:00:24. > :00:31.MUSIC: London's Calling. With just a week to go before the Olympics
:00:31. > :00:36.the eyes of the world turn to London. Security firm G4S and the
:00:36. > :00:42.Government are caught in the spotlight as the omni sham Knowles
:00:42. > :00:47.-- is the omni channels becoming an omni farce. Former gymnast Anne
:00:47. > :00:51.McEvoy is warming up. Government has been on the back
:00:51. > :00:56.foot, but can it get back on medal- winning form. The Prime Minister
:00:56. > :01:00.claims the London Olympics will give a �13 billion boost to the
:01:00. > :01:05.economy. The commentator Simon Jenkins thinks the coalition is
:01:05. > :01:11.living in La-La Land. This week, the Government announced it was
:01:11. > :01:19.giving �50 billion to businesses for lending. I just do not know
:01:19. > :01:23.where they have gone, I just do not know if they exist at all. And the
:01:23. > :01:28.Greatest Show on Earth in one of the greatest city on earth. Two
:01:28. > :01:34.Londoners, Larry Lamb and film- maker Julien Temple, share their
:01:34. > :01:44.tales of the city. Maybe it is because I am a Londoner. That I
:01:44. > :01:47.
:01:47. > :01:55.love London so. Calling to the faraway towns.
:01:55. > :02:04.Evening, all. Welcome to programme a -- This Week, desperately in need
:02:04. > :02:08.of early intervention. The Olympic family are facing all sorts of
:02:08. > :02:12.challenging circumstances, not least having to listen to the
:02:12. > :02:17.highly respected Culture Secretary. It is still Jeremy Hunt claiming it
:02:17. > :02:21.is, quote, completely normal for the private sector to fail in his
:02:21. > :02:26.contractual obligations to provide security for the Games. Or the
:02:26. > :02:30.equally respected Olympics Minister Hugh Robertson. He says, there is a
:02:30. > :02:35.scale from mild embarrassment to complete disaster and this is not
:02:36. > :02:42.significantly embarrassing. I am guessing he is not an easy guy to
:02:42. > :02:45.embarrass. What were the minister's thoughts on the shambolic four hour
:02:45. > :02:52.coach journey transporting athletes from the airport to the Olympic
:02:52. > :02:58.Village? It is known as the omnibus trip forever. He says people have
:02:58. > :03:03.been on buses and it is regrettable and I am extremely sorry and
:03:03. > :03:07.clearly the drivers need to know where they are going. What will
:03:07. > :03:12.ministers think of next? Drivers that know where they are going, it
:03:12. > :03:17.will never catch on. Speaking of those who are paid to state the
:03:17. > :03:22.obvious and two are in no danger of being promoted, I am joined tonight
:03:22. > :03:28.by two former politicians to consistently failed to win gold. It
:03:28. > :03:34.is Oona King and Michael Portillo. One is #bowbelle Oona "pearly" King
:03:35. > :03:42.and #sad man on a train Michael "choo-choo" Portillo. Welcome to
:03:42. > :03:45.you both. Your moment of the week. When Det HSBC compliance officer
:03:45. > :03:51.resigned after money laundering had been revealed in his bank on a
:03:51. > :03:55.fantastic scale. The Charltons to have been running some of our banks
:03:55. > :04:00.have produced a situation where the reputation of the City of London
:04:00. > :04:07.hangs by a thread. I do not think it has been helped by the
:04:07. > :04:14.regulators. Mervyn King, or Paul Tucker who was sending e-mails to
:04:14. > :04:18.Bob Diamond saying, you are a brick. I hope he spelt the world -- word
:04:18. > :04:21.correctly. I think a whole generation of bankers need to be
:04:21. > :04:28.culled and the Bank of England will need someone brought in from a
:04:28. > :04:32.foreign country to manage it. HSBC in America took in $4.7
:04:32. > :04:37.billion from Mexico, never once crossing their minds it had
:04:38. > :04:42.something to do with Mexican drug cartels. If we want to send 200
:04:43. > :04:48.euros abroad, we have to fill in forms that long, but as long as you
:04:48. > :04:54.are sending it from Mexico, you are fine. A but it is the Americans
:04:55. > :05:00.doing the cleaning. Your memory. moment was on BBC One today showing
:05:00. > :05:05.a trailer for the Paralympics. Everybody is talking about the
:05:05. > :05:11.Olympics, but this trailer is only 90 seconds, but I think it will
:05:11. > :05:16.change the way Britain thinks about his ability. It will fast forward
:05:16. > :05:21.as about three decades into the 21st century. We all know how long
:05:22. > :05:31.it takes to affect social change. If you have not seen it, look at it,
:05:32. > :05:34.
