:00:41. > :00:45.Morning, folks. Welcome to Sunday Politics.
:00:45. > :00:48.Labour is riding high in the polls and after more bad economic news
:00:48. > :00:52.this week, the opposition is catching up on the key question for
:00:52. > :00:56.voters: which party can best run the economy? But can Labour
:00:56. > :00:58.convince a sceptical business community that it's friend, not foe.
:00:58. > :01:04.Shadow Business Secretary Chuka Umunna thinks so and he joins us
:01:04. > :01:09.for the Sunday Interview. Last night, Britons cast their
:01:09. > :01:12.votes and had their say on Europe. But could we soon be voting on a
:01:12. > :01:14.more profound issue than who should win the Eurovision Song Contest -
:01:14. > :01:19.namely, whether Britain should leave the European Union all
:01:19. > :01:22.together? UKIP's deputy leader and a former Europe Minister go head to
:01:22. > :01:27.head on whether it's time to stay in Eurovision but walk away from
:01:27. > :01:31.the EU. All that and the best political
:01:31. > :01:34.panel in the business analysing the week ahead - expect a lot on the
:01:34. > :01:44.Leveson inquiry and tweeting with the abandon of Jeremy Hunt on a
:01:44. > :01:45.
:01:45. > :01:48.The government says it is satisfied with measures taken since the 7th
:01:48. > :01:57.July terror attack. We hear from others including survivors, who
:01:57. > :02:00.All that between now and noon. But first, the news with Maxine
:02:00. > :02:03.Mahwhinney. Good morning. The Conservative
:02:03. > :02:10.party co-chairman, Lady Warsi, is facing questions about an expenses
:02:10. > :02:15.claim for rental payments in London. The landlord told the Sunday Times
:02:15. > :02:17.he didn't receive any money from her. Lady Warsi has said she paid a
:02:17. > :02:23.friend who was renting the house. Our political correspondent, Terry
:02:23. > :02:27.Stiastny, reports. The claims made against the
:02:27. > :02:31.Conservative Party's co-chairman, Baroness Warsi, centre on the time
:02:31. > :02:35.she spent staying at a flat in Acton in west London in 2008. Lady
:02:35. > :02:38.Warsi said that although she mainly stayed at hotels in London, there
:02:38. > :02:42.was a period of around six weeks when she spent occasional nights at
:02:42. > :02:46.the flat. Lady Warsi did claim expenses for her overnight
:02:46. > :02:51.accommodation during this period. At the time, peers were entitled to
:02:51. > :03:01.claim up to �165 a night for staying in London. In a statement,
:03:01. > :03:02.
:03:02. > :03:12.However, the owner of the flat told The Sunday Times that he didn't
:03:12. > :03:15.
:03:15. > :03:19.An adviser to Baroness Warsi, who also stayed at the flat that time,
:03:19. > :03:23.said Lady Warsi made a financial payment on each occasion which
:03:23. > :03:27.compensated him. A Labour MP has called for the House of Lords
:03:27. > :03:30.authorities to investigate further. More questions about expenses in
:03:30. > :03:40.Westminster will bring back bad memories of the expenses crisis of
:03:40. > :03:43.recent years. The United States has said
:03:43. > :03:48.President Assad's "rule by murder and fear" in Syria must come to an
:03:48. > :03:52.end. Yesterday, United Nations observers said more than 90 people
:03:52. > :03:55.had been killed near Homs, 32 of them children under the age of ten.
:03:55. > :03:59.The Foreign Secretary, William Hague, has summoned the charge
:03:59. > :04:04.d'affaires to the Foreign Office and has called for energy meeting
:04:04. > :04:06.of the Security Council. Campaigners opposed to a trial of
:04:06. > :04:09.genetically modified wheat in Hertfordshire have been banned from
:04:09. > :04:12.holding a rally at the test site because of concern that the crop
:04:12. > :04:15.may be damaged. Opponents had been planning a day of action against
:04:15. > :04:20.the experiment, but the Home Office authority obtained an order to ban
:04:20. > :04:22.them from surrounding land. A rally is taking place in a park nearby.
:04:23. > :04:25.Hundreds of households in the north-east of Scotland have been
:04:26. > :04:28.asked to take measures to protect themselves against high levels of a
:04:28. > :04:31.gas which has been linked to lung cancer. The Scottish Government
:04:31. > :04:34.issued the warning after increased levels of radon were detected in
:04:34. > :04:44.more than 800 properties in Aberdeenshire.
:04:44. > :04:47.That's it. There's more news here on BBC One at 5:50pm. Andrew.
:04:47. > :04:50.These are challenging times for the British economy, and the coalition
:04:50. > :04:53.government is paying the price, with Labour now pulling away in the
:04:53. > :04:56.opinion polls and Ed Miliband and Ed Balls catching up with David
:04:56. > :04:59.Cameron and George Osborne when it comes to who voters most trust to
:04:59. > :05:02.run the economy. But if Labour wants to make the issue their own
:05:02. > :05:04.they could do with the endorsement of business, but that's a
:05:04. > :05:08.relationship that has always been complicated.
:05:08. > :05:12.Under Tony Blair, relations between New Labour and business were close.
:05:12. > :05:16.Too close for many in his party. But Labour leader Ed Miliband has
:05:16. > :05:21.signalled a very different approach with his talk of producers and
:05:21. > :05:26.predators. Despite that rhetoric, chukka a mother has vowed to
:05:26. > :05:30.rebuild Labour's relationship with business -- Chuka Umunna has vowed.
:05:30. > :05:34.Promising to become their voice in opposition. What other big issues
:05:34. > :05:38.that businesses face? The biggest is the state of the economy. We
:05:38. > :05:42.learnt that it shrank by 0.3% in the first quarter, more than
:05:42. > :05:46.previously thought. The IMF said the government's deficit reduction
:05:46. > :05:50.plan had delivered substantial progress, and its head, Christine
:05:50. > :05:57.Lagarde, said she looked back with horror at the state of the public
:05:57. > :06:02.finances left by Labour. When I think back myself to May 2010, when
:06:02. > :06:06.the UK deficit was at 11%, I tried to imagine what the situation would
:06:06. > :06:12.be like today if no such fiscal consolidation programme had been
:06:12. > :06:17.decided. I shiver. This week also saw the publication of the Beecroft
:06:17. > :06:21.report, which recommended cutting employment regulation. An idea that
:06:21. > :06:25.was backed by business but attacked by Labour. Government ministers
:06:25. > :06:29.upset business leaders earlier this month by telling them to work
:06:29. > :06:33.harder. Labour is hoping that this souring of relations presents an
:06:33. > :06:37.opportunity for them to rebuild their own tattered relationship
:06:37. > :06:47.with business. The Shadow Business Secretary Chuka Umunna joins us for
:06:47. > :06:51.
