13/06/2012 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 13/06/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Morning folks. This is the Daily Politics.


Today's top story: Tensions in the coalition as the


Lib Dems say they won't back Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt in a


Commons vote on his handling of Nick Clegg twists the knife and


tells the Leveson Inquiry that he has always kept his distance from


Rupert Murdoch and other media barons.


George Osborne says Germany should stump up to shore up the eurozone,


but suggests it may take a Greek exit from the euro to persuade


Angela Merkel. And can new alcohol zones stop


alcohol fuelled violence? We'll hear from the community campaigner


Helen Newlove whose husband Gary was killed by drunken yobs. I work


with ten areas across the country who have access to �1 million


funding, bringing communities together to drive down anti-social


behaviour through problem drinking. All that to come before 1pm. Of


course, Prime Minister's Questions at noon. This will be the first one


in three weeks. With us for the duration deputy chairman of the


Conservative Party Michael Fallon and Labour's Sadiq Khan, the shadow


I can't speak. We're also joined by the Lib Dem MP,


Jo Swinson. Who has been doing the rounds of other networks this


morning! Welcome to the Daily Politics.


Let's kick off with the split inside the coalition over the


future of Jeremy Hunt. Yes and his handling of the News Corporation


bid for BSkyB. Last night the Liberal Democrats announced they


would not vote with the Conservatives to back Mr Hunt.


Instead, they will abstain lead to go headlines in the papers this


morning about a coalition at war. This morning Jeremy Hunt looked


relaxed as he left his home in Central London with his bike. There


is the little backpack. The Conservative whips are taking


the vote seriously by ordering one MP to cut his honeymoon short and


to return to Westminster. You may wonder why given that he a two week


recess, that he could have had the holiday earlier. Is this an act of


Lib Dem trecherry? This is an op opposition day. It is disappointing


the Liberal Democrats aren't going to turn up, but that's a matter for


them. They want to make clear they are not involved in this argument


about News International or the Leveson Inquiry or whatever and it


would have been nice to have had them voting with us, but it is


understandable. So you are relaxed? They won't back


you down when the chips are down? They have backed on us on getting


the deficit down and making this a fairer country. Let's be fair to


the Liberal Democrats, on these tough decision, they have stood


with us shoulder-to-shoulder. This isn't one of the big tough decision.


This is a matter of party politics. Labour have chose tonne put a


motion down and it is up to the Liberal Democrats to decide whether


to take a party political view or not.


Solicitor you will still be -- so you will just be as inclined to


vote for Lib Dem plans on Lords reform?


Well, these are Government plans for Lords reform.


It doesn't diminish your enthusiasm? Lords reform is a


tricky Bill. It is a tricky issue, but the Government as a whole is


committed to bringing forward proposals.


Jo Swinson, the Lib Dem policy, you want an independent investigation


into Jeremy Hunt's handling of the BSkyB affair, is that right?


think that that that would have been the right thing. The Prime


Minister is the person who gets to make that decision. It is his


decision alone. It is your policy.


We think that should have been the decision.


Isn't that what the Labour vote would give you? It wouldn't.


but they are calling for that. Is that right, they are calling - well,


I ask you, do you want an independent investigation? We do.


They put a motion down. They want what your policy is, why don't you


vote for it? Well, they know that passing their motion doesn't change


the decision that has been made. But why not vote for it? Apart from


anything else, it is an opportunistic move by a Labour


Party who found this viewpoint. When they were in Government, they


didn't abide by this code or these suggestions.


Your policy is an independent investigation, Labour is putting a


motion down calling for an independent investigation. Explain


to our viewers why you wouldn't vote for for something that is your


party's policy? It is a party political opposition day motion.


Voting for that would not make it happen. We've made our views


clear... It would change the principle? We have made our views


clear on your programme and elsewhere. We have made it clear


that we disagree with that decision that was taken. As a result, we


will not be joining the Conservatives in the lobby tonight


because that wasn't a decision that was taken as a coalition wide


agreement. So why don't you join with Labour


who are advocating the policy you told our viewers that you stand


for? It doesn't deliver. There maybe more of a chance of


delivering if you voted for. If you voted for it and it went through,


it would pressure on the Government. The decision has been taken.


your principle decision is to sit on your hands? We are taking part


in the debate. Don Foster will be setting out the Liberal Democrat


position. Sadiq Khan I'm lost. You explain


what to do. There are other other devices open to us to persuade the


Prime Minister. In the past, when we were in Government, when


opposition day debates were won by the opposition, we changeted our


policy. A good examples was the Ghurkhas, we lost that vote and the


policy changed. And the threat of a vote on BSkyB


forced News Corp to withdraw. So try and convince her because I've


failed. For Jo to call me opportunistic is a badge of pride!


The reality is this Jo, we are not concluding that Jeremy Hunt is


guilty. Nor are we.


We are saying there is this ministerial quote which was beefed-


up by this new generation Prime Minister with a new generation


Deputy Prime Minister. This is the new politics. Serious allegations


have been made about his special advisers who, because he


overstepped the mark, took the decision to resign. The buck


shouldn't stop with him. There is an allegation about misleading


Parliament which is serious. Jeremy Hunt wasn't exonerate d at the


Leveson Inquiry. We are saying, "there is this guy who is paid


�20,000 a year, many more of your constituents earn, he is


investigating Baroness Warsi, he is he is twiddling his thumbs, why not


allow him the opportunity to earn his crust and investigate Jeremy


Hunt." That's what should have been decided. There is two issues. When


you say that Jeremy Hunt hasn't been exonerated. On how he dealt


with the bid, he has given a good account of what he did.


It is about the issues to do the Ministerial Code, about the issue


about special advisers. If you think he has been exonerated


why why do you want an independent investigation? There are two issues.


There is the issue about whether he took independent advice and how he


dealt with the BSkyB, but there is the issue about who his special


adviser was doing and whether that line was overstepped. There are


questions that remain. I'm not saying that means that he has


broken the Ministerial Code, but an independent investigation would


have been a good thing. Questions which will never be answered


because you haven't got the guts to vote with him.


Jo, by you not supporting the Conservative Party and let's be


clear, our motion has been signed by the other opposition parties,


but you are not in opposition, you are in Government, because you have


not supported the Conservative Party, you are questioning the


decision of David Cameron. David Cameron said, "I think he is in the


clear." Questioning his judgement. We can disagree.


I have done my best and cause trouble, but I have failed! We


I don't know if you have completely failed.


Nick Clegg is giving evidence to the Leveson Inquiry this morning.


Here a flavour of what he has been saying.


Two occasions only when I think you met with Rupert Murdoch. The first


is the 16th December 2009. Yes. That was a dinner, Rebekah Brooks


so was it just four of you? No. No. No. There were a large number of


people there. As it happened I was at the very end of the table where


the children sit so to speak! LAUGHTER


And didn't have, I only had very fleeting interaction with Rupert


Murdoch before the dinner and as I said goodbye at the end.


Thank you. I was an observer as much as


anything else. How candid of him. Well, that was


Nick Clegg talking about his less than cosy relationship with Rupert


Murdoch. Now, I mean, Jo Swinson, let me come to you about that issue.


