:00:45. > :00:48.Welcome to the Daily Politics. Today's top story... David Cameron
:00:48. > :00:51.tells European leaders they must accept cuts to the EU's proposed
:00:51. > :00:56.budget for the next seven years, as the Brussels summit goes into its
:00:56. > :00:59.second day. But with 26 other prime ministers and presidents pushing
:00:59. > :01:05.their own agendas, can any agreement be made today, or could
:01:05. > :01:09.the whole thing get kicked into next spring? Back home, the
:01:09. > :01:13.Government outlines its vision for Britain's energy policy. It looks
:01:13. > :01:17.like you will be footing the bill. And what really goes on at a
:01:17. > :01:27.European summit? Adam has an inside guide to the inner workings of the
:01:27. > :01:31.
:01:31. > :01:33.All of that coming up in the next hour. With us for the duration,
:01:33. > :01:39.Pippa Crerar, political correspondent at the London Evening
:01:39. > :01:44.Standard, and Iain Martin, who writes for the Telegraph. Pipette
:01:44. > :01:53.is heading off to India with Boris Johnson - what could possibly go
:01:53. > :01:55.wrong?! Money well spent! Let's start with energy. The government
:01:55. > :01:58.has finally announced what it's going to do about keeping the
:01:58. > :02:02.lights on and emissions down and it's something of a compromise. An
:02:02. > :02:04.estimated �110 billion is needed in the next decade to renew the UK's
:02:04. > :02:10.ageing electricity infrastructure, with much set to go into low-carbon
:02:10. > :02:13.power sources like wind farms and nuclear power to cut emissions. But
:02:13. > :02:22.no decision has been taken about setting carbon emission targets for
:02:22. > :02:24.2030 - this has been delayed until 2016, after the election. This
:02:24. > :02:32.morning, the Lib Dem Energy Secretary, Ed Davey, has been out
:02:32. > :02:36.defending his plans. No one is losing out, this is a win-win. Not
:02:36. > :02:39.just for the coalition, for the country. We are having to take
:02:39. > :02:43.tough decisions in this government, but the Liberal Democrats are
:02:43. > :02:49.determined to play our role, to make sure we get the investment,
:02:49. > :02:54.growth and green jobs, and today is delivering on that. There was a
:02:54. > :02:58.huge tussle between the Treasury and Ed Davey's department. He can
:02:58. > :03:01.tell when a politician is being slightly disingenuous, when he
:03:01. > :03:06.describes something as a win-win situation for the country. There
:03:06. > :03:10.has been a vicious row between Osborne and Ed Davey' department.
:03:10. > :03:14.The Treasury really thinks it has won, that it has won concessions,
:03:14. > :03:23.the Lib Dems have conceded there won't be those targets on
:03:23. > :03:29.decarbonisation bike 2030. However, wind power sceptics will say the
:03:29. > :03:33.government is still increasing the subsidy by a fairly large amount.
:03:33. > :03:36.Do you think it is strange politics, given the rise in energy bills is
:03:36. > :03:40.hurting everybody, but particularly those on average and below average
:03:40. > :03:46.incomes, to come up with a plan that's going to add, it's hard to
:03:46. > :03:50.tell the figure, about �110 to a bill. Yes, depending on who you
:03:50. > :03:54.listen to. Ed Davey describes it as a win-win, others might describe it
:03:54. > :03:58.as a Blues lose, because you have consumers who are very sceptical of
:03:58. > :04:01.the big energy companies acting as some sort of cartel, they are
:04:01. > :04:05.facing energy bills going up and having a lot of other expenses to
:04:06. > :04:09.deal with. �180 may not seem much to some people but for people
:04:09. > :04:14.dealing with cuts across the board and having to tighten their own
:04:14. > :04:17.belts, it is. Green groups are also going to be unhappy about it.
:04:17. > :04:22.They've picked the carbon tabards into the long grass after the
:04:22. > :04:26.election. You wonder a compromise in which the only people are the
:04:26. > :04:31.big energy companies who are taking over from the banks as popular hate
:04:31. > :04:35.figure number one. The spokesman for the big energy companies
:04:35. > :04:39.recently left from her job being spokesman for the banks, which is
:04:39. > :04:42.rather convenient! The other difficulty for the government is
:04:42. > :04:46.the week began with the Prime Minister saying we are in an
:04:46. > :04:50.economic war, this was like May 1940 in economic terms. If that's
:04:50. > :04:54.the case, the priority should be cheaper energy prices to fuel the
:04:54. > :04:57.recovery, rather than increasing prices. One of the things Ed Davey
:04:57. > :05:01.said this morning, and they say it all the time, this will mean
:05:01. > :05:05.thousands of new jobs created in green energy. What he never says,
:05:05. > :05:09.what they never tell you, is how many thousands of jobs will be
:05:09. > :05:13.destroyed by higher energy prices for the rest of industry. For
:05:13. > :05:19.example, the aluminium industry in this country no longer exists
:05:19. > :05:24.because energy is too expensive. What will be next? The �180 we've
:05:24. > :05:28.talked about is the up of and of 7.6 billion overall for the energy
:05:28. > :05:32.companies. They are really delighted that they can have some
:05:32. > :05:37.certainty... We are guaranteeing their capital investment as
:05:37. > :05:40.consumers. The that is pretty much it. I'm sure there will be lots of
:05:40. > :05:45.consumers who aren't happy about that. I have a sense this story
:05:45. > :05:50.isn't going to go away. I suspect the compromise deal won't unravel
:05:50. > :05:53.but they will be a lot of nit- picking of it from both sides. Now
:05:53. > :05:56.it's time for our quiz, and it's been reported today that many MPs
:05:56. > :06:02.are embarking on lavish, all expenses paid, fact-finding trips
:06:02. > :06:04.abroad. The Independent says the trips cost more than �1.5 million,
:06:04. > :06:08.paid for by foreign governments, pressure groups and companies over
:06:08. > :06:18.the space of two years. But we want to know - which of these
:06:18. > :06:18.
:06:18. > :06:23.destinations hasn't been visited by Sri Lanka, China, Cayman Islands or
:06:23. > :06:33.Sandy Island in the Coral Sea. Later in the show, Iain and Pippa
:06:33. > :06:37.
:06:37. > :06:39.will give us the correct answer. Now, another day, another shirt. EU
:06:39. > :06:42.leaders have resumed talks in Brussels aimed at setting a budget
:06:42. > :06:45.for the next seven years, to 2020. Divisions remain over whether
:06:45. > :06:48.spending should be increased or reduced. This morning EU officials
:06:48. > :06:52.warned European leaders against seeking to delay any budget deal
:06:52. > :06:55.until a further summit next year. Aides to the EU Council President
:06:55. > :07:00.Herman van Rompuy say the facts will not change by delaying summit
:07:00. > :07:03.negotiations. Yesterday's talks opened with van Rompuy suggesting a
:07:03. > :07:12.seven year budget of 940 billion euros - a big enough reduction that
:07:12. > :07:14.could maybe allow David Cameron to claim some sort of victory. The
:07:14. > :07:17.latest proposals see 460 billion euros for smart and inclusive
:07:17. > :07:26.growth, including the cohesion fund that goes mainly to poorer
:07:26. > :07:29.countries. The cohesion fund has been topped up by 11 billion euros
:07:29. > :07:36.on original budget proposals in an attempt to appease countries such
:07:36. > :07:39.as Italy and Poland. There's 372 billion euros on the table for
:07:39. > :07:41.sustainable growth, which includes 278 billion for the direct farm
:07:41. > :07:51.payments and market measures, taking in the Common Agricultural
:07:51. > :07:53.
