12/12/2012

:00:45. > :00:51.Morning, Foulkes. This is the Daily Politics. Something is clearly

:00:51. > :00:56.rotten at the heart of our banking system. HSBC, Britain's biggest

:00:56. > :01:01.bank, has just been slapped with the biggest-ever banking fine, over

:01:01. > :01:06.�1 billion for money laundering involving drug cartels. And rogue

:01:06. > :01:12.regimes, and terrorists. The US Department of Justice accused the

:01:12. > :01:15.Bank of having an astonishing record of dysfunction.

:01:15. > :01:20.Westminster has been besieged by the lovers of a pint, who today

:01:20. > :01:30.want to get rid of the so-called beer escalated you to.

:01:30. > :01:31.

:01:31. > :01:34.Has the Government jilted the gay My passionate belief is that the

:01:34. > :01:39.second most precious thing in life is the right to express yourself

:01:40. > :01:49.freely. And we will be looking at moves afoot to get the law on

:01:50. > :01:56.

:01:56. > :01:59.All that and more coming up and the next 90 minutes. With us for the

:01:59. > :02:06.duration on the 12th of the 12th of 2012 -- scary! We have some up and

:02:06. > :02:11.coming stars of the political firmament. Nick Hurd, son of

:02:11. > :02:16.Douglas. He is minister for civil society. You won't find much of

:02:17. > :02:24.that in here! According to the Daily Mail, he has modelled for the

:02:24. > :02:28.Boden catalogue. Is that true? is true. He won't know what that is,

:02:28. > :02:35.but I do. And we also blessed by the shadow

:02:36. > :02:40.business secretary, a male model in his own way, Chuka Umunna. He

:02:40. > :02:50.apparently sang the Mr Bean theme tune. Is that true? It is, with

:02:50. > :02:55.several other people. That is my claim to fame! I got two right in a

:02:55. > :03:01.row! First, the banks. British banks are creating headlines for

:03:01. > :03:05.all wrong reasons. HSBC has been fined more than �1 billion, yes, I

:03:05. > :03:10.said billion, not million, for helping launder money for Mexican

:03:10. > :03:16.drug cartels and rogue states such as that nice place, North Korea,

:03:16. > :03:19.which has just launched a missile. Standard Charter has been fined

:03:19. > :03:24.almost �200 million for sanctions- busting on behalf of nice regimes

:03:25. > :03:31.like Iran and Libya. City traders have been arrested for allegedly

:03:31. > :03:37.fixing the London interbank rate, LIBOR, for which Barclays has

:03:37. > :03:41.already been fined almost �300 million. And the tax payers had to

:03:41. > :03:46.fork out �270 million to Northern Rock customers because the bank

:03:47. > :03:54.couldn't keep its paperwork in order. That only leaves the co-op

:03:54. > :03:58.unscathed. Good old co-op! HSBC turned a blind eye to money

:03:58. > :04:02.laundering by drug cartels, terrorists and regimes in Cuba,

:04:02. > :04:08.Iran, Libya and Burma. It was the Bank of choice for Mexican drug

:04:08. > :04:16.gangs. They used the bank so often they build special boxes to fit

:04:16. > :04:20.into HSBC's teller slots. How could this happen to a British bank? You

:04:20. > :04:27.used to be with Flemings, another British bank. Her who behaved a lot

:04:27. > :04:30.better. The fundamental problem here at the root of all this is

:04:30. > :04:37.that banks were regulated very badly. Gordon Brown has admitted

:04:37. > :04:41.that. The regulatory regime in which banks operated was far too

:04:42. > :04:48.lax. I think there is also another problem, the way in which bankers

:04:48. > :04:52.are paid, it is all about maximising short-term profit. But

:04:52. > :04:56.we are now taking a serious approach to regulation, which we

:04:56. > :05:02.haven't had for 30 years. It wasn't the rules. The problem was that

:05:02. > :05:06.people were breaking the rules. This is a matter of criminality!

:05:06. > :05:12.Absolutely. That is the particular issue here. In relation to Northern

:05:12. > :05:15.Rock, I don't think it is. And ask you about HSBC. It has to be

:05:15. > :05:19.criminality if you are money laundering for grown -- drug

:05:19. > :05:23.cartels in Mexico. I'm amazed nobody has gone to jail over this.

:05:23. > :05:31.Ditto. To say that we should have had better regulated banks is

:05:31. > :05:37.nonsense. Many, including Ed Balls, agree that the political consensus

:05:37. > :05:39.which was Pro a light touch regime was wrong at the time. But the

:05:39. > :05:44.important thing for us is to rebuild trust and confidence in the

:05:44. > :05:48.British banking sector. It is going to take a long time. It will, but

:05:48. > :05:52.there is a national interest in this. Increasingly, people have

:05:52. > :05:57.been talking about it being a London problem, of the back of

:05:57. > :06:03.LIBOR, PPI misselling, interest rates and so on. We have got to

:06:03. > :06:06.resolve this. I am proud that we have the world's global financial

:06:06. > :06:10.services sector here in London, but we have got to maintain that

:06:11. > :06:15.position. We are particularly seen with the regulators in New York,

:06:15. > :06:19.seeking to make political capital out of London's position. Do you

:06:19. > :06:22.think they are picking on us? think there was definitely a hint

:06:22. > :06:26.of that in respect of Standard Chartered and the New York

:06:26. > :06:30.regulator. There were sources close to the Fed and close to the

:06:30. > :06:37.Treasury in the US who looked not very favourably on the attitude

:06:37. > :06:43.adopted. Standard Chartered was found guilty of sanctions busting

:06:43. > :06:46.for a nice places like Iran, Burma and Libya. I am not defending any

:06:47. > :06:50.of the Rhondda whatsoever. I am simply making the point that we

:06:50. > :06:56.have a leading financial services centre here and we have got to

:06:56. > :07:01.maintain that position and rebuild trust and confidence. It isn't just

:07:01. > :07:07.an issue for regulators. It is an issue for the leaders of the big

:07:07. > :07:15.banks themselves. This isn't just a few rotten apples. We need to

:07:15. > :07:23.fundamentally change the culture of our institutions. Most of the HSBC

:07:23. > :07:32.wrong doing took place between 2002 and 2010. He was chief executive of

:07:32. > :07:41.HSBC for most of that time? I... Mr Green? That is right. Stephen Green.

:07:41. > :07:49.And what does he do now? He is a trade minister. How can you have a

:07:49. > :07:55.trade minister who presided over a bank, chairman from 2006-2010, when

:07:55. > :08:00.all this was going on? He has got to account for himself. He regrets

:08:00. > :08:06.it, he says. He hasn't accounted for himself. He is open to

:08:06. > :08:10.accountability on that. I like Stephen Green. I think he is a good

:08:10. > :08:14.chap. There are a lot of people who say it that they think he has done

:08:14. > :08:21.a good job as trade minister, but he could have put this issue to bed

:08:21. > :08:26.if he had come to the House of Lords as many were asking and dealt

:08:26. > :08:31.with questions on this topic. But he hasn't allowed people to

:08:31. > :08:36.question him, to hold him to account. That's the problem.

:08:37. > :08:46.left with a pension pot of... Anyone like to guess? It's not

:08:47. > :08:50.

:08:50. > :08:57.small. Over half a million a year, probably. �19 million pension pot.

:08:57. > :09:04.According to my notes here. And this is a man who was chairman of a

:09:04. > :09:08.bank that turned a blind DI to money laundering by drug cartels,

:09:08. > :09:11.terrorists and regimes in Cuba, Iran, Libya and Burma. Ordinary

:09:11. > :09:16.people watching this programme, struggling to make ends meet as

:09:16. > :09:20.their fuel bills go through the roof, will be saying, there is

:09:20. > :09:24.clearly one law for these kinds of people, a totally different law for

:09:24. > :09:34.me. There is a huge amount of anger at the banks, and this will only

:09:34. > :09:39.throw more petrol on the flames. is on the banking reform committee.

:09:39. > :09:46.Northern Rock taking 270 million from the taxpayer, on top of the

:09:46. > :09:52.billions already given to bail them out. It is stupidity. It is lack of

:09:52. > :09:57.information, typical of the way in which the banks were operating at

:09:57. > :10:06.the time. We need to get regulatory framework, and we are making

:10:06. > :10:10.progress. On this northern Rock issue, and people have been seeing

:10:10. > :10:15.stories about them having to pay out this money, why, given that the

:10:15. > :10:18.Government knew about this in October, would it not factored into

:10:18. > :10:24.the forecast and provided to the OBR to factor into their forecasts

:10:24. > :10:33.of public sector debt? That is one for the Treasury. I don't know the

:10:33. > :10:39.answer. They wanted to keep it out of the public view? Do not think of

:10:39. > :10:45.the Treasury knew about it, they should have factor that in? With

:10:45. > :10:50.the greatest respect, I am not taking any lessons from a Labour

:10:50. > :10:55.politician about failure to regulate the bank's! We need to

:10:55. > :10:58.conduct a proper inquiry and see what comes out of that. It is an

:10:58. > :11:03.unprecedented litany of disasters in the banking sector. Household

:11:03. > :11:10.names like HSBC, Barclays. I don't think we have heard the last of

:11:10. > :11:14.them. You have on this programme, because Jo has a much more

:11:14. > :11:19.important subject. Not a good day for the banks, and also not for

:11:19. > :11:23.beer. What would motivate 1,000 angry men and a few women to

:11:24. > :11:33.descend on Westminster on such a winter's des? The rising price of

:11:34. > :11:34.

