03/07/2013 Daily Politics

Daily Politics. The NHS - free at the point of delivery, but not if

you're a foreigner. It is not the international health service! The

Government consults on charging non-EU nationals for going to the

doctor. It's usually David Cameron and his

MPs who are in a bit a bother over Europe, now Ed Miliband has his own

euro-woes over whether to hold an in-out referendum.

And the two men will take each other in PMQs - we'll bring you that live

at midday. You have an idealistic view of the world. The problem is

you sound like a 1980s alternative comedian. It is hilarious, in many

years that many respects. Taking on the mantle of Ben Elton does not

help anyone. You sound like a Tory politician.

And the fall-out from yesterday's row between the Labour MP and the

Labour blogger. That was great television yesterday! It really was!

I was trying hard not to smile. All that coming up in less time than

it takes to knock a top seed out of Wimbledon. And on centre court here

in SW1 - and with us for the duration - Westminster's finest

mixed doubles pairing. The Shadow Europe Minister Emma Reynolds and

the health minister Dr Dan Poulter. Welcome to the programme. First, who

should have the right to free treatment on the NHS? The Government

is launching a consultation today on how to restrict foreigners' access

to hospitals and doctors surgeries. JoCo has all the details.

Yes, that's right. Under the proposals, non-EU nationals who come

to the UK for more than six months could be charged at least �200 a

year to access NHS treatment. More than 270,000 migrants came to study

and work in Britain last year from outside the EU, who are likely to be

affected by the levy. The Department of Health said the cost of treating

foreigners is at least �30 million a year for the NHS in England alone.

However, doctors have claimed the move would turn surgeries into

border posts. And Dr Clare Gerada, the chairwoman of the Royal College

of GPs, said �30 million was the equivalent of just two hours of the

NHS's annual spending. So, why should doctors be border

control agents? That is not the case, and it would not be the case

that doctors would have to refuse treatment for patients, that would

never happen in the NHS. But we want to introduce a system which make

sure that the money that we put into the NHS as a government is bent on

British patients, just as when we travel overseas we have to take out

health insurance or make sure that we are provided for with health

care, we believe it is right that people who come here as tourists or

students should make provision for the cost of their own health care.

How would a doctor know if somebody had paid the levy? We have people on

long stays, people coming here as students. As a condition of the

students reason we could put the levy down or make sure that some

that he had health insurance. would not get in if they did not pay

the levy or have health insurance? This is what the consultation is

about. If you want to come here and study, and foreign students pay full

tuition fees, so it will not be a deterrent, an extra couple of

hundreds of pounds... You could throw in the health care if they are

paying through the nose for their fees! If you went anywhere overseas,

you would have to pay for health care. In the NHS, we need to make

sure that many in this country goes on British patients. Don't we want

more students to come here and pay full fees? Students are usually

pretty healthy anyway, why not just throw in the cost of the health care

and get even more coming and paying �12,000 a year, sometimes �15,000?

It is not a barrier for students coming here. They are already paying

many thousands of pounds. Making sure we have a levy which covers the

NHS and make sure that local patients are not shortchanged has to

be the right thing. How big a problem is health to resign? I think

you'll estimate was on the conservative side. It could be �200

million a year, which is a lot of money which should be going to

support British patients. We know there is money... We have not been

very good in some parts of the country at recouping money from EU

migrants. Other countries are better at that. In terms of more general

health tourism, at the minute we don't have any system for properly

tracking who is accessing the NHS. People are given an NHS number and

right to access when they turn up. We don't know the full cost, which

is why it could be up to �200 million. Your boss, Jeremy Hunt,

said the NHS is owed �12 million from foreigners. That is a figure

that we know there is money from the EU migrants... There is meant to be

a money transfer. Why don't you get that before you do anything else?

are cracking down on that and making sure that we deal with it more

effectively. We have inherited a system which did not do anything

like this. In the last three years we have put measures in place, local

hospitals are getting better at recouping the money than they were.

There is a problem at some hospitals need to do more, that is why we are

having a drive on the EU side as well. But the big focus needs to be

on people from outside of the EU coming in, potentially costing up to

�200 million a year. That is what we need to focus on, taking sure

British patients are not shortchanged. If these people can't

afford to see a doctor or decide they have been put off, they could

be carrying diseases that we could all end up getting? The point is

that this system operates in every other country that we may visit. The

point is that people are coming into this country. If they need emergency

treatment, that would always be provided. Doctors will always

provide emergency treatment, but we need to make sure we recoup the

cost. To recharge for emergency treatment? At the moment, in the

system from the Labour Government, we do not charge of almost any

treatment. If they end up in A&E, they will get that free at the point

of use, but will they subsequently be charged? Initially there was a

distinction the previous government brought in on what was emergency and

what was non-emergency. That has become increasingly blurred. What

would you do? It was blurred because it sums it presents with TB, which

may be secondary to HIV, there would be other complications of illness

that develop. The definition of emergency treatment has been widened

and widened and widened further. There needs to be a more clear

definition and consultation between immediate life-saving treatment and

treatment which is more routine, day-to-day care and treatment. We

have to look into this and make sure we get the money back. What is

Labour's position? We will consider these proposals. We agree with the

principle, migrants who come in and use the health service should not be

able to use it for free. The NHS is a national health this, not an

international health service. We certainly agree. But we need to get

a little bit of perspective. The Health Secretary has tried to blame

foreign migrant workers who come before that who come here for the

A&E crisis. I thought he was blaming the doctors contract? A contract

which came in in 2003 is responsible... The principle... ? It

I think it is workable. If you are not a British citizen, you are not

paying taxes as a student and so on, you leave again, you should pay for

your health care? The NHS should be better and more effective at

recouping the cost. You don't think it is an foe began stigmatising

foreigners? I don't think so. I'd like to see more foreign students. I

think it is a great shame that the immigration figures, that the Tory

led government have been putting downward pressure on students coming

here. The rest of the world want foreign students. But some of them

are going to the dodgy foreign language schools, which you allowed

to fester. When Diane Sabot -- Diane Abbott said, what price, xenophobia?

She is your shadow public health spokesman. She is wrong? You just

said you did not think it was xenophobic or stigmatising? I don't

think the principle of recouping the cost is xenophobic... She does.I

think she is referring to the fact that there have been some

Conservative MPs who have tried to blame this issue for other crises.