:06:51. > :06:55.Welcome. You admit Labour lost support of business at the last
:06:55. > :07:00.election, you would like to win it back, naturally. On making it
:07:00. > :07:04.easier to hire and fire people, you say that is a distraction. Almost
:07:04. > :07:08.every business lobby in the country says the opposite. First of all,
:07:08. > :07:14.let's be frank. Business doesn't necessarily speak with one voice on
:07:14. > :07:18.all matters. For example a voice might be put up on BBC programmes,
:07:18. > :07:22.but his experience might be different from small businesses in
:07:22. > :07:26.my constituency. I used to practise as an employment lawyer before I
:07:26. > :07:30.was elected. If you look at the proposals in that Beecroft report,
:07:30. > :07:35.for example the one that has featured very strongly is this
:07:35. > :07:37.proposal to allow employers to fire at will, that is something that the
:07:37. > :07:43.British Chambers of Commerce has said this week they wouldn't want
:07:43. > :07:49.to see. The real issue for many businesses... Let's look at what
:07:50. > :07:53.the BCC said. They said Adrian Beecroft is right to point out that
:07:53. > :07:59.at a time when millions of people are unemployed, ministers should be
:07:59. > :08:03.looking for ways to make it easier, less costly to employ people. They
:08:03. > :08:08.may not like everything but they are broadly in favour of it. What
:08:08. > :08:11.we have argued for, in order to do that, is for a National Insurance
:08:11. > :08:15.break for micro businesses. That is something that the Federation of
:08:15. > :08:19.Small Businesses has argued strongly for. That would make a
:08:19. > :08:22.difference when you are looking to grow your business and take a --
:08:22. > :08:26.take people on. If you look at the concerns that businesses have, I
:08:26. > :08:33.don't deny that employment law is a concern. It would be remiss of me
:08:33. > :08:40.to do that given my and experience. But a survey has been done, 51%
:08:40. > :08:44.said the number of -- the lack of skills is their number one concern.
:08:44. > :08:48.They don't run small businesses. Let's look at the Institute of
:08:48. > :08:52.Directors. I don't think you can produce a single group that
:08:52. > :08:58.represents business that supports your point of view. Beecroft's
:08:58. > :09:02.recommendations are encouraging... They don't support you. I think it
:09:02. > :09:06.is a load of nonsense. What he is saying? If you would let me get a
:09:06. > :09:12.word in edgeways, to take one group and say they represent a whole of
:09:12. > :09:15.business would be misleading. produced two. Well done. You name
:09:15. > :09:18.one that supports your point of view. The British Chambers of
:09:18. > :09:22.Commerce agrees with us that we should not be given employers have
:09:22. > :09:27.the power to support -- to fire people at will. They want every
:09:27. > :09:32.other part of Beecroft. The issue is not whether Beecroft is right or
:09:32. > :09:36.wrong. The issue is that you cannot call on a single group representing
:09:36. > :09:40.business that takes your point of view. Absolutely, I can. I have
:09:40. > :09:43.always -- already cited the British Chambers of Commerce. The
:09:43. > :09:47.Federation of Small Businesses has said it has grave concerns that if
:09:47. > :09:50.you start setting up a two-tiered employment system, where you have
:09:50. > :09:54.one set of laws for businesses with employees fewer than 10, and
:09:54. > :09:57.another set of laws for everybody else, it would create a whole range
:09:57. > :10:01.of uncertainty. To say that the Beecroft report commands the
:10:01. > :10:06.support of the entire business community is simply wrong. If you
:10:06. > :10:11.look at the ICAEW, a leading organisation in the business
:10:11. > :10:14.community... The Institute of Chartered Accountants, which
:10:14. > :10:17.advises businesses themselves. They have said the Beecroft report is
:10:17. > :10:21.not the way to get the economy going. It is in the name of growth
:10:21. > :10:25.that the government is backing this report. They are saying that but
:10:25. > :10:29.for the employment law regime, we would not be in a recession. That
:10:29. > :10:34.is basically Adrian Beecroft's argument. You have said yourself, I
:10:34. > :10:38.was watching your sister programme, that the big issue is demand. That
:10:38. > :10:43.is the reason that our businesses are not growing at the moment.
:10:43. > :10:47.Richard Branson and ally for you? Richard Branson has argued in the
:10:47. > :10:50.Observer interview that we should do something on National Insurance
:10:50. > :10:56.to help micro and small businesses. That is something that we have been
:10:56. > :10:59.arguing for. As I have said, I have not denied that at the 2010 general
:10:59. > :11:04.election, Labour lost support in the business community, despite the
:11:04. > :11:14.popularity of Peter Mandelson and Alistair Darling. This is what
:11:14. > :11:17.Richard Branson actually said. You're not in favour of that.
:11:18. > :11:20.relation to business rates, it is something we would have to make a
:11:20. > :11:24.decision on if and when we got back into government because we would
:11:24. > :11:27.need to see the state of the public finances. On regulation, one of the
:11:27. > :11:30.things that the government has done is that it extended the primary
:11:30. > :11:35.authority scheme, which helps reduce the regulatory burden for
:11:35. > :11:40.businesses at a local level. If you have a business that spans three
:11:40. > :11:42.local authorities, you would have had to have dealt with all three
:11:42. > :11:49.and relation to different rules and regulations enforcement. We have
:11:49. > :11:52.set up a system which the government -- which looks to cover
:11:52. > :11:56.more businesses, which means you have a lead authority that you deal
:11:56. > :11:59.with. That was to bring down regulation. I don't deny we should
:11:59. > :12:02.look to reduce regulatory burden where we can, but I don't think we
:12:02. > :12:08.should be watering down a fundamental basic rights of
:12:08. > :12:11.everybody watching this programme in the name of growth. There is no
:12:11. > :12:17.economic or emperor call data to show that would get our economy
:12:18. > :12:21.going again. Sir Richard Branson is wrong? In an interview today he
:12:21. > :12:24.will say he is broadly supportive of Beecroft. If that is what he has
:12:24. > :12:29.said, and I haven't had the privilege of listening to his
:12:29. > :12:33.comments... You haven't had his support either. I do not agree that
:12:33. > :12:38.the Beecroft report is the way to go to get growth going in our
:12:38. > :12:44.economy. Andrew Adonis has been brought back into upon a duster
:12:44. > :12:48.will be -- to help on industrial policy. He has said that the third
:12:48. > :12:52.runway at Heathrow is economic self-mutilation. In government we
:12:52. > :12:56.promoted and supported the third runway. You are against it now.
:12:56. > :13:00.are looking at the feet of aviation generally in the south-east, in the
:13:00. > :13:03.context of our overall policy review. You are against the third
:13:03. > :13:09.from a? At the moment, we are looking at what we should be doing
:13:09. > :13:12.in the south-east. Are you against the third runway? We are looking at
:13:13. > :13:16.it in the context of our overall policy review, that is the answer
:13:16. > :13:20.to the question. Everybody gets fixated on the third runway. Even
:13:20. > :13:26.if we had one at Heathrow, we are likely to reach capacity there
:13:27. > :13:31.fairly quickly. So we do need a solution in the south-east.
:13:31. > :13:36.supported by the CBI, the IoD, Unite and the GMB union. And you
:13:36. > :13:39.are against it? I have just said, we are looking at it in the context
:13:40. > :13:44.of our policy review. One of the things that we have offered, and it
:13:44. > :13:47.goes to a big point of contention with politics in general, is that
:13:47. > :13:51.we often talk about the need to move away from quarterly capitalism,
:13:52. > :13:55.to move away from making decisions in the short term and having
:13:55. > :14:00.decisions made in the long term. We as politicians are often the
:14:00. > :14:04.obstacle, because we have election titles and a change of government.
