:00:55. > :01:04.Politics. On a day when the world's leaders have come to Northern
:01:04. > :01:11.Ireland, it is the start of the G8 conference in Lough Erne and it has
:01:11. > :01:14.started with a little political stardust. But warm words aside, the
:01:14. > :01:18.conference agenda will be tough, with the leaders far from agreed on
:01:18. > :01:21.what to do about the civil war in Syria. We'll have all the latest.
:01:21. > :01:24.Plus, Labour sets out its plans for schools, extending some of the
:01:24. > :01:26.freedoms enjoyed by academies to all. But do plans to sack
:01:26. > :01:30.unqualified teachers fall foul of employment law? And former minister
:01:30. > :01:34.Hazel Blears tells us its time to start paying our interns. All that
:01:34. > :01:37.in the next hour, and our special guest today is the investor and
:01:37. > :01:46.entrepreneur Julie Meyer of Ariadne Capital. Let's start with the
:01:46. > :01:49.Co-op's troubled banking division. The news today is that there's been
:01:49. > :01:54.a deal with the regulators to try and plug a 1.5 billion pound
:01:54. > :01:59.shortfall in its balance sheet. Is it a good deal, Julie? It is
:01:59. > :02:05.interesting how they got to where they are and how they will get out,
:02:05. > :02:15.two separate issues. My perspective would be looking at the rise of new
:02:15. > :02:15.
:02:15. > :02:19.lenders, like Soper. What happens to the Co-op bank I think has less of
:02:19. > :02:29.an impact on overall the economy and the financing of small businesses
:02:29. > :02:37.
:02:37. > :02:44.than some of the new funders. that because we are still living in
:02:44. > :02:50.an age where banks like the Co-op are still teetering on the edge?
:02:50. > :02:55.People will find it difficult to hear the news that the Co-op needed
:02:55. > :02:57.that amount of money? The banks would probably argue that they are
:02:57. > :03:00.being given mixed messages about whether they should prepare their
:03:00. > :03:06.balances or keep lending. A new banking system is emerging.
:03:06. > :03:11.Unregulated? You have to be regulated, and so do the crowd
:03:11. > :03:17.lenders, so they are dilated but much less so, but the interesting
:03:17. > :03:22.thing is how much they are growing. People may think this is for the
:03:22. > :03:27.doctors and dentists of the world, this is becoming a mass phenomenon.
:03:27. > :03:32.Does it need to be regulated? If you look at the issue of the Co-op, it
:03:32. > :03:39.is a big test for the regulator, will the regulator turn its
:03:39. > :03:45.attention to the phenomenon you are talking about? Who guard the
:03:45. > :03:50.guardians? Do we trust people to be honest? No, and there is something
:03:50. > :03:54.to be said for new light structures, lean technology,
:03:55. > :04:01.efficient structures and some new institutions giving broader
:04:01. > :04:06.competition. Are we seeing green shoots in the economy? Yes, it is a
:04:06. > :04:16.fantastic time to be an investor, but the economy feels uneven. It is
:04:16. > :04:16.
:04:17. > :04:25.not just the high-growth start-ups, we work with corporate is trying to
:04:25. > :04:29.find a system to create high-growth but I feel the economy is very
:04:29. > :04:33.uneven with people embracing this massive digital transformation in
:04:33. > :04:39.society, and some people, sometimes the heads of large culprits, who
:04:39. > :04:44.believe they can choose the moment at which they engage. Spend their
:04:44. > :04:50.money, you mean? Know, maybe they are sitting on a large amount of
:04:50. > :04:55.cash, but technology advances not just because large corporate
:04:55. > :05:02.boardrooms decide it is going to advance at a certain pace or not. It
:05:02. > :05:04.has its own natural momentum. Now it's time for our daily quiz.
:05:04. > :05:07.And the think tank Policy Exchange has suggested building new super
:05:07. > :05:10.prisons and doing away with establishments like Holloway and
:05:10. > :05:14.Wormwood Scrubs. But what does it want to do with the old buildings?
:05:14. > :05:18.Is it to use them as army barracks? Turn them into boutique hotels?
:05:18. > :05:27.Replace them with supermarkets? Or create inner city farms? At the end
:05:27. > :05:33.of the show we will give you the correct answer. The 39th summit of
:05:33. > :05:36.the G8, hosted by the UK in Lough Erne is in full swing today. The
:05:36. > :05:46.great and the good have clamoured to a quiet corner of Northern Ireland
:05:46. > :05:49.to thrash out the big issues of the day. Joining the Prime Minister
:05:49. > :05:51.David Cameron for a high level pow-wow are Presidents Obama, Putin
:05:51. > :06:00.and Hollande, Mrs Merkel, Canada's Stephen Harper, Italy's Prime
:06:00. > :06:03.Minister Enrico Letta and Japan's Shinzo Abe. The G8 summit's agenda
:06:03. > :06:06.has been carefully created by the Prime Minister to encompass three Ts
:06:06. > :06:09.- tax, transparency and trade. With his main focus on setting global
:06:09. > :06:12.rules to share tax information and cracking down on tax dodgers. But it
:06:12. > :06:15.seems Syria will be dominating the conversation with high level
:06:15. > :06:18.meetings expected between the UK, US and Russia. With such a packed
:06:18. > :06:24.agenda, is it any wonder that the wives and Mr Merkel are not
:06:24. > :06:32.attending? Mrs Obama is in town for the G8 but she's been sent to Dublin
:06:32. > :06:35.to watch Riverdance. Well, earlier today, President Obama arrived in
:06:35. > :06:43.Belfast for the G8 Summit, and he took some time out to talk to young
:06:43. > :06:47.people about future hopes for Northern Ireland. Here in Northern
:06:47. > :06:52.Ireland, this generation has known even more rapid change than many
:06:52. > :06:56.young people have seen around the world. And while you had unique
:06:56. > :07:02.challenges of your own, you also have unique reasons to be hopeful,
:07:02. > :07:10.for you are the first generation in this land to inherit more than just
:07:10. > :07:17.the hardened attitudes and the bitter prejudices of the past. You
:07:17. > :07:24.are an inheritor of a just and hard earned peace. You now live in a
:07:24. > :07:30.thoroughly modern Northern Ireland. Of course the recessions that have
:07:30. > :07:34.spread through nearly every country have inflicted hardships here as
:07:34. > :07:41.well, but day-to-day life is changing throughout the North. There
:07:41. > :07:47.was a time people couldn't have imagined Northern Ireland hosting a
:07:47. > :07:54.gathering of world leaders as you are today. And our chief political
:07:54. > :07:57.correspondent Norman Smith joins us now from the G8 Summit. President
:07:57. > :08:01.Obama talking about a transformed Northern Ireland, but of course it
:08:01. > :08:06.is a conflict in the Middle East that will dominate the talks today,
:08:06. > :08:14.and as it stands they couldn't be further apart, Russia, the UK and
:08:14. > :08:21.the US? Yes, there is no disguising the yawning divide of Russia and
:08:21. > :08:28.everyone else here. Canada's Prime Minister described the summit as the
:08:28. > :08:35.G-7, plus one. That said, I don't think there is any sign of President
:08:35. > :08:39.Putin giving in, he doesn't seem to change his position easily and he is
:08:39. > :08:43.utterly convinced of his stance which means what we are going to see
:08:43. > :08:47.from President Obama and the Prime Minister is trying to sketch out a
:08:47. > :08:53.longer argument which is to say that if nothing is done, then the danger
