:00:37. > :00:39.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:40. > :00:49.As International Trade Secretary Liam Fox sets out his vision
:00:50. > :00:51.for post-Brexit trade deals, we look at the challenges
:00:52. > :00:57.Is Theresa May about to give the green light
:00:58. > :01:01.With rumours of a possible Commons vote next month,
:01:02. > :01:05.we'll ask former Government bigwig, Oliver Letwin.
:01:06. > :01:08.After Labour announces it would implement a total ban
:01:09. > :01:11.on fracking for gas, does the controversial technique
:01:12. > :01:16.We'll hear from the energy boss who's just imported a tanker
:01:17. > :01:23.And does how a politician stands make a difference to how
:01:24. > :01:35.We'll discuss whether "power-posing" is all it's cracked up to be.
:01:36. > :01:38.All that in the next hour and with us for the whole
:01:39. > :01:41.of the programme today, a man who has spent the last six
:01:42. > :01:44.year at the heart of Government, serving throughout the coalition
:01:45. > :01:46.as minister for government policy and before that,
:01:47. > :01:48.many years at the centre of the Conservative
:01:49. > :01:56.Let's kick off with the reports this morning that Theresa May could be
:01:57. > :01:58.preparing to give the green light to Heathrow expansion-
:01:59. > :02:02.despite opposition from some Conservative MPs.
:02:03. > :02:05.The Financial Times reports on its front page today
:02:06. > :02:08.that the Conservative Party chairman, Patrick McLoughlin,
:02:09. > :02:12.has been crunching the numbers and that he believes the PM
:02:13. > :02:15.would win a vote in parliament on the controversial plans.
:02:16. > :02:19.Oliver Letwin, you were on the cabinet committee for airport
:02:20. > :02:21.expansion until you left Government this summer -
:02:22. > :02:27.do you think Theresa May is going to push ahead with this?
:02:28. > :02:36.I have no way of telling. As soon as you leave, you know nothing about
:02:37. > :02:41.what is going on. Did you get any impression before? Not really. But I
:02:42. > :02:45.think it is pretty certain that the government will have to decide in
:02:46. > :02:49.favour of one or the other. I don't believe we can do without some
:02:50. > :02:55.airport expansion in the London and south-east area, so the question is
:02:56. > :02:59.which and where. If we look at Heathrow, we know there is fierce
:03:00. > :03:02.opposition in the Cabinet, not least from Justine Greening and Boris
:03:03. > :03:08.Johnson. So do you think the Prime Minister has enough votes to drive
:03:09. > :03:11.through a policy of expansion to airports? That, I also don't know
:03:12. > :03:15.because I am not the Chief Whip and I have not done the analysis, but my
:03:16. > :03:19.guess is that probably, across Parliament as a whole, there would
:03:20. > :03:24.be a majority in favour. I would be surprised if there were not. I would
:03:25. > :03:29.vote for Heathrow expansion because I think it is a natural thing. It is
:03:30. > :03:34.a hard and it has advantages from that point of view. But what will
:03:35. > :03:39.she do with the members of her Cabinet who would vote against,
:03:40. > :03:44.Boris Johnson and Justine Greening? I don't know, but one way of dealing
:03:45. > :03:48.with it is to have a free vote. And she could then rely on enough Labour
:03:49. > :03:53.support as well as support from the Tory backbenches. The Liberal
:03:54. > :03:56.Democrats only have eight MPs more obviously. This has now got to a
:03:57. > :04:05.point where delay would be seen at by many as the worst option. Delay
:04:06. > :04:09.would be the worst option. My guess... But you have been at the
:04:10. > :04:14.heart of government for a long time and this issue has been discussed
:04:15. > :04:18.time and time again. But I am not informed about the SNP. My guess is
:04:19. > :04:21.that from a Scottish point of view, having Heathrow expand would be a
:04:22. > :04:29.good thing because there are a lot of flights to and from... I think
:04:30. > :04:33.they would vote in favour. But from what you know, do you think most of
:04:34. > :04:38.your colleagues have now been persuaded that expansion at Heathrow
:04:39. > :04:42.is a necessity from an economic point of view? I would guess that
:04:43. > :04:46.there is a substantial view across Tory MPs as a whole that we need
:04:47. > :04:53.expansion of one airport or the other. I doubt there are huge
:04:54. > :04:56.passions pro one or the other. My guess is that whichever the
:04:57. > :04:57.government goes forward probably get a majority.
:04:58. > :05:02.Our guest of the day, Oliver Letwin, was responsible for writing the 2010
:05:03. > :05:04.Conservative Manifesto, and so the question for today is -
:05:05. > :05:11.Was it Battersea Power Station in London, The Eden Project
:05:12. > :05:15.in Cornwall, The Lowry Arts Centre in Salford Quays a smoothie
:05:16. > :05:21.At the end of the show, Oliver will give us the correct answer.
:05:22. > :05:24.Liam Fox, Theresa May's international trade secretary,
:05:25. > :05:27.has been setting out his vision for post-Brexit trade
:05:28. > :05:32.Speaking in Manchester, Liam Fox said the UK has a golden
:05:33. > :05:42.opportunity to forge a new role for ourselves in the world.
