09/06/2011 The Record

Hello and welcome to The Record. The main headline:

David Cameron has addressed the Northern Ireland Assembly at

Stormont. He told Assembly Members the constitutional future of

Northern Ireland did not rest with the Government but now rested with

the people. Also on this programme: What are the lessons of the

explosion at the nuclear plant in Japan?

And MPs react to news that the Attorney General has found no

evidence to support conspiracy theories about the death of the

scientist Dr David Kelly. His statement today should put to

bed some of the outrageous and fallacious speculations that

members of our security forces might have murdered Dr Kelly.

But first, David Cameron has become the second Prime Minister to

address the Northern Ireland Assembly at Stormont since the

signing of the Good Friday Agreement 13 years ago. He was

driven to the Assembly building on the outskirts of Belfast shortly

after 2.00pm, meeting officials as he arrived, before stepping inside

the famous and historic building. A short walk through the building,

and then Members of the Assembly got to their feet as the Prime

Minister entered the chamber. David Cameron spoke first about some of

the history of the building. Can I say what an honour it is to stand

here and speak in this historic chamber? Of course, I recognise

this is not a place without controversy. In the past it was for

some a guarantee of their place within the Union. For others, a

symbol of a state and a system from which they felt excluded. They do

not intend to ignite that debate, but I am reminded of the words of

King George V when he opened the Northern Ireland Parliament in 1921,

and his appeal to all Irishmen and women to stretch their hand of

forbearance and conciliation, to forgive and forget, and to join in

making for the language they love a new era of peace, contentment and

goodwill. -- the land which they love. He said it was time to start

moving beyond the peace process. Given the history of Northern

Ireland I do not underestimate the scale of the challenge. But it is a

depressing fact that since the 2006 St Andrews agreement, the number of

so-called Peace Walls has in -- increased from 37-48. It is

disappointing that in too many places Protestant and Catholic

communities remain segregated, sharing the same space but living

their lives apart. According to one survey, the cost of division

through the duplication of public services alone is around �1.5

billion each year. But this is not just about the economic cost. It is

about the social cost, too. It is these divisions that helped to

sustain terrorism and other criminal activities, particularly

within deprived communities. It was time to revive the private sector

and attract investment. Northern Ireland is simply too dependent on

the state for economic activity. According to one report, three-

quarters of your GDP is accounted for by a state spending. At a time

when we are dealing with the biggest budget deficit in our

peacetime history, that is unsustainable and has to change. We

recognise the difficulties facing Northern Ireland as you chart a new,

more sustainable economic future requires us in Westminster to act

responsibly. That is why we made sure that Northern Ireland did

proportionately better than other parts of the UK in the Spending

Review. By the end of this Parliament, the Northern Ireland

resource budget will have gone down by 6.9%, 1.7% per year.

concluded: let's work together to make

devolution a success. Let us work together to revive the economy. Let

us work together to build a shared future. And in working together, be

assured that you have a Prime Minister, a secretary of state and

a government that will always stand by the people here in Northern

The Attorney General, Dominic Grieve, has rejected calls for an

inquest into the death of the Government scientist Dr David Kelly.

It was in the summer of 2003 that the body was discovered of the

scientist who was at the centre of a row between the BBC and the

Labour Government over the details of intelligence on Iraq. The Hutton

Inquiry in 2004 found that Dr Kelly had committed suicide. But a group

of doctors have mounted a long- running campaign for the inquest to

be reopened, claiming the evidence did not point to suicide. Dominic

Grieve spoke about the large amount of paperwork he'd received about Dr

Kelly's death. Having given all the material that has been sent to me

the most careful consideration, I have concluded that the evidence

that Dr Kelly took his own life is overwhelmingly strong. Further,

there is nothing I have seen that supports any allegation that Dr

Kelly was murdered, or that his death was the subject of any kind

of conspiracy or cover-up. In my view, no purpose would be served by

my making an application to the High Court for an inquest. Indeed,

I have no reasonable basis for doing so. There is no possibility

that at an inquest a verdict other than suicide would be returned.

turned to the theory that the body of Dr Keme had been moved at the

area where it was found. -- Dr Kelly. If it had been moved, why,

by whom and for what purpose? This issue has been fertile ground for

imaginative speculation. In fact, all of the evidence provided by the

careful forensic examination of the scene at the time, and a detailed

review which exceptionally I have undertaken, supports the view that

Dr Kelly died from -- died where he was found and from the causes

determined. There is no evidence I have seen that would suggest any

other explanation, or suggest any cover-up or conspiracy whatsoever.

