:00:41. > :00:43.Afternoon, folks, welcome to Sunday Politics. Our top story:
:00:43. > :00:47.George Osborne wants Britain to "play its part" to stabilise the
:00:47. > :00:52.world economy. But opposition is growing to a request for billions
:00:52. > :00:55.of pounds in extra funds from Britain to bailout the eurozone.
:00:55. > :01:04.Does the Chancellor have a fight on his hands?
:01:04. > :01:06.The unions didn't like it, neither did some of his own MPs. Has Ed
:01:06. > :01:08.Miliband got his fingers burnt messing with Labour's economic
:01:08. > :01:15.policy? I'll be asking Shadow Business Secretary, Chuka Umunna,
:01:15. > :01:18.Their judges ruled that radical Muslim Cleric, Abu Qatada, can stay
:01:18. > :01:26.in this country, so should we leave the European Court of Human Rights?
:01:26. > :01:28.We'll debate that live. And our regular political panel is
:01:28. > :01:31.here to analyse the week ahead in politics and tweeting throughout
:01:31. > :01:38.the programme, including the journalist whose story could end
:01:38. > :01:42.Environment Secretary Chris Huhne's political career. In London, why
:01:42. > :01:52.Boris Johnson has said that he backs a new airport. What is the
:01:52. > :01:56.
:01:56. > :01:58.coalition government going to All that is coming up. First, the
:01:58. > :02:00.news with Tim Willcox. The long journey to finding a
:02:00. > :02:03.Republican presidential candidate has taken another twist overnight
:02:03. > :02:06.after the right winger, Newt Gingrich, triumphed in the key
:02:06. > :02:08.South Carolina primary. The former Speaker of the House of
:02:08. > :02:11.Representatives pulled off a surprise victory over the current
:02:11. > :02:19.frontrunner, Mitt Romney. Our North America editor, Mark Mardell,
:02:19. > :02:25.reports from South Carolina. Meet Gingrich's supporters had a
:02:25. > :02:30.lot to celebrate. -- Newt Gingrich's supporters. But he has
:02:30. > :02:34.an immense amount of work to do if this victory is to be any more than
:02:34. > :02:37.a flash in the pan. The former Speaker told the crowd why he
:02:37. > :02:44.wanted to win the right to take on President Obama in the autumn
:02:44. > :02:48.election. I believe because we, after a year of conversation -- we
:02:48. > :02:53.decided we wanted to run because we concluded, this is the most
:02:53. > :03:03.important election of our lifetime. If Barack Obama can get re-elected
:03:03. > :03:07.
:03:08. > :03:11.Just think how radical he would be in a second term. The victory is a
:03:11. > :03:15.blow to Mitt Romney, the front runner who is distrusted by many
:03:15. > :03:20.Republican Conservatives. In his speech, he warned Newt Gingrich to
:03:20. > :03:24.lay off attacking -- attacking his record as a businessman. Our party
:03:24. > :03:28.can't be led to victory by someone who has also never run a business,
:03:28. > :03:32.and never run a state. When my opponent's attack success and free
:03:32. > :03:36.enterprise, they are not only attacking me, but their attacking
:03:36. > :03:43.every person who dreams of a better future. Black - but they are
:03:43. > :03:46.The state by state election next move to Florida. Conservative
:03:46. > :03:50.celebrating here tonight will hope they have found one single
:03:50. > :03:56.candidate they can unite behind and so a pos Mitt Romney. This result
:03:56. > :04:02.means the road ahead will be long and probably rather nasty. -- and
:04:02. > :04:04.Close The Deputy Prime Minister, Nick
:04:04. > :04:11.Clegg, has defended Government proposals for a �500-a-week benefit
:04:11. > :04:14.cap. Mr Clegg told the BBC he believed the measures would
:04:14. > :04:17.encourage people who were able to work to seek employment. But he
:04:17. > :04:19.said more thought was needed on the way the plans are implemented.
:04:19. > :04:23.The Government's controversial plans to reform the NHS in England
:04:23. > :04:26.are expected to be criticised this week in a report by senior MPs. The
:04:26. > :04:28.Commons Health Select Committee - which is led by a Conservative - is
:04:28. > :04:31.likely to attack Health Secretary Andrew Lansley's strategy of trying
:04:31. > :04:34.to save billions of pounds while attempting to carry out a major
:04:34. > :04:37.overhaul of the service. A 6-year-old girl is in hospital
:04:37. > :04:40.with serious injuries after being mauled by a dog. It happened in a
:04:40. > :04:50.park near Chingford in north-east London yesterday. The dog bit off
:04:50. > :04:51.
:04:51. > :04:54.part of her ear. Police are trying to find the dog and its owner.
:04:54. > :04:56.That's it - there's more here on BBC One at 6:30pm this evening.
:04:56. > :04:59.Andrew. There's mounting opposition from
:04:59. > :05:02.MPs to the idea that Britain should stump up billions of pounds to help
:05:02. > :05:05.the stricken eurozone. The money would be channelled through the IMF
:05:05. > :05:08.- the International Monetary Fund - which has asked for an extra �325
:05:08. > :05:11.billion from members. In a moment I'll be joined by senior Tory
:05:11. > :05:18.backbencher, David Davis. But first, this is what the Deputy Prime
:05:18. > :05:21.Minister said on this morning's Andrew Marr Show. We ought to, and
:05:21. > :05:26.the Chancellor was very clear about this, we must always be strong
:05:26. > :05:30.supporters of the IMF. It is a linchpin, in many ways it was a
:05:30. > :05:36.British invention in the creation of these great institutions in the
:05:36. > :05:40.post-war period. It is a linchpin in creating a system of stability.
:05:40. > :05:43.We will contribute more if we asked to? We will always make our fair
:05:44. > :05:48.contribution to the IMF, when it says and shows that increased
:05:48. > :05:52.contributions are necessary. David Davis, do you agree with the Deputy
:05:52. > :05:56.Prime Minister? Historically he is right, the IMF has been the
:05:56. > :06:00.linchpin, but you have got to ask himself why -- yourself why the
:06:00. > :06:05.Americans, Canada, Japan, are all antagonistic towards this proposal.
:06:05. > :06:08.It is because the IMF is about to do something new. That is not to
:06:08. > :06:12.look after poor countries in difficulty but prop up some of the
:06:12. > :06:16.richest countries in the world, in pursuit of a policy which has
:06:16. > :06:20.failed already. I don't know which buyout this will be by the time we
:06:20. > :06:23.get to it. -- which bail-out. Principle because the leaders of
:06:23. > :06:28.Europe will not recognise it is not just the return that has a problem
:06:28. > :06:35.but that the euro is a problem. -- not just the eurozone that has a
:06:35. > :06:39.problem. Look at the proposals, they are continually bailing out
:06:39. > :06:44.but not allowing the one thing which will allow Greece, Portugal,
:06:44. > :06:48.Ireland, Spain, Italy to recover, which is devaluation, which
:06:48. > :06:52.requires leaving the euro. As a result, what we are looking at is
:06:52. > :06:56.probably a decade of zombie economies, of countries to have no
:06:56. > :07:00.way forward other than to cut back on public services and public
:07:00. > :07:06.spending. They have got to do some of that anyway, but if they haven't
:07:06. > :07:12.got any growth in the economy, all our markets in Europe... They will
:07:12. > :07:17.be suffering poverty for a decade. British policy as given by the
:07:17. > :07:20.Treasury, the Chancellor, the Prime Minister, is to try to save the
:07:20. > :07:25.eurozone as currently constituted. We are supporting measures to that
:07:25. > :07:28.end. Is that the wrong policy? think it is. I think we should
:07:28. > :07:32.recognise that the measures designed to keep Greece and
:07:32. > :07:36.Portugal and maybe others within the euro are not working. They
:07:36. > :07:40.actually hold out the prospect for causing a bigger catastrophe and
:07:40. > :07:43.crisis. I think we should think again about that possible but I can
:07:43. > :07:46.understand why. There is lots of business pressure on the government
:07:46. > :07:51.to protect the euro as it now stands, because we have got big
:07:51. > :07:54.markets. But they are going to be eroded and damaged by the policy
:07:54. > :08:01.the European Union is following. Our policy in your view should be
:08:01. > :08:05.to let purism break up? I would go for an orderly reductions. -- to
:08:05. > :08:08.let the eurozone break up? I still think there will be a eurozone in a
:08:08. > :08:13.decade, but if they are sensible, it would be the strong economies of
:08:13. > :08:17.the north plus those they can keep within, France and Italy, probably,
:08:17. > :08:23.in the medium term. I don't really think that keeping Greece and
:08:23. > :08:26.Portugal, maybe Ireland within, is in the very long term, even
:08:26. > :08:31.possible. If the government comes to Parliament to ask for more money
:08:31. > :08:35.for the IMF, will you vote for or against? If it is for the IMF to
:08:35. > :08:40.support the current year his own policies, I would vote against.
