21/03/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 21/03/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


As the Conservative Party descends into civil war,


will David Cameron be able to quell the unrest as he prepares to tell


the Commons that he still believes in compassionate Conservatism?


A "narrow attack on working age benefits".


Iain Duncan Smith's parting words are a gift for Labour,


The deal allowing migrants arriving in Greece to be sent back to Turkey


came into effect yesterday but is it deterring people from crossing?


And how doing this could land you with a ?100 fine


or even a criminal record.


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


today two former leadership hopefuls for their respective parties.


The Conservative MP, David Davis, and Labour's Chuka Umunna who's


fresh from the launch of his All-Party Parliamentary Group


First this morning, leaving the EU could cost ?100 billion to the UK


economy and cause the loss of almost a million jobs,


according to a report commissioned by the Confederation


The analysis by the accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers


says household incomes could be between ?2,100 and ?3,700 lower


If that isn't a project fear, I don't know what is. It is perfectly


legitimate to point out the risks involved in us leaving, but of


course the campaign that I am a part of, hands on the table, it also


telling the story of things we stand to gain through continued


membership. The CBI represent over 150,000 businesses employing 7


million people in our country. They are pointing out that if we leave it


could cost up to 100 billion and we could lose 1 million jobs. That is


research and it should be taken notice of because of who the CBI is.


Of course there will be research on the other side as well. For me it is


not just an economic issue. It is about how we see our country, how we


amplify the great in Great Britain. We are already a fantastic country,


so making sure we can achieve good tangible things or people at home


and abroad. It is a serious organisation, so on those figures,


they would be mad to vote to leave the EU. Which is the serious


organisation? PricewaterhouseCoopers? The CBI? Are


you saying that the numbers are wrong? I am, essentially. The


numbers assume there is no low skilled immigration, and that is


where the numbers disappear. One of the ex-members of the monetary


committee tweeted earlier that the difference we are talking about over


nearly 20 years that they are forecasting is less than the change


in the forecast between the Autumn Statement last year and the budget


this year. It is tiny. Different in tone though. I agree with Chuka


Umunna on one thing. It is not about finely balanced forecasts. They have


made mistakes, but put that to one side. This simple truth is this is


about how we see our country. We have got a great country. Can it


stand on its own to feet? Yes. It can do a better deal with free-trade


and Europe has done in the past. Is it a country that can grow off the


back of this? My view is yes, as the viewers know. This report is


irrelevant. Interesting that you should raise the members of that


committee, because the person who oversaw this PricewaterhouseCoopers


report is a former member. And didn't think to point out how small


the differences. He clearly thinks it will have a detrimental affect on


our economy. In the end, I wouldn't argue that if we leave the European


Union we couldn't stand on our own two feat. But would it be better? If


we put the figures aside because that will not win or lose the arc


and, although it is interesting that when we have both sides on, you go


to the figures, but putting that aside, will you be able to convince


people that they wouldn't be liberated or better off if there was


a vote to leave the EU? That is the proposition being put by the other


side. I don't buy the notion that we are shackled by the European Union,


which the other side are putting. If we look at votes from the European


Council, nine out of ten times we are on the majority side. I don't


buy this talking down Britain's influence in the European Union and


getting run over because that doesn't happen. I have been there, I


have negotiated in this council, I know how it works. 72 times in the


last ten years we have tried to stop the European Union and 72 times we


have lost. How many times have we won? The fundamental point is


countries try to avoid falling out with each other. We are the ones


being outvoted. Listen. We have been outvoted more times than any other


country in the European Union. Latvia, Lithuania, nobody has been


outvoted more times than we have. As the country done so badly being part


of the EU? A lot of it has been under a Conservative Government


recently, which says this country has done well economically and it is


the Conservative Government that has kept Great Britain out of the Euro


crisis. Originally the decision was under Labour, but out of the Euro


crisis and out of Schengen. What are you liberating Britain from? If you


want to talk history, if you look at history Britain, when we joined in


73, we were doing badly. In terms of exports to Europe. We were never


very good at that. The Commonwealth and not to Europe. When we joined,


we joined, we did really well for about 20 years, what you might call


the common market period. Since the single market period, which everyone


thought was the common market squared, actually we have done


relatively poorly. Less well than countries outside the European Union


in selling into Europe. Go on, finish your point. There is plenty


of evidence to show you if you want to look at it. Look at the issue of


free trade negotiations. Not just a Europe that other parts of the


world. But we can negotiate bilateral agreements. We can't. Let


me finish. Briefly! We can't do it. When they do it for us, in two


thirds of those areas, our export rate goes down. Reply and then we


move on. We benefit from the fact we don't have tariffs when we sell to


the EU, our biggest export market. You are assuming tariffs would be


imposed? Yes. But we also have trade agreements with 50 other countries.


I am not saying we couldn't reach the trade agreement with another


country but we would have more bargaining power. When negotiating


with China, they have 3 billion people and we are sitting on this


side of the table with half a billion people. I don't believe we


would have the same clout sitting on our own. On that basis, we finish.


Obviously that conversation with David and Chuka was incredibly


illuminating, but you'd be forgiven for getting rather confused


with all the facts and figures thrown about on the EU.