I wish to emphasise that my conclusions and decision are, as

they must be, entirely my own, based on my assessment of the

evidence. I have received no representations of any kind from

the Prime Minister or any other ministerial colleague on this

decision. The Attorney General's decision also substantiates the

findings of a postmortem and toxicology reports conducted

following Dr Kelly's death and published by the Ministry of

Justice last October in the interest of maintaining public

confidence in the inquiry into how Dr Kelly came by his death. The

opposition, therefore, accepts the decision today, on the basis that

he has very carefully and clearly outlined his detailed reasons for

not applying to the High Court to request an inquest into Dr Kelly's

death, due to the lack of new compelling evidence that Dr Kelly

did not commit suicide. As a member of the foreign affairs committee

that took evidence from David Kelly in 2003, I have never doubted that

he committed suicide. I always believed Lord Hutton was right on

this, even though his conclusions on the war have subsequently been

challenged. I have known the Attorney General for many years and

I know he will have done a thorough and diligent job. Will he accept

that the evidence on this is clear and it is time to bring closure to

this matter and move on? Will he know that when, along with

intelligence and security colleagues, I questioned Dr Kelly

two days before he died, I formed the view that a very distinguished

public servant was deeply distressed by the situation in

which he had placed himself. But although I am not persuaded by any

of the theories that have been put forward as an alternative to

suicide, could the Attorney what he thinks would be lost by allowing

the process of inquiry to be completed by an inquest? Well, the

first problem, have to say to my right honourable friend, is that

there is no basis on which the High Court could possibly order an

inquest. So in my judgment, if I were to go to the High Court and

make such an advocate -- application, it would be dismissed,

and dismissed, have to say, on the basis of my reasoning, with a

certain amount of irritation. the Attorney General agree with me

that his statement today should put to bed some of the out Regis and

fallacious speculations -- outrageous and so fallacious

speculations that members of our security forces might have murdered

Dr Kelly? Can I welcome his statement. He will know that this

will do nothing to discourage the paranoid conspiracy us so. On the

other hand, even if an inquiry had gone ahead, they would not have

changed their mind just because of the existence of evidence. Talking

of paranoid conspiracy theorists, when the parliamentary secretary of

state for transport told the media last year at the Hutton Inquiry had

cut corners, was he speaking on behalf of the government?

I am quite sure he was not speaking on behalf of the Government. In any

case, the Government, as far as I'm concerned, does not have a position

on this matter. I do, based on my review.

