:00:39. > :00:42.Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:43. > :00:45.As the life of a British hostage hangs in the balance somewhere
:00:46. > :00:49.in the so-called Islamic State, David Cameron and Barack Obama say
:00:50. > :00:55.yet again they won't be cowed by the barbarism of the terrorisists.
:00:56. > :00:58.yet again they won't be cowed by the barbarism of the terrorists.
:00:59. > :01:02.Nato leaders are in Wales for a crucial summit.
:01:03. > :01:06.But Islamic State is now top of the agenda.
:01:07. > :01:09.Will the UK commit to joining the US in air strikes against terrorist
:01:10. > :01:14.Some crimes are on the verge of being decriminalised
:01:15. > :01:16.because some police forces have all but given up investigating them.
:01:17. > :01:23.We'll be joined by a former presenter of Crimewatch.
:01:24. > :01:25.Ed Miliband makes a heartfelt plea for Scotland to remain part
:01:26. > :01:30.But as support for the Union shrinks, are Scots in a mood to
:01:31. > :01:38.And, we reveal the secret of success in public life - the dark art of not
:01:39. > :01:55.With us for the duration, broadcaster and writer Nick Ross.
:01:56. > :01:59.David Cameron has said he will not rule anything out in relation to
:02:00. > :02:02.military action against the so-called Islamic State.
:02:03. > :02:06.It's what leaders usually say in current circumstances.
:02:07. > :02:10.Two US journalists have already been beheaded by jihadists now in control
:02:11. > :02:16.Now they're threatening to murder a British national they hold hostage.
:02:17. > :02:19.At the request of the family the BBC is still not naming him,
:02:20. > :02:24.though the name has appeared in other media outlets.
:02:25. > :02:29.Last week, President Obama admitted the US still did not have
:02:30. > :02:32.a strategy for how to deal with Islamic State - though America has
:02:33. > :02:35.mounted over 120 air strikes which have played their part in removing
:02:36. > :02:41.This morning, the Prime Minister did the media rounds to tell us
:02:42. > :02:55.I think the most important thing to consider is that we must not see
:02:56. > :02:58.this as something where you have a Western intervention, over the heads
:02:59. > :03:04.of neighbouring states, leaving others to pick up the pieces. What
:03:05. > :03:07.is required, and we have this, is a strategy to help those on the
:03:08. > :03:12.ground, and have an Iraqi government that can make a real difference.
:03:13. > :03:15.Kurdish forces that can make a difference, and then we ask what
:03:16. > :03:19.more we can do to help them. It needs to be that way around,
:03:20. > :03:22.properly thought through and patiently delivered, rather than
:03:23. > :03:29.sometimes, as in the past, these considerations have not been made.
:03:30. > :03:33.That was the Prime Minister at the NATO summit in Wales earlier this
:03:34. > :03:36.morning. He met with President Obama just before we came on and they will
:03:37. > :03:42.get into a plena recession later and over lunch. -- plena repossession.
:03:43. > :03:45.Joining me now is the former Defence Secretary Liam Fox.
:03:46. > :03:51.In your view, what would military action look like for the British in
:03:52. > :03:55.Iraq and Syria? We know that the allies in the region, the Iraqis and
:03:56. > :04:01.the Kurds, like a sufficient degree of air power. They are unable to get
:04:02. > :04:06.strategic targets in Iraq or Syria, from which ISIS draw their
:04:07. > :04:09.strength. That needs to happen. Secondly, were there to be a ground
:04:10. > :04:12.counteroffensive, they may require air support which they cannot
:04:13. > :04:17.deliver themselves. Other allies in the region may deliver them but it
:04:18. > :04:23.would require help from the West. So we should join America in its air
:04:24. > :04:29.strike campaign? Yes. Not just in Iraq but in Syria? To answer that
:04:30. > :04:33.question, you first need to answer the question, what is the real
:04:34. > :04:39.threat? Where does it come from? How can we properly counter it? The main
:04:40. > :04:43.bases are in Syria. Some of them, yes, which is where they have
:04:44. > :04:47.command and control. We need to deal with those and the lines of supply.
:04:48. > :04:52.If you are asking for a legal basis on which to do it, we have the fact
:04:53. > :04:55.those command and control centres are directing a lot of what is
:04:56. > :05:00.barbaric treatment of the Syrian population. So you would not just
:05:01. > :05:04.join with the Americans in the air strikes in Iraq? You would extend
:05:05. > :05:10.the air strikes into Syria? If required. The border really exists
:05:11. > :05:14.only in the minds of western cartographers. The border does not
:05:15. > :05:17.really exist in practice. If that is where the threat is coming from, and
:05:18. > :05:22.we believe it is of the magnitude we say it is, we need to deal with it.
:05:23. > :05:28.And in your way of doing things, with this bombing of bases in Syria
:05:29. > :05:34.take place, first consulting President Assad in the massacres or
:05:35. > :05:39.without his permission -- in Damascus. We need to do what we need
:05:40. > :05:43.to do. We would go ahead without his permission? Yes, the Prime Minister
:05:44. > :05:45.is right that we need to get as wide a coalition in the region as
:05:46. > :05:49.possible but we have to understand that they may lack the military
:05:50. > :05:54.capability to do what is required to deal with the threat, as I have said
:05:55. > :05:58.before, it is threefold. It is a humanitarian threat immediately to
:05:59. > :06:02.the population. It is the wider destabilisation of the region which
:06:03. > :06:06.could lead into a religious war. And it is the centre of export for
:06:07. > :06:12.jihad. We must understand the necessity for action. Despite
:06:13. > :06:16.Syria's military assets being seriously decomposed, the one thing
:06:17. > :06:20.they do have is one of the most sophisticated anti-aircraft defence
:06:21. > :06:25.systems in the world. The Russians have provided it for them. What
:06:26. > :06:31.happens if he unleashes that on the jets because he has the capability
:06:32. > :06:34.to knock them down? What do we do? It is a military question but you
:06:35. > :06:38.have other assets, complex weapons that can be released from a long way
:06:39. > :06:44.outside contested airspace, for example. So we would not have to go
:06:45. > :06:47.into Syrian airspace? If you look at the Libyan campaign, we often have
:06:48. > :06:51.the ability to raise weapons which are highly accurate but don't
:06:52. > :06:57.require air power in the space. That worked well. The other macro
:06:58. > :06:59.militarily, yes. But not afterwards. Politically is not the
:07:00. > :07:07.same thing but you are asking me from the military perspective. What
:07:08. > :07:10.do you make of this? You're right, militarily, lots is possible.
:07:11. > :07:13.Diplomatically, politically, strategically on the ground it is
:07:14. > :07:19.more compensated. As we have seen from Libya, the region sees with
:07:20. > :07:22.ethnic differences, tribal and religious views which we barely
:07:23. > :07:25.understand and we have made a mess. We assumed the Arab Spring was going
:07:26. > :07:30.to be fantastic and it has not turned out the way that the Liberals
:07:31. > :07:36.and Democrats hoped it would. You say we but not everybody did.
:07:37. > :07:41.Assumed it would. Many people were worried that it would be a disaster.
:07:42. > :07:46.Well, they turned out to be right. If you look at what has happened in
:07:47. > :07:50.Iraq, the failure to brand the basic difference between the different
:07:51. > :07:54.branches of Islam, and propping up one against the other, we have made
:07:55. > :07:58.a terrible mess in the past. I agree with Liam that weakness is not a
:07:59. > :08:01.good solution but nor is what headedness. If we go in without a
:08:02. > :08:06.clear idea of what we're doing, we will be seen as imperialists. What
:08:07. > :08:11.is the endgame? To keep Syria and Iraq intact, along the lines of the
:08:12. > :08:16.boundaries that were drawn in this city during the First World War? Is
:08:17. > :08:21.it their sovereign integrity we are protecting from Islamic State? Why?
