:00:40. > :00:48.Afternoon, folks, this is the Daily Politics. Our top stories today:
:00:48. > :00:52.World leaders gathered in St Petersburg to argue whether Syria
:00:52. > :00:57.with Russia saying the US military strike would drive another nail into
:00:57. > :01:01.the coffin of international law. We will have the latest on the
:01:01. > :01:05.international talks and get the latest from Westminster, Paris and
:01:05. > :01:08.Brussels. We report on the Battle of
:01:08. > :01:15.Westminster e-mail newsletters as top political hacks go toted toe
:01:15. > :01:20.armed with a humble laptop. And Australians go to the polls
:01:20. > :01:27.tomorrow after a general election chock full of gaffes.
:01:27. > :01:37.No one, however smart, however well educated, however experienced is the
:01:37. > :01:42.suppository of all wisdom. You would have to have a heart of
:01:42. > :01:46.stone not to laugh! All of that for the next hour. For the next
:01:46. > :01:52.half-hour, the editor of prospect magazine, Bronwen Maddox. We will
:01:52. > :01:57.discuss the latest from the G20 meeting in St Petersburg in a
:01:57. > :02:01.moment. First, Tony Blair. He has given an interview to BBC Four about
:02:02. > :02:12.the crisis. He said there was no doubt the debate was hugely
:02:12. > :02:17.influenced by what happened in Iraq. I said we had to support action in
:02:17. > :02:22.Syria before the vote and I said after the vote I was disappointed by
:02:22. > :02:29.it. This is something where I have to disagree with the leadership of
:02:29. > :02:33.the party. I know it is a difficult position for political leaders to be
:02:33. > :02:37.put in when they have to take decisions like this but my position
:02:37. > :02:41.on these issues is pretty clear over a long period of time. You can hear
:02:41. > :02:45.on these issues is pretty clear over more on what he said on Syria and
:02:45. > :02:55.what it means for Britain. That will be broadcast on Monday at 8pm on BBC
:02:55. > :02:59.Four. He has his own distinct position on these matters, but would
:02:59. > :03:04.it be true to say there are quite a few doubts in the Labour Party about
:03:04. > :03:08.the position Labour has found itself in now? I think that is right. I
:03:08. > :03:13.think Tony Blair is being a bit unfair to Ed Miliband, if that is
:03:13. > :03:19.possible, by saying the Labour leader had taken a firm position
:03:19. > :03:22.against military action. Whereas Ed Miliband was careful to say I am not
:03:22. > :03:27.backing it at this point on the evidence that has been given which
:03:27. > :03:31.is why I am voting against this, but I am not ruling it out completely.
:03:31. > :03:35.This has hardened up as the debate has gone on and people have taken
:03:35. > :03:39.the view that Labour is against it. Quite a few MPs have said we do not
:03:39. > :03:46.want to be boxed into that position, we want them to say we do back this
:03:46. > :03:50.is the evidence improves. Is he probably right that if it had all
:03:50. > :03:55.gone swimmingly in Iraq after the invasion, even if weapons were not
:03:55. > :04:00.found, as they were not, but it had turned into a kind of North
:04:00. > :04:05.Islington democracy blooming in the desert, then the country's attitude
:04:05. > :04:10.would be different? Is he right? I am sure he is right. Even if you set
:04:10. > :04:13.aside questions of whether it was legal or not, success for a lot of
:04:13. > :04:20.people validates difficult decisions. The fact is it was not
:04:20. > :04:24.just a mess, and a mess where a lot of people got killed, mainly
:04:24. > :04:28.Iraqis, but one which shows errors of judgement from Western countries.
:04:28. > :04:36.That is what people are recalling from. It is the carnage of the
:04:36. > :04:41.aftermath. A sense that we could control it and then the realisation
:04:41. > :04:46.that we could not. Interesting. So, the G20, are meeting in St
:04:46. > :04:50.Petersburg. Although it is meant to be a forum
:04:50. > :04:54.for discussing the world economy, it has been comprehensively
:04:54. > :04:58.overshadowed by Syria. The world leaders discussed the crisis over
:04:58. > :05:03.caviar and blini last night for dinner. That seems to have confirmed
:05:03. > :05:09.the split for major powers. Russia has said a US strike would drive
:05:09. > :05:13.another nail into the coffin of international law. Although
:05:13. > :05:17.President Putin says he does not rule out any military action through
:05:17. > :05:24.the UN, nobody really believes him. The Americans certainly do not. They
:05:24. > :05:27.do not think he does all credible. They have accused Russia of
:05:27. > :05:33.continuing to hold the UN security Council hostage. What of written?
:05:33. > :05:37.The effects of the decision not to intervene are still being felt.
:05:38. > :05:40.David Cameron said those who opposed military action would have to live
:05:40. > :05:46.with the way they voted. He also announced that the UK would have to
:05:46. > :05:51.give an extra £52 million in humanitarian aid for Syria, some of
:05:51. > :05:55.which would go to help Syrians targeted by chemical attacks. And
:05:55. > :05:59.amid accusations that Britain has been sidelined in St Petersburg, a
:05:59. > :06:05.senior Russian aid has been quoted as saying it is just a small island,
:06:05. > :06:07.no one pays any attention to them. Comments the Russians have denied.
:06:07. > :06:12.Let's hear what George Osborne had Comments the Russians have denied.
:06:12. > :06:16.to say about this this morning. The House of Commons has made its
:06:16. > :06:20.view clear at that military action in response to chemical weapons. I
:06:20. > :06:24.am happy with the way I cast my vote. People who cast their vote a
:06:24. > :06:29.different way have to account for that. Britain is today leading
:06:29. > :06:33.efforts to step up the humanitarian response to what is happening in
:06:33. > :06:37.Syria, the tragedy of 2 million people leaving that country, fleeing
:06:37. > :06:44.for their lives. I'm joined from Paris by Emma
:06:44. > :06:48.Suleiman, whose is a spokesperson for one of the main Syrian
:06:48. > :06:52.opposition groups. We spoke on the day that Parliament was debating
:06:52. > :06:58.whether or not we should be part of any military intervention or attack
:06:58. > :07:01.on Syria, we now know the results. Are you disappointed that Britain
:07:01. > :07:06.will not be part of any military attack on the Assad regime? Of
:07:06. > :07:19.course we are very disappointed today. We were hoping for Britain to
:07:19. > :07:25.stand by the whole and go for severe action against Assad and here I have
:07:25. > :07:33.to highlight that this is a strike to end the war, not to start a new
:07:33. > :07:39.war. What we felt actually was the discussion at the Parliament was
:07:40. > :07:43.more about Iraq 2003, not Syria 2013. I think there is a
:07:43. > :07:53.misconception about the Syria case here. I believe Syria here is more
:07:54. > :07:56.like Bosnia's case where there is an urgent need for humanitarian
:07:56. > :08:03.intervention and to end this conflict. All right. But the
:08:03. > :08:12.British, can I just interrupted and ask another question, the British
:08:12. > :08:17.have voted no. There was no agreement in St Petersburg. And it
:08:17. > :08:23.is by no means a foregone conclusion that Mr Obama will get his majority
:08:23. > :08:26.in Congress. And even Francois Hollande is not risking a vote in
:08:26. > :08:32.the National Assembly that would bind him. It is possible, is it not,
:08:33. > :08:41.that there will be no attack as Mac yes, it is very possible. If there
:08:41. > :08:47.is no attack we will not see an end to the daily misery that we live.
