07/11/2012 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 07/11/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Morning, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics. I have never been


more hopeful about our future. I have never been more hopeful about


America. And I ask you to sustain that hope. Four more years for


Obama as he sweeps to to victory in the US presidential elections. The


defeated Mitt Romney calls for an end to political bickering. He will


be lucky. Europe's most powerful woman is on


her way to Downing Street to knock out an agreement on the EU budget.


Will they make any progress? We have elections closer to home


next Thursday, not quite as exciting, but voters in England and


Wales will choose their Police and Crime Commissioners, we will tell


you what's what. I am an MP, get me off the


backbenches. As she touches down down under, Nadine Dorries is


suspended by the Chief Whip. With us today for 90 minutes of the


finest in public service broadcasting available on this side


of the Atlantic are - think of them of the Romney and Obama of British


politics. Caroline Flint and Damien Green. Welcome to you both. First


the main story, perhaps even the year, Barack Obama has been re-


elected as President of the United States of America. You have heard a


lot about electoral colleges and swing states over the last few days,


here are the latest results as they stand. With all states having


declared, except for Florida, keeping an eye on that one, Barack


Obama has 303 electoral college votes, compared to Mitt Romney's


206. He won almost all of the crucial


swing states, including Ohio. That state's 18 votes fell in the


President's favour and took him across the winning line. There were


congressional elections, as well. The results didn't change.


The Democrats keep control of the Senate on the latest figures. They


returned 51 Senators compared to the Republicans' 45 and two two


independents. The house of representives the Republicans still


hold the majority. The US networks declared Mr Obama


the winner around 4.30am our time but it was almost 6.00am UK time


before Governor Romney conceded defeat. Later President Obama


addressed supporters in his home town of Chicago. Both men looking


for a more bipartisan future, though they always say this sort of


thing at this time. I have just called President Obama to


congratulate him on his victory, his supporters and his campaign


also deserve contkwrat -- congratulations. I wish all of them


well, but particularly the President, the First Lady and their


daughters. This is a time of great challenges for America and I pray


that the President will be successful in guiding our nation.


The nation, as you know, is at a critical point, at a time like this


we can't risk partisan bickering and political posturing, we have to


do the people's work and citizens have to rise to the occasion.


the weeks ahead I also look forward to sitting down with Governor


Romney to talk about where we can work together to move this country


forward. We will disagree, sometimes fiercely about how to get


there, as it has for more than two centuries, progress will come in


fits and starts. It's not always a straight line, it's not always a


smooth path. By itself the recognition that we have common


hopes and dreams won't end all the gridlock or solve all our problems


or substitute for the pain-staking work of building consensus and


making the difficult compromises needed to move this country forward.


But that common bond is where we must begin. Our economy is


recovering, a decade of war is ending. A long campaign is now over.


President Obama there. Joining us now from Washington is our


correspondent Kim Ghattas. In the final weeks of the campaign


everybody was saying it was just too close to call. In the end,


President Obama won really pretty comfortably. What happened? Well,


several things happened, including a superstorm last week which really


gave President Obama an opportunity to remind the American people of


his style of leadership. He was out there during - or after the storm


in the north-east of the United States, being presidential, instead


of campaigning and Mitt Romney was out of the picture for a few days.


Of course, that's not what helped him win the election but it helped


him edge forward in those polls. Then, a fantastic political machine.


President Obama in his victory speech himself described it as


possibly the best political team in political history and he is


probably right. Then you have the issues. You have women and you have


the anti-immigration policies of the Republicans. Their policies on


women, their positions on women are also very alienating so those two


issues were really detrimental when it comes to getting the vote out


for Republicans. Women came out in droves for Obama. And Latinos, 69%


of them voted for Mr Obama. Then you have the economy. It was


supposed to be Mr Obama's weak point. In the end, in some strange


way it may have been one of his strong points because we were


seeing the beginnings of a recovery and people probably thought we


better keep with this steady hand. Briefly, ironically after what's


been dubbed a bitter and negative campaign, calls from all sides for


a more bipartisan approach. Is that wishful thinking? It's the classy


thing to say when you have lost and you have just won and certainly


President Obama is going to try to reach across the the aisle and Mitt


Romney may think this is possible and may feel himself to be in a


compromising mood but you have to remember that the popular vote is


very much split down the middle. This is not a nation that has come


together, healed divisions and overwhelmingly elected Mr Obama. He


has the majority with the electoral votes but does not have an


overwhelming mandate from the people. So there is still going to


be opposition against his policies down the line, particularly because


as you mentioned, the House of Representatives is still dominated


by Republicans, as well. Thank you. Not everybody said it was too close


to call, for the record. Who said it wasn't too close to call?


need to dwell on that. A pat on the back!


It was too close to call in the popular vote, but the electoral


college vote it was always clear Mr Obama had a substantial majority


and that's what happened on the night. The popular votes close,


only a couple of million in it, but Mr Obama has a majority of over 100


in the electoral college because he picks up the big states with the


big electoral college votes and Mr Romney didn't get any of the swing


states, bar north Carolina, so far. They lost a seat in Massachusetts,


a state Mr Romney had once before Governor of. Damien, Mr Obama is


still in the White House. Democrats still have the Senate. What's


changed? Well, not a lot in some ways. If we are drawing lessons


from Britain and inevitably it's always slightly artificial to do


that, but I take heart from the lesson that even in difficult


economic times governments that are seen to be gripping the economic


issue and tackling it get re- elected. That heartens me. If you


look at the Republican side, what the Republicans didn't get was -


they got almost no black votes, they got few his pan I can votes, -


- Hispanic votes. They got only a minority of female votes, and among


young college educated women they were way back. If you look at the


Conservatives in Britain you are in an equivalent place, almost no


black votes, no Asian votes, and you are bad among women votes.


That's an exageation -- exaggeration. You are not good in


these categories. There is a warning, I suspect Mitt Romney lost


this election, not during the general campaign, but actually


during the primaries where he tacked too far to his own party's


slightly wilder fringes. People didn't forget that. I think the


lesson for my party, the Conservative Party, is precisely,


keep doing what David Cameron has always done, which is reach out


beyond the base and issues which are difficult, which he has taken


on, like overseas aid where there is criticism from within the party,


stick to it, actually it's not just the right thing to do, it's the


right thing to do politically, as well. We have a clip of the Prime


Minister reacting to Mr Obama's re- election.


I would like to congratulate Barack Obama on his re-election. I have


really enjoyed working with him over these last few years and I


look forward to working with him again. There's so many things that


we need to do. We need to kick- start the world economy and I want


to see an EU-US trade deal, in Jordan I am hearing appalling


stories of what's happened in Syria and one of the the first things I


want to talk about is how we must do more to try to solve this crisis.


It's Barack now! My mate, says Mr Cameron. Speaking there in Jordan.


Caroline Flint, the danger for Labour, looking at this is that if


you are the incumbent, trajectory is everything. The economy is still


in trouble but it seems to be getting better, living standards


are beginning to rise again. Now the coalition, particularly the


Conservatives, that's what they'll be saying come the next election.


It's been tough, it's still difficult, but it's getting better.


