04/02/2013 Daily Politics

Good afternoon, welcome to the Daily Politics. There has been a

dramatic turn of events in court this morning. Former Liberal

Democrat cabinet minister Chris Huhne has changed his plea to

guilty of perverting the course of justice and has resigned as an MP.

The first big parliamentary vote on gay marriages fast approaching. As

many as 180 Tory MPs look like they will refuse to follow David Cameron

and vote in favour. The Chancellor has been laying down the law to the

City. If the banks don't put a great big electric fence between

the bits that look after your savings and the bits that do the

risky stuff, he will step in and force them to split up. What does

Parliament have in common with 1970s rock legends Deep Purple, at

least according to the speaker? All that within the next hour. Our

guest of the day is the City analyst and financial blogger

Louise Cooper. Welcome. This morning's dramatic turn of events

at Southwark Crown Court first. Until now, former Energy Secretary

Chris Huhne was pleading not guilty to perverting the course of justice

in a case relating as to whether or not he got his former wife to take

points relating to a speeding offence. Within an hour, that

changed. I have pleaded guilty today. I am unable to say more

while there is an outstanding trial. Having taken responsibility for

something which happened 10 years ago, the only proper course of

action for me is to resign my Eastleigh seat in Parliament, which

I will do very shortly. That is all I can say today.

Chris Huhne speaking outside court not very long ago. James Landale,

our deputy political editor, joins me. Asda's legal journalist and

political commentator Joshua Rozenberg. That is a dramatic turn

of events. Only one week ago Chris Huhne was pleading not guilty, now

he is not. What a difference a week makes! He has been considering his

position and speaking to his lawyers. They will have told him

that if he pleads guilty before Ray Durie is sworn in he will get a

shorter sentence than if he pleaded not guilty and was convicted. He

thinks pleading guilty is the right thing to do and has been released

on unconditional bail pending the trial of his former wife Vicky

Pryce. How does the trial of his former wife affect the timing of

the sentence? He will not be sentenced until the trial of Vicky

Pryce is over. That is the priority for the courts. Once that trial

ends, Chris Huhne will be brought back. The judge may want to report.

He will then sentence Chris Huhne for the FMC has admitted.

Perverting the course of justice is a serious crime? Very serious, the

penalty is a limited, it could be as much as life imprisonment. I

would not say it would be in this case, but it will be imprisonment,

the judge has hinted at that. He told Mr Hoon, be under no illusions

about the sentence you will receive. I think the going rate is anything

from 12 months downwards. In similar cases sentences of 12

months have been passed, reduced to six months, four months. Can you

remind us are broadly of the events surrounding the case? The question

was who was driving the family car at the time that it was spotted by

a speed camera. The allegation is that Chris Huhne was driving and he

got his then wife to take the points, to say that she was driving.

She has said boot she is denying the charge of perverting the course

of justice and says she was coerced by him and has put forward the very

unusual defence of marital coercion. James Landale, he had to resign his

seat, even if there was a technical justification? It was not an

option? But for 511 votes, Chris Huhne could be Deputy Prime

Minister today. He was one of the Lib Dems' big beasts. They don't

have a -- don't have many of them. His career is now over. He realised

he had no choice but to go. You can get into technical arguments about

parliamentary rules, you can't be a sitting MP and sentenced to prison

for more than a year. I think he thought that regardless of those

rules, he had to go. The political significance is huge. We will have

the first by-election of this parliament where the coalition

parties, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives, go head-to-head in

Chris Huhne's constituency. The majority is just over 3000, it is

eminently winnable for the Conservatives and already on their

target list. I think many Conservatives will see this as an

opportunity to throw the kitchen sink at the by-election. If they

win it it would be a good way for David Cameron to silence people who

are doubting his leadership. Many Conservatives at the moment feel

very angry and upset with the Lib Dems because of their refusal to

support the boundary changes. They might see this as an opportunity to

get their own back. What about the loss to the Liberal Democrats? Has

there been reaction from Nick Clegg? Nothing officially at. We

expected to make a statement, at some point he has to say something

about this. Chris Huhne, the Lib Dems wanted him back. And he said

so, Nick Clegg? He used the phrase, at the top table, something like

that. One Lib Dem said to me that Chris Huhne is a carnivore in a

party of herbivores. He took the fight to the Conservatives, he

would argue the toss with David Cameron over the Cabinet table, but

Conservatives' treatment of Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems about AV.

