:00:37. > :00:43.The Government has denied exaggerating a warning
:00:44. > :00:47.from the medical director of NHS England about the impact
:00:48. > :00:49.of a possible strike by junior doctors.
:00:50. > :00:54.We'll hear from the former health minister Norman Lamb.
:00:55. > :00:57.After the City watchdog drops an investigation into the culture
:00:58. > :00:59.and practices of banks, have we moved beyond
:01:00. > :01:11.The United States claims 2,500 Islamic State fighter were killed
:01:12. > :01:14.in December by coalition air-strikes.
:01:15. > :01:22.We'll discuss the campaign against IS in Iraq and Syria.
:01:23. > :01:28.And in the first of a new series of films, we talk to former Home
:01:29. > :01:35.I always felt as Home Secretary there was some person who worked in
:01:36. > :01:39.the department whose name you did not know, whose responsibilities you
:01:40. > :01:44.had no idea of, who was going to destroy your career.
:01:45. > :01:48.All that in the next hour and with us for the whole
:01:49. > :01:53.of the programme today I'm joined by the Times columnist
:01:54. > :01:55.Rachel Sylvester, and the Independent's Middle East
:01:56. > :01:59.First, let's talk about a report in this morning's Independent that
:02:00. > :02:04.officials working for Jeremy Hunt intervened in the writing
:02:05. > :02:06.of a warning from NHS England's medical director Bruce Keogh
:02:07. > :02:11.to the British Medical Association about the risks to patient care
:02:12. > :02:13.in the event of a major terrorist attack during
:02:14. > :02:19.Staff from the Department of Health urged Bruce Keogh
:02:20. > :02:20.to make his warning as "hard-edged" as possible.
:02:21. > :02:28."Given it is the Government's ultimate responsibility to do
:02:29. > :02:33.everything it can to ensure public safety, it is completely right
:02:34. > :02:36.that the Department expressed a view on communication with the BMA".
:02:37. > :02:40.Let's talk now to the former health minister, the Liberal Democrat
:02:41. > :02:44.Norman Lamb, he's in our Norwich studio.
:02:45. > :02:49.What is wrong with the medical director and the government wanting
:02:50. > :02:56.to make sure that we'd be covered jawing a strike in the event of a
:02:57. > :03:01.terrorist attack? I don't have any difficulty with liaison, discussion.
:03:02. > :03:06.Indeed, when I was in the department there was constant discussion with
:03:07. > :03:08.NHS England. But one of the principles of the Andrew Lansley
:03:09. > :03:13.reforms was to create this independent body. And I suspect
:03:14. > :03:18.you'd probably agree that it does look rather as if an independent
:03:19. > :03:20.official within NHS England is being leaned on by the government on
:03:21. > :03:25.something that ultimately very politically sensitive. But he
:03:26. > :03:30.doesn't say that, he says it was entirely appropriate that the NHS
:03:31. > :03:36.should coordinate the operational response to the strike threat. Well,
:03:37. > :03:42.as I say, I have no difficulty with discussion between the department
:03:43. > :03:48.and NHS England. But what concerns me most about all of this is that it
:03:49. > :03:52.will probably damage trust further between the government and the
:03:53. > :03:57.junior doctors. And what's in the interest of everyone is that
:03:58. > :04:01.actually we get this dispute settled and settled very quickly. That's a
:04:02. > :04:05.different matter. I understand that but it is a different matter.
:04:06. > :04:09.There's been a brouhaha about this letter and trying to work out
:04:10. > :04:14.exactly what's with it. Let me quote the letter, because the relevant
:04:15. > :04:19.part is the following: "Will the BMA NCO that members will be available
:04:20. > :04:24.to respond to a major incident whether this is declared because of
:04:25. > :04:28.a single event or an unprecedented surge in activity? Will junior
:04:29. > :04:32.doctors who would otherwise have been rostered for duty make
:04:33. > :04:34.themselves available to respond in a timely way within an hour of a major
:04:35. > :04:40.incident being declared?" What timely way within an hour of a major
:04:41. > :04:43.wrong with the medical director request in that information? So if
:04:44. > :04:49.you remember back to when this was released, it caused an enormous
:04:50. > :04:53.furore among young doctors, they made clear at that time that of
:04:54. > :04:57.course they would respond, it is part of their duty as doctors to
:04:58. > :05:02.respond in the event of an emergency of that sort. And I suppose the
:05:03. > :05:06.critical thing, Andrew, and you will understand this absolutely, is was
:05:07. > :05:13.this politics getting involved? Was it actually to just six it up a bit
:05:14. > :05:19.in order to put pressure on the BMA at a moment of intense pressure in
:05:20. > :05:23.this dispute? What I'm interested in is finding ways of ratcheting down
:05:24. > :05:29.the battle tween government and junior doctors to find a settlement
:05:30. > :05:33.to this dispute rather than making it more difficult. All right, Norman
:05:34. > :05:40.Lamb, thanks for joining us. Rachel, is there a story in this? We've been
:05:41. > :05:44.there before with sexed up dossiers and the problem for the government
:05:45. > :05:47.is that if it looks like they are playing politics with the NHS. It
:05:48. > :05:52.looked as though they were exploiting the Paris terror attacks.
:05:53. > :05:55.Surely it is the duty of the government, if it faces a junior
:05:56. > :06:00.doctors strike, not talking about the ROMs or rights of that, but
:06:01. > :06:05.facing a strike, is not the of the government to establish that these
:06:06. > :06:08.junior doctors will, as they almost certainly would, make themselves
:06:09. > :06:12.available in the event of a terrorist attack? Absolutely, but
:06:13. > :06:19.the point was whether the letter was really written to be leaked. I think
:06:20. > :06:25.it is about the politics, playing politics with the NHS, which applies
:06:26. > :06:29.equally to the BMA. Patients and voters will not forgive politicians
:06:30. > :06:35.or doctors who look as though they are playing politics. The government
:06:36. > :06:38.could, or the Department of Health, could just have left Bruce Keogh to
:06:39. > :06:45.write the letter in his own words in his own way? Yes, I mean this is
:06:46. > :06:51.presented as being independent and it obviously isn't independent. It
:06:52. > :07:02.also seems to be exploiting the massacre in Paris in a way, you
:07:03. > :07:04.know, people were criticised for exploiting 9/11. But if you were the
:07:05. > :07:08.government you exploiting 9/11. But if you were the
:07:09. > :07:10.sure that these junior doctors were available in the event of a
:07:11. > :07:15.terrorist attack given the atmosphere of the time, all talk was
:07:16. > :07:18.Britain could just as easily be under threat, it was the duty of the
:07:19. > :07:22.government to make sure that the doctors will turn up. I have no
:07:23. > :07:25.reason to believe that they wouldn't. My guess is they would
:07:26. > :07:28.break their strike and they would of course come into the hospitals, but
:07:29. > :07:32.the government had to establish that. But that does not seem to have
:07:33. > :07:36.been the purpose of this letter and the publicity given to this letter.
:07:37. > :07:43.This was to put pressure on the junior doctors. It does not seem to
:07:44. > :07:46.have been a perfectly reasonable administrative instruction. It seems
:07:47. > :07:52.to have had a very direct political intent. Just to ratchet things up?
