:00:36. > :00:41.Good afternoon and welcome to the Daily Politics. More union trouble
:00:42. > :00:44.for Labour in Scotland as the man at the centre of the Falkirk selection
:00:45. > :00:49.row and the dispute at Grangemouth resigns.
:00:50. > :00:52.The Government has another go at at making the case for spending ?43
:00:53. > :00:56.billion on some fast trains and track.
:00:57. > :01:00.When Mo met Tommy - we'll be speak to the man who tried to change the
:01:01. > :01:10.leader of the EDL's views about Muslims.
:01:11. > :01:12.And what on earth would persuade the son or daughter of an MP to... Well,
:01:13. > :01:20.become an MP? All that in the next hour. And with
:01:21. > :01:23.us for the whole programme today is a man whose career's an inspiration
:01:24. > :01:26.for any aspiring politico - former Home Secretary and Foreign
:01:27. > :01:35.Secretary, and soon to be former MP, Jack Straw. Welcome to the
:01:36. > :01:37.programme. Thank you. Let's start with foreign affairs, because this
:01:38. > :01:40.afternoon the Prime Minister is hosting the leaders of Pakistan and
:01:41. > :01:43.Afghanistan, Nawaz Sharif and Hamid Karzai, here in London. The
:01:44. > :01:46.discussions were instigated by David Cameron last year to work towards a
:01:47. > :01:50.peace deal in Afghanistan and the neighbouring areas of Pakistan. So
:01:51. > :01:56.will anything be achieved at today's meeting?
:01:57. > :02:06.I think so, and I hope so. Pakistan and Afghanistan's problems are
:02:07. > :02:17.essentially the same, and there has been a great deal of enmity between
:02:18. > :02:24.the governments. It runs right across the border, and Hamid Karzai
:02:25. > :02:30.once the Pakistan government to release some of the Taliban leaders,
:02:31. > :02:32.but he also wants the Pakistan government to be firmer about
:02:33. > :02:38.terrorism across the border, so it is quite complicated. And is now as
:02:39. > :02:50.Sharif up for that? Because that is the key issue. Notwithstanding the
:02:51. > :02:55.fact that it is highly probable that part of the intelligence service are
:02:56. > :03:00.implicated in the running of the Taliban, their security forces have
:03:01. > :03:05.lost many more people than imagined in fighting against terrorism. But
:03:06. > :03:10.these discussions are much better than not having discussions. What
:03:11. > :03:16.about the talks between the Afghan Taliban and the Afghan government?
:03:17. > :03:21.Can those be restarted? They can. It is like the talks that Tony Blair
:03:22. > :03:28.and John Major before him instigated with the provisional IRA. You are
:03:29. > :03:31.essentially taking a terrorist organisation out from using
:03:32. > :03:36.terrorism as its main political methods to using argument as its
:03:37. > :03:40.main political method. It can often be a very complicated and difficult
:03:41. > :03:45.process. But it is the only way, isn't it? It is, and there are
:03:46. > :03:50.examples across the world that show that you have to do it if you want
:03:51. > :03:59.an end to conflict. And will these talks kick-start that? They will
:04:00. > :04:03.start it. There will be a flash, but the situation will not be resolved
:04:04. > :04:11.just like that. These are incremental changes. But holding
:04:12. > :04:15.talks is an important step forward. What about Hamid Karzai's future.
:04:16. > :04:18.When American and British troops leave at the end of next year, what
:04:19. > :04:24.will happen to him? Will he survive? Will he physically
:04:25. > :04:31.survive? Yes, I think he will. I meant politically! Well, people do
:04:32. > :04:37.keep trying to kill him. He has a very effective security around him,
:04:38. > :04:44.so I suspect he will be able to personally survive. And he will be a
:04:45. > :04:48.big force in Afghan politics. He comes from a very distinguished
:04:49. > :04:53.family, indirectly related to the last king of Afghanistan, and he is
:04:54. > :04:56.a brilliant communicator. So I don't think it will be the last of Hamid
:04:57. > :05:00.Karzai at all. Thank you. Now it's time for our daily quiz.
:05:01. > :05:03.The question for today is: what are parliamentary authorities planning
:05:04. > :05:05.to spend a quarter of a million pounds on?
:05:06. > :05:08.Is it: a) Upgrading the gym. B) Straightening Big Ben. C) Raising
:05:09. > :05:12.the Speaker John Bercow's chair. Or d) refurbishing the Commons' bars?
:05:13. > :05:19.At the end of the show Jack will give us the correct answer.
:05:20. > :05:23.Ed Miliband is under fresh pressure to re-open the investigation into
:05:24. > :05:27.the candidate selection process in Falkirk. Earlier this year Labour
:05:28. > :05:29.suspended the selection process in Falkirk after launching an
:05:30. > :05:32.investigation into Unite's recruitment drive to the local party
:05:33. > :05:37.after allegations of vote-rigging there. That investigation found no
:05:38. > :05:40.wrongdoing, but a cache of e-mails released to the Sunday Times at the
:05:41. > :05:43.weekend appears to implicate Unite in Scotland in a concerted attempt
:05:44. > :05:50.to undermine Labour's initial investigation. At the centre of the
:05:51. > :05:52.scandal is Stevie Deans, the constituency party chairman in
:05:53. > :06:01.Falkirk, whose e-mails appear to reveal the scale of the plot. So say
:06:02. > :06:04.the Sunday Times. Mr Deans was also the Unite boss at the Grangemouth
:06:05. > :06:09.oil refinery until yesterday, when he resigned from his job at the
:06:10. > :06:12.facility. Back in May, Mr Deans was suspended from the Labour Party
:06:13. > :06:15.while an investigation was launched into allegations of vote-rigging and
:06:16. > :06:19.the methods Unite used to recruit new members to the local party. In
:06:20. > :06:22.July, Unite threatened industrial action at Grangemouth after the
:06:23. > :06:25.owner of the chemical plant, INEOS, suspended Mr Deans, accusing him of
:06:26. > :06:32.using company time for union business. In September Labour found
:06:33. > :06:35.no evidence of wrongdoing in the Falkirk selection after key evidence
:06:36. > :06:46.was withdrawn, and Mr Deans was reinstated to the party. But a cache
:06:47. > :06:49.of e-mails from Mr Dean's work account at Grangemouth leaked to the
:06:50. > :06:52.Sunday Times appear to show that Mr Deans oversaw the retraction of key
:06:53. > :06:59.witness statements from the initial inquiry. Unite denies that anything
:07:00. > :07:03.untoward took place. Meanwhile the row at Grangemouth between INEOS and
:07:04. > :07:07.Unite over the treatment of Mr Deans continued until last week when a
:07:08. > :07:10.deal was struck to keep the plant open. Well, a little earlier I spoke
:07:11. > :07:14.to Eric Joyce, the current MP for Falkirk. He sits as an independent
:07:15. > :07:17.after being suspended from Labour following a fight in a Commons bar
:07:18. > :07:21.last year. He is standing down at the next election. I began by asking
:07:22. > :07:29.him why he wanted the inquiry re-opened. The enquiry is very
:07:30. > :07:33.significant for the Labour Party. It was focused on Falkirk, but it was
:07:34. > :07:39.clearly a problem with Unite which went across the Labour Party. I
:07:40. > :07:45.believe Unite came along and interfered with witnesses, and the
:07:46. > :07:53.enquiry was stopped in Falkirk. That meant the Labour Party what off the
:07:54. > :07:56.hook. What do you think they were trying to do, Unite, under
:07:57. > :08:02.allegations of trying to influence the selection in your view? Their
:08:03. > :08:07.political purpose at the moment is to move the Labour Party to the
:08:08. > :08:10.left. It wants to put as many of its own friends and Labour colleagues
:08:11. > :08:18.into labour seat in order to follow the whip of the leadership of Unite.
