:00:09. > :00:12.Forget the pumps, worry about the reactors. Is the real crisis that
:00:12. > :00:16.the lights are in danger of going out?
:00:16. > :00:21.Has Britain got an energy strategy, as the nuclear option unwinds, is
:00:22. > :00:24.time running out. It is disappointing, I won't
:00:24. > :00:27.pretend otherwise, there is momentum behind nuclear new build
:00:27. > :00:30.in the UK. Will it be the Government, consumer or environment
:00:30. > :00:36.that ends up paying, we ask the experts.
:00:36. > :00:42.We are already back in recession, says the OECD, should the
:00:42. > :00:47.Government be more worried about that than petrol cans and pasties.
:00:47. > :00:51.The three Musketeers were on the train to ask if an elected mayor
:00:51. > :00:55.would make a difference. Of all the cities Birmingham looks most likely
:00:55. > :00:59.to vote to get a mayor, they will get more powers if they do so,
:00:59. > :01:03.which powers. Should the UK add plea bargains to their armoury in
:01:04. > :01:08.the fight against terrorism. We have been speaking to the head of
:01:08. > :01:18.the FBI. The more I'm in the business I believe that sources and
:01:18. > :01:21.wires are essential to address terrorism.
:01:21. > :01:26.Good evening, at the petrol pump there is panic, at home higher
:01:26. > :01:30.bills. In the North Sea a leaking gas rig, and now plans for a they
:01:30. > :01:36.generation of nuclear power station lie in tatters, two companies have
:01:36. > :01:40.pulled out. The Government as attempts to reduce carbon emissions,
:01:40. > :01:43.while restructuring or energy consumption are looking for
:01:43. > :01:49.strained and contradictory already. Can you keep everyone happy and
:01:49. > :01:55.keep the lights on, or will someone pay a heavy price.
:01:55. > :01:58.In energy economics it is known as the trilemma, it is one of the
:01:58. > :02:03.thorniest issues facing the Government, how to secure security
:02:03. > :02:07.of our energy supply, at a price that supports the economy, without
:02:07. > :02:12.damaging our global environment. The elusive solution that provides
:02:12. > :02:15.a mixed energy supply, and reduced demand, that will keep Britannia
:02:15. > :02:22.afloat, without alienating the consumers, who have to pay for it
:02:22. > :02:29.all, through their bills. Hopes of a stable energy policy
:02:29. > :02:32.took a hit today, as two of the big six energy giants, pulled out of a
:02:32. > :02:35.joint venture to build new nuclear reactors in the UK, here in North
:02:35. > :02:39.Wales and Gloucestershire. The man who was Business Secretary under
:02:39. > :02:43.Gordon Brown, and who now works as a spokesman for the nuclear energy
:02:43. > :02:46.industry, conceded it wasn't a good day for nuclear power. It is
:02:46. > :02:50.obviously disappointing news, that both these companies have made the
:02:50. > :02:56.decision, on purely commercial grounds, and I understand and
:02:56. > :02:59.respect that, we do have two consortia still actively pursuing
:03:00. > :03:04.nuclear new build plans in the UK. That is tremenduously important and
:03:04. > :03:08.will be important for the UK going forward. Now we have to find,
:03:08. > :03:12.hopefully, a buyer for this particular consortia, the Horizon
:03:12. > :03:15.Project, so the plans in North Wales go ahead. It is disappointing,
:03:15. > :03:19.I will clearly not pretend otherwise. There is momentum behind
:03:19. > :03:28.nuclear new build in the UK. The Government is committed to ensuring
:03:28. > :03:33.that is maintained. So are we. For sale, then, the chance to build
:03:33. > :03:37.two nuclear tour plants. Any takers?
:03:37. > :03:43.Or is gas the answer? In his budget last week, George Osborne delighted
:03:43. > :03:49.the industry with incentives that might mean a new dash for gas.
:03:49. > :03:52.Gas is cheap, and has much less carbon than coal, and will be the
:03:52. > :03:56.largest single source of electricity in the coming years. My
:03:56. > :04:01.right honourable friend, the Energy Secretary, will set out our new gas
:04:01. > :04:05.generation strategy in the autumn. This week's gas leak on the he will
:04:05. > :04:09.began platform in the North Sea, is a stark reminer, as Britain taps
:04:09. > :04:12.ever more marginal energy reserves it gets harder and riskier,
:04:12. > :04:15.firefighting ships were on the scene today amid fears of an
:04:15. > :04:18.explosion. On shore, there is much excitement
:04:18. > :04:23.about shale gas, but they are still waiting for the decision from
:04:23. > :04:27.Government on whether extraction, by hydraulic fracturing, or
:04:27. > :04:30.fracking, can restart, after it caused two earthquakes near
:04:30. > :04:35.Blackpool. Here in a London hotel today, more evidence of the
:04:35. > :04:38.environmental part of that trilemma. Just this week the Government
:04:38. > :04:43.delayed a decision, that has already taken four years to debate,
:04:43. > :04:48.mandatory reporting, by business, of carbon emissions. Sustainability
:04:48. > :04:53.analysts, who have rated the carbon foo footprint of scores of FTSE 250
:04:53. > :04:55.companies, say that delay is already damaging Britain's
:04:55. > :05:01.competitiveness. Businesses will be reluctant to invest for the future,
:05:01. > :05:05.to invest in new technology, to invest in sort of operational
:05:05. > :05:07.efficiencies that are required, to see how they might transition to
:05:08. > :05:10.the low-carbon economy. They will be less likely to invest in
:05:10. > :05:15.research and development, and develop any products and services
:05:15. > :05:20.for the future. And therefore, potentially, not be as competitive
:05:20. > :05:25.as some of our other countries could be in this particular space.
