18/03/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 18/03/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Afternoon folks, welcome to the Daily Politics.


Protests on the tampon tax, personal independence payments,


and now a VAT increase on energy saving products -


why is the Chancellor under such sustained attack from his own MPs


David Cameron and other EU leaders meet in Brussels to agree


on what they'll offer the Turks to take back migrants -


but will the Turkish Prime Minister accept the deal?


The papers aren't frightened to tell us what they think about the EU -


but will you be taking any notice of what they say?


And did two ten-year-olds, with a bit of help from


Alistair Campbell, get the better of me on CBBC this morning?


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


two guests who I hope won't be as difficult as those girls,


Rosa Prince, author of "Comrade Corbyn",


who also writes for the Telegraph, and Sun columnist, Trevor Kavanagh.


So just 48 hours since George Osbone delivered it, Wednesday's budget


seems to be coming under multiple attack from his own MPs.


And after hostile press reaction, there are signs it might not be


going down too well with the public either.


you just hate politicians with prepared sound bites.


A YouGov poll for The Times today shows 38% of the public think


Wednesday's Budget was unfair, just 28% thought the opposite.


And 51% now think the government is handling the economy badly.


Conservative MPs are also queuing up to lay into the Budget.


Anne-Marie Trevelyan has led the rebellion on the so-called


Tampon Tax, describing it as "fundamentally wrong".


A survey of Tory MPs show four out of five want to tear into the Sugar


Bolton MP Chris Green speaks for many when he describes it


John Redwood is kicking off about a move to increase VAT


on energy saving materials like loft insulation and solar panels.


And David Burrowes is amongst those ganging up against the Chancellor's


plans to cut funding for Personal Independence Payments


or PIPs for everywhere in the UK apart from Northern Ireland,


saying his decision "takes a backward step from


Last night, Education Secretary struggled to defend George Osborne's


proposed changes to PIPs when quizzed about it on Question


I think overall we want there to be control of the welfare budget, that


is something we have made very clear in our manifesto, we also made very


clear we are not going to balance the books on the back of the most


vulnerable and the disabled and we still hold to that promise. First of


all have too finished the consultation and the conversations


we are having with MPs, but also with disability groups and others,


before we even bring any legislation forward. It was interesting last


night, the Education Secretary implying there were still a


consultation period going on, almost that nothing really had been


decided. This morning it was said she was speaking out of turn and


there would be more discussion, but the government was like position had


not changed. We are joined by Conservative MP Paul Scully. On the


PIPs, is there a sense that the government is in retreat, and that


if it isn't, there would be a Tory rebellion? My particular position


with that is that we have had the consultation over the last few


months, and it is important we carry on talking about this issue.


I really don't think it needs to be completed with the budget. It was


unfortunate in many ways it was announced with a budget, because we


need to make sure that personal independence payments work for


people, especially the most needy. Would you vote for them at the


moment? I want to see the detail, it is all very well having a couple of


lines on a budget statement, but it is all about the detail, seeing the


consultation. What about the vat issues, what is your beef? Again, it


is not in the budget, this is something that the European court


actually overruled the UK Government, saying that we can't


continue to charge 5% of tax VAT, on energy-saving products, and it is


absolutely outrageous that the European court... What have we got


to charge? The full 20%. So we have a situation where we can look at a


sugar tax, where we are penalising people are doing something the


government doesn't believe is right but we can't reward people for the


thinks is a good thing. Frankly, we need to leave the EU, that is why I


am campaigning to leave it on June 23. So this is grist to your mail,


that the insulation tax on insulation products that we are all


meant to be doing is not determined by Westminster but by Brussels? The


FT, when they cover the European court decision spoke of the fact


that they thought that the European Commission preferred subsidies to


VAT relief, so basically a hand-out or someone else's money, rather than


a cut in VAT. These should be UK decisions. Labour is going to put


down an amendment to reverse on the insulation tax, will you vote for


it? It is something I am seriously considering. I always vote as one


member of a Conservative government, I would love to think that people in


Sutton voted for me personally, I have limited currency, so when I


want to make a point, I rarely want to make sure it is actually going to


make that point, that we will see some changes as a result. I look at


the wording, how it affects the budget, and if it doesn't affect the


good things that have happened, of which there are many in the budget,


then I will support the amendment. Ayew that interested in solar panels


or wind turbines or is it just a good stick to beat the government?


For me it is raising the point of our role as a member of the EU. I


have the confidence that we can stand and look globally, outward,


rather than the inward looking European Union. That is where I am


looking and my focus. Is your Chancellor a bit of a busted flush


on the back benches? Not at all. He has raised thousands of people out


of paying 40% tax that should not have been in that category in the


first place. The fact he has improved small business rates


relief, as someone who ran a small business or 20 years before I was


elected, that is rarely important. He fall went any major pension


reform, he did not put up the fuel escalator. If you don't use that now


when will you ever use it? He tried to construct a budget that didn't


make any enemies on the Tory backbenches, and he is now facing


multiple attacks on the Tory backbenchers from people like you.