:05:43. > :05:50.Where progress has stalled at the multilateral level, the UK must be
:05:51. > :05:52.ready to look at more bespoke Ilori lateral and bilateral arrangements
:05:53. > :05:59.to make sure the global marketplace remains fair and free. We cannot
:06:00. > :06:03.allow foot dragging by those unwilling to seize the benefits of
:06:04. > :06:10.free trade to hinder progress on important issues for the rest, such
:06:11. > :06:11.as eradicating nontariff barriers in services, digital or intellectual
:06:12. > :06:12.property. Much of the focus so far has been
:06:13. > :06:15.on what relationship Britain After all, the UK can't enter
:06:16. > :06:21.into formal negotiations with any other country while it's
:06:22. > :06:24.still a member of the EU - so that's two years
:06:25. > :06:27.after article 50 is triggered. Our Ellie has been talking to two
:06:28. > :06:29.former international trade negotiators to see what they think
:06:30. > :06:32.of the longer term job about the new trade
:06:33. > :06:39.agreement with Britain. To prosper in the future,
:06:40. > :06:48.it must be again, but getting other countries to queue up to sign
:06:49. > :06:52.on the dotted line will not be easy. How much Britain continues to look
:06:53. > :06:54.to Europe will affect relationships and deals
:06:55. > :06:59.for countries further afield. It would be difficult for us
:07:00. > :07:02.to have a free trade deal with the UK or for the UK
:07:03. > :07:06.to negotiate free-trade deals with countries outside the EU if it
:07:07. > :07:10.stays in the single market or if it opts for a customs
:07:11. > :07:12.union with the EU. Maybe some advantages for Britain
:07:13. > :07:15.in doing that, but it's hard to see how we would negotiate a free trade
:07:16. > :07:18.agreement with UK alone The EU and Canada are about to sign
:07:19. > :07:22.a comprehensive economic and trade agreement,
:07:23. > :07:25.or Ceta, which will eliminate nearly There is talk in Westminster that
:07:26. > :07:30.Britain should push So what does one of the negotiators
:07:31. > :07:35.who worked on that deal think For Canada, it would be working
:07:36. > :07:41.out its economic relationship with other partners in North America
:07:42. > :07:44.and then going on to the rest I assume the UK will pursue
:07:45. > :07:49.the same kind of analysis - "We have to sort things
:07:50. > :07:51.out with Europe first". From there, it needs
:07:52. > :07:54.to get its relationship The WTO is kind of the baseline
:07:55. > :08:02.from which it can build other free-trade agreements with either
:08:03. > :08:09.bilateral or multilateral partners. It's like having a floor in place
:08:10. > :08:13.so that you can build the stairs. Most of Britain's trade
:08:14. > :08:15.negotiations will be the new Department for
:08:16. > :08:18.International Trade. But as well as a new sign,
:08:19. > :08:22.the department will also need some We haven't needed them
:08:23. > :08:26.for more than 40 years, I have been told trade
:08:27. > :08:33.negotiators from Canada, New Zealand and Australia have
:08:34. > :08:46.already been in to gain real life -- to talk about their experiences
:08:47. > :08:51.of negotiation. Finally, a little birdie told me
:08:52. > :08:53.that former foreign trade negotiators have also been
:08:54. > :08:55.approached by the Government Then there are the rumours that
:08:56. > :09:03.Britain could just borrow some. We think the ideal would be for us
:09:04. > :09:13.to lend a few of our negotiators with Australia so that
:09:14. > :09:21.we can get an optimal outcome, but perhaps the British
:09:22. > :09:23.government would draw They run courses in negotiation
:09:24. > :09:27.at the London Business School. Crucially, the tutors insist
:09:28. > :09:29.that the skills are easily learned, Experts estimate that Britain
:09:30. > :09:33.could need up to 700 trade negotiators over several years
:09:34. > :09:35.to get the job done. We've been joined from Cardiff
:09:36. > :09:38.by the Ukip member of the welsh assembly, Mark Reckless,
:09:39. > :09:40.and from Brussels by the Liberal Democrat
:09:41. > :09:55.MEP Catherine Bearder. Oliver Letwin, you were involved in
:09:56. > :09:58.this before you lost your job. Do you favour the UK cutting loose in
:09:59. > :10:02.what they call a source of hard Brexit from the customs union, and
:10:03. > :10:07.then try to negotiate some sort of relationship with the EU? I don't
:10:08. > :10:14.think those decisions you can make unilaterally. The question is what
:10:15. > :10:19.is doable with our EU partners. And what is doable? I don't know yet.
:10:20. > :10:22.What I am clear as about what we need to get out of it. The first
:10:23. > :10:27.thing we need is clarity that we will be able to sell retail,
:10:28. > :10:32.financial and professional services into the European markets. That is
:10:33. > :10:38.crucial for the City of London. So access to the single market.
:10:39. > :10:42.Specifically for retail and financial services. Secondly, we
:10:43. > :10:47.need a continuation of the zero tariff regime we have on exports and
:10:48. > :10:51.imports of goods, which is relatively easy to achieve because
:10:52. > :10:54.it is in the mutual interest. Thirdly, this is what makes the
:10:55. > :10:58.first in particular are very difficult, we need to reassert what
:10:59. > :11:01.the British people have voted for, which is control over migration. The
:11:02. > :11:09.question is, how to put that package together. Some say you want to have
:11:10. > :11:14.your cake and eat it. Correct. But would you be prepared to take some
:11:15. > :11:20.element of freedom of movement in order to guarantee your first point,
:11:21. > :11:23.the retail services and financial services sector being preserved?
:11:24. > :11:28.Speaking for myself if I was a one man show and the only person in the
:11:29. > :11:33.UK, yes, I would. But the people of our country didn't vote for that.
:11:34. > :11:37.They voted for absolute control over migration. Mark Reckless, what trade
:11:38. > :11:41.agreement should we have now and how should we go about it? Well, we have
:11:42. > :11:46.trade arrangements now where we trade freely with the European
:11:47. > :11:52.Union, and I expect they will be maintained. They are the status quo.
:11:53. > :11:55.It may be described as a temporary arrangement, but the reality is that
:11:56. > :12:00.five people are employed in the EU exporting to the UK for every three
:12:01. > :12:05.who are employed in the UK exporting to the EU, so it is strongly in our
:12:06. > :12:09.mutual interest and I expect that will continue. There was an
:12:10. > :12:13.expectation that both you and Oliver Letwin hold onto, which is the idea
:12:14. > :12:16.that because of the arrangements in terms of exports, Germany will be
:12:17. > :12:19.keen to cut that sort of deal. But actually, the head of Germany's
:12:20. > :12:24.industrial federation has said there will be no access to the single
:12:25. > :12:25.market for the UK without freedom of movement. Then there would be
:12:26. > :12:45.significant tariffs on his members' goods being
:12:46. > :12:47.sold to the UK. He seems prepared to take that risk. I think that is
:12:48. > :12:50.unlikely and I wonder if you correctly understood what he said.
:12:51. > :12:52.They have put out statements before saying free trade must be maintained
:12:53. > :12:54.with the UK. So Catherine Bearder, it is bluff from the Germans and
:12:55. > :12:58.also from Matteo Renzi in Italy today to try and say that there will
:12:59. > :13:00.not be a favourable deal for the UK. In the end, practical matters will
:13:01. > :13:07.come to the fore, particularly when it comes to business. You have to
:13:08. > :13:13.get it right. We don't have access to the single market. We are a full
:13:14. > :13:19.member of the European Union. In the same way that Wales is a full member
:13:20. > :13:27.of the UK. So there are no restrictions on trade. If we are
:13:28. > :13:31.coming out, they will say that the rules are that you are a full member
:13:32. > :13:40.and you have to sign up to full movement. If you are outside that,
:13:41. > :13:45.the rules will be different. America trades with the European Union.
:13:46. > :13:50.There American banks working within the European Union. They have to
:13:51. > :14:00.abide by the rules. At the moment, as a member, we don't have all that
:14:01. > :14:12.rigmarole. The American banks will have regulatory equivalents of what
:14:13. > :14:19.happens in the EU, and that will allow all banks within the EU to be
:14:20. > :14:25.able to passport services into the EU. So I don't see that as a
:14:26. > :14:28.challenging area. What I do think we will be able to do is open up a
:14:29. > :14:34.third markets overseas, particularly to our tradable services which
:14:35. > :14:38.offers real opportunities to improve the prosperity of the United Kingdom
:14:39. > :14:44.in the future. Catherine Bearder, is that not possible? Well, why would
:14:45. > :14:50.the European Union give it to us? At the moment, we are a full member. We
:14:51. > :14:57.abide by the rules, and that is accepted. Why would they give us the
:14:58. > :15:02.same access when we are outside? Because that is what its own rules
:15:03. > :15:07.say. Oliver Letwin, you seem to be facing the prospect that you could
:15:08. > :15:11.not have both and that you would be prepared to give on freedom of
:15:12. > :15:14.movement, which Theresa May has indicated she feels Britain cannot
:15:15. > :15:19.do because of the result of the referendum. If that is the case,
:15:20. > :15:20.what would happen to things like passport in for financial services?
:15:21. > :15:36.How disastrous would it be? I think Mark is right that Miffid2
:15:37. > :15:42.allows countries to export the financial services without going
:15:43. > :15:48.through great great morals. The question is Binny to get some kind
:15:49. > :15:54.of guarantee we would continue to have that access but they're all
:15:55. > :15:58.sorts of things we have to trade in this very complicated situation.