That kind of big beast, parties don't have many. The Lib Dems had

very few and now one is gone. aid to Nick Clegg say he is shocked

and saddened by Christian's conduct. He telephoned Nick Clegg last night

to tell them of the decision to plead guilty. Even though they were

up against each other in the leadership contest, Chris Huhne

only just lost. It will also be a personal loss to Nick Clegg? These

guys were colleagues together in the European Parliament. They have

been knocking around as young friends and rivals within the Lib

Dems for many years. And to see a friend of yours like this go down

like this is something that I think he will clearly feel very

personally. But the challenge for Nick Clegg now is to work out what

strategy you'll deployed to try to protect his party politically,

because this will be a huge blow -- what strategy he will deploy. If

anybody wants to denigrate the lake -- the Lib Dems, they will mention

Chris Huhne and they hit will be made.

MPs will debate the Marriage Bill and House of Commons tomorrow. It

it becomes law, gay people will be able to get married for the first

time in England and Wales. The law would allow for religious same-sex

weddings as well as civil, but only if religious organisations opt in.

The Church of England and shirts at -- Church of Wales will

specifically be prevented from doing so. The Government insists

nobody will be forced to offer gay weddings if they don't want to, but

critics say those safeguards are not enough. And many critics are

within the Conservative Party. David Cameron has invited his MPs

to support his plans for gay marriage but it looks increasingly

that many want to leave them standing at the altar.

Bit is estimated that as many as 120 Conservative MPs will vote

against the Bill, and a further 60 could abstain. Less than half are

expected to vote in favour of. Yesterday 20 Conservative

constituency association chairman delivered a letter to Downing

Street warning of significant damage to the Conservative Party if

the Bill is enacted. But with the vast majority of Labour and Lib Dem

MPs set to back the plan, it should not have any problem in getting

through. The Prime Minister thinks most of the public on his side.

Polling figures vary but most have found Dave -- found a majority in

favour of same-sex marriage. One recent poll suggested 55% in favour

and 36% against. But a poll published at the weekend suggested

that 20% of people who voted Conservative would not do so again

in 2015 if the Government pushes ahead. Geoffrey Vero, the chairman

of the Surrey Heath Conservative constituency Association, one of

the people who delivered that letter to Downing Street, and a

Conservative MP who backed the plans, both joined me now. What

damage is being inflicted on the Conservative Party, in your mind,

because of plans to legalise gay marriage? It is difficult to

totally quantify but we know we have had a very considerable number

of e-mails and litres -- letters into the constituency office, and

directly to Michael Gove, who is our MP. He disagrees with you?

are fundamentally opposed, we have agreed to disagree. Everybody is

entitled to their own views, I would like to make it very clear,

but our fear is we are having resignations, activists saying, I'm

terribly sorry, but next time around I won't be sending out the

leaflets, I won't do stuffing or mocking up. It is very important,

in order to get selected at a general election, you need to get

the vote out. That is the risk David Cameron is taking. Gavin

Barwell, is it worth the risk? a Conservative because I believe

marriage is hugely important in our society. Providing there is

protection for religious groups who do not want to conduct same-sex

marriages, I would like to see the maximum of people be able to

benefit from this institution and exchange the same virus that my

wife and I have. The list that you just stated shows that it is

unlikely to have significance one way or the other, but it is about

the principle, not the boats. polls indicate that the majority of

the public are in favour of. And a majority of Conservative supporters.

So what do you say about the claims made by Geoffrey Vero but you will

bleed support in the party, grass roots will desert you? That is not

my experience in my constituency. Three vote issues are difficult,

they divide parties, there will be members of the party who have a

different opinion, and I respect that opinion, but if you look at

the wider picture in terms of all the things the Government is doing,

you will not see dedicated and committed Conservatives giving up

altogether. Louise, how does it look to you when you hear people

like Geoffrey Vero saying that it is turning off the grass roots of

the party? I think the vocal minority of grassroots Tories, out

shouting, as always happens, the majority are too busy paying their

mortgages, paying their bills, coping with financial crisis and

unemployment and they look at Westminster and say, what is going

on? You people are out of date and out of touch. Especially some of

these grass roots, church-going, playing golf on Sunday take people.

Out of touch with what modern Britain looks like. I'm afraid this

is the perception from the outside looking into this issue which is

convulsing the party. That will be more damaging than the activists

you might lose? This is a view expressed by people... This is a

complex issue. We are trying to overturn 5000 years of views on

perceived civilisation. We are a progressive country, we are moving

forward, and the presentation to the letter -- of the letter to

David Cameron was saying just slow the process down. We don't believe

it is in the manifesto or mandate within his government, we would

like it debated long and hard. The statistics are all over the place.

