17/07/2012 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 17/07/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Good afternoon and welcome to the Daily Politics. Just ten days to go


to the greatest show on earth! But big questions still remain about


the security arrangements for the Olympic Games. The chief executive


of G4S is about to start answering questions from MPs. He could be in


for a rough ride after his firm admitted they had failed to recruit


enough security staff. But ministers warn that now is not the


time for a witch hunt. Could the Olympics provide the shot in the


arm that the British economy needs? The Government hopes it will but


new data shows the economy is still struggling to get back on track.


Can the coalition last until 2015? Can Ed Miliband move further ahead


in the polls? It is the end of term, so we will be putting these


questions and more to three of Westminster's big hitters. And,


what do members of the political elite like to read on their


holidays? We'll be talking to the man who has drawn up the definitive


reading list for MPs. All that in the next hour. The final hour of


the Daily Politics until September. Yes, we're getting ready for a


fantastic British summer: We are predicting endless sunshine, Team


GB will be topping the medal table, and the economy will return to


robust growth. Hold on, that can't be right! Anyway, maybe our panel


of MPs today can offer some slightly better predictions for


what is in store as we head in to the summer recess. They are the


Culture Minister, Ed Vaizey, the Deputy Leader of the Liberal


Democrats, Simon Hughes, and the Shadow Energy Secretary, Caroline


Flint. Welcome to you all. I guess we should fire the starting gun by


talking about the Olympics. With only ten days to go, serious


questions are being asked about the security arrangements for the Games.


The chief executive of G4S is just starting to give evidence to the


Home Affairs Select Committee. He's answering questions from MPs after


it emerged that his company had failed to recruit enough security


personnel. We'll bring you a bit of what he says later in the show.


First though, the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, says the row over


G4S won't compromise security. is a problem that is being rapidly


sorted out. The difficulties really got going round about the turn of


the year when we had to double up on the number of security guards.


It was always expected the Army would come and we would have the


large military contingent. My information is they're working very


well with G4S and they are delivering the safe security


service. Well, the Home Secretary, Theresa May, was called to the


Commons yesterday to answer an urgent question about all this. She


started by responding to a series of media allegations made about the


G4S row. First it was reported that ministers knew there would be a


shortfall in security staff last year. This is untrue. HMI see


reported at my request of LOCOG security preparations last


September. He reported again in February and reported that LOCOG


had plans in place to deliver the required number of security


personnel. No specific problems were identified with G4S scheduling.


No minister for crime and security attended meetings in which he was


told there was a security staff shortage. G4S repeatedly assured us


they would overshoot their targets. They have failed to deliver their


contractual obligations. We have the finest military personnel in


the world. Troops who are willing, ready and able to stepping reckon


she calls. We can be sure of their professionalism in delivering a


safe and secure Olympic Games. Every mum once the Games to be an


outstanding success. -- everyone. We need things back on track after


the shambles. Can the Home Secretary tellers how many people


she expects G4S to provide? -- tell us. They say it will be 13,000.


Based say the vast majority are still in process. -- they save. The


Deputy Mayor said, the issue was flagged up repeatedly by both the


NPA and the mayor's office for more than a year, two G4S directly, the


Olympic Security Board and the Home Office. They have been discussing


the short for for nine days. Last Monday, the Home Secretary told her


she was confident our partners will deliver. -- short ball. It is


incomprehensible that monitoring was that poor that no one told her


until Wednesday. How on earth could the Minister responsible for


delivering a Olympics security be the only person not to know? I have


explained week commissioned reports into their preparedness. They


contained recommendations which were acted on. Subject to acting on


those recommendations, it was on track to deliver security personnel.


Last Wednesday, G4S told us they would be unable to deliver their


obligations. That was Theresa May asking questions. Ed Vaizey, it all


seems to come down to timing. Is it conceivable that Theresa May only


really knew there was a problem last Wednesday? One can examine the


timings. We need a safe and secure Olympic Games. Theresa May and


LOCOG have made a decision to bring in defence personnel. That is in


order to deliver a safe and secure Olympic Games. With all the


contingencies for the Olympic Games, there are contingencies in place.