:05:25. > :05:30.With a new question mark over any nuclear Rennaissance in the UK, and
:05:30. > :05:33.safety and environmental risks linked with any renewed dash for
:05:33. > :05:38.gas, Britain's cleaner energy companies reckon they have spotted
:05:38. > :05:42.a chance. Six of Britain's leading wind energy providers are launching
:05:42. > :05:48.a fightback, an ad campaign that argues wind power should play a
:05:48. > :05:53.larger part in Britain's future energy supply. They say that unless
:05:53. > :05:58.renewables play a bigger role, then the rush we are seeing for this
:05:58. > :06:02.kind of energy, petrol at the pump, will be echoed elsewhere in the
:06:02. > :06:09.system. With growing numbers of consumers desperate to get hold of
:06:09. > :06:13.gas and electricity that simply isn't on-line when they want it.
:06:13. > :06:19.Renewables are important, for our diverse tee, and for providing jobs
:06:19. > :06:24.for the next ten years. Renewables will lead to lower cost of energy
:06:24. > :06:29.for the UK consumer, because gas price also carry on increasing.
:06:29. > :06:32.rests on the shoulders of this generation to find a way through
:06:32. > :06:37.the energy trilemma, successfully juggling the economy, energy
:06:37. > :06:47.security, and the environment. Or risk handing the next generation an
:06:47. > :06:48.
:06:48. > :06:55.energy system that doesn't deliver. We have Peter Lilley, the co-
:06:55. > :06:57.founder of the campaign Plain Stupid, and Tom Burke, who has
:06:57. > :07:02.advised three environment secretaries. Thank you for coming
:07:02. > :07:06.If we look, first of all, at the nuclear pull-out, does it leave
:07:06. > :07:09.Britain's energy strategy in crisis? It leaves the policy in
:07:09. > :07:12.crisis but doesn't leave Britain in crisis, because the policy, to a
:07:12. > :07:16.large extent, was based on a complete mistake, that we were
:07:16. > :07:20.running out of generational capacity, and we needed nuclear to
:07:20. > :07:23.fill that gap. Reality is we are closing down gas-fired power
:07:23. > :07:27.stations at the moment because there is not enough demand for them.
:07:27. > :07:32.So Britain is not in bad position, but the policy is in a complete
:07:32. > :07:36.mess. You mean we are fine without the nuclear power stations?
:07:36. > :07:39.don't need nuclear power station, even if you were very optimistic
:07:39. > :07:44.and started building a new nuclear power station some time next year,
:07:44. > :07:48.you would be in the middle of the next decade before generating any
:07:48. > :07:52.electricity from it. It was always a mistaken policy.
:07:52. > :07:58.Do you think that's right? Do you think the whole idea that we put
:07:58. > :08:00.all our energise into the new nuclear and that was a complete
:08:01. > :08:05.mistake? Theoretically the new existing nuclear power stations
:08:05. > :08:09.will be decommissioned, they may be extend, but they have decommission
:08:09. > :08:14.dates. Quite a lot of coal-fired stations will be illegal under
:08:14. > :08:18.European Union rules. Unless we will use less electricity we will
:08:18. > :08:22.need more xasty. The cheapest way is more gas, which produces half as
:08:22. > :08:27.much carbon as coal and oil. The only way you can meet carbon
:08:27. > :08:31.commitments, if you think it is important to reduce or eliminate
:08:31. > :08:38.carbon emissions and producing electricity that is nuclear, is the
:08:38. > :08:40.way to go. You say "if" we think it is important? You don't? I don't
:08:40. > :08:46.think it is nearly as important people do, I don't know the science,
:08:46. > :08:50.but I trained in physics, but the economics built up on the back of
:08:50. > :08:55.the carbon fears I don't go along with. We are back to fossil fuels?
:08:55. > :08:58.The fear is we are rushing towards a very gas-dependant future. We
:08:58. > :09:04.will end up with a huge amount of our electricity and heating coming
:09:04. > :09:08.from gas. Gas is hugely expensive, household energy bills went up by
:09:08. > :09:11.�175 on average last year. Almost all of that driven by gas. It is
:09:11. > :09:15.highly polluting, and most imported. It seems madness we would go down
:09:15. > :09:19.that route when we could make renewable energy the cornerstone of
:09:20. > :09:24.our energy strategy like Germany has. Renewables are way more
:09:24. > :09:30.expensive than gas? Not true. this country at this stage? Gas is
:09:30. > :09:34.the main reason why bills have gone up. And gas is hugely. That is a
:09:34. > :09:37.different point. Gas and fossil fuels have gone up a lot, that is
:09:37. > :09:42.the main reason bills have gone up. But if we were to switch to wind
:09:42. > :09:46.and sol la, then our bills would be much, much -- solar, then our bills
:09:46. > :09:50.would be much, much higher. That is not true. Why the need to subsidise
:09:50. > :09:54.them? Let's be clear of nuclear subsidies. You have to remember how
:09:54. > :10:01.bad this decision is for the Fukushima clear industry. What has
:10:01. > :10:05.been said, is even -- the nuclear industry is. It was said even with
:10:05. > :10:09.the subsidies it wasn't going to be economically viable. Let's clear up
:10:09. > :10:13.the fossil fuels versus renewables, this is key. Where would consumers
:10:13. > :10:17.get a cheaper deal going forward? Exactly, that is why Peter is wrong
:10:17. > :10:22.to say it is the only option. The key thing for consumers is to
:10:22. > :10:26.separate global energy prices and bills. The way to do that driving
:10:26. > :10:29.energy efficiency forward by demand reduction and running the energy
:10:29. > :10:34.system more efficiently, focusing on driving bills down. We have
:10:34. > :10:38.exactly the wrong priority in the current proposed reform of
:10:38. > :10:44.electricity markets, which will try to increase supply expensively,
:10:44. > :10:48.however you do it, instead of thinking how you do it. The fact
:10:48. > :10:51.Tom avoided answering the question gives the game away, renewables are
:10:51. > :10:56.far more expensive than fossil fuels. Do you think people will
:10:56. > :10:59.have to change the way they live? doubt very much, I think we are
:10:59. > :11:03.moving towards a situation where the price of gas may come down, we
:11:03. > :11:08.will switch to more gas production, that will happen to reduce the
:11:08. > :11:12.level of carbon emissions, it will reduce the costs. If we find we
:11:12. > :11:15.have large reserves of shale gas, as they have in the states.