:08:19. > :08:21.Labour in Falkirk was a target for that when I sadly left the party,
:08:22. > :08:27.and that therefore was the place where they put most effort in. Much
:08:28. > :08:33.more will be made public in due course. What about the chair of the
:08:34. > :08:44.Labour Party and Unite member, Stevie Denes? It is quite clear he
:08:45. > :08:48.spent much of his time at his employment instead of helping people
:08:49. > :08:52.to hang on to their jobs. He created a battle by stressing the importance
:08:53. > :09:03.of the Labour Party in the local Falkirk selection. He sits there is
:09:04. > :09:07.the chair of the Labour Party and who will be chairing this meeting
:09:08. > :09:11.next Sunday? It will be him. That cannot be a fair and reasonable
:09:12. > :09:24.situation. What action would you like Ed Miliband to take? I think he
:09:25. > :09:29.should reopen the enquiry, and carry it on with the officials who were
:09:30. > :09:34.there. We know that it was terribly undermined, but the implications of
:09:35. > :09:38.the failure to carry out the enquiry are severe for the party. This is a
:09:39. > :09:46.watershed moment, and it is important that the leadership of the
:09:47. > :09:58.party to not bottle it out. Eric Joyce, MP. We did ask Unite for
:09:59. > :10:05.an interview but no one was available. They say there is no
:10:06. > :10:11.evidence even in the e-mails that have been printed by the Sunday
:10:12. > :10:18.Times that Mr Deans did anything untoward is at all. Should they
:10:19. > :10:26.reopen the investigation? They should actively consider it. The
:10:27. > :10:33.enquiry didn't exactly find no evidence. It was faced with a
:10:34. > :10:38.situation where there had been clear evidence of concerns about what had
:10:39. > :10:44.been going on, but that evidence, key evidence, was later withdrawn by
:10:45. > :10:48.those concerned. So there was then and absence of evidence, and in that
:10:49. > :10:57.absence, it was not able to proceed. And Unite was cleared? Sort
:10:58. > :11:00.of. I have not seen the e-mails in question, but I think there was a
:11:01. > :11:04.case presented by the Sunday Times for that to be further questions
:11:05. > :11:10.which will need to be dealt with. So I don't think this is going to go
:11:11. > :11:15.away. It runs into the catastrophic tactics adopted by Unite in respect
:11:16. > :11:20.of Grangemouth. To be blunt, my analysis is that Len McCluskey put
:11:21. > :11:28.in turn union Unite politics before the interests of their members at
:11:29. > :11:31.Grangemouth plant. That is a very serious claim, because unions are
:11:32. > :11:36.there to represent their workers, and 800 people lost their jobs. It
:11:37. > :11:42.is a serious claim, but it is hard to see any other explanation for
:11:43. > :11:45.what happened. You had Stevie Deans being subject to discipline, because
:11:46. > :11:51.as it is now clear, he was using company time and money to spend on
:11:52. > :11:57.Labour Party activities, and not just the odd e-mail, but a
:11:58. > :11:59.substantial part of his time. When he is disciplined, strike action is
:12:00. > :12:05.threatened, and that spirals into further action. Mr Deans has now
:12:06. > :12:11.resigned, presumably because he accepts the strength of the case
:12:12. > :12:17.against him. Whichever way you look at what happened at Grangemouth, it
:12:18. > :12:20.is hard to see how on earth the Unite union could have ended up with
:12:21. > :12:24.those tactics where they lead their troops up to the top of the hill,
:12:25. > :12:31.they were refusing to make any kind of concessions with INEOS. They said
:12:32. > :12:35.they were calling the company's bluff, and the company was
:12:36. > :12:40.exaggerating the losses. They did, but there are better ways of calling
:12:41. > :12:44.people's bluff than to get almost to the point where the plant is closed.
:12:45. > :12:48.You don't need to be a senior executive at INEOS to know that
:12:49. > :12:54.there is substantial overcapacity at refineries across the world. He got
:12:55. > :12:58.right to the top of the hill, and like the Duke of York, scurried back
:12:59. > :13:06.down again. And what should Ed Miliband do? He has not either
:13:07. > :13:11.wattled it all runs scared. I don't have access to anything except that
:13:12. > :13:19.which I have read in the Sunday Times. It is for the committee to
:13:20. > :13:27.make a judgement about whether there it is sufficient evidence to reopen
:13:28. > :13:31.the inquiry. But if the public perception here is that something
:13:32. > :13:34.went awry in Falkirk, despite the denials from Unite, and less Ed
:13:35. > :13:44.Miliband does take action, won't he look as if he is levelling out? He
:13:45. > :13:51.has been very tough about all of these things. When information first
:13:52. > :13:55.came out about what had been going on in Falkirk, that is why the
:13:56. > :14:06.inquiry was established. Should Stevie Deans still be the chair? If
:14:07. > :14:12.there is something of concerned there, that needs to be looked at.
