07/11/2012 Daily Politics

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