14/03/2014 Daily Politics

Afternoon, books, welcome to the Daily Politics. Tony Benn, one of

the Labour left's most iconic figures, has died at the age of 88,

he passed away surrounded by his family, to which he was always

close. Tributes are coming from all sides. Ed Miliband called him a job

in the powerless, David Cameron says it is a sad day for British

politics. -- a champion for the powerless.

The West says the referendum in Crimea is illegal and warns Russia

of tough sanctions. Following the Edward Snowden revelations, the

European Parliament agrees sweeping new rules on data protection. A

triumph for individual freedom or just more red tape? And when it

comes to getting ahead in politics, does background matter, sex, drugs,

money, the old school tie? Do voters care way you came from or what you

got up to in the past? All that in the next hour, and with

us for the next half-hour is the associate editor and columnist at

the Sunday Times, Camilla Cavendish, welcome to the Daily Politics. He

was a Labour Cabinet minister in the 1960s and 1970s, a strong if

divisive voice of the Labour left, a prolific diarist and in later life a

political campaign outside Parliament. But that rather

understates the life that Tony Benn lead. He died this morning at his

home in West London surrounded by his family. He had been ill for some

time. His family released a short statement saying, we will miss all

his love, which has sustained us through our lives. We are comforted

by the memory of his long, full and inspiring life, and so proud of his

devotion to helping others as he sought to change the world for the

better. Political leaders have been paying

their respects, here is Ed Miliband, who used to work for Tony Benn when

he was a teenager. It is obviously a sad day. I think Tony Benn will be

remembered as a champion of the powerless, a conviction politician,

somebody of deep principle and integrity. You always knew what he

stood for and who he stood up for, and I think that is why he was at my

right across the political spectrum. There are people who agreed with him

and disagreed with him, including in my own party, but people admired the

sense of conviction and integrity that shone through. The Prime

Minister has also been commenting, this is what he had to say. One of

the fundamental principles set out by the Leveson Inquiry are met by

the Royal Charter, and all have been accepted by the industry over the

last three months. In a number of areas, the media have accepted

additional measures that go beyond the recommendations. These include a

dedicated fund for investigations, making publishers be accountable for

all material, including photos, and a whistle-blowing hotline. As a

result of all of this, we have a workable system...

We apologise for that, that is obviously the wrong clip from the

Prime Minister, who was full of praise for Tony Benn this morning.

He said that although he did not agree quite often with what he

said, he admired him as a tenacious politician, a great writer and

campaign. What are your thoughts? My generation mostly would have seen

Tony Benn as the outsider, the national treasure, he made wonderful

speeches, and he was very authentic, and for a lot of us he

represented the conviction politician that many others feel

there is enough of. He was a divisive character for me because he

was quite important in my childhood. One of my father's veterans was

Brian McGee, who is a philosopher now, but he switched to the SDP in

the 1980s and lost his seat in 1983. My first political memory was of him

losing that seat, and I remember him saying the party has changed, it is

not me, the party has moved, and I think Benn, you can argue that Roy

Jenkins led the Labour Party, but Tony Benn was so important in that

debate, and he had a whole host of ideas which a lot of people in the

party felt were unacceptable. To look back now and remember his

arguments about unilateral disarmament, leaving NATO,

effectively... Withdrawing from the European Union. That is very

interesting, because he said it was bureaucratic and centralised, which

was a shrewd point. Of course, what he wanted to put in place in Britain

was also bureaucratic and centralised, so a slightly ironic

position for him to take. We will follow up some of these beams. Tony

Benn first became an MP way back in 1950, a long time ago, and he was

involved in some of the most bitter Labour Party battles of the late

20th century during his long career. To some on the left, he was a hero.

Too much of the mainstream, he was blamed for keeping the party out of

power for a generation. In later life, he became an over until a

figure, popular on the lecture circuit and a prolific diarist.

Political correspondent Iain Watson looks back at his life.

To give 100% support to those who do not or cannot or will not pay the

poll tax! For much of his political career, Benn was seen as a left-wing

firebrand, taking the argument for socialism onto the streets. His

first victory against the establishment was when, as Anthony

Wedgwood Benn, he refused to inherit his father's peerage so he could

remain an MP, a battle fought not on the barricades but in the courts and

ultimately in the House of Commons. You have defeated the Tory Cabinet,

the House of Lords... In a minister in Harold Wilson's government, he

was seen as a moderniser and a technocrat, he helped create the

Concorde project. Wilson later said that Tony Benn immatured with age.