So if you have any burning questions do get in touch with us by tweeting


and include the word #dpeu or you can use the contact us


page on our website at bbc.co.uk/dailypolitics.


This Thursday we'll put your questions to


the Conservative's Sam Gyimah and Ukip's Paul Nuttall who I'm sure


will both do their very best to answer as clearly as possible.


After all the stress of the last few days you can hardly blame


Perhaps he doesn't want to come back.


is he planning to do this Easter break?


At the end of the show Chuka and David will give us the correct


Maybe they can tell is where they are going on their Easter break.


Now, in case you've had your head buried in the sand for a few days,


you're probably aware that all is not well


After Iain Duncan Smith's resignation on Friday,


the Prime Minister will today use a statement in the House of Commons


to defend a record of what he calls "modern, compassionate


Yesterday Mr Duncan Smith took to the airwaves to declare


that the Government was in "danger of drifting in a direction that


divides society rather than unites it".


His particular complaint was over initial plans to cut over ?4 billion


from the bill for disability benefits, which Mr Duncan Smith


He went on: "It just looks like we see this as a pot of money,


that it doesn't matter because they don't vote for us.


Today the Prime Minister will use a statement in the Commons


to respond to the criticisms and defend his record of "modern,


compassionate Conservatism" which he says has been his trademark


since he became party leader in 2005.


Last night Conservative grandee Sir Roger Gale criticised


Mr Duncan Smith, saying he was guilty of opportunism


at its absolute worst and suggested the former Work


and Pensions Secretary had an ulterior motive.


He went on to say the resignation was designed to do as much damage


In cause and in support of the Brexit cause as possible.


Today's Times makes further grim reading for the Government


with the Prime Minister reportedly telling a Cabinet colleague


that he blames George Osborne for the row over disability cuts.


Former Conservative leader Michael Howard urged MPs to calm


down and remember the party's collective responsibility


However, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has said George Osborne needs


to come to the House of Commons and explain how


he will reconfigure his Budget in the wake of Iain Duncan Smith's


Our party is very, very clear that we want to protect the personal


independence payments for those with disabilities. The Budget doesn't add


up. The Chancellor of the Exchequer should come back to Parliament and


explain that. Far from just Iain Duncan Smith residing, if the


Chancellor puts forward a Budget, which he did, knowing full well that


he was taking this huge hit on the disabled, then really it should be


perhaps in considering his position as well as Iain Duncan Smith who has


already gone. Jeremy Corbyn. I'm joined now from central lobby


by Conservative MP Chris Philp, a member of the Treasury


Select Committee. Welcome back to the Daily Politics.


Iain Duncan Smith has said this Government is in danger of drifting


in a direction that divides society rather than uniting it. Is he wrong?


I think he is wrong. The Government's record is a good one.


800,000 people less Rian relative poverty than five years ago. Wages


are going up. Thousands of children no longer live workless households.


We have put through the biggest increase in the minimum wage at and


given gigantic tax cuts to people on low incomes by increasing the


personal threshold. This Government has a fantastic record of helping


people on low incomes. Taking the point about disabilities, we are


spending more on disabled benefits now that Labour were five years ago,


both in pound terms of real terms, and even if these changes go


through, which it looks like they will not, even without that,


disability spending would have increased by ?1 billion a year so I


disagree with Iain Duncan Smith's conclusions. So you stand by the


policy of restricting the personal independence payment even though the


changes will not happen? I think it is right that it should be reviewed


and it is a measure of the Government's maturity and


sensitivity that when a policy is proposed... That is not how it was


taken by Iain Duncan Smith. He did acknowledge that it was just a


consultation. It is a sign of the Government's maturity and


sensitivity that when something is criticised, they are willing to


think again, as they did over working tax credits. I think it is a


sign of strength and maturity and it is good to look again to make sure


that the things proposed actually work. The Conservatives make sure


that people who need help get that help and that is why disability


spending is higher now than it has ever been at any point in the


history of this country. You could call is majority or a backlash


trying to hold the party together and they are out of touch because


they did not predict this reaction, despite protests from Tory MPs about


changes to tax credits. What do you say about the judgment of George


Osborne? It was a consultation and when you are looking to do something


contentious and difficult, doing a consultation and listening to that


consultation is the right thing to do and it is exactly what happened.


When it comes to welfare reform, Iain Duncan Smith argued, even


though he has seen these things -- overseeing these things, everything


has fallen apart from pensioner benefits. How does that square with


the idea that we are in it together? The richest 1% in this country pay


30% of all taxes, a higher figure than under Labour. The richest in


society are paying their fair share, and in fact more than they used to.


But I am asking about benefits. Iain Duncan Smith said the problem was


the juxtaposition, what he saw as reductions to disability payments


and then at the same time offering cuts, tax breaks, to the middle


classes, with cuts in corporation tax, capital gains tax, and raising


the threshold at which you pay the 40p tax rate. That is not we are all


in this together. We will come to that but the biggest tax cut of all


is raising the threshold from 6000 to 11,000 500. The biggest change


disproportionately benefits people on low incomes.