:14:13. > :14:17.Is it a saga that does not reflect well on the national leadership of
:14:18. > :14:21.Unite, both in respect of their relationship with the Labour Party,
:14:22. > :14:24.but also in respect of their representation of their members at a
:14:25. > :14:32.huge plantlike Grangemouth? Eric Joyce also said that Len McCluskey
:14:33. > :14:41.should go. That is a matter for them. I would say that I would put
:14:42. > :14:46.any money on the fact that his predecessor, Tony Woodley, would not
:14:47. > :14:52.have landed his union in such an appalling position as Mr McCloskey
:14:53. > :14:55.has done. What do you think it does in terms of public perception of
:14:56. > :15:00.unions, and whether they are all working in the interest of they
:15:01. > :15:05.unions? I have already had good relations -- always had good
:15:06. > :15:10.relations with the unions, when I was Home Secretary and Justice
:15:11. > :15:19.Secretary. Not just with major unions like UNISON, but I also had a
:15:20. > :15:26.special relationship with the prison Association. I see people who come
:15:27. > :15:32.in who haven't got union membership who have suffered grave injustices
:15:33. > :15:34.by their employers, but you need to have unions recognising their
:15:35. > :15:42.fundamental responsibilities to their members, and if they fail
:15:43. > :15:47.that, they felt everything. The gunmen has published a new case for
:15:48. > :15:50.HS2, the line connecting London with Birmingham, Leeds and mentored. --
:15:51. > :15:55.the government. The Transport Secretary will be speaking later
:15:56. > :16:03.this afternoon. The government says the scheme would boost the economy
:16:04. > :16:09.to the tune of ?15 billion per year. We are joined now by the Transport
:16:10. > :16:13.Minister, Susan Kramer. Welcome to the programme. As the argument of
:16:14. > :16:19.HS2 shifted? We have been talking about this for the past year or so.
:16:20. > :16:25.Initially the case was shorter journey times. That seems to have
:16:26. > :16:30.been relegated below are arguments about capacity and connectivity and
:16:31. > :16:33.economic benefits. Is that right? The discussion about capacity, which
:16:34. > :16:39.is crucial, has been there from the beginning. I think a lot of the
:16:40. > :16:45.conversational focus was on speedy because that had an element of
:16:46. > :16:50.excitement to it. The real rationale for the project has always been
:16:51. > :16:54.structured around capacity. I have been imposed two weeks. I have
:16:55. > :17:01.already had a take note that the rail regulator has turned down a new
:17:02. > :17:04.service because there is no room to put the additional trains on. We
:17:05. > :17:10.really have a severe capacity problem. You mention the economic
:17:11. > :17:13.benefits. That has been spoken about to a great extent. The estimate for
:17:14. > :17:21.the economic benefit of HS2 has now been lowered. Instead of ?2 50 per
:17:22. > :17:29.?1 spent, it is ?2 30. Will it go down again? We are confident around
:17:30. > :17:33.these numbers that you refine them as you go along. This is a
:17:34. > :17:36.sophisticated piece of refinements that is taking place. If anything, I
:17:37. > :17:44.think most people think we are understating the benefits. Why as it
:17:45. > :17:49.gone down, then? We had some costs coming out of environmental
:17:50. > :17:54.measures. That was a sensible element to make sure was included in
:17:55. > :18:01.this. So you do refine things. 2.3 is a good result for a large project
:18:02. > :18:04.taking a long period of time. As you will know, these projects continue
:18:05. > :18:11.to serve people over a long period of time. The actual demand increase,
:18:12. > :18:20.the uses by passengers, is capped three years after we finished the
:18:21. > :18:28.second stage of the project. In terms of winners and losers, do you
:18:29. > :18:35.accept the conclusion of the KPMG report that some parts of the
:18:36. > :18:43.country will just not then fed but will be losers, will become lest --
:18:44. > :18:53.will just not -- will not just not benefits but will become losers? We
:18:54. > :18:57.are looking at the proportion of the general wealth of the country is in
:18:58. > :19:02.different places and has been affected, in a sense, by HS2. We
:19:03. > :19:06.have got a whole economy that is benefiting by 15 billion. Places
:19:07. > :19:14.that are closest to the line, that can build of the Iraq potential that
:19:15. > :19:19.comes in -- the economic potential that comes in, they will do best. My
:19:20. > :19:23.point is that actually there will be some areas that lose investment
:19:24. > :19:26.because it would be redirected to those places you have just
:19:27. > :19:31.described. In other words, they will become less competitive. There are
:19:32. > :19:38.other projects going on at all times. In the next Parliament, we
:19:39. > :19:48.are spending 73 billion in transport improvements. Only 17 billion is
:19:49. > :19:52.going into HS2. There will be new trains, new electrification, new
:19:53. > :19:56.projects all over the country. They will mainly benefit the closest
:19:57. > :20:05.areas. This pattern of loss and gain is limited use. It is the
:20:06. > :20:10.distribution of wealth. Can you confirm HS2 will not go ahead
:20:11. > :20:14.without cross-party support? There has been cross-party support for
:20:15. > :20:18.this. When I sat in the house of Lords, the voices from the Labour
:20:19. > :20:23.benches and Labour peers with long experience in rail worker absolutely
:20:24. > :20:29.firm and determined. The Labour front bench was determined and clear
:20:30. > :20:36.that they are engaged fully with HS2. I expect that to be the case.
:20:37. > :20:40.In the studio are one of the leading critics of HS2 on the Conservative
:20:41. > :20:47.benches, and Jack Straw, a supporter of the scheme. Do you back on
:20:48. > :20:57.alternative or does nothing me to come? No, quite the reverse. There
:20:58. > :21:00.are lots of alternatives. Certainly there are other schemes and oppose
:21:01. > :21:08.all that have been put forward by eminent railway engineers as well.
