06/11/2012 Daily Politics

Good afternoon and welcome to the day Lee. Believe it or not, we are

halfway through this Parliament. Doesn't time fly when you're having

fun? Seems like a good day for a half-term report. We will be asking

the all-important question, is a day radically reforming government

or an omnishambles of a partnership? -- is it a radically

reforming government? In America, will it be Obama or

Romney? And Giles will be looking at the

very expensive and entertaining campaign roller-coaster. Election

day, election day! Up and at them! And do you have nightmares about

All that in the next hour. With us for the whole programme, the former

Labour MP Chris Mullin, who now writes to pass the time of day. He

also acts, I bet you didn't know that! He will hit our screens

tomorrow as a vicar in an adaptation of his first novel, A

Very British Coup. Secret State starts on Channel 4 tomorrow, you

will be able to see him in a dog- collar. Have you got a big part?

Let us not exaggerate. I said to the directors, I'd like a little

walk-on part, if you don't mind. I thought they might make me a

backbench MP or minister, but instead they made me a vicar

conducting a memorial service foreign debt Prime Minister. It was

a speaking part when it started, I had three or four little rolls, my

first one was to stand outside the church and welcome the mourners, my

second was to greet the grieving widow, a very beautiful woman who I

had to take by the hand and escort to the church door. That was

reforms about 20 times from different angles. Then I made a

short speech from the pulpit, after which the choir would strike up

behind me. However, when I got to see the first episode, everything

has gone except a few seconds of me standing, but you have to be very

quick, standing at the church door. The choir has gone, everybody has

gone. That is the television business! All on the cutting room

floor, but I am there. We will keep our eyes peeled. It is aren't --

based on my first novel A Very British Coup, actually it is

inspired by rather than based on. Very loosely inspired. Can you

recognise your book? Very loose the. I have been extremely likely --

lucky that they bought the rights, it was filmed once in the 80s and

they stuck more closely to it. They have changed the title. They rang

me up, very embarrassed, and said, do you mind if we do not use the

title? It is very good, though, very gritting, -- gripping, Charles

Dance, Gina McKee, Gabriel Byrne, it is well worth watching. Is this

the start of a new career for you? I think my acting career is over.

Before it even began! Time for our daily quiz. The

Which political figure is off to Which political figure is off to

the jungle? Michael Heseltine, George Osborne, Nadine Dorries or

Jacob Rees-Mogg? Chris will give us the answer later. Don't bother e-

mailing us, we only give one mug away a week - that is austerity for

you! You probably don't even know why

today is so momentous. Tuesday the 6th November 2012 marks the exact

halfway point of this Parliament. To mark this auspicious occasion

the Government was meant to be producing its very own mid-term

review, which it was going to publish around now. But like so

much else in government it has been delayed. Never mind, we at the

Daily Politics are here to help and have produced our very own mid-term

report. The most important subject is the economy and tackling the

deficit. Overall, the deficit has come down. Britain borrowed �126

billion last year, but it was still �10 billion above the target the

Government set when it came into tired -- into power.

The Government has come up with radical ideas on free schools,

academies and the curriculum. It wanted to be radical on health as

well, but the Health and Social Care Bill ran into trouble. It was

forced to hold a listening exercise to get it through Parliament.

On welfare, the coalition has gone where previous governments have

feared to tread. From 2013, it will introduce a cap on the total

benefits a household can receive up around �500 a week, so it will not

exceed the average household pay. The coalition needs to maintain

discipline over Europe. There could still be a classroom dispute over

boundary changes and, of course, they could do more on banking

reform and reforming social care. Joining me now are Rachel Sylvester,

political commentator for the Times, and Fraser Nelson, editor of the

Spectator magazine. Fraser, what would you give the coalition out of

10? Probably six-and-a-half. Five stars for education and welfare.

The economy has not been very good, I'd probably give that one-and-a-

half stars. And four unforced errors, you should take away stars

for the needless mistakes which they seem to keep making. There is

an idea of shambles which very cunningly Dist -- disguises a

government which is not that bad. Rachel, how would you characterise

the coalition? Two party's governing in the national interest

or ruling in a constant state of omnishambles? As Fraser says, on

education and welfare they have been good, but on fell -- on health

reforms they have spectacularly failed to explain what they were

doing, constitutional reform has been a constant ding-dong between

the parties, and on the economy it is as if they have set the course

but we don't know what the result will be, the examiners are still

adjudicating the papers. In the next couple of years we will find

out whether the question has been answered. You both mentioned they

have been radical in certain areas, are on welfare and education.