:14:04. > :14:08.One of the things we have said on aviation policy, it will involve
:14:08. > :14:12.long-term decisions for business generally, let us work with you to
:14:12. > :14:16.come up with a long-term solution to our aviation challenge going
:14:16. > :14:20.forward, so that we can provide business with a long-term policy
:14:20. > :14:24.setting they need to have the competence to invest. A lot of
:14:24. > :14:28.policy uncertainty created in aviation but also in areas like low
:14:28. > :14:32.carbon and energy throws a lot of uncertainty over a policy area
:14:32. > :14:35.which discourages the private sector from investing. That is one
:14:35. > :14:41.of the very big problems at the moment. You have also got problems
:14:41. > :14:44.on the deficit. Ed Balls tried to make out that the IMF had been
:14:44. > :14:54.supporting Labour's position but you know that is not true. Let's
:14:54. > :15:00.
:15:00. > :15:10.look at what the IMF has been Let's look at what the OECD has
:15:10. > :15:20.
:15:20. > :15:23.You are not going to get Christine Lagarde making strident comments
:15:23. > :15:28.about government policy given the George Osborne sponsored has the
:15:28. > :15:32.position. Let's look at what she has said. She said to have a
:15:32. > :15:38.credible fiscal policy, you need growth and we have not seen growth
:15:38. > :15:44.for a long time in this country. Last year the IMF forecast was 2.3%
:15:44. > :15:49.and now they are forecasting 0.8%. If we carry on on the current
:15:49. > :15:54.trajectory, in a recession at the moment, it is questionable that we
:15:54. > :15:59.will even reach 0.8%, so we have a government that said their policies
:15:59. > :16:02.would get growth going again but actually we are in a recession...
:16:03. > :16:08.But if Christine Lagarde is in the pockets of the Chancellor and
:16:08. > :16:13.unreliable, why did Ed Balls claimed she was supporting Labour's
:16:13. > :16:17.policy of or fiscal stimulus? Because her deputy said that
:16:17. > :16:27.cutting temporarily VAT would be one of the ways to get growth going
:16:27. > :16:28.
:16:28. > :16:33.again. But she said it should be fourth in line of the new policies
:16:33. > :16:39.to be considered. The IMF have not said to do it now. Your policy says
:16:39. > :16:44.to do it now. You are not going to get Christine Lagarde unhelpful to
:16:44. > :16:49.George Osborne... So she is only saying these things, the comment
:16:49. > :16:53.that she shivered about your deficit, because she is in the
:16:53. > :16:57.Chancellor's pockets. government is going to be borrowing
:16:57. > :17:02.more than Alastair Darling would have been under his deficit
:17:02. > :17:06.reduction plan. But she shivered at the deficit reduction plan. Is she
:17:06. > :17:11.saying that because she is a propagandist for the Chancellor?
:17:11. > :17:17.I am not saying that. But you have to look at what she says in context
:17:17. > :17:22.of her relationship with the government. There are mixed views
:17:22. > :17:24.from economists. Many of them got it wrong. When the government
:17:24. > :17:27.announced the Comprehensive Spending Review, many economists
:17:27. > :17:32.talk that would be the best thing to get growth going again and now
:17:32. > :17:38.we are back in recession. You cannot look at Christine Lagarde
:17:38. > :17:45.and say she is an oracle. So why did Ed Balls claimed that she was
:17:45. > :17:49.on sight? It wasn't true! Well, she has said we need growth for a
:17:49. > :17:54.credible fiscal policy and to that extent there is the agreement, and
:17:54. > :17:59.people in the IMF have said we need to look to stimulus measures.
:17:59. > :18:05.Either what she says matters or it doesn't. Of course it matters but
:18:05. > :18:11.she is not the only person that matters. Are you in a position to
:18:11. > :18:17.name a predator company? No. Why? If you let me answer the question,
:18:17. > :18:23.it wasn't about going around and labelling companies good or bad and
:18:23. > :18:27.predators or producers. He did! he did not. We want to promote good
:18:27. > :18:31.business practice. Things which are innovative, things that value
:18:31. > :18:37.people that work in the companies, the companies that look to resolve
:18:37. > :18:42.the inevitable difficulties... said some companies are predators.
:18:42. > :18:47.Can you still not name what he meant by that? That is not what he
:18:47. > :18:52.was saying in his comments. What other kinds of business practices
:18:52. > :19:00.that will get the economy going again? What companies that are
:19:00. > :19:07.successful and producing...? right. We have a grubbing middle-
:19:07. > :19:12.class. Before we run out of time. A one to ask you about Baroness Farsi.
:19:12. > :19:17.Will Labour make a big deal about this? -- I want to ask you about
:19:17. > :19:21.Baroness Warsi. This is not something that any politician from
:19:21. > :19:29.any party can crow about. When you see these types of stories, it is
:19:29. > :19:34.bad for politics, generally. I am not happy to see this and I am
:19:35. > :19:38.surprised. In order to rebuild trust, there has to be a proper
:19:38. > :19:42.independent investigation because so long as the stories endure, we
:19:42. > :19:46.are going to struggle to rebuild the trust and confidence that we
:19:46. > :19:51.need there to be between Westminster and the people. That is
:19:51. > :19:57.incredibly important. Chuka Umunna, thank you for being with us on a
:19:57. > :19:59.Sunday morning when we should all be in the park! Thank you. Now,
:19:59. > :20:02.last night's Eurovision Song Contest might have proved, yet
:20:02. > :20:06.again, that the rest of Europe isn't exactly crazy about us, but
:20:06. > :20:09.how do we feel about them? It has been almost 40 years since the
:20:09. > :20:11.British people were asked to vote on the question, but there are
:20:12. > :20:14.signs that chance might come again, with Tory backbenchers calling for
:20:14. > :20:18.a referendum on our future membership of the European Union
:20:18. > :20:24.and even Labour said to be considering one. Giles Dilnot has
:20:24. > :20:27.been beside the seaside to find out more.
:20:27. > :20:31.We British, islanders, have always fluctuated, like the waves, over
:20:31. > :20:33.our relationship with those across the Channel. Although wanting us to
:20:34. > :20:39.immerse ourselves deeper into Europe, or get out completely, has
:20:39. > :20:43.been considered the extremes. But now with all this euro turbulence,
:20:43. > :20:51.if it is hard to work out if more people want out, it is easier to
:20:51. > :20:56.prove more would like a say. And while everyone is napping, could be
:20:56. > :21:00.tide had turned enough that now is the moment that one political party
:21:00. > :21:09.seizes the initiative and says "we are the one that will offer the
:21:09. > :21:11.British people a vote on Enid or out of Europe"? -- in or out.
:21:11. > :21:14.A pebble's throw from Southend, in Thurrock, 46,000 people responded
:21:14. > :21:22.to a people's pledge vote in a turn-out higher than local
:21:22. > :21:25.elections. 90% wanted a referendum. That experience proves to me that
:21:25. > :21:29.the first party leader in this country with the coverage and
:21:29. > :21:34.enough respect of the British people to come out now for a
:21:34. > :21:40.referendum will enjoy it electoral rewards now. But party leaders
:21:41. > :21:43.coming after run the risk of looking opportunist and cynical.
