09/01/2013

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:02:53. > :02:57.Lack of affordable housing is the biggest social justice crisis in

:02:57. > :03:02.this country, according to the planning minister, Nick Boles. On

:03:02. > :03:06.Newsnight tonight, he reveals a new policy to encourage more house

:03:06. > :03:10.building which what he jokes are bribes, or Boles Bungs, cash for

:03:10. > :03:13.communities that agree to new house anything their area. You can build

:03:13. > :03:21.a new playground for local kids or do whatever you like with new money.

:03:21. > :03:25.I wanted to call it the Boles "bung". We will debate the idea and

:03:25. > :03:29.ask if anything else might solve the housing crisis.

:03:29. > :03:33.Stay in the European Union, a blunt message from the Obama

:03:33. > :03:38.administration on Britain's future. What has it to do with them? We

:03:38. > :03:45.will ask a euro-sceptic MP and a former state department spokesman.

:03:45. > :03:52.After attacking US gun control laws following the Connecticut shootings,

:03:52. > :04:02.Piers Morgan will not be deported from America, we ask if he regrets

:04:02. > :04:07.calling the gun lobby "stupid"! Hello, good evening, if the

:04:07. > :04:09.community town or village where you live is prepared to accept new

:04:09. > :04:13.housing developments, community groups will be given hard cash,

:04:13. > :04:16.perhaps hundreds of thousands of pounds. The idea is being

:04:16. > :04:20.implemented right now by the planning minister Nick Boles, who

:04:20. > :04:24.caused a row on Newsnight last month, by explaining why Greenfield

:04:24. > :04:28.sites would need to be built on if Britain is going to meet the demand

:04:28. > :04:33.for housing. Tonight Mr Boles goes even further. He reveals to us his

:04:33. > :04:37.latest plan to use an existing levy or tax on house builders, to give

:04:37. > :04:41.local communities some hard cash, as a big incentive to say yes to

:04:41. > :04:51.development. We will debate the wisdom of all of this in a moment,

:04:51. > :04:52.

:04:52. > :04:56.first here is the political editor. Meadows and moors, valleys and

:04:56. > :05:02.viaducts, we are on a journey among it all to find the great bricks of

:05:02. > :05:06.Great Britain. If a Domesday Book itemised every piece of the country

:05:06. > :05:10.many years ago, where have we gone on to build.

:05:10. > :05:16.Newsnight is back on the road with the planning minister, last month,

:05:16. > :05:22.on this programme, he said only 9% of this land was developed. He was

:05:22. > :05:27.accused of making his sums up on the back of a fag packet. This,

:05:27. > :05:31.then, is the fag packet. More modest, modern, Domesday Book, on

:05:31. > :05:36.the walls of the minister's office in Whitehall. There has been quite

:05:36. > :05:42.a row about how much of England is actually developed. Some

:05:42. > :05:48.campaigners have said, oh it's 15%, it is 25%, that is affected by

:05:48. > :05:53.urban development. And you said? said it is 8.9%. The idea that some

:05:53. > :05:57.how there is nowhere to build in the south-east is just not true, as

:05:57. > :06:01.this map, I think demonstrates. Everywhere needs housing, in the

:06:01. > :06:04.deep countryside, Cumbria, where we are going, is a good example,

:06:04. > :06:09.people still want their kids to be able to live in the village that

:06:09. > :06:19.they grew up in. If you don't build any houses, they can't. Because you

:06:19. > :06:19.

:06:19. > :06:23.know, holiday makers buy the houses, at stratospheric prices.

:06:23. > :06:27.Destination one, we are heading to what the minister's map suggested

:06:27. > :06:31.are yawning voids, the co-ordinates that test Nick Boles's assertion,

:06:31. > :06:41.that we have so many green and pleasant fields, some of them can

:06:41. > :06:46.

:06:46. > :06:50.be offered up. This is Brough.

:06:50. > :06:53.It is on its high street that Leslie lives with her four children

:06:53. > :06:59.in a rented home. She and her husband are professional carers for

:06:59. > :07:04.their neighbours in Brough, priced out of the market, Leslie is on

:07:04. > :07:08.Nick Boles's conscience. What can he do to help her?

:07:08. > :07:18.A short drive through forbidding foggy moors to Crosby raifrpbs

:07:18. > :07:24.worth, where the minister tells her just what he's going to do. Good

:07:24. > :07:27.morning everybody. We are in the Upper Eden Valley, nestled near the

:07:27. > :07:29.Cumbrian lakes and Yorkshire National Park, on the front here is

:07:29. > :07:33.planning policy S Newsnight is here, because it is the first in the

:07:33. > :07:38.country to put the views of its community into planning. It will

:07:38. > :07:41.hold a vote on the outcome. Nick Boles chose here to make an

:07:41. > :07:44.exclusive announcement. What we have decided is that for those

:07:44. > :07:50.areas that have a neighbourhood plan, and get it through the

:07:50. > :07:55.referendum, then 25%, a quarter of the revenues from the community

:07:55. > :08:00.infrastructure levy, will go to the neighbourhood to spend on what the

:08:00. > :08:03.hell you like. That money will come to you if you build new houses.

:08:03. > :08:10.Does anybody feel they want to respond to the announcement that

:08:10. > :08:14.Nick has made. The bribe! I wanted to call it the Boles "bung". This

:08:14. > :08:18.is a new pot of money that the council might once have thought

:08:18. > :08:25.100% their's to spend. What do they make of it? The days when we are

:08:25. > :08:29.going to sit back and get allocations for anything are gone.

:08:29. > :08:33.You are prepared to accept 25% of your pot dwindling. The important

:08:33. > :08:36.point to make this is a new revenue stream. This isn't money that the

:08:36. > :08:40.district council is already getting of which we are taking away 25%,

:08:40. > :08:45.this is a new tax, that is bringing in new revenues and we are saying,

:08:45. > :08:53.you are going to get 75%, and 25% will go to the neighbourhoods, if

:08:53. > :08:57.they have a neighbourhood plan. are those priced out reassured.

