30/04/2012 Daily Politics

Good afternoon, a welcome. Gloom descends over the eurozone as

Spain slips back into recession. David Cameron says we are only

halfway through a crisis which is tracking down the world economy.

Location, location, location, well appointed apartment block in a

prime position adjacent to the Olympic village, perfect for an

anti-aircraft battery. They are in coalition now, but how

will the Liberal Democrats look different from the Tories at the

next general election? We debate live.

Commons authorities consider giving MPs iPads amid claims they will cut

down on printing costs and increase efficiency. Yes!

All of that in the next hour, and with this, the Liberal Democrat

deputy leader Simon Hughes. First, the Prime Minister is under renewed

pressure this afternoon to answer questions about his embattled

culture secretary Jeremy Hunt. The Labour Party are calling for a

statement from David Cameron, who admitted he might not be in the

clear. He insisted that any further questions should wait until he

appears before the Leveson Inquiry, which will be mid-May at the

earliest. Do we have any news about the statement? We will have to wait

about another half an hour or so before the Speaker makes up his

mind on this. Clearly, behind the scenes, sources will say, the

minister made a statement last week, the Prime Minister answered

questions at PMQs, but against that, the Labour Party say there is a

huge amount of interest, there are still questions to be asked about

why the Prime Minister has not referred the matter to his adviser

on potential breaches of the ministerial code. Even if the Prime

Minister is called here back before MPs to answer more questions about

this, it seems pretty clear that for now at least he will be

sticking to what he has been telling us, that he does not

believe at the moment there is evidence that Jeremy Hunt has

broken the Ministerial Code. He wants to give him time to give his

evidence under oath before the Leveson Inquiry, and even -- if

something emerges at that stage, he will either refer the matter to his

adviser to see if the Ministerial Code has been broken, or he could

take action himself. That is the line he will stick to, but if he is

called back before MPs, that will be another uncomfortable session

for the Prime Minister. Do you think David Cameron should

give a statement to Parliament? is the speaker's call, I will not

second-guess that. Do you think he needs to, politically? I do not,

because he gave a full interview yesterday. Everybody has reported

that. The position is clear, there is the Leveson Inquiry and the code

of conduct, that has been accepted by the Prime Minister, and we know

they will be resolved next month, because he is likely to be before

the Leveson Inquiry next month, and the Prime Minister has made a

commitment he accepts there might be a further issue, and it will be

dealt with. He has to refer something if there is a breach of

the Ministerial Code. You were the first Liberal Democrats to break

ranks and say quite clearly that this issue should be referred to

Sir Alex Allan, and we do not know if that is going to happen. Is the

Prime Minister being slow? understand the sequence he argues

for. White issue is the substance, I am clear what the substance is.

The Rupert Murdoch empire, for years, have been chasing after all

been chased by Labour and the Tories. We have argued that

relationship was unhealthy, Vince Cable has had a tough opposition,

the question is, has the government continued to be as tough in being

independent and resisting the blandishments when Jeremy Hunt took

over as it was when Vince Cable was there? We will get the answers next

month. You were the person who raised the issue, should he be

referring to Jeremy Hunt now? Prime Minister has accepted there

might be an issue. If there is, the code is clear that the Prime

Minister has a duty to refer, and it seems to be that the Ministerial

Code has to be followed. On the face of it, it looks surprising if

it will not be, but I am prepared to let Jeremy Hunt give his

evidence and then I assume it will have to be referred before the

ministerial code. The Prime Minister said he will listen to

what Jeremy Hunt says. Under the rules, it is his responsibility,

but the code is clear that in certain circumstances, the Prime

Minister has to use the adviser to make sure the code is followed.

Ever since -- evidence has emerged that George Osborne was lobbied by

James Murdoch. Would you like to see George Osborne before the

Leveson Inquiry? I have appeared before Lord Justice Leveson, he is

robust and no nonsense. He is clear as to who needs to appear before

him. I have no doubt that he will say if he thinks that other

ministers need to appear, and I have no doubt they will appear.

think George Osborne should and will appear? That is Lord Justice

Leveson's call. If we are talking about things that have emerged from

e-mail correspondence between the Murdoch empire and ministers or

their advisers, if we expect the Jeremy Hunt answers questions, do

we expect George Osborne? Lord Justice Leveson is looking at the

relationship between that politicians and the media. We have

heard from Mr Murdoch, he is coming to the political phase next month,

and one of those people who will potentially give evidence, he has

made it clear he will not be bullied by a government ministers,

he will want to go to the bottom of the question, what were the links

between Murdoch and other media and ministers? If he thinks the

Chancellor or the prime minister or others have something to tell the

inquiry, he will have them in front of him. Yesterday, Harriet Harman

suggested that Rupert Murdoch should be stripped of his

broadcasting licence in the UK. Do you agree? No. I was the first

person to raise this issue with Ofcom. I argued that, given there

is now a fit and proper person Test party invite us, against the Labour

government's wishes... Ofcom had assured me and have now said

publicly they are actively pursuing an ongoing consideration both about

individuals and about the company, and they will come to a decision as

soon as possible. We have to leave them to do that independently. It

was wrong for the Labour Party to say that Jeremy Hunt should resign,

and it is wrong for them to say that they should be stripped of

their licence now, without letting Ofcom... The have had serious

doubts. Yes, but the regulator is there to adjudicate. Has that

changed your mind? Since I went to Ofcom and said, can you look at

their suitability, of course, James Murdoch has resigned his post.

