:00:40. > :00:43.Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. With just over a
:00:43. > :00:46.week to go until David Cameron's big speech on Europe, politicians
:00:46. > :00:56.and business leaders line up to warn him not to damage our
:00:56. > :00:56.
:00:56. > :00:59.relationship with the EU. Are they right? Should he listen?
:00:59. > :01:01.In a week when the Government has been busily marking it's own
:01:01. > :01:05.homework, we ask Communities Secretary Eric Pickles whether,
:01:05. > :01:07.when it comes to housing policy, it's a case of must try much harder.
:01:07. > :01:10.That's the Sunday Interview. And, as violent protests continue
:01:10. > :01:13.in Belfast over the decision to cut the number of days the Union flag
:01:13. > :01:16.flies above the City Hall, we'll debate the decision and the
:01:16. > :01:26.significance of the riots, as two politicians at the heart of the
:01:26. > :01:28.
:01:28. > :01:31.controversy go head to head. In London, 12 fire stations to go.
:01:31. > :01:41.I will be asking the fire commissioner whether we will be
:01:41. > :01:45.
:01:45. > :01:47.All that and the best and the brightest political panel in the
:01:47. > :01:51.business - Isobel Oakeshott, Janan Ganesh and Nick Watt with views,
:01:51. > :01:54.insight and gossip on the big stories of the day. They'll also be
:01:54. > :01:59.tweeting as fast as their little digits allow throughout the show.
:01:59. > :02:02.Now, Ed Miliband has had a busy weekend. Yesterday, he made a
:02:02. > :02:06.speech designed to draw a line under the New Labour years and move
:02:06. > :02:10.on. In it, he conceded the last government lost touch with voters,
:02:10. > :02:13.especially over issues like immigration. But he defended one of
:02:13. > :02:23.the remaining big beasts of the last government, Shadow Chancellor
:02:23. > :02:24.
:02:24. > :02:29.Ed Balls, when pushed by the BBC's You mentioned Ed Balls, does to
:02:29. > :02:37.scare middle-England a little? think he scares the Tories and
:02:37. > :02:40.David Cameron. We have said we were going to the next election as a
:02:40. > :02:46.team but I am not going to start measuring the curtains for Downing
:02:46. > :02:50.Street. He will be a member of the Cabinet? Yes, he is doing a great
:02:50. > :02:55.job and will continue doing a great job. Ed Miliband talking to James
:02:55. > :02:58.Landale on the Andrew Marr Show this morning. And I'd like to take
:02:58. > :03:05.this opportunity to wish Andrew a speedy recovery from all on here on
:03:05. > :03:10.the Sunday Politics after his stroke earlier this week.
:03:10. > :03:15.Did you buy his endorsement of Ed Balls? He didn't specifically say
:03:15. > :03:19.Ed Balls would be Shadow Chancellor on the day before the next election,
:03:19. > :03:26.but the reason he needs to offer assurance is that there has been a
:03:26. > :03:29.lot of speculation this week David Miliband my going to the Shadow
:03:29. > :03:34.Cabinet. David Miliband made a significant speech last week in
:03:34. > :03:38.which he made a very interesting argument on the economy that the
:03:39. > :03:43.Blairites are putting out - let's accept the amount of money in the
:03:43. > :03:48.pot, but have a debate about the priorities and how you spend that,
:03:48. > :03:52.and we would obviously prioritised the poor and the coalition would
:03:52. > :03:59.prioritise the rich. Whereas Ed Balls is criticising the government
:03:59. > :04:05.for sucking the demand out of the economy. The problem with Ed Balls
:04:05. > :04:10.is it brings up bad memories. they feel they are economically
:04:10. > :04:20.vindicated by what has happened over the last few years - Labour -
:04:20. > :04:20.
:04:20. > :04:25.and still have not made the same gains in the opinion polls. I think
:04:25. > :04:30.if they move him, it will not be this year, it will be closer to the
:04:30. > :04:34.election, and even then I'm not convinced it will happen. Would you
:04:34. > :04:39.want him on the backbenches? I don't think he will accept a
:04:39. > :04:44.middle-ranking shadow cabinet job, so there is a Geoffrey Howe problem
:04:44. > :04:48.for Ed Miliband. He is stuck with him whether he wants him or not.
:04:48. > :04:53.Yes, there was not a cast-iron guarantee. You learn to interpret
:04:53. > :04:57.every word, so it was not a cast- iron guarantee and I think that is
:04:57. > :05:06.because Ed Miliband would like his brother back, and perhaps only
:05:06. > :05:10.because his brother would only accept the shadow chancellor role.
:05:10. > :05:15.Now, the waiting is almost over. No, I'm not talking about David Bowie's
:05:15. > :05:18.new album. It's much more exciting than that, because in just over a
:05:18. > :05:21.week David Cameron will travel to the Netherlands to spell out, at
:05:21. > :05:24.last, where he sees Britain's future in Europe. He's expected to
:05:24. > :05:34.call for the repatriation of powers from Brussels in a deal to be
:05:34. > :05:38.
:05:38. > :05:42.endorsed by a referendum. Controversial stuff. This week, 10
:05:42. > :05:48.senior business figures including Richard Branson warned the
:05:48. > :05:52.government against marginalising the UK in Europe. They wrote, "we
:05:52. > :06:02.must be very careful not to call for wholesale renegotiation of our
:06:02. > :06:08.
:06:08. > :06:12.EU membership, which would almost They are not alone. The US
:06:12. > :06:16.Assistant Secretary for European Affairs told British reporters that
:06:16. > :06:20.America favours a strong British force in Brussels. Yesterday
:06:20. > :06:26.Michael Heseltine warned David Cameron against rushing into a
:06:26. > :06:30.referendum, describing his strategy as an unnecessary gamble. George
:06:30. > :06:39.Osborne has raised the spectre of British departure, telling German
:06:39. > :06:44.newspaper Die Welt, the EU must change. This morning it has been
:06:44. > :06:54.reported in the Observer that Ken Clarke is joining forces with Peter
:06:54. > :06:56.
:06:56. > :06:58.Mandelson to stress the benefits of remaining in the Union. I'm joined
:06:58. > :07:02.now by Martin Sorrell, CEO of WPP, the worlds biggest advertising
:07:02. > :07:07.company - and a signatory to the letter in the Financial Times on
:07:07. > :07:12.Wednesday. The EU is changing, the eurozone will get closer in fiscal
:07:12. > :07:17.terms and political terms, economic terms, we will not be part of that
:07:17. > :07:23.so we will have to renegotiate our relationship. There will be
:07:23. > :07:27.attempts to. From the point of view of business, if you look at things
:07:27. > :07:31.like the car industry, financial services industry, being part of
:07:31. > :07:37.what is the largest economic force in the world, it is better for us
:07:37. > :07:42.from a business point of view to be part of that so I would rather be
:07:42. > :07:46.inside the tent trying to renegotiate the things that you and
:07:46. > :07:50.I find oppressive, rather than be powerless to make the changes.
:07:50. > :07:57.you saying that David Cameron is right - he will have to do some
:07:57. > :08:01.renegotiation? Yes, but it is about how you try to go about it. If you
:08:01. > :08:05.grandstand, Showboat, the chances of being able to renegotiate
:08:05. > :08:09.anything fundamental will be difficult. Somebody raised the
:08:09. > :08:14.issue this morning in the papers about how John Major went about it
:08:15. > :08:18.in a quieter and more diplomatic way, and I think that is necessary
:08:18. > :08:28.because you bring out the opposition, you bring out the
:08:28. > :08:28.
:08:28. > :08:31.American reaction, the German reaction. Was George Osborne
:08:32. > :08:38.grandstanding when he raised the prospect of our departure? He said
:08:38. > :08:42.in order that we can remain in the European Union, the EU must change.
:08:42. > :08:47.That is negotiation again, trying to secure benefits and changes. It
:08:47. > :08:53.is a question of how you go about it. He is raising the prospect that
:08:53. > :08:57.we may not remain in the European Union. Speaking from our business's
:08:57. > :09:01.point of view, I don't think that will be helpful. This uncertainty
:09:01. > :09:07.has been raised and we have enough uncertainty in the world with the
:09:07. > :09:11.eurozone, the US fiscal deficit, the Middle East, China, we have
:09:11. > :09:16.enough uncertainty around the world without adding to it again. If you
:09:16. > :09:21.are thinking about it from the point of view of multinational
:09:21. > :09:25.businesses, were they will locate their plants, their people, their
:09:26. > :09:30.headquarters, it will put that increasingly at a level of
:09:31. > :09:36.uncertainty which will disadvantage the UK. You have previous on this -
:09:36. > :09:40.you signed a letter in 2003 saying we have to join the euro. You said
:09:40. > :09:45.if we didn't it would be damaging for British-based businesses,
:09:45. > :09:52.British employees and the British economy as a whole. We suggest you
:09:52. > :09:56.were wrong there. We still believe, certainly from a business point of
:09:56. > :10:00.view, from an economic point of view, and from the point of view of
:10:00. > :10:05.Britain in the future world, it would be better to be a significant
:10:06. > :10:09.part of Europe. He wanted us to join the euro, and you said it
:10:09. > :10:15.would damage business and the British economy. I would suggest to
:10:15. > :10:19.you that you were wrong, so why are you right now? We will have to see
:10:19. > :10:27.how it plays out. At that particular point in time, I
:10:27. > :10:30.wouldn't disagree with you. If we, the British people, attempt quite a
:10:30. > :10:35.fundamental renegotiation of our relationship with Europe, not
:10:35. > :10:45.attempting to get out, but a fundamental renegotiation, that
:10:45. > :10:45.
