28/11/2012

:00:50. > :00:54.Good morning, Foulkes. This is Daily Politics. And it is time,

:00:54. > :00:59.gentlemen please. Supermarkets might be banned from offering buy

:00:59. > :01:02.one, get one free deals on alcohol in their attempt to cut binge

:01:02. > :01:06.drinking. Will it work? Government says, yes, we will

:01:06. > :01:13.protect the green belt, but we need to build millions of new houses,

:01:13. > :01:18.and they have to go somewhere. We ask how they can do it. It is Prime

:01:18. > :01:23.Minister's Questions in just half- an-hour. What has Ed got it up his

:01:23. > :01:28.sleeve for the PM this time? And we meet the man who wants to cancel

:01:28. > :01:35.Christmas. Buying somebody a gift often obliges them to buy back you,

:01:36. > :01:41.and if they are skint, they can't afford it, that his pain, not joy.

:01:41. > :01:47.What a cheery chap! I am still expecting a present from you.

:01:47. > :01:53.already bought it! All that coming up in the next hour and a half of

:01:53. > :01:57.public service TV at its finest. Joining us today, the Minister for

:01:57. > :02:05.education and schools, Matthew Hancock. And the shadow Justice

:02:05. > :02:08.Secretary, Sadiq Khan. David Cameron will be handed Lord Justice

:02:08. > :02:12.Leveson's report into the standards of the press. Tomorrow he will

:02:12. > :02:16.stand before the House of Commons and tell them what he plans to do.

:02:16. > :02:22.It is a big moment for the Prime Minister, and you will not be able

:02:22. > :02:25.to please everyone, even on his own side. The papers are universally

:02:25. > :02:27.opposed to independent state regulation. The victims of phone

:02:27. > :02:32.hacking of press intrusion are adamantly against the industry

:02:32. > :02:37.being left alone to run its own affairs as it has so far. Many MPs

:02:37. > :02:40.have already made up their minds. The Labour front bench a say that

:02:40. > :02:44.pretty much nothing Lord Leveson says should be adopted, but they

:02:44. > :02:49.haven't seen it. This morning, a letter is going around signed by

:02:49. > :02:56.more than 80, mostly Tory, MPs, opposing any kind of statutory

:02:56. > :03:01.regulation. We believe the statutory regulation should be an

:03:01. > :03:07.absolute last resort. It would mean effectively state licensing of

:03:07. > :03:12.newspapers. We moved away from that in 1695. On the table are sensible

:03:12. > :03:16.proposals put forward by Lord Black to have a voluntary scheme whereby

:03:16. > :03:21.all newspapers would sign up to it, where it could pro actively

:03:21. > :03:28.intervene, levy fines, and its decision would be binding. That is

:03:28. > :03:33.a much better way to proceed than introducing laws. Conor Burns MP.

:03:33. > :03:39.We are joined by Lib Dem leader -- deputy leader Simon Hughes. Do you

:03:39. > :03:45.believe that self-regulation has failed? Yes. And would you be

:03:45. > :03:52.prepared to back state regulation, and new law? We have to be very

:03:52. > :03:55.clear that people don't misunderstand, this is not

:03:55. > :04:01.regulating the press so there is a body that tells the press what to

:04:01. > :04:06.do. This is a regulation like we do for financial services or for fair

:04:06. > :04:10.trade off for you, the broadcasters, which is allowing you to get on

:04:10. > :04:15.with your job but having a statutory system which makes sure

:04:15. > :04:19.that when there are complaints, there is a system in place.

:04:19. > :04:23.hacked off campaign say that doesn't go far enough, and it won't

:04:24. > :04:28.insure that the press carry out -- don't carry out the sort of

:04:28. > :04:35.malpractices that have happened in the past. What you say to that?

:04:35. > :04:39.Let's see what Lord Justice Leveson says. He has heard all the evidence,

:04:39. > :04:45.including from the Campaign for the victims, Milly Dowler's family and

:04:45. > :04:49.many others. They are clear that we cannot go on as we are. Things have

:04:49. > :04:52.to change. The press have had the chance to put things right and have

:04:52. > :04:57.failed. There is a poll in today's papers which show that that is

:04:57. > :05:04.reported -- supported by the overwhelming majority of the

:05:04. > :05:08.British people. So I think we have to wait to see exactly what Lord

:05:08. > :05:14.Justice Leveson says tomorrow, but I am clear that the sort of

:05:14. > :05:18.concerns that the victims, the Milly Dowler family for example,

:05:18. > :05:23.have are redressed, because in the past they have not been able to

:05:23. > :05:26.clear their name, to prevent abuse. We need to make sure there is a

:05:26. > :05:31.right to redress guaranteed in the future. Are you worried about

:05:31. > :05:40.reports that David Cameron and Nick Clegg could come out with different

:05:40. > :05:44.views in response to Lord Leveson? All three party leaders agreed that

:05:44. > :05:48.the Leveson Inquiry should be set up. There was consensus to do this

:05:48. > :05:51.and who should conducted. I hope that when all three party leaders

:05:51. > :05:59.have had a chance to read the report, there will be a consensus

:05:59. > :06:04.about what we do, and that we will be a will to support the level some

:06:04. > :06:08.recommendations. That is what I hope. But there are reports that

:06:08. > :06:13.Nick Clegg is preparing a separate speech, that he could go into the

:06:13. > :06:17.chamber after David Cameron's response to the proposals and say

:06:17. > :06:22.something quite different. Liberal Democrats are an

:06:22. > :06:30.independent party. This is not governed by the coalition agreement.

:06:30. > :06:35.We will form our own agreement, our own opinion when we see the report.

:06:35. > :06:40.We haven't heard yet where the Prime Minister is likely to land.

:06:40. > :06:48.Whereas the Prime Minister going to land, Matthew Hancock? I imagine he

:06:48. > :06:52.will read the report. Will he adopt the proposals? He only really fell

:06:53. > :06:58.short of saying that he would adopt it unless it was completely bonkers.

:06:58. > :07:03.Even if it included new laws and statutory regulation. He reads the

:07:03. > :07:08.report for the first time, we understand, straight after PMQs. He

:07:08. > :07:12.is allowed access from 12 o'clock, but I imagine he will be busy for

:07:12. > :07:17.the first half an hour. Say you are saying he is likely not to adopt

:07:17. > :07:25.the proposals? No, I am saying that he is likely to read it before he

:07:25. > :07:30.decides. He will have had time to look at it by early tomorrow

:07:30. > :07:37.afternoon. He has 24 hours. What you think you will do? I think he

:07:37. > :07:40.will make a judgment based on what he has seen. What can I say? What

:07:40. > :07:43.happens when you receive a report like that and you are the prime

:07:44. > :07:48.Minister is that you have to consider it very carefully, and you

:07:48. > :07:56.are given 24 hours in order to be able to think of your appropriate

:07:56. > :08:01.response. But it might be observed for some people. It cost �3.9

:08:01. > :08:10.million to set up, they have been 184 witnesses. It would be silly

:08:10. > :08:16.for him not to adopt any proposals put forward. It would be absurd for

:08:16. > :08:22.him to prejudge it. We have heard from the victims about what

:08:22. > :08:31.happened. There are already legal case is going on, because one lot

:08:31. > :08:36.of what happened is already illegal under existing law. It is not

:08:36. > :08:40.surprising that he wants to wait and have a look at what is in the

:08:40. > :08:44.report before setting out his position. It is not only

:08:44. > :08:47.understandable, 80 has also very sensible. Do agree with some of

:08:47. > :08:52.your senior Conservative colleagues warning that any new law to

:08:52. > :08:58.regulate the press would require returned state licensing of papers.

:08:58. > :09:02.I personally would need a lot of convincing that we need to have

:09:02. > :09:08.stayed licensing, and statutory regulation. But I want to see what

:09:08. > :09:13.the report says. The most egregious problems in the culture of the

:09:13. > :09:20.press are already being prosecuted, and there are already laws around

:09:20. > :09:24.what you can put in a newspaper. We will have to look at... But only if

:09:24. > :09:28.you're a person with money. It is ME if you have means that you can

:09:28. > :09:33.afford to take a newspaper to court. That is what would change if a new

:09:33. > :09:40.law was passed. Let's see what laws are proposed. It is true that

:09:40. > :09:47.access to lawyers is expensive. There are many ways to skin that

:09:47. > :09:54.cat. Labour have stated what you want to do. You would support a new

:09:54. > :09:59.system of regulation? We have not said we are going to give the

:09:59. > :10:09.Leveson Inquiry a blank cheque. But unless the report is bonkers, we

:10:09. > :10:13.would probably follow the recommendations. David Cameron has

:10:13. > :10:21.formed a view, which is am less Leverton is bonkers, he will follow

:10:21. > :10:27.the regular it -- and regulations. I have shared a platform with Simon

:10:27. > :10:30.many times when I have agreed with him. Three things - they could be

:10:30. > :10:34.an independent monitoring system for the press, it should be

:10:34. > :10:40.compulsory, so that editors can't walk out of the PCC and refused to

:10:40. > :10:45.play ball and there has got to be proper redress for victims of this

:10:45. > :10:50.sort of stuff. If you have and nine-year-old Gill, sister of the

:10:50. > :10:59.bereaved student who dies in a road accident, who was photographed

:10:59. > :11:03.crying, in breach of PCC guidelines. A photograph lifted of a deceased

:11:03. > :11:11.child from Facebook, published. It is not against the law, but it is

:11:11. > :11:16.against the PCC guidelines. An example where by statutory

:11:16. > :11:24.underpinning would help. Do you agree with that, Matthew?

:11:24. > :11:29.certainly agree that redressed needs to be stronger. There is

:11:29. > :11:35.enormous agreement over lots of things, but the question is how you

:11:35. > :11:40.make it happen under the consequences of how you do that. As

:11:40. > :11:43.Lord Justice Leveson has said, he is considering the evidence, he is

:11:43. > :11:50.an extremely smart man, and no doubt he will consider all of these

:11:50. > :11:58.questions. Matthew, you are a smart man as well. We have had many

:11:58. > :12:03.select committee reports, enquiries, investigations. What you believe?

:12:03. > :12:10.Are I believe I would like to look at the evidence before coming to a

:12:10. > :12:14.snap judgment. Define bonkers. What would be bonkers? The system has

:12:14. > :12:24.failed to regulate the banks. What makes you think it can regulate the

:12:24. > :12:31.newspapers? Statutory underpinning is very important... Statutory

:12:31. > :12:38.underpinning is regulation. What we are saying is that they need to be

:12:38. > :12:44.independent, compulsion and redress. Nobody is accusing our judges of

:12:44. > :12:51.being political hacks. Nobody is accusing solicitors... But there is

:12:51. > :12:57.no democratic accountability of judges. We lobbied for... Not we,

:12:57. > :13:07.you. Politicians. You lobbied. should wait and see what the judge

:13:07. > :13:08.