:21:43. > :21:47.Inside the sealed bubble of Westminster, politicians may not
:21:47. > :21:50.have heard such message or they're happy tuning it out. The problem
:21:50. > :21:54.with a polarised referendum is that the vast majority of people are
:21:54. > :21:58.somewhere in the middle and do not get given the option they want.
:21:58. > :22:04.They are forced to choose between these two extremes, cutting off
:22:04. > :22:08.from Europe or going for a rush into more integration. That is not
:22:08. > :22:12.what the majority of people want and so it is not the right question.
:22:12. > :22:19.But Labour may be able to bask in considerable Tory discomfort if
:22:19. > :22:22.they are promised such a polls. There would be advantage for Labour
:22:22. > :22:26.in the splitting the Conservative Party but surely the main point is
:22:26. > :22:31.what is in the best interests of the country, and if we are going to
:22:32. > :22:36.have a vote on Europe at some stage, which I think we probably will, it
:22:36. > :22:43.has got to be a considered debate and it has got to be on the
:22:43. > :22:48.question of where Europe is at the time, and the end of all of this
:22:48. > :22:55.euro turbulence. Over time, they have endlessly
:22:55. > :22:58.talked about. It is 37 years since we were asked what we thought, fast
:22:58. > :23:01.forward to today and suddenly we the public may have to think about
:23:01. > :23:04.our answer. And deputy leader of UKIP Paul
:23:04. > :23:12.Nuttall and former Europe Minister Denis MacShane join us to debate
:23:12. > :23:19.the question. Europe. In or out? Paul Nuttall, why do you want to
:23:19. > :23:25.lead the EU? It is a bureaucratic mess, it is expensive. -- leave the
:23:25. > :23:32.EU. We cannot control our borders. I want Britain to be an independent
:23:32. > :23:39.nation that looks to the Globe, not just to Europe. It is our biggest
:23:39. > :23:44.trading partner. I am very keen on a referendum that we stay out of
:23:44. > :23:50.the Eurovision Song Contest! I would vote to withdraw, I think!
:23:50. > :23:54.What is the answer to his point? are lots of international
:23:54. > :23:57.organisations and if we have a referendum, I think we will vote to
:23:57. > :24:01.stay in but it will not solve anything because we are bitterly
:24:01. > :24:05.divided in Europe, like in the 19th century we were divided on free
:24:05. > :24:10.trade and the Irish question, and it is a fault-line on British
:24:10. > :24:15.politics, and if I thought a referendum would solve anything...
:24:15. > :24:19.What is the substance? He says we will be better off out of Europe.
:24:19. > :24:25.He says we will concentrate on trading with emerging markets.
:24:25. > :24:30.terrific idea but Belgian exports more than we do to India. The
:24:30. > :24:36.eurozone as a whole has a balance of trade surplus. They look at us
:24:36. > :24:40.and see a country without any growth, in recession, huge balance
:24:40. > :24:44.of trade and debt problems, and they would like Britain to be more
:24:44. > :24:50.like some of the eurozone countries who are performing their wealth.
:24:50. > :24:54.Wouldn't we end up in splendid isolation if we were to leave?
:24:54. > :25:01.We are the 7th largest economy in the world. I want us to look
:25:01. > :25:05.towards Australia, Canada, India, the big emerging nations with fast
:25:05. > :25:10.growing economies. Not within the European Union, which is a
:25:10. > :25:18.bureaucratic mess, overseeing a currency that is falling apart.
:25:18. > :25:24.Look, let's be very clear. We do 1.4% of our trade with India. We
:25:24. > :25:29.export more to Ireland! He says we should do more! I am all for that.
:25:29. > :25:34.William Hague has and the last two years banging the drum for UK trade
:25:34. > :25:38.anywhere except in Europe and actually our trade with the outside
:25:38. > :25:43.world is coming down. I am not against it. Joe Johnson, a
:25:43. > :25:48.Conservative MP, wrote a good pamphlet a few days ago and he said,
:25:48. > :25:52.Britain is far behind the rest of Europe in terms of export and trade
:25:52. > :25:58.promotion and the idea that quitting Europe will open a sop to
:25:58. > :26:02.marvellous trade opportunities is not realistic -- will open us up.
:26:02. > :26:06.Her we have connections with these countries. We have economic,
:26:06. > :26:11.business and linguistic connections and we are missing a fantastic
:26:11. > :26:17.opportunity by tying ourselves to the slowest growing economic block
:26:17. > :26:20.on the planet. Wouldn't we end up being like Norway? You are not part
:26:20. > :26:26.of the decision-making process but you have to implement most of what
:26:26. > :26:30.the EU says. Not necessarily. We want to be friends with our
:26:30. > :26:34.European partners and a free trade deal will be on the table. 3
:26:35. > :26:41.million jobs in this country are dependent on our membership of the
:26:41. > :26:48.EU. But 12 million jobs on the Continent are dependent on jobs in
:26:48. > :26:57.the UK! That is as silly argument. Take Norway. Nor which implements
:26:57. > :27:00.more EU directives than we do! Take Switzerland. Switzerland... I love
:27:00. > :27:03.it when Paul Nuttall and Nigel Farage talk about trading with
:27:03. > :27:07.India and Pakistan and the rest of it but they are all for keeping
:27:07. > :27:11.these people out of the UK and you cannot be so unpleasant about
:27:11. > :27:15.foreigners in Britain and then say, but we would love to increase trade
:27:15. > :27:21.with these other countries. You cannot be open to business and
:27:21. > :27:25.closed to foreigners, which is your policy. We cannot have open-door
:27:25. > :27:30.immigration. In a time of recession... Let's stick to the
:27:30. > :27:36.European Union. Isn't it the factor that he might get his way? If the
:27:36. > :27:40.eurozone becomes a fiscal union, it will become much more tightly
:27:40. > :27:45.integrated. We will not be part of that and we will effectively be
:27:45. > :27:51.more outside. We might be more marginalised, I do accept that and
:27:51. > :27:58.I do worried. If we have and in or out referendum, fine. What would we
:27:58. > :28:03.lose? We would lose that position we had for a good number of years,
:28:03. > :28:10.been in there fighting for as hard as we can to maintain some open and
:28:10. > :28:15.liberal policies. For example, when our beef was safe after mad cow
:28:15. > :28:23.disease, only the EU would excepted. Canada and Australia would not.
:28:23. > :28:28.Hong Kong, our colony, said you must be joking, British beef.
:28:28. > :28:31.are staying in Europe for mad cow disease? Do not be flippant about
:28:31. > :28:35.our Cultural Industry. It is important for our farmers that we
:28:35. > :28:39.can export. I think British agricultural exports would come to
:28:39. > :28:47.a halt, as a small example. Should we put that to the people rather
:28:47. > :28:53.than commit in or out? There may be different terms. We tried to
:28:53. > :28:58.renegotiate for many years. I think this is not able to be reformed.
:28:58. > :29:03.The last time we had a referendum on this was in 1975 and you voted
:29:03. > :29:08.on trade. You both may have voted but I was not even born. What gives
:29:08. > :29:13.the generation above the right to have a say on this issue but not my
:29:13. > :29:19.generation? Yes or no, who would win? I think faced with isolating
:29:20. > :29:27.ourselves completely, even some of the right wing press would say this
:29:27. > :29:30.is insanity. I asked for yes or no as. OK! I think the British people
:29:30. > :29:33.would let us come out, I think the British people are firmly of that
:29:33. > :29:37.belief at the moment. Thank you both.