Without wanting to be too rude. I mean he was at the kids end of the


table, Nick Clegg. Is the reason for that that the Lib Dems have


never been regarded as important enough to be anywhere else and


that's why you have never been corrupted? We certainly haven't had


the cosy relationship with the Murdochs that I have to say say my


two colleagues here, their parties have had as we have seen as has


come out in the Leveson Inquiry. We have had a record for years calling


for better regulation, the culture media and sport recommendations


were ignored by the past Government. I am delighted we have the Leveson


Inquiry to look into these issues which are important and need to be


addressed. But that wasn't the question I


asked. Is the reason that you haven't been corrupted is because


no one felt the need to corrupt you? Well, of course, there hasn't


been the courting of the Liberal Democrats that the other parties


have experienced, but you know, certainly, you know, we are in the


coalition Government and since that time have not, even though we have


been in a position of significant power have not still succumbed to


the courting that others have had. But the important thing is that we


get some justice and improved situation, not actually about


politicians because this isn't about politicians. This is about


the general public and the faith they can have in the media and


particularly in how it deals with ordinary members of the public.


say it is not about politicians, but there has been no shortage of


party leaders and former former Prime Ministers at Leveson Inquiry


and Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband took about the culture of briefing


or lack at lack of it. Did you authorise your aides to


brief against Mr Blair? Do you think they may have done


without your knowledge knowledge? If they did so it was without my


authorisation. When I was a Cabinet Minister I did


raise a concern that I had with Mr Brown. I believe in September 2008


about some of Mr McBride's activities.


Ed Miliband there. Sadiq Khan, do you believe Gordon Brown when he


says, "I did not authorise any briefings against Tony Blair.".


heard the evidence of Ed Miliband who spoke from personal experience


and I can't contradict what Ed Miliband said.


No, do you believe Gordon Brown when he said, he was asked "did you


ever authorise any briefings against Gordon Brown?" "no.".


have no personal knowledge. I saw the footage of Ed Miliband and


Gordon Brown and Michael said, they can't both be right.


Who do you believe more? I know it is difficult for you, especially


someone, but who do you believe more? Who do you believe? He says I


didn't authorise any briefings and he goes on to say, he is asked


actually Gordon Brown, "what about, special advisers, using the media


and newspapers to get Tony Blair to step down." "I would hope not.".


Miliband gave an example and he gave a date. Let viewers conclude


what they want to conclude. What do you think? Ed Miliband gave


an example in his personal experience he witnessed it. So it


it speaks for itself. Do you believe that John Watson


went to see Gordon Brown and never talked about it? Come on, Andrew.


How many questions on this. You have heard both... We have got a


lot more, haven't we? Keep them coming! You might answer one?


Watson, Ed Miliband, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown give evidence to the


Leveson Inquiry... Do you believe him? That Tom Watson can visit him


in the middle of organising a coup and they don't talk about it? Do


you believe that pigs are flying over this studio? I can't see any.


You are under oath. Ed Miliband talked about media


ownership in the evidence. Is this now Labour policy, no company


should have more than 20 or 30% of the newspaper market share? When he


floated the idea about the concentration of ownership which


leads to concentration of power and whether that's healthy in a


democracy. You have a situation where there is a concentration of


power in those who own newspapers and there was an attempt for News


Corp to own BSkyB which can lead to some of the challenges we have seen.


But that's what Ed Miliband would like to see a cap at 30% and that


would mean the Murdoch empire selling one newspaper? He didn't


give a specific figure. He did say not more than 30%?


know that News Corp own 37%. I think it is 34%. I am not going


to quibble. It is 34, but they own 37%. When


there is too much concentration of power.


I take the point. I am trying to work out how it would work. I think


it means selling off a newspaper? It means legislation and we have


had rumours about the Murdochs wanting to sell their media


interests here and they may decide seeing, the way the wind is going,


Do you regret that this Leveson Inquiry was set-up? No, it was


needed to clear the air. Both the two parties got too close to all


these media empires. We did when we were trying to get into government


and they did when they were in government. The public needs to be


reassured that that cannot happen again. Our constituents have better


redress for themselves when they are targeted by the press. Clearly,


the regulatory system is not working. It is painful for


everybody involved and embarrassing. Embarrassing to hear that Gordon


Brown seems to be in denial about what was happening when he was


Prime Minister. But Labour were not in power any more and it is more


embarrassing for the government that is. David Cameron will be


giving evidence. He is being dragged kicking and screaming. We


demanded a public inquiry, you said no. You had 13 years to have an


inquiry into this stuff but you did not. We will learn the lessons from


it. We will see if we can come up with a better regulatory system for


our politicians and constituents. Say you're going to take the


warnings from the previous prime ministers? We are going to see what


Leveson reports. We will see when it comes out in the autumn.


Greece is going back to the polls on Sunday after the last set of


elections failed to produce a conclusive result. Last night, the


Chancellor George Osborne talk about the prospect of the exit from


the Greek Euros. He said so far the response to the crisis had been


depressing. Spain's borrowing costs have risen despite the bail-out of


its bank this weekend. Jo are you depressed? Not exactly optimistic.


Five days on from the Spanish bail out and the eurozone crisis is


rumbling on. On Saturday, the eurozone countries handed Spain's


banks 100 billion euros to stabilise the economy. But it has


not convinced the markets and there are signs the contagion could


spread to Italy where the cost to the government of borrowing for ten


years peaked at 6%. Last night, the Chancellor George Osborne said the


bail out seemed to be too little, too late. He suggested that the


eurozone should press on with deeper integration in order to


shore itself up. Yesterday, the European Commission President Jose


Manuel Baroso proposed a banking union across the euro. It looks


like the German Bundesbank will block that plan but George Osborne


said Germany should agree to stand behind the entire eurozone that it


might take Greece leaving the road to persuade Angela Merkel to stump


up more German cash. Thank you, that did sign a -- sound


quite depressing. Jo Swinson has gone, she will be at PMQs and we'll


be live there at 12 o'clock. Michael Fallon, just clarify, is it


British government policy that the eurozone has to be retained intact


in its current membership? policy is that the eurozone has got


to sort itself out. We cannot go on like this. I understand that.


have got to sort themselves out. But does that sort itself out with


all the members or with a reduced membership? With all the members,


clearly. What cannot go one that is grees 1/2 in, half out, this


uncertainty which is damaging our economy going month after month,


summit after summit. But when you opposed Britain's membership of the


eurozone and you did not oppose the idea of the eurozone covering the


countries that it did, you said this is not an optimal currency


area, it cannot work with all these different countries in it, they do


not have the same economies. If you thought that them, why is your


policy to keep us together now? They have got to put in place the


things they did not do at the time. If they want to go on with the


single currency across the zone then they have to put in place the


stuff they did not writing at the beginning to allow sufficient


fiscal transfers between the wealthier ones and the poorer ones,


to improve the governance of the sector and look after the deposits


in the bank. Say you want a federal Europe for the eurozone, that is


your policy? They must decide. We are saying it will not work, you


cannot have a zone like this working unless you have some kind


of fiscal transfers. You will end up with bail-out of the bail-out.


understand that but it is Conservative-led government policy


to urge the creation of a federal eurozone, a federal government


eurozone. It they have a semi federal eurozone at the moment.