As I say, I do think I am attacking the Chancellor, I am attacking the


fact we can't make our decisions within the European Union, which is


part of a wider campaign in the lead up to Independence Day, shall we


say, on June 23. That is really my focus. If you look at the budget,


there are many good things for the Chancellor to do. His chances of


being the next Tory leader are not looking so good. That is a decision


to come. I really haven't even started to think about that,


frankly. That is hard to believe. It is just the media who talk about


that. It is always the media. If Mr Osborne is such a considered and


insightful political strategist, why is he always in a mess? This is a


very good question, he is a very good tactician but I am not sure


about the strategy, and I think this is more than an Omni shambles. Not


just things like the tap in tax and the sugar tax on all the other


things that have caused so much anger, we will still overshoot on


the deficit, we still have a ?1.75 trillion national debt, and there is


a very good chance it could be blown completely of course between now and


the general election, let alone between now and the next leadership.


What is your take on the Chancellor's statement? He is a rare


politician that is extremely tactful -- tactical and insightful except


when it comes to his own image. I think he has done damage with the


public, the public to begin with the not too, and he has done nothing in


this budget or the intervening years between becoming Chancellor to


really improve that and I don't understand why. Politicians are


normally so vainglorious, it is all about making themselves look good.


In a way it is quite proficient that he doesn't seem to be to do it for


himself. You get the impression he is a Chancellor for when things are


going right. But as a Chancellor when things go wrong, he doesn't


have the connection with the public that will help them get through the


things that are going wrong. In theory everything is going right, or


would have been up until this moment because the Conservatives are in


power, they can do things of that have never dreamt of being able to


do. He could have taken bold decisions which would have been


applauded certainly on his own side of the house and in the end would


have perhaps borne fruit in time for the next election. He failed on all


of these fronts, and we saw this gigantic national debt and still


growing deficit. Let's begin with Tory rebellion morning, we are doing


a service for you by doing a survey. We're joined now from Bristol


by the Conservative MP, Johnny Mercer, who is concerned


about the changes to The arm payments to disabled people


that are paid to -- these are payments to disabled people. What is


your complaint about what the government is planning? Andrew, you


will have to come back to be because I have a different voice coming


through my, not you. Really, what kind of voice is it? You sound like


a lady, actually. The operation is only half finished. You can hear me,


can't you? There is another voice in my BMI can't hear Andrew. Hold on,


there you go. Can you hear me now? Yes, I can hear you, but also three


other different voices. We can go for it. We don't want to do that, we


will try to sort that out, Mr Mercer and we will come back to you on


that. And go away, our finest technicians are on it as we speak.


Is there a kind of mood of rebellion in the Tory backbenches at the


moment, partly sparked off because you are going your separate ways on


the referendum? I think there is a lot of open debate. I'm not sure if


it is the same as rebellion. People are looking at if you different


things. We talked about the budget, this is why I think it is wider than


just a budget. We are looking at the European referendum, how the


European decisions affect our budget and finances, so that is quite a


fundamental issue, you are absolutely right. But I think the


2015 intake and the 2010 intake before, our independent thinkers, I


don't think we are party apparatchiks, but we do understand


that the fundamental things, we are not serial rebel is, it doesn't get


you that far if you just seen as a serial rebel. Apart from Jeremy


Corbyn, obviously. People don't like parties that are perennially


divided. If this is a bitter campaign, and it has been quite


bitter so far, even if the Prime Minister wins the referendum, it


could be quite difficult just to return to business as usual.


Frankly, I think some of the things in the periphery, the personal


attacks, the personal things, the driven debates, are something that


we just don't need. This is a really, really important decision


for the country. It will affect us for the next few decades, and that


is why we have got to concentrate on the issues. Is it not surprising


that, having had to retreat on making essentially cuts on tax


credits for the working poor, that he would not have been a lot more


careful in what was being planned for the disabled? If you have to


retreat from the working poor and many want to take on the disabled,


maybe you need some new advisers? I think so, and also the presentation


of the 2.2 billion saved, the savings on the PIPs and the 2.2


billion being spent on middle-class tax breaks is so neatly discernible


that it just makes people think they are robbing the poor to pay the


rich. And that just doesn't go down well. Mr Corbyn has been given an


open goal. He has, that is why we have seen him have probably his best


week since he has been leader. And doing not badly in the polls. Any


Labour member who takes that to seriously would be wise to remember


Ed Miliband. But it helps, it also means he is there, when you are


doing like that in the polls, the Parliamentary party is running out


of excuses to mount a coup against him. Yes, I never thought it was


that likely. I agree. Just because of the scale of the victory and the


two fingers up to the people who joined the party. And it goes back


to the electorate who chose in the first place. It solidifies his


place, he is not going anywhere. The one thing I thought interesting with


his budget response was not just what he said but how he said it.


