07/07/2013

:00:44. > :00:47.Politics. Farewell Abu Qatada. It's only taken

:00:47. > :00:50.us eight years to send you packing. The extremist Muslim cleric has

:00:50. > :00:54.already arrived in Jordan this morning. We'll be talking to Justice

:00:54. > :00:57.Secretary Chris Grayling. We know what Nigel Farage thinks -

:00:57. > :01:00.he's never off the telly. But what about the rest of UKIP? Stay tuned

:01:00. > :01:05.for the biggest survey yet of UKIP councillors. We'll be putting our

:01:05. > :01:08.results to the party leader. As Ed Milliband and Union baron Len

:01:08. > :01:18.McLuskey come to blows, we'll be asking political bruiser John Reid

:01:18. > :01:21.who's in charge of Labour? In London: Disruption and confusion

:01:21. > :01:31.in town halls as the Government encourages councils to allow

:01:31. > :01:41.

:01:41. > :01:44.And with me - on our centre court in W1, three big hitters - Miranda

:01:44. > :01:49.Green, Janan Ganesh and Nick Watt who'll be tweeting throughout the

:01:49. > :01:51.programme. So after a lot of money and eight

:01:51. > :01:54.years of legal wrangling, the extremist Muslim cleric, Abu Qatada,

:01:54. > :01:58.has finally been deported to Jordan. The Home Secretary hadn't quite put

:01:58. > :02:01.out the bunting to see him off, but the TV cameras were on hand to

:02:01. > :02:04.follow every step of his journey by police convoy from Belmarsh Prison

:02:04. > :02:10.in South London to RAF Northolt in West London, where he boarded a

:02:10. > :02:14.private jet in the early hours of this morning. We haven't seen so

:02:14. > :02:17.many cameras sent to follow one car journey since the Royal Wedding.

:02:17. > :02:19.He's already landed in Jordan where he'll be tried on terrorism charges

:02:19. > :02:26.after Britain signed a treaty meant to guarantee that evidence obtained

:02:26. > :02:30.through torture won't be used against him. It's been a long battle

:02:30. > :02:33.for the Government and the Labour one before it, so it's not a

:02:33. > :02:37.surprise the Prime Minister was keen to get up early on a Sunday to give

:02:37. > :02:42.his reaction. I was absolutely delighted. I mean, this is something

:02:42. > :02:46.this Government said it would get done and we have got it done. It's

:02:46. > :02:50.an issue that, like the rest of the country, has made my blood boil that

:02:50. > :02:53.this man who has no right to be in our country, who is a threat to our

:02:53. > :03:01.country and that it took so long and was so difficult to deport him but

:03:01. > :03:04.we have done it. He is back in Jordan. That's excellent news.

:03:04. > :03:10.And we're joined now by John Reid who, when a Labour Home Secretary,

:03:10. > :03:14.also tried to deport Mr Qatada. You all did. It's it's quite a success

:03:14. > :03:17.for Theresa May, though. Full credit to Theresa May. This has been a

:03:17. > :03:20.long-running saga and it's a difficulty in a democracy that

:03:21. > :03:26.politicians must act within the law. I am sure if we were acting on a

:03:26. > :03:31.whim or frustrations he would have been on a plane long ago. But legal

:03:31. > :03:36.process is layer upon layer of appeal. And the resolution of

:03:36. > :03:39.Theresa May and indeed every other Home Secretary who sustained this

:03:39. > :03:46.throughout has meant that the British people are now safer than

:03:46. > :03:51.yesterday. They're also poorer, more than 1. .7 million and a lot of

:03:51. > :03:58.years, a lot of lawyers I expect made a few bob out of this. It's

:03:58. > :04:02.largely because you were constantly thawarted by the Human Rights Act

:04:02. > :04:06.you interviewed, is that still right for purpose? It isn't largely

:04:06. > :04:09.because of that. Long before we signed up to the Act the

:04:09. > :04:14.international treaties against torture, for instance, were

:04:14. > :04:18.deployed. There was all sorts - we were always a member of the

:04:18. > :04:21.Convention of European Human Rights. Why has it never happened before?

:04:21. > :04:26.What has never happened? It's taken eight years to get rid of someone

:04:26. > :04:30.regarded as a serious threat to this country? You are underestimating the

:04:30. > :04:33.number who are delayed for time after time and at the end of the day

:04:33. > :04:38.people can say well, we have been here so long that you are disrupting

:04:38. > :04:41.our family life, including convicted terrorists. So, there is a

:04:41. > :04:47.frustration, if you are asking were we frustrated? Yes, of course we

:04:47. > :04:51.were. Nothing that we would have liked better than to be in Theresa

:04:51. > :04:56.May's position this morning. What's the one thing you would like to see

:04:56. > :05:00.which means we haven't to spend another �2 million on eight years on

:05:00. > :05:04.another case? I revise the immigration rules so the misuse of

:05:04. > :05:07.some of the articles of the European Convention on Human Rights,

:05:07. > :05:12.particularly the right to family life, is no longer an excuse for

:05:12. > :05:15.people to - who have no respect for family life, who would blow up

:05:15. > :05:18.families, can use that as an excuse to stay in this country. I am

:05:18. > :05:23.delighted this morning, not least for the British people because while

:05:24. > :05:27.everybody has rights, and Abu Qatada had rights, as well, once he settled

:05:27. > :05:31.here, everybody has rights. The 65 million other British people had

:05:31. > :05:36.rights, as well. The basic right is the right to life. Because without

:05:36. > :05:40.life no other right can actually be enjoyed. It's good news. We need to

:05:40. > :05:48.move on. We are going to talk about the Labour Party, that will surprise

:05:48. > :05:50.you! Ed Milliband and his union backer

:05:50. > :05:53.and bankroller, Len McCluskey, are having relationship issues at the

:05:53. > :05:56.moment. Mr McCluskey is leader of Unite and has accused Labour of

:05:56. > :05:59.smearing his union over allegations that it tried to hijack the

:05:59. > :06:02.selection of a party candidate in Falkirk. There are claims Unite has

:06:02. > :06:04.been throwing its weight around in other constituencies, too. Here are

:06:04. > :06:09.the two men in action on Friday afternoon.

:06:09. > :06:13.I am not going to let any individual, including men McCluskey

:06:13. > :06:18.get in the way of upholding the integrity of this party. I am not

:06:19. > :06:25.going to allow machine politics, bad practice, malpractice, even corrupt

:06:25. > :06:30.practice, to besmish the integrity of Labour Party members up and down

:06:30. > :06:33.this country. I am angry about this, incredibly angry by what's happened,

:06:33. > :06:38.certain people have let down this party. I am not going to let it

:06:38. > :06:42.happen. It's depressing that Labour Party leaders seem to want to have a

:06:42. > :06:46.clause four moment, they've got to have a situation where they front up

:06:46. > :06:51.union leaders. Ed doesn't need to front up me. I am his friend. I

:06:51. > :06:54.support him. Yes, we have differences of opinion. Police

:06:54. > :06:59.inquiry fine, we will investigate, I am sure the police have a lot better

:06:59. > :07:03.things to do than this. Of course we will co-operate with that.

:07:03. > :07:07.Ed Miliband, Len McCluskey, is this a defining moment for the Labour

:07:07. > :07:12.leader? It's an important moment for the whole party. Because the

:07:12. > :07:17.question here is not only the misuse of the rules and regulations which

:07:17. > :07:21.has already been verying theed, Ed Miliband has referred to the police

:07:21. > :07:28.-- investigated. It's a battle, a political battle between those who

:07:28. > :07:34.want to take Labour back to the 70s and 80s as Len McCluskey does where

:07:34. > :07:41.we represented the section sectional voice, and those like Ed Miliband

:07:41. > :07:45.who want to see us move increasingly towards an open party which reaches

:07:45. > :07:49.across class, across geography, gender, in which ordinary trade

:07:49. > :07:53.unionists can play their part with many others. Make no mistake, this

:07:53. > :07:57.is not an argument about trade unionists. There are millions of

:07:57. > :08:00.decent people who are members of trade unions. The trade unions

:08:01. > :08:06.themselves give them a voice, give them protection. It's about the

:08:06. > :08:10.misuse of power allegedly of trade union bosses and only one or two

:08:10. > :08:12.trade union bosses and Ed Miliband as he said in his article this

:08:12. > :08:19.morning, has pointed out the direction in which the Labour Party

:08:19. > :08:22.should move. You are in no doubt then that Unite's involved in a

:08:22. > :08:27.long-term strategy for a left-wing takeover of the Labour Party?

:08:27. > :08:30.no doubt that the leader of Unite wants to impose an idea logical

:08:31. > :08:36.direction on the Labour Party that would lead us into political

:08:36. > :08:40.oblivion. As it did in the 1970s and 1980s and that's why at heart this

:08:40. > :08:46.is a political struggle. But it is not a struggle against trade

:08:46. > :08:51.unionists or trade union unions. Like the Co-operative Society and

:08:51. > :08:55.many not in any group, we want them in the party. I understand that.

:08:55. > :09:04.MrMiliband has acted in Falkirk, whether Unite activities have been

:09:04. > :09:08.the most coninterest version. Should he act to -- con troversial. You are

:09:08. > :09:11.right he has acted. He's acted pretty quickly actually over six

:09:11. > :09:16.weeks the Labour Party has frozen the selection process. It's

:09:16. > :09:21.suspended members. What about the others? As regards the idealogical

:09:21. > :09:24.battle what you have to do is read the article in The Observer today

:09:24. > :09:29.where he makes it clear that the type of Labour Party for which we

:09:29. > :09:32.are looking is modern, open, reaching out. I understand that. We

:09:32. > :09:36.know from Unite's own words they're involved in trying to impose their

:09:36. > :09:40.candidates all from the left on to 40 other constituencies. What should

:09:40. > :09:44.he do about that? Well, I can't give you a detailed solution here but I

:09:44. > :09:49.can give you a general approach to it. The key is to try and make sure

:09:49. > :09:53.that trade unions like others who join the party do so directly,

:09:53. > :09:59.rather than through the vehicle of trade union bosses. Because when you

:09:59. > :10:02.do that you place them in the position that many very rich people

:10:02. > :10:05.are placed in the Conservative Party where they are paying lots of money

:10:05. > :10:11.and then trying to determine what the policies of that party will be.