:08:47. > :08:53.Assad continues to abuse his people. And he did not stop, by the way, he
:08:53. > :08:59.trusts that Russia will continue to do his diplomacy and continue to
:08:59. > :09:04.lobbying to secure that Assad stays in power. As long as Assad believes
:09:04. > :09:11.he is going to win, he is going to continue. Nothing suggests that
:09:11. > :09:17.diplomacy so far had forced Assad or forced him to accept a dialogue or a
:09:17. > :09:22.compromise unfortunately. Today, if doing nothing, if the West or of the
:09:22. > :09:28.international community do not do anything, not only will Assad
:09:28. > :09:32.continue to kill his own people and destabilise Syria, also there is
:09:32. > :09:38.complete chaos where we see extremist elements are imposing on
:09:38. > :09:42.the liberated zones and we do not see any real support for the
:09:42. > :09:48.Democrats. Don't get me wrong, Britain on the other side has been
:09:48. > :09:52.providing vital assistance on the humanitarian, political and
:09:52. > :09:56.diplomatic side, but that is not enough. Emma Suleiman, good to talk
:09:56. > :09:59.to you again, thank you for joining us. We are joined by the Times
:09:59. > :10:03.to you again, thank you for joining journalist, soon-to-be Conservative
:10:03. > :10:09.peer, Danny Finkelstein. And in Birmingham by the shadow Europe
:10:09. > :10:15.Minister Emma Reynolds. Wasn't there a time when the Labour Party stood
:10:15. > :10:22.to help people like Emma Suleiman, and now you are not? Let me be
:10:22. > :10:26.clear, the Labour Party condemns the violence that we have seen in Syria
:10:26. > :10:30.over the last few years and we stand by part of the international
:10:30. > :10:36.community in wanting to see an end to the Assad regime. What we were
:10:36. > :10:41.voting on last week was a call for evidence to be produced, the 4-wheel
:10:41. > :10:48.make any decision about military action. That is something that
:10:48. > :10:54.Labour MPs but also Conservative MPs and Lib Dems MPs voted on. Are you
:10:54. > :10:58.happy with the evidence from American intelligence, German
:10:58. > :11:00.intelligence, the evidence that is open source, British intelligence
:11:00. > :11:08.intelligence, the evidence that is now from Porton down. Do you have
:11:08. > :11:11.enough evidence to continue? The UN weapons inspectors are still to
:11:11. > :11:17.produce their report. It is worth pointing out that at the end of that
:11:17. > :11:21.debate last week, although Britain did not rule out military action in
:11:21. > :11:26.principle, it was the Prime Minister and the government after the vote
:11:26. > :11:30.that took that option off the table. Is there any doubt in your mind that
:11:30. > :11:37.the Assad regime used chemical weapons against its own people? We
:11:37. > :11:42.were asked to vote on this last week when the UN weapons inspectors were
:11:42. > :11:46.still in Syria. I am asking you this on Friday morning, is there any
:11:46. > :11:54.doubt in your mind? We have not seen the report 's yet. So there is
:11:54. > :11:58.doubt? There is a possibility and it is very likely that it was chemical
:11:58. > :12:04.weapons but we did not have any evidence of that when we voted last
:12:04. > :12:07.Thursday. Quite a lot of evidence is still being presented and you are
:12:07. > :12:10.saying it is only possible that he used chemical weapons. What more do
:12:10. > :12:17.saying it is only possible that he you need? What difference would it
:12:17. > :12:21.make? Supposing it is proved be on doubt that he used chemical
:12:21. > :12:24.weapons, what difference would it make to your policy? We were clear
:12:24. > :12:30.last week that there would have to be evidence before making this
:12:30. > :12:36.decision, that any decision regarding military action should be
:12:36. > :12:40.taken. David Cameron chose to recall Parliament early last week. I am
:12:40. > :12:46.sorry, that is nothing to do with the question I have asked. I have
:12:46. > :12:49.asked you that even if it is shown beyond doubt that chemical weapons
:12:49. > :12:54.have been used, how would that change Labour policy? We are not in
:12:54. > :12:58.that place now because David Cameron stood up in the British Parliament
:12:58. > :13:02.last week and gave his word to the British people that the UK would not
:13:02. > :13:07.use military force in Syria. All right, you are not answering the
:13:07. > :13:12.question. Don't go away, I will try with another question later. Let me
:13:12. > :13:20.bring Danny Finkelstein in at the moment. Why did Mr Cameron, almost
:13:20. > :13:28.in a fit of pique after he lost the vote, pick up the toys and run out
:13:28. > :13:32.of Parliament? Should he not say, I get it now? If events change and if
:13:32. > :13:40.chemical weapons were used again, if the weapons -- evidence is
:13:40. > :13:43.overwhelming, say I will be back? He cannot act without the support of
:13:43. > :13:46.the Labour Party because there are a lot of rebels and Liberal Democrat
:13:46. > :13:51.rebels. I think he perfectly concluded that the Labour Party
:13:51. > :13:56.would not support action. I was listening their very carefully. We
:13:56. > :13:59.still do not know whether or not when the evidence is there, and all
:13:59. > :14:05.of us know really what did happen, even if when the formal evidence is
:14:05. > :14:11.presented, we do not know whether Labour will support action. Even if
:14:11. > :14:16.he does not know, surely it makes sense, that even if he knows he
:14:16. > :14:20.cannot square Labour on this matter, that if more evidence comes, if
:14:20. > :14:26.there are developments, if Mr Assad uses chemical weapons again, he is
:14:26. > :14:31.going back. Why did he tie his hands? It is a very difficult
:14:31. > :14:34.medical cult elation. He could have left it open. I think he realised he
:14:34. > :14:40.could only get a majority with Labour's support. He does not want
:14:40. > :14:43.to be like Lucy and Charlie Brown with the ball, continually running
:14:43. > :14:51.up, only for Ed Miliband to pull the ball away. Like there is in the
:14:51. > :14:55.Conservative party, Labour is split on the question of action. Ed
:14:55. > :14:59.Miliband will probably lead in a different way and decide to ask more
:14:59. > :15:07.questions, rather than act. You do not want to be in that position
:15:07. > :15:13.forever. Do you agree with this political calculation. Do you agree
:15:14. > :15:19.that he should say, if events warrant it, I should come back? I
:15:19. > :15:27.think he made the right decision. He does not have a majority in his own
:15:27. > :15:32.party. If chemical weapons are used to, what would be the policy of
:15:32. > :15:36.labour? We have to judge what happens and the evidence, but we are
:15:36. > :15:42.in a difficult position now. The discussion you have just had in the
:15:42. > :15:46.studio suggest David Cameron was not obliged to say what he did say at
:15:46. > :15:52.the end of the debate last week, but he has said that. We are in that
:15:52. > :15:57.situation. I am asking what your policy would be. I ask because we
:15:57. > :16:01.have been briefed Labour would only change its policy if there were
:16:01. > :16:07.significant changes and the examples we were given of the record by a
:16:07. > :16:11.Labour aid was if Al-Qaeda got position of large stockpiles of
:16:11. > :16:15.chemical weapons or if there was a direct threat to the National
:16:15. > :16:20.security of Britain. I ask the question because these conditions do
:16:20. > :16:25.not include Assad using chemical weapons against. So I ask you, what
:16:25. > :16:29.would Labour 's policy be if chemical weapons are used again?