She was reacting immediately in the aftermath of Jeremy Hunt's interview

this morning, outlining the policy that our other guests just has. I

agree that you should recoup the cost. And she doesn't. The Shadow

Public Health Minister, the first time she has been quoted since she

left This Week, said, what price xenophobia? Stigmatising foreigners

accessing NHS creates a public health risk. That would seem to be

an attack on the policy. There is a public health risk which you have

underlined, people could need treatment for TB and other diseases,

and if untreated, they could infect other people. How long is the

consultation period? It will go into the autumn. There should be

something later in the year. Should we chalk one up for UKIP?

On Friday the European Union Referendum Bill has its second

reading in the House of Commons. The private member's bill, which is

backed by the Conservative leadership, seeks to commit the

Government to a referendum on Britain's memberbership of the EU in

2017, after a renegotiation of powers. And it poses a condundrum

for Labour leader Ed Miliband. Here's Jo with more.

Everyone knows that David Cameron has problems with Euro rebels.

Splits in the Tory Party over Europe are almost what we've come to

expect. But there's also a growing question about what Labour should do

about Europe. Ed Miliband could face problems of his own, with competing

factions in his party backing different strategies. On Friday, MPs

have their first chance to vote on the Conservative Referendum Bill.

Labour complain the Bill is a Tory stunt, and whips have told

backbenchers not to bother turning up unless they're prepared to make a

supportive speech on Labour's position. But some in his party want

Miliband to commit to his own referendum. One plan is to promise a

vote within six months of the next election - well, before the Tories'

2017 timetable. There's even a radical option of demanding a

referendum before the election. It could be Labour - rather than the

Conservatives, for a change - who look to be most split on Europe. One

of the Labour MPs in favour of a referendum is John Cryer, and he

joins us live from Central Lobby now. John, when would you like the

in-out referendum? As soon as possible. You have to have this

decision got out of the way. There have been an awful lot of changes to

the European constitution and to our Constitution which have shifted

powers to Brussels. Nobody has had a say since 1975, and it is about time

they did. We should have a referendum as soon as possible.

in the minority in your party? wanting a referendum as soon as

possible, probably, but I think a growing number think it would be a

good idea. Even the euro supporters think the divide between Parliament

and the people is just unsustainable. The majority of them,

including Tories, are reasonably happy with the EU, or staying inside

the EU. Amongst voters, it is the other way round. You can't sustain

that. On Friday, will you vote with the Conservatives in defiance of

your whips? No. I will not turn up and vote, I will abstain. I think

the bill is a con, it has clearly been hatched by the Tory leadership.

It would give us a referendum on four or five years. In the meantime,

the Prime Minister says he will renegotiate membership. We all know,

including the Conservatives, that that will not happen. He will not

get any substantive powers back. I don't know why he doesn't have a

referendum as soon as possible. Ed Miliband change direction? How

likely is it that Labour could call for a referendum ahead of the

election? I suppose the bill could be amended to bring the date

forward, which I think would be a good thing. Your original question

was Will the Labour Party change its position? In my view, I think we

will. I am one of those who has said all along, even before David Cameron

made his original announcement, that we should be calling for a

referendum, and we should be promising that we will have one

after the next election, should we win power. Have you any support in

the shadow cabinet? I don't know. I don't go around canvassing opinion.

Maybe I should. I understand there are people in the shadow cabinet on

the front bench who are supportive of my position of others. I put

forward my arguments. I am not organising anything. I put them

Do you think Labour will change its position before the election?

have been clear and consistent on this issue, unlike the Tories who

had a vote in 2011. I will come to him in a moment, tell me about your

priorities. We said it is the wrong priority at the wrong time.

Promising a referendum in four years' time creates economic

uncertainty for four years, could affect foreign investment and

therefore, jobs. Martin Sorrell, who is well known to be a Tory

supporter... He voted with Mr Blair. He tends to be more on the

conservative side. It's his is simple question. I am asking you is

there any chance you would change your policy before the General

Election? We have said we don't want a referendum now and we don't

want one in four years' time. The Government should focus on the

economy. If you look at polling, people care more about the economy

than anything else. This Bill on Friday is a distraction. Can our

viewers concluded you want a change of policy before the election?

his two years to go before the election. I have set out our

position as it is now. I am asking is there any chance you will change

this before we go to the polls? will keep on the statute book, the

referendum mock. Secondly, Europe is in a state of great flux. The

argument is abating, but ongoing. We don't know what the dynamic will

be between those in the eurozone and the UK. Croatia is outside.

Let's see what happens with the dynamics of that relationship.

are keeping your options open? Are you telling me then, as a result of

the so-called dynamics between those within the eurozone and those

out of the eurozone, between now and 2015, you might change of

policy? I don't think it will change significantly. So you won't

change a policy? I do not expect us to. It would be silly to rule out

something. You are keeping your options open. We need to make these

decisions on the national interest. What matters now, is when the

eurozone integration happens, but the UK still has a say in what

happens. This Bill is not worth the paper it is written on is it? After

the next election the new Parliament will decide if we will

have a referendum in 2017, not this Parliament. You cannot bind the

next Parliament? If this as past as law, the next Parliament will have

to vote down, which it can do. It will have to make a proactive

exercise to do that. It would set into law that we will have a

referendum in 2017. There would have to be further legislation

before a referendum. You would have to legislate for the referendum?

would have to go further, but it would require a new Parliament to

directly the vote down the bill that had been passed. In other

words it won't compel a Government to have a referendum in 2017, there

would have to be another vote. It would make it difficult for David

Cameron, if he were still to be Prime Minister ought for

Conservative Government, Labour and the Lib Dems could say, we want

another boat. It would be stated that the next Parliament would say

they want to change what is done in this Parliament. According to the

authorities, it would still require further legislation, if you past

this. The next Parliament would have to pass for the legislation?

The next Parliament would have to do more, but they would have to

underwrite to say they wouldn't do what they wouldn't do what was

passed in this Parliament. That implies that unless you have a vote

to undo it, it would happen automatically. It won't happen

automatically. The Commons authorities have stated, in order

for it to happen and to go ahead, there will still have to be

legislation? There will have to beat actions taken. They would have

to be proactive or reacted to stop it on the basis of the fact we are

initiating something in this Parliament. The Conservative Party

wants to give the people a say on Europe. It is a clear issue in the

country to have an open and frank discussion about Europe. I was born

in 1978 and I did not have a vote on Europe. We should look at how

Europe should be and in the meantime look at what powers we

need to take back. Another issue for the Labour Party is the unions.

