15/08/2012 Newsnight

Tonight, unemployment is down after nine months of a shrinking British

economy. Does anyone know what's going on? With the Mayor of London

telling the Government to stop pussy footing around on measures

for growth, the Work and Pensions Secretary tells us their plan is

the right one. The fact is that where he's wrong,

Boris is wrong, is the Prime Minister and chancellor do not sit

there twiddling their thumbs. Together with their colleagues such

as myself, we are working on every way. Also a potentially big

development on the LIBOR scandal. American prosecutors sumon three

British banks for manipulating LIBOR. Is this the the start of a

battle royal. Virning trains are out of the railway business. Sir

Richard Branson is far from pleased and tells us it is the government

that is off the rails. It is the standing that the same department

officials who made the same mistakes with GNER and National

Express are going down the same line with First Group and it's sad.

The pride of Great Britain, Jessica ensis the Olympic champion.

lessons of winning. We have a special report on whether some of

the genius behind Team GB could translate to your birx or even to -

- business or even to the Government. It is trying to be a

true meritocracy, you get what you need on merit. We will ask our

panel, including Ben Ainslie, UK Good evening. One of the basic

school economics lessons is that when you have a shrinking economy,

more people end up out of work. Wrong. Apparently. We have a double

dip recession and the good news today was that unemployment fell

again. We will hear from the Work and Pensions Secretary on his

explanation for the puzzle and whether the Government really is

pussy footing around and guilty of inertia when it comes to taking

bold measures for growth. Before that, our economics editor joins me.

It is a puzzle what is going on. all know the terms jobless recovery.

But what we have at the moment is recoveryless jobs. Tens and tens of

thousands of jobs being create indeed an economy that is that is

shrinking, but increedingly rapidly. The Bank of England very

pessimistic on every area. Pulling back on investment, back on exports

and everything and yet jobs are there. It's made some economists

think maybe think there is no recession. Recession let's be clear.

The jobs created in the last three months were in London, a lot were

self-employed a lot were part-time jobs, and when you dig into the

deep detail of what kind of jobs those are, while it is great for

the people who get them, it is not so great for the story of how we

dig ourselves out of this mess as I Clocking off time at Britain's

fastest growing workplace, yes, sorry everybody else, it's London.

Over half the jobs created in the past three months were created here.

It's a mystery really. The economy is shrinking, but the workforce is

actually growing. It's made some economists doubt we are even in a

recession. Others think it is the employment figures that are hiding

something. What's going on? You can't mistake it. This month's

46,000 drop in the jobless statistics is part of a trend. The

graph peaks over the winter and is falling. But dig into the figures

and there is a glaring trend. Over the same period 36,000 people

became self-employed. It's not dark. It's not satanic and it's not a

mill. It is part communications agency, part workplace for anybody

who wants to hire T I started out as an inconcern in April 2012 and

now I do everything from art direction, coming up with logoes,

looking at colours. This route into the labour market is typical for

many. I get paid, maybe I should get paid more. But you are not an

employee?. No I am an independent, I was an inconcern and when I came

back I am on a contract at the moment. So I come in and hope.

Technically you are self-employed. Technically, though I don't think

of it like that. Her boss was once senior manager at a major ad agency,

the consultancy he runs now has a loser structure. We see everything

we do as project base, where we work in very short moments of time,

with very good people. This concept of working, no employees, no

clients no employees is our headline, it allows us to bring the

right people. Compared to a steel works this might seem nebulous, but

this is the kind of business that is growing. But it is fuelled on

extreme precariousness of labour, even for the highly skilled. We are

about to commission an artist in Japan for a job for a guy in Leeds.

