07/12/2015 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 07/12/2015. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


Thousands of homes remain without power in North West England


and Scotland following some of the worst flooding seen in years.


The Prime Minister, who's been chairing an emergency


meeting of the crisis committee, Cobra, will visit some of the worst


More armed patrols on Britain's transport network


following a suspected terrorist knife attack at the weekend.


Should the number of Bishops in the House of Lords be cut to make


We'll be finding out who's managed to bag Cartoonist of the Year.


All that in the next hour and with us for the duration two new MPs,


Conservative MP Andrea Jenkyns caused a bit of a shock


when she un-seated Labour's Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls.


And Labour's Neil Coyle un-seated Liberal Democrat MP,


and Justice Minister, Simon Hughes in Southwark and Bermondsey.


Jenkyns, Andrea Marie, the Conservative Party candidate,


Coyle, Neil, Labour Party 22,000... CHEERING.


What is it like toppling a big political beast? I am pinching


myself still, seven months later. I can't believe I'm wearing the same


jacket is then. No one would have noticed if you hadn't said


anything. What does it feel like though? It's amazing, really. That


night of the election, my mum, I walked in at the weekend and she was


playing it over again. It's such a privilege. It's a great honour to be


here and I'm loving every moment of it. Did you speak to Ed Balls? Heard


from him since? He was very gracious on the evening. He was, on the


night. What about you? Simon Hughes was very much part of the furniture


in Southwark and Bermondsey. He had a solid reputation for doing


casework and they were big boots to fill and I've had more than 4000


people approach me since May, and it feels a long time ago already. You


are thrown in at the deep end to get on with the job casework arrives and


you have to do it. Does the shadow of your predecessors haunt you


because they were so associated with the seat? A little. It is not even a


shadow. I still see Simon out in the constituency. There is a reality to


who is not wanted. And all of the casework has been handed over, so


there is a continuation for some of the people who you was helping you


now see me. The number one issue closes to your heart? Health, that


is the reason I went into politics. What do you want to try and achieve?


Having lost my heart father through eight hospital infection, and


antibiotic resistance has been on the agenda. Two weeks ago I launched


a hands hygiene campaign and there is a shocking statistic that 25% of


commuters in London have PCs on their hands. So hand hygiene is


important to stop infection -- faeces on their hands. We will leave


it there. It is time for the daily quiz.


The question for today is who does our guest of the day Andrea Jenkyns


c) Christine Lagarde or d) current Miss World, Rolene Strauss?


At the end of the show, Neil and Andrea will give us


Now to the floods, which have left a trail of devastation


And with more rain forecast for the North West and Scotland,


there appears to be no immediate end to the misery.


Thousands of people remain without power and many have had to spend


With many transport links still cut, health care will be restricted


today and some schools will stay closed.


David Cameron will visit some of the worst affected areas this afternoon.


He's been chairing a meeting of the Government's Cobra emergencies


Let's talk now to our correspondent, Carole Walker.


Give us the latest in terms of response from Cobra. As you say,


David Cameron chaired the meeting, bringing together the relevant


ministers and representatives of some of the emergency services who


joined it down the line from some of the badly affected areas. What the


government is doing is focusing on the immediate crisis, so that is


about checking to make sure that everyone is safe. If there are


people in their homes you need to be evacuated that they are taken to


safety. Looking at problems with transport links on the roads and


bridges that have been cut. On the railway lines, what more can be done


to restore some of those vital links. Looking as well at the issue


of power. We know that tens of thousands of homes were cut off at


some stage. Some of those supplies have been put back on, but not all


yet restored. The government is trying to see what more it can do on


that because it creates huge problems for hospitals, care homes


and the like. We will then move into the second phase, which is looking


at what more needs to be done to help some of those communities which


now have to cope with the terrible mess and aftermath of the flooding.


When Liz Truss makes a statement in the House of Commons we will hear


more details about. Beyond that, we are told the government will look at


the basis for its planning of the flooding, a review of the


assumptions made. We heard from Rory Stewart, the environmentalist,


saying -- environment Minister, saying some places at their highest


ever rail fall in a short space of time. They are trying to save the


basis of planning is the right one or it needs to be prepared for more


incidents like this. The criticism, as you know, is that despite the


money spent after the last round of severe flooding, they really could


not withstand this deluge this time round. Clearly the flood defences,


even the new flood defences put in place, in many places they were


quite inadequate with the flood waters so high that they came over


the top of the defences. The government is saying some of those


flood defences did make a difference and gave householders and businesses


longer to prepare and evacuate. But there was still huge amounts of


damage and difficulty course. Yes, local communities and council


leaders are already saying they need more defences and more money spent.