Jeremy Corbyn, just because he has been around for so long, he sounded


so confident, whereas usually a Leader of the Opposition as we all


know, that is the toughest gig. It is not your field of expertise, it


is not something you are dealing with day in, day out, but you have


to respond to a budget you have not had any pre-sight of, and he spoke


very well. It could have been leaked. Most people knew what was


coming. I have always said it would be a mistake to underestimate Jeremy


Corbyn. I watched his budget response and it was pretty good. A


lot of people divided it and said it was knee jerk stuff, but I thought


he handled it quite well. Let's see if lines to Bristol Arbor -- are up


without interference, Mr Mercer, does it sound like me? It sounds


like you. I apologise for that, but let's proceed nevertheless, what is


your beef about the government's changes to the disabled?


I just think we need to be really careful. We're talking about the


most vulnerable group in society, the bottom 20% in terms of former


ability. This is their lifeline. We've got to be ready careful. We've


got to get it right and we've got to get the message right. At the same


time we have to accept that this is an ongoing, fluid process. There


have been judgments in the last 18 months which have PIP made claimants


go up treble in that time. We need to maintain our ability and agility


to work with that and make sure the money is going to the right people


so that we are looking after our most vulnerable, and at the same


time in courage and those who can work to get into work, which is what


this Government was elected to do. I do have concerns about it. Whenever


we're dealing with the most vulnerable in our communities, we


need to be relief careful. We need to communicate the policy properly.


It can be enormously worrying. The PIP payment is a real lifeline for a


lot of people in Plymouth. How widely are your concerns shared by


your bank bench colleagues? I don't know, I've just arrived from


Washington last night. I will look at this and interrogate it. I'm a


compassionate conservative, I don't know any other form of conservatism


than that. I was concerned and I am concerned in terms of how we


communicate this properly. But I'm not going to stick my head in the


sand and say we walk away from a problem where there may be abuse and


there may be duplication and sake we don't have time to fight that fight,


because we have too, if we're going to make sure that we're giving our


most vulnerable people as much money and support as we can, as much as


they deserve. In dealing with the most vulnerable groups in society,


you need to be very careful and we need to be very -- we need to work


very hard to communicate what we're doing to those groups. There is some


I've seen some evidence of that. But I've also seen that money lost in


fraud to people making claims that they're not entitled to is peanuts


in the overall scheme of things, and indeed the bureaucratic


inefficiencies of the department in the handing out of these benefits


costs more money than whatever is lost, small as it is, through fraud.


I agree with that, Andrew. There has been a lot of work in this area.


Fraud and abuse of it is minimal. You have to balance that with the


policy, as it was first presented in the media, that was that PIP was


just going to get taken away. If you are on PIP, it's going to be


heartbreaking. If there are policies we can make Tibet improve care for


our most vulnerable people, we have to do that. We must work hard to


make sure that people understand we not adjusting most people's


payments. This government is spending more and more on


disability. We have to be fair. The budget this year is ?50 billion, ?34


billion on defence, so we are prioritising this correctly. We have


to be very careful if we're dealing with these groups. According to the


ISS, several hundred thousand, it may require more than eight tweet,


several hundred thousand disabled people could disability payments


altogether or see them but quite substantially. That would be a cut


that would matter a lot that these people, because they are not on that


much money. They are generally on low levels of pay. You take away a


bit of the disabled payments they get and that will cause real pain to


people who I would suggest are already suffering a. You're


absolutely right. I don't want to blow my own trumpet but I spend so


much of my time working with these groups. I'm in it for that 20% who


we have to look after, for whom life is really difficult. I work with the


Special Olympics. There have been veterans charities ringing my phone


since this came out, talking about this policy. We have to be careful


with projections and what it actually means. If there are points


coming off someone's PIP assessment, it doesn't necessarily mean they're


going to lose money. This government is committed to looking after its


most vulnerable. The Prime Minister has said that. I would welcome


people to come to my surgeries in Plymouth or wherever that may be, if


there are the most vulnerable who are being this affected by this,


because that is not the intention and we need to do better as a


government to get that across. Naturally we asked for the


government to give us someone we could speak to about this, either


from the Treasury or the Department for Work and Pensions, but none were


available, not even the Downing Street cat.


The question for today is all about a suggestion


for a new tax that's been made by the Environment


Yes, another new tax, the Conservatives are very


open to the idea these days, it seems.


At the end of the show, Rosa and Trevor will give us


Now, a UKIP candidate for the the Welsh Assembly in May


has been attacked after accusing Eastern European immigrants


in Cardiff of causing a "hygiene problem" in the city.


Gareth Bennett, who tops the party's list in South Wales Central,


and they have a list system in Wales, is reported to have made


the comments in a newspaper interview.


We're joined now from Cardiff by Mr Bennett.