We have seen completely different pollings on this. I think it is

very important to respect some of the older people. We had a chat

earlier, this is a generational issue. A lot of people,

progressively over the age of 45 and 50, feel this is an attack on

many of their core beliefs and I think we need to have a much more

rational discussion than perhaps being dismissed as old fogies.

is an important point. If you look at the polling, it is perhaps not

surprising that older people and people of these are more concerned.

Just to dismiss those objections and say you are out of touch, you

don't get it, is not right. You have to understand their concerns.

But you will not change! But the legislation addresses some of the

concerns. Many of my constituents worried that their church, mosque

or synagogue would have to marry people they don't think they should.

We need to convince them that the safeguards are there. We either

live in unequal society or we don't. We either live in a society that

discriminates against people, or we don't. Yes, but it is the way we

conduct the debate, we cannot tell people they are out of touch and

dismiss their objections. The boat will happen on Tuesday and is most

likely to go through. It will do, but it is only one process. It has

to go to the Lords and then come back. You have to go through the

drafting of the bill. I think it is poorly drafted at present. We need

to consult more. It is not just an issue of equality. Why not? It has

complexities as regards teachers, children and everything else.

Equality seems to be the 53rd card in the pack, the joker which trumps

any arguments you have. If you don't like something, play the

quality card. It is more complex. Can you give us some examples of

some of the bad drafting of things you don't like? The drafting makes

a nonsense -- traditionally in marriage, the grounds for divorce

are none consummation and adultery. You can't have that in same-sex

marriage. It comes across as very bizarre. The new Archbishop of

Canterbury is seriously questioning what David Cameron is doing. The

Pope is totally against this. It is a complex issue and you are playing

with core beliefs in humanity. It is not purely an equality issue.

But I understand there is another point of view and we have to

There is concern that all teachers have a responsibility under the

Education Act to teach marriage. They will be required to teach

same-sex marriage similar to normal marriage. I know Michael Gove is

keen to try to give as many protections in at as possible but

there is arrest that teachers, who fundamentally disagree, may well

find they are isolated and may well lose their jobs because of

subsequent legislation overturning it in the European courts.

Listening to Geoffrey, he represents a section of the

Parliamentary Party. To what extent will this be a blow to the

authority of David Cameron when around 180 MPs vote against? I hope

more Conservative MPs supported than vote against it. I would like

every Conservative MP to packet. 10 years ago, you would not see

Conservatives proposing this type of thing. -- to back it. I hope

that as many of my colleagues as possible will support the proposal.

We know there could be about 150, 180 MPs who will vote against.

would be very surprised if the numbers voting against are as high.

I will not speculate on the figures. I hope more Conservative MPs would

vote for it than Against. Is it a matter of strategy? Is it the

climax to the detoxification of the Tory brand? As the strategy, I was

so just it is not working as he intended. It is about promoting

marriage. I hope the Government will quickly bring forward

proposals in relations to tax allowances. I believe marriage is a

key pillar of the society. Provided there is protection for faith

groups who do not want to conduct these marriages, I want to see as

many people as possible benefit. That is why legislation is a good

thing. I do not want the Government to tummy if I am married or not.

Promoting it by these policies, I think maybe I am more of a Liberal.

I want to be a were to run my life how a one to arrive children to be

educated in maths. Not whether marriage is a good thing for gay

people or otherwise. You are adding to some extent to the perception

which will only harm the prospects of the Tory Party. It is not an

issue we brought to the table. David Cameron brought it to the

table. There was no indication in his manifesto or mandate that he

was going to bring into the table during his current government. I

think he could handle the issue very much more carefully than he

has done. He could have rolled the pitch, or laid the ground, during

his current Parliament so that when you get to the next Parliament,

they could have been a vote. Let the people decide. I would prefer

there to be a referendum. If the majority of people and country are

in favour of it, so be it and we accept that. We do not believe that

David has a mandate for it in the current Parliament. Some people

will say to their MPs, Conservative MPs, but they could look homophobic.

What you say to that? That is very sad. -- what do you say to that? I

have been very keen that the debate be conducted so that everyone has

an equal view. Many of us have been criticised, prejudiced or bigoted.

It is not about homophobia. It is about the institution of marriage.

For many people, it is between a man and a woman. Thank you both for

joining us. If someone lends you money, they have got a bit of a

hold over you, and that applies as much to governments as it does to

you and me. In the case of countries, they raise loans through

bonds - a kind of IOU to investors which they promise eventually to

repay - with interest, of course. As a consequence, governments of

all stripes are very keen to keep the bond markets and the ratings

agencies, who opine on a nation's creditworthiness, sweet. But has

the current Chancellor, George Osborne, gone too far in his

The trading floor of rubber bank in the City of London. Not as busy as

they were in the boom but still powerful in the past. Men and women

on trading floors like this throughout the world still have a

huge impact on our Government's fiscal policy. That matters to

every one of us. That is because some of them trade on the

international bond market. That is massively important to the

Government's handling of the economy. It has become powerful

because of its huge size. Governments have deficits and these

accumulate every year into a big debt, which needs to be financed.

