29/11/2015 Sunday Politics London

The Government continues its push for the UK to join air-strikes

Is it winning the argument and does it have the votes in Parliament

We'll hear from former Tory defence secretary Liam Fox, and Respect

Jeremy Corbyn is struggling to get his way over Syria, as he tries to

persuade his Shadow Cabinet to back his opposition to bombing.

We'll hear from Shadow Justice Secretary, Charlie Falconer.

And the former Conservative chairman Grant Shapps resigns

from the Government over allegations he failed to act on bullying claims

inside the Tory Party, but is that really the end of the story?

In London, the Chancellor spared the Metropolitan Police but his spending

decisions will have consequences for transport, housing and councils

So, yesterday, former Conservative Party chairman

Grant Shapps resigned from the Government over allegations he

failed to act on claims of bullying in the youth wing of the party.

It's a complicated story, as Giles Dilnot explains.

Grant Shapps, former co-chair of the Conservative Party

and now a former minister, must wish as his senior aide Paul Abbot

Clarke once tipped for the top by Tatler magazine unsuccessfully

As a result of his behaviour during that campaign,

about which complaints were made, he was taken off the candidates list.

A girlfriend at the time declaring he was "unfit to be an MP".

In early 2014, Mr Clarke approached

the Conservatives and Grant Shapps in particular with an idea.

It was simple, bus loads of young Tory activists to marginal seats

during the 2015 general election campaign to doorstep constituents.

In the face of of unshifting polls, the idea appealed to Conservative

Central Headquarters but they wanted to have some control over it.

Grant Shapps decided not only to back the idea, but help pay for it,

and put Clarke in charge of the operation.

never met are you going to be a part of this? -- are you going to be

Roadtrip 2015, as the plan was called, had another

motive for Clarke, to see him back on the Conservative candidate list

and perhaps he would have and this story ended if not for the apparent

suicide in mid-September of a young activist called Elliot

Johnson, who left a note, naming Mark Clarke as someone who'd been

bullying him and a secret recording of Clarke challenging him in a pub.

In the wake of Elliot Johnson's death, lurid allegations emerged

about Clarke, alleging sexual misconduct, drugs, intimidation

blackmail and bullying connected to Roadtrip, all denied by Mark Clarke.

But August e-mail exchanges between Mr Clarke and Mr Shapps

aide Paul Abbot show Mr Abbott was aware of complaints

Nothing was done and since Mr Shapps gave Clarke an official Party role

he has now resigned saying "the buck stops with me".

The Prime Minister says a full internal investigation is under way.

Elliot Johnson's father wants an independent external investigation.

The most serious allegations about Clarke were made after

Grant Shapps had been moved to a junior ministerial position

and Lord Feldman, David Cameron s chief fundraiser and close friend,

He says the party cannot find nor was aware of any written

If, by falling on his sword, Mr Shapps hoped to stop

the scandal spreading, he may actually only have become

The Sunday Politics panel is here. Nick, here is the case for Shapps.

He has been made a scapegoat. This is not the end of the story. I think

it is not the end of the story. Grant Shapps did sign up Mark Clark

to do this. I think it is getting awfully close to the door of Andrew

Feldman. They went -- he went to college with the Prime Minister and

organised some balls. They go back a long way. The road trip was run out

of Conservative campaign headquarters in the run-up to the

general election. Most significantly for Andrew Feldman, he signed the

checks to allow the road trip to take place. We're not talking small

cheques, we are talking many hundreds of thousands of pounds

Grant Shapps was in charge of it on a day-to-day basis but Andrew

Feldman and his sister helped the running of the road trip. What it

does is put the attention onto some of the attention onto summary the

attention would be, what did Andrew Feldman do? What did he know and

when and what did he do? What we have to remember is Baroness Warsi,

who was co-chairman, kicked this guy out of the party. Feldman was

Chairman Ben and Shapps brought him back. Feldman was co-chairman and

Feldman is still the chairman now. In terms of the party, what some

people were saying to me yesterday, actually, it cannot be seen that

Cameron is protecting Lord Fellman -- Feldman because he is his friend.

He has got questions to answer. I also think that if people who are in

the party feel these questions are not being answered, and it is not an

open process, loads more leaks will come out and it will get messier and

messier and messier. It is a rum do, what was going on inside the Tory

Party in its youth wing. Multiple allegations of bullying and sexual

harassment. Culminating in this young man taking his life on a

railway line. It is an appalling thing. There is a history of unusual

behaviour amongst Conservative students going back to the 1980s

when Norman Tebbit closed down the Confederation of Conservative

students. It is the most extreme incident I have ever encountered.

