18/11/2015 Daily Politics

Dramatic events in Paris this morning as French police carry out

a massive anti-terrorist operation following the attacks last Friday.

Armed units moved in early this morning, resulting

One female suspect reportedly blew herself up.

Another man is also said to have been killed.

The French government says the operation is now over.

David Cameron promises a "comprehensive strategy"

to deal with the threat posed by the so-called Islamic State.

So will that mean an imminent vote on extending

Jeremy Corbyn faces open revolt within the Labour Party over

his stance on military action and dealing with the terrorist threat.

Can the Labour leader reassert his authority at PMQs today?

This is New York City. No one tells us what neighbourhood to live in,

what team to root for or what Delhi to eat cat.

And slick American campaign techniques are now de rigeur

We speak to the American strategist who hopes to

All that in the 90 minutes, and with us for the whole of the programme

today, the Environment Minister, George Eustice, and the Shadow

Let's start with the dramatic events in Paris this

morning where armed police raided a flat in the suburb of Saint Denis

in an operation linked to Friday's terrorist attacks.

One female suspect blew herself up and another man was killed.

Five police officers were hurt and at least five people were

We can bring you some pictures of this now just as they come in. Saint

Denis is in that part of Paris, you see it on the way in on the

Eurostar, it is on the left. The National Stadium, the Stade de

France is also in this part, where two suicide bombers blew themselves

up on Friday night. These are not live pictures, but they are very

recent. This operation was launched at about 4am local time, and

involved over 100 police backed up by the army. The army now on the

streets in Paris for the first time in living memory in a sense of being

involved in anti-terrorist operations. If you have been to

Paris recently, you see the police around the Eiffel Tower, government

buildings, but the Army this morning involved in this anti-terrorist

operation. The police paramilitaries took the force of this, and it looks

like it was successful from the French police point of view. They

were very anxious, although it was a siege situation, to catch and get at

least one of the people they were after a live, because so many of

those involved on Friday night's atrocity either killed themselves

all were killed by the police as they were trying to take control

again. But they have now got somebody, at least one, perhaps two

people involved, who will now face interrogation from the French

security services. These live pictures coming in from Saint Denis

in Paris at what looks like the end of the anti-terrorist operation in

that particular part of Harris. JoCo.

That operation which had been going on all morning does look finished.

We had reports that some of the officers were taking off their

helmets, which looked as if they had got everybody they wanted to get.

There are also reports this morning that have not been confirmed that

the people holed up in that apartment were planning some sort of

attack on La Defence, the districts to the West.

Clearly a dangerous operation, with the police themselves suffering

casualties, we don't think any fatalities. And a police dog was

injured as well, we are told. The Prime Minister has promised to

present a "comprehensive strategy" to deal

with the so-called Islamic State. David Cameron told Parliament

yesterday that he would respond personally to

a sceptical report from the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee

published earlier this month. Mr Cameron believes that

the terrorist atrocities in Paris have strengthened the case

for air strikes in Syria and reports today suggest he could seek a

Parliamentary vote before Christmas. Though Downing Street this morning

began to play that down a bit. But will he be able to

win over sceptical MPs? Earlier this month the Foreign

Affairs Select Committee urged David Cameron not to press ahead with

a vote on UK air strikes against It said any benefits would be more

than outweighed by the risks of "legal ambiguity, political chaos

on the ground, military The committee urged the

Prime Minister to focus instead on The UK is already taking part

in air strikes against IS targets in Iraq, at the

request of the Iraqi government. On Monday RAF Tornados attacked a

group of more than 30 IS fighters who were preparing an attack

on Kurdish forces near Sinjar. There have already been targeted UK

drone strikes in Syria after British born jihadis Reyaad Khan and Ruhul

Amin were killed in Raqqa in August. It was ruled lawful as an act

of self-defence. But for David Cameron, extending to

full air strikes is more tricky, In 2013 Parliament voted on

whether to take military action The Government lost 282

against to 272 in favour. Andrew. George Eustis, if the Prime

Minister now thinks it is right to take the water Syria, why doesn't he

get on with it? We are acting in Iraq at the moment, and big progress

is being made. But the Prime Minister has always been clear that

there will only be action in Syria if there is support for it.

Why? There isn't a constitutional need for it. The Prime Minister said

that we do need to have a clear strategy, a broad strategy that

looks at counter-terrorism, and community cohesion at home. He is

going to respond directly. So why haven't we got it? This has been a

long time coming, we have seen this coming. There is no surprise, there

is only the timing. We have known, even the downing of the Russian

passenger jet over Sinai was a clear sign that Islamic State was

operating and out of area. Terrorist capability. So why have we not yet

had the Prime Minister's Hanson for dealing with it? The Prime Minister

would have been able to get air strikes in Syria in the last

parliament, but the Labour Party would support that. Some of your own

side wouldn't. They wouldn't. Would you support it? I would. I would

have supported intervention against Assad in 2013 we could have brought

this civil war to an earlier conclusion. And I certainly support

action in Syria now. You should be willing to go after Isil wherever

they are. The Royal United services Institute, an independent think

tank, has said that while the parliamentary manoeuvring

continues, the UK's reputation as a reliable military partner is being

undermined. It is right, isn't it? I would prefer it if we had voted to

go into action in Syria at the end of the last Parliament. Why not do

it and throw yourself, at some stage of labour... If you do it because

the Government thinks it is the right thing to do, and Labour puts

down a motion of no confidence, then you live or fall by the vote in the

Commons. Do the right thing. I think it is right on matters of military

intervention that we seek a Parliamentary consensus for it. The

Prime Minister has always said that that was what we would do. Is it

always true on every possible military action that Britain will

take, that there needs to be a Parliamentary consensus? When you

are talking about a sustained air campaign, then yes, he feels he

should have parliamentary backing for that. The answer is not to

sidestep Parliament, it is to persuade Parliament that this is the

right thing to do. But he is not. Why is he taking so long to reply?

The select committee report was iffy about extending the war. There were

lots of arguments for not doing it as well as there are strong

arguments were doing it. Why is the Prime Minister taking so long to

reply? He said he's going to reply to it directly personally. The key

thing they ask forward is to say that they needed a coherent wider

strategy that included how we bring the civil war in Syria to an end.

