03/03/2013

:00:42. > :00:46.Good morning, hoax. Welcome to the programme. After the Tories'

:00:46. > :00:49.disastrous showing in the Eastleigh by-election, the Prime Minister

:00:49. > :00:53.attempts a fightback. But he tells his party there will be no lurch to

:00:53. > :00:56.the right. How is that going down with restless backbenchers? Who

:00:56. > :01:03.better to ask than Chief Whip Andrew Mitchell? After another bad

:01:03. > :01:11.week for the economy, we ask Vince Cable if the Government can

:01:11. > :01:16.continue cutting and stimulate growth. Right here we have the

:01:16. > :01:20.stale bread... And R Michael Gove's plans for history horrible or just

:01:20. > :01:26.what the doctor ordered? We will ask Dr David Starkey, who goes

:01:26. > :01:29.head-to-head with Professor Richard Evans and be -- on the historic

:01:29. > :01:33.plans. In London, plans to double the

:01:33. > :01:43.number of journeys by river. Is the Thames a realistic option as a

:01:43. > :01:47.

:01:47. > :01:51.All that and a political panel offering more fun, insight and

:01:51. > :01:58.excitement than you will find this side of a post by-election pub

:01:58. > :02:04.crawl around East Leake with Nigel Farage. It is Janan Ganesh, Isabel

:02:04. > :02:08.Oakeshott and Steve Richards. So, the Tories postmortem continues

:02:08. > :02:16.with David Cameron using an article in the Sunday Telegraph to reject

:02:16. > :02:21.calls from in his party to lurch to the right. The Conservative Party

:02:21. > :02:25.must stay on the common ground, representing... No, not the middle

:02:25. > :02:30.ground. This is not about triangulating a point in politics

:02:30. > :02:35.between us and other parties. It is certainly not about a lurch in any

:02:35. > :02:38.direction. It's about making the success of these things, in the

:02:38. > :02:42.most challenging circumstances of any government in modern times,

:02:42. > :02:46.that this government has set about doing. When the Prime Minister is

:02:46. > :02:51.in trouble he writes an article for a Sunday newspaper. Did you enjoy

:02:51. > :02:56.it? I didn't get to the end. I got about two sentences three before

:02:56. > :03:03.losing the will to live. He can take heart from the fact that the

:03:03. > :03:08.reaction from backbenchers has been fairly muted. David Davies had said

:03:08. > :03:11.that if the Tories came third there would be a crisis. On other Daily

:03:11. > :03:14.Politics, he said that. Clearly, there has not been a crisis. Having

:03:14. > :03:18.said that, there is something slightly ominous about how muted

:03:18. > :03:22.the reaction has been. It feels to me that something fishy might be

:03:22. > :03:25.going on. We need to wait and see what happens at the budget. Maybe

:03:25. > :03:31.they are waiting at the budget. If they get another omnishambles

:03:31. > :03:34.budget, it is going to be gloves off? It's either the budget or the

:03:34. > :03:38.May local elections they are waiting for, I suspect. I thought

:03:38. > :03:42.the article in the Sunday Telegraph was not scintillating. But it's

:03:42. > :03:46.called point, that the party should not move to the right, is basically

:03:46. > :03:52.correct. The ultimate proof of that was easily. You have to remember

:03:52. > :03:58.that they did feel a stridently conservative candidate. They fought

:03:58. > :04:01.a core vote campaign. They even used UKIP coloured purple and

:04:01. > :04:07.yellow campaign paraphernalia. The campaign took place only six weeks

:04:07. > :04:11.after the in-out speech that David Cameron gave on Europe. It's

:04:11. > :04:15.difficult to see how they could have done any more to appeal to the

:04:15. > :04:20.right-wing UKIP vote. And it didn't work. That leads me to conclude

:04:20. > :04:23.that competing with UKIP on the right is a mug's game. The further

:04:23. > :04:28.you go in that direction, the further you alienate wavering

:04:28. > :04:31.centrist voters. The Prime Minister says he's not moving to the right.

:04:31. > :04:34.The Home Secretary and just a secretary at out of manoeuvres. One

:04:34. > :04:38.is calling for total withdrawal from the European Court of Human

:04:38. > :04:42.Rights. The other is saying they will get rid of the Human Rights

:04:42. > :04:46.Act. What is that about? Exactly, slightly conflicting messages

:04:46. > :04:52.coming out from the various Sunday papers. You get those quite right-

:04:52. > :04:56.wing headlines. We are not lurching from the right, that is what is

:04:56. > :05:00.coming from David Cameron. It's interesting that David Davis gave

:05:00. > :05:04.that interview with you before Eastleigh. He is a formidable

:05:04. > :05:07.operator and he would not have made that warning without intending some

:05:07. > :05:12.kind of follow-up, knowing then that it was likely they would come

:05:12. > :05:17.third. At some point, perhaps around the budget, there will be a

:05:17. > :05:21.follow-up from him and others. They are clearly waiting to time it. It

:05:21. > :05:26.is incredibly interesting, it is because this call to go right,

:05:26. > :05:31.Cameron has said we will not lurch to the right, as some have observed

:05:31. > :05:36.today, quite a lot of what Cameron is arguing for his honour the right.

:05:36. > :05:43.He's off a day in-not referendum, welfare reforms, public service

:05:43. > :05:49.reforms, its difficult to see where he goes coming after the election.

:05:49. > :05:59.It's not just the backbenchers that have some issues, he's not exactly

:05:59. > :06:02.

:06:02. > :06:07.flavour of the month in the party Up and down the country, people are

:06:07. > :06:12.very frustrated. They feel that the voluntary party has not been

:06:12. > :06:16.listened to. There seemed to be a group of modernisers around the

:06:16. > :06:19.Prime Minister that have his ear. We, in Conservative Grassroots,

:06:19. > :06:26.really want to appeal to the Conservative Party leadership to

:06:26. > :06:30.wake up and listen to its core membership. And not just its core

:06:30. > :06:35.membership, loyal Conservative voters, lifelong loyal Conservative

:06:35. > :06:40.voters, who have been utterly switched off by what has been going

:06:40. > :06:44.on for a little while now. Niemi now, former Tory Cabinet

:06:44. > :06:47.minister Andrew Mitchell, back in the political fray after something

:06:47. > :06:54.of an enforced absence. This is his first interview since leaving the

:06:54. > :07:00.Government last year. We are not going to go over the whole pleb

:07:00. > :07:05.incident again. They are saying it is time to listen to the grassroots,

:07:05. > :07:08.they are fed up? I think they are fed up, the protest A3 that your

:07:08. > :07:12.panel has so clearly identified in the earlier part of this programme

:07:12. > :07:20.shows why they are fed up. The question for the Government is if

:07:20. > :07:23.it is pursuing the right policies. In very difficult circumstances, in

:07:23. > :07:28.all of the key areas, I think they are doing exactly that. What

:07:28. > :07:31.lessons did you learn from Eastleigh? That it was a difficult

:07:31. > :07:34.lesson for the Conservative Party, it's not as bad as some I can

:07:35. > :07:39.remember. But it was extremely difficult. The lesson that we have

:07:39. > :07:43.to take away, as any to communicate what we're doing better, and they

:07:43. > :07:48.are, after all, two core texts which show what this government is

:07:48. > :07:52.about. One is David Cameron's speech at the party conference last

:07:52. > :07:58.year, in Birmingham. The other one is the speech that he made about

:07:58. > :08:03.Europe. Both of those two things, most Conservatives can camp on the

:08:03. > :08:07.ground that he set out. But these are not lessons, I asked you what

:08:07. > :08:09.the lessons of Eastleigh were. The reason I ask is because it is quite

:08:09. > :08:13.clear that if you cannot win in Eastleigh you do not have any

:08:13. > :08:16.chance of having an overall majority? I don't think by-

:08:16. > :08:21.elections are a good guide to the result of the next election.

:08:21. > :08:25.there are no lessons? No, there are, the lessons are that we need to

:08:26. > :08:30.communicate what we're doing better. The two speeches I'd mentioned I

:08:30. > :08:34.believe are the core texts. But he said that well before Eastleigh and

:08:34. > :08:38.he still didn't win. And not just a by-election, he did and when his

:08:38. > :08:45.General Election in 2010, Eastleigh was one of your target seats. He

:08:45. > :08:48.didn't win the by-election and your chance of winning Eastleigh is

:08:48. > :08:53.unlikely and therefore your overall majority is unlikely? The policies

:08:53. > :08:57.we are pursuing are the overall best policies for Britain. If you

:08:57. > :09:01.look at the sophisticated polling carried out on election day by Lord

:09:01. > :09:06.Ashcroft, you can see that, at the next election, in a choice between

:09:06. > :09:15.Ed Miliband and David Cameron, the voters of Eastleigh would plump for

:09:15. > :09:19.David Cameron. How deep and serious is the anger? There is a healthy

:09:19. > :09:23.debate on other Tory backbenchers which will, I think, come to a head,

:09:23. > :09:27.if you like, at the time of the budget. This is going to be an

:09:27. > :09:34.extremely important budget. If you ask me, as a former Chief Whip,

:09:34. > :09:38.about discipline on the backbenches, I think that the party has been

:09:38. > :09:42.incredibly disciplined. There will not be another omnishambles budget?

