:00:36. > :01:20.but will any of them tickle the electorate's taste buds?
:01:21. > :01:31.He could be running the EU soon, in which case David Cameron won't be
:01:32. > :01:56.How accurate were you? I am very pleased that you mentioned that.
:01:57. > :01:59.Basically, our poll was not conducted on the eve of the
:02:00. > :02:08.election, it was conducted a week in advance. Subsequently we found that
:02:09. > :02:11.a fifth of those who said that they voted in the European elections said
:02:12. > :02:17.that they made up their mind in that last week before the election. So,
:02:18. > :02:23.an average error of 2.8%, we got the five parties in the right order.
:02:24. > :02:25.Actually, we were one of the first to predict that UKIP was going to
:02:26. > :02:30.come first in the European elections, which we are pleased
:02:31. > :02:34.with. But obviously, it is not an eve of the election poll, it was a
:02:35. > :02:38.snapshot point in time rather than a prediction. You say you were the
:02:39. > :02:42.first company to say that UKIP would top the poll, but you did
:02:43. > :02:46.overestimate the share of the vote that they would get, and you think
:02:47. > :02:50.the reason for that is that it was not done on the eve of the
:02:51. > :02:55.election? That's right. Everything narrowed a bit towards the election.
:02:56. > :03:03.Actually, you people that conducted their polling closer to the election
:03:04. > :03:07.were much more accurate. It was a point in time, rather than the
:03:08. > :03:09.predictive element. Looking at Labour and the Conservatives, they
:03:10. > :03:15.were much closer in the end, were you surprised by that, that they
:03:16. > :03:19.narrowed towards the end? Not necessarily. I think people were
:03:20. > :03:23.making up their minds until that point in time, and further out,
:03:24. > :03:31.people were potentially trying to be a little bit more, there were trying
:03:32. > :03:35.to protest in their vote, in the voting intentions polls, but when it
:03:36. > :03:39.came to it, they decided to vote for the main two parties. What do you
:03:40. > :03:47.think worthy influences in those last few days? Because we had been
:03:48. > :03:54.discussing the main issues for months beforehand... It was very
:03:55. > :04:01.difficult, there were a lot of difficult stories regarding UKIP,
:04:02. > :04:05.regarding the other parties. It is difficult to say what actually swung
:04:06. > :04:11.it. But as it was, it was a great result for UKIP. And we did predict
:04:12. > :04:16.them to come first. What about the Liberal Democrats, because they
:04:17. > :04:20.imploded? What do you think that says, one year out from the general
:04:21. > :04:23.election? It shows that it is going to be very, very difficult for them.
:04:24. > :04:29.We have done focus groups among people who voted Lib Dem in 2010,
:04:30. > :04:33.and they feel really very betrayed by the party. And I think the
:04:34. > :04:39.polling showed that just it is going to be very difficult, but actually,
:04:40. > :04:45.we need to take into consideration factors such as incumbents in, so,
:04:46. > :04:51.although it was a bad result, it is yet to be seen how bad it will be
:04:52. > :04:54.next year. There has been plenty of discussion about the leadership of
:04:55. > :04:59.Nick Clegg, so do you think he will stay? I think it is going to be
:05:00. > :05:07.difficult to oust him. Certainly, the failed coup last week showed
:05:08. > :05:12.that. But I think it is going to change as we come towards the
:05:13. > :05:14.election. That will focus minds. But in the European election, everything
:05:15. > :05:22.was focused on the Lib Dem is, rather than Labour. What about the
:05:23. > :05:27.state of Labour in the Conservatives and of the general election? And
:05:28. > :05:32.think it is fair to say that Labour would have liked to be much further
:05:33. > :05:35.ahead than they were. As everybody keeps saying, this general election
:05:36. > :05:42.is about momentum. We have got a year, it is going to be the longest
:05:43. > :05:45.campaign ever, and with Labour not having that momentum behind it in
:05:46. > :05:46.the European elections, it will be difficult for them going into party
:05:47. > :05:51.conference. Yesterday,
:05:52. > :05:56.the former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown was on the telly and he was
:05:57. > :06:00.asked about the plot to get rid of Nick Clegg following the party's
:06:01. > :06:02.disastrous election performance. And he appeared to compare the
:06:03. > :06:05.Business Secretary, Vince Cable, to Was it a) Romeo b) Iago c)
:06:06. > :06:15.Richard III or d) Macbeth? And in a bit, Katharine will
:06:16. > :06:21.give us the correct answer. The Conservative Party are
:06:22. > :06:23.considering offering Scotland full control of income tax as part of a
:06:24. > :06:27.devolution sweetener if Scots choose to reject the offer of independence
:06:28. > :06:30.in September's referendum. It would mark a significant U-turn
:06:31. > :06:32.for the party, who have always resisted further
:06:33. > :06:34.devolution, including voting against the setting up
:06:35. > :06:37.of the Scottish Parliament in 1999. Last year, Ruth Davidson,
:06:38. > :06:41.the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, set up a commission
:06:42. > :06:44.chaired by Lord Strathclyde to look at the issue of further powers
:06:45. > :06:48.for the Scottish Parliament. It recommends that all income
:06:49. > :06:53.tax-raising powers should be transferred to Holyrood, giving the
:06:54. > :06:57.Scottish Parliament responsibility Writing in the Scotland on Sunday
:06:58. > :07:05.over the weekend, Ms Davidson described the current limited powers
:07:06. > :07:09.over tax were destabilising and akin Scotland currently has
:07:10. > :07:16.the power to vary the existing income tax bands by up to 3%, and
:07:17. > :07:20.this will increase to 10% from 2016 The Tories are the last of the main
:07:21. > :07:29.parties to outline their plans, with Labour planning devolution of three
:07:30. > :07:35.quarters of the 20p tax rate and control over housing benefit and
:07:36. > :07:37.more powers for Scotland's islands. Meanwhile the Lib Dems have proposed
:07:38. > :07:43.that Holyrood should raise 50% of the money it spends
:07:44. > :07:49.and have control over income, Joining me now from our Glasgow
:07:50. > :08:11.newsroom is our politIcal How significant is this? I think it
:08:12. > :08:13.is significant. The Conservatives started out opposing devolution
:08:14. > :08:17.altogether, and they have certainly not been at the forefront of pushing
:08:18. > :08:22.the boundaries of it over the last 15 years. This looks to be a bit
:08:23. > :08:25.different. The headline measure, the full devolution of income tax, is
:08:26. > :08:32.actually slightly more radical than what the Labour Party is proposing,
:08:33. > :08:37.if there is a no vote in September. Ruth Davidson, the leader of the
:08:38. > :08:41.Conservative Party in Scotland, was elected to that position talking of
:08:42. > :08:45.a line in the sand, that the powers which are coming to the Scottish
:08:46. > :08:50.Parliament regardless of the independence referendum vote, that
:08:51. > :08:54.these should be a line in the sand, and that there should not be further
:08:55. > :09:00.development of devolution. But now she is saying, and the proposals of
:09:01. > :09:06.this draft guide commission are covering this, and saying that these
:09:07. > :09:10.should be in the Conservatives' manifesto for 2015. How much impact
:09:11. > :09:16.do you think all of this discussion about tax-raising powers will have
:09:17. > :09:20.on undecided voters in Scotland? I think the parties advocating
:09:21. > :09:26.Scotland's continuing relationship with the rest of the UK, advocating
:09:27. > :09:29.a no vote in the referendum, by which I mean Labour, the
:09:30. > :09:33.Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, are all determined not to
:09:34. > :09:37.be seen as the parties of no change. And so, they have all been
:09:38. > :09:43.developing these proposals for further devolution if there is a no
:09:44. > :09:47.vote. And I think they have done that in part because most opinion
:09:48. > :09:55.polls suggest that whilst there is not yet a majority for
:09:56. > :10:02.independence, most polls do suggest that there is an appetite for the
:10:03. > :10:07.Scottish Parliament to take greater control over the domestic affairs of
:10:08. > :10:11.Scotland. And the Conservatives are saying, giving it full control over
:10:12. > :10:16.income tax would be about accountability, making the
:10:17. > :10:17.parliament accountable for raising much more of the money which it
:10:18. > :10:20.spends. With us now from Edinburgh is Marco
:10:21. > :10:25.Biagi from the SNP, and the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, Ruth
:10:26. > :10:41.Davidson, joins us from Glasgow. Starting with you, Marco Biagi, do
:10:42. > :10:45.you welcome this? We welcome that there is now a consensus which says
:10:46. > :10:49.Scotland needs more powers, it is good to see the Tories joining in
:10:50. > :10:53.with that. But the question now is the scale of those powers, and who
:10:54. > :10:58.can be trusted to deliver them. With a yes vote, we do not just get
:10:59. > :11:02.income tax, we get control over all things, most importantly our oil
:11:03. > :11:07.revenues, which continue to flow south, even under these proposals.