:11:34. > :11:38.beer, of course. The government's alcohol duty escalator increases

:11:38. > :11:47.the price of the tax on beer by 2% per year more than the rate of

:11:48. > :11:51.inflation. CAMRA's chief executive is in Westminster. I notice the

:11:51. > :11:57.signs behind you. I believe they are the signs of pubs that have

:11:57. > :12:00.shut. Is that correct? They are indeed, and some of hour

:12:00. > :12:04.campaigners are here today. These are people who have lost their

:12:04. > :12:09.local pubs, and one of the reasons for those pub losses is undoubtedly

:12:09. > :12:13.the high rate of tax we are paying. We would like to see the escalator

:12:13. > :12:17.scrapped. Excuse me for using a hackneyed phrase. We are all in

:12:17. > :12:21.this together. Why shouldn't be a drinkers pay a little more? No one

:12:21. > :12:26.is saying they shouldn't pay their fair share. But what is happening

:12:26. > :12:31.is that they are paying 2% every year above the rate of inflation.

:12:31. > :12:38.We are saying scrap the escalator. The attacks shouldn't go up by more

:12:38. > :12:43.than the rate of inflation. The government's figures show that over

:12:43. > :12:46.the next two years, they are expecting their beer tax revenue to

:12:46. > :12:53.fall while beer drinkers are still paying through the nose. That

:12:53. > :13:00.doesn't look like good politics to me. You are complaining about the

:13:00. > :13:04.price of beer, but according to the campaign for real-ale and the

:13:04. > :13:10.editor of the Good Beer Guide, real-ale has never been in ruder

:13:10. > :13:13.health. Breweries are opening. They have managed to buck the trend on

:13:13. > :13:17.the double-dip recession because there is a surge of the number of

:13:17. > :13:23.brewers coming onto the scene. are here to talk about the overall

:13:23. > :13:29.beer market, and of course pubs. If you look at the whole of the UK,

:13:29. > :13:33.not just real ale, that has just declined massively over the last 20

:13:33. > :13:37.years, and it continues to do so, so if we are going to get

:13:37. > :13:41.investment back into the market place and back into jobs, we need

:13:41. > :13:45.to see some support for the brewers, but more importantly, when we are

:13:45. > :13:51.seeing so many pubs closing, and we're talking about an industry

:13:51. > :13:54.that supports a million jobs, there is a real opportunity here for the

:13:54. > :13:59.Government to show some support for a great British industry and invest

:13:59. > :14:04.in British jobs. The chairman of the all-party Save the pub group,

:14:04. > :14:10.you were not doing very well. could ask other people. You can ask

:14:10. > :14:17.CAMRA members. We are campaigning on a number of issues. The unfair

:14:17. > :14:25.rates of beer duty is one of them. Today we are here to talk about

:14:25. > :14:32.beer duty. The increase escalator doesn't make sense. It is stifling

:14:32. > :14:36.business, closing pubs. What we are calling for today is common sense.

:14:37. > :14:40.It doesn't make sense to have an escalator introduced in a

:14:40. > :14:44.completely different economic environment in 2008, when inflation

:14:44. > :14:47.was different and the cost of living was different. This is doing

:14:47. > :14:53.damage to a great British industry, and doing damage to pubs who can't

:14:53. > :14:56.absorb the extra costs. But it is your Chief Secretary to the

:14:56. > :15:02.Treasury that keeps putting it up. Have you spoken to Danny Alexander

:15:02. > :15:05.about this? I have indeed, and I raised it in Treasury Questions

:15:05. > :15:11.yesterday. He said it is being looked at, and we are trying to

:15:11. > :15:14.push the case. Alistair Darling left us with a strange situation,

:15:14. > :15:20.criticised by Conservatives and Liberal Democrat MPs when it was

:15:20. > :15:26.introduced, and now being imposed by Labour MPs. This is a tax that

:15:26. > :15:31.no longer makes sense. We are going to do everything we can. There are

:15:31. > :15:36.well over 1,000 CAMRA members giving a very clear message that

:15:36. > :15:43.the beer duty escalator is bad for British pubs, and we hope we met

:15:43. > :15:49.that they will see sense. Just before we go, is it true you are

:15:49. > :15:53.only allowed in your supporters to have tea and biscuits before they

:15:53. > :16:02.meet the MPs? The beer is saved for later? Everybody will get a good

:16:02. > :16:10.old pint of real-ale on CAMRA later! Probably a wise move. Well

:16:10. > :16:20.done for asking. Sorry about that. Cheers to both of you! We do the

:16:20. > :16:22.

:16:22. > :16:28.same, tea and biscuits before and Do you support this campaign?

:16:28. > :16:35.I'm a big fan of CAMRA. They were concerned about the issues which

:16:36. > :16:41.affect pubs, and it's more complex than the beer duty in terms of

:16:41. > :16:46.Wyatt public houses are struggling. There is lots of social factors,

:16:46. > :16:55.not least the price of booze in the supermarkets. This escalator was

:16:55. > :16:58.introduced by a Labour. Would you like to scrap it? What I do know is

:16:58. > :17:04.that the Government is very sensitive to the cost of living

:17:04. > :17:09.issues in relation to council tax, fuel duty. Rail fares. At some

:17:09. > :17:15.point, you do have to recognise there are difficult decisions to be

:17:15. > :17:19.taken. The escalator may be one of them. CAMRA is furious with a

:17:19. > :17:23.government at the moment because they would introduce a statutory

:17:23. > :17:27.code to govern the relation between tenants and large pub companies and

:17:27. > :17:31.they have remained on so many of their commitments. That needs to be

:17:31. > :17:34.dealt with. The seal on anniversary in January when the Government

:17:34. > :17:40.promised to help small pubs which are shutting and they have not done

:17:40. > :17:42.yet. Secondly, where pubs are closing, going under, you often see

:17:42. > :17:47.supermarkets moving straight in because you don't need to change

:17:47. > :17:56.the planning laws. On the review of the beer duty, we support the

:17:56. > :18:01.review. Would you like to see it scrapped? Our commitment to reduce

:18:01. > :18:06.VAT to 17.5% would cut the price of beer by 5p. That actually mean

:18:06. > :18:13.something to people. We are supporting the review. Thank you,

:18:13. > :18:18.gentlemen. Time, as they say. Do you think anybody who watches

:18:18. > :18:28.this programme earns millions of pounds? I don't know how much

:18:28. > :18:32.

:18:32. > :18:35.people in here. I don't know. Enough of this. Now, you bunch of

:18:35. > :18:39.lazy, stay-at-home, silly, nothing better to do than watch the useless

:18:39. > :18:44.Daily Politics, numpties. Watch this. Oi, now you watch it!

:18:44. > :18:47.Insulting me is possibly a criminal offence. And if that doesn't spook

:18:47. > :18:51.you, the sight of Peter Tatchell dressed as a policeman and with a

:18:51. > :18:54.Pantomime Dobbin is definitely enough to scare the horses. Section

:18:54. > :18:57.5 of the Public Order Act was written 26 years ago to tackle

:18:57. > :19:03.football hooligans by making it a criminal offence to use insulting

:19:03. > :19:05.words or behaviour. It's united unlikely bedfellows in a campaign

:19:05. > :19:12.to reform it, after cases of a Christian arrested for saying

:19:12. > :19:17.homosexuality was a sin. A fine later quashed for a teenager who

:19:17. > :19:25.said woof woof to some labradors. And a student arrested for saying

:19:25. > :19:32.to a police officer, "Excuse me". Do you know your horse is gay?

:19:32. > :19:36.is insulting. You on nicked! remember I had been here before in

:19:37. > :19:41.a fictional context. I once did a show called Not the 9 o'clock News,

:19:41. > :19:49.some years ago, and we did a sketch where grief these Jones played

:19:49. > :19:54.Constable Savage. A racist police officer to whom I, his station

:19:54. > :20:02.commander, is given a dressing-down for arresting a black man on a

:20:02. > :20:10.string of ludicrous charges. The charges for which he was arrested

:20:10. > :20:15.worthies. Walking on the cracks in the pavement. Walking in a loud

:20:15. > :20:22.shirt in a built-up area during the hours of darkness. And one of my

:20:22. > :20:27.favourite, walking around all over the place. He was also arrested for

:20:27. > :20:32.urinating in a public convenience. And the looking at me in a funny

:20:32. > :20:38.way. Who would have thought that we would end up with a law which would

:20:38. > :20:42.allow life to imitate art so exactly if? It's often used to

:20:42. > :20:47.arrest people for expressing opinions and beliefs. And we think

:20:47. > :20:51.that is dangerous. It is not compatible with a free and

:20:51. > :20:58.democratic society. We are delighted the cross-party group of

:20:58. > :21:02.MPs are supporting the appeal and we have the backing of both the

:21:02. > :21:04.current director of Public Prosecutions and the formal one.

:21:04. > :21:14.Perhaps the Government's only concern is appearing to licence

:21:14. > :21:21.

:21:21. > :21:26.insulting police men. Right I'm The horse was nodding in agreement.

:21:27. > :21:31.Anyway, Giles Dilnot there. And we're joined now by the Liberal

:21:31. > :21:36.Democrat President, Tim Farron. Welcome back to the Daily Politics.

:21:36. > :21:40.You want to see insulting removed from the Public Order Act, why?

:21:40. > :21:44.It's important to be courteous and polite. It's not wise to insult

:21:44. > :21:50.people. What we're talking about is not the banter we have been

:21:50. > :21:56.discussing, but the rights of people of deeply-held convictions

:21:56. > :22:01.to express them in a way not meant to be abusive, not meant to cause a

:22:01. > :22:04.public order offence, but is simply likely to rile those who take

:22:04. > :22:09.different positions. I have the National secular Society and the

:22:09. > :22:13.Christian Institute in my office not long ago arguing for the right

:22:13. > :22:18.to defend and insult one another. They should be allowed to do so.