We can do that because he is the right person to do the job, not

because we are employing a lot of people that need to be paid. That

liberation, taking down the walls and changing the relationship

between employer and employee, where we work together, for a

common objective, is the way the world is going. It is this kind of

work, plus the Olympics, that the experts think have done most to

reduce the jobless figures. We have moved from a jobless recovery, into

a recession which is creating jobs, which is pretty strange. That's

happened for two reasons: the first is a shift to part-time employment,

and also people are shifting towards self-employment. So over

the past two years, self-employment has risen by approximately 7%, and

traditional employment, say, by a company for by the government has

risen by only 1ers 1%. For the Olympics f today's figures reflect

a short terms boost, get ready for the hangover. Over the short-term,

the Olympic Games employed about 100,000 people. And for lots of

those people their contracts are going to run out in September when

the Paralympic Games finishes. Many of those people were comparatively

young, and they are going to enter an economy where youth unemployment

is running at 21%. There is no reason why the positive job stats

might be ing a less whole some picture. Compulsory liquidation for

businesses are at their lowest since the crisis began. For the

economy to create 200,000 jobs in three months is good news,

especially for those that get them, but economyically it is the tined

of jobs that matter. If it really is the coffee bars and ad agencies

and hair salons of London that are soaking up the unemployment, it

would take a brave economist to predict that is sustainable,

because this is the precare yat and they don't spend much. Precarious,

low paid, part-time work can't on its own drive the recovery, let eye

lone -- let alone rebalance the the recovery.

We will hear from Paul in a moment. I caught up with the Work and

Pensions Secretary at his office earlier today.

Are you surprised that an economy which is shrinking is also creating

jobs? It needs explaining, I think, and people will obviously want to

look at these figures and set them against the state of the economy,

but we have from the ONS the statement that we are in recession,

but through that period of recession we have now got three-

quarters of sustained jobs growth and the majority of those at full-

time jobs, so there is a sustainable process. I am not

forecasting ahead. It is great, down to the private sector, because

they are the ones creating the jobs and that is robust, but the

position we've got at the moment is the sport we are giving and what

the private sector is doing is quite considerable. Bank of England

is forecasting zero growth this year and the deputy governor saying

unemployment going down is a genuine economic puzzle we don't

understand? Who am I to question people as the economists from the

Bank of England. Do you understand it? The reality is that they all

seem to be taking a different angle on this. The only thing I can deal

with is what we have right now and looking at it seriously, 201,000

new jobs, a net position now if you look at the private sector, they

have created since the election nearly a million new jobs, and we

have essentially 630,000 more people in work than we had in 2010,

those are the facts. No hidden figures. Surely, it is

unsustainable to have an economy that is shrinking in the long-term

and have more and more people in jobs, that can't add up. You have

to get growth right. What the Government and myself and George

Osbourne agree s we have to do more to get the economy moving, the

economy needs to be growing at a faster rate. But what we are seeing

from this, and it is important, this is telling us a very strong

story about the strength of the private sector in the UK. Which as

and when we get into growth, you will see a staggering increase and

a good support from them, because they are in a difficult period

creating jobs, so if with get growth growing in the economy

economy, they should do well. help push ahead with that

staggering increase, Boris Johnson says he wants you to stop pussy

footing around, cut taxes, cut red tape, build an airport, get

involved in big public spending projects. OK, I love hearing from

Boris and I like talking to him a lot and he is a good mate of mine

but there are some things that we have to also get in perspective. We

have a debt ridden economy that we inherited, massively fuelled by

deficit. Any government work its salt has to get that under control

and that is what George Osbourne has been trying to do with some

success. We know we need to be looking at all those things we can

do to help in the short-term growth. There have been a lot of building

programmes going on that are yet to come to fruition but will help fuel

this. You are not pussy footing around?. I wouldn't use that term.

The Chancellor is determined and is driving stuff and sometimes through

bureaucracy things don't happen as fast as they should in government

and that is another point he and I have been working on to break down

the Prime Minister's determined to do this, we have had meetings about

this, we are focusing on the things that should have gone through

months ago. Boris Johnson is talking about institutional inertia

in the Government. We will talk about reregulating the workforce,

but inertia in the government, a serious charge and you are pleading

gilingty? -- guilty. governments have to recognise they

have to keep their foot on the accelerator when programmes are

going through like capital programmes, but it is more

difficult, if you have regulations and rules you can't ride roughshod

over those. There's more to come. The fact is that where he's wrong,

Boris is wrong, is the prils and chancellor do not sit there

twiddling their thumbs. Together with their colleagues we are

working on every way. If you take my area, the way we have been

working to get young people back to work through the youth contract,

work experience which Labour and the trade unions have attacked, we

are gambling on young people, investing the money, these things

are beginning to work. The praise the private sector for being an

engine for growth and jobs. But it seems that quite a large proportion

of this increase in employment is in the London area, and some of

that may very well be due to the Olympics and the Olympic effect and

that was major pump priming by a government in a capital project.