Give us another chance. I think that's an obvious thing that Damien


and the Conservatives are going to say. I would counterthat to say


this, first of all, Barack Obama has created a massive injection of


investment into the economy, I think I am right in saying they've


had 32 consecutive months of job growth. The job growth is not as


good as Britain's. It's a consistent trend for them. In my


own area, energy, he has taken, you know, the leadership to say we need


to invest in green technologies, we need to invest in low carbon. That


is helping... Can I just say, the biggest decision he has taken is to


say let's invest in shale gas, is Labour in favour of that? There are


environmental considerations to consider, if it's viable, let's


look at that. The truth is he has said that but he's also said about


investing in other low carbon, much more low carbon than shale gas.


Last week we saw in this country how all over the place the


coalition are on that issue. He is also someone for whom the American


public believe that he is in touch with their concerns and actually


Americans saying overwhelmingly compared to Mitt Romney that he is


actually understands the concerns of those people who are struggling


and poorer. He has advocated tax cuts for the very rich, for example.


Mitt Romney was advocating to actually tax cuts for the rich,


Obama was saying no to tax cuts for the rich, these are dividing lines


that illustrated here in terms of actually David Cameron being more


of a Mitt Romney candidate than an Obama candidate. David Cameron's a


Mitt Romney? I am saying... Miliband is Barack Obama? David


Cameron has supported tax cuts for the very rich. There are people in


this country who say he is out of touch and not in touch... The rate


he's cut is back to is 5% higher than it was for the whole of


Labour's 13 years in pow sneer we are going to see next year people...


Tax on the rich is higher under Labour. We know from organisations


that have said the budgets have put in by this Government are


regressive and not fair. political editor said to me last


night, who is close to the coalition, if there had been a


polling booth in Downing Street it would have been a land landslide


for Obama? In 2008 I went to one of the election night parties and


people were shocked to find a Conservative MP handing out pins at


the door and I was wearing an Obama one. This time? Absolutely, Wye


have voted for Obama. A few of your side campaigning for Mitt Romney as


well. Who was? I have seen Rob Wilson on Twitter this morning


saying this is, four more years where things aren't going to get


done. You said Conservatives were campaigning for Obama, who was?


understand people were out there supporting it. Who? I can't say the


name. You are making an accusation but haven't got a name. You can see


from Twitter this morning there were Conservative MPs supporting


Mitt Romney. It's different from campaigning.


It's the first time in 40 years that both candidates on a ticket


lost their states? I didn't, I do know. Massachusetts and Wisconsin


went. They did. Trivial knowledge. President Obama


will be hoping for a more favourable global economic backdrop


during his next term as President. The eurozone crisis has not gone


away and this evening Angela Merkel flies into London to try to break


the impasse over the the EU budget with David Cameron. The EU wants a


6% increase in the budget over 7 years. David Cameron has called for


an increase only in line with inflation. But last week his own


MPs rebelled on the issue demanding a complete freeze. One of those


rebels, Mark Reckless is on College Green. Welcome to the programme.


What do you want David Cameron to We want a cut in the EU budget,


just as we are seeing cuts in domestic budgets across the country.


I would like David Cameron to welcome Angela Merkel to Britain,


but there's clearly been a parting of the ways. While you expect


Germany wants a cut in the budget, given that it always pays in more,


the reality is they are so deep into the euro they're prepared to


pay higher out into the EU budget and in this country our Parliament


and our people are not. Are you expecting a clash between the two,


since there's been a parting of the ways? The newspaper headlines say


it all, "Discord over the EU budget." And, "Merkel threatens


Cameron with a clash.". It will be difficult to reach agreement on the


EU budget. The two countries have a lot of interests in common. Germany


sells 75 billion euros of goods to us every year and we need to see a


relationship with Germany where it's a supporter and friendly


relationship, but one where we trade freely, but where this


country governs ourselves. What can David Cameron to move Angela


Merkel? What should he threaten her with? I think he should reassure


her that whatever happens in terms of the budget, however much Britain


is unable to go along with the EU and the way Germany wants to take


that, we want to remain on friendly terms with Germany and there should


be a free trade arrangement between Britain and the EU, just as EU --


the EU has with Switzerland and others. It would be easier to do


that outside of the structures of the EU so we are not always getting


in Germany's way and stopping them taking Europe to the political


union they want, but where they are still able to sell us to and we are


still able to sell to them. All the reports say Angela Merkel is fed up


with David Cameron. She holds the cheque book, so she calls the


shots? I think that's right. I think that really supports what


I've just said, that we shouldn't be getting in their way and


stopping them taking the EU in the way they want and always explaining


from the sidelines. We should be better off as an independent


country, trading with Europe and governing ourselves. Germany will


still want to sell their cars to us and we'll still want to export to


them. The fact that Germany is so powerful within the EU is a good


thing, because they have a strong interest in negotiating a free


trade deal with Britain and we would be better off with that trade


relationship, but taking our own decisions for us in our Parliament.


Thank you. David Cameron's flying back from


Jordan, Angela Merkel is coming in from Berlin. They'll dine tonight


at Downing Street. I'm sure it will be very cosy. To find out what


might happen we are joined from Berlin by the German MP Ralph


BrinkHauss. David Cameron is going to say to Mrs Merkel tonight that


he wants a real-term freeze on the EU budget. What will Mrs Merkel say


in reply? So I guess that is a question of budget. It's not a main


issue. Regarding the future of Europe, we are concerned about what


Mr Reckless said some minutes ago, that there is a sway from the UA.


This is a tragedy for the political and economic union. Do you think


that will happen? Do you see Britain is becoming increasingly


semi-detached from Europe? What we see is that we are separating,


because the attitude from many politicians of the UK is that we


want to have only a market union, a single market. But what we see is


we also have to have a political union and this is really a main


point. To add something to it, you cannot be a member of a single


market club without paying the membership fee. This is the


attitude of Mr Reckless and it will not work. Is it reaching the stage


where Britain is now clearly suck a drag on the European Union doing


what it wants to do, the core countries certainly, that it would


be better if Britain was a lot more semi-detached and didn't get in the


way? No, I guess rereally need Britain. We need Britain to balance


the European Union, to balance the peripharals of the country of


southern Europe and the countries of the middle of Europe and of


northern Europe. For this reason it is really a tragedy what is


happening and we have to do everything to keep Britain in the


union. All right. Let me come back to one of the big issues. You


didn't want to talk about it at the start, but one of the big issues in


the British political scene, at a time when Britain is cutting its


public spending and increasing taxes, things are hurting and the


number of police has been cut and cuts in social service budgets and


welfare and so on, the British across the political spectrum are


keen that the European budget shouldn't increase. What is the


German position? So, we have exactly the same attitude, so


members of German Parliament, at at least from me party, also want to


freeze the budget. There is no question about it, but it's not the


time to have all the vetoes and say no. It's a time for compromise, so


what we are facing is the situation where we have a big package and one


point in this package is the budget and we also have another issue in


this package, it's the bail-out question and it's the question of


the future of a common Europe. We have to arrange a compromise and at


the end of the day we need on the one hand the UK and on the other,


for example, Italy and France. This is the aim of Angela Merkel, to


analyse this compromise. But even the German Foreign Secretary says


that the EU budget is a nonsense, subsidies going to day spas and


romantic hotels and the Common Agricultural Policy, which is a


backward-looking 20th century invention, dominates the spending


of the budget. What do you say? This is absolutely true, but we


have to see the budget as a process. What we want to have in the future


is a budget to organise growth. Not to organise old-fashioned parts of


the economy. You haven't got that. You have got an old-fashioned


budget and if anything, there will be cuts in research and development


and cuts in funds going to eastern Europe, but the French and the


inefficient German farmers will still get the CAP? I do not think


that the German farmers are inefficient. I guess we have to see


what German farmers are doing. was trying to provoke you. It is


very rural, so I have to complain about that! It's absolutely true,


that we have to improve this budget. This is the process and we need the


support of the UK within this process and without the support of


the UK within the process we get into a situation or we will get


into the situation as if we have to rely on the countries and they will


be in the south of Europe and these countries want to have the old-


fashioned budget as you have addressed it. Stick with us. I want


to bring in Damian Green, who is a member of the Conservative Party in


the coalition government. What do you say to our friend from Germany


that you are just getting more and more distant. You are not a player


and you're on the margins and edges and he regrets that? I would say


first that the person who speaks not just for the Government but for


the party is David Cameron on this, rather than Mark Reckless and David


Cameron is trying to do things that, as ralph has just said, he should


freeze. He said he would like to, but he's prepared to compromise.


