21/04/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 21/04/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Afternoon folks, welcome to the Daily Politics.


The Conservatives have admitted failing to declare tens of thousands


of pounds in election spending in key marginal seats.


The party blames an "administrative error" for a failure to declare


all the expenses relating to its General Election 'Battlebus'.


The Government vows to press ahead with plans to force all schools


in England to become academies, despite fierce opposition


from Labour and a growing number of Tory MPs.


But do robots present an opportunity or a threat to our livelihoods?


Labour's deputy leader is a cautious fan - he joins us live.


And, as the Queen turns 90, we talk to the former MP who used


to give her a daily account of all the gossip among her loyal


Do you think we will be replaced by robots. I don't know what you're


talking about. The microchip has landed.


All that in the next hour and, if you're watching, Your Majesty,


a very happy birthday from all of us here at the Daily Politics.


Joining us on this auspicious occasion is Natalie Bennett,


Natalie, of course, is a staunch Republican and she once said


that the Royals should be evicted from Buckingham Palace and moved


But we won't be reminding her of that at all today.


First today the Conservatives have admitted failing to declare ?38,000


The party has blamed an "administrative error"


for failing to register the accommodation costs


of activists involved in its 'Battlebus 2015' operation.


The admission follows an investigation by Channel 4 News


and their political correspondent Michael Crick joins me now.


Welcome to the programme. You have been on the story for some time, I


get the impression that every time you go back to it it gets bigger?


Yes we keep finding more stuff and the Electoral Commission is having


to widen its investigation. The key thing is, is when they conclude that


investigation, because there is 12 months after that the candidates


report their expenses, just a month after the election, so in other


words something has to be done by the beginning of June when the 12


months is up for there to be prosecutions relating to the


declaration of expenses. There are two lots of declaration, locally and


nationally. Locally each candidate can spend about ?15,000. There are


national expenses which is just under ?19 million for the


Conservatives. What we found is that there is all sorts of campaigning


been going on involving these battle buses, where clearly we are taking


activists to constituencies, putting them up in hotels and they were


supporting the local individual candidates. Now the Electoral


Commission guidelines say if you campaign in support of individual


candidates, that counts as a local expense. The The cost has appeared


on the national returns, but the cost of the hotels has not appeared


anyone and that is what the Conservatives have admitted, because


of this error should have been on the national returns and they're now


going to rectify it. Where will they put it? They will put it on the


national returns. I would argue it should be on the local returns,


because they were staying in local hotels to support local candidates


in the South West, tonight we will report on how the battle bus went to


the Midlands and the north. Most of the candidates there became MPs and


in most cases if the costs are apded to their local returns, then they're


over the limit and they're in trouble in theory. The accommodation


was booked, let me be kind, in an elliptical way? It was booked


centrally, but sometimes it was booked through individuals, rather


than through the party. This is a pattern we uncovered a few weeks ago


in the three by-elections, you remember the big by-elections in


2015 when the Tories were determined to thwart Ukip and in the South


Thanet constituency where the Tories were determined to beat Nigel


Farage. It is all sorts of expenses that the Conservatives claim should


be national expenses, or they haven't been on any expense returns,


which should be attributed to their local candidate. It is hard not to.


If you turn up to a help a local candidate, it is not like helping a


political broadcast, but if I'm helping a local candidate that cost


must be for the local candidate. Yes, it is better than that in terms


of proof, the people that were on the battle bus were proud of what


they were doing and they were tweeting about it, putting it on


Facebook and pictures of them and their candidates and we have


obtained the scripts that they went around with, hello, I'm Mikel --


Michael crick calling on behalf of your local candidate. And it will


not surprise you we contacted the Conservative Party this morning.


This what is they told us: Are they saying the battle bus we


can charge to the national campaign. That is arguable. But we admit that


the overnight accommodation or whatever it was, should have been a


local? Yes, they say that was an administrative error. They argue


that should be a national expense. We would say, hang on, you stayed in


that hotel to fight in that seat and that hotel. So they're still trying


to put it on the national ledger? Yes on the national ledger they were


bnd 3.5 million under the limit. So if it is a local expense and if it


was attributed to these seats locally, in most cases they would be


over the limit, the candidate would have spent too much. The limits are


important, in order to create a level playing field. Don't go away.