:08:40. > :08:46.be joined by many of your colleagues? -- will you be joined?
:08:46. > :08:49.There are quite a few who are critical of supporting the eurozone
:08:49. > :08:55.with British taxpayers' money. The Prime Minister has said we did not
:08:55. > :08:57.intend to do that. I suspect there would be quite a few there, yes.
:08:57. > :09:01.Political parties can't win elections if they are not trusted
:09:01. > :09:05.on the economy. Despite the television's economic troubles,
:09:05. > :09:13.Labour is struggling to convince voters that it could do better. It
:09:13. > :09:15.is also struggling in the polls. One put Labour five points behind
:09:15. > :09:17.the Conservatives this morning. That's despite Labour's leadership
:09:17. > :09:20.efforts to shift the political debate forward.
:09:20. > :09:25.Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls, said he could not commit to reversing
:09:25. > :09:29.any government cuts, if Labour came to power in 2015. He backed the
:09:29. > :09:32.coalition's cap on public sector pay. The head of Labour's biggest
:09:32. > :09:36.union donor was furious and said embracing austerity would lead to
:09:36. > :09:40.the destruction of the party and certain election defeat. Ed
:09:40. > :09:45.Miliband stood firm, saying it was tough if people disagreed with him.
:09:45. > :09:49.Meanwhile, the party has not given up fighting individual cuts,
:09:49. > :09:53.helping defeat government welfare reforms in the Lords. One Labour MP
:09:53. > :09:58.questioned whether this new strategy made sense. I think Ed
:09:58. > :10:01.Miliband is to go back to the drawing board, to rethink through a
:10:01. > :10:07.current deficit reduction plan, which he should have. But one that
:10:07. > :10:10.has got some real meat in it. was John Mann. With me to discuss
:10:10. > :10:20.Labour's economic policy, the Shadow Business Secretary, Chuka
:10:20. > :10:21.
:10:21. > :10:27.What is different about Labour's economic policy now, compared with
:10:27. > :10:31.a week ago? I think the key thing is that we have emphasised what we
:10:31. > :10:35.would do in the current climate, given the current situation with
:10:35. > :10:38.the public finances. We still, absolutely oppose the economic
:10:39. > :10:44.strategy that is being pursued by the government. Not least because
:10:44. > :10:46.yes, it is true, we have to reduce debt. But the way they are going
:10:47. > :10:51.about it is counter-productive. Because it is creating a vicious
:10:51. > :10:56.circle. So what is different? key thing we have emphasised is
:10:56. > :11:00.that we are not in a position to promise now to reverse all of the
:11:00. > :11:03.different things that the government is doing. In respect of
:11:03. > :11:08.the 2015 general election. In the same way that viewers of this
:11:08. > :11:11.programme are not in a position to decide, given household finances,
:11:11. > :11:15.where they will be in three years' time, whenever they decide to go on
:11:16. > :11:20.holiday, we are not in a position to do that either. I asked what was
:11:20. > :11:23.different. That was also your policy over a week ago and it has
:11:23. > :11:27.been your policy throughout opposition. Ed Balls told the
:11:27. > :11:31.Labour conference last September, no matter how much we dislike
:11:31. > :11:36.particular Tory spending cuts or tax rises, we cannot make promises
:11:36. > :11:42.not to reverse them. I won't do that, neither will any of my shadow
:11:42. > :11:47.cabinet colleagues. So that is not new either. I suppose the one thing
:11:47. > :11:53.that has been different is that we have been very clear that we are
:11:53. > :11:57.not in a position to promise -- make promises on public-sector pay,
:11:57. > :12:02.which are practically different from the government. We have said
:12:02. > :12:05.that we would accept the 1% cap on public sector pay. Where we differ
:12:05. > :12:10.from the government is that we think you should look to do that in
:12:10. > :12:13.a far more fairway. If you were tough on those earning more in the
:12:13. > :12:18.public sector, we believe that in respect of lower-paid workers, we
:12:18. > :12:21.would be able to give them �250 more at least. On the public sector
:12:21. > :12:26.pay freeze, you are really running to catch up with the coalition
:12:27. > :12:30.there. I don't accept that. In government, we were quite clear
:12:30. > :12:35.from 2009 that we would have to have public sector pay restraints,
:12:35. > :12:38.and we made some reference to that in our manifesto as well. If that
:12:38. > :12:45.is the any substantive change, and it is what Andy Burnham told me on
:12:45. > :12:48.The Daily Politics last week as well, is that alongside the public
:12:48. > :12:53.sector for its -- pay freeze enough to restore your economic
:12:53. > :12:57.credibility? I think for economic credibility, you need growth.
:12:57. > :13:00.That's why we have put forward are five point plan for growth in jobs,
:13:00. > :13:04.because we say that you cannot reduce the borrowing of the country
:13:04. > :13:09.unless you have growth, unless you have people getting back into work.
:13:09. > :13:13.2.6 million people out of work are people not paying income tax and to
:13:13. > :13:16.whom we have to pay benefit. We must prioritised growth in
:13:17. > :13:22.particular as a way of sorting out the country's finances. To that
:13:22. > :13:26.extent, that is a key distinction between us and the government. The
:13:26. > :13:30.government say everything has to be about the debt, we say you can't
:13:30. > :13:34.reduce your debt unless you have gross going again. I understand
:13:34. > :13:44.that but if we look at the map - a measure of growth going again. If
:13:44. > :13:55.
:13:55. > :14:04.you look at the public attitude -- It doesn't get worse than that.
:14:04. > :14:07.What I would say, polls are polls. that matters of votes. First of all,
:14:07. > :14:10.clearly, if we had got everything right and people had full
:14:11. > :14:14.confidence in the Labour Party, we would be in government now. We have
:14:14. > :14:18.to be humble enough to admit we did not get everything right, for
:14:18. > :14:21.example around the regulation of the banks. Secondly, I see the
:14:21. > :14:25.survey -- the poll in front of us but what really matters is what
:14:25. > :14:30.people think in the ballot box. We have had five by-elections over 12
:14:30. > :14:35.months, not all of them easy, that we have won. Those are votes from
:14:35. > :14:38.people. David Cameron in particular will tell you this, in the lead-up
:14:38. > :14:41.to the 2010 general election, the polls were saying he was going to
:14:41. > :14:46.be governing with a majority and that he would win the election.
