22/11/2015 Sunday Politics London

Could British war planes be in action over the skies of Syria

Later this week, David Cameron set out his strategy

George Osborne says all Whitehall departments have agreed to cuts

as he gears up for his Spending Review this week.

We speak to one of his Conservative predecessors.

And it's been a pretty rough week for the Labour Party.

With his MPs in mutinous mood, how can Jeremy Corbyn steady the ship?

In London, despite the focus of a heightened terror threat,

the Government could next week spell the end of the Police Community

And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political

They pay me to say it, so I am happy to do so.

Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh - who'll be tweeting

Following the terror attacks in Paris, President Hollande has

embarked on putting together a Grand Coalition to defeat Islamic State in

Syria, involving the UN, America, Russia and, naturally, Britain.

The British Government is keen to join but faces the little problem

Later this week, David Cameron will present

his Syrian strategy to Parliament in the hope it will command a majority

Here's what the Chancellor had to say on the Marr Show earlier

This week, we are going to step up our diplomatic efforts,

our humanitarian efforts, and make the case for a greater

The Prime Minister will seek support across Parliament

for strikes against that terrorist organisation in Syria and frankly

Britain has never been a country which stands on the sidelines

Nick, am I right in thinking that you can see now the makings, the

putting together, of majority for the Prime Minister's desire to bomb

in Syria? They are being reasonably cautious that they are pretty

confident that, even now, they have the numbers. Three big things have

happened since three weeks ago when the Prime Minister was indicating he

was unlikely to have a vote. Paris has changed everything. Jeremy

Corbyn has had a challenging week. Thirdly, the Prime Minister has said

he will set out the comprehensive strategy. Labour MPs who said they

would like to support him have said they could not do it unless there

was a comprehensive strategy. It is also turning Tory MPs can lead by

Crispin Blunt, who would have voted against. He is now indicating he

possibly will vote for this. DUP, Nigel Dodds, who has eight MPs at

Westminster, he is indicating that if the Prime Minister set this

out... It looks like the numbers are there. We did here this morning that

the BBC reported the DUP with back the Prime Minister if what he had to

say was credible. We are told the Tory rebels are about 15 and Labour

rebels thinking of voting with the Government or abstaining could be as

high as 50. What is your intelligence? A huge number, from

very senior people as well. Actually the number of senior people leaving,

exiting the Shadow Cabinet, I think a challenging week would be an

understatement. It is at a whole new level. There is only so much time

you can buy with free votes. Jeremy Corbyn opposes the party policy

This time he would set his own policy but no 1 would come with him.

How many times can you play that trick before people say this is a

loose conglomeration of individuals and not a party? Do you think he

would go for a free vote? Maria Eagle has just published a paper

which is very hawkish. Hilary Benn has been making noises about this.

Who is there to support, apart from John McDonnell, in this position? He

is very isolated on this. The problem for the Prime Minister is,

in a sense he gets what he wishes for. We begin joining others in

bombing and things do not really changed in Syria. I do not think the

House of Commons is the primary obstacle facing David Cameron. I

think he will get the votes could not see much because of the case he

will make later this week but because what happened in the last

week. They focused on all necessary measures and use combat as a

metaphor, but a deliberate metaphor, I think. The biggest problem is not

the Parliamentary vote for David Cameron, it is the diplomatic

struggle to agree with Russia exactly how we go about this. Russia

are happy to bomb in Syria against Isil but they are not happy to do so

in a way which, in their words, destroys the statehood of Syria

which alludes to their traditional support for the existing Syrian

state and basher al-Assad. The politics is far more challenging

than the technical act of getting the votes together. That is the

problem. What is the endgame? Transition can sometimes take a long

time. A very long transition. On Wednesday, Chancellor Osborne

will announce the Government's Over the next five years, they

will total ?4 trillion. But even to stay within that barely

imaginable sum of money, Mr Osborne will have to continue to cut

departmental and welfare spending. Hence the mantra you will hear this

week of "a country that lives within its means" - in other words more of

a squeeze on many public services. The Chancellor wants government

departments to find a further ?20 billion worth

of savings between now and 2020 So, where could that money come

from? Welcome to our virtual Treasury

courtyard. Now, they don't have one of these

in the real courtyard but it represents everything the

Government is due to spend this year I'm going to start by highlighting

a few of the most significant parts You can see the ?217 billion

which goes on Social Security. That includes everything

from jobseeker's allowance to There is the ?35 billion

the UK is due to spend this year And George Osborne says that's

a figure he is determined to bring Now,

the focus of his statement is the money which goes on administering

and delivering public services. Here it is,

and you can see it's just under half We are going to delve into

the budgets of a few of the most It is the NHS which accounts

for the biggest chunk The Chancellor is not going to find

any of his savings here because he has promised to increase

NHS funding in England by ?10 The Government's also promised

a real terms increase That is part of its commitment to

meeting the Nato target of spending The Government is also committed to

spending 0.7% of GDP on overseas aid - meaning that

budget is also protected. So, the Chancellor is not going to

find any of his ?20 billion of savings he says he needs to make

from either health, defence or aid. So, where could it come from

instead? What about

from the education budget? That is a big part of what the

state spends on public services Here

the Conservatives have promised a That means savings

from here will be limited. Although the rest of the budget does

not have any guaranteed protection. Here is the money that goes

to English local authorities. This was one of the first

departments to agree to big savings Let's look at the Home Office whose

budget this year is ?10.6 billion. The single biggest thing

Theresa May's department spends money on is the grant it gives to

police forces in England and Wales. Although they also get some of their

money from other sources including And some of the other departments

which are going to have to find big savings over the next four years are

the departments of business, But let's go back to that big part

of government spending I mentioned Because

of course that is where a lot of the focus has been in the weeks

and months before this statement. Again here there is plenty

the Chancellor will not touch. The state pension is

a massive part of the budget. But the Government has

a long-standing promise not to cut it along with various pensioner

benefits. The other areas of big spending

the Government has had to look to are housing benefit, disability

benefits and incapacity benefits. And, you can see that big sum

of money, ?30 billion, which is due to be spent

on personal tax credits this year. An area where the Chancellor has

found that making savings can So, the Chancellor faces some tricky

trade-offs on Wednesday when he unveils his spending plans

for the next five years. Paul Johnson from the Institute

of Fiscal Studies has some ideas. Paul, welcome back to the programme.

