:00:37. > :00:42.Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics. Universal credit is
:00:42. > :00:47.slammed as over-ambitious and suffering from poor management. Will
:00:47. > :00:51.the government still be able to deliver its flagship welfare reform?
:00:51. > :00:57.David Cameron arrives at the G20 summit in Russia. They still sent a
:00:57. > :01:02.car for him, but after last week's vote on Syria has Britain lost its
:01:02. > :01:06.place at the top table? The man who helped deliver the Olympics says it
:01:06. > :01:12.is time to take the politics out of building big infrastructure. We'll
:01:12. > :01:15.ask him why. And can local councils cope with more cuts or are there
:01:16. > :01:26.still too many foreign jollies and town hall fat cats?
:01:26. > :01:29.We do not deal in caricature in this programme! All that coming up in the
:01:29. > :01:36.next hour. With us for the duration Merrick
:01:36. > :01:39.Cockell. He assures me he is no fat cat but he used to run Kensington
:01:40. > :01:43.and Chelsea Council, the richest and poshest borough in the country, and
:01:43. > :01:45.is now the chairman of the Local Government Association, which
:01:45. > :01:50.represents councils in England and Wales. Welcome. Before we move on,
:01:50. > :01:54.thousands of children have been starting at school this week but
:01:54. > :01:57.there's been a warning that half of school districts will not have
:01:57. > :02:01.enough primary school places in just two years' time. That warning has
:02:02. > :02:11.come from the Local Government Association, the organisation that
:02:11. > :02:16.Merrick chairs. Let's ask him. We are in a population bubble. There
:02:16. > :02:22.has been a boom of children, babies turning into children about to go to
:02:22. > :02:25.primary school, and that will work through the whole education system
:02:25. > :02:32.so twice the demand is placed. Hardly a surprise. We saw it
:02:32. > :02:37.coming. Why have we not allowed for it since it was obviously
:02:38. > :02:44.predictable? We have been seen it coming through but have been waiting
:02:44. > :02:49.for data. In the end it comes down to places. You know the population
:02:49. > :02:53.overall is in this country but where will it be exactly? Then it is
:02:53. > :02:58.parents applying for children in places and that is choice as well.
:02:58. > :03:03.People do not always want to send their children to school where they
:03:03. > :03:09.live. We have to work with the government to meet the demand. With
:03:09. > :03:11.two years to go, is there time? A lot of councils and schools have
:03:11. > :03:17.been taking action already. They lot of councils and schools have
:03:17. > :03:20.have been converting play space and parts of buildings. Not necessarily
:03:20. > :03:26.things they want to lose but they have been turning them into
:03:26. > :03:31.classrooms. We are in a complicated world of education. The councils are
:03:31. > :03:35.no longer responsible day to day for schools. There is a lot of freedom
:03:35. > :03:41.for schools with free schools and academies, and as a result of that
:03:41. > :03:50.we are seeing a problem of a lack of forward planning. That needs all of
:03:50. > :03:53.us, particularly as the children move into primary, they will move
:03:53. > :03:56.into secondary and we need a lot more secondary schools to deal with
:03:56. > :04:01.that. Wasn't it you will party, the Conservative party, who took the
:04:01. > :04:07.power away from local authorities? Yes, and the view of the Local
:04:07. > :04:11.Government Association is we have a democratic mandate to represent
:04:11. > :04:16.people locally and to understand the conditions locally. We need to be
:04:16. > :04:22.able to work effectively with new schools and those that currently
:04:22. > :04:27.exist. Michael Gove accepted our report very clearly yesterday I
:04:27. > :04:32.think. As things stand at the moment, in two years time, if
:04:32. > :04:38.nothing else was done, how many places would we be short of?
:04:38. > :04:46.Theoretically, there will be half the number of places for new pupils
:04:46. > :04:51.so it is significant. That bad.We saw a similar problem in London five
:04:51. > :04:53.or six years ago and we dealt with it effectively. We will keep an eye
:04:53. > :04:57.on it. Over-ambitious. Weak management.
:04:57. > :05:01.Poor governance. These are just some of the charges facing Iain Duncan
:05:01. > :05:04.Smith and the Department for Work and Pensions over the roll-out of
:05:04. > :05:10.the new universal credit, or lack of it, in a highly critical report by
:05:10. > :05:15.the National Audit Office. Labour is enjoying the government's problems.
:05:15. > :05:20.They are calling it a Titanic sized IT disaster. Well, they know about
:05:20. > :05:22.them. The universal credit is designed to combine six individual
:05:22. > :05:25.benefits, including housing benefit, income support and working tax
:05:25. > :05:31.credit, into one single monthly payment. Crucially it is meant to
:05:31. > :05:34.encourage people to take up work by ensuring that they will always be
:05:34. > :05:39.better off having a job than staying on benefits. The government wants to
:05:39. > :05:42.see all claimants receiving the universal credit by 2017, and it had
:05:42. > :05:47.originally planned to introduce it for all new claimants from next
:05:47. > :05:50.month. But that has been dramatically scaled back to a series
:05:51. > :05:55.of trials, and so far only about 1,000 people are receiving the
:05:55. > :05:59.credit. The government has written off more than £34 million on new IT
:05:59. > :06:07.systems for the project and big questions remain about how it will
:06:07. > :06:10.be delivered. But the National Audit Office also said that universal
:06:10. > :06:12.credit could well go on to achieve considerable benefits if the
:06:12. > :06:21.department learns form these early setbacks. -- learns from these early
:06:21. > :06:25.setbacks. Earlier Labour were granted an urgent question in the
:06:25. > :06:31.Commons. Let's listen to what Iain Duncan Smith had to say. Every
:06:31. > :06:36.National Audit Office recommendation has already been made. The key
:06:36. > :06:40.lesson I take from this is this: That unlike the previous
:06:40. > :06:48.government, who went and crashed one IT programme after another, no
:06:48. > :06:52.government minister ever intervened to change them early so they
:06:52. > :06:57.delivered on time, we are not doing that. I have taken action on this
:06:58. > :07:03.particular programme. This programme will deliver on time and in budget.
:07:03. > :07:11.We're joined now by Max Chay, director of the National Audit
:07:11. > :07:17.Office. The Secretary of State says he recognises the criticisms in your
:07:17. > :07:25.report but they are kind of historic now. He has dealt with them. He is
:07:25. > :07:29.on track. The Department for Work and Pensions is revising its plans.
:07:29. > :07:36.I don't think they have been finalised, checked over or approved.
