13/06/2012 Daily Politics

Morning folks. This is the Daily Politics.

Today's top story: Tensions in the coalition as the

Lib Dems say they won't back Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt in a

Commons vote on his handling of Nick Clegg twists the knife and

tells the Leveson Inquiry that he has always kept his distance from

Rupert Murdoch and other media barons.

George Osborne says Germany should stump up to shore up the eurozone,

but suggests it may take a Greek exit from the euro to persuade

Angela Merkel. And can new alcohol zones stop

alcohol fuelled violence? We'll hear from the community campaigner

Helen Newlove whose husband Gary was killed by drunken yobs. I work

with ten areas across the country who have access to �1 million

funding, bringing communities together to drive down anti-social

behaviour through problem drinking. All that to come before 1pm. Of

course, Prime Minister's Questions at noon. This will be the first one

in three weeks. With us for the duration deputy chairman of the

Conservative Party Michael Fallon and Labour's Sadiq Khan, the shadow

I can't speak. We're also joined by the Lib Dem MP,

Jo Swinson. Who has been doing the rounds of other networks this

morning! Welcome to the Daily Politics.

Let's kick off with the split inside the coalition over the

future of Jeremy Hunt. Yes and his handling of the News Corporation

bid for BSkyB. Last night the Liberal Democrats announced they

would not vote with the Conservatives to back Mr Hunt.

Instead, they will abstain lead to go headlines in the papers this

morning about a coalition at war. This morning Jeremy Hunt looked

relaxed as he left his home in Central London with his bike. There

is the little backpack. The Conservative whips are taking

the vote seriously by ordering one MP to cut his honeymoon short and

to return to Westminster. You may wonder why given that he a two week

recess, that he could have had the holiday earlier. Is this an act of

Lib Dem trecherry? This is an op opposition day. It is disappointing

the Liberal Democrats aren't going to turn up, but that's a matter for

them. They want to make clear they are not involved in this argument

about News International or the Leveson Inquiry or whatever and it

would have been nice to have had them voting with us, but it is

understandable. So you are relaxed? They won't back

you down when the chips are down? They have backed on us on getting

the deficit down and making this a fairer country. Let's be fair to

the Liberal Democrats, on these tough decision, they have stood

with us shoulder-to-shoulder. This isn't one of the big tough decision.

This is a matter of party politics. Labour have chose tonne put a

motion down and it is up to the Liberal Democrats to decide whether

to take a party political view or not.

Solicitor you will still be -- so you will just be as inclined to

vote for Lib Dem plans on Lords reform?

Well, these are Government plans for Lords reform.

It doesn't diminish your enthusiasm? Lords reform is a

tricky Bill. It is a tricky issue, but the Government as a whole is

committed to bringing forward proposals.

Jo Swinson, the Lib Dem policy, you want an independent investigation

into Jeremy Hunt's handling of the BSkyB affair, is that right?

think that that that would have been the right thing. The Prime

Minister is the person who gets to make that decision. It is his

decision alone. It is your policy.

We think that should have been the decision.

Isn't that what the Labour vote would give you? It wouldn't.

but they are calling for that. Is that right, they are calling - well,

I ask you, do you want an independent investigation? We do.

They put a motion down. They want what your policy is, why don't you

vote for it? Well, they know that passing their motion doesn't change

the decision that has been made. But why not vote for it? Apart from

anything else, it is an opportunistic move by a Labour

Party who found this viewpoint. When they were in Government, they

didn't abide by this code or these suggestions.

Your policy is an independent investigation, Labour is putting a

motion down calling for an independent investigation. Explain

to our viewers why you wouldn't vote for for something that is your

party's policy? It is a party political opposition day motion.

Voting for that would not make it happen. We've made our views

clear... It would change the principle? We have made our views

clear on your programme and elsewhere. We have made it clear

that we disagree with that decision that was taken. As a result, we

will not be joining the Conservatives in the lobby tonight

because that wasn't a decision that was taken as a coalition wide

agreement. So why don't you join with Labour

who are advocating the policy you told our viewers that you stand

for? It doesn't deliver. There maybe more of a chance of

delivering if you voted for. If you voted for it and it went through,

it would pressure on the Government. The decision has been taken.

your principle decision is to sit on your hands? We are taking part

in the debate. Don Foster will be setting out the Liberal Democrat

position. Sadiq Khan I'm lost. You explain

what to do. There are other other devices open to us to persuade the

Prime Minister. In the past, when we were in Government, when

opposition day debates were won by the opposition, we changeted our

policy. A good examples was the Ghurkhas, we lost that vote and the

policy changed. And the threat of a vote on BSkyB

forced News Corp to withdraw. So try and convince her because I've

failed. For Jo to call me opportunistic is a badge of pride!

The reality is this Jo, we are not concluding that Jeremy Hunt is

guilty. Nor are we.

We are saying there is this ministerial quote which was beefed-

up by this new generation Prime Minister with a new generation

Deputy Prime Minister. This is the new politics. Serious allegations

have been made about his special advisers who, because he

overstepped the mark, took the decision to resign. The buck

shouldn't stop with him. There is an allegation about misleading

Parliament which is serious. Jeremy Hunt wasn't exonerate d at the

Leveson Inquiry. We are saying, "there is this guy who is paid

�20,000 a year, many more of your constituents earn, he is

investigating Baroness Warsi, he is he is twiddling his thumbs, why not

allow him the opportunity to earn his crust and investigate Jeremy

Hunt." That's what should have been decided. There is two issues. When

you say that Jeremy Hunt hasn't been exonerated. On how he dealt

with the bid, he has given a good account of what he did.

It is about the issues to do the Ministerial Code, about the issue

about special advisers. If you think he has been exonerated

why why do you want an independent investigation? There are two issues.

There is the issue about whether he took independent advice and how he

dealt with the BSkyB, but there is the issue about who his special

adviser was doing and whether that line was overstepped. There are

questions that remain. I'm not saying that means that he has

broken the Ministerial Code, but an independent investigation would

have been a good thing. Questions which will never be answered

because you haven't got the guts to vote with him.

Jo, by you not supporting the Conservative Party and let's be

clear, our motion has been signed by the other opposition parties,

but you are not in opposition, you are in Government, because you have

not supported the Conservative Party, you are questioning the

decision of David Cameron. David Cameron said, "I think he is in the

clear." Questioning his judgement. We can disagree.

I have done my best and cause trouble, but I have failed! We

I don't know if you have completely failed.

Nick Clegg is giving evidence to the Leveson Inquiry this morning.

Here a flavour of what he has been saying.

Two occasions only when I think you met with Rupert Murdoch. The first

is the 16th December 2009. Yes. That was a dinner, Rebekah Brooks

so was it just four of you? No. No. No. There were a large number of

people there. As it happened I was at the very end of the table where

the children sit so to speak! LAUGHTER

And didn't have, I only had very fleeting interaction with Rupert

Murdoch before the dinner and as I said goodbye at the end.

Thank you. I was an observer as much as

anything else. How candid of him. Well, that was

Nick Clegg talking about his less than cosy relationship with Rupert

Murdoch. Now, I mean, Jo Swinson, let me come to you about that issue.