This is about personal behaviour. The parents of Elliott Johnson

raised an important question of chronology. Grant Shapps stop being

co-chairman in May. Some of the allegations against Mark Clark, some

of the complaints surfaced as recently as August. There is a

deeper structural problem, which is the Conservative Party does not have

activists. They have to find them where they can get them. Or, when

summary has a reputation as bad as Mark Clark, they end up going along

with them because options are so limited. It will not be the end of

the story. David Cameron is expected to ask MPs

to approve UK air strikes The Government thinks it now has

enough support to risk a vote in the Commons, even though

the Labour Party is still unclear. And the PM will almost certainly

need Labour votes to get his way. Mr Corbyn is still trying to rally

his Shadow Cabinet and Labour MPs He told Andrew Marr they should

recognise his direct mandate And so what I've done is what I said

I would always do, I would try to democratise

the way the party does things. Yes, I have sent an e-mail to party

members, and actually, 70,000 have already

replied with their views. I don't know what all the views are,

obviously, I haven't read them all, Surely we must recognise that

in a democracy, the Labour Party has a very large membership, nearly

400,000 members, they have a right to express their point of view and

MPs have to listen to it and have to try and understand what's going

on in the minds I've been joined by

Charlie Falconer, Jeremy Corbyn s Are you minded to support government

on the subject of Syrian air strikes? I am. Then need to be

assurances, given to the House of Commons but I am minded to support

air strikes. The reason I am, I think Isil poses a threat to the

region and also Europe, including the United Kingdom. I believe air

strikes over Iraq and Syria are having an effect on reducing that

risk. I think it is wrong that we are participating in Syria when what

is going on is we are trying to defend the United Kingdom. I believe

the only long-term solution is there needs to be a solution to the Syrian

civil war and the bombing of cracker will not significantly contribute to

that. -- Raqqa. I believe we do not have a choice. The likelihood is

that the Shadow Cabinet will agree a collective position in this matter.

There are honourably held collective views. The Shadow Cabinet on

Thursday, they were appropriately discussing. Everybody was conscious

of the fact we have to reach a conclusion in national interests.

With an issue like this where there is agreement on the factual

material, international law, the final judgment, there is such a

difficult decision to be made, it is not surprising that our

disagreements in the Shadow Cabinet. It is unlikely that tomorrow you

will be able to agree a collective line. I think that is right. It is

unlikely we'll be able to agree a yes or no answer to the question the

Government is about to post. If it does not and there is a free vote

for this among Labour MPs, it does make it certain that Mr Cameron will

win by a convincing majority. I do not know the position. I think

everyone is weighing up the merits of the argument. The right thing to

do is for mothers of the Parliamentary Labour Party members

of the Shadow Cabinet to consider all the arguments and reach a

conclusion as to what they think is in the national interest. It is

clear that enough Labour MPs will abstain or side with the Government

to give Mr Cameron a majority, even if that are some Tory defectors If

the position where it was whipped against by the Labour Party, that

with very significantly reduce the chances if it were a free vote. I do

not know what the final figures would be. Your figures sound right.

Should there be a free vote? What is the alternative given the position

you are into a free vote? My own view is I do not think this very

important issue should be allowed to be a situation that forces

resignations on people. I think the right course is, if the Shadow

Cabinet cannot come to a collective view, and I accept that maybe

unlikely, probably the best course is a free vote. That is ultimately

for the leadership to decide. For an opposition which aspires to

government when you're not a debating society. You are the

opposition, the alternative government. What would voters think

if you cannot agree a collective position on something as important

as war? What the Government be seeing is a legitimate debate. The

public is like the Parliamentary Labour Party and like the saddo

Cabinet, of different views. You need to come to a collective view.

We need to know your view on this. The differences with this is I do

not think it will be possible. I do not think that is surprising. That

reflects the debate that is going on in the country. The debate going on

in the country is going on within the Labour Party. If Mr Corbyn was

to attempt, and he said this morning it is his decision to whip or not.