:13:08. > :13:12.says. Before we go, newspaper editors are worried that in the end,

:13:13. > :13:15.whatever his set-up, if it does have some sort of statutory backing,

:13:15. > :13:18.if it is in law that they will have some may looking over their

:13:18. > :13:24.shoulder on a daily basis, every time they write a story, it will

:13:24. > :13:27.have to be checked, is that the reality of it? There is a

:13:27. > :13:32.widespread campaign amongst the editors to try to have no change.

:13:32. > :13:36.And I understand where they're coming from. They, like everybody

:13:36. > :13:41.else, have to be subject to discussion by Parliament,

:13:41. > :13:45.Parliament deciding what to do. We asked Lord Justice Leveson to help

:13:45. > :13:51.us decide what to do. He's been Tia taking evidence and deciding what

:13:51. > :13:57.to say. You are saying it would happen? I think he is highly

:13:57. > :14:01.intelligent, a very robust report, I assume we will want to support

:14:01. > :14:06.all that he proposes. I assume that, and I hope that that commands

:14:07. > :14:11.general support across Parliament. Simon, then queue. The BBC can

:14:11. > :14:18.reveal six copies of letters and were delivered to Downing Street

:14:18. > :14:25.about an hour ago. He won't have time to read them, because Prime

:14:25. > :14:30.Minister's Questions are coming up. Blockers are already offering

:14:30. > :14:36.�1,000 for a copy! The Government are looking at

:14:36. > :14:40.putting a minimum price on alcohol. It is already something the

:14:40. > :14:44.Scottish government is trying to do, although it is the subject of a

:14:44. > :14:52.legal challenge and an EU competition law. Could it turn the

:14:52. > :14:59.tide on a culture of a responsible drinking? Jo Coburn has tottered

:14:59. > :15:05.over to her podium. If that's libellous!

:15:05. > :15:10.The Government is looking at banning buy one, get one free deals

:15:10. > :15:20.on alcohol, and introducing a minimum price per unit of 45p. This

:15:20. > :15:21.

:15:21. > :15:26.would mean that the price on the Public health experts wanted a

:15:26. > :15:29.minimum of 50p per unit. A Sheffield University study said

:15:29. > :15:33.this would see a dramatic fall in binge drinking, which they think

:15:33. > :15:37.would fall by more than 10%. And they said that moderate drinkers

:15:37. > :15:42.wouldn't be nearly so badly hit. People no harm themselves by

:15:42. > :15:49.drinking to excess would have to spend another �120 per year to keep

:15:49. > :15:52.up their habit. There are a million alcohol-related violent crimes, and

:15:52. > :15:56.1.2 million at alcohol-related hospital admissions last year. Some

:15:56. > :16:01.believe that a minimum Farkhod prize would cut hospital admissions

:16:01. > :16:06.by nearly 100,000 over a five-year period, and help prevent something

:16:06. > :16:11.like 3,000 early deaths. The Treasury could also suffer with a

:16:11. > :16:16.reduction in tax revenue. When Canada introduced a similar minimum

:16:16. > :16:20.price, they lost 8% in revenue. The Scottish government has already

:16:20. > :16:24.opted for the 50p minimum price. The Bill completed its stages in

:16:24. > :16:34.the Scottish Parliament, but is not yet on the statute books, as it is

:16:34. > :16:37.Could this prevent some fools drinking themselves half to death?

:16:37. > :16:42.Or is it a measure that will simply hit people who simply enjoy a

:16:42. > :16:46.couple of quiet drinks and don't want to pay a fortune for it? Miles

:16:46. > :16:52.Beale from the wind and trade spirit Association is with us, also

:16:52. > :16:57.Eric Appleby, from Alcohol Concern. The government says alcohol-related

:16:57. > :17:04.health problems and crime costs cost us �21 billion. Can we afford

:17:04. > :17:07.not to do this? There's only real one model that is the evidence for

:17:07. > :17:11.the government introducing a minimum unit price, and it's been

:17:11. > :17:16.pretty heavily discredited. It won't work in real life. It's the

:17:16. > :17:19.Sheffield University model. The report on Monday question the

:17:19. > :17:23.underlying assumptions pretty heavily. We don't think it will

:17:23. > :17:26.work. We also think it penalises most of us who are moderate

:17:26. > :17:31.drinkers. We think there are plenty of other ways of achieving the

:17:31. > :17:36.right result, which is to reduce consumption. We are making quite

:17:36. > :17:40.good progress. In Canada, they introduced it in 2010, it reduced

:17:40. > :17:44.alcohol consumption by 8%, including a 22 % fall in high-

:17:44. > :17:48.strength beers, which are thought to be a cause of the chaos in our

:17:48. > :17:51.town centres on a Friday and Saturday night. It's not really

:17:51. > :17:55.comparable. There was provision there and they had a monopoly

:17:55. > :18:00.provider. Not really the same background we have in the UK with a

:18:00. > :18:04.free market. It's not a good comparison. Eric Appleby, the real

:18:04. > :18:06.disposable income in this country is that it well below. People have

:18:07. > :18:10.really had to tighten their belts. Electricity prices are going

:18:10. > :18:14.through the roof, food prices are going through the roof, now you

:18:14. > :18:18.want to slap alcohol prices through the roof - why? They won't go

:18:18. > :18:21.through the roof. This is a targeted measure at particularly

:18:21. > :18:26.groups of young drinkers and the very heavy drinkers, vulnerable

:18:26. > :18:31.groups who are buying the cheap, strong those? The average drinker

:18:31. > :18:34.will hardly feel the effect of this. It is targeted at dealing with the

:18:34. > :18:38.problems and not the general population. It is a targeted

:18:38. > :18:45.measure. It's not at all. Minimum unit pricing would apply to

:18:45. > :18:49.everyone. If it came in at 50p, two thirds of the products you see on

:18:49. > :18:53.the supermarket shelf would be affected, prices would go up. Even

:18:53. > :19:00.at 45p it is over half. To give you an example, 50p minimum unit price

:19:00. > :19:05.would put up a bottle of vodka from around �9 to �13.13, a pretty hefty

:19:05. > :19:08.increase. What would you say to that? I don't know which

:19:08. > :19:12.supermarkets he is going around, but the only ones to get that level

:19:12. > :19:16.of impact would be the ones where they are piling high that she

:19:16. > :19:19.bloggers and the cheap white ciders. If you walk around the supermarket,

:19:19. > :19:23.you can see it's not going to impact on the vast majority of

:19:23. > :19:27.products. And the important thing is it's not going to impact at all

:19:27. > :19:33.and people going out for a drink in the local pub, it will have no

:19:33. > :19:36.impact on pub prices. Matthew Hancock, you won a Home Office

:19:36. > :19:44.minister in 2010 and said the government, quote, had no intention

:19:44. > :19:51.of introducing minimum unit pricing. What changed? March, 2011? The

:19:51. > :19:57.evidence is very strong. How do they find out where the costs are?

:19:57. > :20:02.The costs are in our A&E units and police stations every weekend. It's

:20:02. > :20:05.a consultation. It's a consultation on the price so that we can look at

:20:05. > :20:13.the debate that happens and see where the appropriate price level

:20:13. > :20:17.is. But this isn't a measure that will impact on those, wider than

:20:17. > :20:22.those who won in the most vulnerable circumstances. For

:20:22. > :20:26.instance, you joked about BBC One. Your taste in wine of far too

:20:26. > :20:32.expensive to be affected. You've not seen the average price of a

:20:32. > :20:37.bottle of Blue Nun! What is the price on average of wine sold in

:20:38. > :20:42.supermarkets? It is �5. Which means a lot of people are buying wine for

:20:42. > :20:46.less than �5. They will be affected by this measure. People who want to

:20:46. > :20:50.have some wine on a table at the weekend, they can't afford a lot,

:20:50. > :20:55.may be one of life's little luxuries. You are going to put the

:20:55. > :21:00.price of, food prices up 30 %, energy prices up 20 % and now

:21:00. > :21:07.you're going to put up the price on a bottle of wine - why? In terms of

:21:07. > :21:12.a targeted measure on the strong ciders, the strong lagers and on

:21:12. > :21:14.excessive consumption, then the impact... You've got to look at the

:21:14. > :21:20.big picture and the impact of the cost of this, not only to

:21:20. > :21:23.individuals but also to the state through the NHS. Why wasn't it in

:21:23. > :21:28.your manifesto? We have ideas all the time. We've known about this

:21:28. > :21:31.long before you wrote the manifesto. You look at the evidence and what

:21:31. > :21:35.is working. The new New the evidence before you came to power.

:21:35. > :21:42.The evidence is obvious in the streets of our cities every weekend.

:21:42. > :21:50.Do you not get out? I represent Newmarket. It's not a great place

:21:50. > :21:54.on a Friday night. This is... You've got to look at the evidence.

:21:54. > :21:58.You've got to keep looking at it. That's why we consult on the

:21:58. > :22:03.measure, not least because, as you say, there is a serious problem

:22:03. > :22:08.here and it needs to be addressed. The idea that you shouldn't look to

:22:08. > :22:12.Canada for ideas, I don't agree with it. The Prime Minister said,

:22:12. > :22:15.it seems to me that what we should do is what we suggested before the

:22:15. > :22:20.last Budget. Try to target the problem drinkers and problem drinks.

