:00:37. > :00:39.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:40. > :00:40.British warplanes could be joining the French
:00:41. > :00:44.But will British bombs make a significant difference
:00:45. > :00:50.?12 billion extra for military hardware and two
:00:51. > :00:55.After cuts to the MOD budget five years ago, has
:00:56. > :01:02.the government decided it now needs to spend more to keep us safe?
:01:03. > :01:05.Schools and the metro are closed in the third day of lockdown
:01:06. > :01:07.in Brussels with one of the Paris suspects still on the run.
:01:08. > :01:14.It's a familiar backdrop to many state occasions,
:01:15. > :01:17.but now Admiralty Arch has been sold to foreign investors as a hotel.
:01:18. > :01:19.Should we be selling off Britain's architectural crown jewels to
:01:20. > :01:32.All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole
:01:33. > :01:34.of the programme today the Conservative MP, Johnny Mercer
:01:35. > :01:42.First this afternoon, the prospect of British warplanes
:01:43. > :01:44.bombing targets is Syria controlled by so-called Islamic State
:01:45. > :01:48.This morning David Cameron visited Paris, laying a flower
:01:49. > :01:53.and paying his respects, along with French President,
:01:54. > :01:56.Francois Hollande, at the Bataclan theatre where 89 people died at the
:01:57. > :02:03.Later he appeared at a joint press conference at the
:02:04. > :02:05.Elysee Palace, where he made the case for British warplanes joining
:02:06. > :02:12.We must also do more to defeat Isil in their heartlands,
:02:13. > :02:17.The UK is already playing its part as a member
:02:18. > :02:21.of the counter-Isil coalition, striking targets in Iraq, providing
:02:22. > :02:24.intelligence over the skies of Syria, and helping out allies
:02:25. > :02:30.On Friday, the United Nations unanimously backed action
:02:31. > :02:37.Later this week, I will set out in Parliament our comprehensive
:02:38. > :02:42.I firmly support the action President Hollande has
:02:43. > :02:45.taken to strike Isil in Syria, and it is my firm conviction that
:02:46. > :02:52.Of course, that will be a decision for Parliament to make.
:02:53. > :02:56.Today, I have offered President Hollande the use of
:02:57. > :02:59.RAF Akrotori for French aircraft engaged in counter-Isil operations.
:03:00. > :03:01.It is clear the world is coming together to
:03:02. > :03:09.That was clear on Friday night, when, almost one week after the
:03:10. > :03:12.brutal terrorists murdered people here in Paris, and sought to divide
:03:13. > :03:17.We showed our firm resolve and, together,
:03:18. > :03:42.David, and -- David Cameron at that press conference with Francois
:03:43. > :03:45.Hollande. The Prime Minister and Chancellor at the weekend said they
:03:46. > :03:47.would not bring forward a proposal for air strikes to the House of
:03:48. > :03:52.Commons unless they were sure they could win it. Are we presuming they
:03:53. > :03:56.have the numbers now? It looks very much as though that is the case.
:03:57. > :04:00.Clearly the mood in the house has shifted quite dramatically. We had
:04:01. > :04:06.that boat and the United Nations in New York on Friday night, calling on
:04:07. > :04:12.all the countries that could use all possible means to confront and
:04:13. > :04:16.defeat IS -- vote. That will be an important factor as MPs weigh up the
:04:17. > :04:21.decision whether or not to support military strikes into Syria. You
:04:22. > :04:27.have had in the whole mood after Paris attacks, as we saw David
:04:28. > :04:31.Cameron standing alongside Francois Hollande. He knows how important the
:04:32. > :04:36.symbolism of that will be and how MPs will want to do all they can to
:04:37. > :04:40.try to support France. You also have increasing indications from the
:04:41. > :04:45.Labour Party that they may have to accept a free vote amongst Labour
:04:46. > :04:50.MPs on whether or not to support military strikes into Syria. We know
:04:51. > :04:55.Jeremy Corbyn has a very strong misgivings about it but it appears
:04:56. > :04:59.that the Shadow Cabinet, so many of them, would be prepared to support
:05:00. > :05:03.strikes that it might be that the leadership simply accepts it would
:05:04. > :05:07.be better to give them a free vote rather than try to impose discipline
:05:08. > :05:11.when that simply might not work, and clearly if there was to be a free
:05:12. > :05:16.vote in the Labour Party, that would make it easier for Labour MPs to
:05:17. > :05:19.support David Cameron. But it will depend on the case that David
:05:20. > :05:25.Cameron sets out later this week. He is going to make the unusual step of
:05:26. > :05:29.actually answering the report by one of the select committees. So is he,
:05:30. > :05:34.in the response, going to set out more than just a case for military
:05:35. > :05:37.air strikes? I think what he will try to do is answer all of the
:05:38. > :05:41.points that the foreign affairs select committee made. What they
:05:42. > :05:46.said is that air strikes on their own would not be sufficient. But it
:05:47. > :05:53.has to be part of a wider, coherent strategy. What David Cameron will do
:05:54. > :05:58.will be to say, yes, the committee asked for assurances about wider
:05:59. > :06:01.international support. You have got the vote in the United Nations. The
:06:02. > :06:05.committee asked for greater efforts to try and find a diplomatic
:06:06. > :06:10.solution to resolve the difficulties and civil war that is raging inside
:06:11. > :06:15.Syria. You now have that process underway, starting with the talks in
:06:16. > :06:18.Vienna. You have the Russians involved and engaged. And at least
:06:19. > :06:22.the start of a process that could looked away wider political
:06:23. > :06:26.solution. He will point to the efforts that the UK is making, along
:06:27. > :06:31.with other countries, to provide help in the camps and so on. And he
:06:32. > :06:34.will say, that is part of the wider strategy, Britain should be
:06:35. > :06:38.involved, along with the United States, the French and many others
:06:39. > :06:44.in extending those strikes into Syria, because that is where Islamic
:06:45. > :06:47.State has its base. Where David Cameron will struggle, and where
:06:48. > :06:51.some members of the foreign affairs select committee are still waiting
:06:52. > :06:55.to hear greater reassurance is on the question if there are air
:06:56. > :07:00.strikes, who is going to follow up with boots on the ground? It is not
:07:01. > :07:02.clear who would carry out that role. Thank you very much.
:07:03. > :07:06.And we're joined now by the SNP's Patrick Grady.