:21:09. > :21:16.-- and proposals. Many of them, the implication is the cost would be
:21:17. > :21:20.high, around ?20 billion. The disruption was something like 14
:21:21. > :21:23.years of weekend closures to carry out alternatives so you could have
:21:24. > :21:28.something like the capacity that would be created by HS2. I think
:21:29. > :21:35.that they scaremongering story that was put about the government to try
:21:36. > :21:43.to have a precursor to a business case. -- that was a scaremongering
:21:44. > :21:47.story. We need to consider them at a time when we are having to pay the
:21:48. > :21:51.bills of the last government, is this the best way to spend our money
:21:52. > :21:57.on transport? If you are going to drop speed and moved to capacity and
:21:58. > :22:02.connectivity, HS2, as it is currently configured, does not
:22:03. > :22:06.connect properly with Heathrow or the Channel Tunnel rail link. It
:22:07. > :22:11.doesn't go into the centre of cities. As you said yourself, Jo,
:22:12. > :22:19.the has pointed out that there are going to be areas of the country
:22:20. > :22:29.that see permanent loss. -- the report has pointed out. How
:22:30. > :22:32.important is this line? There will be collectivity. If she wants to
:22:33. > :22:37.ensure that there is a line through North London to connect it with HS1,
:22:38. > :22:42.that is fine by me. But there will be more complaints from people in
:22:43. > :22:47.the southern parts of the country. Let me say more about this. As the
:22:48. > :22:53.Conservative Transport Secretary has pointed out, the Labour leaders of
:22:54. > :22:57.major cities across the north-west and the North are all backing this.
:22:58. > :23:03.So is the overwhelming majority of members of Parliament. We are at
:23:04. > :23:09.silly clear that this will bring benefits. -- we are absolutely
:23:10. > :23:13.clear. On this issue of if you have the benefits in Manchester, will it
:23:14. > :23:19.chalk activity away from other areas? -- will it draw activity. The
:23:20. > :23:23.north and north-west have been suffering for decades from a
:23:24. > :23:27.disproportionate investment that has benefited your constituents in the
:23:28. > :23:33.south and south-east. Look at crossrail. I am in favour of it. But
:23:34. > :23:36.one of the reasons London and the south-east has done so well
:23:37. > :23:41.economically is because it's transport is better. We need to
:23:42. > :23:49.rebalance this. On the rate of return, it has come down from 2.50
:23:50. > :23:59.to 2.30, and I tell you what, if my bank offered that... They won't! If
:24:00. > :24:05.Labour were so supportive of this, Jack would know it would not be on a
:24:06. > :24:10.one line whip on Thursday. If you are so concerned, as I am, with the
:24:11. > :24:13.economic health and welfare of the north, this project would be started
:24:14. > :24:17.in the north. We would be improving connectivity between those northern
:24:18. > :24:22.lines. You are talking about a project that finishes in the north
:24:23. > :24:26.by 2033 or beyond. If you build the Birmingham-London line,
:24:27. > :24:30.international experience shows that it will start to suck things more
:24:31. > :24:37.into London. Let me just say to you, Jack, Birmingham's leader and other
:24:38. > :24:43.cities, they would be in favour of it. I wouldn't expect anything else.
:24:44. > :24:48.Let Jack respond. The reason you have a line from London to
:24:49. > :24:55.Birmingham is because that is where there is a capacity constraint. That
:24:56. > :24:59.is not true. It is. The evidence is overwhelming. I see it for myself
:25:00. > :25:07.every day. I use the West Coast Mainline, and look at Euston. When
:25:08. > :25:11.it opened, the number of passengers was a tiny proportion compared to
:25:12. > :25:16.now. The place is heaving. The tracks are heaving. There has been a
:25:17. > :25:18.wonderful increase in train usage. But there was an increase in
:25:19. > :25:28.capacity, which was disruptive for years. On the Trent Valley line,
:25:29. > :25:32.there was a quadruple in. You have got to improve capacity in the
:25:33. > :25:37.South. How disappointed are those northern leaders going to be if the
:25:38. > :25:48.Chancellor pools the support? Ed Balls has been giving support. This
:25:49. > :25:54.is a matter for the whole Labour Party. His job is to raise questions
:25:55. > :26:01.about costs. I would also say this. To some extent, a project of this
:26:02. > :26:07.kind, this scale, involves some act of faith. You have to get the
:26:08. > :26:11.numbers right. Hang on a second. So did the Olympics. Why Szczesny
:26:12. > :26:19.Cabinet committee on the Olympic for four years. -- I cared the come
:26:20. > :26:27.beauty -- I chaired the Cabinet committee on the Olympics for four
:26:28. > :26:33.years. Are you sure that Labour will continue supporting this? I'm sure.
:26:34. > :26:38.We are supporting this on Thursday. If we were not, we would have our
:26:39. > :26:41.troops are there. As you know, in opposition, you always have a one
:26:42. > :26:49.line whip if you support something. How many Tory rebels do you think
:26:50. > :26:56.there will be? On the Department for transport's own figures, use and is
:26:57. > :27:01.only the second least crowded line. -- Euston. If you look at the
:27:02. > :27:07.figures, it is 28% of the trains on the West Coast Mainline that are
:27:08. > :27:11.full. With improvements, that could be improved. For example,
:27:12. > :27:19.lengthening trains. We have to finish it up there. It was the first
:27:20. > :27:23.time, thank you both, in 35 years that the presidents of Iran and the
:27:24. > :27:28.US had spoken. The short conversation between Hassan Rouhani
:27:29. > :27:33.and Barack Obama came off the last month's UN General assembly. Mr
:27:34. > :27:36.Rouhani has struck a more moderate tone than its predecessors and says
:27:37. > :27:41.he wants a deal on Iran's nuclear programme. Our guest of the day,
:27:42. > :27:47.Jack Straw, thinks the new Iranian president is a man the West can do
:27:48. > :27:53.business with. May I press the Prime Minister on
:27:54. > :27:59.this issue of relations with Iran? With respect, his previous answer
:28:00. > :28:03.sounded as if he had taken no account of the fact that since our
:28:04. > :28:10.embassy was sacked by Ahmedinejad, there has been an election in Iran,
:28:11. > :28:14.however imperfect. It has led to a different individual, Hassan
:28:15. > :28:18.Rouhani, becoming president, who, to my knowledge, somebody the West and
:28:19. > :28:27.the British Prime Minister can deal with. Could I ask you to deal
:28:28. > :28:31.carefully with the Foreign Secretary to identify areas of common interest
:28:32. > :28:40.and get them involved in solving Syria? I agree that of the election
:28:41. > :28:45.of a president who has a greater, and to reform is a good step. I have
:28:46. > :28:48.written to President Rouhani to rate a series of issues that need to be
:28:49. > :28:52.settled between Britain and Iran. Above all, we need to see progress
:28:53. > :28:56.on what the president has said himself is important, which is
:28:57. > :28:59.trying to come to an agreement where Iran gives up the idea of you clear
:29:00. > :29:05.weapons, and in return we see some relief on sanctions. That would be
:29:06. > :29:10.major progress. -- the idea of nuclear weapons. This is not hoping
:29:11. > :29:15.for the best. We have singled Iran has been capable of in the recent
:29:16. > :29:18.past. We should go in to these discussions cautiously. David
:29:19. > :29:24.Cameron. Joining us this Dr Matthew Levitt, who specialises in
:29:25. > :29:29.counterterrorism and intelligence at the Washington Institute. Welcome to
:29:30. > :29:32.the programme. First of all, do you agree that the tone has changed,
:29:33. > :29:44.that Hassan Rouhani strikes a mocha Cilic we note? There is no way the
:29:45. > :29:48.line at -- to deny that. What we need is more than statements. We
:29:49. > :29:54.need to Seattle progress, tangible progress, not only on the
:29:55. > :30:04.negotiations but on the human rights issues. -- to see tangible progress.
