15/03/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 15/03/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


Theresa May's plans for greater surveillance powers are back


Labour say want substantial changes to the Bill.


The shadow home secretary Andy Burnham joins us live.


There are just 100 days until polling day in the EU


Referendum and today sees the Confederation


Of British Industry throw its weight behind the campaign to remain.


We'll hear from the CBI's head honcho, Carolyn Fairbairn.


The Green Party have also launched their own campaign to keep


Britain in the EU, saying they're 'loud and proud' about their support


And if you thought delivering the Chancellor's Budget speech


was tricky enough, spare a thought for the leader of the opposition -


We'll discuss how to prep for the big day.


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


of the programme today, Ukip's immigration and financial


Ahead of tomorrow's budget, George Osborne has been busy this


morning, bigging up government investment in new infrastructure


Here's the Chancellor speaking in central lobby -


suited up in the obligatory high-vis jacket.


Five years ago as part of our long-term economic plan


we gave the go-ahead to Crossrail and here it is nearing completion.


In the Budget tomorrow, I'm giving the green light


to Crossrail 2 in London and the new High-speed 3 link


across the North of England and in the Budget we will not go


for short-term fixes in this uncertain world,


we're going to have long-term solutions to Britain's long-term


problems and the Budget is going to make sure Britain is fit


That was Central London he was speaking in, not the central lobby!


Confused. He has a wardrobe of high visibility jackets, are you excited


by the announcements? I am intrigued and I will be open-minded about it


because I come from the North West of England, born in Manchester, and


some ideas about opening up railways from Manchester to Sheffield and


Leeds, for me, somebody who loves the countryside, believing there is


an opportunity to build tunnels underneath the beautiful landscape,


that can be an option. What I want to look at is the greater detail of


cost. You are against HS2? Yes, it is a folly which has been proved in


many ways to be over expensive. But it will open up, to the government,


vast areas of the countryside. It will do a number of things, it will


ensure only the wealthiest can use it because it is expensive. It is


displaced if, it will move people from London to buy houses in the


north of England so they can commute to work which will have increased


pressure on housing in northern England and there are relevant


studies which show you will not get the economic and if it is they


suggest you do. You look at the equivalence between Lil and Paris


and we saw big changes on that. -- Lille. Do you think it does help the


economy despite Nigel Farage saying it is a waste of money and will only


benefit a small number of people? HS2 has to be taken out of the


equation and we have looked at expanding or improving their weight


structures in England. Are you in favour of Crossrail to? We may have


to consider the argument on that. -- two. I have not seen the


implications two. I have not seen the


rail. I want to look at a roadway system which is creaking at the


seams and has not had a great deal of investment, particularly in the


North, where you can look at the immediate problem with trains going


to Sheffield and Leeds, why are we not looking at expanding the


railway, the trains themselves, the platforms? These can be done


immediately. I want to look at the immediate impact on costs and review


the whole idea in the future. The question for today is -


which TV couple have been discussing their trip to Chequers


for a dinner with Tony Blair, over which they discussed


the whereabouts of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction


with the then prime minister? Was it a) Adrian Chiles


and Christine Bleakley? Theresa May's plan to grant powers


to the state to collect the web-browsing histories


and internet connection records of individuals is back


in the Commons today. The Investigatory Powers Bill


is the latest attempt to give the secret services legal backing


for internet surveillance of anyone suspected of criminal


or terrorist activity. The issue led to a bust-up


in the coalition government, with Nick Clegg blocking


the so-called 'Snoopers' Charter'. Theresa May introduced the bill


to update legislation for police and security services "to keep pace


with the modern world" - addressing gaps that degrade


the government's ability to combat Among the provisions of the Bill


is the collection and storage by communications companies of 12


months of everyone's web browsing history, known as internet


connection records. A statutory framework for the police


to apply to hack someone's smartphone or computer -


a so-called equipment interference. And the creation of


an Investigatory Powers Commission. A senior judge who will oversee


the use of all investigatory powers supported by a number


of Judicial Commissioners. Labour say they will put aside party


politics to work "constructively" with the government


if the Home Secretary allows lengthy But the SNP and the Liberal


Democrats will oppose it, Joining me now from central lobby in


the Palace of Westminster is the Shadow Home Secretary, Andy Burnham.