Well we're joined now from Bristol from the former


Liberal Democrat MP Tessa Munt, she lost her seat in Wells


What is your reaction? It is an extraordinary reaction, the idea it


is an error is tosh. The constituents in my area were


completely foxed by the fact that they had millions of leaflets


through their door. My agent said probably something like a quarter of


a million pounds worth of paper was delivered through doors and all the


leaflets referred to the fact that this was a campaign that all about


23 seats, of which mine was one and 23 seats does not make a national


campaign. We have photographs of people being briefed, there were


people who didn't know who my successor, what my successor's name


was, they couldn't pronounce his name, but they were knocking on


doors campaigning. So we have local campaigning that is being masked as


national campaigning. It is utter rubbish. Do you feel cheated? No,


but I think my constituents should feel cheated. Because actually what


we have in this country, we have been watching the American


elections, what we have to make sure we don't get is some sort of


ludicrous money-buying votes. That is what has happened. And when you


look at my election returns, all of the spending is accounted for, we


are clear and transparent about the way we have done everything. You can


see every leaflet and the invoice from the printer and all of the


information is there. It seems that this is not the way that the other


parties have chosen to fight the campaign. Thank you. Michael Crick,


is the question whether the commission allows to put it on the


national register or it is on the constituency and they will be over


the limit. I don't know entirely. They're trying to put it on the


national ledger, but the commission is investigating what we have


reported and what we said last night and it is not clear whether the


admission by the Tories results from that investigation, whether they


basically have been forced to say that, by the commission, but the


Electoral Commission, the impression we get is they're being hardline,


they have a reputation for being a feeble body. On this they realise


something has gone wrong. The question is whether they will


recommend to the police before the June deadline that there should be


prosecutions, or the alternative would be to allow under the law a 12


month extension for further investigations. Whether they go that


far or whether they say, look, there was clearly misinterpretation of the


rules and the rules need tightening up and they may go down that avenue.


More on Channel 4 tonight? Indeed. We will tune in. And they say


investigative journalism is dead. They're wrong.


The question for today is: in a radio interview this week what did


Hillary Clinton say she always carries around with her?


c) A copy of Donald Trump's book


At the end of the show we'll see if Natalie


David Cameron says he will press ahead with plans to force every


state school to become an academy despite increasingly vocal


opposition, much of it from within his own party.


One Tory MP has labelled the plans "Draconian,


Academies were introduced by Labour and extended


Currently, under Education Secretary Nicky Morgan,


55% of secondary schools and 18% of primaries are academies -


Last month George Osborne unleashed his big Budget idea -


forcing all schools in England to become academies


Nicky Morgan fleshed out the plans, which include ending the obligation


to have parents as governors, scrapping qualified teacher


status and giving schools taken over by a new head


But, much like else in this Budget, opposition to the Chancellor's plans


came swiftly and from all corners, including his own.


More than a dozen Conservative MPs have so far raised


concerns about the plans, including Stewart Jackson,


who said the plans were "Draconian, heavy handed and top down".


Critics even included a former Education Minister, Tim Loughton,


who said he supported academies in principle, but was unhappy


with a "compulsory and arbitrary" timeline being set.


The Local Government Association said ministers needed to "consider


the wishes of parents, communities, teachers


and councils before imposing any new education structures".


And a National Union of Teachers poll of its members found just 7%


of schools leaders supported the forced academisation plans.


But yesterday David Cameron defended the proposals


at Prime Minister's Questions, saying it was time


This is something started by the Labour government,


given rocket boosters under this government.


We see massive improvements in our schools because of academies


and we say let's get on with it, finish the job, and give all of our


I'm joined now by the Education Minister Nick Gibb.