:11:08. > :11:10.But also there is the question of whether the Tories can be depended
:11:11. > :11:15.upon to follow through on these. You have already referred to was
:11:16. > :11:22.Davidson's line in the sand statement, and the fact that a few
:11:23. > :11:27.extra powers have been mooted. That was following a long process of
:11:28. > :11:34.liberation by the three no campaign parties to decide what they wanted
:11:35. > :11:38.to offer extra. Surely the Tories would not come out as publicly as
:11:39. > :11:44.this if they were not serious about it? Well, they have had form on
:11:45. > :11:48.doing that, in 1979, they did precisely that. But you have to ask,
:11:49. > :11:52.what has changed between the Calman commission reporting a few extra
:11:53. > :11:57.powers, stamp duty and landfill tax, and now, an independence
:11:58. > :12:01.referendum, that is what has changed, and these parties have an
:12:02. > :12:06.incentive to try to offer the minimum possible they can to try to
:12:07. > :12:10.win this. You have to ask, can you really trust the Tories as a party
:12:11. > :12:16.which has always been against devolution? The only option is with
:12:17. > :12:20.a yes vote. Adam Tomkins, respond to the fact that there is not much
:12:21. > :12:26.trust with the Conservatives, is this not just a straightforward
:12:27. > :12:30.bribe? Not at all. The Conservative Party now has an established record
:12:31. > :12:33.of delivering with devolution. The Conservative government delivered
:12:34. > :12:41.the Scotland act 2012, which allowed for the biggest fiscal transfer in
:12:42. > :12:47.British fiscal history. It is the Conservative government after 2015,
:12:48. > :12:51.should they win, who will deliver the proposals that the Strathclyde
:12:52. > :12:57.commission has published this morning. And those proposals are
:12:58. > :13:00.designed simultaneously to strengthen the union, the family of
:13:01. > :13:06.nations in this country, and also to give Scots autonomy over their
:13:07. > :13:09.domestic affairs, which they are reported to crave in opinion poll
:13:10. > :13:14.after opinion poll. Scots do not want independence, they want crater,
:13:15. > :13:19.enhanced devolution. There are those who say it would be easier to shift
:13:20. > :13:23.the blame if things go wrong if Scottish people control more of
:13:24. > :13:28.their tax-raising powers. It would be harder for an SNP government to
:13:29. > :13:31.blame Westminster? That's right. At the moment, the Scottish Parliament
:13:32. > :13:37.is responsible for a very large amount of money, ?35 billion, about
:13:38. > :13:41.60%, more than that, of identifiable public expenditure in Scotland, is
:13:42. > :13:46.already the responsibility Holyrood. But even under the
:13:47. > :13:49.Scotland Act 2012, the Scottish Government is not responsible for
:13:50. > :13:53.raising much of the money it spends. It is true, isn't it, most
:13:54. > :13:59.people in Scotland want more powers, they do not want full
:14:00. > :14:04.independence? The polls are closing in favour of yes at the moment. But
:14:05. > :14:10.all this conversation seems to be about tax, not so much about areas
:14:11. > :14:17.of response ability. Where are the promises over support for business,
:14:18. > :14:21.new powers to help improve state pension or to extend childcare and
:14:22. > :14:25.gain revenue from its? These are areas which are absent, as far as I
:14:26. > :14:29.can see, from the Conservative proposals, but things we would be
:14:30. > :14:30.able to do with a yes vote. But actually you have some tax-raising
:14:31. > :14:32.powers already, able to do with a yes vote. But
:14:33. > :14:37.actually you have which you choose not to use, and yet you want to
:14:38. > :14:41.continue with things like free prescription charges, neo- tuition
:14:42. > :14:45.fees, a certain amount of social care paid for. You would have to pay
:14:46. > :14:55.for these things, so would you be able to do it?
:14:56. > :15:03.moment, there have been substantial changes. The income tax powers were
:15:04. > :15:08.set up in 1997 to try to be almost impossible. If we wanted to move it
:15:09. > :15:12.up down, most of it would be swallowed up by an administration
:15:13. > :15:16.charge by HMRC. There is a danger that we go down the same path if
:15:17. > :15:21.similar canard is put up to try to persuade people that these are real
:15:22. > :15:24.powers when, in fact, the great majority of power, the areas of
:15:25. > :15:29.responsibility where any normal parliament would be able to deliver
:15:30. > :15:33.for its people, are continued to be denied to Scotland. Eight "yes" vote
:15:34. > :15:38.means we have power over all areas. But it is about how you run things
:15:39. > :15:45.economically as far as both people involved on both sides would argue.
:15:46. > :15:50.As Ruth Davidson is calling for, the way income tax has gone is not
:15:51. > :15:52.different from the offer of independence massively because you
:15:53. > :15:56.would have your own currency and wouldn't be setting your own
:15:57. > :16:05.interest rates. -- wouldn't have your own currency. There are three
:16:06. > :16:11.key areas where we wouldn't have control, even under Ruth Davidson's
:16:12. > :16:15.proposals. The idea that we are putting forward is of two sovereign
:16:16. > :16:19.nations in partnership so yes, where we agree on things and can get
:16:20. > :16:22.common interest, on things like currency or anything else, we have
:16:23. > :16:27.two sovereign nations working in partnership. We do take different
:16:28. > :16:32.approaches and have different priorities in some places, and we
:16:33. > :16:35.can do things differently. It's interesting how the SNP can't answer
:16:36. > :16:40.that question. Enhanced devolution is what the majority of Scots want.