:11:15. > :11:20.have conceded the main reason why bills have gone up is the price of
:11:20. > :11:24.gas. Why would you want to become more dependant on expensive,
:11:24. > :11:27.imported gas. It is less expensive than renewables, and there is a
:11:27. > :11:33.prospect, that we have large reserves of shale gas, which in the
:11:33. > :11:37.states is halving the price of gas. Exxon disagree, British Gas
:11:37. > :11:42.disagree, Deutsche Bank disagree, they all say shale gas is unlikely
:11:42. > :11:46.to bring down costs for consumers. We have seen it bring down costs.
:11:46. > :11:52.Your analysis depended on what you call more efficiencies, which,
:11:52. > :12:00.reading between the lines, means people using less energy, or
:12:00. > :12:03.insulating the loft? Do more energy efficiency and make better use of
:12:03. > :12:09.your generating capacity. households or a country? As a
:12:09. > :12:12.country. Not just as households, but businesses as well. We will use
:12:12. > :12:16.renewables, we are legally committed to generating 35% of our
:12:16. > :12:22.electricity from renewables. We are going to use gas, I have no problem
:12:22. > :12:27.with us using gas. Frankly, the Chancellor disagrees with both
:12:27. > :12:31.these guys, we saw it in the package, that gas is cheap. I don't
:12:31. > :12:35.know quite where they think it is such an expensive option. What is
:12:35. > :12:39.so frustrating s the Government have been bending over backwards to
:12:39. > :12:45.try to make nuclear work, offering all sorts of hidden supsidies, now
:12:45. > :12:48.the nuclear dream is falling apart, and all the time they could have
:12:48. > :12:52.been investing in renewable energy like other countries, this is a
:12:52. > :12:54.blooming global he industry, we are falling behind and not xoting with
:12:54. > :12:59.these countries, because the Government -- competing with these
:12:59. > :13:04.countries because the Government has put all their eggs in nuclear
:13:04. > :13:10.or gas. We have gone for two of the worst options as opposed to the
:13:10. > :13:15.obvious middle one? The idea you can run a modern economy on wind
:13:15. > :13:21.that blows sometimes and then not, and sun that goes in at night.
:13:21. > :13:24.Germany does it? It is reining back on its subsidies and it is only a
:13:24. > :13:30.small share. This summer the German Government is expecting to get 40%
:13:30. > :13:40.on some days of its total. On some days, what about the others. Let me
:13:40. > :13:46.finish. Sorry. 40% of its electricity some days from PVC
:13:46. > :13:51.polar alone. In nuclear capacity we lose 24% of it to unplanned outages,
:13:51. > :13:57.it is just as intermittant as solar. Even in Germany the sun doesn't
:13:57. > :14:02.shine at night. It is very important. I'm saying that is
:14:02. > :14:08.proving a point, which is you can't rely on it? He's not proving a
:14:08. > :14:13.point. The point is we have a grid that can manage losing 24% of its
:14:13. > :14:19.electricity, nuclear, without any problems, because you manage all
:14:19. > :14:22.the sources of energy on a grid are intermittant. I don't think any of
:14:22. > :14:27.us realise how steeply household bills will rise with gas. The
:14:27. > :14:30.Government stuck out a press release on Saturday before the
:14:31. > :14:35.budget, saying gas power plants could say at the current carbon
:14:35. > :14:39.levels to 2045, that is under the radar, that will be a huge cost.
:14:39. > :14:44.don't get the cost you are making. Why should gas be a huge cost?
:14:45. > :14:49.Because gas bills are going up, all the bills are going up? If you
:14:49. > :14:54.replace an expensive fuel by a more expensive fuel, they go up more.
:14:54. > :14:59.You can't pretend that these other sources of electricity, are less
:14:59. > :15:02.expensive, and still demand supsidies for them. By any
:15:02. > :15:09.calculation you have to have supsidies for wind, you need twice
:15:09. > :15:13.the subsidy of offshore wind. You even need subsidy for nuclear.
:15:13. > :15:15.Government has lost its appetite for renewables? The Chancellor
:15:15. > :15:19.doesn't seem to be very enthusiastic about renewables, the
:15:19. > :15:23.point is, he's putting his eggs into the gas basket, but his own
:15:23. > :15:26.independent advisers on climate change, say that for the UK to stay
:15:26. > :15:31.within our carbon budgets, that all three political parties say they
:15:31. > :15:37.support, then we have to have the power sector decarbonised by 2030,
:15:37. > :15:41.he wants gas plants operating with high emissions until 2045.
:15:41. > :15:46.The Press Pack was in full cry today, sniffing out which cabinet
:15:46. > :15:50.minister has or hasn't chowed down on a pasty, and which has or hasn't
:15:50. > :15:55.filled a Gerry can full of petrol. But humming in the background is
:15:55. > :15:57.the big story. This country's slow economic recovery. Today the
:15:57. > :16:01.Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development, the EOCD,
:16:01. > :16:11.predicted we are in a double-dip recession, given their record of
:16:11. > :16:13.
:16:13. > :16:18.predictions, perhaps that was good news for George Osborne. Do you buy
:16:18. > :16:22.this? It is a dizzying array of predictions. What is puzzling some
:16:22. > :16:26.people in Government, they do take it seriously, but they are also
:16:26. > :16:31.looking at other indicators published after the OECD put their
:16:31. > :16:35.note out, which shows things are tipping up. The PMI is ticking up,
:16:35. > :16:38.and this service sector is going up. Very technical, but lots of people
:16:38. > :16:42.have been watching since January, that some of these figures going up
:16:42. > :16:47.north rather than south. The chatter, we even did on this
:16:47. > :16:51.programme, a film about "oh my gosh we have found some growth". There
:16:51. > :16:54.is beginning to be chatter more upbeat against the general
:16:54. > :16:58.background of gloom. More upbeat than before. Last September there
:16:58. > :17:04.were people in the cabinet who were saying these indicators are so bad
:17:04. > :17:10.we do need to look at Plan A minus. That is not true moment. If we were
:17:10. > :17:14.to get, in three weeks when the real figures come out, that real
:17:14. > :17:18."R" recession, that won a massive boom for the op session, at a time
:17:18. > :17:23.when this Government -- opposition, at that time when the Government is
:17:23. > :17:29.not having a great time. This graph gives us a longer view of the
:17:29. > :17:30.history of how quickly we have out of recessions, or economic gloom in
:17:30. > :17:35.of recessions, or economic gloom in the past. We are the lower blue
:17:35. > :17:40.line, I can't really make it out, maybe the viewers can a bit better,
:17:40. > :17:45.this is because of the pace Which? We are deleveraging at the moment.