:10:11. > :10:15.This is a problem actually for all parties which is why I think Ed

:10:15. > :10:20.Miliband's suggestion that you should have a cap, say �50,000

:10:20. > :10:27.across parties of any contributions. People just don't think he's got it

:10:27. > :10:33.in him to take on the likes of McCluskey. 22% of Labour voters

:10:33. > :10:36.think he is a strong leader. Every challenge is also an opportunity. Ed

:10:36. > :10:40.Miliband didn't particularly go looking for this fight. This fight

:10:40. > :10:46.came to him. But I think he understands, as everyone else in the

:10:46. > :10:49.Labour Party does, that a struggle of this nature which is in essence

:10:49. > :10:52.politically is a determining struggle about the direction of the

:10:52. > :10:57.Labour Party and I have no doubt in my mind that the direction in which

:10:57. > :11:03.Ed Miliband wants to move, which is an open, modern, relevant party...

:11:03. > :11:06.Is he tough enough to step up to the crease and take on Unite and Mr

:11:06. > :11:10.McCluskey? The evidence of the last few days in his own words suggests

:11:10. > :11:14.he is. This is not about personalities and shouldn't be, and

:11:14. > :11:18.I read in some newspapers it's a replay of six or seven years ago,

:11:18. > :11:21.this is too important for old skoerts to come into this. -- scores

:11:21. > :11:24.to come into this. This is about the future of the Labour Party and this

:11:24. > :11:28.country, my God, desperately needs a Labour Party to provide an

:11:28. > :11:32.alternative Government. You have been writing about this, what do you

:11:32. > :11:36.make of this? You are saying - it's not about old scores. Isn't the

:11:36. > :11:43.political problem is that the Labour leadership are denouncing Unite for

:11:43. > :11:47.their tactics in Falkirk, but on the political point is that for Unite,

:11:47. > :11:52.for Len McCluskey the words Tony Blair are dirty words and a lot of

:11:52. > :11:56.people around Ed Miliband who share that view and Tom Watson was the

:11:56. > :11:59.general election co-ordinator, he shares that view. Until the Labour

:11:59. > :12:04.Party doesn't regard the words Tony Blair as dirty words, are they not

:12:04. > :12:08.going to struggle to connect? He was of course the Labour Party's most

:12:08. > :12:16.successful leader. I dispute the Labour Party does regard Tony Blair

:12:16. > :12:20.in that way. Secondly, if you are asking me if there was struggle

:12:20. > :12:24.between two factions in the Labour Party years ago, the answer is yes,

:12:24. > :12:28.I bear the scars on my back. I resigned the day Gordon Brown came

:12:29. > :12:34.in, you remember, partly for this reason. The point I am making is

:12:34. > :12:38.that today it is too costly to allow whatever divisions previously

:12:38. > :12:43.existed to divide those forces which include most of what's called the

:12:43. > :12:46.Blairites, most of what are called the Brownites, they should be united

:12:46. > :12:49.together on what is a major struggle coming about the direction of the

:12:49. > :12:54.Labour Party and we are on the same side on that. As far as I am

:12:54. > :12:57.concerned it's far too important to allow those old things to interfere

:12:57. > :13:02.with making sure the Labour Party survives and moves in the right

:13:02. > :13:07.direction. What do you make of it, Miranda? There are people on Twitter

:13:07. > :13:15.and elsewhere within the Labour Party trying to say this is an early

:13:15. > :13:20.silly season story and the voter doesn't possibly even understand the

:13:20. > :13:23.intricacies of the selection. As Dr Reid has said this is an important

:13:23. > :13:28.moment for the Labour Party. I am intrigued by this article today. We

:13:28. > :13:32.want to amend, not end, the union link. It's not really a link. It

:13:32. > :13:36.looks to the public like ownership. Where do you end up to defuse that?

:13:36. > :13:40.John Reid has given us an idea of where you think we should go. What

:13:40. > :13:48.is your thought? This is the first time this week I have seen the real

:13:48. > :13:53.essence being addressed, it's not The Unite's tackics. Ed Miliband has

:13:53. > :13:57.been tenacious so far in going after the specific case of Falkirk. It's

:13:57. > :14:00.the ultimate objective which they're candid about in their strategy

:14:00. > :14:05.document and that's to move Labour Party to the left. If they succeed

:14:05. > :14:08.it doesn't matter if they go about in the most blameless textbook

:14:08. > :14:12.fashion, observe every rule, every protocol, it will be a probable for

:14:12. > :14:15.the Labour Party. This is a party which has already struggled with

:14:15. > :14:20.public opinion on issues like welfare and immigration and the

:14:21. > :14:24.economy. Unite would have them move further away. The question is not is

:14:24. > :14:27.Ed Miliband tough enough to deal with them and tactics, does he

:14:27. > :14:33.believe Unite are wrong in their long-term vision for the party?

:14:33. > :14:36.is the mid-term. This is a time when the Government's meant to be in the

:14:36. > :14:41.doldrums and the opposition is meant to have a spring in its step and

:14:41. > :14:44.instead we have Ed Miliband on the rack and David Cameron flipping

:14:44. > :14:48.hamburgers. First of all, thank you for what I take was a compliment in

:14:48. > :14:53.your opening remarks. I agree entirely with you. Profoundly. This

:14:53. > :14:57.is a political struggle. When people look back at the successes of the

:14:57. > :15:04.Labour Party over the dozen years we were in power, people tend to think

:15:04. > :15:07.that power was just handed to us. It wasn't. It was derived out of a real

:15:07. > :15:15.struggle inside the Labour Party to modernise us and we had to take on

:15:15. > :15:19.militant, we had to take on Scargill and Bennites at various stages. That

:15:19. > :15:22.was, unfortunately, a necessity in order to create what was the modern

:15:22. > :15:26.forward looking Labour Party. Ed Miliband is now on the verge of that

:15:26. > :15:31.struggle. It has been brought to him because as you said, there are one

:15:31. > :15:38.or two trade union lieders, by no means them all by the way --

:15:38. > :15:48.time. That's the struggle we are now engaged. I think Ed Miliband is up

:15:48. > :15:52.

:15:52. > :15:57.for that. Do you listen to Drenge?I don't. But I understand Tom Watson

:15:57. > :16:01.recommends them. The United Kingdom Independence

:16:01. > :16:05.Party, UKIP is rapidly coming in from the fringes of politics to chal

:16:05. > :16:13.enthe main parties. But how much do we know about their foot soldiers

:16:13. > :16:23.and what they think? Well, with the help of a specially-commissioned

:16:23. > :16:25.

:16:25. > :16:30.Sunday politics survey, Giles Dilnot UKIP are blooming. Once branded can

:16:30. > :16:34.cranks and gladflies, even clowns. Their significant success in this

:16:34. > :16:38.May's local elections in places like here in Buckingham and widespread

:16:38. > :16:43.expectations that they'll do well in next year's European elections,

:16:43. > :16:47.means owe Pope Benedict vents to take them seriously. -- means

:16:47. > :16:51.opponents. For those who may not have

:16:51. > :16:54.considered UKIP, there is a big question - once famously asked by

:16:54. > :17:00.UKIP's leader himself. The question I want it ask - that we are all

:17:00. > :17:03.going to ask, is - who are you? for the first time we really have a

:17:03. > :17:09.chance to answer that question, thanks to a survey commissioned by

:17:09. > :17:12.the Sunday politics and conducted by ComRes of 101 UKIP councillors

:17:12. > :17:15.across England and Wales. Not only does it give us a clear view of who

:17:15. > :17:19.they are, but what their political background is and what they really

:17:19. > :17:24.think. Essentially it is the first survey

:17:24. > :17:27.of UKIP councillors. We have a great response rate. #r50 % of UKIP

:17:27. > :17:31.councillors from England and Wales responded to this within a week. --

:17:31. > :17:36.50%. They are keen to share their views. Www. We caught up with three

:17:36. > :17:40.to ask what they made of our survey. -- we caught up.

:17:40. > :17:46.The first thing is, like most of their colleagues, they share a

:17:46. > :17:50.political starting point. Cheers. I have been a Conservative voter for

:17:50. > :17:53.years and years but not actually been a Conservative member. I think

:17:53. > :17:58.I directed Chris away from Conservatives because he said - I

:17:58. > :18:03.ought to go with the Liberal Democrats. I said - don't go there!