Let's start with this tricky question of tax credits. What is the

Chancellor, in your view, most likely to do? He has two big

choices. He can decide not to make any cuts, or much in the wake of

cuts, next April. That is what all of the bus has been about, the cuts

that will come in next April. - the fuss. Most of the savings will come

in the long run full he has also announced the new universal credit

system will be much less generous than he was originally intending. In

five or ten years time, even if he does not put the cut scene he was

planning in April, he will still make much the same level of saving

for them if he does that, his spending in 2016 on welfare benefits

will be ?4 billion or so higher than he was planning and he will bust his

own welfare cap, the cap he has legislated, which assumes he will

make those savings. That is one option. The other option is he will

try to find some savings in 201 , maybe reduce the cuts to tax credits

that have some savings and look elsewhere in the welfare budget to

make up the rest of the savings Whatever he does on tax credits will

cost money, certainly in the short run. His deficit reduction plan for

the ship is already in some trouble. He faces huge pressures to

spend more on everything from health to Social Security. -- for this year

is already in some trouble. The first thing to say about that

surplus in 2020, there is a huge amount of uncertainty about where we

will be. Forecasting these things by view ad is an extreme you tricky and

uncertain business. Ignoring that, assuming the whole world moves as he

expects over the next few years he will require cuts of about 25% in

those unprotected apartments we have just heard about the Home Office,

local government, and so on, on top of the cuts that happened during the

last parliament will Boyd -- involve really sharp cuts between 2010 and

2020. They are big changes to the way which we will deliver local

Gottman and the way we will be delivering police force, the way we

will be delivering further education and so on. Those areas of government

will change fundamentally over the decade. Let me get these right. When

you add up all the cuts, those made in those about to happen, between

20102020, major departments, the unprotected ones, will face cuts of

up to 40%. -- between 2010-2020 Is it doable? That is a good question.

It may not turn up that badly if the economy does better than expected

all the Chancellor finds some additional savings in Social

Security, or he does not aim for the 10 million surplus and goes for a 1

billion surplus. -- 10 billion. If he does go down that route, it will

be more difficult than it was in the last parliament. If there were easy

cuts to have made, they will have been made already. Do not forget one

of the biggest bits of public spending goes on the pay of people

who work in the public sector, the pay of nurses, teachers and civil

servants and so on. That was quite easy to hold down over the last

parliament. Pay in the private sector was doing so badly. We

expect, almost economists now expect that pay in the private sector will

rise well to be strongly. In that world it will be quite hard to hold

down pay right across the public sector, as he said he would do back

in the July budget. Joining me now Nigel Lawson,

Margaret Thatcher's longest serving Welcome back to the programme. Thank

you, I enjoyed your rant the other day. It was not a rant, it was a

carefully scripted commentary but thank you for your remarks. Let me

take an overall review on the Chancellor 's position. The

borrowing figures for October were pretty bad, looks like he will

overshoot this year 's borrowing. Is the austerity programme in trouble

again? It is difficult, he has a difficult time because of these

ridiculous protected programmes which should not exist. Aid is going

up again and again, the Nobel Prize for economics has been given to an

English economist, he is Scottish in fact, and one of his principal

findings, he is a great expert on global poverty and one of his major

findings is that overseas aid although well-intentioned does more

harm than good. Yet that is going up and up. He has got a tough time but

it can be done. When I was Chancellor I was able to balance the

budget and get it into surplus and he has to do it as well. He has huge

pressure on security, the police, the NHS, we were just talking about

mitigating cuts on the tax credit side, these are all hard to resist

in the current atmosphere. It is going to be very difficult and

although I suspect it will mainly be cuts in savings in public spending I

think he will have to do more on the tax side than he would have liked.

There is some logic in that, for example it looks as if, Paul Johnson

was seeing, or maybe it was you but he is likely to some extent to defer

the cutting of the tax credits. It's quite right to take a knife to the

tax credits, they have grown far too much and are undesirable in their

present size. But nonetheless what he did propose originally was a bit

too much for some and therefore he has got to delay it a bit. But when

he presented, he presented a package including raising income tax

threshold. He could, as part of the package delay that a little bit and

help on the tax side. The government has always said it will do all the

heavy lifting, the heavy lifting will be done by cuts in spending

rather than increasing taxes. Will he now have to look at increasing

some taxes are hats at a time of low oil prices on fuel duty? I think

that's a good suggestion and it is sensible to do that. But defer a

reduction which he might find less... Yes but might he have to

look at some tax rises? I think you should look at the fuel duty, yes.

President Hollande has said that national security comes before

deficit reduction, he has sidelined the fiscal pact he has with the rest

of Europe. He plans a huge increase in security spending, 17,000 more

police and border guards and other security personnel. Will the British

be looking at George Osborne to do something similar next week?

President Hollande has never been keen on deficit-reduction in the

first place. It's not unconnected with the fact as well that the

French economy, and I live in France, the French economy is in a

bad way. We are doing much better. Security is important but the

government has said very clearly that it is going to be keeping to

the 2% target, 2% of GDP on defence spending, something France is not

doing even though it has considerable defence expenditure.

