:00:35. > :00:41.Afternoon folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics. On the show today:
:00:41. > :00:43.Has the Guardian's coverage of Edward Snowden's intelligence leaks
:00:43. > :00:50.put British national security at risk? David Cameron says yes. So
:00:50. > :00:54.does Nick Clegg. But Vince Cable says the paper has "done
:00:54. > :00:59.considerable public service". We'll debate the issue. Plaid Cymru kicks
:00:59. > :01:05.off its autumn party conference in Aberystwyth. I'll be talking live to
:01:05. > :01:10.party leader Leanne Wood. Could global warming do more to help
:01:10. > :01:19.humans than harm them? The Danish environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg will
:01:19. > :01:21.be here to discuss his theory. And we report from Strasbourg on the
:01:21. > :01:31.European Parliament vote to slap bigger health warnings on cigarette
:01:31. > :01:35.packets and help stub out smoking. All that in the next hour and with
:01:35. > :01:42.us the editor of the Independent, Amol Rajan. As well as editing a
:01:42. > :01:45.national newspaper he's found time to write a book about history's
:01:45. > :01:49.greatest spin bowlers and this week told readers of the Evening Standard
:01:49. > :01:59.how hard it is to find a good reggae night in London. Which you have
:01:59. > :02:02.read? Not yet. But I will. Impossible. Of course he never
:02:02. > :02:05.consulted me. But let's start with the latest on the attempts by the
:02:05. > :02:09.three main parties in Westminster to agree a new form of regulation for
:02:09. > :02:12.the press. Ross Hawkins is keeping an eye on developments. Ross, who's
:02:12. > :02:18.involved in this and are they likely to reach an agreement today? I have
:02:18. > :02:23.spent all morning for you, trying to look over these roof tops to try and
:02:23. > :02:27.see white smoke arising as the thrilling conclusion of the cross
:02:27. > :02:33.party talks comes. I have to tell you this is a smoke-free view so
:02:34. > :02:40.far. What is happening, Harriet Harman, the Culture Secretary and
:02:40. > :02:46.Lord Wallace are having a debate about a small part of a bigger
:02:46. > :02:57.debate. They agreed a plan for regulating the press in March and
:02:57. > :03:03.agreed to re-open a few bits of that. But whether they agree or not,
:03:03. > :03:06.they're not going to make a great many of the newspapers happy,
:03:06. > :03:12.because while the issues are important to them, they won't do
:03:12. > :03:15.things about the issues like the capacity of Lords, ladies and MPs
:03:15. > :03:23.there to change the system on their own in the future. Thank you. Keep
:03:23. > :03:30.up there, I'm sure. Look, there is white smoke! Just joking! It's not
:03:30. > :03:34.even April Fool! Where is The Independent on this, your paper
:03:34. > :03:39.seems to be all over the place. No, we stood with The Guardian and the
:03:39. > :03:46.financial times and were interested to hear what Parliament produced.
:03:46. > :03:52.I'm yet to be convinced of the need for statutory underpinning. So you
:03:52. > :03:56.have changed, new editor, new ideas. Not this. We have a position which I
:03:56. > :04:01.have stuck to. We want the two parties to come together. The
:04:01. > :04:08.difference between the two parties, the press and groups like the May
:04:08. > :04:13.and the -- Mail and The Telegraph is not that huge. It does sound like
:04:13. > :04:18.The Independent. I understand you're not keen on the newspaper industry's
:04:18. > :04:19.proposals and not keen on the Government's proposals. We are
:04:19. > :04:23.looking. There is something going on Government's proposals. We are
:04:23. > :04:28.in Parliament today and we will see whether it is effective. I don't
:04:28. > :04:31.think it will satisfy several newspaper groups. There is a
:04:31. > :04:34.question as to whether or not whatever Parliament produces, if it
:04:35. > :04:39.doesn't satisfy the newspaper group, whether it makes the newspaper
:04:39. > :04:43.industry lack the trust of the public even more. We will look at
:04:43. > :04:49.the proposals and see whether they work. Will you sign up in the end,
:04:49. > :04:54.if the Government brings this into law? We will have a look before we
:04:54. > :05:00.sign up. Even will have a look. I'm not fog o' -- going to say here
:05:00. > :05:05.whether we will sign up. Why not. We will look at what is put forward.
:05:05. > :05:09.But the principle of whether newspapers should be regulated by
:05:09. > :05:12.statute is quite an important, you don't need to look at that, that is
:05:12. > :05:17.the line the Government wants to go. Do you accept that principle? We
:05:17. > :05:21.have said that we think that it ought to be accepted that what
:05:21. > :05:26.Parliament puts forward after a judge-led inquiry is something that
:05:26. > :05:29.we sign up to. Having said that... The other newspapers have changed
:05:29. > :05:33.their positions too. You will have to ask them. We will have to look at
:05:33. > :05:36.what comes out today and what we are in favour of is Parliament and the
:05:36. > :05:40.newspaper groups coming together to find common ground. What we want is
:05:40. > :05:45.for newspapers to have more trust from the public. All of this is a
:05:45. > :05:50.function of the weakness of newspapers, not of their strength.
:05:50. > :05:54.There is a feeling that we are as an industry on our knees, there is a
:05:54. > :05:59.feeling that we are facing huge commercial pressures and there is a
:05:59. > :06:07.feeling this may curtail our ability to do what we do best. So we want a
:06:07. > :06:13.negotiated position to allow us to continue causing mischief. Should a
:06:13. > :06:16.newspaper print a story, even if it might jeopardise national security?
:06:16. > :06:19.The Guardian has already published leaks by the former US intelligence
:06:19. > :06:22.contractor Edward Snowden and says it will print more revelations from
:06:22. > :06:25.him. The paper's editor Alan Rusbridger said they were right to
:06:25. > :06:28.publish the files and have helped to prompt a necessary and overdue
:06:28. > :06:32.debate. The Guardian says more than 20 newspaper editors from a dozen
:06:32. > :06:36.countries support its decision. But there's been fierce criticism of the
:06:36. > :06:39.Guardian. Earlier this week the director general of MI5, Andrew
:06:39. > :06:46.Parker, warned it "causes enormous damage to make public the reach and
:06:46. > :06:49.limits of GCHQ techniques". And the former head of GCHQ, Sir David
:06:49. > :06:52.Omand, said leaking surveillance programme details have been the most
:06:52. > :06:54.catastrophic loss to British intelligence ever - worse than
:06:54. > :07:03.traitors Philby, Burgess and McClean. Yesterday, Nick Clegg said
:07:03. > :07:07.that some of the information published by the Guardian would have
:07:07. > :07:10.gone over the heads of its readers but would have been immensely
:07:10. > :07:17.interesting to people who want to harm the UK. Meanwhile David Cameron
:07:17. > :07:22.had this to say. When you get newspapers who get hold of vast
:07:22. > :07:27.amounts of data and information that is effectively stolen information
:07:27. > :07:31.and they think it is OK to reveal this, I think they have got to think
:07:31. > :07:37.about their responsibilities and are they helping to keep our country
:07:37. > :07:40.safe? But not everyone in the Cabinet is critical of the Guardian.