And when we get to get back? He says he is going to make that response

himself. I understand there is some difficulty in answering these

questions. What about this one. Do you think it would be right, given

what we have seen unfold on the streets of Paris, and given that our

own intelligence services believe it is only a matter of time before

something almost as terrible or just as terrible happens on the streets

of written, -- Britain, that this Government should continue to cut

police numbers? You have seen this week the Government announced that

is going to double the budget on dealing with cyber crime, an extra

1900 personnel... That is not police numbers. No, but the

counter-terrorism element of the police budget was protected in the

last Parliament, and it will be protected again in this one. Except

that there has been a clear-cut in the Home Office's budget, and the

head of the London Met says that the cuts that are still to come, another

5000 officers will have to go, from a 32,000 strong police force in the

capital. We will have to wait until they get the spending review

decisions to know exactly how much the police will be asked to save,

and it would be over four years. Let me just give you the figures from

the ISS. Public spending on police was cut by 14% in real terms between

2010 and 2014 /15. And now it faces further cut at a time when we faced

Robert Blake the biggest terrorist threat this country has ever faced,

even bigger than the IRA now if Paris is anything to go by. Does

that make sense to continue cutting? Within the budget, you

would prioritise things like counter-terrorism. You prioritised

overseas aid. The point is on the police that crime has gone down in

the last five years. Policing is changing. That is a Europe-wide

phenomenon, as you know. Policing is changing, there is more emphasis on

things like cyber crime, and we have doubled the budget on that, and an

extra ?2 billion going into special forces. Contrary to reports in the

media, special forces are not patrolling the streets. How many

armed police can France deployed within one hour of a terrorist

attack? I don't know. 120,000. How many armed police could Britain

deploy within an hour? An absolute maximum of 6000. 6000 versus

120,000, and you thinking next week's, rancid review you would we

seem to be in touch with this country if you continue to cut

police budget? Within the budget, you prioritise where there is

greatest to public safety. Thank you Ray much.

A bitter row has broken out in the Labour Party over the renewal of

Ken Livingstone, an opponent of the nuclear deterrent, has been put

in joint charge of a review to help decide Labour's position on it.

When a Shadow Defence Minister who's suffered with depression questioned

his suitability for the role, Mr Livingstone's reported to have

said he "might need some psychiatric help".

Why has he been appointed? My understanding is that when the NEC

met recently, they made a joint decision that they would move our

work streams down into six key areas, and one of those is foreign

affairs and defence. That will obviously include the Trident

review. That work is being led by Maria Eagle, our Shadow Secretary of

State for Defence, but she will co-chair that body with Ken

Livingstone, who is a member of the NEC. That model as a model they have

adopted across the six work streams. One member of the Shadow Cabinet,

one member of the NEC. But you now have a Shadow Defence Secretary who

is in favour of the renewal of Trident, and Ken Livingstone

chairing this review alongside her who doesn't. Can you understand why

she is reported to be furious? She didn't know, she wasn't told, she

had a mention with Jeremy Corbyn last week and she wasn't told about

the possibility of Ken Livingstone heading up this review. My

understanding is that this decision was made by the National executive

committee, not Jeremy Corbyn. Do you understand why she is furious and

feels undermined? I haven't spoken to Maria, so I don't know if that is

how she feels or not. This is a model that we have adopted across

the board, and it is not new. We are democratic organisation, and we

allow all sides to put their points of view. Tessa Jarl was the chair of

Ken Livingstone's campaign when he ran to America London, to back --

two people from different backgrounds working together. But if

you're shadow secretary is reportedly thinking of resigning, it

isn't working, is it? I can't tell you what she thinks, because I

haven't seen her. Is Ken Livingstone suitable for that role if he says

about one of his critics, Kevin Jones, Junior Shadow defence

Minister, that he should see his GP, that he should see a

psychiatrist? This is a man who had a battle with depression? Is that

appropriate? If that is what is said, of course it isn't. In

politics, nobody should be speaking to each other like that. We have had

insults hurled across the House of Commons, and it is not the right way

to talk about each other, but these are hugely serious issues, not just

about Trident, but also because of the conversation we were just having

because of the imminent threat posed by Isil, and it is right that the

Labour Party is trying to engage in a democratic process engages

different points of view. There are different views across this across

the country. But this is about judgment and the judgment of the

leader of the Labour Party. Her Majesty is my loyal opposition, and

his judgment will be called into question if he has appointed someone

like Ken Livingstone who has made comments like that about a fellow

MP. The NEC made a joint decision. Is

that appropriate for Ken Livingstone to say that? If he says about a

Parliamentary colleague, although Ken Livingstone is not in

Parliament, that somebody suffering from depression should go and see

his GP. I cannot confirm he has said it. Should Ken Livingstone

apologise? I do not think anybody in politics should be making comments

like that. We ought to be having a proper debate about the way in which

we keep people safe in this country. Is that the way to conduct

the debate? It is also reported that he has called Maria eagle mad for

believing that Trident is worth spending ?20 billion on? If it is

going to be a grown-up debate is Ken Livingstone the man to lead that

debate? I cannot comment on that because I have not seen it. Kevin

Jones has actually responded and saying however ended tears. Labour

MPs are all over social media as saying how outraged they are about

these comments and if he has been appointed to this very important

role, is that the sort of debate we can expect? Absolutely not. The sort

of debate we ought to be having as we ought to be respectful to one

another and concede there are different points of view. Should he

go? My understanding is that is why these bodies have been constituted a

this way so that different opinions are taken into account. Are you

happy for Ken Livingstone to continue in that role? I am not

going to comment having not seen anything that you have just read out

to me. I do not think that is the right way to conduct politics

either. I will look at what he said and take a view. Nobody should be

saying to anybody in any political party that they need to seek

psychiatric help and if that is what has been said of course he should

apologise. Should Jeremy Corbyn's judgment be cold into question after

making that decision without consulting his Shadow Defence

Secretary? The national executive committee which is drawn from across

the Labour Party... She did not even know. Was he right to accept the

decision by the NEC for Ken Livingstone to run that review? We

are a democratic party and decisions are made through the NEC which is

our ruling body. In terms of the town which Jeremy Corbyn has said

since he became leader, it has been respectful, kinder, straighter with

people. None of that sounds very kind respectful. That is my point.

This is watchable see from Jeremy Corbyn. That is how he expects us to

conduct debate. There is no sense in which anybody should be hurling

insults at anybody else and if that has happened we ought to take a

strong line. How strong should that might be? Jeremy Corbyn said unity

would be Labour's watchword. This looks the exact opposite. Unity

should be our watchword but within that we ought to be having

respectful and open debate about issues that are incredibly complex,

whether it is Isil and the situation in Syria, responding to Paris,

issues about police cuts or Trident, these are complex questions and it

is right that we have a debate but we must do that respectfully. When

there is a Trident debate next week they will not be an agreed

position? No. We are having a review. There are different views

across the Labour Party as across the country. That is the purpose of

the view. -- review. One person wants Trident and one person does

not. They might represent different views. At some stage there has to be

settled view from the opposition. When? The review is ongoing for

several months. We have announced the two co-chairman of the details

will be set out quite quickly. Jeremy has set out his personal view

but he has to persuade the rest of the party of that. We are a

democratic member led organisation and will have that debate and come

to consensus about the right way forward but it is right to ask the

question in relation to Trident, should we be spending this much of

our defence budget on keeping us they've when the threat we face

comes from organisations like Isil? You disagree with the Shadow Defence

Secretary? I have not come to a set of view. I want to have that

conversation. I would much rather have a leader who is willing to

listen to all points of view than a Prime Minister who has taken a

stance and will not admit there are competing priorities. All 129

fatalities from the terrorist attacks on Friday have been

identified. Scores of nationalities involved than people of all

backgrounds, ethnic persuasions and so on, in the atrocities, of the

129. The Paris prosecutor has told journalists it is unclear whether

the alleged organiser of the attacks has been picked up in that police

raid. They are not clear whether they managed to get him.