:05:34. > :05:39.it is amazing. Here in the UK, certainly in the studio, which are
:05:39. > :05:44.feeling the Olympic party spared, but the IMF has missed the memo.
:05:44. > :05:51.They downgraded the UK's growth forecast to an almost non-existent
:05:51. > :05:57.0.2%. They have no idea if it will grow like that or not. It makes you
:05:57. > :06:02.wonder how we can afford to pay G4S their management fee. Is the
:06:02. > :06:11.coalition's austerity programme hurting rather than working? We
:06:12. > :06:21.turned to colonist Simon Jenkins and this is his take of the week.
:06:22. > :06:27.
:06:27. > :06:30.Britain is in the grip of a recession. Two years ago, David
:06:30. > :06:34.Cameron announced he was going to bring as out of recession and he
:06:34. > :06:40.had planned for growth. It has failed and we are in a double-dip
:06:40. > :06:45.recession. There are two ways you can approach this. You can say
:06:45. > :06:50.austerity is good for us and it is the right way of balancing the
:06:50. > :06:54.budget. The shortage of liquidity in the economy does not matter. But
:06:54. > :07:03.that is not what the Government says. It says it wants to pump
:07:03. > :07:08.large amounts of money into the economy. The sum of money is �325
:07:08. > :07:12.billion, more than the total take of taxation in a year. They are
:07:12. > :07:20.going to put another 50 billion interbank lending to businesses
:07:20. > :07:25.which does not exist. It is a fraud, it is a scam, it is a lie. This
:07:25. > :07:31.economy at the moment is in a liquidity trap. People have money
:07:31. > :07:36.but are not spending it, the money is not in circulation. It is
:07:36. > :07:40.sitting in corporate and company bank accounts. This means it is the
:07:40. > :07:46.equivalent of a patient lying in the road bleeding to death. It
:07:46. > :07:51.needs money, it needs blood. It is like the Black Death, it is the
:07:51. > :07:55.curse on the economy at the moment and nothing is being done about it.
:07:55. > :08:02.My proposal, which is a keen Xian proposal, is that the money should
:08:02. > :08:08.be given to people. Put it into their bank accounts. Give them �500
:08:08. > :08:17.or �1,000 as a Christmas bonus. You can do this, it just has not
:08:17. > :08:22.happened. The answer to why bite -- they do not do things like this is
:08:22. > :08:27.very curious. I have asked plenty of bankers and economists. The
:08:27. > :08:31.reason they think such things are rather vulgar is it sounds like
:08:31. > :08:35.giving people money for nothing. You are listening the straps of
:08:35. > :08:45.discipline that you are imposing on the economy. You do not just give
:08:45. > :08:49.
:08:49. > :08:55.people money who have not deserved it. Why not give it to the banks?
:08:55. > :09:00.Simon Jenkins, welcome. Good to see you. Let's get this clear. Are you
:09:00. > :09:09.saying what we now call Plan A, cutting the deficit, is not working,
:09:09. > :09:13.it is making things worse? Yes. Because? Yes because we are in a
:09:13. > :09:17.double-dip recession. They said they were going to rescue us from
:09:17. > :09:22.recession and engineer growth and they were going to pump money into
:09:22. > :09:26.the economy. They were not advocating austerity, they were
:09:26. > :09:34.advocating balancing the budget and pumping money into the economy.
:09:34. > :09:42.That is what they said. The money never existed. I asked the simple
:09:42. > :09:47.questions of people, where did �325 billion a go? Where is it? What
:09:47. > :09:53.happened to this a vast sum of money? It is a simple fraud on the
:09:53. > :10:01.public. You say they are giving the banks the money, but they are not,
:10:01. > :10:05.they are swapping it for bonds. They previously had cash. The Bank
:10:05. > :10:09.of England have taken the bonds and put them on their balance sheet and
:10:09. > :10:15.put money in instead and the difference is infinitesimal. Yes,
:10:15. > :10:21.the money does not exist. No money has been pumped into the economy.
:10:21. > :10:28.They used the phrase over and over again, the Government is pumping
:10:28. > :10:34.another 50 billion into the economy. Not this part of the BBC. I said
:10:34. > :10:39.the news. It is a phrase that never should be used. What do you say?
:10:39. > :10:44.say he has got a good point, we need liquidity. But the fact that
:10:44. > :10:49.policy is not working does not mean that an opposite or changing policy
:10:49. > :10:53.would be an improvement. For example, if we adopt the policy of
:10:53. > :10:58.giving money to people, if that led to an increase in the deficit, that
:10:58. > :11:02.would make things worse. The reason is the markets would take that and
:11:02. > :11:05.the markets would charge the Government more for its borrowing.