:22:20. > :22:24.This is a blanket rise. You didn't have it in your manifesto, the Home

:22:24. > :22:28.Office said two years ago that you weren't going to do it, you had no

:22:28. > :22:32.intention. The Prime Minister said you should target rather than a

:22:32. > :22:36.blanket. You are doing the opposite of all of that. And no, the Home

:22:36. > :22:41.Office didn't say we weren't going to do it. What bit of no intention

:22:41. > :22:44.of introducing minimum unit pricing dump I understand? They didn't say

:22:44. > :22:49.they wouldn't, they said they had no intention. We looked at the

:22:49. > :22:53.evidence. So the words are meaningless! No, they are an

:22:53. > :22:57.accurate description of the situation. You have no intention of

:22:57. > :23:04.increasing VAT to 25 %, is that meaningless because you could do

:23:04. > :23:07.it? It's a ridiculous argument. When I say we have no intention to

:23:07. > :23:11.do something, that means we have no intention to do something. When I

:23:11. > :23:16.say we absolutely won't do something, that means we absolutely

:23:16. > :23:19.will do something. No, you explained that. Any time a

:23:19. > :23:23.politician says, we have no intention, we know not to take a

:23:23. > :23:30.blind bit of notice. Labour opposed this measure in Scotland, which is

:23:30. > :23:35.a little bit ahead of the curve. Are you going to increase drinks in

:23:35. > :23:41.London, England? We agree there should be a minimum price on an

:23:41. > :23:47.alcohol unit. I welcome the conversion from Matthew. For very

:23:47. > :23:53.good reasons. The presentation talked about some of the challenges

:23:53. > :23:58.we face. I think a minimum unit... He's changed his mind and you have

:23:58. > :24:02.one policy for Scotland and one for England. No, we think it's a good

:24:02. > :24:06.idea. The you opposed it in Scotland. A You can change your

:24:06. > :24:11.mind. The Scottish Labour Party opposed it. We agree with what

:24:11. > :24:15.Theresa May has announced today with the consultation and the price.

:24:15. > :24:24.The minimum unit has already been decided by your government, last

:24:24. > :24:27.March. Today is about the 45p. Quickly, final thought. It just

:24:27. > :24:31.won't work in practice. I'm surprised that the Labour Party

:24:31. > :24:35.supports it when it's clearly going to hit those on the lowest incomes

:24:35. > :24:38.far hardest. The other thing worrying us is the idea you might

:24:38. > :24:43.BAM the 3 ft to offers, which is penalising people for being

:24:43. > :24:47.sensible shoppers. A final thought from you. It's not a blanket

:24:47. > :24:53.measure. It is targeted. The evidence is irrefutable, which is

:24:53. > :24:59.why doctors, nurses, police and local authorities want to see it.

:24:59. > :25:04.After that, you probably need some kind of fortifying beverage!

:25:04. > :25:11.Perhaps you are looking around for a wee dram of something. You know

:25:11. > :25:14.that here on the Daily Politics, we like to help and we will send you a

:25:14. > :25:19.Daily Politics mug that you can fill up are practically anything

:25:19. > :25:24.you like. Tea, coffee, hot chocolate or, as some do, half a

:25:24. > :25:34.bottle of Blue Nun. We will remind you had to end in a minute. Let's

:25:34. > :26:05.

:26:05. > :26:15.see it you can remember when this I am not going to exploit for

:26:15. > :26:16.

:26:17. > :26:22.political purposes my opponent's I fought and won 12 parliamentary

:26:22. > :26:32.elections. I tottered it up. 329,000 people voted for a Labour

:26:32. > :26:40.

:26:40. > :26:50.# We'll always be together, however far it seems.

:26:50. > :27:01.

:27:01. > :27:05.The # We will always be together, To be in with a chance of winning a

:27:05. > :27:15.Daily Politics mug, send your answer to our special quiz e-mail

:27:15. > :27:20.

:27:20. > :27:24.What ABBA terms and conditions? will tell them later. I've got them

:27:24. > :27:29.just here somewhere. It's coming up to midday. Let's take a look at Big

:27:29. > :27:33.Ben. Prime Minister's questions, so what's in store for David Cameron

:27:33. > :27:37.today? Plenty of economic news this week which Ed Miliband could go one,

:27:37. > :27:41.the Leveson Inquiry coming up tomorrow and Nadine Dorries, she's

:27:41. > :27:43.back from the jungle, maybe she's planning an appearance. Let's not

:27:43. > :27:46.forget there are thousands of people clearing up from all the

:27:46. > :27:53.flooding, they might feel they deserve a mention because they're

:27:53. > :27:57.going through a terrible time. Before... The Work Programme we

:27:57. > :28:01.want to talk about, before we do, is there still a possibility that

:28:01. > :28:05.Mr Cameron will go up and give his opinion on the Leveson inquiry

:28:05. > :28:10.tomorrow? The mere threat of it will probably be enough to

:28:10. > :28:14.concentrate minds inside Number 10. It is unlikely but yes, Nick Clegg

:28:14. > :28:17.could say, I speak as a party leader, I speak as someone who has

:28:17. > :28:22.a different view from the Prime Minister, who has failed to reach

:28:22. > :28:28.agreement in government about what should happen. The Work Programme,

:28:28. > :28:32.this was the idea that you would get companies... It was ramped up a

:28:32. > :28:35.lot, you'd get companies to try and put people back to work. We seem to

:28:35. > :28:40.have spent millions of pounds and hardly anybody is in a job after

:28:40. > :28:46.six months. It's one of these pieces of news that the leader of

:28:46. > :28:56.the opposition is likely to seize on. The top of politics is talking

:28:56. > :28:57.

:28:57. > :29:00.about almost nothing else but the Leveson Inquiry. Surprisingly, the

:29:00. > :29:04.truth is there is no point Ed Miliband asking about it now

:29:04. > :29:09.because the Prime Minister will brush him off. I think it's likely

:29:09. > :29:13.he does talk about economic news. One of the parts of bat bat will be

:29:13. > :29:16.irresistible for Labour is to say, look, for two years, like we've

:29:16. > :29:26.been warning about the failure of programmes for the long-term

:29:26. > :29:29.

:29:29. > :29:33.unemployed, the figures show that They will say they need to finish

:29:33. > :29:36.the programme and so on and so forth. But Ed Miliband will be able

:29:36. > :29:42.to sing long time unemployment going up, this scheme does not work.

:29:42. > :29:45.Nadine Dorries, heavy lobbying, I'm being told. Not necessary by her

:29:45. > :29:50.but friends of hers to the Speaker, saying she has come out of the

:29:50. > :29:55.jungle especially to be here today. Give her a chance to ask a question.

:29:55. > :30:01.Will the Speaker fall for that, do you think? Do you think the speaker

:30:01. > :30:07.is ever worried about inviting coverage of himself? He is a self-

:30:07. > :30:11.effacing character, I don't think he will fall for that! Although the

:30:11. > :30:14.Leveson Inquiry is dominating the media classes, we've got the Autumn

:30:14. > :30:19.Statement next week as well. The leader of the opposition may want

:30:19. > :30:23.to set things up for that. Exactly. He knows as well as the report,

:30:23. > :30:29.some of the previews an interview shows will be looking ahead to the

:30:29. > :30:34.Autumn Statement. In a sense, he wants to frame the debate and say,

:30:34. > :30:38.actually, the debate is next week, he will claim it for Labour, it's

:30:38. > :30:42.about government failure, failure to deliver on its economic targets,

:30:42. > :30:47.failure to deliver its Work Programme. George Osborne and David

:30:47. > :30:51.Cameron will not agree with that. Has Labour welcomed the new

:30:51. > :30:54.Canadian central banker? What is interesting is Ed Balls had no

:30:54. > :30:57.notice he was going to be appointed but he instantly welcomed him

:30:57. > :31:03.warmly. He dropped in the statement that he knew him and obviously had

:31:03. > :31:11.known him as sitting Minister and adviser to Gordon Brown. He had a

:31:11. > :31:17.really widespread welcome. Let's go I am sure the House will wish to

:31:17. > :31:22.join may in expressing our sympathies for the victims of the

:31:22. > :31:28.flooding in recent days, and forgiving our praise to the police,

:31:28. > :31:31.the fire service, the ambulance service, good neighbours,

:31:31. > :31:36.volunteers, the Environment Agency, and all those who have done things

:31:36. > :31:41.to help those in distress. Mr Speaker, I have had meetings this

:31:41. > :31:44.morning with my colleagues and will do so later today. The whole House

:31:44. > :31:47.will of course endorse the words of the Prime Minister in paying

:31:47. > :31:53.tribute to our fantastic emergency services in responding to the

:31:53. > :32:00.terrible floods and those who have been victims of it. Mr Speaker,

:32:00. > :32:10.tomorrow sees the publication of the leather some report. Does my

:32:10. > :32:12.

:32:12. > :32:15.right honourable friend agree with me that those should be victims --

:32:15. > :32:22.those who were victims were treated unfairly, and that the status needs

:32:22. > :32:27.updating? My honourable friend is exactly right. The status quo is

:32:27. > :32:31.unacceptable and needs to change. This Government set up the Leveson

:32:31. > :32:35.Inquiry because of unacceptable practices in parts of the media and

:32:35. > :32:40.because of a failed regulatory system. I look forward to reading

:32:40. > :32:43.the report carefully. I think we should try to work across party

:32:43. > :32:48.lines on this issue, and it is right to meet with other party

:32:48. > :32:51.leaders about this. What matters most, I believe, is we end up with

:32:51. > :32:58.an independent regulatory system that can deliver and in which the

:32:58. > :33:01.public will have confidence. Speaker, I associate myself

:33:02. > :33:05.entirely with the Prime Minister's remarks about the victims of

:33:05. > :33:09.flooding. All of my sympathies and the sympathies of this side of the

:33:09. > :33:14.House go to those victims, and our thanks go to the emergency services

:33:14. > :33:17.and Environment Agency for the fantastic job they do. I would also

:33:17. > :33:23.associate myself with his remarks about the levels and report which

:33:23. > :33:28.will be published tomorrow. -- the Leveson Inquiry report. This is a

:33:28. > :33:34.once in a generation opportunity for change, and I hope this House

:33:34. > :33:38.can make it happen. When the work programme was launched in June 2011,

:33:38. > :33:44.the Prime Minister described it as the biggest and boldest programme

:33:44. > :33:50.since the Great Depression. 18 months on, can he update the House

:33:50. > :33:57.on how it is going? I can update the House. Over 800,000 people have

:33:57. > :34:01.taken part in the work programme. Of those, over half came off

:34:01. > :34:06.benefits, over 200,000 people have got into work because of the work

:34:06. > :34:10.programme. But I think it is worth remembering that the work programme

:34:10. > :34:15.is dealing with the hardest to work cases there are in our country.

:34:15. > :34:19.These are people, adults who have been out of work for over a year

:34:19. > :34:23.and young people who have been out of work for over nine months. And

:34:23. > :34:28.on that basis, we need to make further progress, but it is the

:34:28. > :34:33.right programme. But Mr Speaker, the scheme is aspires to create

:34:33. > :34:41.sustained jobs for people, and in a whole year of the programme, out of

:34:41. > :34:46.every 100 people, just two got a job. That is a success rate of 2%.

:34:46. > :34:50.And the Government estimates... I don't know why the part-time

:34:51. > :34:57.Chancellor is chuntering. He was telling of the Work and Pensions

:34:57. > :35:00.Secretary in Cabinet yesterday for the failure of the work programme!