:18:03. > :18:08.What about you, Paul? I was brought up in the '80s, in the time of

:18:08. > :18:13.Margaret Thatcher. I remember her being such a strong leader. When I

:18:13. > :18:20.could vote, I was a Tory voter but got disenchanted with the Tory Party

:18:20. > :18:24.over European issues and two years ago, I joined UKIP. These are Tory

:18:24. > :18:27.voters. 70% used to vote Conservative. One-third were active

:18:27. > :18:33.members and have stood for the Tory Party in the past. Very few are

:18:33. > :18:37.coming from other parties. 21% have previously been elected as

:18:37. > :18:43.Conservative councillors and 33% have been Conservative Party

:18:43. > :18:48.members. In terms of policy, immigration is the top issue for

:18:48. > :18:52.UKIP councillors. More important than Europe. 76% of UKIP councillors

:18:52. > :18:58.believe immigration has had a negative impact on Britain, over the

:18:58. > :19:02.last 30 years. Immigration is a huge problem to people, even in leafy

:19:02. > :19:06.Buckinghamshire. What you have got there is Labour obviously started

:19:06. > :19:12.with the influx, 500,000 people coming in, and, of course, what they

:19:12. > :19:16.see in Cameron and Clegg is just a free for all, open doors, come and

:19:16. > :19:24.help yourself. The general public, they have recognised that there is

:19:24. > :19:28.stress on every social service. Education, housing, NHS, the queues

:19:28. > :19:33.are getting bigger. And we can't address it. I think it affects

:19:33. > :19:37.everybody. If you think it doesn't affect you, then you are crazy. It

:19:37. > :19:42.affects everyone. Absolutely everyone. An interesting result was

:19:42. > :19:47.on the environment. 81% believed climate change is either not

:19:47. > :19:57.happening, or human activity is not mainly responsible. I think I was

:19:57. > :19:58.

:19:58. > :20:04.veering on that it has no affect, then I thought about it, that maybe

:20:04. > :20:07.there was possibly an affect. But when we have got our policy man, Mr

:20:07. > :20:11.Roger Helmer who has given papers with conferences and what have you,

:20:11. > :20:15.it is all backed up that there is no truth that climate change is causing

:20:15. > :20:20.all these problems. These are cyclic things that are happening. It is not

:20:20. > :20:27.climate change. The majority of UKIP councillors support the death

:20:27. > :20:32.penalty. 69% for the murder of a police officer. 70% for murders

:20:32. > :20:37.committed by terrorists and 65% for child killers. I can see people are

:20:37. > :20:47.generally fed up and they are saying - a lot of people these days across

:20:47. > :20:50.

:20:51. > :20:55.the board - saying an eye for an eye, a tooth for a'. Also -- a' -- a

:20:55. > :21:00.tooth for a tooth. There is no deterrent. People are

:21:00. > :21:05.not frightened of prison. In some prisons it can be a comfortable

:21:05. > :21:09.lifestyle. Your policy agenda, from the survey, is fairly right-wing.

:21:09. > :21:12.Does that mean it'll be difficult to attract Labour voters to you?

:21:12. > :21:16.challenge people and I knock on the people who have got Labour posters

:21:16. > :21:23.in their windows. After about three or four minutes, I can tell you,

:21:23. > :21:27.there is a good number that actually say, Mm, I agree with your policy.

:21:27. > :21:32.Well, Labour supporters are the same as everybody else. They are normal

:21:32. > :21:36.people, going on in normal days. They are not stupid. They want to

:21:36. > :21:43.vote for someone who they can believe in. I think we are the party

:21:43. > :21:48.to believe in. They believe that for so much, in the end, UKIP is a party

:21:48. > :21:52.here to stay. If circumstances changed, would you go back to the

:21:52. > :21:58.Conservatives? No, I don't. I'm a firm believer that UKIP now stands

:21:58. > :22:02.on its own as oar party. Two years ago -- as a party. Two years ago I

:22:03. > :22:08.might have said yes. Now I so believe what we stand for and what

:22:08. > :22:13.we are doing, I think we now have a right to carry on as a party.

:22:13. > :22:18.I'm sorry, I wouldn't go back to a party that has basically u-turned on

:22:18. > :22:25.virtually everything and gone against traditional Conservative

:22:25. > :22:31.vote voters... The damage has been done. Yeah, the damage is done.

:22:31. > :22:35.Nigel Farage joins me now from Kent. This survey shows what people have

:22:35. > :22:41.long-suspected. UKIP is a party dominated by Conservatives.

:22:41. > :22:44.Disgruntled Conservatives. What it shows is that our elected

:22:44. > :22:50.councillors are successes came predominantly in the south-east of

:22:50. > :22:53.England and east of England. Where we broke through this year, were in

:22:53. > :22:58.predominantly Conservative areas. These from shire elections taking

:22:58. > :23:01.place on May 2nd. It is no surprise to me that 70% of that particular

:23:01. > :23:06.survey had previously been Conservative supporters. You know,

:23:06. > :23:12.had you gone to Barnsley or Rotherham or Middlesbrough, or any

:23:12. > :23:15.of those by-elections which UKIP - or South Shields - in which UKIP has

:23:15. > :23:18.been coming second in safe Labour seats, in by-elections, you would

:23:18. > :23:21.have found there the vast majority of our voters had actually come from

:23:22. > :23:26.the Labour Party. It does depend a bit what part of the country you go

:23:26. > :23:29.to. But the area where the survey was done is not entirely a

:23:29. > :23:34.Labour-free area. You have said you caused "an up-Welling of support

:23:34. > :23:38.from people across the political spectrum." That's wrong. You draw

:23:39. > :23:43.your support overwhelmingly from disgruntled Tories. Well if you go

:23:43. > :23:47.to South Shields a constituency in which we had never stood before, a

:23:47. > :23:52.place which has been solid Labour, where they have weighed the vote for

:23:53. > :23:56.100 years n a very short by-election, we went from 0 to 25%.

:23:56. > :23:59.Most votes coming from Labour voters. If you look at the European

:23:59. > :24:04.elections in 2009, the areas in which we came first, places like

:24:04. > :24:11.Hull, where UKIP was topping the poll, and places like wroth am ham

:24:11. > :24:16.where we recently won -- Rotherham. You will see in those Labour areas

:24:16. > :24:20.we are making progress. I think Mr Miliband's decision this week, not

:24:20. > :24:23.at this stage anyway, to back a referendum on EU membership, means

:24:23. > :24:27.that, you know, we will be attacking the Labour vote more and more over

:24:27. > :24:32.the course of the next few months. If you look at the views of your

:24:32. > :24:37.councillors, robust right-wing views on immigration, capital punishment,

:24:37. > :24:41.climate change. Your party has clearly hoovered up Tories from the

:24:41. > :24:44.right of the Conservative Party? Well clearly if we go to East Anglia

:24:44. > :24:48.or the south-east of England you will find many traditional

:24:48. > :24:51.Conservatives who look at David Cameron, who seems to be pryer

:24:51. > :24:54.advertising gay marriage, climate change and keeping the foreign aid

:24:54. > :24:58.budget as high as possible. -- pryer advertising.

:24:58. > :25:01.They look at that and say they can't vote Conservative. We look at the

:25:01. > :25:07.European manifesto and say at least there there are things we can agree

:25:07. > :25:11.with. Yes, it is true that most UKIPers have views on immigration

:25:11. > :25:16.but they are sincible views. We used to have 30,000 to 50,000 people a

:25:16. > :25:19.year coming to live, work and settle in this country. Over the last ten

:25:19. > :25:23.years it is 500,000. We are saying the time has come to get a grip and

:25:23. > :25:32.get control. Actually that appeals right across the political spectrum

:25:33. > :25:36.to people because it is plain, common sense. It looks like the main

:25:37. > :25:40.function the UKIP will be to deprive the Tories of votes and seats. How

:25:40. > :25:44.does it feel to be Ed Miliband's best hope of getting to Number Ten?

:25:44. > :25:49.You have your briefing. You will stick to it. Nothing I will say will

:25:49. > :25:54.change your mind. I will have one last try. When we had the Eastleigh

:25:54. > :25:59.by-election in the late winter this year, the headlines the next day

:25:59. > :26:03.were - UKIP deprived Tories of the seat. After that Lord Ashcroft spent

:26:03. > :26:07.a considerable sum of money finding out who were the UKIP voters, where

:26:07. > :26:12.had they come from and what were the key issues and reasons why they

:26:12. > :26:16.voted UKIP. I'm thankful to Lord Ashcroft to save us from having to

:26:16. > :26:21.do it. We saw one-third of the vote in Eastleigh came from the Tories,

:26:21. > :26:26.one-third came from the Liberal Democrats. 20% came from old Labour

:26:26. > :26:29.and 10% came from people who had not voted for anybody for 20 years but

:26:29. > :26:34.felt with UKIP they could reengage for the process. The answer to your

:26:34. > :26:37.question is simple: Of course we are picking up Tory votes and there is

:26:37. > :26:42.huge disenchantment in Cameron. Many people believe the guy is not a

:26:42. > :26:45.Conservative at all. But overall, the majority of our votes come to us

:26:45. > :26:48.from parties other than the Conservative Party. This is not a

:26:49. > :26:54.splinter group on the right of the Conservative Party. This is a new,

:26:54. > :26:58.national party, not hide-bound by political correctness, prepared to

:26:58. > :27:02.stand up and say things everybody else has tried to brush under the

:27:02. > :27:05.carpet for decades. We are here and here to stay. If you are a threat to

:27:05. > :27:11.all the parties, including Labour, why do you think it is that Stewart

:27:11. > :27:17.Wood, a key figure in Ed Miliband's inner circle, he says you should be

:27:17. > :27:21.allowed to join the preelection debates. We think we can discount it

:27:21. > :27:24.because he is a fan of yours. It is because he knows you you will split

:27:24. > :27:29.the Tory vote and let Labour in. Again you are sticking to the

:27:29. > :27:33.script. It is fine if you want to do it. I keep repeatedly telling you,

:27:33. > :27:36.we pick up more votes across the spectrum than we do just from the

:27:36. > :27:41.Conservative Party. It is a fact, it is well-documented. Yet nobody

:27:41. > :27:45.inside the London Metropolitan media mindset wants to accept it. We seem

:27:45. > :27:51.to think that believing in Britain, it should govern itself, we should

:27:51. > :27:53.have a trade relationship with Europe W we seem to believe it is

:27:53. > :27:58.right-wing. Remember, it was the Labour Party, the left of the Labour

:27:58. > :28:02.Party in the '70s and '80s even Neil Kinnock at one time, who believed in

:28:02. > :28:05.that view. As for the TV debates. They are a long way away. I know

:28:05. > :28:10.everybody is talking about the general election and what may or may

:28:10. > :28:14.not happen. I would like to remind viewers on May 22 bed next year, we

:28:14. > :28:20.have a magsal election and European election. -- May 22nd. Every one of

:28:20. > :28:25.us is entitled to vote. On that day we have over 5,000 council seats up

:28:25. > :28:31.for grabs. If UKIP is able, on May 22nd, to win the European elections,

:28:31. > :28:35.I think keeping us out of the pre--election debates in '15 would

:28:35. > :28:40.like slightly ridiculous. Would you agree with your councillors in our

:28:40. > :28:49.survey that Britain today is a worse place because of immigration? ?