:07:53. > :07:56.To ratchet things up, and rather naive, knowing that if this got out
:07:57. > :07:59.they would get a lot of egg on their face, which is what has happened.
:08:00. > :08:03.The question for today is all about radio phone-ins.
:08:04. > :08:06.Who is the latest politician to decide to join the likes
:08:07. > :08:09.of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson and host a regular show on LBC
:08:10. > :08:12.Is it a) William Hague, b) Alex Salmond,
:08:13. > :08:25.I guess he wouldn't have to come to the country coming he could do it
:08:26. > :08:27.down the line. and Patrick will give us
:08:28. > :08:35.the correct answer. It's pretty easy this week, isn't
:08:36. > :08:38.it? I'm giving nothing away. That's what we like.
:08:39. > :08:41.Are the Government and the regulators going soft on banks?
:08:42. > :08:43.That's the fear among some MPs after the City watchdog announced
:08:44. > :08:48.that it was shelving a review into banking culture.
:08:49. > :08:53.The culture many people thought helped create the crisis in 2008.
:08:54. > :08:55.MPs on the Treasury Select Committee have summoned the bosses
:08:56. > :08:58.of the Financial Conduct Authority to give evidence later this month
:08:59. > :09:04.George Osborne says he had no prior knowledge of the decision.
:09:05. > :09:06.But, more broadly, is the Government shifting its tone
:09:07. > :09:13.In June shortly after the general election George Osborne made
:09:14. > :09:17.a speech to top bankers at the Mansion house in London.
:09:18. > :09:38.In July, in his emergency budget, the Chancellor took further action
:09:39. > :09:41.by reducing the bank levy and replacing it with a less onerous
:09:42. > :09:48.Before the election HSBC declared that the bank levy was a factor
:09:49. > :09:50.in its ongoing deliberation over whether to move its headquarters out
:09:51. > :10:08.Later that month Martin Wheatley, the chief executive of the City
:10:09. > :10:10.watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority -
:10:11. > :10:15.Mr Wheatley was unpopular with city bosses.
:10:16. > :10:17.For example, in 2014-15, the watchdog raised ?1.4 billion
:10:18. > :10:20.in fines on banks and other financial companies,
:10:21. > :10:30.more than in the previous four years combined.
:10:31. > :10:33.And just last month the FCA revealed that it had shelved plans
:10:34. > :10:38.for an inquiry into the culture, pay and behaviour of staff in banking.
:10:39. > :10:41.The chairman of the Commons Treasury Select Committee,
:10:42. > :10:44.Andrew Tyrie, said recent decisions by the FCA were giving
:10:45. > :10:49.the impression of a "weakening of resolve".
:10:50. > :10:52.George Osborne was asked about that yesterday on the BBC.
:10:53. > :11:04.That was a completely independent decision that I had no foreknowledge
:11:05. > :11:08.of. What did you think of it? It's got to be an independent decision
:11:09. > :11:11.for our banking regulator. But you are the Chancellor and you must have
:11:12. > :11:15.a view as to whether there should be that sort of investigation into the
:11:16. > :11:20.way the banks have been behaving? I would say that we did have that
:11:21. > :11:22.investigation, it was a cross-party parliamentary commission that
:11:23. > :11:25.included people like the Archbishop of Canterbury on the.
:11:26. > :11:28.We've been joined from Sheffield by the Labour MP John Mann,
:11:29. > :11:30.who is a member of the Treasury Select Committee.
:11:31. > :11:33.And in the studio is the stock broker and market commentator,
:11:34. > :11:38.And I should just say that we did ask the Treasury for an interview
:11:39. > :11:45.with a government minister on this, but none was available.
:11:46. > :11:52.David Buik, is the government changing its attitude to the banking
:11:53. > :11:58.industry? I don't think so. We have come a long way since John McFall's
:11:59. > :12:02.committee after the financial crisis. He was the labour on Peter
:12:03. > :12:07.chaired it under the last Labour government. Yes, keep late a leading
:12:08. > :12:12.Andrew Svoboda versus role -- he played a leading and
:12:13. > :12:18.it was a shambles and the government did not seem to know what was going
:12:19. > :12:23.on. An awful lot of water has passed under the bridge, a lot of changing
:12:24. > :12:27.personalities. I believe the situation now that Andrew Bailey is
:12:28. > :12:30.responsible for Prudential banking, he has the great response of the
:12:31. > :12:35.entire industry, he is a very good communicator. The regulations have
:12:36. > :12:39.changed. We will not know if they are the right regulations until we
:12:40. > :12:43.hit the next crisis, we never do. But are we really sure that the
:12:44. > :12:47.culture has changed all that much? Are we really sure that a lot of the
:12:48. > :12:53.kind of culture that created the crisis in 2007 and 2008 is still not
:12:54. > :12:57.there? I absolutely think the changes have been implemented.
:12:58. > :13:05.Because a lot of this stuff that has come up, the PPI stuff, you will see
:13:06. > :13:10.a lot of court cases with people serving long prison sentences which
:13:11. > :13:15.they deserve. Every time I'm told that by somebody in the city,
:13:16. > :13:19.another scandal erupts. Yes but many of them, with great respect, our
:13:20. > :13:24.historical, and it takes a long time to bring these people to book. As
:13:25. > :13:29.far as I'm concerned Tracy McDermott has done a fantastic job. And she
:13:30. > :13:33.is? She is basically the temporary head of the FCA until somebody is
:13:34. > :13:39.appointed. She won't mind me saying this, she is around five, and she is
:13:40. > :13:43.a brilliant Rottweilers. So why doesn't the government give her the
:13:44. > :13:47.job? She doesn't want it. Maybe she knows something we don't. John Mann,
:13:48. > :13:53.the Treasury Select Committee is going to bring in the bosses of the
:13:54. > :13:57.FCA to find out why this enquiry was shelved. What do you think, at the
:13:58. > :14:03.moment, is going on? Well we know what is going on. In August the FCA
:14:04. > :14:09.had a huge amount of work ongoing into culture within banks and how to
:14:10. > :14:16.ensure that the culture was appropriate. In September Martin
:14:17. > :14:22.Wheatley left and instantly all that work was changed. Not just one piece
:14:23. > :14:27.of work, but lots of pieces of work that have been going on for some
:14:28. > :14:33.years. Every single bit of it dropped. In essence the FCA will
:14:34. > :14:38.have no point for existing. But since the FCA is, we are told, in
:14:39. > :14:43.independent regular tree authority, why would it dropped this enquiry
:14:44. > :14:50.into culture, even if the government wanted it? The government has no
:14:51. > :14:54.part in stopping it. It is my belief the government has interfered. I
:14:55. > :14:59.think the enquiry will prove that, and hopefully prove precisely how
:15:00. > :15:05.they have interfered. The FCA has not reached its own conclusions. Its
:15:06. > :15:10.been told what to do. It's been told by the Treasury. And it's a bit
:15:11. > :15:16.weaselly for George Osborne to say "I had no prior knowledge". We can
:15:17. > :15:19.define that as saying, I personally wasn't informed, because the way I
