12/03/2014 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 12/03/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Morning, folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics. After months of internal


wrangling, Ed Miliband's given us Labour's policy on an EU referendum.


He has promised an in/out referendum in the event of any changes, but he


thinks that there won't be any changes, so it won't happen. You


could be forgiven for being confused.


The Prime Minister of Ukraine's gone to the White House to discuss the


crisis over Crimea. I've asked the country's ambassador in London what


he makes of the West's response. It's battle of the deputies at PMQs


today as the Prime Minister is on an official visit to Israel. Clegg


versus Harman, and all the rest of the action, will be live at midday.


And speaking of PMQs, we'll take a look at the top five ways to


confuse, distract and generally tick off your opponent in a noisy Commons


chamber. All that coming up in the next 90


minutes of TV so good it'll probably prevent BBC Two being closed down


and moved online. And joining us for the duration are two of the sharpest


minds in Westminster, and they're also two of the sharpest dressers.


Oh, yes. It's Shadow Leader of the House Angela Eagle, who says she


once went on an official visit without realising she was wearing


odd shoes. I know the feeling. It's happened to us all. Nobody noticed!


Just me. And Business Minister Matt Hancock, who's famed for wearing a


maroon V neck pullover under his suit jacket, a habit described by


one newspaper recently as "fogeyish". Welcome to both of you.


After that sartorial introduction, let's turn first to Ed Miliband's


announcement that he's ruling out a referendum on Britain's membership


of the EU - except in what he calls the unlikely event that we decide to


transfer further powers to Brussels. Here's the Labour leader speaking


earlier this morning. Today I am announcing that the next


Labour government will legislate for a new lock. Not simply a referendum


on any treaty change proposing the transfer of powers, because there


have been too many referenda like that in other countries which have


been ignored. But a lock that guarantees there will be no transfer


of powers without an in/out referendum. Without a clear choice


about whether Britain will stay in the youth.


Ed Miliband speaking earlier. He had already said as much in the


financial Times this morning in an article. Today's announcement is a


big deal, not least because it opens up a major dividing line between the


two biggest parties, and it has big implications for UKIP and the Lib


Dems, too. JoCo, remind us where they all now stand.


Yes, you could be forgiven for losing track of exactly what the


main parties are offering when it comes to a vote on our relationship


with the EU. Only last year Ed Miliband decided to back the


Government's so-called "referendum lock" - a law passed in 2010 which


would give the public the chance to accept or reject any major new EU


treaty if it represented a big loss of power to Brussels.


Today Mr Miliband has gone further. He's said that Labour will legislate


so that any new transfer of power triggers an in/out referendum on


Britain's membership of the EU. So is an in/out referendum inevitable


under Labour? Well, no, not according to... Ed Miliband. He's


said that it's "unlikely there will be any such proposals for a transfer


of powers in the next parliament". That marks a clear dividing line


with the Conservatives. If elected, David Cameron has promised to hold


an in/out referendum in 2017 after attempting to renegotiate Britain's


relationship with the EU. Instead Mr Miliband has edged closer to Nick


Clegg's position on Europe. In the 2010 Lib Dem manifesto, he promised


to hold an in/out referendum the next time there is a "fundamental


change" in the EU's treaty arrangements.


And then there's Nigel Farage. He would hold an immediate referendum


on Britain's EU membership. But now that the Tories are the only major


party guaranteeing a vote, how can he persuade people to vote UKIP?


Andrew. Thank you, JoCo! You covered that


very well. Angela Eagle, your position was that you would have a


referendum, but it would be an treaty change, and it would be


whether we liked the treaty change? Is that correct? We supported the


conservative legislation last year. Actually, it was 2011. And I believe


you abstained on it. It is on the statute book. And you supported


that? What we have done today... We will come to that in a moment. Until


today, your policy was to support coalition policy, which was that if


there are treaty changes, they should be put to a vote? Yes. The


change today in the policy, then, is that if there are treaty changes,


then it would become not a vote on the changes, but an in/out


referendum? What we have said is that if there is any further


transfer of power from the UK to Brussels in any future treaty


changes, we won't have a treaty -based referendum, we will have an


in/out referendum. That is Labour's lock, which Ed Miliband announced in


his speech today. But you also think that it is unlikely in the course of


a Labour government elected in 2015 and running for five years but there


would be any treaty changes that would take place? What Ed Miliband


said today is that it is unlikely but possible, because we don't have


a crystal ball in which we can completely predict what will happen


in the future. There are areas where EU members might want to continue


arrangement, particularly on the fiscal union for those in the


Eurozone, which might have implications. So what he has said is


that our priority is a Labour government will be jobs, growth, the


NHS, and not banging on about Europe. But if there were these


changes that happened in Europe which looked like they would lead to


treaty change and more powers to Brussels, first of all we would have


to agree them, and if we did agree them, we would give the British


people a choice in an in/out referendum. But you do think it is


unlikely that there would be the treaty changes, and therefore I'm


likely under Labour that there would be an in/out referendum? I think Ed


Miliband has been very upfront today. Our policy isn't to go for


the treaty change or to bang on about Europe. There are more


important things to do for a government. So he said we will


concentrate on them. But he also recognises and acknowledges that


people are worried about continuing drift of powers to Europe, and he


has given this commitment on a Labour lock which, if circumstances


are right, and he thinks it is unlikely, there would be this shift


of powers, there would be a guarantee, a legislative guarantee,


of an in/out referendum. Can we also established that they


couldn't even be a referendum on this and less and Miller band


government had agreed to treaty changes in the first place? -- and


Ed Miliband government. Yes. There could be reforms on access to


benefits, foreign criminals, things you could do to make Europe better


without treaty change, but if there were an agreement during the next


Labour government to treaty change, that would buy legislation be put to


the people in a referendum. And if there were treaty changes, and you


put these to the British people, which would then be an in/out


referendum, so the British people would be asked to vote to stay in


Europe, and to agree the treaty changes as well, how would you vote


if you didn't like the treaty changes but wanted to stay in


Europe? I think that the issue is that a lot of the people that want


to have a referendum are talking about out. I understand that, but


what about my question? It is entirely theoretical... A lot of


people might say, I don't want to give any more power to Brussels,


although that is what they have agreed to, but I don't want to


leave, I want the status quo. How would you vote? The issue about


Europe is that nobody wants the status quo. We want to improve the


way that Europe works. It is clear from talking to all our voters that


there are things that voters are worried about about Europe.


