14/02/2014 Daily Politics

Afternoon folks, welcome to the Daily Politics. Labour win

Wythenshawe with an increased share of the vote. UKIP push the Tories

into third, and the Liberal Democrats lose their deposit. We'll

discuss the by-election fallout. David Cameron repeats his message

that money is no object in the relief effort as yet another

Atlantic storm hits the UK. Plans for a law to allow MPs to be sacked

by local voters are rained off. The Lib Dems are livid. As is the

Conservative Zac Goldsmith. We'll talk to him live.

And could viral videos swing the outcome of the next general

election? We will take a look at the latest effort from the Labour Party.

All that in the next hour, and with me for the duration editor of

Prospect Magazine Brownen Maddox, and the political editor of the

Economist, James Astill. Welcome to you both. Let's start with the

Wythenshawe by-election, won last night by the Labour candidate

Michael Kane. This was entirely inspected -- expected. Speaking in

the last hour, Ed Miliband claimed it showed Labour were listening to

the electorate. It was a very, very good result for the Labour Party. We

added to the share of the vote, we gained support and I'm delighted by

the result we have. What you saw was the governing parties, the

Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, in total retreat. This is a

constituency where, even in 1997, the Conservative Party were polling

about 20% of the vote, so they should be deeply concerned. There is

a reason for this, that they have been telling people that everything

is fixed, that the economy is fine, the cost of living crisis is there,

and the people of Wythenshawe and Sale East no differently. --, they

no differently. Earlier this morning David Cameron was asked whether he

was worried that his party had been pushed into third by UKIP. This

by-election, the result was never in doubt. It's a relatively safe Labour

seat and I congratulate the winner and welcome him to Parliament. In

terms of coming third, that is disappointing. By-elections are a

time when people know they're not changing the government. They often

use them to send a message to politicians to make a protest. I

always believe in listening to the messages, and I want to win back

people to my party, and that's what I'm fighting to do at the next

general election. Our Adam spent the night at the Wythenshaw count, and

joins us now. You lucky man. It is the morning after the night before.

How does it look today? Looking a bit windy and wet, at the moment.

Thank you, Andrew, for making me to stay up till 3am from a result that

we predicted three weeks ago when the by-election was called. Labour

with is really strong showing an increasing the majority -- a really

strong showing. UKIP making it to second place, all eyes were on UKIP,

and they did pretty well, increasing their share quite a lot, but not one

of the stronger showings they've had in a by-election. They've had quite

a few others in the north where they've done better. The

Conservative Party shoved into third place, a bad night for them. Not as

bad as it was for the Liberal Democrats, losing their deposit with

less than 5% of the vote which cost them some money. Somebody much

happier is Michael Kane. Have you had much sleep? A few hours, but not

much. Were looking at the election through the prism of UKIP. Was that

an issue or a distraction? When the election started the Westminster

story was it was about UKIP, but they didn't break through at all. If

I was David Cameron I'd be more worried about UKIP, if I was Nick

Clegg I'd be more worried about them. The results shows that the

Labour Party increased its majority Ed Miliband's message is getting

through, so we were delighted. Did you even need to go out and

campaign? This is rock solid territory for the Labour Party. We

had deep relationships here. Paul Goggins was respected, dedicated,

immensely popular. We knocked on doors every week, and we will go

back out again to knock on the doors. We have deep-seated roots in

this constituency, and I think people recognise that, and they

recognise the issues we campaigned on, hospital pressures, the cost of

living crisis and the on her council cuts. I know one of the accident and

emergency unit down the road -- the unfair Council cuts. Where is this

crisis that Labour keep going on about? The evidence is that this

Tory led government, propped up by the liberal -- Liberal Democrats,

they closed the accident and emergency at Trafford, of the road,

then they closed the walk-in centre in the town centre, and overnight we

had 1000 ambulances queueing up this winter with people waiting to get

into the hospital. We have had over 700 people waiting on trolleys for

over four hours. This is going back to the dark days. We have had 80

operations cancelled. We cannot allow this to happen any more.

