:00:47. > :00:51.Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Our top story: will the coalition
:00:51. > :00:55.agreed to scrap red tape in the Budget to make it easier for
:00:56. > :01:00.employers to hire and fire? I will ask the new Lib Dem business
:01:00. > :01:07.minister, Norman Lamb. Alex Salmond has and one to business referendum
:01:07. > :01:10.until late 2014, but says he will kick off the Yes campaign in May.
:01:10. > :01:14.Scotland's first minister joins us for the Sunday interview. As the
:01:14. > :01:21.price of petrol reaches record highs, should the Chancellor cut
:01:21. > :01:25.fuel duty? The petrol head and a green campaigner go head-to-head.
:01:26. > :01:30.And our top political panel here to analyse British politics in the
:01:31. > :01:34.week ahead, and tweeting fervently throughout the programme. It London,
:01:34. > :01:39.should a Christian charity be allowed to provide a paid
:01:39. > :01:49.parliamentary interns. Some MPs say controversial views on
:01:49. > :01:54.
:01:54. > :01:57.All that and more in the next hour, There is new evidence of the scale
:01:57. > :02:01.of funding cuts charities are facing. A leaked report suggest the
:02:01. > :02:06.sector has lost at least �1 billion of funding in the current financial
:02:06. > :02:10.year. The Cabinet Office disputes the figures.
:02:10. > :02:13.Some of the funding hasn't materialised. This Nottingham
:02:13. > :02:18.counselling Service has told people for more than 30 years. The charity
:02:18. > :02:21.was held by it there hundred million pounds Transocean fund set
:02:21. > :02:25.up by the government to help charities adapt to cuts in funding.
:02:25. > :02:30.-- transition fund. It found in the leaked report that charities face
:02:30. > :02:35.to cut of �524 million in the financial year and estimated cuts
:02:35. > :02:45.to all UK charities would be between �1,000,000,005.5 billion
:02:45. > :02:48.I think we can be fairly sure that the charity sector is being hit
:02:48. > :02:54.disproportionately hard and we can be confident that this year's cuts
:02:54. > :02:58.are going to be harder. Charities are calling on the Chancellor to
:02:58. > :03:03.announce another transition fund in his forthcoming Budget. But money
:03:03. > :03:06.is tight. The government said reforms including tax incentives
:03:06. > :03:11.and greater access to contracts would provide an extra �600 million
:03:11. > :03:16.for charities over this Parliament, but, said this report, that
:03:16. > :03:18.represents the facts. It made all kinds of extrapolations from
:03:18. > :03:22.analysis of a relatively small number of charities that by
:03:22. > :03:26.definition were the most vulnerable. There will be a reduction in public
:03:26. > :03:29.expenditure on charity, but the question is as a government, what
:03:29. > :03:35.are we doing to support and strength and the sector.
:03:35. > :03:38.Cabinet Office's dispute the figures, but no one denies that
:03:38. > :03:41.charities are struggling in tough economic times, and that is a worry
:03:41. > :03:44.for the government with the Prime Minister committed to opening up
:03:44. > :03:51.public services and giving the voluntary sector a far greater role
:03:51. > :03:54.in tackling societies deeper A man has been shot dead by police
:03:54. > :03:59.after they stopped a car in which she was travelling. The incident,
:03:59. > :04:01.which took place in Cheshire last night, has been referred to the
:04:01. > :04:06.independent Police Complaints Commission. Two men were arrested
:04:06. > :04:10.at the scene. At least 15 people have been killed and more than 50
:04:10. > :04:14.injured in a head on a train crash in southern Poland. The trains were
:04:14. > :04:22.travelling at high speed on the same track. Fancied for the moment.
:04:22. > :04:24.More news at after 6:30pm. -- that Less than three weeks to the Budget
:04:24. > :04:29.but the coalition is trying to reach agreement on measures to
:04:29. > :04:35.boost economic growth. Let's talk to the Liberal Democrat business
:04:35. > :04:40.minister, Norman Lamb. Mr Lam, do you plan to do anything to make it
:04:40. > :04:46.easier for small businesses to hire and fire? Well, yes. The government
:04:46. > :04:50.is all ready work in -- already working on ways to ease the route
:04:50. > :04:52.to take on a new worker, just the simple things to make it easier to
:04:53. > :04:58.get all the different measures in place when you take on an employee.
:04:58. > :05:02.That is often very difficult for small businesses. We are also
:05:02. > :05:05.extending the qualifying period before you can claim unfair
:05:05. > :05:08.dismissal between one year up to two years, and addressing the
:05:08. > :05:12.problem of settling disputes when things go wrong, making it easier
:05:12. > :05:15.to settle disputes and reduce the number of claims that end up in
:05:16. > :05:20.tribunals. There are already a number of things that we are doing.
:05:20. > :05:24.And there will be a call for evidence to look at what happens
:05:24. > :05:29.internationally, both in countries like Germany and Australia, to get
:05:29. > :05:33.used of people in this country as well about how you can ease the way
:05:33. > :05:36.forward for small businesses -- get the views of people in this country.
:05:36. > :05:39.Would it be fair to say you are against the report that was
:05:39. > :05:45.commissioned in Downing Street? You are against the report's radical
:05:45. > :05:49.plans to cut employment regulations. Correct? I want there to be a
:05:49. > :05:53.rational debate about this. I was an employment lawyer and I
:05:53. > :05:59.understand employers frustrations very well. I want to address the
:05:59. > :06:05.anxieties that employers have about the challenges of employment law.
:06:05. > :06:09.So are you largely for or against the changes? Why I am against is
:06:09. > :06:12.encouraging a culture of hiring and firing. The best employment
:06:12. > :06:18.practices to recruit well, investing your staff, and that is
:06:18. > :06:21.the best way to improve productivity. -- invest in your
:06:21. > :06:27.staff. I recognise there are many employers to get anxious about what
:06:27. > :06:31.happens when a number employee -- and employees underperforming. I
:06:31. > :06:36.have ideas from my own practice in employment in how we can ease the
:06:36. > :06:39.way for employers to resolve the problems, often reaching agreements
:06:39. > :06:42.with the employee. The problem is you have to go to an expensive
:06:42. > :06:47.lawyer at the moment to get it sorted out, something like I used
:06:47. > :06:50.to be. What we want to do is mainstream the approaches I used to
:06:50. > :06:53.make it easier for small businesses to deal with those problems when
:06:53. > :06:58.they arise, and I think that is a really important thing we need to
:06:58. > :07:04.tackle. Some of that sounds like tinkering at the edges. Wouldn't it
:07:04. > :07:09.be fair to say, as the Tories say, that the Lib Dems are the road
:07:09. > :07:11.block to the reform on this issue? Absolutely not. I have had
:07:11. > :07:15.constructive discussions with conservative colleagues about how
:07:15. > :07:19.to make the system work better. What we all are focusing on is
:07:19. > :07:26.finding ways in which we can boost employment, and that is critical.