:07:40. > :07:43.Here's what Business Secretary Vince Cable had to say on the Today
:07:43. > :07:48.programme this morning. I think The Guardian has done a considerable
:07:48. > :07:52.public service. Edward Snowdon's contribution is two fold. One is a
:07:52. > :07:59.positive one, the other is more worrying that a large amount of
:07:59. > :08:03.general yubly -- jerch Euanly -- genuinely important material has
:08:03. > :08:07.been passed across. The conclusion that Nick Clegg came to it we need
:08:07. > :08:13.to have proper political oversight of the intelligence services and
:08:13. > :08:16.arguably we haven't until now. With us now is Rachel Robinson from the
:08:16. > :08:19.human rights campaigning group Liberty and we're also joined by the
:08:19. > :08:22.writer and commentator Douglas Murray, who earlier this week wrote
:08:22. > :08:25.an article headlined: "Why all this country's enemies will be grateful
:08:25. > :08:34.for the schoolboy vanity of the Guardian". Welcome to you both.
:08:34. > :08:39.Vince Cable said the Guardian sup -- had done a public service. What
:08:39. > :08:43.tuning of that -- what do you think of that. Well he thinks it is
:08:43. > :08:47.liberal to support whistle-blowing, but he recognises there is a
:08:47. > :08:51.national security problem. It is extraordinary that a member of a
:08:51. > :08:55.government can in any way condone what has been, as the intelligence
:08:55. > :09:00.chiefs have said, a catastrophic gift to this country's enemies. What
:09:00. > :09:07.do you say to that? What we have to remember, of course, like MI5 have
:09:07. > :09:10.responsibilities, whistle-blowers and newspapers have ethical
:09:10. > :09:15.responsibilities. In our view, all the information that has been
:09:15. > :09:20.published today has in no way compromised national security. How
:09:20. > :09:29.do you know? As far as we can see, the information has been published
:09:29. > :09:35.carefully. David Omand says is it is the most catastrophic loss of
:09:35. > :09:39.British intelligence ever. All we can say is we don't know what
:09:39. > :09:43.information will be disclosed in the future. But as far as we can see,
:09:43. > :09:47.there has been a very careful and considered approach. Of course it
:09:47. > :09:52.would be irresponsible to release huge amounts of information. But
:09:52. > :09:58.they have released huge amounts and it is shown by publishing it it has
:09:58. > :10:07.not just shown how we are under surveillance, but showed those who
:10:07. > :10:11.would destroy us how the agencies gather this information. This is
:10:11. > :10:16.vital information. We don't consider that anything that has been
:10:16. > :10:22.released. But you don't know. Is of that nature. Essentially what has
:10:22. > :10:30.happened here is that a public debate has been promoted to have the
:10:30. > :10:37.chief of MI5 say this is essentially treacherous act to say if you're not
:10:37. > :10:45.with us, you're against us is deeply misleading. We needed a debate about
:10:45. > :10:49.the manner of surveillance. We are worried that we, the ordinary
:10:49. > :10:53.people, could be collateral damage. Yes, there is a public concern about
:10:53. > :10:57.the way they go about their business. There are all sorts of
:10:57. > :11:01.checks and balances in place, including Parliamentary oversight to
:11:01. > :11:06.check that. But the discussion has come so far on to the issue I of
:11:06. > :11:09.what has been published by the Guardian. What has been ignored is
:11:09. > :11:14.that the tens of thousands of files Guardian. What has been ignored is
:11:14. > :11:21.which the Guardian has had access to, which it has sent around the
:11:21. > :11:27.world with glee and a frivolity which is astonishing. The so-called
:11:27. > :11:36.reporter, his boyfriend had his flights paid for by The Guardian and
:11:36. > :11:39.the boyfriend of a journalist from the Guardian was travelling with
:11:39. > :11:44.thousands of files on his person. If anyone thinks these entire files are
:11:44. > :11:48.not in the possession of Chinese Communist Party at not in the
:11:48. > :11:54.possession of the Russian Security Service, they are naive. I mean, the
:11:54. > :11:58.first thing that was said that look there is oversight of the Security
:11:58. > :12:05.Services and that is sufficient, that is worrying. That is not what
:12:05. > :12:08.he is saying. He said there are 58,000 secret documents which Edward
:12:08. > :12:13.Snowdon and his people were going around the world, The Guardian had,
:12:13. > :12:16.they have been spread all over the place and the Russians and the
:12:16. > :12:21.Chinese must have access to that. They will have broken into their
:12:21. > :12:29.computers that is sure lay threat? As far as we are aware, things that
:12:29. > :12:36.are... But you don't know what they have in Beijing or Moscow. Your not
:12:36. > :12:42.intelligence experts. You have no idea about the capabilities of
:12:42. > :12:47.Moscow and Beijing to get access to 58,000 secret documents. No, we
:12:47. > :12:52.don't. What we are in a position to talk about is the constitutional
:12:52. > :12:58.balance and scrutiny of the Security Services and about ethical
:12:59. > :13:02.journalism. This isn't journalism. Are you happy for editors of
:13:02. > :13:05.newspapers to be making decisions about national security. Do you
:13:06. > :13:11.think they're qualified, do you think they have the experience, the
:13:11. > :13:17.knowledge and judgment to make decisions abo sophisticated
:13:17. > :13:23.intelligence? This is not of course it is not a concerns that have been
:13:23. > :13:29.expressed about on what basis journalists have the right to make
:13:29. > :13:33.the decision. But let's not forget journalism, one of the core
:13:33. > :13:40.functions is to hold the powerful to account. You don't need to tell me
:13:40. > :13:44.that. That is his business. I would defend to the death Alan Rusbridger.
:13:44. > :13:48.Would you have published it? You're talking about stuff we don't know.