The government says it is spending ?2.3 billion over this parliament on


flood defences. The question is whether it is being spent


flood defences. The question is and whether the government needs to


look again at the sort of defences it is building. Carroll,


Westminster, thank you. Let's talk now to the


Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, Tell us your experiences over the


weekend because you were really caught up with it, along with many


constituents. Yes, I don't think I had an experience as bad as many


people here. I am stood on the street by the bridge, no distance


from a seer, and businesses are deluge and out of business potential


it -- no distance from us here. Hundreds of families are out of


their homes, probably the Christmas and it is heartbreaking. My


experience is pretty limited in the context. It is a real reminder that


the weather is changing. It certainly appears to be. And we are


not getting once in a hundred years deluge is, they are happening on an


annual basis. That is something we need to mitigate against. Let's turn


to how you would do it. In some ways the level of rain was unprecedented,


but you say we are seeing more of this sort of climate extreme. Would


you agree it's impossible to protect against such extreme weather events?


First of all, a bit difficult to hear you, but I think I got it. In


the end, very cautious about pointing the finger at anyone. The


reality is that this was extreme weather, but the problem is we are


getting more extreme weather more often. This is Cumbria and we are


used to challenging and difficult weather conditions. We are made of


tough stuff up here. But this is an incredible thing, which has taken


everybody by surprise. The question we need to ask ourselves is, whether


it was right to cancel some of the funding for flood defence schemes


over the last few years. The last three governments bear some


responsibility for that. Knowing that if you can protect against


these extreme circumstances, then the amount of money you save and the


amount of misery you prevent is infinitely greater than the outlay


of spending money on the schemes. Which schemes specifically? You said


they were promised up the previous floods and then they will shelve and


should have been funded, that would be during the coalition time, so


which one specifically? There were around 300 across the country which


I protested against at the time, and they included one on the River Kent,


just yards away from us over to the left. If you spend money in advance


on these things, then obviously, if you get extreme weather, then as a


consequence you are preventing billions of pounds of damage, not to


mention the human misery that those things lead to. I absolutely buy


that climate change is happening and this is a consequent change, and


it's a consequence of activity over decades, so where do I point the


finger? At all others, humankind is responsible. Even if you don't


believe it is human created, it is clearly climate change. This is


happening more and more often, so the investment in flood defences is


necessary and a wise investment. It depends how it is spent, I suppose.


Five years ago Carlisle got a ?35 million flood defence scheme and now


it is one of the worst affected areas. In a sense, it has obviously


been spent in the wrong way or there isn't any amount of money that can


protect against that sort of freak weather. To an extent, you are


right. It is freak weather and I'm very cautious about pointing the


finger at anyone. The main job is to put an arm around people. Because it


was the government the Liberal Democrats were involved in last


time? No, on these schemes, I pointed the finger then and


criticised those schemes in 2012. But the point I'm making, if you


look at individual schemes, some will have been overwhelmed even with


this weather. But some have actually succeeded. A few years ago here in


Kendal, about 500 yards away from where I am stood, that was the part


that flooded all the time and we spend ?1 million on a flood defence


scheme and it is an area which has been broadly protected in this awful


weather. So flood defence schemes work. If you think about the


insurance claim is not being paid out because of that scheme, as an


individual one, and the human misery not caused because the scheme has


been built, it is worth every penny and it is the back. Actually, the


scale of investment that we need to be thinking of is that much greater


-- and it is paying back. Briefly, on insurance, what sort of situation


are people in in terms of claiming for the widespread damage that has


been done? Some people have had great response from their insurers,


many others have had a poor response, a delayed response. And


others, frankly people who often have no money whatsoever, they find


themselves in a situation where they have chosen not to insure the


property because they had no cash to start off with. For those people, I


feel desperately sorry and we need to get alongside those people. There


are people who will be out of their homes at Christmas and have nothing


at all and no prospect of anything coming back in terms of insurance.


This is a human catastrophe and we have to stand with those people.


Tim, thank you very much. There were schemes that were cancelled, Andrea


Jenkyns, under the Coalition Government, between 2010 and 2015.


Was it a mistake? It's a difficult decision of any government to make.


We were recovering from the worst recession in peace time, so where do


you put the money? Whichever department it is, you cannot money


-- magic money out of thin air. Whichever one you take it from, it


leaves another one short. I am pleased we have this ?2.3 billion


investment. My heart goes out to the community and its devastating


families. It wasn't that long ago, 2009, there were similar. When you


say you have to find the money or take it from another department,


what Tim Farren is saying, is that you could prevent the spend that has


to come to repair the damage. The government has a long-term economic


plan and we see short-term measures that have long-term costs and


consequences down the line. The flood prevention budget was cut by a


third when the coalition took office in 2010.


It was cut although the government argues it was up to local


authorities to do some of the spending, but could they really are


forced to deal with that sort of devastation we are seeing here? It


was unprecedented, the amount of rain. The big thing is, we have ?2.3


billion of investment. Over the course of Parliament. Last week,


Darfur announced a cut to the flood prevention and coastal erosion


budget. Is that short-sighted? The Environment Agency Chief Executive,


out and said that they have adequate funding, now. Going forward, the


chief executive, we are going in the right direction. My heart goes out


to the people here who does not get help from that. We need to learn to


be better next time. The Environment Agency said the flood defences put


in place in 2010 they could survive a 1 in 100 year event, 2 years


later, they are breached. Is Tim Farron right that Labour would have


to pledge as much money because these things are happening all the


time, they are not won in 100 year event is? What is genuinely


long-term? Too often from Conservative ministers we see


numbers in a column that are supposed to add up and they don't.