They have a single currency. What they have not bottom-placed is a


fiscal element that can underpin that. If they want to go on with a


single currency it is obvious they have to put in place some


arrangements to transfer money from the wealthier countries to the


poorer countries. Be your government is saying there should


be a banking union and they should be the debt mutualisation said that


there are eurozone bombs, that is your government's policy -- bonds.


What we cannot have is the continuing uncertain seas and a


constant call for the propping up of weaker countries. We are out of


the bail out mechanism. Had we stayed in the mechanism we would


have had to come up with �10 billion sterling, we have saved


that from being out of the bail out mechanism. What that does not solve


is the continuing crisis. They have to put in place arrangements to do


that. In effect, Labour's policies are no different from the


government's. You think there should be greater integration in


the USM but we will not be part of it? That is a summary I agree with.


What we are frustrated by is for eurozone have fallen into the trap


of being obsessed with just austerity and no plans for growth.


Michael is right that it is a eurozone problem and it is


incumbent on the bigger countries in the eurozone, Germany in


particular, to do more. The ECB should be the Bank of last-resort


rather than going to the IMF or elsewhere. But if you get a German-


dominated federal Europe, that inevitably, of which we will not be


part, that inevitably changes our relationship with Europe. We will


forever be on the periphery, do you accept that? We will have to wait


and see. What we cannot have is our closest trading partner going from


disaster to disaster. We trade the most with them. Even last year, we


exported huge amounts to the racing countries. If the Spain comes that


or the contagion spreads, it is catastrophic for the eurozone


countries but it is disaster for the UK as well. To accept that this


policy you are both urging results, because I've seen live review thing


for the foreseeable future we will ever be part of this, that Europe


will develop with its own currency, a banking union, with eurobonds


being issued, with the fiscal union, it in effect becomes closer to a


federal system than ever before and we are not part of it, you are


happy with that? In the short term we need to ensure the eurozone


countries do whatever they can to bring about stability. In the


medium to longer term we want to trade with them and continued to


trade if not the same, but more. Let's be clear, we cannot stop them.


You what urging them. We cannot stop them anyway. It is not for us


to decide whether they have a more federal state. We are saying if


they want to go ahead with the zone, all the countries have to sort out


how they will transfer funds from the stronger ones to the weaker


ones. If they want to give up their currency and give up control of


their banks, we are saying what they have got to do is recognise


reality. You cannot have a system that does not complete. You have


got to be able transfer money from the strong ones to the week. I get


that. When Downing Street says when it comes to a referendum on Europe,


quote, that is not something the British people want, where is the


evidence for Downing Street saying that? What they want is for it to


be sorted out. But where is the evidence for Downing Street telling


us the British people do not want a referendum? Their priorities are to


get growth going in this country. But what is the evidence that the


British people do not want a referendum? When Downing Street


issued that there was a poll in the Times St 80 % what a referendum.


What is the evidence for Downing Street St we do not? The issue is


what is the evidence for Downing Street telling us we do not want a


referendum? What they want at the moment is for the government to


focus on getting growth and making sure the his own sorts out its


problems. There is no evidence that the British public do not want a


referendum is the answer to your question. I think what Michael was


trying to say, forgive me, is the policy for us should be to do all


we can to stimulate jobs and growth in the country, rather than being


distracted by a campaign for a referendum. Thank you.


As some of you may know, the European football championships are


underweight in Poland and the Ukraine. England, I am told, drew


1-1 against France on Monday night. I am told it is good. Not good


enough. We want more. What could fire up the team to put a bit of


fire in their belly? A bit of an incentive to win the next game


against Sweden on Friday. They will be lucky. What better than the


prospect of owning a Daily Politics mug? Yes, boys, if you win on


Friday we will reward you with one of these. For the rest of you, you


have to Guess The Year. I hope we will send one if they do win.


will. Let's see if you can remember If I can find collaboration with


any other parties in the House then I am willing to do that. This is


claimed to be the world's first And to be in with a chance of


winning a Daily Politics mug send your answer to our special e-mail


address, [email protected] You can see the full terms and conditions


for Guess The Year on our website, bbc.co.uk/dailypolitics.


Coming up to midday, Prime Minister's Questions starts in a


few minutes. We are joined by the BBC's political editor Nick


Robinson. The first PMQs for three weeks. There has been some


developments from Nick Clegg at the Leveson Inquiry. I'm just told that


he said Jeremy Hunt gave a good account of how he handled the BSkyB


bid. It highlights what may be puzzling to people about the Lib


Dem's position. They will not back Jeremy Hunt today, they will not


back the Prime Minister's judgment but they are not criticising the


way he handled the BSkyB bid. They are simply saying there should be


an investigation. I am lost! think Nick Clegg has always wanted


to keep his party together and where there are votes which there


will be split and there are Lib Dem backbenchers who wanted to vote


against Jeremy Hunt, he would rather they will vote together and


abstained, rather than some vote against a government minister,


others abstained, others vote in favour. It is a matter of high


principle then? An element of party management. An element that he


genuinely feels passionately. When people say all politicians crept to


the Murdochs, he wants to say, we did not. We all know why that was.


No one was interested. No one thinks they matter. I did not say


that. On the other hand, they can say they have fought against that


media bias and they have done it for decades and they want to gain


some credit for saying we are here despite that. A few Ed Miliband, do


you go on this Leveson media village stuff. We will find out


I am sure the whole House will wish to pay tribute to the fallen


servicemen since the House met. Captain Stephen Healey and Michael


Thacker and Gregg Stone. These were talented, dedicated soldiers who


made the ultimate sacrifice for the safety of our nation. Our deepest


condolences are with their family, friends and colleagues. We will


always remember them. This morning, I had meetings with


ministerial colleagues and others and in addition to my duties in


this House, I shall have further such meetings today.


I am sure all members will wish to associate themselves with the Prime


Minister's tribute. Can the Prime Minister reassure my constituents


that there will be no policy shift at all in relation to the third


runway at at Heathrow and this Government will focus on improving


Heathrow's hub status and displacing some of the short haul


and less valuable slots elsewhere. First of all, I know this is not


just a constituency campaign for my honourable friend. It is something


he feels very powerfully about. The coalition position has not changed.


Clearly, we must not be blind to two important considerations. One


is how we expand airport capacity, but how do we make sure that


Heathrow operates better and we make sure we welcome people better


to our country better than at the moment. A lot of progress has been


made and I congratulate the Home Secretary for the extra resources


and the people put into doing that important job.


Can I join the Prime Minister in paying private to Captain Stephen


Healey and Private Gregg Stone. They served our country with


dignity and bravery and the co dough lances of the -- condolences


of the House go to their family and their friends.


Account Prime Minister tell us why he referred Baroness Warsi, but not


the Culture Secretary? There. is a difference between the two


cases. In the case of Baroness Warsi, there has not been a judge-


led inquiry with witnesses taking evidence under oath to get to all


of the factual information behind her case and that is why I have


asked Sir Alex Allen to look at that case, but I have to say I am


happy with the explanation I have been given by Baroness Warsi. She


admits to breaking the Ministerial Code. She apologised for breaking


the Ministerial Code and that's an important point.


The Prime Minister refers to the Leveson Inquiry, but account Prime


Minister confirm that in his appearance at the Leveson Inquiry,


the Culture Secretary was quite properly because it is not the


remit of the Leveson Inquiry asked a single question about whether he


misled this House and thereby broke the Ministerial Code.