:07:53. > :07:56.Policy. This has been increased by 8 billion euros on the original
:07:56. > :08:06.proposal in an attempt to appease the French, but still represents a
:08:06. > :08:07.
:08:07. > :08:09.cut on previous years. Van Rompuy has suggested that the global
:08:09. > :08:16.Europe fund, which includes development aid and the diplomatic
:08:16. > :08:19.service, be trimmed by 6 billion euros to 61 billion. And that 5
:08:19. > :08:27.billion euros be lopped off the Connecting Europe facility used to
:08:27. > :08:30.fund cross border infrastructure. But the administration budget
:08:30. > :08:40.remains at 63 billion euros despite proposals from the UK for reducing
:08:40. > :08:44.
:08:44. > :08:51.it. This is what the Prime Minister had to say on the way in to another
:08:51. > :08:55.day of negotiations. There really is a problem in terms there hasn't
:08:55. > :08:59.been the progress in cutting back proposals for additional spending.
:08:59. > :09:04.It isn't it time for tinkering, it isn't it time for moving money from
:09:04. > :09:10.one part of the Budget to another. We need an affordable spending cut.
:09:10. > :09:14.That's what's happening at home, that's what needs to happen here.
:09:14. > :09:24.The Prime Minister looking quite fresh despite a late evening and an
:09:24. > :09:25.
:09:25. > :09:28.early start. Gavin Hewitt joins us now. Where are we this morning?
:09:28. > :09:32.you've just heard, David Cameron arrived this morning and he is
:09:32. > :09:36.still not happy. He believes that all that happened last night was a
:09:36. > :09:40.shuffling of the pack. A little bit more to the Common Agricultural
:09:40. > :09:44.Policy, to appease the French, a little more to cohesion funds to
:09:44. > :09:49.help Poland and those other countries in central and eastern
:09:49. > :09:52.Europe who say that currently the proposal is unacceptable. But what
:09:52. > :09:55.the British are insisting on, not just that some of the
:09:56. > :10:01.administration costs should come down, they want to see that overall
:10:01. > :10:06.figure, the 940 billion euros. They want to see that come down. Will
:10:06. > :10:09.they achieve that? It's going to be difficult. Lots of pessimism on the
:10:09. > :10:14.way in here. One of the things that Britain needs to be careful about.
:10:14. > :10:18.It has two strong allies in this - Sweden and the Netherlands. Watch
:10:18. > :10:22.out for an attempt to try and ease them away. For them to be more
:10:22. > :10:30.willing to compromise and therefore leaving David Cameron more exposed
:10:30. > :10:35.on his home. If the summit was to pass or to agree, be getting the
:10:35. > :10:39.distribution of it, the total sum in the Herman Van Rompuy budget,
:10:39. > :10:42.could Mr Cameron claimed that as a victory, because it's tens of
:10:43. > :10:50.billions more than he has been saying and it is not a real-terms
:10:50. > :10:54.freeze? He could claim it is something of a victory. The
:10:54. > :10:59.original proposal was way above eight trillion. Then Herman Van
:10:59. > :11:03.Rompuy came in, he lowered that by 80 billion. We are now stuck with
:11:04. > :11:09.940 billion. But when the Treasury set out what its target was, it was
:11:09. > :11:14.significantly below that, about 886 billion. On the other hand, if you
:11:14. > :11:20.look at the spending limits, the spending ceiling in the proposal,
:11:20. > :11:24.you could claim there was actually a small cut compared to last time.
:11:24. > :11:28.In the way that many things are done here, after all, this is a
:11:28. > :11:32.city known for fudging things, you could walk away and say there has
:11:32. > :11:37.been some success here. In terms of those overall figures, I think some
:11:37. > :11:42.people would turn around and say, if the British accepted 940, they
:11:42. > :11:45.would say, well, a little bit of success. But in the end, it's not a
:11:45. > :11:50.freeze in terms of the actual spending. That's the difference.
:11:50. > :11:55.You can try and freeze the ceiling or try and freeze what is actually
:11:55. > :11:59.going to be spent. If we had to settle, if the British had to
:11:59. > :12:09.settle on 940, bed be plenty of those saying that is not a freeze
:12:09. > :12:11.on money spent. And we've been joined by the Shadow Europe
:12:11. > :12:19.Minister, Emma Reynolds, and Conservative MP and former
:12:19. > :12:24.If he settles for that as a budget, will you back that? We will await
:12:24. > :12:28.the outcome of the summit. This is a long and difficult set of
:12:28. > :12:33.negotiations. We appreciate that, we know it's not an easy challenge
:12:33. > :12:36.for the Prime Minister, but we do think it is doable. Sweden and the
:12:36. > :12:40.Netherlands are allies. If David Cameron had perhaps hit the bones
:12:40. > :12:45.and talked to Capitals earlier, he might have got Germany and some of
:12:45. > :12:49.the other contributor states on side, too. But you voted for a
:12:49. > :12:54.real-terms cut in the Budget. This is not even a real-terms freeze
:12:54. > :13:00.that is being proposed. Would you accept that? We are going to see
:13:00. > :13:05.what happens. We can't prejudge the outcome. I know it's a hypothetical
:13:05. > :13:10.question but it's a reasonable one. If Mr Cameron settles for a modest,
:13:10. > :13:15.real-terms rise in the Budget, a modest one, would Labour support
:13:15. > :13:18.it? It will depend if there is any change to a rebate. It will depend
:13:18. > :13:24.on the shape of the Budget. We will look closely at what the
:13:24. > :13:32.negotiations, how they proceed. We will judge the outcome when... If
:13:32. > :13:35.we get an outcome this time... voted for a cat. We would like that.
:13:35. > :13:39.We will wait to see what he comes back with. What would you settle
:13:39. > :13:47.for? There will be lots of different things attached to this
:13:47. > :13:52.with the rebate. But we voted to have, at worst, a cut, a cap on
:13:52. > :13:57.inflation. Many of us would like to see a further cut. It's the art of
:13:57. > :14:04.what is possible. A further cut is not on the agenda. The knot at the
:14:04. > :14:06.moment. Not on the agenda, period. At the moment. One of the things
:14:07. > :14:11.the Prime Minister is arguing for is to reduce the running costs of
:14:11. > :14:15.the EU. We are spending �45 billion just on running it. I understand
:14:15. > :14:21.that but let's get real. This is a budget for the next seven years.