:35:00. > :35:03.And the Government estimates that without the work programme, the

:35:03. > :35:09.basis on which they did the tender, five out of every hundred would get

:35:09. > :35:12.a job. Isn't the their historic first to have designed a welfare-

:35:12. > :35:17.to-work programme way we are more likely to get a job if you are not

:35:17. > :35:21.on the programme? I have to say to the Leader of the Opposition, I

:35:21. > :35:27.listen carefully to what he said, and what he said was wrong. He said

:35:27. > :35:31.only 2% of people on this programme got a job. That is not correct.

:35:31. > :35:35.Over 800,000 people have taken part, and over 200,000 people have got

:35:35. > :35:39.into work. If you look at the specific figure he was referring to

:35:39. > :35:44.yesterday, which is those people continuously in work for six months

:35:44. > :35:50.when the programme... He is only looking at a programme that has

:35:50. > :35:54.been going for a year, and that figure is 19,000 people. He should

:35:55. > :35:58.listen to the CBI. They say: The work programme has already helped

:35:58. > :36:05.to turn around the lives of thousands of people. These other

:36:05. > :36:08.people Labour left on the scrapheap. He should be apologising! I think

:36:08. > :36:15.that is as close we get to an admission that I was right and he

:36:15. > :36:19.was wrong, Mr Speaker. He boasted that his flagship policy, the work

:36:19. > :36:26.programme, was about tackling the scourge of long-term unemployment.

:36:26. > :36:33.Can he confirm that since the work programme was introduced in June

:36:33. > :36:37.2011, long-term unemployment has risen by 96%? Let me give him the

:36:37. > :36:42.employment numbers. 1 million more private sector jobs over the last

:36:42. > :36:47.two years. Since the last election, 190,000 fewer people on out-of-work

:36:47. > :36:53.benefits. Just in the last quarter, employment up by 100,000,

:36:53. > :36:58.unemployment down by 49,000. And while we are at it, let's just

:36:58. > :37:03.remember Labour's poisonous legacy. Youth unemployment up 40%, women

:37:03. > :37:06.and employment up 24%, 5 million on out-of-work benefits. That's the

:37:06. > :37:14.legacy we are dealing with, and we are getting the country back to

:37:14. > :37:17.work. I wish for once, Mr Speaker, he would just answer the question.

:37:17. > :37:23.I asked him a simple question about whether long-term unemployment had

:37:23. > :37:27.gone up by 96% of, and the answer is yes. And while he is talking

:37:27. > :37:32.about Labour programmes, let's talk about the Future Jobs Fund. Last

:37:32. > :37:35.Friday, the Government introduced an interesting document. He spent

:37:35. > :37:39.two years rubbishing the Future Jobs Fund. What do these documents

:37:39. > :37:45.say? He said the scheme provided net benefit to participants, their

:37:45. > :37:49.employers and society as a whole. In other words, it was a success.

:37:49. > :37:56.And he rubbish the programme, and it helped 120,000 young people into

:37:56. > :38:01.work. His work programme has only helped 3,000 people. They shout,

:38:01. > :38:04.what does it cost? We cannot afford not to have young people in work.

:38:04. > :38:10.Isn't the truth, he got rid of the Labour programme that was working

:38:10. > :38:14.and replaced it with a Tory one that isn't? Once again, he is

:38:14. > :38:17.completely wrong, and let me give him the figures. Our work

:38:17. > :38:22.experience programme is in half of the young people taking part

:38:22. > :38:28.getting into work. That is the same result as the Future Jobs Fund, and

:38:28. > :38:32.it cost 20 times less. That is the truth. Our programme is good value

:38:32. > :38:38.for taxpayers' money, is getting people into work. He wasted money

:38:38. > :38:45.and left people on the dole. Speaker, the more he blusters, the

:38:45. > :38:49.Reddin he gets, the less convincing years. We know in real time what

:38:49. > :38:55.happened in yesterday's Cabinet. They were at each other like rats

:38:55. > :38:57.in a sack. The Chancellor is blaming the Work and Pensions

:38:57. > :39:01.Secretary. The Work and Pensions Secretary, he is blaming the

:39:01. > :39:07.Chancellor for the lack of growth. And the Prime Minister, he is doing

:39:07. > :39:13.what he does best - blaming everyone else for the failure. And

:39:13. > :39:17.isn't this the reality? Their failure on the work programme is a

:39:17. > :39:23.product of their failure to get growth and a failure of their whole

:39:23. > :39:27.economic strategy? He worked in a government where the Prime Minister

:39:27. > :39:32.of the Chancellor could and be in the same room as each other! Rats

:39:32. > :39:38.in a sack doesn't even do it! Why don't we look at what he has

:39:38. > :39:44.achieved on welfare this week. Once again, this week, Labour voted

:39:44. > :39:49.against the welfare cap. Now today, they are asking us to vote on a

:39:49. > :39:53.motion in front of this House on welfare. Last night, this motion

:39:53. > :39:59.specifically said they wanted further reform of welfare. Today,

:39:59. > :40:03.the motion has mentioned nothing about reform of welfare. The truth

:40:03. > :40:06.is there regains the benefit cap, against a housing benefit cap,

:40:07. > :40:16.against the work programme. They are officially the party have

:40:17. > :40:18.

:40:18. > :40:22.something for nothing. I will tell him the reality, Mr Speaker... His

:40:22. > :40:25.welfare programme is failing. His welfare reform programme is failing.

:40:25. > :40:30.Because there isn't the work, and his economic strategy is failing,

:40:30. > :40:33.and that is the reality. He has a work programme that isn't working,

:40:34. > :40:41.a growth strategy that is not delivering and a deficit that is

:40:41. > :40:51.rising. It is a Government that is failing, our Prime Minister that is

:40:51. > :40:55.

:40:55. > :40:59.He just can't keep his cool when he knows he is losing the argument, Mr

:40:59. > :41:05.Speaker. It is the British people that are paying the price they his

:41:05. > :41:12.failure. What we can see is a leadership that drowning. This

:41:12. > :41:15.Government has cut corporation tax, scrapped the jobs tax, backed the

:41:15. > :41:19.regional growth fund, funded 1 million apprenticeships, is

:41:19. > :41:22.rebuilding our economy, sees a million more people in private

:41:22. > :41:30.sector work. We are putting the country back to work. Their party

:41:30. > :41:34.wrecked it. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will the Prime Minister join me in

:41:35. > :41:38.congratulating the Milton Keynes based Formula One team on winning

:41:39. > :41:45.the world championship for three years in a row? Another fine

:41:45. > :41:49.example of British technological innovation. I am delighted to

:41:49. > :41:53.praise and paid tribute to the Formula One team based in his

:41:53. > :41:58.constituency which sadly beat the Formula One team based in my

:41:58. > :42:01.constituency! But it is a remarkable fact that if you look at

:42:01. > :42:06.all of the Formula One cars, wherever they are racing in the

:42:06. > :42:09.world, almost all were built, designed, Engineer here in Britain.

:42:09. > :42:15.It is an industry in which we lead the world, and we should be proud

:42:15. > :42:19.of it. The Prime Minister must have studied his Government's own report

:42:19. > :42:23.which shows that the Future Jobs Fund had a net benefit to

:42:23. > :42:27.participants, employers and society, and given this report, and given

:42:27. > :42:30.that youth unemployment is now higher in Leicester that it was at

:42:30. > :42:37.the general election, why did he tell me a year ago that the Future

:42:37. > :42:40.Jobs Fund provided a just and I quote, phoney jobs. Youth

:42:40. > :42:43.employment went up 40% under the last Labour government. But the

:42:43. > :42:48.fact that the Future Jobs Fund are these. If you take the figures for

:42:48. > :42:52.Birmingham, 2% of the placement under the Future Jobs Fund were in

:42:52. > :42:56.the private sector. The rest was in the public sector. And the cost of

:42:56. > :43:06.the scheme was 20 times higher than the work experience placement which

:43:06. > :43:06.

:43:06. > :43:13.is doing just as well. THE SPEAKER: Order! The right

:43:13. > :43:18.honourable lady must be heard. Government is consulting on the

:43:18. > :43:23.compensation people will get if HS2 goes ahead. It is critical for

:43:23. > :43:26.people in my constituency. I ask the Prime Minister if he will give

:43:27. > :43:30.me a personal undertaking that he will study the proposals for the

:43:30. > :43:33.final package is the consultation and compensation and be sure that

:43:33. > :43:37.those people whose homes, businesses and lives will be

:43:37. > :43:42.disrupted by this scheme if it goes ahead are both fairly and

:43:42. > :43:46.generously compensated. I will absolutely give that undertaking, I

:43:46. > :43:51.will look carefully at the scheme. We are consulting at the moment.

:43:51. > :43:54.The proposals were put forward are as good as the scheme that HS one,

:43:54. > :43:58.and better than the compensation scheme for previous motorway

:43:59. > :44:01.developments. There is an advance purchase scheme for property

:44:01. > :44:06.purchase to simplify the process for property owners in the

:44:06. > :44:10.safeguarded area. There is also a voluntary purchase scheme to allow

:44:10. > :44:13.homeowners outside the area to have their homes purchased. Am willing

:44:13. > :44:20.to discuss with her and others how we can make sure this scheme works

:44:20. > :44:24.properly for people. On Monday, the police and crime commissioner Bob

:44:24. > :44:28.Jones and the Chief Constable Chris Simms called for a fair policing

:44:28. > :44:31.for Birmingham and the West Midlands. West Midlands arguably

:44:31. > :44:35.has the highest policing needs outside London. How can the Prime

:44:35. > :44:39.Minister hoped to build a one nation it areas like Birmingham and

:44:39. > :44:44.the West millions -- West Midlands lose 800 frontline police officers,

:44:44. > :44:50.and low crime areas like Serie get extra bobbies on the beat? Don't we

:44:50. > :44:54.all deserve to live in Safe Communities? Yes, we have asked the

:44:54. > :44:59.police to make funding reductions, and they have been able to do that,

:44:59. > :45:03.keeping a higher proportion of bobbies on the frontline, which

:45:03. > :45:06.actually has been effective, taking people out of back-office jobs, and

:45:06. > :45:10.at the same time, crime has fallen and public confidence in the police

:45:10. > :45:16.has risen. We are asking the police to take difficult decisions, but

:45:16. > :45:22.they are delivering. I would like to congratulate the coalition

:45:22. > :45:28.government on introducing regulation to protect the welfare

:45:28. > :45:33.of wild animals performing in travelling circuses. Yet this House

:45:33. > :45:37.voted overwhelmingly for a complete ban in 2011. While we wait for a

:45:38. > :45:40.draft bill to be published, will the Prime Minister committed to

:45:40. > :45:48.introducing legislation so that his ban can be introduced in this

:45:48. > :45:53.Parliament? Just that, but I think my honourable friend is absolutely

:45:53. > :45:57.right. We have changed the regulations even in advance of

:45:57. > :46:03.legislation so that the will of this House can be met. Petrol

:46:03. > :46:07.prices in this country are amongst the highest in the EU, and diesel

:46:07. > :46:14.prices the very highest. Given that the Prime Minister is introducing

:46:14. > :46:18.minimum limits on alcohol pricing, can he turn his mind to a maximum

:46:18. > :46:22.limit on alcohol duty, and start reducing the price of petrol and

:46:22. > :46:25.diesel for hard-pressed families? The honourable gentleman makes an

:46:25. > :46:33.important point, and because of the changes we have made, petrol and

:46:33. > :46:37.diesel are 10 p less per litre than they would have been. That is the

:46:37. > :46:44.effect of this government, and we want to go on making that progress.