:29:37. > :29:40.It's approaching 11.30am. You're watching the Sunday Politics.
:29:40. > :29:50.Coming up in 20 minutes I'll be looking at the week ahead with our
:29:50. > :29:52.
:29:52. > :29:56.political panel. Until then, the Hello and welcome from us. As the
:29:56. > :30:00.government says it is satisfied with how it responded to issues
:30:00. > :30:05.raised by the 7/7 terror attack inquest, some survivors tell us why
:30:05. > :30:08.not enough has been done. Joining us for the next 20 minutes,
:30:08. > :30:11.Labour MP and former Home Office Minister Meg Hillier, and Simon
:30:11. > :30:14.Hughes, deputy leader of the Democrats.
:30:14. > :30:19.First of, we are looking at migration and the changing face of
:30:19. > :30:23.London. Latest figures show that net inward immigration to the UK of
:30:23. > :30:26.250,000 a year. The capital has been the main point of entry for
:30:26. > :30:31.new arrivals and latest figures show that the number of babies born
:30:31. > :30:36.in London to mothers from overseas is that a record high. What are the
:30:36. > :30:40.implications of that? Latest government figures show that
:30:40. > :30:44.over half the babies born in London in 2010 have mothers from outside
:30:44. > :30:47.the UK. Double the rate seen across the rest of England and Wales. In
:30:47. > :30:53.Newham, over three quarters of babies were born to mothers from
:30:53. > :30:57.overseas, the highest rate in the country. Brent, Westminster and
:30:57. > :31:01.Kensington and Chelsea all follow closely behind. Of all the brothers
:31:01. > :31:05.-- babies born to foreign mothers, the most came from Poland, a change
:31:05. > :31:10.from Pakistan which had the most foreign mothers giving birth in the
:31:10. > :31:18.UK between 2000, and 2009. A brief snapshot there. Joining us
:31:18. > :31:24.from Leeds, a representative from the think tank, migration UK. What
:31:24. > :31:30.is your reaction to figures showing 50% of new berths are from -- to
:31:30. > :31:33.mothers from other countries. know that the vast majority of
:31:33. > :31:37.mothers had to London. I think the previous government loosened
:31:37. > :31:42.controls to such an extent that we have seen a high at -- sharp
:31:42. > :31:47.increase in net migration, from 50,000 in the mid-90s to what we
:31:47. > :31:51.see today, a staggering 252,000. That is an extraordinary figure
:31:51. > :31:58.which is illustrating the pace of change that we are having to cope
:31:58. > :32:01.with in London. Does it matter? celebrate cultural diversity, we
:32:01. > :32:05.are a welcoming community, a welcoming country. But the change
:32:05. > :32:09.is taking place at such a pace that it is adding pressure and a burden
:32:09. > :32:13.on services such as housing, schools and the NHS. More
:32:13. > :32:17.importantly, I think integration. Integration is key to the community
:32:17. > :32:22.spirit and to success within our whole community. It is much more
:32:22. > :32:27.difficult with this large-scale immigration taking place. Former
:32:27. > :32:32.Home Secretary Alan Johnson said this week, that under Labour or the
:32:32. > :32:36.last year of Labour, they had got the figure down to 160,000. It is
:32:36. > :32:41.250,000 now and going up, who is right and wrong here? What is the
:32:41. > :32:46.present government doing? This government is doing, has put in
:32:46. > :32:50.some tighter controls but it must fulfil its promise to take net
:32:50. > :32:55.migration down from the hundreds of thousands, to the tens of thousands.
:32:55. > :32:58.We have to be much tighter and have more effective measures. We need to
:32:58. > :33:02.ensure that individuals are not abusing legitimate entry routes
:33:02. > :33:05.into this country. We should continue to welcome professionals
:33:05. > :33:11.and genuine students who wish to study and then leave the country.
:33:11. > :33:14.But whom would also look at illegal immigration and ensure that any
:33:14. > :33:18.illegal immigrant is sent back to their country. You won't need
:33:18. > :33:21.reminding that it was under Labour that we lost control. I would
:33:21. > :33:25.dispute that but if we look at the numbers, and we have heard some
:33:25. > :33:32.figures talked about, there is a culture of population across the
:33:32. > :33:39.what, a whole changing wake -- across the world, a-changing way
:33:39. > :33:43.that people move around. The fact it is Polish women in the majority
:33:43. > :33:47.reflects a different pattern of migration. A lot of Brits go abroad,
:33:47. > :33:50.to Europe, and live and work and study there. We're not living in
:33:50. > :33:54.the world of 20 years ago, we are living in a world where we have a
:33:54. > :34:00.lot more movement. I think this reflects that, partly. Do you have
:34:00. > :34:05.no concerns with that figure, at 56% are born to people that just a
:34:05. > :34:09.generation ago were mothers who lived elsewhere? It is partly
:34:09. > :34:16.looking at London and it is a point that has been made, a lot of people
:34:16. > :34:19.moved to London. In my borough in Hackney, over 50% of births were to
:34:20. > :34:23.foreign mothers. We are very young Borough, the average age is 32,
:34:23. > :34:26.about a quarter of residents are under the age of 60. These people
:34:26. > :34:32.will be paying the pensions of the rest of Britain in the future, and
:34:32. > :34:36.are vital to the life blood of our economy. Simon Hughes, in a similar
:34:36. > :34:39.inner-city constituency, are their issues, are there cultural issues,
:34:39. > :34:45.particularly the needs of populations here, which impact on
:34:45. > :34:48.public service? Of course there are. If the population goes up greatly,
:34:48. > :34:53.and the population of London has been going up significantly for
:34:53. > :34:57.years, and will go on going up, then of course, the capital city
:34:57. > :35:00.takes the most pressure and we have to deal with that. The pressure
:35:00. > :35:05.points for made have always been providing enough affordable housing.
:35:05. > :35:08.We are desperately short. It is not a single party blame issue, it is a
:35:08. > :35:12.legacy of governments over the years, we don't have enough
:35:12. > :35:16.affordable housing. There is not as much pressure in some areas. The
:35:16. > :35:22.NHS has coped quite well. In some areas there are pressures on
:35:22. > :35:25.privates -- primary schools. We can be tough on immigration, I have
:35:25. > :35:32.always taken the view that we should not be part of an agreement
:35:32. > :35:35.and we should have our own controls. We should be tough in relation to
:35:35. > :35:40.immigration. I was critical of one decision of the last government,
:35:40. > :35:45.which David Blunkett to, which did not faze him the time that the
:35:45. > :35:50.Eastern European countries are allowed people in. I said there
:35:50. > :35:55.could be very large numbers of people coming, the predictions were
:35:55. > :35:59.miles out, I think we had 10 times as many. The benefit is that we are
:35:59. > :36:02.a culturally diverse city. It has huge benefits in terms of links
:36:02. > :36:07.with the world. Many of the people from Commonwealth countries, where
:36:07. > :36:12.we went and settled there... With probably any won the Olympics
:36:12. > :36:17.because we are the sort of mixed city that we are. Two points. The
:36:17. > :36:21.largest number are Polish mothers, you can't restrict that now with
:36:21. > :36:26.the free movement in Europe. But you can't put this back in the box,
:36:26. > :36:30.it is something that has happened. It is built into London's
:36:30. > :36:36.infrastructure. We can't restrict the Polish, that's fine. But we can
:36:36. > :36:39.have tighter measures. This figure of 250,000 is too high and we are
:36:39. > :36:44.looking to the coalition government to deliver and fulfil its price of
:36:44. > :36:49.reducing this to the tens of thousands. Thank you for joining us.