:16:41. > :16:44.There is no great enthusiasm in Scotland for independence, there is
:16:45. > :16:47.no great enthusiasm for the constitutional status quo. The only
:16:48. > :16:52.party not to have recognised this is the SNP. Labour, Lib Dems and now
:16:53. > :16:58.the Scottish Conservatives have all but forward very ambitious proposals
:16:59. > :17:02.for home rule for Scotland within the UK and that is what the majority
:17:03. > :17:05.of Scots want and only eight no vote will deliver that. A yes vote will
:17:06. > :17:11.deliver not more devolution but the end of devolution. What about the
:17:12. > :17:14.point Marco Biagi makes that you are talking about tax-raising powers but
:17:15. > :17:19.what about the area of responsibility like pensions? The
:17:20. > :17:22.Strathclyde commission looked at pensions and we took the view, which
:17:23. > :17:26.is also the view of the vast majority of Scots who respond to
:17:27. > :17:30.things like the Scottish social attitudes survey, that there is no
:17:31. > :17:33.great appetite for the state pension to be different in Scotland from the
:17:34. > :17:38.rest of the UK, nor is there any great ambition among Scottish
:17:39. > :17:41.taxpayers that they alone should have to fund the state pension in
:17:42. > :17:45.Scotland. There is a very important part of the fabric of our union
:17:46. > :17:49.which is that you are able to retire anywhere in the UK irrespective of
:17:50. > :17:53.where you worked, irrespective of where you paid tax when you were a
:17:54. > :17:59.wage earner. To break that apart, I think, is in nobody's interests at
:18:00. > :18:03.all. Thank you both very much. Katharine, looking at the polls
:18:04. > :18:07.mentioned by Marco Biagi from the SNP, have they moved much? There is
:18:08. > :18:13.a lot of difference between different polling organisations in
:18:14. > :18:18.terms of yes and no votes. Certainly the no vote is ahead but by how
:18:19. > :18:21.much, it really depends. Who is going to impact the outcome are the
:18:22. > :18:26.people who say they don't know. They are the crucial ones we need to look
:18:27. > :18:31.at. In terms of that figure, how many people are we talking about?
:18:32. > :18:35.It's fairly substantial, isn't it? At least one in five people. So it
:18:36. > :18:41.could tip the vote one way or the other, bearing in mind how close the
:18:42. > :18:46.campaigns have become. That's right. But looking at options such as Devo
:18:47. > :18:50.Max, that has always been quite popular in Scotland. What you see
:18:51. > :18:56.now is with all the parties are lining more or less on increased
:18:57. > :19:01.devolution powers, a no vote is almost a default vote for increased
:19:02. > :19:05.devolution and powers. So the goalposts are changing somewhat. Do
:19:06. > :19:10.you think that's going to make it harder for the yes campaign to get
:19:11. > :19:13.any more in terms of votes from the underside? It's difficult to tell at
:19:14. > :19:17.this stage but I would expect that it is going to make the no vote more
:19:18. > :19:22.attractive because it has removed some of the risks involved.
:19:23. > :19:24.In the run-up to the European and local elections, the Daily Politics
:19:25. > :19:30.interviewed rather a lot of politicians from rather a lot of
:19:31. > :19:34.parties. One took exception to this on the eve of polling day. Isn't it
:19:35. > :19:38.a problem in these elections that the class you are talking about is
:19:39. > :19:43.actually shrunk in recent years and, actually, you and I know they don't
:19:44. > :19:46.vote for this. Otherwise we would be talking about you in the same way
:19:47. > :19:50.they have been talking about UKIP, the Greens and whatever. The working
:19:51. > :19:54.class hasn't shrunk. The working class is as big as it ever was, if
:19:55. > :19:59.not bigger. Most people are struggling to get by and need an
:20:00. > :20:03.alternative. Our job is to convince them that socialism is that
:20:04. > :20:07.alternative. If all the socialist parties got together, wouldn't you
:20:08. > :20:13.have a better chance of getting your arguments across? You aren't that
:20:14. > :20:17.far distant, are you? I think we're very different from those. We are a
:20:18. > :20:23.revolution is so sherry party. They are like a ginger group in the
:20:24. > :20:27.Labour Party. Well, we're joined now by Chris
:20:28. > :20:33.Marsden from the Socialist Equality Party. Tell us why you are upset by
:20:34. > :20:38.that interview. Well, I thought the crack at the end was uncalled for
:20:39. > :20:42.and demonstrated bias and it trivialised something which was
:20:43. > :20:46.quite serious. If you consider that at the moment, you have a situation
:20:47. > :20:51.in which the government, and senior figures in the government, are
:20:52. > :20:56.calling for Alan Rusbridger to be prosecuted for publishing material
:20:57. > :20:58.from Edward Snowden, and then it's suggested that socialists are in
:20:59. > :21:03.favour of persecution of journalists, that's obviously false.
:21:04. > :21:08.That was a joke. It was the end of the interview... There was a lot of
:21:09. > :21:16.schoolboy humour in the interview but the point about it is that I
:21:17. > :21:20.believe that your viewers deserve better. These are important
:21:21. > :21:24.elections, under conditions in which many, many millions of people are
:21:25. > :21:29.struggling to get by. You've got a 12% decline in people's living
:21:30. > :21:31.standards, austerities measures being imposed across Europe... How
:21:32. > :21:37.many other TV interviews did you have? This is the only TV interview
:21:38. > :21:40.I did. I did several other radio interviews. You could argue the
:21:41. > :21:44.programme does take it seriously and we do interview the smaller parties.
:21:45. > :21:47.I'm just trying to find out whether you really did take offence at that
:21:48. > :21:50.time or whether it was something that came afterwards that you
:21:51. > :21:56.thought was belittling the party in some way. I thought it was
:21:57. > :22:01.belittling immediately. The reference was from Citizen Smith.
:22:02. > :22:05.Against the wall and that sort of thing. The socialism we believe in
:22:06. > :22:11.is a democratic ego Terry and mass movement of the working class that
:22:12. > :22:20.is not about suppressing journalists. -- ego Terry. I
:22:21. > :22:26.disagree with being associated with it. It is one thing to interview
:22:27. > :22:31.small parties, it's another thing... What is the purpose of
:22:32. > :22:37.this? We are fighting to represent the working class under conditions
:22:38. > :22:42.in which no one seeking to represent the working class. Lots of parties
:22:43. > :22:46.claim to represent the working class. They may be wrong in your
:22:47. > :22:50.eyes but they do claim to represent the working class. None of the mass
:22:51. > :22:58.parties do, including the Labour Party. They are committed to
:22:59. > :23:00.austerity, two cuts, to militarism, like the conflict developing in
:23:01. > :23:05.Ukraine, which is extremely dangerous for the working class of
:23:06. > :23:10.Europe. They're pushing Russia into conditions in which they could
:23:11. > :23:14.develop into a war in Europe. You came 10th out of 15 parties and you
:23:15. > :23:21.were beaten by the Cama group pirates Party. Do you still think
:23:22. > :23:27.it's worth the effort? -- the Pirate Party. In different circumstances,
:23:28. > :23:32.we would have got a better vote. But we are not a Parliamentary party. We
:23:33. > :23:36.base ourselves on the class struggle. Our aim is to give a voice
:23:37. > :23:41.and perspective to the working class. Our party's growth is
:23:42. > :23:43.conditioned on the extent to which the working class moves into
:23:44. > :23:47.political struggle and if you don't think that's going to happen, you
:23:48. > :23:51.are blind because this situation cannot continue. We can't have the
:23:52. > :23:55.rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer out in an item
:23:56. > :24:02.without there being a serious shift in the political conscience of broad
:24:03. > :24:05.layers of working class. Thank you. Newark is a Nottinghamshire town
:24:06. > :24:09.used to being under siege. During the English Civil War, it was a
:24:10. > :24:11.royalist stronghold. The parliamentarians laid siege to it
:24:12. > :24:16.three times before it eventually surrendered. Over the last week,
:24:17. > :24:20.Parliament and the press have done it again. Why? The small matter of a
:24:21. > :24:28.rather important by-election this Thursday. Here's Adam.