:17:45. > :17:48.This is the particular -- with which we are deleveraging moment.
:17:48. > :17:53.This is the particular debt we had going on, and undoing that debt
:17:53. > :17:57.will take a long time. The economists we will set on to that
:17:57. > :18:02.in a moment. Bringing you back to the political point, it would be a
:18:02. > :18:08.blow to the Chancellor if it were true, but would it alter his
:18:08. > :18:14.policies? No way. That was brief. You don't think it will change at
:18:14. > :18:18.all? I think this is has all been about the bond markets, it if it
:18:18. > :18:21.became that serious and find way to signal to the bond markets that
:18:21. > :18:26.they were doing what they said all along, they would have done it last
:18:26. > :18:30.September. They knew this period was going to be choppy. Mervyn King
:18:30. > :18:39.said it was a zig zag year, and it is proving to be.
:18:39. > :18:45.I'm off again. The British economy, is it a soft pastey roll or sausage.
:18:45. > :18:48.We have Ann Pettifor, who wrote a paper on the economic consequences
:18:48. > :18:53.of George Osborne and my other guest. Does it feel to you, Ann
:18:53. > :18:56.Pettifor, like we are in recession? It feels as if we are bumping along
:18:56. > :19:00.It feels as if we are bumping along on the bottom. I'm not sure the
:19:00. > :19:03.OECD have got this quarter right, we haven't even our own number. The
:19:03. > :19:06.fact is whether or not they have got it right, we are not recovering,
:19:06. > :19:10.we are stagnant. The Government talks about the economy being
:19:10. > :19:15.stable, it is just stagnant, and it has been since the summer of 2010.
:19:15. > :19:19.Why do you think it is taking so long for us to recover? This is not
:19:19. > :19:24.a typical recession. Normally when you go into recession from a boom,
:19:24. > :19:34.poplg are flush with cash. We went -- people are flush with cash. We
:19:34. > :19:35.
:19:35. > :19:38.went in with Governments borrowing cash, including oun, individuals --
:19:38. > :19:45.own, individuals borrowing money, and when the banks go bust before a
:19:45. > :19:50.recession you get a different outcome. What is historically named
:19:50. > :19:54.as a depression, the debt deflation makes it hard to recover. The fact
:19:54. > :20:02.is our Government is focusing on public borrowing, that really isn't
:20:02. > :20:05.half as serious as our private debt. I think it was shown, it is the
:20:05. > :20:11.private debt not deleveraged. We are the most indebted nation on
:20:11. > :20:16.earth. The private sector is more indebted than Japan. Who is that?
:20:16. > :20:19.The banks, private firms, corporations, households. In the
:20:19. > :20:24.United States they have started deleveraging that, paying down or
:20:24. > :20:28.foreclosing on their debts by 15%, we haven't. So people are burdened
:20:28. > :20:33.by this debt, dumped on us by the banks, in the credit boom, and
:20:33. > :20:37.nobody is doing anything about it. But the focus is entirely on
:20:37. > :20:40.something else, which is the public sector debt. It is very ironic that
:20:40. > :20:43.Gordon Brown talked about us importing this problem from America,
:20:44. > :20:47.it was America where it all started, and now they have decoupled from us,
:20:47. > :20:51.and they seem to be on the road to recovery and we are not. Where did
:20:51. > :20:55.that come from? That is because Gordon was talking nonsense.
:20:55. > :20:59.they encourage a fiscal stimulus and spent money? I think policy
:20:59. > :21:03.response, America has always had a more flexible economy than us. They
:21:03. > :21:08.had more willing employees and people moving more, naturally their
:21:08. > :21:12.housing market is not the same as our's. It doesn't have, outside the
:21:12. > :21:16.major centres in New York, land doesn't have a great value, it
:21:16. > :21:19.finds a clearing level more easily than in the UK. We didn't import
:21:19. > :21:25.the problem from America. This was a problem across the developed
:21:25. > :21:28.world, in the west, where people basically, our debt grew, far more
:21:28. > :21:32.rapidly for a large number of years, than our economic growth. It was
:21:32. > :21:35.fuelled by debt. We were not unique in that, neither was America.
:21:35. > :21:39.is because our finance sector is out of control, and the Government
:21:39. > :21:46.is not doing anything to restrain the finance sector. The finance
:21:46. > :21:49.sector is still about speculative lending. It is not about investing
:21:49. > :21:56.in infrastructure, energy efficiency, investing in the things
:21:56. > :22:00.that will create jobs. The whole austerity problem is completely
:22:00. > :22:04.misplaced? It is misplaced because all the other sectors are crippled
:22:04. > :22:08.by debt, they are not able to invest and spend, that leaves only
:22:08. > :22:12.the Government. There is no growth, and actually. What would explain
:22:12. > :22:17.there is no growth. Because we are not investing in the places where
:22:17. > :22:21.people can actually:? If you have too much debt to begin with at
:22:21. > :22:25.every level. We agree we have too much at the public and private
:22:25. > :22:28.level. We don't agree with the public level. I would. What was
:22:28. > :22:32.said about the bond markets is absolute rubbish, that is what the
:22:33. > :22:36.Government is saying. We don't depend on the bond markets for our
:22:36. > :22:40.borrowing, but the Bank of England. The Government boroughs from itself
:22:40. > :22:44.at a very low rate of interest. The Bank of England has financed the
:22:44. > :22:48.Government's deficit since 2010. it is that easy, why don't we just
:22:48. > :22:52.let the Bank of England print enough money to pay off all our
:22:52. > :22:55.bebt debt and we will be free tomorrow. We are not asking the
:22:55. > :22:58.Bank of England to print off money to pay debts, we are asking the
:22:58. > :23:01.Bank of England to give the Government the finance it needs to
:23:01. > :23:04.spend. There is a difference between spending on welfare
:23:04. > :23:08.benefits and on infrastructure and investment, which nobody is doing.