The Business Secretary, Vince Cable, has again been criticised for

failing to force banks to lend money to small businesses. Some

months ago, Britain's four biggest banks agreed to increase lending in

an arrangement known as Project Merlin, drawn up to deal with a

shortage of loans following the recession. But new figures show the

banks are already falling short of their lending targets by several

billion pounds. Vince Cable faced MPs during questions to the

Department of Business, Innovation and Skills. Figures published in

May by the Bank of England show the UK's five largest banks lent �16.8

billion to UK small businesses in the first quarter, failing to meet

the targets. It is obviously disappointing and we will monitor

lending closely over the year. We reserve the right to revisit the

agreement if banks can such -- continue to miss the target. Many

small businesses in my constituency complain that when they ask the

banks for funding, they are told not to bother applying because they

will only draw interest to their existing facilities and may have

those withdrawn. What can the Government do to stop banks doing

this? And then claiming they cannot meet their targets because of a

lack of applications? There is a genuinely difficult problem of

trying to get previously highly over-extended banks to lend to

small and medium-sized businesses. The Secretary of State was very

critical of the last Government's performance on this issue, saying

the banks ran rings round that Government. But given that the

first indications of project Merlin show a �2.2 billion shortfall

between what the banks are doing and what the Government agreed they

would do, how would he describe the performance of his Government on

bank lending? Of the leading banks, two of them have met the targets,

which demonstrated that the demand is there for the banks that are

able and willing to change their culture of lending. Of course,

where we have taken on the arrangements which the last

Government had was bringing in the private banks, which are not owned

wholly or partly by the taxpayer, in to this agreement. They are

undoubtedly taking it seriously and we are making clear that we expect

this agreement to be delivered, and that the volume of lending to small

and medium enterprises will increase. Will he reassure us that

he is ready to do more than just monitor the situation? In

particular, not allowing banks to get away with the excuse that the

demand is not there, when it is the price of the loan and the terms

attached that so often is too difficult for struggling small

businesses who need the credit? must realise the Merlin agreement

is a busted flush. There is no good coming from it. The continued

failure of the banking sector to meet the minimum targets set,

meaning no new lending, is really not acceptable. The terms and

conditions, as his own right honourable member has said, under

which those loans that are made are made are really very penal, very

often. Can he not get into that? There is no point monitoring, we

want him to examine what is going on and come forward with concrete

proposals to improve it. The Forum of Private Business are calling for

a return to the traditional bank manager model. Some banks are now

doing that. What can we do to encourage banks to give small

business the individual attention and increase the autonomy of bank

managers to make decisions and get rid of this culture of computer

What we are dealing with here is a long-term issue about how you

change the culture of the banks. Some of them, or one in particular,

has been changing its relationship in terms of management. There are

new banks entering the market and competition will help solve this

problem. A Secretary of State or surf mentioned that pay for chief

executive officers. How would this be delivered? Banks of failing to

meet their obligations. In relation to the wider question of meeting

lending objectives, we were assured when the agreement was signed that

the incentives of senior executives would mean their remuneration board

be greater than the share of small lending on their balance sheets. We

are now trying to establish exactly what that means for individuals.

Cabinet minister as hit back at the Archbishop of Canterbury over his

attack on the coalition's policies. Sir George Young said the

archbishop should praise the government on overseas aid and

funding for poorer school children. The archbishop accused the

coalition of rushing through radical policies that have not been

voted on. In February the Prime Minister proclaimed we will soon

publish a white paper setting out aware approach to public service

reform that will signal the decisive end of the old-fashioned

top-down model. Bold words. What has happened? Nothing. First it was

put off until May and now it has been delayed until July because of

another coalition split. One Lib Dems said that Nick Clegg does not

want there to be any sense that the public sector cannot provide good

public services. And finally, Baroness Thatcher famously possess

no reverse gear, but this Prime Minister has a car stuffed full of

them. It does make us wonder what exactly goes on inside Number 10

when the Prime Minister approves of all these promises in the first

place, only to reverse in the opposite direction when his

pollsters tell him just how unpopular they are. After another

week of chaos on this coalition, is it any wonder that the Archbishop

of Canterbury is now on his knees in despair? On the question of the

Archbishop, I have not seen the full text of what he has said, but

I hope he has found time to balance any criticism of the Coalition for

accommodation for some of the things we have done. For example,

the commitment on overseas aid, making sure the poorest people in

the world do not bear the burden of solving our problems. I hope he

also finds time to commend aware action on more resources for the

NHS, taking lower income people out of poverty. The archbishop said

that we were rushing things through, which is not the case. The UK's

nuclear industry has lessons to learn from the Fukushima nuclear

disaster, according to the chief nuclear officer. The power station

was hit after the devastating Japanese tsunami. Radiation levels

have now risen considerably near the plant. The Inspector Mike

Weightman said the UK's industry needed to be better prepared for

extreme weather events. He said the failure of back-up electrical

services in Japan had been a key factor. They lost all offside power.

They lost their switch gear. Effectively, they left Auk on site

power. -- they lost all onside power. When they do try to take

readings, people were taking batteries out of cars to try and

fix them up to instrumentation. There were also having to find ways

of putting waters into -- water into the reactors. However, they

did not have enough electricity for the pumps. He wanted all nuclear

power stations prepared for the possibility of a lent the loss of

power. Very simple means need to be put in place to keep things safe.

Even if there is onside power, it needs to be in the by-play said

that the pumps can work. One example is laying power cable by

hand. A previous issue was that if they have been a pump that would

put the water straight into the reactor, that would have helped.