:46:44. > :46:49.Could I thank my right honourable friend for visiting yesterday. My

:46:49. > :46:52.constituency has been severely affected by the flooding. The

:46:52. > :46:54.people want to know how they are now going to get insurance at

:46:54. > :47:00.affordable rates for flooding, particularly given that many of

:47:00. > :47:03.those homes have been blighted. Would he joined the impressing the

:47:03. > :47:06.Association of insurers to stop grandstanding, get down to the

:47:06. > :47:16.table, thrash out a deal so that my constituents can get the insurance

:47:16. > :47:20.I enjoyed visiting his constituency with him yesterday, seeing at first

:47:20. > :47:24.hand the appalling damage done by the floods. Speaking with local

:47:24. > :47:28.people, the emergency services and the Environment Agency about all

:47:28. > :47:32.the work that is being done to protect more houses in future. We

:47:32. > :47:37.do need to address the insurance issue. Negotiations are under way.

:47:37. > :47:40.I do want us to get a resolution so insurance companies actually

:47:40. > :47:46.provide what they are meant to, which is insurance for people

:47:46. > :47:50.living in their homes to want proper protection. I thank the

:47:50. > :47:54.Prime Minister for his expressions of sympathy for the family of my

:47:54. > :47:58.elderly constituent who died in the floods. I joined him in expressing

:47:58. > :48:02.sympathy to all those, I think there are four people who have died

:48:02. > :48:06.in the floods. But will the Prime Minister immediately reverse the 30

:48:06. > :48:12.% cuts that he's made in flood defences in the past two years, and

:48:12. > :48:16.what part will he play on the issue of flood insurance for those who

:48:16. > :48:20.live in flood risk areas? Let me join the Honourable Gentleman in

:48:20. > :48:24.paying tribute to his constituents who have had to bear some truly

:48:24. > :48:28.terrible floods. The pictures from St Asaph aware of floods of

:48:28. > :48:32.biblical scenes. I know the emergency service of have performed

:48:32. > :48:35.extraordinary feats to rescue people. On the issue of flood

:48:35. > :48:40.defence spending, the government is planning to spend over 2 billion

:48:40. > :48:44.over the next four years. That is 6% less than over the previous four

:48:44. > :48:47.years, but we believe that by spending the money better and by

:48:47. > :48:50.leveraging money from private and other sectors, we can increase that

:48:50. > :48:55.level of flood defence spending. There spending that is already

:48:55. > :48:59.under way will protect an additional 145,000 homes between

:48:59. > :49:03.now and 2015. But if we can go further then of course we should.

:49:03. > :49:08.Over 3 million people a year fall victim to postal scams, telephone

:49:08. > :49:13.calls and e-mails, making false promises of lottery wins come of

:49:13. > :49:19.windfalls and inheritances. Is my right honourable friend aware that

:49:19. > :49:23.�3.5 billion per year is lost by UK consumers, and will he commit to

:49:23. > :49:28.working with the Home Office to amend existing legislation to

:49:28. > :49:31.protect the predominantly elderly and vulnerable victims? It's an

:49:31. > :49:35.important point. This is a growing area of crime and criminology that

:49:35. > :49:39.is taking place and taking advantage of people using the

:49:39. > :49:43.internet, but often people who are very vulnerable. That's why as part

:49:43. > :49:47.of the National crime agency, we are setting up a new unit dedicated

:49:47. > :49:53.to tackling this problem. It will work across agencies to catch

:49:53. > :49:58.criminals and take the steps she speaks about. A moment ago, the

:49:58. > :50:02.leader of the opposition asked whether or... Long-term

:50:02. > :50:05.unemployment had risen by 96 % since the Work Programme was

:50:05. > :50:09.introduced. He did not receive an answer. Is it a case that long-term

:50:09. > :50:13.unemployment has risen by 96 % since the Work Programme was

:50:13. > :50:18.introduced? I have given the figures for the Work Programme.

:50:18. > :50:21.800,000 people taking part, 200,000 people getting work. And this is

:50:21. > :50:24.against a background where over the last quarter, unemployment is

:50:24. > :50:31.coming down, the rate of youth unemployment is coming down and

:50:31. > :50:35.there are more people in work. That is a record we can build on. A free

:50:35. > :50:40.press is a necessary counterbalance to a strong state. The British

:50:40. > :50:45.people also have an inherent sense of fairness. Therefore we do not

:50:45. > :50:49.need to restrict the press. We need to focus on redress when the press

:50:49. > :50:51.Cross on an acceptable line. With that in mind, will the Prime

:50:51. > :50:56.Minister look at the whole question of access to justice in this

:50:56. > :50:59.country, so that the ability to use the law as we already have on LIBOR

:50:59. > :51:05.and defamation are available to everyone, not just the rich and

:51:05. > :51:09.famous? The I think my right honourable friend makes an

:51:09. > :51:13.important point about access to justice. But one of the key things

:51:13. > :51:16.that the Leveson Inquiry is trying to get to the bottom of is, how can

:51:16. > :51:19.you have it strong and independent regulatory system so that you don't

:51:19. > :51:24.have to wait for the wheels of the criminal justice system or the

:51:24. > :51:28.LIBOR system to work? People should be able to rely on a good

:51:28. > :51:30.regulatory system to get the good redress they want. Whether that's

:51:30. > :51:35.prominent apologies, finds for newspapers or the other things that

:51:35. > :51:40.are clearly some necessary. Department of Education is

:51:40. > :51:44.proposing to close down its Runcorn site, with a loss of 220 jobs at

:51:44. > :51:47.least. It is in the 27th most deprived borough in the country.

:51:47. > :51:52.Can I ask the Prime Minister how this is going to help unemployment

:51:52. > :51:55.and social deprivation in my constituency? It's a pity his

:51:55. > :51:59.Secretary of State refused to meet me on this matter. I know the

:51:59. > :52:02.Honourable Member has met the permanent secretary of the

:52:02. > :52:05.Department of Education to discuss this, and I will certainly discuss

:52:05. > :52:09.this with the Secretary of State. There will be consultation with

:52:09. > :52:13.affected staff and other local MPs, but let me make this point because

:52:13. > :52:15.it is important. We all know you have to try and find savings in

:52:15. > :52:20.department overhead budgets in order to maximise the money that

:52:20. > :52:22.goes into the schools. What this government has managed to do is to

:52:22. > :52:26.maintain the per pupil funding. I'm sure that Honourable Members

:52:26. > :52:31.thinking about it would think that's the most important thing for

:52:31. > :52:34.our schools, children and education system. A last year, more than

:52:34. > :52:39.10,000 men in Britain died from prostate cancer, the silent killer.

:52:39. > :52:44.Survival rates have increased from 20 % to 70 % because of earlier

:52:44. > :52:50.diagnosis and better drugs. Can I ask if he will join me in welcoming

:52:50. > :52:54.the campaign this month to raise Mel -- male health awareness and

:52:54. > :52:58.champion British leadership in cancer research? I not only joined

:52:58. > :53:03.him in praising the campaign, but also praised his efforts that are

:53:03. > :53:06.looking tentatively under his nose in terms of that regard. It is an

:53:06. > :53:09.important campaign because it raises awareness about cancer, it

:53:09. > :53:13.raises awareness about cancers including the one he mentioned that

:53:13. > :53:17.sometimes people are worried about mentioning and talking about. Also

:53:17. > :53:23.things like the cancer drugs fund, that makes sure we get the drugs to

:53:23. > :53:28.the people that need them are also important, too. I once represented

:53:28. > :53:32.a seriously injured car-crash victim who was hounded and put

:53:32. > :53:38.further by an irresponsible press. When he set up the Leveson Inquiry,

:53:38. > :53:42.the Prime Minister said, I accept we can't say it is the last chance

:53:42. > :53:48.saloon all over again. We've done that. Will the Prime Minister, for

:53:48. > :53:54.the victims, for the The Camp blue macro and the Dowlers, keep his

:53:54. > :53:58.word? I think he is right, as is my Honourable Friend the Member for

:53:58. > :54:01.Crawley, is saying that uppermost in our minds should be the victims

:54:01. > :54:04.of the press intrusion and the invasions into privacy and the

:54:04. > :54:08.appalling things that were written about them and their families. What

:54:08. > :54:12.we owe them as a regulatory system that will work for them, that the

:54:12. > :54:18.public will have confidence in, and that is what we hope the report

:54:18. > :54:22.will produce. Leaving home before it is light, returning from work

:54:22. > :54:29.when it's dark. Hard-working families in Rossendale and Darwen

:54:29. > :54:33.have a gross household income of just �25,000. Does my right

:54:33. > :54:37.honourable friend think it's right that their neighbours living on

:54:37. > :54:41.benefits currently earn more? makes an important point mackerel.

:54:41. > :54:45.Only this week we have yet again had a vote on our welfare and

:54:45. > :54:49.benefits cap, which most people would see as generous at �26,000.

:54:49. > :54:53.Once again, Labour have voted for unlimited welfare. We have long

:54:53. > :54:58.memories. We can remember that under Labour, some families were

:54:58. > :55:05.getting up to �100,000 of housing benefit. They did nothing about it

:55:05. > :55:10.because they believe in something for nothing. Since the Prime

:55:11. > :55:15.Minister announced aggressive tax avoidance as morally repugnant, why

:55:15. > :55:20.is his own government now itself actively promoting aggressive tax

:55:20. > :55:26.avoidance by cutting the tax on multinationals that open a finance

:55:26. > :55:30.company in the tax haven from the current 23 % to just 5%? How can we

:55:30. > :55:37.be one nation when the government is on the side of the tax dodgers?