Things have changed. Ofcom is there to regulate, they ought to win the

case, they say they are being active, they will adjudicate.

We will stay on the subject of Jeremy Hunt for the quiz. Yesterday,

Michael Gove Cup for the revealed that Jeremy Hunt has an interesting

item in his house, so what is it? Is it a Sky dish, a sign that Take

That poster, a sprung dancefloor or a copy of Vince Cable's book? At

the end of the show, Simon will give us the correct answer. No

prizes, it is just for fun. For something more serious, is the

economic crisis in Europe about to enter another even more painful

phase? Last week, in the first three months of the year, Britain

slipped from weak economic growth back into recession. The infamous

double-dip. This morning, Spain has also fallen into technical

recession, joining other eurozone countries in the double-dip,

including Belgium, Ireland, Italy and the Netherlands. The backlash

against authority continues with protests a familiar sight on

European streets from Madrid to Athens. In France, Francois

Hollande is poised to take power, Bank -- vowing to end deficit

cutting programmes and reopening the austerity pact brokered by

Germany. Nicolas Sarkozy has previously accused David Cameron of

interfering in the eurozone. This weekend, the Prime Minister risked

doing so again by blaming Europe for the UK's economic problems.

What is happening it is a massive tension between the single currency

that countries are finding difficult to adapt to. It is going

to be a very long and painful process in the eurozone as their

workout, do they want the single currency with a single policy and

all the things that go with it, or are they going to have something

quite different? They have to Do you think the eurozone is facing

a renewed threat of collapse? we saw it this month, it can get

worse. It depends on the reactions of the ECB and of politicians in

Europe. What to do me? We heard David Cameron defend gloomy

predictions and St that the eurozone is facing a renewed threat

of collapse. What does that do to market speculation? It is the

politicians within the eurozone that can have the bigger impact,

because they are going to be called upon to solve the crisis. In the

first quarter of this year, the ECB have calmed down the tensions by

throwing it liquidity into the markets, but that does not solve

the problem. It bought a politicians' time. There is an

irony, every time we get a pinnacle in the tensions of the crisis, and

this has been going on for years, it is then that politicians have

the desire to come out with something really firm in terms of

structural reform. It is then they can go back to their electorate and

say, we have to do something. If you like, the ECB has potentially

prolonged the crisis. What is the reaction in Germany to this idea of

pressure for either pumping up and backing that the ECB or any risky

bail-out fund? What is the German government feeling? They are

waiting for Sunday. Election day. The French have to decide their

President. The Greeks have to decide their government. It is

another fortnight until we have elections in our biggest state,

North Rhine-Westphalia. Until then, nothing will happen. What about the

prospect if the polls are to be believed that Francois Hollande

becomes the next president? How will Angela Merkel react? There

will be much gnashing of teeth in Berlin and they will then get on

with it. As every German Chancellor and every French President has done

for the last 40 years. It will not make any difference to the crisis

in substance? She was ill-advised to support Nicolas Sarkozy in the

way she did. She will have to make up to Francois on bond. She will

give some way on some measures or some personality decisions. Apart

from that, it will be business as usual. What is the reaction to the

Prime Minister's comments, possibly years of recession or minimal

growth, and blaming the eurozone for Britain's economic woes? Who is

David Cameron? Is that still the feeling? In terms of eurozone

politics, in terms of overcoming the financial crisis, who is David

Cameron? Who is David Cameron, Simon Hughes? Somebody who is

outside the inner circle. The wrong decision? We obviously were unhappy

about that, we have always argued for maximum participation. I

absolutely agree... We should not write-off Nicolas Sarkozy, my

friends I was speaking to today, they say, do not assume it is all

over. I am not a supporter of either, there is not a strong

Liberal candidate. Secondly, absolutely, we have got to see what

happens in the Greek election, we have got to replace the

bureaucratic government with a political government. This is going

to take a long time to resolve. Our job was always to make sure that we

helped as far as possible a smooth landing for the most difficult

economic turbulence we have had in my lifetime. Has David Cameron done

that? We had the blip in December, when we had a different view as to

whether we should have participated, but life has moved on, and there is

participation. We have to continue working with our colleagues,

because the eurozone future is important to Britain's future, our

biggest trade is with Europe, so if It's being said it faces a renewed

threat of collapse and it is as a result of turmoil in the eurozone

that Britain is facing the double- dip recession. The eurozone has not

helped us at all, but it's very important that we remain as strong

as possible as an economy. What will happen after the elections