:14:21. > :14:25.There is nothing on the agenda for Mr Cameron other than a cut. But if
:14:25. > :14:30.it boats for something along these lines, it isn't for seven years. A
:14:30. > :14:32.real-terms cut is not on the agenda. This is a budget for the next seven
:14:32. > :14:37.years with the adjustments that can happen on a year-by-year basis.
:14:37. > :14:41.We've got to get the best possible deal we can now. That is what the
:14:41. > :14:46.Prime Minister is batting for Britain on. We've got to maintain a
:14:46. > :14:51.rebate, and we don't get any losses on that front. What is the minimum
:14:51. > :14:56.Mr Cameron has to bring back for you to vote for it? It will be a
:14:56. > :14:59.complicated package. We need to see real signs that the EU is cutting
:14:59. > :15:03.its running costs. That we are spending money most efficiently,
:15:03. > :15:07.rather than on running the EU. This has been a problem. People in this
:15:07. > :15:11.country don't see where this money is going in our interests. We've
:15:11. > :15:15.got to get real. We've had years and years under the last government
:15:15. > :15:22.of above-inflation increases. The last government also gave away our
:15:22. > :15:25.rebate, which has been negotiated back by Mrs Thatcher. Half of it.
:15:25. > :15:30.Here we have somebody who's not going to give away any more of the
:15:30. > :15:34.rebate. The original purpose of the rebate was because Britain didn't
:15:34. > :15:38.benefit very much from the Common Agricultural Fund. Nothing's
:15:38. > :15:43.changed. Hold on, it's changed enormously. When I first started
:15:43. > :15:48.covering these matters, the CAP accounted for 82 % of the European
:15:48. > :15:54.budget. Under the new proposal it will be down to 40 %. You can't say
:15:54. > :16:04.nothing has happened. The argument was that, as the CAP went down as a
:16:04. > :16:10.
:16:10. > :16:15.percentage, so Britain's rebate There are so many areas where
:16:15. > :16:19.Europe has increased its influence in how we run the government in the
:16:19. > :16:25.UK. We are paying for things and constituents cannot see the benefit
:16:25. > :16:32.to this country and they certainly cannot see the benefit of paying
:16:33. > :16:37.�45 billion to pay 35,000 people working for Europe. The BBC
:16:37. > :16:42.probably employs more people than the Royal Navy! That is another
:16:42. > :16:46.matter altogether. Can we really afford to fund such a big
:16:46. > :16:51.institution that does not have such clear benefits to the United
:16:51. > :16:57.Kingdom? Our biggest gripe is the cost of running the institution of
:16:57. > :17:03.the EU as well as what the money goes on. What do you make of that?
:17:03. > :17:08.It is around 8% of the Budget. What matters is how the structural funds
:17:08. > :17:13.are spent and in some areas they are spent very well and lead to job
:17:13. > :17:17.creation, and in other areas not so well, so we would like to see a
:17:17. > :17:22.budget that delivers job creation and growth across the EU but
:17:22. > :17:29.especially in the newer member states. What makes you think that a
:17:29. > :17:35.budget overhaul, that accounts for 1% of GDP, and the structural fund
:17:35. > :17:40.Bobby a lot less, will make a blind bit of difference to European
:17:40. > :17:45.growth -- will be a lot less? small stake like Slovakia, the
:17:45. > :17:51.structural funds are significant in their economy. I understand if you
:17:51. > :17:57.put a lot of money into a small country, it may make a difference.
:17:57. > :18:02.But in what way will the structural funds make a blind bit of
:18:02. > :18:06.difference to Europe's growth? member states have a much lower
:18:06. > :18:13.standard of living than others and it makes sense for us all that
:18:14. > :18:18.there is a better equilibrium, so we get less migrants, a few are
:18:18. > :18:22.migrants, Surrey, and the structural funds in some of the new
:18:22. > :18:27.member states make a real difference -- fewer migrants, I'm
:18:27. > :18:34.sorry. I understand that but I am not sure how it will affect
:18:34. > :18:39.European Growth. It is a small part of GDP. It sounds to me like David
:18:39. > :18:43.Cameron is in trouble. There is a head of steam building up around
:18:43. > :18:46.the Herman van Rompuy suggestion, which is less than the European
:18:46. > :18:51.parliament would like but is still considerably more than David
:18:51. > :18:56.Cameron said he would get. He will also be under pressure from the
:18:56. > :19:01.Foreign Office to sign up to a deal. They will take their realpolitik
:19:01. > :19:06.view that this is the best you will get so go for it. But if Cameron
:19:06. > :19:10.says, I have got a deal, and comes back to London and Labour are not
:19:10. > :19:14.happy with it and Euro-sceptic Tories are not happy with it, it
:19:14. > :19:19.could be defeated in parliament and that is his worst nightmare, that
:19:19. > :19:29.he ends up as a prisoner of his party. It is still not certain that
:19:29. > :19:30.
:19:30. > :19:35.they will get a deal. Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande, if they say
:19:35. > :19:40.no, the worst-case scenario will be at the end of 2013 we could have
:19:40. > :19:45.the budget forced on to you, and the Prime Minister looks completely
:19:45. > :19:49.out of control, as though he has not had any say in it at all to
:19:49. > :19:54.what he should hoped to achieve is a deal, not least to keep his
:19:54. > :19:59.backbenchers at home happy because there will be a lot of unrest
:19:59. > :20:04.otherwise. I don't see from these figures how we will do that but we
:20:04. > :20:09.will see. We have been enjoying your company so much and by popular
:20:09. > :20:13.demand, we are holding you hostage. It has been 37 years since the UK
:20:13. > :20:15.has had a referendum on Europe and ever since he became Prime Minister,
:20:16. > :20:20.David Cameron has been under pressure to hold an in or out
:20:20. > :20:30.referendum. But if the UK did opt to get out of the European Union,
:20:30. > :20:34.
:20:34. > :20:39.what kind of relationship could it A little bit of European flavour at
:20:39. > :20:45.a Christmas market but no, this is not a German one, I am at London's
:20:46. > :20:50.south bank's Winter Festival, not too far away with a place that has
:20:50. > :20:57.had a choppy relationship with the European Union. There has been many
:20:57. > :21:06.a backbench rebellion about Europe over there. It could be enough to
:21:06. > :21:10.10 you to drink. -- enough to turn you to drink. There is nothing
:21:10. > :21:16.Swiss here but we do have a chocolate fountain, which brings me
:21:16. > :21:22.to Switzerland. It dips into the EU, making deals on bits it likes, but
:21:22. > :21:27.it has been frozen out in the past for not signing up to legislation.