:30:05. > :30:12.Are you asking too much in terms of limiting its nuclear programme and
:30:13. > :30:15.what they would like? No question, we're talking about the nuclear
:30:16. > :30:19.programme and they are talking about the sanctions. But there is middle
:30:20. > :30:31.ground. We should be pursuing this devil Matic route seriously but with
:30:32. > :30:35.eyes wide open. -- diplomatic route. There can be progress. We shouldn't
:30:36. > :30:38.just take them at their word before there is actual progress on the
:30:39. > :30:44.ground. While the negotiations have to be step-by-step, there are
:30:45. > :30:59.multiple issues that have to be negotiated.
:31:00. > :31:03.Matthew Levitt said that Iran has been known for deception. The mother
:31:04. > :31:08.and father of their problems has been failure to describe -- provide
:31:09. > :31:14.full disclosure about the nuclear activity. And they are still not
:31:15. > :31:20.doing that. We are not certain. I don't disagree with what he is
:31:21. > :31:26.saying about the need for care in the negotiations. But Hassan
:31:27. > :31:32.Rouhani's election does represent a great opportunity for the West in
:31:33. > :31:44.the way that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's election represented a setback. I
:31:45. > :31:46.hope that these negotiations with the permanent members of the
:31:47. > :31:51.Security Council and Germany will make progress. But is there really a
:31:52. > :32:00.substantive difference between Hassan Rouhani and Ahmadinejad? What
:32:01. > :32:05.is the substantive difference between what is happening in Iran
:32:06. > :32:08.now and previously? I have spent as much time as I can seeking to
:32:09. > :32:15.understand the incredibly complicated power structure in Iran.
:32:16. > :32:23.And where did it get you? With great information, not necessarily greater
:32:24. > :32:26.understanding. But behind everything is the supreme leader, and
:32:27. > :32:31.ultimately he is the final authority, but it is much more
:32:32. > :32:38.complicated than that. The fact that Hassan Rouhani was allowed to
:32:39. > :32:43.stand, and then got a much vigour vote than many people were
:32:44. > :32:50.anticipating, is an indication of the desire by the Iranians people
:32:51. > :33:00.for change. He is different from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in terms of the
:33:01. > :33:06.things that Ahmadinejad used to say in terms of wiping Israel off the
:33:07. > :33:11.map, and denying the Holocaust. Iran has always said it's nuclear
:33:12. > :33:16.programme is a peaceful bid to generate electricity. Most people do
:33:17. > :33:27.not believe that. The real issue is this, as Mr Straw said. One is to
:33:28. > :33:30.give the resident the space to negotiate earnestly. A six-month
:33:31. > :33:38.window is a very short period of time. There are also all kinds of
:33:39. > :33:49.power leaks within Iran right now. The situation is complicated. Going
:33:50. > :33:56.with eyes wide open. But there are precedents of previous Iran
:33:57. > :34:04.presidents, and in my new book on Hezbollah, one of the things I found
:34:05. > :34:09.that I didn't use in the book because it is meant to be more about
:34:10. > :34:16.Iran, the CIA looking back at these presidencies, what they found was
:34:17. > :34:20.that none of the previous presidents were interested in
:34:21. > :34:24.curbing support for terrorism, and if they were, this would be up to
:34:25. > :34:29.the supreme leader. This is a different president. This is the
:34:30. > :34:36.history of relatively moderate presidents in Iran. The Israelis
:34:37. > :34:40.always deal with Iran very suspiciously because of previous
:34:41. > :34:47.rhetoric and their fears about any sort of attack. But if Iran wants to
:34:48. > :34:51.reach the status of a nuclear state, in which it could manufacture
:34:52. > :34:56.a nuclear bomb quite quickly, how much risk are you prepared to take?
:34:57. > :35:01.Well, the Middle East does already have on nuclear weapons state,
:35:02. > :35:05.Israel. Not that anyone admits it. But we all know it. And they have
:35:06. > :35:12.refused to accept any kind of sanction. I don't know whether Iran
:35:13. > :35:20.have nuclear weapons system, and whether they developing it. But
:35:21. > :35:25.their lack of candour, and trying to enrich uranium, raise very serious
:35:26. > :35:35.questions about their intentions. Plutonium, too. Not just uranium.
:35:36. > :35:37.And if they want to lift the sanctions, which unquestionably are
:35:38. > :35:43.biting, and as for long-term agendas, we want to see a more
:35:44. > :35:50.constructive role internationally. You have to have one step at a time,
:35:51. > :35:57.and part of the strategy of the West needs to be to help and in power
:35:58. > :36:01.Rohani. Thank you both very much. It's been a pleasure.
:36:02. > :36:04.Vigorous and sometimes raucous campaigning is what you expect in a
:36:05. > :36:07.vibrant democracy. But what happens when lies are told about rival
:36:08. > :36:09.candidates, innuendo is spread, racist or anti-semitic campaigning
:36:10. > :36:12.techniques are used? They've been an unfortunate feature of British
:36:13. > :36:15.election campaigns, and an all-party report out today suggests such
:36:16. > :36:19.practices are still prevalent. In a moment we'll hear from one of the
:36:20. > :36:20.authors of that report, but first let's remind ourselves of some
:36:21. > :36:32.memorable political campaigns. A 1983 by-election in Bermondsey was
:36:33. > :36:35.mired in accusations of homophobia. The now Lib Dem deputy leader Simon
:36:36. > :36:40.Hughes took on Labour candidate and gay rights campaigner Peter
:36:41. > :36:44.Tatchell. One liberal leaflet presented the context is a straight
:36:45. > :36:48.choice, and Simon Hughes on with one of the biggest recorded swings
:36:49. > :36:54.against Labour. He later apologised for any part of the campaign which
:36:55. > :36:57.had been homophobic. In 2005, Labour was accused of anti-Semitism when
:36:58. > :36:59.they produced a poster which critics claimed portrayed the then
:37:00. > :37:05.Conservative leader Michael Howard is fading. Labour said it was just
:37:06. > :37:13.anti-Tory. Later, Labour's Oona King fought
:37:14. > :37:17.George Galloway, who overturned a 10,000 majority. Oona King said she
:37:18. > :37:20.faced anti-Semitism in what she described as one of the dirtiest
:37:21. > :37:24.campaigns we have ever seen in British politics.