Welcome. The Labour Party are going to add Stein today, isn't that


handing the government a blank cheque? No, it is not. This Bill is


needed because we have a law which is going to expire later this year


so these are not normal circumstances. The country needs a


new law in this area that gives powers to the police but also create


strong safeguards for the public. That is my challenge to the Lib Dems


and SNP because if they let the current law for, what will they put


in its place? Otherwise they leave people at risk of more loss of


privacy. We are going to work constructively but what I will do is


set out very clear concerns and I will say to Theresa May that if she


does not listen to them, we will withdraw support from the timetable


of this ill because we are not prepared to have a substandard Bill


on the statute book. How will you do this? You have been called gutless


by the Lib Dems who are opposing it and you say that you will withdraw


support further down the line but is that going to do anything to


persuade Theresa May to change her mind? Yes, as I said before this


Bill is on a tight timetable so the government needs our support.


Interesting words from the Liberal Democrats but from my point of view,


it is irresponsible to say, we are going to go into outright opposition


because I don't think that is right or in the interests of the country.


The police and security services need the powers to do the job.


However, a big however, I will set tough test for the government.


Internet connection records, I believe at the moment that they are


far too widely drawn. I believe they should be very strictly limited to


the domains visited on the Internet, not Urls. It needs to be a much


tighter set of information. Secondly, the current Dell says that


the police should access them in respect of any crime, the prevention


and detection of any crime. I don't think that is acceptable. It is not


acceptable for police to look at someone's connection record in


respect of motoring crimes. Only in respect of more serious crimes. What


will they be? It is very easy to agree with it in principle. You


think the government has drawn the net to white in terms of the number


of public bodies which can use the new Lords. -- laws. Where would the


boundaries be? I don't see why the Food Standards Agency or gambling


commission would have access to the connection records and I will warn


the Home Secretary that she should reduce that list before they have


our support. I want the definition and scope of Internet connection


records much reduced and I also want a higher threshold for their use. I


also want a presumption of privacy at the very start of this ilk. It


needs to be clear that if you are to depart from that and intrude on


someone's privacy, you must have very strong reasons for doing so. --


Bill. The current law says that it should be on the grounds of national


security at present. In the past we have seen the label to cover a


multitude of sins. I have worked with trade unionist who have been


investigated by the police for nothing more than going about their


lawful right to strike so we need to have clarity in the legislation that


the law cannot be used in that way. -- unionists. Ordinary people cannot


have their powers taken away from them. People will remember Doreen


Lawrence, whose family were surveilled after the loss of her son


and that is fundamentally unacceptable. The Bill must


completely rule out any possibility of the misuse of these powers. Why


do you not just oppose the Bill? That is a massive shopping list of


changes you want to stop surely your leverage in negotiating would have


been heightened if you had said we are not going to support the Bill


unless you make changes? Outright opposition just drags the whole


thing right down. As I said, the country needs a Bill on the statute


book by the end of the year because the interim legislation is about to


expire. It would be irresponsible in my view to let the legislation fall


without anything in its place. I have spoken to people in the police


force who say the world is going dark on them, they cannot see


communications in the way they used to to. Conversations are in online


forums rather than traditional telephones and they are losing the


ability to disrupt terrorist. That is not acceptable and I think the


SNP and Liberal Democrats are wrong to turn away from these issues. We


are trying to find a reasonable way through. My prices play, there is no


blank cheque. On the six areas outlined in the Commons, I want to


see significant movement from the government on all of them and we do


not see it, I will withdraw support from the timetable on this Bill. The


Labour Party have suspended for a second time a member posted


anti-Semitic tweet. A spokesperson has said Vicki Kirby has been


suspended from the Labour Party pending investigation. Is the Labour


Party dealing with these sorts of incidents quickly enough? Well, we


have today and I am glad to hear that because from what I have seen,


the comments were completely abhorrent. Labour has always led


from the forefront in tackling anti-Semitism, and I am glad to hear


that this action has been taken today, and to be honest, for a party


that believes in true equality and has always fought racism and


xenophobia of all kinds, we have to maintain full public confidence in


our procedures and I want there to be no question at all that our party


has no tolerance at all of any form of anti-Semitism, is phobia or any


other kind of racism. What is your position on the Investigatory Powers


Bill? I am deeply concerned by it because if you listen to Big Brother


What you have analysed this, they say the danger is that this could go


into the extreme of any democratic country. -- Big Brother Watch. The


average unity to catch -- the opportunity to catch criminals


causes a great deal of concern. 95% of people are not involved in any


criminality and yet all of them are going to be brought within this. As


Andrew has said, he does not seem to be putting a very strong case


towards the government by, as you pointed out, just abstaining on


this. Would it be irresponsible to let the whole Bill fall and take the