:07:26. > :07:29.We can improve competitiveness. But at the same time we do not throw
:07:29. > :07:33.away employment rights that could increase anxiety and end up with
:07:33. > :07:37.unintended consequences. I think there is a way forward where we can
:07:37. > :07:40.achieve agreement on this, improving processes, and making it
:07:40. > :07:43.simpler for small employers to tackle these problems without
:07:43. > :07:48.losing the protection that is actually important for many working
:07:48. > :07:54.people. You are close to Nick Clegg. I am not asking what will be in the
:07:54. > :07:57.Budget, but he's your party of for a deal on tax, a cut on the top
:07:57. > :08:05.rate of income tax in return for higher property taxes on big
:08:05. > :08:11.houses? As a general sort of principle, I think shifting tax
:08:11. > :08:15.away from employment and onto an unearned wealth and pollution is a
:08:15. > :08:21.good principle, but the Lib Dem priority is to cut tax for people
:08:21. > :08:27.on low and middle incomes. That is where the squeeze is. Are you up
:08:27. > :08:34.for a deal or not? Our focus is absolutely on cutting tax.
:08:34. > :08:37.understand that, but are you up for a deal? That has to come first.
:08:38. > :08:41.then are you what run deal? I am not part of the budget negotiations,
:08:41. > :08:49.and you will have to wait until we know that the -- details. That is
:08:49. > :08:52.the principle, we want to cut tax for people on lower incomes.
:08:52. > :08:55.Whether Scotland decides to stay in the United Kingdom will go alone is
:08:56. > :08:59.an independent country is the biggest challenge to the British
:08:59. > :09:03.constitution in 300 years. Alex Salmond doesn't want to settle the
:09:03. > :09:07.question until the autumn of 2014. David Cameron once the issue
:09:07. > :09:10.resolved earlier, maybe much earlier, but what will the road to
:09:10. > :09:15.the referendum look like? At the moment there are more questions
:09:15. > :09:24.than answers. When is the referendum taking place? Autumn
:09:24. > :09:27.2014 is Alex Salmond's favoured date. Last week it was suggested
:09:27. > :09:30.18th October 1920 14 would be the day of destiny. But David Cameron
:09:30. > :09:34.has made it clear he does not want to wait that long. I think there is
:09:34. > :09:38.a strong case for getting on and asking the question. The Scottish
:09:38. > :09:42.people I speak to one to have this debate, they want to have the
:09:42. > :09:46.question answered. -- wants to have this debate. There is a cloud over
:09:46. > :09:50.Scotland's future. I don't see why we have to wait as long as the
:09:50. > :09:53.First Minister wants. One of the biggest areas of disagreement
:09:53. > :09:58.between London and Edinburgh is over what should be on the ballot
:09:58. > :10:02.paper. The UK government says they should be a single straightforward
:10:02. > :10:07.question on independence. But the Scottish government wants to
:10:07. > :10:11.include an option on Defoe Max. And then there is the question on who
:10:11. > :10:16.will be able to vote. Alex Salmon says 16 and 17 year-olds should
:10:16. > :10:23.have the vote -- Alex Salmond. But he wants to exclude Scots in the
:10:23. > :10:25.rest of the UK who are not on the as the mechanics of the referendum
:10:26. > :10:29.there is pressure on the First Minister to set out exactly what an
:10:29. > :10:39.independent Scotland would look like. I travel to Aberdeen to meet
:10:39. > :10:42.
:10:42. > :10:47.Alex Salmond for today's Sunday First Minister, Scotland face is
:10:47. > :10:52.the most decision -- important decision in 300 year, so I want to
:10:52. > :10:55.get clarity on what independence means. As head of state, you say
:10:55. > :10:58.you would keep the Queen. But it wasn't that long ago the your
:10:58. > :11:04.party's policy was to have a referendum on a republic and lots
:11:04. > :11:08.of your member -- members are of a republican mindset. Is this a
:11:08. > :11:12.change because you do not want to scare the voters? I think that was
:11:12. > :11:16.15 years, and in those 15 years parties have changed policies Major
:11:16. > :11:19.times at Westminster and are barely recognisable from 15 years ago, but
:11:19. > :11:23.for a number of years we put forward the proposition that Her
:11:23. > :11:27.Majesty the Queen and her successor should be head of state in a
:11:27. > :11:31.constitutional monarchy. Nothing unusual about that. Scotland and
:11:31. > :11:35.England had 100 years we have the same monarch a way independent
:11:35. > :11:40.countries. -- where we had the same monarch but where independent
:11:40. > :11:44.countries. The Queen is head of state in 16 countries at the moment,
:11:44. > :11:49.so we would be in the family of countries there. I think there is a
:11:49. > :11:53.wider message to people, and that is the aspect of the Social Union
:11:53. > :11:57.between Scotland and England that we want to see continue, and I
:11:57. > :12:01.think the monarchy is the personification of that. So no
:12:01. > :12:05.post-independence referendum on a republic? Correct. Let's move to
:12:05. > :12:09.another area way you seem to have changed policy. You have also said
:12:09. > :12:14.to want to keep the pound, but it also said -- it was long ago you
:12:14. > :12:18.were an enthusiast for the euro. Why the change? As was that Tony
:12:18. > :12:23.Blair government, and the Liberal Democrat government might be now. I
:12:23. > :12:28.am saying that I was just reported of saying that when the facts
:12:28. > :12:32.change, I changed my mind. I think it was a great adage from a great
:12:32. > :12:36.economist. Given the condition of the year wrote, that is not a
:12:36. > :12:43.sensible policy option to advocate -- given the condition of the euro.
:12:43. > :12:47.I don't think the euro is looking for additional members. We are
:12:47. > :12:51.looking forward as they Stirling's own, and that seemed to have a lot
:12:51. > :12:57.of strength. Three years ago you'd told Spanish television that euro
:12:57. > :13:02.membership is "a strong argument for independence". You also added
:13:02. > :13:07.in that sterling was sinking like a stone. I will rest on John Maynard
:13:07. > :13:10.Keynes. When the facts change, I changed my mind. Not a bad adage.
:13:10. > :13:13.But like with the flip-flop on the monarchy, it's hard to avoid the
:13:13. > :13:17.impression you have changed, because you know that Scotland do
:13:17. > :13:21.not want to join the euro even though you have been a supporter of
:13:21. > :13:24.membership until recently. You have done it again to not scared of
:13:24. > :13:31.horses, we will keep the head of state, keep the pound but a few
:13:31. > :13:34.years ago you were arguing for the euro. I was elected as first
:13:34. > :13:39.minister of Scotland by a substantial number of Scottish
:13:39. > :13:44.people in 2007 and re-elected by an overwhelming number of Scottish
:13:44. > :13:47.people in 2011. They seem to accept that the evolution of policy is
:13:47. > :13:51.Ayse -- a sensible thing in the modern world. So you will keep the
:13:51. > :13:55.pound? That is your policy. So interest rates would be set in
:13:55. > :14:00.London. I can remember a time when you would complain endlessly about
:14:00. > :14:04.interest rates being set in London but she would not change it? Again,
:14:05. > :14:08.the circumstances have changed. One of the arguments in terms of
:14:08. > :14:13.sterling was that it went to a long period of time where there was a
:14:13. > :14:17.premium on sterling interest rates, say over Deutschmark rate. We are
:14:17. > :14:22.now in a period where sterling interest rates, not the rate paid
:14:22. > :14:26.by businesses, but nonetheless the official Bank of England rate is
:14:26. > :14:30.extremely low and I don't think there is an interest rate argument
:14:30. > :14:34.against sterling at the moment. I think there are good arguments in
:14:34. > :14:39.favourite of the currency zone policy that we are putting forward.