:13:48. > :13:52.We don't know what the Guardian redacted and what advice they got
:13:52. > :13:57.from the Government and what terrorists might do with the
:13:57. > :14:02.information. That would mean erring on the side of caution. I used to
:14:02. > :14:06.work in the Foreign Office. They are very hard-working and effective
:14:06. > :14:13.people who exist on the basis of a network of trust and require some
:14:13. > :14:16.secrecy. I don't believe in making their jobs harder. If there is
:14:16. > :14:25.anything we can do, the problem they have is all the victories they chalk
:14:25. > :14:31.up and the successes we don't know about. There is an ill lis twiegs
:14:31. > :14:35.journalists and activist. The Guardian has tried to put our
:14:35. > :14:40.national security at risk by publishing documents by holding on
:14:40. > :14:45.to document and if anyone needed any demonstration of this change that
:14:45. > :14:50.has happened, you can see it from what Glenn green walled, the
:14:50. > :14:56.so-called journalist said when his partser in was detained. He said he
:14:56. > :15:00.would now, because of what happened, he would publish more and he said I
:15:00. > :15:04.have secrets op the intelligence services that Britain will regret
:15:04. > :15:07.doing this. That is not the language of a journalists. I think later he
:15:07. > :15:24.said he was speaking in anger. By of a journalists. I think later he
:15:24. > :15:33.the Security service picking this up? Why was this information is
:15:33. > :15:39.allowed, why did it ever get to this in the first place? There is no way
:15:39. > :15:52.we can know if this is as serious as they complain, claim. -- as serious
:15:52. > :15:57.as they claim. There is a perfectly sensible discussion about a number
:15:57. > :16:01.of people, particularly contractors, who have access to the kind of
:16:01. > :16:06.information to Snowden did. Is it still a secret then? There is a
:16:06. > :16:12.debate about that. What it really comes down to is the decision by the
:16:12. > :16:16.Guardian about what and what should not be in the public domain. We used
:16:16. > :16:26.to say, who guards the Guardian? That is more widget a night than
:16:27. > :16:31.ever to ask. -- more illegitimate. Without Snowden's role in this we
:16:31. > :16:36.would not be having this debate. What was happening would not have
:16:36. > :16:39.become apparent and we would not be having a legitimate debate. So you
:16:40. > :16:46.think it is a good thing that Mr Snowden, now in the hands of Mr
:16:46. > :16:52.Putin, I suggest you would not survive in Russia, I do think it is
:16:52. > :16:59.a good thing that he has 58,000 documents of British secrets? What I
:16:59. > :17:03.said was without his actions, without the Guardian's actions, we
:17:03. > :17:08.would not be having a discussion of huge significance. We think that
:17:08. > :17:11.Snowden's actions were brave and we think he has done a public service
:17:11. > :17:15.and that the Guardian has done a public service. So you are not at
:17:15. > :17:22.all worried that this American citizen, who still 58,000 documents
:17:22. > :17:24.of British national secrets, is now in the hands of the Kremlin, that
:17:24. > :17:36.does not worry you add or? That is a in the hands of the Kremlin, that
:17:36. > :17:42.separate issue. What we are talking about is... Is it a good thing he
:17:42. > :17:49.has got these documents? It is good that this has come to light. We
:17:49. > :17:54.would not know the extent of the surveillance on us if Mr Snowden had
:17:54. > :18:00.not done what he has done. Reed-mac we would. Anyone who knows how
:18:00. > :18:03.electronic data surveillance and gathering occurrence would have a
:18:03. > :18:08.decent idea. Guardian supporters are talking about this as if it is a
:18:08. > :18:13.decent idea. Guardian supporters are debating game. They seem to think it
:18:13. > :18:20.is purely a debate about the liberal intelligentsia in London. It is
:18:20. > :18:28.about the commonest party of China, or Al-Shabab, or the enemies of this
:18:28. > :18:35.country reads these documents. -- the Communist Party of China.
:18:35. > :18:39.The party conference season may be over for the Westminster parties but
:18:39. > :18:41.there is more to come. The SNP holds its conference next week in Perth
:18:41. > :18:46.there is more to come. The SNP holds and today, Plaid Cymru are meeting
:18:46. > :18:50.in Aberystwyth. In a moment I will speak to Leanne Wood, but first,
:18:50. > :18:56.James Williams on the challenges facing the Welsh nationalist party.
:18:56. > :19:02.Aberystwyth, a popular seaside resort and the most popular place to
:19:02. > :19:10.gain the insight into the Welsh psyche. Those are the words of Mike
:19:10. > :19:16.Parker, riding 20 years ago. Gathering here this weekend for its
:19:16. > :19:20.national conference, Plaid Cymru is not here to soul search. They did
:19:20. > :19:24.that after their last election results. They fell from being the
:19:24. > :19:29.second biggest party and junior coalition partners to third behind
:19:29. > :19:34.the Tories. They have reflected on that and are here to celebrate as a
:19:34. > :19:40.party who feels it is on the up. That is due in no small part to a
:19:40. > :19:44.thumping victory this summer. Plaid Cymru have shown that they remember
:19:44. > :19:48.how to campaign and that will give the party a boost of confidence.
:19:48. > :19:55.There are major strategic challenges for the party and four Leanne Wood
:19:55. > :20:02.which remain to be addressed. The new leader of Plaid Cymru is Leanne
:20:02. > :20:07.Wood. That was 18 months ago and since then, the committed socialist
:20:07. > :20:13.has prioritised the economy. Do they offer a credible outturn out of --
:20:13. > :20:18.alternative at a time of austerity? We were the party that held office
:20:18. > :20:25.before the worst recession in 80 years and we did well to put in
:20:25. > :20:28.place policies which Labour has taken forward and they have not
:20:28. > :20:35.ditched any of our economic policies. We can demonstrate that we
:20:35. > :20:38.are competent in dealing with an economic presses. Perceived by some
:20:38. > :20:44.as a party for only Welsh speakers, Plaid Cymru's progress has been slow
:20:44. > :20:50.so electing Leanne Wood, the first non-fluent Welsh speaker to lead the
:20:50. > :20:55.party, was seen as an address to the problem. There are other concerns,
:20:55. > :21:01.though. Plaid Cymru's unique selling point was that it was the party that
:21:01. > :21:09.stood up for Wales and was constitutionally concerned. We now
:21:09. > :21:12.have Carwyn Jones looking at powers for a Federal UK, conservatives
:21:12. > :21:22.looking at the devolution of broadcasting, the Lib Dems showing
:21:22. > :21:27.Federalist credentials. Everyone is crowding in on Plaid Cymru
:21:27. > :21:31.territory. They want to stand alone in Wales, the 2016 Assembly
:21:31. > :21:34.elections. They will need a distinct message otherwise it will be
:21:35. > :21:41.difficult for them to expand beyond these traditional strongholds.
