:00:46. > :00:50.Good afternoon and welcome to the Sunday Politics. Our top story: the
:00:50. > :00:53.G8 summit ends with a planned agreement to promote jobs and
:00:53. > :00:57.growth and keep Greece in the Eurozone, but was anything decided
:00:57. > :01:00.that will make the slightest difference to the euro crisis? We
:01:00. > :01:05.will have the latest live from Chicago.
:01:05. > :01:09.Over �1,200 a year and rising, so what will the Government do about
:01:09. > :01:12.household fuel bills? Energy Secretary Ed Davey joins us for the
:01:12. > :01:15.Sunday interview. The Police Federation accuses
:01:15. > :01:20.Theresa May of being on the precipice of destroying the police
:01:20. > :01:24.service. The organisation's chief, Paul McKeever, is here to explain
:01:25. > :01:28.why as he goes head-to-head with the police minister Nick Herbert.
:01:28. > :01:32.And our sharp and zesty political panel are here as always, analysing
:01:32. > :01:36.British politics in the week ahead and tweeting feverishly through out
:01:36. > :01:40.the show. In London this week, a charity for
:01:41. > :01:46.the disabled cries foul after a London council removes its code
:01:46. > :01:52.spanks and starts its own recycling scheme for profit. -- it removes
:01:52. > :01:58.its clothes banks. All that to come between now and 1
:01:58. > :02:02.o'clock, but first the news. Good afternoon. President Obama
:02:02. > :02:05.says world leaders made genuine progress at the G8 summit near
:02:05. > :02:09.Washington, despite there being no agreement on a plan to tackle the
:02:09. > :02:13.Eurozone crisis. He said all the leaders acknowledged that growth
:02:13. > :02:16.and job creation must be the top priority, but the German Chancellor
:02:16. > :02:20.Angela Merkel insisted that Eurozone countries must stick with
:02:20. > :02:24.austerity measures to cut their deficits.
:02:24. > :02:27.After the summit, President Obama had this to say about the talks.
:02:27. > :02:32.agreed that we must take steps to boost confidence and promote growth
:02:32. > :02:38.and demand while getting our fiscal houses in order. We agreed on the
:02:38. > :02:43.importance of a strong and cohesive Eurozone and affirmed our interest
:02:43. > :02:46.in Greece staying in the Eurozone while respecting its commitments.
:02:46. > :02:50.We also recognise the painful sacrifices the Greek people are
:02:50. > :02:53.making at this difficult time, and I know my European colleagues will
:02:53. > :02:58.carry forward these discussions as they prepare for meetings next week.
:02:58. > :03:01.A man the of the G8 leaders have now travelled to Chicago for a NATO
:03:01. > :03:04.summit which is expected to be dominated by the withdrawal from
:03:04. > :03:07.Afghanistan. It comes as a senior government
:03:07. > :03:16.official revealed a small number of British soldiers could remain after
:03:16. > :03:21.the combat forces withdraw in 2014. Gathering in Chicago, NATO is keen
:03:21. > :03:26.to show that its members still stand tall and United on
:03:26. > :03:31.Afghanistan, and that NATO are still a formidable alliance, even
:03:31. > :03:35.once those towering defence budgets are cut. For President Obama, David
:03:35. > :03:39.Cameron and the other leaders here, getting combat troops out of
:03:39. > :03:43.Afghanistan goes down well with the majority of voters, long since
:03:43. > :03:46.weary of the war. It is how to do that with credibility that is at
:03:46. > :03:50.issue, without looking as if NATO is running for the exit. Many
:03:50. > :03:55.nations have had enough of their soldiers fighting and dying on
:03:55. > :03:57.Afghan soil. French combat troops may leave by the end of this year,
:03:57. > :04:03.unless the new French leader is persuaded to change his mind.
:04:03. > :04:07.Either way, NATO insists that it is all part of the plan to hand over
:04:07. > :04:12.security to Afghan forces by the end of 2014. During that process,
:04:12. > :04:16.you will see the withdrawal of troops and a gradual change of the
:04:16. > :04:22.roar of our troops from combat to support. It is not in contradiction
:04:22. > :04:26.with our strategy. What is decided here is as much about appearance as
:04:26. > :04:31.reality. By the end of this summit, NATO leaders hope to send out a
:04:31. > :04:35.clear message of support for Afghanistan, post 2014, financial
:04:35. > :04:42.and political, not least so that the manner of NATO's leaving does
:04:42. > :04:45.not reflect badly on the alliance. An earthquake in northern Italy has
:04:45. > :04:48.killed at least six people and caused thousands of others to flee
:04:48. > :04:53.into the streets. The earthquake, which struck in the middle of the
:04:53. > :04:55.night north of Bologna, had a magnitude of six. Rescue teams are
:04:55. > :04:58.now combing the area amid reports that more people may be buried
:04:58. > :05:02.under rubble. Thousands of Chelsea fans are
:05:02. > :05:06.expected to line the streets in west London today as the team
:05:06. > :05:09.parades the Champions League trophy. They triumphed over Bayern Munich
:05:09. > :05:13.in a dramatic final last night in Germany, when Didier Drogba scored
:05:13. > :05:19.the winning goal in a penalty shoot-out.
:05:19. > :05:23.That is it for the moment. More news here at 6 o'clock on BBC One.
:05:23. > :05:27.As we heard, the G8 summit ended in Camp David yesterday with a
:05:27. > :05:31.statement that combined boilerplate -- boilerplate with banalities.
:05:31. > :05:36.Nothing to resolve the euro crisis, the proposed action of any sort.
:05:36. > :05:39.Today the Prime Minister is at a NATO meeting in Chicago, from where
:05:39. > :05:45.our chief political correspondent joins us. Did I miss something? Was
:05:45. > :05:49.there something of substance decided at the summit? The blunt
:05:49. > :05:54.answer is no. Anyone looking at the summit must have a profound sense
:05:54. > :05:59.of deja-vu, because how many times have we been at these summits and
:05:59. > :06:01.emerged with a bit of paper with bold statements of intent and
:06:02. > :06:08.declarations of determination to defend the euro, but at the end of
:06:08. > :06:12.the day, these are just words and not even new words. There is talk
:06:12. > :06:16.of emphasising jobs and growth. Who would not be in favour of that?
:06:16. > :06:19.When you look at the detail of the communique, it contains a line
:06:19. > :06:24.suggesting that different countries may have to adopt different
:06:24. > :06:29.measures. That seems to be a green light for Europe to continue in a
:06:29. > :06:33.disorderly fashion. What happened at this summit was that President
:06:33. > :06:36.Obama and David Cameron and a few others hoped to use it to crank up
:06:36. > :06:41.the pressure on the German Chancellor Angela Merkel to give
:06:41. > :06:45.the okayed the German taxpayers to spend more popping up struggling
:06:45. > :06:49.southern European countries. But Angela Merkel came, saw and left
:06:49. > :06:52.and conceded pretty much nothing. For the European leaders, the
:06:52. > :06:56.caravan moves on to Brussels this Wednesday and yet another summit.