:14:39. > :14:45.But interest rates would be set in an independent Scotland to suit the
:14:45. > :14:51.the UK, not Scotland. It will be the Bank of England setting it.
:14:51. > :14:55.do not have a single member, not a single Scot, who would be a likely
:14:55. > :14:59.candidate at the monetary policy at the Bank of England. We are saying
:14:59. > :15:03.if you look at similar arrangements in the past say between Belgium and
:15:04. > :15:09.Luxembourg to pursue a successful monetary union over many years,
:15:09. > :15:13.then Luxembourg had influence, not determination, but influence. But
:15:13. > :15:17.then who does determine interest rates? We live in an era of an
:15:17. > :15:23.independent central bank. wouldn't be you. But it would not
:15:23. > :15:27.be George Osborne of all the UK. I am merely pointing out that
:15:27. > :15:32.politicians in London or Edinburgh would not do it, but we would have
:15:32. > :15:38.ability through the monetary policy committee to argue in terms of the
:15:38. > :15:43.economic conditions. It is not a foregone conclusion they would have
:15:43. > :15:53.a member for you one. Who would back me? They are meant to be
:15:53. > :15:54.
:15:54. > :16:00.Politicians at Westminster are also in a position of no political
:16:00. > :16:05.influence. If you have monetary union, which is what you're saying,
:16:05. > :16:09.all the lessons from the recent eurozone crisis are that for
:16:09. > :16:14.monetary union to work, it needs a high degree of fiscal union as well.
:16:14. > :16:18.So, in an independent Scotland, your fiscal policy would not be
:16:18. > :16:22.totally independent. I disagree with you. I think the fundamental
:16:22. > :16:25.lesson of the eurozone crisis is that for monetary union to work,
:16:25. > :16:33.there has to be comparable productivity rates between
:16:33. > :16:39.component members. The euro currently has a combination of
:16:39. > :16:46.different productivity levels, that's the underlying instability.
:16:46. > :16:49.One of the reasons that a sterling zone would work would be that we
:16:49. > :16:59.have similar productivity levels between Scotland and the rest of
:16:59. > :17:06.
:17:06. > :17:10.the UK. I agree, you need a fiscal stability arrangement. One much
:17:10. > :17:17.respected economist here in Scotland, often quoted by your
:17:17. > :17:22.party, says that your fiscal room for manoeuvre would be limited.
:17:22. > :17:27.it would be limited, but if I may say so, I spelt it out a couple of
:17:27. > :17:31.weeks ago at the London School of Economics, to general acceptance, I
:17:32. > :17:38.would say, half a dozen fiscal policy initiatives you could make
:17:38. > :17:42.to boost growth within the context of a stability pact. Your fiscal
:17:42. > :17:46.room for movement is limited in the modern world anyway. By being part
:17:46. > :17:52.of a monetary union with the rest of the UK? I would not necessarily
:17:52. > :17:56.say that. Let's say that we said borrowing should not be more than
:17:56. > :18:00.3% over the long term, I would say that is no more than the fiscal
:18:00. > :18:04.discipline that any sensible country would have in any case.
:18:04. > :18:09.That's interesting, you would agree to enter into a borrowing packed
:18:09. > :18:16.with London? There would have to be a stability pact. Which would limit
:18:16. > :18:22.the amount you could borrow. Can we clarify whether an independent
:18:22. > :18:25.Scotland would have to reapply for membership of the EU? No, we would
:18:25. > :18:30.be a successor state, one of two successor states, both of which
:18:30. > :18:36.would have to negotiate, but within the context of the wider European
:18:36. > :18:45.Union. But there is no precedent for an EU member-state doing this,
:18:45. > :18:48.it is uncharted territory. There are and many leading legal experts,
:18:48. > :18:55.including at Glasgow University and Edinburgh University, and many
:18:55. > :19:05.others, who have said that Scotland would have to reapply. Why should
:19:05. > :19:09.
:19:09. > :19:14.Scots believe you, rather than the experts? Many people, including
:19:14. > :19:17.former director generals of the European Union, all argue the
:19:17. > :19:21.contrary position, that both countries would be in the same
:19:21. > :19:25.position with regard to each other, and with regards to the European
:19:25. > :19:29.Union. And of course, there is no precedent for any country being
:19:29. > :19:34.expelled, either. We have established that it is
:19:34. > :19:39.unprecedented, though you are trying to give a guarantee - have
:19:39. > :19:43.you sought advice from your own Scottish law officers? We have.
:19:43. > :19:48.What did they say? You can read that in the documents that we have
:19:49. > :19:53.put forward. What did they say? cannot give you the review of the
:19:53. > :19:56.legal advice of the law officers, you know that. But what we can say
:19:56. > :20:03.is that everything that we have published his consistent with the
:20:03. > :20:10.legal advice that we have received. We can argue, lawyer against a
:20:10. > :20:14.lawyer... No, I am just asking you what the advice was. The only
:20:14. > :20:20.precedent I can think of in terms of the publication of legal advice,
:20:21. > :20:25.from any government, is the advice on the Iraq war. No government will
:20:25. > :20:29.publish legal advice. But this is about the future of our country. Do
:20:29. > :20:33.you not owe it to the Scottish people to publish both the advice
:20:33. > :20:38.of the Scottish law officers and the advice of Brussels? Have you
:20:38. > :20:43.got advice from Brussels? As you would expect, the commission has
:20:43. > :20:50.said that they will not answer an hypothetical question. Although you
:20:50. > :20:55.will have noted the number of agency reports saying that European
:20:55. > :21:00.Commission lawyers actually agree with the successor state argument.
:21:00. > :21:05.Why are you dragging out the referendum? I am not dragging it
:21:05. > :21:09.out at all. We have got to have a timetable which can be agreed in
:21:09. > :21:16.the Scottish Parliament. If I may say so, the people who are saying
:21:16. > :21:20.this seem to be in no fit condition to argue their case. So, run it now
:21:20. > :21:25.and win. I think it is important that when we come to the referendum
:21:25. > :21:30.in the autumn of 2014, that people have an exact proposition on
:21:30. > :21:35.independence, which I have pledged to give, everybody's questions
:21:35. > :21:39.having been answered to people's satisfaction. And of course, people
:21:39. > :21:45.in Scotland have to know what the alternative is. In the last few
:21:45. > :21:50.weeks we have seen a variety of alternatives springing forward, the
:21:50. > :21:56.only thing the anti-independence campaign are agreed on is that
:21:56. > :22:02.they're against independence, but they disagree on everything else.