The point I would make to the honourable gentleman he asks


specifically about why I have not referred the case to Sir Alex Allen


and that's the case. I haven't done that, but I have Sir Alex Allen for


his advice on the future guidance on judicial decision making which


is something that he was discussing at the Leveson Inquiry and I will


be discussing tomorrow as well. And Sir Alex Allen replied to my letter


and I will put a copy of both letters in the library of the House,


but the House might want to know what Sir Alex Allen said in reply


to my letter. He said this "I note your decision in relation to Jeremy


Hunt adherance to the Ministerial Code which is, of course, a matter


for you. The fact that there is an ongoing judicial inquiry probing


and taking evidence under oath means that I do not believe I could


usefully add to the facts in this case." He goes on to say, he goes


on to say that he remains available if circumstances should change, but


those are the views of Sir Alex Allen.


Mr Speaker, the key issue is who makes the judgement on whether


there has been a breach of the Ministerial Code? This is what Lord


Leveson said, "I will not be make ago judgement on whether there has


been a breach of it. That is simply not my job." That is the job of Sir


Alex Allen. Now let's take one of the issues that was - Mr Speaker, I


know they have been well whipped. I can see they have been well well


whip today! They have -- whipped today! They have got the memo from


the Prime Minister... They have got the memo from the Prime Minister's


aide because he is sending memos around. The last one began,


"comrades." I like the sound of that, Mr


Speaker. We need a protective wall of sound! Last week we rather dried


up. Please show sufficient stamina for the full half-hour.


Now, now, now, Mr Speaker. Let's take one of the issues that was not


raised at the Leveson Inquiry. The Culture Secretary told this House


on 25th April and I quote, "I made -- there is no point in the part-


time chancellor trying to give him the answer before I asked the


question! I made absolutely no intervention in a quay zi judicial


process that was at the time was the responsibility of the Business


Secretary. Yet now we know he wrote a memo to the Prime Minister that


said, "If we block it, our media sector will suffer for years."


Account Prime Minister confirm in that answer on 25th April, the


Culture Secretary was not straight with this House of Commons?


Well, first of all, let me explain on hour side of the House, comrades


is a term of endearment! It is not an official title!


LAUGHTER If I can explain it in that way.


The point is, all comrades, of course. Look, the point about the


Ministerial Code is it is the job of the Prime Minister to make the


judgement about the Ministerial Code and I have made that judgement.


I have quoted to him, I quoted to him what Sir Alex Allen says and


Sir Alex Allen is very clear that he couldn't usefully add to the


facts in this case. Now I'm sorry, I'm sorry that the whole political


strategy behind his opposition motion has collapsed, but


nonetheless that is the fact of the case. Now, he asks very


specifically about the note that the Culture Secretary sent to me on


19th November and I would refer to him in that note he specifically


says it would be completely wrong to go against the proper regulatory


procedures and that's what the truth of what has happened in


recent days is that the Culture Secretary gave a very full account


of his actions to the Leveson Inquiry and he demonstrated that


when it came to the BSkyB bid he took independent advice at every


part of the process. He followed independent advice at every point


of the process which is a contrast to how the last Government behaved.


Mr Speaker, let's be clear about what the Prime Minister is claiming.


He is claiming when the Culture Secretary told this House I made no


interventions seeking to influence a judicial decision that a memo to


the Prime Minister is insignificant document in relation to a decision


the Government has to make. The first time in political history


that's the case. If the case is so strong of the Prime Minister, why


is his deputy not supporting him? Well, first of all, let me read


what this note said on 19th November. It said this. This is


from the Culture Secretary and I quote "it would be totally wrong


for the Government to get involved in a competition issue which has to


be decided at arm's length." That's what he said. When he got


responsibility, when he got responsibility for this dossier, he


behaved in exactly that way. Let me make one point. By the the way the


whole reason we are discussing this take-over is because the last


Government changed the law to allow a foreign company to own a British


broadcasting licence. This is a point, this is a point that they


conveniently forget. Now, he asked me very specifically about the


Deputy Prime Minister. Let me be absolutely frank. What What we are


talking about here is the relationships that Conservative


politicians and frankly Labour politicians have had over the last


20 years with with News Corporation, News International and all the rest


of it. To be fair to the Liberal Democrats, they didn't have that


relationship and their abstention tonight is to make that point and I


understand that it is politics. THE SPEAKER: Order. Order. Order.


The House House must calm down. Order. Mr Ed Miliband.


I have to say he has reached a new state of delusion I mean really and


truly! You know, Mr Speaker, he just wants to talk about the past!


He was - he just wants to talk about the past, Mr Speaker. He was


the future once! Now, isn't the truth and isn't the


truth, and isn't the truth the Deputy Prime Minister, the Deputy


Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister says the bid, says the


decision should go to the independent adviser. The


Conservative Chair of the Committee of standards in public life, the


Conservative chair of the Public Administration Committee says it


should be referred. The former Chair of the Committee on standards


in public life says it should be referred. Isn't the truth, the


reason he won't refer him to the independent adviser is because he


is scared the Culture Secretary won't be cleared?


Well, imitation is the sincerist form of flattery. Well, the clear,


he says we're talking about the past. There are elements of this.


This whole Leveson Inquiry, the whole problem of the relationship


between politicians and the press some of it is about the past and we


had a little insight into that when the former Prime Minister gave


evidence and he said this. He said, "The one thing I can say definitely,


the one thing I can say definitely is no one in my position would have


instructed briefing against a senior minister."


LAUGHTER I can tell you - perhaps, perhaps,


perhaps the victims can put their hand up. Any takers? I don't need


Sir Alex Allen to adjudicate on that one!


Everyone knows it was the Prime Minister who decided to appoint the


Culture Secretary to oversee the bid and it is the Prime Minister


who is clinging on to him now in the face of all the evidence.


Doesn't he realise it is no longer about the Culture Secretary's


judgement, it is about the Prime Minister's judgement which is so


badly flawed even his deputy won't support him.


Well, I do hope the England football team are better at putting


the ball in the back of the net. Look, the point is, it is for the


adviserer on ministerial standards to discover the facts. My judgement


is we should let the Culture Secretary get on with organising


the most important important event which is the Olympics. When we come


on to the Olympics, let us consider this - if there was an Olympic


medal for double standards and hypocrisy, the Labour Party would


be well in the running. I'm really very worried about the


conduct of the Education Secretary. In the average classroom he would


have been excluded by now. He must As we remember those who fell 30


years ago during the Falklands war, Argentina continues to dispute


British sovereignty over those islands. Yet Argentina also


continues to receive loans worth billions of pounds from the World


Bank of which British taxpayers are a major shareholder. Will the Prime


Minister join President Obama in instructing his officials to vote


against anymore such loans to Argentina?


I think my honourable friend makes an important point. No British


taxpayers money is is spent on world banks loans to Argentina. A


an important point is what happened yesterday which is the Falkland


islanders decided to hold a referendum. Argentina is trying to


hide this argument and pretend the views of the of the Falkland


islanders don't matter, they do matter.