Investors buy the bonds. Because the market has become so huge,

investors have a lot of power. reason British government bonds are

so attractive is our AAA credit rating. George Osborne has tried

super hard to make sure it stays that way but has it worked? Many

people think that 20 their team will be the year that the UK loses

its AAA rating. -- 2013. The Government has had to admitted his

off-track at hitting a reduction targets. They are not as worried

had it happened -- as had it happened three, four, and five

years ago. Other countries have also lost theirs. Investors have

become used to renew normal. Perhaps they have to become used to

ratings being a bit lower. should not pay any attention to

credit ratings agencies was that they have been completely

discredited by their role in the financial crisis. It does not

matter Warnock what they say about UK government debt or not. -- does

not matter at all. It was unfortunate that government policy

was dictated by credit agencies. It was a big mistake. It led us to

tighten fiscal policy too quickly. The negative impact has been quite

significant, as we know. Some MPs believe that if you do borrowed,

you have to play by the Rules of the lenders. No one will like the

credit agencies determining what democratic governments do. If

democratic governments put themselves in the positions of

borrowing at these fantastic rates, they will be subjected to the

commercial decisions of rating agencies and markets. Can the

Government escape the grip of the bond market and the ratings

agencies? The Government should set out a long-term fiscal strategy.

That should involve fiscal tightening - cutting spending and

raising taxes over the medium to long term. We do need to balance

the books. If we do that, the bond markets will take care of

themselves and that will give us the freedom to run more sensible

policies in the short term so we can get growth back into the

economy. These guys may look too nice to be masters of the universe

but for as long as governments borrowed, people like them will

always have a big say in what they do. Joining me now is Brooks

Newmark. He is a Conservative member of the Treasury Select

Committee and used to be a senior partner at a private equity firm,

Chris Leslie, the Shadow Financial Secretary. Louise Cooper, a city

analyst, is still with us. How humiliating would it be for the UK

to lose its AAA credit rating? would have said before the US had

its downgrading and France had its downgrading, I certainly would have

been very concerned. The evidence is at least that it actually has

not had too much of an impact on the rate that people actually

willing to pay for bonds. Psychologically it is important but

the reality is, if it happens, I do not think there will be much of an

impact. George Osborne exaggerated hugely the importance of keeping

our AAA credit rating or the way from 2010 up until now? I do not

think he exaggerated. I am St Ewe, the reality years... The evidence

is it does not look like there will be much of an impact from investors.

Politically and psychologically, it is important. The markets, in

reality, I suspect, probably would not punish us as much as, for

example, when we had the emergency budget. That there would have

impacted us. Will the markets be kind to the UK if it loses its AAA

credit rating? Because of quantitative easing, effectively

because now the Government owns a third of its own debt, it is kind

of irrelevant. We are seeing the Bank of England distorting the gilt

market because it is buying so many gilts. That is what is pulling the

interest rate down on British government debt. That is what is

going on. That is not an indicator that the international investors

are that convinced of the UK. By the way, gilt yields have actually

been rising recently. As is happening in the US and Japan and

elsewhere. George Osborne made such a big deal of keeping debt interest

payments down. We're hearing, to some extent, interest payments will

go up. It has only gone up marginally. The point I am making

is, it is the actions of the Bank of England - distorting the gilt

market - it is not a reality saying, the UK is a great and safe place.

It is the Bank of England. This is an important point. For several

years, the Chancellor has been saying his particular path of

fiscal policy, the cuts agenda and austerity was the be-all and end-

all when it came to the bond markets. I think that Louise is

right. There are many more factors that come into play, particularly

when the Bank of England get the printing presses going and are

buying and purchasing so much of the nation's debts. Independent

monetary policy is key to the driving force. Had it not happened,

there would be a different set of drivers. The notion that George

Osborne is saying, it does not matter what is going on with the

AAA. It is important. Unilever won a general election claiming that it

was all about defending the AAA rating and credibility and all

these things. We never lost back under the last Labour government.

Would we have lost it had the spending plan continued? Would we

have lost it before quantitative easing and what they have judged

that Britain was a dodgy place? Lots of factors come into this.

Fiscal policy, monetary policy and also a growth. A lot of traders in

the City want now to seek economies that have an engine to generate

revenues so they can get back into balance. The deficit is going in

the wrong direction. It was up 10% on there -- at the beginning of the

year. The deficit is down by a quarter and is continuing to go

down. We will talk about the deficit and the debt. The Prime

Minister got himself into a little bit of trouble about paying down

the debt. Also the issue about whether the economy is distorted.