:15:20. > :15:25.operate is that they don't inform us of those, with a nod and a wink. His
:15:26. > :15:29.officials knew what was going on and I predict that he wants one of his
:15:30. > :15:31.senior officials to in fact run the FCA to complete the job for him,
:15:32. > :15:40.which is to neuter it. So you believe that contrary to what
:15:41. > :15:46.Mr Osborne told the BBC this week that the government was involved on,
:15:47. > :15:52.if I put it this way, Leeming, pressuring, the FCA not to proceed
:15:53. > :15:55.with this inquiry? Directly and specifically, not just generally but
:15:56. > :16:02.specifically. I think that the Treasury committee inquiry will
:16:03. > :16:07.uncover how that happened and it is a huge scandal in terms of the
:16:08. > :16:12.approach of the government, not least because they're saying one
:16:13. > :16:18.thing publicly, as Osborne did, but doing something else privately. But
:16:19. > :16:23.also the motives for doing it. And in my view, George Osborne's motive
:16:24. > :16:28.is to maximise the income he gets back in from selling of shares in
:16:29. > :16:33.RBS and Lloyds bank. That's what this is about because the economy
:16:34. > :16:38.isn't going as well as he wants and his projections, which he gets
:16:39. > :16:43.independently from the OBR, are not going to be that good in his March
:16:44. > :16:48.budget and later this year. He wants to compensate for that. It is
:16:49. > :16:52.obviously a very important and serious accusation, that you are
:16:53. > :16:55.saying the government did lean on this, and it would be fascinating to
:16:56. > :16:59.see the evidence because the Treasury are saying that isn't what
:17:00. > :17:05.happened. I'm saying it very specifically. Let me ask you this
:17:06. > :17:08.question. Given that your inquiry hasn't yet started, your inquiry
:17:09. > :17:13.into the lack of an inquiry, which is a what you're about to do, how do
:17:14. > :17:16.you know all this? Because when we've had the FCA in front of us
:17:17. > :17:21.before we are aware of what their work programme has been and their
:17:22. > :17:26.priorities and it is not just this one inquiry that they were doing
:17:27. > :17:30.into culture and the work on that, it's a series of things that they've
:17:31. > :17:34.dropped. Some things have been announced. I believe there are other
:17:35. > :17:38.pieces of work that have been dropped that were very important
:17:39. > :17:45.internally in the FCA that have disappeared, stopped, ended. This is
:17:46. > :17:50.a huge change in regulation and in essence, what has happened is that
:17:51. > :17:58.the Prudential RideLondon to, the PR eight, and Mr Bailey, which looks at
:17:59. > :18:04.the grand picture, is continuing its work but the precise regulation of
:18:05. > :18:09.individual banks and individual bankers has come to an end. It is
:18:10. > :18:14.self-regulation now for individual banks. That is a huge approach that
:18:15. > :18:17.has not been agreed by Parliament and I don't believe there's a
:18:18. > :18:24.consensus in the that it is right to do that. Let me put that. What is
:18:25. > :18:28.your response? Obviously, he is privileged information but I don't
:18:29. > :18:33.get but I think Andrew baby at the Prudential banking authority has a
:18:34. > :18:36.very close relationship with the FCA and banks have transgressed. Nobody
:18:37. > :18:41.is trying to get away from that. But they have been rubbished to a degree
:18:42. > :18:44.where it is care to productive to recovery and I think Andrew Bailey
:18:45. > :18:49.and his meetings with the FCA have probably decided that the work in
:18:50. > :18:55.terms of dealing with the behavioural factor should be done
:18:56. > :19:00.individually by each bank. John Mann can summon whoever he likes, or the
:19:01. > :19:04.chairman, to ask an investigation and they are highly entitled to do
:19:05. > :19:09.so but I believe that you deal with one individual bank, each one in
:19:10. > :19:15.this country, on an individual basis and you will get a much better
:19:16. > :19:19.result in the long term. Would it not be fair to surmise that the
:19:20. > :19:22.government has taken fright at the prospect of HSBC moving its
:19:23. > :19:25.headquarters from London? It is by far the biggest bank even though
:19:26. > :19:34.most of its operations are not in this country. And indeed we learn
:19:35. > :19:38.that the FCA is shelving, is not pursuing, action against HSBC over
:19:39. > :19:44.its Swiss private banking arm, which was such a scandal last year. Again,
:19:45. > :19:48.that was HSBC. You could put together a case to say that the
:19:49. > :19:55.Government is kind of in retreat from the banks. You could and it
:19:56. > :19:58.doesn't look terribly good but what I'm saying to you is that I believe
:19:59. > :20:01.that within the importance of the Bank of England and all the
:20:02. > :20:05.regulatory authorities, they have a duty of care to make sure that the
:20:06. > :20:11.banking fraternity works as well as it possibly can. It is a matter of
:20:12. > :20:14.wholesale indifference to Douglas and to Stuart Gulliver, the chairman
:20:15. > :20:17.to the Executive of HSBC, whether they have their head office in
:20:18. > :20:25.London or not because they can go pretty much anywhere. But it would
:20:26. > :20:31.be huge reputational damage to the government if it was to lose HSBC.
:20:32. > :20:34.It is more than that. It would be huge rotation or damage to the city
:20:35. > :20:38.and on and the City of London Police financial sector contributes about
:20:39. > :20:44.50% of GDP. I believe this is a pragmatic approach. John Mann and
:20:45. > :20:47.his Treasury select committee have every right to have the drains up to
:20:48. > :20:51.see why they've come around to these decisions but I haven't think it has
:20:52. > :20:55.been done with the best interests of everybody, in the full knowledge
:20:56. > :20:58.that the FCA will bring transgressors to book in a very
:20:59. > :21:02.serious manner and we will find this out in the next three to six months
:21:03. > :21:07.when loads of people are going to go to jail. Unless you are in HSBC's
:21:08. > :21:11.Swiss banking arm. John Mann, I will give you the final word. David was
:21:12. > :21:15.exactly right that watch it happen is that each bank is properly
:21:16. > :21:20.regulated individually. That is exactly the change that is taking
:21:21. > :21:27.place. That is the regulation that is not going to happen. It is all
:21:28. > :21:32.going to be generalised - risks to the whole system. Mr Bailey's role
:21:33. > :21:38.in it and the PRA. The regulator will in essence have no effective
:21:39. > :21:42.role whatsoever in the future. This is a huge change. We need to expose
:21:43. > :21:47.that and have a proper debate about whether that decision, inspired by
:21:48. > :21:52.Osborne and the Treasury, is the right one. Obviously, I don't make
:21:53. > :21:57.it is. I understand. Very briefly, Wendy you expect to have the FCA in
:21:58. > :22:00.front of the select committee? It is this month. I also hope and think we
:22:01. > :22:04.will have Mr Osborne and perhaps other Treasury officials as well.