:14:46. > :14:52.That did not happen. We have to be absolutely focused on the main
:14:52. > :14:55.things that people care about, the cost of living is the one thing
:14:55. > :14:59.that people are concerned about at the moment. That is something Ed
:14:59. > :15:04.Miliband was talking about. He was ridiculed for talking about the
:15:04. > :15:10.squeezed middle. That is a key argument. If all that is true, why
:15:10. > :15:16.have you got a 23% credibility on the economy? At a time when it is
:15:16. > :15:19.hardly going well for the coalition. Polls go up and down. These haven't,
:15:19. > :15:24.they have kept going down. If you look at the overall rating for the
:15:24. > :15:29.Labour Party, it is significantly higher than 2010. We will come on
:15:29. > :15:32.to that in a minute! Votes are what matters and the key thing is, are
:15:32. > :15:35.we making the arguments that really impact on people's lives? I have
:15:35. > :15:39.over 4,000 people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance in my
:15:39. > :15:42.constituency, they don't care about polls, they care about what you are
:15:43. > :15:52.going to do to get me back into work. That is what really matters,
:15:53. > :15:54.
:15:54. > :15:58.Let's look at welfare reform, which is becoming a big issue. �26,000 a
:15:58. > :16:03.year, more than the average age, isn't that plenty for anybody on
:16:03. > :16:08.benefits to be collecting from the state? If you put it in those terms,
:16:08. > :16:11.you make a persuasive argument. We are not opposed to a benefit cap in
:16:11. > :16:15.principle. We are opposed to the way that the Government is doing it.
:16:15. > :16:19.Actually this is based on what Eric Pickles has said in a letter to
:16:19. > :16:22.Number 10 Downing Street. He pointed out last year that because
:16:22. > :16:26.of the changes, you would be forcing 40,000 people into
:16:26. > :16:33.homelessness. It was a departmental letter which the Government now
:16:33. > :16:36.says was based on false figures. Hang on just a moment. This is
:16:37. > :16:41.their own communities secretary saying that this could potentially
:16:41. > :16:45.cost them more money in the long term. In respect of that �26,000
:16:45. > :16:48.figure which you mention, Andrew, the way it has been calculated,
:16:48. > :16:52.they say that is the average of what people in work are learning in
:16:52. > :16:58.this country. The average includes people on benefit. In fact it comes
:16:58. > :17:02.in under what the average would be for people not on benefit. For any
:17:02. > :17:06.of our viewers watching this programme, they would have to earn
:17:06. > :17:11.�35,000 a year, much above the average wage, to end up with the
:17:11. > :17:16.take home of �26,000. Surely that is a decent cab for people on
:17:16. > :17:21.benefits. Otherwise you take away any incentive to work. There are a
:17:21. > :17:27.number of problems with it, as I said. I have outlined why the
:17:27. > :17:32.26,000 figure is not entirely accurate. What would you have?
:17:32. > :17:36.are not in Government at the moment. But you don't like what the
:17:36. > :17:43.Government is doing. No, what I said was that in principle we are
:17:43. > :17:48.not opposed to having a benefits cap. We are opposed to the way the
:17:48. > :17:53.Government has done it. There is also an issue about having the same
:17:53. > :17:57.level across the country, which needs to be looked at. Would you
:17:57. > :18:01.have a London cab and one for the rest of the country? I am not
:18:01. > :18:06.necessarily saying that. So what are you saying? The Government
:18:06. > :18:10.needs to think this out better. do you. Hang on just a minute,
:18:10. > :18:13.Andrew. We are not in Government. It is for the Government to come
:18:13. > :18:19.forward. If you are criticising the Government then you need to tell us
:18:19. > :18:22.what you would do. We do not have a problem with the cap in principle,
:18:22. > :18:29.but Denise to be implemented in a fair weight which would not cost
:18:29. > :18:34.more to society. -- which needs to be implemented in a fair way.
:18:34. > :18:39.McCluskey, let's look at what he had to say. It was not just policy.
:18:39. > :18:41.He said that Ed Balls's sudden embrace of austerity challenges the
:18:41. > :18:48.whole course that Ed Miliband has set for the party and perhaps his
:18:48. > :18:52.leadership itself. That is the head of your union, Len McCluskey, so
:18:52. > :18:56.how significant is he as a political figure to talk of Labour
:18:57. > :19:01.leadership? Len McCluskey leads the country's biggest union and it is
:19:01. > :19:04.significant when he says anything. I fundamentally disagree with it
:19:05. > :19:09.though. We have to be careful that we do not end up doing George
:19:09. > :19:12.Osborne's work for him. Why do I say that? Because the argument that
:19:12. > :19:18.George Osborne is seeking to prosecute is that there are only
:19:18. > :19:25.two options. Either 100% austerity or an option which says we do not
:19:25. > :19:29.have to do any consolidation at all. We are going for a more sensible
:19:29. > :19:32.argument, which says that we have to consolidate and reduce borrowing,
:19:32. > :19:36.but in a realistic way that does not choke off growth and keeps
:19:36. > :19:39.people in work and can hopefully raise living standards, which is
:19:39. > :19:44.the big issue for people in this country. It seems to be so subtle
:19:44. > :19:48.that it is not getting through to the country. Let's look at your
:19:48. > :19:53.leader's net approval rating, among all voters. It compares to light of
:19:53. > :20:01.last year with January now. He had a negative approval rating in July,
:20:01. > :20:07.not great, -12. Now it has gone all the way down in six months to minus
:20:07. > :20:13.35. As I said, these are opinion polls. By that is what you get for
:20:13. > :20:16.subtlety. You say that. That is what the opinion polls tell us.
:20:16. > :20:21.say that, but what are the big issues that people are talking
:20:21. > :20:25.about? I have talked about the cost of living rises. The debate around
:20:25. > :20:29.capitalism and the way markets work. Ed Miliband has been leading this
:20:29. > :20:32.debate and to talk about it in the party conference speech. He was
:20:32. > :20:35.criticised at the time by the Prime Minister in particular and now
:20:35. > :20:40.everybody is saying that this is something that we need to look at.
:20:40. > :20:44.I have already talked about the squeezed middle. Are the arguments
:20:44. > :20:51.that he is making resonating? Yes. If you look at the different voting
:20:51. > :20:54.systems that we had, by-elections, local elections, remember we took
:20:54. > :20:59.its 800 more councillors, several hundred more than the
:20:59. > :21:03.Conservatives... He cannot even influence his own supporters. This
:21:03. > :21:07.is what it is like among Labour voters. In July he used to have a
:21:07. > :21:13.positive rating of 30% among Labour voters, which was not great. He now
:21:13. > :21:18.has a positive reading of 4%. That is among Labour voters. Andrew,
:21:18. > :21:23.Andrew, opinion polls go up and down. Sorry, they did. It just goes
:21:23. > :21:28.down. This is over a period of a year. The six months. Opinion polls
:21:28. > :21:33.go up and down over a longer period. People form their views on
:21:33. > :21:37.political parties over the course of many more months, actually years.
:21:37. > :21:40.If we look at the opinion polls leading up to the 2010 general
:21:40. > :21:43.election, David Cameron would be governing without the Liberal
:21:43. > :21:46.Democrats right now. We are under no illusion about the scale of the
:21:46. > :21:51.task. Come back in another six months and we will see what has
:21:51. > :21:55.happened. You are obsessed with opinion polls, Andrew. You can see
:21:55. > :22:00.Ed Miliband interviewed on BBC Radio 5 Live with John Pienaar at 7
:22:00. > :22:06.o'clock. The ruling by the European Court of
:22:06. > :22:11.Human Rights last week that the radical Muslim cleric Abu Qatada
:22:11. > :22:16.cannot be deported to Jordan has left many asking whether we should
:22:16. > :22:26.reform the court or leave altogether. David Cameron is
:22:26. > :22:30.