Without wanting to be too rude. I mean he was at the kids end of the

table, Nick Clegg. Is the reason for that that the Lib Dems have

never been regarded as important enough to be anywhere else and

that's why you have never been corrupted? We certainly haven't had

the cosy relationship with the Murdochs that I have to say say my

two colleagues here, their parties have had as we have seen as has

come out in the Leveson Inquiry. We have had a record for years calling

for better regulation, the culture media and sport recommendations

were ignored by the past Government. I am delighted we have the Leveson

Inquiry to look into these issues which are important and need to be

addressed. But that wasn't the question I

asked. Is the reason that you haven't been corrupted is because

no one felt the need to corrupt you? Well, of course, there hasn't

been the courting of the Liberal Democrats that the other parties

have experienced, but you know, certainly, you know, we are in the

coalition Government and since that time have not, even though we have

been in a position of significant power have not still succumbed to

the courting that others have had. But the important thing is that we

get some justice and improved situation, not actually about

politicians because this isn't about politicians. This is about

the general public and the faith they can have in the media and

particularly in how it deals with ordinary members of the public.

say it is not about politicians, but there has been no shortage of

party leaders and former former Prime Ministers at Leveson Inquiry

and Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband took about the culture of briefing

or lack at lack of it. Did you authorise your aides to

brief against Mr Blair? Do you think they may have done

without your knowledge knowledge? If they did so it was without my

authorisation. When I was a Cabinet Minister I did

raise a concern that I had with Mr Brown. I believe in September 2008

about some of Mr McBride's activities.

Ed Miliband there. Sadiq Khan, do you believe Gordon Brown when he

says, "I did not authorise any briefings against Tony Blair.".

heard the evidence of Ed Miliband who spoke from personal experience

and I can't contradict what Ed Miliband said.

No, do you believe Gordon Brown when he said, he was asked "did you

ever authorise any briefings against Gordon Brown?" "no.".

have no personal knowledge. I saw the footage of Ed Miliband and

Gordon Brown and Michael said, they can't both be right.

Who do you believe more? I know it is difficult for you, especially

someone, but who do you believe more? Who do you believe? He says I

didn't authorise any briefings and he goes on to say, he is asked

actually Gordon Brown, "what about, special advisers, using the media

and newspapers to get Tony Blair to step down." "I would hope not.".

Miliband gave an example and he gave a date. Let viewers conclude

what they want to conclude. What do you think? Ed Miliband gave

an example in his personal experience he witnessed it. So it

it speaks for itself. Do you believe that John Watson

went to see Gordon Brown and never talked about it? Come on, Andrew.

How many questions on this. You have heard both... We have got a

lot more, haven't we? Keep them coming! You might answer one?

Watson, Ed Miliband, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown give evidence to the

Leveson Inquiry... Do you believe him? That Tom Watson can visit him

in the middle of organising a coup and they don't talk about it? Do

you believe that pigs are flying over this studio? I can't see any.

You are under oath. Ed Miliband talked about media

ownership in the evidence. Is this now Labour policy, no company

should have more than 20 or 30% of the newspaper market share? When he

floated the idea about the concentration of ownership which

leads to concentration of power and whether that's healthy in a

democracy. You have a situation where there is a concentration of

power in those who own newspapers and there was an attempt for News

Corp to own BSkyB which can lead to some of the challenges we have seen.

But that's what Ed Miliband would like to see a cap at 30% and that

would mean the Murdoch empire selling one newspaper? He didn't

give a specific figure. He did say not more than 30%?

know that News Corp own 37%. I think it is 34%. I am not going

to quibble. It is 34, but they own 37%. When

there is too much concentration of power.

I take the point. I am trying to work out how it would work. I think

it means selling off a newspaper? It means legislation and we have

had rumours about the Murdochs wanting to sell their media

interests here and they may decide seeing, the way the wind is going,

Do you regret that this Leveson Inquiry was set-up? No, it was

needed to clear the air. Both the two parties got too close to all

these media empires. We did when we were trying to get into government

and they did when they were in government. The public needs to be

reassured that that cannot happen again. Our constituents have better

redress for themselves when they are targeted by the press. Clearly,

the regulatory system is not working. It is painful for

everybody involved and embarrassing. Embarrassing to hear that Gordon

Brown seems to be in denial about what was happening when he was

Prime Minister. But Labour were not in power any more and it is more

embarrassing for the government that is. David Cameron will be

giving evidence. He is being dragged kicking and screaming. We

demanded a public inquiry, you said no. You had 13 years to have an

inquiry into this stuff but you did not. We will learn the lessons from

it. We will see if we can come up with a better regulatory system for

our politicians and constituents. Say you're going to take the

warnings from the previous prime ministers? We are going to see what

Leveson reports. We will see when it comes out in the autumn.

Greece is going back to the polls on Sunday after the last set of

elections failed to produce a conclusive result. Last night, the

Chancellor George Osborne talk about the prospect of the exit from

the Greek Euros. He said so far the response to the crisis had been

depressing. Spain's borrowing costs have risen despite the bail-out of

its bank this weekend. Jo are you depressed? Not exactly optimistic.

Five days on from the Spanish bail out and the eurozone crisis is

rumbling on. On Saturday, the eurozone countries handed Spain's

banks 100 billion euros to stabilise the economy. But it has

not convinced the markets and there are signs the contagion could

spread to Italy where the cost to the government of borrowing for ten

years peaked at 6%. Last night, the Chancellor George Osborne said the

bail out seemed to be too little, too late. He suggested that the

eurozone should press on with deeper integration in order to

shore itself up. Yesterday, the European Commission President Jose

Manuel Baroso proposed a banking union across the euro. It looks

like the German Bundesbank will block that plan but George Osborne

said Germany should agree to stand behind the entire eurozone that it

might take Greece leaving the road to persuade Angela Merkel to stump

up more German cash. Thank you, that did sign a -- sound

quite depressing. Jo Swinson has gone, she will be at PMQs and we'll

be live there at 12 o'clock. Michael Fallon, just clarify, is it

British government policy that the eurozone has to be retained intact

in its current membership? policy is that the eurozone has got

to sort itself out. We cannot go on like this. I understand that.

have got to sort themselves out. But does that sort itself out with

all the members or with a reduced membership? With all the members,

clearly. What cannot go one that is grees 1/2 in, half out, this

uncertainty which is damaging our economy going month after month,

summit after summit. But when you opposed Britain's membership of the

eurozone and you did not oppose the idea of the eurozone covering the

countries that it did, you said this is not an optimal currency

area, it cannot work with all these different countries in it, they do

not have the same economies. If you thought that them, why is your

policy to keep us together now? They have got to put in place the

things they did not do at the time. If they want to go on with the

single currency across the zone then they have to put in place the

stuff they did not writing at the beginning to allow sufficient

fiscal transfers between the wealthier ones and the poorer ones,

to improve the governance of the sector and look after the deposits

in the bank. Say you want a federal Europe for the eurozone, that is

your policy? They must decide. We are saying it will not work, you

cannot have a zone like this working unless you have some kind

of fiscal transfers. You will end up with bail-out of the bail-out.

understand that but it is Conservative-led government policy

to urge the creation of a federal eurozone, a federal government

eurozone. It they have a semi federal eurozone at the moment.

