09/03/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 09/03/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Morning, folks, welcome to the Daily Politics.


Junior doctors are back on strike in England this morning,


More than 5,000 operations have been postponed because of the strike.


But with no sign of the Government backing down over the new doctors'


contract, where does the dispute go next?


Could it be raised by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn


as he puts his questions to the Prime Minister?


We'll bring you all the action from the Commons, live at noon.


Government plans to extend Sunday trading hours in England and Wales


may not pass, thanks to opposition from some Tories and the SNP.


We've sent out Ellie with the moodbox.


If they are open, people buy more, so we spend money, so it is not


I was about to say - and it's not even Sunday.


And we'll be talking about claims that a night of stand-up comedy


aimed at helping Jeremy Corbyn isn't causing much of a laugh in Scotland.


All that in the next hour and a half and with us for the whole


of the programme today two MPs we'd pay good money


No, I mean we'd pay them to sit down.


It's the Conservative justice minister Dominic Raab,


and Labour's shadow transport secretary Lilian Greenwood.


Junior doctors in England are back on strike this morning,


this time for the first of three 48-hour stoppages.


It's the longest so far and more than 5,000 treatments have had to be


postponed, but once again medics will be providing emergency


It's all thanks to a dispute with the Government over


its decision to impose a new contract for junior doctors.


Let's have a listen to NHS England's Anne Rainsbury.


Clearly there are a difficult number of days ahead for the NHS.


We have been working very, very closely with


hospitals up and down England, in order to ensure that they have


It's important to be clear that urgent and emergency care


will continue as normal, and therefore it is some planned


And we're joined now by Dr Andrew Collier,


he's a former co-chair of the British Medical Association's


Welcome to the programme. I thought the next stage was that the junior


doctors, if they did not get reconciliation, were going to


withdraw accident cover but that are not doing that, why not? We would


never do anything to place a patient at risk so the industrial action


today and in the next two days will be completely safe. When we withdrew


the plans for emergency cover we did not think our colleagues or patient


Dexter would want that to happen so we've revised that in the light of


public opinion. Even if the dispute progresses you will keep emergency


cover? Completely. Nobody will do anything to put a patient at risk.


Regrettably it is the only thing that hopefully will make the


government and Jeremy Hunt listen to the concerns of doctors. I knew


worrying that you want to get the governments attention? These


disputes could drag on, the emergency cover could be there, and


by and large it peters out? I've been dreadfully worried for three


years about the safety of the NHS and junior doctors's contract,


that's why we entered negotiations to improve things. We've seen some


improvements to the contract, although not enough. The past few


months we've been engaged in a game of hide and sick. Jeremy Hunt has


been hiding. Where is he hiding, in a cupboard somewhere? When we tried


to approach for a straight answer we can't get one. If at any just


employers answering questions on Facebook, I think that demeans his


position, the fact they did that, 260 questions, of which only 26 were


answered, and is not forthcoming. Are any talks scheduled our door is


open. I think talking is the way out of the dilemma. Bristol have time.


These are some of the points in the deal. What they are going to impose,


that's the way to describe it, no doctor will ever be rostered for two


weekends in a row, maximum number of consecutive nights will be cut from


seven to four, maximum hours worked the week cut from 91 to 72, that


would seem to be the basis of an agreement? Certain elements of the


contract proposed would be improvement, others are so toxic it


is unacceptable. One of the things we've seen is the removal of


independent oversight in the number of hours junior doctors work.


Through our training we move between trusts and it's difficult to embed


in the network of trusts. They currently have an independent system


where hours are monitored. If a trust of works junior doctors, it's


that kind of thing that worries them. It is time to sit down, talk


and listen. If you got independent oversight reinstated would that


change things? We need to look at the whole contract, it is committed,


it would run to several hundred pages, it's about ironing out those


details. When the door is shut on negotiations we can't I am out. It's


time to talk. We would be more than happy to call off industrial action


going forward if we could get those talks back going. Let's get


background the table and talk. What if that doesn't happen, you head


towards August when the deal is imposed, what will the junior


doctors do, what is your legal position? They are dedicated to the


NHS but we might see them move abroad. They already want him,


stretching them Senate might push us beyond breaking point. We might see


fewer people taking up critical specialities like accident and


emergency, general practice, mental health, and if only a few doctors go


abroad the sustainability of the system could crash down. That is


what worries me. One part of the argument is what you will get paid


on Saturday, I believe it is time plus the deepest and on Saturdays,


even if you only work one Saturday a month? That's part of the agreement.


People have tried to characterise this as a debate on pay. Pay is part


of the concerns the junior doctors, in three years' time, it will drop.


Yet it is about so much more to say it is about Saturday working is so


wrong. I can see what the Tories want to do that because they are


concerned they have made a non-funded election promise, they


have said they will have seven-day working, within the existing budget.


And when the public health accounts committee last week, questions were


asked about where is the money for this, no answers were forthcoming.


Thank you. Why is Jeremy Hunt hiding, Dominic? Why has that been


closed? There's been plenty of talking over a protracted period, we


have seen several thousand surgeries postpunk. I don't think that's


right. We put in huge and extra investment, we have seen 10,000 new


doctors in the NHS over the last Parliament, you've got to have a


form as well, it can't just be a bottomless pit where you pour in


more money. I think junior doctor changes will be good for patients,


the medical director of the NHS, I also think it is a reasonable deal


for doctors. It is not because the dispute is going on. My question is


about how you break the logjam. It sounds as if Jeremy Hunt is not


coming back for talks, could he be that should he be? I think it is


reasonable for the doctors because it is a pay rise and the hours been


cut. As for Saturdays they are only being asked to do the same as


firefighters and police. When you get the stage where talks are being


regarded as kicking it into the long grass, this is difficult, we don't


want to fight people like and, we want to be on the side of doctors,


and above all, on the side of patient Dexter. The exhaust Mori


poll today blames the government entirely for the strike and a


further 28% blame both side. In terms of whose side you are on, you


have 85 of the public utter 85% of the public against you. The same


poll also showed an increasing number of people opposed to the


strike. They want you to resolve it. Your sentiment sounds as if you have


reached the end of the road on talks. If you are outside watching


this and in the private sector the idea that you could be held to


ransom about contract is ridiculous. In the private sector we've always


said about Saturday working, the same basic deal as the firefighters


and the police. And not all of the doctors's representatives have been


as reasonable as Andrew. We ought to have a proper debate based on the


facts. Yet at the end of the day the government must take the decision,


you can't have the NHS or the government held to ransom. That was


something that was not true, Dominic said this would not happen in the


private sector, is right. They would go elsewhere. We have a monopoly


employer delivering free care at the point of delivery. We don't want


doctors to go elsewhere, you said yourself they may go overseas. They


will be driven overseas. The comparison with the private sector


it is valid. Lilian, will you be on the picket line? I am concerned


about the impact on hospitals, I know my local hospitals are already


struggling to recruit doctors and nurses. Morale is at rock bottom.