:16:29. > :16:34.Given what happened last week, there would have to be a substantial
:16:34. > :16:39.change in the situation in Syria and those examples have been given,
:16:39. > :16:44.particularly if Al-Qaeda gets its hands on chemical weapons and starts
:16:44. > :16:51.using those. I have got that, it is a simple question. Not necessarily a
:16:51. > :16:56.simple answer, I understand that, or is it a yes or no? If chemical
:16:56. > :16:59.weapons used again, would Labour change its mind? You said you would
:16:59. > :17:04.if Al-Qaeda got chemical weapons, would you change your mind if Mr
:17:04. > :17:07.Assad used chemical weapons against? The government are not
:17:07. > :17:13.going to bring that back to Parliament. I am asking about Labour
:17:13. > :17:16.policy. The sensible way forward would be if the conditions change
:17:16. > :17:22.that the Prime Minister and Ed Miliband, and there have been
:17:22. > :17:25.difficult days in the last week, but it is still in the national interest
:17:25. > :17:31.for those leaders to come together to discuss things if the -- if the
:17:31. > :17:34.situation changes. Thank you for joining us from Birmingham. Do you
:17:34. > :17:39.situation changes. Thank you for get the feeling both the main
:17:39. > :17:46.parties have got themselves into a mess? This is fascinating and the
:17:46. > :17:49.politics is so bad. The political decision on both sides, starting
:17:49. > :17:53.with David Cameron, he did not have to have a vote and he ignored the
:17:53. > :17:58.lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan, get the evidence clear. But having
:17:58. > :18:05.lost the vote, he did not have too boxed himself in. But Labour
:18:05. > :18:08.producing two QA extra justifications for how it makes
:18:08. > :18:16.change its position and Al-Qaeda is a very special case, why bring that
:18:16. > :18:21.up? Why not go for the obvious one, supposing Assad uses them again?
:18:21. > :18:25.Both should leave open the route to taking action and not too boxed
:18:25. > :18:30.themselves in. If Assad uses chemical weapons. Where would the
:18:30. > :18:34.government be, where would this country be if he uses chemical
:18:34. > :18:39.weapons against? The Prime Minister is in favour of using action to deal
:18:39. > :18:43.with the situation now. The people who oppose that have got to explain
:18:43. > :18:49.whether they would change their mind in different circumstances. If I was
:18:49. > :18:53.Assad listening to this right now, I could use them again when ever I
:18:53. > :18:57.want. You have to use a sober judgement as to whether what we
:18:57. > :19:03.heard from Emma constituted real question is always just a way of
:19:03. > :19:06.putting off deciding on action. I think Labour would not support
:19:06. > :19:11.action and until that position changes, the Prime Minister cannot
:19:11. > :19:19.act. That is not the fault of labour but a lot of Conservatives will
:19:19. > :19:24.not. You said, what more evidence do you want? I want to know who
:19:24. > :19:29.directed those weapons, is it Assad or the generals, is it a regime we
:19:29. > :19:33.are dealing with? That is harder to answer.
:19:33. > :19:36.Who do you think sets the daily news agenda here at Westminster? The
:19:36. > :19:48.Prime Minister? As if! The editor of the Today programme? He wishes. Now
:19:48. > :19:53.you are talking! A lot of the day's big stories are shaped by a series
:19:53. > :19:55.of emails sent out by a handful of influential journalists to their
:19:55. > :19:59.subscribers. And competition is stiff to be the most influential of
:19:59. > :20:03.all. Here is Adam with the latest in our series:
:20:03. > :20:12.it is seven o'clock and the deputy editor of the Telegraph has already
:20:12. > :20:15.been up for two hours scanning the papers for gems he can put into his
:20:15. > :20:22.daily digests. When I used to work as a
:20:22. > :20:26.correspondence, they used to wish I had a crash course of what is around
:20:26. > :20:30.in the papers so I could sound more informed than I was. So when I
:20:30. > :20:34.started doing this e-mail, I gave my colleagues something useful to allow
:20:34. > :20:38.them a short cut to the things that really matter. He is helped by a
:20:38. > :20:43.colleague in the office who -- in the office who has been not only.