:09:42. > :09:46.I can compare it to John Major's day, when discipline went out of

:09:46. > :09:51.the window. I think they have been very disciplined. David Davies says

:09:51. > :09:56.that it is a crisis for David Cameron, coming third? He wants the

:09:56. > :10:00.Conservative Party to win the next General Election. Well, he is a

:10:00. > :10:03.Tory MP. He is, he wants the Conservative Party to win the

:10:03. > :10:09.election and his advisers always worth listening to. But was he

:10:09. > :10:12.right? I think coming third was deeply disappointing and a bad

:10:12. > :10:17.result for the Conservative Party. I think has to be seen in the

:10:17. > :10:21.context of by-elections, as a protest vote and not a sign of the

:10:21. > :10:24.likely outcome of the next election. On the one hand we had the Prime

:10:24. > :10:30.Minister telling us he is not going to moved to the right. On the other

:10:30. > :10:33.hand, we have Theresa May and Chris Grayling saying we will repeal a

:10:33. > :10:38.hidden Rights Act, we are going to leave the court of human rights

:10:39. > :10:41.altogether. Is that the direction your party should be going in?

:10:41. > :10:44.think the news this morning from Chris Grayling, and I have only

:10:44. > :10:49.seen the interview that he has given, is exactly the right thing

:10:49. > :10:53.to do. I think the approach he is taking will be hugely in Britain's

:10:53. > :10:59.interests. I think we must wait and see what goes into the next

:10:59. > :11:01.manifesto. I would expect something like that TB in it. There is a

:11:01. > :11:07.story in the Mail on Sunday, that you have been in discussions with

:11:07. > :11:15.the Prime Minister about a job as Britain's next to EU commissioner.

:11:15. > :11:20.Is that true? My main aim at the moment is to concentrate on looking

:11:20. > :11:28.after my constituents in Sutton Coldfield. But he had a chat with

:11:28. > :11:31.the Prime Minister about this? chat with the Prime Minister from

:11:31. > :11:36.time to time. But I am not going to do my career planning here.

:11:36. > :11:39.sounds like you have been talking about it? There is an important job

:11:39. > :11:43.to do, to make sure that Europe changes in the interests of

:11:43. > :11:47.everybody in Europe and in Britain. I don't deny that. But my central

:11:48. > :11:52.interest is to support my party in any way I can and look after my

:11:52. > :11:55.constituents in Sutton Coldfield. Keep us posted. House prices are

:11:55. > :11:59.quite low in Brussels, it could be a good time.

:11:59. > :12:02.Now, amid the Lib Dem sex scandal, the Eastleigh by-election and the

:12:02. > :12:06.departing Pope, you might have missed what was a truly awful week

:12:06. > :12:10.for the UK economy. Bad news for the Government and tough times for

:12:10. > :12:15.the man charged with getting Britain's business is booming.

:12:15. > :12:18.Vince Cable is in his third year as a business secretary. His job,

:12:18. > :12:24.trying to get British business and the economy growing again, isn't

:12:24. > :12:27.getting any easier. Last week, Britain lost its treasure it AAA

:12:27. > :12:31.rating and the figures confirmed a shrinking economy for the last

:12:31. > :12:38.quarter of 2012, putting us officially on the verge of one

:12:38. > :12:43.unprecedented triple dip recession. No wonder, with the budget A little

:12:44. > :12:48.under two weeks away, he is said to favour more spending on

:12:48. > :12:54.infrastructure projects. There was some good news. Not the economy,

:12:54. > :12:58.but Eastleigh, where they hold on to Chris Huhne's old seat. That's

:12:58. > :13:07.despite criticism of Nick Clegg's handling of allegations over Lord

:13:07. > :13:11.Rennard. But the Business Secretary were -- is refusing to rule out

:13:11. > :13:20.relay his party one day, so there could be a silver lining for Vince

:13:20. > :13:23.Cable. And he joins me now for the Inflation remains high, and the

:13:23. > :13:28.squeeze on living standards is worse than at any time since the

:13:28. > :13:32.1920s. Sterling is slipping. The deficit reduction has stalled. Bond

:13:32. > :13:37.yields are rising. Productivity is slumping. There is no growth in the

:13:37. > :13:41.economy. The AAA rating is gone. What is the good news about the

:13:41. > :13:46.Government economic strategy? is good news to set aside that long

:13:46. > :13:50.list of difficulties. Job growth is very substantial. 1 million private

:13:50. > :13:56.sector jobs over the last two years. Company formation start-ups are at

:13:56. > :14:01.a record rate. The areas we need to be, exporting to the big emerging

:14:01. > :14:05.markets, big manufacturing countries in particular, education

:14:05. > :14:09.services, there are some positive signs. You are quite right, that

:14:09. > :14:14.list is a grim one and it reflects the depths of the crisis we are

:14:14. > :14:18.emerging from. You have said that manufacturing is a key driver of

:14:18. > :14:23.our economy. But output fell in manufacturing in the 4th quarter of

:14:23. > :14:27.last year, and again last month. So, no growth, no rebalancing of the

:14:27. > :14:31.economy. The manufacturing story is heavily influenced by the fact that

:14:31. > :14:36.a big chunk of manufacturing is construction products, things like

:14:36. > :14:40.steel, cement and glass, which had been hit very badly by the slump in

:14:40. > :14:43.construction. If you look at the bits of manufacturing that adhered

:14:43. > :14:51.to the big emerging markets, like engineering, you have got some very

:14:51. > :14:54.good, successful companies. overall it is down? Lending to

:14:54. > :14:57.businesses, you and the coalition have always been talking about this,

:14:57. > :15:01.that has been going down for months and the rate of decline is even

:15:01. > :15:05.faster, there is less and less going to business? I am alarmed by

:15:05. > :15:09.that as well. It is one of the consequences of the banking crisis.

:15:09. > :15:13.It takes years and years for banks to adjust their balance sheet. One

:15:14. > :15:16.of the casualties has been lending to businesses. The Government has

:15:16. > :15:25.introduced a Funding for Lending scheme, which has mainly helped the

:15:25. > :15:32.Margaret -- mortgage market. The new banks are taking advantage of

:15:32. > :15:35.it and the business bank will help mending. It is a problem and we

:15:35. > :15:45.have got a lot to do, particularly getting the state-owned banks much

:15:45. > :15:53.

:15:53. > :15:57.You were expecting an export boom. No boom, very little growth.

:15:57. > :16:00.exports fall into two distinct categories. Where we are exporting

:16:01. > :16:04.to the growth market of Asia and countries like Turkish and Brazil,

:16:04. > :16:08.we are doing well. There is rapid growth. We started from a will he

:16:08. > :16:12.base. There was neglect for many years and the more competitive

:16:12. > :16:15.exchange rate helps but on the other side half of our exports go

:16:15. > :16:19.to the European Union and they have been clobbered by the crisis there

:16:19. > :16:23.and we have been hit. But in terms of restructuring the economy, it

:16:23. > :16:27.has to come through exports and it is proving pretty... I was looking

:16:27. > :16:32.at comparative figures, both the dollar and sterling have seen a 30%

:16:33. > :16:38.declin since 2006. But American exports over that time are up 70%.

:16:38. > :16:43.Ours are up 10%. They have actually started to slowdown in recent years.

:16:43. > :16:47.It's a pretty terrible record. is. I think the fact is this over a

:16:47. > :16:51.decade-and-a-half, partly because of an over-valued exchange rate,

:16:51. > :16:56.but for more complex reasons, British companies and the

:16:56. > :16:59.Government at the time took their eyes off the big growth markets. We

:16:59. > :17:03.fell horribly behind not just Germany and the US but also

:17:03. > :17:07.countries like France and Italy and rebuilding an exporting

:17:07. > :17:10.infrastructure is a major challenge. We are actually doing it. We are

:17:10. > :17:14.putting in place better trade finance facilities. My department

:17:15. > :17:17.has a whole lot of new products we are trying to help exporters with

:17:18. > :17:21.and putting effort behind trade promotion but you pose the

:17:21. > :17:24.challenge rightly. Here, over two- and-a-half years into power with

:17:24. > :17:28.this coalition, in your particular area, we have manufacturing in

:17:28. > :17:35.decline, lending to business in decline, sterling in decline, but

:17:35. > :17:39.no export boom. It's a remarkable catalogue of failure for a Business

:17:39. > :17:43.Secretary. Not at all. As I said, there are some very positive things

:17:43. > :17:47.happening. Exports to emerging markets, rapid job growth in the

:17:47. > :17:51.private sector, lots of private companies being established and a

:17:51. > :17:56.lot of entrepreneurial activity but we have deep-rooted problems and

:17:56. > :18:00.the kind of things I'm responsible for, the long-term issues which is

:18:00. > :18:03.why we're building an industrial strategy working over the long-term

:18:03. > :18:06.working with our industries, investing in skills and

:18:06. > :18:09.apprenticeships, science and innovation. They take a long time

:18:09. > :18:19.to mature. Let's look at what Nick Clegg said on this. To see what you

:18:19. > :18:30.

:18:30. > :18:35.Do you agree with him? Is he right? Yes, and I have said that many

:18:35. > :18:41.times. And yet for all the talk up there and I have seen you say it

:18:41. > :18:45.too, for extra infrastructure spending, it's still in decline.

:18:45. > :18:50.Public investment was �50 billion a year when you came into power. Last

:18:50. > :18:54.year it was �28 billion. Almost half. Next year it will be �25

:18:54. > :18:58.billion and then in the next couple of years it falls to �22. So you

:18:58. > :19:02.talk about it, but it continues to fall. The decline from �50 billion

:19:02. > :19:05.which you refer to, came from the fact that there had been a big

:19:05. > :19:08.burst of infrastructure spending in the middle of the financial crisis

:19:08. > :19:11.which was rightly the right thing for Alistair Darling to have done

:19:11. > :19:14.but he then slashed capital spending by half and we have been

:19:15. > :19:19.living with the legacy. You have kept with that, you haven't changed.

