:00:45. > :00:48.$:/STARTFEED. Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics. Alex Salmond
:00:48. > :00:52.will meet with David Cameron in just over half an hour, after thae
:00:52. > :00:56.gree plans for a referendum on Scottish independence. There'll be
:00:56. > :00:59.one question and held in two years' time.
:00:59. > :01:06.The Home Secretary Theresa May is expected to tell MPs she will take
:01:06. > :01:10.Britain out of over 100 European Union measures on law and order.
:01:10. > :01:12.The Government asks Virgin Rail to continue operating the West Coast
:01:12. > :01:16.main line for at least another nine months.
:01:16. > :01:20.MPs could get paid more in return for paying more into their pensions
:01:20. > :01:28.and waiting longer to draw them. We'll look at the latest proposals
:01:28. > :01:30.for MPs' pay. All that in the next hour. With us
:01:30. > :01:35.for the whole programme today is the businessman and entrepreneur
:01:35. > :01:37.James Cann. Welcome to the Daily Politics. If you have any thoughts
:01:37. > :01:40.or comments on anything we're discussing then you can send them
:01:40. > :01:49.to us: daily.politics@bbc.co.uk or tweet your comments using the
:01:49. > :01:52.hashtag #bbcdp. Let's start with the news this morning that the
:01:52. > :01:56.Government has asked Virgin Rail to continue to operate the West Coast
:01:56. > :02:00.main line for at least another nine months. The move comes after the
:02:00. > :02:04.original franchise process was scrapped by the Transport Secretary
:02:04. > :02:09.last month, after Virgin appealed against a decision to award the
:02:09. > :02:14.contract to their rivals FirstGroup. Well, James Cann, your impressions
:02:14. > :02:17.of this whole debacle? I think it's a bit of a mess to say the least.
:02:17. > :02:24.The thing that probably concerns me the most is you know, the
:02:24. > :02:28.Government is probably the biggest spender in the UK and there's a
:02:28. > :02:33.real encouragement for Government to govern and business to run
:02:33. > :02:37.businesses. This was quite an important opportunity where the
:02:37. > :02:41.Government essentially is procuring to bring in a private contractor to
:02:41. > :02:46.run a business. The way that it's gone about doing that and the
:02:46. > :02:49.issues that it's caused have been quite embarrassing. On the one hand,
:02:49. > :02:53.you select somebody then you change your mind. Then you say you've got
:02:53. > :02:58.it wrong. Now you're going to get essentially legal issues from both
:02:58. > :03:03.Virgin, from the company that was granted it. You're almost going to
:03:03. > :03:06.have to retender the process. are going to retender it. On that
:03:06. > :03:10.basis and the way you've outlined your concerns, do you have any
:03:10. > :03:14.faith in the process in the way that it will be carried out for a
:03:14. > :03:18.second time, when the first time, the technical flaws that were found
:03:18. > :03:22.meant the process had to be done again? For me, I'd like to
:03:22. > :03:25.understand what the technical issues were. I understand
:03:25. > :03:30.Government procurement quite well. I'm pretty sure there were a number
:03:30. > :03:33.of clear issues where those guidelines have been breached. I
:03:33. > :03:37.think therefore to retender, to be blunt, I don't think it should take
:03:37. > :03:41.that long. If you've done it once before, you've gone through the
:03:41. > :03:46.process, there's probably been a handful of issues you haven't been
:03:46. > :03:51.very clear about, therefore why would it take that long again. As a
:03:51. > :03:55.commercial businessman, that should be done, I would imagine... Do you
:03:55. > :04:00.think the franchises should be between 13 and 15 years, that
:04:00. > :04:03.apparently has been used as one of the arguments for the mistakes in
:04:03. > :04:07.terms of predicting passenger numbers and effects of inflation.
:04:07. > :04:10.Do you think the franchises should be shorter? Typically those type of
:04:11. > :04:15.deals are ten-year type deals, bearing in mind you are talking
:04:15. > :04:19.about a huge amount of investment required to manage, to control, I
:04:19. > :04:23.think any investor going into that needs an opportunity to recover the
:04:23. > :04:27.investment that it makes wh. You're dealing with large-scale projects
:04:27. > :04:32.of that nature, you need to have a sensible period of time. One could
:04:32. > :04:35.argue is it ten or 13, the point of principle here is do it and do it
:04:35. > :04:38.right, make sure it's clear and transparent and also, remember, you
:04:38. > :04:43.have the entire business community looking at you for encouragement to
:04:43. > :04:46.say, when I put a tender forward, because to private businesses,
:04:46. > :04:49.tendering for Government contracts costs an awful lot of money. That's
:04:49. > :04:52.the worry isn't it that they have to put the money in again. It takes
:04:52. > :04:56.a huge amount of time. What you're trying to do, if you imagine today,
:04:56. > :05:01.large businesses sitting there saying, you know, is it worth it?
:05:01. > :05:05.Can I risk that much time and money because if I do end up winning and
:05:05. > :05:09.they change their mind. FirstGroup may still decide to sue. Now, it's
:05:09. > :05:14.time for our daily quiz. David Cameron is the latest in a number
:05:14. > :05:17.of public figures who are narrating a chapter of a famous book. The
:05:17. > :05:27.section he's recorded it out today. The question is which book is Mr
:05:27. > :05:28.
:05:28. > :05:33.The question is which book is Mr We'll give you the answer at the
:05:33. > :05:36.end of the show. It's been highly contentious and
:05:36. > :05:39.after months of negotiations David Cameron is about to meet Scotland's
:05:39. > :05:43.First Minister, Alex Salmond, in First Minister, Alex Salmond, in
:05:43. > :05:47.Edinburgh. They are expected to sign a deal grapbtding the power to
:05:47. > :05:52.hold a referendum on independence. What's at stake here and was been
:05:52. > :05:55.agreed? Alex Salmond had wanted there to be two questions on the
:05:55. > :05:59.ballot paper, one asking about independence and another, asking
:05:59. > :06:05.for more devolves powers. There will be just a single yes/no
:06:05. > :06:09.question on independence. The SNP had also lobbied for 16 and 17-
:06:09. > :06:13.year-olds to be allowed a vote, which David Cameron has agreed to.
:06:13. > :06:17.Both sides claim they've achieved their goals, but the honours are
:06:17. > :06:20.divided. The Electoral Commission will play a key role, advising on
:06:20. > :06:24.the wording of the question, something which the SNP had
:06:24. > :06:28.previous live rejected. And will oversee other issues such as
:06:28. > :06:32.campaign finance. The vote will take place in the Autumn of 2014,
:06:32. > :06:38.meaning a marathon campaign for both sides. But this was always the
:06:38. > :06:41.SNP's preferred date. David Cameron has pledged that keeping the United
:06:41. > :06:46.Kingdom together is his number one priority. Whereas Alex Salmond has
:06:46. > :06:50.said the referendum is an important step towards creating a fairer and
:06:50. > :06:55.more prosperous Scotland. Last week, a poll suggested support for
:06:55. > :07:00.leaving the UK has recently dropped. 53% of people are in favour of the
:07:00. > :07:05.union, compared to 28% who want independence. Well, we can now talk
:07:05. > :07:10.to the SNP's Derek Mackay, the Scottish local government minister.
:07:10. > :07:13.Thank you for joining us. The terms of trade have been agreed, but we
:07:13. > :07:17.don't yet have a question. What would you like it to be?
:07:17. > :07:20.Scottish Government would like the question to be - do you believe
:07:20. > :07:25.that Scotland should be an independent country?