legislation with it? This goes to the argument of opposition. You


stand on a principle that you want to stand on and say you want to


protect the interest of people, and therefore withdrawing the timetable


is the way forward. I think he should be joining in terms of the


Lib Dems. And opposing the government? To ensure that the


combined elements of strength brings in the changes he wants. That is


typical that we have seen the Labour Party of late, they want their cake


and eating it. Which specific bets would you like to see changed


dramatically? You say that the net would be too wide and trying to many


bits of private data, what about leaving the country without any sort


of surveillance powers? He is suggesting they would not have any


position to be able to protect people, but we've got a vast web of


legislation that the police can use. What I would look at, for example,


when considering individuals using the web, why can councils and other


organisations have the same access? We had similar problems with local


council getting expanded powers, that has caused huge problems with


ordinary members of the public. We are joined by Victoria Atkins, who


has been sitting on the joint Parliamentary committee scrutinising


the plans. Why do you think so many people are opposed to this Bill?


Many people are not opposed to this Bill. Most people recognise the need


to have an act that looks after national security, gives the police


and security services the powers they need but protects civil


liberties. People clearly feel it does not make that balance. Both our


guest said it is an acceptably intrusive. You will be able to sweep


records of every individual and hold them for a year. Andy, on the 4th of


November, when the draft Bill was introduced, praised the Home


Secretary for getting the balance broadly right having listened to


legitimate concerns. But this Bill is absolutely critical. We cannot be


under any illusions. The criminal world is using the Internet, just as


we do. We need to make sure the police and security services have


the powers they need. What is there to make sure the powers are not


exploited? There have been cases when councils have used the powers


to spy on people. There was a great deal of upset about that and the


powers of the council were restricted. But in this bill we


have, for the first time, all of the powers connected together in one


place and we've got a real world leading oversight. Why is it world


reading? The senior judge will be appointed by the Prime Minister and


only set for three years. That does not show great independence. We had


form the Lord -- we heard from the former Lord Chief Justice, that


shows the robust independence of the judiciary. We have real oversight


with judicial commissioners who will be working with secretaries of


state. They will be reviewing the oversight provisions as a whole. The


investigatory Powers Tribunal will be very much overseeing the work of


the security services and the police. But how is bulk interception


and hacking going to help fight terrorism? We got briefings from


GCHQ and others who use these powers. The difficulty of these


powers is by definition there is a limit to what the security services


can say about the use of these powers because if they tell us


everything then the criminals will change their methods accordingly.


But what they have done is produce an explanatory note, try to give


Case studies of how these powers work, and I'm in no doubt, having


seen some of this evidence myself, that these powers are necessary,


just and proportionate. Those are the themes that run throughout this


Bill, I know that Andy was talking earlier about council officials


being able to access data. Any accessing the data will need to fit


with the law, which will be that it is necessary, just and


proportionate. That sort of wording is very vague and it does lack


clarity on when, where and in what circumstances these powers can be


used. You can see there is plenty of room for abuse. I don't accept that,


if we look at communications data, in the past it has been accessing


mobile phone records to see who called when and why. That data is


absolutely critical in 95% of organised crime cases. It is used in


100% of counterterrorism cases. We have to be realistic. The criminal


world has moved on into the digital age. We did ask a Home Office


minister to come onto the programme but none was available. There are 90


days until the EU referendum. This morning the former shadow


business secretary, Labour's Chuka Umunna,


phoned-in to Boris Johnson's radio show on LBC, to take him to task


about his motivations I look at those who are campaigning


for us to come out, look at Michael Gove, I disagree


with Michael on a huge amount, but he is


a man of conviction. You brought a circus to your house


to make the announcement... Instead of campaigning with Michael,


Iain Duncan Smith and others and what you need to understand,


this isn't about you, This is about the prospects


of the British people and their democracy and I have


to say that it is very sad that we are being invited


to continue to remain in a system that I think is less


and less democratic. We have a huge opportunity now


to strike out for freedom and all you hear from the remaining


campaign is gloom and negativity This morning the body


which represents thousands of British businesses -the CBI -


threw its weight behind And the CBI's director general,


Carolyn Fairbairn, joins me now. You gave an interview where you back


to Britain remaining in a reformed EU but today we find out you won't


be officially aligning so will not be able to campaign. Why the change


of heart? We have a very clear mandate from our members. We've been


consulting and serving and we know that our members employ 7 million


people across the UK. They've given us a resounding voice that 80%


support remaining in the EU. However, we don't think economics is


the only issue, we think there are broader issues and we are going to


be making the economic case on their behalf. 80% of your members have


backed staying in. Would it be seen as fence sitting if you don't


officially align yourself to campaign? I really don't think so.