:19:19. > :19:22.You are not learning Mr Clegg - Mr Clegg said we need to learn from

:19:22. > :19:26.that. But under your coalition's plans, infrastructure spending

:19:26. > :19:31.continues to fall year after year? I think in the Autumn Statement

:19:31. > :19:33.last year we went some way to correcting that. Big capital

:19:34. > :19:37.investment in things like science and universities. But, we need to

:19:37. > :19:43.do a will the more. This is the area where the Government, through

:19:43. > :19:46.the Budget and subsequently now has to focus, getting capital spending

:19:46. > :19:50.going. Big infrastructure projects take years to get off the ground.

:19:50. > :19:55.You cannot just press a button but you have to do it. You say you are

:19:55. > :19:59.doing it. These are the figures from the Treasury public finances

:19:59. > :20:04.data bank dated 225th February. Public spending -- 25th February.

:20:04. > :20:10.Public spending on infrastructure will go from �25 billion next year

:20:10. > :20:14.to �22 billion by 2015-16. For all your talk, it's still declines.

:20:14. > :20:18.Well that has to be reversed. it in the Budget? My colleagues in

:20:18. > :20:21.the Government will be arguing very strongly for a much heavier

:20:21. > :20:24.emphasis on capital spending and infrastructure and getting big

:20:24. > :20:28.products moving. Is the Chancellor listening? I think he is. He is

:20:28. > :20:34.heavily involved in it. We've identified 40 big infrastructure

:20:34. > :20:39.projects. The obstacles to getting them off the ground - partly about

:20:39. > :20:43.funding because PFI has collapsed in the funding crisis. A lot of

:20:43. > :20:48.physical and training problems. If you are doing tunneling, you have

:20:48. > :20:53.to train engineers it, takes time. Exactly. If you are only talking

:20:53. > :20:56.about that and not got to the stage of spending, this kind of

:20:56. > :20:59.infrastructure spending can bring no relief to the current state of

:20:59. > :21:02.the economy it. Won't get us out of the stagnation this year or next?

:21:02. > :21:07.Well there are different kinds of capital spending. The kind of

:21:07. > :21:10.things I'm doing in our department, for every �1 put forward by

:21:10. > :21:14.universities from their own money, we get from private sector, we

:21:14. > :21:17.match it. That happens quickly. There are road projects which

:21:17. > :21:21.involve maintenance rather than big construction which can be moved

:21:21. > :21:23.quickly. We have to get that moving. If you were honest with us, you are

:21:24. > :21:27.deeply disappointed by what happened in this field, aren't you?

:21:27. > :21:31.Yes, I am. I think we should be doing a lot more and that's where

:21:31. > :21:37.the focus has to be now. Your department isn't ring-fenced when

:21:37. > :21:43.it comes to spending cuts. Should health, education and everseas aid

:21:43. > :21:48.remain fing-fenced? -- overseas aid. I have been critical of fence 46

:21:48. > :21:51.fencing, but I accepted the policy. My colleagues agreed we would do a

:21:51. > :21:55.ring-fencing approach in this Parliament. That's what we're

:21:55. > :21:59.committed to and I'm living with it and delivering substantial cuts in

:21:59. > :22:03.my debt. But I think in general it is not a good approach in the long-

:22:03. > :22:10.run. Are you up for any more cuts or due feel, as fillip Hammond the

:22:10. > :22:15.Defence Secretary said this weekend, that he doesn't want any - Philip

:22:15. > :22:20.Hammond. He is what we now call the National Union of Ministers. Are

:22:20. > :22:24.you a member? I think I have been fingered as the shop steward. There

:22:24. > :22:28.is a very strong argument, if we are interested in greth and

:22:28. > :22:32.recovery, for investing more, not less in skills, science and

:22:32. > :22:42.innovation. -- growth. I will make that case in Government. There was

:22:42. > :22:49.

:22:49. > :22:53.a sting with what Mr Hammond had to Do you agree with that? If I was

:22:53. > :22:57.trying to help Philip Hammond with his Budget, I would sympathise with

:22:57. > :23:02.him not wanting to cut front-line troops which if you trapped the

:23:02. > :23:05.Trident missile, which my side of the coalition argues would make

:23:05. > :23:08.significant savings. What about the welfare spending being further cut?

:23:08. > :23:12.I think it would be very difficult to go further down that road. My

:23:12. > :23:16.party has argued that there are elements of universial benefit that

:23:16. > :23:24.we should perhaps be looking at. All right.

:23:24. > :23:27.You wrote to the heads of the big FTSE firms - excuse me - that men-

:23:27. > :23:32.only boardrooms should be a thing of the past. They had them. You

:23:32. > :23:35.urged them to redress the gender balance, telling them to change the

:23:35. > :23:41.paternalistic culture, urge a significant female presence. A bit

:23:41. > :23:44.rich given your party's own record on women? Well, the matter did not

:23:44. > :23:48.the complaints about Lord Rennard very well. We acknowledged that and

:23:48. > :23:51.that's why we set up inquiries to investigate what happened and how

:23:51. > :23:55.we improve the procedure it. Wasn't good practice. I'm particularly

:23:55. > :23:58.concerned that the women that were affected by it, do feel that they

:23:58. > :24:02.get proper treatment. We have to address that. No it wasn't a good

:24:02. > :24:07.example. As far as women on boards is concerned, that is a separate

:24:07. > :24:11.issue, but a very important one. The more women there are in top-

:24:11. > :24:15.decision-making the better. Your own female MPs, own 12% of Liberal

:24:15. > :24:21.Democrats are female. Many in vulnerable seats. The Tories are

:24:21. > :24:25.are better at 16%, Labour better at 33%. It is a bit tough to lecture

:24:25. > :24:29.boards, when your own party is hardly in the van grd? No, we are

:24:29. > :24:32.not. We have to do more. I think you will find in terms of our

:24:32. > :24:35.candidates in our existing winnable seats next time, we are going to do

:24:35. > :24:41.much better. It is not a great record. We acknowledge that. We

:24:41. > :24:45.have to do more. Last week you sin cysted that Nick Clegg knew nothing

:24:45. > :24:49.-- insisted. That Nick Clegg knew nothing specific or unspecific

:24:49. > :24:53.about the allegations of Chris Rennard. Within 12 hours it was

:24:53. > :24:56.proved wrong. Who misled you? told that he didn't know about the

:24:56. > :25:00.specific allegations. Who told you? Well I talked to his team about it.

:25:00. > :25:04.I was actually asked what I knew. I knew nothing and I wasn't involved

:25:05. > :25:08.at any stage but I did add that because his team had informed me

:25:08. > :25:12.that he didn't know anything about the specific allegation. And that

:25:12. > :25:18.remains the case. His office misled you? No, they didn't mislead me on

:25:18. > :25:24.that. They said he didn't know anything... You said he knew

:25:24. > :25:29.nothing but he knew something. it is about general issues. Hes a

:25:29. > :25:33.acknowledged that. At that point, it was - was he aware at all about

:25:33. > :25:37.allegations about Mr Rennie, Chris Rennard, you had been told he

:25:37. > :25:41.wasn't, and he was. I was told he wasn't aware of specific

:25:41. > :25:46.allegations but this whole question of who said what to whom? It is be

:25:46. > :25:49.an important question. That's why we have set up an inquiry to get to

:25:49. > :25:55.the bottom of it, rather than apportioning... I understand, but

:25:55. > :26:01.as you know Nick Clegg said he knew about allegations way back in 2008

:26:01. > :26:04.that Chris Rennard was told to "stop it now" and it is now even

:26:04. > :26:10.being said that Mr Clegg's office this it was a reason why he was

:26:10. > :26:14.encouraged to step down. Why didn't he single him at the 2009

:26:14. > :26:19.conference. Let's hear what he had to say: I would like to pay my own

:26:19. > :26:23.tribute to Chris. Chris, I can honestly say, if it wasn't for your

:26:23. > :26:32.guidance and encouragement, I wouldn't have been elected as an MP,

:26:32. > :26:36.let alone now be leading the party. And if it wasn't for the Rennard

:26:36. > :26:39.School of Campaigning, this would not be a party ready to transform

:26:40. > :26:44.British politics, ready to win, winning already.

