12/06/2012 Daily Politics


12/06/2012

Jo Coburn is joined by Trevor Phillips, chair of the equality and human rights commission. They look at gay marriage and the church's announcement that they could not support it.


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 12/06/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Good afternoon, welcome to the Daily Politics. Are church and

:00:42.:00:46.

state heading for a messy divorce over gay marriage? The Church of

:00:46.:00:48.

England has this morning issued a highly critical response to the

:00:48.:00:51.

Government's plans to allow gay couples in England and Wales to

:00:51.:00:53.

marry, warning that the legislation could undermine the church's

:00:53.:00:58.

established status. The UN says it's gravely concerned

:00:58.:01:02.

about the escalation of violence in Syria. We'll be talking to former

:01:02.:01:06.

Liberal Democrat Leader, Paddy Ashdown.

:01:06.:01:09.

Cricketing hero, Ian Botham, steps up to the crease to deal with a

:01:09.:01:12.

problem that's stumped politicians. He'll be with us later in the

:01:12.:01:14.

programme. And feeling blue? Is the bad

:01:14.:01:18.

weather getting you down? We'll be asking if we can blame the Prime

:01:18.:01:25.

Minister. All that in the next hour and with

:01:25.:01:28.

us for the whole programme today is the chair of the Equality and Human

:01:28.:01:35.

Rights Commission, Trevor Phillips. Welcome to the programme. Good

:01:35.:01:40.

afternoon. Now first this morning let's talk about health because

:01:40.:01:42.

later today ministers will confirm that doctors and NHS managers will

:01:42.:01:45.

be banned by law from denying older patients treatment simply on the

:01:45.:01:48.

grounds of their age. It follows a series of reports showing that

:01:48.:01:51.

older people often suffer sub- standard care and uneven treatment

:01:51.:01:58.

in the NHS and the social care system. Is this something you

:01:58.:02:05.

support? It is terrific and long overdue. The original argument was

:02:05.:02:10.

it you introduced age discretion legislation it would move Dr's

:02:10.:02:15.

discretion. But you have to have some protection for people who are

:02:15.:02:21.

older. On top of that, what you cannot have, which existed in the

:02:21.:02:25.

health service, our blanket rules that say people over a certain age

:02:25.:02:28.

may not have some treatment it you would give automatically to

:02:28.:02:35.

somebody under that age. So you have treatments denied to a fit 65-

:02:35.:02:39.

year-old, who can run 10 miles a day, to an unfit for two year-old

:02:39.:02:44.

who can barely walk to the shops. It is a reasonable approach and it

:02:44.:02:49.

is long overdue. Is it the case a lot of the distressing images we

:02:49.:02:54.

have seen are about a general lack of care and dignity being given to

:02:54.:02:59.

older people, rather than them being denied clinical treatment?

:02:59.:03:06.

is true, particularly in the social care arena. In the home care

:03:06.:03:11.

inquiry, which showed people were being given 15 minute slots and

:03:11.:03:18.

they were being left in their dirty garments and all of that. What is

:03:18.:03:24.

also true, some bits of the system have policies, and those policies

:03:24.:03:28.

say in a blanket way, let's not look at the individual, let's say

:03:28.:03:33.

if you are over 50, you cannot have this liver treatment. So there is

:03:33.:03:38.

evidence those policies exist? Exactly. What we're saying is we

:03:38.:03:43.

have to look at the individual. you think it will open floodgates

:03:43.:03:47.

of legal action, people saying I was not offered that treatment and

:03:47.:03:53.

I am 65 and they should have been? I don't believe that for a second.

:03:53.:03:57.

Most people trust their doctors and this says, doctor's exercise their

:03:57.:04:01.

discretion but they do have to think of the individual in front of

:04:02.:04:04.

them, rather than the birth certificate.

:04:04.:04:08.

Now, gay marriage. The Church of England has today responded to the

:04:08.:04:10.

government's consultation on same- sex marriages saying that the

:04:10.:04:12.

proposals would dilute an institution, vastly important to a

:04:12.:04:16.

healthy society. The Government launched their consultation earlier

:04:16.:04:21.

this year looking to make same-sex marriage legal by 2015. The

:04:21.:04:23.

proposed legislation would allow same-sex couples to marry in a

:04:23.:04:26.

registry office or civil ceremony but the ban on marrying in a

:04:26.:04:30.

religious service would not change. The Home Office has insisted that

:04:30.:04:33.

no religious organisation would be forced to conduct weddings. However,

:04:33.:04:35.

today the Church of England has responded to the Government's

:04:35.:04:39.

consultation, saying that the proposed legislation is shallow.

:04:39.:04:42.

They worry that keeping the ban on marrying same-sex couples in

:04:42.:04:46.

religious services would not survive legal challenges. Gay

:04:46.:04:49.

Rights campaigners have accused the church of scaremongering. Support

:04:49.:04:52.

for same-sex marriage was seen as a cornerstone of David Cameron's new

:04:52.:04:56.

direction for the Conservative Party. However, the issue has

:04:56.:04:59.

proved divisive for backbench Tories with MP Peter Bone, calling

:04:59.:05:05.

the proposals "completely nuts". I'm joined now from Norwich by the

:05:05.:05:07.

Bishop of Norwich, the Right Reverend Graham James, and here in

:05:07.:05:16.

the studio with me is Labour MP Chris Bryant. Graham James, why do

:05:16.:05:20.

you think the consequence of same- sex marriage would have a big

:05:20.:05:24.

impact on society? Want are the things the Government consultation

:05:24.:05:28.

paper suggests is there is a distinction between civil marriage

:05:28.:05:33.

and religious marriage. This is a new distinction in English law.

:05:33.:05:37.

Marriage is a centuries-old institution which has always been

:05:37.:05:43.

defined as the Union as one man and one woman. That goes back before

:05:43.:05:49.

church and state. One of the things we fear is two different

:05:49.:05:53.

understandings of marriage creates a whole host of new minorities in

:05:53.:05:59.

society. So including one group, that is those who want same-sex

:05:59.:06:04.

marriage, will inevitably create a division in our understanding of

:06:04.:06:09.

marriage, which is meant to be a unifying factor within society.

:06:10.:06:15.

this is about equality, essentially. That is what the supporters of this

:06:15.:06:19.

proposal want to see. Surely that saw it is, and extension of equal

:06:20.:06:25.

rights, same-sex couples want to have that heterosexual couples

:06:25.:06:31.

have? We also have civil partnerships and same-sex marriage

:06:31.:06:36.

wouldn't give any greater rights to same-sex partners. One of the

:06:36.:06:39.

things that is clear in our documents is we support civil

:06:39.:06:45.

partnerships. We do want stable, permanent, faithful relationships

:06:45.:06:51.

between same-sex couples in society, as it strengthens society. The

:06:51.:06:56.

distinction in marriage is the sexual union of a man and a woman.

:06:56.:07:00.

The ceremony does not marry someone, it is the sexual union that creates

:07:00.:07:05.

the marriage which is why we have a annulment in civil law and

:07:05.:07:09.

determined by consummation. One of the things in the consultation is a

:07:09.:07:15.

failure to define how this would work across same-sex couples and

:07:15.:07:20.

heterosexual couples and that is left to case law to determined.

:07:20.:07:26.

