04/11/2015 Daily Politics

The Government's about to publish plans for new surveillance laws.

The Investigatory Powers Bill will set out how the police,

intelligence agencies, and other state bodies can access people's

In fact, David Cameron's having a spot of bother over a few issues.

Yes, take the dispute over junior doctors' pay

They'll get an 11% pay rise, but they'll have to work more

Is today's new offer enough to ward off industrial action?

Barnaby from Bristol, it could be your lucky day.

Jezza's been crowd-sourcing his questions to Dave again.

And, it's meant to celebrate our cultural and creative heritage

And with us for the duration, a beautifully gender-balanced

panel, especially designed to please Jack Dromey's wife, Harriet Harman.

Deputy Leader of the Commons, Therese Coffey,

who famously got locked in the House of Commons library, and

Shadow Home Office Minister, Jack Dromey, who has never been locked

Now first this morning junior doctors in England are being offered

an 11% pay rise in an attempt by the Government to head

But Saturdays would become part of their normal working week -

rather than being classed as "unsocial hours".

And there'd be an end to guaranteed annual pay rises.

Let's hear what the Health Secretary, Jeremy Huntm had

We have actually been wanting to negotiate with the BMA since June

but they have refused to sit round the table with us.

Instead they have proceeded to ballot for industrial

I think the only responsible thing to do is actually to publish what

our offer is today when it is clear they are not interested

Jeremy Hunt. IDG decide to go public with the offer of an 11%

Jeremy Hunt. IDG decide to go public basic pay for junior doctors instead

of going to the BMA and negotiating? basic pay for junior doctors instead

The situation has been drawing out. It

The situation has been drawing out. to address that. We want to make

sure every doctor who has to address that. We want to make

understands the implications. It really matters. It has not been or

negotiation. That is the criticism of the NBA. -- BMA. Is that the

right way to handle it? You heard from the Health Secretary, he felt

the BMA was from the Health Secretary, he felt

negotiate. It does matter that instead of having to do something

through an intermediary, brothers and the BMA want to hear the facts

themselves and get that decision. It is good for them and bid for patient

themselves and get that decision. It safety. There is a lot to be

positive about in safety. There is a lot to be

good. There is loads of anger. The ballot papers could go out today. It

has not worked, the negotiation. ballot papers could go out today. It

deal. If you are told by your union you will get a 30 the cent pay cut

and you will work more hours, it would be no surprise to be angry

and you will work more hours, it that is not the case. --

and you will work more hours, it cut. They will have

and you will work more hours, it It is good news for doctors. Do you

and you will work more hours, it Yellow mac and it has two

and you will work more hours, it justify its own actions. The 11% pay

rise which is being offered follows justify its own actions. The 11% pay

a cut of 20-30% in out of hours pay. Rightly or wrongly, that is the net

result of the contract that is being, not

result of the contract that is Government, the BMA says it will be

imposed if Government, the BMA says it will be

can understand why doctors are out on the streets protesting.

can understand why doctors are out do not choose when they are ill.

There is a need to address the issue that people have higher success

rates if they are treated, or arrived in hospital, on a weekday.

We believe by moving from the 10am -7 p.m. Standard hours for Monday to

Saturday and then an additional premium for working any thing and on

Sundays, we think that is the right balanced approach. Do you

Sundays, we think that is the right is there they lose 20%-30% of that

out of hours pay bastion marked it is about mitigating a loss of 30% of

out of hours pay. -- out of hours pay? No junior doctor will lose pay.

Not true. Why do you say that? I have looked the facts and listened

to junior doctors. Is it true there should be extended coverage at the

weekends? Yes, it could mean the issue of life and death. Jeremy Hunt

is a wee bit like dodgy employers are used to deal with in the world

of work, making now you see it, now you do not office. 11% offer, that

camouflage is what will happen in terms of unsocial hours payments.

One junior doctor I saw this morning will lose ?8,000 a year as a

consequence. What are you proposing? Are you proposing they should keep

the 11% pay rise and still be paid doubled the amount of money they

will get for anti-social hours? My experience the world of work does --

is that it does not help when the employer places a gun at your head.

Going over the head of those who represent junior doctors. That is

wrong. The next stage is that we would be with the Government saying

we need enhanced capacity at the weekend. What we need is a

withdrawal of the threat, a toning down of language, a serious

negotiation at the next stages, where there will be some give and

take. Would you go to junior doctors in your constituency and say, oh by

the way, I know you will get 11% more because you will lose unsocial

hours, you will lose ?8,000 a year. That is not the case. Every single

junior doctor will not lose a penny. For those where there is a

transition, there will be a pay we met to cover that. A basic starting

salary will increase to ?25,000. By the time they come to training it

will be ?55,000. We will have to move on quickly. Should the BMA

withdraw its threat for balloting members? They should be back around

the negotiating table. If I were Jeremy Hunt, I would ring the phone

and contact the BMA to try to sort this out. This is about safeguarding

the interests of junior doctors. Should they further compromise? The

Secretary of State should be very clear. He has made a very clear

offered to the doctors directly and they need to act on that. Take it

all leave it. Now yesterday, the former

Labour Leader, Neil Kinnock, gave an interview in which he warned

the current Labour Leader, Jeremy Corbyn, that British voters would

not back a party that supported Lord Kinnock said his party must

confront the "reality" that it will not win a general election with a

defence policy opposing the renewal But only hours after he issued his

warning, Scottish Labour MSPs voted with Nicola Sturgeon's Nationalists

at Holyrood for a motion calling Now, Jeremy, do you actually support

what Lord Kinnock was saying? The reality is the British public will

not vote for a party that supports unilateral nuclear disarmament. Any

government, which is perceived to put national-security at risk, there

is no doubt. I know fast lane very well. The instinct of the British

people is that they want to be guaranteed they have strong national

defences and the capacity to intervene globally where

appropriate. The first thing is, we must in -- unequivocally be on the

side of the British people. To be frank, we must learn the lessons

from history that if we sound like we're anti-defence, the British

people will never support the Labour Party. So, Jeremy Corbyn is wrong?

You can have an intelligent debate about how you might make bold moves

as part of a multilateral strategy. Sometimes the debate gets

polarised. I do a unilateralist or a multilateralist? Do I want to see a

nuclear free world? Yes, without hesitation. We must not send the

message that somehow we're anti-defence. We never have been and

we never will be. What message is Labour sending? MSPs in Scotland

voted with nationalists to scrap Trident. Its leader supports the

renewal of Trident. The vast majority of Labour MS -- MSPs

supported but the leader does not. There is a lively debate going on.

