:00:43. > :00:47.Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Spain is heading
:00:47. > :00:52.for a massive 100 billion Euro bail-out of its dodgy banks. But is
:00:52. > :00:55.it big enough? As the Chancellor blames the Euro crisis for
:00:55. > :00:59.Britain's economic woes, we'll get the view from the City. That's our
:00:59. > :01:02.top story. When it comes to reforming our
:01:02. > :01:06.schools who is the true heir to Blair? Secretary of State Michael
:01:06. > :01:10.Gove or his Labour counterpart Stephen Twigg? The Shadow Education
:01:10. > :01:13.Secretary joins us for the Sunday interview.
:01:13. > :01:17.And should the Government perform the mother of all U-turns yet and
:01:17. > :01:23.give the go ahead for a third runway at Heathrow? The two sides
:01:23. > :01:26.go head to head on airport expansion.
:01:26. > :01:29.All that and the best political panel in the business, looking
:01:29. > :01:37.forward to the week ahead and tweeting as if the Spanish banking
:01:37. > :01:42.sector depended on it throughout the programme. The mayor has signed
:01:42. > :01:49.up to be cycling revolution. With a bicycle only traffic lights but
:01:49. > :01:57.will the motorists give it a green All that in the next hour. First
:01:57. > :01:59.Good afternoon. The Chancellor, George Osborne, has warned that
:01:59. > :02:03.Britain's economic recovery is being killed off by the crisis in
:02:03. > :02:10.the eurozone. He said European leaders need to find a permanent
:02:10. > :02:14.solution. Our political correspondent Chris Mason reports.
:02:14. > :02:19.It might be his job to manage our economy, but George Osborne is
:02:19. > :02:23.effectively saying it's not my fault we are in this mess. The
:02:23. > :02:27.Chancellor has blamed our troubles on Europe before but his language
:02:27. > :02:30.today is striking. Any chance of getting the economy going again is
:02:30. > :02:36.being killed off by what is happening on the Continent, he
:02:36. > :02:42.writes. Ministers add those countries that use the euro will
:02:42. > :02:46.need to bind closer together. have been very clear for some time
:02:46. > :02:51.and George Osborne has reiterated that today that we think for those
:02:51. > :02:56.countries in the eurozone there is an inevitability about them having
:02:56. > :03:01.more collective responsibility in certain areas. The UK would remain
:03:01. > :03:05.in the European table but not and more powers to Brussels without a
:03:05. > :03:10.referendum. Labour say the Chancellor is deeply complacent and
:03:10. > :03:14.out of touch to blame Europe for what they call a double-dip
:03:14. > :03:17.recession made in Downing Street. Judges will be given new guidelines
:03:17. > :03:20.to ensure fewer foreign criminals escape deportation by claiming
:03:20. > :03:24.their right to a family life will be breached if they are removed
:03:24. > :03:27.from the UK. The Home Secretary, Theresa May, has decided that MPs
:03:27. > :03:33.should be able to vote on whether tighter rules should apply to
:03:33. > :03:37.Article 8 of the Human Rights Act. A clear-up operation is under way
:03:37. > :03:40.in west Wales after yesterday's flooding. Some villages were cut
:03:40. > :03:48.off and houses and caravan parks were flooded by up to five feet of
:03:48. > :03:53.water. Hywel Griffiths reports. When a flood it reaches your front
:03:53. > :03:58.door there is little choice but to let it through. Outside this House,
:03:58. > :04:03.there's a growing pile of ruined flooring, and furniture. It just
:04:03. > :04:07.came in through the front door, the back door, and it was just so quick.
:04:08. > :04:13.I don't know where it came from. It was like a river straight through
:04:13. > :04:17.the House. After a month's worth of rain fell in one day, rescue teams
:04:17. > :04:22.were batting against the tide. Even a lifeboat crew had to be airlifted
:04:22. > :04:27.to safety. If you want an idea of the force of the flood water, look
:04:27. > :04:32.at this enormous slab asphalt which was carried by the current and
:04:33. > :04:36.deposited on top of a rubbish bin. It's left a huge holes exposed.
:04:36. > :04:41.Although water is being pumped away, beers are warning people need to
:04:41. > :04:48.stay on their guard. Unfortunate, people are getting too close to the
:04:48. > :04:53.river banks, and there's a danger some body could get swept away or
:04:53. > :05:00.trying to drive through floodwater. With over 300 flood alerts in place
:05:00. > :05:09.across Wales, the full impact is only just becoming Clare. -- clear.
:05:09. > :05:11.That's it. There's more News here Billions in bailouts have already
:05:11. > :05:15.been poured into the tiny economies of Greece, Ireland and Portugal.
:05:15. > :05:18.Now Spain is rattling its much bigger begging bowl and the word is
:05:18. > :05:21.it might need up to 100 billion euros later this month just to
:05:21. > :05:23.rescue its banks, which are awash with worthless property loans. But
:05:23. > :05:31.will that be enough? And who's footing the bill? Allister Heath,
:05:31. > :05:36.editor of City AM joins us. Who is going to pay this?
:05:36. > :05:40.Ultimately, the Europeans. It will lend 100 billion euros to the
:05:40. > :05:44.Spanish and they will give the money to their banks. Clearly,
:05:44. > :05:49.European tax payers, but also Spanish taxpayers, because this is
:05:49. > :05:54.massively increasing their national debt. Spain is transferring
:05:54. > :05:59.property debt from the banks on to the Government's books which will
:05:59. > :06:04.weaken the Spanish government but strengthen these very dodgy banks.
:06:04. > :06:09.Can they afford this? Who knows, really, because this bail-out fund
:06:09. > :06:14.has supposedly got 500 billion euros in it but we have not seen
:06:14. > :06:17.the money yet. I doubt that this will be enough, because I suspect
:06:18. > :06:23.their property debts are much larger than that and we have other
:06:23. > :06:27.countries which might need a bail- out. At the moment, there might
:06:27. > :06:31.temporarily be a stop to the crisis but I don't think it solves any of
:06:31. > :06:34.the deep-seated problems. Spain could come back for more money
:06:34. > :06:39.because it's even worse than it looks? And others may join the
:06:39. > :06:45.queue behind them? Spain could easily come back for more money.