You don't back the seven-day service the government proposes? I agree


there should be contract reform, everyone thinks that, yet you have


to do that by talking and reaching agreement. Patients will lose out if


we go overseas -- our doctors go overseas at the moment we struggling


to recruit. Would you give the junior doctors what they are asking


for, like the Independent oversight and the Saturday clauses? I would


talk. The only way this will be resolved will be about that getting


around the table. Progress has been made on some points, not others. I'm


not going to be on the picket line because I'm discussing this year. I


completely understand the anger of junior doctors. And it is clear that


the public to. This dispute, like all of them, will only be resolved


when people get around the negotiating table. Thank you.


And you can find out more about the junior doctors' strike


in England and the background to the dispite on the BBC's special


report page www.bbc.co.uk/juniordoctors.


Now, we've seen some high-profile figures weigh in to the referendum


Not least, according to this morning's Sun, the Queen.


One of our favourite viewers of the programme, so we say Hi, tell us of


the Sun was accurate or not, I have my doubts!


The paper declares that Her Majesty backs Brexit -


this is based on unnamed sources, naturally, who were present


when she was said to have told Nick Clegg she believed the EU


Buckingham Palace says she remains entirely neutral.


Yesterday's big intervention was from Bank of England Governor


Mark Carney, who incurred the wrath of Leave campaigners


when he described exit from the EU as the "biggest domestic risk"


He also, however, acknowledged that there were risks


So, as a public service, which of course is why we get out


of bed in the morning, we thought we'd look at some


of the main possible risks on both sides.


Yes, as we speed down the road towards the EU referendum on June


23rd, voters will be keeping an eye out for the possible dangers


If we leave the EU, the central warning from 'in' campaigners


is that it could be harder to trade with other EU countries,


which could hit exports, damage the economy and put


But Leave campaigners say staying in will prevent Britain


making its own trade deals with major emerging economies,


instead, tying British businesses to a shrinking European market.


When it comes to security, those arguing for an in vote say


that leaving the EU would mean leaving the European Arrest Warrant


and Europol, both of which they say help fight crime and terrorism.


Leave campaigners say staying in means there's little chance


of cutting net migration, currently at 323,000 -


more than half of which comes from the EU.


Renewed talk of Turkey joining the union will only add to that


Could prices of food and other goods rise if we vote to leave?


That's the claim that's been put by the in campaign,


which says import tariffs could add to the burden on households.


While those backing Brexit say that staying in means Britain


being dragged into inevitable further EU integration -


which could, they claim, mean paying into another Eurozone


bailout and even the creation of an EU army.


So those are some of the main risks as viewed by both sides


We are indeed. Lilian Greenwood, the biggest risk of staying in?


I think the main risks are associated with the leaving. I will


come onto that in a minute. Are you saying there are no risks to staying


in? We know where we are if we stay in. We have been members of the


European union for decades. If there are changes coming down the road, we


have an opportunity to influence those. No risks? There are risks


facing us as a country, as there are to the European Union as whole. I


don't think they are associated to staying in. What is the biggest risk


of coming out? The biggest argument you hear from the remaining campaign


is the short-term instability, but people said that about the


referendum. Last year we rose to having the third highest foreign


investment in the world. Is there a risk? There are risks on both sides


and I think Mark Carney tried to set out the balance of risks on both


sides. I think the most important thing he said about staying in is he


said he thought it was more likely than not that the European Union


would go for international frisking banking union. If that is a case,


how does Greece get out of the rut? How does Italy not fall into


question mark it sounds like an EU in a state of crisis. You accept


there could be short-term risks? Short-term disruption, if we vote to


leave? I think there are pros and cons for both positions. It was a


simple and straightforward question. If I say there is a certain risk,


press conferences will go out saying the game is up. There are pros and


cons for both ways. I think the brighter prospects for the UK are


having less burden on SN Es. Small and medium-sized businesses. And


funnily enough Mark Carney said that yesterday. There was nothing to stop


us trading now. There is, the EU has strict confidence over those deals.


We still trade, China Germany trade a lot more with China than we do.


But we are under a protectionist umbrella. Was the governor not


within his rights to assess what the risks were of leaving? That is the


job of our central banker, isn't it? He has to be careful, as does the


Queen, about being drawn into the politics of it. The Queen is just a


newspaper story. The governor was on the record yesterday. You are not


saying the Queen is in favour of Brexit? I love to Nick Clegg's


comment about having no recollection. He sounded like a


shoplifter outside Woolworths full of pockets of Mars bars. Was the


governor right? A fair laying out of the risks on certain courses of


action that is what they are asked to do? I will not quibble about what


he did. I felt personally reading the media reports that they had not


picked up on the serious downsides of staying in, particularly this


issue of the Eurozone not reforming. He said chances are the Eurozone


will not proceed to that. How do you get grease out of the rut? Most of


the action, if we stay in, will be in the Eurozone. If there is future


integration, which is the wish of some leaders, isn't that a risks are


staying in? They could agree things that will not be in our interests?


We need to be part of the negotiations in the EU. But we


aren't? We have chosen to stay out of the Eurozone and that is a


decision we are happy with. My point is this, my point is if we stay in


and vote to remain, there could well be the five presidents report could


be implemented. The governor could be wrong and the Eurozone could go


too much closer fiscal and monetary union. It could decide things not in


our interest, and we are no longer in the Eurozone so we could be


outvoted. There are risks associated with the remaining, discussions that


might happen within Europe. Use it only are there were not? I said we


were better off being part of the EU and influencing the future direction


of Europe than sitting on the outside and all the uncertainties


about leaving. One of the risks of leaving is we do not know what our


relationship will be with the single market. It was interesting at the


weekend that both Iris Johnson, pro-Brexit, and Douglas Carswell,


started to talk about maybe we should try to negotiate a free trade


agreement with Europe. -- Boris Johnson. Rather than a full single


market agreement. That is a risk. A free trade agreement is nowhere near


as open as a single market agreement. If you look at the single


market it includes all the social... They talk about social justice and


policing. You talk to a bureaucrat in Brussels and they save you want


to be in the single market, you need to be in everything. There is a


Swiss, Norwegian, Turkish option. Britain's economy is bigger than all


of those combined. I don't think it is unreasonable to say we want a


bespoke deal for Britain. We have sold ?59 million more. We have a


neutral interest in that. It is a risk and we don't know what the mood


of the rest of the European Union would be if we vote to get out.


There will be people saying we cannot offer the Brits are good deal


otherwise others will want it. Do we think given the trade deficit we


have with the EU that German manufacturers, French farmers and


pharmaceutical firms will be so vindictive they will hit their own


pockets by hitting such rigid trade barriers that we have the impact


your talking about. We could have tariffs. Is that a savoury argument


for the in campaign to use? What about British expats abroad if we


vote to leave? That will be subject to negotiation but I'm sure we would


come to a sensible, mutual understanding, allowing people who


have been there for a certain period of time to stay. I think we should


do the same here. We don't know that? You don't know anything


because you cannot engage in the Brexit negotiations... We will not


have the verdict from the British public... Would all EU citizens of


this country continue on the same basis? That would have to be subject


to negotiation. Not to set up silly hostages to fortune in advance,


which is what you're trying to get me to do. I'm tried to clarify the


issue so people can make up their mind how to vote. Many viewers


abroad will be watching in Spain, France and Italy. They will like to


know what their status would be. I can't give you an answer because the


EU could not give you an answer until used adding that negotiation.