There is no doubt about that. What is quite interesting is, in my

dealings with the Armed Forces over the years, within the Armed Forces,

there were different views in relation to the nuclear deterrent. I

have not got a problem about a sensible debate about how you might

take some bold steps here nationally to achieve that international

objective. Let's have that debate at the next stages. Coming back to

that, do not ever send the message that somehow we do not take

seriously the national security of the people of Britain. Today in the

police debate, will be arguing exactly that. Some people are saying

you are sending a message. When do you have that debate? The Shadow

Defence Secretary wants to push this decision out of the way. There is a

gateway decision coming in the next 12-18 months, when will you have

that debate? The key period will be the next 12 months. Maria Eagle is

heading up a debate. We need to have that debate in an open and honest

way. It does not send the wrong message. Labour is a party of safety

and security and strong defence. It is extraordinary. You have Labour

leadership normally crating people in Scotland. Or to getting rid of

Trident -- supporting and getting rid of Trident. The Labour

leadership wants to scrap Trident. We, in the leadership debate, say

the grass roots movement may have a very different view to the PLP. With

the greatest respect to Teresa, I have a great deal of respect for

her. Within your party, first of all, you are the Government that has

presided over very significant cuts to our Armed Forces but also

presided over the biggest cut in Europe to our police service, which

is putting at risk safety and security where people live and

work. I am not sure I will take any lessons from the Tories about

safeguarding national security. You are pointing out cuts to

conventional full SIS. Can Labour send out a message to the British

public that it supports defence, is rock-solid behind defence, but can

do so without the nuclear deterrent? We need to have the debate about how

we can make bold steps to achieve this. How we might take some bold

steps to achieve this. It comes back to the fundamental point, which is,

we will never, ever, put at risk the national-security of the British

people. Jeremy Corbyn also mentioned there are problems about having a

vote on the problems in Syria. He said on television that perhaps

Labour needs to revisit taking action over Isis. Mistakes were made

in Iraq. No doubt about that. I am open-minded in terms of military

intervention in Syria. All I would say is it has to be part of a wider

package will stop you cannot stand by and see terrible things happening

on the 1 hand. On the other hand, to believe you can resolve this simply

by way of military force is to arrive at the wrong conclusion.

Thank you. What do you think about the renewal of Trident? Do you back

it? At the next stages, the debate will be having, what place does

Trident play in defence policies? I have given my answer.

Now, free from the compromises of coalition with the

Liberal Democrats, and in power with the first Conservative majority

government in nearly two decades, the job of Prime Minister should

have got a whole lot easier for David Cameron after

Well, it hasn't quite worked out that way.

Yes, Jo, when David Cameron won an unexpected majority of 12 at the

election he might have thought that governing was going to get easier.

But the joys of spring have turned into a gloomy

autumn for the PM as Conservative MPs get a taste for rebellion.

20 Tory MPs - amongst them Tim Loughton and Jacob Rees-Mogg -

backed a Labour motion demanding changes to the Government's plans to

Then in the Commons on Monday, Zac Goldsmith, Tory candidate for London

spoke out against the government's plans to extend right-to-buy.

And that evening it was reported that Downing Street had dropped

plans for a Commons vote on intervention in Syria, with up to

30 Tory MPs said to be lining up to vote against the Government.

Today sees the publication of the Investigatory Powers Bill,

which we will talk about, with David Davis has been at the forefront of a

rebels demanding the Government make concessions.

While Lord Strathclyde has begun his tricky task

of reviewing the powers of the House of Lords, after peers rejected

With all of that even before the Cabinet has started to argue about

the UK's membership of the European Mac, this could get potentially dark

of the Prime Minister. The Investigatory Powers Bill has

been published today and it looks as if judges will be granted the right

to administer and anti-terrorism operations. I'm not going to

pre-empt what the Prime Minister will say in half an hour. There have

been three reviews. The need was felt that the executive to be

heavily involved in the authorisation of warrants, while

other reviews have suggested that authorisation of warrants, while

judicial oversight is needed. Do you agree with the need for judicial

oversight, authorisation? Ultimately the panellist and the Home Secretary

are accountable to the the panellist and the Home Secretary

need to ensure the panellist and the Home Secretary

the most intrusive powers the has come all operate in a legal

framework has come all operate in a legal

Secretary will talk about that has come all operate in a legal

later. Just to be has come all operate in a legal

think that on the important crucial decisions, it should be a judge that

makes this decisions, it should be a judge that

the Home Secretary? I don't want to pre-empt anything. There have

the Home Secretary? I don't want to disagreements in your party over

this and David Davis claims it is could go if the bill is to pass. I

believe the panellist and Home Secretary have been looking

carefully at Secretary have been looking

hasn't been thought of overnight and she will present

hasn't been thought of overnight and of Commons shortly. There has been

hasn't been thought of overnight and huge listening exercises. It is

absolutely clear that are premised and the Home Secretary others

responsible for keeping the country safe, not the judges. That sounds

like you would be happy for it to remain in the hands of the Home

Secretary. If it does not and there is not clear judicial authorisation,

will the bill for? That is likely and it would be a tragedy in terms

of the safety and security of British people. And don't you come

in part. -- down to you, in part. We support the strong powers of the

security services, 20% is counterterrorism and 8% is charged

sexual exploitation and abuse, paedophile gangs, fraud and grooming

online. We need enhanced powers, yes, but those powers need proper

judicial safeguards. So you will vote it down if you do not get those

judicial safeguards which means you will lose all of it. I think the

House of Commons is likely to reach a consensus on this in the next

stages. Because we are at one in rising to the threat posed to the

people we represents the government must learn from the sorry lessons of

history that the people of Britain want safety and security but they

will not trust government to exercise those powers. External

scrutiny is key. Do you accept David Davis's point that it will not get

through without that scrutiny because other Tory rebels will not

say yes to it. To be honest I have not paid attention to what David

Davis says on this matter, what I am conscious of is that the government

has been looking carefully at the different powers, I think it does

want to move ahead with the consensus so that we get to this

place where we are doing things that will protect the body public. That

is one the potential rebellion and has been outlined clearly. We have

had the rebellion on tax credits. Syria is looking like a potential

problem, we were told they would be a vote on air strikes if there was a

genuine consensus. It is clear he cannot get one and that is why we

aren't getting the vote. The government is again trying to which

a broad consensus, the events of summer 2013 were striking in the

House of Commons and it is interesting that a group of Labour

MPs had debate earlier in this Parliament, and seemed keen that we

should do more in this field. But it is right that the Prime Minister

should want to get cross-party support for this. Broad support. It

isn't just Labour, the Daily Telegraph is talking about 20 - 30%

Tory rebels who are not happy. We have had the report from the

Conservative select committee. The Prime Minister's language says he

wants to vote and he hasn't got the support. This shouldn't come down to

Conservative versus labour. These are serious matters for the nation

to address. I think the approach is right. There's no point in coming to

the House without that consensus and I am sure that the premised and the

Home Secretary will continue to work to achieve that. Will it still be a

priority to work for this vote? Tackling Syria is a priority, it's

leading to a man or human tragedy, with the migrant situation, my word,

we need to tackle the refugee situation. In 2013I was content to

vote for additional military intervention. Events keep evolving

but fundamentally the Prime Minister has been clear, we need to resolve

this situation and it is not having a future for Assad or indeed for

Isil. When do you think that food should be? -- that vote? I don't

know but it needs to be when the majority of British parliamentarians

are ready to say yes. Looking at the refugee situation and the ongoing

tragedies in Syria, we need to take decisive action. How would you vote?

