05/09/2012 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 05/09/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Morning, folks. This is the Daily Politics. Today's top story:


As David Cameron puts the finishing touches to his Government reshuffle,


the Mayor of London Boris Johnson spoils the party, claiming the PM


is preparing to ditch his promise not to build a third runway at


Heathrow. Deputy PM Nick Clegg is keen to


show off his latest recruit. Former Minister David Laws returns as


Schools Minister. But as a Tory MP says the reshuffle marks the start


of a divorce in the coalition, are the Lib Dems strengthened or


weakened? After an eight-week break, Prime


Ministers Questions returns. We'll have all the cheers, jeers and


tears live from noon. And should British politicians take


a leaf out of the American political playbook and push their


wives - or husbands - into the limelight? Iraq knows what it means


when a family struggles. He knows what it means to want something


more for your kids and grandkids. Barack knows the American dream


because he's lived it. All that to come before 1.00pm, and


with us for the duration the brand new Conservative Party Chairman


Grant Shapps and Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury Labour's


Rachel Reeves. Welcome to the Daily Politics. Before we get started,


let's get something out of the way. We hear that wee Grant here has a


bit of a problem. He doesn't like wearing ties, which is a bit of an


issue for a politician. Apparently Mr Shapps hates them so much he


spends as little as possible on them. This one cost �4? Yes, but


Marks & Spencer's objected and said it was �5. On the Daily Politics we


have noticed you're going for quite shiny ties - I don't want to say


too shiny so we think you should go in for a new look in your new job.


So how about these that we have rustled up here? Which camera is on


here? That's very patriotic. have this one here for you.


these yours, Andrew? Less of your heckling. Then we have another one


- London too - little guards in a box at Buckingham Palace. That's


also very nice, part of the era, and this, of course, is from my


hometown, the world famous paisley pattern, which I think we nicked


from somewhere in India, Raj Stan in the 19th century. A bit of


history there. Yes, from the cotton mills. We have the three ties.


Which one would you like? The one on your neck. No, the Lib Dem one.


Can't find a tie like this. They're all machine washable, by the way.


The 2012 one. Going to try to take this away, like the mug. Oh, you


have done that before. The other two will be on eBay later today.


LAUGHTER Now, after the big Cabinet moves -


not that big - yesterday, this morning the Prime Minister has been


finishing off his ministerial line- up with many of the more junior


posts being filled. So let's have a look at how the class of 2012 is


shaping up. What do we know, Jo? Well, we know pretty much


everything. As Number Ten's reshuffle draws to a close, we can


now have a good look at some of the key appointments in this new


generation of Ministers. At the Business Department the fresh faces


are Michael Fallon and Matt Hancock. That's being seen as a way for the


Conservatives to keep a closer eye on Vince Cable, the Lib Dem


Business Secretary. At Justice Chris Grayling replaces Ken Clarke


at the Cabinet table. He's expected to take a harder line over prisons


and the European court. Helen Grant, one of the 2010 intake, also gets a


job. At Education the Lib Dem David Laws is back in Government two


years after resigning over his expenses, and as Minister of State,


this gives the party more influence at Michael Gove's Department. Liz


Truss, another new girl, is also given a junior job. At Transport


the new man in charge is Patrick McLoughlin, who unlike his


predecessor says he has an open mind over a new runway at Heathrow.


Simon Burns, the former Health Minister, joins him. And at Health


David Cameron's old boss Andrew Lansley is out in favour of Jeremy


Hunt. He's joined by Norman Lamb, an ally of Nick Clegg, and Anna


Soubry and Dr Dan Poulter, both elected in 2010. So what does the


Government look like after all these changes? Well, it includes


more bright young things, with eight MPs from the 2010 intake


beginning their climb up the Ministerial ladder. But as these


are all junior posts the average age of the Cabinet is little


changed, down from 54 to 52. And the number of women in the Cabinet


has fallen from five to four. Baroness Warsi will continue to


attend Cabinet despite being moved to a new position at the Foreign


Office. Let's speak now to our deputy


political editor James Landale. The warning has been at Heathrow, Boris


Johnson trying to spoil the party for David Cameron. Yes, he clearly


doesn't want to let this one drop. Yesterday he put out a statement


raining on David Cameron's parade saying it was wrong to get rid of


Justine Greening from the transport department simply because she was


against a third runway and Boris Johnson is against a third runway.


Today Boris Johnson decided to push that even further and has asked the


Prime Minister not just to rule out any change of this policy into the


next election, but he wants him to rule it out forever. This was


something the Prime Minister's spokesman this morning was fairly


dismissive of and saying the policy is the policy. The coalition


agreement is the coalition agreement and governments don't get


into what may or may not happen after the next election. The papers


have reported that it is a tilt to the right. Lib Dems are saying


they're going to hold them to the coalition agreement. Does this mark


a start of a divorce in the coalition? Look, the point is this


coalition remains. However much you change the personnel within it, it


is still a coalition, and until such time it ceases to be a


coalition it doesn't really matter how you change the personnel. Yes,


you could have a bit more nuance here and there, but the agreement


is pretty clear. The Liberal Democrats are making sure they're


not going to change any of that they're saying if the Conservatives


want to make more right-wing noises they can use that to their


electoral advantage saying it's more important to have in their


point of view Liberal Democrats in Government restraining these new


right-wing Conservatives. On, for example, Heathrow, there might be a


change of policy, but it's not going to be - Grant Shapps, the


party chairman, made clear this - until the next general election.


We're not talking about something that's going to happen in the next


couple of years. We're talking about change to the Tory manifesto.


Also on things like justice, yes, there might be a change in tone


from Chris Grayling, but where exactly will he change policy? Is


he suddenly going to turn on the taps and allow the prison numbers


to go up and increase prison capacity. It won't be Lib Dems's


restraining but the Treasury because they're just not going to


give them the money. Thank you. Grant Shapps, what did Warsi do so


wrong she had to be replaced by you? I don't think anything. I


think she was a very good chairman. Whenever you reshuffle you always


say why is that person not doing that job and doing something else


and vice versa? The truth is at some point you need to move your


team around. In the case of this Prime Minister... She went off in a


huff to Yorkshire we're told. Before a reshuffle people say


they're happy doing the jobs. I said the same about my housing job.


It's with some regret I moved from that work because I would like to


see it through, but she's about to do a important job at the Foreign


Office. She's at a senior level, still going into the Cabinet, so I


am sure her contribution will be there for a long time. I am told


three Cabinet Ministers cried when they were fired or moved. Were you


one? No. Are you sure? You're making me very emotional about it.


Let me see if I can make you cry about something else - how many


have you inherited? I haven't gotten into that. You're the


chairman, and you don't know how many your party - any general


fighting a war would want to know how many soldiers he has?


appreciate the advice. Maybe I can help you because when Mr Cameron


became Prime Minister - became leader of his party - not Prime


Minister - in 2005, there were 300,000 Conservative members.


According to a Conservative home survey just gone in July, there is


now between 130 and 170,000, losing almost 50%. I treat this with


scepticism for one reason because the truth is membership isn't


entirely pooled centrally - some of it is, through a central system. A


lot of place still work... You're denying the Conservative Party


membership has plummeted? The truth is, and it's impossible to


absolutely know because Conservative Party membership,


actually, probably as with other parties, is handled at a local


level and then pooled at a national level to try the find out figures.


When I find out more about this, no doubt I'll come back and talk to


you, but there will be lots of members not registered nationally.


