04/05/2016 Daily Politics

Tomorrow voters across Britain will go to the polls

in the largest set of elections, outside of a general election,

Elections in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland,

English councils, London, police commissioners,

A chance for every voter in the land to cast a ballot.

So what will it mean for the political landscape?

The Government signals that it may give ground on accepting child

Ministers are due to hold talks with Tory rebels in an attempt

It should all provide some good knockabout

for Prime Minister's Questions - we'll have all the action,

All that in the next hour and a half.

Scheduled by the BBC and so far not by government ministers.

And with us for the whole programme today the former Conservative

minister and party chairman, Grant Shapps, and the shadow cabinet

Jon is one of the MPs for Leicester, who's football team

have won something called the Premier League -

Grant's local team is Hatfield Town FC.

Apparently, like Leicester, they also play in blue.

But, as far as we can tell, that is where the the similarities

Anyway, I don't know whether the next 90 minutes will be

like watching Leicester or Hatfield, but I'm hoping there

The government could be about to change its stance

on whether to resettle child refugees who are already in Europe,

With lots of their own MPs concerned about the issue, they could face

defeat in the Commons next week, unless some sort of deal is reached.

And potential Tory rebels are meeting the Immigration Minister

Meanwhile, Sir Erich Reich, who himself came to Britain

on the Kindertransport in the 1930s, has called on the government

Unaccompanied children, they're in Europe and Mr Cameron

thinks they're safe, but they are not.

They hide in woods, they hide from authorities.

All kinds of things and tens of thousands of

children have been lost, nobody knows where they are.

My view is, given I came on what was called the

Kindertransport, Britain should help a little bit more.

Grant Shapps, should the government change its mind and take some of

these unaccompanied child refugees in Europe? Yes. How many? I don't

know, once you get into the detail it becomes quite complicated. What

you don't want to do is create factors which means people decide to

send their kids to Europe and cause more people to risk their lives on

the journey, but I think the problem the government has is, no country in

Europe is doing more in Syria, ?2 million spent in that region, we are

taking another 3000, but the problem is that it kind of, when you get

down to what is happening on your doorstep, looks and feels not quite

right. Has the government got the message? I expect it has. I don't

have any inside information but, fundamentally the Prime Minister is

a decent man, he will be seeing this, you heard what he said. They

have stuck firmly to their guns. We spoke to a number of ministers about

this. They have firmly defended the Prime Minister, the central tenet is

to not taken refugees unless they have a close relative. You think

they will give way on that? I think the concern is real. People have

been dismissive of the concern of creating the situation like in

Germany. Is it a case that migrants can go back to Turkey, those that

cross the sea? Does that remove the pool factor? This is one of many

reasons, you can get into the complexities, this is why it is so

complicated. But you asked the question of whether I think the

government needs to move on it and I think they should. Will it be enough

if the government says it is prepared to allow unaccompanied

children to come to Europe if they have distant relatives? Will that be

enough? I don't know the specifics. My colleagues are closer to the

issue. But I do know like many people in this country, my father

came after being chased out, we are doing more than any other European

nation in Syria to sort it out, but we are in danger of undoing that

good work. What do you say to Grant Shapps, who says the government

should change its mind? I agree with Brad and he made a very reasonable

case. The signal seems to be that the Prime Minister and ministers are

meeting to see if an agreement can be thrashed out. I hope they meet

the Lord who has been moving it in the House of Lords, he was on the

news earlier raising questions about what this deal could be. I hope they

will meet him. An agreement would be allowing 3000? That was the motion I

supported but to be honest if we can reach consensus with the government

I would go along with whatever consensus is reached. There is

already a replacement mechanism in place. Other countries are not doing

their bit. Is enough being done in terms of dealing with child

refugees? I don't think enough is being done but that does not mean we

should not be doing anything. We have heard the stories of children

going rough. I would be happy to go along with whatever consensus is

reached, I just want us to get consensus.

Yes, it is finally upon us, the biggest set of elections outside

Voters in every area of the country will be able to vote

in English Local Council Elections, Scottish Parliament Elections,

Welsh Assembly Elections, Northern Ireland Assembly Elections,

mayoral elections, including for the London mayor,

and Police and Crime Commissioner elections.

And if that wasn't enough there are also two Westminster

by-elections in Ogmore and in Sheffield Brightside.

Here's our Jeremy Vine with a taster of what is in store.

Thursday is very exciting because there's going to be

There is a chance for everyone in the UK to have a vote,

there are even two Westminster by-election in Ogmore and

Let's look first at the Northern Ireland Assembly,

because that's up for election with its complicated,

And then there's the Welsh assembly as well.

Here is the map as it was left last time in 2011.

The question here is whether actually these Labour

strongholds in the south can be dislodged in any way

Plus there is the Scottish parliament.

Let's look at the result five years ago.

They got more than the 65 seats they need for an overall majority.

They govern alone with 69 and left Labour in a distant

Bring on the other parties and we'll see the map tells the story.

This wash of SNP yellow just covering Scotland.

Is there any chance they could do even better this time?

Firstly, the result in 2011 showing the SNP on 46% here.

But actually if we move forwards to 2015, the general election year,

50%, half of the vote for Nicola Sturgeon's party.

Now if they repeat that this year in the Parliamentary elections,

you have to wonder whether any Labour seat is safe.

Let's not forget another election is taking place.

That's for the Police and Crime Commissioner.

Where it's pink, an independent won in that area.

There's almost no end to this, is there?

Liverpool, Salford, Bristol and of course London, the locations.

Not so well in other parts of the South of England,

The Assembly election happening in London as well.

As you can see, this Labour red will help Siddique Khan,

maybe, if he becomes London's Labour mayor.

It will offset Labour losses elsewhere.

Elsewhere, what about those English councils?

Councillors up and down England being elected.

It's worth us looking at what happened in 2008 to Labour.

They had a very, very bad year under Gordon Brown and they've

Gordon Brown in third place in local elections in 2008.

He's in a kind of honeymoon period by this year, 2012.

This is crucial that 2012 was the last year these councillors,

this particular set of councillors, were elected.

And Labour did rather well, didn't they?