I could not in conscious roll out military intervention because if you

look at the desperate circumstances in Syria that might be appropriate

-- I could not rule it out. Yet it needs to be part of a wider

diplomatic solution under the auspices of the UN. I voted against

in 2013 because it was simply a military initiative. The military

initiative alone won't solve the problem. On the other hand, if the

government comes with a size of case, seeking to achieve consensus

with other countries in the region engaged in finding the solution and

says that one element that might be safe havens, we should look at that

with an open mind. But and cannot get consensus, because of the

leadership, they would not be reliant on the leadership of the

backbench MPs. It won't get consensus if they say are you for or

against military intervention. I think the House should say, what

part should military intervention play in an attempt to find a lasting

solution. And the Prime Minister has not said, I need every MP to be with

me on this. There will always be people who oppose military

intervention come what may, as they do on other matters. Let's not try

to isolate this again into being something partisan. Finally on the

mood of backbenchers, presumably you interact with them regularly, what's

the mood. So many of the new ones seem willing to flex their muscles

and cause trouble for the government. The mood is largely

positive, we won an election. One topic that often came up in the past

was Europe and yet the party is united behind having that referendum

in 2017. Some people, come what may, will want to leave the EU. It is a

respectable position to take in that regard but I think the majority of

people are happy to stay in a reformed European Union. Ultimately

the British people will decide. They will indeed.

Now every so often a museum fails to grab a masterpiece

Over to the V, who have come in for a lot

of stick over their refusal to show a collection of Margaret Thatcher's

Who wouldn't like a peep inside one of Maggie's bags?

I hope your rhyming slang is working! Conservative MPs

are said to be outraged by the museum's decision

and have called for the collection to be saved.

Imagine our surprise when the V called our office, demanding, no

less, a Daily Politics Mug for their Fine Decorative China exhibition.

We can see why you want one, but there's only one way you can

get your mitts on one of these national treasures.

Yes, all you have to do is guess when this happened?

Even people within Downing Street are calling it an omnishambles

budget! I can't remember the last time I

bought a pasty in Greggs. I am innocent of these charges and I

intend to fight this in the courts and I am confident that eg will

agree. -- confident that a jury will agree.

# The power of love, a force from above

To be in with a chance of winning a Daily Politics mug, send your

answer to our special quiz e-mail address - that's [email protected].

today, and you can see the full terms and conditions

for Guess The Year on our website, that's bbc.co.uk/dailypolitics.

It's coming up to midday here - just take a look at Big Ben -

Yes, Prime Minister's Questions is on its way.

And that's not all - Laura Kuenssberg is here.

Back from gallivanting. In the last ten days I have been to regulate and

Berlin because now the government is really starting to try to appear,

and also to try generally need to push ahead with renegotiations and

our relationship with the EU -- I've been to Iceland. Last week David

Cameron pressed the flesh with Nordic leaders in Iceland and

yesterday we were with George was born in birding with his

counterpart, the German finance minister, -- George Osborne was in

Berlin. An important person in German politics. They were pushing

forward the agenda. Angela Merkel says she will do everything she can.

What that means in practice is more difficult to predict. Indeed it is.

But the Treasury were delighted and taken aback by just how fulsome she

was in her promise of help. I think there are some things that clearly

we know now that are going to be relatively easy for the government

to get. Getting rid of ever closer union, for example. A lot of senior

figures in Europe are on the record union, for example. A lot of senior

as saying, that is OK, we'll union, for example. A lot of senior

to clarify that. union, for example. A lot of senior

is concerned the tricky thing union, for example. A lot of senior

be this idea of union, for example. A lot of senior

that they can't put their own interests and of the pound. That

will be complicated for Germany in terms of people we spoke to why we

were there. In terms of people we spoke to why we

wholesale change, things where the public will think, yes, the British

governor has won a big concession, does that look likely at this stage?

Not at this stage but this is clearly where the government want to

take the debate. They've had research done, showing that people

are in the middle on this. There are 10% of people on either side who

would fight to the death to stay or leave, most people are in the middle

and most people are not paying attention to the

and most people are not paying really believe that

and most people are not paying they will be able to

and most people are not paying fighting around one issue or another

but the fighting around one issue or another

can tie in a ribbon and say, here are these miraculous concessions

that we have won from the EU. Interesting that the traditional

political tactic is to pick a fight and then you will look like you have

one. They haven't got to that point but one

one. They haven't got to that point government told me,

one. They haven't got to that point it needs his crusade and we are

happy to play along with that. We know that there are voices

happy to play along with that. We Tory party who will not be happy,

come what may. Looking at some of the big issues, what might be raised

today at Prime Minister's Questions? There have

today at Prime Minister's Questions? rebellions since the start.

today at Prime Minister's Questions? certainly have. Bad mood is up. It

is in the air. The House of Lords issue around tax credits -- the mood

is up. The House of Lords issue has allowed some MPs to feel like

rebelling despite being told that it is constitutional outrage. It has

changed the mood of the session. People have come back post

conference, the Tories had a smooth successful party conference... They

feel that the Labour Party is not united and does not know its

position. The Tories are certainly not united on the European Union.

This is why some Tories worry about them not being a strong united

opposition because that can make you feel complacent and you can get

involved in your own twists and turns. What will Jeremy Corbyn talk

about today. Potentially junior doctors, a very big issue for people

around the country. The Department of Health is trying their hardest to

that the BMA has captured the agenda on this in a slightly misleading way

perhaps. I would not be surprised if Labour raise that today. Or perhaps

the visit of the Egyptian leader, talking to David Cameron.

Additionally given Jeremy Corbyn's interests in those issues, we heard

him talk about Saudi Arabia before. How much pressure is Jeremy Hunt

under? In the context of a spending review in three weeks' time, there

is Jeremy Hunt under? In the context of the spending review in three

weeks' time, there's no new extra money anywhere in government at the

moment. I think what he is trying to do is stick to this. Make a deal

work without promising any extra cash that he doesn't have. We have

seen before, the NHS can very fast become very troublesome for the

government. One of the stickiest moments for the coalition was the

reform of the NHS under Andrew Lansley. Jeremy Hunt has come to an

impasse with the medical profession. Right now it doesn't feel like the

bits of government are thinking that he's made a mess and this is

damaging him particularly... But... Ballot papers could go out today.