:07:36. > :07:40.We still think there are significant issues. What is the most significant
:07:40. > :07:45.issue the government needs to address? We were concerned of the
:07:45. > :07:47.lack of a detailed plan as to how universal credit would work.
:07:48. > :07:53.Although there were clear objectives, it was not clear exactly
:07:53. > :07:56.what services would be offered online, how online security would be
:07:56. > :08:02.developed and the systems they would need. Didn't that surprise you? This
:08:02. > :08:06.could be regarded as the biggest single change in welfare since this
:08:06. > :08:11.country established the welfare state at the end of the Second World
:08:12. > :08:15.War, that there is a lack of a plan? Certainly we found it very
:08:15. > :08:19.surprising given the priority of this programme. We felt and over
:08:19. > :08:24.ambitious timetable set at the beginning contributed to a lack of
:08:24. > :08:31.clarity about the requirements needed. They had to develop the
:08:31. > :08:36.policy requirements and some of the systems in tandem. Is it your
:08:36. > :08:43.assessment that this can still be in place and universal by 2017? We
:08:43. > :08:50.haven't seen the latest plans. In our report we raised very clearly
:08:50. > :08:54.that there is a risk, by keeping the 2017 date but starting later, that
:08:54. > :08:57.the roll-out will have to be quicker and that raises risks for claimants
:08:57. > :09:01.and the administration. Thank and that raises risks for claimants
:09:01. > :09:05.for joining us on the Daily Politics.
:09:05. > :09:08.We invited a minister on to the programme - but our very polite
:09:08. > :09:13.request was declined. He even said please! Instead we are joined by
:09:13. > :09:17.Conservative MP, Charlie Elphicke, he sits on the Olympic Delivery
:09:17. > :09:18.Authority. With us too, is the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary,
:09:19. > :09:24.Liam Byrne. He follows all this for Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary,
:09:24. > :09:30.the Labour Party. The most important change in welfare in 60 years and
:09:30. > :09:37.the NAS that you do not have a plan. -- the National audit of the. Iain
:09:37. > :09:45.Duncan Smith thinks it is on time and budget and he has the man who
:09:45. > :09:50.brought in the Olympics on time and on budget as well. But he has just
:09:50. > :09:56.brought him in. Because a lot of things have not been done properly.
:09:56. > :10:00.We have a Secretary of State that is clearly on the ball. As soon as he
:10:00. > :10:08.realised there were problems, he did not allow the disaster to unfold,
:10:08. > :10:11.hands on, change in management. We have just heard from the National
:10:11. > :10:14.Audit Office that they have yet to be convinced that it will be on time
:10:14. > :10:19.and on budget. I think events will be convinced that it will be on time
:10:19. > :10:23.speak for themselves. The Secretary of State is very hands-on and
:10:23. > :10:33.confident. I am confident he will achieve his goal. You might be in
:10:33. > :10:40.power by 2017. Because we have an election in between. Will you
:10:40. > :10:46.continue to attempt to meet the 2017 deadline? We do not have enough
:10:46. > :10:51.information on the table. On the table? We don't know frankly what is
:10:51. > :10:54.going on inside universal credit because the Secretary of State has
:10:54. > :11:00.led parliament up the garden path for most of the last two years. In
:11:00. > :11:05.March he told us it is entirely on track. A month before, his own
:11:05. > :11:09.appointee reset the project. Four track. A month before, his own
:11:09. > :11:15.months before that they downgraded the number of people going on the
:11:15. > :11:19.system next year by 80%. The quiet man has become the cover-up man and
:11:19. > :11:24.what we saw this morning was one of the most invasive performances I
:11:24. > :11:27.have ever seen from a minister in the House of Commons. We want this
:11:28. > :11:34.to go well and that is why I said in the summer, let's have cross-party
:11:34. > :11:40.talks so we can answer these questions. We will have to come to a
:11:40. > :11:44.view on this for our manifesto. So as things stand is you do not know
:11:44. > :11:48.if a Labour government would continue with a universal credit
:11:48. > :11:53.reform? We want to but right now we cannot promise an answer to the
:11:53. > :11:58.question you rightly ask because we have had cover-up after cover-up.
:11:58. > :12:02.The question in Duncan Smith has been giving this morning is that
:12:02. > :12:09.despite the National Audit Office report, he says it is all going
:12:09. > :12:14.swimmingly, but the fact is, from next month, every new claimant was
:12:14. > :12:19.meant to go on universal credit. They are not. And you only have 1000
:12:19. > :12:24.on a pilot programme with the simplest of claims that do not even
:12:24. > :12:30.need any IT. Iain Duncan Smith thinks it is on track. But it is not
:12:30. > :12:34.on track if new claimants are not going to participate as of next
:12:34. > :12:41.month, which was the track! You are off that track. Iain Duncan Smith is
:12:41. > :12:46.right to ensure this roll-out is successful. It is a big reform. The
:12:46. > :12:50.right to ensure this roll-out is Labour Party has opposed universal
:12:50. > :12:56.credit... He says he is in favour of it. We offered cross-party talks in
:12:56. > :13:04.the summer. They voted against it in the Commons. They have opposed every
:13:04. > :13:08.welfare reform, that's why they are the welfare party. Given that
:13:08. > :13:16.universal credit is something that if it is to proceed will survive
:13:16. > :13:20.many governments, why not sit down with the Labour Party and explain
:13:20. > :13:23.the problems and how you intend to address them and they can then
:13:23. > :13:26.inform themselves over how they would handle it if they come to
:13:26. > :13:34.power? What would be wrong with that? Labour have opposed every
:13:34. > :13:38.single welfare reform we have proposed. We supported universal
:13:38. > :13:42.credit and you know that. This system right now is broken, it needs
:13:42. > :13:49.fixing. Universal credit could be part of that answer. It is too big
:13:49. > :13:53.to fail. But today the Secretary of State dropped the target of a
:13:53. > :13:58.million people on the system by next year. He could not tell us how many
:13:58. > :14:02.people would be on the system by the election. He is keeping the 2017
:14:02. > :14:08.date back to hit that he would have to move a quarter of a million
:14:08. > :14:13.people every single month onto the system. That is a city almost the
:14:13. > :14:18.size of Derby. Anyone as experienced as you are in the ways of Whitehall
:14:18. > :14:24.knows that is a pretty tall order. It is but one that Iain Duncan Smith
:14:25. > :14:29.is confident about. It had plenty of experiences from the disasters in IT