:21:27. > :21:31.This Tory Euro-sceptics says it is the best model. Switzerland retains
:21:31. > :21:36.its democracy and makes its own laws. It enters into a series of
:21:36. > :21:40.bilateral agreements with the EU and has access to the single market,
:21:40. > :21:48.but only a token contribution to the EU budget and I think that
:21:48. > :21:53.would be a lot better for the UK. What about Norway? Norway's
:21:53. > :21:58.relationship is different, it is a member of their economic area so
:21:58. > :22:02.its citizens have the same rights to go across the EU and work as
:22:02. > :22:07.other member states, but without some of the bits that it doesn't
:22:07. > :22:11.like. Some critics warn that the UK not to try the Norwegian model
:22:11. > :22:18.because Norway's still pays a lot into the EU and has signed up to
:22:18. > :22:22.most of its laws, despite not being able to influence them. We are out
:22:22. > :22:27.so politically so it is integration without representation. We are not
:22:27. > :22:33.represented. Many of the issues I think a controversial in the
:22:33. > :22:37.British EU debate, like the social dimension, justice and home affairs,
:22:37. > :22:43.most of these are in the Norwegian model, so you will not really
:22:43. > :22:48.escape those things for. What about trying a new flavour altogether?
:22:48. > :22:53.Wants a Labour pro European, this German-born MP now wants the UK to
:22:53. > :22:58.leave the EU and says it should create an entirely new institution.
:22:58. > :23:03.Even countries like Switzerland and Norway have to implement everything.
:23:03. > :23:08.Norway even pays for the Budget. For the United Kingdom, a country
:23:08. > :23:13.of that size and significance, it would require a new institution and
:23:13. > :23:20.at the core of it, the workings of an internal market. A halfway house
:23:20. > :23:22.or go the whole hog. If the UK ever does decide to leave the EU, there
:23:22. > :23:26.will be even more questions about what to do next.
:23:26. > :23:34.Susana Mendonca reporting. We have been joined from Brussels by the
:23:34. > :23:44.UKIP MEP Marta Andreasen. What kind of relationship in your mind would
:23:44. > :23:49.a UK outside the EU have? Well, I think that the UK should leaves. I
:23:49. > :23:57.don't think it should follow the example of the Norwegian example or
:23:57. > :24:05.The UK will be in this unique position that has belonged to the
:24:05. > :24:11.EU for a long time, and now has to really restructure its trading,
:24:11. > :24:18.restructure its regulations, and all this talk about the car
:24:18. > :24:24.industry moving away, I think it is nonsense. I think that the UK has
:24:24. > :24:29.now to develop other markets, other relationships with a different
:24:29. > :24:35.markets. The EU economy is shrinking, so I think the UK should
:24:35. > :24:44.stop trying now to develop this new relationship because, you know, we
:24:44. > :24:49.are selling less and less to the EU members. Hold on. I need to ask you
:24:49. > :24:54.another question. I will get back to what I originally asked you. If
:24:54. > :25:00.the UK is outside of the EU, with therefore none of the obligations
:25:00. > :25:03.and costs that EU membership imposes on us, why with the
:25:03. > :25:07.Europeans give us access to the massive free-market, the open
:25:07. > :25:17.market, of the European Union without exacting a considerable
:25:17. > :25:18.
:25:18. > :25:21.price for? The first day that we left the European Union, the UK
:25:21. > :25:27.would pay 43 million less to the European Union, so this is the
:25:27. > :25:32.first benefit it would have. If the UK decided to leave, I think this
:25:32. > :25:38.would bring the whole of the European Union to rethink the whole
:25:38. > :25:43.structure. The UK is in a perfect position today, a very strong
:25:43. > :25:48.position to negotiate its demands. Cameron today should be doing this.
:25:48. > :25:52.Because the European Union needs the UK more than the UK needs the
:25:52. > :25:57.European Union, I can assure you, and that is why Angela Merkel went
:25:57. > :26:05.to Downing Street last week. went because it was a scheduled
:26:05. > :26:14.trip. Tim Burr... No, she went because she wanted... I beg your
:26:14. > :26:24.pardon. I am asking my guest. He's leaving the EU on the agenda?
:26:24. > :26:26.
:26:26. > :26:30.Ultimately possibly commit yes. -- We are putting a series of
:26:30. > :26:33.practical proposals through it and this is what we want this
:26:33. > :26:39.government to be negotiating with Europe to get a better deal for
:26:39. > :26:42.Britain to stay within the EU. That is the ideal position, but I
:26:43. > :26:46.believe that can only happen if it is backed up with a very real
:26:46. > :26:51.threat that if we don't get anything like that better deal than
:26:51. > :26:57.we need to have an in or out referendum and put it to the people.
:26:57. > :27:04.You recommend out? I don't know. If we were to have a referendum today,
:27:04. > :27:08.the amount we pay, the restrictions we get back, I think I would vote
:27:08. > :27:13."out", but if you asked the British public if they would stay in if we
:27:13. > :27:18.had a much better deal with more powers decided here, as people
:27:18. > :27:22.thought they were voting for in 1975, most people would want to
:27:22. > :27:28.stay in. I don't think we will get that better relationship unless
:27:28. > :27:35.there is a real threat of a referendum. Does Labour have a
:27:35. > :27:39.position on repatriation of powers? It remains to be seen whether this
:27:39. > :27:44.government will argue for repatriation of powers. The Liberal
:27:44. > :27:49.Democrats do not want that. We know the Conservatives do. Whether they
:27:49. > :27:53.can is another matter. I did not ask you about the Conservative
:27:53. > :27:56.Party but the Labour policy. believe we should strongly
:27:56. > :28:02.prioritise reform of the European Union to make sure that the budget
:28:02. > :28:05.is spent better, to make sure there is a proper single market...
:28:05. > :28:11.not repatriation? We will wait and see what the Conservatives will
:28:11. > :28:16.come up with. But you do not have to wait to answer the question. In
:28:16. > :28:21.principle, would Labour like to see some powers repatriated to London?
:28:21. > :28:27.A think the priority should be arguing for reform. Is that yes or
:28:27. > :28:32.no? I do not think it is realistic... One year ago in this
:28:32. > :28:36.studio, Ed Miliband said I don't think Brussels has too much power.