So, they had to get 38% just not to lose councillors on Thursday,

The Conservatives, by contrast, only had to do better

We'll bring the graph to the end here and let's have a look and this

And you can see, 35% to the Conservatives and 29 for Labour.

Let's not forget Ukip in there, 13% above the Liberal Democrats.

My goodness, so much data coming our way on Thursday.

And you can see more in-depth results and analysis

with the elction results programme with Huw Edwards tomorrow night

We're also joined now by the SNP's Deputy Leader Stewart Hosie.

Let me start with the English local elections. Grant Shapps, why should

voters trust the Tories when even the Prime Minister's Mum saves a

petition opposing cuts to the council? Not all councils are doing

the right thing. I don't have all the details but not every council

gets it right. On balance, the Conservative council does a good

job. My local council, they faced a budget that was the near to making

the council go bust and years later the council is perfectly solvent.

How can the majority of Conservative councillors be doing the right thing

when Gary Porter, he says, even if councils stop filling in potholes,

maintaining parks, close children centres, libraries, leisure centres,

turn off every street light, they will still not have saved enough

money to plug the financial black hole. Look at the reality. That is

the reality! People said if we have these cuts there will be councils

going bust. I am not aware of any council that has. He is the Tory

leader of local government. He probably has an agenda about getting

more money to local government. So he is wrong? Yes, he is wrong. I

don't think local government is about to go bankrupt. If you look

back six years, if councils undertake the kind of cut they had

in the last parliament they will go bust, you said, the answer is, the

government has given flexibility to local authorities including the

ability to keep 100% of business rates. They have put the future of

local government financing in the hand of local authorities. Are you

denying that has been deep cuts to important services? There has been

tough times all round. I did not say that. I am telling you as I see it,

I've not seen a single Council which has run into the kind of financial

Armageddon that was predicted. By better sharing, doing things in more

intelligent ways, using the benefits of business rate retention, we are

seeing councils rostering. I've got a good idea for something to save

on, traffic lights, we've had a massive increase in out-of-control

junctions. Cut down on that. I am sure getting rid of traffic

lights will be a huge advantage. About 16 billion pounds saving each

year. Is there any cuts to local government? We think it is unfair.

The poorer councils in poorer areas are disproportionately cut to some

other councils. We did that on the Sunday Politics show, that cuts to

Labour areas per Capita have been higher than Tory areas. Are you

against any kind of cuts now to local government? Jeremy Corbyn and

John McDonnell have been clear of the scale of the cuts, hitting a

surplus target later in this Parliament. So we don't need some of

these cuts they are forcing through. I understand you don't like a number

of the Tory cuts and they may be ideological, but are you against any

further cuts? We don't think these cuts are necessary to hit the

surplus at the end of the parliament. We feel these cuts are

falling unfairly on the poorest areas, and we don't think it is the

right way to approach local government finance. Are you

depressed, given the number of cuts made, given the budget that

unravelled very quickly this year, the embarrassment of the Prime

Minister over the Panama papers, and so on. Rather than fighting these

elections fair and square you embroiled in an anti-Semitism row in

the Labour Party? I am depressed about it. I want to be talking about

cuts to local government, rising class sizes and the waiting list for

hospital appointments and the budget and the cuts George Osborne tried to

do to disability benefits. It is a problem. We are told it is up to 50.

As I understand it that is not the correct figure. You don't think it

is just a smear as Diane Abbott described it? The Labour Party is

not an anti-Semitic party. Where we find individuals through their

Twitter and Facebook accounts or high profile individuals going round

TV studios and making offensive remarks, we deal with them, suspend

them and we send the message we don't want people with those views

in the Labour Party. Grant Shapps, you are a former chairman of the

Conservative Party, the electoral commission is meeting today with

police and prosecutors to see if they get more time to launch

possible criminal investigations into ?38,000 of Tory campaign

spending that seems to have been wrongly lodged. I will put it no

higher than that for the moment. This shambles happened under your

watch? I am not one to shirk my responsibilities, I resigned from my

last government job to take responsibility related to somebody

else. I can tell you that compliance was not my area. So you knew nothing

about this? I didn't. As chairman of the party you allowed expenses of

these campaigners who were going to local constituencies, staying in

local hotels, you allowed them to be charged to the national campaign and

not the local campaign? I was co-chairman, campaigning was my

side, not the money and the finance. You were behind the battle bus

business? The campaigning, not the finance. You didn't wonder whether

charges being made. I don't like shirking my responsibilities but

this side of things was not my side. Is it not palpably wrong, since

these campaigners were going to help local Conservatives fight, that any

expenses, hotel bills in particular, should be charged to the

constituency? Everything has to be done within the law. It is for the

electoral commission and others to judge that. If you are asking me

about the specifics, compliance wasn't my side. I am asking you

about the printable, if a bunch of Tories go to help, not a national

campaign, but fight for a local Tory candidate, their costs must go on

the constituency budget? As I understand it, you have to apply

costs as they fall. But there are lots of areas where it isn't

straightforward. For example, what if the Prime Minister and others

come into town and, does that go on to the local constituency? It was

all filed correctly, I believe. They have admitted, if you were not in

charge of compliance, who was? Other people in the party at the time.

Who, Lord Feldman? I don't want to go into details. If you weren't in

charge of compliance, you were obliged to know who was? There was a

separate compliance department. You want to spread the blame. As a party

you are bang to rights on misappropriation of electoral

spending and it is a criminal offence. They have said they have

complied correctly. The electoral commission is there to make those

decisions. I am asking for your view as chairman of the time? It was all

correctly done. Never one to shirk my responsibilities, you are going

on a point I cannot help you with. Clearly, should the electoral

commission be granted more time so this doesn't get kicked into the

long grass? They need more time to investigate this, agree? I don't

know. You don't know? What did you do as party chairman? You are asking

me about something that happened over a year ago which I had no

control over. It is not for me to decide. Education is under the

control of the Scottish Parliament. If you are a poor student from a

poor background, why is Scotland now the worst part of the United Kingdom

in which to try to get to university? It is not. If you think

what we have done to help people, nurseries maintained. EMAs

maintained, tuition is free. There is an issue about the kids of the

poorest backgrounds get into university, not just in Scotland.