:24:29. > :24:32.Newark's distinctly damp option market. They're having a by-election
:24:33. > :24:36.here because their previous MP, Patrick Mercer, offered himself to
:24:37. > :24:40.sail for some reporters posing as lobbyists. The mood here is a bit
:24:41. > :24:45.wet. Did you know the by-election was happening? No. I don't take any
:24:46. > :24:50.notice of them. They're was happening? No. I don't take any
:24:51. > :24:54.to me. Is there a sense of by-election fever? I haven't noticed
:24:55. > :24:55.it. But there has been a total deluge of politicians thought for
:24:56. > :25:02.the Lib Dems, David Watts. Michael deluge of politicians thought for
:25:03. > :25:06.Payne for Labour. UKIP's Roger Helmer, hoping to capitalise on his
:25:07. > :25:11.party's victory in the European elections. The Conservative Robert
:25:12. > :25:15.Jenrick is fighting back with a different VIP by his side almost
:25:16. > :25:20.every day. All in a constituency that is part countryside, part
:25:21. > :25:23.market town. It's steeped in history, especially the English
:25:24. > :25:27.Civil War. He is a piece of political trivia for you. William
:25:28. > :25:31.Gladstone was first elected as an MP in this constituency. He gave his
:25:32. > :25:35.victory speech from the balcony of that hotel, which gives me an idea
:25:36. > :25:38.for a Daily Politics by-election candidate quiz.
:25:39. > :25:42.Who is your favourite Prime Minister from history and why? William
:25:43. > :25:46.Gladstone was a fantastic MP for Newark. He didn't stay here very
:25:47. > :25:49.long after falling out with the juke of Newcastle who controlled
:25:50. > :25:53.elections in those days so it was easier to be elected in Newark in
:25:54. > :25:56.the 19th-century than today. I don't think I have a favourite Prime
:25:57. > :25:59.Minister because all of them have outlaws. I think my favourite
:26:00. > :26:03.politician was Paddy Ashdown, who should have been Prime Minister but
:26:04. > :26:09.never quite made it. It's got to be so Winston Churchill, hasn't it? He
:26:10. > :26:11.made a difference in the last century that probably no other Prime
:26:12. > :26:15.Minister has made. He saved our country. It might sound cliche but I
:26:16. > :26:19.think it's got to be Clement Attlee. After seeing a world that
:26:20. > :26:23.was fighting, he realised we had to rebuild the country. Proud of the
:26:24. > :26:28.NHS. I was at the Newark hospital today. You didn't say David
:26:29. > :26:31.Cameron. The prime and it has been very supportive. We've had him three
:26:32. > :26:36.times in the constituency and are grateful for that. We're not going
:26:37. > :26:37.to see Prime Minister Nigel Farage, are we? Well, I wouldn't be so
:26:38. > :26:50.sure. No Blair or brown? are we? Well, I wouldn't be so
:26:51. > :26:52.country. Aww, you all get a prize! Apparently the blues are in the lead
:26:53. > :26:57.up this bakery Apparently the blues are in the lead
:26:58. > :27:00.is, can the purples taste victory in a Westminster election for the first
:27:01. > :27:04.time ever? Delicious! There are 11 candidates
:27:05. > :27:07.standing in the Newark by-election. The BBC website has all the details.
:27:08. > :27:13.Chris Mason is in Newark, The BBC website has all the details.
:27:14. > :27:17.who your favourite Prime Minister was or how many buttons you might
:27:18. > :27:22.have eaten but over to you, Chris. -- bonds.
:27:23. > :27:24.have eaten but over to you, Chris. Good afternoon. We have been a bit
:27:25. > :27:29.more lucky with the weather than Adam was the other day. This square
:27:30. > :27:31.is absolutely groaning with politicians. If you popped in for
:27:32. > :27:37.your cabbages or tomatoes or duck politicians. If you popped in for
:27:38. > :27:42.eggs - ?1 9412 - the chances are, you are going to get badgered by
:27:43. > :27:47.rosette wearing politicians. The UKIP caravan turned up at about
:27:48. > :27:51.8:30am but there are more Conservative MPs here, I suspect,
:27:52. > :27:56.than there are Westminster. It has the feel of an election race that
:27:57. > :28:00.isn't in a safe seat, despite the Conservative majority last time
:28:01. > :28:05.being more than 16,000. Adam has his mood balls when he goes out and
:28:06. > :28:09.about testing public opinion well, your heart out, because I've got the
:28:10. > :28:12.Daily Politics whiteboard. I've been doing a word association game with
:28:13. > :28:16.voters in the square, asking what they think when I name the main
:28:17. > :28:20.parties will top Conservative - not interested in me or nothing. This is
:28:21. > :28:22.not remedy scientific. interested in me or nothing. This is
:28:23. > :28:26.different, useless, interested in me or nothing. This is
:28:27. > :28:30.dividing opinion - makes more interested in me or nothing. This is
:28:31. > :28:35.to me, reminds me of Australia's policy on immigration. Policies are
:28:36. > :28:36.a bit extreme. Nick Clegg has work to do. Clegg
:28:37. > :28:42.a bit extreme. Nick Clegg has work to do. is an unashamed barefaced
:28:43. > :28:46.liar, said one correspondent. Let's talk to Dan Churcher, the news
:28:47. > :28:48.correspondent at the Newark Advertiser.
