:00:39. > :00:43.Good afternoon, welcome to the Daily Politics. The union goes back into
:00:44. > :00:48.talks with management in Grangemouth, but will it be enough
:00:49. > :00:53.to save the plant? Cameron and Clegg catch over green levies and gas and
:00:54. > :00:58.electricity, but how much will scrapping them reduce energy bills?
:00:59. > :01:02.And can I say on behalf of the committee that we have found your
:01:03. > :01:08.evidence most unsatisfactory. PC plebs feel the heat from MPs, but
:01:09. > :01:12.still no apology for the man they helped force from office, Andrew
:01:13. > :01:16.Mitchell. And oh, for a simpler age, and
:01:17. > :01:24.overwhelmed white hole holds an e-mail free day. -- Whitehall.
:01:25. > :01:29.All that in the next hour. With us for the whole programme today is
:01:30. > :01:32.political columnist Will Hutton, former editor in chief of the
:01:33. > :01:36.Observer and principal of Hertford College, Oxford, were also works
:01:37. > :01:42.with the Work Foundation, what a long introduction! Let's start with
:01:43. > :01:44.the situation at the oil refinery and petrochemical plant at
:01:45. > :01:48.Grangemouth. Yesterday the company which owns the plant, INEOS, said
:01:49. > :01:53.they would close the petrochemical plant with the future of the
:01:54. > :01:57.refinery on the same site uncertain. Last night Unite, which represents
:01:58. > :02:02.workers at the site indicated they were prepared to agree to new terms
:02:03. > :02:07.and conditions from INEOS. In the last hour, Unite General Secretary
:02:08. > :02:12.Len McCluskey left the talks, saying he was optimistic that the plant
:02:13. > :02:16.would survive. I think I was encouraged by what the First
:02:17. > :02:20.Minister said that the Scottish government are not going to allow
:02:21. > :02:24.this plant to close down, and that is also our position. We are not
:02:25. > :02:29.going to allow this plant to close down. We are not going to allow 800
:02:30. > :02:33.jobs to go and the community of Grangemouth to become a ghost town.
:02:34. > :02:38.And we are not going to allow the security of Scotland to be put in
:02:39. > :02:42.peril. Scotland correspondent Laura Bicker joins us now from
:02:43. > :02:47.Grangemouth, talks and now continuing, or restarting, I should
:02:48. > :02:52.say, today - how likely is it in your view that INEOS will reverse
:02:53. > :02:57.their decision to close the plant? It is a very difficult one. It is
:02:58. > :03:01.interesting to hear Len McCluskey's use of the word optimistic. When
:03:02. > :03:05.workers left here yesterday, optimism was not any thing that they
:03:06. > :03:11.would have thought when it came to this plant. But the pressure is now
:03:12. > :03:14.ramping up on the company, INEOS. Yesterday you heard from the First
:03:15. > :03:18.Minister, saying that he would not allow this plant to close. This
:03:19. > :03:22.afternoon we expect the Scottish finance secretary, John Swinney, and
:03:23. > :03:26.the Scottish Secretary, Alistair Carmichael, together to have talks
:03:27. > :03:29.at this plant, a sign that both be Scottish Government and the
:03:30. > :03:32.Westminster government are really taking this seriously and working
:03:33. > :03:39.together. So the pressure is now on INEOS. The problem is, this plant,
:03:40. > :03:44.according to INEOS, is losing ?50 million per year, the petrochemical
:03:45. > :03:47.side of it. They claim it needs ?300 million worth of investment, and
:03:48. > :03:52.that is because of the depletion of these North Sea gas supplies, and
:03:53. > :03:57.they want to import gas from America. They need to re-equip the
:03:58. > :04:01.sites to do that, and they say that will cost ?3 million. Now, whether
:04:02. > :04:05.or not these new pay and conditions that the union are agreeing to will
:04:06. > :04:08.allow them to go ahead and do that, that will be something that the
:04:09. > :04:13.shareholders will have a look at. The interesting thing is that the
:04:14. > :04:17.main shareholder is a man called Jim Ratcliffe. He rarely gives
:04:18. > :04:21.interviews, he is a man who trained in Birmingham, and at the weekend he
:04:22. > :04:26.did still a Sunday newspaper that if the workers did not make the right
:04:27. > :04:33.decision, there would be no happy ending for this plant. Certainly, he
:04:34. > :04:36.has carried through his bread. If there were substantial changes to
:04:37. > :04:43.the union position, they would consider it. The pressure, as I
:04:44. > :04:45.said, is ramping up. Hopefully, we will get a clue as to what will
:04:46. > :05:00.happen then. The union clearly did not believe
:05:01. > :05:05.INEOS, when it said it was losing money hand over fist, but now it
:05:06. > :05:10.seems like the union is prepared to accept those demands. They certainly
:05:11. > :05:16.overplayed their hand. INEOS and Jim Ratcliffe, the company he built, by
:05:17. > :05:19.buying petrochemical plants and oil refinery is around the world that
:05:20. > :05:22.nobody wants, putting it together and making them work better, I
:05:23. > :05:27.suspect he would, if you could, hold on to petrochemical plant. So in
:05:28. > :05:34.that sense, the union got that right. INEOS is in an invidious
:05:35. > :05:38.position. The kind of cuts to pay and bonuses and in particular the
:05:39. > :05:43.final salary pension were swingeing, unbelievable. Better than losing
:05:44. > :05:46.jobs? Better than losing jobs. We have a system of industrial
:05:47. > :05:51.relations in Britain that allows a situation where the union has to
:05:52. > :05:54.take on a problem side by side, rather than bargaining across a
:05:55. > :05:58.whole industry. That allows the union and employer to fall into this
:05:59. > :06:02.kind of pit, but the straight answer to your question is the union
:06:03. > :06:06.overplayed their hand. Do you think they will reverse the decision?
:06:07. > :06:10.Despite all the big words from any as, if the union does agree to the
:06:11. > :06:15.new pay and conditions, will they say, all right, we will keep it
:06:16. > :06:22.open? I think Kabul would like to keep it open. There was a sense that
:06:23. > :06:28.they would... That is their business model, buying these low margin,
:06:29. > :06:30.high-volume parts of the petrochemical and chemical industry
:06:31. > :06:37.worldwide that nobody wants, running them rather well. They have a very
:06:38. > :06:41.flat management team, and they go in hard on the workforce in the way
:06:42. > :06:46.they are doing here. That is how they do it. Whether or not, after
:06:47. > :06:51.all that has been said, that will be seen as a climb-down by them is
:06:52. > :06:54.another matter. I also think, by the way, Len McCluskey and Alex Salmond
:06:55. > :06:58.saying they are not going to let us close - actually, they have no
:06:59. > :07:06.instruments. The decision is entirely INEOS's, not theirs. Is
:07:07. > :07:11.there another buyer out there? There is only INEOS, people want to sell
:07:12. > :07:15.these plans, not by them. One of the problems is the rise of shale gas in
:07:16. > :07:18.the United States, and there is too much refining capacity in the
:07:19. > :07:30.reviewer been union, so actually these plans are on the edge of
:07:31. > :07:34.utility. In the European Union. So they are impotent, Alex Salmond and
:07:35. > :07:39.Len McCluskey, in that sense. That is my view, unless they come up with
:07:40. > :07:44.serious money to help the old Grangemouth complex retool around
:07:45. > :07:49.imported shale gas. Now, that was in play, kind of in the weeks after
:07:50. > :07:53.this, and what Jim Ratcliffe wanted was that money from government plus
:07:54. > :07:57.the deal from the union, and they thought they might have enough to go
:07:58. > :08:01.with. Let's see if that can be reinstated. I have to say, one thing
:08:02. > :08:05.that does need to be said, we all talk about our kids being less well
:08:06. > :08:09.off than ourselves, we all mourn the end of final salary schemes, we'll
:08:10. > :08:15.think about how tough it is going to be ten, 20, 30 years' time. This
:08:16. > :08:19.fight is everyone's fight, and Unite are going to lose it.