:07:07. > :07:17.What material difference would British warplanes making of bombing
:07:18. > :07:23.IS and Syria? The Prime Minister has specific weapons that other forces
:07:24. > :07:28.don't have. We have been asked to provide the capability because it
:07:29. > :07:31.provides a way that coalition don't have of targeting people. We are
:07:32. > :07:35.being asked to do it in Syria, and that is why we should get on with it
:07:36. > :07:41.and get it done. How many planes are we talking about? We are looking at
:07:42. > :07:44.between four and eight Tornadoes, but it's not about numbers, it is
:07:45. > :07:48.the effect on the ground and what we are delivering to speed up the
:07:49. > :07:51.conflict and making sure we can have time and space for a political
:07:52. > :07:57.settlement. But if it is not about the numbers, with the Americans,
:07:58. > :08:00.French and Russians and others bombing in Syria, and you say it has
:08:01. > :08:05.special capability, but would it change the course of the battle we
:08:06. > :08:09.are engaged in? Of course it would. If you can accelerate the process of
:08:10. > :08:14.targeting and accelerate the process is on the ground, by extension, you
:08:15. > :08:17.will increase the chances of a peaceful political situation. That
:08:18. > :08:21.will give them the time and space to operate. If you give yourself a
:08:22. > :08:24.number of extra weapons and capabilities, of course it means you
:08:25. > :08:29.can achieve what you are trying to do more quickly. Johnny Mercer, you
:08:30. > :08:35.have some here. You say it will make a material difference? There are a
:08:36. > :08:37.large number of countries already bombing so we're waiting to more
:08:38. > :08:43.detailed case about how that will have an impact. You just heard that,
:08:44. > :08:47.so would you be open to listening to that sort of military case? We said
:08:48. > :08:52.we would listen to the case for action but we need a full case for
:08:53. > :08:56.the range of action necessary, and that also includes building the
:08:57. > :08:59.peace. The UK Government spent 13 times as much money bombing Libya as
:09:00. > :09:02.it did with the humanitarian reconstruction effort in the
:09:03. > :09:06.country. Look at the legacy that has left. We want to see a very detailed
:09:07. > :09:10.case from the Prime Minister when he makes his statement. But you are
:09:11. > :09:15.open to it and the idea, following the UN resolution on Friday? We said
:09:16. > :09:20.we needed to hear the full detail from the Prime Minister. We have
:09:21. > :09:23.already taken a cautious approach to military intervention, especially in
:09:24. > :09:26.a situation when there are so many different actors. The UK is
:09:27. > :09:29.currently chairing the Security Council and it should be trying to
:09:30. > :09:34.build peace and a diplomatic solution before it becomes engaged
:09:35. > :09:39.in conflict. Let's look at what happens after the air strikes. We
:09:40. > :09:42.have heard from various military experts and commanders that air
:09:43. > :09:47.strikes will only achieve so much. It will contain IS to an extent, but
:09:48. > :09:51.not defeat them. Do you accept that in order to defeat IS in the way the
:09:52. > :09:56.Prime Minister is talking about, ground troops are needed? Some sort
:09:57. > :10:01.of ground troops are needed. Do we need US and UK ground troops? Of
:10:02. > :10:04.course not. But there has to be a ground war? It has to be part of a
:10:05. > :10:08.wider strategy. It is part of the aid we have done, and training the
:10:09. > :10:12.indigenous forces, but you are right. Air strikes need to be
:10:13. > :10:16.alongside a coercive and full-blown strategy to contain so-called
:10:17. > :10:22.Islamic State. At the moment we don't have that, so if we have the
:10:23. > :10:26.air strikes, what is the point? They have been going on for many months
:10:27. > :10:31.and IS is still able to hit and hit hard. There is no prospect of ground
:10:32. > :10:35.troops or any sort of ground troop force being put together by other
:10:36. > :10:39.countries in the region, and unless there is, what is the point of
:10:40. > :10:43.continuing? Forgive me, but there is a ground force. The Kurds are there.
:10:44. > :10:49.But they are only interested in certain parts of the territory. We
:10:50. > :10:52.have to work hard to build a broader coalition, and if we can do that by
:10:53. > :10:57.saying we will provide air support, they may come forward. Yes, but
:10:58. > :11:00.again, we could add the few planes to the air force and the Kurds are
:11:01. > :11:04.only interested in territory they would like. There is no widespread
:11:05. > :11:08.coalition of ground forces that will ultimately defeat IS on the ground.
:11:09. > :11:13.You are right, there isn't on the ground and at the moment. That is
:11:14. > :11:17.what we are trying to build. If we provide the capability, we will get
:11:18. > :11:21.people coming forward. Billy -- there are the Kurds and other groups
:11:22. > :11:25.who want to see a peaceful Syria. They want to see a peaceful society
:11:26. > :11:29.as before. If you give them the tools to do it, that's all we're
:11:30. > :11:32.trying to do. The idea that we can go in and take ground forces and do
:11:33. > :11:36.the whole thing, it doesn't work like that any more. It will be an
:11:37. > :11:40.indigenous solution, and if we can help with very specific
:11:41. > :11:44.capabilities, we should. We talked about the UN resolution. There is
:11:45. > :11:48.one, and the SNP say they want UN support for air strikes and you have
:11:49. > :11:51.got that. We expect the prime ministers to set out clearly a
:11:52. > :11:54.comprehensive plan, not just about the air strikes but some of the
:11:55. > :12:00.stuff that Johnny Mercer has been talking about. Surely air strikes is
:12:01. > :12:05.now at the first stage in order to contain IS before some sort of
:12:06. > :12:10.ground Force goes in? What has come from the UN is not a chapter seven
:12:11. > :12:14.declaration, it's a broader mandate for countries to take action to
:12:15. > :12:18.defeat Isil. In 2013, the government wanted us to bomb Syria to stop
:12:19. > :12:21.President Assad, and now it seems they want to do it to support
:12:22. > :12:27.President Assad. A lot of contradictions. In your mind, the UN
:12:28. > :12:34.resolution does not invoke military action? We have to see what kind of
:12:35. > :12:39.military action will be made. That is not the question I am asking. For
:12:40. > :12:43.the SNP, does the UN resolution passed on Friday which says to take
:12:44. > :12:49.all necessary measures on the territory to suppress terrorist
:12:50. > :12:55.acts, does that not in your mind... It depends on the nature of action
:12:56. > :13:01.proposed, whether it is the UN coalition which would require
:13:02. > :13:04.support under Commission number seven. But what is being proposed by
:13:05. > :13:08.the Prime Minister, we are yet to see the detail and we are not in a
:13:09. > :13:14.position to make a final decision. -- we are not yet. In your mind,
:13:15. > :13:18.does it invoke military action? Does it seem enough for you, Wes
:13:19. > :13:23.Streeting, to see a green light for British air strikes? I think it was
:13:24. > :13:26.abroad and unexpected mandate. Patrick is right that if there is a
:13:27. > :13:30.UN force, it needs further resolution. I don't think our forces
:13:31. > :13:33.or anyone else needs further sanction from the UN. I was
:13:34. > :13:38.personally surprised that we got that degree of unanimity from the
:13:39. > :13:42.UN, and now it is how it is implemented rather than whether it
:13:43. > :13:46.gives consent. Does it change the Labour position on air strikes? Not
:13:47. > :13:50.yet because we're waiting to see what the Prime Minister says on
:13:51. > :13:53.Thursday. From my point of view, I've had a sceptical view about
:13:54. > :13:58.whether air strikes would be desirable or effective. It certainly
:13:59. > :14:03.helped me along the way. What I want to see from the Prime Minister on
:14:04. > :14:07.Thursday, and Johnny made the military case, and the capability
:14:08. > :14:13.that Brimstone can offer other countries in the coalition. You
:14:14. > :14:17.think it will change the military outcome? Britain has a unique
:14:18. > :14:20.capability, and that is there, but I need to see if there is a diplomatic
:14:21. > :14:25.strategy that brings residents are sad to the table and a plan for a
:14:26. > :14:30.post Assad Syria. Is the humanitarian response there? And how
:14:31. > :14:34.can we learn the lessons from recent interventions which haven't gone so
:14:35. > :14:38.well? If he has a comp defensive strategy, I'm open to supporting the
:14:39. > :14:42.Prime Minister. So you would be prepared if you are convinced, and
:14:43. > :14:45.it sounds like you could be, and you would vote against your party if the
:14:46. > :14:53.line from the Labour leadership is to not to vote for air strikes? I'm
:14:54. > :14:56.not sure we are there yet, but I put this above other issues, and I think
:14:57. > :15:00.about what is in the best interests of my constituency and the national
:15:01. > :15:04.interest and the people of Syria. If I believe it is right to support air
:15:05. > :15:05.strikes and the Labour whip says something else, reluctantly I will
:15:06. > :15:19.vote with my conscience. Has Michael Fallon provided you into
:15:20. > :15:23.the MOD to persuade you? Recently, there has been another
:15:24. > :15:29.briefing offered to opposition MPs. This is not a persuasion exercise
:15:30. > :15:33.but educating us into the complexity of Syria. We're not famous for
:15:34. > :15:41.humility as politicians. But it is so context even people
:15:42. > :15:45.with extensive military, diplomatic expertise will struggle to
:15:46. > :15:48.understand all the dimensions. Particularly for myself, these
:15:49. > :15:55.information briefings are welcome. It comes back to the logic of
:15:56. > :16:01.bombing in Iraq, IS, but somehow not bombing them in Syria where they do
:16:02. > :16:08.not respect borders, why should we? There is a question of mandates. The
:16:09. > :16:12.coalition has asked... Who would invite us to bomb in Syria?