:26:45. > :26:50.Now given what Mr Clegg now tells us he knew at that time, what does

:26:50. > :26:54.that sort of econium send to the women who made the allegations, or

:26:54. > :26:57.the people who'd heard the allegations? Well, those women are

:26:57. > :27:04.very hurt by what has happened and felt the matter was not properly

:27:04. > :27:08.dealt with and they are right. is being heaped on Chris Rennard,

:27:08. > :27:11.the praise. He was praising his record as a campaigner. He was a

:27:11. > :27:15.brilliant campaigner. That's separate from personal conduct in

:27:15. > :27:20.the office. That has to be properly investigated. After Eastleigh is

:27:20. > :27:25.Nick Clegg's leadership safe? nobody is diveg. He'll lead the

:27:25. > :27:29.Liberal Democrats into the general election at 2015? If he wishes to,

:27:29. > :27:33.I'm sure he will. That's the assumption. He does, does that mean

:27:33. > :27:36.you have to abandon all hope of being leader? I can see this side

:27:36. > :27:41.of the election you are probably the major contender to take over if

:27:41. > :27:45.he was to step down. But post-2015 they'll likely turn to a new

:27:46. > :27:49.generation? Probably. I'm not helping or planning to be the

:27:49. > :27:52.leader. For logical reasons, I don't rule it out. If he falls

:27:52. > :27:56.under a bus, there will be people who will be looked at. It is not

:27:56. > :27:59.something I'm hoping, conspiring or competing to do. He is safe in his

:27:59. > :28:05.job and he is getting on with it. Thank you for being on the Sunday

:28:05. > :28:08.Politics. Now, how's your history? When you hear the words "William of

:28:08. > :28:11.Orange", do you think of an invading Dutch monarch or the

:28:11. > :28:14.Foreign Secretary after a trip to the tanning salon? And are you a

:28:14. > :28:17.bit sketchy about the Reformation but think it might have something

:28:17. > :28:21.to do with Robbie Williams going back to Take That? Well, it's a

:28:21. > :28:24.good job Michael Gove is on the case. He has plans to change the

:28:24. > :28:34.way we teach history in schools in England. But what are they and will

:28:34. > :28:39.they work? Susana Mendonsa's been back in time to find out. This is

:28:39. > :28:44.school, Victorian-style. These nine and ten-year-olds are on a day trip

:28:44. > :28:47.to London's ragged school mue zem but in the future kids this young

:28:47. > :28:57.won't have to be caught about the Victorians because the way we teach

:28:57. > :28:57.

:28:57. > :29:04.his industry changing. -- Ragged School Museum. Now we are doing

:29:04. > :29:08.spelling. Excellent. Well done. So what cooks for these kids?

:29:08. > :29:13.like the Romans. I really like the Romans.

:29:13. > :29:19.I did like the Great Fire of London. The Egyptians.

:29:19. > :29:22.Sit up. Yes, pay attention. The Egyptians

:29:22. > :29:26.are not on the new curriculum but the Romans are and there will be

:29:26. > :29:30.more focus on chronology and knowledge. But why? There is a

:29:30. > :29:35.perception, which I think is real, that children are leaving school

:29:35. > :29:38.without a deep knowledge of the chronology of British history and

:29:38. > :29:43.the history of countries that are important to this country. They

:29:43. > :29:46.tend to repeat the same periods of history over again, the Tudors and

:29:46. > :29:56.then the Second World War. I think children need to understand the

:29:56. > :30:03.

:30:03. > :30:06.whole of our history if they are One attempt to get children

:30:06. > :30:10.interested has been Horrible Histories. The programme's

:30:10. > :30:16.historical consultant thinks that the Government's curriculum might

:30:16. > :30:23.struggle to engage their minds. feels a bit like a 19th century

:30:23. > :30:26.rote learning type of scholarship. It's all about absorbing facts that

:30:26. > :30:31.are flown at them, rather than communicating with children.

:30:31. > :30:37.will learn by repetition, repeat, repeat, repeat. Remember, remember,

:30:37. > :30:44.remember. Back in Victorian times it was all about rote-learning, the

:30:44. > :30:47.idea Ross repeating facts again and again until it stuck in your head.

:30:47. > :30:50.Critics of Michael Gove's plans think he is heading back in that

:30:50. > :30:56.direction. Supporters think the balance has tipped too far the

:30:56. > :30:59.other way. The 70s array move away from textbook based teaching in

:30:59. > :31:04.private schools. According to Nick Gibb, secretary schools began to

:31:05. > :31:12.focus more on skills and knowledge in 2007. But how much do these kids

:31:12. > :31:20.know? The Spanish Armada, what here today attack England? I seriously

:31:20. > :31:26.doubt no! The who was the Queen at the time? Queen Victoria. Who was

:31:27. > :31:36.Brunel? I'm just guessing. Maybe a Queen? Do you know what the Magna

:31:36. > :31:40.To be fair, a few adults out there will not know the answers to those

:31:40. > :31:45.either. So, his Michael Gove right or

:31:45. > :31:55.wrong? Dr David Starkey and Professor Richard Evans joined me

:31:55. > :31:56.

:31:56. > :31:59.Richard Evans, what is wrong with what Michael Gove is proposing?

:31:59. > :32:06.There are lots of things wrong with what he is proposing. First of all,

:32:06. > :32:11.it's his a very personal plan he has brought up. It was a large

:32:11. > :32:16.consultation exercise, consulting teachers. He pushed that all to one

:32:16. > :32:19.side. Many of these historical organisations, conservative

:32:19. > :32:28.teachers who are used to teaching in schools, they are absolutely

:32:28. > :32:31.horrified. It is a very amateur set of proposals. It is just teaching a

:32:31. > :32:36.chronicle. There doesn't teach the kind of historical skills that you

:32:36. > :32:39.need to analyse the past, to make up your mind. It is shoving facts

:32:39. > :32:43.down schoolchildren's throats without giving them a chance to

:32:43. > :32:48.debate and make it they remind. What say you? I think there are two

:32:48. > :32:55.problems with what Richard has just said. We have seen from those clips

:32:55. > :32:59.their the staggering level of ignorance. University Challenge, a

:32:59. > :33:03.question on 1688, it got an answer from one good student at Bangor,

:33:03. > :33:11.the monarch involved was Elizabeth I. From another even brighter

:33:11. > :33:16.student, a medical student at UCL, that it was William the first. Out

:33:16. > :33:20.by 600 years. That is a problem. Richard does not seem to think it

:33:20. > :33:24.is. There is evidence of an extraordinary evacuation of basic

:33:24. > :33:27.historical knowledge. He talks about debate and criticism, you

:33:27. > :33:31.cannot debate unless you know. This whole skills approach has got it

:33:31. > :33:35.the wrong way round. I think there is something much more

:33:35. > :33:40.fundamental... Before you go on, can I get your reaction to that?

:33:40. > :33:45.You need to know the facts before you can analyse them? No, Michael

:33:45. > :33:49.Gove is preparing kids to do well in a pub quiz or come top in

:33:49. > :33:54.Mastermind. The curriculum is not about teaching them to understand

:33:54. > :33:58.and analyse history. The facts do not come first. They come together

:33:58. > :34:02.with the interpretation. They both belong together. I absolutely agree

:34:02. > :34:07.that factual knowledge is important. When should it be taught? It should

:34:07. > :34:12.be taught in an age appropriate way. Michael Gove is posing to get

:34:12. > :34:16.seven-year-olds to understand early medieval history, he wants ten-

:34:16. > :34:21.year-olds to be up to understand the Magna Carta. He wants 11-year-

:34:21. > :34:25.olds to understand John Locke, for goodness sake. Having a whole

:34:25. > :34:31.chronology of basic history, from five to 18, starting at the present,

:34:31. > :34:34.is not going to work. I will interrupt him, the problem is that

:34:34. > :34:38.the current curriculum, which Richard is defending, is wholly

:34:38. > :34:41.dishonest. He talks about the need for debate, the need to question

:34:41. > :34:47.everything. Richard, should schools be questioning and debating the

:34:47. > :34:50.Holocaust or should they be presenting it as moral fact? That a

:34:50. > :34:53.really good point. The new curriculum says that the children

:34:53. > :34:59.have to learn that the unique evil of the Holocaust. Now, there are

:34:59. > :35:04.several problems with that. First, it is a moral and not historical

:35:04. > :35:09.approach. Secondly, the uniqueness. That is wholly controversial.

:35:09. > :35:14.is exactly what is going on now. I have never heard a single debate in

:35:14. > :35:21.school on the issue of the Holocaust. It is taught as a moral

:35:21. > :35:26.absolute. It should be taught as an historical issue. We are agreeing!

:35:26. > :35:28.How can you understand it without knowing something about the history

:35:28. > :35:33.of anti-Semitism? How can you understand it without knowing

:35:33. > :35:37.something about Germany? Germany does not appear in this entire...

:35:37. > :35:42.You said you were going to drop out. Come on, I am taking you at your

:35:42. > :35:48.word. Let's take another point. You said you disliked myths and hero

:35:49. > :35:54.worship. Why do we have Mary Sicko there? Have you looked at the text?

:35:54. > :36:04.They describe a fashion that is clearly designed to make her the

:36:04. > :36:09.antithesis. Do you remember Diane Abbott saying we do not want blonde,

:36:09. > :36:15.blue-eyed women in the National Health Service. She's being

:36:15. > :36:22.referred to as the patron and heroine of these nurses. The

:36:22. > :36:25.current curriculum is affected by current political concerns. And she

:36:25. > :36:29.is in the new curriculum. What they need to be taught to do is to look

:36:29. > :36:33.at somebody like that and asked difficult questions about them. The

:36:33. > :36:38.new curriculum does not combine historical thinking more skills on

:36:38. > :36:40.the one hand with the facts. It just has the facts. We are now

:36:40. > :36:46.agreeing that the current curriculum, it has fundamental

:36:46. > :36:50.problems? No, no, you are generalising. I have ever seen any

:36:50. > :36:56.evidence in any of the teaching materials that there is any debate

:36:56. > :37:00.on her at all. You get the final word, seeing as he has said a lot.

:37:00. > :37:06.The current curriculum does a narrative of British history from

:37:06. > :37:11.the age of 11, up to the age of 14. Let's remember, this is up to the

:37:11. > :37:16.age of 14. There is another bunch of problems about 14-16, 16-18. But

:37:16. > :37:19.it is centred on a narrative of British history, it combines that

:37:19. > :37:24.with skills and it has some world history and European history. That

:37:24. > :37:26.is why the new one is absolutely missing that. You have a whole

:37:26. > :37:34.generation leaving school without knowing anything about any other

:37:34. > :37:38.country. It really is wrong. The campaign for the current curriculum,

:37:38. > :37:42.it was headed by a list of signatories with Jesse Jackson at

:37:42. > :37:46.the top. It is politically and left-wing skewed and quite

:37:46. > :37:50.deliberately so. It is a product of the last government and it needs

:37:50. > :37:56.demolishing now. We shall see how many viewers have ever heard of

:37:56. > :38:01.her! There is a good reason they haven't. The U-boat get 100 lines

:38:01. > :38:04.for a overrunning. -- you both get 100 lines for overrunning.