Especially on issues like access. How would that person vote? You make


changes that require a referendum. But if somebody wants to stay in


Europe but not doesn't want the changes, how would they vote? It is


entirely hypothetical. We don't know what that would be. What is wrong


with the position? It is utterly incomprehensible, as we have just


seen. There is a perfectly reasonable argument for lots of


people who would say, we don't want to give more powers to Brussels, but


we don't want to leave, either. I happen to think we want to get


powers back from Brussels, so we have a very simple proposition at


the next election, which is that the Conservatives, we now know, are the


only party that can deliver a referendum. UKIP say they want a


referendum but can't deliver it. All that a vote for UKIP will do is


increase the chances of Ed Miliband becoming Prime Minister. The Lib


Dems say they don't what a referendum at all. It is dead


straight at the election. If you are in favour of a referendum, the only


party that can deliver that is a vote for the Conservative Party. And


your own Conservative Party chairman told us that only 6% of the British


people think it is the most important issue facing Britain


today. You are banging on as a Tory obsession on an issue of which the


British people don't regard it is that important. Of course, it is one


issue among many that are important for the future of the country. You


are not giving us a referendum on the 17 issues above it in the list


on the pole. -- the poll. But this is the sort of issue that you would


put to a referendum, in the same way that independence for Scotland is


the sort of issue you would put to a referendum. The Scottish people


voted for a national government, so that is clearly important to the


people of Scotland. Even UKIP, who wants to leave Europe, their policy


is not just to leave Europe, it is immediately to have a referendum. So


there is a perfectly reasonable argument for referendum. Lord


Ashcroft says that the promised referendum is a sideshow. You are


going to give us a referendum anyway. I think that resolving our


relationship with the European Union is a perfectly reasonable task for a


government to do, amongst many other tasks. And that is what an elected


majority Conservative government will do. Of course we have to


continue turning around the economy, and of course there are


many other areas of work that we have been working very hard on, that


are as yet unresolved. Youth unemployment is coming down, there


is further to go. But a referendum on Europe, you could be guaranteed


that we are the only party that can deliver that. You might hear a bit


more of that point over the year ahead! Finally, Angela Eagle, on the


matter of a referendum on Europe, there is, I'm right in saying, no


difference between you now and the Lib Dems? I think there is a


narrower... We have always agreed with the Liberal Democrats that


Britain's future is best in Europe for strategic reasons, reasons of


the economy. But you are now the same on how and when and under what


circumstances we would have a referendum? I think that we are


closer together with the Liberal Democrats on that. There is no


difference. But what we are not doing is putting in a huge amount of


uncertainty, banging on about Europe, uncertainty for business, by


having an arbitrary date for referendum. There is uncertainty


because your policy is incomprehensible. It is absolutely


clear. There is no difference between you and the Lib Dems now on


the matter of a referendum? No. We are clearly both pro-European


parties who want to give the British people a say.


Thank you all very much. The interim Prime Minister of


Ukraine is travelling to Washington today to discuss the ongoing


stand-off with Russia over Crimea. Moscow is showing no signs of


backing down despite pressure from the West. David Cameron warned this


week of further consequences if Moscow tries to use an independence


referendum in Crimea this Sunday to strengthen its hold over the region.


Yesterday I spoke to Ukraine's ambassador to London, Volodymyr


Khandogiy, and asked him if he accepted that Crimea was on the way


to becoming part of Russia. We are determined to continue our


efforts with our partners and friends to prevent Russia from doing


this. Angela Merkel and David Cameron have


said that if the referendum which looks highly likely seals the


annexation of Crimea to Russia, there would be consequences. What


would Vladimir Putin listen to in terms of consequences?


Putin and Russia is a nuclear weapon state and posturing itself as a


super power so it's difficult to draw a list of the actions which


Russia will be willing to take, but we still have to exert pressure on


Russia, not only in the economic area, but there are other,


political, diplomatic and even military, the use of force should be


considered at this stage. Military action seems unlikely. The


consequences, the West seemed to have made it clear that that would


be probably off the table or at least a last resort, but in terms of


economics, David Cameron famously once said in regard to the Georgia


conflict that if Russians marched into Georgia he would stop them


marching into sell bridges. Do you -- Selfridges. Do you think David


Cameron is prepared to put his money where his mouth is in regard to


Ukraine? It would make the West to realise that without targeted, but


very strong economic pressure, Russia would not stop what it's


doing. But as you mentioned, military response, of course, this


is a very lylikely thing and no-one would like it. No-one. In the first


place in Ukraine, no-one would like it. But, again, what we are facing


now is the blatant violation and very serious situations, which


amounts to aggression. If Russia continues to ignore the West what


happened? -- what happens? Do you end up with some sort of stand


gorilla we're -- guR Rhyl la -- guerilla warfare? There is a real


poght of further escalation of the -- possibility of further escalation


of the troubles in Crimea and we would like to avoid that escalation,


but the country that has to stop it and that has to avoid it in the


first place the further escalation is Russia. All of us, western


countries, EU, has to work very hard and demonstrate strength in face of


the Russian invasion. On that basis, Matt Hancock, how much strength


should the Government be showing? He talked about the military option. Is


that true? I think it's absolutely vital to try to de-escalate this


crisis and that's been the goal of the Government throughout. That


does, of course, involve considering economic and targeted sanctions.


Military is off the table? There is no way that will happen? We have


been trying throughout to de-escalate the crisis. Terms of


economic sanctions, how far should the Government go, because so far


it's proven totally useless in terms of persuading Vladimir Putin to back


down? Think one of the -- I think one of the moments at which he took


a pause was when the stock market opened and it fell 10% last Monday.