that we have this week, across Great Britain, is that we will need

to review whether we are doing everything we can to move on with

growth. Clearly, it's been difficult. There's a new session of

Parliament. I want us to pull every single lever for growth and if

there are more to pull, we need to pull. What do you say to this

insistence that we can do something to help the eurozone and help

growth, is that just empty words? think the whole word is becoming

far more important to all of the people, especially in the UK. Many

economists don't believe that number that came out, but

regardless of that, I think for all politicians growth is going to be

the real watchword. Are the programmes the wrong way to go, in

the countries which are under huge pressure to make severe cuts?

politicians are realising that they've got to be efficient by pro-

growth policies. If you are from the point of view of Germany, that

certainly you need structural reform. Unfortunately, that can

take years to pull through. Look at Thatcher's labour market reforms.

In the meantime, we need to stop the spiral, such as we are seeing

in Spain, where banks are under pressure from 25% unemployment and

drop in property prices and that meaning that banks haven't got the

money necessarily to lend. The slowing down of growth too, so you

need some pro-growth policies to stop this spiral. What is the

structural reform you are advocating? Pension reform, labour

market reform and budgetary reform. This has been going on for some

time. If you take the eurozone in general, many countries were

supposed to have done that prior to 1999. Generally speaking, it's when

that's done that invest towards start to buy the bonds from those

countries. The social Democrat Government failed because they did

all those structural reforms. The employment rate in Germany is

higher than in most countries in Europe. The pension system is still

in need of reform, because we get older all the time, but they did

reform it. I'm not entirely sure whether that's correct. Do they

take the idea that it all comes down to what Germany does?

course not. Look at the Netherlands. That is a net contributor. The

Government has collapsed. France is important whatever else. America

may be the more important partner, but France is extremely important,

and so is Italy and Spain. absolutely clear that given the

Government's form when there was a disruption in Greece at the time,

we were right to make sure we protected ourselves against

reputational loss, which meant ratings would go down and weighed

start to see either further inflation or whatever. Now

everybody is say we must pull the growth levers, but there are issues

for France. They have retirement age much earlier than we do and

they won't be able to afford that. We've taken the difficult decisions.

But were the Liberal Democrats a block on the reform here? That's

the argument being put against them, saying they tried to slow it down.

We have clearly been willing to say that the pension age must rise, but

look at a whole restructuring of the system so people get a much

more secure pension by 2015 at the end of the exercise. That is

sensible, because it accepts the reality of longer life, but

realises you have a different way. Thank you all very much. It emerged

yesterday that the MoD is proposing to station surface-to-air missile

on top of a block of residential flats in East London in the

Olympics. Residents in Bow Quarter have received leaflets. It says the

missiles will only be fired as a last resort. Over now to Ross

Hawkins, who is on College Green for us. Noisy neighbours, somewhere

safe to put your bins, you don't normally have to worry about high-

velocity missiles being put on your roof, but that is a real concern

for some. Over now to two MPs. It's your constituents, who we are

talking about here. They and you must accept that we do need to

defend the stadium and that can be difficult and people are just going

to have to make allowances. Yes. People are excited and they are

working closely with the authorities to make sure that there

is proper security and that's what we are all concerned about. But,

what is really worrying about this situation is that it's been done

within a -- dealt with in a cack- handed way. People have received

leaflets and they've seen army officers going through the flats

without proper explanation and that's quite alarming and there are

questions that people are asking. The first thing some of the

constituents knew was they got the leaflets from the pizza company and

from the local Tay-away and there was one saying, "By the way there

may be a surface-to-air missile on your roof."? That's right. It's

unacceptable. Everybody would expect a bit more consultation and

explanation of what this entails, what this would mean and what would

be the worst-case scenario in a heavily-built area. These missiles

are being put above residential properties in a heavily built-up

area and that's unprecedented. Patrick Mercer, a quarter of a

century in the army, so you must know that when the military come so

close to civil society they have to think about what they're doing and

handle themselves with tact. It doesn't sound like they're done

that, does it? It's very difficult. I think she made some very good

points and you are right, this has to be with the content of the

people. The more the people agree the more they understand the better

the result will be, however, ultimately, the defence is needed.