Time now for our Guess the Year competition.

We'll tell you how to enter in a moment but first tell us

# She drives me crazy and I can't help myself...

We have become a grandmother of a grandson called Michael.

Tonight, the number of television channels in Britain doubled.

# It's another day for you and me in paradise

# Cos it's another day for you, you and me in paradise. #

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

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

Entries must arrive by 12:30pm today, and you can see

the full terms and conditions for Guess The Year on our website -

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

The first Prime Minister's Questions since the attacks in Paris. Probably

more important today for Jeremy Corbyn. I doubt there will be much

crowd sourcing of questions from Jeremy Corbyn today. The BBC's

political editor is here. Starting with the government, lots of reports

that David Cameron was moving towards a vote, that it looked as if

he was going to take the plunge, get his ducks in a row, and I understand

there has been a ring back. David Cameron will not put a vote to the

House of Commons unless he is sure he can win it comfortably. This is

not something the government wants to look like they have sneaked

through. They might do not want to walk into the lobby is on the night

of the potential vote that it is that so little going to happen. This

is not going to be on a knife edge and if it seems like it is he will

not do it. How does he tell? His whips can tell him how many Tories

are going to vote for him and how many rebels he faces, they cannot

tell him what the Labour Party is going to do. One of those theories

doing the rounds is that the government may ask Labour MPs who

are interested in voting for action, maybe as many as 50, to put

something in writing, to give them something kind of guarantee or

public statement that they will back the government. Do not underestimate

how bruised ministers feel by what they see as Ed Miliband's betrayal

on a very different vote, action in Syria in 2013. They will be looking

for something that looks like a guarantee. Whether or not that

mechanism of the public written statement comes as not a question

that is yet settled but they are looking for solid things that they

know they can take to the House and win comfortably. It looks like it

might be by a slow and it will not happen -- if it does. To be sure he

is dependent and it is a very difficult time because... To use the

word chaos in the Labour Party would not be an exaggeration. Mr Jones is

a shadow defence spokesman for the defence party and was attacked by

Ken Livingstone who is heading up a review on defence policy and he has

responded. People can have political differences but to use mental

illness as a tool to attack somebody you disagree with on a political

issue is disgraceful. Jeremy Corbyn has worked very hard alongside other

members of Parliament to take the stigma away from mental illness and

Ken Livingstone's comments sure we have a long way to go. His comments

are in the dark ages frankly and that is where they should stay. The

internal civil war continues. The war of words. Chris Leslie who was

the former Shadow Chancellor has called on Ken Livingstone to resign

from the defence review and possibly from Labour's ruling committee the

national executive committee. What has happened in the last few days is

very significant. We have always known there were big differences

between the Parliamentary Labour Party and Jeremy Corbyn but what we

have seen as those tensions smash up against one thing real. What

happened in Paris and how Jeremy Corbyn has responded to it has

caused a great deal of concern not just among those who could be

dismissed as Blairite but amongst moderates in the Labour Party. For

Jeremy Corbyn supporters the kind of things he has been saying is exactly

why he won. He does not believe that violence is the answer to the

problems we face in this country and he believes Western intervention is

partly responsible for what has been happening. When the government wants

military action you have the Labour Party having a really damaging fight

amongst themselves. At a time when the Labour Party seems to be at

sixes and sevens on key issues of national security there is no sense

that Jeremy Corbyn is trying to reach out to the middle or the

rights of his party. Appointing Ken Livingstone is the exact opposite.

Indeed. For many Labour MPs the phrase that Kevin Jones uses, that

it is something from the dark ages, that is what many people in the

Labour Party remember, fights in the 1980s, and think that people

involved in those are back and telling them what to do. This is a

real clash of ideology. It is a real clash of the sort of street fighting

politics. There is a battle. It is chaotic but it is a fight for the

soul of who they really are and who they represent. In the last few days

Jeremy Corbyn supporters repeatedly unjustifiably talk about the

mandate, more and more MPs talking about the mandate that they got from

voters that the general election, 9 million voters, seeing that it is

different frame in terms of Jeremy Corbyn's mandate. Ken Livingstone's

appointment comes after a number of appointments. Mr McDonald as the

Shadow Chancellor. Even the unions were not keen on that. This policy

adviser who described various Labour people as scumbags. Andrew Fletcher.

Seamus Milne from The Guardian. Mr Livingstone in defence policy. The

question will have to wait because we are going to the Commons.

Mr Speaker, may I associate myself and the whole house with what the

Government have said about the attacks in Paris. People in

Blackpool were among those murdered on a Tunisian beach, and our tower

was lit in red white and blue for those killed by terrorist in France.

I raised an issue about neighbourhood policing and security

being threatened by the scale of proposed cuts, and the Lancashire

funding formula which has now been admitted to be flawed. Can I reflect

him -- asking to reflect on the words, when facts change, change my

mind, and when local intelligence can be crucial against, perhaps this

isn't the time to jeopardise it with arbitrary Treasury cuts. I thank the

honourable gentleman for what he says about Paris and the importance

of the whole house coming together over this issue, and perhaps the

house would like a brief update. One British and, Nick Alexander, was

killed at the Bataclan Theatre. Three other British National Party

now been released from hospital and returned to the UK. The Foreign

Office and red cross of providing support for at least another 15

nationals for trauma. We will be providing support for all of those

affected by what happened. There has been news from France this morning

in terms of terrorist arrests, and I can say more about that later on. On

policing, what I would say to the honourable gentleman is that we have

quite rightly in this Parliament protected counter-terrorism

policing. We are going to protect that again in this Parliament. What

we have done in terms of policing otherwise is we have seen an

increase in neighbourhood officers over the course of the parliament,

and a 31% cut in crime. Let me commend the police, not just

counter-terrorism police but all police, for the work they do, and we

will announce our proposals next week. Mr Speaker, as our hearts go

out to the people of France at this time, will the Prime Minister agree

with me that the first duty of Her Majesty is government must be to

protect British citizens from harm? So will he take immediate action to

secure our UK borders from those who threaten our nation, and on security

grounds alone, restore complete sovereignty over our British borders

from the European Union? I think my honourable friend raises a very

important question, and I want to explain in answering a very

important point, which is because the UK is not only Schengen Area, we

already retain full control over who is entering our country, and we are

able to check all entrants at the border, EU nationals and EEA

nationals included. On the house might be interested to know that

since 2010 we have refused entry to almost 6000 EU national, and many of

these were stopped at our border controls in Calais. In terms of

other people we have stopped, since 2010 we had denied entry to nearly

19 -- 95,000 people, and one of the principal reasons for not letting

people in is national security concerns. We have that situation

already because we are not in the Schengen Area.