:36:49. > :36:52.After the inquest last year into the July 7th a terrorist attack of
:36:52. > :36:56.2005, the coroner made a number of recommendations for future
:36:56. > :36:59.improvements. The government published a progress report this
:36:59. > :37:04.month saying it was satisfied with what had been done. Others
:37:04. > :37:08.including some survivors say they are not so pleased.
:37:08. > :37:12.The air ambulance was used to ferry teams of specialist trauma doctors
:37:13. > :37:18.above the congested streets, to the bomb sites. We provided multiple
:37:18. > :37:24.teams, to multiple bomb sites across London. We treated, or
:37:24. > :37:29.helped treat over 700 patients that day. We had 16 teams, we flew over
:37:29. > :37:34.26 missions. As acknowledged in the 7/7 inquest, we played a vital role
:37:34. > :37:39.in saving lives. Research has shown that the system work better because
:37:39. > :37:44.we played that role. It may look and sound just like another
:37:44. > :37:48.emergency service. But London's air ambulance is actually a charity. In
:37:48. > :37:51.the coroner's report into 7th July attacks, she wrote about her
:37:51. > :37:55.concern that London should have to rely on a service dependent on the
:37:55. > :37:58.public's charity and staff giving up their time for free,
:37:58. > :38:02.particularly as a global city, a major terrorist target and a host
:38:02. > :38:07.of the Olympic Games. The recommendation was that its funding
:38:07. > :38:10.and capacity should be reviewed. have not had dialogue with the
:38:10. > :38:14.Department of Health about this review into our capacity and
:38:14. > :38:18.funding. We believe it needs to happen urgently and we wait
:38:18. > :38:21.optimistic before it to happen. The recommendation for a review on
:38:21. > :38:24.capacity and funding was addressed to more than just the government,
:38:24. > :38:28.it was addressed to the Mayor of London as well and we will address
:38:28. > :38:31.it to the people of London. So far we have had no definite response
:38:31. > :38:35.from the Mayor of London as to helping us with either support or
:38:35. > :38:39.funding. The Department of Health told Sunday Politics it was still
:38:39. > :38:42.deciding what the terms of the review might be. Not that you would
:38:42. > :38:46.know from reading the government's official review into the progress
:38:46. > :38:49.made on the coroner's report. It says that discussions continued
:38:49. > :38:52.between government and London's air ambulance about funding and
:38:52. > :38:56.capacity. Despite the fact that London's air ambulance tell us that
:38:56. > :38:59.no such discussions have taken place recently. They tell us that
:38:59. > :39:05.people who drew up this week's progress report did not even make
:39:05. > :39:09.contact with them to check. Another recommendation that has not been
:39:09. > :39:13.followed up to everyone satisfaction was number 7. For
:39:13. > :39:16.Transport for London to review keeping first aid kits on
:39:16. > :39:21.underground trains. TfL say they have reviewed it but decided it was
:39:21. > :39:26.impractical. Putting them on trains is a practical issue. They are very
:39:26. > :39:30.dusty and dirty places. We looked to see where we could put them.
:39:30. > :39:33.They may be lost at any time will but if we put them under seats,
:39:33. > :39:38.customers tend to steal them. We can get first aid equipment to
:39:38. > :39:42.people very quickly from the right places, which is on stations.
:39:42. > :39:46.Instead of first aid kits at stations that we had on 7/7, we
:39:46. > :39:49.have a new improved version. These are not good enough, at least
:39:49. > :39:54.according to this woman who was on the train attacked near Edgware
:39:54. > :39:57.Road. When a bomb goes off in the middle of a tunnel, I don't
:39:57. > :40:04.understand what used the first aid kit on the station platform Allen &
:40:04. > :40:14.Overy is going to be. -- on the state -- on the State for -- on the
:40:14. > :40:19.state -- on the station platform is going to be. How quickly can you
:40:19. > :40:25.get equipment is somebody trapped in a tunnel? I have been told I was
:40:25. > :40:29.trapped for about an hour. Jackie now feel disappointed. What has to
:40:29. > :40:34.happen to make them do what is right for the travelling public?
:40:34. > :40:40.What does it take to make people, in a position to make these
:40:40. > :40:46.decisions, stop being smug and get off their backsides and do
:40:46. > :40:49.something? I am joined by former deputy Mayor
:40:49. > :40:55.Richard Barnes, who was in charge of co-ordinating London's response
:40:55. > :40:59.to incidents like 7/7, and a solicitor robe and in some of the
:40:59. > :41:02.7/7 survivors and families of the victims. -- representing some of
:41:02. > :41:06.the 7/7 survivors. How far have your recommendations been
:41:06. > :41:09.implemented? One of the biggest problems is that what has been
:41:09. > :41:13.implemented is not being properly communicated. We are told that
:41:13. > :41:18.things have changed, but we are not told what they are. Sometimes for
:41:19. > :41:22.very sound reasons. Recently on the emergency service front, there was
:41:22. > :41:26.a big operation called for defensive, where the emergency
:41:26. > :41:30.services were being tested. And the results of that operation are not
:41:30. > :41:34.being published at all. It says in the recent updates that we have
:41:34. > :41:38.circulated the results to all our partners, but not to the travelling
:41:38. > :41:42.public, who want to know whether a response is going to be passed
:41:42. > :41:47.enough for what can you deduce from that? You can't deduce their
:41:47. > :41:52.problems. If the government are not saying that this government wracked
:41:52. > :41:56.as this operation is working well, I deduce that it is not. Did you
:41:56. > :42:00.have access to that information? But the show that London has not
:42:00. > :42:10.responded well? I would not say that London has responded badly at
:42:10. > :42:11.
:42:11. > :42:16.all. When I chaired my report and look at what position we were in on
:42:16. > :42:23.7th July 2005, and where are we now, which of our 54 recommendations
:42:23. > :42:30.have been recommended? One was that Transport for London should
:42:30. > :42:35.consider having first aid kits in cabs. We said they should consider
:42:35. > :42:42.it and look at it properly. You are happy they decided not to go ahead?
:42:42. > :42:47.We now have 171st a depots across London. I have travelled in cabs
:42:47. > :42:51.and there is very little space to put it there -- 170 first-stage
:42:51. > :42:59.depots. I don't want to rely on a driver who has been traumatised
:42:59. > :43:03.himself. You heard a survivor saying that they do not want it
:43:03. > :43:07.along the platform, they wanted on the train with quick access.
:43:07. > :43:14.understand what they want. Hopefully would happen on 7th July
:43:14. > :43:20.is a one-off if you like, and there are other incidents were perhaps
:43:20. > :43:26.supply of first aid equipment from the stations is appropriate. It is
:43:26. > :43:31.nonsense to suggest that when Richard Barnes proposes, as chair
:43:31. > :43:35.of the review committee, that there should be first aid kits on trains,
:43:35. > :43:39.and then five years later, the coroner supports that
:43:39. > :43:43.recommendation, invites them to reconsider it, to review it. It is
:43:43. > :43:47.extraordinary that it is beyond the wit and the brains in this country
:43:47. > :43:52.to install sufficient first aid equipment on an Underground train.