:08:20. > :08:24.Time for our daily quiz, and the question for today is what gift did
:08:25. > :08:29.the cabinet give to Prince George as a christening present? Was it a
:08:30. > :08:36.teddy bear, a pint toy box, a signed photo of the Cabinet, what every
:08:37. > :08:39.newborn wants, or a chunk of national debt in the form of a
:08:40. > :08:43.government bond? At the end of the show, Will Hutton will give us the
:08:44. > :08:47.right and is a! You have got time to think about it! What is the best way
:08:48. > :08:51.to cut energy bills? Yesterday the Prime Minister announced he wanted
:08:52. > :08:55.to roll back on so-called green taxes that added to the cost of our
:08:56. > :08:58.bills. This morning the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, said he
:08:59. > :09:02.disagreed with that approach but confirmed that the Government was
:09:03. > :09:05.reviewing ways to bring down bills. The debate about how to bring down
:09:06. > :09:12.the cost of living is the number-one talking point in Westminster. Ed
:09:13. > :09:15.Miliband has the agenda with his plan to freeze gas and electricity
:09:16. > :09:19.prices until the start of 2017. Former Prime Minister John Major
:09:20. > :09:22.added fuel to the fire on Tuesday when he suggested that energy
:09:23. > :09:27.companies should be hit with a one-off windfall tax on profits.
:09:28. > :09:30.Yesterday, David Cameron said he wanted to roll back some of the
:09:31. > :09:35.green regulations and charges that are putting up bills. But what are
:09:36. > :09:39.they? And how much do they cost as? According to the department of any,
:09:40. > :09:45.about 9% of the average dual-fuel bill is made up of green charges. --
:09:46. > :09:51.department of energy. However, the government says these measures will
:09:52. > :09:55.actually help to reduce bills by up to 11% by 2020. This morning Nick
:09:56. > :10:00.Clegg into that other ways the obligations could be met. We will
:10:01. > :10:05.provide money to low income households funded from these levies.
:10:06. > :10:09.We could perhaps fund that through general government expenditure, but
:10:10. > :10:13.one way or another, we need to help those low income families with their
:10:14. > :10:17.fuel bills this winter. I don't want us to turn our backs on the poorest
:10:18. > :10:20.in society, the thousands of people who are employed in the green
:10:21. > :10:25.renewable energy sector, I don't want us to turn our backs or the
:10:26. > :10:28.sake of future generations on the environment. But of course we can
:10:29. > :10:31.strike a balance, we will provide solutions to this as a government,
:10:32. > :10:36.and we will do it in the weeks and months to come.
:10:37. > :10:39.With us now is the Conservative MP and Parliamentary Private Secretary
:10:40. > :10:44.to the climate change minister, Greg Barker, welcome to the programme.
:10:45. > :10:46.Were you taken by surprise when the Prime Minister announced he wanted
:10:47. > :10:51.to roll back some of the green regulations and charges? I don't
:10:52. > :10:57.think there is anybody within the coalition that is not concerned
:10:58. > :11:02.about rising... I asked if you were surprised. No, these were the things
:11:03. > :11:05.that were ensuring that low income families at the biggest amount of
:11:06. > :11:12.opportunity to lower their costs, to ensure we are getting the best value
:11:13. > :11:16.from our energy sector. So I was, you know, the cost of living is a
:11:17. > :11:20.big issue, particularly in a constituency like mine. So green
:11:21. > :11:24.levies to put a burden on consumers? Well, if you look at the
:11:25. > :11:31.fuel poverty element of the levy, actually, what that is doing is
:11:32. > :11:35.taking 250 thousand families out of fuel poverty this year alone. --
:11:36. > :11:41.250,000. These are long-term investments, but we have to look at
:11:42. > :11:46.the vet facts very clearly, because next year we will be affecting
:11:47. > :11:51.?750,000. It is delivering real benefits to real families. So why
:11:52. > :11:57.does the Conservative prime Minster want to roll them back? I think one
:11:58. > :12:00.wants to review whether they should be on bills, general taxation, there
:12:01. > :12:06.is a lot of debate about that, but the fuel poverty element is a very
:12:07. > :12:12.important policy that both parties in the coalition are very committed
:12:13. > :12:15.to. It was a U-turn, wasn't it? He is under pressure from Ed Miliband
:12:16. > :12:21.who has been leading the debate on cost of living, and he panicked. I
:12:22. > :12:30.absolutely do not believe that. We have taken ?178 of everybody's
:12:31. > :12:34.bills. How have you done that? The renewable heat incentive was put
:12:35. > :12:38.onto everyone's Energy Bill, and that is now in general taxation.
:12:39. > :12:43.Every single government levy, government taxation needs to be
:12:44. > :12:47.reviewed, and how it is impacting the lowest income families in our
:12:48. > :12:52.country. So you want to roll back the judges for bills and put them on
:12:53. > :12:56.general taxation? These are things that are being discussed at the
:12:57. > :12:59.moment, but the issue that we are not concerned about energy bills as
:13:00. > :13:04.they had the doorstep in constituencies is very much at the
:13:05. > :13:07.forefront of the Prime Minister's mind and the Department of Energy
:13:08. > :13:13.and Climate Change. But it has to go somewhere, you are arguing? There is
:13:14. > :13:16.fuel poverty that is crucial, and we need to ensure we are getting better
:13:17. > :13:20.value for money out of the levies which are being implemented by the
:13:21. > :13:24.energy companies, who needs to ensure they are delivering when they
:13:25. > :13:27.can. I mean, the difference between what the Conservatives are offering
:13:28. > :13:31.as part of the coalition, even though the Liberal Democrats do not
:13:32. > :13:36.agree with it, and what Labour is proposing is these were actually cut
:13:37. > :13:39.bills, not just freeze prices, this will actually bring down energy
:13:40. > :13:46.bills. Well, there are three elements to these subsidies. One is
:13:47. > :13:51.the subsidies to renewables, to the nuclear power plants that are going
:13:52. > :13:56.to be built, and that is not going to go, I don't think. Then you
:13:57. > :13:59.cannot do that, otherwise you will not get the investment. So that is
:14:00. > :14:04.one element that is going to stick in this, the ?112 that is talked
:14:05. > :14:09.about. The actual amount that can be taken out of bills and put into
:14:10. > :14:13.general taxation which, by the way, is the proper place for it - if you
:14:14. > :14:17.are looking at public interest things like having more efficient
:14:18. > :14:22.homes, particularly for poor people, it is a good thing for Britain if we
:14:23. > :14:26.have energy-efficient housing stock, and the question is, if you make the
:14:27. > :14:31.lowest pay the same tax as the highest paid, it is very regressive.