:15:59. > :16:00.There are also lots of things we need to arrange. My experience of
:16:01. > :16:06.negotiating, which I have done quite a lot of over the last many years is
:16:07. > :16:09.if you reduce these things too stark simplicity is no way that goes down
:16:10. > :16:12.well on TV so to speak, it all goes wrong. But you have to do is very
:16:13. > :16:16.subtly unpick all of the many elements and work through them so
:16:17. > :16:21.you get a package. You should not think it on the EU and us. There are
:16:22. > :16:31.27 other member states. You have to knit this thing together. So it will
:16:32. > :16:36.become bigoted and take a long time. A new report says by cronies to
:16:37. > :16:42.spend ?500 million per year on new staff. Brother to get the EU out of
:16:43. > :16:45.unnecessary speculation, we will engage in more bureaucracy to try
:16:46. > :16:51.and unpick this very complicated process you have just outlined. You
:16:52. > :16:56.have to put this in some context, ?65 million a year compared to ?700
:16:57. > :17:02.billion a year. If you get the deal you want. That is 10,000 times as
:17:03. > :17:07.much. If you are going to get the deal you want and we don't know that
:17:08. > :17:10.at this particular stage. There are reports in the Financial Times that
:17:11. > :17:14.says there was a shortage of space, staff don't have anywhere to work in
:17:15. > :17:19.the Brexit department. Laptops are being shared. These are the kinds of
:17:20. > :17:25.problems you get over matters of weeks, of course it is makes good
:17:26. > :17:28.press but it is very dreary. There is a big game of multi dimensional
:17:29. > :17:32.chess that has to be played, and it is going to take a long time to get
:17:33. > :17:37.it right. I think Theresa is a very good long-distance persistent
:17:38. > :17:41.negotiator and I suspect at the end we will get our cake and be able to
:17:42. > :17:48.eat it. Catherine Debrunner did, though you go. It takes an awful
:17:49. > :17:51.long time, Whitehall has its own problems and it will gobble up a lot
:17:52. > :17:57.of that money promised to the NHS in the referendum. It will take years.
:17:58. > :18:03.The Canadian free trade agreement has taken years. And store has to be
:18:04. > :18:07.ratified. Yes, and they are now really concerned because if we are
:18:08. > :18:12.outside that a large part of the trade agreement was because the UK
:18:13. > :18:17.was involved. So it has to be done sector by sector, you are talking
:18:18. > :18:21.about toys, chemicals, drugs, agriculture and the chemicals you
:18:22. > :18:30.can use and the methods. It just takes forever to do a trade
:18:31. > :18:36.agreement. At the moment, our businesses have access, and we are
:18:37. > :18:40.making those rules. Outside it will take forever. Are you going to tell
:18:41. > :18:48.those businesses that they can just go and wait for five years while we
:18:49. > :18:52.are busy negotiating? What about the uncertainty question, Catherine
:18:53. > :18:56.Bearded, that is raised, because if the UK isn't definitely leaving the
:18:57. > :19:01.customs union, and I suppose we don't yet know, in a way what is
:19:02. > :19:07.Liam Fox going to do over the next few years as head of International
:19:08. > :19:09.trade? Because while we are still a member, we are forgiven from
:19:10. > :19:19.negotiating our own bilateral agreements with third parties. We
:19:20. > :19:23.are forbidden from agreeing them, we can discuss. I think it is quite
:19:24. > :19:26.clear we are going to leave the customs union. But there can be
:19:27. > :19:33.lengthy trade discussions but while they are going on, the status quo is
:19:34. > :19:39.that we have free trade and open access, so unless Catherine Bearder
:19:40. > :19:43.thinks that we will pay far more of that than we would then what will
:19:44. > :19:46.happen is there will be a transitional arrangement where we
:19:47. > :19:52.have the status quo, we transition to whatever these longer-term
:19:53. > :19:56.arrangements are back on the basis that we can negotiate with Canada,
:19:57. > :19:59.we can negotiate with the United States, and rather than having this
:20:00. > :20:05.very complex, restrictive and frankly protectionist negotiation
:20:06. > :20:09.that the EU can, we can open up my kids much more and go back to the
:20:10. > :20:14.principle of actually having mutual recognition of our regulation.
:20:15. > :20:17.Instead of agreeing a single set, everyone has to fly to trade,
:20:18. > :20:20.actually as long as you are compliant with one set of
:20:21. > :20:26.regulations, then your goods and hopefully many sector services are
:20:27. > :20:31.accepted as well. Mark Reckless, think you have lost your earpiece,
:20:32. > :20:37.over the net when, are you happy with the three Brexiteers? Yes, a
:20:38. > :20:40.very formidable team. Do you think they will get on? The media is
:20:41. > :20:43.reporting that is already some sort of discord between the three of them
:20:44. > :20:48.but is it an impossible task for them as a trio to come together and
:20:49. > :20:54.bring forward some sort of coherent plan when they are approaching it
:20:55. > :20:57.from such different angles? I was constantly told during the years of
:20:58. > :21:01.the coalition that it would fall apart. Politicians are grown-ups,
:21:02. > :21:06.they work these things out, of course it makes good press. We might
:21:07. > :21:11.put it back to you if it does. The critical point is that it is not in
:21:12. > :21:14.the end anyone else, my whole experience over the last few years
:21:15. > :21:18.is that when you are negotiating these kinds of things, in the end it
:21:19. > :21:22.is done head of government to head of government. This is Theresa may
:21:23. > :21:26.have will have to carry this. I have had many years of experience and I
:21:27. > :21:31.don't envy the people on the other side of that table, because she's
:21:32. > :21:37.very good at it. In the end it would be her that drives it, in the end it
:21:38. > :21:40.is down to Theresa. Catherine Bearder and Mark Reckless, thank you
:21:41. > :21:51.very much, we will be revisiting this.
:21:52. > :21:55.My guest of the day today - Oliver Letwin - has been at the top
:21:56. > :21:57.of the Conservative Party, and at the heart of Government,
:21:58. > :22:01.But for much of that time he's kept a very low profile, beavering away
:22:02. > :22:03.behind the scenes - ensuring the smooth running
:22:04. > :22:06.of the coalition government from 2010 to 2015, helping
:22:07. > :22:08.David Cameron to implement his 2015 manifesto, and finally -
:22:09. > :22:10.for just two weeks - leading the government's fledgling
:22:11. > :22:12.Brexit unit after the referendum in July.
:22:13. > :22:15.Mark Lobel has been checking out Mr Letwin's political journey.
:22:16. > :22:21.Advising Margaret Thatcher on education, Oliver Letwin
:22:22. > :22:23.was already a Number Ten insider in his 20s.
:22:24. > :22:25.When Mrs Thatcher left Downing Street, this Eton-educated
:22:26. > :22:27.son of academics sought to enter parliament himself, and spoke
:22:28. > :22:31.to the BBC about how to give state schools a better sense of identity.
:22:32. > :22:34.Simple things, like giving them school songs and school
:22:35. > :22:36.histories and other things, which are traditional
:22:37. > :22:40.After two failed bids to become an MP, Oliver Letwin's efforts
:22:41. > :22:45.blossomed in West Dorset, just as New Labour took over.