Everything is a risk. Mark Carney set out the risk of caucusing from


the Eurozone against financial services. It ought about the fact


more likely than not there would be no reforming the Eurozone. We have


talked about that. Isn't there a risk if Turkey joined the European


Union? The clearest risk from what we had Dominic say is he would like


to leave the EU and scrap some of the workplace rights that have come


from the EU. I think people in the UK worried about jobs would be


worried about those. What I am asking is, do you regard it as a


risk that if we stay, that Turkey may become is a member of the EU? Of


course there is the potential for further countries to join the


European Union. We would be part of those discussions, as we have been.


Would you be favour of Turkey joining the European Union? I very


much welcome the discussions happening with Turkey about issues


that affect us in Europe, like migration. That is not why are


asked. Is it your party's policy all your personal view that you would be


in favour of Turkey joining the European Union? I think we need to


have in our discussions with Turkey, discussions about our shared values.


There are concerns about human rights in Turkey that would have to


be dealt with before there could be a question of them joining the EU.


You don't see it happening in the full sable future? I don't think it


could happen until those issues are discussed and addressed. One of the


consequences of the Visa liberalisation deal is only, as far


as we can see, it refers to the Schengen area. We will not be


obliged to respect the liberalisation for Turkey? I think


there is huge pressure to reform the whole way the EU rules on free


movement work, as a result of the appalling scenes we are singing


Greece and in relation to Turkey. But if you want to have a proper


public confidence in border controls, you cannot do that from


within the European Union. The short answer to our question about Turkey


is I don't think we could engage, accept Turkey to be a member under


the current rules. We would have a veto. Every country has one. I think


that may be true. That is true. But there would be huge pressure on the


UK to back down. We've had that in relation to all of the... Inside the


EU you accept although Angela Merkel is trying to do a deal that would


give Visa free travel throughout the Schengen area, that would not cover


us because we are outside that? Look at the pressures we are already


facing because of our current arrangements and free movement rules


we have signed up to. That is the basic problem. You talk about a


Norwegian model and Norway has to sign up to it. I'd said there are a


whole range of models and because our economy is bigger than those we


are in a pretty good negotiating position. Let's move on.


Now, it's been a chilly week, and here at the Daily Politics,


we like to think MPs are staying warm as they travel


That's why our guests of the day arrived in stretch limousines


They were on an away day yesterday to Dagenham,


Here they all are travelling in a minibus together -


and don't they look like they're having a jolly day out?


And as they've all kept their coats and scarves on, we can only assume


What they needed of course was a nice hot drink to warm up.


And what better way to enjoy it than in a Daily Politics mug?


There - don't they look much happier already?


Now in a minute Lillian can explain why Jeremy Corbyn


and John McDonnell weren't in the minibus too, but first,


if you'd like to be in with a chance of winning your own mug,


MUSIC: Really Sayin' Something by Bananarama


Whatever the result, we believe he's going to have a really big future


MUSIC: Music and Lights by Imagination


MUSIC: Eye Of The Tiger by Survivor


I'm getting pretty old, but this is the first time I've had


into the middle of the Sahara Desert.


MUSIC: Just An Illusion by Imagination


MUSIC: Love Come Down by Evelyn "Champagne" King


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


send your answer to our special quiz e-mail address -


Entries must arrive by 12.30pm today, and you can see the full


terms and conditions for Guess The Year on our website -


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


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


And that's not all - The Guardian's Nick Watt is here.


Good to see you. What do you think Mr Corbyn's strategy will be today?


I know he feels pretty uncomfortable about the deal on migrants, so maybe


he will talk about that. But one week away from the budget. The


economic figures, those tax receipts are looking pretty bad, so that


might be quite a tempting target for Jeremy Corbyn. George Osborne has


worried he had to move his surplus target back by one year, that is


what he did in July's budget. As I understand from senior Whitehall


sources, the surplus EU is trying to achieve by 2019-20 is looking really


bad and possibly minus figures. So maybe the economy. There is very


little the Prime Minister can say about the budget this side of the


Chancellor delivering the budget. But the Turkish deal negotiated by


Angela Merkel with the Dutch Prime Minister in tow, and no one else,


not even double task or Francois Hollande was involved, it does


involve spending British money and the forcible removal of migrants


from Greece back to Turkey. It is not clear if that can be done. It is


not clear if it is legal. Surely the Leader of the Opposition, wants to


hold government to account on a major issue, this has to be what he


goes for. I know he does feel strongly about this and I think of


particular interest to Jeremy Corbyn is the UN are saying, look, this


goes against basic rules. You cannot force a plea remove people. How do


they do it anyway? Exactly. For Angela Merkel in the dead of night


to agree with the... She is reaching a bilateral deal with him but cannot


get it past the 28 members of the European Union just yet. Just at the


time Ankara is closing opposition newspapers, it is fertile territory


for Jeremy Corbyn. But we are all week away from the budget and the


economic picture is not looking quite as good as they did at the


time of the Autumn Statement in November, so that might be territory


for him. He may be surprises us all by talking about something we


haven't talked about. We talk about Kennedy's first 100 days, but today


is Jeremy Corbyn's 100th question. Only you would know that!


I did as well. I read it in the Independent. I thought they were


closing it. No, alive and kicking as a newspaper for a few days and then


online. Very good! Which questioned today will be the 100th question?


That is... Andrew, there is the mathematician. It is the fourth. You


did know. All of sorts talk inside the Parliamentary Labour Party about


Mr Corbyn. It died down for a while and has led back up again. Jeremy


Corbyn does not have the confidence of the Parliamentary Labour Party.


Some ultras would like him out immediately and talk about having an


Australia strategy. A convict! These are the leadership spills you have


had in labour and of the Liberal party in Australia that got rid of


Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott. Essentially what one former minister


said to me, and it is quite brutal language, is we have to keep on


shooting him until he goes. That is what the ultras are saying. More


mainstream people are saying he got 59.7% of the vote in the party


membership. That vote, if anything, is going up. If you try and move


against him you will embolden those people, him and undermine what you


are trying to do. Now over to the House of


The Prime Minister. Thank you Mr Speaker. This morning I had meetings


with my colleagues and I shall have further such meetings today. People


in Bristol South look forward to the promised Chef apprenticeships yet


question how this will happen on the eve of National Apprenticeship Week,


does the Prime Minister have a delivery plan or is he making it up


as he goes along? We achieved 2 million in the last Parliament, we


are confident of achieving 3 million in this Parliament. We have a


delivery plan, based on large companies continuing with their


plans for apprenticeships. We want small companies to do more and the


public sector to join in with larger plans and we regularly review


progress towards the target. James Berry. Mr Speaker, many of my


constituents get the train to central London every day for work


and are concerned about terrorist threats posed by Daesh in the


capital. Can my friend Mike update the House on progress made on


tackling the source of that threat in Iraq and Syria? --, honourable


friend update the House? It was very striking what is this and


Commissioner Mark Rowley said last week about the dangers we face.