His United trying to take over your party? No, the Labour Party grew

out of the trade union party. I think the Prime Minister needs to

be careful when he talks about trade union barons. There are lots

of working people across the country who are members of a trade

union survey get protection from unfair dismissal. Not many of them

are members of the Labour Party, individually. The some of them are.

Not many. The percentage of union members compared to the percentage

of Labour members is very small. Why have 12 Labour constituencies

been in special measures since 2005? This is a fatuous article in

the Times, which frankly does not deserve to be on the front page.

am not talking about the times. I am not linking anything. I am

asking you why, because the Times article, which I am not depending

on, because it fudged the timing, why have 12 neighbour

constituencies been in special measures since 20 -- 2005. Some of

those constituencies go back further than 2005. I know why you

are asking this question. There has been a problem in Falkirk. Ed

Miliband has been very decisive in putting a stop to what was

happening, because there were serious allegations of wrongdoing.

I am not asking about Falkirk. We know it is recently into special

measures. Special measures mean the constituency party is taken over by

the National Party and it is national officials who oversee it.

I would like to know the answer why these constituencies you put into

special measures into 2005 - knot Falkirk, why are they still in

special measures? There were problems in these constituencies.

You have had years to sort it out. The party has felt the need to

monitor what has happened over time. If we were not doing that, you

would be asking why we are not keeping a close eye on it. If you

do not know, that is fine. Is it right that a union like United

should be able to round up 100 people to join the Labour Party,

send the names to the Labour Party with a cheque from the union to pay

for their membership, is that right? I think it is wrong. It is a

one-member, one-vote. We read introduce that in the 1990s. If you

are a member of the Labour Party, you should make a personal

commitment. It is a one-member, one-vote in the selections. So you

are against it, that is clear. Now, travel to foreign places can

often be uncomfortable. There's getting over the language barrier,

acclimatising yourself to the weather and adapting to local

customs, as the Prime Minister found when he inspected a guard of

honour accompanied by a goose- stepping soldier on his trip to

Kazakhstan this week. But a good host always tries to make his

guests more comfortable, and what better way to make a Brit feel at

home than brewing him a nice cup of tea in a Daily Politics mug! There

it is, we get every work. If you want to be as hospitable to your

guests as the Kazakhstan President, now is your chance to get hold of

one of our well travelled mugs. We'll remind you how to enter in a

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 81 seconds

minute, but let's see if you can To be in with a chance of winning a

Daily Politics mug, send your answer to our special quiz email

address: [email protected]. And you can see the full terms and

conditions for Guess The Year on our website:

First time I think we have done a year that I was not born.

It's coming up to midday here. Just take a look at Big Ben. That can

mean only one thing - Yes, Prime Minister's Questions is on its way.

And that's not all, Nick Robinson is here. Do we have moving pictures

for the year you were born! You are very brave!

You treated this morning -- outwitted. The press charter is

going to the Privy Council, but it is not the Government or the

opposition's Press Charter, it is the press's pressed charter?

Parliament agreed, or the party leaders agreed a common approach

for a new Royal charter to establish an organisation like the

BBC and other public bodies, to establish a new form of press

regulation. We all had to wait for the Privy Council, the advisers to

the Queen to sign things off, to actually make this happen. It was

supposed to go in May, it did not go. Everybody assumed it would go

to the next meeting of the Privy Council, and that his next

Wednesday. The victims of press abuse, people like JK Rowling,

Madeleine McCann's parents and others, said get on with it. But

the charter that will go before the Privy Council next week won't be

the one Parliament agreed, not the one the Prime Minister and the

Leader of the Opposition and Nick Clegg once, it will be the press's

rival proposal. It is not because it is about to become approved and

accepted, it is because the lawyers are saying, if you don't go through

the proper processes, there will be a massive court case in which the

newspapers of it down for many months. Is it the newspapers or the

Government that has put forward this charter? There are two rival

charters. Who has put forward the press one? It is the press who is

doing it? The people who used to run the old regulators. The

expectation is the Privy Council won't sign off on this, but the

view of the lawyer's, if you are a cynic you might think the

Government are playing for time, but it is the advice they are

getting. It is not enough for ministers to look at it and say,

forget that. But in legal jargon, this is a credible proposal for a

Royal charter so must go through every possible stage, even if it is

rejected. To prevent the judicial review? The legal challenge would

be that it is not a fairly and justly considered. Hacked off will

be very hacked off. We had hacked off, we will have really, really

hacked off! More than ever before. They have a meeting with the

Culture Secretary this afternoon. They are treading carefully because

they regard the Culture Secretary as a target. We are now over to

the best way to celebrate the 65th birthday of the NHS is for the

government to strip out the culture of secrecy, and for patient safety,

have health professionals back at the heart of the NHS? The way to

celebrate the 65th birthday of the NHS is to go on investing in it like

this government is, with an extra �12 billion, but also to be on the

side of patients. That is why we are introducing the Chief Inspector of

hospitals. We need to end the culture of secrecy and cover-up that

we had under Labour. Mr Ed Miliband!

I am sure I speak for everyone when I say there is deep concern over

what we have witnessed in Egypt, including appalling violence and

deaths just one year on from free elections. Might I ask the Prime

Minister for assurances that all the appropriate steps are being taken to

guarantee the safety of UK nationals in that safety? I can give him that

assurance, and also to safeguard our embassy in Cairo. We are advising

British National Party against all but essential travel to Egypt,

except for the red Sea resorts, as set out on the foreign office

website. These are deeply disturbing scenes. The level of violence is

appalling. We should appeal to all sides to stop the levels of

violence, and particularly the sexual assaults. It is not for this

country to support any single group or party. We should support proper,

democratic processes and proper government by consent. I agree with

him, we all want to see a proper resolution to the present crisis.

Can he tell the house what work is being done, even at this late stage,

by the UK and the European Union, to encourage the Egyptian government to

secure a negotiated political solution to this crisis in advance

of today's Egyptian army deadline? Very clear messages have been sent

to President Morsi, Obama, who has spoken to him directly. -- very

clear messages have been sent to President Morsi, including by

President Obama , who has spoken to him directly. The government needs

to bring about peace and stability in that country.