:22:46. > :22:48.He's caught the eye of Tory leaders ever since, first
:22:49. > :22:51.in William Hague's Treasury team, but things got wobbly as the 2001
:22:52. > :22:53.general election approached, when he briefed the FT that a Tory
:22:54. > :23:00.government would cut taxes by much more than first thought.
:23:01. > :23:09.Then Chancellor Gordon Brown held up a Wanted poster.
:23:10. > :23:11.Bloodhounds were employed to sniff him out.
:23:12. > :23:14.When he finally resurfaced to find the Tories still in opposition,
:23:15. > :23:19.new leader Iain Duncan Smith made him a Shadow Home Secretary.
:23:20. > :23:21.And the next new leader, Michael Howard, appointed him
:23:22. > :23:25.Shadow Chancellor as they fought the 2005 election together.
:23:26. > :23:29.Oliver is, as everybody knows, very clever.
:23:30. > :23:33.He's got a very inventive and fertile mind.
:23:34. > :23:37.So I didn't really think hard about appointing him
:23:38. > :23:43.He's quite transparent, and you don't have to worry,
:23:44. > :23:46.as you do sometimes with some people, over whether they're playing
:23:47. > :23:52.games or what lies behind whatever they're suggesting.
:23:53. > :23:58.With Oliver, what you see is what you get.
:23:59. > :24:00.Mr Letwin was also one of the earliest backers
:24:01. > :24:03.of the next Tory leader, David Cameron, and having
:24:04. > :24:05.made his own ideological journey more towards the centre,
:24:06. > :24:07.quickly became the future PM's policy chief as the 2010
:24:08. > :24:13.With a hung parliament, he became a chief negotiator
:24:14. > :24:17.during coalition talks with the Liberal Democrats.
:24:18. > :24:20.He's somebody that you get a strong impression is in it
:24:21. > :24:24.for the public interest and not for his personal interest.
:24:25. > :24:29.So he was a very easy, engaging characters to work with.
:24:30. > :24:31.And even on those occasions where he was having to champion
:24:32. > :24:34.things for his party that he didn't always believe in,
:24:35. > :24:37.he had the decency to look uncomfortable and embarrassed.
:24:38. > :24:39.During the coalition, the two men met to work
:24:40. > :24:41.through policy areas, from the Queen's Speech to regular
:24:42. > :24:51.I guess we had a form of cafeteria government,
:24:52. > :24:54.where Oliver and I met once a week, I think it was a Tuesday morning
:24:55. > :24:57.at 7.30 in the Downing Street cafeteria on the lowest
:24:58. > :25:01.And over a kipper or some porridge or something, we would
:25:02. > :25:03.have a list of five, six or seven difficult issues,
:25:04. > :25:06.and we would work through them and see if we could gain agreement
:25:07. > :25:12.so that as little as possible needed to go to Cameron and Nick Clegg.
:25:13. > :25:15.But the Cabinet Office minister's attempts to keep a low profile came
:25:16. > :25:17.unstuck when he was caught dumping Parliamentary papers
:25:18. > :25:21.and constituents' letters in a park bin.
:25:22. > :25:24.I have to apologise to constituents who wrote to me,
:25:25. > :25:26.because I think you're right, on reflection, that I shouldn't have
:25:27. > :25:33.David Cameron stuck by his man until his last political breath,
:25:34. > :25:39.appointing him to lead a Brexit unit last June.
:25:40. > :25:42.Perhaps Mr Letwin's desire not to climb the political ladder helped
:25:43. > :25:44.convince Tory leader after Tory leader to keep him
:25:45. > :25:54.But it was pulled from under his feet, with the rest
:25:55. > :26:02.of Cameron's old guard, by Theresa May.
:26:03. > :26:07.Well, Oliver Wright when, hope you enjoyed that trip down memory lane.
:26:08. > :26:11.Let's return to one of those intriguing moments, when you put
:26:12. > :26:16.confidential vapours into the bin at Saint James 's Park on five separate
:26:17. > :26:20.occasions, why? Just to correct you, they were not confidential papers,
:26:21. > :26:26.they were letters from constituents. They were not confidential papers,
:26:27. > :26:29.just to be clear. And I shouldn't have put them in the bin, no, I
:26:30. > :26:33.should have shredded them, which I have done since. Was just an
:26:34. > :26:37.absentmindedness, just one of those things? I really didn't think about
:26:38. > :26:42.it, and I should have thought about it. I was in the habit then as I am
:26:43. > :26:46.now of dictating my constituents correspondence early in the morning,
:26:47. > :26:49.and I was walking in the park are needed to get rid of them, and I
:26:50. > :26:53.should have put them in the shredder, which I have done since.
:26:54. > :26:59.In terms of the long span had been in power in one way or another, but
:27:00. > :27:06.the Jews the most sleep over? Oh, I'm not prone to losing sleep, but I
:27:07. > :27:11.buried a lot -- Watt what did you lose the most sleep over. I would
:27:12. > :27:14.turn on the radio or read my blackberry, which I have a summary
:27:15. > :27:17.of the overnight use and think I have to do something about that.
:27:18. > :27:21.Then I wouldn't rush into Downing Street and try to get the machine to
:27:22. > :27:24.do something about it. It was a constant business of trying to
:27:25. > :27:29.manage things that problems did not turn into crises. Which ones did?
:27:30. > :27:35.Brother occasions, policies, that ended up becoming crises? I think of
:27:36. > :27:40.the poll tax with the one of them. Were those when you said a mistake?
:27:41. > :27:46.That wasn't when I was in office, of course, I think the poll tax was a
:27:47. > :27:50.disaster. But you were an adviser. That was a very long, slow burn
:27:51. > :27:55.thing. I left halfway through the middle of that thing. So you didn't
:27:56. > :27:58.lose sleep? No, because I was not implement in the policy. I think in
:27:59. > :28:02.retrospect it was completely the wrong policy but that is a different
:28:03. > :28:06.matter. I am talking about a crisis or a problem in the things happening
:28:07. > :28:10.moment to moment. As an example, almost every winter we have problems
:28:11. > :28:15.with the flooding. The nation has problems with the flooding. And it
:28:16. > :28:20.continues. It does, but gradually I think we are getting it under some
:28:21. > :28:23.kind of control. I used to wake up worried endlessly, have we done
:28:24. > :28:27.enough, what can we do to respond to it, how can we deal with this
:28:28. > :28:34.particular incident? But then things will just blow up out of nowhere.