You keep monitoring developments as we approach them. You wait. You say,


there might be a problem here. You only call on your contingency when


it gets to a point way you might need to. There will always be


defence personnel helping the Olympics. We have just called in it


additional personnel. It still does not answer the question where


Yvette Cooper says it is incomprehensible that Theresa May


only knew there was a problem last Wednesday. A senior member of the


Olympic Security Board was told about this. The question is, at


what time to call on the contingency? The problem is such


that now is the time to call it in. The problem is now of a nature way


you need to call on the contingency. I understand what you are saying.


The key point is that on Wednesday the decision was made. It you have


answered that marvellously and comprehensively. People should have


known about this if there were concerns last year and the


Government was doing its job properly. If it was monitoring the


progress of how many people were being recruited, we would not have


been in this position. It depends on what G4S were telling the


Government and organising committee. They are the second largest company


in the world - the largest security company in the world. They have one


in 10 of the contracts. They should be able to do with good job. They


are a reasonable contract had to deliver. I know from constituents


and others they do not always do a good job. The really crucial issue


is that the Government right fully, it would not have mattered if it


were the Labour government or a coalition government, takes action


to employ it extra people. You are saying the Home Office basically


can put its feet up. Let's answer the question. Theresa May regularly


asked the questions and was given information. It seems to me that


first and foremost, thank goodness for the police and troops who are


going to step in. A number of troops are coming back from


Afghanistan. They will step in. They will do there. We are told by


the Home Office and Theresa May they were reassured. I wonder if


they were asking the right questions. What I would have asked


about is, how many people have you got on the books out of the total?


How many people have turned up for the training to carry out the


security job? In some cases, only 50% of people were turning up for


training. For something as big as this commit you would have a team


of people acting out what would be the scenarios in terms of things


going wrong. You need to ask specifics. It seems Theresa May was


not asking specifics. I was not there and did not see the questions


that were asked. Ministers and officials and the organising


committee would regularly have asked these questions. You cannot


imagine he was not passed on a regular basis how many people had


come to recruitment, a clearance... My judgment is that they did not


tell the truth about what was going on. That is fair enough. They


waited till the very last minute to say, I am sorry, we cannot do it.


If you ask the questions and those are the answers you get. BBC Surrey


understands that only 20 G4S staff turned up when 300 where rigid


contracted for various duties. Parties according to the Police


Federation in Surrey. -- were originally contracted. It is worth


saying that we have taken this decision in the interests of the


security of the Games. It was taken in order to secure the Games. The


contingency was in place. You have a contingency because if things go


wrong, you can correct that. We can talk about who knew what. One of


the key problems was the software used by G4S to Schedule the


appearance of security guards. That is where the problem started. You


move along this process and the closer to Olympics you get, when it


comes to a point when it is essential to make the games safe


and secure of, you take that decision. All of us, whatever our


politics, support the most fantastic project. It is, for


London, the most fantastic thing probably we will ever get in our


lifetimes. The Army and the police will step in and do us proud.


sure. Well, if the Government was hoping the Olympics would be a


distraction from the wider problems of the economy, they may be in for


a rather nasty shock. Yesterday, the IMF downgraded the Britain's


growth prospects saying that it would grow by just 0.2% this year


and 1.4% in 2013. Back in the spring they had forecast the


economy to grow by 0.8% this year and 2% in 2013. Because growth has


fallen in the last two quarters Britain is currently in recession,


although the Ernst and Young ITEM Club has forecast we will return to


growth in the second half of the year. However they argue that


because of the current recession, growth over the course of the year


is expected to be zero. What is more, the National Institute for


Economic and Social Research published figures last week showing


that the UK is trapped in the longest slump in modern history,


longer even than that of the 1930s. Today, however, the Government will


point to light at the end of the tunnel. This morning's inflation


figures show the Consumer Price Index falling to 2.4% in June, down


from 2.8% in May and lower than most analysts had expected. With us


now is Jonathan Portes from the National Institute of Economic and


Social Research. How concerned should be paid by this forecast?