I am grateful for his answer, and I know that he and the Foreign

Secretary will keep the house updated in the coming days. On

another subject, the country will need 240,000 extra primary school

places by 2014. Can he assure parents that this won't be met by

increasing class sizes? I can assure him that we put in

place, through the Spending Review, the additional money for 500 errors

and extra school places, so we should be able to provide those

school places without seeing an increase in classes. But class sizes

are rising. When the Labour government came to office, the

number of infants taught in class sizes over 30 was a quarter. When we

left, it was just 1.8%. It has doubled on his watch. That is the

reality for many parents. Under his plans, one third of new schools are

being built in areas where there are surplus places. Can he explain to

parents in areas where they are struggling to get children into

primary schools, why he is building schools where there are already

plenty of places? What he left is the biggest budget deficit in

Britain's peacetime history. We have had to make difficult decisions,

that is why we have cut welfare, but areas of spending. But an education,

we have made it a priority, and that is why the money going into schools

is going up and not down. That is why we are funding half a million

extra school places and why this government has built 200 new school

buildings. Now, he asks about new schools going in to different areas.

What that is code for is Labour's opposition to free schools. We want

more new good schools. Their policy is still the same as John

Prescott's. Remember that? The trouble with good schools is that

everyone wants to go to them. We want good schools but, as ever, his

questions are written by Len McCluskey of Unite.

Mr Speaker, as always, this Prime Minister has no answers to the

questions he is asked. If he won't answer me, maybe he'll answer David

Simons. He is the Conservative spokesman for the Local Government

Association. This is what he says. We know of schools that are

literally falling down and still have to compete with Rand new-builds

down the road. In other words, in areas where there are surplus

places. Isn't the truth that while he is pouring millions of pounds

into building new schools where there are already places, the only

way he will meet the shortage in other areas is teaching kids in

Portakabins and increasing class sizes? The last Labour government

cut primary school places. Let me tell him what his government is

doing. The education capital budget is �21 billion over the next six

years. That is what we are doing. What is so interesting is that he is

taking his script from the trade unions, who don't like choice, they

don't like new schools, they don't like free schools. They want to

control everything. What we know is one organisation they have got

control. We see it in black and white - they have taken control of

the Labour. Mr Speaker, I am speaking for

parents up and down this country. The usual very low grade, very

substandard, very unnecessary heckling. If the question that mad

recession has two run longer, it will. Let's try to retain some

decorum which the public can respect.

And let's have a debate about ethics. He gave a tax cut to his

Christmas card list, he brought Andy Coulson into the heart of Downing

Street. The idea that he is lecturing us about ethics takes a

double standards to a whole new level.

Now, in this one policy on schools, we see the hallmark of this

government. They make the wrong choices on tax and spending. The

millionaires tax cuts, the top-down we organisation of the NHS and

schools in areas with surplus places. All the time, they repeat

the meaningless mantra, we all this together.

He goes up and down the country speaking for Len McCluskey. No

wonder the former Home Secretary calls them the party of the

graveyard. The fact is, I have got it here, I have got the press

release, how Unite plans to change the Labour Party. I know you are

paid to shout by Unite, but calmed down a bit! This is what it says. We

give millions to the party. The relationship has to change. We want

a firm E class -based and left-wing general election campaign. He is too

weak to sack his Health Secretary, to stand up for free schools, to

stand up to the Unite union, too weak to run Labour and certainly too

New rules mean my constituents have to register individually if they

want to vote to stop electoral fraud. Does he think the same rules

should apply to joining a political party? I think she is absolutely

right. Individual voter registration is a major step forward. Frankly, we

have a situation where we have one of our political parties where it

has become apparent that votes are being bought, people are being

signed up without consent, all done by the man, let McCluskey, who gave

him his job. Demand for food banks is 30,000

households -- was 30,000 households in media before the general

election, 350,000 households last year. Will the Prime Minister

acknowledged that rocketing demand for food bank shows we have a

problem? I am sure as a member of Unite, he will want to look very

carefully at his own constituency Labour Party. Who knows how many

people they have bought and put on the register? Food bank use went up

ten times under Labour. That is what happened. This government is helping

working people by freezing the council tax, giving 24 million

people a tax cut and taking 2.4 million of the poorest people out of

tax. The Prime Minister will be aware of the recent terrible

stabbings in my Shipley constituted which led to the death of an

84-year-old woman and a serious injury to a nine-year old boy

playing in the park. Will he join me in praising the police for the

swiftness of making arrests in this particular case, but also in

supporting the local community and congratulating them on their

steadfastness and community spirit, which has helped this community get

through a very, very traumatic period? I certainly join the

honourable member. These were truly shocking events and reading about

them, particularly the young boy who staggered out of the park bleeding,

having been stabbed, and reading about the grandmother described as

so much of a community member that they were seen as everybody's

grandmother is truly disturbing. I join him in his praise, and we must

make sure that justice is to. The government has promised that by

2016, no one will have to pay more than �72,000 towards the cost of

that personal care. I don't know whether he has read an article in

the Financial Times on Saturday which says that the cap will not be

an actual costs, but eligible costs. They will not include the

cost of people meeting moderate care needs, nor all the costs incurred in

going into a private residential home. Isn't this another example of

him promising to do one thing and planning something completely

different? We are introducing what was debated

and discussed in this house in terms of those cost that will be covered,

and those that will not. The party opposite had 13 years to cap the

cost of care, to do something about the rising cost of social care, and

did precisely nothing. May I congratulate the government on

achieving political agreement for the next round of reform? That might

I make a plea, that proper time be taken to agreed implementation, to

ensure a level playing field and a fair deal for Britain and our

farmers? The honourable lady is right. We

have a good deal over the common agricultural policy. We need to

listen to farmers about concerns so they are not disadvantaged as

against other countries, and we need to take time to introduce the new

system. When the last system, in terms of the single farm payments,

was introduced so quickly, we suffered large fines from Europe as

a result. She is extremely wise. Minister aware of the rather

disturbing commitment, which was given yesterday by his Chancellor,

that he will continue to interfere and intervene in the affairs of the

Royal Bank of Scotland on behalf of the taxpayer? Is he aware that in

his last intervention the completely irresponsible behaviour has cost the

British taxpayer �4.5 billion in the loss of value of the shareholding.

Pity instructors Chancellor to desist from any such intervention in

the future? -- could he instructed his Chancellor to desist?

I know he has experience of lending money!

It is very important that the government stands up for the

taxpayer and makes sure that the Royal Bank of Scotland has the right

strategy and leadership going ahead so that they get the money put by

the last government into the banks Two days ago saw the start of

independent retailer month. Does he agree we need to do more to keep

independent shops vital question marks on this issue I agree with

the honourable gentleman. He speaks for a lot of Britain, and that is a

we should be looking at our town centres, looking after what we can

do to back our town centres. We should be looking at the rate

system and how it works. We should also be looking at a planning

system and how we can use change of use and we should work with local

authorities who want to see the town centres succeed. It is a vital

issue for towns of and down our country and it has our full backing.

