10/09/2012 Daily Politics

Good afternoon. Welcome to The Daily Politics. The unions appear

to be having a grand day out at their conference in brighten town.

But are more strikes looming? We will be speaking to Brendan Barber,

the General Secretary of the TUC. just want to say what a golden

summer it has been. It has given the country a tremendous lift. It

has brought the country together. We will be looking back at

Britain's golden summer of sport and asking just what we can learn

from it. Can this man succeed where others have failed? He wants to

slash-and-burn red tape. We will see how he will do it. And we will

be asking if the Government can actually do anything about the cost

of living. With us for the first half an hour today, the founder of

moneysavingexpert.com, Martin Lewis. Welcome back. First today, let's

talk about the London Olympics. Alas, it is over. Today, around one

million people are expected to line the streets of London to cheer

Britain's Olympic and Paralympic heroes. This is what the Prime

Minister had to say earlier. At the end of the most unbelievably

successful Olympics and Paralympics, I just want to say what a golden

summer of British sport we have had, and what a golden summer it has

been for the country. It has given the country a tremendous lift, and

it has brought the country together. It has given us memories that we

will be talking about for years and generations to come. I think 2012

will be like 1966, something we talk about without children and

grandchildren, something which will continue to delight us, long after

this time has passed. We can speak now to one of

Britain's greatest Paralympians, Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson.

Presumably you would agree, it has been the greatest a Olympics and

Paralympic Games ever. It has been amazing, not just because of Team

GB and ParalympicsGB, but because of the organisation. Seb Coe's idea

was to put athletes at the heart of the Games, and it has made it an

amazingly enjoyable experience for everybody. David Cameron said the

UK will -- Lord Coe also said that the UK will never think of

disability in the same way - do you agree? Definitely. There has been a

change of perception. People were coming out of the venues talking

about the sport, much less about the disability. I did not hear

people talking about overcoming adversity, which was a great relief

to everybody. But it is difficult to measure how attitudes will

change going forward. But I think people are more positive about

disabled people. One year on, it is important that we remember back to

how everybody felt at this time. The Olympics and Paralympics, they

are not reality, they are fairy dust. That glow will disappear.

you think it will be different this time, or do you think that in six

months' time, all of that euphoria will have faded? I think they will

definitely have moved forwards. There is a real glow about how

everybody feels at the moment, but I Dusan so different attitude from

people. People are coming up to be in the streets, saying, I have seen

disabled people in a new way. I have realised that I am one step

away from it myself. Anybody can have an accident and it can change

their lives. Yes, that in itself can be hugely positive. All this

talk about harnessing the spirit of the Paralympics, it is all very

well to say it, but how does it work? Part of it is about how we

can join everything up after deep for tears. In politics, we talk

about sport or health or education, and it would be great to link all

of those up. There will be children turning up at sports clubs, wanting

to be the next Victoria Pendleton, or the next Sarah Storey. Then they

will realise how hard it but we have to think about how we can

change the culture of participation. We are becoming more unhealthy as a

nation, and that needs to change. It sounds amazing in the background,

so have a great afternoon on the parade.