Mr Bennett, what is it that you said? Well, Andrew, I alluded to


waste problems in this area of Cardiff. These have intensified in


recent years with the arrival in that area of high numbers of Eastern


European immigrants, and I suggested that the problem may be connected


with that development in the area. I see you are having trouble with your


earpiece, like our other guests. I can hear you now. Thank you very


much. You said there is a hygiene problem. What is that problem? It is


caused by black bags being left outside houses. There is lots of


anecdotal evidence of this. There is a piece in the South Wales Echo


demonstrating that very problem. You might be able to pick out the large


number of black bags that have simply been thrown in the front


garden not on a rubbish collection day. These are the local residents


complaining. That is clear evidence that there is such a problem. Once I


get into the assembly, I will be representing the views of these


residents. It seems rather strange, the suggestion that I should not be


representing their very genuine concerns about this issue. What


evidence do you have that there is -- if there is this rubbish problem


that it is migrants who are causing it? I don't have any firm evidence


to give you now but if you wish I can come back in a week's time with


lots of residents from that area and we can have a talk live on air if


you want about that problem. Many have connected it in talks with me


to the Eastern European influx, and I'm happy to bring those people into


the studio. The only problem is, Andrew, you might need a bigger


studio. Indeed, you could say that in general... Would it not have been


checked the evidence first, to have established the evidence before


making the accusation? The accusation that Eastern European


migrants are causing "A hygiene problem". Yes, that would have made


sense. Why didn't you do it? Well, where is this data caps? Which


council can tell me the connection? There is very clear empirical


evidence, Andrew. 15 years ago we did not have this level of


immigration in this area of Cardiff, and we did not have that level of


hygiene problem. That is clear empirical evidence. Why'd you


believe it is Eastern European migrants responsible for this?


Because many people have told me so. But you haven't yet established any


independent evidence. Have you spoken to any of these Eastern


European migrants to see if they are responsible and see what they say?


So I go up to them and say, please sir, are you responsible for the


black bag problem? What do you think their response to that is going to


be? Yes or no I would imagine. And a punch in the face possibly. So you


are suggesting they are violent? Not in them a plea, but if you want to


do that, you can come down to Cardiff and see what the responses.


Do your party now want to remove you from the list? I believe that may be


the case but I don't know, I haven't spoken to anyone from the party


today. They've been trying to get a hold of you. Well, I was coming on


this programme. I have sent them a problem with the draft of a legal


letter so that if they try to deselect me without due process,


they will face a legal action from me for lost earnings of ?300,000.


They are aware of this. If they believe my comments have brought the


party into disrepute, we could have a rerun of the candidate selection


process in which I was elected as the lead candidate by the Ukip party


members throughout Wales. If they want to, we could have a rerun of


that. If the Ukip party members think my comments are in any


distributable, they can vote appropriately. It would be


interesting to see if they that rerun ballot where I would place in


it. It sounds like you're going to be fighting among yourselves. Is it


true that you don't like knocking on doors? You don't think politicians


should not on people's doors to get people's votes? Lots of people are


watching Coronation Street and they don't want to get interrupted from


doing that. With canvassing, you get a lotto skewed results. I've seen a


lot of candidates campaigning for the first time he gets election


fever, they come in saying they're going to win the seat and they get


15%. When you knock on people's doors and they are watching


Coronation Street, they are liable to tell you they will vote for you,


they will often tell you anything to get rid of you. There is a limited


scope for canvassing. There is a base for it but not always. Are you


Ukip's new loose cannon? I understand you described the Labour


leader of Cardiff Council as brain dead? I believe I did say that, but


that view is widely held in Cardiff from even within the Labour Party.