:20:43. > :20:47.Then applies the finishing touches as he takes his daughter to school,
:20:47. > :20:55.mainly on the top deck of the boss. That is because it to show bit of
:20:55. > :21:01.news happens at ten past eight, the big interview on the Today
:21:01. > :21:07.programme. At 8:30am, the e-mail is off to subscribers. The number is
:21:07. > :21:13.secret, but it is in five figures and includes very influential
:21:13. > :21:17.people. There are a lot of meetings early in Westminster and a crucial
:21:17. > :21:21.one is the 8:30am Downing Street meeting and my aim is to get it to
:21:21. > :21:25.people in time for that meeting so the people in number ten get to read
:21:25. > :21:30.it before they sit with the Prime Minister and discuss what is going
:21:30. > :21:33.on. At the same time, Paul Waugh of Politics Home has been trying to
:21:33. > :21:39.reach the same website with The Waugh Room, he he claims to have
:21:39. > :21:44.introduced the daily e-mail to British politics. It is not free and
:21:44. > :21:48.there is friendly competition. We have software telling us who
:21:48. > :21:52.receives the e-mail and where they are and whether they read it or not
:21:52. > :21:56.and how much they read. For the moment, a big majority of them open
:21:56. > :22:00.it every day and read it. That could moment, a big majority of them open
:22:00. > :22:09.change because it is a fickle market. Have you a bigger open rate
:22:09. > :22:15.for Paul Waugh? He works as hard as me and he produces an excellent
:22:15. > :22:18.e-mail. Each morning, Westminster is bombarded with e-mails attempting to
:22:18. > :22:23.set the agenda. This is from Conservative home, and others from
:22:23. > :22:27.elsewhere. At the other end of the Conservative home, and others from
:22:27. > :22:32.day, the Spectator magazine is getting in on the burgeoning evening
:22:32. > :22:38.market with an e-mail written I Isabel Hardman who has noticed a new
:22:38. > :22:43.trend. People are keen to get the verdict so the Tories would be keen
:22:43. > :22:48.to say, obviously, Prime Minister 's questions was a win for us, and you
:22:48. > :22:52.can mention this in the e-mail. And there is an enthusiasm for putting
:22:52. > :22:57.stories in briefing because people read it and if they have something
:22:57. > :23:01.that will not wait until tomorrow, they can get it out and people will
:23:01. > :23:05.take it home. Newspapers have always picked themselves up but this seems
:23:05. > :23:11.like a new breed of super commentator. Where is my spam
:23:11. > :23:16.folder? ! Adam Fleming reporting. And we have
:23:16. > :23:19.been joined by Paul Waugh, editor of the website Politics Home, who is
:23:19. > :23:21.also in on the political email game. His offering is called The Waugh
:23:21. > :23:28.Room. Get it? ! You have got your His offering is called The Waugh
:23:28. > :23:34.website, Politics Home, Ben has got his newspaper, why do you toil to
:23:34. > :23:39.send out these e-mails? It is a lot of work and we get up very early. To
:23:39. > :23:46.beat Ben Brogan, even have to get up very early! Have you got a slave
:23:46. > :23:49.like him? I do not, we submit a separate e-mail and everything in my
:23:49. > :23:59.e-mail is written by me. The reason people read it, people at number
:23:59. > :24:03.ten, and the media, this because it is political intelligence in both
:24:03. > :24:08.senses. It is early, direct, simple to open. Is it because we are lazy
:24:08. > :24:13.and cannot we -- and cannot be bothered reading the papers? It is,
:24:13. > :24:18.but the Internet does not work unless you make life easier and that
:24:18. > :24:22.is the point. On your readership, by the way, do you have a higher
:24:22. > :24:28.opening rate of e-mails? We have a very high rate, about 90%. We did a
:24:28. > :24:33.survey recently. The point is that they sign up to our e-mails and they
:24:33. > :24:37.pay for it and you will open it if you pay for it. But then, it is
:24:37. > :24:43.free. It is £1 50 per week, virtually nothing! That is quite a
:24:43. > :24:50.what. Less than a Cup of coffee.You are right! Among your readership,
:24:50. > :24:57.what kind of addresses have you got? Dave at number ten? Read Ed at
:24:57. > :25:00.Highgate? We have them all, the Prime Minister once said, thank God
:25:00. > :25:07.for your morning -- for your morning memos, I find out what is going on.
:25:07. > :25:12.A lot of MPs say the same thing and they like it because they are going
:25:12. > :25:16.beyond the medium we things. So are people trying to influence what you
:25:16. > :25:21.put in that because it is a way of getting to these people? Absolutely,
:25:21. > :25:26.like any kind of journalism. Isabel is right, there is a spin war going
:25:26. > :25:28.on and I get text messages from all sides. The smarter ministers know
:25:28. > :25:33.what to drop gently because it is a sides. The smarter ministers know
:25:33. > :25:38.mixture of gossip and a summary. So they are becoming quite powerful?
:25:38. > :25:45.Yes. I am launching one next week called, so what, what next? What is
:25:45. > :25:49.that going to be about? It will give you a verdict and it will tell you
:25:49. > :25:54.what happens next. A verdict of what has happened in the day. Will you
:25:54. > :26:02.make money or is it just a service? We are very commercial. Is that a
:26:02. > :26:06.yes? That is a yes.We are now getting e-mails in the morning and
:26:06. > :26:11.e-mails telling us what happened in the day and that drove the story
:26:11. > :26:14.forward to the next day, what next? We have exhausted the time frame
:26:15. > :26:20.because we get morning e-mails. Sometimes a week evening. This comes
:26:21. > :26:25.from the United States, in America, you often have to see the future in
:26:25. > :26:31.politics. It is powerful, and e-mail, it is an incredibly powerful
:26:31. > :26:37.tool for getting a message. I read The Waugh Room and Ben Brogan. I
:26:37. > :26:44.will have no time to read the newspapers! That is the aim!Not
:26:44. > :26:49.good news for newspapers! Now, are you craving a bit more
:26:49. > :26:53.back-stabbing to your politics? Or perhaps you are after one or two
:26:53. > :26:56.more sexist gaffes? Well, look no further than our dear friends Down
:26:56. > :26:59.Under, who are currently gripped in election fever, ahead of a general
:26:59. > :27:02.election tomorrow. On the one hand, Australians can opt for current
:27:02. > :27:06.Prime Minister Kevin Rudd from the Labour Party. He is the one who was
:27:06. > :27:10.ousted by Julia Gillard before the 2010 election, and then got his own
:27:10. > :27:13.back in June this year when her forced her out. And on the other
:27:13. > :27:17.hand, there is the frontrunner and gaffe-connoisseur Tony Abbott. Are
:27:17. > :27:21.you still following me? He heads the Liberal Party and has a lead in the
:27:21. > :27:24.polls, thanks to tough policies on asylum and a promise to repeal
:27:24. > :27:28.Labor's carbon tax. But it is not both men's policies that have been
:27:28. > :27:39.dominating the campaign. Here is a round-up.
:27:39. > :27:48.No one, however smart, however well-educated, however experienced,
:27:48. > :27:56.is the suppository of always done. -- of all wisdom. He has given you a
:27:56. > :28:05.few tips? I have taken them on board and some days I have my hair just
:28:05. > :28:14.highlight -- just how I like it. They are younger, they are feisty, I
:28:14. > :28:23.can probably say with a bit of sex appeal. Do you want to know who to
:28:23. > :28:33.vote for? I am the guy with a not bad looking daughters. -- the knot.
:28:33. > :28:42.This is the election of 2013 in Australia, not 1813! And we have
:28:42. > :28:45.been joined in the studio by Jason Groves, President of Australian
:28:45. > :28:49.Liberals Abroad, and from Sydney by John McTernan, who used to work for
:28:49. > :28:56.Tony Blair and then worked for the former Australian PM Julia Gillard.