:08:53. > :08:56.is that in time President Assad will be removed and replaced by an
:08:56. > :09:01.extreme Islamist regime which will not only be to the disadvantage of
:09:01. > :09:05.the West but also to Russia because the last thing Russia wants in its
:09:05. > :09:10.sphere of influence is a fundamentalist regime. The hope is
:09:10. > :09:16.that in time that may begin to chip away at President Putin's
:09:16. > :09:22.resistance. What might make that more difficult is America's decision
:09:22. > :09:27.to arm the rebels in Syria. Is there an expectation now from the Obama
:09:27. > :09:32.Administration that somehow the UK will follow suit in terms of arming
:09:32. > :09:36.rebels? Whatever the expectation in the United States, I think the blunt
:09:36. > :09:41.reality is there will be no arming of the rebels in the near future by
:09:41. > :09:45.Britain and the simple reason for that is Parliament and public
:09:45. > :09:49.opinion. If you look at the Parliamentary arithmetic, there is
:09:49. > :09:54.no way David Cameron could win a vote. Iraq casts a very long
:09:54. > :09:59.shadow, which is why Downing Street are trying to recalibrate this whole
:09:59. > :10:03.argument to say it is not just about supplying arms to the rebels, this
:10:03. > :10:09.is about a broader geopolitical struggle is similar to Afghanistan
:10:09. > :10:13.and North Africa, about confronting Islamists who pose a fundamental
:10:13. > :10:17.challenge to Western values. In other words it is a longer campaign
:10:17. > :10:22.which is William Hague said this morning could go on for years. In
:10:22. > :10:25.the near future I think there is no prospect of us offering arms which
:10:26. > :10:32.is why David Cameron and William Hague have been stressing non-lethal
:10:32. > :10:38.assistance. The stressing is on non-lethal assistance such as
:10:38. > :10:40.armoured cars and night vision goggles. And the Conservative MP who
:10:40. > :10:44.chairs the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, Richard Ottaway, is here
:10:44. > :10:47.now. Do you agree with that assessment that there is no chance
:10:47. > :10:56.of any sort of decision being made by the Government to arm rebels in
:10:56. > :11:02.Syria? I think it is pretty unlikely, Norman Smith's assessment
:11:02. > :11:08.is pretty accurate. I would like to see a discussion, but actually what
:11:08. > :11:13.is going to be proposed is critical here. If we are talking about
:11:13. > :11:16.continuing support with non-lethal equipment perhaps, I'm sure people
:11:16. > :11:22.will support it. The line that I think most of my colleagues in
:11:22. > :11:28.parliament would be reluctant across is physically arming and providing
:11:28. > :11:34.lethal equipment. Are you in favour of arming rebels with lethal weapons
:11:34. > :11:38.or not? I want to see the proposal before I make up my mind. If there
:11:38. > :11:43.is a sensible proposal that could bring this conflict to a closure and
:11:43. > :11:49.get the sort of pressure on President Putin that Norman Smith
:11:49. > :11:54.was talking about, then I think that is worthy of consideration. It would
:11:54. > :12:01.never pass a vote, would it? We have heard from Tory backbenchers and the
:12:01. > :12:08.Mayor of London saying that arming the rebels would be disastrous
:12:08. > :12:12.because Britain would be pressing weapons into the hands of maniacs.
:12:12. > :12:19.think giving a few cases of rifles to the rebels would be a mistake and
:12:19. > :12:23.I wouldn't support it, but if their work to be a sophisticated approach
:12:23. > :12:28.combined with a diplomatic effort, I think that effort could be supported
:12:28. > :12:34.by some sort of pressure. Russian president was pretty angry,
:12:34. > :12:41.I was surprised by the language he used saying Britain was in danger of
:12:41. > :12:46.supporting rebels even with their non-lethal assistance, who killed
:12:46. > :12:52.their enemies and eat their organs. It doesn't sound like there will be
:12:52. > :12:57.any meeting of minds. I think it is a mistake for him to use an isolated
:12:57. > :13:07.incident and use it as the basis of a decision that will affect millions
:13:07. > :13:07.
:13:07. > :13:11.of people. This is a serious civil war that could affect the security
:13:11. > :13:19.of the Western world. What about America's position here? What is
:13:19. > :13:26.public opinion about arming Syrian rebels and getting involved in a
:13:26. > :13:29.conflict? Let's face it, Americans, when they are told they are going to
:13:29. > :13:33.war by their president they get behind it, but I think we need to
:13:33. > :13:37.change the rules of the game. We are on the side of freedom and we
:13:37. > :13:43.believe that, and that is why America and Britain get behind when
:13:43. > :13:49.there is a call to go to war. One of the told stories about Libya is how
:13:49. > :13:52.technology played a major role. Why don't we arm everyone, the good and
:13:52. > :13:58.the bad, with the communications ability to tell their story to
:13:58. > :14:07.world. Let them get their story out there about the ideals they are
:14:07. > :14:12.fighting force because frankly I'm not sure the average American knows.
:14:12. > :14:16.We need the case for what they are fighting for, the principles of that
:14:16. > :14:19.course, and that is what is being lost and that is why nobody can
:14:19. > :14:24.really determine whether this is good or bad because nobody really
:14:24. > :14:30.understands what it is we could be fighting for. Isn't that the worry,
:14:30. > :14:34.we don't know who the good guys are here. The Syrian Government not, in
:14:34. > :14:42.the terms that have been framed by the British Government, but who are
:14:42. > :14:46.these rebels? You are quite right to ask the question, who are the good
:14:46. > :14:51.guys, I don't think there are any at the moment. We are seeing a conflict
:14:51. > :14:56.between Russia, Iran, Hezbollah in Lebanon on one side supporting the
:14:56. > :15:00.regime, on the other side you've got the Qataries, the Saudis, Turkey,
:15:00. > :15:04.supporting the rebels, and now the United States. And this is one hell
:15:04. > :15:10.of a mess at the moment. Is Assad winning? Those were the reports
:15:10. > :15:13.coming out now, and the reason I suggest that we are hearing more
:15:13. > :15:16.desperate rhetoric, if you like, from people like William Hague,
:15:16. > :15:19.saying the UK Government wants to ensure the opposition in Syria is
:15:19. > :15:23.not exterminated before a political settlement can be reached, is that
:15:23. > :15:32.because Assad is winning? He's certainly on top at the moment,
:15:32. > :15:35.controlling all the major cities bar one. The rebels are in the
:15:35. > :15:40.countryside and though they have room to manoeuvre, it's hard to say
:15:40. > :15:43.they are not in control. What about Bosnia? That will evoke strong
:15:43. > :15:49.emotion. Tony Blair, if you remember, he counted the then
:15:49. > :15:53.American President, Bill Clinton, and led forces to go into, or
:15:53. > :15:58.intervention in the form of airstrikes, into Bosnia. Are you
:15:58. > :16:04.worried about those comparisons coming true in Syria? There's an
:16:04. > :16:09.important distinction with Bosnia. Bosnia was an oppressed regime with
:16:09. > :16:12.an oppressed government taking part in ethnic cleansing. Here, we have a
:16:12. > :16:14.Civil War and we are basically taking sides. Whether or not that is
:16:14. > :16:23.the right thing, only history will tell us.