:06:56. > :07:04.Is there any sense among European leaders that they will do anything
:07:04. > :07:10.more productive in Brussels? Actually, the indications are that
:07:10. > :07:16.we are veering dangerously close towards drift land. Sources say
:07:16. > :07:21.this informal summit next week in Europe will not be expected to be
:07:21. > :07:24.the occasion of any major resolutions to the Eurozone crisis.
:07:24. > :07:28.Then you are looking to June the tenth, when Mario Monti has called
:07:28. > :07:33.another gathering, this time with Francois Hollande and Chancellor
:07:33. > :07:38.Merkel to have another think. Then you go on to the Greek elections on
:07:38. > :07:41.June 17th, and then you are getting close to your holiday land. The
:07:41. > :07:48.danger is that although everyone says they do not want to kick the
:07:48. > :07:52.can down the road, that is what is going on. Enjoy the Windy City.
:07:52. > :07:55.At least I can see the sun over there.
:07:55. > :07:58.Now, this week, Energy Secretary Ed Davey warned that British
:07:58. > :08:03.households face blackouts in a decade unless the country builds
:08:03. > :08:07.more generating capacity. He wants public backing for plans to spend
:08:07. > :08:11.more on new nuclear plants and renewable energy. Why?
:08:11. > :08:16.Well, the UK is facing a looming energy gap, with some experts
:08:16. > :08:20.predicting a 20% short fall in production by 2015. This is because
:08:20. > :08:24.a quarter of our current coal and nuclear power stations will have to
:08:24. > :08:28.close in the next decade because they are too old or too polluting.
:08:28. > :08:32.Next week, the Government launches its new energy bill, aiming to
:08:33. > :08:36.reform the wreckage to market. The energy bill will offer financial
:08:36. > :08:39.incentives, hoping to convince energy companies to invest in low-
:08:39. > :08:43.carbon technologies like nuclear and renewables. All this comes
:08:43. > :08:46.against a backdrop of ever-rising energy bills for consumers, with
:08:46. > :08:51.almost 4 million households expected to be in fuel poverty.
:08:51. > :08:55.That is where energy bills are more than 10% of income this year alone.
:08:55. > :09:01.With research showing that the average annual household fuel bill
:09:01. > :09:06.is now at �1,252, how can the Government feel the energy gap
:09:06. > :09:14.while keeping our energy bills affordable? The Energy and Climate
:09:14. > :09:19.Change Secretary Ed Davey joins me now for the Sunday interview.
:09:20. > :09:24.The average cost of household energy bills has risen five times
:09:24. > :09:28.faster than average household income in the past eight years. Why
:09:29. > :09:35.do you persist with policies that drive up the price of energy even
:09:35. > :09:38.more? The real thing driving energy bills for households is the cost of
:09:38. > :09:42.global gas and oil. We need to make sure our economy is better
:09:42. > :09:48.insulated. We are having to import more and more gas as the North Sea
:09:48. > :09:51.oil and gas supplies run-down. That will leave our economy more exposed.
:09:51. > :09:56.Oxford Economics published an analysis last week which showed
:09:56. > :10:01.that if we don't take action on climate change, the impact of
:10:01. > :10:08.fossil fuel price hikes like we have seen when the Arab Spring
:10:08. > :10:12.happened or previously will be very damaging to the economy. Climate
:10:12. > :10:19.change policies can reduce that damage by 50%. They can insulate
:10:19. > :10:24.the economy from global gas prices. The average annual fuel bill is now
:10:24. > :10:30.�1,252, incredibly. It is over 6% of the average take-home pay of the
:10:30. > :10:33.average earner. I understand that world prices are pushing up demand,
:10:33. > :10:37.but you are forcing electricity companies to buy onshore wind at
:10:37. > :10:40.twice the rate of alternatives and offshore at three times the rate.
:10:40. > :10:47.Why do that when there is enough upward pressure without you're
:10:47. > :10:52.adding to it? The impact of bills on policies to tackle fuel poverty
:10:52. > :11:00.and renewable technology is quite small compared to the impact of
:11:00. > :11:04.global gas prices. Ofgem says it is �100 per average bill. We are doing
:11:04. > :11:09.a lot to help consumers. The Deputy Prime Minister announced a package
:11:09. > :11:15.that I negotiated with the Big Six. That will help people move on to
:11:15. > :11:21.better tariffs for their suppliers. The energy providers have agreed
:11:21. > :11:26.that every year, they will tell their customers what the best
:11:26. > :11:30.tariff for them is. Since I have been energy secretary, we have put
:11:30. > :11:34.behind collective switching. This is the idea of bringing consumers
:11:34. > :11:41.together so that they can get better deals on the market. Last
:11:41. > :11:44.week, Which? did their auction, which managed to bring together
:11:44. > :11:54.over 150,000 consumers, and they got a better deal on the market and
:11:54. > :11:59.saved an average of �120. Look at this graph. It shows the energy
:11:59. > :12:03.costs. There is the gas price. Much more for onshore wind, much more
:12:03. > :12:08.for offshore wind. That does not include the full cost of keeping
:12:08. > :12:13.back up stations to run fossil fuel when the wind doesn't blow. And
:12:13. > :12:18.sometimes it doesn't. Why are you forcing people to buy more
:12:18. > :12:22.expensive electricity? Why do that when there is enough in the market
:12:22. > :12:27.forcing the price up without government interference? Firstly,
:12:27. > :12:33.those figures are wrong. The price of one - -- onshore wind is much
:12:33. > :12:39.lower. What is it? The difference between gas and onshore wind has
:12:39. > :12:42.halved in the last five years. what are the right figures? Many
:12:42. > :12:47.expect onshore wind to be competitive. These are from your
:12:47. > :12:51.department. They are from Civitas. Civitas published them, but they
:12:51. > :12:57.are from your department. I can show you the latest figures. They
:12:57. > :13:01.show that onshore wind and offshore wind, the price of those is coming
:13:01. > :13:06.down fast. We have a taskforce that is working with all the offshore
:13:06. > :13:12.wind generators. Big companies like Siemens and so on. We hoped to
:13:12. > :13:16.reduce the cost of offshore wind by 30% over the next few years.
:13:16. > :13:22.Investors in indigenous energy supply. You don't have to pay for
:13:22. > :13:28.the wind, long term. And it is clean. This is a good investment.
:13:28. > :13:34.Our subsidies are driving down the cost. They are driving the price up,
:13:34. > :13:40.and it is passed on to us. You are wrong. That was a static graph.