Keeping manifesto promises is a good thing, not a bad thing.


One of the reasons why this country has create 2.4 million new jobs,


more than the rest of Europe put together, is because we cut


corporation tax from 28-17%, encouraging businesses to create


jobs. The way to combat poverty and help people earn more money is by


job creation. In fact, that is our strategy and it's working. It's not


sustainable. . We are 4% of the world's economy but 7% of the


world's welfare state spending so getting people off welfare and in


work is the right thing for the country and for individuals. 2.3


million jobs is something we can be proud of. There was a suggestion IDS


has an Al tierior motive -- you will steerior motive, do you think he


did? It's difficult to know what an individual is thinking. I won't go


as far as questioning IDS's motives. Let's say he's concerned and it's a


coincidence it helps his Out campaign. Does it help it? Well, I


think he would probably think it destabilises the Government a little


bit and any resignation does. I'm happen Foy take it at face value and


happy to argue with him on his terms, as I think he's wrong on the


basis of the facts. People on low incomes are as a matter-of-fact


better off than five years ago. He should know. He's been the Work and


Pensions Secretary for an awfully long time. If we take it at face


value, that he was being authentic, particularly with the amount of work


he's done on this issue, if he's saying this actually really is sort


of attacking the very core of compassionate conservatism, that


really damages David Cameron and George Osborne's leadership? I think


IDS is simply wrong about that. If you look at the fact we are spending


more money today on disability benefits, than in the past,


including under the last Labour Government. The biggest ever


increase in the minimum wage is coming, helping people on lower


incomes, we are lifting millions of people out of income tax entirely,


the lowest paid. All those things help people on low incomes and back


to work. The record is one to be proud of. Tell even Crabb, where's


he going to find the ?4 billion for... It's ?1 billion a year which


is about 1% of the budget. Where should it come from? He needs to


have a look at that, think very carefully and make sure people


who're entitled to benefits claim them, particularly for the minor


conditions. The issues with the PIPs, people were getting points,


for example if people needed help getting their shoes on. That's not


right. The proposals need fine tuning. Some things do need


changing. The fundamental point is getting people off welfare, into


work, more people on disabilitiesing than ever before and we need to see


more than that -- on disabilities than ever before. Stay with us.


IDS sat at the Cabinet table, he will have listened to discussions


Pre-Budget, he's now resigning over a cut that isn't going to happen? It


goes back to something more fundamental than the single cut. You


saw it perhaps at its most clear in the general election when both David


Cameron and George Osborne were talking about 12 billion cuts in


welfare. But at the same time saying we are not going to cut Winter Fuel


Payments for wealthy pensioners, we are not going to cut free travel for


pensioners. He's got a budget of ?220 billion odd. Massive? So it's


natural George would look there. Over ?120 billion of it is pensioner


payments and that was off limits. He knew that because of the manifesto.


He's known for a long time and must be decided it would be part of the


discusses. He was exasperated by that happening time and time again.


He was forced to find a cut in the area which, for him, is fundamental.