:22:02. > :22:07.Many people in Scotland just think you are frightened, because you
:22:08. > :22:13.think you will lose if you have the referendum now. Many people, not
:22:13. > :22:17.just in Scotland... You are. They told me there would not be a
:22:17. > :22:25.Scottish Parliament, and there is, then they told me there would not
:22:25. > :22:29.be an SNP government. I think we will win the referendum, and I am
:22:29. > :22:36.so confident about that that shortly after the local elections
:22:36. > :22:42.in May, the yes campaign will be launched, and that campaign will
:22:42. > :22:48.not just be the Scottish National Party, it will be a broad-based
:22:48. > :22:52.campaign, with job creators, unions, a variety of people coming together
:22:52. > :22:56.to enunciate the case for independence. That positive
:22:57. > :23:01.approach is going to contrast markedly with opponents who are
:23:01. > :23:08.united only in their negativity. Thank you very much. This week, the
:23:08. > :23:15.cost of petrol will reach record highs, 137.4 pence for a litre of
:23:15. > :23:18.unleaded. The increasing strain on motorists is fuelling a campaign to
:23:18. > :23:24.urge George Osborne to cut fuel duty in his budget this month. So
:23:24. > :23:28.far, the signs are that he will not heed their calls, but could any cat
:23:28. > :23:38.actually bring in more money to the Treasury? We have been looking at
:23:38. > :23:52.
:23:52. > :23:57.These days, petrol bills are feeling anything but mini. This man
:23:57. > :24:01.runs tours around London, and fuel prices weigh heavily on his mind.
:24:01. > :24:06.Seriously, it is getting pretty scary these days. It is a new
:24:06. > :24:09.record, at �1.42, it is extortion it, and I just hope and pray that
:24:09. > :24:13.it has not got any more. Petrol and diesel prices have gone in that
:24:13. > :24:17.direction for lots of reasons - instability in the Middle East, the
:24:17. > :24:23.value of the pound, but also because of tax. The Government
:24:23. > :24:26.takes duty and VAT worth 60p in every pound spent at the pumps, the
:24:26. > :24:30.highest proportion in the EU. The coalition are trying to do
:24:30. > :24:39.something about it. They have postponed two planned increases in
:24:39. > :24:43.duty, they have introduced a fuel stabiliser, and this week, people
:24:43. > :24:50.in remote areas are getting a discount on their fuel duty. Drive
:24:50. > :24:58.on. And with budget fever revving up at Westminster, some are
:24:58. > :25:01.lobbying the Chancellor to do even more. I am asking the Government to
:25:01. > :25:08.forgo the August tax rise and look seriously at cutting fuel taxes in
:25:08. > :25:11.the long term. The latest stats this week show that a cut of only
:25:11. > :25:18.Melaine Walker in fuel duty would create 180,000 jobs. We desperately
:25:18. > :25:27.need those jobs.. But the problem is, that would require the
:25:27. > :25:31.Government to pull off a tricky manoeuvre with the public finances.
:25:31. > :25:36.If the Chancellor decides to cut fuel duty, his dabbling with
:25:36. > :25:39.something which in principle brings in �30 billion a year, and any cut
:25:39. > :25:43.will reduce that by several hundreds of millions. So, he has
:25:43. > :25:52.got to be careful, it will potentially make a bit of a dent,
:25:52. > :25:56.although, in the content -- context of a total tax take of between �500
:25:56. > :26:03.billion and �600 billion, there is an argument that he could take a
:26:03. > :26:10.cut of a couple of pence per litre. The Chancellor is facing demands
:26:11. > :26:15.from a load more people than you could fit into a Mini. That was our
:26:15. > :26:25.whole production team! So, should the Chancellor cut fuel duty in his
:26:25. > :26:30.
:26:30. > :26:38.Budget? Joining me now, Quentin Willson, from FairFuelUK, and Sian
:26:38. > :26:44.Berry. This is actually affecting the economy, and people. The point
:26:44. > :26:51.is that if you cut duty by 2.5p, the CBI report says it will be
:26:51. > :26:54.fiscally neutral for the Treasury, because you create jobs. That money
:26:54. > :26:58.is going back into the economy, things like clothing, food,
:26:58. > :27:02.household goods, leisure and entertainment. All of these things
:27:02. > :27:07.are being constrained because people cannot afford... But surely
:27:07. > :27:12.you're simply moving the money from fuel duty to people spending it on
:27:12. > :27:15.other things. Yes, but money which is not spent on higher fuel duty
:27:15. > :27:20.will be spent in the wider economy. What could be wrong with that, no
:27:20. > :27:25.loss in revenue, he says? If you're going to spend money on something
:27:25. > :27:27.like this, then the main thing is getting people out of car
:27:28. > :27:32.dependency. We know what the markets have done to the petrol
:27:32. > :27:36.price recently. The AA have called them greedy speculators. Any cut
:27:36. > :27:44.will be swallowed up by speculation like that. We need to be spending
:27:44. > :27:48.money on reversing bus cuts, rail fares. Some people this week have
:27:48. > :27:52.been talking about transport poverty, where you have not got a
:27:52. > :27:57.car and your bus services have been cut. That's the kind of thing we
:27:57. > :28:02.need to be spending money on. should we have to pay more than our
:28:02. > :28:06.European neighbours for petrol? would accept a delay in the further
:28:06. > :28:09.increase, because of what the markets have done, but a cat is
:28:09. > :28:14.effectively government spending, and government spending needs to be
:28:14. > :28:22.spent instead on getting us out of the car. It will give people a
:28:22. > :28:25.relief socially. The truth is that since 1997, the overall cost of
:28:25. > :28:31.motoring, unlike public transport, which has gone through the roof,
:28:31. > :28:36.has fallen by 7%, so why more for motorists? Tell that to the people
:28:36. > :28:40.who write to me to say, I have had to give up my job because I am
:28:40. > :28:43.spending more on fuel than I am spending on rent every month. It is
:28:43. > :28:49.a deeply important social issue, which is emasculating the economy
:28:49. > :28:53.and stopping people going to work. Half of all families in actual
:28:53. > :28:58.poverty do not have a car at all. These cuts are having a terrible
:28:58. > :29:01.effect on young people looking for jobs, trying to get into education.
:29:01. > :29:07.Those are social problems which could be solved by further
:29:07. > :29:16.investment in bus services. I am saying we should do both of them,
:29:16. > :29:22.we have got to develop a transport system, that is something we need,
:29:22. > :29:30.but it will take 10 years. But a cut in fuel duty would help lots of
:29:30. > :29:34.ordinary families, what's wrong with that? Most households are
:29:34. > :29:41.single car households, most of the people in the household do not rely
:29:41. > :29:46.on the car, they rely on public transport. 70% of councils have cut
:29:46. > :29:50.bus services this year. It would only cost tens of millions to
:29:50. > :29:58.reverse those cuts to the bus services. But you want a cut in
:29:58. > :30:05.duty at a time, over the years, we used to see tables about fuel duty,
:30:05. > :30:09.and we see that now it is lower in real terms than it was in 2009.