:07:25. > :07:30.Straightforward, clear and unambiguous. Zuz it have the
:07:30. > :07:34.support of the pro-union parties? think they're pretty close to that
:07:34. > :07:38.wording. I'm sure they would want more prejurortive terms talking
:07:38. > :07:42.more Negtively about independence. I think everyone understands what
:07:42. > :07:45.the question means and what's significant about today, this is an
:07:45. > :07:50.historic agreement where the bill, the question and framework for the
:07:50. > :07:55.referendum will be made in Scotland. That's what the SNP Scottish
:07:55. > :07:57.Government sought all o long. say the pro-union parties would
:07:58. > :08:01.like more negative language. It's very important because the way you
:08:01. > :08:08.frame the question is influence the answer. I mean most questions do,
:08:08. > :08:12.don't they? If you ask a straightforward question, agree or
:08:12. > :08:16.disagree, could you understand people might feel that is tilting
:08:16. > :08:19.in your favour? It was good enough to establish the Scottish
:08:19. > :08:23.Parliament itself, where people were asked a question, would you
:08:23. > :08:27.lick a Scottish Parliament? It's the same framework, it's the same
:08:27. > :08:31.formula that's been deployed for the independence referendum. What's
:08:31. > :08:34.crucial it's not a conva luted question. It's a direct yes or no,
:08:34. > :08:39.do you want independence for Scotland and whatever words feature
:08:39. > :08:42.in that, as long as it's clear what the proposition is, I think that's
:08:42. > :08:46.most important. The Electoral Commission has an official role now
:08:47. > :08:51.to decide whether the question is fair, will you abide by the
:08:51. > :08:54.Electoral Commission's views on this? In the same way that any
:08:54. > :08:58.Government or Parliament takes the advice of the Electoral
:08:58. > :09:02.Commission... If they say no... think we'll wait and see what they
:09:02. > :09:06.say around the question. Most people aren't far away from the
:09:06. > :09:10.wording that we proposed. We'll see what their advice is. We wouldn't
:09:10. > :09:13.want to be prejudice their position on that. But the Parliament elected
:09:13. > :09:16.by the people of Scotland and incidentally, two thirds of the
:09:17. > :09:19.people of Scotland trust in its Parliament to make better decisions
:09:19. > :09:24.than Westminster, will determine what the question will be. Of
:09:24. > :09:28.course, we want it to be fair and transparent and unambiguous. The
:09:28. > :09:31.Electoral Commission will have exactly the same role in this
:09:31. > :09:34.process as they do for other elections in the United Kingdom.
:09:34. > :09:37.That seems fairly consistent. they reject the question as it
:09:37. > :09:42.stands and say it needs to be changed, you and your party will
:09:42. > :09:45.abide by that? We'll cross that bridge when we come to it. I don't
:09:45. > :09:49.believe they will reject the question. We want clarity in what
:09:49. > :09:51.the question is. We're proposing the question - do you believe
:09:51. > :09:55.Scotland should become an independent country. That feels
:09:55. > :09:58.fairly strailgt forward to me. People understand what that means.
:09:58. > :10:01.The substance of this debate is not necessarily the wording of the
:10:01. > :10:05.question, but whether people want to be an independent country - yes
:10:05. > :10:08.or no. We'll get to those issues quickly now we've moved on the
:10:08. > :10:13.process. What about the support as it stands? Opinion polls over the
:10:13. > :10:16.last year or so have showed less than a third of Scots supporting
:10:16. > :10:20.independence. The herald poll last week found less than a third. You
:10:20. > :10:23.have a mountain to climb. We have a long way to go. We have two years
:10:23. > :10:27.to impress upon the people of Scotland the very positive case for
:10:27. > :10:30.independence. If opinion polls were everything, I wouldn't be sitting
:10:30. > :10:34.here as a member of the Scottish Parliament that said I would be
:10:34. > :10:39.defeated. Going from behind in the opinion polls, the SNP delivered a
:10:39. > :10:43.majority Government that was unthinkable before the May 2011
:10:44. > :10:47.elections. We have a long way to go, but here's crucial, two pollles
:10:47. > :10:51.that really matter. The most important poll will be the one in
:10:51. > :10:55.the Autumn of 2014. Two interesting polls, the first, if we can prove
:10:55. > :10:57.the case that Scotland would be better off economically, a majority
:10:57. > :11:01.would vote for Scottish independence. The second poll was
:11:01. > :11:03.around trust in the Scottish Government. More people trust the
:11:03. > :11:07.Scottish Government to make the right decisions for Scotland than
:11:07. > :11:11.the UK Government. That is the essence of independence. That's why
:11:11. > :11:16.I believe we can win. It's amazing that the polls have fallen over the
:11:16. > :11:21.last few months. Let's see what independence would mean. Keeping
:11:21. > :11:24.sterling and the Queen, what does independence mean as far as you're
:11:24. > :11:28.concerned for the people of Scotland? Independence means that
:11:29. > :11:33.the people of Scotland get the Government that they vote for. That
:11:33. > :11:36.means that we wouldn't be ruled by a Conservative liberal Government
:11:36. > :11:41.we didn't vote for. Your monetary union, you'd be part of the union,
:11:41. > :11:46.your interest rates would be set in London not in scolgd. That's
:11:46. > :11:52.correct. -- Scotland. That's correct. We would have more fis Val
:11:52. > :11:57.power than under current arrangements. We would pick the
:11:57. > :12:01.kurbsy that best suits Scotland's needs. We're not alone in proposing
:12:01. > :12:06.a monetary union. Over 39 countries in the world have that.
:12:06. > :12:10.eurozone doesn't seem to be functioning well as part of a
:12:10. > :12:13.monetary union. We're not proposing that. You would be in a union where
:12:13. > :12:21.your fiscal flexibility would be limited, wouldn't it? The Scottish
:12:21. > :12:25.Government within the current arrangements has a very -- very
:12:25. > :12:29.little fiscal independence. The monetary union and sterling seems
:12:29. > :12:33.right for Scottish circumstances, would be good for English, Welsh
:12:33. > :12:37.and Northern Ireland circumstances as well. Why would we reject a
:12:37. > :12:41.country with such immense wealth. In Scotland we generate more than
:12:41. > :12:45.we spend. You mention the wealth, when people come to vote in 2014,
:12:45. > :12:49.they won't know the predicted income from North Sea oil because
:12:49. > :12:53.no decision on how the funds from North Sea oil will be split has
:12:53. > :12:56.been made. The commission will be looking into that. People will not
:12:56. > :13:01.know how much income you can generate from that fund. They'll
:13:01. > :13:08.have a great deal of clarity. We can estimate even at this stage
:13:08. > :13:12.that there's about �1.5 trillion worth of ref enough still to come
:13:12. > :13:17.from -- revenue still to come from North Sea oil and gas. Those
:13:17. > :13:22.figures I can tell you now. In terms of the future, we want to
:13:22. > :13:30.invest in renewables. That's not the question I asked. In terms...
:13:30. > :13:33.We will... Just let me put this to you. We will put a full democratic
:13:33. > :13:37.case in terms of a white paper where we can answer the questions
:13:37. > :13:42.that people will rightly ask. Because figure that's have come
:13:42. > :13:47.from Government expenditure and revenue service for Scotland say,
:13:48. > :13:52.given figures for 2010/11 even with the Scottish share of North Sea oil,
:13:52. > :13:56.Scotland would run a deficit of �10.7 billion. What would you do,
:13:56. > :13:59.cut services or borrow money? think it's perfectly clear across
:13:59. > :14:05.the world with the current international recession very few
:14:05. > :14:10.countries don't run a deficit. A structural deficit at the moment wh.
