:00:45. > :00:49.Afternoon, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. An epic spat in
:00:49. > :00:54.the Commons with Tories queuing up to strangle Nick Clegg's plans to
:00:54. > :00:58.reform the Lords. This morning, the Prime Minister has appealed to
:00:58. > :01:03.backbenchers and coalition partners alike not to descend into division
:01:03. > :01:08.and navel-gazing. That is our top story.
:01:08. > :01:13.And an Olympic-sized fiasco over security for the Games. Who is for
:01:13. > :01:16.the high jump? Yvette Cooper is this week's Sunday interview.
:01:16. > :01:23.Our political panel of the best and brightest here every week to
:01:23. > :01:26.analyse British politics in The Week Ahead and tweeting with the
:01:26. > :01:30.speed of Usain Bolt throughout the programme.
:01:30. > :01:36.The Olympics are 12 days away. How will the London Transport programme
:01:36. > :01:40.code and what were the legacy be? How secure can we make the 2012
:01:40. > :01:46.Games? All of that coming up in the next
:01:46. > :01:50.hour but first the news. Many thanks. It has emerged that
:01:50. > :01:54.the Government was warned about problems with the G4S contract to
:01:54. > :02:02.provide security staff for the Olympics 10 months ago. Concerns
:02:02. > :02:06.were raised by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary. The
:02:06. > :02:10.Home Office insists that matters were resolved earlier this year.
:02:10. > :02:15.The questions keep coming for the security firm G4S. So they keep
:02:15. > :02:20.coming, too, for the Government. Who knew what and when? Could this
:02:20. > :02:24.problem have been spotted earlier and sorted out sooner? This is a
:02:24. > :02:30.disaster as far as people are concerned. It is almost threatening
:02:30. > :02:34.to spoil the party. What we need to do now is to pull together and make
:02:34. > :02:40.sure that they deliver the Games that everybody wants, the Greatest
:02:40. > :02:44.Show on Earth. No, insist ministers, this will not spoil the party or
:02:44. > :02:48.the Games. There was always a back- up plan to bring in more troops
:02:48. > :02:52.like these if there was a problem. The military were always going to
:02:52. > :02:56.have a significant role keeping us save at the Olympics, but that role
:02:56. > :02:59.is now rather bigger. The Government says this hitch is not
:02:59. > :03:04.that surprising given the scale of the Olympics but they were in the
:03:04. > :03:09.dark about G4S's failure to recruit enough staff until a couple of days
:03:09. > :03:13.ago. We of course have been monitoring the situation with G4S.
:03:13. > :03:18.Their management told us right up until last week that everything was
:03:18. > :03:21.on track. The moment that they didn't, we put in place a
:03:21. > :03:27.contingency plan, but we have had that plan for many months. We are
:03:27. > :03:32.very lucky to have fantastic armed services. Labour say that ministers
:03:32. > :03:37.have been complacent. The G4S there are more questions to come. Their
:03:37. > :03:41.chief executive will face MPs at Westminster on Tuesday.
:03:41. > :03:46.The Syrian Government has denied using tanks and helicopters in its
:03:46. > :03:49.assault on the village of Tremseh. UN inspectors are due to return to
:03:49. > :03:53.the area today to continue their investigations into what exactly
:03:53. > :03:57.happened. Our correspondent is in Beirut. The Syrian Government
:03:57. > :04:03.clearly putting up a strong defence of its actions this morning. That
:04:03. > :04:06.is right. Basically they are saying that this was a targeted attack on
:04:06. > :04:11.several buildings in the village used as bases by what they call
:04:11. > :04:14.terrorists, armed rebels in other words. That co-ordinates with what
:04:14. > :04:20.the UN observers of binding on the ground. After their first visit
:04:20. > :04:23.yesterday they reported it was a specific attack on opposition
:04:23. > :04:27.activists and not an all-out assault on the village killing
:04:27. > :04:31.civilians. Where there is a discrepancy is in the use of heavy
:04:31. > :04:35.weapons. The UN is sticking to its story that they have found evidence
:04:35. > :04:40.of mortars and artillery being fired into the village, presumably
:04:40. > :04:44.by Government forces, and the observers themselves last Thursday
:04:44. > :04:48.saw a helicopter firing into the village, obviously a Government
:04:48. > :04:53.helicopter. The Foreign Ministry spokesperson in Damascus, the
:04:53. > :05:00.Syrian official, insists absolutely that Syrian forces did not use
:05:00. > :05:07.tanks, artillery, anything happier than a rocket -- heavier than a
:05:07. > :05:11.rocket-propelled grenade which can be used by one man. That is
:05:11. > :05:15.contradictory to the UN observers' findings. Discrepancies. On the
:05:15. > :05:19.issue of a massacre, the UN account seems to be closer to that of the
:05:19. > :05:23.Syrian Government than it is to the activists on the ground, who said
:05:23. > :05:27.there was a big massacre of civilians. Thank you.
:05:27. > :05:32.Health trusts in the South West of England are considering imposing
:05:32. > :05:35.pay cuts of up to 5% on staff in a bid to cut costs. 19 cuts are
:05:35. > :05:39.suggesting changing the terms of conditions of doctors and nurses
:05:39. > :05:43.with the threat of being sacked and rehired on new contracts if they
:05:43. > :05:45.refuse. The trusts say they are looking at more flexible ways of
:05:45. > :05:51.rewarding staff and they would consult with trade unions before
:05:51. > :05:54.making changes. Amir Khan has lost his WBA and WBC
:05:54. > :05:59.light welterweight unification fight against Danny Garcia at in
:05:59. > :06:02.the early hours of this morning in Las Vegas. The fight was stopped in
:06:02. > :06:07.the 4th round after Amir Khan had been not to the floor three times.
:06:07. > :06:11.It is his second defeat in succession. -- knocked to the floor.
:06:11. > :06:15.There is more news on BBC One at 7:30pm.
:06:15. > :06:18.There are areas of profound differences between the
:06:18. > :06:22.Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, as David Cameron in this morning's
:06:22. > :06:25.Sunday Times said, as if we did not know. But he insists the coalition
:06:25. > :06:29.is the right answer for Britain in troubled times but this has not
:06:29. > :06:31.been a good week for coalition partners. The plans for Lords
:06:31. > :06:41.reform has were mugged in the Commons by a series of Tory
:06:41. > :06:41.
:06:41. > :06:44.backbenchers looking for a fight. The scars will take a while to heal.
:06:44. > :06:50.Monday, Nick Clegg presents his plan for reforming the House of
:06:50. > :06:57.Lords. But dedicated individuals cannot compensate for flawed
:06:57. > :07:02.institutions. This bill is about fixing a flawed institution. Behind
:07:02. > :07:08.the scenes, Tory rebels were mobilising. 70 signed a letter
:07:08. > :07:14.spelling out their objections, and what the Commons lose its power? He
:07:14. > :07:18.wants a bunch of politicians anyway and why now? -- who wants a new
:07:18. > :07:22.bunch? The Conservative whips applied the thumbscrews. I was
:07:22. > :07:29.certainly being worked very hard. Several conversations on several
:07:29. > :07:32.days including on the day of the vote. Several conversations about
:07:32. > :07:36.my own reasoning behind it, my future, all sorts of things, and
:07:36. > :07:41.that is their job. The arm-twisting was not enough. Just before 10
:07:41. > :07:44.o'clock on Tuesday night, the Commons voted on the plans. 91
:07:44. > :07:50.Conservatives rebelled, two of their ministerial aides who lost
:07:50. > :07:53.their jobs. Then the Government step back from the brick,
:07:54. > :07:57.withdrawing a programme motion, which is the bit of business that
:07:57. > :08:01.set the parliamentary timetable. The coalition were almost certain
:08:01. > :08:05.to lose the vote. In the House, the Prime Minister was losing his rag
:08:06. > :08:11.with one of his backbenchers, Jesse Norman, to the astonishment of
:08:11. > :08:16.those watching. He pointed his finger directly in Mr Norman's face.