:11:05. > :11:10.Because the Government is spending more than it is receiving, the
:11:10. > :11:15.impact would be catastrophic. I think we are stuck with a policy,
:11:15. > :11:19.which I agree is damaging, but we are stuck with it because the
:11:19. > :11:25.alternative would be more damaging still. Would you add to the
:11:25. > :11:30.deficit? Know. If you printed the money and gave it to people, it
:11:30. > :11:35.would add to the deficit. We are worried about what other bankers
:11:35. > :11:40.might think. It is about how the markets would react. At the moment
:11:40. > :11:45.the markets are reacting negatively. Not in what they are charging the
:11:45. > :11:49.Government to borrow. No, the Government's credit is high, but
:11:49. > :11:57.would it be damaged by a one off printing of money? The question is
:11:57. > :12:03.how you define the deficit. I agree with what you say. We should give
:12:03. > :12:11.money to people. That is one of the Labour Party's policies, which is
:12:11. > :12:15.to reverse the VAT cut which would give an average family �450. But
:12:16. > :12:21.our point is we should actually be investing in growth for jobs. For
:12:21. > :12:27.instance you have a tax on bankers' bonuses and you put it into getting
:12:27. > :12:31.every young, unemployed person into work. He is not saying the
:12:31. > :12:38.politicians mess around, or he is saying give the money to the people.
:12:38. > :12:43.I am saying I agree, but do it through investing in growth. It has
:12:43. > :12:49.a great disadvantage of falling into Michael's trap. I am proposing
:12:49. > :12:56.to reinflate the economy. This is a classic liquidity trap. It is about
:12:56. > :13:01.the amount of money circulating. At the moment I honestly think George
:13:01. > :13:05.Osborne's strategy is sufficient for the IMF to say, thank God
:13:05. > :13:11.somebody is doing something constructive and printing billions
:13:12. > :13:16.worth of money and putting it into bank accounts... If you look after
:13:16. > :13:21.the unemployment, you look after the economy. That is not what we
:13:21. > :13:26.have done. Forget investment and Government project, just give
:13:26. > :13:31.people the money. Politicians hate the idea of giving people money.
:13:31. > :13:35.You cannot do that because of the deficit. When you do quantitative
:13:35. > :13:42.easing, the Government ends up with a whole lot of Bonn's that it did
:13:42. > :13:46.not have before. If you give the money to people, that has to appear
:13:46. > :13:52.on the Government's books as an expenditure. No, you printed it. It
:13:52. > :13:58.is not spending. It is spending because you have not got a pile of
:13:58. > :14:05.Bonn's as you did when you put it into banks. Forget the bombs. Print
:14:05. > :14:10.the bloody money. If you are going to give people all this money, you
:14:10. > :14:15.must assume there is a lot of spare capacity and no-one else does.
:14:15. > :14:20.Mainstream economists do not think so. You could end up with a huge
:14:20. > :14:25.inflation and interest rates would then saw and imports would be
:14:25. > :14:32.sucked in. What was pumping the money into the economy meaning in
:14:32. > :14:37.that case? What did they mean? I want to do what the Government says
:14:37. > :14:42.it wants to do. What they meant was by taking the bonds of the banks,
:14:42. > :14:46.they thought the banks which lent to businesses. That may not have
:14:46. > :14:53.happened, but that was the logical guess. That is lending to
:14:53. > :14:58.businesses who do not want to borrow. There is no demand. But you
:14:58. > :15:08.can stimulate demand by having a tax him -- tax-break on home
:15:08. > :15:13.improvements. Labour thinks you should invest in growth and jobs.
:15:13. > :15:19.It is interesting that you want to give people money and micro-manage
:15:19. > :15:23.in ways that you approve of, like home improvements, a cut in VAT.
:15:23. > :15:30.What is wrong with Simon's approach? Just give people the
:15:30. > :15:34.money. Because it is not the real world. Being completely honest,
:15:34. > :15:40.let's talk politics. Would it be credible for the Labour Party to
:15:40. > :15:48.get up and say, let's give away money. That is their problem, not
:15:48. > :15:58.mine. The Government gives money to people every day, for example
:15:58. > :16:00.