:10:45. > :10:49.would damage business and the economy? No, it leads to one
:10:49. > :10:55.certainty and postponement of decisions, the decisions made by
:10:55. > :11:03.people in terms of locating factories, when and where they're
:11:03. > :11:08.going to make their decisions are becoming increasingly uncertain. If
:11:08. > :11:12.you look at Lee levels of capital spending in the United States, the
:11:13. > :11:20.UK and Western Continent, given the general uncertainty we have, there
:11:20. > :11:25.has been significant delay. There has been a lack of investment, and
:11:25. > :11:28.the last time I looked America was not renegotiating... There are
:11:28. > :11:32.enough challenges without introducing more uncertainty.
:11:32. > :11:38.you give an example of a company that has said it is not coming
:11:38. > :11:42.until the uncertainty is over. can think of many examples. Just
:11:42. > :11:46.one would do. Without naming specific, there are several
:11:46. > :11:51.examples of companies that have postponed their decision.
:11:51. > :11:55.operate across the world as well as in Europe, if we had a more semi-
:11:55. > :12:00.detached relationship with Europe, why would it damage your business?
:12:00. > :12:10.It is about access to the market. You are saying that most people
:12:10. > :12:11.
:12:11. > :12:15.against the idea want us to end up as a Norwegian example. The
:12:15. > :12:24.Norwegians end up paying about 80% of what we pay for the privilege of
:12:24. > :12:31.being outside, the Swiss have been trying to negotiate trade deals for
:12:31. > :12:37.10 years. 25% of our business is in continental Europe... Can my
:12:37. > :12:45.finish? The last time I saw you lecture, you said that increasingly
:12:45. > :12:51.you -- European business was not growing fast and all of your growth
:12:51. > :12:56.was taking place outside of Europe. Europe has a West part, which is
:12:56. > :13:00.slower growth, and an eastern part. There is an interesting dynamic to
:13:00. > :13:04.what you are talking about. We were talking for the programme about
:13:04. > :13:08.whether a referendum will take place, putting that to one side for
:13:08. > :13:12.a minute, by the time this is sorted, western continental Europe
:13:12. > :13:17.will probably be coming in to a recovery phase. We would make the
:13:17. > :13:22.decision, if we chose to come out, to come out at precisely the wrong
:13:22. > :13:27.time because there will be a cyclical recovery. Will David
:13:27. > :13:32.Cameron be worried that important business people like Martin are
:13:32. > :13:36.speaking out like this now? fairly sure he is worried, and what
:13:36. > :13:41.we will see over the next few days and weeks will be a parallel
:13:41. > :13:44.operation. What we have seen in the last few days is quite an operation
:13:44. > :13:49.by a Europhile business groups and figures like yourself to put the
:13:49. > :13:53.case that you have. I know that Number 10 is concerned about this
:13:53. > :13:57.and we will see another operation where you get some moderate Euro-
:13:57. > :14:02.sceptic business figures who will come out and put the opposite case.
:14:02. > :14:06.Not had bangers, but a reasonable case for renegotiation. And you
:14:06. > :14:11.think there was a reasonable case. You would want the best possible
:14:11. > :14:17.terms. Anybody would want that. The question is what practically you
:14:17. > :14:23.can get, given the position, and the downside is, if we come out,
:14:23. > :14:27.that we will not have the exposure to this significant part of the
:14:27. > :14:30.world. I think David Cameron will like the fact you are making the
:14:30. > :14:34.case for Britain in the European Union because he doesn't want to
:14:34. > :14:39.leave. Isn't the challenge for you, the argument that you are making
:14:39. > :14:45.about factories pulling out of the European Union - out of the UK -
:14:45. > :14:49.are identical to the arguments that Britain in Europe put forward in
:14:49. > :14:53.1999 as to what would happen if we didn't join the euro. Those
:14:53. > :14:57.arguments were wrong and our decision not to go in was right.
:14:57. > :15:03.Shouldn't you say we got it really badly wrong 12 years ago, and then
:15:03. > :15:13.maybe people would listen to you now. They did say to Andrew that
:15:13. > :15:17.
:15:17. > :15:22.And the scares that you gave. You signed a letter. Looking at future
:15:22. > :15:26.economic history and development, we are already disadvantaged in
:15:26. > :15:30.relation to the growth markets of the world. One of the biggest
:15:30. > :15:39.opportunities that we have is to be part of the biggest - 450 million
:15:39. > :15:43.people, bigger than the United States, although it is not what --
:15:43. > :15:51.not one country, obviously... But we are trying to negotiate a free-
:15:51. > :15:55.trade zone. For me, the question is not whether you try to meet gauche
:15:55. > :16:00.-- whether you try to renegotiate, because he is doing that. It is all
:16:00. > :16:03.about the questions that you raise. I see no prospect of renegotiating
:16:03. > :16:09.anything fundamental to the central market, including employment
:16:09. > :16:12.legislation. Are you as sceptical as I am about the prospects for
:16:12. > :16:17.repatriation? I think it is very difficult. The people on the other
:16:17. > :16:22.side, the members of the club... It reminds me, in a perverse way, of
:16:22. > :16:27.the Turkish-EU situation. Many people said they wanted the Turks
:16:27. > :16:31.in, many people said they didn't, and the Turks got fed up and said,
:16:31. > :16:36.a plague on all your houses. I think on the other side, people
:16:37. > :16:41.will be saying, enough is enough. The biggest issue for us is the 17
:16:41. > :16:46.eurozone countries, as opposed to the 27, and the increasing
:16:47. > :16:51.influence of those 17. Did you not relocate your company anyway away
:16:51. > :16:55.from Britain, even before renegotiation came on the agenda?
:16:55. > :16:59.Job that was very unfair, that was because the previous government
:16:59. > :17:04.threatened to tax overseas profits. The coalition government legislated
:17:04. > :17:08.to remove that. Is this a better government for business than the
:17:08. > :17:12.last one? To their credit, this government, in the short term, have
:17:12. > :17:16.tried to make sure that Britain is open for business, in terms of
:17:16. > :17:20.corporation tax. We now have the current debate about appropriate
:17:20. > :17:30.levels for corporation tax.. you coming back to Britain? We came
:17:30. > :17:35.
:17:35. > :17:41.back. We actually came back. fully updated edition of the
:17:41. > :17:45.coalition agreement will be provided a new road map, or will
:17:45. > :17:48.it? It has been introspection time at Westminster. It has been a week
:17:48. > :17:54.of half-term reports, with the Government marking its own homework,
:17:54. > :17:59.department by department. It is clear there remains work to be done
:17:59. > :18:05.in the brief of Eric Pickles. Britain's housing crisis remains
:18:05. > :18:15.unsolved. This week, one of a Eric Pickles' junior ministers and
:18:15. > :18:16.
:18:16. > :18:23.Indeed, the 2011 census showed home ownership in England falling over
:18:23. > :18:29.the previous decade for the first time in 60 years, from 68% to 63%.
:18:29. > :18:36.Mr Pickles' solution is more new homes, but the think tank the
:18:36. > :18:42.posture exchange says... -- the policy exchange. His department is
:18:42. > :18:51.also responsible for community cohesion. In today's Sun on Sunday,
:18:51. > :18:58.Mr Pickles attacks at... But what preparations has the Government
:18:58. > :19:08.made for the potential influx of Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants?
:19:08. > :19:08.
:19:09. > :19:15.Eric Pickles joins me now for the Sunday Interview. Eric Pickles,
:19:15. > :19:20.welcome and to this, our first edition of Sunday politics for 2013.