:14:29. > :14:34.from the previous government. He did not close his eyes and hope it would
:14:34. > :14:38.all be all right on the night. He has been hands on. He did close his
:14:38. > :14:44.eyes because he told parliament in March it was all on track when he
:14:44. > :14:49.knew himself that it wasn't because he had just appointed someone to
:14:49. > :14:52.reset the project, in the words of the National Audit Office. Given
:14:52. > :15:04.that you think this is the way forward and you would like it to
:15:04. > :15:06.happen, assume whoever wins the next election, wouldn't there be an
:15:06. > :15:09.interest in sitting down with Liam Byrne and going over what the
:15:09. > :15:10.problems are and what you intend to do about them so he can inform
:15:10. > :15:25.himself? together and talk these things
:15:25. > :15:31.through from time to time. I rode together and talk these things
:15:31. > :15:39.to Iain Duncan-Smith and said, I am worried about this. I had a
:15:39. > :15:50.petulant letter back saying, get lost. We have had briefings on the
:15:50. > :15:55.design and the principles. When we ask for basic information, like the
:15:55. > :15:58.business case, we have to go through freedom of information
:15:58. > :16:02.procedures to try and get it. At the end of the day they said, you
:16:02. > :16:06.cannot have anything. That is not good enough. So far they have had
:16:06. > :16:11.to write off 34 million in IT. That good enough. So far they have had
:16:11. > :16:18.is the figure we know at the moment. They still claim it is on time and
:16:18. > :16:21.on budget. Given that Labour managed to waste 13 billion on the
:16:21. > :16:25.NHS IT system, why would anyone managed to waste 13 billion on the
:16:25. > :16:31.have more confidence that you can do any better? We should establish
:16:31. > :16:37.a degree of consensus across all sides of the house. As you say,
:16:37. > :16:43.odds on there will be a change of Government at the next election. No,
:16:43. > :16:49.you are saying that. I read the odds, just like you. We have got to
:16:49. > :16:54.make sure that we go into the next parliament with our eyes wide open
:16:54. > :16:56.and with a plan people can vote on. What is wrong with putting before
:16:56. > :17:01.the British people a realistic, it What is wrong with putting before
:17:01. > :17:06.informed plan for change? A petulant dismissal at cross-party
:17:06. > :17:11.talks is not appropriate. Do you have a local Government view on
:17:11. > :17:18.this. Yes, this is absolutely crucial. We have been talking about
:17:18. > :17:24.our concerns about the over ambition of it. This is not just an
:17:24. > :17:29.IT project. Part of the overt ambition was thinking people would
:17:29. > :17:34.be able to go online themselves and access universal credit. We have
:17:34. > :17:39.seen a change at the beginning of the year. We have seen the pilot
:17:40. > :17:44.areas working with local authorities and they have to go
:17:44. > :17:48.through the practicalities. That caution is wise because the chances
:17:48. > :17:53.are that we have to make it work, because it is too important, but we
:17:53. > :17:58.have to learn from the pilot areas and those 1000 people. Have you
:17:58. > :18:06.learnt anything yet? Literally every day we see the figures and on
:18:06. > :18:10.how it is working, so it has got to get working, but it has to happen
:18:10. > :18:15.at a local level with partnerships between Government and the local
:18:15. > :18:19.authorities. Come the election, the Government will have to be in
:18:19. > :18:25.position to have convincing evidence it is on track. By then
:18:25. > :18:30.they will be on a much better position. If you have only wrote it
:18:30. > :18:38.out to a few other places, it will not happen in 2017. E Ian Duncan
:18:38. > :18:44.Smith is confident it will. He has a team who knows what they are
:18:44. > :18:49.doing. He his hands on. David Freud has also been on the ball working
:18:49. > :18:54.with local authorities. We have got the right leadership team to see it
:18:54. > :19:01.through. If it does look as if it is on track, we support it? Yes, if
:19:01. > :19:07.it is on track. But we have not got that information on the table.
:19:07. > :19:11.Charlie is more confident than I am. If the leadership of the Secretary
:19:11. > :19:19.of State was so great, how has he ended up with a report like this
:19:19. > :19:25.that is so damaging. You said something seems to be very wrong in
:19:25. > :19:31.the mind Of the man at the helm of the Department of Work and Pensions.
:19:31. > :19:37.What did you mean? What I said, I quoted a great delivery grew, Sir
:19:37. > :19:44.Michael Barber, and he had a great phrase which is delivery is not a
:19:44. > :19:49.set of activities, but a state of mind. I do not think it is a state
:19:49. > :19:53.of mind at the Department of Work and Pensions and what they are
:19:53. > :19:55.doing today is proof of that. Thank you both for being with us this
:19:55. > :20:01.morning. The Prime Minister arrived you both for being with us this
:20:01. > :20:08.an hour ago in Russia for the G20 summit. It will be dominated by
:20:08. > :20:14.discussions of Syria. The host, Vladimir Putin, is opposed against
:20:14. > :20:22.any military action against Bashar al-Assad. Mr Cameron may have am
:20:22. > :20:26.meeting with him, but there will be no bilateral meeting with President
:20:26. > :20:31.Obama. He will be meeting with the President of France who has
:20:31. > :20:38.supported military action. Are we making too much of this? We always
:20:38. > :20:41.like to pour over everything, the President is not seeing the Prime
:20:41. > :20:47.Minister, is there a significance in this or not? So far as the
:20:47. > :20:52.British-American relations are concerned, it will be disappointing
:20:52. > :20:56.for David Cameron he is not having a separate meeting with President
:20:56. > :21:01.Obama. But it is not as if they do not speak a lot on the telephone.
:21:01. > :21:06.They have discussed things a lot, certainly in the build-up to the
:21:06. > :21:09.parliamentary vote. That is disappointing and bad for him in
:21:09. > :21:13.terms of how the British press will react well stocked inevitably it
:21:13. > :21:19.looks like a snub if it is not intended as such. It is worse for
:21:19. > :21:24.David Cameron, really because he he is at a summit which is supposed to
:21:24. > :21:28.be about the economy, but will be dominated by discussions over Syria,
:21:28. > :21:34.yet he is completely removed from the argument. His officials on the
:21:34. > :21:38.plane were saying, we are going to be concentrating on banking and the
:21:38. > :21:43.economy. He will not be a part of the big discussion about what
:21:43. > :21:52.happens next in Syria. He is not here yet. The discussions will be
:21:52. > :21:58.taking in the palace in the next half-an-hour or so in St Petersburg.