I enjoyed my recent visit to the Nissan factory in Sunderland for

the first of the mass market electric vehicle which will support

over 500 jobs at the plant and 200 across the car industry. I look

forward to visiting the North East again soon. When the Prime Minister

next visit the region he will seek the key issue facing the region is

unemployment. There are over 20 applicants for every advertised

vacancy and his policy of local enterprise partnerships and

enterprise zones is not making the same effective impact on the

region's economy as the development agency did. Will he consider the

appointment of a minister to work with the local enterprise

partnerships and the individual members of Parliament for the

region, to push forward the private sector employment agenda? Ministers

do work with the enterprise zones. Let me give him the figures.

Obviously we want to see more, but employment in the North East is up

by 9,000 since the election. The North East private sector jobs are

up 37,000. It is not just the success at Nissan, we have Hitachi

committed to building the new train building plant in County Durham.

That will bring 700 jobs. We have the new tunnel which opened in 2011,

extra money going into the Tyne and Wear Metro. All of those things can

make a difference. And in his own constituency, the youth claimant

count has fallen by 4% over the last year. Will the Prime Minister

take the opportunity on his next visit to promote apprenticeships

and the support Government is giving to them among North East

businesses, and will he pressed the Ministry of Transport to get on

with the job of doing it? The last time I was in the north-east I made

a speech about apprenticeships. It is remarkable the number of people

who started apprenticeships under this Government. I can tell him in

terms of the transport issue he raises, is actually we are funding

feasibility studies into fixing problems on the road north of

Newcastle to Scotland, and the Newcastle Gateshead bypass. We are

improving the a 19 between Newcastle and South Shields. This

is a much better record than the party opposite, even though they

had a Prime Minister who came from the north-east. They never did what

we are proposing. Given the Prime Minister is so keen to talk about

infrastructure investments, can he explain why his Government has cut

capital investment again in 2015, 16 by nearly �1 billion? I have to

say to the honourable lady, she is wrong. If she looks at the figures

and take the plan as a Labour had for this Parliament, we have added

to those plans. We have increased the amount of capital spending. But

if you come to this House and you oppose changes on welfare, you

oppose cuts to Government programmes, you oppose the of this

and she changes it you are making, they have not supported a single

cut. It you do all of those things, there is no way you would have any

capital spending at all. That is the problem with the weakness from

the Labour front bench, because they have not taken any tough

decisions they cannot support the capital spenders To this country

needs. Can the Prime Minister confirm reports from Jordan a new

treaty has been signed and this country could have the pleasure of

seeing the back off Abu Qatada this week? I can confirm this treaty has

taken through both the Jordanian Parliament and also our own. I

don't want to say anything that in any way could stop what we all want

to happen, happening. When the Government tried to go workers to

exchange their rights for shares, we were told 6,000 businesses would

sign up. In the event only six have shown an interest. Not 600 or 60,

but six, what went wrong? programme has not started yet. It

starts in September. It is a programme that has been praised by

the Institute of Directors, praised by the CBI, praised by the

Federation of Small Businesses. Of course it has not been praised by

of the United unions. He is a member of the unite unions so he

has to stick to their script. What a sad day for democracy. Question

Number Ten. I very much for, I look forward to visiting Bury and I

always take special time to look at the statue of Sir Robert Peel.

Whenever the Prime Minister does find time to sample the delights of

a Bury, Ramsbottom and Tottington again, will he join me in meeting

some of the hundreds of local small businesses and charities who will

be �2,000 a year better off from next April, because of the new

employment allowance which will cost employers and National

Insurance contributions, giving them an incentive to create genuine

new jobs? I think my honourable friend is absolutely right. You can

walk down any high street in any town in Britain and point out to

shopkeepers and businesses, if they do employ people they will see a

�2,000 reduction in their National Insurance bill. If they don't

employed people, they can take people on and not pay National

Insurance. It is only possible because of the tough decisions this

Government has taken on spending and welfare. It was never backed by

the party opposite but it demonstrate we are on the side of

people who want to get on. Prime Minister's deputy party

leader in Scotland is describing the UK Government's scaremongering

about independence as silly, whilst one of his key donors in Scotland

is describing it as puerile, and a leading commentator says it is

tripe. Given the Prime Minister is in charge of UK For -- fear for the

UK Government, will he ditched this tripe? I was asked this question

yesterday. I will give a different but similar answer, which is if you

look at the information being produced by this Government on what

would happen in terms of Scottish independence, I think it is

impartial, extremely powerful and sensible. The fact is, the Scottish

nationalists are using the argument. They are losing the arguments on

jobs, losing the argument on the economy and losing the argument on

the influence Scotland will have on the world. Bring on the arguments,

because you are losing the battle. We have raised over �10,000 for

local and a underprivileged children's. I'm sure the Prime

Minister will join me in praising these local voluntary clubs in the

community. It is in stark contrast to the kind of institution we tried

to block via political influence... My honourable friend is right. It

is an honour I am an honorary member of my local Rotary Club.

They are unimportant part of the big society, they do an excellent

job and they don't go round hoovering up members by making

single payments from trade unions in order to buy influence. In March,

the climate change minister said, I wouldn't be sleeping if we did not

have 10,000 signed up to the green deal by the end of the year. Given

that only four households have signed on the dotted line, is that

Len McClusky is false as well? -- fault. He is wrong about the

figures for stomp of 37,000 households have had assessments and

over 5,000 have had their boy has changed. Of course, I sorry I

missed out the honourable member have received sponsorship from the

unite Union. Oh you don't! I suspect he ought to go through his

constituency Records, checked the members are still alive, that it

might be a good start. The Prime Minister has won much praise for

his work on dealing with tax avoidance, but some people have

called him hypocritical, what does he say to that? What is

hypocritical is to take donations from a donor in the form of shares

in order to avoid taxes. That is what the Labour Party has done.

They should pay back the �700,000 to the taxpayer and that money

should be going towards schools and hospitals. That is Labour's shame.

Can the Prime Minister confirmed the laces work programme figures

show it is missing every single one of its minimum performance

standards? The honourable lady is asking about the work programme.