:14:32. > :14:34.So it is good to see this being discussed. I would not lay a lot of
:14:35. > :14:38.money on actually bills being reduced by more than ten or 20
:14:39. > :14:45.quid, frankly, that is the maximum you could take out. There is a small
:14:46. > :14:51.amount which can be rolled back, in that sense. The essential point is
:14:52. > :14:55.that when the coalition came into government there wasn't a department
:14:56. > :15:02.looking at energy efficiency. There is now a whole unit. If we can
:15:03. > :15:05.reduce our leaky housing stock, if we can permanently invest in the
:15:06. > :15:15.infrastructure of our homes, we will start to reduce bills. Metering. By
:15:16. > :15:20.30%. Smart metering, I think it's a really important point. Over the
:15:21. > :15:23.next decade, every home in Britain will have a smart meter you can
:15:24. > :15:28.control, hopefully with your mobile phone. You can decide where you want
:15:29. > :15:37.to buy your energy from commerce which quickly. Smart metering is not
:15:38. > :15:40.something we should retreat from. The amount of money which can
:15:41. > :15:45.actually be taken out without sacrificing some policies, is very
:15:46. > :15:51.low. How many properties of hard work committed under the Green
:15:52. > :15:58.Deal? 250,000. The answer is 12 actually. That's under the Green
:15:59. > :16:02.Deal finance. 80,000 people have had their homes assessed, for energy
:16:03. > :16:09.efficiency measures. But having the work actually done? Many have taken
:16:10. > :16:14.measures to make their houses more efficient. Haven't gone into the
:16:15. > :16:20.finance part of the Green Deal. But they have accessed energy. It is the
:16:21. > :16:24.biggest roll-out of energy efficiency measures across our
:16:25. > :16:29.housing stock in generations, if not decades. Wright, the Prime Minister
:16:30. > :16:33.has done this to draw on the dividing line with the Liberal
:16:34. > :16:41.Democrats, hasn't it? Not at all. There's clear understanding that we
:16:42. > :16:45.are concerned about bills. These are things we are committed to
:16:46. > :16:52.addressing. So I don't think there is a dividing line there, at all. I
:16:53. > :16:59.am self named as a turquoise Tory. The Miller band price freeze will
:17:00. > :17:04.only work because companies will have two hedge -- Ed Miliband.
:17:05. > :17:11.That'll be a tax on their profits. Frozen energy prices. Isn't that a
:17:12. > :17:15.better idea than John Major's tax? Not at all. Freezing energy bills
:17:16. > :17:20.first of all, it's going to ensure energy companies hike their bills
:17:21. > :17:25.up. Or they hike them up at the end. It's a false solution. All it
:17:26. > :17:29.does is put it on pause, not looking at the competition we need to set
:17:30. > :17:32.up. OK, thank you. Green levies haven't been the only source of
:17:33. > :17:35.coalition tensions over recent days. This morning, Nick Clegg has been
:17:36. > :17:39.making a well-trailed speech in which he's stated his opposition to
:17:40. > :17:41.some of freedoms enjoyed by free schools in England, including their
:17:42. > :17:48.ability to hire teachers without Qualified Teaching Status. I support
:17:49. > :17:52.free schools and academies but not with exemptions from minimum
:17:53. > :17:57.standards. That is the bit I want to see changed and that will be clearly
:17:58. > :18:03.set out in our next general election manifesto. There is nothing,
:18:04. > :18:07.absolutely nothing, inconsistent in believing that greater school
:18:08. > :18:13.autonomy can be married to certain core standards for all. And I'm
:18:14. > :18:17.totally unapologetic that the Lib Dems have our own ideas about how we
:18:18. > :18:22.do that. And I'm joined now by the the Liberal Democrat deputy leader,
:18:23. > :18:27.Simon Hughes. What is the Lib Dem policy on free schools? We support
:18:28. > :18:31.the idea people being able to set up schools but we think they should
:18:32. > :18:34.have minimum standards, they should be inspected by Ofsted, the
:18:35. > :18:38.regulator. They should have qualified teachers and they ensure
:18:39. > :18:43.that the curriculum taught in all schools in England is taught in
:18:44. > :18:47.them, too. Why is Nick Clegg only bring this up now? The idea of
:18:48. > :18:51.having unqualified teachers was agreed two years ago and nothing was
:18:52. > :18:56.said by Nick Clegg publicly and it's come as a total surprise to the
:18:57. > :18:59.Conservatives. We had our policy which has always argued that we
:19:00. > :19:03.should have qualified teachers. We've always argued that we should
:19:04. > :19:06.have an agreed curriculum. We negotiated with the Conservatives an
:19:07. > :19:11.agreement in which that wasn't confirmed as part of the coalition
:19:12. > :19:22.policy. The Tories wanted a much greater freedom of the education
:19:23. > :19:24.sector. And Nick Clegg was happy forward in the last two years. We
:19:25. > :19:27.negotiated and it wasn't our policy. It didn't come from our side of the
:19:28. > :19:32.coalition. Nick is very clear and reaffirmed this this year that we
:19:33. > :19:36.want a change to do the idea of free school management to make sure we
:19:37. > :19:39.have qualified teachers. So parents have a guarantee, and there is the
:19:40. > :19:46.same core curriculum taught there so parents have enough choice. That was
:19:47. > :19:51.a dramatic change by what was publicly said by David laws. One of
:19:52. > :19:54.the key tenets of freedom, freedom to set your own curriculum, if you
:19:55. > :19:59.like, and freedom to take on the teachers you want, whether they are
:20:00. > :20:02.qualified or not. That is the core principle of free schools which
:20:03. > :20:06.David laws was signed up for. We have debated many times, the
:20:07. > :20:13.coalition parties have their own positions and we win some arguments.
:20:14. > :20:19.But you are not clear this. We were. Never policy saying we take
:20:20. > :20:23.everybody out of tax up to ?10,000. It's become coalition policy because
:20:24. > :20:31.we agreed it. Free schools came from the Tories, Nick is reinstating the
:20:32. > :20:36.parents guarantee that we will give free schools greater success. Do you
:20:37. > :20:40.think it was a mistake to take the family didn't agree with the
:20:41. > :20:44.government 's court bans on this? It's hypocritical, if you feel your
:20:45. > :20:48.schools minister helped design the policy, has stood by the policy,
:20:49. > :20:51.publicly, in the last two weeks. Didn't say anything about the
:20:52. > :20:56.problem with unqualified teachers and yet, here we have this from Nick
:20:57. > :21:02.Clegg. It looks hypocritical. I don't think it looks hypocritical at
:21:03. > :21:04.all. I'm a trustee of a secondary school and I don't think parents and
:21:05. > :21:09.teachers must understand this at all. It's a department led by
:21:10. > :21:12.conservatives, Michael Gove, and is number two is a Liberal Democrat,
:21:13. > :21:16.and they have agreed between them what to do in this coalition
:21:17. > :21:20.government that is what the Liberal Democrats want to do in the next
:21:21. > :21:26.Parliament. If you remove the exemptions from minimum standards,
:21:27. > :21:32.the heart of the case for free schools, what is the point of it?
