expected
:43:26. > :43:31.and it is unlikely any of them will come out before it finishes because
:43:31. > :43:36.the report proved to be more devastating and scathing than
:43:36. > :43:42.journalists like myself predicted. Were you surprised? I was surprised
:43:42. > :43:50.how far it has gone. The focus is on corporate governance. What they
:43:50. > :43:57.said about Tom Crone and Colin Myler, effectively that they have
:43:57. > :44:01.lied. They said one thing in 2009... The opposite of that is true, as
:44:01. > :44:06.much as a year before that. Interestingly, they point the
:44:06. > :44:11.finger at Les Hinton. He is the person of whom Rupert Murdoch said,
:44:11. > :44:21."I would trust him with my life. I worked with him for 52 years." He
:44:21. > :44:23.
:44:24. > :44:29.goes back to the to the to the Adelaide paper that Rupert Murdoch
:44:29. > :44:33.started. Remember, he was taken out of News International which is why
:44:33. > :44:37.James Murdoch took over and went to run the Wall Street Journal. The
:44:37. > :44:39.evidence that, the suggestion there was a cover-up goes higher than it
:44:39. > :44:42.was before. It goes to the top if you are
:44:42. > :44:47.talking about the corporate governance and the words are
:44:47. > :44:52.damning. We will come to the fact that not all members of the
:44:52. > :44:56.parts of that report. But what happens now to the Murdoch global
:44:56. > :45:00.empire because however damning this report is, it is a Parliamentary
:45:00. > :45:09.Committee report and it is very important and devastating, but what
:45:09. > :45:14.impact will will it have on the Leave aside whatever action
:45:14. > :45:19.Parliament may decide to take ultimately about being misled and
:45:19. > :45:25.figged to. There'll be a vote in Parliament and whether or not
:45:25. > :45:30.people are called back -- fibbed to. The thing that is ticking in the
:45:30. > :45:35.background is a decision whether BSkyB is a fit company to hold a
:45:35. > :45:38.broadcasting licence. The reason BSkyB is controlled by News Corp
:45:38. > :45:43.who own 39% of it, if this was a question about an individual
:45:43. > :45:46.director sitting on the board who it transpired had lied or something,
:45:46. > :45:50.then the easiest answer to that is take that person off and put
:45:50. > :45:55.someone else on. If however what you are dealing with is a corporate
:45:55. > :45:58.culture company, it's not that easily fixed. Step back from the
:45:58. > :46:02.line that's divided them about whether Rupert Murdoch is a fit and
:46:02. > :46:04.proper person, the committee say it isn't, that's split on party
:46:04. > :46:09.political lines and the Tories said that the reason they didn't vote
:46:09. > :46:13.for the whole report was because of that one line. Step back from that
:46:13. > :46:16.line and there is plenty of stuff about wilful blindness, a cultural
:46:16. > :46:19.ignorance and the rest of it. it's unbelievable that they
:46:19. > :46:22.couldn't have known? essentially you have a company that
:46:22. > :46:25.when confronted with trouble the first instinct was to cover it up
:46:25. > :46:30.and that cover-up or that approach went on in the face of mounting
:46:30. > :46:33.evidence for a very long time. They say that rather than having an
:46:33. > :46:36.epiphany moment, they decided the game was up when they couldn't face
:46:36. > :46:40.the evidence. Why is that significant? Because if you are
:46:40. > :46:44.Ofcom and considering whether it's possible to regulate this company
:46:44. > :46:48.at all, if anything were to happen that was untoward, no suggestion
:46:49. > :46:51.there is by the way at Sky, a very well-run company, but if something
:46:51. > :46:56.were to come up, how can you regular gate a company when the
:46:57. > :47:02.starting point about the people you are talking to would be to lie,
:47:02. > :47:07.deceive and dissemble. Do you think they may be more minded, bearing in
:47:07. > :47:11.mind they are already investigating whether they are fit to hold a
:47:11. > :47:14.licence which the Deputy Leader said they are not? Where Ofcom were
:47:14. > :47:18.at I don't know, but if you take the report at face value and
:47:18. > :47:22.discount the line about Rupert Murdoch that's divided them, it's
:47:22. > :47:28.devastating. I think Steve's got it spot on, but I think there's an
:47:28. > :47:31.additional point. It's very clear that there was a culture of conduct
:47:31. > :47:35.in the News International papers was disassembly bling and dishonest,
:47:35. > :47:40.I've testified to that myself when I was involved in politics it was
:47:40. > :47:44.the case. The issue will be whether there has been a change over the
:47:44. > :47:47.last recent period as people have understood what's going on and
:47:47. > :47:54.whether that's a change. individuals involved have gone,
:47:54. > :47:59.haven't they? If you are talking about Tom Crone Les Hinton and
:47:59. > :48:04.Colin Myler. James Murdoch has been moved. In a sense would that be it?