:16:13. > :16:16.That is precisely the question which is why the legal case has to be
:16:17. > :16:21.strong. President Assad will not invite us,
:16:22. > :16:24.neither IS, the question does not arise, there is a legitimate
:16:25. > :16:31.Government there. This is the heart of the current --
:16:32. > :16:35.the question. The situation is complex on the ground. Is British
:16:36. > :16:41.military action going to add anything, or should we continue to
:16:42. > :16:43.use our diplomatic strength to work for a broader, more peaceful
:16:44. > :16:49.solution. If there is to be military action,
:16:50. > :16:53.there has to be a long-term because deduction plan.
:16:54. > :16:57.Will the UK have to work with President Assad and the Russians?
:16:58. > :17:01.They were very people to be bombed when the proposal was put two years
:17:02. > :17:07.ago. To stay safe at home, we need to do
:17:08. > :17:12.everything, with our brilliant security services, but an element is
:17:13. > :17:15.foreign policy intervention and keeping that problem as far away as
:17:16. > :17:23.we can. We need to move on from Iraq.
:17:24. > :17:27.People might argue in France it was because of the French bombing IS in
:17:28. > :17:31.Syria that they became a target. People can argue that but a
:17:32. > :17:33.fundamental aspect is we need to stay safe at home and part of that
:17:34. > :17:44.is surgical intervention abroad. Later today, we'll hear from the PM
:17:45. > :17:47.about how the government plans to spend ?178 billion on the UK's
:17:48. > :17:50.defence over the next decade. There will also be more details
:17:51. > :18:10.about a new rapid response force With the threat from IS and a newly
:18:11. > :18:16.confident Russia, the review will promise new cash with an extra ?12
:18:17. > :18:20.billion for equipment. There will be nine new patrol aircraft after the
:18:21. > :18:25.last Spending Review reduced our capability in this area. There will
:18:26. > :18:30.be two 5000 strong Stryker brigades for deployment in emergencies
:18:31. > :18:35.similar to those used by the French after the attacks in Paris. There
:18:36. > :18:37.will be more money for counter-terrorism and cyber
:18:38. > :18:41.security. In his July budget, the Chancellor
:18:42. > :18:49.said the Government would the belated target of spending 2% of GDP
:18:50. > :18:52.on defence every year up to 2020. Today, Michael Fallon summarised
:18:53. > :18:55.what the Government has committed to.
:18:56. > :18:59.The Defence Budget is going to rise every year of this Parliament,
:19:00. > :19:02.and we are going to spend more on giving the Armed Forces
:19:03. > :19:06.More ships, more planes, better equipment for the special
:19:07. > :19:15.forces, making sure we have more troops at readiness, ready to go.
:19:16. > :19:18.And we're joined now by former head of the Army and now
:19:19. > :19:30.Do you think the Armed Forces will be satisfied with the settlement?
:19:31. > :19:37.Compared to the slash and burn, this has a lot of things to commend it.
:19:38. > :19:40.On the back of a commitment of 2% of GDP being spent.
:19:41. > :19:45.We need to look at the small print. The headlines look encouraging.
:19:46. > :19:50.How wrong that the Government get it in 2010?
:19:51. > :19:54.They need credit for the fact it remains controversial but it isn't,
:19:55. > :19:59.defence of the incoming Galician Government inherited a black hole
:20:00. > :20:03.from Labour. Over ambitious plans built up over seven years. That
:20:04. > :20:08.amounted to saving 10% of the defence budget over ten years. The
:20:09. > :20:16.Chancellor, in the age of austerity, said in 2010, it had to do with 18%
:20:17. > :20:21.less spending power. Ugly things had to be done. Cancelling the maritime
:20:22. > :20:30.patrol aircraft. That really was shooting yourself in
:20:31. > :20:35.the foot. Now they are building new maritime aircraft? Yes and no.
:20:36. > :20:40.The world look different in 2010. What a waste of money.
:20:41. > :20:47.I am not sure, that programme had a lot of difficulty.
:20:48. > :20:51.The new outcome might be better. Looking at things announced today,
:20:52. > :20:57.on the back of the army having reduced by 20,000 men, we are
:20:58. > :21:01.talking about two Stryker brigades, this is encouraging. These are not
:21:02. > :21:05.new ships. They are from the existing forces.
:21:06. > :21:09.We have gone full circle. In the middle of the previous
:21:10. > :21:15.decade, we would have fast flexible forces. Then there was extended
:21:16. > :21:18.campaigning in Afghanistan. That period seems to be over and we are
:21:19. > :21:24.going back to making our forces more agile.
:21:25. > :21:28.The strike brigades, like the Americans, we could have had these
:21:29. > :21:33.ten years ago. Johnny Mercer, slash and burn, it
:21:34. > :21:40.was a mistake in 2010 to make all those cuts, and now the Government
:21:41. > :21:44.is plugging those holes left. That is an oversimplification. I am
:21:45. > :21:48.quitting Richard Dannett. Saying they make these cuts then
:21:49. > :21:53.putting them straight back in. Not at all. The threat is ever evolving.
:21:54. > :21:57.They are thinking, how are we best positioned going forward as a nation
:21:58. > :22:03.to combat these threats which changing.
:22:04. > :22:06.What has come out today has been encouraging.
:22:07. > :22:11.Hard decisions had to be made in 2010, it is easy to forget, a ?35
:22:12. > :22:15.billion black hole in defence spending, we had to do something.
:22:16. > :22:21.We have finished in Afghanistan. We are looking to the future to think
:22:22. > :22:24.how can we best go up against this complex and clear threat as we saw
:22:25. > :22:29.in Paris. Let us look at the announcement,
:22:30. > :22:34.nine new maritime patrol planes, after the governments scrapped our
:22:35. > :22:39.capacity into a tent at a cost of ?3.4 billion to the taxpayer. It
:22:40. > :22:44.went before a select committee. How do explain that when we are spending
:22:45. > :22:48.billions rebuilding something similar you dismantled.