:55:37. > :55:41.I think he has misunderstood. We are introducing a general anti-

:55:41. > :55:51.avoidance rule. Something which he, in 13 years of Labour government,

:55:51. > :55:51.

:55:51. > :55:56.never managed to do. We will do it in three. We were all inspired by

:55:56. > :56:00.the amazing London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics. It gave an

:56:00. > :56:03.incredible summer of sport. But it's so important to get people

:56:03. > :56:08.involved in grass roots and community sport. Will the Prime

:56:08. > :56:11.Minister meet with me, with the sport and recreation Alliance, the

:56:11. > :56:15.Community Sports Partnership Network and Sport England, to

:56:16. > :56:20.discuss the initiative, the first of which is receiving in my

:56:20. > :56:23.constituency. I am happy to meet about this issue. I do think it's

:56:23. > :56:28.important that we take the legacy of the Olympics and turn it into

:56:28. > :56:32.increased rates of participation. Yes, working with the organisations

:56:32. > :56:35.he is speaking about, but also recognising the many heroes and

:56:35. > :56:39.heroines around our country who run the Saturday-morning football clubs,

:56:39. > :56:42.rugby clubs, cricket clubs. I think it's those clubs that provides a

:56:43. > :56:48.much of the answer for getting more sport into our communities and

:56:48. > :56:53.schools as well. Will the Prime Minister, like me, welcomed the

:56:53. > :56:56.ceasefire in Gaza last week and regret all those who died as a

:56:56. > :56:59.result of the conflict, but also recognise that fundamentally the

:57:00. > :57:04.future of the Middle East lies with peace and justice for the

:57:04. > :57:08.Palestinian people, be they in Gaza, the West Bank or in refugee camps?

:57:08. > :57:12.We have to recognise the Palestinian people. Accordingly,

:57:12. > :57:17.tomorrow, will the British government cast our vote at the

:57:17. > :57:20.United Nations in favour of Palestinian recognition without any

:57:20. > :57:29.preconditions, such as suggesting they should not have access to the

:57:29. > :57:32.International Criminal Court as an independent, recognised nation?

:57:32. > :57:36.welcome the fact there is a ceasefire and that that conflict

:57:36. > :57:41.has ceased. I don't go all the way with him on the rest of his

:57:41. > :57:45.question. But the Foreign Secretary will be making a statement in a few

:57:45. > :57:55.moments about it. I don't want to steal his thunder. But it is

:57:55. > :57:59.

:57:59. > :58:00.important we use our vote to try to peace process that works is when

:58:00. > :58:06.Israelis and Palestinians come to the table and talk through the

:58:06. > :58:09.final stage issues, including Jerusalem, refugees, Borders. When

:58:09. > :58:14.they did themselves. We can wish for all we want at the UN. In the

:58:14. > :58:18.end, you've got to have direct talks between the direct parties to

:58:18. > :58:21.get the two states solution we want. The Prime Minister will be aware

:58:21. > :58:26.that on the order paper for tomorrow's business, there is a

:58:26. > :58:31.debate in my name to mark the 40th anniversary of the expulsion of

:58:31. > :58:35.agents by IED Amin from Uganda and their rival to the UK. Because of a

:58:35. > :58:40.need for a statement on the Leveson Inquiry, it is likely that my

:58:40. > :58:43.debate may not take place now. I and the community at large fully

:58:43. > :58:47.appreciate the circumstances. However, would the Prime Minister

:58:47. > :58:51.acknowledged the importance and the need for having such a debate and

:58:51. > :58:56.also, would he do whatever he can to ensure that I am given another

:58:56. > :58:59.debate as an as possible? I think the reaction of colleagues from

:58:59. > :59:02.across the house shows that he speaks for the whole house and I

:59:02. > :59:06.believe the whole country in wanting to speak up for the Ugandan

:59:06. > :59:10.Asians who came to our country in the 1970s, who has made the most

:59:10. > :59:14.fantastic contribution to our national life. It's very good to

:59:14. > :59:17.see, I remember meeting his parents and how proud they are of him,

:59:17. > :59:21.second generation coming to this country, sitting in the House of

:59:21. > :59:27.Commons and speaking up so well on these and other issues. While I

:59:27. > :59:31.don't have control of the House of Commons agenda, sadly, I very much

:59:31. > :59:36.hope that the people that do will listen carefully to the point he

:59:36. > :59:40.made and the schedule this debate as fast as possible. Can the Prime

:59:40. > :59:47.Minister confirm that as a result of his part in the 50p tax rate,

:59:47. > :59:55.8000 people earning over �1 million will next year gain an average of

:59:55. > :59:58.�107,500. Whose side is he on? 45p, the top rate of tax will be

:59:58. > :00:02.higher under this government than in any of the 13 years of the last

:00:02. > :00:06.government. That is the fact. The richest in our country will

:00:06. > :00:15.actually be paying more in terms of income tax in every year of this

:00:15. > :00:21.government than in any year of that government. In Harlow, Comet has

:00:21. > :00:25.made shop staff redundant and there are transport logistics staff at

:00:25. > :00:28.risk. Many are suggesting there has been malpractice. Would he ask the

:00:28. > :00:31.Business Secretary to investigate this and ensure that anyone who has

:00:31. > :00:36.lost their job get the proper support and help they are entitled

:00:36. > :00:39.to? I'm happy to look at what he says. What has happened at Comet is

:00:39. > :00:44.a tragedy for those people who work there. I will talk to the Business

:00:44. > :00:48.Secretary about it and see what can be done in the way that he suggests.

:00:48. > :00:54.Last week, the Prime Minister told me and the House that the

:00:54. > :00:58.government was investing an extra �900 million to combat tax

:00:58. > :01:04.avoidance. In fact, as HMRC will confirm, no such investment is

:01:04. > :01:09.taking place. It is facing a 15 % cut in its budget. Is the Prime

:01:09. > :01:13.Minister guilty of fact avoidance or fact deviation? This government

:01:13. > :01:17.has put 900 million into the specific measures of tax getting

:01:17. > :01:23.hold of tax avoidance. All these schemes grew up under years of a

:01:23. > :01:26.Labour government. They never did a general anti-tax avoidance. They

:01:26. > :01:36.presided over a system where people in the city were paying less tax

:01:36. > :01:39.than their cleaners. It took this government to sort it out. Can I

:01:39. > :01:42.wore my right honourable friend not to be remembered as the Prime

:01:42. > :01:45.Minister who introduced state regulation of the press. A free

:01:45. > :01:52.press is an essential part of a free democracy. Would he agree with

:01:52. > :01:55.me that state regulation of the presses like pregnancy. You are

:01:55. > :02:00.just either pregnant or not pregnant, you have state regulation

:02:00. > :02:06.or you don't. There is no alternative Third Wave. Where I

:02:06. > :02:09.would agree with my Honourable Friend is that a free press is

:02:09. > :02:12.absolutely vital for a free democracy. We should recognise all

:02:12. > :02:16.the press has done and should continue to do to uncover

:02:16. > :02:20.wrongdoing, to stand up to the powerful. This is vitally important.

:02:20. > :02:30.Whatever changes we make, we want a robust and free press in our

:02:30. > :02:38.

:02:38. > :02:44.The government is cutting child benefit to support... To 100,000

:02:44. > :02:50.families who look after disabled children. Whatever our views on how

:02:50. > :02:54.our economic problems were brought about, surely it cannot be right

:02:54. > :03:04.that children who were the poorest and most venerable pay the most for

:03:04. > :03:12.

:03:12. > :03:13.this economic policy? We think it is the right step to take because

:03:13. > :03:17.those with the broadest backs should be bearing the greatest

:03:17. > :03:27.burden. We have frozen child benefit but other families but we

:03:27. > :03:32.

:03:32. > :03:39.have increased the child tax credit And that brings us to the end of

:03:39. > :03:45.Prime Minister's Questions. It is all a kind of warm up for

:03:46. > :03:52.tomorrow's Leveson Inquiry report. The exchange between the two front

:03:52. > :03:56.benches was dominated by work, unemployment and by the various

:03:56. > :04:06.schemes. Figures out for the Government on its work programme

:04:06. > :04:06.

:04:06. > :04:11.are not that great, so Mr Miliband went on that, as Nick Robinson said.

:04:11. > :04:17.Mr Cameron fought back by saying that the Future Jobs Fund, Labour's

:04:17. > :04:22.scheme, had been expensive and not a great success either. A lot of

:04:22. > :04:28.statistics thrown about there. First we will hear from you and

:04:28. > :04:32.what you had to say. Lots of the males in response to the work

:04:32. > :04:37.programme statistics. Even by his recent standards, that was a woeful

:04:37. > :04:47.performance by David Cameron. His refusal to answer a direct question

:04:47. > :04:48.

:04:48. > :04:54.only increases the public distrust. It is incredible how negative Ed

:04:54. > :04:59.Miliband years. And this: Under Labour, it paid not to work, and

:04:59. > :05:03.under Cameron's Conservatives, it pays to work. John Wakefield and

:05:03. > :05:07.London says, David Cameron's future work fund may be cheaper than the

:05:07. > :05:15.last government's policy, but at least the last government's policy

:05:15. > :05:19.actually worked. Those being employed are mainly getting part-

:05:19. > :05:22.time jobs only. And for those of you asking about why members of the

:05:22. > :05:28.Labour front bench were wearing red ribbons, that was to mark worldwide

:05:29. > :05:33.AIDS Day which takes place on Saturday. But they were wearing the

:05:33. > :05:40.ribbons today? Yes, the fight against HIV campaign, running this

:05:40. > :05:46.week. Nick Robinson, the Tories are ramping up the rhetoric on welfare

:05:46. > :05:52.and on various things to do with that. Labour reads the polls, it is

:05:52. > :05:58.a difficult subject. Mr Cameron called then the party have

:05:58. > :06:02.something for nothing twice. Chancellor is probably about to

:06:02. > :06:08.announce further welfare cuts, and then say to Labour, what do you

:06:08. > :06:12.want to do? It seems likely the cap on housing benefit could come down.

:06:12. > :06:16.They could be some reduction in the rate of increase of benefits.

:06:16. > :06:25.Remember they go up in April, and usually at this time of year, the

:06:25. > :06:29.Chancellor tells us by what rate they will go up. It is likely to be

:06:29. > :06:33.less than the rate of inflation for those people out of work. So what

:06:33. > :06:39.the Tories want next week to be about is a row about what future

:06:39. > :06:44.cuts to make in welfare. What a Labour wanted to be about his, hold

:06:45. > :06:52.on, you told us he would bring the deficit down, and you haven't.