But it is worse in Scotland? That is why the First Minister has made it

clear we want to see 750 million over the terms of this Parliament to

get 20% of the University intake from children from the 20% poorest

backgrounds. You have been in power for nine years, why is it, if you

are from a poor background you have the least chance of getting to

university than any part of the United Kingdom? These are marginal

differences. I will give you the figures. If you are from the top 20%

in England, you have 2.5 times more chance of getting to university than

if you are from the bottom 20%. In Scotland, it is 3.5 times, 30%

worse, in a country which has always prided itself, that poor kids will

get a decent education. Why is it worse than Northern Ireland, Wales

and England after nine years of your rule? We recognise the problem,

which is what we have set about changing. But you have been there

for nine years. With 20% of the kids from the poorest backgrounds

targeted to get 20% of university places, it is not all about

university education. As you know, we have 119,000 full-time college

place it which lead to positive out comes. 25,000 apprenticeships every

year, moving to 30,000. Youngsters have the choice to go to university,

do a trade, go to college, go straight into work. You are right,

it is not always about university, so let's look at the standards of

reading, writing and numeracy, check that you whether you go into

university, go to work, or further education. According to a survey,

the reading, writing and counting, an old-fashioned word, 413 and 14

new has been falling since 2011. -- 13 and 14 new roles. It is amongst

poor pupils. That is why we're putting in extra the extra teachers

and the new build schools. You have been in power for nine years, why

has this happened on your watch? These things come and go under every

administration, every authority and government. It isn't wringing our

hands when we identify a problem... You have failed to rectify the

problem. You make the point it has fallen for the last couple of years.

It rose in the previous years we were in power. You are falling back.

You cannot stand still, you have to look at the numbers and fix it. The

attainment funding has been put in place. All of the things we are

doing is to remedy the problems you identify. In 2007, your party

promised to reduce the average class sizes in primary schools in Scotland

down to 18. What is it washed and Mark it is higher than that, sadly.

It is a lot higher, 23.3. You took money from primary schools and put

it into free tuition fees for middle-class students. At the

beginning of the interview you were going on about people going to

university, but you cannot allow people to go to university and

support them using unlimited amounts of money over steer times. We had to

make difficult choices. I taking money away from primary schools? The

money and the choices we are making now will remedy the problems you are

identifying. You are right want comparing England with Scotland.

Spending per head in primary and secondary school is higher in

Scotland. School spending has fallen by 5% in real terms and has

increased in England by 3%. As much as spending per head primary and

secondary remains higher in Scotland than it does in the rest of the UK,

and that is the right thing to do. Stuart Posey, thank you very much.

Donald Trump is the nomination for the Republican party in the United

States. It was a bruising and bare-knuckle fight and when he takes

on Hillary Clinton, and she has the Democratic nomination, even though

she couldn't win Indiana yesterday, that will come up in election in

November. We can expect it to be just as bloody. But viewers, you

have a tough contest on your hands right now.

So to be in a with a chance of winning one of these -

see if you can remember when all this happened.

# you know, what my freedom means to me

# what it means, what it means to me #

Icelanders think it will be a long, hard cod war ahead.

After passing through customs and immigration, the Ugandan Asians

were taken to an airport building for special reception

You can see why they call it Spaghetti Junction.

Though, the engineers point out, unlike a

plate of spaghetti, it stands up and it's highly planned.

To be in with a chance of winning a Daily Politics mug,

send your answer to our special quiz email address.

Entries must arrive by 12.30 today, and you can see the full terms

and conditions for Guess The Year on our website:

We have been told the French presidential election will be on

April 23 and the second knockout round will be on made the seventh.

Put it in your diary. To midday here, just

take a look at Big Ben, Yes, Prime Minister's

Questions is on its way. And that's not all -

Laura Kuenssberg is here. You have had a good track record in

telling us what Jeremy Corbyn is going to go on, so no pressure. The

Prime Minister is going to announce a form of climb-down over taking in

child refugees from continental Europe. The details haven't been

confirmed, but I have been told to expect him to make an announcement

about what might he branded humanitarian visas, a time-limited

permission the children who are vulnerable in camps on mainland

Europe to be brought to this country. It is not exactly what the

many rebels who have been amassing over this have been asking for, but

there have been lots of discussions about compromises behind-the-scenes

in the last 36 hours. I think David Cameron will give ground on this in

the last half an hour. This time last week, he was absolutely adamant

in the House in response to that Cooper's blistering questions in the

last couple of days, Downing Street under severe pressure with the

referendum going on, helps matters from the rebel's point of view has

made the calculation he will have to move. Was it just the waiter

political opinion. Grant Shapps said the Prime Minister should move on

this. That is the prospect. Losing next week under pressure during the

referendum campaign is not something where they want to go.

greater resilience and a great team effort. I've had meetings with

others and additional meetings later today. Martin Day. May I start by

associating myself with the comments regarding Leicester City. The

Foreign Secretary said there is a need for a new initiative in the

Syrian dialogue to keep it alive. Will the Prime Minister withdraw his

ear strakes and redouble his efforts? What I think we should do

is both things, continue to hit Daesh terrorists but do everything

we can to support dialogue between the opposition and the Syrian regime

which is what the process has been about. My right honourable friend

will be aware that Conservative candidates are standing and Labour

will lose some seats. We are aware of the stamping out of racism and

anti-Semitism. Would my right honourable friend join me and our

colleagues in condemning the actions and propaganda of Hezbollah and

Hamas? I wish my candidates well. If you want well-run services and want

to keep costs and taxes don't it is right to vote Conservative. But the

point he makes about Hamas is important. They are a terrorist

group who believe in killing Jews. Whatever the right honourable

gentleman says about combating anti-Semitism, it will mean nothing

until he withdraws the remark that they were his friends. He should do

it today. I join the Prime Minister in

congratulating Leicester City on their amazing achievements. I hope

it is not an indication that he is going to support another football

team or is he going to stick with the two he has got already?