If there were a decision to whip Labour members to vote against

bombing, would that be a resignation matter for you? I do not want to

comment on that. I very much hope any sort of resignations will be

avoided. I think the position will be we will have a further discussion

on Monday and a collective you will be reached as to how we go forward

in relation to the progress. One Labour MP told us that Mr Corbyn's

and of this vote seems to him like a deliberate search for a fight and he

is very disappointed. I do not agree. The key thing about what is

happening now is not who sent a letter when. The key thing which the

public want us to debate is the question itself. Should we support

air strikes or not? I think the important thing about this week will

not be who said what to whom but will be where you stood on the

issue. It is one of those issues where the judgment about what was

right and what was wrong will not come on the basis of the politics of

these few days. It will come on what happens going forward. What was the

right decision? Let me ask you this. We do not have much time. Because

you are a lawyer and an expert on the Labour Party, if Labour MPs

sought to unseat Mr Corbyn, and there is some wild talk around on

that, witty automatically be on the ballot paper of a new leadership

election? I have not addressed that. It is not a moment to talk about any

sort of leadership challenge. Jeremy Corbyn is leader. He was elected two

months ago with a huge mandate. That is the position within the Labour

Party and that is where we have to address it. It can hardly be a

stable position to have a Labour leader, in such a key issue has

bombing in Syria, at odds with a huge chunk of his Shadow Cabinet

rest room at that position is unsustainable over the period. It

was absolutely clear when Jeremy was elected, there were significant

disagreements between Jeremy and others on policy. What is happening

is the Labour Party is holding together. So far.

So, once again a British government is gearing up extend military action

It's a well-trod road and the outcome has not always been

predictable, or pleasant, which is why so many are hesitant.

Ellie Price has been looking at the Prime Minister's case

for action, and what role the UK military might play.

That bomb in Paris, that could have been London.

If they had their way, it would be London.

I can't stand here and say we're safe

I can't stand here either and say we will remove the threat

from the action we take, but do I stand here with advice behind me

that taking action will degrade and reduce that threat over time?

Absolutely, and I've examined my conscience

David Cameron says he no longer wants to outsource this sort

Britain is currently involved in air strikes against so-called Islamic

State, but only in Iraq, shown here in the bottom half of this shot

The border, for British forces at least, is crucial.

IS, Isis, Daesh - whatever you want to call it - control or is free to

operate in swathes of territory in Iraq and Syria.

Its so-called caliphate stretches from Aleppo in Syria to

The lines on the map are relatively fluid, it recently lost control

That was down to Kurdish forces with the help of US-led air strikes.

Currently Australia, Canada and France are also flying

bombing missions over both countries, targeting IS.

According to the latest figures released on Friday,

the US and its allies operating under the banner of Operation

Inherent Resolve have conducted more than 8,500 air strikes against

Islamic State targets since the start of the campaign last year

That's 5,580 air strikes in Iraq and 2,925 in Syria.

More than 16,000 targets have been damaged or destroyed,

including more than 4,500 buildings, nearly 5,000 fighting positions and

The vast majority have come from US aircraft, but the RAF has run 3 6

They've been launched from this base in Cyprus, where

The base has also been used to carry out refuelling and

The perception out there is the question as to whether or not

the UK should be involved in the campaign in Syria or not

The reality is we are involved in that campaign but in an inconsistent

Other countries, our allies, the Americans and French

in particular, just don't quite understand where we are up to.

The PM insists the RAF can provide specific skills

that coalition partners are keen to make the most of.

The ability to launch highly accurate Brimstone missiles.

We are very good at not killing people collaterally,

the UK, so in that sense I think us moving into Syria is good.

The sad thing is that no matter how good you are, there will be innocent

people killed but they are dying anyway because of Isil, and it's

coming to the stage where you have to move forward and do things, even

though that sort of thing happens, that cannot be

Of course Russia is also involved in air strikes in Syria,

but its support of President Assad's regime puts it at odds with

The scale of these tensions demonstrated when Turkey,

which vehemently opposes Assad, shot down a Russian plane last week.

Most experts agree that air strikes alone will not destroy the common

enemy of IS, that ground forces will be needed, but agreeing on exactly

who those forces would be, could prove the biggest obstacle to peace.