There is a whole host of things that are ill-thought out. A Home

:07:26.:07:30.

Office has said no religious organisation will be forced to

:07:30.:07:35.

conduct those same-sex marriages? But there will be a redefinition of

:07:36.:07:39.

marriage for everyone. At the moment, within the Church of

:07:39.:07:44.

England people have a right to be married in their parish church, and

:07:44.:07:48.

Church of England clergy are in effect, registrars. We are not

:07:48.:07:51.

confident that if there was a challenge when the legal definition

:07:52.:07:57.

of marriage is altered to the position that the Government's

:07:57.:08:02.

assurances could withstand. Chris Bryant, two understandings of

:08:02.:08:06.

marriage, basically there would be two definitions, it wouldn't be the

:08:06.:08:12.

sexual union of a man and woman? is depressing that the Church of

:08:13.:08:18.

England, the big issue to have a row with the Government about it is

:08:18.:08:25.

not about the NHS, it is about same-sex and the quality Coulstock

:08:25.:08:28.

but it is a shame the Church of England cannot get its history

:08:28.:08:33.

right. Civil marriage was introduced in the 17th century and

:08:33.:08:37.

the Church of England was restored at the Restoration and did not

:08:37.:08:45.

object to it. The Church of England did choose to oppose the law, but

:08:45.:08:50.

subsequently said it was right to change the law. When marriage was

:08:51.:08:55.

concede that the woman was a chattel of the husband at the

:08:55.:08:58.

Church maintain that. When we tried to change that, the Church of

:08:58.:09:05.

England opposed it. But they now accept that marriage has changed in

:09:05.:09:12.

every generation. What about them, the claim that civil partnerships,

:09:12.:09:16.

which the Church supports, are enough? The bizarre thing is, one

:09:16.:09:21.

bishop this morning was maintaining the bishops had supported civil

:09:21.:09:27.

partnerships. Completely untrue. 6- 1, they voted against it in the

:09:27.:09:37.

House of Lords. Secondly, we now have a situation where you can have

:09:37.:09:40.

a civil partnership in a church, if the Church chooses to allow that to

:09:40.:09:46.

happen, but you cannot have a marriage! It is ludicrous. Graham

:09:46.:09:50.

James, there wasn't the widespread support for civil partnerships in

:09:50.:09:55.

the first place, and marriage has evolved over the centuries?

:09:55.:09:59.

Undoubtedly, marriage and vaults over the centuries. It is feasible

:09:59.:10:06.

for marriage to a golf further. What we are saying is the present

:10:06.:10:10.

consultation raises a good many issues about the nature of marriage

:10:10.:10:19.

that we want answered. It simply isn't the case that there had been

:10:19.:10:23.

two different understandings of marriage. The Church's

:10:24.:10:27.

understanding a mistake's understanding has been the same.

:10:27.:10:33.

am sorry, that is factually and legally wrong. The understanding of

:10:33.:10:40.

civil marriage is different from the sacraments of marriage. I

:10:40.:10:47.

disagree with you as an Anglican, albeit a boycotting Anglican

:10:47.:10:52.

because of the Church's stance on these issues. I do hope you do

:10:52.:10:56.

change, just like the Church changed on slavery. The sacrament

:10:56.:11:02.

of marriage, should be free for you to keep as such. What they don't

:11:02.:11:07.

understand is why the Church does not support commitment, made in law

:11:07.:11:17.

and in a ceremony, which is the same difference same-sex allows.

:11:17.:11:22.

view is at the moment, civil partnerships allowed the stable,

:11:22.:11:25.

permanent and faithful relationships to be recognised in

:11:25.:11:28.

the law. A change in our understanding of marriage affects

:11:28.:11:37.

us all. For the state to change immediately, an age-old institution

:11:37.:11:41.

which has been the union of one man and one woman, without very careful

:11:41.:11:48.

thought about the consequences, then we need to think much further.

:11:48.:11:53.

His Graham James out of touch and representing and out of touch, old

:11:53.:12:01.

fashioned view? Or is this I threat to the church? I would never say

:12:01.:12:07.

Graham James is out of touch. But I do think the arguments being made

:12:07.:12:10.

marks something different. The submission this morning helps. What

:12:10.:12:16.

the Church is worried about is not so much homosexuality, it is the

:12:16.:12:20.

status of the Church. The Government is offering choice for

:12:20.:12:24.

the first time. The only choice that won't be available to anybody

:12:24.:12:30.

is to force a vicar, Coychurch to conduct a same-sex union. Except

:12:30.:12:33.

they are worried about legal challenges? I can say with

:12:34.:12:38.

authority, we the Commission do not believe the European Court would

:12:38.:12:45.

ever take that view, all case law says the opposite. And this would

:12:45.:12:51.

never support a challenge. But the issue, which is Graham James

:12:51.:12:55.

raising, should be discussed. That is the question of the change in

:12:55.:12:59.

the status of the Church. 500 years ago, the state said to the church,

:12:59.:13:04.

you are in charge of deciding what marriage is. Now parliaments are

:13:04.:13:13.

saying, we decide what marriage is. That is a reasonable thing. I don't

:13:13.:13:16.

think it has to lead to disestablishment. I do think the

:13:16.:13:23.

Church getting into a pickle about this removes, if you like, the

:13:23.:13:27.

Church's role as being a spiritual guide. Fighting to be the agent of

:13:27.:13:30.

the state, doesn't seem to be the right place for the Church of

:13:30.:13:35.

England. The Church of England was created by Parliament, Cromwell

:13:35.:13:42.

took it through the House of Lords and Parliament. We disagree on how

:13:42.:13:46.

and when the Church of England was created. At the Church of England

:13:46.:13:52.

would be cutting off its nose to spite its face ellipsis with this

:13:52.:13:55.

argument by saying it is the biggest change in 500 years. My

:13:55.:13:59.

hope they would do exactly what they did after they voted to keep

:13:59.:14:04.

slavery in place, 30 years later they apologised. Politically, will

:14:04.:14:09.

it be voted on? They have made a commitment, but with the opposition

:14:09.:14:15.

coming through? I am sure a bill will be presented. Whether it is a

:14:15.:14:21.

private member's bill from somebody, which will probably be heavily

:14:21.:14:25.

supported in the House of Commons, and similarly in the House of Lords.

:14:25.:14:29.

But we will have to deal with the bishops of both. What a warning,

:14:29.:14:35.

Graham James. We will end on that. Plans to make it tougher for

:14:35.:14:38.

relatives of those living in the UK to migrate here were announced in

:14:38.:14:41.

the Commons yesterday. The Home Secretary, Theresa May said that in

:14:41.:14:44.

2010, 18% of all non EU immigration was through the family route and

:14:44.:14:47.

she claimed that in the past sham marriages were widespread. However

:14:47.:14:51.

the debate wasn't as well attended as it might have been and some

:14:51.:14:54.

suggested a certain football game may have had something to do with

:14:54.:15:04.
:15:04.:15:05.

In 2010, family immigration accounted for approximately 18% of

:15:05.:15:10.

all non EU immigration to the UK, around 54,000 people out of 300,000.

:15:10.:15:13.

