28/04/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 28/04/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



We now know that the 96 football fans who died at Hillsborough 27


But should the current Chief Constable have


Naz Shah has been suspended from the Labour Party over


Has the Labour Leader been too slow to act over this and other


We'll be speaking to Ken Livingstone.


Leaving the European Union is a threat to jobs, wages


and prices say the Prime Minister and a former union boss.


But a group of economists claim quitting the single market


would boost national income and raise living standards.


# This is what it sounds like...#


We put a Prince mega fan through his paces.


I saw Prince live, you know. Did you? A great night, I think.


From what I can remember, which isn't a lot.


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


Liberal Democrat Leader, Deputy Prime Minister


First this morning, the Chief Constable


suspended following Tuesday's verdicts in the


David Crompton is accused by campaigners of overseeing


attempts to shift the blame on to Liverpool fans


Police and Crime Commissioner, Doctor Alan Billings,


who took the decision to remove David Crompton from his job,


I've reached of this decision with a heavy heart,


following discussions with David, both in the run-up to


and following the delivery of the Hillsborough verdicts.


My decision is based on the erosion of public trust and confidence,


referenced in statements and comments in the House


of Commons this lunch time, along with public calls


for the Chief Constable's resignation from a number


Nick Clegg, should David Crompton have been suspended? I think there


should be no alternative. I spoke to AlanBillings about it, the day


before the judgment came out. I think it was quite clear from that


and other conversations that whilst of course David Crompton was not


around 27 years ago, the decision by South Yorkshire Police to continue,


after by the way having issued a fulsome apology to the families in


Liverpool, to nonetheless, continue with a lot of the misinformation


that had been perpet waited by South Yorkshire Police over so many years,


was a huge error and quite, rightly, I think, he has taken responsibility


for it. Is there a risk, that because of the failure to get to the


truth for 27 years of what happened that day, at Hillsborough, that


individual police officers today may be unfairly blamed for the actual


deaths of the 96 fans, remember than, or just for the cover-up. Of


course, there are lots of risks. I as a constituency MP in South


Yorkshire, on behalf of of my constituents, I'm worried, for


instance, that the good, dutiful professional dedicated police


officers who work in the South Yorkshire force, who have nothing to


do with the events, either what happened in Hillsborough or


subsequent events, they are deeply demoralised now. Urgently, for the


people of South Yorkshire we need to somehow try to restore a sense of


morale and purpose to the force itself. Unfortunately for the force


it goes wider than Hillsborough. If you look at the explanations of one


of David Crompton's predecessors to the House of Commons about the


horrific things that happened in Rotherham, the sexual exploitation,


and some very vulnerable children there, claiming the force had no


idea what was going on, I'm afraid this is another hammer blow against


a force whose credibility has been damaged in so many respects over a


long period of time. Should David Crompton resign, go permanently, do


you think? To be honested. He is suspended now. This is not going to


be fixed by whether or not he is suspended. We have a were found


problem in a police force who for various, complex reasons, have


simply not met the most basic standards not only of integrity but


professionalism on a number of fronts over very many years.