Would Labour commit? If they went government, would you like to see


them commit vast sums of money? Committed to protecting communities


and make sure that flood prevention is save money is a sensible


measure. The Environment Agency had a 20% staff lost since 2010. Right


now, we are seeing the threat and closure of five fire stations in


Cumbria alone, these are not sensible measures that protect


communities long-term. What would you do different as the Labour


Party? Team announced the review, ?2.4 billion, what specific measures


protect communities long-term? If we are saying infrastructure needs to


be put in place now, let's get on with it rather than, as we have had


from this covenant, cuts to budget that have long-term consequences. We


have had long-term investment which the Environment Agency said is good.


They do not have the resources when faced with .net cuts. It is about


how you spend it, which is what Tim Farron was saying, not just money.


Insurance, that must be a nightmare for people. How are they getting


insurance? Lots of viewers would ask how can you get insured if you live


in a flood areas? I lived in Boston, Lincolnshire for five years. That


was the same insurance, difficult in the Fens. Something has to be done.


Should the government but the Fens. Something has to be done.


on insurance companies to still give people a reasonable package of cover


in areas where these sort of things will happen? We need to look into


it. Better correspondence with those organisations. People need


insurance, it is their lives, what they have built up. The government


needs to focus on prevention and making sure insurance is available.


Insurance companies need to pay up quicker. We had flooding in


Southwark, businesses and residents found it difficult to get payments


as quick as they needed to move on with their lives and keep their


businesses open. We will leave it there.


Extra uniformed and undercover police,


backed by a growing number of armed officers, have been drafted in to


protect London's transport network, after a suspected terrorist-related


Let's talk now to our Security Correspondent, Frank Gardner who's


Frank, do you think now lone wolf attacks, which this seems to be,


seen as the most likely ongoing threat? How do the police prepare


for it? I want to just pre-faced this by saying I will put some


distance between what I am saying and the incident you referred to. I


will talk in entirely generic terms. There is an ongoing threat.


Because of the incredible volume of very slick propaganda videos coming


out of Syria, out of Isis. Which is aimed at a vulnerable and


impressionable people, who perhaps feel they are not part of society,


no great loyalty to Britain. A lot of this propaganda is very effective


at radicalising and turning people. And encouraging them to carry out


attacks in countries like France, Belgium, Britain, etc. Basically,


countries that are part of the correlation that are confronting


so-called Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. -- part of the coalition. This


has increased since the Paris attack. The air strikes are


definitely hurting Isis. They are hemming them in, hurting their will


supplies, their sources of revenue. Their way of hitting back is to


encourage people to do so called... Lone Wolf, I don't like that


expression, there is always some kind of connection. The police and


the security services are most concerned about the people who they


call SVEs spontaneous violent extremists. People who are


call SVEs spontaneous violent of any network or plot, they don't


necessarily need to have gone to Syria. But they have served a lot of


violent extremist propaganda online and have decided to do something in


response to it. The former First Minister of Scotland at the weekend,


Alex Salmond, said none of the seven foiled plots by the security


services was directed from Syria, he claims. Underlining your claim that


actually, this is something connected to what is going on, but


is home-grown. Yes. Just because it is not directed by them, there is no


evidence that San Bernardino with the murder of 14 people in


California, was directed by them. But the fact is, it is inspired by


them and what is going on. People who carry these things out are doing


it in the name of Isis. Even if Isis doesn't even know they are doing it.


That is what is worrying. It gives the psychopathic violent, murderous


people, with criminal intent and sometimes criminal background, some


kind of cloak of a bigger, some sort of, bigger, higher aim. Actually,


what they are doing is just murdering innocent people. Boris


Johnson has entered the debate on the military side, the conflict


aside, do we have to let the Russians back President Assad's


boots on the ground to defeat Isil. In a way, is he not stating the


obvious, the unspoken that Britain has two, to some extent, gone in on


that side, in order to defeat Isis. I would disagree with that. There is


very little fighting between Isis and the Assad regime. The President


Assad regime have mostly for the non-ISIS rebels, which is why when


Russia came in with their air strikes, look at the map of those


air strikes. Almost all of them, the vast majority, over 80% of them,


have been hitting the rebels, non-ISIS rebels, closest to Assad's


forces. Identify the Russians want boots on the ground. They have


probably in excess of 1000 people now, some special forces, but most


of them force protection, to protect their warplanes and their bases,


their camps. They don't want another Afghanistan type ground campaign and


Britain does not want to get involved in that, if we can avoid


it. Thank you. The yell from a passenger, has rather You Ain' tNo


Muslim Bruv captured social media. -- has rather captured.