Over half the employment statistics we see come from outside of London.

It is not all to do with the Olympics. A lot of the Olympic

effect, such as the temporary jobs won't come through to the figures

until next month or the month after, because these are June June figures

we are looking at. These are before much of the Olympic surge. Of

course there is an effect of Olympics in the longer term stuff

but remember, most of these jobs are full-time full-time jobs, not

par time. These are jobs that will go on beyond the Olympics. There is

a problem that some people see in what are called zero hours

contracts in which people have a job but are not told how many hours

they will work or from day-to-day how much they will get paid. That

is very hard for people, because at the moment, if they take these jobs,

they may lose benefits. People who desperately want to get into the

workforce and can't. Of course the good thing about this is I agree

that that is a problem under the present system, which is a clunky

ses roo system set up by the last government. The universal credit

which comes in next year will hugely help here because it will

cover every hour you work and because it will be real time, it

will pick it up every month. If you change your hours as the months go

by, we will pick it up and we will support you through that at every

hour all the way up until you break free of the system. Yes, at the

moment, some of those are difficult decisions, I accept that.

accept it is a problem. Yes, but of course, sometimes when you are

going into work you need to take that bit of a chance, you need to

say this job will develop, it is worth the risk getting into work.

But we recognise that, and we want to see jobs that develop people and

dome with those people and to do that you need to have protections

in place to make sure that unscrupulous employers don't get

away with making life a misery for employees because they can. Of

course we have to look carefully at this. It is all right for people to

say get on and do it. We have made changes. These discussions will go

on further and more will happen. But they have to be done in the

context of what is good for the economy and still allows us to

develop people in work rather than harming them. That is a balance the

Chancellor and Prime Minister and myself and the Liberal Democrats

all agree about. But there is more we can do.

There is a development tonight in the LIBOR bank rate fixing scandal.

Several banks have apparently been sumoned to appear in court by the

What's happened is that the state level prosecutors of Connecticut

and New York State have demanded that they produce evidence, we

don't know what evidence, they demanded this two months ago, if

they don't produce it, they can be penalised. What we think this is is

that states are doing this on behalf of civil... A prosecution.

No, citizens who have cases outstanding or about to be brought

against these banks. Why might they be doing it, yesterday we saw the

US regulator take $340 million from Standard Chartered and there is an

element in America which is a lawsuit dominated society, of form

a queue and these states have got to the head of the queue. One of

one senior lawyer involved in one of these class actions told us

tonight that this is the wars of injury -- walls of Jericho tumbling

down. One of the banks who didn't want to be named said, they implied

bring it on because it is one thing to be fined and prosecuted by

states, by government, it is another thing to be taken on, on a

lengthy legal battle and what you have to prove is person X lost

money from LIBOR manipulation on day Y and in the American courts,

good luck really. One of Britain's best known and

most successful business figures is seething tonight over losing his

real franchise. Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Trains will not be

running on the West Coast Main Line. They are being replaced by first

group which is paid more and the Government says office more in

terms of service. Sir Richard is very far from pleased. First to

explain what's been going on here is Jo. This is a big row over a big

train set. When you look at the map of the route involved, you can

understand. It is basically the four biggest cities in the UK are

embraced in the West Coast Main Line, London, Birmingham,

Manchester and Glasgow. 31 million people, the catchment area for this.

�5.5 billion has been agreed for that because it is very lucrative.

But that is �750 million more than Virgin were prepared to offer and

Virgin and the reason they are livid is because they are saying

First Group who won the bid have overpaid, to the extent they may be

bankrupt. Insanity was the word used. The market tends to agree,

because if you look at the shares in the Stagecoach, which is half

the owner of Virgin Trains, they were up 2% today because they

didn't get the franchise, which means they didn't overpay. Whereas

the other company, fruch frup, -- First Group, their shares were down.