Domestically we are protecting counterterrorism policing and


investing in counterintelligence and securities abuses as we did in the


last element, we are making good progress and pushing Daesh backs


this is something we need to do domestic league and overseas. I was


appalled to see yesterday that the Labour Party has readmitted Somerby


to their party who says that the 9/11 suicide bombers must never be


condemned, and belongs to an organisation that says that we


defend Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. Appalling views and I hope the


Leader of the Opposition will throw the person out of the party instead


of welcoming him in. Jeremy Corbyn. Mr Speaker. I hope the Prime


Minister will join me in morning of the death today of the fifth Beatle,


George Martin, and the wonderful music that will last for time that


he gave us. Last week the Prime Minister told the house we had a


strong economy with a sound plan. If the economy is so strong, why this


week has he forced through a ?30 per week cut, hitting some of the


poorest disabled people in the country? First let me join him in


what he said about George Martin, he was a massive figure, a giant in


popular music and responsible for some tunes that will live for ever


more. I'm only disappointed that he can't comment on my earlier point.


It seems to me that we have a responsibility as party leaders for


our own parties. He asked about the strength of the economy. We do face


an uncertain international environment and all the experts warn


of the danger we face. Yet today we have zero inflation percent, our


economy is growing, which is growing and we cut the taxes that people are


paying. That, combined with reforming welfare, and we are doing


that, is the way to get the deficit down, continue with growth and help


deliver for working people in Britain. Jeremy Corbyn. Mr Speaker I


do not believe that the majority of people in this country are content


to see someone diagnosed with cancer today and unable to work next year,


reduced to poverty because of the cuts this government is putting


through. The Chancellor has found another ?6.6 billion to reduce


corporation tax and big business. Despite our corporation tax already


being lower than any other G7 nation. Today action for children,


the Children's Society, the National children's bureau, shows local


authority spending on children and young people has been cut by ?2


billion, 71%. Does this not show a wrong choice by the pro-minister?


Let's look at what has happened to corporation tax receipts since we


cut corporation tax. That's the question because the point of


setting tax rates is to raise money rather than make a political point.


And the fact is that corporation tax receipts are up by 20% under this


government so we have more money to spend on children, and children's


services, on education. Whereas if we put up tax rates as reasons to be


suggesting we would get less money in. That's the result, they care


about making a political point, we care about raising revenue and


providing good services. I asked, if there's more money available to be


spent on children's services why are there half a million more children


in poverty in Britain because of the policies of his government? If we


really have the strong economy the Prime Minister claims, why did


Chancellor warned last week and I quote, we may need to make further


reductions? Who will they fall on, young people, women? Will he rule


out attacking those groups? He will see the Budget next week when my


right honourable friend who has an excellent record of steering the


economy stands and to deliver it. About those remarks on poverty let


me say what has happened since 2010. There are 680,000 who were workless


households. Think what that means. 80,000 households where someone is


bringing home a wage, putting food on the table and paying less taxes.


There are 40,000 fewer households where no member has ever worked and


480,000 fewer, that is about tackling poverty, all things never


delivered by Labour. Mr Speaker, the problem is the number of households


suffering from in work poverty because of the insecure jobs,


because of zero hours contracts, because of low wages. As he well


knows, the poorest have paid the most for the cuts and women have


paid for 81% of those cuts. Mr Speaker, on 99 previous attempts to


ask questions to the Prime Minister, I have been unclear or dissatisfied


by the answers, as indeed have many other people! So, on this auspicious


100th occasion, can I ask the Prime Minister to help a young man named


Cal. Last week the Prime Minister told the engineering employers


Federation that we have a skills shortage. A good admission. Callum


as a bright young man, wanting to make his way in the world and he


says,... Well, maybe the Prime Minister does as well... Will the


government acknowledged the importance of sixth form colleges


and post-16 education services in Britain? Let me congratulate the


honourable gentleman on getting to 100 not out, that will be welcomed


across the House. What I would say to Callum is what we are introducing


is a situation where we and cap university places so as many people


who want to go can go and we will introduce in this Parliament 3


million apprentices. That combined with better funded sixth forms and


further education colleges means we've got a proper education system


that can really drive opportunity in this country. Let me come back once


more and child poverty, let me give him the figures. 800,000 fewer


people in relative poverty than 2010. 300,000 fewer children in


relative poverty in 2010. That is the Labour measurement used so when


he gets to did this batch proxy can tell us that he was wrong about


child poverty. -- when he gets to this dispatch box. The prime


ministers seems to be answering the last question but one. If I could


bring him back to the question from Callum, and point out that there has


been a 10% cut in real terms in sixth form and further education and


adult education has been cut by 35% during his time as Prime Minister,


the construction output in Britain has shrunk for two consecutive


quarters now. Surely this is a matter of concern? Is this not a


sign that this economic recovery has been constructed on sand? Let me


first confirmed that we have protected 16-18 education in this


spending round. He talks about construction. We want to see every


part of our economy growing and it is, unlike so many in what is a


difficult and dangerous world right now. Yet if you look at our


construction plans because we have a strong economy we can commit to HS2,


the biggest road programme since the 1970s, the largest rail programme


since Victorian times and together with huge infrastructure projects in


energy and other areas. Those things are only possible because we have a


strong and growing economy. We know what Labour would do. His spending


plans are a risk to the nation 's finances, his tax plans a risk to


every family in the country and we know what he wants which is to put


up taxes on people earning over ?20,000, that's the plan and it


would wreck this country's finances. Mr Speaker we have the construction


industry in recession at a time when there is an acute need for new


housing. Construction apprenticeships have fallen by 11%


since 2010. We have the lowest rate of house building since the 1920s,


almost 100 years ago. Will the Prime Minister look again at this issue,


stop the cuts to skills training and the cuts to investment


that are holding back this country, holding back the skill ambitions of


so many young people and invest in them and invest in our future. I


have to pick up the right honourable gentleman on his statistics because


we have seen a massive boost to apprenticeships and apprenticeship


funding under this government, 2 million in the last Parliament, 3


million in this one. House-building under Labour fell by 45% and has


since increased by two thirds, over 7000 new homes delivered since 2010


and now completions our up, housing starts at the highest level since


2007, lasted, they nearly doubled the low point of 2009. They wrecked


the economy, created that instability, we have been building a


strong economy and that is what we have to stick with. Mark Spencer.