:08:57. > :09:02.deems what affordability is in affordable housing. My husband and

:09:02. > :09:06.I work as carers in the community, and we still can't reach, you know,

:09:06. > :09:11.getting a deposit together for the mortgage, paying the monthly rent

:09:11. > :09:16.with four children. Where do we stand at the end of the day. What

:09:16. > :09:20.assurances do we have? That it will be affordable for us. Your

:09:21. > :09:25.situation is absolutely typical, I am afraid. It is a huge national

:09:25. > :09:28.crisis, I think, for my money, I think it is the biggest social

:09:28. > :09:31.justice crisis we have, it is bigger than bad schools that we

:09:31. > :09:36.have plenty of bad schools, it is bigger than people without jobs

:09:36. > :09:38.that we have lots of people who are desperate for jobs. After digesting

:09:39. > :09:42.Nick Boles's exclusive announcement, people in that meeting would later

:09:42. > :09:45.e-mail that programme, they would express concerns that since his new

:09:45. > :09:49.fund will not all flow to the council, councils might be more

:09:50. > :09:53.resistant to neighbourhood planning, because of this, they suggested, it

:09:53. > :09:57.just wouldn't work. The minister, though, remained adamant it would

:09:57. > :10:01.help people like Leslie. He took her to what he thought was an

:10:01. > :10:05.affordable home. With the work we do it varies, so it needs to be

:10:05. > :10:10.something that I know at least my husband will earn within that month.

:10:10. > :10:15.Rents at the moment, we are paying what we could pay on a mortgage, in

:10:15. > :10:21.rent, but it is finding the deposit and going through everything.

:10:22. > :10:25.much is that a month that you would think was doable? About �500-�600.

:10:25. > :10:29.It is very, very hard, this is going to take a very long time to

:10:29. > :10:35.change. The situation we have with the housing market in England is 40

:10:35. > :10:39.years in the making. How does that strike you, he is saying we are

:10:39. > :10:43.many years away from your situation being made easier? Then at the end

:10:43. > :10:49.of the day if it doesn't help me t will help my children.

:10:49. > :10:53.Over at the Dales, to the cafe not far away, where Labour has a

:10:53. > :10:56.different take. Housing starts are down 9% on last year, the point I'm

:10:56. > :11:04.making really is the Government's strategy to deliver more housing

:11:04. > :11:10.isn't working anywhere. So we want them to really look at how they put

:11:10. > :11:15.more delivery mechanisms into the system, so that all areas, because

:11:15. > :11:20.absolutely every area needs more housing and more affordable housing.

:11:20. > :11:24.That was the north of England, where empty houses exist, they just

:11:24. > :11:27.aren't cheap enough for Leslie, in the south there are different

:11:27. > :11:31.pressures, that is why Nick Boles said in order to unblock the log

:11:31. > :11:36.jam, you have to open up other possible options, go for

:11:36. > :11:40.Greenfields. So to Harlow, and one such Greenfield, it has been guilt

:11:40. > :11:44.on, we brought one of the minister's fiercest critics to it.

:11:44. > :11:48.Is the lack of housing because too little land is available, or is it

:11:48. > :11:51.another reason. You think it is land, if you release more land the

:11:51. > :11:56.house builders will build. You have to look more closely at the housing

:11:56. > :12:00.market. The house builders have a low output, high margin model. They

:12:00. > :12:04.will build the houses they think they can sell. The demand is there,

:12:04. > :12:08.unquestionably the demand is there, prices have gone up stratferically,

:12:08. > :12:12.why are people not building if it is so easy. What is stopping them,

:12:12. > :12:14.I don't think it is a lack of land. You have to come up with an

:12:15. > :12:17.alternative explanation, I have an explanation. I'm not the Government.

:12:17. > :12:20.Your Government and the last Government are in denial about this,

:12:21. > :12:26.when we built enough houses in this country the state built a lot of

:12:26. > :12:31.them. Throughout the 1970s the state built over 120,000 house as

:12:31. > :12:34.year. Private sector house building since the war is pretty steady, the

:12:34. > :12:38.real loss is in public house building, it is cut even more

:12:38. > :12:43.recently. This is the what it looks like

:12:43. > :12:50.after building on green fields, this is what it looks like before.

:12:50. > :12:52.Down the road, here the bulldozers are poised to roll into this more

:12:52. > :12:56.consensus green field plan. If the Government is going to offer you

:12:56. > :13:00.money, you can spend it on something? You can always spend

:13:00. > :13:03.money, but is it a useful project to the area. There is nothing I can

:13:03. > :13:07.think of that sort of money will satisfy in the area. If you were

:13:07. > :13:11.talking about millions, maybe. Couldn't you as a community do

:13:11. > :13:15.something with �100,000? Of course you can. It doesn't address the

:13:15. > :13:22.first problem we looked at. This development defies all of the

:13:22. > :13:28.original plans for Harlow. That they don't overlook various areas.

:13:28. > :13:32.That the road system is capable of carrying it, et cetera. Just before

:13:32. > :13:35.Christmas, the think-tank that Mr Boles used to run said this

:13:35. > :13:38.Government's policies says it is currently on course to build

:13:38. > :13:43.300,000 fewer new homes than the plans of the previous Government,

:13:43. > :13:48.presiding over the lowest rate of house building since the 1920s.

:13:48. > :13:54.Nick Boles needs his bribes and his bungs to work.

:13:54. > :13:57.The planning minister, Nick Boles, is here. Along with three

:13:57. > :14:01.interested partners, Roberta Blackman Woods, and Simon Jenkins

:14:01. > :14:06.and John Stewart. Do you agree that something must be

:14:06. > :14:09.done, and this might be the right something? Something must always be

:14:09. > :14:12.done. What do you mean by that? Something must be done to address

:14:12. > :14:16.the housing shortage? There is always a housing shortage too.

:14:16. > :14:20.There is plenty of land to build houses on. There is more derelict

:14:20. > :14:25.land in this country, post- industrialisation than in any

:14:25. > :14:30.history in Britain. Building on in a few meadows outside Harlow will

:14:30. > :14:34.not solve the housing crisis. There is plenty of sites with planning

:14:34. > :14:38.permission existing that hasn't been used yet. Two million houses

:14:38. > :14:41.could be built on juggling the figures. The issue is how you treat

:14:41. > :14:46.planning. Selling planning permissions, in effect, through

:14:46. > :14:49.bribes, is not the way to plan this country. You should decide to build

:14:49. > :14:54.where it is appropriate, it might be on greenfield sites in places.