:28:35. > :28:36.Once we had a massive problem with backlog of passport agency
:28:37. > :28:41.applications and you have to do with that. What about the cutting taxes
:28:42. > :28:44.by 20 billion in 2001, when we couldn't find you? I was a
:28:45. > :28:49.correspondent at the time and we were looking for you. I was rushing
:28:50. > :28:53.around West Dorset making speeches, you could have family perfectly
:28:54. > :28:57.easily! First of the think it was very silly in retrospect to arrange
:28:58. > :29:00.for me to disappear. What should have happened as I should have been
:29:01. > :29:03.sent on a podium to expand exactly what I was saying, and I learn from
:29:04. > :29:08.that episode, that when things go wrong you are much better in front
:29:09. > :29:11.of cameras than out of you. . You think of the Andrew Lansley has an
:29:12. > :29:15.social care bill, you posted once you had been through it line by line
:29:16. > :29:19.but given how divisive it ended up, how much worse was that before it
:29:20. > :29:26.was published? I think the direction of that was right. But I think we
:29:27. > :29:32.made some errors, because I don't think we realised at the time just
:29:33. > :29:37.how difficult it is to knit together the various aspects of health and
:29:38. > :29:40.social care. And I think that we really have been learning over the
:29:41. > :29:44.past few years as a country is that in the end it is about the person,
:29:45. > :29:50.and they don't come in sort of strict bureaucratic pockets. This
:29:51. > :29:54.elderly and frail person is not a patient in the NHS, or an object of
:29:55. > :29:58.care by social care, it is one person and we need one integrated
:29:59. > :30:03.system to look after them. And gradually I think Jeremy Hunt is
:30:04. > :30:06.getting towards that. Do you wish you had killed that the dead? Think
:30:07. > :30:11.you would have been better to have attended at that time to the
:30:12. > :30:16.creation of the seven-day NHS as we can to do later, rather than getting
:30:17. > :30:19.distracted interchanges, which while I think you are perfectly sensible
:30:20. > :30:25.in principle, did not advance the really difficult agendas. You have
:30:26. > :30:27.been involved as we have now uncovered in people in similar
:30:28. > :30:30.different areas of government. Would you rather just have had your own
:30:31. > :30:36.department, you know, one of the big departments yourself to run? Oh no,
:30:37. > :30:39.not at all, partly because it is totally fascinating to be at the
:30:40. > :30:43.centre of government. You really feel you are making a difference Day
:30:44. > :30:46.by day. But partly also because it is a question of each person having
:30:47. > :30:49.their own strengths and weaknesses, and there were colleagues of mine
:30:50. > :30:54.vastly better at front line politics than I was ever going to be. But I
:30:55. > :30:58.think that I was able to do very often was to get to the bottom of
:30:59. > :31:01.what was really going on in the machine, and in the country, and
:31:02. > :31:08.then try to find some way of correcting what was happening.
:31:09. > :31:17.Not one department you would have fancied running? No, I was happy
:31:18. > :31:20.where I was. Greg Oliver's diaries say you were predicting that Michael
:31:21. > :31:25.Gove would win the Conservative leadership election. Which one?
:31:26. > :31:32.After the referendum. Telemachus sorry, I thought you were talking
:31:33. > :31:36.about 2010. Sorry, I am taking you backwards and forwards across the
:31:37. > :31:40.history of the Conservative Party. I thought it was more likely to be a
:31:41. > :31:45.Brexiteer than not. And I thought therefore that it would be Boris.
:31:46. > :31:48.Then it was clear that Boris was not going to win because he had stepped
:31:49. > :31:54.down, so the question was over Michael Gove or Andrea. As it turned
:31:55. > :31:58.out, it was Andrea. In the end, I think the Conservative Party made
:31:59. > :32:03.the right choice. Even though you thought it should have been a
:32:04. > :32:07.Brexiteer? No, I thought it would be. So you did not favour a
:32:08. > :32:14.Brexiteer like Michael Gove or Boris Johnson, you just presumed it would
:32:15. > :32:18.be? Correct. I can now say I own view. I swore a vow of silence at
:32:19. > :32:22.the time because I was preparing for whoever was going to be the next!.
:32:23. > :32:27.My view was that Theresa was the right candidate, and I still hold by
:32:28. > :32:35.that -- she was going to be the next Prime Minister. Ken Clarke has said
:32:36. > :32:38.David Cameron will be remembered as being the man who made the mistake
:32:39. > :32:42.of taking us out of the European Union. I think David Cameron will be
:32:43. > :32:46.remembered for lots of things, rescuing this country from the brink
:32:47. > :32:50.of bankruptcy and initiating public service reform. Of course, people
:32:51. > :32:53.will also remember the referendum. There will also remember other
:32:54. > :32:58.referendums which went the other way. Scotland was a great success.
:32:59. > :33:04.What is your assessment of the Remain campaign now, bearing in mind
:33:05. > :33:08.that it failed? We know it wasn't a successful campaign. I think it was
:33:09. > :33:15.probably wrongly targeted. In retrospect, it would have been
:33:16. > :33:23.better to make a less strident argument of a more detailed car. For
:33:24. > :33:27.me, as someone who had been a long term Eurosceptic but voted for
:33:28. > :33:30.Remain, the reason was not because I thought that disaster would strike
:33:31. > :33:34.one way or the other, but because I thought on the balance of risk,
:33:35. > :33:40.there was greater risk to leaving than remaining. So the punishment
:33:41. > :33:43.Budget was a mistake? I think altogether, the campaign was to be
:33:44. > :33:46.high-intensity and it would have been more persuasive to people in
:33:47. > :33:49.the middle ground who had not made up their minds if we had argued what
:33:50. > :33:53.was true, which was that it was a balance of risk and you were trying
:33:54. > :33:56.to choose the less risky course of action for this country and there
:33:57. > :34:01.were risks on either side. And I think that kind of tone, which was
:34:02. > :34:04.not the tone on either side, would have been more persuasive. Did you
:34:05. > :34:09.try and persuade David Cameron and George Osborne of that? No, because
:34:10. > :34:14.I see these things in retrospect and I believe them, but I am very
:34:15. > :34:19.conscious that I have been one of those people who is least adept at
:34:20. > :34:26.planning election campaigns. It is not my forte. What are you doing
:34:27. > :34:29.next? I have many plans. I am just in the middle of founding a red tape
:34:30. > :34:33.Institute, which is going to identify, on a cross-party basis,
:34:34. > :34:39.the areas of regulation that we will be able to get out from post-Brexit
:34:40. > :34:43.and do so quickly because of consensus across the parties. That
:34:44. > :34:48.could be a significant contribution. I am also writing various books. So
:34:49. > :34:54.you will be a sort of adviser to the post Brexit process. No, I have
:34:55. > :34:56.mercifully been spared being an adviser any further.
:34:57. > :34:59.When you see the union jack fluttering in the breeze,
:35:00. > :35:06.For thousands of years, flags have represented a people's
:35:07. > :35:08.hopes and dreams. We wave them.
:35:09. > :35:15.And still in the 21st century, die for them.
:35:16. > :35:18.Tim Marshall, former diplomatic editor at Sky,
:35:19. > :35:21.has a new book out "Worth Dying For: The Power and Politics of Flags" -
:35:22. > :35:58.Worth Dying For - The Power and Politics of Flags,
:35:59. > :36:09.Let's start with the Union Jack. We have a picture, in case anyone
:36:10. > :36:16.doesn't know what it looks like. What is the story behind it? It is
:36:17. > :36:25.the story of our union, the story of the legend of St George, the legend
:36:26. > :36:31.of St Andrew, King Angus in Scotland. Said Andrew looked up at
:36:32. > :36:35.the sky before going into battle and saw this great white Cross, hence
:36:36. > :36:40.the saltire. Then they added things on. Unfortunately, we did not put a
:36:41. > :36:46.dragon in, which is problematic with our flag. And then after 1707 and
:36:47. > :36:51.the act of union, here we are. But what you really see in it is down to
:36:52. > :36:56.you. It is in the eye of the beholder. I think it is quite a good
:36:57. > :37:00.flag. It is certainly one of the best-known in the world. It has
:37:01. > :37:06.endured. But there will be people who look at it, and there was a
:37:07. > :37:09.nickname in certain quarters, the butcher's apron, because if you are
:37:10. > :37:13.that particular beholder and you look at that flag, it means
:37:14. > :37:20.something very different. Let's talk about symbolism. Why are they so
:37:21. > :37:26.symbolic for many people, whether it is on porches in the states all
:37:27. > :37:31.waved at various events during the year to denote patriotism or burnt
:37:32. > :37:38.or whatever it is, they are very important. Because it is the
:37:39. > :37:46.embodiment of ideas. There are so many examples. The Ethiopian flag is
:37:47. > :37:50.a good example, red, gold and green. The only African country not to be
:37:51. > :37:52.fully colonised was such an inspiration to the rest of Africa
:37:53. > :37:57.that when the African countries began to become independent
:37:58. > :38:01.themselves many of them took inspiration from red, gold and
:38:02. > :38:05.green. These are just colours, but what they mean to people who look at
:38:06. > :38:11.in Africa is freedom, independence and standing up against the outside
:38:12. > :38:20.oppressor. How old or how recent our flags? You will get letters, several
:38:21. > :38:24.of them. I get them all the time! It depends on your definition of a
:38:25. > :38:28.flag. 20,000 years ago, I'm sure somebody stuck a skull on top of the
:38:29. > :38:32.post and carried it in front of them. Is that a flag? Maybe not.