:08:16. > :08:20.He was red-faced and very aggressive. Mr Norman clearly did
:08:20. > :08:24.not seem very happy but did not really respond adversely either. I
:08:24. > :08:29.thought he dealt with the situation terribly well actually. That gave
:08:29. > :08:34.Ed Miliband an opening at PMQs at midday on Wednesday. Mr Speaker,
:08:34. > :08:40.last night he lost control of his party and not for the first time.
:08:40. > :08:45.Not for the first time he lost his temper as well. A few hours later,
:08:45. > :08:51.David Cameron faced his party at the 1922 Committee of backbench MPs.
:08:51. > :08:54.Nick what of the Guardian had his ear to the door. Message number one
:08:54. > :08:57.was that we are going to have one last go at this and we are not
:08:57. > :09:02.going to go on about House of Lords reform for ever and then a second
:09:02. > :09:05.message was that we should have a smaller elected element. This is
:09:05. > :09:09.the George Osborne idea which she has been put into ministers, which
:09:09. > :09:12.would be removing the 92 remaining hereditary peers and in 2015 you
:09:12. > :09:16.would replace them with an elected element and that is all you would
:09:16. > :09:25.do this Parliament. The Lords is in limbo. A bit like relations between
:09:25. > :09:27.the Tories and the Lib Dems after this turbulent week.
:09:27. > :09:35.The Lib Dem man in the Foreign Office is Jeremy Browne and he
:09:35. > :09:37.joins us from Taunton. Good afternoon. What makes you think
:09:38. > :09:43.that Tory rebels will change their minds over Lords reform by
:09:44. > :09:48.September? Well, that is a conversation you should perhaps
:09:48. > :09:52.have with them and the Conservatives. Nick Clegg lead a
:09:52. > :09:57.completely unified party in the House of Commons to a majority of
:09:57. > :10:01.338, I think, on Tuesday evening, in favour of a largely elected
:10:01. > :10:03.democratic Parliament. In a way, the ball is in the Court of the
:10:03. > :10:09.Conservatives and Labour because they have been playing games with
:10:09. > :10:12.this legislation. They need to decide how they will take forward
:10:12. > :10:15.the will of Parliament as expressed on Tuesday evening. I have had that
:10:15. > :10:18.conversation with a number of Tory rebels and they have said they will
:10:18. > :10:25.not change their minds and they expect the rebellion to be even
:10:25. > :10:29.bigger next time because they have their bit between the -- their
:10:29. > :10:33.teeth. We have the coalition agreement, entered into three by
:10:33. > :10:37.the Lib Dems and the Conservatives. It is a contract of how we are
:10:37. > :10:40.going to go about the coalition Government together. It is not
:10:40. > :10:44.entirely conservative or entirely Liberal Democrat and it reflects
:10:44. > :10:47.the fact that neither party won the general election. You cannot have
:10:47. > :10:51.an approach where one party picks and chooses which bits of the
:10:51. > :10:55.agreement they are going to honour. It is a package of measures as a
:10:55. > :11:01.whole. I think the expectation should be that both parties will
:11:01. > :11:05.honour their side of the contract, their obligations. They should
:11:05. > :11:08.enact that overall package. If one party is reluctant about one part
:11:08. > :11:13.of the package, they have to address that issue seriously
:11:13. > :11:21.because, if you like, the ball is in their court. But my big
:11:21. > :11:25.message... Go on? I am grateful to you for letting me interrupt you.
:11:25. > :11:29.The Prime Minister is going to give it one last go, that is his exact
:11:29. > :11:32.wording. It is hardly fighting them on the beaches. If I was a rebel, I
:11:32. > :11:39.would think one last go and then it is over and I need to rebel one
:11:39. > :11:42.more time. I think the rebels on the Conservative benches need to
:11:42. > :11:45.remember that the Conservatives did not win the last general election
:11:45. > :11:50.so they are not in the business of an act in their manifesto in full
:11:50. > :11:57.and they have no mandate to act their manifesto in full. -- not in
:11:57. > :12:01.the business of connecting their manifesto in full. There has to be
:12:01. > :12:04.some give and take. There is a coalition Government between two
:12:04. > :12:08.distinct political parties, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats,
:12:08. > :12:13.and that agreement reflects the fact that no party won the general
:12:13. > :12:17.election. I think some Conservative backbenchers are behaving as though
:12:17. > :12:20.they won and no doubt they wish they had, but they did not. I wish
:12:20. > :12:24.the Lib Dems had won but we did not either. There is some give and take
:12:24. > :12:28.a both parties have to behave in a responsible, disciplined way.
:12:28. > :12:32.Coming back to my first point, on Tuesday night, the Liberal
:12:32. > :12:39.Democrats, Nick Clegg's party, which is a blend, aggressive and
:12:40. > :12:49.Kevin Rudd. You have made that point twice. -- Nick Clegg's party
:12:50. > :12:50.
:12:50. > :12:56.were disciplined, aggressive and co-ordinated. In this long article,
:12:56. > :13:02.David Cameron does not give a single word in favour of Lords
:13:02. > :13:06.reform and yet this is meant to be a rallying cry to the rebels.
:13:06. > :13:10.Jeremy Hunt saying that if it was up to him there would be 100%
:13:10. > :13:14.elected House of Lords. So there is a range of views. Is the Prime
:13:14. > :13:17.Minister's heart in it? I believe it is because he signed up to the
:13:17. > :13:22.coalition agreement as a whole and it is contained within the
:13:22. > :13:25.agreement. He voted along with me and an overwhelming majority of MPs
:13:25. > :13:31.on Tuesday evening for a democratised Parliament. Let me
:13:31. > :13:35.make this point. It is the crucial, underlying point. I strongly agree
:13:35. > :13:42.with the point that you are driving at. We need to make sure that in
:13:42. > :13:45.this country we have a coalition that is, if you like, well... The
:13:45. > :13:48.worst type of coalitions are where the parties cannot agree on
:13:48. > :13:51.anything and do nothing in particular. The best coalitions are
:13:51. > :13:58.where the parties are more than the sum of their parts and they bid
:13:58. > :14:02.reach other up, if you like, raised in the bar. It is good to have that
:14:02. > :14:06.mindset and good for Britain to have an optimistic and ambitious
:14:06. > :14:09.Government. That is the type of condition that we need to see. We
:14:09. > :14:13.do see it but we need to see it more than we do at the moment. If
:14:13. > :14:16.you like, the mentality for both parties should be what can we add
:14:16. > :14:19.and not what can we subtract from the coalition and that will be in
:14:19. > :14:23.the interest of the country as a whole. There we drag you back to
:14:23. > :14:26.what you can deliver. You stress that this is a coalition where we
:14:26. > :14:32.have to do things that we do not really like and they have to do
:14:32. > :14:39.things they do not really like. If House of Lords reform is dead, our
:14:39. > :14:43.boundary changes also dead? I am not sure that actually the
:14:43. > :14:48.Conservatives don't really like House of Lords reform. What is the
:14:48. > :14:52.answer to my question? Well, it was in their manifesto. David Cameron
:14:52. > :14:56.and George Osborne and William Hague and others voted on Tuesday
:14:56. > :15:01.evening for House of Lords reform. If House of Lords reform is dead,
:15:01. > :15:06.Jeremy Browne, would you still vote for boundary changes? I don't
:15:06. > :15:10.accept the premise of your question. It might be. I don't think it is a
:15:10. > :15:16.tit-for-tat arrangement. There is a package of arrangements and
:15:16. > :15:20.contained in it are a number of constitutional measured and you
:15:20. > :15:25.have mentioned two, including other measures, and we are enacting that
:15:25. > :15:31.package as a whole. For a sample, it directly-elected Police
:15:31. > :15:35.Commissioners, which was in the Conservative manifesto and not
:15:35. > :15:38.Liberal Democrat manifesto. -- for example. And in good faith we
:15:38. > :15:43.enacted that part of the agreement even though it is a Conservative
:15:43. > :15:49.policy. Might you still boat for boundary changes if you do not get
:15:49. > :15:53.Lords reform? -- vote. That is a hypothetical question. It is a good
:15:53. > :15:59.question. We have just had a massive majority in favour of House
:15:59. > :16:05.of Lords reform. It is only in Alice-in-Wonderland politics where
:16:05. > :16:08.it is called a disaster. No other country in the world looks at our
:16:08. > :16:11.House of Lords and things that is the model they want for their
:16:11. > :16:19.Parliament. We need to modernise it and have progressive change and
:16:19. > :16:23.that is what Parliament voted for David Cameron has already started
:16:23. > :16:26.to map out the outlines of what might be in the next Tory manifesto.