Talking to UKIP they would say there have been dark days in the

campaign. They say Labour activists daubed graffiti on the UKIP shop in

Sale and abused their activists. I think they are diverted away from a

very poor result. We run an extraordinarily professional

campaign with lots of volunteers, knocking on doors, listening to

issues. They produced absolutely no evidence of that, and if they did,

we would investigate and take action but there has been no evidence of

that whatsoever. Congratulations again, and you have to wait a week,

because they are all on holiday. Just finishing up on UKIP, I was in

the office there earlier and they are still quite bullish. A few years

ago, they say, they were nowhere in the seat but they have increased

their vote by a lot, so they think that's a positive thing ahead of

European elections in May. Sounds like the people of Wythenshawe have

a new Paul Goggins on their hand from the way he spoke there. -- on

their hands. We've been joined now by the Conservative MP Brooks

Newmark and UKIP's head of policy Tim Aker. We did ask the Lib Dems

for an interview, but no one was available. I wonder why. Let's come

to the Conservatives. By-elections are here today, gone tomorrow, only

a 28% turnout, it is derisory, but the Labour Party has consistently

been strong in by-elections. It is their 13th win since 2010. It has to

mean something. Yes, it does. Historically, anybody in

government, it's very difficult when you are in government, particularly

when you have to make tough decisions, that means you have to

bring down the deficit, and it has an impact on peoples lives. But the

good news is, the government has been creating jobs, reducing the

deficit and increasing growth which means, for example, 1.6 million jobs

today extra, which means 1.6 million extra who are secure. So why did

your share of the vote dropped by 11% in Wythenshawe? There are a

whole host of factors, as you heard from the new Labour MP. When it

comes to by-elections, people, for whatever region -- reason, they want

to give the incumbent government are kicking. We are no different than in

the past when the Labour Party were in government, they got a kicking as

well. One of the reasons you did not win the last general election was

because your performance in the North was lacklustre, particularly

in the cities. This suggests that the Conservative brand in the North

of England is still dying. We actually gained a number of seats in

the North, in the north-west, and the north-east. Maybe in the rural

seats, but you did not win a seat in the northern city. And in the

suburbs as well. It's like asking why Labour parties don't win the

rural areas, they just generally don't. It is about the general

trajectory of what is going on. As you pointed out, in this

by-election, we didn't do well. I totally acknowledge that. It would

be hard to argue any other way. Whether it matters in the long term

it's harder to say. UKIP, you came from nowhere, you got 18% of the

vote. It's OK. Not life changing. It's a solid result. It is a tough

seat. You were 9000 votes behind the winner. He won't exactly breathing

down their necks. Our vote went up five fold. We are seeing a trend

that we are the opposition in the north. It's a waste of time voting

for the Conservative Party and the Liberals in the north, because as

the results show, not just the by-election, but rather, South

Shields, we are challenging Labour. Can you reply to that? From this

by-election, and other straws in the wind, the Tory and Liberal Democrat

vote is collapsing in the north and UKIP is the beneficiary will stop

they have become the Liberal Democrat repository. It's for people

who are not sure. That's what we see in the north and the south. What the

Liberal Democrats are finding out is there is a cost of being in

government and being responsible. The price that is that their vote in

particular, compared to ours, is dropping enormously, and UKIP has

been the beneficiary. , general election, I think things will be

different. -- come a general election. You have taken a leaf out

of the Liberal Democrat book, changing your colour depending on

the seat. We saw the emergence of red, promising to protect welfare

benefits. You are now the kind of red UKIP up in the northern

constituencies, and the Thatcherite party in the South. All of these

labels mean very little. We would prioritise that spending here. Where

we lead on the response was about putting our people first. I don't

remember you talking about protecting people's welfare benefits

in the Eastleigh by-election. We proposed the bedroom tax, that's a

benefit cut. They have become more like the Liberal Democrats. They say

one thing nationally. We heard Nigel Farage a few weeks ago saying he

would cut benefits and the NHS, but in this particular by-election, they

changed their tune completely. We will take no lessons from a

party... They are the Liberal Democrats now. We will not take

lessons from a party that has made at lifetime out of doing one thing

and saying another. You can have too much of a good thing, and it's great

fun watching the Conservatives and UKIP going together. What did you

make of the by-election? I'm enjoying this, but there are two

questions. Whether UKIP can take votes of labour, and it is plausible

they might in the north, but I then think this shows that. -- I don't

think this election shows that. But it makes a good point about where

the Conservatives in the North are at the moment. The thing about UKIP

in the North is whether people will vote differently in a general

election. The next issue is going to have detailed polling. Prospect

magazine will have details of whether UKIP supporters who voted

Conservative last time will vote for them again when given a choice

between that and Ed Miliband. The polling does say yes, a lot of them

will. That tends to support David Cameron's view but there's still a

big question hanging out there. Nonetheless, this by-election was

not South Shields, it was ultimately a bit of support for UKIP, and it

suggest that the notions that the mainstream parties will suffer

somewhat equally because of the rise of UKIP, but that might not be

correct. I think the Conservatives will be able to say that they will

get the UKIP vote away from Ed Miliband, even if it works against

them in northern seat. I suppose it doesn't matter in the European

elections. But what does? I think we will do well. I think we have to

make sure that we get more than 20 MPs. The formula is different, and

it is by region, and in some regions we do well and in other regions we

are working on it. It's encouraging for the north-west. It's early days.