:22:18. > :22:22.when that drug Oxford student insulted the police force, by

:22:22. > :22:26.telling the police officer that his horse was gay, he was then arrested

:22:26. > :22:33.for making homophobic remarks. If you change the law, this stuff

:22:33. > :22:37.could not happen anyway? response to this, there is no

:22:37. > :22:41.offence which has been committed in the last few years under this

:22:41. > :22:45.political heading which would not have been easily prosecuted under

:22:45. > :22:49.abusive behaviour, incitement to violence, anything already in

:22:49. > :22:55.existence in the law. The issue is protecting freedom of speech, not

:22:55. > :23:00.reducing the powers of the police. But this is a much coarser nation

:23:00. > :23:04.than it used to be. The traditional British politeness and civilised

:23:04. > :23:12.behaviour has gone out of the window. You only have to drive

:23:12. > :23:16.around London. The House of Commons. Drivers are here behaved the way

:23:16. > :23:20.drivers used to be paid in New York. Are you sure you want to make his

:23:20. > :23:25.even more of a rude society? think the issues the police are

:23:25. > :23:30.concerned about over whether they can apprehend people who are

:23:30. > :23:33.causing difficulty, they are unfounded concerns because the law

:23:33. > :23:38.already allows people to be arrested for abusive behaviour,

:23:38. > :23:41.violent, threatening behaviour and so on. Even an intentional in salt

:23:41. > :23:44.is something different. We're talking at the freedom of speech

:23:44. > :23:48.for people with political, religious, philosophical

:23:48. > :23:52.convictions to be able to say things which are in the face of

:23:52. > :23:58.other people. We have a right to offend and a duty to accept that

:23:58. > :24:03.offence and a free society. What to say about courtesy is different. I

:24:03. > :24:07.agree with you. Western society as a whole is losing very important

:24:07. > :24:13.basic manners that we once had. It's a sad thing but it is not

:24:13. > :24:23.affected by the Government of any colour deciding to prevent free

:24:23. > :24:23.

:24:23. > :24:28.speech. If we take a rift out of the Andrew Mitchell playbook, and

:24:28. > :24:33.call some body a pleb, that is Ruud and stupid to do. But should not be

:24:33. > :24:36.illegal in your view, is that right? I'm not sure. The

:24:36. > :24:41.interpretation of existing law, intentional insults it would be

:24:41. > :24:47.something which is potentially actionable. If somebody perceives

:24:47. > :24:51.there had been insulted, I, as a Christian, being insulted by some

:24:51. > :24:58.body saying there is no God, get over it, I should be able to live

:24:58. > :25:01.for that. If somebody is an atheist, and has offended by me saying they

:25:01. > :25:06.are going to hell, something like that, they have got to live with

:25:06. > :25:11.that. It's an honest exchange of views. Let's see it your

:25:11. > :25:15.parliamentary colleagues agree. not sure we are that course as a

:25:15. > :25:23.society. Shakespeare and Chaucer they were pretty bad. I'm going

:25:23. > :25:28.back a bit. It may be nice inside the Carlton Club. I work in the

:25:28. > :25:35.House of Commons and it pretty tough. There is a clear issue here.

:25:36. > :25:41.Which is why we are consulting on it and reviewing the conclusions.

:25:41. > :25:49.The word insulting leads to challenges. Would you go along with

:25:49. > :25:52.this? I think the Home Office need to look at it. All right. We are

:25:52. > :25:55.not convinced over the need to change this. We will listen to the

:25:55. > :26:04.campaigners on it but I think you can have freeze speech without

:26:04. > :26:09.needing to insult people. -- a free speech. It's about where you

:26:09. > :26:12.personally feel insulted? It's a difference between are being

:26:12. > :26:17.deliberately offended by somebody else for so we have the equal

:26:17. > :26:25.marriage issue this week and those sides should be expressed without

:26:25. > :26:28.worry of being prosecuted. We will keep you posted. Thank you. Now,

:26:28. > :26:31.he's a man of principle who achieves what he wants to do. And

:26:31. > :26:34.he prevails in the end because he's honourable, decent, a great British

:26:34. > :26:41.hero. Who could Tom Baldwin, Ed Miliband's spin doctor, possibly be

:26:41. > :26:43.talking about? Wel,l Wallace of Wallace and Gromit fame. The

:26:43. > :26:47.cartoon character that Times cartoonist Peter Brooks has

:26:47. > :26:50.compared to the leader of the Labour party. Unable to shake off

:26:50. > :26:56.the perhaps unfavourable comparison, the Labour leadership team have

:26:56. > :26:59.decided to embrace it. "He's got a nice dog" says Mr Miliband. And

:26:59. > :27:02.Wallace, or Ed Miliband, also reveals in an interview for Grazia

:27:02. > :27:09.magazine what he bought his wife Justine for her birthday. Jewellery,

:27:09. > :27:15.perfume, underwear perhaps? No, he bought her a coffee machine. Used

:27:15. > :27:18.for. -- used for. Well, Mrs Wallace, I mean Mrs Miliband, if you're

:27:18. > :27:21.watching, we've got the perfect accompaniment for a coffee machine.

:27:21. > :27:31.We'll remind you how to enter in a minute. But let's see if you can

:27:31. > :27:31.

:27:31. > :28:13.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 41 seconds

:28:13. > :28:23.It is twice the size of Trafalgar Square. It's quite is twice the

:28:23. > :28:37.

:28:37. > :28:47.height of Nelson's Column in the # You've got a lot to answer for #

:28:47. > :28:48.

:28:48. > :28:58.Baby, I love you. # You've got a lot to answer for...

:28:58. > :29:00.

:29:00. > :29:03.Lots of guessing in the studio here. To be in with a chance of winning a

:29:03. > :29:06.Daily Politics mug, send your answer to our special quiz email

:29:06. > :29:16.addres. And you can see the full terms and conditions for Guess The

:29:16. > :29:17.

:29:17. > :29:22.Year on our website. Maybe I can get one? I only work here! It's

:29:22. > :29:29.coming up to midday here. Just take a look at Big Ben. It's a cold but

:29:29. > :29:33.rather nice winter's day in London town. PMQs is on its way. Nick

:29:33. > :29:39.Robinson is here. They is is the first chance for Labour to spell

:29:39. > :29:43.out what they would do to the benefit cuts or are joining the tax

:29:43. > :29:47.credits are because, crucial to the argument, an argument about

:29:47. > :29:51.language. The Treasury, George Osborne, wants to talk about

:29:51. > :29:55.capping benefits. Are they are going up but not that fast. Labour

:29:55. > :30:00.are saying, 60% of the people affected are working families, it's

:30:00. > :30:03.a real terms cut say you should talk about cuts to tax credits. The

:30:03. > :30:13.Shadow work and pension secretary has called it a shirkers tax. You

:30:13. > :30:16.listen to these exchanges today, and remember this battle about

:30:16. > :30:23.language is entirely to do with the politics of whether you regard this

:30:23. > :30:33.as unfair. If you describe the policy which never it fits into a

:30:33. > :30:36.

:30:36. > :30:39.TV graphic or sound bite. Led to go Thank you, Mr Speaker. This morning

:30:39. > :30:47.I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, and I shall

:30:47. > :30:50.have further such meetings later today. Can my right honourable

:30:50. > :30:57.friend confirm that the fall in youth unemployment figures is the

:30:57. > :31:00.largest since records began? And will he meet with me to discuss how

:31:00. > :31:04.employment opportunities in Tamworth, including youth

:31:04. > :31:08.employment, can be promoted still further?

:31:09. > :31:12.I would be delighted to meet with my honourable friend to discuss the

:31:12. > :31:16.business situation in Tamworth, but he is absolutely right. This

:31:16. > :31:21.morning's figures show the largest quarterly fall in youth

:31:21. > :31:26.unemployment on record. 72,000 fewer people unemployed this

:31:26. > :31:29.quarter. There is no room for complacency, still far too many

:31:29. > :31:35.people long-term unemployed, but in these figures we can see 40,000

:31:35. > :31:40.more people in work, they can seize up, unemployment down by 82,000,

:31:40. > :31:50.and the claimant count down. Over 1 million extra private sector jobs

:31:50. > :31:51.

:31:51. > :31:56.under this government. Mr Speaker... Mr Speaker... Mr

:31:56. > :32:04.Speaker, today's fall in unemployment and rising employment

:32:04. > :32:08.is welcome. Part of the challenge remains the stubbornly high level

:32:08. > :32:14.of long-term unemployment. Does the Prime Minister agree that this

:32:14. > :32:18.remains a fundamental importance, for the country as a whole? I do

:32:18. > :32:22.agree, and as I mentioned in my first dancer, long-term

:32:22. > :32:27.unemployment remains stubbornly high. The good news is that long-

:32:27. > :32:30.term youth unemployment is down by 10,000 this quarter, so that is

:32:30. > :32:35.encouraging. Long-term unemployment for others is still a problem,

:32:35. > :32:44.which is why the work programme and getting the work programme right is

:32:44. > :32:48.so important. Clearly there is more to do. He said on 18th January,

:32:48. > :32:54.unemployment will get worse not better. Perhaps he would like to

:32:54. > :32:58.withdraw that. Mr Speaker, I am glad the Prime Minister recognises

:32:58. > :33:02.that long-term unemployment is still a challenge. I want to ask

:33:02. > :33:05.him about the people who were doing the right thing in finding work. In

:33:05. > :33:09.his Autumn Statement, the Chancellor decided to cut tax

:33:09. > :33:12.credits and benefits, and he said it was the people with the curtains

:33:12. > :33:21.drawn who would be affected. Can the Prime Minister tell us how many

:33:21. > :33:27.of those hit actually in work. fact is this, that welfare needs to

:33:27. > :33:32.be controlled, and everyone who was on tax credits will be affected by

:33:32. > :33:36.these changes, because we have to get on top of the welfare bill.

:33:36. > :33:40.That is why we are restricting the increase on out-of-work benefits,

:33:40. > :33:45.and it is also the reason why we are restricting in-work benefits.