:28:49. > :28:50.Let's talk to Dan Churcher, the news correspondent at the Newark We're
:28:51. > :28:58.awash with senior politicians at the moment. It is unprecedented. This
:28:59. > :29:00.by-election came about in strange circumstances but we have the Prime
:29:01. > :29:07.Minister four times, the Foreign Secretary three. Ed Miliband last
:29:08. > :29:12.week, as well. Things are starting to heat up. It's interesting. How do
:29:13. > :29:17.you read this by-election? You look at the numbers from last time - a
:29:18. > :29:19.whopping majority for the Conservatives. The Lib Dems are
:29:20. > :29:23.stacked up 10,000 or so Conservatives. The Lib Dems are
:29:24. > :29:25.may be plenty of those are up for grabs by the other parties if recent
:29:26. > :29:31.election performance is anything to go by. Is it as close as this market
:29:32. > :29:35.square suggests? You've got to ask yourself whether there is such a
:29:36. > :29:39.thing as a safe seat now, with UKIP. Straight off the back of their
:29:40. > :29:44.very successful result in the euros, I expect, or would
:29:45. > :29:50.anticipate, that the Conservative majority will be hit very hard by
:29:51. > :29:53.UKIP and as to whether they retain the seat, I believe they probably
:29:54. > :30:01.will but with a much reduced majority. Have you had Nigel Farage
:30:02. > :30:05.at the door of the newspaper? No, he was in town on Saturday but we
:30:06. > :30:08.haven't seen him in our offices. We have had the Prime Minister in and
:30:09. > :30:14.William Hague and Ed Miliband last week. How much enthusiasm is there
:30:15. > :30:19.from people in the constituency for the election? Firstly, it's a
:30:20. > :30:22.by-election. Historically, the turnout would be quite low. And
:30:23. > :30:27.people were at the polling stations a matter of days ago for the local
:30:28. > :30:32.and European elections. It will be interesting, I think, to see what
:30:33. > :30:38.the turnout is. Last time we had 71%, which is a high number, but I
:30:39. > :30:46.think there is a real sense here that these are exciting times. We
:30:47. > :30:51.never expected to be here and with the E major and soggy UKIP doing so
:30:52. > :30:55.well, people want to be involved in that, wants to be a part of it, in
:30:56. > :31:01.determining what happens with politics nationally. We're grateful
:31:02. > :31:05.to you. Dan Churcher from the Newark Advertiser, a busy man with an
:31:06. > :31:09.addition to butt out on Thursday. No doubt all of the analysis will be
:31:10. > :31:14.the week after. This square is groaning with politicians, rosette
:31:15. > :31:19.and journalists. I have to say, if I was coming out to my shopping and I
:31:20. > :31:29.Newark, I might give the square quite a wide berth.
:31:30. > :31:37.Just to pick up on a couple of those points, Katharine, the question of
:31:38. > :31:42.con is there such a thing as a safe seat? It would be a mammoth task to
:31:43. > :31:46.overturn that Conservative majority, yes. The one poll we have
:31:47. > :31:50.had so far does put the Conservatives ahead, however, he
:31:51. > :31:56.begins a massive swing to UKIP. In both Corby and easterly, the UKIP
:31:57. > :32:01.vote share has been underestimated by the polls. We have got another
:32:02. > :32:05.one coming out this afternoon. It is going to be really important to look
:32:06. > :32:15.at all of the factors, including turnout, but it could be a perfect
:32:16. > :32:18.storm for UKIP. They have got the wrangling in the European Commission
:32:19. > :32:22.at the moment, they have got Labour doing not as well as they should be
:32:23. > :32:28.doing as the party of protest, and essentially, it could be seen to be
:32:29. > :32:33.something of a free vote to express dissatisfaction with the Tories.
:32:34. > :32:44.What about intentions? Is there any polling to indicate anything
:32:45. > :32:48.regarding this by-election? There is. Last week we did some to show
:32:49. > :32:53.that actually, UKIP voters in the European elections do intend to vote
:32:54. > :32:57.in the same way in the general election. However, the point is,
:32:58. > :33:03.this is a by-election, and people will feel more free to vote for
:33:04. > :33:09.perhaps an alternative. Listening to Chris Mason, and that stream of
:33:10. > :33:12.senior Tory politicians who have come into Newark to try to
:33:13. > :33:17.consolidate that Tory majority, I mean, they are going to fight very
:33:18. > :33:22.hard to keep a sizeable majority, aren't they? Absolutely, and it is
:33:23. > :33:27.very much in their favour at the moment. However, there could be this
:33:28. > :33:32.major upset, because UKIP are really gaining through these by-elections
:33:33. > :33:41.since 2010. Is Labour featuring in this by-election, in terms of votes
:33:42. > :33:44.which could perhaps swing it? King at the poll over the weekend, they
:33:45. > :33:52.were just one point behind UKIP. However, taking into account all of
:33:53. > :33:56.the other fact is, I think UKIP would expect to be building this
:33:57. > :34:01.week. In case you have forgotten, there is just time before you go to
:34:02. > :34:07.give us the answer to and the question was, yesterday, Paddy
:34:08. > :34:10.Ashdown appeared to be likening the Business Secretary, Vince Cable, to
:34:11. > :34:20.a Shakespearean character, but who was it? I am embarrassed to say, I
:34:21. > :34:35.have got absolutely no idea. Have a guess, if we were thinking of
:34:36. > :34:40.alleged treachery? Iago? Well done. Thank you very much for coming onto
:34:41. > :34:45.the programme. So, what is in store for us this week. Tony Blair has
:34:46. > :34:55.the programme. So, what is in store this morning, outlining his vision
:34:56. > :35:00.for Europe. On Wednesday, MPs return to the Commons for the big event of
:35:01. > :35:03.the week, the Queen's Speech, when the Government announces its
:35:04. > :35:08.legislative programme for the coming year. On Thursday, voters go to the
:35:09. > :35:15.polls in the Newark by-election. Joining us now from College Green,
:35:16. > :35:25.James Lyons and Holly Watt. First of all, Holly Watt, how critical is
:35:26. > :35:29.this Newark by-election? This polls put the Conservatives ahead at the
:35:30. > :35:33.moment, and as we have seen, they are taking no chances. I think they
:35:34. > :35:38.are probably very keen to avoid losing too many votes to UKIP, which
:35:39. > :35:42.would terrify the Tories in marginal seats. Will this be seen as a
:35:43. > :35:49.weather vane ahead of the general election? I think it will be seen as
:35:50. > :35:53.a pointer, certainly, yes. What will be interesting to see is how close
:35:54. > :36:00.UKIP can run them, if they cannot actually take the seat. It looks
:36:01. > :36:06.like the Conservatives are on course to retain at least a little of that
:36:07. > :36:14.huge majority. And David Cameron is there today. But if UKIP are still
:36:15. > :36:19.holding up well after the European elections, which many Tories hope
:36:20. > :36:22.will be their high watermark, then there will be a lot of rattled
:36:23. > :36:27.backbenchers. What about the Queen's Speech, Holly, what is in it? Well,
:36:28. > :36:33.there is quite a wide range of things. Labour has been throwing
:36:34. > :36:36.this zombie Parliament criticism at the Conservatives and Lib Dems,
:36:37. > :36:42.insisting that they have still got lots of legislation coming through.