The leaked letter from one of the most senior police officers to the

Home Secretary says cuts to police budgets could reduce very

significantly the ability to respond to a Paris style attack. The

Chancellor is going to be under pressure to make security more

important than deficit-reduction. Certainly for the foreseeable

future. Security is essential. It is vital. But I think the police are

complaining a little bit too much. Look how much the police are

spending now on chasing up often unsubstantiated accusations of

historic sex abuse. That has got nothing to do with security. Those

resources should be put where they need is. I think also what the

police need is not just money, and the security services to, they need

intelligence. I think it would make a lot of sense and what I would like

to see the government doing is to expedite the passage of the

investigatory Powers Bill which is long overdue and badly needed. In

this climate you accept that cutting the top rate of income tax back to

the 40% that you originally introduced, that that is politically

impossible for the foreseeable future? It depends how far you can

proceed. I would hope that during this parliament it can be done. It

is politically difficult but there is no budgetary reason against it.

When I cut it it increased revenue and it would do so again. The cap

which George Osborne has already done in the last parliament from 50,

245 even though the Liberal Democrats he did it and it raised

money and didn't cost anything. To be cutting police numbers, to be

struggling to find money for the NHS, to be doing something for the

working poor on tax credits, making life a bit more difficult for them

but then to be cutting the top rate of the highest earners? That is why

I don't think you can be doing it now that you were asking about the

foreseeable future. You still think he can do it before the end of this

Parliament? Yes I do. On Europe how confident are you feeling about

winning the referendum to withdraw? Nobody can call a referendum. It is

difficult enough sometimes to call a general election and referendums are

even harder to call. Logically I don't think he will do it. Logically

David Cameron ought to be campaigning to leave because what he

said at the beginning was he was dissatisfied with the European Union

as it is. He wanted a fundamental reform to be enshrined in treaty

change. Then stay in a reformed European Union. There is not going

to be a reformed European Union There will not be a treaty change.

What the referendum is going to be about is if you want to stay in or

leave and an reform European Union. So logically he ought to say leave

and that is where I am because if it is an reform we don't want to stay

in it. So even if the primer Mr was to get all his renegotiation demands

such as we know them it would not change your mind on coming out? No,

if he demanded a lot more and got it, major reforms which I have

written about but I don't have time to go into no, I think it would be

welcomed right across the European Union. This is not the view of the

majority of the people, but we cannot tell the rest of the

countries what to do, all we can say is what we are going to do. As we

get closer to the referendum date, we don't know when it will be but

when we get closer to it being announced, in terms of who seem to

be the major figure who leads your side of the referendum campaign if

not Nigel Farage, who? Certainly not Nigel Farage. I think the people who

want to stay in have put up a businessman. Stewart draws. Not a

particularly captivating businessman. Who will be the

equivalent? I have no idea, but we will wait and see but it certainly

won't be Nigel Farage. He will be an important player. Why not? Because

Ukip has just one member of Parliament. We are a parliamentary

democracy and the majority party is the Conservative Party. Nigel

Lawson, thank you for being with us. Thank you.

It's been a pretty torrid week for the Labour Party.

Splits on everything from how to deal with terrorists to

Trident, to Ken Livingstone, culminating in a bizarre row

about whether or not the Shadow Chancellor wants to scrap MI5.

John McDonnell insists Britain's spies are safe in his hands,

though he did admit that his party has had a "rough week .

It is the week that Jeremy Corbyn and his party grappled with issues

In the wake of the Paris attacks, the Labour leader said he was not

happy with the idea of police officers shooting to kill

on British streets, which led to a very stormy party meeting,

So, you tweeted, "please tell me it is not true that Jeremy just said,

faced with Kalashnikov-wielding genocidal fascists, our security

I, along with millions of Labour voters

in this country, were very concerned by the interview that Jeremy gave.

Thankfully, Hilary Benn, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, clarified matters

very quickly and restated support for the use of lethal force and

support of the use of drone strikes, which Jeremy had also questioned.

Jeremy himself, thankfully, a few hours later,

also issued a clarification, and I'm very pleased he did.

A lot of Labour voters will have been very relieved.

Then came a row about the former Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone,

being appointed to co-chair the party's review of Trident, and

the emergence of a letter from a campaign group calling for MI5 to be

disbanded that the Shadow Chancellor, John McDonnell, seems

And we found something else interesting that John

This Parliamentary motion he proposed last October saying

taxpayers who do not like war should be able to opt out

The military is where the next battle may lie.

If and when the Government brings forward

plans to extend British air strikes from Iraq to Syria, some Labour MPs

want to vote in favour, while their leader is a committed

One Labour figure is speaking out for the first time.

I think it would be wrong to suggest there is a settled view on the

People will bring their own prejudices,

which are from being instinctively for intervention, to having long

The only thing I would ask of all of my colleagues is we look

at this with an open mind, examining the facts rather than

seeing how it matches our prejudices, and then reach a

decision which is in the national interest.

Do you think Jeremy Corbyn is able to do that?

He has some very strongly held views that we should not get involved

He may have to come to a point where he says,

now that I'm not just a backbencher, I am actually the Leader of

There is an element of national interest and that is

For the young Corbynites at this event about Labour's economic policy

The only reason we look bad to the general public, the only reason

we do not look very strong at the moment, is that we are not united.

If you have criticisms with the Leader, you should take it up

It is not fitting to do these things in the press, criticising people.

Do you think there is a plot against Jeremy Corbyn?