The experts, the officers, who will have carried out the reconnaissance,

will have decided this is the best area and the weapons are designed,

if necessary, to be used in built- up areas, not necessarily with

people present. I'm reassured by the fact it's been carefully

thought through and that we have got this particular weapons system

in place. You say designed to be used in such areas, but we are

talking potentially about the British military shooting down an

aircraft, but whether it falls down in bits because it's been blown up,

it is going to do damage in the area and endanger lives. That is

the situation we have on a day-to- day basis anyway. The difference is

if this happens now, as we are speaking, that two very high --

high-quality aircraft will be used. Here we are talking on TV about

national security. It's no accident this is so high profile? This is a

PR campaign for the bad guys? don't think so at all. The fact we

are all standing here, including the MP and her constituents, what

we are saying to the bad guys, "If you dare and try, you know what

will hit you." It's a good thing. Reassuring? No. Patrick needs to

recognise if you want to give out signals, it's very important to get

the people to understand exactly what this involves and they've been

left in the dark and that's not reassuring. Thank you both very

much. We all know there's going to be lots of inconvenience and

struggle with special lanes. Some people, it seems, will have a

particular sort of anxiety, but it doesn't look like taif got much of

a choice. -- they've got much of a choice. We'll look to the general

election in 2015. If the coalition makes it that far, of course. The

Liberal Democrats are trying to implement the differentiation

strategy, but just how possible is that when your tied up in

Government? How much can you promise when your only realistic

chance is in coalition? We have been trying to find out what Simon

Hughes' next manifesto might look look. It's the list of promises a

party makes to win votes, but these manifestos were written before the

age of coalition Government. Next time around, the Liberal Democrats

could take a very different approach, according to the peer who

led two of the party's election campaigns. Aim sure what we'll do

will be, we'll listen one, two, three, five-five numbers of issues

which are crucial for us and we'll say that the more Liberal Democrat

MPs you elect, if you like those policies, the more of those

policies are likely to be implemented by the next Government,

whether it's a Liberal Democrat Government or a Labour Government

or Tory Government or coalition. The coalition agreement that these

men helped hammer out took bits from the two manifesto $, but both

sides got their red-line issues in. In the future, should a party's

manifesto outline the areas where they might compromise if they end

up around the table in here again? The institute for Government, which

has carried out into research on how it was formed, warned that

could be a bad move for the Liberal Democrats. I don't think it would

be sensible for parties to put in their manifesto, "These are the

things we really want to do. We'll definitely stick to these, but

these are the others we'll basically drop if we have to." It

would look rather odd and it would weaken their bargaining position in

any negotiations too. Beware the manifesto pledge. It was a mistake

for us to fight the last election on the basis that the candidates

are signing a pledge that there would be no increase in tuition

fees and I think that's a lesson I'm sure that all three political

parties will learn, that you have to couch it rather than saying,

"Over my dead body." That was something that we are still

recovering from. The dawn of the TV leaders' debate is another reason

to leave contentious bits out of the manifesto altogether, according

to one backbencher. Nick Clegg boosted enormously Liberal Democrat

support through his performance in the hustings on the TV. Then the

media looked through the Liberal Democrat manifesto and found some

deeply unpopular things. I think manifestos will have less in them

in the future and I think they will be more about general direction and

the philosophy and value of parties rather than specific policies.

Although the two main parties might stick to the usual approach.

Tories and Labour Party won't campaign on the assumption there's

going to be a coalition, because they'll campaign to win and

therefore they'll have much more traditional styles to their

manifestos. A list of maybes then, rather than promises. Joining Simon

Hughes now is Conservative MP and coalition fan, Nick Bowles. We

advocated a pact at the next election, do you still support it?

I'm still a fan of the coalition. It's given the country a strong and

stable Government. What about it? have to accept on the pact I'm

really much a lone voice. Siem son will confirm this has not been

warmly -- Simon will confirm this has not been warmly embraced. I

would like to see a majority. don't want to campaign, but you

would rather have a pact in order to have a coalition? I will be

campaigning for a Conservative majority and I am now, but what I

think we need to recognise is that as a party, a the Conservatives, we

have found it hard traditionally in the last few years to build that

majority Government. I think this coalition Government has been a

very good Government at a time of difficulty for the country. Much

better than my minority Government would have been. I don't think that

we should burn our bridges. We'll campaign as independent parties and

have different manifestos and different plans, but I hope we

won't be trashing the Liberal Democrats and they won't trash us,

because we might need to work together again after the next

election in the national interest. That's the difficulty, isn't it? If

you are going to campaign separately, then one would expect

there will be a bit of trashing. If, as you had suggested in Liberal

Democrat seats, the Conservatives would not put up a candidate and

urge supporters to vote Liberal Democrat, then obviously there

wouldn't be the problem for that. Is that something you would still

like to see? I'm a realist. I'm a junior MP. Nobody else in my party,

nor in the Liberal Democrats, thought this was good. Let's deal

with reality, rather than hopes. That would help the Liberal

Democrats. If there wasn't a Conservative up against them in the

seats, under boundary changes, or marginals, they would increase the

number in Parliament? I promise you that the Liberal Democrats

conference will not allow us to not fight every single seat in the

election. Nick put up an interesting idea. I agree with him

that we've had the Government we needed in this difficult time. The

only majority that could have been formed was a Conservative and

Liberal Democrat majority. There wasn't a majority with Labour. We

did the right thing in the national interest. I'm clear it will last

for five years, because we have to show that coalitions can work, if

that's what the people ask us to do. At the next election wail draw up

the manifesto. You saw the example and I think Nick is right in one

respect, we will be much more careful that we are not pretending

that only majority governments are the outcome and Tim made that point.