Later today, commemorations begin for Holocaust Memorial Day in

Israel. I hope there is agreement across all parts of this house in

sending our best wishes to those commemorating the occasion, and

sending a statement that anti-Semitism has no place in our

society whatsoever and we have a duty to oppose it. Tomorrow, people

will go to the polls in council elections in England. Nine of the

ten most deprived councils are set to see cuts higher than the national

average with eight facing cuts more than three times the national

average, meaning less money for youth services, adult social care

and those in areas of the greatest need. The Prime Minister used to say

we are all in it together. What happened to that? Left me -- let me

join the right honourable gentleman in saying that we should always

support Holocaust they. -- Holocaust Day. I am going to press him on this

point. He said, it will be my pleasure and my honour to host an

event in Parliament where our friends from Hezbollah will be

speaking, I have also invited friends from Hamas to speak as well.

They believe in killing Jews around the world. If he wants to clear up

the problem of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party, now is a good time to

start, withdraw that they are your friends. Mr Speaker, I've made it

clear that Labour is an antiracism party and there is no place for them

in it. We have suspended all members and -- who have taken part in

anti-Semitism and established an enquiry. The point he was making

relate to a discussion I was hosting in order to promote peace process

and it was not an approval of those organisations, I absolutely do not

approve of those organisations. Mr Speaker, the reality is vulnerable

people are being abandoned in this country. The Prime Minister has said

that social care and support for the elderly is a priority for him. If

that is the case, why has he cut 4.5 billion since 2010, leaving 300,000

older people without care and support they need to live in

dignity? We are putting more money into social care and allowing

councils to raise council tax. I'm afraid he will need to do this one

more time. He referred to Hamas and Hezbollah as his friends. Are they

your friends or not? Those organisations believe in persecuting

and killing Jews. They are anti-Semitic, racist organisations.

He must stand up and say that they are not his friends. Mr Speaker,

obviously anyone that commits racist attacks or is anti-Semitic is not a

friend of mine. I would also invite him to think for a moment about the

conduct of his party and his candidate in the London mayoral

election. The way in which they systematically are smearing my

friend, the member for tooting, who is our candidate for mayor. I wish

him well and I invite the Prime Minister to undertake to ensure that

the Conservative Party assists from the actions it is taking in smearing

my friend. Last week, the Joseph Rowntree foundation's destitution

report found 1.25 million people in Britain were unable to afford the

essentials to stay fed and clean. When will the stronger economy mean

that fewer people need to use food banks? It means there are over 2

million more people in work than when I became Prime Minister, you

can earn ?11,000 before you pay tax, and we've introduced a national

living wage, which was never done in 13 years of a Labour government. I

reject what he says about Labour's candidate for the London mayoralty.

We are not responsible for everything anyone says when they are

with us, but there is a pattern of behaviour for the honourable member

for Tooting. He shared a platform with the man whose trained the

ringleader of the 7/7 attacks. He shared a platform with a man who

called for Jews to be drowned in the ocean. He described this as flowery

language. If he wants to know why they have a problem with

anti-Semitism it is because they share platforms with anti-Semitic

people. Withdraw the remark about Hamas and Hezbollah being your

friends. Last week the Prime Minister tried to smear my friends,

the Minister for Tooting. It turns out that one of those is an active

Conservative supporter. He should reflect on the word is said by Lord

Lansley, that racism was endemic within the Conservatives. We have

set up an enquiry and I would suggest he does the same. It has

been said that the housing bill removes the security these people

need, it is fundamentally wrong. Homelessness is up a third. A voter

wrote to me and said he and his family will lose their home if the

housing bill goes through. Why can't the Prime Minister followed the

example from the Welsh Labour government in placing illegal

responsibility -- a legal responsibility to help people during

a housing crisis? What this government has done in England,

rebuilt twice as much council housing in the last six years as

Labour did in 13. I will not let this rest about the honourable

member for Tooting. He raised the case for Ghani. Do you want to know

the views of the person your leader has just quartered? He described

women... The honourable member for Islington may be interested. He

described women as subservient to men, he said homosexuality was an

unnatural act. He stood on a platform with people who wanted an

Islamic state. That is why his attempts to deal with anti-Semitism

are utterly condemned to failure. He will not even condemn people who sit

on platforms with people like that. I was trying to help the Prime

Minister, I did point out that the gentleman concerned is a

conservative. Maybe he would think about that.

Another former Conservative candidate said, I will be voting

Labour, I am ashamed of the repulsive campaign of hate. Mr

Speaker, homelessness has been reduced by 67% in Wales since the

new regulations came in. Why can't he do the same in this country?

Inequality is getting worse, education should be a route out of

poverty. But new figures show that the number of people participating

on an adult education course fell by a fifth. How can we tackle

inequality when the Prime Minister is taking away opportunities for

people to find a pathway out of poverty. Inequality has gone down

under this government. It is because we've got a growing economy, a

living wage, more jobs, people paying less tax. I say to him, we

are investing in the schools to give people opportunities, schemes to

allow people to own homes. He opposes those things because the

truth is, he may be a friend of Hamas but he is an enemy of

aspiration. Mr Speaker, politics is about

choices. The Prime Minister cart... Order, order. Order, order. Let me

very gently say to the assiduous but slightly overenthusiastic whip, the

member for Hexham, his role is to be seen and not heard. No further noise

from the honourable gentleman today or his sidekick to his right. We

will not shout people down in this chamber. The quiet or leave. Very

simple. Jeremy Corbyn. Thank you Mr Speaker. This government has cut

capital gains tax for the richest, every turn they make the wrong

choices. Tomorrow, people can make their own choices about the crisis

of social care, the housing crisis in this country. The unprecedented

cuts to local councils in areas of greatest need. The cuts to further

education, taking opportunities away from young people. The choices have

been made will stop they cut taxes for the rich. We want to ensure

there is proper taxation to ensure there are decent services for the

rest. Prime Minister. Tomorrow is about choices, you can choose a

party on the side of security for hard-working people, who wants to

make sure there are more jobs, better pay, lower taxes, good

schools for your children, a seven-day NHS you when you need it.

Or the other choice, you can back a party that puts extremists

overworking people. And is incapable of providing the leadership your

local council needs, or the country needs.

Does my right honourable friend agree with me in order to create a

northern powerhouse that can produce innovation and prosperity,

investment is needed in vital transport links in northern cities?