Something radical needs to be done. Whoever is elected as the Police and


Crime Commissioner in South Yorkshire next week, this is their


absolute number one priority. Now some people have said about


disbanding the force, folding it into another one. I'm in the if that


necessarily will produce better policing in the local area but


clearly every option needs to be considered. A message on a website


for the forces' retired officers said they had dedicated and


courageous careers and they should be proud of their work, deit spite


the inquests' conclusions. What is your response to that? It is a very


insensitive thing to say, right now. In the very strict limits of how it


might have been intended, of course it is right to say there are plenty


of individual police officers, I know many of them, who are as good


as police officers, any other around the country, and their integrity


should not be willfully be besmirched because of what happened


27 years ago or recently in the inquests but to say that now. It


wasn't meant for public consumption But to say that - I can understand


why the families of the 96 feel it was an incredibly crass and incense


think of thing to say but look, I'm also a South Yorkshire MP. I want a


good police force to do good work for my constituents and the problem


at the moment you have a force in complete disarray. So after the PCC,


the Police and Crime Commissioner elections next week, we finally have


to turn a page on this very, very sorry history of the force over many


years. Thank you. Our Guest of the Day,


Nick Clegg, is a big music fan. But which '80s' popstar did


he dress up as when he was Was it a) Mick Jagger, b) David


Bowie, c) Freddie Mercury I know which one I'm ghg for. -- I'm


going for. So the Bradford West MP


Naz Shah was suspended from the Labour party yesterday,


pending an investigation into whether tweets she sent before


she was an MP were anti-Semitic. She had already resigned her


minor and unpaid post as Parliamentary Private Secretary


to the Shadow Chancellor, The party will hope to draw


a line under the matter but today more questions


are being asked about its handling of this and other


allegations of anti-Semitism. Yesterday, MP Naz Shah


was suspended by the Labour Party following the discovery of social


media posts she made One post suggested the country


should be moved to the United while another showed


Martin Luther-King with the caption "never forget that everything Hitler


did in Germany was legal", This is not the first time the


Labour Party has been accused of Last month activists


Gerry Downing and Vicki Kirby And yesterday, Bradford councillor,


Mohammad Shabbir, was also excluded Several senior Labour politicians,


including Lord Levy, say the party has a "serious


issue" with anti-Semitism. Labour MPs John Mann


and Wes Streeting have criticised leader Jeremy Corbyn


for being "flat-footed" on the issue, and said


they want to see the Labour The Board of Deputies a body that


represents British Jews have called on them to implement a strategy on


this issue. And we're joined now by the former


Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, Who is facing calls to be suspended.


I have heard a lot of criticism of Israel, I have never heard anything


anti-Semitic. I think blurring the things undermines the real


importance of anti-Semitism. A real anti-Semite doesn't hate the Jews in


Israel, they hate their Jewish neighbour in Golders Green or Stoke


Newington, it is a physical loathing. When Naz Shah MPed a very


Kates the forceable removal of Israeli Jews to the United States,


it is not anti-Semitism? No, it is over the top and rude. I supported


Naz in her campaign to... Is that not anti-Semitism? No, she was rude,


over the top, who am I to denounce anyone for doing that The forceable


deportation of Jews? Wrong. Not anti-Semitic I don't think she S it


was incredibly rude. I don't think she was an anti-Semite. When the


investigation is finished they will say she was rude and over the top


but they won't find evidence that she hates Jews. When she urges in an


online poll that show wants people to vote her way because "The Jews


are rowing", that's not anti-Semitic? We have to investigate


the charges and contexts in which they are made. If she is


anti-Semitic, like the other three or four members we have found to be


anti-Semitic, she will be expelled. When she posted a tweet, linking to


a blog which claimed that Zionism was grooming Jews to exert influence


at the highest levels of public life s that not anti-Semitism? That's


part of the classic anti-Semitic thing that there is an international


Jewish conspiracy. She link to the blog. You have said there isn't a


provenlt I suggest to you that the evidence I'm giving to you suggests


that at the very least one should have an open mind? I have an open


mind. No, you have said she is not anti-Semitic I see nothing to


suggest to me that she is anti-Semitic, I wouldn't have


supported here, if I thought she was. When she the puts on social


immediate and disaccept nights a slogan "Never forget anything that


Hitler did in Germany was legal." Is that not anti-Semitic? It is a


statement of fact. Hitler passed the laws to allow him to do it. What is


the point of the fact? It is history. But Hitler was mad, he


killed six million Jews. Why would you undermine it was legal to kill


six million Jews? She is not saying it is legal, but what they did in


the way they ran that country allowed them not to kill only 6


million Jews but kill the Communists and lefties like me. My father


almost died when a Nazi sub, sinked his boat. We all have fares fathers


like that, not all. So when the Luton Labour councillor was


suspended after describing Hitler as "the greatest man in history" and


saying she wanted Iran to wipe out Israel in a nuclear attack, that is


not anti-Semitism? That is and that's why she has been suspended or


expelled. You said there sent anti-Semitism in the Labour Party?


No, what I have said is that in 47 years in the party, in all the


meetings I have been n I have never heard anyone say anything


anti-Semitic. There is bowed to be in a party of 500,000 people. You


will have a handful of anti-Semites and a handful of racists. You don't


seem to know what is going on, within your own party, and you have


been a life-long member. When Vicky Kishy, when she says Jews have big


noses and slaughter the oppresside that semitism? -- Vicky Kirby?