:06:45. > :06:49.It's about how far house prices will fall in Spain. Spain says 20%
:06:49. > :06:53.but other independent analysts think it might even reach 50% at
:06:53. > :06:57.some stage and if that happens, there will be lots of bad debt and
:06:57. > :07:01.the Spanish government wants to endlessly bail-out its banks, so
:07:01. > :07:07.therefore it will have to borrow more money. Either this will
:07:07. > :07:11.reassure the markets in the short term or open a new can of worms,
:07:11. > :07:15.and the Greeks will say, they are getting 100 million, no tough
:07:15. > :07:21.conditions, but it will encourage people to vote against the Greek
:07:21. > :07:27.bale-out conditions. Exactly, in the short term, the markets of a
:07:27. > :07:30.letter gently, desperate for action. In the short term, when people
:07:30. > :07:35.realise the big issues created by this, the fact that the Greeks are
:07:35. > :07:40.no longer going to save that they trust the Germans and Europeans
:07:40. > :07:43.will be strict with them, there will be a lot of worries. The real
:07:43. > :07:48.problem is the bad debt is not going away but being moved about
:07:48. > :07:52.the system. The taxpayers are having to pick up the bad debt.
:07:52. > :07:55.looks like Europe will be a drag on the British economy for the
:07:55. > :08:01.foreseeable future and I suspect that's why the Chancellor is now
:08:01. > :08:05.blaming Europe. It's clearly not all their fault in the case of the
:08:05. > :08:09.UK but I can see the eurozone going on and on and on because there will
:08:09. > :08:15.be small bail-outs of the small bay leads after small bail-outs.
:08:15. > :08:19.Ireland did exactly what Spain did and now they are in deep trouble. I
:08:20. > :08:25.don't think the problem will go away soon and the single currency
:08:25. > :08:30.experiment I'm afraid to say, is ending in disaster. Thank you very
:08:30. > :08:32.much. Now, Tony Blair and New Labour may be fading into political
:08:32. > :08:36.history, but in the Department for Education their legacy lives on.
:08:36. > :08:38.It's been a busy two years in the Department for Education, where the
:08:38. > :08:41.Secretary of State Michael Gove has accelerated the Blairite policy of
:08:41. > :08:44.creating academy schools. There were 203 of them when the coalition
:08:44. > :08:49.came to power. There are now more than 1,800 with others in the
:08:49. > :08:54.pipeline. The job of deciding whether Labour supports or opposes
:08:54. > :08:59.those plans has gone to Stephen Twigg. An icon of New Labour's
:08:59. > :09:02.victory in 1997 when he snatched Michael Portillo's seat. Twigg was
:09:02. > :09:06.a schools minister when Tony Blair was pursuing his education reforms,
:09:06. > :09:12.often against the will of his own party. Now under Ed Miliband he's
:09:12. > :09:14.back covering his old brief. This time as Shadow Secretary of State.
:09:15. > :09:17.After seeming to endorse another coalition idea with a distinctly
:09:17. > :09:19.Blairite flavour, free schools, he's in the tricky position of
:09:20. > :09:29.carving out a winning blueprint for Labour's next manifesto, while
:09:30. > :09:31.
:09:31. > :09:41.leading the opposition to ideas his And Stephen Twigg joins me now for
:09:41. > :09:48.
:09:48. > :09:51.What is the difference between Labour's approach to schools now
:09:52. > :09:55.compared with when you were in government? Obviously we are having
:09:55. > :09:59.a policy review, Look and that what worked in government, in other
:09:59. > :10:01.parts of the world, in schools around the country. The big
:10:01. > :10:05.challenge in education in this country is to break the link
:10:05. > :10:09.between family background and how well children do at school. We
:10:09. > :10:15.started to do that in government and they want us to continue that
:10:16. > :10:19.job. When it comes to these kinds of changes, you started, Michael
:10:19. > :10:24.Gove as Education Secretary is suddenly doing what new Labour
:10:24. > :10:31.dreamed of doing, independent self- governing state schools, and
:10:31. > :10:36.introducing them faster than Tony Blair dreamed of. No, he has taken
:10:36. > :10:40.our Academy programme and turned it on its head. Our academies were
:10:40. > :10:43.Lytton at underperforming schools, in areas of great social and
:10:43. > :10:50.economic need and bringing in new innovative management to schools in
:10:50. > :10:52.that area. Michael Gove says they can vote to become an Academy and
:10:52. > :10:57.we know from the survey's most schools are doing this because they
:10:57. > :11:07.get more money. That's not about promoting innovation in schools.
:11:07. > :11:15.
:11:15. > :11:19.That was in reference to what Michael Gove was doing. He seems
:11:19. > :11:23.pretty pleased with the way it's going. I think what's really
:11:23. > :11:27.important is we are judged by what works. Labour's Academy programme
:11:27. > :11:31.worked because we brought really good people in to run schools and
:11:32. > :11:36.we had high qualities teaching in those schools. I worry that Michael
:11:37. > :11:39.Gove's approach is dogmatic which simply says, by having academies
:11:39. > :11:47.and free schools you can improve a. I don't think evidence supports
:11:47. > :11:52.that. Labour policy in 2005 was to go for academies and foundation
:11:52. > :11:59.schools. And free schools, too. Tony Blair wrote the introduction
:11:59. > :12:05.to it and said, we would like to see free schools as well.
:12:05. > :12:09.created all sorts of ways, academies, trust schools, and I
:12:09. > :12:13.support innovation in schools but I recognise that there are many
:12:13. > :12:21.community schools that a pioneering as well. It's not only the
:12:21. > :12:25.Academy's. The key, to me, is to have the innovation, and the key to
:12:25. > :12:30.that is good head teachers working with a really good teachers. If the
:12:30. > :12:40.Academy model works, your party's model, why should it be limited to
:12:40. > :12:43.failing schools? Why not apply it to bog-standard comprehensives?
:12:43. > :12:48.That's a very good point and one thing we're doing in our policy
:12:48. > :12:51.review is looking at the freedoms schools should have and my feeling
:12:51. > :12:55.is it should apply to all schools regardless of their structure and
:12:55. > :12:59.for example I spoke about the benefits of a longer school day.
:12:59. > :13:06.Why not allow all schools to do that? That would make them
:13:06. > :13:09.academies. Or giving greater freedom to other schools. In our
:13:10. > :13:13.Academy programme we had sponsors who worked closely with the school
:13:13. > :13:21.to bring about improvement but the Government doesn't even have that
:13:21. > :13:26.and we know most schools who had voted to become Academys have done
:13:26. > :13:30.so for financial reasons. It's not necessary for innovation.
:13:30. > :13:33.confused. You raise the prospect that maybe all schools should
:13:33. > :13:37.become versions of academies and on the other hand, you criticise the
:13:37. > :13:41.Government for rolling out academies. I criticise them for the
:13:41. > :13:44.way they've done it because we now have 2000 schools which are
:13:45. > :13:49.academies and who are they accountable to? Michael Gove. I
:13:49. > :13:57.don't think it is desirable, a good system, and some of them will fail.
:13:57. > :14:03.We have to have systems which spot the early signs of failure. Do you
:14:03. > :14:13.accept, Tony Blair and your successor thought this model should
:14:13. > :14:21.