Senior government figures believe there will be a strike. They are

prepared to have that fight? There is no extra cash. Nowhere for them

to go. This slight recalibration of the deal we've seen today is an

attempt by Jeremy Hunt to get around the BMA and make this direct appeal

to doctors. There is sense in government that there is small

motivated group protesting against these changes but they might be able

to I know the whole house will join me

in paying tribute to those who have fallen serving our country. They

gave their lives so we could live hours in freedom. It is right to

reflect on Armistice Day and a contribution to all of those who

have served our country. This morning I had meetings with

ministerial colleagues and others and in addition to my duties in this

House I shall have further meetings today. I would like to associate

myself with the comments from the Prime Minister. I look forward to

joining the Armistice Day parade in my constituency. It has grown to the

largest in Britain. Speaking to constituents in Warwickshire, the

Government commitment of 2% GDP spending was very welcome. Given

volatile state of many parts of the world, it is more important than

ever that we maintain that commitment and give rage chew

support, resources and commitment available. -- give our brave troops.

We live in an uncertain world. The 2% on defence spending and .7% on

aid spending helping our security as well as making sure we are a

generous and moral nation and having the ultimate insurance policy of a

replacement for Trident submarines. Jeremy Corbyn... Thank you, Mr

Speaker. I concur with the Prime Minister's marks concerning

remembrance -- Sunday and remembrance weekend. We mourn all of

those who die in all wars and resolved to build a peaceful future

where the next generation does not suffer from billboards of past

generations. Last week, I asked the Prime Minister the same question six

times and he could not answer. He has had the week to think about it.

I want to ask him one more time... Can he guarantee that next April

nobody is going to be worse off as a result of cuts to working tax

credits? Let me be absolutely clear with the honourable gentleman. What

I can guarantee next April as there will be an 11,000 passenger

allowance, so you can earn 11,000 before paying tax. There will be a

national living wage of ?7 20, giving the lowest paid in our

country a ?20 pay rise. On the issue of tax credits, we suffered the

defeat in the House of Lords. We suffered the defeat in the House of

Lords. With new proposals in the Autumn Statement. At that point, in

exactly three weeks' time, I will be able to answer his question. Now, if

he wants to spend the next five questions asking it all over again,

I am sure he will find it is very entertaining and interesting. How it

fits with the new politics, I am not quite sure. Over to you. This is not

about entertainment. This is about...

This is not funny for people who are desperately worried about what is

going to happen next April. If the Prime Minister will not listen to

the questions I put, will not listen to the questions that are put by the

public, then perhaps the Prime Minister will listen to a question

that was raised by his honourable friend, the member for Brigg and

Goole, who last week concerning tax credit changes said, the changes

cannot go ahead next April and that any mitigation should be for

mitigation. What is the Prime Minister's answer to his friend?

Very much the same answer that I gave to him. In three weeks' time,

we will announce our proposals and he will be able to see what we will

do to deliver the high pay, low tax, lower welfare economy we want to

see. That is what we need in our country. We are cutting taxes and

increasing pay but we also believe it is right to reform welfare. He

will have his answer in three weeks' time. Meantime, he had to think

about this but if we do not reform welfare, how will we find the police

service we are talking about today? How will we find the health service

we could be talking about today? How will we paid for the defence forces

we are talking about today? The honourable gentleman has been

consistent. He has opposed every reform to welfare that has ever come

forward. If we listened to him, we would still have families in London

getting ?100,000 a year in housing benefit. The answer to the question

is, you will find out in three weeks' time. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

The reality is that the Prime Minister makes choices and he has

made a choice concerning working tax credits that has not worked very

well so far. But he must be aware... I give an example. A

serving soldier, a private in the Army with two children and a partner

would lose over ?2000 next April. I asked the question...

The questions will be heard. And the answers will be heard. Simple as

that. Mr Jeremy Corbyn... Thank you, Mr Speaker. Surely that is the whole

point of our parliament, that we're able to put questions to those

authority. And so, I have a question... I have a question from

Kieron, a veteran of the first Gulf War. His family are set to lose out.

He rides it is a worry for the family. There is fear and

trepidation about whether we will be able to get by. Is this how the

Government complete -- treats veterans of the armed services? Let

me take the case of the serving soldier. Many soldiers, indeed all

soldiers, will benefit from the ?11,000 personal allowance that

comes in next year. That means they will be able to earn more money

before they even start to pay taxes. Serving soldiers with

children will benefit from the 30 hours of childcare. Of course,

serving soldiers and others will be able to see our proposals on tax

credits in exactly three weeks' time. What I would say to the

serving soldier is that he is now dealing with an opposition party,

the leader of which, said he could not see any use for UK forces

anywhere in the world at any time. That serving soldier would not have

a job if the honourable gentleman got anywhere near power.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I invite the Prime Minister to cast his mind

to another area of public service that is causing acute concern at the

present time? I know he is trying to dig himself out of the hole with the

junior doctors offer this morning which you await the detail. There is

a question I want to put to him. I quote Doctor Cliff man, the

president of the Royal College of emergency medicine. He said that

this winter will be worse than last winter. Last winter was the worst

winter we have ever had in the NHS. Can the Prime Minister guarantee

there will be no winter crisis in the NHS this year? First of all,

when it comes to the Royal College of emergency medicine, they actually

support what we are saying about a seven-day NHS and the junior doctors

contract. He says, wait for the detail. I would urge anyone in this

House and detail. I would urge anyone in this

watching to go on to detail. I would urge anyone in this

of Health website and look at the pay calculator. You will be able to

see that no 1 working legal hours will lose out in any way at all. It

is an 11% basic pay rise. Deliver is the stronger and safer NHS. As for

the state of our NHS more generally, it is benefiting from ?10 billion

that we put in it is benefiting from ?10 billion

Labour Party at last election said they did not support. I believe the

NHS has the resources they did not support. I believe the

needs. That is why we are seeing it treating more patients with more

needs. That is why we are seeing it delivered, more tests being carried

out. It is a much stronger NHS and the reason is simple. We have a

strong economy supporting our strong NHS. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

strong economy supporting our strong that the Prime Minister has not

offered any comment whatsoever that the Prime Minister has not

the Windsor crisis -- the winter crisis of last year and what will

happen this year. Mr Speaker... Order, order! The

leader of the position is entitled to ask questions without a barrage

of noise. The Prime Minister is entitled to answer questions without

a barrage of noise. That is what the public is entitled to expect. Mr

Jeremy Corbyn... If the Prime Minister will not answer questions

that I'd put, then I quote to him, the renowned King's Fund, which has

enormous expertise in NHS funding and NHS Administration, and I quote,

the national health service cannot continue to maintain standards of

care and balance the books. A rapid and serious decline in patient care

is inevitable unless something is done. Could I ask the Prime

Minister, which is rising faster? NHS waiting lists or NHS deficits?