THE SPEAKER: Mr Jeremy Corbyn. I want to start, Mr Speaker, by

expressing the horror of all those on this side of the house at the

events in Paris on Friday evening, and our concern you'd -- continued

solidarity with all victims, whether they be in Paris, Beirut, Ankara,

Damascus or anywhere in the world. We know that at least one British

and has been killed, and many more injured. Many British people live

and work in Paris, millions visit Paris and France every year. Can the

Prime Minister continue what he was saying earlier in response to my

friend the member from Blackpool in terms of giving support to the

British affected by the attacks, and what the Government's latest advices

on travelling to France and our need to show the best possible normality

in relations with the French people? I thank the Leader of the

Opposition for his remarks and I say what a pleasure it was to be with

him last night at the England-France football match, where I thought

there was a tremendous display of solidarity. I'm sure they can say in

the Marseille is louder in the Stade de France, but I was proud to be

there. There is never any justification for terrorism, and we

can all be clear about that at all times. He asked specifically what we

could do more to help British people caught up in his problems. Peter

Ricketts, our ambassador in France, is doing a brilliant job, and I'm

keeping my eye closely on the consular situation. In terms of

travel advice, it is all on the Foreign Office website, but I agree

with him, the most important thing is for people to carry on with their

lives. It is important that the Eurostar continues to function,

flights continue to go, people continue to travel to enjoy London

and Paris and go about our business. Yes we need enhanced security, and

that is happening with the way that the police are acting here in the UK

and elsewhere, but one of the ways to defeat terrorism is to show them

that we will not be cowed. We know that sadly after such atrocities as

we have seen, intolerance often increases. Islamophobia,

anti-Semitism, racism. Will the Prime Minister agree with me that it

is vital that everyone in public life, particularly politicians, are

careful about how we discuss these issues, and will he also join with

me in making it very clear that the dreadful events of terrorism in

Paris have nothing in common whatsoever with the 2 million

British Muslims in this country who are as appalled as anyone else by

the events in Paris last Friday? I will happily join the right

honourable gentleman in that. Some of the strongest and best statements

have been made by a whole series of magician Muslims coming together to

say that these attacks are in no way carried out in their name. But I do

think it raises an important issue, which cannot be said often enough,

that these watches of Isil are no reflection of the true religion of

Islam, which is a religion of peace. But at the same time, we do have to

recognise that whether these terrorists are in Tunisia or Egypt

or Paris or London they spout the same bile that they claim comes from

the religion of Islam, and that is why we have to take apart what they

say and prove that that is not the case. It is not good enough to say

there is no connection between these terrorist and Islam, they are making

a connection. We need to prove that it is not right, and the support of

Muslim scholars is absolutely vital and I commend them for their work.

Surely a crucial way to help defeat Isil is to cut off its funding, its

supply of arms and its trade. Can I press the Prime Minister to ensure

that our allies in the region and all countries in the region are

doing all they can to clamp down on individuals and institutions in

their countries who are providing Isil with vital infrastructure, and

will he, through the European Union and other forums if necessary,

consider sanctions against those banks and companies and if necessary

countries who turn a blind eye to financial dealings with Isil which

assist them in their work? We do play a leading role, as I said

yesterday, in making sure that the supply of money and weapons and

support is cut off, but I think we should be clear about where Isil got

their money from originally. What happened was that because we didn't

have a Government in Iraq that effectively represented all of its

people, and because in Syria you have a leader who is butchering his

own people, Isil was able to get hold of oil, get hold of weapons,

get hold of territory, get hold of banks, and it is that that they have

been able to use in order to fund their hatred and violence, and so we

cannot dodge for ever the question of how to degrade and destroy Isil

both in Iraq and in Syria, and that is why I will be setting out my

response to the foreign affairs select committee. So yes, go after

the money, the banks, cut off their supplies, but don't make that a

substitute for the action that is required to beat these people where

they are. Next week the Chancellor will

present his Autumn Statement stood a house. Can the prime and is to

clarify something about the source of the necessary extra funding to be

set out for the security services which we support. Will it come at

the expense of other areas, either within the Home Office budget or a

win in other areas of public spending, or from new funding? Does

he want to go on longer so that the Chancellor can explain the answer to

him? We will set out in full our decisions next week, but we have

already said that we will be funding an increase in the security services

of 1900 personnel, safeguarding the counterterrorism budget, and we will

be seeing an increase in terms of aviation security. All of this is

part of an overall spending settlement. At the same time as

funding our security, increasing our defence spending, we have to make

decisions that eradicate our budget deficit and keep our economy strong.

We don't do that just for the common -- current generation, we do it for

our children and grandchildren, because none of these things, not

even strong defence, is possible without a strong economy. I am not

sure where the money is coming from following the Prime Minister's

answer, but no doubt it will come. London has been targeted by

terrorists before, and this weekend was Mike events in Paris have

focused attention not just on London but also other cities throughout the

whole of Britain. Policing plays a vital role in community cohesion,

gathering intelligence of those who may be about to be a risk to all of

us. But this is surely undermined if we cut the number of police officers

by 5000. Does the Prime Minister agree with the commission of the

Metropolitan Police, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, who said, I quote, I

genuinely worry about safety of London if the cuts go through on

this scale? The right honourable gentleman asks where the money comes

from. We on this side of the house never forget that every penny we

spend comes from taxpayers. Borrowed money is simply taxes that are

deferred, and that is why it is so important to eradicate our deficit

at the same time as making sure we find our security intelligence

services and police properly. We are protecting the counterterrorism

budget. We see a 3800 increasing neighbourhood police officers in the

last parliament at the same time as a 31% increase in -- 31% cut in

crime. The Shadow Home Secretary has said that a 10% efficiency target

for the police is doable. Is the Leader of the Opposition saying that

he doesn't agree with his Shadow Home Secretary? There does seem to

be a little bit of disagreement on the opposition front bench today.

I have a question from a taxpayer, actually. And his name is John, and

he says, at a time... LAUGHTER

SHOUTING. At a time when we are facing the

greatest threat from terrorism ever faced, police numbers and resources

are cut. Demands on the police have been increasing steadily as budgets

are slashed, increasing stress on officers. Couple that with

detrimental changes to their pay, terms, conditions and pensions, it

is no wonder that morale in the police force is so poor, one in

three are considering leaving the force. Will he be able to tell us

whether or not this community policing and other police budgets

are protected or not in next week's Autumn Statement?

Let me tell him again, neighbourhood policing numbers have gone up by

3800. In the capital city, we have seen a 500% increase in

neighbourhood policing. We have also, because we have cut

bureaucracy, but the equivalent of an extra 2000 police on the streets.