But like the rest of the immigration system it has not been

:15:13.:15:17.

regulated effectively for many years. Sham marriages have been

:15:17.:15:19.

widespread, people have been allowed to settle in Britain

:15:19.:15:23.

without being able to speak English and they have not been rules in

:15:24.:15:27.

place to stop migrants becoming a burden on the taxpayer. We are

:15:27.:15:32.

changing all of that. The UK needs a system for family migration

:15:32.:15:36.

underpinned by three simple principles. One, that those who

:15:36.:15:40.

come here should come on the basis of a genuine relationship. Two,

:15:40.:15:44.

that migrants should be able to pay their way and three, that they are

:15:44.:15:47.

able to integrate into bridges society. We agree that stronger

:15:47.:15:51.

safeguards are needed for the taxpayer of family migration. If

:15:51.:15:54.

people want to make this country their home, they should contribute

:15:54.:15:58.

and not be a burden on public funds, but it isn't clear that the vexed

:15:58.:16:04.

weighed to protect the taxpayer is to focus solely on sponsors salary.

:16:04.:16:08.

In the current economic climate, someone on 40,000 today could lose

:16:08.:16:11.

their job next month and then there's no way to protect the

:16:11.:16:14.

taxpayer. It also doesn't take account of the foreign partner's

:16:14.:16:19.

income and may have a differential impact on women. Can she explain

:16:19.:16:22.

why the Government will do a consulting on a bond which could

:16:22.:16:26.

have been used to protect the taxpayer if someone did need public

:16:26.:16:33.

funds later on? The effect of this change will be directed against the

:16:33.:16:39.

British Asian community, not illegal immigrants, settled

:16:39.:16:42.

Britain's who are here, pay their taxes and contribute to this

:16:42.:16:47.

country. I really don't believe that the British Home Secretary

:16:48.:16:52.

should be determining who a spouse of a British citizen should be

:16:53.:17:00.

based on an arbitrary limit and -- an arbitrary financial limit.

:17:00.:17:03.

congratulate the Secretary of State on bringing forward one of the most

:17:03.:17:07.

important announcements of this session. So important I'm here to

:17:07.:17:10.

ask a question rather than watching England against France! There's a

:17:10.:17:15.

lack of public confidence in our immigration system. I'm doing my

:17:15.:17:19.

bit! Is it not the case that the best way to tackle this lack of

:17:19.:17:23.

confidence is to bring these sorts of measures forward that strengthen

:17:23.:17:28.

public confidence by strong and robust Innovation? Can I thank my

:17:28.:17:30.

honourable friend for his commitment to this issue such that

:17:30.:17:37.

he is in the chamber. I notice there have been one or two levers

:17:37.:17:41.

since the statements started which may have something to do with what

:17:41.:17:47.

is happening in Ukraine! reference to the Football!

:17:47.:17:49.

Damian Green, the Minister responsible for immigration, joins

:17:49.:17:52.

us now and Chris Bryant, who's a shadow Home Office minister, is

:17:52.:17:57.

still with us. Is this purely about numbers, knocking down the number

:17:57.:18:01.

of people coming here from non EU countries so that you can hit the

:18:01.:18:06.

target you set? It does help us to hit the target, but it is mostly

:18:06.:18:10.

about two things. Fairness and cohesion. The fairness in that we

:18:10.:18:15.

don't think people think it is fair that you can come here and in the

:18:15.:18:19.

full expectation from day one that you can live off benefits. Is there

:18:19.:18:23.

evidence to show what numbers of people who are from non-EU

:18:23.:18:27.

countries marrying British Simpsons -- citizens are sponge of the

:18:27.:18:31.

state? For migration Advisory Committee on whose independent

:18:31.:18:36.

report we based the figure of 18,600 as a minimum income level

:18:36.:18:41.

say that is the level at which you stop being dependent on benefits.

:18:41.:18:49.

About 45% of those applying for marriage are coming in at below

:18:49.:18:55.

that level. That doesn't answer the question. How many people... The

:18:55.:18:58.

Government statistics I've seen say foreign-born people are less than

:18:58.:19:03.

half as likely to claim benefits as bone born here. Those are people

:19:03.:19:09.

coming here to work. You would expect them... How many? Nearly

:19:09.:19:17.

half of those who come, under the marriage route, are eligible and up

:19:18.:19:22.

at an income level where they can get income related benefits.

:19:22.:19:26.

eligible. How many of them do claim? The vast majority. You don't

:19:26.:19:31.

know. We do, we have the assessment coming up tomorrow. The amount

:19:31.:19:38.

saved to the taxpayer is �700 million. The critics will say those

:19:38.:19:40.

proposals would exclude something like two-thirds of British people

:19:41.:19:45.

from living in the UK as a couple if they marry and non EU national

:19:45.:19:53.

by setting it at that 18,700. People -- not enough people

:19:53.:19:57.

turnover that. You will be persecuting the poor.

:19:57.:20:01.

persecuting anyone. They will have to split up or they will have to

:20:01.:20:05.

move abroad. This is a new definition of persecution. You

:20:05.:20:08.

don't have the absolute right to come from anywhere in the world and

:20:08.:20:14.

on day one of arriving in Britain, live off benefits. Why are you

:20:14.:20:23.

pitching it at 18,700? Because that is the point at which people are

:20:23.:20:27.

not going to be living off income related benefits. It is an

:20:27.:20:32.

absolutely clear point. We were offered by the migration of

:20:32.:20:36.

advisory figure a higher figure. They suggested 25,500, which would

:20:36.:20:41.

be the point at which people become net economic beneficiaries. We took

:20:41.:20:44.

the low level because we thought this was fair. This is a fair

:20:44.:20:48.

policies. There's one point I do agree with. Somebody coming to this

:20:48.:20:53.

country should not expect to live off the British taxpayer. Somebody

:20:53.:20:58.

sponsoring, whether a partner or a dependant of any kind, coming into

:20:58.:21:02.

this country should be able to prove that person isn't going to be

:21:02.:21:08.

a burden on the taxpayer. You would support that level? The question I

:21:08.:21:11.

have is about the many anomalies I think this will set up an by

:21:11.:21:15.

relying only on the salary of the sponsor, whether you introduced

:21:15.:21:19.

some injustices and don't sort out the problem. In the present

:21:19.:21:23.

economic circumstances, you can be on �40,000 today and earning

:21:23.:21:27.

nothing in two weeks' time because you could be made redundant. How

:21:27.:21:31.

have you protected the taxpayer from the partner of that person?

:21:31.:21:36.

Let's say you what a British army veteran, you are disabled, you want

:21:36.:21:41.

to marry an American who is earning $100,000 a year, is going to come

:21:41.:21:46.

to the UK and the moment they arrive, they will start earning

:21:46.:21:49.

�80,000 a year but that salary is not allowed to be included. Isn't

:21:49.:21:55.

it? Christian do his homework. This doesn't apply to the military. They

:21:55.:21:59.

are covered under a different part of the immigration laws. This is

:21:59.:22:06.

changing the immigration laws... The army... The broad thrust of

:22:06.:22:10.

this, you'd do agree with. I agree with the principle, but I wonder

:22:11.:22:13.

whether there isn't a different -- different way of doing it rather

:22:13.:22:17.

than relying on salary. Somebody commits to laying down a certain

:22:17.:22:21.

amount of money, which I think some people, in particular in poorer

:22:21.:22:26.

parts of the country, might be able to raise, which then does protect

:22:26.:22:30.

the taxpayer better. You would not be able to redeem it until you had

:22:30.:22:38.

had three or five years without claiming benefits. The problem, I

:22:38.:22:43.

looked at the bond when I was doing Chris's job, the problem is that it

:22:43.:22:47.

is an expensive visa only available to the very rich and slightly dodgy

:22:47.:22:55.

who want to bring relatives in. Where would you set the Bond level?