This man's spent ten years of his life pretty much committed himself


to helping out the working poor, getting them back on the escalator,


off their backs because he believes they've ended up in that position


because of bad luck or bad breaks, bad family things, schools,


whatever. That's been fundamental. What he's I think felt over time,


time and time again, is that he's been handicapped in that by the fact


he's got to focus all his cuts, inevitably some cuts in this area,


all the cuts in that area. Why did you resign now, that's the thing. He


said the latest plan to restrict disability benefits was deeply


unfair and we have been through that with Chris. Isn't the truth though


that the original reform, the replacement of the Disability Living


Allowance with the personal independence payment PIT has been an


expensive fiasco, that's what it was called by the Public Accounts


Committee and that happened entirely on Iain Duncan Smith's watch. It's


expensive. That, as you said earlier, now looks withdrawn. He


still faces the problem of finding ?4 billion over four years from that


part of his budget. He's forced into that part of his budget which for


him he's done it time and time again. Universal Credit is looking


problematic because of the cost in constraint. All of that reflects a -


he thinks I suspect an assault on the central area of reform he wants


to bring about. As for why does it take him so long - to resign from a


job which is the centre of what you have been trying to do is an


incredibly painful thing to do. I know, I've been there. It's not easy


to do. No, so if he wanted to stay committed to the cause that he has


devoted so much time to, why did he resign at all unless there was an


ulterior motive to leave to EU? I think that's absolute nonsense. Do


you? Yes. Or did it poison Cabinet so much that he thought actually I'm


going to lose my job anyway? I don't think so. I saw arguments in the


Westminster village, most of it is nonsense. I don't know what the


atmosphere was, I don't think it's difficult. I think actually the fact


a referendum's been given's taken all of that poison out of the


debate. It's inflicted the Tory party in the past, no doubt about


it, but it's actually outside. You have Bill Cash and Bernard Jenkin


saying you did the right thing to allow a referendum because it takes


it outside Parliament, allows it to be a people's judgment. You can't


really ignore the context of the EU referendum here though. Iain Duncan


Smith was perhaps the most awkward and vociferous rebels against John


Major's Government over the Maastricht Treaty so even though it


didn't cause him to resign, collective responsibility's made


people feel they can do things they have not Don previously? The press


were excited about all the Cabinet Ministers being there and


campaigning to vote Leave. They were in the photo because they were


Cabinet Ministers. It gave them standing and leverage, normally the


backbench wouldn't have that. Had Iain Duncan Smith said I'm against


Europe, it wouldn't have made the back page, let alone the front-page


of the newspapers. This is not about that. You have got to understand,


Iain has been a man devoured by an aim... Also a bad relationship


between him and George Osborne that's gone on for a very long time,


very bad blood between them. Gossip columns... Oh, you know. People


underestimate because I'm afraid political journalists underestimate


that level of principle commitment. It's eaten him up over the years and


that's why it's been so painful for him to leave. Principles, he should


be a hero in Labour circles? This idea that he's a champion of the


disabled and the low-paid and those who need help is nonsense.


OK, he's recanted on personal independence payments, that is a


good thing, but he was the biggest champion of the bedroom tax and two


thirds of those who were hit by that ultimately were the disabled. But my


bigger sadness is not that it's taken him so long to recant, but


actually that if you look at polling on this and where the public are,


because we are increasingly becoming such a segregated society, many


people in work don't know people who're in receipt of benefits. You


look at the bedroom tax, a substantial part of the population


supported that, so one of the big questions is, how do we build


stronger bonds between us so there's greater understanding. The villain


of the peace here is George Osborne. He has, budget after budget, behaved


like a conartist going around telling people that he has


progressive budgets and those with the broader shoulders pay the


heaviest burden when we know that is anything but the case. IDS, if you


like, has exposed that in technicolour. That's why Jeremy


Corbyn was right that George should look at his own position because


he's ultimately responsible. I've got 788 people in my constituency in


receipt of this personal independent payment who face having this cut


unless hopefully we'll see a reversal. Sounds like it might be


shelved. They have already been clobber bid the bedroom tax which


was cruel beyond belief. Chris, is George Osborne's career finished in


trying to go for the leadership on the basis of what Chuka said?


Definitely not. Look at his record as Chancellor. We have had a massive


minimum wage increase, unemployment's gone down enormously.


We have created 2.3 million new jobs. Unememployment's fallen by a 5


... 55... But Chris. David Willets, a minister in the last Parliament,


the resolution foundation's very clear, it's a respected independent


think-tank. The majority say, for example, of the income tax changes,


which will occur, will disproportionately benefit the top


10% of earners. You were wrong to suggest the low-paid will not be


paying tax. Of course they will be paying tax, they'll be paying


national insurance. This mantra, taking the low-paid out of tax all


together, it's nonsense. Out of income tax. Come on! Come on, it has


been a massive achievement of the coalition and this Government to


take a lot of the lowest paid out of income tax. It's a significant


component of their business. But hang on a second. You ought to


recognise that. Tax Credits, taking those things away. Use offset things


against that. You haven't been able to bring the party with you. Can he


still be leader, George Osborne? If there is a leadership contest in the


next few months, no, but beyond that, you know as well as I do, the


memory span of the Westminster village is a few months. Really,


amongst Tory MPs, they'll forgive him do you think? You will be his


campaign manager! Thank you very much! Before we let


Chris go, yes, you can announce your leadership! John Major famously


referred to the bustards at the time of his treaty. Has Iain Duncan Smith


graduated to that status again with his resignation? No, I find it hard


to understand because he ran on the manifesto and we got a majority


elected on the manifesto that included ?12 billion of welfare


savings so he can't claim it's a surprise. The policy he was objected


to, the PIPs will now be looked at again. So I find it surprising but I


wouldn't describe him in those terms, no. Are you going to run the


Chancellor's campaign for leadership then because you have defended him


vigorously? Listen, I defend the Government and the Chancellor


because I know they are doing a good job, there is no vacancy at the


moment and there won't be for some time to come, so we shouldn't engage


in speculation and we should focus on the job.


On Sunday the European Union's deal with Turkey to stop the migrant flow


from Turkey to Greece came into force.


Syrian migrants and refugees who arrive in Greece are now


expected to be sent back if their asylum claims


Despite that hundreds of migrants have continued to arrive.The BBC's


James Reynolds joins us now from Lesbos.


Do migrants arriving realise the rules have changed?


Not all of them. I was on the beach on Sunday morning as they cheered


when they arrived. It was suggested to me that they simply didn't know


the rules had changed and that they may not be able to stay in Europe


all that long. I explained to some they might have to go back and they


looked pretty devastated. The fact that more people have come today,


this morning, several hundred of them from less boss, clearly


indicates word's not crossed the Aegean that things have changed. In


that case, there are going to be more and more people, if you like,


stranded in Greece, some of them will be forcibly removed because


they won't want to claim asylum there because they want to get the


Germany, but what is going to happen to those people just sitting


waiting? Two sets of people here, I don't


want to go too much down a worm hole which might lose everyone if I try


to explain it. But essentially you have got at the moment, 45,000 to


50,000 migrants who will be abiding by the old rules, they are eligible


to stay in Europe and to be relocated. The trouble for them is


that no-one's stepped forward from Europe saying I'll have that lot, a


few here and a few there, so those people might be stranded in Greece.