:38:04. > :38:14.The coming up: I will be looking at the week ahead with our political

:38:14. > :38:17.

:38:17. > :38:22.panel. Until then, the Sunday Hello, welcome from others. This

:38:22. > :38:25.week, we will be talking about how to make more of the river as a

:38:25. > :38:29.regular form of transport. A little later, these are difficult times

:38:29. > :38:35.for councils with difficult decisions to make. Our counsellors

:38:35. > :38:40.trained and paid and have to do the job? Mark Field and Diane Abbott

:38:40. > :38:45.out with me today. Welcome to both. A quick word on ECT kick-off with.

:38:45. > :38:48.Mark, you are a well-known Tory plot there. Does this bring forward

:38:48. > :38:54.the day when you consider installing the extra phone lines in

:38:54. > :38:57.your Westminster pad? Obviously a very disappointing result for the

:38:57. > :39:03.Conservatives. We would have liked to have done better. The important

:39:03. > :39:06.thing from the party's point of view is to not lose our nerve.

:39:06. > :39:10.Let's have a proper postmortem. Obviously we have to move on from

:39:10. > :39:15.that. When were you have that postmortem? The urgent meetings you

:39:15. > :39:20.have been having around Adam Afriyie and everything else?

:39:20. > :39:23.think that is taken as read. But much more importantly, the party

:39:23. > :39:27.needs to discover on the ground where things went wrong. Clearly,

:39:27. > :39:31.this is a must-win seat at the next General Election, given the

:39:31. > :39:35.boundary changes are not going to happen. One of the disappointments

:39:35. > :39:39.is the search for UKIP. It was felt that David Cameron had rather put

:39:39. > :39:45.this issue to bed. The idea was that we had rather shocked the UKIP

:39:45. > :39:49.Fox by having that talk about a EU referendum. Clearly, that has

:39:49. > :39:52.backfired. Do you think you are now more write about thinking for the

:39:52. > :39:56.future and you need to look for someone else as a leader?

:39:56. > :40:00.future thought is simply if the coalition doesn't blast and we are

:40:00. > :40:04.back in opposition in 2015, clearly there will need to be a fundamental

:40:04. > :40:07.change of direction and where the Conservative Party does. Are we a

:40:08. > :40:15.bit closer to that? It is going to be made the 15th. My view has

:40:15. > :40:19.always been that this coalition will always last right through. We

:40:19. > :40:23.have some very difficult issues that have to be faced, particularly

:40:23. > :40:28.in relation to the economy. I think the public want see a government

:40:28. > :40:34.pushing the national interest. do we turn Labour into a party that

:40:34. > :40:40.is more than one nation north of Watford? No, no. East the was a

:40:40. > :40:43.difficult city for us. I don't dig we have ever held it. But we never

:40:43. > :40:50.expected to come higher than third or 4th. It would be unreasonable to

:40:50. > :40:53.expect anything else. Really? It was not long ago that you well, you

:40:53. > :40:59.had the UKIP thing. What worries me about them doing so well is that

:40:59. > :41:07.they will drag the centre ground towards them on issues like

:41:07. > :41:12.immigration and Europe. I don't In several parts of London,

:41:12. > :41:16.detectives working at the specialist unit dealing with sex

:41:16. > :41:20.crimes, allegations that they tried to persuade victims not to pursue

:41:20. > :41:24.complaints. What did you feel about that? I thought it was very

:41:24. > :41:29.shocking. We have one of the lowest rates of conviction for rape in

:41:29. > :41:32.Europe. Less than one in 30 rape victims can expect to have their

:41:32. > :41:37.crime cleared up. It shows a pretty rotten attitude to what is a

:41:37. > :41:45.serious crime. Mark Field, satisfied that the practice is not

:41:45. > :41:48.going on across London now? totally satisfied I'm afraid, no.

:41:49. > :41:53.In a more trivial way, the evidence of what has happened with the

:41:53. > :41:58.Liberal Democrats and that Lord Rennard fear or is the fact that

:41:58. > :42:01.you cannot push up any of these sorts of issues. -- furore. The

:42:01. > :42:04.public demand transparency, that is expected of the police and I hope

:42:04. > :42:09.we will get to the bottom of that. Why aren't more people travelling

:42:09. > :42:13.to work by river? This week, the mayor announced plans to double the

:42:13. > :42:18.number of river journeys by 2020. But his travel by the Thames likely

:42:18. > :42:22.to remain mainly for tourists, as the cost and time of journeys rules

:42:22. > :42:25.it out as a genuine commuter option?

:42:25. > :42:28.It last year's Jubilee was a reminder of the time when the

:42:28. > :42:36.Thames was the busiest waterway in the world. On a normal day, it is

:42:36. > :42:38.more likely to look like this. But the Met wants that to change, this

:42:38. > :42:43.week announcing his plan to double the number of journeys on the river

:42:43. > :42:47.by the end of the decade. In order to do that, he has pledged �10

:42:47. > :42:50.million. Part of that is going to go on three new piers and he also

:42:50. > :42:54.wants better information from people so they know when they are

:42:54. > :42:59.going and how long it is going to take until the next service comes

:43:00. > :43:02.along. But could he be doing more? A report by the London Assembly

:43:02. > :43:07.said that for people to really treat the river as an alternative

:43:07. > :43:11.type of transport, it needs to be marked as one on the Tube map, a

:43:11. > :43:14.recommendation he has not adopted. Every mode of transport is really

:43:14. > :43:18.at capacity in London. We are looking at increasing capacity on

:43:18. > :43:23.the Tube and the rail. If we can make it like a tube line, carrying

:43:23. > :43:27.12 million passengers a year, it will help other motor transport and

:43:27. > :43:31.transform the river into a genuine mode of transport. But is the

:43:31. > :43:36.Thames ready? According to the Policy Exchange, millions of extra

:43:36. > :43:40.journeys on the river could lead to something like chaos on the water

:43:40. > :43:44.without air traffic control style management. Again, that is absent

:43:44. > :43:47.from the mayor's plant. At the moment there is an disruption and

:43:47. > :43:51.that would get worse. It's important to think about some kind

:43:51. > :43:55.of air traffic control system to make sure you have a steady flow

:43:55. > :43:59.and less disruption. As an alternative to the Tube and buses,

:43:59. > :44:04.it certainly fails at one count, Speed. A morning commute from North

:44:04. > :44:09.Greenwich to London Bridge takes 34 minutes. On the Tube, it is just

:44:09. > :44:12.nine. For tourists, that is less of a problem. City Cruises are the

:44:13. > :44:18.largest tour operator on the river. They think too much focus is

:44:18. > :44:22.sometimes put on commuter services as opposed to tourism. Cruising on

:44:22. > :44:25.the river is an experienced. It is wonderful. We have three World

:44:25. > :44:29.Heritage Sites, we have 50 attractions you can view from the

:44:30. > :44:35.boat. It is that message, that messaging that needs to get out.

:44:35. > :44:38.fact, the figures in this week's action plan show City Hall expect

:44:38. > :44:42.the increase in travel to come more from tourist services than

:44:42. > :44:48.commuters. Those hoping the Thames can be transformed into some kind

:44:48. > :44:58.of Tube line that will have to wait a little on their guard. -- a

:44:58. > :45:03.

:45:03. > :45:08.Joining me is Richard traistyi, the mayor's river ambassador. --

:45:08. > :45:12.Richard traistyi. Is it price, or time? A lot of people are keen to

:45:12. > :45:17.use it. Upstream to Putney there has been a skeleton service. That

:45:17. > :45:20.will be changed from the 2nd April. Otherwise, I don't think people who

:45:20. > :45:25.want to use the river are too put off by the price. It's not actually

:45:26. > :45:29.that much more, really. It is double, stpbt? It is excluding low

:45:29. > :45:34.earners? -- isn't it? The people who say they want to use it, who

:45:34. > :45:38.live by the river, in fact, you know, low earners can get, if they

:45:38. > :45:42.wanted to use it, they can get season tickets. They certainly get

:45:42. > :45:46.reductions by having Oyster or travelcards. The make a point, the

:45:46. > :45:50.people living by the river, we know the people living close to the

:45:50. > :45:55.river in piers, in nice flats. Is that what this service, you hope

:45:55. > :46:00.will develop into, something for the quite well-off? Not entirely.