But I will tell the Leader of the Opposition something. As well as

wanting resources, the police want the appropriate powers. And hasn't

come to something when the leader of Her Majesty Osman opposition thinks

that the police when fronted by a Kalashnikov waving terrorist isn't

sure what the reaction should be! Mr Speaker, the attacks on Paris

were quite clearly an attack on all of us. Does the Prime Minister agree

that our resolve must be unbreakable? We should hunt down

Isil wherever it is operating, wherever it is planning, wherever it

is plotting, and if that means shoot to kill, then so be it, and if that

means action in Syria, then so be it. I think my Hywel Poole friend is

right. What I have said is that in order to respond to this very severe

threat that we face, we need focus on counterterrorism here in the

United Kingdom giving our intelligence agencies the laws they

need, giving our police the powers they need, and making sure we are

vigilant. We need counter extremism as we were discussing earlier, the

importance of stopping the poisoning of these young minds, not least

through these radical preachers on the Internet. But we also need to

stop the problems at their source. We know where much of this problem

is coming from. It is Isil, not just in Iraq, but in Syria. What I said

to the house yesterday is I will prepare a detailed report to

demonstrate that we do have a clear strategy of bringing in the

neighbourhood powers, bringing in the regional powers, building a

future for these countries and stability in the least, but I

believe part of that is taking action against Isil wherever it is.

In the wake of terrorist outrages and the ongoing civil war in Syria

it is very welcome that there is significant diplomatic progress in

trying to find a solution to the Syrian crisis. The UK joined the

United States and France and Russia and Iran at talks in Vienna at the

weekend and all signed a communique committing progress through the

United Nations. Will he confirm that he will support a UN Security

Council resolution on this before seeking to intervene Mellitah rally

in Syria? I am grateful for asking this question. Russia has different

aims to ours and have obediently threatened to veto any such

resolution. -- repeatedly. It is always preferential to have the full

backing of the United Nations Security Council but what matters

most of all is that any action we would take would both be legal and

would help protect our country and our people right here. You cannot

outsource to a Russian veto the decisions we need to debar country

safe. The first survey of UK public opinion on military intervention

since the Paris attacks has shown 52% believe that the UK should

engage with all countries to coordinate an appropriate response

Mellitah Relay or otherwise backed by United Nations resolution and

only 15% believe the UK should independently launch our strikes.

Will he commit to giving a commitment to secure a UN Security

Council resolution, which the UK and Russia agreed to? I could not be

clearer. Of course it is or was preferential in whatever action you

are taking, whether lifting people out of the Mediterranean or taking

action in the Middle East against Isil, it is always preferential to

have a you, United Nations Security Council resolution but is they are

threatened with veto again and again my job is not to read an opinion

poll but to do the right thing to debar country safe. -- keep our. The

French armed police, who stormed the Bataclan and killed those vile

murderous scum are heroes and so are the British armed forces who protect

our public spaces and people. Will the Prime Minister sent a note of

unequivocal support to those officers on patrol and ensure that

in the review next week they have the resources they need to keep us

safe? I absolutely agree. We ask the police every day to take risks on

our behalf and let me thank the police who policed so effectively

the game at Wembley last night. In terms of the French police the House

would welcome an update. We have seen the news of an operation in

Paris, two suspects have died, seven arrests made, this operation has

finished. We should all bravery of the French police handling with what

is a very challenging situation. I. I hope that can be consensus right

across the House. If we are confronted with a situation like

this the British police should not be in any doubt. If you have a

terrorist who is threatening to kill people you can and must use force.

-- lethal force. President Obama said I have emphasised the

importance of tax credits to help working families afford childcare

and keep families in the workplace. Does he agree with the importance

the president of the United States has attached to tax credits? What is

important is that we do the best we can to help low-paid people and that

is why we are taking people out of income tax. 3 million of the lowest

paid taken out of income tax since I became Prime Minister. An ?11,000

threshold before B will have to start paying tax at all. Helping

working families with childcare, helping a national Living Wage

starting next year, something I suspect President Obama would love

to introduce in the United States. We are doing it here. Integrating

health and social care would be a great prize for devolved cities and

regions. Without effective democratic and clinical overstate

things can go badly wrong. Already in Manchester a major hospital

reorganisation is waiting judicial review. Can I ask him to ensure that

proper safeguards are in place so the local authorities retain a last

resort to refer NHS changes or independent clinical reviews? I will

look carefully at what he says. This goes to a larger point which is we

are currently changing the way our country is run. These big devolution

deals in Greater Manchester and Liverpool and the West Midlands mean

we are going to have powerful Metro wheres who are accountable to local

people for their decisions they made, which as I direct form of

accountability and we can be confident of devolving health and

social care to those authorities. Our country has been too centralised

for too long. Our northern cities will benefit from these massive

devolution deals but if we devolved the power and the money we have to

devolve the trust and the accountability as well. Against the

backdrop of a tidal wave of local job losses, the Teesside collective

industrial carbon capture is the very real potential to secure a

major StepChange in our industrial renaissance. Ahead of the Paris

conference will he meet with me and the industrial leaders driving this

project so we can secure these immense climate change games with

the UK leading this industrial revolution and make this initiative

a reality for Teesside and the UK? I know how important it is that we all

work on behalf of Teesside not least because of the difficulties that

have been in Redcar and that is why we have the task force and that is

why the additional resources are going in. I am happy to look at the

project he docs about. It may be best for him to meet with the Energy

and Climate Change Secretary. We have to make decisions about all of

these technologies. In my constituency of North Warwickshire

manufacturing is thriving thanks to innovative small businesses such as

one group who are creating high-quality local jobs and

apprenticeships in engineering. Given the challenges these types of

company fees in finding traditional funding support what assurances can

you give that this Conservative government understands the

importance of our innovators and will continue to provide initiatives

such as the annual investment fund to ensure British businesses

continue to lead the way? We want to rebalance the British economy, not

just in terms of the devolution of power, but also CE is thriving

manufacturing sector. Manufacturers want to see continued investment

into the captive bolt centres that do a good job of making sure

technology taken up, strong support for the apprenticeship programme,

and they also want to make the annual investment allowance

permanent and it will be at ?200,000 throughout this parliament so that

manufacturing companies and others who want to make investments now

they can do so in a way that will be profitable. My niece is safe and

well having been caught up in the aftermath of the Paris attacks and

she wants to know as a student for three years in Paris whether this

country is going to be safe on her return? She is worried about the

cuts to the ambulance, the police under services in this country and

whether we will be prepared with those cuts to be as prepared as

those in Paris. I want to know why we are not joining with the Russians

to get a UN mandate to remove Isis from Syria. I am glad to year that

his niece is safe after these terrible attacks. To answer her

question, we are doing everything we can to make sure this country is

safe. After the intelligence we had some years ago about the potential

of a marauding firearms attack at multiple locations and perhaps the

capital city or elsewhere we have run exercises, done research, looked

at everything we can, to make sure that ambulances and crews will be

able to go into a hot zone and recover casualties, that we have the

right number of armed police in the different parts of our country, that

we can respond including using other forces, and we have looked at what

the French have done in terms of surging troops onto the street and

we have made sure that can happen here. There's never a 100% guarantee

of safety but we are doing everything possibly can. I warmly

congratulate the Prime Minister on new funding that has been announced

for special forces equipment, but may I draw his attention to the

plight of David and Maria Summers who have struggled to obtain a

permanent residency for Maria despite being married for 45 years?