That's anti-Semitic. You have dug out virtually every comment. All


from recent years. You have said you never heard anything I never H You


didn't know about these? When they erupted in the news, yes. I have


never met any of these people. Meeting them is not the issue. It is


what they said. When Kadim Hussein, former Labour Mayor of Bradford


shared a post complaining that the schools in the area only taught, Ann


Frank and six million zionists killed by Hitler that's not


anti-Semitism? That's why he has been suspended. So there is a


problem There is not a problem. You are talking about be a handful of


people in a party of 500,000. Jeremy Corbyn has moved rapidly to deal


with all of them. No he hasn't. He didn't want Naz Shah to be suspended


order Vicky Kirby. She is the one by the way who says Jews have long


noses and slaughter the oppressed. He met with Naz and they agreed she


would stand down while the investigation goes on. He called her


in to see him. We have hand #ye8d these things very rapidly. --


handled these things. Miss Shah is a colleague and friend, also a member


of the Labour Party, a Bradford councillor, who has not been


suspended who refers to the Jewish people as zial, which you will know


is a racial epitit. If it is, he will be expelled. You are talking


about a huge investigation, virtually anything everyone has put


on the internet and it has been found. You have said in 47 years it


hasn't been a problem In 47 years I have not heard anyone say. You have


missed this? No, many people are new and recent members of the party who


joined in the big influx. 300,000 new people came N some of them are


bound to be... Some of these are not part of the 300. Maybe you don't see


anti-Semitism because you set a very high par bar for it. Afterall you


are the man who welcomed Yuset Al-Kari to London in 2005. Called


him a grossive voice. This is man who called for Jews and homosexuals


to be killed. Is that not anti-Semitic? No this is the man who


called on Muslims around the world to donate blood after the attacks of


9/11. When he came to London I went to him with the mosque where I heard


him say - no man should hit a woman and you should not discriminate


against homosexuals. I cannot equate whey heard him say to... He has


heard for Jews to be killed. You embraced him. A man who made a clear


aented accept itedic statement? -- anti-Semitic He made no anti-Semitic


statement here in London, this stuff has come out more recently.You


didn't know this. No, all I knew was... You didn't do due diligence


on him I don't investigate people.You don't worry about the


people you may be sharing platforms. You talk about women, he also said


"To be be a solved from guilt a rained woman must have shown good


conduct." None of with that was what he said in my presence. Hitler was


kind to dogs He advocated at the mosque no Muslim should hit his


wife. You didn't know that he said Jews should be killed. He didn't say


anything like that at City Hall or the renalpents park mosque. There


are now 11 MPs calling for you to be suspended from the Labour Party.


-- from the You are under some pressure


this mornings aren't you? I have said what I believe to be


true, that Naz Shah is not anti-Semitic. She made remarks, but


that does not make her an anti-Semite. There was a


confrontation between you and John Mann. We can show you a bit of that.


You are a Nazi apologist! You are rewriting history! Go back and check


what Hitler did! You have obviously never heard of Mein Kampf! Have you


never read it? From 1932. I had been a journalist since 1973 and I have


never heard an MP calling a fellow MP a Nazi. A Nazi apologist. A


Labour MP to pay former mayor of London and former Labour MP and


Labour activist, chair of a Commission, Nazi apologist. He went


completely over the top. I was doing a radio interview at the time and he


was shouting, I am a racist, anti-Semitic. I have had that with


John Mann before. Screening a couple of weeks ago I was a bigot down the


phone. It does not worry you these Labour members, many of them in the


mainstream, not Jo hold Blairite enemies, that they see an apologist


for people making anti-Semitic statements in your party. I am not


an apologist for anybody making anti-Semitic statements and they


will be expelled from the party if they are doing but do not confuse


that with criticising the Israeli government. It is not criticism of


the Israeli government policies for a member to say Hitler was one of


the greatest people in history and juice... They will be expelled from


the party and that process has started. Can you continue as head of


the foreign policy Commission, at given everything that has been said?


These things -- these things dominate the news and people, down


when they check what you have said. I am sure a lot of people have had


phone calls from the Daily Mail, and when they talk to me, that is not


what I am saying. We will leave Nazi -- we will leave Naz Shah to be


investigated and if she is not found to be innocent, she will be


expelled. Chris Ryan, the Labour shadow Leader of the House has said


this. In Parliament today, he said anti-Semitism is wrong, and of


story, I am tired of people trying to expel it away and, yes, I am


talking to you, Ken Livingstone. He should check my record. We worked


with Jewish groups to get across to our children the scandal of the


Holocaust and the groups challenging anti-Semitism and I had a very good


working relationship with the Jewish community. You are found to have


brought disrespect to your office when you like and a Jewish


journalist to a concentration camp guard. I cannot tell a journalist,


whether they Jewish or, whatever, but if he is chasing me at night and


barking questions at me, you might be rude to them and some people


might hit them. He said he was just doing his job. You were found to not


be doing your job, the enquiry found you had brought disrespect to your


office. We went to the High Court and the judge opened his judgment by


saying, I hope nobody here will suggest Mr Livingstone is


anti-Semitic and we won the case. What you make of this? I understood


the reason why it Labour MPs were calling for you to resign was not


because she defended Naz Shah but it because you reportedly said


something about Hitler's approach to Zionism in the 1930s, is that right?