Of particular concern to my constituents is the junction of the

834 and the A5 60 Gatley. Will the Prime Minister and his ministers

meet with me and discuss how we can keep traffic moving in and out of

Manchester and alleviate congestion in my constituency of Cheadle. She

is right to raise this and that is why we established transport for the

North to look at schemes like the one she proposes, so we can speak

with one voice. It is why we are investing 13 billion. Planning for

the next strategy is now underway. It is the right time to make the

point that she does. Last week, the Prime Minister took issue when I

raised the issue of unaccompanied Syrian refugee children in Europe.

And the candid transports of the 1930s. Since then he has been

written to by the chairman of Kindertransport. He said the echoes

of the past haunt many fellow and I. I feel it is incumbent on us to

demonstrate our compassion and human compassion to provide sanctuary to

those in need. Why has it taken so long and the threat of a

Parliamentary defeat for the Prime Minister to begin changing his mind.

Let me pay tribute to the gentleman the honourable member raises. And

also, let's be clear, no country has done more than others when it comes

to Syrian refugees. No country has raised more money and only the

United States has spent more money. I do want us to proceed with as much

support across the House as we can. It is right to stick to the

principle we shouldn't be encouraging people to make this

dangerous journey. It is right to stick to the idea we keep investing

in the refugee camps and neighbouring countries. It is right

not to take part in the EU relocation and resettlement schemes,

which have been, in my view, a failure. We are taking in migrants,

child migrants with the direct family scheme. We will talk to Save

the Children to see what we can do for children who came here before

the EU Turkey deal was signed. What I don't want to do is take steps

that will encourage people to make this dangerous journey. Otherwise,

our actions, however well-meaning, could result in more people dying,

rather than more people getting a good life. Last week I accused the

Prime Minister of walking by on the other side when he defended his then

policy opposing further help for unaccompanied refugee children in

Europe will stop if, what we are hearing now, is the beginnings of a

U-turn, I very much welcome it as I'm sure all members on side of the

House do. I encourage him to think more about what can be done, given

the Kindertransport help 10,000 children from Europe. I asked the

Prime Minister to thank Lord Alf Dobbs and all campaigners who have

worked hard for the UK to live up to the example and the spirit of the

Kindertransport. I think all those people deserve recognition for the

work they have done to put this issue so squarely on the agenda. I

do reject the comparison with the Kindertransport. And for this

reason, I would argue that what we are doing primarily which is taking

children from the region, vulnerable people from the camps, going to the

neighbouring countries and taking people into our country, housing,

clothing and feeding them and making sure they have a good life, that to

me is like the Kindertransport. To say the Kindertransport is taking

today, children from France, Italy or Germany, safe countries that our

democracy, that is an insult to those countries. Because of the

steps we are taking, it won't be necessary to send the amendment back

to the other place, the amendment doesn't mention a number of people.

We will go round the local authorities and see what more we can

do. But let's stick to the principle we should not be taking new arrivals

to Europe. The Department of Health are looking to introduce a self DNA

test for pregnant women, in order to reduce the number of miscarriages.

This will have the consequence of increasing the number of abortions

with those with down syndrome. I know there is nobody in this House

who cares more for those with special needs for protection and the

safety of those with special needs, so will the Prime Minister meet with

me and representatives of the East Lancashire down syndrome support

group to look at ways to protect those with down syndrome and it will

not simply be screened out? He raises an important issue. A local

people of down syndrome parents came to my constituency surgery on Friday

and made these arguments to me. I am taking this up with the Department

of help to make sure all the processes are followed. There are

moral and ethical issues that need to be considered in these cases. On

the other hand, we have to respect the view that women want to have

screening and testing about the health of their children. We should

be in favour of maximum transparency. On the basis it is

optional, rather than mandatory, but it is part of routine care. Health

Secretary will have to find a way through this, but we have to make

sure we go about it in the right way. UNESCO car components for Ford

and Nissan cars and employs hundreds of people, including from my

constituency. I'm sure the Prime Minister knows the need to get right

our manufacturing industry. Does he agree with the managing director,

Mike Matthews, who said it would be business suicide for the UK to leave

the EU? I listen to all the business voices, particularly those in

manufacturing, and so many say we are better off in a reformed

European union. We get an enormous amount of investment from Japanese

motor industries. I will be welcoming the Japanese Prime

Minister to the UK tomorrow, when I am sure this is on the agenda.

Closed question, Doctor Julian Lewis. Nato is the cornerstone of

Britain's defence but our place in the EU is a vital part of protecting

national security. It helps by ensuring the issues are settled by

dialogue and helping to provide assistance in particular

circumstances, for example, the Balkans. I entirely agree with the

Prime Minister's remarks about Nato. Does he accept that whilst

dictatorships often attacked democracies or other dictatorships,

democracies seldom, if ever, go to war with each other. If an aim of

the EU, is to prevent conflict between its own members, as in World

War I and World War II, is it not heading in precisely the wrong

direction by trying to create an unelected supranational government

of Europe, which is accountable to nobody? My honourable friend has

very long standing and passionate views on this. I will make a couple

of points. I don't think we should forget some of the country is now in

the European Union, until recently, were not democracies, but what forms

of dictatorship. The second point, those countries that have worked

towards an omission of EU have had to put in place all sorts of

democratic and other norms to help them on their way. The final point,

we have had an unparalleled period of peace and prosperity in Europe

and my argument with me, whether you want to attribute all of that to

Nato, or some of that to the EU, why would you want to put it at risk?