:14:21. > :14:25.Is that Labour policy? No, it's not Labour policy. Academies have done
:14:25. > :14:28.some brilliant things but so, too, have community schools and they
:14:28. > :14:32.want to move the debate on because the structure of a school, the name
:14:32. > :14:36.of a school, the way it's governed, is not the main thing. Why is that
:14:36. > :14:42.not your policy any more seen as it was supported by you when you were
:14:42. > :14:45.in power? Our programme did brilliant things. It was fantastic.
:14:45. > :14:49.Some of the Government's academies and free schools will do some
:14:49. > :14:54.brilliant things but we have got to look at the evidence and it says
:14:55. > :14:58.and leadership that makes a difference in our schools and is
:14:58. > :15:02.quite wrong for us to dismiss the many brilliant community schools
:15:02. > :15:10.that don't want to become academies. I'm still confused because you told
:15:10. > :15:14.me earlier that you thought all schools should have an academy *
:15:14. > :15:18.Freedom and yet I put up the Andrew Adonis quote that we never bleed
:15:18. > :15:21.all academies should be restricted to just failing schools and we
:15:21. > :15:25.wanted all schools to be academies and you tell me it's no longer
:15:25. > :15:29.Labour policy. The Academy freedoms which is of the earlier questions
:15:30. > :15:34.was about, the second half of my point is that there are certain
:15:34. > :15:37.expectations parents should have of every school. For example, I
:15:37. > :15:41.disagree with Michael Gove when he says academy schools are not bound
:15:41. > :15:47.by the school meals standards. It's a very big concerned in terms of
:15:47. > :15:52.public health. I'm in favour of having entitlement for parents and
:15:52. > :15:56.pupils regardless of the school. Let me make other point. Curriculum
:15:56. > :15:59.flexibility, one of the freedoms we gave to academies which has
:15:59. > :16:04.continued is more freedom over the curriculum. If that makes sense,
:16:04. > :16:07.which I think it does, that extended to all schools. It doesn't
:16:07. > :16:17.necessarily mean those schools have to become academies in order to get
:16:17. > :16:18.
:16:18. > :16:23.that status. Most primary schools Do you welcome the government's
:16:23. > :16:26.intention to move on to some intention to move on to some
:16:26. > :16:31.primary-school swith academy status? Sometimes academy status
:16:31. > :16:37.might be the solution, but you questioned Michael Gove on this in
:16:37. > :16:43.January, look how badly he handled the school in Harrogate. Much
:16:43. > :16:49.better to work with parents. Do you back academies in primary schools?
:16:49. > :16:55.So the Times, but sometimes a better solution is a federation.
:16:55. > :17:03.What about if the parents vote for it? Yes, of course if the parents
:17:03. > :17:11.vote for it. Sometimes the solution might be academy status but not
:17:11. > :17:17.always. What about free schools? Do you agree with Andrew Adonis?
:17:17. > :17:22.Labour set up dozens of free school academies before 2010. Our policy
:17:22. > :17:26.was to oppose free schools. Andrew is a good friend of mine and I
:17:26. > :17:32.agree with him on a lot of these things but I don't agree with him
:17:32. > :17:37.on that. So you are opposed to free schools? Some are now being
:17:37. > :17:41.established, some of them are excellent schools, and I am not in
:17:41. > :17:45.the business of closing down excellent schools. I have a
:17:45. > :17:50.different concern about free schools - at the moment there is a
:17:50. > :17:56.serious shortage of primary school places in the country, and yet the
:17:57. > :18:01.spending priority is on free schools. That does not make sense.
:18:01. > :18:06.It was the last government that told local authorities to get rid
:18:06. > :18:13.of service places. Let me ask you this - when you close down three
:18:13. > :18:17.schools if you get into power? course not. All the existing free
:18:17. > :18:22.schools will continue to exist under Labour? No blank cheques are
:18:22. > :18:28.written either way. If the school is successful, of course we won't
:18:28. > :18:33.be closing it down. A would you be creating any more free schools?
:18:33. > :18:38.need to look at that. You say you need to look at it but I have Ed
:18:38. > :18:48.Miliband here, saying "free schools are the opposite of the thing we
:18:48. > :18:48.
:18:48. > :18:54.need." If your leader says that, why do you need to look at it? The
:18:54. > :19:00.cost we don't believe they are the right answer. I have been to visit
:19:00. > :19:04.the woodpecker school, which is fantastic, that is because the head
:19:04. > :19:10.teacher is brilliant. We will not be in the business of closing
:19:10. > :19:13.schools like that. We want their admissions. If free schools can be
:19:13. > :19:18.fantastic, why does your leaders say they are the opposite of the
:19:18. > :19:24.thing we need. Because this is not the programme we would have brought
:19:24. > :19:28.in if we had won the election. you won't create free schools if
:19:28. > :19:34.you are in power? If you are believing in three schools, don't
:19:34. > :19:40.vote Labour? Not at all. Parents don't care that much whether the
:19:40. > :19:43.local school is a community school, a free school or and Academy, they
:19:43. > :19:48.want good quality school and the evidence is that it is the quality
:19:48. > :19:53.of the teaching that matters much more than the name on the board
:19:53. > :19:57.outside the school. Foreign languages could be made compulsory
:19:57. > :20:04.for primary-school children for the first time, do you support that?
:20:04. > :20:11.do. So why did you abolish compulsory languages for 14-16 year
:20:11. > :20:16.olds? Because that is a different situation. Children will get along
:20:17. > :20:20.of of learning languages if they learn them younger. When you make
:20:20. > :20:28.this change, the teaching of foreign languages collapsed in the
:20:28. > :20:33.state system and 75% of modern language GCSEs, don't you now wish
:20:33. > :20:38.to apologise for that change? think the mistake we made was not
:20:38. > :20:45.to focus on primary schools first, I think having more choice at 14
:20:45. > :20:53.makes sense. Some younger people are so dissatisfied with being
:20:53. > :20:58.forced to learn languages at that stage, we shouldn't do it. Thank
:20:58. > :21:02.you for joining us. The coalition government has done
:21:02. > :21:05.so many U-turns even we have lost count, but whilst some of those
:21:05. > :21:11.political pirouettes have been embarrassing they have been small
:21:11. > :21:15.beer, but there is growing pressure for a rethink on their opposition
:21:15. > :21:25.to a third runway at Heathrow as part of the policy review on
:21:25. > :21:28.
:21:28. > :21:34.aviation. Any U-turn on that could really shake things up.