Thank you. Unemployment in Sherwood has halved since 2010. Given that


the Chancellor will make his budget statement next week can the Prime


Minister assure the House you will continue to support education and


support to get to jobs that is maintaining the Conservative lot of


aspiration? My honourable friend is right, the school improvement


programme we are driving forward combined with an capping university


places and investing in apprenticeships is giving people a


ladder of opportunity to make the most of their lives and the most of


the aplomb and opportunities clearly created in this country where there


are 2 million more people in work. I know he has a particular interest in


his constituency, and extending the Robin Hood line and is meeting with


ministers to deliver this. Just the sort of infrastructure project this


government wants to get behind. Angus Robertson. Mr Speaker, the


refugee crisis is the biggest issue facing governments across Europe. Is


the Prime Minister ashamed that any UK Government programme, we now know


that in Folkestone trafficking victims were locked up without food,


asylum seeking children were forced to sleep on concrete floors,


patients with diarrhoea denied access to showers and a naked woman


was allegedly beaten at a detention centre. As the Prime Minister


ashamed of this? I would say that our asylum system


is fair and Britain, down the ages, has given people asylum who are


fleeing persecution and torture. When it comes to the issue of


resettling Syrian refugees, it was instructed at this week's European


Council with a chart showing how many countries have actually be


settled Syrian refugees, Britain has done far better than any other


country except Germany. Angus Robertson. This week the Scottish


refugee Council called for an investigation into how asylum


seekers are treated and housed in Glasgow. They want the Home Office


to commission an independent inquiry into claims of substandard housing


and deep -- dehumanising treatment by his government. Will he


commission that investigation? We are very happy for these issues


to be properly investigated. The home affairs select committee on


this House of Commons has done a report into the way asylum, housing


is commission. If the Scottish Parliament wants to carry out those


investigations, of course the United Kingdom government will cooperate.


We need to make sure when we take people in they are properly housed,


look after, their children at school, because that is the sort of


generous country we are. Mr Stevenson.


Thank you Mr Speaker. I welcome the Government's excellent initiative to


encourage employers to hire ex-offenders. Speaking as someone


who employs an ex-offender by the excellent working chance charity,


good the Prime Minister sure the House that implies in the public,


private and voluntary sectors play their part in providing excellent


opportunities? I agree with my friend and agree


with what he has done. If people are applying for a job, they have two at


some stage declared the criminal record they have on the offences


they may have committed. The question is do they have to do it


absolutely at the CVE stage? We believe they shouldn't. This level


-- civil service will do this. You might at least get the chance of an


interview so you are not ruled out. That is what we talk about. When we


talk about life chances for people in our country and giving people


sometimes a second chance to have a go at their life, we are putting our


money where our mouth is. If the British people vote to leave


the European Union, will the Prime Minister resign, yes or no?


No. It is very much to the Government


must back credit that over 2 million jobs have been created since 2010.


-- government's credit. But nearly 1 million have gone to non-UK EU


nationals. Does the Prime Minister agree with me that the EU's free


movement of people is damaging UK nationals implement prospects and


contributing to the people still unemployed and has not been


compensated for by jobs in other countries the European nationals.


If you look at the figures over the last five years two thirds of the


rise of employment over the last five years has been made up by jobs


going to British people. Where I would agree with her is in


combination with the welfare reform we have introduced for EU citizens


and the tougher control on migration from outside the EU, we should see


while fair reform in the UK as the flip side of migration control. We


want to make sure it always pays for British people to train up and do


the jobs available. We should see immigration control and welfare


reform as a way of getting more of our people into work.


Thank you Mr Speaker. Does the Prime Minister agree with me it is very


important we make the positive case for Britain remaining in the EU?


Each of us get ?1200 back for every ?120 we get back, we have lower


prices and choice in shops and easier travelling for holidays and


businesses. Can the Prime Minister explained how our membership of the


EU impact so many aspects of our lives?


The honourable lady makes an important point. In all the


arguments about single markets and sovereignty we can sometimes lose


some of the simple consumer benefits of being a member of the European


Union. The things she mentioned about cheap air travel, ease of


travel, not having any tariffs, these are things we take for granted


now, but simply weren't the case 40 years ago. That is a strong part of


the very positive case we should make the remaining in the EU. But


with her own constituency in mind I also think we should point of the


enormous success of the British car industry, which now employs and is


responsible for over 140,000 jobs. That is a great European success


story. A lot of those cars go to the European market and we want to make


sure that continues, tariff free. Thank you. Our security is


guaranteed under Nato and this government's action to meet our 2%


commitment is most welcome. I recently visited RAF Odiham in my


constituency where the chin-ups -- chinooks base. Would the Prime


Minister improve the living quarters for these people?


I pay tribute to all the people who service those helicopters. I visited


Afghanistan something like 13 times in recent years and their


professionalism and brilliance in flying at very low levels is very


remarkable. They have rightly been decorated for the work they do. We


have an upgraded programme for the chinooks, which means new


helicopters replacing part of the existing fleet. Some ?2 million has


been spent on RAF Odiham but if more is needed, we shall make sure that


happens. In 1949, aged 11 months, my constituent William was diagnosed


with polio. He has worked from the age of 15 and continues to work at


67 but following a clearly flawed EIP assessment he is set to lose his


motor ability card, within three weeks. He said it will leave him


unable to leave the House and unable to work. Will the Prime Minister


urgently review his case and the case of 14,000 disabled people who


have this as an essential lifeline? What we have found so far with


personal independence payments is we are spending more money on


disability, rather than less money on disability. I will look very


carefully at the case. The whole point about PIP compared to DLA is


there is a proper medical screening process. I am sure your constituent


will welcome us being so close to eradicating polio entirely from our


world and this government is committed to going the extra mile


and making that happen. Schools in South Suffolk were


delighted this week to see the publication of the Government's


consultation on fairer funding. Given that the first part of this


consultation will focus on the core principles, does my right honourable


friend agree with me, one of those principles must be to recognise


rural schools face unique and unavoidable costs which are not


funded under the current formula? I certainly agree it is right we are


examining this formula and trying to achieve better fairness. I think


everyone can see that the figures between best funded schools on the


less worst funded schools, that gap has got too great. I agree, it will


be vital, the specific needs of schools in rural areas are properly


considered. Our proposal suggests sending additional funding to all


schools in sparsely populated areas. To follow up the question from my


right honourable friend, the Leader of the Opposition, that official


figures show... It is not funny. 12,000 vacancies in construction are


hard to fill due to a lack of skilled applicants. Can the Prime


Minister explain why the number of construction apprenticeships have


fallen under him? The point is we are building more


houses, investing more in construction, training more


apprentices. The money is there from the Government and now we are going


to have the apprenticeship levy on the larger businesses that will make


sure we can fund apprenticeships long through this Parliament. Mr


Bellingham. The Prime Minister will be aware of a recent tragic fatality


on the A17 in my constituency. Whilst we must await the result of a


full inquest and police inquiry, does he agree it is vital the local


council is consulted when it comes to looking at new safety measures?