:48:04. > :48:09.James Murdoch sits on the board of Sky and is responsible for the
:48:09. > :48:13.company's pay TV global strategy. What does it do to the reputation
:48:13. > :48:18.or reputations of Rupert and James Murdoch? Well, it's not great is
:48:18. > :48:22.it? To be accused by a committee - I mean some individuals have
:48:22. > :48:27.different views and some are well- known, but there's a lots of them.
:48:27. > :48:30.For the things they've agreed on to have happened in your company is
:48:30. > :48:34.devastating. Rupert Murdoch said last week of News Corp we are an
:48:34. > :48:38.ethical company only exist to do good. Hold that up against this.
:48:38. > :48:43.That's why I wonder whether it was wise to divide the committee by
:48:43. > :48:47.putting in a sentence that led to the tuition because the strength of
:48:47. > :48:50.what Steve's said is a unanimous Select Committee which would be in
:48:50. > :48:53.a stronger position. So are you saying that now actually this
:48:53. > :48:57.report, although scathing in its content is weaker politically
:48:57. > :49:01.because of that split, because of the four Conservatives are not
:49:02. > :49:05.going to agree to those key bits where Rupert Murdoch is not a fit
:49:05. > :49:11.person to exercise the stewardship of a company and in a way will then
:49:11. > :49:17.have less bite, if you like? 100%. It's always the case that the
:49:17. > :49:22.divided Select Committees are always weaker than individual ones.
:49:22. > :49:25.The whole of the debate will be about the question about whether
:49:25. > :49:29.Rupert Murdoch is a proper and fit person. Ofcom will have to make its
:49:29. > :49:33.view. I think that could slide attention away from the big body of
:49:33. > :49:37.issues that Steve's described which are in the agreed part of the
:49:37. > :49:41.report. It makes it possible to spint, doesn't it? Yes, and what do
:49:41. > :49:46.you think about that, how do you think they will present it -- spin
:49:46. > :49:50.it. They've got to be careful. They've issued a statement saying
:49:50. > :49:54.we are considering the report but apologies for anyone who's had
:49:54. > :49:59.their privacy invaded, deep apologies for wrongdoing which we
:49:59. > :50:03.acknowledge went on in the News of the World. So mea culpa again. If
:50:03. > :50:07.they come out really hard and attack it as politically motivated,
:50:07. > :50:11.even if you take that at face value, you are talking about someone like
:50:11. > :50:14.Tom Watson, who has an extreme view on this, but hang on a second, they
:50:14. > :50:20.put him under surveillance and followed him around. They went to
:50:20. > :50:26.war on this. There's another thing here which says the integrity and
:50:26. > :50:29.effectively of the Select Committee relies on the oral and written
:50:29. > :50:33.evidence. They demonstrated contempt in the most play tant
:50:34. > :50:38.fashion. This is like the old News International, -- blatant. These
:50:38. > :50:42.are the people walking the walk, you know. So they haven't left that
:50:42. > :50:46.culture behind in that sense? fairness they've done an awful lot
:50:46. > :50:49.to change... They closed the paper and moved people? They have
:50:49. > :50:53.compliance officers coming out of every available office now. So they
:50:53. > :50:56.have gone to town an trying to change this. To say that they are
:50:56. > :50:59.right on the edge here of a judgment being made about them by
:50:59. > :51:04.Ofcom which could be very damaging and here is another question to ask
:51:04. > :51:08.- is it conceivable that a News Corporation bid for the rest of
:51:08. > :51:16.BSkyB could be contemplated in any circumstances in the forthcoming
:51:16. > :51:20.period? Just very briefly before we move on and to look at Leveson. You
:51:20. > :51:23.could say we have heard the evidence, the Government in cahoots
:51:23. > :51:26.with sex abuse international and the Murdoch empire all the way
:51:26. > :51:32.through the last few decades, the music stopped, bad luck for the
:51:32. > :51:36.coalition? I think there's a degree of truth in that. There's a lot to
:51:36. > :51:41.be said about 24/7 media, the relative power of News
:51:41. > :51:44.International in relation to Labour and other Governments. I'm
:51:44. > :51:48.personally delighted that the music has stopped in this case. But then
:51:48. > :51:50.you need to say, what are you going to do about it and that's the point
:51:50. > :52:00.Steve raise and he's quite right. Thank you very much.