:28:36. > :28:46.What is the position now? I think Brussels does have too much power
:28:46. > :28:54.won. I will give you the final word, martyr Andreassen? Before talking
:28:54. > :28:59.about repatriation of powers, David Cameron should say he is leaving
:28:59. > :29:03.the European Union. I repeat what I said to you. I think the EU is very
:29:03. > :29:09.worried about the UK leaving and we are in a very good position to
:29:09. > :29:16.negotiate. First we have to say that we are leaving. Right. I think
:29:16. > :29:19.I've got that bit. Sank used for joining us from Brussels. -- a
:29:19. > :29:23.thank you. Now, you may be surprised to hear
:29:23. > :29:26.this but MPs have been kicked out of Parliament today. No, it is not
:29:26. > :29:30.because it's a Friday and they have all been sent back to their
:29:30. > :29:33.constituencies. Nor is it due to repair works. Any other ideas? It
:29:33. > :29:36.is because young people have taken over the green benches. Yes, today
:29:37. > :29:40.is Youth Parliament day, where 307 youngsters get to debate what they
:29:40. > :29:44.want in the Palace of Westminster. One of the issues they have been
:29:44. > :29:52.discussing is a curriculum for life. They will be lucky! Let's hear a
:29:52. > :29:58.bit of what they have been saying. Why go to school for several years
:29:58. > :30:06.to then not be able to get a job? Y N-Dubz �60,000 in debt? All of us
:30:06. > :30:15.in the UK Youth parliament have a power to make change happen -- why
:30:15. > :30:22.should we end up �60,000 in debt? Youth unemployment is at its
:30:22. > :30:26.highest for a generation but so is the help available. I am 17 and it
:30:26. > :30:32.is important for me to think about getting ready to work, but what
:30:32. > :30:36.about the 11 and 12-year-olds that we represent? Is it a concern they
:30:36. > :30:44.share? How relevant is it for them to be the Youth Parliament
:30:44. > :30:48.campaign? If the fact that so many young people are unemployed is a
:30:48. > :30:53.reflection of the economic climate. All too often we are blamed for not
:30:53. > :30:57.getting jobs. But I can assure you that not enough is being done. We
:30:57. > :31:02.all go to college and get qualifications but that is not
:31:02. > :31:05.enough. We need work experience, help with writing CVs,
:31:05. > :31:15.professionals coming into schools and colleges and giving as
:31:15. > :31:18.
:31:18. > :31:21.practical advice as well as And they say young people are not
:31:21. > :31:24.as well behaved as the older generation. Just look how well-
:31:24. > :31:34.behaved they were compared the Prime Minister's Questions, and how
:31:34. > :31:41.articulate, too. And they didn't read anything either. Let's go to a
:31:41. > :31:47.16-year-old from Hertfordshire. What were you talking about today?
:31:47. > :31:52.I was speaking against making transport cheaper, better and
:31:52. > :31:56.accessible for all. I was allocated it, so I had no choice in it. It
:31:56. > :32:00.was challenging! That will be useful if you get into parliament
:32:01. > :32:07.and you'd have to do what you are told by the whips! What are you
:32:07. > :32:11.hoping to achieve today? Personally, it is a review of a curriculum to
:32:11. > :32:16.prepare us for life. From speaking to people in my area and from my
:32:16. > :32:20.school, I can see how important it is that we need that review.
:32:20. > :32:25.Michael Gove has been brought in recently, so we need his help and
:32:25. > :32:29.the government help to make sure that the students are getting
:32:29. > :32:33.educated the Right Stuff and in the right way. Have you spoken in the
:32:33. > :32:38.chamber, were you speaking on the green benches? What was it like,
:32:38. > :32:42.did you feel you are on TV? The it was a weird feeling but it was
:32:42. > :32:48.really good. Very nerve-racking and a bit scary, but hopefully people
:32:48. > :32:52.got my point and I came across in the right weight. Do you think you
:32:52. > :32:55.might have an appetite for this, will we see you as an MP and one
:32:56. > :33:00.day? Hopefully, you never know. I want to go into politics in some
:33:00. > :33:05.way. I hope to do law and politics at Uni. Will believe that is a
:33:05. > :33:15.future career. It's the Daily Politics is still going, come and
:33:15. > :33:18.
:33:18. > :33:21.see us. Before we say goodbye to you two, we need to get the answer
:33:21. > :33:24.to our quiz. Earlier we told you about some of the foreign fact-
:33:24. > :33:34.finding trips MPs have been taking, but we wanted to know - which of
:33:34. > :33:35.
:33:35. > :33:39.these destinations hasn't been What is the answer? If any MP has
:33:39. > :33:45.put in Sandy Island in their expenses, they are in trouble - it
:33:45. > :33:55.doesn't exist! It is the correct answer. It would be very
:33:55. > :33:58.
:33:58. > :34:02.It's just gone 12.30pm. Coming up in a moment it's our monthly look
:34:02. > :34:06.at what's been going on in European politics. For now it's time to say
:34:06. > :34:08.goodbye to my two guests of the day, Pippa Crerar and Iain Martin. This
:34:08. > :34:11.week, members of the European Parliament have been meeting in
:34:11. > :34:14.Strasbourg for their regular plenary session. So what have they
:34:14. > :34:17.been getting up to? And what else has been happening over in
:34:17. > :34:27.Brussels? Here's our guide to latest from Europe, in just 60
:34:27. > :34:30.
:34:30. > :34:33.Despite 12 hours of talks, eurozone finance ministers failed on Tuesday
:34:33. > :34:39.to reach a deal to release the bail-out funds to stop Greece going
:34:39. > :34:45.bankrupt. Finance ministers and the IMF will try again on Monday. In
:34:45. > :34:48.Strasbourg, MEPs approved 670 million euros of emergency help for
:34:48. > :34:52.Italy, a region hit by a devastating earthquake in May.
:34:52. > :34:56.That's the biggest EU aid package ever paid out to remember. MEPs
:34:56. > :34:59.discussed making it cheaper and easier for all of us to splash out
:34:59. > :35:03.on our credit cards across Europe, by standardising personal credit
:35:03. > :35:07.and debit card payments. On Wednesday, the European Parliament
:35:07. > :35:12.backed new laws to make motorbikes, three-wheelers and quad bikes safer
:35:12. > :35:15.and cleaner. MEPs finally approved the nomination of Tonio Borg, a
:35:15. > :35:20.Maltese Catholic conservative, as the you's new health commissioner.
:35:20. > :35:30.He replaces his fellow countryman who designed after an anti- fraud
:35:30. > :35:34.