Did he encourage officials to look again at this case? I am happy to

look again at this case but it gives me the opportunity given the

constituency he represents to say something about a group of people

that we see very little about because we do not comment on their

amazing work, but Hereford is an important part of the nation's

security domestic league and overseas. Very brave people work

there and we should give them credit. My constituent was a soldier

in Iraq and Afghanistan and is currently training to be a doctor in

London. He told me that with the proposed in your doctors contracts

morale in the NHS is law than at any other point during his time on the

front line. Does he agree that Loma rile amongst our junior doctors is a

threat to patient safety? -- low morale. Please look very carefully

at what the government is offering before you decide to go one strike

because what is on offer is not an increase in hours, for many doctors

it will mean life long hours, it is not a cut in the pay bill for junior

doctors, it is an 11% basic pay increase. It will mean a better

rostering of doctors including at weekends with more support for

consultants. Go on the Department of Health website, look at the

calculator and see how you will be affected because we have given a

guarantee that anyone working legal hours will not be worse off under

this contract. This is good for the NHS, good for doctors, patients,

good for patients and I hope the BMA will call off their damaging strike.

Fundamental to the success of the Good Friday Agreement was the spirit

of peace and reconciliation that saw dozens or hundreds of convicted

terrorist released from prison. Many had been found guilty of murder. Yet

in the last week we hear the alarming news of a 66-year-old

former paratrooper being arrested in connection with events that took

place 43 years ago. In a week we are all having to once again contemplate

sending our young men and women into harm's way with our security

services on high alert, what message does this send to our armed forces

and security services? I understand his concern that the feeling that

many will have on seeing this news but the truth is about our country

is one of the most important things about it is the government does not

decide who is prosecuted and who is not. We have the rule of law,

independent prosecuting authorities. This is something people across the

world pride out for and we have here and we have to support them even

when they take decisions that sometimes we want attention.

Yesterday the principal parties in Northern Ireland came together and

agreed a deal to make sure that the devolved institutions and continue

to work. That deal involved people who have lost loved ones to

terrorism, who have been opposed to each other all of their lives,

sitting down and working together to try to deliver good government for

this part of the United Kingdom and that is what we should look to to

the future. The decision last week by HMRC to close their offices in

Bradford will mean the loss of over 2000 high school high wage jobs, 1.2

million in business rates and almost 12 million of the district's retail

step goal spending which will have a devastating impact on Bradford. And

you give me assurances that HMRC will meet with Bradford MPs to

consider the clear economic and social case for keeping those

offices in Bradford open? I am happy to ask the financial secretary to

meet with the local MPs. We will make sure that Jobcentre plus and

all of the supporters there for people who potentially are their

jobs. In Bradford, the claimant count is down by 26% in the last

year so jobs are available. It is a difficult and important point I am

going to make, everyone in this House wants to see HMRC raise more

money and make sure that people and companies do not avoid their taxes

and that means reform and it means to make sure that HMRC is even more

effective in raising the taxes on which our public services depend.

Acknowledging that sport can bring a nation together and nations

together, as demonstrated at Wembley last night, which he ensure that in

addition to the welcome extra investment in the police and

security services, investment in sports such as cricket will be

maintained because they are a tool to help us face longer term

challenges in integrating communities? I am sure over the next

week the spending requests will quicken as we get closer to the

spending review. It is important we have put in place the school sport

premium for primary schools and it is making a real difference. There

is a role for the sporting bodies to play. Many receive large amounts of

money from the television contracts and the more of them that the more

of them that can use that to ensure we are bringing on the young stars

of tomorrow, that is absolutely vital. As the new leader of the

anti-austerity movement in Oxfordshire, can he tell us how his

campaign is going? What I said to my local council is what I say to every

council, which is you have to get more for less, not less for more. On

this side of the House we want to make sure that every penny that is

raised in council tax is well spent and if his council would like to

come in and get the same advice I will gladly oblige. At a time when

he saw rightly emphasises the need for our solidarity with France, and

I asked if he can see what he can do to ensure that the Franco British

Council set up over 40 years ago to promote civil society partnership

can continue to do its important work in fields as diverse as defence

and community cohesion? Without a very small amount of funding from

both governments it will not be able to do that. I am happy to look at

that proposal. France and Britain have a lot to learn from each other

and we should enter into these discussions in that spirit. We have

a lot to learn about integrating people into our country, about how

we have effective counter-terrorism policing, about how to share

intelligence, and I am committed to making sure we burst you all of

those things with France. Wigan council has had a cut in funding

over the last five years and lost a third of its staff. Does he advise I

should write to the leader of the council regarding the reduction or

should I place the blame firmly where it belongs, with his

government? If he is looking for someone to blame she might want to

blame the Labour Party which left the country with the biggest budget

deficit anywhere in the Western world. The advice I would give her

about her local council is to look at its overall spending power, the

combination of business rates, council tax and Grant and ask what

money they have got to provide local services.

Prime Minister's Questions predictably dominated by events in

Paris. President Hollande of France was also giving a press conference,

and he says France is at war with Islamic State. He wants a large

coalition, his words, working against IS militants who threaten

the whole world and commit massacres in the Middle East. Hollande said,

we are at war, and a French aircraft carrier is today leaving the French

Mediterranean naval port to head for the Middle East region to help

Frenchmen literary operations in the Syrian area. -- French military

operations. Interestingly, it will be accompanied by a British

destroyer which will provide air strike cover for the ship Charles de

Gaulle. HMS destroyer will be accompanying it to the region. That

second to last question there about Anglo-French Corporation, that will

be some of that in action. Ed Buxton says the exchanges between

the two leaders began with the House of Commons at its best,

statesman-like questions and answers, then it turned, and both

leaders let themselves down by playing politics with national

security. All wind says, I worry greatly for

the Labour Party, it is becoming increasingly evident that there is

no alternative to the conservative Government. Gareth says, please

challenge the Prime Minister's answer about there being 3800 more

neighbourhood police. This is at best wrong, at worst a lie. I am a

neighbourhood police officer, and there has been no increase, in fact

it is the opposite. Bill Waterman on the same theme, David Cameron is

away with the fairies regarding neighbourhood policing. They are

calling other offices neighbourhood officers, but they are not walking

the streets. Going back to the question I was

coming to before PMQs, but before I do, can you give me your overall

impression? Yesterday the Prime Minister told the House of Commons

he wants to make a case for military action, the most serious they had

Prime Minister can do, and Jeremy Corbyn chose not to ask the Prime

Minister question on that. It is difficult territory for him, and the

Prime Minister gave a full statement yesterday saying what his treasured

you would be, but this is one of the most significant thing is a

Government can say it wants to do, and the opposition leader due to the

strange times we are in chose not to go on that particular question, it

was left instead to the leader of the third biggest party, Angus

Robertson, the SNP leader at Westminster, to put that question

twice about whether or not the government would seek a mandate from

the United Nations, and David Cameron said twice he did not

believe that he would have to go to the UN. He said it was ideal and

preferable, but he didn't say he would do it.