Though you're not pushing to retract that at all? No, I never retract


anything I say at all. At least we know where you stand and you did


answer the questions straight. Now, EU leaders meeting in Brussels


have agreed a package of measures to offer Turkey in return


for the country taking back the thousands of migrants arriving


in Greece every day. Many of them the islands and many


make it onto the mainland. The plan is an essential part


of the EU strategy to solve the migrant crisis, with fears


that the numbers attempting the crossing will increase again


as summer approaches. It has already been at record levels


in the winter months. Let's talk to our correspondent


in Brussels, Ben Wright. As I understand it, the European


Union has agreed the broad outlines of what it's going to offer, based


on the Merkel package. Do we have any idea yet what the Turkish


reaction is? Many floors up from where I'm standing they are having


that discussion right now. Donald Tusk, president of the Council,


Jean-Claude Juncker, they are all having small groups of meetings with


the key players to back an agreement hammered out before the rest of the


28 members of the European Union sit down together and try and sign this


off. The European Union agreed their negotiating position over five hours


of talks last night. Now they're trying to do a deal. There is no


guarantee there going to get one because there are a lot of sticking


points. We know Angela Merkel really wants a deal, but for instance,


Cyprus is not going to just sign off new accession talks with Turkey


unless the Turkish government and accept that the Cypriot government


is the government for the whole island. Greece is demanding more


personnel to go down and help put this plan into practice. There are


all sorts of hurdles to clear, despite what clearly is eight strong


desire from the Turkish side and from the European Union to get an


agreement. As I understand it, the deal will certainly in the early


stages of it involve 72,000 Syrians and about 72,000 Syrians in Greece,


would they just go back to Turkey? Is there any idea what then happens


to be 72,000, because when I look at what is coming out of Eastern


European capitals, they say they are not going to take any? Viktor Orban,


the leader if you like for that central Eastern European bloc,


absolutely adamant that he may even veto a deal here, really angry about


the prospect of Syrian refugees as part of this plan being sent from


Turkey, and" had out among other EU countries, not the UK I should say,


we are not -- men handed out with a quota. There is real resistance


there. This is the second part of the deal, the first part is that


from an unspecified date, perhaps as early as Sunday, anyone arriving


illegally on Greece's shores will be turned around, maybe within hours,


possibly at the maximum of days, and is sent straight back to Turkey, and


on this one-for-one exchange of serious -- Syrians begins. But the


practical implication of the plan has huge questions around it, aside


from the big broad concerns about the legality of the plan in the


first place will stop this is why several leaders going into these


talks, President Hollande last night for instance, were not suggesting


that a deal here is inevitable, even though, as I said, everybody knows


that another migration crisis is weeks away as the weather starts to


warm up, and they need something in place that they hope can stop people


making that journey across the GMC to Greece. Just finally, when I used


to cover these summits, we used to judge them on links, whether we


needed one, two or three shirts. How many have you got with you? I have a


few shirts. I have just heard somebody say they may need some new


pants, so I think there is an expectation here that this could go


on a bit. I will keep you posted. BBC News through out the day will


keep you posted. And I'm joined now in the studio


by the Labour MEP Claude Moraes, and from Wrexham by UKIP


MEP Steven Woolfe. Claude Moraes, let me come to you


first, are you comfortable in doing a deal like this with Turkey? Know,


and that it would work as well is going to be a really moot point.


Ashun no. This one-for-one, has not been tried around the world, perhaps


Australia, push backs, and many take one, it is going to be extremely


difficult, but if I tell you where it is coming from, it is coming from


genuine crisis. Secondly, I was speaking to the Greek Immigration


Minister on Wednesday, and he said Turkey will be part of a solution of


sorts. So you have to try something. The final solution to this, if you


like... Not the best phrase. I just realised, a compassionate and


organised solution to this in the end will involve Turkey in some way.


I think it is more realistic now, because you are dealing with Turkey


not getting much, this views a realisation has 72 conditions.


Taxation is as far away as it ever was. Cyprus is saying no to the


talks, France will block it, every parliament has to say yes to it.


Accession is not even on the cards. So that's kind of Spectre is just


not there. Let me go to Stephen Walsh. Even if the European Union


did not exist, Europe would be facing a migrant crisis, and in some


collective way we would have to deal with that, and we would have to deal


with Turkey, wouldn't it? Absolutely. I have always said on


the show and in others that this crisis is a combination of many


factors, not just the war happening in Syria, but the regime change we


had in Libya, the impact in Afghanistan and Iraq, and of course


the economic costs of having trade between the European Union and other


countries in Africa that puts tariff on those countries, very


excessively. So the only solution to this would be a global solution run


by the United Nations, and not placing the pressure solely on the


EU. That is the big thing that has been missing from the whole of this


crisis from the start. The UN, the international community have not


come together, they have all left it in the hands of the EU, and there


are potential solutions to this. Take, for example, at the moment


Russia has helped cleanse Isis from the northern part of Syria. There is


a real opportunity now for the world to come together and have a safe


zone in that area to allow Syrians to come back and create some kind of


Marshall plan to rebuild that country and let those people have


their lives back again. Can I just suggest to you though that if it has


been difficult enough to get a concerted and collected action


between 28 European members all in the same continent and union, that


getting the kind of UN reaction that you are calling for, and the scale


that would be required would be, to put it politely, unprecedented and


unlikely? I don't think it would be unprecedented and unlikely, not like


this potential deal, which is really reckless, foolish and potentially


dangerous for the U -- long-term future of Europe as a continent. If


you look at the way they dealt with the Kurdish area in northern Iraq,


when we had to deal with Saddam Hussein, the world community came


together and created a safe sound. That was basically the British and


the Royal Marines that did that, that was John Major with his air


cover, it wasn't the UN. I am suggesting here that on that


occasion we came to a very positive, swift solution to enable the Kurds


to live freely without the pressure that came from Saddam Hussein. Now


we have great opportunity with Isil being depleted. Where is any


evidence that Isil is depleted, any evidence I have seen has suggested


that the Russians have not been attacking Islamic State at all.