He did not speak does she did not win the election but became the


largest party in 1932, his policy was not to kill Jews to deport them


to Israel. I am shocked, in all my years of politics, I have never seen


this perverse logic which throws Hitler and rewriting Hitler --


history into a sensitive debate. What is this is to talk about Hitler


and your views of his approach designers given what happened and


given the sensitivities around the Jewish community here and around the


world. Of course everybody defends a person's right to be critical of the


Israeli government and my party, we have had issues. I have had to


suspend people. You suspended one for three months. He said many awful


things. The point is there is something, this was said last night,


there is something on parts of the left in British politics that enters


into an incredibly intellectual retorted justification to link


Hitler and modern politics. Your colleagues think you are part of


that. The simple truth, that was Hitler -- that was Hitler's policy


when he first came to power, the move Germany's Jews to Israel. So


that is all right? No, I denounced that. Why raise the point? I was


interviewed and you have known me not to answer a question. I do not


understand. I1940, Adolf Eichmann wanted to forcibly remove him to


Madagascar and now we have a Labour MPs saying he should be forcibly


removed to America, I do not understand the point. I was asked a


question and I answered it, you have never known me not to. That was


Hitler's bowl -- policy in 1932 when he came to power. You are a


household name and people know you in the country and you are part of


mainstream politics. I never thought I would see the day well-known


politicians would rake over Hitler's views in a way that people would


simply not understand. Things, they are either historically true or not.


That is one reason I pursued my policies because I do study history


because if you do, you can avoid making the same mistakes again.


You're also a politician responsible for choosing your words carefully


and not entering this weird and contorted view that allows you to


talk about Hitler in the same breath as the Jewish community in Britain.


It is extraordinary. What about political comparisons, is that not


the problem? Why do you use the Holocaust is a political comparison


to highlight your objects and to be Israeli government? That is what


offends people. My objection to the Israeli government, for nearly 70


years, Palestinians stock, why use the Holocaust and hip to underline


that point? -- Palestinians. I make no point between the current Israeli


policy and the Holocaust and Hitler, was asked the question in an


interview. If you say, was it true we were invaded by the Normans in


1066, I would say, yes, that is true. I will not avoid the truth.


We're joined now by the Labour MP John Mann.


You have seen them having a confrontation earlier. We have been


speaking to Ken Livingstone and we showed your remarks, he says you are


over the top calling him a Nazi apologist. He is a Nazi apologist


and he is a worse historian than he is a politician. Factually


inaccurate. He should read Mein Kampf, by Hitler. He should study


what the Nazi state including what Hitler did when he came to power in


1993 and the events of that year and he should see what the first and


second and third thing that Nazi regime did and who it targeted and


why. He should look at what he and his leaders said about Zionism. And


he should reconsider why he has said these hugely offensive and grotesque


remarks. The timing is calculated. And offensive as well. He should not


be sat on Labour's National Executive Committee, he should be


suspended today. What do you say to that? I simply say, go back and


check, is what I said true or not? The BBC have a huge team of


researchers and it would take a couple of hours to go back. What is


the point? I was asked a question and I answered it. In 41 years since


winning my first election, 45 years, I have never lied. I do not think it


is entirely historically accurate because they had already started


attacking the Jews when he came to power. It was not an attack to say


he would deport all the Jews. You seem to be implying he was not such


a bad guy because he just wanted to deport them and he just went wrong


later on. People will think this is unbelievable. He was a monster from


start to finish, it is simply the historical fact that his policy


initially was to send Germany's Jews to Israel and there were private


meetings between Zionism and Hitler's government that were kept


confidential when they had a dialogue about whether to do that.


Do you think Ken Livingstone is anti-Semitic? Yes, he is and his


rewriting of history. He is factually wrong. Hitler was not a


Zionist. He blocked any attempt to get Jews into what was then


Palestine. And the reason he did so and he said so and it was expressed,


was because a Zionist state would be an international Jewish conspiracy


and a base for it. He said it in Mein Kampf and it was said by his


foreign Minister who specified that in great detail in 1937, outlining


why they were not prepared to allow Jews they wanted to get rid of the


leave to go to what was then Palestine because it would have


created a power base for an international Jewish conspiracy.