Are you going to rethink these plans? No the vision I set out is


for all schools to become academies and that is the vision we will


proceed with. It is about ensuring we have good schools in every part


of the country and in every local authority area, because good schools


that become academies can spread best practice to underperforming


schools and underperforming schools get strong sponsors to improve edge


kalgs. It is improving schools so when a parent drops off their child


they can be confident the school is of high quality.


You are not going to listen to the strength of feeling within your own


party from elevated levels saying that Conservatives should be schools


choice rather than imposing an arbitrary line, ideally any in


principle but not the compulsion? We are listening and talking to


colleagues in the House of Commons and local authorities and the


teaching profession and we want schools to have flexibility and


choice in how they might become academies, standing alone or not. We


are talking about a period of six years and as a government we have to


know where we are going to be in six years when increasing numbers of


local authorities have 80% or 90% of academies. This is about giving


professionals control of their school so they can raise standards


of reading, maths, academic standards, and improve behaviour,


and it is working. 350 pupils in schools that are sponsored academies


that were underperforming and are not. Does the government have a


mandate to do this? Six years is a fairly long timeline. Obviously not.


There was no mention of this during the election. This is further


privatisation, taking a public asset and putting it into private hands


away from the control of communities. We believe all schools


should be under local democratic control. We want to get rid of these


schools and academies. There is simply not the evidence to say that


academies Asian in itself improve standards. Schools around the


country over recent years have fought off academies Asian and local


communities have said they might do not want to be academies and it is


being imposed. Many Tory MPs echoing those sentiments. One says,


academies have little accountability or parental environment. --


involvement. There is greater accountability. He is wrong? Yes. We


take swift action when schools that are academies underperform. There


are many examples of underperforming schools that stay underperforming


every year. That cannot happen with the academies programme because we


intervene swiftly to move academies and transfer them to better


performing schools. 30 Tory MPs against this compulsion element of


academies. We also have leading Tory councillors who have expressed anger


and are calling on you to rethink the policy. Someone saying if it is


not broke do not fix it. The Tory leader of Hampshire County Council


urging the government to focus on dealing with schools where there are


problems not win they are performing well. Schools that are performing


well have a duty not just to sit as islands, we have to take the


expertise of those strong head teachers and spread it to the


underperforming schools. Even in Hampshire a quarter of secondary


schools are not good or outstanding. It is not the fault of the people


who are outstanding. We want them to collaborate to make sure that every


school is high performing. You have failed to sell this policy. There is


a lot of Tory strength of feeling against that. That is my fault. We


need to do more to make the case. It is about ensuring there are no


underperforming schools in our system and that is what parents


want. Not a school that has been in special measures. We are talking


about schools that are outstanding. Tristram Hunt the Shadow Education


Secretary says you are in danger of not providing choice to parents. The


whole point of the academy programme under Labour was to give parents a


choice of schools and you want to take them all back under local


authority control. Choice involves schools competing against each other


seeking pupils that will give them the best results. The problem is


Jerry picking of pupils and pushing out of pupils who they think will


not perform. Our academies allowed to cherry pick? The local secondary


school in my area takes from the same catchment area it did under


local authority control. We have a whole philosophy education based on


schools competing against each other line to get the best for themselves


not for every pupil. What we saw in Brighton and Halls was getting


schools to coordinate together to get the best possible result for


every pupil in the area and that is what should be the foundation of


education. Is this going to be in the Queen's Speech? We are hearing


this is not going to be a piece of legislation. We never say what is in


the Queen's Speech until the Queen's Speech. We are pressing ahead. That


implies you are. We do not announce in advance what is in the Queen's


Speech. An underperforming school, fewer than half getting five GCSEs,


an academy took it over and nearly three quarters of children are


getting five GCSEs or more. Could you look at an exception for rural


schools who are doing brilliantly who do not want to be landed with


the burden of helping other schools? Rural schools have a better chance


of survival under a trust model that under the local authority because


they can share back offices, cut costs. No exception from them being