Certainly, he was one of the few politicians to become more left wing

in office. In 1981, after the Labour election defeat, he split the party

down the middle, challenging Denis Healey to the leadership and losing

narrowly. His critics say that it helped keep Labour from power for

almost two decade. He argued for the nationalisation of big banks,

withdrawal from the EU. The Sir Humphrey Applebys of every country

of Europe have got together, and if we do this, the Dutch say the

Belgians will not object over what the Italians said... So the minister

has got no power anyway! In 2001, he said he was leaving Parliament to

take politics and was a leading figure in the campaign to stop the

Iraq War. The popularity of his one-man shows, where people page to

view his thoughts, confirmed he had completed the journey from dangerous

radical to national institution. He was a prolific diarist, a chronicler

of contemporary events. And just last year, he told the BBC he

remained convinced that politics shouldn't be about shoddy

compromise. My mother said to me once, she said, all decisions,

including political decisions, are basically moral. Is it right or

wrong? Tony Benn often declared that politics should be about policy, not

personality, but today Westminster has lost one of its most distinctive

and distinguished figures. Tony Benn, who died this morning at

the age of 88. Shirley Williams was one of the gang four rebels who went

off to found the Social Democratic Party in 1981, and from Birmingham

we are joined by Clare Short. Shirley Williams first, I would

suggest Tony Benn is one of the reasons you left the Labour Party.

Yes, that is probably true. I was actually a close friend of his in

the 1960s, he was the minister, the Postmaster general, and he was

tremendous and on top of technology, Acorn computers and so on, all of

this in his period. He really understood it better than anyone

else in the cabinet. The thing was at that time he was still very

clearly, essentially, a mainstream Labour Party supporter. He was on

the centre-left, not on the far left. Not, above all, on the kind of

anti-leadership left, which he later became. I think that he was hugely

popular in the constituency with activists, he was always the top of

the pile, and he was also a brilliant speaker, but one of the

things people have not said about him which was true was he was a

tremendously polite and courteous man. He never went into

personalities. He said politics is about policy, not personalities, and

he lived by that. Therefore people were surprised that he behaved so

well. He was not partisan, he was passionately partisan but not sourly

partisan, a big difference. But I have to say that on several issues,

Babb is the central one was Europe, we saw the world in a completely

different way. Clare Short, Mr Benn was enormously popular on the left

but not popular with all of the left of the Labour Party, was he? No, I

think, as Shelley says, he was an absolute gentleman, he had a lovely

marriage and family. He was very charming. -- Shirley. But I think he

got a high from the populist backing and became an oppositionist. If he

had behaved in a different way, he would have been a leading figure.

Someone said he was the Tony Blair of his time in terms of his

communication skills. He gave an interview not so long ago, a few

years ago, saying Enoch Powell said that all little careers end in

failure, mine ended a long time ago. He said, I have made mistakes. He

could have been a much bigger influence, but he went for the

populist, ultraleft, popular with some, cutting himself off from the

mainstream and potential leadership. And I think that was a loss. Was the

turning point for Mr Benn, Michael Foot had become leader, he took over

from Jim Callaghan, and he beat Denis Healey, but then Denis Healey

stood for the deputy leadership, and against, I understand it, a lot of

advice from the left, Benn stood for that as well, almost won, didn't,

but then began to flirt with Militant Tendency instead. Is that

fair? That is what happened. When Michael Foot won, he said, never

underestimate the passion for unity. The party had divisions and wanted

to come together, so it elected Michael. Then Tony, making the

decision in the middle of the night without consulting anyone, decided

to challenge for the deputy leader and stir up the divisions again. I

think that is when he departed the mainstream. And he went off on a

more and more sort of populist with the left grassroots, and at that

time, of course, various groups were coming into the Labour Party, and I

think he got a bit captured by the rousing support he got from those

elements. But that said, he was always a brilliant speaker, such

clarity in what he said. When people heard him, they would say, I do not

really agree with him, but isn't he wonderful? And always great company.

Charming, and when his son Hilary Benn became a junior minister in my

old department of international development, Tony came to the

Commons, went into the visitors' gallery, and there were tears of

pride rolling down his cheeks that his son was there. Did you ever kiss

and make up? Not really. We never broke off either, Clare's

description is absolutely right, he responded to this adulation from the

far left. We did not break up, we simply drifted apart, and on an

issue of policy, not on personal friendship. Was it Europe more than

anything else? He wanted a siege economy with huge import controls.

He wanted to nationalise, I think, at least the top 25 if not top 100

companies. In 1980, he spoke to the Labour Party conference and said,

within days of being in power, we should repatriate everything back

from Brussels. And of course it was against the nuclear deterrent as

well. But was it Europe that was the big divide? There are different

views, I shared many of his views about social policy, I believed in a

more equal society, I favoured comprehends of schools, all that

kind of thing. The big division was that I saw Europe coming together as

being the way to end wars in the West, in Western Europe at least.