David Cameron will say he'll use the veto if there's not a freeze.


That is a sensible position. Unless you actually put some lines down


then you do just get the drift that Europe too often falls into.


Actually saying at this time, actually increasing spending in


ways that may well not be constructive, is not a sense ill-


thing for Europe. It's obviously not for sensible for us in Britain


to contribute, but it's less sensible for Germany, that


contributes even more. Labour doesn't want to compromise along


the lines that Mr Brinkhaus is presenting, so no compromise for


you. That's correct. We voted on that in July as well, on a moction.


-- a motion. We do believe that a cross -- across the situation, we


have all of us are tightening our belts and reduce our budgets and


there's nothing wrong at this point in time in expecting the same of


the EU. I think part of the problem for David Cameron is going back to


when he went to the meeting and said shaking the veto and we were


left outside of discussions, he hasn't created the diplomatic


negotiation that was necessary for him to be in a better position to


ask for a real-terms cut and that is a shame. I'm going to give you


the final word. At a time in continental Europe, particularly in


Greece, Italy, Spain, now France hol hol hol has said this is the --


Francois Hollande has said this is the most austere budget in Paris,


where is there not a bigger head of steam in Europe for a freeze on the


European budget, or even a cut in the budget when national budgets


are being slashed? I guess because this is not the main question. We


are talking about a banking union. We are talking about a lot of


regulation stuff. We are talking about bail-out questions or about


the debt crisis and so this issue of the budget is not the main point


in political discussions. I regret this, because I am absolutely in


the same position as most of my friends in the UK, that we really


have to freeze the budget or at least modernise it and so the final


word of my side is please we need your support. Thank you very much.


We do a programme called Politics Europe it's on every -- once a


month every Friday, I hope you'll join us on that. Now, are you a


discontented member of Parliament, trying to get noticed on the


backbenches? Showing off your knowledge about the price of basic


food stubgz, bred, -- bread, eggs, milk perhaps? We know what you need


to do to brighten up your day, a contest in which you can prove your


worth and we have just the thing and you don't need to embarrass


yourself in the Australian jungle to win this one. The Daily Politics


mug, or drink the kangaroo urine it contains. I don't know whose mug


that got into. Sorry about that! It was yours then! We'll see if you


can remember when this happened. # A tingle up and down the spine...


Arch arch I'm ready, willing and able... # Here you see the figure


has been exceeded, so I can confirm that there will be a Conservative


government. # You lay your cards on the table


and tell me what you plan to do... # Everybody's doing it, the mambo


rock... # Hash


Fly me to the moon and let me play upon the stars... # It gives me


great pleasure to inaugurate this terminal and to name this building


in which we are now standing the And to be in with a chance of


winning that mug, without the kangaroo urine in it, send your


answer to our special e-mail address: If they want the kangaroo


stuff they can have it. No. It's coming up to midday here. We'll see


Big Ben behind us. There it is. Quite a nice, sunny day, but crisp


and cold. The B division on Prime Minister's questions, but not here,


we have the A team. I'm going to walk off. Here today, gone tomorrow.


Go on. I just called you the A team and all I'm getting is abuse. Right,


so we have Harriet Harman and William Hague. Nick Clegg. That


means that the opposition will be questions by which I mean


Conservative backbenchers. It might be interesting. The dynamic today


is less likely to be focused on Nick Clegg, but more on whether


Tory backbenchers choose to use it as a opportunity to talk about


boundaries, which is an argument barely noticed outside Westminster,


but still going on inside the Palace of Westminster or whether


they use the opportunity to try and humiliate and embarrass Nick Clegg,


because one of the striking things earlier in the year and I think


there have been huge consequences for the relationship between Nick


Clegg and the Conservatives on this, was when Tory backbenchers richly


humiliated him on reform of the House of Lords. There are always


quopbs quepbss. -- consequences. It seems to me they are quite restless


and a lot of rebelled and they see Nick Clegg as the problem or part


of the problem on Europe and they have heard his speech last week, in


which he was smearing about a promise wrapped in a Union Jack. He


called it a false promise. Quite tempting to do that, but like all


of us they will be thinking Obama, and know that the Prime Minister is


not there. How will that play out? You have had the results in


everybody's mind and they will overshadow the questions today?


will. Everyone is making calculations about what they mean.


I heard you talking about it in terms of the lessons about women


voters. I think an incumbent as one is a big deal if you are David


Cameron. They've been losing again and again. Somebody won. Straight


Mr Speaker, the House will wish to join me in paying treub pute to the


British soldiers killed in Afghanistan last week. Lieutenant


Edward Drummond Baxter and Lance Corporal Siddhanta Kunwar. Our


condolences are with the friends and family. With remembrance day on


Sunday we are reminded of the remarkable job the armed forces do


to ensure our safety and security. Furthermore, the House will wish to


Black, the Northern Ireland Prison Service officer, who was shot and


killed last Friday. As my honourable friend the Secretary of


State for Northern Ireland said on Friday, we utterly condemn this


cowardly crime. Our thoughts are with David's wife and children at


this distressing time. Mr Speaker, I am sure also the House will want


to join me in congratulating President Obama on his election


victory last night. I suspect that's the only point I will be


cheered today by the benches opposite! We look forward to


continuing the Government's work with him in building a more


prosperous, a more free and stable world. Mr Speaker, this morning I


had meetings with Ministerial colleagues and others in addition


to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later


today. May I fully associate myself with the sincere tribute paid to


the two fallen servicemen and to David Black. It's right this House


pays tribute to those who have fallen in the service of our


country, never more so than in the week of Remembrance Sunday. May I


also say that President Obama will be relieved to get the support of


Mr Speaker, the former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Lord Steven has


said police morale is at national crisis levels. Is he right and why


is that the case? Mr Speaker, as he will also know,


the latest figures show that overall crime is down by 6%. Victim


satisfaction with the police has actually gone up. Response times to


emergency calls has been maintained or improved. Crime has fallen


presipively in his own constituency. When will he congratulate the


police rather than denigrate the police on doing a difficult job


dealing with savings, as everybody has to, whilst keeping the public


safe? Does my honourable friend agree with the German finance


Minister calling on the OECD to tackle the challenge of corporate


tax avoidance by multinational companies?