:28:49. > :28:53.think that what has happened to Britain since 1997, with totally,

:28:53. > :28:56.frankly unprestricted, excessive immigration has had a negative

:28:56. > :29:01.effect on society. We have a million of our youngsters out of work, we

:29:01. > :29:06.are prepared to open up the doors next January to the whole of

:29:06. > :29:13.Bulgaria and Romania. So immigrants have made Britain a worse place?

:29:13. > :29:16.think Britain is -- I think British market towns and cities have become

:29:16. > :29:22.far more divided communities over the course of the last 15 years than

:29:22. > :29:27.they were before and I'm sorry about that. Do you listen to Drenge?

:29:27. > :29:33.that. Do you listen to Drenge? Sorry? Do you listen to Drenge? Um,

:29:34. > :29:39.OK. I didn't hear that, I apologise. It is a group that Mr Tom Watson

:29:39. > :29:44.listened to and recommended that Mr Ed Miliband listened to. I wonder if

:29:44. > :29:52.you Z clearly from the look of your face, you didn't, you don't.

:29:52. > :29:56.From a rather puzzled Kent we are joined by the Justice Secretary,

:29:56. > :30:05.Chris Grayling. You say that voters shouldn't be tempted by that nice Mr

:30:05. > :30:09.Farage. Why isn't he to be trusted? We have got an opposition that is

:30:09. > :30:13.ahead in the opinion polls, that is showing all the signs of entryism

:30:13. > :30:16.from the left that we saw in the 1980s. What we are hearing from

:30:16. > :30:20.Falkirk and elsewhere is what we heard from parts of this country in

:30:20. > :30:23.the 1980s when the militant tendency was looking to take over parts of

:30:23. > :30:29.the Labour Party. We have a left-wing trade union leader,

:30:29. > :30:33.overtly trying to take over the Labour Party and imposing a laeft---

:30:33. > :30:38.left-wing agenda I asked you about MrFarage, why isn't he to be

:30:38. > :30:42.trusted? Well, the issue - it's not about Mr Farage. It's actually about

:30:42. > :30:46.who is going to form a Government after 2015. The article I wrote was

:30:46. > :30:49.basically saying to people who are Conservative-minded look at what's

:30:49. > :30:53.happening in the Labour Party, look at the challenge this country faces.

:30:53. > :31:00.It would be disastrous for Britain if we ended up with Ed Miliband as

:31:00. > :31:04.Prime Minister after the next election. If you you are lured by

:31:05. > :31:10.other temptations, the smooth Patter of MrFarage you will end up with Ed

:31:10. > :31:15.Miliband as Prime Minister and by looks of it you will end up with Len

:31:15. > :31:18.McCluskey since we know selections that have already taken place have

:31:18. > :31:23.imposed left-wing candidates into parliament who will have immaterial

:31:23. > :31:27.impact on this country. We cannot afford as politicians on the right

:31:27. > :31:34.to allow Ed Miliband and Len McCluskey and his team into Downing

:31:34. > :31:37.Street. Why don't you take Muir -- make sure you stop that by doing a

:31:37. > :31:41.deal with UKIP? It's not about deals with anyone. The issues of concern

:31:41. > :31:45.in the survey, immigration is down by a third. We have capped welfare

:31:45. > :31:49.to make sure that we limit the amounts of money that go to people

:31:49. > :31:52.who are dependent upon benefits. We are delivering real changes to our

:31:52. > :31:55.state schools system of the kind that Conservative supporters have

:31:55. > :31:59.always wanted to see. I am delivering changes in the justice

:31:59. > :32:04.arena. I announced today a review with changes ahead to the way we

:32:04. > :32:08.look after young people, the perks available in youth offenders

:32:08. > :32:11.institutions, already made changes to regimes in adult prisons. These

:32:11. > :32:14.are things Conservative supporters have wanted to see for a long time.

:32:14. > :32:17.They're happening today even though we are in coalition. Look at the

:32:17. > :32:23.alternative. Take one issues people are concerned about, which is human

:32:23. > :32:25.rights. We have seen in the last week my shadow, the person who would

:32:25. > :32:29.be Justice Secretary and responsible for human rights in a Labour

:32:29. > :32:32.Government, stand up and make a speech saying the current human

:32:32. > :32:37.rights laws in this country are fine. I profoundly disagree with

:32:37. > :32:42.that. In Government, in a majority we would change our human rights

:32:42. > :32:47.laws but if people go and vote for someone else or stay at home we end

:32:47. > :32:50.up with a Labour Government. Back to this point you seem reluctant to

:32:50. > :32:54.talk about and instead bash Labour which is not what I am asking about

:32:54. > :33:00.at all. We have seen that many people who might have voted for you,

:33:00. > :33:04.who voted Conservative in the past, will now vote for MrFar and --

:33:04. > :33:08.MrFarage. Maybe in enough numbers to give MrMiliband the keys to Downing

:33:08. > :33:12.Street which you say would be a disaster and MrMcCluskey and the

:33:12. > :33:16.rest of them. I ask again why don't you do a deal to stop that

:33:16. > :33:19.happening? Well, you don't do deals. You fight for your principles, you

:33:19. > :33:22.fight for what you believe is right. The Conservative Party isn't going

:33:22. > :33:25.to go to a general election having done a deal with someone else. We

:33:25. > :33:30.are going to a general election and fight on the principles we believe

:33:30. > :33:34.in. If you take the issue of Europe, the one on which a number of people

:33:34. > :33:38.have expressed concerns in the last few years. On Friday the entire

:33:38. > :33:41.Conservative Party went to the House of Commons and voted for a

:33:41. > :33:48.referendum on the European Union. We face opposition to that from Labour

:33:48. > :33:53.and the Lib Dems. Not from UKIP. Why can't you do a deal with a party

:33:53. > :33:56.that's already full of people who used to be Conservatives? Look, we

:33:56. > :33:59.have to get legislation through the House of Commons. The reality of the

:33:59. > :34:03.House of Commons is that it's Labour and the Lib Dems who have more votes

:34:03. > :34:07.than us in the House of Commons. So therefore if we are going to win the

:34:07. > :34:11.argument the only way we will be able to change these things, the way

:34:11. > :34:15.we can deliver a referendum, a renegotiation first because that's

:34:15. > :34:18.crucial, we have to have a renegotiation so there is a genuine

:34:18. > :34:25.deal to offer, we have to get a majority Conservative Government.

:34:25. > :34:28.understand that. But you are only trailing Labour by 6-10% in the

:34:28. > :34:33.polls, it's not a huge amount Labour is ahead at the moment. A deal with

:34:33. > :34:37.UKIP would make it much more likely that you form a Government after the

:34:37. > :34:43.next election. You have seen the election projections, no deal with

:34:43. > :34:49.UKIP, MrMiliband could win an overall majority with less than 35%

:34:49. > :34:53.of the vote. Well, the deal I want to do is not with another party.

:34:53. > :34:56.It's with voters. It's with voters who might be tempted to vote for

:34:56. > :34:59.UKIP, voters who might be tempted to vote for the Labour Party or Lib

:34:59. > :35:04.Dems. We have to say to them if you want a referendum on Europe, if you

:35:04. > :35:07.want new human rights laws, to carry on with welfare reform, if you want

:35:07. > :35:11.more education changes of the kind you believe in, if you want a

:35:11. > :35:16.tougher criminal justice system you need a majority Conservative

:35:16. > :35:21.Government. All right. Abu Qatada back in Jordan today. The Home

:35:21. > :35:24.Secretary said in the aftermath of this we need to look at the European

:35:24. > :35:28.Court of Human Rights and nothing should be off the table, quote. But

:35:28. > :35:33.nothing off the table, does that include the possibility that we

:35:33. > :35:36.would leave the European Convention on Human Rights? Yes, it does. We

:35:36. > :35:40.have been very clear. We are currently doing detailed work on

:35:40. > :35:43.options. I have personal responsibility within the

:35:43. > :35:48.Ministerial team for human rights issues. We are currently looking at

:35:48. > :35:52.what the options are for us. I have been very clear indeed, we are not

:35:52. > :35:56.ruling anything in, we are not ruling anything out. I have said

:35:56. > :36:00.clearly at a minimum there will be a replacement for the Human Rights

:36:00. > :36:03.Act. We will have a fundamental change to our realise with the

:36:03. > :36:10.European Court of Human Rights. We cannot go on with a situation where

:36:10. > :36:15.we have people who want to do real damage to this country able to stay

:36:15. > :36:19.here, when they represent a threat to us A future Conservative

:36:19. > :36:23.Government with a majority, one of the options would be to leave the

:36:23. > :36:28.convention altogether? One of the options, I have ruled nothing in and

:36:28. > :36:31.out. A future Conservative Government with a majority will make

:36:31. > :36:33.wholesale changes to human rights laws. The problem is not the

:36:34. > :36:40.original convention written by Conservatives and is a sensible

:36:40. > :36:44.document. It's the way in which the European Courts interpret it and

:36:44. > :36:47.re-interpret it You can't change the convention yourself. You can't

:36:47. > :36:52.change it. Well, that's why we are working through detailed options and

:36:52. > :36:56.we will come up later this year with a clear plan. We will go to the next

:36:56. > :37:00.election in our manifesto with a clear plan for change that will set

:37:00. > :37:04.out exactly what we will do, when we will do it, how we will do it, what

:37:04. > :37:08.the legal basis will be. We will have that in good time for the

:37:08. > :37:12.election but I am absolutely clear there will be wholesale changes to

:37:12. > :37:15.the way that human rights laws operate in this country. I am sure

:37:15. > :37:20.UKIP will agree with you, but I understand there will be no deal,

:37:20. > :37:24.you have made that clear. Thank you for joining us. Coming up in 20

:37:24. > :37:34.minutes, I will be looking at the week ahead with our panel. Until

:37:34. > :37:37.