Tim O'Toole is the Chief Executive of First Group and he says he is r

he is still upbeat and it is going to work out well in the end. We are

going to be delivering a lot more capacity. We are going to put in

new electric trains north of Birmingham. We are going to provide

direct service to more places than available now, show Shrewsbury,

Bolton, a number of other locations. We are also going to be redoing the

interiors of the trains. Some people aren't a fan of them. We are

going to do them. Are passengers going to notice a difference?

will notice a change in livery. The trains are warn, they are getting

newer trains later. They will be getting spruced up carriages, Wi-Fi,

better catering, they might be getting less leg room because they

are talking about squeezing more passengers on to trains and fares

might be going up and this is on top of yesterday's fare increase,

going up 6%. But I think the big winner is Her Majesty's Treasury,

�5.5 billion over the next 13 years when they could use it.

We did ask to speak to First Group tonight but they are not available.

I spoke to Sir Richard Branson via describe earlier.

Why do you think Virgin lost this bid? I think first of all just to

say, it is obviously disappointing for all the staff on the Virgin

West Coast, who have done a fantastic job over the last 15

years and turning one of the most dilapidated networks into one of

the best networks in the world. We hoped we could take it the next

stage over the next 15 years. But bidding system in the UK is a

strange one in that as the incumbent we knew what we had to

bid, we wanted to be realistic, we have never had a company go bust at

Virgin. And we bid what we felt was the correct figures. It's taken one

company, a bid, an enormous amount more, to rerail -- derail us and we

hope the Government have not made the same mistakes that they made on

the East Coast main line. Do you really think Government has not

done due diligence, that the sums don't add up and can't work at that

price? Let me quickly explain our background on this. On the East

Coast we bid twice, and we were the runners up. We got our figures

correct. GNER beat us once, they went once. National expression beat

us on the other occasion and they went bust. The East Coast main line,

from being a track that had more passengers than the west coast, now

has something like 13 million passengers less, it's been a

disaster. On this particular bid, the company that has won First

Group, with First Great Western, they handed their contract back

three or four years early to the government at a great cost to the

taxpayer and they saved themselves an enormous amount of money at the

end of that contract. We have just learnt today that their bid, our

bid was ahead of them up to 2020 and just in the last three years,

suddenly they have worked out they can give the Government another �2

billion completely unrealistic figures for the numbers of people

they are suddenly going to imaginically get in those last

three years and even if they doubled fares they wouldn't be able

to afford it. We are baffled that the Government have fallen for what

seems to be a very similar trick, or a similar approach to what

happened with First Great Western. Obviously Government knows the

background to this. They have to maximise the take for the taxpayer.

If they are offered a vast sum more it would look odd if they took a

lower bid? The cost to government of taking the biggest bidders every

time is enormous. The cost to the taxpayer of GNER going bust and

national express going bust has been enormous. We would have been

running high speed fast trains on the East Coast main line, more than

30 million passengers on the East Coast main line if our bid had been

accepted and they hadn't gone for the highest bidder. And

interestingly, the other two bidders on the West Coast Main Line

who weren't incumbents bid something like 2.5 billion less

than First Group. First Group was a company that was struggling. It

needed cash flow in the short-term, and so it put in a bid where they

are not paying the Government a lot in the short term and right at the

end of the contract they are suddenly going to find another �2

billion of income. It is astounding that the same department officials

who made the same mistakes with GNER and National Express are going

down the same line with First Group and it's sad. I personally have got

lots of other wonderful things like space projects and exciting things

to do, but very sad for all the staff at Virgin Trains who have

done a magnificent job and created the best rail network in the world,

but certainly in the UK. You could sound like a sore loser? One could

sound like a sore loser. We didn't speak out when we were runners up

to GNER. We didn't speak up when the same thing happened to us with

cross country. And the people who took it over have lost money since.

On a fourth occasion we think it is important that the public know

what's happened. Is Virgin then now out of the railway business? If the

rules stay the same we are almost definitely out of the railway

business. We bid twice for the East Coast main line before, it costs a

lot of money, and although we would love to run it, if the rules are as

they are, I don't think we will waste our money bidding again.