I am sure everybody will warmly welcome the work the Chancellor is


now doing with the finance department and the finance ministry


in Berlin to crack down on what was industrial-scale tax avoidance by


large corporate entities in this country and elsewhere allowed to go


on unchecked under 13 years of the Labour Government. Harriet Harman.


Mr Speaker, can I join the Deputy Prime Minister in expressing our


deepest condolences for the death of Lieutenant Edward Drummond


Baxter and Lance Lance Corporal Siddhanta Kunwar and at remembrance


services this Sunday we will remember not just those who died in


the two two world wars but all our servicemen and women who have lost


their lives. We accepted our deepest sympathy to the family of


David Black of the Northern Ireland Prison Service, who was killed last


Friday. Mr Speaker, can I also join the Deputy Prime Minister in


offering our warmest contkpwrt hraeugss to the -- congratulations


to the President of the United States, Barack Obama. This morning,


he spoke of his determination to create more jobs, healthcare for


all and tackling the scourge of inequality. We wish him well. Mr


Speaker, Lord Justice Leveson will be publishing his report and


recommendations soon. The Deputy Prime Minister said that provided


Lord Justice Leveson's proposals are proportional and workable, the


Government should implement them and we agree. So when Leveson's


report is published, will the Government convene cross-party


talks to take it forward? We need a strong, free press and we also need


a proper system to protect people from being, as the Prime Minister


said, thrown to the wolves. I agree with much of what she said


about Leveson. If his proposals - we haven't seen them yet, we need


to wait and see, are workable, we should seek to support them. Of


course, that's the whole point of the exercise. I also agree with her


that we should work on a cross- party basis where we can, this is a


major, major issue which escapes the normal kind of tribal point-


scoring in party politics. There are two principles, both of which


she alludes to. Firstly, that we must do everything to ensure that


we maintain a free, raubgous independent press, it's what makes


our democracy in a country what it is. But also make sure that the


vulnerable are protected from abuse by the powerful. That happened on


an unacceptable scale and on too many occasions. We need to be able


to look the parents of Millie Dowler in the eye and say that in


future there will be permanently independent forms of recourse,


sanction and accountability when things go wrong in the future.


I thank him for that answer. We must have a press which reports the


truth without fear or favour. But after all the evidence that came


out during the inquiry, particularly as he says, from the


Dowlers and the McCanns, we simply can't continue with the status quo.


A press complaints system where a publication can simply walk away


from the system and a system that is run by the press. Will the


Deputy Prime Minister agree that a version of business as usual will


simply not do and it would be a derelicion of our duty to allow the


report to be kicked into the long grass? I think everybody accepts


whatever their individual views about this, that business as usual


is simply not acceptable. The status quo has failed and it's


failed over and over again. The model of self-regulation that we


have seen over the last several years has not worked when things


have gone wrong. I agree with the premise upon which we in the


Government actually created the Leveson Inquiry which is to seek


out recommendations for change. That's the whole point of the


Leveson Inquiry. I look forward to all of us having the opportunity to


work together in the public interest to get this right. Now, Mr


Speaker, this week the Deputy Prime Minister sent an e-mail to his


party members. In it he describes the task of finding child care as a


real nightmare. Isn't it clear that cutting the child care element of


tax credits has made that nightmare worse for for parents? I tell you


what I think has helped many people who have to - struggle to make ends


meet and pay for child care is the fact this Government that is


providing 15 hours of free pre- school support and child care to


every three and four-year-old in the country, no Government's done


that before. It's this Government, as of next April, that will be


providing 15 hours of pre-school support and child care to some of


the poorest two-year-olds in the country. No other Government has


done that before. It is this Government that is taking two


million people on low pay out of paying any income tax altogether.


That's the record I am proud of. The Deputy Prime Minister has shown


himself to be completely out of touch. The reality is that many


part-time working parents are having to give up their job because


of the cuts in tax credits and having instead to be on benefits. I


asked him about the child care elements of the tax credits and he


hasn't answered. Why won't he admit the cut he voted for has cost


families �500 and 44,000 families are losing out? If If that wasn't


bad enough they're cutting from Sure Start. In his e-mail he said


he was going to reveal... Order. I know that the Junior Minister in


the back row thinks that her views are relevant, not interested. Order.


I don't want heckling. I want the question to be heard and it will be


heard with courtesy. If the session has to to be extended, so be it.


Thank you. I am beginning to have quite a lot of sympathy with the


honourable member for mid- Bedfordshire. All those rats and


snakes and that was even before she went to the jungle. In the Deputy


Prime Minister's e-mail he said he was going to reveal... Mr Speak.


Order. I have made the point once. I am going to make it only once


more. Mr McCartney, your heckling is not wanted. It doesn't help.


Stop it. And stop it for the remainder of this session and in


the future. I have made the position clear. Harriet Harman.


Thank you, Mr Speaker. In the Deputy Prime Minister's e-mail he


said he was going to reveal what really goes on behind those


Whitehall doors. Perhaps in his next week's instalment he will tell


the truth, under his Government families are worse off, aren't


they? As of next April, because of one of the most radical tax changes


interviewsed by any Government in living memory, 24 million basic


rate taxpayers will be �550 better off. That is a radical change I am


very proud of. I am proud of the fact that three and four-year-olds


are going to benefit from changes, two yearlies are going to -- two


yearlies are -- two-year-olds are going to benefit. Tax credits are


not the best answers, for many families so yes I accept we need to


do more to make child care affordable so more women can get


back into work at an earlier stage, that is what this Government is


setting about doing. While we are also cleaning up the mess left


behind by her. He comes to the despatch box and says one thing but


he does something completely different and he is at it again on


the police. Two years ago, he made a solemn election pledge that the


Lib Dems would provide 3,000 more police officers but there aren't


more. There are 6,800 fewer. It's tuition feess all over again. Why


should anyone trust the Lib Dems on policing? At least they can trust


this side of the House with the economy. Let me explain.


Mr Speaker, let me explain. The Shadow Chancellor's not here...


Order. The right honourable gentleman is in danger of being


heckled noisously and stupidly by both sides. The right honourable


gentleman's answer will be heard, however long it takes. I am used to


getting it from both sides. The Shadow Chancellor is not here but


just to underline the point, last year in a television interview he


denied that there was a structural deficit while Labour was in power.


Last month in another television interview he denied the denial. So


now that we have the Shadow Chancellor briefing against himself


in television interviews, how on earth is anyone going to have faith


that this lot can sort out the economy? People know they can't


trust - people are finding they can't trust this Government object


the -- on the economy because of the Government he supports we have


lost two years of economic growth and borrowing is going up. I don't


know why they're so cheerful about - why they're so cheerful about the


cuts in police numbers. They might not be bothered, but their


constituents certainly are. It's always the same with the Lib Dems,


you can't trust them on tuition fees, on child care, and when it


comes to voting next week people will remember you certainly can't


trust them on the police. What about her promise of no boom and


bust? What happened to that one? This coalition has now been in


power for two and a half years and in those years we have given 24


million basic rate taxpayers an income tax cut and taken two


million people on low pay out of paying income tax cut, we have cut


the deficit by a quarter, reformed welfare. What has she and her


colleagues done? What have they done? Gone on a few marches, denied


any responsibility for the mess we are in and they haven't even filled


in their blank sheet of paper where there should be policies. She might


be hoping for some bad news, to make her point in this country. We


are sorting out the mess she left Moving on, as we must, I would echo


the Deputy Prime Minister's comments on the US election and


congratulate Barack Obama. It's always good to see a leader re-


elected in difficult times. Would the Deputy Prime Minister agree


with me that alongside new and emerging markets, Britain should


seek to strengthen our trade ties with the US through a new trade


deal as we seek to boost our recovery and start one across the


Channel? The lesson of the election in the States is that voters'


memories are longer than members opposite seem to think, because


voters when it comes to casting a vote remember who created the mess


in the first place and who has to do the painstaking, difficult, and


yes, longer-than-we-hoped job. There is so much we need to do to


work together with the new administration. He talks about


trade. I would like to see a new EU and US Free Trade Agreement to


create a spur to economic growth. I was delighted to here also


overnight that the President actually single out his commitment


to dealing with climate change, another area where we can work


together with them. The Deputy Prime Minister tells us that he


supports the living wage and the increase announced on Monday. Can


he tell us how many Lib Dem councils pay the living wage?