The next lot, the second lot of people are those who've been


arriving since Sunday. The European essentially says if they do not have


the right to relocation, unless they have a valid asylum claim. If the


claims which would take place, some of them behind me, are refused,


they'll be turned back and taken to Turkey.


Thank you. Apologies for the poor line. It is technically not very


easy. We're joined by the Labour Peer Lord


Dubs who has an amendment in the Lords today to give 3000


unaccompanied child refugees Welcome to the Daily Politics.


Before we get onto that amendment, it is early days, and do you think


of this one out and one in system will work? To be honest, I don't


know. The jury is out. The intention is a good one. That all people who


have the intention of becoming refugees should be able to claim


their status and have that status and the United Nations rules. Some


people are coming in and are clearly would-be refugees. Others are just


coming because it is another way of getting into Europe. I don't blame


them for that but it does not qualify under the refugee


Convention. You don't think there is something distasteful about a deal


predicated on migrants crossing from Turkey to Greece create this one for


one resettlement in Europe? If it works and it stops them leaving


Turkey, then it will be successful, provided that other people know that


the way to get into Europe is to claim refugee status, and if they


qualify then they can come in. What evidence is there that this will


deter anyone? We have seen the numbers turning up. James Reynolds


has said that the new rule changes have not got through to everyone,


but even when they do, do we think people wait to try and cross into


Europe when they are being bombed and shelled at home? Well, it will


have an effect. How big the effect is, we don't know, clearly. Look at


it the other way round. When Angela Merkel said come to Germany, it went


up. So I think it will go down. There are other aspects of the


agreement that much more problematic than that but I think at least this


may well reduce some of the flow, which means fewer people will die at


CMU Mediterranean, which is the most important thing. I agree with that.


I think we are capping the numbers we are taking at 70 2000. Yes, but


the claims in Europe were over 1 million in 2015. -- we are capping


the numbers at 72,000. Yes, but is it fair? Is that number of 72,000 a


fair number? It is not a fair world. The system is grotesquely unfair and


we have not found a way of dealing with it but this is an attempt to


deal with one aspect of it. I think there is a misinformation put that


goes on, as though this is the fault of the European Union. Isn't it? No.


J Hardy is in the Middle East, growing problems, and if we were not


in the European Union we would still have to grapple with this problem.


Yes, but some people have legitimately, I think, it said is


the EU cannot deal coherently with a problem like this then what is it


for? They need to do a better job. On the discussion of how many people


come in, I was talking about this in my speech today, that we need to


have a bigger discussion about what happens when people settle here and


how we had great damage to our communities. Be careful about that.


It is clearly the case that Schengen makes it more difficult to deal


with. A border free Europe makes migration flows more difficult to


deal with, which is why there is such tension between many of the


countries and Germany. When Angela Merkel said come to Germany, they


came to Europe, not just in Germany. But we are not in Schengen. I am


just making the point about how difficult it is for Europe to deal


with it. This difficult eastern border which is difficult to man


anyway. But if countries had taken quotas, it could have been handled


in a more systematic way. You would still have the flood and the problem


of managing where they are. Does it betray Europe's values? Shouldn't


the EU deal with this crisis? They could have taken quotas, individual


countries, rather than outsourcing the problem to Turkey at a price.


You asking not complicated things. Angela Merkel has become a


conscience of Europe. Who thought that would white meat -- who would


have thought that would happen? If other people had taken on the burden


sharing people, it would have been better, a better world. I think we


should have tried to do that. I think we should have tried to share.