:14:54. > :14:57.The issue has to be one of planning. Do you plan work that appropriate

:14:57. > :15:02.development should take place, protecting beautiful areas and

:15:02. > :15:04.country areas, which are going fast, or do you say, let rip, let money

:15:04. > :15:09.determine it and bribe anyone we can to build houses, that is not

:15:09. > :15:11.the way to approach planning. problem is planning, not just what

:15:11. > :15:17.we heard. You are bribing people with their

:15:17. > :15:24.own money, it is public money? trouble s firstly, Simon started

:15:24. > :15:30.with something that isn't drew. The CPRE, I don't agree with the figure

:15:30. > :15:36.even they say there is only enough brownfield land for 1.25 million.

:15:36. > :15:40.They agree only 460,000 can be built in areas where we need

:15:40. > :15:44.housing most, London and the south- east and the south west. There are

:15:44. > :15:47.only over 100,000 homes empty for more than six months. The idea that

:15:47. > :15:51.there are land out there that we can put two million houses on to

:15:51. > :15:55.solve the problem is frankly not true. Let him come back on this.

:15:55. > :16:02.Also this question, there is a degree of nimbyism, we all like our

:16:02. > :16:06.local area to look good, we are quite conservative, about that.

:16:06. > :16:09.Isn't this saying this is a good way to encourage people to have a

:16:09. > :16:14.stake in what is happening in their area? The agreements in place

:16:14. > :16:18.already, which is the way you tax developers to provide roads,

:16:18. > :16:23.schools and so on, that's in place already. We are making housing very

:16:23. > :16:27.expensive in this country by the fancy schemes. That is not true,

:16:27. > :16:31.economically, if Simon had spent a little time looking at economic

:16:31. > :16:35.theory, what he would realise is the 106 agreement and the levy,

:16:35. > :16:40.drives down the price that the developer pays the landowner for

:16:40. > :16:45.the land. The landowner's best alternative use for this land

:16:45. > :16:50.agriculture, agriculture land prices are 10,000 an acre,

:16:50. > :16:53.development prices are �2 million an acre. From where you sit, is the

:16:53. > :16:56.problem planning question, or that people don't like new developments

:16:56. > :17:00.in their areas, and don't like what is being planned, or is it, frankly,

:17:00. > :17:03.that we are all broke and can't afford new housing any way? In the

:17:03. > :17:08.short-term it is a question on the demand side, it is a question of

:17:08. > :17:11.mortgages, since 2007 we have seen horrendous crisis in the economy

:17:11. > :17:15.and mortgage market. If we go back over the last 20 years, it is

:17:15. > :17:18.largely a supply problem. The planning system in this country

:17:18. > :17:22.controls the supply of land. You have to have a planning permission

:17:22. > :17:28.available to build legally, so it controls the supply of land. Can I

:17:28. > :17:32.pick up on this point about a bribe or bung, I'm sorry minister I find

:17:32. > :17:36.the term unfortunate used. It is his term? It was meant to be a

:17:36. > :17:40.joke! The point about the community infrastructure levy, which is where

:17:40. > :17:47.the money is coming from. It is an infrastructure levy, it is a levy

:17:47. > :17:49.on land value to pay for the infrastructure that we require to

:17:49. > :17:52.facilitate development. That is only proper and right. Whether it

:17:52. > :17:56.can be paid for by the land is another question. It is only right

:17:56. > :18:00.it should be the case. If some of that is taken off and given to

:18:00. > :18:03.local communities, as long as it is spent on infrastructure that is

:18:03. > :18:10.fine, it is not a bung or bribe, it is not cash in pockets. They are

:18:10. > :18:13.going to put a roof on the village hall, or build a primary school, or

:18:13. > :18:17.a park. Are you persuaded by this, you are in favour of localism, and

:18:17. > :18:21.local people having a say, presumably you are in favour of

:18:21. > :18:25.cash going to all those wonderful things, what is wrong with the

:18:25. > :18:28.idea? We are happy that the Government is taking the

:18:28. > :18:33.infrastructure levy forward, we lobbied for it, we are happy for

:18:33. > :18:36.local communities to benefit from it. It is not enough, on its own it

:18:36. > :18:39.is not enough to deliver affordable houses across the country. We will

:18:39. > :18:44.come on to what more should be done. Are you saying, then, that this

:18:44. > :18:47.idea is at least worth a look, you think it might work? We think it's

:18:47. > :18:52.worth having at the edges, but it is not going to deliver the amount

:18:52. > :18:55.of housing that we need. The Government, you know the minister

:18:55. > :18:58.is now saying he recognises there is a huge crisis in housing, the

:18:59. > :19:04.Government have got to upscale their efforts, we really want them

:19:04. > :19:08.to be looking at issues like. Bring some passion and vision back into

:19:08. > :19:12.planning, stop saying that planning is just an obstacle all the time,

:19:12. > :19:18.we can use planning to deliver growth. We can use planning to

:19:18. > :19:21.develop new garden cities, urban extensions. Using what for money?

:19:21. > :19:24.This is really interesting, there are pots of money, we think the

:19:24. > :19:28.Government isn't using the money that is available effectively. They

:19:28. > :19:32.could be looking at SIL, they could be looking at the Regional Growth

:19:32. > :19:35.Fund, money going to other things. Bring this together, use it

:19:35. > :19:39.stragically. So we get, not only housing, and I think we have to be

:19:39. > :19:41.careful not only to talk about housing, we need to talk about

:19:41. > :19:46.building places, building communities that people want to

:19:46. > :19:50.live in. They need schools, and they need jobs as well as houses.

:19:50. > :19:54.actually don't disagree with a lot of what was said. We are using all

:19:54. > :19:57.of those different pots of money to try to unlock sites. I share her

:19:57. > :20:02.passion for garden cities and the way they were developed. My case in

:20:02. > :20:05.a sense is very simple, the last Government, I believe, tried to

:20:05. > :20:09.force people to accept development. And it didn't work. They just

:20:09. > :20:14.didn't take it, we're a very old, democratic country, we won't be

:20:14. > :20:16.told what to do. My job, therefore, is to try to persuade people. It is

:20:16. > :20:20.partly to persuade them of the social justice problem, which is

:20:20. > :20:22.very real for all of their kids. But it is also to persuade them

:20:23. > :20:26.that new development can benefit their community, can benefit the

:20:26. > :20:31.people who live there now, and that's what I'm trying to do.