We are not a political organisation and we never have been but we are


very strong in the voice we have for prosperity, growth, employment, and


the general health of the economy. That is the voice we want to have.


It will be about informing the debate so people understand the


implication for jobs and growth and the future of the economy. But you


won't be allowed to spend more than ?10,000 during the six weeks, you


will be limited in outlining the arguments you want to present. If


it's so important, why are you sitting on your hands? Between now


and April the we can do whatever we like, and we will be making the case


strongly. -- April 15. And not after that? It is worth thinking about


what we do, we speak out, talk on platforms, we write. We can continue


to do those things. We've been in discussion with the Electoral


Commission about how we can do that. The important thing is we have a


resounding voice from our members in terms of staying in the European


Union. Were you scarred by your experience in the Scottish


independence referendum? This is about making a case that is the case


that our members would like to make around prosperity and growth, not


about making a political statement. The position we had is an extremely


clear and simple one. Are you breathing a sigh of relief that a


powerful organisation are not going to align themselves? Not


necessarily, when I was a junior barrister we had to prepare cases on


expert witnesses and when you had an expert witness you needed to have an


expert that was generally right on the issues. When you look at the


CBI, they were wrong on the Euro, and 100 years ago they were wrong on


the gold standard. If I was presenting them as a case before a


judge they would throughout the fact that on almost every major political


issue which they've espoused the view, they've been wrong. One other


point. They would be asked whether they have a conflict-of-interest in


this case. It is right and I'm sure that Carolyn would say it, they have


received over ?800,000 from the European Union, whether through


research or other ways, that would be regarded as a conflict of


interest. I think the British public will say, they were wrong before and


will be wrong now. On the issue of conflicts of interests, there are


absolutely none. We provide a commercial service to a small part


of the European Union, less than 0.5% of our revenue. It is a


ludicrous claim. In terms of the position, the euro was a very


different question. What we are facing is an issue, we have enjoyed


a period of real prosperity as part of the European Union and what many


businesses up and down the land are saying is they can prosper within


the European Union. They want to reform it further but they can


prosper. The prospect of uncertainty that will come from triggering


Article 50 and not knowing the alternative... You say this is a


different case but the arguments you are using are identical. You're


using the fear mongering. You say that Britain will fall into a mire


and never be successful in the future. You say that business will


not be able to trade with the EU that we will have no access to these


markets. First of all, the free trade element which only Belarus and


Russia are not part of. Will we be excluded from Turkey and Iceland?


Then you have a single regulatory regime, which we have very little


influence over. Those arguments are identical, they have been


replicated. I don't accept that. What the European Union gives at the


moment is a guarantee of tariff free access to 500 million consumers. The


moment article 50 is triggered, that guarantee is lost. We cannot go


back. For two years, we are OK. When you say the CBI have been wrong,


what about the figures looking at the views of business? People always


say small businesses support leaving but the figures are quite damning.


Just 6% of firms in the CBI think leaving the EU would be in the best


interest of the economy. Why do so few businesses back this? I've seen


quite a few that support leaving the European Union but looking at the


analysis is quite interesting. Over 95% of the businesses in the UK are


less than 50 people but if you look at 73% of this poll, they consist of


businesses over 250 people, which is 0.1%. Why do they not back the exit?


It comes down to the arguments they hear from government affairs


officials, lobbyists, who keep telling them, as I kept hearing,


that these companies will not be able to trade, we would have tariffs


imposed upon us, when none of this is the case. I saw it before as a


lawyer advising companies. I was often in conflict to those lobbyists


who have financial interest. They deal with the regulations that


compounded the cost. Does your poll fairly reflect the businesses in the


UK? Absolutely. What you will see, not one single business survey of


any size of business, even the FSB survey, has a majority in favour of


leaving. You've never explained how you have any influence. Are you


saying small businesses under 50 people, of which there are hundreds


of thousands, are overwhelmingly in favour of staying in the EU? Yellow


might not one survey has shown a majority. There are many businesses


that are global and immediately want to trade and have access to the


single market. We are talking about a small business environment where


many of them value that tariff. When I was a private equity lawyer,


someone wanted to invest in housing in Poland and it did not stop them.


Trade was still going on even though they were not in a common market.


