ANY QUOTES USED MUST BE ATTRIBUTED TO MURNAGHAN, SKY NEWS

DERMOT MURNAGHAN: It should have been a good week for David Cameron – crime statistics went down, employment went up and borrowing was reduced, but instead the government looked confused over energy policy, out of touch as the Chancellor attempted to travel first class on a train and weak for waiting so long to get rid of Chief Whip, Andrew Mitchell. So where did it all go wrong? Well I’m joined by the Education Secretary, Michael Gove. A very good morning to you, Mr Gove, you heard it there, look what you could have done with those statistics, particularly on the economy which you keep telling us is the key motivator of this government yet there was some spectacular foot-shooting again.

MICHAEL GOVE: Well it’s always the case in politics, isn’t it, that you will find there are weeks when the headlines are populated by stories which are of interest to the Westminster village and contain an element of human drama, but which for most people are just part of the froth of political life and not central to the concerns which will determine how they vote and how they live their lives. I remember when I was a journalist and then subsequently as an opposition politician, reading about Tony Blair’s worst week ever but no matter how many of these worst weeks he had, no matter how many apparently tough headlines there were, he came surging through with landslide majorities because the fundamental policy decisions that he had taken mattered more than the reporting of some of the personality issues that crop up.

DM: But that’s the point, we’re not saying it was his worst week, we’re saying that it should have been a good week and it didn’t resonate so are you …

MG: But it will.

DM: But are you amongst those in the Conservative party who are saying something has gone wrong at Number Ten with the communications team, with the team around the Prime Minister who are advising him that they are out of touch and making him and others seem out of touch?

MG: I don't think so, no. I think the point that you made about the good statistics on the economy and the point that you also made about improvements in the NHS, have been communicated effectively by Ministers in those departments and will continue to be communicated effectively but I think more important than communication – vital though it is – because in a democracy governing is a conversation with the voters and you need to make sure that that conversation remains civilised and engaged, but more important than communication is the delivery of policy and all of these stories reflect the underlying fact that the economic strategy that George Osborne has chosen, the reforms that were introduced by Andrew Lansley, both of them of course controversial but both of them delivering.

DM: And of course your own policies, we’ll get on to those in a moment but let’s look at some of the specifics of last week and before and large looming amongst them is the Chief Whip, now former Chief Whip, Andrew Mitchell. Was there no sense that he should have gone earlier?

MG: Well I think in the case of both the Prime Minister and Andrew, the Prime Minister having made a decision, having recognised that Andrew had made an outstanding job as International Development Secretary, felt that he could continue to do a very good job as Chief Whip and bring to the party some of the intelligence and skill he had deployed in a different Ministerial role.

DM: But either you go when it happens and lance the boil or you look tough, hang out there and then you stay in the job – the Prime Minister looks weak both ways.

MG: Arguably you can look back at these four weeks and you can see at any given point, like anyone using the amazing gift of hindsight, if only you’d done X or if only you’d done Y but throughout history there have been Ministers whom it was assumed were going to have to go, who indeed toughed it out in office and then went on to deliver worthwhile reforms. So hindsight is a wonderful thing.

DM: But it’s not hindsight. The facts didn’t change, we knew and it was admitted at the time that Mr Mitchell swore at police officers, he admitted that and then apologised for it, what was in doubt was some of the other words he used but the facts didn’t change throughout the story and they still haven’t changed so why didn’t he go then?

MG: Because the judgement as to whether or not Andrew should have gone was a judgement that he himself made and it came as a result of reflecting on the delicate and nuanced role that the Chief Whip plays. Most people won’t know what the Whips office in government does, it’s the human resources department, the personnel team, and so much of it depends on inter-personal relations and Andrew came to a judgement that his management of the inter-personal relations, the glue that binds the party together, was compromised by the way that this story had developed. Now David Cameron wanted to keep Andrew, I wanted Andrew to stay because I don’t believe and the Prime Minister doesn’t believe that thirty years of public service should be effaced at a stroke by seven seconds of unacceptable but very human exasperation but Andrew came to that decision and he did so because he wanted to put the interests of the party collectively ahead of his own. I think in making that judgement he has confirmed what I’ve always thought of him which is that he is a decent guy who had one moment when he let his temper get the better of him and if there is anyone in public or in private who hasn’t at times bitterly regretted losing their rag, then I don't know who they are.

DM: Tell me your thoughts about the Chancellor’s travelling arrangements which again have cut across what you were saying there could have been a fairly positive economic message there, travelling on what it seems was a second class ticket and attempting to travel first class. I know that within the Ministerial Code of Conduct that’s what the Prime Minister recommends for you Cabinet Ministers as well, but have you ever done that, have you ever travelled on a standard class ticket and gone into first class?

MG: I have paid for an upgrade, yes.

DM: You have paid for the upgrade and you have requested the upgrade?