:30:09. > :30:17.of every litre you put into your card goes in tax, the highest in
:30:17. > :30:21.the eurozone. This is not right. does make business more expensive,
:30:21. > :30:26.doesn't it, including heavy vehicles? Yes, and fuel prices are
:30:26. > :30:33.only going to go up in the future. In the long term we need to reduce
:30:33. > :30:38.our reliance on oil, not encourage it by doing this. How would you pay
:30:38. > :30:45.for it - there is no money, so you will have to find the money?
:30:45. > :30:55.would increase economic activity, that's the way we do it. By
:30:55. > :31:01.
:31:01. > :31:05.reducing duty, you're increasing That was fun. It is midday and you
:31:05. > :31:10.are watching the Sunday Politics, coming up in 20 minutes. I will
:31:10. > :31:20.look at the week ahead with our political panel. Until then, the
:31:20. > :31:24.
:31:24. > :31:29.Welcome to the land a part of Sunday Politics where we will be
:31:29. > :31:33.talking about hacking, horses and have a head-to-head between Boris
:31:33. > :31:37.Johnson's to rival biographers. They will be here shortly. A little
:31:37. > :31:42.later, why some MPs are saying one Christian charity should not be
:31:42. > :31:49.allowed to pay for parliamentary in terms because of their "extremist
:31:49. > :31:54.views". To pick over the entrails of the week are Bob Neill and Heidi
:31:54. > :31:58.Alexander, the Labour MP for Lewisham East. She also has a
:31:58. > :32:02.shadow post in the Department of Environment and rural affairs. We
:32:02. > :32:09.know the Olympics are a showcase for the capital, but can they be a
:32:09. > :32:13.showcase for protest, public sector cuts, as suggested by the leader of
:32:13. > :32:18.the country's biggest union? Not in the way been proposed by Len
:32:18. > :32:24.McCluskey. It was disgraceful to say that the Olympics, which is a
:32:24. > :32:27.showcase for the UK is a legitimate target for, his phrase, civil
:32:27. > :32:32.disobedience. We have industrial relations issues, and there are
:32:32. > :32:37.other ways to pursue it, but that was a throwback to the bad old days
:32:37. > :32:40.and a naked bit of self-interest. Whatever disputes you might have,
:32:40. > :32:44.the last thing you do start trashing your country in front of
:32:44. > :32:49.half of the world, and potentially encouraging people to spoil what
:32:49. > :32:54.should be a fantastic event for folks and families across the
:32:54. > :32:57.country and the world. He is only suggesting protest, not breaking
:32:57. > :33:04.the law. Should and visitors to the country get a rounded and full
:33:04. > :33:08.impression of what people are thinking? -- shouldn't visitors.
:33:08. > :33:12.This is the point in the year when the eyes are on London, and it
:33:12. > :33:16.should be a showcase for the capital. I disagree with what Len
:33:16. > :33:21.McCluskey said. I don't think we should be disrupting the Games. I
:33:21. > :33:25.think the problem here is that the unions and a lot of public sector
:33:25. > :33:29.workers are very fed-up and frustrated with the way the
:33:29. > :33:33.negotiations, the so-called negotiations have gone on on public
:33:33. > :33:38.sector pensions and I think there is frustration there, but I don't
:33:38. > :33:43.think they would be helping their own course, because I think they
:33:43. > :33:48.would be losing public support were they to disrupt the Games. With the
:33:48. > :33:52.mayoral election only weeks away, it is no coincidence that
:33:52. > :33:55.publishers have seen their opportunity. Not one, but two
:33:55. > :33:58.updated biographies of Boris Johnson are about to be published.
:33:58. > :34:01.They assess his record and shed fresh light on what was happening
:34:01. > :34:07.behind the scenes during what many feel was his Hurricane Katrina
:34:07. > :34:15.moment, the summer riots. My house is on fire, my neighbour's house is
:34:15. > :34:19.on fire. It is bedlam on the streets. Both authors say the riots
:34:19. > :34:22.took Boris Johnson by surprise, but according to one biographer,
:34:22. > :34:27.Downing Street sources said they found it incredible that the mayor
:34:27. > :34:30.did not return from holiday until the 4th day of disturbances. The
:34:30. > :34:33.sources have maintained that the mayor did not understand gravity of
:34:33. > :34:37.the situation and that his lack of empathy with local people in front
:34:37. > :34:41.of the cameras dismayed the Tory leadership will watching. However,
:34:41. > :34:45.the following morning he would appear on the radio and seemed to
:34:45. > :34:50.criticise the Government's plans to cut police numbers. I think this is
:34:50. > :34:57.not a time to think about making substantial cuts in police numbers.
:34:57. > :35:00.This announcement put a huge strain on his relationship with the Prime
:35:00. > :35:07.Minister. As the capital came to terms with the destruction, its
:35:07. > :35:12.national and local government were I am joined by Andrew Jameson and
:35:12. > :35:16.Sonia Purnell who both have updated biography is coming out. How did
:35:16. > :35:20.the summer riots and his handling of them define Boris Johnson? You
:35:20. > :35:24.say he flunked it. Why? I think that was his test as to what he
:35:24. > :35:28.would be like is a national leader. He was put under a lot of pressure,
:35:28. > :35:32.and people needed empathy, leadership and reassurance and
:35:32. > :35:35.guidance. The police were being criticised and were not able to
:35:35. > :35:39.contain the violence and he was out of the country for quite a long
:35:39. > :35:43.time. When he did come back, he didn't quite strike the right note
:35:43. > :35:47.and looked slightly smirking in interviews in Clapham with a member
:35:47. > :35:53.of the public who was trying to tell him how bad things were for
:35:53. > :35:56.her. I think he failed that particular test. Do you agree was
:35:56. > :36:00.his Hurricane Katrina moment? Should he have come back soon and
:36:00. > :36:05.taken a different approach? Here was his lowest point. He was stuck
:36:05. > :36:09.in a Winnebago van with his wife and children, and everybody was
:36:09. > :36:15.wrong-footed by this. There was not a single person who was not
:36:15. > :36:20.astonished. Did he take too long to come back though? I don't think so.
:36:20. > :36:24.It could have been one night quicker. When he came back and came
:36:24. > :36:28.to Clapham, did he get the mood right? No, he got it wrong, but he
:36:28. > :36:33.recovered by picking up that this was not the time people wanted less
:36:33. > :36:36.money spent on the police, so he tore up the policy on that and to
:36:36. > :36:41.the Normans annoyance of Downing Street he went on the Today
:36:41. > :36:44.programme and said he should not be so cutting money for the police.
:36:44. > :36:48.Cameron was furious with him, but in that respect he did respond to
:36:48. > :36:52.public opinion. You found he had had dinner the night before we
:36:52. > :36:55.David Cameron and did not mention he would go on to his favourite BBC
:36:55. > :36:59.programme and attack the Government's cuts to policing.