:14:10. > :14:14.Compared to the UK, those figures show Scotland's deficit
:14:14. > :14:18.proportionately is smaller than the UK. But how would you pay for it,
:14:18. > :14:23.balance it? In the exact same way that any other country in the world
:14:23. > :14:26.would, on the basis of our assets and projections we would be able to
:14:26. > :14:30.borrow like any other independent nation. We would have access to far
:14:30. > :14:36.more resources. We're blessed with resources in this country, natural
:14:36. > :14:39.resources and human resources as well. We would borrow. With more
:14:39. > :14:43.adept economic policies we could deliver growth and economic
:14:43. > :14:49.recovery more quickly. Thank you very much. We can now talk to
:14:49. > :14:54.Norman Smith in Edinburgh for us. This is an historic moment. Sum up
:14:54. > :14:58.the feeling, the atmosphere from where you are. I think there say
:14:58. > :15:04.broad consensus amongst the parties that it is a genuinely historic
:15:04. > :15:09.moment and we cover politics day in, day out, we cover rows and splits
:15:09. > :15:13.and gaffes and what have you, they pale into insignificance with the
:15:13. > :15:18.comparison of the magnitude of events now unfolding over the next
:15:18. > :15:23.two years. You could be signalling an e -- event bringing to the end
:15:23. > :15:26.of the 300 years of history. The consequences for the politicians
:15:26. > :15:31.and political parties are massive. For David Cameron, very obviously,
:15:31. > :15:36.he does not want to be the leader of the Conservative and Unionist
:15:36. > :15:41.Party at a time when it splits. Similarly, for Alex Salmond, this
:15:41. > :15:45.is his moment. This is what the SNP have strifb for for decades. Were
:15:45. > :15:51.he to lose the referendum, it seems to me it poses something a question
:15:51. > :15:56.for what on earth is the SNP for. And for Labour too, if the Scots do
:15:56. > :16:00.vote for independence, then it make it's a huge mountain for Labour
:16:00. > :16:03.ever to win again south of the border. There are massive
:16:03. > :16:05.consequences and implications for all three main players here.
:16:06. > :16:11.Beautiful day for a big moment, which will be carried out behind
:16:11. > :16:15.you. It's all about the process today really. Single question on
:16:15. > :16:25.the ballot paper, referendum, timing has been set. 16 and 17-
:16:25. > :16:25.
:16:25. > :16:29.year-olds to vote. Would do you Alex Salmond won some important
:16:29. > :16:34.tactical victories, but Downing Street will comfort themselves by
:16:34. > :16:38.having one the big strategic victory, which was to ensure there
:16:38. > :16:42.was one question. The great fear was the two questions and
:16:42. > :16:47.devolution Max. However, they took the view it was basically a free
:16:47. > :16:50.luench question that everyone and anyone would -- lunch question,
:16:50. > :16:54.that everyone and anyone would vote for that, because you don't have to
:16:54. > :16:57.worry, so Downing Street take the view by getting it down to one
:16:57. > :17:01.question it's a crucial win and they believe they can beat Alex
:17:01. > :17:06.Salmond on that. Word of caution, although the polls would suggest
:17:06. > :17:10.that the SNP have an allmighty mountain to climb, they've climbed
:17:10. > :17:17.such mountains before in successive by-elections and the last
:17:17. > :17:21.Parliamentary election. James Caan, it's a long campaign. Do you think
:17:22. > :17:27.people will be fed up or will they understand the issues more? I think
:17:27. > :17:33.they understand the issues. I think the interesting thing for me is
:17:33. > :17:36.first, over 65% of the local people are not voting with their feet, the
:17:36. > :17:40.polls suggesting that there isn't the kind of euphoria of
:17:40. > :17:45.independence on the ground as you might be looking at when you listen
:17:45. > :17:49.to politicians. However, as a businessman, if I took a very
:17:49. > :17:53.helicopter view on this, I think this comes down to North Sea
:17:53. > :17:58.revenues at the end of the day. I think this is a whole issue which
:17:58. > :18:02.is clouded in massive debate. the economy? Really, it comes down
:18:03. > :18:06.to the one issue, who will get the lion's share of the revenues and we
:18:06. > :18:10.are talking about a lot of money? The question that goes through my
:18:10. > :18:14.head when I listen to those two interviews is if you took away
:18:14. > :18:17.North Sea revenues would we still be having the same debate? I'm not
:18:17. > :18:21.sure, because I think that's the thing driving this, because I think
:18:21. > :18:25.Scotland would like to keep all of those revenues for themselves. I
:18:25. > :18:31.think the UK currently is looking on a macrolevel and saying they're
:18:31. > :18:38.important to us as a whole and economies of scale that we can help
:18:38. > :18:42.a much greater population across the board. It's not about politics,
:18:42. > :18:46.but money. We'll talk more about this with our three MPs later in
:18:46. > :18:50.the programme. First, later today the Home Secretary, Theresa May, is
:18:50. > :18:55.expected to tell MPs that the Government will opt out of over
:18:55. > :19:00.100EU measures on law and order. James can tell us more. Thank you
:19:00. > :19:04.very much. It's a long-standing thorny question. How much should
:19:04. > :19:08.the prosecution and police officers and our courts co-operate with
:19:08. > :19:13.counterparts in the rest of the union? For many, many years it's
:19:13. > :19:17.been done on an intergovernmental basis, but now as part of the
:19:18. > :19:23.Lisbon Treaty there's a plan to bundle it up and make it agreed by
:19:23. > :19:27.the EU decision-making structures, so no veto and the of justice has a
:19:27. > :19:32.say in what is -- the court of justice has a say in what is going
:19:32. > :19:39.on. The Home Secretary will say the Government is minded to opt out, as
:19:39. > :19:48.is their right. I have two men here with me to explain their views.
:19:48. > :19:53.Dominic Raft from the Conservatives and also Chris Bright the Shadow
:19:53. > :19:58.Immigration Minister. Dominic, where is the Government thinking of
:19:58. > :20:03.opting out? There has been a drive for some time now to move towards a
:20:03. > :20:06.pan-European criminal code, backed up by a prosecution under the
:20:06. > :20:11.jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. This is a fork in the
:20:11. > :20:15.road and an opportunity to say we want to co-operate on a base-by-
:20:15. > :20:19.case basis, but we don't want to see democratic control, so what the
:20:19. > :20:24.Government is saying we'll opt out on block and look across the piece
:20:24. > :20:28.and do a cost-benefit analysis and we might opt back in if there's an
:20:28. > :20:33.interest, but we should maintain democratic control. There's a huge
:20:33. > :20:36.amount of co-operation. It's been proved to work. They've been able
:20:36. > :20:39.to tackle people trafficking and paedophile rings and getting
:20:39. > :20:46.suspects back from other countries here. Aren't you putting all that
:20:46. > :20:51.at risk? I don't think so. We want enhanced, practical co-operation
:20:51. > :20:56.and we have great co-operation co- operation after the Anders Breivik
:20:56. > :21:04.atrocity and that didn't require control. We don't see the FBI
:21:04. > :21:11.handing out dick tacks to the UK police. This is negotiated by
:21:11. > :21:17.Labour and we should not put it aside, but see the cost and benefit
:21:17. > :21:23.analysis. I've been through the 130 measures and we would be amazed
:21:23. > :21:25.where we don't use them. Doesn't that sound sensible. You suggested
:21:26. > :21:29.this is not what happens in the future. We have already been co-
:21:29. > :21:32.operating and we have opted into many of these things up until now
:21:32. > :21:37.and the Government's intentions, so far as I understand it, and it's a
:21:37. > :21:42.muddy area, is to opt out of these, so where we have seen co-operation
:21:42. > :21:46.on providing data perfect country to country on paedophiles, where we
:21:46. > :21:49.have seen co-operation on driving disqualifications, or for that
:21:49. > :21:53.matter on the arrest warrant, as far as I understand it, the
:21:54. > :21:58.Government's intention is to withdraw. Or maybe to go back in
:21:58. > :22:06.and in a sense the hoki cokey position is the worst of all,
:22:06. > :22:12.because there is no clarity, when criminals in Europe, we would like
:22:12. > :22:18.to send them back and we won't be able to do that. Once the deal is
:22:18. > :22:22.agreed and the new opts-ins have been agreed, won't there be