All the polls show people are worried about the economy, about


jobs, about growth, about business, whether their business will still


be in business. The Prime Minister has arranged the deck chairs on


International Development, and who runs the Commons - not exactly in


touch with public opinion, is he? think there has been change in


probably half the Cabinet posts. Not the posts at the top. What he's


tried to do is this - we want some stability within the Government in


order to continue to tackle the really big issues of things like


dealing with the deficit, but actually what you want to do have


people who have a proven track record of delivery, so we have -


we're about to bring into the Government - the man who delivered


the Olympics, who got all the stadium built on time, the Chief


Executive of LOCOG. That's somebody with - right, business people.


me in the British history - a businessman who has been a success


in British politics? Typically what we have seen from businessmen who


have come in - I am thinking of Archie Norman or someone who has a


very specific business background. What's different about this is he's


not been running a business in the traditional sense -


PROBLEM WITH SOUND Correct? Let me explain. There is a


difference here. He's delivered through the public service the 2012


Games, add staith stadia and had to battle the Whitehall machine from


that perspective. He's an insider but good at delivery. The theme of


the reshuffle is putting in place people who understand how to get


the job done. We have passed all the legislation. We have had all


the policy ideas. This half of the Parliament has to be about


delivering it. That's what this team is about. You came in without


a team for delivery? You wasted two years because you had people who


couldn't deliver? Not at all. What you have in politics and in


Parliament - you know, the process is a two-stage thing - three,


really. You have to design the policy, something which has yet to


happen for Her Majesty's opposition but a stage you have to go through.


You have to implement that by passing the laws, which is a very


elongated process. It took two years the pass the first bit of


housing legislation getting through Parliament. We're into the third


stage. What the Prime Minister has done is brought... You're into the


first stage of implementation by what you just said. You said you


designed the policies. You said you then had to make these policies law.


Now you're going to implement. It's only after two years in power


you're going to... I have said on your programme before democracy is


a very slow process. I wish it was a lot faster. Let me ask you this -


the deficit has started to rise again. The cuts have barely begun.


88% of cuts have to be introduced. There is no growth in the economy,


and you have increased the tax and regulatory burden on the economy.


What difference will the reshuffle make to any of that? Well, let me


just challenge your assumptions first of all. You're right that the


deficit is proving difficult this year. It's absolutely true. No-one


imagined the world economy in this position in Europe in particular


all this way through. No-one - I think you have said that you have


predicted it, but mainly economists weren't predicting three or five


years after the start of this we'd be in this situation, so it's


difficult. We're fighting strong head wind, but secondly it's not


true to say that the deficit overall hasn't been cut. No, I


haven't said that. I said the deficit is starting to rise again,


and these are your Government figures, but never mind... Let's be


clear. We dealt with a quarter... You have only cut the deficit by


25% last year. It's now rising again. The deficit is under


pressure. I absolutely agree. It's clear we're not getting as much


growth as we would like, and the rest of Europe is getting none too.


Let's not underestimate the problems. I must challenge your


point about regulation. The surveys typically show that actually we


have been making some headway on cutting regulation. I'll give you


one simple example. Last week I got a housing development going which


has been stalled for more than ten years in Kent. It will build 22,000


homes in the next 20 years. How many quangos were involved in


trying to get that going over those ten years? Answer: 63 of them. We


have cut the number of kanggos down to virtually nothing and we are


cutting the bureaucracy. Rachel Reeves, you're not denying the


overall tax burden has risen under your Government? We have always


said if we're going to deal with the deficit, we're going to reduce


the spending... Yes or no? Let me explain. 8/10 of it has been


reducing spending and the other has been reducing the tax burden. One


last thing - people flippantly say most of the cuts have yet to come


in. That's true if you work off the spending that was projected to go


like this, but since we have already reduced the expenditure,


you can take any moment in time, project forward and say, by there


point you would have had all of that extra spending and the pain is


going to be felt. It's not spent - you get that. I get you. You use


the word "cut" where it matters. You must think it's much ado about


nothing. The key personnel haven't changed, and the policies haven't


changed. It's all well and good to say now we're going to move to


implementation stage but we have had over two years now and all


that's been delivered is a double- dip recession. I am still not at


all convinced there are any policies in place to get us out of


that situation. Of course there are problems in Europe and elsewhere.


The reality is apart from Italy, we're the only one of the 20 most


industrialised economies that's come back into recession, and the


fact that we're in recession has to be due to the policies that have


been implemented here in the UK, the decisions to cut as far and as


fast as the Government have done have choked off economic growth,


resulted in us going back into a recession. As you say, Andrew, also


means that this year in the first four months of this year we're


borrowing 25% more than we were doing a year ago, whereas -- with


most people predicting borrowing this year will be more than last.


That's not because the Government haven't made the cuts and put up


tax. It's because tax revenue isn't coming in because businesses aren't


succeeding and Unemployment is high Before we move on, why is Downing


Street spinning against Justine Greening for sticking to your


party's promise not to build a third runway? He's been attacked


and she had to be moved and only in the job for ten months. She's the


one who is sticking to the manifesto pledge? We are all


sticking to it. That's to be absolutely clear. For now. We are


not going to build a runway. It's back on - That's a bit disingenuous.


Firstly, you went into the election - You were in favour of one.


There's no problem. At least we are being honest. People in put any and


Richmond didn't think you were going into the election saying you


weren't going to build it in the next couple of years. When you go


into an election you publish a manifesto and people expect you to


stick to it and we are absolutely going to stick to it. I would


suggest that you are both all over the place when it comes to this.


You came to power being against it. And you are now in the process of


changing your mind. You fought the last election being in favour and


now you're against it. It's what called a muddle on the left and


right. We'll come back to this after PMQs so hold that thought. We


need to move on. Right, as we have been discussing, the reshuffle


hasn't been solely a Conservative affair, with Nick Clegg getting in


on the action too. The big news bringing David Laws back into


Government as schools minister, and a Minister of State in the Cabinet


Office. He was keen to show him off. The two joined the Breakfast Club


in East London, where the Deputy Prime Minister enjoyed a bowl of


porridge, whilst David Laws stuck to a single piece of toast. Mr


Clegg used the visit to champion the pupil premium, money for


schools for children from deprived backgrounds. The Liberal Democrats


see this as one of their principal successes in Government. I attach


particular personal significance to this. I heard and saw about this


when I was travelling different cubs ten years ago and I first


wrote about it ten years ago and David and I put it into our


manifesto and put it into the coalition agreement and now it's


coming to a school near you, so to speak. That is a very exciting


journey for us to have seen. David in his new position in the


department for education, among other things, will make sure that


all schools use the premium as well as you have done. Nick Clegg there.


We have been joined now by the Liberal Democrat MP, Martin Hoard.


Welcome to the programme. He has two jobs, which is the most


important? They are both important. In education he's clearly going to


be championing the implementation, but the Cabinet Office role, with


the free-roving brief is really quite significant. It will enable


him to troubleshoot across issues where we don't have Lib Dem


ministers, so that could be a very significant one that watch. What


you like to see? Like defence? That's an obvious one. The Trident


review is contentious within the coalition and there was a defence


with Nick Harvey, but he's not there, so that's one area where


David could offer advice and support. You have got David Laws


back but everybody is saying this reshuffle is a move to the right.