:08:22. > :08:25.I am not sure that the current democratic structures in Iraq will
:08:26. > :08:29.hold. There is a strong likelihood you will end up with a much more
:08:30. > :08:33.federal structure. Some of the Sunni tribes will want to have more
:08:34. > :08:37.autonomous provinces. There could be partition, let's be, and if the
:08:38. > :08:44.Kurds have their way, it will be. All you have a federal structure. --
:08:45. > :08:48.otherwise you will have. The reason I'm saying this is that federal
:08:49. > :08:51.solutions where the post-colonial answer of the Foreign Office to
:08:52. > :08:56.every problem they faced, from central Africa, to the Caribbean, it
:08:57. > :09:02.was all federations and not one of them lasted more than a couple of
:09:03. > :09:05.years. And Iraq and Syria are the last two vestiges of the Versailles
:09:06. > :09:09.settlement, which is worth picking up a history book to read about.
:09:10. > :09:15.What is happening in Iraq is there is a dynamic developing, where you
:09:16. > :09:18.are now effectively, you call it partition, but you could finesse it
:09:19. > :09:21.as a more federal structure. But that is what is happening on the
:09:22. > :09:26.ground. You are getting ethnic divisions appearing in the country.
:09:27. > :09:32.The most important thing is that one way or another, the ISIS threat,
:09:33. > :09:35.which is serious, is diminished. It is not for us to tell the countries
:09:36. > :09:40.in the region how they should govern themselves. But they have made it
:09:41. > :09:43.clear they cannot deal with the threat of ISIS on their own and they
:09:44. > :09:49.will need help to do so. The danger of this is that you begin to think
:09:50. > :09:53.you can win with just their power. In a sense, it seems for the West,
:09:54. > :09:57.it is not so bad, our boys and girls will not be in danger, we will not
:09:58. > :10:01.put boots on the ground apart from special forces that we never know
:10:02. > :10:08.about. We don't really get our hands dirty. But almost no war is decided
:10:09. > :10:11.by air power alone. That's right. Every voter who has an opinion on
:10:12. > :10:14.this and every politician who decides on this has got to
:10:15. > :10:19.recognise, once you are there, you are truly committed. You may say
:10:20. > :10:23.that you are committed but you are prepared to pull out if a few RAF
:10:24. > :10:28.pilots get shot down, we will bail out in the hope they do as well. But
:10:29. > :10:33.I think it is so easy to be headstrong on this because the
:10:34. > :10:37.threat is sober ministers -- so pernicious, violent and ghastly, we
:10:38. > :10:41.must do something about it. But I think that doing something about it,
:10:42. > :10:46.particularly uninvited... If we are invited in, that is different. I
:10:47. > :10:52.think the Iraqis will invite us and the Kurds are certainly well. But
:10:53. > :10:56.not President Assad. Of course. As we have your experience as a defence
:10:57. > :11:01.minister here, Liam Fox, the plight and position of this British hostage
:11:02. > :11:07.is dreadful. And our options, I would suggest, are seriously
:11:08. > :11:13.limited. Very limited. You come up against what we all feel, which is,
:11:14. > :11:16.if that was someone in our own family, what we would want to be
:11:17. > :11:20.done to help them, which is anything at all. Against the position that
:11:21. > :11:25.governments find themselves in, which is if they given to groups
:11:26. > :11:29.like this, it is simply increasing the chance of others being taken
:11:30. > :11:34.hostage in the future. It is a terrible dilemma for governments. It
:11:35. > :11:39.is one of those decisions that leaders have to take, which are very
:11:40. > :11:43.lonely and difficult. I really feel hugely for the family but also for
:11:44. > :11:47.the Prime Minister and other leaders who have to take such difficult
:11:48. > :11:50.decisions. Thank you for joining us. But don't go away because we are
:11:51. > :11:51.sticking on this broad bean, particularly with the NATO summit
:11:52. > :11:56.taking place. -- this broad theme. Any discussions
:11:57. > :11:58.about tackling the jihadists in Iraq and Syria will be taken
:11:59. > :12:01.on the fringes of this Nato summit. The crisis
:12:02. > :12:02.in Ukraine is supposed to be This morning,
:12:03. > :12:06.the Nato Secretary General said Russia was still de-stabilising
:12:07. > :12:08.eastern Ukraine, despite talk Yesterday, President Obama said he
:12:09. > :12:16.wanted Nato to send an "unmistakable And will President Putin
:12:17. > :12:35.pay any attention? There may be talk of a cease-fire
:12:36. > :12:39.but the crisis is still set to dominate the two day summit which
:12:40. > :12:42.began this morning. Ukraine wants to join the organisation, but the move
:12:43. > :12:47.has made a number of leaders nervous. Article five of the NATO
:12:48. > :12:52.treaty states that an attack on one NATO country is considered an attack
:12:53. > :12:56.against all of them, meaning Britain would be obliged to defend Ukraine
:12:57. > :13:01.from any Russian aggression. British troops will soon be participating in
:13:02. > :13:05.joint military exercises with Ukraine, but actual membership could
:13:06. > :13:09.be seen as a step too far. So what could we see announced over the next
:13:10. > :13:13.couple of days? It is expected there will be an announcement on a
:13:14. > :13:17.so-called readiness action plan, which would include a 4000 strong
:13:18. > :13:21.rapid reaction force, that good response to a Russian attack. There
:13:22. > :13:26.will also be calls for all member states to follow Britain and spend
:13:27. > :13:30.at least 2% of their GDP on defence. Finally, there will be
:13:31. > :13:34.discussions over whether NATO should have permanent bases in Baltic
:13:35. > :13:35.member countries. Some think it is currently forbidden under an
:13:36. > :13:40.agreement with Russia. Let's talk to
:13:41. > :13:50.our defence correspondent, Jonathan I understand there is still no
:13:51. > :13:55.appetite for NATO to send arms to the Ukrainian government. So far, it
:13:56. > :14:02.is verbal professions of support but no military hardware, is that right?
:14:03. > :14:06.That is right in one sense. They are sending body armour and they are
:14:07. > :14:10.certainly giving quite a lot of expertise. What they will agree at
:14:11. > :14:14.the summit is to set up what they call a trust fund, which will help
:14:15. > :14:18.train the Ukrainian military in things like command and control, how
:14:19. > :14:21.to look after wounded soldiers. There is practical help, but of
:14:22. > :14:27.course, as you say, Ukraine is not a NATO member, nor has it asked to be
:14:28. > :14:30.a member, yet at least. They are pretty limited. What they are trying
:14:31. > :14:36.to do more is reassure those members of NATO who were former Soviet
:14:37. > :14:43.satellite states, like the Baltic states, and talk about beefing up
:14:44. > :14:45.their presence but also beefing up military activities, exercises,
:14:46. > :14:52.essentially come in Eastern Europe, to reassure them.