:33:45. > :33:48.But what we have also done is increase the personal allowance,

:33:48. > :33:57.because on this side of the house, we believe in cutting people's

:33:57. > :34:02.taxes when they are in work. He is raising the taxes of people in work,

:34:02. > :34:09.and he didn't answer the question. The answer is, despite the

:34:09. > :34:13.impression given by the Chancellor of the us Cheka, over 60% of those

:34:13. > :34:18.affected a Ren work -- the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is

:34:18. > :34:21.the factory work on a night shift. It is the cleaner who cleans the

:34:21. > :34:28.Chancellor's office while his curtains are still drawn and he is

:34:28. > :34:33.still in bed! The chancellor calls them scroungers. What does the

:34:33. > :34:38.Prime Minister call them? He just said that we are not cutting taxes

:34:38. > :34:46.for people in work. Someone who is on the minimum wage and works full-

:34:46. > :34:52.time will see their income tax bill cut by 1 1/2 under this Government.

:34:52. > :34:57.-- Cat by a half. This Government will say to working people, you can

:34:57. > :35:02.earn another �3,000 before you even start paying income tax. That is

:35:02. > :35:06.why we have taken 2 million people out of tax altogether. He should be

:35:06. > :35:14.welcoming that. This is the party for people who work. His is the

:35:14. > :35:18.party for unlimited welfare. course, he is just wrong on the

:35:18. > :35:24.detail. The Institute for Fiscal Studies table says quite clearly

:35:24. > :35:30.that, on average, working families are �534 a year worse off as a

:35:30. > :35:33.result of his measures. I notice he wants to get away from what the

:35:33. > :35:40.Chancellor of the Exchequer said last week, and we know what the

:35:40. > :35:48.Chancellor was trying to do. He was trying to play divide and rule. He

:35:48. > :35:53.said his changes, and I quote, "were for people living a life on

:35:53. > :36:00.benefits, still asleep while their neighbours go out to work." but it

:36:00. > :36:03.turns out it just wasn't true. It is a tax on strivers. Will the

:36:03. > :36:10.Prime Minister now admit that the Chancellor got it wrong and the

:36:10. > :36:17.majority of people hit are working people? He says that we haven't got

:36:17. > :36:23.the detail right. We know his approach to detail is to take a

:36:23. > :36:27.2000 page report and accepted without reading it! That is his

:36:27. > :36:37.approach to detail. I am surprised the shadow chancellor is shouting

:36:37. > :36:37.

:36:38. > :36:47.again. We learned last week, like bullies all over the world, he can

:36:48. > :37:03.

:37:03. > :37:11.Order, order! I want to hear the Prime Minister's answer. Order!

:37:11. > :37:16.Let's hear it. Specifically answer the leader of the opposition's

:37:16. > :37:20.question. He mentioned the Institute for Fiscal Studies figure.

:37:20. > :37:25.They do not include the personal allowance increase put through in

:37:25. > :37:31.the Budget. They do not include the Universal Credit changes which will

:37:31. > :37:35.help the working poor. Under this government, we are lifting the

:37:35. > :37:40.personal allowance, taking millions out of tax, standing up for those

:37:40. > :37:45.who work. He only stand up for those who claim. I must say, Mr

:37:45. > :37:54.Speaker, I have heard everything when the boy from the Bullingdon

:37:54. > :38:04.Club lectures people on bullying. Absolutely extraordinary. Have you

:38:04. > :38:09.

:38:09. > :38:14.He doesn't want to talk about the fact, but let's give him another

:38:14. > :38:20.one. He is hitting working families, and the richest people in our

:38:20. > :38:26.society will be getting a massive tax cuts next April. An average of

:38:26. > :38:28.�107,000 each for people earning over a million pounds. Mr Speaker,

:38:28. > :38:32.is the prime minister the only person left in the country Rue

:38:32. > :38:37.cannot see the fundamental injustice of giving huge tax cuts

:38:37. > :38:41.to the richest while punishing those in work on the lowest pay?

:38:41. > :38:46.The tax rate for the richest under this government will be higher in

:38:46. > :38:49.every year than it was for any year when he was in government. He

:38:49. > :38:54.obviously has a short memory, because I explained to him last

:38:54. > :38:59.week that under his plans for the 50p tax rate, millionaires paid �7

:38:59. > :39:04.billion less in tax than they did previously. The point of raising

:39:04. > :39:08.taxes is to pay for public services. We are raising more money for the

:39:08. > :39:13.rich, but where he is really so profoundly wrong is the choice that

:39:13. > :39:18.he has decided to make. Because the facts are these: Over the last five

:39:19. > :39:23.years, people in work have seen their incomes go up by 10%. People

:39:23. > :39:27.out of work have seen their income go up by 20%. At a time when people

:39:27. > :39:32.accept a pay freeze, we should not be increasing benefits. And yet

:39:32. > :39:35.that is what he wants to do. A party that is serious about

:39:35. > :39:41.controlling welfare isn't serious about controlling the deficit

:39:41. > :39:46.either. From the first part of his answer, he is claiming to be Robin

:39:46. > :39:50.Herd. I don't think that is going to work. He is not taking from the

:39:50. > :39:56.richest in giving to everybody else. And didn't the business Secretary

:39:56. > :40:02.give it away? This is what he said: "what happened was some of their

:40:02. > :40:08.donors, very wealthy people, stamped their feet. So they

:40:08. > :40:11.scrapped the mansion tax and went ahead with a 50p tax cut." Mr

:40:11. > :40:16.Speaker, they look after their friends, the people on their

:40:16. > :40:23.Christmas card list. Any well, they hit people who they never meet and

:40:23. > :40:28.whose lives they will never understand. His donors put him when

:40:28. > :40:34.he is, pay him every year, determine his policies. But it is

:40:34. > :40:38.perfectly clear, Mr Speaker, what the Labour Party's choice is. Their

:40:38. > :40:46.choice is more benefits paid for my more borrowing. They should listen

:40:46. > :40:50.to the Labour trade minister who said this: "you know what you call

:40:50. > :40:55.a system of government way you say, oh, we're in trouble, we will go

:40:55. > :41:05.and borrow low then give it to people. It is called Greece. Close

:41:05. > :41:09.

:41:09. > :41:13.they are not serious about the Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will the

:41:13. > :41:17.Prime Minister join me, and I am sure, the whole house, in sending

:41:17. > :41:24.our deepest sympathies and condolences to nurse Jacintha

:41:24. > :41:28.Saldanha who died this week. Does anybody wishing to support the

:41:28. > :41:32.family by donating to the King Edward VII hospital fund, and

:41:32. > :41:35.urging the press to preserve the privacy of this family. I am sure

:41:35. > :41:39.the whole house and indeed the whole country will join the

:41:39. > :41:43.honourable lady and join me in paying tribute to this nurse, and

:41:43. > :41:47.giving more our sympathies and condolences to her family. She

:41:47. > :41:51.clearly loved her job, cared deeply about the health of her patients,

:41:51. > :41:55.and what happened is a tragedy. There will be many lessons to be

:41:55. > :42:05.learned, and that echo what she said about the press keeping their

:42:05. > :42:08.

:42:08. > :42:14.distance and allowing his family Is the prime minister still

:42:14. > :42:19.intending to introduce the snoopers charter, euphemistically known as

:42:19. > :42:26.the communications and data Bill? Does he realise that he will be

:42:26. > :42:31.spying, his government, on more people in Britain than even all the

:42:31. > :42:41.press barons put together? Where did he get this advice and idea

:42:41. > :42:42.

:42:42. > :42:52.from? Was it down at Wapping? Was it his friends down there? Tony?

:42:52. > :42:58.I really believe on this issue the Honourable Gentleman is wrong. This

:42:58. > :43:01.is an important issue, and I feel is very strongly. As Prime Minister,

:43:01. > :43:08.you have to take responsibility first and foremost for national

:43:08. > :43:12.security and people's safety. Data communications, this is not the

:43:12. > :43:16.content of a phone call, it is the fact a phone call took place, is

:43:16. > :43:21.used in every single terrorist case and almost every single serious

:43:21. > :43:24.crime case. The question in front of a house of Commons and indeed

:43:24. > :43:28.the House of Lords is simply this: Because we currently have that data

:43:28. > :43:32.for fixed and mobile telephony, what are we going to do as

:43:33. > :43:38.Telephony increasingly moves over the internet? We can stand here and

:43:38. > :43:42.do-nothing and not update the law. The consequence will be fewer

:43:42. > :43:46.crimes solved, few were terrorists brought to justice. I do not want

:43:46. > :43:52.to be the prime minister who puts this country into that position.

:43:52. > :43:56.The Government's proposals on judicial review conflict with

:43:56. > :44:06.article 29 of Magna Carter 1297. Does the Government proposed the

:44:06. > :44:09.

:44:09. > :44:15.We don't intend that, but I am sure that he would understand... Order!

:44:15. > :44:19.Order! I would like to hear this. The point we are making is that the

:44:19. > :44:25.extent of judicial review has massively increased in recent years,

:44:25. > :44:28.and we think that there is an need for her recent rules to extend the

:44:28. > :44:31.costs of judicial review so that the costs are covered. Then we can

:44:31. > :44:36.maintain access to justice, but speed up the wheels of government a

:44:36. > :44:40.little. Will the Prime Minister answer the

:44:40. > :44:44.question he was asked three times by my Right Honourable Friend, and

:44:44. > :44:50.dodged a few moments ago? Willie confirm the majority of households

:44:50. > :44:57.will be hit by the real-terms cuts to benefits and tax credits are

:44:57. > :45:01.working household? The point I made is bigger than that. Everyone on

:45:01. > :45:06.working tax credits will be affected by the fact we are only

:45:06. > :45:10.increasing them by 1%. But the fact is we have to control welfare to

:45:10. > :45:14.deal with the massive deficit we were left by the party opposite,

:45:14. > :45:19.and there is a choice in politics. You could either control welfare

:45:19. > :45:25.bills, or you can say no to a welfare cap, no to the controller

:45:25. > :45:32.of welfare, borrow, build a power deficit and put us back where we

:45:32. > :45:36.came from. At the Liaison Committee yesterday, the Prime Minister began

:45:36. > :45:41.by saying that the Government would accept crucial Lords amendments to

:45:41. > :45:45.make the justice and security bill acceptable on secret courts. But he

:45:45. > :45:55.ended the session by appearing to say that he wouldn't accept those

:45:55. > :45:55.