Let me deal directly with the Kings fund. What we have done on this side

of the house is the point in new chief executive to the NHS, Mr Simon

Stephens where he worked under the last Labour government and did a

very good job for them. He produced the Stevens plan which he said

required ?8 billion of government funding. We are putting in ?10

billion behind that plan. That is the plan we are producing. The

results you can see, we have 1.3 million more operations, 7.8 million

more outpatient appointments and 4.7 million more diagnostic tests. What

is going up in the NHS is a number of treatments, the number of

successful outcomes. He wants to know who is heading for a winter

crisis. I would predict it is the Labour Party that is heading for a

winter crisis. Look at his appointments! His media adviser is a

Stalinist. His new policy advisor is a Trotskyist and his economic

adviser is a Communist was the busiest trying to move the Labour

Party to the left, I give him full marks. -- a Communist. If he is

trying to move the Labour Party to the left, I give him full marks. Mr

Speaker, the issue I raised with the Prime Minister was the national

health service. In case he had forgotten. I would like to remind

him that since he took office in 2010, the English waiting list is up

by a third. There are now 3.5 million people, 3.5 million people

waiting for treatment in the NHS. If his party cannot match its actions

by its words, then I put this to him. Will he just get rid? The NHS

is in a problem. It is in a problem of deficit in many hospitals, a

problem of waiting lists, a problem of the financial crisis that has

been faced with so many others. Can he now addressed that issue and

ensure that everyone in this country can rely on the NHS which is surely

the jewel in all of our crowns? Since I became premise, let me tell

him what has happened since then. The number of doctors up by 10,500,

the number of nurses up by 5800, fewer patients waiting to start

treatment than under Labour, we have seen mixed sex wards virtually

abolished and seen rates of hospital infection plummet. It's happened for

a reason. Because we've had a strong economy and some of the strongest

growth anywhere in the world, because we have unemployment

falling, inflation on the floor, we are able to fund an NHS whereas the

countries that he admires all over the world with their crazy socialist

plans cut their health service and that the people who need their help

the most! -- they hurt the people who need their help the most. The

UK's Internet economy is much the largest of the T20 nations at 12.4%

of GDP but as consumers move online soda criminals. Does the Prime

Minister agree that the Investigatory Powers Bill must give

our security services the powers they need to keep us safe, whilst

ensuring that proper controls exist on how we use those powers? My

honourable friend is absolutely right to raise this. It is one of

the most important bills that this House were discussed. It is going

through pre-legislative scrutiny. The Home Secretary today will set

out very clearly what this bill is about and why it is necessary. Let

me make one some ballpoint. Communications data, the who called

who and when of Telecom allegations has been absolutely vital in

catching rapists, child abductors and solving other crimes. The

question before us is, do we need that data when people are using

social media to commit those crimes rather than a mobile phone. My

answer is yes, we must help the police and our security and

intelligence services to keep us safe. Mr Angus Robertson. Think you,

Mr Speaker. This week when remember all the sacrifices from past and

present conflicts and show respect to veterans and service families.

Does the Prime Minister agree that everything must be done to deliver

on the military covenant, of the spirit and the letter? I agree with

both parts of the question, these remembrance services are important

up and down the country and the military covenant is one of the most

important things we have where we make a promise to our military that

because of the sacrifices they make on our behalf, they should not have

less good treatment than other good people in this country, and indeed

where we can we should provide extra support. This is the first

government to put the military government properly into law --

military covenant and every year to improve it whether by hospital

treatment, free transport, council tax discount, and so many other

things, and we report on it every. Mr Angus Robertson. Is the Prime

Minister aware that many service widows continue to be deprived of

their forces pensions if there is a change in their personal

circumstances? Does he agree that this is a clear breach in the spirit

of the military covenant and what will he do to rectify this wrong? We

made a big change, last, I think, around Armistice Day, to make sure

that many people to Schmeichel last year, to make sure that people who

had remarried could get pensions. The big step forward welcomed by

British Legion. If we need to take further steps I am very happy to

look at them and see what be done. I remember that in the last budget we

looked at the case of police widows and tried to put right their

situation as well. Doctor James Davis. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will a

Prime Minister joined me in congratulating Prestatyn, which is a

finalist in the great British high street awards? And will he confirm

whether the UK's government will hold discussions with the Welsh

assembly have and which is about the division of business rates councils

to Wales so that other times in my constituency have a better

opportunity to regenerate? -- other towns. I do join him in

congratulating Prestatyn. I don't know if it is in the same category

as my hometown of Chipping Norton which has also been nominated so I

might have a conflict of interest. What I would say is, in Wales,

business rates is a devolved issue but it's open to the Welsh

government, should they choose to take our approach of devolving that

business rate income directly to local councils so that local

councils have a better connection local councils so that local

between the money they raise and the decisions they make to attract

business investment and industry to their area. I went to Cheltenham

ladies College and the Prime Minister went to Eton. Both schools

which invest Minister went to Eton. Both schools

teaching and facilities for music, dance, arts and drama. Yet while

he's been Prime Minister, the schools which educate 92% of our

pupils have cut teachers in those subjects. Will his legacy be that

Britain stopped being a world leader in creative and cultural industries

and becomes an also-ran? I do not accept that. And if you look at

school funding, it has been protected under this government

school funding, it has been we want to continue protecting it.

What I will make no apology for is the clear focus we have on getting

the basics right in schools. It's absolutely essential that we get

more children learning the basic subjects and getting basic

qualifications. And then subjects and getting basic

that it is more possible to put in place the arts, dance and drama that

I want my children to have as they go to their schools. Damian Collins.

The Channel Tunnel and the Port of Dover are major pieces of lateral

infrastructure but when there are disruptions to services it causes

chaos on the roads of Kent. As the government computers work on the

spending review will the Prime Minister gives special consideration

to the need for an urgent long-term solution to Operation Stack? I

absolutely recognise the serious problems caused to Kent residents

and businesses when it was necessary to put into place Operation Stack.