Martin Lewis, your impressions, I used adages over? Very much so. I

am a proper track-and-field fan, I go to track-and-field events during

the year. So this was really special for me. And also, it cannot

be underestimated how much it means to have four or five weeks off the

doom and gloom of the economy. It is good for the psyche of the

nation. Now, we have to manage ourselves back into hearing about

the euro crisis and everything. also think it is good for the

country, we have shown that we can organise things very well,

efficiently, and that people in this country will really get into

things. The white elephant in the room is the enormous amount of

money that this has cost. In a way, it almost feels like, let's not get

back into that just yet. Will we recoup what we spent or even come

close to it? But the truth is, that money has been spent, we are never

getting it back if we do not recoup it, everybody has had a good time,

so let's celebrate that. But the real question now is, what colour

medal will be good for legacy? Has the money gone far enough? Teva the

jury is still out on that. We will be talking a bit more about whether

politicians have managed to get some of the Stardust and whether

the economy has benefited, later in the programme. Now, let's talk

about red tape. The Government says it wants to get rid of it, or at

least, rather a lot of it. Hundreds of thousands of businesses across

the UK are to be exempted from health and safety inspections,

under new changes to be introduced next year. It is what ministers are

calling a blitz on red tape, which will see 3,000 regulations

affecting businesses in England scrapped or overhauled. Joining us

now from brighten is Martin Smith of the GMB union. The Government

says this is all to help business - surely it is a good thing? It is a

rehash of an old announcement which was made 18 months ago. We have got

to look at the politics of it. Our view has not changed, which is that

this sends the wrong message to small and medium businesses, who

might hear that the inspection regime has changed, so they might

think they are exempt from health and safety rules. We think it will

save hardly anything, it actually, some people will get into trouble

with their health because of it. It is just not worth doing. So the

Government is obviously not going to get your support, but does that

apply to all of these 3,000 regulations? Well, we do not know

the detail of these regulations, but we are very concerned to make

sure that our members enjoy a health -- healthy and safe work

place. We know that 10% of our members, in retail, for example,

have had an accident in the last year, meaning that they have had

time off work. We spoke to two major retail change, and they said

to us, they do not think these changes will help them. They need

regulations to help them manage risks in the workplace. Which

retail chains are these? We have a lot of members in major retail

change, and two of the big four, we have spoken to this morning. --

retail chains. They are saying, they need to manage risks, they

agree with us, they need the regulatory framework. They need to

make the workplace save, not only for their work force, but for

shoppers as well. What do you make of the new Business Secretary

saying, he wants business to react positively to this? He says he will

be championing business in his new department. I'm sure he will do

that. And the unions will champion the interests of working people.

That is perfectly understandable. But when it comes to health and

safety, we work together with employers, where we can, to limit

the number of accidents and unhealthy work practices. We do not

want to be chasing after employers, after an accident has happened, so

we want a good regulatory framework. But surely, there is also room for

you to be championing small businesses, to take on more people,

to free them up from some of the restrictions and limitations, even

if it is only for a limited amount of time? Well, some of these

limitations which they talk about are making sure that there are

enough wheels on the chairs in the office, making sure there are no

trip hazards. Any responsible employer would do this anyway. I do

not see how this can be a saving for small businesses. It is good

business practice. Unfortunately, some employers will get the message

from this announcement that they are no longer applicable, and

people will get hurt as a result. Of a business minister who I just

mentioned is with me now. Let's just pick up on one of those points,

the possible increase in accidents, and actually, he says, two major

retail chains do not really want this kind of relaxation of

regulation? We are not talking about relaxing regulation on any

kind of high risk area. That means construction sites, chemical plants,

care homes. This is about things like office premises. I visited an

Internet entrepreneurial office today. These are not high risk

environments, but they are still at the moment subject to health and

safety checks, checks which really are not necessary. We think there

is an awful lot that can be done indeed to help the health and

safety people focus on the important areas which are indeed

high risk. Talking about cutting 3,000 - have you got a list of all

of these regulations? Yes, we have been on the case since the

coalition government started. There are around 20,000 regulations

altogether. Some of those are purely nominal. We consulted

business and others, such as charities and voluntary

organisations, to ask them to tell us which of these regulations

really impact on them. There are around 6,500 which really have an

impact. I want to see around 3,000 of those, nearly half of them,

either scrapped or significantly overhauled, to minimise the cost to

business. Call me a cynic, but every government has talk about

this area, even since the days of Michael Heseltine - why do we have

any faith that you will do any better than anybody else?

Governments have pledged this before, I accept that. We are doing

it again, but we have been on the case for two years. What does that

mean? We have challenged business to tell us which of the regulations

are getting in the wake, which challenged charities as well, who,

for example, have to have criminal records checks every time somebody

moves. That can be streamlined. Do you need paper driving licences any

more? There is an awful lot of stuff which can be simplified.

is this going to happen? It will happen from now on. It will go on

until the end of next year. It is an extremely talented and timetable.

regulations by the end of 2013? -- challenging.. How will you know?

are going to report to Parliament. We may miss that target, but we

will try. Not another failed target. We have never done this before,

with a specific number. We have got to try, we have got to do

everything possible, to help business create new jobs. You have

got this target of 3,000 regulations by 2013, and you may

not get all of them - how much money will it save the economy by

then? We have already saved through the regulations we have already

done, the red-tape cutting, some �850 million. Of these 3,000...

do you measure that? You try to make an assessment of the actual

cost of each individual regulation, if businesses did not have to do

this. For small companies, they have not got time to do this, so

they have to pay for a consultant to come in and do it. So, you can

measure some of the costs. They do not all involve cost. For example,

everybody has to have a no smoking sign on their premises, which has

to be displayed in a particular way, with exactly the same wording -

why? What is your response to this? Everybody wants to get rid of

unnecessary regulation, but what about the point raised by the union,

that actually, this will be disadvantageous? We all hate red

tape and regulation, but we all think that employee protection is

an important thing. This is a question of language. Looking at

consumer issues, there are a number of ridiculous regulations. The one

on money laundering requirements, for example, which says that if you

want to open a bank account, you need paper statements, but then, we

are encouraged to back online, so we do not have paper statements.

you trust the Government to make sure they are picking the right

ones? No, I slightly wary about the less a fair attitude. We have pay-

day lenders, with pathetic, Tsar of regulation. We have claims

companies bursting a pall over the place, which in many cases is not

necessary. If these are totally unnecessary, I am sure we are all

with you on things like the paper driving licence. We welcome back.