Secondly, it will therefore be more helpful not to have too many gos at

what others have done or what they are saying, because we may have to

How can you differentiate? We will all due that they should not be

money spent on a like-for-like replacement of Trident. The Tories

will argue for a like-for-like replacement, we would save a lot of

money by doing that, which we would spend on other things. We want tax

policies that help the people at the bottom end, we oppose giving

tax concessions to people at the top, because we want the gap

between rich and poor closed. We want more regulation of the banks,

the Tories want less regulation. What about more cuts after the next

general election? Than it Alexander admitted it will be in the next

Lidl Democrat manifesto -- Danny Alexander. The economy will not be

sorted in five years. What he said it was not about death and it cuts,

he asked all departments to think about where they would find savings

if they needed to move budgets around. When asked about going to

the election, promising further cuts, he said, I am afraid so.

is him speaking in a coalition government on behalf of the

government having corresponded with colics. We will form our own view

in 2015. That sounds like Simon Hughes is trying to say they would

not necessarily go into the next election promising further cuts.

Differentiation would mean more attacks on Conservatives. How much

does that worry you? Not at all. We are separate parties. Two years in,

Conservatives are now frustrated about some of the things we would

have liked to have done as a majority government that we have

not been able to do, and we will want to assert them more clearly

and more firmly in our manifesto. Renegotiation and were -- over our

membership of the EU. The introduction of the British and

have rights to replace the European Convention of Human Rights, so we

can get rid of a bigger target without waiting eight years for the

European Court to make up its mind. We feel strongly, and they will be

underlined in our manifesto, in the way they were not the last election,

because we did not note there would be such contentious issues.

would see that outlined in a Conservative manifesto? You cannot

make it explicit which policies you will throw away, because you might

as well not put an end. But what you can do is spend more time

elaborating your policy positions on things that really matter to you

and less time on things that matter less. Do you agree that the Liberal

Democrats are blocking the recovery? No, which are in

government together. There are some things we would like to do, but we

have got to work through this as a coalition and get some sensible

policies in place. I agree with him, we need to pour every lever on

gross. A day you accept your party brogues and Series promises that

were made in the last manifesto? your party broke a series of

promises? We wanted to drop tuition fees, the Tories wanted tuition

fees. We were stuffed, we could not deliver. It was difficult for us.

They might have been another way of dealing with it. We could have put

in a new graduate contribution system. It would have allowed us to

confirm what we have said, but we have learnt the lesson. You cannot

make a pledge that you cannot deliver. What would you say on

tuition fees in the next election? You have to look at things as they

are. It will be a lot Blanda, because you cannot make promises,

because of the risk of coalition. In Scotland, we were in collision,

we delivered residential care for the elderly free and a better

system of student tuition. There was a Labour Party minority

government in Wales, we made a deal to ensure money for pupils in

schools. In coalition, we have delivered all four of those things

in the manifesto you showed. The other partner in a coalition has to

put its priorities on the table, and we negotiate, but we will

continue to make a more fair, Moorgreen, more international

Britain. We will take them on. look forward to it!

Breaking news. A spokesman for John Bercow says there will be two

urgent questions asked on the floor of the House this afternoon, Ed

Miliband to the Prime Minister, about referring Jeremy Hunt to the

independent adviser on the ministerial code. The other is from

Keith Vaz, about the queues at Heathrow. You are forewarned!

We are in the last few days of a parliamentary session that began

with the Queen's Speech, almost two years ago. The longest in 150 years.

With local elections on Thursday, the politics will continue, so

there is no break for Pippa Crerar and Andrew Pierce. Such hard

working hacks! Can I get your reaction about the urgent question?