If they are planning a plot they should probably think

about the fact Jeremy was elected with 59.5% of the vote, I think

And we saw, from the beginning, he went

from the least likely person to get in to the front runner, to the

If people are plotting to get rid of him, they really should listen

The party should be based around what the party members want.

Unfortunately for them there will be another flash point

On Tuesday there will be a vote in the House of Commons on Trident,

Labour MPs have been instructed not to turn up.

We understand a bunch of them, including some big names,

are thinking about defying their Leader and voting

It would be a largely symbolic vote but another visible symbol of

I'm joined now from Doncaster by the Labour MP Caroline Flint -

she was a minister under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

Good morning, thank you for coming back on the programme. Let me begin

with a general question, it's been a pretty terrible week for Labour

what is the mood now on the Labour backbenches among your colleagues?

It's not been a great week for Labour, that is correct. I think

part of the reason for that is we haven't looked certain and confident

on some of the big issues the nation are worried about. What we have to

have from the leadership, not just Jeremy but those around him, is

certainty about what we think about what is happening in terms of the

terrorist acts in Paris. But more widely about what the certainty we

can offer as Labour Party about how we will support our national

security. I think understandably there have been concerns, I don t

think just on the backbenches of the Labour Party, but also amongst the

Shadow Cabinet, that is clear, but also more widely amongst the party

membership as well. The news has been dominated for a week now by

these terrible events in Paris. Has Jeremy Corbyn mishandled the Labour

response to these events? I think what is really important is that

with leadership does come a massive responsibility to speak clearly and

with certainty about a whole number of issues. But probably more than

any other subject area if you like national security demands that.

Because at a time where we are all reeling from what has happened in

Paris, and there is no doubt Jeremy Corbyn takes very, very seriously

what has happened there and its implication for the security of

British people as well and others around the world. The question of

allowing our pleas through the legal framework which already exists to

take action when they are presented with a terrorist in front of them

but also on some of the other matters about how we should move

forward in a united way with other countries to tackle Isil, I think

that certainty has been wanting and not helped, I have to say, when

other members of the Shadow Cabinet cannot speak with one voice about

what the leader wants to do. I hope out of this week we will see some

clarity and certainty coming forward and I think we already know, and I

have heard more this morning, that David Cameron will come back to the

House of Commons this week. We do need a plan, it can't just be about

military action, it has to be more than that and I hope we can be in a

position to opportunity going forward to tackle the threat of Isil

which is the most major threat to security around the world that we

have at the moment. If Mr Cameron comes form with that

dashes forward with that kind of plan, would you back military action

in Syria? I believe there can be a case former literary action in

Syria. We are facing the most profoundly barbaric group of

terrorists I think I have ever realised in my lifetime or thought

about. -- military action. Also the most resourced group of terrorists

in the world. It is a different situation to what we faced a few

years ago where I voted against military action when Cameron came

back to Parliament to deal with Assad. We have in this country and

this region, a number of dangerous groups. There are a number of -

there is a hierarchy of dangerous groups and Isil is the top of that

list. If it can be about, yes, what sort of military action should take

place, maybe the air strikes... Like we are doing in Iraq, within that a

wider plan as to how we will deal with civil war in Syria and what

else we need to do going forward. That is something I feel I could

support. You say there is no doubt that the Labour leadership takes

these matters seriously. Can I point out, just before the election this

year, the Shadow Chancellor penned his name to a document supporting

the abolition of MI5 and disarming the police? Last year he supported

people opting out of having their taxes fund any kind of military

activity. I do not think... I suspect a lot of people will not

think that is taking these issues very seriously. Is Mr McConnell fit

to hold the second most important position within the Shadow Cabinet?

One of the aspects of the leadership campaign over the summer was a sense

that Jeremy was authentic and very clear about his views. And, you

know, they may not be shared with everybody, I may have some different

views to Jeremy on that. Part of his appeal was the authenticity, that it

did not have any spin. He said he did not realise what he do when he

held that the letter and seemed to support it. We had a leadership

election. There was a massive surge in our membership and Jeremy had an

overwhelming mandate. Maybe, you know, Jeremy and John McDonnell

have earned the right within that to put forward their views. What is

clear to me, I am a moderate politician, but I am also a

conviction politician. I do not say one thing to one group of people and

another to another group of people. If the leadership believes in these

things, they should say that and the biggest test is then to let the

British people determine whether they agree with them or not. I think

clarity, authenticity and honesty, they are all very important and that

is how you create trust. The last election, at the end, it was clear

your party had a problem over the issue of economic security. When Mr

Corbyn has said about not shooting terrorists and his reservations

about killing jihadi John, is not a danger, as some polls suggest this

morning, though it is not a danger, as some polls suggest this morning,

voters are national security and not just economic security? When it

comes to leadership, as you know, you may have your own view is that

you had before but you have to be open to actually other views as

well. That is why we're having this debate within the Parliamentary

Labour Party as to how we get a position regarding what we do next

in Syria. Jeremy has an overwhelming mandate. With that comes a

responsibility leadership which shows the ideas he puts forward and

answers to these really difficult questions, whether on the economy

national security, can also reach out beyond the Parliamentary Labour

Party and to that matter the Labour Party. Part of that is winning

People's trust to back you. That is the task, not just the Jeremy but

any leader of the leather party He needs to show he can do that. I

think he wants to do that. -- the Labour Party. They have said this

morning they will have a full discussion in the Shadow Cabinet and

there will be discussions within the Parliamentary Labour Party as well.

Leadership does require a wider reach and responsibility beyond

boundaries. Are you surprised that in so many personal appointments,

John McDonnell, Ken Livingstone now on defence, Mr Corbyn seems to have

made no effort to reach out to the centre of your party, much less the

right of it? Well, all party leaders, I have to say, and I have

seen a few, do tend to sometimes surround themselves not only with

elected politicians but the paid staff who are part of their group.