:21:58. > :22:06.I glad -- I am glad you got there before him. OK, the British do not
:22:06. > :22:10.matter that much on Syria. Are we clear what the American strategy
:22:10. > :22:15.will be? President Obama is there to make friends and influence
:22:15. > :22:19.people as he tears up to get Congress to back some kind of
:22:19. > :22:24.attack on Syria. He will not get Vladimir Putin, so what does he
:22:24. > :22:31.hoped to achieve at the G20 about Syria? It is about winning the
:22:31. > :22:36.argument. Whether he wins an argument, and it is not going to be
:22:36. > :22:39.a vote at the end of the G20 and people will make their views known,
:22:39. > :22:44.but it is about winning an argument internationally. The Mexican
:22:44. > :22:50.President was talking to the BBC recently and he had President Obama
:22:50. > :22:54.on the telephone and he was apologising for what they had done
:22:54. > :22:58.to the Mexicans. It is important for President Obama to do things
:22:58. > :23:01.like this, to build relations with all the leaders here, so he now can
:23:02. > :23:09.sit down and talk about Syria and say, are you on my side or are you
:23:09. > :23:16.on Bashar al-Assad's side? Vladimir Putin will be saying the opposite.
:23:16. > :23:20.We are joined by the former Defence Secretary Liam Fox and the four
:23:20. > :23:25.Middle East secretary for the last Labour Government, Peter Hain.
:23:25. > :23:29.Paddy Ashdown said last week's events had a profound implications
:23:29. > :23:35.for our country and they diminish our Kapri hugely. Do you agree with
:23:35. > :23:39.that? I do. Certainly in the short term the decision last week has
:23:39. > :23:45.left the prime minister sidelined in any discussions about Syria at
:23:45. > :23:50.the G20. It has given some pause for thought amongst our allies
:23:50. > :23:55.about being able to deliver any promise that future British Prime
:23:55. > :23:57.Ministers might make. There are serious questions week in
:23:57. > :24:02.Parliament have to reflect upon about how the events of last week
:24:02. > :24:08.are interpreted internationally. How did you vote? I voted in favour
:24:08. > :24:13.of intervention. Do you agree with Paddy Ashdown? I agreed that the
:24:13. > :24:17.Prime Minister should never put himself in a position where he can
:24:17. > :24:21.be humiliated on a fundamental policy matter. He tried to bounce
:24:21. > :24:28.Parliament and they would not be bounced. Should he have foreseen
:24:28. > :24:34.that? We had a debate and I was part of moving the motion on 11th
:24:34. > :24:41.July when the House voted on a backbench motion on a Thursday
:24:41. > :24:45.afternoon by 114-1 with 39 Tory MPs saying effectively the Government's
:24:45. > :24:50.policy was wrong. At the root of this I believe this is one of the
:24:50. > :24:55.most monumental policy failures in recent times. What we should have
:24:55. > :24:59.been doing is making sure we had negotiations on track, instead of
:24:59. > :25:05.posture rising over regime change and arming the rebels and finally
:25:05. > :25:11.military strikes. How did you vote? By was not there, I could not get
:25:11. > :25:19.back on time. I would have voted for the Labour amendment. Is it in
:25:19. > :25:22.our power to get negotiations? As I have been following this there have
:25:22. > :25:26.been huge attempts to get negotiations and they have failed
:25:26. > :25:32.because neither the Russians Bernard President Assad have much
:25:32. > :25:36.interest in negotiation. President Assad thinks he is winning. We have
:25:36. > :25:41.to get perspective about what we can actually do in the internal
:25:41. > :25:46.dynamics in the civil war in Syria. There is a limit to what we can do
:25:46. > :25:52.diplomatically. We have put a lot of effort into trying to get
:25:52. > :25:56.diplomatic activity going. But if all the parties involved in the
:25:56. > :26:02.civil war do not want to negotiate with one another, what chance is
:26:02. > :26:09.there? It is always the opposition, whether it is his or yours, we must
:26:09. > :26:13.try and get more negotiating, but sometimes when you are in power you
:26:14. > :26:20.cannot get it. You try to negotiate the Iranians out of a nuclear bomb.
:26:20. > :26:25.That did not happen. What makes you think that President Assad will
:26:25. > :26:31.negotiate at all? First of all, I am not a pacifist. I was behind the
:26:31. > :26:34.action in Kosovo. I was behind intervention in Syria and I was in
:26:34. > :26:44.the Cabinet that took the decision to invade Iraq. This is a civil war.
:26:44. > :26:50.It is Sunni versa Shea, Russia versus America, and President Assad,
:26:50. > :27:00.like it or not, is backed by nearly 40% of the population. They do not
:27:00. > :27:05.like him, but fear the alternative. This is a very complex civil war
:27:05. > :27:10.and I do not accept negotiations have been pursued vigorously by
:27:10. > :27:15.either side. The do not think it has been pursued? Obviously they
:27:15. > :27:18.have not been pursued by either side in the civil war, but your
:27:18. > :27:23.criticism is the British Government has not done that? I think it has
:27:23. > :27:29.been pursuing the wrong policy, first regime change and then arming
:27:29. > :27:31.the rebels. What has it not done? We should have said to the
:27:31. > :27:35.opposition, we are not going to are We should have said to the
:27:35. > :27:40.me and we are not going to demand regime change, we should have said
:27:40. > :27:44.you come to the table and come with a plan for a local negotiated
:27:44. > :27:48.ceasefire, a nominating ministers you want to serve in the new
:27:48. > :27:52.Government, and accept that President Assad's ministers will
:27:52. > :27:57.also serve in that Government. We have not been doing that. It is
:27:57. > :28:01.incredibly difficult, but we know from Northern Ireland and other
:28:01. > :28:09.parts of the world weather have been conflicts like this, it is the
:28:09. > :28:13.only way forward. The last time I was in Northern Ireland it was
:28:13. > :28:17.British sovereign territory. Why should the Islamic side of the
:28:17. > :28:22.rebels listened to us? We are members of the Security Council and
:28:22. > :28:26.we are members of a number of other international institutions,
:28:26. > :28:30.including NATO. It would be a disaster if last Thursday's vote
:28:31. > :28:36.was taken as a sign of British isolation. We should be more active
:28:36. > :28:41.on the international agenda. If you look around the world, in America
:28:41. > :28:46.this issue has been used as a partisan issue. Government against
:28:46. > :28:51.opposition. The same seemed to be happening yesterday in France and
:28:51. > :28:55.it is happening in the UK. It is very dangerous in a deeply
:28:55. > :28:58.interconnected world where the security problems over there can be
:28:58. > :29:03.here very quickly, for politicians to use these issues as party
:29:04. > :29:08.political footballs. One of the reasons Parliament voted the way it
:29:08. > :29:10.did and why public opinion is that as it is in Britain, is that people
:29:10. > :29:14.have yet to be convinced of as it is in Britain, is that people
:29:14. > :29:20.supporting what seems like a futile gesture. The debate in Washington
:29:20. > :29:24.at the moment is about how few missiles President Obama needs to
:29:24. > :29:29.send. This is not a debate about regime changed or about invasion or
:29:29. > :29:34.about bringing people to the table. It is a debate about, I said a red
:29:34. > :29:38.line should not be crossed, so I should do something about it. Why
:29:39. > :29:41.should we not support the Americans? There is a big issue
:29:41. > :29:46.about the use of chemical weapons. Americans? There is a big issue
:29:46. > :29:51.We were all horrified by the pictures on our television screens.