:28:56. > :28:59.Jason, you are 10,000 miles away and about 40 years behind the rest of
:28:59. > :29:06.the world when it comes to women. No, the idea that any party reader
:29:06. > :29:11.led by somebody who is anti-women could be successful in modern-day
:29:11. > :29:16.Australia... May be just patronising and stuck in the 1950s! The
:29:16. > :29:22.difference between Tony Abbott and Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard is he
:29:22. > :29:26.is a real person, a real Australian and somebody Australians warmed to
:29:26. > :29:32.with all of his expressions. People do not understand what they have got
:29:32. > :29:38.with Kevin Rudd, it is a confected image. We have a delay, but let's
:29:38. > :29:42.see how it goes. Given that Tony Abbott has been pretty prone to
:29:43. > :29:49.gaffes in this campaign and in previous years, why does it look as
:29:49. > :29:55.if the party -- why does it look as if Labor will lose by quite a what?
:29:55. > :30:05.I think the Labor Party damaged itself a great deal. They were neck
:30:05. > :30:08.and neck with the Liberal party in the polls and Julia Gillard was by
:30:08. > :30:13.far the preferred Prime Minister. All the way through, the most
:30:13. > :30:18.difficult time she had had, all the focus groups said they liked Julia
:30:19. > :30:23.because she was clever. They wanted a smart Prime Minister. They have
:30:23. > :30:30.always had a hovering question about Tony Abbott's character. There is a
:30:30. > :30:35.streak of aggression in him and there is that extraordinary
:30:35. > :30:36.patronising, condescending, sexist tone which has let out during the
:30:36. > :30:42.campaign. If we had had a good run tone which has let out during the
:30:42. > :30:46.at it when we did, Julia beat Abbott soundly as preferred Prime Minister
:30:46. > :30:51.but this year there was too much noise and too much internal politics
:30:51. > :30:55.in the party. Other than the problems which the Labour Party has
:30:55. > :30:59.faced, which would be huge given the number of times they have changed
:30:59. > :31:03.their leader, if Mr Rabbitte does win and all the polls suggest he
:31:03. > :31:12.will win, what other than the Labor Party will have one it for him -- is
:31:12. > :31:16.Mr Abbott does win. The last six years have been a series of
:31:16. > :31:22.fiascoes. Not just the leadership with Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard
:31:22. > :31:26.but the squandering of a uniquely good set of circumstances which they
:31:26. > :31:31.inherited from Howard. The carbon tax, the mining tax, the free money
:31:31. > :31:35.giveaways, the ways they have mismanaged every type of reform is
:31:35. > :31:43.about patents in and restoring the government to Australia. John
:31:43. > :31:50.McTernan, I understand the bookies say it is a 98% chance that Tony
:31:50. > :31:59.Abbott will win. What will happen to the Labor Party if it goes into
:31:59. > :32:03.opposition? There is one oddity about this election which is Tony
:32:03. > :32:10.Abbott, if he does become Prime Minister, he will have a government
:32:10. > :32:14.term, maybe two terms defined by the Labor Party. He will either be
:32:14. > :32:20.trying to repeal what they did with the carbon tax and he is omitted to
:32:20. > :32:24.implementing Julia Gillard's education reform and her disability
:32:24. > :32:30.care package. In a funny kind of way, he comes in with no policies of
:32:30. > :32:35.his own, apart from one which is resented by his backbench and hated
:32:35. > :32:39.by business which is a big tax on business to pay a very generous
:32:39. > :32:48.paternity leave. The Labor Party in opposition will have to do what a
:32:48. > :32:52.good party in opposition does which is decide why it lost the election,
:32:52. > :32:57.agree quickly that they will take it on the chin from the public and then
:32:57. > :33:04.start to hold the government to some scrutiny. We have not got too much
:33:04. > :33:08.time so I had to bring Bronwen Maddox in. What is the significance
:33:08. > :33:14.of a Conservative victory in Australia? I think this is a serious
:33:14. > :33:18.election. Underneath all the personalities and jokes. It is about
:33:18. > :33:24.a kind of economic unease which has been a couple of decades of strong
:33:24. > :33:29.enviable informants but this has turned into an election about living
:33:29. > :33:34.standards, worry about what will happen to Australians, a very
:33:34. > :33:41.resource rich economy. These worries are there. It is not just about
:33:41. > :33:45.1-party sniping at another, it is about the future of the country and
:33:45. > :33:51.people saying very clearly, we are worried. Is Mr Abbott wins, what is
:33:51. > :33:58.the first important thing that he will do? Repealing the carbon tax is
:33:59. > :34:04.one thing he will do. This has stifled investment in Australia and
:34:04. > :34:06.cost a lot of jobs. It has had a big impact on how businesses can grow.
:34:06. > :34:09.Talking to people here I have run impact on how businesses can grow.
:34:09. > :34:14.into a couple of people who have moved to London because they could
:34:14. > :34:18.not get jobs in their chosen field in Australia. Australians are always
:34:18. > :34:23.moving to London, including yourself! I will be up watching the
:34:23. > :34:28.results come in. It will be interesting to see, even if it is a
:34:28. > :34:31.foregone conclusion. Coming up in a moment, it is our monthly look at
:34:31. > :34:34.foregone conclusion. Coming up in a what is going on in European
:34:34. > :34:39.politics. For now, it is time to say goodbye to all of our guests,
:34:39. > :34:43.including Bronwen Maddox. For the next half hour we will be focusing
:34:43. > :34:47.on Europe. We will be discussing Greece, the eurozone reaction to the
:34:47. > :34:51.crisis in Syria and the role of the European Court of Justice. Here is
:34:51. > :34:57.our guide to the latest from Europe in just 60 seconds.
:34:57. > :35:04.A European Parliamentary committee held hearings on US fugitive Edward
:35:04. > :35:09.Snowden's allegations that America's NSA had spied on European
:35:09. > :35:11.institutions. MEPs do work to make work.
:35:11. > :35:21.They voted to tackle unemployment, create jobs and tackle movement of
:35:21. > :35:26.workers. Spanish relations in Gibraltar are tense than the Armada.
:35:26. > :35:36.Are unlawful actions and threats against Gibraltar are unacceptable.
:35:36. > :35:42.The European Parliament calls for a European defence force under
:35:42. > :35:48.European command. And 15 million were gripped by a TV duel as German
:35:48. > :35:56.Chancellor Angela Merkel traded blows over tax and spying with her
:35:56. > :36:03.rival. Most said it was a dead heat, both claimed victory.
