:00:34. > :01:01.tell us why he disagrees. Police officers accused of misleading MPs
:01:02. > :01:04.over Plebgate will be hauled before Parliament and told to apologise or
:01:05. > :01:09.risk jail. We'll speak to the Committee chairman. Ed Miliband says
:01:10. > :01:13.he would offer firms a 12-month tax break if they agree to pay the
:01:14. > :01:24.so-called "living wage" - so would that cut benefits? Or cut jobs? And
:01:25. > :01:33.which country has the most sexist Parliament?
:01:34. > :01:40.All of that in the next hour. And with us today is Axelle Lemaire -
:01:41. > :01:41.she's the French MP for our very own constituency here in...Northern
:01:42. > :02:09.Europe. constituency here in...Northern
:02:10. > :02:14.saying they approved of him. Why is he is so unpopular? I wish I knew
:02:15. > :02:20.the answer W would tell him! I would, of course. The left in power
:02:21. > :02:25.has implement it reforms which had not been done in the past, and maybe
:02:26. > :02:28.that only ask could do without having the country demonstrating in
:02:29. > :02:33.the streets. We are reducing the public ever sit, we are changing
:02:34. > :02:37.schools, we are reforming the labour market, bringing more flexibility,
:02:38. > :02:45.we are reforming the pensions system, which is terrific tricky and
:02:46. > :02:51.difficult. But people do not see the results, what they see is their
:02:52. > :02:52.taxes going up and a president who has great capacities to compromise,
:02:53. > :03:12.but when it has great capacities to compromise,
:03:13. > :03:18.second day of his term, wasn't he, his popularity just died. Is it
:03:19. > :03:25.because of his programme of tax rises? Farmers have protested, and
:03:26. > :03:29.truck drivers, over the eco-Mac tax, for example, and they want to see
:03:30. > :03:33.more of a balance, with public expenditure getting cut. You have
:03:34. > :03:37.got the wrong programme? Well, we are discussing the finance bill at
:03:38. > :03:46.the moment. When you look at the budget for 2014, 80% of the budget,
:03:47. > :03:52.of the savings, will be in cuts in public expenses, it is only 20%
:03:53. > :03:56.coming from tax rises. So, the public perception is clearly wrong.
:03:57. > :04:01.Also, people do not make the differentiation between local taxes
:04:02. > :04:21.and national taxes. So, last year, it was the opposite, it was two
:04:22. > :04:23.and national taxes. So, last year, have had to scrap higher levies on
:04:24. > :04:29.individual savings because of protests, a potential strike in top
:04:30. > :04:33.football clubs protesting at the 75% tax levy on incomes of more than 1
:04:34. > :04:38.million euros, these are big Rob 's. But I think it is in the
:04:39. > :04:42.Financial Times today, describing this as a U-turn, but we are in the
:04:43. > :04:48.process of discussion over the budget. To me, as an MP, I see it as
:04:49. > :04:54.Parliamentary democracy. -- these are big problems. We are just saying
:04:55. > :04:58.what we think should be improved, so it is a discussion. But in the end,
:04:59. > :05:03.in a couple of weeks time, the budget will be voted on. What about
:05:04. > :05:06.this idea of consensus as you said yourself that he is not going for
:05:07. > :05:12.the headlines, but he is described as a man of indecision, U-turns are
:05:13. > :05:13.mentioned, that he cannot make a decision without speaking to
:05:14. > :05:34.everybody decision without speaking to
:05:35. > :05:39.market, it was not an easy task. But he spoke with all the unions, all of
:05:40. > :05:43.them, and they came up with a solution, which was the first time
:05:44. > :05:49.in 30 years that an agreement could be breached. But then people do not
:05:50. > :05:53.necessarily see that. But I assume that in the long-term, the results
:05:54. > :05:58.will be positive. I am sure you will hope so, before the next election,
:05:59. > :06:01.of course. Looking at elections, what about the threat from the
:06:02. > :06:05.right, from the national front, who seem to be gaining in support in
:06:06. > :06:13.some of the national by-elections, that is as a result of Francois
:06:14. > :06:17.Hollande's policies, isn't it? This is a phenomenon that we see across
:06:18. > :06:23.Europe, I am afraid, the rise of populist parties, of extremism. But
:06:24. > :06:42.it is particularly true in France, and especially at the
:06:43. > :06:44.it is particularly true in France, people are racist. We think
:06:45. > :06:48.immigration is positive for the country, when it is well controlled.
:06:49. > :06:52.The other thing is to have an economic and social agenda, and
:06:53. > :07:04.prove that we can help raise living standards, help put growth back into
:07:05. > :07:11.the economy. We are out of recession for the last two months, I think,
:07:12. > :07:15.and the rise in unemployment is decreasing, at least. So, we aren't
:07:16. > :07:19.starting to see the first positive results of what we are trying to do.
:07:20. > :07:30.And you think that might turn it around? What about his relationship
:07:31. > :07:32.with Angela Merkel? It is, as the Financial Times says, a bit of a
:07:33. > :07:53.one-woman show, isn't it? Financial Times says, a bit of a
:07:54. > :07:56.is a very well-balanced relationship, with all of the
:07:57. > :08:00.different ministers. For example, the economy minister, he is on the
:08:01. > :08:04.phone every single day with his German counterpart, and we work
:08:05. > :08:08.together very well. So I think between what we read in the press
:08:09. > :08:15.and the reality of the negotiations, there is quite a difference.
:08:16. > :08:18.You will not have forgotten, if you are a regular viewer of the
:08:19. > :08:22.programme, that Britain could be on the way to a referendum on our EU
:08:23. > :08:25.membership after the next election. Whether the relationship is good or
:08:26. > :08:28.bad for Britain is an issue that divides politicians, the public and
:08:29. > :08:31.businesses. Well today, the largest business group, the CBI, is holding
:08:32. > :08:35.its annual conference and it has decided that the country is better
:08:36. > :08:38.off inside the EU than out. The group says that the net benefit of
:08:39. > :08:42.EU membership to the UK could be more than ?62 billion, that's ?3,000
:08:43. > :08:43.a year to every household, because membership has opened up trade with
:08:44. > :09:09.the EU and But industry isn't exactly full of
:09:10. > :09:15.starry-eyed Europhiles, and the CBI also says that if we do stay in then
:09:16. > :09:17."reforms are urgently needed". This assessment has already been
:09:18. > :09:26.challenged, with UKIP leader Nigel Farage saying...