:23:08. > :23:12.Least of all the Government. policy terms, does what the
:23:12. > :23:17.Chancellor laid out in last week he is budget, make our recovery
:23:17. > :23:21.easier? I don't think it does. wouldn't call it a budget for
:23:21. > :23:26.entrepeneurs? I would suggest nothing can. When you get in this
:23:26. > :23:35.position there is no magic way out. In the 1930s, we didn't sit back,
:23:35. > :23:40.we didn't sit on our hands and say. John MaynardCan, he's work was not
:23:40. > :23:44.published until 1961. The point is, we didn't sit on our hands and
:23:44. > :23:51.allow unemployment to rocket upwards and output to slump, and
:23:51. > :23:56.businesses to go bust and families to go bankrupt. John Maynard Canes
:23:56. > :24:00.didn't publish his work until 1936. I would like the Government to
:24:00. > :24:04.spend not on welfare but infrastructure, which would create
:24:04. > :24:07.the income to restore the banks to stability.
:24:08. > :24:12.Today, the minister responsible for encouraging more councils to have
:24:12. > :24:16.elected mayors told Newsnight that he hoped they would one day be more
:24:16. > :24:21.powerful than cabinet ministers. It seems a more attractive proposition
:24:21. > :24:26.than being a member of Ed Milliband's shadow cabinet, Liam
:24:26. > :24:29.Byrne said he would quit to run for mayor in Birmingham, if they
:24:29. > :24:33.decided they wanted one. Will public figureheads make any
:24:33. > :24:38.difference, and will they have any real powers to change things. Our
:24:38. > :24:48.political editor and her infag teeingable producer have been in
:24:48. > :25:02.
:25:02. > :25:06.You heard of the Great Train Robbery, this is the great train
:25:07. > :25:09.givaway. We are travelling to Birmingham with three of localisms
:25:09. > :25:19.real fans, they will explain to people what they will get if they
:25:19. > :25:22.
:25:22. > :25:26.vote for a mayor. Grb if they vote for a mayor.
:25:26. > :25:32.The three mayoral Musketeers, are confident of the Prime Minister,
:25:32. > :25:37.and the original architect of how mayors could work, Peter Clarke who
:25:37. > :25:44.has nursed it through, Michael Heseltine, and Lord Donaldson, who
:25:44. > :25:48.has championed mayors, and -- Lord Adonis, who has championed mayors.
:25:48. > :25:55.I did what powers would they get? What would Birmingham demand if
:25:55. > :26:00.they get an effective leader. Alex Salnond does not wonder what
:26:00. > :26:04.Whitehall will do for me, he thumps the table and says this is what I
:26:04. > :26:07.want. We need those people in cities. The City Council of
:26:08. > :26:11.Birmingham has a budget of �4 billion a year, it has
:26:11. > :26:18.responsibility for 400 schools and huge other responsibilities.
:26:18. > :26:21.not give the powers to elected councils, why not why one
:26:21. > :26:25.charasmatic figure? That is the view of councils, the situation is
:26:26. > :26:31.not broken, why fix it. The situation is not fine, there are
:26:31. > :26:36.not leaders who are nationally known, there is a situation of one
:26:36. > :26:40.of compromise, loaders emerge from discussions behind closed doors,
:26:40. > :26:44.every decision goes to endless committees. The result is Whitehall
:26:44. > :26:48.has a virtual monopoly of decision making. What do you say to cities
:26:48. > :26:52.who look like they are not interested in this exercise? There
:26:52. > :26:56.is only one referendum in a city so far, London, huge majority in
:26:56. > :27:00.favour. Who in London would turn the clock back now and not have a
:27:00. > :27:05.mayor? Virtually nobody. A city that wants to get left behind, what
:27:05. > :27:09.can one do about it, if they opt to be left behind, that is up to them.
:27:09. > :27:13.People will make their call on whether or not they want to travel
:27:13. > :27:18.with Lord Heseltine, when there are referendums in ten cities, up and
:27:18. > :27:28.down the country, on the 3rd of May. The Institute for Government, asked
:27:28. > :27:32.
:27:32. > :27:35.YouGov if there was any appetite 37% didn't know or care. Then the
:27:35. > :27:45.institute asked a question intended to bring out whether current
:27:45. > :27:53.
:27:53. > :27:57.council leaders were big figures in Despite such polling results, there
:27:57. > :28:00.is still considerable dissent. sounds exciting to have a Boris and
:28:00. > :28:04.Ken contest, but in practice, politicians are not perfect people.
:28:04. > :28:09.We have checks and balances, but people don't do exactly what they
:28:09. > :28:13.should do, and there needs to be a checks and balance. The idea of
:28:13. > :28:23.giving somebody total power for four years wrong.
:28:23. > :28:28.Sir Thomas at wood here is cet did -- credited as one of Birmingham's
:28:28. > :28:31.earliest MPs. Here they hope future mayors will be more powerful than
:28:31. > :28:36.cabinet ministers. Choosing one directly elected guy means it is
:28:36. > :28:39.the people who chose what happens. There is one person identified, it
:28:39. > :28:42.diminishes the significance of councillors, they don't like it.