We had a big peak in the run-up to the last European elections, so we

will see. One polling survey company has some 30%, and the Conservatives

well behind. We will talk more about this later in the programme, but

thank you to all of at the moment. -- all of you. Now it's time for our

daily quiz. And while turnout was down to a rather depressing 28% in

the Wythenshaw by-election, there's been another contest at Westminster

this week which has been anything but apathetic. In fact, so desperate

were MPs to win the Westminster cat of the year contest there were even

accusations of vote rigging. The well of democracy has truly been

poisoned. Anyway the winner's been chosen, but which cat has taken the

prize? Is it a) Bosun? B) Parsnip? C) Kevin? Or d) Scaredy-Cat? At the

end of the show, Bronwen and James will give us the correct answer. It

seemed like such a good idea, and a pretty popular one. If your MP has

been up to no good, you have the power to recall them and force a

by-election. A form of MP recall was in all three party's manifesto. And

it made it into the Coalition Agreement. But now it looks like the

idea has been dropped all together and it's left coalition relations on

thin ice. It all started so well for the two-man luge at the head of the

Government, as both parties agreed it was time to clean up politics

after the expenses scandal. And promised to pass legislation to

equalise constituency boundaries, reduce the number of MPs and

introduce the power of recall. The idea was that 10% of the electorate

could sign a petition calling for a by-election when their MP was guilty

of serious wrongdoing. The coalition agreement even stated they would

bring forward early legislation. But a draft bill in 2011 was frozen out

after some complained about the additional requirement that a

committee of MPs would first have to decide if wrongdoing had taken

place. Now we learn that the power of recall won't be in the next, and

final, Queen's Speech by the time things have thawed out in May or

June. It must have been squeezed out by all that other legislation they

are going bring forward over the next year.

It's left one or two Lib Dems, including party president Tim

Farron, rather unhappy. He said last night the decision to drop the

policy showed the Conservatives didn't trust the electorate. Let's

get more on this now from our political correspondent Carole

Walker. Tim Farren said the Prime Minister

had blocked the idea, and I think you're about to speak to Zac

Goldsmith, a Conservative MP who will disagree strongly given what

his Twitter feed. -- said today. It's is a sense that before the

general election the parties want to get on with issues that really are a

voter's priorities. Although there was a massive public outcry after

the MP expenses scandal, this is not something that voters are clamouring

for at the moment. There is also a big disagreement about exactly how

the principles of this should work. MPs will tell you that the principle

is a good one, that voters should have more power to get rid of MPs

who misbehave, but when it comes to exactly how that should be

triggered, there's a lot of dispute. Something you should not have first

in the findings by this Parliamentary standing -- standards

committee. Others think that the bar has been set too high, and

constitutional reform committees in the Common criticised the proposals

and said they should be dropped because, in practice, it would never

happen, so voter expectations would be raised and realistically. In the

mix of all that, the idea is not going to make the Queens speech, it

won't be put into law this side of January -- of a general election,

and there's a good deal of scrapping about who is to blame. With us now

is the Conservative MP who's been pushing for a new right of recall,

Zac Goldsmith. Welcome to the Daily Politics.

If you are a maverick, George Galloway, myself, Caroline Lucas,

you haven't got a hope. It was totally anti-democratic. It was not

a small step towards a recall, it was a step backwards in terms of

democratic evolution. It was an appalling piece of legislation and I

am thrilled it was dropped. I'm less thrilled that the principle is

dropped. Recall was the only promise we made in the heat of the expenses

scandal, running up to the last election. The only reform proposal

that might have empowered voters. Everything else was nonsense. This

would enable voters to hold their MPs to account in safe seats, and

people knew it, and they looked forward to it. Could David Cameron

have rescued it? I think he could have, and I think he's behaved

appallingly. I have seen clips all date from David Cameron about what

it meant before the last election, and it's been dropped. It didn't

mean anything to him before. Nick Clegg and Tim Farren have been

disingenuous. They had three and a half years to deliver it. After the

criticism of the first draft bill, they haven't changed it. It was

never going to get through Parliament. I would have voted

against it and this is one of my big issues, I couldn't have supported

the bill. He had an opportunity to come back with something proper but

he chose not to. He kept talking about kangaroo courts. The only

caught in a recall system is the constituency, so not a nice word to

use. He effectively said that he is worried that genuine recall would

make MPs vulnerable. He wrote to me this morning to make the point.