I have heard about this tragic accident and I am sure on behalf of


everyone we should send our sympathies and condolences to those


involved. I think he is right to say and so many of these cases the


parish council has a lot of expertise about roads that are not


things that could be done and they should be listened to in this and


other cases. On Sunday we celebrated Mother's Day


and just yesterday International Women's Day. Members opposite


rightly working to celebrate women on both occasions. Why has this


government introduced cuts to public services, a freeze to child benefit


and reductions in work-related benefits that have left mothers ?13


billion worse off? The one thing I share with the


honourable lady is it was right to celebrate Mother's Day, I shared it


with my mother, but I think I have probably said enough about her for


the time being a! Also, it was a privilege to welcome to number ten


yesterday some inspirational women from all walks of life, to mark


International Women's Day. I'm not saying this government has sold all


of these problems. We have more women in work, they are getting


higher pay, paying lower taxes, getting more childcare and retiring


with better pensions. When it comes to the things government needs to


do, we are appointing more women to senior positions, to public


appointments. The honours system is properly reflecting women.


Some said, what about the pay gap? It is at its lowest published level.


We have abolished the pay gap for the under 40s. When it comes to


protecting women, this is the Government that criminalised forced


marriage and introduced the duty to report female genital mutilation. It


set out a specific domestic violence measure. We introduced Claire 's Law


so people can find out about violent partners. I accept there is more to


be done, but let me say this to the Labour Party, one thing you could


help with, no more segregated, political meetings. Let us end the


process of having people with bigoted religious views treating


women as second-class citizens. I think you should all take the


pledge, no more segregated meetings! The UK still has relatively poor


superfast broadband and far too many mobile not spots. Great work has


been done but what will my right honourable friend be discussing with


his right honourable friend the Chancellor, in advance of the Budget


Statement next week, in how we can improve coverage further,


particularly for rural, small businesses in areas like mine?


I think my honourable friend is right to raise this. Since 2010 we


have nearly doubled the number of homes and businesses with superfast


broadband. We are on track for the 90-95% target but there is more that


needs to be done. I think this is something for members right across


the House. Ten year is ago we were all rather guilty of leading


campaigns against phone masts. Our constituents now want coverage for


their Internet, they want coverage for mobile phones. We need to make


sure we change the law in all the ways necessary, to make sure the


masts are built, we increase coverage and make sure everyone is


connected to the information superhighway. Thank you. 76% of the


cost of a bottle of whiskey is taxed. Last week the Government's 2%


cut in duty Priest revenue by 2.5 million. Well that Prime Minister


accepts one of our greatest products as taxed too much and join with me


in calling for a further 2% cut in duty in this year's budget?


The Chancellor and I have consistently backed Scotland,


Scottish whiskey and this vital industry. Let me say this. On the


day the profit and loss account comes out for Scotland, you can see


there is a ?15 billion gap that Scotland would face if it was


outside the United Kingdom. I dread to think what taxation would be have


to be levied not just an whiskey but petrol, work incomes, Holmes. That


is the prospect of life outside the United Kingdom and why I am so we


voted to stay together. The Government has just presented


three White papers to Parliament under their self-imposed legal duty


to provide information under the European referendum act. The


Minister for Europe, during the proceedings between the two houses,


undertook to me that the Government's information under that


act would certainly be accurate and impartial, as he put it. The three


recent White papers are not. My right honourable friend is the


enforcer of the ministerial code, which demands ministers give


accurate information to Parliament. Will my right honourable friend


issue instructions to Foreign Office ministers to review and correct


these White papers? Let me say to my honourable friend,


we believe in the sovereignty of Parliament. Parliament dictated that


these documents would be published and that is why they are being


published. On the question of their content, their content has been


prepared by civil servants and all the appropriate codes. If he does


not agree with some of the content I would say, challenged the content.


Have an argument about the content, not the process.


The Prime Minister's notes will indicate to him that I raised the


question at the National wildlife crime unit this year, I'm delighted


to report its funding has now been secured. For the next four years. I


take full responsibility for that. I read it on my website, so it must be


true! As my mother used to say, it never hurts to say thank you, and I


do. Can I ask him on a similar matter


how his manifesto pledge on not using animals in circuses is


progressing? Can I thank him for raising such good questions. On the


circuses and wild animals, we have a manifesto commitment. We did not


manage to meet it in the last parliament. We license these things


so strictly I think we are talking about one or two circuses. Two,


thank you. We are committed to legislating when Parliamentary time


allows. Later today colleagues across the House and I will be


launching a Parliamentary group on ending homelessness. Will my right


honourable friend join me in welcoming the work of organisations


around the country, including the Hope Centre in my constituency and


pledge as a government we will do all we can to help homeless people


and address the causes of homelessness so we can enter this


problem once and for all. We hope to build by the end of this


Parliament 1 million new homes. All the arguments against homelessness


eventually come down to providing effective new homes.


Can the Prime Minister imagine the shock when a shop worker discovered


he was going to lose money as a result of the introduction of the


living wage question that that is because to introduce it be and Q are


cutting allowances. As a result he will take home ?50 a week less, or


?2600 a year after the hourly rate goes up. Can that Prime Minister and


Chancellor in their budget next week ensure that nobody working on a shop


takes on less money? We want to see people take hope that more money and


that is why we introduced the national living wage which will be


at ?9 by 2020. We are cutting the taxes of people like the friend whom


the honourable lady refers, will be able to earn ?11,000 from the 1st of


April before paying any taxes at all. A recent study led by Imperial


College has shown biomass, is progressed through the contracts for


difference, could save Bill payers and the Treasury millions of pounds.


An industry that supports many jobs in Selby in Cleethorpes. Can the


Prime Minister look at this as a sustainable business


model? Biomass comes from the US and Canada. Will you look at this so we


can try and get it into the programme? I will, but what we have


do realise is the extra amount of money we are prepared to put into


renewable energy is a finite amount and in the end we have to make sure


that what we get is cost effective. I will look carefully at what my


friends as. It used to be said in English family's home was their


castle. But following the Government's Housing Bill new


tenants in social housing will be on pre-5-year contracts. Does the Prime


Minister think it is right a student beginning their secondary education


may face eviction at the time they come up to their GCSEs and A-levels?


We want for their home to genuinely be there on which is why we are


extending right to buy so that millions of people will be able to


own their own home. As for future tenancies, we want to make sure


social housing is therefore the people who need it most. No current


tenant is going to be affected. That is why we think this Housing Bill


will see more homes built, more homes owned, more homes rented and


will be good for housing in our country.


Prime Minister's Questions ending for the day, Jeremy Corbyn asking


about welfare cuts at a time when corporation tax is cut comic he then


moved on to children in poverty and then to the lack of apprenticeships,


as he sees it. We'll come back to these things in a moment. What did


our viewers make things today Camille,? Jeremy Corbyn chose some


good topics today yet 100 questions have not equipped him with the skill


of making a point, not once was David Cameron ruffled by the Leader


of the Opposition, John agrees, given the faces of the MPs behind


Jeremy Corbyn, quantity is not what matters. Mark says, at last Jeremy


Corbyn should 70s, his first win of the Prime Minister who showed that


again he cannot answer the question and his government does not care


about the week, the poor, the sick. Ian says, delighted to hear about


the reduction in disability payments, yet no follow up because


Jeremy Corbyn missed his chance again. Many people seem to think,


good topics although not making the points. He picked good topics


because it was a bit scatter-gun, he moved on to something else.


