15/06/2016 Daily Politics

George Osborne says he'll be forced to break his own manifesto promises

if Britain votes to leave the EU next week, raising taxes

But has the threat of a punishment budget backfired?

The Chancellor's warning of further cuts and tax rises to come has

sparked a major backlash among many Conservative MPs backing Leave,

who say Project Fear has gone into hyperspace.

Will those Conservatives show their frustrations at the final

Prime Minister's Questions before the referendum, and how

will Jeremy Corbyn respond to the threat of more austerity?

We'll bring you all the action from the Commons live at midday.

Philip Green has told a Commons committee he's sorry

for the demise of BHS - but has the billionaire businessman

done enough to convince sceptical MPs?

And is Nigel Farage all at sea as he leads a flotilla of fishing

boats up the Thames to Westminster in protest at EU fishing quotas?

A nice day for sailing up the Thames! We could have done the

programme from the back of the vote! Ann wrote

of the programme today, two MPs who know a thing or two

about drifting rudderless through choppy political waters -

it's the Conservative minister, backing Remain, Ed Vaizey,

and the Labour MP, backing Leave, John Mann.

The referendum campaign feels tense, fraught, and perhaps

Spooked by a tightening of the opinion polls,

the Remain camp are hammering home their message on the economic

impact of a vote to leave the EU with the promise of

a gloomy emergency budget to follow soon after.

It's gone down like a cup of cold sick among

Leave, meanwhile, are still desperate to show they've got a plan

for what the UK would look like after exiting the EU,

even if they're not in the position to make promises, given they're

So both sides today are claiming to have a pretty accurate vision

of how events could unfold after the vote next Thursday -

The Leave campaign has published a Queen's Speech-style "road map"

to show how the UK could split from the EU by 2020.

They claim new laws could be introduced to end the automatic

right of all citizens to enter the UK

And they predict a new EU-UK trade deal outside the single market

They also say new laws could be introduced to

cut VAT on energy bills and divert more funds to the NHS.

so that the mysticism from the leave side but what are Remain seeing in

the crystal ball? Chancellor George Osborne warns this

morning his first priority after a Leave vote will be

a new "Brexit budget". He's been joined by former

Labour Chancellor Alistair Darling to say it would mean tax

rises and spending cuts, to plug the ?30 billion black hole

in the public finances that he says The Chancellors foresee there'd

need to be a 2p rise And even protected budgets

like the NHS, schools and defence But those warnings haven't gone down

well with a growing number of Conservative MPs,

who've signed a letter this morning saying

they find it "incredible" the Chancellor is threatening

to renege on his manifesto promises, and promising to vote

down any such budget. This is what George Osborne had

to say in the last 20 minutes. We're sharing a platform and arguing

the same case for the first time. It is quite simple. We have both been

Chancellor as the economy has faced very difficult times. We know what

happens when you lose control of the economy. We've both had to deal with

the consequences of the public finances collapsing and the

difficult decisions that the country then has to take. And today we're

here together because we agree on this - a vote to be the EU would do

it to us all over again. That is the Chancellor George Osborne. Lets

Victor one of the MPs who has not been overly impressed by Mr

Osborne's warning. He is Jacob Rees-Mogg and he is in the central

lobby of the House of commons. What is wrong with having an emergency

budget? If there is a vote to leave, there will be big decisions to take.

The Chancellor basically means to tick down and, regrettably, stop

talking nonsense. If we vote to leave on Thursday week, there is a

minimum two-year period in which we are still a member of the European

Union. Article 50 takes time to be exercised so what he is doing in

this hysterical suggestion of an emergency budget is ignoring the

treaty provisions for an orderly departure of a member state. He

really ought to read the treaty is more carefully and particularly an

excellent report by the House of Lords European committee, which sets

out how article 50 would work and underpins that the purpose of

article 50 is to avoid an economic dislocation, both for the leaving

state and, even more importantly from their point of view, from the

point of view of other member states of the EU. But many on your site,

for Leave, have stated that there could be a short-term shock. There

could be instability and George Osborne is only saying that the

Government would respond in the end of the Bob vote, which he and other

economic institutions have predicted would lead to some sort of economic

meltdown. The economic meltdown idea is a far-fetched one but what most

of the commentators have said is that there may be some instability

in currency markets but there is always instability in currency

markets. This is par for the course in the financial system. No body

would know the economic effects within a week or two of a vote to

leave so an emergency budget is really indicating a degree of panic.

It is a very silly thing to say, quite honestly, and for the

Chancellor to jettison Conservative principles in favour of his euro for

the seems to me desperate Leon Weiss. There was an emergency budget

in 2010 to deal with the financial crisis so it isn't as if you have

had emergency budgets before. In 2010 there was a new government that

felt the different economic policy should be followed. That was the

reason for the budget, same reason as a 1979, and in 1997, Gordon Brown

had a budget when he came into office. When the governments change,

the resort was a budget because economic policy changes. That's not

an emergency, that's a matter of routine. So in terms of you and

others signing to say that you would vote down that sort of budget, you

are going to vote against your own government on something as critical

as a budget? It is not my government, it is Her Majesty's but

I am going to stick to the manifesto that I stood on which said that we

would not raise tax. The economy is not going to react in the way he is

saying. The forecasts are based on assumptions that no rational person

would follow and the Treasury assumptions are ones that he's given

away to an independent body, until he decided he needed to arrange the

figures to suit his political argument. But you are prepared to

basically vote down the budget are Conservative Government? I would

vote against a budget that broke the Conservative Party's manifesto and a

budget introduced out of spite to punish the British voters for not

obeying the wisdom of George Osborne. It is the height of

arrogance the week before a vote to say, if you don't do as I say and

going to punish you. I think it is very damaging to George Osborne's

credible as he is Chancellor. Do you think George Osborne should remain

as Chancellor if the UK votes to leave the EU? It won't be a matter

for me to dock but what do you think? Let's wait until we have the

voted dock you been quite unspoken. He has done a lot of damage to his

credible as it and will have a hard chance to repair it.

Ed Vaizey, this is Mr Osborne's punishment budget if we vote to

leave, and it is crashed and burned on take off. I donated the

punishment budget. I think George Osborne is making a very important

point, which is a point we have to get across, that we know there will

be an economic shock if we weave the EU. Every credible analysis of the

economy says there will be a significant impact on our economy.

This is very serious stuff. How big would the Treasury save impact would

be? George's budget proposal sets out the kind of changes you would

have to see to fill that hole. How big does the Treasury say the impact

would be in its short-term report? What was it central forecast? What

the Institute of fiscal... I'm asking you about the Treasury

because that is your Government's department. I am asking you about

apples, you answer about oranges. What was the central forecast for

recession in the Treasury's short-term report? What I'm telling

you is that this budget George Osborne is setting up with Alistair

Darling is based on the Institute for Fiscal Studies estimate, which

was a ?20 billion to ?40 billion impact on the public finances and

George is quite right to take the mid-range, 30 billion to dock there

is to be a mid-range impact on the public finances. It would mean

increased taxes and it would mean having to cut spending. The Treasury

said it would go down by 0.4% over a year. Nobody wanted to go down,

obviously, but why does a shallow recession, the shallowest since

1956, of zero .4%, result in this massive measurement and tax rises

and spending cuts amounting to ?30 billion? Explain that. You are using

this word punishment. What George Osborne and Alistair Darling do,

united together, the first time they have spoken together as one on a

public platform, is to say there will be an impact on the public

finances and when the Chancellor sees the impact on the public

finances, he or she has to act and they have to make tough decisions

and those tough decisions will include raising taxes or cutting

spending. I was trying to work out why this response would be required,

given how shallow the Treasury said the recession would be. In terms of

the impact, you've seen Rolls-Royce today talking about the potential

impact on one of our most successful Manufacturing completes. We've seen

BT yesterday telling its 80,000 boys the kind of impact it would have.