There is other evidence that they have cleansed Isis from that area,


Assad has tried to look after that area himself and create some


security, but the key point is that the Russians have backed down to the


extent where they say there should be talks in Geneva, this is a great


opportunity actually for the world to come together and said let's


create this positive framework. Let us put that to Claude Moraes, what


is your reaction? The UN might be a better vehicle the doing this? Is.


Cotton, the UN are providing the tents you see in Turkey where there


are almost -- it is a 4-star dichotomy. The UN is there. America


take more, the Canadians could take more, and they are. The


international community has to take more Syrians, no question, but when


these countries, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey became saturated, they were


always going to come to Europe, whether there was a European Union


or not, that was going to happen, and this seems to be conveniently


forgotten by those who want to just talk about the EU in this sense. The


question is now what are you about the European crisis, Turkey will be


some solution, but there is some realism in taking it down a notch


and realising it won't just be about Turkey, which is what happened in


the original discussion. There may be, Rosa, some kind of deal snatch


Cox together, but I suggest there is a fair chance, put it no higher than


that, that it could start to unravel very quickly, and that could be the


backdrop to our referendum campaign, and it could well be unhelpful to


those who wish us to remain in the European Union. I think it goes both


ways, because the images that happen with each refugee surge that we see


coming in the spring and summer, they are directly opposed to each


other. On the one hand, you have streams of people coming in, and the


concerns that our friends in Cardiff talked about, what that means for


national countries. But then you also see these horrific sights of


children dying, a little boy washed up on the beach last year I think


change the whole nature of the debate last summer. It also


suggested, did it not, that the European Union and not stepped up to


the crease to deal with this huge problem, and now many months after


it, it is still struggling to find a way forward. VE is useless, -- the


EU is useless... I should point out that other people think it is not. I


would argue that it would be worse because what this crisis shows is


that you need to come together, and as you say, the deal being stitched


together today is not going to be a perfect deal, it is not even going


to be a particularly good deal, but it means that finally politicians


and countries are coming together to try to get a grip on this. Are these


ongoing relevance the backdrop to the referendum campaign, if I can


put it that way, is this helpful to the Leave campaign? Yes, and I think


the campaign is going in the direction of the leave aside anyway.


I agree with Rosa, as you might think I would, that the European


Union is absolutely hopeless, and it has demonstrated this on almost


every major issue it has had to deal with, whether it is the single


currency or the European Constitution or the rest of it, but


on immigration and border control, it is known, as you say, that this


was happening for at least 18 months, maybe longer. And it has


done absolutely nothing concrete to deal with the problem at the


beginning, and it is now completely out of control. I don't think there


is anything that can be done that will work with Turkey. That will


almost certainly unravel as fast as it is cobbled together. I think at


the end it will be Turkey that will be the spectre that the referendum


day vote when I think people will say we have had enough of this.


Claude Moraes, is there not at least a possibility that any kind of


agreement like this will be it illegal under not just UN, but under


the Geneva Convention, and the European human rights laws? My


understanding it is illegal to treat migrants as a group, every migrant


needs to treat asylum seekers as individual cases. In this new deal,


they have inserted individual analysis of each case, which is an


extraordinary thing. It means people would be processed in Greece. It


will be extremely difficult but there will be resources put into it.


It has happened to the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s, it has


happened, and Europe can do it. I disagree with Trevor. I think on


Turkey as a spectre for the Leave campaign, as people get the facts,


and as Trevor knows, France across the political spectrum does not want


Turkey in, Cyprus doesn't even want the talks to start. These


liberalisation has been blocked by 72 chapters. Once people get the


facts, they realise Turkey is not coming in. If they don't get Visa


liberalisation, I understand they have met half the 72 conditions, but


if it don't get that, why would they agree? There are too many problems


in Turkey, and they realise there will only be one strand of a bigger


solution. What is now happening is everyone is getting more realistic.


Turkey is just not going to get that much any more because it has a lot


of its own troubles. The EU has been much more realistic in this deal


than it was in the original one. Just briefly, if there was to be


some kind of UN deal overall, which you were advocating on our programme


today, would it be right for Britain to take a bigger share than we


planned to do of particularly Syrian migrants as part of a UN deal? I'm


not sure we can pick out how many numbers we do. The right decision


was to take those from the camps. Would we take more? This is not


about the numbers you take or how you distribute them, because it


could be an endless thing. You look at this migration crisis, uniform --


you know from Germany, over 90% of those who have gone into Germany are


economic migrants. You all talking about Greece, but you have to watch


coming from Libya to Italy. There will be those who say we can't come


into Greece, we tried to find other routes. So this process is going to


be bigger. Greece is saying 50,000 would potentially come each month


for the next year. Just before we go, we heard members of your party,


the lead candidate on the South west central list for Welsh Assembly 's.


He has talked about migrants in a particular road, I think, in


Cardiff, having hygiene problems stop he said the head of the Labour


Party in Cardiff Council is brain-dead, there are some people in


Ukip in Wales calling for his deselection. What is your position?