:22:30. > :22:34.pushing for changes, but what are It was the debt of World War Two
:22:34. > :22:38.and the Government was run from his bunker below Whitehall. Winston
:22:38. > :22:42.Churchill took to the airwaves to propose a new organisation that
:22:42. > :22:49.would safeguard human rights across the battle-scarred Continent. The
:22:49. > :22:53.Council of Europe. We must try to make the Council of Europe, or
:22:53. > :23:02.whatever it may be called, into a really effective leader, with all
:23:02. > :23:07.the strongest forces concerned, woven into its texture. With a High
:23:07. > :23:11.Court to sort out disputes. He got his way, because there are now 47
:23:11. > :23:15.member states and the cornerstone is the European Convention on Human
:23:15. > :23:18.Rights, written in 1950, which guarantees things like an
:23:18. > :23:23.individual's right to live, freedom of expression and freedom of
:23:24. > :23:26.torture. Individuals who feel those rights have been denied can take
:23:26. > :23:31.their own Government to the European Court of Human Rights in
:23:31. > :23:34.Strasbourg. For some, it strayed far from Churchill's ideal. Getting
:23:34. > :23:37.there has to write on this actually shows that the cabinet at the time
:23:37. > :23:41.was concerned that the text of the convention was a reflection of
:23:41. > :23:44.English common law principles, the protection of rights that we have
:23:44. > :23:48.enjoyed in this country for centuries. What has happened since
:23:48. > :23:51.has been the growth of a human rights culture, driven by the
:23:51. > :23:56.Strasbourg court, which has taken those fundamental principles very
:23:56. > :24:01.far away from the common law tradition that the convention was
:24:01. > :24:04.established to protect. He means decisions like the one this week
:24:04. > :24:08.that the Islamist cleric Abu Qatada cannot be deported from the UK.
:24:08. > :24:12.That followed a ruling that British prisoners should be given the vote,
:24:12. > :24:16.which caused outrage in the Commons. In his speech next week, David
:24:16. > :24:21.Cameron will push for changes to the court, mainly to make it more
:24:21. > :24:27.efficient, such as cutting the backlog of cases, currently 150,000
:24:27. > :24:31.long. There is easier said than done, according to this QC. We can
:24:31. > :24:38.propose reforms that are debated for months, for example the
:24:38. > :24:41.committee of ministers, but if they think it is a political agenda
:24:41. > :24:45.designed to dilute the power of the court, rather than merely to make
:24:45. > :24:50.it more efficient, then those proposed reforms will not go
:24:50. > :24:54.through. Others hope to mount a defence against the court by
:24:54. > :25:00.writing a British Bill of Rights, which could from Strasbourg. If you
:25:00. > :25:04.want the Prime Minister to do the reverse Churchill, and withdraw
:25:05. > :25:06.from the Convention of Human Rights altogether. -- some people want the
:25:06. > :25:16.Prime Minister to do a reverse Churchill.
:25:16. > :25:18.
:25:18. > :25:21.To debate this, Helena Kennedy and Martin Callanan, the Conservative
:25:21. > :25:26.leader in the European Parliament. David Cameron is off to Strasbourg
:25:26. > :25:30.this week to argue for major reform in the European Court. If that
:25:30. > :25:35.proves impossible, should Britain withdraw? It might do. I hope we
:25:35. > :25:42.can get some reforms. The trouble is that there has been a series of
:25:42. > :25:47.increasingly ludicrous job to rent from the Court of Human Rights, --
:25:47. > :25:51.ludicrous judgments. It is bringing human rights into dispute. If we go
:25:51. > :25:54.to a part in the UK, and we ask what people think, you will get an
:25:54. > :25:57.answer that cannot be printed because of these judgments that are
:25:58. > :26:03.superimposing the will of an unelected panel of judges, some of
:26:03. > :26:05.whom are not even legally qualified, over the will of Parliament and the
:26:05. > :26:14.elected Home Secretary of this country and it is becoming
:26:14. > :26:18.ridiculous. If we cannot get major reform, should we withdraw? No. We
:26:18. > :26:22.were at the heart of drafting the European Convention on Human Rights
:26:22. > :26:27.and it was a very good purposes. It was about creating a template of
:26:27. > :26:32.standards that should apply around all of Europe. It should bring
:26:32. > :26:36.conformity to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As it
:26:36. > :26:44.were dealt as Winston Churchill would have wanted? With votes for
:26:44. > :26:48.prisoners? -- has it worked out? This is very much about the
:26:48. > :26:51.protection of democracy. Winston Churchill would have been appalled
:26:51. > :26:55.to find that the convention, which is perfectly well drafted and well-
:26:55. > :27:01.meaning, we do been used to mean that terrorist prisoners cannot be
:27:01. > :27:08.deported from this country. -- would be used. Let's talk about
:27:08. > :27:10.this. Let's put it in the context of that pub. Back there again!
:27:10. > :27:14.point about human rights was that you have to make decisions that
:27:14. > :27:18.will not be popular with people sometimes but which are about
:27:18. > :27:23.protecting principles. This is about torture. One of the things
:27:23. > :27:27.that the European Court did was to say very clearly that the process
:27:27. > :27:30.that we have developed of having discussions with countries and
:27:30. > :27:35.protections, diplomatic assurances with countries that have a record
:27:35. > :27:39.on torture, diplomatic assurances so that we can return people, they
:27:39. > :27:43.found that we were right on that and they found in our favour. But
:27:44. > :27:48.they said that the evidence was that Abu Qatada would be facing
:27:48. > :27:54.trial that was based on evidence extracted from people using torture.
:27:54. > :27:57.We have led the way in the world on saying that torture cannot be
:27:57. > :28:00.tolerated and sometimes you have to make decisions, even if that means
:28:01. > :28:04.that that people can take advantage of it. It is not just the
:28:04. > :28:08.occasional bad decision. The court has found against the UK 300 times
:28:08. > :28:12.in the last few years. These are decisions that often fly in the
:28:12. > :28:15.face of common sense. Do you really think that this country is a
:28:15. > :28:21.bastion of human rights abuses to mean that the court can stand
:28:21. > :28:26.against us? Nobody has any faith in their judgments. Would you replace
:28:27. > :28:32.the European Convention, if we withdrew, with the British Bill of
:28:32. > :28:36.Rights? Ideally, yes. I have no problem with the concept of human
:28:36. > :28:43.rights being recognised. I agree with it. Of course we do not agree
:28:43. > :28:46.with torture. Look at the Abu Qatada case. He arrived in this
:28:46. > :28:50.country on forged documents. Since then he has not been loyal to the
:28:50. > :28:53.country, he backed the 9/11 hijackers, he was described as a
:28:53. > :28:57.truly dangerous individual in a British court. Successive home
:28:57. > :29:01.secretaries, Labour and Conservative, have tried to deport
:29:02. > :29:05.him and the court has said no. Let's move on from Abu Qatada
:29:05. > :29:09.because I want to get the principle. What would be wrong with a British
:29:09. > :29:13.Bill of Rights that would be used in our Supreme Court, and are the
:29:13. > :29:18.finest judges in Europe, and that British Bill of Rights reflecting
:29:18. > :29:21.our experience from the Magna Carta onwards? That is what we are
:29:21. > :29:24.investigating. I am sitting on a Government commission that is
:29:24. > :29:30.looking at this and we are taking evidence. What would be wrong with
:29:30. > :29:33.it? The number of things have been raised. People are concerned that
:29:33. > :29:37.if we withdraw from the European Convention, that would mean
:29:37. > :29:41.withdrawing from the Council of Europe. It would be very difficult
:29:41. > :29:45.to withdraw from the European Court... That is a technical thing.