On the other hand, please not too laissez faire.. Is it really going

Small businesses create the next jobs. We have got to help them do

it. This somebody sets up an enterprise, you cannot put pan

signs on avoiding hassle when you are trying to focus on running and

institution or a business. So that will be welcomed. One of the

biggest obstacles may be your boss. The Vince Cable said very clearly

it is nothing to do with site washers, it is a demand issue.

went on to say that sensible deregulation is supported, it is

sent the coalition agreement. Everybody supported. It is in the

agreement that we are going to do it that is why we started the red

tape challenge, and all Ministers are part of this agenda, as are all

of the other departments. We have got other Ministers asking if they

need that bit of red tape. How are you getting on with Vince Cable?

Very well. Relations are fine. you text in like Ed Balls? We are

talking. We are from different parties, we have different

perspectives and occasionally different language, but all

Ministers in the Department, five Conservative and two Lib Dem, are

working together. I think we have just got time, because it is the

TUC conference, we wanted to hear from Brendan Barber, because one of

the boroughs will be any potential strike action. Let's hear what we

had to say -- the worries. Congress, it is time for change. The

Government's strategy is failing Britain, the economy is on its

knees, services are being devastated and society is becoming

more fractured, as benefits are cut for the poor, while taxes are

slashed for the rich. Austerity isn't just some temporary sacrifice.

It could be with us for the duration. A self- perpetuating

economic nightmare. It is already beginning to happen. Beyond the

boutiques of Notting Hill and the mansions of Kensington, there is

another country, a Britain of boarded-up high streets,

pawnbrokers, food banks, a Britain of stratospheric inequality, where

the rich float free and the poor sink further into penury. A Britain

of hopes denied for millions of our young people. Brendan Barber, the

outgoing general secretary of the TUC. A divided Britain, failed

economic policies. No, we have cut tax for everybody, not just for

entrepreneurs, and we are reforming the benefit system, yes, but that

is to help people who are working hard and are prepared to go for

those jobs. But to squeeze on living standards. There has been a

squeeze because of what has happened with energy prices, food

prices and commodity prices. The Government to try to help by

freezing council tax and by raising the personal allowance. Can they

really do anything? We will be talking about this later on, a

public sector pay freeze, food is on the rise, petrol is still high,

it is tough. Certainly, it has been a very tough time and the problems

in the eurozone and the world economy with rising food prices

have gone on far longer than people predicted, but the Government has

been tried to help and the economy is now revving up. With no growth?

We don't know if there is no growth, there have been encouraging signs

in the last few weeks that the economy may well be starting to

grow again and we need to pick that point and get behind British

business when it does. There is talk of co-ordinated strike action,

what is the message? I would be very sad if that happened, that is

not in the spirit of what we have seen of the Olympics and the

Jubilee, when people have been getting behind the country. The

public sector still has over all better wages than the private

sector, it enjoys higher pensions, even though the contributions have

been reformed and I think it would be a great shame that at the point

at which we need the economy to start growing again, if we had a

damaging strikes. A what is your view about the unions? Brendan

Barber is leaving at this particular point, but there is the

threat of court later strike action because he sees things extremely

different theatre Michael Fallon -- of strike action for? I have no

problem with strike actions as employee showing their displeasure,

but when it becomes a political point and is done as a political

action over the fact that the Government has been elected of the

day is not doing what people want, I find that more difficult, because

that is a democratic process. Labour did not get in, we have a

liberal and Conservative pact and they are doing what the electoral -

- Elektra to put them in full. Unpleasant as it is, so striking

when things are manifestly wrong, I am completely in support. Trying to

disrupt the economy for the elected political party, I find more of a

wrench. A you will want to avoid strike action, so is there any

chance at of reopening talks on pensions or the pay freeze? I think

the trade unions though they still enjoy better pensions than the

private sector, who in many cases don't have them, and they know that

because people are living longer, contributions have to increase, but

I do think they will think again -- I do hope they will think again,

because they went BSP disruption to the economy, there will be

disruptions to parents and everybody else, people trying to

get to work -- they won't just be disruption. My call Fallon, good

luck with your bonfire of the regulation -- Michael. We will have

you back before the end of 2013 to see how many sheep have got rid of.

As we have seen, the conference of the Trades Union is under way in

Brighton, with delegates calling for radical changes to the

Government policies, including the three-year pay freeze and

industrial action. There is one motion that says consideration

should be given to the practicalities of a general strike.