forced to academies? No. We want all schools to academies. We set out in


their manifesto that we wanted academisation to continue. We have


had to look six years ahead. We have authorities like Bournemouth won 87%


of schools today are academy. Where are we going to be in five or six


years? You must have known that when you were drying up the manifesto. We


said we were going to continue with the academisation process and that


is what we are doing. Now it's fast approaching 12:30pm,


which is usually the time that the Queen likes to take her gin


and Dubonnet while watching We know this from Buckingham Palace


sources. And perhaps today she might make it


a double because, in case you hadn't In the last hour or so the Prime


Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have been leading


the tributes in the Commons. As the sands of culture shift


and the tides of politics ebb and flow, Her Majesty


has been steadfast. A rock of strength for our nation,


for our Commonwealth, and on many As her grandson Prince


William has said, time and again, quietly and


modestly, the Queen has shown us all that we can confidently


embrace the future without compromising


the things that are important. Whatever different views


people across this country have about the institution,


the vast majority share an opinion that Her Majesty has served


this country and has overwhelming support,


with a clear sense of public service and public duty, as the Prime


Minister just indicated. She has carried out that duty


with enormous warmth. We know that the Queen is popular


but is the monarchy's popularity guaranteed?


Joining me now is Tom Mludzinski from the polling company ComRes.


Nothing has danger, has it? Politicians cannot get near the


favourability and approval ratings for the Queen. This gets close to


some of the Royal Family members, Prince Charles. The popularity of


the marquee is fairly steadfast. There have been blips along the way


around the time of Diana's death and the management of that but it has


been fairly rock solid in terms of whether people want to keep the


moderately or move to a republic. 75% have said they might want to


keep the monarchy. There is not a difference between the Queen's


personal popularity and the monarchy in general? The Queen is probably


slightly more popular but so are the young royals, Prince Harry, Prince


William and Kate Middleton are extremely popular, almost as popular


as the Queen in many respects. It is the intervening period. Prince


Charles is below his mother and his children. People are less keen on


Prince Charles than Prince William so that will affect people's views


towards succession. That is right but most people think it is right


that Prince Charles should take over from the Queen and become king. Much


depends on housekeeper forms on the roll and what sort of duties he


takes on. The public profile he takes on when he is king.


We're joined now from central lobby by the Conservative MP Adam Afriyie,


So I guess the Queen is one of his constituents.


As I mentioned earlier she is a republican.


Are you going to be celebrating the Queen's birthday? I certainly will


be. Can I correct you? She is not my constituent, I yam her subject and


she is a resident and she is a very welcome resident. What is the


difference? A resident does not have the right to vote. I yam her subject


rather than her MP. Are you happy being her subject? I always find it


quite churlish even better of those with the academic view that we


should move from having a monarchy because in practice the Queen is a


figurehead, head of state, she generates world peace and creates


social cohesion so she is doing pretty much what we want to do


though it seems churlish and bitter to say she should be removed as the


monarch. That was not my question. I wondered whether on the 21st-century


we should be regarding ourselves as subjects rather than citizens. It is


a technicality in the wording. It means quite a lot. We are a


democratic nation and it is the elected people like myself who form


governments. The thing I have noticed about the Queen is she is


always positive, optimistic, pulling people together and holding them


together. Weight often we create laws about social be -- and trying


to pull things together and she has played a greater role than many of


us politicians. Today I am not celebrating the Queen's birthday, I


am focusing on the election campaigns coming up. Why? I would


congratulate the Queen as an individual for her many decades of


service. She has done a huge amount of work, a huge job. In politics we


are focusing on the upcoming elections. You could not have a


toast? It would only take a few moments. I would have joined you in


a drink of course! It is really important we think about the


problems with our Constitution which were brought up in the elections


pending story. In our first past the post system we have a problem in


that the huge amount of focus is on swing voters in swing seats so... We


are talking about the monarchy. We are talking about constitutional


reform. What the Green Party's focus would be is on the House of Commons.


You do not want to get rid of the monarchy? I am happy to retain the


ceremonial monarchy like Sweden. What role does the Queen in this


country have that the king of Sweden not have? She has the power to form


the government. That is what the King does. There it is ceremonial.