:36:43. > :36:46.They are looking at people being able to plan terrorism in Syria,
:36:47. > :36:52.pension reforms, all sorts of things, really. But they may well
:36:53. > :36:55.bring out something which surprises people, simply to prove that they
:36:56. > :37:00.are not a zombie Parliament at this point. Yes, and that has been the
:37:01. > :37:07.criticism, hasn't it, that they have run out of in terms of legislation,
:37:08. > :37:13.so do you think we will be proved wrong on that? They are certainly
:37:14. > :37:17.dredging the ideas box. We have heard talk of heroism bills,
:37:18. > :37:22.exempting good Samaritans from certain things, and ideas of
:37:23. > :37:26.fracking. But the point remains, when the MP 's comeback this week to
:37:27. > :37:30.Westminster for the Queen's Speech, they will just have an extra week's
:37:31. > :37:36.holiday, because they have got so little to do. I feel that what the
:37:37. > :37:42.coalition wants is a kind of steady as she goes Queen's Speech. They
:37:43. > :37:47.want the focus to be on the economy. Her Majesty I think will actually
:37:48. > :37:48.say the words long term economic plan. We have seen the King of Spain
:37:49. > :37:55.abdicating today, and I am sure if abdicating today, and I am sure if
:37:56. > :38:05.she is forced to say that on Wednesday,
:38:06. > :38:05.she is forced to say that on what do you think will now
:38:06. > :38:11.choreography for the next year, none of us are used to having this extra
:38:12. > :38:16.year, so how of us are used to having this extra
:38:17. > :38:20.feel at Westminster? I think both the Conservatives and the Lib Dems
:38:21. > :38:25.are hoping to have a managed separation, a conscious uncoupling,
:38:26. > :38:30.I suppose, but whether they manage that, who knows. There have been
:38:31. > :38:32.signs in recent weeks that that may not happen. The Lib
:38:33. > :38:36.signs in recent weeks that that may in a bit of a meltdown themselves.
:38:37. > :38:42.They are probably not going to do very well at all in Newark. It
:38:43. > :38:48.They are probably not going to do interesting. Reflate, let's talk
:38:49. > :38:53.They are probably not going to do about FIFA, the World Cup, and Qatar
:38:54. > :38:57.- do you think there should be a rerun of the
:38:58. > :38:59.- do you think there should be a host the World Cup in 2022?
:39:00. > :39:05.- do you think there should be a meetings going on today. And we
:39:06. > :39:10.- do you think there should be a had the allegations over the weekend
:39:11. > :39:12.which will be top of the agenda. The powers
:39:13. > :39:17.which will be top of the agenda. The quite limited, so where we go from
:39:18. > :39:23.here is difficult to see, but there is going to have to be a thorough
:39:24. > :39:24.investigation, and I would not be surprised if
:39:25. > :39:30.investigation, and I would not be rerun of the vote. That might
:39:31. > :39:34.investigation, and I would not be that we might have too reopened the
:39:35. > :39:37.decision regarding 2018, where obviously England were robbed, and
:39:38. > :39:45.the tournament went to Russia. This is usually embarrassing for FIFA. We
:39:46. > :39:51.have heard Lord Goldsmith, who were Tony Blair's top lawyer, saying
:39:52. > :39:54.today that there is a serious case to answer,
:39:55. > :39:57.today that there is a serious case allegations do stack up, then it
:39:58. > :40:04.will have to be rerun. Everything is pointing in that direction. Thank
:40:05. > :40:08.you both very much. For the rest of today's programme, we have four new,
:40:09. > :40:13.wonderful, female MEPs, or beautiful, all intelligent. Joey
:40:14. > :40:25.Barton, eat your heart out. Joining us now are Vicky Ford, Anneliese
:40:26. > :40:31.Dodds, Jane Collins and Catherine Bearder. Anneliese Dodds, have you
:40:32. > :40:38.had to give up a job to do this and become an MEP? Well, my life changed
:40:39. > :40:42.anyway last year because I gave birth to a little boy, so I have
:40:43. > :40:47.been on maternity leave. I normally work as a senior lecturer, so I have
:40:48. > :40:58.been off, and I am very grateful to my employer, Aston University. And
:40:59. > :41:02.what about you, what happens now? It is going to be very interesting,
:41:03. > :41:07.because there is now a wave of new UKIP MEPs coming in, so there will
:41:08. > :41:13.be stronger representation for the Eurosceptic voice over there. Let's
:41:14. > :41:16.get down to it, then - there have been discussions already about the
:41:17. > :41:20.European Commission president rumbling on, and reports that David
:41:21. > :41:25.Cameron has made threats that the UK would have to leave if Jean-Claude
:41:26. > :41:31.Yunker became the president. Who would be your candidate? I want to
:41:32. > :41:33.see a reformer. We have said a number of times that our
:41:34. > :41:42.relationship with Europe once to change. Names that we have heard
:41:43. > :41:53.include the Finnish candidate, and the Irish one. Christine Lagarde has
:41:54. > :41:56.also been a name which has come up. Funnily enough, Francois Hollande
:41:57. > :42:00.does not seem to be wanting to be challenged by the Right in France. I
:42:01. > :42:05.want to see a reformer, anything else would be a backward step. Let's
:42:06. > :42:16.hear from another former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, earlier today.
:42:17. > :42:21.I am not a candidate, do not get my name mixed up with this, that is not
:42:22. > :42:24.going to happen. In respect of who should be the president, my view is
:42:25. > :42:28.that we should just look for the best doesn't do the job. There
:42:29. > :42:36.should not be any predisposition, we should just find the best person to
:42:37. > :42:40.do the job. It is an important job, and if you define it in the way that
:42:41. > :42:44.I am defining it, in other words, you want someone who is capable of
:42:45. > :42:47.driving through that big agenda, then that is the kind of person you
:42:48. > :42:52.should go for. Ought about Tony Blair?! This is the man who gave
:42:53. > :42:56.away the British rebate and handed more powers to Brussels. What the
:42:57. > :43:00.voters have said very firmly in my region is, we do not want more of
:43:01. > :43:05.the same. And Kenny has pretty well said he is not up for it, and there
:43:06. > :43:12.are not that many more names up for it, are there? Again, he is totally
:43:13. > :43:16.against reform, he is almost Federalist, so that would be a
:43:17. > :43:20.disaster. I am so relieved to hear Tony Blair say he will not be a
:43:21. > :43:27.candidate. Because quite frankly, he is a megalomaniac and a warmonger.
:43:28. > :43:30.So who would you have, then? It is a difficult decision. There are not
:43:31. > :43:35.many names which appealed to me on the list. Whichever way you dress it
:43:36. > :43:41.up, they are all in favour of more integration into the EU, not what we
:43:42. > :43:44.are for. But the irony is that you are going to have bigger
:43:45. > :43:49.representation in an institution which you do not believe in, so is
:43:50. > :43:53.it going to be the role of UKIP to disrupt and create dissent in the
:43:54. > :43:58.European Union? No, I do not think that is the way we look at things.
:43:59. > :44:02.We are certainly not going over there to join the club, we are there
:44:03. > :44:06.to do a job, to be the eyes and the ears of the people that voted for
:44:07. > :44:11.us, and they voted very, very strongly in this last election.
:44:12. > :44:15.Catherine Bearder, how did you manage to succeed, since you are the
:44:16. > :44:22.only lip them MEP? If I knew what that was, I would bottle it and pass
:44:23. > :44:24.it around my colleagues. -- the only Liberal Democrat MEP.