:29:51. > :29:55.The difficulty is getting the judgment right in terms of military
:29:55. > :30:00.action between sending a signal to the regime about our ability to
:30:00. > :30:03.degrade its command and control, and doing it to an extent that it
:30:04. > :30:11.changes the dynamic of the civil war. No-one in Washington is
:30:11. > :30:16.talking about that. President Obama is digging up what he might do, to
:30:16. > :30:22.try and get more people to back him. When he talks about this it is
:30:22. > :30:28.limited, narrow, targeted, a futile gesture if you won to use the old
:30:28. > :30:31.Peter Cook Joe, time for a futile gesture, or it is no more than a
:30:31. > :30:52.slap on the wrist. The difficulty, and where Parliament
:30:52. > :31:02.wanted more debate, is what happens if we sent a signal and they do it
:31:02. > :31:07.again. That is a genuine worry. The problem of this approach all along
:31:07. > :31:13.and I fear it is the problem of President Obama's posturing is what
:31:13. > :31:19.comes next? With there be retaliation and escalation? Yes,
:31:19. > :31:25.chemical weapons are abhorrent, but they account for only 1% of all the
:31:25. > :31:40.casualties in this war for Syrian conflict, so you are not dealing
:31:40. > :31:45.with the 99%. If the international community sends out a signal that it
:31:45. > :31:49.is not willing to act in the face of what was a blatant use of chemical
:31:49. > :31:53.weapons against a civilian population, surely the risk is that
:31:53. > :31:59.others will do it again and that will be on our conscience. The
:31:59. > :32:10.Labour Party cheer led the election of President Obama and his
:32:10. > :32:18.re-election. You were huge supporters of the victory of
:32:18. > :32:23.Francois Hollande in France. And yet if you had a vote in Congress next
:32:23. > :32:30.week on the existing motion, you would be voting against President
:32:30. > :32:33.Obama. I would and that is very disappointing but I think he and the
:32:33. > :32:39.French president have gone down the wrong track. The opposition leader,
:32:39. > :32:43.the president of the opposition last year in Syria, resigned because he
:32:43. > :32:49.could not get agreement about the different groups, to pursue exactly
:32:49. > :32:53.the negotiating strategy that I am suggesting could make progress in
:32:53. > :32:58.this negotiation, so that is where we should be focusing. Do the Local
:32:58. > :33:15.Government Association have a policy on Serie A? We do not, the views are
:33:15. > :33:19.mine! -- policy on Serie -- Syria. The case was not made effectively in
:33:19. > :33:27.Parliament and in a wider every year. What surprised me, Peter
:33:28. > :33:31.referred to being one of the five members permanently of the UN
:33:31. > :33:36.security council and a world leadership role that comes with that
:33:36. > :33:41.was hardly mentioned at all. If there is further action, maybe that
:33:41. > :33:45.argument, that we have a responsibility that goes with being
:33:45. > :33:50.at the centre of the UN, might be part of a further debate. He was
:33:50. > :34:03.from Scotland have just joined us from Holyrood's questions. I had
:34:03. > :34:08.better give you the first reply. Hang on, my grandfather was
:34:08. > :34:14.Scottish! But you can't do the accent! A lot of people said that Mr
:34:14. > :34:19.Cameron just didn't make the case. Even if that were true, there was a
:34:19. > :34:24.promise of a second vote. We could have taken the time. We would have
:34:24. > :34:28.then have the announcement of President Obama going to Congress,
:34:28. > :34:32.we would have then seen what the French are doing. Now the Prime
:34:32. > :34:36.Minister has been sent into negotiations with no hand to play
:34:36. > :34:41.and that is bad for the United Kingdom. We will see how it goes.
:34:41. > :34:45.Thank you. Traffic jams, airport delays, now power cuts are being
:34:45. > :34:49.talked about. Britain has been rated just 24th in the world for the state
:34:49. > :34:52.of its infrastructure and a report today suggests it is partly
:34:52. > :34:57.short-term thinking by politicians that's to blame. Labour commissioned
:34:57. > :35:00.John Armitt, who chaired the Olympic Delivery Authority, to look at
:35:00. > :35:05.what's going wrong and he's published his report today. This
:35:05. > :35:07.morning he joined Ed Balls touring the Crossrail site in central
:35:07. > :35:10.London, Europe's largest construction project, which is
:35:10. > :35:19.delivering a new railway for London and the South East. The Shadow
:35:19. > :35:26.Chancellor said that for decades successive governments had been at
:35:26. > :35:31.fault. We can't let the future down. The Olympics shows we can make
:35:31. > :35:36.these decisions and deliver them and I hope that all parties will work
:35:36. > :35:40.together to implement this important report and make sure that we can do
:35:40. > :35:44.the big infrastructure projects, which will deliver the jobs,
:35:44. > :35:49.infrastructure and prosperity that our economy needs in decades to
:35:49. > :35:54.come. And the chair of Labour's infrastructure review, John Armitt,
:35:54. > :36:01.is here with me now. A 10-year plan? ! Why not a great leap forward? It
:36:02. > :36:04.is actually a 25 to 30 year plan. What I have said is that it is
:36:04. > :36:11.is actually a 25 to 30 year plan. absolutely critical that we address
:36:11. > :36:16.the long-term. Our infrastructure is the bedrock of our society. It is
:36:16. > :36:19.what enables all of us to lead a civilised life, it is what underpins
:36:19. > :36:23.business in this country and it is civilised life, it is what underpins
:36:23. > :36:27.critical we get it right but we can't get it right if we
:36:27. > :36:32.flip-flopped backwards and forwards. But we still may get it wrong in a
:36:32. > :36:34.long-term view because politicians and their advisers are notoriously
:36:34. > :36:41.bad at predicting the future. For and their advisers are notoriously
:36:41. > :36:47.example, many people think the case for the HS2 line, the second
:36:47. > :36:53.high-speed line, is a 20th century one. That high-speed trains were
:36:53. > :36:58.20th century technology. The French and Spanish and German state it but
:36:58. > :37:05.in the 21st-century of holograph communications, it is totally out of
:37:05. > :37:12.date! -- the French and Spanish and Germans did it. There is a greater
:37:12. > :37:17.growth of high-speed rail across the world than there has ever been so
:37:17. > :37:22.the world is not abandoning it. The French and Spanish have cut it back.