Recall would make MPs vulnerable, which is why he has not supported

it. He has instead supported the complete and utter nonsense Billy

put forward. If we were to have five seconds silence, would we not hear

an audible sigh of relief from your party's own backbenchers that that

isn't going ahead? I don't buy into that. I pressed my own recall bill

to vote. It was a vote in which only backbenchers could take part and it

won with a thumping majority. Only 17 MPs voted against. The majority

who backed it were MPs. That was genuine recall. Parliament is up for

reform, the difficulty is that Cameron and Nick Clegg are not. It

remains to see if Ed Miliband is. If he would have put this forward in

opposition, he could have won. He could take the agenda and show that

he believes in democracy and the electorate. He has an amazing

opportunity and I hope he takes it. You would encourage Ed Miliband to

take the batter? It must be delivered because it's the only way

to have a meaningful change that will shake up Parliament, genuinely

empowered voters and ensure that Parliament does its job of holding

them to account and make sure MPs are kept on their toes. You don't

think the mood has changed after the demonstration of the defection of

your MPs? I don't think it mattered at all. I'm lucky I get on with my

association but if they had chosen to deselect me last month, I would

have been happy to go to the voters to try my luck in a general

election. Recall is democracy full for this no other way to describe

it. All arguments against recall effectively our arguments against

democracy itself. It is extraordinary, really. Despite the

noise as we make, the party today believe they can get away with

breaking promises on this scale. It's extraordinary. You have had an

interesting conversation on twitter with Tim Farron, from the Lib Dems,

who is broadly on the same space as you on this issue? Any chance you

could get together to put the show back on the road? Yes, I will work

with anyone. I think he agrees with me and supported my bill. I know he

supports general recall, but his entire body language suggests he

will always put his party first. I don't think we can move forward and

that is willing to hold his party to account in the way I am. Otherwise

we won't make any progress at all. I sympathise with this noble

endeavour. It was promised by party leaders but it's tough to argue MPs

are not becoming increasingly accountable for their constituencies

and the deselection is the Tories have seen recently, perhaps the

promise of reform with the unions, it promises more of the same in the

Labour Party. There's no doubt, that rather fundamental change is making

Government tougher to run. We have seen that in enormous rebellions the

party is carried out in recent times. Voters still want to see

efficient smooth running Government so there is a balance there. We are

edging towards a slightly more accountable system. It's still the

case and it would be the case under Nick Clegg's reforms, as an MP could

go on holiday for five years and you could be deselected but you would

still be the MP. I could either BNP or going on holiday that two years,

there's nothing in the structures today or anything Nick Clegg

proposed in his bill to prevent me from doing that. I could be the

worst MP and as long as I'm not in jail for 12 months, I'm fine full is

nothing voters could do about it. It matters less than a marginal seat.

You would be booted out at the next election. If you are in an old

Labour mining town where people never vote Conservative or a

rock-solid Tory seat, that's the choice people would have. You want a

system to protect an MP from harassment, from people who don't

like the views. I completely support the democratic principles you've

said, but it proves not as simple as that when people started. People

argued about the system. You mean the process of it? The process how

to do about the party would have a lot of influence on it and so on. I

welcome the rebellions. The increasing independence shown by MPs

right across the budget spectrum. He said he needs a mechanism. In the

end, the people themselves, not a committee of MPs, not the party of

whips, but the people themselves can take action. I would agree with that

but they have won at least every five years. But it on a flawed

mechanism if you're in a safe seat. Even in a marginal seat. What would

additional voters have to do, vote for the Lib Dems? They might

disagree with anything they stand for, they might vote Labour... They

could be deselected. But, until the election, I would still be the MP.

You grab two or three years without any representation at all. It's a

flaw in the system. MPs need to be kept on their toes throughout the

five years and no, when they make promises, they will be held to those

promises. You might find MPs make less extravagant promises because

they're more likely to keep them. I think it would improve the

relationship between people and those in power. People are pulling

away from politics. And the political establishment. And all the

data backs that up. Something big is needed, and I think this could be

it. There is one example in the world where recall exists, plenty of

times but not one success story. Let me ask you a final question. What

the Conservatives going to put in the next manifesto on this? If we

walk away from this side of the election and have the gall to

introduce into our next manifesto, frankly, it makes a mockery of the

whole idea of a manifesto. People are going to struggle to believe

anything I say. It's open to the black me to point that out. If you

put it on, we say, why should we believe you? No one can blame the

coalition. Both parties promised it. We could push this through, and that

could easily be demonstrated if he were to take the lead on this

because it would get support in parliament. No doubt about that. We

shall see if he takes up the challenge. Thank you. Who wouldn't

want to live in a nice affordable House, with local parks, well

financed local amenities, and well thought out public spaces? Ah, if

only local authorities could deliver such an idyllic dream. The Garden

City movement however has always said it could deliver that, and a

number of Garden Cities exist and thrive to this day across the globe.