Above all what we have got to do is find a way of stopping people


drowning in the seas. We have got to find a way of assessing whether they


are refugees or not. Other people come in as well and they don't claim


to be refugees. We have got to find a way of doing that and this latest


effort is an attempt to do that, so to this extent, it is fair. As for


the price to Turkey, should we be relying on Turkey? Poor human rights


record, freedom of the press is curtailed, so is this the country we


should be doing this sort of deal with? To be honest, I am not sure we


have any choice. They are the ones geographically in that position and


ensuring that we provide aid and support, and I think we are the


second-biggest contributor to that, so that people aren't making that


dangerous journey but they are closest to the territory from which


they have come, that is an important part of this. There is not one magic


solution to this. You need a sweep of measures. I worry about different


aspects of the deal. I don't worry about the exchange. That is sensible


and I don't worry about the subsidy. Visa free access to everybody with


Turkish papers is incredibly dangerous for European security,


because we know the Turkish Government has been helpful to Isil


and other jihadist groups, so what is to tell you the people the


Turkish papers are definitely takes? There is a serious issue hidden it


behind some sensible measures. What do you make of Lord Dubs's proposal


to take in 3000 unaccompanied children? We don't know. The British


Government has tried a number of things in advance of other


countries. We were the first to put money into countries around Syria,


and we are talking about large sums and I think we are still the


second-biggest in the world. We have tried to say that we will take


children from camps there because that will not have a pull factor


effect. That is still part of the 20,000? I think there is some


addition now, new proposal in the few days. I think the Government has


done a good job of trying to balance those two problems and I don't know


the details of this. The argument in favour of my amendment this


afternoon is that there are estimated to be 24,000 unaccompanied


child refugees in Europe. These children are possibly in Greece,


possibly Italy, possibly near Calais. They are vulnerable to


people traffickers, vulnerable to criminality, vulnerable to being


lured into prostitution. We owe them safety. The point of my amendment is


that 3000 would-be Britain's share of the larger total. We could handle


that. In 1938 we had 10,000 unaccompanied children coming in and


I was one of them. These are 3000. I think we can manage that. The crisis


is pretty severe, having young people homeless, adrift, sleeping in


the streets. We can't let that go on. How are you doing in terms of


getting support? Ask me later today! I am delighted that the public


response has been as it is. One backbencher like me would not


normally attract that kind of attention. People have said they


welcome it and we know people who have offered to be foster parents.


They have got to be vetted and so on. I think it is astonishing and I


am delighted. I think too often in the immigration debate it is boils


down to numbers. Because of the targets that the Home Secretary has


set. In the end we are talking about human beings. We are talking about


individuals. I think in the end as human beings we should do what we


can. I think 3000 compared to the 11,000 that we took in in the 1930s


is doable. The reason it boils down to numbers is... It doesn't. It is


human beings and that is my point. We don't distinguish between


refugees and... In my amendment. I know, but we are just answering this


point. The numbers have grown explosively. Economic migrants,


exactly, that is my point. Lord Leavey threatened to resign this


week are less Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, made it absolutely


clear that anti-Semitism will not be tolerated in the Labour Party and he


said he has not gone far enough in cracking down on it. That Jeremy


Corbyn do more on that issue? I was at the meeting on Monday and he was


asked about this and he said adamantly that they totally abhor


racism and anti-Semitism, so it depends how much people hear what he


says. But you say there is a problem of anti-Semitism among some elements


of the far left. Jeremy Corbyn has already said that he despises racism


and anti-Semitism that is enough being done in the far left? Baroness


Royle is carrying out an investigation into what has happened


at the Oxford University Labour Club. It would be disingenuous to


deny that on fringes of the left their having problems with


anti-Semitism but if anyone can lead the charge in stamping it out and


showing zero tolerance to it, it is Jeremy. I am hopeful that he will do


that because we cannot stand for any discrimination or prejudice of any


type whatsoever in the Labour Party. I am dismayed that we are seeing the


reports that we are seeing but is beholden on us to stamp it out and


deal with it. I think that it absolutely clear and I agree with


you entirely but we have got to be careful that when people at critical


of Israeli Government policies, they are not accused of being


anti-Semitic, and some people merge the two and they are clearly totally


different. Yes. Thank you. Did you know you could get fined


for carrying golf bags And you're not allowed out


after 11pm if you're under It's all down to what's called


Public Space Protection Orders, essentially powers given to councils


in England and Wales to deal They've been seen by some


as the son of the ASBO, and in certain areas are proving


just as controversial. Ellie and producer Sam have


been to find out more in Hillingdon, and we should say no


Public Space Protection Orders were breached in the


making of this film. Welcome to the London Borough


of Hillingdon, where the council has It means you can get


into trouble for doing certain things like gathering


in groups of two or more. So Sam, my esteemed colleague and I,


decided to go into the shopping centre there and loiter,


where we could get fined up to ?100. Similarly, in the same area,


if I decided it would be easier for me to get around


by skateboard, I could In other parts of Hillingdon


it is not the skateboard they are worried about


but cars, specifically stationary or parked cars,


left with their engines running. Sam, have you left


the engine running? The idea behind it is to combat


anti-social behaviour. In set areas there is a ban


on spitting, and drinking alcohol It is stopping people for example


gathering in groups of more People mustn't spit


on the roads and that. The council has got


powers to stop and fine you if you are in that shopping


centre standing more than one of you, standing


together in a group. They are worried about


anti-social behaviour. Why should we be fined


for standing in a place? You know if there is


a group of elderly people standing there,


they will not get fined. Using a skateboard, pedal cycles,


rollerskates, rollerblades or other similar devices could land yourself


with a fine of ?100. I agree with that because they whizz


around and you have to put your brakes on really quickly


because you nearly Hillingdon isn't the only council


that's issued these Public Space One civil rights group


suggests there are at least The Local Government


Association says they offer a quicker response


than prosecuting offenders Surely the idea behind


this is just to give local councils the power to deal


with local problems. Well, it is all very well


for public authorities to say, "We are going to pass these very


vague and broad orders but you can trust us only to enforce them


in the right circumstances." We think that is wholly incompatible


with the rule of law. These orders create


criminal offences. When you are talking about criminal


offences people should be able whether or not they are on the wrong


side or the right side of the law and this kind of discretion is not


compatible with civil liberties. We did approach Hillingdon


Council for an interview Maybe they were worried


about being caught in a group of two I am very pleased to say they


managed to avoid arrest or finds in that film.