:22:05. > :22:13.Come back and taught was after you have these meetings? Will do. --
:22:14. > :22:14.come back and talk to us. Thank you very much. A developing story that
:22:15. > :22:29.we will be continuing to cover. The UK continues to fly intensive
:22:30. > :22:31.armed reconnaissance missions across Syria and Iraq,
:22:32. > :22:36.but missions in the last few days over northern Iraq, attacking
:22:37. > :22:50.targets in Mosul and Ramadi. On the 30th of December,
:22:51. > :22:53.Tornados returned to Ramadi, bombing two machine-gun positions
:22:54. > :22:58.and assisting coalition aircraft in strikes on IS militants,
:22:59. > :23:06.as Typhoons assisted the Peshmerga with an attack on a terrorist rocket
:23:07. > :23:09.launcher team near Sinjar Typhoons and Tornados
:23:10. > :23:15.continued to patrol the Sinjar area on the last day
:23:16. > :23:20.of 2015, using Paveways against machine-gun positions
:23:21. > :23:24.and a group of militants. On New Year's Day, an RAF Reaper
:23:25. > :23:29.drone supported coalition air strikes in Ramadi,
:23:30. > :23:32.and on the following day another Reaper used Hellfire missile
:23:33. > :23:46.near the city of Fallujah. A city of certain iconic status in
:23:47. > :23:50.whole story. At the beginning of this year,
:23:51. > :23:52.Typhoons delivered a number of successful attacks in Ramadi
:23:53. > :23:55.and Tornados and a Reaper drone attacked nine other targets
:23:56. > :23:56.across northern Iraq. While the RAF continue to fly
:23:57. > :23:59.surveillance missions over Syria, the last time a British aircraft
:24:00. > :24:01.struck the country when an RAF Reaper hit a checkpoint
:24:02. > :24:05.south of IS stronghold We can speak to the BBC's
:24:06. > :24:24.defence correspondent Before we come onto the British, how
:24:25. > :24:29.much credence is the defence community giving the American claims
:24:30. > :24:34.that IS is now suffering real casualties from the air war? I think
:24:35. > :24:39.there is credence and I think there is also evidence that IS are losing
:24:40. > :24:46.ground. For example, Ron Mahdi is now in the hands of Iraqi security
:24:47. > :24:49.forces, albeit there are pockets of resistance. The town has been
:24:50. > :24:58.booby-trapped and is still difficult to move around but there is no doubt
:24:59. > :25:02.that the territory it has has shrunk by 40% in Iraq, Tampa sent in Syria.
:25:03. > :25:08.But on that point of casualties, it is interesting. In December, the
:25:09. > :25:17.Coalition, the Pentagon essentially, said that 2500 IS fighters had been
:25:18. > :25:21.killed. Overall, 5000 have been killed in the past year plus a few
:25:22. > :25:25.months yet they still say that there are still about 30,000 IS fighters
:25:26. > :25:28.so there are lots of people who aren't sure that this strategy of
:25:29. > :25:32.killing them is going to work because other people pop up, as
:25:33. > :25:36.we've seen in Iraq and Afghanistan. You take out high-value targets and
:25:37. > :25:39.mid-level targets and the resort was somebody else who takes their place.
:25:40. > :25:45.And on the British contribution, in Syria itself, are we right to be
:25:46. > :25:50.quizzical about what would seem to be the lack of activity of the dish
:25:51. > :25:54.forces over Syria? I don't think you'd be right to say the RAF has
:25:55. > :25:58.been doing nothing because they have been very busy carrying out strikes
:25:59. > :26:02.six days out of seven in Iraq, pretty much every day for the past
:26:03. > :26:07.month. They have been supporting that operation and fast jets like
:26:08. > :26:11.tornadoes and typhoons are like the cavalry, helping troops to the
:26:12. > :26:15.ground. They are helping in a way they are not in Syria. You can ask
:26:16. > :26:19.the question legitimately when the Prime Minister said ahead of that
:26:20. > :26:23.quote, just over a month ago, that Britain would make a meaningful
:26:24. > :26:26.difference, has Britain made a meaningful difference in Syria, and
:26:27. > :26:32.the answer at the moment does not appear to be yes. I understand that
:26:33. > :26:36.RAF Reaper is - and we saw an RAF Reaper doing a strike on Christmas
:26:37. > :26:41.Day - have been looking out for high-value targets. They have seen
:26:42. > :26:44.high-value targets, I'm told, but they haven't carried out attacks,
:26:45. > :26:50.they haven't carried a out a Hellfire Missiles fire because there
:26:51. > :26:53.hasn't been the right time. They do not want to cause a billion
:26:54. > :26:56.casualties. There has to be the right time when they get those
:26:57. > :27:05.individuals. -- cause civilian casualties. I think you can say that
:27:06. > :27:09.reapers have been doing surveillance missions over Iraq. They are looking
:27:10. > :27:10.out for individuals but they haven't made a difference yet. Thank you
:27:11. > :27:20.very much for that. Let's discuss this campaign against
:27:21. > :27:28.Islamic State with my two guests. You have a new book out called Chaos
:27:29. > :27:31.and Caliphate. You briefed Labour MPs on air strikes in Syria before
:27:32. > :27:40.the vote in parliament. What did you tell them? Well, I said that I was
:27:41. > :27:46.all in favour of Islamic State being weakened or eliminated but what was
:27:47. > :27:51.proposed really wouldn't have much effect. Already, before Britain
:27:52. > :27:55.became involved, there were far more American air emissions than there
:27:56. > :27:59.are actual attacks. In other words, there are more aircraft in the sky
:28:00. > :28:07.looking for targets and they can find targets, so this was never
:28:08. > :28:13.going to have much military impact. There are successes, like Ramadi, in
:28:14. > :28:18.a sense. The Iraqi army moves in. But first of all, Ramadi is now in
:28:19. > :28:21.ruins so we used to have a population of 600000 and these
:28:22. > :28:27.people are now internally displaced. Some of them will be refugees
:28:28. > :28:33.abroad. But as inevitable as part of a wall. But particularly this type
:28:34. > :28:39.of war. It is presented as a victory for the Iraqi army but they have
:28:40. > :28:43.been, in many cases, a mopping up force after the other side has been
:28:44. > :28:50.eliminated or weakened by heavy air attack. So air attacks in Iraq have
:28:51. > :28:55.played a role? Yes, but in very specific circumstances. Also in
:28:56. > :28:58.Syria. If so-called Islamic State fighters, and they are very well
:28:59. > :29:02.trained, dig in and fight to the last bullet in fixed positions that
:29:03. > :29:06.you can identify with ground forces, they are going to suffer heavy
:29:07. > :29:11.losses. They did this in the siege of Kobane which went on for four
:29:12. > :29:19.months. And they did lose in the end. But in Ramadi, they haven't
:29:20. > :29:23.really done that again. They leave 250 350 men behind, they don't fight
:29:24. > :29:26.the last bullet. They are sort of reverting to being a gorilla force
:29:27. > :29:32.so it becomes more difficult to target them. Let me ask you this.
:29:33. > :29:37.Unlike a year ago, or even less, Islamic State is losing ground in
:29:38. > :29:42.Iraq now. It has lost several cities or towns. The Pentagon, though I
:29:43. > :29:46.would put a big question mark over their 25,000 figure - I remember the
:29:47. > :29:51.Vietnam figures, which were fantastical as well do- but even so
:29:52. > :29:55.we know they have been suffering casualties. There are also
:29:56. > :29:59.increasing reports that they're suffering increasing defections as
:30:00. > :30:03.well. Would it not be possible to argue, or at least consider, but
:30:04. > :30:10.Islamic State is now passed its peak?