Two and half years ago the Coalition said it wanted to build more in

England. And then has said very little since. You can see a pattern

in this programme. Giles has been looking at why. There has been an

upsurge in focus on the garden city of Letchworth recently. At least the

concept behind it. The founder of the Garden City movement at the

knees Howard. Why? Because the Victorian mixer planning social

interaction, housing and infrastructure might be a solution,

albeit updated for the 21st-century. To me, garden city is about creating

a balance community and thinkable to do for their enjoyment. Ethical

brands of a planned development for the committed and that the Garden

City. Whether it was a hundred years ago or not. I know what your

thinking. These houses look expensive and they are. Nobody in

bad urban housing could just move here now. But the Garden City

concept was always rooted in being affordable, even turning a profit

but those who lived and invested in it. One of the main reasons we are

interested in Garden City is at an ideas precise because of the idea

they can behave themselves. You're talking about bits of land who are

currently very low value, once you build a town have enormous value and

if you can capture that uplift and recycle it into the town to pay for

the infrastructure and the facilities, the schools, new towns

doing Canon have pay for themselves. At the knees Howard came up with the

idea of a garden city and he didn't just think about how people lived

and where they lived but where they would work, how they will spend

their leisure time and also, more importantly, how they could afford

to live here. Letchworth was the first. Welwyn Garden City followed

and there are many places around the country that would say they had at

least a bit of a Garden City concept within them. But given the fact that

most parties, quite like the Garden City idea, and the coalition

committing to building more of them, in 2011, why has it all gone quiet?

Well look at what happens if you want to build anything in a a leafy

rural environment. Now imagine a building a whole town. It's not the

when. It's the where that might be the hiccup and then see the ripple

you find who will be against. Recently the Telegraph said it had

learned of plans for Yalding in Kent and Gerrard's Cross in

Buckinghamshire. No one welcomes new development. I know it's not

perceived as the best thing, but I think everyone is recognising

something has to be done so I think you answered the light with who was

going to take that big decision. In November last year, Lord Wolfson

offered a quarter million pound prize for anyone who could come up

with a blue skies Garden City design that was visionary, economically

viable and sparklingly popular. The Government however has hardly

bubbled over on the topic. It is disappointing. We have been calling

on the Government to publish its plans for Garden City is the two

years. We certainly hope the prize will prompt the Government into

action. For some, the exciting prospects of Garden cities as one

part of a housing solution seem obvious but unless it's grasped

we're all just going round and round in circles. Giles Dilnot reporting.

And we've been joined by Miles Gibson, director of the Wolfson

Economics Prize. We know what garden cities. Why do need competition?

Because plenty of people, although they understand the concept of the

Garden City, album worried about how you could implement one. We have

done it before and we think we can do it again. As your board

indicated, painted people think that the concept of garden cities in

something, and I'm including the politicians the day, but what the is

asking how would you do it quit at how can you persuade people that

there's a future for them in a nice place to live? How can you offer

them something better than what have so far. Let's come back the

practical edges of this. Let me ask you this. We've had Welwyn Garden

City, the most famous one, because the names on the title. That was a

while ago. Before the Second World War, continued afterwards. If we

were to start today, in what way do you think would garden cities

different from the ones we have done it in the past? And how would you

stop them ending up as just another Newtown? Actually, that's a question

we are asking for thought we were offering ?250,000 for the answer to

that question. There could be a university. There's money to be made

here. What might be different? We are asking people about, what's

different about the way we live today compared to Welwyn Garden

City? We are a car dominated society for example full that can be push

the clock back on that? What about technology? What can broadband and

Wi-Fi do for us. Cycle lanes, great places to bring up your children,

with parks, gardens, allotments, flood plains, things that we need in

the new cities which you might not have had in cities prewar and

post-war. Is there any sign in your view that the current Government is

prepared to commit on this? You have to look at other politicians have

actually said, so I think Eric Pickles come out recently and said

the coalition was paid to build a few garden cities. Nick Clegg said

in a speech he is interested in the concept, as well, and Ed Miliband at

who's interested in new generation of new towns, and asked Sir Michael

Lyons to think about how that might come about. We are hoping the body

of entries we get to our prize will give people a bit of material to do

the thinking necessary. Can you point to Labour not in power, but

can you point to any ground work being done by the coalition on this?