The IMF is bringing its forecast into line with those and others


have had for some time. The economy is essentially flat. We are not


really learning anything new. The economy has essentially been flat


for the last 18 months. We have all speculated that would continue for


some time. Why has recovery been so slow? The Government titled fiscal


policy too fast. The IMF recognises that. Yesterday it said that an


appropriate place of tightening would be at half the pace the


Government did. Second of course, the wider economic environment -


the global environment - has also been downbeat. People in the


eurozone have made similar policy mistakes. We have also had a period


of high oil prices. Really the deficit reduction plan has not been


the right way to get recovery. IMF has downgraded forecasts for


the whole eurozone. It has predicted Britain will grow faster


than the eurozone. Some of the numbers are looking very good.


Inflation has come down. It is hoped unemployment figures will be


geared as well. We are creating private sector jobs. We are cutting


income tax and corporation tax. There is a lot of good news going


on in terms of the economy. We all know the global crisis. That is not


what was said. The IMF has continually supported the deficit


reduction plan. We are borrowing at around 1.7%. That is one of the


lowest among developing countries. Let me put that back to Jonathan.


That has been one thing the Government has shouted most loudly


about. Our debt is affordable. We're not having to pay super high


interest rates. That is what has kept Britain that lining but not to


It is very good news that we can borrow at low rates. We can now


borrow at the lowest real interest rates in recorded economic history.


We have a lot of unemployed people, and a housing shortage. It is not


rocket science. Would that be a policy would support?


Government yesterday announced a spending planned on railways. We


start now, it is a five-year plan, and it is the most capital


effective way of getting the economy going. There will be an


announcement after the summer holidays on housing. Jonathan's


main critique was that we were too tough in what we did in 2010. At


the time, all the advice was that it you are not tough in the UK,


you're likely to be having the same problems as your neighbours. That


was wrong? No, that was the advice that other countries were going


down the plughole. There have been some adverse consequences but we


have been gradually pulling through. If we gradually begin to build, if


we continue to see unemployment drop, keep inflation down as well,


we will be in a much better place. But we were promised the deficit


reduction plan, the cuts were going to create better outcomes and we


have not seen that. Some of these decisions about improving railway


lines were decisions taken by the last government. They were stopped


and delayed, and now rehashed. Many of these will not happen until


after the next general election, and this is what is worrying. We


could repeat the tax, we could build more homes, and helped to get


more unemployed people back into work.


The Alistair Darling plan would not have deferred that much at the


point we are at now, do you agree with that? The forecast before the


election was to cut the deficit by a quarter by about now, and that is


indeed what has happened. Unfortunately, part of that has


been extra cuts matched by extra spending because of the


consequences of this prolonged lack of recovery. Simon has got the


economics quite wrong. People who understood the crisis, people like


Martin Wolf, the economics editor of the Financial Times, they said


quite clearly it was not sensible. Unfortunately there was the mistake


the government made. If you put to economists in a room, you will get


different opinions. Geoffrey Howe was attacked when he was


implementing in the 1980s. But the government promised recovery and


that it would wipe out the deficit and it hasn't been able to do that.


Businesses can't get money... have announced investment in rail


infrastructure, we will be announcing housing programmes in


the autumn, there is a lot going on. Jonathan is perfectly entitled to


come here and spout his own political philosophy, but to say


there is ridiculous. You have to look at the facts. Hang on a second,


you have had your say. Britain is the only advanced economy to see a


major down provision since the spring. You know that part of the


effect on our economic recovery is that the eurozone is in recession,


we trade with Europe. We have seen China's growth figures coming down,


bad figures for the United States. We have a recession made in Downing


Street. We have reassured the markets, infrastructure investment


as well. The would it be so different under Labour? If you


think about the Alistair Darling plan, it was also about cutting the


deficit. Of course it was about cutting the deficit, we said we


would cut it in half over the parliament. They made that choice,


and in order to meet their choice they decided on an austerity


programme which has sucked the life out of our economy. I know my own


area of businesses who have got order books which are full, but


they can't get loans from the banks to meet their orders. We have a


million young people out of work, and the government also took the


decision to delay and stopped what I would call some shove already


projects to go ahead to build jobs and growth. These will not be


happening until after the next general election. Ed Vaizey...