Hitler was not a Zionist. And to suggest so is so grotesque. It is


calculatedly offensive. I think you have lost it, Mr Livingstone, I


think you need help. It is a deliberate calculated attempt to


cause problems and to stir up hatred. What you on at the moment?


You should certainly not be on Labour's National Executive! Do you


understand why those remarks, you say you are telling the truth, but


how they would it -- would set a community and people who lived and


survived or died during the Holocaust? -- upset. That is not


true, I have not said it was a Zionist, I said his policy in 1932


was to deport Jews to Israel, that does not mean I agree. You said it


today, do you withdraw that? I said that was his policy and it was


followed by private conversations between the Zionist leadership and


Hitler's government about whether to carry out that policy, he did not.


You are raising these points about the early 1930s at a time when the


party faces a crisis of anti-Semitism in its own ranks.


People will be baffled this is what you are doing. I am not raising


these points, and was planning a nice quiet morning in the garden


until I am descended upon by these journalists saying, is this true? I


would be happier to do the garden, it is a nice day out. You have been


here and you have answered the question is, that cannot be said of


all politicians. We are grateful for that. People will make up their own


minds about what you're saying and we will let you go back your garden.


John Mann, thank you. Now, what's the best way of dealing


with Britain's drug problem? Stricter laws, better enforcement


or harsher sentences perhaps? Well, our guest of the day,


Nick Clegg, thinks not. In government, he was


a big proponent of but failed to persuade his


Conservative cabinet colleagues that Giles has been looking


at the arguments. In British politics,


it seemed we'd all agreed that cannabis and other drugs


would and should be illegal. No politician who wanted office


was going to seriously Whenever they have, they've lost


and they've been told For a variety of reasons,


countries like Uruguay, Portugal and nearly half the States


of America have relaxed their laws on cannabis at least because,


they say, total The intense attack on prohibition


of cannabis over the last 30 years has led to a shift


in the nature of cannabis. We no longer import balanced


cannabis, which has a mixture of THC and cannabidiol,


from Morocco or Lebanon, we have tended to result


in home-grown cannabis, to get the maximum


bang for their bucks. It's a chicken and egg


argument about a plant. Does prohibition make


underground drugs far stronger, open a gateway to experimentation


with harder drugs? And even if that's the case,


now it's out there, would decriminalisation


or legalisation - they're means skunk, spice and other


synthetic replacements would simply It's rather like suggesting that


if we took a drug that was freely available, alcohol,


that people wouldn't want to drink vodka or whisky,


they would prefer just So the drugs genie


is out of the bottle. But do people who are


criminalised want to seek help? Does somebody with a criminal record


for smoking something arguably less dangerous in moderation than alcohol


find themselves marginalised? These are some of the arguments


Nick Clegg has explored in other parts of the world,


and others agree. Free markets in all drugs


would be a disaster. But where countries have


decriminalised the possession of drugs, we have seen often very


good health gains. And the classic example of course


is Portugal, where it realised it was economically unfeasible


to continue the traditional way Let's look at Colorado,


for instance, where they have decriminalised and


legalised cannabis use. Amongst 12-18 year olds being


randomly tested in high schools, we used to see about 5.6% of those


young people testing So the drugs genie


is out of the bottle. Now it's up to 57%


since legalisation. But trading drugs initiatives aside,


there is one problem that has always pushed drugs use,


especially cannabis, You have a lot more people


who wouldn't have developed psychosis, schizophrenia-like


condition, if they hadn't And the trouble is that a good


proportion of them are so dependent I rang a drug addict


friend of mine who's in recovery and I said,


Jamie, what do you think He said, well, if you legalise


drugs, send the police round, put me in handcuffs,


because in six months, I'd be dead. They've failed to understand


what addiction means to people. If you're an addict,


you can never get enough. For all the arguments for changing


things, it seems the obstacles, if you'll forgive me,


are as high as ever. We're joined now by the Mail


on Sunday Columnist Peter Hitchens. Welcome to the Daily Politics but


Nick Clegg you have returned from atending a UN summit in New York on


drug reform, it was widely panned of being something of a damp squib.