:30:11. > :30:17.Yes, they are being attacked by different forces at different
:30:18. > :30:20.points. But losing ground? One thing to bear in mind is that the
:30:21. > :30:25.battlefield is about the size of Great Britain and a lot of this
:30:26. > :30:31.ground is desert or semi desert. 40% of Syria is step land or does it.
:30:32. > :30:38.All of this stuff that comes out of the Pentagon, saying 14% lost to
:30:39. > :30:41.Islamic State territory, it is pretty meaningless. The population
:30:42. > :30:46.is very concentrated along the rivers and in the cities. So yes,
:30:47. > :30:52.they are under pressure, yes, they have suffered losses, but all these
:30:53. > :30:57.very precise figures like 2500 dead, obviously amiss. Take with a big
:30:58. > :31:00.inch of salt. They have tunnels underground, they do not appear
:31:01. > :31:06.outside, they do not publish casualties figures. They are an
:31:07. > :31:10.attempt to produce finite figures that Isis, Islamic State, is not
:31:11. > :31:14.only passed its peak, but going down, and there really isn't any
:31:15. > :31:18.evidence for that at the moment. But less than a year ago Islamic State
:31:19. > :31:23.looked like it was unstoppable. There were even stories it was going
:31:24. > :31:27.to get to Baghdad at one stage. It doesn't have that situation now,
:31:28. > :31:30.does it? No. Well there are two things, aren't there? Islamic State
:31:31. > :31:35.the military force and Islamic State the ideology. The more thing is that
:31:36. > :31:39.the ideologies shows no signs of being defeated and that seems to be
:31:40. > :31:43.spreading around the world. So this isn't just about troops on the
:31:44. > :31:48.ground, winning or who's losing a ground war in or Syria, it's also
:31:49. > :31:54.about the spread of an awful and dreadful, wicked ideology to Britain
:31:55. > :31:58.and other countries. And it's being exported and spreading. And you are
:31:59. > :32:05.seeing young girls being radicalised in their bedrooms in the east of
:32:06. > :32:10.London. The chief henchman wielding his sword is a British man. And
:32:11. > :32:16.that's the battle. It is a battle of ideas. At least, if not more than a
:32:17. > :32:23.battle of guns, I'd say. Rachel talks about the ideology of Islamic
:32:24. > :32:28.State spreading into other parts of the world, into the Maghreb. How
:32:29. > :32:34.significant is the Islamic State presents now in Libya? Well, it's
:32:35. > :32:39.pretty significant. You have seen that they blew up a police academy
:32:40. > :32:46.yesterday with a vehicle packed with explosives. They killed 65, 100
:32:47. > :32:54.people. They have spread along the coast from the city of Sirte. That
:32:55. > :33:00.is now one of their strongholds. They have tried to take over two of
:33:01. > :33:05.the big oil ports, there. So they have taken over a huge chunk of
:33:06. > :33:08.territory. Just a slightly different view from Rachel, it is important to
:33:09. > :33:13.Islamic State that they actually have a functioning state. It may be
:33:14. > :33:22.under pressure. Because they want the caliphate. And that was not a
:33:23. > :33:25.name of Al-Qaeda, they did not run a state. They also have an
:33:26. > :33:28.administration, they conscript locals for soldiers. I do not
:33:29. > :33:34.believe this 30,000 figure, I think it is far more. From the Western
:33:35. > :33:37.European point of view, these are terrorist attacks, but what makes
:33:38. > :33:42.them so different from the old al-Qaeda, this is backed by a state
:33:43. > :33:47.with money, with resources. Revenue raising powers and so on. If it
:33:48. > :33:50.fails five times it can try another five times. That is what it is
:33:51. > :33:58.trying to do in Libya and Yemen, set up ministates. You cover all this in
:33:59. > :34:03.your book? I do. In good book shops now. Good and bad.
:34:04. > :34:06.Here at the Daily Politics, we like to spoil our loyal viewers
:34:07. > :34:11.So sit back, get comfy, and enjoy the first of a new series
:34:12. > :34:14.where Giles Dilnot has been talking to former home secretaries
:34:15. > :34:29.about leading one of the great offices of state.
:34:30. > :34:33.Whitehall, the heart of government.
:34:34. > :34:36.But do you think you could handle the police, the security services,
:34:37. > :34:38.counterterrorism and, once upon a time, prisons?
:34:39. > :34:44.Very little good news crosses the Home Secretary's
:34:45. > :34:49.Not many people come out of the Home Office with their
:34:50. > :34:54.It's extremely hard work, which isn't often
:34:55. > :35:01.You go to bed at night thinking everything is calm
:35:02. > :35:04.You're woken up at two in the morning and some
:35:05. > :35:13.It has nothing to do with you but in the
:35:14. > :35:16.morning, everyone is going to be out for your blood, saying
:35:17. > :35:20.Jill Rutter was a senior civil servant and is now at the Institute
:35:21. > :35:23.for Government, and of all Whitehall jobs she thinks this one's
:35:24. > :35:28.The Home Office used to be a real political graveyard.
:35:29. > :35:30.That was particularly when it had responsibility for prisons,
:35:31. > :35:32.which it's lost, but it's still in charge
:35:33. > :35:35.of things - counterterrorism, police, immigration -
:35:36. > :35:39.where the big question is, what will go wrong?
:35:40. > :35:42.So the Home Secretary knows that something will go wrong somewhere
:35:43. > :35:47.They don't know what and they don't know when.
:35:48. > :35:49.So one of the key attributes of being Home
:35:50. > :35:53.Secretary is to be able to manage those risks,
:35:54. > :35:56.react calmly and not be panicked by headlines into bad
:35:57. > :36:04.That level of responsibility can be daunting when offered the job.
:36:05. > :36:07.Even the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, when he asked me to do
:36:08. > :36:10.the job, started the conversation by saying, "Jacqui, I expect this
:36:11. > :36:17.And I managed to avoid the F word that Margaret Beckett
:36:18. > :36:20.used when asked to be Foreign Secretary but I think
:36:21. > :36:23.something unguarded came out of my mouth at that particular moment.
:36:24. > :36:29.I'd actually asked him, if at all possible,
:36:30. > :36:33.It's surprising that one of the things that makes the job
:36:34. > :36:35.a challenge is the department itself.
:36:36. > :36:40.Kenneth Baker, who was one of my predecessors and a friend,
:36:41. > :36:43.he said to me, shortly before the 1997
:36:44. > :36:45.election, "Listen, Jack,", he said, "Good luck as Home Secretary.
:36:46. > :36:51.One always felt as Home Secretary there was some
:36:52. > :36:54.person who worked under a discreet department,
:36:55. > :36:56.whose name you didn't know, whose responsibilities you had
:36:57. > :37:00.no idea of, and as you put your head on your pillow at night,
:37:01. > :37:09.And I think that's probably pretty accurate because in any big
:37:10. > :37:12.organisation, things go wrong and you don't necessarily know
:37:13. > :37:16.about them until they go wrong and then
:37:17. > :37:21.the buck stops with the Secretary of State.
:37:22. > :37:23.This personal responsibility combines with the seriousness
:37:24. > :37:25.of the issue into quite a bruising mix.