:16:00. > :16:06.winter fuel. It gives money to The-art raged proposal is that when
:16:06. > :16:12.we give people money, we should not add it to do deficit. -- the
:16:13. > :16:17.outrageous proposal. With the first Budget in 2010, he said give me
:16:17. > :16:20.five years. In the Pre-Budget Report, he said give me seven years,
:16:20. > :16:26.and now the Prime Minister is saying, give me 10 years. How can
:16:26. > :16:30.you go on like this? What fascinates me is the terminology.
:16:30. > :16:34.This week, George Osborne said, I'm giving �50 billion in guaranteed
:16:34. > :16:40.loans to businesses. This time the banks cannot quarrel with it. I am
:16:40. > :16:45.giving the money to businesses. Why is it different? This is nothing to
:16:45. > :16:49.do with the deficit. That was dishonest in a different way. The
:16:49. > :16:54.dishonesty was that it was for projects that were absolutely ready
:16:54. > :17:00.to go and were sound. So why would projects that were ready to go and
:17:00. > :17:04.sound, why would they not take care of themselves? Why not give the
:17:04. > :17:10.same money to people? The Government does not trust people.
:17:10. > :17:15.They trust bankers. Yes, but not people. I have discussed this with
:17:15. > :17:20.people who know and it is intellectually robust. Politicians
:17:20. > :17:24.cannot bring themselves to do something like this. It is tacky.
:17:24. > :17:33.am happy with your scheme as long as we have expenditure cuts that
:17:33. > :17:37.are equivalent. Why? Because it would be economically neutral.
:17:37. > :17:41.want to persecute the poor. At the moment, we have seen the Government
:17:41. > :17:46.prioritising those that can afford to take a hit, but not giving them
:17:46. > :17:50.that hit. Things like the Social Fund, we have cut the social fund
:17:50. > :17:56.which people could get a Eacott from if they did not know of one.
:17:56. > :18:01.It is outrageous. Give them the money. We will see if anybody takes
:18:01. > :18:05.notice. If anybody knows where the 325 billion, about to be topped up
:18:05. > :18:10.by another 50 billion has gone, please write to us. Because we
:18:10. > :18:13.would like some of it! Now, fear not Oona, it may be past the
:18:13. > :18:15.watershed, which means it's way past your bedtime, and despite
:18:16. > :18:19.Michael wearing his favourite cherry-flavoured lip gloss, we
:18:19. > :18:24.won't be inflicting our This Week Kiss Cam on you just yet. We're
:18:24. > :18:27.saving that treat for Alan. You'll just have to make do with a cuddle
:18:27. > :18:33.from actor Larry Lamb and film- maker Julien Temple, talking about
:18:33. > :18:36.their love of London town. And as it's our final show before the
:18:36. > :18:39.summer break, it's your last chance until September to have your tweets
:18:39. > :18:46.and emails ignored by us on the Twitter, the Fleecebook, and the
:18:46. > :18:49.Interweb. Now, with just days to go to the
:18:49. > :18:52.opening ceremony even I have turned my attention to feats of Olympic
:18:52. > :18:56.proportions. Three bottles of Blue Nun already tonight, and we're
:18:56. > :18:59.still on air. It's a new programme record! But I know others are
:18:59. > :19:02.taking things a little more seriously, like The Economist's
:19:02. > :19:12.Anne McElvoy, who's donned a leotard and leggings to give us her
:19:12. > :19:37.
:19:37. > :19:41.Believe it or not, I used to be a gymnast. That was back in the days
:19:41. > :19:46.of Soviet might and East German judges. But I can still dream of
:19:46. > :19:52.back flips and somersaults, as I wait for the call to join Team GB
:19:52. > :20:02.and Hoover up the gymnastics medals. So I might as well keep on training,
:20:02. > :20:02.
:20:02. > :20:07.If I do get the call, I am a bit worried about who is going to
:20:07. > :20:11.protect me and my team-mates. G4S was contracted by the Government to
:20:11. > :20:17.provide security for the games and then discovered it could not rustle
:20:17. > :20:23.up and up bodies. So Nick Buckles was stretched on the rack by some
:20:23. > :20:29.unforgiving MPs. Mr Buckles, it's the humiliating shambles, isn't it?
:20:29. > :20:37.It is not where we would want to be, that is certain. It is a
:20:37. > :20:44.humiliating shambles, yes or no? cannot disagree with you.