:37:25. > :37:30.And 2010 saw a campaign which could change the way elections are fought.
:37:31. > :37:33.Labour narrowly on old East and Saddleworth, but the result was
:37:34. > :37:37.declared void by an election court, which ruled he had lied about his
:37:38. > :37:41.Lib Dem opponent. And the author of that cross-party
:37:42. > :37:49.report into the conduct of election campaigns, Natascha Engel, joins us
:37:50. > :37:53.now. Some political campaigns have been dirty, it was ever thus. But
:37:54. > :38:00.what of the worst examples that you have come across? Yes, right at the
:38:01. > :38:05.outset, this was not about stopping people from campaigning robustly.
:38:06. > :38:09.And it was not about curbing freedom of speech, that was another thing
:38:10. > :38:12.that was very important. What we wanted to do was identify pieces of
:38:13. > :38:18.political campaigning that were beyond the pale, and we heard really
:38:19. > :38:22.distressing stories. The day after one candidate lost his seat in
:38:23. > :38:28.Gloucester, his children found a severed pig's head in his garden.
:38:29. > :38:31.That doesn't belong in politics. How'd you know that was a campaign
:38:32. > :38:36.thing? It could have been a vindictive member of the public?
:38:37. > :38:39.There had already been a concerted campaign against him where in the
:38:40. > :38:44.local newspaper that had been a letter to say that the population of
:38:45. > :38:50.Gloucester wasn't ready for a foreigner to represent them. He was
:38:51. > :38:54.born in Middlesex. So it is that sort of campaigning that we are
:38:55. > :39:00.really looking to stamp out. Why hasn't this been looked at before?
:39:01. > :39:06.It has, but it was looked at expressly in terms of anti-Semitism,
:39:07. > :39:09.in 2006 there was a report about anti-Semitism in electoral
:39:10. > :39:13.campaigning. The electoral commission refused to do much about
:39:14. > :39:17.it, or was certainly half-hearted about it, so we decided to widen out
:39:18. > :39:23.the remit, identify if there really was a problem, and we found that if
:39:24. > :39:26.there was a problem, we would put forward proposals.
:39:27. > :39:31.What can you do to actually stamp it out? You want campaigns to be
:39:32. > :39:40.robust. It is the crossing the line that is difficult to draw. That's
:39:41. > :39:43.right. We have law, and it is obviously the cases where the law
:39:44. > :39:46.has been broken, it can be difficult to know what to do. We want the
:39:47. > :39:50.political parties to come together and decide that we have a cultural
:39:51. > :39:53.shift in the way that we campaign, to make sure that we identify
:39:54. > :39:58.clearly when things are overstepping the mark, but most of all what we
:39:59. > :40:01.thought would be helpful was to have one person specifically responsible
:40:02. > :40:05.in each political party for taking on a complaint and having a look
:40:06. > :40:09.very quickly at whether there is something wrong. Shouldn't campaigns
:40:10. > :40:15.coordinator is be the people who deal with this sort of thing?
:40:16. > :40:25.I think this is a really good idea from Natascha. A compliance officer
:40:26. > :40:34.ought to do this. I was subject to a vicious campaign in Blackburn. I
:40:35. > :40:39.have Jewish blood in me. It was said that because I was Edu, no Muslims
:40:40. > :40:42.should vote for me. And the chap who put these leaflets around was taken
:40:43. > :40:48.before the criminal courts and convicted of an offence under
:40:49. > :40:55.electoral law. So are those laws not working, then? The laws during an
:40:56. > :41:00.election campaign are tighter than they are outside, so they need
:41:01. > :41:03.better to be used. But I entirely accept, what Simon Hughes and his
:41:04. > :41:10.friends got up to in Bermondsey, where they distributed badges which
:41:11. > :41:14.said, I have been kissed by Peter Tatchell, was even more abject given
:41:15. > :41:18.the fact that Simon Hughes subsequently accepted that he was
:41:19. > :41:25.gay, but it would have been dreadful whether he was gay or straight. The
:41:26. > :41:33.leaflet about Michael Howard was disgraceful, and there have been
:41:34. > :41:39.Conservatives who were very upset. Did you say anything about it at the
:41:40. > :41:46.time? I was unaware at the time. I have now fought nine elections. More
:41:47. > :41:51.fool you! There is no need to go in for dirty campaigning. Not in
:41:52. > :41:55.marginal seats? You need to look ahead to the election in 2015,
:41:56. > :41:58.particularly looking at the coalition, whether there are
:41:59. > :42:04.marginal seats, and they will be at each other. I think the public hate
:42:05. > :42:09.negative campaigning. What they want to know is, what do you stand for,
:42:10. > :42:11.where do you come from? The problem we identified was that there were
:42:12. > :42:14.candidates who didn't want to come forward and say that they were being
:42:15. > :42:19.negatively campaigned against for fear of being seen as weak or not
:42:20. > :42:22.being up to the rough-and-tumble of election campaigning, when actually
:42:23. > :42:28.this was stuff that was way over the line and was illegal. How do we stop
:42:29. > :42:33.that from happening in the first place and get out those sort of
:42:34. > :42:37.messages? Dirty campaigning doesn't really work, it backfires. And
:42:38. > :42:43.winning out of a dirty campaign, it takes something out of your soul.