:44:25. > :44:28.it around my colleagues. -- the only Liberal We were the only party to
:44:29. > :44:35.come out as the party of in, and it was the right thing to do. We knew
:44:36. > :44:41.once we went into government, which was also a brave decision, to go
:44:42. > :44:44.into government as a junior party, and governments always get a
:44:45. > :44:49.kicking, but we were the only one brave enough to stand up for in,
:44:50. > :44:55.which was absolutely the right thing come we have other parties which
:44:56. > :45:05.didn't. But that has been derided by the voters, your view, that the
:45:06. > :45:11.pro-European party of him, as you say it, has been completely honest?
:45:12. > :45:15.The Tories were kicking it into the long grass, and the Labour Party was
:45:16. > :45:22.just talking about national politics. What is Labour, then? We
:45:23. > :45:26.are the party of a Europe which is being reformed. We are upfront about
:45:27. > :45:31.it, unlike the coalition. We are the party that says, we need to have an
:45:32. > :45:35.EU which is more focused on jobs and growth. For a long time we have set
:45:36. > :45:38.out what we would like to see changing in the EU, which has not
:45:39. > :45:42.been the case with the other parties, which is very
:45:43. > :45:48.disappointing. But you cannot reform the main issue which people voted
:45:49. > :45:54.on, which is migration. While we are in the EU, there is no reform on
:45:55. > :45:58.migration. With respect, I did not interrupt you. People on the
:45:59. > :46:01.doorstep are very concerned about what is happening, particularly
:46:02. > :46:05.around their living standards. For some people, that is linked to
:46:06. > :46:09.migration. And Labour again has been the only party which says, we need
:46:10. > :46:12.to look at the standards that we need, so that people are not
:46:13. > :46:16.affected by competition from other countries. Your party has been
:46:17. > :46:19.against the minimum wage and against all measures which protect people
:46:20. > :46:23.from competition from migration, so we need to have an honest debate
:46:24. > :46:32.about this. Are you against the idea of limiting the freedom of movement
:46:33. > :46:36.of people within the EU? I think it has been very important for British
:46:37. > :46:39.people and migrants but we need safeguards so that it doesn't lead
:46:40. > :46:45.to a race to the bottom and in some areas, like housing and working
:46:46. > :46:48.rights, it has. Would you want to limit the freedom of movement? Would
:46:49. > :46:53.you want to have a cap on the number of people who could come from other
:46:54. > :46:56.EU countries into Britain? We've seen in this country how having a
:46:57. > :47:02.target on the number of migrants simply doesn't work. That's because
:47:03. > :47:06.we can't control the EU migration. I'm talking about the Government's
:47:07. > :47:11.overall target for migrants coming into the country. That hasn't worked
:47:12. > :47:15.for them. What Labour is saying that we need longer transitional periods
:47:16. > :47:18.for new countries coming in but the fundamental problem is that it isn't
:47:19. > :47:23.a migrants themselves but the potential impact they have on the
:47:24. > :47:26.labour market, on housing, and public services. We should deal with
:47:27. > :47:30.that and not demonise people coming into the country. You won't be able
:47:31. > :47:35.to hit that target on the levels of migration. I just find this whole
:47:36. > :47:40.argument from Labour trying to rewrite history. Labour was the
:47:41. > :47:45.government that presided over the economic collapse of this country
:47:46. > :47:51.and uncontrolled immigration. The economy was growing when we left
:47:52. > :47:58.office. Do you apologise or whether frontbenchers wrong to apologise?
:47:59. > :48:02.They have apologised for it. But was that apology right? Personally I
:48:03. > :48:05.feel that we a lot from migration but I think it's right to look at
:48:06. > :48:10.longer transitional controls for new countries coming in. But in relation
:48:11. > :48:14.to your first point, the economy was growing when we left office. There
:48:15. > :48:20.do need to be stronger controls on freedom of movement of people,
:48:21. > :48:24.especially in areas - I see it in parts of the east of the - where
:48:25. > :48:29.we've had some very big pockets of immigration and this is why the
:48:30. > :48:32.Prime Minister has said no more accession countries without looking
:48:33. > :48:37.at much more than just transition controls but other controls. A
:48:38. > :48:43.renegotiation on that issue is part of the whole package. That does not
:48:44. > :48:51.mean no immigration but it means you need to look at the whole ago Chez
:48:52. > :48:55.Chez. Isn't that what people want? There are over 2 million Brits
:48:56. > :49:02.living and working in the rest of Europe and others looking here.
:49:03. > :49:06.History will tell you that when there are difficult times, difficult
:49:07. > :49:14.decisions to be made, pressures on services and housing, it's very easy
:49:15. > :49:21.to say that it is their fault. Why is your argument falling on deaf
:49:22. > :49:27.ears? I was elected and we have... You were the only one. In a lot of
:49:28. > :49:30.places where we were working, we were winning councils and holding
:49:31. > :49:39.councils and doing really well in pockets. We got a kick in, like all
:49:40. > :49:45.the parties got a kicking, because... Conservatives and Labour
:49:46. > :49:57.got a drubbing. Labour should have come second. Best result since 1994.
:49:58. > :50:02.What about the renegotiation? There is pressure being put on David
:50:03. > :50:05.Cameron for firmer plans and policies in terms of repatriating
:50:06. > :50:09.powers. He's promised a referendum. In some extent, you've had your high
:50:10. > :50:16.point in the European elections, many critics will argue, and that
:50:17. > :50:18.will be that. The way the EU treats David Cameron, with great
:50:19. > :50:21.disrespect, and especially with people saying that David Cameron is
:50:22. > :50:29.trying to use blackmail if he becomes president, it shows how much
:50:30. > :50:34.clout we have in the EU. But there is no renegotiation or reform on
:50:35. > :50:38.migration if we're in the EU. But if John Claude Junker gets in, he will
:50:39. > :50:42.be part of a massive block. He is also with Merkel. That is going to
:50:43. > :50:47.have a great influence, no reform, and it will go to federalism. So if
:50:48. > :50:52.you ask me who I definitely didn't want to beat you president, Tony
:50:53. > :50:57.Blair and Mr Junker. What are you going to do if Mr Junker does become
:50:58. > :51:01.the President? The mandate that I believe people voted for in my part
:51:02. > :51:04.of the world where three Conservatives stood and three were
:51:05. > :51:11.elected, is that we want reform which works for business but we do
:51:12. > :51:15.need reforms on movement and... So the package of what we can negotiate
:51:16. > :51:26.will get put to the people in an in-out referendum. First of all...
:51:27. > :51:29.First of all, you have to have next year's general election. There will
:51:30. > :51:34.be a choice of voting for these two parties, which is more of the same,
:51:35. > :51:41.or of parties which give you a chance of a renegotiation and a
:51:42. > :51:48.referendum. There will be no chance of a referendum, will there, if John
:51:49. > :51:53.Claude Junker becomes the president. It is going to make it very
:51:54. > :51:56.difficult for David Cameron to get the reforms he wants. That's why I
:51:57. > :52:03.said electing him... Here's Angela Merkel's favourite. We spent the
:52:04. > :52:06.last year having a review of all the competencies that we have with the
:52:07. > :52:13.European Union and every single one has come out and said that we have a
:52:14. > :52:17.good level of competencies in the balance of our level of membership
:52:18. > :52:20.of the EU. There are a few reports going on but there is one that
:52:21. > :52:24.hasn't been released by David Cameron and that is the one on
:52:25. > :52:30.migration. I can bet some money here that says that it is saying it is
:52:31. > :52:35.fair and equitable. What it's saying is that what we do here, whether we
:52:36. > :52:40.don't enforce the legislation on minimum wages and housing is...