They have a single currency. What they have not bottom-placed is a

fiscal element that can underpin that. If they want to go on with a

single currency it is obvious they have to put in place some

arrangements to transfer money from the wealthier countries to the

poorer countries. Be your government is saying there should

be a banking union and they should be the debt mutualisation said that

there are eurozone bombs, that is your government's policy -- bonds.

What we cannot have is the continuing uncertain seas and a

constant call for the propping up of weaker countries. We are out of

the bail out mechanism. Had we stayed in the mechanism we would

have had to come up with �10 billion sterling, we have saved

that from being out of the bail out mechanism. What that does not solve

is the continuing crisis. They have to put in place arrangements to do

that. In effect, Labour's policies are no different from the

government's. You think there should be greater integration in

the USM but we will not be part of it? That is a summary I agree with.

What we are frustrated by is for eurozone have fallen into the trap

of being obsessed with just austerity and no plans for growth.

Michael is right that it is a eurozone problem and it is

incumbent on the bigger countries in the eurozone, Germany in

particular, to do more. The ECB should be the Bank of last-resort

rather than going to the IMF or elsewhere. But if you get a German-

dominated federal Europe, that inevitably, of which we will not be

part, that inevitably changes our relationship with Europe. We will

forever be on the periphery, do you accept that? We will have to wait

and see. What we cannot have is our closest trading partner going from

disaster to disaster. We trade the most with them. Even last year, we

exported huge amounts to the racing countries. If the Spain comes that

or the contagion spreads, it is catastrophic for the eurozone

countries but it is disaster for the UK as well. To accept that this

policy you are both urging results, because I've seen live review thing

for the foreseeable future we will ever be part of this, that Europe

will develop with its own currency, a banking union, with eurobonds

being issued, with the fiscal union, it in effect becomes closer to a

federal system than ever before and we are not part of it, you are

happy with that? In the short term we need to ensure the eurozone

countries do whatever they can to bring about stability. In the

medium to longer term we want to trade with them and continued to

trade if not the same, but more. Let's be clear, we cannot stop them.

You what urging them. We cannot stop them anyway. It is not for us

to decide whether they have a more federal state. We are saying if

they want to go ahead with the zone, all the countries have to sort out

how they will transfer funds from the stronger ones to the weaker

ones. If they want to give up their currency and give up control of

their banks, we are saying what they have got to do is recognise

reality. You cannot have a system that does not complete. You have

got to be able transfer money from the strong ones to the week. I get

that. When Downing Street says when it comes to a referendum on Europe,

quote, that is not something the British people want, where is the

evidence for Downing Street saying that? What they want is for it to

be sorted out. But where is the evidence for Downing Street telling

us the British people do not want a referendum? Their priorities are to

get growth going in this country. But what is the evidence that the

British people do not want a referendum? When Downing Street

issued that there was a poll in the Times St 80 % what a referendum.

What is the evidence for Downing Street St we do not? The issue is

what is the evidence for Downing Street telling us we do not want a

referendum? What they want at the moment is for the government to

focus on getting growth and making sure the his own sorts out its

problems. There is no evidence that the British public do not want a

referendum is the answer to your question. I think what Michael was

trying to say, forgive me, is the policy for us should be to do all

we can to stimulate jobs and growth in the country, rather than being

distracted by a campaign for a referendum. Thank you.

As some of you may know, the European football championships are

underweight in Poland and the Ukraine. England, I am told, drew

1-1 against France on Monday night. I am told it is good. Not good

enough. We want more. What could fire up the team to put a bit of

fire in their belly? A bit of an incentive to win the next game

against Sweden on Friday. They will be lucky. What better than the

prospect of owning a Daily Politics mug? Yes, boys, if you win on

Friday we will reward you with one of these. For the rest of you, you

have to Guess The Year. I hope we will send one if they do win.

will. Let's see if you can remember If I can find collaboration with

any other parties in the House then I am willing to do that. This is

claimed to be the world's first And to be in with a chance of

winning a Daily Politics mug send your answer to our special e-mail

address, [email protected]. You can see the full terms and conditions

for Guess The Year on our website, bbc.co.uk/dailypolitics.

Coming up to midday, Prime Minister's Questions starts in a

few minutes. We are joined by the BBC's political editor Nick

Robinson. The first PMQs for three weeks. There has been some

developments from Nick Clegg at the Leveson Inquiry. I'm just told that

he said Jeremy Hunt gave a good account of how he handled the BSkyB

bid. It highlights what may be puzzling to people about the Lib

Dem's position. They will not back Jeremy Hunt today, they will not

back the Prime Minister's judgment but they are not criticising the

way he handled the BSkyB bid. They are simply saying there should be

an investigation. I am lost! think Nick Clegg has always wanted

to keep his party together and where there are votes which there

will be split and there are Lib Dem backbenchers who wanted to vote

against Jeremy Hunt, he would rather they will vote together and

abstained, rather than some vote against a government minister,

others abstained, others vote in favour. It is a matter of high

principle then? An element of party management. An element that he

genuinely feels passionately. When people say all politicians crept to

the Murdochs, he wants to say, we did not. We all know why that was.

No one was interested. No one thinks they matter. I did not say

that. On the other hand, they can say they have fought against that

media bias and they have done it for decades and they want to gain

some credit for saying we are here despite that. A few Ed Miliband, do

you go on this Leveson media village stuff. We will find out

I am sure the whole House will wish to pay tribute to the fallen

servicemen since the House met. Captain Stephen Healey and Michael

Thacker and Gregg Stone. These were talented, dedicated soldiers who

made the ultimate sacrifice for the safety of our nation. Our deepest

condolences are with their family, friends and colleagues. We will

always remember them. This morning, I had meetings with

ministerial colleagues and others and in addition to my duties in

this House, I shall have further such meetings today.

I am sure all members will wish to associate themselves with the Prime

Minister's tribute. Can the Prime Minister reassure my constituents

that there will be no policy shift at all in relation to the third

runway at at Heathrow and this Government will focus on improving

Heathrow's hub status and displacing some of the short haul

and less valuable slots elsewhere. First of all, I know this is not

just a constituency campaign for my honourable friend. It is something

he feels very powerfully about. The coalition position has not changed.

Clearly, we must not be blind to two important considerations. One

is how we expand airport capacity, but how do we make sure that

Heathrow operates better and we make sure we welcome people better

to our country better than at the moment. A lot of progress has been

made and I congratulate the Home Secretary for the extra resources

and the people put into doing that important job.

Can I join the Prime Minister in paying private to Captain Stephen

Healey and Private Gregg Stone. They served our country with

dignity and bravery and the co dough lances of the -- condolences

of the House go to their family and their friends.

Account Prime Minister tell us why he referred Baroness Warsi, but not

the Culture Secretary? There. is a difference between the two

cases. In the case of Baroness Warsi, there has not been a judge-

led inquiry with witnesses taking evidence under oath to get to all

of the factual information behind her case and that is why I have

asked Sir Alex Allen to look at that case, but I have to say I am

happy with the explanation I have been given by Baroness Warsi. She

admits to breaking the Ministerial Code. She apologised for breaking

the Ministerial Code and that's an important point.

The Prime Minister refers to the Leveson Inquiry, but account Prime

Minister confirm that in his appearance at the Leveson Inquiry,

the Culture Secretary was quite properly because it is not the

remit of the Leveson Inquiry asked a single question about whether he

misled this House and thereby broke the Ministerial Code.