Reminiscent of William Hague. One area where he was successful against


Tony Blair was that he would ask multiple questions, the Prime


Minister has folders in different sections and Tony Blair had problems


doing that. The problem for Jeremy Corbyn is that he might averaged a


century of questions yet he has not matched David Cameron's quarter of a


century of experience at Prime Minister's Questions. David Cameron


was preparing to a major quarter of a century ago, he is accomplished


and can handle it. The problem is you did not really feel that Jeremy


Corbyn was scoring any runs, to stick to the cricketing analogy.


He's trying to highlight the analogy. The point he wants to make


is that David Cameron, you say everything is fine. If so, why are


you cutting disability benefit, if everything is fine why is the


construction industry in such trouble? The reason they want to


focus on the economy is not just because of the Budget next week.


They believe Labour lost two elections in a row because it had no


credibility on the economy. They need to restore that, and then what


the Labour leadership are saying is that they need to have a narrative


that the government is complacent and not acknowledging the impact of


the cuts and the impact of the falling tax receipts and the fiscal


targets of George Osborne. The first question from Jeremy Corbyn was,


White were some benefits to the disabled being cut by ?30 a week,


which is what Jeremy Corbyn claimed. The Prime Minister did not answer.


What's the answer, Dominic? They are moving to a condition where if


you've got a condition, you get your jobseeker's allowance and then


that's moved to the personal independence payment. That means


that you got a personal tailored uplift bearing in mind the impact


your condition has on your work prospects. We've got hundreds of


thousands, think 293,000 extra disabled people in work compared


with two yours ago. It's quite patronising to suggest that because


you have a disability you can't be encouraged and incentivised to work.


No, but until that happens is it not rather cruel to be cutting the


welfare benefits by ?30 a week? It's not a straight cut, that element is


moved into the personal tailored assessment of their need. It's not


just ticking boxes. They could end up with less? Depends on their


condition. We are making sure the welfare system is there for those


who need it, and encouraging others who can work to be encouraged and


incentivised and supported into work. I think it's an important


principle. Would it be wrong if people who are disabled, still


looking for work although not able to find it because it's harder in


these conditions, would be wrong for them to be economically


disadvantaged and they do find the work? Exactly why the personal


independence payment should make sure this doesn't happen. It's a


much more accurate personally tailored assessment of their


personal needs. Lilian Greenwood? I know from my constituent Manuel have


contacted me that they really, really anxious about this and don't


feel they are getting the support. There was another question about the


experiences people have in applying for this payment and losing support


and the whole process is making life anxious for them. Are they right to


be anxious? Of course. That is the experience. Going through the system


of large numbers of appeals being upheld, people aren't getting the


support they need and they are being made even more worried as a result


of the process. All these changes are difficult and yet the point was


made throughout PMQs, a smug you have a vibrant economy, you can't


put money into either the welfare system all the schools -- unless you


have a vibrant economy. The problem of Jeremy Corbyn is that liberty


believes he is coming up with other than pride from the left. You would


not want to rescue Britain's welfare system on the backs of the disabled,


which? There are no easy cuts left. None of these things are easy. You


want to ensure that the welfare budget, a huge proportion of what


the government spends, is properly tailored to those who need it. And


those who can get into work properly is aborted to do so. I think that's


a sensible principle. Is not also sensible to balance the budget, if


that is your aim, and those with the broadest backs, not with those who


are often the weakest and most anxious in society? Think we do,


compared to 2010, if you a millionaire you are paying more


income tax. That's a concrete example of how what we do is good


for the economy and fairer. This will stand or fall in some cases.


There could be cases of disabled people worse off as a result of


these changes. I would suggest that would be wrong and embarrassing for


the government. The aim, our hope is that a personalised approach to


this, assessment based on the need of the individual will avoid that


and mitigated more than a more automated ticking boxes approach. We


shall see. It might have been an issue Jeremy Corbyn should have


concentrated on more. Gerry Downing is a member of a socialist


organisation, we understand that he has been readmitted to the


membership of the Labour Party. Are you happy with that? Have not seen


the detail of what the NEC has decided... It is not a matter of


argument, we know he is a Trotskyist revolutionary. The purpose of


Socialist Fighters to end capitalism on the planet by socialist


revolution. The kind of person who should be allowed to join the Labour


Party now given that he wasn't before? That does not sound


consistent with our party values so it'll be interesting to find out


what the NEC say. He describes the 911 attack as creating outrage which


must never... You must be puzzled as to where the NEC have allowed him to


rejoin the party. I will be interested to see how they went


through their deliberations. He has given support in certain


circumstances to Islamic State. Socialist Fight says the defend the


fight of Isis against US imperialism. It has called for


tactical military assistance in defence of Isis. I have absolutely


no truck with those comments. I am as mystified as I am sure you are.


It seems quite bizarre that the NEC should allow somebody with these


views, a Trotskyist revolutionary, to join the Labour Party.


A website has the letter sent think there was an objection, and now you


are back in. If John McDonald, the Shadow Chancellor, gets his way,


they would do away with the compliance unit, was meant to vet


these people. We had a former member of the paedophile information


exchange who was allowed in. If John McDonald had his way, you would not


have that unit and there would be more of the sort of people coming


into the Labour Party. As you are saying, Lillian, this person has a


profoundly different worldview to you and a profoundly different


worldview to the majority of British voters. Why has the NEC agreed to


this? It is from the compliance unit that reports to the NEC. Whether


there is a mistake or it is an oversight... It cannot be an


oversight? He is a well-known figure and there has been quite a lot of


publicity about this. As Lillian is saying, it is a challenge for the


Labour Party are they go into the next election allowing people like


this... Do you think it would be right to change the rules in the


Labour Party so the leader is, if there is a leadership challenge, the


existing leader of the Labour Party is automatically, if they want to


be, on the next ballot? I think that is a matter for party conference.


They decide on constitutional matters and changes. I was asking


you? I am happy with the rules as they stand, but it is a matter for


Labour members, if they want to bring forward changes to our


Constitution, that will be discussed at party conference. But you


wouldn't change the rules as they stand at the moment? I have no


particular view on changing the rules on that regard, but it is a


matter for party members. Are you a party member? I am satisfied with


the rules we have got. That is an answer and I thank you for it. Nick,


thank you. Budget next week, busy time.


Later today MPs are expected to vote on plans to give councils in England


and Wales powers to extend Sunday trading for major stores.


Well, Ellie's been out with the entirely unscientific


Welcome to London's West End, one of the busiest and biggest


shopping areas in the whole of the country,


but I'm not here for the week's best bargains, oh no -


So, should trading hours be extended on a Sunday?


Should we extend opening hours on a Sunday?


Because I work in retail, and I don't want to work any later


But surely you would get the hours back,


We may need to get something and then the shop's not


A good idea if you don't have to work on a Sunday,


Some shops open early, some shops open late,


and you never quite know where you are.