:09:27. > :09:31.Well, joining us now from the CBI conference in London is Michael
:09:32. > :09:41.Rake, the president of the CBI and chairman of BT. Welcome to the
:09:42. > :09:46.programme. You were sharing a platform with the Prime Minister
:09:47. > :09:52.earlier. Is the CBI's view on Belgrade ship the same as David
:09:53. > :10:12.Cameron's? Based on a huge project we have carried out over the last
:10:13. > :10:15.Cameron's? Based on a huge project engaged. Have you accurately being
:10:16. > :10:28.able to gauge the level of euro scepticism amongst your members?
:10:29. > :10:34.Well, no, in the business community, it is very clear, we want to remain
:10:35. > :10:38.in the European Union. We have to be competitive. It is a hugely
:10:39. > :10:42.important trade area with many bilateral agreements, including some
:10:43. > :10:46.extremely important ones coming up. We understand the frustrations of
:10:47. > :10:49.businesses small and large about unnecessary regulation, whether it
:10:50. > :10:54.comes from Brussels or London. Whilst we need regulation, it needs
:10:55. > :10:57.to be effective and it does not need to be burdensome, particularly when
:10:58. > :10:58.we have the beginnings of a recovery, and we have to make sure
:10:59. > :11:23.this recovery is sustainable. recovery, and we have to make sure
:11:24. > :11:27.should be a referendum is a we in the CBI are very clear... Is it not
:11:28. > :11:32.a question for business as well? If you are saying it is critical, and
:11:33. > :11:36.John Cridland said there is no credible alternative to being in the
:11:37. > :11:42.EU, so surely business has got to make a play in political terms to
:11:43. > :11:47.stay in the EU? I am sorry, I can hardly hear you, but I think you
:11:48. > :11:51.were asking about alternatives. In the work we did, we have looked at
:11:52. > :11:55.alternatives, and we think the regional example, the Swiss
:11:56. > :11:59.example, would not work, we would be to remove, we would have to bear the
:12:00. > :12:03.costs of compliance without any influence. We do not think that is
:12:04. > :12:08.the way to go, when we are trying to come out of this very long downturn.
:12:09. > :12:14.We want to create conditions for investment and trade in the European
:12:15. > :12:31.Union and across the world. Whether it
:12:32. > :12:38.Union and across the world. Whether business must simply state what the
:12:39. > :12:43.obligations might be. Michael Rake, thank you very much. Sorry you could
:12:44. > :12:46.not hear us but we could hear you loud and clear, which is always a
:12:47. > :12:52.bonus. We're joined now by the UKIP leader Nigel Farage - and Axelle
:12:53. > :12:57.Lemaire is still with us. Well, that is a bit of a blow, isn't it,
:12:58. > :13:00.because not only does he say the majority of his members, businesses,
:13:01. > :13:05.backed the idea of staying in the EU, but that it is absolutely
:13:06. > :13:10.critical, and it would be a huge mistake to leave? Let's remember,
:13:11. > :13:14.the CBI is big business, it is corporatism, it is effectively an
:13:15. > :13:19.arm of government. Most of the firms in the CBI love the EU. It is
:13:20. > :13:23.fantastic for them. They go to the commission, they help the commission
:13:24. > :13:41.draft rules, and those rules stop small competitors
:13:42. > :13:45.draft rules, and those rules stop to throw a few small businesses in,
:13:46. > :13:50.knowing that when another poll was done, more than 1000 firms, with a
:13:51. > :13:55.genuine spread of large, medium and small businesses, half of them
:13:56. > :13:59.said, the costs of the single market outweigh any benefit. This CBI,
:14:00. > :14:02.these were the same people 12 years ago saying we should join the euro.