The point I would make to the honourable gentleman he asks

specifically about why I have not referred the case to Sir Alex Allen

and that's the case. I haven't done that, but I have Sir Alex Allen for

his advice on the future guidance on judicial decision making which

is something that he was discussing at the Leveson Inquiry and I will

be discussing tomorrow as well. And Sir Alex Allen replied to my letter

and I will put a copy of both letters in the library of the House,

but the House might want to know what Sir Alex Allen said in reply

to my letter. He said this "I note your decision in relation to Jeremy

Hunt adherance to the Ministerial Code which is, of course, a matter

for you. The fact that there is an ongoing judicial inquiry probing

and taking evidence under oath means that I do not believe I could

usefully add to the facts in this case." He goes on to say, he goes

on to say that he remains available if circumstances should change, but

those are the views of Sir Alex Allen.

Mr Speaker, the key issue is who makes the judgement on whether

there has been a breach of the Ministerial Code? This is what Lord

Leveson said, "I will not be make ago judgement on whether there has

been a breach of it. That is simply not my job." That is the job of Sir

Alex Allen. Now let's take one of the issues that was - Mr Speaker, I

know they have been well whipped. I can see they have been well well

whip today! They have -- whipped today! They have got the memo from

the Prime Minister... They have got the memo from the Prime Minister's

aide because he is sending memos around. The last one began,

"comrades." I like the sound of that, Mr

Speaker. We need a protective wall of sound! Last week we rather dried

up. Please show sufficient stamina for the full half-hour.

Now, now, now, Mr Speaker. Let's take one of the issues that was not

raised at the Leveson Inquiry. The Culture Secretary told this House

on 25th April and I quote, "I made -- there is no point in the part-

time chancellor trying to give him the answer before I asked the

question! I made absolutely no intervention in a quay zi judicial

process that was at the time was the responsibility of the Business

Secretary. Yet now we know he wrote a memo to the Prime Minister that

said, "If we block it, our media sector will suffer for years."

Account Prime Minister confirm in that answer on 25th April, the

Culture Secretary was not straight with this House of Commons?

Well, first of all, let me explain on hour side of the House, comrades

is a term of endearment! It is not an official title!

LAUGHTER If I can explain it in that way.

The point is, all comrades, of course. Look, the point about the

Ministerial Code is it is the job of the Prime Minister to make the

judgement about the Ministerial Code and I have made that judgement.

I have quoted to him, I quoted to him what Sir Alex Allen says and

Sir Alex Allen is very clear that he couldn't usefully add to the

facts in this case. Now I'm sorry, I'm sorry that the whole political

strategy behind his opposition motion has collapsed, but

nonetheless that is the fact of the case. Now, he asks very

specifically about the note that the Culture Secretary sent to me on

19th November and I would refer to him in that note he specifically

says it would be completely wrong to go against the proper regulatory

procedures and that's what the truth of what has happened in

recent days is that the Culture Secretary gave a very full account

of his actions to the Leveson Inquiry and he demonstrated that

when it came to the BSkyB bid he took independent advice at every

part of the process. He followed independent advice at every point

of the process which is a contrast to how the last Government behaved.

Mr Speaker, let's be clear about what the Prime Minister is claiming.

He is claiming when the Culture Secretary told this House I made no

interventions seeking to influence a judicial decision that a memo to

the Prime Minister is insignificant document in relation to a decision

the Government has to make. The first time in political history

that's the case. If the case is so strong of the Prime Minister, why

is his deputy not supporting him? Well, first of all, let me read

what this note said on 19th November. It said this. This is

from the Culture Secretary and I quote "it would be totally wrong

for the Government to get involved in a competition issue which has to

be decided at arm's length." That's what he said. When he got

responsibility, when he got responsibility for this dossier, he

behaved in exactly that way. Let me make one point. By the the way the

whole reason we are discussing this take-over is because the last

Government changed the law to allow a foreign company to own a British

broadcasting licence. This is a point, this is a point that they

conveniently forget. Now, he asked me very specifically about the

Deputy Prime Minister. Let me be absolutely frank. What What we are

talking about here is the relationships that Conservative

politicians and frankly Labour politicians have had over the last

20 years with with News Corporation, News International and all the rest

of it. To be fair to the Liberal Democrats, they didn't have that

relationship and their abstention tonight is to make that point and I

understand that it is politics. THE SPEAKER: Order. Order. Order.

The House House must calm down. Order. Mr Ed Miliband.

I have to say he has reached a new state of delusion I mean really and

truly! You know, Mr Speaker, he just wants to talk about the past!

He was - he just wants to talk about the past, Mr Speaker. He was

the future once! Now, isn't the truth and isn't the

truth, and isn't the truth the Deputy Prime Minister, the Deputy

Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister says the bid, says the

decision should go to the independent adviser. The

Conservative Chair of the Committee of standards in public life, the

Conservative chair of the Public Administration Committee says it

should be referred. The former Chair of the Committee on standards

in public life says it should be referred. Isn't the truth, the

reason he won't refer him to the independent adviser is because he

is scared the Culture Secretary won't be cleared?

Well, imitation is the sincerist form of flattery. Well, the clear,

he says we're talking about the past. There are elements of this.

This whole Leveson Inquiry, the whole problem of the relationship

between politicians and the press some of it is about the past and we

had a little insight into that when the former Prime Minister gave

evidence and he said this. He said, "The one thing I can say definitely,

the one thing I can say definitely is no one in my position would have

instructed briefing against a senior minister."

LAUGHTER I can tell you - perhaps, perhaps,

perhaps the victims can put their hand up. Any takers? I don't need

Sir Alex Allen to adjudicate on that one!

Everyone knows it was the Prime Minister who decided to appoint the

Culture Secretary to oversee the bid and it is the Prime Minister

who is clinging on to him now in the face of all the evidence.

Doesn't he realise it is no longer about the Culture Secretary's

judgement, it is about the Prime Minister's judgement which is so

badly flawed even his deputy won't support him.

Well, I do hope the England football team are better at putting

the ball in the back of the net. Look, the point is, it is for the

adviserer on ministerial standards to discover the facts. My judgement

is we should let the Culture Secretary get on with organising

the most important important event which is the Olympics. When we come

on to the Olympics, let us consider this - if there was an Olympic

medal for double standards and hypocrisy, the Labour Party would

be well in the running. I'm really very worried about the

conduct of the Education Secretary. In the average classroom he would

have been excluded by now. He must As we remember those who fell 30

years ago during the Falklands war, Argentina continues to dispute

British sovereignty over those islands. Yet Argentina also

continues to receive loans worth billions of pounds from the World

Bank of which British taxpayers are a major shareholder. Will the Prime

Minister join President Obama in instructing his officials to vote

against anymore such loans to Argentina?

I think my honourable friend makes an important point. No British

taxpayers money is is spent on world banks loans to Argentina. A

an important point is what happened yesterday which is the Falkland

islanders decided to hold a referendum. Argentina is trying to

hide this argument and pretend the views of the of the Falkland

islanders don't matter, they do matter.