:20:44. > :20:48.million is your fee and you think you ought to claim it? Yes. Even
:20:48. > :20:54.after what has happened? We expect to deliver a significant number of
:20:54. > :20:57.staff for the Olympics. Astonishing. The question is whether the
:20:57. > :21:01.humiliating shambles rubs off on the Government. Jeremy Hunt, the
:21:01. > :21:07.Culture Secretary, used inverted logic to insist that big contracts
:21:07. > :21:12.always go wrong anyway. Mr Cameron has made noises about G4S's rewards,
:21:12. > :21:20.but can the Government get away with laying blame at that door when
:21:20. > :21:26.outsourcing is one of its key The thing about gymnastics is that
:21:26. > :21:28.it is about momentum and balance, both at the same time. That is
:21:28. > :21:33.something David Cameron seems to have lost in these tricky last few
:21:33. > :21:41.weeks. He is clinging to the Paul Moore Horse of power, but not as
:21:41. > :21:45.elegantly as Britain's best medal hope. He drags the entire Cabinet
:21:45. > :21:48.and the Westminster press pack to a train depot in Birmingham to show
:21:49. > :21:54.that teamwork was intact and neither he nor Mr Clegg were in
:21:54. > :21:57.danger of a prima donna moment. am even more committed to coalition
:21:57. > :22:03.government, to making this coalition government today than I
:22:03. > :22:07.was in May of 2010 when Nick Clegg and I formed this Government.
:22:07. > :22:13.tough to be in Government at difficult times. It is not always a
:22:13. > :22:18.walk in the park, or the Rose Garden. Asked about the chances of
:22:18. > :22:23.this delicate balancing act lasting until 2015, a change of emphasis.
:22:23. > :22:27.am not a big betting man but I would not bet against it. I would
:22:27. > :22:30.put a considerable amount of money on us seeing through until 2015,
:22:30. > :22:35.because that is for we are committed to doing and what we will
:22:35. > :22:40.do. Underline how strong the coalition are, Georgia and Dani
:22:40. > :22:50.headed for the nearest black hole, where they started digging. --
:22:50. > :22:54.
:22:54. > :22:58.But will they still be birdies in 2015? The coalition was intended to
:22:58. > :23:02.last, but a great number of Tories have different ideas. They want to
:23:02. > :23:07.see more individual flair from their protege, and they think Mr
:23:07. > :23:10.Cameron has been held back by a wobbly Mr Clegg. In the Westminster
:23:10. > :23:13.tournament, that is good news for Ed Miliband, who is beginning to
:23:13. > :23:23.look like one of the contestants who fluffs the qualifying rounds
:23:23. > :23:27.
:23:27. > :23:30.but might just make it into the Meanwhile, we heard more about
:23:30. > :23:35.Barclays Olympian attempts to manipulate the LIBOR rate. Everyone
:23:35. > :23:41.has agreed it is someone else's fault. Among bankers, Sorry Seems
:23:41. > :23:46.To Be the hardest word. Barclays former number two said he thought
:23:46. > :23:51.the Bank of England had told him, via Bob Diamond, to dip the LIBOR
:23:51. > :23:57.rate. Did you regard it as an instruction from the Bank of
:23:57. > :24:01.England, or from the public authorities generally in England?
:24:01. > :24:06.From the Bank of England. This was disputed by the Governor of the
:24:06. > :24:10.Bank of England, who said he knew nothing about it. The first I knew
:24:10. > :24:14.of any alleged wrongdoing was when the reports came out two weeks ago.
:24:14. > :24:18.By the time this is sorted out the coalition's fate will be sealed and
:24:19. > :24:22.I suspect Wall Street as well as the City will feel the strain. Like
:24:22. > :24:29.many forms of financial wrongdoing, it just came to be seen as the norm,
:24:29. > :24:36.and a lot of powerful people look to the other way. -- they look to
:24:36. > :24:43.the other way. I have always dreamed of being in the Olympics.
:24:43. > :24:52.And you never know, I might still get the call up.
:24:52. > :24:57.That was actually the bank manager on the phone. Pune macro, is the
:24:57. > :25:02.public sector union right to go on strike on the eve of the Olympics?
:25:02. > :25:06.I don't think so. I don't think it is helpful when all the eyes of the
:25:06. > :25:10.world are on London. But obviously you need to have a negotiated
:25:10. > :25:14.settlement, you need people sitting down and actually negotiating. I do
:25:14. > :25:19.not think the Government has done that with any real intent. But is
:25:19. > :25:24.it right that a union should go on strike when only 11% of members
:25:24. > :25:28.voted for the strike? I think it is very unfortunate and unhelpful for
:25:28. > :25:31.London, unhelpful for the workers and I do not think it is helpful to
:25:31. > :25:35.get an agreement. But I understand there is a lot of ill feeling
:25:35. > :25:38.because they have been treated badly. I think the Government
:25:38. > :25:41.should have done more. The Government needs to treat it with
:25:41. > :25:47.more urgency and do some proper negotiating instead of posturing.