:21:41. > :21:46.Leanne Wood joins us now from Aberystwyth. Welcome back to the
:21:46. > :21:52.Daily Politics. You have been leader of Plaid Cymru for two years. What
:21:52. > :21:56.have you achieved? We have achieved quite a lot under my leadership I
:21:56. > :21:59.would say. We have come to Aberystwyth this weekend on the back
:21:59. > :22:15.of a very successful by-election victory this summer on in is known
:22:15. > :22:19.-- Inis Mon and Caerphilly. We are upbeat and looking forward to what
:22:19. > :22:24.promises to be an enjoyable conference. Why is your party losing
:22:24. > :22:33.membership if you are on the move? Our party gained new members last
:22:33. > :22:38.year. We are up to 23% on our membership. You are losing overall.
:22:38. > :22:41.There are challenges for all parties of growing membership, we would love
:22:41. > :22:46.more members, but we are actually growing and new members joined the
:22:46. > :22:48.party after the Inis Mon by-election and many of those members were young
:22:48. > :22:53.people. We need young people to be and many of those members were young
:22:54. > :22:58.involved in politics and many are disillusioned at the moment with the
:22:58. > :23:02.mainstream political parties. What is your main focus at the
:23:02. > :23:05.conference? Is it the general election in 2015 or the Welsh
:23:05. > :23:13.conference? Is it the general assembly elections in 2016? We are
:23:13. > :23:19.at a slightly different place in the electoral cycle to the other parties
:23:19. > :23:25.in that they are focusing Army 2020 Newco general election. Ours is the
:23:25. > :23:28.2016 National Assembly election, where we tend to put forward a
:23:28. > :23:32.programme of government and hopefully people will back that and
:23:32. > :23:33.programme of government and return a Plaid Cymru government. I
:23:33. > :23:37.hope to be Plaid Cymru's First return a Plaid Cymru government. I
:23:37. > :23:44.Minister in that government after 2016. You have only got 11 out of 60
:23:45. > :23:52.seats, you have a long way to go. There is nothing I have seen in the
:23:52. > :23:56.state of Welsh politics which suggests there is any thrust behind
:23:56. > :24:02.you to form a government after 2016. It sounds that you have written of
:24:02. > :24:07.Westminster. I would suggest you look at the results of the
:24:07. > :24:11.by-election. There was a huge swing towards Plaid Cymru. There was
:24:11. > :24:21.indeed, but you know as well as I do that by-elections hardly ever tell
:24:21. > :24:25.you anything. Yes, you may be right, but it gives us hope that we can
:24:25. > :24:30.replicate that success throughout the rest of Wales. What we did on
:24:30. > :24:33.Inis Mon, we put forward a clear message to people on the economy and
:24:33. > :24:39.the need for jobs and we offered some hope for the future of young
:24:39. > :24:43.people on that island. I think we can tell that message in other parts
:24:43. > :24:45.of Wales as well. It is about building of the Welsh economy,
:24:45. > :24:49.of Wales as well. It is about building up Welsh economies, and
:24:49. > :24:53.confidence in people, so that we can stand more on our own two feet. That
:24:53. > :24:57.is something that delegates here this weekend will be talking about
:24:57. > :25:05.and we will be thinking about how we can progress our agenda ahead of the
:25:05. > :25:08.2016 National Assembly elections. I understand the Welsh economy has
:25:08. > :25:13.2016 National Assembly elections. I been performing badly,
:25:13. > :25:17.underperforming in the UK. As I understand, Plaid Cymru's economic
:25:17. > :25:21.policies are well to left of Labour, so why would that encourage
:25:21. > :25:31.business to come to Wales if Plaid Cymru is, in effect, a Welsh
:25:31. > :25:35.Socialist party? I think Plaid Cymru's politics reflect the centre
:25:35. > :25:44.of gravity in Welsh politics, to the left of UK politics. That is why the
:25:45. > :25:48.economy is a central priority. We don't have the powers in our
:25:48. > :25:52.National Assembly to be able to affect change in the economy and
:25:52. > :25:57.therefore, getting the tools to do the job of turning around the
:25:57. > :26:00.economic performance has to be number one priority. Since I have
:26:00. > :26:05.been the leader in this party, I have talked about jobs, jobs, jobs,
:26:05. > :26:11.the economy and the need to create a solid infrastructure in Wales so we
:26:11. > :26:16.can build foundations for a six as full future. How are the Welsh
:26:16. > :26:21.lessons going? Say something in Welsh. How about the BBC's Daily
:26:21. > :26:30.Politics is the best programme on British television, or without sound
:26:30. > :26:33.like in Welsh? My lessons are ongoing. I am not fluent by a long
:26:33. > :26:37.way but my daughter is in Welsh ongoing. I am not fluent by a long
:26:37. > :26:42.medium school and she is a very good teacher, actually. That was very
:26:42. > :26:50.impressive. If you said what I asked you to say I could not agree more!
:26:50. > :26:59.Good luck with your conference, thank you for joining us.
:26:59. > :27:08.Is the world about to end? Is the general secretary of the world
:27:08. > :27:15.meteorological Society introducing -- you is the general secretary of
:27:15. > :27:20.the world meet a logical society. There is a high likelihood that
:27:20. > :27:26.changes in our climate system are the influence on global warming. It
:27:26. > :27:31.should serve as yet another wake-up call that our activities to date
:27:31. > :27:37.will have a profound impact on society not only for us but for many
:27:37. > :27:40.generations to come. The world has not been getting warmer recently but
:27:40. > :27:44.it is warmer than it was only several decades ago. How worried
:27:44. > :27:53.should we be about it? Is it worth investing huge sums of money to
:27:53. > :28:06.reverse effects? I am joined by Bjorn Lomborg, who argues this
:28:06. > :28:13.turret distorts the debate. -- this rhetorically distorts the debate. I
:28:13. > :28:17.think it ends up making people less worried in the long run. It makes
:28:17. > :28:20.people feel good, like we really have got to do something, but we
:28:20. > :28:26.have been doing this for 20 years and we have managed to do virtually
:28:26. > :28:33.nothing about climate change. We have made a lot of promises but the
:28:33. > :28:36.world has probably cut carbon emissions about half a percentage
:28:36. > :28:38.point. We have done virtually nothing except spent a lot of
:28:38. > :28:44.money. At the moment it is your view nothing except spent a lot of
:28:44. > :28:50.that climate change, in the sense of the planet getting warmer, is at the
:28:51. > :28:54.moment a net benefit to the planet over all. But I would suggest if it
:28:54. > :29:02.continues to get warm, it's easy to be a benefit. Absolutely, we have
:29:02. > :29:06.looked a lot at the problems and climate is one of them. All of the
:29:06. > :29:17.economic tell at moderate warming is a benefit to the world. -- all of
:29:17. > :29:23.the economics tell us. It is important to recognise that in
:29:23. > :29:27.economical terms it is a spent benefit, we have already got it.