The Prime Minister said he believes the Leveson Inquiry dealt with the

relevant issues regarding the Secretary of State for culture,

media and sport, but it did not deal with section 11 A of the

financial services and markets Act which deals with market abuse and

the passing of information to one party in a market situation which

is not available to others. Given the hundreds of texts, e-mails and

memos in this situation, will he ask the Financial Services

Authority to examine the evidence, see whether there has been a breach

of section 11 A or any other part Clearly there are very strict rules

governing all of these areas. The point I would mate to him is there

is no doubt the special adviser behave wrongly and that is why he

offered his resignation and white was accepted.

Mr Speaker, I am sure all members will congratulate the volunteers

who raised �6.5 million to recognise the contribution and

sacrifice in the Second World War by Bomber Command personnel. For

the memorial to be opened by Her Majesty the Queen on June the 28th.

But the costs of security on the day have risen sharply and despite

necessary constraints on all government expenditure, would my

right honourable friend consider financial support from the

government to make sure veterans and their relations are properly

looked after? I think my honourable friend is

right to raise this issue. Bomber Command, many people served in

Bomber Command in the Second World War, many people lost their lives

and it is right there will be this this -- splendid memorial unveiled

by Her Majesty the Queen. These memorials tend to be paid for by

public subscriptions. I will look carefully at what he says. The

Department for Culture, Media and Sport does have an ability to

intervene when monuments are done on a national basis. I'm sure the

Culture Secretary would have been listening carefully.

Due to top-down government health cuts, South Tees hospitals have had

reduced services leaving both hospitals uncertain of their future.

Would the Prime Minister support his Foreign Secretary who said to a

crowd of 4,000 people, that the government NHS cuts are

unacceptable? First of all, I would point out

that the increases in health spending for his Primary Care Trust

is at 2.9 % increase and an �8.2 million increase for the current

year. That is what is happening. The only reason more money is going

into the health service in his constituency is because this

coalition government decided to invest in our NHS, against the

advice that we receive from the party opposite who think increases

in health spending are irresponsible.

Question number six, closed question, Mr Philip Hollobone.

As my honourable friend nose, cabinet meetings are occasionally

held outside London, not least so we can get different ministers to

meet with different organisations. The Cabinet has met in Bradford,

Ipswich, Derby, Cardiff and the Olympic Park. Locations for future

meetings will be announced in due course. Were the Cabinet to come to

Kettering, it would be able to congratulate Kettering Borough

Council on its pledge to freeze council tax for the next five years

and to celebrate the Department for Transport's funding for the wedding

-- widening of the Kettering bypass. Will be right honourable friend

agreed to invest in the Midland Mainline which would make a big

difference to the Kettering economy? I joined my it honourable

friend it in congratulating his Borough Council and it shows what a

valuable -- the value for money Conservative councils can provide.

We are committed to a lecture find 300 miles of railway routes. That

compares with just nine miles which were at a lecture fired under 13

years of the last Labour government. There is a large amount of support

for the Midland Mainline a lecture vocation. A decision will be made

and I will listen very carefully to what he says.

Given that the purpose of the Leveson Inquiry is to get out the

unvarnished truth about the unhealthy relationship between some

politicians and the media, why do government ministers, including

himself, need to be briefed by lawyers and coached by lawyers

before attending to give evidence? What ministers I'm sure I doing is

you have to be familiarise yourself with a huge amount of evidence

going back over seven years. I have provided to the Leveson Inquiry,

for instance, all the evidence I can find with meetings of press

proprietors and the press going back to 2005. There is a huge

amount of information preparation and I think that is entirely

appropriate. My constituency has a height

recycling rate, the best in the north-west. Does the Prime Minister

believe it is right for a huge waste burning incinerated to be

built there, an incinerator rejected by the local planning

board, overwhelmingly opposed by my constituents and which would

involve transporting lorryloads of waste hundreds of miles across the

country? Will he do what he can to stop an inappropriate development

which surely cannot be called environmentally sustainable?

completely understand the honourable lady's concern and she

is right to raise this issue. I understand her disappointment that

this has been appealed against the local planning board's decision.

But as she knows, peels like this can be made -- appeals. She can

make her views clear. There is a need to take into account the size

and scale of any proposed development and also to look at the

potential effect of any local communities and I'm sure she will

want to make those points. The Prime Minister will be aware of

the latest British Social attitudes survey showing a record fall in

public satisfaction with the NHS. My question is this, I would

appreciate an answer, because the Health Secretary would not give one

yesterday. Will the Prime Minister intervene to stop the scandal of

the NHS having to rely on charitable donations having to fund

the purchase of the latest radiotherapy equipment? What I have

to say it is this government is putting record sums into the health

service, we are increasing the money into the health service but

if he wants me to stand here and criticise the volunteers and the

charities and the big society that provides so many scanners and great

Sheen's for our health service, I will not do that. I think it adds

to our health service. There is a 2011 survey of people who used the

health service, rather than asking people about their perceptions, and

that found 92 % of in-patients rated their overall experience as

good, very good or excellent. That is what is happening in our health

service and we should be proud of Can I ask the Prime Minister, will

the Government go ahead with high speed to, a project which is

extremely important to the economy and jobs in the north. If the

answer is yes, can I suggest we start laying the track in West

Yorkshire first? I am grateful for that enthusiastic endorsement. I

believe we should go ahead with eight just too. -- H S two. In

links to the question asked by his neighbour about Heathrow, there are

many flights which could be avoided if we had a network of high-speed

rail in our country and I'm keen that we press ahead with it.

Before the last general election, the Prime Minister made an

important speech condemning crony capitalism with money buying power,

power fishing for money and a cosy club at the top making decisions at

their own interest. Is this not a pitch perfect description of the

undignified courting of News Corporation by the Culture

Secretary? When will the Prime Minister shows some judgment of

this? If they are looking for volunteers for the Olympic team for

hypocrisy, it could be the decathlete there. We had 13 years

of pyjama parties, christenings, changing the law, sucking up to the

Murdochs, honestly, what a load of brass neck!

Thank you, Mr Speaker. In 44 days' time, the Olympics and Paralympics

come to London. Millions of people will be coming to London to enjoy

the games. Most of those individuals will be totally

dependent on public transport to reach the venues. Will my right

honourable friend condemn the Unite union for calling bus strikes and

doesn't the silence from the party opposite on this subject speak

volumes for that attitude to London? I think my honourable

friend was entirely right. If you want an example of crony politics,

frankly it is the fact that the party opposite get �5 million from

the Unite union and when it comes to this strike that could disrupt

the Olympics, absolute silence. Not a word of condemnation. It is not

surprising because Unite union did not only give them the money, they

pick their leader as well. The patient satisfaction survey

results have shown the greatest reduction in patients' satisfaction

in the history of the National Health Service. What will the Prime

Minister do turnaround perceptions about the failure of the NHS and

his government? Are if you look at the King's Fund who carried out

this survey, they say this. There is no evidence of a real decline in

service quality of performance. That is what the King's Fund say

about their own survey. I would put more weight on a survey of people

who have been using the NHS and the users of the NHS, 92 % of in-

patients, 95 % of outpatients, rated their overall experience as

good, very good or excellent. Since the election, there are 4,000 more

doctors, mixed-sex accommodation is down 94 %, hospital infections are

at their lowest levels since surveillance began and the number

of people waiting 18 weeks is also at the lowest level since records

began. Average waiting times are down as well. The health service is

performing extremely well and we should praise all those who have

delivered that performance. The Prime Minister will be aware

that there is a current shortage of primary school places across our

country. Is particularly acute in Winchester where there are

temporary classrooms to accommodate pupils for this September. What is

the government doing to help councils in this Goldie and whether

he is confident enough is being done to prevent a repeat of this

performance when these pupils reach secondary school? -- This Old Year.