Menzies Campbell has also said so. Does that weaken the Liberal


Democrats? I don't think it is. There are obviously the same number


of Lib Dem ministers as before. We have important changes not just


David, but people like Norman Lamb at health and Paul Burstow did a


great job on the social care side, but Norman has enormous experience


in mainstream NHS politics and policy, so that's going to be very


important. I think overall, where there are some ministers who are


being portrayed as sort of right- wingers going in, I think the point


is if we stick to the agreement and the same is true on aviation, then


we should be in for a reasonably smooth path. I think where the


coalition has had problems in the last couple of years is where we


have deviated from the agreement. That's the problem, because you say


if you stick to the agreement, but we are seeing the Conservatives not


sticking to the coalition agreement and you just haven't got that


influence in Government to stop things happening like House of


Lords' reform or tuition fees, which you went into the election


promising one thing and did the total opposite. I wouldn't like to


speculate if if we had in coalition with the Labour Party. There are


issues like the NHS and - Which your conference voted against.


Lords reform, that's where we have seen Conservative ministers perhaps


not delivering or going off piste a little. The key message of the


reshuffle is we now need to stabilise Government again. We have


had a jittery year and we need to stabilise and look forward, but it


needs to be rooted in the agreement and there's still plenty to do.


Picking up on what Rachel is saying, do you think Jeremy Hunt should


have been promoted to health? raised a few eyebrows. That's being


nice. Do you think he should have been? It has raised Lib Dem


eyebrows too. With the exception of BSkyB issue, he's proved to be a


part of a good team. Conservative ministers have been describing this


as removing obstacles to getting policies done. That sounds like the


Liberal Democrats here in those departments. Do you agree? No, I


don't, obviously. I think there are some - actually there is a lot of


stability on the Lib Dem side within senior ministerial level and


the Secretary of State levels. The key people - Vince Cable and Ed


Davey will be there pursuing the green business agenda and


delivering on things like the Green Investment Bank and the green deal.


Which we are still waiting for? Absolutely. They are on track and


they'll be delivered, so the commitments are still there and


they're powerful. On issues like aviation and planning we have to


stick to the agreement and we'll be fine. Making sure that nothing


happens before 2015. Do you see it as the start of divorce, hold on to


what they've got, but planning for the 2015 election? Not at all. On


Heathrow Airport, you may see both parties probably starting to begin


to think about 2015 manifestos and when they might promise in the next


Parliament. Ministers have - didn't have any policies in the


south-east. You are against any new runways. The coallation agreement


says none at Heathrow Airport, Gatwick Airport or Stansted Airport.


If the Conservative Party want to discuss it and changing what goes


in their manifesto that's fine, but they need to stick to the coalition


agreement in the meantime. Talking about business and how important


the economy is and there are many in business who feel that there is


still a block on reform, on things like employment law and supply-side


measures that could be done and Vince Cable, as Business Secretary,


two new hench man around him, obviously he is seen as someone who


has brought in the reports. Do you think it needs to change? I found


it was not very motivating to staff to threaten employment rights. I


don't think that's the solution to jobs and growth. We need to


concentrate, but Vince and others are consVinced that's much about


the green economy and stimulating Britain in the areas in which we


are exceptional and not about deregulating and damaging


employment rights. There may be changes that we can work through


and trying to support Europe in trying to rescue the eurozone,


which I think is actually the biggest block to growth, these are


the important things and I don't think we need to focus on things


like Beecroft. Thank you. The new Cabinet will meet this afternoon to


have the first get-together since yesterday. There will be a run for


the chairs, since there probably aren't enough. The Conservatives


believing in a limited government of course. The Prime Minister is


expected to say warm words and outline what he expects, but what


the Cabinet really wants, all of them, is one of these. They don't


care about their new jobs and smart offices. They just want a Daily


Politics mug. And if they're lucky David Cameron might be giving them


out this afternoon, but for all of you at home you have to enter the


Guess the Year competition. We'll remind you how to enter, but we'll


see if you can remember when this happened.


# Turn and face the strain # Changes... # How are you getting


on with the new coins? It's just terrible.


# You're never going to get my love # Mr Big stuff... #


# The ink is black # The page is white


# Together we learn to read and write... # The Times and financial


times will go to the tabloid shape. It's the modern thing. We're just


doing it first. # I tip my head to the new


To be in with a chance of winning the mug send your answer to our


special quiz e-mail address: Now, it's coming up to midday here. Just


looking at Big Ben. It's a beautiful day here in Westminster.


A lovely late summer's day or early autumn day, depending on how you


look at it. There hasn't been questions for eight weeks, so we


welcome back Nick Robinson. I was told by a leading Tory that what


happened early in the summer, when it was clear that they couldn't get


the boundary changes through and that the economy still wasn't


growing, that the Prime Minister looked over the abyss and thought,


"I could be a one-term Tory Prime Minister. I better do something


about it." And the reshuffle is part of doing something? Somebody


said to me yet, he might only have two-and-a-half years and I think


there is that sense that when you look at some of the ruthless


changes, shoving Justine Greening out and having someone who is a


climate change spep tick as the new Environment Secretary and --


sceptic and the new environment and moving around Vince Cable, this is


a man who has not lost faith in his economic strategy or Chancellor,


but patience with the system to deliver the policies he's already


announced. That's partly why they are so delighted to get the guy in


from the Olympics, Mr Delivery, Paul Deighton to go around


Whitehall saying, "Why isn't this working?" but that's partly because


he thinks he might not be here any more and because it's the best


chance of winning the next election, and get growth. You get a sense


from David Cameron and Nick Clegg that when they make changes, like


Mr Nick Clegg's wealth tax, or the change that David Cameron has made,


which you have been through, they very much have an eye on their own


backbenchers and they know have very few favours and they are doing


things to play to that gallery? striking thing about this


government and I find it a surprise constantly is it's much tighter at


the top than many single party governments and much weaker at the


bottom. In other words, you look back at economic crises of the past.


Wilson devaluation and Heath on the U-turn and Thatcher on wets and


dries and then devaluation. There were great battles in Cabinet.


There is no battle in Cabinet about economic strategy. The Labour Party


will probably say they wish there were, so I'm not making a point


saying aren't they clever, but observing there is no that fight.


Where is the tension in politics? It's between Liberal Democrats who


don't like the direction their leadership is taking them in and


many Tories who just dream of that majority we saw on Guess The year.


Did you see that huge figure? Why haven't we got that, they'll be


thinking. They want to be able to do things they think Tory


governments ought to do and with a new justice sect who knows or the


new party chairman. In a sense, they are ditching policies, because


this was a Conservative reshuffle. It wasn't a Government reshuffle.


It's a Tory reshuffle. The ditching policies hug a hoody and the husky


and the greenness and no runway at Heathrow Airport. These are all


positions they took in opposition for PR reasons. They didn't have


big debates over the rights or wrongs. But took the positions


because they were trying to reBrandt party and that rebranding


is all unravelling now. Party organisations have those as symbols


and much of that is unraveled. There is a big change since then,


the economic crisis. Hold that House will wish to pay tribute to


the servicemen who have fallen, Lance Corporal Matthew Smith of 26


Engineer Regiment and Guardsman Jamie Shadrick of the Grenadier


Guards. We send our deepest condolences to their friends,


family and loved ones. Their selfless service to our Government


will never be forgotten. I would like to say to the House one word


about the huge success this summer of the Olympic and Paralympic Games.