:20:31. > :20:35.you buy into the structure too, the idea of to have a referendum, to

:20:35. > :20:41.have local people being brought on board? I have no problem with that,

:20:41. > :20:43.in principle. It is going to split communities, the real problem here

:20:43. > :20:49.are the landowner, they are the people who get the huge profits out

:20:49. > :20:54.of it. The idea that you some how produce some local harmony by these

:20:54. > :20:58.serious, I mean Nick is bribing people to have housing estates and

:20:58. > :21:00.wind turbines, the money involved is very considerable. Quite why the

:21:00. > :21:03.whole community doesn't get it I don't know, that is another

:21:03. > :21:06.question. The question is where do you want the development to take

:21:07. > :21:12.place. Britain is a low-density country, the houses are like the

:21:12. > :21:17.houses we are looking here, most of Europe they have flats. If you have

:21:17. > :21:20.a housing crisis you build high- density, where you have roads and

:21:20. > :21:24.facilities in existence already. This meadow development is just

:21:24. > :21:28.crazy. Those of us, and I don't know about anybody else, those of

:21:28. > :21:32.us who have more than two homes. I have two homes, one I own on a huge

:21:32. > :21:36.mortgage, one that the taxpayer, thankfully rents for me in my

:21:36. > :21:41.constituency. Simon has at least two homes, I have been to two of

:21:41. > :21:45.them. Those of us who have two homes or more, have to be careful

:21:46. > :21:51.about telling people they need to build in the top floor of a flat,

:21:51. > :21:55.when people want a house with a garden. Do you see a cultural

:21:55. > :21:58.difference in this country when you come here, you are originally from

:21:58. > :22:01.New Zealand. We don't want to live in flat, people want to own their

:22:02. > :22:05.own homes and feel priced out of the market? There is a strong

:22:05. > :22:08.preference for homeownership, as in other countries like New Zealand,

:22:08. > :22:11.it is definitely the case. There is opposition to development of all

:22:11. > :22:18.kinds, and house anything particular, because it is the most

:22:18. > :22:22.common form of development, as an Antipodean I find puzzling. What

:22:22. > :22:26.Nick is talking about is you are addressing issues people are

:22:26. > :22:29.worrying about. If the local people hear there is a housing development

:22:29. > :22:34.and there are another 50 houses, the first thing is congestion on

:22:34. > :22:37.the road F you live where I live there is already congestion, if

:22:37. > :22:41.this is relieving congestion by fund ago round about or road

:22:41. > :22:46.widening. If it is a bung that goes on unnecessary things, I would be

:22:46. > :22:49.concerned about that. Minister, isn't this quite small beer, though.

:22:50. > :22:53.The part of the housing crisis is more and more people rent, we have

:22:53. > :22:56.to get used to that, the British idea that we will own our own homes,

:22:56. > :23:00.perhaps, there is a generation finding that incredibly difficult.

:23:00. > :23:04.Even though you may do things around the edges, as was suggested,

:23:04. > :23:08.it won't work for most people? not willing to accept that. In the

:23:08. > :23:13.19th century, homeownership was a privilege, it was the exclusive

:23:13. > :23:19.preserve of people with money, or rich parents. We can either head

:23:19. > :23:22.back to that, that is where we are heading, homeownership sank by 5%

:23:22. > :23:25.in the last decade in England. We can go back there, or recognise we

:23:25. > :23:29.have a huge amount of undeveloped land, that isn't special, all of

:23:29. > :23:38.the special land, 40% of it is protected by various destinations,

:23:38. > :23:43.there is a huge amount of it undesignated. In Germany what is

:23:43. > :23:49.home occupation? It is low. problem is in cities. How many

:23:49. > :23:53.homes do you own. I'm paying for your house, bloody hell! The issue

:23:53. > :23:56.is here is city housing, there is a shortage of house anything cities.

:23:56. > :23:59.Housing in cities is badly managed at the moment. People don't occupy

:23:59. > :24:03.enough of the houses the Government is doing the right thing to

:24:03. > :24:08.encourage them to get rid of surplus bedrooms. This business of

:24:08. > :24:12.trying to get people to build on meadows is a total distraction. It

:24:12. > :24:15.is about planning cities properly for people to live in.

:24:15. > :24:18.There is nothing new in senior American politicians, or even

:24:18. > :24:22.diplomats for that matter, saying they want Britain to play an

:24:22. > :24:26.influential role in the European Union. What is highly unusual is

:24:26. > :24:29.for a senior diplomat at the US State Department, Philip Gordon, in

:24:29. > :24:32.this case, to criticise the very idea that Britain should hold a

:24:32. > :24:36.referendum on the EU. He warned that referendums can turn countries

:24:36. > :24:41.inward. All this comes as leading British business figure, including

:24:41. > :24:44.Richard Branson, sir Martin Sorrell, the head of the CBI, sir Carr ka,

:24:44. > :24:48.warn that wholesale renegotiation of EU membership, could damage

:24:49. > :24:52.British business and put EU membership in peril. Allegra

:24:52. > :24:55.Stratton is here with background. What has been said and what is the

:24:55. > :25:00.reaction in Downing Street? Downing Street is saying that actually they

:25:00. > :25:03.agree, that they too want Britain to have a strong role with the EU,

:25:03. > :25:09.full stop. What Philip Gordon said, was it is in America's interest for

:25:09. > :25:12.Britain to be at the forefront of the EU. He said it was in America's

:25:12. > :25:17.interests, especially above all EU countries if Britain is in there.

:25:17. > :25:22.If you have this referendum you are turning inwards. This is classic

:25:23. > :25:26.megaphone diplomacy, the problem is it is screechingly loud when we are

:25:26. > :25:32.weeks away where the Prime Minister will give the speech where he will

:25:32. > :25:36.set out where he thinks. He has to tow the line, with the euro-

:25:36. > :25:41.sceptics, one across the table from us, will decide that part of the

:25:41. > :25:48.British public and people in his own cabinet. And on the one land,

:25:49. > :25:53.and some senior politicians who sound euro-sceptic, they are more

:25:53. > :25:57.pro it than they sound, so George Osborne, and sometimes David

:25:57. > :26:01.Cameron. He may agree with Philip Gordon, but in the speech he has to

:26:01. > :26:05.offer up something substantial to people who he has kept waiting for

:26:05. > :26:10.a long time. Philip Gordon is saying this is an internationally

:26:10. > :26:16.awaited event. Marc Reckless is well known for his

:26:16. > :26:26.demands for a referendum, and we have an Assistant Secretary of

:26:26. > :26:31.