I think you can see the impact of economic consequences, even though


that wasn't as a direct consequence of action. It was temporary, because


it pulled back and recovered? Who knows what the reasons for that are,


because they may have seen at that point the conflict


December-escalating. It wasn't direct action from the West or


Government that forced his hand. What would? We have been absolutely


clear that we are happeny to consider and meet -- need to


consider further consequences, not least as the ambassador said, should


this - What are they? What would do it? You've got the referendum on


Sunday and after Sunday unless things change dramatically, Crimea


goes back to Russia. As you said in interviewing the ambassador, there


are targeted interventions and you will understand why we don't want to


show our hand too early. Should the Government be tougher? Would Labour


be tougher? We supported what they've done and said in the


statement that we had on Monday after the EU council that we were


supportive of what the Government had done, but we don't want them to


take things off the tail. We want them - You would have some sort of


military action? It doesn't help to speculate in diplomatic terms about


what consequences might be. What you have to do is do the work to ensure


that you can create a proper united approach among NATO and the allies


around and that's going on, but I think that Putin isn't going to be


worried by us stopping indulliging in -- indulging about talks or not


going to Sochi or the G8. It's not going to do it, so I think we need


to put in place a situation where the crisis can be de-escalated, but


at the same time we have to ensure that the NATO allies are in step


with each other. It's a gross violation of international law and


the treaties that they've signed with the Ukraine. It can't go


unpunished and I think the Prime Minister's going to have to think


about other actions that are slightly more serious than stopping


talks about visas. It's clear that's not going to make a difference. We


had a Russian journalist on yesterday. He said Putin doesn't


care. I don't think the leak from Downing Street saying we wouldn't


consider sanctions, that photograph of the briefing paper that went into


the National Security Council was very helpful. That did weaken us,


did it? I don't think a part of a photographed piece of paper is an


indication of the Government's position. Well, is it not? It's very


clear. William Hague is very clear in response to questions about that


that half a photographed piece of paper from one official, no matter


how senior, is not an indication of the Government's position. You'll


understand why, when considering what further action to take,


especially because of the importance to get the international dimension


of this, linking with the Germans and the French and the Americans in


terms of response, in particular and others, that's why we are not


speculating about what further action is and could be taken.


Actually, we are getting on with getting to a position when we can


make sure that those consequences do follow. A lot of German members of


Parliament in Angela Merkel's party made it clear they were worried


about the economic impact. How nervous is the City here about


action that might harm interests? Obviously, there has been volatility


in the markets. We have had poor diplomatic relations in the past


with Russia and traders have continued. The question is how


targeted too. Targeting individuals as opposed to trade across the board


and how to strike that balance is an important question. Of course,


that's one consideration, especially for some of the other countries


involved, as you mentioned. We have to make sure that it is absolutely


made clear to President Putin that this is un cceptable behaviour and


the cross-party consensus on this is strong. Happy birthday the interweb.


Yes, it's been over 25 years since Tim Berners Lee hooked up the


fastest-growing medium of all time, the World Wide Web. He didn't


actually invent the internet. That's apparently entirely different, but


without the web there would be no Twitter, Facebook or talking cats


and worst of all, you would have to write in with your Guess the Year


entry instead of emailing. To a tribute to the invention that


changed the world we are going to transmit to the winner an


interactive 2D version. Mug. It will be beamed straight to your desk top.


We are going to e-mail you a picture of one and we'll chuck in the real


-- real one in the post by snail mail. We'll see if you can remember


when this happened. # Your eyes have promised sweet


love... # We do not retreat. We are not


content to stand still. MUSIC


# He was a top man at his craft # But then his number came up with


the draft... # # Pardon me boy is that the


Chatanooga... # They've declared they're making war


upon you. Taking us back a bit. To be in with


a chance of winning the mug, send your answer to our special quiz


e-mail address: You can see the full terms and conditions on the website.


Coming up to midday. We'll look at Big Ben. It's behind me. There it


is. Prime Minister's questions is on its way. If you would like to


comment you can e-mail us. You can also tweet your thoughts. What's


that I hear you cry, where is Nick Robinson? The whole nation wants to


know that. He's taking advantage of the spring sunshine and he's with


the daffodils in St James' Park. We are joined by another big man, The


Telegraph's Ben Brogan. He's never been seen with the daffodils on a


spring morning. Where we come on to questions today, what so far has


been the immediate fallout of Mr Miliband's new policy on the


referendum in Europe? It seems to be a degree of argument whether it's a


policy and clear and precise, or whether there is confusion to it.


Whether there will be a referendum or there isn't if Labour win. I


think he's having to manage his way through that. There will be if


there's going to be treaty change, there won't be if there isn't treaty


change? It seems to be a policy that's cake and eat it. He bants to


sound -- he wants to sound like he's going to have a referendum and also


reassuring everyone he wouldn't have a referendum. He has set the exam


question and provided the answer. He wants those who might be thinking


about whether or not to vote Labour to be assured he does believe in a


referendum. It sounds a bit opportunistic. It doesn't sound


clear. Really? Triangular, that has never happened before! Hard to


believe! The Mirror had a strange headline this morning. Almost


implying he's going to give you a referendum, which is very different


from the FT headline, in which the article appeared - surely, it was


the Mirror headline that was the misleading? I wouldn't dare to


suggest that the Mirror is into misleading headlines. Ed Miliband is


trying to develop a policy that can be all things to all people and


suits him given the moment. He wants us to think that he might offer a


referendum, while also saying there won't be a referendum. That doesn't


sound clear. It's perfectly clear as I explained before, if circumstances


arise in which powers are transferred to the EU and the then


Labour Government agrees with that, there will be an in/out referendum.


Only a vote for the Conservatives can deliver you a referendum. Did I


say it before? I'm going to say it again. We'll give you a tenner every


time you say it. We'll be rich. I would suggest that that means to use


Mr Miliband's own words, a referendum under Labour is unlikely?


Because I think it is unlikely that Mr Miliband is going to agree to


something that would be deeply unpopular in this country, which


would be the further moving of powers from the UK to Brussels?


Indeed. He seems to be posing a hypothetical question, because he


says it's unlikely to happen. What is more telling is that it indicates


to us the extent to which party policy for all is being driven by a


view of Europe that wants to put Britain in a position to be able to


opt to leave Europe. It's the euro scepticism of politics which is


driving all the political leaders and UKIP is contributing to that,


which has forced Labour's hands and David Cameron's hands and Nick


Clegg's hands. It is true that in the last election the Labour Party


stood on a referendum only on joining the euro. Not anything else.


Doesn't what he said this morning, the Conservatives I understand are


quite happy with it, because Mr Farage has said that Ed Miliband


would promise a referendum too, similar to the Tories. The box has


been -- Mr Farage's fox has been shot. Only the Tories will deliver


now? That policy applies and it is the case at the moment. It's only


the Conservative Government that is guaranteed to deliver a referendum


on whether or not Britain should continue to be a member of the EU.


There's no doubt about that. What we need to keep remind ourselves is


about, on the current polls the chances of the Conservatives being


in office is still a matter for debate and the fact is we can talk


about a referendum all we like, but the statistical outcome suggests we


are not going to get one. That's why we are pouring over what Ed Miliband


has to say, because if it isn't the Tories it will be him, so we like to


know what he's going to do. What is Harriet Harman going to say? Don't


answer that, because we're going over now.