Are investors looking for evidence of gross? They are. The problem

with quantitative easing - buying gilts - it mask the underlying

problems. We call investors in gilts and double-deck that bond

vigilantes. Why do we say that? They hold governments and

politicians to account. They go through with a fine-tooth comb the

economic data - the statistics coming out of government finance.

As soon as they look horrid, they stop lending, or they demand a high

interest rate. We hate those investors. Actually, in the capital

world we live in, they occupy a very important place by holding

governments and their financial statistics to account.

Unfortunately, the problem with quantitative easing and what the

Bank of England is doing, the power of those bond vigilantes has gone.

It is about how much money the Bank of England will spend buying gilts.

That takes pressure of the politicians to take the painful

decisions that need making. I am not a big proponent of Q E.

The first �200 billion was fined...! After the first �200

billion, we should have stopped, we need to focus on issues such as

building confidence, growth and so on. The real reality on the ground,

as Chris knows, we have more men and women in work than ever before.

GDP figures are important but we know it is as much of a Mystic Meg

in terms of actually understanding the GDP figures. The real figures

on the ground for ordinary people is whether they have a job. More

men and women today have a job than ever before, that is what is

important. Let's come to the debt and deficit figures, these two

gentlemen arguing about whether the deficit last year has gone down,

and debt, which is rising. I'm a simple girl, I like the absolute

debt figures. Absolute debt, the amount the UK is indebted in

entirety, has almost doubled in the last four years, and it would

increase again. It has gone up from �811 billion to 1.1 trillion pounds

while this government has been in power. It depends how you cut the

figures. You are nodding... Yes, because Economics 101, which the

Prime Minister was trying to teach the shadow Treasury Minister, debt

is spending more than a you have coming in. He was told off! Just a

second. Well you have a deficit you are adding to your debt. This last

has a huge deficit. He would have continued spending more money than

we have, the debt figures would be much late -- much larger under

Labour. We have had a big speech from George Osborne, slightly

overshadowed by what has happened with Chris Huhne. Louise Cooper, if

a bank fails, if the investment arm of the bank fails, does that mean

it will not drag its high-street be to -- its high-street titbit with

it? He wants to ring-fence the supposedly safe banking from, and I

hate this world -- I hate this word, the casino banking. How much

outstanding mortgage debt do you think we have in this country?

Anyone want to guess? 1.2 trillion pounds is the outstanding mortgage

debt. It is more than the UK government debt. Any kind of

property price fall further from here, any economic pain, you start

to get bad loans on that mortgage debt. The losses are humongous. I

don't get that retail banking is saved and investment banking is

dangerous, and investment banks should be allowed to go to the wall.

If you look at the balance sheets of the big banks today and you mark

the assets on their portfolios, not just this country but particularly

France or Spain, they are completely under water. Certainly

the Spanish banks and big French banks. Our banks are getting their

house in order, which is why ordinary people are finding it hard

to get loans. The ring-fencing will not work, then. In the terms set

out by George Osborne, this will mean we won't have a similar style

crash that we experienced in 2008, that investment arms of banks will

not be able to drag down retailers? The jury is still out on ring-

fencing. This is one way of doing it, don't necessarily split them

but keep in reserve, and this is crucial, just in case, the power to

have full separation. He said, I will do the Reserve Bank by bank by

bank, but what we need in reserve is a power to have that separation

across the boards between retail and investment banking. If that is

not there, this is a lawyer's charter for banks to contest one by

one by one. If you're going to electrify it, and electrify it

properly. He has only partially been forced to climb down,

because... I want to deal with the toxic issue. The toxic issue of the

banking, lots of it was, unfortunately, derivatives trading.

Lots of the derivatives were being traded 200-1 in terms of the assets

underlying those derivatives to what the market was trading. That

is the dangerous part, wrapping up mortgages is a separate issue, it

is an issue, but I think what we need there is more transparency in

those pools of mortgages being wrapped up, so we understand the

assets underlined in those Pools. But the real danger of trying to

separate out his a proprietary trading of the investment banks,

and the derivatives trading. Willetts make London less

attractive as a financial centre? - - will it make London less

attractive? If we do it in the UK and other places don't, we will

lose out. The trouble is getting the regulation to happen all over

the world. Lots of countries look at the City of London with covetous

eyes, because it makes a loss of many in the good times. We can't

have the taxpayer being on the club again for what happened when the

banks over-extended themselves... That is why the leverage ratio... I

don't think the Chancellor will put a clause in the Bill on that.

so sorry, I have to say goodbye to you. And goodbye to my guest of the

day, Louise coup before stop we have a busy week in politics ahead

of us this week. The Right Reverend Justin Welby,

the former Archbishop of Durham, has formally confirmed as the 105th

Archbishop of Canterbury today at a ceremony at Canterbury Cathedral.