real scandal... The you are pointing at Simon Hughes, your


coalition party. Is there a real risk to loosening fiscal policy


now? You talked about the railways announcement, but something that is


more immediate, spending money, the stimulus, wouldn't the Liberal


Democrats support that? That is why you will hear an announcement in


September to get the housing investment. We have seen the car


industry producing a surplus of cars for the UK. The Government is


clear that it is pulling every lever to do that. There is no


complacency in any part of the country in the UK. We could have


made a different judgment in 2010. No one would have predicted we


would have such a difficult position. Growth has been slower


but it is beginning to turn the corner. It sounds lovely, we look


forward to the next few months. England and Wales is bigger than we


thought. Well, the population is. According to the first set of


results from last year's census, which were released yesterday,


there are 56.1 million people living here now. That's an increase


of 7% in the last ten years. And the Office for National Statistics


say that more than half of the increase is down to immigration,


which has sparked a fresh round of debate about the subject. A debate


that Adam is going to carry on out on College Green. We have some big


numbers to chew over this afternoon. We have a representative from the


Campaign Group, migration watch. This will come as no surprise to


you, these numbers? It didn't. If anything, they were larger than we


thought they would be. The problem is not just the numbers, it is the


fact that we are over the next 15 years going to be adding 5 million


plus people to the population, that means needed and the facilities you


will find in the big cities. Are we planning for that? I don't think so.


Have these new figures really changed the debate at all? It


sounds like it hasn't. It is a big number, and it will take a real


effort in terms of planning and so on. The rate of growth is the same


it has been throughout our history. Secondly, if you look at different


parts of the country and, the picture is very different. If you


look at the north, they face the very different challenge is to the


south. We should not start by thinking a growing population is a


bad thing. More people paying more taxes. That is a good thing. If you


look at the countries whose population is shrinking, they are


worried about that. To the problem is not the number, just the spread?


A no, it is the numbers. If you look at immigration numbers, that


is totally unprecedented. We are talking about a quarter of a


million net, that has never happened before. Of course


immigration is great, but not at this sort of level where you have


got to think about jobs, housing, services, roads. What happened


yesterday in the south-east with the chock-a-block roads, you had


better get used to that. That wasn't because if immigration.


Exactly, we had a massive number at one time. If you get the sort of


immigration we have been getting over the last 15 years, that is


what you will face every day without the Olympics. Matthew, your


case got helped by the report showing what would happen is


migration stopped altogether. extra workers in the economy,


whether they are born abroad or here, will obviously help. Some


will say that those immigrants get older, so it is not a long-term


solution. That is right, but in the short term we are agreed our


priority is getting down the deficit, so is now the time to be


cutting down on extra workers from abroad? I'm sure you'll agree, it


is a bit mad we have to wait for such a long time to find out how


big the population is. That's right, but we have been saying all along


these are the numbers we can get, so you can project and you can't


plan for it. What has not happened so far is that planning. It is all


very well to say people will generate activity in the economy,


that is a good thing, of course it is, but on the other hand we have


unemployment rates at the moment of over 2 million unemployed, youth


unemployment running at 20%. Is this the time to be saying yes, we


need even more immigration? I don't think so. Another interesting fact


that came out of the census data released yesterday is that the UK


is the third most densely populated country in the EU after mortar and


the Netherlands. -- Malta. For some in Government


the summer break probably hasn't come round quickly enough...


Economic woes, coalition in- fighting, Labour ahead in the polls,


and of course that Olympic security headache. So how did we get here?


Giles has been looking back over the last few months. They say a


week is a long time in politics so the last few months have seen an


age. Storm clouds have gathered, tectonic plates have been shifting.


A few months ago, something Labour were concerned about their man at


the top. The coalition have forced through tricky health reforms,


getting on with government, but basically the ship of state seemed


on keel. Today there was a quiet confidence in Labour. Recent pm


queues performances have a more relaxed Ed Miliband, a more


irritable Prime Minister. This is not have -- not just the rise of


Labour. The coalition has gone off course. It is OK to take wise


choices if you are competent, give the impression you are not and


people will change their minds. They are arrogant posh boys who


show no remorse, no contrition no passion to one to understand other


people's lives. That Budget - if he had known, and why didn't he know?