:19:20. > :19:23.Very nice to be here. The planning minister in your own department
:19:23. > :19:33.declared this week that the housing shortage was the greatest social
:19:33. > :19:37.injustice being faced by this country, do you agree? Well, we
:19:37. > :19:41.inherited this situation. You cannot get housing away from such a
:19:41. > :19:46.low level very quickly. But the signs are encouraging. But is it
:19:47. > :19:51.the greatest social injustice ever faced by this country, it was your
:19:51. > :19:54.minister who said that? reference are was making to the
:19:54. > :20:01.Policy Exchange was regard to the claim about the lowest levels since
:20:01. > :20:08.the 1920s. It is a great injustice, among other ones. So, it is not the
:20:08. > :20:12.greatest? No. The Future Homes commission says we need about
:20:12. > :20:16.300,000 new homes every year - do you agree with that? We certainly
:20:16. > :20:20.need to increase the amount of building. We are about 11% up on
:20:21. > :20:26.what we were at last year. We are doing a number of schemes, of which
:20:26. > :20:30.I am sure we will be able to go through in detail. We are
:20:31. > :20:37.increasing the availability of land, we are helping with regard to
:20:37. > :20:41.equity shares. But fundamentally, when you went for your mortgage,
:20:41. > :20:46.when you were young man, or when I did so, the kind of deals which
:20:46. > :20:50.were available to us are not available now. Let's look at the
:20:50. > :20:53.record, because it is early days, but there are some figures. Let us
:20:53. > :20:59.accept for the sake of his interview that the last government
:20:59. > :21:03.had a poor housebuilding record. In the last year of Labour, there were
:21:03. > :21:08.116,000 new houses completed. In the most recent annual figure we
:21:08. > :21:16.have for your government, it is only 117,000, an increase of less
:21:16. > :21:22.than 1%. York Wheel on track to get slightly more than 132,000.
:21:22. > :21:26.these are your government figures up to September of last year. From
:21:26. > :21:31.your own department. Houses completed. We have not had any more
:21:31. > :21:37.published that I have seen... we have issued some figures to
:21:37. > :21:43.suggest that we are on track for something between 132,000 and
:21:43. > :21:49.133,000. That is more than 11% up. These are completions, the official
:21:49. > :21:55.figures, as I say. I would suggest to you that when you look at
:21:55. > :22:05.housing starts, it is going to get worse again. Look at these figures.
:22:05. > :22:12.These are housing starts in England. So far this year, or almost to the
:22:12. > :22:17.end of last year, just 98,000. we are 11% up on what we were the
:22:17. > :22:22.year before. No, you are down on the year before. I don't think your
:22:22. > :22:28.figures are correct, I'm afraid. These figures have been researched
:22:29. > :22:32.and I have checked them myself. am delighted about that. They are
:22:32. > :22:37.official government figures from the ONS, showing quite clearly that
:22:37. > :22:43.the number of housing starts is in decline. What I am saying to you
:22:43. > :22:52.very clearly is that on last year, we are 11% up. I think taking
:22:52. > :22:55.quarterly figures is not necessarily terribly helpful. I am
:22:56. > :23:00.not for one moment painting a position to say everything is rosy,
:23:00. > :23:05.but what I am saying is that in terms of the combination of new by,
:23:05. > :23:11.together with first buy, releasing more public land for housebuilding,
:23:11. > :23:16.with these measures, we can show some small - maybe you want to
:23:16. > :23:22.dismiss it as insignificant - but I think there is progress. But these
:23:22. > :23:26.figures show that in the year to September, there were only 98,000
:23:26. > :23:33.new starts, so are you telling me that in this year, you will
:23:33. > :23:38.complete more houses than the year just finished? I am saying that we
:23:38. > :23:45.are 11% up on the previous year. So, the short answer to that question
:23:45. > :23:48.is yes. You will build more houses in 2013 then you did in 2012?
:23:48. > :23:53.You have spent a lot of time going over the figures. I have spent a
:23:53. > :24:00.lot of time. I am not going to come into its prestigious show like this
:24:00. > :24:03.and not know what I am talking and not know what I am talking
:24:03. > :24:11.about. Well, the Policy Exchange, an intellectual out rider for the
:24:11. > :24:15.Cameron project, says this... the point that I made at the start
:24:15. > :24:22.was that we started with the lowest level of house building since the
:24:22. > :24:27.1920s. That was our base. And it has now got lower. What I have just
:24:27. > :24:32.politely pointed out is that we have actually produced more houses,
:24:32. > :24:36.rather, the building industry has, than the latter two years of Labour.
:24:36. > :24:41.Of course, that was from the immediate aftermath of the
:24:41. > :24:47.financial crash. Labour's record, which I accept is not great, in the
:24:47. > :24:55.year 2002, it was 144,000. The following year, 155,000. The next
:24:55. > :24:58.year, 169,000, and continuing to go up after that. You are nowhere near
:24:58. > :25:00.any of these figures, and even these figures were not great.
:25:00. > :25:05.these figures were not great. will take some time to get to these
:25:05. > :25:08.figures, which as you rightly say, are not great. The housing market
:25:08. > :25:13.is a largely dysfunctional market. It is not delivering the numbers
:25:13. > :25:19.that we want. That is why we have made a number of reforms on the
:25:19. > :25:23.supply of housing. I have just gone through one or two of the
:25:23. > :25:29.initiatives, but at least we have been able to make sure that young
:25:29. > :25:34.people can now get on the ladder, at least for new-build. How many
:25:34. > :25:41.houses do you hope to build this year? I think the figure should be
:25:41. > :25:49.somewhere in the region of between 132,000 and 133,000, and that is in
:25:49. > :25:59.no way adequate in terms of the numbers. I am talking about this
:25:59. > :26:03.year. I am asking you about 2013, not 2012. I would... We should...
:26:03. > :26:09.We have signed contracts, just dealing purely with social houses,
:26:09. > :26:16.to deliver 170,000 social houses over that period. I am simply
:26:16. > :26:23.asking about this year, 2013. answer to that is a figure greater
:26:23. > :26:25.than 133,000. It is starting to rise. Given that we have abandoned
:26:25. > :26:29.national targets which did not deliver, and given that we are
:26:29. > :26:33.looking towards local growth, and given that we have introduced all
:26:33. > :26:36.of these reforms with regard to planning, and given that we have
:26:36. > :26:46.further plans to enable people to be able to take out mortgages, all
:26:46. > :26:48.
:26:48. > :26:52.of these things kind of have a bit of a lag. Do you accept that the
:26:52. > :26:55.housing shortage, which is pretty dramatic and likely to get worse,
:26:55. > :26:59.is one reason why people find it very hard to get on the housing
:26:59. > :27:06.ladder, because houses are too expensive? Houses are very
:27:06. > :27:10.expensive, and if the rest of consumer products had risen at the
:27:10. > :27:14.same rate as house prices, then we would be in a great deal of
:27:14. > :27:22.difficulty. Do you know how much a chicken would have cost if it had
:27:22. > :27:30.gone up by the same rate over the last 30 years? �47. Do you think
:27:30. > :27:34.house prices are too high? It is one thing which is purely market-
:27:34. > :27:43.driven. It is controlled by the supply, and the supply is
:27:43. > :27:47.inadequate. It is related to land as well. Let me move on to another
:27:47. > :27:51.issue, because it affects housing. Much of the extra demand which we
:27:51. > :27:56.have seen has come from record immigration. Now, that could
:27:56. > :27:59.intensify, despite government efforts. In one year's time, 29
:27:59. > :28:03.million Romanians and Bulgarians will be free to come and live and
:28:03. > :28:06.work in the UK. As the Home Office giving you any estimate of how many
:28:06. > :28:12.are actually expected to come in the next couple of years? To be
:28:12. > :28:17.honest, I don't think anybody entirely knows the number that will
:28:17. > :28:21.come from Bulgaria and from Romania. So, have you had a guesstimate from
:28:21. > :28:26.the Home Office? I have had no discussions with the Home Office
:28:26. > :28:29.with regard to the numbers. So, if you have no idea of the numbers,
:28:29. > :28:34.which is what you have said, does that mean you have not been able to
:28:34. > :28:43.do any preliminary work on what their housing needs might be?
:28:43. > :28:50.know of a number of borrowers that have an average number, so I would
:28:50. > :28:56.expect to see an influx in the east of London, which would be the
:28:56. > :29:00.predominant area. Have you done any preliminary work on the
:29:00. > :29:04.implications for our housing demand as a result of this? I do not know
:29:04. > :29:09.what the boroughs are doing. Have you done any? Yes, we have done
:29:09. > :29:13.some. And what is the consequence, how many are you planning for them?
:29:13. > :29:19.That is not something which I think would be helpful, to go through the
:29:19. > :29:22.numbers for that, just yet. Why? Because I think you would have to
:29:22. > :29:28.have a degree of confidence, in terms of the numbers, before I
:29:28. > :29:33.would publicly say. One of the reasons I have asked for fresh
:29:33. > :29:37.information is to make sure that before I make a public statement
:29:37. > :29:41.with regard to this, that I am confident on the numbers. So, like
:29:41. > :29:45.2004, when the then government told us only about 15,000 people would
:29:45. > :29:55.come from Poland and that fear and so on, and it turned out to be
:29:55. > :29:58.