The trade union brings together 54 units with 6.2 million members and

they are not happy. General Secretary Brendan Barber says the

governor's economic policies have failed. Last year saw the biggest

buy-out -- day of industrial action for decades, hundreds of thousands,

maybe millions, of public sector workers went on strike over changes

to pensions. Now the TUC has organised another day of action on

20th October. They wanted end to the three-year pay freeze and the

public sector, the not below- inflation 1% pay rises that the

Chancellor has demanded for the next two years. They also say that

Government cuts will mean 700,000 public sector job losses and higher

unemployment. Without a radical change of approach, the countries

could be facing years of stagnation. Brendan Barber is in Brighton,

welcome to the programme. Should the public be prepared for more

strikes in the autumn as the unions try to make their point about the

economy? We may see more disputes and some of my colleagues in major

public service unions indicated that that is a possibility, but

look, I hope that the Government will realise that the biggest

argument of the lot here is about the failure of their policies to

get any growth in a our economy. There has been no growth since the

coalition came to office. We really need a change of course to give

people some sense of hope and to begin to restore people's living

standards. So you don't support the idea of Cordery to strike action,

or even the idea being debated about a general strike -- co-

ordinated strike action? That is not the way forward in your view?

did not say that. Decisions on strike action are taken by members

and by individual unions through their proper procedures and

certainly from the TUC's position, we very much stand ready to support

unions that make that decision and to co-ordinate unions, particularly

Unions working together in the same sector, teachers' unions and local

government unions, health unions. We very much work to provide that

ordination. What is it going to achieve? Last year, we saw the

biggest day of strikes for decades and it didn't achieve anything. The

Government is not going to reopen talks on pensions, we had from the

Business Minister, or reopen talks will change their policy on pay. --

or change. I hope that they do reconsider some of their policies

on key issues like pay, and certainly on the issue of pensions,

I think the determination of Trade Unionists to support the action

that took place, and it was unprecedented, 30 unions in

November taking industrial action together, that was a major factor

in persuading the Government to revise key proposals on pensions.

But, look, I want to see some genuinely new thinking to get our

economy moving again. We have got this huge squeeze on living

standards that people have been facing, real-terms pay cuts for the

last three or four years, stretching out now into the future.

The Government are saying they are determined to impose a pay cap for

the next two years of only 1%. How long is this misery going to go on?

Particularly when it is not delivering what it is supposed to

be delivering. Borrowing levels are going up. Do you not accept,

Brendan Barber, that the economy needs to be rebalance? That there

has to be a greater private sector creating wealth, creating jobs, and

fewer people employed by the state, particularly in jobs that are not

delivering anything? What we need, I don't think we need a rebalancing

in that crude simplistic way, less public sector and more private

sector, we need economic growth. And it is economic growth that will

deliver higher living standards and also, incidentally, deliver better

public services. We need a decent it funded, well resourced public

services, but we are not getting that growth, unlike other major

economies that have seen some recovery since the crisis hit by a

whole world back in 2008. The United States, other major European

economies, they have recovered the ground that was lost in the depths

of the recession. Our economy is still over 4% smaller than before

the crash. And government policies have got an awful lot of

responsibility for that is more, dismal economic performance. The --

dismal. You are suggesting more money should be spent by the

Government, added to the current borrowing figures and that the

public sector should stay the same size and that should be supported.

What do you think that will do to the economy? It is not as simple as

that. Look, we need a real national project for growth. That has got to

involve real investment in infrastructure. How much money

would you like to see? There have been huge cuts in public money. One

of the first decisions the new Chancellor made after the election

was to cut the school buildings for the future programme, �6 billion of

construction spending that was keeping people in work, modernising

the school system, and the axe was taken to that virtually within the

first week. We need money putting back into that infrastructure. We

need major reform of our banking system, so it is delivering

investment that supports the real economy. We need active industrial

policy, recognising the sectors that have real potential for growth

and putting the levers of public policy and funding behind those

sectors. There are lots of areas where government can act.