:36:59. > :37:04.behaved like the mayor of London and represented London. He is not
:37:04. > :37:07.there to represent Cameron. Did you think he was right? What was the
:37:07. > :37:10.response to his turning on the government and saying there he
:37:10. > :37:14.needs more money for the police when he had spent three years
:37:14. > :37:19.saying he could cope with the cuts? That was the biggest rift they had
:37:19. > :37:24.ever been between Boris and Cameron. George Osborne was sent to deliver
:37:24. > :37:29.a severe dressing down. Downing Street people said he did really
:37:29. > :37:33.messed up and they were very cross. He would have been a bigger mess
:37:33. > :37:38.not to do it, frankly. But what did they feel about it? One of them
:37:38. > :37:43.described him as a selfish showman? I am not sure at this hour of the
:37:43. > :37:47.day I can use the actual language. It tends to be the second division
:37:47. > :37:51.people who get very cross with Forest. Cameron and Osborne,
:37:51. > :37:55.although crosser the time, they are serious enough to know that if he
:37:55. > :38:01.does not stand up for London Boris doesn't have a hope. With the
:38:01. > :38:03.election coming up, can he say that this is a good record? I am
:38:03. > :38:07.surprised how weak his record is. He is obviously a talented and
:38:07. > :38:11.clever person but it strikes me they're not big achievement for him
:38:11. > :38:15.to talk about. We can talk about the bikes, which are fun, but they
:38:15. > :38:19.cost a lot of money, about �100 million which is a lot of money
:38:19. > :38:23.during a time of austerity. We have the new buses, but only one at the
:38:23. > :38:28.moment. That cost �1 million. I happen to like it very much that
:38:28. > :38:30.it's questionable whether that is a priority. He got rid of the head of
:38:30. > :38:36.the Metropolitan Police but his successor only lasted a couple of
:38:36. > :38:41.years. You are taking on balance a negative view. Do you accept that
:38:41. > :38:46.you? Has he come up to the mark? There were fantastically low
:38:46. > :38:52.expectations. Do year-old Polly Toynbee said he would be exposed as
:38:52. > :38:58.a clown and a liar. Did he come up to your mark? Yes, because he was
:38:58. > :39:02.so determined not to gratify critics on the right and left. He
:39:02. > :39:06.actually took it very seriously and got a man called Simon Milton in to
:39:06. > :39:10.run things and he did that very well. A quick sense from both of
:39:10. > :39:14.you, has there been a certain amount of complacency? The polls
:39:14. > :39:19.look closer than we thought. Do you think he will win? It is impossible
:39:19. > :39:24.to say but I think it is good that fight has become tougher. That will
:39:24. > :39:27.show Tories in other places like Bromley, that will bring them out.
:39:27. > :39:32.I am hoping the argument goes to policy rather than personality. The
:39:32. > :39:37.more it goes on to policy, the more trouble he is in. The one quick
:39:37. > :39:40.word from you to. Bob Neal, just back on the riots, was the selfish
:39:40. > :39:45.in turning on the government about not providing enough money for the
:39:45. > :39:49.police when he accepted the settlement for policing? I think
:39:49. > :39:53.Andrew makes a fair point. In a mature world of devolution you are
:39:53. > :39:57.going to have different nuances from those of us who have a job to
:39:57. > :40:00.do in central government to contain public spending and the mayor of a
:40:00. > :40:04.city like London who has to fight his corner. I am relaxed about it.
:40:04. > :40:08.I think it was a creation of artificial divisions, because the
:40:08. > :40:15.Livingstone camp has little to go on. If it comes to records, Boris
:40:15. > :40:19.is the man who keeps his word. Ken has repeatedly broken his. Forest
:40:19. > :40:22.should have been standing up for London before the riots -- Forest
:40:23. > :40:26.should have been. People in my community were coming up to me and
:40:26. > :40:31.saying they were concerned about cuts to police as they were seen
:40:31. > :40:35.crime, burglary, robbery, serious violence rising. We need police on
:40:35. > :40:39.our streets. It is simply not good enough for Boris Johnson to play
:40:39. > :40:43.catch-up at the end of his four years. Thank you very much indeed.
:40:43. > :40:48.We will have to see what the next chapter is.
:40:48. > :40:52.The air have been calls from some MPs to stop one Christian charity
:40:52. > :40:56.providing paid in turns to worker members in parliament. The
:40:56. > :41:00.organisation Care has strong views on homosexuality. One MP has
:41:00. > :41:08.described them as extremist, but another London Tory MP has said he
:41:08. > :41:12.is happy to have a Care in turn These are the London offices of
:41:12. > :41:19.Care, in Westminster. From the outside there is little clue as to
:41:19. > :41:23.what they are about. Their website provides a bit more information.
:41:23. > :41:26.write speeches for parliamentarians, make our supporters aware of when
:41:26. > :41:30.key votes are happening and we asked them to write into
:41:30. > :41:35.parliamentarians. Along with campaigning on Christine issues,
:41:35. > :41:41.Care pays for interns to work in NP offices a campaign which has become
:41:41. > :41:45.controversial in recent weeks -- M P offices. In 2009, the sponsor the
:41:45. > :41:49.event in central London discussing therapeutic approaches to same-sex
:41:49. > :41:52.attraction, which some describe as trying to change gay people's
:41:53. > :41:57.sexuality. This greatly concerned Philip Dawson, who, amongst other
:41:57. > :42:02.things, is the treasurer of the Enfield Conservative Party. Their
:42:02. > :42:06.MP had an intern from Care. Royal College of psychic --
:42:06. > :42:10.psychiatrists say to suggest that there is a treatment for
:42:10. > :42:14.homosexuality allows prejudice to flourish. So our question on
:42:14. > :42:18.whether a registered charity should be giving its support through co-
:42:18. > :42:22.sponsoring an event could be argued that they are in effect creating an
:42:22. > :42:27.environment in which prejudice and discrimination flourish. Indeed,
:42:27. > :42:34.one openly gay MP feels Care directly discriminated against him.
:42:34. > :42:40.And in turn would help to ben Bradshaw with his 1997 -- when his
:42:40. > :42:43.1997 campaign. Very late in the day, the in turn was told, and I do not
:42:43. > :42:49.know she was given an explanation, that you could not work for ben
:42:49. > :42:53.Bradshaw. I think the reasons that Care gave to me were pretty clear.
:42:53. > :42:57.You believe it is because you are gay. Absolutely no doubt about it.
:42:57. > :43:01.It caused quite a for Rory at the time. Since the beginning of the
:43:01. > :43:06.time there has been a campaign to stop MPs taking interns from Care.
:43:06. > :43:10.Three London MPs have had one in the last year, and one of them,
:43:10. > :43:16.David Lammy, says he wouldn't take on again. Another, Paul Burstow
:43:16. > :43:19.said he had no comment to make. But the third, David Burrows, whose
:43:19. > :43:24.interne worked in the same room, says he fully intends to take on
:43:24. > :43:28.again. If you are going to judge the character of Care and then make
:43:28. > :43:32.dishes and on the intern you have to look at what they have done over
:43:32. > :43:38.the years. They have made a great contribution to public life. They
:43:38. > :43:41.have played a key role in trying to encourage people opting into the
:43:41. > :43:46.human trafficking direction -- directed, focusing on the child
:43:46. > :43:49.victims of human trafficking and also the areas around pornography
:43:49. > :43:52.and internet service providers. Regardless of their agenda, does
:43:52. > :43:58.the fact that they are paying the in turns to work in Parliament mean
:43:58. > :44:05.they will have divided loyalties -- in terms. Ben Bradshaw think so.