I want to send our congratulations to the superb performance of


Britain's athletes and Paralympians. Want to say a huge thank you to all


the volunteers who put such a smiling fas on these Games and a


large well-done to all the organisers. I think they made the


entire country proud and as they have promised, they have indeed


inspired a generation. This morning I had meetings with Ministerial


colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House I shall


have further such meetings today. Is the Prime Minister aware that


Look at the loud boos that greeted the Chancellor will halt the posh


boys forever. Why doesn't he be a man and do the decent thing and


call a general election? Very good to see the honourable gentleman


back in such good form. I'm sorry when I was forming my government of


all the talents I couldn't find him on my speed dial. But I have done


something that new Labour never managed. I have taken a minor and


put them in the Cabinet and they Order. Order. The House must calm


down. Nadine Dorries. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, you will be


aware that the Deputy Prime Minister and local Democrats


renegged on a promise. They said they'd deliver boundary changes. I


wonder if the Prime Minister could answer if the Deputy Prime Minister


goes to him and says in exchange for state funding of political


parties he would deliver boundary changes, what would the Prime


Minister's answer be? Well, I'm not in favour of extending state


funding. I think it's very important that all political


parties work hard tie tract members, to attract donations, and frankly,


when we get those, we pay credit to people for funding political


parties, which is in in the public interests. Mr Speaker, let me join


the Prime Minister in paying tribute to Lieutenant Andrew


Chesterman to have 3rd Lieutenant the Rifles, Lance Corporal Smith


and Guardsman Jaimmy Shadrick of the Green deer Guards. They all


died serving our country. They will never be forgotten, and our


thoughts are with their family and friends. I also want to join the


Prime Minister in thanking everyone involved in the Olympic and


Paralympic games, our athletes, our fantastic volunteers and indeed our


whole country that united in support of Team GB and did come


together. It did show our country at its best, and we should all be


proud of the achievement. Mr Speaker, after two-and-a-half years


in Government, the Prime Minister returned from his summer break and


told the nation that he now realised it was time to cut through


the dither. LAUGHTER


Who did he have in mind? LAUGHTER


I must say, he's had all summer to think of a question, and that's the


best - is that really the best he can do?! Let me - let me set it out


for him. Let me explain what this reshuffle is all about. It is not -


it is not that there are two economic departments in our country


- the Treasury and Business. I want every single department to be about


the economy. I want the Transport Department building roads. I want


the Communities Department building houses. I want the Culture


Department rolling out broadband. I want the Agriculture Department


backing British food. This is gaff that means business, and we've got


the team to deliver it. Mr Speaker, he mentions the reshuffle, and of


course, it's good to see the Chancellor still in his place. I


have to say to the - I have to say to the Prime Minister, he's come up


with an ingenious solution to the problem of his part-time Chancellor


- he's appointed another one - the former Justine Greening -- Justice


Secretary. It's a job share. We'll see how they get on. I don't know


if he remember, but a year ago, he published his national


infrastructure plan alongside the autumn statement, and he said at


the time of that plan it was an all-out mission to unblock the


system. So can he tell us one year on of the road building projects


announced in that plan, how many have actually started? Well, first


of all, I'm glad he mentioned the issue of Chancellors because, of


course, I have got my first choice as Chancellor. He's got this is


third choice as Shadow Chancellor. And apparently, he still has to


bring in the coffee every morning. That's just how assertive and butch


the Leader of the Opposition really is. Now, he asked about


infrastructure. He asks about infrastructure. If you look at what


is planned by this Government between 2010 and 2015, we will be


investing �250 billion in infrastructure. That compares with


just �113 billion between 2005 and 2010. That shows he's absolutely


not got a clue. The difference between the Shadow Chancellor and


the Chancellor is the Shadow Chancellor was right about the


economy, and the Chancellor was wrong, and look, and look, I have


to say - I have to say, Mr Speaker, the Paralympic crowd spoke for




Now, of course, characteristically, it's another Prime Minister's


Questions - we're back. He doesn't answer my question. The answer is,


none of the red-building programmes announced in his grand


infrastructure plan have started. Let's look at another grand claim


he made. In March he published his housing strategy, and he said our


housing strategy is beginning to get Britain building again. Before


he starts talking up his next announcement about housing, let's


look at the last. Can he tell us since his announcement how many


houses have started to be built? Housing starts are up 30% since


2009, which was the lowest rate of house building since the 1920s.


That is what his Government left. Now, he prays to the gunwales. Let


us remember it is the Shadow Chancellor who landed us in this


mess. Who was the City Minister when the City went bust? The Shadow


Chancellor. Who was the man who gave us the biggest deficit budget


in the developed world? The Shadow Chancellor. That is what that team


has developed. That is why British people will never trust them again.


Mr Speaker, I think sometimes he forgets - he's been Prime Minister


for two-and-a-half years. He's got to defend his record, and he can't


defend his record. Of course, again, he didn't answer my question. I


asked him - I asked him about what happened to housing starts since he


made his announcement. The reality is housing starts have fallen since


then and are 20 - 24% lower than they were a year ago and lower than


they were at time of the last Labour Government, so another grand


claim, another grand claim that hasn't materialised. Now let's talk


about planning. In March after 18 months of consultation, he hailed


his flagship planning policy and said it was the biggest revolution


in 60 years, but on Sunday, Mr Speaker, he said he was frustrated


by the system, and the hoops we have to jump through, and he wanted


to change it again. Mr Speaker, how is the Prime Minister so


incompetent that he brings in a flagship planning bill, calls it a


revolution, then six months later says it's not fit for purpose?


national planning statement we inherited from Labour was over a


thousand pages. It is now down to just 52 pages. We have radically


simplifyed the planning system, something he should be praising


rather than attacking. He might want to notice that today the World


Economic Forum has come out and said for the first time in a decade


instead of Britain going down did world competitiveness ratings,


we're back in the top ten and rising. Let me read what they said:


"The United Kingdom continues to make up lost ground in rankings


this year, lost ground that happened under the last Labour


Government." Now, there is a reason for that. It's because this


Government is cutting regulation, cutting corporate tax, taking


people out of tax, getting our businesses moving in this country,


investing in the regional growth fund, delivering more


apprenticeships than any other Government. That's what we're doing.


What's he done this summer? Where are the policies on welfare and on


education? Nothing. Where is the great plan for our economy? His


only answer to a debt crisis is to spend more, borrow more and put up


the debt. Back to the bunker, I'm afraid, after that one, Mr Speaker.


I notice - I think the crimson tide is back as well.


LAUGHTER Mr Speaker, over the last two-and-


a-half years we have seen announcements on infrastructure


failed, announcements on housing failed, announcements on planning


failed. Now, what's the reason for this economic failure? The reason


is his fundamental economic approach is wrong. After the summer,


we now know that in his whole two- and-a-half years as Prime Minister,


the British economy has not grown at all. So why doesn't he admit it?


The real problem is this: plan A has spectacularly failed. Let me


tell him what is actually happening in our economy, which is you're


seeing the private sector growing and expanding. There are 900,000


more people employed in the private sector than there were two years


ago. We are now a net exporter of cars and motor vehicles for the


first time since the 1970s. You're seeing the fastest rate of business


creation that you have seen for decades. That is what is happening.


Our economy is rebalancing. There is growth in the private sector.


Our exports to China are up 72%,ed to inia, up 94%, to Russia up over


a hundred per cent. That is what is happening. It is a hard road, a


difficult road but we'll stick to that road because we'll deliver for


the British economy. Mr Speaker, we're in the longest double-dip


recession since the Second World War. How out of touch does this


Prime Minister sound? And I - I have to say - and I have to say to


Tory Members of Parliament, if they go to their constituents and start


trying to blame everybody else - they have been in Government two-


and-a-half years! It's happened on their watch. Now, Mr Speaker, Mr


Speaker, we saw a reshuffle yesterday. He brought back the


member for Yeovil who had been sacked. He promoted the Culture


Secretary, who should have been sacked, and he left in place the


part-time Chancellor that the whole country knows should be sacked.


It's the same old faces, the same old policies and no change


reshuffle. Mr Speaker, if he really wants to cut through the dither,


there's no place like home. The big difference in British politics is


that I don't want to move my Chancellor. He can't move his


Shadow Chancellor. The fact is in spite of all the economic


difficulty, this is a strong and united Government, and in spite -


and in spite - in spite of all the opportunity, this is a weak and


divided opposition. THE SPEAKER: Order. Order! Order!