:29:45. > :29:48.What would be wrong with having a British Bill of Rights? We could
:29:48. > :29:55.have a British Bill of Rights and still be part of the European
:29:55. > :30:00.consensus. Including everything but adding more of Britain? A listen, I
:30:00. > :30:04.am one of the people always arguing that we should have jury trial,
:30:04. > :30:08.habeas corpus, incorporated into our very own Bill of Rights. The
:30:08. > :30:15.problem with it is that people like Martin really want to use this as a
:30:15. > :30:19.Trojan horse because they don't like Europe. The Council of Europe,
:30:19. > :30:23.as you well know, is completely separate to the EU. Take another
:30:23. > :30:28.issue, prisoner voting rights. The House of Commons has voted on a
:30:28. > :30:31.number of occasions by enormous majorities that we do not wish to
:30:31. > :30:35.give some prisoners in the UK the right to vote. The European Court
:30:35. > :30:41.of Human Rights is substituting its judgment for the will of our
:30:41. > :30:46.elected representatives. If this is such a good thing, it stand before
:30:46. > :30:49.the people of the UK in elections and ask them. What are the chances
:30:49. > :30:54.of David Cameron making any material progress on this? We will
:30:54. > :31:04.see what he comes up with. He wants a filtering mechanism. What are his
:31:04. > :31:08.chances? I don't think they are You are watching the Sunday
:31:08. > :31:18.Politics. In 20 minutes I will be looking at the week ahead with the
:31:18. > :31:26.
:31:26. > :31:30.political panel. You're watching As the economic forecasts did clear
:31:30. > :31:38.by the day, how much money is being wasted by leaving the lights on in
:31:38. > :31:42.London? -- forecasts get gloomier. Joining us, Tessa Jowell and
:31:42. > :31:46.Conservative MP for Croydon Central, Gavin Barwell. I will start by
:31:46. > :31:49.talking about the crime figures this week. While they have come
:31:50. > :31:54.down, over all the fences have come down, it has come down far less
:31:54. > :31:57.than elsewhere in the country. -- overall offences have gone down.
:31:57. > :32:01.Violent crime looks to be going in the wrong direction. You have to
:32:01. > :32:10.look at crime figures over a longer period. Over the period that Boris
:32:10. > :32:15.has been there, they are down 10%. There were a significant number of
:32:15. > :32:23.defences -- offences connected with the riots. The overall trend on
:32:23. > :32:27.robberies is down, certainly in Croydon. We hope to see that
:32:27. > :32:31.continue. I don't actually agree with Gavin on the figures. If you
:32:31. > :32:34.take the years of the Labour government, overall crime fell by
:32:34. > :32:41.40%. We have now seen serious violent crime beginning to rise
:32:41. > :32:45.again. Rape, and very particularly knife crime, which was one of the
:32:45. > :32:51.Mayor's number one priority is, when he stood as a candidate to be
:32:51. > :32:55.elected. He would tackle life crime in London and he has to answer why
:32:55. > :32:59.knife crime is rising, not falling. I will help him with the answer and
:32:59. > :33:03.say the fact he is cutting police numbers by more than he told
:33:03. > :33:09.Londoners he would is clearly a factor in this. Police on the
:33:09. > :33:13.street reduce knife crime. Do you agree with that, or do you think
:33:13. > :33:18.should happen? The police numbers will be higher at the end of
:33:18. > :33:23.Boris's turn than when he -- what he inherited from Ken. I don't want
:33:23. > :33:27.to see a fall in frontline officers and I support the Mayor in same
:33:27. > :33:32.money to keep numbers at 32,000 officers after the Olympics, I
:33:32. > :33:36.think he is right to do that. are said to be 900 below that, so
:33:36. > :33:42.perhaps Gavin will join with me on calling on the Mayor to restore
:33:42. > :33:46.those cuts -- they are set to be 900. Boris Johnson attempted to
:33:46. > :33:50.breathe new life into the decades old idea of an airport in, or close
:33:50. > :33:54.to the Thames Estuary. Some saw a mayoral candidate keen to keep
:33:54. > :33:58.alive a scheme he has backed so relentlessly, at least until after
:33:58. > :34:03.the next mayoral election. There is not much evidence yet that the
:34:03. > :34:06.Prime Minister has, quote, warmed to the idea, other than the Mayor's
:34:06. > :34:11.word for that. But this did remind us that this is a government in
:34:11. > :34:15.need of a modern, updated aviation policy. As the Chancellor said last
:34:15. > :34:25.autumn, all options for a new hub airport are being considered as
:34:25. > :34:28.
:34:28. > :34:32.A huge hub airport in the history, technically it's possible, hurdles
:34:32. > :34:36.are many. A son called -- sunken battleship full of explosives, bird
:34:36. > :34:40.strikes, fierce local opposition and coalition partners, the Liberal
:34:40. > :34:45.Democrats. We would not support the building of a new airport and we
:34:45. > :34:49.would do our best to stop it. is the airport in the news again?
:34:49. > :34:53.Have some on the blue side of government warmed to the idea?
:34:53. > :34:57.policy has not been cleared through the normal government processes. It
:34:57. > :35:03.seems to me, that someone in favour of the airport is deliberately
:35:03. > :35:07.pushing the story. The history aboard's most high-profile
:35:07. > :35:11.supporter is... For a long time, George Osborne and David Cameron
:35:11. > :35:15.have been very interested in the idea of a long-term, sustainable
:35:15. > :35:20.solution for Britain's aviation needs. Apart from extra runways at
:35:20. > :35:24.Heathrow, Stansted and Gatwick, the government has also always said it
:35:24. > :35:30.is looking at all of the aviation options. There is now time to make
:35:30. > :35:40.the case for and mystery airport, or kill it. -- 4 and estuary
:35:40. > :35:45.This may not move the airport idea any closer, but it is reopening the
:35:45. > :35:50.debate, shifting it, might you say? Perhaps shifting the perception a
:35:50. > :35:53.little bit. They have got a big decision coming up on capacity.
:35:53. > :35:58.What we know is that there is an aviation reviewed going on. We have
:35:58. > :36:02.been told there are no extra and run race -- no extra runways at
:36:02. > :36:10.Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. Apart from that, nothing is being
:36:10. > :36:16.rolled in or out. That includes the Thames Estuary and also the high-
:36:16. > :36:20.speed air link -- rail link between Heathrow and Gatwick. The aviation
:36:20. > :36:25.industry say there is a vacuum in policy, this is a shambles, a joke,
:36:25. > :36:28.very critical of the government policy. Some suggest that Boris
:36:28. > :36:33.Johnson may have overplayed his hand, and there is a danger of
:36:33. > :36:37.whipping up opposition, not just in Conservative areas like Kent, but
:36:37. > :36:41.also among the Liberal Democrats, who are against expansion. Those
:36:41. > :36:48.are the messages that were seen to be coming out of Number 10 on the
:36:48. > :36:53.Thursday, the day after this big announcement. I think what the real
:36:53. > :36:58.concern is, is because they have been critical of the Mayor, he put
:36:58. > :37:02.this idea out there, and from their point of view, opponents could then
:37:02. > :37:06.easily kill it. I think there is another angle. When I have ever
:37:06. > :37:11.spoken to the Mayor about it, he says he always wants to shift,
:37:11. > :37:17.broaden the debate on aviation, one capacity. I think arguably, he has
:37:17. > :37:25.perhaps done that when it comes to the capacity issues we will see in
:37:25. > :37:30.the south-east -- on capacity for Do you support the idea of an
:37:30. > :37:35.estuary airport? I think the Mayor is right to look at it. If you look
:37:35. > :37:39.at the 12th Chinese cities that will be in the world top 25 cities,
:37:39. > :37:44.London has a connection with just two. Can you see it happening, do
:37:44. > :37:46.you want it to happen? You can't take a final decision until you
:37:46. > :37:50.have looked at all the different options and the government is right
:37:50. > :37:53.to do that. I want to see a Mayor of London who is looking at the
:37:53. > :37:58.long term economic future of the capital and maintaining their
:37:58. > :38:04.status as an international hub is important. You are well plugged
:38:04. > :38:08.into Conservative HQ, has David Cameron wants to the idea? It is
:38:08. > :38:11.clear that he is prepared to look at it, they are not saying they
:38:11. > :38:17.will go ahead with air but it is an option on the table. We knew that
:38:17. > :38:19.already. -- they have not said they will go ahead with it.