:22:49. > :22:55.That is for the MoD to explain. There were serious problems with
:22:56. > :22:57.that Nimrod programme. We had that capability gap.
:22:58. > :23:02.We have these aircraft coming online. They provide a great
:23:03. > :23:07.capability. We need to plug that hole in our defence.
:23:08. > :23:13.Personnel, there has been an announcement about a lot more money
:23:14. > :23:17.for military hardware. What about the people who will use that
:23:18. > :23:21.military hardware? Those numbers have been run right down, you agree?
:23:22. > :23:28.I agree. It is not about how many people but
:23:29. > :23:31.capability on the ground. As we increase technological capability,
:23:32. > :23:38.you need fewer numbers, an inevitable part.
:23:39. > :23:41.Is that right, fewer numbers? Some military people today are saying,
:23:42. > :23:47.without the well-trained force, without a long-standing force to
:23:48. > :23:51.deal with using this military hardware, there is a mismatch.
:23:52. > :23:55.You need the people. One thing people are talking about now is the
:23:56. > :24:01.desire to increase the size of our special forces. We will struggle. An
:24:02. > :24:05.army reduced by 20,000, we recruit special forces from the trained
:24:06. > :24:10.strength of the Army, Royal Marines and air force. With a smaller pool,
:24:11. > :24:15.you will struggle. Quantum is actually important. What do you say?
:24:16. > :24:23.A fair point. The key is to retain the skilled
:24:24. > :24:28.troops who can operate, it is not about racking up 120,000, but
:24:29. > :24:34.retaining those skilled people and having that capability to go
:24:35. > :24:41.after... How do you read tame them? -- retain. If the size has been
:24:42. > :24:45.reduced since 2010, it is an awful lot you need to find and train.
:24:46. > :24:50.The key to retaining people is looking after them, giving them
:24:51. > :24:54.enough money, giving the equipment, increasing their quality of life
:24:55. > :24:59.across the board. You need that money within defence to do so.
:25:00. > :25:03.Are they being looked after properly? Reports say personnel are
:25:04. > :25:10.facing cuts to their benefits. That is not looking after personnel.
:25:11. > :25:13.Don't let's comment on reports. There is a new programme to be
:25:14. > :25:19.announced possibly today come later, about how the Armed Forces
:25:20. > :25:24.will be remunerated and their terms and conditions. It is right they are
:25:25. > :25:29.reviewed and brought up to date with a more modern approach.
:25:30. > :25:31.I am relatively comfortable the new model as unfolded will look after
:25:32. > :25:36.people. Your main point is right. Without
:25:37. > :25:41.the people who feel they are well looked after and well led and well
:25:42. > :25:46.focused on, they will vote with their feet. If they are well looked
:25:47. > :25:51.after, but I think they will be, then we will keep good people.
:25:52. > :25:56.Do you support this Defence Review? One of the lessons from the Defence
:25:57. > :26:00.Review, going back to the last one, we need more long-term thinking from
:26:01. > :26:05.the Government. I do think the Nimrod decision in 2011 was a
:26:06. > :26:10.mistake, criticised by senior personnel at the time.
:26:11. > :26:19.We can -- we are in a position without adequate Barone capability.
:26:20. > :26:24.As we heard the news today about off the coast of Scotland and Russian
:26:25. > :26:28.submarines. It will take another ten years for
:26:29. > :26:34.the new going to come on stream and in that time we do not have the
:26:35. > :26:39.capability we need. There are gaps. Of course the Government across the
:26:40. > :26:43.whole board of public spending in 2010 had challenges after the
:26:44. > :26:47.banking crisis, every department has defined savings and we will see that
:26:48. > :26:51.on Wednesday. There has been too much short-term thinking and the
:26:52. > :26:56.Chancellor may make the same estate again with the constraints in terms
:26:57. > :26:59.of the fiscal envelope, making appealing short-term decisions which
:27:00. > :27:03.costs the taxpayer more in the long term.
:27:04. > :27:08.Do you support these cuts to the police budget?
:27:09. > :27:12.When the Government looks at a security review and what it is try
:27:13. > :27:17.to do within the UK to keep a safe, clearly there will be some taken
:27:18. > :27:21.away and some given more. Some coming... Should the police be
:27:22. > :27:25.cut by 20%? That is a general decision by the
:27:26. > :27:31.people who run the country. Do we need police numbers on the
:27:32. > :27:35.street? We need as much as we can afford to keep us safe as much
:27:36. > :27:41.should we be spending... If you can't afford the police, you
:27:42. > :27:44.can't afford the GCHQ capabilities that we need to put money in to keep
:27:45. > :27:48.us safe. Should those budgets be cut on
:27:49. > :27:51.police spending? I am not going to answer because I don't have full
:27:52. > :27:55.oversight. Would you be happier with fewer
:27:56. > :27:59.police? We would far rather have more police but you have to do what
:28:00. > :28:04.you can afford otherwise you are not prepared for the threat.
:28:05. > :28:10.Richard, is it your view the UK should be bombing in Syria?
:28:11. > :28:14.The short answer is yes, but only, the capability that our aircraft
:28:15. > :28:23.bring is useful and sends an important message to Islamic State,
:28:24. > :28:27.Mr Putin, our allies, we are standing with them. It is important.
:28:28. > :28:32.Bombing is only a precursor to sorting this issue on the ground
:28:33. > :28:37.which has to be grappled with. I hope your earlier discussion, we
:28:38. > :28:42.really have two grip this issue of ground forces.
:28:43. > :28:45.But not ours? Not until we have done everything else we can do. Who would
:28:46. > :28:51.they come from? We have to use the Iraqi army, we
:28:52. > :28:55.have to get our heads around the Syrian regime, President Assad, his
:28:56. > :29:02.forces, in the same way the Russians have two. The Jordanians, other
:29:03. > :29:06.countries in the region. We have seen our TV screens filled with
:29:07. > :29:10.streams of refugees coming in, including a lot of fit young men.
:29:11. > :29:16.They have come from that region, do they not want to go back? In which
:29:17. > :29:20.case we should be holding them in refugee camps, putting them into
:29:21. > :29:25.units, reinforcing local forces, so they can fight for their own peace
:29:26. > :29:28.and freedom. That is an important thing to think about.
:29:29. > :29:32.Now, how would the Labour Party as a whole vote on any proposal to extend
:29:33. > :29:35.There are clearly big splits in the party.
:29:36. > :29:39.Here's the Shadow Chancellor, John McDonnell
:29:40. > :29:45.Cameron is going to come to the House of Commons with his plan,
:29:46. > :29:48.and there is a bit of confusion over how Labour MPs are
:29:49. > :29:52.Like you, your leader was in favour of a free vote, matters
:29:53. > :29:55.of peace and war and conscience, but he now wants a whip to vote.
:29:56. > :30:00.What will happen is we will consider this in Shadow Cabinet and then go
:30:01. > :30:04.Most of those MPs will be consulting their local constituency parties.
:30:05. > :30:08.Then, they will come to a considered view.