:22:55.:22:59.

As you didn't declare which rate you would pitch it at in opposition,

:22:59.:23:04.

I will not do that now. Is this quite a brave move by the

:23:04.:23:07.

Government to come out and set a bar to achieve some of the things

:23:07.:23:12.

they want to do to stop people coming here, on day one and

:23:12.:23:17.

claiming benefits? Everybody agrees that the cheating issue is one we

:23:17.:23:22.

have to tackle. I don't think this will make a blind bit of difference.

:23:22.:23:28.

In terms of the numbers of people coming over? By the way, 18,600,

:23:28.:23:33.

the cost of the average wedding is not far short of that these days. I

:23:33.:23:37.

would be very surprised... I can see the political arguments about

:23:37.:23:42.

this and the Government wants to send a signal. But I would be very,

:23:42.:23:52.

very surprised. If it doesn't achieve what you want, which is to

:23:52.:23:56.

bring down those numbers and help economically... It will not do

:23:56.:24:06.

anything for the economics. best estimates, the Immigration

:24:06.:24:09.

Advisory Committee thinks the number of visas issues will be

:24:10.:24:15.

13,000 fewer. It is not huge numbers. The family route is a

:24:15.:24:21.

relatively small part of the Overall numbers. The vast majority

:24:21.:24:26.

are students. Sham marriages is quite a big issue. Sham marriages

:24:26.:24:33.

is a huge issue, as is forced marriages. In percentage terms,

:24:33.:24:39.

about two-thirds of immigrants come under student visas, that is why we

:24:39.:24:45.

took action... But it will harm settled Asian families here.

:24:45.:24:50.

think it will cause some anxiety. The problem is... I understand what

:24:50.:24:54.

you want to do and nobody is going to accuse the Government of bad

:24:54.:24:58.

faith, but the question is, will it make a huge difference? We will see

:24:58.:25:03.

in a couple of years. Does it send the right sort of message? The

:25:03.:25:07.

Overall message is a problem one. Employers talk about this all the

:25:07.:25:13.

time. Britain is beginning to feel like it is shut for business. We

:25:13.:25:17.

need clever people. Some of these will be husbands and wives. That is

:25:17.:25:22.

why there's a problem about the British woman in particular,

:25:22.:25:28.

because of the pay gap differential, who marries... It is only her

:25:28.:25:32.

salary that is able to be considered. She marries somebody

:25:32.:25:35.

who is earning well abroad and is intending to come to this country

:25:35.:25:41.

and has a guaranteed job in this country on way more than the 18,500

:25:41.:25:45.

the Government is considering, and that is not able to be considered.

:25:45.:25:51.

That person can come in on a work visa. It has got nothing to do with

:25:51.:25:56.

employment. If people can come here to do a graduate level job...

:25:56.:26:00.

not heard that way abroad, you know that, that is the problem. Thank

:26:00.:26:03.

you. Now, it was a certain former prime

:26:03.:26:06.

minister who spoke nostalgically about warm beer, old maids cycling

:26:06.:26:09.

to Holy Communion and long shadows on cricket grounds. Well, I can't

:26:09.:26:12.

speak for the maids or the beer, but cricket isn't all about village

:26:12.:26:16.

greens or, come to that, summer weather. It can be played anywhere,

:26:16.:26:18.

in any weather, and there's apparently a message for Cameron's

:26:18.:26:21.

"Big Society". It's being played right here, under a soggy Big Ben,

:26:21.:26:25.

today. To explain all, we have Home Office minister Crispin Blunt and

:26:25.:26:33.

none other than Sir Ian Botham. Ian Botham, what is it you're doing?

:26:33.:26:38.

How does it work? It is very simple. There are so many of these multi-

:26:38.:26:42.

games areas around the country that get used we believe at an average

:26:43.:26:47.

of one hour per day. They are dormant for long periods of time.

:26:47.:26:52.

We are trying to bring in a very raw basic level form of the game of

:26:52.:26:56.

cricket, which needs six people to play it in one of these can find

:26:56.:27:02.

areas, or a gymnasium, or village hall. It can be played anywhere.

:27:02.:27:07.

You play it in this area, you rotate all the time. Everyone Batts,

:27:07.:27:12.

everyone bulls and everyone, more importantly, umpires the game as

:27:12.:27:16.

well as fielding. It is total involvement and it is done and

:27:16.:27:20.

dusted in an hour. We're trying to get away from a lot of kids

:27:20.:27:24.

impressions of cricket, which is that you stand at fine leg, you are

:27:24.:27:28.

there for most of the day, you don't get a bowl or bat... Isn't

:27:28.:27:36.

that true?! That is the advantage of being an all-rounder! We wanted

:27:36.:27:42.

to show them that you can have this great game. You don't need pads or

:27:42.:27:46.

all of the equipment. You need a bat and a synthetic ball. It is

:27:46.:27:51.

cheap and easy to do. Be it is making it more accessible. As well

:27:51.:27:54.

as what you've said about standing there for hours waiting, you need

:27:54.:27:59.

quite a big space to do it and this will work against that. Yes. We are

:27:59.:28:01.

trying to give opportunities to people who would not have an

:28:01.:28:05.

opportunity. We have had guys who have never picked up a cricket bat

:28:05.:28:08.

and within 15 minutes they know the rules and a loving the game.

:28:08.:28:17.

that because it is seen as more of a posh sport? Possibly. But also

:28:17.:28:21.

the fact that you do need a bigger area, you need 21 other people to

:28:21.:28:25.

play and you need all of the equipment, then a couple of umpires.

:28:25.:28:30.

It takes some organisation. This doesn't. What's not to like about

:28:30.:28:36.

this? Not very much not to like! What is quite good for the Prison

:28:36.:28:40.

Service is it fits into the kind of spaces that are available in prison.

:28:40.:28:44.

Ian alighted on what I think is the real benefit, which is the umpire's

:28:44.:28:49.

role. All of the players rotate around and it is the social effect

:28:49.:28:52.

of people learning how to take responsibility for their decisions

:28:52.:28:55.

and then taking decisions themselves and receiving decisions

:28:56.:29:00.

and learning to accept them. There's a rather exciting social

:29:00.:29:04.

ethic about this, all of which sits with the ethics around cricket as

:29:04.:29:11.

well. It has a big potential benefit for offenders as well as

:29:11.:29:15.

society as a whole. You think it will go as far as helping to

:29:15.:29:25.
:29:25.:29:26.

rehabilitate offenders are? Not on its own. If you have an activity in

:29:26.:29:30.

custody, where we do insist that people make time for physical

:29:30.:29:33.

activity in custody, if you have an activity that they want to do and

:29:33.:29:38.

get engaged with, and has a social benefit in terms of relationships

:29:38.:29:41.

they make and have to make through the game, so much the better.