For any party leader, whoever they point, they have to show they will

work in a way that is not just fashioned by their own particular

background and experience and maybe their own point of view. There is a

wider responsibility here. The Labour Party is not a pressure

group. We exist to win elections in order to put our platform into

practice in government. Therefore, the people around Jeremy, who have

been appointed, they have to demonstrate they understand the

responsibilities of that, responsibilities to the wider Labour

Party. Some people within it he may not agree with him on everything but

at heart we all want to win the next election. Importantly, 400,000

people took part in the leadership election. That is amazing. We have

had a ground swell of people join the party and many of them want to

be active in a very positive way. I welcome mat. We have to convince

millions of people to support us in the next election and in all the

elections up to 2020. Final question to you, if Mr Corbyn continues the

way he has begun, will he be leading your party into the 2020 election?

Does he have any chance of winning? Look, we have had, seven, eight

nine weeks since the leadership election. It has been rocky along

the way. We have made significant impact when it came to the debate

around tax credits for working people. Will he lead your party into

the next election? What Jeremy has to do now is focused on how he leads

our party right now. That will determine our fortunes in the weeks,

months and also in 2020. Thank you for joining us.

We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now

Coming up here in 20 minutes, the Week Ahead.

First though, the Sunday Politics where you are.

Our time this week is devoted largely to policing and security.

Has the Paris attack seriously curtailed the Chancellor's

Even if it has, will he still signal the end of the Police Community

Here with me this week, David Lammy, Labour MP for Tottenham, and

Victoria Borwick, Conservative MP for Kensington, until recently one

The Statutory Deputy Mayor for London.

As an added bonus, we have an elected Police and

Crime Commissioner with us - Surrey's Kevin Hurley.

And someone who was once Head of Counterterrorism at the City

You have seen it at both ends as a politician.

Let's have a word straightaway about the warnings to the

Home Secretary at the end of the week that the response to

terror attacks would be severely affected by big cuts in numbers

Kevin, that was focusing on how we would respond if the

There were warnings we could not mobilise enough people.

Is that your view and perspective, as someone who, presumably,

The Met would call on straightaway to provide officers?

My residents work in London, so it is directly relevant.

I think I am coming at this from probably three key points.

Because of the insecurities of our borders,

where a large number of people still come in, not so concerned

Each one takes up ten AK-47 rifles, like they used over there,

25 of them jumped out on a truck at Clacket Lane on the M25.

The next issue is the cuts are seriously starting to make serious

inroads into Police Community Support Officers and neighbourhood

Of course, we talk about the firearms response.

What on earth are we doing in this day and age where 100 years

after the First World War we are still sending single-shot riflemen

What does that mean when you say single-shot?

Police weaponry around the whole country, with the armed response

vehicles, consists of a high-quality rifle that has been deliberately

downgraded to fire single shots based on the old rationale of police

We are now in a situation where we need to immediately challenge

The only way you can do that, if you like, my military background

You have to suppress their fire by firing more back,

Let's get back to that central point.

If something similar happened in London tomorrow,

would there be enough resources enough officers, to respond to it?

There would be, broadly speaking, officers able to respond to it.

The issue is, what is the level of their weaponry and could they

maintain the kind of resilience we are seeing right across France?

Let's get on to the politics at this time.

At Prime Minister's Questions this week, the Labour Leader asked

if the budget for community policing would be protected.

Neighbourhood policing numbers have gone up by 3800.

In the capital city we have seen a 500% increase

We have also, because we have cut bureaucracy, put the equivalent of

A pretty robust response from the PM.

Politicians do not say this lightly but I am afraid he misled the House.

Numbers in neighbourhood policing have fallen by 5700.

If there is a blue light, the police will turn up.

If it is at neighbourhood level decimated, not there.

They were very much the new, ethnic minority officers coming through.

Neighbourhood teams, stripped back, over stretched.

Neighbourhood policing has all but vanished.

Victoria Borwick, were you there at the time?

I can only say this from my experience at the GLA.

The wonderful thing is, The Met is about the one larger

London-wide borough that has not actually had police cuts.

But did you recognise those figures that he gave?

We have said to The Met that they must be able to choose how

The wonderful thing is, we now have neighbourhood policing,

We do not have, as in the Ken Livingstone day, two people here

and two people there, which might have meant the high street split

Let's get on to the detail in a second.

In 2010, he was saying, there were just 800 community police officers,

Were there 800 neighbourhood policing officers in 2010?

I cannot remember exactly that year and exactly that figure.

That was the year when police had the highest number ever.

He was saying there were 800 at that time who were dedicated

Somehow, that has gone up now to 5000 dedicated neighbourhood

David Lammy says the actual trend has been the other way.

Every area now has an inspector and two people neighbourhood

Every area has got dedicated police that are not going to go off

and be running around after other things happening in London.

What we are talking about is making London safe

Again, I'm just wondering about these figures.

We knew there was a kind of, not a golden age, but a lot money

was put into neighbourhood policing, up to 2008/2009/2010.

We saw great strength during the Olympics where again we

At this stage you will say you are very happy.

with the current level of neighbourhood policing and you

No, what I am saying is, actually, there may be changes but it is up

to The Met to decide, operation policing, who should be where.

We have just heard, if there is a threat,

We have to increase our counterterrorism spending,

the armed response, we have to re-look at the other things we are

The commissioner has already said that all of those things

It is not for me - or any of us - to sit here and say how many police

Can I ask Kevin very quickly, from your knowledge of London,

I may tip into your feelings about Surrey as well...

The Prime Minister was actually saying the number

of neighbourhood policing had gone up across the country.