You'd have to ask them, I think. But you are the specialist full subdue

follow these things. Day in day out. I they talk vaguely about it. It

sounds nice. We have a housing problem in this country. I'm not

aware that any area has been designated, the groundwork has been

done, any plans being drawn up. Are you? You would have two ask them

that but my job is to dangle a ?250,000 check-in for the people who

can give is the best ideas how we should do it. What Lord Wolfson has

been clear about, he thinks the politicians will follow the debate

rather than lead it. They need answers. They need technical answers

as to how to actually do this and then they will come forward with

proposals. You will have to wait because it's inconceivable that the

Conservatives in particular are going to go down this road this side

of the election. The harsh truth is that the biggest need for these

garden cities is in the south-east of England. That's where the housing

shortage is greatest for the bats where people want to live. And the

Conservatives are not going to open this whole can of worms in

constituencies that they either want to hold onto or hope to win a couple

from the Lib Dems. Too bad the whole thread of the people in leafy

villages, and by the way, where going to have a Garden City over the

hill. That might be the perception, at the national level, but if you

look at what's going on in local authorities in the south-east, there

are some local authorities capable of delivering quite large

settlements, for example, if you look at Charlot District Council,

they're proposing a extension to this stuff. North Huntington, big

settlement of over 5000 homes going in there. I was talking to the

developer about that recently come and they had just four objections to

that proposition, so it can be done. It can be done. That is not a garden

city though. A garden city 's 50,000 new homes and we've not built any

since the 1960s. The government at the time of the 40s and 50s, like in

Stevenage, said to the local objectors, thank you, but stuff you,

it's happening anyway. It's hard to think our government today could not

adopt a broadly similar tack. I know that this is my playful at ?250,000,

but please. Three entries already this morning. But that is why, given

that demand is hottest in the south-east, it won't happen under a

Tory government. It could only happen under a Labour government. It

is politically impossible this side of the election. What is easier is

due dribbling five or 10,000 town -- five or ?10,000 house clutches, you

cannot have a garden bed. Although I am sure your prize will get the most

wonderful vision and the dream of the little figures walking through

the models. It's always the same little figure. That person has made

a fortune. The parents pushing the body and all that. One of the things

were asking, one of the Di mentions of the question is, how do you make

a garden city popular -- the dimensional. People will say it

cannot be done. There is no point in you asking. I don't believe that. We

have to be optimistic. We have to think that people can be persuaded

that development of high quality that brings new infrastructure and

services with it is a good thing for them and their communities. Didn't

Gordon Brown talk at one stage about those for new towns? What happened

to that? One of those was Bicester. All the 5000? They are tiny. I'm not

going to save that was a good initiative or not. I think we will

get more propositions of that kind of size from entrance to the

competition, but we need to be ambitious about this. The figures

that James was using earlier are more what we are looking for. A

city, the clue is in the title, you want something that will end up as a

city even if it doesn't start as one. Haven't you got a problem of

perception here? When people hear the words garden city, they think

that is nice, but what they fear is they will end up with a new town,

and that is not so nice, and with some honourable exceptions, they

aren't so nice. You need to speak to some people who live in the new

towns. Milton Keynes is a nice place. That is the honourable

exception. But people living near it before it was billed might have a

different view. -- before it was built. I am sure the residents of

Milton Keynes would not be that happy. I will guarantee you that the

value of those houses has gone up not down. I'm sure of that, but

that's true everywhere in the south-east. In the end, to get this

done, to be brutally honest about it, do you not need French style

planning laws? Otherwise the central government says you will do it. Or

even Chinese style? That is how we did the new towns. But we should

remember that Letchworth was not built in that way. They were built

with private money and they are successful places. Places that

people want to live. They have high value. If we did it before, we can

do it again. Thank you very much. An interesting concept, and good luck

with the essays. I'll be writing mine tonight. In just over three

months, 400 million people across Europe will be able to cast their

vote in fresh elections to the European Parliament. How many

actually will? Property a third. So what's at stake? Adam's been to

Brussels to find out. -- probably a third.

The perfect addition to the Brussels skyline, a 70 metre tall platform

that goes round and round in circles. It's a great place to get

an overview of Europe's big year. The first big event affects one of

the building over there, the European Parliament, because those

elections to it in May show that the way the wind is blowing, it could be

in for a historic realignment. Polling across Europe suggest that

far left, far right and extreme Eurosceptic parties could be on the

up. Do they organise themselves into an efficient legislative machine

that will achieve what they want to try and undo bits of legislation,

try to roll back the political frontiers of Europe? Or will they

simply become a blocking my obstructive group that sit on their

hands and try to stop things from happening? But the excitement

doesn't end there. Then a new president of the European Commission

needs to be is elected. You will miss all this by the end of the

year. We are still working. He is still working until November but

then a replacement needs to be found, and frankly, it is a

merry-go-round. For the first time ever, the seven pan-European

political groups in the Parliament have picked their own candidates for

the job because the Lisbon Treaty says the appointment should reflect

the results of the European elections. But the final choice will

be made by the national leaders at a summit, and they do not want their

hands tied, so there's a good chance they will take no notice. But their

decision then goes back to parliament, where it has to be

approved by a majority, who might kick up a fuss. Then the leaders and

the new president select a commissioner from each member state,

and the Parliament can veto all of those. Confused? Well, so are they.