The fact is it has 312,000 people into work. 60% of the people going

into the work programme are coming off benefits and while the unite

Union and the members opposite might not want to hear this, and

while it might not be part of Len McClusky's script, this programme

is twice as good as the flexible New Deal. As a doctor who once had

to listen incredulously to a patient at explain via a translator

or that she only discovered she was nine months pregnant on arrival at

Heathrow Airport, I was pleased to hear the statement on health

tourism today. Does the Prime Minister agreed that although

savings are modest, the principal matters. The health service should

be national and not international? I think my honourable friend makes

an important point. It is a National Health Service and not

internationals. British families pay around �5,000 in year in taxes

to pay for the NHS. It is bright but those who don't have a right to

use the NHS gets properly charged for it. We have made this

announcement and I hope there will be all-party support for it, but

Labour's health minister has condemned it as xenophobic.

bedroom tax is turning into a disaster in constituencies like

mine. Families are moving out of good quality, social housing and

into the private rented sector at a cost to the taxpayer. Three and

four-bedroom houses are standing empty and classed as hard to let.

We have pensioners approaching me saying they want to downside but

they can't because priorities go to families. Is this not turning into

a disaster for the taxpayer? What this is his first for the taxpayer.

We don't give a spare room subsidy for people in private sector

accommodation, so we shouldn't give a spare room subsidy for people in

council accommodation. The question now is for the party opposite. We

have decided to remove the spare room subsidy, they now say they

support of spending changes. Is that still the case or are they

committed to repealing this? Absolutely no answer. The shocking

abuse that was revealed in Winterbourne view and by operation

Jasmin in Wales has revealed a gap in the law which means that whilst

the staff get prosecuted, the organisations are never corporate

LEA accountable. Will a Prime Minister meet with me and a small

delegation to discuss how we can plug this gap in the law and ensure

there is proper accountability for abuse and neglect? I am happy to

meet with him about this issue because it is important. In the

Francis report there were a number of recommendations about duties of

care and the duty of candour we need to put in place. I am keen to

make sure we get this done. Royal charter approved by this

House, still not been sent to the Privy Council when it should have

been in May. Will he assured his house and the victims that he won't

do a deal with certain newspapers to further watered down the

recommendations? What I will save to the right honourable gentleman,

we have to follow the correct legal processes. The legal advice we have

shared with the Leader of the Opposition is we have to take these

things in order. We have to take the press Royal charter proposal

first, then we have to bring forward the Royal Charter of which

we have all agreed. The press's Royal Charter has some serious

shortcomings, so I have not changed my view. Mr Speaker...

gentleman wanted to be called, I have called him. I am most grateful,

Mr Speaker. Given a selection of Parliamentary candidates is a

legitimate concern of this House, will have Prime Minister agree with

me that the voting irregularities in the Falkirk constituency should

be looked at as a matter of urgency? Order, order. The question

is about apart the matter, not Government responsibility. Not a

matter for the Prime Minister. A complete waste of time. Mr Peter

Bone. Mr Speaker, the all-party group against human trafficking has

raised the awareness of modern-day slavery to a greater level. I am

delighted to report last night, 150 members of this House and the other

house, attended the AGM. It is a credit to the Prime Minister's

personal commitment to this. Would he consider, and perhaps in the

next Queen's Speech having a modern slavery Act? I pay tribute to the

honourable member for the consistent work he has done on this

vital issues. It is important we wipe out a modern-day slavery and I

enjoyed going to meet with him and other members, in the House of

Commons, in order to see just how bad the situation is. We are

looking at legislative options and I will be chairing a committee

across Government to look at what more could be done. Glenda Jackson.

One of my constituents and her three-year-old child have become

homeless fleeing the most heinous domestic violence. And now, despite

a legally living and working in this country for four years,

immigration technicality has made them destitute. Will the Prime

Minister please examine this legislation and its possibly

unintended consequences, so in future no woman and her child may

suffer a double abuse? I am happy to look at the individual case the

honourable lady raises. It is linked to the last question about

modern-day slavery, were sometimes immigration rules have caused

slavery -- difficulty for those who want to flee the people keeping

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 81 seconds

Inspectors were told not to serve his problems because it was

embarrassing for the Government. Was it his conception when he set

Labour members took over. A pretty lively Prime Minister's

Questions come to an end. Ed Miliband asked about Egypt, it did

not get us very far, but at least he did it. He then moved on to schools,

drawing a contrast between the areas of the country short of primary

school places than those which had 20 but were still adding the

government support for free schools to these areas. -- those which had

plenty. There were about eight mentions of Len McCluskey from the

Prime Minister. That was interesting, he is not an MP, he is

leader of the Unite union. But Mr Cameron has been reading his focus

groups and he thinks this plays rather well. He managed to shoo

homeland McCluskey into virtually every answer. The Speaker got upset

because many of the questions were not about government policy or the

Prime Minister. -- he managed to shoehorn Len McCluskey into

virtually every answer. Michael Murray, an e-mail, said,

will Mr Cameron ever give direct answers to direct questions? If he

does not know the answers, why is he Prime Minister? Jeffrey says that Ed

Miliband has showed why he cannot be trusted - opposing choice, freedom

and free schools. One viewer said, surely it is time the Prime Minister

thought about his constant vilifying of the trade unions. It is not

right. Ian Whiteley says that he started of statesmanlike over Egypt,

then it descended into a slanging match. Dave got in plenty of digs

overland McCluskey and Unite but Ed skewered him up -- about bringing in

Andy Coulston. Mr Winston says, the Prime Minister certainly hammered Ed

Miliband and it is clear there is growing confidence on the Tory

backbenchers, but Martin said that the preplanned mantra about Labour

being controlled by the unions is hypocritical, taking early when you

consider David Cameron taking the side of the press barons during the

Leveson Inquiry and the influence of big business. Crispin in

Chesterfield says that David Cameron keeps banging on about the unions,

but who is pulling his strings when it comes to delaying new press

regulation? He came out saying he did not like

the press charter, which was interesting. Am I right in thinking

that those around Mr Cameron in the Government at the moment and his

political strategists think that Labour are on the defensive? They

are on a roll. There is something striking happening, which you can

see in Prime Minister's Question Time. Week after week, the Tory

awkward squad, will to want to get rid of David Cameron, they were

awkward in public, they would attack on it like or him. Now, two or three

of him lobbed him a soft ball so that he could attack Labour and the

trade unions. There are two separate things going on. Tory strategists

believe that on the issue of the Unite union's influence, they can

portray Ed Miliband as weak. The speaker would have pulled up at some

months ago. He would have said, you are not supposed to ask questions in

opposition, you are not supposed to this for partisan propaganda. Yet

the Speaker let him get away with it. The second thing going on is a

sense that the Tory family is briefly, at least, coming together.