The findings of the NHS in England report into the sudden closure of

Bootham Park mental health hospital in your, has confirmed the

relationships and authorities between all NHS bodies and is

defined under the health and social care at 20 of 12 are dysfunctional

and failed patient at -- patient safety. Harm occurred and life has

been lost. Will the Prime Minister accept his health act has to change

due to the serious risk created and in line with NHS England's

recommendations? I will look carefully at what she said my

understanding is she called for action on an outdated and dangerous

facility last year. That is what happened. I am pleased action was

taken, it wasn't fit for purpose. The CQC identified serious and

life-threatening issues on patient safety and they were not right. As a

result, there was a decision to close and reopen the facility after

the changes. You will have incidents of poor practice. What matters, do

we intervene fast enough and put them right. At this case, I will

look again at what she said, but it does look like action was taken. The

Christian News Edie and sheer children in Syria are suffering from

genocide by Daesh and we should recognise it as such. My urge to the

Prime Minister, to indeed do more to replicate the Kindertransport of the

1930s. That is what we are doing in taking children directly from the

camps in Syria. If we were to take 16-year-olds from a safe environment

in Europe, we would be causing more misery and encouraging the people

traffickers. He asked me two questions, whether there is more we

can do to label what has happened as genocide. This has always been

something done under a legal definition, but I believe very much

it is clearly heading, there is a strong case for saying it is

genocide. I hope it will be portrayed unspoken as such. On the

issue of the Kindertransport, I would agree, we have an enormous

amount of what we can be proud of. The money we put into the camps, we

raised more in London on Monday than any humanitarian conference has ever

raised in the world. We are going to do more for children already

registered in Europe after, before the EU Turkey deal. But the

principle we should try to cling do is we shouldn't do anything that

encourages people to make the perilous journey. That has been the

cornerstone of our policy and it should remain the case. For the

benefit of the House and 410 and 11-year-olds up and down the

country, will the Minister explain what the past progressive tense is.

Will he set out his definition of a modal verb? I will say to the

honourable lady, the point of these changes is to make sure our children

are better educated than we are. That is why I am delighted with

three children in state schools going off to do these tests. I am

delighted they are going to be. Thank you Mr Speaker. Three years

ago, three years ago... Order, order. Three years ago five members

of a family from County Durham were killed in a tragic accident A18. The

coroner said he had no confidence in the work of the proposed work of the

highway authority to remedy the situation. The council wants to do

all they can and have committed to carry out the work. But resources

are very limited. Could my right honourable friend give serious

consideration to an application from the council for additional

resources? I will have a close look I will look to see if more

evidence can be done to make it safe. Eritrea was described as the

North Korea of Africa in the recent inaugural all-party group meeting.

There was government forced indefinite constriction. Will the

Prime Minister personally and urgently review Home Office guidance

which says it is safe to transport asylum seekers back to Eritrea? I

will look at what he says. We know Eritrea is a deeply, undemocratic

and autocratic country. It has done appalling things to its people and

that is one of the reasons why so many of those seeking to cross the

Mediterranean, through the Libyan route, have come from a country.

When I have the opportunity to meet the Eritrea leadership in Malta, I

made those points very strongly. Four years ago, I asked my right

honourable friend on behalf of my mother, if the EU referendum vote

could be brought forward because of her age. She was then 100. She now

wishes to know if she needs to set a world record for longevity before

the Chilcott report is published? I think I can reassure Maud, that this

summer she will have a double opportunity to deal with these

things. I referendum on June the 23rd and I'm sure the Chilcott

report will come not too much longer after that. I imagine she will want

a backbench business debate on the matter. Tata steel wishes to

complete the sale of its assets by the middle of June and one referred

bidder in place by the end of this month. Does the Prime Minister think

it is a realistic time frame and there will be a credible process of

due diligence? What processes is the Prime Minister taking to make sure

Tata is making good on its promises as a responsible seller? The

positive news is the deadline yesterday was met by a number of

serious enquiries of interest into buying all of Tata, and that is good

news. We need to work intensively with Tata and the buyers to get the

list down to those who are seriously intending to bid. What it is a short

timetable. What we are doing is talking intensively with Tata to

make sure they do everything they can to make sure this is a serious

sales process. The Prime Minister made an important announcement with

regard to refugee children. Obviously, time is of the essence

because of the peculiar vulnerability of children without

the guidance and protection of their families. Could the Prime Minister

give an indication to the House of how quickly he expects to have those

arrangements in place? I am grateful to my right honourable friend, who

has spoken passionately about this issue. I don't see any reason why

there needs to be a long delay. We need to carry on conversations with

local councils, because many of them, particularly in the south of

England, are under pressure because of the number of child refugees who

have come. Then hopefully we can make progress during this year.

Documents leaked earlier this week appeared to confirm what most have

feared, that the transatlantic trade and investment partnership makes

unacceptable concessions to public health and safety regulations,

opening the doors for US investors to sue for loss of rockets. Will the

Prime Minister recognise the concern raised by the French president and

Talbot House what this government is seeking for a national health

service and public service? This is the register of red herrings. The

health service is completely protect did under this agreement, as it is

under other agreements. They're all sorts agreements people might be

against free trade and wanting to see an expansion of and investment

and jobs. People should be honest and say they don't want to see these

things happen instead of inventing total red herrings. Calm yourself,

Mr Campbell, you are supposed to be a senior statesman in the House.

Calm down. Take up yoga, I have told you before. Cheryl Murray. The

lifeboat celebrates its 150th anniversary this year in my

constituency. Will he congratulate them, not just the new one, but all

of them who keep us safe at sea? I am very happy to do that, in

conjunction with my honourable friend. Very brave people, having

met some of them, especially during the flooding earlier in the year.