:36:03. > :36:13.With us for the next 30 minutes I have enjoyed by two MEPs, Syed
:36:13. > :36:19.Kamall add Richard Howitt. The German election campaign, is
:36:19. > :36:23.Angela Merkel gets re-elected, what would be the significance of that
:36:23. > :36:28.for the rest of Europe? It might see the rest of Europe read out after
:36:28. > :36:34.holding their breath for a long time. So much has been, let's see
:36:34. > :36:38.how German domestic opinion comes down, don't frighten the domestic
:36:38. > :36:44.opinion before the elections. I do hope the SDLP party will win. I
:36:44. > :36:48.think they may well be in the coalition. That would be with Mrs
:36:48. > :37:01.Merkel, it will be a grand coalition. It will be a traffic
:37:01. > :37:12.light coalition. They are into that colours. If Pearce dined Brooke
:37:12. > :37:21.comes in, they are they do need to see more stimulus, allow some slack
:37:22. > :37:27.for recovery in Europe but also in Britain's interest as well. Mrs
:37:27. > :37:31.Merkel's people have been talking about perhaps looking for a way to
:37:31. > :37:36.get some repatriation of powers back from Brussels for all the major
:37:36. > :37:41.European countries. I would suspect the Conservatives there are pretty
:37:41. > :37:44.anxious to see Mrs Merkel re-elected and not hobbled in coalition with
:37:44. > :37:52.the social Democrats who do not want to see a repatriation? Absolutely.
:37:52. > :37:55.It has been positive that Mrs Merkel and Mr Cameron have found agreement.
:37:55. > :37:59.They have found agreement on cutting the EU budget, including
:37:59. > :38:08.repatriations powers back from Brussels stock that is why we would
:38:08. > :38:12.like to see Mrs Merkel re-elected. Is it not surprising that in a
:38:12. > :38:16.eurozone crisis, in a time of hardship and austerity for a lot of
:38:17. > :38:21.Europeans, that the main centre-left party in Germany, the social
:38:21. > :38:28.Democrats, should be doing so badly? When I looked it was only about
:38:28. > :38:34.22%. If there is to be a left of centre coalition, a red Green
:38:34. > :38:38.coalition, they are not far short of 50%. That is income edition. The
:38:38. > :38:44.social Democrats are the German Labour Party, they are your
:38:44. > :38:50.equivalent. Why would a left of centre party, relatively moderate
:38:50. > :38:53.left of centre party, do so badly in times of economic difficulty? I
:38:53. > :38:58.celebrate they are our partners, we work closely with them in the
:38:58. > :39:04.European Parliament. There have been five successes elections in Germany,
:39:04. > :39:11.each one of those has been won by the social Democrats. It has been
:39:11. > :39:13.the best guide to how future federal actions come down. Yes, Merkel has
:39:13. > :39:18.the lead at the moment but it is a actions come down. Yes, Merkel has
:39:18. > :39:23.very soft lead. Let's see what happens. Indeed, let's see what
:39:23. > :39:26.happens. MEPs discuss the prospects of the
:39:26. > :39:30.eurozone with the president of the Euro Group. Latest figures from the
:39:31. > :39:36.European Central Bank suggest the outlook for the eurozone this year
:39:36. > :39:40.has improved a bit. It improved by 0.3% in the second quarter. Not a
:39:40. > :39:44.huge amount, but more than was expected. There are concerns that
:39:44. > :39:50.some countries will still need further financial assistance. Since
:39:50. > :39:52.2010, European leaders have committed 500 Elidh new rows in
:39:52. > :40:06.bailout funds to Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Cyprus. -- 500,
:40:06. > :40:11.euros. Now there is talk of a possible bailout for Greece again.
:40:11. > :40:17.The International Monetary Fund estimates that Athens will need 11
:40:17. > :40:23.billion euros for new financing on top of what has already been agreed.
:40:23. > :40:27.Speaking to MEPs, European President Jeroen Dijsselbloem said Greece
:40:27. > :40:32.would definitely need more help next year. It is clear that despite
:40:33. > :40:40.recent row Gres, Greece's troubles will not have been completely
:40:40. > :40:44.resolved by 2014. It is realistic to assume that additional support will
:40:44. > :40:50.be needed beyond the programme. In this context, the Euro Group has
:40:50. > :40:54.indicated clearly that it is committed to providing adequate
:40:54. > :41:00.support to Greece, during the current programme and beyond, until
:41:00. > :41:05.it has regained market access. We are now joined by the financial
:41:05. > :41:14.commentator Louise Cooper. Another bailout, seems to be on the cards
:41:14. > :41:20.which will upset a lot of people. The break-up of the eurozone, the
:41:20. > :41:23.exit of Greece, all of that seems to be on the table. There are a couple
:41:23. > :41:29.of things which have happened. First of all, we have a new boss at the
:41:29. > :41:34.European Central Bank, marry draggy. Under him the European Central Bank
:41:34. > :41:44.is more political, very different from the previous boss. The second
:41:44. > :41:47.thing is the prospects for the whole of the eurozone has been
:41:47. > :41:51.significantly improving over the last few months. The combination of
:41:51. > :41:57.those things is we are no longer expecting the eurozone to implode.
:41:57. > :42:02.What are the politics then of Greece getting another bailout? If Greece
:42:02. > :42:13.gets another bailout, won't others come back for another bailout?
:42:13. > :42:16.Exactly. To be honest, 11 billion euros is tiny. Markets are
:42:16. > :42:23.completely ignoring it. It is nothing we did not know. It is
:42:23. > :42:27.almost irrelevant. But today we are already seeing reports that Ireland
:42:28. > :42:38.is saying, you know what, we would like a 10 billion or 11 billion, two
:42:38. > :42:44.credit line to help us of. Portugal expects the same as well. Do we know
:42:44. > :42:50.what the Greeks have done with their bailout? It is interesting when you
:42:50. > :42:56.ask them, they say we have implemented several measures. Greece
:42:56. > :43:01.is basically a very sick patient and all we seem to be doing is providing
:43:01. > :43:09.a very expensive sticking plaster rather than solving the fundamental
:43:09. > :43:17.problem. One solution is to exit and the other solution which would be a
:43:17. > :43:21.psychological blow would be for the country to leave the euro, the other
:43:21. > :43:25.solution is that there will have to be fiscal transfers, money from the
:43:25. > :43:30.rich countries to the poor to keep it together. We have not done
:43:30. > :43:34.either. Until then we will apply expensive sticking plaster. We have
:43:34. > :43:40.heard from Louise and we know from the market is not going to implode.