It is not for me to make the deselection process, that would be


the NEC and I understand they will do so but what I will say is I have


asked for the transcript of what this man has said from the


journalist, and if the journalist has extrapolated his views to make


it a gory story, then I think the journalist has repercussions. You


can watch on the Daily Politics today on iPlayer. And I will do


that, but if he has also said in the terms of the language that you blame


migrants or those who come to this country for all the ills of this


country, if there is a tone of any form of racism in their whatsoever,


I will be demanding that the NEC takes the strongest terms possible


to deal with this man, and not only that, I would ask those who have


examined him and approve them that they too should be reprimanded by


the NEC, because there is no room in this party for anyone, and I make


that point emphatically, there is no room for anyone in this party going


forward for anyone who makes any racist, xenophobic or any types of


comments. This is not the way forward for this party in the


future. Steven Woolfe in Wales, Claude Moraes in London, thank you


for choosing us. -- joining us. Now, the MP for Rochdale,


Simon Danczuk, has been ordered to pay back more than


?11,000 pounds in expenses after an investigation


by the Parliamentary Mr Danczuk was a Labour MP


until he was suspended by the party in December over a separate incident


in which he admitted sending lewd Let's talk to our political


correspondent, Eleanor Garnier. Why is he paying back the 11,000,


what did he claim that he shouldn't have done? He admits he has made a


mistake, that is why he needs to pay this money back. He is the MP for


Rochdale, so he lives up there, but he rents somewhere down in London,


where he stays while he is working in Westminster, and under the


Parliamentary rules, in addition to claiming for rent, MPs are also


allowed to claim up to ?2400 per child, per year, as long as the


children are routinely staying in the accommodation. Mr Danczuk has


four children, and in relation to the claims for the younger children,


they are deemed within the rules they are absolutely fine, but


imitation to the two eldest children, and the claims he made the


them, the investigation found Mr Danczuk had claimed more than


?11,500 over three years, despite his children not ever staying with


him. So he has now got to repay that. The investigation also


concluded that he made those claims knowing there was no reasonable


prospect of the children staying at the accommodation. So a pretty clear


conclusion from the expenses watchdog. For his part, Mr Danczuk


has said he holds his hands up, he made an error and will pay this


money back as soon as possible. He also says he made the claims


according to what he believed to be at the time as an accurate


interpretation of the guidelines for study says he is happy to work with


its, this watchdog, to help bring the regulations up-to-date so they


are more in line with day-to-day realities of modern family life.


Thank you very much for that. You do get the impression, you take


everything else that has happened with Mr Danczuk, first of all it


never rains but it pours for him now and secondly really the view in the


Labour Party must be that his days as a Labour politician are over? I


think so, he has one of those toxic bad smells around him now. I was


part of the team that did the original expenses investigation and


it amazes me that all these years on politicians are still cavalier with


what is our money, and also that the system is still seems to be broken.


For it to come out, it was pretty damning today, it rarely is that


damning, and for him to just say he's going to work with it... Payet


back... And nothing further than that happens.


Now, we broadcasters have to stay impeccably neutral when it come


The newspapers, on the other hand, they can tell us


exactly what they think, and try to influence us,


But will that have any effect on how people decide how to vote?


I spend a lot of time reading the papers in my job,


but over the last few months, and for the next few months,


they have been full of Europe, Europe, oh, and a little bit more


But will what they say and the slant that these newspapers have have any


Newspapers, will they influence how you vote in the EU referendum?


I'm not going to vote on the EU.


Because they haven't told you enough.


You don't know what's doing that, what's doing that.


It probably will, yeah, it probably will.


Because I don't know very much about it.


Will the newspapers influence how you vote in the EU referendum?


I don't need the newspapers to make my mind up for me.


I've already made my mind up, thank you.


So you get it from them, from their perspective.


But you wouldn't listen to one paper in particular?


Because I always do my own politics, it's what I believe in my heart


and from my mum and what I believe in the community is best for me.


So if one of these papers came out and told you to vote one way


Will the newspapers influence how you vote


Well, everybody tells you what they want you to believe.


And I think you don't get it from one source,


you have to get information from different sources,


before you make up your mind, that's all.


And we're joined now by the former Liberal Democrat MP and campaigner


In 1975, over 90% of the newspapers were in favour of Britain staying


in. This time, more of them will probably be in favour of coming out.


We don't know yet but certainly the coverage would suggest that. That's


a free society. Yes. There is very clear history and it's reasonable


that the press should be allowed to be partisan in the way that


broadcasters are not. They have set themselves some rules within that,


that they are supposed to separate news and comment. If that was really


applied by the self-regulatory and several of the papers wouldn't be


able to print everything every day. Every headline has to be justified


by the text below it, not what is left in the office or some sources


that are not included by the headline. And also they have to take


care not to print in accurate, misleading or distorted information.