They put their lives at risk all the time to save others. They are the

bravest. What matters is what works. In the long-term interests of the

country, fixed term parliaments are an important of that. Can the Prime

Minister ensure his government's performance includes the long

overdue creation of a centre evidence on sexual abuse of children

something I raised in PMQs with Margaret Thatcher. We can deal with

the awful consequences of child sex abuse on victims and perpetrators,

but we must use early intervention expertise to stop it from happening

in the first place. Will the Prime Minister backed the excellent work

of ministers and members from all parties and get this much-needed

centre up and running without delay, within the five-year term of this

government? I am glad the honourable gentleman rescued his own question

with those last words. We are grateful to him, constitutionally at

least. I am sorry it has taken a question

in 1989 to get an answer. Setting up a centre of expertise on sexual

abuse is what the Home Office is doing. It will identify and share

high-quality evidence. Alongside this, the Department for Education's

Centre will ensure social workers across the country can learn from

the best examples. It is a good example of government reform, which

I know he supports. The Prime Minister and we aren't these benches

can be proud of the fact, in recent years we have reduced relative

poverty and income inequality. We are a one nation party, or we are

nothing. Does he agree with Lord rose, the leader of the Remain

Campaign that if we were to lead the EU and exercise greater control over

immigration for the sake of public services, wages would rise even

faster? What would happen, if we were to lead the EU, we would see an

impact on our economy that would be negative. That is the view of the

Bank of England, the IMF, the OECD and a growing number of

international bodies. Anybody who wants to make this choice, it is a

choice for the British people to make. We have to be clear of the

economic consequences. In 1972, aged 19, nine months married and six

months pregnant with their first child, my constituent, Susan

received the knock on the door to say her husband had been killed in

action in Northern Ireland. Yet when she married and found love again,

she lost all compensation for her and her daughter. She still has no

compensation for having made that huge sacrifice. It is a disgraceful

way to treat those who have lost loved ones serving our country. Will

the Prime Minister meet with me and Susan to discuss this case and the

injustice which still faces war widows in this country Western Mark

I will make sure she gets the meeting and the attention she

deserves. I know the Minister met with the war Widows Association to

put forward their case. It was this government but did make a historic

change, so war widows who remarried from April one 2015, would retain

their war widows pension. That was a change long as four and only

delivered under this government. At the moment, we are of the view of

the long-standing policy of successive governments, we shouldn't

make these changes and apply them retrospectively. Yesterday the

foreign affairs select committee started our enquiry on Anglo Russian

relations. This afternoon, I have a Westminster Hall debate on Anglo

Russian relations. Despite the tension that exists, will the Prime

Minister give us an assurance he will redouble his efforts to lower

tensions with his fellow permanent member of the UN Security Council?

Of course we want to keep tensions low and the one good relations, but

we cannot ignore the fact Russian backed and direct its separatists

have effectively tried to redraw the boundaries of Europe. When we

consider how dangerous exercises like that have been in the past, we

have to take it extremely seriously in the present.

Can I thank the Prime Minister for joining Leicester MPs and the rest

of the planet in congratulating Leicester City football club on

their historic success in the Premier League. During this amazing

season, the local Leicester hero, Gary Lineker, thought the idea of

Leicester winning was so far-fetched, he said if they did

when he would present match of the day in his underwear.

As an Aston Villa supporter and my commiserations to the Prime Minister

on their season, does he agree in politics, as well as in football,

when you make a promise, you should keep it? I absolutely agree. I have

been watching everything Gary Lineker has said since. He is not

quite answering the question. Something nobody gets away with in

this House. I hope it is the start of him joining the blue team.

As PMQ's finally comes to an end, an extraordinary Prime Minister's

Questions, not just because of the length but also because the Prime

Minister and the Leader of the Opposition were like ships passing

in the night. Jeremy Corbyn began by asking about local spending, an

appropriate question, David Cameron replied by asking if he still

thought he was friends with Hamas and Hezbollah, the militant groups

lined up against Israel. Jeremy Corbyn went on to ask about

government spending, the Prime Minister asked if he was still

friends with Hamas and Hezbollah. So it went on for six questions, then

it spilled over into the London mayoral candidate, with, inevitably,

Zac Goldsmith being brought up, he has made comments about the

platforms, the Prime Minister hitting back at Jeremy Corbyn for

the platforms he has shared, and vice versa. Just when you thought it

could not get any more unusual or interesting, Angus Robertson stood

up and asked the question about the refugees, children, unaccompanied

child refugees and whether the government was changing policy.

After a long answer, it became clear that David Cameron has changed

policy, and the amendment in the House of Lords, the Prime Minister

slipped and at the very end of his answer that they will now accept

that amendment. There we go. It was long but it was unusual. Most people

wrote in about the exchanges between the Prime Minister and Jeremy

Corbyn. It went down hill from there. All he needs to do is

withdraw the comments about Hamas. The Prime Minister has raised a

problem for Jeremy Corbyn. The Speaker should remind the

increasingly red-faced David Cameron that it is questions to the Prime

Minister, not the Leader of the Opposition. Another agrees,

disgraceful from the Speaker letting David Cameron hijack PMQs. What do

we make of it? It was extraordinary, and extraordinarily brutal. David

Cameron trying to use every single second to transfer it into Jeremy

Corbyn's question Time. Trying to change it. The Labour Leader kept

trying to return to the subject he wanted to talk about. I think it was

a very memorable session because it was more like a very rough and tough

campaign debate rather than what that is meant to be about, which is

the Prime Minister of the day being held to account on the big issues of

the day. It was not until Angus Robertson got to his feet that we

got to anything like the traditional format. We have had the

anti-Semitism row rumbling on in the Labour Party. We have got major

elections tomorrow across the country. Given the length the Prime

Minister went to to bring up a Hamas, I wonder if the Tories have

got private polling of focus groups that show that this is resonating? I

think they see that there is clearly an opportunity to claw back a pretty

safe lead in the London mayoral election. We don't really know, the

code won't be until Friday night, but the widespread assumption has

been that London is pretty safe for Labour. That is a crucial piece of

the jigsaw for Jeremy Corbyn. His critics believe as long as he can

hold on to London, he is basically safe for now. I think the fact that

David Cameron demonstrably brought this up and made this an issue, he

was armed with quotes as long as your arm, all sorts of information,

he became mob handed and determined to make that point that they think

is having an impact. Labour sources said it would be impossible for it

not to have any impact at all, the chaos of the last week, but whether

it has a significant impact is something that they don't. As ever

in politics, whilst we are fascinated with the detail, most

will have seen the noise and chaos, but will not have been following

every single detail. In London it is not working. The more dirt thrown at

Sadiq Khan, the bigger the polling. That is quite a substantial lead he

has got, this attempt, not to claim he is an extremist himself but to

taint by association, does not seem to be working. I think you're right

and I don't know what will happen in London. It operates in a bubble.

Very wary of reading into too many opinion polls. I would hesitate. Can

I make a slightly different point? When Jeremy Corbyn became leader

saying they would be a different atmosphere, every leader does this.