:52:00. > :52:04.
:52:04. > :52:07.Can you remember when this Well, it happened 15 years ago
:52:07. > :52:09.today. Doesn't time fly in the fun world
:52:09. > :52:13.of politics?! Mr Blair went on to become the most
:52:13. > :52:20.successful Prime Minister in Labour history, but he was a controversial
:52:20. > :52:27.figure who still divides opinion. Is the moodbox.
:52:27. > :52:31.-- here is the moodbox. When Tony Blair was elected in 1997,
:52:31. > :52:35.the sight that greeted him here at Downing Street were crowds of
:52:35. > :52:38.supporters waving flags. He went on to win another two elections but he
:52:38. > :52:43.was a man who divided opinion, not least on the issue of Iraq. Now,
:52:43. > :52:50.today, I don't have any flags but I have some balls and our very own
:52:50. > :52:54.moodbox. The question I'm asking is simple - Tony Blair, good or bad?
:52:54. > :52:59.I think he's good because he keeps to his policies and does it well.
:52:59. > :53:05.He's very firm on what he says and no-one can change his opinion once
:53:05. > :53:10.it's said. OK so where do you want to put it? Go on. He started off as
:53:10. > :53:13.a very truthful man and somehow became corrupted. Why was he
:53:13. > :53:23.horrible? He ran away from the country, didn't want to be an MP
:53:23. > :53:27.
:53:27. > :53:37.any more, did he? You put it in bad and I'll put it in good. We are off
:53:37. > :53:42.
:53:42. > :53:45.Like all the rest of us, a bit good, a bit bad. Can I put two in?
:53:45. > :53:49.Fantastic. I think he should stand accountable for what he made our
:53:49. > :53:52.country do without our consent. Bad!
:53:52. > :53:56.Afghanistan, going to war, I thought it was great, I thought
:53:56. > :54:06.it's what he should have done. Iraq? Yeah. He was right to go to
:54:06. > :54:10.
:54:10. > :54:14.Iraq? I do, yes. Hedging your bets? Pretty much even Stevens here,
:54:14. > :54:18.although the bads seem to be just about winning. They're clearly the
:54:18. > :54:23.man who won three elections in a row and divided the nation back
:54:23. > :54:28.then is still dividing the nation now.
:54:28. > :54:31.Tony Blair's speech writer now Times Columnist Phil Colins is with
:54:31. > :54:36.us now. How do you think history will judge Tony Blair?
:54:36. > :54:40.Very hard to say. In the classic clich, it's too early to tell.