:37:26. > :37:35.If you're in another department, there's quite a reasonable chance
:37:36. > :37:38.that the mistake you make will be in some dark,
:37:39. > :37:41.hidden corner, where no-one's looking.
:37:42. > :37:47.There are no dark, hidden corners in the Home Office.
:37:48. > :37:52.When I was told that I had to release a prisoner
:37:53. > :37:56.because he was convicted of an offence which didn't exist,
:37:57. > :38:00.because I had failed to have that offence renewed in the Prevention
:38:01. > :38:03.of Terrorism Temporary Provisions Order, and what had happened
:38:04. > :38:06.was an official had left off a little D
:38:07. > :38:10.from the list, and so of course I go to the House of Commons and explain
:38:11. > :38:13.that Chummy, who is plainly guilty, is going to be
:38:14. > :38:17.It is complete incompetence by J Straw.
:38:18. > :38:20.You just have to accept these things.
:38:21. > :38:23.Managing the internal structure and culture of the Home Office
:38:24. > :38:32.There were obvious times when what I wanted to do was a shock
:38:33. > :38:35.to the system within the department, which
:38:36. > :38:38.was used to saying, "I don't think, Home Secretary, we really can do
:38:39. > :38:42.This is outside the purview or the scope of what is possible".
:38:43. > :38:47.And I never accepted that for a minute.
:38:48. > :38:51.There were occasions when press officers would phone...
:38:52. > :38:55.When journalists would phone the press office to ask
:38:56. > :39:00.what the Home Office line was on whatever
:39:01. > :39:03.it was and they would be told, "Well, the Home Office line is A,
:39:04. > :39:12.And on top of trying to push your own agenda,
:39:13. > :39:20.there is the constant intrusion of crises.
:39:21. > :39:22.The day I arrived, it was a beautiful, clear,
:39:23. > :39:24.sunlit day and the permanent secretary, Richard Wilson,
:39:25. > :39:27.said to me, "Jack, what can you see out in the sky?"
:39:28. > :39:35.At any moment an Exocet, which you can't see,
:39:36. > :39:38.will come through the sky and it will land right there and it
:39:39. > :39:42.will explode unless you're very careful".
:39:43. > :39:47.Jacqui Smith had to handle a terrorist attack on Glasgow
:39:48. > :39:51.Airport and be judged on how she coped.
:39:52. > :39:55.There was a certain element of that which was, "Good grief,
:39:56. > :39:57.she didn't come running screaming out of Downing Street -
:39:58. > :40:02.Well, I always knew I was going to hold it together
:40:03. > :40:04.because I was a well-briefed, confident,
:40:05. > :40:11.experienced politician at that point.
:40:12. > :40:13.But that probably did some good in overcoming people's
:40:14. > :40:16.apprehensions at whether I was going to be able to manage it.
:40:17. > :40:19.For me, I suppose the thing that came out of the blue
:40:20. > :40:21.was the advisory council on the misuse of drugs
:40:22. > :40:28.If anyone remembers anything about my time in office,
:40:29. > :40:31.they remember that, and I still get not exactly fan mail -
:40:32. > :40:33.the opposite of fan mail - about that.
:40:34. > :40:36.But that came out of a clear blue sky.
:40:37. > :40:38.But Charles Clarke didn't believe in the department
:40:39. > :40:48.I thought that just about all crises - perhaps not the intruder
:40:49. > :40:51.in the Queen's bedroom but just about every other crisis -
:40:52. > :40:52.is, broadly speaking, predictable in general,
:40:53. > :40:58.And so the job of the Home Office, I thought, was to be
:40:59. > :41:01.able to predict what might happen, to understand what the risks
:41:02. > :41:03.were and put preventative strategies in place,
:41:04. > :41:09.Trying to focus on your political agenda on the one hand and fend off
:41:10. > :41:15.If you were to describe it graphically,
:41:16. > :41:18.it's like being in a ship, knowing your destination and having
:41:19. > :41:23.it vaguely in sight but in the middle of
:41:24. > :41:25.a tempest, in a storm, and winds which are buffeting
:41:26. > :41:29.you one way and the other every day, and trying to deal with
:41:30. > :41:32.them while at the same time reaching your destination.
:41:33. > :41:35.The only caveat I would put on that is that the destination
:41:36. > :41:44.Being such an all-consuming job is perhaps
:41:45. > :41:52.why so few Home Secretaries go on to be Prime Minister.
:41:53. > :41:54.You ignore the skills and nuances you'd need
:41:55. > :41:56.You ignore the skills and nuances you'd need to move upwards.
:41:57. > :42:01.Probably obsessed is not far off the mark with changing things
:42:02. > :42:16.that I probably didn't devote enough time and energy to the presentation.
:42:17. > :42:21.It is often a frustration at Number Ten that they feel
:42:22. > :42:24.the people who are the departmental heads in their words "go native"
:42:25. > :42:27.and stop thinking about the broader politics and start
:42:28. > :42:30.thinking about the actual job itself.
:42:31. > :42:33.And I think that was probably a criticism that could be
:42:34. > :42:37.And certainly that aspect of what I had to do
:42:38. > :42:39.as Home Secretary was always with me.
:42:40. > :42:41.The politics of the moment not always and in some ways,
:42:42. > :42:46.Isn't it an irony of one of Whitehall's toughest jobs that
:42:47. > :42:49.for the sake of keeping us all safe, the Home Secretary is worst
:42:50. > :43:00.Giles Dilnot, with the first instalment of his new series,
:43:01. > :43:06.So You Want To Be A Secretary Of State.
:43:07. > :43:12.Rachel, when you listen to all these former Home Secretary 's talking
:43:13. > :43:17.about the difficulties of the dangers, you go to sleep at night,
:43:18. > :43:21.who knows what is going to happen when you wake up? Isn't it all the
:43:22. > :43:28.more remarkable, at least in terms of longevity, that Mrs May,
:43:29. > :43:32.appointed in 2010, is still Home Secretary in 2015? And still
:43:33. > :43:37.considered a potential leader of the Tory party. It hasn't destroyed her
:43:38. > :43:41.career. Absolutely. It is the Department for things that go wrong.
:43:42. > :43:48.Crime, Law and order, drugs. Things that matter directly to voters, too.
:43:49. > :43:51.And also safety and security. John Reid one said it is a bit like a
:43:52. > :43:54.five-year-old football match, everybody chasing after the ball and
:43:55. > :43:58.everybody forgets another disaster is unfolding on the other side of
:43:59. > :44:02.the pitch. Everything going wrong on all sides. It is extraordinary that
:44:03. > :44:07.she has not only survived but is still considered a potential future
:44:08. > :44:11.prime ministers. What the Home Office covers, it is less than it
:44:12. > :44:17.used to, it used to include justice as well, there is now a separate
:44:18. > :44:23.department. It has domestic security, police, security services,
:44:24. > :44:30.counterterrorism, prisons... I think they come under justice now. But is
:44:31. > :44:34.the Home Office right to have one department for all of this, do you
:44:35. > :44:38.think, Patrick, in this sophisticated age? Yes, why not? I
:44:39. > :44:46.thought they were all looking for a sympathy vote that wasn't quite as
:44:47. > :44:51.deserved as they imagine. And people do not blame people long term for
:44:52. > :44:55.any of these disasters, they know that whoever is Home Secretary is
:44:56. > :44:59.not responsible for them. At the time, yes, there is a great sort of
:45:00. > :45:04.media coverage, who is to blame and so on. But I don't think that lasts
:45:05. > :45:07.which is why so many of these people, they've might not become a
:45:08. > :45:13.Prime Minister, but then most people don't. But long-term there are not
:45:14. > :45:18.people that live in the imagination of British people as being demonic
:45:19. > :45:24.or appalling, because I think people are more sensible than that.