:21:33. > :21:38.What is the point of creating this instability in the education system
:21:39. > :21:43.when you already have academies? I understand the case for having many
:21:44. > :21:47.runners and riders, but, actually, once you move the exemptions, I'm
:21:48. > :21:52.not sure what you are left with. I'm a huge fan of free schools,
:21:53. > :21:58.personally. In my own constituency. You think there are two idea
:21:59. > :22:02.logical? They are too big a risk of parents but there are good ones and
:22:03. > :22:07.bad ones. There is one which is doing well and one struggling in my
:22:08. > :22:10.constituency. The answer to your question as you allow anybody to
:22:11. > :22:15.come forward with a proposal to set up a school, in order to challenge
:22:16. > :22:26.the supremacy of either the local education authority or the local
:22:27. > :22:34.Christian academies. There is, I think, watching the fragmentation of
:22:35. > :22:38.a national system, and parents are left navigating in high degrees of
:22:39. > :22:42.uncertainty. You have no idea who's going to run a free schools. You
:22:43. > :22:50.have no idea who's going to be around. There's no underwriting of
:22:51. > :22:55.it whatsoever because... That's why rolling back on the reforms. I just
:22:56. > :23:03.think, I am for challenging incumbents, monopoly, but there's a
:23:04. > :23:10.point we have to say these are careers and lives at stake. I have a
:23:11. > :23:15.constituency in which we have all these issues bubbling around. I have
:23:16. > :23:20.argued we need new school provisions and it's better you get an existing
:23:21. > :23:23.provider to expand if you have a good reputation because it gives
:23:24. > :23:29.security. This is about making sure all the providers under laws have
:23:30. > :23:34.minimum guarantees to parents. You and labour are at one on this. You
:23:35. > :23:38.have got to guarantee it's going to be there for ten years. Once you do
:23:39. > :23:44.that, how was it free? In what way is it free? There's only 174 free
:23:45. > :23:52.school so far. Let's see how many more,. A lot, the private sector
:23:53. > :23:56.schools started off as independent creations because somebody thought
:23:57. > :24:01.we need to have a school here and they have done very well
:24:02. > :24:05.academically. Just briefly... Hang on... It sounds exactly the same.
:24:06. > :24:09.Before I let you go, green taxes, did you know David Cameron is going
:24:10. > :24:16.to announce a new policy to announce a deposit of rollbacks that a
:24:17. > :24:21.rollback of this? I was surprised about point but not surprised in the
:24:22. > :24:26.Tories. Are we don't have this from now in, various sides of the
:24:27. > :24:29.coalition... Let me answer the previous question. A lot of Tories
:24:30. > :24:34.are sceptical of green things, even though the Tory party did have an
:24:35. > :24:37.argument saying vote Green before. We are traditionally a Green party,
:24:38. > :24:41.and environmental party, committed to renewables and all those things,
:24:42. > :24:47.so we're trying to make sure the coalition is secured about that. I
:24:48. > :24:51.think in the end, there may be adjustments in whether taxation
:24:52. > :24:55.float falls. Would you be happy to see it on general taxation? If we
:24:56. > :24:59.don't invest continually in renewables, we don't give ourselves
:25:00. > :25:06.good energy sources which are good for climate and the pilot that
:25:07. > :25:09.planet. That planet. Simon Hughes, thank you. European Leaders are
:25:10. > :25:13.travelling to Brussels this morning for a European Union Summit. But the
:25:14. > :25:16.the agenda there has been rather overshadowed by revelations that the
:25:17. > :25:18.US National Security Agency may have eavesdropped on the German
:25:19. > :25:22.Chancellor Angela Merkel's mobile telephone calls. I'm joined now from
:25:23. > :25:29.the summit by our political correspondent Iain Watson. Is there
:25:30. > :25:33.a theory in Bill and about what has happened in terms of allegations of
:25:34. > :25:39.eavesdropping on Angela Merkel's calls? Yes, she said to be livid
:25:40. > :25:43.about this. She spoke to Barack Obama about it and despite a
:25:44. > :25:49.telephone call, presumably not monitored, she clearly wasn't happy.
:25:50. > :25:57.So much so, the American ambassador has been summoned to a meeting with
:25:58. > :26:04.the German Foreign Minister. Angela Merkel has been accused of not
:26:05. > :26:11.taking this seriously. She said she has got no idea how insecure their
:26:12. > :26:14.messages have been. It's in danger of overshadowing this EU summit
:26:15. > :26:18.because the European Commissioner in charge of the internal market has
:26:19. > :26:21.said that the internal market has said that this shows Europe
:26:22. > :26:25.shouldn't be dependent on America any longer and should create its own
:26:26. > :26:29.digital infrastructure. Data cloud which the Americans can't penetrate.
:26:30. > :26:33.Although this isn't officially on the agenda, believe it or not, there
:26:34. > :26:37.will be a session on data protection and on the Digital economy so it's
:26:38. > :26:41.inevitable it will be discussed. There are concerns from France but
:26:42. > :26:48.the extent of US monitoring there. Theory on behalf of the Chancellor
:26:49. > :26:54.Angela Merkel. -- fury. What about David Cameron? Cutting red tape.
:26:55. > :26:59.Absolutely. He might be uncomfortable if he gets drawn into
:27:00. > :27:04.a debate on security given the role of GCHQ. He wants to talk about
:27:05. > :27:09.cutting red tape, he wants to hold Brussels's feature to the fire. He
:27:10. > :27:14.will be flanked by two members of his business task force. They are
:27:15. > :27:19.puzzled by this because they have been getting rid of 5000 regulations
:27:20. > :27:22.in the last five years and, in addition to that, David Cameron is
:27:23. > :27:26.happy to talk about deregulation across the EU but hasn't talked at
:27:27. > :27:30.all about bringing powers back from Brussels. He hasn't talked about
:27:31. > :27:34.repatriation of powers and saying there are certain things Brussels
:27:35. > :27:37.shouldn't be doing. He says it got no idea which powers he once
:27:38. > :27:41.returned to the UK and he's trying to help deregulatory the European
:27:42. > :27:47.economy to boost competitiveness. Thank you very much. Should Angela
:27:48. > :27:54.Merkel really be surprised that America is listening to everybody? I
:27:55. > :27:59.think it is a surprise, actually. She is the de facto leader of Europe
:28:00. > :28:04.at the moment and the idea that your biggest ally, the USA, their
:28:05. > :28:13.security agency is aided and abetted by GCHQ, listening to mobile phone
:28:14. > :28:20.calls. Goodness, it's gobsmacking, I think. Actually, a lot of talk in
:28:21. > :28:28.Britain about press regulation and we mustn't have the Leviathan
:28:29. > :28:34.sitting behind us with the recommendations. But here is
:28:35. > :28:41.Leviathan. Sitting across, not just Angela Merkel's and Francois
:28:42. > :28:47.Hollande's but also David Cameron's, too. I think it's a
:28:48. > :28:54.major, major, major issue. It's important because the manner in
:28:55. > :28:59.which it's done, there is no accountability, no framework in
:29:00. > :29:03.which it's done. What do you say David Cameron accusing the guardian
:29:04. > :29:06.of linking -- leaking that information that they were
:29:07. > :29:25.threatening national security? If you are an editor, and I'm on the
:29:26. > :29:29.Observer and the Guardian, you can either be duty-bound to put into the
:29:30. > :29:38.public domain. Even if it was a threat to national security? You
:29:39. > :29:44.know, you can't take an absolutist position that everything must be put
:29:45. > :29:52.into the public domain without any attempt... That's not been the
:29:53. > :29:58.Guardian's position. But, I mean, putting into the public domain, the
:29:59. > :30:05.NSA has this extensive surveillance on e-mail traffic, whether or not it
:30:06. > :30:13.aggregated, and there's no framework of accountability, it may or may not
:30:14. > :30:18.be alerted by a Labour minister, come on. This is big potatoes. It's
:30:19. > :30:29.important it is discussed and actor. It's going to be even more
:30:30. > :30:32.after the news today. Back in 1981, more than 360 concurred that
:30:33. > :30:38.Thatcherite policies would end in financial calamity. Offence are
:30:39. > :30:43.generally held to have proved them wrong. -- events. A similar debate
:30:44. > :30:46.has been occurring over George Osborne's prescription for the
:30:47. > :30:50.economy. Those arguing that his austerity package is similarly
:30:51. > :30:54.flawed had felt vindicated, but have recent signs of promising growth
:30:55. > :31:01.changed the economic weather? Here is David.