:30:09. > :30:11.My view has always been I think Parliament should act as Parliament
:30:12. > :30:14.and not on a party political basis, and we should arrive
:30:15. > :30:18.at a view which is in the best interests of the country.
:30:19. > :30:22.And we're joined now from Glasgow by the Labour activist Stephen Low.
:30:23. > :30:25.He was behind the victorious motion at the Scottish Labour conference
:30:26. > :30:27.last month calling for Trident to be scrapped.
:30:28. > :30:38.Wes Streeting, first of all, we heard a John McDonnell say Syria
:30:39. > :30:43.could be a free vote for the Labour Party. Is it really a serious option
:30:44. > :30:51.to have the Labour Party having a free vote on a massive matter of War
:30:52. > :30:54.and peace? I think we have to do. We heard the earlier argument from
:30:55. > :31:00.Jeremy that there was a clear Labour position one way or another. And
:31:01. > :31:04.ordinarily, that is true, but when Jeremy was elected leader of the
:31:05. > :31:08.Labour Party, his views are so different to wear the Labour Party
:31:09. > :31:12.has traditionally been since 1945 on a whole range of issues, but on
:31:13. > :31:19.this, my big fear on the free vote on this issue is that I don't know
:31:20. > :31:25.what Jeremy's conclusion will be. We know broadly what his instincts are
:31:26. > :31:29.on war, but if the Labour whip was to vote against military action in
:31:30. > :31:34.Syria, the question becomes not what is in the best interests of Syria
:31:35. > :31:38.and national security, but are the Labour MPs going to undermine Jeremy
:31:39. > :31:42.Corbyn? Or will they give David Cameron a kicking? I think this
:31:43. > :31:45.issue is far more important than test of loyalty is far more
:31:46. > :31:51.important than tests of loyalties Syria as well, but it has to be
:31:52. > :31:58.about the best interests of this country and the people of Syria.
:31:59. > :32:01.We've seen recently that there is a debate in the Labour Party on a
:32:02. > :32:06.broad range of issues. But is it credible that the Labour Party
:32:07. > :32:11.cannot come to a collective view and cannot show leadership, because the
:32:12. > :32:15.leadership under Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell feels undermined by
:32:16. > :32:22.many of your parliamentary colleagues, despite having a huge
:32:23. > :32:27.mandate, that they cannot rely on the support of their own MPs? Your
:32:28. > :32:31.question reinforces the point I am making. If this issue becomes about
:32:32. > :32:36.whether we are loyal to Jeremy Corbyn or accepting the mandate, we
:32:37. > :32:40.are filing Parliament. Isn't that what leadership is about? -- we are
:32:41. > :32:45.failing Parliament. What about Parliamentary MPs who will not back
:32:46. > :32:51.there leader on this, if as we suspect, the Jeremy Corbyn will not
:32:52. > :32:56.back the proposal to bomb Syria? This is not a question of backing
:32:57. > :33:00.Jeremy Corbyn and it is about Labour Party policy. The Labour Party voted
:33:01. > :33:05.a few weeks ago to lay down a whole set of structures before air strikes
:33:06. > :33:09.on Syria would be accepted. It looks very unlikely that anything David
:33:10. > :33:15.Cameron is likely to come up with in the next week will do that, and I
:33:16. > :33:20.expect Labour MPs to back Labour Party policy. Jeremy Corbyn is, in
:33:21. > :33:26.that respect, not a factor. The conference made a decision. I think
:33:27. > :33:31.we should back that decision. What do you say, Wes Streeting? With
:33:32. > :33:33.respect to Stephen, we need to get real about whether Labour Party sits
:33:34. > :33:40.in relation to policies past conferences. Frankly, we don't know
:33:41. > :33:45.what the Prime Minister will say on Thursday and Stephen doesn't either.
:33:46. > :33:48.Things in Syria are changing so fast that a policy resolution passed at
:33:49. > :33:52.the Labour Party conference, I'm afraid, is not good enough for me.
:33:53. > :33:58.Stephen will want to talk about Trident, I am sure. The Labour Party
:33:59. > :34:02.conference is in favour, so does he expect Jeremy Corbyn to follow that?
:34:03. > :34:07.Did he agree with Jeremy Corbyn breaking the whip 500 times as a
:34:08. > :34:10.backbencher? The sort of technocratic debate about which
:34:11. > :34:16.conference passed what, these are fascinating questions but they don't
:34:17. > :34:21.get to the heart of the real issue. The Labour Party and Jeremy Corbyn
:34:22. > :34:24.have to get real says Wes Streeting. What about democracy and
:34:25. > :34:28.accountability? Wes Streeting should be accountable to the Labour Party
:34:29. > :34:36.and Labour Party members. That is not a big ask. Particularly when
:34:37. > :34:43.they have come up with a very considered position. And this is
:34:44. > :34:46.Hilary Benn's position as well, this list are preconditions. You not
:34:47. > :34:50.supporting Hilary Benn over the conditions that need to be satisfied
:34:51. > :34:55.in his mind before Labour can support air strikes? When we first
:34:56. > :34:58.spoke about Syria I laid out a series of issues that were important
:34:59. > :35:01.to me that chime identically with what Hilary Benn has said and we
:35:02. > :35:07.have to see what the view of the front bench is. That is once David
:35:08. > :35:10.Cameron sets out a position and the Shadow Cabinet, but Stephen is
:35:11. > :35:14.talking about Labour Party policy. And the policy on Trident, and I
:35:15. > :35:16.think there are arguments both sides, whether the money could be
:35:17. > :35:20.better spent on conventional forces, but the conference is in
:35:21. > :35:24.favour on Trident but he won't be lecturing Jeremy Corbyn. And in
:35:25. > :35:27.terms of accountability, of course I am accountable to my local Labour
:35:28. > :35:31.Party, but fundamentally the people I am accountable to it are the
:35:32. > :35:35.people of Ilford North. They are the people that factor in my decision
:35:36. > :35:41.making. Then Stephen Lowe, let's come to the issue of Trident.
:35:42. > :35:44.Official Labour Party policy is to renew Trident. Jeremy Corbyn, John
:35:45. > :35:50.McDonnell and others should back the current Labour Party policy. That
:35:51. > :35:56.policy is under review. But the current policy is to renew Trident.
:35:57. > :36:01.If you look at what was voted through at the UK conference, that
:36:02. > :36:06.was a year one document of a three-year policy development
:36:07. > :36:11.process. The second thing is, when Labour Party members had a chance to
:36:12. > :36:16.vote on the specific issue of Trident, as opposed to four lines in
:36:17. > :36:20.the 32 page document, that was at the Scottish party conference a few
:36:21. > :36:25.weeks ago. But it is not a devolved issue. It's not a devolved issue,
:36:26. > :36:30.but the Scottish Labour Party... In a way, it doesn't count. No, that
:36:31. > :36:34.was the Scottish Labour Party view that would be fed into the UK policy
:36:35. > :36:38.process, and that is the mandate from the National policy Forum will
:36:39. > :36:41.undertake to progress. Incidentally, if that is the vote that the
:36:42. > :36:46.Scottish Labour Party conference made it is likely to be the vote at
:36:47. > :36:51.other conferences. Isn't that the point, it is an indication, a strong
:36:52. > :36:56.indication, that that view and that Jeremy Corbyn on Trident better
:36:57. > :37:01.reflects the Labour Party and Labour Party membership than those who do
:37:02. > :37:06.want to renew it? At Labour Party conference, members, delegates,
:37:07. > :37:10.unions, they all have the opportunity of debating Trident in
:37:11. > :37:13.detail and a motion that was opposed to Trident, and despite it being a
:37:14. > :37:18.big issue in the media, they chose not to. I think that is an
:37:19. > :37:21.indication. Look where Stephen's revolutionary socialism would
:37:22. > :37:25.leaders. He is talking about a three-year policy-making prose --
:37:26. > :37:30.process. We are voting on it before Christmas. This isn't a realistic
:37:31. > :37:35.way for MPs to vote on things or the basis of a credible government. The
:37:36. > :37:40.Trident will happen when it decides it happens, but I expect Labour MPs
:37:41. > :37:44.to consult fully with their party members about where we go from here.