:16:23. > :16:28.All right. Now, the shipping forecast. There
:16:28. > :16:33.are places that have hosted meetings of the G8 or the G7 or the G 6 when
:16:33. > :16:40.the group was a bit smaller. Now we can add the name Lokeren to the
:16:40. > :16:46.list. -- Lough Erne to the list. Do the summits ever make the list?
:16:46. > :16:50.Think of it as a romantic mini break, albeit one that costs �50
:16:50. > :16:53.million to stage, with hundreds of journalists and 8,000 police
:16:53. > :16:57.officers there too. Much is agreed in advance. David
:16:57. > :17:05.Cameron's already dropped in on most of his fellow leaders and,
:17:05. > :17:10.behind-the-scenes, diplomats called Sherpas have painstakingly got
:17:10. > :17:14.consensus. Do you recall what was agreed around
:17:14. > :17:18.the table by the bejumpered leaders at last year's meeting in Camp
:17:18. > :17:26.David, what was in the communique issued in the French resort of
:17:26. > :17:29.Deauville in 201 1? And remind me what the talks were about beside the
:17:29. > :17:34.like in Canada three years ago. Sometimes a G8 really does stick in
:17:34. > :17:39.the memory though, like the last time Britain hosted the gathering in
:17:39. > :17:42.2005 at Gleneagles in Scotland. Or maybe it was the celebrity studded
:17:42. > :17:46.Make Poverty History campaign that captured the public imagination,
:17:46. > :17:51.rather than the pledges on aid, and climate change. Many agree the real
:17:51. > :17:54.action is now at the much larger meetings of the G20. After all, can
:17:54. > :17:59.you really address the world's problems if you don't include the
:17:59. > :18:03.leaders of countries like China and India? Richard Ottaway, what is the
:18:03. > :18:10.point of the G8 if you haven't got people like China? Well, you've got
:18:11. > :18:14.most of the key players. I agree, there are difficulties if China are
:18:14. > :18:18.not there. There is an opportunity for politicians to engage on an
:18:18. > :18:21.agenda they know is coming and to come up with constructive solutions.
:18:21. > :18:26.What can you remember which was significant, the other question
:18:26. > :18:30.posed in the film about G8s? Out of that sum my opinion, the Deauville
:18:30. > :18:33.partnership providing aid for the countries in transitioning in the
:18:34. > :18:38.Arab uprising. I'm pleased to say, it's back on the agenda again I
:18:38. > :18:42.think here in Northern Ireland this year. From a business perspective,
:18:42. > :18:46.do you think it achieves anything? Are the summits worthwhile? I'm not
:18:46. > :18:50.convinced. We need to take it to the level which is higher. You mentioned
:18:50. > :18:54.transparency as well. What I would love to see coming out is, at least
:18:54. > :18:57.can we get all parties to agree a level of transparency, openness and
:18:57. > :19:03.freedom, even if it sounds idealistic, how can anybody say
:19:03. > :19:07.that's not a good idea, because then we can start to measure regimes or
:19:07. > :19:12.Governments by the level of freedom, transparency, openness and then we
:19:12. > :19:15.can start to say who's a good guy and bad guy. At a minimum, it's just
:19:15. > :19:19.tit-for-tat without going into a gran lard level of let's be
:19:19. > :19:23.specific, or taking it up a notch and saying, what are we trying to
:19:23. > :19:27.achieve at a principal level. I don't pay attention to it, I admit.
:19:27. > :19:35.If people like Julie aren't Faying attention to it and we are talking
:19:35. > :19:39.about leaders in the would of dis-- paying attention. What is the point?
:19:39. > :19:43.As a cynical politician, there are people out there who like failure,
:19:43. > :19:47.who want things to fail and are fighting for failure and therein
:19:48. > :19:51.lies the clash between pragmatism and idealism. You are talking about
:19:51. > :19:58.people fighting for failure. Are the right countries involved? Do we want
:19:58. > :20:02.to hear what Italy is saying at the high level summits? Well, no,
:20:02. > :20:05.there's the G20, a bigger grouping. These are the key players running in
:20:06. > :20:11.the major economies of the the world and they know what is going on.
:20:11. > :20:21.they solve the big global economic problems? Let's talk about an issue
:20:21. > :20:26.
:20:26. > :20:30.that David Cameron has been taketh talking about? The economy? Yes, a
:20:30. > :20:34.commentary piece was in the newspaper today saying everybody
:20:34. > :20:37.wants companies like Google to come that their economy. The bigger issue
:20:37. > :20:42.is the contribution that we ask of people who're part of our society,
:20:42. > :20:46.whether it's a Google, whether it's an... What sort of contribution
:20:47. > :20:50.though? You are talking about paying their taxes? A bigger contribution.
:20:50. > :20:55.American corporate tax is high, that's why the technology firms keep
:20:55. > :20:59.a lot of cash you've shore and end up buying technology which is fine.
:20:59. > :21:03.There's so much more they could do with the billions kept offshore and
:21:03. > :21:09.I wonder whether or not we give the large US companies a very long lust
:21:09. > :21:12.of things they could do for us. They could support our schools,
:21:12. > :21:17.scholarship programmes, venture capital, all sorts of things. Do we
:21:17. > :21:23.let them know what being a good corporate citizen is? Do we worship
:21:23. > :21:25.them and let them do a bit of tax and we think they are wonderful
:21:25. > :21:29.you think David Cameron's right? don't know, because I don't know
:21:29. > :21:32.what is being requested, but I believe that we should expect a lot
:21:32. > :21:37.out of people. I felt that expectation when I came to this
:21:37. > :21:44.country. Yes. I mean hopefully we'll get a out outcome over tax,
:21:44. > :21:46.transparency. What do you want to see as a good outcome? The overseas
:21:46. > :21:52.territories agreeing that they'll publish all the people operating in
:21:53. > :21:56.those countries. Yes. But will they? Asking is one thing, agreeing it and
:21:56. > :22:00.being put into practice, do you think it will happen? Jo, what the
:22:00. > :22:03.G8 does is focuses minds. It's a point in the calendar that says, we
:22:03. > :22:07.are having a decision on this, and look at the pressure that's been put
:22:07. > :22:10.on the OTs in the last week and they've fallen into the line. That
:22:10. > :22:13.is what international diplomacy, what international efforts are all
:22:13. > :22:18.about and that's what the G8 will achieve.