That is partly due to the Europe bill coming up later this week. On

Friday, they can vote on the referendum. One thing I can tell

you, which I don't think has been out there yet, is the Prime Minister

is inviting you. Have you had your invite? He will have a barbecue for

every current dividend MP inside Downing Street. There will be a

family photo for every Conservative MP on the green bench of Downing

Street. And a special meeting with the Prime Minister and strategists.

In other words, they are using this bill to get everybody to Westminster

and pull together, have a festival, a Tory party party! There will be a

photograph on the green benches. Sounds like party management to me.

So what? You might say. Forgive me if I have said this before, people

forget that politics is a tribal sport, a team game. Whether morale

is good or bad does not secure you an election, but, rightly or

wrongly, Tory morale is high. that? If the recovery is under way,

it is barely perceptible among most voters. The coalition has not been

the happiest of parties in recent months or years. Why is Labour

feeling on the defensive and the Tories have a spring in their step?

I don't feel we are on the defensive. I think the tale about

the barbecue on Friday night tells us what is really behind Friday 's

European debate, and that is the Prime Minister trying to manage his

own party. All prime ministers do that. Two it is an occasion for him

to say that the Lib Dems are against this and we are for it, it is an

occasion for him to try to unite his party around that one issue. On the

substance of whether we should be in or out of Europe, there are deep

divisions within the Tory party. I think it is a convenient device for

him on Friday to try to unite his party. How long it will last, I

don't know. We have been consistently ahead in the polls

since the disastrous Budget of last year. White bag not by much. Now we

have fixed term Parliaments, which I am in favour of, because I think it

was a farce when there was always a question of, will the Prime Minister

call an election or not? We have started the process of setting out

our alternative, but we are doing it in a thoughtful and considered way.

I think we are on the front foot. At the start of June, we had a very

strong start to the Parliamentary session with speeches by Ed Balls

and Ed Miliband. The latest polls have shown that your leaders down to

5%. At this stage in the run-up to the 1997 election, you were points

ahead. It was a very different time. Yes, Labour was well ahead!

there was also an unpopular Conservative Government of many

years. The Conservatives did not get the majority at the last election,

obviously we. Did not win either, so we are at a much closer pegging.

Aren't they overplaying Len McCluskey? He mentioned him eight

times, he drags him in. If you asked him about the weather, he would

probably blame it, and also the bedroom tax, an Unite. Despite all

the bankrolling of Labour, Len McCluskey and his union have been

remarkably unsuccessful in getting their candidates chosen. That is the

real story in the Labour Party. not sure that is true. I was elected

by an open primary, and I find it deeply distasteful, and other unions

find this as well, that unions can be selecting Labour MPs. How many

prospective candidates has Unite forced onto a Labour constituency?

Two there was an example in Falkirk. But they did not win. And in

Brighton a candidate strongly backed by the unions was selected.

issue is how many are they on a roll? How many have Unite forced

onto a Labour constituency? There is a clear trend that those candidate

strongly backed by the unions tended to win, sometimes regardless of what

is independent commentators thought of their performance. There is not

evidence for that. I have been through an open Labour Party

selection, I was the only woman on a shortlist of eight. There was a

heavily union backed candidate and I beat them. Obviously there are trade

union members in my own membership who sometimes favour the trade union

backed candidate, and sometimes do not. But there are some people in Ed

Miliband's own frontbench who are publicly expressing their run

happiness. Jim Murphy said they, meaning Unite, can't bully and get

their way within the Labour Party. There is a row taking place in

private that has basically emerged in public. If you are political

party, that is a gift when your opponents do that, when they row

with each other. In my role as health minister I engage with the

unions, and there is clearly disquiet from the unions about the

strength and power of Unite in the Labour Party. What are the unions?

When you see that, for example, Unison, which is more moderate, I

believe, than Unite, have much less they say. The Labour Party as a

party has traditionally had brought union backing. But now one union is

beginning to buy votes in the process. Unison have complained

about Unite being too powerful? I would not say they have direct

complained, but you can pick up background disquiet from union

members. Tom Watson, a key figure in your party, a big union man. Has he

got too much power when it comes to choosing candidates? Tom Watson is

in the position he is in because he is a tremendous campaign in his own

constituency. We are both in the Black Country. Has he too much

power? In the 1990s, we introduced one member, one vote. We will do all

we can to make sure that this is fair and transparent. I am

determined, as a Labour MP, that the people up for election in 2015 have

had the backing of their local party. It is really important that

that happens. Ed Miliband has been very decisive when it came to

Falkirk. The party stepped in and stop the process, froze the

membership so that only members who joined from March of last year were

eligible, and so we're getting a grip on the problems in Falkirk.

Nick, a final word? We did not speak about primary school places, earlier

this week, an all-party Commons committee said that over 250,000

school places were needed by September 2014, and there was a

danger that music rooms and libraries would be replaced by unit

of the classrooms. Although it did not feel like it was Ed Miliband's

day, I think the Labour leader has invested in a story he thinks would

fit in with people 's life experiences in the next few months

and weeks to say, when your child is in an overcrowded classroom or does

not have a classroom, here is why. And all the places are to be

available for September, when the school goes back. Thank you.

Now, we could, if we wanted to, head to the supermarket at three o'clock

on a Sunday afternoon. But could we get an appointment to see our GP

then, or have a routine NHS operation on our knee? Probably not.

But all this could be about to change under plans by Health

Secretary Jeremy Hunt to make care in NHS England truly 24/7. In fact,

data shows that mortality rates actually increase during

out-of-hours provision. But doctors say the proposals won't work in a

service already overstretched. Former doctor and author of NHS SOS

I was a hospital doctor of the 37 years. I advise the Government on

the care of elderly people. Nothing would appease me more than being

able to offer comprehensive care in the NHS, 247. Surgeries will be

open seven days a week so patients could see their doctors without

missing work. In NHS hospitals, the care on a Sunday night would be

just as good as the care on a Wednesday morning. It wouldn't only

be patient centred, but staff centred. It would make it easy to

deliver promptly and safely, everything we want for our patients.