When I was looking at small Internet businesses, exactly the same. Trade


continues irrespective of the countries. You are concerned about


whether there would be tariff, which I argue there would be none, and the


regulations. Now, the campaign over


whether the UK should stay in or quit the European Union


is already a pretty crowded, and occasionally complicated field,


with numerous groups forming ahead of the referendum on


Britain's EU membership. out its campaign to keep


Britain in the EU. Here's what party leader


Natalie Bennett had to say I think probably many people in this


room have been at and will be I think this one will sound and look


a lot different to a lot I am proud to be on an


all-women panel talking I am proud to be on a panel


where we talk positively The fact is that what the EU


is about is what the Green Party Internationalism, thinking


for the long-term, collaborating rather than focusing


on competition, working together And we've been joined


by the Green MP Caroline Lucas. What is the case for staying in the


EU? It is essentially that we believe we have a better chance of


tackling the major challenges we face day, whether it be climate


change, the refugee crisis or terrorism, by working with others


rather than walking away from that, and what the Green Party can bring


to this debate is a different tone and issues. You heard just now that


the debate is dominated by jobs and the economy, and that is incredibly


important and important it gets out there but there are other ways of


mobilising people, reaching out to young people in particular, you may


not be particularly exercised by those issues but are worried about


the environment and social rights and I think the Green Party can run


a strong campaign, Bloom entry to the main campaign but reaching out


to different kinds of people. -- but, elementary. Last year, Jenny


Jones wrote that Green support for the EU should end and the EU stands


for corporate empowerment and the trampling of Greek democracy, is she


wrong? I do think she is wrong. Do you support the transplanted


investment partnership? No, I do not, I oppose it but you have to


make a distinction between the right wing governments that inhabit most


of the seats around the council table and the European institutions.


One of the biggest cheerleaders for TTIP is David Cameron. Anybody who


thinks that by withdrawing from the EU, we will have a cuddly trade


policy, they live in fantasyland and David Cameron will put the same


principles of TTIP into bilateral trade agreements. The best way of


fighting TTIP is to work with our colleagues in Germany, 255 thousand


who were in Berlin recently mobilising against TTIP, it is by


lobbying against members of Parliament to have the power to stop


TTIP, and the people who signed a petition across Europe to stop TTIP.


We should recognise that by putting right wing policies into Europe, you


get right wing policies out. You need to make a distinction between


the right-wing governments around the table and the importance of


working at the EU level. You are supporting staying in the EU because


you don't like the policies of David Cameron. I did not say that. That is


the logic of your argument. If Jenny Jones is indulging in fantasy


politics, issue not right about the contradiction between Green


opposition to TTIP and yet its continued support for the EU? You


won't be able to counter what is going on in the EU by staying in


stock I object to all sorts of thing that the government is doing but I'm


not saying we should turn our back on democracy. I am a democratic. I


will fight that. The question about the referendum is, do we think we


will be safer, greener, safer, longer if we stay in the EU or come


away and all the evidence suggests we have a better chance of a better


outcome for our kids and their kids if we stay in the EU rather than one


thing we can fight the battles by being on R.N.. The party's policies


are against so many things in the EU. They are not happy with the


single market. You sort of thing, what is there left to support but


Mark... By being in the EU. It is beyond conception that we would be


better off dealing with issues like climate change is a single country.