We are joined now by George Galloway. What should be done to

thwart Islamic State, if not British bombing, what should be done to hit

it in its heartland? Most of these terrorist attacks were carried out

by people living in the countries in which they operated, Tunisia,

France, Belgium and so on so you will not physically stop people

bombing Raqqa turning up on the streets of Paris. But the planning

involved Islamic State. There's not much logistics involved in taking

arms into a nightclub and killing innocent people. There are many

weapons in Europe, nobody is suggesting these weapons came from

Syria. I don't want to dodge your question, I must strongly in favour

of destroying Isis and Al-Qaeda as anybody else, more than the David

Cameron government or they wouldn't be tolerating a situation where

Turkey and Saudi Arabia have been supporting these people for years

and until now are supporting them. We are steeped in blog so far but it

is bloodier to go on, I promise you. What would you do? I would support

the people fighting Isis and Al-Qaeda on the ground. The wide PG

militia -- YPG militia. Give them weapons, every kind of support we

can. It is a far better way than us joining in. Do you support Russian

attacks on the anti-Assad forces in Syria? Yes, if they are coordinated

with the Syrian government's army. So do you support British attacks on

Islamic State forces in Iraq at their request of the Iraq

government? I do, and if they were coordinated with the Government that

make sense militarily, and if we coordinated our involvement with

Russia and the Syrian government in Syria, I would support that too but

it's because I'm pretty sure the British government's real game is

regime change and because we have seen regime change before in Iraq

and Libya and they ended so disastrously, I am against it. It's

not because I'm a pacifist. There was a time when David Cameron's

priority was to get rid of a sad's regime but isn't it clear that David

Cameron has realised that defeating Islamic State is more important to

Britain's national interest than getting rid of Mr Assad? If it were

you probably wouldn't have me on because I would be supporting it,

but I don't believe that. I pray his utterly farcical claim in the House

this week that there were 70,00 moderate rebels armed and ready to

take over the land liberated by our bombardment. You say that is

fantasy? If there were 700 I would be surprised. We will bomb territory

which will then be taken by other so-called moderate fanatics, the

ones as I said to you before that only cut off half your head. Should

we regard the Russians and the Assad regime as our allies in the fight

against Islamic State? We had that chance and that was incinerated by

our ally on his attack on the Russian air force bombing these

people, shot out of the sky provoking a crisis between east and

west, between Nato and Russia, which was completely unnecessary and

completely contrary to any legitimate war aims. Could it not

still be put together? I wish it would, I suspect it won't. If we had

time to discuss it I would operate this point. Turkey is the source of

this problem, the Turkish border has been open to these people. They have

been selling billions of dollars worth of oil. A lot of it is being

stolen by Isil and sold in Turkey, I believe to relatives of President

Erdogan, which is then sold onwards to neighbouring countries. You

cannot be serious about fighting Isil while you're Nato ally is

openly collaborating with them. You follow closely what is going on in

the Labour Party at the moment, does Jeremy Corbyn have an alternative to

a free vote when this comes up for a vote in the Commons? If I were him,

I would whip the vote because his enemies in the ... Because our

record on intervention is so bad, because the likelihood of it not

going well is so high, I would dare these rebels to facilitate David

Cameron's court. Is that the intention? It looks to me as if it

is ripping itself apart. This is Ramsay MacDonald in reverse, the

leader remaining loyal to the party and the MPs joining effectively and

national government in terms of War and peace at least so if I were

Jeremy Corbyn, I would whip this vote and let the Labour members pass

verdict on those that troop into the lobby with Liam Fox and David

Cameron because I am pretty sure this is not going to end well. Even

at the expense of ripping apart the Shadow Cabinet too? You would be

whipping the Shadow Cabinet where there seems to be a majority against

Jeremy Corbyn's position. Some of them might surprise you with their

fidelity to the party in those circumstances, others might go. They

are supporting the elected leader in the way the rope supports a hanging

man. What are the chances of Jeremy Corbyn following your advice?

Probably not, I would think listening to John McDonald and Ken

Livingstone they will go for a free vote, that will merely postponed...

And give David Cameron his big majority. Yes. It seems to me time

to face that up. Thank you very much. At this point we say goodbye

to viewers in Scotland. Party divisions on the issue

of air strikes Here's the Conservative MP

and chairman of the Defence Select Committee, Julian Lewis, speaking

in the Commons debate on Thursday. Air strikes alone will not be

effective, they've got to be in coordination

with credible ground forces. Now, the suggestion there are 7 ,000

non-Islamist, moderate, credible ground forces, I have to say,

is a revelation to me and I suspect I've been joined

by former Conservative Defence Two years ago you want to Britain to

bomb the forces of President Assad, who is fighting Islamic State, now

you want us to bomb Islamic State, which is fighting President Assad.

Doesn't map flip-flop undermine your credibility? The original vote was

very different, it was because Assad had used chemical weapons in breach

of international law against his civilian population and the question

then was worthy international community going to uphold that

international law by making a punitive strike to teach the Assad

regime and the rebels, who it was suspected might also have chemical

weapons, that it would not be acceptable to use them. But it would

have created more chaos in Syria and allowed Islamic State to benefit, to

exploit that, as it had done previously. I'm not sure I'd buy

that because if you have made a relatively small number of punitive

strikes from some of the command and control of the regime to send a

signal not to use chemical weapons again, that would have upheld the

international community's position. Do you accept that extending British

bombing into Syria now against Islamic State this time is not a

military game changer, that it is -- its military impact will be marginal

at most? I think its military impact may be moderate at best, I accept

that, however within that we have a number of weapons systems that can

diminish the chance of civilian casualties, and I think that's

important because it denies a propaganda weapon. Obviously

anything that reduces civilian casualties is vital, but it won t

change things very much on the ground militarily.