The real point is, you can bring up different surveys and say, what

about this, what about that? The two key points are, everybody knows

there will be an economic shock and George Osborne is saying, the second

key point, is that means there will have to be an emergency budget, we

will have to address levels of spending levels of taxes to get the

budget by contract. How would you get that emergency budget through?

There isn't a majority in the Commons for it. I haven't seen the

names on the letter. 57 Conservative MPs described Mr Osborne's position

as untenable. There is no majority in parliament for this budget,

therefore the budget wouldn't get through. What George Osborne is

saying is this is the kind of budget that you would have to expect if we

beat. I think it is a perfectly valid thing for a Chancellor,

somebody who has been Chancellor for six years. Unemployment fell again

today. A lot of what George Osborne has done... Address my point. You

only have a majority of under 16, at times it is under 12. 87 Tory MPs

and rising regard this threat as untenable. They will not vote for

it. -- 57. Labour is not going to vote for it, I assume, we will find

out from John Mann. You will not get this budget through. It is an empty

threat. It is not an empty threat. How would you get it through

Parliament? After a Leave vote, if there is, God forbid, a Leave vote,

Parliament would have to reconvene, the Chancellor will have to set out

what he thinks the risks are going to be. He would be Chancellor, will

he? There will have to be a budget proposed by the Chancellor. At that

point, MPs will have to very much decide what their duty is. Is their

duty to help get the economy back contract, given the economic

shock... Could you explain the logic... Or is it simple to say, we

are going to be a roadblock? Could you explain the economic logic, give

me any major economist in the world who would then this was a response,

that if we are heading to recession as a result of leaving, which is the

Chancellor's scenario, we would go into recession, what is the economic

logic is a recession stares us in the face at we raise tax and cut

spending? As I said earlier, the Chancellor is someone who has Stuart

did the public finances for the last six years. We see one of those

results today with 20,000 fall in an employment. We've seen long-term

unemployment fall significantly and that's because he did get the public

finances... But what is the economic logic of raising taxes and cutting

spending as we are heading into recession? He balanced the budget

over the last six years, or at least significantly... Excuse me, he's

balanced the budget? Significantly reduced our deficits because he had

to raise some taxes and he had to cut... He slowed down the spending.

Excuse me, Ed Vaizey. You may be rewriting the future, we won't know

until we reach there, but you can't be allowed to rewrite the past. He

actually slowed down the spending cuts because we were in such a

situation and instead of balancing the budget by 2015, which was his

promise, he gave us an ?80 billion deficit. So I ask again, can you

name any credible economist, because Remain is very keen to quote

mainstream economists, who would think that slashing spending and

increasing tax would be a credible response to a recession? No doubt

economists might pile in after this, as they piled on on this whole issue

of whether we should leave the EU. And when I was last on this

programme, you asked Kate Hoey to name any credible economist who

could say that leaving the EU would be good for our economy. So you are

bringing out Kate Hoey. I am asking you, can you name... I am asking

you, can you name an economist that thinks this would be a... Don't try

and filibuster. You did it earlier and it didn't go down too well. Just

answer this question. Name and economist that thinks that Osborne's

punishment budget would be the correct response.

You know that when George took decisions about cutting spending and

raising taxes, organisations like the IMF told him he was playing with

fire. They came round and said what George Osborne did was correct. Let

me see if I can get an answer to this question dash in a manifesto,

you promised a referendum. He also promised more money for the NHS, you

also promised not to raise VAT or income tax or national insurer and

is. But you never anywhere said in the manifesto, but we can't keep any

of these promises if you vote to leave in the referendum. So it was a

false prospectus, wasn't it? The prospectus was to hold the

referendum, which was a manifesto promise. I have said that. In the

current state of our ability to manage the economy with the state it

is in now with us as a member of the European Union and trading freely

with the market of 500 million, we can do the things we have done. You

never told us that, there is nowhere in the manifesto that all these

major promises are predicated on as a voting, in your view, the right

way on the referendum. There are issues in the manifesto you cannot

foresee. David Cameron had to carry out his successful negotiation. It

was in the manifesto. You promised a referendum. He has secured our

vision for Britain in the European Union. Would anybody in the Remain

vote for a budget like this post the referendum? It is not a proposed

budget, it is a press stunned by George Osborne and rather silly one.

John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor says, Labour would not

vote, Labour would be against it, I would assume. I think we can take it

for granted, the SNP would vote against it. Almost 60 Tory MPs are

rising, would vote against it. It is a nonsense, Ed Vaizey. Sorry, I

thought you are still asking John. How would you get it through? The

Chancellor would come to the Commons after a vote to Leave, God forbid,

people would see the impact on the economy and the Commons would have

to take a view on whether it is important to get the budget back on

track and the national finances back on track given the new and dangerous

situation. John, why was Alistair Darling associating himself with

this this morning? Desperation, last attempt to shore up the vote. I am

hearing, even in Scotland, the vote in many constituencies may be going

for Leave, even in Scotland. That would be a surprise. That is what I

am hearing. Alistair Darling was not representing the Labour Party this

morning, to your understanding? Clearly not, if it was someone

representing the Labour Party, it would have been John McDonnell. So

he was representing Alistair Darling? Yes, and his judgment on

this is wrong. It is desperate politics trying to build up this

project fear even more. It is not working, it is nonsense. It is

almost a classic illustration of what nonsense it is. The Chancellor

this morning on BBC, implied it was a consensus, and he used Alistair

Darling's position that Labour and Conservative said the same thing. I

am asking you, I know you don't want me to, but that is why I am

continuing. I feel it is a bit unbalanced. You are the one that the

questions to answer. He said we have a Labour Chancellor, Conservative

Chancellor and it was a broad view of what we had to do. Now we hear

from the Shadow Chancellor, we wouldn't vote for this. It has

crashed and burned on take-off. He was standing with the Labour

Chancellor in the last Labour government, when Labour used to win

elections, who had to handle an economy in crisis following the

banking crash. Alistair Darling is a credible figure who knows what it is

like when you are facing an economic shock. He says, this is exactly...