:14:53. > :14:58.Do they feel that they have got to reinforce Article five, that if one
:14:59. > :15:01.member is attacked, all members are attacked and they have got to go to
:15:02. > :15:05.the the member that has been attacked? Is there a sense that
:15:06. > :15:09.people have lost faith in Article five and that the primary purpose of
:15:10. > :15:14.the NATO summit is to reassure people that Article five is alive
:15:15. > :15:18.and well? You will not find any leader here saying that they do not
:15:19. > :15:22.believe in Article five and that they would not come to the military
:15:23. > :15:26.help of another country if it was attacked. That is a founding
:15:27. > :15:30.principle of NATO, if you throw that away, you probably do not have much
:15:31. > :15:33.of an alliance. In theory they are committed to that, in practice, you
:15:34. > :15:37.could ask questions as to whether they would want a war with Russia,
:15:38. > :15:41.and whether Russia it self would like to create a war. Certainly
:15:42. > :15:47.creating instability in Ukraine at the moment. You will not find
:15:48. > :15:51.anybody here that says that it is not going to be enacted upon as a
:15:52. > :15:55.founding principle. Since we have got you here, could I move onto
:15:56. > :16:00.Islamic State: Last night there was a number of reports coming out of
:16:01. > :16:04.the summit that it looked more likely now that Britain would join
:16:05. > :16:12.America in air strikes against Islamic State. Have there been any
:16:13. > :16:16.developments on that front this morning? A very clear message from
:16:17. > :16:19.the Prime Minister who says that he is keeping the option open. We
:16:20. > :16:24.understand they are inching forward, the British government, in helping
:16:25. > :16:29.Kurdish forces, Iraqi forces, already supplying body armour, an
:16:30. > :16:33.aeroplane landed this morning, and there is talk, they have supplied
:16:34. > :16:37.arms, and munition. Supplied by a third country. There is a
:16:38. > :16:42.possibility Britain may directly supply weapons to the Kurdish, to
:16:43. > :16:45.the Iraqi forces. This probably is not a summit where they are going to
:16:46. > :16:50.come out with some statement that for example Britain may join America
:16:51. > :16:54.in air strikes, certainly, that is one of the discussions on the
:16:55. > :16:58.sidelines, on the margins. The focus is president of Balmer and David
:16:59. > :17:03.Cameron. President Obama would like sub old. Not just the support
:17:04. > :17:07.Britain but the neighbours as well. -- President Obama would like
:17:08. > :17:10.support. That is the key, as David Cameron has said, he would not like
:17:11. > :17:15.this to be seen as some kind of Western intervention, they did that
:17:16. > :17:19.as a matter of interest in Libya, Jordan and the UAE were taking part.
:17:20. > :17:22.Always looks like Western intervention, because they provide
:17:23. > :17:28.most of the warplanes and the assets. Hinchey very much. -- thank
:17:29. > :17:39.you very much. Liam Fox, what is the most that this
:17:40. > :17:45.NATO summit can do about Ukraine? It is to reassure our allies, in NATO,
:17:46. > :17:48.that Article five does mean something, and to send a very clear
:17:49. > :17:54.message to Russia, the problem is that we are playing catch up, Russia
:17:55. > :17:58.launched a cyber attack on Estonia and we did nothing, they cut off
:17:59. > :18:02.gas, they invaded Georgia, in these situations we have done very little.
:18:03. > :18:05.The message that this has sent to Vladimir Putin, the West will be
:18:06. > :18:14.prodded and will probably not respond. That is where we need to
:18:15. > :18:18.get realignment. While Isis is an imminent military crisis, there is
:18:19. > :18:21.also a political crisis, and it is a crisis principle: We believe
:18:22. > :18:25.sovereign nations like Ukraine should be able to exercise self
:18:26. > :18:29.determination, Russia believes in a sphere of influence, that the former
:18:30. > :18:32.soggy and republics, Russia has a veto on their behaviour, it believes
:18:33. > :18:37.that the protection of ethnic Russians lies with Russia, we
:18:38. > :18:41.believe that it lies with the countries in which those people 's
:18:42. > :18:45.lives. There is a clear difference in principle. What we require is
:18:46. > :18:51.de-escalation, Russian forces out of Ukraine, so that they are... It is
:18:52. > :18:56.not going to happen... Why would he do that, the separatists he supports
:18:57. > :18:59.are losing the war, the Ukrainian military is moving in on the main
:19:00. > :19:04.centres of population in eastern Ukraine. He has now sent in,
:19:05. > :19:08.although he denies it, but it is clear that it would not happen
:19:09. > :19:11.without his support, Russian armour and Russian forces. They are helping
:19:12. > :19:16.them and the tide is turning, indeed they may be moving onto this major
:19:17. > :19:21.town in the south by the Black Sea. Why would he pull back? If that
:19:22. > :19:25.happens there has got to be another wave of Western responses, that
:19:26. > :19:30.economic sanctions. Hopefully there can be some sense seen between
:19:31. > :19:33.President Vladimir Putin and the Ukrainian president about how to
:19:34. > :19:36.de-escalates the issue. If the Russians continue their behaviour,
:19:37. > :19:40.which is completely unacceptable and illegal, we will have no alternative
:19:41. > :19:51.but to have further economic response. The real politic, the
:19:52. > :19:55.harsh reality, certainly in eastern Ukraine, Mr blood and a Putin can do
:19:56. > :20:00.whatever he wants, there will be penalties but he can do what he
:20:01. > :20:04.wants. The emphasis of NATO now, as Liam Fox says, trying to catch up.
:20:05. > :20:08.They are trying to reassure the Baltic states, the members of NATO,
:20:09. > :20:14.which Ukraine is not, that we will not let this happen to you. Two
:20:15. > :20:18.separate things: NATO defending NATO nations, that is Article five.
:20:19. > :20:23.Ukraine is not a NATO nation, it is an ally, but that is new. The other
:20:24. > :20:27.side, how do we make sure that we are not making Vladimir Putin even
:20:28. > :20:31.more popular than he already is? Liam is correct, he is prodding us
:20:32. > :20:35.and he is doing that because it is making him very popular at home. The
:20:36. > :20:40.thing at this from his perspective, look at this... Think about liberal
:20:41. > :20:45.Russian citizens... We see our people. -- think that they were
:20:46. > :20:49.Russian citizens. We could say that they were out people in some
:20:50. > :20:53.islands. And they are British, and we have some other not very
:20:54. > :20:57.legitimate regime, remember, this did not go from a democracy to a
:20:58. > :21:00.democracy, it occurred through a coup. That is when the uprising
:21:01. > :21:04.began, that is when the Russians began supporting the people. We
:21:05. > :21:08.British may feel about self-determination for our own
:21:09. > :21:12.people. The Russians see this as Russians under threat. But in a
:21:13. > :21:18.Putin is very popular. We have got to be very careful that we do not
:21:19. > :21:23.play into his hands. What you say? -- blood in a Putin is very popular.