:14:03. > :14:06.They were wrong about that and they are wrong about this. So you are
:14:07. > :14:13.dismissing the 240,000 businessmen buzz of the CBI, then, does their
:14:14. > :14:16.voice not matter? Again, what is interesting is that even within the
:14:17. > :14:21.CBI, the cracks are beginning to show. There is a significant
:14:22. > :14:25.minority of members who Digby Jones, who was the Director-General
:14:26. > :14:29.a few years ago, has now come to the view that reform is impossible
:14:30. > :14:33.within this European Union, and the sooner we have a referendum on it,
:14:34. > :14:52.the better. Is it not true, Axelle Lemaire,
:14:53. > :14:56.the better. Is it not true, Axelle to pay for membership? They bring it
:14:57. > :15:00.is stronger with Britain in. It is this old debate sounds surreal to
:15:01. > :15:04.me. If I wanted to be cynical, I would say please, leave this, we
:15:05. > :15:08.will help the French business, because you run with of our main
:15:09. > :15:14.competitor, if you are out you are out of the picture. We are your
:15:15. > :15:17.biggest export market. The British market is absolutely crucial for
:15:18. > :15:20.France, and for Germany, we are the biggest export market in the world
:15:21. > :15:24.for those two countries and we will go on, doing business, regardless
:15:25. > :15:28.whether we are in a political union. That an argument for reform which is
:15:29. > :15:32.David Cameron is saying, if as you say we are so important from a trade
:15:33. > :15:37.point of view, that is, that is the leverage for reform. It could be but
:15:38. > :15:43.the only way a negotiation is would work you walk in carrying a big
:15:44. > :16:02.stick and you say give me X, y and Z or we are leaving. The
:16:03. > :16:05.stick and you say give me X, y and Z thedown you nay say they have looked
:16:06. > :16:09.at the trading alternative, they have looked at Norway, Switzerland
:16:10. > :16:15.and the benefits of leaving just aren't that good. We would have no
:16:16. > :16:19.influence and we would have the costs Nay talked about the rest of
:16:20. > :16:23.the world, and the Swiss model. Switzerland has got more trade deals
:16:24. > :16:28.with other parts of the world than we do as members of the European
:16:29. > :16:32.Union. It took nine years for them to renegotiate access to the single
:16:33. > :16:37.market. Nine year sas long time. Switzerland are rich, they have got
:16:38. > :16:41.more trade deals globally and the Swiss have recognised that Europe is
:16:42. > :16:43.not if economic future of the world. We have to be global not just
:16:44. > :16:50.European. What do you say to that? On reform,
:16:51. > :16:52.what I hear here in this country, is that we need to put to tackle the
:16:53. > :17:13.red tape, put down that we need to put to tackle the
:17:14. > :17:20.more developed. What is the problem with e-commerce at the moment, we
:17:21. > :17:25.have 28 different states, applying their own regulations, so Europe is
:17:26. > :17:28.good in the sense it brings agreement. It was used for
:17:29. > :17:32.environmental legislation and the reality is we finished up with
:17:33. > :17:36.thousands of new laws, coming over the course of the last few year,
:17:37. > :17:40.some Governments interpret them rather more fully and wholly than
:17:41. > :17:46.others, but the fact is the source of legislation is Brussels. Do you
:17:47. > :17:51.disagree, and can you, you don't have to, but can you point to the
:17:52. > :17:56.fact that this ?62 billion in net benefit from EU membership, they are
:17:57. > :18:03.confident about that figure. I have never heard such rubbish. You can't
:18:04. > :18:22.say the CBI... They are discredited because they wanted us to join
:18:23. > :18:26.say the CBI... They are discredited can't guarantee there wouldn't be
:18:27. > :18:31.tariffed on 90% of exports If Mr Hollande wants French unemployment
:18:32. > :18:37.to rocket he can consider tariffs. The German car industry is powful
:18:38. > :18:40.within lobbying, they wouldn't allow Angela Merkel to contemplate
:18:41. > :18:45.tariffs. Do you think that is true? I think you are missing the point.
:18:46. > :18:50.Our priority is to be in a strong position enough, top negotiate a
:18:51. > :18:56.good transatlantic partnership with the United States, and we are very
:18:57. > :19:01.conscious we wouldn't be able do that these as a single country. It
:19:02. > :19:07.is Europe with its 500 million customer, in one single market, in
:19:08. > :19:10.faith of the US that can negotiate in a proper position. Switzerland
:19:11. > :19:12.has done that with China. Iceland has done a free trade deal with
:19:13. > :19:32.China and they have 300,000 people. China and they have 300,000 people.
:19:33. > :19:37.the particular situations on the type of goods, the whole... You are
:19:38. > :19:41.right the rules would change. We could scrap a whole load of
:19:42. > :19:44.employment regulations on small industry, we could look at
:19:45. > :19:49.environmental legislation more sensibly. Companies need stability.
:19:50. > :19:56.You would re-open the whole book of negotiation and rules, it would
:19:57. > :20:00.bring so much uncertainty. When productions fallen by 50%, is
:20:01. > :20:04.stability being suck in a currency that is 20% overvalued for France
:20:05. > :20:09.now? If that is stability I don't want it. If we are the fifth biggest
:20:10. > :20:14.power, you are the six St. On that, oh dear. They always do. Don't they.
:20:15. > :20:20.Thank you very much. Now, officers accused of giving
:20:21. > :20:22.misleading accounts of a meeting with Andrew Mitchell are facing an
:20:23. > :20:24.investigation by the police Watchdog. They will be called back
:20:25. > :20:45.investigation by the police I have seen in 25 years and I have
:20:46. > :20:51.been a Select Committee chairman myself. It hinges on the not telling
:20:52. > :20:55.of the truth, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth is
:20:56. > :21:00.central to our judicial system and is the core of policing, and on two
:21:01. > :21:03.occasion, these police officers have plainly not told the truth. So that
:21:04. > :21:10.is why they have been recalled, which is unusual, to say the least,
:21:11. > :21:14.and that is why I think the IPCC has takesen over the inquiry -- taken
:21:15. > :21:18.over the inquiry and said it was fine but the conclusions are wrong,
:21:19. > :21:21.and we are going to prejudge them. I am joined by the chairman of the
:21:22. > :21:25.Home Affairs Select Committee Keith Vaz. Welcome to the programme. You
:21:26. > :21:28.believe these police officers lied to you and your committee It is
:21:29. > :21:31.important they come before the committee, and explain why the
:21:32. > :21:53.evidence they gave to us did not -- sergeant. He did not
:21:54. > :21:58.disclose the fact he has 13 previous allegations of misconduct, and in
:21:59. > :22:03.respect of DC Hinton when asked about a reference to Teresa May he
:22:04. > :22:06.said the transcript contained type graphical error, so what that
:22:07. > :22:11.affected of course was the credibility of the answers they gave
:22:12. > :22:14.us and therefore in effect it might affect the credibility of what they
:22:15. > :22:19.said previously. So we are talking about their credibility, you are not
:22:20. > :22:23.expecting them to radically change what they said, with regard to the
:22:24. > :22:26.meeting they had with Andrew Mitchell. We will have to see what
:22:27. > :22:29.they say, of course they are at liberty to say to the committee
:22:30. > :22:36.anything they want to, about what happened at that meeting, but as you
:22:37. > :22:40.know, we recommended specifically that there should be a case to
:22:41. > :22:42.answer, for misconduct, the IPCC has worked with great speed to make sure
:22:43. > :23:01.that there is going to be a hear, worked with great speed to make sure
:23:02. > :23:05.hear from these officer, we will hear from the IPCC, because of
:23:06. > :23:09.course when they came before us, they said we can't look at this
:23:10. > :23:13.again, they then looked at our report and decided they could look
:23:14. > :23:18.at it again, we want to know why. Do you think we will get to the bottom
:23:19. > :23:21.of this? After all these Select Committee hearings, the Independent
:23:22. > :23:25.Police Complaints Commission, now saying they will look at this
:23:26. > :23:30.particular case, we still haven't had a response, of course, from the
:23:31. > :23:35.CPS over the actual altercation and incident itself. To the lay man, it
:23:36. > :23:40.must seem ridiculous in terms of testify time and resources that have
:23:41. > :23:45.gone into this? Absolutely. When the police can conduct a murder
:23:46. > :23:51.investigation very very quickly, one of the forces was the West Midlands
:23:52. > :24:10.Police who centsly investigated a person -- recently, a person
:24:11. > :24:13.Police who centsly investigated a third of a million pounds and
:24:14. > :24:17.hundreds of police officers have been involved. Yes, I hope we will
:24:18. > :24:22.have closure, as far as the Select Committee is concerned, we have a
:24:23. > :24:25.degree of closure, we felt it was important that this should be done
:24:26. > :24:30.independently and now the IPCC will be conducting this investigation.