:06:52. > :06:57.Indeed. What will Labour do about welfare, Sadiq Khan? It is part of

:06:57. > :07:04.the policy process as you do Europe towards 2015. I interviewed Liam

:07:04. > :07:11.Byrne last Sunday. It is not yet clear the direction Labour wants to

:07:11. > :07:15.going. We're in favour of welfare reform. Our welfare-to-work

:07:15. > :07:19.programme, the New Deal, Future Jobs Fund, getting people out of

:07:19. > :07:24.welfare and into work, making it a requirement upon somebody to get a

:07:24. > :07:27.job interviews, making it incumbent upon you to do certain things. The

:07:27. > :07:31.system is still not perfect, and that is why we support Universal

:07:31. > :07:38.Credit. But we recognise that housing costs vary around the

:07:38. > :07:42.country, so one-cap won't work. If you live in Rotherham, the cost of

:07:43. > :07:48.your housing is far cheaper than if you live in Tooting. To have a

:07:48. > :07:53.universal cap applying to both doesn't work. And housing benefit

:07:53. > :07:57.recognises this by having different levels. So we agreed the need to be

:07:57. > :08:00.a reform. The problem is the consequences of the Government's

:08:00. > :08:08.plans, both of the transitional arrangements and the fact that

:08:08. > :08:15.their IT system won't work... That's unusual! There is a big bang

:08:15. > :08:21.approach, which is why you heard reports that Ed Miliband alluded to,

:08:21. > :08:24.arguments between Iain Duncan Smith and George Osborne yesterday. Their

:08:25. > :08:28.promise of the deficit going down hasn't happened because of long-

:08:28. > :08:34.term unemployed and zero growth. Maybe you have more in common than

:08:34. > :08:40.the debate would suggest. If only it were true. Saying you are in

:08:40. > :08:43.favour of welfare reform is all motherhood and apple pie. When it

:08:43. > :08:47.comes to a vote in the House of Commons about what we are going to

:08:47. > :08:51.do, that is what matters in politics, and last week, again, it

:08:51. > :08:54.was about the eighth time I have voted in favour of a cap on

:08:54. > :08:58.benefits so that people who are out of work cannot take home more than

:08:58. > :09:03.the average family takes home in work. I think it was about the

:09:03. > :09:06.eighth time I had to vote in favour of that because Labour keep on

:09:06. > :09:11.voting against it. It came back from the House of Lords, we had to

:09:11. > :09:16.vote on it again. But Labour are putting up every possible barrier.

:09:16. > :09:22.We are absolutely reforming welfare to make sure that work always pays.

:09:22. > :09:27.We are piloting the Universal Credit. Of course IT is difficult,

:09:27. > :09:31.but it is on track. And we are going to reform welfare so that we

:09:31. > :09:38.don't have something for nothing culture. Everybody knows that,

:09:38. > :09:46.under Labour, these things got worse and worse. I was going to

:09:46. > :09:50.move us on to the Leveson Inquiry. I won't ask one thing. Excuse me, I

:09:50. > :09:57.am in charge, and I have no intention of letting you be in

:09:57. > :10:03.charge. Which probably means I will, under your language. This work

:10:03. > :10:08.programme the Government has made so much off. Sometimes in PMQs, you

:10:08. > :10:12.can get the figures wrong. Let's take the 14 month, the longer

:10:12. > :10:18.figure, so we give you the benefit of the longer period. The figures

:10:18. > :10:26.are that 800,000 people have gone into some kind of work under this

:10:26. > :10:30.programme. But only 31,000 are still in a job after six months.

:10:30. > :10:34.The Government had assumed that even with no programme, 5% would be

:10:34. > :10:38.in a job after six months, so you had a better chance of getting a

:10:38. > :10:45.job by not going into the program then going into it. That's not the

:10:45. > :10:51.case. It is very difficult in politics, and unhelpful in the long

:10:51. > :10:56.term, to base an argument on inaccuracies. So when Ed Miliband

:10:56. > :11:02.said only 2% of people... Let me answer the question! He made a

:11:02. > :11:09.mistake. I haven't. Answer my question. Let me answer the

:11:09. > :11:15.question. A quarter of people have gone into a job. How many have been

:11:15. > :11:19.in for six months is a growing number, but because the programme

:11:19. > :11:25.only started 14 months ago, it takes time to get people in and to

:11:25. > :11:31.keep them in work for six months. And that 31,000 figure you

:11:31. > :11:34.mentioned has gone up in the last two months from the 12 month figure

:11:34. > :11:38.to the 14 mother-figure, gone up much faster than earlier, because

:11:38. > :11:42.when you get a programme of the ground, it takes time to get going,

:11:42. > :11:46.but then it is rising more rapidly. But the key point is, should we

:11:46. > :11:52.have a system to try to get people off benefit and into work that pays

:11:52. > :11:58.a result? Of course we could. the key point is that only 3% of

:11:58. > :12:02.people who have gone into this programme end up in a job that

:12:02. > :12:09.survives after six months. That is the key point. And the cost of this

:12:09. > :12:13.have been 475 million to date. It works out on average at �14,000 per

:12:13. > :12:19.job. If we talk about the cost of it, the cost to the taxpayer per

:12:19. > :12:24.job is just over �2,000. Because we pay by results, if the result of

:12:24. > :12:31.poorer, the taxpayer pays less. That was the argument about the

:12:31. > :12:38.Future Jobs Fund. Would we like youth unemployment... Is hasn't

:12:38. > :12:43.worked, Matthew, just Fessey up! will come back to it when we have

:12:43. > :12:47.18 months of figures, and we will see. We shall see the proof of the

:12:47. > :12:51.pudding shall be in the throwing it away. A final word on the Leveson

:12:51. > :12:56.Inquiry, Nick. The Prime Minister played an almost entirely straight

:12:56. > :13:04.bat, but he did open the door to all-party talks. Miliband has been

:13:04. > :13:08.talking about it. What will that actually mean, all-party talks?

:13:08. > :13:13.There are certain areas in which all party talks have been a ruse to

:13:13. > :13:17.make sure that nothing is done at all. Party funding, reform of the

:13:17. > :13:22.House of Lords, nothing done. One exception has been the issues of

:13:22. > :13:26.MPs' expenses, where there was a deal to set up this new independent

:13:26. > :13:31.regulator. A couple of see ya folk on both sides of the House of

:13:31. > :13:34.Commons put to me, do we really want a regulator for the press on

:13:34. > :13:39.the model of the Parliament regulator for expenses? In other

:13:39. > :13:45.words, someone who is recruited precisely because they know nothing

:13:46. > :13:49.about the place they are regulating. That gives a sense of independence,

:13:49. > :13:55.but can produce an arrangement that doesn't quite satisfy anybody at

:13:55. > :13:59.all. We need to move on. Lord Justice Leveson unveils his

:13:59. > :14:02.reported 1 o'clock tomorrow, and the Prime Minister will be in the

:14:02. > :14:08.Commons by have passed two. He will be there for 90 minutes to take

:14:09. > :14:14.questions from everybody. It is a very, very big moment in politics,

:14:14. > :14:18.even if press regulation bores you at home. It is a defining time for

:14:18. > :14:21.the relationship between politics and media. A Government Minister

:14:22. > :14:25.has suggested more than 1,500 square miles of land should be

:14:25. > :14:30.built on in England over the last 20 years -- next 20 years to meet

:14:30. > :14:34.the demand for new houses. The Housing Minister, Nick bowls, says

:14:34. > :14:38.we should increase the proportion of country we build on. Although he

:14:38. > :14:46.insists we would protect the green belt and stop a whole load of what

:14:46. > :14:50.he called pig ugly developments being stuck up by Lady builders. --

:14:50. > :14:55.lazy builders. We are saying clearly that we are going to

:14:55. > :14:58.protect the green belt, but if people want to have housing for

:14:58. > :15:03.their kids, want people to be able to bring up their kids in a small

:15:03. > :15:12.house with a garden, we have to build more on some open land.

:15:12. > :15:20.much? Not a lot. We have in England about 9% of land is developed in

:15:20. > :15:25.any way. So 91% is not. All we need to do is build on probably another

:15:25. > :15:33.2% or 3% of land, and we will solve our housing problem. How many

:15:33. > :15:36.houses is that? Over time, another one of 2 million houses. With us

:15:36. > :15:41.now is John Hoad from the Campaign to Protect Rural England. He says

:15:41. > :15:46.we need to build a 12% as opposed to the current 9%. That doesn't

:15:46. > :15:55.sound too dramatic? I think it sounds very dramatic, actually. The

:15:55. > :15:58.figures are problematic. Current urbanisation impact on around 12 to

:15:58. > :16:03.13% of our land. And we are talking about the most pressured parts of

:16:03. > :16:08.the country, south-east and south- west. If you throw-in National

:16:08. > :16:14.Statistics, it doesn't sound so bad. Why are we talking about those

:16:14. > :16:18.areas in particular? Is it the only place it could go? The pressures

:16:19. > :16:22.the development for new housing, which are really there, are in the

:16:22. > :16:27.South East and South West primarily. If you look at the North and the

:16:27. > :16:32.Midlands, we have plenty of brownfield land. We have got enough

:16:32. > :16:38.land to build 1.5 million houses at the moment, so why don't we use

:16:38. > :16:45.that first? We have been given an assurance that green belt land will

:16:45. > :16:51.not be built on. They mixed messages all the time. Can we

:16:51. > :16:57.really protect greenfield and green belt land? I don't think so. Our

:16:57. > :17:01.own research shows we have 80,000 houses being proposed on Green Belt

:17:01. > :17:07.land at this point in time in local planning authority plans. Matthew

:17:08. > :17:14.Hancock, mixed messages they? protection on the Green Belt will

:17:14. > :17:20.stay, nick Bowles made out very clear. But the key point he was

:17:20. > :17:24.making is that we have a shortage of housing in this country. And no

:17:24. > :17:29.one disagrees with that. You have to follow that through to the

:17:29. > :17:32.conclusion. If we need more housing, we need to build more houses. That

:17:32. > :17:36.may sound like a statement of the obvious, but houses have to go

:17:36. > :17:46.somewhere. But what about the pressure on houses in the south-

:17:46. > :17:50.east and south-west? Weeny to make sure that our children and

:17:50. > :17:55.grandchildren have houses they can afford to live in. We have to do