The reason the outcome of the Paris climate talks was better than many


feared was because the EU was working as a block and had so much


more leverage and was able to ensure that of the new countries in the EU


had more ambitious targets. That as a positive campaign, and that is the


difference between the Green campaign and some of the other


remain campaigns. Caroline's position, looking at the environment


and green issues, is very important. And works better by staying in the


EU. She takes that view because she says you need to work together with


people and other countries and organisations but I take an opposite


view to that. It is one of democracy and I don't believe the EU is a


democratic organisation, I think it is anti-democratic and it has shown


that in its history in the way it treated Ireland and Holland and


France and the way it treats Greece in terms of its austerity. The


structure and nature in which the commission controls everything,


creates everything working in secret, means it is an


anti-democratic organisation. As Andrew Huxley put in his book, a


brave New World. Would Greece have had a better chance outside of the


EU? Would it have been better for the treatment of people there, not


being part of this construct? Let me make a distinction between being a


member of the EU and the single currency. The Green Party have never


supported the week and the way in which the Greeks were treated was


wrong but I think it is interesting that even the party in power at the


time is not arguing that we should come out of the EU, they clearly see


that their future is working with others in the EU to reform it. I am


not saying that the whole of the EU with perfect, I have been a member


of the European Parliament and out how cumbersome it can be. -- know


how cumbersome. People elected to the British government are elected


under a far less fair and proportional voting system than the


European Parliament. If we want to stop TTIP is doing gauge with


members of the European Parliament. -- is dying engaging. -- is by


engaging. The 13% of people unemployed across the EU, the


average youth unemployment hits at 13%, the highest levels of suicide


sit there in Greece, the EU is a factor and cause of this. If you are


talking about is rising governments, the 255,000 in Germany would have


more of an impact on a single government than... The EU has been


better at giving access to the TTIP governments than the British


government. If you want to stop TTIP, you need to get to Parliament


about against it, and similarly, other MPs need to vote against it.


Talk to your colleagues and get them there as well. Caroline Lucas, thank


you. The Prime Minister likes to say


he and his party offered the referendum on our membership


of the European Union. UKIP like to say he never would have


if they hadn't grown so strong. 3.8 million votes at the General


election, an MP, and it won If the Referendum is causing


internal trouble inside the Conservative and Labour parties,


UKIP is no different. Giles has been unpicking the real


battles between senior Kippers... they like him, he's very good


at media, with people and on stage. But it's always been an insider


issue that you don't want to get He still has a great


deal of support in UKIP. It's been a long 23 year


slog but you know what? Ukip has grown up enough


to have proper in-fighting, which is fair to say is the same


in many other older parties, I am a man of my word,


I don't break my word. ..and three days later


changed his mind and winning just one seat in Parliament,


with an MP who does not always see eye to eye with the leader,


who did not win a seat, there are other big characters


in this insurgent party who are learning all the time


how to get their way. Four years ago I made this film


for the Daily Politics asking whether Ukip was a one-man band,


that one man being in Nigel Farage, and the party did not like that


sort of question partly They are not any more and that holds


the key to why they might be fighting inside


the party these days. What Nigel wants Nigel gets used


to be the way but it isn't any more and actually, that might be quite


a good thing. Nigel Farage had a big influence


over the Ukip's NEC, Lots of new members were elected


to that last year and there were rumours around


at the time that Farage was thinking of abolishing the NEC


and having a different kind of governing body which he appointed


people to do. As a result the NEC is throwing


its weight around a bit more and we saw this with the selection


for candidates in A list was put forward which Farage


did not like and he came back with his own list for the NEC


and the NEC said, right, we will scrap this and go out


to members and get a ballot on this. This was the first time that the NEC


really pushed back against Nigel and he did not get


the results he wanted. He did not want Neil Hamilton top


of the list and Neil Hamilton got on the list and now he has


a good chance of being elected I am delighted I am the choice


of Ukip members in Wales. Whatever Nigel Farage's views are,


he did not have a vote in this election process but the ordinary


Ukip members in Wales did. Win - they can claim a victory


for their 23 year cause. Lose by just by a little,


they can scoop up those crushed by the narrow defeat as did


the SNP after the indy ref. But it's also providing grit to some


of the internal rivalries - party lines blur, and some


in the party back different It will get to the point


where they are fighting so hard Nigel is not someone who likes this


kind of check and balance, he is someone who is sure


of himself, he points at his many accomplishments and you can't deny


this, he has taken the party from nowhere to winning


the European elections, to getting millions of votes


and basically getting He looks at it and goes I delivered


this, why are you questioning me? Other people in the party


want to change the tone of Ukip, I can't see how it will be resolved


and let some nicknames really shift Owen Bennett ending the report.


Douglas Carswell, Neil Hamilton, Lord Pearson, all senior figures who


found themselves briefed against by the leadership. What is it about


Farage where he falls out with everybody? I don't necessarily think


he everybody? I don't necessarily think


political party, people have very strong views about Wallace or


direction or the ideas and then you have a robust argument with the


leader sometimes. I have had discussions with Nigel. Arguments


question my Antony you can call them argument or discussion. I respect


the fact he is willing to engage with you about the debate. Is he


willing to engage? It sounds like he is losing the iron grip he had on


the party and maybe that is a good thing. Every leader comes to a stage


where... You have to look at this, this man has achieved what most


people have not, which is force our government to have a referendum that


people are about to have. They took us through the elections that we won


in the election and he did not do that through force of will but


actually listening to other people about direction and views and


getting the message through. I don't think it is fair to say that he does


not listen to people because I know he does. Does he take a strong view?