We have seen it in Belgium as well. The King brings various parties


together. The Queen cannot give us a government we do not want. That is


clear. FORCEDWHITE We have a constituency


that relies on the her redry system. So does Denmark and Belgium. I want


to start with House of Commons of the House of Lords. It is clear from


all the polls and public sentiment that as long as the Queen is alive


the monarchy is safe. No one, even Natalie Bennett has an appetite to


do anything as long as the Queen is arrive. Does it come under more


danger when she dies and Prince Charles comes to the throne. It is


not a day to talk about death on her birthday. There is a danger of


having a monarch that may not be in tune with the people. But what the


Queen and Prince William have demonstrated that they recognise it


is about being in tune with the nation. But Parliament is supreme


here and at the end of the day if there were a situation which needed


addressing it would be addressed. I get upset with the comments that


smack of being sour when there is no practical matter that needs to be


dealt with. The Queen is doing wonderful work for the country and


the Government and the people and the common wealth and holding the


nation together. Don't get sad. What do you say to a historian who said


the Queen has done nothing that people will remember, unlike queen


Victoria and she sees the role as just a job and she won't give her


name to an era. I say thank you Mr Starkey, that is the point, that is


why we have had a harmonious nation and government for at least 90


years. If you had a referendum now, because it is the only way you could


get rid of her, you would have to have a referendum, you would lose at


the moment wouldn't you? We are not calling for that. We are calling for


a referendum on proportional representation. We had one to change


the voting system. You know that alternative vote is not proportional


representation. We had that vote and you lost. That is a non-row


portional system. Since this is the queen's birthday, we are not going


to discuss proportional representation. Have you passed a


law. Has she agreed to it. We will be together later in the evening, we


will have to see about that one. Natalie Bennett twice in one day!


Thank you for joining us. With Scottish, Welsh,


local and mayoral elections coming up in just two weeks,


the Green Party are hoping to turn what they term the green surge


into votes at the ballot box. But despite achieving a record


3.8% of the vote in last year's general election,


the Greens failed to win any extra parliamentary seats,


so will it be different this time? Our guest of the day


Natalie Bennett thinks so. Here she is speaking at the party's


local election campaign These are really exciting elections


for the Green Party. We have more than 1,500 candidates


up and down the country. Many of them will be out today


knocking on doors, out delivering People are doing the hard


work to turn that If you look back a bit


to 2015, we outpolled You contrast that to 2010


and we outpolled them in one. Natalie Bennett is here. Your


counter parts in Scotland are set for a bumper election, some suggest


they could win eight seats. Why is the party flat lining in England and


Wales? I don't think that is true. What we have in England and Wales


where we have proportional representation, the London Assembly


and the Wales Assembly, our leader in Wales did a brilliant job in the


first leader debate. But the Welsh party has dropped to 3% of the


regional vote and that is down from 3.4% at the last Assembly election.


Party membership in England and Wales has dropped from 66,000 to


63,000 last year. You're going the wrong way? What we are seeing is


63,000, contrast that with 12,000 when I became leader. But it is


going down. I find there is two groups in the council elections,


there is places like Sheffield, Liverpool, Oxford and of course


Bristol, where in Bristol west we got close to winning our second


Parliamentary seat. Places where we have been strong we are looking to


become stronger. That is the thing, you're going to try and extend your


presence and your vote in those areas, but you won't improve your


standing in places where you're not. Where we are growing is the other


group of councils where we are making an impact where we have a


chance to win our first seats and I have been travelling around the


country where even a couple of years ago there may not have been a Green


Party. Now we have a chance to win our first councillor. People like


the message that says we are tired, we are not happy with the council


performance and we want a new Green broom asking questions and


challenging. That is a message striking home in many communities.