:35:34. > :35:36.inquiry linked him to an attempt to And with us now, I've been joined
:35:37. > :35:39.by two members of the European Parliament. The Liberal Democrat
:35:39. > :35:42.George Lyon, and Emma McClarkin for the Conservatives. Let's take a
:35:42. > :35:49.look at one of those stories in more detail, the appointment of
:35:49. > :35:56.Tonio Borg as the new Maltese Commissioner. One had to go because
:35:56. > :36:00.of problems of corruption. He's not been replaced by someone who tried
:36:00. > :36:07.to put an anti- abortion statute into the Maltese constitution. And
:36:07. > :36:11.he's the health commissioner. Maltese. Like most Maltese, he is
:36:11. > :36:14.Roman Catholic. I think it is a dangerous debate we've had this
:36:14. > :36:17.week, an argument about whether we should stop somebody taking up the
:36:17. > :36:22.role of commissioner because they are a devout Catholic and they
:36:22. > :36:25.uphold the morals of their church. But we supported his nomination
:36:25. > :36:29.going through. On balance, we thought he was capable of giving
:36:29. > :36:33.the job as a commissioner, rather than judging him on his religious
:36:33. > :36:39.beliefs. So he can do the job of Health Commissioner despite his
:36:39. > :36:43.view that there should be a constitutional change in Malta or
:36:43. > :36:47.making abortion illegal. It is illegal in Ireland as well. We need
:36:47. > :36:53.to look at, are we having dual standards just because the left
:36:53. > :36:59.Jews to pick an argument this week? What do you think? There are
:36:59. > :37:06.serious concerns about... As a defender to be his right to hold
:37:06. > :37:10.the views he holds, but he has strong views on abortion, gay
:37:10. > :37:14.rights and divorce. He is being appointed where he will make
:37:14. > :37:18.decisions on these issues. The issue for us and the Liberal group
:37:19. > :37:23.was, we didn't doubt his combatants but we questioned whether that was
:37:23. > :37:27.the right portfolio. We would ask for his which portfolio, or else
:37:27. > :37:32.strip away some of these issues so the gay rights issue and abortion
:37:32. > :37:37.was given to another commissioner. Does the parliament have a veto
:37:37. > :37:43.over an appointment like this? have the right to strike down all
:37:43. > :37:48.the commissioners. It is one out, everyone out? Yes, that's the power
:37:48. > :37:56.we have. It is a nuclear bomb you can use. It is a bit like the
:37:56. > :37:59.Budget. We have an influence, but you could have threatened. If there
:37:59. > :38:02.was a big clean-up well within the parliament, we could strike out all
:38:02. > :38:06.the commissioners and left there was changed. We've taken out
:38:06. > :38:12.commissioners before. So European leaders have spent hours trying to
:38:12. > :38:15.hammer out a deal on the future budget for the European Union. But
:38:15. > :38:23.whatever they agree, MEPs in the European Parliament will still get
:38:23. > :38:26.a say on the final numbers. Jo You may think all the action is
:38:26. > :38:30.happening in Brussels, with the leaders of the 27 member states of
:38:30. > :38:33.the EU. But any budget deal agreed by them over there still has to
:38:33. > :38:38.have the approval of the members of the European Parliament in
:38:38. > :38:44.Strasbourg. The signs don't look good. The majority of MEPs want an
:38:44. > :38:47.increase in the EU budget, not a frieze, and certainly not a cat.
:38:47. > :38:52.There's been fierce debate in Parliament over the budget this
:38:52. > :38:56.week, with MEPs just as divided as leaders of the member states over
:38:56. > :38:59.how EU funds should be spent in the future. The dead hand of
:38:59. > :39:03.bureaucracy is destroying innovation and destroying jobs in
:39:03. > :39:10.Europe. National democracy and free markets would be a much better
:39:10. > :39:15.model. This union, if it wants to become a real federal union, needs
:39:15. > :39:24.resources. Needs its own income. That is the big battle to do now.
:39:24. > :39:27.We shall do it together and if necessary, without you, Mr barrage.
:39:27. > :39:31.The man leading the that associations in the parliaments is
:39:31. > :39:37.more money is needed for growth. The overall amount proposed is too
:39:37. > :39:45.low, because it would mean that for the next seven years the EU budget
:39:45. > :39:49.would be lower than it is this year, 2012. The Commission President's
:39:50. > :39:56.original proposal was a budget of just over one trillion euros over
:39:56. > :39:59.seven years, to 2020. A 5% increase on the current level. The European
:39:59. > :40:04.Council President, who is leading the Brussels the associations, has
:40:04. > :40:10.suggested a lower figure of around 973 billion euros. Still too high
:40:10. > :40:15.for David Cameron, who wants a freeze at 2011 levels, around 886
:40:15. > :40:20.billion euros for the same period. We don't have the money as we used
:40:20. > :40:23.to 20 to 30 years ago, to go on a spending spree. Francois Hollande
:40:24. > :40:27.on Paris was elected on that and what he is doing now is calling for,
:40:27. > :40:32.gosh, we've got to have a programme of spending better and spending
:40:32. > :40:36.less. The UK is not alone. The Netherlands and Sweden brought you
:40:36. > :40:40.back David Cameron's position and also want the EU funds spent
:40:40. > :40:45.differently. The key issue for European success in the future is
:40:45. > :40:48.cost control and responsible public budgets. But countries like France
:40:48. > :40:53.are not going to give up a penny of their agricultural subsidy, Italy
:40:53. > :40:56.doesn't want to. To be frank, France should also consider its own
:40:56. > :41:01.budgetary problems. The power of the European Parliament on
:41:01. > :41:04.budgetary matters can't be underestimated, and not just on
:41:04. > :41:08.long-term funding. There's also an ongoing row over the amount of cash
:41:08. > :41:14.needed for this year's and next year's budget. MEPs could decide to
:41:14. > :41:23.wield the veto to get what they want. I don't like the word of veto
:41:23. > :41:27.and the threat. But realise that for instance, on next year's budget,
:41:27. > :41:31.Parliament has voted against. We are in the situation of a veto
:41:32. > :41:36.coming from the parliament. Now all the governments have to take that
:41:36. > :41:44.on board. A clear warning to EU leaders back in Brussels not to
:41:44. > :41:48.ignore the will of the European Parliament. We were listening to
:41:48. > :41:54.that. The European Parliament wants a much bigger increase even than
:41:54. > :41:58.the commission, is that right? they voted through about 5% rise -
:41:58. > :42:04.slightly above the figure the commission came out with. They've
:42:04. > :42:11.been banging on about that for the last year or so. I just think they
:42:11. > :42:17.are out of touch with reality on that one. If you start, they are
:42:17. > :42:21.sitting there and negotiating the long-term budget negotiating
:42:21. > :42:26.committee, it is clear from going round the table that while there
:42:26. > :42:29.are strong noises about we might veto the Budget if it's not be Dean
:42:29. > :42:32.of, the real game that is being played is to make sure there is
:42:32. > :42:35.proper flexibility in how you manage the Budget. We don't even
:42:35. > :42:39.have the basic powers that the Scottish parliament has, which is
:42:39. > :42:44.to rollover if anyone under Spence at the end of the year or switch
:42:44. > :42:48.budgets. To ensure the priority of jobs and growth are at the heart of
:42:48. > :42:53.the small reform budget. And to ensure there's a mid-term review.
:42:53. > :42:57.This Budget is for seven years. We need a mid-term review that says,
:42:57. > :43:03.well, if things are starting to improve by 2017, maybe have another
:43:03. > :43:07.look at it. It seems these are the areas the parliament might use the
:43:07. > :43:11.veto. Do you agree it's unlikely that the European Parliament is
:43:11. > :43:20.going to get what it voted for? The commission is an even going to get
:43:20. > :43:27.as much as the 970 billion that Jo mentioned their. But it won't use
:43:27. > :43:31.the veto even if it doesn't get it. The parliament could use a veto.
:43:31. > :43:34.That is why it is so important negotiations are going on today and
:43:34. > :43:39.that David is there, fighting for what is best for the UK from our
:43:39. > :43:43.position. It might be blocked ultimately by the parliament with
:43:43. > :43:47.their veto. Regardless of how many people are threatening to use the
:43:47. > :43:52.veto there, Parliament do still have that, but we need to get the
:43:52. > :43:58.right budget for the whole of the European Union. Why do so many MEPs
:43:58. > :44:02.want to see an increase in the budget when they know that across
:44:02. > :44:12.Europe, even in France now, national governments are having to
:44:12. > :44:12.