:37:37. > :37:40.then, the Sunday Politics across the Sleer Hello. Welcome from us. Coming

:37:40. > :37:47.up later, the row over new Government guidelines that allow the

:37:47. > :37:52.public to film council meetings. Joining me andy Slaughter, Labour MP

:37:52. > :37:56.for Hammersmith and neighbour neighbouring MP Conservative, Angie

:37:56. > :38:01.Bray. Can we start with a local issue to you both, but you more so,

:38:01. > :38:06.Andy. This Earl's Court redevelopment. Controversial plan.

:38:06. > :38:10.It's been approved by the mayor just this week. The scheme involves

:38:10. > :38:14.demolishing two estates and the Earl's Court exhibition centre to be

:38:14. > :38:17.replaced with four so-called villages, a high street and

:38:17. > :38:20.estimated 7,500 homes. There has been a lot of opposition,

:38:20. > :38:24.campaigners argue the loss of Earl's Court would damage trade and that

:38:25. > :38:28.the centre should be listed. There's been a lot of opposition from you.

:38:28. > :38:33.Here we are, all the legal challenges have come to nothing. You

:38:33. > :38:39.have to go with this now, haven't you? Where to start. 7,500 homes in

:38:39. > :38:45.villages, well, these are villages 30-storeys high. They'll all be sold

:38:45. > :38:48.off plan for a millionsold off plan for a million plus to foreign

:38:48. > :38:53.investors or city investors and to do that, to make a development two

:38:53. > :38:58.or three things are happening. Councils are selling their land at

:38:58. > :39:08.huge undervalues. Secondly, they're knocking down good quality newly

:39:08. > :39:12.

:39:12. > :39:17.modernised affordable homes, houses with gardens to do that. They're not

:39:17. > :39:23.bll --... Local residents campaign, one quoted this week saying this is

:39:23. > :39:28.exciting. A new home. They found that resident, did they? She wasn't

:39:28. > :39:34.alone. I can talk about 90% of the 2,000 people living currently in

:39:34. > :39:38.those homes who want to enjoy homes, who are against this, who have

:39:38. > :39:45.petitioned to say they don't want their homes demolished and have been

:39:45. > :39:52.ignored by Boris Johnson, by the councils. This is developers riding

:39:52. > :39:56.roughshopped with the collision of Tory politicians -- roughshod.

:39:56. > :40:01.exhibition centre, the trade point, it brings a lot of trade, a lot of

:40:01. > :40:06.activity to that area. It's been long-established. You are happy to

:40:06. > :40:11.see a yuppification of this area, social cleansing again? I think that

:40:11. > :40:16.it's less political in fact than Andrew is making out. Over in Newham

:40:16. > :40:20.the Labour council there is having precisely the same debate with

:40:20. > :40:25.residents about wanting to do major refurbishment work, regeneration

:40:25. > :40:31.work on an estate. This isn't about Tory politicians trying to bring

:40:31. > :40:36.innupies, it's about -- yuppies. I was the GLA member for the area that

:40:36. > :40:44.includes this part of London for eight years. I know it well. It is a

:40:44. > :40:49.tired area. It's an isolated get owe. -- ghetto. Every person who

:40:49. > :40:52.lives in the area are going to be given a new home complete with new

:40:52. > :40:55.fittings, money as compensation for the inconvenience of having to move.

:40:55. > :40:59.They will be included in the development. What's not to like?

:40:59. > :41:04.Well, I am afraid is you describing my residents as living in a ghetto.

:41:04. > :41:09.These are actually - this is a mixed community. About half the

:41:09. > :41:12.properties, near to half, have been sold under right to buy.

:41:12. > :41:15.Professional people live there, low income people as well, they have a

:41:15. > :41:23.right to live in London. They shouldn't be forced out of London.

:41:23. > :41:29.This is both Jerry mannedering and social engineering. They've been

:41:29. > :41:33.given homes. 10% - against guidelines of 40% of all housing,

:41:33. > :41:36.there is 10%... Affordable housing on top of all the houses that are

:41:36. > :41:41.going to be built for the people who are going to be given a replacement

:41:41. > :41:44.home. The 10% comes on top of that. I do think that people deserve to be

:41:44. > :41:49.given an updated home. Why should they be forced to live in an area

:41:49. > :41:53.that's running down? Surely this is an opportunity to really uplift the

:41:53. > :41:59.area and everyone will benefit. Anybody who thinks the Tories are

:41:59. > :42:04.demolishing working people's homes in order to help them when 990%

:42:04. > :42:08.don't want is -- 90% don't want... We could spend the next 20 minutes

:42:08. > :42:14.talking about this, but we will return to it. Let's move on. The

:42:14. > :42:17.department forever he had -- for education released a list of new

:42:17. > :42:21.free schools. They can be set up by parents, charities and businesses

:42:21. > :42:25.and so on. One of these proposed schools came as a shock to a London

:42:25. > :42:30.council which had been making other plans for the earmarked site.

:42:30. > :42:36.Jennifer Conway has more. Once upon a time this was the home

:42:36. > :42:39.of Ashmount Primary School, the building was old and according to

:42:39. > :42:42.the council unsuitable for a school. They moved to a new site last year

:42:42. > :42:46.and planned to sell this land to developers to build over 100 homes.

:42:46. > :42:49.But here in Islington they've had to go back to the drawing board as a

:42:49. > :42:53.few weeks ago when the list of proposed free schools to open next

:42:53. > :42:58.year was published they discovered one was already earmarked for that

:42:58. > :43:03.site. Islington Free Primary is the school in question. It's to move to

:43:03. > :43:06.the old Ashmount site and is one of the schools in London that's been

:43:06. > :43:12.given a tentative green light. Half the Government's new free schools

:43:12. > :43:15.are in London. This one is backed by the private education company

:43:16. > :43:20.Bellview and they're aiming to open doors next year. The first we heard

:43:20. > :43:23.is when we saw the name of the Borough on the list. We had no input

:43:23. > :43:27.and were never consulted. We are probably the one Borough in London

:43:27. > :43:31.who don't need a new school. We have enough places for parents and

:43:31. > :43:35.pupils. We don't have a problem, certainly not in that part of the

:43:35. > :43:38.Borough. These concerns were echoed in Westminster. Can he explain to

:43:39. > :43:45.parents in areas where they're struggling to get children into

:43:45. > :43:49.primary schools where why is he spend spending money building

:43:49. > :43:56.schools when there are plenty of places? He asks about new schools.

:43:56. > :44:01.That is code for Labour's opposition to free schools. We want more new,

:44:01. > :44:05.good schools. The Department for Education told us that no final

:44:05. > :44:10.decision had yet been taken. We have identified the former site as a

:44:10. > :44:20.possible site for an approved Free School and are in contact with the

:44:20. > :44:22.

:44:22. > :44:26.Islington say they'll be doing all they can to stop the planned school

:44:26. > :44:30.in the meantime. Do you think this is right, that

:44:30. > :44:34.point here that the first a local authority knows about a building it

:44:34. > :44:37.owns, it has had a school in is when a list is published saying it's a

:44:37. > :44:44.free school to go in there? I don't know the process by which this was

:44:44. > :44:46.done. I don't know who knew what. Does that sound right in terms...

:44:46. > :44:53.Sounds messy. The principle is they're still discussing it and no

:44:53. > :44:56.decision has been made. Clearly this is a not a definite site and by what

:44:56. > :45:00.the report says that's something that's going to be sorted between

:45:00. > :45:03.them Isn't the interesting thing they don't need a school for primary

:45:03. > :45:07.pupils there and not particularly in this area and this is a building

:45:07. > :45:16.they've been able to make a decision about and they want it to be used

:45:16. > :45:20.for something else, in fact, for housing? If the point you are make

:45:20. > :45:24.something that this particular borough doesn't vb a shortage of

:45:24. > :45:28.free school places, you shouldn't be putting free schools in there, I

:45:28. > :45:30.disagree. You need to look at this as a shortage of good quality school

:45:30. > :45:35.as a shortage of good quality school places. The fact there are school

:45:35. > :45:40.places, doesn't mean the parents want to take them up. The principle

:45:40. > :45:44.of the free schools in the first place. Well, they had planned around

:45:44. > :45:49.this land and created a new school and someone comes along and stops

:45:49. > :45:53.that. Speaking from my borough, there is a shortage of housing and

:45:53. > :46:01.also school places. We have a borough looking to provide both. I

:46:01. > :46:04.must say it is doing a good job. have two free schools. We have a

:46:04. > :46:07.free school which will be up and running later this year. The key

:46:07. > :46:12.issue from you I want to hear about, I know that Ealing has a particular

:46:12. > :46:17.need for places, do you think any new school in Ealing should be a

:46:17. > :46:22.free school? Yes. No more community schools? Why not? What is wrong with

:46:22. > :46:25.the local schools? We have some good local schools but we need

:46:25. > :46:28.alternatives. The great thing is providing parents about greater

:46:28. > :46:32.choice. Parents wouldn't be agitating for free schools if it

:46:33. > :46:37.wasn't for the fact that they feel they are not being given what they

:46:37. > :46:42.want in what the schools provide. This is an assessment made by the

:46:42. > :46:46.parents t.s not for me to argue with them. I think we reflect that by

:46:46. > :46:50.providing wider choice. Andrew talks about agitation and parents

:46:50. > :46:56.speaking. No better example for that than the first set up in your

:46:56. > :47:03.constituency, Toby Young's free school. People wanted it. I don't

:47:03. > :47:07.have a problem with free schools, any giving children a good

:47:07. > :47:11.education. The problem I have is where it is topdown from Whitehall,

:47:11. > :47:14.when we were told it was about localism. When you are displacing

:47:14. > :47:18.activities. Those 100 homes in Islington were going to be

:47:18. > :47:23.affordable homes for local people. This isn't Hammersmith where they

:47:23. > :47:26.are for the super rich. Islington has a brilliant record in building

:47:26. > :47:30.affordable homes. We are going to have seven free schools in

:47:30. > :47:33.Hammersmith. I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem that

:47:33. > :47:38.every penny the council can get out of the Government, or the Government

:47:39. > :47:43.gives directly into education, will go into free schools or academies.