Fraser, looking at those two in isolation, has it been a radically

reforming government? If it succeeds in welfare or education,

that will be more than, in my view, Labour managed in 13 years. So you

could say it was a success. But the new schools still are not keeping

pace with the number of new pupils, so you will end up with even worse

shortages than under Labour. In welfare they are continuing what

Labour did really well, but a lot depends on the complete rewrite of

the welfare system, the universal credits, which will take years to

work out if it will succeed or not. The economy, Rachel Sylvester, is

still the big challenge? Absolutely. There is a new spending round

coming up which the parties will have to try to reach agreement on,

which will be yet another flashpoint between the two parties.

I think the big test is whether or not coalition can be made to work.

Although at the top the two leaders want it to, the two parties at

getting increasingly fractious, particularly on the conservative

side. The classroom rubber throwing around and Ink spots are getting

slightly out of control and immature. They have to decide

whether they want to complete the exam or not. I love you analogies,

you are doing very well! Fraser, on the workings of the coalition, the

idea was the right thing for the right time, in austerity, but has

it delivered stability in government or are we now seeing as

relationships become more frayed that it has not worked as a

concept? The fact that the coalition is still here after two-

and-a-half years, I didn't think we would get to the halfway report

stage. It has never been done before in peacetime British

politics. It is an incredible achievement in the adversarial

system, they have kept the class together, to use the analogy. But

has it brought stability? It has not brought growth. That has been

the biggest single disappointment of the Government, how little there

has been in trying to fix the economy. Rachel, on the basis the

coalition has lasted thus far, will it last until 2015? I don't think

it is in the interests of either party forehead not too. This is the

result the electorate delivered, it was not bat Clegg and Cameron

wanted to get lovey-dovey and the Rose Garden, the electorate did not

deliver an overall majority, so they had to make it work, they have

to make it work until 2015. Thank you for your school mid-term report.

With us now his former Lib Dem leader Ming Campbell and the former

cabinet minister Cheryl Gillan. Is it working, Ming Campbell? Yes. As

it has just been pointed out, many thought it would not work at all.

We are halfway through, a lot of achievement, maybe lots of things

we'd like to have done better, but if you compare the coalition

Government's performance against the last two-and-a-half years of

the Labour government, you'd be bound to give as much higher marks.

They would argue there was more growth coming out of that last

government ban over the last two- and-a-half years. But at what

expense, at the expense of a deficit right out of control. The

only reason we can talk about growth, infrastructure etc is

because of the off-air -- austerity of the last two-and-a-half years.

We have maintained confidence in the bond market, the Stock Exchange

and the pound, everything which would have been subject to very

heavy pressure if we went straight into some kind of growth scenario.

George Osborne says he will miss some of the key targets. Do you

think people feel better than a few years ago? What is interesting is

there are still majority support for the economic policy. Of course

some people have been hurt, it would be very foolish to argue

anything other than that, but the point is we have restored stability.

Looking around Europe, you can see some countries where they would

give their right hand to have the kind of stability we have. Don't

mention Europe, as far as the coalition is concerned! I voted for

the Prime Minister against his own rebels! Funny, that. I am very

happy to talk about Europe. Cheryl, you have sat around the Cabinet

table, was there a perceptible shift in relations during those few

years? The coalition operates on two levels, I would agree with

Menzies Campbell, at Cabinet level it works extremely well. A right up

until the time at which you left? Yes. I would argue it is working

now as well. I think there is a responsible and mature attitude.

Two parties came together in the interests of the country and they

have tried to put together a blueprint for government which will

not only heal the economy but will spread some fairness and

responsibility and equality. I think lots of those goals have been

achieved. However, just listening to the Commons, I think it is

different for the pupils in the classroom. I think the prefects

have one aspect of the coalition right, I think the pupils in the

classroom are a bit fractious and therefore you see the turmoil among

some backbenchers. Would you agree the leaders, David Cameron,

particularly, in your case, have lost touch with grassroots and MPs?