:21:24. > :21:26.We have a responsibility to international order and law, which
:21:27. > :21:31.says that if Russians who live in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, their
:21:32. > :21:35.protection is the responsibility of their governments. Of their laws, of
:21:36. > :21:39.their constitutions, not an external power. If you allow the principle to
:21:40. > :21:43.take hold them there is no international law. Only if those
:21:44. > :21:46.governments are sensible, and if they believe in self-determination
:21:47. > :21:51.they must consider that there are times when they must allow a vote,
:21:52. > :21:54.as we are allowing in Scotland, to ask if you want to do your own
:21:55. > :22:00.thing. May well be... The last time there was a pol, 80% of people in
:22:01. > :22:04.Crimea said they wanted to be independent of Kiev. No matter how
:22:05. > :22:09.independent and irresponsible, are we going to support them? That is
:22:10. > :22:13.not what we are saying, what we said was, any move towards independence
:22:14. > :22:17.in Crimea has got to be legal and in line with the constitution of laws
:22:18. > :22:28.of Ukraine. It cannot simply be a good guitar. -- cannot seem to be a
:22:29. > :22:31.coup d'etat. One final question, the Americans were moving their
:22:32. > :22:34.attention elsewhere, particularly to the Pacific, the Americans were
:22:35. > :22:39.getting angry that at the height of the Cold War, they accounted for 68%
:22:40. > :22:44.of NATO defence spending and 20 years after, when Europe did not
:22:45. > :22:48.seem under threat, 75%, this year repair and sad demobilised and cut
:22:49. > :22:53.defence. -- because Europeans had been mobilised. Is there really an
:22:54. > :23:02.appetite, with the Eurozone mired in stagnation and mass unemployment, to
:23:03. > :23:07.defence -- increased defence spending. They decided they would
:23:08. > :23:10.bank the Article five guarantees and cut the defence spending. Now they
:23:11. > :23:14.are beginning to think again. Looking at countries like Estonia,
:23:15. > :23:18.it is over 2%, and rising. They are beginning to realise that life
:23:19. > :23:23.outside of the soviet union does not mean life without the threat of
:23:24. > :23:29.Russia's. We are barely over that. But we are. Barely. We should be
:23:30. > :23:33.leading at the summit by saying that the Brymon Vista can say that a
:23:34. > :23:40.future Conservative government would guarantee we stay over to depend of
:23:41. > :23:48.GDP. -- we stay over 2% of GDP. The built-in NATO comes, and this is in
:23:49. > :23:53.a cartoon, the built-in NATO comes and everybody is searching for their
:23:54. > :23:55.wallet! The idea that America could choose to pivot away from European
:23:56. > :24:03.and American security towards Asia, it was never a choice will stop it
:24:04. > :24:06.has global interest and therefore global responsibility, this idea
:24:07. > :24:10.that America could suddenly turn its back on Europe and turn towards the
:24:11. > :24:14.Pacific, looks a bit odd today. I understand what you are saying but I
:24:15. > :24:30.still think that it is the modus operandi of Barack Obama to do so.
:24:31. > :24:37.Some police forces in England and Wales have given up investigating
:24:38. > :24:42.certain crime, a scathing report has found that in some areas, police
:24:43. > :24:46.were asking victims to investigate for themselves instead of sending an
:24:47. > :24:53.officer. Roger Baker is the inspector who produced the report.
:24:54. > :24:55.37 forces carry out what are called displaced investigations, the other
:24:56. > :25:01.six have and attend everything policy. We do not criticise the desk
:25:02. > :25:09.-based investigations. But it is when a member of the public phones
:25:10. > :25:12.the police, and they ask if there is any evidence. What we did have a
:25:13. > :25:16.problem with, a lot of these crimes will simply then be filed straight
:25:17. > :25:20.away and the public have been asked to effectively carry out their own
:25:21. > :25:23.investigations to the extent of, if you do not contact us back further
:25:24. > :25:29.with more evidence, that is the end of the case. We have found that in a
:25:30. > :25:33.third of the forces we examined. Arab guest of the day, Nick Ross,
:25:34. > :25:39.former presenter of that highly rated show Crimewatch, he founded
:25:40. > :25:47.the Jill Dando Institute of crime science at university. He has
:25:48. > :25:49.written books about crime. -- at the University College London. I thought
:25:50. > :25:52.that you were meant to be the government of law and order, why are
:25:53. > :25:56.citizens investigating their own crimes? I don't think the Liberal
:25:57. > :26:02.Democrats have ever been the party of law and order, they are a part of
:26:03. > :26:06.the government. Are they to blame? They certainly do not help. I voted
:26:07. > :26:11.against the government reducing the police budget each year, I see it
:26:12. > :26:15.first hand, how stretched police forces are. I believe in strong law
:26:16. > :26:18.and order measures. It is unacceptable to be sending out the
:26:19. > :26:22.message that people have got to investigate their own crimes, that
:26:23. > :26:28.is a ludicrous message to send out. The police have got to be realistic
:26:29. > :26:32.and say to people, look, without any evidence, we cannot really pursue
:26:33. > :26:35.this any further. I think that is just being honest with people,
:26:36. > :26:40.nothing wrong with being honest. There are organisations that have
:26:41. > :26:44.been set up, like face watch by Simon Gordon in London, rolled out
:26:45. > :26:48.across the country, businesses are going through CCTV evidence for
:26:49. > :26:53.police and handing them a crime sheet with the relevant CCTV
:26:54. > :26:58.evidence, to enable them to crack on and get people to justice, rather
:26:59. > :27:04.than sitting for hours, waiting for CCTV footage, which they will not
:27:05. > :27:07.realistically do. -- wading through. Can you blame this on cuts, you
:27:08. > :27:12.follow the mantra of the left whenever public services are in
:27:13. > :27:16.trouble, you say that it is all the fort of the cuts, but in fact, six
:27:17. > :27:24.of the 43 forces in England and Wales actually attend the scene of
:27:25. > :27:30.every crime. -- it is all the fault of the cuts. If six can do it, why
:27:31. > :27:33.not the other 37? They do not. Just because they are attending does not
:27:34. > :27:37.mean they are doing anything meaningful all worthwhile, it may be
:27:38. > :27:40.that the other police forces are being more honest. Without any
:27:41. > :27:46.particular evidence there is not a great deal that we can do. How do
:27:47. > :27:51.you know unless you look? It depends upon what the crime is, it may be
:27:52. > :27:56.that you depend upon CCTV footage, we have got to look at all of the
:27:57. > :27:59.methods. With things like face watch, and test it in, set up by
:28:00. > :28:03.businesses, it is they found years ago that police are wading through
:28:04. > :28:08.CCTV footage, spending hours doing that. -- Facewatch. That seems to be
:28:09. > :28:12.a useful thing. But the police will turn up to every event in an ideal
:28:13. > :28:16.world, they will investigate and bring everyone to justice but we do
:28:17. > :28:19.not live in an ideal world. Certainly in my area, the police do
:28:20. > :28:23.a pretty good job in difficult circumstances. What you make of the
:28:24. > :28:30.idea that the police tell victims of crime to look for fingerprints, to
:28:31. > :28:34.check CCTV... And scour second-hand goods websites to see if they can
:28:35. > :28:37.find their stolen property? Three things to say: It can be
:28:38. > :28:42.distressing, we forget that some crimes which to an outsider do not
:28:43. > :28:46.seem very important, like a burglary within your own household, can be
:28:47. > :28:51.hugely important. And live with you for a long time. And if you do not
:28:52. > :28:55.think anyone is on your site, it can be upsetting. But it is incredible
:28:56. > :29:01.that Her Majesty 's Inspectorate have suddenly stumbled upon this as
:29:02. > :29:04.if it is new, car crime and burglary have gone down by three quarters,
:29:05. > :29:14.perhaps he is too young to remember the 1970s. He is not that young! In
:29:15. > :29:17.those days, very few, if your car was broken into, very few would have
:29:18. > :29:22.been investigated. Even going back much further, it was our
:29:23. > :29:27.responsibility, as citizens, to put up a hue and cry before there was
:29:28. > :29:31.police force. The pendulum has gone so far the other way, that we have
:29:32. > :29:37.become utterly dependent almost on the nanny state. In some extends it