she knows, her own leader - THE SPEAKER: The honourable lady has


asked the Deputy Prime Minister. I hope members will have the courtesy


to hear the answer. I certainly want to hear it. The her own leader


has said this is a voluntary process and we need to encourage


employers to pay the living wage. No-one will disagree with the idea


of a living wage, where people are paid a fair wage for a fair day's


work. There's a lot of extra work to be done to make this a reality,


but guess what, it's this Government, because of our tax


changes, that mean that as of next April someone working on the


minimum wage will have their income tax cut by half. The tragic death


of private David Lee Collins while off duty in Cyprus is a devastating


blow to his mother, my constituent and to family and friends in the


constituency and across Manchester. Will the Deputy Prime Minister


assure me that the Foreign Office and the MoD are working with


Cypriot authorities to ensure that the perpetrators are brought to


justice? I think everybody - our hearts go out to the mother and


indeed the other family and friends of David Lee Collins who came to


such an untimely death in the way that he described. It's obviously


right for him to raise this issue on behalf of the family. I can


certainly assure him that the MoD and the Foreign Office will do


everything they can to find out exactly what happened and bring the


perpetrators to justice and I'm sure the Secretary of State for


Defence, who is here, will seek to keep him updated as things esolve.


-- evolve. Crops were destroyed in the devastating floods that


devastated my constituency last month, warnings that we face


another winter of floods. The Government promised to binning


forward plans for a new deal on flood insurance in July. My worried


constituents are still waiting. When will this incompetent and out-


of-touch government actually act on making sure that ordinary families


and businesses are protected from flooding or will in the end this be


another broken promise? She packed in every soundbite into that one!


Mr Speaker, we are involved in very detailed discussions with the


insurance industry, precisely to provide her constituents with the


reassurances that they rightly seek. I only point out that that was a --


an agreement that was never reached in the 13 years in which Labour was


in power. We are doing that work now. It's complicated and it's very


important and we are devoted a lot of attention to it and I hope we'll


be able to make an announce in the not too distant future. Thousands


of people are being killed in Syria each month and the suffering of


their people is immense. Sources within the country say that British


assistance has been slow and that the priority ought to be supporting


the civil administration councils, so that basic water and sewage


services can be connected. What more can the Prime Minister do to


discuss with President Obama to really bring about a solution to


this crisis? I know that the Prime Minister, who is in the region


right now, discusses this on an on- going basis with the President and


will continue to do so. We are the second-largest bilateral donor in


Syria. The circumstances are incredibly difficult for the


delivery of aid and eansance, but we need to make every -- assistance,


but we need to make every effort to accelerate. Any suggestions he


wishes to make to the Department for International Development and


others, about how we do that, will be well received. Official


documents show the health reviews best option is downgrading


Kettering General Hospital's A&E, maternity, children and acute


services and cutting 550 of the 658 beds. How can anyone believe the


Prime Minister when he claims those NHS services are safe in his hands?


I find it extraordinary she persists in this wilful


scaremongering. She plucks out the worst-case, whereas she knows, no


decision has been taken. Instead, of frightening people about what is


happening in the NHS, why doesn't she celebrate the great work of our


nurses and doctors and our other clinicians in the NHS, who are


delivering an absolute world-class service for the people of Kettering,


Corby and elsewhere? Could the Deputy Prime Minister confirm the


Government's commitments to marine renewable energy, especially in the


south-west? I think this is clearly an area where the south-west has a


natural advantage and it's one of the many areas which are reflected


in the diverse approach to renewable energy generation in the


future, because we have to wean ourselves off an overreliance on


one kind of energy and spread our bets more fairly in the future.


only is it Obama day, but it's adoption week. My ten-minute rule


bill in the last sessions called for equalising statutory rights for


leave, pay and allowances between adoptive parents and parents who


are born to them. This can be done by regulations. Could the dep my


Prime Minister ask a minister or two -- Deputy Prime Minister ask a


minister or two to meet with me to eliminate this unfairness? I will


make sure. I would like to pay tribute to her for her London-


standing campaign to equalise the rights of parents of adopted


children to equalise that and with other parents. It's something I


believe should be the case. It's something we have been looking at


closely. I hope we'll be able to make an announcement on that issue


in the not too distant future. the Deputy Prime Minister aclear


that the Chancellor's initiative to get the OECD to crack down on


international tax avoidance is all the more important when corporation


tax went up 6% in the last ten years, but income tax receipts


doubled? Yes, it's quite right that the Treasury and the Chancellor


have been so keen in providing further resources to ensure that


the teams in Whitehall, the HMRC and elsewhere, would crack down on


this, are able to do that. The figures that we hope we'll be able


to recoup in tax paid that otherwise would have been avoided


are eye-watering. Billions of pounds of tax will come in the


vaults of the treasury which would either wise have gone walk-about.


Norway, Sweden and Denmark hold the top three spots in the last quarter,


so will the Deputy Prime Minister take the opportunity to


congratulate these countries on their energy results? Last time I


looked it was to include Iceland, but now it doesn't. What is he


going to do next, pick owl Malaysia? Or Indonesia? Try be pour


consistent, please. -- more consist ten, please. Does the -- consistent,


please. Does the Deputy Prime Minister expect to be involved in


the selection process for the EU commissioner? I won't be a


candidate however much he might hope otherwise! The Deputy Prime


Minister's predecessor and mine is Labour's excellent candidate in the


police and crime commissioner elections in Humberside. But the


Tory candidate describes the role as the job from hell. Does the


Deputy Prime Minister agree with his Tory colleague or does he think


that personally he has it harder? On the issue of the the


commissioner elections, I'm not going to try to compare notes with


my predecessor, but I hope everybody will turn out to vote.


The fact there are so many has-been politicians who are standing might


put quite a lot of people off, but I hope none theless they will


participate in the important elections. -- none the less they


will participate in the important elections. Last week, Stephen


farerer was sentenced to life for the brutal murder of my constituent


and a form by -- another resident, so will the Deputy Prime Minister


thank the police for their speedy and successful conclusion in this


case and sending our deepest condolences to the families?


sure the whole House wishes to join in with the wishes to the family


and friends. The police moved very fast. It's very important in cases


like this that the public sees where possible justice is done, but


justice is done as rapidly as possible. Can the Deputy Prime


Minister explain to the House why the Liberal Democrats are fielding


only 21 candidates out of 44 in the crime commissioners' elections?