:13:40. > :13:48.Over time, the prices of renewables, both onshore and offshore and solar,
:13:48. > :13:50.are coming down fast. It is a success. You are not just forcing
:13:50. > :13:54.us to buy more in a tree -- more expensive electricity, but the new
:13:55. > :13:59.carbon floor price comes in next year, twice the size of the
:13:59. > :14:05.European press. That will be passed on in energy bills as well. Indeed
:14:05. > :14:09.it will, because we want to make sure we move to low-carbon
:14:09. > :14:13.electricity generation. That is important both in terms of energy
:14:13. > :14:21.security and also because we are becoming more exposed to gas
:14:21. > :14:27.imports. We also have to clean our electricity generation. This floor
:14:27. > :14:32.price adds �3 billion to the cost of electricity generation. We will
:14:32. > :14:37.pay for that. You have to look at the forces of competition which
:14:37. > :14:41.will be generated because of the carbon price floor. We want to see
:14:41. > :14:47.more investment in low-carbon technologies. That includes
:14:47. > :14:50.renewables, nuclear and carbon capture and storage. If we can
:14:50. > :14:54.incentivise more investment in these new technologies, these low-
:14:54. > :14:58.carbon Technologies, which will be essential in the decades ahead not
:14:58. > :15:02.just in the UK but globally, then we cannot just meet our climate
:15:02. > :15:06.change objectives and our energy security objectives, which are
:15:06. > :15:16.critical for every family in the UK, but we can do it in the most cost-
:15:16. > :15:24.effective way. We can use the power You were against nuclear power in
:15:24. > :15:31.your manifesto, then, you got into the coalition, and you said, we
:15:31. > :15:38.might build up sub-stations, and you are introducing a guaranteed
:15:38. > :15:42.full price, which is a subsidy. are right to say that the Liberal
:15:42. > :15:49.Democrats did not support new nuclear in our last manifesto,
:15:49. > :15:54.mainly because we have got worries about the cost of it. But now you
:15:54. > :16:01.are subsidising get it. We are not. We did not win the election. The
:16:01. > :16:05.Conservative policy was not too dissimilar. They have real problems
:16:05. > :16:12.and concerns about the cost of new nuclear, because the history has
:16:12. > :16:22.been very expensive. The Conservative manifesto... We do not
:16:22. > :16:31.
:16:31. > :16:36.have enough time. The Tbilisi -- The Conservative manifesto is clear
:16:36. > :16:40.that there should be no public subsidy for nuclear. That is the
:16:40. > :16:46.coalition agreement, that is our departmental policy, and I am
:16:46. > :16:50.determined that there will be no public subsidy. But your policy,
:16:50. > :16:59.you can call it a subsidy or not, that will add to people's energy
:16:59. > :17:04.bills. The policy is clear, there is going to be no public subsidy
:17:04. > :17:08.for nuclear. We are determined to make sure we negotiate hard. The
:17:08. > :17:18.history of nuclear, it has been very expensive, it has added costs
:17:18. > :17:21.
:17:21. > :17:25.to consumers, and because I am worried about consumer bills, I am
:17:25. > :17:29.not going to allow the negotiations on a clear to add to their belts.
:17:29. > :17:35.Who will build the first new generation of nuclear plants and
:17:35. > :17:44.where? We have to see. We are negotiating. We have opened
:17:44. > :17:49.negotiations with EDF, they have the project in Somerset. If we can
:17:49. > :17:53.get a deal that involves no public subsidy, we could see that project
:17:53. > :18:01.proceedings. When will the power come on stream? Because there are
:18:01. > :18:06.huge costs, they take a long time to build. EDF say, if we can reach
:18:06. > :18:09.agreement, based on a public subsidy, they would be thinking
:18:09. > :18:13.about it happening by the end of the decade. This is the same
:18:13. > :18:18.company that is building a new station in northern France, it said
:18:18. > :18:27.it would cost 3 billion, but it will cost 6 billion. It has been
:18:27. > :18:34.delayed for four years. Similarly, in Finland. That is why we protect
:18:34. > :18:40.the taxpayers and consumers interests. This is the first
:18:40. > :18:50.consultation which says they should be no public subsidy. We are going
:18:50. > :18:54.to be tough an hour negotiation. -- on our negotiation. There is a
:18:54. > :19:00.source of Safe Energy beckoning it, it is called shale gas. There are
:19:00. > :19:05.five trillion cubic feet under Morecambe Bay. You could treat it
:19:05. > :19:14.that like North Sea oil in the 70s. It is an opportunity, but I did not
:19:14. > :19:18.agree we should go hell-for-leather forehead. -- for it. You have got
:19:18. > :19:23.to make sure that there are stronger regulatory frameworks in
:19:23. > :19:27.place, up otherwise there could be environmental damage. People who
:19:27. > :19:32.have seen the drilling in the north-west are boarded by seismic
:19:32. > :19:36.effects, that is why we commissioned scientists... They are
:19:36. > :19:40.no bigger than the earthquakes we have had in Yorkshire for scores of
:19:40. > :19:45.years. That is why we published the report, so people could see what
:19:45. > :19:49.they were saying. We had a meeting recently in Downing Street, we got
:19:49. > :19:56.some of the biggest energy companies in, who are looking at it
:19:56. > :20:02.in North America and elsewhere, people like Shell, Centrica, and
:20:02. > :20:06.they said you should take your time in exporting -- exploiting these
:20:06. > :20:11.resources, and they also said the reserves in the UK are not huge.
:20:11. > :20:16.The game changed in reserves are in the Ukraine and in China. I think
:20:16. > :20:22.that could potentially have big changes in the gas market globally.
:20:22. > :20:29.The latest estimate says that there is 1000 trillion cubic feet of gas
:20:29. > :20:36.under the seat -- under the sea on Britain's shawls. Is it because you
:20:36. > :20:42.hate the idea of a new fossil fuel? Not at all. We are going to try to
:20:42. > :20:48.see whether we can exploit this resource. It is sensible that we
:20:48. > :20:55.try to see if we can exploited, that is why we want to exploit wind,
:20:55. > :20:59.tidal, Marine Energy, the renewable resource of Sola. All of these are
:20:59. > :21:03.on this island, we are an energy Island, it is a fantastic
:21:03. > :21:08.opportunity, but when we exploit the resources, we should be
:21:08. > :21:14.cautious. We need to maintain energy security, to meet our
:21:15. > :21:17.climate change obligations. Last week, the head of the Police
:21:17. > :21:27.Federation accused the Home Secretary of being on the precipice
:21:27. > :21:33.of destroying the police service. Governments like to boast about
:21:33. > :21:36.getting more police on our streets. This is not what they mean it.