Thank you very much. In the past hour Ecuador has

accused the British Government of threatening to storm its embassy in

London if Julian assang is not handed over. What is going on.

has been holed up in the Ecuadorean embassy since June, trying to avoid

extradition on rape claims which he denies. We are expecting a decision

tomorrow if on whether Ecuador will allow him political asylum.

It is a little known law we found out tonight about the diplomatic

consular premises act act. It says if the Secretary of State withdraws

his consent in relation to land, it ceases to be diplomatic or consular

premises. This seems to be reminding the Ecuadoreans by

bringing this law up that the British Government does have the

power to enter the embassy. The Foreign Office has confirmed it has

reminded Ecuador about this law. Very quick response from the

Ecuadoreans. Such a threat is improper of a democratic civilised

and rule abiding country. If this measure announced by the British

officials is inacted, it would be unfriendly and hostile and it will

force us to respond, we are not a British colony. Is there any

precedent for this happening? Entering an embassy is

diplomatically scene as beyond the pale. It has happened in 1979, the

the Iranian hostage crisis. It hasn't happened in the UK, or in a

western democracy. If this did happen, oppressive regimes could

use the same argument to go into the British Embassy. It is

difficult to believe that they will go ahead with a raid. It is perhaps

more like lie this is a bit of private sabre-rattling.

There's no doubt that individual effort, extraordinarily motivated

athletes and dedication helped win so many medals at the Olympics, but

would any of the organisational secrets behind Team GB help the

rest of us in business or in government or in daily lives. Times

correspondent Matthew Syed thinks there might be. Before we speak to

our guests, here is Matthew's special report on the secret

The London Games. Arguably the greatest in modern Olympic history.

The city is now moving on. Perhaps the most intriguing story of 2012

is how British sport has moved on. The pride of Sheffield, the pride

of Great Britain, Jessica Ennis is the Olympics champion.

16 years ago Team GB was an international laughing stock. Today,

it it is it is held up as a model for the rest of the world. What is

the inside story of this extraordinary transformation and

are there wider lessons that can be learned from Britain's sporting

miracle that can help us achieve world beating status in business

and education. Sport has a particular kind of

truth. You live and die on objective results, with no room for

spin or artifice. Perhaps no British sport has

achieved more astonishing results than rowing. They won nine Olympic

medals in London and they are gearing up for Rio in four years'

time. We are there for one another, through the hard times and bad

times. We are always there to help each other out. It is this ethos

the collective pursuit of excellence that has driven the

success of British rowing. But 16 years ago British sport had a very

different culture. Britain has had its best day so far in the Olympic

Games winning two more medals and the promise of a silver in the

men's tennis doubles. But the team's medal total could be the

lowest for 40 years. Not much has gone right for Britain in the

Atlanta 1996 where Team GB won just a solitary Gold Medal. Funding was

virtually non-existent and there was a widespread acceptance that in

the face of fierce international competition, deline was inevitable.

The fight back started in the some what curious decision by John Major.

Peter Keen, a cycling coach who would become Director of

Performance at UK Sport was one of the beneficiaries. When Lottery

funding came in in the '90s and opportunities came for people like

me to do this as a career, as a profession, rather than something

in my spare time, that was a life- changing moment for me and many

others in British sport, because you had the opportunity to try and

put into practice in a systemic way what you may have learnt from

working with one or two individuals. The new system was emerging that

would reef illusionise British sport and at its core was a so-

called traffic light system. Sports that failed to perform were shown a

red light and have their funding cut. Sports that succeeded were

given a green light and extra money. The competition between sports for

funding was unapologetically Darwinian. But this ruthless focus

on success went far deeper. Walking the shop floor is fundamental. I

like to get to know the younger athletes coming up. David Tanner

has been at the helm of British rowing for more than a decade.