We're joined now by the Opposition Leader for Hammersmith


Fulham Council, Greg Smith, who for eight years was in charge


Some of these offences sound bizarre. Standing in a pan left your


after bus stop, that is Hillingdon Council's take on this. That is


surely a mistake. I think so. I am all for localism. When something


serious in a locality blows up and it is affecting people's lives,


noise, kids not being able to sleep, or not being able to get to achieve


station, as we had in Hammersmith and Fulham about ten years ago, but


the council to be able to react quickly for a short period of time


to solve that problem, that is what I am in favour of. Is it OK to have


a power where you are not allowed to assemble in groups of more than one?


We are seeing an increase in rough sleeping particularly in London. The


way to deal with that is not to criminalise a whole group of people


but is actually to ensure we build more homes and we have a massive


problem on that in London. Secondly, I worry about it disproportionately


being used against young people who increasingly are stereotyped and


demonised in British society and too often a are kind of painted as a


problem simply by convening together in a particular place. Yes because


what do you expect young people toe do? If they meet with friends with


skate boards, surely that's not a criminal offence? Totally. I'm not


suggesting I would want to see... Some local councils are? Sure. I


can't speak for other local councils, that's for them to answer.


Certainly I wouldn't want to see in Hammersmith or Fulham, restrictions


on one or two Kong are gating. For inexplicable reasons sometimes,


certain locations become megahotspots where suddenly you find


hundreds of people congregating in often small places, housing estates,


which is the way a lot were built in London makes them... And is


intimidating? Stops kids sleeping, and we need to do something about


it. Some of the evidence shows that it works apparently, for a short


period of time, as Greg was saying, to troubleshoot in local areas, if


you want to devolve powers, this is what you get? It depends how wide


the pow, you are that you devolve. This allows councils to translate


what would be a civil offence into a criminal offence. That is a power


devolution too far. I have a lot of sympathy with Greg's public order


issues and to some extent the police should deal with that as well. This


sort of thing can focus on rough sleepers, religious preachers and


people having a demo and using a megaphone. This is too broadly


drawn. So does it need to be... You narrow it down. So it's too broad.


Don't forget, often you end up with displacement. An issue in my borough


is prostitution. What you often find - I mean we are doing an inquiry on


the Home Affairs Select Committee on this now - but once you have moved


it from one area, you are simply displacing it to another place where


actually you need to get to grips with why it's happening. I have


sympathy with my constituencies, why is it that young people haven't got


enough to do? There are loads of different reasons for that which we


could fill a whole programme talking about. We'll leave you to think


about that. Thank you very much. Now, we've spent quite a lot of time


discussing the EU referendum but there are some other rather


important elections taking Here's our handy Daily Politics


guide. There are seven sets


of elections happening in May, all of which will take


place on the same day, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland


will hold national elections. There are 60 seats up for grabs


in the Welsh Assembly. The Scottish Parliament


will elect 129 seats, where the SNP currently


holds a majority. And in Northern Ireland


there are 108 seats which will be decided for representatives


to the Northern Ireland Assembly. Across England there are local


government elections.124 councils 35 Metropolitan councils,


19 unitary authorities And four cities in England


will elect Mayors, London, Londoners will also elect members


to the London Assembly And finally, voters in 41 police


forces in England and Wales will elect a Police


and Crime Commissioner. And we're joined now from Glasgow


by the elections expert How important are the local


elections bearing in mind just over a month is the EU referendum? Well,


you use the word local elections but I think people in Northern Ireland,


Wales and Scotland would dispute that. For them, as you said, in your


earlier piece, these are national elections. The truth is, this is the


biggest set of mid term elections between now, certainly and 2019 when


we get the European elections. The truth is for Scotland, Wales and


Northern Ireland, their devolved assemblies are now clearly, for many


things, the principled body that makes decisions in those parts of


the UK. For London of course it's the London Mayor and that's become a


really important office inside the capital. The Police and Crime


Commissioner as well, the truth is many people struggle to understand


what that is about and they had an appallingly low turnout when the


first elections were held in November 2012. Again, the local


elections in England for people who have them, again, they'll determine


their local councils. This is certainly a big, important set of


elections. There's real power at stake here and, to that extent at


least, it will help shape the future of British politics through the next


four or five years. Let's look at Scotland. How do you rate Labour's


chances in terms of any recovery there.


Zero is almost the answer to that question. Right. The Labour Party is


struggling north of the border, it has been ever since the 2014


independence referendum. Since then, politics in Scotland has been


primarily about are you for or against independence. Most who voted


yes look as though they are determined to vote for the SNP and


there's about a fifth of people who'll be willing to vote for the


SNP even though they didn't vote for independence because they like the


idea of SNP standing up for Scotland. The opinion polls at the


moment in Scotland put Labour at around a fifth of the vote, which,


if that were to transpire into the ballot boxes would be the party's


worst performance in any elections since and including the first


contest in 1918. So the SNP unassailable there because I presume


the Tories won't do much better than they are at the moment? Absolutely


correct. The Conservatives in Scotland look as though they are


towards the high end of the range within which they have been


oscillating ever since 1997 when they got a whitewash in the UK


general election. The polls putting them at around 17-18% and that's led


to excitement to speculation whether the Tories can get ahead of Labour.