Because we are standing in those areas where Liberal Democrats will


to stand. I know the party opposite doesn't understand the meaning of


the word internal party democracy, but it's something I'm very proud


we have and he should try it some day. There are obscene bonuses and


there is the biggest divide between the rich and the poor, so can hi


right honourable friend make clear it's the overriding ambition of


Government to deliver a fairer Britain and one of the ways of


doing it is affordable housing and social, rented housing which


delivers both fairness and growth? Yes, and that's why it's so


important that we are committed to a �20 billion worth of investment


into affordable housing, generating tens of thousands of more homes so


families have an affordable home they can call their own and also I


would draw his attention to the significance of the announcement


made by the Secretary of State for Local Governmant yesterday, that we


will be looking at doubling the amount of -- of funds that can be


used to invest up to �22 billion of extra money into local


infrastructure. That's the way to make the country fair and get the


economy moving. Can I join in the tribute to the two soldiers and


David Black who gave their lives last week? Tomorrow morning will


mark the anniversary of the Poppy Day massacre in Enniskillen. This


week, the police have received a new line of inquiry. Will the


Deputy Prime Minister join with me in echoing the survivors' call for


justice and for new information to be brought forward? I'm sure he


speaks on behalf of all of us that we should pause and reflect on the


terrible suffering of those who now have to relive 25 years later, the


memories of that terrible atrocity and those who were killed, injured


and maimed. I know that the Secretary of State for Northern


Ireland will be attending the anniversary event. This is an


extremely difficult week for all those who suffered at that time and


have had to live with the memories ever since. Yes, of course, I can


confirm that where there are new leads and new evidence that that


will be pursued rigorously and will provide all support in order to


make sure that is the case. Under the previous Government, officials


used discretion to refuse to provide information to people who


were brought up in case. Will the Deputy Prime Minister look to open


the files so people who are brought up in care can find out what


happened to them? I certainly they he's right in saying that all of us


given the daily drip, drip effect of the horrific revelations that


seem to get worse every day and seem to be taking place on a scale


that before now was unimaginable, that we send out a clear message


from all sides to any victim, who is sitting at home, alone, still


harbouring the terrible memories and terrible suffering that he


endured, that this is the time for them to speak up and for them to


come forward. We'll help them. We'll reach out to them and make


sure that their suffering is atoned for and where we can find those who


have perpetrated these terrible abuses, that they're brought to


justice, even several years since they might have occurred.


Scotland's First Minister has misled the public on legal advice


that doesn't exist, rewritten the Ministerial Code for his own gain


and there are strong suggestions that he will ignore the Electoral


Commission in the upcoming referendum. People in Scotland are


losing faith in the First Minister and this Government are in danger


of being complicit in yet another muddle. Does the Deputy Prime


Minister trust the First Minister to deliver a favour, legal and


decisive referendum on separation? As I hope she would be prepared to


recognise, we have been working on a cross-party basis, particularly


between the parties that believe in the maintenance of the family of


the nations of the United Kingdom to ensure that there is a fair,


legal and decisive vote in the referendum. I certainly agree with


her characterisation. The spectical of the SNP administration using


taxpayers' money to stop disclosure to the public of legal advice that


was never sought, honestly you couldn't make it up. It's like


dropping Iceland from the arc of prosperity. Rising prices to keep


their homes warm and driver their cars are putting pressures on rural


areas. What will my friend be taking to make the tax system


fairer and put more money in the pockets the people on lower and


middle incomes? That is precisely why the centrepiece tax reform of


this Government is a radical one to lift the point at which people


start paying tax, up to �10,000. From the �6,400 when we took over


from Labour. And that, when we deliver that, will deliver a �700


tax cut to over 24 million people in this country, including in his


constituency. It's something we should celebrate. Bearing in mind


we were selling arms to the Gaddafi regime right up to the uprising, is


the Deputy Prime Minister pleased that the Prime Minister's busy now


selling arms to Saudi Arabia? A country where human rights is non-


existent and amputations and floggings take place frequently and


we know how women are treated there. Is that Liberal Democrat policy?


have the strictest of controls of almost every economy in the world,


goching the conditions in which we can sell arms to others --


governing the conditions in which we sell arms to others. Nothing we


can do impedes our ability to tell allies and other governments where


we have real concerns of human rights record, about their


democratic record and about their civil liberties record and that's


exactly what the Prime Minister's been doing this week. I sometimes


think the Deputy Prime Minister would like to send me to a jungle


in Australia for a month, but would he agree with me that one two


different parties get together in the national interest to clear up


the mess that Labour have left us, we are doing the right thing and in


particular, driving unemployment down? Can I pick up one


constituency, in Corby it went down 4.6% last month. For the first time


in my Parliamentary career I wholeheartedly agree with him.


Let's treasure this moment, because I suspect it will be very, very


rare indeed, but like him, when I heard that the honourable member


for Mid-Bedfordshire had been sent to a jungle to eat insects, I


thought that despite the appearance of civil ilt, it indicates a new


discipline in our Whips' Office. We are doing a great job together to


create jobs in the future and Nick Clegg without any notes taking


on all-comers, almost thrown at the end by a friendly question! Not


usually very friendly towards the be happy with that performance. He


seemed particularly raoeuled by questions -- riled by questions


from the Labour side. Harriet Harman began interestingly on the


Leveson report, really saying - Labour have committed themselves to


supporting whatever Leveson comes up with. Would the Deputy Prime


Minister do the same, knowing that Mr Cameron has a few problems if


Leveson comes out with statutory regulation. We are going to hear


what our experts thought of it. We are going to hear from our e-mails


first. They weren't overly impressed, the


viewers. There were some who said, as David said, Nick Clegg seemed to


handle himself well. Harriet Harman was clumsy in and the questions


were too long. Bill in Doncaster, second division affair. Nick Clegg


is not a patch on William Hague and Harriet Harman will insist on


scripted jokes. Alan said, new faces at PMQs but same old


accusations. It's Labour's fault after being half-way through a


parliament when does this Government accept blame? Tom, after


the opening gambit I thought what a pleasure to see a constructive and


well-intentioned PMQs, within seconds it towards into a farce


worse than any I have ever seen. This is not the face of British


politics that should be seen throughout the world. Frederick


said, is that a Deputy Prime Minister at the despatch box or a


puppet version of David Cameron? If he reiterates any more of the


ancient history about the mess Labour left behind, then he should


be confined to a history book. Take that, Mr Clegg. The coalition's


gone through a rough patch over House of Lords reform, over


attitude to wind power, it's divided them, as well. There is a


big issue looming in the autumn statement of where will the extra


cuts come from, as well, and still the Lib Dems would like to see some


extra tax on the very wealthy. Is Leveson now another issue that's


going to divide the coalition? and potentially the most serious


for them, I think. Leveson feels to me a bit like a car driving 100mph


through a brick wall as far as this Government is concerned. Seems


likely, of course we don't know, that Lord Justice Leveson will


recommend what is a terrible phrase, statutory underpinning. Tphordz,


instead -- in other words, instead of saying a new beefed up


independent regulator, but one that the press itself as it were creates,


that there should be something in law that at least says such a


regulator must exist, that seems to be where the tension is. The Lib


Dems clearly would support such an idea. It seems to me increasingly


clear that the Conservative side of the coalition will not, although


David Cameron's uttered nothing in public, we have seen Michael Gove


rubbish the idea and Eric Pickles rubbish the idea. George Osborne


would be reluctant about such an idea and David Cameron has to work


out what does he do if he doesn't want to implement this, but Nick


Clegg does want to implement it. It's going to be a real problem for


them. Am I right in saying that the Labour position is now in favour of


statutory regulation of the press? I think we think that if there is a


way in which we can balance what we cherish, which is the freedom of


press in this country compared to other places but have something


that's tougher and may need statutory regulation that solves


some of the issues that clearly in the past the Press Complaints


Commission couldn't do that's something we should be open to


discuss and we have to find some way that it's not just business as


usual in the way the press has been regulated in the past. Is it not


the case that Labour has committed Labour to supporting Leveson,


whatever it comes up with. What Harriet actually said was about


workable proposals and that - that's what we are looking for.