:28:42. > :28:48.The Mayor of Birmingham will be a more significant figure than
:28:48. > :28:52.members of cabinet. It will be a hugely political post. If you have
:28:52. > :28:55.somebody sitting there as Mayor of Birmingham, a household name, and
:28:55. > :29:01.won an election across the second largest city in the country, you
:29:01. > :29:07.are not in a position to say no to them. If the Prime Minister says
:29:07. > :29:12.you may have a God case we won't give you power of the welfare
:29:12. > :29:15.budget -- a good case, but we won't give you power of the welfare
:29:15. > :29:20.budget? The Prime Minister has said the mayors will sit around the
:29:20. > :29:26.table with him twice a year, and they can put the case. If you are
:29:26. > :29:29.at that cabinet meeting and the mayors are united in demanding a
:29:29. > :29:33.certain set of powers, I'm sure they will come out and talk to you
:29:33. > :29:37.and other broadcasters, I think it would be very difficult for a Prime
:29:38. > :29:41.Minister, unreason below, to be refusing powers that ought to be in
:29:41. > :29:44.the hands of cities and mayors. Those in Government Des operate to
:29:44. > :29:49.see a new platoon of mayors across the country, know this is probably
:29:49. > :29:53.their last chance in a generation to pull it off. Somewhere like here,
:29:53. > :29:56.Birmingham, is a poster child for the policy. People here are up for
:29:56. > :30:01.it. There are places like Nottingham and Wakefield, where
:30:01. > :30:07.they are slower on the uptake. If you are in Government and pushing
:30:07. > :30:12.this policy, you want a number of cities to go to it so mayors become
:30:12. > :30:15.the normal, not an oddity. Which new powers to wrest away from
:30:15. > :30:21.Whitehall will be up to these new politicians. Central Government
:30:21. > :30:26.doesn't yet know what cities like Birmingham will take back. The head
:30:26. > :30:31.of the FBI has said Britain should follow the US lead and allow
:30:31. > :30:33.terrorists to make plea bargains. It claims it can help for the
:30:33. > :30:38.capture of other terrorists through the information they yield. Would
:30:38. > :30:41.it lead people to say what they thought prosecutors wanted to hear.
:30:41. > :30:47.From an ethical perspective should we choose national security over
:30:47. > :30:57.natural Jews is it T Pips Taylor, who has catch -- justice.
:30:57. > :30:57.
:30:57. > :31:01.Peter Taylor has been in America watching the spies.
:31:01. > :31:04.America's domestic Intel against service, the Federal Bureau of
:31:04. > :31:08.Investigation, has a history of running human sources, often wiring
:31:08. > :31:13.them to make secret recordings. more I'm in this business, the more
:31:13. > :31:17.I believe sources and wires are absolutely essential to address
:31:17. > :31:22.espionage, and terrorism and the like. It is adapting that long
:31:22. > :31:26.history of using sources and wires to threats of today that have been
:31:26. > :31:30.the challenge. The FBI has one particular tool in its armoury to
:31:30. > :31:36.counter terrorism, that is used far more liberally and extensively than
:31:36. > :31:40.in the UK. It is called, a plea bargain, a process in which a
:31:40. > :31:43.suspect agrows to co-operate, in return for a much shorter -- agrees
:31:43. > :31:48.to co-operate, in return for a much shorter sentence. The question is,
:31:48. > :31:53.would the UK benefit from adopting a similar system. For us, in the
:31:53. > :31:57.area of terrorism, it is an essential tool. To have a system
:31:57. > :32:04.whereby there is an incentive to provide information.
:32:05. > :32:09.At their headquarters, in Virginia, the FBI use role playing exercises
:32:09. > :32:14.to train their special agents. We were given rare access to see how
:32:14. > :32:18.they are taught to turn and recruit sources. And how to use a plea
:32:18. > :32:21.bargain as an incentive. Do you want me to get information. I tell
:32:21. > :32:24.you what I want to do, I want you to hang out with the same people
:32:24. > :32:30.you have in the past, and do the same things you have always done.
:32:30. > :32:34.But just, under direction from us. If I do what you are asking, what
:32:34. > :32:38.about these charges? I can't promise you anything, but, I want
:32:38. > :32:43.to help you out in every way I can. I want you to help me out in every
:32:43. > :32:49.way you can. It is a give and take relationship. So you are saying,
:32:49. > :32:52.you could keep me out of prison? I'm saying I'm going to try.
:32:52. > :32:59.anybody finds out I'm doing this, there is a lot of people who will
:32:59. > :33:03.kill me, you know that. Woods Clive Woodward trains the new recruits to
:33:03. > :33:08.- Martin Woods trains the new recruits to plea bargain, but to
:33:08. > :33:12.use it carefully. The best way to recruit someone is to hold
:33:12. > :33:16.something over them. As was played in today's sin Nair yo. You have a
:33:16. > :33:20.criminal charge over someone -- scenario, you have a criminal
:33:20. > :33:23.charge over one you have leverage over them. People think
:33:23. > :33:31.interrogation is finger pointing, screaming, they don't expect
:33:31. > :33:36.someone to be emtheyic and sympathetic to their cause --
:33:36. > :33:43.emtheyic and sympathetic to their cause and come with honey. That is
:33:44. > :33:48.what we teach in our training sessions. One of the most useful
:33:48. > :33:53.people in the war against terror was a young American Muslim, who
:33:53. > :34:00.would eventually agree to a plea bargain with the FBI. He openly
:34:00. > :34:04.boasted before a television camera. When Americans come in with the
:34:04. > :34:09.mind set to clean, my Muslim brother and sisters, I will kill
:34:09. > :34:13.every American I see in Afghanistan. Mohammed Babar had helped set up a
:34:13. > :34:19.terrorist training camp in Afghanistan, attended by many
:34:19. > :34:23.British would-be Jihadists, including this man, Kazi Rahman.
:34:23. > :34:27.can't wait to see British soldiers on the battlefield and see them run,
:34:27. > :34:32.I'm happy to kill hem. Is Two years after the interviews, Mohammed
:34:32. > :34:35.Babar flew back to New York. Remarkably, even this fiercely
:34:35. > :34:40.committed Jihadi, could be induced to become a human source.