What about in London, the mayoral candidate polled as low as 2% in an


opinion poll. That is down from 4.5% in 2012. What we seeing as the


mayoral election heightens up and people are hearing what our


candidate is saying, her slogan is the power of good ideas. She has


good ideas that will translate into votes in the mayoral and the London


Assembly, where we have already had two representatives and we have a


chance to grow that representation here. What impact will the results


have on your future leadership, will you stand for re-election as leader?


Well as I have said, at the moment there is only one election I'm


focussed on, which is the elections in May and the referendum. These are


the elections the democratic elections for the whole people of


England and Wales. Because you haven't made a decision? No the


Green Party, it comes up every two years. At the moment I'm not


thinking about that. People say if you're planning to stand again, you


wob able to say so now, are you waiting for the results of election


first? No I think it would be a distraction if I were to say


anything. If you said you were standing again, why would that be a


distraction? We want to focus on electing our first green councillor


in Exeter and Newcastle. I'm not talking and anything else. You're


taughting about -- talking about it. But it is coming up and people may


want to know why you couldn't say yes. We have elections. Let's focus


on the local elections where people debate local elections. We have been


heading to an a presidential style of election and that is not right we


should focus on the local elections. The Scottish green leader said


greens believe in bringing power closer to the power, wouldn't a vote


to the leave the EU bring power closer. Well we are campaigning to


stay in. Jenny Jones isn't. Last year about 95% backed a remain


campaign. The Green Party has people with different views. But we have no


problems with that, because the Green Party doesn't whip. So we are


comfortable with people having different views and as Jenny did,


state her position and stating the Green position that we believe we


need to work together on the joint problems that we face. We need to


make decisions at the right kind of level. If we are thinking and


pollution and workers' rights, we need to work at a European level.


Thank you. Now, they're pre-programmed,


are told what to say, and aren't No, I'm not talking


about politicians. And they're getting


smarter all the time, With technology advancing at speed,


what will the rise of the robots mean for us mere humans


and the jobs we do? Here's Tom Watson, the deputy leader


of the Labour Party, Robots used to be the stuff


of science fiction, but they're In his budget last month,


George Osborne announced that driverless cars will be trialled


on our roads as early as next year. A development that will have huge


ramifications for the haulage industry, cab drivers and possibly


the rail industry too. Management consultants Deloitte say


that 11 million jobs will go when robots do the work that


humans do today. The age of automation will unleash


forces as profound and destructive as the Industrial Revolution did


300 years ago. Our question has to be -


do we make technology our friend I think we have to embrace it


and I want the Labour The last machine age led


to the Industrial Revolution From the factories and the railways


to the town halls and public squares But it also left a terrible


legacy of inequality, disease, slums, poverty,


child labour and it took a combination of capitalist


philanthropy, municipal leadership and the power of organised


labour to change that. Despite their rhetoric,


the Tories don't have a proper Because their ideology dictates


that the market alone must We believe in harnessing the power


of the enabling state to everyone gains from the benefits


automation brings us. We are entering the second machine


age, a new era of automation. It sound like science fiction,


but this isn't the stuff of HG Wells, it is happening


in Tonbridge Wells right now. We did ask to speak to a robot, but


none was available. A bit like Conservative ministers. You


mentioned this statistic that robots will claim 11 million jobs, isn't it


in the nature of the reports that they're always wrong? Generally. But


it points in the right direction. Deloitte said there a is high


probability of 11 million jobs and a possibility it could be 19 million.