:46:00. > :46:04.We want to see everybody using it. It is focused on that. If you let

:46:04. > :46:08.me finish the answer, the fact is that there are people living by the

:46:08. > :46:13.river, who most definitely do want to use it. They maybe, as you have

:46:13. > :46:16.described them. Quite well-off. But other people, too. Indeed old age

:46:16. > :46:20.pensioners, who have the Freedom Pass will actually have half the

:46:20. > :46:25.price that other people will have and then, of course, fll be -

:46:25. > :46:31.anybody who wants to use it, -- there will be. - anybody who wants

:46:31. > :46:35.to use it regularly, season tickets give enormous reductions. The issue,

:46:35. > :46:38.as everyone accepts, is interconnectivity, how do they get

:46:38. > :46:43.towards needing the bus or other form of transport to get to the

:46:43. > :46:47.river first? And all the information tying up. That is all

:46:47. > :46:50.part of the river strategy. TfL. Now that they have a river strategy,

:46:50. > :46:55.which of course they didn't before but now that they do, we will be

:46:56. > :46:59.working on signage. We will be working on connectivity and as was

:46:59. > :47:03.mentioned into the film, we'll certainly be working on

:47:03. > :47:08.incorporating the river transport into the London travel map, along

:47:08. > :47:12.with the underground lines. Are you optimistic or do you believe this

:47:12. > :47:16.could become a genuine alternative mode of transport a serious one,

:47:16. > :47:21.taking numbers away from other forms? I am optimistic. One of the

:47:21. > :47:26.models we've looked at it some depth is the Brisbane river in

:47:26. > :47:31.Australia, a windy river like the Thames and ten million people use

:47:31. > :47:35.the boats there, similar boats. Similar catamaran form of boat.

:47:35. > :47:40.Going forward, what we want the river to do is to relieve some of

:47:40. > :47:43.the other services. Where I'm a member, in Wandsworth particularly,

:47:43. > :47:48.very long river front, actually the underground service going along the

:47:48. > :47:54.line of the river isn't particularly good. Its mainline

:47:54. > :48:00.trains or buses and it would relieve the buses -- it's mainline.

:48:00. > :48:05.Why a promise of this by 2020? The mayor won't be around then? What

:48:05. > :48:08.can we see while he is still mayor? He is looking forward, to have a

:48:08. > :48:12.plan. What will happen over the next four years while he is mayor,

:48:12. > :48:17.rather than looking so far ahead? In the last four years, when he is

:48:17. > :48:20.mayor, the use of the river has gone up by 25%. Pretty significant.

:48:20. > :48:25.He did decide, in 2008, with a certain amount of cajoling from the

:48:25. > :48:32.likes of me, that it was a good idea. So, we have worked hard and,

:48:32. > :48:35.you know, as I say, this is, really, a landmark moment, to get TfL to

:48:36. > :48:41.have a river strategy that they didn't have before. It was all

:48:41. > :48:45.buses and underground and roads and so on. Now they have their eyes on

:48:45. > :48:49.the river. Diane Abbott dou, believe this will unlock it,

:48:49. > :48:53.without more subsidy. -- do you believe? Lots of people have hope

:48:53. > :48:57.that we'll turn it into a thriving mode but it hasn't happened. I have

:48:57. > :49:00.heard people say they are going to turn the river into the equivalent

:49:00. > :49:03.of the Central line for years and it doesn't happen. It doesn't

:49:03. > :49:07.really serve communities and taking them where they want to go. If you

:49:07. > :49:11.are in Hackney the river is not going to take you to work in the

:49:11. > :49:15.City or West End. This is another Boris gimmick like his blessed zip

:49:15. > :49:20.wire. That was a one-off. You mean the

:49:20. > :49:24.cable car. The cable car. Yeah. Introducing a permanent zip wire

:49:24. > :49:30.across - there is an idea! Would you run away and play with that

:49:30. > :49:40.one? Well, people have suggested it. Do you think this is a gimmick?

:49:40. > :49:44.don't. I think some parts have been a success. To be honest, it is

:49:44. > :49:47.never going to be a mass transit option, partly because of tides and

:49:47. > :49:52.the pure volume, compared to looking at how many people are on

:49:52. > :49:56.the Tube going down the District line. Millions a day. You have to

:49:56. > :49:59.go around the Isle of Dogs to go from North Greenwich to London

:49:59. > :50:03.Bridge, it is slightly unfair it make that comparison. I think it is

:50:04. > :50:06.a leisurely form of transport. I love going by boat. It tends to be

:50:06. > :50:11.something I do at the weekends with my children going to Greenwich,

:50:11. > :50:16.rather than something I will do on a dilly basis. It is not commuter

:50:16. > :50:20.challenge. - Daily basis. Who knows, perhaps we can see improvements

:50:20. > :50:26.soon. London has 1,00 local councillors much it is a tough job

:50:26. > :50:30.at the moment for those who take their duty seriously. -- 1,800.

:50:30. > :50:32.There are tough decisions on spending to take and to make to

:50:32. > :50:37.voters Rthey paid enough and skilled enough?

:50:37. > :50:43.Most of us will know, more or less, what we get out of our local

:50:43. > :50:46.councils? Such as lending us book, emptying our bins and comparing for

:50:46. > :50:50.the elderly. Perhaps less familiar is the work of councillors, they

:50:50. > :50:54.man the meetings and committees on town halls but do you know how

:50:54. > :50:58.diligently they work? Sunday Politics London has contacted all

:50:58. > :51:00.London authorities about their councillor's attendance records.

:51:00. > :51:05.Most attend well but some councillors do much worse,

:51:05. > :51:10.attending half of meetings or less. Brent has two councillors who have

:51:10. > :51:14.done just that since May 2010. In Hounslow it's three, and two

:51:14. > :51:19.boroughs with directly-elected mayors, Hackney and will you I

:51:19. > :51:24.shall ham have four. Last week, a Lewisham councillor was forced to

:51:24. > :51:28.resign after attending just one meeting in the last six months, the

:51:28. > :51:31.statutory minimum. They are paid a basic allowance which is topped up

:51:31. > :51:38.if they take on extra responsibilities, such as chairing

:51:38. > :51:41.a committee. In London the basic rate varies from �7,500 to �11,200.

:51:41. > :51:44.I think probably councillors shouldn't be paid at all. There are

:51:44. > :51:47.lots of people who work hard in public service, school governors,

:51:47. > :51:51.for example, who don't get paid. There would be an advantage, I

:51:51. > :51:55.think that some of the people who are the deadwood hanging on because

:51:55. > :51:59.they get paid the money, would decide to standdown.

:51:59. > :52:04.Others argue that it is actually higher payments that could attract

:52:04. > :52:11.brighter and better candidates but West Africa-tightening budgets,

:52:11. > :52:15.what can council do to get members working -- with ever-tightening

:52:15. > :52:20.budgets. Now the points of view of Clive

:52:20. > :52:24.Betts now, the Chairman of the Select Committee on local

:52:24. > :52:28.government. Are they skilled and paid enough? I think councillors

:52:28. > :52:31.have an incredibly difficult job as your piece said at the beginning

:52:31. > :52:36.there. The cuts they are now making throughout the country are

:52:36. > :52:40.unprecedented in their scale. So, they have a very difficult job

:52:40. > :52:43.making choice abouts which services to cut and explaining them to

:52:43. > :52:47.constituents and listening to constituents about them. We have

:52:47. > :52:51.found that councillors are not representative of a community as a

:52:51. > :52:55.whole. The average age is 60, a minority of people in work when

:52:55. > :52:59.councillors don't do a full-time work job, they do an important

:52:59. > :53:04.part-time job. Some of them work. But we were told repeatedly of

:53:04. > :53:09.people who get an allowance to do council o work but because they

:53:09. > :53:13.have to get time off on their council job from their day jobs

:53:13. > :53:17.they end up being worse off. Would you like to see the allowances

:53:17. > :53:22.increased for a rank and file officer? The majority of people on

:53:22. > :53:26.many councils are pensioners. There is no great incentive for them to

:53:26. > :53:32.look at the position who are on -- of the people who are on the

:53:32. > :53:39.council with a job, or of those who might be deterred from going on the

:53:39. > :53:45.council. MPs have let their pay and allowances be overseen by an

:53:45. > :53:49.independent body. Why should they say they should have an independent

:53:49. > :53:52.body. What about employers rthey sympathetic enough, make allowances,

:53:52. > :53:57.encourage people to be council ors and put back into the community?

:53:57. > :54:01.Not always. -- councillors. We had examples of people who said - carry

:54:01. > :54:04.on with your council work and you will get the sack. Other people who

:54:04. > :54:10.were told at the Jobcentre don't put on your application form that

:54:10. > :54:15.you are a councillor, as nobody will take you on. We are

:54:15. > :54:19.encouraging employers to release people for Territorial Army a good

:54:19. > :54:22.scheme, do something similar for councillors. And instead of giving

:54:22. > :54:27.allowances, why not look at the people who are in work, who have to

:54:27. > :54:31.take time off, why not have the element of allowance as a also of

:54:31. > :54:34.earnings. The public can understand, that give up your time to be a

:54:34. > :54:38.councillor and you will get your earnings covered. That arrangement

:54:38. > :54:41.to be brought. In Whether about the Cabinet structure in place, which

:54:41. > :54:46.gives quite important powers and responsibilities to a small group

:54:46. > :54:51.of councillors but leaves a few or a lot of backbenchers and so on who

:54:51. > :54:55.perhaps aren't proving as useful? Doesn't this, you know, produce an

:54:55. > :54:58.argument for slimming down local authorities? Getting rid of

:54:58. > :55:02.councillors? It certainly doesn't stop the number of complaints

:55:02. > :55:04.coming to individual councillors. There is a danger sometimes that

:55:05. > :55:09.councils overcentralise and it is the Cabinet members who get advice

:55:09. > :55:12.and support and backbenchers are left to fend for themselves. We

:55:12. > :55:15.went as part of our inquiry to Sunderland and looked to what they

:55:16. > :55:18.are doing. They are giving more power and responsibilities to what

:55:18. > :55:22.they called, not backbench councillors but frontline

:55:22. > :55:26.councillors. More councillors make morgue decisions with more support

:55:26. > :55:30.to help constituents. -- making more decisions. It was a very good

:55:30. > :55:33.model. I know what Conservative councillor in Bromley was thinking

:55:33. > :55:38.of reducing the number of councillor. Do you think it is time

:55:38. > :55:41.for this? It probably is in London. I wonder whether they are over

:55:41. > :55:45.counciled with almost 2,000 and 33 London boroughs. I was a councillor

:55:45. > :55:49.before I came an MP in the neighbouring borough of Kensington

:55:49. > :55:53.and Chelsea. We had an allowance system when I was on the council

:55:53. > :55:56.initially, almost 20 years ago at �1,500. I think the allowance is

:55:56. > :56:00.roughly the right level. I think there is a difficulty that it

:56:00. > :56:04.becomes almost like a second income or second pension for a few people

:56:04. > :56:08.who hang on in there because of the financial element of it all but I

:56:08. > :56:12.do wonder whether we actually probably have too many councillors.