The fact we have not been there has been an encouragement for other

countries. For example, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan, in recent

months they have stopped contributing to the air campaigns.

It makes it more difficult for us to persuade them to take part if we are

not taking part. We have a militarily absurd policy of bombing

in Iraq but not in Syria. After we have joined America, France,

Bahrain, Syria, Russia, Australia, and recently Saudi Arabia and the

UAE in bombing IS in Syria, what then? The question is, our ability

to degrade military capability. One of the problems with sorties in Iraq

is command and control is coming from Syria. That is where they are

drawing strength from. The US has launched 2703 strikes in Syria alone

and others have carried out 154 Why is that not doing the degrading You

have to carry out the number of attacks to provide that degradation.

We need to continue that. The question you are alluding to is the

right question. Even if you have degraded the ices capabilities,

which is what we want, what is the next step? How do you hold any

territory you may take from them? Part of the reply from the Prime

Minister is there are 70,000 moderate opposition fighters ready

to become the ground force against Islamic State. Who is the leader and

what do they want? You have a disparate grouping. Not 70,000

acting together. What the Prime Minister was saying from the joint

intelligence committee, what they are saying was, there is a potential

force of that size. The longer we wait to do great ices, the smaller

that force is likely to be and the less its capabilities are likely to

be. -- Isis. It is a fantasy to say there are 70,000 ground troops ready

to come in and help on the ground if we extend the bombing to Syria.

Let's assume the numbers are correct. To further questions we

have to ask. Are they willing to operate together as a single force?

The second is, do they have the capability to do so? Over the next

few days, part of the debate will be around that. It will be around the

fact you may have to supply some of those forces with mentoring and

training to enable them to be able to be an effective force against

Isis, which they have not necessarily been able to up until

now. The wacky experience on that was disastrous. I would say, look at

the other side. -- the wacky experience. Look at our ability to

mental the Afghan army. Isn't it inevitable that everyone to make

progress against Islamic State, in some way, President Assad and the

Russians will have to become our allies? This is a very difficult

pill to swallow for many people who think the regime is particularly

unpleasant. I would love to see a different regime in place that was

not killing its civilian population and gay people in Syria chance to

discover their own future. But, as we have done in previous military

situations, sometimes we have to recognise these challenges have to

be dealt with in series, not in parallel. That is what is very

important about the statement by the Prime Minister. It is not an ices

only strategy but Aaron -- Raqqa only strategy but and Raqqa first

strategy. You are saying you are getting support of factions. The

important thing is we bring together all those who want to deal with IS

first. They are the threat to national. We need to grasp the size

of that threat to national to. They hate us, Andrew. Not because of what

we do because of who we are. They will never stop that. Why would we

get help from non-IS forces on the ground if we are also seem to be on

the side of the Russians? They are also a threat to those people inside

Syria. It is in the interests of all parties concerned to deal with what

is a highly ideological, dangerous, fascistic threat. They endanger

regional security. We must not allow them to export it.

It's just gone 11:30am, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now

Remember those cuts to the Fire Service last year.

Well, the latest figures show that response times

Sadiq Khan, Labour's mayoral hopeful,

So is Mark Field, Conservative MP for the Cities

Forgive me, Mark, you will have to hang on for a moment while I fire

These Labour leadership difficulties, how much an impact

are they having now and are they going to have on your chances?

Well, as far as the mayoral elections next May,

it should be to decide who is the best candidate to lead our City

We have big challenges in London, the housing crisis is getting worse

Government policies are making it more difficult for Londoners to

Before we get on to policy, you need to be heard, don't you

What impact are the difficulties that your leader is having?

If you look at all mayoral elections since 000,

candidates who win mayoral elections are candidates who can set

What makes them the best candidate to lead the City?

I want to be London's champion, London's fighter to the Government.

Sometimes it might be to my own party as well.

What do you think of this letter that was sent,

What about the timing of that, given a decision hadn't been made,

hasn't been made, collectively, on air strikes?

I am not part of the Shadow Cabinet so I am not privy to

the discussions that took place in the Shadow Cabinet.

There is a Shadow Cabinet meeting on Monday.