I wish to congratulate Team GB at the Sochi Games. I have had meetings


with ministerial colleagues and others, and I will have further such


meetings today. Our congratulations to Kelly


Gallagher, from Northern Ireland, who won the first medal. Mr Speaker,


given rising racism and xenophobia, including recent racist attacks in


my own east Belfast can is chintzy, what more can Government do to


ensure that the public debate on issues such as EU membership and


immigration are more balanced and celebrate the positive contribution


of immigrants in the run-up to the election? I agree with her, we need


to strike the right balance between explaining to the public that we are


running a tough but firm immigration system but also open to those who


want to come here and make a contribution and pay their taxes and


contribute to our way of life. I was deeply saddened and shocked to hear


about the incidents that happened to members of the Polish and Chinese


community in her constituency, and even more so what has happened to


her colleague. I understand that the first Chinese Minister in Europe is


being subject to racist abuse, and I rang her a few weeks ago to express


my support. Since a ?700 tax cut, free school meals and the pupil


premium will improve the opportunities and lives of many of


my constituents, even though these ideas were not entirely welcome to


some among our coalition partners, will he welcomed the fact that


coalition Government and the compromises that go with it can


deliver sound policies? I strongly agree with him,


especially on those policies. And one of them, as he will know, is in


the papers this morning because of the slightly in X bookable views of


an entirely unknown if highly opinionated -- inexplicable views of


a former member. Free school meals from September will save families


money and improve education for children. We should be celebrating


the policy. I would like to join the deputy and


in paying tribute to sap that either morally from 32 engineer Regiment --


Adam Morely, and pay tribute to his family and friends who mourn him.


And I also congratulate our Paralympic medal winners. Mr


Speaker, at the last general election, the Deputy Prime Minister


said that local people should have more control over their health


services. Can he explain to the House and the public while last


night he voted against that? Actually, we voted for measures to


make sure that there is local consultation. I am intrigued by her


line of enquiry, given their record in the NHS. We don't seem to get any


further than what is happening in Wales, where they haven't met their


target since 2009. I really don't think after the Francis Report and


all of the other revelations of what happened in the NHS under Labour,


they have much to stand on. He is not even prepared to justify what he


spoke about last night, when the Lib Dems could have stepped in and stop


it what happened. First they said they were against the change, then


they put down an amendment, then they sold out to the Tories, and the


Tories got their way again. Is there any logic to how the Lib Dems vote


other than self-interest? Mr Speaker, this from a party that


spent a quarter of ?1 billion, ?250 million, on sweetheart deals for the


private sector, which alleged operations and procedures which


didn't help a single patient. A party which ranks in Wales against


competition in the NHS, a party which suffers from collective


amnesia about the terrible suffering of the patients in Mid Staffs and


other parts of the NHS mismanaged by them. Hospitals are under threat and


they want people to remember what the deputy prime ministers said in


the House today. Last week Lib Dem ministers were falling over


themselves at their spring conference to denounce government


policies and even their own departmental colleagues, describing


them variously as unfair, absurd and hated. Yet they keep supporting


them, take the bedroom tax. His own party president says the bedroom tax


is wrong, unnecessary and causing misery. But they voted for it. Now


they say they want to abolish it. Are they for the bedroom tax against


it? Which is it? Mr Speaker, there are 1.7 million


people on the housing waiting list in the country, and 1.5 million


spare bedrooms. That is a problem we inherited, like so many problems,


from them. On this side of the House, we are trying to sort out the


mess that they created. If they are incapable of taking any


responsibility or expressing any apology for the mess they have


created, why should we take any of their questions seriously at all?


They are for it, and only Labour will scrap the bedroom tax. The Lib


Dem Chief Secretary to the Treasury said cutting the top rate of tax


would be cloud cuckoo land. If the Lib Dems were against this tax cut,


why did they vote for it? Guess what the top rate of tax was under


Labour. Anybody? Anybody? Was at 50? Was it 45? 40p for 13 years! And


now she is complaining it 5p higher. If she is going to try to make


consistency of virtue, how about this? This week the Labour Party has


been talking about the need to give young people jobs opportunities.


Last week they tabled an amendment to the Deregulation Bill which will


tell half a million young apprentices that they are no longer


apprentices. And worse than that, they issued a report a few months


ago that says that hundreds of thousands of youngsters on level two


apprentices are dead weight. What a kick in the teeth for the young


people we should be helping onto apprenticeships. We will have a


bankers bonus tax for youth jobs, because youth unemployment has


doubled. THE SPEAKER: There is far too much


noise. People ought to be able to hear the questions and hear the


answers. Whether members respect each other, they ought to respect


the public. Harriet Harman. Long-term youth unemployment has


doubled under his government, and with so many people struggling to


make ends meet, and many driven to relying on food banks, it is an


absolute disgrace that the Lib Dems voted through a tax cut for the


richest. Mr Speaker, on Sunday, the Deputy Prime Minister shared with us


everything he loves about Britain. He loves his cup of tea. He loves


the shipping forecast. And he loves flip-flops. Not so much footwear for


the Debbie Prime Minister, but certainly a way of life. -- the


Deputy Prime Minister. With his posturing... With his broken


promises and posturing, doesn't he relies that he might love written,


but Britain doesn't love him back. The punch line was a long time in


the delivery, and it wasn't really worth waiting for. I know she


doesn't want the facts to get in the way of a preprepared joke, but how


about this? Youth unemployment is lower now than it was in her last


year in office. 1 million more people in relative poverty then than


there are now. 150,000 people more employed now. What we know is that


they are the party of 40p. They are the Porteous sweetheart deals for


the private sector and the NHS. They are the party of Fred Goodwin. And


now they are the party against apprenticeship Crewe. Mr Speaker, he


is siding with the Tories and totally out of touch. So whatever


was said last weekend, no one is going to be fooled by the Lib Dems'


phoney rows with the Tories when they are trotting through the


lobbies with them. They used to dog about two parties


coming together in the national interest. Now they are two parties


bound together by mutual terror of the electorate.


Mr Speaker, however she wishes to characterise things, she has a


record which she needs to defend room and bust, of sucking up to the


City... THE SPEAKER: Order! The deputy prime


and as to's response must be heard. A record of increasing youth


unemployment and bequeathing to this generation the country's worst


peacetime deficit ever. Is that really a record that she is proud


of? As ever, we are clearing up the mess that she left behind.


Mr Speaker, the Government's response to the recent storm damage


to help fishermen and restore the link to Dawlish is appreciated, but


the vital transport links to the Isles of Scilly and its damage has


largely gone unnoticed, not something local authorities can


resolve on their own. Will the Deputy Prime Minister ensure that


delegations can meet the appropriate ministers so that we can seek to


support for a long-term and resilient solution to this problem?