:47:43. > :47:47.It will not go to community schools even though they desperately need

:47:47. > :47:52.investment and are very good schools. It is the bias and the -

:47:52. > :47:56.and this focus on only having... is the responsiveness to parents or

:47:56. > :48:00.people or organisations that want to set up the schools. I've never had a

:48:00. > :48:04.letter from the a parent which said - I want my school to be turned into

:48:04. > :48:08.a free school or I want a new school and I want it to be a free school.

:48:08. > :48:11.Lots of letters about the conditions of schools. Some letters about the

:48:11. > :48:15.standard of education. Mainly we have really, really good,

:48:15. > :48:19.particularly primary schools, in west London. Let's be clear from

:48:19. > :48:24.what you did. There is a certain amount of uncertainty about Labour's

:48:24. > :48:29.position. Would you say no more free schools. I would say a level playing

:48:29. > :48:36.field. No more free schools? When we get into power, I don't think we are

:48:36. > :48:39.going to try and unravel any successful school that there is. And

:48:39. > :48:43.I visit free schools in the exact same way as I visit community and

:48:43. > :48:49.church schools and all of that, if they are providing good education,

:48:49. > :48:52.good on them. What I want to see is children put before politics. At the

:48:52. > :48:56.moment with Gove, you have politics, politics, politics. We have to move

:48:57. > :49:00.on. OK. Should you be allowed to film, photograph or record your

:49:00. > :49:04.local council meetings? Last month the Government issued new guidelines

:49:04. > :49:07.for local authorities, including greater transpancy. The result?

:49:08. > :49:12.Well, in some cases people have tried to seize their opportunity,

:49:12. > :49:16.only to find some councils are not so receptive to the idea. Our first

:49:16. > :49:21.report on this historic parliamentary day... Spending on

:49:21. > :49:25.people who are sick and disabled has very nearly doubled... This was the

:49:25. > :49:28.first debate for the House of Commons to be broadcast on TV. Now,

:49:28. > :49:33.nearly 25 years on, ministers say they want local councils to be

:49:33. > :49:37.opened up to modern technology in a similar way. People are blogging,

:49:37. > :49:40.tweeting, social media and the use of YouTube is growing. We want

:49:40. > :49:43.people to have access to see things and know what is going on in their

:49:43. > :49:47.council. I think it is right that councils open up and work with

:49:47. > :49:51.people. At the same time there has to be a balance. People shouldn't be

:49:51. > :49:59.disrupting meetings. If they want to recall meetings, they ought to be

:49:59. > :50:03.able to notify the council to make that practical. I am eeye lowed. --

:50:03. > :50:08.I'm allowed. But disruption is being caused. My Government says I can do

:50:08. > :50:12.this. My Government is filmed. The London Assembly is filmed. Two weeks

:50:12. > :50:19.ago at this meeting of Tower Hamlets Council, a resident filming the

:50:19. > :50:21.meeting was asked to stop but refused. OK, we will take a

:50:21. > :50:25.five-minute adjournment. Government allows me, this is

:50:25. > :50:29.England, we are democratic. Looking back at the footage, a week later,

:50:29. > :50:33.the man doing the film told us it was the Government's new guidance

:50:33. > :50:38.that sparked him into doing it. was inspired by his words. I thought

:50:38. > :50:42.they were completely correct. We, the residents of Tower Hamlets know

:50:42. > :50:46.nothing about what happens within Tower Hamlets Council. All we see

:50:46. > :50:50.are these terrible, damning programmes on television about Tower

:50:50. > :50:53.Hamlets Council and we need to know what is happening within the

:50:53. > :50:57.council. Tower Hamlets declined to take part in the programme but told

:50:57. > :51:00.us the Government rules only apply to Cabinet meetings rather than full

:51:00. > :51:05.council which is where the incident took place. Nevertheless, "At the

:51:05. > :51:10.outset of a council meeting on 26th June 2013, the Speaker confilmed she

:51:10. > :51:13.is keen to move towards filming of proceed proceedings but in a planned

:51:13. > :51:17.manner with proper protocols in place to support any new

:51:17. > :51:20.arrangements." But across London this week in Hammersmith and Fulham,

:51:20. > :51:24.members of the public were already given permission to film

:51:24. > :51:28.proceedings. Does the council support the aims of the Save our

:51:28. > :51:31.Hospital campaign? The council has supported the campaign to protect.

:51:31. > :51:35.The local authority also welcomed in our cameras. Not because of the

:51:35. > :51:39.Government, they say, but the spirit of openness. We are all for having

:51:39. > :51:44.the cameras in to film what we do. We want it done properly, though.

:51:44. > :51:48.Who decides what is proper? I think the rules have to reflect what the

:51:48. > :51:52.policy is. And I'm aware our rules probably don't reflect the openness

:51:52. > :51:56.that I'm now talking about and we are going to look into that and see

:51:56. > :51:59.what we can do. But, for the moment the old rules are still in place.

:51:59. > :52:02.Youp can't film at a council meeting, without permission of

:52:03. > :52:07.whoever is running it. -- you can't. At the beginning of this, everyone

:52:07. > :52:11.had to be a vote that the BBC would be allowed to film T but as a

:52:11. > :52:16.procedural bell for the meeting rings, the opposition tell us, they

:52:16. > :52:18.are not impressed. I'm a little bit surprised. The credit will rest with

:52:18. > :52:24.you and the Sunday Politics. They have never done this before. We have

:52:24. > :52:28.asked them to do it at least on one occasion form lane they have not. --

:52:28. > :52:31.formally. If you look at the wider issues, there must be 150 people

:52:31. > :52:37.outside protesting about hospital closures and they are being told

:52:37. > :52:41.only 50 are allowed in. addressing the protesters outside,

:52:41. > :52:48.local Labour MP, Andrew Slaughter. The Conservatives here were quick

:52:48. > :52:54.ton point out to us that the filming restrictions were introduced by him

:52:54. > :52:59.in 2003 when he was Leader of the Council. Instructions imposed

:52:59. > :53:02.introduced by yourself, not letting cameras into meetings. I think they

:53:02. > :53:05.heard the Labour Leader now saying it was something, you know they felt

:53:05. > :53:13.should happen a lot and were complaining to the Conservatives

:53:13. > :53:16.about it. It was a long time ago. 2003, I believe. Can I say, Tim, my

:53:16. > :53:21.experience is slightly different. When you are actually in Government

:53:21. > :53:24.or run the council, then we don't want them in, when you are the

:53:24. > :53:27.opposition and there are lots of protesters outside, then you do.

:53:27. > :53:31.What I certainly never did - which is what happened to me a few weeks

:53:31. > :53:35.ago - I tried to take a photograph, knots to film, but take a photograph

:53:35. > :53:40.of the planning decision. -- not to film. Of the planning decision to

:53:40. > :53:45.not down 760 of my residents' homes when the planning committee was

:53:45. > :53:48.voting to do that. Two burly security guards tried to confiscate

:53:48. > :53:52.my phone and throw me out. The few you are getting from Hammersmith

:53:52. > :53:56.council was probably pre-arranged for the day for the BBC to show you

:53:56. > :54:01.how open they are. Normally they are more testy. They say they are going

:54:01. > :54:06.to review the restrictions that were put in place by one Mr Slaughter. At

:54:06. > :54:09.last, let transparency reign. answer is, in social media, we are

:54:09. > :54:15.in a completely different world now. I think everybody is waking up to

:54:15. > :54:19.the fact that the more you resist, the public knowing what is going on,

:54:19. > :54:22.whether the public want to know what is going on, is another matter.

:54:22. > :54:27.is very rude not to have introduced you, but bring you in, but Colin

:54:27. > :54:32.Campbell has been listening, deputy leader of Bexley Council. Everyone

:54:32. > :54:35.is waking up to social media. Recently you had someone recording a

:54:35. > :54:40.meeting and disrupted the meeting, according to you, and you called the

:54:40. > :54:46.police. An overreaction, isn't it? Not really, the people concerned

:54:46. > :54:51.belonged to a small group of people locally that have a had Is triof

:54:51. > :54:56.disrupting meetings and being abusive. -- have a history of. It

:54:56. > :55:01.was only called after the meeting was stopped four or five times. The

:55:01. > :55:05.chairman was called to get them to behave. They refused to do so. They

:55:05. > :55:07.wouldn't leave the room. The minister gave us a statement saying

:55:07. > :55:12.they thought it was a very interesting use of police resources

:55:12. > :55:16.and said it was a real shame. Well, it was a use of police resources. It

:55:16. > :55:21.took them an hour to get there. That shows you how police resources are

:55:21. > :55:25.in London. He was saying it wasn't a great use. You might say it is not a

:55:25. > :55:28.great use of police resources but when you have a group of people that

:55:28. > :55:33.are being abusive, they are breaking up a meeting. Do you think the

:55:33. > :55:36.filming is part of that, because they are playing to the cameras?