This is becoming an issue. What the Department for Education has done

is put aside �1.4 billion of schools' capital and a further �1.4

billion for the subsequent year. There is also the opportunity

through free schools to have excellent new schools established

in constituencies so we not only get new capacity but it -- we get

the competition and choice which I believe will drive up standards.

The use of food banks in Plymouth has gone up from 792 nearly 4,000

in a year. Is the Prime Minister proud of the fact that changes to

his benefit arrangements have caused this to happen? There is no

doubt about that. Is he therefore going to stand up and say, that is

fine, food banks are lovely. Yes, they are lovely and the people of

Plymouth are magnificent but will he... Will he passed the buck on

this and go for the gold medal in passing the buck as he has...

Prime Minister. First of all that may join her in praising the people

of Plymouth who do you huge amount for their neighbours and members of

their community. That is all for the good. Yes, we have had to make

difficult decisions but we have protected tax credits for the least

well-off, we have protected benefits for the least well-off.

The biggest welfare reform that we have made is to put a cap on

welfare where we have said, you should not be able to get on

welfare more than the average family gets in work, and when we

put that forward, �26,500 a year, the party opposite voted against it.

Kamal right honourable friend tell the House how much it would cost

the country to take part in the bail-out of Spain's banks this week

he had not stood up for Britain and got us out of the previous

government's commitment? honourable friend makes an

important point. Before this government came to power, bail-outs

were carried out with Britain playing a full part in those bail

out, often as much as 14 % of the total. 100 billion euros bail-out

of Spain, Britain could have been paying as much as 14 billion euros,

�10 billion. That money has been saved because this government,

unlike the last one, stands up for Britain in Europe.

Prime Minister, and on the shambles of a budget you claimed you had

read, a double-dip recession you made in Downing Street, and a Tory

lead committee reporting that the coalition lacks strategic direction,

evidence if it was ever needed that men can multi-tasking, obviously

just that some are not very good at it. Prime Minister, have you now

run out of steam or is the job just too big for you? Prime Minister.

I'm pleased my honourable friend the education secretary is

introducing compulsory poetry reading lessons in class and

perhaps we could start with the honourable gentleman.

Order. Order. What is route is for people to continue shouting when

they have been asked not to do so. I know the Honourable Member for

Cohen valid is exceptionally well- behaved and he will sit in his

usual quiet, respectful fashion. Mr David Burrows. Thank you. The Prime

Minister has called for compassion for my constituent, Garry MacKinnon,

who doctors report will take his life if he is extradited. Can the

government be true to its word and stop the extradition and finally,

after ten years, give Garry MacKinnon his life back? I know my

honourable friend has campaigned long and hard over this issue. The

Home Secretary is carefully considering a wide range of

material before making her decision. She has instructed two independent

medical experts to review the report that have been submitted in

this case. This is not an easy case, as he knows. There are a number of

difficult issues before she makes an announcement.

The popular NHS walk-in centre in my constituency has recently closed.

These NHS walk-in centres are closing all over the country, why?

It is certainly not because the money in the NHS is being cut

because it is not being cut. The money in the NHS is being increased.

If we had followed her advice, the money would be going down. What

matters is the money in the NHS is spent to deliver better health

outcomes. That is a decision which needs to be taken locally. Giving

the fascinating evidence that was presented by his predecessor to the

Leveson Inquiry, with the Prime Minister agree with me that it

would be overwhelmingly in the public interest, to publish the

Downing Street phone records so we can finally establish what

conversations happened between his predecessor and Rupert Murdoch?

my honourable friend nose, governments cannot release

information provided by previous governments but I'm sure this is an

issue that the previous Prime Minister will want to consider,

given the clear statement that he made.

The Prime Minister will probably not be aware that a firm in my

constituency produces cream liqueurs and other alcohol products.

I do not know if he ever relaxes with his. I have recently beat

planning a �10 million investment - - recently been planning. However,

they are now worried that HMRC are reinterpreting how they treat these

products for duty, under pressure from the European Commission with

their erroneous interpretation of the European Court of Justice. Will

he ensure that a competent Treasury Minister makes myself and other MPs

to ensure that common sense and consistency prevails.

I have not tried one of these delicious sounding their fridges.

If it is all right with the honourable gentleman I will wait

until after tomorrow before trying. -- beverages. I do understand there

is an issue with HMRC and I'm happy to arrange a meeting so they can

look closely at this issue. Unprecedented levels of flooding

hit the North Caribbean communities at the weekend causing untold

damage to business has -- Ceredigion. I think the Prime

Minister for his words of support and I know the council, emergency

services and many in the local community rallied to ensure no loss

of life. Can I urge the Prime Minister to urge all insurance

companies to act now with renewed speed on this so we can get the

communities back on their feet as quickly as possible? I certainly

joined my honourable friend in praising the emergency services who

did a superb job at the weekend. I spoke to the Welsh Secretary and

also the Welsh First Minister to pass on what my best wishes for the

work they have done. In all the situations, there is clearly the

rescue and emergency part of it. Then there is the recovery phase. I

think in many ways the most difficult phase to get right is

when people are going back into soaked homes with peeled plaster

and all the other problems that come about and making sure they get

swift action from the district council and above all from the

insurance companies. I will certainly worked with him to make

There is civil war in Syria. The economy is in recession. The

Chancellor is blaming that recession on the eurozone crisis.

The eurozone crisis gets worse by the day. There were riots in Poland

last night and major demonstrations in Moscow. But the exchange at PMQs

was dominated by the future of the Culture Secretary, Mr Hunt. We will

talk about that in a minute. First, we hear what you thought.

Well, you have just stolen my thunder because that's that's

exactly what a lot of the viewers said. They did wonder why it was

that most of PMQs was devoted to Jeremy Hunt. So we had this from

Kevin from London. "is the euro about to collapse? Is there civil

war in Syria? What are they on about?" We had this from a Jeremy

Hunt "does the Westminster Village think the rest of the world really

cares about this?" We will never if it was from the Jeremy Hunt.

Jacqueline in Bristol says, "Ed Miliband quoting David Cameron

about being the future once. The delivery was so poor he could get a

raspberry for it." Surely sooner or later Jeremy Hunt's conduct will

have to be properly investigated. Well, they went with Jeremy Hunt so

we better talk about it. We have had this letter, the Prime Minister

has unveiled this letter from the man that is supposed to look after

the Ministerial Code just explain to our viewers, Nick, what happened.