No one is quite sure how the back and forth will actually work. Please

remain seated, the ride is not over yet. Because the President of the

Council, Herman van rhomboid -- Rompuy. He has not been -- he will

leave at the end of the year. Cathy Ashton, the foreign policy supremo

is out of the door as well. It really is enough to make your head

spin. But fear not, here is the really, really easy version. By the

end of the year it will have set in motion the way Europe moves from

here over the next five years. It is not so much what happens during the

year, but what is in place by the end of the year, that is what will

set off Europe on a course which could be very different from that

which we see at the moment. Adam Fleming reporting. The turnout

was 28% in this by-election in the north-west yesterday. The European

elections in this country, you could probably put a number three in front

of it, but not a number four. This by-election saw a very low turnout

and there will be a low turnout in the parliamentary elections, and

what we are all looking for is how well UKIP does, how badly the

Conservatives do, and how that feeds into the general election next year.

Do you think UKIP, is there an amateur bit about them, that they're

not very good at managing expectations? It is a political

skill and they have had Nigel Farage and other leading UKIP people on the

programme saying that they will come first, which, of course, they might

not. An interesting problem is that Labour will run 32% in a poll, and

UKIP on 26, a good second, so the Tories on 23. If they had not been

telling everybody they would come first, and they come second, it will

seem they've not done well. That's why this OK result for them in

Wythenshawe is not such a bad thing. Just two, sort of, slow their energy

little bit. A big fallout, if the Tories and Lib Dems do badly. Which

is widely expected. In the European elections? Yes, the fallout for them

afterwards? Yes, they will have to be arguing even more strongly that

the European elections, like a by-election, not ready any guide to

a general election. But people are expecting UKIP to do well. And, if

you like, parallel parties right across the continent coming up with

an anti-Europe message expecting them to do well, as well. It is

interesting, even though I'm not expect the turnout to be very high.

We could end up with a different European Parliament. And real reason

to pay attention to it. And that's the story on the European

elections. UKIP is just a part of it because you will see that phenomenon

and much further to the right in France, with the National front, the

Freedom parties in Finland and Holland, even Sweden looks like it

may have one or two MEPs from the hard right. Who knows what Greece

and Italy are going to send us? The European Parliament could have a

block of 35-40% of MEPs outside, to the right of the mainstream. And, at

a time, moreover, when the parliament is claiming more powers

and more of a say in the way the commission runs itself. So it is

concerning, no doubt so it will be worth watching the election results.

The boating. I wouldn't go that far. -- the voting. Of course, I always

vote. Now, as we know, the next General Election is going to be on

seventh May 2015. And that means the campaigning and electioneering is

already taking place. How do we know that? Well, the parties are turning

to youTube, Facebook and Twitter to try and create a viral internet

buzz. Take a look at this. Make yourself heard. Don't wait for

a general election, don't wait for a referendum, don't let anyone put

jobs at risk and don't let anyone throw our recovery away. Let's keep

Britain prosperous Thomas safe and strong. Vote Liberal Democrat.

That was an example from each party but how they're trying to use social

media to get their message across. And we're joined now by the

political editor of BuzzFeed, Jim Waterson. It's at the cutting edge

of social media. Welcome. Let's take the Labour won, because of the most

recent one, and it's clearly the most sophisticated as well. What did

you make of it? I thought was brilliant, the first time any

British poetical parties accident something to communicate outside of

someone of Westminster on this scale. It won't have cost much to

do. A few hours with staff they've got, nothing to distribute and it

reached 400,000 people, people who are normally look at political

videos. Is it good or bad but it looks like the Conservatives can

afford less good graphics and the Daily Politics? It was pretty awful.

I think some people would agree with that as well, but I think they will

come back with something better. The main thing they got to do is have a

bit of humour. It's hard for politicians to drop their guard and

show self-deprecation. And awareness. That was lying about Ed

Balls being controlled by Ed Miliband and predictions going

wrong, and that's an interest of 10,000 people, it's not going to

spread far. The Labour won, it got almost 440,000 hits. It's a lot for

a political video. -- belabour one. When I see things that go viral,

quite often, they are not made to go viral. But they do go viral because

people just like them. -- the Labour one. Can people make them go viral?

Just try to be funny, drop your guard. The Labour won and funny,

it's serious. It's poignant, in fact. There's pictures of George

Osborne eating a pasty, looking very unhappy with that. The reaction was,

people are finding it funny. Here is the big question. In this country,

we've never had the video political advertising and like the USA and

other countries. We don't allow the parties to advertise on TV. They get

free space instead, whereas, in America in particular, campaigns can

be dominated by television advertising. Will this, the fact the

parties can go round the existing broadcasters, and go direct to the

public, get round the broadcasting rules, is this the beginning of

American-style advertising in British politics? I wouldn't go that

far but we will see a lot of paid adverts in the 20 15th election.