We've ready and permitted short-term measures to reduce the impact

including the temporary availability of one every and is contingency

measure. I know he met with the Chancellor and other Kent MPs and

we're happy to build on this work. I understand the pressures and we will

do all we to relieve them. May I associate myself with the

do all we to relieve them. May I the Prime Minister made about what

will happen this weekend and also his comments he made to the leader

of the SNP. God his comments he made to the leader

about the fact that thousands of his comments he made to the leader

people who served in the royal navy before 1987 are not entitled to full

compensation, this means that people who have been exposed to disease

stand to lose out massively compared with people in civilian life to the

extent that some idiot who's been exposed in industry could get

?150,000 in compensation, and it is probable that a service person will

only get ?31,000. This is clearly a moral outrage as well as being in

breach... moral outrage as well as being in

honourable gentleman for raising this issue. I understand the Defence

Secretary is looking at it. Since putting in place the military

covenant with tried every year to make progress, whether to do with

widows or with different groups disadvantaged in some way. I am

happy to look at the points he makes. Thank you, Mr Speaker. At the

Royal Society, they've identified the need for 1 million scientists,

engineers and technical professionals by 2020. One way to

bridge the skills grab is an increase in

bridge the skills grab is an apprenticeships like the ones in

Basildon. -- the skills gap. Yet for every one place available 20 people

apply. Will my right honourable friend redouble his efforts to meet

our commitment to 2 million new apprenticeships? This target is

essential and I believe we can achieve it. Going back to questions

from the Honourable member for Slough one way will achieve it is by

making sure that more young people have the qualifications necessary to

apply for an apprenticeship will stop many firms find that a lot of

people apply but when you look at the people who don't have a

qualification in English and maths and becomes down. I'm delighted to

announce that in terms of advice and apprenticeships, to make sure we

work with businesses to get this target, the Right Honourable member

for structure and maven is going to take the place of the Right

Honourable member for Watford who is moved on to other things -- the

Right Honourable member for Stratford-upon-Avon. He is going to

help me make sure we deliver on this. My constituents in Blackpool

face a 11 me on police cuts from the spending review and the new Home

Office formula which tops ?45 million of Lancashire Police. I ask

him whether a cross-party letter from the MPs of like a ship, one

from my neighbourhood watch group, one from other commissions, mostly

Tories, and the Chief Constable, all saying that the process is flawed,

how many blue lights must he have before we had meltdown? Let me say,

the reforms to the police funding formula is a consultation on which

no decisions have been taken. Mayo congratulate the luxuries to him

because crime is down in Blackpool by 5% -- May I congratulate the like

should police. Funding for the Lancashire Police is the same in

cash terms as 2003. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary found

that Lancashire Constabulary is exceptionally well prepared to face

its future financial requirements. That is the view of HMI sea. In a

country where crime however you measure it has fallen significantly

since this government took office. Annemarie Trevelyan. Thank you, Mr

Speaker. My constituent, one of the UK's leading burns specialists went

on Monday to Bucharest to help Romanian medical teams dealing with

the nightclub fire. I understand that there are 150 patients in need

of critical care and only 25 beds in big rest. She has asked if the Prime

Minister will consider offering practical medical assistance to

these victims by allowing the use of UK burns facilities for their

treatment. I think my honourable friend is right to raise this tragic

event that happened in big rest last Friday. All our thoughts are with

the victims and their families. I'm pleased to hear about the visit of

this doctor and herself was work. It's a very good suggestion to look

that if we can offer specialist help and I will take it away and see what

can be done. The Prime Minister will understand the heartbreak at the

death of a child. For parents not to know what has happened to the ashes

of that child, as is the case with Mike and Tina troll hill in Hull and

other families around the country must be very cruel. Will the Prime

Minister agree to meet Mike and Tina to discuss why we need national and

local inquiry as to what happened in that case around baby ashes? Paige

are completely understand how her constituents feel. This must have

been an absolutely tragic event, made worse by not knowing what has

happened to their child. I am very happy to arrange that meeting. I am

not aware of this case. Let me look at it and see what I can do.

I was delighted that the Chancellor chose our county city of York to

launch the new national infrastructure commission. Could the

Prime Minister confirm that this is the start of a new era where

important investment decisions like roads and railways between the

cities of the North will help to bring growth to our region? My

friend Mike is right to raise this. People in Yorkshire have long felt

that there has not been a fair in a deal in terms of transport funding

on roads and rail. And I think that people can now see that ?13 billion

is being spent on transport in the North as part of our plan to

rebalance the British economy. We've committed more than 4.8 ?3 on road

improvements and we are still improving the a 64, vital for York,

and we will look at what more we can do to make sure this vital part of

the economy has the transport links it needs. John Nicholson. Thank you,

Mr Speaker, on the ninth these extreme state for culture media and

sport told the select committee that there were no plans to sell Channel

4. -- the Secretary of State said that. Can the Prime Minister confirm

that that is the government 's position that there are no

initiatives underway to privatise this important and much loved public

institution. I'm a big fan of Channel 4, it was a great

Conservative innovation. A combination of fully why slow and

Margaret Thatcher that helped to bring Channel 4 to our screens. --

Willie Whitelaw and Margaret Thatcher. I'm a big fan. I wanted to

have a strong, secure future. I think it's right to look at all the

options to see of private investment into the channel could help to

safeguard and the future. Let's look at the options. Let's not our minds,

like some on the opposition front bench, let's not close our minds,

they think that private is bad and public is good. Let's have a proper

look at how to make sure this great channel goes on being great for

years to come. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Everyone who has had any

contact with the adoption process will be familiar with the

frustration that are necessary delays can cause to prospective

parents. Would the Prime Minister take action to speed up the adoption

process so that more children can be placed with the right families more

quickly? Benchmark my friend Mike is right to raise this. We've seen a

72% increase in the number of Jordan adopted and the waiting time on

average has fallen by five months. -- children adopted. Toulon, yet if

you look across the 150 councils responsible, 68 of them have no

mechanisms for early placement, where you run fostering and adoption

alongside each other. If we could introduce that, not least to our

regional adoption agencies that will establish, many more children will

get the warm and loving home we want for them. On Armistice Day will the

prime ministers that thought for the 633 of our bravest and best who died

as a result of two political mistakes. 179 in pursuit of

non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 454 who died

in the Helmand province inclusion that promised that no shot will be

fired. Will he rethink his own plan to order more of our brave soldiers

to put their lives on the line in the chaos and confusion of a 4-sided

civil war in Syria? I have great respect for the honourable gentleman

but with great respect, on Armistice Day we should put aside political

questions about conflicts and decisions made, and simply remember

the men and women who put on a uniform, went and served and risked

their lives on our behalf. Let's make Armistice Day about that, not

about other questions. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The last week has been a

very good one for Cornwall airport in Newquay with the scrapping of the

development fee which was an additional tax on passages and a

barrier to growth, the enactment of new air links that link Cornwall to

mainland Europe, and the upgrading of the Gatwick limp with the support

of the PSL. Will the Prime Minister join me in congratulating the team

at Newquay airport for their work in supporting the Cornish economy? I am

a huge fan of Newquay airport and a frequent user. The government made a

series of promises about helping the airport to make sure that vital

connectivity between Cornwall and the rest of the country and

continental Europe is there and I am delighted it's so well. Norman Lamb.