:29:42.:29:46.

you agree with that, Ian Botham? Can't have positive effects in the

:29:46.:29:50.

way you have described it, in terms of sharing roles and then somebody

:29:50.:29:54.

adjudicating, even in a prison environment? Year. It is unique as

:29:54.:29:58.

well. You are playing for yourself, but you are playing with five other

:29:58.:30:04.

people. You have to police it as well as play. There's no point in

:30:04.:30:07.

thinking I don't like that guy over there, so why would give him out.

:30:07.:30:12.

By the time the other five have dealt with you, you will be in a

:30:12.:30:17.

minor situation. It gives you a bit of that. It is disciplined, but it

:30:17.:30:22.

is having fun with discipline. The other thing, I would much rather

:30:22.:30:25.

get the kids off the streets and the Street corners and get them

:30:25.:30:30.

into this. It is instant. You play for yourself, you put your scoring

:30:30.:30:34.

on your iPhone or BlackBerry and it goes to the national grid and then

:30:34.:30:38.

it will come back and say you are now number two in Westminster,

:30:38.:30:43.

number 36 in Middlesex another 200 in the UK. That is how we see it

:30:43.:30:49.

going. It will build up and then you'll have regional finals. It

:30:49.:30:54.

will expand and once they get the bug, the kids will go for it.

:30:54.:30:58.

think it will take off in that way? Not being a cricket expert myself,

:30:58.:31:03.

it is interesting seeing you defining it in that terms. I think

:31:03.:31:07.

it will. I believe it will end up being international, not just in

:31:07.:31:11.

this country. There's talk about it in Australia already, there's a lot

:31:11.:31:16.

of interest over there. I think it is magnificent, everybody wants to

:31:16.:31:26.
:31:26.:31:28.

Presumably sport is played in prison, why would this make a

:31:28.:31:34.

particular difference? It can adapt to the kind of spaces available for

:31:34.:31:38.

physical activity in prison. Then you have the rules and

:31:38.:31:43.

responsibility so round it. That's why I think it will work in custody.

:31:43.:31:47.

Every prison is different, and every prison governor or have to

:31:47.:31:51.

make a decision on what resources they have available to spend and

:31:51.:31:54.

whether it stacks up against the other things he wants the prisoners

:31:54.:32:00.

to do. But what is more interesting is the wider benefit, getting

:32:00.:32:05.

cricket in two parts of the community. As a cricket fan, I

:32:05.:32:11.

appreciate that possibility. Before you go off, Ian Botham, slightly

:32:11.:32:16.

related, will England beat South Africa in the test? Yes. That was

:32:16.:32:21.

nice and short. Crispin Blunt, this is unrelated but it is the current

:32:21.:32:26.

story, your reaction to the same- sex marriages and the Church's

:32:26.:32:31.

response? The coverage I have seen on the position of the Church of

:32:31.:32:38.

England is they seem very split on this issue. I was speaking this

:32:38.:32:42.

morning on this. The Government have come forward with proposals

:32:42.:32:47.

designed to protect the position of all the churches, they will be

:32:47.:32:51.

prescribed from offering same-sex marriage. I think that position may

:32:51.:32:56.

have some legal difficulties of its own. I don't think anybody would

:32:56.:33:01.

tolerate a position where religions are being forced to conduct same-

:33:01.:33:08.

sex marriages, it has to be a matter for them. The Government is

:33:08.:33:12.

proposing the state recognised the quality of marriage, and inequality

:33:12.:33:18.

is not acceptable. One thing I want to say about the England and South

:33:18.:33:23.

Africa series - something to think about - you have the two best

:33:23.:33:26.

bowlers, Dale Steyn and Jimmy Anderson and they will be competing

:33:27.:33:34.

against each other. That will be fascinating in itself.

:33:34.:33:37.

Our guest of the day Sir Trevor Philips, is standing down from his

:33:37.:33:40.

job as chair of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission this year.

:33:40.:33:44.

The Government are taking the opportunity to "refocus" the role.

:33:44.:33:47.

But that's not the only thing that they're changing when it comes to

:33:47.:33:56.

equalities legislation. Here's Adam. The nine so-called protected

:33:56.:33:59.

characteristics, discrimination based on any of them is illegal

:33:59.:34:05.

under the qualities act of 2010. But the Government say they will

:34:05.:34:09.

repeal some of that legislation, such as employment tribunals losing

:34:09.:34:16.

the power in ordering businesses to make changes to their whole

:34:16.:34:20.

organisation over one case. Businesses will no longer be

:34:21.:34:25.

responsible if an employee is harassed by a third party.

:34:25.:34:28.

Employees will lose the right to request information from their

:34:29.:34:34.

employers if they think they have been discriminated against. That is

:34:34.:34:39.

a step and the right direction for entrepreneur, James Caan. He says

:34:39.:34:44.

most cases of false claims brought by employees affected by the

:34:44.:34:48.

recession. Ilott then go because the business is declining and you

:34:48.:34:53.

have to reduce costs. When you look to let the individual go because

:34:53.:34:57.

she wants the company to survive, the employee will go to a lawyer

:34:57.:35:02.

and come up with some reason saying, you're letting me go because it is

:35:02.:35:07.

not because the business is not there, it is because of my colour,

:35:07.:35:12.

Mike Reid, my race and religion. one of his companies, the reason is

:35:12.:35:18.

say they have a diverse workforce is nothing to do with equality laws.

:35:18.:35:21.

With the freedom of Labour, increased individuals coming in

:35:21.:35:25.

from different cultures it adds benefit to the economy. I think it

:35:25.:35:29.

is something that has been wonderful as a company. We have

:35:29.:35:34.

done it without the legislation. The public sector will be affected,

:35:34.:35:38.

the Government is considering whether to scrap the law that says

:35:38.:35:43.

all public bodies, such as schools and hospitals have a general duty

:35:43.:35:48.

to foster a quality, which would be a big change. All of this appals

:35:48.:35:54.

Labour. I think it is death by a 1000 cuts of a quality protection

:35:54.:35:59.

in this country. Whether it is repealing some of the existing

:35:59.:36:05.

legislation, or not going ahead with things we expected, light

:36:06.:36:09.

legislating to outlaw age discrimination, watering down

:36:09.:36:12.

provisions and making it more difficult for employees and

:36:12.:36:16.

consumers to exercise their right and get support. The Commission is

:36:16.:36:22.

reviewing the role and funding of the Equality and Human Rights

:36:22.:36:27.

Commission, the watchdog that oversees all this.

:36:27.:36:37.
:36:37.:36:38.

And we're joined now by the Conservative MP, Nadine Zahawi. I

:36:38.:36:47.

think I elevated to to Sir Trevor Phillips. I am just a common man.

:36:47.:36:52.

This is nothing to do with equalities laws, what do you say

:36:52.:36:57.

about that? I wish that was true. It never occurs to that individual

:36:57.:37:02.

who said that. The situation we are in now, is different to 20 years

:37:02.:37:07.

ago, when discrimination of various kinds, not just race, but gender

:37:07.:37:12.

and disability will comment. The law isn't the be all and end all,

:37:12.:37:16.

but it changes the atmosphere and the climate. Without the law we

:37:16.:37:20.

would still be seeing the kind of discrimination we saw in the 80s.