This is exactly what I would expect. I don't know what John McDonnell's

position is. We have just been told. There is this peculiar mindset from

Jeremy Corbyn where he won't share a platform

There will be more money spent on the NHS if we leave. There was a

consensus perhaps for the first time. Would be ?100 million over

?350 million that vote the grating as the amount of money that is spent

and sent to Brussels every week? It all depends who is in power and who

makes the decision. What would you do? I would be looking to Spencer

Gifford and sufficient money, which would be under 100 million, on

putting money back into the NHS, getting into the hospital deficits,

recruiting nurses, getting nurses bursaries, and adding moneyback

international health service, would be my priority and if that money

becomes available, that's what I would do. Or you think this is an

alternative manifesto and they shouldn't be putting this board?

Let's look at Labour on immigration because you have put a lot about

immigration. It does look as if Labour is panicking as much as the

Conservatives. We've had Tom Watson, the devil do bid, saying there would

be moves, proposals, to curb the free movement of people. -- Tom

Watson the Deputy Leader. Poor I called for it in the last

Parliament. The problem is, you can't do it because the EU refuses.

On whose authority is he saying it? Go but not the Labour Party because

it is not what Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonell think. You would have

to as Tom Watson. I'm not privy to their discussions but I agree with

the principle of what Tom Watson and others have said. However, the

problem with that is that the EU rules do not and I were to happen,

so the issue for all of us is going to be, whatever the vote, what do we

do afterwards on the Friday? And if it is the bob, we have that

opportunity. Let's go straight over to the Commons to speak to the

shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Seema Malhotra. Let me

come to you straightaway. You have heard the Chancellor with what has

been called a punishment budget. If we vote to leave and the Chancellor

came forward with a budget like that, would Labour vote for it or

not? Hello, Andrew. We have been very clear that we won't be

supporting a budget that sees cuts to the NHS, cuts to working people's

support. We don't believe that a Tory Brexit and then an emergency

budget is going to give people the reassurance that there is going to

be a brighter future at all with Brexit. What we are saying, and we

are calling on people today, with our opposition day, to say that

there is a brighter future if we stay in the EU. That is absolutely

where we need to be. I understand that that is your position. Can I

just clarify, because Alistair Darling, former Labour Chancellor,

appeared with George Osborne as the outline of this post Brexit budget

was announced. Can I take it that Mr Darling was not represented the

Labour Party by being with Mr Osborne on that? Lube the context of

this is very clear. This is the same warning that the IFF and others

brought in, that there would be a hole in our budget... I asked you

about Mr Darling. It would be nice to get announced that it was he

speaking just for himself or did he in any way represent the Labour

Party? He's talking in terms of how we would need to address, and the

country would be to address, a hole in public funding finances. But what

we've been saying is that we would not be voting for more cuts, so what

we need to do, and the message that we want to give, is that if you want

security and you want prosperity and you don't want to do self-inflicted

damage to our economy... You said that. I've been trying to get an

answer to my question. I'm not getting answers from Ed Vaizey and

I'm not getting answers from you. So please give some respect our

audience who are voting next Thursday and only ask you one more

time, was Alistair Darling just being for himself by being alongside

Osborne or did he represent the Labour Party? We have said very

clearly, Andrew, and I'll just say this again... No, don't say it

again, just answer the question. It is important that you answer the

question. The context is a new. All right, well, you're not going to

answer the question. I'm sorry, Seema Malhotra. I've had enough. You

are not answering the question, so let's not waste our time with any

more of this. Is it going to go on like this? When is the referendum?

Next Thursday. Couldn't come soon enough!

Now, today is our last PMQs programme

and you might be wondering, what could have changed when we come

Clearly not politicians answering the question.

Will it still be David Cameron vs Jeremy Corbyn?

Will the BBC still be able to afford the huge budget for JoCo's graphics?

Will Ed Vaizey be here in the studio...again?

I keep coming back for this punishment! It is like a Russian

doll. If you just answer the questions, I wouldn't need to be

rude. Well, you can be sure there's one

thing that will stay the same regardless of whether we vote

to leave or remain - And that's because we've got a job

lot of them stacked in boxes So if you want to be

in with the chance of winning this historic mug, which is actually just

the same as all the others, all you have to do is tell us

when this happened. For South Africans to trade together

to celebrate the birth of democracy. We've been praying long

enough for it, haven't we? 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 12:30pm today

and you can see the full terms and conditions on our website.

It's coming up to midday. It is a beautiful summer's des. There won't

be a Primus is questions next week because of a referendum. Laura

Coombs Boadicea. I would suggest that a normal PMQs, the Labour

leader would stand up and say, if the Chancellor things he can do this

kind of budget rose Brexit, he's got another thing coming, but can Mr

Corbyn do that, since he is nominally on the Remain site? I'm

not sure. I think there is something else there because we know that

Jeremy Corbyn often want to do his own subjects! They're already under

way. We will come back to you. I know the whole house will join

with me incentive condolences to the family and friends of those killed

in the in Orlando on Sunday. This attack, along with the callous

murder of a French policeman on Monday, is a stark remind of the

challenge we face to defeat the poisonous ideology of Daesh both

online and on our streets. I believe that together with our friends, our

allies and our common values, we will prevail. This morning I had

meetings with ministerial colleagues and added just two duties in this

House, I shall have further such meetings later today. Thank you, Mr

Speaker. I share the Prime Minister's sentiments in the Sabet

is expressed to the victims, families and friends of those in

Orlando. The Australian parent company of a United Kingdom company

who see Europe as a major market expansion have put on hold their

plans to build a factory in the enterprise zone on the South

Lowestoft industrial estate. Lowestoft has enormous potential as

a centre for serving the European maritime market but does the Prime

Minister share my concern that this opportunity would unnecessarily be

placed at risk if the UK beats the EU? -- leaves. I share his concern.