:16:26. > :16:31.Are you going to start doing that for the Liberal Democrats as well?
:16:31. > :16:33.Are you going to start going your separate ways before the May 2015
:16:33. > :16:40.election? Well we are less than half way through this Parliament.
:16:40. > :16:45.So, I think people can get aahead of themselves. We will not have a
:16:45. > :16:49.general election until May 2015. We are only in the summer of 2012. Of
:16:49. > :16:57.course we are separate parties the Liberal Democrats will have a
:16:57. > :17:03.separate manifesto and so will the Tories and the Labour Party. Is it
:17:03. > :17:05.helpful of the Prime Minister giving we would like to see in the
:17:05. > :17:11.Conservatives manifesto if he didn't have the Liberal Democrats
:17:11. > :17:15.around his neck. Well the Conservatives didn't win the last
:17:15. > :17:18.election. They may well not win a majority at the next general
:17:18. > :17:22.election or subsequent ones either. I point I make and I come back to
:17:22. > :17:26.it. The psychology of a successful coalition is that if I come with up
:17:27. > :17:30.a fantastic idea for, for example, education, what I think is best is
:17:30. > :17:34.if the coalition partner, rather than trying to water down my idea,
:17:34. > :17:38.comes back with a fantastic idea of their own. In other words we bid
:17:38. > :17:43.each other up and become more of the sum of our parts. We try to
:17:43. > :17:47.have a healthy competition which isn't about... Oh, we seem to have
:17:47. > :17:51.lost the line down it Taunton there, just as he was making a point. He
:17:51. > :17:55.had already made most of it before, I think we got the gist of what
:17:55. > :17:59.Jeremy Browne was saying. Thank you for joining us on the Sunday
:17:59. > :18:02.Politics. The current row about G4S and the security fiasco at the
:18:02. > :18:07.Olympics is a reminder if it is needed that being Home Secretary is
:18:07. > :18:10.one of the toughest jobs in British politics but my Sunday interview
:18:10. > :18:16.guest still wants the job. It may be one of the great offices of
:18:16. > :18:21.state but the Home Office is also a graveyard for ministerial careers.
:18:21. > :18:25.You've got to grip immigration. Over 3 million more people came to
:18:25. > :18:29.this country than left it under the last Labour Government. A policy
:18:29. > :18:34.they admit they got wrong. You have to run the police and keep law and
:18:34. > :18:38.order while the Chancellor tightens the purse strings. You have to pray
:18:38. > :18:42.prisoners don't leap the fence like they did under Home Secretary,
:18:42. > :18:46.mourpd and hope that queues don't swamp Heathrow or riots don't
:18:46. > :18:50.dominate the headlines as they did last summer. Perhaps most important
:18:50. > :18:54.of all, it is your responsibility to stop terrorists mounting the
:18:55. > :18:59.kind of attack on this country, the memory of which sends a shiver down
:18:59. > :19:08.our collective spine. The woman who wants that job is Labour's Yvette
:19:08. > :19:11.Cooper. She is my Sunday Interview. Let's try and find out what kind of
:19:11. > :19:14.Home Secretary you would make. Let's start with immigration,
:19:14. > :19:19.always a huge topic. Labour now says it was wrong on a number of
:19:19. > :19:22.things about immigration. So, specifically what would the
:19:22. > :19:26.immigration policies of Home Secretary Cooper be? Well you are
:19:26. > :19:30.right we have said that there were things we didn't get right,
:19:30. > :19:33.including we should have brought the points-based system in earlier
:19:33. > :19:38.and we should have had transitional controls around Eastern Europe we.
:19:38. > :19:42.Need to learn from that and look forward. So what would you do...
:19:42. > :19:46.Let's park all that. Some of the things we would concentrate on
:19:46. > :19:50.first of all is on illegal immigration. We know it is getting
:19:50. > :19:53.worse. For example there has been a nearly 20% reduction in the number
:19:53. > :19:57.of illegal migrants being stopped at Heathrow as rault of the
:19:57. > :20:03.downgrading of security checks last year. -- as a result. We know there
:20:03. > :20:06.is a 20% reduction in the number of foreign criminals dedeported. A
:20:06. > :20:14.starting point for any system, if it is going to be fair, the rules
:20:14. > :20:19.need to be be enforced. You need foreign db -- proper enforcement.
:20:19. > :20:23.And a guy who raped a 12-year-old girl is in the news this morning,
:20:23. > :20:26.from Sudan, he can not be deported because of your Human Rights Act.
:20:26. > :20:30.don't note cases. We have said there is more action that needs to
:20:30. > :20:34.be taken on foreign criminals but it has got worse in the last 12
:20:34. > :20:38.months. Since the election there is a reduction in the number being
:20:38. > :20:42.deported not actually because of the courts but because the Borders
:20:42. > :20:45.Agency is not teaking illegal immigration seriously or
:20:45. > :20:50.enforcement and is not getting the bureaucracy right. The Home
:20:50. > :20:55.Secretary took a decision to cut 5,000 staff from the Borders Agency,
:20:55. > :20:58.putting huge pressure on. We are seeing it in what is happening at
:20:58. > :21:03.Heathrow. Let's look at legal I will graigs before any cuts in the
:21:03. > :21:08.borders. When you came to power there were just under 50,000 net
:21:08. > :21:12.migration coming into this country. By the time you left office it had
:21:12. > :21:17.risen to over 250,000 a year, net, coming in.
:21:17. > :21:21.Looking at that, did you let too many people in? I think what you
:21:21. > :21:26.saw was a huge increase in travel and trade, right across the world.
:21:27. > :21:30.So you saw comparable increases in migration in most other western
:21:30. > :21:34.European countries and most other in fact major western economies.
:21:34. > :21:38.But we have said we should have had the points-based system in
:21:38. > :21:42.earlier... You opposed the when the Tories proposed the in the 2005
:21:42. > :21:46.election. We introduced it but we should have introduced it earlier.
:21:46. > :21:50.Did you let too many in? skilled migration I think has been
:21:50. > :21:54.too high for some years. It does need to come down and that's why -
:21:54. > :21:59.it is why we brought the points- based system in but I think it
:21:59. > :22:02.needed to be tightened further. you did let too many people in?
:22:02. > :22:06.have to lock at different kifpbdz migration. I understand that. I
:22:06. > :22:13.will come on to the different times in a minute but overall did you let
:22:13. > :22:16.too many in? Start for the different kinds. It matters. Low
:22:16. > :22:20.skilled migration was too high we. Should have brought in a points-
:22:20. > :22:24.based system and also the level of migration from Eastern Europe was
:22:24. > :22:28.higher than we would have wanted. We didn't get the assessment of the
:22:28. > :22:31.figures right at the time. I don't think however it was wrong to have
:22:31. > :22:33.an an increase in legitimate foreign graduate students who are
:22:33. > :22:37.coming to Britain to our universities and bringing billions
:22:37. > :22:41.of pounds into our universities as well. It is important to recognise.
:22:41. > :22:45.You can't just treat all migration as the same. That's what the
:22:45. > :22:49.government is doing and their approach isn't working.