:21:36. > :21:40.30,000 off-duty officers marching against this government's plans for
:21:40. > :21:47.reform. At last week's Conference, claiming their relationship the
:21:47. > :21:52.service has with his ultimate boss is broken. We no longer trust you
:21:52. > :22:00.in the police service. End of story. The government's of gimmick is that
:22:00. > :22:04.the police are the last, long and reformed public service. -- on
:22:04. > :22:08.reformed. Some of its roles can be done cheaper by civilians. Let's
:22:08. > :22:15.stop pretending the police are being picked on. Every part of the
:22:15. > :22:20.public sector is having to take its share of the pain. The police say
:22:20. > :22:25.they are unique job, the sacrifice of a right to strike and being
:22:25. > :22:28.effectively on Calle 24/7 to put themselves in arms wait means they
:22:28. > :22:32.should be treated differently. There is a feeling that these
:22:32. > :22:38.people do not respect them, that there is a lack of understanding of
:22:38. > :22:43.their job, and that has created a real problem for this government
:22:43. > :22:46.that previous governments did not face. Last year saw two reports
:22:46. > :22:52.into pay and conditions that have been viewed with suspicion. The
:22:52. > :22:56.author insists the work was independent, fair, unpolitical and
:22:56. > :23:00.much misunderstood. That is disappointing, because for the
:23:01. > :23:07.hard-working officers doing the most difficult, demanding jobs,
:23:07. > :23:12.working shifts, in the cold and wet, facing dangerous and angry men, in
:23:12. > :23:18.many cases, those police officers, if my recommendations are
:23:18. > :23:23.implemented, get a pay rise. But tens of thousands of officers have
:23:23. > :23:26.got convinced that this is all bad, it is all part of a pay cut for
:23:26. > :23:31.political ideological reasons, and that could not be further from the
:23:31. > :23:35.truth. Most serving officers I spoke to privately except some
:23:35. > :23:39.reform is inevitable and necessary. But the privatisation of certain
:23:39. > :23:43.roles has left them deeply uneasy, and on pay and conditions, they
:23:43. > :23:47.resent facing a future where they may make the calculation that the
:23:47. > :23:52.job gets more out of them than they do out of the job. That message is
:23:52. > :23:55.coming to Westminster's front line. I have had a number of police
:23:56. > :24:01.officers come to my surgeries, they are in agreement with a number of
:24:01. > :24:07.reforms, but they feel it is happening too fast, too far.
:24:07. > :24:12.Uncertainty and anxiety is not good. Why the Prime Minister is so keen
:24:12. > :24:22.to reform the police may lie in the past. In 1993, Michael Howard
:24:22. > :24:32.
:24:32. > :24:35.backed away from similar reforms, Let me come to you first. We all
:24:35. > :24:41.about to go through some fundamental changes that will alter
:24:41. > :24:46.policing together, that is what you said. We are the first organisation
:24:46. > :24:53.to call for a commission, many years ago. But it has to be
:24:53. > :24:57.holistic reform. They were the only organisation in the public sector
:24:57. > :25:00.that said we accepted we should take our fair share of the cuts. We
:25:00. > :25:05.listened to the Inspector of Constabulary, who said you could
:25:05. > :25:12.cut the police service but up to 12%, and then you are down to the
:25:12. > :25:17.bone. We accepted that. Piecemeal, you are cutting on to the bone.
:25:17. > :25:21.That is not true. The savings have been identified by the independent
:25:21. > :25:28.inspector, and on top of that, things like the two-year wage
:25:28. > :25:35.freeze wealth -- will save a further sums of money. That applies
:25:35. > :25:39.across the public sector. People are living longer, changes have to
:25:39. > :25:46.be made it to deal with the deficit, but somehow, the police should pay
:25:46. > :25:52.no part in that? That is not true. The police has consistently opposed
:25:52. > :25:56.reform, whenever it has been proposed. You are opposed the
:25:56. > :26:03.introduction of community support officers. This is going way beyond
:26:03. > :26:08.that. If you look at what is happening, we have got a four-year
:26:08. > :26:12.pay freeze in the public sector, we accept that, and the reforms to
:26:12. > :26:17.pensions, which we cannot negotiate on. But we have this review which
:26:17. > :26:21.has been adopted by the government, which has 121 recommendations,
:26:22. > :26:28.which would fundamentally change policing. It opens the door to
:26:28. > :26:33.horsetail privatisation, you'd use accountability and resilience. --
:26:33. > :26:38.wholesale privatisation, you would lose accountability and resilience.
:26:38. > :26:47.In Devon and Cornwall, 700 officers have gone already, it is put in the
:26:47. > :26:50.community at risk. The review says nothing about privatisation. It
:26:50. > :26:55.says that they should be a basic standard of fitness in the police,
:26:55. > :27:00.which I am astonished at the Police Federation should oppose. We are
:27:00. > :27:09.negotiating. We discovered that there were 25,000 police officers
:27:09. > :27:13.who were not on the front line at all. One in five. What the report
:27:13. > :27:16.says is that it is important that we have a system of remuneration
:27:16. > :27:23.that makes sure you prioritise the front line, that pays people for
:27:23. > :27:31.the job they of the wind, and if they are not fit enough... It is
:27:31. > :27:36.opening the door to privatisation. Even the core of British policing
:27:36. > :27:40.has been fundamentally changed, people trust the office of
:27:40. > :27:44.constable, and they understand it, they understand the Independent
:27:44. > :27:51.role they play, and you are changing that. You are making
:27:51. > :27:54.outlandish claims, you will not make any progress at will. -- all.
:27:54. > :27:58.There is no change to the Palace police officers have to make
:27:58. > :28:03.arrests. The use of the private sector in policing was introduced
:28:03. > :28:10.by the prop -- by the last government. This is going way
:28:10. > :28:15.beyond that. These claims will not stand up to evidence. Tell me why
:28:15. > :28:22.in the tender document that it talks about patrol. Why is it
:28:22. > :28:26.mentioned? You say you do not want that, and it is mentioned. There is
:28:26. > :28:31.no intention of doing that. They would not have the power was,
:28:31. > :28:35.because we will not do them. It is a red herring. You talk about
:28:35. > :28:42.faring -- fairness, and some officers will lose 25 to the 2% of
:28:42. > :28:47.their spending power. Why are we being treated differently? Why are
:28:47. > :28:53.we having pay reviews on top of everything? It is important to
:28:53. > :28:55.realise these reforms do not change the overall picture. They say we
:28:55. > :29:01.should have a system which recognises those officers to win
:29:01. > :29:06.the most important jobs, instead of the system at the moment, weighed
:29:06. > :29:11.you increase your pate every year, regardless of the skills you have.
:29:11. > :29:15.Even after these reforms are implemented, the police will still
:29:15. > :29:21.have one of the best deals on pay and pensions in the public sector.
:29:21. > :29:27.You have to look at the job we do. Is that true? Yes, we are
:29:27. > :29:30.reasonably well paid for what we do. We say so. We were open to reform.