I well remember visiting his constituency and seeing what a

thriving business location Lowestoft is. He is right that many companies

come to Britain and invest in Britain for many reasons but one of

the most important is access to the single market of 500 million

customers. Next week we have the opportunity to put our place in that

single market beyond doubt and I hope that we wake up on June 24

knowing that businesses are going to invest more in our country, create

more jobs in our country, see more growth in our country, because that

will help the families of our country and the unemployment figures

today, another welcome fall in unemployment, we could see continued

progress. Lets see our country moving forward. I concur and join

with the Prime Minister in his remarks about the terrible deaths in

Orlando. On Monday I joined a vigil of thousands of LGBT people in Soho

in London to mourn the deaths of the 49 and also I want to say, we say

thank you to all those all over this country who attended vigils on

Monday night to show their concern and their horror about it. Quite

simply, we defeat such atrocities through our love and our solidarity

and we need to send that message out. Three years ago, there was a

cross-party agreement for the lamentation of section 40 of the

Crime and Courts Bill and to proceed with Leveson to once prosecutors

were concluded. The Prime Minister will be aware that today there is a

lobby of Parliament by the victims of phone hacking. The Prime Minister

said a few years ago that we all did too much cosying up to Rupert

Murdoch. Some of his Tory Brexit colleagues are certainly cosying up

to Rupert Murdoch at the moment but will the Prime Minister give a

commitment today that he will meet the victims of press intrusion and

assure them that he will keep his promise on this? Let me again echo

what he said about the Orlando bombings. In terms of the Leveson

issue, we said that we'd make a decision about a second stage of

this inquiry once the criminal investigations and prosecutions were

out of the weighted top they are still continuing and so that is the

situation. -- out of the way. I have met with victims of press intrusion

and I'm happy to do so again. I think people can accuse me of many

things but cosying up to Rupert Murdoch is not one of them. My

question was, will he meet the victims of phone hacking? I hope you

will because they deserve it anti-bra missed that he would meet

them. A major thunder of the Leave campaign said, and I quote, "If it

were up to me, I'd privatise the National Health Service". The

honourable member for Uxbridge said, "If people have to pay for NHS

services they will value them all". Both he and the honourable member

for Surrey Heath are members of a government that has put the NHS into

record deficit. These people are now masquerading as the saviours of the

NHS. Wolves in sheep's clothing. Did the honourable member for Totnes get

it right when she rejected the duplicity of this argument in the

Leave campaign and decided to join the Remain campaign? I was delighted

with what my right honourable... My honourable friend, the Member for

Totnes, said about changing her mind, which is a brave thing for

politicians to do, and saying that she thought that the NHS would be

safer if we remain inside a reformed EU. I believe that very profoundly,

because the key to a strong NHS is a strong economy and I think there

can't be any doubt that nine out of ten economists, the governor of the

Bank of England, the IMF, the OECD, all of these other organisations,

saying our economy will be stronger and it is a strong economy that

delivers a strong NHS. Last week, the Prime Minister gave a welcome

commitment to the closing of the loophole in the posting of workers

directive. We will hold him to that but we are concerned about the

exploitation of migrant workers and the undercutting of wages in this

country as a result of that. On that issue, will the Prime Minister today

commit to the outlawing of the practice of agencies that only

advertise abroad for jobs that are in reality jobs in this country?

First of all, he and I absolutely agree about the evils of Modern

Slavery Bill that is why this government passed the Modern Slavery

Bill with all-party support. We've doubled the fines that can be put on

companies for exploiting labour in this way and we have strengthened

the gang masters licensing authority and they have commenced and carried

out a number of prosecutions, including in the eastern and, where

I was yesterday, and so we continue to take action on every level to

make sure people are paid their wages they should be paid and that

protections are there on the minimum wage and now on a national living

wage. -- including in the East of England. I think all of those are

vital and we will continue with those measures. I think people are

entitled to a fair day's pay for a fair day's what. My question was

about outlawing the practice of advertising by agencies only in

other countries. Tens of thousands of EU and other people who have

migrated to Britain work in our public services and do a fantastic

job. Many people in Britain are also concerned about immigration and

their local communities. Surely what communities need is practical

solutions like the migrant impact fund set up by Gordon Brown when he

was Prime Minister to deal with the extra pressure on housing, schools

and hospitals. Will the Prime Minister now

concede that it was a mistake to abolish that fund and will he work

with us to reinstate it as a matter of urgency, to give support to those

communities that are facing problems on school places and doctors'

surgeries? He is absolutely right. In answer to the question about

employment agencies that only advertise for overseas workers, we

are looking at Battersea if we can ban that practice because we don't

believe that is right. Of course, the answer to so many of these

questions is actually to make sure we are training, educating and

employing British people and getting member qualifications they need to

take on the jobs that are economy is creating an today's unemployment

figures are another reminder that. In terms of funds to help

communities impacted by migration, we have a pledge in our manifesto,

which we are looking forward to bringing forward, with a controlled

migration fun to make sure we put money into communities where there

are pressures because, of course, there are some pressures and we do

need to address them and I'm happy that we will be able to work on a

cross-party basis to do that it cos I've said many times, there are good

ways of controlling migration and one of them is the rules we are

bringing in so people don't get instant access to our welfare

system, but there are bad ways of controlling immigration. Leaving the

single market and wrecking our economy is certainly one of them.

Today, a flotilla of boats is due to come along the Thames complaining

fishing quotas are not going to the UK domestic fleet. My have not seen

them yet, but presumably they are on their way. The Prime Minister will

be aware that reforms made three years ago put the power back into

the hands of member states and it is the UK Government that has given

nearly two thirds of the English and Welsh fishing quotas to just three

companies, excluding small fishing communities along the coasts. Can

the Prime Minister stop blaming Brussels on this and tell our

fishing communities what action he will take to allow them to continue

their work and go further out in collect Kingfish? First of all, can

I thank him for the reforms we carried through in the last

Parliament and the honourable member was crucial in delivering those

changes. What we have seen in the last five years is an increase in

the value of the UK fishing industry of something like 20%. We export

every year about one billion pounds worth of fish to the EU and there is

no country in the world that has a trade agreement with the EU that

doesn't involve tariffs, taxes on the sale of its fish. There is no

way we would get a better deal on the outside than the deal we get on

the outside. So working with fishing communities, working with fishermen

and keeping the market open and make sure we manage our fish stocks

locally and appropriately is part of our plan. His government still

handed quotas over to three very large companies at the expense of

small communities around Britain, I hope he reflects on that. Mr

Speaker, with eight days to go before the referendum, the Labour

position is, we will be voting to remain because it is the best way to

protect families, protect jobs and protect public services. We would

oppose any posed Brexit austerity budget, just as we have opposed any

austerity budget put forward by this government. Will the Prime Minister

take this opportunity to condemn the opportunism of 57 of his colleagues,

who are pro-Leave, these are members who backed the bedroom tax, backed

cutting disability benefits and cutting care for the elderly, who

suddenly have now had a conversion to the anti-austerity movement. Does

he have any message for them, does he have any message for them at all?