They can even be biased in their news coverage but what I'm not


supposed to do is distort or mislead, or lie. Do they really need


to separate news from opinion in newspapers? If you look at front


pages on the left and the right, it is clear that the news is motivated,


the choice of the news and how they present that news, whether it's the


guardian or the Daily Mail, is informed by their worldview. As I


say, if they followed their own code, and this is their own code,


written by a committee mainly of editors, it says they must take care


to separate comment and news. They don't do it, I agree, but maybe they


should just abandon the pretence that they do it, given that they


don't. Did you sign up to that, separating news from opinion, at a


tabloid? I don't think you can really do that because the editorial


line of a newspaper colours and flavours the approach to news. It's


one of the facts of life. I think it's fantasyland to suggest that


because a paper has a view, as we do, particularly on Europe but on


many other subjects, that we don't express that in the coverage of


things we agree on. But I think that what it means is that you shouldn't


state as a factual news story what is an opinion of the editor. Maybe


Trevor is right, that it can't be done. In which case their sham


regulator should dispense with that sham rule. Trevor is a well-placed


because he is on this independent regulator and I admire him for his


opinions. But just like there is no way I should be on a press


regulator, there is no way that a regulator that says it is


independent, the biggest advocate of carrying on before pre-Leveson.. You


are a journalist, what are you doing as a press regulator? They needed a


journalist who knew about popular newspapers and therefore I was


appointed. You were appointed by Hayden Phillips, who you appointed


from the foundation group. So you appointed the guy who appointed you.


That's a really cushy number, if your newspaper did that you would be


the first to call it out. So I think you should resign yourself. I think


that is perfectly legitimate. My role in the appointment of the


chairman of the selectors was very peripheral. We simply met... This is


surely not what you came for. I want to go back to Europe. The British


papers are pretty Eurosceptic, aren't they? That informs how they


are covering this referendum. I think by and large they are. I think


it's very difficult not to be. I think in our case we are trying to


get as much balanced publicity and coverage with views from all sides


as we possibly can. Most of the headlines are pretty negative about


Europe. Because I think the subject is pretty negative. It's a perfectly


legitimate view, but it's not a balance. On Newsnight you said that


Rupert Murdoch chooses the line. I don't object to that, proprietors


only newspaper and they can say what the line is, it usually suits their


own commercial interests, but what I object to is newspapers saying we


speak for our readers, when really it is the proprietor saying it. I


don't really the standard line of your argument. There is no reason


why Rupert Murdoch shouldn't decide the line of something. I agree, but


then admitted, that he does. I think he did admit it. Andrews said there


is a lot of negative stuff in your newspaper and you say it is a


negative issue. There is a lot of negative stuff in your newspaper


about it because of one man who owns the newspaper. You're making an


assertion but it doesn't mean you're correct. We are entitled to have a


say about a major subject. He is saying it is Rupert Murdoch's view.


We are going round in a circle here. The ultimate view as Rupert Murdoch


has said several times in the past, he will make the ultimate decision


after a word from the editor of the paper. I think we're not giving


enough credence to the other way around, which is that readers often


drive their editorial decisions. Some readers are pretty anti-EU, and


working on newspapers when I did, that was very much a consideration,


what do our readers think? We knew what our readers thought and what


they wanted. I always thought it was best to ignore readers A you think


that the weight of your scepticism in the papers will influence the


outcome? If they say things that aren't true, and the Queen headline


was not supported by the text, even if what she said was correct, it did


not say that she backed Brexit, that was a breach of the code. OK, we


have to leave it there. Now,


there's an old showbusiness saying that you should never work


with children or animals. Well, we have animals in the studio


here all the time and it's never done us any harm, although


Molly the dog's hair is tricky to get out


of the carpet, I'm told. So when we agreed to let two CBBC


viewers with an ambition to work in politics come on the show,


we thought what could go wrong? in politics come on the show,


we thought, what could go wrong? Well here they are, two


10-year-olds called Charlotte and Henrietta, being interviewed


by me about their support You know what I mean


by the nanny state? The Government telling


you what to do. Isn't this just another example


of the Government trying to tell Mr Neil, do you remember


on January 31st 1983, when seat belts


were made compulsory? It wasn't a popular idea,


people didn't like it. But do you know how many


lives it saved a year? Because the Government


did something. If it's saving lives


and it's helping the NHS, I think we should be


told what to do. When I was your age and someone


told me not to do something, Maybe you weren't


educated properly enough. To future politicians there!


Wonderful, isn't it? They were great.


That was a clip from All Over the Workplace, which was broadcast


I'll be back on Sunday with the Sunday Politics.


We will dissect the budget yet again. Hope you can join me.


It's here. The biggest names in sport


and entertainment are warming up for an unmissable night.


Meet The Luthers. My family want the best for me.


Jack Whitehall seeks help from Gareth Bale.


so can you introduce me to Cristiano Ronaldo?


Download Subtitles