The Prime Minister will not be happy, but it is the right end. If

the Prime Minister says he has got nothing to hide, and it has got

nothing to hide, and he should deal with it. It was a nonsense that

Lord leathers and should be the moral arbiter, he is investigating

phone hacking! -- Lord Justice Leveson. Some people ask about what

the point of Alex Allan was. Do you think, in the end, David Cameron

will have that independent inquiry by the independent adviser? They

will continue to be pressure on him. Jeremy Hunt seems to be on

probation. Until he appears before the inquiry, we will continue

having questions from the Labour Party, starting this afternoon,

putting pressure on David Cameron to have more information. It has

not gone away yet, it is likely to get even worse for David Cameron,

we have got Rebekah Brooks releasing texts and e-mails to the

Leveson Inquiry, which she set to the Prime Minister, so there will

be a lot of nervous advisers in Number Ten, waiting to see what

they reveal. Well Jeremy Hunt survive? I think he will, not least

because that does not appear to be any new information that has come

to light since the story broke. The Prime Minister likes him, I was

talking to Tory backbenchers, they like him, there is little pressure

from within the party to get rid of him. He is an effective human

shield for the Prime Minister. Let's look ahead to local elections,

and the mayoral elections. The pulse of the road between Ken

Livingstone and Boris Johnson over the past few weeks, how big a

factor will national politics be? Boris Johnson is doing everything

in his power to present himself as Boris Johnson first, and a

Conservative candidate second. He was deflecting questions left,

right and centre about the impact of the party's national woes. He

says it is irrelevant, nothing to do with what people are concerned

about. That will have some traction, but I think we will begin to see

him brought down slightly. He is massively ahead in all of the

opinion polls so far of his own party, and Ken Livingstone is

behind the Labour Party, so he is doing everything he can to ally

himself with the party and persuade voters that he is the Labour man in

power. David Cameron needs Boris Johnson to win. This reminds me of

1990, Mrs Thatcher was in big trouble, so Ken Baker span before

the local election votes that if they held Wandsworth and

Westminster, that was a decisive victory for her. They won those

boroughs, but the results in the rest of the country were disastrous,

but nevertheless, it was carried off as a great day for her. This is

what they are doing with Boris Johnson, but I would remind viewers,

only six months later, after Thatcher's victory, she was gone.

An ominous tone! The double-dip recession, on the doorsteps, how

much will that play for all of the Party's pin-up prospect? To a

certain extent, Boris Johnson is the candidate most likely to print

London after of recession, both by job-creation measures and also his

relationship with the Treasury, he had a lively relationship with

George Osborne in the past, but he insists he can get more money out

of them for London. It will have an impact, but not as big as some

people might suggest. The National Party leaders will knock-on very

intently, Ed Miliband appears to be sending out signals that if Ken

Livingstone loses, it is a reflection on him and not on the

Labour Party. He said that if the election was on Labour policies,

London would be taken. Labour is expected to do well in the assembly

elections, and to put on seats there. The Conservatives expect to

lose seats. We will have a strange situation, may be doing well as a

party in London, but not able to get their man into power. Ed

Miliband will say, he is not my candidate, but it will have some

fall-out. On the sort of independent nature of David

Cameron's 2010 intake of MPs, the various groups of MPs from wind in

their tuppence to the debate, how were Richard BP buy them? They are

the liveliest, most independent- minded intake I can recall. They

are terrific news for journalists like me, because they give great

headlines. You cannot silence them, because they know they are not

necessarily going to get ministerial jobs, because 20 of

them are backed by the Liberal Democrats. They have decided to go

for it, and they are flexing their muscles, which must be to the

despair of Tory whips. Alongside Simon Hughes, as if by

magic, Jon Ashworth and Pauline Latham had -- Pauline Latham. Do

you belong to any of these independent groups? Not a specific

membership, but I tend to go in and out of meetings if it is something

that is of particular interest for me. Why are you an independent

voice? I am fairly loyal, but there are a few things that will happen

in the future that I think I might have a voice on. Which are those?

We will have to wait and see! are the areas that you or

interested in, going into the meetings? I am concerned about the

House of Lords reform. I am not happy about throwing the baby out

with the bathwater, which is what I think we are going to do. And same-

sex marriage. I do not have anything against gay people, I have

no problem, but I have a problem with any form of marriage ceremony.

How would you describe the feeling amongst you and your colleagues

about Moore's reform? There are a significant number of us that are

concerned. We are looking at what the final proposals will be when it

comes to the House of Commons. do you say to that? You are in for

a big fight, what message do you send to Pauline? I respect of you.

Neither of the issues she mentions are easy. Why have a principled

view on the House of Lords reform, it will have to beat a compromise,

it will have to be mainly elected and some appointed, to get

agreement. They do not want it to happen. But the principle must be,

those asked to obey the laws Chew's who make the laws. Only one other

country in the world has a wholly nominated top house. We are behind

the curve. Once you stop -- once you start paying them, they would

challenge the supremacy of the House of Commons. I understand, I

was on the commission which looks at the relationship, and we might

need to make that even clearer. The reason it is already clear, we are

elected every five years at most, so we have a mandate, but the Lords

will be elected in thirds, so they will never have a recent mandate.