Nine members of my family are or were members

I have lots of friends at the highest level.

On a daily basis, people tell me they are not anywhere

Officers at the grassroot level whether it is on response or CID

Neighbourhood officers are continually failing to meet

appointments for the public because they are being cut.

In Surrey, which is right next to us, the richest county

in the country, they are going to lose 400 members of staff

Victoria, you mentioned helpfully that there are big choices to make.

Let's try and bury down into that, whether it will be armed police or

that kind of specialism, or, indeed, Police Community Support Officers.

Police Community Support Officers were introduced several years ago.

That was to help provide the reassuring and visible presence

that people seem to want in their neighbourhoods, eyes

Andrew Cryan now reports on their steady demise and possible

Britain is introduced to the Community Support Officer,

It is not just jam tomorrow, it is protection today.

London was the first place in the country to have them.

They were invested with some of the powers of full police

They could direct traffic and pedestrians,

remove abandoned vehicles, issue fixed penalty notices such

as for dog fouling, or littering, demand the name and address

of someone acting in an anti-social way, and the power to seize drugs.

What they do not have is the power to arrest.

After next week's comprehensive spending review, Scotland Yard is

set to decide on the future of the community support officer.

One of the options on the table some people say, means the end

Some think the view from Scotland Yard could be that other

The Met is facing such drastic budget cuts that the Commissioner

has said one possibility is to cut all PCSOs in the capital.

The Commissioner himself says they are the eyes and ears

I think it is a vital, intelligence policing resource that

Following the tragic events in Paris last weekend, there has been much

discussion about how London could cope in a similar situation.

The Met police has said they want more armed officers.

The Government has promised nearly 2000 new intelligence

With other priorities, does it mean the community support officers stand

Former Met Police Commissioner Ian Blair has warned he thinks it would

I think it would be a disaster, an absolute disaster.

In the end, it is intelligence from the community that will lead us

And it is those patrolling PCSOs who get to know the communities,

This is policing with communities, not at communities.

If the choice is community support officers or fully warranted police,

some say it should be a simple decision.

For the organisation, of course there has been some benefit.

They provide a role, they are back for warrented police officers.

I wouldn't decry that for one minute.

But they are not warranted police officers

and they do not perform the same role of a warranted police officer.

They are part of the family and they do a blooming good job

I am not going to stand here and say they do not.

We are talking about cutting our numbers and cutting policing.

That, to me, would be the first thing to cut, before you start

But before writing the obituary of the community support officer,

it is worth considering that the cuts coming down

the line might not be as apocalyptic as some people are making out.

Back in 2010, there were about 500 police community support officers.

Or if the choice were between the PCSO and a real police

The important thing is it is extremely unlikely that we will see,

with the current situation we have seen in the last week,

Exactly how the cuts will come or how the changes will come, it is up

to the Commissioner to decide with the mayor and the Home Secretary.

Boris has always gone on record to say he would rather

they were not cut but new decisions have to be made now, as a result

of the terrible, terrible bombings we have seen in Paris.

Even if we cannot make sense of the claims that have been made

about neighbourhood policing in the last years, do you accept that the

trajectory and the way Boris Johnson and his deputy Stephen Greenhalgh

have replaced PCSOs with police officers available

for the front line is the better of the two options?

You speak to shopkeepers about how often they are seeing

community support officers at neighbourhood level, they are not.

You asked the mosque, you ask the synagogue, you ask the schools.

Those officers are vanishing, they are going.

That is why, actually, very sadly knife crime is spiking, because the

officers are not there to know the young people, to be in the community

That is what is happening and this move will bring us back to where

Public order officers had disappeared across London,

we needed 2,500 from the rest of the country to actually

This is very serious and the Conservatives are playing politics.

They are redesignating language they are fixing the numbers.

The truth is the numbers are falling.

1.3 billion taken out of the budget, it's got to fall somewhere,

Even if they were redefining the neighbourhood policing,

people also want to be able to see a doctor when they want to see

them, they also need to have their children educated in schools, to be

All these departments are facing pressures as well.

The Home Office, the police, have to do the same as well don't they?

You decide where your priorities are.

I think there are issues around efficiency and IT but

when we had riots we needed two and a half thousand

We are facing very, very serious pressures in relation

This is absolutely not the time to strip away that

neighbourhood level where the intelligence actually comes from.

Let me bring Kevin in, what have you done in Surrey?

What we have done, we have lost some of them the

but key thing is we are reducing by 400 staff by losing all the support

staff who do the interviewing of the prisoners and the case processing.

That means the uniform officers rather than being out

in the neighbourhoods will spend hours back in the police station.

We are spinning the wheel right back to the police officers

My view is the government have made a very big mistake in cutting police

as far as they already have done because it is security which

underpins the economy which enables the Chancellor to make the taxes.

We need to think of this as an economic decision.

The important thing is we all know counterterrorism is not

The Prime Minister has gone on record as saying that, the Home

Secretary has gone on record saying that, and so has Bernard Hogan-Howe.