:37:22. > :37:27.Because they have built a lot. It is not about speed, it is about
:37:28. > :37:34.capacity. The whole idea of what I am suggesting is that we give
:37:34. > :37:38.politicians the very best analysed evidence, which is the role of the
:37:38. > :37:41.commission. The commission does not make the decision, the commission
:37:41. > :37:47.gives the politicians the evidence on which Parliament can vote, in
:37:47. > :37:52.principle for 25 years. We then take a central view. You bring those
:37:52. > :37:57.plans back to parliament and a vote on them and then you have a
:37:57. > :38:01.coalition of political support to go forward and do things. What about
:38:01. > :38:05.those who would be opposed to some of the big infrastructure things?
:38:05. > :38:12.There is always opposition to something big. A lot of people are
:38:12. > :38:17.against a third runway at Heathrow and another airport in east London,
:38:17. > :38:24.and fracking. Where would they fit in? Their voices would be heard by
:38:24. > :38:28.the commission when it pulled together its evidence and made its
:38:28. > :38:33.assessments on the options and solutions. I am not proposing that
:38:33. > :38:36.we ignore our climate change obligations. I am not proposing we
:38:37. > :38:43.ignore the voice of local government, the voice of the people
:38:43. > :38:47.with alternative views, but at the end somebody has to make a decision.
:38:47. > :38:55.You cannot say we will not make a decision because we do have
:38:55. > :39:00.opposition. We had half of Kent in uproar when we did the first
:39:00. > :39:06.high-speed line. But after debating it and talking to everybody, the
:39:06. > :39:07.decision was made. Everybody had the opportunity to talk about different
:39:07. > :39:13.decision was made. Everybody had the routes but at the end of the day, we
:39:13. > :39:18.have to choose one. We need to speed up infrastructure and we need, I
:39:18. > :39:27.think in your report, John, you talk about a succession of large projects
:39:27. > :39:32.so investors can see a succession of good returning schemes coming in.
:39:32. > :39:40.But it is absolutely right that we cannot lose the voice of local
:39:40. > :39:46.people. Some may call them nimbies but they have a right to be heard
:39:46. > :39:52.and to be taken seriously. Even with HS2, the campaigns against it have
:39:52. > :39:56.improved the project already, so there is a positive role, not just a
:39:56. > :40:12.representational role, for a voice at a local level.
:40:12. > :40:13.wise people taking decisions for the longer term up of which the
:40:13. > :40:19.politicians will rubber-stamp or longer term up of which the
:40:19. > :40:20.vote against it? I do not. If people object and they take the wrong
:40:20. > :40:25.decisions, people put them out of object and they take the wrong
:40:25. > :40:32.office. Wise men and women in white will not the answer to this. I am
:40:32. > :40:37.trying to get the best evidence in front of politicians. This is not
:40:37. > :40:42.taking democratic debate out of the process but it is making sure that
:40:42. > :40:46.process takes place against a very balanced and well thought through
:40:46. > :40:52.set of assessments. That is what politicians need. Good evidence to
:40:52. > :40:55.make decisions on. Politicians on the left and the right already love
:40:55. > :41:03.make decisions on. Politicians on big projects. Whereas smaller things
:41:03. > :41:09.that need to be down, improving some of our secondary roads, improving
:41:09. > :41:14.some of our existing railway lines, improving some of our existing
:41:14. > :41:19.airports, that is in danger of being crowded out for the big prestige
:41:19. > :41:23.project that people like Tony Blair and David Cameron and Ed Miliband
:41:23. > :41:28.can put their names too. Successful infrastructure is not just about the
:41:28. > :41:35.projects, it is about making the best out of what we have got. It is
:41:35. > :41:39.about encouraging you and me to use less electricity, not just to keep
:41:39. > :41:49.using more. Could prices are going all the time! If you are now in
:41:49. > :42:00.charge of it, should we build HS2? My personal opinion I believe we
:42:00. > :42:04.should. Should we build a third runway at Heathrow? I am on the
:42:04. > :42:09.commission so I cannot comment on that but it has been fascinating
:42:09. > :42:12.listening to the different arguments for and against, about capacity, and
:42:12. > :42:18.different airlines even have different views. That depends on
:42:18. > :42:23.whether or not you have a lot of slots at Heathrow! When will you
:42:23. > :42:28.report on that? Preliminary report is this December. The final report
:42:28. > :42:34.is after the next election. Should we be having a dash for gas,
:42:34. > :42:38.fracking? We should understand the potential for fracking and then make
:42:38. > :42:44.judgements about what it can do for this country and the impacts before
:42:44. > :42:50.making a final decision. Although people are right to be sceptical
:42:50. > :42:55.about politicians decisions -- their ability to take long-term decisions,
:42:55. > :43:00.people will think there is sense to sit down and identify what the big
:43:00. > :43:09.infrastructure things we will need in the next decade? Absolutely, we
:43:09. > :43:13.are beginning to see problems with insufficient power in parts of the
:43:14. > :43:21.country outside London and that cannot be done overnight. Fracking
:43:21. > :43:24.is another way of generating energy. These are long-term problems that
:43:24. > :43:29.need to be solved. If we turn our back on this now we will have very
:43:29. > :43:32.serious problems in 20 years that will undermine the economy
:43:32. > :43:36.potentially. There is an understanding we have to work
:43:36. > :43:41.together to work out the priorities and take some of these decisions and
:43:41. > :43:46.get a move on. I have seen it done at Hinkley point and other places
:43:46. > :43:51.like that, where whether those decisions are right and wrong, if we
:43:51. > :43:59.do not take them, our capital city would and major cities will have a
:43:59. > :44:05.real problem. Can you do a bit more because you have lots of land that
:44:05. > :44:09.is not currently being used? We have lots of land on which we are
:44:09. > :44:14.building. We build as fast as the planning regime will allow us to
:44:14. > :44:17.build. You telling me for every piece of land you have planning
:44:17. > :44:23.permission you are building on? I piece of land you have planning
:44:23. > :44:27.certainly am. Planning consent drives us to construction and that
:44:27. > :44:32.is the problem with housing and supply in this country. We need more
:44:32. > :44:37.opportunity for supply. You have done this for Ed Miliband and Ed
:44:37. > :44:44.Balls, but would it not be worth also at least going to the
:44:44. > :44:47.government to get their reaction? I rang Paul Dighton yesterday and told
:44:47. > :44:51.him what I would be sailing and I would be delighted if the government
:44:51. > :44:56.showed some interest in this -- what I would be saying. Credit to
:44:56. > :45:01.Berkeley homes, they continued building through the recession, but
:45:01. > :45:06.there are 400,000 homes with planning permission with no shovels
:45:06. > :45:10.on the ground yet. In the end it is down to money. Shall we give you a
:45:10. > :45:21.shovel on the way out? Thank you very much.