And it seemed to me the way the future lay. I think the indication,

for example, one of the reasons he fought Denis Healey, who was after

all a damn good Labour man, was that Denis Healey exemplified the power

of the international markets, the power of the international

institutions, and Tony, I think, oddly enough would have nothing to

do with that, he would not even be there to oppose them. He simply

wished they didn't exist, he looked curiously backwards. Interesting how

attitudes changed towards him, because we forget that at the time

he was a hate figure for the Conservatives and he wasn't that

popular with a lot of his own party as well! Are member he once said,

when it was put to him that he was a national treasure, he himself said

yes, now that I am regarded as harmless! Indeed. That is how it

was. The meetings were packed out. People love to hear him. People who

did not vote Labour or would not agree with him. They loved him. He

became a national treasure. Because he was so eloquent and did try to

raise issues of principle, when people knew he was stimulating their

thinking and not going to do something crazy that would put the

economy on the rocks, they would love him. Do we know what turned him

left? In the 60s, he was moderniser. He was forward-looking.

He did not seem to have much to do with unions or the Labour left. He

was always going on about Concorde. He was seen as the future of the

Labour Party. Yes, he was. He had a growing suspicion of civil servants.

That mirrors the feeling on the right wing of the Conservative

Party. Tony disliked them a lot. He thought they were there to betray

what the ministers wanted to do. The other big factor was both the

leaders, he preferred Callaghan to Wilson. Both Prime Minister is he

saw as in the business of selling out. He took on more and more

powerful position in order to force people not to sell out. That really

meant he could not believe in the fundamental compromise at the heart

of democratic government. It is inescapable. Does he belong with the

figures in British politics who are huge figures, controversial and

divisive as well? I think of Bevan and is goggle on the left and

Thatcher and Powell on the right. Do we put Tony Benn into that category?

What I would like to actually ask both of you is whether you think he

has made people more cynical about politics. On the one hand, later on,

he was marvellous. He gave you hope and hope for things to change. On

the other hand, I cannot help but think he felt all mainstream

politicians were going to let people down. That ends up making you feel

cynical. He stood apart from the main run of politicians by being an

uncompromising idealist. They all sold out one way or another. As he

went on, a lot of what he advocated was impossible. It was backward

looking. The world economy was as it was. In that sense, he was the

beacon of the left but actually it was impractical, what he was

advocating. In his later years, when he was the old Testament prophet, as

Michael Foot said, he was more comfortable and people enjoyed that.

Really he vacated the struggle of practical policy to make the country

fairer. He went off to an impossible list position which was supported by

some but did not help. It has been a pleasure to listen to you. Now, what

makes a suitable or unsuitable politician? Nigel Farage hit the

front pages this week after allegations about his personal life.

The lawyers have asked me to say they are unsubstantiated. But does

anyone really care? Does it matter if the next Tory manifesto is being

written by a gang of old Etonians? And if, heaven forbid, an MP was

involved in some scrapes and shenanigans before entering

parliament, then is that really a problem? So, how much do people care

about the backgrounds and pasts of these men? In a recent survey, most

people said that they were annoyed if an MP had never had a real job.

55% in fact. Bad news for ex-special advisers, local politicians, think

tankers, or even journalists. Worrying news for David Cameron. A

lot of people think going to Eton doesn't make a good politician, with

38% complaining that old Etonians don't understand how real people

live. But there's good news for any politician with a racy past or a few

youthful indiscretions to their name. Drug-taking, going bankrupt,

or being caught shoplifting. The public don't seem to mind. Time to

own up perhaps? The daily politics is always

available. We sent our Adam out to see what people think. Parliment is

looking pretty nice in the background. What do the public think

about what the politicians have in their backgrounds? School is not

medically important but exposure to life and industry is incredibly

important. Having a real job? Having a real job brings you life

experience you need to make decisions properly. What about the

issue that all the pals of David Cameron went to Eton? Does it

matter? It is a bloody good job they did. Does it matter what they are

doing behind closed doors? If they are hypocrites, yes. Dodgy? I do not

think so. Wide and if a politician committed a crime in their use,

would that be a deal-breaker? If they did something really bad? No.

What is really bad? Stole a car, let's say. No. I would need to know

more about the circumstances. Doing the right for the community is

important. Whatever politician had taken drugs when they were a

teenager? We all make mistakes. With us now is Peter Kellner from YouGov,

who did the survey and the former Conservative MP, Jerry Hayes,

himself no stranger to the odd controversy. In fact, he's just

written a book about his time in Westminster which purports to be a

no holds barred expose of parliamentary scandals.