We must keep London safe, our capital safe,

Still to be hotly debated. What resources will you put back into the

borders? Did you think you will take us down that territory? It is the

same thing, it is all part of a package. It is one for another day,

thank you. When the Chancellor details on Wednesday not just his

Autumn Statement but his spending plans expect more voltage for the

Northern powerhouse. With public spending in London on the byword

project very end relative terms to the rest of the UK it looks as

though London should be worried The 21st-century has seen the capital

changed dramatically. New infrastructure backed up by billions

of pounds of government spending has helped London into a position where

it dominates the rest of the country. But could the years of high

investment be coming to an end? Five years ago the government was

spending more on every Londoner than anyone else on the British mainland

in part due to huge projects like Crossrail and the Olympics. Only the

Northern Ireland received more. But London has fallen back. We received

less than the Scots and the Welsh and the people of the North are

gaining fast. Next week when George Osborne sets out his spending plans

for the coming half decade could we see London lose more ground? It

could easily be that London's time has come and gone. The big

investment in London, particularly upgrading the tubes, Crossrail,

other infrastructure which took place under the Labour government is

now followed by eight Conservative government which is intriguingly

investing in the Midlands and the North. The Northern powerhouse was

launched in 2014. Manchester is newly created me will receive

additional powers over areas like skills and health -- newly created

Maher. The leader of Manchester City Council is clear such powers would

be good for the capital as well London should have exactly the same

powers and the evidence from the best performing cities in Europe is

that we are cities have more control over those levers of economic growth

the city 's economy does better but also the national economy. He also

said London has been receiving a disproportionate amount of money.

That has been the case for a long time, the amount of spending has

been disproportionate and we need to start redistributing that. If there

is a concern from London, the only way they will stop subsidising the

rest of the country is by having the investment in other parts of the

country which allows them to become self-sustaining. With the capital

generating more money for the Treasury than any other region in

the country, if London is seen to not be getting a fair deal next week

there are sure to be concerns. Lets not linger on if Labour should be

the ones making these arguments and if George Osborne has stolen the

clothing, is this the right thing to happen and do you fear the impact it

could have? I have to say I think the direction of travel, giving more

autonomy to the north, must be the right thing. The country is

unbalanced to London and the south-east. Having said that, one in

four people in London are living in poverty. One in for young people are

unemployed. We don't have any powers over social care and health care,

any real powers over school places and just 7% of the budget comes from

taxation, whereas other major cities like New York, 50%. We need a Maher

who can raise money -- mayor who can raise money himself and is not

reliant on a Chancellor making decisions on our behalf. First soul

on the Conservatives not exploring much interest in devolution, what do

you think about it now, having been a London politician most of your

life? We have seen tremendous investment, the opportunity of

having a mayor who has driven forward the interest and investment

in our city. And it has reached a peak and we're now seeing

post-London? Not all, at the conference earlier this week, not

party political, everyone said the important thing was to have both.

London was doing well so the important thing was to also invest.

But we know there is not the money? Tell me the dynamic that Manchester

and the North can gain but London can gain as well? London has gone

out and Boris has gone out in particular to get investment from

overseas countries and companies. London is thriving, business is

booming. We are doing well in London, it's the same opportunity to

do that in the north. I agree with David that it is important that we

say let's give those other parts of London the opportunity. This is the

chance to work with labour leaders in Manchester and Leeds, we are

putting the country first. We are seeing what is best for the country

and what is best is to enable those parts to make their own decisions to

devolve into structure and spending and power. What's not to like? I get

the feeling George Osborne is waiting to see if they will keep

City Hall. He doesn't want to give the powers to what he thinks will be

a Labour mayor. Labourer were not missing financial devolution.

Skyscrapers are up but they are not building housing for ordinary

Londoners. Day centres being cut across the city. Youth unemployment

one in for. That is an infrastructure in need of investment

but it needs the Chancellor today to give the powers to a London mayor

who can raise taxation and get on with it. Rapidly running out of

time, now for the rest of the portico news in 60 seconds. --

political news. On Wednesday more than 13,000 people

signed a petition to ban lorries from the London roads in the rush

hour. It was after a fatal collision between a cyclist and a tip the

trunk full -- tipper truck. The next day the mayor attended the official

opening of Central London's first segregated superhighway. Cyclists

were kept segregated from other traffic. Students from the Mulberry

School in East London have is did the White House to hear the First

Lady inspired them about their future. Michelle Obama visited the

school in June and talked about the importance of education. As England

played France, 70,000 English and French fans sang the Marseillaise to

show their solidarity after the terrorist attacks in Paris.

Let's get back to the cycling issue. David first. Would you say that

London is more congested than it has been for a very long time? Would you

put it down to the cycle engineering works? Absolutely not. Anyone who is

unemployed is becoming an bluebird driver. They are congesting you have

issue with works across London which are uncoordinated. Ten seconds.

Boris Johnson has failed on congestion. Absolutely not. People

need to come up bicycles and onto -- people need to get on to bikes and

of polluting cars. Can Jeremy Corbyn rein

in his discontented MPs? Can George Osborne sell

his spending cuts? Helen, let's start with the spending

review. It is quite clear that deficit reduction is not getting any

easier, even though the economy has been growing for some time. I

thought it was interesting that even Nigel Lawson said the Chancellor may

have to look if he wants to continue reducing the deficit, not just at

spending cuts but tax rises. That is about having a surplus by 2020. It

gives them very little room for manoeuvre. The big problem for the

Tories in this Parliament, last parliament you had heavy cuts for

councils which fell a lot on adult social care. A small number of

people which hugely affected by that. The next round of cuts will

mean a much larger group of people are affected. That is much harder to

get past the public. It gets in a lot of money and a big revenue from

the Government. Is that possible? There is logic to it, given to what

has happened with oil prices. The logic is, low oil prices and the

political logic will be, the gunmen will say, they have done enough on

making fuel cheaper tax wise in recent years. They now have

political room for manoeuvre on that issue. George Osborne is now boxed

in, not just by the decision to aim for a surplus and the decision to

aim for troubling pounds in welfare cuts, but also by the decision

alluded to by Nigel Lawson to protect entire departments of

spending, health service and foreign aid. Anything to do with people over

65. That leaves you with one option, to go to departments which have

already made absolutely swingeing cuts over the last two years and ask

for more. There is a perverse incentive that when the Treasury

knows that for example local government or business is able to

make very deep cuts, as they have done, those departments are awarded

by being asked more cuts. There is a perverse incentive almost to hold

out. George Osborne has a thoroughly consistent record. He will duff up

the Labour Party and then implement the fiscal deficit reduction plan.