:24:31. > :24:36.What will happen if the officers don't take your, take up your kind
:24:37. > :24:41.offer of apologising or saying they did mislead the committee. We will
:24:42. > :24:45.refer them to the House for contempt proceed, that has a particular
:24:46. > :24:49.approach, and that has a particular procedure, they will be asked to go
:24:50. > :24:53.before the House and the House will take a view on it. So it will go out
:24:54. > :24:57.of the hands of the Select Committee, and into the hands of the
:24:58. > :25:01.House itself, which has happened only rarely, so I hope they will
:25:02. > :25:03.take the opportunity of putting the record straight tomorrow. Because of
:25:04. > :25:23.this threat, record straight tomorrow. Because of
:25:24. > :25:28.very much this is a big opportunity for them to come before the
:25:29. > :25:32.committee, to explain why we were misled to put the record straight
:25:33. > :25:35.and to closure. That is the ultimate sanction? It is within the remit,
:25:36. > :25:39.isn't it, so we are clear? At the end of the process, yes, that is the
:25:40. > :25:42.case, but this will not happen tomorrow. This will be an
:25:43. > :25:45.opportunity for them to put the record straight and the Select
:25:46. > :25:51.Committee hopes very much that will happen. Watching this, I am sure you
:25:52. > :25:55.have vaguely been aware of the plebgate saga, what is your view? I
:25:56. > :26:00.can't comment on this specifics of the care, but by am impressed by the
:26:01. > :26:03.roles played by the Select Committee, this one in particular,
:26:04. > :26:08.but Select Committees hear in -- here in this country in if they are
:26:09. > :26:13.a real counter power to the executive, and we with real powers
:26:14. > :26:31.of inquiry, so I think that is a kind of model for the
:26:32. > :26:35.spring to mind when you think of the UK Parliament which is no strange
:26:36. > :26:38.irto controversy over the treatment of female member, it seems we are
:26:39. > :26:44.not the only ones with problems over sexism. Take a look at this. The
:26:45. > :26:49.National Assembly in France earlier in month, a French MP is making a
:26:50. > :26:54.speech. You can't really hear on this recording but a male MP is
:26:55. > :27:00.making clucking noises. Don't call me a chicken says
:27:01. > :27:05.Veronique Massonneau, in France it means airhead. Let us go to the Dale
:27:06. > :27:12.in Ireland where they are about to vote on a motion on abortion. Watch
:27:13. > :27:18.what happens next. Cue #lapgate. A speech by the then Australia Prime
:27:19. > :27:23.Minister Julia Gillard went viral when she got fed up of sexist
:27:24. > :27:42.remarks. I was offenced when he went out in the front
:27:43. > :27:49.day from this leader of the opposition S That went well. Her for
:27:50. > :27:57.mentor Tony Abbott runs the country now.
:27:58. > :28:02.I am joined Bihar ret Baldwin. What did you think of that played round
:28:03. > :28:07.the world of Julia Gillard in the Australian Parliament? I am in full
:28:08. > :28:12.empathy and I was sitting in the National Assembly when this incident
:28:13. > :28:19.happened, to my female colleague who was considered as a chicken, by...
:28:20. > :28:25.With the clucking going on. I think if you ask any female MP, at least
:28:26. > :28:28.in France, I don't know in other country, she will have personal
:28:29. > :28:31.stories to tell, I can give you mine, I have plenty, but one of them
:28:32. > :28:53.is I was, I was asking mine, I have plenty, but one of them
:28:54. > :29:00.why don't you go and breastfeed your children? Lady, what do you think of
:29:01. > :29:04.that? Well I would say that our Parliaments are supposed to
:29:05. > :29:09.represent the real world. We would be naive top think it doesn't exist
:29:10. > :29:15.in the real world. In the workplace, I speak as someone, I would say
:29:16. > :29:19.Parliament is more civilised than other working environments. How do
:29:20. > :29:24.you respond to that, or do you respond? We do represent the people,
:29:25. > :29:28.as you said, so we have to set an example, and I think it also, we
:29:29. > :29:34.have to do it through the number of women sitting in Parliament, in
:29:35. > :29:40.France we are at 26%, which is one in four, not equal, but not as bad
:29:41. > :29:44.as here I think it is 22. It is not as bad as here. We have an equail
:29:45. > :30:02.Government, 18 as bad as here. We have an equail
:30:03. > :30:09.by the Prime Minister. A phrase that would never have been used to a man.