If David Cameron had written the letter himself, he wouldn't have

written it differently. The independent adviser on ministerial

interests, the person the Labour Party have been saying must look

into this case has written to him and I'm going to para phrase. He

said the facts came out in the Leveson Inquiry. There is no value

in me looking for more facts. He says, "I remain open to looking

after it if if things change." David Cameron said "it was my job

to decide whether the code was broken. My job therefore, to decide

whether Hunt should stay or go. The role of the adviser was to

establish the facts." I have gone back to look at this great thing,

the Ministerial Code. Right. Let's read what it says. "if

there is an allegation about a breach of the code and the Prime

Minister having consulted the Cabinet Secretary feels that it

warrants further investigation, he will refer the matter to the

independent adviser." It is up to the Prime Minister. So people who

think that Hunt should have gone, they are saying, "You should have

got rid of him." Would Ed Miliband, if he is Prime Minister, say, "Your

job in the Cabinet, he hands over to someone else to decide whether

you stay or go." My guess, he wouldn't.

The Prime Minister is the gatekeeper. One of the things we

have been discussing in Parliament and outside of Parliament over the

last two weeks because we have been on recess is the issue is whether

the Prime Minister should be the gatekeeper bearing in mind the self

interest the Prime Minister clearly has. The issue of who is a minister

should be the job for the Prime Minister. The issue of who resolves

whether there has been a breach of ministerial codes bearing in mind

you have an independent ministerial adviser, should be the independent

ministerial adviser. If there is evidence of a breach, you refer it

to the independent adviser and that's what should have happened in

this case. That opens the possibility and it

would be interesting if this was the case that the Prime Minister

gets a report, an independent report report saying someone has

breached the Ministerial Code, but says, "I choose to keep them."

sanction should be the job for the Prime Minister. He decides whether

a minister is appointed or stays. You need assistance sometimes for

somebody to look at the evidence and decide whether somebody...

David Cameron is basically saying and I think he regrets the way this

Ministerial Code was written. He says, "It is up to me who is in my

Cabinet and if you don't like it, vote for another party." It was

updated by David Cameron when he came Prime Minister in 2010.

Because he wanted to have a new style of of politics, he updated

and change it had. He says, "We, the foreies, must be

different." His letter to Alex Allen was sent today and he

received a reply today. Who remains in the Government has

to be a matter for the Prime Minister. In the end, it has to be

for the Prime Minister. He has taken that decision. He has the

option of seeking advice, but the facts of the case have been

exhaustively examined on television, under oath by a judicial inquiry

and really, I I nothing new has emerged over the last two months to

show that there has been a serious breach.

What hasn't been examined and that's the substance of the Labour

motion today, and what the Liberal Democrats are going to abstain on

is the suggestion that he breached the Ministerial Code A, by

misleading Parliament, Leveson didn't discuss that, and by failing

to control his special adviser. Clearly, the facts on the special

adviser was was looked into at Leveson, but there was never - did

you fail to control your special adviser.

We have had one debate and he is going to explain the answers he

gave which were superseded by the evidence he laid in front of

Leveson, a huge amount of text and e-mails and he will tear clear that

up -- he will clear that up. They will have to look at the role of a

special adviser. There were two other things that

came out that are transport issues that I'm interested in. PMQs kicked

off with a question from Zac Goldsmith, a great environmentalist

whose constituency is on the Heathrow flightpath. He told the

Prime Minister, "You are going to stick, aren't you to your Tory

commitment to not build a third runway?" The Prime Minister did not

say yes at all. When he came to HS 2 and the high-speed railway, the

Prime Minister said, "I am in favour of this." But I am told the

project is being kicked into the long grass and that HS 2 is not

going to happen in the foreseeable future. It is interesting there

maybe a U-turn in the making over the runway and HS 2 being kicked

into the long grass. There maybe a U-turn on the runway, but not until

the next manifesto. I don't think David Cameron thinks he could get

away with either in coalition with the Liberal Democrats or with some

of his own supportsers like Zac Goldsmith or with the people in

West London who voted a particular way because of the Tory manifesto.

He couldn't get away with a U-turn until he put it to the country

again. There is pressure from business on the Conservative Party

to come up with a solution to this aviation crisis. A, on high-speed 2,

the anxiety I'm told is about money. The Treasury was always relaxed

about high-speed 2 because it was so many years away it didn't have

anything to do with the period at which our deficit was being cut.

The problem is that the Chancellor told us, it will take more years

than originally planned to cut the deficit and therefore, you get a

cross over the moment the Treasury is trying to cut spending, it comes

at the same time as this massive investment to pay for high-speed 2.

If you speak to businesses inside this country and outside this

country, one of the biggest criticisms is lack of transport

infrastructure to get to this country and to get freight around

and other things around as well. If Nick is right, another example of

the needs of our country being acraifiesed for the -- sacrificed

for the greater good of the two political parties in charge at the

moment. There are different issues, the

airport capacity issue is a major issue. Heathrow is full. We are

going to get a consultation document calling for evidence as to

how we use our airports we are and where people think the next runway

should be built across the South East or elsewhere. How long will

that take? How long is a longer project.

Even longer now. So these are different projects.

Labour fought the last election in favour of a third runway at

Heathrow and the other two parties were against it. After you lost,

you changed your policy to be against a third runway.

I heard your transport spokeswoman tell me that you were against it.

You are reviewing the policy? are reviewing our transport policy

which includes aviation, but we are in favour of high-speed two.

You would like to see that go ahead? High tweed two? Yes -- high-

speed two? Yes. The issue is we are told by this

this chancellor he will bring forward projects and he needs to do

so and the good thing about high- speed two, you have a number of

different revenue streams to help fund it, but you have got a

situation where Crossrail will be finishing shortly and it will be

easy to transfer the skills from Crossrail to high-speed two.

It will be finished by 2015. High-speed two is a a longer term

project and it requires legislation to go before Parliament. It wasn't

on the Queen's Speech, was it? Delay. Delay. Delay.

You didn't do anything for 13 years about high-speed railways. We are

getting on with it, but it is a long-term project.

Crossrail was announced in 1986, it is now 2012! Things happen quickly

Five years ago, Gary Newlove was murdered by three youths outside

his home in Warrington. He had gone outside to speak to a gang of

youths who he believed had been vandalising his wife Helen's car.

Since then Helen, now Baroness Newlove, has been determined to

make sure her husband's death is not just another statistic. For

this week's soapbox, we joined her on an estate in Havering, East

London, one of the neighbourhoods across England and Wales where she

has been trying to tackle anti- social behaviour through community

The police have named the man who died after confronting a gang of

youths outside his home. He was Garry Newlove. Detectives described

his murder as sickening. On the 10th August 2007, my family

life ended as I knew T my husband, Garry Newlove, was attacked by a

gang of youths. He was kicked in the head 14 times and suffered 40

internal injuries. My neighbourhood suffered from under-age and binge-

drinking. I attended my local meetings, spoke

to my local agencies who classed anti-social behaviour as low level

crime. So no action was done. Everybody has a right to live

safely and happily in their communities. Under-age and binge-

drinking drags communities down. That is why I was pleased to be

made a Baroness In the House of Lords, giving me a national

platform to champion the voices of communities who suffer such

problems. We have to stop under-age and

binge-drinking. Stop shops from selling alcohol to under-age

drinkers. If need be, close them down if they persist. Stop street

drinking. Make drinking more sociable and not anti-social and

working the trade. Working together helps everybody.

Hello, Syd. How are you? It is lovely to see you.

There is a hidden team of people who work tirelessly without seeking

reward or recognise recognition to make life better for everyone. We

are in Havering where the spirit flourishes. The generations have

reached an understanding of mutual tolerance. People work with the

authorities for the good of the community.