The public do not like a politician who has not got a real job, he went

to Eton and had the right connections to get into politics.

David Cameron is stuffed, isn't he? You'll agree with these should Ed

Miliband be more popular. One of the things the moment, you take the

three main party leaders and they are all unpopular. I do not remember

a time in the last 40, 50 years, when all three have been unpopular

at the same time. We know why Mr Cameron is not seem to connect. Is

it equally because he is posh in Eton and the rest of it? Is it true

the North London son of a Marxist professor finds it hard to connect

with these people? It is about not having had a real job. If you

include journalism and think tanks and being a special adviser and all

of that, none of the three party leaders David Cameron, Nick Clegg,

Ed Miliband, none of them in that sense have had real jobs. When you

go back to the 20th century and Stanley Baldwin. He did not enter

parliament he was 50. At about the age of 60, keep became Prime

Minister. That is how they did it then and they do not do it like that

now. If you look at Mr Clegg and Mr Cameron, they are all keen from the

same kind of stone in some way. They all went to Oxbridge and came to be

special advisers within a mile off where we are now. We talk about

authenticity. Bob Crow, Tony Ben and Nigel Farage. Is that what they

lack? I do not think David Cameron lacks that he is a really really

nice guy. Nick Clegg is nice as well. They are desperately

unpopular. All the major parties are bitterly divided. Really, hopelessly

divided. Not as divided as in the days of Tony Blair -- Tony Benn. We

were talking about the battles with Tony Benn and Denis Healey. Mrs

Thatcher was divided with the wets and the dries. This did keep them

out of power for 18 years. When you had the divisions under Margaret

Thatcher, the Tories had, for much of the time, a huge majority and it

did not matter very much. The problem now is the collision between

the divisions, which are more personal and less political than

they used to be. Also with the Parliamentary arithmetic. It is like

the Syria vote last August. Had the Conservatives had a majority vote of

100, they would have got that three. I was one-year below Mr Cameron. He

should not be embarrassed. What did you see about him? It is a question

of, what do you mean by real job? Cameron, for six or seven years, was

employed in the private sector. Hang on! We need to be a bit careful. One

of the things that people worry about, and I worry about, the point

you are making is that lots of politicians do not know how to run

their departments because they have never run anything. The anything you

can say about Cameron is they have had longer and he had some time in

the private sector, which is different from a lot of other MPs.

It depends what you regard as real job. It is about what kind of

private sector jobs really count. He did not have to take tough,

managerial decisions. He did not have to face shareholders who were

upset. Michael Green is a very difficult man. That is another good

point. He was with Lamont went all is another good point. He was with

Lamont went all as difficulties occurred. He has been forged and

metal out of a crisis. Perhaps all politicians should take comfort from

the pole that strongly suggest people really do not care what you

get up to, unless you murdered your granny. I was surprised how low the

figures were. If you are shoplifting as a teenager... I think the thing

that has surprised me most was politicians who pretend they are

happily married, and are in fact later come out as gay. I thought

people would prevent that -- resent that but they do not. He kept me as

a columnist so he has impeccable judgment. What is the biggest

revelation? What will shock people is the amount of drink and the

amount of bile and there was in the House of Commons. You remember Ron

Brown, dear old Ron Brown. He picked up the maze and smashed it on the

floor. One of the bigwigs came in in the middle of the day punched him in

the stomach, threw him out of the House and he was given a good

kicking. Ceaseless mocking of the Lib Dems is a favourite

parliamentary pastime and this week has brought fresh material. Lord

Biro, a candidate for the Bus Pass Elvis Party received 67 votes in a

Nottingham by election, with Lib Dem candidate Tony Marshall coming last

with 56. Oh, dear. But is there a bigger

problem hidden by this jolly facade? Could this result spell the

beginning of the end for the Lib Dems? Before we get to that, let's

remind ourselves of some past political upsets.

You can get off back to Mexico, knowing your attempt to buy the

British legal system has failed. Richard Taylor, whose sole policy

was the protection of Kidderminster Hospital.

I'm delighted to say Elvis lives! And he joins us from Nottingham.

Well, in fact it's Lord Biro, aka David Bishop. You seem to have a lot

of names. Wellcome. To what do you attribute your defeat in this

remarkable by-election? I think the Lib Dems did not campaign hard

enough. That was a big mistake on their part. They would have been

better off not standing actually. Given this success you have had,

relative success, what are you going to do next? I have sent a message to

Mr Putin saying, would he leave Ukraine, the Crimea, and invade

Meadow Lane, Nottingham, and take over Notts County the bull crap to

save them from relegation? -- Notts County Football Club. How highly

which you rate your chances? A lot higher than that. Do you fancy

perhaps standing next to Nick Clegg up the road? Someone has already

asked me that. Apparently he is not very popular in Sheffield. He may

not be the leader in 12 months' time. We have another 12 months to

go. Maybe Skegness possibly. I do not know. You have the bug? The

political bug. I have had that for a long while since 1997 when I stood

against Neil Hamilton. That was when I was Martin Bell in the white suit.