:25:47. > :25:52.Maybe if they go on strike, the Government will fire them. Well,
:25:52. > :25:56.since Boris caved in and paid the bus drivers, train drivers, the DLR
:25:56. > :26:00.drivers and everybody else who demanded another 500 quid, what can
:26:00. > :26:05.you expect? The military are not going to get paid more and they are
:26:05. > :26:10.doing all of the work. If you give in to one lot, you will have all of
:26:10. > :26:14.the snouts in the trough. I just think the Government has been
:26:14. > :26:17.entirely lacklustre in having any consistent policy on it. And I do
:26:17. > :26:24.not think they have fairly negotiated. Whose fault is the
:26:24. > :26:29.strike, the Government, or the hard-left union leadership? There
:26:29. > :26:34.is an issue around how many members have been consulted. Whose fault is
:26:34. > :26:39.it? I will not apportion blame because I do not know who has been
:26:39. > :26:42.responsible for what. There has been so much mud-slinging. If it
:26:42. > :26:49.were a huge issue, more than 11% of members would have voted for strike
:26:49. > :26:54.action. If they have been so badly treated, why did only 11% of the
:26:54. > :26:59.members should vote for strike? That is why I am saying I have a
:26:59. > :27:03.problem for it -- with it. We were hearing today in the House of Lords
:27:03. > :27:08.that 95% of women police stay in their job and yet at the same time
:27:08. > :27:12.they are very unhappy. I think that two can be simultaneously true.
:27:12. > :27:18.What do we make of all of these glitches, which is probably an
:27:18. > :27:24.understatement, with the G4S business, the potential strike, bus
:27:24. > :27:31.drivers holding the mayor to ransom and him giving Ian, the bus getting
:27:31. > :27:36.lost? Is it just us picking on the bad bits and it will all be all
:27:36. > :27:41.right on the night, or are we heading for a potential disaster?
:27:41. > :27:47.It will all be all right. I wanted to ask him but I will come back to
:27:47. > :27:53.you. Well, I think this is an event run by a committee. I do not think
:27:53. > :27:56.there is anybody in charge. Come on, that is unfair. The leadership is
:27:56. > :28:01.diffuse and the leadership of security seems very diffuse. I
:28:01. > :28:06.think it has been brilliantly contrived to go wrong. I disagree.
:28:06. > :28:11.I think it will be a fantastic success. I think the huge issue is
:28:11. > :28:16.G4S. That is a much wider discussion over when we contract
:28:16. > :28:21.out the role of private sector... Well, the G4S was a company that
:28:21. > :28:24.your government made rich. Yes, the Labour Party started down the road
:28:24. > :28:29.of saying, in principle we will not save the private sector is rubbish
:28:29. > :28:32.up everything, in principle we should have private-public
:28:32. > :28:37.partnerships. I agree with that but there are some things the private
:28:37. > :28:41.sector should not be doing. The key point is oversight. Where was the
:28:41. > :28:45.Government's oversight. If this had happened in the public sector we
:28:45. > :28:49.might never have learned about it. G4S will pay big price for this. I
:28:49. > :28:55.am not sure Mr Buckle will be with us for much longer. If the
:28:55. > :28:59.Government has any guts, it will be demanding huge penalty payments
:28:59. > :29:04.from this company. But at the moment it looks as though they will
:29:04. > :29:11.get a �57 million management fee. If he gets that, he will not have
:29:11. > :29:14.elixir stand on. He would not have a leg to stand on. But when
:29:14. > :29:18.governments threaten how they will do this or that a private sector
:29:18. > :29:24.contractors, you often find that at the end of the day they do not.
:29:24. > :29:29.Given that when Labour left Power, �80 billion of public sector
:29:29. > :29:34.services were out sourced to the private sector, it is hard for
:29:34. > :29:37.Labour now to turn on the principle of outsourcing. We are not. We are
:29:37. > :29:41.saying there are some things the private sector does really well.