:29:38. > :29:42.is right, but it is a bit of a distraction. Only three or 4% of
:29:43. > :29:46.known crimes finish up in court anyway. We will never arrest all of
:29:47. > :29:51.those making travel and the reason we have wrestled it down, these kind
:29:52. > :29:55.of crimes, that the police are not investigating, is nothing to do with
:29:56. > :29:58.magistrates. We should stop talking bread and circuses and look at why
:29:59. > :30:08.they came down and we will copy it across to other areas. Doesn't this
:30:09. > :30:10.report view all the line of the Association of Chief Police
:30:11. > :30:14.Officers, which says because of the cuts, we have got to make choices,
:30:15. > :30:17.and therefore, we decide that there is some things we do not have to
:30:18. > :30:25.resolve, the less important stuff, less important in our opinion, we do
:30:26. > :30:33.not investigate? That will be the message that they give. Police
:30:34. > :30:36.forces have to prioritise. There are not the resources to do everything
:30:37. > :30:41.and there never will be. Of course they have to prioritise what they do
:30:42. > :30:45.but it is not necessary about police priorities. The police should
:30:46. > :30:48.reflect the public's priorities. It is not just a question of saying the
:30:49. > :30:52.public can go hang and the police will decide what is important. The
:30:53. > :30:56.police should concentrate on what the public think is important. Nick
:30:57. > :30:59.mentioned burglary and it would be completely an acceptable to me if
:31:00. > :31:06.the police did not attend every burglary. -- completely an
:31:07. > :31:09.acceptable. But there is one police officer to every 450 citizens also
:31:10. > :31:12.and you are more likely to meet Doctor van you are a police
:31:13. > :31:18.officer. There's only one every ten square miles. They have so me things
:31:19. > :31:22.to do. You only have 40, roughly two answer emergency call that any one
:31:23. > :31:28.time. We have to tailor expectations to what is realistic. Absolutely,
:31:29. > :31:32.and that is my point, we have to be realistic. I go out with my police
:31:33. > :31:36.force on many occasions. I have been with scenes of crimes officers to
:31:37. > :31:40.see what they do. In my experience, the police do a very good job, given
:31:41. > :31:45.how stretched they are, and with the issues they have to deal with. It
:31:46. > :31:49.will never be perfect. There will be issues they get wrong but broadly,
:31:50. > :31:53.they do a pretty good job. Wood reassurances one thing but bringing
:31:54. > :31:56.people to justice is another. We have made it progressively more
:31:57. > :32:00.difficult for the police to do that, probably rightly. If you go
:32:01. > :32:04.back 100 years, I homicide trial at the Old Bailey would have lasted a
:32:05. > :32:08.couple of hours, and now it is weeks and months. With things like the
:32:09. > :32:11.police and criminal evidence act, it is increasingly difficult for the
:32:12. > :32:19.police, they have do have a trial before a trial with the CBS. We have
:32:20. > :32:22.to lower people's expectations about what the courts can achieve. We are
:32:23. > :32:25.having the debate about rape and we need to have it more widely. It is
:32:26. > :32:30.not a panacea and not the only tool in the tool box. Philip Davies, stay
:32:31. > :32:32.with us, because I am going to talk about crime some more.
:32:33. > :32:35."Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime",
:32:36. > :32:37."prison works", "tougher sentences" "more bobbies on the beat".
:32:38. > :32:40.These are just some of the slogans politicians love to trot out to show
:32:41. > :32:43.Indeed, crime has been declining over
:32:44. > :32:48.So do our politicians deserve a hearty pat on the back
:32:49. > :32:54.Or is the explanation, well, a bit more complicated?
:32:55. > :32:58.We'll talk to our guest, Nick Ross, in just a moment - he's written all
:32:59. > :33:15.For some time, The Blue Conservatives eyed the boys
:33:16. > :33:18.- and girls - in blue as the last great unreformed public service.
:33:19. > :33:21.Whilst others did not go along with that view,
:33:22. > :33:24.the Coalition has made reform a key plank of its home affairs policy.
:33:25. > :33:26.Its argument is that even after reforming and having to make
:33:27. > :33:29.financial cutbacks, crime overall is still falling and has been
:33:30. > :33:35.Today, the lightbulb moment for many in the Home Office seems to be
:33:36. > :33:44.trying to understand why, and what the so-called drivers of crime are.
:33:45. > :33:50.We believe they are alcohol, drugs, opportunity, the effectiveness of
:33:51. > :33:55.the criminal justice system, character, and profit. If we can
:33:56. > :33:59.understand each of these drivers better, and how they relate to one
:34:00. > :34:00.another, we should be able to devise better policy to prevent crime
:34:01. > :34:02.occurring in the first place. The Home Secretary signalled
:34:03. > :34:05.in the last 24 hours a move towards more preventative policing policy,
:34:06. > :34:09.mergers of emergency services, and repeated her belief that
:34:10. > :34:23.the necessity and indeed desire is The Labour government in the late
:34:24. > :34:27.90s introduced reforms that put a big focus on prevention, the police
:34:28. > :34:29.working with local councils and communities, and introduced
:34:30. > :34:34.neighbourhood policing which made a huge difference in cutting crime.
:34:35. > :34:38.However, we have seen neighbourhood policing being undermined, and a lot
:34:39. > :34:41.of things going backwards. I think it is a problem as well that fewer
:34:42. > :34:43.criminals are being brought to justice. Victims need support and
:34:44. > :34:45.justice as well. Some see the grand scheme
:34:46. > :34:48.of crime and how to control it went back earlier into the 90s
:34:49. > :34:56.and are clear what it was down to. I think what Michael Howard started
:34:57. > :35:03.doing as Home Secretary, his prison works, toughening up policy, set
:35:04. > :35:07.sentencing, and changing the whole view of the Home Office that had
:35:08. > :35:11.before seen rising crime as inevitable, and a problem to be
:35:12. > :35:17.managed. I think that was a key part of what happened. Since 1994-1995,
:35:18. > :35:23.crime has been falling most years, a fairly consistent trend under
:35:24. > :35:28.governments of both stripes. It is not just locking people up because
:35:29. > :35:32.they will come back out again. Why house somebody so they can come out
:35:33. > :35:34.and commit more crime? We can be much smarter about that.
:35:35. > :35:37.And now it seems policing will involve not only uniformed officers,
:35:38. > :35:43.but us just being a bit smarter about how we use our stuff.
:35:44. > :35:52.We are carrying thousands of pounds of goods around in our bags,
:35:53. > :35:58.laptops, mobile phones, iPads, all kinds of things which are tradable.
:35:59. > :36:03.They are worth something. If you think about the levels of theft, and
:36:04. > :36:06.how they actually track, you can look at spikes in crime, for
:36:07. > :36:14.example, when a new mobile phone comes out. It goes up, shock horror.
:36:15. > :36:15.In the past, this was labelled as blaming us.
:36:16. > :36:18.Now it seems whilst focusing on our traditional demands on them,
:36:19. > :36:20.politicians and police are making reducing opportunity and temptation
:36:21. > :36:24.Nick Ross and Philip Davies are still with us.
:36:25. > :36:32.Nick Ross, the official crime figures have been going down across
:36:33. > :36:37.the Western world. But across the Western world, you have a huge
:36:38. > :36:41.variety of law and order regimes, some putting more emphasis on
:36:42. > :36:46.prison, and others putting less. Do we really know why it is falling?
:36:47. > :36:49.Yes, and firstly, can I just point out what you have said is
:36:50. > :36:53.revolutionary. Here you are on the BBC, taking it as read that crime
:36:54. > :36:59.has fallen across the industrial world. I have been saying this since
:37:00. > :37:02.about 1997-1998. I have been ridiculed by MPs, saying it was
:37:03. > :37:08.complacency, they were just statistics, official figures and so
:37:09. > :37:13.forth. We know from hospital admissions, insurance and lots of
:37:14. > :37:16.ways of trying elating crime, it is falling all across the Western
:37:17. > :37:19.world. The other dispiriting thing is the tribalism you get from
:37:20. > :37:23.politicians, who are all trying to put their own spin on it. Generally
:37:24. > :37:27.in crime, someone to the right of centre, who is conservative,
:37:28. > :37:31.believes if you are nasty to people, you will get less crime.