I have had it since then. Stay with us. Joining me in the studio to make

sense of it all is Stephen Tall, editor of Lib Dem voice.

There may be little significance in a local government by-election, but

you have lost eight out of your last 15 deposits, 11 seats in Scotland,

is this the writing on the wall? I don't think so, I do not think the

North Clifton Ward in Nottingham, with old you respect to the

inhabitants, is not necessarily pointing to what will happen at the

general election. But you are right that being in government ain't the

most popular thing to do, better to be in opposition in terms of poll

ratings, but the only way you change things is in government. But isn't

the risk that you have been in government, you have done the

unpopular things, a lot of people did not want you to be in government

with the Tories in the first place, and the risk is that if things are

starting to come right, for example in the economy, the reduction of the

deficit, whatever, the Tories, being political bruises, will take all the

credit for this? Are you suggesting they would try to take credit for

Lib Dems? They already have on the policy of taking people out of tax.

You will have seen the poll in the Evening Standard last night showing

that more voters, 45%, give credit to the Lib Dems for that. We will

see, I am hoping that was something that was our top priority and has

been delivered in government will have some payback for the party, but

we will have to wait until May 2015 to find out. If you get a thumping

in the European elections, as Elvis was indicating, does that mean the

leadership could come under question again? I think it is very unlikely

but possible that the Lib Dems could get entirely wiped out at the

European elections. You could lose every MEP? It is possible, if it

sinks to 6% of the vote, you could see them or lose. I don't think it

will happen, but what you see with Nick Clegg trying to take the fight

to Nigel Farage is do two things, appealed to the segment of the

population that is pro-European and galvanise Lib Dem supporters who

might otherwise be a bit worried about what the party has done in

coalition. It is about saying, this is a reason to vote for the Lib

Dems, shore up the vote that often does not turn up for European

elections. How would you assess the Lib Dems' situation at the moment?

They did better in Eastleigh than national polls suggested. The UKIP

factor is critical, and Clifton North, the Lib Dems would just

beaten by Elvis, they were beaten by UKIP, who got 500 votes to the Lib

Dems' 50. We are really looking at significant inroads from UKIP, and

as you say, I agree that the Lib Dems could really suffer at the

European elections. The only thing to hang onto is a pro-European

platform, because this would be true across Europe - the anti-European

parties are going to succeed, and that leaves your position poor! A

final word of advice for the Lib Dems, Elvis? You have got Clegg on

your face, that is due to me, sorry about that! We will keep an eye on

your political career, Elvis, thank you for joining us. Thank you very

much! Coming up in a moment, our regular look at what has been going

on in European politics, but now it is time to say goodbye to Camilla

Cavendish, thank you for being with us.

For the next half hour we will be focusing on Europe, discussing the

situation in Ukraine and the new rules on data protection agreed by

MEPs in Strasbourg this week. First, a guide to the latest from Europe in

just 60 seconds. Aired on the referendum in Crimea,

German Chancellor Angela Merkel warned Russia it faces massive

damage economically and politically if it didn't ease tensions in

Ukraine. -- ahead. Clarity from Labour about Europe, sort of, Ed

Miliband promised a referendum on membership but only if the UK was

asked to transfer more powers Brussels. American billionaire money

guru George Soros, who broke the pound, told the European Union might

not survive long lasting stagnation. MEPs voted to introduce a common

charger for all mobile phones. And finally, good news for commission

Vice President Viviane Reding after a cottage pie she bought on her last

trip to the UK was next. I got a lot of offers from people who said, my

mother makes the best cottage pie in Great Britain, I will send one to

you! People have been very unhappy that the cottage pie was stolen.

Lunch, anyone? Who could have thought a cottage pie

would have such problems? With us for the next 30 minutes, two MEPs,

Syed Kamal, who represents London for the Conservatives, and Graham

Watson, who represents the south-west of England and Gibraltar

for the Liberal Democrats. Welcome to you both. As you head towards the

European elections, not that far away, are you beginning to run down

now? Well, you could say we are beginning to step up. We had more

votes this week than normally, and next time we meet on the floor of

the house in Strasbourg, we will have a lot of votes to get through.

There is a lot of legislation to be cleared, we have to clear the decks.