There is going to be more, and it's going to be from a knight, Sir


Malcolm Bruce. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I wonder if the Prime


Minister has seen today that PWC have produced a report saying that


Aberdeen needs to recruit 120,000 skilled people in the next ten


years if we're to deliver our capacity in the global energy


economy? Will the Government take steps to ensure that an energy


academy and the necessary support for training is put in place so we


can deliver growth for the United Kingdom? I think my Right


Honourable friend raises a very important point, which is the


growth of the economy around Aberdeen obviously linked to that


area which has been extremely successful. I want to see that


continue to expand. I'll listen carefully to what he says and what


the Government can do to help provide that extra capacity, which


I have seen for myself. Can the Prime Minister confirm that we know


in the summer that the UK have borrowed �9.3 billion more in the


first four months of this year than it did in the corresponding period


We have cut the Budget Deficit by a quarter in two years, but obviously


it's very challenging to get the deficit down. I would just note


that Labour's answer to getting the deficit down is to borrow more. To


borrow an extra �200 billion. The one way you cannot get borrowing


down is to put borrowing up. Speaker, my constituents were


delighted when BMW announced 250 million to increase Mini production


and call their axe Ford plant the heart and home of this great


British success story, does the Prime Minister agree that this kind


of inward investment is vital to kickstart the economy and we must


do more to prioritise policies to make the UK more attractive to


investors? My honourable and friend have neighbouring constituencies


and many constituents who work there say it's very good news that


BMW are investing 250 million, on top of the 500 million announced


last year. That is safeguarding over 5,000 jobs in the Oxford and


Swindon plants. It is part of a huge recovery story for the British


motor manufacturing industry. We are now net exporters. That hasn't


happened since the 1970s and it's a huge credit to Jaguar Land Rover


and Nissan and Toyota and BMW, to all the companies that are invest -


- investing and choosing Britain. They are not choosing Britain


because of the weather, but because we are cutting tax and investing in


the infrastructure and they know this is a country open to business.


Poor Wirral families face the indignity of food banks and Save


The Children are launching their first campaign for British children.


What is the Prime Minister doing to help? We target families who are


the poorest in the country with the tax credits. But we should also


praise the voluntary efforts that help the poorest families in this


country too. Would my right honourable join me in paying


tribute to the 23 people in our country who work with such


commitment in the private sector, the one that generates the wealth


of this country and would he welcome the fact that under this


government we now have more people employed in the private sector than


at any time in our history? I think the point he makes is very


important. If you actually look at the figures and include all of the


financial sector, there are more people employed in the private


sector today, in Britain, than at any time in our history. What you


seek - oh, the Shadow Chancellor says that's because we are if


recession. It's because companies are choosing to employ people and


the private sector is getting larger and that is good news.


Employment is up 201,000 this quarter. Unemployment is down


46,000 this quarter. The claimant count has fallen. The rate of


unemployment is down. Youth is down and I would have thought the whole


House would welcome those figures. Last Sunday, the Prime Minister


told us there should be no more excuses for failure. Given that his


policies have produced the longest double-dip recession since the war,


with output down and borrowing up and a collapse in consumer


confidence, is his failure to apologise because he doesn't take


his own advice or because he considers that a record of


outstanding success? This comes from an honourable lady who served


in a government which after 13 years delivered us the longest and


deepest recession since the war. And gave us the biggest budget


deficit virtually any country in the developed world had. Of course,


it takes time to get yourself out of a hole, as deep as the one that


was dug by the Shadow Chancellor and the Leader of the Opposition.


Does - over the summer Jaguar Land Rover announced the creation of


1100 further jobs. This is in addition to the 750 jobs they are


creating in my constituency. Does the Prime Minister agree there is a


stark contrast between the rhetoric of the last Labour Government about


reriefg the industry and the actions and delivery -- reviving


the industry and the actions and delivery of this Government? He's


right. In the last two years Jaguar Land Rover has hired an extra 8,000


new workers. That is a massive success story for the West Midlands


and for a great British brand, but also a big success for massive


inward investment from the Indian parent company. We should praise


all these and recognise we have to do even more to make Britain a


really business-friendly country. With low rates of regulation and


tax and lots of support for apprenticeships and infrastructure.


That is what we are delivering on this side of the House and we'll


continue to do so. Hundreds of young people from outside Europe


chose London Metropolitan University, confident in British


higher education. He needs to tackle visa fraud, but will he lift


the threat to deport students who paid their fees and complied with


all the rules? I know that the honourable gentleman speaks with


considerable experience and obviously wants to speak up as well


on behalf of his constituency. Having looked at this case and look


at the action that the Border Agency has taken, it seems to me


there was some real abuses going on. What I want to see is Britain open


to students - and let's be clear, anyone who can speak English and


who has a university place is able to come here and study at our


universities, but quite rightly the immigration minister has been very


hard in terms of closing down bogus colleges and making sure that good


universities like this one, if they are not meeting the rules, they


have to take action. That must be right if we're going to control


immigration. Does the Prime Minister -- is the Prime Minister


aware that in Watford in the last quarter of 2012, where the numbers


have just come out, 327 new companies were incorporated? This


is a record. This is way beyond anything else in history and I


think he would agree it shows the Government's poll for encouraging


private enterprise is succeeding. He makes a very important point. As


I understand it, 2011 saw the fastest rate of new business


creation of any year that we have seen in decades. That's what our


economy requires. It takes time and patience, because we need a massive


rebalancing, away from the public sector, towards the private. We


need to see other industries, not just finance and retail succeed. We


want to see the business regeneration happening right across


the country. This rebalancing takes time. It is difficult, but it's the


only long-term way out of the economic difficulty that we were


left by the party opposite. Prime Minister is right to


celebrate the most extraordinary Paralympics that we have seen and


are seeing at the moment and the exceptional achievement of Team GB


within those Games. What will he then say to Baroness Tanni Grey-


Thompson and the others who have warned this week that his decision


to cut disability living allowance will prevent disabled people


participating in sport and threaten the legacy of the London Games?


First, the message I would give to everyone in Paralympics GB, the


separate team to Team GB is a huge congrallations for their massive --


congratulations for their massive success. It's been truly inspiring


being able to watch on television or the privilege of going there, to


see absolutely packed stadiums for the Games. Not something everyone


expected, but something that says a lot about our country and people.


Answering the question directly, we are not cutting the money that is


going into supporting disability. We are reforming the system,


replacing disability living allowance with a personal


independence payment and it is all about recognising people's needs.


It has been worked up with the disability lobby very, very


carefully and I think it will be improvement on the current system.


The Prime Minister, I know, is well aware of the lack of capacity at


Britain's airports, but in seeking to resolve this problem, will he


consider of the opportunity presented by regional airports like


those in Birmingham, that can help rebalance the economy? I think my


friend makes a very good point about regional airports. Let me be


frank, the very large infrastructure projects are


extremely difficult for individual governments to take and to deliver.