The more people who recognise that, they have nothing to do with Islam,


the better. It is something incredibly accurate. What about the


police presence? There was a huge furore over claims that George


Osborne was going to cut back on police numbers. He didn't, in the


end, probably as a result of that pressure, are you happy with the


police presence on the street? We need to say that the police are


doing a great job. It is not easy for them. We need to commend them


for their bravery. Are there enough police on the street? Crime has gone


down. But with this threat? With this threat?


I think it is a joined up... Approach that we need. It is all the


services. I mean, I was... This threat has been going on a while. I


was in Bali, ten years ago and I just missed the Harley bombs, by 20


seconds by jumping into a taxi, that has left an impression on me, my


parents and I almost got blown up -- Bali bombing. We have got to pull


together. Cross-party. And defeat it. We are doing the right thing.


The fact that the police were there within a few minutes and they


captured him... In order to be cross-party, we need consensus. In


Southwark, only 16% of knife crimes last year have been solved.


Inexcusable to pretend that crime is a sensible or reasonable level. The


police do not have the resorts is they need. We have lost 200 police


and PC SOs since 2010. As usual, with the budget, we have had smoke


and mirrors. Because of the amount of extra money going into


counterterrorism, we will still lose all of the PCSOs in London who


provide front-line intelligence. There is a target. We have aborted


seven attempts in the last 12 months, the police are doing a


fantastic job. That is also the security services. If you want to


increase levels of police on the cheap network, you need the police


to do it. -- on the tube. Are there community relations which are


strained in your constituency? When I met with arms to talk about the


rise of Islamophobia, they talked about the additional measures. To


tackle the radicalisation. -- imams. Those relationships will be


strained, the more we lose police in the borough. It prevents the passing


on of information on individuals that imams have become concerned


about. That is a real risk. There is already an arrest every other day in


London at someone suspected... Watched a bishop contribute


in the House of Lords recently? Maybe you even remember Archbishop


Geoffrey Fisher crowning Queen My guests and myself were too


young. But is it right that


in modern Britain, Christianity A new report by the Commission


on Religion and Belief in British Public Life is calling


for significant changes in the role of Christianity


in our multicultural society. The report contends that British


institutions need to change to reflect a "general decline"


in Christian affiliation. It says a "new settlement"


is needed to reflect the fact that almost half the population doesn't


identify with any religion. The Commission says faith schools


are "socially divisive" and that selection of pupils based on


their faith should be phased out. It calls for acts


of faith worship in assemblies to be ended, and replaced with a


"time for reflection". And in the House of Lords,


the number of Anglican bishops should be cut to make room


for leaders of other faiths. Major national and civil events,


such as the coronation of the monarch,


should be reformed to give them more And the government should re-focus


anti-terrorism legislation to promote freedom of speech,


particularly on campuses. The National Secular Society has


said the report is full of "handwringing,


but no concrete solutions". But the Church of England says the


Commission "misunderstands" the role of faith schools, and says most


public opinion is opposed to the And the vicar and religious


commentator, Giles Fraser is with us It gives us ace shot on where we


are. Christianity down, other religions up -- eight snapshot.


Secularism at. What do you do in that context? That is correct. That


is exactly what is happening. How do you get your national institutions


to reflect that reality? That is important. What it doesn't do is


that it doesn't get the fact that religion is becoming not something


about the great and the good any more. It is becoming something much


more on the street, something much more fractured and diverse. That is


why it is growing. Right. That is something that this commission


doesn't really get to. It doesn't get too... It is still talking in


terms of established religion, how you perform the various different


institutions. At the same time, there is a sort of bottom up growth


of religion, in a different way which is not being addressed. But


not organised religion. Disorganised religion. Disorganised religion. If


the report says and you agree, that Christianity is going down and other


religions are going up, does that and should that necessarily


correspond with the deep Christianisation of public life?


De-Christianisation. One has to be specific. Bishops in the House of


Lords, my personal view is that I completely agree. You would say yes.


I would get rid of bishops in the House of Lords. Their role is widely


seen as not having a sort of mandate. From religious communities.


What about having Christian assemblies and singing hymns in


schools, should that stay or go? Here is the problem. The problem


with it becoming a moment of reflection, it becomes so


generalised that it ends up having no contact whatsoever. It becomes


even more boring than it can be already. It is too sanitised. It


becomes a sort of mushy spiritualism where there isn't really any


content, that is my problem. I would prefer to have lots of different


forms of contribution. But not a sort of Esperanto of religion, which


is rather dull. You would like to see a plurality of representation,


religion, but still religious as opposed to nonreligious? As you


argued, many people are not religious at all. I take your point


about it being ground roots, although I am not sure in what form


that takes. Does this report is not reflect the vast numbers of people


who just don't think religion, in any sense, is important? It is


important, but not in the way the report describes it. Most of the


news items we have at the moment are the affect of religion and


religiosity on the world and politics. And that is essential,


that we up our religious literacy. It's pretty low in this country and


it's part of the reason we don't understand the world. If you look at


places, towns in this country that have high religious literacy they


often have good relationships between different faith communities.