Absolutely and that is what parties do. Is it a good thing that Farage


is not getting his way in the way he once did? He is actually being


challenged by Neil Hammerton and said he did not wanting to get top


of the list but he is. Is it good? It shows we have a party that has


more people involved in the discussions, there is more openness


in the way these discussions come into the press, I don't and that is


necessarily the right thing to do so, but what it also shows is that


underneath there will always discussions about whether people


succeeded or not. Not because Nigel wanted them to but because there


were differences in the party. What do you think will happen to


Douglas Carswell after the referendum? There is a difference in


style between him and Nigel Farage. Is he likely to jump back to the


Conservatives? I would not know what Douglas wants to do. He is as


passionate as me and the other members of the party in leaving the


European Union and is campaigning to do so. If I was to make a guess, I


believe Douglas would take the issues he has at hand about opening


up democracy, bringing more opportunity for people, to get


involved and try to push that through into the policies of Ukip


and others. Will there be a leadership contest after the


referendum? I would not know about that. Do you think there will be?


I'm not sure, what happens after June the 23rd is there will be some


major issues to face. If we win, and I believe we will, from seeing


people campaigning on the streets, we need to ensure that we leave. We


will be concentrating on making sure Cameron commits to his word of


leaving the European Union. Tomorrow is Budget Day -


complete with Downing Street photo-calls featuring


the Chancellor's red budget box, discussion of what the Chancellor


will drink during his speech, and the weighty budget red books


which provide all the detail conveniently left out


of the statemetn. It's perhaps the biggest day


of the year in the Chancellor's calendar - but it's also a tricky


day for the leader of the opposition who has to respond to the Budget


speech having only just In a moment we'll discuss the best


way to prepare to give First though, here's how the last


Labour opposition leader and last Conservative opposition leader


coped with the task. Today, everyone can see what an


utter mess this Labour government have made of the British economy.


The fastest rise in unemployment in history, the worst recession


since World War II, and the worst peacetime public


As of today, any claim they have ever made to economic competence


Mr Deputy Speaker, the hopes of millions of working


people are more important than his hopes of being the future


We know this Chancellor is personally ambitious


but when the economic recovery is still fragile,


he should be ambitious not just for himself but for the country.


We've been joined by Torsten Bell, former policy advisor


to Ed Miliband, who was involved with prepping the former labour


How much site do you get of the contents of the statement? I have


worked for chancellors and Shadow Chancellor is and the job, you might


think is harder for chancellors because they need to put together a


budget, whereas all the opposition leader has got to do. It turns out


that the Chancellor has thousands of civil servants and Leader of the


Opposition has probably got about five people stuck in a room, not


even with him in the chamber. It is definitely a harder gig. Do you get


much of a chance, usually the Shadow Chancellor will say, thank you for


giving me a little bit beforehand, what are we talking about? We


talking about nothing. You get a few pages of a four with heavily


redacted text. It might tell you something has happened to


productivity. What has changed is the British newspapers give you more


advanced site of parts of the budget. That has made the job


slightly easier than it was in the 1990s when Ken Clarke believed in


secrecy. What do you do to prepare? One of the things about budgets is


they do two things, not just the announcement of policy measures, it


is also a state of the nation debate. One of the jobs of Leader of


the Opposition is to make their case about what they think the state of


the nation is. Clearly, you can write most of that in advance. You


look at what is in the newspapers and plan for what you think might be


announced and hopefully you show yourself to be fleet of foot in the


chamber. That's the most difficult bit of all. In terms of what goes on


behind-the-scenes, it must be pretty nerve wracking. Particularly if you


set up a narrative that is then shot down by George Osborne before you


stand up. That would be a bad result. You are looking to avoid


that happening. It has happened. Ed Balls had a difficult time on one


occasion. It is difficult for everybody and I would say different


politicians deal with it in different ways and the other thing


you cannot tell from watching it on TV is the sheer wall of noise. It is


always load in the House of Commons, budget day and particular government


benches after the Chancellor has given a speech are particularly


loud. Keeping going through that wall of noise is not


straightforward. What about the difference between the Shadow


Chancellor and the Leader of the Opposition. How different is it? The


Shadow Chancellor answers the statement. The overall shape of the


challenge is the same but clearly autumn is slightly lower key. It


depends on the individuals in those posts. Some have a good grasp of


economics, some are slightly less versed. Who are you thinking of? I


could not possibly say. It is an unenviable task having to stand up


and respond on those occasions. What would you do to prepare? Pretty much


the same lines as this. When you are a barrister you need to prepare for


some severe judges. You've got to marshal the arguments as best as you


can. I would back that up with evidence, prepares statements and


lines, then use experience of debating style. The other thing to


say is the Chancellor says a lot and he speaks for an hour, he is


prepared that in advance. The job of the Leader of the Opposition is not


to respond to everything. The big things, if you don't say anything


about the big things then people like you and others have a harsh


judgment but they definitely should not be in the business of saying, on


your 15th point, I think you could improve this. The challenge is to


have something to say on the state of the nation and respond to the big


things in the budget. How prepared is Jeremy Corbyn?