:22:49. > :22:52.understand that. I'm still not if you think we let too many. In let's
:22:52. > :22:57.look at the gross migration, the breakdown in figures. The last year
:22:57. > :23:03.you were in power. 9 3thourd Brits came become into the country. You
:23:03. > :23:09.will not stop them coming back. -- 93,000 Brits. 176,000 from the
:23:09. > :23:17.European Union. We can't stop them coming. In it is not an Irish this
:23:17. > :23:25.morning but 3 22,000, by far the biggest bulk came from outside the
:23:25. > :23:29.EU. That is in our control. Would you support this number? We have
:23:29. > :23:34.supported proposals that the government has proposed.
:23:34. > :23:37.That reduces the number. You would reduce that. In You want to reduce
:23:37. > :23:41.low skilled migration. Because that affects such a large proportion, it
:23:41. > :23:45.does have an impact on the overall level as well. So if you would
:23:45. > :23:50.reduce that, can you give us any kind of ballpark then of what you,
:23:50. > :23:55.as Home Secretary, would regard as a proper level of net migration.
:23:55. > :23:59.You left us with 250,000 coming neverry year. What would you aim
:23:59. > :24:02.for? We have said issues around controls, targets, caps and limits
:24:02. > :24:06.is something we need to do considerable work on as a result.
:24:06. > :24:12.Give me a figure. I think it is important we do this in a serious
:24:12. > :24:15.and steady way. The Government has picked out a ballpark figure.
:24:15. > :24:19.etrying not to interrupt you but I am. I'm not interested in the
:24:19. > :24:22.Government. I'm interested in you. For someone who has apologised for
:24:22. > :24:27.previous immigration policy I'm trying to get a rough idea of what
:24:27. > :24:31.you think in the 21st century, a net migration ballpark figure
:24:31. > :24:35.should be, what is it? Sure. The Government did what you are asking
:24:35. > :24:39.me to do now. To pick a figure out of thin air. David Cameron did that.
:24:39. > :24:43.He said he wanted to reduce net migration from 250,000 to the tens
:24:43. > :24:48.of thousands. In fact that hasn't worked. As a result... You can't
:24:48. > :24:51.give me faiing. We haven't seen the net migration figure changing and
:24:51. > :24:55.also the condition sequence of what he is doing by bundling up net
:24:55. > :24:59.migration, as you are asking me to do, is instead to end up trying to
:25:00. > :25:02.cut the number of serious graduate students. I don't think your
:25:02. > :25:06.apology will count for much among viewers if you can't give us an
:25:06. > :25:09.idea of what you think the scale of immigration should be. Well you
:25:09. > :25:13.know what you are asking me to do is you are asking me to do what the
:25:13. > :25:16.Government has done and that isn't working. I think you should look
:25:16. > :25:19.separately for example at what is happening with students, you should
:25:20. > :25:22.look separately at what is happening with low skill migration
:25:22. > :25:27.and particularly, there is a whole lot of immigration which doesn't
:25:27. > :25:32.even count in the Government's net migration figure that you want to
:25:32. > :25:35.target. For example, student visitor visas and student visitor
:25:35. > :25:39.visas are going up. It is not included in the Government's
:25:39. > :25:43.figures and they are not foe cousin on that. On crime and prisons and
:25:43. > :25:47.crime, would you be a David Blunkett Labour Home Secretary or a
:25:47. > :25:55.Roy Jenkins Labour Home Secretary? Well I think the approach that we
:25:55. > :25:59.took in fact... What would you be? We said tough on crime and the
:25:59. > :26:05.causes of crime. That's the awere proch that David and Tony Blair
:26:05. > :26:10.took and a series of Labour Home Secretaries took. It has worked. We
:26:10. > :26:14.had crime fall. It fell everywhere in Europe and America. If I had
:26:14. > :26:18.promised new 1997 that crime would fall by 40% you would not have
:26:18. > :26:23.believed a word of it. It did happen. It was as a result of the
:26:23. > :26:27.approach we took. I'm trying to get you to look forward not backwards.
:26:27. > :26:31.Bear with me it, a thing we journalists have. I'm trying to
:26:31. > :26:35.work out what you would do. Let me show you what your leader says. You
:26:35. > :26:40.said when Ken Clarke says we need to look at short sentences in
:26:40. > :26:45.prison because of high reoffending rates, I'm not going say he's soft
:26:45. > :26:50.on crime. Every time the Tories do something, you come at them from
:26:50. > :26:56.the right. Even the Justice Secretary said
:26:56. > :27:01.they are taking risks with public safety. You have to look at
:27:01. > :27:05.community sentences, where they work and what you can do to prevent
:27:05. > :27:09.reoffending. Is your leader right in saying that high reoffending
:27:09. > :27:14.means we have to look at short sentences or is Sadiq Khan, your
:27:14. > :27:19.Justice Secretary right, in saying that the Justice Secretary are
:27:19. > :27:24.taking risks. They are both right. How can they both be right? Some of
:27:24. > :27:26.the things Ken Clarke wanted to do, he wanted to end up, I think it was
:27:26. > :27:30.substantially reducing rape sentences. I don't think that is
:27:30. > :27:34.the right thing to do. I think that is Ken Clarke getting the balance
:27:34. > :27:39.wrong. There are o areas of course where you want to prevent
:27:39. > :27:42.reoffending but I do think the Home Secretary is taking a huge risk by
:27:42. > :27:46.cutting 60,000 police officers. you to the right of the claerning?
:27:46. > :27:51.It is much too is impistic to talk like that. To the right of Ken
:27:51. > :27:56.Clarke. I think it is much too simplistic. Let's come on to G4S,
:27:56. > :28:04.it is one of these periodic nightmares that hits the Home
:28:04. > :28:07.Office. Would hole secretary Cooper ever high G4S again? They do look
:28:07. > :28:10.like a complete shower at the moment. It is shocking what they
:28:10. > :28:17.would have dob. You have to have an awful lot of scepticism about their
:28:17. > :28:21.ability to deliver a CI think it is not just about G4S. Serve working
:28:21. > :28:26.to deliver the Olympics, fantastic works have gone on with the venues.
:28:26. > :28:30.It is not just about G4S letting the country down. Why on earth did
:28:30. > :28:33.the Home Office not know what is happening. And wait to the last
:28:33. > :28:37.minute. It is utter incompetence. I'm not sure if you answer mied
:28:37. > :28:41.question. It was you, the Labour Government that made G4S rich. I
:28:41. > :28:47.have a list of contracts you gave them. I see the boss, who is now
:28:47. > :28:51.touring the studios ised paid almost �1 million a year with �5
:28:51. > :28:56.million of share options. Sounds like a banker. You made them rich.
:28:56. > :29:00.Would you ever employ them again? Public-private partnerships can be
:29:00. > :29:03.effective. You wouldn't expect me to set what the framework would be
:29:03. > :29:07.for every individual contract. asking whether you would use them
:29:07. > :29:12.again. I would certainly not want to be contracting out core public
:29:12. > :29:16.policing to them, which is what the Government has been forcing police
:29:16. > :29:21.forces to. You wouldn't let anybody do that. You are right. You
:29:21. > :29:25.shouldn't be contracting out policing It is a big mistake.
:29:25. > :29:28.want to move over to Lords reform. Briefly. I think the Government,
:29:28. > :29:33.the Home Secretary has serious questions to answer. She has not
:29:33. > :29:36.yet explained whether she is on top of what is happening with the G4S
:29:37. > :29:41.number of staff and the volunteers and also how on earth could they
:29:41. > :29:44.not know with what it looks like now, that they were actually
:29:44. > :29:48.advised in the autumn. If the Home Secretary was here, what was the
:29:48. > :29:52.number one question would you ask: Is she in control of it now. Do we
:29:52. > :29:55.now know that there won't be any additional police or troops needed,
:29:55. > :29:59.and secondly, how could she possibly have not known, even as
:30:00. > :30:03.late as Monday of last week, she was saying she was confident it was
:30:03. > :30:08.going to be all right. Final question on Lords reform in our
:30:08. > :30:11.last mib. Labour says it is in favour of an elected second chamber.