support this motion that has just been passed which means the banks

should be nationalised? Has it just been passed at the TUC? We had a

debate on two things, a motion and a statement at the congress this

morning. I said to the Congress the idea of just nationalising all of

the banks, as if it was a panacea, I don't think makes sense. And of

course, we are very much aware that there would be potentially huge

costs in doing that. But we do need, that doesn't mean to say, we don't

need rage a reform of the banking system. -- major reform. We need it

in a number of areas in terms of regulation, new institutions to

make sure investment is getting out to the wider economy, then it's to

be very radical reform. Just briefly before you go, coming to

the end of a ten-year stint, you have been along time, what is your

greatest achievement? -- eight long time. I find it hard to think about

one or single thing. Because you have done so many? The TUC and the

trade union movement play a very important part in the life of this

country, in terms of these great debate about public policy and day-

in, day-out, thousands and thousands of workplaces, millions

of people's lives are made better by the work of unions, so I am very

optimistic we have got a very important job to do for a long time

to come. Brendan Barber, thank you very much. Martin Ellis, listening

unions -- Martyn Lewis? Or is he striking a chord with public

sentiment? If you talk to public sector workers, they don't like

what has happened to their pensions, so they represent a large number of

people. I don't think they are that out of touch. Nationalising the

banks is not going to happen, but I have some sympathy in that we are

mandated to have a bank account, that has to be seen as a public

service and one million people not having them in this country is a

disgrace, so we have to tweak it towards tighter regulation in the

way that banks regulator in that -- work in that core product. But I do

think we perhaps have cut back too much on regulation and do need more

investment for growth. It is that constant friction between deficit-

cutting and the need for investment and I think infrastructure projects,

and I suspect they will come back, I think... The Government says they

are about to come back and are ready to go. He is not that out of

sync with mainstream opinion. the public in general do hate

strikes, because it is them who are If there is one thing many people

like complaining about, apart from that, it is the cost of living. It

is putting the squeeze on everyone's money. But can the

Government do very much about rising prices? We sent David to

find out. Politicians will always tell you they are on your side,

they are listening, and they are fighting to keep the cost of living

down. And we always believe them, don't we? Do you think the

Government is doing enough to keep the cost of fooled -- the cost of

fuel and food down? Definitely not. Absolutely not. There is a lot more

could be done by the Government. think people just have to be more

careful with how they spend their money, and not obviously spend lots

on cake. But is it actually fair to blame politicians for things like

the cost of food, petrol, or commuting into work? Politicians

are pretty powerless, actually, when it comes to global prices and

food inflation. The price of oil going up or down, for example. They

will sometimes blame it on the sunshine and things like that, but

I rarely feel sorry for politicians. On this occasion, however, when the

economy here is influenced by things abroad or by supply and

demand, there are limits to what they can do. So what have they

done? Well, personal tax allowances have been increased. Fuel duty

increases have been postponed, and the Office of Fair Trading is to

probe into the price of petrol. Rail fares are set to rise by

double the rate of inflation next year. But are things as bad as they

feel? Food, fuel and rail prices continue to increase, but they are

increasing at a lesser rate than they were about a year ago. But the

public's perception of that may be quite different. In fact, they

perceive far higher increases in inflation that is reflected by the

numbers. Here's some radical food for thought. Ministers should

forget about public opinion and actually do less, not more, about

the cost of living. The trouble is, politicians are judged by us all on

what they do, and they feel they have got to do something on of the

time. Just make sure that you set broad parameters, and then let his

knees get on with it. There are some examples of governments trying

to mitigate the effects of the markets. In Asian economies, they

have introduced subsidies for food and fuel at certain times. We find

that very quickly, those public coffers are trained in the support

of lower prices for consumers. Politicians like to believe that

they have got on of the answers, but it seems the cost of living is

largely outside of their control. We are joined now by the

Conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi. Can politicians actually do anything

about the cost of living? Well, you can do some things. For example,

make sure that the interest rate at which the government borrows it

remains competitive. We have done that, for years, and food and fuel

are still rising. I do not disagree. Commodity prices are going up. But

on fuel, I think wrote is important that we continue to debate what the

oil companies are doing, and we have had whistleblower as saying

that this could be a price-fixing issue. Hold on. I always find this

frustrating, when politicians talk about fuel, and talk about the oil

companies. �1.40 per litre, the majority of that is tax. If you

wanted to win a general election, one of the main things you would do,

and I am not saying it is right to do this, would be to drop petrol

prices down to �1. Ministers said to me recently, 200 of them, said

to me, the first thing they would be doing would be to cut the price

of petrol. Let me take you up on that. If we dropped it by 10p,

which is dropping it quite significantly, and 1p lowered... I

am not saying that his dramatic. We can do lots of stuff, we can start

spending more now, Denmark has just done its, they have effectively

done what Labour are calling for, borrowing more and spending more,

but in the end, they are still in recession, the next generation has

to pay the price for what we spend today. At the end of the day, you

can do lots of popular things very quickly, to become more popular,

but you will pay for them. That so much more honest answer. To say, we

do have the ability to drop petrol down, but the best of the taxpayers

would then have to subsidise the car driver. It is the fact, what

annoys me, is that politicians do not use that type of language. We

can cut gas and electricity prices, too. The question is, who will pay

for it? The average energy price now is more than �1,300. The

cheapest is �1,040. It is a charge for apathy. Those people who are

financially illiterate pay more than serve the people, and wealthy

people, like me, who know what we're doing. You cannot effect

change on that -- you can change that by regulating the market more

strongly, but you choose not to do that. The electorate needs honesty.

Should politicians be more clear run these issues? You cannot get

more honest than people saying, we have inherited a situation where

there is no more money. Liam Byrne told us, good luck to you, there is

no more money. You have got to balance the books somehow, when

your borrowing �450 million per day. But when motorists said, �1.45 per

litre is just too much, we have tried to do something about it, we

have deferred some of the fuel duty rises. It is 10p less, not a huge

amount of money, true. But my children, your children, our

children, will have to pay, if we are irresponsible now. And it is

the same with food prices as well, is it? There is no VAT on food, it

is a very different case. Prices go up around the world, and you have

got to try to do what you can. If interest rates go up by 1%, the

money that we borrow, you will know better than anyone, what that would

do to mortgage payments and all of the other payments. Yes, but we

talk about quantitative easing, which is not really printing money,

and if you look at PPI, it has put more money into the economy, done

more for people with a lack of income, than quantitative easing.