We were talking about the kind of appointments Jeremy Corbyn has made,

and we went through the list. It has culminated in Ken Livingstone being

in charge of the defence review along with the shadow defence

spokeswoman. What I was going to ask is, when you look at how provocative

some of these appointments are to the centre and right of the Labour

Party, is he trying to provoke an early leadership challenge so he get

it over with? I asked a member of the Shadow Labour team this morning

if they thought that he was trying to force the more southerly to

resign. He said, I don't know about that, but suggested that sometimes

it feels that way. There is a spectrum of paranoia at one end,

saying everything that Jeremy Corbyn is doing is trying to provoke an

enormous bust up, a mass exodus of people from the party. But those on

the other side say, he is doing is a what he said he said he would always

do, appointing a team in his image. On this journey, day by day, the

make it work brigade are finding it harder and harder and harder to make

it work. The appointment of Ken Livingstone is just the latest in a

line of these kinds of things. In the next few weeks, we have got

Jeremy Corbyn Lanning to a tend -- planning to attend a Stop the War

rally. And next week the Labour Party is trying to ask Labour MPs to

abstain on a vote on Trident which is being put forward by the SNP and

defy the party's own official policy.

You mentioned the continual argy-bargy within the Labour Party.

We have had this developing row now between Kevan Jones, speaking on

defence the Labour, saying he didn't quite know what Ken Livingstone's

credentials were heading up a row of -- a review of the policy. Ken

Livingstone said that Mr Jones needed treatment for mental

problems, Kevan Jones hit back at him, and now we have Mr Livingstone,

all of this happening in one morning. This is what he had to say

on LBC. If he apologises for criticising my ability to do this

job, perhaps... You have control over your professional capacities.

He has no control over his mental health. If he wants to apologise,

that is fine. Ken, just say sorry to the man. He suffers from clinical

depression, and you cast aspersions on his mental health. He was rude

about me. Would you have said the same things about his psychiatric

health if you knew that he was a sufferer of depression. Of course I

wouldn't. Well, there you go. The next word is sorry, I think. Once he

apologises for criticising my appointment, I might be nice.

Ken Livingstone just are so ago. Should he apologise? He absolutely

should. I hadn't heard confirmation of what he said, but it sends such a

damaging message to anybody who is struggling with mental illness

around the country, and of course he should apologise. Laura talked about

what she graphically called the make it work brigade in the Labour Party

beginning to despair. Are you part of the make it work brigade? We are

all in the make it work again! So are you beginning to despair as

well? Absolutely not. Jeremy Corbyn is ten June -- changing the tone of

PMQs, putting forward his plans to cut tackle the cuts in being,

working people and difficulties in the steel industry.

On the issue of the Russian veto, if we went to the UN and Russia vetoed

our attempts to get involved further in the Middle East, would that be

the end of it the Labour? It would depend on the deal that Cameron was

putting forward, and we have said very clearly, Hilary Benn and Jeremy

Corbyn have said we will consider the plan that David Cameron puts

forward. At the moment, we have talks going on in Vienna that look

like they may make some progress towards a full political and

diplomatic settlement in Syria. A full political and diplomatic

settlement? Really? It looks like we may make some progress towards

that. But if the Russians veto our foreign policy, Labour would go

along with that? That is my question? It depends on the plan

David Cameron puts forward. He said himself yesterday that simply

dropping a few bombs want to transform the situation in Syria. We

have been clear that he ought to go to the UN and try to get a mandate

faction, but it should only take place as part of a wider plan.

Russia are involved in those talks in Vienna, as are we. Should Ken

Livingstone, given his failure to apologise to Mr Jones, should he

resign from, or indeed be fired from, this defence review? The body

that takes action on matters like this is the second of committee. My

understanding is they are the body that has appointed him. I was asking

for your view. If he doesn't apologise, I would expect that this

would go back to the NEC and they would take action, and I would think

that would be the right thing to do. He is defying the Labour leader on

this. My view is that he should apologise. And if he doesn't? Then

it should go back to the National executive committee, and they should

take action. What does that mean? I can't pre-empt what they should do.

Do you think that they should fire him? My preference would be that he

would apologise or they would persuade him to. That would be more

productive. If he doesn't? He told us in that clip not to wait for an

apology. If he doesn't, would you like the NEC to demand he stepped

down? I think it would be very difficult to move forward on the

basis on which we currently are without an apology. I think we would

have to find a way to bring forward a solution that would mean that

those... That body could work together, and I think that doesn't

look likely. We go to the Central lobby of the House of Commons, John

Woodcock. What you make of Ken Livingstone's refusal to apologise?

I think it is really disappointing, and I hope that when the furious

this morning has died down and he does reflect on this issue, because

Kevan Jones's bravery in speaking out about depression in the House of

Commons when no one else really had done that before is what led me to

be able to feel able to talk about the depression but I have suffered.