:38:19. > :38:23.government recognises the importance of having this
:38:23. > :38:27.international hub. There are real issues with police night as with
:38:27. > :38:31.Heathrow in terms of pollution and noise and its ability to expand.
:38:31. > :38:35.The Mayor is right to have pushed this idea. Have you seen any signs
:38:35. > :38:39.or got any idea that the Prime Minister or the Chancellor have
:38:39. > :38:42.warmed, that they now support this idea more than before? I can't
:38:42. > :38:45.speak personally for the Prime Minister or the Chancellor. I think
:38:45. > :38:50.the fact the government has set out the review shows there is an
:38:50. > :38:54.appetite took find a solution. third runway has gone out of the
:38:54. > :39:01.window now and labour accepts that, so you would presumably welcome
:39:01. > :39:06.this kind of original... It is decades old, but this revival of
:39:06. > :39:10.the idea. I agree with a lot of what Gavin has just said. London
:39:10. > :39:14.and the south-east definitely need more airport capacity, for the
:39:14. > :39:21.reasons that Gavin has outlined and many more besides. I think there
:39:21. > :39:27.are two points. I think the Mayor did overplay the announcement meant
:39:27. > :39:31.his great mates, Dave and George... You would say that. I would, but
:39:31. > :39:38.the important point is realising this. This is a 15 year product --
:39:38. > :39:40.project, and therefore it has got to be handled deftly at every stage.
:39:40. > :39:44.If the Liberal Democrat partners in the coalition are going to sit on
:39:44. > :39:49.it, it is very unlikely to make progress. The point is that this is
:39:49. > :39:57.the kind of project, a bit like the Olympics, that has got to be
:39:57. > :40:01.planned on a cross-party basis. would all fit into a logic. Tell us
:40:01. > :40:08.that you like this idea and you would like it pursued. I like the
:40:08. > :40:13.idea of building capacity in London and the south-east. You want expert
:40:13. > :40:19.views on where the best location is. You want expert analysis of the
:40:19. > :40:23.impact on Heathrow and the hundred 1,000 jobs. You want a proper
:40:23. > :40:28.assessment of how it might create an altogether different balance in
:40:28. > :40:37.London. I am absolutely in favour of looking seriously at all the
:40:37. > :40:42.options but doing it on a cross- party basis. A lot of people in
:40:42. > :40:48.Croydon go to Gatwick, you must be attracted by this idea for a double
:40:48. > :40:52.hub? I think that is an option. A lot of my constituents are employed
:40:52. > :40:56.at Gatwick Airport, the vitality of Gatwick is important to Croydon. I
:40:56. > :41:00.think since the ownership was transferred to BAA we have seen an
:41:00. > :41:03.improvement in the service that passengers get. We want to find a
:41:03. > :41:07.solution best for London's economic future and which represents
:41:07. > :41:10.taxpayers best. Cash-strapped councils have been turning off the
:41:10. > :41:14.street lights in order to save money and protect other services
:41:14. > :41:17.from the cuts. But London is bucking that trend and the number
:41:17. > :41:21.of street lights has actually increased in the last year. We have
:41:22. > :41:25.also discovered a rather awkward problem affecting half of the
:41:25. > :41:29.capital's Tube stations. This is Stratford International
:41:29. > :41:33.station. In the last decade or so, hundreds of millions of pounds have
:41:33. > :41:38.been spent up grading it. One thing they didn't get round to building
:41:38. > :41:42.was a light switch. The problem is that they used to turn the lights
:41:42. > :41:46.of by using a circuit breaker. In this day and age, it doesn't pass
:41:46. > :41:51.health and safety, so the lights shine all the time. Stratford
:41:51. > :41:56.station is not alone. We found that half of London's Tube stations
:41:56. > :42:00.don't have a light switch at all. In all, that is 136 Tube stations
:42:00. > :42:07.where come day or night, the lights stay on. Transport for London say
:42:07. > :42:10.they don't know how much it costs the taxpayer. However, could it be
:42:10. > :42:14.that all over London, money is being wasted on unnecessary
:42:14. > :42:18.lighting? It was certainly the worry for Westminster Council, who
:42:18. > :42:21.are in the process of replacing all the street lights in the borough
:42:21. > :42:26.with a computerised system which leads the council been the lights
:42:26. > :42:29.as and when they think it is appropriate. The word of dimming
:42:29. > :42:35.the lights is something that will frighten people. The fact that they
:42:35. > :42:39.think it is going to be dark and dingy. We have seen on the street,
:42:39. > :42:43.we have dimmed the lights, and some of it, you don't notice it at all.
:42:43. > :42:48.It might not look like much is happening here, but what you are
:42:48. > :42:52.seeing is the street lights being turned down by 25%. The lights on
:42:52. > :42:56.the street are so high tech, you can control them remotely. You can
:42:56. > :43:06.stand on the street with an iPad, or even a phone, and turn them up,
:43:06. > :43:08.
:43:08. > :43:12.But at the moment, Westminster are pretty unusual. Sunday Politics but
:43:12. > :43:16.to every local authority in London and only seven of 33 have dimmed
:43:16. > :43:21.the lights at all in the last year. In effect, spending on street
:43:21. > :43:26.lighting has gone up, with 4,000 new units put up over the capital
:43:26. > :43:30.in the last 12 months. Shouldn't we be welcoming the move by councils
:43:30. > :43:35.to keep a safe. Isn't it common sense that better street lights
:43:35. > :43:40.mean less crime? Not necessarily, according to one ex- gang member.
:43:40. > :43:44.In a time when I was of a frame of mind, we used to do things in
:43:45. > :43:47.daylight. Street lighting meant nothing. I guess it is good for the
:43:47. > :43:51.people who come out of their house and they are scared, to reassure
:43:51. > :43:58.them, it is good for them to have street lighting, so they can feel
:43:58. > :44:02.safer. But it is not going to matter to somebody who wants to do
:44:02. > :44:06.something to them. Some fear that saving money on street lights may
:44:06. > :44:10.be a false economy. When you consider it costs �1.6 million to
:44:10. > :44:12.clear up every time there is a fatal road accident, you can see
:44:12. > :44:17.the consequence of not getting this right to the public purse, let
:44:17. > :44:22.alone beefier that this will create among those who decide not to go
:44:23. > :44:29.out at all -- let alone the fear. Come the morning, the arguments for
:44:29. > :44:34.keeping the lights on maybe harder to make. I am joined by London
:44:34. > :44:38.Assembly Member Darren Johnson from the greens, and from Ealing council,
:44:38. > :44:43.cabinet member responsible for the environment and transport. Darren
:44:43. > :44:47.Johnson, what do you think of the Tube stations? Is there nothing
:44:47. > :44:53.that can be done about this? It is ridiculous that they still have not
:44:53. > :44:58.got a way of turning the lights off at these Tube stations. The once
:44:58. > :45:05.above ground, obviously. Are we spending too much on street lights?