:55:36. > :55:40.films was not the issue. It was obvious from the beginning they were

:55:40. > :55:44.there to disrupt the meeting. They have a history of disrupting...

:55:44. > :55:50.Let'slike at the history. Are you going to allow cameras to film?

:55:50. > :55:53.Let's look. We allow cameras, already. Similar to the clip you

:55:53. > :55:57.have seen. If you want to film, you calls on the say saying you want to

:55:57. > :56:01.film. You don't have to give a reason. Usually it is an

:56:01. > :56:04.organisation. We have allowed filming that we know. In the case of

:56:04. > :56:11.these individuals, they did not do that. Two seconds before the meeting

:56:11. > :56:15.started they stuck a camera - sorry, an iPhone about six inches from the

:56:15. > :56:19.face of the chairman and insisted... You saw that as specific

:56:19. > :56:24.circumstances. Incidentally do your web cast your council meetings?

:56:24. > :56:34.are looking at doing it? Why not?I will tell you why not. The building

:56:34. > :56:39.

:56:39. > :56:43.we are in at the moment is 40 years old and falling to bits. We are

:56:43. > :56:47.refurbishing a building nearby and putting into the cabling to do that.

:56:47. > :56:53.There will be a meeting in September and they'll look at the guidance out

:56:53. > :56:58.to the public and the existing guidance to enable... You would like

:56:58. > :57:04.to screen most or all of these meetings. I can't speak for all the

:57:04. > :57:10.councillors. Points well-made are how many peep want to see t we have

:57:10. > :57:14.seen some councils spend �250,000 and have 17 people looking at it.

:57:14. > :57:18.Transparency is important. It can cost a lot of money. It need not

:57:18. > :57:22.cost money. The key point is when we have people to film, and I think it

:57:22. > :57:25.is right they should - everything else is, and certainly it is right

:57:25. > :57:28.that City Hall and Parliament gets filmed. And there were a debate

:57:28. > :57:32.about that at the time you may recall but I think it is important

:57:32. > :57:36.there is common sense. People should say in advance - I'm going to be

:57:36. > :57:40.coming and I want to film. Prior permission. We have decided on that

:57:40. > :57:45.You have to take account of people and children we have come to the

:57:45. > :57:48.meetings. The answer is, most of the time it is dull. Worthy but dull.

:57:48. > :57:52.Occasionally you have a Tory council supporting the closure of its local

:57:52. > :57:55.hospitals and the public get excited. That might be dull. This

:57:55. > :58:05.isn't. Colin Campbell, thank you very much. What else has been

:58:05. > :58:07.

:58:07. > :58:12.happening this week? Here is what in infrastructuring in London. In a

:58:12. > :58:22.letter to the Times he wrote -- if reserves are swhal can be exploited

:58:22. > :58:22.

:58:22. > :58:25.in London we shall leave no stone in London we shall leave no stone

:58:25. > :58:29.uninfrastructuringed. -- unfracked. Campaigners of closure to Lewisham

:58:29. > :58:32.you hospital have taken their campaign to the High Court. Jeremy

:58:32. > :58:36.Hunt told MPs in January that Accident & Emergency and maternity

:58:36. > :58:41.services in the south-east London hospital would be downgraded.

:58:41. > :58:47.The Government has announced the herbal stimulant khat should be

:58:47. > :58:50.banned. It is a plant that's chewed used by Somali, Yemeni and Ethiopian

:58:50. > :58:56.communities. The move comes after the Government's official drugs'

:58:56. > :58:59.advisor concluded it should not be banned. The UK. 's widely-known

:58:59. > :59:05.off-sure windfarm, London Array has opened this week. It is claimed its

:59:05. > :59:14.1 # 65 turbines are capable of generating enough clean energy to

:59:14. > :59:21.power nearly 500,000 homes. -- 165. Angie Bray, look at those, why on

:59:21. > :59:28.earth do we want shale gas? We have discovered we have an awful lot of

:59:28. > :59:34.shale in this country. Not under London probably. Well, there could

:59:34. > :59:38.be. Let's have common sense. The I am the voice of common sense. You

:59:39. > :59:42.will frack where it is easiest to access first and there are better

:59:42. > :59:48.places in London but as technology gets better, it maybe that every

:59:48. > :59:54.part of this country has to play its part. Wind or shale? Wind certainly.

:59:54. > :59:58.I think the jury is out on fracking. Until we know more about the science

:59:58. > :00:02.and effects, I think it would be foolish to rush into that. Often

:00:02. > :00:08.these things are seen as a silver bullet to solve the energy crisis.

:00:08. > :00:11.20 seconds to go on khat. Been criminalised, a lot of Somalis in

:00:11. > :00:15.your constituency, do you agree? do. I have a lot of people come to

:00:15. > :00:18.my surgery saying there are worried about khat and they think it is

:00:18. > :00:21.quite demotivating for young people who tend to use it and they think it

:00:22. > :00:24.should be made illegal, not least because we have all the supplies

:00:24. > :00:27.coming through this country to go to other countries where it is banned.

:00:27. > :00:37.Thank you very much. Andrew. Back to Thank you very much. Andrew. Back to

:00:37. > :00:39.

:00:39. > :00:44.Thank you very much. Andrew. Back to you. In a moment we look ahead to

:00:44. > :00:47.next week. First the news. Good afternoon. The radical Muslim

:00:47. > :00:50.cleric, Abu Qatada, has arrived in Jordan after being deported from

:00:50. > :00:55.Britain. He left on a plane from RAF Northolt overnight and has been

:00:55. > :00:58.taken to a court in the capital Amman this morning. It brings to an

:00:58. > :01:05.end eight years of legal wrangling. Our political correspondent Ross

:01:05. > :01:11.Hawkins reports. Abu Qatada on his way out of

:01:11. > :01:15.Britain. For years, Home Secretaries and Prime Ministers wanted to see

:01:15. > :01:20.this sight, for years he frustrated them. A new treaty meant he could

:01:20. > :01:24.finally be put on a plane to Jordan where he's twice been convicted in

:01:24. > :01:28.his absence of supporting terror plots and where he will now face a

:01:28. > :01:31.re-trial, happy news for the Prime Minister. I was absolutely

:01:31. > :01:36.delighted. I mean, this is something this Government said it would get

:01:36. > :01:41.done and we have got it done. It's an issue that, like the rest of the

:01:41. > :01:45.country, has made my blood boil that this man, who has no right to be in

:01:45. > :01:48.our country, who's a threat to our country and it took so long to

:01:48. > :01:51.deport him but we have done it. He is back in Jordan. That's excellent

:01:51. > :01:56.news. And now the Government wants to

:01:56. > :01:59.change the rules that it says made Abu Qatada so difficult to deport.

:01:59. > :02:04.They want fewer appeals in immigration cases, more published

:02:04. > :02:07.plans in the autumn. Conservatives want what they say would be a

:02:07. > :02:10.fundamental change in Britain's relationship with the European Court

:02:10. > :02:14.of Human Rights, which they blame for delaying this case. One of the

:02:14. > :02:17.options would be to have nothing more to do with this court. Lib Dems

:02:17. > :02:22.in Government would oppose a change like that. And any plans would have

:02:22. > :02:24.to wait until the next Conservative manifesto. What we need to do is

:02:24. > :02:27.ensure that yes, of course we protect human rights and this

:02:28. > :02:31.country has a fine record in relation to the protection of human

:02:31. > :02:34.rights but we want to make sure that when there is somebody in this

:02:34. > :02:39.country who is dangerous and somebody in this country who poses a

:02:39. > :02:42.threat to this country that we are able to remove them. With Abu Qatada

:02:43. > :02:47.finally landed on Jordanian soil, how best to achieve that balance

:02:47. > :02:52.will be contested and the world will watch to see whether he gets the

:02:52. > :02:56.fair trial here promised by Jordanian officials and expected by

:02:56. > :02:59.British politicians. Police in Canada say they expect the

:02:59. > :03:03.number of casualties to rise after a tanker train was derailed and

:03:03. > :03:07.exploded in a small town in Quebec. One person is confirmed dead, but

:03:07. > :03:11.dozens remain unaccounted for in the town of Lac-Megantic. More than

:03:11. > :03:14.2,000 people have been evacuated. The train was carrying crude oil

:03:14. > :03:18.when it apparently began to roll away after being parked by its

:03:18. > :03:21.driver. Andy Murray will attempt to win his

:03:21. > :03:25.second Grand Sslam title when he plays the World Number One Novak

:03:25. > :03:28.Djokovic in the Wimbledon men's singles final this afternoon. All

:03:28. > :03:32.15,000 tickets for Centre Court have been sold, but many queued overnight

:03:32. > :03:41.in the hope of watching the game on the big screen inside the All

:03:41. > :03:51.England Club. That's all the news for the moment.