:45:55. > :45:58.amendments. Could you clarify which We want this to pass through

:45:58. > :46:05.Parliament, having listened to the excellent points through the House

:46:05. > :46:07.of Lords, I think the Leader of the Opposition is catching the disease

:46:07. > :46:13.of the Shadow Chancellor of not being able to keep his mouth shut

:46:13. > :46:21.for longer than five seconds. We will listen very carefully. The

:46:21. > :46:31.fundamental choice is to make sure that these proceedings are

:46:31. > :46:31.

:46:31. > :46:36.available to judges and they should make a decision. The Environment

:46:36. > :46:40.Secretary this week described went to a bines as any appropriate

:46:40. > :46:45.technology which matured in the Middle Ages. Does he agree? Why

:46:45. > :46:52.not? The we are making serious investments in that renewable

:46:52. > :46:56.energy. We have set up a subsidy which stretches the tomb 2017 and

:46:56. > :47:01.that's why the renewable Energy capacity of this country has

:47:01. > :47:05.actually doubled in the last two years under this Government. Will

:47:05. > :47:10.he agree with me that not only has this Government had to deal with

:47:10. > :47:16.the catastrophic budget deficit which we inherited it from the

:47:16. > :47:20.former prime minister but also, as the figures reveal today, a tidal

:47:20. > :47:24.wave of emigration deliberately fostered by the Labour government

:47:24. > :47:27.concentrating on putting these two issues right are the most important

:47:27. > :47:33.issues facing this government for security for the people of this

:47:33. > :47:38.country? He makes an important point which is emigration was out

:47:38. > :47:43.of control under the last government. Net migration ran at

:47:43. > :47:48.over 200,000 a year, 2 million across a decade. Under sensible

:47:48. > :47:53.controls we have put in place, it's fallen by a quarter in recent years

:47:53. > :47:57.also what is interesting about this, you can have proper control of

:47:57. > :48:02.immigration while also saying to the world other universities are

:48:02. > :48:05.open to foreign students to come and study here, and as long as they

:48:05. > :48:09.have an English language qualification and a degree place in

:48:10. > :48:13.university, there's no limits on the numbers which can come.

:48:13. > :48:20.Controlling immigration, but making sure the best and brightest come to

:48:20. > :48:25.Britain. Iceland had a huge economic difficulties and rejected

:48:25. > :48:35.austerity and has seen a recovery driven by domestic demand.

:48:35. > :48:35.

:48:35. > :48:41.Unemployment is 2.4% lower than the UK. Those with children receive the

:48:41. > :48:47.most support in Iceland. Will he congratulate them on working hard

:48:47. > :48:53.to turn things around and does he think is anything he can learn from

:48:53. > :48:56.Iceland? I think if the case for an independent Scotland is a makers

:48:56. > :49:01.more like Iceland, I'm not sure that will recommend itself to the

:49:01. > :49:08.voters. Britain and Iceland have very good relations and I will make

:49:08. > :49:12.sure it remains to be the case of. Can I welcome the fall in youth

:49:12. > :49:20.unemployment in Hastings, where it has fallen steadily for the past

:49:20. > :49:25.nine months and is at its lowest since May 2010. Will he consider

:49:25. > :49:29.the continuation of youth contracts are so that can continue?

:49:29. > :49:33.grateful for her point. We will continue with the apprenticeships

:49:33. > :49:36.which have reached over one million under this government but also with

:49:36. > :49:40.the youth contract and work experience because we are seeing

:49:40. > :49:47.large numbers of people going into work experience coming off benefits,

:49:47. > :49:52.finding a job and finding it's a very good start to a working career.

:49:52. > :49:58.On the day unemployment in Scotland show the largest fall at in four

:49:58. > :50:03.years, it is the as shocked as I am by reports in the newspapers that

:50:03. > :50:09.some of JobCentre managers were actively encouraging employers to

:50:09. > :50:14.convert paid vacancies in to unpaid work experience placements to

:50:14. > :50:20.satisfy dw p targets? Will he condemned this practice and ensure

:50:20. > :50:23.it ceases immediately? He makes an important point. We want work-

:50:23. > :50:28.experience places to be additional places, encouraging more people to

:50:28. > :50:33.get appealing for work so they have a chance of getting a job but it's

:50:33. > :50:38.good he welcomes the fact employment in Scotland as increased

:50:38. > :50:44.27,000 since the election and unemployment has fallen by 19,000

:50:44. > :50:48.this quarter, so we are making progress. Would the Prime Minister

:50:48. > :50:54.join me in welcoming the progress that has been made around the

:50:54. > :50:58.country since the autism Act 2009 in supporting adults with autism?

:50:58. > :51:02.And following the recent National Audit Office report, would he join

:51:02. > :51:07.me in encouraging his ministerial colleagues and local authorities

:51:07. > :51:15.across the country to accelerate his progress next year when the

:51:15. > :51:19.adult autism strategy is due to be reviewed? May I pay tribute to my

:51:19. > :51:24.friend who was instrumental in getting a landmark act on to the

:51:24. > :51:29.statute books. The impact of it continues right up to this day and

:51:29. > :51:34.beyond. We want all adults living with autism to live recording lives

:51:34. > :51:39.within a society which accepts them up. The review of the strategy is

:51:39. > :51:42.coming up next year between March and October. It is vital it is a

:51:42. > :51:49.cost government at but and I will make sure this is dealt with in a

:51:49. > :51:54.co-ordinated way. The Green Investment Bank was due to be given

:51:54. > :52:00.new borrowing powers in three years' time. But, in a few other

:52:00. > :52:02.chances abject failure to meet that borrowing target, because it was

:52:02. > :52:08.predicated on meeting those borrowing targets set by the

:52:08. > :52:14.Government, is he still committed to giving borrowing powers to the

:52:14. > :52:16.Green Investment Bank and, if so, when? This government has set up a

:52:16. > :52:24.Green Investment Bank within two years whereas the party opposite

:52:24. > :52:29.did nothing about this for 13 years. Even at a time of fiscal difficulty,

:52:29. > :52:33.because of the mess we were left in, we put �3 billion into this, so

:52:33. > :52:38.right now it doesn't need to borrow because it has the money to invest

:52:38. > :52:44.and I think what is needed is the equity risk finance and that's

:52:44. > :52:54.exactly what the Green Investment Bank will provide. He goes to

:52:54. > :52:57.

:52:57. > :53:02.summer tomorrow. Has he noticed -- a summit. Has he noticed that the

:53:02. > :53:06.European Parliament is a parliament for the EU ensuring democratic

:53:06. > :53:12.legitimacy for the EU? Does he agree with this? What really say to

:53:12. > :53:19.the other leaders when he goes to their summit tomorrow? I do agree

:53:19. > :53:22.with him on this one. It is actually the national parliaments

:53:22. > :53:26.would provide the real democratic legitimacy within the European

:53:26. > :53:31.Union. When we are discussing banking union, it is to this House

:53:31. > :53:35.that we should account. It is to this size that represents our tax

:53:35. > :53:41.payers are that we should account and I always bear that in mind her

:53:41. > :53:44.when I am negotiating as I will be tomorrow at the European Council.

:53:44. > :53:49.Can the Prime Minister confirm the Autumn Statement revealed to the

:53:49. > :53:59.Government is now borrowing to London �12 billion more than it

:53:59. > :54:03.

:54:03. > :54:10.previously planned to? -- to London �12 billion? -- �212 billion. The

:54:10. > :54:16.party opposite was disappointed that borrowing would come down this

:54:16. > :54:21.year but this is the fact. Prime Minister has rightly said we

:54:21. > :54:25.are locked in a global economic race. Does he share my concern that,

:54:25. > :54:30.having the highest aviation taxes and the world, makes it harder for

:54:30. > :54:38.business to compete? And it increases the cost of living? Will

:54:38. > :54:44.he ask the Treasury to conduct a full review? I very much understand

:54:44. > :54:49.the point. Obviously, I get lobbied regularly by countries around the

:54:49. > :54:52.world particularly Commonwealth countries about their passenger

:54:52. > :54:59.duty also we don't have plans to commission a further research

:54:59. > :55:08.because we have just complete -- completed a thorough consultation.

:55:08. > :55:12.We have limited the rise of it until 2013 so the rates have only

:55:12. > :55:16.increased by a �1 for the majority of passengers but I will bear in

:55:16. > :55:20.mind very carefully what he says. The Autumn Statement did not

:55:20. > :55:25.include a forecast of child poverty as a result of the policies

:55:25. > :55:29.announced. Can he confirm it will be published soon? Could he tell

:55:29. > :55:35.the House whether he really believes his policies will increase

:55:35. > :55:39.or reduce child poverty in Islington? We want to see a lasting

:55:39. > :55:42.reduction in child poverty and I think we need to have a policies

:55:42. > :55:47.which address, not only whether people are just above or below the

:55:48. > :55:52.poverty line, are but policies which address the causes of poverty.