continental Europe is there and I am Can I thank the Prime Minister for

his welcome... Order! I want to Can I thank the Prime Minister for

share this question. Mr Lamb? Can I thank the Prime Minister for

Mac can I thank the Prime Minister for his welcome for the campaign

launched this for his welcome for the campaign

from across society joined the Right Honourable

from across society joined the Right Coldfield, Alistair Campbell, and

me, in Coldfield, Alistair Campbell, and

those suffering from mental ill-health. The truth is that those

who ill-health. The truth is that those

the same rights ill-health. The truth is that those

as others enjoy in moral and economic case for ending

overwhelming. Will the Prime moral and economic case for ending

Minister do what it takes to make sure

Minister do what it takes to make delivers the investment, the extra

deliver genuine equality? Let me say to the honourable gentleman, who did

a lot of work on this in the last Parliament, I very much welcome the

campaign and what they want to achieve. We set out in the NHS

Constitution parity between mental and physical health and we have

taken steps towards that for example by introducing the first time

waiting times and proper targets for talking therapies. There are now

twice as many people undergoing those that abuse as there were five

years ago. I those that abuse as there were five

there is more to do in those that abuse as there were five

committed to doing so. Andrew Mitchell. Following up the question

from the gentleman from Norfolk Mitchell. Following up the question

North, I want to emphasise that this Mitchell. Following up the question

agree that there's now Mitchell. Following up the question

opportunity to build on Mitchell. Following up the question

widespread support across all parts of society, and end historic

injustice between the treatment of mental health and the physical

illness. My honourable friend is absolutely right. We are investing

more in mental health than ever. We will spend in 11.4 billion in this

financial year and will spend in 11.4 billion in this

group to make sure real terms increases in their investment in

mental health services so it can't be treated as the Cinderella service

that has sometimes been the case in the past. If we do that, and also

deal with some of the other issues like mental health patients being

held in police cells, we can have a far better system for dealing with

mental health in this country. Thank you Mr Speaker. After the

announcement of job losses in Northern Ireland, one factor has

been high energy costs, will the Prime Minister work with the

Northern Ireland energy initiative to address these issues as a matter

of urgency. For people who are currently in work in Northern

Ireland and are very worried about the impact of cutting working tax

credits. Given that the Prime Minister and the Chancellor are in

the same mode and showing a surprising degree of flexibility

across a range of issues recently will he refers the first of the

policy and remove the threat against working families in Northern Ireland

and across the country? First of all, on the issue of industries, if

a company horrifies as part of the energy intensive industries, it will

see a reduction in its bill,, and the second point I would make to

Northern Ireland is that we have passed in this House historic

legislation to allow Northern Ireland to set its own rate of

corporation tax and the sooner we can put together all the elements of

the Stormont has agreement, the sooner Northern Ireland will be able

to take action to build a stronger private sector in Northern Ireland

which is what I want to see. On the issue of tax credits, I give the

same answer. He will know in three weeks. He also knows that people

working in that business or in others will be able to an ?11,000

before they pay taxes, get more help with childcare and have a higher

wage. We will keep welfare costs under control so that we can build

great public services. Prime Minister's Questions started

late and ended even later. It ended on tax credits. A question from

Nigel Dodds. Jeremy Corbyn kicked off with tax credits would he

referred back to the fact he used his six questions last week on tax

credits to then proceed again to try to pin down the Prime Minister on

whether anyone would be worse off as a result of the tax credit changes.

That followed rebellion and defeat in the House of Lords. The first

three questions on that issue. Jeremy Corbyn moved on to junior

doctors before then trying to test the Government record on health with

his final two questions. It was a slightly awkward and uncomfortable

start to Prime Minister's Questions. There was a lot of barracking to

Jeremy Corbyn, who just talking before continuing on. The Prime

Minister responded on the tax credit issue with, you will have to wait

and see. We have the Autumn Statement and the spending review

coming up in a few weeks' time. That is where we will find out whether

there will be money splashed out to try to mitigate some of the changes

to tax credits. Another change in tactics from Jeremy Corbyn was

instead of quoting members of the public, he used experts. The Kings

fund, a medical expert, to try to put the Prime Minister under

pressure. The Prime Minister did not feel as much under pressure this

week as he did last week. There were a couple of questions, one from

Angus Robertson on the military covenant about whether the Prime

Minister and government are committed to that in spirit. One or

two questions at the end from Norman Lamb, a Liberal Democrat, and Andrew

Mitchell, the Conservative MP. It was about mental health. This was

the weakest performance. He looked like a typical politician trying to

score Picking up on what you said about tactics, I have been watching

PMQs. I am fed up with the shouting and heckling on the backbench side.

Isn't it time the cameras turned on the offenders? It might make them

behave much better. Ed Miliband used to try to ride through the barrage

of it stops and it does have an effect. On the performance of Jeremy

Corbyn with the change in tone and tactic, especially health. It felt a

little bit faltering. Some of the ways in which he asked the

questions, particularly on the NHS. These are important issues. Not

necessarily that focus. We know over the years, we watch PMQs, the way

you make progress on the way you punch through the political defences

of the Prime Minister is by going specific and repeating specific

questions and demands. You do not really get that far. It seemed like

a strange PMQs. Neither of them were up for the dance today David Cameron

said it is getting longer and longer. Part of the energy of these

sessions is, you are on the clock, it is a deadline. It felt flabby.

John Bercow is allowing lots of questions Jeremy Corbyn has an

effective tactic of just stopping when the backbenches are getting

incredibly rowdy. That does happen quite a lot of times and gives it a

very different mood. Members of the public think it is quite right to do

that. Let's move on to the spending review and the Autumn Statement. A

lot of that was pushed to, let's see what happens in a few weeks' time.

What can people expect? Three weeks today the Chancellor sets out a

number of plans. It adds more flesh to the different investment

programmes. Will he mitigate the tax credit changes? He said he will

listen to concerns being raised and come back to it. We are committed to

welfare spending by 12 William pounds and increasing wages and

lowering taxes. What will happen with this? -- ?12 million. There

will be some kind of mitigation. Worth remarking on a quite

significant bus stop that is going on about it with the Chancellor

trying to raid the budget of Iain Duncan-Smith's beloveds programme of

universal credit. This is the huge, super programme of welfare which is

supposed to take over from welfare payments. It has been said that the

Chancellor is quite up nicking some of the cash, a couple of million

through universal credits. A few sharp words. That would be a very

problematic way. The comment made by David Cameron, he has voted against

welfare changes. Any proposals where there is a huge amount of money

spent which could be spent on other things, particularly non-protected

departments. You'll agree you need to bring the cost of welfare down.

What you will have is fewer people claiming housing benefit than we

have at the moment. In the here and now, 82% of children in Addington

are being brought up in families where tax credit is really matter to

them. I think it is absolutely wrong he has made this move. It does not

surprise me there has been a reaction to it against the political

-- across the political spectrum. Another issue that PMQs today, the

Prime Minister brushed aside the concerns being expressed by Gordon

Marsden over the police. Not true that violent crime is falling,

sexual crime and suchlike is up. Just two weeks ago, what was

reported on was there would be 5 million crimes of fraud online and

cyber crime. You would see statistics showing a 40% increase

will stop most important of all, if you cut 17,000 police officers and a

further 22,000 police officers, it will put the public at risk. When

you went to the people of your constituency in Suffolk, back in

May, did you say, vote for me and I will cut 22,000 police officers? I

will tell you what I said. I will stand on a platform to balance the

books we start to pay down the debt that Labour ballooned when they were

in office was the public has the second lowest funding per head with

police. 29 forces at the moment will benefit. 13 will reduce the debt has

led to changes that Suffolk police and others have responded. It makes

common sense for fire stations and police stations to be one building,

not separate. It has not been done. The problem generally is the low

hanging fruit has gone. Where will it come from? All of the back

office, the tax avoidance, surely it went in the first five years of the

Coalition Government? That has been taken into account. Where will it

go? You will have seen a change with police and crime commissioners. They

bring in ideas without affecting the operation. Those low hanging fruit

are quite difficult and have not been done.

a chorus of voices have said simply this, from London to Lancashire,

chief constables are saying that we can no longer guaranteed public

safety of the government proceeds with cuts on this scale.