:03:51. > :03:54.Now back to Andrew. Thanks, Maxine. So will Andy Murray

:03:54. > :03:57.beat Novak Djokovic later today? Will England thrash the Aussies at

:03:57. > :04:03.Trent Bridge? Will MPs shout, hooray, we've been recommended a pay

:04:04. > :04:06.rise? And what does John Prescott have in common with Chris Huhne,

:04:07. > :04:14.John Stonehouse and Jonathan Aitken? All questions for the Week Ahead and

:04:14. > :04:17.John Prescott is in our Hull studio ready to answer one of them. What do

:04:17. > :04:20.you have in common with them is that you resigned from the Privy Council

:04:20. > :04:24.this, in your case over lack of progress on Leveson. What do you

:04:24. > :04:28.think that will achieve? Well, first of all, it's my choice, probably out

:04:28. > :04:32.of all that group either removed from or involved in scandal, that's

:04:32. > :04:37.not my case, but I am a member of the Privy Council which parliament

:04:37. > :04:41.in dealing with the Leveson proposals came to a compromise to

:04:41. > :04:45.use a Royal Charter and to use the Privy Council for that. I believe,

:04:45. > :04:50.therefore - I accepted that there might be a way forward if they all

:04:50. > :04:53.agree, I suspect now what the Government's doing is putting the

:04:53. > :04:56.press post -- proposal opposite to what parliament agreed on the fast

:04:56. > :05:01.track and that means the delay, that delay you talked about yourself,

:05:01. > :05:05.Andrew, in the last 70 years, seven inquiries, all the recommendations

:05:05. > :05:09.have been avoided about the abuse of the press. Simply because they

:05:09. > :05:13.delayed it. If we go this way this Wednesday, as I am sure the Prime

:05:13. > :05:16.Minister's now said, and they put the press alternative, which is a

:05:16. > :05:21.divided one, not supported by all the press, put it on the fast-track,

:05:22. > :05:28.that could take 15 months. That will take us to the bebeginning of the

:05:28. > :05:32.2015 election by January. That's got all the signs of being, delay, delay

:05:32. > :05:37.again. Successful for the press to protect itself but not good for the

:05:37. > :05:42.victims or parliament itself. your claim that the Prime Minister

:05:42. > :05:46.is complicit in kicking this into the long grass? He said the

:05:46. > :05:50.alternative newspaper proposals had serious shortcomings. He is not

:05:50. > :05:54.supporting them, are you saying he is complicit in kicking the official

:05:54. > :05:57.version into touch? I believe it to be double talk. Let me tell you why,

:05:57. > :06:01.when the Prime Minister said first of all in March after parliament had

:06:01. > :06:04.passed it he would put parliament's proposal to the Privy Council in

:06:04. > :06:08.May, he never did. Now we are getting to the July one and he says

:06:08. > :06:13.I am going to put the press one first. That means it's November for

:06:13. > :06:17.parliament's declared view of which the press alternative is against,

:06:17. > :06:22.it's entirely different. It's not independent, it's not free, etc,

:06:22. > :06:26.like the one proposed by parliament. I think what will happen here as a

:06:26. > :06:31.politician using my judgment, that's all we can do, if he then finds that

:06:31. > :06:35.the press one, which is the only one you can deal with to get before the

:06:35. > :06:38.next election, by this process, and he then says those things that

:06:38. > :06:42.annoyed me before, we have cleared them talking to them, let's go ahead

:06:43. > :06:47.with the press one. You know, I think that's going to happen. If I

:06:47. > :06:51.wait to find out until July, which is the latest time it can happen --

:06:51. > :06:56.January, I will be annoyed about that. I am now saying to people,

:06:56. > :07:01.look, two charters, very different to each other. One independent, one

:07:01. > :07:05.controlled by the press. Under those circumstances, it's controversial

:07:06. > :07:09.for the Privy Council to agree or disagree that process on Wednesday

:07:09. > :07:14.will bring a conflict between the monarchy and indeed parliament's

:07:14. > :07:19.declared view. All right. Moving on to one subject to take advantage of

:07:19. > :07:25.you on the programme. John Reid, your former colleague said earlier

:07:26. > :07:29.that Ed Miliband and Len McCluskey had two different version visions

:07:29. > :07:33.have -- visions of what Labour should stand for. What side are you

:07:33. > :07:37.on? I am on the side of the Labour Party. I think Ed Miliband is

:07:37. > :07:42.carrying out as leader his obligation, whether a complaint by

:07:42. > :07:46.members, to investigate them. I might say to Len, I know in the T

:07:46. > :07:53.and G as it was, now Unite, they investigate complaints about vote

:07:53. > :08:00.circumstances. Leaders have to do that. There is April inquiry. Let's

:08:00. > :08:08.-- there is an inquiry. Ed is the leader, elected by members. He now

:08:09. > :08:12.has to deal with change. When I was involved in a strike I was called

:08:12. > :08:15.politically motivated, that's the nature of trade union activity.

:08:15. > :08:21.Clause four and one member, one vote, highly controversial. That's

:08:21. > :08:25.the nature of the party. Let's have more open debate on it. Less

:08:25. > :08:31.accusations, less personal and then get on with the real problem which

:08:31. > :08:34.is funding our political parties. The no longer right honourable John

:08:34. > :08:39.Prescott, we will leave it there. Thank you for joining us. I still

:08:39. > :08:44.feel the same! You look the same! You sound the same, as well. Let me

:08:44. > :08:49.pick up on this Labour story. Where does this Miliband and McCluskey

:08:49. > :08:53.standoff go now? Well, the former deputy leader of the Labour Party

:08:53. > :09:00.has informed us Ed Miliband is leader of the Labour Party and that

:09:00. > :09:04.feels like Jim Mortimer saying we have full confidence in Michael Foot

:09:04. > :09:07.of the party. When you are using that language you think, oh, dear.

:09:07. > :09:11.The problem with the Labour Party is it feels like an organisation that

:09:11. > :09:15.really is nowhere near power. I think where we go with this is that

:09:15. > :09:17.Ed Miliband as he said in The Observer wants to mend but not end

:09:17. > :09:25.the Labour Party's relationship with unions and what he is going to want

:09:25. > :09:29.to do is mould that in his image. They're saying you would change the

:09:29. > :09:31.union Levy, at the moment you can opt out, you would opt in and it

:09:31. > :09:35.would be individual union members saying that they're making the

:09:36. > :09:44.donation. Your money would go to the Labour Party? Whatever it is you

:09:44. > :09:50.sake, it would go there rather than MrMcIncludes yk I? The significance

:09:50. > :09:55.-- McCluskey. And yes, with the unions, as well. Should the Tories

:09:55. > :10:03.enjoy this moment? It may be brief, but it is remarkable at this stage

:10:03. > :10:07.in the political cycle, we have Ed Miliband on the rack and MrCameron

:10:07. > :10:11.flipping burgers? The Conservative Party is far more cheerful than it's

:10:11. > :10:15.been for a long time and this has added to its feeling of exuberance

:10:15. > :10:19.and confidence. I thought even in your interview with Chris Grayling

:10:19. > :10:22.there is this sense they have the confidence to say, whether it's just

:10:22. > :10:25.this little run of good luck they've had, including the Ed Miliband

:10:25. > :10:29.affair, to say you know we are now on course for the general election.

:10:29. > :10:32.Some of them are saying they could get an outright Conservative

:10:32. > :10:40.majority and part of that is because the Labour Party's talking to

:10:40. > :10:43.itself. Not to the country. MrCrosby has given them talking points now,

:10:43. > :10:47.as MrGrayling illustrated they are determined to use. If I ask about

:10:47. > :10:52.America he will tell me about India. If I ask about India, he will tell

:10:52. > :10:55.me about China. I am not sure that's wise. Someone said don't interrupt

:10:55. > :10:58.your opponent while he is making a mistake. I wonder whether the Tories

:10:58. > :11:02.might be better advised to allow what's happening in the Labour Party

:11:02. > :11:09.to continue happening. It should be said also if Ed Miliband becomes

:11:09. > :11:13.Prime Minister he will have to deal with Vladimir Putin, with tougher

:11:13. > :11:16.people than Len McCluskey. If you are a voter, it's rationale actually

:11:16. > :11:22.to infer from this a broader impression of how tough he would be

:11:22. > :11:28.on the international stage as Prime Minister. The point I made last week

:11:29. > :11:38.was that ten years ago he would have had James Purnell, Steven Buyers on

:11:39. > :11:39.

:11:39. > :11:43.his side, that Labour right has the last decade. MPs' pay coming up this

:11:43. > :11:47.week and reports that an independent body is going to recommend a rise.

:11:47. > :11:51.It's not going to happen, is it? I don't think there is any way it

:11:51. > :11:56.can happen. You can't have a country being asked to tighten its belt

:11:56. > :11:59.again and again and have parliament getting more expensive and MPs, who

:11:59. > :12:04.the survey is interesting, behind their recommendation it shows most

:12:04. > :12:09.people don't know what an MP does. When they understand what a GP does

:12:09. > :12:12.who is paid now about �100,000 a year you can't argue an MP is

:12:12. > :12:17.underpaid and if the public doesn't understand what this service

:12:17. > :12:21.provides. Legally it has to happen. Parliament had a loss of confidence

:12:21. > :12:25.and handed the process to them and it's a package. They looked at the

:12:25. > :12:29.allowances and now they're looking at pay. They say the two are link

:12:29. > :12:35.because the reason why you have the mess over allowances is because the

:12:35. > :12:40.pay was too low. It's interesting. Ian Kennedy has a piece in the

:12:40. > :12:44.Sunday Times today and in there he says overall, we are going to reduce

:12:44. > :12:48.the cost of politics. When I spoke to David Cameron about this last

:12:48. > :12:53.week on a trip with other journalists he didn't rule out the

:12:53. > :12:57.pay rise. He did say is the overall costs have got to come down.

:12:58. > :13:02.symbolism of the MPs getting a rise at the moment when everybody's

:13:02. > :13:09.else's pay is frozen. The symbolism is toxic. It's an idea whose time

:13:09. > :13:18.will never come. They can never win. It's the Tim Henman of the

:13:18. > :13:28.political ideas. But not Andy Murray. On that point let's move on.

:13:28. > :13:33.

:13:33. > :13:37.Be there to cheer on Andy Murray. I am sure he is going to win. Next