I have no idea but I'm sure he's been doing the preparation. Do you


think he will do well? I've no idea. I don't know where he's up to. Top


tips? The world has changed and in the olden days you passed notes into


the chamber but nowadays there is text message and Twitter and I


recommend he uses those. That very neatly moves into the last item,


free advice. Now, if you're watching this show


close to a computer or a smartphone, chances are you are interacting


with us on Twitter using But did you know Twitter is fast


approaching its tenth anniversary? Joining us to discuss


its increasingly important role in political life -


using slightly more than 140 characters, I hope -


is Lewis Wiltshire, Twitter's senior But before we discuss the highs,


let's remind ourselves of some David Cameron himself made the first


prominent Twitter gaffe when he told Absolute Radio in 2009


that "too many tweets make a bleep" - a prophetic lesson


he was to fail to learn himself. The next year Bristol East MP


Kerry McCarthy learnt to her cost that revealing postal vote counts


during the General Election was a big no-no - she was cautioned


by police for election fraud. Perhaps the most popular gaffe


was committed by Ed Balls in 2011 after he tweeted his name instead


of searching for it. Ever since, each April 28th,


thousands pay homage by tweeting Tweeting photos has often got


politicians into trouble. In June 2013 George Osborne posted


a photo of him eating a burger Those lampooning him


included Eric Pickles, who tweeted a picture


of him in similar pose, There were more serious consequences


for Emily Thornberry when she posted a photo of a house draped


in St George's flags while campaigning in the Rochester


Strood by-election. Miliband himself was responsible


for some sloppy tweeting following the death of Bob Holness


in 2012, saying that "a generation will remember him fondly


from Blackbusters". In 2013 David Cameron wrote "@IDS-MP


and I are determined Sadly for the Prime Minister @IDS-MP


is a parody account of the Work Pensions Secretary -


the real Iain Duncan Smith And who can forget UKIP -


who complained that @reporterboy - that's our Giles the way -


had filmed a piece about Actually, it was Westminster


Cathedral. Lewis Wiltshire from


Twitter has joined us. No doubt enjoying those


recollections. We've seen lots of politicians messing up. Therefore


the grace of God go I. What is your favourite Twitter mistake? The Ed


Balls one, I am fond of, he still tweaked it every year. What they


show is not only is everything that MPs say a matter of public record,


that's always been the case, but also, with Twitter, everybody has a


voice. The voting public can challenge MPs. Is it just an echo


chamber? Are you just seeing these sentiments reverberating back? I


don't think so because we see all ranges of the political spectrum


reflected back. In any group that big you will always get political


views covered but all the parties use it and followers use it as well.


Is it worth the risk? There are loads more mistakes. Is Iain Duncan


Smith right not to be on Twitter? 88% of UK MPs are on Twitter. They


use it in a very powerful way to connect to the electorate. They also


use it in a way that is dialogue. Everyone has a voice, people can


speak truth to power. They can challenge MPs and ask them


questions. Are you a fan of Twitter? I have made mistakes. I feel that


Twitter users will go in search of mine. But it is essential to get


messages out. How difficult is it to distil your thoughts into 140


characters? You get better at it very quickly. Is that the truth of


it? I think politicians have found an authenticity of voice. Barack


Obama, the most followed, in the UK as well, Nicola Sturgeon, David


Cameron, Boris, others. Nigel Farage as well. Right across the range.


Politicians that speak with an authenticity of voice.


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


Which TV couple have been discussing their trip to Chequers


for a dinner with Tony Blair, over which they discussed


the whereabouts of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction


Was it a) Adrian Chiles and Christine Bleakley


b) Richard and Judy c) Andrew Neil and Jo Coburn


or d) Ant and Dec So Steven what's the correct answer?


I think it was Ant and Dec. It was Richard and Judy! I thought it was


obvious. Tomorrow is budget day and we will


have full coverage. I will be presenting from Bolton.


You and I - we're gonna change this country...


He said, "I am President of the United States,


# All my friends know the low rider... #


Download Subtitles