:29:30. > :29:35.But we are astonished that government has given police in such
:29:35. > :29:39.a low priority. We are getting the knock-on effect from other areas of
:29:39. > :29:43.the public sector being hit, like the social services, education, we
:29:43. > :29:48.are having to pick up the pieces from that. There is extra work to
:29:48. > :29:53.be done, and public safety is being put at risk. You have given us a
:29:53. > :29:57.low priority, it is unfair. Police officers will tend to earn 15% more
:29:57. > :30:01.than other emergency services. They will have the best public sector
:30:01. > :30:11.pensions available. They will continue to be able to earn
:30:11. > :30:17.overtime. �2,500 a year on average. You are cutting the numbers. The
:30:17. > :30:27.police picked at 143,000 under the last government, unit are already
:30:27. > :30:28.
:30:28. > :30:33.back to 186,000, with people to Of course we have to make savings.
:30:33. > :30:37.All the political parties admit that we would have to make savings.
:30:37. > :30:43.But with a situation where we have 6000 officers on restricted duties,
:30:43. > :30:47.that number has doubled in the last eight years. We have 24 off --
:30:47. > :30:53.25,000 officers who are not on the frontline. The government knows it
:30:53. > :30:58.has been caught out giving the police a very low priority, with a
:30:58. > :31:02.20% cut. Overseas Development has been increased by 34%. There is not
:31:02. > :31:07.a force in the country that will have a 20% cut to its budget.
:31:07. > :31:12.will be even higher with inflation. The Sunday Times was talking about
:31:12. > :31:17.a scheme taking over from ASBOs. will replace ASBOs with a better
:31:17. > :31:23.system which will enable injunctions to be obtained earlier
:31:23. > :31:25.to deal with crime and deal with reoffending more effectively.
:31:25. > :31:29.Things like that are being lost because of what is going on
:31:29. > :31:33.elsewhere. They are still going. You are watching The Sunday
:31:33. > :31:43.Politics. In 20 minutes, I will be looking at the week ahead with our
:31:43. > :31:48.
:31:48. > :31:52.political panel. Until then, the Hello and welcome from us. Coming
:31:52. > :31:56.up, while a charity for the Disabled is crying foul after a
:31:56. > :32:01.London council decided to remove its recycling banks from public
:32:01. > :32:07.land and run its own second-hand clothes business instead for profit.
:32:07. > :32:11.John and me this week are Lynne Featherstone, Home Office minister
:32:11. > :32:15.and Lib Dem MP for Hornsey and Wood Green, and the Labour MP for
:32:15. > :32:18.Islington North, Jeremy Corbyn. First, rioting spread rapidly
:32:18. > :32:25.across -- rapidly across the city last summer, but compensating those
:32:25. > :32:28.who suffered has not been such a quick process. Some 136 cases are
:32:28. > :32:32.still outstanding nearly nine months on, and the Labour MP for
:32:32. > :32:41.Tottenham said this week that this was unacceptable. These people are
:32:41. > :32:44.victims and not simply clients. A process claim form means sleepless
:32:44. > :32:49.nights and the brutal reality of losing your business or shutting up
:32:49. > :32:56.shops. Lynne Featherstone, this is your bag. You have responsibility
:32:56. > :33:01.for this now. It seems grindingly slow, and still not sorted. Why?
:33:01. > :33:05.is very sad and serious that there are people who still have not had
:33:05. > :33:10.their compensation. But the Home Office has been moving mountains to
:33:10. > :33:15.do as well as we have done. In London, those are not quite the
:33:15. > :33:22.right figures, because in London, there were 707 claims outstanding
:33:22. > :33:27.of which 571 have been settled with insurance companies. There are only
:33:27. > :33:35.three original claims in London that have not been settled. The 136,
:33:35. > :33:39.which includes those three, come from the individuals who were
:33:39. > :33:48.originally refused by the insurers and then had to make a claim later.
:33:48. > :33:56.So there are 133 new claims in that figure. OK, so around 500 insures
:33:56. > :34:01.companies are asking for the money. And people have had to go through
:34:01. > :34:06.being denied insurance money. Isn't that a long time, nine months?
:34:06. > :34:13.These companies need to get back on their feet. He and they are being
:34:13. > :34:18.practically chased. But around half of them ask for Documentation or
:34:18. > :34:21.papers, and ask again and again, and they don't arrived. You need a
:34:21. > :34:26.paper trail where possible. Sometimes documents have been lost
:34:26. > :34:32.or burnt or are not available, and the insurance adjusters make
:34:32. > :34:36.adjustment for that. But we are now going to close down the central
:34:36. > :34:43.operation and get right down into the local areas to chase it
:34:43. > :34:47.proactively, the few last ones. in half these cases, the claimants
:34:47. > :34:51.are not providing documents. What about the point being raised by
:34:51. > :34:55.some that your entitlement could be affected if you have received
:34:55. > :34:59.donations or any other sources? David Lammy raised to bat in the
:34:59. > :35:06.house. Can you clarify that? gather there was one example of
:35:06. > :35:10.that which was stopped immediately. That is not acceptable. Say you can
:35:10. > :35:13.receive money as a donation and it does not affect your claim?
:35:14. > :35:17.that would be outrageous if it affected you claim just because
:35:17. > :35:20.some philanthropist had given you something. You are up against
:35:21. > :35:27.hardship. If you have to wait for a claim, there is a gap underpinning
:35:27. > :35:31.it. Jeremy Corbyn, have you had any cases yourself? For fortunately, my
:35:31. > :35:35.constituency was largely spared. Damage was done to a couple of
:35:35. > :35:38.properties and I believe it has been settled. The issue David
:35:38. > :35:42.raises is a very serious one. Tottenham was seriously damaged and
:35:42. > :35:46.it is not just the compensation, it is the depressive effect on the
:35:46. > :35:50.local economy of unusable businesses, which then depresses
:35:50. > :35:55.the whole area and cuts down the number of people training and
:35:55. > :36:00.shopping there. It needs to be sorted out quickly. What comes into
:36:00. > :36:06.force after this happened is an act which is 125 years old. There has
:36:06. > :36:11.been some indication that the Government might use that. Can you
:36:11. > :36:15.clarify on that? We are looking at whether the Act needs changing. In
:36:15. > :36:22.my view, it certainly does. It does not cover things we think might
:36:22. > :36:25.need to be covered. For instance vehicles? Vehicles that are damage
:36:25. > :36:29.on the property are covered. Vehicles damaged because they are
:36:29. > :36:34.parked out on the road are not covered. It is an old act and we
:36:34. > :36:43.need to take another look at it. Feet we need to look at the causes
:36:43. > :36:47.of the riots and the aftermath of I think the way in which young
:36:47. > :36:53.people who were very peripherally involved received strong sentences
:36:53. > :36:59.is a very bad message. Those who committed acts of arson and so on
:36:59. > :37:03.Keighley deserve to face justice. We need to look at that. That is
:37:03. > :37:07.another issue, but I wonder whether provisions of an act which, for
:37:07. > :37:12.instance, don't take into account a car that is not outside your
:37:12. > :37:18.property that is 100 years old... There were no cars around 100 years
:37:18. > :37:25.ago. So you can't blame the parliament of 1890 or whenever it
:37:25. > :37:30.was. No, but clearly, the speed with which some communities have
:37:30. > :37:36.not been able to get back on their feet because of delays... But the
:37:36. > :37:41.issue is, whose responsibility is it? Is it the insurance, if you
:37:41. > :37:44.have insurance? Or is it a riot, therefore the riot Act applies,
:37:44. > :37:50.therefore the state must compensate? In this case, the riot
:37:50. > :37:55.Act applies and compensation is being paid. David Lammy raised the
:37:55. > :38:03.issue of why the shares industry did not deal with all of the claims,
:38:03. > :38:07.because they are professionals at it, rather than just the riot act?