But we need to have that debate. On the other matter, I say this from a

Christian background, they should be a difference between what the

state recognises as a partnership, like in the rest of continental

Europe, and what faith groups recognise. Sacrament of marriage

are very important to the Christian Church and others, but allowing

people as adults to join his civic partnership and call it the same

think is for me something which is an acceptable way in a modern age

of making sure people were given equal recognition. Civil

partnerships, what is the difference? We could have a long

debate. There is a difference in practice, and people feel they are

differentiated in the status they give. With the commission going

over these issues, let's refer back to Jeremy Hunt. He is still in his

post, you will have the urgent question. Ed Miliband failed to

make the killer blow. I do not know about that. The key thing is, David

Cameron has to show some responsibility, he cannot hide

behind Lord leathers and -- Lord Justice Leveson. He appoints his

ministers, and he has responsibility for the ministerial

code, show -- so we should request an inquiry. The longer the prime

minister delays,... The more he looks weak, and people will ask,

The three main parties all face specific concerns on Thursday. In a

bout of expectation management, the Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles,

has said the Conservatives could lose 400 to 450 to Labour. Labour

hope their national lead translates into gains of at least 700 seats,

by despite that Ken Livingstone still trails Boris Johnson and the

whrds, who were in the words of -- Liberal Democrats, who were in the

words of one Liberal Democrat, slaughtered last year, will they do

any better? Do you agree that members should hold their noses and

vote for Ken Livingstone? I think people should vote for Ken. He was

wrong in saying that? He was making a point about the way the election

is going, but actually there are other elections going on 3rd May,

on Thursday. It's not just all about lon and you have to remember

the context -- London and you have to remember the context. In 2010 we

had the second-worst general election result. We lost seats from

193. We made good progress and we had some gains. I won my own by-

election last year and this year we are hoping to make progress in the

south. I've been looking out on Thursday evening for Norwich and

Reading and Harlow. Those bellweather places where I suspect

we saw people voting Tory coming back to Labour. Will it be the

amount of progress we want, probably not, but some. We'll

return to Ken Livingstone since you didn't want to talk about him. Is

the reason that Tom Watson said people should hold their noses, so

hardly a wringing endorsement, is because of embarrassment over his

tax affairs, which he's defend and his comments over the Jewish

community and others that have made him not the best candidate Labour

would have chosen? Do you endorse him? Are you saying there should be

such? Of course, they should. He's the Labour. I'm not a Londoner, but

I'll encourage them to vote on Thursday. This is from a Shadow

Cabinet member, "The voters must not think they can wash their hands

of responsibility for their actions if they fail to vote against the

Tories." Is that what you would have put it? What he's saying

directly is that Boris Johnson is a big celebrity, but people who vote

for him have to remember they are vote forg a Tory who supports

cutting -- voting for a Tory who supports cutting taxes. Whatever

that Labour candidate says or does? He's the candidate and he's very

good for the Labour Party. He's setting out a programme to cut

fares and a programme to bring back London-based educational

maintenance allowance. I think that's a great manifesto for London.

If I was a Londoner I would vote for him on Thursday. Do you think

there's a scepticism about the machine politics, if you like, in

Labour, that there's a wider problem? You used to work in Ed

Miliband's office. I did. Selected for a safe by-election seat then

another selected in Feltham and then we had the by-election

selection in Manchester Central, Lucy Powell, also a triumph. Ed

Miliband said, "We are trying to do politics in a different way."

Doesn't this give the impression of stitchups? I can see why you would

make that point. We have a council leader in Scotland and Dan Jarvis,

who has served our country in Barnsley and Debbie Abrahams in

Oldham, so they are not all people who have worked in politics who are

fighting the lections. Sthr how worried -- by-elections.

worried are you about things in Glasgow? We know we have a lot of a

job to do. These are fought on proportional representation. Last

time the same set of elections - You think the SNP will win? If they

put up the same number as last time, we would be having a different

discussion. Paula, do you agree you'll lose 450 seats? I think in

the last four years, in 2008, we had a high. It was in the run-up to

the general election, so obviously we did well. I suspect that we will

lose some seats. I find it very - Will you lose as many as 450?

hope so, but it's possible, because we did have a huge high. We weren't

expecting to win many of those seats four years ago. We did win

them and we are likely to lose quite a lot. Do you think Boris

Johnson's strategy in London to distance and differentiate himself

from the national scene, from pasty tax and charity tax, is the right

way? Boris is running to run London. He's not running to run the country.

The Conservative candidate to run London and he doesn't want to be

seen - I've been a counsellor for 23 years before I came here and it

used to annoy me and say it was a referendum on the Government, but

it isn't. It's about local people. Not what I've done or what Simon

Hughes or anybody else has done. Running London is a pretty big job.