I think it is very important to keep in touch with the backbenchers,

I probably was not as good as I ought to have been myself. I

remember the Major government when I was a minister, we spent a lot of

time talking to backbenchers. Every Secretary of State when I was first

elected in 92 had groups of backbenchers in and was really

across their subject and took us through each operation of each

department of state. It works at the top is the basis of what Cheryl

is saying, because there is a need for government to work, and perhaps

for the Lib Dems it is their first time in government, but the parties

have become disillusioned? I think in the second half of the coalition,

the Liberal Democrats, and Menzies will know more about this than I,

would like to put water between themselves and the Government. My

feeling is that Nick Clegg will not make it as leader of the Liberal

Democrats to the next election. I think he will stand down about the

year beforehand. I think he will remain Deputy Prime Minister. I

would be surprised if he even contest the seat for Parliament at

the next election. The answer is no to all three of those. I talked to

Nick Clegg from time to time, I see nothing but somebody determined to

to see this through, just as the coalition must be determined to see

through, particularly the economic programme. Because he is happy?

Because it is his duty. Some politicians, and three, I think, in

this studio, went into politics out of a sense of duty. Having been

elected they felt compelled to continue to discharge their duty

and responsibilities, that is how Nick Clegg sees it. Has he changed?

You know him. It has been difficult for him at the beginning but also

recently with constitutional reform, has he changed as a person and a

leader? Is he more tough? He has been through fire and brimstone.

Leadership is very difficult. And Minister of a coalition is even

more difficult. And leader as the Deputy Prime Minister of a

coalition government at a party who has not had any responsibilities

for 80 years is very difficult. I think he is different. Is the

relationship different with David Cameron? Probably less affectionate,

because government is hard and there are difficult decisions to

take. People disagree. People often say political parties are like

coalitions, but coalitions are like political parties. There are

different strains and strands of I think Nick is looking more

towards the position in his party. He asked to play towards the

Liberal Democrats Gallery, and I think politicians must remember

their party members and what they think. Having observed them, I

think it is David Cameron who has grown. AC Moore sure footed nurse

and it is David Cameron who has have to make some brave decisions

in this coalition. Do you agree? he is as sure footed as that, why

did he have so many difficulties this week over the issue of Europe?

Certainly a lot of the people on the back benches on the

conservative side seemed to believe it. As far as Nick Clegg is

concerned, of course it has been a baptism but he has learned a

tremendous amount and not only to manage his party but to manage his

role in government. I should make clear I am not predicting he will

stand down as deputy prime minister, but I think as leader of Lib Dems.

I would agree that. I think the pact is between the men at the top

and if Nick Clegg can't carry his party with him, I think he will

stay there as Deputy Prime Minister but I do think the problems in

Europe are inherent in our party. am they being dealt with properly?

There is a long way to go. I was reliving Maastricht again and I

would support the government because I don't want to see David

Cameron with one hand tied behind his back but there are temptations.

Labour attempted some of our less mature backbenchers and that caused

the problem. I was reliving Mrs Thatcher saying no, no, no, and

that was the straw that finally broke the back. Cuckoo Europe is

where we do need to do some work because the Conservative Party and

the majority of our members want the deal with Europe renegotiated,

and that is where I stand and my colleagues stand. It is the

question of how we do it and how we forge the new relationship with

Europe because we don't want to go further into a political union.

but you don't achieve influence in Europe so long as you are semi-

detached. One of the casualties of last week is that David Cameron

formed an alliance with Germany, with France, Finland and the

Netherlands, and as a result of the so-called mandate he has been given

by his party, he will have to Renee gone that alliance which is deeply

damaging in the short term and long term. The charges of incompetence

has been levelled at the government. How do you change that perception?

A just because the opposition says it, doesn't mean to say it is right,

as Chris Mullin knows! How do you change that perception when there

have been arguments about wind farms, on Trident, and on Europe.

Wait a minute. When Tony Blair determined to make a decision on

Trident, about 150 Labour MPs voted against him. When it came to Iraq,

there were about 150 Labour MPs who voted against that. Are you saying

you are unified on those issues? Some mistakes have been made, and

admitting to them is first and foremost what should be done. All

of those accidents make it more possible that we may face a Labour

government and it is the last thing this country needs. The two

consecutive substantial rises in the pension fund Labour's offer of

25p to pensioners when Gordon Brown was Chancellor of the Exchequer.

low blow there. In fact pensions did go up very substantially under

the last government. On Europe, it is an altogether different league

from some of the other difficulties we have mentioned. It is the kind

of fault line that runs through the Tory party and it does threaten the

coalition. It threatens their credibility with the electorate.

have been told we have spent far too much time, but stay here.