:34:40. > :34:44.Over six months he told the FBI everything. What he had done, who
:34:44. > :34:48.he had trained with in Pakistan, and the attacks they were planning.
:34:48. > :34:53.Mohammed Babar was to prove a human source that Intelligence Services
:34:53. > :34:58.dream of. He was critical, he's an individual
:34:58. > :35:03.who had both the access and capability to get into groups that
:35:03. > :35:06.simply would not have exist without him. In return for a much shorter
:35:06. > :35:12.sentence, he agreed to co-operate and reveal everything. Instead of a
:35:12. > :35:16.life sentence, he served just five years, and is now at liberty. Such
:35:17. > :35:20.dramatic reductions are typical in America. But, for many in Britain,
:35:20. > :35:26.such deals raise the uncomfortable prospect of seeing convicted
:35:26. > :35:31.terrorists walking free. The director of the FBI believes
:35:31. > :35:35.MI5 and the British police stand to gain an intelligence windfall,
:35:35. > :35:39.should plea bargaining operate as it does in America. He points to
:35:39. > :35:43.the hundreds of convicted Islamist terrorist prisoners in British
:35:43. > :35:48.jails. Whose heads are full of vital intelligence. Which they are
:35:48. > :35:53.unlikely to divulge, unless they are given an incentive to do so.
:35:53. > :35:56.think my brothers and sisters in the UK, don't have that same access
:35:56. > :36:03.to intelligence. Do you think the UK would benefit from doing the
:36:03. > :36:06.same? I do. If they had access to the information in the head of a
:36:06. > :36:10.number of persons who have been arrested over a period of time, as
:36:10. > :36:13.to where they went for their training, whether it be Pakistan or
:36:13. > :36:18.some place else, who was involved in the training, what other plots
:36:18. > :36:22.were in training. They would be a benefit to those agencies to have
:36:22. > :36:28.access to those intelligences. Britain has reaped huge benefit
:36:28. > :36:32.from the FBI's plea bargain with Mohammed Babar. In 2004, in an
:36:32. > :36:36.operation code named Crevice, British intelligence secretly
:36:36. > :36:42.filmed a suspect in a lock-up, checking the fertiliser stored for
:36:42. > :36:45.a massive bomb. The suspected targets included a nightclub and a
:36:45. > :36:50.shopping centre. The man under surveillance was the leader of a
:36:50. > :36:54.British terrorist cell, and had trained in Pakistan alongside Babar.
:36:54. > :36:58.As part of his plea bargain, Babar gave evidence in open court,
:36:58. > :37:03.evidence that proved critical in the conviction of five members of
:37:03. > :37:08.the cell. All were given life imprisonment. It prevented the
:37:08. > :37:12.people who were being charged with that crime from claiming that they
:37:12. > :37:15.were just opportunists that they were momentarily enraged by
:37:15. > :37:19.something that had happened in the world. It showed how they had been
:37:19. > :37:24.training and planning and preparing to mount a terrorist attack here in
:37:24. > :37:30.the UK for quite a long time. Kazi Rahman was arrested for
:37:30. > :37:33.attempting to buy weapons and sentenced to nine years.
:37:33. > :37:40.Babar has also given evidence against terrorist suspects in the
:37:40. > :37:46.USA and Canada. So, if plea bargaining can be so
:37:46. > :37:49.successful, why don't we adopt the American system? In America the
:37:49. > :37:54.prosecution and defence reach a formal agreement and then put it to
:37:54. > :38:01.the judge, with a recommendation on sentencing. Which he can accept or
:38:01. > :38:06.reject. By contrast, in the UK, the prosecution and defence can
:38:06. > :38:09.encourage the judge to take account of the defendant's assistance. But
:38:09. > :38:13.they can't make a specific recommendation on sentencing. So,
:38:13. > :38:17.unlike in America, the accused has no clear idea of what he will get
:38:17. > :38:21.in return. For many years it is something that
:38:21. > :38:26.those of us involved in law enforcement, here in the UK, have
:38:26. > :38:30.been wondering whether there might be some movement on. If somebody is
:38:30. > :38:33.going to be asked to really compromise the rest of their life,
:38:33. > :38:38.in terms of potential safety and security, there has to be something
:38:38. > :38:41.in exchange. Do you think we should do plea bargaining as in America.
:38:41. > :38:45.think we have to be hugely careful, there is the risk of people giving
:38:45. > :38:52.false evidence in exchange for a discount on their sentence. That's
:38:52. > :38:56.something we have to be vigilent about. If we could find some way of
:38:56. > :39:02.offering something more in exchange than we currently have, which is
:39:02. > :39:07.actually very little, then I think that could only be a good thing.
:39:07. > :39:10.Tentative steps have been made towards American-style deals, with
:39:10. > :39:14.the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act of 2005. But, there is
:39:15. > :39:20.still a long way to go before Britain benefits from the wealth of
:39:20. > :39:23.intelligence potentially to hand. Director Muller's words will
:39:23. > :39:33.probably fall on welcome ears at MI5, Scotland Yard, and the Home
:39:33. > :39:34.
:39:34. > :39:40.Office. You can see the first part of Peter Taylor's new series,
:39:40. > :39:45.Modern Spies, on BBC on Monday night. We have the Conservative
:39:45. > :39:53.Party MP, Patrick Mercer and Keith Vaz here to argue it out. They know
:39:53. > :39:59.how to spend their Easter break! We are grateful chaps. You heard from
:39:59. > :40:02.the head of the FBI saying the UK would benefit, if there was even
:40:02. > :40:06.the remotist chance this could foil terrorist plots in the country, why
:40:06. > :40:09.wouldn't you chance it? You have to be very careful, exactly as Peter
:40:09. > :40:14.Clarke has said, he has a lot of experience in counter terrorism
:40:14. > :40:18.work. I'm not in favour of the further Americanisation of our
:40:18. > :40:23.legal system. We have two different systems, our's works very well, it
:40:23. > :40:28.is an issue of guilt or innocence. Once you start to make it into a
:40:28. > :40:32.shade of innocence and guilt, it becomes very difficult. I think
:40:32. > :40:36.that though there is examples of information being helpful, it isn't
:40:36. > :40:41.a consistent set of examples. I think we need to be very careful
:40:41. > :40:45.indeed. And very careful means, don't do it? Keith's making good
:40:45. > :40:49.point, but all I can say, it wasn't called this or anything like as
:40:49. > :40:52.formal. I saw this in Northern Ireland on endless tours over there,
:40:52. > :40:57.when we managed to turn someone, when we managed to arrange
:40:57. > :40:59.something with the judge, which was the exception, rather than the rule,
:40:59. > :41:02.it was inevitably useful. Not necessarily because of the
:41:02. > :41:07.intelligence we received, but because of the very important
:41:07. > :41:10.message that it sent to his, they were all men in my case, to his
:41:10. > :41:14.colleagues. So the psychological whistle-blowing really?