:37:45. > :37:48.I think that the vote at Scottish party conference, which was
:37:49. > :37:53.overwhelming, 70% across sections of the party, shows where the Labour
:37:54. > :37:56.Party's feeling is going. I would expect to Labour Party members and
:37:57. > :38:02.MPs to fully participate in the Trident review the party has set up
:38:03. > :38:04.and take that as a starting point. How are you going to vote in the
:38:05. > :38:10.Trident debate tomorrow, Wes Streeting? Tomorrow is an opposition
:38:11. > :38:13.Day motion. I actually want to hear the arguments for and against. There
:38:14. > :38:17.are interesting argument saying that the money would be better spent on
:38:18. > :38:22.conventional forces. The Gateway vote is where I will cast my vote.
:38:23. > :38:26.So you are not a wholehearted back of the current policy? I've always
:38:27. > :38:30.been slightly sceptical, which is why I am cross about the lecturing
:38:31. > :38:32.of Labour MPs from Stephen. These are really big issues facing the
:38:33. > :38:43.country and they don't need to be boiled down to conference
:38:44. > :38:45.resolutions. We do need a proper debate. When it comes to the actual
:38:46. > :38:48.vote, I will vote probably in favour of renewing Trident but I will
:38:49. > :38:51.consult my party members. The people that matter the most are the people
:38:52. > :38:54.of Ilford North who sent me to Parliament. Stephen Lowe, thank you.
:38:55. > :38:56.Now, Brussels is on its third day of lockdown,
:38:57. > :38:58.with schools and the metro closed, as the Belgian capital remains
:38:59. > :39:02.Let's talk to our Europe correspondent, Chris Morris,
:39:03. > :39:13.-- Christian Fraser. Does it look as though it will continue? Yes, I
:39:14. > :39:19.think so. They are getting to grips with the problem. We have had 21
:39:20. > :39:23.arrests in the last 24 hours, and we have just had a statement from the
:39:24. > :39:26.federal prosecutor that since last night they had picked up another
:39:27. > :39:29.five people and at one of the addresses they recovered 26,000
:39:30. > :39:33.euros and some other things are currently looking at. You get a
:39:34. > :39:40.feeling that the network that may have supported the brothers in
:39:41. > :39:43.Molenbeek is being carefully dissected and they are picking more
:39:44. > :39:47.and more people up all the time, and the crucial problem for the Fred
:39:48. > :39:53.prosecutor is that they still don't have their man, Salah Abdeslam is an
:39:54. > :39:57.unknown quantity and we do not know where he is -- federal prosecutor.
:39:58. > :40:01.Until he is picked up, the anxiety will remain. I have seen the
:40:02. > :40:05.pictures along with everyone else. Eerily quiet on the streets of
:40:06. > :40:11.Brussels, but what is it like to be in a capital city that is literally
:40:12. > :40:14.emptied of its people? Well, it is quiet. It's a bit busier today given
:40:15. > :40:18.that it's the start of the working week but it's not normal to see an
:40:19. > :40:23.armoured personnel carrier -- carrier on the forecourt of train
:40:24. > :40:26.station. There are soldiers and police at strategic parts of the
:40:27. > :40:30.city. Some people are getting on with it, the more resilient ones. It
:40:31. > :40:34.is peculiar how you go about ordinary life. You going to copy
:40:35. > :40:40.shop and you think about how how you might hide if something happens --
:40:41. > :40:44.copy shop. You go to hotels and wonder if it is a safe one. We had
:40:45. > :40:48.colleagues in the centre of Brussels who were locked down in their hotel
:40:49. > :40:51.for several hours and told to stay away from the windows. Some people
:40:52. > :40:56.have had quite an anxious time over the last few days. I think that will
:40:57. > :41:00.continue. As long as the threat level is there. We expect to hear
:41:01. > :41:05.from the Prime Minister this afternoon, and he will discuss
:41:06. > :41:11.whether it remains at level for going forward, but as long as Salah
:41:12. > :41:14.Abdeslam is at large you wonder how he can register threat. I don't know
:41:15. > :41:18.if you had a chance to talk to people, but do they generally
:41:19. > :41:24.support the action taken by the government? I think there is some
:41:25. > :41:30.frustration about the intelligence, and certainly the intelligence
:41:31. > :41:33.around Molenbeek. It is quite clear by now that they lost track of the
:41:34. > :41:37.situation. There was a network of people they did not know much about,
:41:38. > :41:41.and until yesterday people were scratching their heads, saying, why
:41:42. > :41:44.are people not being picked up this is the threat? I think they have
:41:45. > :41:48.answered some of those questions in the last 24 hours but there is still
:41:49. > :41:54.a problem. You feel the pressure that the interior Mission is under
:41:55. > :41:58.-- interior Minister is under. He said he wanted to know everything
:41:59. > :42:01.about these districts, even if the local authorities bang on every door
:42:02. > :42:04.and demand to know who is living there. There is a bit of
:42:05. > :42:09.finger-pointing between local authorities and the federal state.
:42:10. > :42:13.They are pumping something like ?400 million into surveillance and better
:42:14. > :42:18.police resources, but we are eight days on from the Paris attacks and
:42:19. > :42:23.steel they are not getting to grips -- still they are not. They have
:42:24. > :42:28.still not found Salah Abdeslam and I think people might be thinking that
:42:29. > :42:29.in a small area like Brussels, why has that not happened? Christian
:42:30. > :42:32.Fraser, thank you very much. Now,
:42:33. > :42:33.it's going to be an exceptionally This afternoon, Mr Cameron will
:42:34. > :42:37.outline the government's priorities for the Strategic Defence
:42:38. > :42:42.and Spending Review. On Tuesday,
:42:43. > :42:44.the Commons will debate an SNP motion on Trident, intended to put
:42:45. > :42:50.Labour in an awkward position. On Wednesday,
:42:51. > :42:51.the Chancellor takes centre stage with the Autumn Statement
:42:52. > :43:03.and Comprehensive Spending Review. You can watch all of that in the
:43:04. > :43:04.Daily Politics special from 11:30 a.m..
:43:05. > :43:06.Michael Fallon will also brief opposition MPs
:43:07. > :43:10.at the MoD to set out the case for military action in Syria.
:43:11. > :43:14.The Prime Minister is due to publish his response to the Foreign Affairs
:43:15. > :43:16.Select Committee by Thursday, making the case for expanding UK airstrikes
:43:17. > :43:23.to Syria with a Commons vote expected in the next two weeks.