:38:33. > :38:35.Fast forward, and you have got cloth, but if you put paint onto
:38:36. > :38:41.cloth, it is pretty heavy and then if it rains, you will fall backwards
:38:42. > :38:46.off your horse into battle. So silk - the Chinese invented Suk. About
:38:47. > :38:50.3000 years ago, you can start colouring silk and carrying it into
:38:51. > :38:54.battle. Take that along the silk road, and you meet the Arabs. The
:38:55. > :38:58.Arabs then start to have their own flags. In the Crusades, we have this
:38:59. > :39:03.unfortunate collision between the two, but a lot of Europeans thought,
:39:04. > :39:08.that is a good idea. From that comes the European flags. From there comes
:39:09. > :39:13.heraldry and out of heraldry comes the national flag we see today.
:39:14. > :39:17.Let's look at Chinese flags. What does that flag is a? It's says
:39:18. > :39:24.communism! With Chinese characteristics, which is capitalism
:39:25. > :39:31.now. The colour red says communism. The big star is the Communist party,
:39:32. > :39:36.and it dominates the flag. Behind it are the four categories of the
:39:37. > :39:41.Chinese. There are the presents, the proletariat. There are the
:39:42. > :39:45.bourgeoisie, and then very cunningly, there is the patriotic
:39:46. > :39:49.capitalists. That was very far-sighted of the Chinese in the
:39:50. > :39:55.1940s. Now the last one dominates the other three, but dominating them
:39:56. > :40:01.all is the party. Do you have a favourite flag? I think the Union
:40:02. > :40:07.Jack. Other than that. It something you interested in's it is something
:40:08. > :40:11.I am moved by, for the reasons Tim says. And I think it is above the
:40:12. > :40:17.fray. It is outside politics, like the Queen. It is something we can
:40:18. > :40:21.all unify around, rather than being divided. It is something we are
:40:22. > :40:34.supposed to unify around, but it can be divisive. Are you uniting around
:40:35. > :40:42.the EU flag? I meant the Union Jack. Almost all of us feel British. I
:40:43. > :40:45.accept that if you are in Scotland and use of Independence, you might
:40:46. > :40:49.pick a different view. But most of us who believe in the union believe
:40:50. > :40:53.in the flag because it is outside the disputes about everything else.
:40:54. > :40:58.What about the difference in style and imagery? You talked about
:40:59. > :41:01.Ethiopia. European style flags and flags from the Arab nations, is
:41:02. > :41:07.there a big difference in what they are trying to say? Yes. This is
:41:08. > :41:10.blindingly obvious, but worth pointing out. Obviously, the
:41:11. > :41:15.Christian symbolism fades. You have the Scandinavian cross in the north.
:41:16. > :41:18.The Portuguese flag has the five stigmata of Jesus on it, the Greek
:41:19. > :41:24.flag has the cross. That starts to fade as you head into the East. Two
:41:25. > :41:31.things happen then. One is that you have the Arab colours of revolt. The
:41:32. > :41:37.Saudi flag has the profession of faith on it. That is so obviously
:41:38. > :41:44.not European. The Arab flag is a revolt. There were three Islamic
:41:45. > :41:47.dynasty is. All three are represented on the Arab flag of
:41:48. > :41:51.revolt, the red, green and the red, green and black. That was to bring
:41:52. > :41:54.together the Shia and Sunni dynasty is to become pan Arabic. That is why
:41:55. > :41:57.so many of their flags are those colours. The Saudis decided that
:41:58. > :42:03.they were different and they were the true holders of the faith.
:42:04. > :42:09.Interestingly, along come Isis. They no longer have green, because that
:42:10. > :42:13.is associated sometimes with the Shia faith. If you look at the
:42:14. > :42:18.difference between the Saudi flag and its calligraphy and beautiful
:42:19. > :42:22.green, and the ragged, old-fashioned, brutal flag. Firstly,
:42:23. > :42:29.it is square, because Mohammed's flag was supposed to be square. And
:42:30. > :42:34.they want to go back to that. That is the point. The calligraphy says
:42:35. > :42:40.sixth century. We are the rough and ready, original Sunni Islam. And the
:42:41. > :42:47.white is the stamp of Muhammad. It is very similar to some of the
:42:48. > :42:51.letters in the museum in Istanbul. That whole flag screams, we are the
:42:52. > :42:57.authentic voice of Islam, in opposition to the others. That is
:42:58. > :43:00.the politics of flags. You are fascinated by this. It is a vehicle.
:43:01. > :43:02.I like talking about current affairs.
:43:03. > :43:05.Earlier this week, the first ever US shale gas to be imported to the UK
:43:06. > :43:08.The shale gas, extracted using the controversial fracking
:43:09. > :43:11.technique, was bought by Ineos, the oil refinery at Grangemouth,
:43:12. > :43:16.because they say it was cheaper to import than extracting gas
:43:17. > :43:20.Also this week, Labour's shadow energy secretary,
:43:21. > :43:22.Barry Gardiner, announced at the party conference
:43:23. > :43:25.that his party would ban fracking in the UK if they form
:43:26. > :43:32.and they give rise to real environmental dangers.
:43:33. > :43:39.But technical problems can be overcome.
:43:40. > :43:43.So on their own, they are not a good enough reason to ban fracking.
:43:44. > :43:47.is that it locks us into an energy infrastructure
:43:48. > :43:53.long after our country needs to have moved to clean energy.
:43:54. > :43:57.that a future Labour government will ban fracking.
:43:58. > :44:10.We've been joined by the director of Ineos, Tom Crotty.
:44:11. > :44:16.What is your reaction to what Barry Gardiner said, band fracking if
:44:17. > :44:19.Labour comes to government? I think it is misguided and misinformed and
:44:20. > :44:23.it misses the point, which is that there are so many jobs in this
:44:24. > :44:27.country dependent on supplies of gas. We hit our homes with gas.
:44:28. > :44:31.Industry uses gas. To assume that there was a bright new tomorrow and
:44:32. > :44:38.we flick a switch and that goes away is naive. But is he right to say
:44:39. > :44:43.that fracking locks us into fossil fuels? No. Gas is a required fuel.