:42:44. > :42:46.The price is far too high. We wanted to bring parties together and have a
:42:47. > :42:50.really positive framework for action. Natascha Engel, thank you
:42:51. > :42:54.very much. An unlikely pairing were the stars
:42:55. > :42:57.of a BBC One documentary last night. Tommy Robinson was the leader of the
:42:58. > :43:00.English Defence League, or EDL, who have campaigned against what they
:43:01. > :43:02.see as the "Islamification" of Britain. Tommy meets prominent
:43:03. > :43:10.British Muslim Mo Ansar, who wants the EDL banned. The film ends with
:43:11. > :43:16.Tommy Robinson's shock decision to leave the EDL. Here's a taster of
:43:17. > :43:22.what happened when Tommy met Mo. In a democracy, when you are angry,
:43:23. > :43:26.you protest. You should use your freedom of assembly, which is what
:43:27. > :43:31.we will be doing today. If an Englishman commits a crime, throws a
:43:32. > :43:36.bottle at the police, or commits a crime or gives a Nazi salute,
:43:37. > :43:40.bottle at the police, or commits a That won't happen. You have said
:43:41. > :43:46.yourself there are strange types in the EDL. If somebody commits a crime
:43:47. > :43:52.today, is it right for us to blame all English people? It is just a yes
:43:53. > :43:56.or no question. If the people pick up a book and it says throw a bottle
:43:57. > :44:01.at the police officer, and they do it, it is the book's fault. Do you
:44:02. > :44:03.accept that you are adding to fear and hysteria causing attacks on
:44:04. > :44:11.Muslims? And Mo Ansar joins us now in the
:44:12. > :44:13.studio. What do you think persuaded Tommy Robredo them to leave the
:44:14. > :44:19.English Defence League? I hope it was a combination of factors. I
:44:20. > :44:24.think 18 months with me is more than enough to force most people out of
:44:25. > :44:27.most occupations! I think spending time with people from a diverse
:44:28. > :44:31.range of Muslims, hearing different views. I think going to a mosque was
:44:32. > :44:40.important. You could have knocked him over with a feather after that.
:44:41. > :44:43.And did you change your views of him and VE Day after making that
:44:44. > :44:53.documentary? I think Tommy has been quite clear that he hasn't shifted
:44:54. > :45:00.in his views after that. I did have an impression of him. I had painted
:45:01. > :45:08.him as some kind of Goebbels figure for the 21st-century, and... And was
:45:09. > :45:12.he like that? Spending time with somebody always humanises them, and
:45:13. > :45:19.there are soft sides to him, and although I think the effect it has
:45:20. > :45:24.had on music -- Moslem communities has been disturbing, he is a complex
:45:25. > :45:26.character. The interesting thing about
:45:27. > :45:30.documentary is that your views what also challenged by other Muslims.
:45:31. > :45:40.They don't necessarily think you are a good spokesperson for moderate
:45:41. > :45:46.Islam. You accept that? Do they -- I accept that they think that. I have
:45:47. > :45:50.been working as head of diversity for an organisation, and you do
:45:51. > :45:55.things like equal rights, and stand up for women and gay rights as well.
:45:56. > :46:01.Let's take some of those issues. You are challenged on sharia law on
:46:02. > :46:04.whether you approve of these being punished by having their hands
:46:05. > :46:13.chopped off, and you refused to give a definitive answer. I think it is
:46:14. > :46:25.abhorrent. That one up. We did have that conversation, it's just doesn't
:46:26. > :46:29.make that to the public sphere. And if slaves were treated justly and
:46:30. > :46:33.with no rights whatsoever, why would anyone object? You were challenged
:46:34. > :46:37.on this last night. Twitter is an open forum where people can
:46:38. > :46:38.challenge. You think that if slaves are treated justly and with full
:46:39. > :46:49.rights, there is problem with it? If we had a three-day debate about
:46:50. > :46:55.slavery a year ago. It was about the historical context in ancient times.
:46:56. > :47:00.I hope it was quite an academic debate. Are you saying there are
:47:01. > :47:05.some instances when slavery is OK? No. I think there should be no
:47:06. > :47:11.slavery. I think that would be obvious. But you indicate that there
:47:12. > :47:15.are circumstances when... If you want to analyse something that
:47:16. > :47:20.happened hundreds of years ago, there should be academic freedom to
:47:21. > :47:24.debate those things. You mentioned women and gay rights. Tom Holland
:47:25. > :47:40.was in the documentary. He said is lamb, -- is lamb needed to be
:47:41. > :47:43.reformed. Do you agree? To an extent. If we are talking about
:47:44. > :48:00.Reformation, the Reformation required is with Ms limbs are not
:48:01. > :48:06.necessarily Islam. How are you... I hope you're not saying that
:48:07. > :48:13.Christians are the best example. I am merely talking about Islam. What
:48:14. > :48:23.about this cool to modernise or liberalise parts of Islam? I think
:48:24. > :48:30.he is talking about a Reformation in Islam as we had in Christianity.
:48:31. > :48:37.There is a great debate going on in Islam about how you relate what is
:48:38. > :48:42.in the Koran and then in the commentaries to a modern-day
:48:43. > :48:49.setting. The idea that there is one single school of thought in Islam is
:48:50. > :48:52.nonsensical. There is no single school of thought in Christianity.
:48:53. > :48:57.One of the things that has come out from what Mo says, although it is my
:48:58. > :49:10.language, is that a lot of the practices in Islam, I fact -- are in
:49:11. > :49:16.fact cultural. The position of women is cultural, based on subs with
:49:17. > :49:21.commentaries. -- subsequent commentaries. In my surgery, I say I
:49:22. > :49:27.would prefer them to remove the Vale. I also say to them, I will
:49:28. > :49:33.honour their right to wear the veil, but it makes it easy if I can see
:49:34. > :49:39.their face. I have been outspoken about Peter Holub own and several
:49:40. > :49:47.Wollaston. -- Peter Holub own and several Wollaston.