Non-protected departments are really going to be hit. Behind the scenes

that are epic battles between ministers and the Treasury about

where they will find their cuts between 25 and 40%. Some people

believe the easy savings went between 2010 and 2015. Some

ministers are trying to look for bigger opportunities to make bigger

changes to make reforms that also deliver cash but there are really

serious and worrying conversations. People about this, and briefly, for

the police, it has become not a serious political issue yet but it

may well. Some conservative lease commissioners are making protests as

well. -- police commissioners. Thank you, Laura.

Are you the type of person who likes a campaign?

Do you send around appeals on Facebook and change

Are you fond of a good slogan badge and partial

If so, does it really achieve anything?

Writer James James Bartholomew thinks not - he says it's really

This is the birthplace of Octavia Hill.

She was co-founder of the National Trust,

but more importantly, she was a major social reformer in the 19th

She was appalled by the living conditions of the working poor.

But instead of just wringing her hands about it

She created low-cost housing for them.

These days, many people think that merely

expressing an opinion establishes that they really, really care.

They use wristbands, hashtags, tweets,

twibbons and T-shirts to show they have fashionably right-on opinions.

I call this phenomenon virtue signalling.

It is the idea that having and expressing particular opinion

In Britain we can be quite sophisticated about this.

We can indicate how good we are by saying we hate something.

"I hate the Daily Mail" means "I am an open-minded liberal sort

"I hate Ukip" means "I'm not a racist", and the more angry

and the more I beat the drum about how I hate Ukip, the more it

But have you noticed something about this kind of virtue?

In contrast to Octavia here, it does not require actually doing anything.

It requires a show of effort and no sacrifice.

I suppose the reason that all this virtue signalling really

irritates me is that there are still people who are truly virtuous.

These are plaques commemorating people who did actual good deeds.

And that kind of generosity and decency takes place today

among ordinary people, people who stay together for the sake of the

children, a person who looks after an elderly parent, maybe for years.

There is such a thing still as actual virtue.

But virtue signalling without actually doing

It is self-righteous, vain, and silly.

It is not what you say or think that matters, it's what you do.

James Bartholomew, at Octavia Hill Birthplace House in Wisbech.

What's new about this? Presumably throughout history there have been

holier than thou people. As the Internet make this worse? I don't

know. This is going back to the subject write about, the welfare

state. The welfare state has a lot to do with it, people feel they have

outsourced their decency, I pay taxes, therefore I don't have to

anything! That is part of why virtues signalling without doing

anything has increased. Are they doing nothing? Surely the idea of

saying that I feel strongly about this and other people will say, I

agree, what can we do, you have been crowd sourcing something you can do

about it, whereas you might not have known what to do in the first place.

You can do two things. Change government policy which could do

good or harm, or you could do something like setting up a home for

the elderly or an organisation that visits lonely elderly people. You

can do something. And that's great. Campaigning can lead to that. What

irritates me is the people who I've met, in contrast to people who do

real good, the people who think, I can say that I hate the Daily Mail

and Ukip and I vote Labour once every five years, I am a morally

superior person. That irritates me because there are people who make

sacrifices... LAUGHTER

The suggestion is that virtues signalling is a problem for the

left! The phrase that I created is mentioned several hundred times in

the Guardian because they are accusing each other of virtues

signalling. Is that fair? It is not what you say, it is what you do. It

used to be that if an MP got half a dozen letters they would think it

was a movement. Now you can get hundreds of e-mails. Many standard,

some telling personal stories. I think there is now a welcome culture

of people finding it easier to communicate with their MP and that's

a good thing. Using to be suggesting that there is a sanctimonious tone

about it and laziness behind it. Absolutely, lazy, vain,

self-righteous. With these conditions you can do so easily,

saying that there are naked women in the Sun, that is awful. Not actually

changing anything. Do you do virtue signalling, Therese it's

extraordinary. Twitter doesn't reflect British opinion in anyway,

even people who click an e-mail, I think that has lost its currency as

well. You do not have to think things through, you can say, this is

awful and you don't have do think through the consequences, reducing

tax credits, what's the other side of the story? What do you do to do

something about things. I can't start boasting that, that would be

equally bad! You sort the trap! Do you volunteer, do you do things? I

don't want to boast about things I do. That would be pride as well. Let

me spare you the embarrassment, thank you.

Now, what do Anthony Gormley, William Shakespeare and

The answer is they all feature in the new British passport,

designed especially to celebrate the UK's creative and cultural past.

It's meant to be the most secure passport ever, but its launch

The travel document features seven men, but only two women

and no-one from Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.

Here's what the Home Office Minister, James Brokenshire had

The people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland continue to be

pioneers within the creative sector. And in recognition of all of these

achievements, I'm today proud to unveil the latest design of the UK

passport. Under the theme of "Creative United Kingdom".

This design will be used for the next five years, and features the

works of many of this country's finest creative talents.

With me now, passport expert Martin Lloyd. He's the author of The

Passport. This has caused almighty row. Apparently yes, we have a

pretty picture book for a passport. It wasn't always like that. What was

it like? It's derived from a letter of introduction and a king 's

licence which was permission to leave the country. It came looking

like a letter of introduction! Of course you didn't need a Buddhist

passport. This man, Charles Sloan, went to France on a French passport!

It was quite easy. The British passport cost ?2 seven and six, the

French one cost four shillings. No argument! To bring it forward, only

two women, seven men. What do you think of that? I don't know. I like

women! Does it matter? It does. The idea that men are more creative than

women, there are some outstanding women who should have been included

like the wonderful architect who designed the Olympic Village. Why

don't we have creative people of that kind reflecting the diversity

of this country as well? I just think maybe your government has a

problem with women? It's not true, Elisabeth Scott is featured and she

designed the RSC. Do you know much about her? I know she's designing

iconic buildings. The things we are addressing like gender equality, it

is nonsense to say that we don't like women. Who has the best

passport? We must. It is almost the most expensive. Doesn't mean it is

the best? Of course not. It is a good demonstration of the skill of

the printers, clever ideas, but the forgers are always six months behind

them so they have to keep renewing these things. If we left the

European Union would we need another passport? That would be good, we

could go back to Victorian times and have something personally signed by

the Foreign Secretary! That's the way to do it! Passport and 13. Izzy

and to Thomas Hodges, signed by Lord Palmerston. -- is used to Thomas

Hodges. When you handed that to a foreigner, they knew you were

British! This just time to put you out of your misery.

Therese, press that big red button there.

The answer to Guess The Year was 2012. The mug goes to our viewer.

Christa Williams, well done. That's all for today.

The One O'clock News is starting over on BBC One now.

Andrew will be back here as well, so do join us then.

I'm actually tingling with the excitement.

We're going to test your skills at the wheel.

It's too intimidating. Do it for your family!