:31:02. > :31:09.Cast your mind back to 1981, Princess died's wedding, the Brixton
:31:10. > :31:12.riots, and 364 economists signing a letter to the I'm saying that the
:31:13. > :31:19.government economic policy would end in disaster. -- letter to the
:31:20. > :31:23.times. Quite the reverse now, where we still have had legions of
:31:24. > :31:27.economists saying that the present Conservative government's economic
:31:28. > :31:33.plans will end in tears, or at least they did. One has to be flexible.
:31:34. > :31:38.George Osborne is, I think, being crazily inflexible. Of late, things
:31:39. > :31:42.have been looking up. His best news is that the economic recovery is
:31:43. > :31:46.finally picking up speed and we are seeing strong economic growth,
:31:47. > :31:50.employment rising, unemployment falling, consumer confidence rising,
:31:51. > :31:56.public sector borrowing falling. He has had a raft of good news. That
:31:57. > :32:00.has allowed economist on the other side of the document to settle a few
:32:01. > :32:04.scores on the Chancellor's Bihar. I think his detractors were wrong from
:32:05. > :32:07.the outset. If he had not reduced government borrowing, we could have
:32:08. > :32:10.ended up in the situation that Japan is in today with 20 years of
:32:11. > :32:14.increasing government borrowing to try to get economic growth going,
:32:15. > :32:19.but it has failed and it has now got a national debt of 250% of national
:32:20. > :32:23.income. Britain could have ended up in that position is George Osborne
:32:24. > :32:28.had taken the advice of his detractors. I wonder who he is
:32:29. > :32:39.thinking of... There is nothing credible about a plan that leads to
:32:40. > :32:42.a double-dip recession, to thousands of businesses going bust, to 1
:32:43. > :32:44.million young people out of work, billions wasted on soaring benefits,
:32:45. > :32:47.borrowing going up, not down. That is not credible, that is just plain
:32:48. > :32:50.wrong. But was it all a cunning plan, or did George gets lucky? It
:32:51. > :32:55.is hard for us to tell whether people were wrong to question his
:32:56. > :33:00.strategy, or has his timing been quite fortunate and things have come
:33:01. > :33:03.together for him very conveniently ahead of the general election? It is
:33:04. > :33:08.hard to know in retrospect how the economy would have done if we had
:33:09. > :33:11.not imposed those cuts, those tax rises. It might have done better,
:33:12. > :33:15.consumer demand would have been stronger, but equally bond markets
:33:16. > :33:20.might have taken fright, we might have become the next Greece.
:33:21. > :33:22.Economic iTunes are rarely settled definitively. Fans of us there at
:33:23. > :33:37.a... Liam Halligan of the Telegraph joins
:33:38. > :33:42.me now, Will Hutton is still here. Last year you called George Osborne
:33:43. > :33:46.the kamikaze Chancellor, were you wrong? I think I called the kamikaze
:33:47. > :33:51.Chancellor rather earlier than that. Look, economies have cycles,
:33:52. > :33:58.they go up and down, that is one of the rhythms of economic life. I
:33:59. > :34:02.remember, back in 2010, I had to make a decision about when I thought
:34:03. > :34:06.levels of output would get back to where they were in 2008. And you
:34:07. > :34:11.know, normally, the great recession of the 1930s took four years, and
:34:12. > :34:18.the office of budget responsible to and others would say that we would
:34:19. > :34:21.get back to those 2008 levels in 2012. -- the Office for Budget
:34:22. > :34:24.Responsibility. What I saw in his first budget, I thought it would
:34:25. > :34:29.take longer than that, and it has taken longer than that, and what
:34:30. > :34:33.happened was, he has taken his foot off deficit reduction in the last 12
:34:34. > :34:39.or 18 months, it is stable, and there has been a renewed reduction.
:34:40. > :34:45.The way I see it, it has been 100% validated. It has lasted six years,
:34:46. > :34:49.not four, the longest in 100 years. When he actually has a pause in it,
:34:50. > :34:53.we get some kind of recovery, and a snapback is what we were always
:34:54. > :34:58.going to get, and we are watching that. The question is what follows
:34:59. > :35:06.after the snap back. I am surely will agree 100%! My hero! Was George
:35:07. > :35:12.Osborne just lucky? Jo, I am not going to be painted into austerity
:35:13. > :35:17.versus growth, as a defender of the coalition by Will or anybody else.
:35:18. > :35:20.This is the economic reality. Yes, growth is going to be better than we
:35:21. > :35:26.have seen. We have just had two consecutive quarters of growth for
:35:27. > :35:31.the first time since mid-2011, we are about to get a third, but it is
:35:32. > :35:35.a very long way from a recovery. I have serious problems with the UK's
:35:36. > :35:40.economic policy mix. We are still running a very big trade deficit,
:35:41. > :35:43.the biggest in 30 or 40 years. That has carried on into this year. The
:35:44. > :35:47.money that we are borrowing is actually bigger than the increase in
:35:48. > :35:53.nominal GDP. We have credit card lending, the highest it has been for
:35:54. > :35:59.all but one month in the last 11 years. Does that mean Will was
:36:00. > :36:04.right? The austerity policies... It does not at all, it does not mean he
:36:05. > :36:08.is right at all, but it is not as if you are either for austerity or
:36:09. > :36:13.against it. What I am saying, what I am saying is that the growth that we
:36:14. > :36:17.are seeing, yes, it is great we have got some growth, that there will be
:36:18. > :36:21.a little bit more investments now, but we are all being extremely
:36:22. > :36:26.complacent. The UK economy has not turned a corner. That is my
:36:27. > :36:29.position! The gilts market has been propped up by printed money. We are
:36:30. > :36:35.doing more to increase borrowing, that would make the situation worse.