I visited his constituency to see for myself and here for myself the


damage done to many communities by the terrible floods and the extreme


weather in recent times, and I know how long he has been campaigning on


this issue. I will ensure that that meeting does take place with the


relevant Minister. We should also extend condolences to


the family and friends of Bob Crow. The Secretary of State for defence


has issued a ministerial correction where he corrects the full third


that there was no measurable change in the radiation discharge at HMS


Vulcan near Dounreay. Does he agree that the Ministry of Defence should


be fully answerable to the Scottish environmental protection agency? I


would also like to express my condolences to the family and


friends of growth. Whether you agreed with him or not, he had


forthright views and worked tirelessly for what he believed in


and the people he represented. On the issue of Dounreay, the Ministry


of Defence sought to be as open as possible. It is important that all


of us work together in order to ensure that the nuclear deterrent is


managed and maintained safely, and that is exactly what everyone is


seeking to do. We now know that the Leader of the Opposition is opposed


to an EU referendum and won't deliver one. The Deputy Prime


Minister is opposed to an EU referendum and won't deliver one.


The leader of the UKIP party wants an EU referendum, but can't deliver


one. The Prime Minister wants an EU referendum and will deliver it by


2017. Would the stand-in Prime Minister tell the House which of the


party leaders trust the British people and is a real Democrat? As


ever, a pleasure. I'm glad to see he has fans on the other side of the


House too. Since he mentions my right honourable friend, the Prime


Minister, let me quote what he said a couple of years ago at this


Despatch Box when we voted together. "My clear view it is when this


Parliament proposes to give up powers there should be a referendum.


That is the guarantee we have written into law. It is important we


establish clear use for the -- rules for the use of referendums." That is


remains my view. That's what we legislated on. A recent survey of


the TUC reckoned that 67% of hard-working people working in the


private industry will not get a rise this year. How does that square with


the fat cats in the banks getting the big bonuses? The richest in


society are paying more in every year of this Parliament than they


did under any year under Labour. It was his party that let the bankers


run amuck and the party of Fred Goodwin that went on a prawn


cocktail offensive to suck up to them and they wiped off so much of


the value of the British economy it amounts to ?3,000 lost to every


household in the United Kingdom. Is that a record he's proud of? Does


the Deputy Prime Minister accept that the measures that have been


announced so far have had no impact on President Putin? They are


refusing to negotiate with the Ukraine Government and continue to


strengthen their hold on crime? Will the Government press the targeted


economic sanctions against senior members of the Government there and


their supporters in order to reinforce the message that the


annexation of Crimea is unacceptable and is wholly in breach of


international law. I'm sure my honourable friend speaks for


everybody on all sides when we says that we should seek to do everything


to deter the Russians from making the situation any worse, but also


de-escalate and that is why it's terribly important we work together


with our American allies and with countries across the EU and to use


the collective clout of the EU, political and economic, to set out


as we have done a ratchet of sanctions which can be and will be


deployed if de-escalation doesn't happen. Starting, I stress this, I


hope have soon with Russian agreement to enter into contact


talks. On his party's recent defeat by the bus pass Elvis candidate can


his message be summarised by par phrasing the words of a song, "You


ain't nothing but a lap dog." ? Mr Speaker, at least we are not the lap


dog of the bankers, which is what Labour was in office. At least we


didn't crash the British economy. At least we didn't cost every household


?3,000. At least we didn't preside over an increase in relative poverty


and youth unemployment. We are creating a stronger economy and


fairer society that his party failed to do. The Deputy Prime Minister


will be encouraged that the economy is growing faster than expected,


showing the value of this Government's long-term economic


plans. Does he share my satisfaction that it's been achieved through a


resurgence in manufacturing, with companies such as those in my


constituency who have more than doubled in size over the past three


years and are investing in a new ?65 square foot factory in Rugby? I


strongly agree with him. By sticking to the plan, despite all the


overtures from the members opposite to abandon it, we have provided


growth that otherwise would not have taken place. In the car sector we


have seen spectacular success. There is now a vehicle rolling off a


British production line every 20 seconds. We are producing more cars


than ever before. The party opposite presided over decline in


manufacturing, three times as great as what happened in the 1980s. Last


week, my constituents elected a new Labour councillor. Does the Deputy


Prime Minister think it was his party's support for the bedroom tax,


the trebling of tuition fees, unfair cuts to the poor families or


betrayal of the NHS which led them to put bus pass Elvis ahead of the


Liberal Democrats? Putting bus pass Elvis aside for one moment, which I


admit was a novel experience for us as it was for the people of Clifton,


I am wondering did the Labour candidate admit to how much they had


cost every household in Clifton? Did they admit they allowed the bankers


to run amuck in 2008? Did they admit to the fact they were the party that


crashed the British economy? Did anyone on the doorstep apologise to


the people who are the -- for what the Labour Party did to this


country? The Cotswolds is a very special place because of the


stewardship and planning, yet in the last year this is threatened because


of the number of applications for new houses amounting to thousands.