But PMQs turned into Punch and Judy. Every week, it is Angus Robertson

who asks the question where you go, why didn't Jeremy Corbyn lead on

that subject? Today it should have been that question. That would have

been the sensible one. You mention, does this resonate outside

Westminster? It is such a basic tenet of modern politics that a

mainstream party is not racist or anti-Semitic that people cannot

believe we're having this discussion in the 21st century. This is why it

keeps coming back to the floor. The vast majority of Labour MPs now this

is true and they are in despair. The seminal intervention in last week's

PMQs was Yvette Cooper, senior Labour backbencher. She has been in

the vanguard of this issue. Labour has backed her. Here is an issue of

progress. And yet, the Leader of the Opposition is effectively handing

this over to the leader of the Parliamentary party of the Scottish

nationalists. He has been vocal on the issue, just not today. Just

listen to Laura, he would know that the whole was breaking here, things

were changing. Why would you not go on that issue which plays to

everything Labour is meant to stand for? I'm sure Jeremy had in mind

that we have got the local government elections and he raised a

series of legitimate questions. He has got six questions. I think the

questions he put to David Cameron were entirely reasonable and good

questions. He did not get the answers because David Cameron knows

that he is cutting into local government. As you will know. Is it

hurting? If you have the Jeremy Corbyn Labour Party associated with

Ken Livingstone's remarks on Hitler and Zionism, with the anti-Semitic

tweets coming out from members of the Labour Party, David Cameron

dragging up this old phrase about friends of Hamas and Hezbollah. Is

it hurting? Let me talk about the phrase, Hamas is an organisation

that do not even believe Israel has a right to exist. We do not support

Hezbollah. Your leader has not condemned it. He said in PMQs today,

he does not approve. What was the phrase he had with reference, he

does not support racist and anti-Semitic organisations. He

condemns racist organisations. That suggests he was condemning them. He

could not bring himself to say the names? I am condemning Hamas and

Hezbollah. We do not believe these organisations should be associated

with. What is also not clear is what the government's position is on

child refugees. It is obvious there is movement but they will be under

pressure to give convincing details and if they don't, they might find

themselves with a big problem and a potential defeat next week.

Welcome to the programme Greg Mulholland, Hywel Williams

Welcome to the two of you so far. Hywel, antiestablishment parties are

in the March, is this one Plaid Cymru must make a breakthrough? We

are working very hard indeed and split might be between the Tories

and Labour, in Wales, it is Plaid against Labour and Plaid has the

momentum with Leanne Wood. So you think you will increase your seats

significantly? What does significantly mean? What does it

mean to you? The system we have in Wales is stacked against dramatic

breakthroughs unless you have the situation you have in Scotland when

it is Tamil chillers. Labour are worried. Jeremy Corbyn referred to

the situation in Wales. If I was him, I wouldn't have done so, but he

thinks they are in trouble. John Ashworth, are you in trouble in

Wales, there is a lot of scrutiny on Labour's record there. Nigel Farage

predicted Ukip would get five seeds on the watch is only. And now we

have Plaid saying they will make the breakthrough? We are taking nothing

for granted and we are campaigning hard. Let's see where we are on

Friday morning when we see the results. I think we will continue to

have a Labour government in Wales on Friday morning. A Labour government

on its own or will it have to go into coalition? We will see when the

results come through, but I am confident Labour will continue to be

in government in Wales. In government army yes. Labour would be

in government, but will they be governing alone or will they have to

look to the other parties because they may only just be the largest

party? We are taking nothing for granted and we are working hard. I

will be on election night coverage, but I think I will be on your rival

competitor programmes. Surely not. Do you agree with Jeremy Corbyn?

Labour won't lose any seats in these elections? Let's see where we get

to. We are enthusiastically campaigning confidently and we are

not taking anything for granted. Let's see where we get to after 10pm

tomorrow night. Hywel, what about Ukip taking five seats, you will

then lose to Ukip? We will see about that later on. We are confident of

keeping our constituencies and winning some more as well. Ukip, in

this election, they are a significant sideline issue, but

really it is Plaid against Labour. Who do you want to run Wales, the

tired Labour government or Plaid with exciting manifesto? Let's talk

to Diane James from Ukip. You are contesting less than half of the

seats innings councils, why aren't you contesting more? Because we have

gone for the target seats, if you like, where we believed we stand a

really good chance of success. Let's put it into perspective, we are

party of just over 20 years of age and we haven't got the

infrastructure to support candidates in every seat. We have learned

lessons from other elections, we're putting a huge amount of effort into

supporting those candidates that are standing for us. We are hopeful of

success on their behalf. If Ukip doesn't gain council seats in

England when other anti-populist groups are gaining ground across

Europe, will be be any point to Ukip after the June referendum? Yes there

will, this is the question you both ask Ukip personnel on every

programme. And there is a point, and the point is, it is Ukip that

achieved the referendum. David Cameron had to react to the Ukip

threat by ensuring the referendum was delivered and included in his

manifesto. Look at the mess he is in now, as a result. In terms of

council seats, we are defending council seats were eight individual

stood on the Ukip banner. We are confident they will get back in. And

an accredited polling organisation from the University has said we are

on course to take 40. I am confident from that point of view. I think we

have Greg Mulholland now from the Liberal Democrats. Your fight to

campaign on unnecessary cuts to services, how will the electorate

take you seriously when during the coalition a number of local services

for Kotze? First of all, people are seeing what a majority Conservative

Government does with unnecessary ideological cuts, rather than

dealing with the deficit in the economy. People will also take the

Liberal Democrats seriously, because you have two main parties in England

who are at each other's threads in the most extraordinary civil war.

Labour are tearing themselves apart and the Conservatives are tearing

themselves apart. People want a centre party who have progressive

values and stand up the people in their communities. That is why

people will be looking to elect Liberal Democrat members, Scottish

Parliament and MSPs tomorrow. When you talk about services being cut

ideological and by the Conservatives, but they were

different cuts when UN coalition, during that time, 350 libraries

close, 350 youth centres in England and sure start centres in England

close. What is different about those cuts as you say to the ones are

happening now? Those cuts were made by councils, largely Labour and

Conservative councils. The situation financially for local government is

tough. So no responsibility at all for you in government? Where we

write to seek to bring down the levels of public spending at a time

when it was out of control? Yes. Is the need to carry on making the cuts

Labour and Conservative ministers are carrying on making the services?

Absolutely not. But going back to classic politics where we are

talking to people on the streets and people are responding. We want to

see the good old-fashioned Liberal Democrat policies coming back. We

will have to we're almost out of time. The answer

to guess the year was 1972. We were all wrong in the studio.

We will be doing the US elections with Donald Trump undoubtedly the

Republican nominee. I thought you were going to