:29:27. > :29:32.What we are talking about is what kind of climate do we want towards
:29:32. > :29:36.the end of the century? It is going to be a negative, so it is a problem
:29:36. > :29:45.we need to tackle. The real issue is, we are tackling it badly. We are
:29:45. > :29:53.spending huge amounts of money, we are estimating $250 billion a year,
:29:53. > :29:56.£170 billion a year, for Europe and yet after having spent all of that
:29:56. > :30:02.money every year for the rest of this century we will have reduced
:30:02. > :30:12.amateurs by one 20th of one degree centigrade. We cannot measure it in
:30:12. > :30:14.100 years. What you have always said is that climate change is happening
:30:14. > :30:16.and that the issue of the debate is that climate change is happening
:30:16. > :30:20.should be about climate change policy. How do you respond to the
:30:20. > :30:26.fact of warming, which we all accept? Do you have high cost and in
:30:26. > :30:31.effective policies or no cost and ineffective policies? On the policy
:30:31. > :30:35.question, a lot of environmentalists have got it wrong. One of the things
:30:35. > :30:39.I find it difficult to reconcile with in terms of the movement is the
:30:39. > :30:47.implications for populations around the world. For instant, --
:30:47. > :30:51.instance, people are in favour of organic food as against GM crops.
:30:51. > :30:55.instance, people are in favour of What would be a low-cost but highly
:30:55. > :31:02.effective solution or response to climate change? We asked 27 top
:31:02. > :31:06.economists that question and they said if you spend the money on the
:31:06. > :31:11.current policies for every pound you spend, you avoid three pence of
:31:11. > :31:16.climate damage. A bad way of spending money. If you spend it on
:31:16. > :31:20.research and development into green energy and make the next generations
:31:20. > :31:27.of energy so cheap everyone will want to buy them for every pound
:31:27. > :31:30.spent you will alloy £11 of damage. -/avoid. You're asking us to invest
:31:30. > :31:38.in something we don't know whether it will come right. We are putting
:31:38. > :31:40.money into wind and solar, because they do provide alternative
:31:40. > :31:44.renewable sources of energy. You're they do provide alternative
:31:44. > :31:50.asking us to put billions into things that may end up delivering
:31:50. > :31:56.nothing. Well, the real choice I think is we are now spending lots of
:31:56. > :32:02.money on things we know are not going to cut very much. Such as?
:32:02. > :32:07.Wind, solar and Biomass. We know that doesn't work that what is the
:32:07. > :32:14.British and German governments think. It will cut a little bit. But
:32:14. > :32:16.probably 3 or 4% of the European emissions. The rest will be exported
:32:16. > :32:20.to China and elsewhere and we will emissions. The rest will be exported
:32:20. > :32:27.end up paying and that is why we say for each spend you -- pound you
:32:27. > :32:33.spent you avoid three pence. But we know if you look at research in
:32:33. > :32:37.agriculture, yes, you don't know if that particular grant will work, if
:32:37. > :32:41.you spend it across a range of different opportunities, some will
:32:41. > :32:47.work. We have just need one or a few to work. There has been a change in
:32:47. > :32:51.the debate and I would suggest the combination of the current hiatus in
:32:52. > :32:57.temperatures rising and the recession that hit everyone after
:32:57. > :33:02.the financial crash in 2008, have made and you see it in the argument
:33:02. > :33:06.over energy businessmans in -- bills in Britain, it is tougher for
:33:06. > :33:10.politicians to get green policies through. Of course this Government
:33:10. > :33:12.said it would be the Greens ever and when David Cameron rebranded himself
:33:12. > :33:15.said it would be the Greens ever and as a modern Conservative people
:33:15. > :33:20.remember he replaced the Conservative torch with a green
:33:20. > :33:24.squiggle and he went and hugged some huskies. We have come a long way
:33:24. > :33:29.from that. Green policies are not attractive. In Britain and in
:33:29. > :33:36.America and China and India, if you want to get elected it is no not by
:33:36. > :33:41.-- not by saying have a green tax and Ed Milliband has a price freeze
:33:41. > :33:46.to say that is where the deis. Green politics have become unfashion nab.
:33:46. > :33:51.That is a shame. There is a way of selling the politics and boosting
:33:51. > :33:57.industry. We will have to leave it there. Thank you. Coming up in a
:33:57. > :34:01.moment it's our monthly look at what's been going on in European
:34:01. > :34:08.politics. For now it's time to say goodbye to Amol Rajan. So for the
:34:08. > :34:10.next half an hour we're going to be focussing on Europe. We'll be
:34:10. > :34:13.discussing the European Parliament's decision to increase the size of
:34:13. > :34:17.warnings on packets of cigarettes, the role of Europol in policing
:34:17. > :34:19.across the EU, and a new border surveillance programme the stop
:34:19. > :34:21.illegal immigrants. First though here's our guide to the latest from
:34:21. > :34:37.Europe - in just 60 seconds. The hours pilots will work with
:34:37. > :34:46.changed after new rules on flight and rest times. Despite lobbying
:34:46. > :34:53.from pilots. Jose Manuel Barroso visited Lampedusa after the disaster
:34:53. > :34:59.where hundreds of migrants died. It will be easier for doctors, and
:34:59. > :35:04.nurses to get their qualifications recognised in other EU countries a
:35:04. > :35:12.MEPs voted for a European professional qualifications card.