:30:10. > :30:13.He claims he was doing it from the advert, Indeed. Anyone can judge. It
:30:14. > :30:18.is an issue of representative take, it is slightly shocking, that of the
:30:19. > :30:21.women in Parliament, here, although Labour is in the opposition, more
:30:22. > :30:26.than half of the women in Parliament are Labour. We only four women in
:30:27. > :30:30.the Cabinet, we have something like 42% on the Shadow Cabinet. We have
:30:31. > :30:35.need to get the voice of women in leadership positions if we are going
:30:36. > :30:38.to deal with this issue. Our party had a woman Prime Minister and she
:30:39. > :30:42.was Prime Minister for 11 years and was regardeds as one of the greatest
:30:43. > :30:48.the country has had. I do agree that in terms of the at mo fear in
:30:49. > :30:52.Parliament. You can't go into politics unless you are prepared to
:30:53. > :31:13.put up with the insults that go your way, they go in the direction
:31:14. > :31:19.put up with the insults that go your with that? Do you think it should be
:31:20. > :31:28.enshrined in law, or should there be 50% of candidates being enshrined in
:31:29. > :31:31.law? In law, politicians are exempt from the Sextus commendation act, so
:31:32. > :31:35.you can positively discover late in favour of women. I think we should
:31:36. > :31:41.all aspire to have half of our politicians being women. -- from the
:31:42. > :31:46.sex discrimination act. I think it can be a slow way to change things,
:31:47. > :31:49.but I am strongly against all women short lists, because I would like to
:31:50. > :31:55.say that I am here on my merit, rather than... I am here on my
:31:56. > :31:59.merit, but I was selected from an all women short list. All women
:32:00. > :32:02.short lists have transformed Parliament, and transforming
:32:03. > :32:22.Parliament by getting more women into its changes what we do. I
:32:23. > :32:27.Parliament by getting more women you brave, rather than just talking
:32:28. > :32:32.about the size of the bombs on the bullets that you use. So, there is a
:32:33. > :32:36.cultural shift, a different tone of conversation, from having women
:32:37. > :32:40.there, but if, as it is enshrined in law in France, and have a certain
:32:41. > :32:45.representation, you still get those incidents in Parliament, of people
:32:46. > :32:54.being rude to you, so in a way, that in itself does not change, does it?
:32:55. > :32:57.So is it just something you have to put up with? No, but in the
:32:58. > :33:03.long-term, it creates an environment. Men who use that kind
:33:04. > :33:10.of behaviour will be seen as violating, and doing gender
:33:11. > :33:13.discrimination. When you look at the number of Tory candidates selected
:33:14. > :33:32.so far, out of 51, only 15 are women. My
:33:33. > :33:37.so far, out of 51, only 15 are if they do not respect the law on
:33:38. > :33:43.putting an equal number of candidates in elections. I think you
:33:44. > :33:47.cannot put a law on women wanting to come forward and be politicians.
:33:48. > :33:50.Apparently about a third of the people who put their names forward
:33:51. > :33:53.in the Conservative Party are women, and about a third of them get
:33:54. > :33:59.selected proportionately. So there is nothing to suggest that it is
:34:00. > :34:04.disproportionate to the number of people who aspire to become an MP.
:34:05. > :34:08.Isn't one of the reasons why fewer women aspire because they see fewer
:34:09. > :34:11.women in politics? And one of the things that we, as women
:34:12. > :34:19.politicians, have a responsibility to do, is to end this macho
:34:20. > :34:23.environment in which women work, which puts off young women from
:34:24. > :34:25.wanting to stand, from wanting to lead. Caroline Flint, a Labour
:34:26. > :34:43.minister at lead. Caroline Flint, a Labour
:34:44. > :34:46.strong as Julia Gillard never has to go through the horrible experiences
:34:47. > :34:50.that she enjoyed before she made that brilliant speech. Thank you
:34:51. > :34:56.very much, all of you. Thank you, Axelle Lemaire, for being my guest
:34:57. > :35:00.today. Now for a look at The Week Ahead. The cost of High Speed Rail
:35:01. > :35:02.two comes under scrutiny tomorrow by Parliament's Treasury Select
:35:03. > :35:05.Committee, with evidence to be heard from economists and infrastructure
:35:06. > :35:08.experts. Later in the day, MPs on the Defence Committee will hear from
:35:09. > :35:11.the Secretary of State, Philip Hammond, on Future Army 2020, the
:35:12. > :35:16.strategic plan for the UK's armed forces. Wednesday is Prime
:35:17. > :35:23.Minister's Questions. Will energy prices return as the issue of the
:35:24. > :35:26.day? It is a subject which has dominated in recent weeks. There
:35:27. > :35:30.will be no PMQs next week as Parliament will be in recess. On
:35:31. > :35:32.Thursday, the heads of the three UK intelligence agencies will appear
:35:33. > :35:56.before the Intelligence and Security Committee in Parliament.
:35:57. > :36:08.And we are joined from College Green by Kevin Schofield from the Sun, and
:36:09. > :36:11.the Guardian's Rowena Mason. On HS2, first of all, David Cameron is
:36:12. > :36:16.trying to make a clear dividing line from Labour, saying that people will
:36:17. > :36:21.see Labour as betraying the north of England if it withdraws support for
:36:22. > :36:27.HS2, so it is this a clever tactic? Yes, well, today coming he set out
:36:28. > :36:33.plans in a speech at the CBI to ask Sir David Higgins, the chairman of
:36:34. > :36:38.HS2, to cut costs on the ?42 billion project. It comes after Labour has
:36:39. > :36:42.turned the screws, really, on the Tory party, over HS2, saying that it
:36:43. > :36:45.will not give the project a blank cheque. It
:36:46. > :37:11.to pull support because that money could be spent better elsewhere?
:37:12. > :37:17.Yes, it is fairly tempting, I think, for Ed Balls, when we are talking
:37:18. > :37:23.about ?42 billion, and for a party which is struggling to shake off its
:37:24. > :37:27.spendthrift tag, if it was to say, we're not going to spend this money
:37:28. > :37:30.on this project, we are going to spend it on other things, like maybe
:37:31. > :37:34.house-building or bringing down the national debt, it must be very
:37:35. > :37:40.tempting, which is why Ed Balls has thrown out a few feelers, and given
:37:41. > :37:46.very broad hints that he is thinking about pulling Labour's support for
:37:47. > :37:49.it. I think there is tension between him and Ed Miliband over whether or
:37:50. > :37:55.not Labour will ultimately support HS2. What is your prediction? I
:37:56. > :38:13.think when push comes to shove, I think when push comes to shove, I
:38:14. > :38:17.not to. It is going to be a tight one, but when push comes to shove, I
:38:18. > :38:23.think Labour will probably just support it, with extreme caveats.