You could give people money. My biggest frustration, if I was

sitting in your chair, the thing that would drive me up the wall, it

is not going to be a quick fix, but the real thing we could do would be

to have compulsory financial education in schools. If you did

that then people would start to have an understanding of the

differentials in gas and electricity. You would avoid a

bloodbath which is coming when universal credit is introduced, and

people who have been budgeting on a weekly basis, to doing so on a

monthly basis, and I tell you, people are not financially literate

enough to deal with that. Pensions as well. Why we do not have

financial education in schools, you refuse to give people the tools to

deal with these things. You cannot say people have to look after

themselves, but not give them the tools. With huge respect to you, we

are doing a lot on education. We are trying to make mathematics...

Not on universal credit, when you move from weekly to monthly.

that point was, what we are doing in schools. I have been campaigning

on this for two years. It is all about having a deep understanding

of maths before we move on from that. We need the basics right. We

had 13 years when nothing happened. I have got to stop you both there.

We will have to get you both on again. Now, after the excitement of

last week's Cabinet reshuffle, become a what's in store for us

this week. In a moment I will be speaking to a couple of political

hacks who can give us the inside track. But first, a round-up. The

TUC conference is taking place in Brighton. Brendan Barber's

successor, the TUC's first female general secretary, speaks tomorrow.

Plaid Cymru are also holding their conference this week in Brecon. The

Hillsborough Independent Panel discloses its findings on Wednesday.

The panel has analysed more than 400,000 pages of documents relating

to the death of 96 Liverpool fans in 1989. Also on Wednesday, the

latest unemployment figures are announced. The Government will be

hoping for good news following positive unemployment figures in

August. We can now go to college green, to speak to Sam Coates from

the Times and Pippa Crerar, the City Hall editor of the Evening

Standard. Starting with you, Pippa Crerar, on those unemployment

figures, how much comfort can the Government take? I think it will be

part of a bigger picture which is going on this week, which is that

the Government is launching a new drive to boost growth. We have had

announcements this morning about cutting red tape, and Vince Cable

will be doing his industrial strategy later in the week. And

then the unemployment figures are a third part of that. It is all part

of the Government's drive to persuade us that they are back on

track, that the memories of the botched Budget and a difficult

summer are over, and that the economy is going to go places. We

have had a reshuffle, we have got a focus on business policy this week,

and they blew be trying to persuade people that the boom was over the

weekend about plots and discontent with David Cameron are just that.

Sam Coates, looking ahead to the growth figures, that's where

everybody will be focusing their attention, because another

contraction would be pretty devastating for the Government,

wouldn't it? Absolutely. It is quite interesting. What we have

seen over the weekend, Tory commentators close to George

Osborne, and a handful of politicians, saying that all of a

sudden, everything is on the up. Unemployment is going down, growth

might have turned a corner, and that actually, after the Olympics,

we should be optimistic about the economy. Experts, outside of the

Westminster bubble will present a slightly different picture. They

say we just do not know that the economy has turned a corner, we

have absolutely no idea what is going to happen in the eurozone,

either. It does not look like the banks have been successfully

encouraged to lend, either. So, there is an attempt this week by

Tory politicians to tell us that things are getting better, but I

think viewers should be slightly cynical about that, it is no more

than positioning before the party conferences. We have had the story

about Colonel Bob Stewart, urged to stand as a stalking horse by two

backbench colleagues - Sam Coates, what is the mood on the Tory

backbenches? They were said to be pleased by the reshuffle, is that

true? The stories about Bob Stewart a curious, I think they are several

weeks old. But I think the discontent which has been generated,

partly by the reshuffle, and partly by the ongoing malaise, is very,

very real. I was picking it up, it was acute last week. I think there

are people speaking about David Cameron's future. I'm not sure

whether it will actually mean anything, but such is the depth of

dislike and high feeling currently in the Tory party, I would not be

terribly surprised if there were other people with half an eye on

what might happen in the future. Last week was meant to see a

reshuffle which would please the right, and indeed, David Cameron

promoted people like Chris Grayling and Owen Paterson. But a hours

before the reshuffle, I was speaking to one why his Cabinet

minister who said, the problem with promoting the right is that the

rest are left without jobs, and they will be just as upset as they

always are. Pippa Crerar, speaking of relations between the back

benches and the leadership, on the Labour side, we have just spoken to

Brendan Barber, but this is a difficult moment for Labour as well,

in terms of its relationship with the unions, isn't it? Very much so.

Ed Miliband was speaking to union leaders this morning, but not

appearing in front of the delegates. It is a tricky one, because Labour

has decided not to oppose the pay freeze, the public sector pay

freeze, and the unions are not happy about that. Also many on the

left of the party, and on the backbenches, share that view. It

will be to the good for Ed Miliband to balance the conflicting demands

on him, as a pragmatic party leader, who wants to encourage mainstream

opinion, to marry that with the views of his union paymasters, who

provide about 80% of the party funding.