:22:22. > :22:27.clarity? Well it's an if. It's up to the council, one we opt out, to
:22:27. > :22:31.decide how much that should cost us. It expressly says we have no rule
:22:31. > :22:37.in deciding how much that costs. Secondly, there's the danger that
:22:37. > :22:41.all right we have opted out of the ar rest warrant and we want to
:22:41. > :22:46.renegotiate it -- arrest warrant and we renegotiate it, so what
:22:46. > :22:51.happens if another teacher abducts a 15-year-old girl? Will we be able
:22:51. > :22:57.to get a terrorist back from Italy? There is no agreement on the bits
:22:57. > :23:02.to opt in and there's no certainty you'll get the opt-outs. You need
:23:02. > :23:06.the agreement of the commission. It will be tricky. There are risks
:23:06. > :23:09.alongside in here and going down the track towards an integrated EU
:23:09. > :23:12.criminal justice system, but this is Labour's opt-out so if it
:23:12. > :23:17.doesn't work there are questions to answer there. What I would say,
:23:17. > :23:21.look at each measure on a cost and benefit fal cyst and ask yourself,
:23:21. > :23:27.are these in British interests -- analysis and ask yourself, are
:23:27. > :23:30.these in the British interests? Sharing data more broadly, DNA
:23:30. > :23:35.fingerprinting, that is something that even the last Government
:23:35. > :23:41.didn't opt us into. How many should we opt out? We should look at them
:23:41. > :23:47.all in the round. How many? There are very few that I can see in the
:23:47. > :23:51.list that I would want to out of opt out of. Driving
:23:51. > :23:58.disqualification is really useful if someone is disqualified in
:23:58. > :24:01.Poland, then they should be disqualified here and the rules
:24:01. > :24:05.apply. There's a majority that says no tangible law enforcement in
:24:05. > :24:09.Britain at all. There are others like the European Arrest Warrant
:24:09. > :24:14.where we should reform it and go back in. We can't reform it
:24:14. > :24:17.unlaterally. Thank you very much. As you can see, this is not
:24:18. > :24:22.something you can resolve in five minutes. This will run and run. We
:24:23. > :24:28.have got a long way to go. Technically the opt-out wouldn't
:24:28. > :24:31.happen until 2014, so prepare for more. Well done for trying, anyway,
:24:31. > :24:35.but no, consensus wasn't reached. Governments of all persuasions
:24:36. > :24:40.always claim they're on the side of business and they are especially
:24:41. > :24:43.fond of saying they're sticking up for the little guys. The coalition'
:24:43. > :24:49.no different and believes the private sector and smaller
:24:49. > :24:51.employers will be the ones to help to drive the recovery. To help get
:24:51. > :24:55.things going ministers have announced loans and tax breaks
:24:55. > :25:04.worth billions of pounds, but is that really the job of Government
:25:04. > :25:10.or best left to people like, well, our guest today, James Caan? These
:25:10. > :25:14.are the dragons. Five of Britain's wealthiest and most enterprising
:25:14. > :25:17.business leaders. Dragons' den where business Gods pick winners
:25:17. > :25:21.and losers. The Government's been playing its own version, putting up
:25:21. > :25:28.millions of pounds in loans and tax breaks to help entrepreneurs get up
:25:28. > :25:34.and go. London's Fashion and Textile Museum is more friendly
:25:34. > :25:40.than the dep and it may be where one day Elaine may find her work.
:25:40. > :25:44.She has created a business with a start-up loan programme. She has
:25:45. > :25:54.been lent �2,000 and she has a mentor. I tried the bank and they
:25:54. > :26:00.told me I had no chance. But the interest rates are so high. This
:26:01. > :26:06.loan has put me in the position to open the doors to begin trading.
:26:06. > :26:11.this age we have to agree that we have a high unemployment record and
:26:11. > :26:18.if we can give them the mentoring and experience from within business,
:26:18. > :26:22.matched with a loan, then it's a great initiative. So, what's not to
:26:22. > :26:27.like? With, while this is good news for people like Elaine, it's our
:26:27. > :26:32.taxpayers' cash being used to back their businesses. Is it our job to
:26:32. > :26:36.say, "I'm in."? I don't think the Government should provide financial
:26:36. > :26:39.support to small businesses. In the end the taxpayers are taking risks
:26:39. > :26:43.if the Government is guarantee supporting and finance that banks
:26:43. > :26:46.themselves should be taking. I think this is very dangerous.
:26:46. > :26:51.start-up loan scheme is just one of about nine pots of money available
:26:51. > :26:54.to entrepreneurs like Elaine. On the way, you have got the business
:26:54. > :26:57.in the green banks and regional schemes, all of which add up to
:26:57. > :27:02.billions of pounds in Government support for smaller firms. That's a
:27:02. > :27:06.lot of eggs in a lot of baskets, but is it really the way to go?
:27:06. > :27:10.fact you have got different pots all over the place is a huge
:27:10. > :27:13.problem, because businesses first and foremost don't know how to
:27:13. > :27:17.access the information on those pots. That's part of the problem.
:27:17. > :27:21.Secondly, a lot of the pots are either time-sensitive or by the
:27:21. > :27:25.time you recognise you can avail yourself of it, they've been
:27:25. > :27:28.fulfilled, so there's no money left in that pot. Which is another
:27:28. > :27:31.reason why some experts are sceptical about the wisdom of the
:27:31. > :27:34.Government's approach to helping small business. The paradox here is
:27:34. > :27:40.if the scheme did provide a meaningful amount of money for
:27:40. > :27:45.small businesses then the taxpayer would be on the hook for very large
:27:45. > :27:49.financial risks. If on the other hand, the schemes were small then
:27:49. > :27:51.they won't help small businesses very much, so by and large I think
:27:51. > :27:57.the schemes are bad in principle and will probably provide very
:27:57. > :28:00.little help in practice. The rights and Government's attempts don't
:28:00. > :28:05.probably bother Elaine too much. She's just happy to be up and
:28:05. > :28:08.running, but they should matter to us, but, after all, it's our money
:28:08. > :28:13.they're playing with. Lovely clothes. David Thompson reporting
:28:13. > :28:16.there. James Caan is with us and we have been joined by Margot James,
:28:17. > :28:23.the Conservative MP. We'll pick up on that point, should taxpayers'
:28:23. > :28:27.cash be used in the form of loans to prop up businesses? I think
:28:27. > :28:31.there's a definite place for Government support for new
:28:31. > :28:37.businesses, start-ups to provide some support, because we all know,
:28:37. > :28:41.we have been through a huge banking crisis and there has been a failure
:28:41. > :28:47.of business loans from banks. are really filling in the gap? It's
:28:47. > :28:50.an admission of failure that the banks haven't lent, so the taxpayer
:28:50. > :28:54.steps in? The taxpayer has always had a role in supporting small
:28:54. > :28:59.businesses. When I ran mine I had a little bit of support from
:28:59. > :29:02.Government and it really helped us. I wouldn't normally look to the
:29:02. > :29:06.Government if I was running a business still, but there's a role
:29:06. > :29:11.and a lot of these things are loan, they are not all grants, so the
:29:11. > :29:15.taxpayer, you can view it as an investment and I think that they do
:29:15. > :29:19.provide a really necessary boost to some small businesses that can't
:29:19. > :29:23.raise even when the banking days were good, it was still very
:29:23. > :29:26.difficult. If you didn't have collateral when you were starting a
:29:26. > :29:32.business, to get a loan in the traditional banking way, so I think
:29:32. > :29:36.there's a role. Gl is that right, the businesses -- Is that right,
:29:36. > :29:40.then? Should the taxpayer step in, because they sound like risky
:29:40. > :29:46.enterprises? What I can say is I think we should applaud K
:29:46. > :29:50.Government for taking some sense of leadership here. The heart of the
:29:50. > :29:53.UK economy is small businesses. Britain is a nation of shopkeepers
:29:53. > :29:55.and here we have a situation where we have so many young people who
:29:55. > :29:59.are desperately looking to do something. They are looking for
:29:59. > :30:02.support and I think the Government has put together a very creative
:30:02. > :30:06.solution, with not just capital, but as you saw in the clip, it's
:30:06. > :30:08.capital with mentors, so providing people with the opportunity of
:30:08. > :30:18.building businesses, because if those people weren't doing that
:30:18. > :30:26.