:21:34. > :21:39.70 million passengers a year, around 180 destinations worldwide,
:21:39. > :21:44.Heathrow is Europe's busiest airport. If I wanted to fly to
:21:44. > :21:48.Philippines or the China, both emerging markets, I could check-in
:21:48. > :21:53.at Terminal 5 but I would not be able to fly direct. I would have to
:21:53. > :22:03.catch a connecting flight at an airport outside the UK. That
:22:03. > :22:03.
:22:03. > :22:08.matters, say big business, because firms want direct connections, and
:22:08. > :22:14.a third runway is the answer according to some MPs who wants to
:22:14. > :22:19.oppose the idea. We need Heathrow to be able to compete with others
:22:19. > :22:22.so that Britain has a proper airport with international
:22:22. > :22:27.connections all over the world, particularly to these new emerging
:22:27. > :22:33.expanding economies in Asia. have to have good links to them to
:22:33. > :22:38.remain competitive. There are great cities in China that you can't get
:22:38. > :22:42.to directly from the UK. government has promised to look at
:22:42. > :22:47.all the options. It could opt for a new hub airport in the Thames
:22:47. > :22:53.estuary, so-called Boris Ireland. Stansted or Gatwick could be
:22:53. > :23:03.expanded but new runways would go against the coalition agreement. Or
:23:03. > :23:03.
:23:03. > :23:07.a third runway could be built at Heathrow. A no parliament combined,
:23:07. > :23:11.but our concern about the environmental impact of the
:23:11. > :23:15.Heathrow third runway is very significant and I don't see any
:23:15. > :23:21.technological solution on the horizon which could cause us to
:23:21. > :23:27.change our minds. IC us opposing a third runway at Heathrow. Senior
:23:27. > :23:33.Lib Dems I have been speaking to made it clear they would oppose a
:23:33. > :23:38.third runway, but one Tory I spoke to said the government should lay
:23:38. > :23:43.the groundwork for a third runway, and the next Conservative manifesto
:23:43. > :23:47.should not have any promises ruling out runway expansion. That could
:23:47. > :23:53.mean a fight with Tory MPs whose constituencies are in the
:23:53. > :24:02.flightpath. Flights, over every 90 seconds. This one has already
:24:02. > :24:11.promised to spark a by-election, and he is prepared to go further.
:24:11. > :24:15.If we have a manifesto like that, in this area I would not stand as a
:24:15. > :24:20.conservative on that manifesto. I suspect there are others who feel
:24:20. > :24:26.strongly, the same way. A bumpy ride ahead, whatever the
:24:26. > :24:32.destination. With me now, the Conservative peer Lord Glendonbrook,
:24:32. > :24:38.otherwise known as Michael Bishop who until 2009 run the airline BMI,
:24:38. > :24:46.and the Labour MP John McDonnell who represents the constituency of
:24:46. > :24:53.Hayes and Harlington. Michael Bishop, Boris Johnson said recently
:24:53. > :24:58.he throw third runway is dead, move on, what do you say? His proposal
:24:58. > :25:02.is pie-in-the-sky, in the sea as opposed to in the sky. The history
:25:02. > :25:07.of Heathrow is one of the projects which will never be allowed to
:25:07. > :25:13.happen, and I don't think this third runway will be an exception.
:25:13. > :25:17.He's Row is one of the great national assets we have, still the
:25:17. > :25:21.world's greatest international airport, but it is in decline to
:25:21. > :25:26.other major airports it has to compete with. Surely we should
:25:26. > :25:33.invest in success? I agree, but there is another solution to
:25:33. > :25:37.expanding. There is a cross-party consensus that expanding would be
:25:37. > :25:43.devastating for the local community, and also for air pollution, but we
:25:43. > :25:47.are served by five major airports around London. We have to link them
:25:47. > :25:54.effectively by rail in particular, and then we can compete with the
:25:54. > :25:59.world. We move 140 million passengers through London airports,
:25:59. > :26:06.twice Frankfurt, four times Amsterdam, so we are competitive
:26:06. > :26:10.now. My fear is that developing runways will cost us jobs, not gain
:26:11. > :26:17.us jobs. The reason businesses are not moving to London is quality of
:26:17. > :26:21.life, and what do they say? Air pollution and traffic congestion so
:26:21. > :26:25.we are creating a problem for the future. For the last 25 years it
:26:25. > :26:29.has been a consensus between successive governments that
:26:29. > :26:34.airports should be given new runways on an incremental basis and
:26:34. > :26:39.now we have a situation where that runway it is needed and it has to
:26:39. > :26:49.be at Heathrow. Why does it have to be at Heathrow?
:26:49. > :26:49.
:26:49. > :26:59.If you financed it in the Thames estuary, national assets would have
:26:59. > :27:03.to close to fund it. I think passengers want to interconnect
:27:03. > :27:08.with in the same airport. No passenger will book a trip where he
:27:08. > :27:12.has to do part of it by a bear, trust the rail system to catch
:27:12. > :27:19.another flight. Were we are losing out to the provincial markets of
:27:19. > :27:24.the provincial cities. Frankfurt, Madrid, Amsterdam, Paris, they now
:27:24. > :27:29.have better links than we do to these markets. That's not true. I
:27:29. > :27:34.checked this because Michael raised the issue of China are few weeks
:27:34. > :27:41.ago in the press and I checked the number of flights to China - we
:27:41. > :27:45.have 100 a week. They are all to Shanghai and Beijing. But that is
:27:45. > :27:49.where the profits are, that is where the big-business connections
:27:49. > :27:59.are needed. We need to be more creative about this. This
:27:59. > :28:00.
:28:00. > :28:05.incremental growth has got us into this mess. We can out compete in
:28:05. > :28:10.the future if reconnect up the airports. Do we have enough links
:28:10. > :28:15.for the emerging markets of the provincial towns? A fact of the
:28:15. > :28:21.matter up is that Frankfurt, and Germany is a country with strong
:28:21. > :28:27.environmental views, has actually not ploughed down area of the
:28:27. > :28:32.forest around Frankfurt to create a new runway -- has done that.
:28:32. > :28:36.took five years to make that decision, and thousands of people
:28:36. > :28:43.camped out in the woods. But the project was completed, and it took
:28:43. > :28:49.seven years to build. What happens if we don't have a new
:28:49. > :28:54.runway at Heathrow? Our economy is based on a very mobile society. You
:28:54. > :28:57.can think of London as an aircraft carrier, where people fly in and do
:28:57. > :29:07.their business and fly out again. The geographical position at the
:29:07. > :29:08.