:43:40. > :43:46.I am not saying it will be easy. See Greece has done nothing, I do not
:43:46. > :43:53.defend parts mistakes in Greece -- past mistakes in Greece. It has had
:43:53. > :43:57.the biggest fiscal retrenchment of any country in history. Public
:43:57. > :44:04.service cuts, tax increases, has that austerity message worked? No,
:44:04. > :44:12.it has had the biggest GDP reduction, three years, 12%. You go
:44:12. > :44:15.to Greece, you see prostitution, UC suicides shooting up. The idea that
:44:15. > :44:20.they have done nothing, I am afraid you have got to open up your eyes
:44:20. > :44:26.and see it. This is going to be a bailout that written will not pay a
:44:26. > :44:29.penny for in the eurozone, yet British businesses and British jobs
:44:29. > :44:35.are going to be supported by that taking place. Why should we be
:44:35. > :44:43.against it? Europe may not be sliding into further recession. The
:44:43. > :44:48.eurozone may slide in intact. Would I be right in thinking there will be
:44:48. > :44:52.eurozone may slide in intact. Would a long slow painful recovery and if
:44:52. > :44:59.you are young and unemployed in Spain, Greece, Portugal, Ireland, it
:44:59. > :45:03.will be a long time before you get a job? Absolutely. The damage done to
:45:03. > :45:11.the Greek economy cannot be underestimated. We are talking about
:45:11. > :45:17.Greece, it is getting slightly better, but the economy is still
:45:17. > :45:24.contracting. Second quarter GDP figures, the Greek economy
:45:24. > :45:29.contracted by 3.8%. A quarter of the rate? That is a year-on-year rate.
:45:29. > :45:36.You compare that to the first quarter of 2012. Still disappearing
:45:36. > :45:40.but Dave smaller rate? Yes, it is still contracting but not
:45:40. > :45:44.contracting quite as fast. It is decelerating. It is not great, it is
:45:44. > :45:50.not getting worse, it is marginally improving, but the Greek economy has
:45:50. > :45:57.some substantial challenges yet and the process is incredibly slow,
:45:57. > :46:02.because of the political problems, both in Greece and across the euro.
:46:02. > :46:11.That is the problem. The process is so slow that it takes time. They are
:46:11. > :46:18.in budget surplus. What is holding them back is the debt, otherwise I
:46:18. > :46:22.agree. The debt is the problem, 11 billion bailout is irrelevant, the
:46:22. > :46:29.big picture is Greece still has enormous debt. It has accumulated
:46:29. > :46:33.national debt. It had 100 billion euros of debt reduction and it needs
:46:33. > :46:38.another at that is politically of the table. Is the conclusion not
:46:38. > :46:42.just for Greece, but would it not be fair to say the prognosis for the
:46:42. > :46:48.Eurozone in the years ahead, the next two, three, five years, is not
:46:48. > :46:55.depression but pretty much stagnation? It is pretty much
:46:55. > :47:01.stagnation. If you look at any successful currency union, what you
:47:01. > :47:06.have, whether it be sterling in the UK or dollars in the United States,
:47:06. > :47:10.you have a situation where the rich part pay for the poor parts. When I
:47:10. > :47:13.talk to my German political friends, they say they know eventually, they
:47:13. > :47:19.will have to pay by fiscal transfers. I could not say that by
:47:19. > :47:28.the election -- before the election, and they say, why should we pay when
:47:28. > :47:35.we have tightened our ballot -- our belt and the Greeks have not? Thank
:47:35. > :47:38.you, we will see what happens. World leaders, meeting at the G20 in
:47:38. > :47:42.Syria, have been unable to reach agreement on what to do about Syria.
:47:42. > :47:45.And there is a similar diversity of views at the European Parliament. Jo
:47:45. > :47:48.Coburn has been in Brussels, gauging the range of opinions.
:47:48. > :47:49.100,000 people have been killed so far in the Syrian conflict.
:47:49. > :47:51.100,000 people have been killed so Diplomatic efforts to end the
:47:51. > :47:54.bloodshed have failed but images of people choking to death after a
:47:54. > :47:59.chemical attack on a suburb of Damascus was a game changer. It
:47:59. > :48:03.crossed the red line drawn by the US President and a military strike
:48:03. > :48:10.against the Assad regime seems imminent. The only European country
:48:10. > :48:16.likely to join forces is France. The pressure on the Assad government and
:48:16. > :48:19.the decision of Assad and this dictator is very important. If we do
:48:19. > :48:31.not have any threats, there is no way to change his mind. In the UK,
:48:31. > :48:35.it has been a different story, after MPs rejected any British military
:48:35. > :48:40.action against Syria. Even the principal of intervention was voted
:48:40. > :48:44.down, with blame on all sides. The Prime Minister ruled out a further
:48:44. > :48:51.vote. Some MEPs believe that may have to change. If there is another
:48:51. > :48:53.vote for another reason, another atrocity or say more pressure from
:48:53. > :48:56.our allies or whatever, I suspect atrocity or say more pressure from
:48:56. > :49:02.the vote would go through. I am not, I know the Prime Minister has
:49:02. > :49:07.said, but I would not say never to these sorts of things. We have to
:49:07. > :49:11.keep all options open. The capital cities in Europe seem a long way
:49:11. > :49:15.from the crisis in the Syria and while politicians have been
:49:15. > :49:19.agonising about taking political action against the Assad regime, the
:49:19. > :49:24.public is broadly sceptical about another war in the Middle East which
:49:24. > :49:31.they fear could make things worse. If an intervention takes place,
:49:31. > :49:41.especially an attack against the Syrian army, it will not lead us to
:49:41. > :49:49.any solution of this humanitarian tragedy. The European Union has been
:49:49. > :49:52.notably quiet Syria, more involved in the crisis in Egypt's. Some
:49:53. > :49:57.believe that is the wrong approach and want the leaders in Europe to
:49:57. > :50:01.play a more prominent role. I believe the high representative and
:50:01. > :50:06.others have been remarkably quiet and I do not think that is an
:50:06. > :50:08.appropriate response in light of the urgency that the international
:50:08. > :50:13.community is facing with chemical weapons being used, with the
:50:13. > :50:17.humanitarian disaster growing every day and with the global discussion
:50:17. > :50:22.about how to end the killing of the people in Syria and how to enter
:50:23. > :50:26.that war. The prospect of increasing numbers of Syrian refugees arriving
:50:26. > :50:31.at the Borders of Europe may demand a clear response from the EU. 2
:50:31. > :50:44.million people have fled and true macro. But politicians in Brussels
:50:44. > :50:49.are divided. -- 2 million people have fled Syria. It is impossible
:50:49. > :50:54.for Assad to use aeroplanes, helicopters and even missiles to
:50:54. > :51:00.launch his weapons and his chemical weapons in particular. Syria has
:51:00. > :51:04.dominated discussions, with world leaders gathered in St Petersburg
:51:04. > :51:11.for the G20 summit. Finding a solution will take much longer.