:37:20.:37:23.

That would mean people who currently contribute to companies

:37:23.:37:27.

like that one would feel shut out of the labour market, and probably

:37:27.:37:31.

would be. They were major changes in terms of the way people were

:37:31.:37:38.

employed, and the workforce as it looks now. Do you think, although

:37:38.:37:42.

this is a well-motivated, it is a burden on business? It is promoted

:37:42.:37:47.

by a lot of noisy people who don't employed any body, and don't work

:37:47.:37:52.

with employers. As a matter of fact, this proposition, it is all very

:37:52.:37:58.

difficult and so on, over six years since the Equality and Human Rights

:37:58.:38:04.

Commission has been in business, Dino amid times we have prosecuted?

:38:04.:38:10.

Tell us. Three times. And we have settled it before going to court.

:38:10.:38:16.

So the idea of employees being forced into court all the time is

:38:16.:38:21.

nonsense. The Government should remove the anxiety small employers

:38:21.:38:27.

have about an. People from ethnic minorities and disabled people. And

:38:27.:38:34.

particularly women of child-bearing age. Your average hairdresser

:38:34.:38:38.

thinks they will run into trouble. But there is no possibility if they

:38:38.:38:42.

can do themselves sensibly. It would be great if we could help

:38:42.:38:48.

people do with it. Do you accept that? It is the rhetoric that has

:38:48.:38:53.

frightened employers into thinking it's legislation and the qualities

:38:53.:38:56.

legislation that will make it difficult for them to hire and fire

:38:56.:39:02.

people, for example? I think he has a good point, there is a lot of

:39:02.:39:07.

misconception around employing women. As soon as they fall

:39:07.:39:13.

pregnant there is an enormous additional cost to small businesses.

:39:13.:39:18.

There has been a piece in the Times, going over the numbers. When you

:39:18.:39:25.

talk to small businesses, there is this urban myth these things cost

:39:25.:39:33.

an enormous amount of money. On the other hand, when you do conducts

:39:33.:39:38.

surveys, and round tribunals, which is a different area, when they feel

:39:38.:39:42.

the cost of tribunals, the time it takes that maybe there is better

:39:42.:39:48.

ways of doing it. Trevor says not many people are dealt with in that

:39:48.:39:54.

way? That is the concern, rather than cases coming to? It has

:39:54.:39:59.

nothing to do with the qualities legislation, it is sorting out the

:39:59.:40:03.

machinery of the employment tribunal system. Precisely, and the

:40:03.:40:07.

settlement agreement Vince Cable was talking about is positive. An

:40:07.:40:11.

employer can offer a settlement to an employee, if they do not accept

:40:11.:40:17.

a one to go to the tribunal, the tribunal won't take that settlement

:40:17.:40:20.

into account. It is better and faster than the compromise

:40:20.:40:25.

agreement we have now, which is suited to larger employers. Do you

:40:25.:40:29.

accept the legislation is not a burden on business, not a

:40:29.:40:34.

significant burden? Some of it is, because some of the conversation we

:40:34.:40:41.

have had back, for example, the third party discrimination is the

:40:41.:40:46.

responsibility of the employer. So some of it is. The work Trevor has

:40:46.:40:51.

done is incredibly valuable, but to refocus the organisation and to

:40:51.:40:55.

tighten its budget is the right thing to do. This requirement on

:40:55.:41:00.

public bodies to have an equality duty, to make sure anything they do

:41:00.:41:06.

has some equality duty in it, was described by death by 1000 cuts

:41:06.:41:09.

because the Government is repealing it. Is it necessary to have it

:41:09.:41:16.

there? It is, I wish the Government would use it more effectively.

:41:16.:41:20.

Their case for deficit reduction would be aided if they used it more

:41:20.:41:25.

effectively. We have done an assessment of the 2010 spending

:41:25.:41:29.

review and published a few weeks ago. One of the things we

:41:29.:41:34.

discovered, the Government tried very hard and they did do very well.

:41:34.:41:41.

But one of the things that was interesting, people premium, 2.5

:41:41.:41:45.

billion a year, it did not do a gender impact assessment. If they

:41:45.:41:49.

had, what would have been revealed is the real problem is not all poor

:41:49.:41:55.

children. It is mainly boys of a particular ethnic group. They could

:41:55.:42:03.

have cut the bill of the pupil premium by 50% had they done a

:42:03.:42:07.

proper assessment. Also, it is so the Government makes better

:42:07.:42:11.

decisions. What is happening now is the Government is, in a way,

:42:11.:42:15.

because it wants to receive -- wave a flag on how it is helping

:42:16.:42:20.

businesses, it is taking away the tool to make better decisions and

:42:21.:42:26.

spend less of the public's hard- earned money. Do you think the

:42:26.:42:29.

Government has an agenda that it basically wants to abolish the

:42:29.:42:34.

Commission? Not true. The Government wants to focus the

:42:35.:42:41.

Commission on the strategic aims, tighten the board. Bring on board

:42:41.:42:45.

members that have a business background, so there is a closer

:42:45.:42:49.

understanding and focus it on the things it does really well. Take it

:42:49.:42:56.

away from conciliation services, which is a necessary.

:42:56.:43:02.

As the violence in Syria continues, the UN reports say Syrian troops

:43:02.:43:09.

have tortured children and use them as human shields on tanks. The UN

:43:09.:43:14.

Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon is concerned that the violence has

:43:14.:43:19.

intensified across Syria over the past couple of days. William Hague

:43:19.:43:23.

is visiting Pakistan, but made the statements and said military

:43:23.:43:27.

intervention was not being considered and there was hope for

:43:27.:43:32.

some kind of peaceful transition. Each day reports emerge of savage

:43:32.:43:37.

crimes. The Syrian military are bombarding towns with heavy

:43:37.:43:41.

weaponry, and then releasing militia groups to murder civilians

:43:41.:43:47.

in their homes. It is reminiscent of the Balkans in the 1990s. Two

:43:47.:43:53.

weeks ago in Houla, 108 civilians died in this manner including

:43:53.:44:01.

children. A similar atrocity was committed last week in Qubair. Un

:44:01.:44:05.

monitors attempting to report on these events have been shot at and

:44:05.:44:13.

obstructed. These grotesque crimes have eliminated to the world, the

:44:13.:44:18.

nature of Syria and the regime. It is to break the spirit of

:44:18.:44:23.

opposition in Syria and tried to reassert control. This is as futile

:44:23.:44:28.

as it is morally reprehensible. By branding their opponents terrace

:44:28.:44:32.

and using tanks, the regime is driving Syrians to take up arms to

:44:32.:44:38.

defend their homes and by singling out particular communities it is

:44:38.:44:44.

inflaming sectarian tension. We are joined by Lord Ashdown. William

:44:44.:44:47.

Hague has said there are similarities with the Balkans,

:44:48.:44:54.

Bosnia, military militia killing civilians. Do you agree with that?

:44:54.:45:00.

Yes, up to a point. I know there. He is trying to make, it is a valid

:45:00.:45:08.

point, there are horrors going on there. But I suspect dark deeds are

:45:08.:45:12.

going on which both sides. In Bosnia we could have acted, but we

:45:12.:45:18.

chose not to, foolishly. In Syria, I think we cannot act, even though

:45:18.:45:23.

we would like to. The reason is, we cannot get unanimity in the

:45:23.:45:27.