Look, the decision to go to war military intervention, is the most

difficult decision members of Parliament can take because people

will die. Whether you get it right or wrong, people will die. I am

waiting to see what further comments David Cameron and Philip Hammond

I would be surprised if colleagues who have not yet seen the motion

There are strong arguments for and against.

Are you saying you haven't formed a view yet?

I am waiting to see what the motion is.

We all want to make sure these terrorists are taken out.

It is really important to understand things have moved with the United

We can all see the progress that appears to have been made after

What would be the involvement of regional parliaments?

To be fair to David Cameron, it really is important that I say that.

He's spent three hours in Parliament this week,

Which way do you think you will vote?

I want to make up my view after I have heard all the debates up

At the moment, I have not made up my own mind.

Can I ask you about what the impact is of the splits,

the splits in the Shadow Cabinet, and what people are proceeding

For the last 20 years, you don't have to start with the

Whenever it comes to decisions of war and military action,

the Labour Party always is a party with lots of opinions.

The Labour Party feels instinctively uncomfortable with military action,

especially when there are lessons we have not learned yet in relation

The reality is, the question that David Cameron

answered again and again in his own way was, does it make

His answer to the Commons was, yes, it does.

That motivates me in being Mayor of London.

The key thing for me, as someone who will be in charge of London's

Do you think it will make London safer or will it make London more

I want to wait and see and speak to other experts.

What we know from the military strikes in Iraq is there have been

The difference between Iraq and Syria is

The Iraqi government's there with significant troops.

The question that needs answering is how many troops are in Syria

A figure of 70,000 is used by David Cameron in relation to the

There are questions that even the chair of the Defence Select

You know that Ken Livingstone has suggested that Tony Blair was

responsible for what happened here in 2005?

I completely disagree with Ken Livingstone.

The responsibility for the atrocities in London on

the 7th of July, when 52 Londoners, of all ethnicities and all faiths

and all backgrounds, died, the responsibility's with those four

killers who follow an evil ideology and those

But he saw the intelligence, as he said this week,

and he had been told, or Tony Blair, he says, was warned,

that this is just the kind of consequence that would happen from

That is for Ken Livingstone to explain what Ken Livingstone said.

I'm quite clear in my mind, the responsibility for the attacks

in London lie solely with the four killers and not anybody else.

I think it is very fair what Sadiq is saying.

What is a game changer and a difference to the Iraq

situation 12 years ago, is the fact that there was a UN resolution,

not quite a resolution to go to war but nonetheless a Security Council

resolution which, obviously, by its nature, has been approved

There is a sense it is part of an international operation.

Personally I will vote in favour of bombing Syria.

I have been uneasy about what happened two years ago, partly

because I think this is really an issue for executive authority.

I am not very comfortable with the idea of Parliament having a say at

every opportunity, not least because we are all going to be under

pressure from constituents, and those are loud voices, the silent

majority perhaps, who are more easy on this issue. Very quickly.

Just to say to Sadiq on this, it is a pretty fair analysis he has

given and I think it is an important point.

We need to have a sense of what role we will be playing in the future.

We need to have a sense of what role we will be playing in the future.

We need to hear a little bit more of this from the Government.

Inevitably we're going to be just one player.

The US, France, Russia, they are all going to be there too.

We know what happened with the police in terms of the

Let's look at more in that Spending Review.

London's transport budget, and the capital's boroughs,

the Chancellor announced a major funding shake-up for them, with

critics arguing they have not, for the first time, been hit hardest.

We will abolish the uniform business rate.

By the end of the parliament, local government will keep all of

Because of the amount we raise in business rates is, in total,

much greater than the amount we give to local councils

through the local government grant, we will phase that grant out

By the end of this Parliament, local authorities' biggest funding

stream from the Government will all but dry up.

Instead they will get some extra powers to increase council tax to

pay for social care and also to keep all their business rates.

Some parts of London generate exceptionally high business rates.

The total pot for England is about ?26 billion, of which London

Certain bits of London get huge amounts.

For example, Westminster gets ? .8 billion, almost twice that

So, does that mean that certain parts

Because council tax and business rates, particularly

in London, add up to more than local government spends, there will

be a question of what is handed over to London government, to fund out

That is going to be a complex negotiation.

I suspect the Government may want, for example, to off load funding

of TfL or the police on to London government as part of this reform.

And so, with all of that to come, it is very hard to say as yet what

the Spending Review means for sure when it comes to local government

funding, and potentially that of the police, public transport, and more.