I think what we need to do is build a process that hopefully has cross-


party support so we can look carefully at this issue and deliver


changes that will address the problems of capacity that we'll


have in future years and that address the issues of the hub


status of the UK. I'm hoping to make an announcement about this


over the coming days, but it's important we worse across party


lines, because this won't happen unless parties actually sign up to


a process that can deliver. wondered if I could cut through the


waffle that the Prime Minister gave us in the answer to disability


living allowance. The reality is that 600,000 disabled people will


be losing an extra cost benefit. Instead of just giving warm words


to disabled people in this country, why doesn't he take aside his


immovable Secretary of State and say to him it's time we thought


again on this one? The move from disability living allowance to


personal independence payments has been an exercise of huge


consultation, with the disability lobbies, to try to make sure that


we get this right. The fact is there are hundreds of thousands of


people on DLA, who have never had a recheck since they started to take


on that benefit. There are many others on disability living


allowance and I know this as a parent who filled out the form


myself, who have to fill out reams without getting a proper medical


check that would get them the benefit quicker. We are moving from


an out-of-date system to a new that will help disabled people.


Selective dor sal rhizoo -- dorsal operations are only available


outside the NHS. Will the Prime Minister look at this situation and


help the families who are raising money for their children to have


this operation across the country get NICE to change their mind?


will look closely at this. I quite understand, as I said one moment


ago, as a parent of a very disabled child, if there was anything you


could do to get that child out of the wheelchair you would want that


to happen. I've looked at this case. NICE actually says this operation


is a treatment option for some children and young people, but it


does caution against the potentially serious complications,


because it's an irreversable operation and so there are risks


involved. I'll look very carefully and see if there is anything more


than NICE should consider. Prime Minister always advises the


trade unions to go for remembering sillation and in the interests of


fairness can I ask you to speak to his new Health Secretary and say


would he involve himself in the dispute in Northumbria healthcare


and ask their board to do what the people are doing and refer their


dispute to the NHS Staff Centre for Resolution. He will have been


listening carefully and I'm sure he will be able to discuss it with the


honourable gentleman. I think it's very important that motorists have


the right to renew their car tax at the Post Office, if they don't have


internet access. The DVLA contract is up for renewal soon. Will the


Prime Minister make sure it stays with the Post Office? I think he


makes an important point, particularly representing, as he


does, a far-flung rural constituency with people living


across a number of different islands. I'm sure the Business


Secretary will have been listening to what he says, although there's a


limited amount of interference into contracts like these that can the


Government can make. Does the Prime Minister have full confidence in


his police and crime commissioner in Hampshire? What I would say


about the commissioners is we haven't yet had the elections. We


are going to have elections in November. I think it's a very good


opportunity to broadcast from this House what an important set of


elections these are. I want to see a new form of accountibility, it


coming through our policing forces. I think it's an excellent reform


and I'm sure one that many people want to turn out and vote and I


hope vote for their local Conservative candidate. Over the


summer, a number of commuters in my constituency suffered flooding and


we were flooded in part because our drainage dykes are not cleared out,


because the boards fear prosecution under conservation habitat


legislation. Will the Prime Minister meet with his new


Environment Secretary and take away this threat of prosecution so that


drainage dykes that were built and dug to protect property, can do


their job? As someone who represents a constituency that has


been subjected to flooding, I know how many frustrations there can be


in local communities when things that need to be done don't get done


quickly enough. Sometimes that is the fault of different agencies.


Sometimes it's the fault of landowners and locals authorities.


All sorts of issues have to be crunched through, but I'm sure the


Secretary of State will have been list being -- listening carefully.


Can the Prime Minister confirm with no ifs or buts that there will be


no third runway at Heathrow Airport whilst he leads his party? Clearly,


while I do believe we need to establish a form of review that


will bring parties together and make a decision about airport


capacity, I will not be breaking my manifesto pledge. A letter from and


a meeting with the Secretary of State for Defence has confirmed


that the seabgd battalion, the Royal regiment of Fusiliers is the


only one that should not have been cut on military grounds. Instead,


what did happen was the further criteria that regimental losses be


capped to one battalion, thus saving more other battalions in


Scotland. Would the Prime Minister meet with me and others from across


the House to discuss this issue? I'm very happy to around a meeting


between my friend and the Defence Secretary and others. I think it's


right to see the Army changing the structure not in the overall size,


because with 82,000 regular soldiers and 30,000 territorials,


the Army won't be changing in its overall size. It was difficult and


it is difficult to do that in a way that respects regimental decisions


and issues that I know a number of honourable members hold very dearly


and it's important we do that across the United Kingdom. That is


what the Government has set out, but I'm happy to arrange that


Comes to an end on a point of order, first PMQs in the new parliamentary


season. The economy dollnating the exchanges between the two sides, as


expected. We'll come to analysis of that in a


moment but first, we'll hear what you thought of this exchange.


the comments were about the economy - whoever and whichever party you


support. So Diane from Truro, Cornwall said, "A reshuffle that


failed to address the economic woes or failed economic policies was


doomed to quickly break down. Ed Miliband left off from the break


with a strong performance today" but heather said, "His dither at


the start of PMQs is lame. He should be scoring multiple goals


against David Cameron. If he can't, Labour are sunk" this one, "What is


Labour's plan? Ed Miliband says their economic plan is wrong, that


the Prime Minister has been in for two-and-a-half year, yet this


follows a 30-year spending binge which accelerated under Gordon


Brown", from Nathan in Kent, "I am one of the few Tory Party members


Grant Shapps inherited, although my membership does expire this month,


Ed Miliband has made a stack point at PMQs. David Cameron has been in


for two-and-a-half years. He can't keep blaming the last Government.


We're not buying that excuse anymore." There we go, not sure if


we should be helping the Conservative Party to recruit. That


may be the way - before we come on to the less important analysis,


let's just get out of the way immediately the big issue that was


raised at PMQs, which was that the Prime Minister accused Mr Miliband


of not being butch enough. Are you butch enough, Grant Shapps? Well, I


think what he was probably trying to describe... I am not asking


about that I am asking about you. Yes, yeah, yeah. You are? Of course.


What evidence do we have to show this? Do you make coffee for


anyone? I haven't gone about making coffee for other people. Does that


count? You write under another name. That's not butch. That's a pen name.


That's right. Michael Brown. Green. I thought he used to advertise cars


on television. Look, I think the point he was trying to make is


simple - you have a shadow Chancellor he doesn't want. He


didn't ask for this man. He actually appointed somebody else


who ended up not doing it, tried to appoint a second person, has ended


up with his third choice. Who was the second one? Nick will fill us


in with the detail. Maybe I have had too long on the is unlounger.


Clearly Alan Johnson was the Shadow Chancellor. I think he tried then


not to appoint Balls and delayed. I... How can I forget - he was


trying to get his brother David back in and convince him to do it,


and he refused to do it for the second time. Who told you that?


didn't reappoint straight away. did. It was done within an hour. I


understand there was a conversation. You may know better. Look, he


wanted his brother to do it. He wouldn't. He has ended up with Ed


Balls. In the Cabinet meetings Balls is disrespecting his leader


on his Blackberry, not interested in anything he says, but back to


the Blair-Brown division that dogged the last Government, we


realised how divisive it was and how it affected the running of this


country. Of course, if David Cameron was butch enough he might


have taken on his Chancellor and put a new one in. I think the


Chancellor is doing a job any person who wants to see this


country avoid the Greek deficit crisis or what's happening in Spain


where, you know, rates are six, 7% to borrow money... That's... We're


1.5% here. We have come to the conclusion you cannot solve the


debt crisis by spending more money. I have this question for you, which


is this: when are we actually going to hear anything at all from Her


Majesty's opposition about what you would do in Government? Not a


single policy, nothing. You have asked the question. I raise the


question. Normally what you would do is allow the person to answer.


We have been very clear that if we were in Government now, we would


put forward a plan for jobs and growth that include teampsrary cut


in VAT... More borrowing. genuinely bring forward more


investing. This Government talks about infrastructure and roads,


planning, housing, and as Ed Miliband said today none of it has


been delivered. A bank bonus tax of 50% and using that money to create


jobs for young people and the construction of 25,000 new


affordable homes. Those - wait a second. Let me finish - that would


help get the economy growing again, but by getting people back to work


and helping businesses succeed and pay tax would help get that down.