:22:18. > :22:21.Richard, thank you. Writing ahead of the G8 conference,
:22:21. > :22:26.French President, Francois Hollande, stressed that there can be no growth
:22:26. > :22:31.or development that is not sustainable. And, that the G8 must
:22:31. > :22:34.do its part to curb carbon emissions. Joining me ahead of the
:22:34. > :22:37.key vote in the European Parliament's Environment Committee
:22:37. > :22:42.on Wednesday on the flagship Emissions Trading Scheme is the EU
:22:42. > :22:46.commissioner for climate action, Connie Hedagardt. Welcome to the
:22:46. > :22:50.programme. Before that issue, G8 leaders, as we have been discussing,
:22:50. > :22:55.are at Northern Ireland today and tomorrow discuss trade, tax and
:22:55. > :23:02.transparency. Climate change isn't on the official agenda. Why not?
:23:02. > :23:07.Well, you must ask the G8 President about that, but it's in the
:23:07. > :23:10.preparatory work. President Hollande sent a very strong call that don't
:23:11. > :23:14.forget also when you are talking about the longer term, that climate
:23:14. > :23:18.change is one of the overarching challenges you have to deal with
:23:18. > :23:22.also economically. It's very port. Do you think it's slipping down the
:23:22. > :23:27.global agenda? No, I don't think so. I think that
:23:27. > :23:31.it's simply because there are other areas coming up also that we all
:23:31. > :23:35.understand why they are busy handling the economic issues. I
:23:35. > :23:40.think the economic community, the leaders of the world need to
:23:40. > :23:45.understand what the World Bank has said, the IMF has said, the OECD has
:23:45. > :23:48.said, that dealing with climate change is not an viement issue, only
:23:48. > :23:52.it's very much something you should do in order to prepare your economy
:23:52. > :23:57.for the future. That should be a very clear message also to the G8.
:23:57. > :24:03.Except that the Emissions Trading System, which is the EU flagship
:24:03. > :24:08.environment policy for reducing carbon dioxide emissions is in
:24:08. > :24:12.disarray. I spoke to people in Strasbourg who said this policy is
:24:12. > :24:17.now dead, environmentalists, because the price of carbon is so low and
:24:17. > :24:23.attempts to intervene in the market have failed. Is it dead?
:24:23. > :24:31.It's not dead. But it needs some life support. That is the
:24:31. > :24:33.possibility that the European Parliament airians have once again
:24:33. > :24:38.been talking about. The Environment Committee of the Members of
:24:38. > :24:43.Parliament two days from now. I can only encourage everybody to ups that
:24:43. > :24:50.all kinds of alternatives to having a market-based system where you put
:24:50. > :24:53.a price on carbon, all the other alternatives. By the way, the
:24:53. > :24:58.automotive industry too. It's not that wow, how nice it is that it
:24:58. > :25:02.costs nothing to pollute. The alternative is, you get a fragmented
:25:02. > :25:05.patchwork of 27 different countries doing things. I hope the
:25:05. > :25:10.Parliamentarians this time will get their act together, including, by
:25:10. > :25:15.the way, also some of the British Conservatives who voted no the last
:25:15. > :25:19.time. I hope they can now endorse the compromise that the Environment
:25:19. > :25:24.Committee chair has put together. But realistically, it's not going to
:25:24. > :25:27.happen. Who is going to change their minds? I mean, they sounded pretty
:25:27. > :25:33.entrenched when you spoke to some of the Conservative mens, some of the
:25:33. > :25:37.businesses as well who were lobbying mens who've said that the European
:25:37. > :25:41.institution shouldn't be interfering in a market based system. Either
:25:41. > :25:45.they don't interfere or the system goes down?
:25:45. > :25:49.I think the listeners can imagine what would have happened if
:25:49. > :25:52.everybody had said in the midst of the crisis, we don't interfere with
:25:52. > :25:56.the banks because they are they are market based. There are so many
:25:56. > :26:00.extraordinary things we have had to do because of the economic crisis
:26:01. > :26:07.that I say that people will understand that we must also do
:26:07. > :26:11.something when the price to pollute has come down to almost nothing.
:26:11. > :26:15.It's an obstacle for the innovation that we need in Europe, it's an
:26:15. > :26:20.obstacle for the energy efficiency and resource efficiency that we so
:26:20. > :26:24.much need in Europe. And what should make them change their mind compare
:26:24. > :26:27.toed the former vote? -- compared to the former vote? People have
:26:27. > :26:32.realised that when we in the commission said, please get this
:26:32. > :26:35.right or else you risk the price coming too close to 0, then I think
:26:35. > :26:39.many have said wow, that was almost happening after the first vote in
:26:39. > :26:43.Parliament. So they can see that now it's serious, they had to make up
:26:43. > :26:48.their mind, do they want to keep this market based system or do they
:26:48. > :26:52.want a patchwork and fragmented way forward and therefore I believe that
:26:52. > :26:57.they will get it right later this week, I very much hope so and I
:26:57. > :27:00.would very much encourage that. you are discussing the issue of the
:27:00. > :27:04.Emissions Trading System, energy prices, fuel prices continue to go
:27:04. > :27:07.up? What do you say to the people of Europe? That's what they are
:27:07. > :27:12.interested in, they are not particularly interested, I suggest,
:27:12. > :27:16.in a system that they don't have any relationship to. They want to know
:27:16. > :27:21.if energy prices will come down? very much understand that people are
:27:21. > :27:26.concerned about high energy praises, but if we get it right with this cap
:27:26. > :27:30.on trading, the prices will come back to where they were last fall.
:27:30. > :27:35.That's what we are talking about. What we need in order for each of us
:27:35. > :27:39.to save money on our energy bill, that is more energy efficiency, that
:27:39. > :27:43.is more new technologies. I think that most people realise that in a
:27:43. > :27:47.world where still more people want a share in the good life, the demand
:27:48. > :27:53.for energy, goods, commodities, will only increase, so if in Europe we
:27:53. > :27:57.want to create more jobs and improve our competitiveness, it's a very big
:27:57. > :28:02.advantage to become much more energy efficient, much more resource
:28:02. > :28:04.efficient and that is what can be helped if we get it right with the
:28:05. > :28:09.backlogging and the vote later this week.
:28:09. > :28:15.What was your reaction then to the bid to include a target to decooer
:28:15. > :28:17.Bonnise the UK's electricity generation by 2030 which was
:28:17. > :28:23.narrowly defeated in Parliament because the Chancellor insisted a
:28:23. > :28:29.decision on that target should be delayed to 2016. Was he wrong?
:28:29. > :28:33.You know, I'm not going to interfere with your domestic UK debate...
:28:33. > :28:37.you have set out very clearly what is necessary to bring down energy
:28:37. > :28:41.prices, to try and reduce the polluting that's done. Was it a
:28:41. > :28:46.mistake by this Government and the chancellor to postpone that
:28:46. > :28:52.decarbonisation target? The Commission is very much aware
:28:52. > :28:56.that we need now, not many years from now, we need now to send a very
:28:56. > :29:00.strong signal to those who want to invest in this area. There's a lot
:29:00. > :29:05.of potential investments ready out there, but they need to know where
:29:05. > :29:10.are we heading after 2020. That's why at the European level, we are
:29:10. > :29:13.suggesting we should define the 2030 targets. I'm very pleased the UK
:29:13. > :29:18.Government's endorsed that, but what I say is that your internal
:29:18. > :29:21.discussion of how many targets do you want to have, we can be a bit
:29:21. > :29:24.patient there, waiting for you to define that. We have just opened the
:29:24. > :29:28.discussion now from the Commission and I hope that all member states
:29:28. > :29:30.will understand why the sooner we get the targets right, the better
:29:30. > :29:33.from Europe and for employment in Europe.