Leicester is a really good example. Places like that are good. Do you


think the UK should still be thought of as a Christian country? When


people claim that... That is the bases, the history, the attrition --


tradition. It claimed to be a Protestant country to keep the


Catholics out from France, and so forth, and when people say it, I get


nervous. I think they are trying to usher in something. When the far


right say they are a Christian country, they mean they are not a


Muslim country. When people say not in my name, I agree with that. Would


you say it is still a Christian country? In the main, I would. Giles


is one of the vicars who read my bands at my wedding. Would you,


Andrea? I think there is the other element. Why is religion important?


Surely it is about finding your place in the world and the


community, and white are we looking for differences rather than


commonalities -- why are we? What about in schools? Faith schools are


divisive. People laud the fact that they get good results but you're


going in on the basis of your religion. In Northern Ireland they


have been trying to move away, unsuccessfully, in some instances


from segregation on religious lines. Are they a good thing? Yes, and for


this reason. We are different and we believe in different sorts of


things. The idea that we impose a similarity and command and control


of ethics and religion from the top is ridiculous. We need to have that


diversity in the education system. Tony Blair was a huge fan of the


faith school system and it really started under him, but if successive


governments are trying to have an egalitarian school system, is it


desirable? The scrutineers what they are teaching and how the students


come out. But bishops are less than 3% of the members of the House of


Lords and we should look at involving other religions in the


House of Lords rather than the hereditary peers. I think it's bad


religion. You think it is bad for the state, but I think it's bad her


religion for us up to the establishment. I think it takes off


the edge for us to be more concerned with dressing up and speaking out.


That is the problem with bishops in the House of Lords. The Church of


England says if the law on collective worship were repealed,


schools would risk losing a reflection of the full breadth of


human experience. Are they right? It is a nonsense of particular brand of


Christianity to be imposed on people. No one obeys the law. That


is clearly a nonsense that has to be changed. I prefer to see it go and


it become a mushy spiritualism. What about religious studies as a subject


at school? It has been compulsory up to GCSE level. Should it stay? I


would be happy for it to be opened up for the study of non-religions


and atheists and secularists. So many people are put off religion at


school. I would like there to be a living playing field and people be


put off atheism as well. -- level playing field. You are going to the


lowest common denominator then. The report also wants more nonreligious


slots on thought for the day on Radio 4. Does that make sense? My


problem is this. It does seem a bit like getting people who want to say


they hate football going on match of the day. It is a religious slot and


I think it should stay that way. But the sum onto, and rubbish religion


-- for someone to come on to rubbish religion would be nonsense on songs


of praise, and also one Thought Of The Day. What about more separation


between church and state? Are there other ways you would like to see it


happen on the basis of this report? You have the choice of swearing in


when you enter Parliament. Should you keep all of that? I would,


personally. No one tells you you have to turn around during prayers,


that was a surprise. It is to protect those behind. You turn


around and face the back of the benches. Nobody tells you before


this first time in the chamber. There are some strange customs. Are


you offended by them in any way? I haven't met anyone offended by it.


You have a choice not to be there if you are offended by that practice.


The truth is the disestablishment is coming in the future of the country


and nobody will give at the Parliamentary time it requires. The


MPs have more interesting and important things to do, but it will


come. Giles Fraser, thank you. Now let's take a look at what's


in store for us this week. David Cameron is today announcing a


major expansion of the government's shared-ownership scheme, which he


says will allow nearly 200,000 The European Council President,


Donald Tusk, is writing to EU leaders today to set out his


position on Britain's renegotiation. He'll say that plans to strip EU


migrants of their benefits could be On Wednesday, Jeremy Corbyn will


face David Cameron for The decision on whether to build


a third runway at Heathrow airport A cabinet committee formed to help


make the decision is due to meet And Jeremy Corbyn says he will


attend a fundraising dinner on Friday, organised


by the Stop the War Coalition. This is despite some of his own MPs


calling on him not to attend. Let's talk now to Isabel Hardman


from the Spectator and Rafael Behr Welcome. Are we going to get this


decision on Heath Row, or the direction of travel? First week


heard it would be delayed until next year but now we are told it will


happen before the end of the year. The official spokeswoman for the


Prime Minister said today we would get the clear direction by the end


of the year which sounds to me a little different to a clear


decision, but she did say we should not get too worried about semantics.


It may be that some sort of holding statement is issued. But we are


assured that there are meetings taking place over the next week that


means we will get a direction, whatever it means. It's going to be


difficult because the cabinet is split, and certainly the reports of


the delay would be centred around problems of pollution and air


quality. It's all a bit embarrassing, really. You remember


the Chancellor's Autumn Statement the other week and he said that we


are the builders. Such an important part of the agenda on paper that


they get off with infrastructure and are retooling the country, but we


have known for a decade that Britain, in theory, needs new


airport capacity and as soon as possible and the reality is that


there find political reasons why it's difficult to put it at Heathrow


Airport because our MPs near Heathrow Airport and then wanted


because their constituency don't want the noise of the overflights.