:26:31. > :26:35.State in the Obama administration, What is it to you about these

:26:35. > :26:39.comments? The response to the Financial Times, where Richard

:26:39. > :26:46.Branson expressed concern about the uncertainty that a decision and

:26:46. > :26:50.referendum would create. We live in an integrated world. We require

:26:50. > :26:54.collective action to solve global and regional challenges. Trend, if

:26:54. > :26:57.you think about it globally, is to strengthen international

:26:57. > :27:04.institutions, not weaken international institutions, and

:27:04. > :27:10.from a US perspective the EU has been good for the UK, having the UK

:27:10. > :27:13.vocal has been good for Europe. It service the interests of the United

:27:13. > :27:17.States. What do you think of this, it is clearly in American interests

:27:17. > :27:20.that they have a strong ally in Britain, and politicians actually

:27:20. > :27:25.of both parties in the United States, for many years, have said

:27:25. > :27:29.Britain is only really strong if it is strong in Europe? The US may

:27:29. > :27:33.like Britain being an advocate for US interests in the EU, there may

:27:33. > :27:36.be some people in New York who wouldn't mind too much if EU

:27:36. > :27:40.regulation were to stifle competition from the City of London.

:27:40. > :27:45.But, ultimately what matters, is the interests of the British people.

:27:45. > :27:49.I think this debate has really moved on in the last two years

:27:49. > :27:53.particularly. It now does look like the British people will have a say

:27:53. > :27:57.in the referendum, for the first time ever, no-one under the age of

:27:57. > :28:01.55 has such a vote, where we decide whether we want to govern ourselves

:28:01. > :28:05.or continue to be governed through the European Union. Are you in any

:28:05. > :28:10.way irritate bid what was said today, or you think this is --

:28:10. > :28:17.irritated by what was said today, do you think the Americans have an

:28:17. > :28:22.interest, even if it is not in line with your views, even if what PJ

:28:23. > :28:27.Crowley was saying we get a good deal for the world and the country?

:28:27. > :28:30.Earlier in his remarks he said it was a matter for the British

:28:30. > :28:33.Government, Philip, and the British people, and I think that is really

:28:33. > :28:37.important that is recognised. Ultimately we had to look at what

:28:38. > :28:42.is in the interests of the British economy. Do we want our own laws,

:28:42. > :28:46.perhaps the US might like us to moderate slightly how EU

:28:46. > :28:51.regulations affects them. Our economy, so much of it is governed

:28:51. > :28:56.by EU regulation. We have to obey single market rules exporting to

:28:56. > :28:59.the EU, why should we obey them for the domestic economy and exporting

:28:59. > :29:03.else where Let me ask about the referendum question. What was

:29:03. > :29:06.picked up is the implication that perhaps the referendum is the wrong

:29:06. > :29:10.thing, it would make us turn inward was the suggestion. It might do

:29:10. > :29:14.exactly the opposite, might it not? It might give people a chance to

:29:14. > :29:19.express their opinion for origins on a matter that affects us very

:29:19. > :29:22.deeply? Sure, and as Philip Gordon said, this is a matter for the

:29:22. > :29:27.British people, ultimately. On this side of the Atlantic, you know,

:29:27. > :29:31.there is a lot of attitudes about US membership in the United Nations,

:29:31. > :29:35.it comes up over four years, there is a sliver of our population that

:29:35. > :29:38.does not think that, or thinks that the United States membership in the

:29:38. > :29:44.United Nations is a challenge to our sovereignty. We happen not to

:29:44. > :29:47.put that to a vote. To the larger question, the reality is domestic

:29:47. > :29:51.issues have broader international implications. There is nothing

:29:51. > :29:55.wrong with voices in Europe or in the UK saying to the United States

:29:55. > :29:59.politicians, look, we don't care how you solve your debt and

:29:59. > :30:03.spending crisis, but if you fall off a cliff, at some point in the

:30:03. > :30:08.future, and you go back into recession, that is going to have a

:30:08. > :30:11.profound impact in Europe, and likewise, I think it is perfectly

:30:11. > :30:15.appropriate for the United States to say, look if you take steps,

:30:15. > :30:18.while they can be logical from a domestic standpoint, end up

:30:18. > :30:22.weakening what has become a very significant international

:30:22. > :30:26.institutions in the EU, if you think that will be helpful to the

:30:26. > :30:29.world. Do you think the Obama administration thinks Britain is a

:30:29. > :30:33.less important ally if we are not in the EU? I don't think this is an

:30:33. > :30:35.Oort or, this is a win, win, win for the United States. There is a

:30:35. > :30:42.great convergence of interest between the United States and the

:30:42. > :30:45.UK. And this pillar is vitally important, when then you put shared

:30:46. > :30:50.bilateral interests in the context of an EU, or in the context of NATO.

:30:50. > :30:55.It is not an either-or proposition, it is the fact that the special

:30:55. > :30:58.relationship between the United States and the UK has multiple

:30:58. > :31:03.venues through question effective action can be achieved. Is that the

:31:03. > :31:06.way you see today's comments, or is it to go back to what you said at

:31:06. > :31:12.the start of the conversation, there are clearly American economic,

:31:12. > :31:15.domestic and political interests in what we do, and perhaps the pro-

:31:15. > :31:19.pond regins of opinion there, or those who think about it, is we

:31:19. > :31:24.should stay in the EU? I think it is inconceivable that American

:31:24. > :31:28.people would allow a NAFTA court strike down EU laws, the idea that

:31:28. > :31:31.the American people would accept being governed in a way this

:31:31. > :31:35.country has been governed. They are telling us what they think about

:31:35. > :31:39.what we do, does that cause you concern? We have very important

:31:39. > :31:42.defence relationships with the US, the US is our largest single

:31:42. > :31:45.trading partner, but at the moment that trade relationship is run by

:31:45. > :31:48.the European Union. What I would like to see is that trade

:31:48. > :31:52.relationship run in British interests, rather than tying

:31:52. > :31:56.ourselves to one declining continent in the EU, we should

:31:56. > :32:00.trade freely across the world, and negotiate a free trade deal with

:32:00. > :32:05.the United States and rising economies in China and India and

:32:05. > :32:09.elsewhere, and trade dols that are in the British interests, opening

:32:09. > :32:13.up our agricultural market to the US and other countries, we have

:32:13. > :32:19.huge ambition to do better deals in the British interest.