:44:44. > :44:47.We need gas, even with renewables. When the sun as much and in the wind
:44:48. > :44:50.is not blowing, you have to keep the lights on and the best back-up
:44:51. > :44:56.system is gas. It is a low carbon alternative. Well, you disagree with
:44:57. > :44:59.what Barry Gardiner is saying, which is hardly surprising, but he is
:45:00. > :45:01.tapping into public sentiment on this, as is Labour, because only one
:45:02. > :45:11.in five people support fracking. There are so many polls on this
:45:12. > :45:17.unlike the opinion polls they are very varied. We get a completely
:45:18. > :45:23.different result. The government's energy tracking polling show that
:45:24. > :45:26.just 31% supported. We are going out into village halls and town halls in
:45:27. > :45:29.the areas we are likely to do this and saying these are the facts,
:45:30. > :45:33.because people have not been presented with facts. When they get
:45:34. > :45:38.the fact they are in the Nutley more supportive. You talk about jobs and
:45:39. > :45:41.you have invested an awful lot into fracking, but instead of bringing in
:45:42. > :45:49.gas from America, why not just invest in North Sea oil and gas? We
:45:50. > :45:55.are. Invest more. We have put a lot of North Sea oil gas rigs but there
:45:56. > :46:00.is insufficient gas. It will be 80% import it in five years' time. Not
:46:01. > :46:03.producing our own gas will do is replaced those imports, keep that
:46:04. > :46:06.income within the UK, not having it going to regimes across the world
:46:07. > :46:13.who potentially unstable and not reliable. So why should we not keep
:46:14. > :46:17.that money in the UK? What do you think of government policy so far
:46:18. > :46:20.towards fracking? It has been very positive, the government have been
:46:21. > :46:26.supportive. Except it is not happening. We have started seismic
:46:27. > :46:29.testing in the areas where we have licenses. Now we have got the
:46:30. > :46:35.licences we are starting to work. Do you think government should have
:46:36. > :46:44.gone further and faster with fracking? Note, I think it was quite
:46:45. > :46:47.right to be cautious. It is the kind of thing that will only build
:46:48. > :46:51.confidence gradually of the regulatory regime is really tight
:46:52. > :46:54.and the environmental regimes are properly addressed. I spent a lot of
:46:55. > :46:58.time with officials going through exactly what had been done, talking
:46:59. > :47:01.to members of the industry and the regulators and became convinced that
:47:02. > :47:09.we had got it straight, and I think that that's stage it was right to
:47:10. > :47:15.license. The truth is whatever Barry Gardner says or doesn't say today
:47:16. > :47:19.the truth is the UK will be using gas fields to come. I happen to
:47:20. > :47:26.believe a passionate believer in climate change but we are going to
:47:27. > :47:30.need gas. Is fracking solution? Somebody who think they have the
:47:31. > :47:33.solution in the energy sphere you should be very sceptical about, it
:47:34. > :47:35.is a big mix of things was that this is one of the things that reduces
:47:36. > :47:39.our dependence on Mark Webb, Russia and the Middle East. Can you think
:47:40. > :47:43.of three parts of the world you would least likely want to be
:47:44. > :47:47.dependent on? It is clearly worth trying to produce our own. You say
:47:48. > :47:51.people are not being presented with the facts, what are the facts? How
:47:52. > :47:57.do you know the technology is completely safe? There is no such
:47:58. > :48:02.thing as 100% safe, when you take your car to the petrol station,
:48:03. > :48:06.there is a risk. Nothing is perfect, North Sea oil and gas has issues, we
:48:07. > :48:09.all know that. We will make sure this is done as safely as humanly
:48:10. > :48:14.possible because we are taking 20 years of learning from the US.
:48:15. > :48:18.Another is right, in the early days some rogue things went on, which are
:48:19. > :48:23.now regulated and we would not be a able to do in the UK. Regulations
:48:24. > :48:27.are very tight. Even so, it is not happening at the moment. There are
:48:28. > :48:30.licenses that have been taken, and applications have been made, and
:48:31. > :48:35.they haven't gone ahead, partly because of local opposition. One
:48:36. > :48:39.could say that the government, newcomer had been deaf to the
:48:40. > :48:46.anti-fracking campaigners who just wanted. It is very slowly and
:48:47. > :48:49.gradually happening, partly because we have given local population is
:48:50. > :48:52.the right, which I think they should have, to decide whether they wanted
:48:53. > :48:56.them in their own place. I think the regulation will make sure it is
:48:57. > :48:59.ecologically safe and sound, but of course if you have a great big
:49:00. > :49:03.object right next to your house, I don't know where you live, but if I
:49:04. > :49:06.had one next to mine, I would have something to say about it, so it is
:49:07. > :49:09.right that locals can treat it as a normal planning application, which
:49:10. > :49:14.means it doesn't happen overnight but we should not be upset about
:49:15. > :49:18.that. Doing these things slowly and gradually gaining popular acceptance
:49:19. > :49:24.of the right way. Will that be quick enough here? Take us to three years
:49:25. > :49:27.just to do the science, we won't do anything until we know the content.
:49:28. > :49:34.We will do test drilling, which will take two or three years before we
:49:35. > :49:38.get to think about developing. There is another option, of course,
:49:39. > :49:44.nuclear power, and Theresa May has finally given the green light to
:49:45. > :49:48.Hinckley. Do you support that? We think it is a sensible technology to
:49:49. > :49:54.invest in. You are talking about electricity. 80% of this country's
:49:55. > :49:58.houses are heated by gas. But you are still in favour of her giving
:49:59. > :50:05.the go-ahead to Hinkley Point? We are extremely supportive of nuclear
:50:06. > :50:09.investment, I am not sure that Hinckley is the best investment, it
:50:10. > :50:13.is very expensive, but it is a start. When you look at things like
:50:14. > :50:16.the strike price, it seems to be much more expensive, and not value
:50:17. > :50:22.for money for the taxpayer. No, I don't actually think that. At ?90 a
:50:23. > :50:29.kilowatt hour, the product from Hinckley can compete with any
:50:30. > :50:32.totally non-carbon if as fuel. With gas, if you are going to equal that,
:50:33. > :50:36.you would have to do something like carbon capture storage and those at
:50:37. > :50:42.the moment are expensive technologies. So you need in the
:50:43. > :50:45.system what is called baseload, the kinds of plants that will produce
:50:46. > :50:48.electricity at all times of day and night and are available when the
:50:49. > :50:53.wind is too high or too low and the sun isn't shining and salon. You can
:50:54. > :50:56.get that from two sources, from gas and from nuclear. If we build
:50:57. > :51:01.nuclear stations we can get it without the carbon, which is a help
:51:02. > :51:04.towards the world's reduction of carbon, and it is more or less the
:51:05. > :51:08.cheapest way of doing that at the moment. I think we can do better and
:51:09. > :51:13.I think subsequent generations of nuclear, especially small modular
:51:14. > :51:17.nuclear reactors will be more Finance Bill and probably in the end
:51:18. > :51:22.cheaper. Do you think Theresa May did irreparable damage with China by
:51:23. > :51:27.putting temporary hold on giving the go-ahead to Chinese investment? No,
:51:28. > :51:35.my experience of investing -- negotiating with the Chinese... You
:51:36. > :51:39.have negotiated with everyone! These are very grown-up, very subtle, very
:51:40. > :51:43.intelligent. They are very sensitive. But they understand
:51:44. > :51:47.things from a very long perspective, and a fuel leaks for Theresa to make
:51:48. > :51:51.her mind about this, perfectly sensible for a new permanence to do,
:51:52. > :51:55.will not fracture the relationships. I think the golden era as it's
:51:56. > :51:58.called of UK- Chinese relationships is still going strong and it is
:51:59. > :52:01.important it will be, because Chinese and India will be the
:52:02. > :52:06.dominant features of the landscape of the board of the next 30 to 40
:52:07. > :52:12.years. Wendy thing you will start packing? Emotionally within the next
:52:13. > :52:20.five years. Tom Crotty, thank you for coming in. As we all know in
:52:21. > :52:21.politics, just as in other walks of life,
:52:22. > :52:23.certain things go in and out of fashion.