What can my right honourable friend friend do to help resolve this? I


know he feels very strongly about this and there are of course strong


planning protections in place for areas of outstanding natural beauty


and it's some of the country's most important treasures. The framework


makes clear that great weight should be given to conserving areas of


outstanding natural beauty, which have the highest levels of


protection and we announced last week, that areas of outstanding


beauty and national parks will be excluded from new legislation


allowing agriculture buildings to be converted to housing without the


need for application. Can the Deputy Prime Minister confirm that if the


independent review body on Health Service staff pay recommends an


increase the Government will accept that advice or will they freeze the


pay of some of the lowest earners in the NHS for yet another year? We


will make the announcement shortly about the views on the pay review


body recommendations. We want to protect what is the highest number


of nurses employed in the NHS since the NHS was founded. We need to make


sure the NHS continues to employ more rather than the few you are


clinical staff that are employed under Labour to ensure that patients


get the best possible treatment under the NHS. On Monday South


Korean newspapers said that North Korea was due to execute 33 people


for having had contact with a Christian missionary. Given that


there are 250,000 people in prison camps, would the Deputy Prime


Minister urge the BBC World Service to use its existing transmitters to


broadcast into North Korea, especially as more and more North


Koreans have access to radios? He raises a very important issue and as


he knows our embassy in Pyongyang continues to engage critically with


the regime to ensure that there are as many opportunities for dialogue


as possible, including information coming into the country. The BBC


World Service is operationally independent and I understand at the


end of last year they decided that they couldn't continue to offer an


effective and affordable Korean language service. That is a matter


for them itself. One of my constituents died after GPs failed


to uncover her cancer. There are many other who are trying to get


appointments and they are victims too of the dep Prime Minister's


shameless, spineless cap titchlation to the Tories on the NHS? It was his


party that wasted a quarter of a billion of money on deals with the


private sector to undermine the NHS on tariffs which the NHS could not


meet for operations which weren't delivered. Why can't he tell the


House why he tabled the amendment just last week to tell 500,000


youngsters that they can no longer be called apprentices. We stand up


for fairness, we stand up for a strong NHS, he doesn't. Has the


Deputy Prime Minister read the testimony in yesterday's tribunal in


Wales? Does he has sympathy with people with less access to drugs and


does he agree it's the time to give them the opportunity to access the


services. I was appalled and I'm sure everybody would be about the


experiences of one of the honourable gentleman's constituents. In Wales,


the NHS run by Labour, 33% of patients wait more than eight weeks


to access dying no, sir ticks. -- dying no, sirrics. In England it's


only 1%. I think the comparison speaks for itself. This week marks


three years since the bloodshed began in Syria. More than 2.5


million people have fled the country and the dead can no longer even be


counted. We must all bear responsibility for or shameful


famure to intervene, but they are the ones running the country. What


we -- what renewed effort will his Government make to end the slaughter


before all hope fails? He knows my own views. I felt there was a case


for intervention at the time when we voted on this. His party voted


against it, but if he wants to speak with his own party leadership on


that matter he's more than welcome. I agree, the humanitarian


catastrophe there is of an unimaginable scale. We must do


everything we can to help. That is why I think I'm right in saying,


that our humanitarian effort is now the largest this country has ever


delivered. Why also the Home Secretary and others in Government


are now administering in conjunction with the UN a new programme where we


allow the most destitute and desperate refugees some refuge in


this country as well. During the recent floods, the Prime Minister


announced grants of ?5,000 for those homes flooded to put in flood


defence measures in their homes. You can imagine the disappointment then


of people from the 1,000 homes in my constituency who were only flooded


18 months prior who got no such support. Will he look at this policy


with the Prime Minister to see whether the same grants can be made


available to those people who were flooded too? Of course, I will do


so. As someone who witnessed the terrible flooding in my own


constituency some years ago, flooding can hit different parts of


the country in different ways and we must, as we adapt to this new very


difficult reality, we must make sure we build up resilience in all parts


of the country and provide assistance as fully as we can across


the country too. The honourable member for Westmorland agrees with


me that the hated bedroom tax is caing misery for those affected.


Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree with the President of his party or


is friend -- or his friend the Prime Minister? I think and everybody


thinks that we need to deal with this mismatch between large numbers


of people on the housing waiting list, something her party never did


anything to address in 13 years and the fact there are a large numbers


of spare bedrooms which are not being used. Her Government presided


over the change which we are now delivering in the social rented


sector in the private sector. She needs to explain why they want to


support the change in one part and not the other. Portsmouth FC made


history by becoming the UK's largest 100% community buyout. Today, many


clubs face an uncertain future due to lack of financial transparency,


opaque F rules and a structure that promotes irresponsibility in


business and doesn't promote sporting excellence in a woman's


team. We need to lessons, the Select Committee's report and the work of


Supporters Direct and act to protect the interest of clubs, their fans


and ultimately the national game? I certainly agree. I think fans across


the country feel this is a really important issue. We can't just have


big-money hollowouts of the game that everyone loves. I know somes


something that the Secretary of State for culture, media and sport


is looking at on an on going basis and I urge her to take up this


issue. I think it's something we need to keep a close eye so that


sports clubs large and small can thrive in the country. There are


reports that the Department for Work and Pensions is proposing stopping


paying benefits into the Post Office card account. Does the Deputy Prime


Minister support that policy? I don't think it's true and I will


certain confirm it with him, but that's not something which I'm aware


of. Last Thursday 16-year-old Sam from Romsey collapsed in a school PE


lesson. One of the reasons he's still alive is bought the excellent


school already had a defibrillator. They've ordered two more. What steps


is he prepared to take to encourage more schools to have them and will


he command the work of the foundation who have been leading the


way on this issue? I certainly and I'm sure many honourable members


across the House have also come across this issue in schools and


sporting clubs and other recreational facilities in their


constituencies. There are some great organisations. They promote the need


to make them more available and I certainly think we should all work


with the campaign groups to raise the profile of this important issue.


The average nursery cost is now higher than the average mortgage.


Childcare costs have risen five times faster than wages since the


election. Given that we are expecting his long-awaited tax-free


child scare scheme to be announced, can I ask him what discussions he


has had about relationships of this scheme with universal credits and


the cliff edges it creates? What assessment he has made of this


scheme and its impact on price inflation? She raises a very


important issue. As it happens, childcare costs have come down in


England, but they go up in Labour-run Wales. We must do all we


can to help parents and families with the costs, that's why we are


delivering 15 hours of free childcare to all three and


four-year-olds in the country and for the first time ever to


two-year-olds for the most deprived families. You are right, we need to


do more, that's why we will announce the details of the tax-free


childcare offer which will benefit many, many families with the very


high costs across the country. The study end of Deputy Prime


Minister's Questions. Harriet Harman chose areas such as the closure of


accident and emergency, taking away local control from hospitals. She


then moved onto the bedroom tax, which she thought wasn't that


popular among Lib voters. She then moved on to why the live donors had


agreed to cut the top rate of tax to 45p. -- why the Lib Dems had agreed.


Many of you have been saying that Nick Clegg sounded just like David


Cameron when he answered these questions. Viewers were not overly


impressed by the performance on either side. This from a viewer:


Harriet Harman didn't answer a single question, she just made short


speeches. Helen Manning said, Harriet reads the script and Nick


Eaves the answers. I never thought I would want David Cameron back. Alan


says Mr Clegg will need a much better show when he meets Nigel


Farage in April's debates. Poor performance, says Geoffrey J. I hope


this isn't the future of the Nick Clegg /Nigel Farage debate.


Given that we have that debate coming up, what did we learn that of


Mr Clegg's performance? He faces a continuing difficulty, which is, is


he proud to be part of the coalition or angry or embarrassed about it? He


has always argued that come election day, voters would give him credit


for doing things that were unpopular as part of a coalition. Of course


his party are very anxious about that, and you often hear them


complaining about the Tories because they want to create distance. What


was telling was the way Labour MPs clearly had a strategy for the half


hour which was to stick it to Nick Clegg at every opportunity the idea


that he is a friend of David Cameron and is collaborating with him.