:52:41. > :52:43.Briefly, should Labour offer an in-out referendum? On the basis of
:52:44. > :52:49.the MEPs that were elected, the success of Eurosceptic parties. As I
:52:50. > :52:53.mentioned before, this is Labour's best result in a European elections
:52:54. > :52:58.for 20 years. Nonetheless we do need to listen to people and for a very
:52:59. > :53:01.long time, Labour has been saying we would offer people a referendum if
:53:02. > :53:05.it looked like the relationship with the rest of Europe was going to
:53:06. > :53:08.change. The difference is that we are completely clear on what we need
:53:09. > :53:13.to see changed in Europe and the Conservatives haven't come out on
:53:14. > :53:16.this have the right to know. You said you want more European taxes,
:53:17. > :53:24.more European spending. That is what I have heard. We argued against an
:53:25. > :53:27.increase in the budget and we said people needed to keep the rights to
:53:28. > :53:28.maternity and paternity leave, the social chapter, which you would
:53:29. > :53:34.jump. Let's hold it there. We can't get away from election
:53:35. > :53:37.fever on the Daily Politics. We can't stop analysing why
:53:38. > :53:40.people vote the way they do. In a moment we'll be talking to one
:53:41. > :53:44.professor who thinks voting habits may be hard-wired into us
:53:45. > :53:46.from birth. But first let's take a trip
:53:47. > :53:54.down memory lane. And against many expectations, Mr
:53:55. > :53:59.major has done it with the smallest Conservative majority since Winston
:54:00. > :54:02.Churchill's in 1951. Four consecutive victories for the
:54:03. > :54:08.Conservatives have been done for a hundred years. This is perhaps one
:54:09. > :54:13.of the most rheumatic nights, for many people the most dramatic night
:54:14. > :54:19.in British politics they've seen. It was like 1945 when Labour swept in,
:54:20. > :54:24.like 1979 when the Tories swept in. Let's have a look over here at our
:54:25. > :54:30.swing, tough. No swing at all from last time. There has been a very
:54:31. > :54:36.small squint of the Tories but the Labour Party has survived in their
:54:37. > :54:42.battle ground seats in the middle. Tony Blair back with a majority of
:54:43. > :54:49.66, with the smallest popular vote since the great reform act of 1832
:54:50. > :54:52.for an incoming government. In narrow political terms, it's been
:54:53. > :54:57.fascinating, not to see the country deliver a hung parliament but to
:54:58. > :55:03.vote in a way that has produced a political scenario of immense
:55:04. > :55:07.complexity. We'll see whether these elected politicians really are able
:55:08. > :55:10.to work together and are up to the job.
:55:11. > :55:13.And we're joined now by Dr Darren Schreiber from Exeter University,
:55:14. > :55:16.who has been been developing the new field of neuropolitics,
:55:17. > :55:22.Neuropolitics is based on the idea that your brain is built for
:55:23. > :55:26.politics so for the last 3 million years, we've been involved in a
:55:27. > :55:31.cognitive arms race. We are having a bigger, more expansive brain, that
:55:32. > :55:35.has been an advantage and it's strange because humans have such big
:55:36. > :55:38.brains in such relatively small bodies. The evidence seems to
:55:39. > :55:43.suggest our brains are built for politics. What are you saying? That
:55:44. > :55:48.we are born with the view is that we then have later on? The second
:55:49. > :55:52.chapter in my book argues that we're hard-wired not to be hard-wired
:55:53. > :55:55.because as you've seen in this conversation, politics is really
:55:56. > :55:59.complicated, so that's why we need such a huge brain. Dolphins,
:56:00. > :56:04.elephants, orangutans all have much larger brains than we might expect
:56:05. > :56:08.because they also have complex Coalition or politics. We have the
:56:09. > :56:12.most complex politics and the biggest brains to go along with it.
:56:13. > :56:17.That's the brains behind it, if you like, but what about the nurture
:56:18. > :56:21.argument, that, actually, if you are brought up in a certain area with a
:56:22. > :56:25.family that believes a certain political tribe, doesn't that have
:56:26. > :56:28.more influence over whether you're hard-wired or not? What your
:56:29. > :56:35.background is and where you come from does have a lot of influence
:56:36. > :56:40.but that predict about 69% of your political attitudes. If I brain
:56:41. > :56:44.image you as a Republican or Democrat in the USA, I can tell your
:56:45. > :56:49.party affiliation with about 80 to be sent accuracy, by brain imaging
:56:50. > :56:51.you while you do a gambling task force top that a significant be
:56:52. > :56:55.better than if I know the political affiliations of your parents. By
:56:56. > :56:59.knowing your parents I know your genetics and the environment that
:57:00. > :57:03.you are talking about in which we are raised. It isn't just biology
:57:04. > :57:05.but the effect the environment has on our brains that allows us to tell
:57:06. > :57:11.a lot about your political attitudes. Let's try some of this
:57:12. > :57:16.out on our guests. Do you think your political allegiances in your DNA or
:57:17. > :57:20.has it developed? Well, I'm married to a zoologist who studies monkeys,
:57:21. > :57:25.so nature and nurture is almost equal but if you are liberal and
:57:26. > :57:31.fair thinking and for fairness, you are Lib Dem. This is a little brief
:57:32. > :57:35.taste test. A little strip of paper I'm giving each guest, which have
:57:36. > :57:40.come from Darren Schreiber, not made by me. You put them in your mouth
:57:41. > :57:47.and give us your thoughts after a second or so. You can chew it. Just
:57:48. > :57:55.put it in your mouth. Don't worry. Any taste? Paper. Just paper. What
:57:56. > :57:59.is your response, Darren? There is preliminary evidence that people who
:58:00. > :58:03.are more Conservative taste a bitter taste. It's a small percentage of
:58:04. > :58:09.effect but what we're finding is that there is a slight probability
:58:10. > :58:13.of somebody being more Conservative who has a sharper taste. Different
:58:14. > :58:25.people have had pretty squeamish reactions. A sort of dry, papery
:58:26. > :58:32.taste. Nobody -- no bitter taste? Are you sure you ripped up
:58:33. > :58:32.taste. Nobody -- no bitter taste? bits of paper? It's more bitter than
:58:33. > :58:40.sweet but bits of paper? It's more bitter than
:58:41. > :58:44.more Conservative, then? I will, of course, have to remain completely
:58:45. > :58:48.impartial. I'll chew it afterwards but I won't give you the results.
:58:49. > :58:49.Thank you very much. Interesting that the ladies didn't really get
:58:50. > :58:52.the taste. The one o'clock news is
:58:53. > :59:13.starting over on BBC One now. as Britain's museums open up...
:59:14. > :59:17.at night.