Security Council, and that is essential. We cannot act without

:45:27.:45:34.

that. But on a humanitarian basis? No, the truth is the days when the

:45:34.:45:38.

West was powerful enough to treat the Security Council with cavalier

:45:38.:45:43.

regard are over. I think there will be many who will be pleased about

:45:43.:45:53.
:45:53.:46:00.

In Libya, we played very canny diplomacy. We made sure those who

:46:00.:46:04.

led the charge were the regional voices, especially the Arabs.

:46:04.:46:08.

Secondly, we concentrated on humanitarian intervention, to save

:46:08.:46:13.

those suffering rather than regime change. This time it seems to me we

:46:13.:46:16.

have gone back to the old practice of making it easiest for the

:46:16.:46:20.

Russians to cast their veto by making this led by the West and

:46:20.:46:27.

making it about regime change. The result is that we've got ourselves

:46:27.:46:33.

into an impasse we did not need to get into. But we are where we are

:46:33.:46:38.

now and we have to decide what we do next. That is how we got here.

:46:38.:46:41.

Do you think that if the Government and other governments had played it

:46:41.:46:45.

differently, the Russians would be on board in some way to put

:46:45.:46:53.

pressure on? That is a legitimate question. I think clever modern

:46:53.:46:57.

diplomacy is about making it as difficult as possible for the

:46:58.:47:04.

Russians to disagree. And the Chinese. If we had had this led by

:47:04.:47:09.

Arab forces, especially Turkey, and if we had had it about humanitarian

:47:09.:47:12.

intervention rather than removal of the one from the Russians had got,

:47:12.:47:15.

we would have made it more difficult for them to cut their

:47:15.:47:23.

veto. It would have been... Do you believe in the Kofi Annan plan?

:47:23.:47:32.

think it is over now. The really dangerous situation we have got

:47:32.:47:35.

ourselves into, we need to learn the lessons of Libya. We are living

:47:36.:47:40.

in a different age. We need to be more canny about our diplomacy. It

:47:40.:47:43.

was led by the Americans, not by William Hague, but it was still

:47:43.:47:48.

wrong. They did talk about regime change with Colonel Gaddafi. No one

:47:48.:47:57.

ever said he would stay end any post. If I may gently suggest to

:47:57.:48:00.

you that you are wrong. We deliberately did not say it was

:48:00.:48:04.

about regime change. The Security Council resolution did not go that

:48:04.:48:09.

far. We were careful to say it is about humanitarian intervention.

:48:09.:48:12.

Everybody knew that at the end of that process Gaddafi had to go, but

:48:12.:48:17.

we started with a humanitarian intervention. What about this

:48:17.:48:20.

Russian suggestion for an international conference? Is that

:48:20.:48:23.

them just playing with the international community or do you

:48:23.:48:28.

think there's a genuine mood in Russia because of the terrible

:48:28.:48:33.

images from Homs and Houla? Although they will not come out

:48:33.:48:36.

blatantly against their ally, they do want something to be done and of

:48:36.:48:40.

course also said Iran should be part of that. I think it is playing

:48:40.:48:44.

for time. When you're in these situations, you have to go every

:48:44.:48:48.

last mile for peace. We have to take them at base value. It would

:48:48.:48:53.

be foolish to reject that option, but I guess the Russians are trying

:48:53.:49:00.

to play for time. Where we are now, the impacts can only be broken when

:49:00.:49:04.

the Russians change their position. The danger of this impasse is not

:49:04.:49:09.

just that the killing goes on in Syria, it is that this develops and

:49:09.:49:12.

to work wider war which engulfs the whole of the Middle East and that

:49:12.:49:18.

is the danger. What would tip that over the edge? We've seen these

:49:19.:49:23.

dreadful massacres. Lebanon. When it starts to spread into Lebanon...

:49:23.:49:29.

You now have Saudi Arabia arming the rebels. Many of these are now

:49:29.:49:34.

Sunni, Shea conflicts within Syria. If that tips over into Lebanon, a

:49:34.:49:40.

widening conflict is a real possibility. Matt Seaton called the

:49:40.:49:47.

first and second world wars the European civil wars. -- mousy tone.

:49:47.:49:52.

In order for that not to happen, his William Hague right, if it is

:49:52.:49:56.

how you interpret it, to suggest that if the best efforts might fail,

:49:56.:50:00.

that they will have to consider other options? Do you see that as

:50:00.:50:04.

in suggesting that military intervention may at some point be

:50:04.:50:09.

necessary? In diplomacy you never say what you are not going to do.

:50:09.:50:13.

We all know that absent a shift in the Russian position, and in the

:50:13.:50:18.

Chinese position, a military intervention by the West would be

:50:18.:50:21.

unfeasible in the present circumstances. If we are clever, we

:50:21.:50:25.

might try to resuscitate the Arab voice, bring Turkey into this. If

:50:25.:50:30.

we could put Turkey up front, there would be different. But you are

:50:31.:50:34.

straight back into Sunni and Shia factions. From the impasse we are

:50:35.:50:39.

now in, there are very few ways out of this absent the Russians

:50:39.:50:41.

realising they are not doing themselves any good by supporting

:50:41.:50:48.

Assad. Pretty gloomy and bleak. certainly is. That is international

:50:48.:50:51.

politics for you. Another day, another former prime minister in

:50:51.:50:56.

the dock. It must be the Leveson Inquiry. This morning it was the

:50:56.:50:59.

turn of John Major who acknowledged he had been given a rough ride by

:50:59.:51:02.

the press when he was in power. He was asked about a lunch he had

:51:02.:51:06.

before Rupert Murdoch -- with Rupert Murdoch just before the 1994

:51:06.:51:14.

election. It became apparent in discussions that Mr Murdoch said

:51:14.:51:18.

that he really didn't like a European policies. This was no

:51:18.:51:24.

surprise to me. He didn't like our European policies and he wished me

:51:24.:51:29.

to change our European policies. If we couldn't change our European

:51:29.:51:33.

policies, his papers could not and would not support the Conservative

:51:33.:51:38.

government. As I recall, he used the word we when referring to his

:51:38.:51:43.

newspapers. He did not make the usual nod towards editorial

:51:43.:51:48.

independence. It is not very often someone sits in front of a prime

:51:48.:51:51.

minister answers to a Prime Minister, I would like you to

:51:51.:51:57.

change of policy and if you don't change your policy, my organisation

:51:57.:52:02.

can't support you. People may often think that, they may often react

:52:02.:52:06.

that way, but it is not often do that point is put to a prime

:52:06.:52:09.

minister in that fashion. James Landale has been following the

:52:09.:52:15.

day's events. What did you make of what John Major said? It was very

:52:15.:52:21.

interesting if. That excerpt was all about a meeting in the early

:52:21.:52:25.

part of 1997 about one of those crucial meetings between a prime

:52:25.:52:29.

minister and a media baron. There's quite a heavy debate about whether

:52:29.:52:33.

or not John Major is accusing Rupert Murdoch of giving the wrong

:52:33.:52:38.

evidence to the inquiry. Mr Murdoch said at one point in his evidence,

:52:38.:52:42.