:49:48. > :49:58.What about young gills wearing the veil? -- young girls. I understand
:49:59. > :50:06.that. I had a long conversation with my wife about this. She is from
:50:07. > :50:11.Finland. She has a very European view, as do I. My view was,
:50:12. > :50:17.actually, each to their own. If parents and kids want to decide
:50:18. > :50:22.that, it is not my cup of tea, but they can do it. The headscarf is
:50:23. > :50:32.about identity. Headscarf, fine. We are talking about the veil. I'm not
:50:33. > :50:42.a fan but do we legislate? We should say, as a norm, that it is not a
:50:43. > :50:53.good idea. The former MP said more could be done to stop young girls
:50:54. > :50:56.being groomed for sex. One of the discussions we had, I spent three
:50:57. > :51:03.hours talking to the mothers and the families of victims of grooming and
:51:04. > :51:07.with members of the England defence league near to Blackburn. Part of
:51:08. > :51:14.the conversation was, we have a problem in society generally. In the
:51:15. > :51:20.UK, 200 women are abused or raped every day. They come from all
:51:21. > :51:28.races. Mo, don't dodge the issue, with respect. There are more white
:51:29. > :51:34.people locked up for sex offences than Muslims. There is a specific
:51:35. > :51:37.pub in the Muslim community will -- with the way women are treated and
:51:38. > :51:42.the young men come forward with a view of women. That can turn to lead
:51:43. > :51:49.what we have seen with grooming, where groups of predominates
:51:50. > :51:55.Pakistani men are grooming young girls. -- predominantly. We have
:51:56. > :52:02.seen organisations be very outspoken. But they haven't done
:52:03. > :52:09.enough until now. There is complacency on all sides. Thank you
:52:10. > :52:12.very much. You might think that having a politician for a parent
:52:13. > :52:24.would put you off West Mr for life. I suspect in many cases it has. --
:52:25. > :52:35.Westminster. Jack Straw to be the -- could be the next father to hand the
:52:36. > :52:44.political baton to his son. My stature has grown. 1995, and Patrick
:52:45. > :52:50.Jenkin is called to speak. Only it's not Patrick but his son on his feet.
:52:51. > :52:54.Perhaps we can forgive, on this occasion. Lord Jenkins and only left
:52:55. > :53:01.the Commons five years before his son arrived. Today, Westminster has
:53:02. > :53:05.20 MPs whose fathers were also in the Commons. You might say it is in
:53:06. > :53:09.their blood. A relatively new entrant to the Westminster family
:53:10. > :53:14.tree is the Conservative Laura Sands was on her father, Duncan, was a
:53:15. > :53:22.government minister in the 50s and 60s. When I was born, I had a pram
:53:23. > :53:27.which said, vote for daddy on the side. I was pretty much a recruit
:53:28. > :53:41.from a force to volunteer from a young age. -- a recruit, a force to
:53:42. > :53:45.volunteer. Children following their parents into politics is not new. We
:53:46. > :53:49.all remember our former Prime Minister William Gladstone, but
:53:50. > :53:56.perhaps not his son, Herbert, who became Home Secretary in 1905. Fast
:53:57. > :54:02.forward more than half a century and Douglas, now Lord Hurd, an MP in the
:54:03. > :54:09.70s, 80s and 90s, has been followed into the Commons by his son, who is
:54:10. > :54:14.currently a junior minister. Then there is the prominent Tony Benn,
:54:15. > :54:18.here campaigning in the 1963 by-election. His son, Hillary, was a
:54:19. > :54:26.Secretary of State under the Labour Prime Minister 's Blair and Brown.
:54:27. > :54:33.And this father son duo are both still grow much active in
:54:34. > :54:40.Westminster. Lindsay Hoyle is a deputy speaker. His father is a
:54:41. > :54:44.former Labour MP. The first impression was a Labour Party
:54:45. > :54:52.Conference, he was out delivering leaflets. I was the cheap Labour.
:54:53. > :54:59.I've always got that eastern memory. I was scarred for life. Did you
:55:00. > :55:05.encourage him to go into politics? Well, I hoped he might become an MP.
:55:06. > :55:11.It was up to him. He was not influenced by ourselves. We try to
:55:12. > :55:16.be as normal a family as you could. As for the latest additions, Jack
:55:17. > :55:18.Straw's son has been elected as a Labour candidate for the
:55:19. > :55:23.neighbouring constituency to his dad. John Prescott's son David hopes
:55:24. > :55:28.to be contesting Greenwich and Woolwich, and there are even rumours
:55:29. > :55:34.that Tony Blair's son is eyeing up a seat for the 20 15th election. And
:55:35. > :55:39.with us to discuss this is Matthew Parris. Before I come to you, are
:55:40. > :55:43.you pleased your son might be following you into Parliament? Yes,
:55:44. > :55:50.but he is doing it on his own merits. He is gay to have a tougher
:55:51. > :55:59.fight and to Blackburn. -- he's going to have. I don't think you
:56:00. > :56:03.would do well to draw favours by saying that Jack is going to hand
:56:04. > :56:07.the baton onto him. I think there is a strong undercurrent in British
:56:08. > :56:12.culture of resentment against, you know, it is not what you know, it is
:56:13. > :56:15.who you know. In America, they don't have a Royal Family so they
:56:16. > :56:24.reproduce it in their politics. But we do. I think, although he is your
:56:25. > :56:28.son will have got him hearings, from now on it is good to be a
:56:29. > :56:31.disadvantage that he is your son. People are going to think he is only
:56:32. > :56:38.there because he is Jack Straw's son. But it is in the blood, it is
:56:39. > :56:44.in the dinner table speech. That is the reason, rather than there might
:56:45. > :56:49.be a case of, yes, there is some help being offered. It is there all
:56:50. > :56:53.the time. I am not an eligible engineer like my father. It is
:56:54. > :57:00.different. -- an electrical engineer. I don't think there is
:57:01. > :57:06.much you can do to get your child a seat. But the public think there is.
:57:07. > :57:10.They don't like it. There may be advantages in having a dad like me,
:57:11. > :57:15.but when it comes to politics, there are only disadvantages. On this
:57:16. > :57:20.thing families and politics, my family talked about politics all the
:57:21. > :57:30.time. But they were obscure, not known. I had no baggage when I was
:57:31. > :57:40.trying to make my way in politics. You have got something to live up
:57:41. > :57:45.to. It is difficult, I would say. I know his son and he is brilliant. It
:57:46. > :57:53.will be difficult for him to live up to his father. What I would like to
:57:54. > :57:57.see is the reverse. If Boris Johnson and his brother could get their
:57:58. > :58:03.father to stand, he would be a great addition to the House of Commons. If
:58:04. > :58:10.you think Boris was colourful, try Stan! Just time before we go to find
:58:11. > :58:14.out the answer to our quiz. If you can remember, the question for today
:58:15. > :58:20.was, what our Parliamentary authorities planning to spend
:58:21. > :58:25.?250,000 on? Upgrading the gym? Straightening Big Ben? Raising the
:58:26. > :58:31.speaker chair? Or refurbishing the bars? I think it is the gym. That is
:58:32. > :58:43.terrific. I use it on a regular basis. Do you? ! Absolutely.
:58:44. > :58:50.Spinning a body blast, yoga... It is in the old cell block of a police
:58:51. > :58:56.station. You are right. It is the gym. I'm glad you're using it.
:58:57. > :58:59.Thanks to all of the our guest today. From all of us here, goodbye.