:29:41. > :29:46.There are some good IT contracts that it makes sense to give to the
:29:46. > :29:54.private sector. Outsourcing things like some HR management, back room
:29:54. > :29:58.staff, you can do that. Prisons? Exactly. When the state has its
:29:58. > :30:04.hands on you, like you are being escorted to jail, I do not agree
:30:04. > :30:08.with that. I am saying that we need to redraw who, what is outsourced
:30:08. > :30:12.to whom. That is what the discussion should be about. They
:30:12. > :30:16.used to meet in the Rose Garden, now in a factory, Mr Clegg and Mr
:30:16. > :30:21.Cameron. Is there any point to these staged opportunities for the
:30:21. > :30:26.rest of the country? Well, there would be more. If they got the
:30:27. > :30:29.script right. I had not seen that clip until just now. It was
:30:29. > :30:35.extraordinary that David Cameron started talking about, I would not
:30:35. > :30:38.bet against the coalition lasting. Surely the official answer, given
:30:38. > :30:42.by Nick Clegg, is that there is an agreement and the coalition will
:30:42. > :30:47.last until 2015. If that was said repeatedly with conviction there
:30:47. > :30:50.would be some point to it. Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems keep on
:30:50. > :30:55.giving the official answer and it is the Tories that are just not
:30:55. > :30:59.toeing the line. With the Lords reform, that was ridiculous. His
:30:59. > :31:09.party, Cameron's party, is out of control and the Lib Dems have been
:31:09. > :31:14.Another way of looking at it is Parliament has finally got some
:31:14. > :31:20.stuff about it. The one thing it seems to have done by virtue of
:31:20. > :31:23.being a coalition is it has given Parliament and you lease of life.
:31:23. > :31:28.Look at the select committee investigations and the grilling of
:31:28. > :31:35.people from Rupert Murdoch to Bob Diamond. Do you not feel there is a
:31:35. > :31:39.bit of a spring in the parliament step? Yes, I absolutely do and I am
:31:39. > :31:45.on a select committee myself. But that is a separate issue to the
:31:45. > :31:52.coalition. I said that, but do you agree with me? I agree with you.
:31:52. > :31:58.Yes, I do it and it brings up the quality of whatever the Government
:31:58. > :32:03.brings forward. The Lords Bill was not even half-baked, it had not
:32:03. > :32:09.been near the oven at top. If cover it brings legislation of such poor
:32:09. > :32:15.quality, it will get torn apart. You know they say when a woman is
:32:15. > :32:21.tired of This Week, she is tired of life, which explains why Diane
:32:21. > :32:25.Abbott is currently less than busy pushing up political daisies in the
:32:25. > :32:31.shadow public health team. But they also say that when a man is tired
:32:31. > :32:39.of London, he is tired of life. So with the world swotting up on their
:32:39. > :32:45.Cockney rhyming slang, Jackie Brambles, omni shambles, we have
:32:45. > :32:49.decided to put London in this week's spotlight with an exclusive
:32:49. > :32:59.preview of Julien Temple's latest hymn to the greatest city in the
:32:59. > :32:59.
:32:59. > :34:45.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 106 seconds
:34:45. > :34:52.stuff. Welcome to This Week. Hundreds of thousands of people
:34:52. > :34:58.coming to the London Olympic Games, what kind of city will they find?
:34:58. > :35:04.Do you want to go first? Certainly a different city from where we
:35:04. > :35:09.ended up at the end of that clip. The film I made is a time travel
:35:10. > :35:17.piece that begins with London on film for the first time in the 18
:35:17. > :35:22.90s and brings us through to today. The changes are extraordinary, but
:35:22. > :35:27.I think despite her totally different the city is physically,
:35:27. > :35:32.mentally, there is still a spirit of London that affects whoever
:35:32. > :35:40.comes here. They come here and become Londoners and continue this
:35:41. > :35:46.core aspect of our city it. Larry? I grew up in the suburbs on the
:35:46. > :35:53.outer edges, on the northern side. Until I came back to London as an
:35:53. > :35:59.actor aged 30, I was not to up with what went on in the middle. All of
:35:59. > :36:04.a sudden, it became relevant to me, living in the centre of the capital.
:36:04. > :36:11.I remember in 1977 when it was just beginning to buzz around Notting
:36:11. > :36:18.Hill and places coming up and you would go and have a hamburger in a
:36:18. > :36:25.special place. Subsequently it has turned into this extraordinary, a
:36:25. > :36:31.magnificent city. It is really to me the greatest city in the world.
:36:31. > :36:37.The biggest change in London has been that up until the mid-70s it
:36:37. > :36:41.was the capital of the United Kingdom. Today it is an
:36:41. > :36:46.international city state. That is the difference. Immigration has
:36:46. > :36:52.made a huge difference. It is unique in the history of the world.