I've never asked anything from a prime minister and here is John

:52:42.:52:46.

Major saying he asked me to change my policy. Others say what Rupert

:52:46.:52:50.

Murdoch was referring to was corporate favours, very specific

:52:50.:52:56.

context they were discussing the proposed acquisition of the times

:52:56.:53:00.

with Margaret Thatcher. The other interesting point he has made his

:53:00.:53:04.

he has given a very, very strong warning to the current generation

:53:04.:53:08.

of politicians. He said he failed to reform the media, he should have

:53:08.:53:13.

done, he said it was a missed opportunity. He said that today's

:53:13.:53:16.

politicians are in the last chance saloon, they have to act, they

:53:17.:53:19.

can't not act simply because they might want to curry favour with the

:53:19.:53:23.

media baron in the future. Picking up one of your points about

:53:23.:53:27.

conflicting evidence. Two perspectives. Let's listen to

:53:27.:53:32.

Gordon Brown also giving evidence about a conversation or not with

:53:32.:53:38.

Rupert Murdoch. You are relying on second-hand conversations that are

:53:38.:53:42.

reported by people who are not participants in the events. I don't

:53:42.:53:46.

take that as a serious comment about what happened. Were your

:53:46.:53:50.

aides involved in using the media to force or attempt to force Mr

:53:50.:53:56.

Blair's resignation in 2006? would hope not. Were they involved?

:53:56.:54:02.

I would hope not. I've got no evidence of that. What do you make

:54:02.:54:09.

of that form of words used by Gordon Brown? I would hope not.

:54:09.:54:13.

exactly a denial. No. There's a fair amount of documentary evidence

:54:13.:54:19.

of the scale of the divisions between Camp Blair and camp Brown.

:54:19.:54:24.

That claim was met with a certain degree of incredulity outside the

:54:24.:54:27.

court and within Westminster yesterday. I was referring to

:54:27.:54:31.

something not played in that clip, but about declaring war on Rupert

:54:31.:54:35.

Murdoch and this was about the allegiance which by those News

:54:35.:54:38.

Corporation papers. What has the media made of that evidence from

:54:38.:54:47.

Gordon Brown? They believe that there's a certain degree of history

:54:47.:54:52.

being revised. The media have that view of a lot of the evidence given

:54:52.:54:56.

to the live as an inquiry. A lot of it is about a lot of things that

:54:56.:54:59.

happened in the past. John Major has been trying to give his account

:54:59.:55:04.

of what happened during the ERM exit. One of the side bits of the

:55:05.:55:08.

Leveson Inquiry has been setting the record straight, getting their

:55:08.:55:13.

line across at on stuff which is already out there in all the

:55:13.:55:17.

biographies that have been written since then. If you read Alastair

:55:17.:55:21.

Campbell's diaries, they would give it slightly different account,

:55:21.:55:24.

perhaps, a different emphasis to that which was given by Gordon

:55:24.:55:30.

Brown yesterday. Yes. Difference in opinion is slightly contrary.

:55:30.:55:35.

Anyway, I will leave it there. Thank you.

:55:35.:55:40.

Let's talk about the weather. Over to Adam outside.

:55:40.:55:45.

For once it is actually a nice day if it was February! I have got an

:55:45.:55:48.

umbrella in case it rains and a couple of guests as well. We have

:55:48.:55:53.

got Peter Gibbs, the busy weather presenter, and then Page, a

:55:53.:55:58.

pollster. Is it really that wet? Yes. We have unrealistic

:55:58.:56:02.

expectations of a British summer. British farmers are cool and often

:56:02.:56:07.

quite work. It has not like this everywhere. I've just come back

:56:07.:56:11.

from the north of Scotland and I've got a bit of a suntan. I flew back

:56:11.:56:14.

on the same plane as Danny Alexander. It was a low-cost

:56:14.:56:20.

airline. Does he have a suntan as well? Slightly. Will there be any

:56:20.:56:24.

break-in this cloud? Will it dry up? A glimmer of hope for the end

:56:24.:56:27.

of the month for southern and eastern parts of the UK. It should

:56:27.:56:35.

get a bit warmer, but then the rain sets in across the north-west. I

:56:35.:56:38.

think long-range weather forecasts are like political forecasts, they

:56:38.:56:43.

can be a bit fraught. Is this just weather or is something do so --

:56:43.:56:47.

specific making it this way it? has been the jet stream. It has

:56:47.:56:51.

died south over the last few weeks. It wasn't that long ago that we

:56:51.:56:55.

were getting temperatures in the mid-twenties, at the end of May. We

:56:55.:56:58.

have short-term memories! You have got something that looks quite

:56:58.:57:03.

scientific. At Ipsos MORI we went back and crunched the numbers to

:57:03.:57:06.

see if we could find any relationship between the amount of

:57:06.:57:10.

rain and how people are happy with the Government. The answer is

:57:10.:57:14.

there's not much relationship. It seems to depend more on what the

:57:14.:57:19.

Government does rather than acts of God in terms of how it is doing.

:57:19.:57:22.

Maybe on election days, a lot of rain might favour one party over

:57:23.:57:27.

another, depending on how motivated their supporters are to vote. But

:57:27.:57:32.

over all, no. We are a bit stoic as Brits. We are used to this weather,

:57:32.:57:37.

we just get on with it. You are talking to somebody from Glasgow!

:57:37.:57:42.

Is there any idea that bad weather reflects badly on politicians. It

:57:42.:57:46.

is raining and I hate David Cameron! I don't think there's any

:57:46.:57:53.

evidence of that. For last time he was as unpopular as he is now, he's

:57:53.:57:56.

not as unpopular as some predecessors, but you will remember

:57:56.:58:00.

there were floods in Yorkshire and he went off to Rwanda. That was

:58:00.:58:04.

going to Rwanda rather than the floods, that was when he was in

:58:04.:58:07.

opposition. Voters judge their politicians on their basic

:58:07.:58:11.

competence and not the weather. think I just felt a spot of rain!

:58:11.:58:15.

Back to you in the hot, dry, warm studio.

:58:15.:58:21.

All right! I got the message! There don't seem to be any

:58:21.:58:23.

relations between what people feel about their politicians on the

:58:23.:58:28.

weather, is the wet weather getting you down? It is fantastic. Because

:58:28.:58:32.

politics is dull, what do we retreat to? The weather. Anybody

:58:32.:58:36.

else in the world would think, what are these people on? It is

:58:36.:58:41.

important! I am extremely interested. If it matters to your

:58:41.:58:46.

garden, that is a thing... I grew up in a country where it was either

:58:46.:58:51.

hot and wet or hot and dry. That is really dull weather for top thank

:58:51.:58:54.

you. That's all for today. Thanks to our

:58:54.:58:57.

guests. The One O'Clock News is starting over on BBC One now. I'll

:58:57.:59:00.

be here with Andrew at 11.30am tomorrow with all the big political

:59:00.:59:03.

Jo Coburn is joined by Trevor Phillips, chair of the equality and human rights commission. They look at gay marriage and the church's announcement that they could not support it. Other guests include the Labour MP, Chris Bryant and the Bishop of Norwich, Graeme James.

Plus, a discussion on the latest violence in Syria with Paddy Ashdown, and Ian Botham is trying to get more young people involved in cricket.


Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS