11/01/2016 Daily Politics

Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.

Labour's annual income could fall by ?6 million as a result of legal

changes to party funding being debated in the Lords today.

An internal Labour document says changes to its funding

from the unions could leave the party unable "to maintain

its current structure, staffing or offices".

Another member of Jeremy Corbyn's front bench team resigns,

this time it's the Shadow attorney general Catherine McKinnell,

citing "concerns about the direction" of the party.

Four months to go until London gets a new Mayor.

The gloves are off between the two main contenders.

We'll be reviewing the contest so far.

The first junior doctors' strike in 40 years is due to start at 8am

They are an essential service so they should not mess around with

schedules. They are paid clap, it is not right.

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

Conservative MP, Mims Davies and Labour MP,

and Shadow Economic Secretary, Richard Burgon.

Now, first this morning the authorities in northern France

are taking action to improve conditions for migrants.

In Dunkirk, a semi-permanent camp will be established.

In Calais, part of the migrant camp - known as "The "Jungle" -

is to be cleared and replaced with a facility that will eventually

A good idea? A sensible plan? Doing something has to happen because so

many people are attracted to this area and living in conditions which

nobody wants to see. It is sensible we look at something but really I

want to see these people in countries where they want to be,

where they are supported properly, and ultimately, we as a country are

able to maintain our borders and make sure that we are not seeing

people continue to flock to France, and we are working actively with

France to make sure those people and we are working actively with

with humanely. You said it should be resettled in countries where they

like to be and if that happens to be Great Britain, should that be

allowed? I spent many weeks on the recent immigration Bill, taking lots

of evidence with many people with different views on this and the

concern about the way we are perceived, we need to get

immigration right, and I think this will is maybe going to deal with

people who feel we are the soft touch and on our doorsteps, able do

not feel we are getting it right. Does that not mean we should not

take more migrants? We're not taking any Syrian refugees, other than

those from camps. Those from Calais, should we take them into the UK? We

have a plan that is working and have settled people from camps, and it is

dangerous to keep allowing people settled people from camps, and it is

come across from Europe, in difficult conditions, because that

is a better place to be, in their own countries. We have so many

unaccompanied minors and they have to be dealt with. Is it a magnet if

you set up a permanent facility or a semipermanent facility, does it

become a magnet for more people to come across and make dangerous

journeys to try and get into Great Britain? Firstly, the conditions in

the refugee camp in Calais are horrific. I have friends who have

gone over there to help and no human being should be allowed to live in

that condition. 8000 people are in Dunkirk, and 5000 people are in

Calais. This is much smaller than the refugee crisis after World War

II, so it is important to remember people are fleeing persecution. You

would want to see them rehouse in Great Britain? We need to take

shared responsibility and the true to our humanitarian values and help

people who are in desperate need of help was not family people would you

take? It is not a question of numbers but firstly, the government

was not prepared to take enough people, we were not propelling our

moral duty, but because of public opinion, the government increased

the number of people that they were going to allow to come to Great

Britain, and I do think we need to take our fair share across Europe,

and we need a France-UK agreement about how to help these people

living in awful conditions in the refugee camps.

The question for today is all about Jeremy Corbyn's Twitter

account, which last night was apparently hacked and began

broadcasting a series of rather unusual messages.

Among them was one about the Prime Minister.

Was it a) An evil monster b) A jolly nice chap

At the end of the show, Mike Guest here will give us an answer. -- my

guests. A confidential document set out the scale of Labour's funding

crisis. The document seen by the Guardian says Labour's annual income

could fall by ?6 million a year after legislation going through

Parliament. The document said it would be impossible to maintain its

current structure, staffing or offices. The Bill, being debated

today, would seek union members having to opt in to pay a levy is

part of their fees. Labour believes around 3 million fewer members would

do so, slashing its income. Ed Miliband introduced changes to the

rules which were already set to reduce contributions from union

members. The government is also planning to cut short money.

That is the funding opposition parties got to help with their

Parliament to duties. It would further cut Labour's income by about

?1.3 million a year. We did ask the Department

for Business for an interview but no Joining me now is the Shadow Justice

Secretary, Lord Falconer. It is but got to be done with

writing, within the next three months, and the system has worked

well over a long period of time. The last time people tried to change it

was immediately after the General strike when the Tory government

tried to do it then. It is obviously motivated by an attempt to reduce

the amount of funding coming to Labour, and it is entirely

consistent with the other changes that have been referred to. It is

not just about signing up to a political levy, it is also trying to

break agreements between employers and unions whereby money is taken

out of somebody's wages with their agreement and given to the union. It

looks to me very much like it is motivated by trying to reduce the

amount of funding that is coming to Labour. You are desperately worried

about a loss of funds because that is important. I am talking about the

physical system in this country. That is the key issue here. Do you

think it is right that the amount of funding coming from the unions to a

political party should be attacked in legislation? I do not,

particularly with something that has worked for so long. People can still

opt in, why is it being attacked? It is a transparent system. There is

not an attack on that ability of unions to give money to the Labour

Party, they can still do it. Exactly, it will be more difficult.

If you make things more difficult and impose unnecessary bureaucratic

requirements, that reduces the number. You are absolutely right

when you say that the intention is to make it more difficult, not

fairer. Why, and I ask this rhetorically, why attack the

operators, which is where employers and employees agree it should be

done. I can think that the only reason for attacking the check off

arrangements is in the hope of less money being available. You have

referred to this in your opening, the short money is being reduced.

The short money is money made available to political parties,

opposition parties, to try and help them properly oppose the government,

and it is something that all political parties have agreed on for

years and years and years. Why would you want to reduce the money

available? Hang on, let's just stick with the funding views, we've come

onto money. Ed Miliband introduced changes to rules around trade union

affiliated funding where it would be a case of people opting in, so why

can that not be used in the same way as political funds? What is being

talked about is whether a union has a political fund. What Ed Miliband

was talking about and I enthusiastically agree, is that if

the money is to come from Labour, then individual member should agree

to that. Why shouldn't they agree? Why shouldn't they actively do it,

opting in? Yes, it is more difficult and more transparent, and it shows

that people want the money to go to Labour. You are upset because of

what is seen as easy political funding for Labour which will go

down. You are not addressing the point I am making which is that the

written agreement has to be to a political funds and secondly, why

attack the agreement is reached between employer and employee, which

both sides agreed to? Because what you are doing is putting up

particular bureaucratic difficulties to try and reduce the money going to

Labour. How much less will Labour received? You look at the front page

of the Guardian and it gives a figure of ?6 million, is that what

you think will happen? I don't know but I know that if you make the

bureaucratic processes more difficult that will inevitably leads

to less people giving money, and... You have a bigger membership, more

people have joined the party since Jeremy Corbyn became leader. What

are you worried about? Are you not scaring people into saying the

Labour Party will not be able to fund its own act it is best might

you do not know. I am making the point... I do not know the precise

figure, you are right that I know it is wrong to simply pass a piece of

legislation because although you purport to make it for one person,

your real purpose is to try and reduce the effect of the opposition

on the government. Are these sorts of measures not taken on a

cross-party basis and this has been totally abandoned by the Tory

government? The cost of politics has to come down as a whole and we will

talk about that shortly but I don't think there is anything wrong with

being able to opt in, that is not bureaucratic. I opted in and became

a member of the Tory party and it was easy. If you want to be

involved, you should have the ability. Historic employer -employee

agreement, maybe people don't feel that. Should be done online? --

should it. If you want to join a political movement party, you should

be able to think about it. You don't if you just think it is more about

your employee rights and how you work. You know, it may feel slightly

different to whether you want to be a member of the Labour Party and

many are probably question thing that right now, so it is a perfect

time. I mean, no balancing measure is being taken, is it? To cap

donations to the Tory party, and I'm sure my other guests would say, what

is being done to cap the individual donations from hedge fund managers

or rich bankers, who it is said they would exert pressure on the

policymakers? It is very difficult to get support in politics. Are you

attacking the Labour Party? No, it is difficult to bring money in

because people don't necessarily believe in politics the way they

used to, so I think absolutely we need to make it clear how you are

involved, make it very clear where the money comes from, and make it

clear that when we are making savings in all areas

clear that when we are making asking each area to look at their

own, and... asking each area to look at their

good thing that there is a huge asking each area to look at their

Conservative Party and partly asking each area to look at their

because of the measures taken, when general elections ago, there will be

a reduced amount of money? general elections ago, there will be

democracy. I hear you... general elections ago, there will be

it is therefore you, and general elections ago, there will be

to opt other hedge funds and a jaw somebody who sends me ?25 because

they believe in the Conservative Party, that option should be

available to everybody. Isn't it an Party, that option should be

anachronism that the five big union still have such large political

funds anyway at their disposable that then people can say that you

are using that money to exert political pressure on the Labour

leadership? I want working class able involved in politics, that is

not an anachronism. That is not answer my question. The issue is

this. It is not just attacking the ability of unions to become involved

in the Labour Party, it is attacking the ability of unions to be involved

in anti-racist campaigns. One campaign was funded by trade unions

and played a key role in beating the BNP and they are very worried about

their future because of this measure.

What about the fact that have large political funds that are

used to pressurise, as some people see it, Labour leadership into

passing policy that they would support? I do not want to see trade

unionists taken out of the political process. I think this comes down to,

do we believe, that it is important to have an opposition that is funded

properly and can hold a government to account. Winston Churchill

believed you should not interfere with the other political parties'

funding arrangements. I agree with that principle is well and I am

disappointed that the Conservatives are parting from that principle.

Where is that in the Conservative manifesto? I would have to dig that

out! I do not think it is in the manifesto. Coming back to you

finally, would this be overturned? You would have to... The Lords would

not reject the whole bill, they will make changes to the bill to make it

fair, to make the political process work better, because I think it is

an attack on the political process. Stay with us.

In the last hour it's been confirmed that another member

of Jeremy Corbyn's shadow team has resigned.

Catherine McKinnell, who was the Shadow Attorney General,

wrote to Jeremy Corbyn to say she was standing down mainly

However, in her letter, she also says she is concerned

"about the direction and internal conflict within the Labour Party"

and her fear that this is taking it down

Well, the Labour leader was on the Today programme

this morning and was asked about his recent reshuffle:

It's never easy, and that I have gathered because I've read

the diaries of many former leaders, and there's never a good time to do

it, and according to every expert at Westminster,

reshuffles are always planned to take place in a few hours

and then take a few days and that I fully understand and appreciate.

We have a Shadow Cabinet that is strong, we have a team

that is strong, the party membership is very strong and so we have

widened the Shadow Cabinet to represent the diversity

of the country and diversity of the membership of

the Parliamentary Labour Party, so I am happy with it,

we are moving on, doing a lot of campaigning and getting ready

Well, that was Jeremy Corbyn. Does it feel strong to you, the shadow

Cabinet? There has been another resignation from Catherine McKinnell

who says she is worried and concerned about the direction of the

party. The shadow cabinet does feel strong. It is a very strong and

diverse team. I was only told as I was coming into the studio about

Catherine McKinnell's resignation. She was an effective Attorney

General -- Shadow Attorney General. She had given important advice over

the last few months. She cites family reasons and she has recently

had a baby and she has done an incredibly good job. She does cite

family reasons, that is in the letter as she said, but she also

says she finds it negative and actually, the direction of the party

at the moment, rightly or wrongly, is something that she is worried

about. What do you say to her? I think is important that the party

faces outwards against the Conservative Party and the other

political parties, and that is what the Labour Party is determined to

do. Do you think it is failing to do that at the moment because of the

infighting? John McDonnell said those who resigned after the

reshuffle were part of a narrow right-wing clique within Labour, and

some of the protest group were hard right. I did think it is right that

we should be talking about each other. I think we should be talking

about the Conservatives. I do think that a reshuffle, like any reshuffle

inevitably becomes a flash point for difference, but we have got to move

on from there. Was he wrong to say that? I don't think any of us should

be attacking each other. Do you think Charlie Faulkner is part of

the hard right? Not at all. The thing is, whatever the media

reports, all Labour MP and Labour Lords agree 99% of things. Does not

look like that, if you have the shadow Chancellor, not over Syria or

Trident, these are major decisions, they don't agree, that is fine.

Jeremy Corbyn says he wants to have a debate that it is not true that

the party agrees 99% when you take just those big issues? On anti-cuts

policies, the vast majority of Labour MPs agree. Why did he call

the three that resigned a narrow right-wing clique? We need to be

looking outwards, that is what Charlie said. The vast majority of

Labour MPs agree on the vast majority of things. There is nothing

unusual about members of a political party having disagreements. The

Conservative Party on the European Union are in fundamental

disagreement with each other. They are, but is it helpful for people

like John McDonnell in the position he's in, to start accusing members

of his own party and members of the shadow cabinet team of being right

wing? There are people on the left of the Labour Party and to the right

of the Labour Party. Labour is a broad church and should be. What

about Trident? Is it inevitable in your mind that the current Labour

Party policy on Trident will be changed? The policy will be

reviewed. It is being reviewed. In the last Labour Party manifesto we

said we would renew Trident. We are now working towards the next

manifesto. Labour MPs have different views on that. I am for not renewing

Trident. Charlie is for replacing Trident but we don't fall out about

it. I'm asking about inevitability because following the reshuffle,

Maria Eagle who would like to renew Trident has been moved, in order to

reflect an anti-Trident view from having Emily Thornberry there. Is it

inevitable in your mind now that Maria Eagle has been moved, that

Trident will not be renewed as Labour Party policy? In Democratic

processes, there is nothing that is inevitable. Let's see what decision

is made when the Democratic process takes place. I agree with what

Richard has said. Really? Who will be campaigning to renew Trident? It

will not be renewed now that we look at who is in charge of defence

policy in Labour? I agree with what Richard has said. There is a process

in the Labour Party. There are members who prefer renewal. Why was

Maria Eagle moved? That is a matter for Jeremy Corbyn. What Richard has

said is absolutely right, it is for the party to decide what our policy

is. If the policy is changed by the end of the summer, as Ken

Livingstone has said he would like it to be, will you still be part of

the shadow cabinet team? Lets see where we get to in relation to that.

I am in favour of the renewal of Trident. I have made that clear just

as Richard has made it clear he is against it. This issue has been

present in the Labour Party for a very long time. I will not start

speculating about whether the party will change its policy. You must

know in your mind about what you will do if it does. I will not start

speculating on the telly. Why not? I think the right thing is to have the

debate in the party. Thank you. Now, let's take a look

at what the political week As we've been hearing, this evening,

Labour's Parliamentary Party meets It's the first time Labour

MPs have come together And the UKIP leader,

Nigel Farage heads to Wales where he'll be debating Britain's

membership of the EU with the First Minister

of Wales, Carwyn Jones. Tomorrow, junior doctors are due

to go on Strike for 24 hours in a dispute with the Government

over pay and conditions. In the afternoon the Prime Minister

appears in front of the liason committee, where he'll be grilled

about Syria and climate change. And the Housing and Planning Bill

returns to the House of Commons. On Wednesday, David Cameron

faces Jeremy Corbyn across the Despatch Box

for their weekly dose of PMQs. And later that day, President Obama

delivers his annual State of the Union address,

the final one of his Presidency. Let's talk now to Isabel Hardman

from the Spectator Kevin Maguire, first of all, what

will it be like at tonight's meeting of Labour MPs, the PLP? Will it be

harmonious? No, it will not be harmonious. Labour MPs are very

divided at the moment. We have seen after the resignation of Catherine

McKinnell and the reshuffle, Labour have got this power problem. Jeremy

Corbyn was backed by the members and yet he's still not master of his own

shadow cabinet front bench team and most MPs do not support him. Maybe

he will try and contain it, there will be a lot of nervous nerves, a

few jabs rather than a full out assault, but Labour is not

harmonious at the moment. It is not just Trident and it is not just

Syria, and it is not just foreign policy issues, it is a kind of

feeling among a lot of MPs that Jeremy Corbyn does not have what it

takes to win a general election. His supporters insist he has. Isabelle

Hardman, what is the feeling that you get ahead of this PLP meeting

this evening? I think Jeremy Corbyn is not going so may become a

discussion among different factions. Was he not expected to go? I think

we have been expecting for a few days that he would not go to this

one. I think on the session is outside of the PLP will be what to

do next. There is a sense among junior frontbenchers that it may not

be worth continuing to serve under his leadership that those in the

shadow cabinet say it is the best thing for the party to stick in

there, to try and influence policy on Trident, rather than to leave and

leave it to Corbyn's dies. On Trident, talking to Richard Burgon

and Charlie Faulkner, there is a process to go through, do you think

it is inevitable that party policy will change on Trident? No, I think

the party conference will have the final say. The big unions, Unite and

GMB are in favour of Trident. They have tens of thousands of members in

relatively well-paid jobs building that submarine system. They don't

believe claims they will be given other jobs. If you go through that

system, it will not get through. Labour is committed to renewing it,

it is German Corbyn who is at odds with the party policy. If you can

change how Labour makes policy, cutting the unions out which is what

Tony Blair did, he might get it then, but I feel there is no shift

in the trade unions at the moment to back getting rid of Trident. He is

in a power struggle with some of the people who backed him in the

election for the leadership. Let's talk about the EU referendum.

Listening to the Prime Minister yesterday, it seems it is clear his

preferred timetable is wrapping up negotiations in February and holding

a referendum in June or July, is that how you see it? That timetable

may slip and he has made it clear he is happy to let it slip in order to

get a better deal which suggests he suspect there may be some delay,

particularly with Angela Merkel is not attending the Davos summit which

I think will slow things up in some people's minds. That may mean the

referendum cannot take place until September because you cannot hold it

over the summer. If there is a migrant crisis again over the

summer, the Prime Minister may judge it is not a good idea to hold it

straight after that so we could see further delay to next year. What

about the party holding together over the issue of Europe? The

Conservative Party has always been divided. How would you rate David

Cameron's chances? Zero. You cannot do it. He says the members can

campaign against him. He does that out of weakness. Giving them a free

vote makes it look like Jeremy Corbyn in posing iron discipline

over Syria when he allowed his shadow cabinet to go different ways.

Most of the MPs are getting to a point where the majority of Tory MPs

will vote to come out. He is not going to hold his party together.

Whatever that result, the other side will not accept it. It is one of

Labour's best chances in the run-up to the next election, that the

Tories will once again to hurt themselves apart over Europe. On the

doctors strike, Isabelle briefly, how difficult is this now for the

government? It has escalated to an extent that nobody is wanting to

back down. In the end, do you think a compromise will be reached on the

government side? I think neither side trusts the other. Conservative

MPs are now no longer prepared to say that the government has handled

the striped Italy well. Most people are saying I can see we could have

done this better so that is not a good vote of confidence on the

conservative side -- they have not handled it particularly well.