Disappointed? I wasn't surprised. You have such diverse opinions


across the world so you have nations like Asia and China, Asian countries


that want to chop people's hands off if you touch drugs and you have the


huge experiment in Latin America towards decriminalisation and or


legalisation, the film conflicted the two, so the world is quite


polarised in its debate. So no wonder if you bring those countries


together they can't agree. So nothing substantial was achieved?


Not much was achieved there. What is happening is the interesting thing,


what is happening in countries across the world who are


experimenting, innovating, trying to do something different to reduce the


harm of drugs, that's where the debate is now. Not in the UN it is


more at national or even local level. Do you accept that because


there are polarised positions, as Nick Clegg has outlined, it is very


difficult, then, to look at what some people would argue is the


sensible view of decriminalising some drugs, in ordered to reduce the


number of people who are actually becoming addicted to harder drugs?


Almost everything you have said was factually wrong there. The problem


with this debate is it is conducted a the a level of ignorance which is


positively astonishing. The biggest decriminalisation experiment


probably in the Western world has been conducted in this country since


1917 under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Cannabis has been effectively a


decriminalised drugs for many years. The head of Flying Squad said so in


1994. Lord hail school that well-known hippie instructed


magistrates to stop sending people to to prison for cannabis possession


in 1937. The number of people arrested and prosecuted has been


dropping like a stone in the past few years. Before then the police


invented something without asking Parliament, the cannabis warning, to


let people off. Canning business possession has been decriminalised


in this country. What is going on now is a well-fund the campaign, I


call it billionaire dope, to achieve the next stage, the marketing,


selling on internet, advertising and selling in shops and huge profits to


be made, while at the same time - this is vital, the mental health


risks, are enormous and Nick Clegg's party has been very rightly


concerned about mental health, and the way it is neglected, a huge


contribution to mentedal ill innocence this country is made by


the very drugs which he seeks to legalise. Taking the point that in


your view Peter hitch yins there has been a de facto... It is not my view


the fact are available. I can present a book to Mr Clegg, if you


read it, you will have to stop saying everything you say. Don't say


you don't get any gift on this programme. In terms of mental


illness, that's the big worry for people, that actually you can argue


for decriminalisation and we will cite statistics from countries like


Portugal that have shown you can then remove the barriers to help


addict. But a because of the nature of the skunk or the cannabis which


is now being dealt, you are getting increasing inspects of young people


suffering from schizophrenia, why is your party still pushing that? I


think Peter, bless him, just is on the wrong footing. Don't bless me.


Drugs are bad for you. Right. They cause harm. I'm a dad, I don't want


my kids hooked on drugs. You have to reduce the harm of drugs. What you


can't doe, which is Peter and other - is shou wish it away and somehow


think you can prohibit drugs out of existence. They have been in


existence for thousands of years, they will always be with us. So as a


society, if you want a grown-up debate you have to ask yourself why


the war on drugs, and the prohibitionist approach has not


worked and ask yourself, for instance, if you want to look at the


evidence, and the data, why is it that we have just had the highest


rate of drug-related fatalities in this country, 3,500 people,


drug-related deaths in 2014. Portugal, after decriminalisation,


and by the way, they didn't do it for some hippie instipt, they did it


because originally they were worried about the link between drug


addiction and hth HIV contamination, a spread of HIV. They have had 22


drug-related fatalities. At some point people like Peter have to


accept that the war on drugs is not working. If something is not


working, I generally think you try something else. If you look at the


cover of the book you will find to says - the war we nevering fought.


Peter, can I just put to you... No, Nick Clegg is aski for an adult


argument. Hang on, let me put the figures to you. In Portugal -


because people are interested in evidence-based n Portugal the number


of street deaths from drug overdozes, fell, the number of new


HIV infections from dirty needles fell from 2,000 to 400. In


Washington state, the first year of legalisation, raised a lot of money,


too, that went into helping drug addict, but marijuana-related


convictions fell by 81% after the first year of decriminalisation.


There is a mix of figures. But everything comes down to


decriminalisation and legalisation. Let us concentrate on something I


know about and we can influence, what is going on in this country,


the covert, de facto, decriminalisation of cannabis in


this country. You need to look at the figures on the past five years


alone the number of arrests for cannabis possession has halved. The


head of Bristol police said earlier on this week they weren't bother to


arrest people for cannabis propossess. If you stop pretend


there is a savage prohibitionry war. This country isinvolved in a huge


decriminalisation experiment. All the things you blame on prohibition


are the result of this experiment about which you appear not to know,


all the figures are available. Some obtained by you in parliamentary


questions asked by you, you ought to know. If only people would discuss


this and let's discuss it factually. I wrote a book on this, it contains


the details of how this happened. Why don't you pay any attention, you


say you are worried about your kids... Hang on. We have run out of


time. If you are worried about your children you should not be pleased


with the way they are exposed wholly to a completely unrestrained


cannabis trade. Peter, hang on, let Nick Clegg answer Peter, of course


is correct when he is saying that there is sort of de facto


decriminalisation going on. Thank you. I'm going to right that down


and quote T It is not a remarkable discovery. . You have never said T


you have said a couple of years a... ALL TALK AT


ONCE Pietersener, you need to let him speak, it is not a monologue.