We are joined now by our Monday MPs' panel. We are joined today by

By think it is fairly important that we keep up a relationship with

the unions, it is a historic one and we can be mutually supportive

and in our aims, we think that the public sector can do a very good

job and it is not all about privatising the sector's -- the

private sector. One is Ed Miliband hiding away? I don't stay if he is

hiding away or not but the relationship between the unions and

Labour will continue and I think it should continue, it has been good

for the country that we have that relationship. Important in terms of

labour's policy and reaction to the public sector pay freeze, unions

are very upset. Did Ed Miliband do the right thing? I think in the

circumstances, he did, because we are dealing with the reality of now.

Would we have dealt with it defending government, the answer

might be different. -- in government. The Government has now

had to increase its borrowing because it got its economic

strategy wrong and therefore, there is nowhere for the Government to go,

but that is the Government's making rather than anything positive the

Labour Party have done. Do you welcome the overtures coming from

Labour politicians like Ed Balls towards Vince Cable, trying to

forge closer links between the Lib Dems and Labour? With all of these

things, I think there is a fair amount has been going on. In is it

a good thing? A I think any dialogue between any of the party's

in Westminster is sensible when we have such an enormous economic

crisis. I think the unions to have a problem, because Labour

themselves, the Labour leader supports the Government pay freeze,

and that is very difficult and if the unions do decide to hold a

general strike, I think it is the wrong thing for the country and it

will put Labour in a very difficult position. Meanwhile, the coalition

is focusing on what counts, the economy. People feel their living

standards are being squeezed, a pay freeze continues as food and fuel

goes up, don't you have some sort of sympathy? A I have some enormous

-- I have enormous sympathy. As my colleagues said on Saturday,

another by constituents came to see me on Saturday and even those

working and in good jobs, it is difficult. The public to appreciate

the country is in a mess. Economic click it is typical. The ban after

two years of a coalition government? They should even after.

If you compare how we are doing in this country compared to others, it

is difficult for people to understand. They certainly don't

understand are the private sector and even in the public sector,

where it is hard, people understand they have to keep gritting their

teeth. You agree with Vince Cable that it is not to do with supply-

side measures, it is to do with the man? I think it is everything. If

everything was as black as white as everyone who might say, we would

sort it ages ago. It is complicated. Is it as restless on the

backbenches as we heard from Sam Coates? Tories are very

dissatisfied after that reshuffle. A I don't think the Tory

backbenchers I told to are not dissatisfied. He why you talking

to? The 2010 intake. Have we were elected under a pack form put

forward by David Cameron and he is doing a good job -- a platform.

What is your response to these stories of stalking? Why are people

publicly admitting that they were asked to stand against the David

Cameron, or people overtly criticising him or telling him to

get rid of his Chancellor before the reshuffle? What was Bob

Stewart's response to the stalking? That it was silly. Two backbench

MPs asked him to do it. But Parliamentary party, in every party,

is an ambitious pace. People who don't get jobs will always be

dissatisfied. The reality is that I, along with any of my colleagues,

want to see the coalition government getting on with the job

of sorting out the economy and this talk of stalking horses and

leadership challenge as, at this point in the political cycle, is

silly. It is Tory MPs who are talking about it, with all due

respect. It isn't the common Terry at, they are reacting to what has

come from MPs? Did the reshuffle do what it was supposed to do in

quelling doubts among backbenchers? Without doubt, and Michael Fallon

were saying exactly the right things about cutting regulation and

getting the economy moving and creating jobs and that is what a

lot of us want to hear and where the focus to be. I had been a

Conservative for a long time. I looked through the 1990s and I

remember exactly what happened when you had a party divided and could

not work with itself. Have things changed? Boundary changes have gone

down in flames thanks to the Liberal Democrats, a watershed

moment for Conservative MPs, ill to make it harder to achieve that

majority? I was perfectly candid about this because I was one of the

MPs whose constituency was scheduled to disappear. Actually,

boundary changes were the right thing for the Government to do. We

stood on a manifesto that said we would reduce the number of MPs,

make the numbers more equal, so I am very disappointed that the Lib

Dems are not going to support it. There was a coalition agreement and

if it was not met, so be it. Boundary changes are off the table.

Of what you say? You must be delighted in the Labour Party?

Probably, yes, because I think some of my patch -- backbenchers called

it the gerrymandering Bill, that was the purpose behind it, rather

than what the Government said about reducing the size of the electorate.

I was expecting add extra 1,000 majority on boundary changes. And

as politicians, we tend to look very much on our own perspective,

but I think what the coalition will discover is that constitutional

reform can be difficult. It is very easy shouting from the opposition

asking why don't she reform the House of Lords, which the Labour

government did in taking away most of the hereditary peers, but

getting everybody to agree it must be reformed is easy, what is that

the colt is what the reform should be. It's would have helped if

Labour would have supported us -- it would have helped. It wouldn't

have taken 100 years. I was there during all the constitutional

debates during Scottish devolution and never did we have a programme

motion, the kind of programme motion we have Beck, it did not

exist. Nor did we have night sought guillotines, because it was

constitutional and taken on the floor or the House -- of the House.