Now, at 8am tomorrow morning, up to 38,000 junior doctors

will drop their stethoscopes and stage a 24-hour strike

across England, in a dispute over new contracts that would allow

hospitals to rota more weekend staff.

It's the first mass walkout of medics since the 1970s

and doctors' leaders and government ministers have accused each other

So what do the public think about it?

We are just hours away from a junior doctors strike.

Junior doctors said the government plans for a seven-day NHS,

fully staffed, will put patients at risk.

Are people with them or against them?

Footballers kick a ball for 90 minutes and get paid lots

but doctors work overnight and they get paid nothing.

The NHS was being cut back all the while and staff

are being made to suffer, more pressure is being put

They work very hard and don't get a lot of the support and respect

Take a ball and pop it in the support box.

I suppose being near Saint Thomas's Hospital,

it was inevitable we would get some doctors and patients

but it is interesting which way round their views are.

We are late for a hospital appointment.

Are you for or against the junior doctors strike?

It is not just doctors, they will target all

It is easy for MPs, they work 9-5, they have a 60% pay rise.

We work our as is off for our patients.

I really care for our patients and I think it is a very wrong way

The government is saying is is better pay.

The doctors are saying it is worse pay.

To be honest, a seven-day national health is what we need.

At the weekend, and you have a problem, you cannot

The junior doctors strike tomorrow, are you broadly in favour

Because they are an essential service and you should not mess

The NHS is already struggling. I think it does dramatically affect

pay and it is shameful to pretend it is not important. As a junior

doctor, take the ball and pop it in the support box.

We always say this and we shared. It is not scientific, its location may

have helped, but it is very clear that more people are in support of

the junior doctors than our against. There you have it, according to our

very scientific mood box. The majority of people back the junior

doctors. It is right, we should support them, and letting them

continue to do unsafe ours is not supporting them, and exploitation is

that this government is trying to look at. In terms of the changes to

the way this happen, I am disappointed. People are upset at

being at this point, and if you want to see a doctor tomorrow, you will

be concerned. Let's hope some sanity prevails, and hopefully, everybody

can come back to the table and avert this. 11% overall is mainly how

people will be better off. There will be the majority of doctors in a

better position. Sadly, what ever happened in terms of a communication

breakdown is concerned. On the government side as well? From my

understanding, and I have had junior doctors coming into my local

surgeries, and when I have spoken to them, they did not have a full

handle on this. I hope that before people go on strike tomorrow, they

are clear on how it affects them. Has the government handled it well?

In a strike, everybody will say no, but we are not in that position,

there are some hours to go, but I think there is an impasse here, and

ultimately we should not be allowing them to do 70 or 80 hours a week in

that kind of role without support. The government needs a look at it.

You don't support the strike? Looking at the individual situation,

I would not like to see the strike. They have valid concerns? Yes,

speaking to some doctors, I'm not sure they have the full. Let them

look at that fully tonight. Do you support the doctors going on strike?

I believe they have no other option. They have been treated appallingly

and if I was in my constituency, rather than in Parliament tomorrow,

I would be on the local picket line. I would encourage viewers to go down

to the picket line and asked junior doctors why they feel they have had

no other option than to go on strike. It troubles me when she says

that these junior doctors do not have a full handle on it. It

troubles me when Jeremy Hunt was saying in the House of Commons that

they did not understand. These are educated people and they have not

been misled by the BMA. They know that they have been backed into a

corner. For the first time in 40 years they feel necessary to go on

strike. It could put patients' lives at risk. The action by the BMA, it

is set, will lead to patients suffering. -- it is said. All

essential life-saving operations will take place. Not in that all

essential life-saving operations will take late to stop -- not in

February. People's lives will not be put at risk by this strike. Is it

responsible for the momentum linked to Jeremy Corbyn's leadership

telling activists to turn out on the picket line tomorrow, isn't that

really a return to the militants days of the 1980s? What I said was I

encourage viewers, the public, to visit picket lines and asked junior

doctors to the natural why they are going on strike. There is nothing

wrong or strange for members of the public to take cups of tea and cake

down to the picket line and asking junior doctors what they think. That

is the key thing. We have heard what politicians, Jeremy Hunt, think

about it, let's hear from the junior doctors, and then make up your mind.