Coalition means tangling with a range of thorny issues, none more

thorny than boundary issues and reducing the amount of MPs in the

Commons. With opposition to the changes building, it was announced

yesterday the Lords vote on the matter would be dropped. The

Tories' Lord Strathclyde, the leader of the House of Lords, said

senior members of the government needed to discuss the issues before

Pearce could hold the vote. That is what he's had to say. All of those

involved need time to reflect before this House is invited to

make a decision on the amendments all its merits. It will not

surprise the house that those involved include senior members of

the government, and until their discussions are concluded the

electoral administration bill will not proceed further in committee.

This House should be considering the amendment itself and the issues

raised by the amendment but it is not. Instead, in a move we believe

to be unprecedented, the government has pulled the bill from the order

paper. Why? We have heard no satisfactory explanation. I have

heard the actual reason is that time could not be found for the

Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister to meet to consider the

issues. My Lords, even if that is the case, it is not a sufficient

explanation. Not sufficient for the workings of government, but

absolutely not sufficient for the relationship between the executive

and the legislature. Parliament is not applied in of government. In

particular, Parliament is not the plaything of a political party in

trouble. That was yesterday in the House of

Lords. What is going on exactly? There is a Labour amendment which

would have the effect of kicking the whole issue of boundary changes

in to 2018. That is an amendment Liberal Democrats peers wish to

support, and there is substantial crossbench support as well. The

government is committed to - the Conservative Party of the

government - is committed to boundary changes. After reforms by

the Labour Party and Tory rebels, Nick Clegg said, OK, we will not

vote for boundary changes. Another point, quite a few Conservative MPs

are not keen, particularly the new intake who find themselves out.

government can't keep delaying this Up hoping the government will

deliver. Some seats have very few people. They can't because the

Liberal Democrats and Labour will vote together to make sure it

doesn't happen. I think negotiations are still going on.

there any chance the Lib Dems could be talked around? I find it

difficult to perceive any circumstances in which Nick Clegg

would depart from what he said publicly. It is right there should

be a conversation between the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime

Minister about any situation which arises. I am not privy to the

inside workings of this but it would be difficult for Nick Clegg

to change his position. I think we will see this pushed into long

grass, but I don't think it has gone off the agenda for the Prime

Minister, for the party, or the electorate. We need to reduce the

size of the government, and did you meet the coalition agreement...

Dems are... It is not going to happen? No, boundary changes Irish

extremely destructive and they are trying to slide an extra one threw

him five years rather than every 10 years. Will that be the end of the

coalition? No, and it is not unknown for governments to

manipulate boundary changes. It is not unusual for governments to do

so. Thank you very much. If you are a keen scholar of Chris Mullin is'

diaries and novels, perhaps you fancy a slice of it glamorous life

of the MP, but how do you get on the ballot paper in the first

place? Before you can be elected as an MP, you have to be selective as

a PPC, a prospective parliamentary candidate. Becoming one of them is

very difficult. For the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, you first

have to get past a set of tests designed by this psychologist.

might have for example a group exercise looking at how people

interact, how they solve problems. There would be an interview which

is looking at how you can provide evidence. One thing MPs have to do

is prioritised and analyse information quickly so we looked at

that. You might have an in-tray exercise, dilemmas, how you would

solve problems. Past them and you are on to the approved candidate

list. Labour miss out that step. Vanities roughly the same process -

apply for a seat when it becomes vacant, hope they do not get rid of

your application. Then repeat, often at different ends of the

country, until you get selected. This man coaches Tory wannabes who

want to get into Westminster. body knows everybody and your

reputation starts from when you become an activist. Whatever you

say in your answers, people will check. There was a lot of informal

vetting that goes on. Good is quite a gruelling process, isn't it?

is a tough process, ending with a tough job. At to address complaints

that this is biased towards a certain kind of go-getter, Ed

Miliband has launched a programme where people get training and

coaching to help them through the process. To make it seem more

transparent, the Tories experimented by selecting Sarah

Wollaston as they can do to through an open primary where the public

would vote as well. Before you say it isn't this a bit technical?

Remember this, around half of constituencies are considered safe

seats which means the local party members are not just selecting

their candidate, they are really picking your MP.