:44:12. > :44:15.take an axe to their own budgets? can't explain... A lot do it.
:44:15. > :44:20.have 17 member states who are beneficiaries. Poland is leading
:44:20. > :44:24.the charge for a bigger budget. Why? Because they have an interest.
:44:24. > :44:28.Clearly, when you've got France, Germany, Austria, benevolence and
:44:29. > :44:32.the UK all calling for a cut, it is quite surprising we don't see that
:44:32. > :44:39.reflected in the debate. I find myself and my Conservative
:44:39. > :44:47.colleagues calling on that. Labour MEPs vote for a rise?
:44:47. > :44:52.they voted against. But there group Dade, they are overwhelmingly voted
:44:52. > :44:56.for a whopping 5% increase. group that they are part of it. But
:44:56. > :45:01.the Labour MEPs... There is remarkable consensus here among
:45:01. > :45:07.MEPs. They are Eurocrats. They are part of the machine and they don't
:45:07. > :45:11.like the word no. They like to see themselves as the answer.
:45:11. > :45:16.remarking on there is a consensus between Conservative, Lib Dem and
:45:16. > :45:22.Labour in the European Parliament to restraining the Budget.
:45:22. > :45:26.Absolutely. That's what we voted for and we argued for. One of the
:45:26. > :45:30.huge mistakes a lot of parliamentarians make his Facey
:45:30. > :45:34.fiscal responsibility being the preserve of Euro-scepticism. It is
:45:34. > :45:38.nonsense. We need to spend money better in Europe if we are to
:45:38. > :45:42.convince citizens that Europe is worthwhile. Do you think they will
:45:42. > :45:46.come to an agreement in Brussels? The word is not, not going to
:45:46. > :45:50.happen today. But I think that's bad for the UK and bad for the
:45:50. > :45:55.whole of Europe as well, waiting around, when are they going to do
:45:55. > :46:01.this deal? I don't think a deal is going to be done. Most member
:46:01. > :46:04.states will want to have another go at it and frame the debate. 2013?
:46:04. > :46:09.Mr Cameron has to negotiate with his backbenchers as well as the
:46:09. > :46:12.rest of Europe. This week MEPs have been debating two reports on shale
:46:12. > :46:14.gas, seen by many as a possible low cost, low-carbon solution to
:46:14. > :46:18.Europe's energy needs, although others have raised environmental
:46:18. > :46:23.concerns. So what is it? Shale gas is produced by a process called
:46:23. > :46:26.hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. This pumps water at high pressure
:46:26. > :46:31.into rock to create narrow fractures, which allow shale gas to
:46:31. > :46:40.flow out and be captured. In 2010, a Government study estimated there
:46:40. > :46:48.could be 5.3 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas in the UK. But a
:46:48. > :46:53.study earlier this year suggested there could be much more offshore.
:46:53. > :46:55.Maybe up to 100 trillion cubic feet in the North Sea. This week, MEPs
:46:55. > :46:58.accepted a report by the Energy Committee which said each member
:46:58. > :47:01.state the right to decide for itself whether to extract shale gas.
:47:01. > :47:04.But MEPs also voted in favour of a report from the Environment
:47:04. > :47:07.Committee which outlined the need for tougher regulation on shale gas
:47:07. > :47:17.activities, although an amendment proposing a moratorium on all shale
:47:17. > :47:20.
:47:20. > :47:22.Speaking during the debate on Tuesday, the co-author of the
:47:22. > :47:30.Energy Committee report Niki Tzavela said shale gas was
:47:30. > :47:36.potentially a game-changer. Based on American experience because we
:47:36. > :47:40.don't have a European experience of this, shale gas is potentially the
:47:40. > :47:46.biggest energy development since the 1920s, as big a change as when
:47:46. > :47:53.we switched from using coal to oil. And we have been joined from the
:47:53. > :47:58.Hague in the Netherlands by the Dutch Green MEP Bas Eickhout. This
:47:58. > :48:08.must be a nightmare for a green light Q. Her new fossil fuel which
:48:08. > :48:10.
:48:10. > :48:15.is clean and cheap and based in If it was a fossil fuel like that,
:48:15. > :48:20.I would not have a problem. But is it clean and visit easily
:48:20. > :48:26.recoverable? If it would have been a keen fossil fuel, I would not
:48:26. > :48:31.have any problems. -- clean. But people are talking about the first
:48:31. > :48:34.real change in the energy system since the 1920s. Those people on
:48:34. > :48:40.missing the energy revolution that is going on in Germany and Denmark
:48:40. > :48:44.now, and that is the switch to renewable energy, so why should we
:48:44. > :48:50.go down this uncertain route through shale gas? Well we know
:48:50. > :48:55.other countries are already making the move to renewables. I go for
:48:55. > :48:59.renewables, it very clearly. Maybe they are having second thoughts
:48:59. > :49:06.because Denmark, which is more wind Power Mac event anywhere in the
:49:06. > :49:11.world, also has the highest cost of electricity -- more wind power. But
:49:11. > :49:19.the United States, which has had a shell gas revolution, has managed
:49:19. > :49:22.to cut its emissions by 5% -- shale gas. Natural gas prices in America
:49:23. > :49:28.of one third of Europe and companies on relocating to America
:49:28. > :49:33.because of it. The gas price in Europe is high mainly through taxes
:49:33. > :49:37.and that has been the case also before the shale gas, and the
:49:37. > :49:41.prices are high in Denmark was already before they went to wind
:49:41. > :49:46.energy. That is mainly due to the tax structure of the way we deal
:49:46. > :49:52.with energy resources. I am talking about wholesale energy prices
:49:52. > :49:56.before tax. But we are not talking about one third then. But you are
:49:56. > :50:01.right that there is this discussion in the US and we are looking at an
:50:01. > :50:05.increase in gas used in the US but at the same time, if you look at
:50:06. > :50:09.the problems they are having with shale, they are having problems
:50:09. > :50:13.with water quality because the water that was used for the
:50:13. > :50:19.fracking has been contaminated by chemicals, and that is now being
:50:19. > :50:24.investigated in the US by their environmental protection agency.