If you look at analysts, there was a report from the Bank of America that


say they think half of global manufacturing jobs will be


automated, the jobs that are done by humans that would liberate $9


trillion of labour costs. So there are big changes, technological


advance is getting quick and that state of flux is greater and you can


only deal with that change if you are prepared to put the empowering


state at the heart, working with employers and workers to deal with


the disruption. I can see the role of state skilling people for the


changes, but governments, and it is also clear that you can see what


jobs existing jobs could be in danger. The one thing governments


can never do is see what new jobs will come. You can equip people to


be ready to move. If youI were sitting here in 1994, we would never


have seen all the jobs that the internet was going to create. That's


right. But if you just say let's leave to it fate, let's leave it to


the goods of the market, as as state you will miss opportunities. My


argument is we need to institutions that bring the state together in


partnering up workers and employers to make sure we are investing tax


dollars in the right way. What else would it do? It doesn't predict the


future. As I said, I see the point of making sure the people of the


country have the best skills to be able to move which ever way the jobs


are. But you risk huge investments in areas that don't turn out. The


French Government did this in the pre-internet age and invented its


own pre-internet technology. It doesn't exist now. You're to let


entrepreneurs develop technology, but how you skill the workforce. If


you look at the NHS, people are now wearing wearable medical devices,


measuring their own health. We scowled have a revolution in health


diagnostics creating a new generalers are of clinicians. We


can't even digitise health records yet. We spent 12 billion failing to


do that. We are good at fail, because on the left you have a sense


of people go to protectionist measures and on the right there is


the sense you can't plan ahead, because the state does haven't a


role. You need sensible pragmat tichl.