:30:26. > :30:30.they would be relying on Government They're not relying on the state
:30:30. > :30:35.for a handout. They're doing something for themselves. How much
:30:35. > :30:38.are we talking about? You're talking about �2,500 to get them up
:30:38. > :30:42.and running. What we're not looking for, we don't want to own their
:30:42. > :30:46.businesses. We don't want them to be dependent. As you saw in the
:30:46. > :30:50.clip, you have an idea, if she produces her own dresses that she
:30:50. > :30:53.sells to the local community, local shops, she starts to become self-
:30:53. > :30:58.sufficient and therefore, we've almost created a job there. This
:30:58. > :31:01.scheme could create thousands of jobs and to me, I'd like to applaud
:31:01. > :31:06.the Government and say I'm glad we're doing something about it.
:31:06. > :31:12.difficult is it to set up a small business? It's getting easier.
:31:12. > :31:15.Compared to? To ten years ago. It is easier to register a company now.
:31:15. > :31:18.We're reducing the bureaucracy and the regulations associated with
:31:18. > :31:23.registering yourself as a limited company. I think in that sense,
:31:23. > :31:27.things are getting easier. An interesting model for what the
:31:27. > :31:31.Government is trying to do is the Prince's Trust. I used to mentor
:31:31. > :31:36.young people with business ideas through the trust. That was only
:31:36. > :31:40.available, it was a similar amount of money, �2,500uals the maximum
:31:40. > :31:46.loan they could get. They've started 40,000 businesses. Are they
:31:46. > :31:50.still going? Yes, they're doing well. They are quite rightly, they
:31:50. > :31:53.focus on people from very disadvantaged communities or people
:31:53. > :31:56.who, ex-offenders, you know people who need a second chance. The
:31:56. > :32:01.Government is seeing the benefit and thinking we should apply that
:32:01. > :32:04.to a wider group. One of the things that's key is not only are those
:32:05. > :32:09.businesses going, but what's really important is 65% of those loans
:32:09. > :32:14.granted to those young people have been repaid. So not only have we
:32:14. > :32:18.created jobs and businesses but we've recovered that ininvestment -
:32:18. > :32:21.- investment back. Are you in favour then, because credit, money
:32:21. > :32:24.and lending is the problem, are you in favour of the Business
:32:24. > :32:31.Secretary's business bank plans? am. I think I'm certainly willing
:32:31. > :32:36.to give it a chance. I think it is a good initiative. On that scale, I
:32:36. > :32:40.would prefer to see a private sector solution. You said it's a
:32:40. > :32:44.good idea. Sorry I thought you were talking about the business bank,
:32:44. > :32:49.that's �1 billion for a state-owned bank. That's slightly different
:32:49. > :32:54.when I was talking earlier. idea being there are still state
:32:54. > :32:58.intervention,if you like. Going back to the point there is has this
:32:58. > :33:01.crisis in banking, it's not just credit drying up, it's also skills
:33:01. > :33:04.being lost. When I was in business 20 years ago, you could go into a
:33:04. > :33:07.High Street bank, you could meet someone who understood your
:33:07. > :33:11.business and the market and had a specialisation in small businesses.
:33:11. > :33:14.Then we had this whole you know, drift to central control and
:33:14. > :33:20.everything being decided by a computer. A lot of those skills
:33:20. > :33:23.have been lost. It's important that the Government recognises the need
:33:23. > :33:28.to get capital into businesses and I'm willing to give the business
:33:28. > :33:33.bank a good chance. OK. Margot James thank you very much and James
:33:33. > :33:37.Cann. Parliament is back after the party conference season and there's
:33:37. > :33:40.plenty going on. Tomorrow we expect to hear whether the computer hacker
:33:41. > :33:45.Gary McKinnon will be extradited to the United States for charges there.
:33:45. > :33:48.Wednesday is the first Prime Minister's questions for four weeks.
:33:49. > :33:51.It's sure to be a lively one. David Cameron and Ed Miliband haven't
:33:52. > :33:56.come face to face since Andrew Mitchell's encounter in Downing
:33:56. > :33:59.Street with the police and all eyes will be on him. Thursday sees a
:33:59. > :34:04.European heads of state meeting in Brussels and more discussions about
:34:04. > :34:08.the planned European banking union are expected. The Scottish National
:34:08. > :34:13.Party also begin their annual conference in Perth on Thursday. On
:34:13. > :34:16.Saturday, the TUC hold their rally in London protesting against the
:34:16. > :34:20.Government's austerity policies. Ed Miliband is expected to join the
:34:20. > :34:27.march. Let's talk now to Iain Martin who writes for the telegraph
:34:27. > :34:31.and Ben Duckworth from the tollal politics website. Welcome to the --
:34:31. > :34:39.Total Politics website. Welcome to the programme. Andrew Mitchell will
:34:39. > :34:44.be close to David Cameron how awkward will that be? Very awkward.
:34:44. > :34:48.If he doesn't turn up to PMQ's and attending the House of Commons
:34:48. > :34:50.again he might as well resign as an MP. It will be a fiery occasion.
:34:50. > :34:56.Labour have the Prime Minister precisely where they want him on
:34:56. > :34:59.this. This story is playing out brilliantly for the Opposition. It
:34:59. > :35:06.keeps running. There are new stories every couple of days or the
:35:06. > :35:10.latest twist. For Labour, it's perfect because it feeds into that
:35:10. > :35:14.stereotype that the Prime Minister is so keen to get rid of of the
:35:14. > :35:20.Conservative Party. It's just there. He's a walking party political
:35:20. > :35:24.broadcast for the Labour Party. Prime Minister will not be keen to
:35:25. > :35:28.seed his Chief Whip because of media pressure. The talk around
:35:28. > :35:32.Westminster is that won't happen. As Iain Martin has outlined you
:35:32. > :35:37.will have this drip, drip effect, if he's still there. Do you think
:35:37. > :35:41.he will still be there? My big question about it is how does he
:35:41. > :35:44.possibly have authority over the MPs he's supposed to corral to vote
:35:44. > :35:49.for the Government. The MPs at the conference last week doing
:35:49. > :35:53.impressions of Andrew Mitchell. It's already a difficult generation
:35:53. > :35:56.of MPs to whip as his predecessor found out. When Andrew Mitchell
:35:56. > :35:59.calls you into his office for a meeting without coffee and what's
:35:59. > :36:04.going to be ringing around your head, can you imagine that scene in
:36:04. > :36:07.Downing Street when he has lost his temer -- temper with a couple of
:36:07. > :36:10.policemen. Sounds like a lot of fun in terms of party politics. Looking
:36:10. > :36:16.at Europe the issue that won't goi away for David Cameron, no mat
:36:16. > :36:19.whaer he says, we saw the papers, the reports of friends of Michael
:36:19. > :36:23.Gove and Cabinet members who say they would like to see Britain
:36:23. > :36:28.leave the EU. Still a headache. is a headache for him. He's trapped
:36:28. > :36:32.in a sense. He has, he's draining support about six or seven or 8% of
:36:32. > :36:36.the national support. He's draining support to UKIP and some activists
:36:36. > :36:39.and donor money. But it's very difficult to get those people back
:36:39. > :36:42.because they feel they have been promised things before in the past
:36:42. > :36:48.by David Cameron on Europe and that they can't believe a word that he
:36:48. > :36:52.says. What Gove has done very interestingly is to open up a whole
:36:52. > :36:57.new front that suggests that Cameron realises he has to shift a
:36:57. > :37:00.bit, that he has to, for renegotiation, which he keeps
:37:00. > :37:03.talking about, for that to mean anything, the Tories have to have
:37:03. > :37:07.this ultimate sanction of being prepared to consider leaving if
:37:07. > :37:15.they don't get the renegotiation they want. The problem is there has
:37:15. > :37:18.been this repositioning,if you like, Ben Duckworth, on Europe, but it
:37:18. > :37:22.marches MPs back up to the top of the hill and nothing much happens,
:37:22. > :37:26.he's going to be in big trouble. Yes, David Cameron's MPs don't
:37:26. > :37:32.trust him on Europe. They believe he overpromises. There's very
:37:32. > :37:36.strong language at various EU summits, but in the end they
:37:36. > :37:39.doesn't deliver. Europe is particularly messy because the
:37:39. > :37:42.unique way the European Union operates, where for example today
:37:42. > :37:45.in Theresa May's statement about eawe law and order, she can only
:37:45. > :37:50.talk about what the Government is minded to do because in 2014 it all
:37:50. > :37:53.has to be negotiated again. In another sense, is the fact that the
:37:53. > :37:58.Euro-sceptics on the Conservative benches aren't one united force.