In the last parliament he halved the overall fiscal deficit. In this

Parliament he went into the election saying, I will run a 10 million

surplus two years before the general election. He has all it is a laid

back by one year. He has announced today the 10 billion has pretty much

gone. He may run a surplus but it may be ?10 rather than 10 billion!

That will be much closer to the Ed Balls plan. As Helen was saying he

has got himself into this mess because he set a trap for Ed Balls.

There is a danger of just public weariness. I think the Treasury is

worried about this. The mood of the public. We are into our sixth year

and there is still 80 million to go. The public in Greece just got fed

up. In Portugal a few weeks ago the Portuguese economy was recovering

well but the public got fed up. In the election campaign we heard about

the long-term economic plan. If you asked people what that was, there

are a few new. Most people assume that things were on the upside. They

did not realise the cuts in the second term would be deeper. The

comprehensive spending review will be live on BBC Two. It will be a

political event. Let's move on to the Labour Party. We have the vote

on Trident. SNP are putting it down and it is meant to be a trap for

Labour. The leader it is against it but the party is in favour of it

credible to say, just abstain? I think they will get away with it. It

was set at conference but it cannot come onto the conference floor for

three years. The Labour leader is completely opposed to it. He has

said there is no compromise on it. He has had to make a series of

compromises. No matter what Mr Corbyn and John McDonnell wants

they cannot change it for another three years? What happened at the

Labour conference is they attempted to have it debated but they failed.

It is up to the National policy Forum. This review is being chaired

by Maria Eagle and Ken Livingstone for that they are looking at it and

it will go to the National policy Forum to decide. That is a way of

overruling what the existing rules are full you have a strange

situation where Jeremy Corbyn wants to promote grassroots

decision-making on things he agrees with. Not so much in this case. The

point Caroline Flint was making you cannot keep having free vote on such

massive issues as to whether this country should have nuclear

deterrent and whether we should extend the battle against Islamic

State to Syria. You cannot have a huge disparity between leader and

Parliamentary party on existential issues. What it leads to is the

leader having to use flirted, surreptitiously methods to get his

own way and negotiate around party policy. The ultimate example this

week with getting Ken Livingstone, the famous defence expert, to have

the defence review. Briefly, because I want to move on. If you get 6 % of

the vote in the leadership election, it is that at the fair to put your

views forward. They need to make a decision by the time there is a big

vote on Trident next year. The difficulties they hear and now. And

that is Syria. The here and now is having an effect. We had a policy

morning. One of the questions was about national-security. -- a poll

this morning. Who do you think would keep you and your family safe? 9%

trusted David Cameron and only 7% voted for Jeremy Corbyn. The point I

put to Caroline Flint, this is dangerous for Labour. They already

have a problem with economic security. That is one reason they

did not win. To not be trusted national-security as well, it means

it is well nigh impossible to win an election. There was a seductive

narrative about patria to them with Jeremy Corbyn not singing with Queen

-- not seeing the Queen 's speech. I think particularly in the aftermath

of Paris, what people were looking to see from leaders were looking to

see from leaders in summary. That is a huge problem. The problem also

comes with the fact these polls are very bad. At this stage, Ed Miliband

was doing better and that was, even then, people were talking about

whether it would bring him down Debts have a look at the state of

the parties with the poll. I'm told this is the biggest Tory lead over

Labour since John Major took over from Margaret Thatcher, 15 points.

There we have the Tories on 42 and Labour down to 27. The Labour vote

came down a couple of points. Ukip are still doing pretty well, at

15%. The Lib Dems are still flat-lining at 7%. The Scottish

National 's get five. It means a lot more in Scotland. The Green party is

down at 3% and going nowhere. At this stage of the process is it is

not -- the process, it is not that important. Given all the problems we

have had about tax credits and Tory difficulties, it is pretty

disheartening. The last time the Labour Party scored 27% in a general

election was under Baikal foot as leader. It has been a defining

moment for Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party. -- under Michael Foot.

You need to ensure the nation's finances are safe and

national-security is safe. On the second one, is a nation secure in

your hands? He appeared to be found wanting. You have a at a clown

situation, what would you do? He equivocated and said, I would be an

easy. -- a Bataclan Theatre situation. Only the next day did he

finally set out the circumstances in which he would approve that type of

response by the security services. The problem was his initial

responses showed his instincts. Putting that in front of the British

people, you will have a challenging time winning an election like that.

The Parliamentary Labour Party has to be careful. They may not be in

tune with the people in the country in the Labour Party who elected Mr

Corbyn as leader. Although they are getting impatient, I would suggest

they have to wait at least until May until the Scottish elections, the

local government elections. They really cannot move before then, can

they? They acknowledge he has a thumping great mandate from the

election. A lot of those people have actually converted to being full

party members. He still has a huge backing at grassroots level. The

Mint is thriving and drawing in huge crowds of people. -- momentum is

thriving. Even a later post was then they could come third in Scotland.

They were saying Jeremy Corbyn is the 1 guy who could bring back the

votes that were lost to SNP in recent years. By one warning to the

Labour Party is, if you think 2 % is low, wait until the public starts to

focus on the next election? 27% is not the floor for Labour. We shall

see. That is all for today. The Daily Politics will be back

on BBC2 at noon tomorrow. And we'll be back again next

weekend at the same time. We will be back to disentangle the

spending review next Sunday at the same time.

Remember if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.