:29:08. > :29:15.Thames estuary is at the furthest eastern tip of the UK. The journey
:29:15. > :29:20.to there would be another 35 miles. Let's get real, and I agree with
:29:20. > :29:24.the Prime Minister. He has challenged the Avening -- aviation
:29:24. > :29:29.industry to get real about the fat. We know that high-speed rail is
:29:29. > :29:34.coming, which takes 20% of the short haul flights out of Heathrow,
:29:35. > :29:43.that can be made up for with flights elsewhere. We no passenger
:29:43. > :29:48.loading on individual airplanes has increased 25%, and we also know -
:29:48. > :29:53.this is the big one - if we don't tackle this, we will not tackle
:29:53. > :29:55.climate change and our children will never forgive us. We have to
:29:55. > :30:00.leave it there. The you are watching the Sunday
:30:00. > :30:04.politics. Coming up in 20 minutes, I will be looking at the week ahead
:30:04. > :30:14.with our political panel. Until then, the Sunday politics across
:30:14. > :30:18.
:30:18. > :30:21.Hello and welcome to the London part of the show. Coming up later
:30:21. > :30:25.in the programme, the Dutch cycling revolution that's coming to London?
:30:25. > :30:29.But do London's motorists want to give way to cyclists? I'm joined
:30:29. > :30:31.for the next 20 minutes by London's newest MP, the Labour member for
:30:31. > :30:37.Feltham and Heston, Seema Malhotra. And the Conservative MP for Bromley
:30:37. > :30:40.and Chislehurst and Local Government Minister, Bob Neill.
:30:40. > :30:43.Welcome to both of you. But first, Sunday Politics can exclusively
:30:43. > :30:45.reveal new research claiming that there is a direct link between
:30:46. > :30:48.advertisements for prostitutes in the back of newspapers and sex
:30:49. > :30:51.trafficking. Ahead of the Olympics, there are calls for the Mayor and
:30:51. > :30:54.police to use existing powers to clamp down on local newspapers
:30:54. > :30:56.getting rich from the exploitation of women. I'm joined by Mary
:30:56. > :31:00.Honeyball, a Labour MEP representing London in Brussels who
:31:00. > :31:02.commissioned the research. And sex worker Catherine Stephens an
:31:02. > :31:10.activist with the International Union of Sex Workers who believes
:31:10. > :31:13.the ads serve to protect sex workers. Can I start with you call
:31:13. > :31:21.Mary Honeyball. What proportion of women identified through
:31:21. > :31:26.advertising have been trafficked? It is a lot. In London, 94.6% of
:31:26. > :31:30.women who work in the sex industry are actually migrants. It's almost
:31:30. > :31:35.all of them, actually, who come from other countries. They will not
:31:35. > :31:39.have all been trafficked. What is the proportion because that's the
:31:40. > :31:45.important statistic? Sexual adverts in newspapers are being blamed for
:31:45. > :31:49.the increase in sex trafficking. Is that the case? It is the case and
:31:49. > :31:54.the police themselves say it is the case. A year-and-a-half ago the
:31:54. > :31:59.Metropolitan Police rope to newspaper editors across London
:31:59. > :32:04.saying that there is a direct link between the advertisements in the
:32:04. > :32:07.newspapers for sexual services and human trafficking. The police are
:32:07. > :32:16.absolutely certain there is a link and that's one of the reasons I'm
:32:16. > :32:22.so concerned about it. Is there a right approach? It still seems if
:32:22. > :32:26.there is a link, and there is a high proportion of migrants
:32:26. > :32:30.offering their services through newspapers, shouldn't it be the
:32:30. > :32:34.police approaching this through criminal investigations?
:32:34. > :32:38.certainly think it should be. We need to tackle this in every way we
:32:38. > :32:41.can because when we are talking about trafficking, it's not only
:32:41. > :32:46.something which is a criminal offence but something which is
:32:46. > :32:51.violent, horrible, one of the worse things that can happen to anyone.
:32:51. > :32:57.Very often, these are young teenagers. We are not talking about
:32:57. > :33:00.consenting adults in any way but a violent, very nasty crime. Do you
:33:00. > :33:07.accept the link but actually it's worth going down the route of
:33:07. > :33:14.trying to stop sexual adverts in newspapers? The organisation with
:33:14. > :33:18.which I work is based on evidence and in reality, rather than
:33:18. > :33:24.stereotypes and assumptions. We hadn't seen this document yet and
:33:24. > :33:28.we have not been sent a copy by your office. It seems to be a
:33:28. > :33:34.survey of people are work in London offices. If you look at the history
:33:34. > :33:41.of research around the proportion of trafficking, in the sex industry,
:33:41. > :33:46.the Police Research, things are like Acumen, you are looking about
:33:46. > :33:53.5% of the total people working in the sex industry who are trafficked.
:33:53. > :33:58.Also, one of the UK problems is a legal problem, the law works very
:33:58. > :34:03.well to facilitate trafficking because it makes it a criminal
:34:04. > :34:07.risky for anyone who comes into contact with women in the sex
:34:07. > :34:11.industry to contact the police. We would like to see a situation where
:34:11. > :34:16.people could report and everybody in the sex industry has the
:34:16. > :34:19.protection of the law. The should you be clamping down on sexual
:34:19. > :34:24.adverts in the newspapers? We've got to be careful about legislation
:34:24. > :34:28.because it has to be proportionate and unenforceable. Is it
:34:28. > :34:34.justifiable to have up women justifiably trafficked? Absolutely
:34:34. > :34:40.not, which is why we had strengthen the law with his real one abilities.
:34:40. > :34:45.It a criminal offence to pay for sex, if the woman has been
:34:45. > :34:52.trafficked, controlled by a pimp or coerced. Whose responsibility is it
:34:52. > :34:57.to know? How will newspapers know? The first thing, if you try to make
:34:58. > :35:05.it a criminal offence, to be the customer of those adverts is...
:35:05. > :35:12.that law means there's a number of cases of clients, even a case
:35:12. > :35:17.quoted by Harriet Harman, where a client had paid �10,000 of some
:35:17. > :35:22.bodies debt bond to help her escape Commission, and then was able to go
:35:22. > :35:26.on and give evidence in court. That client would now be committing a
:35:26. > :35:32.criminal offence and confessing to a crime against which there is no
:35:32. > :35:37.defence if the contact the police. I don't think that's an accurate
:35:37. > :35:41.reflection. I've had 25 years as a barrister before I came to
:35:41. > :35:45.Parliament and there was considerable discretion but it
:35:45. > :35:52.somebody gives evidence for the Crown, even if they may have been
:35:52. > :35:58.complicit, there is a discretion. Is it too blunt an instrument? Will
:35:58. > :36:02.it have an impact on it trafficked women? I think it's got potential
:36:02. > :36:07.have an impact on trafficked women and it's for this reason. You have
:36:07. > :36:13.to look at behaviour. Where are the uses of sex services finding them?