Asked his opponents, would he have smiled so what? It is one thing


cooking up tax breaks, but then spending weeks you turning on


pastis and fuel. Where had a collective discussion... That sort


of thing burns holes in your credibility. Four weeks on from the


Budget, even people in Downing Street are calling it a shambles


budget. Add to that, a horse, Rebecca, Andy Coulson... Though


most are more concerned about the lack of money than Leveson, it


hasn't helped. The banking crisis and the Barclays scandal have seen


bitter exchanges with each side keen to destroy the economic


reputation of the other, descending into a personal boxing match.


has impugned my integrity. Coalitions have tension, it is not


new, but having lost the referendum, Nick Clegg has put his finger on


what he wants more than anyone - I also know there will be those who


are not interested in rational discussion, opposing whatever


reform in whatever century. wranglings have left a chasm


between right-wingers and grassrootss -- grassroots Lib Dems.


On both sides there would be far less to benefit. Joining us now is


the Sun's political commentator. What is urinalysis of the


difficulties facing David Cameron? They seem to come on every front -


the coalition, George Osborne, the budget, the economy, Europe - and


it is immigration. I am not sure he has the answer to any of those to


satisfy the voters. You have suggested that getting rid of


George Osborne as Chancellor would help. Isn't he one of the stars of


the Government and the right hand man to David Cameron? I am not


saying he should go. I am saying he should be required to concentrate


on one of ah job only. He needs to be the full-time Chancellor. -- one


job only. He is also spending a lot of time politicking. He is


combining the two when it comes to attacking Ed Balls, in my view, in


a way that backfired on him. The budget was a car crash. They spent


the next several weeks doing U- turns to try to get away from the


brick wall. Either he has to concentrate on one job or find


another job. Should he focus on being Chancellor rather than also


being a strategic mind within the Government? That label from Labour,


Ed Miliband, the part-time Chancellor, has stuck. George


Osborne is a very successful Chancellor. He is brilliant. Every


senior politician in the coalition is also a political strategist.


in any way that George Osborne is. Other Cabinet ministers will


contribute. George Osborne is a consummate politician. It is a myth.


I do not know where it comes from. The Budget was a success.


amount of time he puts in is a factor. The Budget was a success,


the U-turns that came afterwards. Let's take it as a whole. It has


been very successful. We have done a great many things to put the


economy back on track. There is nothing wrong with the Budget, it


is the handling of it. The U-turn is that followed it were


unnecessary. They were not carefully thought through. When


negotiation for U-turn took place, it was bungled. They were


constantly in reverse. The point is, the opinion polls by Andrew Cooper


show all the things I have been saying. Why don't you just face the


facts? In an opinion poll today, Conservative support went up.


has plunged. That cannot be good, however much you dress it up.


are in the middle of a government during an extremely difficult


economic period. You do not expect the normal rules. Certain Neath


they want to change. That is fine. What about your prognosis?


coalition depends not on David Cameron and Nick Clegg, it depends


on their troops. What to have been the ranks of the Conservative Party


is a lot of unhappiness. -- you have. When Graham Brady has his


finger on the pulse of all the views and thoughts of backbenchers


and when he starts talking about the early demise of the coalition,


I think it is in danger. Boris Johnson has said it is doomed to


succeed. Is Lords reform dead in the water? I think so. If it is


dead in the water, the Liberal Democrats were not get their way.


Hardly any wonder that Nick Clegg feels somewhat lobotomised by the


Government. I do not think he does. The budget fundamentally was very


good. Pit tip poor people at attacks. What was frustrating is


that we did try to persuade the Chancellor it was not a moment to


talk about income-tax. I understand why it was turned in economic terms


but politically it was a bad call. It was a coalition government


budget. The coalition will stay for five years, that was the deal.