Kingussie Nick Clegg and Harriet Harman sitting around the same table


after that? -- can you see? The obvious answer is that we are going


for a majority! I am glad to be so boring and predictable. But why did


Harriet Harman not say anything about Bob Crow? I have no idea. I


tweeted yesterday about Bob Crow when I found out the sudden news. He


wasn't a Labour person. He wasn't a Labour member. He was a very


effective trade union leader, and I think Ed put out a tribute to him


yesterday. Due think she just forgot? I have no idea. And it fell


to a Scottish National Party raise it. I think everybody was shocked


with Bob's sudden death. What did you make of Nick Clegg's


performance? He spent a lot of time pointing out the flaws of the last


Labour government, and explaining that the argument at the start, two


parties coming together in the national interest. But he also


pointed out all the things that have been achieved on the things Harriet


Harman asked about, the fact that there waiting list times are down,


more nurses and doctors. But in the chamber, especially if you are the


Lib Dem leader, you have got to make the coalition argument, because you


have a bank of Tory MPs behind you, and you need that support. The funny


thing was watching George Osborne's face, because he didn't know where


to look, and he wasn't necessarily agreeing with what the deputy was


saying. Especially the bus pass and Elvis stuff. He was going to


explode. But everybody was laughing, because they did come fifth behind


the bus pass Elvis party. Hasn't Nick Clegg with that performance


flown in the face of everything that his tactic has been in recent


months? The tactics of the Lib Dems from Mr Clegg down has been what


they call aggressive differentiation, that they go out of


their way to pick issues where they are different from the Tories, and


they attack the Tories. Danny Alexander at the weekend said there


would be no increase in the threshold for paying income tax if


it hadn't been for the Lib Dems. We had Iain Duncan Smith on immediately


afterwards who totally denied that. But today on PMQs, on network


television, no differentiation at all. It is Deputy Prime Minister's


Questions, not Lib Dem leader's questions. So he is there to


represent the government. And the labour questions will be hostile,


and statistically he gets mainly Tory questions from that side of the


House. What was telling was that he never found a way of turning his


answers into statements about what the Lib Dems have done and what they


hope to do. He never found a way to politicise them, and instead went on


the attack against Labour, and that didn't work. He did have a go at


Dominic Cummings, the special adviser to Michael Gove. And he was


quite personal about it. We are going to have at the election the


unusual position of two parties standing on the same record.


Whatever we set out for the future, the point is that both the Lib Dems


and the Conservatives are going to stand on a record in government. You


support what you have done in government. From our point of view,


the record is increasingly strong. So are there things you are not


proud of? I am proud of everything we have done. And as a government


Minister, I take full responsibility. Fight and fight and


fight again to get you locked to agree to raise the income tax, he


said. I remember reading the pamphlet in 2001 arguing for an


increase in the tax threshold for a Tory manifesto. But it wasn't George


Osborne promising it. Mr Cameron said in 2010, we can't afford it.


No, he said he couldn't afford to promise it. That debate was all


about how you deal with the deficit. Did you resist it or didn't you? I


wasn't in those discussions, but is -- as far as I know, we didn't


resist it, and we are thrilled to put it through because it is a tax


cut for 24 million people. We believe in people having more of


their own money, so to try to argue that people resist a tax cut for 20


formally in people is never going to fly. It was a Lib Dem policy, you


will give them credit for that, surely? Remap it was a coalition


agreement. So Danny Alexander was being economical with the truth when


he said he had to fight it through opposition from the Conservatives? I


don't know why Danny said that. What I do know is that at the election,


we will have cut tax for 25 million people, put more money in their


pockets, which wouldn't have happened under a Labour government.


Increased poverty. There will be a united record on which... Nobody


ever tells Matt finish a sentence, do they?


He is arguing for the coalition to be standing at the next election. I


am saying, no matter what the two different future offers, and ours


will be better, we stand on the same record. But we are the only party


who can deliver a referendum on Europe. Is it not the case that a


lot of conservatives, if there was money around the income tax cuts,


and clearly there was, because raising the threshold cost a tonne


of money, if there was money around to do it, a lot of Tories would like


to have seen the threshold where the 40p rate clicks in raised, because


this is a threshold that originally took in only 1.5 million people, and


has now risen to almost 5 million people. A lot of conservatives are


troubled with the way George Osborne approaches this. They are very


concerned about cuts at the bottom of the income scale, and they are


very concerned about more people being drawn into the 50p rate of


tax. Lets not forget the tax cuts for


millionaires. But it benefits people on the 40p rate as well, because the


change more than offset... More people are paying a higher rate of


tax under the Conservative government, that is one of your


achievements. If you look at national insurance as well, then


adding in the national insurance contributions, as soon as you are


into paying tax at 20p, you have to then adding the national insurance


as well, so the change in the gap between what your employer pays you


and what you take home in your pay packet, there is not much change.


But the focus of the tax cuts has been on people who are working hard.


But do you accept now that the first ?10,000 or so is tax-free, any rise


now doesn't help the poorest any more, because they are not paying


tax. Any rise in that tax threshold is not designed to help the poorest,


and if you really wanted to help the working poor, you should raise the


level where national insurance start, which at the moment you only


have to earn ?5,000 a year before you start paying it. ?10,000 is


still not well paid. The minimum wage, full-time, gets you about


?12,500. So that area is still very much targeted. For millions of


people who are working part-time who would love to earn ?12,500 a year,


they can't get the extra hours. What we need to do is have an economic


recovery that works for working people, not just for those few at


the top. They say they have the fastest recovery of the G-7 country.


And a million more jobs. You are talking about the numbers, but what


I am talking about is underemployment. There are millions


of people who are having a real struggle in this country to make


ends meet who want to work more hours and can't get them. Your tax


cuts are doing nothing to help them. I am talking about the millions of


people who are getting more financial security because of the


way that this works. I am talking about moving on, because this is a


foretaste of the debate we will have next week when it is budget day.


Working forward to it! Ben, thank you very much.


Now, politicians seem to have a rough old time of it. No one likes


them and many voters just can't be bothered. But Kevin Meagher from the


Labour Uncut blog isn't blaming politicians, he's blaming you - yes,


you, the electorate! So should we be dragged kicking and screaming to the


ballot box? Here's his soapbox. Politics and pliions have taken a


bark from the public. For me, it's not always their fault. It's not


just a new politics, but a new electorate. We have become a nation


of the wilful ignorance. We don't understand the decisions taken or


the alternatives and sometimes it feels we don't want to. We don't


follow current affairs like previous generations did. Ignorance isn't so


much bliss as standard these days. According to a recent poll, 47% are


angry with politicians. While 25% of us are bored with them. Only 2% are


inspired. It wasn't always this way. Labour's 1945 election landslide has


been eS described to politically motivated servicemen casting their


votes on behalf of a better world. The idea of voting for a better


world doesn't compute. Politicians therefore try a different tactic.