:45:21. > :45:25.Town and city halls are looking at how they will manage funding
:45:25. > :45:29.Town and city halls are looking at because of cuts from the Government.
:45:29. > :45:35.They all say they have had to shoulder an unfair share of the
:45:35. > :45:39.austerity budget. Has local Government been shaken out of
:45:39. > :45:44.financial complacency or has it been squeezed until the pips
:45:44. > :45:46.squeak? In the offices of Hammersmith and
:45:46. > :45:49.squeak? Fulham Council in London they offer
:45:49. > :45:56.the services we come to expect from local Government. But unusually in
:45:56. > :46:00.the face of cuts to their grant from central Government, up
:46:00. > :46:03.residence in neighbouring Kensington and Chelsea and in
:46:03. > :46:07.Westminster are very often dealing with the same staff in a server
:46:07. > :46:13.sharing plan they call the tri- borough partnership. It has been a
:46:13. > :46:18.success. Sharing back-office services and training departments
:46:18. > :46:21.together makes a considerable contribution to the overall target
:46:21. > :46:26.without it becoming apparent on the streets. Three wealthy, a
:46:26. > :46:31.neighbouring, all Conservative councils. A unique partnership or
:46:31. > :46:36.one that could work elsewhere? Other councils are looking at
:46:36. > :46:39.policies of this kind. Some of them have got joint chief executives and
:46:39. > :46:45.many more could work together in this way. Radical ideas on how
:46:45. > :46:49.council's empty our bins and how they provide health and social care
:46:49. > :46:54.for adults and the elderly, have been the order of the day across
:46:54. > :46:59.the UK as the Government tries to tidy the nation's finances. But
:46:59. > :47:03.there is a growing sense councils of all political colours have cut
:47:04. > :47:09.as much as they can. We cannot continue to make efficiency savings
:47:09. > :47:15.because that will not go the way of meeting the savings in finance we
:47:15. > :47:20.have to make. We are going to have to stop doing things and that is
:47:20. > :47:24.the reality that is going to be faced by local Government. Local
:47:24. > :47:29.Government has made more than its fair share a contribution towards
:47:29. > :47:34.the reductions. But that cannot go on for ever and it cannot go on in
:47:34. > :47:40.a sort of cheese-paring fashion that we have become used to. People
:47:40. > :47:44.in white or know that deep in their hearts. You cannot go on doing this
:47:44. > :47:48.for ever, but for the moment they cannot think of a way of stopping
:47:48. > :47:51.it. What makes it more difficult is it is not just about the money from
:47:51. > :47:56.central Government that affects it is not just about the money from
:47:56. > :48:00.local Government costs. We looked at Eric Pickles's' 50 suggested
:48:00. > :48:06.savings and there is nothing in that for us at all. Much of it we
:48:06. > :48:10.had in place. But our costs keep going up and here in Birmingham the
:48:10. > :48:17.demographics are that we have a growing elderly population. It is
:48:17. > :48:21.an increased demand on adult care services and those adult care
:48:21. > :48:26.services have to be paid for and Government are not recognising that.
:48:26. > :48:30.There are two things local authorities seem to agree on. They
:48:30. > :48:35.dislike lectures or deficiency from a Whitehall that struggles to do it
:48:35. > :48:41.themselves and the solution is one the Government will not like, and
:48:41. > :48:48.greater local tax-raising powers. Do not expect that in any national
:48:48. > :48:51.manifesto soon. We have got Sir Merrick Cockell, of
:48:51. > :48:57.manifesto soon. the Local Government Association.
:48:57. > :49:02.Are you expecting local authorities to make more cuts and savings?
:49:02. > :49:07.Local Government makes up a huge part of the Public Sector spend. We
:49:07. > :49:13.think local Government has done it really well so far, but there is
:49:13. > :49:18.more a work we can do. The work of the tri-borough partnership is a
:49:18. > :49:23.good example. There is more that we can save and more areas can learn
:49:23. > :49:27.great lessons. Great councils are doing it and being innovative for
:49:27. > :49:31.the benefit of residence and the taxpayer. You are asking local
:49:31. > :49:37.Government to make more savings than you are demanded of your own
:49:37. > :49:42.central Government? We have saved around 40% ourselves, so we
:49:42. > :49:47.practise what we preach. Local Government makes up around 25% of
:49:47. > :49:52.Government spending. It is not about savings, it is about
:49:52. > :49:57.efficiency. It is about making sure we collect all the council tax will
:49:57. > :50:00.stop it is cracking down on that as well as being innovative. You have
:50:00. > :50:05.got so many departments and so many well as being innovative. You have
:50:05. > :50:11.ministers that the Cabinet table has had to be extended so they can
:50:11. > :50:16.sit around it. We have practised what we preach, we have cut our
:50:16. > :50:18.costs by 40% and we will be continuing to make sure that local
:50:18. > :50:24.costs by 40% and we will be councils have the tools to make
:50:24. > :50:31.innovations and savings. Next year there will be £100 million a year
:50:31. > :50:34.to encourage councils, to share management and share services, to
:50:34. > :50:39.bring the public sector together and have a better service for
:50:39. > :50:43.residents. He has mentioned the three boroughs in London,
:50:43. > :50:48.Hammersmith, Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster, who came together
:50:48. > :50:54.to share back-office functions. Far more than back office. Has that
:50:54. > :51:01.resulted in substantial savings? Yes, we are still on target to save
:51:01. > :51:08.about £50 million a year by the end of the year 2015-2016. So he is
:51:08. > :51:12.right? The difficulty is we have already taken 42% cut in our grant
:51:12. > :51:17.from central Government. We have already taken 42% cut in our grant
:51:17. > :51:23.had a one-year 10% reduction implemented, in a couple of years'
:51:23. > :51:28.time, which turns out to be about 15%. I have looked at the tri-
:51:28. > :51:35.borough figures. They will have to save another 50 million. Simply
:51:35. > :51:39.being at the very forefront of integration and working together is
:51:39. > :51:44.not sufficient. The fact is we have run out of money and the system is
:51:44. > :51:51.bust. I think we run this country a bit like we did when we had an
:51:51. > :51:56.empire. We have a Government department budgets run in silos
:51:56. > :52:01.right the way down to almost local level decisions being taken and
:52:01. > :52:06.signed off by permanent secretaries will stop we have to change the
:52:06. > :52:12.system. We have got a lot of change to do, but Government has got a lot
:52:12. > :52:14.of change to do. We have to move it from the parent-child relationship
:52:14. > :52:19.of Government. We get our figures a from the parent-child relationship
:52:19. > :52:25.few months before each financial year. We have to move to a more
:52:25. > :52:29.mature grown-up way. We should be negotiating the full term of
:52:29. > :52:33.funding for that Government and ministers should say, you have
:52:33. > :52:36.agreed the bottom line, you sort out the differentiation between the
:52:37. > :52:41.growth areas of London and the other parts of the country and the
:52:41. > :52:46.most needy parts. It is not our problem any more. But we have all
:52:46. > :52:51.got to make a big change, we cannot carry on as we are. We are simply
:52:51. > :52:58.running out of money. What do you say to that? He is right, try
:52:58. > :53:03.borough has shown what can be done by integrating local authorities.