Praing -- practical proposal that is get that balance. For statutory


regulation. We do think as it was said there and I have to say there


was cross-party agreement, we would like to move forward on a cross-


party basis because this is such a big issue. It isn't a


straightforward situation to regulate in terms of of protecting


the freedoms of the press which are important. It can't be business as


usual and we need tougher regulation. Is there a chance of


cross-party approval? As Nick was saying, the opinion on the


Conservative side seems to be against statutory regulation of the


press? And for obvious reasons, because the idea of having a sort


of law that says you the press can do this but can't do that, it


raises hackles among all Democrats, I would have thought. In principle,


there's no reason why it shouldn't proceed on a cross-party basis tpwu


does seem, -- but it does seem, I understand Labour's position the


same way do you, that whatever Leveson says, they will support.


It's sensible to wait and see. I can agree that the Press Complaints


Commission has not been ideal, it can't carry on as we have done.


say the least! Quite. But there is clearly a way of doing better


voluntary regulation and so on. Also, the fact that often gets


forgotten is a lot of the worst behaviour of the press in the phone


hacking scandal was actually illegal. We do have laws that can


be used now because hacking people's phones and so on is


breaking the law. Are the Conservatives not faced with a


difficulty then if Justice Leveson, as seems likely, will come out for


for statutory regulation? I suspect what he will come out with, I don't


know any more than anybody else, is something that's slightly more


complex. He is a very clever lawyer, therefore... The more complex the


more lawyers get big fees. I am not being cynical about lawyers. I am!


I am married to one. It's dangerous for me to be cynical about lawyers.


I am also the Minister for Criminal Justice. I have a professional


interest as well. The last thing we need is complexity. People want to


know what their rights are with the press if, -- if the press press


behaves, they believe, badly. problem with simplicity is when you


try and define it in law, that does get difficult, that's why looking


at the details of what Leveson says is a sensible approach. What we are


seeing now at the moment is beginning of campaigns building up.


There is a new campaign effectively funded and run by the press, it's


in particular the Mail and Telegraph in the van guard, for


obvious reasons News International don't want to be out tpropb on this


issue -- front on this issue. Against any statutory regulation.


Interestingly, we are getting the role of the Select Committee on


culture media and sport interesting on this, the Tory chairman is


opposed. He is supporting the newspapers and opposing statutory


regulation. So expect this one to be a real, real fight. The only


possible way through I can see for David Cameron, if he wants to be as


it were calculated about it, if he thinks that Lord Justice Leveson


comes up with a specific idea, all tb not the central one, which is


impractical or regarded as silly, in a sense he tries to divert


attention and say look at this, this isn't going to work, use the


Select Committee perhaps who have talked of having their own hearings


into regulation, even the possibility that they call Lord


Justice Leveson to give evidence before them about what his own


proposals - you can just see how a Government - there's no way David


Cameron can dismiss this report. What he is going to be thinking is


what do I do to get out of it? we believe that the Leveson will be


published before the autumn statement on December... By end of


November I am told is the plan. After that he's run out of time. He


can't do it the week of the autumn statement. Exactly. By the end of


November. It was what I was told yesterday and would you expect him


to have his own news conference and to publish his report. But usually


the authors of these reports, particularly when they're judges,


don't expect to then get themselves dragged in for interviews, let


alone a Select Committee hearing in order to justify their proposals.


Usually they put them on the table and leave the scene, as it were and


lobby privately. A final point, the Tory eurosceptics gave Mr Clegg...


A clean ride? Mark Reckless had a sarcastic question about who would


replace Kathy Ashton, the joke was maybe you, Nick Clegg. Actually the


timings don't work for Mr Clegg to take that job even if he fancies it


as an escape route. And that last question, a man who's constantly


attacked the coalition. That was about the by-election!


Nick, thanks to you for being here. Now it may not quite have the


pazazz of the US presidential race, but voters in England and Wales


have elections of their own coming up in just a week.


Yes, next Thursday they'll be choosing the first ever Police and


Crime Commissioners. Intended to make the police more


accountable to the public, they've been described by one senior


officer as the biggest change to policing since 1829.


There are 193 candidates standing for the 41 police forces of England


and Wales, excluding London where the mayor already acts as PCC.


It was expected that a lot of those candidates would be independent,


and 53 are running without the support of a party. But of the main


parties, the Conservatives and Labour have put up candidates in


all areas, while the Liberal democrats are fielding 24. UKIP


also have 24 candidates hoping to enter office, while the English


Democrats have 5 and the Green Party 1. A full list of candidates


can be found on the BBC website. Joining us now is the cross-bench


peer and former senior civil servant Michael Bichard. Much of


the criticism seems to be police will focus on antisocial behaviour,


for example, what's wrong with that? I don't think anything


particularly wrong with that. One of my aerpb concerns is -- my


concerns is whether they do that in a co-operative way F you elect an


commissioner they're going to want to establish profile, their


identity, their own organisation at a time when we need them too be --


to be co-operating with other agencies. Look at what happened in


Rochdale around child protection when that didn't work well. That


worries me. It also worries me whether they're going to co-operate


with national forces as effectively as they need to. The police don't


have a great track record. That's the crux of matter, how do you stop


a police and crime commissioner interfering, if you like, and


putting their stamp on an area without taking operational matters


away from the police. They are obliged by law to co-operate


nationally for the first time we have introduced a strategic


policing requirement so for for things like counterterrorism or


moving police around if there are riots riots or something there is a


requirement to do so. Rochdale is an interesting example because we


are seeing - we have these inquiries going on into historic


problems, that actually now you have got a democratically elected


person who is responsible for overseeing the police force, not


running the police force but overseeing it, it will, I hope, be


much less likely that things can go on that seem to have gone on in the


Where do you draw the line of priorities that are going to be


given to the commissioner on operational matters?


commissioner will provide the plans and say that he wants to


concentrate on drugs in these areas or something like and the Chief


Constable says, "OK, fine. I'll allocate officers this way." It


won't be the commissioner allocating the officers. If they


are saying they want to concentrate on drugs, clamping down on drugs or


more police on the beat, or every reported crime should be vez gaited,


how does that -- investigated, how does that that not impact on


operating areas? They will both obviously have a continuing


dialogue about that. But that is healthy, because that's what is


suppose today happen now. It just happens with police authorities and


the reason - What's the difference? The difference is that we are now


discussing it. Nobody in the country can name their Police


Authority chair. We have discovered that 7% of people in the country


have ever heard of police authorities. There is supposed to


be an accountibility mechanism, but this will work. My concern is how


do we make them work and reduce the risk. One of the risks I believe is


here is that we are going to need clever and good commissioners to


avoid problems. If you decide that you want to put more money into


burglary when there is no further sources around that comes from


somewhere. You'll have to reduce the work you are doing on road


traffic. That seems to me to take you into the operational area. I'm


not saying we should have these. I'm saying there are some things on


the first day that the commissioners look at and one of


them is how to avoid the whole thing becoming politicised.