And one of those MPs wants to be the Mayor of London, Zac Goldsmith, so


it's hard to disentangle what is a practical and abroad strategic


reason to put it at Heathrow Airport or Gatwick, and what is just sort of


tactical calculations to avoid a split in the Conservative Party.


That is just a bad look for the government when they're trying to


suggest they have broader strategic infrastructure. We look forward to


hearing what the direction of travel is. It sounds like a fudge term.


Let's turn to the EU renegotiation, talking of potential fudging and


Donald Task and the letter going out to member states. The sticking point


is the same, that the one that could bring support the Prime Minister is


this moratorium on in work benefits. It is problematic to say the least.


This is why he has let the timetable slip. He had originally said that he


would hope to present his plan and agree it with EU leaders at the EU


Council summit in December but admitted last week that he cannot do


this and he will be looking at the February meeting to do it. As


Raphael says, the government keeps saying it is a government that


delivers, not just on infrastructure but also on renegotiation. At the


moment, you can see the Eurosceptics rubbing their hands with glee at


this being a government that does not seem to deliver on the


renegotiation as well as airport decisions. How will he be able to


dress up the renegotiation on the basis of the broad areas he wants a


deal on when Eurosceptics will say that there is no substance and he


hasn't achieved anything substantial? Some of them are almost


in the bag. There is the big symbolic point about exempting


Britain from closer union, which makes it sound like some great


federalising project. The signals we are getting from other continental


leaders is you can probably find a way around it. It does come down to


the specific point about migrant access to benefits, and the


technical problem with that is that you probably have to go to the


Lisbon Treaty and that can't be changed because it's about the fair


treatment of workers across the European Union. People have other


things to deal with on the continent, the migrant crisis,


Syria, and it's not on anyone's agenda to have a treaty


renegotiation, and if you do have that, other country leaders and


other populations will say, if we are all putting in the bid to change


the way the EU works, we have a few grievances of our own. What the


Prime Minister has to do is somehow turn around and say, I got a deal


and it's brilliant, now let's move on and discuss the wider issue of


whether Britain should be a member of the EU and that is a tricky bit


of footwork to exercise. Let's talk about Jeremy Corbyn attending a Stop


the War meeting despite advice not to do so. -- to do so. There does


seem to be a rift that is not going to go away within the Labour Party


any time soon. Both sides are becoming steadily more defiant, so


if Jeremy Corbyn were feeling weak, he might have decided he had a hot


date with his allotment that meant he could not have attended but he


says he will keep going. His critics have been very outspoken on the


airway, that they have been encouraging the abuse of MPs on


social media. They wrote an ill-advised post about the origins


of Islamic State which suggested that their worldview is not


necessarily something the Labour leader would want to align himself


with, but he is happy to. There is the broader point about the Labour


moderates, as they see themselves, what they want clarity, is whether


or not Jeremy Corbyn is happy for people who simply aren't in the


Labour Party to become part of the party by osmosis. There is party


differences. Obviously there will be some that don't have use MPs like,


but they want the sense Jeremy Corbyn that he is the leader of the


Labour Party and there is a boundary Way you support Labour MPs and


around the campaign there are other hard left parties, the Socialist


workers party, and Liberty, who have traditionally not been the Labour


Party. If Jeremy Corbyn is happy for them to dictate terms to Labour MPs


as part of an extra Parliamentary whipping operation on the hard left,


that's a big change in the structure of the Labour Party and the


moderates want clarity on whether that is part of the Jeremy Corbyn


agenda. On the point about showing strength here by not going for the


date with the allotment, is that what it is? Does Jeremy Corbyn feel


stronger to do that? Certainly. The old by-election at the end of last


week where expectations were low and I joined in those low expectations,


the fact that the Labour Party managed to hold a seat quite


uncomfortably and a lot of people turned out, there is a feeling that


punctuated the end of a difficult week and few weeks for the Labour


leader and now they can say, OK, we have proved that people will still


turn out for us and now other MPs who don't like Jeremy Corbyn, get


back in your box and let's make it work. That's the mood around the


operation of the moment. He is disinclined to yield to that


pressure right now. Thank you to both of you. Have a good week.


Well, let's talk a little more about Jeremy Corbyn and Stop the War


Joining us now from Momentum, the campaign group closely associated


Before I come to you, should Jeremy Corbyn step back from his


involvement with stop the war? We should not be snobbish about


allotments. But given some of the misguided statements about Paris


reaping the whirlwind and the disruption outside the Labour Party


office while we were trying to campaign to win the by-election.