:36:36. > :36:43.Full to I have to say, for 30 years, I have been trying to argue that
:36:44. > :36:47.Keynesian economics is not about the doctrine of permanently having
:36:48. > :36:54.budget deficits. That was not what he argued. But you were for spending
:36:55. > :37:00.more in 2010? I was in favour of reproducing, in 2010, what we did
:37:01. > :37:04.after the IMF crisis in the 1970s. We took eight years to get back to
:37:05. > :37:09.budget balance then, and my view was we should take eight years to do
:37:10. > :37:16.it... It will be ten! It would have been much better, if we had declared
:37:17. > :37:22.that before, in 2010, than to do what was done, which was utterly
:37:23. > :37:26.unnerving. There has been some savage cuts in local government...
:37:27. > :37:32.They have not carried out all the cuts they said they would in the
:37:33. > :37:37.timescale. Jo, our national debt is going to increase by 50% in the next
:37:38. > :37:41.four years. He in Westminster, everyone focuses on the deficit, but
:37:42. > :37:50.it is about the debt, which is massively increasing. How much more
:37:51. > :37:58.can we bear? Of course, it is about dead in a larger sense than that. --
:37:59. > :38:02.debt. The story is about private debt, much more than public debt.
:38:03. > :38:06.The story is about an economy which does not have, as you have correctly
:38:07. > :38:11.identified, it does not have a strong trades of goods sector, to
:38:12. > :38:15.sell services overseas. There has been no rebalancing. The response by
:38:16. > :38:21.our economy to this big devaluation, the biggest in our history, has been
:38:22. > :38:25.unbelievably disappointing. Deed George Osborne, in the rhetoric he
:38:26. > :38:38.used, choke off consumer demand early? We are never going to know
:38:39. > :38:41.categorically, whether we would have had growth last year or the year
:38:42. > :38:43.before, whether there was a stimulus undertaken by Labour, if they had
:38:44. > :38:46.been in power, or whether George Osborne was right to try to shrink
:38:47. > :38:49.the state and that growth has come back, albeit anaemic league. Did he
:38:50. > :38:51.joke of consumer demand? We can never know, and all I would say, for
:38:52. > :38:54.all the political parlour games that we are engaged in, even in this
:38:55. > :38:58.interview, the reality is that we have seen in this country, in
:38:59. > :39:07.numerical terms, the biggest Keynes Ian boost in our history. Because
:39:08. > :39:12.public spending has continued. A smart guy like you, one of the
:39:13. > :39:17.younger heroes... You could feel and insult coming! Would I debt?! It is
:39:18. > :39:25.all about getting ahead of the curve. The idea of having crisis
:39:26. > :39:30.conditions, like in 2008- 10, is to get ahead of what happened, and the
:39:31. > :39:36.reason that Dedham went up, we got behind the curve, so the dynamic of
:39:37. > :39:44.this. You defended, for years and years and years... Absolutely not,
:39:45. > :39:50.absolutely not. The that is a calumny! Did you know that economics
:39:51. > :39:54.could be this interesting?! If I had, we would have done more of it!
:39:55. > :39:58.You said there would be no growth in 2013, on the basis of what had been
:39:59. > :40:02.carried out by George Osborne, but there is growth and in that sense
:40:03. > :40:10.you were wrong. I have always tried to say, you have peak levels of
:40:11. > :40:13.output... 2008, output got to a peak. It then fell. The question was
:40:14. > :40:18.when it was going to get back to its previous peak, but everyone said it
:40:19. > :40:24.would be 2012. I have stuck to the position that it will be 2014, it
:40:25. > :40:29.will be 2014, and that is not a wrong call. About cost of living,
:40:30. > :40:32.growth has returned, but the big question is cost of living, because
:40:33. > :40:39.prices are going way ahead of wages. You'd think that will continue, we
:40:40. > :40:44.are not going to say that correct? Absolutely, the squeeze on wages,
:40:45. > :40:48.real wages, has been unprecedented in the last 100 years. Yes, we have
:40:49. > :40:52.got nominal GDP growth happening, but we have got interest rates lower
:40:53. > :40:55.than inflation, so people are losing out on their savings. There will
:40:56. > :41:00.continue to be a cost of living squeeze. In my view, with all
:41:01. > :41:03.respect, the way to increase the cost of living is not to borrow and
:41:04. > :41:17.spend more in a situation where you are already at the limit of what you
:41:18. > :41:20.can borrow and spend, so much so that the gilts market has to
:41:21. > :41:22.continue to prop up... I am going to have to stop you. We have to
:41:23. > :41:24.innovate and invest our way out of this crisis. Hallelujah to that, but
:41:25. > :41:32.NASA necessarily state investment. We need our own show! You do, you
:41:33. > :41:37.can get together afterwards. Be quiet! The long-running scandal
:41:38. > :41:41.known as plebgate, which led to the downfall of the government Chief
:41:42. > :41:44.Whip Andrew Mitchell, came in for a detailed investigation at the Home
:41:45. > :41:48.Affairs Select Committee yesterday. The saga began when Mr Mitchell, as
:41:49. > :41:50.he was cycling out of Downing Street, had an altercation with
:41:51. > :41:57.police officers. He was accused of calling the officers pleb is, a word
:41:58. > :42:02.he has denied using. At a meeting later, three police officers met Mr
:42:03. > :42:04.Mitchell. After the meeting, they told journalists that Andrew
:42:05. > :42:09.Mitchell had refused to elaborate on what he did or did not say in the
:42:10. > :42:12.Downing Street incident. It was that meeting that dominated the hearing
:42:13. > :42:19.when the three self-styled PC plebs appeared before the committee.
:42:20. > :42:26.Detective sergeant said at the end of the meeting, I appreciate your
:42:27. > :42:31.candour, I appreciate that you have gone beyond what you said in the
:42:32. > :42:34.media. In an interview with BBC Midlands afterwards, you said, he
:42:35. > :42:38.has come out with what he has not said, but he is not saying what he
:42:39. > :42:42.did say, and that has caused an integrity issue. I suggest to you
:42:43. > :42:48.that when you spoke to BBC Midlands afterwards, you were not telling the
:42:49. > :42:53.truth. I was telling the truth. I was telling it as I saw it. I had
:42:54. > :42:58.just come out of the meeting, there had been a fair deal said during the
:42:59. > :43:02.meeting. Mr Mitchell's account, with regard to saying things under his
:43:03. > :43:07.breath, that was said at the beginning of the meeting. Later in
:43:08. > :43:13.the meeting, he reiterated that he had not gone beyond what he had said
:43:14. > :43:16.previously... You said that he spoke with candour in the meeting, how can
:43:17. > :43:21.you go from saying he was candid in the meeting do what you said to the
:43:22. > :43:27.BBC outside? I explained that earlier. Prior to the meeting, my
:43:28. > :43:31.understanding was that Mr Mitchell had only ever said, I do not agree
:43:32. > :43:35.with the words attributed to me. The candour I was referring to was that
:43:36. > :43:44.during the meeting, he came out and said, I did not use the specific
:43:45. > :43:47.words pleb and moron. OK, fine, so Mr Mitchell should not be included
:43:48. > :43:53.because he happens to be a member of the public. Have you changed your
:43:54. > :43:59.position at all? Mr Jones, you don't want to apologise for any think you
:44:00. > :44:02.might apart from not having... Can I remind you, gentlemen, as I have
:44:03. > :44:08.reminded all witnesses, that giving false evidence to a select committee
:44:09. > :44:11.is contempt of the house, and can I say on behalf of this committee that
:44:12. > :44:17.we have found your evidence most unsatisfactory?