:37:32. > :37:35.Lock people up, bring back hanging, deterrence and all the rest.
:37:36. > :37:39.Liberals on the left tend to believe that if you are nice to people, you
:37:40. > :37:43.will get less crime, community sentences and so forth. Each of them
:37:44. > :37:48.madly cherry picks the data, starting with the ideology and
:37:49. > :37:52.getting the data to make it stick. Actually, the criminal justice
:37:53. > :37:56.system as only tangential, very marginal effects on crime rates. We
:37:57. > :37:59.can see this for the very reasons you have pointed out because the
:38:00. > :38:02.same pattern is happening in the industrial world. Theresa May, bless
:38:03. > :38:07.her, said something I have never heard her say before on that clip
:38:08. > :38:12.you just showed. She said there were six drivers of crime, and the
:38:13. > :38:17.criminal justice system was only the fourth on the list. She is right and
:38:18. > :38:21.that film was right, the summary was right, temptation and opportunity
:38:22. > :38:24.are what changes the crime rate. Can I give you a political example? If
:38:25. > :38:29.you make the expenses system in the House of Commons very easy to
:38:30. > :38:32.fiddle, you will find it is fiddle. You will find that those with the
:38:33. > :38:37.greatest opportunity, constituencies outside London, tends to fiddle it
:38:38. > :38:40.more than those within, not because they have a different moral
:38:41. > :38:43.character but because of opportunity. Even the Prime Minister
:38:44. > :38:47.had to pay back some money, as I recall. If you make it difficult,
:38:48. > :38:51.these things don't happen. If you make society by default, difficult,
:38:52. > :38:55.which is the reason car crime has come down, they are great difficulty
:38:56. > :38:58.in steel now. There is concern about moral character which is proper and
:38:59. > :39:03.justified but it is not the way to manipulate crime figures and
:39:04. > :39:06.certainly not the way we will reduce victimisation. Philip Davies, are
:39:07. > :39:11.you and your kind going to stop taking credit for falling crime
:39:12. > :39:15.rates? I agree with a lot of what Nick said. I have got his book and I
:39:16. > :39:19.have met him and he's gone into more detail about his views. He is right
:39:20. > :39:22.about car crime, the enhanced security measures are clearly the
:39:23. > :39:26.reason why it has come down and no one can deny that. It is only part
:39:27. > :39:32.of the story. There are other things, other technology has played
:39:33. > :39:35.a big part, CCTV has helped bring evidence to court, the DNA database
:39:36. > :39:39.has made a massive difference in terms of highlighting who has been
:39:40. > :39:42.responsible for things. Technology generally has been a massive help in
:39:43. > :39:49.dealing with crime, bringing people to justice. But I don't think it is
:39:50. > :39:52.the whole picture. I think we still need to be tougher on crime. If you
:39:53. > :39:56.speak the local police forces and asked them how to reduce crime in
:39:57. > :39:59.the area by 50%, they will all say that the best thing is to take the
:40:00. > :40:04.ten most political offenders and put them in prison. It is perfectly
:40:05. > :40:08.obvious that if the most prolific offenders are in prison, they cannot
:40:09. > :40:12.commit crime. We should not forget that aspect either. That is
:40:13. > :40:19.logically true but is it true in practice? In America and in this
:40:20. > :40:22.country, we put, particularly America but by European standards,
:40:23. > :40:27.Britain to put quite a high proportion of people in prison. No,
:40:28. > :40:35.we don't. Higher than France, Germany and Italy. This is the
:40:36. > :40:40.Howard league's we send 17 people to prison for every 1000 crimes
:40:41. > :40:45.committed in this country. You will find it hard to find a lower
:40:46. > :40:49.percentage. But in terms of percentage of the population, we do.
:40:50. > :40:52.Let me finish my question, when you look at other countries, which don't
:40:53. > :41:00.put as many people in prison, crime is still falling. Where is the
:41:01. > :41:03.correlation, the causation? Different countries have different
:41:04. > :41:07.experiences and cultures and histories. They have different
:41:08. > :41:11.issues. I prefer to look at what has happened in this country in the past
:41:12. > :41:14.and what is happening now. The fact is, whether people like it or not,
:41:15. > :41:18.since we started putting more people in prison, crime has come down. The
:41:19. > :41:22.facts of the matter are, and the Ministry of Justice figures are very
:41:23. > :41:28.clear, the longer people spend in prison, the less likely they are to
:41:29. > :41:31.reoffend when they come out. Let me put that point Nick Ross because we
:41:32. > :41:34.hear it a lot. I agree with Philip on lots of things but he is making
:41:35. > :41:39.the classic error, his ideology is defining the way he sees this. Here
:41:40. > :41:43.is a correlation that he says is causation because it happens to fit
:41:44. > :41:46.with his ideology. There are lots of other correlations which don't fit
:41:47. > :41:51.with the ideology. But he has said something which is important, which
:41:52. > :41:55.I agree with. Huge numbers of real-life experiments and academic
:41:56. > :42:02.experiments show that deterrence does not work in the way we think it
:42:03. > :42:06.should. That is why people who promote the -- who could suffer the
:42:07. > :42:09.death penalty, will still promote those behaviours. It is like people
:42:10. > :42:13.not stopping smoking even though they know it will kill them. If you
:42:14. > :42:17.lock people away, particularly a very fine group of highly prolific
:42:18. > :42:22.offenders, but you have to define the group very carefully, then it is
:42:23. > :42:25.true they cannot commit offences outside prison. Filipe, I will give
:42:26. > :42:35.you the final word. -- Filipe. Prison is essential in reducing
:42:36. > :42:38.crime but it is also about an appropriate punishment for people.
:42:39. > :42:41.Should not forget that sending people to prison is because they
:42:42. > :42:44.deserve to be punished for what they have done. We should not pretend
:42:45. > :42:47.that punishment should never play a part in the criminal justice system.
:42:48. > :42:50.The Labour leader is in Glasgow today to make a last-ditch pitch
:42:51. > :42:53.for a no vote in the upcoming referendum.
:42:54. > :42:56.Ed Miliband says Scots should vote for a Labour government to get
:42:57. > :43:00.the change they need, rather than "erecting a new border"
:43:01. > :43:05.Alex Salmond says hundreds of thousands
:43:06. > :43:08.of Labour supporters are considering voting Yes on September 18th.
:43:09. > :43:19.But Mr Miliband says he'll give Scots a better deal.
:43:20. > :43:26.This is the change I bring, change to bring a fairer country, changed
:43:27. > :43:33.to bring a fairer Scotland. Not the change of erecting a new border, the
:43:34. > :43:36.only ambition of the Nationalists. This is my programme to change. This
:43:37. > :43:42.is my contract with the people of Scotland. -- for change. Freezing
:43:43. > :43:47.energy bills, raising the minimum wage, fairer taxes with the new 10p
:43:48. > :43:52.starting rate, and a higher rate of 50p, taxing the bankers bonuses, to
:43:53. > :43:52.get our young people back to work, including here in Lanarkshire.
:43:53. > :44:08.APPLAUSE And yes, abolishing the bedroom tax
:44:09. > :44:17.across the UK. APPLAUSE Not just here.