Normally people say you are taking your party's view and they won't,


but they'll take an independent view, but if you just said you are


going to take all the traffic officers away and concentrate on


something else, you have got to justify yourself to the people in


four years' time and if there's been a massive increase in traffic


accidents, then that will act as a contraipbt. It's a constrapbt --


constraint. It's a constraint that all politicians have to face.


Balls said that it raises the prospect of a politician telling a


Chief Constable how to do their job in one way or another, but Labour


candidates, if they get elected and I'm thinking of one big personality


in particular, are we saying he'll not try to tell the Chief Constable


what to do? It's about how the thing -- things work out. It's how


the relations evolve. What is disappointing, to be honest, given


that the Government decided they want to pursue this route, I feel


that they've put very little effort into developing the discussion


about what the relationship should be. I've been out in different


parts of the country and a lot of the members of the public their


first question is, what is this meant to achieve? The Government,


given that they put such political capital behind this role, I think


thea haven't invested in -- they haven't invested in making these


real to the public. That's why they are talking about low turnout and


why so many members of the public are not sure what this is about.


Would Labour keep them? What we would have to see how the roles


develop. The truth is we are standing candidates. How the role


develops, I think is something we can look over in the next couple of


years. We have an independent commission looking at policing, so


the jury's out on that. In terms of a democratic mandate, if you take


the accusation that you haven't done much to communicate to the


public, they are not talking about it in all the pubs around the


country. The turnout will be low. Firstly, I think that would have


been much truer the fact that nobody knew about it a couple of


months ago. I go out a lot. And a lot more people know. We have the


website and what is interesting that the website has had more than


one million hits with all the people on it. If gou to the website


and I -- you go to website and you want the hard copy, more than


100,000 people have got the literature. What would be


unacceptable for you in terms of turnout? If it fell below 20% t


would be difficult to say they've got a mandate. There are members of


the House of Commons who are elected with 20%. This is a new


election and you would hope there would be a spirit. On the target


basis, does it matter? It does matter a little, because legitimacy


matters and these are new posts and it would have been better to


encourage a higher turnout, but I would rather look forward than


having the political knock-about. Don't say that. That's our trade.


But these guys will be there the day after the election. One of the


things that worries me, you have one commissioner for the whole of


Kent or Gloucestershire, which is where I live and they really are


going to have to work very, very hard to make sure that they are


consulting right across the patch, so that the decisions are seen to


be made fairly across those counties. That is going to be


difficult. That may, over time, ensure that people get to know the


commissioners much more than we do now. I think we could have managed


the process up until this point better. We could have done more to


help independent members to come forward and there were some


discussions about that, that didn't materialise. I think we could have


done more in terms of information. We didn't. Thank you. Viewers in


England and Wales can see a special programme Police Elections 2012


tonight at 7.30 on BBC One. 100% of the votes have been counted in


Florida. President Obama is 0.5% ahead of Mitt Romney. 45,000 votes


in it in the state where over eight million votes were cast. There


could be in challenges to that. Not that will affect the outcome.


many in terms of electoral college seats? 29. Yes, they are going to


President Obama. Whilst we are been talking it's been announced that


the famous Boris bikes in London are going up. They are will cost


twice as much. They'll double in annual fee. An interesting morning


to announce that! The backbench Conservative MP, the woman who


accused the Chancellor and Prime Minister of not knowing the price


of milk, Nadine Dorries, she has jetted off to Australia to appear


in some ITV show I've never heard of. It's called I'm a Celebrity,


Get Me Out of Here. If you've heard of it, she has had a good offer,


but do you think she should be there rather than working for the


people in the Commons? I don't think she should, but I think it's


stupid anyway. That's my opinion. I think she should be deducted her


money from being an MP if she is doing something else and she is not


there in the Houses of Parliament. I don't think a great deal of her,


because she doesn't seem to be interested in the politics. She


only -- she is only interested in herself. Hopefully she'll have a


good time and decide that that's the place she wants to settle down.


I don't think it's the right type of thing for her profession. I


wouldn't have thought it doesn't give you much respect for her as a


Conservative Party MP and I wouldn't think that was a good idea


for her to be there. Some of Nadine Dorries's constituents there. The


Conservative Chief Whip, who has only been in the job a few weeks,


he's suspended Nadine Dorries and asked her to come to explain


herself if and with she gets voted off the show. We are joined by one


of her now former Conservative colleagues, Zac Goldsmith. Welcome


to the programme. What do you think should happen to Nadine Dorries?


Well, I don't think it should be up to us. I think the only people who


can judge whether or not she is a good and worthwhile MP are her


constituents. If I was a constituent I would be annoyed. I


would share that view. It's got to be up to them. The whip - it's an


area where the whip cannot take an informed decision. What happens if


an MP treats recess like a long holiday or don't have surgeries


when they are supposed to? Or don't turn up to Parliament or abstain


too much? Where do you draw the line and when is it acceptable and


not? It has to be arbitrary if the whip is involved. The only answer


is to empower local voters to make that decision and you can only do


that by introducing recall, which if you remember, was promised by


all three parties before the last election and which has been more or


less dropped. The Government will tell you it hasn't, but it has. The


version that is still lingering in Parliament is not recall. It's


called recall, but it's not. Instead of handing power to voters,


it hands up to a committee. It's a hopeless piece of legislation. We


need recall. That is the answer. Why can't we have recall when MPs


behave so clearly against the will of the people? It hasn't been


dropped. There are two separate issues. You withdraw the whip which


someone has made it clear they are not going to support the Government


and you tell the whips' office that you are swanning off for a month


and then it's clear you are not going to be there. What about


recall in It's a different thing, because one of the reasons it's


taking so long and there is a draft bill on the table, is that you


obviously want to avoid the point where a single-issue pressure group


can get together, because someone holds a view. They do that in the


states. You make the bar a certain level. Ultimately it's the next


election, recall. It's not, because if you exist in the safe Tory seat


with a 25,000 majority, voters are not going to vote Labour. They


never have historically. They'll vote for the best they have, which


is the party they have. It would also apply to a Labour seat. If you


want to replace your bad Tory MP with a good one, you can't do it


without recall. If Denis MacShane, for example, who stood down from


Parliament, having done bad things, but having done good things -


Supposing he hadn't, there would be recall. Suppose there had been


recall. One of the things in the draft bill is the thought that


instead of suspension from the Commons which is what the committee


did, they recommended a recall. I just don't know whether he could


have been recalled. If he wasn't recalled, if an MP behaves badly in


our eyes, but their constituents, not enough of them merits a recall,


that's democracy. Terry Fields went to jail because of the poll tax. He


was a hero. Are Labour in favour? Yes, we are. Can you press that


button, as we have to choose Guess the Year. Who is it? There he is.


The year was 1955. Anthony Eden was re-elected as Prime Minister with a


Download Subtitles