There will be a lot of interest in his views on gay marriage, because

MPs will vote on that issue for the first time tomorrow. Wednesday will

see the publication of a landmark report into the failings leading to

the deaths of dozens of people in the care of Mid Staffordshire NHS

Foundation Trust. On Thursday the Prime Minister goes to Brussels for

two-day talks on the future of the EU budget. Joining me from College

Green up up a career from the Evening Standard and Ben Duckworth.

But first, here is what the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, said

about Chris Huhne. Chris Huhne has pleaded guilty this morning and

announced he will be standing down as an MP. This is obviously an

extremely serious matter and it is essential that the legal process is

now allowed to run its course. I am shocked and saddened by what has

happened but I believe that Chris Huhne has taken the right decision

in resigning as an MP. Nick Clegg, the leader of the Lib Dems.

Pippa, what is your response to today's events with Chris Huhne?

took us all by surprise. We have had weeks and weeks of self-

confidence coming from both a man and his associates, I think we all

expected a long week of it in the courts this week. Everyone is taken

aback at Westminster, it is a huge story. The next step will be the by

election, the first one which will have pitted the Conservatives

against the Lib Dems in a really winnable seat since the election,

so I think it will be gloves off. Ben Duckworth, this will be the

first time Tories and Liberal Democrats are up against each other,

coalition partners, since the government began? Yes, and the

conservative MPs are baying for Lib Dem blood after they kiboshed the

boundary changes last week. They will be looking to take a scalpel

over their Lib Dem partners. -- a scalp from. Nigel Farage is making

his way around the constituency, which is the area he is MEP for.

For the Lib Dems, depending on how Chris Huhne is sentenced, they have

to recover from that and the test is whether they will be able to

hold the seat. Nigel Farage has not ruled himself out. Pepper, in terms

of the loss for the Lib Dems, how do you gauge Chris Huhne's

departure? He was a heavy hitter for a party which is lacking in

them. Had he been acquitted and come back into mainstream politics,

he would probably have ended up in Parliament again and would have

been a leading contender for the leadership after the election,

should Nick Clegg stand down. Nick Clegg may be privately relieved

that he is no longer around to oppose that threat, leaving Vince

Cable the main leader in waiting for the Lib Dems. If we move on to

the issue of Europe, never far away, Ben, and we have these two-day

talks on the future of the EU budget, is there any good feeling

left from David Cameron's speech on the in-out referendum? It had a

very short honeymoon indeed, particularly with the gay marriage

vote tomorrow, I think there will be a sense of a renewed and even

strong expectation from Conservative MPs that it has to be

something symbolic from these two days at the end of the week, where

David Cameron goes to Europe and basically sticks its European

counterparts. For David Cameron, I think he needs something symbolic,

whether it is a supportive gesture or quotes from Angela Merkel,

something which shows that after the speech he is being taken

seriously on that stage, and the idea of Britain being able to come

to a new settlement is a possibility. If it will be

difficult to get any kind of concession? It is a huge problem,

he has 26 EU leaders to persuade and inevitably he will have to tone

down his rhetoric in private conversations with them. If that

feeds back into Britain and Westminster, the Euro phobic wing

of his party which so far has reached some sort of accords with

the Prime Minister since his speech will be at it again, they will be

snapping at his heels and desperate for concessions. He has said there

will be a referendum but he is not legislating for it in this

Parliament, and there will be a lot of pressure for him to do that.

Joining us now is our Monday panel of MPs, Conservative Alan paints,

Anas Sarwar wire of Labour and a Liberal Democrat, who drew the

short straw on the day that Chris Huhne charged -- changed his plea,

Tessa Munt. What is your reaction? I am amazingly shocked. Chris has

had a very long career both in Westminster and as an MEP, he has

been a fantastic constituency MP. I am stunned. I heard the news on the

way you this morning. His political career is over? I think so. He has

finished it himself, which is the right thing to do, no question.

heard Nick Clegg saying he is shocked and saddened. We all are.