:29:33. > :29:38.Thank you very much. In a weeks' time, the Chancellor,
:29:38. > :29:41.George Osborne, will announce the result of his spending review all
:29:41. > :29:44.the great departments of state like the Home Office, health and
:29:44. > :29:48.education and defence will find out how much they'll have to spend in
:29:48. > :29:51.the years ahead. One report today calls for something
:29:51. > :29:55.far more radical than we are likely to hear next week calling for many
:29:55. > :30:05.of the departments we are talking about themselves to be merged or
:30:05. > :30:07.
:30:07. > :30:12.abolished all together. It's been written by the MP, Dom Dominic Raab
:30:12. > :30:17.who is with me now. It's different when you compare it
:30:17. > :30:22.with Japan and the US. I think in this report that if we almost half
:30:22. > :30:28.that number by merging, abolishing some to 11... Halving? That is
:30:28. > :30:33.dramatic? ! But let's be clear. We trying to do two things. Cut out the
:30:33. > :30:36.bureaucracy and the waste, so most of this is certainly not touching
:30:36. > :30:40.frontline services or core programme spending, it's looking at the
:30:40. > :30:45.administration and capital budgets and we reckon we could save �8
:30:45. > :30:48.billion a year in doing that. That's still a huge amount which would go
:30:49. > :30:51.down to paying down deficit faster but also cutting down taxes to give
:30:51. > :31:01.it stimulation to the private sector. Which departments would you
:31:01. > :31:07.
:31:07. > :31:11.departments. You don't need the bureaucracy, I think there has been
:31:11. > :31:15.a lot of debate around the Department for the check, media and
:31:15. > :31:25.sport. Do we need a freestanding bureaucracy around those
:31:25. > :31:30.
:31:30. > :31:39.institutions? If you look at Dec and Defra, if you merged them you would
:31:39. > :31:49.get more joined up policy-making. What do you feel about merging
:31:49. > :31:54.
:31:54. > :32:04.departments? I am 2000% behind it. I spoke to someone who thought it was
:32:04. > :32:12.such a shame, one out of eight bodies, run by very nice people who
:32:12. > :32:19.have no sense of how much of a privilege it is to be given that
:32:20. > :32:28.money. Was this person from one of the department's Dominic has
:32:28. > :32:36.mentioned? It is really not... That just resonate so loudly and clearly
:32:36. > :32:44.with my experience over the past 15 years. They are well-meaning people
:32:44. > :32:51.but the pest people to have control of their own money are taxpayers. --
:32:51. > :32:55.the best people. We can figure it out and so forth. The problem I see
:32:55. > :32:59.with this idea that looks great on paper is how do you save that money?
:32:59. > :33:05.Because all you are going to do is take freestanding bureaucracies and
:33:05. > :33:09.put them in another department, and we will have big bulging departments
:33:09. > :33:13.that spend the same amount of money. They might save a little bit, but
:33:13. > :33:18.unless you cut the amount of work they do they will be spending the
:33:18. > :33:22.same. We have been careful in the analysis and the production of this
:33:22. > :33:27.report to make it clear we are not really aiming centrally at programme
:33:27. > :33:33.spending. In the private sector, if you have merging acquisition you
:33:33. > :33:37.would expect the company to save something like this, and why should
:33:37. > :33:44.those principles not also apply in the public sector? This is another
:33:44. > :33:52.good example because it is not about the snapshot we have now - The Home
:33:52. > :33:58.Office was split and since that period there spending has increased
:33:58. > :34:07.by five billion pounds a year. One of the biggest problems we have got
:34:07. > :34:15.is deporting foreign prisoners. I think we have less joined up policy
:34:15. > :34:19.than before. Do you remember John Prescott oversaw the mammoth
:34:20. > :34:28.department for transport and the regions which was deemed a failure,
:34:28. > :34:33.it was too big and overreaching, it didn't work? I haven't looked into
:34:33. > :34:38.his tenure. You are talking about joining departments together, and
:34:38. > :34:43.what happens is that various sections get forgotten. You might
:34:43. > :34:50.save money but is it worth it for the loss of function? I think we
:34:50. > :34:59.would get more efficiency. If you look at Dec and Defra, we have
:34:59. > :35:07.decarbonisation and energy policy separated from our capability with
:35:07. > :35:11.flood defences so not only would we save taxpayers money, but we would
:35:11. > :35:16.drive much greater efficiency. A lot of this proliferation has happened
:35:16. > :35:20.in the last 30 years so the idea that we couldn't do without some of
:35:20. > :35:30.this bureaucracy is crazy. Absolutely, and I think when
:35:30. > :35:34.
:35:34. > :35:37.everybody is tightening their belts, we should. The -- anything we where
:35:37. > :35:41.can reduce the size of Government means the average small business
:35:41. > :35:45.person is carrying less of a weight on their shoulders and that is how
:35:45. > :35:52.we have to go from the macro to the microbe. I am trying to help people
:35:52. > :35:57.to connect, to reduce the size of Government. Everybody wins, it is
:35:57. > :36:04.not reducing functionality. think decisions would be made more
:36:04. > :36:11.quickly as a result? The biggest fixed cost for any company has is
:36:11. > :36:17.how am I going to pay the Government what I owe them through PAYE
:36:17. > :36:20.national insurance. Small businesses are focused on what their pay the
:36:20. > :36:28.Government, not about how they are going to take business to the
:36:28. > :36:38.world. We have to reduce the cost of Government, the fixed cost of PAYE
:36:38. > :36:42.national insurance. Each separate silo tries to prove its worth by
:36:42. > :36:48.creating extra to prove its worth. We will reduce the regulatory
:36:48. > :36:53.impact. Do you think it will get a good hearing? The Chancellor has
:36:53. > :37:00.always got an open mind and I'm sure it will get looked at carefully, but
:37:00. > :37:05.we must stretch the debate and look at it clearly. If you solve this
:37:05. > :37:15.one, you will get an award, I'm sure. Thank you for being on the
:37:15. > :37:16.
:37:16. > :37:20.programme. Now, it's time for a look at the week ahead. The political
:37:20. > :37:23.press pack will be spending today and most of tomorrow camped out on
:37:23. > :37:25.the shores of Lough Erne in Northern Ireland where the Prime Minister,
:37:25. > :37:28.David Cameron and leaders of the world's most powerful countries are
:37:28. > :37:31.deep in conference. After that, Mr Cameron will be hot-footing it back
:37:31. > :37:34.across the Irish Sea to take his place for Prime Minister's Questions
:37:34. > :37:38.on Wednesday. A little later that evening it's George Osborne's turn
:37:38. > :37:41.in the limelight with the Mansion House speech on Wednesday evening.