:38:07. > :38:11.But then we would have had to change primary legislation to do
:38:11. > :38:15.that, and we wanted to be quick, so we took the fastest option, which
:38:16. > :38:20.was for those who were insured to go through insurance agencies who
:38:20. > :38:23.do this every day. And we would recompense the Insurance Agency.
:38:23. > :38:30.But there is a disturbing number of people who are uninsured in any
:38:30. > :38:33.respect. You can't take away the need for insurance, though. If it
:38:33. > :38:35.has done anything, the events of last summer, it will persuade
:38:35. > :38:38.people to look carefully at their insurance situation.
:38:38. > :38:42.The determination of a London council to find new sources of
:38:42. > :38:48.income has placed it on a collision course with one of the country's
:38:48. > :38:52.leading charities. Bromley wants to ban Scope's recycled clothes banks
:38:52. > :38:58.and move into the business of selling on its residents' unwanted
:38:58. > :39:02.clothes itself for profit. A charity shop and a row of
:39:02. > :39:06.recycling bins in south London, an unlikely political battleground.
:39:06. > :39:10.Most of the facilities here are the council's, but this one is
:39:10. > :39:14.different. A clothing bank owned by the charity Scope, one of 34 in the
:39:14. > :39:18.borough, where people can donate old clothes to help people with
:39:18. > :39:22.cerebral palsy. This is one of the last collections that will ever be
:39:22. > :39:26.allowed to be made from this site. Next month, Bromley Council will
:39:26. > :39:29.evict the charity and takeover not just the spot, but all the others
:39:29. > :39:35.in the borough. Hopes will now be sold at a profit, with the money
:39:35. > :39:39.ending up in the town hall. Scope claimed this decision will lose
:39:39. > :39:43.them �360,000 a year in Bromley alone, much more than the local
:39:44. > :39:50.authority are set to gain. clothes come out of the banks, come
:39:50. > :39:53.to our shops, and we sought to them, steam clean them and then sell them.
:39:53. > :39:57.Whereas if they take them directly to the rag trade, they will just
:39:57. > :40:03.get right for them, and that is not what people put them in the club
:40:03. > :40:06.spent four. Local opposition is being mobilised. Customers in
:40:06. > :40:09.Scope's Bromley shops are being asked to put their names on a
:40:09. > :40:13.petition. This store alone has nearly 400 signatures. It is
:40:13. > :40:16.terrible. There will not be anything around for people to take
:40:16. > :40:21.their clothes too. The charity claimed the economic situation
:40:21. > :40:25.means fewer people are donating clothes straight to the shops. A
:40:25. > :40:28.combination of the two means that some shops may have to close. And
:40:28. > :40:32.more importantly, services which disabled people rely on to get by
:40:32. > :40:36.may have to close as well. That means help provided to people like
:40:36. > :40:42.Lola and her mother Jo. Scope provided the family with help above
:40:42. > :40:47.and beyond what the state was able to do. We got a diagnosis when
:40:47. > :40:53.Leila was two of cerebral palsy. We were bowled over. The information
:40:53. > :41:00.we were given at the time was almost zero. They don't seem to
:41:00. > :41:06.know how to speak to parents yet. I phoned Scope and spoke to somebody
:41:06. > :41:10.who was immediately very helpful. Providing services for vulnerable
:41:10. > :41:14.people is not just the preserve of charities, it is also the job of
:41:14. > :41:17.local councils, and having had their budgets slashed by the
:41:17. > :41:22.Government, money has to be found elsewhere, which is why the idea of
:41:22. > :41:25.using clothing banks to protect services is becoming popular. In
:41:25. > :41:28.Hertfordshire, local authorities have taken control of their
:41:28. > :41:33.clothing banks. And here in London, nine boroughs are exploring ways of
:41:33. > :41:43.changing how we do it here which could mean they follow suit. The
:41:43. > :42:09.
:42:09. > :42:13.Mall, Bromley are alone in the The fall-out from the financial
:42:13. > :42:19.crisis has put a lot of pressure on high streets. It may be that
:42:19. > :42:22.London's charity shops are about to find themselves even more squeezed.
:42:22. > :42:27.Joining us are Warren Alexander, chief executive of the charity
:42:27. > :42:31.Retail Association, and Simon Parker, director of the new Local
:42:31. > :42:37.Government Network. Warren, councils need the money. They can
:42:37. > :42:39.do it door-to-door. What is wrong with what Bromley are doing?
:42:39. > :42:44.Keighley, councils are under pressure and they need to generate
:42:44. > :42:50.more money. But the damage they are doing to charities by taking away
:42:50. > :42:54.the significant and important source of income is doing a lot of
:42:54. > :42:59.harm and depriving charities of money that they would spend on
:42:59. > :43:04.local services. Simon? No one wants to see Charities losing out. We
:43:04. > :43:08.have seen some of the critical work organisations like Scope do. But
:43:08. > :43:12.there is also critical work that local authorities do around social
:43:12. > :43:16.care, elderly care and looking after kids. These services are
:43:16. > :43:20.under pressure and councils in London are taking budget cuts of up
:43:20. > :43:24.to 15% last year and something similar this year. The cry is to do
:43:24. > :43:28.more with less and be innovative and find ways to fund these
:43:28. > :43:32.services. That is what they are trying to do. Are we right that
:43:32. > :43:35.other councils are thinking of doing something similar, and a few
:43:35. > :43:38.years down the line, a lot might be doing it? It seems likely that
:43:39. > :43:44.councils will consider this because they have to look at every source
:43:44. > :43:47.of revenue they have got to support the bedrock services they provide.
:43:47. > :43:51.So other councils are considering it as a potential source of revenue.
:43:51. > :43:55.I would be surprised if a lot of the authorities were not thinking
:43:55. > :43:59.of going down this route. There's nothing to stop charities doing
:43:59. > :44:03.door-to-door collections. They already do door-to-door collections.