Let him speak. You do yourself no favours with this. I'm doing a big


favour. Nick Clegg I'm pointing out his views are not remarkable. Of


course there is de facto decriminalisation going on, the


Chief Constable in Durham has made it clear his police officers are not


going to arrest people for the personal possession of cannabis. On


that narrow point I agree, let's have honesty decriminalisation is


happening. What people doesn't address is that you have this sort


of legal twilight world where it is happening in practice but it is not


recognised in law, at the same time, it is the criminal gangs who


nonetheless continue to profit from it all. My question is - to what -


at what point is criminality, mass criminality the answer to drugs and


the what were that they do to individuals? I have never understood


why anyone think that is letting criminals run this industry is the


best way to protect youngsters. Because they have no interest in


protecting youngsters whatsoever. So let cynical businessman run t like


they ran the tobacco industry. Thank you.


A quiet day today. So the Prime Minister has today


joined forces with the former General Secretary of the TUC,


Brendan Barber, arguing that leaving poses a 'triple threat'


to workers: on jobs, But this morning, in the Commons,


eurosceptic Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin claimed


that the government had done a dirty deal over the Trade Union Bill,


watering it down in exchange for Union backing - and cash -


for the 'Remain' campaign. It has been confirmed to me,


through more than two independent sources,


Number Ten instructed these concessions to be made,


after the discussions This being true, would amount


to the sale of Government policy This wreaks of the same


as "cash for questions". This shows this Government really


is at the rotten heart We're joined now by Patrick Minford,


one of eight economists in favour of Britain leaving


the European Union, who have said this morning that quitting


the single market would boost national income and raise


living standards. Would it not be fair to say when we


have the IMF, EECD, the World Bank, Treasury, IMS, all saying that...


That you represent a perfectly distinguish group of economists, you


are outliars on this debate? When you are say we are outlayers, it is


an impressive list but all Her Majesty's Government's friends which


have been lined up to pitch in and how many have done any work on this?


What we have done, is a lot of work on this, ape the glaring kind of


hole in the modelling of the Government, in a nutshell, is that


they have assumed we leave the tariffs of the EU in tact when we


leave. Our point is this is crazy because the big gain from leaving


the EU is to get rid of tariffs and go to unilateral free trade. That's


the option. When you do that you unleash a dynamic of falling price,


food prices for the poor, very important. Manufacturing prices.


These are raised 20% by EU protectionism. Let me unpick that.


Because that's interesting. First of all, does


Our consumers are paying for it. All of these bodies you've spoken about


have not looked to these point. The assumed wittingly carry on imposing


the common external tariff on everybody outside. The entire point


of leaving the EU is to gain freedom over our commercial policy, our


trade barriers and move to free trade. Nick Clegg? I am perplexed.


Is there any guest I will agree with? I didn't realise that was the


exercise. I hear to disagree with everyone? I am perplexed because the


single market is created by your former boss, Margaret Thatcher. If


you pull out of it, but you just said you would. And then abide by


WTO, it would absolutely hammer British export manufacturing,


700,000 people working in the car many factoring industry in this


country would suddenly faced 10% tariffs, the farming community would


have 30% tariffs, the benchmark one Gisby kebab. You would have a very


detrimental effect on manufacturing, yet the rest of our economy, so


important to services. Would be a lot out of the actors we need to


single market. I find it very curious free to do. You must read


our report for the full answer but basically the single market does not


apply much to services yet. Leslie that on one side because it's not


that it is not complete. So we leave that on one side and it's small


potatoes in this argument. That is the answer to your last point. On


the first point, what you forget, who pays for all of this protection?


The answer is the British consumer. In addition, the British consumer


pays for higher prices, for German and French partners and German and


French manufacturers. The British Digital carries an enormous load.


For you see dust bodies are wiped out his element, they have forgotten


that when we leave, the best policy is to get rid of all of this. Every


first year student in those that free trade dominates protectionism.