:43:24. > :43:26.We're joined now by the Guardian's Rafael Behr, and Tom Newton Dunn,
:43:27. > :43:41.Welcome to both of you. The timing, do we expect this boat on air
:43:42. > :43:44.strikes next week? Well, on Thursday, the Prime Minister will
:43:45. > :43:48.set out the case and the framing of that is the foreign affairs select
:43:49. > :43:53.report which was sceptical about military action. Then there will be
:43:54. > :43:58.time for MPs to formally consider the response with some more briefing
:43:59. > :44:03.of MPs, and certainly Number ten will be keen to make sure that they
:44:04. > :44:09.feel enough MPs are persuaded on both times that it is a vote they
:44:10. > :44:12.can win. There may be 15 or 20 conservatives who need persuading,
:44:13. > :44:16.and we don't know on Labour MPs, but the feeling is that it is tilting
:44:17. > :44:19.towards the Prime Minister being able to get it through and therefore
:44:20. > :44:24.possibly next week or the week after we will have the vote. Do you think
:44:25. > :44:30.the UN resolution will be a big factor? Absolutely huge. One of the
:44:31. > :44:34.great problems most MPs have who are undecided, which is a diminishing
:44:35. > :44:37.number, I think he could have won it in July. It would have been tight
:44:38. > :44:43.but I think enough Labour MPs would have come over. But they wanted to
:44:44. > :44:49.win it bigger? They wanted a slam dunk so they can say Britain has
:44:50. > :44:53.squeaked it through. The UN resolution gives the legal backing,
:44:54. > :44:57.which is a huge part of it. Even though it does not specifically
:44:58. > :45:00.invoke the chapter seven that gives military action the green light? To
:45:01. > :45:04.be honest, they had the legal backing anyway because of the self
:45:05. > :45:07.defence roles they have used for taking out the likes of Jihadi John.
:45:08. > :45:12.The UN just makes it copper bottomed.
:45:13. > :45:19.Has the Government got its priorities right, equipment, but
:45:20. > :45:25.some debate over a of personnel? We will hear the full details at
:45:26. > :45:29.3:30pm. We have heard the good stuff from the Prime Minister. Even
:45:30. > :45:35.Strategic Defence Review is get briefed out a few days in advance.
:45:36. > :45:40.In DCAL, it seems. Everyone appreciates there is not a
:45:41. > :45:46.never ending pot. You how to reshape the Armed Forces to fit the threat
:45:47. > :45:51.it is cyber, terrorists, it sounds like they have a good balance with
:45:52. > :45:57.this extra kit, the air carriers coming on board and Amanda is good
:45:58. > :46:03.news. Is there a disconnect between the good news Tom says the Prime
:46:04. > :46:06.Minister has talked about, while cutting police numbers, in light of
:46:07. > :46:12.the terrorist threat we now face, and looking at those pictures from
:46:13. > :46:17.Brussels and Paris and the 20% cut? You heard General Dan it described
:46:18. > :46:21.the slash and burn approach. This is a broader problem the
:46:22. > :46:27.Chancellor has with public spending, he embarked on deficits and debt
:46:28. > :46:34.reduction, shrinking the amount of Government there was, reducing the
:46:35. > :46:39.supply side. But the demand has not gone down. Now there is a wider
:46:40. > :46:44.security threat. People will expect more bobbies on the beat, the
:46:45. > :46:46.security to grow in accordance with the threat.
:46:47. > :46:51.The message of the Government said five years has been these are
:46:52. > :46:55.austere times and there is a limit to spending. There is a degree of
:46:56. > :47:00.spinning around whether the Government is meeting demand with
:47:01. > :47:04.the money available. If you look at protected departments, health,
:47:05. > :47:10.defence now with this commitment, adding to the list of international
:47:11. > :47:12.aid, schools, the logic is non-protected departments will take
:47:13. > :47:19.a massive hit. A problem the Chancellor will have,
:47:20. > :47:23.he ought to have if we had an opposition which was effective, is
:47:24. > :47:27.that he has not come he has delivered the cuts but not reduced
:47:28. > :47:33.the deficit by the amount he promised. People will realise we
:47:34. > :47:38.have had a lot of pain but the gain in terms of improving the fiscal
:47:39. > :47:43.outlook is not that great. Taking that into account, how does
:47:44. > :47:48.George Osborne square the circle? ?20 billion of savings he wants, on
:47:49. > :47:53.top of ?12 billion of cuts to welfare, running into problems with
:47:54. > :47:57.making those cuts in tax credit which is supposed to be lessening
:47:58. > :48:04.the impact, and achieving preceptors, how does that work?
:48:05. > :48:10.Someone will get hurt. You forgot about pensions. ?120
:48:11. > :48:17.billion of ring-fenced money. There are very few departments left
:48:18. > :48:24.which are not ring-fenced. The most interesting, the Home Office,
:48:25. > :48:29.Justice, universities and post school training. They will get
:48:30. > :48:33.massive cuts. The Chancellor can do something else. Tax rises?
:48:34. > :48:38.Certainly. He has to put a huge amount of tax
:48:39. > :48:42.rises on councils are giving them permission to raise council tax.
:48:43. > :48:50.Extraordinary political wing from the Chancellor. There are Government
:48:51. > :48:56.wide things you can do such as civil servant pay, Armed Forces pay,
:48:57. > :49:02.costing and enormous amount. A small slice of the hand, some play with
:49:03. > :49:08.progression across civil service pay could save many billions. Tax
:49:09. > :49:11.credits will be the big one. I think George Osborne, having messed this
:49:12. > :49:18.up proudly previously, will push the boat out to make sure he gets
:49:19. > :49:21.reasonably universal, but something substantial which means spending a
:49:22. > :49:27.lot of money which means he has to find it from somewhere else.
:49:28. > :49:33.In the Autumn Statement last year, the target. This was much higher. It
:49:34. > :49:40.has shrunk down because he realised he overreached. One of the few
:49:41. > :49:48.Labour effective attacks was to bring Government spending down.
:49:49. > :49:53.There is essentially a reserve fund and the Chancellor could bring that
:49:54. > :49:58.down further. He has done a discrete U-turn essentially abandoning his
:49:59. > :50:01.target. He has a lot of political room for manoeuvre because the
:50:02. > :50:05.Labour Party hasn't done enough to show it has a credible approach to
:50:06. > :50:09.dealing with the fiscal situation. He could raid from himself at the
:50:10. > :50:13.end of parliament and push those targets for a surplus.
:50:14. > :50:18.But you don't make the savings next year.
:50:19. > :50:32.Where would he come up with ?4 billion next year. And the next
:50:33. > :50:39.issue is what an extraordinary timing it will be for the Chancellor
:50:40. > :50:45.to make the case for war on Syria, just as we try to get our heads
:50:46. > :50:48.around figures in the Autumn Statement.
:50:49. > :50:52.Is he being cynical? It pays to be cynical about the way things are
:50:53. > :50:58.timed in politics but you cannot attribute events in Syria to a
:50:59. > :51:01.Downing Street grade designed to overcome difficulties over the
:51:02. > :51:06.fiscal situation with these things colliding.