# We're S H O P P I N G, we're shopping.#


You know, you just like to stay in bed later in the morning


and when you wake up, you go to the shops and it's already shut.


You must have a very long lie in!


I am a church organist, so my Sundays


are always taken up, usually in the mornings.


But there are plenty of other hours in the day to go


I work on a Sunday, I look after the elderly.


And you know what, I think if they are open, people buy


more, so we spend more money, so it's not a good idea.


Oh yeah, I didn't think about that actually!


Not that many people actually go shopping on a Sunday.


You'd be surprised at how dead it is, so an extra three or four


Well, they shopped and then they dropped their balls


into the mood box and actually the opinions seem to be pretty even


Can I just have a little look at that handbag?


And Neil Gray from the SNP joins us now from Parliament's central lobby.


The SNP definitely going to vote against today? The proposals as they


stand, we have said, had proposals we could not countenance. They would


disproportionately impact on the retail workers who work on a Sunday


in Scotland and we believe they would lose their premium pay as a


result. The Government still has an opportunity, however. We have not


voted on this yet, they have an opportunity to come forward with


proposals we could accept. That would be amending legislation or


evolving employment law to Scotland, which is what we have called for


from the beginning. But you will be voting with the Tory rebels as it


stands? Yes, against the proposals as they stand. It is clear, the


evidence from the shop keepers union, and from others, that this


would have an effect on the premium pay of Sunday shop workers. You have


held this position since before Christmas, as I understand, so why


has it taken you so long to make up your mind on this Bill? We have been


working to trying convince the Government to take a different view


on this. Trying to stitch up a deal with the Government? Not stitch up a


deal but provide protections for Scottish shop workers and elsewhere


in the United Kingdom, who are going to have their Sunday premium pay put


at risk by these proposals. We've been quite clear from the beginning.


In them but we made a very clear call to the Government, to look at


this again and they have not come back with an offer that is


appropriate to us. Just stay with us. Should the Government comeback


with a deal then you will win? I honestly think the SNP are just


playing political games with this. I'm not sure they are very serious


about it at all. It would be devolved from Local Authorities, so


there would be a strong local democratic element of this. I would


of thought is given the SNP's hole shtick this is something they would


embrace. You are a party that wants devolution of power from Whitehall,


so why are you standing in the way of people choosing what is right for


their constituencies and economies question mark this is would be


unworkable if the proposals currently on the table were to go


forward. Quite frankly that is a nonsensical


argument from the studio. From our point of view, we are very clear. We


want to see the protection of Scottish Opera workers who are


working on a Sunday and get premium pay for that. Why should the SNP get


involved in something that is really only going to affect England and


Wales? You have given up the policy and -- on abstaining from issues


that do not affect you. People will view it as the party being


hypocrites. It is not. It is clear, the evidence is there, the shop


keepers union have made it clear. That is why we're taking the line we


are. It is absolutely not a hypocritical position to be in. It


an impact on Scotland. It is not just the SNP unhappy about it. 24 of


your colleagues are going to vote against, or vote for an amendment.


What do you say to them? We keep talking on all sides of the House


about doing something for the high street. It faces enormous pressure


from online retailers. This is a concrete and tangible thing we can


do. It would be subject to Local Authorities taking the decision. On


the workers rights point, I totally understand anyone who for reasons of


faith or family, I have young kids myself, doesn't want work any more


on Sunday that is why there would be a clear opt out for those people.


But you cannot keep talking about helping the high Street and every


time oppose specific measures that would help us do that. Is there any


chance the Government will pull this boat if it loses? I'm not sure. I do


not have any inside track. I hope it goes through. I think is good for


the high Street, for local democracy and we protect those around freedom


of choice. You say there is still time for a deal. What would you like


to hear, specifically? You said General protection but what would do


it for the SNP? Protection for the premium pay shop workers on a Sunday


or the devolution of implement law so we can protect our shop workers


in Scotland from what would be a regressive move. To have talks lined


up with the Government for this? The ball is in their court. No one has


come knocking on your door? Not as far as I'm aware. OK, thank you.


Buckingham Palace has just announced it has registered a complaint with


the independent Press Complaints Commission after it said the Queen


had expressed strong views with Nick Clegg. We know if the Queen had


anything to say about Europe, she would say it on her favourite


programme, which is the Daily Politics. It is now time for lunch,


she will be sipping her drink. Now, would you pay to watch a night


of comedy, music and poetry to help That's the aim of an event


called JC4PM, that's been It's apparently proved very popular


at venues in England, but it's been reported that


tickets for tonight's show at the Festival Theatre in Edinburgh


have proved harder to sell. According to Buzzfeed organisers


are blaming the dominance of the SNP Well, one of the first comedians


to come out for Corbyn was Grainne Maguire,


and she joins us now. Welcome. What is it about the Scots?


They don't like your tumour, is that why they are not turning up? You can


blame Jeromy for a lot of things but the state of the British live comedy


circuit! I thought that was quite healthy. Everyone is watching on


television. Are you going to the Festival Hall to night? I cannot


make it to night. But stand up for Jeremy are doing dates all around


the country. You are filling out places, so why not in Edinburgh?


It's Wednesday, it's miserable. How do you know it's miserable? A bit


dour in Edinburgh? Comedy promotion is hard. Maybe this is too bigger


venue. They did say most venues have been standing room only. But this is


one of the largest theatres in Scotland, owing to lack of choice.


You have Charlotte Church, Mark steel, Jeremy Hardy... You also, not


you personally, but you are including a Labour MSP called Mr


Finlay. Maybe it is the politicians they do want to see. I am told he


has a great set. He is packing them out. Now you have advertised the


fantastic line-up. What kind of jokes do you tell at a JC4PM gig?


Remember this is daytime television. The most adorable thing about doing


these gigs, you have standard comedians but there is always a


politician at the start doing a little five minutes. Most


politicians do, I'm not a comedian but I do work with clowns....


However, Siddique Khan has got a strong club ten minutes. Does he


question at he does, a strong second career waiting for him. It will be


interesting after the election. Kezia Dugdale has bought tickets,


but she is not going. What do we read into that? Not very good at


diary management! LAUGHTER When is the next one that you are


doing? I am doing one in Brixton. There are events all over. It is so


much fun, there is a raffle. What is the prize? I can do a few jokes! The


second career now. After the failure of the first one! We only have ten


seconds. I love Ed Miliband because he looks like David Miliband but


reflected in a spoon. You did it in ten seconds, very good!


Consider Edinburgh already sold out. There's just time to put you out


of your misery and give The year Mark Thatcher got lost in


the desert and many got found again. Regard that as a good or bad news


story. Press the button. Let's find out who the winner is.


Well done! That's it for today, we thank all of


our guests for being with us. The One O'clock News is starting


over on BBC One now. JoCo and I will be here at noon


tomorrow with all the big political It's a huge weekend of sport,


live across the BBC.


Download Subtitles