There are simple things you can think about for these long term

loss of power issues. Also, after 9/11, work was done to figure out

the best way to store equipment off site. If in theory there was a

tsunami that hit Britain, would our work nuclear plants go the same way

as Fukushima do? It would be difficult to say. What we have done

in the UK is it appears we have a different approach to looking at

external hazards. We do not just based it down on -- based it on

what is the largest one we have seen? We look at the historical

data and estimate the worst case scenario. Fortunately, we are not

in a fault line, so aware seismic hazard is not as high. However, if

we did have an earthquake, there would be mass destruction right

across the infrastructure. Would you agree that it would be easier

for you to do your job and draw up a report if there was a widespread

understanding regarding the risks of the nuclear industry? I don't

believe it would make it easier for me to draw up my report. My report

is about saying, OK, this is our bases and we can learn from

Fukushima. It is not about the acceptability of nuclear power, the

tolerance of the nuclear power were industry in the UK. This is simply

saying, here is an accident, it has caused so cycle impacts -- it has

impacted on society. What can we learn about it so we can minimise

anything similar happening in the UK? You are watching The Record.

David Cameron address the assembly in at Stormont and said that the

constitution of Northern Ireland rested with the people. At this

point we say goodbye to our viewers on the BBC news channel.

A former Deputy Prime Minister Lord Prescott has set the phone hacking

scandal has shown there is something rotten in the state of

England. In the Lords, he insisted on a public inquiry being held into

the issue. And then you might talk about the Press Complaints

Committee. A body to that is there to hold the media, particularly the

press to account. Even the Press Complaints agency fell to

investigate anything into phone hacking, something that I think it

has an authority to do so. It is worse than that because the share

was fined �20,000 for misleading statements. If that is the body

that has some report, the police should investigate. We are right to

say there is something rotten in the state of England at present and

it is not an acceptable proposition. If you talk about how the media,

you'd better start doing something about the people who are

controlling it who are in content. Regarding the phone hacking that

the noble Lord mentioned, the phone hacking allegations as I have said

before our very serious, but they are matters of the criminal courts

and not for this debate today. the unrest in the Arab world now.

The government has urged British people to leave Yemen where

hundreds of civilians have been killed. Royal Marines are standing

by to help with any evacuation. situation in the Yemen has been

very grave for a long time. I think that we all owe a debt of gratitude

to those members of the Foreign Office who are still prepared to

stay in the embassy in the circumstances, given that the

embassy has come under attack on a number of occasions. But come the

noble Lord assure us, I know this is difficult, but one we know that

demand will be the targets of groups like Al-Qaeda, that in the

eventual possible absence of British personnel on the ground, we

will be able to monitor what is going on in Yemen properly and not

rely solely on Yemen's neighbours to pass information to us? We need

to get high quality information of the best kind. Out to be -- as to

the Al-Qaeda involvement, there is concern that they are operating

there. Getting accurate information is difficult. It is essential for

the government to be even-handed and to which the local population

well. Should that not include Israel? Has the government taken

steps to ask Israeli troops not to shoot at unarmed civilians? This

question is about Yemen. Unfortunately, every country has

different situations that have to be handled differently. We have to

appreciate, respect and understand the end the workings of these

countries to be effective. Now, where have all the tickets gone?

The prospect of sitting in these stadia at the 2012 Olympics does

not seem likely for thousands of people after they found out their

ticket applications were turned down. The Mayor of London Boris

Johnson said he was cheesed off because he did not get his ticket

request and there was another politician on the Labour benches

that did not get what he wanted. Can we have a statement about the

Olympic tickets debacle and in particular why is it they can

devise a system by which a million people did not get anything at all

in the first ballot and people have to do as I do and register on a

French website to get a sensible way of trying to purchase tickets

for the Olympics? Should the committee not be called in, showing

them the instruments of torture and getting them to sort this out?

There were more bitter for tickets and tickets were available, said

they had to be a rational system. There will be an opportunity a week

from today to talk about this and I will give ministers due warning

that the honourable member is on the warpath. So look out for him.

And that's it from this edition of the Record. But do join me for the

Record Review when we not only look back at the week in Parliament, but