:44:18. > :44:19.Joining me now from Glasgow is Jeane Freeman from the Yes campaign.
:44:20. > :44:21.She has a background in Labour
:44:22. > :44:23.having been a senior political adviser to First Minister Jack
:44:24. > :44:31.The battle is clearly on to the Labour vote, if I can put it that
:44:32. > :44:35.way, particularly in the West of Scotland, to do with social
:44:36. > :44:39.services. -- for the Labour vote. Why is Alex Salmond and the yes
:44:40. > :44:45.campaign saying that if Scotland stays in the union, they risk a
:44:46. > :44:46.privatised NHS? The only person that can privatise the NHS is Alex
:44:47. > :44:56.Salmond. The campaign is saying that because
:44:57. > :45:01.while the Scottish Parliament has power over the shape of the NHS,
:45:02. > :45:05.what we do not have is control over the finances. The finances that come
:45:06. > :45:10.to Scotland to spend on public services come as part of a formula,
:45:11. > :45:16.which is based upon how much public expenditure those services is made
:45:17. > :45:21.in England and Wales. We may have control over the kind of NHS that we
:45:22. > :45:24.want in Scotland, what we do not have control over is the total
:45:25. > :45:29.financial package that would allow us to fund it. Those are two
:45:30. > :45:33.separate issues. Taking them one at a time: one is privatisation, the
:45:34. > :45:37.other is amount of money that you get to run the health service. Can
:45:38. > :45:42.we establish right away, regardless of the amount of money, that there
:45:43. > :45:46.is no danger of Scotland having a privatised health service unless the
:45:47. > :45:53.Scottish Parliament decided that is what it wants. We cannot establish
:45:54. > :45:56.that, Andrew, because there is the transatlantic trade and investment
:45:57. > :46:00.agreement that is currently being negotiated between the European
:46:01. > :46:03.Union and the United States, the UK Government has refused to exempt the
:46:04. > :46:09.National Health Service from that agreement. What that agreement will
:46:10. > :46:16.do is open up the market of the NHS, and therefore, let me finish...
:46:17. > :46:20.Let me finish... I'm trying to... That is a European issue. It is not
:46:21. > :46:25.and you know that, it is a UK Government issue. If the UK
:46:26. > :46:28.Government does not exempt the National Health Service, and we
:46:29. > :46:32.remain a part of the union, no matter what the Scottish parliament
:46:33. > :46:37.may want to do about the NHS in Scotland, the market for the UK,
:46:38. > :46:41.because it is the UK that signs it, is then open to private companies
:46:42. > :46:47.coming in. They can insist upon doing that. We cannot separate the
:46:48. > :46:52.two matters in the way that the No campaign would like us to be able to
:46:53. > :46:57.do. Labour supporters across Scotland are coming to realise that
:46:58. > :47:03.increasingly. Having now had to admit that threats of Tory
:47:04. > :47:06.privatisation in Scotland can work because you control your own health
:47:07. > :47:09.service, you are now saying that the danger may come from a free trade
:47:10. > :47:16.agreement which is not even been agreed or signed? You are mistaking
:47:17. > :47:21.me for a politician and an SNP politician, I have not asserted any
:47:22. > :47:25.of the things you are suggesting. I represent women for independence and
:47:26. > :47:28.we are very clear that the privatisation agenda, south of the
:47:29. > :47:33.border, is a threat to the National Health Service, because of the
:47:34. > :47:37.reason I have given you, and because we do not control in Scotland the
:47:38. > :47:41.total finances that Scotland earns, because that comes back to us from
:47:42. > :47:51.the Treasury, based on that formula that I mentioned. Let's be crystal
:47:52. > :47:55.clear about who is asserting what, this debate is about what Labour
:47:56. > :48:00.supporters in Scotland want to do. Labour in Scotland is run by the
:48:01. > :48:04.United Kingdom, is run by London Labour, and they are conflating a
:48:05. > :48:08.Labour against SNP argument with an argument about independence, which
:48:09. > :48:12.is about the decisions in Scotland being taken by the people who live
:48:13. > :48:17.and work in Scotland. The second issue, the amount of money. Is it
:48:18. > :48:22.not a fact that every year, under the last Labour government, since
:48:23. > :48:27.1997, and every year under this coalition government, Scotland,
:48:28. > :48:33.along with the rest of the UK, has had an increased health budget. It
:48:34. > :48:39.is not. It is not? Alistair Darling asserted that, perhaps that is where
:48:40. > :48:43.you have taken it from. The ombudsman followed up the Andy
:48:44. > :48:48.Burnham question, that is the Labour UK shadow health spokesperson, his
:48:49. > :48:55.assertion that that claim was not true and the as men said Andy Berman
:48:56. > :49:00.was right. -- the ombudsman said Andy Burnham was right. In real
:49:01. > :49:03.terms the spend at UK level by the Westminster government has declined
:49:04. > :49:10.on health. How much has the health budget been cut in Scotland? It has
:49:11. > :49:14.not been cut in Scotland because our Parliament has taken a decision to
:49:15. > :49:20.ring fence health spending in Scotland and protect it. You can
:49:21. > :49:23.only do that within the limited pot of money that comes not from the
:49:24. > :49:27.Treasury, which is significantly less than Scotland contributes to
:49:28. > :49:32.that country. That depends which way you look at it. When it comes to
:49:33. > :49:34.health spending, the fact is that you could move money from anywhere
:49:35. > :49:40.in the Scottish budget to help if you wanted to, and if you still felt
:49:41. > :49:43.there was not enough money, even as things stand now, you could increase
:49:44. > :49:50.tax or increase spending on health but you have chosen to do none of
:49:51. > :49:54.that. Not true. We are dancing on the head of a pin, I am not an
:49:55. > :49:59.elected politician, so I do not get to increase or decrease taxes. You
:50:00. > :50:04.are confusing me with someone else. We are dancing on the head of a pin.
:50:05. > :50:07.If you increase health spending, that would mean that in Scotland
:50:08. > :50:10.because of the fixed money, not because of the resources that we
:50:11. > :50:13.earn in Scotland and contribute to the UK but because of the fixed
:50:14. > :50:19.amount of money, we would need to cut spending on education or justice
:50:20. > :50:25.or housing, that is what it would mean, your argument. In terms of
:50:26. > :50:29.increasing taxes, let me remind you, people in Scotland already pay taxes
:50:30. > :50:33.for the National Health Service. Are you seriously suggesting we would
:50:34. > :50:37.pay twice for a health service simply because down south, the UK
:50:38. > :50:42.Government wants to decrease its spending on health by introducing
:50:43. > :50:47.privatisation and market forces? That is a nonsense. As you know, I
:50:48. > :50:53.was not suggesting that, but we have run out of time. Where are you on
:50:54. > :50:57.this, on the union? We are not dancing on the head of a pin, it is
:50:58. > :51:03.on the edge of a precipice! Emotionally I am for independence, I
:51:04. > :51:07.will swallow my profound dislike of nationalism, Scottish, Russian,
:51:08. > :51:11.English, such a chip on the shoulder mentality, but rationally, I am
:51:12. > :51:15.really concerned. I am really concerned for the left. If they
:51:16. > :51:20.believe there is going to be Nirvana after independence, look to France,
:51:21. > :51:24.where they had a left-wing Prime Minister, who came in expecting
:51:25. > :51:28.that, and the fiscal reality has meant that they have had to be quite
:51:29. > :51:31.right wing and conservative. I think you will find that spending on the
:51:32. > :51:35.health service and also some other things, which are so precious to the
:51:36. > :51:39.left, will decline very rapidly within three or four years after
:51:40. > :51:48.independence. We will see, we will see how it goes on after September
:51:49. > :51:50.18. The new Education Secretary Nicky Morgan was apparently brought
:51:51. > :51:59.in to calm the nerves of the education establishment.