There is the Luddite tradition. Has that gone? In the British Retail


Consortium a third of retail jobs would go in the next generation


because of warehouse technology. They work very closely with


employers to make sure that new jobs are created and the workforce are


supported. You think particularly the union wing of the Labour Party


which often oppose new technology in the 60s and 70s, these days are


gone? They have an interest in protecting the interests of their


workers. You cannot stop technological advance and you have


to make it your friend or enemy but you can provide a safety net for


workers in industries in transition. All of those poor journalists


affected by the destructive power of technology, you have to find new


ways to support information in the hands of citizens. There have been a


lot of other journals jobs created in different ways, which often do


not pay as much. How would you judge the performance of the Labour Party


in the various elections in May? Certainly not doing interviews with


you won I talk about 200 wins or whatever. Expectation management. I


have no idea what the outcome of the elections in May will be because


they are easy ways of separate elections and the local campaigns


and local government elections are going to be unique. You are not


going to give us a yardstick? I do not have one. How are relations with


your leader? You support Trident. You want to curb the influence of


some of Jeremy Corbyn's supporters. If that was the price it would be


disastrous. We get on very well. I just wondered how you were getting


on giving your various positions. Very positive. We have struck up a


close personal friendship which allows you to have different views


of the world than manage that. If Labour was to lose the London


mayoral election I would suggest your performance in Scotland, Wales


has been hemmed in, but would there be another leadership crisis? That


is another way of getting me into expectations management. I spoke to


Labour Party members. They hoops Jeremy and me as leader and deputy


leader and it is up to them if they want to express their dissent. A big


issue you have been associated with, then it will be 2012 you said there


was a clear intelligence suggesting a power powerful paedophile network


linked to parliament and Number 10. No one has been arrested much less


charged. Operation Midland has been closed down. You were wrong? A


number of people have been arrested and some of them convicted. Not to


do with a paedophile ring connected to Parliament and Number 10. There


is a public inquiry looking at that and various criminal inquiries that


are not complete. There have been no arrests of a powerful paedophile


ring involving fee is a Number 10. It was the information exchange. We


know that. I did not know that. Used and by that statement? There have


been no major political public figures charged as a result of this


investigation. When you are a parliamentarian you have to see


where you can make a difference. We have criminal inquiries and


investigative journalism and a public inquiry and we have to let


them do their work can see where the outcome comes. Come back and talk to


us about this. I would be delighted. How does the Queen know


what her loyal MPs are up to? But she also has other


ways of finding out. One of the government whips,


the Vice Chamberlain of the Household, writes Her Majesty


a dispatch every evening to tell In the first year of the Blair


government, this task fell to Janet Anderson,


who has just published her missives BBC Radio 4 has dramatised a small


selection of Janet's Wednesday 8th of April,


your Majesty, last day before the Easter hols,


so suffice it to say that honourable At 3pm Madam Speaker announced


questions to your Prime Minister, only today it was your


Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for the Environment,


Transport and the Regions. Two million jobs being lost from our


manufacturing sector... When John Bercow, a rather odious


little Tory MP from Buckingham, tried to provoke your


Deputy Prime Minister, This was the man, he boomed,


who had been chairman of the National Federation


of Conservative Students when Norman Tebbit closed it


down because it was... Michael Fabricant is,


the Conservative MP for Mid Staffs, who looks for all the world


as though he wears a wig but won't admit it,


could be described as... Your Majesty, your Secretary


of State for Social Security, Harriet Harman, was first up


for questions today. It is almost impossible


to see her in action without recalling the hatchet job


done on her by the Observer One really does wonder


whether she is going to recover. Janet Anderson MP with humble duty


reports Tuesday 9th of June 1998. Your Secretary of State


for Social Security Harriet Harman was even spotted in the smoking room


buying rounds of drinks, I can assure your Majesty this


is not a regular occurrence. Mr John Bercow introduced a ten


minute rule bill to prevent anyone who does not pay income tax


or is resident outside the country Seems rather sensible,


but what a shame it had to be introduced by such


a tiresome little man. Bercow constantly bores us


with his attempts to be more 11% of average earnings


in the United Kingdom by contrast So irritating had this become


in a recent debate on sport that Labour's Stephen Pound from Ealing


was moved to comment, personally I would rather


have a sex life. Janet Anderson is with us now,


and we're also joined by the current occupant of that role,


the Conservative MP Kris Hopkins. It is racy. What will you writing


those things to the Queen for? I thought she could read Hansard if


she wanted a parliamentary report. I got the sense she had a good sense


of humour when I met her. I thought she might appreciate some of the


gossip, what went on in the bars and the tearoom and what everyone was


saying about each other. I think she did. Did she give you feedback? Not


directly, but the Prime Minister did. Also her private secretary


Robert Fellowes said to me how much she had enjoyed it. She used to read


it every evening before dinner. As an aperitif before the main course.


You going to write these daily digests to fill in the Queen what


has been happening in Parliament? Janet perhaps adopted a radical


approach. Are you going to do the same? I have been doing it for a


year. The content remains private. It is a great privilege to write to


our Majesty. I understood it was against the official secrets act to


publish these so there may be space in the tower for you. You get taken


hostage by the Queen. It is dramatic. I am picked up by a and


said a biscuit and a cup of coffee. Is that as torturous as it becomes?


There was a problem a few centuries ago when one member of the Royal


Family came to the palace and did not return, so I am a hostage and


win the Queen comes back I return. You are safely returned. I remember


as they were leaving for Westminster Prince Philip said to me, if we do


not come back safely, you get shot or something, don't you? He said, we


will not be able to do that because you are going to ban handguns. They


Bulls have a very good sense of humour. They were great company. The


Queen is very adept at making you feel at ease. I remember my first


morning in Buckingham Palace thinking, if my mother could see me,


but she is so good and so skilled, and if we think of the hundreds of


thousands of people she has to make small talk with almost daily, she


makes you feel she is interested in you, she wants to hear what you have


to say. Are you enjoying her birthday? Absolutely. Do you get a


uniform? Morning suit, top hat. A wand of offers. You can perform


magic tricks? It feels like that. When I was asked if I would consider


taking the job my only rule was no ties. Do you get paid more? The


role? The role comes as part of the government Whip roll. What is wrong


with John Bercow? John would be the first to say he could be quite


difficult when he first came in, but he is much more popular and I think


he is a very good Speaker. You might want to re-edits some of those.


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


The question was: In a radio interview this week what did


Hillary Clinton say she always carries around with her?


Was it a) An American flag b) Hot sauce c) A copy of Donald Trump's


So, Natalie, what's the correct answer?


I do not know the answer. I was going to guess Donald Trump's route


because it might be cathartic to have the punching session. The most


logical answer would be coffee. It is hot sauce. I think she likes to


add it to whatever she is eating. The Department for Education say


that it is 66%, not 55%, of secondary schools that are


academies. 5655 schools in total. You look like you've


just seen the Grim Reaper. Well, it was a lot to take in,


wasn't it?


Download Subtitles