:36:13. > :36:18.It's a big problem in London. It suggests local advertisements in
:36:18. > :36:24.local newspapers, who get �44 million in terms of revenues a year,
:36:24. > :36:31.that's the route, and if you look at it, marketing is going to be the
:36:31. > :36:36.way in which you generate demand for services. There has to be a
:36:36. > :36:39.proportion to that link. OK, thank you both very much for coming in.
:36:39. > :36:42.It's very rare these days that a British politician is proud to say
:36:42. > :36:45.they are taking their policies from Europe, but the Mayor of London
:36:45. > :36:47.seems to be the exception. Under pressure from cyclists during the
:36:47. > :36:50.election campaign, Boris Johnson signed up to the "Love London, Go
:36:50. > :36:53.Dutch" campaign - agreeing to adopt some of the cycling policy's from
:36:53. > :37:03.Europe's number one cycling nation. So what exactly does that mean?
:37:03. > :37:12.
:37:12. > :37:17.Andrew Cryan went to Holland to No helmets, high-visibility jackets,
:37:17. > :37:23.padlocks. Welcome to Groningen in Holland, the world's number one
:37:23. > :37:27.cycling city. Between 60% of all journeys are made by bicycle.
:37:27. > :37:32.Compare that to England, and London, it's only 3% but that has not
:37:32. > :37:39.happened overnight. It's down two decades and decades of a very
:37:39. > :37:44.controversial decisions. Once upon a time, Holland had similar traffic
:37:44. > :37:49.to the UK falls of congested roads became hard for cyclists. By the
:37:50. > :37:55.1970s, a soaring number of deaths of children became a source of
:37:55. > :38:00.outrage. Politicians made an enemy of the car but a friend of the
:38:00. > :38:10.bicycle. This man was one of them. There was a resentment towards the
:38:10. > :38:14.car. A street is something you play on as a child. You should have come
:38:14. > :38:19.for it to shop and work on it and there was a strong sentiment at the
:38:19. > :38:25.time. We did not called ecological but it was, in a sense. What was
:38:25. > :38:30.important was that there was a strong political debate on who is
:38:30. > :38:35.the end of the streets. The winner in Groningen was duffer good a
:38:35. > :38:39.bicycle. It's easy to see how they did it. Cars and bicycles are
:38:39. > :38:44.separated were possible. When they meet, cyclists have the priority
:38:44. > :38:47.like on this roundabout. There are special traffic lights and parking
:38:47. > :38:56.at your bike is not a problem particularly at the railway station
:38:56. > :39:00.where they had 6,000 spaces. At London Bridge, they just have 400.
:39:00. > :39:05.So it's great news for people on bicycles but in London, the most
:39:05. > :39:15.popular form of transport is the motor car. So what is Groningen
:39:15. > :39:19.
:39:19. > :39:26.I mean, instantly, what do I do here? This is not where I am meant
:39:26. > :39:31.to be. Are they honking me? In the centre of town, it's confusing. I
:39:31. > :39:35.can't drive up there. Back when all of this started in the 1970s, the
:39:35. > :39:39.first thing they did was try to stop cars driving through the
:39:39. > :39:43.middle of town so they put a ring road around it. You can drive into
:39:43. > :39:48.the centre but have to drive out the same way you went in so there
:39:48. > :39:54.is no through traffic and once you are in, you can't go many places.
:39:54. > :40:00.So, basically, unless you're making a delivery or are a taxi, you would
:40:00. > :40:05.be absolutely mad to try to drive here. But once you get out of the
:40:05. > :40:10.centre, it a different story. Since so many people have been putting
:40:10. > :40:16.off the driving, in the suburbs, traffic flows well so Groningen,
:40:16. > :40:22.easy to drive, beautiful to cycle but could we apply that to London?
:40:22. > :40:27.A lot of cyclists think we can. Before this year's election, people
:40:27. > :40:31.demanded we go Dutch. The mayor signed up to the campaign. But
:40:31. > :40:36.given the scale of the task, anybody expecting London's roads
:40:36. > :40:43.that to be the same as the Netherlands perhaps shouldn't hold
:40:43. > :40:46.their breath. I'm joined by Mustafa Arif from the
:40:46. > :40:48.London Cycling Campaign who started the Love London, Go Dutch. And by
:40:48. > :40:55.the legendary racing driver Sir Stirling Moss. Welcome to both of
:40:55. > :41:00.you. We have watched that film. Boris Johnson committed himself to
:41:00. > :41:05.go Dutch. Ought firm proposals are you hoping to see? Firstly, it's
:41:05. > :41:10.important to recognise that the transformation of London into a
:41:10. > :41:16.place which has saved and inviting four Cycling... Surely that is
:41:16. > :41:21.debatable? No, it's going to take a long time and won't happen quickly.
:41:21. > :41:29.It's a multi- decade programme for the the Dutch started in the 1970s.
:41:29. > :41:34.The Danish start of the 1990s. We want three flagship schemes in the
:41:34. > :41:41.next four years. Cycling and walking will be prioritised. That
:41:41. > :41:48.can show these things can be done in London. Having identified areas?
:41:48. > :41:51.We want the mayor to take ownership of this and work out how he wants
:41:51. > :41:57.to do this because it has to be local priorities and where it makes
:41:57. > :42:02.sense. Do you think it is achievable? Has Boris Johnson got
:42:02. > :42:09.any firm proposals as to where those areas could be? He gave two
:42:09. > :42:19.examples and suggested Vauxhall, the joy rate to repair, as an area,
:42:19. > :42:19.
:42:19. > :42:24.and I can't remember the other one. -- gyratory. What do you think of
:42:24. > :42:30.it as an idea? Should we emulate other cities in Europe where
:42:30. > :42:36.cyclists feel better? It's a great idea but not feasible. In London,
:42:36. > :42:40.we are so closed in, so many vehicles, a density of vehicles are
:42:40. > :42:44.higher than anywhere else and I don't think it is feasible. I think
:42:44. > :42:48.they should make it law you must wear a helmet so if anybody falls
:42:48. > :42:54.off, at least they have some protection. Have you ever cycled in
:42:54. > :43:02.London? With a bicycle, not really? I have a scooter, a same sort of
:43:02. > :43:07.thing. It does make a difference. It's the feasibility which is key.
:43:07. > :43:11.We looked at Groningen but there's no comparison between that City and
:43:11. > :43:16.London in terms of, not just its size, but there are streets and
:43:16. > :43:20.number of vehicles and heavy vehicles on the road for the
:43:20. > :43:27.thirsty, helmets being compulsory, the evidence is making it
:43:27. > :43:33.compulsory reduces the number of people cycling. Is it feasible to
:43:33. > :43:37.make London a cycling city like Groningen? Groningen is a smaller
:43:37. > :43:42.place but not the only place in the Netherlands. All of the Netherlands
:43:42. > :43:48.has good quality cycling structure. We can look at Amsterdam and bigger
:43:48. > :43:55.cities and the ideas used there. In the New York, Manhattan, a lot of
:43:55. > :44:00.work has been done recently and we could apply those lessons to London.