The Prime Minister said he believes the Leveson Inquiry dealt with the


relevant issues regarding the Secretary of State for culture,


media and sport, but it did not deal with section 11 A of the


financial services and markets Act which deals with market abuse and


the passing of information to one party in a market situation which


is not available to others. Given the hundreds of texts, e-mails and


memos in this situation, will he ask the Financial Services


Authority to examine the evidence, see whether there has been a breach


of section 11 A or any other part Clearly there are very strict rules


governing all of these areas. The point I would mate to him is there


is no doubt the special adviser behave wrongly and that is why he


offered his resignation and white was accepted.


Mr Speaker, I am sure all members will congratulate the volunteers


who raised �6.5 million to recognise the contribution and


sacrifice in the Second World War by Bomber Command personnel. For


the memorial to be opened by Her Majesty the Queen on June the 28th.


But the costs of security on the day have risen sharply and despite


necessary constraints on all government expenditure, would my


right honourable friend consider financial support from the


government to make sure veterans and their relations are properly


looked after? I think my honourable friend is


right to raise this issue. Bomber Command, many people served in


Bomber Command in the Second World War, many people lost their lives


and it is right there will be this this -- splendid memorial unveiled


by Her Majesty the Queen. These memorials tend to be paid for by


public subscriptions. I will look carefully at what he says. The


Department for Culture, Media and Sport does have an ability to


intervene when monuments are done on a national basis. I'm sure the


Culture Secretary would have been listening carefully.


Due to top-down government health cuts, South Tees hospitals have had


reduced services leaving both hospitals uncertain of their future.


Would the Prime Minister support his Foreign Secretary who said to a


crowd of 4,000 people, that the government NHS cuts are


unacceptable? First of all, I would point out


that the increases in health spending for his Primary Care Trust


is at 2.9 % increase and an �8.2 million increase for the current


year. That is what is happening. The only reason more money is going


into the health service in his constituency is because this


coalition government decided to invest in our NHS, against the


advice that we receive from the party opposite who think increases


in health spending are irresponsible.


Question number six, closed question, Mr Philip Hollobone.


As my honourable friend nose, cabinet meetings are occasionally


held outside London, not least so we can get different ministers to


meet with different organisations. The Cabinet has met in Bradford,


Ipswich, Derby, Cardiff and the Olympic Park. Locations for future


meetings will be announced in due course. Were the Cabinet to come to


Kettering, it would be able to congratulate Kettering Borough


Council on its pledge to freeze council tax for the next five years


and to celebrate the Department for Transport's funding for the wedding


-- widening of the Kettering bypass. Will be right honourable friend


agreed to invest in the Midland Mainline which would make a big


difference to the Kettering economy? I joined my it honourable


friend it in congratulating his Borough Council and it shows what a


valuable -- the value for money Conservative councils can provide.


We are committed to a lecture find 300 miles of railway routes. That


compares with just nine miles which were at a lecture fired under 13


years of the last Labour government. There is a large amount of support


for the Midland Mainline a lecture vocation. A decision will be made


and I will listen very carefully to what he says.


Given that the purpose of the Leveson Inquiry is to get out the


unvarnished truth about the unhealthy relationship between some


politicians and the media, why do government ministers, including


himself, need to be briefed by lawyers and coached by lawyers


before attending to give evidence? What ministers I'm sure I doing is


you have to be familiarise yourself with a huge amount of evidence


going back over seven years. I have provided to the Leveson Inquiry,


for instance, all the evidence I can find with meetings of press


proprietors and the press going back to 2005. There is a huge


amount of information preparation and I think that is entirely


appropriate. My constituency has a height


recycling rate, the best in the north-west. Does the Prime Minister


believe it is right for a huge waste burning incinerated to be


built there, an incinerator rejected by the local planning


board, overwhelmingly opposed by my constituents and which would


involve transporting lorryloads of waste hundreds of miles across the


country? Will he do what he can to stop an inappropriate development


which surely cannot be called environmentally sustainable?


completely understand the honourable lady's concern and she


is right to raise this issue. I understand her disappointment that


this has been appealed against the local planning board's decision.


But as she knows, peels like this can be made -- appeals. She can


make her views clear. There is a need to take into account the size


and scale of any proposed development and also to look at the


potential effect of any local communities and I'm sure she will


want to make those points. The Prime Minister will be aware of


the latest British Social attitudes survey showing a record fall in


public satisfaction with the NHS. My question is this, I would


appreciate an answer, because the Health Secretary would not give one


yesterday. Will the Prime Minister intervene to stop the scandal of


the NHS having to rely on charitable donations having to fund


the purchase of the latest radiotherapy equipment? What I have


to say it is this government is putting record sums into the health


service, we are increasing the money into the health service but


if he wants me to stand here and criticise the volunteers and the


charities and the big society that provides so many scanners and great


Sheen's for our health service, I will not do that. I think it adds


to our health service. There is a 2011 survey of people who used the


health service, rather than asking people about their perceptions, and


that found 92 % of in-patients rated their overall experience as


good, very good or excellent. That is what is happening in our health


service and we should be proud of Can I ask the Prime Minister, will


the Government go ahead with high speed to, a project which is


extremely important to the economy and jobs in the north. If the


answer is yes, can I suggest we start laying the track in West


Yorkshire first? I am grateful for that enthusiastic endorsement. I


believe we should go ahead with eight just too. -- H S two. In


links to the question asked by his neighbour about Heathrow, there are


many flights which could be avoided if we had a network of high-speed


rail in our country and I'm keen that we press ahead with it.


Before the last general election, the Prime Minister made an


important speech condemning crony capitalism with money buying power,


power fishing for money and a cosy club at the top making decisions at


their own interest. Is this not a pitch perfect description of the


undignified courting of News Corporation by the Culture


Secretary? When will the Prime Minister shows some judgment of


this? If they are looking for volunteers for the Olympic team for


hypocrisy, it could be the decathlete there. We had 13 years


of pyjama parties, christenings, changing the law, sucking up to the


Murdochs, honestly, what a load of brass neck!


Thank you, Mr Speaker. In 44 days' time, the Olympics and Paralympics


come to London. Millions of people will be coming to London to enjoy


the games. Most of those individuals will be totally


dependent on public transport to reach the venues. Will my right


honourable friend condemn the Unite union for calling bus strikes and


doesn't the silence from the party opposite on this subject speak


volumes for that attitude to London? I think my honourable


friend was entirely right. If you want an example of crony politics,


frankly it is the fact that the party opposite get �5 million from


the Unite union and when it comes to this strike that could disrupt


the Olympics, absolute silence. Not a word of condemnation. It is not


surprising because Unite union did not only give them the money, they


pick their leader as well. The patient satisfaction survey


results have shown the greatest reduction in patients' satisfaction


in the history of the National Health Service. What will the Prime


Minister do turnaround perceptions about the failure of the NHS and


his government? Are if you look at the King's Fund who carried out


this survey, they say this. There is no evidence of a real decline in


service quality of performance. That is what the King's Fund say


about their own survey. I would put more weight on a survey of people


who have been using the NHS and the users of the NHS, 92 % of in-


patients, 95 % of outpatients, rated their overall experience as


good, very good or excellent. Since the election, there are 4,000 more


doctors, mixed-sex accommodation is down 94 %, hospital infections are


at their lowest levels since surveillance began and the number


of people waiting 18 weeks is also at the lowest level since records


began. Average waiting times are down as well. The health service is


performing extremely well and we should praise all those who have


delivered that performance. The Prime Minister will be aware


that there is a current shortage of primary school places across our


country. Is particularly acute in Winchester where there are


temporary classrooms to accommodate pupils for this September. What is


the government doing to help councils in this Goldie and whether


he is confident enough is being done to prevent a repeat of this


performance when these pupils reach secondary school? -- This Old Year.