:30:11. > :30:14.Every major constitutional change passed by the last Labour
:30:14. > :30:20.Government required a programme timetable a limit on the debate.
:30:20. > :30:24.Why not - why don't you vote for one on this Lords reform. We voted
:30:24. > :30:28.for the bill. We didn't vote for the programme motion. Only ten days
:30:28. > :30:33.deaf bait which would have allowed the Government to force through
:30:34. > :30:42.bits of the bill that needed to be amended. You only gave eight days
:30:42. > :30:43.to Scottish devolution, seven days to the Welsh Assembly, twodys to
:30:43. > :30:47.day we talked about earlier, did you that in four-and-a-half days.
:30:47. > :30:50.You could argue about the number of days but why not vote for some kind
:30:50. > :30:54.of timetable if you are in favour of it. Bnch before these time
:30:54. > :30:58.tables were brought. In I was in Parliament then and we managed to
:30:58. > :31:01.get legislation through it. Requires the Government to talk to
:31:01. > :31:04.us about each stage and we have said we'll work with them to Mick
:31:04. > :31:08.sure it gets through Parliament if the Government will work with us to
:31:08. > :31:12.do that but it needs to be amended. That's why we had to say this about
:31:12. > :31:16.the timetable motion it, would not have allowed us to be able to amend
:31:16. > :31:25.the bill in the way we need but we need it to get through to have
:31:25. > :31:30.House of Lords reform. Have a good You are watching Sunday Politics.
:31:30. > :31:37.Coming up next 20 minutes, I will be looking at the week ahead with
:31:37. > :31:41.our Sunday panel. Until then, the Sunday Politics across the UK.
:31:41. > :31:45.Hello and welcome to the London part of Sunday Politics. Joining me
:31:45. > :31:49.for the next 20 minutes, shadow Olympics minister Tessa Jowell, the
:31:49. > :31:58.Labour member for West Dulwich and West Norwood, and the Conservative
:31:58. > :32:02.MP for Beckenham and member of the Defence Select Committee. There is
:32:02. > :32:06.only one story in London, not the rain, the Olympics. Londoners were
:32:07. > :32:11.always promised that the additional cost of the Games would just be 38p
:32:11. > :32:14.for the average household per week. We have been paying that for over
:32:14. > :32:18.six years. Opinions are still divided on whether that was value
:32:18. > :32:22.for money. As Hugh Robertson has been telling us, there are areas
:32:22. > :32:27.where exactly what Londoners can expect in return for that sum of
:32:27. > :32:32.money has yet to be decided. I know not everybody likes this analogy,
:32:32. > :32:38.but what we are talking about here per week, you cannot even buy a
:32:38. > :32:46.Walnut whip for 38p. I was tempted to bring one! If you buy one of
:32:46. > :32:52.them once a week for 10 years, do you want that or the spent of the
:32:52. > :32:57.Olympic Games? This is what it has cost. The average London house sold
:32:57. > :33:01.has had to go one extra sugary treat less for the sake of hosting
:33:01. > :33:08.the Olympic Games. The deal was signed off by a Labour Government
:33:08. > :33:15.and Labour Mayor. Would this cost gusting minister prefer it to have
:33:15. > :33:18.been cheaper? -- cost-cutting minister. I would not. The then
:33:18. > :33:22.Government look that the Games and the possibilities that came to this
:33:22. > :33:26.country as a result of staging the Games, and I wish they had done
:33:26. > :33:29.more with them. That was when the plans were for a larger scale,
:33:29. > :33:34.regeneration of Stratford and the other things. That is when that
:33:34. > :33:37.came about. The centrepiece of that investment, the half a billion
:33:37. > :33:41.pound Olympic Stadium, still without a permanent tenants sorted
:33:41. > :33:43.for after the Games. It may be too early to judge whether it
:33:43. > :33:47.represents good value or perhaps whether Londoners would have
:33:47. > :33:50.preferred to spend their cash on something else. There have been
:33:50. > :33:55.some well-publicised problems over the stadium, principally because we
:33:55. > :33:58.have had too many people wanting to get into it and not too few. That
:33:58. > :34:01.is what caused the delay and I think we will get over that and I'm
:34:01. > :34:07.completely sure we will deliver a mixed-use communities stadium with
:34:07. > :34:11.football at its heart after the Games. It sounds like they might be
:34:11. > :34:19.some news coming soon? There may very well be but that depends on
:34:19. > :34:22.the good negotiations. Before the Games? That depends on the
:34:22. > :34:27.negotiations. It is well known that lots of people are interested in
:34:27. > :34:30.being part of the Olympic Stadium. It is a fantastic facility. We have
:34:30. > :34:34.already got the World Athletics Championships coming to London in
:34:34. > :34:37.2017, which we secured last year. We had lots of communities
:34:37. > :34:41.interested in using it around the stadium. I would like to add a
:34:41. > :34:44.football club to that and it would be the icing on the cake. I am
:34:44. > :34:48.confident that will happen but we cannot make an announcement before
:34:48. > :34:55.the Games possibly. But we could have that used? Possibly but
:34:55. > :34:59.probably not. -- but we could have that news? Possibly but probably
:34:59. > :35:04.not. You can never guarantee anything, but we will be pretty
:35:04. > :35:07.sure that it will open again in 2014 on time. On the subject of
:35:07. > :35:11.certainty, could there be any room for manoeuvre on the highly
:35:11. > :35:17.controversial Games lanes designed to let at Leeds and sponsors was
:35:17. > :35:21.around London while we, the people paying for it, sit next to them? --
:35:21. > :35:24.athletes and sponsors. The best advice to anybody travelling in
:35:24. > :35:29.London, if you are thinking of driving into central London, please
:35:29. > :35:32.do not. If it was complete gridlock on the whole of London grinds to a
:35:32. > :35:38.halt then nobody can move anywhere. I don't think that will happen, by
:35:38. > :35:41.the way, but you would be foolish not to look at the worst case
:35:41. > :35:45.scenario. So there are varying mixtures of excitement and bread.
:35:45. > :35:51.By the end of the summer, opinions may have changed about whether it
:35:51. > :35:54.was all worth it or not. Tessa Jowell, are you alarmed by
:35:54. > :36:00.the recent travel problems, particularly looking at the M4 and
:36:00. > :36:03.the rehearsals at the key London stations that did not go very well.
:36:03. > :36:08.First of all, I do not think it is fair to say they did not go very
:36:08. > :36:12.well. The M4 has now reopened. has, surprisingly! The fact is that
:36:12. > :36:16.these problems will arise and we have to brace ourselves for more
:36:16. > :36:20.difficulties in the days before the opening ceremony. The important
:36:20. > :36:25.thing is the unity of purpose to address those problems and sold
:36:25. > :36:28.them. When you say more problems, what are you thinking of? I cannot
:36:28. > :36:38.be of anything worse than a crack on the M4, the main route from
:36:38. > :36:41.Heathrow air court. -- I cannot think of anything worse. We have to
:36:41. > :36:46.manage the problems rather than going into meltdown and assuming
:36:46. > :36:51.nobody can do anything about them. We have an expert team at LOCOG and
:36:51. > :36:56.Transport for London managing this. It is our job to give confidence to
:36:56. > :37:00.that, not to... OK, are you confident? What about the transport
:37:00. > :37:04.system itself, grinding to a halt? That was the question put to the
:37:04. > :37:08.minister. Well, I do not think it will but if it does we will get
:37:08. > :37:12.through it and that is the end of it. We have got to sort it. It was
:37:12. > :37:15.not designed for the Olympic Games and it was designed for London 100
:37:16. > :37:19.years ago. We have adapted it and it will be adapted again and things
:37:19. > :37:24.will go wrong and people will complaint and other people will
:37:24. > :37:29.have a magic journey. And that will happen. If it does grind to a halt,
:37:29. > :37:32.perhaps not literally, then should people consider it suspending the
:37:32. > :37:37.restrictions on the roads and people could use those specific
:37:37. > :37:42.claims? That is the kind of sensible, last ditch strategic
:37:42. > :37:48.planning. That will be a decision under gold command for the police,
:37:48. > :37:52.at Transport for London, and the Mayor. Let them take those
:37:52. > :37:56.decisions. These are not things that have not occurred to them. Of
:37:56. > :37:59.course they have thought of them. But he would be in breach of the
:37:59. > :38:05.deal signed with the Olympic Committee that those loans would be
:38:05. > :38:08.kept empty and designated for those people. -- those lanes. But if you
:38:08. > :38:12.have a crisis you have to manage the crisis and create a solution.