:45:05. > :45:09.I think there are massive savings to be made, not by plunging London
:45:09. > :45:14.into total darkness. We definitely don't want that. But technology is
:45:15. > :45:20.the answer. If we move to energy saving early delights, we also have
:45:20. > :45:23.dimming programmes where lights can be deemed in certain areas, we
:45:23. > :45:32.don't necessarily need a uniform level of brightness across the
:45:32. > :45:36.You are responsible for the greatest increase in street lights
:45:36. > :45:41.recently in Ealing. What are you doing to mitigate the effects?
:45:41. > :45:45.are right. In 2005, residents gave us a clear message. Let there be
:45:45. > :45:50.light. We have been delivering that throughout Elin. Now that we have
:45:50. > :45:54.finished their programme, with better street lighting across the
:45:54. > :45:58.borough, we are looking at a programme of installing street
:45:58. > :46:05.lights in locations that are crime hot spots. We are also looking
:46:05. > :46:09.forward to moving towards efficient street lighting. Why are you
:46:09. > :46:13.putting lighting in just because residents ask for it? They also
:46:13. > :46:17.want libraries, education, great children's services. Absolutely and
:46:17. > :46:21.we are working on all of those areas but in 2005 we were one of
:46:21. > :46:26.the worst boroughs for lighting. I can proudly so that we have
:46:26. > :46:29.transformed that with the programme that we have. -- proudly say.
:46:29. > :46:34.you think there is any link between reduction of crime and street
:46:34. > :46:37.lighting? With this programme we are working with the police and
:46:37. > :46:45.local representatives to identify locations when you street lighting
:46:45. > :46:51.will make a real difference to tackle the crime. -- new street
:46:51. > :46:57.lighting. Also real differences where we have got CCTV, now you can
:46:57. > :47:01.see what is on the camera. Do you think local authorities are doing
:47:01. > :47:05.enough? I think there is far more potential to save money and energy.
:47:05. > :47:10.Obviously we don't want to plunge London into darkness and fear of
:47:10. > :47:13.crime is important. But also householders are being urged to
:47:13. > :47:18.save energy in their own homes and quite rightly. The public sector
:47:18. > :47:27.also needs to get its own house in order and stop wasting money.
:47:27. > :47:32.we ever spent too much John Whiting? I think Darren has set out
:47:32. > :47:36.a good plan. Lighting, commensurate with people feeling safe as they
:47:36. > :47:40.walk the streets, and that is important. Croydon always seems to
:47:40. > :47:47.be very light. Is there enough? They are putting in an intelligent
:47:47. > :47:54.lighting system which can be turned down in particular areas so that
:47:54. > :47:59.the system is flexible. In certain boroughs we have a programme so
:47:59. > :48:06.that there is a win-lose situation. The borough council wins by saving
:48:06. > :48:10.money but residents lose out with demonstrates. I am sorry, but...
:48:10. > :48:16.also need to make sure that struck the tube station is sorted out in
:48:17. > :48:22.time for the Olympics. It would be embarrassing. -- Stratford to
:48:22. > :48:32.station. Very illuminating but we have to move on! What else has been
:48:32. > :48:34.
:48:34. > :48:38.On Monday, Shepherd's Bush was a bad place to be for criminals.
:48:38. > :48:42.Coppers and cameras the law assembled to mark the transfer of
:48:42. > :48:45.new powers over policing to this man. I carry the can in the sense
:48:45. > :48:55.that I want London to be safer and I am pleased that we are achieving
:48:55. > :49:00.that. The acronym for the new body? Inside London's Government, another
:49:00. > :49:04.landmark. 12 years after its first meeting, the London Assembly used
:49:04. > :49:11.to new powers to have its first vote to block one of the Mayor's
:49:11. > :49:15.policies. The Occupy protesters were occupied with a court case
:49:15. > :49:19.about how long their occupation would continue. The verdict came
:49:19. > :49:23.back. Not very long. Just last week on the programme,
:49:23. > :49:26.outgoing Westminster council leader Colin Barrow told us that plans to
:49:26. > :49:36.introduce parking charges at evenings and weekends should stay.
:49:36. > :49:38.
:49:38. > :49:42.We have argued about police numbers already but this new policing Board,
:49:42. > :49:47.some argue, because it is just the Mayor holding the commissioner to
:49:47. > :49:52.account, if you like, is less accountable. I think they have done
:49:52. > :49:55.the sensible thing and separated responsibility between those
:49:55. > :49:59.running the service, the Mayor and the commissioner, and given the
:49:59. > :50:03.assembly the role of scrutinising the work. Previously, they were
:50:03. > :50:07.making decisions and also scrutinising so this separation is
:50:07. > :50:12.very sensible. Do you think Labour might have encouraged this move?
:50:12. > :50:18.They didn't do it. The test will be whether it safeguards the safety of
:50:18. > :50:23.people on the streets. Is this a structure that will oversee the
:50:23. > :50:27.reduction of crime? Will it preserved in line with the Mayor's
:50:27. > :50:31.promises the number of people policing the streets? She has got
:50:31. > :50:38.it back to those numbers. Do you accept that this will be a crucial
:50:38. > :50:43.issue, with crime going up again, in a mayoral election? We were hit
:50:43. > :50:48.so hard by it the riots and so I support the police in numbers. The
:50:48. > :50:53.solution the Prime Minister came up with was to increase them, so the
:50:53. > :50:58.Mayor is right and keeping the numbers at 32,000 is important. But
:50:58. > :51:01.what do you do with them? The Mayor deserves a lot of credit to bring
:51:01. > :51:11.in single patrolling so that we seek more visibility with the
:51:11. > :51:16.
:51:16. > :51:19.numbers that we have got. Thank you. Welcome back. There have been
:51:19. > :51:24.tweeting throughout the programme and they are with me now, the
:51:24. > :51:29.political panel, the best and brightest, I am told, of a new
:51:29. > :51:35.generation of commentators. Janan Ganesh of the Economist, Isabel
:51:35. > :51:40.Oakeshott of the Sunday Times and Rowenna Davis of the New Statesman.
:51:40. > :51:44.Isabel Oakeshott, Chris Huhne, your story. The Sunday Times has agreed
:51:44. > :51:49.to hand over the communications, emails with his former wife. Has it
:51:49. > :51:53.done so yet? We will do that next week. The police have been looking
:51:53. > :51:59.at this for a very long time. The Criminal Prosecution Service has
:51:59. > :52:05.had a file for a very long time and the fact that they have considered
:52:05. > :52:09.it so carefully shows how sensitive the case is. This is a sitting
:52:09. > :52:13.cabinet member and it is a serious allegation. Are there lots of
:52:13. > :52:16.emails? Will it take the police a long time to go through them?
:52:16. > :52:21.Speedie when I go through the mouth but the police cannot afford to
:52:21. > :52:25.make mistakes so they may not be that quick. -- speedy when I go
:52:25. > :52:30.through emails. You may want to ask me what will happen. What will
:52:30. > :52:34.happen? If I knew that then I would go to the bookmakers and pile money
:52:34. > :52:39.on. They all think Chris Huhne is heading for a swift exit. I think
:52:39. > :52:43.it is a difficult one to call. have seen all of the emails. Are
:52:43. > :52:46.they incriminating? I can't talk about emails because they are
:52:46. > :52:50.subject to a confidentiality order from the judge. I think the police
:52:50. > :52:55.will need to look at all of the evidence. It is a difficult
:52:55. > :52:59.decision for them to take. Will anybody as the implicated?