Chris Mullin, you have been there, done that, got the T-shirt. Is it

more technical these days in terms of getting selected? He certainly

seems like that from the description given there, but you

can never stop parties doing what they want to do in the end.

thought there was more direction now with a list candidates?

there have always been attempt by the machine to impose. The Tories

had there A-list, Labour has a certain Inside Track as anybody

noticed. The have parachuted candidates in, haven't they? There

have been cases when the Chancellor of the Exchequer have sat ringing

round in order to get an individual selected. The thing that has

happened is they are getting much younger than they were in my day.

Is that a good thing? I personally don't think it is. My advice to

people is to go out and do something useful in the world, and

then you can make a greater contribution once you are elected.

It may be the wrong advice because some of these guys get into

Parliament in their late 20s, then they are the leader of their party

by the time they are 38. In fact all three of the present party

leaders were only in Parliament five years before they became the

leaders of other parties. That is a phenomenal change. I have been

looking back at the diaries of the Attlee government and the Macmillan

government and they were so old and tired that they could not cope with

the pressure of government. The Attlee government had been through

the war and they were on their knees. Do you need to be young to

Do you need to be done to deal with the pressures? I don't mind people

getting younger in general, but I think I'd world. How old were you

when you were selected? I was 39, but I was 545 when I became a

minister, which must have raised eyebrows. -- I was 54 off 55.

there are lots more women. Especially on the Labour side, but

not so much with the Tories. Cheryl Gillan told me she was only the 6th

Tory woman to sit in the Cabinet in the history of the Tory party! Is

that not astonishing? The Tories have a problem with women and the

fact that the top public schools still dominate the selection

process. All the parties have a problem with the fact they are all

shrinking in size and less and less people are wanting to become an MP

now, that is why they tried to hold open primaries, in the case of

Sarah Wollaston, for example, but that is unusual. The Tories tried

it in my end of the country and just the usual suspects showed up.

It is decision time for America, will President Obama have another

four years in the White House, or will the Republican challenger Mitt

Romney win the day? On this side of the Atlantic, the elections can

seem confusing - although swing states and electoral colleges. But

fear not, here is Jeremy Vine with a helpful guide of how it works and

what to look out for. Should we remind ourselves of a map

as it was left in the 2008 elections? It looks a bit like a

draw, there is almost as much red as blue. It was a very convincing

victory for Barack Obama, and the reason is the electoral college

vote system. I have put a bobble on each state showing the number of

electoral college votes, California with 55 has the biggest, the

Dakotas have relatively small, they are rural and lightly populated.

Texas has 38, Florida has 29, you have to get above 270 when you add

up the colleges. That is why they have been campaigning in states

which are competitive with the electoral votes on offer. States

like a Colorado, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida and Ohio.

Everyone talks about what -- talks about Ohio, because it seems to

predict the winner time after time after time. This is how the

candidates have been dealing in Ohio. The one thing about this

graph, we get to the third of October and what happens? Romney

suddenly snaps into contention in the first debate, he has been close

ever since. But looking at the graph, it looks like Obama takes

Ohio, and you might say he looks good for a second term.

Florida, Florida is fascinating with so many different voting

groups and a real indicator of how the Democrats are advancing. They

are really, really doing well with Latino voters, single women and

college-educated voters. Look at this, you see the trajectory where

Obama comes through, and there are lots of heavily Republican parts of

Florida, by the way, but the urban parts tend to be democratic. But it

is almost as if Romney suddenly connect with the debate and goes

into the lead. Florida looks a better bet for the Republicans, but

if you see the margin of victory from last time for Obama, Romney

need to take Florida and Ohio and some others in order to overtake

the Democrats. It really looks like quite a big task for the Republican

challenger. Joining me from Washington to give

us the latest is Kim Ghattas from the BBC. Is it too close to call?

Yes, it is a dead heat, especially in national polls. But as Jeremy

said, it is about the electoral colleges. But even in the key

battleground states, sometimes in many of them, it is too close to be

able to tell exactly which way things will go. The key

battleground of judgment is one state that everybody will be

watching. We will start however by watching Virginia. The polls their

close and about 12 hours from now. Fairly soon after that we will be

able to tell whether Obama or Romney have carried that state. If

Obama does, it becomes a lot more difficult for Mr Romney to become

the big day in this race, although not impossible. Them we will all be

looking at Ohio, which is such a key battleground state. Mr Obama

has a small but steady lead which he has had for a bit now. They have

been campaigning like mad, I have just discussed with my guests how

exhausting the process has been. They can't be many undecided voters

left? You look at these men and they seemed so different, and two

of the two different visions for America, are there still undecided

voters? Yes, and they will possibly make up their mind at the last

minute when they go into the polling stations. I already saw

people lining up early this morning, polls are open in DEC and Maryland,

they open at 7am in Virginia, but it has been a frenzied campaign up

until the last minute to try to get every single one of those voters

not only to make up their minds but to come out and vote, that is what

it is really about. Mr Romney is leaving nothing to chance, he is

still campaigning today, he will be going to Cleveland, Ohio, and

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, unheard- of in some countries campaigning