:29:58. > :30:03.750,000, this could be another In fairness to Michael Howard, he
:30:03. > :30:10.cut the figures are almost exactly right. I am reluctant to give a
:30:10. > :30:15.figure until I am confident. Let's talk about the ball park. One Tory
:30:16. > :30:23.MP said let's make the assumption that they cover the same rate as
:30:23. > :30:25.they did from Poland and lot fear, he said then we are talking about
:30:25. > :30:32.another 300,000 Romanians and Bulgarians - is that a reasonable
:30:33. > :30:37.assumption? No, I don't think so. A why not? Because I need to be sure
:30:37. > :30:42.about the figures before I make a public pronouncement. That has not
:30:42. > :30:47.changed in the last two minutes. let's be honest - do you have any
:30:47. > :30:52.idea how many Romanians and Bulgarians will come? I have been
:30:52. > :31:00.given a figure, I'm not confident on the figure, and until I am
:31:00. > :31:05.confident I will not quote it. you give a ballpark figure? Perhaps
:31:05. > :31:09.I wasn't very clear, so let me be clear, I have seen figures, I
:31:09. > :31:13.wasn't confident with those figures, I asked for a further explanation
:31:13. > :31:18.and when I have got that and when I feel confident about the figures,
:31:18. > :31:25.then I will talk about the figures. Does the figure you have been given
:31:25. > :31:32.worry you? When I am confident about the figures, I will express
:31:32. > :31:37.my confidence or worries. But do you accept that this could present
:31:37. > :31:44.another major increase in housing demand in a country where there has
:31:44. > :31:49.already a major housing shortage? Given that we have got a housing
:31:49. > :31:54.shortage, any influx from Romania and Bulgaria is going to cause
:31:54. > :31:59.problems and it is going to cause problems not just in terms of the
:31:59. > :32:03.housing market but also on social housing markets, but one of the
:32:04. > :32:08.reasons why I am not repaired to start the scare story going is that
:32:08. > :32:13.I think we need to be reasonably confident about the figures.
:32:13. > :32:17.appreciate I am not looking for a scare story, I was looking for the
:32:17. > :32:22.scale of the problem. Let me finish with a question - when you're lost
:32:22. > :32:28.on this programme in September I asked when you were going to stop
:32:28. > :32:35.councils fining people for putting their bins out on the wrong day.
:32:35. > :32:38.You said watch this space, an announcement is due very soon.
:32:38. > :32:46.Given the unreasonable nature of these charges, we are actually
:32:46. > :32:53.going to legislate. When? If in the next session. Some time this year?
:32:53. > :33:00.If yes. There will get rid of fining for putting your rubbish bin
:33:00. > :33:07.out on the wrong day? Yes, if you put the wrong yoghurt pot into the
:33:07. > :33:12.wrong rubbish bin, it is ludicrous to find people, and ludicrous to
:33:12. > :33:18.find a woman who is just a few yards out of her driveway, but if
:33:18. > :33:22.people scatter there litter about that is unreasonable. Anyway, no
:33:23. > :33:30.finding for putting your rubbish bin out on the wrong day?
:33:30. > :33:33.Absolutely. A Eric Pickles, thank you.
:33:33. > :33:35.Now, violence continued in Belfast last night, with 29 police officers
:33:35. > :33:38.injured in riots following the latest protest at the City
:33:38. > :33:40.Council's decision to restrict the flying of the Union flag. Northern
:33:40. > :33:43.Ireland Secretary Theresa Villiers has called for restraint this
:33:43. > :33:45.morning and warned that the protests are damaging Northern
:33:45. > :33:47.Ireland's economic prospects. So what lies behind them and how
:33:47. > :33:57.representative are they of the views of Belfast's protestant
:33:57. > :34:00.
:34:00. > :34:05.community? Giles Dilnot has been to the city to find out. Stones, fire
:34:05. > :34:12.bombs and fireworks thrown in rioting in Belfast. Young
:34:12. > :34:16.Protestants waving flags over the loss of a flag. Police with water
:34:16. > :34:21.cannon this has masked men and lasers. Explosive tensions we
:34:21. > :34:26.thought were in the past. Whilst all that is true, and this is where
:34:26. > :34:31.it has been happening, you are in the part of the UK were politically
:34:31. > :34:35.nothing is exactly what it says on the tin. It is not all of Belfast,
:34:35. > :34:40.not every Protestant, not just about the flag. There are layers
:34:40. > :34:45.and layers to this. The focus is Belfast City Hall, not short of
:34:45. > :34:53.British symbolism, and what flag flies above it. That issue was
:34:53. > :35:00.brought up by Republicans who wanted no flag or two flags.
:35:00. > :35:03.Unionists wanted their flag flown daily as it had been. Pushed hard
:35:03. > :35:10.to back the Unionist side, the Alliance Party responded with a
:35:10. > :35:15.compromise to both - the Union flag only, flown only on designated days.
:35:15. > :35:19.The irony is that for 12 years that has been the agreed policy at
:35:19. > :35:25.Stormont, and there has not been one word of complaint from any of
:35:25. > :35:35.the Unionist parties in 12 years. Part of the difficulty around this
:35:35. > :35:39.is that some politicians have stirred up sectarian fears for
:35:39. > :35:44.party political reasons. A small section of Northern Ireland's
:35:44. > :35:49.Protestant community saw it as an attack on their cultural identity
:35:49. > :35:53.in the midst of austerity. Whenever you go to a disadvantaged area and
:35:53. > :35:57.people think their identity has been taken away from them, the flag
:35:57. > :36:02.becomes more important because they don't have any stake in society,
:36:02. > :36:07.and that is the problem. Police suspect the hand of old loyalist
:36:07. > :36:17.hard men in the protests. Those behind them say it is more about a
:36:17. > :36:18.
:36:19. > :36:23.grassroots generational reaction, as critical but own -- of its own
:36:23. > :36:33.politicians. The to like putting Palestine in charge of Israel, it
:36:33. > :36:35.
:36:35. > :36:40.just doesn't add up. Now the DUP are telling people it is OK, it has
:36:40. > :36:45.changed. Belfast has changed. Once viewed from a distance, the
:36:45. > :36:50.sectarian divide mystified, now the majority of the city feels the same.
:36:50. > :36:55.In the market the trouble doesn't past the smelling test -
:36:55. > :37:05.consultation 10 minutes away is more likely about the price of fish
:37:05. > :37:06.
:37:06. > :37:12.The majority of people want to provide for their families. This is
:37:12. > :37:17.definitely affecting shops and businesses in Belfast. Take
:37:17. > :37:27.yourself home. For many, what they want to fly got is the political
:37:27. > :37:29.and economic cost to squabbling over symbols.
:37:29. > :37:32.And Alliance MP Naomi Long and Edwin Poots, Northern Ireland's
:37:32. > :37:42.Health Minister, and a member of the Democratic Unionist Party joins
:37:42. > :37:43.
:37:43. > :37:48.Now that you have seen the reaction to your decision, do you accept
:37:48. > :37:53.that by reducing the number of days the flag flies, it has just been
:37:53. > :37:58.deeply upsetting and provocative to half your city? I don't accept that
:37:58. > :38:02.and I don't accept the threat of violence and intimidation should in
:38:02. > :38:08.any way alter the democratic process. We had a very difficult
:38:08. > :38:11.decision to take in City Hall. My party colleagues took legal advice
:38:11. > :38:16.and the quality advice given to them by the council. They looked
:38:16. > :38:23.carefully at the situation that happened in other councils, such as
:38:23. > :38:28.Lisbon City Council, so we looked at the evidence and our councillors
:38:28. > :38:33.believed this was the right thing to do in what is a shared city with
:38:33. > :38:37.a Dover's view. It reflects that Belfast is within the UK, it
:38:37. > :38:41.respects the flag in the way the book we are encouraged to do by the
:38:41. > :38:46.College of Arms, and it reflects the fact there are many people who
:38:46. > :38:52.have a stake in the City and share that allegiance. One to is your
:38:52. > :38:59.reaction to that? I did vote against the flags policy in Lisbon
:38:59. > :39:05.back in 2002, but the truth is... I didn't interrupt you. She has got
:39:05. > :39:09.it wrong on this issue, and not just the few 1000 people are
:39:09. > :39:16.protesting, but hundreds of thousands of people are angry at
:39:16. > :39:20.this decision. The national flag can't be flown on the building 95%
:39:20. > :39:25.of the time. The Alliance Party need to realise that going back to
:39:25. > :39:31.the majority rule in this instance them lining up with Sinn Fein, that
:39:31. > :39:41.that type of majority rule does not work and instalment it is much
:39:41. > :39:42.