:38:12. > :38:15.Of course the Olympic Committee would be party to any of that but
:38:15. > :38:25.they want as much as anybody else for the Games to be a fantastic
:38:25. > :38:27.
:38:27. > :38:32.success. Absolutely. You can take possibility to the very limit of
:38:32. > :38:41.what is likely. That is what the test events have done. The test
:38:41. > :38:44.days, at what Network Rail did, all to try and identify where the
:38:44. > :38:49.weaknesses are and be in a position to address them if they do arrive
:38:49. > :38:52.in real time. One of the problems of the strikes, the bus drivers
:38:52. > :38:59.trying to strike a deal over bonus payments. What do you say to them
:38:59. > :39:03.because that has not been resolved? Perhaps they could think about the
:39:03. > :39:08.military, should they get a bonus? They will not get a bonus and they
:39:08. > :39:12.will be delighted to come in and sort out the problem. Quite frankly,
:39:12. > :39:17.I asked the bus drivers to stop. We have to make this a great event.
:39:17. > :39:21.Sort it out as fast as possible. absolutely agree with that. I am on
:39:21. > :39:26.the record as saying there should be no strikes during the Olympics.
:39:26. > :39:29.So should they pay the bonus? the most important thing is to get
:39:29. > :39:33.round the table and negotiate. My understanding is that there is
:39:33. > :39:36.money on the table to fund the bonus. The whole thing has got to
:39:36. > :39:41.be done fairly between the different elements of Transport
:39:41. > :39:46.personnel. But there should be no strikes. Moving on from Transport
:39:46. > :39:50.to legacy, which is very important. One London won the bid it was a
:39:50. > :39:55.different economic climate. Knowing what we know now, could be Games
:39:55. > :39:58.have been done for less money, should have been done for less?
:39:58. > :40:08.It would not have been worth spending money on building venues
:40:08. > :40:09.
:40:10. > :40:13.without regenerating the park in which the venues sit. You could not
:40:13. > :40:19.have done anything if you had not invested in washing the soil,
:40:19. > :40:23.levelling it, dealing with waterlogging. Now there will be
:40:23. > :40:29.2800 homes after the Games and another 7500 to come. A new
:40:29. > :40:38.community for London. Do hundred and 50 sweet treats, a price worth
:40:38. > :40:43.paying? -- at 250. Some people will say no. I say yes. Quite frankly we
:40:43. > :40:46.are going to have a fantastic event. It will showcase London and it will
:40:47. > :40:52.be a world-class event. We will show that this country may well be
:40:52. > :40:55.in the doldrums at the moment but it can still put on a class act.
:40:55. > :40:59.you regret that we have got to the Olympics happening in a matter of
:40:59. > :41:03.weeks and no idea what the stadium will be used for in the future?
:41:03. > :41:07.Should that have been sorted out so we know what that legacy would be?
:41:07. > :41:11.Well, they are trying to sort it out. Seven years? These things are
:41:11. > :41:15.not as easy as that. Seven years since like a long time but equally
:41:15. > :41:20.it will be sorted out and I hope very much they will get someone to
:41:20. > :41:23.occupy it and use it to maximum capacity. Can we look at the other
:41:23. > :41:26.side of that assertion? Six out of eight venues have got their long-
:41:26. > :41:30.term tenants which has never happened in any other Olympics city.
:41:30. > :41:34.Tell me about an Olympic city that before the Games is so advanced
:41:34. > :41:41.that they have settled the legacy of the stadium as we are? But your
:41:41. > :41:46.idea was not taken up in the end. Which? He wanted to party bring it
:41:46. > :41:52.down and then rebuild it. I think it will be. It will not be and
:41:52. > :41:58.85,000 seater stadia because who needs that? What about imminent
:41:58. > :42:01.news? We could expect an announcement before the Games.
:42:01. > :42:05.not party to that, but the sooner the better and in the autumn I
:42:05. > :42:10.think we will know who will be there in the longer term. All right.
:42:10. > :42:14.It emerged that G4S the private company hired to provide security
:42:14. > :42:20.for the Games failed to train at the workers as promised and the
:42:20. > :42:22.army have been called in to fill the gap. This is what Theresa May
:42:22. > :42:26.said in the House of Commons to explain. We were receiving
:42:26. > :42:32.assurances from G4S until very recently and the gap in the numbers
:42:32. > :42:35.was only crystallised finally yesterday. Because we have been
:42:35. > :42:42.monitoring this, we had had discussions with the minister of
:42:42. > :42:47.defence about whether there would be availability of troops. -- the
:42:47. > :42:51.Ministry of Defence. And that is why yesterday we were able to take
:42:51. > :42:57.that decision, having prudently been making those discussions and
:42:57. > :43:03.contingency arrangements. Joining us from Westminster, Margaret
:43:03. > :43:07.Gilmore from the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and
:43:07. > :43:13.Security Studies. Now we know that 3500 soldiers on their way to shore
:43:13. > :43:16.up the shortfall and security staff, is that a shock for you? What a
:43:17. > :43:21.fiasco. The military were asking what do you need and what can we
:43:21. > :43:25.give you? We know that all the specialists stuff around the
:43:25. > :43:29.sailing and in the Thames and the big military hardware that we have
:43:29. > :43:33.seen, we know about that, but we also know that our troops a bridge
:43:33. > :43:39.at logistics but they were kept away. Then a small number have come
:43:39. > :43:43.in. -- our troops are brilliant at logistics. Then finally they have
:43:43. > :43:47.been brought in. His security compromised? Of course not, if
:43:47. > :43:53.anything they will do a better job. The ball might feel more
:43:53. > :43:56.comfortable. I will just put that question to Bob Stewart. 3500
:43:56. > :44:01.troops have been drafted in two weeks before the Games start. That
:44:01. > :44:05.is a big ask. It is a big ask and clearly it was a shambles for G4S
:44:05. > :44:08.and they have made a big mistake and I hope they will pay for that.
:44:08. > :44:12.Shouldn't the Government have known? Theresa May said the
:44:12. > :44:19.Government have reassurances but it does not sound convincing. Why did
:44:19. > :44:23.they not know about the short for? The answer is that I do not know. I
:44:23. > :44:26.suspect it was hidden by G4S. When the Government found out, I am
:44:26. > :44:29.quite sure that they started ringing alarm bells immediately.
:44:30. > :44:33.The military have been put on standby and they are being used.
:44:33. > :44:37.That is what they have to do and what the military are there for. As
:44:37. > :44:41.I said earlier, it would be jolly nice if they could get a bonus, but
:44:41. > :44:45.they will not. What about other contingency plans coming into
:44:45. > :44:49.force? The key thing about the military is that these people are
:44:49. > :44:55.going to come in and they will do the simple task that they will do
:44:55. > :45:00.very well of speeding long queues in securely. Checking bags and
:45:00. > :45:03.getting people through and doing the perimeter work. I think the
:45:03. > :45:08.contingencies in place for other eventualities are in a different
:45:08. > :45:15.sphere. I think they all stand up. I have never seen anything like the
:45:15. > :45:19.type of security that we have got that these Games. We rings of steel
:45:19. > :45:24.around it. And there has been a spate of arrests not just in London.