:45:25. > :45:30.What we have with the Home Office now, it is like a ministry of the
:45:31. > :45:37.interior on continental Europe now. It used to be overarching. Yes, and
:45:38. > :45:41.the more liberal aspects of law and order, whether it is prisons and
:45:42. > :45:44.rehabilitation or legal, have gone to the Ministry of Justice so it is
:45:45. > :45:59.a much more crime, Law and order apartment. Giles will be back with
:46:00. > :46:02.another report shortly. In five months, people in Scotland will vote
:46:03. > :46:06.in fresh elections to the Scottish Parliament. The SNP leader and First
:46:07. > :46:08.Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, has pledged she won't make
:46:09. > :46:13.the campaign all about independence for Scotland. The new party launched
:46:14. > :46:16.this week is determined to make the relationship between Scotland and
:46:17. > :46:20.the rest of the UK a central issue in this election. It is called A
:46:21. > :46:22.Better Britain Unionist Party and one of its founding members is
:46:23. > :46:26.Stephen Gordon, who joins us from Glasgow. There are already three
:46:27. > :46:33.Unionists parties in Scotland, the Labour party, the Liberal Democrats,
:46:34. > :46:40.among them, why do you need another one? I would consider there to be no
:46:41. > :46:46.particularly Unionist party in Scotland at the moment. We believe
:46:47. > :46:49.the other parties are nominally Unionist because they purport to
:46:50. > :46:56.support the union but what we have seen is a development of a range of
:46:57. > :47:00.policies through the Smith commission and in the latest interim
:47:01. > :47:04.report, which showed that a lot of concessions have been made in as
:47:05. > :47:08.much as what we are heading for is devolution max, for which there is
:47:09. > :47:13.no mandate from the people of Scotland to develop these policies
:47:14. > :47:18.and we believe that these policies ultimately lead to what has been
:47:19. > :47:22.called independence light and do not benefit Scotland or the United
:47:23. > :47:28.Kingdom and, indeed, are further danger to the UK. So none of these
:47:29. > :47:32.existing Unionist parties, we believe, actually do want to forward
:47:33. > :47:36.the union. They seem to be courting the SNP agenda. They are part of a
:47:37. > :47:39.5-part group that developed these policies and the reason we want to
:47:40. > :47:44.get into politics in Hollywood now is that we don't see anybody
:47:45. > :47:50.following web of filling that gap and providing a truly Unionist
:47:51. > :47:55.perspective. Am I right in thinking that you would like to see some
:47:56. > :47:59.powers that Edinburgh, Holyrood, currently has, returned to
:48:00. > :48:04.Westminster? No, that is not the case at all. When they had the
:48:05. > :48:09.initial vote on whether we should have a Scottish Parliament, whether
:48:10. > :48:12.it should have tax-raising powers, almost a third of the electorate in
:48:13. > :48:19.Scotland voted against those tax-raising powers. Almost a quarter
:48:20. > :48:22.voted not to have a Scottish Parliament at all. Since these
:48:23. > :48:26.things have come in, we've seen that the Scottish Parliament can do great
:48:27. > :48:31.things and introduce good policies that are good for the people of
:48:32. > :48:35.Scotland. We would like to see it using what is essentially a budget
:48:36. > :48:41.surplus to be able to introduce policies in Scotland that I believe
:48:42. > :48:46.could be leading to good practice across the UK. It could provide
:48:47. > :48:50.synergies for the UK and to date we have been able to do that. The
:48:51. > :48:57.problem is that what we have from the Smith commission, based on...
:48:58. > :49:00.Ultimately, to tell you how the party started, we were all working
:49:01. > :49:04.for the better together campaign and we could see that the way that the
:49:05. > :49:08.politicians were heading was actually to take us further down the
:49:09. > :49:13.road to independence without actually winning the vote and that
:49:14. > :49:16.is a thing that we had a particular concern about because we didn't
:49:17. > :49:20.believe that the existing so-called Unionist parties were promoting the
:49:21. > :49:26.policies that would help us be better together that were actually
:49:27. > :49:29.promoting policies which actually almost amounted to independence,
:49:30. > :49:34.which is something that the Scottish people... Can I just clarify,
:49:35. > :49:43.because I'm not exactly sure what it is you stand for. I know you stand
:49:44. > :49:46.for the union but I'm not sure... Is it your position that the status
:49:47. > :49:51.quo, the current division of power between Westminster and Holyrood,
:49:52. > :49:54.should remain? That, I believe, can deliver the kind of synergies, best
:49:55. > :49:59.practice and benefits for Scotland that we have currently seen. What we
:50:00. > :50:03.believe is that the further powers outlined in the Smith commission
:50:04. > :50:08.report, which is in development, will lead to something that is far
:50:09. > :50:11.greater than that and could lead to problems within the United Kingdom
:50:12. > :50:17.because of the lack of uniformity in the way of doing things. We have
:50:18. > :50:20.seen some powers, we believe, abused by the current Scottish Government
:50:21. > :50:25.in terms of setting things up like Police Scotland in a way that is
:50:26. > :50:28.different from the rest of the UK and using those powerless to do
:50:29. > :50:37.things that take us out of step with the UK in as much as it facilitates
:50:38. > :50:44.independence. How many seats are you going to win? We have been very
:50:45. > :50:48.realistic for stock we would be very happy with one list MSP. Ultimately
:50:49. > :50:53.that would be under the proportional representation system. One is
:50:54. > :51:02.modest. It is modest but then again... Yes. Thank you.
:51:03. > :51:04.We've had talk of cauliflowers in the corridors of power -
:51:05. > :51:06.and warnings of dangerous economic cocktails.
:51:07. > :51:08.Here's Ellie with the political week in just 60 seconds.
:51:09. > :51:11.The PM's new year's resolution got off to a flying start with trips
:51:12. > :51:14.He still wants to ban EU workers from
:51:15. > :51:17.claiming benefits for four years but says he is open to suggestions.
:51:18. > :51:19.He also gave his Euro-sceptic Cabinet
:51:20. > :51:23.They will be allowed to campaign to vote to leave.
:51:24. > :51:26.Jeremy Corbyn had a January detox with a reshuffle
:51:27. > :51:31.It took days but in the end he sacked two
:51:32. > :51:34.frontbenchers, prompting another three to walk out in protest.
:51:35. > :51:37.By Wednesday, he wanted to talk about
:51:38. > :51:39.something else, like flood defences, but at PMQs, David Cameron
:51:40. > :51:42.was determined to have his pound of flesh.
:51:43. > :51:45.It was a revenge reshuffle so it was going to be
:51:46. > :51:54.Speaking at PMQs, Jeremy Corbyn revealed why
:51:55. > :51:57.he's so good at that geography teacher side-eye thing.