:39:42. > :39:46.better for everyone. I want to show you a leaflet, it is in the colours
:39:46. > :39:50.of the Alliance Party and it shows this picture of the flag
:39:51. > :40:00.disappearing and it changes the alliance slogan which has always
:40:00. > :40:08.been "a shared future" Into "a shared future for whom". I think
:40:08. > :40:12.you and other members distributed 40,000 of these leaflets, you have
:40:12. > :40:21.really played your part to stir this up, haven't you? I have not
:40:21. > :40:27.played any part. He your party has. I think the Alliance Party have
:40:27. > :40:30.stirred this up by removing the national flag and I don't see,
:40:30. > :40:39.whenever I travel to other parts of the UK, I see the national flag
:40:39. > :40:49.flying with didn't -- with dignity. It was a wrong decision to remove
:40:49. > :40:50.
:40:50. > :40:54.it and it has been detrimental to Northern Ireland and the community.
:40:54. > :41:00.Up was there really that much pressure to get rid of this flag on
:41:00. > :41:03.most days of the year? There are a couple of things Edwin has said the
:41:03. > :41:07.need to be addressed and the reality is that in Lisbon City
:41:07. > :41:12.Council were Edwin was a member, unionists took the flag down, then
:41:12. > :41:16.put it back up under pressure, and then finally had to remove it. He
:41:17. > :41:21.was present when the decision was taken to fly the flag on designated
:41:21. > :41:26.days in line with the equality advice given to the council. I am
:41:26. > :41:30.happy to defend that position. In terms of my colleagues, I am not a
:41:30. > :41:34.member of Belfast City Council so the DUP have to answer why they
:41:34. > :41:39.targeted me in this hateful campaign, in an inflammatory
:41:39. > :41:43.leaflets which spoke of tearing down the flag. They have stirred
:41:43. > :41:47.tensions rather than trying to address the issue of how we express
:41:48. > :41:52.sorrow identity in a shared society. With respect to how the flag is
:41:52. > :41:57.flown across the rest of the UK, many councils use the designated
:41:57. > :42:03.days policy. It is recommended, so the idea that it is anti-British is
:42:03. > :42:12.nonsense. There is sensitivity around this issue... I want to
:42:12. > :42:21.bring Edwyn back in. Why did you target Naomi? She is an alliance
:42:21. > :42:30.Party member. Her office is the centre of activity for Alliance in
:42:30. > :42:36.Belfast. That was the office that people could easily relate to women
:42:36. > :42:44.came to making their protest known. Let's get away from this, the cause
:42:44. > :42:50.of the issue is the removal of the flag. It only brings Belfast City
:42:50. > :42:54.Hall into line with the rest of the province. Stormont Parliament
:42:54. > :43:00.already has a similar arrangement to it, some town councils have a
:43:00. > :43:06.similar arrangement. It brings it into line with the amount of days
:43:06. > :43:10.you fly the flag. A doesn't bring it into line with the rest of
:43:10. > :43:13.Northern Ireland. The status quo was working and that has been
:43:13. > :43:18.damaged and we can see the consequences of it. Leaving aside
:43:18. > :43:22.the people engaging in violence on the street, and that is to be
:43:22. > :43:25.condemned, we need to reflect their hundreds of thousands of people
:43:25. > :43:35.across Northern Ireland who have been greatly offended by this
:43:35. > :43:37.
:43:37. > :43:39.particular decision. Am afraid we are going to have to leave it there.
:43:39. > :43:42.It's approaching quarter to 12. You're watching the Sunday Politics.
:43:42. > :43:45.Coming up in just over twenty minutes, I'll be looking at the
:43:45. > :43:55.week ahead with our political panel. Until then, the Sunday Politics
:43:55. > :44:00.
:44:00. > :44:05.Hello and welcome. Coming up later - a dozen fire stations to close,
:44:05. > :44:13.500 firefighters to be lost. What effect of that have on the safety
:44:13. > :44:19.of Londoners? Joining us today the Conservative MP Mary McLeod, and
:44:19. > :44:24.Meg Hillier, Hackney and Shoreditch for Labour. First this week, a
:44:24. > :44:31.recipe for reform? Proposals to change the face of the capital's
:44:31. > :44:36.police force have been unveiled. The strands to them, the closure of
:44:36. > :44:39.some stations and dismantling the safe neighbourhood teams in
:44:39. > :44:49.electoral districts in the capital in favour of a more centralised
:44:49. > :44:49.
:44:49. > :44:55.It is Bobby's, not buildings, that a rest on burglars. That's the
:44:55. > :45:01.mantra. Over the next couple of years, the Met will sell off 200
:45:01. > :45:06.buildings, including New Scotland Yard. In addition, more than 1,100
:45:06. > :45:10.supervisor and management positions will go. Over the same period, the
:45:10. > :45:15.target is to cut crime by 20%, whilst increasing public confidence
:45:15. > :45:24.in the police by the same figure. The Met is trying to use the Post
:45:24. > :45:32.Office to replace some police counters. However, will Londoners
:45:32. > :45:42.be convinced by such major changes? Well, is Meg Hillier convinced?
:45:42. > :45:46.
:45:46. > :45:53.am not happy about any reduction in police officers. On stations, in my
:45:53. > :45:59.area... I am less concerned generally about those, because
:45:59. > :46:03.frankly, it is difficult to contact the police at the moment, however
:46:03. > :46:07.you try to do it. They have really got to up their game on contact
:46:07. > :46:10.with the public altogether. If this cuts programme does not deliver
:46:10. > :46:14.better contact with the police, we need to be on top of them about
:46:14. > :46:18.that. It is not about the numbers of stations, it is about that
:46:18. > :46:25.contact. You can queue for half an hour at the police station and then
:46:25. > :46:29.not get a great service, and I think it is abysmal. Uni good
:46:29. > :46:37.access on the telephone, and you need good police stations as well.
:46:37. > :46:42.Frankly, Stoke Newington police station, in my local area, is a
:46:42. > :46:47.terrible service at the moment. You go in and you queue for ages. It is
:46:47. > :46:50.not a good way to do is things like passing on intelligence. Having
:46:50. > :46:54.locally-based offices could work well, as long as they are there
:46:54. > :46:58.when they are supposed to be. As long as you can contact the police
:46:58. > :47:02.24 hours a day, seven days a week, in an emergency, or indeed just to
:47:02. > :47:09.pass on information. That is where we need better quality of service.
:47:09. > :47:13.Can you defend these proposals? First of all, on numbers, there are
:47:13. > :47:22.more police officers now in London than we had under Ken Livingstone
:47:22. > :47:28.as mayor. We have had this debate again and again. The numbers will
:47:28. > :47:32.be lower in the boroughs from 2010 onwards. There will be more police
:47:32. > :47:36.officers in London in 2015 than there were under Ken Livingstone.
:47:36. > :47:40.That is true. In terms of these proposals, the key thing about
:47:40. > :47:44.cutting crime, and crime in London has gone down, therefore, what I
:47:44. > :47:49.want is to get police officers out on the streets, visible, not in
:47:49. > :47:53.buildings. Yes, people need to be a good contact the police. That's why
:47:53. > :48:01.things like the 101 number are going to be really important.
:48:01. > :48:06.trying to move this forward, so, you would be happy to see some of
:48:06. > :48:13.these buildings going, but what people do not know yet if any,
:48:13. > :48:18.where will this new access be? well, they will be finalising these
:48:18. > :48:22.proposals on that at the moment. But in principle, if that is what
:48:22. > :48:29.you're asking, then we have to look at getting more police out on the
:48:29. > :48:34.streets. That's what the public want. You have had these models of
:48:34. > :48:40.six uniformed officers in your constituency, electoral districts,
:48:40. > :48:44.all 6 assigned, but that has been reduced to two in each area - will
:48:44. > :48:49.at continue to give reassurance? think there is reassurance, with
:48:49. > :48:52.increasing numbers of visible officers. I think the public liked
:48:52. > :48:56.to have some form of police presence, that they know they can
:48:56. > :49:01.go somewhere, and it is finding appropriate ones in each borough to
:49:02. > :49:05.make it happen in London. But let's look at the results. This is all
:49:05. > :49:10.about making sure we are cutting crime. That's the measure that I
:49:10. > :49:14.will use. It is true, that is a measure we will all be using. One
:49:14. > :49:18.of the real benefits of having neighbourhood based police is
:49:18. > :49:21.having a friendly face for people to pass on little bit of
:49:21. > :49:26.intelligence. It makes it feel like everybody working together against
:49:26. > :49:30.crime, rather than having a distant, remote place to report these things.
:49:30. > :49:37.I am very concerned already about the quality of access to police.
:49:37. > :49:42.And I think that these cuts could mask that. In terms of that
:49:42. > :49:45.relationship, one important aspect... We should stress that
:49:45. > :49:49.there will be more consultation, and final proposals have not yet
:49:49. > :49:54.been put forward. What about the Fire Service? It has to find cuts
:49:54. > :49:58.of about �45 million over the next two years. 12 stations will be
:49:58. > :50:01.closed, the fleet of fire engines will be reduced and more than 500
:50:01. > :50:11.firefighters will go. In a moment, the Fire Commissioner will be
:50:11. > :50:14.