:55:52. > :55:56.What traps people into poverty? Of course, not enough money is part of

:55:56. > :56:00.it, not enough jobs is another and that's why today's news on

:56:00. > :56:05.unemployment is so welcomed but we need to look at all of the things

:56:05. > :56:14.which trap people in unemployment which includes family breakdown,

:56:14. > :56:19.drug abuse, alcohol abuse and unemployment. As he knows, Plymouth

:56:19. > :56:24.is a global leader in the Marine Science Engineering Research. I

:56:24. > :56:33.very much welcome the initiative by the Government to spend more money

:56:34. > :56:37.on at the science base. Would he be willing to meet with me and

:56:37. > :56:43.Plymouth members of Parliament and businesses, to discuss how they

:56:43. > :56:46.could become involved in the small cities super broadband initiative

:56:46. > :56:53.and will help us to rebalance our economy and attract private

:56:53. > :56:57.investors? I'm a very happy to meet with him. I know he stands up

:56:57. > :57:01.strongly for Plymouth a's economy. On the science budget, we made a

:57:01. > :57:05.decision at the start of this government, to freeze the science

:57:05. > :57:11.budget rather than cut it, and I'm sure that was the right answer and,

:57:11. > :57:15.since then, on broadband, I will look carefully about what he says

:57:15. > :57:20.about it. I'm sure he will be glad to know Devon and Somerset have

:57:20. > :57:24.been allocated over �33 million it to deliver a super-fast broadband

:57:25. > :57:34.and we're working hard to make sure those plans are on track because

:57:35. > :57:35.

:57:35. > :57:38.it's important for cities and rural areas, as well. The Prime Minister

:57:38. > :57:41.and members of this House will be fully aware of the serious threat

:57:41. > :57:46.posed to democracy by dissident republicans in Northern Ireland.

:57:46. > :57:50.The police have stated there is evidence of loyalist paramilitary

:57:50. > :57:53.involvement in some of the protests in Northern Ireland this week. It

:57:53. > :57:58.included a murder attempt on police officers protecting my constituency

:57:58. > :58:02.office. Will he not only condemned as reprehensible assault on

:58:02. > :58:06.democracy from those who style themselves as loyal, and willing

:58:06. > :58:13.agreed to meet with me and my colleagues, the justice minister

:58:14. > :58:16.for Northern Ireland, to discuss the grave security situation?

:58:16. > :58:22.absolutely join her in condemning the violence we have seen on the

:58:22. > :58:29.streets of Belfast. In no way are these people being loyal or

:58:29. > :58:32.standing up for being British for the violence is unjustified. I

:58:32. > :58:36.agree completely with what he said about the attack on the police

:58:36. > :58:40.officers. We should pay tribute to the work the Police Service of

:58:41. > :58:45.Northern Ireland do. I know the whole House would like to express

:58:45. > :58:49.our solidarity with the honourable lady and her colleagues who have

:58:49. > :58:54.been intimidated in recent days and a ball is happy to meet with MPs

:58:54. > :59:01.from Northern Ireland. But I am always happy to meet with MPs and

:59:01. > :59:04.Northern Ireland. Will he congratulate my two young

:59:04. > :59:13.entrepreneurs who have taken the initiative to start the Cornish

:59:13. > :59:19.cheese company and a passion company in my constituency? Does he

:59:19. > :59:24.agree this is just the sort of business initiative we need to see?

:59:24. > :59:29.I'm delighted to John honourable lady in congratulating the

:59:29. > :59:35.entrepreneurship -- joined the honourable lady in congratulating

:59:35. > :59:40.the entrepreneurship. I'm looking forward to pasting that cheese. I

:59:40. > :59:43.shouldn't maybe, because of my weight. The rate of start-up of a

:59:44. > :59:47.new businesses in this country is at a record high and because we

:59:47. > :59:56.need a rebalancing between the public and private sector, we need

:59:56. > :59:59.this to continue. In opposition, the Prime Minister said he wanted

:59:59. > :00:03.this government to be the most family a friendly government this

:00:03. > :00:09.country had ever seen. Why is the cutting maternity pay for working

:00:09. > :00:12.mothers? First of all,, what can honourable lady to the House of

:00:12. > :00:17.Commons and congratulate hair on her recent a by-election a success?

:00:17. > :00:23.We have had to take difficult decisions about welfare in and out

:00:23. > :00:29.of work. So we put a cap on 1% of all the working benefits including

:00:29. > :00:33.the one she mentions but, above all, on this issue, the right thing is

:00:33. > :00:37.to cut the tax as a people in work rather than take more in taxes and

:00:37. > :00:40.then redistributed through tax credits will stop we want to cut

:00:40. > :00:47.taxes on those who work and that's what we are doing and there will be

:00:47. > :00:51.more of it to come. Over the last five years, benefits have risen

:00:51. > :00:55.twice as fast as salaries for that does he agree that whilst we have a

:00:55. > :00:58.duty to the least well-off, it cannot be fair that people out of

:00:59. > :01:05.work enjoy bigger increases in living standards than those who

:01:05. > :01:09.work hard day and night to support themselves and their families?

:01:09. > :01:13.put that extremely clearly. Many people in our country have seen a

:01:13. > :01:20.pay freeze year after year after year. And yet welfare benefits have

:01:20. > :01:24.gone up. So, in politics, we face a choice. Do we go on putting those

:01:24. > :01:30.benefits up, which actually is not helping those people who are on the

:01:30. > :01:34.pay freeze in work, or do we take a tough decision? We have taken a

:01:34. > :01:38.tough decision. The only welfare minister Labour had called

:01:38. > :01:46.honourable member for Birkenhead, said there approach simply is not

:01:46. > :01:50.serious and once again, he is it right. May I congratulate the Prime

:01:50. > :01:55.Minister and the UK government on following the lead of the Scottish

:01:55. > :02:00.government and parliament in introducing equal marriage, minimum

:02:00. > :02:04.pricing by alcohol and the smoking ban up previously pulled up given

:02:04. > :02:06.that unemployment is now lower in Scotland and the rest of the UK,

:02:06. > :02:16.will he follow the lead of the Scottish government by introducing

:02:16. > :02:18.

:02:18. > :02:22.a more cohesive measure for growth? There is an extra �300 million for

:02:22. > :02:27.the Scottish government to spend and so it they want to spend that

:02:27. > :02:31.on the shop already measures, they can, but I'm happy to say, when

:02:31. > :02:40.good policies are introduced in any part of the UK, we all have the

:02:40. > :02:50.opportunity to follow them. Statement. We'll return to that in

:02:50. > :02:50.

:02:50. > :02:53.a moment. We saw the new dividing line in British politics. The

:02:53. > :02:58.uprating of benefits. The Government said they could only go

:02:58. > :03:04.up by 1% in the next three years. Now opposed by the Labour Party.

:03:04. > :03:10.There is a clear division there. It turned a little nasty. The Prime

:03:10. > :03:20.Minister described Ed Balls as a bully. He's probably do not before.

:03:20. > :03:20.

:03:20. > :03:30.But he's probably done that before. He was asked whether he had wrecked

:03:30. > :03:34.

:03:34. > :03:41.If only we could all draw a shroud over what we did at university!

:03:41. > :03:51.They have picked up on the debate. He was looking to me to make the

:03:51. > :03:58.point! You couldn't afford a restaurant, could you? I was very

:03:58. > :04:03.well behaved at university. Viewers also interested in the debate. The

:04:03. > :04:07.benefits discussion. This from Jacqueline in Keynsham. I am tired

:04:07. > :04:10.of being called a scrounger because I can no longer work. The

:04:10. > :04:14.Chancellor and the Prime Minister going on about drawn blinds and

:04:14. > :04:21.curtains is alienating a part of disabled society that has no choice

:04:21. > :04:26.in the matter. This from Helen Manning: Ed Miliband's continued

:04:26. > :04:33.reference to Sherpas not workers is so monotonous. He stands on the

:04:33. > :04:37.side of benefit claimants. Michael firm: David Cameron always quotes

:04:37. > :04:42.benefit claimants in percentages to make sure it sounds like people are

:04:42. > :04:47.getting more. But it only just covers the price rises. And this

:04:47. > :04:54.from Jeremy Clarke: Why aren't they are asking about the bank has yet

:04:54. > :05:01.again? Nick, there was a factual argument we are trying to get to

:05:01. > :05:11.the bottom of. The leader of the opposition said that if you only

:05:11. > :05:12.

:05:12. > :05:16.increase in work benefits by 1%, that is a cut in real terms. The

:05:16. > :05:19.Prime Minister then said, that doesn't include this huge rise in

:05:19. > :05:22.personal allowances, so that particularly people on lower

:05:22. > :05:30.incomes will find that a huge chunk of their income won't be taxed at

:05:30. > :05:34.all. On first sight, I thought they had both made mistakes, but I have

:05:34. > :05:38.just check with the Treasury teams to see if they can provide some

:05:38. > :05:43.information. Ed Miliband said that the Institute of Fiscal Studies has

:05:43. > :05:47.said that the average loss, if you took into account everything, was

:05:47. > :05:52.�533 for families. In fact, Labour's own press release

:05:52. > :05:55.yesterday only applied to couples where only one person learns. The

:05:55. > :06:00.Government is increasing personal tax allowance. If there are two of

:06:00. > :06:07.you getting at, that obviously increases your income at the same

:06:07. > :06:13.time as a cat in real benefits level is curbing it. Five and and

:06:13. > :06:18.�34 is a figure that applies. The Prime Minister then claimed...

:06:18. > :06:21.what about fuel duty and all the rest of it? The Prime Minister

:06:21. > :06:25.claimed that this didn't include personal allowance, but I think it

:06:25. > :06:29.did. It would be remarkable if the Institute of Fiscal Studies, trying

:06:29. > :06:33.to do distributional analysis of the impact of all the changes that

:06:33. > :06:37.have been introduced, given that the increase in personal allowances

:06:37. > :06:41.one of the biggest and most expensive tax changes of all, I

:06:41. > :06:44.would be amazed if they didn't include that. I think that is

:06:45. > :06:51.absolutely right. So it is a question of what you include in the

:06:51. > :06:58.calculation. You can see, in very simple terms, the Institute of

:06:58. > :07:02.Fiscal Studies produced tables the day after important statements. How

:07:02. > :07:09.you win the bottom 10th, are you when the top 10th? If you are in

:07:09. > :07:12.the bottom five, below the average, you lose. The people just above,

:07:12. > :07:17.some of them again as a result of the personal tax allowance, of

:07:17. > :07:21.which counteracts that cap in the benefit levels. And the people at

:07:21. > :07:26.the very top lose because there was a different measure for pension

:07:26. > :07:30.taxes. But they lose because of a whole range of other steps as well,

:07:30. > :07:34.that the coalition government has taken. But in a sense what this was

:07:34. > :07:39.proving is partly what I was saying before, which is that language is

:07:39. > :07:42.crucial. That a viewer who roti in and said, and sick of his language.