:44:00. > :44:04.I had just come back from New York and they are not as far ahead as
:44:04. > :44:11.London and they're only doing it on the outskirts of Manhattan, not
:44:11. > :44:16.through the centre. That is segregated tracks. Isn't
:44:16. > :44:19.segregation what is needed for safety question of yes, but in a
:44:19. > :44:24.Groningen, what they tried to do is reduce the amount of through
:44:24. > :44:31.traffic and one problem we have with safety is this a lot of rat
:44:31. > :44:36.running through residential areas with the volume of traffic is too
:44:36. > :44:41.high. Could it work? I think it can. We have a campaign which is
:44:41. > :44:49.applicable in London. I was delighted to send off the cyclists
:44:49. > :44:56.as they joined 28th April cycle ride. They are campaigning for
:44:56. > :45:02.safer cycling. Brian Dowling, who was killed, was from Hounslow at. I
:45:02. > :45:05.had a friend who was killed in Hounslow. Save the cycling, I think
:45:05. > :45:09.we are frustrated by those who go through red lights but to say we
:45:09. > :45:13.have a vision for London which is not just about the motor car but
:45:13. > :45:21.people living, walking, cycling and families doing that together.
:45:21. > :45:25.need to learn more about it. Frankly, children should be taught
:45:26. > :45:35.lane discipline and that sort of thing. There is bicycled all over
:45:36. > :45:36.
:45:36. > :45:42.I think they are doing that to some extent. There can be innovative
:45:42. > :45:47.ways that can change the whole of London, bit by bit. What should
:45:47. > :45:52.local London boroughs be doing - should there be segregation? It is
:45:52. > :45:56.a question of horses for courses, and different situations when
:45:56. > :46:02.applied in central London from in my patch in Bromley. I am keen to
:46:02. > :46:11.see more people cycling. Boris Johnson has invested 200 million in
:46:11. > :46:16.promoting cycling in London, he is more committed than anyone, he is a
:46:16. > :46:25.Daily cyclist himself. That roundabout was a black spot, a real
:46:25. > :46:33.problem for accidents in the past. Then there are only expects 5% of
:46:33. > :46:38.journeys to be made by bike by 2026. More households have got bikes,
:46:38. > :46:42.more cycle rides are taking place, more cycle journeys. We are
:46:42. > :46:48.starting from a different position to our European colleagues but we
:46:48. > :46:54.are going in the right direction. Thank you.
:46:54. > :46:59.For a round-up of the rest of the political news in London now, in 60
:46:59. > :47:03.seconds. There was only one story in town
:47:03. > :47:11.this week as the Queen celebrated her 60 years on the throne, but
:47:11. > :47:15.away from the pomp and ceremony, what was the political fall-out?
:47:15. > :47:20.Some stewards were forced to take shelter under London Bridge for
:47:20. > :47:24.part of the night. I didn't get any sleep on the night when we stayed
:47:24. > :47:30.under London Bridge. I did a full shift for them, the weather was
:47:30. > :47:35.terrible, the weather gear they supplied was no good. It was a
:47:35. > :47:39.poncho and high-visibility vest. There was an anti-monarchists
:47:39. > :47:43.protest outside City Hall. I am here to protest the unaccountable
:47:43. > :47:49.power of the ground, what it symbolises which is hereditary
:47:49. > :47:52.privilege, constitutional power that it still has. A on Jubilee
:47:52. > :47:57.breakdowns increased fears that the route which carries 600,000
:47:57. > :48:06.passengers a day will be unable to cope with the increased passenger
:48:06. > :48:11.load during the Olympics. Just before we go, Bob, looking at
:48:11. > :48:16.the images, unpaid job seekers left stranded under London Bridge
:48:16. > :48:20.overnight - that is not the image London wants to project? That was a
:48:20. > :48:24.logistical problem with that particular Contractor. They make
:48:24. > :48:29.that clear themselves, but the idea of getting people to volunteer and
:48:29. > :48:33.support the Olympics has got to be right, in the same way as giving
:48:33. > :48:39.people work experience has got to be a good thing. It is wrong to
:48:39. > :48:44.condemn a programme in these circumstances. This could be the
:48:44. > :48:49.sort of thing they will do in the Olympics, couldn't it? At the
:48:49. > :48:54.Olympics will be keen to work under the best possible standards. London
:48:54. > :48:57.will be meeting with millions of visitors, hopefully, and we want to
:48:57. > :49:01.have good stewarding. It is something that has a lot of
:49:01. > :49:05.attention from the people putting on the Olympics and I am sure you
:49:05. > :49:12.will see it professionally done. Are you reassured it was not
:49:12. > :49:15.exploitation? It was a logistical problem? I personally think we need
:49:15. > :49:20.a bit more reassurance. The government has got to do much more
:49:20. > :49:24.with contractors and with the mayor because to have sent that message
:49:24. > :49:30.to those who might be volunteering or helping with the Olympics that
:49:30. > :49:35.there is no guarantee for you is the wrong thing. Who is policing
:49:35. > :49:40.it? Who makes sure it won't happen? On a obviously the government is
:49:40. > :49:48.not running the Olympics, and it shouldn't be either. I listened to
:49:48. > :49:52.the ranting from John press -- John Prescott on the radio, which was
:49:52. > :49:57.very biased, but this is part of a bigger scheme to give young people
:49:57. > :50:03.the chance to volunteer. That is good but we want it done
:50:03. > :50:13.professionally, we agree about that. That is it from us this week. Just
:50:13. > :50:17.time to say thank you to our guests and I will be back on Monday.
:50:17. > :50:25.How will the Spanish bale-out go down? Which way will the Greeks
:50:25. > :50:28.vote? And will the Prime Minister's mind be on the euro crisis with the
:50:28. > :50:36.prospect of a grilling at the Leveson Inquiry? These are the
:50:36. > :50:45.questions for the week ahead. Welcome to the week ahead. You have
:50:45. > :50:50.the -- heard the interview with Stephen Twigg, what do you think to
:50:50. > :50:58.the policy? I thought he is in a difficult position, clearly a
:50:58. > :51:03.Blairite, but guess who was education secretary in 2010? It was
:51:03. > :51:09.Ed balls and he put the brakes on it so it is a difficult act. People
:51:09. > :51:13.are still not sure if he is in favour of free schools or against.