:50:14. > :50:20.telling us all about the possible impact. But first, this report. The
:50:20. > :50:25.Fire Service as we know it best, tackling blazes across London. But
:50:25. > :50:32.it is also vital for its disaster, terrorism and search and rescue
:50:32. > :50:37.response. Now, in the spot like is this Fire Service itself. -- now in
:50:37. > :50:41.the spotlight is the Fire Service itself. The London force needs to
:50:41. > :50:46.cut �45 million over the next two years. Deeper cuts had been
:50:46. > :50:50.expected, and the Brigade has already been making headway,
:50:50. > :50:58.finding �11 million ore ready for this year. Now, the Fire Service
:50:58. > :51:05.has found another �30 million for the following financial year. It is
:51:05. > :51:15.the fire stations themselves which are for the chop. Another 12 have
:51:15. > :51:20.been earmarked for closure... A total of 18 fire engines are to be
:51:20. > :51:24.cut, and the Brigade is set to lose more than 500 firefighters. The
:51:24. > :51:29.fire brigade says response times will not be affected. In some areas,
:51:29. > :51:32.it will even improve, they say, as the remaining fire engines will be
:51:32. > :51:38.redistributed. There are still concerns that these cuts will have
:51:38. > :51:41.an impact. Anybody who knows anything about fire knows that the
:51:41. > :51:45.human body, the brain, cannot survive for more than a few minutes
:51:45. > :51:49.in a smoke-filled environment. If your local fire station closes, and
:51:49. > :51:53.you have to rely on a fire station much further afield, there is every
:51:53. > :51:56.chance you will be at much greater risk. Unquestionably we will see a
:51:56. > :52:01.higher number of deaths and injuries as a result of this.
:52:01. > :52:08.the past decade, the number of fires in London on a daily basis
:52:08. > :52:16.has halved, from around 150 to 75. With the capital set to lose 12
:52:16. > :52:21.fire stations and 18 engines, could his record be at stake? Joining me
:52:21. > :52:29.now is the Fire Commissioner, Ron Dobson. In your time, how many fire
:52:29. > :52:35.stations have you seen close? memory, there were five in 1998,
:52:35. > :52:40.and one in 2007. So that's six in 15 years. Within a couple of years,
:52:40. > :52:47.you're going to close 12... important thing to remember,
:52:47. > :52:50.firstly, is that during the last 10 years, we have seen the number of
:52:51. > :52:55.fires reducing by more than a third. The number of incidents we have
:52:55. > :53:01.attended has also been reduced by a third. So, significant changes in
:53:01. > :53:06.the risks we face. We have got an attendance target of six minutes
:53:06. > :53:09.across the whole of London. There are some areas of London this and
:53:09. > :53:12.we do not achieve that, but this plan will actually bring more
:53:12. > :53:18.boroughs within that target standard. We can come on to those
:53:18. > :53:22.targets in a minute, a possible improvement, even, in those figures.
:53:22. > :53:26.We we can alter that. But in terms of the closures, if over these 10
:53:26. > :53:32.years, and we know we have got this downward trend, but why has it
:53:32. > :53:35.taken you so long to make the savings, you must have been
:53:35. > :53:42.incredibly bloated? We review the arrangements every three years. We
:53:42. > :53:47.have made some other changes. you are able to get rid of 12
:53:47. > :53:51.stations in two years, what have you been doing the? We have reduced
:53:51. > :53:54.the number of fires, we have been using the resources that we have
:53:54. > :54:02.got to educate the public. We have now got to the point where we think
:54:02. > :54:12.we can reduce it. If you have reduced it so far, and now you lose
:54:12. > :54:13.
:54:13. > :54:20.that number, then presumably... would say the reduction but we have
:54:20. > :54:24.seen will continue. Numbers will continue to come down, the public
:54:24. > :54:28.will continue to be educated. The standards across the whole of
:54:28. > :54:36.London will be maintained. How can you achieve this holy grail,
:54:36. > :54:43.improving things, with fewer people? We have got targets of six
:54:43. > :54:47.minutes for the first response, and eight minutes for the second.
:54:48. > :54:53.on your targets. Those are nationwide... No, those are London
:54:53. > :54:58.targets. Every fire authority sets its own targets. We have the best
:54:58. > :55:02.standards in the country. We are the quickest to get a fire engine
:55:02. > :55:07.out anywhere in the country.. But the response times will not be as
:55:07. > :55:13.good, because you will not have so many engines and stations... At the
:55:13. > :55:23.moment, we have more fire stations in the centre of London. What we
:55:23. > :55:24.
:55:25. > :55:29.are now doing is redistributing the cover to get an even level of cover.
:55:29. > :55:36.But in central London, the fire engines will still not get there so
:55:36. > :55:41.quickly, albeit they may stay within the targets? Any change will
:55:41. > :55:44.be measured in terms of seconds, rather than anything else. But we
:55:44. > :55:52.know that seconds can make the difference. It does not take very
:55:52. > :55:56.long for people to die in fires. it does not. We are achieving our
:55:56. > :56:05.targets in most boroughs. But in many areas, we are doing even
:56:05. > :56:11.better than that. One extra borough will be brought into the six-minute
:56:11. > :56:19.target, so that 32 out of 33 will get a second appliance within eight
:56:19. > :56:24.minutes. Be in my constituency, one station is going, in the
:56:24. > :56:31.neighbouring constituency, Bow is also going. Also Clerkenwell. And
:56:31. > :56:34.my area is growing in population. My concern is that getting rid of
:56:34. > :56:39.12 fire stations, all at once, because of the cuts, let's be clear,
:56:39. > :56:43.is not actually planning for the future growth of places in London.
:56:43. > :56:52.But the number of fires is going down? Let's hope that still
:56:52. > :56:55.continues. The preventive work is a good thing. In my area, when we
:56:55. > :57:00.have a higher incidence than average of fires, we still need a
:57:00. > :57:04.lot of that as well. You can be honest your constituents - we do
:57:04. > :57:09.not need these fire stations, yes, we want firefighters offering
:57:09. > :57:14.safety advice, but we do not need nearly as many engines or buildings.
:57:14. > :57:18.In west London, there is little changed, in terms of the proposals,
:57:18. > :57:25.and this is only a consultation, remember. So, I do not lose any
:57:25. > :57:28.stations. It is a consultation, but there is not much choice. But I
:57:28. > :57:35.think you need to look at this across the city as a whole. It is
:57:35. > :57:39.about saving lives. It sounds like we have had good results on that.
:57:39. > :57:44.But across London, the population is transient, people move around,
:57:44. > :57:48.so I think it makes sense to do this review every three years. I
:57:48. > :57:52.would encourage the public to respond to this consultation, where
:57:52. > :57:57.they have worries, and then hopefully we will get a result that
:57:57. > :58:03.makes sense. Once you have got rid of these for a stations, those
:58:04. > :58:09.sites will have gone forever. thing I want to ask you before you
:58:09. > :58:12.go - I have heard recently, someone at City Hall, suggesting that if
:58:12. > :58:17.you're closing these fire stations, they might be used for new schools,
:58:17. > :58:24.is that a discussion you have had with anybody? No, it is just
:58:24. > :58:28.rumours. In terms of the way we reduce fire deaths and injuries,
:58:28. > :58:33.this is a broad consultation, including lots of other things
:58:33. > :58:36.within the London safety plan. Actually, safety from fire and fire
:58:36. > :58:42.deaths is not about having a fire station and every corner. It is
:58:42. > :58:45.about educating people. -- on every corner. There is no evidence that
:58:45. > :58:49.population growth in London actually increases the risk of fire.
:58:49. > :58:53.Thank you very much indeed. Now, how to find affordable care for
:58:53. > :58:56.your children, so you can combine it better with your work?