This is becoming an issue. What the Department for Education has done


is put aside �1.4 billion of schools' capital and a further �1.4


billion for the subsequent year. There is also the opportunity


through free schools to have excellent new schools established


in constituencies so we not only get new capacity but it -- we get


the competition and choice which I believe will drive up standards.


The use of food banks in Plymouth has gone up from 792 nearly 4,000


in a year. Is the Prime Minister proud of the fact that changes to


his benefit arrangements have caused this to happen? There is no


doubt about that. Is he therefore going to stand up and say, that is


fine, food banks are lovely. Yes, they are lovely and the people of


Plymouth are magnificent but will he... Will he passed the buck on


this and go for the gold medal in passing the buck as he has...


Prime Minister. First of all that may join her in praising the people


of Plymouth who do you huge amount for their neighbours and members of


their community. That is all for the good. Yes, we have had to make


difficult decisions but we have protected tax credits for the least


well-off, we have protected benefits for the least well-off.


The biggest welfare reform that we have made is to put a cap on


welfare where we have said, you should not be able to get on


welfare more than the average family gets in work, and when we


put that forward, �26,500 a year, the party opposite voted against it.


Kamal right honourable friend tell the House how much it would cost


the country to take part in the bail-out of Spain's banks this week


he had not stood up for Britain and got us out of the previous


government's commitment? honourable friend makes an


important point. Before this government came to power, bail-outs


were carried out with Britain playing a full part in those bail


out, often as much as 14 % of the total. 100 billion euros bail-out


of Spain, Britain could have been paying as much as 14 billion euros,


�10 billion. That money has been saved because this government,


unlike the last one, stands up for Britain in Europe.


Prime Minister, and on the shambles of a budget you claimed you had


read, a double-dip recession you made in Downing Street, and a Tory


lead committee reporting that the coalition lacks strategic direction,


evidence if it was ever needed that men can multi-tasking, obviously


just that some are not very good at it. Prime Minister, have you now


run out of steam or is the job just too big for you? Prime Minister.


I'm pleased my honourable friend the education secretary is


introducing compulsory poetry reading lessons in class and


perhaps we could start with the honourable gentleman.


Order. Order. What is route is for people to continue shouting when


they have been asked not to do so. I know the Honourable Member for


Cohen valid is exceptionally well- behaved and he will sit in his


usual quiet, respectful fashion. Mr David Burrows. Thank you. The Prime


Minister has called for compassion for my constituent, Garry MacKinnon,


who doctors report will take his life if he is extradited. Can the


government be true to its word and stop the extradition and finally,


after ten years, give Garry MacKinnon his life back? I know my


honourable friend has campaigned long and hard over this issue. The


Home Secretary is carefully considering a wide range of


material before making her decision. She has instructed two independent


medical experts to review the report that have been submitted in


this case. This is not an easy case, as he knows. There are a number of


difficult issues before she makes an announcement.


The popular NHS walk-in centre in my constituency has recently closed.


These NHS walk-in centres are closing all over the country, why?


It is certainly not because the money in the NHS is being cut


because it is not being cut. The money in the NHS is being increased.


If we had followed her advice, the money would be going down. What


matters is the money in the NHS is spent to deliver better health


outcomes. That is a decision which needs to be taken locally. Giving


the fascinating evidence that was presented by his predecessor to the


Leveson Inquiry, with the Prime Minister agree with me that it


would be overwhelmingly in the public interest, to publish the


Downing Street phone records so we can finally establish what


conversations happened between his predecessor and Rupert Murdoch?


my honourable friend nose, governments cannot release


information provided by previous governments but I'm sure this is an


issue that the previous Prime Minister will want to consider,


given the clear statement that he made.


The Prime Minister will probably not be aware that a firm in my


constituency produces cream liqueurs and other alcohol products.


I do not know if he ever relaxes with his. I have recently beat


planning a �10 million investment - - recently been planning. However,


they are now worried that HMRC are reinterpreting how they treat these


products for duty, under pressure from the European Commission with


their erroneous interpretation of the European Court of Justice. Will


he ensure that a competent Treasury Minister makes myself and other MPs


to ensure that common sense and consistency prevails.


I have not tried one of these delicious sounding their fridges.


If it is all right with the honourable gentleman I will wait


until after tomorrow before trying. -- beverages. I do understand there


is an issue with HMRC and I'm happy to arrange a meeting so they can


look closely at this issue. Unprecedented levels of flooding


hit the North Caribbean communities at the weekend causing untold


damage to business has -- Ceredigion. I think the Prime


Minister for his words of support and I know the council, emergency


services and many in the local community rallied to ensure no loss


of life. Can I urge the Prime Minister to urge all insurance


companies to act now with renewed speed on this so we can get the


communities back on their feet as quickly as possible? I certainly


joined my honourable friend in praising the emergency services who


did a superb job at the weekend. I spoke to the Welsh Secretary and


also the Welsh First Minister to pass on what my best wishes for the


work they have done. In all the situations, there is clearly the


rescue and emergency part of it. Then there is the recovery phase. I


think in many ways the most difficult phase to get right is


when people are going back into soaked homes with peeled plaster


and all the other problems that come about and making sure they get


swift action from the district council and above all from the


insurance companies. I will certainly worked with him to make


There is civil war in Syria. The economy is in recession. The


Chancellor is blaming that recession on the eurozone crisis.


The eurozone crisis gets worse by the day. There were riots in Poland


last night and major demonstrations in Moscow. But the exchange at PMQs


was dominated by the future of the Culture Secretary, Mr Hunt. We will


talk about that in a minute. First, we hear what you thought.


Well, you have just stolen my thunder because that's that's


exactly what a lot of the viewers said. They did wonder why it was


that most of PMQs was devoted to Jeremy Hunt. So we had this from


Kevin from London. "is the euro about to collapse? Is there civil


war in Syria? What are they on about?" We had this from a Jeremy


Hunt "does the Westminster Village think the rest of the world really


cares about this?" We will never if it was from the Jeremy Hunt.


Jacqueline in Bristol says, "Ed Miliband quoting David Cameron


about being the future once. The delivery was so poor he could get a


raspberry for it." Surely sooner or later Jeremy Hunt's conduct will


have to be properly investigated. Well, they went with Jeremy Hunt so


we better talk about it. We have had this letter, the Prime Minister


has unveiled this letter from the man that is supposed to look after


the Ministerial Code just explain to our viewers, Nick, what happened.


If David Cameron had written the letter himself, he wouldn't have


written it differently. The independent adviser on ministerial


interests, the person the Labour Party have been saying must look


into this case has written to him and I'm going to para phrase. He


said the facts came out in the Leveson Inquiry. There is no value


in me looking for more facts. He says, "I remain open to looking


after it if if things change." David Cameron said "it was my job


to decide whether the code was broken. My job therefore, to decide


whether Hunt should stay or go. The role of the adviser was to


establish the facts." I have gone back to look at this great thing,


the Ministerial Code. Right. Let's read what it says. "if


there is an allegation about a breach of the code and the Prime


Minister having consulted the Cabinet Secretary feels that it


warrants further investigation, he will refer the matter to the


independent adviser." It is up to the Prime Minister. So people who


think that Hunt should have gone, they are saying, "You should have


got rid of him." Would Ed Miliband, if he is Prime Minister, say, "Your


job in the Cabinet, he hands over to someone else to decide whether


you stay or go." My guess, he wouldn't.