Without the tax receipts flowing in and with the benefits bill going up,


the Government ends up borrowing more, not less. We need to get the


economy back on track if we're going to get the deficit down.


come to you in a minute - I have not forgotten you're there. Ice-


skating - I have to hold up - LAUGHTER


A quick reply? All it is, is a list of more taxes and more spending


because, hold on... A tax cut for ordinary families? A tax cut for


small businesses. We know the tax cut would be about �12.5 billion,


so more debt, higher taxes. The question is when we were two-and-a-


half years into opposition people were saying, where are the detailed


policies? What would you actually do in all of these areas of


Government... She just gave you some detail. You might not like


them. That's a different matter. Policies that'll help get the


economy moving again and the recession in. We're in a double-dip


recession, the longest since the Second World War, and the deficit


is beginning to increase by 25% in the first four months of this year.


You have those two problems, and they're related because without the


jobs and growth, the deficit goes up. Rather than a few abstract...


Can I bring in the - ALL SPEAK AT ONCE


He's a very patient man. Someone said to me this morning that the


real - we saw these exchanges on the economy, and the Government is


in a difficult position on the economy at the moment. There is no


growth. If the third quarter produces no growth as well, that's


a really difficult position the Government finds itself in. It is,


but you have just seen them absolutely double up on their


economic strategy. Clearly Labour and a lot of people think that's a


mistake. They came under a huge amount of pressure in the build-up


to this reshuffle including business. Business groups were


saying why aren't you delivering? I thought the strike thing about


Prime Minister's Questions were those facts. Ed Miliband in fact


deployed a trip used against Gordon Brown when he was Leader of the


Opposition. I remember in 2008-09 David Cameron would say how many of


this opposition have happened - and the answer was always nil because


it's easy to announce policies, and they get frustrated, whether Lib


Dem or Tories, where's it gone? I suspect David Cameron will go back


to the office and say, why aren't we getting roads built? It's one of


the reasons he's trying to bring someone in. You're right. It would


be incredibly hard if there is no third quarter growth. Remember


behind the scenes in Government there is confusion about whether


employment statistics are giving the real picture or growth


statistics. The growth statistics are down. Some people think they're


wrong and slightly overstated. Is the economy flat or dropping? It


will be interesting over the next six months to see which is giving


us a proper view. Gordon Brown suffered from this. He had some


growth statistics that looked very bad in 2009. Actually, they were


revised up. The economy was doing just a little bit better than


people at the time were saying. Does Labour have any idea how big


the deficit could go? Because it will have - I take your point that


you think things you'll do will bring back growth, and so therefore


in the longer term the deficit starts to come down, but in the


short run it seems to me it's impossible to deny that the deficit


goes up. Do you have any idea by how much that deficit can go up


before the bond markets simply say, you're not on? Interest rates rise.


If you look at the plan Alistair Darling set out before the last


election, that was to half the deficit during the course of this


Parliament. This Government have set out to eliminate the structural


deficit during the course of this Parliament. They haven't. They're


now putting it back by two years and going to borrow at least �250


billion more. Now you have the ratings agencies saying growth is


as important as the deficit numbers because actually, as I have been


saying, without growth you can't get the deficit down. Can I remind


you that when Alistair Darling unveiled his plan Britain was on


negative watch by the ratings agencies. We are on negative watch


then, and could you tell me what was - what was our yield on ten-


year bonds? Well, the yield on ten- year bonds has barely changed since


the election. It's gone up. That's not true. The ten-year bonds


Britain was paying, the yield was similar to Italy's at that time.


Italy's have gone up because of... No, the timing was the same. We


were paying a lot more. No. We weren't. The point I am trying to


get - I understand it's a difficult thing to do. There comes a point


when you can - a tipping point on the deficit, and the difficulty for


Labour is if you're going to add to the deficit is to know when that


tipping point would be. Let me say about the eurozone countries like


Greece and Portugal and Spain and Italy - none of those countries


have the flexibility that the UK has. We've pursued under the last


Government and this Government quantitative easing to keep


interest rates low. Our currency was depreciating, which you can't


have in the eurozone, so Britain was never going to be like Greece,


Italy or Portugal because we have that flexibility in the UK to...


Just as well we didn't join the euro. Let me just say about


quantitative easing - �300 billion of Government bonds have been


bought by the Bank of England. That has kept our interest rates low and


means we're not going to default because we have a buyer of last


resort of our Government bonds. more thing, and I now want to talk


about the King of the water, also known as Boris Johnson. I found it


quite remark - I remember the days of the Tory wets, and they always


criticised Mrs Thatcher in coded language which was kind of deniable


- not Boris Johnson. No, I don't think we have ever seen anything


quite like this. Totally out there. It's a clear challenge to Mr


Cameron. Let's just run the tape on what he has been saying on this


airport capacity business. I am not criticising David, who I like and


admire hugely. All I am saying is they need to end the ambiguity.


I'll say this more clearly if you want in the press conference. They


need to end the ambiguity about Heathrow because at the moment a


lot of people think that there's going to be a U-turn and that


they're sort of gearing up to ditch the commitment against the third


runway. They're going to put another huge runway in the middle


of London's western suburbs when that is not what the City needs.


Boris Johnson wearing his helmet in case there are any in-coming


missiles from Number Ten Downing Street. What he's doing there -


he's putting the Prime Minister's feet to the fire and saying, all


right. I accept you're not going to come it for a third runway this


side of the next election. I want you to rule it out forever, which


is the question the Labour MP asked in the PMQs very cleverly, and it's


the last thing the Prime Minister wants to answer. Absolutely. John


McDonald quoted back - he was quoting David Cameron back at


himself when Cameron in, sorry 2009 at a Conservative Party event said,


"No third runway no, if's no, but's." Zach's constituency.


nearest equivalent to "read my lips", the famous quote by George


Bush Senior before he raised tax. Would he stick to that as


Conservative leader, cleverly worded, beyond the next election?


The Prime Minister said, "I won't break my manifesto pledge," which


means no runway before 2015, which in truth he has to say because of


political reasons, and the Lib Dems wouldn't let him do it even if he


wanted to change his mind. You're right. The row Boris Johnson wants


is to put people out of their misery. They're not going to


because all the parties are in a bind about runways. The trick David


Cameron will now try to perform, having moved Justine Greening, is


to have an independent commission on this. Sure, which won't report


in the after the next election. don't know. I think they'll report


before. I don't actually know the answer to that question. But you


see, the equivalent of what they're trying do is what happened on high-


speed rail where the Transport Secretary got the Tories onboard so


whoever was in Government after the next election, it won't happen.


Grant Shapps, are you in any doubt that Boris Johnson is running to be


his successor? Boris said he isn't, so I'll take his word for it.


would you do that? He's an honourable man. A man who was


editor of the Spectator, promised not to become the Tory MP and


within six months was the MP for Henley. No-one can second-guess


Boris Johnson's mind. You're right. When you see these clips of Boris


saying these things, don't forget, the Mayor of London is campaigning


for his own airport solution which is the Thames estuary. You really


don't think Boris is running to be the next leader? He says he's not.