:36:52. > :37:00.There are more languages spoken here than anywhere in the history
:37:00. > :37:07.of the whole planet. I came to London out of university in 1971
:37:07. > :37:12.and even then London seemed to be in decline. It was not in the same
:37:12. > :37:19.league as New York, Paris was more beautiful and vibrant. Today the
:37:19. > :37:25.only city that rivals London is New York. But in the same way I think
:37:25. > :37:30.whilst it has come on in leaps and bounds and it is fascinating and
:37:30. > :37:35.there are amazing things you can do, what has happened is I feel
:37:35. > :37:42.children somehow or another have lost out in this extraordinary
:37:42. > :37:46.march forward. Kids do not get as good a live now, at least 30 years
:37:46. > :37:53.on in my experience. A lot of them have lost facilities that I would
:37:53. > :37:58.have taken for granted. If you look at the archive film, the kids are
:37:58. > :38:03.in the streets. They are a community. Local swimming pools,
:38:03. > :38:09.public libraries. You are an East under -- East Ender, what do you
:38:09. > :38:13.think? Although London and New York both had loads of different groups
:38:13. > :38:20.living together, the depth of those relationships in London is more
:38:20. > :38:26.integrated. I have spent time in New York and I feel we are a more
:38:26. > :38:31.mixed. If you scratch the surface. In New York you had the Polish
:38:31. > :38:38.sector and all the rest of it and they very rarely interact. My kids
:38:38. > :38:43.go to a school which has incredibly high levels of poverty, but they
:38:43. > :38:49.have amazing opportunities. Yesterday they went to Kew Gardens.
:38:49. > :38:54.Last week they went to the Olympics site. I dropped my son off and I
:38:54. > :39:00.was looking at the Olympic Stadium. There are amazing opportunities
:39:00. > :39:05.coming through. A new swimming pool in Tower Hamlets. But what about
:39:05. > :39:09.education? If you happen to live in an area where the school is not so
:39:09. > :39:15.good, if you happen to live in an area where the facilities are not
:39:15. > :39:20.so good, there are places in London where kids have a real problem.
:39:20. > :39:27.Historically we have had a history of having the worst education, but
:39:28. > :39:33.that has been transformed over the last 10 years. Let me stepping. I
:39:33. > :39:40.would suggest, Michael, that London is both Britain's biggest asset and
:39:40. > :39:45.its biggest problem. The reason is it is the biggest asset is obvious.
:39:45. > :39:50.But there is a big problem because London now has some less in common
:39:50. > :39:56.with the rest of the country than it has ever had before. I am not
:39:56. > :40:01.sure I see that as such a problem. You should speak to people in
:40:01. > :40:08.Manchester when you are on your trains. Let me answer the point
:40:08. > :40:12.rather than just huffing about it. I think it is a very diverse city
:40:12. > :40:17.and Oona has just remarked it is a city of riches and poverty and I do
:40:17. > :40:23.not think there is a problem with it. I want to go back to your first
:40:23. > :40:29.problem, you said what will people going to the Olympics learnt about
:40:29. > :40:35.London? Nothing at all. London has already got a reputation and most
:40:35. > :40:42.people know about it. Kids know the night live in London is comparable
:40:42. > :40:52.with anywhere else in the world. At the Olympics is a complete waste of
:40:52. > :40:54.
:40:54. > :41:03.time and money. But what about the East End? It Olympics site is
:41:03. > :41:08.extraordinary. Have you been around it? The focus that has been made in
:41:08. > :41:13.the East End, badly developed, under used and misused, it is
:41:13. > :41:17.fascinating and it is a wonderful thing to have done, but there are
:41:17. > :41:24.bits and pieces outside that have not been touched at all. If they
:41:24. > :41:29.had decided to take one of the major events places and stick it
:41:29. > :41:34.between Manchester and Leeds and boost the infrastructure with high-
:41:34. > :41:40.speed trains, so that people start moving around... The Olympics has
:41:40. > :41:50.not come to Britain, it has come to London. But we are supporting Team
:41:50. > :41:53.
:41:53. > :41:56.GB, not team at London. unemployment rate in Newham... The
:41:56. > :42:03.unemployment rate in Newham is exactly the same as it was before
:42:03. > :42:09.we spent �9 billion on the Olympics. Yes. How do we stay the greatest
:42:09. > :42:13.city in the world? I think we have to invest in the people who have
:42:13. > :42:20.come here and believe we are a new kind of city and stop pushing them
:42:20. > :42:26.out. One of the big problems is that there is rich and poor again
:42:26. > :42:31.in London. It was when I began my film, but it has come back. We have
:42:31. > :42:36.run out of time. That is your lot, folks, but not
:42:37. > :42:43.for us. It is our end of term Prom at Annabel's tonight. Michael has
:42:43. > :42:47.given Oona a lovely corsage. She has given him a restraining order
:42:47. > :42:52.again. We returned in September for the traditional festival of paint