:38:24. > :38:30.Let's turn our attention to Falkirk, and allegations of vote fixing.
:38:31. > :38:32.Rowena Mason, there is now a twist in the story that one of the
:38:33. > :38:39.complainant is apparently did not withdraw evidence, as had been
:38:40. > :38:44.claimed, so what do you make of it all? It is still very confusing.
:38:45. > :38:46.There are lots of claims and counterclaims, and we have not
:38:47. > :38:50.really had a full explanation from the people in the middle of the
:38:51. > :38:56.story, who originally complained, about exactly what has gone on. An
:38:57. > :39:01.interesting twist this morning is that Johann Lamont, the Scottish
:39:02. > :39:05.Labour leader, seemed to open the door to possibly Labour
:39:06. > :39:22.reinvestigating the allegations, and so
:39:23. > :39:24.reinvestigating the allegations, and to publish the internal report. Tom
:39:25. > :39:36.Harris, the former label transport minister said last night that...
:39:37. > :39:39.They are probably right, insofar as the Labour Party would not normally
:39:40. > :39:44.publish internal reports, however, given the ongoing controversy about
:39:45. > :39:47.this issue, basically, it looks as though they have got something to
:39:48. > :39:51.hide, unless he does choose to publish it. It is starting to
:39:52. > :39:56.reflect quite badly on the Labour leadership. Thank you both very
:39:57. > :40:01.much. I have been joined by Labour's Anne Begg, Malcolm Bruce from the
:40:02. > :40:04.Liberal Democrats and by the Conservative MP Anne McIntosh, for
:40:05. > :40:09.the rest of the programme. Welcome to all of you. As we have been
:40:10. > :40:13.hearing, the saga around the Labour selection in Falkirk has once again
:40:14. > :40:32.raised its head. Yesterday's Sunday Times includes
:40:33. > :40:35.raised its head. Yesterday's Sunday union, at the centre of the
:40:36. > :40:40.controversy, gave his reaction. The truth of the matter is, this is a
:40:41. > :40:43.trap being laid by Tory central office. Of course it is! They are
:40:44. > :40:47.the ones who are making the demands, and of course, the media, the Daily
:40:48. > :40:50.Mail, the Sunday Times, are you telling me they are not the
:40:51. > :40:54.Conservative mouthpiece in the media? They are laying traps for Ed
:40:55. > :41:02.Miliband, and Ed Miliband should not fall into those traps. Anne Begg, is
:41:03. > :41:05.this just a conspiracy of what Len McCluskey calls the Tory press, and
:41:06. > :41:10.Ed Miliband is falling into the trap? Well, I do not think the Tory
:41:11. > :41:14.press will help, but I think this is a problem of our own making. It is
:41:15. > :41:19.not our finest hour. Having said that, it is very much an internal
:41:20. > :41:23.matter for the Labour Party. It is for the Labour Party to get to the
:41:24. > :41:24.bottom of this, to make sure that whatever happened in Falkirk does
:41:25. > :41:45.not happen again. whatever happened in Falkirk does
:41:46. > :41:49.MSP who had to stand down because he was found to be a wife beater in the
:41:50. > :41:53.courts. And there was no call at that time for the SNP to publish any
:41:54. > :41:59.internal reports. Or would it help lay this to rest? I do not know,
:42:00. > :42:04.because I am not party to this. In fact, most people are not. A lot of
:42:05. > :42:08.it is speculation in the newspapers. But I think it is an issue for the
:42:09. > :42:12.Labour Party. It is something they are going to have to look at and
:42:13. > :42:17.continue to look at, both to make sure that this is laid to rest, but
:42:18. > :42:23.also, we need to get on and get a good candidate select it, for the
:42:24. > :42:27.people of Falkirk. In your view, has the Unite union abused its power in
:42:28. > :42:31.Falkirk? I think they did things which were over the line in terms of
:42:32. > :42:52.what they were allowed to do. In terms of what? Interestingly
:42:53. > :42:56.what they were allowed to do. In they have joined the Labour Party.
:42:57. > :43:00.It should be agreed by them! It is in those circumstances that I think
:43:01. > :43:04.the Unite union have overstepped the mark. Because they are using
:43:05. > :43:11.bullying and intimidate three tactics as well? There was coercion
:43:12. > :43:21.and fraud and vote rigging. They were cleared of wrongdoing, of
:43:22. > :43:24.course. We do but if somebody was saying that they wish to make a
:43:25. > :43:32.witness statement, and they were not heard... But that is a matter for
:43:33. > :43:38.the police. My understanding is that the Labour Party had not seen the
:43:39. > :43:41.e-mails. Those have been handed over to the police. So, if there is
:43:42. > :43:43.corruption and wrongdoing and illegality, and that is a matter for
:43:44. > :44:02.the police. illegality, and that is a matter for
:44:03. > :44:10.was dropped on the basis that people at the centre of the case withdrew
:44:11. > :44:15.their evidence, so now, should it be reopened? I want the party to get to
:44:16. > :44:18.the bottom of what exactly happened. Whether it should be published is a
:44:19. > :44:22.different matter. But obviously I think there is an issue for the
:44:23. > :44:25.party, which must get to the bottom of it. It is only by doing so that
:44:26. > :44:30.they will make sure this does not happen again. Will that be enough,
:44:31. > :44:34.Malcolm Bruce? First of all, I think it is a problem for the Labour
:44:35. > :44:38.Party, in terms of its public perception. Any party which may
:44:39. > :44:45.appear to be a partially owned subsidiary of another organisation,
:44:46. > :44:50.like a trade union, has a problem. It is treating the voters with a
:44:51. > :44:54.degree of contempt. I think what Labour have got to address is, if
:44:55. > :45:12.they want to be a national party, they have
:45:13. > :45:18.reinforces that belief. I think if that was true, then Malcolm is
:45:19. > :45:21.right, but as I said, the unions, in regard to the individual selection
:45:22. > :45:25.of candidates, have much less power than they have ever had at any time
:45:26. > :45:29.in history, partly because of one member, one vote. This is why they
:45:30. > :45:33.have resorted to this tactic of trying to get more members who they
:45:34. > :45:36.think will vote that way. But actually, Labour Party members are
:45:37. > :45:44.very good at making up their own mind, and they can be quite contrary
:45:45. > :45:48.at times. The perception is that the unions are up to their old dirty
:45:49. > :45:54.tricks again. The unions would say it is the fault of the Tory press
:45:55. > :46:02.who are making it up. The press pick up a story, you can't blame them.