:51:11. > :51:17.European countries have taken positions on Syria, France, written
:51:17. > :51:24.notably. But there has been no European Union view on it. --
:51:24. > :51:31.Britain notably. I do not agree with it. Our representative, our high
:51:31. > :51:38.representative has spoken out. She spoke this week, last week. What is
:51:38. > :51:41.her policy? Her job is not to tell member states where they do not
:51:41. > :51:46.agree, this has to be the position whether you like it or not. This is
:51:46. > :51:52.where the Eurosceptic mindset is challenged. What is the European
:51:52. > :52:00.Union policy towards Syria after the chemical attack? Working for a
:52:00. > :52:07.political solution. £1 billion of humanitarian assistance, and a third
:52:07. > :52:13.comes directly from Britain. That is fantastic and it is essential, and
:52:13. > :52:19.the people need it. But it is not a foreign policy. It is part of a
:52:19. > :52:23.foreign policy. And there is discussion this week in Brussels
:52:23. > :52:27.about whether distributing masks to protect from chemical weapon
:52:27. > :52:32.attacks... That is not a foreign policy. That is very worthwhile but
:52:32. > :52:38.it is not a foreign policy, so I ask again, what is the European... I
:52:38. > :52:45.cannot detect a united European... There cannot be one, it even the
:52:45. > :52:50.countries are not united. I am quite surprised. You are arguing there is
:52:50. > :52:55.a united European foreign policy and that seems to me that you are
:52:55. > :53:01.arguing night is day and day is night. In France and Britain cannot
:53:01. > :53:04.agree, there is not one. There is not one unless Foreign Minister is
:53:04. > :53:09.agree and they do not. So there is not one! Let's compare this to the
:53:09. > :53:15.position on Iraq or where Europe was split down the middle. There was no
:53:15. > :53:19.foreign policy for Europe that time. Britain and France appear to have
:53:19. > :53:23.changed sides in terms of military intervention but there are strong
:53:23. > :53:29.voices, Germany itself, who are not prepared to sit by while attacks
:53:29. > :53:34.take place and I believe that Europe will be part of the solution
:53:34. > :53:39.internationally trying to build the consensus so we can get action to
:53:39. > :53:43.change. We heard a Dutch MEP criticise the European Union and the
:53:43. > :53:50.high representative Catherine Ashton for not doing enough. How can Europe
:53:50. > :53:55.act as a united body of Europe is clearly not united itself on the
:53:55. > :54:00.issue? There are huge divisions over what the response should be. You
:54:00. > :54:06.have hit the nail on the head, what power does Europe have? We are going
:54:06. > :54:09.to spend a lot of time and we spent a lot of time this week in Brussels
:54:09. > :54:13.and next week intro -- and next week in Strasberg talking about this, but
:54:14. > :54:21.we have no power when it comes to this. Assad will not be sitting in
:54:21. > :54:26.Damascus play scheme in his boot waiting for -- sitting in Damascus
:54:26. > :54:30.quaking in his boot waiting for the European Union to make its decision.
:54:30. > :54:32.It is quite right it is left to member states, particularly ones
:54:32. > :54:36.It is quite right it is left to with military capability.
:54:36. > :54:40.Time now for the latest in our guide to the A-Z of Europe. Adam has been
:54:40. > :54:51.to Luxembourg to visit the European Court of Justice.
:54:51. > :54:58.This is how justice is served EU style. We are about to watch a
:54:58. > :55:03.judgement delivered in the European Court of Justice. Airing in mind
:55:03. > :55:05.this is not a European court of human rights that
:55:05. > :55:09.this is not a European court of hate, this is a different
:55:09. > :55:14.organisation in a different city, doing a different thing. This place
:55:14. > :55:19.deals with European union organisations, countries and
:55:19. > :55:21.companies who are accused taking the rules of the EU. Last year, they
:55:21. > :55:25.passed judgement on whether airlines rules of the EU. Last year, they
:55:25. > :55:29.should pay compensation if passengers are delayed, if people
:55:29. > :55:34.from outside the EU are entitled to housing benefit, and most often the
:55:34. > :55:36.response to national courts who have asked for clarification of any EU
:55:36. > :55:41.response to national courts who have law. This case has been heard by a
:55:41. > :55:44.panel of 15 judges, sometimes they're less depending on how
:55:44. > :55:49.complicated it is. There is one judge from each member said -- each
:55:49. > :55:54.member state, serving terms of six years, and they have a legal
:55:54. > :55:58.background. Sitting on the sidelines, a role British courts do
:55:58. > :56:06.not have, and advocate general. There are eight of them and this is
:56:06. > :56:12.Britain 's, her job is to analyse cases and suggest what the court
:56:12. > :56:13.might do. People find it easier to understand what the court is saying
:56:13. > :56:17.and the reasoning behind the understand what the court is saying
:56:17. > :56:21.thinking of the court if they have an advocate general 's opinion which
:56:21. > :56:26.gives more back around and set the scene, explains what the options
:56:26. > :56:31.were that the court had to consider. And then you might go one way or the
:56:31. > :56:38.other. Secondly, most supreme courts, when they are dealing with a
:56:38. > :56:43.case, have the benefit of judgements that have been given by the courts
:56:43. > :56:48.below. With this court, many of the cases that come to ours are cases
:56:48. > :56:53.that come straight here. Christie -- critics of the justices over the
:56:53. > :56:58.years excuse -- accuse them of expanding pe you by stealth even if
:56:58. > :57:03.they are not elected, but they say judges at home are not elected
:57:03. > :57:04.either. Personally, I am amazed how much the building looks like
:57:04. > :57:11.either. Personally, I am amazed how boutique hotel! This is a big place,
:57:11. > :57:14.doing a big job. There are 600 new cases lodged here every year and in
:57:14. > :57:19.the league table of which countries and up here most, the UK is near the
:57:19. > :57:24.bottom. Not a squeaky-clean as the Feeney but not accused of being
:57:24. > :57:28.naughty as often as France. And it is definitely not the European Court
:57:28. > :57:35.naughty as often as France. And it of human rights! -- not a
:57:35. > :57:42.squeaky-clean as Slovenia. Yes, it is based in Luxembourg. It
:57:42. > :57:47.is not as controversial as the European Court in Strasberg. The
:57:47. > :57:52.problem is to make sure people can play to a ruling. So when France is
:57:52. > :57:59.fined over British beef, France have still not paid that and that is part
:57:59. > :58:02.of the problem. When I did a question to the commission asking
:58:02. > :58:06.when France would pay their final, they ignored it. But by and large,
:58:06. > :58:12.people do follow the rulings. As they should. Tory Eurosceptics who
:58:12. > :58:19.deliberately confuse people between the courts just want to slam the
:58:19. > :58:23.whole thing. But we won the case on the beef ban, David Cameron is
:58:23. > :58:32.saying over Gibraltar we will take a case, and in my view Ron glee, --
:58:32. > :58:35.incorrectly, quite happy to use the court when it is in the interests of
:58:35. > :58:43.Britain, but to go to the Eurosceptic press... You are off on
:58:43. > :58:49.a party political tirade! It is a political programme! Thank you. That
:58:49. > :58:51.is all for today. Thanks to my guests Syed Kamall and Richard
:58:51. > :58:56.Howitt. Bye-bye.