:44:05. > :44:09.think it is difficult for the young people concerned. In my case,
:44:09. > :44:13.although this young woman desperately wanted to work for me.
:44:13. > :44:20.We knew each other, we were friends and we had helped each other on the
:44:20. > :44:30.young people are put under coercion in that respect, regardless of what
:44:30. > :44:41.
:44:41. > :44:46.they themselves might believe. We can go up to Salford and speak
:44:46. > :44:50.to Hazel Blears, who's running a programme on this matter. Can I ask
:44:50. > :44:57.you first whether you think there should be or can be controls on the
:44:57. > :45:00.suitability or otherwise of interns in the House of Commons? I do not
:45:00. > :45:03.personally know the organisation Care. But there is always a danger
:45:03. > :45:13.that if a particular group are paying somebody to work in
:45:13. > :45:17.Parliament, there could be a public perception of having an agenda. The
:45:17. > :45:25.organisation which I am promoting makes absolutely sure that they are
:45:25. > :45:31.not funding specific interns, that's the problem, I think.
:45:31. > :45:35.what about people who might not agree with their views? You can be
:45:35. > :45:40.sensitive when you're interviewing people, you can ask them your views,
:45:40. > :45:46.you do not always have to be 100% in agreement with the person you're
:45:46. > :45:50.working for. But a general sympathy for the views of the person you're
:45:50. > :46:00.going to be working closely with, particularly in politics, I think
:46:00. > :46:03.
:46:03. > :46:07.is important. What are you trying to do about the barriers? Well,
:46:07. > :46:12.there are huge barriers. A lot of the internships are not paid, so it
:46:12. > :46:15.is virtually are -- virtually impossible if you have not got
:46:15. > :46:20.money behind you. If you live outside London, it is very
:46:20. > :46:25.expensive. The scheme that I have set up pays people a proper living
:46:25. > :46:29.wage, it gives people help with housing, the people come and work
:46:29. > :46:33.with their MP for four days a week, but they then get a full training
:46:33. > :46:37.programme about the workings of the House of Commons, it is a very
:46:37. > :46:42.well-designed scheme, it is cross- party, backed by the Speaker, who
:46:42. > :46:48.has given us tremendous support, and our first 10 people came to
:46:48. > :46:55.work in November. They are an inspirational group of people, not
:46:56. > :46:59.all Young, either. Some have been to university, some haven't.
:46:59. > :47:06.you doing your bit to bring on people who might not naturally see
:47:06. > :47:13.a path into Parliament? I do have in terms from time to time, I know
:47:13. > :47:16.all about Hazel Blears' scheme. I think there is room for other
:47:16. > :47:21.organisations as well. I don't think you should be too purist
:47:21. > :47:23.about whether people pay or not, I want people to be able to do
:47:23. > :47:29.internships from as wide a background as possible, that's the
:47:29. > :47:35.most important thing. Is there a slight unease if people are
:47:35. > :47:38.promoting organisations with certain views? There's two things,
:47:38. > :47:45.I do not think we should be having a witch hunt about view was that
:47:45. > :47:49.might not be those of the majority. People are entitled to their views.
:47:49. > :47:55.Hazel Blears is quite right, if you're going to work so -- work
:47:55. > :48:00.with somebody in parliament, you have to be roughly on the same page.
:48:00. > :48:05.I have concerns about unpaid internships. What I do is to take a
:48:05. > :48:09.large number of work experience students, and we have shadowing
:48:09. > :48:14.scheme, where somebody gets to literally be with me for the whole
:48:14. > :48:19.day, to see what my job is. I think the problem with the internships
:48:19. > :48:23.paid for by a third party is that it starts to blur the line between
:48:23. > :48:31.what is lobbying activity and what is the work that needs to go on in
:48:31. > :48:34.an MP's office. A final word to you, Hazel Blears. If you have unpaid
:48:34. > :48:39.internships, it means that usually it is only people with financial
:48:39. > :48:44.support who can do it. I think we need many more people in Parliament
:48:44. > :48:53.who come from a variety of backgrounds, and that includes MPs.
:48:53. > :48:59.There's far too many who have just taken that special adviser route.
:48:59. > :49:08.What else has been happening in London this week? Here's a flavour
:49:08. > :49:14.in 60 seconds. The first of the much-trumpeted new buses hit the
:49:14. > :49:21.streets, and immediately malfunctioned. At the Leveson
:49:21. > :49:26.Inquiry, the former Assistant Commissioner of the Met rejected
:49:26. > :49:29.suggestions that drinking champagne with the crime editor at the News
:49:29. > :49:35.of the World had influenced his thinking. It was revealed that
:49:35. > :49:42.Rebekah Brooks had been lent a horse by the Metropolitan Police.
:49:42. > :49:45.Two years later, the horse was returned. The Mayor's
:49:45. > :49:53.rehabilitation programme at Feltham young offenders' institute will not
:49:53. > :50:00.continue when the money runs out after the mayoral election. The
:50:01. > :50:08.results of the scheme will not be known until the summer. Meanwhile,
:50:08. > :50:15.the new bus continued to falter under the weight of expectations.
:50:15. > :50:21.I'm sure neither of you have got to ride a retired Met Police horse.
:50:21. > :50:24.But are you pleased with what the inquiry is doing? I think we do
:50:24. > :50:30.need to have some light shed on this, it is a matter of concern
:50:30. > :50:34.across the board. Leveson is a respected High Court judge, a
:50:34. > :50:38.member of the Court of Appeal, let's see what comes out, let's not
:50:38. > :50:42.prejudge anything. There is still a lot more to be done. Are you
:50:42. > :50:46.pleased that somehow he is redressing the balance with regard
:50:46. > :50:51.to tabloid newspapers? I think Leveson has really exposed some of
:50:51. > :50:57.the dirty dealings that were going on, whether it's tabloids, members
:50:57. > :51:02.of the police force, the nature and the extent of what was happening is
:51:03. > :51:07.quite alarming, really. I would hope to see quite a hard-hitting
:51:07. > :51:17.report coming out. Thank you very much for being with me today. With
:51:17. > :51:20.