There are concerns there. It is not my place as a backbench Labour MP to


dictate to the leader what he chooses to do. Some MPs have been


saying to Jeremy Corbyn that he should not be involved with the


organisation that says things that you outline. Everyone has to make


those choices. Jeremy's strategy seems to be the same as Ed Miliband,


reach out to the left, rather than the centre. It means engaging with


Stop The War more than the business community and I'm nervous that we


end up in the same position in Twenty20, which would be deeply


unfortunate for my constituents who need a Labour government. Listening


to both Neil Coyle, this is an organisation that is not the Labour


Party, so should the Labour leader B is closely involved with something


like Stop The War? I have come on here to speak about


Momentum first of all. We will come onto that. It is an interesting


discussion, Jeremy Corbyn or Ed Miliband should have reached out to


the business community, rather than grassroots organisations. The idea


that reaching out to the hard left and that whole terminology... He


said to the left, not hard left. It is to the people. Over the summer it


was mass mobilisation of people who felt disenchanted with the


increasingly unequal society. Increasing levels of homelessness,


poverty. A lot of the values in our society, young people in particular


feeling they are not tapping into what represents them. There is a new


mood. To present this in a dichotomous way is a


misrepresentation. Perhaps it is being presented that way because MPs


like Neil Coyle have come in for quite a lot of abuse and


intimidation. Talk us through what happened last week to you. Before


the vote on Syria there was abuse and threats that came through. I


don't hold Jeromy or Momentum momentum responsible -- Jeremy.


107,000 people e-mailed the Labour Party. Less than 1% of those e-mails


were read. Encouraging that tell your MP what to do atmosphere I


ended up with people who felt they could dictate to me what I should do


in Parliament. I have 107,000 constituents, less than 1000


supporting against the war. Some people felt they could tell me what


to do. Amongst those people, some threatened to stab, others


threatened to slap me. Because of my brilliant constituency, more people


offered to buy me a drink and I have had people who have offered security


on a voluntary basis. Is that the role of the people you have talked


about? To do that to MPs, put them under pressure in that way because


they don't agree on this issue over Syria? Absolutely not, I was


completely condemn abuse on the internet, trolling is horrible and I


am sorry you had to experience that. Taking the lead from Jeremy Corbyn


of making it about substance, politics, not about personalities


and not being personal ad attacking people, I would not condone that at


all. But, do you think that if Labour MPs are not representing the


views of their constituents or members of Momentum, this grassroots


organisation that is closely aligned on the left wing, if you like, of


the Labour Party, do you think there should be pressure for those MPs to


go and have people that better reflects the views of people in


Momentum? To answer your question about Momentum's role in providing


that, did someone think that providing a tool to say if you want


your voice heard on an issue which really matters, where people will


die as consequences of air strikes, to say if you feel strongly about


this issue, you can lobby this MP, your MP respectfully. Using a tool


provided by Momentum and you should explicitly keep it... It hasn't been


all respectful. A lot of it has, but not all of it. Of course. Internet


trolling is something that predates Momentum. It exists across all sorts


of society and the misogyny associated is unpleasant. Let's talk


about this deselection and reselection. Do you think MPs like


Neal who don't agree with you should be deselected as somebody else


reselected? -- Neil. That is not our responsibility. Lots of people have


said that Momentum would not campaign for deselection but it does


not try with the report about a Momentum event which was attended by


John McDonald, the Shadow Chancellor. The Lambeth branch


launch in Chuka Umunna's constituency. The leaflet given at


entry said Socialist party, formerly militant. We call for a vote of no


confidence in Chuka Umunna. Mandatory reselection is only a


challenge to those who refuse to carry out the wishes of the people.


Momentum Does support reselection and deselection of candidates.


Absolutely. I was not at the event on Thursday. This was from


conservative home, Mark Wallace. He is a conservative. He was there


clearly. Do you deny those leaflets were being handed out? I was not at


the event on Thursday but my understanding from speaking to


people who were, is that it was an event hosted by Momentum. Lambeth.


Some Socialist party people turned up. They were not invited.


Momentum's goal is for Labour to win the election in 2020 and build the


Labour Party and engage with grass roots. If a small section of people


came in, which I believed it happened... They were handing out


leaflets at the door. Are you saying it was hijacked? That is my


understanding. Do you condemn those leaflets and what they are saying


about entry into the Labour Party? It is not the place for non-Labour


Party members to campaign on the selection or deselection of


candidates. If those Socialist party people... What will Momentum do to


prevent other non-Labour Party taking over your event in future?