:44:18. > :44:22.Proceedings at the Home affairs Select Committee yesterday. And this
:44:23. > :44:25.morning the Home Secretary, Theresa May, addressed issues arising out of
:44:26. > :44:31.the Plebgate saga in a speech to the College of Policing. The events of
:44:32. > :44:36.last year proved overwhelmingly the case for a beefed up IPCC and that's
:44:37. > :44:40.what I'm determined to deliver. The expansion of it is on track. And the
:44:41. > :44:46.IPCC will begin to take on additional cases from next year.
:44:47. > :44:49.Where the IPCC has needed new powers, for instance in its
:44:50. > :44:53.investigation of Hillsborough, we have legislated to provide them and
:44:54. > :44:59.if the evidence of the past week shows we need to go further, we will
:45:00. > :45:03.do so. The Home Secretary, Teresa May, talking about beefing up the
:45:04. > :45:06.Independent Police Complaints Commission, and it was one of them
:45:07. > :45:09.who looked at this and criticised the account given by the three
:45:10. > :45:17.police officers we saw before the home affairs select committee. Can
:45:18. > :45:23.the police recover from this? This is... In opinion polls, their trust
:45:24. > :45:26.ranking is quite high and in some respects, deservedly so. I know some
:45:27. > :45:33.young police officers who are really, really passionate public
:45:34. > :45:37.officials who really take their job seriously but there is, without
:45:38. > :45:43.doubt, a real problem amongst police leadership. Half a dozen chief
:45:44. > :45:48.constables have had to step aside. In the last five years. There's been
:45:49. > :45:54.a number of cases of cover-ups of this type. The way in which the
:45:55. > :45:58.leadership of the Metropolitan Police took the opposite side almost
:45:59. > :46:01.from the start, and seemed disinterested. The wave the
:46:02. > :46:06.politician has been effectively framed, it leaves a terrible,
:46:07. > :46:09.terrible taste in our mouths. And actually, I think there has to be
:46:10. > :46:14.some reform at the top of the police. Ian Blair, the former head
:46:15. > :46:19.of the Metropolitan Police, was brought down by whispering campaign
:46:20. > :46:23.within the Metropolitan Police. Do you think the same would happen with
:46:24. > :46:29.Bernard Hogan-Howe? I just think of the culture at the top of this
:46:30. > :46:36.institution, their capacity to inspire, to lead, there's a lot of
:46:37. > :46:41.sex is in the police, and there's some fantastic police officers doing
:46:42. > :46:46.a fantastic job. Lions led by donkeys. -- sexism. Teresa May has
:46:47. > :46:53.got to get to grips with it. That Sotheby's commission is therefore,
:46:54. > :46:56.ideally. Margaret Thatcher. Formidable or foolish? Brilliant or
:46:57. > :46:59.bullying? Virtuous or vicious? However you describe her, she
:47:00. > :47:03.remains one of the most iconic prime ministers of the modern age. In a
:47:04. > :47:05.moment, I'll be joined by former Conservative MP and Minister,
:47:06. > :47:09.Jonathan Aitken, a friend of Lady Thatcher. He's just written a candid
:47:10. > :47:12.book about her. One that shows a very different side to the longest
:47:13. > :47:13.serving post-war Prime Minister. But first, let's look at some
:47:14. > :48:14.photographs taken from the book. With me now, Jonathan Aitken.
:48:15. > :48:17.Welcome. There are numerous biographies of Margaret Thatcher
:48:18. > :48:21.recently. I interviewed Charles Moore about his. Why did you decide
:48:22. > :48:25.to write this book now? I wrote it because I think I have got an angle
:48:26. > :48:31.on Margaret Thatcher which is summed up in the title. Personality.
:48:32. > :48:37.Anybody who thinks that Margaret Thatcher Furlong realises the
:48:38. > :48:42.extraordinary impact of her personality, which changed things --
:48:43. > :48:47.for long. It changed attitudes, cabinet. I think it's been worth
:48:48. > :48:51.exploring, not the psychobabble way, but by going through the history of
:48:52. > :48:56.her life with a lot of new material. And I thoroughly enjoyed doing it.
:48:57. > :48:59.You got arguably too bad start with there because he went out with her
:49:00. > :49:05.daughter Carol and split up with her. How did that relations between
:49:06. > :49:11.you? It was nice, romantically, but it was one of my less successful
:49:12. > :49:14.career moves. Inevitably one understands why Margaret wouldn't be
:49:15. > :49:20.happy with the young man who hurt her daughter 's happiness. It was
:49:21. > :49:26.never, for me, an issue, except to be sorry about it. But, in reality,
:49:27. > :49:30.one thing from the point of view right now, being a biographer, I did
:49:31. > :49:35.see her at a much closer quarters than I otherwise might have done as
:49:36. > :49:42.a young MP. What insight to that give you into her personality? Well,
:49:43. > :49:47.in home life, the Thatcher family life is pretty dysfunctional. It
:49:48. > :49:51.also revolves around the political ambition. It had its hilarious
:49:52. > :49:54.moments, too. I remember the first time I went to lunch with Margaret
:49:55. > :50:02.Thatcher, on the wall there was a great inscription, a picture would
:50:03. > :50:08.have been given to her by President Assad, in Arabic. She said to me,
:50:09. > :50:14.rather suspect it, I don't suppose your Arabic is good enough to tell
:50:15. > :50:22.me what it is? It was, there is only one God. And Dennis said, thank God
:50:23. > :50:27.we didn't ask the padre to lunch. So was it fun? Spending time with her
:50:28. > :50:31.outside of the political sphere? There was never a dull moment with
:50:32. > :50:37.Margaret Thatcher. She always had such strong views on almost
:50:38. > :50:40.everything. In terms of their personality, people have described
:50:41. > :50:46.her in different ways. While she unkind, difficult, bullying? I think
:50:47. > :50:53.she was all those things. She was never unkind to anybody who might be
:50:54. > :50:59.called in a junior position. Private secretaries, drivers, so on. She was
:51:00. > :51:05.a honey with her staff but the vinegar with her Cabinet. She could
:51:06. > :51:10.be brutal to the high and mighty as I often thought of themselves,
:51:11. > :51:14.ministers who haven't read their briefs properly. Ministers with whom
:51:15. > :51:22.she disagreed and she touring to Geoffrey Howe as is well known. We
:51:23. > :51:25.know how right she was with a howl air of ministers and officials but
:51:26. > :51:29.she was on a mission to get her way. Do you think they will be anything
:51:30. > :51:35.in this book you don't know about Margaret Thatcher? I thought some of
:51:36. > :51:40.the extracts I've read, I thought was interesting the role Denis
:51:41. > :51:46.Thatcher, securing that huge arms deal with Saudi Arabia, and how his
:51:47. > :51:52.friendship with Dick Evans, the chief executive British Aerospace, I
:51:53. > :51:58.thought that was a well told story. One of the things I wanted to ask
:51:59. > :52:05.you. She was lucky with their enemies, Arthur Scargill, he was
:52:06. > :52:14.there for the taking and she took him. That gave her a political base.