want to be the best sport in the world in rowing and we are. We did

that in Beijing, we have done it now. If you see the guys here, when

they are doing their training pieces, they will shout for each

other. It is ease yes to say that, but in some cases there are people

that might be trying to take your place in your boat, but they will

shout for each other. The benchmark is does what you are doing make ts

boat boat go faster, but it is a question asked and people feel

accountable for what they contribute to the programme. It is

trying to be a true meritocracy. You get what you need on merit. The

whole approach to funding starts with understanding what every

athlete needs in terms of coaching, in terms of facilities, the

resources you have to have. What we have tried very hard and well

continue to work on, whatever tough The success of British athletes at

2012 has been extraordinary. It's probably fair to say the elite

sports set up in the UK is now the envy of the world. But what of the

wider story, what are the lessons we can learn from the success of

Team GB when it comes to the broader economy. To business and to

our national culture itself. Zlt leaders of British sport from David

Brailsford have very different personalities but almost identical

values. They define their objective and then deconstruct it. Every

facet associated with success is examined from science to nutrition,

to the colour of the lockers in the changing rooms. It is called the

science of marginal gains and its application extends way beyond

sport. Businesses are interested in what's happened here and when they

look at the structures and metrics that lie behind the measures we

have been talking about, I think that traces to the very origins of

this approach. Which is the difference between a successful

athlete and a less successful one. Every training practice and every

drill, the successful athlete is thinking how do I improve on that,

what would change if I tweaked this. It's that constant self-

reinforcement that lies at the heart of all expert performers and

they are never satisfied. heroes of the London Olympics have

enthused the nation and provided a template for success that

transsends the field of play, but perhaps their most profound

achievement is far broader. The current obsession with celebrity

culture is encouraging the idea you can be somebody without doing

something. They offer a powerful corrective. They have achieved

excellence not overnight through years of dedication and sacrifice.

Self-discipline. Having a structure in which to achieve your ambitions,

working with other people. It is much more long lasting than the

self-gratification which I do recognise. This philosophy of

marginal gains has applications for us all. Those old-fashioned values

of opportunity, hard work and endeavour are as important for

success in life as they are in sport. As London moves on, perhaps

that is the most powerful legacy. Ben Ainslie won his fourth Olympic

Gold Medal last month to add to his silver from 1996. Liz Nicholl is

Chief Executive of UK Sport. Are there some secrets you are

particularly proud of that have turned people who could have been

losers to winners this time? don't think it is rocket science in

terms of how the high performance system in the UK works. At its

heart it is about having a really clear goal and really focusing all

the resources that you possibly can behind the achievement of that goal.

That is what every athlete does, every Olympian does because they

want it and Ben has been driving for that Gold Medal at every

Olympics. He will be looking at the technical and tactical requirements

around his own preparation, so the system here is about the multiplier

effect, when you have all the athletes doing the same thing, and

then across the system, when we look at UK Sport, we fund 47 sports,

Olympic and Paralympic, and we are investing about �100 million a year

and all that investment and all the resources are all focused around

what is going to make each one of those athletes able to achieve

their very best at the games. you try to pick winners, you

channel more where you think it will do most good? Peter in that

interview talked about a meritocratic approach, so we focus

on sports and athletes that can produce medallists at the next

games. Our investment is all about that. We have - we will make those

tough calls, because if you are investing in success, that has got

to be your top priority. Ben, congratulations again. Going back

to 1996, you have seen a few changes. What effect has it had on

you and other athletes? I was very struck by talking about critical of

your team-mates, and your competitive with them, but you are

in a time. That's right. My first Olympics in 1996, it was a a

totally different story. The senior level sailors I was racing against,

were holding down part-time jobs and sleeping in the backs of cars

or camping at the international events. These days we have so much

more support and it does come down to teamwork and people. The The

funding has to be right but you need the right talent and you need

the right coaching and staff to support that. Do you need to also

be open to criticism, for other people to say you didn't do that so

well? Yes, as a sportsman you have to be completely honest with

yourself and those around you. You can't hide from the results

ultimately. You have to take the criticism, you have to always be

looking looking on how you can improvement the hardest thing is

not getting to the top, it is staying there. How does this

translate to business, a lot of people would like Team GB in a

different way to work, but would it work? I think it does. The top

businesses already know this. A picks ar movie is put together with

absolutely with this philosophy of marginal gains, every scene is gone

over. They don't ask whether it is good, they say what would make it

better. Tesco's, the pricing, marketing or Amazon, they are they

are doing something called alpha beta testing, tweaking the pricing

or positioning. That way of thinking is very familiar to UK

Sport. When it comes to organisations and when it comes to

government, we find it harder to follow these examples and there are

a couple of reasons. One is a cognitive bias called loss aversion.