This is one example, but they are doing it all over the country. I


have been to many Momentum meetings and there is by and large a positive


and inclusive atmosphere where people are doing politics


differently. We have groups where someone is beating at the front


often and there is facilitation into small groups -- is speaking. It is


generally positive and inclusive. New Labour Party members often,


people who were previously disengaged or people of the Labour


Party. Answer the question, what is the aim? Walthamstow Labour


councillor. Stella Creasy Labour MP. She reports about intimidation to


her office staff. If Labour councillor suggested any MP who


supported the killing of innocents in this way should automatically go


through a ballot for reselection, is that councillor Ron? That is not


Momentum's position. We understand that, we have had Momentum on


before. But what are you doing to try to de-escalates what seems to be


happening at the behest of momentum Momentum Momentum events. It is a


tiny minority of what is going on, if you go to those events. Going


forward, there will be... Momentum Is a new organisation. It has come


out suddenly off the back of a campaign which mobilised a lot of


people. It is taking a while to build up that organisation. There


will be a clear statement about attendance of meetings and events


that are open to the public, open to everyone. These may be teething


problems. It may be a case, Tom Watson said Momentum were a bit of a


rabble, I will ask you if that is there or not. This is an


organisation who wants to make the most of the new members, new young


people engaged in politics. Which standard politics hasn't done. When


Jeremy won, I was hopeful that a lot of the momentum created by Momentum


would be carried forward and they would be genuine debate and


discussion. Unity in purpose. At the moment, that is not what we are


seeing. Labour councillors, not just MPs, the local level, Jeremy Corbyn


at local level is Labour councillors. They are being told


they need to set budgets for Momentum in Lewisham. Momentum Need


to do more to tackle those who pretend to represent Jeremy Corbyn


when they are actually another political party. You looked


surprised, are you surprised? I am not sure about that particular


incident. You are not aware of what Momentum are doing at local level? I


don't believe it was Momentum. It was widely reported, you do not seem


to know what is happening within Momentum, that is worrying.


Everything seems to be reported as Momentum and we are about mass


mobilisation, popular power. Would you accept you have not got control


of what is going on in your name? Not my name. No, Momentum. It is


growing as an organisation. We have set in place structures which will


ensure... You need to get on with it. This point about popular power


is interesting. Labour councillors are elected by the general public.


Labour MPs are selected and elected, it is not Momentum's place to say


that we are the representative of people, that is not who you are.


Momentum Is enabling people to come together and campaign on issues


which affect them. And also to aim towards building a more


compassionate, just and equal society which doesn't involve


trolling people, bullying people. society which doesn't involve


is more inclusive and representative. We will leave it


there on that positive note. Now this may be news to you,


but abuse and intimidation in In fact, before a West Yorkshire


by-election in 1872, people couldn't vote in secret, and this meant they


were often pressured to back And one


of the original ballot boxes used in that by-election is on display


in Pontefract, as Ros Ball reports. The historic market town


of Pontefract in West Yorkshire, famous for its old castle,


the site of many sieges during the 17th century English


Civil War and where King Richard II And, of course, Pontefract


cakes made from licorice. But this town's 1872 by-election


also deserves a place in history. to vote, could do so in a private


booth, much like we do today. Before the introduction,


the Ballot Act, that year, Either by a show of hands,


by making your choice out loud or This left the electorate wide


open to bribery and intimidation. At Pontefract Museum, they have the


real star of that 1872 by-election. This is one of the five original


boxes from the by-election. We have two in the museum service,


here. This one on display in the


Pontefract Museum is somewhat taller On the top you can see the red wax


seals, which were used to prove using the stamps used to make


Pontefract cakes. I understand you want me to cast


a vote? We have a small ballot paper here


to find out who your favourite In case you were wondering,


Liberal MP Hugh Childers Hmmm...


Which candidate? The BBC's own self-styled


Paisley interrogator? Or the smooth, daytime velvet


glove that hides an iron fist? Sorry, this is a private booth,


check your 1872 Ballot Act! I would have said there was no


contest, who would you have chosen in the secret poll? Whoever lets me


keep this mark. That is a good answer, you have been thinking about


that. Voter registration, are you worried? Not enough people will be


signed up for voter registration? I am not, personally. I know the


government had the campaign in the lead up to the 20 15th election.


There are more people registered. With the new registration, 96% have


been registered. The other 4% will be called nine times. There are


measures in place. There is a lot more money going into local


government. Are you reassured? I am not sure there is more money going


to local government but Southwark Council have done a lot to make sure


people are still on the ballot. We have 17,000 students and young


professionals moving in and out of the constituency, that is the big


risk. For the government to write off 1 million people off the ballot


paper just before the boundary review is very political. It is


propaganda. Briefly. We want complete transparency. If people can


move home and sort out... Why not have automatic registration? If


people can sort out their gasp, electric bill and council tax, it is


easy online, it is simple. Let's go to the quiz.


There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.


The question was, who does our guest of the day


Is it a) Margaret Thatcher? b) Enya?


c) Christine Lagarde? or d) Current Miss World, Rolene Strauss?


The answer is: b) Enya.


Andrea is a singer and songwriter and has compared herself to Enya


# There is only one choice # We must unite


# As one voice # We shall gain #


Have you ever had a number one? I haven't. I am releasing a song for


the Royal British Legion next year. You are still singing at least. For


charity, anyway. I won't ask you to sing, but I will


not ask. I'll be here


at noon tomorrow with all the big


Download Subtitles