The Prime Minister is the gatekeeper. One of the things we


have been discussing in Parliament and outside of Parliament over the


last two weeks because we have been on recess is the issue is whether


the Prime Minister should be the gatekeeper bearing in mind the self


interest the Prime Minister clearly has. The issue of who is a minister


should be the job for the Prime Minister. The issue of who resolves


whether there has been a breach of ministerial codes bearing in mind


you have an independent ministerial adviser, should be the independent


ministerial adviser. If there is evidence of a breach, you refer it


to the independent adviser and that's what should have happened in


this case. That opens the possibility and it


would be interesting if this was the case that the Prime Minister


gets a report, an independent report report saying someone has


breached the Ministerial Code, but says, "I choose to keep them."


sanction should be the job for the Prime Minister. He decides whether


a minister is appointed or stays. You need assistance sometimes for


somebody to look at the evidence and decide whether somebody...


David Cameron is basically saying and I think he regrets the way this


Ministerial Code was written. He says, "It is up to me who is in my


Cabinet and if you don't like it, vote for another party." It was


updated by David Cameron when he came Prime Minister in 2010.


Because he wanted to have a new style of of politics, he updated


and change it had. He says, "We, the foreies, must be


different." His letter to Alex Allen was sent today and he


received a reply today. Who remains in the Government has


to be a matter for the Prime Minister. In the end, it has to be


for the Prime Minister. He has taken that decision. He has the


option of seeking advice, but the facts of the case have been


exhaustively examined on television, under oath by a judicial inquiry


and really, I I nothing new has emerged over the last two months to


show that there has been a serious breach.


What hasn't been examined and that's the substance of the Labour


motion today, and what the Liberal Democrats are going to abstain on


is the suggestion that he breached the Ministerial Code A, by


misleading Parliament, Leveson didn't discuss that, and by failing


to control his special adviser. Clearly, the facts on the special


adviser was was looked into at Leveson, but there was never - did


you fail to control your special adviser.


We have had one debate and he is going to explain the answers he


gave which were superseded by the evidence he laid in front of


Leveson, a huge amount of text and e-mails and he will tear clear that


up -- he will clear that up. They will have to look at the role of a


special adviser. There were two other things that


came out that are transport issues that I'm interested in. PMQs kicked


off with a question from Zac Goldsmith, a great environmentalist


whose constituency is on the Heathrow flightpath. He told the


Prime Minister, "You are going to stick, aren't you to your Tory


commitment to not build a third runway?" The Prime Minister did not


say yes at all. When he came to HS 2 and the high-speed railway, the


Prime Minister said, "I am in favour of this." But I am told the


project is being kicked into the long grass and that HS 2 is not


going to happen in the foreseeable future. It is interesting there


maybe a U-turn in the making over the runway and HS 2 being kicked


into the long grass. There maybe a U-turn on the runway, but not until


the next manifesto. I don't think David Cameron thinks he could get


away with either in coalition with the Liberal Democrats or with some


of his own supportsers like Zac Goldsmith or with the people in


West London who voted a particular way because of the Tory manifesto.


He couldn't get away with a U-turn until he put it to the country


again. There is pressure from business on the Conservative Party


to come up with a solution to this aviation crisis. A, on high-speed 2,


the anxiety I'm told is about money. The Treasury was always relaxed


about high-speed 2 because it was so many years away it didn't have


anything to do with the period at which our deficit was being cut.


The problem is that the Chancellor told us, it will take more years


than originally planned to cut the deficit and therefore, you get a


cross over the moment the Treasury is trying to cut spending, it comes


at the same time as this massive investment to pay for high-speed 2.


If you speak to businesses inside this country and outside this


country, one of the biggest criticisms is lack of transport


infrastructure to get to this country and to get freight around


and other things around as well. If Nick is right, another example of


the needs of our country being acraifiesed for the -- sacrificed


for the greater good of the two political parties in charge at the


moment. There are different issues, the


airport capacity issue is a major issue. Heathrow is full. We are


going to get a consultation document calling for evidence as to


how we use our airports we are and where people think the next runway


should be built across the South East or elsewhere. How long will


that take? How long is a longer project.


Even longer now. So these are different projects.


Labour fought the last election in favour of a third runway at


Heathrow and the other two parties were against it. After you lost,


you changed your policy to be against a third runway.


I heard your transport spokeswoman tell me that you were against it.


You are reviewing the policy? are reviewing our transport policy


which includes aviation, but we are in favour of high-speed two.


You would like to see that go ahead? High tweed two? Yes -- high-


speed two? Yes. The issue is we are told by this


this chancellor he will bring forward projects and he needs to do


so and the good thing about high- speed two, you have a number of


different revenue streams to help fund it, but you have got a


situation where Crossrail will be finishing shortly and it will be


easy to transfer the skills from Crossrail to high-speed two.


It will be finished by 2015. High-speed two is a a longer term


project and it requires legislation to go before Parliament. It wasn't


on the Queen's Speech, was it? Delay. Delay. Delay.


You didn't do anything for 13 years about high-speed railways. We are


getting on with it, but it is a long-term project.


Crossrail was announced in 1986, it is now 2012! Things happen quickly


Five years ago, Gary Newlove was murdered by three youths outside


his home in Warrington. He had gone outside to speak to a gang of


youths who he believed had been vandalising his wife Helen's car.


Since then Helen, now Baroness Newlove, has been determined to


make sure her husband's death is not just another statistic. For


this week's soapbox, we joined her on an estate in Havering, East


London, one of the neighbourhoods across England and Wales where she


has been trying to tackle anti- social behaviour through community


The police have named the man who died after confronting a gang of


youths outside his home. He was Garry Newlove. Detectives described


his murder as sickening. On the 10th August 2007, my family


life ended as I knew T my husband, Garry Newlove, was attacked by a


gang of youths. He was kicked in the head 14 times and suffered 40


internal injuries. My neighbourhood suffered from under-age and binge-


drinking. I attended my local meetings, spoke


to my local agencies who classed anti-social behaviour as low level


crime. So no action was done. Everybody has a right to live


safely and happily in their communities. Under-age and binge-


drinking drags communities down. That is why I was pleased to be


made a Baroness In the House of Lords, giving me a national


platform to champion the voices of communities who suffer such


problems. We have to stop under-age and


binge-drinking. Stop shops from selling alcohol to under-age


drinkers. If need be, close them down if they persist. Stop street


drinking. Make drinking more sociable and not anti-social and


working the trade. Working together helps everybody.


Hello, Syd. How are you? It is lovely to see you.


There is a hidden team of people who work tirelessly without seeking


reward or recognise recognition to make life better for everyone. We


are in Havering where the spirit flourishes. The generations have


reached an understanding of mutual tolerance. People work with the


authorities for the good of the community.