:32:19. > :32:24.A couple of years ago the TV satirist, Armando Iannucci, the man

:32:24. > :32:29.behind The Thick of It, explained his job was sometimes made more

:32:29. > :32:34.difficult that some things in real- life politics were beyond satire.

:32:34. > :32:38.Imagine the mid-term report congratulations and then an next

:32:38. > :32:42.that had pledges gone wrong, that remained a secret, until a

:32:42. > :32:45.Government aide was photographed with the document revealing the

:32:45. > :32:51.internal debate on how long to bury the bad news, you couldn't make it

:32:51. > :32:54.Come n imagine this is Downing Street, and you are a senior

:32:54. > :32:58.Government adviser. The Government is about to publish its Mid-Term

:32:58. > :33:01.Review, there will be some good stuff in it, and some not so God

:33:01. > :33:08.news. Obviously you would rather everyone focus on the good news.

:33:08. > :33:13.The question is, what do you do with the bad news. Do you, (a)

:33:13. > :33:19.publish it all at once, and hope, on balance, you come out ahead in

:33:19. > :33:25.the coverage, or do you (b) publish only the good news, and sneak the

:33:25. > :33:29.bad news out later, only on the Government website. Do you do (c)

:33:29. > :33:32.inadvertantly tell everyone what you are doing, by showing

:33:32. > :33:38.photographers a memo cussing your options.

:33:38. > :33:43.I'm guess you won't have plumped for (C) that is exactly what

:33:43. > :33:47.Government adviser, Patrick Rock, has done. The memo talks about

:33:47. > :33:57.problematic areas, unfavourable copy and broken pledges, that could

:33:57. > :33:59.

:33:59. > :34:04.be published without fanfare. But, guess what they have now got.

:34:04. > :34:07.(fanfare) The fanfare was deafening when the 24,000 document was

:34:07. > :34:11.published this afternoon, the Government had guaranteed that

:34:11. > :34:15.every journalist would be pouring all over it. Now the storing story

:34:15. > :34:19.wasn't so much missed targets and broken pledge, no, it was a

:34:19. > :34:23.Government incompetence, and allegations of deception. So it was

:34:23. > :34:28.certainly happy new year for the Labour leader and his first Prime

:34:28. > :34:33.Minister's Questions of 2013. the Prime Minister tell us why on

:34:33. > :34:39.Monday, when he published his Mid- Term Review, he failed to publish

:34:39. > :34:46.his audit of coalition broken promises. We will be publishing

:34:46. > :34:50.absolutely every single audit of every single prob mis, all 39 --

:34:50. > :34:54.promise, all 399 pledges set out in the Mid-Term Review. He's a PR man

:34:54. > :34:57.who can't even do a relaunch. Half way through this parliament, we

:34:57. > :35:03.know they are incompetent, they break their Prom mys and the nasty

:35:03. > :35:09.Party is back. So, what does the document say?

:35:09. > :35:13.Well, some of the pledges haven't been kept yet, but may be delivered

:35:13. > :35:17.over the next two-and-a-half years, like having a free vote in the

:35:17. > :35:22.Commons over fox-hunting, that appears pretty unlikely. Others

:35:22. > :35:25.look pretty difficult to describe as kept, for example, the

:35:25. > :35:29.guarantees that health spending increasing in real terms in each

:35:29. > :35:33.year of the parliament. The UK Statistics Authortiy has concluded

:35:33. > :35:38.it would be fair Tory say there has been little change in -- fairer to

:35:38. > :35:41.say there has been little change in health spending. What about the

:35:41. > :35:45.top-down reorganisation of the NHS, the document suggests that has been

:35:45. > :35:48.kept, if so, what was all the business about abolishing strategic

:35:48. > :35:52.health authorities, and Primary Care Trusts, and giving more

:35:52. > :35:59.commissioning to gpts, it seemed pretty top-down at the time. Don't

:35:59. > :36:03.hold your breath waiting for legislation creating fewer and more

:36:03. > :36:07.equal-sized constituencies, Nick Clegg is refueinging to support the

:36:07. > :36:12.changes because the Conservatives won't support Lords reform. The

:36:12. > :36:22.publication of the Mid-Term Review on Monday, had real echos of Tony

:36:22. > :36:26.Blair's annual reports. Line-by- line we are delivering on the

:36:26. > :36:29.contract. Now it is claimed it is PR. In the end Tony Blair gave up

:36:29. > :36:34.his Annual Reports after three years, perhaps concluding that no-

:36:34. > :36:39.one really cares what Governments say about how jolly well they are

:36:39. > :36:42.doing. I think all Governments end up doing this, despite their

:36:42. > :36:46.experience, they still think that good news is news to journalists.

:36:46. > :36:50.It is not, unfortunately, they get their headline for a few hours, on

:36:50. > :36:55.the first day, then you lot go around picking holes in it, or you

:36:55. > :36:58.look at the processology, which is exactly what has happened today.