:51:13. > :51:17.The worst thing is it is really not his fault, it is a strategic
:51:17. > :51:24.failure on the part of the Labour party to decide whether they want
:51:24. > :51:29.to support what was originally their policy. The danger that this
:51:29. > :51:37.extends to public policy in general, they end up moving into that
:51:37. > :51:41.territory. What is Labour schools policy? For holding position is
:51:41. > :51:45.that we are not against free schools, we wouldn't change them,
:51:45. > :51:54.but we will not be bringing it in any more. Ed Miliband is against
:51:54. > :51:59.them. The party is divided on that, that is no secret. No not now?
:51:59. > :52:03.the Prime Minister came in, the junior minister under him in his
:52:03. > :52:07.department is Lisa Nandy, who has been very vocal against free
:52:07. > :52:13.schools in the past. Let's get on to this European business. Coming
:52:13. > :52:18.on to this Spanish bail-out in a minute, but the Chancellor said
:52:18. > :52:24.this morning that the economy is going belly-up and it is the euro's
:52:24. > :52:29.fault. Does that washed? For the time being it probably does. The
:52:29. > :52:39.defining argument until the next election will be out to interpret
:52:39. > :52:44.the eurozone crisis. George Osborne will argue it prevents us from
:52:44. > :52:51.growing, Ed Balls will argue that the areas eurozone countries are
:52:51. > :52:57.growing. Not many. Not many, but Germany is still growing. Do you
:52:57. > :53:01.think this can still work? Just to blame... We know the eurozone is a
:53:01. > :53:07.drag on the British economy, but to blame that for the total absence of
:53:07. > :53:13.growth, that is a hard stretch. am it seems to have a familiar ring.
:53:13. > :53:17.In 2000 date, Gordon Brown was saying we were the victims of a
:53:17. > :53:21.global economic slow down and the Conservatives said absolutely not.
:53:21. > :53:27.George Osborne and David Cameron have made a raw political decision.
:53:27. > :53:30.We go on about the Budget and water disaster was, but his big moment
:53:30. > :53:36.was the Autumn Statement when George Osborne admitted his entire
:53:36. > :53:46.economic strategy to front load the cuts, to get growth, is not working,
:53:46. > :53:51.and he will be prolonging the cuts for another two years. His alibi is
:53:51. > :53:55.the eurozone, but the eurozone is not in a recession. It is still at
:53:55. > :53:59.negative growth because Germany is holding it up. It is a difficult
:53:59. > :54:04.one to sustain. Labour is still well ahead in the polls, for quite
:54:04. > :54:10.a while now, and even if the eurozone is a drag on the British
:54:11. > :54:16.economy, this will still be a big opportunity for Labour. Both sides
:54:16. > :54:20.want to come across as Euro-sceptic. Going back to the point you made,
:54:20. > :54:25.we are also seeing George Osborne laying the ground for what I think
:54:25. > :54:29.will be an EU referendum, which I think will be inevitable now. The
:54:29. > :54:36.question will be what is the question, and George Osborne will
:54:36. > :54:41.not want the Yes No vote. He will wanted to be shall we agree to a
:54:41. > :54:48.new fiscal intervention scheme? But whether he can do that without his
:54:48. > :54:52.Tory backbenchers agreeing, I don't know. George Osborne has been
:54:52. > :54:56.saying we have this referendum lock so that if there is this transfer
:54:56. > :55:01.of power from the UK to the EU, there will be this referendum, but
:55:01. > :55:04.no one is talking about the transfer of power and if there was
:55:04. > :55:14.that transfer of power he would veto it so it is difficult to see
:55:14. > :55:15.
:55:15. > :55:20.the circumstances in which we would have a referendum. Let me move on.
:55:20. > :55:26.Leveson, will ever go away? Tomorrow we have David Cameron and
:55:26. > :55:31.George Osborne, then we have John Major, Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg,
:55:31. > :55:36.Alex Salmond, and then David Cameron on Thursday. Where do we
:55:36. > :55:39.begin? I think the big one will be David Cameron. He has faced a lot
:55:39. > :55:44.of questions about his Competency but this will be about his
:55:44. > :55:51.character, and there are a lot of questions he will need to answer
:55:51. > :55:57.about the BSkyB bid, Jeremy Hunt, and it will be massive. What is
:55:57. > :56:01.really interesting to watch out for is how many inquiries do you have
:56:01. > :56:05.where the participant is also the judge? The whole of the Leveson
:56:05. > :56:08.Inquiry will be reporting back to Jeremy Hunt, and David Cameron will
:56:08. > :56:14.be making a call on what has happened and it will be interesting
:56:14. > :56:18.to watch if he signals how much he will accept from Leveson. Gordon
:56:18. > :56:24.Brown will be interesting because there are a lot of questions to ask
:56:24. > :56:30.him. He was the slumber party man but David Cameron is the prime
:56:30. > :56:33.minister, everything else is history. Leveson does not sit their
:56:33. > :56:37.ready to machine gun the Prime Minister, it is genuinely a
:56:37. > :56:41.discovery process for him. I imagine one of the areas he will be
:56:41. > :56:47.interested in, and this has been picked up on the Dispatches
:56:47. > :56:53.documentary tomorrow night, but when David Cameron became part of
:56:53. > :56:58.the Conservative Party he said he would do things in a new way, and
:56:58. > :57:02.then in 2007 you have this falls fast. Why did you do that? There
:57:02. > :57:06.are basically panicked into 1007 won the right wing press turned
:57:06. > :57:10.against them, but Leveson will be keen to discover this narrow
:57:10. > :57:17.question of exactly what questions were asked of Andy Coulson before
:57:17. > :57:21.they hired him. Was he asked whether he was complicit about the
:57:21. > :57:24.degradations that happened at the News Of The World? Five years after
:57:24. > :57:29.his recruitment, we still know so little about that recruitment
:57:29. > :57:32.process. This will be limited by the fact there is a police inquiry
:57:32. > :57:37.going on, so the number of questions they can ask will be
:57:37. > :57:42.limited, and also with special participants date is, David Cameron
:57:43. > :57:49.can request reductions from that inquiry. Don't forget the
:57:49. > :57:54.significance of George Osborne's evidence. Initially he was only
:57:54. > :57:58.giving written evidence, now he will be appearing. What came up
:57:58. > :58:03.from the Jeremy Hunt evidence? He was basically deciding that Jeremy
:58:03. > :58:08.Hunt should get the new cause I judicial role. Quite embarrassing
:58:08. > :58:12.for the Chancellor. The big mystery is why, having made Andy Coulson
:58:13. > :58:18.the press secretary in opposition, he then took him into government?
:58:18. > :58:25.If he hadn't done that, it wouldn't be the issue it is today. Or that
:58:25. > :58:33.shock news, I have to end it. That is all for today. At noon on BBC