When do you go down for the campaign? Campaigning starts after

Easter and will be through to the 22nd of May, when we vote. What did

you make of some people who have been saying that in the UK the Lib

Dems could be wiped out at the European elections? I don't think we

will be wiped out at all. Every party is going to suffer from the

expected surge in the UKIP vote, probably Labour will sublet less

than the Tories and the Lib Dems, but we have to be out of there

fighting the case for staying in the European Union and trying to face

down the narrow nationalists in UKIP. What would be a good result

for the Conservatives? We will be focusing on the agenda for reform,

and making sure that people are aware, if you want a referendum on

the EU, only one party will give you a choice. But that won't be

determined by voting on the European elections. One of the things David

Cameron is making quite clear is how important the European elections

are, whether people like it or not. The European Parliament has equal

power with the 28 governments when it comes to legislation, and that

shows how important MEPs are. If you want reform, it is important to get

a good set of Conservative MPs. You will probably lose some, won't you?

We will see, we will continue pushing the agenda for reform. John

Kerry has been meeting with Sergei Lavrov in London in what looks like

a final effort to broker a deal on the deepening crisis in Ukraine. The

talks, head of a referendum in Crimea on Sunday. -- come ahead.

Residents of the region, which is largely ethnic Russian, will decide

whether or not to join the Russian Federation. These are not looking

too good from the western point of view, here is a gloomy sounding

Foreign Secretary. The fact that so far Russia hasn't actually taken any

action to de-escalated tensions makes this a formidably difficult

task today, and I think that therefore we have to be realistic

about that. In the absence of progress today, at the European

Union, the United Kingdom, we will move to further measures, as agreed.

If this referendum goes ahead and no diplomatic way forward is found. We

are joined from Cambridge by Labour MEP Richard Howard, Labour's foreign

affairs spokesman in the European Parliament. Hearing calls for

sanctions on Russia, but in the world of realpolitik, it seems

pretty clear now that Crimea is lost, that Crimea is back part of

Russia again. Agreed? We can't agree, because the invasion of

Russia was clearly against international law, and if we

simply... Invasion of Crimea, you mean. You would call it an invasion?

The European Parliament in a resolution I sponsored, proposed

called it an invasion. And if we ever decide to come to a deal which

recognises the change, it is an invitation not to Vladimir Putin but

to others around the world to use military force, so what I feel will

happen with Crimea is that it is going to turn into another of the

frozen conflicts of the kind we see in Eastern Europe and Central Asia.

You know, I have stood in Georgia after the Russian invasion looking

across the borderline at 3000 Russian troops, so I know what it

looks like, and there is a huge fear, and therefore we cannot accept

this annexation of Crimea, and of course 8500 troops on the borders

with Ukraine and the statement of the Foreign Ministry in Moscow this

morning, talking about their rights to defend their Russian compatriots,

we must fear that there may be further military action in eastern

Ukraine. Let's dated in two stages, assuming that the Crimea boats to

join Russia in this blather -- plebiscite, whether or not it is

democratic and accurate. -- votes. If that is what happens and the Bush

and say they have done it, whether they accept the will of the Crimean

people, what should Europe do? -- and Russia says. It is an

illegitimate referendum against the Ukrainian constitution where there

isn't even an option for there to be the previous position of being part

of Ukraine on the ballot paper, and it is being held at the barrel of a

gun. I know that, but what does Europe do? Europe has said, if the

referendum goes ahead, there must be more consequences. What worries me

about that is, when they make those statements, when John Kerry talks

about 11th hour talks, we hope that it succeeds, but there is no sign

whatsoever on the ground that the referendum will not go ahead. As you

say, the result is a foregone conclusion, the Ukrainians and the

Tatars in Crimea going to boycott it, so we know the result already.