:51:07. > :51:10.It is falling well for Downing Street is the polite way to put it.
:51:11. > :51:17.We look forward to the headlines. We can say this is a big week at
:51:18. > :51:19.Westminster. Thank you, gentlemen.
:51:20. > :51:21.We've already been talking about plans for defence spending.
:51:22. > :51:23.Sounds like the Government is prepared to
:51:24. > :51:29.But what small change will it find in there?
:51:30. > :51:31.The Ministry Of Defence owns 1% of all land in the UK.
:51:32. > :51:34.So, selling of some of it is certainly an option.
:51:35. > :51:36.In fact, the Government owns ?300 billion
:51:37. > :51:39.worth of property and land in this country, and is currently involved
:51:40. > :51:47.Always in the market for a bargain, Ellie has been having a look.
:51:48. > :51:49.# Our house is a very, very fine house
:51:50. > :51:58.# With two cats in the yard Life used to be so hard. #
:51:59. > :52:02.No longer for the admirals.
:52:03. > :52:05.It is going to be a posh hotel with posh flats,
:52:06. > :52:15.Even if you are not staying in the hotel, you will be able to
:52:16. > :52:20.come and enjoy, have a drink, and admire these wonderful views.
:52:21. > :52:23.The Government sold it in June and made ?65.5 million.
:52:24. > :52:27.But it is still something of doer-upper.
:52:28. > :52:29.It is bringing new life to the building.
:52:30. > :52:31.The building is magnificent also from the inside.
:52:32. > :52:40.Part of our strategy is to work on the restoration of Admiralty Arch.
:52:41. > :52:43.When it went on the market, there were concerns public access
:52:44. > :52:46.The Government is still the freeholder, and has taken advice
:52:47. > :52:50.In fact, so pleased is the minister in charge, he wants to
:52:51. > :52:59.In the last Parliament, we managed to raise ?1.8 billion
:53:00. > :53:06.by selling off about 20% of the property used by the Government.
:53:07. > :53:09.We think we can go much further and raise about ?6 billion.
:53:10. > :53:12.After all, it costs a lot to have a civil servant working
:53:13. > :53:19.Much cheaper to have them working in purpose-built offices.
:53:20. > :53:23.Aren't you just selling off the family silver?
:53:24. > :53:29.No, we're allowing the public into these
:53:30. > :53:31.brilliant, interesting, old buildings the Government no longer
:53:32. > :53:34.needs. Good for taxpayers, and great for the public to use
:53:35. > :53:39.These assets are not all in the capital.
:53:40. > :53:42.It's not everyone's des res but this nuclear bunker is up
:53:43. > :53:47.For the more architecturally astute, there was the Bidston Observatory
:53:48. > :53:54.And, fresh onto the market, this programme can reveal, there's
:53:55. > :53:57.a vacant part of the 19th-century Dulwich Hospital site which could be
:53:58. > :54:04.We estimate up to a quarter of the brownfield land suitable for housing
:54:05. > :54:08.There is huge potential to play a major role
:54:09. > :54:14.Ministers have also introduced a scheme called
:54:15. > :54:17.the right to contest where the public can demand a Government
:54:18. > :54:21.building is sold if they can prove it can be put to better use.
:54:22. > :54:38.Joining us now is the Liberal Democrat peer Lord Wallace.
:54:39. > :54:45.Wellcome, Matt Hancock has said the month has sold ?1.7 billion of
:54:46. > :54:52.Government buildings, is this selling off the family silver?
:54:53. > :54:57.Not entirely but selling to support the current spending is what
:54:58. > :55:04.companies in trouble do. That is one of our worries. He was selling off
:55:05. > :55:07.capital assets, you should be putting that into further
:55:08. > :55:18.investment, that is a first query. What some of them said about is
:55:19. > :55:21.selling off the historic estate, and concentrating on buildings in
:55:22. > :55:24.Croydon or Leeds is clearly what you do if you are shrinking the size of
:55:25. > :55:29.central Government, that is more efficient.
:55:30. > :55:33.As Government becomes more efficient and smaller, an inevitable part is
:55:34. > :55:37.you will downsize and some of that real estate will be surplus. There
:55:38. > :55:41.is a duty to the taxpayer to make sure we are delivering value for
:55:42. > :55:46.money and with expensive property, you could put it to better use.
:55:47. > :55:51.Running these officers is expensive. If you want an efficient central
:55:52. > :55:54.Government, you want Government concentrated, ideally a situation
:55:55. > :55:58.where ministers and senior officials can walk easily from one department
:55:59. > :56:03.to the other. The old War office, in the middle of
:56:04. > :56:10.Whitehall, where you can scatter your senior officials out to Croydon
:56:11. > :56:15.and beyond, that is not efficient. Do you believe selling of buildings
:56:16. > :56:19.like Admiralty Arch, the old War office, does that constitute a
:56:20. > :56:22.security risk? The question I have asked is how far
:56:23. > :56:26.the Government had assured themselves there was not a security
:56:27. > :56:31.risk. This was a state position --
:56:32. > :56:36.possession. When President Bush was here, he
:56:37. > :56:39.insisted his officials insisted the whole of Whitehall be closed off and
:56:40. > :56:45.they asked if the Jubilee line underneath could be closed. There
:56:46. > :56:52.are evident security risks and we were not assured the Government had
:56:53. > :56:55.thought this through before selling. There -- is this wise in these
:56:56. > :57:01.times? We leave security to professionals.
:57:02. > :57:05.Security is left to a brilliant security service structure in this
:57:06. > :57:11.country. If you start down that route, where
:57:12. > :57:17.do you stop? You are saying there is a security risk to sell these
:57:18. > :57:20.buildings because it... We should lead this to the security
:57:21. > :57:28.professionals. The question is, have the security
:57:29. > :57:33.professionals looked at it, has been assured. And invisible times I have
:57:34. > :57:36.no problem with selling off a load of land and property owned by the
:57:37. > :57:42.state, not least because across London we have a housing crisis.
:57:43. > :57:48.There is much of that Brownfield capacity. We know what the driver
:57:49. > :57:52.is, George Osborne has been missing his targets on deficit, debt. He is
:57:53. > :57:56.lucky he has a busy news because this is not a good week for an
:57:57. > :58:01.Autumn Statement. A lot of these sales are driven by wanting to plug
:58:02. > :58:07.the holes in his failures. Look at the seats on tax, terrible.
:58:08. > :58:12.There is a credible point, Johnny Mercer, he wants to make his surplus
:58:13. > :58:17.target, and selling of to bring money into the treasury. I do not
:58:18. > :58:19.think George is going about this by selling the family assets to balance
:58:20. > :58:24.his books. He is trying to run an efficient
:58:25. > :58:29.Government to run an efficient economy on scale and on target.
:58:30. > :58:36.Otherwise you can't do all defence and look after the most vulnerable.
:58:37. > :58:40.It is part of a larger strategy. It is partly about shrinking the
:58:41. > :58:44.state. Senior civil servants are being crammed into remarkably small
:58:45. > :58:49.offices where there are not enough seats for those working there.
:58:50. > :58:51.That is shrinking the state. Thank you to all of our guests.
:58:52. > :58:56.The One O'Clock News is starting over on BBC One now.
:58:57. > :58:59.I'll be here at noon tomorrow with all the big