carrying on until election day. But nobody is leaving anything to

chance. It has been exhausting for the two candidates. They looked

quite haggard yesterday, very, very tired. They were starting to repeat

the same speech over and over. You wonder whether it actually still

makes a difference, but it is about getting the boat out. You don't

look haggard, Kim Ghattas! Our election campaigns look pretty

tame compared to those over the pond. We certainly don't spend as

much. Giles has been holed up in the All Star Lanes Diner, someone

has to do it, night and day for the last three months, analysing this

one! Here are his findings. Eight presidential election seize

billions spent on spin and razzmatazz. Balloons and hot air,

whipping up enthusiasm and urging the UN decided to make up their

minds. Are we fired up?! Are you ready to go?

It is the Battle of two big beasts echoing worldwide, even in the

wilds of Kenya. This is Obama, a large black bowl

from the Kenyan town of Kakamega, and this is his opponent, called

What else, Romney. A big beef with an American

presidential election is if you want to flame will your opponent,

you need an army of creative types with video skills who have seen

every clip your opponent has ever screened. It is an ad war, Mad Men

meets the West Wing, literally. There are plenty of steps we can

take. Right now. Right now. Election day, election day, up and

at them! I'm Barack Obama, and I approve this message. If you

thought that was cheeky, you should shouldn't be with just anybody, it

should be a great guy. It is supper uncool to be out and about and

somebody saying, don't vote. That advert really -- really upset some

of the electoral right. But Romney was accused of not liking a big

yellow bird. Big Bird. It's me, Big Bird. Big, yellow, a menace to our

economy. Mitt Romney knows it is not Wall Street you have to worry

about, it is Sesame Street. some adverts have the thrum of

manners. Knock on doors with me! Make phone calls with me! If you

are willing to work with me. If you are willing to work harder. Then I

promise you. I promise a change For sheer scared the bejiminy out

of any Catholic not daring to boot, this one takes some panel beating.

After that one, I half-expected orcs, a wizard and Gollum come out

to discuss which one should rule their more. But Sauron had some

style. # Mitt Romney style.

Well, dear! American election, I'm interested. Moments to make you

laugh, cry, cry laughing, especially when you realise almost

as many as can vote feel like this little girl, who absolutely can't,

but he's very astute for a four year-old. I'm crying about Barack

Obama and Mitt Romney. It will be over soon!

Fancy reducing a four year-old to tears by the Campaign! Two American

expats who have closely followed every twist and turn up with me,

Stacey her large from Republicans Abroad and Karen Robinson from

Democrats Abroad. Have you been reduced to tears? My voice has

certainly been reduced. It has been a long slog. Why has it felt and

been so long and exhausting? Or did we just forget what the last one

was like? The last one was a very long campaign in 2008, on both

sides we had really competitive primaries. We had a competitive

Republican primary on this side, which went on. Mitt Romney must be

on his knees by now. In terms of confidence in your man, how

confident are you? Feeling pretty confident. I'm seeing the early

voting figures, the numbers of Republicans voting early, and I

think... What are those figures? significantly from last time, at

25% in some crucial swing states, and Democrat numbers are down. But

we can't underestimate the silent majority sitting at home and going

out to vote. Are you worried? ecstatic about their early voting

figures. Stacey is correct, the Republican figures are up from last

time, so full credit from -- to Romney. McCain had a poor record.

But Democrats are massively outnumber Republicans in terms of

early boat numbers, particularly in the critical states like Ohio and

Iowa. But they are significantly down from last time. The numbers

are down across the board, but if you look at the total number of

votes cast by Democrats early, compared to by republicans, we are

still in a lead and we are picking up a significant lead in the

National Popular polls. For a little while it was neck-and-neck.

Just over the last couple of days we have seen movements of about two

points in the direction of the President. It depends on the poll.