I am working with ten areas across the country over the next few years


who have access to to �1 million funding, bringing communities


together to drive down social be behaviour. I do this passionately


because I do not want another family to suffer the highest price


my family paid. Helen Newlove is with us now. It is


very tough for you in the way you lost your husband, but you picked


yourself up and you are working hard to help communities battle


against binge-drinking and other social problems. What keeps you


going? I think listening to people's problems in communities


and I was a community activist where I lived. I had terrible


problems. My neighbours suffered terrible problems with the cars,


alcohol was thrown in our gardens. People were urinenating up the


fences and there is only so much you can take. We attended community


meetings where we had the police and the councillors and everybody


else and it was walking away from one of the meetings that I said


until somebody is murdered they will not do anything. Little did I


know it would be Gary. For me, listening to going through the


trial and and listening to people today, who are suffering the same


problems, if gives me the passion to do something because it should


never ever happen. You should feel safe where you live.


You have explained about the social problems. Do you think those sh use


that you have mentioned -- issues that you mentioned which some of


the agencies deal with and say it is a low lying anti-social


behaviour and crime, do you think those are the problems that can


lead to what happened to your husband? I get infuriated when they


say "low level crime." When they don't live there, it is infuriating.


My mailbag is full of people who shut their curtains, frightened to


go out, they cross the road, that is not low level crime. To me, it


is a silent killer and we need to nip it in the bud fast.


Do you think binge-drinking is the whole issue? Do you think that's


the biggest driver of the crimes and social problems that you are


talking about? It is one of the drivers. Alcohol-related crime is


horrendous because it is a come buston of things. You become anti-


social to people and you get violent. Gary suffered 14 kicks to


the head. 15 people were around him. This was on a summer's evening and


he was in shorts and he asked one single question. You have to look


at the indicators, but in rural areas, people are having their


tractors pinched and people laugh when I say, "We have got Tractor


Watch." They can't employee workers. These are real problems and we


should not dismiss them as low level crimes and I will never give


it a low level crime because Gary started off as anti-social


behaviour and he lost his life and I had to turn his life support


machine off. How do you class that How do you get communities


involved? Are they not frightened to some extent to do what you were


doing? The model used was in Havering, east London. How to get


people to patrol the streets and Aaron way or patrol the neighbours?


Everybody said to me, we need to know what the ingredients are. If I


knew the ingredients I would have a top saleswoman plaque on my


shoulder. You cannot say but these people are very passionate. They


are sick of living in these blighted areas. At the end of the


day, if you want to do something, you do not get anything done by


sitting and complaining. If you want to make a change, try and


connect. There are frightened people out there and not everybody


can do it. It is to help them feel safer so them when they feel they


can do it they can go out. Because it is blighted or we label them


deprived areas, affluent areas, who labels them? We are all the same in


life and we need to be able to live in a safer, happier place. Why was


Havering a good place to go? I love Havering. I am a people person.


When I went to Havering I first met them in a hall. It was very unique


because we had the older generation this side, the younger generation


this side and I was a referee in the middle. There were six


youngsters who had made a DVD and they showed it and they were asking


about the area. One of the things the young lad said was he thought


the old people should be in by 8 o'clock. Then the older people said,


why should I be in by 8 o'clock, I have lived here for 40 odd years.


They are saying you should not be in bed, we are worried because we


do not feel safe. I am connecting them now. They have done a rap


Opera together, opened photograph clubs and we have a 92-year-old


woman who is in charge of the community centre. What sort of help


can the government give to tackle these problems? I think we are


seeing their help. We have the Localism Bill and local people have


a voice but they go one about the Big Society, the Prime Minister


does, he did not say it to give everybody a manual. Everybody mucks


it. When I speak to communities, they want recognition. They say, we


are doing it, we have a great British background and we will


carry on doing it. Michael Fallon, there is a big issue with binge


drinking and we have talked about minimum pricing but will that be


enough to stop the images of our town centres being filled with


drunken yobs who take up all the time of the health services, the


emergency services and the police, it cost a fortune? We are looking


at the unit pricing of alcohol but we are doing other things as well.


We have doubled the penalty for shops selling to under-age children.


There are too many and dredge drinkers. We are giving communities


assay over licences -- too many under-aged drinkers. We are making


it tougher for places to get licences. We are making them


contribute to the cost of clearing this stuff up. The government has


got to do a lot of these little things to create a better climate.


But in the end, it is for communities. I salute what Helen is


doing. We have to start by changing little things. Changing the culture


is what many people say, governments manage to change the


culture in relation to smoking, the tide was turned. Why not be as


radical? Banning, just for example, to be more radical not just change


bits of the law, and it will not change the culture and be more


dramatic about it? Unit pricing may do that, multi- buying may stop


people buying great trunks together. What about banning drinking on the


street? Boris Johnson bandit on the Tube. You can get an alcohol


banning order in areas. We have tried it in Kent. There are some


experiments. We have to look at different ways of getting the


culture to change. It took a long time with smoking but we are


working at it with drinking as well. Thank you, Helen.


Remind me of giving Michael Fallon the history of American prohibition


for Christmas. The Falkland Islands will hold a


referendum next year on their future sovereignty. Yes, a


referendum, fancy that?! They hope there will be a firm message to


Argentina that the islanders will remain British. Comes on the 30th


anniversary of the end of the Argentine occupation of the islands.


David Lidington has just been updating Parliament on the plans.


For our part, the British government will continue to offer


unequivocal support to the islanders, by maintaining a


defensive posture on the islands, by supporting the growing economy


and by protecting their rights and their wishes today, just as we did


30 years ago. The forthcoming referendum will provide I believe,


further evidence that the islanders alone will decide their future and


will offer a simple but powerful expression of democracy.


So, how about that? A Tory lead government finally gives the


British a referendum on sovereignty. Are you proud? Absolutely. This is


the week we celebrate the 30th anniversary of the liberation of


the Falklands. It is a clear-cut issue, do you want to stay British?


It was done in Gibraltar a few years ago. I think it will send a


strong message. If it is good enough for the Falklands, what


about the rest? Where is the evidence that the people of the


Falkland Islands want a referendum? I think you have seen plenty of


evidence. We know what the outcome is, don't we? Do we? How do we


know? It will be a minimum of 95 % in favour of the current status.


hope so. Argentina has been reasserting its claim. It is very


important that Argentina gets the wishes of loud and clear that we


will respect the issues -- wishes of the islanders. What about a


referendum on House of Lords reform? You can have referendums on


lots of things. So specifically, House of Lords reform. There is


evidence that people wanted. The plants are very controversial, as


you know. Changing our constitution forever, let's have a referendum,


trust the people, Michael. referendum was proposed. Will we do


it? Be brave, Michael, you are the deputy chairman of the Conservative


Party. Don't let Clegg bully you. Could we give the Falkland as a


referendum on the House of Lords? And Europe! Enough.


Too much teasing going on here. We have just got time to pick the


winner of the get the year competition. The correct answer was


1977, the year of the Silver Jubilee year and the Labour act --


Lib-Lab pact. And there we go. Alan Atkinson from Kent is the winner.


That is it for today. We thank both Michael Fallon and Sadiq Khan for


being our guests, for being good sports as well. You have to be a


good sport to be on this programme, Newsnight it is not. The One


Download Subtitles