There was an attempt to stifle debate around what for many people

was a very emotional subject. have been constant negotiations for

over a year between the different parties. My disappointment was with

Labour more than the Conservatives, because I knew the Tory Right would

try and stop it, but for Labour to try and pretend they were

supporting it while people in the know know that they killed it stone

dead was a real shame for progressive politics. We could have

got rid of the House of Lords. Disappointment all round. Back to

the subject we are so familiar with, the straining of sinews, the

pushing of limits, the Blood sweat and tears and that is just working

of course on the daily politics, and the Herculean efforts of our

politicians to hop, skip and jump onto the Paralympic and Olympic

bandwagons. Let's see them all in MUSIC: "Gold" by Spandau Ballet.

I think it has lifted the whole country, it has brought people

together and I am very proud of I want to join the Prime Minister

in paying tribute to everyone involved in the Olympic and

Paralympic Games. Our athletes, our fantastic volunteers and indeed the

whole country that united in support of Team GB and came

Every community in the country will be with the athletes every step of

the way, each triumph, each setback, each joy, each sorrow, each victory

and beach disappointment. I think it is really a great national event,

a national coming together and it remains for me to say the very best

We so often allowed ourselves to believe we are a nation of gracious

losers. We are actually a nation that likes that winning feeling and

we have Team GB to thank for that, they have inspired the whole

I think the whole country look at what you did in all and

stupefaction. The question is, how do we keep it going?

Well, it has been a fabulous sum of sport and you can hardly blame the

politicians for wanting to jump on that success bandwagon -- some of

sport. Has any of the Stade has rubbed off for the Conservatives or

the Liberal Democrats? -- Stardust? A I don't think it matters, what

matters is we have a good legacy and those community grassroots

sporting groups get out there and continue to attract the influx of

people contacting them over the summer saying they wanted to try

whatever sport, and we make sure that we have a good, healthy,

active community taking part in lots of sport. There will be a

spike, I am sure, in terms of participation, but everybody has

and will talked about Legacy and we have heard politicians saying the

confidence to deliver big things. What are these big things and what

is being talked about? The biggest thing is to have a more active,

healthier population. Not to do with the economy, then? The

impression that you get from politicians there is they hope this

will somehow inject some momentum into a fact-finding economy.

think we showcased what is superb in Britain, delivering a fantastic

event and of course she want there to be a put it in tourism, but I

come from a background of local authority being a portfolio for

leisure, and my big thing of the Olympics is I want to see people

taking part out there. We can look at these pictures, thousands of

people lining the streets of the parade and the support that has

been seen all summer, particularly from volunteers... One of the

things Vince Cable said is that business can learn from the

Olympics and the Paralympics. What does he mean, Stephen Lloyd?

Everyone should volunteer to help business grow? He hasn't phoned me

to tell me what it means. The two different bits of Medicine that I

think are incredibly significant -- Legacy, the legacy of volunteers,

the 70,000 plus volunteers were just amazing. The lift they gave to

the Games and the whole country was superb and the other thing, the

legacy of perception. Disability is something I have been batting for

for a long time and for the country and the nation as a whole to see

the astonishing exploits of our Paralympian is, I think that all

changed perception across the board about disability -- Paralympians.

Everyone will agree on that but let's look at the specifics. All of

those people have had a wonderful summer, people do feel good as a

result of Team GB and the pulling together of the volunteers, as you

say, but there have been reports in the paper that growing businesses

will be surrounded by advisers in the same way that athletes are

surrounded by their coaches. There is a sense that this -- this is

rhetoric. What helped enormously for Team GB was money,

straightforward investment of lottery cash, a lot of money went

into sport and that is why we were successful. Is that is what -- is

that what is needed? I agree there was money but also confidence. One

thing Mike Politt will share with me on this, or prior to the

Olympics the print media said it was going down the pan and the

great British public decided they would love it and they proved to be

right and I think confidence equally applies in business. What

about the issue of money? absolutely needs money. The reason

we have done so well as Team GB in Alan Pakes and Paralympics is

because of the lottery money and that is the long and short of it --

in the Olympics. The danger is that we will get a spike, we get on

every year after Wimbledon, and that the enthusiasm will go on. I

hope it does but I fear is that as we get further and further away as

it gets more difficult, no more sporting events to engage in,

hopefully the 2014 Commonwealth Games in Glasgow will get the same

passion, but then once it is off the news, people forget about it

and the money dried up. Caroline, your best moment? Undoubtedly

Hannah Cockroft. A fantastic model for everybody, particularly women -

- women in sport. If you go to the Paralympics? No, sadly, but I did

go to Greenwich. Thank you to what you, enjoy the rest of this