:37:41. > :37:48.It's an annual City ritual and Chancellors often use it to set out
:37:48. > :37:50.their thinking. And, of course, he'll be occupied for the remainder
:37:50. > :37:53.of the week, putting the final touches to his spending review,
:37:53. > :37:57.fixing spending budgets for each Government department up to 2015
:37:57. > :38:03.into 2016. He'll make the announcements in his speech next
:38:03. > :38:13.week. Joining us from College Green is Michael Savage of the Times and
:38:13. > :38:15.
:38:15. > :38:20.Elizabeth Rigby of the Financial Times. Elizabeth, how important is
:38:20. > :38:26.the G8 in terms of being a decision-making organisation now?
:38:26. > :38:30.is turning more into a talking shop and there is a concrete story about
:38:30. > :38:35.Syria and how those developments will turn out and whether there can
:38:35. > :38:40.be any process or any agreement made, but in terms of the big issues
:38:40. > :38:45.Cameron is trying to put forward, the EU trade deal and tax issues, I
:38:45. > :38:52.don't think anyone is coming out thinking we will have a concrete
:38:52. > :38:57.deal. You might make sure of the EU trade deal, Syria also not that
:38:57. > :39:04.hopeful, not many signs of action I suspect. Let's pick up one of those
:39:04. > :39:10.things and that is the campaign I David Cameron on cracking down on
:39:10. > :39:15.tax havens. Do you think he will get any agreement on that? He has been
:39:15. > :39:19.pushing hard on that one and there are a lot of people in the US
:39:19. > :39:23.worried about tax who have been praising him. The problem is he
:39:23. > :39:27.might just get ahead of everyone else in these talks. He wants to
:39:27. > :39:32.have a new register which would make it much easier to find out which
:39:32. > :39:35.companies belong to whom to stop them moving tax around the world and
:39:35. > :39:41.offsetting their tax bill. A lot of charities want this to be a very
:39:41. > :39:47.public think, and some charities are saying even over the two days of
:39:47. > :39:54.this G8, �1.4 billion will be moved through tax havens so it is a huge
:39:54. > :40:00.problem. Does it bring much political capital, this campaign for
:40:00. > :40:03.David Cameron? I think it does. Arguably Ed Miliband has been the
:40:03. > :40:10.leader on these issues about fairness in society and there is
:40:10. > :40:14.always this charge with Cameron that he is one of an elite and he looks
:40:14. > :40:19.after his rich friends when it comes to tax decisions. This idea of
:40:19. > :40:24.clamping down on tax avoidance for everyone and making a fairer society
:40:24. > :40:28.and making work pay, I think it is quite a good line for him
:40:28. > :40:34.politically, but as Michael said it is very difficult to get any
:40:34. > :40:39.consensus. You can only really deal with tax on a global level and that
:40:40. > :40:45.is it big problem. Looking ahead to the Mansion house speech, will
:40:45. > :40:53.George Osborne dare to talk about green shoots? We have seen the
:40:54. > :40:57.political dangers in that one before. He will certainly one to be
:40:58. > :41:02.saying something about returning those publicly owned banks into
:41:02. > :41:06.private hands. There has been a lot of talks about this, the problem is
:41:06. > :41:13.how you can do it, the pace at which you can do it, because we bought
:41:14. > :41:23.shares in RBS at about �5, they are trading at around �3, and we are
:41:24. > :41:24.
:41:24. > :41:27.long way off making a profit and we could lose money.
:41:27. > :41:30.Are unpaid internships an invaluable introduction to the job of you
:41:30. > :41:33.dreams? Or a modern form of slave Labour? Young people work for free,
:41:33. > :41:37.gratis and for nothing across the world of business and industry. But
:41:37. > :41:40.is it fair? And should they be paid even though they're happy not to be?
:41:40. > :41:50.Former Labour minister Hazel Blears has a view on this. This is her
:41:50. > :42:20.
:42:20. > :42:30.office as a paid intern. Hello, I am a paid intern and I am a paid intern
:42:30. > :42:30.
:42:30. > :42:33.doing Parliamentary correspondence. These two Rian scheme that I
:42:33. > :42:42.initiated a couple of years ago. They get to have experience of
:42:42. > :42:47.working in Parliament, they get paid a proper wage, and they get help
:42:47. > :42:57.with housing costs, but many young people across the country are being
:42:57. > :43:00.
:43:00. > :43:10.exploited by unscrupulous employers. They are essentially free labour,
:43:10. > :43:11.
:43:11. > :43:14.and most young people across the country are excluded. On paid
:43:14. > :43:17.internships are modern-day scandal and they are particularly rife in
:43:18. > :43:22.the fields where young people are desperate to get a foothold, in
:43:22. > :43:26.fashion, media, journalism, and until recently in politics as well,
:43:27. > :43:32.and that is why I am calling on my colleagues in Parliament to make a
:43:32. > :43:36.pledge to pay their interns. We have got to take a lead in the House of
:43:36. > :43:40.Commons if we are going to encourage others to follow. I also want to
:43:40. > :43:49.make the advertisements of unpaid internships unlawful. In British
:43:49. > :43:54.law, you are worker and entitled to the national minimum wage, and it
:43:55. > :44:00.should not be allowed to advertise unlawful jobs. We need to help young
:44:00. > :44:04.people whose dreams have been dashed because they cannot afford to do an
:44:04. > :44:12.on paid internships. We need to make sure unpaid internships are bound to
:44:12. > :44:15.give people a decent start to their working lives.
:44:15. > :44:18.Well Hazel Blears is with us and she's joined by the other two
:44:18. > :44:20.members of today's Monday panel of MPs - Andrea Leadsom of the
:44:20. > :44:27.Conservatives and the Liberal Democrat MP Annette Brooke. Hazel
:44:27. > :44:30.Blears, what are the statistics? How many interns in Parliament are paid?
:44:31. > :44:38.About 18 months ago the vast majority of interns were not paid
:44:38. > :44:44.and in the last two years we have seen fantastic progress in politics.
:44:44. > :44:47.That recent? Yes, now it is only a handful of MPs and I am saying today
:44:47. > :44:52.that in order for us to ask other businesses to do the right thing, we
:44:52. > :45:02.have got to show some leadership on this issue and say we are committed
:45:02. > :45:05.
:45:05. > :45:08.to paying our interns. We are moving in the right direction but there are
:45:08. > :45:10.still a handful of MPs advertising for internships up to 12 months on
:45:10. > :45:15.paid to do diaries, research, fundraising. That handful, is that
:45:15. > :45:21.across the political spectrum? the handful I have left, I haven't
:45:22. > :45:26.seen many Labour wants, I have to say. Again, they are minority now
:45:26. > :45:29.and if you look back to a few years ago it was a culture. I'm not
:45:29. > :45:34.blaming my colleagues because everybody did it, but in future
:45:34. > :45:44.let's make sure we do the right thing. Do you believe all interns
:45:44. > :45:49.