:43:52. > :43:55.I want to ask the London air ambulance, something that the Mayor
:43:55. > :44:00.and you decided, it is not in our remit, we have not got
:44:00. > :44:05.responsibility, why not? The Mayor can only act on what he has a
:44:05. > :44:10.statutory responsibilities for. There are those who propose that
:44:10. > :44:14.the ambulance service should be part... You take the easy jobs and
:44:14. > :44:24.not the typical ones that cost money for it but I love that you
:44:24. > :44:25.
:44:25. > :44:30.are jumping to different The day after, on the eighth of
:44:30. > :44:34.July, it was due to be in for service. It was a happy coincidence
:44:34. > :44:39.that all the doctors were together for a meeting on 7th July, they
:44:39. > :44:44.were then ferried by the ambulance service out to points where there
:44:44. > :44:49.were the four bombs across London. You can't have a first responder
:44:49. > :44:53.which you can't rely on, seven days a week, 24 hours a day. There are
:44:53. > :44:58.real risk that -- political decisions to be made and looked at.
:44:58. > :45:02.It is an asset to the ambulance service, it is not necessarily a
:45:02. > :45:05.first response of the highest order. What do you think? I have been to
:45:05. > :45:09.the Royal London to see it and the chances of survival if you're
:45:09. > :45:13.picked up by the air ambulance and dealt with by the trauma unit is
:45:13. > :45:17.exponentially higher. We are facing a world where we have more of these
:45:17. > :45:23.threats. Of course we hope it is an aberration but we do not know that.
:45:23. > :45:27.We need to make sure it is not the first point of call at 247 because
:45:27. > :45:32.that is challenging, but it is there as much as can be. I think
:45:32. > :45:37.the film was slightly wrong, I think the doctors are paid for by
:45:37. > :45:40.the charity. As trains are redesigned, there should be space
:45:40. > :45:43.to put it behind glass that you can break in an emergency, I would say
:45:44. > :45:47.the issue around theft and keep it clean. There may be practical
:45:47. > :45:57.challenges here and now but I think it is premature to rule it out
:45:57. > :45:59.
:45:59. > :46:04.completely. Simon Hughes, D feel we I am grateful for this report. It
:46:04. > :46:09.took the terrible Marchioness tragedy to forced London to get its
:46:09. > :46:15.act together. Lifeboat service, much more safety on the river, all
:46:15. > :46:21.that sort of stuff. For me, there is a lot of work still to be done.
:46:21. > :46:27.I have been and seen what the air ambulance do, they do a fantastic
:46:27. > :46:30.job. It would be good if they can be linked with the London Ambulance
:46:30. > :46:34.Service formally, I would support that, and I will willingly pick up
:46:34. > :46:40.these issues, including that of having first aid kits underground,
:46:40. > :46:45.because I think we need to learn the lessons. This demonstrates that
:46:45. > :46:49.there are over 200 rule 43 reports from coroners in the last six
:46:49. > :46:53.months, we had the King's Cross fire report ignored, the
:46:53. > :47:03.recommendations from the Marchioness ignored but the blog
:47:03. > :47:05.
:47:05. > :47:08.they were not ignored. -- ignored... They were not ignored. We need to
:47:09. > :47:12.ensure that coroner's recommendations are put in place
:47:12. > :47:19.and we need some government department to oversee it and say,
:47:19. > :47:27.we agreed with it. But about the Marchioness, you are wrong, a lot
:47:28. > :47:32.was gonna buy the last Government. There is no statutory... A lot was
:47:32. > :47:40.implemented after the last government. What else has been
:47:40. > :47:44.happening in the City this week? A round up, in 60 seconds.
:47:44. > :47:48.A special tube train to mark the diamond jubilee celebrations broke
:47:49. > :47:54.down in the tunnel. Passengers were led down the track after the train
:47:54. > :47:58.stopped on the Jubilee Line near St John's Wood. Transport for London
:47:58. > :48:03.has apologised and said it would compensate those evacuated. Us
:48:03. > :48:08.senior Ukrainian Olympic official has been suspended after a BBC
:48:08. > :48:13.investigation showed he was willing to sell Olympics tickets for cash.
:48:13. > :48:19.He told a reporter that he would have up to 100 tickets to sell.
:48:19. > :48:24.Stella Creasey raised the issue of pay-day loans in PMQs. 65% of the
:48:24. > :48:30.public want to see caps on the cost of credit, when were his ministers
:48:30. > :48:34.finally do something about ending it legal loan sharks in the UK?
:48:34. > :48:39.teaches in a north London school resisting academy status went on
:48:39. > :48:43.strike. The National Union of Teachers said 20 members have taken
:48:43. > :48:49.action against the proposals that the school would become a sponsored
:48:49. > :48:52.Academy of. Simon Hughes. Passengers
:48:52. > :48:58.underground compensated. Signal failures. Will we be able to cope
:48:58. > :49:03.with the Olympics? I represent part of the Jubilee Line and many other
:49:03. > :49:08.stations. I was concerned about the breakdown. They have increased the
:49:08. > :49:13.number of trains and frequency recently so they come roughly once
:49:13. > :49:19.a minute. That is great. But I am glad that these issues came up now
:49:19. > :49:22.because I hope there will be time to sort them before the Olympics.
:49:22. > :49:28.The survey's overall has improved but the problem is, when it is not
:49:28. > :49:33.working, it is such a bad failure - - the service be fooled. I was
:49:33. > :49:37.stuck underground lift a day for 10 seconds and it is not very pleasant.
:49:37. > :49:43.I have a lot of time for the Commissioner for London Transport
:49:43. > :49:51.and I think if anyone can crack it, he can. Thank you, both. Back to
:49:51. > :49:58.Thought last week at the Leveson was a good one? Well, get the
:49:58. > :50:01.popcorn in because you ain't seen nothing yet. Tomorrow Tony Blair
:50:01. > :50:04.will be in the hot seat, and after that come a host of cabinet
:50:04. > :50:09.ministers including Vince Cable and, on Thursday, the man at the centre
:50:10. > :50:19.of the storm Jeremy Hunt. All manna from heaven for our panel looking
:50:19. > :50:24.forward to The Week Ahead. Let's begin with Syria. Back in the
:50:24. > :50:28.headlines after this atrocity. This one seems to be one of the worst.
:50:28. > :50:33.There is the general cry, even from papers that opposed Afghanistan and
:50:33. > :50:40.Iraq, that something must be done. But what? And that includes the
:50:40. > :50:49.Independent, were very sceptical about the Iraq war. They opposed it.