Was the language used by Jeremy Hunt correct when he said he would impose

these new contracts on junior doctors? It upset a lot of them on

this programme. The language in this is important, and if that ultimately

is what is pulling people apart, that is a problem. It is much

broader than just language. Has it led to a breakdown in trust? There

has not been a great deal of trust on both sides as has been mentioned

from day one, but the reality is that if we want the seven-day NHS

service... Doctors say that exist already. We need to make sure it is

safe across the week and is safe for doctors, and... Should they have

more money and funding? That is when they said they would consider these

changes, if more resistors are put into the NHS. I think we committed

where Labour couldn't and put the into the NHS. I think we committed

money where our mouth is. Everybody wants changes in the NHS, an

individual service, but ultimately, it is a big thing to turn

the junior doctors are very keen in what gets delivered and it will be a

real disappointment we cannot keep them on site. I want them to be in

safe working conditions and I want them to feel supported

safe working conditions and I want government and an 11% pay rise is

safe working conditions and I want significant. The losing elsewhere

because they won't be able to charge overtime rate. -- they are losing.

They have to be very flexible, they have to stay on, you have to do all

sorts, and ultimately, what we are offering them is a better deal about

how to plan... Except they offering them is a better deal about

seem to agree with that. There is a lot of evidence that patients who

are admitted to hospital surgery lot of evidence that patients who

have an 11% higher mortality rate at the weekend than during the week.

That has to the weekend than during the week.

service offered by junior doc is. -- doctors. Nobody proposes that things

should remain the same for ever. The NHS after do a fantastic job but we

always have to look at ways to improve it. The sad truth is that

junior doctors have lost trust in the Tory government, that is a big

deal. You are not going to further improve and NHS service... Should

they be working at the weekend? A study in 2012 of 14 million hospital

admissions, patients had a 60% greater risk of death on a Sunday

than a Wednesday. You say there should be reformed, should they be

expected to work more at weekends? Nothing is going to change if Jeremy

Hunt and the Tory government acts like dictators to junior doctors to

go into that job to help people and make people better. Should they work

more at weekends? An agreement should be reached. Between the

government and the BMA and junior doctors. The reason why it has not

been reached is because junior doctors have lost trust in the Tory

government and because the junior doctors have been treated with

disrespect either government, that is my view and it is sad. Jeremy

Hunt is a dictator, it is said. Having sat in his office, he wants

to see a better NHS and where are the patients in this? Let's talk

about them. Actually, if you do go into hospital at the weekend, and

somebody has than 70 hours per week and is frazzled, we need to support

these people, and we need to support all the people working in the NHS as

people do expect a seven-day service, and otherwise as a

government we are picking up the pieces of not getting it right or

dealing with this issue. As Richard said, it is not going to go away.

Every mother and father should have access to parenting lessons. That is

according to David Cameron. He's just given a speech

in which he claims he could have done with more advice raising

children. The classes are part

of a new package of measures which include more support

for teenagers who suffer from eating disorders and more funding

for mental health. This is what I would call

a life-cycle approach. One that takes people

from their earliest years through schooling,

adolescence and adult life. And I believe that if we take

the right action in each of these four areas, combined

with what we are doing to bring our economy back to health,

we can make a significant impact on poverty and on disadvantage

in our country. This is part of a broad range of

proposals that David Cameron has spoken about, but Norman Lamb, the

former coalition Health Minister, said the proposals fall short of the

vision we published as a Coalition Government in 2014. I am

disappointed to hear that and I think 400 million into the health

service, and the parity we are giving... Is it money? I hope so,

and I think it is money in the right place because in my constituency

office I have had various people with postnasal issues and problems

with their teenagers who need support. -- postnatal. Would you

agree with Norman Lamb that it would be smoke and mirrors on behalf of

David Cameron if this is not additional resources into this area?

It is worth questioning, I agree. Absolutely, if you need therapy,

health, mental health services, beds, there should be something for

you. When I have visited the Ambulance Services in Hampshire,

they have mental health workers within their community building. We

need that parity. Should there be parity? Should they be dealt with in

exactly the same way, mental and physical health? Absolutely because

otherwise as a community and families, we pick up the pieces,

whether it comes to crime, family breakdown, harm, absolutely right.

As pressures in life get bigger... You are questioning whether this is

new money or not, Norman Lamb think it is not. ?140 million that the

prime and is to revamp 100 estates, that they drop in the ocean. Having

been a councillor, and seeing how we design housing differently to what

we have now, it is recognition by the prime and is that we need to do

things differently. Will ?140 million pay for the revamp of the

estates? There was a lot you can do with community help and you do not

need to spend a lot of money to make changes in communities. I have been

involved in local litter picking. You cannot do that with ?140

million. It does not need to be that expensive. If you give people pride

in their community, take the bad issues away, it can make a change.

Of course. Let's talk about the parenting but I am sure it will be

targeted and make the right changes in the right areas. Doing nothing is

not the right thing to do. Is should be a lot more if you tackle it

properly. There is no free cheque-book. That is a great amount

of money to put into a targeted area and in terms of mental health

issues, I believe whether Prime Minister says it is going. Is it

insulting to suggest that everybody needs parenting classes? No, I could

do somes with some myself! -- with some. I am happy to go and I

certainly know that having a first and second child, I know the

challenges it puts on relationship, the changes where it comes to

schools, the issues with social media that our children have, I

think we need to look at how we parents better. We are dealing with

the impacts of not great parenting. Should be more targeted then?