:37:58. > :38:02.Instead it's more of a mood towards Europe. There are various ideas
:38:02. > :38:06.running around about how exactly David Cameron should deal with this
:38:06. > :38:10.from his backbenchers, for example Liam Fox wants a time table then
:38:10. > :38:13.referendum. Other MPs would only be satisfied with a definite date for
:38:13. > :38:18.a referendum. It makes it difficult for David Cameron to control that
:38:18. > :38:22.process. Also the mood of MPs towards him on urine. And what are
:38:22. > :38:26.Britain's chances of renegotiating key parts of our relationship with
:38:26. > :38:30.Europe any way, when you could argue that we don't have that many
:38:30. > :38:36.friends round the table and there has to be some sort of unanimity in
:38:36. > :38:41.terms of voting? That's true, but even go back one step beyond that.
:38:41. > :38:47.What does renegotiation mean? What do those who advocate renegotiation
:38:47. > :38:50.actually want? What powers do they want returned? On the single market,
:38:50. > :38:55.do they want Britain to be governed by the rules of the single market
:38:55. > :39:00.but then opt out of the decision making processes which will come
:39:00. > :39:05.from ever greater, closer union, which the 17 members of the
:39:05. > :39:10.eurozone are pushing towards? It's a very complicated, difficult
:39:10. > :39:13.question. My instinct on this, however, is that Cameron comes out
:39:13. > :39:17.of the Tory party conference in pretty good shape, actually. I
:39:17. > :39:20.think it was arguably the best speech of his leadership. He's
:39:20. > :39:24.bought himself some time and some space to operate in all of this.
:39:24. > :39:28.It's not inconceivable, despite the difficulties he has, that actually
:39:28. > :39:31.Europe and doing something big on Europe could be his way back into
:39:31. > :39:36.the game and could be a way of him fighting and winning the next
:39:36. > :39:40.election. We'll end on that prediction, Iain Martin and Ben
:39:40. > :39:44.Duckworth, thank you. I've been joined bit Deputy Leader of the
:39:44. > :39:48.Scottish Labour Party party Anas Sarwar, Lib Dem MP Lorely Burt and
:39:48. > :39:51.Chris Bryant for the Conservatives. In the last few minutes, we can sho
:39:51. > :39:57.you pictures, David Cameron has arrived in Edinburgh for a meeting.
:39:57. > :39:59.There he is. Meeting with Alex Salmond to discuss plans - there
:39:59. > :40:05.they are, shaking hands - for a referendum on independence for
:40:05. > :40:08.Scotland. It's expected the two men will appear for a signing ceremony
:40:08. > :40:13.just over an hour. Going inside there, Alex Salmond and David
:40:13. > :40:18.Cameron. Let's discuss this historic moment with our panel. Do
:40:18. > :40:20.you see it as a historic moment? is an historic moment. This will be
:40:20. > :40:23.the biggest decision the people of Scotland have had to make for 300
:40:23. > :40:27.years. Certainly the biggest decision people will make in their
:40:27. > :40:31.life Times. I'm delighted we finally seem to be getting past the
:40:31. > :40:35.process arguments and hopefully get on to the substance of the debate
:40:35. > :40:39.and give Scotland the honest, transparent debate it deserves.
:40:39. > :40:42.Before we move on to the substance. Let's dwell on the question. I
:40:42. > :40:48.talked about that with Derek Mackay from the SNP. He says they've got a
:40:48. > :40:52.question. Scotland should be an independent state, agree or
:40:52. > :40:56.disagree? The interesting thing is Derek Mackay's version was
:40:56. > :40:59.different from Alex Salmond's version. It is. But Scotland should
:40:59. > :41:04.become an independent state, would you sign up to that question?
:41:04. > :41:07.Salmond has his view of what the result to be. I have my view. It
:41:07. > :41:10.shouldn't for politicians to decide what the question is. Let's leave
:41:10. > :41:14.to to the Electoral Commission. Government is deciding the wording.
:41:14. > :41:17.The Electoral Commission will judge whether it's fair. Absolutely. The
:41:17. > :41:20.Government have put together a proposal about what the question
:41:20. > :41:26.should be. The Electoral Commission tests that question and comes back
:41:26. > :41:29.with process. We should respect the Electoral Commission. We can't have
:41:29. > :41:34.Alex Salmond both the player and referee. The question then will be
:41:34. > :41:38.chewed over when it's finally agleed. Looking at the polls, they
:41:38. > :41:40.have a mountain to climb, the SNP. We talked about that. They are
:41:40. > :41:45.confident they can shift that number because they have two years
:41:45. > :41:49.to do it. This time last year support for independence was at 38%.
:41:49. > :41:52.Now it's 28%. That's not because of the constant process arguments,
:41:52. > :41:56.it's because every time they've been challenged on the details they
:41:56. > :41:58.haven't come up with the answers. Through yut their existence the
:41:58. > :42:01.answer to every question has been independence. Now the question is
:42:01. > :42:04.independence they don't have answers to the questions. Whether
:42:04. > :42:09.it's on currency, whether... They know what they want. They want to
:42:09. > :42:12.stay part of sterling. That's their answer there. They will have then
:42:12. > :42:15.flexibility over fiscal policy if not over monetary policy. Currency
:42:15. > :42:20.is a perfect example. They say the Bank of England will be the lender
:42:20. > :42:22.of last resort and weeds' have the Financial Services Authority --
:42:22. > :42:28.we'd have the Financial Services Authority looking over Scotland.
:42:28. > :42:31.They say we would have a seat over the Monetary Policy Committee, they
:42:31. > :42:37.don't automatically get a seat. And in independence do you really want
:42:37. > :42:41.a foreign country setting your interest rates, and borrowing
:42:41. > :42:46.limits. What about the agreement to have 16 and 17-year-olds vote?
:42:46. > :42:50.a strange one. You're talking about rising 18 here. We've seen them on
:42:50. > :42:53.the canvas cards knocking on doors, who will be 18 at the time of the
:42:53. > :43:00.election. If you're talking about some 16 and 17-year-olds that will
:43:00. > :43:03.be able to vote and some that won't. That is, A, I think it's unfair.
:43:03. > :43:09.Are you principally against the idea of giving 16 and 17-year-olds
:43:09. > :43:13.the vote? No. I think... A lot of your colleagues are. Sure. That's
:43:13. > :43:16.their view. I think it is possibly even open to legal challenge if you
:43:16. > :43:21.give some 16 and 17-year-olds the vote and some not. This is a
:43:21. > :43:24.referendum two years down-the-line here. I would have thought that it
:43:24. > :43:28.was within the wherewithal of the Scottish Parliament to get this
:43:28. > :43:33.sorted. Whether Alex Salmond thinks having them vote in the referendum
:43:33. > :43:38.is to his power or not. I hear it's those that were teenagers when
:43:38. > :43:42.brave heart was on television that are likely to support independence.