But it would be irresponsible to support Jeremy Hunt's call for a

247 Tesco style service at present. Why? The NHS is facing �20 billion

worth of cuts, massive staff reductions, closure of A&E and

closure of some hospitals. All of this in the context of the most

disruptive reorganisation in its history. No wonder services are

overstretched. Worse still, resources will become more scarce

as Government plans for re privatisation unfolds. There will

be tendering process has overseen by lawyers, and money diverted into

profits for multi- millionaire entrepreneurs. Any extension of

services, some think the vast majority of doctors support, will

mean endangering what is currently on offer. In other words, upgrading

services at the weekend may mean downgrading services during the

week. Doctoring is a more serious And Professor Raymond Tallis joins

us now. I think everybody would agree that doctoring is more

complicated than shopping. But also there is a perception that doctors

don't want to work out of hours and the weekends? I began a 104 hour

week when I started as a junior doctor. When I finished I was

working 70 hours a week when I finished. It was normal when I

retired to become a consultant on call. That there was no question of

not doing out of hours care. Nevermind one continuing

preoccupation of patience when you are not being paid for it. His it

to demand would looking at? You put it down to the fact there were no

resources. Let's say the resources were there, would it be reasonable

for people to expect a 24 hour a day service in terms of GPs and

hospital? It's would be wonderful. When I was a doctor in hospital, it

was dreadful on Sunday when you were trying to solve a complex

problem because you did not have a support service. When you were

trying to communicate with primary care there wasn't the support at

the weekend. As I have indicated, it would be fantastically staff

centres. We would be far less concerned, but it requires an

enormous amount of resources at a time when resources are being

squandered a by the Coalition. more money was put into the NHS or

the resources were spent more wisely you could have a more even

service spread across seven days? �12.7 billion will be put into the

NHS during this Parliament. But if you look at the root causes, the

majority of the NHS workforce are on a 24 hour basis. There is the

basis of expanding GP hours and consultant hours. Because the

previous contract could GP now earns �108,000. There is a 24%

increase in pay given to consultants by the previous

Government. Would you like to change that? They were still

allowed to opt out of weekends and evenings. Part of this is what

contract you put in place. Doctors are well remunerated... And they

should work out-of-hours and weekends? Doctors shouldn't just do

on-call work at that time, but more routine work. At night and the

weekends, the mortality rate is higher. When you are earning

�108,000 on average, and you are starting a salary as a consultant

on 84,000... What are you blaming the fact you're 82% more likely to

die in the NHS when you have an operation on a Sunday compared to a

Monday? Are you saying there are enough resources, but doctors are

not good enough at the weekend? am not saying that. But some were

there is a problem. The contracts knitters he did by the previous

Government allowed doctors to opt out of weekend care. So consultant

care, is safer Kerr and better. That is something we need to see

more of. Not just during the week, but in the evenings and weekends.

Good patient care, professionals acting with professionalism. What

do say to that? First of all he is confusing the situation with

primary care and the situations with hospitals. All hospital

consultants provide cover over weekends on a shift basis. It is

not actually being at a hospital delivering care, it is being

provided by on-call cover which is different to providing routine,

daytime care. The other thing is, there is only a certain number of

hours an individual doctor can work. It is inappropriate for a doctor to

work a 100 our week, as I did. We need more doctors. You cannot

spread one doctor over 168 hours in a week. We are can -- recruiting

more consultants. The previous Government recognised that

consultant care is better. We need to have more consultants working at

weekends and out of hours. It is also the case we need a GPS system

that is not necessarily looking at daytime care, but providing care in

the evenings and weekends to keep patients more out of the A&E when

they don't need to be there. are the Government, make it happen.

We need to revisit the contracts we inherited from the previous

Government. Some of these contracts come round in a ten-year sample.

Hackney, idealistic GPs wanted to clawback the opt-out from providing

out-of-hours services. The existing private provider was awful. The

public and the doctors agreed with that. They tried to buy it out and

they were prevented from doing so. By the rules laid down by the

previous Government. Now yesterday we had a bit of a

spat on our programme - which we always enjoy. The Labour MP, Simon

Danczuk, locked horns with The Independent's Owen Jones over the

question of Jobs Seekers Allowance and whether there should be a

seven-day waiting period. Owen Jones attacked the proposal and

well a bit of old-fashioned class warfare ensued. Take a look at this.

You cannot just bring everybody together. You have an idealistic

view of the world. You sound like a 1980s alternative comedian. It is

hilarious in many respects, but taking on the mantle of Ben Elton

does not help anybody in politics. You sound like a Tory politician.

The grotesque sight of the Labour MP scuttling around TV studios to

back Tory attacks on some of the poorest of society. The priority

has to be creating jobs, creating wealth.

Well that ding-dong caused a Twitter storm and led the Daily

Telegraph blogger, Dan Hodges, to write that the Labour Party needs

more of this left-wing rebuttal and he accused the Labour leadership of

being in thrall to Owen Jones. Dan Hodges joins us now. And are we

saying, the word has got out from Ed Miliband's headquarters that

Owen-Jones is not to be touched? Owen-Jones is a made man within the

Labour Party. A Mafia expression? It is a Mafia expression. It has

been leave Owen alone. It is an open secret that Ed Miliband and

his party have been courting going for several months. Why is that?He

is influential and has his newspaper column, he is influential

in terms of his liaison with the unions, think tank he is

established with. And also the direct action movement that Labour

wants to make common cause with. The other element is, the 35%

strategy, Ed Miliband is trying to build a new Coalition around those

who are disaffected with the Labour Party around the Iraq war, and

young and first-time voters. There is a sense Irwin is a spokesperson

for that group. Owen-Jones replied to your comments, saying it is the

most riveting and personal fantasy he has ever read. I don't want to

go into his personal fantasies, certainly not before the watershed!

Would you like to disprove Dan Hodges theory by attacking a Wynne-

Jones on air? This is total rubbish. Ed Miliband has not put out an

instruction to shadow ministers not to have a go at him. I would be

happy to criticise Owen if the occasion arises. And Simon is a

Labour Member of Parliament, he speaks for the Labour Party. Not

Owen. So Simon was right, and I was was wrong? -- Owen. Yes.It is

falling apart. The word is out now, attack it Owen. They will all be

Time to put you out of your misery with the answer to the Guess the

Year competition. The answer was 1942. Why should they have found

out it was 1942? The Al Alan Main, the huge battle

on the North African desert, the turning-point of the war. The first

British victory, actually. Emma, please press the button to reveal

There is one Cup on eBay at the moment selling for �93, but it is

the cancer. OK that's all for today. Thanks to