:51:20. > :51:25.Alex Salmond told me that a Yes campaign for Scottish independence
:51:25. > :51:31.will begin after the local elections in May. That could mean
:51:31. > :51:34.one ferry, very, very long campaign. And we understand that Steve Hilton
:51:34. > :51:44.will be leaving Downing Street, to go to California. Let's discuss all
:51:44. > :51:48.of that, and more now. Let's begin with the question which Norman Lamb
:51:48. > :51:52.would not answer which is, are they are the makings of a deal, do you
:51:52. > :51:56.sense, between the Liberal Democrats and the Tories on
:51:56. > :52:01.agreeing to cut the top rate at some stage, if we have higher
:52:01. > :52:05.property tax on people with big houses? I thought it was a bit
:52:05. > :52:10.feeble of Norman Lamb to be so evasive about this. If you speak to
:52:10. > :52:15.any other Lib Dem, they were quite openly say, yes, they are ready to
:52:15. > :52:18.move on 50p, they are not ideologically wedded to it, which I
:52:18. > :52:23.think is an interesting position. It also puts David Cameron in a
:52:23. > :52:27.difficult position, because the onus is now on him to explain to
:52:27. > :52:31.his backbenchers and the business community why sticking with the 50p
:52:31. > :52:37.is preferable to some kind of wealth tax on property. Will the
:52:37. > :52:41.Tories by this? It is important to remember, the opposition to getting
:52:41. > :52:48.rid of the 50p rate does not just come from within government, it
:52:48. > :52:51.comes from public opinion. My view on the Budget is that you will not
:52:51. > :53:00.really see anything radical in the way of council tax or a mansion tax
:53:00. > :53:07.or 50p, it might be a raid on pensions, in respect of higher rate
:53:07. > :53:12.taxpayers. How would Labour react, do you think, to a deal like that?
:53:12. > :53:17.They would not like the cut in the 50p, but they would quite like
:53:18. > :53:21.wealthy folk pay more for their homes? I think this is a really
:53:21. > :53:25.interesting one. Labour will have to make a decision about what to
:53:25. > :53:31.support. It cannot be the only party which comes out against a
:53:31. > :53:35.wealth tax. But I think what we're seeing is, politics seems to be
:53:35. > :53:39.determined by what works out best in the backroom deals between the
:53:39. > :53:45.coalition partners, rather than what is just and fair for the
:53:45. > :53:49.country. Welcome to coalition politics. But where is the
:53:49. > :53:54.consistency? How do we know what this government stands for, if it
:53:54. > :53:59.is constantly about the balance of power? In my interview with Alex
:53:59. > :54:02.Salmond, I teased him about his new friendship with Rupert Murdoch -
:54:02. > :54:06.what do you make of it, he's really the only major politician who will
:54:06. > :54:11.be seen in public with Rupert Murdoch, whereas a year ago, they
:54:11. > :54:16.were falling over themselves to be seen in public with him... Yes,
:54:16. > :54:21.Rupert Murdoch has a thing for anti-establishment Scots. He was
:54:21. > :54:25.closer to Gordon Brown than you might have assumed. But clearly,
:54:25. > :54:28.there is something going on here. Rupert Murdoch was believe there is
:54:28. > :54:32.a strategic gain for him in the possibility of an independent
:54:32. > :54:37.Scotland, but what exactly that is, whether that is a lower corporation
:54:37. > :54:40.tax rate for possibly basing his company there, or whether it is a
:54:40. > :54:44.lighter approach to press regulation, I do not know. But he
:54:44. > :54:49.must see something in his relationship. I don't think there
:54:49. > :54:53.is any doubt about that. Mr Murdoch has never liked Britain, and he
:54:53. > :54:57.likes it even less now, after the establishment has had its revenge
:54:57. > :55:01.on him, so he would like to break up the United Kingdom, no question
:55:01. > :55:07.about it. Alex Salmond would love the Scottish Sun to support the
:55:07. > :55:11.case for independence, the biggest- selling newspaper. But I think,
:55:11. > :55:17.when Mr Murdoch saw Alex Salmond, Mr Salmond would not confirm this,
:55:17. > :55:22.but I am reading between the lines, Mr Murdoch indicated that if
:55:22. > :55:27.corporation tax in an independent Scotland was cut, he could be talk
:55:27. > :55:30.into moving BSkyB to Edinburgh. That leads into a much bigger issue
:55:30. > :55:33.about England is going to be competing with Scotland for
:55:33. > :55:37.businesses more generally. The other thing which I thought was
:55:37. > :55:42.really interesting about this is that if you look at the pro-union
:55:42. > :55:46.Ks, the problem that they have is that it is very rational and
:55:46. > :55:50.academic, when you look at these arguments, but with your interview
:55:50. > :55:54.with Alex Salmond, you were getting the sense that this is a community
:55:54. > :55:59.based, populist, emotional campaign. If you have something like the Sun
:55:59. > :56:05.coming out and backing them as well, then you're forcing the other side
:56:05. > :56:08.to look more like the rational, cold-hearted... We should point out
:56:08. > :56:16.that Sky already employs about 7,000 people in Scotland, because
:56:16. > :56:20.that is where the call centres are. What a coup that would be. But
:56:20. > :56:24.first of all, I do not think that Alex Salmond is such a bogeyman
:56:24. > :56:28.north of the border as he is here, and secondly, it does him no harm
:56:28. > :56:30.to be seen with the billionaire businessman. It helps his
:56:30. > :56:36.credibility in the business community. He used to mix with
:56:36. > :56:40.Donald Trump, but he has now fallen out with him, so we shall see.
:56:40. > :56:47.Moving on now, what is the significance of the departure of
:56:47. > :56:50.Steve Hilton? Huge. I think there are plenty of people in politics
:56:50. > :56:54.who are good at pure politics, and plenty who are good at
:56:54. > :56:58.administration, but there are very few who have a vision about what
:56:58. > :57:02.the country should look like, and what you should do with power, and
:57:02. > :57:06.Steve Hilton was one of those. Without him, there is a danger that
:57:06. > :57:10.the Government becomes a bit too tactical, a bit too focused on
:57:10. > :57:14.retaining power, and worried about winning the next election, rather
:57:14. > :57:18.than doing something with the country while they are in pole.
:57:18. > :57:22.fear it is that the Government looks like a deflated balloon.
:57:22. > :57:25.Steve Hilton was there to provide the bigger picture, and it is
:57:25. > :57:30.concerning that the reason that he is leaving his because he thinks
:57:30. > :57:37.the Government has one out of steam. So, effectively, we have got three
:57:37. > :57:41.years of frankly not much happening. I think we should all take a
:57:41. > :57:44.sabbatical for three years. It goes back to what you were saying about
:57:44. > :57:51.the coalition, from the Tory papers about the Government running out of
:57:51. > :57:54.steam, and Steve Hilton's departure making it worse. It is interesting,
:57:54. > :57:58.because this government has been incredibly reforming, but the
:57:58. > :58:01.reform has not always been popular, when we look at the NHS or schools,
:58:01. > :58:05.it is not like people are clamouring for these things. But
:58:05. > :58:08.the good thing that reform has provided is a distraction from what
:58:08. > :58:12.would otherwise be a politics of austerity, which is not actually
:58:12. > :58:16.working out very well. When you lose the person who's providing
:58:16. > :58:20.that positive vision, that agenda of what you're about, what you are
:58:20. > :58:26.for, as well as what you're cutting, then it could leave you in a hard
:58:26. > :58:35.place. The big myth about Steve Hilton is that he is some kind of
:58:35. > :58:42.closet leftie, but he is not. He is a Thatcherite. How can you do that,
:58:42. > :58:48.while you are in London? This allows me to officially deny that I
:58:48. > :58:52.am Steve Hilton's guru. But I think I know who it is! That's it for