:52:15. > :52:18.Up until then, she wasn't seen as a heroine of Thatcherism, but it
:52:19. > :52:24.wasn't made in 1979. In her early moves, on privatisation and
:52:25. > :52:28.deregulating the labour market, they were done very cautiously and her
:52:29. > :52:34.caution comes through in the book, I note. Was she more cautious? I think
:52:35. > :52:40.everything you've said is spot-on, thank you for reading the book so
:52:41. > :52:44.carefully. She was complex in her political personality and of
:52:45. > :52:48.course, it changed over the years. At the beginning, she was very
:52:49. > :52:52.cautious. And she resisted for quite some time, some of the most
:52:53. > :52:58.successful of her policies like privatisation. She held it back for
:52:59. > :53:06.quite awhile. But as she got on in her term, the realistic political
:53:07. > :53:11.caution was replaced by an almost reckless ride of the Valkyries, and
:53:12. > :53:16.she wouldn't listen to anybody, and the poll tax was the classic thing.
:53:17. > :53:24.She could easily have stayed in power for much longer. If she hadn't
:53:25. > :53:29.refused to listen. If there a ten year rule about this? After ten
:53:30. > :53:33.years, you've just consumed all your political capital as a national
:53:34. > :53:38.leader and can't go beyond ten years. Tony Blair and Margaret
:53:39. > :53:41.Thatcher found at. You run out of steam. She created too many enemies,
:53:42. > :53:48.didn't she? Certainly towards the end. America may have got it right.
:53:49. > :53:53.Two terms and the end. She got wilder and wilder towards the end in
:53:54. > :53:59.terms of just stamping on people. There was no need for the quarrels
:54:00. > :54:06.with Geoffrey Howe or Nigel Lawson. What anybody able to say, you're
:54:07. > :54:12.pushing it far too far? I have an interesting story which follows on
:54:13. > :54:16.that Saudi Arabian story. The story goes back to Dick Evans, chief
:54:17. > :54:23.executive, of British Aerospace, who goes out to lunch with Denis, and
:54:24. > :54:29.that happened and Backe comes at 5pm and soon as Margaret comes back into
:54:30. > :54:32.the room, Dennis says, have you done it? And she said, I said you
:54:33. > :54:38.wouldn't do it, you are too afraid to do it. Dick Evans thinks there's
:54:39. > :54:42.a domestic quarrel and wants to leave the room but in actual fact,
:54:43. > :54:48.Dennis has got to promise that morning to sack Nigel Lawson. And
:54:49. > :54:54.she said, you can't make to any enemies all the time. I'm going to
:54:55. > :54:59.have to end it there. Very briefly. You should sack mighty chances if
:55:00. > :55:03.your Prime Minister. OK, OK, thank you. Now, do you remember when
:55:04. > :55:05.offices looked like this? The patterned carpets, the yellow and
:55:06. > :55:08.purple colour scheme, the kipper ties and big hair. Oh, and the
:55:09. > :55:12.technology-free desks. There's not a computer, smart phone or tablet in
:55:13. > :55:15.sight. Today the Cabinet Office will resemble a 1970s office as civil
:55:16. > :55:18.servants are having an email-free day between colleagues. There will
:55:19. > :55:20.be no tapping on the phone during meetings, sifting through emails
:55:21. > :55:24.during lunch or messaging the person sitting next to you. Today will all
:55:25. > :55:28.be about talking to each other face to face or on the phone. Will that
:55:29. > :55:32.create a happier work life, making sure you enjoy the company of your
:55:33. > :55:36.colleagues? Or just take up more time and make you stay late at work?
:55:37. > :55:43.Joining me now is Stephen Taylor, an entrepreneur who has recently
:55:44. > :55:47.criticised our reliance on email. Are we obsessed with it? Yes, we are
:55:48. > :55:50.obsessed with e-mail. We live in a society which seems to be obsessed
:55:51. > :55:53.with nonverbal communication. Colleagues sitting next to each
:55:54. > :55:58.other don't want to speak to each other and are happy to send an
:55:59. > :56:06.e-mail. How often do check your e-mails? Too often. How many e-mails
:56:07. > :56:11.do get a payday? From all sources? It runs into hundreds, yes. It's
:56:12. > :56:18.impossible to monitor. Unless you reply to something almost
:56:19. > :56:21.instantaneously, you forget. But do you think it's damaging to
:56:22. > :56:25.business? Surely this is what is speeded up the process of business?
:56:26. > :56:29.I can do so much more. Like everything, it's a blessing and a
:56:30. > :56:34.curse. It's incredibly powerful and useful but when it overused, what's
:56:35. > :56:38.also interesting there is a shift blame. If somebody puts it into an
:56:39. > :56:43.e-mail, suddenly it's in your inbox, didn't you see it? You must read it.
:56:44. > :56:50.And you say, I didn't sit amongst the thousands of e-mails, so it's a
:56:51. > :56:52.powerful tool, but it's got completely out of hand. Picking up
:56:53. > :56:57.the phone is what's important. I so agree with you. People who work for
:56:58. > :57:04.me and with me, for goodness sake, pick up the phone. How old do you
:57:05. > :57:15.regulate it? If somebody e-mails you, you automatically want to speak
:57:16. > :57:19.to them, and an e-mail you back. I think this is a great idea and it
:57:20. > :57:22.needs to be a more holistic approach to communication overall but thank
:57:23. > :57:26.God somebody is taking common-sense and I think it's got to be praised.
:57:27. > :57:30.Would you say to your company, you're not allowed to e-mail each
:57:31. > :57:38.other if you are sitting within somebody's eyeliner. I would. Are
:57:39. > :57:44.you going to do it? Probably not. People need to talk and
:57:45. > :57:50.communication is important. Verbal communication is faster than sending
:57:51. > :57:54.an e-mail. And waiting for their reply. What about customers? People
:57:55. > :57:59.do want to speak to somebody. They want to have a conversation and
:58:00. > :58:06.engage. Is that being lost? Yes, when you see website had no phone
:58:07. > :58:12.number, it's counterintuitive. We need to get back to speaking to
:58:13. > :58:15.people. I think you're on a hiding to nothing but anyway, thanks for
:58:16. > :58:19.coming in. There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our
:58:20. > :58:23.quiz. The question was what gift did the Cabinet give to Prince George as
:58:24. > :58:27.a Christening present? Was it. A) A Teddy Bear. B) A pine toy box. C) A
:58:28. > :58:34.signed photo of the Cabinet. Or d) A chunk of national debt in the form
:58:35. > :58:42.of a Government Bond. I do know the answer but I'm guessing it was the
:58:43. > :58:49.signed photo. Really? A pine toy box. Thanks to our guests. The One
:58:50. > :58:56.O'Clock News is starting over on BBC One now. Andrew will be on BBC One
:58:57. > :58:58.tonight. I buy. -- by die.