:46:03. > :46:04.The Tory press were not to blame. You are seeing an, a dispute
:46:05. > :46:23.The Tory press were not to blame. finest hour, it has shown us in a
:46:24. > :46:29.bad light. That is why they have to get to the bottom of it and make
:46:30. > :46:35.sure it doesn't happen again. Moving on quickly, plebgate, are you happy
:46:36. > :46:37.the officers are coming back before the Select Committee? Yes I am happy
:46:38. > :46:42.that the Independent Police Complaints Commission is looking
:46:43. > :46:45.into allegations of misleading a House of Commons Select Committee
:46:46. > :46:50.and also the public, on a number of issues, I think the whole incident
:46:51. > :46:57.is highly regrettable, and the sooner we can put this to bed the
:46:58. > :47:01.better, both for the British public and Andrew Mitchell himself, for his
:47:02. > :47:04.own police authority at the -- authority at the time to question
:47:05. > :47:09.his intelty. Would you like to see him back in Government? Yes in a
:47:10. > :47:14.very senior position. How does it make the police look? My committee
:47:15. > :47:32.was shadowing or monitoring Andrew Mitchell so I got to
:47:33. > :47:35.was shadowing or monitoring Andrew lied about, so if that is the case,
:47:36. > :47:37.clearly, we have to get to the bottom of it and the Select
:47:38. > :47:41.Committee is determines to do so, that is why they have called the
:47:42. > :47:47.police back presumably. Most police do a fantastic job but it doesn't
:47:48. > :47:52.help their reputation... One of my colleagues said not even who has the
:47:53. > :47:55.resourced that Andrew Mitchell had. Let us leave it there Ed Miliband
:47:56. > :48:00.has confirmed that a future Labour Government would offer businesses
:48:01. > :48:03.tax breaks if they paid the living wage, that is the benchmark based on
:48:04. > :48:09.the amount an individual needs to cover the basic cost of living.
:48:10. > :48:13.Private firms would be able to claim back a third of the cost. Not all
:48:14. > :48:17.Labour supporters are fans of the plans. We are joined by John
:48:18. > :48:23.McTernan who was Tony Blair's political secretary. What isn't it a
:48:24. > :48:25.good idea? The national minimum wage, which the Labour
:48:26. > :48:45.good idea? The national minimum London is ?8.80 an hour which is a
:48:46. > :48:49.40% increase or more on the national minimum wage, I don't think you can
:48:50. > :48:54.increase wages that much without destroying jobs and there is a study
:48:55. > :48:59.by the Resolution Foundation who say if you implement it across the
:49:00. > :49:03.country, it would lead to 300 thousand gloung people losing their
:49:04. > :49:09.job, and I don't think we can afford that. Is that because you don't want
:49:10. > :49:12.to take the leap all in one go? It is something you would say
:49:13. > :49:16.politicians should d pyre to, to that level of living wage over time?
:49:17. > :49:19.The minimum wage has been allowed by the coalition to fall in value and
:49:20. > :49:24.it should be increased. There is no doubt there is a case for that, but
:49:25. > :49:28.the living wage is, is a campaign which on the one hand we are told by
:49:29. > :49:35.the. Ka painers it is wrong to pay people at that level, on the other
:49:36. > :49:53.hand if you say it will cost some businesses to
:49:54. > :49:56.hand if you say it will cost some this. I think Brown and the Tory
:49:57. > :49:59.Governments before this got this right, some people have low wages
:50:00. > :50:04.and they should be topped up by the Government through tax credits or
:50:05. > :50:09.through family credit or through as dung proposes through Universal
:50:10. > :50:13.Credit. That is the right way to reward people in low paid work
:50:14. > :50:18.rather than force them to become unemployed. Anne McIntosh, do you
:50:19. > :50:22.agree with that? Is it better that people, some people just say and
:50:23. > :50:27.accept those lower wages and the state, funded by the taxpayer
:50:28. > :50:33.subsidises that low pay with benefits? What we have done is taken
:50:34. > :50:39.25 million people out of tax so they don't pay tax until ?10,000 so you
:50:40. > :50:44.can earn ?10,000 from April next year. Would you rather not have the
:50:45. > :51:03.living wage and continue to top up with benefits? I
:51:04. > :51:06.living wage and continue to top up now, not to lose people, but not to
:51:07. > :51:12.replace people when they leave their work. Hasn't that been the economic
:51:13. > :51:15.reality, the low wage part-timer, it has been better than loosing your
:51:16. > :51:20.job, if John McTernan is right and he uses the figures there would be
:51:21. > :51:24.300,000 job lost. The same argument was used with the introduction of
:51:25. > :51:30.the minimum wage, and it didn't come to pass, but I think Anne has missed
:51:31. > :51:36.the point, the government is paying out to supplement the incomes of
:51:37. > :51:39.these people. Anybody who is paying tax is not the group we are talking
:51:40. > :51:46.about. So people are getting paid less, that get it topped up by the
:51:47. > :51:50.state. But what if the business can't afford to carry... Well, at
:51:51. > :51:52.the moment, the people who are carrying it are the British
:51:53. > :52:13.taxpayer. It is the cost of carrying it are the British
:52:14. > :52:16.to supplement people? Surely Liberal Democrat, the onus should be on the
:52:17. > :52:24.employer, more should be on the employer so the state doesn't have
:52:25. > :52:28.to keep paying. The problem is... What about the Liberal Democrats? We
:52:29. > :52:32.are in favour of the living wage in principle. We think large companies
:52:33. > :52:36.should be transparent. My own council is committed to it. You
:52:37. > :52:40.can't confuse the minimum wage with the living wage, one is a legal
:52:41. > :52:43.requirement, the other is an aspiration to recognise, that is the
:52:44. > :52:47.sort of money people in full-time work would hope to have, to have a
:52:48. > :52:51.live wage. People should be encourage to pay it. The Labour
:52:52. > :52:55.Party's ideas are worth looking at but you shouldn't confuse the two.