:17:55. > :17:59.that in the same way as protecting what is best, for instance the

:17:59. > :18:05.strengthening of areas of outstanding until Beauty and other

:18:05. > :18:09.protected areas. One thing that hasn't had enough of an earring is

:18:09. > :18:16.that the housing that has been built over the last decade, a lot

:18:16. > :18:22.of it is too ugly. We needed to be in keeping and where local people

:18:22. > :18:26.wanted. In my constituency, have one town that doesn't want more

:18:26. > :18:32.housing, and I have to towns where it is widely accepted that growth

:18:32. > :18:36.is good news. So we need to respond to what local people want, and say,

:18:36. > :18:40.let's put a housing where people welcome it and not put it where

:18:40. > :18:48.people don't want it, and have much more local responsiveness and more

:18:48. > :18:51.I agree that that is what the planning system does. But why have

:18:51. > :18:56.we got the planning minister rubbishing the planning system and

:18:56. > :18:59.saying the solution is to release loads and loads of greenfield land,

:18:59. > :19:02.when we've actually got existing sites sitting there waiting to be

:19:02. > :19:06.developed? But it's the economy and the state of it that is stopping

:19:06. > :19:10.that is happening. Why do we have these smoke and mirrors about

:19:11. > :19:15.releasing green belt and greenfield land? Isn't that what everyone

:19:16. > :19:18.says? The economy matters enormously. The guarantees from the

:19:18. > :19:23.Treasury for housebuilders and the support for the finance to try and

:19:23. > :19:28.unlock what we are planning has already been given is an important

:19:28. > :19:33.part of it. But if we need more housing, and we are all agreed on

:19:33. > :19:36.that, then housing does have to be built somewhere. Why not use that

:19:36. > :19:41.first before going on to the green fields? We are working on doing

:19:41. > :19:45.that as well, but is it enough over the next 20 years? The people are

:19:45. > :19:49.right to be concerned about what Nick Boles will be singing in

:19:49. > :19:55.Newsnight. There are mixed messages. You are against ugly buildings, we

:19:55. > :20:00.all want beautiful buildings. Two months ago Dr Abril Matthew, you've

:20:00. > :20:05.had an hour and a half. Two months ago you announced that homeowners

:20:05. > :20:11.could build anything in their garden up to eight metres big,

:20:11. > :20:15.Permitted Development. You wanted a revolution. Local councillors...

:20:15. > :20:18.They will be ugly buildings, not beautiful. One of the reasons when

:20:18. > :20:23.you speak to developers they are not building is because the

:20:23. > :20:27.economic environment, they haven't got the confidence. You talk about

:20:27. > :20:31.lecturing future grandparents about the importance of housing. Imagine

:20:31. > :20:35.if you on a greenfield site. Once you've built on it it is gone,

:20:35. > :20:39.there is no U-turn from that. It's a responsibility to make sure you

:20:39. > :20:43.will build sensibly on brownfield sites and not on the green field

:20:43. > :20:47.sites. Nick Boles has confused matters by lecturing these guys in

:20:47. > :20:51.the sense you have to build on the 3% additional land, when there are

:20:51. > :20:56.spaces in urban areas, there are under-used facilities, brownfield

:20:56. > :21:06.sites. Not enough is being done to stimulate developers to build

:21:06. > :21:11.

:21:11. > :21:17.Louis Walsh has won �400,000 from the Sun in his libel case. Let's

:21:17. > :21:21.see if we can cheer ourselves up. The sound of Christmas. It's not

:21:21. > :21:25.even December yet. All over Britain, people are stealing time from their

:21:25. > :21:28.employers, pulling out their credit cards, which are already Max doubt,

:21:28. > :21:32.logging on to buy their Christmas presents. Mothers will have to

:21:32. > :21:35.think about getting the turkey ordered, dads will be stocking up

:21:35. > :21:38.on cheap booze before the supermarkets run dry and the Tories

:21:38. > :21:43.slap a minimum price on it. A festive season to look forward to

:21:43. > :21:50.with lots of lovely presents under the tree. Political division and

:21:50. > :22:00.economic division Wigan, we all look forward to it - we can't wait.

:22:00. > :22:12.

:22:12. > :22:16.What is that? Bah humbug! Here is Is it time to ban Christmas

:22:16. > :22:22.presents? Festive gift giving has lost its meaning. It risks doing

:22:22. > :22:26.more harm than good. We can't prioritise our finances and leads

:22:26. > :22:30.us all feeling obliged to buy a long list of packed for a long list

:22:30. > :22:34.of friends that we know they will never used. Of course, this is

:22:34. > :22:38.about changing culture not the law. It isn't a curmudgeonly Bar humbug

:22:38. > :22:43.about getting rid of presents and a victory for the kids. It's about

:22:43. > :22:53.the ever-widening circle of friends, family, colleagues and teachers

:22:53. > :22:56.

:22:56. > :23:02.that we all must x4. -- must buy a four. I believe gift-giving

:23:02. > :23:06.originally developed as a form of social banking., that marriage a

:23:06. > :23:10.coming of age ceremonies. Then, older members of the community gave

:23:10. > :23:14.gifts to people starting out in life. Then as they age they cycled

:23:14. > :23:18.it back, focusing the cash to the people who most needed it. But with

:23:18. > :23:23.Christmas, I give to you, you give to me - it doesn't do the job. I'm

:23:23. > :23:28.sure some of you are thinking, Scrooge, what about the joy of

:23:28. > :23:30.giving? Yes, that does exist. I'm afraid it can occasionally be just

:23:30. > :23:35.a little bit selfish. Because buying somebody a gift often

:23:35. > :23:41.obliges them to buy back four U. And if they are skint and can't

:23:41. > :23:46.afford it, that his pain not joy. Finally, there's the risk of not

:23:46. > :23:53.prioritising our finances. Imagine affluent Janyk here has spent �20

:23:53. > :24:00.to buy her struggling cousin, John, this novelty Christmas hat. John in

:24:00. > :24:05.return feels obligated to spend �20 to buy back these boots. It is a

:24:05. > :24:08.zero-sum game. The net result is John has spent �20 of his money by

:24:08. > :24:13.in this hat. He would have probably preferred to spend it paying off

:24:13. > :24:16.his debts of beating his children. So for some this Christmas perhaps

:24:16. > :24:26.the best gift of all is releasing them from the obligation of buying

:24:26. > :24:29.

:24:29. > :24:33.for you. -- paying off his debts or feeding his children. You not just

:24:33. > :24:38.want to put the atom bomb under them with the saying, don't buy

:24:38. > :24:43.anything for Christmas. This message for me isn't for Christmas,

:24:43. > :24:47.it's all year round. I've been talking about this since back in

:24:47. > :24:51.2007. This isn't about stopping people spending money. This is

:24:51. > :24:55.about stopping people spending money on a necessary things, on

:24:55. > :24:59.tact, on the stress that people have at Christmas. One of the

:24:59. > :25:04.biggest causes of debt, the number of people who cycle, they spent an

:25:04. > :25:08.entire year getting out of last Christmas' debt, only to get in

:25:08. > :25:12.Dead Again. Yes, by your presents for your kids and spouse. But when

:25:12. > :25:16.it comes to feeling obligated about buying people stuff they won't use

:25:16. > :25:19.and then obligated them to buy back for us when they don't want to,

:25:19. > :25:24.isn't it time we gave it a break. If you want to spend the money,

:25:24. > :25:27.grade, go to the high street but by something unique and will use, or

:25:27. > :25:31.give the money to charities who are desperately struggling at the

:25:32. > :25:35.moment. The best gift right now, if you are about to buy 20 people who

:25:35. > :25:38.you know will never used you get something for Christmas, tell them

:25:39. > :25:42.that you are not. Tell them you are putting it into a charity's coffers,

:25:42. > :25:47.were you know it will make a difference. This is about

:25:47. > :25:50.redressing the soul. What is the point of this gift-giving? It isn't

:25:50. > :25:54.just a tick box in exercise. Given that this is a government that

:25:54. > :26:00.wants to dictate the alcohol price two-bit shops and dictate what

:26:00. > :26:05.offers they can make, this must appeal for you, BAM Christmas

:26:05. > :26:15.presents... Or do you have no intention of banning Christmas

:26:15. > :26:16.

:26:16. > :26:20.presents? We will never do that. Not whilst... I will never vote to

:26:20. > :26:25.ban Christmas. I always think the Roman Christmas presents is you

:26:25. > :26:34.should give something you'd like to deceive yourself. I don't like

:26:34. > :26:39.receiving tatty presence. So get you a bra and knickers, you will

:26:39. > :26:48.both be happy. Too much! I presume this doesn't apply to Labour

:26:48. > :26:51.either? It doesn't. Do you have any friends? This time of year, people

:26:52. > :26:57.are members of Christmas clubs, the number of those who go to loan

:26:57. > :26:59.sharks close up, those who use pay- day loans goes up. Maarten's key

:26:59. > :27:04.point is people borrowed disproportionate amounts at this

:27:04. > :27:09.time of year and it is very stressful. And there is peer

:27:09. > :27:14.pressure to give a good enough gift to somebody else. You have the

:27:14. > :27:17.people who don't need the money who are saying, I'm affluent, I want to

:27:18. > :27:23.help you, I'm going to give you a big present. But pride then

:27:23. > :27:33.obligate sued to buy one back that you can't afford.Excluding

:27:33. > :27:34.

:27:35. > :27:44.How many people in your kids' class do you give presents to? Your own

:27:45. > :27:46.

:27:46. > :27:51.children? They will still have something under the tree? An orange,

:27:51. > :27:58.maybe. We used to get a candle for Christmas. If it was really cold

:27:58. > :28:02.and sometimes we would like it! only thing I have about giving

:28:02. > :28:09.gifts for children is we have inflationary gift-giving going on

:28:09. > :28:12.and peer pressure in schools. I sat in a cafe, I remember hearing a 16-

:28:12. > :28:15.year-old talking to her aunt, asking to intercede with the

:28:15. > :28:19.parents, because her parents wouldn't buy her a limousine trip

:28:19. > :28:24.around London for her and all her friends. She said, it's only a

:28:24. > :28:34.couple of hundred quid a head. It's that level of expectation. I think

:28:34. > :28:35.

:28:35. > :28:42.we need to rein back. Yes, I can put you out of your misery and give

:28:42. > :28:52.you the answer to Guess the Year. Do you know the answer? I think

:28:52. > :29:03.

:29:03. > :29:09.It was 1984. I owe you that bottle of cheap fizz. I'm not an alcoholic,