:51:58. > :51:59.It's because he used to be a geography teacher.
:52:00. > :52:02.And finally, George Osborne warned the UK faces a cocktail of serious
:52:03. > :52:23.I think the Shadow Cabinet reshuffle is over. You can correct me if I'm
:52:24. > :52:28.wrong. Where do we go from here with Mr Corbyn and his team? I just
:52:29. > :52:34.thought watching that, each party has done its worst this week. The
:52:35. > :52:37.Tories' Europe divisions are up there in lights and Labour is back
:52:38. > :52:40.to questions on whether it can handle national security and be
:52:41. > :52:45.trusted to protect the nation, and most basic fundamental issue that
:52:46. > :52:49.voters care about. I thought the sacking of Pat McFadden was just an
:52:50. > :52:53.extraordinary way of demonstrating, by Jeremy Corbyn, that he's not
:52:54. > :53:01.going to win credibility on that. And we have Mr Livingstone on this
:53:02. > :53:04.programme, slaps down quite quickly by Labour headquarters, but raising
:53:05. > :53:08.the issue of whether we should remain members of native or stop in
:53:09. > :53:12.the last election Labour work not trusted on leadership and stop they
:53:13. > :53:18.have now added the economy and security into that mix. Where do you
:53:19. > :53:21.see Mr Corbyn? It seems to me that he has strengthened his position in
:53:22. > :53:27.the party. He sat some people. There were a lot of people I had never
:53:28. > :53:32.heard of being replaced by a lot of other people I had not heard of. But
:53:33. > :53:39.maybe that is my mistake. Maybe he has strengthened his position there.
:53:40. > :53:45.Clearly it is a mess but I thought that the coverage of it, of "This is
:53:46. > :53:51.a mess of messes", I don't think people really care how long it
:53:52. > :53:56.takes. Did he set out to fire Hilary Benn? I'm sure he did and he wasn't
:53:57. > :54:00.able to because he would have lost too many other members of the Shadow
:54:01. > :54:03.Cabinet and I think Patrick is absolutely right - he may have
:54:04. > :54:07.strengthened his position in his party, or asserted some kind of
:54:08. > :54:09.authority, but he has weakened his position with the electorate, which
:54:10. > :54:13.is, in the end, what matters with political parties and it was totemic
:54:14. > :54:18.of whether or not Labour is really there to win power or as a protest
:54:19. > :54:19.group and I think Jeremy Corbyn really is showing he's on the
:54:20. > :54:22.protest group side of really is showing he's on the
:54:23. > :54:29.rather than the potential government side. We shall take it from there.
:54:30. > :54:31.If there are any more Shadow ministers or government ministers
:54:32. > :54:34.who would like to resign, you know where we are.
:54:35. > :54:37.Now it's time to find out the answer to our quiz.
:54:38. > :54:39.The question was, which politician has decided to join the likes
:54:40. > :54:42.of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson and host their own radio phone-in?
:54:43. > :54:58.I think we can count at Donald Trump but who is it? It is Alex Salmond.
:54:59. > :55:02.Absolutely right. Yes, the former first minister
:55:03. > :55:04.of Scotland Alex Salmond is the latest politician
:55:05. > :55:06.to willingly put himself in front of the microphone and take
:55:07. > :55:11.on the callers at LBC. That is a London talk station but
:55:12. > :55:13.can be heard throughout the country via satellite.
:55:14. > :55:16.He says he's going to stop biting his tongue and start shooting
:55:17. > :55:20.from the hip, which is a surprise to those of us who've been listening
:55:21. > :55:24.Let's have a look at him promoting the new show, reading out some
:55:25. > :55:33.Mr Paul Robinson says, "Alex Salmond has Fuzzy Felt eyebrows".
:55:34. > :55:36."Wish I had a device that instantly zaps all
:55:37. > :55:38.sound from the radio whenever Alex Salmond's irritating
:55:39. > :55:48."If Alex Salmond was chocolate, it'd be dark and bitter".
:55:49. > :55:51.I actually like plain chocolate Bounty, myself.
:55:52. > :55:58.That was Alex Salmond promoting his new slot on LBC.
:55:59. > :56:00.It'll be taking place during Iain Dale's drivetime show,
:56:01. > :56:13.Do you have any idea what you have unleashed tear? I think we do,
:56:14. > :56:20.actually. He is loving the commercials. I think is going to be
:56:21. > :56:23.natural. He has done a lot of phone-ins. Boris Johnson and Nigel
:56:24. > :56:27.Farage are doing at the moment. Nick Clegg was the first but probably is
:56:28. > :56:31.the most famous. We are hoping to do for Alex Salmond what we did for
:56:32. > :56:39.Nick Clegg, reduce the party from 57 to eight seats. But he's a natural
:56:40. > :56:44.broadcaster. He is a natural broadcaster and he is going to have
:56:45. > :56:48.a view on anything. He shoots from the hip and I think he is going to
:56:49. > :56:52.be quite entertaining. He kind of gives the impression that he is now
:56:53. > :56:57.off the leash. He is free of the reins. But he is actually the
:56:58. > :57:03.party's foreign affairs spokesman in the House of Commons so he could
:57:04. > :57:06.have a view hostages to fortune. He is but he also asks more questions
:57:07. > :57:10.in the House of Commons than I think any other MP on a whole range of
:57:11. > :57:14.issues so he is going to have an opinion on any thing. He says he is
:57:15. > :57:19.going to take the caller Matt Busby is back to the House of Commons,
:57:20. > :57:33.rather like Jeremy Corbyn does,. -- the callers' views.
:57:34. > :57:36.Somebody said on Twitter the other day that LBC's Monica is leading
:57:37. > :57:40.Briton's conversation because we are a national station now, not just
:57:41. > :57:43.London. But I think we are going to change it for this half-hour and be
:57:44. > :57:48.caught leaving Briton's conversation. You might confuse
:57:49. > :57:54.people about the European Union. Are you going to tune in? Certainly. I
:57:55. > :57:57.think it will be great fun. It is a really interesting way for
:57:58. > :58:00.politicians to reach out to ordinary voters and somehow bypass all of us
:58:01. > :58:05.mainstream media, as Jeremy Corbyn likes to call us. But I think it can
:58:06. > :58:11.work quite well for them. I thought Nick Clegg and Boris Johnson had
:58:12. > :58:13.both benefited from doing it. In the end, the so-called gaffes don't
:58:14. > :58:18.matter if people look like human beings. We like to think we know
:58:19. > :58:20.what questions should be asked of politicians but the general public
:58:21. > :58:29.often have a much better view of what should be asked.
:58:30. > :58:32.You going to find a few minutes? There's a sort of menacing gravitas
:58:33. > :58:38.that he has. You always feel like he is about to lash out. When does it
:58:39. > :58:42.start? Wednesday at 4pm on LBC. We will look forward to it.
:58:43. > :58:45.Thanks to Rachel, Patrick and all my guests.
:58:46. > :58:49.I'll be back on BBC One at 11am on Sunday with the Sunday Politics,
:58:50. > :58:55.When I will be joined by the shadow education secretary, Lucy power.
:58:56. > :58:59.Jo will be here on BBC Two on Monday with more