:07:43. > :07:47.But we are not talking about benefits for the disabled, although

:07:47. > :07:53.I know it does affect employment support allowance, which some

:07:53. > :07:59.people who are disabled depend upon. People who are officially

:07:59. > :08:09.designated unable to work are not affected. But this language of are

:08:09. > :08:10.

:08:10. > :08:13.you talking about a cut pre-tax, a Shericka Orest driver, the details

:08:13. > :08:21.are complicated. Both sides are competing for language that works

:08:21. > :08:26.for them. Labour and now opposed for both the 1% up rate for both

:08:26. > :08:30.out of work and in-work benefits, correct? We are opposed to the

:08:30. > :08:40.package. If they maintain this huge tax cuts for people earning

:08:40. > :08:40.

:08:40. > :08:44.millions of pounds... The tax cut for the very rich. If they maintain

:08:44. > :08:49.that at the same time they are putting in a 1% cap, it is

:08:49. > :08:54.something we will vote against. This is a complicated area. I think

:08:54. > :08:59.the Chancellor committed a huge strategic error first of all in

:08:59. > :09:04.trying to do a divide and rule of the nation, and second of all

:09:04. > :09:12.trying to do a divide and rule between the so-called strivers and

:09:12. > :09:17.shirkers. Even if you take the argument that there are people in

:09:17. > :09:21.receipt of benefit, six out of 10 families affected by this being

:09:21. > :09:28.working families. But the issue of the people who are out of work, I

:09:28. > :09:34.look at the people I come across in my constituency, in my constituency

:09:34. > :09:39.frequently I meet young people in families who have come back from

:09:39. > :09:42.university, graduated from college, and cannot find work at the moment.

:09:43. > :09:49.They are doing a constant stream of work experience placements,

:09:49. > :09:57.internships. And in terms of there being this division, the party of

:09:57. > :10:02.strivers or shirkers. Maintaining this massive tax cut for the top 1%,

:10:02. > :10:08.if there is any division, you have a party of the 1% and a party of

:10:08. > :10:14.99%, everybody else. That is the real division here. What do you say

:10:14. > :10:18.to that? What I was struck by was a couple of things. I was pleased to

:10:18. > :10:24.see Ed Miliband open his account by welcoming the very good employment

:10:24. > :10:29.figures. I think he did it through gritted teeth, but it is good but

:10:30. > :10:36.the opposition can welcome what is clearly good news. It is not

:10:36. > :10:43.through gritted teeth. I have 15 people chasing every job vacancy in

:10:43. > :10:49.my constituency. So when I say these figures are will come, I mean

:10:49. > :10:55.it. We're so used to the negative stuff, it was welcome to hear him

:10:55. > :10:59.welcome that. But you are right, that reflected the big dividing

:10:59. > :11:04.line which will run through to the next general election. It is not

:11:04. > :11:08.just about this specific package. This is now the third successive

:11:08. > :11:16.opportunity that Labour have had to embrace some form of welfare reform,

:11:16. > :11:21.and they are clearly not. Because we don't want to give the top 1% a

:11:21. > :11:28.�107,000 tax cut. That is what you are putting through at the same

:11:28. > :11:31.time. At the same time, that you were implementing these cuts, barer

:11:32. > :11:35.thousands of families who are suffering because of what you were

:11:35. > :11:45.doing, enjoyed giving people early millions of pounds a tax cut in the

:11:45. > :11:46.

:11:46. > :11:50.order of �107,000. That is not fair. We can have a ding-dong about that.

:11:50. > :11:55.A think most people watching would be turned off by that exchange, as

:11:55. > :11:59.they are by most of these arguments. What is your message to families in

:11:59. > :12:03.your constituency who will be affected by this, then? The rich

:12:03. > :12:07.are going to be paying a much greater share of the total tax bill

:12:07. > :12:13.than they did in any year when you were in power. That matters to

:12:13. > :12:19.people. And the Prime Minister is also right in that you cannot argue

:12:19. > :12:24.with the fact that we are taking a lot of people out of tax. Our

:12:24. > :12:28.message to working families is we are on your side. We are cutting

:12:28. > :12:33.taxes. We are trying to reduce the cost of living for you. We are

:12:33. > :12:38.busting a gut to try to get the economy going. But we will reform

:12:38. > :12:42.the welfare system because we think the public are above that, because

:12:42. > :12:47.they think it is unsustainable. They don't think it is fair that if

:12:47. > :12:53.people in work are seeing salary increases less than the increase in

:12:53. > :12:58.benefits for people out of work. knew these are complicated, but

:12:58. > :13:02.people care. The �534 average loss that Ed Miliband talked about that

:13:02. > :13:07.is only for one-earner couples. And it does include the latest increase

:13:07. > :13:15.in personal tax allowance. What the Treasury say is, yes, it doesn't

:13:15. > :13:18.include the previously announced increase. That comes in this April.

:13:18. > :13:28.So if you look at the measures that were announced last week, and them

:13:28. > :13:30.

:13:30. > :13:37.alone, you get your 500 and and �84 It is the dividing line, and I want

:13:37. > :13:42.to step back and give people a flavour of the argument. You always

:13:42. > :13:47.take the tough argument! Nick is going to stay with us. The Prime

:13:47. > :13:52.Minister has been making a statement about the murder of the

:13:52. > :13:57.Belfast solicitor Pat Finucane in 1989. It was one of the more

:13:57. > :14:01.controversial killings of the Troubles in Northern Ireland.

:14:01. > :14:07.should be in no doubt that this report makes extremely difficult

:14:07. > :14:13.reading. It sets out the extent of collusion in areas such as

:14:13. > :14:18.identifying, targeting and murdering Mr Finucane, supplying a

:14:18. > :14:22.weapon and facilitating its later disappearance, and deliberately

:14:22. > :14:26.obstructing subsequent investigations. The report also

:14:26. > :14:30.answers questions about how high up the collusion went, including the

:14:30. > :14:38.role of ministers at the time. Sir Desmond is satisfied that there was

:14:38. > :14:42.not, and I quote, "and overarching state conspiracy to murder Pat

:14:42. > :14:48.Finucane". But while he rejects conspiracy, he does find, quite

:14:48. > :14:52.frankly, shocking levels of state collusion. Most importantly, Sir

:14:52. > :14:56.Desmond says he is "left in significant doubt as to whether

:14:57. > :14:59.Patrick Finucane would have been murdered by the Ulster Defence

:14:59. > :15:05.Association in February 1989 had it not been for the different strands

:15:05. > :15:10.of involvement by elements of the state". Part of the Prime

:15:10. > :15:13.Minister's statement there on Pat Finucane. Nick, we know from

:15:13. > :15:18.previous inquiries that the state colluded in the murder of this

:15:19. > :15:23.Belfast solicitor. We know it was a murder witnessed by his wife and

:15:23. > :15:27.three children. What have we learned today that we didn't know?

:15:27. > :15:30.I thought that phrase we heard was important, that phrase about

:15:30. > :15:34.significant doubt. What he is saying is that Pat Finucane could

:15:34. > :15:38.have been alive today if it hadn't been for the decision of some in

:15:38. > :15:42.the security services of Northern Ireland to collude in his murder.

:15:42. > :15:46.It wasn't just, that he was going to be murdered anyway and they

:15:46. > :15:50.happened to know about it and didn't blow the whistle. But it

:15:50. > :15:54.appears to be that the statement says he could have survived were it

:15:54. > :15:59.not for a decision of someone within the state, within the

:15:59. > :16:05.security services, to effectively end his life because he was seen as

:16:05. > :16:08.sympathetic to the IRA. That is extraordinarily serious. It is

:16:08. > :16:13.interesting that the Prime Minister wants to draw this distinction

:16:13. > :16:16.between collusion and conspiracy. I think he is trying to defend the

:16:16. > :16:19.upper reaches of politics and the upper reaches of Whitehall and the

:16:19. > :16:25.civil service in Northern Ireland at the time from saying that they

:16:25. > :16:29.sat at a desk, as it were, and said, it is time to eliminate this man.

:16:29. > :16:37.Clearly that is why he is saying no conspiracy. But collusion means

:16:37. > :16:47.that there were people, and not just one or two, who knew, were

:16:47. > :16:47.