There's nothing to stop the Tories or Labour or the Lib Dems going and

buying all the adverts on you Tube. A new voter, they sit down to watch

something and they will see an advert which is what you have just

shown there for them is nothing to stop that happening. They could be

in bed in newspapers and magazines, couldn't they? They would pay for

them. They could pay for print ads in some respects now. But a video is

much more powerful. The trick is, the reason it goes viral is because

your friends are recommending it. Your friend on Facebook is saying

it's great. It's not like somebody chucking a leaflet through your

door. What do you make of this? Very watchable. It doesn't have that you

must see this, I must pass it on, quality. 400,000 in a short time, it

is very watchable, but this really isn't American political

advertising. That's not so far away. I would suggest it's early days. The

techniques could take is that way, but the tone of it is actually

rather marvellously British. It's funny. They will hire the people who

can do this sort of thing. I would suggest it's quite a short jump from

doing this sort of thing, once you get the in-house expertise, to say,

let's try some negative advertising. Let's try what works in America.

Sure, I'm sure it will change politics in the media for ever.

Colossal election shaping way, but what we have since over it's hard to

get excited about. I struggled to find that Labour advert in any way

amusing or ground-breaking. It seems me perfectly straightforward and I'm

sure it will appeal to people who are basically minded to vote Labour

anyway. That's why they approve this message. It is not entertaining. We

run it for people who are no interest in politics, Labour ought

Tory, tweeting, I don't like either party but it was funny for some it

was influencing them against the parties. What was funny about it? I

don't know, ask them for sub at 400,000 people liked it. I don't

think it's funny but it's well made and slick by the standards of the

Tories won. It was slightly funny. It could've been better. It was

hitting on ahead of a hammer funny, not subtle funny. That hit me on the

head with a hammer funny. Are the parties hiring the expertise

now to do this sort of thing? Yes, Labour have an in House person

separate from the main campaign team doing this sort of thing, and using

this to raise money. If you got this sent to you by the Labour Party

mailing list, you would get things sane would like to donate ?5? That's

the way Barack Obama raced his money. -- raised his money. At the

moment, the law does not allow you to place a party political advert in

the middle of the break of Coronation Street. If I watch

Coronation Street on ITV player, can I place the ad in the middle of

that? There's absolutely nothing to stop you buying it and putting VAT

advert in that slot, if you're watching it on any online catch-up

service. There you go. This will change British politics.

Fascinating, thank you free much. The politicians had to dig their

wellies from the back of the cupboard this week as they set out

to tour parts of the England and Wales hit by flooding and storms.

And the political response to the weather was the main event at

Westminster. Here's David with a round-up in just 60 seconds.

It was raining politicians this week as they got their feet wet to show

that those affected by the wild weather haven't been left high and

dry. But there were some good news as David Cameron declared he'd

splash the cash to help people affected with the flooding. Money is

no object in this relief effort. But not so good and slightly confusing,

ministers said that would be no blank cheque to deal with the

fallout. Meanwhile, smoking in cars with children side may become an

offence, even though Nick Clegg originally had his doubts about it.

Relief for London's commuters as a threatened Tube strike was called

off but Bob Crow and Boris Johnson both declared victory. And

cross-party unity as George Osborne, Ed Balls and Danny Alexander all

ruled out sharing the pound with an independent Scotland. SNP 's were

less happy at what they described as a latest bout of bullying from the

Westminster playground. Scotland Yard has confirmed that a

48-year-old journalist has been interviewed under caution by

detectives from operation building, the investigation into illegal

interception of voice mail messages at Mirror group newspapers. The

journalist in question is a former Daily Mirror editor, peers Morgan.

More on that, no doubt, in the news coming up. The politics of the flood

so far, politicians were slow off the ground, they usually are, they

are rushing to catch up. The stakes are bigger for Mr Cameron than

anybody else. So far, I would suggest terrible for the people, but

not a seminal political event? Not yet, but clearly if David Cameron

didn't manage to show some basic competence in this, it could stick

for the rest of his parliament, so he has to show they were slow but

were hoping the water would go away. Not bad so far. The floods are

happening in a lot of Lib Dem and Tory areas weather will be a

conflict and contest, so I'm watching whether there has been more

rows within the Tories than between the Tories and Lib Dems. New Orleans

on a different scale from this. It is one of the defining moments of

the Bush administration, but so far, this doesn't look like a defining

moment for Mr Cameron. No, I would take a punt and say it isn't going

to be either full support could've gone very badly wrong. As it did for

Mr Bush. I got to interrupt you. Never mind Piers Morgan. There's

just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz. The question

was which cat won the Westminster Cat of the Year competition this

week following allegations of vote-rigging? Was it: a) Bosun. B)

Parsnip. C) Kevin. Or d) Scaredy-Cat. We have 15 seconds. Who

can tell me the answer. Kevin would have my vote. Actually, you are

right. It was Kevin. Owned by Bill Esterson, Labour MP for Sefton

Central. That is it for today. Thanks to Bronwen, James and all my

guests. I'll be back on BBC One on Sunday with the Sunday Politics.

I'll be joined by the RMT union leader Bob Crow. Westminster is on a

break all next week. We're not back for ten days. Bye bye.