I am working with ten areas across the country over the next few years

who have access to to �1 million funding, bringing communities

together to drive down social be behaviour. I do this passionately

because I do not want another family to suffer the highest price

my family paid. Helen Newlove is with us now. It is

very tough for you in the way you lost your husband, but you picked

yourself up and you are working hard to help communities battle

against binge-drinking and other social problems. What keeps you

going? I think listening to people's problems in communities

and I was a community activist where I lived. I had terrible

problems. My neighbours suffered terrible problems with the cars,

alcohol was thrown in our gardens. People were urinenating up the

fences and there is only so much you can take. We attended community

meetings where we had the police and the councillors and everybody

else and it was walking away from one of the meetings that I said

until somebody is murdered they will not do anything. Little did I

know it would be Gary. For me, listening to going through the

trial and and listening to people today, who are suffering the same

problems, if gives me the passion to do something because it should

never ever happen. You should feel safe where you live.

You have explained about the social problems. Do you think those sh use

that you have mentioned -- issues that you mentioned which some of

the agencies deal with and say it is a low lying anti-social

behaviour and crime, do you think those are the problems that can

lead to what happened to your husband? I get infuriated when they

say "low level crime." When they don't live there, it is infuriating.

My mailbag is full of people who shut their curtains, frightened to

go out, they cross the road, that is not low level crime. To me, it

is a silent killer and we need to nip it in the bud fast.

Do you think binge-drinking is the whole issue? Do you think that's

the biggest driver of the crimes and social problems that you are

talking about? It is one of the drivers. Alcohol-related crime is

horrendous because it is a come buston of things. You become anti-

social to people and you get violent. Gary suffered 14 kicks to

the head. 15 people were around him. This was on a summer's evening and

he was in shorts and he asked one single question. You have to look

at the indicators, but in rural areas, people are having their

tractors pinched and people laugh when I say, "We have got Tractor

Watch." They can't employee workers. These are real problems and we

should not dismiss them as low level crimes and I will never give

it a low level crime because Gary started off as anti-social

behaviour and he lost his life and I had to turn his life support

machine off. How do you class that How do you get communities

involved? Are they not frightened to some extent to do what you were

doing? The model used was in Havering, east London. How to get

people to patrol the streets and Aaron way or patrol the neighbours?

Everybody said to me, we need to know what the ingredients are. If I

knew the ingredients I would have a top saleswoman plaque on my

shoulder. You cannot say but these people are very passionate. They

are sick of living in these blighted areas. At the end of the

day, if you want to do something, you do not get anything done by

sitting and complaining. If you want to make a change, try and

connect. There are frightened people out there and not everybody

can do it. It is to help them feel safer so them when they feel they

can do it they can go out. Because it is blighted or we label them

deprived areas, affluent areas, who labels them? We are all the same in

life and we need to be able to live in a safer, happier place. Why was

Havering a good place to go? I love Havering. I am a people person.

When I went to Havering I first met them in a hall. It was very unique

because we had the older generation this side, the younger generation

this side and I was a referee in the middle. There were six

youngsters who had made a DVD and they showed it and they were asking

about the area. One of the things the young lad said was he thought

the old people should be in by 8 o'clock. Then the older people said,

why should I be in by 8 o'clock, I have lived here for 40 odd years.

They are saying you should not be in bed, we are worried because we

do not feel safe. I am connecting them now. They have done a rap

Opera together, opened photograph clubs and we have a 92-year-old

woman who is in charge of the community centre. What sort of help

can the government give to tackle these problems? I think we are

seeing their help. We have the Localism Bill and local people have

a voice but they go one about the Big Society, the Prime Minister

does, he did not say it to give everybody a manual. Everybody mucks

it. When I speak to communities, they want recognition. They say, we

are doing it, we have a great British background and we will

carry on doing it. Michael Fallon, there is a big issue with binge

drinking and we have talked about minimum pricing but will that be

enough to stop the images of our town centres being filled with

drunken yobs who take up all the time of the health services, the

emergency services and the police, it cost a fortune? We are looking

at the unit pricing of alcohol but we are doing other things as well.

We have doubled the penalty for shops selling to under-age children.

There are too many and dredge drinkers. We are giving communities

assay over licences -- too many under-aged drinkers. We are making

it tougher for places to get licences. We are making them

contribute to the cost of clearing this stuff up. The government has

got to do a lot of these little things to create a better climate.

But in the end, it is for communities. I salute what Helen is

doing. We have to start by changing little things. Changing the culture

is what many people say, governments manage to change the

culture in relation to smoking, the tide was turned. Why not be as

radical? Banning, just for example, to be more radical not just change

bits of the law, and it will not change the culture and be more

dramatic about it? Unit pricing may do that, multi- buying may stop

people buying great trunks together. What about banning drinking on the

street? Boris Johnson bandit on the Tube. You can get an alcohol

banning order in areas. We have tried it in Kent. There are some

experiments. We have to look at different ways of getting the

culture to change. It took a long time with smoking but we are

working at it with drinking as well. Thank you, Helen.

Remind me of giving Michael Fallon the history of American prohibition

for Christmas. The Falkland Islands will hold a

referendum next year on their future sovereignty. Yes, a

referendum, fancy that?! They hope there will be a firm message to

Argentina that the islanders will remain British. Comes on the 30th

anniversary of the end of the Argentine occupation of the islands.

David Lidington has just been updating Parliament on the plans.

For our part, the British government will continue to offer

unequivocal support to the islanders, by maintaining a

defensive posture on the islands, by supporting the growing economy

and by protecting their rights and their wishes today, just as we did

30 years ago. The forthcoming referendum will provide I believe,

further evidence that the islanders alone will decide their future and

will offer a simple but powerful expression of democracy.

So, how about that? A Tory lead government finally gives the

British a referendum on sovereignty. Are you proud? Absolutely. This is

the week we celebrate the 30th anniversary of the liberation of

the Falklands. It is a clear-cut issue, do you want to stay British?

It was done in Gibraltar a few years ago. I think it will send a

strong message. If it is good enough for the Falklands, what

about the rest? Where is the evidence that the people of the

Falkland Islands want a referendum? I think you have seen plenty of

evidence. We know what the outcome is, don't we? Do we? How do we

know? It will be a minimum of 95 % in favour of the current status.

hope so. Argentina has been reasserting its claim. It is very

important that Argentina gets the wishes of loud and clear that we

will respect the issues -- wishes of the islanders. What about a

referendum on House of Lords reform? You can have referendums on

lots of things. So specifically, House of Lords reform. There is

evidence that people wanted. The plants are very controversial, as

you know. Changing our constitution forever, let's have a referendum,

trust the people, Michael. referendum was proposed. Will we do

it? Be brave, Michael, you are the deputy chairman of the Conservative

Party. Don't let Clegg bully you. Could we give the Falkland as a

referendum on the House of Lords? And Europe! Enough.

Too much teasing going on here. We have just got time to pick the

winner of the get the year competition. The correct answer was

1977, the year of the Silver Jubilee year and the Labour act --

Lib-Lab pact. And there we go. Alan Atkinson from Kent is the winner.

That is it for today. We thank both Michael Fallon and Sadiq Khan for

being our guests, for being good sports as well. You have to be a

good sport to be on this programme, Newsnight it is not. The One