It is no bad thing to say this is something there is no textbook for.

All children are different. Let's share our ideas. What next you and

the government so confident that people will take up this offer. You

may be right that everyone needs parenting classes. You have piloted

it before but only 4% of eligible parents took it up. Dead they say

you can bend a stick much easier than a large oak. -- don't they say?

Will people take it up? I think if everybody is doing it. If it is

targeted, it is that you are the problem and you might be a rubbish

parent. The social media aspects, the bullying and pressure that our

kids have that I never had, I certainly want to know how to manage

those issues and I will be in a room with anyone to do that. It sounds

like the nanny state, especially from a conservative perspective.

Would you support it? I think there is no greater responsibility than

bringing a child into the world. Any response you can get is wonderful. I

think about how things have changed since I was a child. Social media,

online bullying, the way the world has changed, means that the help and

advice that can be given now would not be the same advice you had 20

years ago. So you would support the idea and open to everybody? I think

it sounds like a welcome step. However, I think a lot of these

things are linked. I was speaking to a GP in my constituency and he said

all these things are linked. He has noticed an increase in mental health

problems, as unemployment went up and job security went down and a

lack of housing. Implement has not gone up? It has gone up

historically. The lack of housing and council housing affects people's

mental health so we need the government to look at the whole

picture to address these issues. Thank you.

The gloves are off in the race to be Mayor of London,

and the fight's not looking that pretty.

Let's take a look, starting with the Conservative's Zac Goldsmith

What I was referring to when I described him as a radical

candidate, as part of a radical process that has enveloped

the Labour Party and taken our politics

We have now an opposition party which is

more extreme than at any time in my lifetime.

You have got post-Paris particularly people being concerned

at a rise in Islamophobia and anti-Semitism in the last year

or so, to call somebody who is clearly of Islamic faith

and with a name like Sadiq Khan,

divisive and radical, to have one of your volunteers using

pejorative language to describe me as that Muslim candidate

It has got nasty. It was always going to get nasty. This is the

closest we get to a presidential election. Londoners have anywhere

can add to it this month. The candidates were out at the back end

of last year but you are right, the gloves are coming off. We do not

know when the referendum will be but we do know we will get a vote on the

mayor. What is your hunch on it at this point? My hunch is Zac

Goldsmith has got to outperform the party. If you look at what happened

in the last election, London was one of the few places where Labour did

well. You would say Mr Khan is in, he is in at City Hall. But we never

went Boris Johnson was in this place first time around, he

was eight or nine points below Ken Livingstone. He outperform the party

and in the last election he radically outperformed the party.

That is what Zac Goldsmith has got to do. The fact that people turn out

in the boroughs of Croydon and Bexley, the ladies in particular and

they go out and vote, will that happen? Is it again battle between

inner and outer? I think it probably is. What you have to remember about

the Zac Goldsmith is, if you go to his constituency in Richmond, those

who know him, my god he gets the vote out. They virtually weighed the

vote, that is how popular he is. If you have exposure to him, he is a

strong candidate. He has not been out and about as much as Mr

strong candidate. He has not been so he has probably got to get out

there. Is it setting pulses racing, this contest? It is probably just

for the village at the moment but it probably will. The line that will

roar is housing. Kids getting on the housing

roar is housing. Kids getting on the That will be the key issue. In terms

of airport expansion for instance, where does that set someone like

of airport expansion for instance, that Goldsmith with the party? As

you know, the criticism of fudging the issue by airport expansion by

the government is because people the issue by airport expansion by

saying they're waiting to see the outcome of this particular contest.