:54:40. > :54:44.is it too early to tell? Yes, on the big things like Iraq, it's
:54:44. > :54:48.early to tell. There's an initial verdict entered which is not
:54:48. > :54:51.favourable, but then you need time to end see. On domestic politics, I
:54:51. > :54:55.think it's clearer. I think the Labour Government inherited a
:54:55. > :54:58.public realm that was very poorly invested in and they did a lot to
:54:58. > :55:01.change that. There was some improvements in the Public Services,
:55:01. > :55:04.not nearly as much as there should have been given the money that went
:55:05. > :55:08.in. There was a gradual improvement in those things, but I think in the
:55:08. > :55:11.fullness of time we'll see whether in the grand sweep of history what
:55:11. > :55:14.kind of a Government it was. much has been written about him,
:55:14. > :55:20.not least by himself in fact. In terms of legacy which Prime
:55:21. > :55:25.Ministers are always obsessed about, and Iraq is always the issue that
:55:25. > :55:29.stands out as how Tony Blair will be measured, but you mentioned the
:55:29. > :55:33.domestic scene. What is his legacy? If you count Northern Ireland as
:55:33. > :55:40.domestic politics, you would have to say Northern Ireland is the most
:55:40. > :55:44.shining example of that. That was a sore that festered for a long time
:55:44. > :55:49.and is immesurably better now as a result of the work of Tony Blair
:55:49. > :55:51.and successive Secretary of States. I think there's also, it's
:55:51. > :55:54.instructive that in the last election campaign there wasn't a
:55:54. > :55:58.single question in the TV debates about the National Health Service.
:55:58. > :56:01.That's testament to a huge improvement over 13 years so you
:56:01. > :56:05.would I v to say that there was improvements there and in education
:56:05. > :56:11.too. One of the least heralded things which Charles will know a
:56:11. > :56:16.great deal about, the falling crime of 35% over the period which is not
:56:16. > :56:20.all attributable to a Government but some of that is. What about, as
:56:20. > :56:24.a person, as a personality, because he's held up very often by those
:56:24. > :56:29.that study political history and politicians and their success in
:56:29. > :56:34.terms of his personality which for you as a speech writer arguably
:56:34. > :56:38.made your job a bit easier because he was seen as a good orator and
:56:38. > :56:42.has the charisma when speaking? made a lot easier. Partly the
:56:42. > :56:45.personality but also knowing what you want to say. Those are the two
:56:45. > :56:48.crucial components if you are trying to write for somebody. Hard
:56:48. > :56:52.to write a clear speech for somebody who doesn't know what they
:56:52. > :56:56.want to say in tend. Who could that be? All sorts of people. Not
:56:56. > :57:00.picking on anyone in particular, in fact it's very comon, because to be
:57:00. > :57:03.crystal clear on what you are trying to do is a rare thing, even
:57:03. > :57:07.in politics -- common. I have said that before about David Cameron but
:57:07. > :57:12.I wouldn't single him out, there are lots of people of whom that's
:57:12. > :57:19.true. Tony Blair was absolutely had a clear sense of where he was doing,
:57:19. > :57:28.which made writing the speech clearer. You could say 1997-2001
:57:28. > :57:32.high watermark for Labour. Is that right? Slightly strong until 2005
:57:32. > :57:37.when we were not sure what the future was. I agree with Phil about
:57:37. > :57:40.the core services, crime, education and health and so on. But what we
:57:40. > :57:43.desperately needed and previous Governments that have lasted a long
:57:43. > :57:47.time also need is a sense of where we are going after that. Do you
:57:47. > :57:51.think there is now? Has Ed Miliband got that? He's working on it. I
:57:51. > :57:56.don't think it's there yet. I'm a fan of Tony's and history will
:57:56. > :58:01.judge him well in many respects but one of my major criticisms would be
:58:01. > :58:05.that from about 2004-2005, I don't think there was that vision about
:58:05. > :58:09.where we were going to go. Gordon made it worse but he inherited the
:58:09. > :58:12.position that Tony set up. We ended up in 2010 with the main reason for
:58:12. > :58:15.voting Labour being we want the Conservatives and that simply is
:58:15. > :58:19.not enough, we have to say where we are going. That's the challenge for
:58:19. > :58:23.Labour in opposition now, Ed is working on it, I don't think it's
:58:23. > :58:29.there by a long way but we'll see. Tony Blair's best speech?
:58:29. > :58:34.The best speech the final one in 2006. The one with the great joke
:58:34. > :58:37.about not running off with the bloke next door? The great Les
:58:37. > :58:41.Dawson joke? Was that you who wrote that or Alastair Campbell?
:58:42. > :58:46.Dawson. It was a collective thing. It was very funny! That's all for
:58:46. > :58:50.today. Thanks to our guests, particularly to you, Charles Clarke,
:58:50. > :58:55.for the whole hour. The One o'clock news is starting on BBC One now and