The Gallup poll had Romney winning. I think with the Poles being as

tight as they are in the swing states and nationally, it plays in

the favour of the opponent -- I think with the polls being as tight.

What is the point in the last few days of saying the same thing again

and again and again? It is motivating people to get out and

vote, and reminding them that you cannot make any of these changes we

have been talking about without casting a ballot. It is getting

people out there, motivating. We have seen that in those key swing

states, Ohio, Florida, Iowa, the Romney campaign team has been in

touch with more people than the Democrats. That is what happened in

2000 and in 2004, when Bush won Ohio. I think it has been negative,

that is how it has been betrayed over a year, would you agree?

think the President has still run a positive campaign... Really?!

People know who the president is and what he stands for, it was very

important that we make very clear - - that they make very clear what

Mitt Romney stands for, he has not made it clear. He has been quite

Jupiter to us. I couldn't disagree more. -- he has been quite

duplicitous. We like deja .com! The President has run extremely

negative campaign. The fact he has been trying to attack Mitt Romney

shows he has not had the record he is able to run and, he has gone out

to say these are the improvements we made, this is how it will be

better in four years. Let me pick up on that, personally I am

incredibly proud of the President's record. We have moved forward, the

economy is improving, we have had 32 statements of economic growth,

the economy is picking up, we have seen passage of major healthcare

reform, which has been an ambition of Americans for a long time. If

you were running purely on his record I think there would be an

enormous reason to be very excited. We have one in six Americans in

poverty, median incomes down by $4,000 a year and we have 47... For

every one person with the job, 15 Do you think Romney has come from

behind to possibly snatch this election question cooker cooker has

had to change his views. I worked on Mitt Romney in Massachusetts and

there are things you do have to be where it is a federal system and

Mitt Romney is talking about giving the States the ability to manage

these programmes and put them in place and that is the clear

difference. That is pragmatic politics, playing to a different

audience. When Stacey talks about Mitt Romney wanting to take away

the federal health care so that it can be delivered on a state basis,

what he means is that if elected he is promising that on day one he

will immediately remove health care from millions of Americans who

already have read, including people in Massachusetts who are currently

benefiting from Mitt Romney's health care plan. If he became

President, do you think he would not do a lot of the things he has

said on this campaign, on Medicare and the foreign policy? I think he

would, and you have to look at the wider race. As nice as it is to win

the presidential race, it is more important to win the house. It is

an important point. If Obama wins, will he be allowed to govern? The

Republicans said last time his Kabul we will make sure he can't

govern. A if he comes in, he has to be willing to compromise. He has

been given partisan proposals and he has not taking anything up. He

has not shown the ability to compromise. How does he break the

deadlock? That is an excellent question, and looking at Congress,

going into this election Democrats were convinced we would lose the

Senate. The Republicans put up a lot of extreme unpopular candidates

and it now looks like we will be gaining seats in the Senate. The

Republicans are moving backwards. am so sorry - I have to finish, but

you are coming back. David Dimbleby will be in Washington to host the

US Election Special on BBC One at 11:35pm tonight and Stacey and

Karen will be back with us this time tomorrow to discuss the

results. To be continued. It is a dream to work on a programme like

this, but believe it or not, some people find our guests a bit scary.

A survey like this has found that George Osborne tops a list of

celebrities people have nightmares about. He was not the only

politician named. In a moment we will discuss whether being the

stuff of nightmares is better than being ignored by the electorate,

but first they met see who else is in the fight Club. There is some

flash photography coming up. -- # The monster mash # It's a

After that scary lot, let's seek the safety of Quentin Letts. Have

you ever had nightmares about a politician? Two nights ago, Tony

Blair. I was walking on May Hill in Gloucestershire, and suddenly Tony

Blair arrived and started hitting golf balls at me. What does that

mean? If I have not got a clue. What about you - ever had

nightmares about a politician? not that I can recall. Quentin once

described me as a deck chair that looked like it had been left out

all night, which I thought was quite good. They used to be a

forceful Tory old battle axe, and Keith Joseph always looked like the

kind of man who might prole up on you in your bad moments. There

don't appear on the list. George Osborne, Gordon Brown, Katie Price,

Ann Widdecombe, Alex Ferguson, Wayne Rooney, Marilyn Manson, and

Ed Balls. Of them, who do you think is the most nightmarish? It is the

ones who have been Chancellor, dipping their hands into your

wallet. None of the women on the list? And Widdecombe in her home

Office days may have put the frighteners on a few people.