What I would say to the right honourable gentleman, there are very

few times when he and I are on the same side of an argument. This must

say to people watching at home, when you have the leader of the Labour

Party and almost all of the Labour Party, Conservative Government, the

Liberal Democrats, the Greens, the Ulster Unionists and the Scottish

National Party old saying, we have huge disagreements, but on this

vital issue, the best option for Britain is to vote to remain in a

reformed European union, really says something. This is a huge choice for

our country, choices have consequences. If we wake up on June

the 24th and we have remained in, the economy can move forward. If we

vote out, experts warn as we have a small economy, lesser wages and less

tax receipts. That is why we would have to do have measures to address

a huge hole in our public finances. Nobody wants to have an emergency

budget, nobody wants to have cuts in public services. Nobody wants to

have tax increases. But there is only one thing worse than not

addressing a crisis in your public finances through a budget, and that

is ignoring it. If you ignore a crisis, you see your economy go into

a tailspin, confidence is reduced in the country. We can avoid all of

this I voting Remain next week. Having recently undertaken a real

I'll tour of my constituency, and Sam told -- sampled some of the

nicest ales in the north, can I ask the Prime Minister to join me in

nodding to the virtues and massive benefits to the economies from small

and medium-size breweries from up and the country? Happy to agree with

my honourable friend, having spent last weekend in Kent and yesterday

in Bury St Edmunds, I agree a large quantity of real ale is one of the

best ways to get through this gruelling referendum campaign. The

British beer industry is in good health because of the duty cuts from

the Chancellor, because of the microbe Ruhe tax regime. We have a

lot of craft beer coming through and the brewers I am talking to and

going to see, they want the single market open and they want to remain

in. On Orlando and the deaths in France, we aren't these benches join

with the condolences expressed by the Prime Minister and the Leader of

the Opposition. We are now only a week away from the biggest question

the UK has faced in a long time, and that is the continuing membership of

the European Union. Exports, goods and services from the Scottish

economy are massive important. Hundreds and thousands of jobs

depend on them. Meanwhile, public services, including the NHS are

supported by many hard-working people buy elsewhere in the European

Union. Does the Prime Minister agree, if we want to protect jobs,

public services, we must vote to remain in the European Union gesture

Mark I do believe the most important arguments is about the future of our

economy. It seems obvious you can listen to the experts or make a

common-sense argument. Today we have access to a market of 500 million

people. For an economy like Scotland, such a big exporting

economy, there is no way we would get a better deal with the single

market on the outside than we get on the inside. If we left we would seek

our economy suffer, jobs suffer, livelihood suffer. It is plain

common sense. I agree with him, for jobs and livelihoods, we should

remain in. There is a consequence the public finances, if our economy

is doing less well, public finances would be doing less well and that

would have consequences for Scotland. Make a raise that with the

Prime Minister? We have learned from a Conservative Chancellor of the

Exchequer and a former Labour Chancellor of the Exchequer, there

would be likely to be 30 billion pounds in cuts to public services or

tax rises, where there to be a Brexit vote. What impact would that

have on public services in Scotland? Please, can we learn now before we

vote? What impact would it have on the budget in Scotland that pays for

the NHS in Scotland, schools in Scotland, local government and key

public services. Is it not another reason why we must vote to remain in

the European Union? What I would say to the right honourable gentleman,

these figures are not based on what the Chancellor of the Exchequer is

saying, they are based on what the Institute for Fiscal Studies is

saying. They are talking about at 20 to 40 billion hole in our public

finances if regs it went ahead. These are organisations quoted in

this House against the government because they are respected for their

independence. Decisions to cut public spending in the UK budget do

have an impact on Scotland. And to anyone who says, these warnings of

course, they could be wrong, they could be inaccurate, this is an

uncomfortable point to make to the right honourable gentleman, of

course there were warnings about the oil price before the Scottish

referendum. It turned out to be worse than the experts warned. Thank

you Mr Speaker. Since the terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels, many

of my constituents are worried that remaining in the EU increases the

risk of terrorism. Fear is exacerbated by the disgraceful

comments of people like Nigel Farage. Does my right honourable

friend agree, security services are helped by the EU and not hindered? I

would say directly to my honourable friend, I have done this job for six

years, working with the Home Secretary, I have seen how closely

our intelligence and security services work with other services

around the world. Of course we keep ourselves safe by investing in

anti-terrorism policing and keep ourselves safe by working with the

Americans and the partnership. I am in no doubt increasing extent of

intelligence exchange that takes place through the EU is of direct

benefit. It is not just you need a border, you need information and

intelligence to police the border properly. We are seeing an enormous

amount of exchange about criminal records, passenger name records.

Outside the EU we can try and negotiate our way back into these

agreements, but right now we are in them and we are driving them.

Knowsley is expected to receive ?10 million in EU funding over the next

three years. EU funding has helped attract his Mrs to the borough like

QVC which created 2500 jobs. Isn't it the case of this important

funding from the EU could be lost if we vote to leave the European Union?

The honourable gentleman makes an important point. Which is, if you

look at these independent, economic reports, they said there is no

financial saving from leaving the EU. The Institute for Fiscal Studies

said, we can include leaving the EU would not leave more money to spend

on the NHS. Rather it would leave us spending less on public services or

taxing more or borrowing more. I would argue there is a big dividend

from remaining inside the EU and we will start to feel it next Friday as

companies could see Britain have made a decision and job creators and

international investors would know Britain meant business and they

would be investing in our country, but there is no interest in leaving.

The number of working households has declined since 2010, will he focus

on more jobs and a growing economy? The most important thing we can do

for parents in our country is to help them get a job, earn a living

and provide for their family. In our life chances strategy, measuring

worthlessness and school attainment are important in helping to ensure

we continue to help lift children out of poverty. Mr Speaker, two

German men run businesses in Scotland, but they cannot vote next

week. They leave for France on Sunday and are considering leaving

permanently if we exit the EU. Will the Prime Minister join my call for

them and others in a similar situation to stay, as they are

highly valued? There are many people who come to this country, work hard

and make a contribution and help to build communities. It is important

to get the numbers into the spec. 5% of the population are EU nationals,

Italians, Germans, Polish and the rest of it. Only five people in the

street will be EU nationals. Look at our NHS, 50,000 EU nationals, care

homes, 60,000 EU nationals helping to look after elderly relatives with

dementia and other conditions as they come to the end of their life.