:58:56. > :59:01.Barnardo's has released a report calling on Hubble to make work pay
:59:01. > :59:04.for low-income parents in particular, by increasing the hours
:59:04. > :59:09.of free child care and the number of people who will benefit under
:59:09. > :59:12.the future universal credit. -- calling on the Government. At the
:59:12. > :59:18.moment it says too many are caught in a poverty trap. London has the
:59:18. > :59:24.highest childcare cost in the country, with it costing around �5
:59:24. > :59:30.an hour for a nursery place in London. Some parents even find
:59:30. > :59:37.themselves out of pocket by working. On average nursery places cost 24%
:59:37. > :59:41.more than elsewhere in Britain. the moment, everybody gets 15 hours
:59:42. > :59:48.of free child care. If the family decides to work 24 hours, they will
:59:48. > :59:54.be more than �7 a week worse off. If they then want to increase hours
:59:54. > :59:58.to 35 hours of work, they will be a massive �15 worse off. Double it is
:59:58. > :00:02.not just London's high childcare costs which make it difficult for
:00:02. > :00:06.working mothers and fathers... Those problems are magnified in
:00:06. > :00:10.London because of the way the transport system works, the high
:00:10. > :00:17.costs of transport, as well as the fact that a lot of jobs, especially
:00:17. > :00:21.jobs at the minimum wage, require you to work unusual hours. But one
:00:21. > :00:26.London council, Camden, has bucked the trend, this week announcing it
:00:26. > :00:30.will increase the statutory number of hours from 15 to 25. Critics of
:00:30. > :00:35.the system say poor parents in the capital are this incentivised from
:00:35. > :00:40.working, so are some parents in London destined to be labelled as
:00:40. > :00:46.shirkers? -- disincentivised. What needs to happen here? We want to
:00:46. > :00:50.try to help families where we can, which is why we are looking at the
:00:50. > :00:54.proposals to make a difference and turn things around. Do you like the
:00:54. > :01:00.idea of a potential tax break, which has been mooted? But then we
:01:00. > :01:06.read in a newspaper that it has been delayed, talk of this �2,000
:01:06. > :01:10.tax relief...? I think it is worth looking at. Today, I had an event
:01:10. > :01:16.in Chiswick for women, looking to turn them into entrepreneurs, many
:01:16. > :01:19.of them with children. In London, we have fewer women as a percentage
:01:19. > :01:23.working than anywhere else in the country. I think that is a huge
:01:23. > :01:29.amount of talent that we want to engage with. We want to do that,
:01:29. > :01:35.but how? If and when the universal credit system is introduced, there
:01:35. > :01:40.will not be that incentive to work, to do that extra bit, because the
:01:40. > :01:44.cost of childcare will nullify it. That's why we are saying, let's
:01:44. > :01:49.looked separately at child care, to say, what can we do to make sure
:01:49. > :01:56.that we are supporting women getting back into the workplace?
:01:56. > :02:04.That is why we are looking at proposals in terms of looking at
:02:04. > :02:10.how you support getting two-year- olds care... The coalition has
:02:10. > :02:15.introduced the guaranteed statutory 15 hours for two-year-olds...
:02:15. > :02:20.That's for the most vulnerable ones, yes. But what we are talking about
:02:20. > :02:27.here is working parents. Friendly, 15 hours a week for the most
:02:27. > :02:35.vulnerable two-year-olds is not going to help working parents. The
:02:35. > :02:39.15 hours is not enough to work. This is because they cannot always
:02:39. > :02:44.buy on top, it is complex. Let the clear, we need to be bold about
:02:44. > :02:47.this. The Government's response has been shambolic. We have had these
:02:47. > :02:57.leaks to the Sunday papers. We hear that there are still arguments
:02:57. > :03:00.
:03:00. > :03:06.going on. We need to see... If you let me finish. Why are we having
:03:06. > :03:11.this issue now? The last Labour government introduced Sure Start
:03:11. > :03:17.centres, they introduced extra free hours, and I am not going to sit
:03:17. > :03:21.here and say... Why on earth are you now having an issue with what
:03:21. > :03:24.we are trying to do? We all need to be bolder, across the political
:03:25. > :03:28.divide, and say that child care is an investment, particularly for
:03:28. > :03:38.working mothers, because the tax that they will pay, the career
:03:38. > :03:50.
:03:50. > :03:57.opportunities they will have, as Let's stop arguing about that one
:03:57. > :04:03.and argue about something else in a moment, but he was a round up in 60
:04:03. > :04:07.seconds. The South London health care trust should be broken up
:04:07. > :04:12.according to its specialist the administrator. It has run up debts
:04:12. > :04:22.of 50 million. Jeremy Hunt will make a decision on the strapped
:04:22. > :04:27.
:04:27. > :04:35.trust -- cash strapped trust in February. The Mayor's Fund charity
:04:35. > :04:41.has announced it will put 600 and for the capital's most deprived
:04:41. > :04:47.children. It was discovered children have been passing out in
:04:47. > :04:52.lessons because of hunger. A New Year and a new start for Ray
:04:52. > :04:59.Lewis, former deputy mayor, returning in a paid role to re-
:04:59. > :05:09.grade the mentor scheme. He left in 2000 date after questions over
:05:09. > :05:10.
:05:10. > :05:20.financial irregularities. Ray Lewis back, is that right?
:05:20. > :05:21.
:05:21. > :05:28.don't think it is a good thing. I can't understand how he can be
:05:28. > :05:32.earning �20,000 for one day's work a week. It is good the mayor once
:05:32. > :05:38.more mentoring, but there are plenty of other people who can do
:05:38. > :05:43.it. Why go back to somebody who has not delivered? Mary McLeod, he left
:05:43. > :05:48.and design because of concerns from the Church of England which the
:05:48. > :05:52.mayor does not seem to have addressed, but he asked him back.
:05:52. > :05:58.Not thing has been proven, and dial as think people are innocent until
:05:58. > :06:03.proven guilty. Not criminally of course. No nothing has been proven
:06:03. > :06:08.so we should take it at face value and he denies these allegations but
:06:08. > :06:14.I do believe British value in terms of the rules of law, people are
:06:14. > :06:21.innocent until proven guilty. you have expected the mayor to do a
:06:21. > :06:24.full investigation into it? The two small up to the Church of England.
:06:24. > :06:32.They passed their concerns to the mayor but it is not immediately
:06:32. > :06:36.clear... The mayor has decided that he thinks Ray is doing a good job
:06:36. > :06:41.and he wants to offer him this position. Let's be clear about this
:06:41. > :06:51.- mentoring for young people in London is critical and role models
:06:51. > :06:57.
:06:57. > :07:00.are important. I agree on that. Andrew, back to you. In a moment
:07:00. > :07:04.we'll look ahead to the big stories that will dominate politics next
:07:04. > :07:06.week with our political panel, but first the news at noon with Chris
:07:06. > :07:09.Rogers. The First Minister of Northern Ireland Peter Robinson has
:07:09. > :07:14.said the only way to stop the recent violence there is through
:07:14. > :07:16.political dialogue. He was speaking after 29 police officers were
:07:17. > :07:20.injured in the latest violence linked to a decision to restrict
:07:20. > :07:26.the flying of the Union flag at Belfast City Hall.
:07:26. > :07:30.The debris left behind after a dangerous night. Calm has returned
:07:30. > :07:35.to this part of east Belfast but the severe violence here has been a
:07:35. > :07:38.setback to the people working to end the trouble. It is almost six
:07:38. > :07:42.weeks since Belfast City Council voted to restrict the flying of the
:07:42. > :07:48.Union flag, sparking a dispute which has brought loyalists on to
:07:48. > :07:53.the street. The First Minister says violence will achieve nothing.
:07:53. > :07:56.flag is not going to go up because somebody throws a petrol bomb at a
:07:56. > :08:01.policeman. The only way forward is through the political process and
:08:01. > :08:05.we are trying to encourage people to engage in that, and bring
:08:05. > :08:09.forward channels so we can talk to people on the ground. He hoped
:08:09. > :08:13.those initiatives will find a way to stop this sort of trouble.
:08:13. > :08:19.Yesterday 29 police officers were injured, their highest casualty
:08:19. > :08:24.figure since the dispute started. Rioting broke out when loyalists
:08:24. > :08:29.walked past the nationalist area. Both sides were involved in clashes,
:08:29. > :08:33.then loyalists attacked the police with petrol bombs and stones. This
:08:33. > :08:38.week senior politicians from Belfast, Dublin and London will
:08:38. > :08:42.hold a meeting to discuss the recent trouble. The people involved
:08:42. > :08:47.believe the situation can be resolved but hopes take a hit with
:08:47. > :08:51.every night of disruption and destruction.
:08:51. > :08:56.Na year-old British girl has been shot dead while on holiday in
:08:56. > :09:03.Jamaica. Imani Green from Balham in south London was in a shop when a
:09:03. > :09:08.gunman opened fire. Several models were also injured in the attack.
:09:08. > :09:15.The court in Egypt has ordered a retrial for the country's former
:09:15. > :09:20.President Hosni Mubarak. He was overthrown in 2011 and imprisoned
:09:20. > :09:24.for failing to prevent the deaths of hundreds of demonstrators during
:09:24. > :09:31.the revolt that forced him from power. Our correspondent is in
:09:31. > :09:36.Cairo. Does this come as a surprise? Not exactly because Hosni
:09:36. > :09:40.Mubarak's lawyers have been pushing hard for this appeal, but it is not
:09:40. > :09:44.just an appeal against the life sentence that he received, but
:09:44. > :09:48.against the entire conviction and so it will be a full retrial. As
:09:48. > :09:54.one lawyer said to me, what happened before those extraordinary
:09:54. > :10:01.scenes of Hosni Mubarak appearing behind a cage in a court room, they
:10:01. > :10:04.appear for nothing now, and that has shocked the relatives of the
:10:04. > :10:08.victims of 850 or so protesters that were killed, they feel he
:10:08. > :10:14.should have got a death sentence and found guilty on the more
:10:14. > :10:18.serious charges of ordering the killings. This could backfire
:10:18. > :10:22.because he will face those charges again, but there is finally a
:10:22. > :10:25.question about his health and whether he is in no condition to
:10:25. > :10:30.face retrial because as well as the other complications he has had in
:10:30. > :10:34.terms of his health, a couple of weeks ago he slipped in prison and
:10:34. > :10:41.he is not in prison any more, he is in a military hospital because he
:10:41. > :10:46.broke his ribs. There are questions about whether he can face a retrial.