:35:12. > :35:19.The Pakistani schoolgirl who was shot by the Taliban has been awarded
:35:19. > :35:25.a peace prize. The European Parliament voted for new laws
:35:25. > :35:28.requiring exploration for shale gas should face the same regulation as a
:35:28. > :35:39.full-scale oil drilling. And with us for the next 30 minutes
:35:39. > :35:43.I've been joined by two former Tory MEPs who now belong to different
:35:43. > :35:49.parties. Edward McMillan-Scott is now a Liberal Democrat MEP and Roger
:35:49. > :35:53.Helmer represents UKIP. Let's take a look at one of those stories in more
:35:53. > :35:55.detail, the decision by the European Parliament to tighten up
:35:55. > :36:05.environmental controls on fracking for gas. Is that sensible? It is not
:36:05. > :36:10.sensible to apply those rules to exploratory drilling. It will hold
:36:10. > :36:15.back exploration and will be damaging to our economy and stand in
:36:15. > :36:19.the way of recovery and it is a challenge for David Cameron. He said
:36:19. > :36:25.he won't allow European rules to stand in the way of British shale
:36:25. > :36:33.gas. It is up to him to make good on that. What do you think I think the
:36:33. > :36:40.impact on euro has been benign. We have seen the Chernobyl disaster and
:36:40. > :36:44.these things can happen. Regulation is important. We only have to look
:36:44. > :36:47.around and see how bad other countries are. Since fracking, the
:36:47. > :36:52.environmental impact is in the country where the fracking takes
:36:52. > :36:54.place. No, the environment is universal. But where you put the
:36:54. > :37:03.place. No, the environment is drills, if I put a drill into more
:37:03. > :37:07.com bay it shouzn't affect Marseille. We are concerned that the
:37:07. > :37:11.rules for applying the technology are sound. That is both... Why isn't
:37:11. > :37:15.it the job of Westminster to do that. It is partly their job and
:37:15. > :37:20.partly the job of the European Union. What we are doing is looking
:37:20. > :37:24.at the way, the best practice and that is what has been arrived at.
:37:24. > :37:29.There is a general consensus from that. What is important for people
:37:29. > :37:33.to understand is the reason they're getting massive energy bills and
:37:33. > :37:40.they're going up, or one of the main reasons, is the European Union's
:37:40. > :37:47.green pretensions. That is putting this cost on energy. Westminster has
:37:47. > :37:51.been putting costs on energy. They're following Europe. Our carbon
:37:51. > :37:57.floor price was set by Westminster and is higher than the one set by
:37:57. > :38:01.Brussels. Europe started with this energy package and Westminster has
:38:01. > :38:04.made it worse. It is fair to say that Europe leads the world in
:38:04. > :38:10.environmental policy and we are seeing that year after year. And the
:38:10. > :38:16.most expensive energy. Yes, but it is the healthiest part of planet and
:38:16. > :38:21.we should take some pride. And we have energy poverty. The industry
:38:21. > :38:25.commissioner said a few weeks ago that we are seeing an industrial
:38:25. > :38:31.massacre in Europe, because of high price of energy. They're starting to
:38:31. > :38:38.realise that. I wanted a few words on that. But we had a pretty good
:38:38. > :38:41.debate on it. How much choice should smokers have about what cigarettes
:38:41. > :38:44.they can buy? What if their preferred packet of fags is seen to
:38:44. > :38:47.be attractive to children and teenagers? Should it be banned? The
:38:47. > :38:51.European Parliament has been voting on a new tobacco directive this week
:38:51. > :38:54.- with some pretty big implications regarding health and smokers' rights
:38:54. > :39:07.for its 500 million citizens. Jo Coburn reports from Strasbourg. Jack
:39:07. > :39:15.Brel and others, there were vs there was a time when French culture was
:39:15. > :39:19.linked to the moody, smoky charms of the cigarette. But times have moved
:39:19. > :39:23.on haven't they? Try lighting up these days in a French cafe and you
:39:23. > :39:27.will soon find out. But there are still concerns about the lure of
:39:27. > :39:31.tobacco for young people. With health groups claiming that there
:39:31. > :39:39.are specific products on the markets like these targeted at teenagers.
:39:39. > :39:43.Elegant, slim line cigarettes and some are even chocolate flavoured.
:39:43. > :39:49.It was appropriate then that here in the heart of France MEPs gathered to
:39:49. > :39:54.vote op measures to make -- on measures to make smoking less
:39:54. > :40:02.attractive to the young. But MEPs agreed to health warnings covering
:40:02. > :40:07.65% of the cigarette packet. But refuse the original proposal of 75%.
:40:07. > :40:15.They backed a bap on flavoured cigarettes, but with a five year
:40:15. > :40:22.delay for menthol cigarettes and banned the packs of ten and rejected
:40:22. > :40:28.a proposal to treat electronic cigarettes as medicines. We don't
:40:28. > :40:33.want to see young people starting to smoke. It is bad for their health
:40:33. > :40:37.and their purses and that is why it is important that we have measures
:40:37. > :40:41.to make it less attractive to young people. This is Parliament's first
:40:41. > :40:45.reading of the directive and it could go through by next year. But
:40:45. > :40:51.it could take two more years to become law across the 28 member
:40:51. > :40:57.states. Tobacco firms will not give up without a fight. Smoking is a
:40:57. > :41:04.fact of life. People smoke. And the choice isn't between do we allow
:41:04. > :41:09.smoking or stop it or do we ban things. The choice is between do we
:41:09. > :41:15.want the cigarette market to be supplied by legal businesses, who
:41:15. > :41:20.obey the laws and pay taxes, or do we want the market to be supplied by
:41:20. > :41:28.criminals operating on the black market? The EU estimates that almost
:41:28. > :41:31.700,000 Europeans die from smoking-related illnesses each year.