:45:24. > :45:27.Is that a taste of things to come? Normally if intelligence agencies
:45:27. > :45:29.are suspicious about people then they put them under surveillance
:45:29. > :45:34.for a long time to get enough evidence to prove there is a plot
:45:34. > :45:38.and put them through the courts. I think the politicians have
:45:38. > :45:40.absolutely zero tolerance of taking any risk on security, so if
:45:41. > :45:44.somebody falls under suspicion, they are being arrested and if
:45:44. > :45:47.there is not enough evidence to put them through the courts, at least
:45:47. > :45:50.if there was something going on then it would have been disrupted
:45:50. > :46:00.and the message has been said that they have been clocked and they
:46:00. > :46:01.
:46:01. > :46:05.Tessa Jowell, what do you say about that? Well militarisation, yes,
:46:05. > :46:09.heavy-handed security, yes, heavy- handed policing, yes. So, that's
:46:09. > :46:14.why I think the aim throughout, is certainly in all the discussions I
:46:14. > :46:17.have been party to, is to ensure security, surveillance, the action
:46:17. > :46:23.to protect the Games is proportionate, so that people are
:46:23. > :46:26.able to enjoy Games, which is safe, and secure, but as I say, doesn't
:46:27. > :46:31.feel as if we've suddenly been invaded. One of the things I think
:46:31. > :46:36.we do owe, however, is a great debt of gratitude to these soldiers who
:46:36. > :46:42.are coming back, many of them from active deployment to take on this
:46:42. > :46:48.responsibility. And as Richard... With a promise of tickets? I hope
:46:48. > :46:52.so, at least, at least some tickets. Or give their families tickets.
:46:52. > :46:57.hope people will thank them. Margaret gill Moroccans another
:46:57. > :47:04.issue that could be a problem with protests, leading up to the games.
:47:04. > :47:10.Dr Margaret Gilmore, another issue could be protests. Is that a
:47:10. > :47:13.difficult issue? Well unless things go pear-shaped, the UK was critical
:47:13. > :47:18.during Beijing of the way things were handled so we can't do the
:47:18. > :47:22.same and come down in a heavy- handed way, however we cannot have
:47:22. > :47:26.the situation where we had last summer where we had major rioting
:47:26. > :47:30.because where you are moving large crowds of people around, if you
:47:30. > :47:34.start getting in the way of that and start getting panic amongst the
:47:34. > :47:37.crowds, then off doubly worse security situation. So there will
:47:37. > :47:41.be protests, but any hibit of violence, I think they will come
:47:41. > :47:46.down heavy handedly and they are watching people coming in from
:47:46. > :47:50.abroad, known protesters, and we have we have seen terrorist arrests
:47:51. > :47:54.we are also seeing people who are known to protest violently, who are
:47:54. > :47:58.being arrested and given little messages that way. Bob Stewart are
:47:58. > :48:03.you reassured, confident, from a security point of view, we will all
:48:03. > :48:06.be fine. It'll all be fine but I have one word of caution, we will
:48:06. > :48:11.find things that will happen that we haven't expected. That's the way
:48:11. > :48:15.of the world and that is why, as Tessa has said, we have got a
:48:15. > :48:18.pretty good organisation to be flexible and, for example, if
:48:18. > :48:21.necessary, with approval, use Olympic lanes, we will get the best
:48:21. > :48:31.way forward. Thank you very much. Nue, look at the rest of the news
:48:31. > :48:35.in 60 seconds. -- now a look at the rest of the news in 60 seconds.
:48:35. > :48:41.With fears the Olympic flame might be doused with a are iny forecast
:48:41. > :48:46.for week one, organise remembers drawing up continge Icy plans,
:48:46. > :48:52.including orderering thousands of plastic ponchos. Worryingly for the
:48:52. > :48:55.Games 27 planners. M4 was closed for repair. The motorway will
:48:55. > :48:59.become part of the Olympic route network on Monday with one lane on
:48:59. > :49:04.each carriageway reserved for competitors, officials and sponsors.
:49:04. > :49:08.In east London residents lost their appeal to have the anti-terrorist
:49:08. > :49:11.ground to air missiles deployed on the roof of their tower block
:49:11. > :49:14.removed. He helped win the Olympics and
:49:14. > :49:20.three general elections for the Labour Party but now Tony Blair is
:49:20. > :49:25.back, advising opposition leader Ed Miliband, on the Games, Sporting
:49:25. > :49:29.and Economic legacy. Braving the llts, a cheeky streaker in Henley
:49:30. > :49:35.jumped on the Olympic bandwagon, armed only with a replica
:49:35. > :49:39.artificial torch. So, is it the weather we are going
:49:39. > :49:42.to have to worry about more than anything else? Listen, with an
:49:42. > :49:45.event on this size and scale you worry about everything. If you
:49:45. > :49:49.worry about everything, you are prepared for whatever arises.
:49:49. > :49:55.can't do anything about the weather. Wouldn't a roof have been a good
:49:55. > :49:59.idea? No.. Why not? Would you like knee spend half an hour. You have
:49:59. > :50:03.about a minute. Like Wimbledon they have done well with their roof.
:50:03. > :50:09.there are very clear rules about how Olympic and world records are
:50:09. > :50:14.set in track and field. And there is a roof, two-thirds of the
:50:14. > :50:17.stadium is covered, and it's been designed precisely to ensure that
:50:17. > :50:23.any record set is valid. So as long as you are not in this thaird where
:50:23. > :50:26.it is uncovered. Then you want your plastic poncho. Do you think they
:50:26. > :50:31.should have done a bit more. We have had a freak Sumner terms of
:50:31. > :50:36.the rain but perhaps more should have been done... To stop the rain.
:50:36. > :50:40.No, but to mitigate it? No, there is damn all you can do. There is
:50:40. > :50:44.only one person responsible and not any of us can easily talk to him.
:50:44. > :50:48.What about refunds? I have tickets, jot door event. What happens if it
:50:48. > :50:53.is rained off. Will you get your money back? I think you ought to
:50:53. > :50:58.talk to the organisers about that. I'm pretty good on most matters
:50:58. > :51:02.Olympic but ticket refunds in the event of rain I'm afraid...