saying they're waiting to see the This has to be true. Remember know

is, no buts, no third runway. I think the Prime Minister probably

regrets those words. If there is a third runway, it

regrets those words. If there is a If you have Zac Goldsmith in City

Hall and then it is delayed, there will be one heck of a fight. It will

be between Zac and will be one heck of a fight. It will

Khan's relationship with the Labour Party and Jeremy Corbyn? I did think

you will see a lot of Mr Corbyn alongside Sadiq Khan. Equally, I do

think he will see Mr Cameron alongside Zac Goldsmith. If you look

at the previous mayors, they are all mavericks. London likes Mavericks. A

party man or woman ain't going to fly. Do you think

party man or woman ain't going to mavericks? Zac can be a maverick. He

stared down a Prime Minister. I think he's his own man. Don't know

Sadiq Khan as well as I know Zac Goldsmith. He has a very strong back

story. The son of a bus strive opposed to a multi

story. The son of a bus strive financier. -- a bus driver. You are

in the shadow Treasury team, what is your view? No one wants to see

in the shadow Treasury team, what is businesses go down but I think Nick

is correct when he says the big issue in this London mayoral

election is the housing crisis in London. Housing prices have gone up,

there are not enough council houses so people in London will have to

decide, is it Zac Goldsmith or Sadiq Khan who are best qualified and best

placed to solve the housing crisis in London. I believe that Sadiq Khan

is best placed if you look at it objectively. You did not answer my

question about business taxes. Do you agree with Sadiq Khan that there

should not be further taxes placed on business? I did think he said

that. He is against further taxes being put on business and wants to

be the most business friendly mayor. Labour is not anti-business. The

Treasury team is not anti-business. We need to make sure we have a

thriving City of London, a thriving city that is properly regulated and

responsible and the benefits of that economic success are shared by all,

not only in London but across the country as well. In terms of the

public interest, what will set it alight? When we start having the

debates. The first one we did on LBC was called the risk in the lift when

Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson actively clashed. You know Boris

Johnson as well as I do. He is a hugely fun guy, but imagine sharing

the debate, Boris Johnson would not even engage with the other people.

He was so hacked off. That gave it a lot of energy. They were really

slugging it out. We need to see the two going at each other. That will

get the energy going. Who are they actively hoping to get out there?

Boris will be key. Boris is an extraordinary politician. He cuts

through everything. I did a day in the life with Boris and what is

fascinating, old fat middle-aged white men like me, young funky Asian

guys, elderly black women, everybody Rafa nights -- gravitates. It is

extraordinary the pulling power. Quite to cuts through for Labour, I

cannot immediately think of a box office Labour politician. I did

believe in celebrity politics. I think what is key is getting as many

Labour activists out there, as many people in the London who support

Labour and support Sadiq Khan. I think we need reminding of the

opportunity for Zac Goldsmith to work the Conservative majority.

Labour are in such peril when it comes to their own party. London is

seen as they Labour city. Boris has not turned around the housing

crisis. He is dealing with it. "Chameleon, comedian,

Corinthian and caricature". That was David Bowie in his own

words from the Hunky Dory album. This morning words such as legend,

inspiration and genius were added People around the world have paid

tribute to the British rock god who has died of cancer at the age of 69.

Two who paid tribute were David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn.

Today we are mourning the loss of an immense British talent.

Genius is an overused word, but I think

musically, creatively, artistically, David Bowie was a genius.

For someone of my age, he provided a lot

of the soundtrack of our lives, from the first time I heard

Space Oddity, to watching our athletes appear in those wonderful

I think it's great we're spending time, just a few minutes,

remembering a great musician and entertainer

and somebody who represents all that is best

in the fantastic cultural diversity in our country.

I cannot think of David Bowie without thinking Life On Mars,

and as soon is I heard of his death, very sad, Life On Mars

Jeremy Corbyn there. One of the many tributes made today. He was iconic.

Your memories of David Bowie? The soundtrack of the nation has become

a lot duller. Before I came into this world I was a showbiz reporter

for the Sun newspaper and I used to chase pop stars like Duran Duran,

boy George and Madonna all around the world. Sometimes you write

disobliging stories about people, sometimes you are rather disobliging

in the reviews of their work, possibly who they are dating or you

may take your journalistic licence a little

too far. Once, because it was a slow news day, I suggested, because I had

seen him having lunch with Eric idle, that David Bowie would become

a Monty Python. This was that the Cannes Film Festival. I did not have

much in the paper so we made this story up. It was stretching it and

then unbelievably, news came through that David Bowie would grant you an

interview. This was in the early 80s. You must have been overwhelmed!

No one ever spoke to me! I sat down, what a great bloke. I was about to

ask a question and he said, you are from the Son. You wrote a story

about me suggesting I would be in Monty Python. Where did you get it

from? He said, as long as it gets you through the night, fair enough.

What do you want to ask me? What a great sense of humour! Was it

the soundtrack of your youth? I was born in 1987 it is not break all to

say the first memory of David Bowie was going to the cinema when I was

six years old to see Labyrinth. I think one of his most overlooked

albums was Tin cat macro machine, nice and heavy, from 1989. Tin

Machine is a fantastic album. I'm sorry, I cannot give you a chance to

talk about David Bowie. There's just time before we go

to find out the answer to our quiz. The question was about

Jeremy Corbyn's Twitter account What did the hackers

called David Cameron. So Richard and Mims,

what's the correct answer? A pie is the right answer. I don't

know why. The One o'clock News is starting

over on BBC One now. I'll be here at noon tomorrow

with all the big political stories Now we can dance, if you would like

to. A new BBC Two comedy panel show

all about people. Each week, everyone we talk about

will share the same names. Promise it's very simple -

not at all confusing. # Tracey, Tracey

Tracey Ullman's Show. # I'm Dame Maggie Smith and

I'm demonstrating my versatility.