We do need to make sure people who come here are working and making a

contribution, but we should celebrate the contribution they

make. Given the government's recent enthusiasm for making forecasts and

predictions, can the Prime Minister please tell the House, in which year

will we meet our manifesto commitment to reduce immigration to

the tens of thousands? At the last year for which EU migration was in

Allen 's, the number of EU nationals and British nationals leaving our

shores to work in Europe and the number of EU nationals coming to

live and work here, the last year that was in balance was 2008. I

would say to my honourable friend, yes, we need to do more to control

migration from outside the EU, and we are doing that with the closure

of bogus colleges and other measures. We are doing more inside

the EU, not least saying people who come here, if they don't get a job

after six months, they have to leave. If they were, they have to

contribute for four years before they get full access to the welfare

system. Those are big changes and sensible ways of controlling

immigration. A nonsense of always pulling out of the single market,

damaging jobs and damaging the economy and having to explain to our

constituents why we have self impose a recession on our economy. Many

from my constituency of Swansea are struggling to make ends meet. The

World Trade Organisation say if we leave the EU, we could face a major

tariffs on trade. We would have to re-negotiate over 160 trade

agreements. Does the Prime Minister agree with me, leaving the EU would

hit hard-working families the most, raising the cost of living and it is

to take a risk to take? The honourable lady is right. It is

always the poorest who will get hit hardest if an economy suffers a

recession. There are two ways the cost of living can be impacted. If

we lead the single market, go to WTO rules, we would have tariffs imposed

on the goods they sell to Europe. But also if the pound was to fall,

which many independent experts forecast, the cost of living rises,

shopping rises, the cost of holidays rises. It is not worth the risk, we

should not risk it, we should keep our country safe. Following the

Chancellor's welcome announcement to launch the new Thames Estuary 2050

growth commission, could the Prime Minister outline his hopes for how

the commission's focus will deliver the infrastructure and economic

development that will allow North Kent to prosper, including my

wonderful constituency of Rochester? Always, whenever I get a question

from my honourable friend, I remember how grateful I am she is

sitting for Rochester and Strood. Happy days. In terms of the 2050

growth commission, the key areas are skills and infrastructure. There is

a serious amount of money being committed to the infrastructure and

we do need to look at things, including the lower Thames crossing,

to make sure the economy in that region can make the most of its

potential. 2500 people are employed in the ceramics industry in my

constituency. Their jobs are dependent on EU trades and rights

are protected by the EU social chapter and their town centres have

been rebuilt with EU funds. With his friends in the Leave campaign

producing more spin than a potter's wheel... Does the Prime Minister

share my fear is that this by your's floors, a Brexit vote can leave is

picking up the pieces of a broken economy the years to come. I am

going to pinch that sound bite. The honourable lady is right, if we lead

the single market and the European Union, the council president has

said, the process probably takes two years. After that you have to

negotiate a trade deal with the European Union. If it is a trade

deal like Canada, it could take seven years. We are looking at a

decade of uncertainty for the economy. On the ceramic industry, I

am advised by my Parliamentary Private Secretary, who did do a

worthwhile job of working in that industry before coming here... He

may not be spinning wheels any more, but spinning for me very

effectively! We exported billions of porcelain soup China and the EU and

if we were outside the EU, there would be a 12% tax. I don't want us

to hit British manufactures, car-makers, aeroplane makers, we

should be investing in those industries and helping them support

and not making the situation more difficult, which is what regs it

would do. 30 years ago when I was a lad, my parents quit their jobs...

30 years ago my parents quit their jobs and they founded a small

manufacturing business around our kitchen table. Today, British

manufacturers, particularly small businesses are worried. They are

worried because if we leave the European Union, they will continue

to make their products to common European standards. Because they

value the free market. They value the single market and they value the

export. They are aware the United Kingdom will have no say whatsoever

in the formulation of those standards. And their competitive

advantage will be destroyed. What advice does my right honourable

friend have for my parents, for small businesses and for the

millions of jobs that depends on them across the country washed your

mark I always assumed my honourable friend was under 30, so I am

shocked. But he makes an important point, if we were to leave we lose

the seat around the table that sets the rules of the single market.

Sometimes those rules can be annoying or burdensome, but they are

the rules we have two meet. If you leave and you have no say over those

rules, you'd don't gain control, you lose control. It is a crucial

argument why the majority of small businesses back staying in EU, as

well as a lot of larger as this is. That I endorse the comments and

associate the SCOP about Paris and Orlando. Ironed assure the Prime

Minister that the SDLP is behind him and his efforts to ensure a Remain

vote but the Brexit campaigners have made our borders their resounding

war cry and will when it comes to the only land border between the UK

and the EU, we're told nothing will change. A critical economic change

for Northern Ireland's voters in eight days... Camber primers to

clarify this point and tell the people of Northern Ireland, what

will become of the border if the UK votes to leave the EU? I thank him

for his remarks about the Orlando shootings but on this issue, if we

vote to stay in, we know what the situation is. We know that the

Common travel area works, we know it can continue and everyone can have

confidence in that. If we were to leave, and as the Leave campaigners

want, make a big issue about our borders, then you've got a land

border between Britain outside the EU and the Republic of Ireland

inside the EU. And therefore you can only either have new border controls

between the Republic and Northern Ireland or, which I would regret

usually, you would have to have some sort of checks on people as they

left Belfast or other parts of Northern Ireland to come to the rest

of the United Kingdom. We can avoid these risks. There are so many risks

here, risks to our children's jobs, risks Tony Hibbert in future, risks

to our borders, risks to the unity of the UK. -- risks to our

children's fugitive top I say avoid the risks and vowed to remain in the

EU. Next week I will be visiting schools in my constituency to

explain both sides of the EU argument to those who will be most

heavily affected by a decision they cannot make. Does the Prime Minister

have any words for these people for the Remain segment? I am grateful

for his hard work. This is about that even if those people in those

schools aren't able to vote, will affect their futures, and I hope

they will talk to their parents and grandparents after being inspired by

my honourable friend about wanting to grow up in a country with

opportunity. We're bound to have more opportunity if we remain in a

reformed EU with 27 other countries. I also think it goes to a point

about what sort of country want our children to grow up in, not just one

of economic and job of that unity is but one where our country is able to

effect change and get things done in the world. We don't diminish

ourselves inside the EU, we enhance the power of Britain and the

greatness of our country. Old Bob Approximately 11,000 Marks Spencer

is employees, many with more than 14 years' service, are about to get a

serious pay cut. Cuts to Sunday pay, bank holiday and anti-social hours

pay, all made on the back of the national living wage, means they

will take home less next year than they do this year, with some losing

up to ?2000. This is not just any pay cut, this is a big, fat Marks

and Spencer pay cut. Does the Prime Minister agree with his Chancellor

that cutting take home pay at M or anywhere else on the back of the

national living wage is wrong and, if so, will he moved to close the

loopholes that make this possible? Obviously, we want to see the

national living wage leading through into the bar having higher take home

pay, not lower take home pay, and we would urge all companies to make

sure that is the case. I haven't seen the information about Marks

Spencer but they know, like any retailer, that they need to attract

and retain and motivate staff that they have and it's absolutely

crucial in retail, particularly with all the competition with online,

that they continue to do that, and they won't do that if they cut

people's pay. I agree with the Prime Minister on Europe. When he said to

the CBR on the 9th of November last year, and I quote, "Some people seem

to say that Britain couldn't survive, couldn't do OK outside the

EU, I don't think that is true," the argument isn't whether Britain could

survive outside the EU, of course it could. So if, as I hope, despite the

panic driven negativity from the Remain camp and Downing Street, the

British people vote next week to become a free and independent nation

again. Will my right honourable friend join me in embracing the

optimism and opportunity for our country and our people that such a

momentous decision would bring? I would say to my honourable friend,

as I said at the CBI, of course Britain can survive outside the EU.

Nobody is questioning that. The question is, how are we going to do

best? How are we going to create the most jobs, the most investment, have

the most opportunities our children, we'll do the greatest power in the

world, get things done? And all those issues, stronger, safer,

better off, the arguments are on the Remain aside. Could I associate

myself and, indeed, all of my party across the country with the remarks

he made earlier on about the killings in France and the brutal,

phobic murders in Florida. The killer and his vicious, homophobic

act do not speak for Islam. The wealthy Eve eat fuelling the Leave

campaign will be an harmed by the inevitable hike in interest rates

that will follow Britain's exit from the EU and the decline in sterling.

The rate rise, however, will have a hit on millions of ordinary British

people. It will push people to lose their homes through repossession and

push low-income people further into crippling debt. Was he advises Tory

Brexit colleagues that there is a long-term economic plan on offer, in

which he can help those people who are hard-working families not to

suffer? It is to vote Remain on Thursday. He and I are often on

opposing sides of arguments but I think it says volumes about the

breadth of the campaign to remain in a reformed EU that we have the

Liberal Democrats, as well as the Labour Party, the Greens, the trades

unions, and so many others, coming from different perspectives but all

saying our economy will be better off so therefore families will be

better off, our country will be better off, if we remain in, and

he's absolutely right in what he says about interest rates. The last

thing homeowners, home-buyers and our country needs is a hike in

interest rates damaging our economy. I'm glad he's bought a long-term

economic plan and that should have, as part of its plan, remaining in

reformed EU. Can I congratulate him for an array our manifesto pledge --

honouring our manifesto pledge and delivering this historic referendum.