Mark Field, what did you feel about the fact that Transport for London

All the operating grant is going in two and a half years' time.

That is a loss of about ?3 billion over the next four years.

There is an argument we have had a pretty good deal in London with

Crossrail, with a lot of the infrastructure, including transport

I sort of accept, to a certain extent,

that other parts of the country will be making a strong case to say they

I am a very big supporter, as I am sure Sadiq is, for Crossrail 2.

It has had a bit of money going into it.

The reality is it will probably have to wash its own face.

It will probably need a lot of private money, which will come.

You are looking to the future, a project that is in dreamland

I thought the argument was, the London population is going up.

The argument was we had to prepare infrastructure.

A lot of that infrastructure would have taken place,

not just in the last five, six years since the Conservatives

I think Londoners have had a pretty good deal.

That is not to say I do not want London to continue to get a good

deal but we have had some tremendous investment in our infrastructure.

There is an issue, not just within the Northern Powerhouse

but other transport projects beyond the capital, that also have received

Is there a possibility they have done you,

On finances, you have made a pledge you would

If you did that, you would definitely not get investment.

You must rethink that, because of what the Government has done

Firstly, London has been hammered by the Autumn Statement this week.

Stick on transport for the time being.

Let's argue about what you can do with this settlement.

The revenue budgets will go from ?800 million to nil within

What TfL needs to do is do the things that are I have pledged to

This is to freeze, in real terms, the fares on the tubes,

We are going to cut bus fares and start a hopper fare

which means you can change buses and just pay the one fare.

What TfL needs to do is make sure it uses the assets it has much better.

Currently, TfL owns property that is more than

How we use our revenue streams is very important.

Frankly speaking, TfL is not as efficient as it could be.

In the course of the last five years, local authorities in London

Transport for London has done well, hasn't it?

Where I agree with you, you are absolutely right.

There is a huge land bank in TfL's hands.

A significant amount of that needs to be utilised

The big difference me, as a mayor, makes, by being full-time,

is I would be committed to making sure we get the best out of TfL

What did you feel when you saw the settlement, the impact on you

That councils will have to pay up to 2%, or allowed to put 2%

on their bills for council tax to pay for social care.

The chair of the LGA, a Conservative by the way, has said this will cause

There is a ?4.1 billion black hole in local authority budgets

The leader of Haringey has said even if she was to raise to the

precept to the maximum 2%, she'll raise, roughly speaking, ?1.7

A massive, massive concern for older Londoners.

There's a direct consequence of the Autumn Statement made

by the Chancellor, welcomed by the Conservative

Places so much Russia on council tax, but when you've got a really

tricky policy, a big elderly population, he passes that onto

local councils, that's awful, isn't it? They need the money and that's

one of the reasons why I think the Government are saying listen, we

have got to devolve some tax-raising power as well. I don't dispute that

a lot of the heavy lifting in relation to getting the deficit

down, making the cuts has already happened as far as Whitehall is

concerned. It is also clear that in the longer term, a lot more of this

will have to be met by local authorities and by businesses.

Businesses are having to have an apprenticeship levy, they will be

subsidising wages to make sure we have a living wage in place but I

accept local authorities will have to be a bit more canny about the way

in which they operate. You have got to give them responsibility. The

police may be happy, not so rosy for London's Ambulance Service which was

placed in special measures this week, and London's Fire Service said

it planned to sell off more engines, this is Fire Service coverage has

weakened. Clerkenwell fire station is closed.

This is how it looked this week now we have the data showing the impact

of the closure. Between the last full year of operation and the first

full year without them, average response times have increased by 13

seconds for the first fire engine getting to an incident, the second

has been a 35 second increase making a new average of six minutes 54

Those figures are still below the London wide target of six minutes

for the first response and eight minutes for the second, but when you

dig down to a local level, analysis by the Labour Party suggests that in

34% of the 650 odd local wards, first responses are coming in at

over six minutes, and in 42% of wards, second responses are coming

in at over eight. Every second counts in a fire and you've got a

situation where in a very few minutes the fire can quadruple.

Although ten seconds might not sound like a huge amount, if you are

person stuck a building with a fire, every single second counts. More

possible reductions to the service were confirmed this week, a plan to

potentially off-load another 13 fire engines in order to find savings of

some ?30 million. The Fire Brigade union are critical of the plans We

are now discussing a second round of cuts. I think Londoners will be

shocked. The evidence shows that moment" fire stations, response

times have increased, we believe that is already having an impact on

public safety and getting rid of further fire engines would be a

disgrace. City Hall point out the response times are still within

their London wide target. We are proving by our responses that we are

staying within the times we are recommending, and fire deaths are

down. In a large part that reduction is down to better fire safety. We

asked for a demonstration from professionals in the fireproofing

business around London. When exposed to a flame, a normal set of curtains

goes up very quickly. But when fireproofing is applied, an

identical set is able to cope with exposure to extreme heat. It is the

spread of fire that is the dangerous part. If a child was to light a

curtain in his bedroom, it would spread rapidly, if it is treated it

would be just that location and it would be scorched, minimum damage.