:10:46. > :10:53.That sold for now. There will be a full round up at 6 o'clock. Now,
:10:53. > :10:59.back to Andrew. So, politics is up and running
:10:59. > :11:01.again in 2013 and what's dominating? Well, coalition, Europe
:11:01. > :11:11.and maybe a Clegg fightback. Some things never change. All will
:11:11. > :11:15.
:11:15. > :11:18.Let's start with the interview with Eric Pickles, particularly on this
:11:18. > :11:23.business of whether there is any official estimates of how many
:11:23. > :11:27.Romanians and Bulgarians will come here in the year when they have the
:11:27. > :11:32.right and privileges of European membership. I think he began by
:11:33. > :11:37.saying he didn't have a figure, but then he said he did but he wouldn't
:11:37. > :11:42.tell me. It is fascinating but I don't think his position is
:11:42. > :11:48.sustainable. He said he was not confident in his figures so I
:11:48. > :11:51.interpret that as either the figures he has seen are either on
:11:51. > :11:57.realistically lope in which case the government will be slated for
:11:57. > :12:01.them, or they are terrifyingly high, in which case they also have a
:12:01. > :12:06.political problem. My colleagues in the daily papers will be scurrying
:12:06. > :12:11.around trying to get hold of the figures. The everybody remembers
:12:11. > :12:18.when it was the turn of Poland and other eastern European countries to
:12:18. > :12:23.have full membership rights, Andrew said only about 15,000 people would
:12:23. > :12:28.come, and about three-quarters of a million came. My view is that the
:12:28. > :12:32.influx of people was not a disaster, what was a disaster politically was
:12:32. > :12:36.the underestimation because it made the government seemed incompetent.
:12:36. > :12:46.It is understandable Eric Pickles would not want to make that mistake
:12:46. > :12:47.
:12:47. > :12:51.again. My question is is this figure subject to a Freedom of
:12:51. > :12:55.Information request? He began by telling me he had not had an
:12:55. > :12:59.official estimate from the Home Office, but then said the Home
:12:59. > :13:04.Office had told him nothing, then said he did have this figure. He
:13:04. > :13:08.could not have a figure unless the Home Office provided him with at
:13:08. > :13:12.least a variety of projections. That's right. Ed Miliband was
:13:12. > :13:19.saying this morning that David Cameron is in danger of sleep
:13:19. > :13:22.walking out of the European Union. He slowed me feel Eric Pickles was
:13:22. > :13:27.sleepwalking into his interview with the you. The challenge he
:13:27. > :13:32.faces is that the challenge of implementing Margaret Thatcher's
:13:32. > :13:42.vision for the enlargement of the European Union to include former
:13:42. > :13:45.
:13:45. > :13:51.members of the Warsaw pact. We did not put in seven year transitional
:13:51. > :13:56.arrangements, as we did with Poland and Hungary. To put it politely, I
:13:57. > :14:04.remember going to Bulgaria before they came in in 2007 and thinking
:14:04. > :14:11.are these people really ready? For example, you see motorcars driving
:14:11. > :14:17.the streets with police markings, and that happens because when they
:14:17. > :14:21.confiscate cars from gangsters they can turn them into police motor
:14:21. > :14:24.cars. They are geographically significant countries, very
:14:25. > :14:29.important for the trafficking of people coming into the European
:14:29. > :14:38.Union, better to have them in than out but you have a big challenge.
:14:38. > :14:45.We will see what the newspapers make of them. The Sunday Times had
:14:45. > :14:50.a story today from the guru, Steve Hilton, now out in California but
:14:50. > :14:55.used to be a key figure in Downing Street. He exposes impotent number
:14:55. > :15:02.turn. He is quite devastating, isn't he? Should we link the timing
:15:02. > :15:08.of this to Mr Hayward's appearance in the Commons last week we could
:15:08. > :15:13.not his finest hour? To be fair, I don't think Steve controlled the
:15:13. > :15:19.timing. The mean a student slipped it to you? I couldn't possibly
:15:19. > :15:24.comment. For those in the Westminster village, we neo- he
:15:24. > :15:30.became frustrated with his inability to push through the
:15:30. > :15:34.radical things he wanted to do. -- we know he became frustrated. He
:15:34. > :15:41.wants to be radical in the face of a stifling Whitehall machine and
:15:41. > :15:45.Brussels as well, and I think David Cameron must miss him. We are at a
:15:45. > :15:55.stage where the Tories need radical ideas. Every government needs a
:15:55. > :15:57.
:15:57. > :16:01.maverick. He is just not there. This is the interesting thing about
:16:01. > :16:06.the story. We know that Steve Hilton feels this way but it is not
:16:06. > :16:10.an opinion confined to him. There are Tory backbenchers and people in
:16:10. > :16:15.Downing Street who are continually frustrated with the ease at which
:16:15. > :16:23.the civil service prevails on public service reform. I want to
:16:23. > :16:26.move on to radio disc jockey. Damian McBride has just written
:16:26. > :16:31.this morning saying where is the government grid? When David Cameron
:16:31. > :16:35.came in he said he wanted fewer special advisers, one-time saying
:16:35. > :16:39.what is the policy on criminal justice? They didn't know because
:16:39. > :16:49.they didn't have proper advisers. They have increased that and they
:16:49. > :16:53.
:16:53. > :16:58.have a new policy unit but it is Nick Clegg will be doing an
:16:58. > :17:03.interview on a London radio station. But in this day and age, everybody
:17:03. > :17:06.can listen to it. He got away with the first week, but there will be
:17:06. > :17:12.some weeks when things will happen that he will just not want to talk
:17:12. > :17:21.about... Exactly, and he is also prone to various rhetorical quirks
:17:21. > :17:26.which people pick up on, like an over-reliance on cliches. Also,
:17:26. > :17:30.getting confused between debt and deficit. Doing it once, and doing
:17:30. > :17:35.it like that, is one thing, but doing it consistently is another.
:17:35. > :17:38.And even if he avoid catastrophe, I don't think he will achieve what he
:17:38. > :17:43.ultimately wants, which is it resurrection of his political
:17:43. > :17:46.popularity in the country. I do not think he has much to lose. You say
:17:46. > :17:53.it was a great success this week, and his people seemed quite happy
:17:53. > :17:57.with it. The slight problem I have is, I cannot get that image of him
:17:57. > :18:01.in that thing out of his head. He has nothing to lose. His popularity
:18:01. > :18:11.is at an all-time low, and he is quite good in those forums. He is
:18:11. > :18:15.very chatty. Week, the political commentators, we have been selling
:18:15. > :18:25.Nick Clegg for a long time - would a judicious investor may be by one
:18:25. > :18:27.
:18:27. > :18:31.at the moment?! I think indeed, he is in such a low place, the only
:18:31. > :18:35.way is up. But I think on LBC, he is much more confident. He came
:18:35. > :18:38.back after the summer, saying, I am going to differentiate myself from
:18:38. > :18:41.the Conservatives, I am not going to be afraid, I am going to say
:18:41. > :18:44.what I think. And you will see that tomorrow, when Liberal Democrat
:18:44. > :18:47.appears in the House of Lords will vote with Labour to try to defer
:18:47. > :18:51.the shrinking of the House of Commons until after the next
:18:51. > :18:54.election. The Tories are furious, there is nothing they can do, and
:18:54. > :18:58.the Liberal Democrats do need to differentiate themselves, and that
:18:58. > :19:01.is a prime example. Being on a London radio station in the morning
:19:01. > :19:05.will not change his political history, but it could be part of an
:19:05. > :19:11.overall attempt at a fight back. am of the view that nothing can
:19:11. > :19:17.change his level of popularity in the country. Isabell Oakeshott is
:19:17. > :19:25.right that he has little to lose, but the amount he has to gain is
:19:25. > :19:29.also up for question. Are we still selling, or buying? I think he will
:19:29. > :19:35.be pushed out in the end, but there is the possibility that he could be
:19:35. > :19:45.pushed out and become a national treasure. But remember, he will not
:19:45. > :19:45.
:19:45. > :19:49.be wearing that incredible hulk onesy. Well, I had no idea what one
:19:49. > :19:54.of those wars, but I do now. It is amazing what you can learn here in
:19:54. > :19:58.there was Mr village. That is all for now. We will all be back at the