:36:58. > :37:04.Poor Patrick Rock isn't the first minister or adviser to get snapped

:37:04. > :37:09.revealing a document. No comment, gracious smile, look good. In fact

:37:09. > :37:14.the mishap has even made it into an episode of the TV comedy, The Thick

:37:14. > :37:20.of It. What would possess you to talk about the streets with notes

:37:20. > :37:25.just there for anybody to see. Patrick Rock joins Labour

:37:25. > :37:29.minister's Caroline Flint and Hazel Blears, and exConservative minister,

:37:29. > :37:33.Andrew Mitchell. Perhaps most serious was Bob Quick, parading

:37:33. > :37:36.details of a yet to happen anti- terror raid. Perhaps one finding of

:37:36. > :37:41.the next Government review is ministers and advisers should all

:37:41. > :37:44.be issued with folders and envelopes to put their sensitive

:37:44. > :37:49.developments in. There is no hotter hot button issue

:37:49. > :37:52.in the United States than guns and what to do about them. After the

:37:52. > :37:58.Connecticut school shooting Barack Obama opened up the emotionally

:37:58. > :38:02.charged debate, and into it stepped the former Mirror editor, Piers

:38:02. > :38:06.Morgan. He criticised America's gun control laws, enshrined in the

:38:06. > :38:10.second amendment to the constitution. Since then almost

:38:10. > :38:13.100,000 people have signed a petition calling for him to be

:38:13. > :38:17.deported. The White House issued a statement defending Mr Morgan's

:38:17. > :38:23.right to free speech. Tonight he had a flavour of how some Americans

:38:23. > :38:27.think about it, when he invited the man who started the petition on to

:38:27. > :38:30.the programme. 1776 will commence again if you try to take our

:38:30. > :38:34.fiefrpls, it doesn't matter how many lemmings you get on the street

:38:34. > :38:40.being for them to have their guns taken, we will not relinquish them,

:38:40. > :38:45.that is why you will fail, do you understand, the establishment knows

:38:45. > :38:49.that no matter how much propaganda, the revolution will rise again. My

:38:49. > :38:53.family was at the core starting Santa Ana, because they came to

:38:53. > :38:57.take the guns of Texas. Don't try what your ancestors did before.

:38:57. > :39:02.Come to America, I will take you out shooting, you can become an

:39:02. > :39:06.American and join the Republic. you finished? Yes I am finish. You

:39:07. > :39:12.will not take my right. There you are, just before I came on air

:39:13. > :39:16.strikes I spoke to Piers Morgan. Do you regret telling Americans

:39:16. > :39:21.what laws are appropriate in their own country and not your's?

:39:21. > :39:25.really. Because I live here. I'm a legal resident in America, the

:39:25. > :39:29.constitution and Bill of Rights applies to me equally as it does to

:39:29. > :39:33.an American. What happens here affects me and my life and that of

:39:33. > :39:38.my family. The guns issue here is now, I think, so dangerous, and so

:39:38. > :39:43.out of control, that something has to give. If I can help frame the

:39:43. > :39:50.debate in a way that is constructive to getting new gun

:39:50. > :39:54.control legislation, then great. But framing in a de -- a debate,

:39:54. > :39:59.you were telling the gun components they were stupid? They were having

:39:59. > :40:03.stupid comments. When you have a massacre like the Sandyhook school

:40:03. > :40:08.massacre and 20 young people blown to pieces by a deranged young man

:40:08. > :40:13.getting Assault Rifles if he wants from a local superstore like Wal-

:40:13. > :40:17.Mart. The reaction of the gun loby that I had, on my show at CNN, was

:40:17. > :40:22.to say more guns less crime, arm everybody, arm the teachers, arm

:40:22. > :40:26.all the movie theatre receptionists, arm everyone at a church, temple

:40:26. > :40:30.and shopping mall and the spiralling descent into gun madness

:40:30. > :40:34.continues. And I do find it stupid and dangerous. I do think that most

:40:34. > :40:39.people in Britain, in particular, where we remember what happened

:40:39. > :40:45.after Dunblane were we brought in very draconian gun control law, and

:40:45. > :40:50.guess what, we have between 30 and 40 gun murders a year, America has

:40:50. > :40:54.11,000-12,000. You can't be surprised as a vit -- at the vit

:40:54. > :40:58.roll, telling them as a foreign in their country that their laws stink

:40:58. > :41:02.which, is effectively what you have just said? I don't know that at all.

:41:02. > :41:06.For all the vitriol I'm getting, I'm getting a lot of people

:41:06. > :41:10.crediting me, a lot of Americans are very concerned about this, who

:41:10. > :41:14.think what I'm trying to do, which is exactly what the President is

:41:14. > :41:17.trying to do and many other people, like the Mayor of New York are

:41:17. > :41:21.trying to do, it is not about banning all their guns or attacking

:41:21. > :41:24.the second amendment, it is a specific campaign to take the

:41:24. > :41:28.military-style assault weapons off the streets and out of civilian

:41:28. > :41:32.hands. They have been used in the last four mass shootings in America,

:41:32. > :41:36.they are the preferred weapon of choice for mass shooters. They load

:41:36. > :41:39.them up with these ridiculous high- capacity magazines that you can put

:41:39. > :41:44.100 bullets in to fire in less than a minute. They are killing machines.

:41:44. > :41:47.They need to be outlawed. Everybody will understand the arguments,

:41:47. > :41:50.particularly over here, they understand exactly what you are

:41:50. > :41:54.saying, you are now a political activist, not a journalist? I don't

:41:54. > :42:00.mind what you call me. I'm comfortable with what I'm doing,

:42:01. > :42:06.and I will continue do doing it, if it makes me popular or unpopular,

:42:06. > :42:11.it doesn't matter, it is what I believe in.

:42:11. > :42:14.The called War on Drugs was declared by President Nixon first,

:42:15. > :42:19.and declared lost in 2011, inbetween many politicians try to

:42:19. > :42:22.avoid the phrase, with the Obama administration suggesting it was

:42:22. > :42:25.counter-productive. Whatever you call t the efforts by the United

:42:25. > :42:31.States to control the production of narcotics abroad, and their

:42:31. > :42:34.consumption at home, the results have involved conflicts in Panama

:42:34. > :42:37.and elsewhere, and the incarceration of thousands of young

:42:37. > :42:41.Americans for drug crimes. The House I Live In is a new film on

:42:41. > :42:45.the War on Drugs, by the director, Eugene Jarecki, and one of the

:42:45. > :42:54.contenders for an Oscar, the film argues the war has been a disaster.

:42:54. > :42:59.Here is a flavour. I'm not a big Superdrug dealer. I have weed. I do

:42:59. > :43:04.what I have to do, I know how to survive, I dib and dab if I have to.

:43:04. > :43:09.It is not hard to tell these are the junkies. Yeah. I think the

:43:09. > :43:15.economy thrives off the drug money. We have judges getting high too.