:44:03. > :44:09.It is interesting that you featured at Bromley, because it looks as if
:44:09. > :44:15.they will get something like between �75,000 and �130,000 a year
:44:15. > :44:24.from selling off these sites. That represents a 0.02 % of their budget,
:44:24. > :44:29.a tiny amount. And the money Scope will lose from this, about �360,000,
:44:29. > :44:34.from just that area in Bromley, is enough to support 720 families with
:44:34. > :44:38.disabled kids through their face- to-face support programme. That is
:44:39. > :44:44.how the cuts will affect charities like Scope, delivering essential
:44:44. > :44:47.services. Are you seriously saying it might affect those services.
:44:47. > :44:55.Won't they have to adapt like everyone and find new ways of doing
:44:55. > :44:58.this or encouraging people to drop those clothes round to shops?
:44:58. > :45:02.Charity shops are significant and important part of the income
:45:02. > :45:06.generated by charities to support services. Stock is the biggest
:45:06. > :45:09.problem they are facing at the moment, getting enough, at a time
:45:09. > :45:12.when charity shops are seeing a huge increase in their customers,
:45:12. > :45:17.to some extent because of the recession. They are finding it
:45:17. > :45:26.difficult to generate enough stock. Seeing this kind of attack on an
:45:26. > :45:30.important source of stock is They sound cack-handed. You have
:45:30. > :45:35.got a system where people can leave their clothes for them to sell on,
:45:35. > :45:39.what is wrong with leaving that continuing? There is a problem
:45:40. > :45:44.about wasting clothes that are dropped in normal waste disposal
:45:44. > :45:48.stuff that could be recycled and re-used, and the public need to be
:45:48. > :45:57.educated, but I cannot see why probably have such heavy measures
:45:57. > :46:05.against a charity which are counter-productive in a financial
:46:05. > :46:08.sense. This is Liberal Democrat austerity in action, setting local
:46:09. > :46:15.authorities against charities in local communities. This is mean
:46:15. > :46:21.beyond me. The figure is tiny. Councils have got to find money and
:46:21. > :46:27.be innovative, but this is called. It is ridiculous. A lot of them
:46:27. > :46:30.will do it. Seriously, if they think that is the answer to
:46:30. > :46:36.reorganising their council structures, to delivering their
:46:36. > :46:43.services, if that is where they have to go, which ever Council,
:46:43. > :46:47.they should be voted out. It is ridiculous. No council thinks this
:46:47. > :46:53.is the entire solution, but if you look at the figures across London,
:46:53. > :47:00.3.2 million quid, 100 social workers. I am surprised at the
:47:00. > :47:04.level of money, it sounds like it is not an especially good deal.
:47:04. > :47:08.Bromley are selling decides to charities to collect clothes? Is
:47:08. > :47:14.that what they are proposing to do? They will go door-to-door with
:47:14. > :47:18.collection. They are not allowed to have their clothes banks. These are
:47:18. > :47:22.banks that the public seats as places for charity. Bromley are
:47:22. > :47:29.taking them away. You think local authorities will have to look for
:47:29. > :47:32.these kind of measures in future? We are looking at a 20% further cut
:47:32. > :47:37.in the next Spending Review, they will have to find money from
:47:37. > :47:41.somewhere. That is the choice you are forcing on people. I come from
:47:41. > :47:46.Haringey, the idea that they could not find more money by the
:47:46. > :47:50.organisation is not right. Councils have to beat very innovative, they
:47:50. > :47:56.have to find savings wherever they can, this is a saving too far, and
:47:56. > :48:06.it is unnecessary. Hackney has decided not to go ahead with
:48:06. > :48:11.
:48:11. > :48:15.throwing charities out. What else has been happening here?
:48:15. > :48:20.The BBC survey on the effects of the housing benefit changes has
:48:20. > :48:24.revealed that 65% of the 26 London boroughs that responded said they
:48:24. > :48:28.had actively tried to relocate people outside the borough in
:48:28. > :48:33.2011/12. Hammersmith and Fulham council have said that couples with
:48:33. > :48:39.a joint income of more than �40,000 will no longer be entitled to a
:48:39. > :48:43.council house. Testing began for a cable-car lift across the Thames in
:48:43. > :48:47.east London. TfL said it would be ready by the summer, but there were
:48:47. > :48:51.no plans for it to be opened before the Olympics. Critics have raised
:48:51. > :48:57.concerns that sponsorship will fail to cover the total cost. Sutton and
:48:57. > :49:04.Cheam MP found himself between a rock and a hard place this week. He
:49:04. > :49:08.attacked proposals to close the maternity unit. The NHS says that
:49:09. > :49:18.would add just six minutes to get elsewhere. Talk to anybody in my
:49:18. > :49:23.constituency, they would laugh you out of the room when you say that.
:49:23. > :49:26.His Paul Burstow hypocritical? Government health reforms, leading
:49:26. > :49:33.to closures, and he is not happy because it is his own local
:49:33. > :49:38.hospital. It is not hypocritical. Everybody loves it if a minister
:49:38. > :49:44.has trouble on their patch. What he says, this is not a ministerial
:49:44. > :49:53.decision, it is a decision by the local PCT, and it is a bad decision,
:49:53. > :49:59.because it is done on a flawed process, on a flawed basis. If they
:49:59. > :50:03.could argue that that was the right choice and the logical choice,
:50:03. > :50:08.which everybody thought was right, he would not be able to campaign
:50:08. > :50:13.against it. But right now, that is not the case. We should know, we
:50:13. > :50:21.know what happened when the decisions were made on the
:50:21. > :50:25.Whittington, particularly on transport. What about the survey,
:50:25. > :50:28.the authorities seemed people move? I am seeing that in Islington. I
:50:28. > :50:32.have checked with the local authority, there are several
:50:32. > :50:42.hundred families out in the cold, their housing benefit is less than
:50:42. > :50:43.
:50:43. > :50:46.the rent, and in a very small number, the rent has been frozen.
:50:46. > :50:50.Communities and families are under threat, it is a disgusting policy
:50:51. > :50:54.that is being followed, capping housing benefit, which impacts on
:50:54. > :50:59.the poorest people living in private rented accommodation.
:50:59. > :51:04.is Islington, not prepared to put up the rent levels to some of its
:51:04. > :51:06.social housing, it says it cannot afford to do that? Absolutely, the
:51:06. > :51:11.government says, if the council wants to pursue a building
:51:11. > :51:14.programme for the future, they must increase rents to 80% of market,
:51:14. > :51:20.which would mean that council tenants in Islington would pay
:51:20. > :51:24.twice as much, Haringey probably slightly less, but a big increase.
:51:24. > :51:27.We need a strategy of housing in London, building more council
:51:27. > :51:35.housing, which is controlled and private sector rentals, and is
:51:35. > :51:45.having a system which pays the rent, rather than evicting families.
:51:45. > :51:52.