When something isn't working we want to double dounl, we want to

keep going and going on, give more money and maybe it will work next

time. The second obstacle is we almost take it for granted with

sport, we know ultimately what success looks like and that is

often not true with public policy. To give you an example, in

education, my daughter's school a couple of years ago, sent out a

note to parents and said we are going to change the way we teach

literacy, we are going to change the way the children are seated,

streamed, change the books. We said that's great. Why? What are you

hoping to achieve and is there any evidence and are you going to test

it, is it going to make the children perform better or love

reading more, why? And this is very, very common. And the answer came

none. They didn't understand why that was a relevant question, they

formed an opinion this would be a good change. I don't think that you

get away with that in Team GB. wouldn't this year under the new

management as it were. Do you see it translating to business, do you

business talk to you and say how do you do this? We have had visitors

into UK Sport to look at our mission control process, which is

very simple. We ask every sport we invest in to have a performance

management approach, and a review three times a year. We ask them to

look at their athletes and tell us how they are doing in a health and

well-being. Examine their system and how is that performing and

their coaches and be self-critical and tell us what is working and

what is not working. We ask them to look at the climate and culture.

The difference over the last four years has been that the sports

trust, that we are not trying to catch them out here, we want to

help them, we want them to win, everybody wants them to win. They

are willing to put up their hands and saying we are not doing well

here, we need help here. The great thing about the system now is,

because we work across the sports, if there is a problem with one

sport, it's been addressed in another sport and we can match that

problem to that solution. Where does money come into this? Look at

the athletes who train, the boxers who train so hard, who would do it

for nothing, but shouldn't do it for nothing, because if money

helped it, the England football team would be scoring goals and not

having penalty shoot-outs. It is only one part of the equation, but

you have to have the money to have the right equipment and coaching

and development. But that only gets you so far. You then need to use

that in the right way. That is where UK Sport offer a lot of

assistance to the different sports. But they each take their own

responsibility to manage that funding properly and use it in the

right way to get the results. wonder if you feel managed because

you have been doing it for a long time. I have a good relationship

with our Performance Director, Stephen Parks. We get on very well.

No, the sailing team are fantastic and allowing the sailors to decide

the direction of their own programmes and they provide the

funding and of course if the results don't come, people ask

questions, but it's worked very well. I notice Roy Hodgson was

saying England could learn from Team GB, but maybe money up to a

point is fine, but perhaps many of the footballers run it more like a

business than sports people, in other words the money has a

negative effect. Yeah, it is clearly possible to be paid too

much, to be over motivated, to be distracted by this. The thing about

money is it is useful up to a point. There is only so much to go around.

The question is how are you going to use it effectively. I think what

UK Sport have done is constantly ask is this going to make the boat

go faster, is this going to make the athlete run faster or jump

higher. What we don't see often enough in most public policy is

this focus of we are going to introduce a new offender

rehabilitation scheme or new policing tactic. Whether it work,

how will we evaluate whether it works. Can we come back in five

years' time and say we thought it was a good idea, tested it out and

it turns out it wasn't. I would be delighted to see politicians do

that but I don't think that comes naturally to them. Are you going to

be back in four years and even better? I am not sure about that.

The next project is the Americans cup, that is really about teamwork.

So four years' time, 2016, it would be great to see the team do just as

well as they have done this time round.

The Duke of Edinburgh is in hospital. Boris on the runway,

demand for action for leadership aims.

The Telegraph has more places for bright students at elite

universities. The Mail has a �35,000 cap on care bills. That is

That is all from us tonight. Good Good evening. We have had some

miserable weather through Wednesday. That lies to the north of Scotland.

Heavy showers follow coastal gales through the night. It will be a

With some lengthy dry spells we will see the temperatures into the

mid 20s but a breeze will drive the showers in sharely frequently

across the south-west of England, Wales as well, with longer spells

of rain returning to Northern Ireland and brushing close to Wales

by the end of the day. There are further further warnings out for

rain over the coming few days. Heavy showers around just about

anywhere. More across the north- west highlands than we have seen

today. But with some sunshine in between, pleasant spells as well.