You have to lobby Government for a lot of money in transport. It

doesn't help if - If the referendums go through they'll have

to do the same. It's very difficult to divorce national politics then

from, if you like, local politics in terms of the London mayorality,

so he's got the right strategy to try to push the national scene

aside? I'm not so sure he's doing that, because he's doing a lot of

strategies and increasing the police on the beat and building

more houses. He's getting employment up. He's doing a really

good job for London and I think he needs to continue. If he's doing a

really good job, it will be as a result of what has been happening

nationally? I don't know about that. It will be what Londoners decide

and it's up to them to decide what they're going to do, but I hope

they'll vote for him, because London is a much brighter place for

the fact that he's there. I really hope that in Scotland people vote

for the Scottish issues that are at local levels and in Wales. I think

we run it very well. I hope the people will reward us for that.

wouldn't you want to be in coalition? It's important that at

local elections. In London I'm an MP and I want people to vote for

Brian Paddick. You have a second choice, so you can vote on for

Boris or Ken. I think there's a case for Brian. He's a police

officer. He knows about security. He wants to deliver 360 affordable

homes and more money from the banks. Good policies. Absolutely, people

should vote for the Mayor. They should vote for the assembly,

because it's important. We should vote elsewhere in the country.

There are very good candidates. Liberal Democrat counsellors must

be thinking, "We're going to prosper from the Government's

difficulties, the Conservative Government's difficulties,

particularly over Jeremy Hunt." was in Manchester yesterday. There

are no Conservative counsellors in Manchester. The same I think is

true in Liverpool. But there are many areas where there are, but

there are no Tories present. The battle there is between us and

Labour. I think we'll do much better than last year. We had a

very bad year for obvious reasons. What would be a good result in

footish for any of us to predict. You lost nine out of 19 last year.

I hope we hold current ones. With a majority, that is. I hope we'll

hold the councils that we are running, but I hope that people

like in Manchester or in Headingley in Leeds or in Sheffield, where the

former leader of the council is defending his seat, I hope people

vote for good counsellors who know how to look after their people.

Know what is good for their cities. If they do that we'll all think

that local Government is working. You think you'll still have 3,000

counsellors this time next week? think we'll hold a significant

numbers. We are in Government. Like Pauline. Governments always - when

Labour they got cut off, unfairly sometimes, because people weren't

voting on local issues. Tory counsellors and Lib Dems will lose

sometimes their seats for nothing they've done. They could be the

best in the world, running the best administration. I take the point.

plead to your viewers vote on local issues. I hope they're Liberal

Democrats. Do you regret not running for Mayor of London? I've

done it once and it's very demanding. I don't regret it,

because I'm deputy leader. I think Brian Paddick has run a better

campaign than four years ago. impact on the race hasn't been very

good. We have a fixed system when you have the one, two choice,

because it's not a fully proportional system. I think Brian

will do better. I think he's communicated a message, tough on

will you and order, pay back for crimes and build more housing and

help the young people. I hope people vote. Right. We were going

to do something completely different, I warn you. Now, which

do you prefer, Angry Birds or draw something? We know the PM is an

Angry Birds man and has in fact completed it. He's also a fan of

the tablet computer and has a specially adapted one, so he can do

business on it. Today, Commons authorities are meeting to decide

whether all MPs should be issued with iPads or other tablets. We

thought we would let our MP panel get used to them. You can count

yourselves lucky we found three. We have three here. Angry Birds is old

hat, so if you're an expert on that, I'm sorry. We have loaded up the

latest hit, temp run for you three. -- Templerun, for you three. You

have to make the little man. Siem son Hughes has already lost. You've

-- Simon Hughes has already lost. Yuef gone on. You played this

before? -- yuef you've gone on. Have you played this before? I have.

You don't get another go. What is your score? Zero. 702. What is your

score, Pauline? Nil. Are you sure? I don't know. As always happens -

No, 2030. We'll leave Jon to carry on to see if he can answer any of

the questions. What do you think of the idea they'll save money and

will help MPs in their work? theory they should mean we lose

less papers, but with computers we use as much as we did before, so

I'm not sure. Although I occasionally use it myself, I'm

against people sitting in the House using technology. Have you got one?

I have one. You are allowed to use it instead of paper for speeches.

You are. Do you use it instead of paper? Do you think it would cut

printing costs? Yes. It's a very good thing. I find it useful. I'm

on the international development Select Committee and I have to go

away and I'm out of the country. To have one is better than a laptop.

Much more efficient. You would advocate it? Yes. My score is

20,678. What about that? That might be the top score. It's beaten the

others. How is the Prime Minister completing Angry Birds? Have you

tried it? I've tried it. I can't get past the one where the little

pigs have the funny cowboy hats. How on earth has he completed it?

Where does he find the time? I've got no idea. You'll try to beat him

now. Do you think it would be be good? The proposal is that we'll

cut back on the printing of Hansard and the older papers, so it makes a

sense. We have to do the quiz answer. I can't remember what it

was. What is the interesting item that Michael Gove revealed that

Jeremy Hunt had in his house? Cable's book. What does he have?

It's a sprung dancefloor, because he's apparently a dab hand at the

lambada. He shouldn't be allowed to swerve for this inquiry. Oh, very