And I am deeply worried that the source of rhetoric we have heard

from William Hague, but from other European Foreign Ministers too,

talking about consequences, has not yet been followed through by

actions. I think on Monday when the foreign ministers meet, there will

be a move towards greater sanctions, but when we saw that very

unfortunate incident where the private Downing Street brief was

photographed and made public, I have been asked in meetings in Brussels,

is Cameron more interested in defending Russian banks in London,

or will he support asset freezes? I do not believe that is his

motivation, we hope it isn't, that that is being asked of us in

Brussels. That was embarrassing, but I suggest the bigger issue is

whether Angela Merkel is prepared to go along with sanctions against

Russia and run the risk of the gas being cut off. In a speech to the

Bundestag this week, she was right, but she missed a trick. She should

have gone straight to Moscow the moment this happened, in exactly the

way that Sarkozy took himself to the Russians went into Georgia. Had she

done that and banter this on the table, because Germany is such an

important trading partner for Russia, she might have secured

something. -- and banged her best. I hope the talks being held in London

will come to something, and I hope John Kerry will be able to persuade

Sergei Lavrov that Russia should withdraw its troops, but if they

don't, we have to put sanctions in place. I will bring in your

Conservative MEP, are we ready for this? Are we up for it? If we do

bring in some tough sanctions, are we really ready for Russia then

saying, right, the gas pipeline is being cut off? Are we ready for the

Kremlin, which can be ruthless, to say, OK, that is what you are doing,

we are taking over the BP assets in Russia and we will take the VW car

plant as well? Are we ready for this? 100 years ago, when troops

were moved across the border, it led to the First World War. What we are

talking about is not a game of Risk, this is the 21st century. If you

move your troops into another country, there will be serious

consequences. But are we ready? If we act against Russia with economic

sanctions, are we ready for Kremlin retaliatory action on our European

economic assets in Russia? That is what I am asking. You have to look

at the consequences of what has already been announced. The Russian

stock market is falling, today's newspapers show a doubling in the

outflow of capital from Russia. What has been announced so far is already

starting to hurt, and further sanctions will hurt more. Back to

our colleague in Cambridge, we talked about Crimea, but I would

suggest it is already lost, it is a done deal, and the big challenge now

is with the mobilisation of the Russian army on the Ukraine border,

with Russian television now spewing out regular propaganda that there

has been a fascist takeover in Ukraine, that Akron provocateurs

look as if they have arrived in the east as well to cause trouble, that

the big issue is going to be what happens if and when Russia takes

East Ukraine as well. Firstly, on Germany, Mrs Merkel has become the

bugbear in the media, but she and the others in the European

Conservative group, not the one that the British Tories are in, but the

influential one, that group has said that they want to move towards

Ukraine having a membership of the European Union. We are already

talking about the association agreement being signed as soon as

the summit in two weeks Carol time, so the idea that Germany is blocking

sanctions, I don't agree. There is a huge Cold War frenzy on both sides,

colleagues from the Baltic states are really worried that NATO will

not stand by its defence commitments to them. On the Russian side, we are

talking about this phrase, defend our compatriots, people killed in

the demonstrations... I am trying to find out what you are going to do!

We had to be sure that when politicians in Europe says serious

consequences, they will follow them through. They called the European

Union like the wizard of Oz. It pretends it has power but in reality

it is weak. I call for, as does Douglas Alexander, for the foreign

ministers meeting on Monday to make good those commitments so we can see

we action in terms of these bands, asset freezes and other sanctions

that really showed Putin that our words mean something in reality. We

will leave it there. We have run out of time. How do we

protect ourselves online? It's a question that's been troubling MEPs

this week as they approved new regulations that would stop

companies from sharing your data online without your permission. It

all comes after last year's revelations from American

whistle-blower Edward Snowden which claimed governments were even using

mobile phone games like Angry Birds to spy on us. Now the inventor of

the internet Sir Tim Berners-Lee says the UK needs to go even further

than European regulations and come up with a new massive bill rights to

cover everything we do online. We've just downloaded this report from

Alex Forsyth who's been to Strasbourg to investigate.

The intranet is embedded in our daily lives. Every minute, billions

of bits of data are shared as we shop, talk, deal and play online.

Recently there have been a stream of reports about how personal

information is used, particularly allegations that some government

agencies have been collecting vast quantities of data from e-mails,

webcams and even the game to play on our phones. It has all caused some

concern. My private life is private. This is the main problem. If

everyone has access to my personal information, we have not a lot of

information about security. When I use the intranet to talk to friends

online, I want to make sure the information I enter here will not

end up summer hours without my knowledge. MEPs say they have come

up with regulations to protect our privacy. This regulation wants to

create more privacy and wants to ensure you have growth on the

internets. That is the future. In the future, we will be buying and

selling more. We want to do it safely and securely. Firms with need

permission to sell or share your data. There will be large fines for

anyone who breaks the rules. They would need consent for profiling,

that is when a user of online information to build up a picture of

your life. Crucially, you would have the right to have all of your

personal data in race from the internet if you want it. If you want

the digital market and we need a digital market community to put this

regulation in place as quickly as possible. It will be good for

companies and it will preserve our data protection as a fundamental

right. This week, regulators have had backing from the European

Parliament. It has taken two years to get to this point. The tower be

negotiated with the 28 member states before being recommended. That could

cost businesses up to ?320 million a year. We are part of the single

market. We should be part of a single set of rules. We're at an

early stage. We have agreed to proceed with the regulation but we

need to look at the detail and make sure the implications of it are

sustainable and proportionate. The proposals have not had an entirely

smooth path. The legislation is one of the most amended in the history

of Parliament. It has met massive opposition. Most worrying to me is,

I have had a letter signed by over 60 universities and medical and

health research institutions, which are saying it'll make it harder for

them to do their research because they have access to data which is

very broad. They often do not know the identities of the individuals.