:45:49. > :45:53.should be paid? Do you agree I agree with what Hazel is saying, but some
:45:53. > :46:01.should have a weeks' work experience. That's fine. Do you have
:46:01. > :46:06.an intern? A fully paid apprentice. Again, whilst I agree with Hazel, I
:46:06. > :46:11.would say apprenticeships are even better. Every year, I take a sixth
:46:11. > :46:15.form lever from a school many my constituency, they get an NVQ level
:46:15. > :46:20.four and some real Parliamentary experience on their CV. Do you have
:46:20. > :46:25.an intern? I do, indeed.Do you pay? I've been paying for a number of
:46:25. > :46:28.years now in wealth. As you will have probably researched. It's been
:46:28. > :46:32.successful. I take them on a short-term basis, but if they
:46:32. > :46:36.haven't got a job at the end of three or four months and it makes
:46:36. > :46:41.sense to extend for another month, I do that, so I'm flexible on that,
:46:41. > :46:46.but try to use Parliamentary money wisely so don't have an intern for
:46:46. > :46:50.example during the summer weeks because I wouldn't be giving them a
:46:50. > :46:54.good experience frankly. Most MPs it seems do they pair interns. What
:46:54. > :46:59.levels are we talking about? I was going to make the point that it's
:46:59. > :47:04.great you have an apprentice, but the levels for them are very low. On
:47:04. > :47:08.my scheme, I've raised nearly �500,000, paid �18,000 a year, they
:47:08. > :47:11.get help with housing and a person development programme and I worry
:47:11. > :47:15.because of the way rent levels are in London that if you are not paying
:47:15. > :47:19.a decent wage, 95% of people from the rest of the UK can't possibly
:47:19. > :47:24.even entertain the idea of working in London. What do you say to that?
:47:24. > :47:28.You know, my apprentices come from Northamptonshire, work most time in
:47:28. > :47:31.Northampton, they come to London a day a week and travel costs are paid
:47:32. > :47:36.for. For them, it's completely brilliant. They tend to be an
:47:36. > :47:40.A-level school lever, either deciding to work and see if they
:47:40. > :47:46.want to go to university or they've decided not to go down that route.
:47:46. > :47:50.It's a win-win. For a school lever, it gives them a years' worth of
:47:50. > :47:54.office experience. Should it be unlawful, as Hazel Blears suggested,
:47:54. > :48:01.to advertise unpaid internship? think that's a difficult one, isn't
:48:01. > :48:05.it? I absolutely agree with the moral high ground because I found it
:48:05. > :48:09.just unacceptable to carry on with the practice that was existing when
:48:09. > :48:14.I first became an inspect. But you wouldn't go as far as what Hazel is
:48:14. > :48:19.suggesting? I would really want to put as much pressure as possible on.
:48:19. > :48:25.If I could just see there might be some exceptions, that's all I'm
:48:25. > :48:28.saying. I would not go back to any form of paying just expenses, as I
:48:28. > :48:32.have done years ago. It's much better to be paid and to make sure
:48:33. > :48:38.it's a quality experience and that you see your person into a job.
:48:38. > :48:41.Which leads me to finally, even though you are agreed on this issue,
:48:41. > :48:45.unpaid interns whether they are doing a job that's not worthwhile
:48:45. > :48:48.and may not lead to anything, doesn't seem very fair. But, having
:48:48. > :48:52.exceptions where you could interns that are unpaid but there is the
:48:52. > :48:57.likelihood that it might lead to a job, surely that undermines your
:48:57. > :49:02.call for the advertising to be unlawful of unpaid internships?
:49:02. > :49:05.don't agree at all. Four weeks' work experience fine, travel expenses
:49:05. > :49:10.lunches whatever. After that, you are asking people to work long-term
:49:10. > :49:14.for no pay in this country and actually if you are working set
:49:14. > :49:23.hours and have set duties, you are a worker under the law and are
:49:23. > :49:28.entitled to be paid. It's not just politics, it's the media and it's
:49:28. > :49:32.rife in music. You need leadership. There are good people in the media,
:49:32. > :49:39.good magazines and journalists. People like Deloittes and PCC, they
:49:39. > :49:45.pay their interns and as politicians we have to show leadership. I'm
:49:45. > :49:48.delighted we have cross party agreement. What about you? We've got
:49:48. > :49:51.to get young people into work, we shouldn't legislate. If they are
:49:51. > :49:54.offered a job and choose to take it, they should have that job rather
:49:54. > :49:58.than not take it. It's a huge mistake. The kind of cultural
:49:58. > :50:02.pressure, the fact we were talking about it now, the fact the behaviour
:50:02. > :50:07.is changing is all great, to legislate would be to go too far.
:50:07. > :50:10.You run the risk that the only time anyone gets work experience is to do
:50:10. > :50:14.nothing and to sit around and make tea. Actually, young people do want
:50:14. > :50:17.to get on to the job ladder, you should give them the chance to do
:50:17. > :50:21.that. But they shouldn't have to work for free, not in the 21st
:50:21. > :50:25.century. We'll leave it there. Labourisation mantra was education,
:50:25. > :50:29.education, education. Over 15 years on from Tony Blair's famous phrase,
:50:29. > :50:34.what is Labour's policy on education and how is it different to the
:50:34. > :50:38.coalition's? This morning, Steven Twigg has been spelling out in a
:50:38. > :50:41.speech Labour's plans. They want to give all schools some of the
:50:41. > :50:45.freedoms currently enjoyed by academies and free schools. This
:50:45. > :50:48.will mean wider discretion over the curriculum, the freedom to change
:50:48. > :50:54.the length of the school term and school control over procurement.
:50:54. > :50:59.This is what he said earlier. We know that giving schools more
:50:59. > :51:05.freedom over how they teach and how they run and organise their schools
:51:05. > :51:11.can help to raise standards. Innovation excites, it can uncover
:51:11. > :51:15.new ideas and breathe life town the system. Innovation challenges the
:51:15. > :51:21.historic inheritances that mean schools do things that way simply
:51:21. > :51:26.because they always have done. So why should we deny these freedoms
:51:26. > :51:31.to thousands of schools? All schools should have them, not just academies
:51:31. > :51:34.and free schools. Stephen Twigg there. Hazel Blears,
:51:34. > :51:38.Labour has finally and officially adopted the free schools policy of
:51:38. > :51:42.the coalition? I wouldn't go as far as that. I'm delighted by what
:51:42. > :51:47.Stephen said today, he wants all schools to be academies, not free
:51:47. > :51:51.schools. The academy programme was started under Tony Blair and it was
:51:51. > :51:55.about making the poor school schools up to the standards of the rest of
:51:55. > :51:59.the schools and I think what Stephen's done today is, he's said
:51:59. > :52:03.he wants to give all schools the freedom on the curriculum and how to
:52:03. > :52:07.organise themselves because that's showing to give teachers that extra
:52:07. > :52:12.incentive to go out there and do the very best they can. I'm delighted.
:52:12. > :52:16.And in a way, you supported whole heartedly the academies programme?
:52:16. > :52:20.Yes. I come back to the issue that Labour won't reverse free schools?