:52:59. > :53:03.Particularly Vince Cable? There are allegations that Chris Huhne sought
:53:04. > :53:10.advice from home in the past. If it tangled up Vince Cable then it
:53:10. > :53:17.becomes a much bigger story. If and if Chris Huhne does go, who will
:53:17. > :53:21.replace him? If he is charged, of course. Yes, and if he does go. The
:53:21. > :53:28.Tories will push for a much green energy secretary, mindful of rising
:53:28. > :53:32.energy prices. It is a Lib Dem cabinet post. Yes. One of the
:53:32. > :53:37.interesting things about this Government is that the ultimate
:53:37. > :53:42.power for the Prime Minister only exists in some form. There are five
:53:42. > :53:45.cabinet posts where he does not have the final say. If Nick Clegg
:53:45. > :53:50.chooses somebody that is not to his liking, there is not much David
:53:50. > :53:55.Cameron can do. If Chris Huhne goes, they want to put in someone that is
:53:55. > :53:58.quite new liberal. S Davey, Jeremy Browne, someone like that. That
:53:59. > :54:02.would be interesting in terms of policy because you are going to get
:54:02. > :54:05.rid of the strongest socialist democratic influences in that
:54:05. > :54:10.Cabinet, which could be an interesting branding issue for the
:54:10. > :54:16.Lib Dems. Actually I think that Nick Clegg gave a strong hint this
:54:16. > :54:20.morning that he wants David Laws back. It was not a hint. In a way
:54:20. > :54:24.we are getting ahead of ourselves. Chris Huhne appears to think that
:54:24. > :54:29.you may be able to stay in position, even if he is charged. I saw that.
:54:29. > :54:32.What do you make of that? Absolute pie-in-the-sky. My understanding is
:54:32. > :54:37.that it would be completely unacceptable to have a Cabinet
:54:37. > :54:41.minister, still doing his job, while facing criminal charges. He
:54:41. > :54:47.does protect his innocence and that is fair enough. Let's move on.
:54:47. > :54:50.Welfare, a big story again. Going back to the Lords. Nick Clegg gave
:54:50. > :54:57.a robust defence of the welfare cap on the Andrew Marr Show. Paddy
:54:57. > :55:00.Ashdown said that he would vote against it in the Lords. I suspect,
:55:00. > :55:05.and I have been criticised for mentioning opinion polls too much,
:55:05. > :55:09.that when you look at opinion polls in this respect, the Tories seem to
:55:09. > :55:12.be on to a winner. They are prepared to fight on that
:55:12. > :55:16.battleground because public opinion is on their side. If you look at
:55:16. > :55:23.the polling numbers, the main grievance that boaters have with
:55:23. > :55:33.the benefit cabbie's that it is not tough enough. -- voters have with
:55:33. > :55:34.
:55:34. > :55:37.the benefit cap is that it is not offer enough. David Cameron has
:55:37. > :55:40.said that he could not believe how tough the public wanting to be on
:55:40. > :55:44.welfare. He went into the campaign assuming that the Tory policy would
:55:44. > :55:47.be too harsh, but he is getting the opposite message in town hall
:55:47. > :55:51.meetings and the like. The Government is very confident on
:55:51. > :55:55.this issue and if anything it is a challenge for Labour. Do they want
:55:55. > :55:59.to be seen as supportive of the current rules. It is an
:55:59. > :56:03.uncomfortable issue for Labour. We saw how Chuka Umunna handled that.
:56:03. > :56:07.It is very uncomfortable for Labour. They want to so that they agree
:56:07. > :56:11.with the principle that the incentives of the system are wrong.
:56:11. > :56:15.They agreed that it is criminal that some people cannot afford to
:56:15. > :56:18.work in this country. But at the same time there are real problems
:56:18. > :56:22.with this particular benefit issue. If you take away benefits now,
:56:22. > :56:28.you'll find that lots of people, and this is raised by the Lib Dems
:56:29. > :56:35.massively, like Simon Hughes, that people will be homeless. I have to
:56:35. > :56:39.reject here. Let her reply. This word homeless goes to the heart of
:56:40. > :56:46.what is going on here. There is a lot of disingenuous spinning going
:56:46. > :56:50.on. What definition of homeless are you using? If you are in a council
:56:50. > :56:54.home, it is a very loose definition. If you are in a council home in
:56:54. > :56:58.Southwark, the rents are incredibly high. Without housing benefit you
:56:58. > :57:02.either move out or you go onto the street. At the moment there are not
:57:02. > :57:06.alternative jobs for people to be going into. You are completely
:57:06. > :57:09.right. Labour cannot win on defending the benefits bill at the
:57:09. > :57:13.moment and that is where they are being quiet about it and that is
:57:13. > :57:18.why Chuka Umunna cannot make any points. The Government will be
:57:18. > :57:22.careful to make sure nobody end up on the street. Imagine these
:57:22. > :57:25.children in cardboard boxes, like an Indian slum. That is absurd.
:57:25. > :57:29.Nobody is talking about taking away their housing. They were still be
:57:29. > :57:33.on a maximum of �400 a week, which is more than MPs get to spend on
:57:33. > :57:37.their flats. We will talk about health again, which will become an
:57:37. > :57:40.issue with the Select Committee. We have had most of the major medical
:57:40. > :57:46.trade unions and authorities and lobbies against the Government
:57:46. > :57:53.reforms. We now have a Select Committee chaired by the former
:57:53. > :57:57.Conservative Secretary of State for Health. Tory MPs must be saying
:57:57. > :58:01.that we have welfare and education reform, why did we go down this
:58:01. > :58:06.road as well? Lots of Tories are mystified as to how they arrived
:58:06. > :58:12.here. In opposition their policy on the NHS was effectively that we
:58:12. > :58:15.love the NHS, at no, really, we really love it. It was a message of
:58:16. > :58:19.reassurance rather than structural reform. Then in 2010 they found
:58:19. > :58:22.this bill emanating from Andrew Lansley, proposing exactly that,
:58:23. > :58:26.radical structural reform of the NHS. Now they are having to unpick
:58:26. > :58:34.the whole thing. The service in for them to do politically would be to
:58:34. > :58:36.abandon the whole thing. This is a terrible issue for Labour. Until
:58:36. > :58:41.recently lots of party members about that the party has been far
:58:41. > :58:47.too quiet on this. Ed Miliband got a massive cheer for this on his
:58:47. > :58:56.conference speech, defending the NHS. They are taking a huge gamble
:58:57. > :59:00.by backing this. There -- I work quite closely on the NHS, and the
:59:00. > :59:05.consistency of the bill has been jeopardised. They are taking things
:59:05. > :59:08.away and it is becoming dangerously inconsistent. Andrew Lansley has
:59:08. > :59:11.one great advantage in this debate, which is that hardly anybody apart
:59:12. > :59:15.from Andrew Lansley actually understand what the proposals are.
:59:15. > :59:20.I remember looking at them when this came up last year and they
:59:20. > :59:23.were fiendishly complicated. This includes Nick Clegg! He did not
:59:23. > :59:27.understand it. Honestly, I don't blame him and I don't think people
:59:27. > :59:31.at home as the understand them either. For all the talk of
:59:31. > :59:34.technical reform of the NHS, there is a clear view in Number 10 that
:59:34. > :59:37.the public only understand one thing about the NHS, which is
:59:37. > :59:42.waiting times. If they go up over the cause of this Parliament then
:59:42. > :59:46.it will be disastrous. And they have started to. This is a negative
:59:46. > :59:50.issue for the Government. Will Andrew Lansley survive? Will there
:59:50. > :59:55.be more changes? There is no prospect of an immediate reshuffle.
:59:55. > :00:01.Yes, there will be if Chris Huhne bites the dust. Not a comprehensive
:00:01. > :00:06.one. A nobody would want Andrew Lansley's job. Thank you to all
:00:06. > :00:10.three of you. Jo Coburn will be on BBC Two tomorrow at midday for the