:41:31. > :41:34.700,000 Europeans die from But not everyone agrees that
:41:34. > :41:42.government should interfere. I think it is frustrating to see that the EU
:41:42. > :41:46.is increasingly infringing on citizens' private life. That is what
:41:46. > :41:51.is happening with something which is considered a general normal
:41:51. > :41:56.behaviour to smoke, it is all right. Everyone knows it might not be
:41:56. > :42:05.healthy, as it is to have a glass of wine, but these are choice of our
:42:05. > :42:08.life. Strasbourg is quiet as MEPs head home to rake over the ashes of
:42:08. > :42:13.life. Strasbourg is quiet as MEPs this week, but it is not clear
:42:13. > :42:26.whether this tale of hazy love and loathing has reached the end
:42:26. > :42:30.credits. Jo Coburn reporting. And we've been joined from Sheffield by
:42:30. > :42:32.the Labour MEP Linda McAvan who as 'rapporteur' took the new
:42:32. > :42:40.legislation through the European Parliament. Is it possible to say,
:42:40. > :42:44.put a figure on how much this will save EU health budgets? Well, the
:42:44. > :42:49.amount, the cost of actually treating people who have illness
:42:50. > :42:55.from smoking goes into huge figures of billions of pounds and euros and
:42:55. > :42:58.so I mean that is one thing. But of course the main point of the
:42:58. > :43:03.legislation was to stop a new generation of smokers from starting
:43:03. > :43:07.to smoke. That is why it is about taking these products off the market
:43:07. > :43:12.and putting young people off smoking. You didn't manage to ban
:43:12. > :43:18.these cigarettes, why was that? We never wanted to ban e-cigarettes.
:43:18. > :43:23.The companies were saying this to people. Nobody was proposing to ban
:43:23. > :43:29.them. The debate is about how to regulate the cigarettes. What sort
:43:29. > :43:33.of, if we have a new product, what the checks and balances to make sure
:43:33. > :43:38.the products do what they say on the tin and they're safe and meet
:43:38. > :43:43.certain product standards when the UK regulator spent three years
:43:43. > :43:53.looking at these, they found that many products were -- substandard.
:43:53. > :43:58.Slim cigarettes, the proposal was to take them off the market, because
:43:58. > :44:04.they're a misleading prushgt and -- product and they're aimed at young
:44:04. > :44:08.women. We didn't get support from Conservative and UKIP and Liberal
:44:08. > :44:15.Democrat MEPs. There is already a massive black market in cigarettes.
:44:15. > :44:19.What is to stop that black market getting bigger now that these
:44:19. > :44:24.tougher regulations are coming in? The new law puts in place measures
:44:24. > :44:30.to combat illegal traffic of cigarettes by requiring more track
:44:30. > :44:34.and traces on cigarettes. But yesterday the House of Commons
:44:34. > :44:38.published a report from the Public Accounts Committee that says the
:44:38. > :44:42.companies are involved in encouraging smuggling by
:44:42. > :44:46.oversupplying in eastern Europe and having them reexported to other
:44:46. > :44:49.countries. The companies have been involved in this before and they
:44:49. > :44:54.were fined for this. So the measures we we have put in place yesterday,
:44:54. > :44:58.if nay become law will -- if they become law will improve things. I
:44:58. > :45:09.don't understand why the industry is lobbying against them. Do you
:45:09. > :45:14.support the changes? I hate smoking but I also resent people who smoke
:45:14. > :45:18.and their rights. I think we are beyond the point of balance. I think
:45:18. > :45:22.it has come to absurd lengths. What is the point of banning menthol
:45:22. > :45:30.cigarettes, largely smoked by older people? A cigarettes are used by
:45:30. > :45:34.people who smoke and want to stop smoking. The wide availability will
:45:34. > :45:40.save tens of thousands of lives, yet the European Parliament, Surrey, the
:45:40. > :45:54.commission, was trying to limit them to pharmacies. It was not a band,
:45:54. > :45:59.but it was close to a band. I think they have responsibility for public
:45:59. > :46:03.health and that is why they have acted. I agree that the 700,000
:46:03. > :46:16.people dying in Europe every year from lung cancer and many other
:46:16. > :46:20.diseases which are the product of smoking. I think e-cigarettes are a
:46:20. > :46:23.product which needs regulation and our approach was allow them into the
:46:23. > :46:33.market on the same basis as cigarettes. We do not want
:46:34. > :46:39.flavours. Anything that is an inducement to young people to smoke
:46:39. > :46:45.should be prevented. What is your final response? Neither mentioned it
:46:45. > :46:50.is children who start smoking, not adults. The key aim was to tech
:46:50. > :46:56.products of the market that attract children. Every day, 570 children in
:46:56. > :46:59.the UK start smoking. The cigarette companies know what they are doing,
:46:59. > :47:06.they target children. Menthol cigarettes are a key gateway had a
:47:06. > :47:12.-- product for young people and you inhale more deeply with them. This
:47:12. > :47:19.is not a nanny state measure, this is a very important public health
:47:19. > :47:25.measure. Josie Manuel Barroso was heckled
:47:25. > :47:31.this week by residents on the islands of Lampedusa initially . --
:47:31. > :47:37.the island of Lampedusa. He was visiting after the migrant boat
:47:37. > :47:41.disaster when 300 Africans died after their boat sank off the island
:47:41. > :47:47.last Thursday. The EU Commissioner for Home Affairs, Cecilia Malmstrom,
:47:47. > :47:52.said Europe needed to act together to prevent more deaths. We need to
:47:52. > :47:57.do everything we can to prevent tragedies such as this one from
:47:57. > :48:01.happening again. It calls for EU action. We need to act in the
:48:01. > :48:07.short-term, medium-term and long-term. I proposed to launch a
:48:07. > :48:12.wide search and rescue operation covering the whole of the
:48:12. > :48:19.Mediterranean, from Spain to Cyprus, to save lives and detect
:48:19. > :48:26.votes in time -- detect boats in time to prevent tragedies. There
:48:26. > :48:31.will be a new surveillance system called EUROSUR. They say it will
:48:31. > :48:36.help combat illegal emigration and cross-border time, but will also
:48:36. > :48:42.help to save migrants' lives. Yann Mulder has been guiding all of this
:48:42. > :48:54.through the European Parliament and joins me now. How will EUROSUR work?
:48:54. > :48:59.EUROSUR will work by setting up member states to gather information
:49:00. > :49:10.EUROSUR will work by setting up from all of the agencies and
:49:10. > :49:16.governments to do with protecting external borders. It will be sent to
:49:16. > :49:23.Frontex, who will communicate it to other participating countries. What
:49:23. > :49:29.is the purpose of EUROSUR? Is it to protect EU borders and make them
:49:29. > :49:35.more secure from illegal immigration? Or is it to stop a
:49:35. > :49:40.tragedy like Lampedusa? All of them. It is preventing irregular
:49:40. > :49:44.immigration, cross-border crime, and at the insistence of the European
:49:44. > :49:47.Parliament we have very much emphasised that it should play a
:49:47. > :49:57.role in saving the lives of people. But the main aim is for strong
:49:57. > :50:05.external borders in Europe inside. Everywhere in Europe, you can travel
:50:05. > :50:08.freely. That means if you do not protect the external borders in a
:50:08. > :50:18.good way, if you have a weak spot, all of the year -- European member
:50:18. > :50:23.states need to be well informed of the state of the external borders.