But even with fewer fires happening, the speed with which the Fire

Brigade is able to respond is a matter of life and death.

Watching that with us is the London Fire Commissioner Ron Dobson. Across

London the figures are still within the target, but surely would accept

if you can and you will get there faster. Targets don't save lives. We

are keen to get to every incident within London as fast as they

possibly can. The figures on screen, we knew they were going to

go up in some places, unfortunately the date skew the figures slightly

because we are not measured at board level. Our targets are London wide

and we have performed very well So when you look at the award details

you accept there is a problem there you haven't addressed? The targets

were set on the 20th of March 2 08 and they were set as target at or a

level and London wide because all members accepted at the time the

levels were too low. We could have board level target and it would mean

we would need an extra 103 fire engines. Would you accept that in a

third of those electoral wards, they are not getting a safe fire response

for that first fire engine? They are getting a safe response. The targets

themselves are at Boro level and across London. But how safe can they

be? In the last five or ten years, fire deaths and the number of fires

we attend have reduced significantly so all of the other work we are

doing, particularly in comparison with the rest of the country, the

rest of the work we are doing is reducing fires. If that is the case,

and the figures show that, but why get rid of these 13 further fire

engines? It's important to remember they have been out of service for

two years. Was this always your plan? No, we discussed it with the

Fire Brigades Union at the time and I gave them an offer which, if they

had accepted it, could have gone back into service. But they have

been out of service for two years. The number of fires have continued

to go down and we are still within our targets, borough and London

wide. Mark Field, you have lost two fire stations, and some of the wards

and told the figures have gone up in your area. I am happy to listen to

what the commissioner has safe, he is the expert in this field more

than a politician who has a range of other political interests that he

pursues in Parliament, and I think one of the issues here, it's

fundamental that there has been a 50% reduction over the last ten

years in the number fires. I accept we have closed ten stations, taken

14 engines out of operation, but it is still seem to be safe. There is a

big gap in the budget which needs to be dealt with. I will bring you in

in a minute, but first the rest of the week's news in 60 seconds

beginning with this report. London Ambulance Service has been

put into special measures following an inspection by the Care Quality

Commission. Overall the service has been rated as inadequate and that

improvements were needed on safety, effectiveness, responsiveness and

leadership. A 17-year-old boy was stabbed to

death in north London. Over a dozen teenagers have been fatally stabbed

in the capital this year. His murder was raised at Prime Minister's

Questions. Every life lost is of course a tragedy and many of these

lives have been lost because of drugs, gangs and knife crime.

Overall, knife crime has come down over the last few years. The Sun

claimed that one in five British Muslims have some sympathy with

people travelling abroad to fight on the side of jihadis in Syria.

Critics claim the methodology of the poll was flawed and the question it

was based on does not even mention jihadis.

Ron Dobson has stayed with us. One of the findings of this ambulance

report, they haven't had training on how to respond to major incidents

since 2012. It surprises me because my staff have taken part in training

with the Ambulance Service this year. We work closely with the

Ambulance Service, I know they have problems and have been working hard

to improve them. I am really reassured by the response of fear in

terms welcoming the report to get better. Via cuts, this problem with

the Ambulance Service, at least the police have had their money saved.

Do you have concerns about London's resilience? Can I pay tribute to

them for the work they do but year after year we have faced cuts. The

London Ambulance Service has had huge cuts over the last few years.

The Chancellor has recently cut the bursary for nurses to train in the

Autumn Statement. That trumps you, they saved them. I welcome and not

having the big cuts George Osborne was promising. We are waiting to see

if more uniformed officers will be lost. Over the last five years we

have lost more than 5000 uniformed officers. The key question is, can

we be sure no further uniformed officers will be lost?

We are going to let that question hang now. Thank you. Andrew.

Sadly that is it for today because we have just been told we have been

truncated to make way for live coverage of the Davis Cup tennis

final here on BBC One. There is always next week!

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

The Davis Cup, the ultimate prize in men's team tennis. To win it, they

must display unity, team spirit No individual can win it alone but