:43:42. > :43:47.You are I presume in favour of 16 and 17-year-olds voting in this and
:43:47. > :43:51.would like to see that extended. Yes, it's SNP policy. That's why
:43:51. > :43:57.it's on the agenda now. Certainly it's something that we've advocated
:43:57. > :44:03.for a long period of time. I mean, basically, people, you know kids at
:44:03. > :44:09.16 they get all their citizenship training and then they're told, oh,
:44:09. > :44:13.sorry, patronisingly, you're not responsible enough to vote now.
:44:13. > :44:18.Lord Adonis had an article recently where he was saying it will get
:44:18. > :44:27.young people into the habit of voting if you get them early and
:44:27. > :44:30.the people, I know a 66 who I trust more to make a political decision
:44:30. > :44:35.than some 16-year-olds. If 16 and 17-year-olds are allowed to vote,
:44:35. > :44:39.then surely you're not going to be able to have another election in
:44:39. > :44:43.Scotland without allowing them to vote? Our argument has been if you
:44:43. > :44:46.have it for one election it should be the case for all elections. You
:44:46. > :44:49.suportd of principle. I think both governments need to work together
:44:49. > :44:52.to ensure 16 and 17-year-olds have the vote. I don't think it's
:44:52. > :44:56.credible to say only some of them will have the vote in the
:44:56. > :45:01.referendum. That's open to legal challenge. The issue is that it's
:45:01. > :45:04.not just about the voting age, all of us as politicians have a much
:45:04. > :45:07.bigger role to do about getting more people engaged in the
:45:07. > :45:11.political process and frankly, most people just don't see politics as
:45:11. > :45:14.relevant to their lives. Do you accept, though, that if, and the
:45:14. > :45:19.polls at the moment point in that direction, that Alex Salmond
:45:19. > :45:22.doesn't win a Yes vote, we don't know, he doesn't win a Yes vote,
:45:22. > :45:27.but enough people support independence in that vote that
:45:27. > :45:37.there will be undoubted pressure for more powers to be devolves to
:45:37. > :45:42.
:45:42. > :45:46.It was despite the SNP. They didn't take part in the convention. Within
:45:46. > :45:52.two months of a Labour landslide in 1997 we had a referendum and we
:45:52. > :45:57.delivered it. Answer the question on devolved power? The Scotland Act
:45:57. > :46:02.was passed which gives powers to Scotland. The only vote that kills
:46:02. > :46:08.devolution is the people vote for separation. I would say, the SNP
:46:08. > :46:12.have bounced into it. Ironically, the clue is in the title, they seem
:46:12. > :46:18.to being bounced into this in the new year. David Cameron came out
:46:18. > :46:21.and sort of kicked this off. It seems strange to me that Alex
:46:21. > :46:25.Salmond didn't want to talk about a referendum. David Cameron started
:46:25. > :46:29.this. Here we are now and thank goodness there is one question. We
:46:29. > :46:34.didn't want the muddle of questions. Just one question. You think David
:46:34. > :46:39.Cameron won on this issue, even though Michael Forsyth says he lost
:46:39. > :46:42.and Alex Salmond got his way? a separate Scotland or United
:46:42. > :46:48.Kingdom. The Prime Minister and the Government will make a very clear
:46:48. > :46:52.case for the benefits of a United Kingdom. In the end, he's in a win-
:46:52. > :46:57.win situation, surely even if he loses that vote he'll get the
:46:57. > :47:00.devolved powers? I think he's in a lose-lose situation in actual fact
:47:00. > :47:06.and I still bear the scars on my back of another referendum that we
:47:06. > :47:10.had about fair votes. I think David Cameron is quite good at
:47:10. > :47:14.referendums. As we all know, ideas come and go in politics and it
:47:14. > :47:18.wasn't so long ago we were talking about brownedary changes. These to
:47:18. > :47:22.the size to the MPs' constituencies were favoured by the Conservatives
:47:22. > :47:29.and it seemed like they had the support of the Liberal Democrats,
:47:29. > :47:34.their partners, but then Tory -- backbenchers scuppered reform and
:47:34. > :47:39.yesterday on the Sunday Politics Grant Shapps indicated to Andrew
:47:39. > :47:42.that despite this he hadn't completely given up. The vote has
:47:42. > :47:46.to take place next year in or around October, when we know the
:47:46. > :47:50.final shape of the boundaries. It has to come back to Parliament and
:47:50. > :47:56.there will need to be a vote through the lobbies. Now, a year is
:47:56. > :48:00.a long time. A week's a long time and a year is a live time. You are
:48:00. > :48:05.still for the votes? Yeah, because it was in the coalition agreement
:48:05. > :48:09.and Nick Clegg came out strongly and said it was base for the basis
:48:09. > :48:14.-- right for the basis of fairness, but I'm putting in place a strategy
:48:14. > :48:21.for us to win the election regardless. Grant Shapps, the party
:48:21. > :48:23.chairman. Wishful thinking? I think so. Certainly, I don't think that
:48:23. > :48:27.the Conservative coalition colleagues can pick one thing they
:48:28. > :48:33.want to support and pick another. With Lords' reform the problem is
:48:33. > :48:38.balance. What we will be talking about is having fewer elected MPs,
:48:38. > :48:43.but opening the floodgates for more unelected peers. Can you
:48:43. > :48:47.catagorically say that it's off the agenda, Lib Dem support for
:48:47. > :48:57.boundary changes? It's not on mine, but it's also above my pay grade. I
:48:57. > :48:58.
:48:58. > :49:02.can't imagine it. Really, you're skewed? -- screwed? I'm sighing
:49:02. > :49:06.deeply. I'm so sorry, but the coalition is agreement, we'll
:49:06. > :49:12.deliver a referendum on alternative vote in return for boundary changes.
:49:13. > :49:16.We passed the legislation. When Nick Clegg threw the toys out of
:49:16. > :49:21.the pram and I'm one of the bad boys on the naughty step voting
:49:21. > :49:25.against the Bill because it's a terrible piece of legislation. That
:49:25. > :49:29.was the deal. People are talking about the wider changes. You can
:49:29. > :49:32.repeat it as many times until you're blue in the face, it doesn't
:49:32. > :49:36.sound like the Liberal Democrats will be persuaded so it's over? Do
:49:36. > :49:40.you think Grant Shapps is on a hiding to nothing basically?
:49:40. > :49:43.because at the end of the day, when the toys left the pram the Deputy
:49:43. > :49:48.Prime Minister didn't ask to repeal the bit of the act that set the
:49:48. > :49:52.boundary commission to its work. It's finishing the work today. We
:49:52. > :49:55.get the final recommendations for the seats and we should put it to
:49:55. > :49:59.the House. Instead of all the talk about whether it's an advantage or
:49:59. > :50:02.not, it would be a slight advantage to us, but at the moment the
:50:02. > :50:06.advantage is to the Labour Party, so we're looking for parity and
:50:06. > :50:11.what we should do it put it to the vote in the House. Nick Clegg has
:50:11. > :50:17.already voted for these changes for equal-sized constituencies. I have
:50:17. > :50:19.74,000 people in my constituency and there are MPs with 54,000.
:50:19. > :50:23.think the Liberal Democrats signed up to the principle, but they're
:50:23. > :50:30.not going to go ahead because they feel you broke your end of the
:50:30. > :50:35.bargain. Can they be bought with the offer of state funding? It's
:50:35. > :50:40.not for me to call it. Would it be warning if you were going to get a
:50:40. > :50:44.considerable amount? The party is cash strapped, so would it be worth
:50:44. > :50:48.saying you will back the idea of boundaries if you get the level of
:50:48. > :50:55.funding? I don't think so. The coalition agreement is a balance.