Everything so far we have agreed has been delivered. Every issue


that has come up, some have come from the Tory manifesto... It had


338 majority. It was one of the larger second readings of any


political reform bill ever. There has to be work done to get the


Tories on board. They do have to deliver. The leadership of the Tory


Party, from the Prime Minister down, understands that is part of the


deal. Coming back as to whether people are willing to deliver Tory


MPs, what do you say to the criticism that it was the wrong


time to do that? I would not say it either in public or privately I


disagreed with the top rate of tax. It is important that Britain sends


the signal. Coalition partners did not agree. We argued the case and


in the end you need to do a deal. lot of people were taking out of


income tax. Treasure -- Trevor has criticised it but the fundamental


approach has been delivered by a very effective Chancellor. He is


fantastic for the UK economy and very well suspect -- respected


abroad and internationally. Trevor Kavanagh does nothing kit will be


delivered. The other day I had a conversation with George Osborne on


this very subject. The reality is that, with seven changes, for


example to protect the House of Commons and MPs from what is seen


to be a threat by a second chamber, Tories can be reassured and it can


be delivered. What about a liberal/Labour coalition? We have


had the Liberal Democrat saying there will be some fracturing in


the year before the election. You cannot rule out a coalition with


Labour. The issue only arises at the next general election and


afterwards. The coalition I want with Caroline and her colleagues


progresses the Lords reforms I have been talking about. If Labour does


not do that, you can expect -- expect any possibility of coalition.


One problem for the Government is that the public is confused about


what the motivation of this government is and where it is going.


Was to talk about the tax cuts, will sit to people in terms of


income tax, we know that tax credits will reduce and money was


given back to millionairess from tax cuts. We have unravelling from


other issues. Discussion was about where people laugh. They are very


worried about the future. A lot of people in work have had to take


cuts in hours and pay has been frozen. The overall cost of living


have gone up. They fear this government is not in touch with


that. Whatever the positives about that, it was completely lost by all


the other things going on that have affected, I think, the sense of


what is his government about, is it in touch with daily lives by the


public. When the cost of living and jobs are on the line, that is a


worrying. Is the public convinced by Ed Miliband? In the last year, I


think what we have seen is a situation develop where some of the


things that Ed Miliband has said coming up to party conference


season, he has talked about the squeezed middle, he was harangued


over those issues. The sense of what he was tapping into, the


concern has improvement in the mind of the public. We're getting a


hearing now in the way we were not this time last year. Full credit to


Ed Miliband for doing that. Thank you very much. Well, as we


mentioned earlier, the chief executive of G4S, Nick Buckles, has


been answering questions from MPs on the Home Affairs Select


Committee. He is still being grilled, in fact, about the failure


of G4S to recruit enough security staff for the Olympics. Let's


listen to some of what he's been saying. Many will take the view the


reputation of the company is in tatters. You would not agree.


think, at the moment, I would have to agree with you. We have had a


fantastic track record of service delivery over many years in many


countries. Clearly this is not a good position to be in. We feel we


have to make every endeavour to deliver as well as we can honour


his contract. It is a humiliating shambles, isn't it? It is not where


we want to be. It is a humiliating shambles for the company, yes or


no? I cannot disagree with you. would not have thought he wrote.


You say you were notified, because you are overall boss, on 3rd July.