:51:52. > :51:59.Greece's future is on hold. The euro crisis continues. It is
:51:59. > :52:08.threatening Spain. What is the EU do in? Holding another summit,
:52:08. > :52:13.naturally! The Government tells us that it is
:52:13. > :52:18.its policy that Greece should stay in the eurozone. That is what it
:52:18. > :52:22.says publicly. What does it say in private? I have been talking to a
:52:22. > :52:29.lot of people connected to the Treasury this week. What is quite
:52:29. > :52:32.striking, the division of opinion amongst people. Some of them say,
:52:32. > :52:38.privately, the Treasury is working on the assumption that they will
:52:39. > :52:42.leave, but officially, they are not admitting that. There is
:52:42. > :52:46.uncertainty in the Treasury about how this is going to play out,
:52:46. > :52:51.there is no consensus as far as I can see. The Government does not
:52:51. > :52:55.really have a policy? It does not have a strategy. The politics of
:52:55. > :52:59.the situation of strange, the worst the eurozone gets, the less likely
:52:59. > :53:06.Britain is to grow, and the better an excuse the government has for
:53:06. > :53:10.that lack of economic growth. It is difficult to know if it is in net
:53:10. > :53:14.interest -- in their interest for the crisis to be sold, because if
:53:14. > :53:19.it did and Britain continue to struggle, they would lose the big
:53:19. > :53:25.excuse. I am reasonably optimistic about the summit, they tend to be
:53:25. > :53:29.more productive than DG8. Does tend to be elegantly curated talking
:53:29. > :53:34.shops. The mistake we make it is focusing on Francois Hollande and
:53:34. > :53:40.neglecting the person who can do something, Angela Merkel. Either by
:53:40. > :53:45.making Gemmill less competitive -- Germany are less competitive...
:53:45. > :53:49.has got an election next year. is already in trouble. But she can
:53:49. > :53:53.either do that all German taxpayers' money to an even greater
:53:53. > :53:59.extent behind the single currency. Those are difficult things to sell.
:53:59. > :54:05.Almost impossible. Europe has overshadowed domestic politics. And
:54:05. > :54:08.it will for the foreseeable future. Yes, what was interesting, you are
:54:08. > :54:12.seeing the change across the Continent, the idea that blanket
:54:12. > :54:17.austerity is the only way is perhaps not as popular as it was.
:54:17. > :54:23.We have seen Francois Hollande, he is not popular, but Barack Obama is,
:54:23. > :54:28.and when he says, growth has been working at for us, it could work
:54:28. > :54:33.here. The Angela Merkel/David Cameron position is a bit more
:54:33. > :54:37.isolated, in a way it was not before. What is interesting, it is
:54:37. > :54:42.not necessarily against David Cameron's interest if there was a
:54:42. > :54:45.fiscal stimulus in Europe, as long as Britain did not pay. Even if he
:54:45. > :54:50.believes austerity is the long-term solution, if they could deliver
:54:50. > :54:55.some growth, that would be helpful for Britain's future come up
:54:55. > :55:01.otherwise, we are making 80% of the Kurds when Europe could be on its
:55:01. > :55:05.knees. -- cards. The report on freeing up the British labour
:55:05. > :55:12.market will be published. Is there any Freedom of Information act
:55:12. > :55:18.involved? Yes, that has happened. The report was commissioned many
:55:18. > :55:23.months ago by the Liberal Democrats. Went Ed Davey looked at it, he
:55:23. > :55:27.thought, I do not like the findings. There were long negotiations,
:55:27. > :55:32.Beecroft was persuaded to drop some of his recommendations, but still,
:55:32. > :55:35.the government did not like them particularly. Now, they have been
:55:35. > :55:39.forced to publish it, because of the Freedom of Information request.
:55:39. > :55:46.They do not have to do anything about it. Well anything become
:55:46. > :55:49.policy? There is a reasonable chance. George Osborne wanted to
:55:49. > :55:53.announce at the last Tory conference that the majority of it
:55:53. > :55:57.would be implemented, and it was the fact that it was leaked to the
:55:57. > :56:01.Liberal Democrats, and they are opposed it, that killed it. But the
:56:01. > :56:05.best part of six to nine months on, with the economy back in recession,
:56:05. > :56:09.it is easy for the Tory half of the government to make the case that,
:56:09. > :56:13.if we do not do this, we look like we are guilty of a dereliction of
:56:13. > :56:20.duty. David Cameron can make the case for it in a way he could not
:56:20. > :56:30.have done. This is a picture of the Chancellor, at the football match
:56:30. > :56:32.
:56:32. > :56:36.last night in Germany. He was Normally, if you would not say
:56:36. > :56:43.anything about ministers going to football matches, they do it all
:56:43. > :56:49.the time, but this relaxing of the Prime Minister, it may not be the
:56:49. > :56:54.best idea. It is quite interesting, one of the biggest criticisms of
:56:54. > :56:57.politicians, they are out of touch with ordinary people, so seeing a
:56:57. > :57:01.Prime Minister who spends time with his family and relaxes a bit is
:57:01. > :57:05.quite refreshing, on the grounds that you get the job done and you
:57:05. > :57:11.are competent. When people are suffering and in pain, seen those
:57:11. > :57:15.pictures does not work. It is interesting that the story has
:57:16. > :57:19.started to come up now, led by the Times, very much part of this
:57:19. > :57:24.Rupert Murdoch agenda, which has turned completely against David
:57:24. > :57:29.Cameron, and will continue to run. I agree, it looks horrendous. And
:57:29. > :57:34.at a time when Number Ten is trying to favour the striving classes. To
:57:34. > :57:38.be seen to be engaging it in leisure pastimes clashes with that
:57:38. > :57:43.message. But there is not a linear relationship between the time spent
:57:43. > :57:47.on the job and how could it you are. If there were, Gordon Brown would
:57:47. > :57:53.have been the best ever Chancellor and Prime Minister. Sometimes I
:57:53. > :57:56.work longer hours than they do! What I have always had a problem
:57:56. > :58:01.with, David Cameron's weekly date nights. Hard working parents will
:58:01. > :58:06.know that is so out of the reach of most of us, I am lucky to get one
:58:06. > :58:12.every three months. I will have a word with your husband! Is a
:58:12. > :58:16.damaging? Yes. If you are seen to be getting the job done and these
:58:16. > :58:19.are good times, all very well and good, but these are tough times,
:58:19. > :58:24.people do not want to see it. Especially when there has been a
:58:24. > :58:29.massive backlash, businesses should be working harder, and we will only
:58:29. > :58:33.get out of the crisis by working hard, but you are not setting the
:58:33. > :58:39.example. William Hague told us to work harder, then the paper's
:58:39. > :58:43.report that David Cameron cannot put down his iPad. Then Downing
:58:44. > :58:47.Street denied it. That quote was one of the least wise statements
:58:48. > :58:51.made by a senior minister this year. But George Osborne going to be
:58:51. > :58:57.football match is better than going to the polo match or a kitchen