You'll have to run against him, I He didn't deny it. On that crash


revelation, of naughty, we say goodbye to Nick. Grant Shapps for


next leader. Unemployment seems to be rarely out of the news at the


moment, but is the media's, and for that, matter the Government's,


fixation on youth unemployment overlooking a more fundamental


problem? Colin Crooks is a social entrepreneur with 20 years'


experience in creating jobs for unemployed people and he argues


that by concentrating on the young we ignore a whole generation of


unemployed men and women who've been left behind without any


prospect of work. Here's his Soapbox. Unemployment is a much


more profound issue that politicians like to admit. It's


especially concentrated in areas like this, which frankly they try


to ignore and where the people have no voice. I believe that just


concentrating on youth unemployment is a profound mistake. A generation


of our people were brought up to work in the local factory. They


weren't educated for anything else. As these jobs dried up, they were


left completely stranded. In some parts of the country unemployment


reaches 50% and even 60% and multiple Government initiatives


have made very little difference to them. For me, these people


represent a let-down generation and they are the victims of a terrible


double whammy. There are up to 10 million people without a GCSE to


their name. That means they can't even apply for most of the jobs


that are on offer. The secret to employibility and education is


attitude. A child's attitude is largely determined by their parents.


Home life, not school, is largely responsible for up to 90% of a


child's educational outcome. Any investment in jobs and skills for


parents will have a massive impact on their children. You Rennes


social enterprises and create jobs in over 20 years. I know places


like Eco Computers is one of social enterprises that kep hem people get


back into work. They don't want charities or grants, but they just


want contracts with real clients and they can create real work and


real training. Why are those jobs? Typical government schemes


concentrate on K Vs and interview skills, but they miss the point.


They are honed at work, not in a classroom. The Government, local


authorities and big business need to actively contract with


organisations such as these that really understand the issues that


people face and actively want to create jobs for the unemployment.


If we do this we will breathe life back into our communities and


create positive adult role models and prospects for our young people.


Colin joins us now. Taking up the points in that film, the jobs are


needed, so do you think in the economic situation that the country


is in that there is the capacity for the sort of jobs to take on the


people you've described? Absolutely. I've spent 20 years employing these


people and creating jobs out of nothing and it's contracts and


about getting local authorities and Government deciding to buy from


social enterprises that work with these people. We don't want grants.


What I want is a contract. I want Government departments to say, "I


will buy a service from you, whether or not it's supplying


toilet rolls or cleaners or whether it's recycling, I will buy from you


in your area where you create people who have been oppressed and


depressed for 20 years." Why isn't it happening? The bureaucracy in


this system is phenomenal and the Government hasn't focused. The


Government thinks about new deals and work programmes. Do they work?


Barely, to be honest. It doesn't touch these people. It touches the


people at the top who would probably get a job in any case. It


does not touch the people at the bottom who are struggling. None of


these work. We need for them to spend the money they are going to


spend. I don't need any extra borrowing or loans. I want the


Government to say, "We are already buying services for this building,


why don't we buy them from this company here that's employing


people who are hard to employ?" Grant Shapps, why isn't it


happening? It's frustrating to hear when it doesn't happen. I know


there is a nursery in my constituency that a contract with


the local authority and they are employing people who otherwise


would find it difficult to be in the market. I've seen it work. In


my last role, partly as a local Government minister, I spent some


time on this finding out why it was that councils feel they have to


impose such incredible prequalification question airs to


sell anything to that -- questionnaires to sell anything to


that local Government and when a business can come in and be more


flexible. It means the local authority buys uncome petively and


it doesn't go to a social enterprise. Because they've never


been good as procurement. They've been talking about for years. Why


is not changing? It's like biting through, I don't know, what, to get


to the people to make the changes. I was involved in trying to cut


down the size of the application. We are saying to local authorities


and you maybe come across this, they should not introduce these


questionnaires if what they are buying isn't more than a certain


figure which could be several hundred,000 pounds, but they will


be directly involved in it and you don't want to contract wider still.


We recognise the problem which isn't being dealt with. What about


Colin's point that actually the programmes that the Government has


put on track to try to employ people they barely work? I think


you have to do a combination of things. You can do a programme -


you made a great point, governments have tried over many years and


guess what, it doesn't really help. You have to do it all together. One


of the things I think will help is the lasting legacy is the universal


credit and it's to Iain Duncan Smith's credit it's been brought in,


because it means when you go to work you are better off through


work and you have to do that as well as put in targeted support and


I think again that offers the best opportunities to start to make the


schemes actually work and be efficient to produce and create,


because people get paid and it's worth doing. Unemployment is coming


down from the figures, down by 46,000. Do you think that is a fair


reflection of what is going on out there, particularly with - no?


in the slightest. What is actually happening is it's coming down


because people are paut into part- time jobs. If you look under --


being put into part-time jobs, if you look under that, 30% of our


working population, 10 million, don't work, so it's a bigger number.


A lot would like to, but they're not counted? I meet them every day.


They want a job. Is it the wrong emphasis focusing so much attention


on the youth which is the point made by Colin in terms of looking


for role models? You should be looking at the lost generation?


thought that was an interesting point, because obviously


unemployment at any age is a serious problem. The reason that


politicians tend to focus on youth is because if you allow early on in


someone's life worklessness to become a way of life that that


becomes a problem throughout and the point is wider, which is if you


look at the inactive economic population, who are inactive, it


may well go much wider and things like making sure that it quite


simply always pays you when you go out and do an extra hour's work you


will always be better off than the welfare equivalent. Those things


are as important. You would agree with this, Rachel, in terms of work


paying? Of course. That's why tax credits were always important to


get people to go back to work, but we have the real problem and Colin


highlights it, underemployment and the difference between the GDP


numbers that show us in recession and then the others that are


decreasing, that some people only work part-time, because the work


isn't really there and there is the creation of jobs, but not real --


really giving people an income, but talking also about contracts for


social enterprises. It's also an issue for small businesses in and


around the country. Small businesses as well can't get


contracts either from local Government or central Government


because of the bureaucracy and they need to have the track records of


success and the big contracts. It's a catch 22 situation. Colin, thank


you very much. While political attention here in the UK is on


David Cameron's reshuffle and the return of MPs to Westminter, over


in the United States the race for the White House is unde rway. Last


week, the Republicans held their convention, with a starring role


for Ann Romney, the wife of the Republican candidate, Mitt Romney.


This week, it's the turn of the Democrats, and last night Barack


Obama's wife, Michelle made a keynote speech. This is the man


America needs. This is the man who will wake up every day with the


determination to solve the problems that others say can't be solve, to


fix what others say is beyond repair. This is the man who will


work harder than anyone so we can work a little bit hard. I can't


tell you what will happen over the next four years, but I can only


stand here tonight as a wife, mother and grandmother, and an


American and make you some solemn commitment - this man will not fail.


We must work like never before. And we must once again come together


and stand together with a man we can trust. That's to keep moving


this great country forward. My husband, our President, Barack


Obama. Thank you. God bless you. God bless America. That's the two


First Ladies for the election campaign. It's very American. The


speeches are pretty much devoid of substance. It's all emotion and


bigging up your husband. Could you see that happening in this country,


Mrs Miliband going in front of a Labour conference and saying these


things about Ed? I just think it would be nice to see more women in


front-line politics. That's not the issue. I'm talking about spouses


here. If it's Hillary Clinton running it will be Bill that will


have to do it. Should spouses play this role? I would like to come


back to my point, because what we don't see in America or the UK or


any countries are enough women. are only seeing them as women


because they're married to men. are seeing them as the appendage of


their husbands and we did see it a bit in the UK election in 2010.


Will Mrs Mill -- Mrs Miliband do something like that? I very much


doubt it. I with like to see the women making their decisions rather


than supporting. One day I'll get them to answer the question I'm


asking. Before we go, just time - we can't do the competition, so we


Download Subtitles