Nobody had any idea this was coming. It is very shocking. We need to try

to look forward, I suppose, from the mess that there is here and see

if we can ensure that the people of Eastleigh have another good

constituency MP. Let's think ahead to the by-election, an opportunity

for the Conservatives? I'm sorry for Chris Huhne, he has taken the

right course of action. The press were predicting that the CPS might

drop their case just a few weeks ago. The by-election will be

extremely interesting, it is a Lib Dem/Conservative battle with the

Labour Party a bit further behind, but when there is a low its -- a

low turnout, anything can happen. I am confident we will take the fight

to the Lib Dems and Labour. How do you rate your chances? If people

look at what Chris did for his constituency in Eastleigh, I think

they will look to a Liberal Democrat MP again. It is deeply

saddening what has happened today, but he has been fantastic. He did

some very good things as a cabinet minister. But on policy grounds

come I suspect the people of Eastleigh would be more inclined to

be conservative thinking, as a result of the changes made? Do you

not feel let down by Chris Huhne over this? And his constituents

etc? I would be mad to say they didn't feel that. But it will be a

different candidate, different circumstances, lots of chaos. There

will be lots of things coming into play and we have to see what

happens, but he has pleaded guilty. You won't be that involved in the

by-election? The Labour Party? Nobody revels in the personal grief

of anybody, so our sympathy is with Chris and his family. It is

interesting that the coalition are already arguing about the by-

election, although not surprising. The Prime Minister had the grief of

his party being torn apart around the EU issue, then there was the

referendum issue this week to try to oust the Prime Minister, now the

coalition are fighting a by- election. I think the Prime

Minister and Deputy Prime Minister will be worried today. I am not

sure what he is talking about when the Prime Minister walked in after

his speech on Europe, he was received with the warmest

recognition and applause he has ever been in the Times that I have

been in the Commons. I don't understand what you mean about

being torn apart. Why are there I have heard of things but I think

the reality is it is pipe dreams trying to ascertain what sort of

support there might be. The reality is there is no support for a

challenge to the Prime Minister. He is there and doing a very good job

in very difficult circumstances. I would bet my life he will be the

leader of the Conservative Party coming up to the next election.

What is driving these plots? If you say there is nothing in them and

their support to challenge the leadership of David Cameron, how

can you say that so categorically when there are plots being talked

about and they are all over the papers? I remember the plots about

Gordon Brown and Tony Blair but they never came to anything. Some

individuals feel they should be in government. It is probably down to

personalities. What is driving it? Egos is fine. Is there a

satisfaction with David Cameron on the backbenches? I do not take that

battle. A few weeks ago, when he came in after his speech on Europe,

the applause and the noise was louder than it has ever been before

in recognition of what he had done. The important point is David

Cameron making a speech on Europe was not acting in the interests of

the country. At a time when you have an economic storm, rather

having a government and Prime Minister to pull the country

together, you have a political party pulling itself apart. Why is

it not in the interests of the country? If it was in interests, it

would be held now. It is a ploy and a waiter tried to win the next

election, to appease backbenchers. -- a way to try to win. The Prime

Minister's demonstration of putting the country's interest first is

demonstrated in coming together with the Lib Dems in the interests

of the country. That proves he puts the country before party politics.

Do you believe it is in the interest of the to have the

election -- the interests of the country to have the referendum?

is entirely up to them. What would you like to see? There are a lot of

people who would like to build to answer a question. It is important

to understand what that means. There are huge numbers of

businesses and farmers in my area. The last thing they want is to pull

out of Europe. What I think is quite interesting is, since the

Prime Minister has spoken on the subject, quite a lot of

organisations have come out in favour of staying in Europe. They

are clear about the fact they do not want to rock the boat at this

stage. So much about income, lots of farming takes place and

associated business. The Lib Dems wanted 10 in/out referendum.

need to make sure people realise what that will mean on a day-by-day

basis. People need to understand exactly what the impact is in the

case of the Scottish referendum. you agree with most of what David

Cameron said in his speech? It seemed to give an impression of

being behind the EU are wanting to keep a central role in the European

Union in the feature and reforming our relationship with the European

Union? -- in the future. Absolutely. That would be my personal position.

We do not the door Europe. We think it is a sensible business

arrangement. -- knocked the door Europe. A friend of mine, who used

to be an MEP, he has actually put together 10 things he would change

about the EU. There are things we need to straighten out and make

sure it works better for us. It is pointless sitting outside of Europe

and hoping. It is a risk, isn't it? We have the eurozone. They will

need to come closer together. There were need to be treaties. -- there

will need. This is an opportunity for Britain to reshape Europe that

we want to be part of. It will give him the opportunity to renegotiate,

as Europe changes itself. Labour will be given the chance to offer a

referendum just before the next election, I would guess? 50% of the

Business the UK does is with other EU countries. Just as 50% of the

business that Scotland has is with the EU. What would be better would

be if the Prime Minister would have a meaningful negotiation and a

meaningful discussion about what membership of the EU means. He is

playing for his cards. If he does not get the right deal, will he

come out of Europe? Is that his plan? Do you think he should

campaign to come out? Let's see what the Delia's. There was the

Swedish Prime Minister, the Danish Prime Minister, who has absolutely

understood what the Prime Minister was talking about. -- who

absolutely understood. David Cameron is talking about further

opt-outs. They are the sorts of things that other European nations

have said, we are not going to agree to that. It is negotiation.