You knew what was coming up. You knew very well - everyone the first


and foremost when the Olympics where due to begin. How is it


possible that all these problems accumulated and add to you, the


overall boss, was only told on 3rd July? -- and that you. Weren't you


progress chasing? Weren't you asking constantly your colleagues


what was happening? What world are you living in? Trying to explain


the process we went through, we had a weekly monitoring process for


both parties - very open - about the process. We started out with


1000 people during June and we had to build up to 10,000 people for


the Olympics. We had a massive pipeline of 20,000 people working


towards July. It was about how many people we were getting ready. Not a


case of having them on the ground and knowingly had a shortage. It


was about having an active pipeline. Simon Hughes, he said it and agreed,


it is a humiliating shambles. They're the second largest security


company in the world. There are lessons to be learned. The select


committee system is doing the job it is now intended to do. You get


parliamentarians of all parties. Later at the issues about public


sector contracts for the private sector, and I think there are lots


of questions about human rights of companies who governments engage,


about whether they pay their taxes properly. I think a lot of them do


not. There are a whole set of issues. Are they capable to


deliver? The reality is we have a public sector that is always able


to intervene when necessary in times of emergency. We have heard


your big defence of the Government over this. Was it a mistake to give


the entire security contractor G4S? We can deal with the fall-out of


what the chief executive has described. With 20/20 hindsight,


you can say what you like. At the time they got the contract, no one


can say it was the wrong thing to do. It would strike me strange to


have it with three or four companies. G4S should be a great


success story. It grew out of Britain. You have a chief executive


quite rightly eating humble pie about what happened. As I keep


saying, the key is to deliver a safe Olympic Games. We know that.


Should there be a cooling off period? Should they be allowed to


bid for other major public-sector Big black Francis Maude have done a


good job, and I am sure they will have a view on the appropriate


thing to do. I think it is too soon to say. The have got to deal with


these things on the evidence, and that will not emerge for some time.


I was speaking to Danny Alexander last night, about making sure where


much more rigorous in how we deliver public sector procurement.


We have not been tough enough. you agree with that, Caroline


Flint? In terms of the public- sector, you are relieved we have


one to stand in. Do you think there should be a cooling-off? I think


what is important here is that we deal with the situation with them


in regard to how they have dealt with the Olympics, and afterwards


there will need to be some discussions about how what was


monitored because there have been massive contract in many government


departments. I don't think a company should have a limit on how


many contracts it has, but is the rigour in how they can deliver


these contracts? That will be a discussion that has to take place


after we have had the most successful Olympics ever. There


will be lessons to learn across government procurement. There are


some fantastic private sector examples of delivering contracts,


but sometimes that is done at the expense of the public sector.


you be happy for G4S to do the security at party conferences?


Everybody will now... G4S will be doubly scrutinised by everybody,


but the important principle is that government needs to improve the way


it places its contracts and monitors them, which it is doing.


MPs are busy getting ready for their summer holidays, were the


only tough decision will be what to read whilst lazing on the beach.


For those who want to show off by the pool they can immerse


themselves in all 736 pages of "The Passage to Power". This is volume


four of Robert Caro's magnum opus on the life of Lyndon Johnson and


certainly not for the faint hearted. Then there's "The New Few", written


by Ferdinand Mount, who argues that power and wealth in Britain is held


in the hands of a small elite ruling class. That's the same


Ferdinand Mount who used to work for the Conservative Party and


who's cousin is David Cameron's Mum. For those who are finding coalition


politics a struggle Mr Simpson suggests reading "Five Days in


London", a book that charts Winston Churchill's difficulties holding


everything together in the dark days of 1940, and think themselves


lucky. And for those who want something a little lighter they


could try Sandra Howard's latest called "Ex Wives". The wife of


Michael Howard has written a novel described as a "story of a


complicated set of relationships and lovers which should interest


many parliamentarians". Finally George Osborne's wife Frances


Osborne has written a new book called "Park Lane", set at the


beginning of the first world war it's a novel that deals with


conflicts in the class system. I wonder where she gets her ideas


from? Keith Simpson is with us now. 50 shades of grey is not on there,


but we won't talk about that. quite happy to. My wife is reading


that book she is quite bored by that. I am asking the questions, Ed


Vaizey! Have you read for them? very large proportion of them.


William Hague said to the foreign affairs team that they should be


doing some summer reading about four years ago. A number of


colleagues then said to me can you let us have them? I think it is a


very nice idea. Most of them are political, aren't they? Yes, most


on conflict, a few novels as you pointed out at the end. Should


there be some more light and shade in there? Some novels away from


politics? If people want to have the more lighter ones, that is fine.


Most colleagues at some stage over the summer holidays tend to read


one big heavy book of some kind because to be fair many of them


don't have the time when Parliament is sitting. That has been the


objective, to give people a whole series of books, some of which are


perhaps relevant today. If the coalition things it has problems,


think about what they were going through in the summer of 1940.


Something you can draw comfort from then. This is wonderful, I have to


say. Are you giving it to the Lib Dems? I have won in a shiny cover.