:52:56. > :53:00.There was a lot of reaction against the minimum wage at the time. Some
:53:01. > :53:02.small businesses will say we can't afford to employ people that the
:53:03. > :53:23.level. Some Biggs businesses are afford to employ people that the
:53:24. > :53:26.people living in poverty have an adult in work, that is not right. We
:53:27. > :53:32.need do something about it. The best thing to do is introduce the living
:53:33. > :53:36.wage. That in a single policy decision can actually make sure that
:53:37. > :53:40.people who are in work, actually are lifted out of poverty. At the moment
:53:41. > :53:44.that is not happening. It is important not to confuse the two.
:53:45. > :53:48.There is one thing that all our three guests have in common. Well,
:53:49. > :53:54.apart from all being huge fans of the Daily Politics, who writes these
:53:55. > :53:59.scrips? . They all chair Parliamentary skit tis. It is an
:54:00. > :54:06.increasingly high profile role. First, let us remind ourself of
:54:07. > :54:11.recent Select Committee moments. I suggest you can give an apology for
:54:12. > :54:14.spinning a yarn to the press to get someone out of high public office,
:54:15. > :54:32.that is what you were motivated to do,
:54:33. > :54:37.following the laws that are there. How can the profits be fair when
:54:38. > :54:45.people can't afford to pay for their energy? Do you accept that you are
:54:46. > :54:50.responsible for this whole fiasco? What point did you find out
:54:51. > :54:56.criminality was endemic at the News of the World? Committee will note
:54:57. > :55:03.you have had to apologise given you claim not to have seen a document
:55:04. > :55:09.which you I believe authored, so... I think. To draw an inference... We
:55:10. > :55:14.immediate to take it with a pinch of salt. Feisty stuff. Let us get the
:55:15. > :55:19.thoughts of our chairs. Let us put you under the spotlight. Malcolm
:55:20. > :55:23.Bruce how come they have improved so much, the reputation of the dusty
:55:24. > :55:25.Select Committee, it seems to have gone? I think all Select Committees
:55:26. > :55:43.have a gone? I think all Select Committees
:55:44. > :55:47.they want to be there, they have something to bring to the table.
:55:48. > :55:51.That makes us much more effective and beyond the reach of Government.
:55:52. > :55:54.So we are more independent. That added a lot to our strength and
:55:55. > :55:58.indeed the impact of what we do. Does it result in any real change
:55:59. > :56:02.though? Yes, I think the right reforms in the last Parliament which
:56:03. > :56:09.have been introduced this Parliament, give us not more power,
:56:10. > :56:13.and therefore a more prominent national platform. We have the power
:56:14. > :56:19.to amend legislation, so prescrutiny you get a detailed idea, I have to
:56:20. > :56:23.say as a member of a coalition, the prominent coalition party, it can be
:56:24. > :56:26.uncomfortable sometimes in screws nicing a department which is so
:56:27. > :56:33.important to my constituency, to try and help them to get the policy
:56:34. > :56:52.right, but gps Does that mean you have to ask tough questions? No
:56:53. > :56:55.right, but gps Does that mean you and enforced. Let us take that
:56:56. > :57:00.issue, do you think it easier to be a member of a Select Committee if
:57:01. > :57:05.you are not the party in power? I don't know because I have never been
:57:06. > :57:08.in that situation. But, of course, the majority on the committees from
:57:09. > :57:13.the Government party, but I say to them, and it is the position I took
:57:14. > :57:17.as a backbencher, I want my Government to get it right, and if
:57:18. > :57:22.there is something the Select Committee can illustrate or point
:57:23. > :57:25.to, that could be a disaster in the making, sensible Governments and
:57:26. > :57:31.sensible departments will listen, I hope to some of the things. Do MPs
:57:32. > :57:35.Grandstand? Do you have to watch if some of you committee members start
:57:36. > :57:39.taking over and become a celebrity? It is worrying if you have a high
:57:40. > :57:41.profile witness like the Secretary of State they might be exposed.
:57:42. > :58:05.Really we now have the opportunity of State they might be exposed.
:58:06. > :58:08.we reach decision by consensus. The most effective Select Committees are
:58:09. > :58:13.the ones who are able to put the political different, leave them at
:58:14. > :58:19.the door and work together. We try to aVoight voting in the committee.
:58:20. > :58:25.There have been fairly high profile case. An amendment comes along where
:58:26. > :58:29.something disagrees and you negotiate it. The department will
:58:30. > :58:33.often wait for a committee report before it finalises a policy and
:58:34. > :58:37.accepted the reputation, because it is based on objective evidence, not
:58:38. > :58:41.the prejudice of 11 member, we brought that evidence in from
:58:42. > :58:51.outside. Who is the best chair in the business? It is difficult to
:58:52. > :58:55.say. They are all our favourites as Bruce forsite would say. Thank you.
:58:56. > :58:56.I will be back tomorrow with all the