That is why Benny's to be time for it. We need to develop allies on

Denmark and Sweden, as many as the leaders have also shown sympathy

towards. Now, Prime Ministers Question Time. We watch it

religiously on the Daily Politics but what do we really learn from

it? The half-hour session gives Members of Parliament the chance to

hold the person in charge to account. But MPs on all sides are

widely derided for their childish behaviour, which many say is

putting the public off politics altogether. The Speaker John Bercow

seems to have lost patience and says the decibel level exceeds

anything that Deep Purple would have exceeded! You are a

distinguished practising barrister will start you would not have

behaved like that in the courts. Do not behave like that in this

chamber. Calm yourself and be quiet. The decibel level is far too high.

What a savage indictment of this I can see he enjoyed that. Order!

Order! Order! Order! Order, I say to the Children's Minister, tried

to calm down and behave like an adult. If you cannot - if it is

beyond you - leave the chamber. Get Do you ever get used to that racket

in the House of Commons? No. I think it is absolutely awful.

Completely unnecessary. We could take a good leaf out of the Book of

most of the councils in this country when you can be heard and

had your chance to have your say. Frankly, I just find it... It is

ludicrous. On occasions, I have been asked on one of your sister

programmes to comment on Prime Minister's Questions. I have gone

to the studio at 1pm. If I sit in the chamber, I cannot hear the

questions, not the answers. If you go outside and listen on the radio

or television, you can hear what is going on. In the chamber, you have

to sit back and listen through the speakers. That does sound rather

pointless, doesn't it? I am showing my age! I do not know about Deep

Purple. I think it is the theatre of little. Those within the

political class probably do enjoy it. Those looking from outside will

probably think it is a bunch of middle-aged men shouting at each

other and not discussing things that are relevant to their lives

every single day. It is entertaining. We were all laughing

when we were watching that. Does it attract some people to the holes

Theatre Of It All? You could argue it is the only time in the week

that the chamber is jam-packed. With Prime Minister's Questions,

people do not realise and appreciate about it. The Prime

Minister has said, it is the one time a week that he gets to know

everything that is going on in every department. If something is

going wrong and has not been brought to his attention and there

is a risk of it being brought up at Prime Minister's Questions, he

wants to know. There is a need for it. If you are the leader of the

opposition, or if you are the Prime Minister, standing there and it is

absolute silence behind you, it is a very lonely place, I can imagine.

Some of the noise is about support to back your leader, saying he or

she is doing the right thing. no good if you cannot hear what is

going on. The whole point is, as we said in the introduction, to hold

the executive to account. Can you hold the executive to account in

Prime Minister's Questions? I think not. The media is partly to blame

on this. Depending on the noise and the one-liners it impacts on how

could a writing you get I am not. You get. You cannot hear most of

the questions are almost of the answers. People want a genuine

cross-examination of the Government. That does not happen at Prime

Minister's Questions. There should be real questions. Patsy questions

should go, shouldn't they? you're going to hold someone to

recant, do it. One thing I would say is on that particular occasion,

what you do get is a sense of the quick-witted miss of some people

who perform. That is a delight. Sometimes I cannot stop but not

because someone has said something very funny. The humour of the

situation is very good. When people can react like that under extreme

pressure, that is fantastic. That goes for every Question Time that

we have at the beginning of every day and not just Prime Minister's

Questions. Nick Clegg is not involved in the Prime Minister's

Question combat. What is it like? It is not the same. Wouldn't it be

nice? There are only 57 of us. We cannot rule the world. It is

important for people to understand that Prime Minister's Questions is

only that one session of the week. Most of the other questions offer

much better scrutiny. Coming back to Prime Minister's Questions, if

there is that killer question exposing something the Prime

Minister does not know, it really does serve a purpose. We have not

had that in recent times was a nothing that jumps to my mind

whether Prime Minister has been exposed. -- in recent times. That

is the scrutiny that is offered the stub the Prime Minister is accused

of not answering questions put to him. -- that is offered. Sometimes

questions from his own side are more tricky. Sometimes members of

the coalition are not prepared to accept the political reality.

partly the noise, not answering the question and sometimes people

showed their childish side and get angry. I do not think that projects