:56:12. > :56:17.Again, in the days of the pre- Cabinet system, that's when I was

:56:17. > :56:20.involved, which has made a great difference. A small number of

:56:21. > :56:24.councillors having tremendous responsibilities and a large number,

:56:24. > :56:26.somewhat twiddling their thumbs. Diane Abbott, it's mayor and London

:56:26. > :56:32.Assembly and this Cabinet system, whether there is an argument or

:56:32. > :56:35.what will we lose if we slimdown or get rid of some councillors? We'd

:56:35. > :56:39.lose ordinary people at a local level knowing there is someone who

:56:39. > :56:43.lives on a street or around the corner for them and speaks for them

:56:43. > :56:47.at the Town Hall. It is an important function of demcascy. I

:56:47. > :56:51.couldn't put their money up. -- democracy. Clearly people have to

:56:51. > :56:55.be paid for out of pocket ebsspenss. If you give them a salary you will

:56:55. > :57:00.get people in it for the money. -- pocket expenses. How important is

:57:00. > :57:04.the local councillor. We hardly see that reflected in a huge turnout at

:57:04. > :57:08.local elections? Well it comes back to the role of both political

:57:08. > :57:11.parties. If we want better quality councillor, both political parties

:57:11. > :57:16.have to search their conscience and think about the sorts of people

:57:16. > :57:19.they are putting forward on local authorities. I lived in the ward I

:57:19. > :57:23.represented. I moved to the ward when I got selected. But I have to

:57:23. > :57:27.say I think it made a real difference. Day-to-day I could see

:57:27. > :57:32.the problems. From the trivial things like potholes, whether there

:57:32. > :57:37.was a house that - where there were potentially squatters and the

:57:37. > :57:41.issues and I was able to report it back on a daily basis. I'm sounding

:57:41. > :57:45.like an anorak on this. Therefore, I think it helps to have local

:57:45. > :57:48.councillors. You would agree with that, no need to change the

:57:48. > :57:53.structure? I think this is very important for people to be

:57:53. > :57:57.represent bid someone really local who they know. Fewer people may be

:57:57. > :58:01.voter but more people are going to MPs and councillors, so it is

:58:02. > :58:06.important we keep them. Time for a round-up for the rest of the

:58:06. > :58:11.political news nted capital this week, in -- news in the capital

:58:11. > :58:15.this week in 60 Seconds. Further evidence of the so-called

:58:15. > :58:18.practice of beds in sheds. When it was revealed that two high street

:58:18. > :58:21.estate agents in Brent are renting out beds and sheds without

:58:22. > :58:27.residential planning permission. Offering substandard housing on

:58:27. > :58:29.behalf of landlords. According to a new NHS audit,

:58:29. > :58:34.London hospitals are failing patients who need emergency care.

:58:34. > :58:38.None of the 28 trust meet all the minimum standards.

:58:38. > :58:42.The London Fire Authority has decided not to challenge mayor,

:58:42. > :58:47.Boris Johnson's, order to hold a public consultation on proposed

:58:48. > :58:52.cuts to the London Fire Brigade. At the vote on the mayor's Budget,

:58:52. > :58:56.Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green Assembly Members spotted the Deputy

:58:56. > :58:59.Mayor was missing, giving them the two-thirds majority they needed to

:58:59. > :59:05.block the vote. They kick pld Johnson out of the chamber and

:59:05. > :59:12.attempted to rush it through but the plot was foiled when the Deputy

:59:12. > :59:17.Mayors with arrived in a nick of time. Leading him to describe them

:59:17. > :59:21.as... Great supine protoplasmis invertebrate jellies.

:59:21. > :59:24.So drama at the City Hall Budget setting meeting. The first time

:59:24. > :59:28.that has ever happened. I have had to sit through a few. Was that

:59:28. > :59:32.right for Labour and the opposition to give up the chance, democratic,

:59:32. > :59:36.open session, hold the mayor to account, because someone was

:59:36. > :59:39.missing, rushed a sneaky quick vote? That's politics. I have been

:59:39. > :59:45.in Parliament for over 20 years. is a brutal game. It was absolutely

:59:45. > :59:49.the right thing to do. Seriously. When I you see that exchange and

:59:49. > :59:55.General eight Arnold having to interrupt the mayor and the mayor

:59:56. > :00:00.insulting Assembly me, doesn't it person people off -- Jenette.

:00:00. > :00:06.! Have you seen Lincoln, the film, people love it? It is a law we can

:00:06. > :00:11.never get away from. Did you feel that? Everyone took it in good

:00:11. > :00:15.humour. Borelies laugh it off. I think onelies yon, will be that

:00:16. > :00:20.every last Tory member will be there for the next three years.

:00:20. > :00:22.-- one lesson. The Glassly sqauling and shouting

:00:23. > :00:26.at Prime Minister's Questions put people off. But this was an

:00:26. > :00:31.opportunity to ask the mayor to explain his policies and given the

:00:31. > :00:34.chance to do it and the opposition groups weren't prepared to do that.

:00:34. > :00:39.Day-to-day they have to deal with Boris. They obviously felt that

:00:39. > :00:43.particular meeting was time for shock and awe. And 95% of the hard

:00:43. > :00:48.work gets done quitely. Labour and Liberal Democrat Assembly Members

:00:48. > :00:52.are able it talk to Boris Johnson and get things done. -- to talk.

:00:52. > :00:58.This is the fun. You look at set- piece moments. A lot of good work

:00:58. > :01:01.we do is very much on a cross-party basis. The irony was, we were told,

:01:01. > :01:04.given discussing transport and so on, that she was late because she

:01:04. > :01:14.was delayed on the Tube but officials rushed to say that was

:01:14. > :01:19.

:01:20. > :01:23.not true. Thank you both very much. In a moment, we will look ahead to

:01:23. > :01:26.the big stories that will dominate next week. But first, the news.

:01:26. > :01:30.Good afternoon, further assistance for the Syrian rebels will be

:01:30. > :01:34.announced in Parliament this week, according to the Foreign Secretary.

:01:34. > :01:41.Speaking to the BBC, William Hague dismissed President Assad's

:01:41. > :01:45.criticism of British policy, describing his remarks as

:01:45. > :01:51.delusional. The shelling and the shooting

:01:51. > :01:58.continues in Syria. Tearing apart a state in which 70,000 have died

:01:58. > :02:04.since the uprising began almost two years ago. But Syria's President

:02:04. > :02:10.has accused the British government of trying to miniaturise the

:02:10. > :02:15.country, in his remarks to the Sunday Times today. This government

:02:15. > :02:19.is acting in a naive and confused manner. William Hague described the

:02:19. > :02:22.interview as delusional. This is a man presiding over this slaughter.

:02:22. > :02:26.The message to him is that we, Britain, are the people sending

:02:26. > :02:30.food, shelter and blankets to help people driven from their homes and

:02:30. > :02:34.families in his name. We are the people sending medical supplies to

:02:34. > :02:41.try to look after people injured and abused by the soldiers working

:02:41. > :02:45.for this man. William Hague said that, faced with the extreme

:02:45. > :02:49.humanitarian distress of Syrian civilians, Britain could not just

:02:49. > :02:54.sit it out. There were arming the rebels is not yet British policy,

:02:54. > :02:58.he made it clear he would not rule it out in future.

:02:58. > :03:01.The Prime Minister has insisted there will be no lurch to the right

:03:01. > :03:05.by the Conservatives following the party's defeat in the Eastleigh by-

:03:05. > :03:09.election. Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, he said he would stick

:03:09. > :03:14.to the course that the Government is on. This report is from Louise

:03:14. > :03:16.Stewart. Following two days of negative

:03:16. > :03:21.headlines after the Conservatives's bruising defeat in the Eastleigh

:03:21. > :03:25.by-election, David Cameron has chosen to fight back. He says the

:03:25. > :03:29.Battle for Britain will not be won by lurching to the right, but by

:03:29. > :03:32.appealing to the common ground. In an interview with the Sunday

:03:32. > :03:38.Telegraph, he pledges to do that by protecting NHS spending,

:03:38. > :03:41.controlling immigration and capping welfare payments. But the leader of

:03:42. > :03:44.the UK Independence Party, which came second in Eastleigh, forcing

:03:44. > :03:47.the Conservatives into third place, said they should be focusing on

:03:48. > :03:54.addressing concerns now, not making pledges for beyond the next

:03:54. > :03:57.election. Jam tomorrow. That is what we keep hearing from the

:03:57. > :04:02.Conservatives, promises about what they might do if they win the next

:04:02. > :04:05.General Election, just as we heard promises from them before 2010.