:50:23. > :50:27.The EUROSUR pilot started in 2010. Italy was included in the pilot but
:50:27. > :50:35.it did not stop Lampedusa, did it? Is that not a worried that it will
:50:35. > :50:40.not work? -- is that not a worry? I have asked myself that question. We
:50:40. > :50:44.can only say that it is not yet completely completed and we have to
:50:44. > :50:50.wait before it is fully functional, and then we can see the results. Let
:50:50. > :50:55.me bring in my guests. Edward McMillan-Scott, if more ships are
:50:55. > :51:02.detected, more people detained, will countries be able to cope with what
:51:02. > :51:08.will become asylum cases? There are already many cases in Europe.
:51:08. > :51:17.272,000. Some countries taking a lot more than other countries. I think
:51:17. > :51:21.it is important that Europe should work together on this, because after
:51:21. > :51:26.all, we are a single market, trying to create a single market which
:51:26. > :51:32.works for everybody. On the other hand, there are countries where
:51:32. > :51:36.there are such desperation that people will track across Africa to
:51:36. > :51:43.get into a rickety boat and find themselves drowning off Lampedusa.
:51:43. > :51:48.This is a tragedy. One of the EU agencies, Frontex, has saved 60,000
:51:48. > :51:58.lives in the editor in ian. It is quite extraordinary the number of
:51:58. > :52:00.vessels coming and going. Europe's eastern and southern borders are not
:52:00. > :52:05.vessels coming and going. Europe's great. If there can be a way to
:52:05. > :52:09.prevent that flow, that is a good political idea but we have no
:52:09. > :52:14.confidence in that. We are glad we are outside the Schengen area. We
:52:14. > :52:17.could criticise the British Government for not doing it right
:52:17. > :52:22.but we must rely on national control of our borders. We cannot rely on
:52:22. > :52:29.poorest borders in Europe and then free movement. -- porous borders.
:52:29. > :52:36.These collaborations between police forces are essential to the exchange
:52:36. > :52:43.of information. Thank you for joining us on Daily Politics. Do you
:52:43. > :52:58.know what Europol does? If not, take a look at this.
:52:58. > :53:02.Welcome to the most secure building in the Netherlands, the offices of
:53:02. > :53:08.Europol in the Hague. It is home to 800 officials who helped police
:53:08. > :53:13.forces in member states fight crimes across borders. We are not a
:53:13. > :53:17.European FBI, we do not have those powers neither do we claim them. We
:53:17. > :53:20.are on intelligence centre that can exchange intelligence in real time
:53:20. > :53:24.very quickly and give the intelligence leads to the National
:53:24. > :53:30.crime agency in the UK, for example, so they can track down and apprehend
:53:30. > :53:39.those criminals. Busting drugs rings is a speciality, hence Europol's own
:53:39. > :53:45.replica meth lab. The this is a typical amphetamine lab based on
:53:45. > :53:51.equipment and chemicals. So that is the Breaking Bad stuff. What is
:53:51. > :54:00.this? This is a machine that can produce tablets. You can tell that
:54:00. > :54:06.this is straightaway. You like this is a typical indoor cannabis
:54:06. > :54:12.cultivation tent. You can buy it for a few hundred euros and start
:54:12. > :54:20.cultivating cannabis. This room is a faradays cage, which means no
:54:20. > :54:26.signals penetrate. Inside, they scrub hard drives and telephones.
:54:26. > :54:29.signals penetrate. Inside, they This forensics expert is a pro at
:54:29. > :54:39.spotting fake euros seized every year. What generally goes wrong with
:54:39. > :54:46.counterfeits is having something to compare it to. If you put it next to
:54:46. > :54:50.a genuine banknote, you find differences. In real life it does
:54:50. > :54:54.not work like that. Up here, they track of counterfeiters who will
:54:54. > :55:01.make knock-offs of anything. Yes, anything. Any kind of product can be
:55:01. > :55:05.counterfeit. We realise that food is also a type of product which is
:55:05. > :55:08.easily and often counterfeit it. also a type of product which is
:55:08. > :55:48.Counterfeit food, how does that work? For instance,
:55:49. > :55:54.crime more difficult, less efficient and probably more costly as well.
:55:54. > :55:55.Europol say an analysis of 600 high-profile cases showed that half
:55:55. > :56:05.of them had links to the UK. high-profile cases showed that half
:56:05. > :56:11.That was Adam being taken away in a police car! We have not seen him
:56:11. > :56:17.since. Why should we not cooperate more with Europol? Crime has gone
:56:17. > :56:28.continental, don't rhyme fighters need to go continental? --
:56:28. > :56:30.crime-fighters. We have no problem with cross-border crime
:56:31. > :56:33.collaboration. We have an objection to the idea of Brussels taking
:56:33. > :56:37.control and we see that in the report, that they are going to set
:56:37. > :56:42.down what information we must give. The British Government, credit to it
:56:42. > :56:45.in this case, has said no, we are unhappy about that. They are quite
:56:45. > :56:52.right too and I hope they will hold off. I think that these
:56:52. > :56:59.international corporations, such as Interpol or Europol, are very
:56:59. > :57:03.valuable. Europol is trying to protect the internal market, all of
:57:03. > :57:07.the infringements like for example counterfeiting, which Interpol does
:57:07. > :57:10.not do. We have got our own Interpol, if you like, within the
:57:10. > :57:18.not do. We have got our own European Union. There is room for
:57:18. > :57:24.both. Europol is a centre where excellent research can be done and
:57:24. > :57:28.where shared information happens, and so on. That is why it is
:57:28. > :57:32.important we do not lose the argument on Europe to the extreme
:57:32. > :57:40.parties like UKIP. Basically they want something which doesn't exist.
:57:40. > :57:52.They think that somehow the UK must give more away. You know that is
:57:52. > :57:57.nonsense, I know -- do not know why you have come here. On Tuesday Nick
:57:57. > :58:04.Clegg said leaving the EU would be economic suicide. We need to get
:58:04. > :58:08.these arguments across. Europol has actually managed to lead to the
:58:08. > :58:13.arrests of several hundred child molesters... You have given us a
:58:13. > :58:15.flavour of the debate to come. That is it for today. Thank you to my
:58:15. > :58:19.guests. Goodbye.