:43:15. > :43:19.Cops sniffing coke, people with good college jobs who can afford

:43:19. > :43:22.the habits. That is the difference. The boys are behind us. The biggest

:43:22. > :43:29.drug industry in the world isn't in Mexico or Columbia, or in

:43:29. > :43:33.Afghanistan, it is in the United States. One of the realities is,

:43:33. > :43:36.most people getting arrested in this country or drugs are selling

:43:36. > :43:40.drugs to support their own habit. If you stand in a federal court,

:43:40. > :43:50.you are watching poor, uneducated people, being fed into a machine

:43:50. > :43:50.

:43:50. > :43:54.like meat to make sausage. It is just bang, bang, bang, next.

:43:54. > :43:57.Somebody down the road said we will fight a war against illicit drugs,

:43:57. > :44:01.because drugs are bad. OK, there is no argument there, think about

:44:01. > :44:06.where we are 30 years later. If you look at all the money spent on drug

:44:06. > :44:10.enforcement, on prison, probation officers, judges, narcotics agents,

:44:11. > :44:14.on adix, and everything else that has expanded due to the war on

:44:14. > :44:18.drugs, it gratifies us because it makes us feel tough on crime. But

:44:18. > :44:22.to what end, we are the most jailing country on the planet.

:44:22. > :44:26.Beyond saud dough Arabia, China or Russia, nobody jails their

:44:26. > :44:31.population at the rate we do. And yet drugs are purer than ever

:44:31. > :44:35.before, they are more available. There are younger and younger kids

:44:35. > :44:42.willing to sell them. If it was draconian and it worked, but it is

:44:42. > :44:48.draconian and it doesn't work, and it leads to more.

:44:48. > :44:52.You can see a full version of the film, The House I Live In, on

:44:52. > :44:57.Storyville on Monday night. Eugene Jarecki directed it, and he's here

:44:57. > :45:00.tonight. You say that the War on Drugs has failed, the slogan has

:45:00. > :45:04.clearly failed, the Obama administration has distanced

:45:04. > :45:08.themselves from it. You can't say taking the drug problems has not

:45:08. > :45:14.made America a safer place than in the 1990s, because crime has gone

:45:14. > :45:20.down, and much of it drug-related? Crime went down for lots of factor,

:45:20. > :45:25.we have created more crime. There is a study that says when you

:45:25. > :45:28.incarcerate 300 people out of every 100,000, that is the tipping point

:45:28. > :45:33.that provides public safety. The moment you go beyond that you

:45:33. > :45:38.foster crime what we do in America is take the non-violent and punish

:45:38. > :45:43.them as though they were violent. We do 740 people per 100,000, among

:45:43. > :45:47.the black community it is 4,000 people. A lot of people make the

:45:47. > :45:51.point it is disproportionately punitive among the black population.

:45:51. > :45:56.I lived in Washington in the 1990s you were 20-times more likely to be

:45:56. > :46:00.murdered than in Belfast, that was mostly drug crime, it was mostly

:46:00. > :46:04.drug crime? It was violent crime. That is drug territory, that has

:46:04. > :46:10.largely gone? No, the violent crime that happens over drug territories,

:46:10. > :46:15.because of the illegality of drugs, if you look in Portugal and Greece,

:46:15. > :46:18.that once they legalise the violence goes away. We learned from

:46:18. > :46:21.prohibition that violence is attached to the drugs. You and I

:46:21. > :46:27.wouldn't be talking about the matter if we were talking about the

:46:27. > :46:29.incarceration of the violent. Who has a problem with that. America's

:46:29. > :46:33.700% explosion of the prison population, is because we

:46:33. > :46:37.incarcerate the violent with the non-violent. Is your solution the

:46:37. > :46:42.decriminalisation of the drugs, saying we should trade in them, and

:46:42. > :46:46.a trading decision, which street corner you deal on? It starts with

:46:46. > :46:51.dealing with it as a health problem, it is that. We should treat drugs

:46:51. > :46:55.certainly we treat alcohol. It is a far more destructive drug than any

:46:55. > :47:01.on the schedule of legal drugs. Its track record of human destruction

:47:01. > :47:05.and public safety and health is peerless. We treat those on the

:47:05. > :47:10.schedule of illegal drugs far more harshly than alcohol, because there

:47:10. > :47:14.is a big business attached to T it defies common sense. It is true

:47:14. > :47:21.there is big business, one of the reasons things are criminalises is

:47:21. > :47:27.society make as moral statement about it. You criminalise murders

:47:27. > :47:32.or rape because you don't think there will be any more, but you do

:47:32. > :47:36.that because they are wrong? That is the nature of it, we unleashed

:47:36. > :47:41.the dogs of war when we launched the War on Drugs. If you want to

:47:41. > :47:44.talk about policies reformed and taxing and regulating drugs, as

:47:44. > :47:48.Washington and Colorado have voted to do. We have laws in America that

:47:48. > :47:52.are so surreal, for example, in California, there are people with

:47:52. > :47:57.non-violent third strieblgs who have life sentence, down the hall,

:47:57. > :48:03.a murder, one of the violent people we should be concerned with are out

:48:03. > :48:08.in 15 years. We are punishing the non-violent more hysterically than

:48:08. > :48:12.the violent. In Holland, where the use of cannabis has been decriminal

:48:12. > :48:18.niceed, they are tougher on it, they don't -- decriminalised it,

:48:18. > :48:22.they are tougher on if, they don't want drugs tourists. You couldn't

:48:22. > :48:28.have more draconian policies than in the United States. We lead the

:48:28. > :48:31.world in demand. We have 40 years of it, and spent �45 billion

:48:31. > :48:34.dollars. We have cheaper drugs more available than before. The violent

:48:34. > :48:39.crime you are talking about, that has been part of the regime that I

:48:39. > :48:42.would say, let's go after violent crime, when you have

:48:43. > :48:45.criminalisation of non-violent petty offence, the police are

:48:45. > :48:49.invent advised to spend their evening on it rather than policing

:48:49. > :48:59.the violence. We will look forward to the film. A quick look at

:48:59. > :49:21.

:49:21. > :49:25.Over 47 million litre water pump from it each day, it hosted its

:49:25. > :49:30.first birth in 1924, and fewer than 10% of its stations are south of

:49:30. > :49:40.the river. London's Tube is celebrating its 150th birthday.

:49:40. > :49:49.

:49:49. > :49:54.# The public gets # What the public wants