Despite the concerns, this advert from the European commission makes

it clear no one wants to feel exposed online. Current data

protection law state from 1985 when 1% of us were on the internet. There

is broad support for a new regulation for the whole of Europe.

Agreement as to how that works will be harder. The European telecoms

network is against us. The French consumer groups are worried about

it. Digital Europe is worried about it. Does anyone back this? If you

talk to some of the people who look forward to new services and exciting

services, they say the current data protection laws date before the

internet age. They need to be updated. What we have to do is get

the right balance between making sure the services can take off

innovation but also make sure people are comfortable with the data that

is being shared. It is trying to achieve the right balance. We are

comfortable with the data that is being shared. It is trying to

achieve the right balance. We're not there yet. There are some concerns.

Some of the fines proposed are disproportionate and could affect

small companies. We have to work to the right balance. The bill has been

amended 3999 times. Do you know what you're doing? I am not sure how that

figure is. Neither and I -- am I. The word is very vague. In France,

they say it is too vague. It says things like legitimate interest. It

is too broad. I agree broadly with that. It is difficult to strike the

right balance between allowing the right people to innovate and making

sure that people 's data is protected. There is no doubt

whatsoever that are now people wishing to sell goods or services

who are targeting, profiling their customers, on the basis of where

those people go, what their spending habits are and so one. That is, to

my mind, and unacceptable abuse of individual weight. When consumers

put data online or user loyalty card or something, they should be aware

how the data is used. Ms consumers know a lot about this, more than

politicians. -- most consumers. Companies will have to appoint a

data protection officer or officers. I thought you were after less

regulation. That is one of the proposals we are concerned about. We

are still at a very early stage. We will get over 4000 amendments. It

has to be discussed between the 28 member states and the European

Parliament. What it shows is that we must be concerned that we do not cut

off innovation by overly prescriptive forms like this. ) this

would stop us being snooped upon. -- this would stop us being snooped

upon. Nick Clegg said he was -- Nick Clegg was right about this. Fancy

working for the EU? Well this is your week because one of the regular

competitions to become a European civil servant opened for

applications. Hopefuls have to go through a famously tough

multi-lingual process called the concours. But just how hard is it to

become a Eurocrat? Here's Adam with his latest A-Z of Europe, where R is

for recruitment. To get here, most officials go

through an infamous, multistage, multilingual process. I am going to

get a taster of the concours. First of all, who am I up against?

Probably be institutions have hired some between 1500 and 2000 people

each year. Applicants have been between 60000 and 70,000 a year. It

is really competitive. It is slightly less gruelling than it used

to be. That always used to be a test of EU knowledge it was much

criticised. It is one of the things that in our modernisation of the

selection process we abolished. Sometimes those questions were very

specialised. They were changed rapidly and you could probably only

often prepare for that test. It helped a lot if you are already

here. I think I can do with some preparation. There is a whole

industry dedicated to that. This book shop in Brussels has a whole

section devoted to passing the concours. This women coaches

hopefuls for a fee. If I was trying to get through this process, what

other main things I should be concentrating on? I would say, I

will try, I will rephrase it like... If I want to go through the

process... Slightly awkward pep talk over. It is test time. Like

everyone, I'm going to do the first part in my mother tongue. Unlike

everyone else, I am missing out part two because you have to do it in a

second language and my French is a little bit rusty. Me luck! It says I

will need to work quickly and accurately. According to a

large-scale study... And hour later, and I am done. Well, all I can say

is, that was very intense. You are up against the clock. The questions

are really tough. You are putting quite a lot of pressure on yourself.

I've got the results a few days later, at Schiphol airport in

Amsterdam. If I get through, I will have another day of face-to-face

exercises and then I will only go into recruitment pool with no

guarantee of the job. So... Happy to confirm he did quite well, 28 out of

40. Although I think they are just being nice. They go one to say I

would not have passed most of the competitions I would have run but

maybe I would have passed one of the easy ones. Oh, well! I think we are

all happy to have not sat that test. How would you rate the quality of

the European civil servants who have dealt with? Roy Jenkins said, he

found brilliant people and useless people but not the reassuring

mediocrity he knew from Britain 's civil service. The the test needs to

be tough. The test needs to be tough because if you pass the test, you

are into because she is number in public service. That is all we have

time for today. Goodbye.