:53:03. > :53:08.We are now rolling it out around the country. Independent reports
:53:08. > :53:13.say that will save 20 billion and give better service. But when local
:53:13. > :53:20.Government says they are running out of money, that is when they
:53:20. > :53:24.have had money added to their reserves, so they have got money
:53:24. > :53:29.there. They need to use it to their ability to encourage businesses
:53:29. > :53:32.into the areas and then we can see a flourishing economy and a strong
:53:32. > :53:36.into the areas and then we can see future for local Government as well.
:53:36. > :53:42.If you are claiming to have no money, why do you have £19 billion
:53:42. > :53:45.of reserves? I have never understood when central Government
:53:46. > :53:50.has money available that is a success and when local Government
:53:50. > :53:55.has, it is surplus money. Part of the problem is because we are am
:53:55. > :54:03.clear about our future funding system. A cut of 15% Leeds to
:54:03. > :54:10.uncertainty. We do not know how much money we will have. We do not
:54:10. > :54:14.have a choice of borrowing money. Uncertainty leads to caution and
:54:14. > :54:18.caution leads to holding money in reserves because you do not know
:54:18. > :54:23.whether there is money available. Why are you adding to Europe
:54:24. > :54:31.reserves? Because it is even more uncertain. The cut of 10% has
:54:31. > :54:35.turned into 15%. It is unnecessary. If we had the relationship I talked
:54:35. > :54:40.about earlier, we would be less cautious and we would have less
:54:40. > :54:45.reserves. The local governments are adding to their reserves because
:54:45. > :54:48.they are prudent. He blamed the last Government for not building
:54:48. > :54:52.the Rupert when the sun was shining. You are blaming them for not
:54:52. > :54:58.building the roof even when it is raining. It is not sensible and I
:54:59. > :55:03.do not think viewers today will understand the council saying, we
:55:03. > :55:14.are short of money and why they are putting away 19 billion N1 region.
:55:14. > :55:20.The main thing is to be more innovative, to be more effective
:55:20. > :55:24.and for residents to change their councils and to challenge them and
:55:24. > :55:30.asked them why they are not being more innovative. They have to look
:55:30. > :55:36.at other councils who are working across the public sector and making
:55:36. > :55:41.savings and giving better services for all of us to enjoy. There is no
:55:41. > :55:45.chance this Government will agree to local authorities having new
:55:45. > :55:50.revenue-raising powers? We have worked very hard to freeze the
:55:50. > :55:53.council tax in the last few years and that this time we want to make
:55:54. > :55:59.sure residence understand this Government wants to do what they
:55:59. > :56:04.can for hard-working, council tax payers and keep it low and get good
:56:04. > :56:08.services. He wanted a municipal bond market of the type they had in
:56:08. > :56:13.the United States. You are not going to get that either a. It
:56:13. > :56:18.these bonds were defaulted, the Government would have to step in.
:56:18. > :56:23.We have been operating under Prudential borrowing for a long
:56:23. > :56:28.time. We have been looking at the Scandinavian model. There is a
:56:28. > :56:34.market out there that the city once that we at a local level could use.
:56:34. > :56:41.But if Liverpool or Manchester or Glasgow defaults...? Where is the
:56:41. > :56:44.record of default? Local councils meet their budget every year. We
:56:44. > :56:49.would not be allowed to borrow on highly risky projects. We want the
:56:49. > :56:54.same sort of freedom that is perfectly normal in other countries.
:56:54. > :57:02.We do not require a change in the law. We are going ahead to offer
:57:02. > :57:07.some competition to the Treasury. The would you like to see a
:57:07. > :57:12.municipal bond market? Our tax payers, the residents who elect the
:57:12. > :57:18.councils, want to see councils providing the goods services they
:57:18. > :57:21.do. We want to make sure we keep council tax low. Residents do not
:57:21. > :57:28.want to see any kind of local tax that puts the council tax up.
:57:28. > :57:34.Municipal bonds, not council tax. Have we got news for you? Cancer
:57:34. > :57:40.and used to be precise. We are talking local politics. We all like
:57:40. > :57:45.to moan about our local council. Bins, pot holes, foxes, and if we
:57:45. > :57:51.could we would blame them about the weather. Here are some local
:57:51. > :58:03.headlines and we are going to put Sir Merrick Cockell to the test.
:58:03. > :58:31.Is it double yellow lines? Yes, over a dead hedgehog. John Humphrys
:58:31. > :58:45.has had his what ruin? A double yellow line? You are one of my
:58:45. > :58:50.residence. I was trying to work out whether John Humphrys was as well.
:58:50. > :58:55.Thank you to all of our guests. The One o'clock News is starting over
:58:55. > :59:00.on BBC One. I will be here at noon tomorrow with all the big,
:59:00. > :59:02.political stories of the day. Join me then. Goodbye.