:52:20. > :52:24.Stephen's said the existing free schools will continue to operate,
:52:24. > :52:27.because you don't want to disrupt children's education and any in the
:52:27. > :52:30.pipeline will be funded. Free schools came about partly because of
:52:30. > :52:34.parents' frustration at the low standards that there were and if you
:52:34. > :52:37.raise standards inle all schools by giving them freedom and having
:52:37. > :52:42.academies, there 'll be very little demand for free schools. So you
:52:42. > :52:45.think in the end that somehow the free schools will wither and die?
:52:45. > :52:48.Probably because I genuinely feel they've come about because parents
:52:48. > :52:52.can't get their children into a decent school so they set up their
:52:52. > :52:56.own. Stephen's talked about parent-led academies, there's not
:52:56. > :52:59.much difference in terms of the ethos we are trying to create.
:52:59. > :53:04.don't think there's any difference between parent-led academies and
:53:04. > :53:08.free schools. You talked about freedom in the curriculum, that's to
:53:08. > :53:11.some extent what free schools and academies are doing? There is a
:53:11. > :53:15.nuance and you are right, it's the role of the local education
:53:15. > :53:17.authority. Stephen said the LEA should be able to intervene where
:53:18. > :53:21.schools are struggle and failing because they have a responsibility
:53:21. > :53:26.to the people in the community. That's right, whatever you call
:53:26. > :53:29.yourself, a free school or academy, the LEA should be able to say we'll
:53:29. > :53:33.help you get back on the rails. you think they should continue to
:53:33. > :53:37.have that role? No. Perhaps one of the greatest achievements of the
:53:37. > :53:41.coalition Government has been the academy and free schools programme.
:53:41. > :53:46.Recently, Sir Michael Wilshere came out and said schools continue to
:53:46. > :53:49.fail the brightest, they are not aspirational, we are in a global
:53:50. > :53:52.race for better education and it's interesting that Stephen Twigg is
:53:52. > :53:57.saying innovation and freedom excites professionals, so let's do
:53:57. > :54:01.more of it. It sounds to me like a reversal sausage machine whereby
:54:01. > :54:04.where making all schools academies, somehow we are capturing them all
:54:04. > :54:07.back under the local council umbrella as they used to be and I
:54:07. > :54:11.think that would be a retro grade step. I think they are doing
:54:11. > :54:14.fantastically well. What is your response to Stephen
:54:14. > :54:19.Twigg saying the freedom should include a longer school day or maybe
:54:19. > :54:23.a longer school term? I don't have a problem with those freedoms. In
:54:23. > :54:26.fact, the Liberal Democrats in their manifesto were actually saying, if
:54:26. > :54:32.freedoms were good for the Labour academies, then they ought to be
:54:32. > :54:36.good for all schools in terms of the curriculum and matters like that, so
:54:36. > :54:40.I'm actually finding a couple of lines I'm absolutely agreeing with
:54:40. > :54:43.them. What we are facing now, whatever
:54:43. > :54:47.one's views on academies and free schools, it would be just
:54:47. > :54:53.irresponsible to try to switch the clock back from everybody's point of
:54:53. > :54:58.view. But personally, I know that I want my party to be thinking through
:54:58. > :55:02.very carefully what is the role of the local authority in this future
:55:02. > :55:07.situation. If you take it to its logical conclusion, you have all
:55:07. > :55:11.academies, all broken free, then actually, your authority, where
:55:11. > :55:14.parents go to to actually make complaints and so on, comes back to
:55:14. > :55:19.central Government. It's like having one local education authority based
:55:19. > :55:22.in the Government department and I don't think that's right.
:55:22. > :55:25.ALL SPEAK AT ONCE That's exactly what we are saying.
:55:25. > :55:28.The local education authority should have the right for all schools,
:55:28. > :55:33.whatever they are called, to intervene when things go wrong.
:55:33. > :55:37.That's right. And free schools. But that's not going to happen, is it?
:55:37. > :55:42.But the responsibility is to their children and families. The teachers'
:55:42. > :55:45.unions, are they happy for a longer school day and term? There will of
:55:45. > :55:49.to be negotiations, but increasingly, everybody's pretty
:55:49. > :55:53.much agreed that having the long-terms and then long school
:55:53. > :55:56.holidays, if you have parents that go to work, it's you expensive to
:55:56. > :55:59.pay for childcare and the evidence is that poorer children fall behind
:55:59. > :56:02.during the long holidays because they don't have the money to go to
:56:03. > :56:08.summer schools and do all the extracurricular education. It would
:56:08. > :56:13.be a great idea to have more terms and shorter school holidays. Coming
:56:13. > :56:19.from a teacher's family, let me put the teacher's viewpoint here.
:56:19. > :56:24.you a qualified teacher? Yes, I am, as is my daughter and husband, so I
:56:24. > :56:30.speak with some passion here that when you have change, it's really
:56:30. > :56:33.important that the changes are at the right pace and you carry your
:56:33. > :56:37.workforce with you. We'd say that in all areas, whatever we are talking
:56:37. > :56:43.about. There's no doubt about it, there are unhappy teachers at the
:56:43. > :56:48.moment and there's a lot of work to be done with teachers. But, and...
:56:48. > :56:52.Do you think Michael Gove's moved far too quickly? What I'll say about
:56:52. > :56:57.Michael, his motivations are first class, I really understand what he's
:56:57. > :57:04.trying to achieve. I agree with Andrea on that. I wouldn't go about
:57:04. > :57:08.it in exactly the same fashion, but standards have to be raised. Michael
:57:08. > :57:11.is so passionate about turning around education and the political
:57:11. > :57:14.life cycle doesn't give you very long. If he's been so passionate
:57:14. > :57:17.that he's not taken everyone with him on day up with, you have to give
:57:17. > :57:21.him the chance and the benefit of the doubt because the changes are
:57:21. > :57:27.going to be so beneficial. right. Can I briefly, before we
:57:27. > :57:32.finish, talk about Labour's report at the weekend, or their policy to
:57:32. > :57:36.sack unqualified teachers? Do you think that is a good idea? If you
:57:36. > :57:42.say that every teacher who's not qualified is somehow a bad teacher,
:57:42. > :57:48.I think that's a bit of a broad sweep. That's what Labour's prop
:57:48. > :57:52.posing, 5,000 teachers who haven't got the qualifications will go?
:57:52. > :57:56.danger is that you will have free schools from teachers who have no
:57:56. > :58:00.qualifications. We have to Bo worried about that and need to be
:58:00. > :58:02.careful how it's worked out. I don't believe in sacking people.
:58:02. > :58:08.Qualifications and training is important and we need to rethink
:58:08. > :58:11.that. I've taught in an independent school where everybody is not
:58:11. > :58:15.qualified and that does work. All right. Thank you. We have just
:58:15. > :58:19.got time before we go to do the answer to our quiz. I don't know if
:58:19. > :58:23.you remember it, it was change or setting up new super prisons, doing
:58:23. > :58:27.away with establishments like Wormwood Scrubs and holt hoeway.
:58:27. > :58:34.What would happen to the old buildings? Would they be turned into
:58:34. > :58:39.boutiques, hotels? They have a Reds didn'tial provision, they are used
:58:39. > :58:43.to looking after people. It is boutique hotels and not farms. Thank