:50:55. > :51:00.We have had to vote for things which we would never have voted for,
:51:00. > :51:03.had we been in charge. That's if we had had an overall majority. So,
:51:03. > :51:08.the Conservatives have taken something out. There may be other
:51:08. > :51:13.things they can put in, but I honestly can't think what that
:51:13. > :51:17.might be. Why are Labour against it We talked about 16-year-olds
:51:17. > :51:22.getting the votes to engage young people. This debate is a perfect
:51:22. > :51:26.example why people are disengaged. Is Labour's position so moral?
:51:26. > :51:29.give you an example. You have a Government trying to gerrymander
:51:29. > :51:32.the constituencies so it gives them a greater chance of winning the
:51:32. > :51:38.next general election and then you have grubby deals to do with money
:51:38. > :51:41.to see if they can overcome that process. I think it's disgraceful
:51:41. > :51:44.and I think everyone will think it's an out-of-touch Government.
:51:44. > :51:48.Labour says it's in favour of constitutional reform. You are
:51:48. > :51:52.doing this because you want to prevent the Conservatives having
:51:52. > :51:58.those extra 20 seat they think they'll get if the boundaries are
:51:58. > :52:01.withdrawn? No, it's not that. Lords' reform is something that
:52:01. > :52:05.everyone is agreed on. There is an argument between the Conservatives
:52:05. > :52:07.and the Liberal Democrats. On the boundaries, there's a fixing of the
:52:07. > :52:11.seats to help the Conservatives win the next general election. It
:52:11. > :52:14.doesn't help the Liberal Democrats. It's a gruby deal purely for the
:52:14. > :52:18.Conservatives. Alongside that, you are moving to single-voter
:52:18. > :52:21.registration because they knows areas where you are less likely to
:52:21. > :52:29.have people register where there is more deprevation and they are more
:52:29. > :52:35.like to be Labour Party seats. takes more votes to elect a
:52:35. > :52:39.Conservative MP than a Labour MP. Even more for a Liberal Democrat.
:52:39. > :52:43.I'm not intruding on that private grief. Whether you are a young
:52:43. > :52:47.voter or middle aged or older it's not a fair situation and the House
:52:47. > :52:50.of Commons voted clearly to bring equal-sized constituencies and
:52:50. > :52:54.we'll bring it back before the House. All right. Thank you all
:52:54. > :52:59.very much. Don't go away. A consultation has been announced
:52:59. > :53:03.today in MPs' pay. The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
:53:03. > :53:07.or IPSA, will look at pensions, pay and conditions. Some of the
:53:07. > :53:11.suggestions have included lower salaries for MPs who take on second
:53:11. > :53:13.jobs and an end to the final salary pension scheme like elsewhere in
:53:13. > :53:20.the public sector. It's now open to members of the public to put
:53:20. > :53:24.forward their views on what they think MPs deserve. That will make
:53:24. > :53:29.interesting reading, I'm sure. Firstly, we'll take the Irish use.
:53:29. > :53:33.What is your response that you could be penalised for having a
:53:33. > :53:38.second job? Not many of my colleagues actually have second
:53:38. > :53:46.jobs. If you for instance had a second job, you would be happy to
:53:46. > :53:49.take a lower MPs' salary? Yes, I don't see a problem. I think it's a
:53:50. > :53:53.full-time job so it's right that MPs shouldn't set their own pay and
:53:53. > :53:57.conditions and people from outside should decide what MPs are paid. We
:53:57. > :54:02.should concentrate on trying to create a fairer and more prosperous
:54:02. > :54:12.country. Do you have a second job? No. Do you have a second job?
:54:12. > :54:17.
:54:17. > :54:23.Certainly not. This is a seven-day- a week job. You are all well paid.
:54:23. > :54:27.For me, it's a seven- day job and you have to juggle everything. I
:54:27. > :54:30.don't know how people have time to do other things, but that's a
:54:30. > :54:34.matter for them and their constituencies. And should they
:54:34. > :54:38.take a pay cut on their MP salary? I'm sure they'll respond to the
:54:38. > :54:42.consultation to tell IPSA what they think. Here's a radical idea, maybe
:54:42. > :54:47.do away with IPSA and pay MPs the sum that they get for their salary
:54:47. > :54:50.and staff and allowances and then we can save the taxpayer a lot of
:54:50. > :54:54.money instead of this great bureaucracy that comes around it.
:54:54. > :54:58.Would could argue that that was as a result of a scandal which
:54:58. > :55:02.occupied minds for a very long time. The suggestion that MPs should
:55:02. > :55:06.receive a pay rise, do you think you're York the money? I think so.
:55:06. > :55:11.I think the MPs are worth the money they're paid, but let's be honest,
:55:11. > :55:16.I'm not one of these people who says I left a six-figure job to
:55:16. > :55:20.come to the House. I'm earning more than I've done in my career, but
:55:20. > :55:25.still earning twice or three times more than most of my constituents.
:55:25. > :55:30.It's a well-paid job by those standards and it's the best job in
:55:30. > :55:35.the world. What about a pay rise, would you say yes to that?
:55:35. > :55:43.shouldn't be for MPs to say what their pay is. Everybody who does
:55:43. > :55:47.their own job will think they do a great job and get paid for that.
:55:47. > :55:51.It's an honour to represent the people and it's for norges to
:55:51. > :55:58.decide. That's why we got in -- others to decide. That's why we got
:55:58. > :56:03.in trouble in the first place. We should let others decide what pay
:56:03. > :56:07.we get and expenses and what our conditions are and what our
:56:07. > :56:11.pensions are, it shouldn't be for us. One of the argument was that
:56:12. > :56:16.the expenses scandal blew up in part because people felt that that
:56:16. > :56:20.was part of their salary, wrongly. Would it be better if they were
:56:20. > :56:23.just paid a bit more? If MPs justified their existence a little
:56:23. > :56:30.more in the way outlined by you, would it be easier to persuade your
:56:30. > :56:33.constituents to back a pay rise? Well, it's really difficult to say.
:56:33. > :56:37.I'm working with IPSA. They are doing a consultation at the moment
:56:37. > :56:42.and I think a lot of people think that we just sit around here,
:56:42. > :56:47.recess comes and we all go, we'll go off to our villas. It's not like
:56:47. > :56:51.that. If people understand the work we do and the hours that we do and
:56:51. > :56:58.the responsibility that we take, there might be less critical
:56:58. > :57:04.thoughts of the fact that yes, we have a reasonable salary. When we
:57:04. > :57:09.go into schools and we ask the students what do we do, we get some
:57:09. > :57:12.hilarious answers back, are you a mayor or a governor of the school.
:57:13. > :57:17.People think when we're on recess exactly that and I think the media
:57:17. > :57:22.have a role to play. After recess the media run the lines, "MPs
:57:22. > :57:28.return to work today." As if we are not working in our constituencies.
:57:28. > :57:31.Briefly, on pensions, they are described as gold-plated schemes
:57:31. > :57:36.because of what is happening elsewhere. Should it be brought in
:57:36. > :57:42.line with other public sector pensions? If you look at the public
:57:42. > :57:45.sector with the pay freezes and record levels of unemployment and
:57:45. > :57:48.inflation rising and not with wage increases. People are feeling the
:57:48. > :57:55.pinch and the last thing they want to see is MPs talking about their
:57:55. > :58:03.own pay and their own conditions. Leave it to external bodies. Very
:58:03. > :58:10.important, we have to do our quiz. Time to give you the answer to it.
:58:10. > :58:17.Do you know, you three, which book it is? Moby Dick, Winnie the Pooh
:58:17. > :58:25.or 50 Shades of Grey or Winnie the Pooh? Is it Noddy? I hope it's
:58:25. > :58:31.Winnie the Pooh. Moby Dick. We'll hear David Cameron. When he had
:58:31. > :58:35.departed Ahab stood for a while and then, as had been usual with him of
:58:35. > :58:40.late, calling a sailor of the watch, he sent him below for his school
:58:40. > :58:43.and also his pipe. There you go, David Cameron. Well done, it was