:52:00. > :52:02.She was facing questions in the Commons yesterday and, lo and
:52:03. > :52:04.behold, she used the opportunity to rebut rumours that the government
:52:05. > :52:06.was planning to introduce compulsory setting by ability in secondary
:52:07. > :52:08.schools - something that would no doubt irritate the education
:52:09. > :52:10.establishment. She was taking part in a debate about infant class
:52:11. > :52:16.sizes. Let's get a flavour. The number of primary schools with over
:52:17. > :52:21.800 pupils in them as rocketed by 381%, so we can forget about the
:52:22. > :52:25.smaller schools with no anonymous pupils, we can forget about knowing
:52:26. > :52:31.every child's name with the growth of these Titans goals. More and more
:52:32. > :52:35.so-called Titan primary schools are struggling to educate their pupils.
:52:36. > :52:39.Assemblies and shift patterns, multiple lunch hours, expanding
:52:40. > :52:43.class sizes, head teachers and teachers doing their best in the
:52:44. > :52:48.most difficult of circumstances. The number of infants taught in classes
:52:49. > :52:55.more than 30 has soared to 93,655, a staggering 200% rise since 2010.
:52:56. > :53:00.This claim, that children are routinely taught in classes of 70 or
:53:01. > :53:04.more, is utterly wrong. This shows that some pupils are taking part in
:53:05. > :53:09.activities such as swimming or arts and craft while supervised by a
:53:10. > :53:13.number of adults. It is hardly unexpected to find this in a normal
:53:14. > :53:16.primary school at some point on a Thursday during the year when the
:53:17. > :53:21.census is taken I will in a moment. It is not how they will be taught in
:53:22. > :53:27.a classroom normally, he has as good a grasp of school census figures as
:53:28. > :53:31.he does of 19th-century history. Macro and audible something has been
:53:32. > :53:40.repeated from what was in the Guardian, which was a compulsory of
:53:41. > :53:44.-- a system of compulsory setting. For the benefit of the house, there
:53:45. > :53:49.is no truth in those rumours at all... Let me also say, to the
:53:50. > :53:54.honourable members here, that there are some people outside of his house
:53:55. > :53:59.who have a rather unhealthy interest sometimes in speculating about what
:54:00. > :54:01.I am or am not about to announce... There is a flavour of the new
:54:02. > :54:05.Education Secretary. Now it's a tough job being
:54:06. > :54:07.a presenter. In at the crack of dawn,
:54:08. > :54:10.having your finger on the political But one of the greatest hardships is
:54:11. > :54:14.trying to get a straight answer. Well, Rob Hutton is
:54:15. > :54:18.a political reporter for Bloomberg and has written a book about it
:54:19. > :54:20.called Would They Lie to You?: How to Spin
:54:21. > :54:23.Friends and Manipulate People. It examines the dark art
:54:24. > :54:25.of what he calls "uncommunication", the art of not saying what you mean
:54:26. > :54:29.which he argues is the key to making His new book helpfully gives us a
:54:30. > :54:50.guide "I'm deeply humbled to accept this
:54:51. > :54:55.award, as I shall now demonstrate by gently boasting
:54:56. > :54:57.for the next three minutes." Another example is "regret",
:54:58. > :54:59.what people really mean when they talk about regret is
:55:00. > :55:02."We're sorry that people are upset about the thing that we did that
:55:03. > :55:05.we're not sorry we did." Its actual definition is, "We're
:55:06. > :55:09.not going to let the fact that we can't work out how to do it stop us
:55:10. > :55:13.from announcing what we want to do." And finally,
:55:14. > :55:14."That's deeply patronising". Of course something we have
:55:15. > :55:16.never heard on this programme. Meaning, "I'm not going to dispute
:55:17. > :55:33.your conclusion, but I think you We are now joined by the author. I
:55:34. > :55:36.see that you have got the book there are, it is quite small, given the
:55:37. > :55:42.kind of language you have got to deal with, I thought it would be the
:55:43. > :55:48.size of Encyclopaedia Britannica! An awful lot of it, inevitably, is the
:55:49. > :55:51.same things coming round again. There was a nice story outside of
:55:52. > :55:55.the United States last year, some people sat down and analysed every
:55:56. > :56:00.answer that the spokesperson for Barack Obama had given, and produced
:56:01. > :56:05.14,000 ways in which he is not going to answer your question. -- a nice
:56:06. > :56:10.story coming out of the United States. 13 categories which are
:56:11. > :56:14.variations of "I have not discussed it within". No spokesman should ever
:56:15. > :56:17.discuss anything with the person they are speaking for, because then
:56:18. > :56:23.they can sing the say, "I do not know what he thinks". -- because
:56:24. > :56:28.they can simply say. Do you think of the scare true language has become
:56:29. > :56:33.worse? Yes, over the last 20 years or so, because there is so much more
:56:34. > :56:36.language that politicians have got to produce, we had the Prime
:56:37. > :56:41.Minister here, he did five broadcast interviews over the last hour. I
:56:42. > :56:48.very much doubt Harold Macmillan was doing the morning round every six
:56:49. > :56:54.months or so. -- obfuscatory language. If you find ways, in his
:56:55. > :56:59.position, to survive that, without creating news... Interesting point,
:57:00. > :57:03.when we began in journalism, a televised interview by the Prime
:57:04. > :57:08.Minister of the day was a big event. It did not happen very often. All
:57:09. > :57:12.the Chancellor. Now, they are on all of the time, quite often without
:57:13. > :57:17.much to say, and what they want to say they want to hide. Too many
:57:18. > :57:22.political programmes, that is the problem. How can you say that, you
:57:23. > :57:26.helped to start the programme and now you stab us in the back!
:57:27. > :57:30.LAUGHTER Matthew Parris indulged my book on
:57:31. > :57:35.crime, knee has a 4 word here, so you can tell Eddie is a good book!
:57:36. > :57:41.-- the as a foreword in the book here. -- so you can tell that it is
:57:42. > :57:47.a good book. There could have been a Europe saying that Europe makes a
:57:48. > :57:52.30% more energy efficient, but instead, "Europe is going to take
:57:53. > :57:57.away the hairdryers! " John Bercow has been accused of appointing this
:57:58. > :58:01.clerk over the head of parliament, no where are we saying, well, the
:58:02. > :58:05.committee of six including the Parliamentary ombudsman made the
:58:06. > :58:09.decision... We never spoil a good story ourselves, most PR people
:58:10. > :58:12.begin as journalists. My last book was the language of journalists,
:58:13. > :58:17.that is what led to this one. Journalists have language that makes
:58:18. > :58:25.everything more furious, a furious blistering row! Every split is a
:58:26. > :58:29.chasm! Coalition on the brink of disaster... While doing that, we
:58:30. > :58:31.realised the other side of this, is that people in government try to
:58:32. > :58:37.make everything as boring as possible. Sometimes, they succeed!
:58:38. > :58:41.We will have two leave it there. Thank you for joining us for the
:58:42. > :58:46.duration, neck. Thank you to Nick Ross.
:58:47. > :58:48.The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.
:58:49. > :58:51.There's no This Week tonight, but Jo will be here
:58:52. > :59:01.at noon tomorrow with all the big political stories of the day.
:59:02. > :59:02.She will have all of the information on the latest news, including the