:50:49. > :50:54.President Assad is, unlike a lot of dictators who were deposed in the
:50:55. > :51:00.Arab Spring, a darkly effective autocrat. Getting rid of him might
:51:01. > :51:05.require more than airstrikes. The group he has on his country, with
:51:05. > :51:11.paid informers and spies and the broader Syrian intelligence date,
:51:11. > :51:17.is fearsome. Unless we are prepared to have a no-fly zone, which we
:51:17. > :51:23.could do, NATO wanted to, and on the rebels, there is not much we
:51:23. > :51:27.can do. We watch kids having their throats slit. It is absolutely
:51:27. > :51:32.devastating but you are completely right. What can we do and what
:51:32. > :51:37.lessons did we learn from Iraq? Firstly that intervention is
:51:37. > :51:41.incredibly expensive and at the moment, the MoD is facing massive
:51:41. > :51:46.cuts and said intervention would be difficult. If we do not have
:51:46. > :51:50.multilateral intervention, you are causing real problems as well.
:51:50. > :51:55.Russia and America and China on know where. And if you intervene
:51:55. > :52:01.without a long-term development plan, you caused massive suffering
:52:01. > :52:05.like we saw in Iraq. With Iraq, there was a plausible strategic
:52:05. > :52:14.reason to get involved, which was the possibility of weapons of mass
:52:14. > :52:19.destruction. That was plausible. don't pretend to to be an expert --
:52:19. > :52:23.to be an expert, but British people look at this and think, let's start
:52:23. > :52:28.listing what we can do rather than what we cannot do. We are keen to
:52:28. > :52:37.say, this will be the perils of this strategy... I do not pretend
:52:37. > :52:43.to have the answers. I am not employed to do that, thankfully.
:52:43. > :52:47.Also the inspector of UN observers, what exactly do they do? It is a
:52:47. > :52:54.terrible story. Our options seem pretty limited.
:52:54. > :52:58.Baroness Warsi. Is she toast? think Chuka Umunna was very good
:52:59. > :53:02.about this in the programme. He was saying a lot of politicians are
:53:02. > :53:07.humble not to just condemn this quickly after what happened with
:53:07. > :53:12.the MPs' expenses scandal. This is an issue for all parties. It
:53:12. > :53:18.happens in 2007, which is a long time ago. I don't think she is
:53:18. > :53:23.toast. I think Cameron values her as a woman and a someone in a party
:53:23. > :53:27.that is not particularly diverse. We will have to see where it goes.
:53:27. > :53:30.But she is not that popular with the Tories. What makes her likely
:53:30. > :53:35.to be toast is not just the substance of the allegations but
:53:35. > :53:39.the fact that she has no friends, particularly the Tory right over
:53:39. > :53:43.the last few years. They have regarded her as an ineffective and
:53:44. > :53:49.lazy defender of the party. There was it true that they would be
:53:49. > :53:54.getting rid of her anyway. Baroness Warsi's name is the one that always
:53:54. > :53:58.cropping up as the one that will be moved in the next reshuffle.
:53:58. > :54:03.said she paid the landlord. The landlord got some money. And that
:54:03. > :54:08.would justify her claiming her expenses. But the landlord said he
:54:08. > :54:13.did not get the money. That could be devastating. She actually said,
:54:13. > :54:18.as I understand it, that she paid the friends, the intermediary, and
:54:18. > :54:23.the landlord said he did not get any money out of either of them.
:54:23. > :54:27.The interesting point is that Labour will not be coasting for
:54:27. > :54:31.Baroness while seed to go because they know they have their own
:54:32. > :54:36.expenses issues -- Baroness Warsi. But they may be used for people in
:54:36. > :54:40.the Conservative Party as an excuse to get rid of her. The job of party
:54:40. > :54:45.chairman used to be a profound role and Chris Patten did it in the
:54:45. > :54:51.early 90s. Norman Tebbit did it. Under Cameron and George Osborne it
:54:51. > :54:55.has been sidelined. They have put people there for honorific purposes.
:54:55. > :54:59.Do they use this opportunity now to put in a heavy hitter who
:54:59. > :55:02.effectively dominates their campaign for the next election and
:55:02. > :55:08.communicate the message to the public in a way that Cameron and
:55:08. > :55:12.was born may not be able to do? Tomorrow at Leveson Inquiry we will
:55:12. > :55:18.be reminded that there was a time when it was hard to get a cigarette
:55:18. > :55:22.paper between Mr Murdoch's organisation and Tony Blair's Lady
:55:22. > :55:27.government -- Labour government. do not think Tony Blair will tell
:55:27. > :55:33.us anything really exciting this week. I think Jeremy Hunt and Vince
:55:33. > :55:38.Cable will be the really interesting thing. Will Vince Cable
:55:38. > :55:44.implicitly do Jeremy Hunt damage? I suspect he will say, I did not
:55:44. > :55:49.tweets anybody at BSkyB and the Murdoch organisation, I have no
:55:49. > :55:53.text relationships... Vince Cable is in no mood to take any prisoners
:55:53. > :55:57.and it all comes down to the questions he is asked. He is not
:55:57. > :56:03.vindictive but if he is asked the right questions, he will not be
:56:03. > :56:07.covering up for anybody. government's of political hope with
:56:07. > :56:12.regard to the Leveson Inquiry is to spread the mark. We are all in this
:56:12. > :56:15.together. Absolutely. Defending themselves gets them know where
:56:15. > :56:19.because I do not think the public are paying attention to each item
:56:19. > :56:26.of the Leveson Inquiry. The job they must do is to prove Labour was
:56:26. > :56:32.as involved as them, with the Murdoch empire, said Tony Blair's
:56:32. > :56:36.appearance may help them to do that. -- so Tony Blair's appearance.
:56:36. > :56:42.suspect they will be laid out how close their relationship was. How
:56:42. > :56:51.often they met. How deep and widespread the contact between both
:56:51. > :56:55.on to Rajs was. Absolutely. -- both Murdoch and Blair teams were.
:56:55. > :56:58.speak about the fall-out of the individuals but what
:56:58. > :57:03.recommendations will Lord Leveson come up with to make sure this
:57:03. > :57:10.never happens again? Is this make or break for Jeremy Hunt?
:57:10. > :57:13.Absolutely. So absolutely, Thursday it is worth getting the popcorn?
:57:13. > :57:17.had the dubious pleasure of going through a lot of the documents that
:57:17. > :57:22.were released on Friday night. I know how to have fun on a Friday
:57:22. > :57:26.night. The one thing they did strike me was just how keen Jeremy
:57:26. > :57:30.Hunt was on this deal and how keen he was to intervene, even when it
:57:30. > :57:35.was Vince Cable's responsibility. He was given legal advice to keep
:57:35. > :57:38.away and he still wrote that memo. He found a way of avoiding the
:57:38. > :57:43.summit to the Competition Commission which was the root
:57:43. > :57:46.Rupert Murdoch did not want to go. The problem is that Jeremy Hunt did
:57:46. > :57:51.seem to indicate that he made no intervention and the memo
:57:51. > :57:56.contradicts that, it seems to. The one thing in his favour, as soon as
:57:56. > :58:00.people say it looks bad and shows bad judgment, almost by definition
:58:00. > :58:05.they are admitting it is hard to prove a concrete offence. As dodgy
:58:05. > :58:09.as the text messages look, they do not constitute a veteran. But in
:58:09. > :58:13.general, his performance on Thursday makes or breaks his career.
:58:13. > :58:18.I think so. Jubilee fever is mounting so no
:58:18. > :58:22.show next weekend, I'll be holding a street party. In New York. But
:58:22. > :58:24.we'll be back here on the Sunday after that at the usual time of