And I think it sends a terrible signal that if we say that this is

just part of the normal toing and froing of political debate, it

isn't. Ken last week said that Maria Eagle was mad if she thought a

particular way, and I know that people speak loosely with that kind

of language, but this was something else. I am not going to get drawn

into, I thought Lisa spoke really well on this, and I am not into get

drawn into the issue of whether he should remain as chair, because I

have big issues with him being chair for different reasons. Then let me

ask you about them. Mr Livingstone seemly didn't know about Mr Jones's

depression issues, so let's say that Mr Livingstone isn't necessarily

anything of an expert on mental health issues. Could you explain to

our viewers, what are his qualifications, his defence

expertise? What does he have in that area to head up this defence

review? I am unable to explain to your viewers that. What has

concerned... I have concerns about whether the Shadow Defence Secretary

was properly consulted on this, what were the reasons for him being

appointed, but that for me is a separate issue to the really serious

thing about a leading member of the Labour Party who is quite openly

using inappropriate language around mental health, and then refusing to

withdraw it. So I think aside from the toing and froing of internal

Labour Party reviews, which is sometimes hard to excite even Labour

Party members about, and much more serious issue is that we can speak

to each other in a decent inhuman way and we can actually make normal

being able to discuss mental health conditions without them becoming to

user reviews -- terms of abuse. I understand that, but I take it what

you're saying is that you don't understand why Jeremy Corbyn has

appointed Mr Livingstone died at the defence review, even you don't think

he has any expertise? -- to head up the defence review. I think he has

kept quiet on that in recent years, that is the most diplomatic thing I

can say. One final question while we have you. Isn't it a problem for

your party that on a morning when we are dealing with the aftermath of

Harris and the ongoing anti-terrorism and the risk to this

country -- of Paris, that Her Majesty is opposition has been

sidetracked into essentially slanging match between two Labour

members? It is not great that this is happening, but be under no doubt

that while I think hopefully all of us here, certainly myself and

everyone I know, is absolutely focused on the issue of how we can

combat Daish, and what we can do beyond our borders to rid the Middle

East region of this terrible evil, and we will go on doing that. I said

that was my last, but one more quick one. Given Mr Corbyn's remarks to

Laura Kuenssberg about shooter killed, his remarks about Jihadi

John, he should have been arrested rather than eviscerated by a drone,

given his appointment of Mr Livingstone, do you still have

confidence in Mr Corbyn is leader of your party? Jeremy Renner aims are

elected leader with a substantial majority, and that isn't better

change any time soon. -- remains the elected leader. I hope that we can

resolve this and be able to work on a better basis that we have been

doing over the last few days. You optimistic about that or depressed

by the prospect? I think optimism and depression in the current

context is not quite how I would describe it. I will keep doing the

best job I have can my constituents! Thank you for joining

us. Laura, I have to say as a journalist

of quite long-standing I have never covered anything like this. For a

Monday night after Labour Parliamentary meeting I have never

had conversations like some of the conversations I had with MPs coming

out of that meeting, crucially not people where we know where they

stand, one said I feel physically sick, I do not know how much longer

I can go with this. Feelings are so high. Just as John Woodcock was

hinting, as he managed his way out of it very diplomatically, Jeremy

Corbyn's very resounding victory, even for those who think it is not

sustainable, there is no alternative. There is nobody waiting

in the wings to rush forward. The question of how this operation

survives day by day is a very live one and briefly worth mentioning,

yesterday in the House of Commons most people were focusing on what

David Cameron said that after David Cameron finished Labour MP after

Labour MPs stood up and made comments that were in open defiance

of Jeremy Corbyn. This is not just about rushed conversations with

journalists, this is starting to happen in public with people not all

on the right of the party. Given what has happened in the past ten

minutes you have got a get out of jail card. Given the problems the

opposition has would not be incumbent on the Prime Minister on

matters of national importance to be showing more leadership? I think he

showed of leadership. Labour are in a real muddle and Jeremy Corbyn...

Come on. I did not ask for your analysis of the Labour Party. We do

not have the comprehensive strategy on how to handle Syria and we do not

know whether or not we are going to get a vote in the Commons on this.

He is going to set out a response to that Foreign Affairs Committee

report. In the fullness of time. They are working on a strategy. I do

not accept there is a lack of leadership at all. You saw

leadership in spades today from David Cameron. You would say that.

Laura, a busy day for you. Now, every campaign needs a sharp

American strategist, and Leave.EU His job is to mastermind

its campaign to persuade Britons they are better off without

the European Union, and we'll be But first, Leave.EU

have some new polling out today. They asked a sample of British

voters whether the UK should remain 38% said it should leave,

with 20% undecided. Leave.EU

also asked what people feel about 48% said free movement

makes them feel unsafe. 9% said it makes them feel safe and

33% said it makes no difference. And who should be the face

of the anti-EU movement? 26% want the Ukip leader,

Nigel Farage, while the London Mayor, Boris

Johnson is the preference for 13%. Home Secretary Theresa May is

the third favourite. And Leave.EU's

Gerry Gunster joins us now. Welcome. You face and back uphill

struggle if you look at that showing that more people want to remain in

the EU. We do. There is something inherent about referendums, which is

one of the reasons why I am working here with Leave.EU and that is that

most people when it comes to referendums want to vote to keep the

status quo. You see for example in the United States 60% of all

referendums and initiatives fail. Because people do not want to make

the change. However, there is precedent and there are a lot of

times when people will go that way. Look at it like a game of billiards,

this is a double blank shot. We have to be able to convince people there

is a problem and secondly sure that there is a solution to that problem.

Billiards? Would your double pronged attack be focused on immigration or

economics or both? I think it is a combination of all of the above. The

polling is showing that they are three issues. Immigration, the

economy and the issue of whether we should have the right to make our

own laws hear in the UK as opposed to having it come out of the EU.

What should be central? The EU principle of free movement, perhaps

unsurprisingly at the moment 9% of people feel safe, bearing in mind

the context of what has been happening, 48% feel unsafe, is that

where you are going to focus? Immigration is the number 1 issue,

no question. The economy is number two. That does not mean that as the

weight is going to be in six months a year. These referendums are

extremely volatile. Use that in Greece and Scotland, numbers were

all over the place. Tomorrow it could be something else. We have got

Labour MP John man who is in the House of Commons. He is in the

Central Lobby of the House of Commons. Given everything that has

happened in recent days about Labour's response to national

security and defence, from the Labour's office, do you still have

confidence in Jeremy Corbyn as leader of your party? I have total

faith and confidence as does everyone in the Parliamentary party

in Hilary Benn who is leading for us on it, who has spelt out our policy

on should to kill, who has spelt out our policy on intervention in

Syria, and everybody including Jeremy is having to come in behind

Hilary Benn who has been given the lead and as long as Hillary

continues to give the lead in this way we are all going to be very

happy because we are in the right place. You have confidence in Hilary

Benn but not in the leader of the Labour Party? Jeremy has confidence

in Hilary as well so that is good news. Hillary speaks for the Labour

Party on matters relating to defence. That has been very clear.

Hillary answered the questions that the Parliamentary party on Monday.

That is the right approach. It is sensible for Jeremy, to allow

Hillary to lead and he has done and Hillary has done it exceedingly

well. What Hillary has said I agree with. You have not been able to

bring yourself to see that you have confidence in the leader of the

Labour Party. I have a huge amount of confidence in Jeremy allowing

Hilary Benn to lead on Syria and for him to spell out the policy. That is

what he has done. Confidence in them both. We want Hilary Benn leading

the way. Not Jeremy Corbyn. Hilary Benn is leading and that is the

right thing to do and it is succeeding because we can unite

behind what he is saying. Thank you. We only have a few seconds. That is

open warfare. It is not. He is perfectly entitled to say that. We

have a leader and Shadow Foreign Secretary who have set out the same

approach on stock to kill. Do you have confidence in Jeremy Corbyn? Of

course. He could not bring himself to say that. You have had members of

the Labour Party agreeing. There's just time to put you out

of your misery and give you The key was the launch of sky

television. Use me in the picture. The One O'Clock News is

starting over on BBC One now. I'll be here

at noon tomorrow with all the big The knives are sharpened,

and the heat is on...