:50:24. > :50:29.They dive into this resource and then run into problems and are now
:50:29. > :50:34.investigating that. That is what we want to prevent in the EU. First
:50:34. > :50:40.research, please. What are the consequences for greenhouse gases
:50:40. > :50:44.and the water quality? Methane is a very strong greenhouse gas. That
:50:44. > :50:47.has been researched here and therefore, we say, please do the
:50:47. > :50:51.research before because otherwise you are doing things wrong which
:50:51. > :50:56.you will have to correct afterwards and we would like to prevent
:50:56. > :51:03.mistakes that are happening now in the US. That is a reasonable
:51:03. > :51:08.position, do your homework first. But your colleague says it does not
:51:08. > :51:16.matter how much shale gas lies beneath the soil of Europe. If we
:51:16. > :51:21.care about climate change, we This is an opportunity that we need
:51:21. > :51:25.to look at very closely. We need to get the right balance between the
:51:25. > :51:32.possible exploitation of this natural resource. If you look at
:51:32. > :51:36.what has happened in the US, we cannot dismiss it out of hand. We
:51:36. > :51:39.need an approach to take care of the concerns about the environment
:51:39. > :51:45.but not making the of regulatory framework so difficult that you
:51:45. > :51:50.cannot exploit it at all. We need to go forward and examine this. The
:51:50. > :51:55.idea that we were constantly rely on Russian gas for the foreseeable
:51:55. > :51:59.future fills me with alarm. We need to look at this and to evaluate the
:51:59. > :52:05.impact on climate change. Clearly we have got a whole lot of coal-
:52:05. > :52:09.fired stations which are about to shut down because of EU regulations.
:52:09. > :52:15.We need some baseline energy production there so that we can
:52:15. > :52:21.expand the renewable sector. We need baseline energy to balance
:52:21. > :52:25.renewables. It is interesting to see the change in tone and
:52:25. > :52:29.priorities of the Conservative side of the coalition government. They
:52:29. > :52:36.came into power boasting they would be the greenest government ever and
:52:36. > :52:41.now, the Conservatives's priority is to get the shale. We have to
:52:42. > :52:47.look at the opportunity we have to have our own supply in the UK and
:52:47. > :52:51.our energy security. No energy is 100% clean and safe. We have to
:52:51. > :52:56.make sure we are looking at minimising the risk. We need to
:52:56. > :53:00.make sure the right safeguards are in place to protect the environment
:53:00. > :53:06.and public health, in defence or -- if that cannot be minimised, then
:53:06. > :53:10.all bets are off when it comes to shale. I know you are a big
:53:10. > :53:14.supporter of renewables but even as Europe heads towards more
:53:14. > :53:20.renewables if that is the case, the harsh reality is that continental
:53:20. > :53:28.Europe is increasingly dependent on Russian gas and Saudi oil. Does
:53:28. > :53:38.that make you comfortable? Either way, this is exactly why we
:53:38. > :53:38.
:53:38. > :53:43.have to get off these kinds of a -- addiction. Our energy system
:53:43. > :53:48.transition, we now have a choice. Do we stick to the centralised
:53:48. > :53:54.fossil fuels or do we go to a decentralised renewable system?
:53:54. > :53:59.That is the decision we have to make. Shale gas is only healthy in
:53:59. > :54:05.the transition time. As I hear from my colleagues, they are in favour
:54:05. > :54:10.of doing research first and looking more into the issues and regulation.
:54:10. > :54:14.I am very much in favour of that. But meanwhile we have to invest and
:54:14. > :54:20.clearly I would like to invest in the energy resource which is the
:54:20. > :54:26.cleanest, and that is renewables. I am sorry, but it is. We are
:54:26. > :54:30.grateful for you coming onto the So as we know, EU leaders are in
:54:30. > :54:33.Brussels today for the budget summit. Strictly speaking it is
:54:33. > :54:38.actually a meeting of the European Council headed up by the Council
:54:38. > :54:48.president Herman Van Rompuy. So how does this key part of the Here's
:54:48. > :54:49.
:54:49. > :54:53.Adam with the lowdown. -- how does this key part of the EU actually
:54:53. > :55:03.operate? You have arrived in Brussels for a
:55:03. > :55:08.
:55:08. > :55:16.What we call summits are actually meetings of the European Council.
:55:16. > :55:19.They happen four times a year and the only part of the EU where the
:55:19. > :55:25.individual countries are represented. The council also meets
:55:25. > :55:29.at ministerial level, so sometimes its finance, agricultural and
:55:29. > :55:33.energy ministers are on the red carpet instead. This is where the
:55:33. > :55:38.meetings happen. They are checked by the President, Herman van Rompuy,
:55:38. > :55:43.and then leaders like Angela Merkel and David Cameron sit around this
:55:43. > :55:49.table, and the negotiations start. But a lot of the work has been done
:55:49. > :55:53.in advance by diplomats. What was that? Advises what always allowed
:55:53. > :55:59.in the room but famously in negotiations over the Maastricht
:55:59. > :56:04.treaty, John Major's right hand man hid under the table and passed him
:56:04. > :56:08.notes here. It says here lot of decisions have to be unanimous but
:56:08. > :56:11.some are taken by qualified majority voting, which is which
:56:11. > :56:16.each country gets a set number of votes based on the population size
:56:16. > :56:21.and it is more complicated than getting 50% of them, but that
:56:21. > :56:24.system will change in 2014. In future the meetings will happen in
:56:24. > :56:28.this new building, where the President will also have a swanky
:56:28. > :56:33.office. When the leaders are finished talking, they put aside
:56:33. > :56:37.their differences for the family photo. Brussels insiders measure
:56:37. > :56:43.the length of a council meeting by the number of shirts that were
:56:43. > :56:49.needed. When the famously gruelling meetings are over, all that is left
:56:49. > :56:59.is to defend your decisions to the voters at home.
:56:59. > :56:59.
:56:59. > :57:04.He snores like that in the office as well. When that they used to be
:57:04. > :57:09.seven or even 15 turn up to the summit, they were manageable, but
:57:09. > :57:13.when there are 27 heads of government, you do wonder! It's is
:57:13. > :57:17.the fact they go on so late into the night. Are they making the best
:57:17. > :57:21.decisions about the future of Europe at 4 o'clock in the morning?
:57:21. > :57:25.They continue to want to meet late at night in the hope it will
:57:25. > :57:31.pressure them into a compromise and I hope this time round it will
:57:31. > :57:36.really work. It is hard for people to grasp what is really going on.
:57:36. > :57:42.99% of the work is done long before you get to the summit. That is the
:57:42. > :57:48.committee of the council? Yes. BT's the council at civil servant level
:57:48. > :57:57.-- it is. What is left when you get to the heads of state is a couple
:57:57. > :58:01.of the big, chunky, really difficult issues. Experience leads
:58:01. > :58:05.you keep them in the room because at some stage, they have to keep
:58:05. > :58:11.them in that room. They used to stop the clock before midnight! I
:58:11. > :58:16.remember! Should the President of the council be directly elected by
:58:16. > :58:22.the people? Maybe they would feel closely to Herman van Rompuy if he
:58:22. > :58:27.was. If it was a direct election, it probably would not be him!
:58:27. > :58:30.think you are right! A lot of people do not know what happens
:58:30. > :58:35.inside the council meetings. We have got the chance to use the
:58:35. > :58:38.ultimate veto to say no to something and we have a prime
:58:38. > :58:45.minister that is prepared to do that. Should he be directly elected
:58:45. > :58:47.or not, that is all I wanted to know? We should consider that. It