:51:02. > :51:06.mean I can't write to you. I'm sure and many people will and I will
:51:06. > :51:12.take up their requests for help but that's something for LOCOG. You are
:51:12. > :51:15.moving in, aren't you? I am, I'm going to be part of the Deputy
:51:15. > :51:22.Mayoral Team overseeing what we hope will be the smooth and happy
:51:22. > :51:28.running of the village. My fellow Deputy Mayors, Duncan Goodhew, Tony
:51:29. > :51:31.Hall and the Mayor of the Village. Charles Allen. That's it. We will
:51:31. > :51:38.be back in the autumn. I will be back tomorrow with Daily Politics,
:51:38. > :51:42.now back to Andrew. Tomorrow we will have the Prime
:51:42. > :51:47.Minister and his deputy joined at the hip over plans to rebuild the
:51:47. > :51:51.country's railways but is Lords reform dead in the water, is the
:51:51. > :51:55.coalition now just the walking wounded and is Chancellor Osborne's
:51:55. > :52:02.job safe in any autumn reshuffle. Questions that are meat and drink
:52:02. > :52:10.to our panel in the Week Ahead. So, row wenia is the Prime Minister
:52:10. > :52:14.kidding us, Lords reform is over? - row wenia. Personally I think it
:52:14. > :52:18.is. What shocked me is the scale and depth of the rebellion. Over
:52:18. > :52:23.100 MPs defying the whip if you count abstentions, not only the new
:52:23. > :52:26.intake but also the old guard lined up, organised by one of the most
:52:26. > :52:31.erudite, intelligent and loyal MPs in the form of Jesse Norman. I
:52:31. > :52:34.think what is interesting about this is their objection is very,
:52:34. > :52:38.very principaled. It is not subject to the pragmatic compromise that
:52:38. > :52:41.David Cameron might like. I don't think they will move on that. What
:52:41. > :52:46.I think is also interesting is in the past David Cameron's pragmatism
:52:46. > :52:49.has served him well, helped him get a lot through but when he comes up
:52:49. > :52:53.against principled objections of backbenchers, I think it makes him
:52:53. > :52:57.look like he is not a true Conservative. Of course the issue,
:52:57. > :53:00.Isabel isn't for or against Lords reform, it is whether you can get
:53:00. > :53:04.this timetable motion in to make sure it doesn't dominate the floor
:53:04. > :53:07.of the house forever and a day. Yvette Cooper was saying on the
:53:07. > :53:12.programme. If the Government came forward with a prr timetabled
:53:12. > :53:15.motion we would look at it. We have the example of Labour timetabled
:53:15. > :53:19.motions. You feel if the Government was serious about this, it could
:53:19. > :53:23.get round the Tory rebels. I think it is possible they could. The one
:53:23. > :53:27.thing that would buy off a lot of Tory rebels, if there was an
:53:27. > :53:31.amendment for a referendum but there is one big misconception I
:53:31. > :53:35.would like to knock on the heads. The Lib Dems keep trotting it out,
:53:35. > :53:40.and that is that the coalition agreement contains a commitment to
:53:40. > :53:45.House of Lords reform. Look at the wording it, does not contain a
:53:45. > :53:48.commitment to do anything, other than set up a series of committees
:53:48. > :53:52.and "bring forward proposals", that is not saying this is a priority
:53:52. > :53:55.for us and we are going to actually make it happen. It is all politics,
:53:55. > :53:59.isn't it, in the end? The Prime Minister's heart, reading the
:53:59. > :54:03.Sunday Times' article is not really in this Lords reform. Would he like
:54:03. > :54:07.it but in the end it is no big deal. Labour wants Lords reform but if it
:54:07. > :54:10.makes more sense playing politics over a programme timetable on the
:54:10. > :54:14.sort of legislation which they always had and timetabled
:54:14. > :54:17.themselves, then it ain't going to happen. It seems that way. I'm more
:54:17. > :54:21.optimistic than most of the Sunday press seem to be that it might
:54:21. > :54:26.still happen. I think there are sufficient numbers of rebels who's
:54:26. > :54:31.objections to the bill are actually quite practical rather than
:54:31. > :54:34.philosophical. That were you to, for example, cut the tenure of
:54:34. > :54:39.elected Lord from 15 years to seven or eight or change the voting
:54:39. > :54:42.system so it wasn't a part list system, you might win enough people
:54:42. > :54:46.over that by the autumn you could win a vote to contract the
:54:46. > :54:50.discussion. And if there was enough time in the House you could win the
:54:50. > :54:53.votes. The House, the Commons doesn't like it. True. As you
:54:53. > :54:57.suggested, it is the second question of timing remember than
:54:57. > :55:01.the principle question is that the obstacle -- rather than the
:55:01. > :55:07.principal question. Where do we see this in regards to
:55:07. > :55:12.Lords op significance. Other than deficit reduction, I'm not sure
:55:12. > :55:16.what the coalition agree on any more. Absolutely. The remarkable
:55:16. > :55:18.fact in the story of this coalition has been the discipline of the
:55:18. > :55:22.Liberal Democrats who have been prepared to vote for things that
:55:22. > :55:25.their heart really, really isn't, in and now that the coalition
:55:25. > :55:28.agreement has almost all been passed through, I really wonder
:55:28. > :55:31.whether they are going to see the rise of the Liberal Democrat
:55:31. > :55:35.backbencher and particularly in September one thing I think we will
:55:35. > :55:43.be talking about a lot is Europe and that issue already... That will
:55:43. > :55:47.do well, go well with them. They can't a aggro on a coalition 2.0.
:55:47. > :55:50.They can't agree on coalition Mark 2. This is the central problem.
:55:50. > :55:54.People have suggested the coalition will be relaunched through a
:55:54. > :55:58.reshuffle. I think that will help if you promote people like Jeremy
:55:58. > :56:02.Browne or David Laws to the Cabinet who are believers in the coalition,
:56:02. > :56:05.that can help at the margins but they will never regain their
:56:05. > :56:13.initial stability as a Government until they discover a new set of
:56:13. > :56:16.policies that they genuinely agree on and that does require a a grand
:56:16. > :56:20.bargain. In the absence of it and in a legislate kpwrif schedule
:56:20. > :56:25.that's busy and active and interesting, all that political
:56:25. > :56:28.space is filled by mischief. They haven't got an agreed platform,
:56:28. > :56:32.other than continuing with deficit reduction, which is not exactly a
:56:32. > :56:36.huge success so far, they have not got an agreed programme to see them
:56:36. > :56:41.through to 2015. I think they really do need to do that. What
:56:41. > :56:45.they will say is actually we are in implementation phase. We are
:56:45. > :56:48.incredibly businessing behind the scenes pushing through the radical
:56:48. > :56:52.reforms on education and welfare particularly. The trouble is, to
:56:52. > :56:55.perception for outsiders is that nothing much is happening. I do
:56:55. > :56:59.think they need to sit down and come up with - it doesn't need to
:56:59. > :57:04.be a massive long document. something that keeps the show on
:57:04. > :57:08.the road. Two or three things they can agree on rain committed to
:57:08. > :57:12.doing. I'm convinced that the main obstacle that the Liberal Democrats
:57:12. > :57:20.don't have that many positive causes to advance. If you were to
:57:20. > :57:25.strike an grand bargain, the Tories would say give us a new runway. I
:57:25. > :57:28.know it is pain for you guys... is painful for a lot of Tories.
:57:28. > :57:31.What would they give the Liberal Democrats in return? They have
:57:31. > :57:35.constitutional demands but beyond that not very much. Reshuffle not
:57:35. > :57:39.until the autumn, if it comes then, we are agreed at that? I'm certain
:57:39. > :57:45.it'll be at the beginning of the September. Here is the question
:57:45. > :57:49.deliciously raised this morning, is George Osborne job's safe is in he
:57:49. > :57:53.shuffle or is Mr Hague breathing down his neck? Should Mr Osborne's
:57:53. > :57:57.job be safe? They are two very different questions. I think George
:57:57. > :58:01.is far too powerful to be moved, so he is only going to move to the
:58:01. > :58:09.Foreign Office if he decides he has a fancy for a bit of foreign travel.
:58:09. > :58:12.I don't blee. Jania I'm sure... Such a... I cannot see George
:58:12. > :58:17.Osborne taking that because it would look like a demotion. Should
:58:17. > :58:21.sne Personally I think yes, but what do you think? If George
:58:21. > :58:26.osintelorn not Chancellor after the reshuffle I will come to the Sunday
:58:26. > :58:32.politics in a dress -- if George Osborne is not Chancellor.
:58:32. > :58:36.I hope is, please. Better pray. His political stock is the lowest it
:58:36. > :58:39.has been and I can understand discussion about his future but the
:58:39. > :58:46.one thing that ueites the coalition is the deficit reduction programme.
:58:46. > :58:48.Which so far is not going great. Would it not be better to have a
:58:48. > :58:52.gruff Yorkshire accent comprehensive schoolboy as
:58:52. > :58:55.Chancellor in the middle of the worst recession in living memory.
:58:55. > :59:00.Absolutely. A lot of the problems, the economy is getting worse,
:59:00. > :59:05.because of Europe but also because we had a Budget which was by all
:59:05. > :59:09.accounts an omni-shambles. The priority might be deficit reduction
:59:09. > :59:18.but let's face it, it is going up. Also this is the Chancellor who
:59:18. > :59:24.made it easier to firework terse bottom for incompetence. That's it
:59:24. > :59:30.for today. For the Sunday Politics, and that's it for the rest of what
:59:30. > :59:35.only the British could call summer but Jo Coburn is back for Daily
:59:35. > :59:40.Politics tomorrow and on Tuesday and I will be back for This Week.