Unfortunately, we have heard some hysterical scaremongering during

this debate. There are those in this House, and in the other place, who

believe that if the British people decide to leave the EU, there should

be a second referendum. Can he assure the House and the country

that whatever the result on June 24, his government will carry out the

wishes of the British people. If the voters to remain, to remain, and if

the voters to leave, which I hope it is, then we leave. I'm very happy to

agree with my honourable friend. In means we remain in a reformed

European Union, out means we come out. And as the Leave campaigners

have said and others have said, out means out of the European Union, out

of the European single market, out of the council of ministers, out of

all of those things, and it then means a process of delivering that

which will take at least two years, and then delivering a trade deal

which could take as many as seven years, so I would say to anyone

still in doubt - and there are even members in this House still thinking

about how to vote - if you haven't made up your mind yet, if you are

still uncertain, when you think of that decade of uncertainty for our

economy and everything else, don't risk it, and vote Remain. The North

Middlesex Hospital accident and emergency unit is incomplete

meltdown. Will the Prime Minister commit to taking swift action to

tackle this crisis? I do understand it is a very busy accident and

emergency unit. It has received over 30,600 patients through its doors in

April alone but it has managed to carry out 40,000 operations and more

than 62,000 diagnostic tests every year. If we look at what has

happened since 2010, there are 120 more doctors, 200 mating more nurses

recruited by the trust. -- 280 more nurses. But I think this comes out

to the core argument of today. If we remain in, we will have a stronger

economy and then we have to make sure we take the proceeds of growth

in that economy and continue to put them into the NHS, as I've always

done as Prime Minister. I'm looking forward to the British people giving

me the opportunity to vote against the vindictive emergency budget.

Will my right honourable friend explained that if the Government is

so strapped for cash, why is it still intent on spending ?50 billion

on HS2? The point is that we will be strapped for cash if you believe the

Institute for Fiscal Studies, or the national Institute for it, can

social research, both impeccably Independent, who say there will be a

hole in our public finances between 20 billion and 40 billion. If the

economy shrinks and you have fewer jobs and lower wages, you get less

tax receipts. If you have less tax receipts, clearly you either have to

make cuts or you have to put up taxes or you have to increase

borrowing. It is a simple matter of mathematics. There is an easy way to

avoid getting into that situation and that is devoted to stay in a

reformed EU next Thursday. Order. I once asked the US Secretary of

State but his policy was in the Caribbean, and he said it was a

potter portrayed in a formulation mode. I think you can use that to

describe today's PMQs. Jeremy Corbyn started with a question which took

us by surprise on phone hacking. He then moved on to the NHS and Leave

and whether the NHS would be weaker or stronger. And then the old

favourite about the post workers directive, and the agencies who only

advertise jobs abroad. We moved on the migrant funds which Jeremy

Corbyn was pushing. The Prime Minister said he had reignited the

migrant funds. Then we had fishing quotas. We didn't see that one

happening, but there is a lot going on on the Thames at the moment with

fishermen for Brexit being assailed by Bob Geldof in a different vote

for Remain. But should be fun. You know it is a big news event when

helicopters are scrambled to cover it. Finally we got to the central,

crucial note of this referendum, the Chancellor saying he would need an

emergency budget if we voted to leave and Jeremy Corbyn as the Prime

Minister what he thought about the 57 MPs who said they wouldn't vote

for that. We then got Mr Cameron to give his case that the union. The

questions were lined up so the Prime Minister could respond in that way.

An unusual PMQs. Break next week. Helen Manning said Jeremy Corbyn

asking questions about phone hacking and agency workers EU directives

when this country is on the brink of deciding future, is farcical.

Kurt said they were the most boring and staged questions by Jeremy

Corbyn. Geoffrey said scaremongering from Mr Cameron Phil is no one. He

should be ashamed of himself, I have a sneaky suspicion it was his last

PMQs as Conservative leader anyway. And then this tweet from Matt -

there are a lot of bored journalists sitting in PMQs wishing they were

outside on a boat, they are miserably watching the flotilla on

Twitter. There is some truth in that. We will

see if we can get some pictures of this flotilla. Is there don't know

flotilla as well. Not unless you have charted it. We have a reporter

on this flotilla, we are going live before the end of this programme.

Some people are barbecuing Scottish langoustine brought all the way from

Peterhead. If that is your kind of thing, it might be worth going to

the river. Look at the pictures. I think the big boat in the middle

belongs to Bob Geldof, the Leave one. Hose down by a Leave boat. A

senior member of the government did say to me this morning, what is

going on in the world. We are on the verge of making this huge decision

and we end up with boats scrapping each other on the Thames. There is a

very strange mood in Westminster because nobody has a clue what is

going to happen. Partly because the polling models don't work and the

parties are discredited after the general election. People are hearing

different messages on the doorsteps. There is a sense that anything might

happen. One of the viewers said, it might be huge, but it might be David

Cameron's last PMQs. It is one of the multiplicity of possible things

that might happen in the next ten days. Is it a strange atmosphere,

John? People are taking control and the politicians don't know what to

do. I am talking about Labour MPs, going out and having street stalls,

they are getting robust exchanges, shall we say. When they are knocking

on doors, to find what is happening, there aren't many knocking on doors,

but they are shocked at the response they are getting. They shouldn't be.