:41:14. > :41:17.psychology of it, to the rest of the terrorist networks, here is
:41:17. > :41:22.someone in police or military custody, and they are singing, they
:41:22. > :41:27.are coughing. What are they saying? What do the victims say to that,
:41:27. > :41:31.look at this case, a man who should have been serving a life sentence,
:41:31. > :41:35.having five years and then being free, a terrorist? Absolutely. It
:41:35. > :41:40.is unpalatable, I accept that, it is difficult to make people, the
:41:40. > :41:45.public, understand exactly what's going on. The points that I'm
:41:45. > :41:48.making are very seldom referred to. The fact that once this individual
:41:48. > :41:53.is in custody, here we are, he has done a deal. What message does that
:41:53. > :41:57.send to his colleagues. The message is, he has informed, he has told
:41:58. > :42:01.people what is going on, he's a liability. Patrick has huge
:42:01. > :42:05.experience, not just in Northern Ireland but in counter terrorism.
:42:05. > :42:10.There is a but coming! The problem is s as he knows in a
:42:10. > :42:16.trial like the Supergrass trial in Northern Ireland, �4 million of
:42:16. > :42:21.tax-payers' money, Robert and Ian Stewart walked free, and 12 people
:42:21. > :42:25.were able to go off. It is sometimes used as a threat. We had
:42:25. > :42:32.interesting evidence from David Birmingham to the select committee
:42:32. > :42:37.on extradition, what he said was he pleaded guilty because he knew if
:42:37. > :42:42.he didn't there was a sentence of 300 years coming his way. He
:42:42. > :42:47.believed the only way to deal with it was plead guilty. Prosecutors
:42:47. > :42:53.are lazy too, they don't have to produce as much evidence, and there
:42:53. > :42:57.is a danger of false evidence. these things have to be balanced
:42:57. > :43:02.out much the points made are well thought out. Particularly with
:43:03. > :43:05.Islamic fundamentalists, who are on the point of killing hundreds of
:43:05. > :43:09.thousands of people. That changes things, particularly when someone
:43:09. > :43:15.has been arrested very early in the commission of an alleged crime, it
:43:15. > :43:22.makes it a whole different ball game. There is a hypocrisy, if you
:43:22. > :43:27.look at how we have profited any way, from plea bargaining in the US,
:43:27. > :43:30.Operation Cef Crevice, -- Operation Crevice, we are the happy
:43:30. > :43:33.recipients. We should continue to be so. Without offering anything in
:43:33. > :43:39.return? It is different judicial system, you have already started to
:43:39. > :43:43.have it in serious and organised crime. You have the Goodyear
:43:43. > :43:47.directions, can you go before a judge and say you will plead guilty,
:43:47. > :43:51.and your sentence is known to you before the matters proceed. If you
:43:51. > :43:55.have a situation where you are able to, in a sense, manipulate the
:43:55. > :43:59.system, you could be giving all kinds of information out, which
:43:59. > :44:03.won't necessarily be information that is going to be helpful. It is
:44:03. > :44:07.such a powerful tool, many of us, you and I discussed it on the home
:44:07. > :44:10.affairs commit year, several times, it is such an important thing, it
:44:10. > :44:13.it is one of the conclusive things you can do to a terrorist. As I say,
:44:13. > :44:18.not just the individual whom you may or may not sentence, but the
:44:18. > :44:21.message it spreads to all colleagues. You have been trying to
:44:21. > :44:24.get this considered for years. The Home Office is very resistant to
:44:24. > :44:29.this, do you think you can change their minds? I don't think I can
:44:29. > :44:33.change anything. If men and women of reason get together, and I
:44:33. > :44:36.persuade people like Keith Vaz to support me, I think we can. I think
:44:36. > :44:41.Patrick is moving in a direction, and the Government is moving in
:44:41. > :44:45.this direction, but we need to be very, very cautious indeed. What we
:44:45. > :44:53.don't want to do. What is your starting point? There are already
:44:53. > :44:58.starting points, the Goodyear directives and the way we deal with
:44:58. > :45:05.queens' evidence, they are all there. If we get the whole of our
:45:05. > :45:10.criminal justice system overtaken by plea bargains, 87% of -- 97% of
:45:10. > :45:14.convictions in America are done by plea bargains, my worry is you
:45:14. > :45:22.start with counter terrorism and then to other aspects of law,s a
:45:22. > :45:28.slippery slope. If anyone will convince them, Captain mers will do
:45:28. > :45:33.it. Reduced in seniority, Major, if you like. Let's take you through
:45:33. > :45:43.the papers, on the front of the FT, you have our top story, the setback
:45:43. > :45:46.Also interesting, George Osborne to challenge Labour on spending, and
:45:46. > :45:50.challenge Labour to match a detailed coalition programme of
:45:50. > :45:56.cuts, stretched into the middle of next parliament. In the Times, a
:45:56. > :46:03.fuel crisis made in Downing Street. The owner of a store in Bournemouth
:46:03. > :46:13.carries his last six gerrycans to sell to motorists. Entrepeneurship
:46:13. > :46:25.
:46:25. > :46:32.That's all we have time for tonight. Today the Bluegrass musician, Earl