There is a limit how to dumbed down the system should become. Remember


Gordon Brown proclaiming his love of the Arctic monkies, why can't they


respond by real people? Why not say, "I'm a middle-aged man. I prefer


Radio 4." Then there was Tony Blair dropping his Hs and who can remember


David Cameron on Jonathan Ross's sofa being requested a question I


can't repeat on the BBC. It doesn't work. It's not that I'm not voting


out of apathy, but it's indifference and exhaustion from the political


class that has been going on for generations now. My answer to fixing


this is greater compulsion, or duty is a defining characteristic of


adulthood. Pay attention because it matters, contribute because it adds


to the common good. Vote to put whoever you want in here or face a


fine. Brave words from Kevin. He's with us now. What has been the


reaction to your proposal? We'll come to that of a fine, but first,


saying the electorate is ignorant and not into current affairs. It's


slightly more nuanced. I've had an interesting reaction this morning.


It's ranged from he's right, to the man's a complete idiot and


everything in between. It's good. That's what it should be about.


People are interested in issues and debating things, but they've turned


off party politics and I think it's really bad because there are - there


are limits. There are only other limits. People are interested in


issues, but not in party politics. Isn't that the fault of the system


and politicians who are in it than the people? We the public have got


to take the culpability. We need to do something about it. You look at


membership of political parties. It's fallen off the Clive. We now


have four out of ten adults routinely not voting in jexes. There


is something going wrong. We have -- general elections. There is


something going wrong. We have to look at the way it is practised.


Labour and Ed Miliband think they are going to entice loads more


people to sign up in this era We have the aspiration. Whose fault is


it? I believe that the people are right and when they give us messages


we have to listen and try to change the way we do things. I've been


doing a thing called the People's Politics inquiry where I've talked


to people who have stopped voting and the really interesting thing is


they are engaged in the local community. It's like someone has


unplugged them from party politics and we have to find new ways of


actually engaging with them. I also think it's part of the cynicism of


our age. It's part of the fact that we aren't having big philosophical


arguments about the nature of politics and I also think some


people don't think that they can affect things any more. We have to


re-engage people by having them develop the self-belief that


politics is about changing the way the country works and if you


contribute and you get involved then you'll be able to help. The message


is not getting through. Do you think a level of conpull shun would turn


it -- cople pull shun would turn -- come plunges turn it around? I don't


think so. If people have a strong view one way are the other and vote


to express that view, that is different to abstaining, by staying


at home. The world has changed in so many ways, especially to allow


people to pick and mix in many parts of their life and a party political


system inevitably presents packages rather than individual sections. I


strongly agree with the point that people aren't engaged. They are


engaged in issues and wanting to change individual things, but where


that traditionally would have led to engagement in a party package - The


choice isn't there. If they don't like the three parties or the five,


they don't vote? There are hundreds of parties. There is an abundance.


The day after the general election either the leader of the


Conservative Party or Labour Party will be Prime Minister. That is just


a fact. We can talk - perhaps we should change the system, but to


paraphrase Churchill this is the least worst system that we have. The


issue is we can reform politics and we should have weekend voting and


electronic voting. Shut the country down for a weekend and say it


matters. We should stop running elections on a Thursday to suit


Civil Servants. It came out strongly in my inquiry. Lots of people said


this morning there should be a box on the ballot paper saying, "None of


the above." I agree with that. That is a kind of informed opposition to


the system. There should be a suggestions box too. Do you accept


that compulsory voting will not happen here? The parties don't


embrace this, but all we are seeing is a system that is diminishing. We


have to revive the way that we reach out as political parties to


communities and that's what we are doing in the Labour Party. We are


doing it with the community development work we are doing, and


we are the only party that has put members on since 2010. We have got


big aspirations to do so with the changes we made last week. Thank


you, Kevin. Imagine you are an MP. I've done it. It's Wednesday. It is,


you know. You've slipped on your tie, your marine jumper and suit


jacket. You've got - I'm not wearing a tie. I'm talking about him. You


check your phone and you realise you've not been invited on to the


Daily Politics, so you truth off to Prime Minister's questions, but with


all the noise in the chamber do you annoy the MPs on the other side?


Here is Giles with our top five tips for getting up the opposition's


nose. There's always the good old-fashioned heckle which isn't


picked up by the microphones, but can be by a bat-erred Speaker. If


one minister is heckling another you yourself Mr Hancock are undergoing


an apprenticeship to become a statesman but I think there are some


years to run. Order, order. If things get really Badu can always


walk. The Lib Dems followed Ed Davey when he was eventually kicked out of


the chamber back in 2008. Why, because they wanted a referendum on


the UK's membership of the E. How times change. Just like in space,


no-one can hear you scream. Why not adopt a visual gesture to wind up


your opposite nun, but be careful you don't strie to a salute and you


are left high and dry when the economy isn't flight lining at all.


Or you can take a tip from your colleagues from the House of Lords


and opt for another type of hand gesture altogether and they say the


Lords is a more gentile sort of place. Or, adopt a form of attack


that's both silent and deadly. Yes, it's Angela ekele and her chilling


combination of a pointed finger and a paralysing death stare. She later


tweeted, "Hashtag power of silence." Do it again. I can do it again. Who


were you staring at? The Prime Minister's PPS who was yelling nasty


things at Ed during his questions and we were all trying to be quiet.


He shut up. Was he frightened? I think he was very frightened. Be


very afraid. That lasted 12.6 seconds. I think it trended on


Twitter. You must have done it intentionally? Yes. I'm a chess


player. I grew up being able to stare at things for long amounts of


time. How long have you been practising? 53 years. Is the PPS


still alive? , but he has never yelled at heed. Why were you


heckling one of your coalition ministers? I Wayne. I was -- I


wasn't. I was making a comment at the member wanting to be a Shadow


Chancellor and I obviously got - I wasn't saying that Joe Swinson


didn't want it. How did you feel when you were ticked off by the


speaker? I thought it was an amusing put-down. You have to take the rough


with the smooth. And you weren't shouting at Joe Swinson? I wasn't,


no. She thought you were. Really? I was having a go. Where is the


jumper? It's warmed up. Just time before we go to give you the answer,


1941, the year FDR was sworn in for a third time. He won a peace ticket


and of course by November he was at war with Japan and then Germany.


Westminster damaged by a bomb that year. Press the button. Hans pB


lesage from Wirral. That's it. Thanks to our guests. The news is on


BBC One. Joe will be back tomorrow at noon with all the big stories. I


am. :


Download Subtitles