She gets a brown envelope! For most of the year, Arnside recess, you


just don't have time. There are some colleagues who walk around


with a book under their arm. Some of them do it! If you have a big


heavy tome to read, what Linby? my stairs at home, I have about


seven books waiting. I will take as many of those as I can. I want to


read some books on Tibet and China, and about some struggles which are


much more worrying than ours. lined up, Ed Vaizey? Yes, the great


thing about this book is it is beautifully written. He began


writing it in the early 1980s, but he interview people then who are


now dead, but using it for the later volumes. Caroline, do you


have more time to read now that you are not the minister? I do get to


read more in the recesses, but I do like to last thing at night the


Reading, and I tend to avoid the overtly political books. I like


history books and I like novels. I have just finished reading the


Sambourne novel. I am into everything Scandinavian at the


moment. Having done the Stig Larsson in one of the summer


recesses, have saved Joe for this summer. Final thought from you,


which would you recommend as your top book? If undoubtedly Robert


Caro because it is about the pursuit and acquisition of power


and most politicians are interested in that.


Time now for something completely different. If G4S's staff turn up


to work this week, one of their tasks will be to stop banned items


getting into the Olympic Park and other venues. So what will the


security industry's finest be looking for on their X-ray machines


to stop spectators smuggling in? We've borrowed Bruce Forsyth's


conveyor belt to help you try to remember what to leave at home on


games days and in a moment we'll ask our guests to see how many they


can name. Simon, Caroline, Ed, just take a look at the big screen.


You'll see the banned items moving along the conveyor belt. Afterwards


we'll see how many you can remember. Are you ready? Let's start the


conveyor belt. And on the Daily Politics "banned


at the olympics conveyer belt", we have... A set of balls, a tennis


racket, a frisbee, large flags, banners, item of clothing with a


political statement, item of clothing with commercial signage,


an oversized ha, large golf style umbrella, long lens camera - not


banned in the photography area, excessive food, a noise maker,


liquid greater than 100ml. So, Ed, Simon and Caroline. That's what


spectators have to remember. Let's see how many you can recall. Good


luck with this. We'll give you 30 seconds Starting now! T-shirts with


political slogans. Excessive food, a large umbrella. Noise makers.


Liquid over 100 ml. Excessive food. Flags, banners. Tennis rackets.


Excessive liquid. The there are just a couple you are missing.


Tennis balls, tennis rackets. Frisbee. Something close to our


industry. Long-lens cameras. you do the clothing? I said both, I


said commercial as well. I'm very impressed, you got every single one


of them. If we have an even wider coalition, see what we can deliver.


He will now be delivering our tickets. For are you going to any


of the events? I haven't got any tickets. I tried to, but I didn't


get any. I have Football Final tickets and Paralympics opening


ceremony tickets. That is through the system. You did well! What


about you? Beach volleyball. There is a surprise. New and most of the


House of Commons. The my wife was in charge of the ticketing, so...


So does that mean you have got some spare? We have four beach


volleyball tickets. I hate to go back... Ed Vaizey has verbal


diarrhoea. I hate to go back briefly to the seriousness of the


Olympics but do you think it will field two security heavy? No, No. I


hope not is the obvious answer. know people are very enthusiastic.


We did better than we might have done in the European football


championships, and people remember the medals, the successes. What is


wrong with an oversized hat? That is because people behind you can't


see anything. As Rooprai, the sun will be shining, but an oversized


hat, I think I would be a bit miffed if I was sat behind that.


The food and drink is obviously just because they want you to spend


a fortune. If you go to any concert they stop alcohol coming in. Almost


I can't bring the tennis racket in. A mouse you are needed on the


court! What about the traffic lanes, do you think they will get on


people's nerves? Aren't there are some issues about the markings of


the lanes, getting on people's nerves? You can do a story every


single day and I'm sure there will be. I came to Doncaster, we had


then Parkinson and everyone was very excited, but these kids had


made their torches and they loved it. It is the legacy of


regenerating that part of London. You get the final word. That is all


for today. Well done to you, you did extremely well. That's all for


Download Subtitles