It's second place over which there was excitement is not much


excitement over first. Just finally, the Mayoral election


in London, how important is that? Oh, this is undoubtedly important


because this is probably Jeremy Corbyn's best prospect of emerging


out of these elections with good news. Back in 2008 when the London


Mayoral contest was last, sorry, back in 2012 when the London Mayoral


contest was fought, Boris Johnson won, even though the party won to


the Greater London Assembly, he was perfectly clear it was a personal


vote for Boris Johnson. Zac Goldsmith doesn't have the same


personal vote, credit to him. The truth is, the opinion polls suggest


Sadiq Khan ought to wear the London Mayoral election and indeed Jeremy


Corbyn badly needs him to, because it could well be the case that it's


in London that the best news for the Labour Party comes.


Back to the fall-out from Iain Duncan Smith's resignation.


The self-styled quiet man of British politics certainly didn't go out


quietly yesterday when he appeared on the Andrew Marr Show.


Here he is responding to criticisms that his departure had more to do


with his opposition to the Prime Minister


and Chancellor's stance on the EU than concern for the disadvantaged.


I care for one thing and one thing only.


It is that the people that don't get the opportunities that my children


I want them given that opportunity and everything I have tried to do


Yes, we can debate some of those things that people didn't


like because they are more about the deficit than about welfare


reform, but overarchingly what I am passionate about is getting that


reform done so society is reformed, so we have more of those people


who have been left behind brought back into the sphere and the arena


We're joined now by Trevor Kavanagh of the Sun and Polly Toynbee


Welcome both of you. How much did the EU referendum play a part in


Iain Duncan Smith's decision to go at this point? I think the two


things are inseparable. I don't believe Iain would have left had the


European Union referendum not been under way. I think he was driven by


other motives which of course as he's explained very clearly, but I


don't think he was unconscious of the impact his resignation would


have on the Brexit campaign. Do you think he thought he was going to be


dumped anyway after the referendum? As I understand it, that'ses the way


things are shaping up. They also probably thought his Universal


Credit scheme was going to be ditched or frozen and I think that


he decided that all of that was, there was another battle to fight


which was Europe and he decided to fight that too. How does Labour make


the most out of this in terms of it improving its chances? Well, I think


it partly just sits and watches the bodies float by beside the river. I


think that what Iain Duncan Smith has done is to deliver a devastating


blow to the authority of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor and the


referendum campaign depends crucially on their authority. This


is very risky and Labour has to be careful not to do anything to


unsettle the campaign. Labour is united in wanting to stay in Europe.


Up to a point. Well, two Maveriks. A few more than two, but... Very few.


It's extraordinary and I think Labour has to keep its eye on the


ball about that referendum campaign and understand that what Iain Duncan


Smith is doing is undermining that. It's a difficult game to play


because of course, the other thing is that everything Iain Duncan Smith


says now utterly utterly overturns everything he's done. The sheer


cruelty of what he's imposed on people knowingly, of what goes on in


his Jobcentres that he's instructed to sanction people, to throw people


off benefits for almost nothing. Is it the end of compassionate


conservatism though either for the reasons Polly's put forward thatty


was in it all the way up to his next if you want to view it that way in


terms of welfare, or his very well laid out arguments yesterday on the


Marr programme that he was on a mission and he doesn't trust the


Government to deliver that mission any more actually, and that is


devastating for David Cameron and George Osborne? I think they could


argue that they have been successful with compassionate Conservatives.


There are a million more jobs created. They have to do something


about a ?100 billion budget on welfare, we can't afford it. The big


mistake was to ringfence pensions and Jeffers seas aid. Because that


doesn't leave them many options. What does it go d to George


Osborne's leadership chances? I think at this staining they are


finished. All together -- at this stage. David Davis said they are


finished for now? I don't think there's any hope of him becoming


leader and the Labour Party must be, it must be music to their ears, they


must be thinking, if only we'd picked someone other than Jeremy


Corbyn, they could be cashing in on this. In fact, all this cashing in,


the stuff about the personalities, it's a very... It's a principle


isn't it? There is a human face to what was going on. I've got 780


people who're in receipt of personal independence payments, keen to see


what is going to happen to them and in the end, people have come in,


there have been reports of people who've committed suicide in my


constituency because of the harsh cruelty of what the welfare changes


are. I don't even like calling it welfare, we are calling it social


security. It's a human face and a reality. I don't care about


Osborne's career... I talked to Iain about this. I can tell you, this is


the passion of his life, welfare reform, getting people back into


work was what he cared about. Actually, in that respect, this


Government's been phenomenally successful. Interesting that all his


defenders are people like you who are Brexiters. People like Bernard


Jenkins never in his life expressed any tenderness towards the poor,


suddenly everyone is weeping crocodile tears. Is there Civil War


in the Tory party do weaning? Absolutely and it's only just


started. A bit of time for the quiz. Do you treble question, where is


David Cameron fleeing to this Easter?


Thank you for joining us. See you tomorrow at noon with the big


political stories of the day. Bye. ..and that's what


she felt with the blues. Most people can be oblivious


to what's going on around them,


Download Subtitles