:52:24. > :52:26.Take, for example, the idea that politicians should make speeches
:52:27. > :52:28.without a jacket and tie, with their shirt-sleeves rolled up.
:52:29. > :52:31.Or talking about what they like to listen to on their ipod.
:52:32. > :52:33.But do you remember last autumn's political hot
:52:34. > :53:12.Well, it turns out that the power pose fad was all in vain.
:53:13. > :53:15.This week, one of the body language experts who popularised the idea
:53:16. > :53:17.announced she no longer believes that 'power pose' effects -
:53:18. > :53:21.such as increasing confidence and appearing powerful - are real.
:53:22. > :53:23.We've been joined by James Brooke, co-director of 'Threshold' -
:53:24. > :53:39.thank you. Are you disappointed she has rubbished the idea? It is all
:53:40. > :53:44.about confidence, and we know people strongly associate confidence with
:53:45. > :53:46.competence, that is the holy Grail, what business leaders and
:53:47. > :53:50.politicians are always trying to achieve. The reason they hooked into
:53:51. > :53:56.it was about five years ago, the study you are talking about seem to
:53:57. > :53:59.interject the science bit. What is the science? The science, in theory,
:54:00. > :54:04.and it is disputed, with good reason, I'll come onto that. We have
:54:05. > :54:08.known for quite a long time that if we stand and act in a confident way,
:54:09. > :54:14.levels of self-reported confidence increase. We feel more confident if
:54:15. > :54:22.you act more confident. You set up straighter than! Indeed, I did. The
:54:23. > :54:27.study out of Harvard suggested not only do we feel more confident, but
:54:28. > :54:31.it changes the neuro hormonal balance in our brain. You mean it
:54:32. > :54:36.gives off and orphans or something? It seems to inject a bit of
:54:37. > :54:38.neuroscience, and there is a fair bit of evidence that if you put the
:54:39. > :54:45.word neuroscience in something people more readily believe it is
:54:46. > :54:50.real. So it is a self-fulfilling prophecy then. Precisely. But if you
:54:51. > :54:53.stand more confident way, you feel more confident and you are more
:54:54. > :54:58.likely to project what in the jargon is composed micro-signals that
:54:59. > :55:03.suggest greater levels of confidence. We know that works. What
:55:04. > :55:07.is questionable is the science bit. Do you think it worked for these
:55:08. > :55:10.politicians? There is one of George Osborne standing with his legs
:55:11. > :55:17.apart, does he look more powerful and confident? The key thing is not
:55:18. > :55:23.get caught practising it, so people can see all the strings. My guess is
:55:24. > :55:28.that was taken almost in rehearsal. What he is probably trying to do is
:55:29. > :55:32.associate that space with a space where he feels powerful. I'm not
:55:33. > :55:37.sure it was in rehearsal, if it isn't rehearsal, how does he look? I
:55:38. > :55:41.think he is slightly showing the strings there. The science bit is
:55:42. > :55:46.disputed, and I think that is important to say. If we are talking
:55:47. > :55:51.about this stuff, I would say this is a hypothesis. There have been
:55:52. > :55:53.studies that suggest it has no effect on the neuro, more balanced
:55:54. > :55:57.that if it works for you, do it. Over there I think he has
:55:58. > :56:01.exaggerated a little too much. We had pictures of George Osborne,
:56:02. > :56:07.Theresa May, Michael Gove, did you get the memo? No. I suspect people
:56:08. > :56:11.knew that I didn't matter from that point of view. LAUGHTER
:56:12. > :56:16.I'm sure that's not the case! And secondly they may have remembered
:56:17. > :56:20.that for the ghastly period when I was Shadow Chancellor and sent off
:56:21. > :56:23.somebody to teach me to do these things, I turned into some of
:56:24. > :56:26.couldn't bear and I don't think anyone else could bear much, and I
:56:27. > :56:30.have never done it since and I don't believe in all this garbage. I think
:56:31. > :56:35.you should just be yourself, and that is the only thing you can do.
:56:36. > :56:40.Come on, James, show me the power pose. Not that I stand that often in
:56:41. > :56:45.the studio, but if I were. I am going to show you what I sense
:56:46. > :56:50.George Osborne was coached to do. The crucial thing is don't do it
:56:51. > :56:58.live, do it as preparation. You mean like I'm doing now? OK. The first
:56:59. > :57:02.thing is, he looks like he is expecting a 747 to fly through his
:57:03. > :57:09.legs. Not very elegant. So exaggerated. The idea is when we are
:57:10. > :57:13.at our most confident we take up the mess space, so that exaggerates it.
:57:14. > :57:19.So if you are just hands on the hips. It is a quite natural, isn't
:57:20. > :57:24.it? It is, you could call it the gunslinger pose, so it is a bit Gary
:57:25. > :57:29.glitter, or it could be wonder woman. Do you think I project
:57:30. > :57:36.confidence here? No, I think you look like somebody... LAUGHTER
:57:37. > :57:41.The hypothesis... We haven't got much time. Not only are you feeling
:57:42. > :57:46.more confident Chameera level of circulating testosterone has
:57:47. > :57:49.increased. Oh great! The key thing is a study has come out, about two
:57:50. > :57:53.years ago, that suggested it makes no difference to testosterone. The
:57:54. > :57:58.crucial thing is if it works for you, do it, take the science bit
:57:59. > :58:03.with a big pinch of salt. I'm not convinced, but one last pose. James,
:58:04. > :58:07.thank you very much. I think we have just got time before we go to find
:58:08. > :58:08.out the answer to our quiz, Oliver let them.
:58:09. > :58:11.The question was where was the 2010 Conservative Manifesto -
:58:12. > :58:14.written by our guest Oliver Letwin - launched?
:58:15. > :58:15.Was it a) Battersea Power Station in London?
:58:16. > :58:19.C) The Lowry Arts Centre in Salford Quays?
:58:20. > :58:21.Or d) A smoothie bar in Notting Hill?
:58:22. > :58:26.So, Oliver, what's the correct answer?
:58:27. > :58:35.Ever since you posted this, I have been desperately searching my
:58:36. > :58:38.memory. How can you not remember? I remember quite a lot about that was
:58:39. > :58:43.in the manifesto and I can even remember sitting at a bench while
:58:44. > :58:45.David was... You didn't put it in a bit nearby? I haven't got the
:58:46. > :58:47.slightest idea. Extraordinary scenes, here.
:58:48. > :59:13.The atmosphere, absolutely electric.