Price, she is the glamour model, isn't she? Are you sure this is

nightmares or a different kind of dream?

We don't want to know about those dreams! We have one person saying I

have nightmares every night about Gordon Brown, but the one about

George Bush in hell is worse. George Osborne reminds me of the

joker from that man. That is your theory, the Chancellor's. Then we

have got Beverley, who says George Osborne, Eric Pickles... Jacob

Rees-Mogg... I could go on, but starting to feel ill. Michael

Howard, by far the scariest. these all Labour contributors you

have on Twitter? They do sound like they have an agenda. You are right.

What about some more Labour ones? It does come down to the thing that

in dreams, a lot of people dream about the Queen, being naked at

Buckingham Palace. Also in a crowd, isn't that a common thing? He does

show you politicians do have an influence over one's psyche and it

is troubling. Isn't it better to be in someone's nightmare than

ignored? That's is the worst thing, popping out press releases and

nobody even notices. Yes, but there must, point that which being in

people's nightmares would prevent you from being an attractive

proposition. Now, hold those thoughts for a moment. We will find

out the answer to the quiz. The question was, which political

figure is often the jungle? Michael Heseltine, George Osborne, Nadine

Dorries, or Jacob Rees-Mogg? suspect the correct answer is

Nadine Dorries. I would have thought there will be a few people

in her own party hoping she will not return. I think this is a pity.

My natural reaction is that she is terrific box office for sketch

writers. She brings a refreshing approach to the Commons. You will

miss her. Yes, but there is a broader point that we want

politicians who are exciting, but bring the voice of the constituency.

I think she is a gift to sketch writers, I don't dispute that for a

moment. She is different. I feel she will reduce herself. Why has

she gone to join this list of celebrities in Australia? What

about her constituents? Sarah Wollaston said she should resign.

She is a colleague, not a constituent. She is saying that she

should resign. There is that view. I wish she would reconsider event

at this late minute because she will diminish her currency as a

politician and that is a pity because she has a lot to contribute.

I have heard she said she is going out there to speak politics to an

audience that would have not otherwise heard it. Constituents

are holding an emergency meeting tonight following reports their

politician is going on to I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here!.

be a parliamentarian is actually a really important thing in our

society and to be a celebrity is a less important thing. The traffic

is the wrong way here, and she is underselling herself. A bit of

dignity is required. I agree with Quentin, having held some minority

positions myself in my own party, that just as she speaks up in

public out of line with the whip, that is in her favour, but doing

this defeat of an elective or sensitive and I would have thought

the constituency may have something to say about that. On that note,

thank you for coming on to the programme. Now to a story that has

dominated headlines recently. The Home Secretary Theresa May has been

making a statement in the Commons outlining the details of a new

investigation into child abuse scandal in North Wales here is what

she had cooker at least has invited Keith Bristow, the director general

of the crime agency to assess the allegations recently received to

review the historic police investigations and investigate any

fresh allegations reported to the police into the alleged historic

abuse in North Wales care homes. will lead a team of officers from

the organised crime agency, other investigative assets as necessary,

and the child exploitation and Online Protection Centre who will

act as the single point of contact for fresh referrals relating to

historic abuse in North Wales care homes. A deputy political editor

was listening to the statement and he joins me now. The government has

for a pretty swiftly upon it is a would be fines have been around for

some time, but clearly the government feels the need to move

swiftly on this. They are all aware of the way the BBC responded to

allocate cooker and that is why Theresa May spent a large part of

last night making this investigation become a reality. We

are talking about the allegations relating to North Wales, just

topping up it and the investigation in those days. What was interesting

was not just Yvette Cooper for the Labour Party but also Tim Lawton

the Conservative saying there are too many investigations here now.

We need to have won over arching investigation that looks at Jimmy

Savile, the police, and Paul the other investigations. Is there

cross party support for that the you? Because otherwise there is

just too much going on, too many people involved in too many

investigations? No, the government view is to let the investigations

do their work. They don't rule out a single inquiry once the other

inquiries have done their work. you checks showed that the

government can do anything else but to launch an inquiry, even, they're

doing the right thing, but I do think we should be very careful

cooking cuckoo Cox. We are talking about allegations which occurred a

very long time ago. At on that note, thank you for bringing the latest.