The interesting thing is, my prediction, the turnout in

working-class communities will be higher than in any other

communities, for the first time since the 50s. It is true,

everywhere I go, the school gates, the local shop, for the first time,

everybody is talking about it. They are not talking about the debate we

politicians are having, whatever our views are. That is not influencing

them, they are talking about what their experience is of it, workplace

discussions, discussions in the community and discussions in

families around the dinner table. That is what is going on and that is

why so many people are going to vote. It has proved much tougher for

the Prime Minister than he thought. He didn't expect to be in this

position one week out, it was meant to be that by now, it would still be

a fight, but a clear majority to Remain. Why hasn't it worked out? I

don't know what the result will be. I still think it will be a Remain

vote. I know I will annoy the viewers again and sound like a

cliched politician, but we know the polls have been wrong and there was

a rogue poll for the Scottish independence, and there was in terms

of the general election. It isn't a slam dunk. My question didn't imply

victory for Remain Leave. Why has it turned out to be tougher? I think

John is onto something because there is a disconnect between Westminster

politicians and their voters. It wasn't meant to be an anti-labour

point, but Labour finds itself in a disconnected position. It is what

has happened to the Labour Party in Scotland. It has been replaced by

the SNP, the centre-left party people vote for that they feel talk

to them. And I think the similar is happening in Labour's northern

constituencies. John has worked very hard to keep in touch with the

voters. That is true, but the David Cameron misjudgement above all. I

think he thought, let's call them the Labour moderates, Liz candle,

Yvette Cooper, very pro-European, historically. They would be

outspoken and it would carry that sway and Jeremy and his leadership

and these new people, that would appeal, I think they bought the myth

of these vast numbers of Jeremy Corbyn fans out there, where are

they? The fact is, there aren't that many of them, they are not knocking

on doors. A lot of them, possibly Jeremy Corbyn himself, not that

convinced about the European Union. The George Osborne, David Cameron

playbook for the referendum was they saw as being a successful tactic in

the Scottish referendum and then a successful tactic in the general

election, don't take the risk with the economy. That is the play, that

is what they decided to do in this referendum campaign as well. Despite

the fact people in the Conservative Party and the Labour Party,

internally in the Remain camp have been saying, we have to offer more

than this, it is not the general election or a replay of the Scottish

referendum. Yes, there is a problem with Labour having a disconnect with

their voters, but one of the big points we have seen, the Prime

Minister is now in an uncomfortable position, then analysis of what

would work in this referendum campaign going on the narrow

economic point, has proved to be wrong. That has not delivered, it

hasn't resonated. I would suggest, and there are all sorts of things

going on in this referendum, I would suggest this referendum was always

going to be about identity as well as how well of the country is. Also,

there has a thing we have seen in the last few weeks, we are in a

post-fact world. People we have been talking to around the country,

seeing people and listening to politicians and asking questions of

politicians, voters don't want to believe any of them at all. So

Westminster scrapping over the 350 million whatever, people don't

believe either side at all. It is about expenses, probably about cash

for honours in Iraq. People had underestimated the level of distrust

amongst some parts of the electorate. I think many voters

it'll be about instinct. The Scottish referendum was as much

about identity as was about the economy and in terms of what John is

finding on the doorstep, I don't know, but I think there are issues

that do resonate. One is about sovereignty, are we ruled by Europe

or not? I think we are strong independent nation. It is about an

economic risk. People do to that point on board. And there is this

whole debate about immigration, not being anti immigration per se but

worried about the effect on public services. There is one very powerful

thing that is also going on, and I don't disagree with what you are

saying, and that's about empowerment. Zero our contracts,

agency work, it's a referendum. We can make a decision and people are

thinking... The feedback I get, people are talking about agency work

all the time. This is what I think is motivated people. It's not about

"We don't like foreigners". There's a tiny group who say that, but that

is not what the vast majority are saying. To me they are saying the

opposite. They are saying, I've got this wonderful Polish neighbour next

to me, but it's my job. And that empowerment where they can make a

decision, that's very big and that's why turnout will be high. We have

run out of time and need to move on. It is fast approaching one o'clock.

Laura, thank you. Now, the businessman

Philip Green has been appearing from MPs over his part

in the collapse of the high There's certainly no intent at all

on my part for anything to be like this, and it didn't need to be like

this, and I just want to apologise to all the BHS people who have been

involved in this. When you first... I wasn't involved in it. I can't

answer you because I wasn't involved in its. You can ask me as many

questions as you like. This was not on my table to deal with. On your

commitment to the pension scheme... Why can't I answer the question? No,

no, no, because you are not getting the right information. He is trying

to make me answer things I cannot answer and force me to give him the

answer he wants and I'm not going to. Before the hearing, Philip Green

described the Parliamentary increase as a process which is not even the

pretence of fairness and objectivity and at its primary objective was

"The destruction of my repeat edition" you describe the showed up?

No, because then he would have been dragged on and it would have been

even worse. His reputation is damaged anyway. When his web of

things are going well, he takes all the glory and all of the money. When

it goes wrong, everyone else takes the hit and he says it is nothing to

do with him. That is fundamentally wrong morally, ethically, and is

fundamentally unfair. But in the end, Ed Vaizey, what did we learn?

Those people are still going to lose those jobs. I haven't seen the

select committee hearing but Frank Field is a highly respected chairman

of that committee, very experienced in these issues, and the reason he

is in front of the committee is about the future of the BHS pension,

so I'm sure the select committee report will influence thinking. The

Government itself is thinking in terms of the insolvency service

inquiry and working with the pensions regulator and the pension

protection fund. But you would expect a committee like Frank's to

either firstly focus on what happened to the BHS pension but also

come up with recommendations on what has happened, for the Government to

say, these are things we should be thinking about. He refused to

guarantee today that people in the scheme would get the same amount,

those already in the scheme, would get the same amount they were

originally entitled to before BHS collapsed, in terms of pensions. If

his plan does fall short, should the Government stepping? It is too soon

to say and I don't want to be accused of dodging the question but

there is a process where you have the pensions regulator, which has

the power, potentially, to ask the former owner of a company to

contribute to a pension deficit, and you've got the pension protection

fund, which was set up precisely to help where a pension fund was in

deficit because of a company going bust. So both those organisations

are working with the BHS pension trustees. But if that doesn't

happen, should the government help? Potentially, the protection fund is

the Government's body to help out when the pension is a deficit. So

maybe, then. Sir Philip Green also said he is working on a solution for

the BHS pensions mess, as he called it, and said it wasn't anything

directly to do with him, in terms of the talks that happened beforehand.

There are 20,000 people in the scheme and it has a ?571 million

deficit. What do you think will happen? I think there is a big

danger those people are going to lose out quite a lot and therefore

it needs government assistance and need him to cough up all the money

he made out of this escapade and put it back in. Do you think that is

likely? No. Oh, well, there you go. I got an answer. That was an answer!

Nigel Farage is leading a flotilla in protest at the EU fishing quotas.

They set off from South End in the early hours of the morning,

and made their way under London Bridge before arriving

You can see them there looking onto the MPs' Terrace.

It's not been entirely plain sailing as they also encountered

pro-Remain ships - one carrying the activist

Bob Geldof - as they made their way toward the Westminster.

We are seafaring nation and it is only fair that this should be fought

out in the Thames. Our man on the front line in the Battle of the

Brexit votes is Giles Dilnot. We go to him live.

You had debates, you've had leaflets, you haven't heard anything

quite like this. A water board war of words between Nigel Farage and

Bob Geldof! A flotilla of fishing industry votes for Leave saying that

the EU has crippled the industry. We got a whole flotilla of small In

votes zipping around and that large barge with Bob Geldof on it,

chanting that the EU benefits fishermen. There were not many

fishermen on board that vote. Nigel Farage pointing out that this is a

millionaire dictating to small businessmen. I saw earlier the

millionaire supporter of Leave.EU smiling at me and saying that it

looked fun. There are people saying the EU has been very bad for them,

Nigel Farage is here to support them, and when it got to that battle

of words, it was quite something and most of us have ears ringing. We've

moved away from the House of Commons because frankly, you wouldn't have

heard a word I said. I'm glad you did but you seem to be going

upstream now. When are you going to turn round and go back down again? I

have absolutely no idea, to be honest. I want a tactical retreat,

from I think, from the sound barrage. Safe sailing, Giles tit

thank you very much. There's just time to put you out

of your misery and give John Mann, press that buzzer. Lets

see who it is. It is Stephen Collinson from

Hastings. Well done, you got the historic mug, which is no different

to any of the others. I'll be back tomorrow

with the Daily Politics at midday and then a special extended

edition of This Week. We'll be on until the small wee

hours of the morning to bring you the results

of the Tooting by-election. And for the benefit of those

who live in Tooting, a full list of candidates standing in that

by-election is on the screen now. You will each collect

a Michelin-starred chef. 'En route,

each chef will prepare a dish.'