MG: Well I’ve done what I think lots of people will do in certain circumstances which is take advantage of what used to be called Weekend First I think, which means you can pay five or ten or fifteen pounds in certain circumstances at the weekend when you have got a standard class ticket to travel in First Class. Sometimes when you are travelling with your family, sometimes when you have got work to do, that additional extra payment is worthwhile. I don't think I’ve ever paid quite as much as George paid, out of his own pocket, to upgrade but the critical thing is I used to be a news editor when I worked on the Times newspaper and I have to say if someone had come to me and said Cabinet Minister pays out of his own wallet for upgrade on train, I would have said yes, that’s not even a diary story never mind a front page lead.

DM: Fair enough but if it was Cabinet Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer attempts not to pay as it seems that his aide approached the ticket inspector and said can he sit in first class without paying because he doesn’t want it to appear either in the papers or to appear on his expenses, have you ever done that? Have you ever been able to sit in first class on a standard class ticket because of who you are, because you are the Secretary of State for Education? Has that ever happened?

MG: Embedded in that question there is the question for me, have I ever tried to, as we would say in Aberdeen, have I ever tried to ‘swig’ the controller …

DM: Well have you?

MG: No, I’ve always paid the fare which …

DM: You have never had one of your Ministerial aides say well look, he is a very, very important man and can he sit there without paying the upgrade?

MG: Well my understanding is that Virgin Trains issued a statement saying that as soon as the Chancellor and his team got on, that they explained to the train manager that they had been booked on a previous train with four seats working together. There were no spare seats which allowed the four of them to continue to work together so one of their number asked if they could sit in first class and then offered to pay.

DM: Don’t they know the rules? It happened to me, tough, you pay the money.

MG: But my understanding was that they did offer to pay the money.

DM: Okay but have you ever done it, have you ever sat with a standard class ticket that you buy to try and keep the cost to the tax payer down, have you ever availed yourself of the space in a first class carriage without paying for the upgrade?

MG: I have always paid for the upgrade.

DM: Okay, right, that is fairly clear and that’s because you are travelling around the country looking at a lot of schools, let’s talk a little bit about education policy and I want to bring to you this story here, I think you’ve seen it, that you’ve been able to read upside down that I’ve got printed out here, about the GCSE English results, the patent unfairness to English students who sat the examination earlier in the year and those who sat it later, getting exactly the same level of achievement but getting different marks for it. There is now a legal challenge and some of those children are going to have to resit those exams this November. Is that not a patent unfairness?

MG: Well the current GCSE system that we inherited does have unfairness’s within it and I do sympathise hugely with the students who sat the GCSE in …

DM: But this is an unfairness you’ve invented, not inherited.

MG: No, it’s an unfairness that we inherited because the design of these GCSEs with modules and the capacity to sit the exam at different times during the year was something that was designed by the last government and which we couldn’t change because all of these new courses began in September 2010, the decisions having been taken by the previous government and if we had upset the apple cart at that point we would have had schools who would have prepared for a new set of exams suddenly having to go back to the drawing board, that would have caused even greater chaos. So we’ve been trying to manage a situation that we inherited to the best of our abilities.

DM: Yes, but the unfairness as well is really manifest when you look at what happened in Wales where they said okay, we will upgrade you. Why can’t that happen to those English students, it’s a one off?

MG: Well I think it’s rather a shame what’s happened in Wales is that one of the consequences of that is students in Wales now will have GCSEs that people will think were marked less rigorously than those in England so students in Wales who say I now have a C pass will be met by employers who will say yes, I can see that it’s been upgraded but this student in England secured it in an examination through a marking regime that was palpably tougher so I’m not so sure and I think that’s a shame. One of the consequences of that I think is that in Wales the Minister acts as the regulator and here we have an independent regulator and I think that’s the right thing to do because I don't think Ministers should be marking students papers and in effect that’s what happened in Wales and while for everyone who has got that upgrade, they might think thank heavens but in the long term it corrodes confidence in the examination system.

DM: Can I ask you lastly about the European Union and the attitude around that Cabinet table towards it and the idea of renegotiating, repatriating powers ultimately renegotiating the UKs relationship with the European Union. Do you really think you have a chance of doing that while the core of the EU, particularly the eurozone, is discussing these big economic issues such as banking regulation and of course the survival of the single currency? Are they really going to listen to Britain when we tap on the outside of the door and say hey, we want to renegotiate and if you don’t let us we’ll have a referendum?

MG: I think you attribute to Britain less power and influence than we have. We are one of the world’s biggest economies, we are a net contributor to the European Union, we give them more than we take out of the deal and therefore we are in a very good position to negotiate better terms for Britain. Of course in negotiating those better terms we want other nations to enjoy the benefits of free trade with us, to enjoy the benefits of co-operation that the European Union has brought but at a time of flux, when everyone recognises that the architecture that we inherited isn’t really appropriate for the 21st century, then it is only right that we and other nations which are not in the Euro, make sure that our interests are safeguarded.

DM: So when could you see us getting a referendum in the UK?

MG: Well I think the first thing to do, more important thing to do necessarily than a referendum, is to make sure that Britain’s relationship with the European Union is right and then the Prime Minister has said that once we have sorted out that relationship, in all our interests, in Europe’s and in Britain’s, then we would seek fresh consent and he said that the clearest and simplest and best way of doing that is through a referendum.

DM: Secretary of State, thank you very much indeed, Michael Gove there.

MG: Thank you.