:04:05. > :04:08.Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has said he would expect a future

:04:08. > :04:13.Conservative government to scrap the Human Rights Act. His remarks,

:04:13. > :04:17.and those of the Prime Minister, will be seen as an attempt to

:04:17. > :04:21.please some on the backbenches who crave what they see as a more

:04:21. > :04:25.muscular conservatism, while trying to broaden the party's appeal.

:04:26. > :04:35.That is all of the news for now. There will be more on BBC One at

:04:35. > :04:43.Now, Cabinet ministers are already fighting like rats in a sack over

:04:43. > :04:46.whether the next round of cuts should come. NHS to the executive

:04:46. > :04:56.David Nicholson's fight for survival is also likely to dominate

:04:56. > :05:03.In the interview with Vince Cable, he came out, I think, probably

:05:03. > :05:07.further from the traditional coalition line and he has before,

:05:07. > :05:10.almost Plan B? Certainly in terms of capping spending, he not only

:05:11. > :05:14.echoed the quote you gave him from Nick Clegg in January, saying that

:05:14. > :05:18.they should have done more, earlier, he was absolutely adamant they

:05:18. > :05:22.needed to do more now and wanted more money to go into capital

:05:22. > :05:27.spending. I think this negotiation over public spending is going to be

:05:27. > :05:30.really, really interesting. In theory, people are always say in

:05:31. > :05:34.public spending, we need to cut it. In practice, they find it much,

:05:34. > :05:39.much more difficult. You on going to have lots of battles between

:05:40. > :05:44.different departments. I get the sense from him that he wants an

:05:44. > :05:50.increase of his budget. Forget cats, he wants more. When you see that

:05:50. > :05:54.the Defence Department and others are doing that, I think this will

:05:54. > :05:58.be really interesting. mentioned the Defence Department,

:05:58. > :06:02.this latest ball began to roll thanks to Philip Hammond. Let's see

:06:02. > :06:10.what he had to say. We will not be able to make significant further

:06:10. > :06:15.cuts without eroding military capability. We are already

:06:15. > :06:19.extremely taut. We have hard targets ahead of us and I am clear

:06:19. > :06:23.we will not be able to deliver big further savings without eroding

:06:23. > :06:27.military capability. He needed the army behind him as he said that.

:06:27. > :06:32.This isn't just about the budget, it's about the next spending review.

:06:32. > :06:36.They are now jockeying, Vince Cable, Philip Hammond, they are playing

:06:36. > :06:41.for position? It is what they call the Comprehensive Spending Review,

:06:41. > :06:45.which comes well after the budget. I was not really surprised to sheer

:06:45. > :06:49.Philip Hammond saying what he did. He has had such a battle to fill

:06:49. > :06:54.what he calls the great black hole in his budget. I think it was

:06:54. > :06:57.something like �36 billion. That is what he had to address. He managed

:06:58. > :07:02.to pull that off. The last thing he wants now is to be told that he

:07:02. > :07:09.needs to make further cuts. He knows that will go down terribly

:07:09. > :07:12.with the core Tory vote. It's all hanging on George Osborne now?

:07:12. > :07:15.was surprised he went as public with his remarks as he did. You

:07:15. > :07:19.would expect Vince Cable to do his lobbying and public, you do not

:07:19. > :07:23.expect somebody who has traditionally been an ally of the

:07:23. > :07:26.Treasury to do it. In general, I don't have much sympathy for what

:07:26. > :07:32.is being called the National Union of ministers. I think they are

:07:32. > :07:35.guilty of what some of us call fiscal nimbyism. They support

:07:35. > :07:40.austerity in the abstract, but when it conflicts with their interests

:07:40. > :07:43.they go cold. The best example so far has been the cap on child

:07:43. > :07:48.benefit. It is a welfare cut. It should be something that most

:07:48. > :07:52.Tories would support. And yet it provoked a huge amount of hostility

:07:52. > :07:58.from Tory backbenchers and the Tory press. It goes to show how

:07:58. > :08:01.difficult it is to make cuts a practical reality. The thing is,

:08:02. > :08:05.Vince Cable believes that the way out of austerity is increases in

:08:05. > :08:09.capital spending. That is the wider political debate. I take your point,

:08:09. > :08:13.the rest of them are battling like hell for their departments, while

:08:13. > :08:17.arguing, in theory, in favour of public spending limits. Even if

:08:17. > :08:21.Vince Cable were to get his way, it would make no difference to the

:08:21. > :08:24.economy for the foreseeable future? As he acknowledged, it takes a heck

:08:24. > :08:28.of a long time for these plans, once agreed, to take practical

:08:28. > :08:33.effect. Certainly by the time of the next election they will not.

:08:33. > :08:36.That is always the downside of capital spending. If they want to

:08:36. > :08:42.do this, they should have done at the moment they came in? As they

:08:42. > :08:48.now admit, some of them. The Tory backbenches, they are not really

:08:48. > :08:52.kicking off after Eastleigh. We are told they are waiting to see what

:08:52. > :08:56.Mr Osborne will do in the budget. I would suggest they should not hold

:08:56. > :09:00.their breath? I don't think it will be a dramatic budget. What Osborne

:09:00. > :09:03.is desperately trying to achieve is to ensure there is no repeat

:09:03. > :09:08.whatsoever of what could be described as an omnishambles. I

:09:08. > :09:12.think memories of this time next here -- last year are still quite

:09:12. > :09:18.fresh. So the buyer is being set quite low, it would be hard to do

:09:18. > :09:21.worse! The pre-Budget was rather bland. He said the pre-Budget

:09:21. > :09:25.Report led the way to the loss of the AAA rating, because it

:09:25. > :09:30.confirmed that the fiscal targets were going to hell and a hand

:09:30. > :09:38.basket. Mr Clyde, is he out of the world's banks to Eastleigh? --

:09:38. > :09:48.I think he is, for the foreseeable future. The encouraging thing for

:09:48. > :09:54.David Cameron is that it shores up Nick Clegg's position, which shores

:09:54. > :09:57.up the coalition. The omnishambles, it comes in various forms. For the

:09:57. > :10:00.Conservatives, having lost Eastleigh, they could then have a

:10:00. > :10:04.budget that doesn't have much in it, it doesn't have to be disastrous

:10:05. > :10:08.but have very little impact. They get a kicking in the May elections,

:10:08. > :10:13.which they probably will, they are stuck at below 30% in the polls.

:10:13. > :10:17.That is when you open the cup and headless chickens run out? I think

:10:17. > :10:23.all of those things will happen. That sequence you have described is

:10:23. > :10:27.about to unfold. The budget, there are no tricks, no magic wand he can

:10:27. > :10:32.wave to suddenly appease those that are furious with him. If who were

:10:32. > :10:37.to wave a magic wand, I think it would look like an omnishambles.

:10:37. > :10:40.All of those things will happen. The question is, what then? We get

:10:40. > :10:44.these stirrings and we know there are lots of Tory MPs that do not

:10:44. > :10:50.like David Cameron and would want him out. But how, when, with who?

:10:50. > :10:56.All of those things are very unclear. Where does this leave

:10:56. > :10:59.Labour? Well, none of us are talking about Labour. I think there

:11:00. > :11:04.by-election result, or fiercely it was absolutely dismal, but they can

:11:04. > :11:08.comfort themselves with the fact that it was not a target for them.

:11:08. > :11:12.I think they did not really put heart and soul into it, far from it.

:11:12. > :11:15.I suppose they are thinking to themselves, well, it is not like we

:11:15. > :11:18.really threw ourselves at this. I think they will write it off as

:11:18. > :11:23.fairly irrelevant. They may have learnt something important about

:11:23. > :11:27.the kind of candidate they put up. It clearly didn't work putting in

:11:27. > :11:30.an outsider in a by-election like that. I think it was a surprising

:11:30. > :11:33.mistake to make. If Steve is right that there is a grim scenario

:11:33. > :11:38.coming for the rest of the year, David does not have to worry about

:11:38. > :11:43.Eastleigh? We thought that would have happened over the past 18

:11:43. > :11:46.months. The economy hasn't grown, we have lost the AAA rating, and

:11:47. > :11:51.yet Labour still feel frustrated that they struggle to land blows on

:11:51. > :11:55.the issue of the economy. A lot of that is because the public don't

:11:55. > :11:58.expect the economy to be much better than it is. Their research a

:11:58. > :12:01.sense of resignation, a real British attitude, that they don't

:12:01. > :12:08.think that a change in fiscal strategy would make much of a

:12:08. > :12:13.difference in the short to medium term. It's difficult for Ed Balls

:12:13. > :12:16.to make incursions into public opinion. We saw that with the

:12:16. > :12:20.emergency question on the AAA rating, when the stage was set and

:12:20. > :12:27.he could have really eviscerated George Osborne. It was more of a

:12:27. > :12:31.tepid score draw. Given the state of the economy, the list of things

:12:31. > :12:35.I read to Vince Cable, it's quite remarkable they are not able to

:12:35. > :12:39.land more punches? They have a tactical dilemma. Does easily

:12:39. > :12:43.suggest that by not saying or doing very much nationally, keeping

:12:43. > :12:47.things fairly vague, they are going to get into power because the vote

:12:47. > :12:51.on the right is split and the Lib Dems are doing well in Tory seats?

:12:51. > :12:55.Or do they now need to start flashing things out, try to really

:12:55. > :13:00.develop a sense of momentum towards the next election? I don't think

:13:00. > :13:03.they have answered that question. They are partly in a dilemma

:13:03. > :13:12.because a five-year parliament means it is still a long way off.

:13:12. > :13:15.But I suspect they do need to start flashing things out. That is it for

:13:15. > :13:19.this week. The Daily Politics will keep you up-to-date throughout the