:16:47. > :16:55.involved in the murder of a man What is the official position that

:16:55. > :17:02.the British state, they knew this man was going to be killed by

:17:02. > :17:05.terrorists, on the other side and did nothing to stop it? Or of the

:17:05. > :17:15.British state worked with terrorists on the other side to

:17:15. > :17:19.help kill him? I used to work at Panorama one are made an award-

:17:19. > :17:24.winning film about Ryan Nelson, double agent, and he was within

:17:24. > :17:28.loyalist terrorism but being run by the security services. In a sense,

:17:28. > :17:35.he not only new the targets that the terrorists were choosing but

:17:35. > :17:37.was involved, I think, in advising her they might want to target so

:17:37. > :17:43.someone at the heart of the organisation was working for the

:17:43. > :17:48.British state. That's how serious it was. It wasn't seriously not

:17:48. > :17:52.bothering. Looking the other way. And the scandal which came out

:17:53. > :17:58.thanks to that programme, and later in more detail, into what Brian

:17:58. > :18:04.Nelson did, is at the heart of this. We now know that clearly does

:18:04. > :18:10.report got further than previous inquiries. The Labour Party back

:18:10. > :18:14.the family in a saying it's not enough, a full inquiry, in which

:18:14. > :18:18.everything is made public is needed force up Tony Blair promised in at

:18:18. > :18:24.2001 if they judge appointed London and Dublin and there was a case to

:18:24. > :18:29.answer, a public inquiry into his death would be held. No public

:18:29. > :18:36.inquiry under Labour was ever held. Why not? We couldn't come to an

:18:36. > :18:42.agreement with the family under the auspices under which the inquiry

:18:42. > :18:48.would take place. By the time we left government, they changed their

:18:48. > :18:53.position and they were trying to bind a framework for an inquiry

:18:53. > :18:56.which would work for the family. What did the Prime Minister say he

:18:57. > :19:04.was going to do as a result of these findings? Has he said is

:19:04. > :19:09.going to be a public inquiry? have also been on air! You have got

:19:09. > :19:14.your iPad telling you. He says the review finds actions by employees

:19:14. > :19:19.of the state actively facilitated the killing, said the Prime

:19:19. > :19:22.Minister. The language is quite careful. He said the review found a

:19:22. > :19:27.relentless effort to refute the ends of justice after the killing

:19:27. > :19:32.and found army officials provided the MoD but highly misleading and

:19:32. > :19:38.inaccurate information. That is deeply shocking. We understand

:19:38. > :19:45.there will be no public inquiry. think the family will be dismayed

:19:45. > :19:52.at that it. If you were just heard that statement. Particularly given

:19:52. > :19:58.the point of that and Nick made. All the family will know is that,

:19:58. > :20:03.were it not for the actions of people involved with the state, he

:20:03. > :20:07.could still be there today. I need a quick reaction from you. We are

:20:07. > :20:12.being told that the Prime Minister's statement is that this

:20:12. > :20:16.to be no public inquiry also why not? We have and listen to the

:20:16. > :20:24.statement now. I have not read the report. -- we have not listen to

:20:24. > :20:32.the statement now. The key thing is the family. Did the Prime Minister

:20:32. > :20:36.apologise? He said, I'm deeply sorry. We should be clear about the

:20:36. > :20:40.distinction. This report which has revealed quite a good deal and has

:20:40. > :20:44.shocked the Prime Minister and many other people, this was about

:20:44. > :20:48.reviewing existing evidence. The call for a public inquiry was that

:20:48. > :20:51.a further evidence could be unearthed and it could be done in

:20:51. > :20:54.public and the family could see for themselves the evidence rather than

:20:54. > :21:00.having to rely on someone they would regard as an agent of the

:21:00. > :21:04.British state to draw a conclusion on the actions. There will be lots

:21:04. > :21:08.more on the BBC News Channel. Thank you for being with us today pull

:21:08. > :21:10.that we need to move on. Now, it has been described as David

:21:10. > :21:13.Cameron's Clause 4 moment. Yesterday, a Conservative Culture

:21:13. > :21:16.Secretary, stood up in the House of Commons and spelt out the

:21:16. > :21:19.government's plans to give gay people the right to marry. We'll be

:21:19. > :21:29.discussing those plans in a moment. But first, here's actor, Simon

:21:29. > :21:41.

:21:41. > :21:45.Callow, out on the streets of Soho When I was born in 1949, gay men

:21:45. > :21:53.and women lead secret lives. They lived in fear of arrest and

:21:53. > :21:58.imprisonment. But gay people started to emerge in the Senate

:21:58. > :22:07.Criminal Shadows, the world was changing, and homosexual love which

:22:07. > :22:12.is part of humanity itself, began to become part of normal life. When

:22:12. > :22:22.I was 18, gay people were at last allowed to have sex. Legally. I was

:22:22. > :22:27.

:22:27. > :22:31.still illegal at 18 but things were Up to a point, but gay couples were

:22:31. > :22:37.still denied the basic legal provisions which extended not only

:22:37. > :22:42.to married couples but also to common-law spouses. Then came the

:22:42. > :22:47.astonishing breakthrough of civil partnership. A huge leap forward.

:22:47. > :22:53.Marriage in all but name. But, in a very important sense, the name of

:22:53. > :22:59.marriage is what marriage is. A symbolic moment, a big step forward

:22:59. > :23:09.for the relationship. An ideal blessing. This is what many gay

:23:09. > :23:21.

:23:22. > :23:27.If David Cameron's big society means anything, it means not just

:23:27. > :23:35.inclusiveness, but mutual respect. And a guarantee of that respect,

:23:35. > :23:38.Should institutions in which we can all participate fully. The Prime

:23:38. > :23:42.Minister has with incredible clarity and boldness expressed

:23:42. > :23:47.himself in favour of gay marriage. There are those in his party who

:23:47. > :23:52.resist this change, as they have resisted every single social change

:23:52. > :23:56.harking back to a golden age, golden for a few perhaps. But the

:23:56. > :24:06.dark ages for money. The poor, women, people from other races,

:24:06. > :24:09.

:24:09. > :24:15.-- the dark Ages for many. I deeply love my partner. For better or

:24:15. > :24:21.worse, richer or poorer, in sickness and In Health, till Death

:24:21. > :24:31.do Us Part. The change in the law will set the seal on a love and

:24:31. > :24:33.

:24:33. > :24:37.make sure we are fully part of the And Simon Callow is with us now.

:24:37. > :24:39.Welcome to the programme. You said in that film there the Prime

:24:39. > :24:43.Minister had boldly expressed themselves in favour of gay

:24:43. > :24:45.marriage but yesterday afternoon, we got the details of the

:24:45. > :24:50.Government plans which would make it illegal for gay people to marry

:24:50. > :24:54.in the Church of England and Wales. Are you disappointed? It's

:24:54. > :24:58.bewildering. More than disappointed. I don't have the ambition to be

:24:58. > :25:03.married in a church, but there must be many Church of England ministers

:25:03. > :25:08.who are strongly in favour of gay marriage, to marry somebody in a

:25:08. > :25:12.church would be a criminal act is an astonishing if medieval idea.

:25:12. > :25:17.I'm bewildered, frankly. Were you under the impression that the

:25:17. > :25:21.Government's plans would allow you to marry in that church of England?

:25:21. > :25:26.That was the impression given the question up it was carefully

:25:26. > :25:31.unclear. Nobody ever made but absolute commitment and we knew

:25:31. > :25:36.there would be huge pressure from the backbenchers also it is a small

:25:36. > :25:40.symbol of saying, yes, but not absolute equality. Just as a civil

:25:40. > :25:45.partnership said you can get married up to a point, because

:25:45. > :25:49.you're not really like everybody else. There's a thing says the same.

:25:49. > :25:53.To make it clear, the Church we filmed you in yesterday, you would

:25:53. > :26:03.not be able to marry there, even if the clergy supported it? Indeed,

:26:03. > :26:03.

:26:03. > :26:08.that's the case. It's a very bizarre thing. What has gone wrong?

:26:08. > :26:12.What I liked about the film was it tell the story of how society's

:26:12. > :26:18.attitude to homosexuals t has changed enormously. I think where

:26:18. > :26:24.we are now is with the Prime Minister who believes passionately

:26:24. > :26:29.in marriage wants to open it up. But not in the Church of England.

:26:29. > :26:33.We want to do something which was possible. You don't think it's

:26:33. > :26:38.possible? We were under the impression that if the clergy in

:26:38. > :26:43.certain churches were in favour, you would be able to marry there?

:26:43. > :26:49.There is a very delicate balance to be strong between a desire to open

:26:49. > :26:52.up marriage to same-sex couples without make made compulsory. There

:26:52. > :26:56.is clear pressure from backbenchers but I would be surprised if there

:26:56. > :27:03.wasn't from the Labour backbenchers, because I don't sense your position

:27:03. > :27:06.on this is on party lines, at all. It is more one faith lines for the

:27:06. > :27:12.you can't underestimate the strength of this feeling.

:27:12. > :27:15.Politicians have got to reflect and respect that. It's the balance.

:27:15. > :27:18.What is Labour's position on this? The Shadow Cabinet will be

:27:18. > :27:23.supporting moving towards gay marriage and we would have liked to

:27:23. > :27:28.have had a situation with churches happy to carry out the ceremonies,

:27:28. > :27:32.being able to do that. There is an issue for the Government and the

:27:32. > :27:39.Church of England. Part of the problem is, it's a bit of yes and

:27:39. > :27:44.No position they have adopted. In some senses, the Prime Minister has

:27:44. > :27:50.a problem. He has a large part of his party who hearken back and seek

:27:50. > :27:57.a Britain we had in the 1950s when we were different. There is a

:27:58. > :28:02.political issue death. There are Labour MPs like this as well.

:28:02. > :28:07.plus women bishops, they are moving to a place where we want to outlaw

:28:07. > :28:11.this. I want to hear Symons response. You said there was a

:28:11. > :28:16.strength of feeling amongst many Conservative backbenchers about gay

:28:16. > :28:21.marriage? We understand many people are frightened it will be

:28:21. > :28:26.compulsory for churches to marry gay people. I personally have no

:28:26. > :28:33.desire for it to be compulsory. This is a protective advice but it

:28:33. > :28:37.seems an extreme one, to me. To introduce the criminal element.

:28:37. > :28:41.afraid it's coming up to 1:00pm. Now, it's time to put you out of

:28:41. > :28:43.your misery and give you the answer to Guess The Year. The return of

:28:43. > :28:53.the Stone of Destiny to Scotland. The unveiling of the Millennium

:28:53. > :28:58.

:28:58. > :29:01.Dome. The answer was 1996. Nick She must have known about the Stone

:29:01. > :29:05.of Destiny. OK, that's all for today. Thanks to our guests. The