What the Treasury in their wisdom have neglected is that this move to


free trade is beneficial to the British economy. You were talking


about unilateral free trade, saying we should take with all of our


tariffs, even if other countries keep their tariffs against us.


Exactly. One of the things we make in our report is that trade


agreements, which everyone is banging on about, have no effect on


our welfare and trade. They divert trade, they do not affect the total


of trade. This talk about trade agreements which Nick and his


friends are banging on about is irrelevant. What matters is our


tariffs because we are a small the world market. What we can influence


is the price are consumers pay, and that is what we focus on. With all


of these August bodies and great men like Nick have not looked at this.


Where can I view as read about it? There is a pamphlet on our website.


Thank you. Our poor children being let down by poor teaching? A report


from the commission on inequality in education and the social market


foundation, which is chaired by our guest of the day, Nick Clegg, says


disadvantaged children are more likely to have less experienced


teachers with fewer qualifications in more affluent ones. Adam has been


asking people here in London to speak about the teachers who had a


big impact on them. Who's your favourite and why? A man called Mr


Rheingold, who was an ex-prisoner of war, fantastic teacher. And


stimulated thoughts, ideas, and everything. I was always bottle of


the class because I never listened. Never did any homework, and it was


the maths teacher. I was always quite good at maths and she took me


under the wing as she listened and I went up the class. That was a


favourite. Mr locum for my English teacher. He just made everything


fun. Is that the most important thing? Yes, because if you have fun


while learning your reserved information better and learn to


enjoy it more. He was yours? I didn't really like any of my


teachers. At school? Mrs Hirst, English teacher, fantastic. Gave me


a love of literature, brilliant. Stayed with me for my entire life.


Do you think teachers can be taught how to be good? No, it would have to


be Mr Farrell because he made economic relative and quite fun.


Have you been using economic knowledge in the last few years? I'm


a trainee accountant, so yes. You only Everything! I wouldn't go that


far but I do treat him to the odd pint when I go back. You start out


with him? Every Christmas. Who was your favourite teacher was like Ms


Holden, the first time I ever liked will go up at conferences Lien the


return of the Jedi. And she was a teacher. We are joined by the Vice


the University. Nick Clegg Comey said this research of disadvantaged


pupils get a grand slam of poor teaching. The research done by the


social market foundation and a data lad that look at the latest facts


and figures is that schools, catering for higher numbers of


children and free school meals, which is the best if somewhat


approximate way of doing it. It's the best measure of disadvantage,


they tend to have teachers with law or no qualifications. Ohio numbers


of teachers with low or no qualifications. Teachers without


degrees in subjects are higher numbers of teachers without degrees


in the subject they are teaching and higher turnover of teachers. For


that reason a lower number of experienced. Those combined to


create, despite the good efforts of the teachers there, lower quality


teaching. This is long established that of all the things that affect a


Chad Dawson at education, curriculum, class sizes, if it is


called an academy or not. The quality of teaching remains at the


most important thing. As we progress through this year along commission


and peel away the different layers of the problem, it appears that the


qualifications and longevity and experience of teachers in the


classroom and schools need the most of their qualified teachers. It's


the wrong way around, I understand. Having teachers who are qualified in


the subject they are teaching, they should have good degrees or


professional qualifications in that area. I was lucky when I was at


school that my teachers had honours degrees in the areas they were


teaching. Is it your arguments they also need a postgraduate certificate


of education that they need to be qualified not just in their subject,


but also as teachers? I think this is where can I do assure making to


speak about this more expertly, the section defines the real because you


can say I have a brilliant history teacher who never had qualified


teacher status and they were the most inspiring teacher ever. That


might be true and I'm sure there are lots of cases like that, but the


general principle appears and the evidence is pretty overwhelming for


it, that having a qualified teacher status does raise the standard and


quality of teaching in the classroom. Let me put that point


Anthony. Teaching is a profession, you characters page up and thing you


can do it because you are well taught. I think Nick and the


commission right to put a spotlight on teaching in the most deprived


areas where you do need to have the best possible teachers and that


stability that Nix speaks about because continuity, known faces and


contrast and families as well. What about this qualified teaching status


was not differ on that because qualified matters but you can do it


the job. I wouldn't want to leave so many gaps in the King as people


think an entirely out from my life that makes entire year out from my


life, learning on the job does work. He said teaching as a profession.


Learning on the job is a trade. That is what journalists do. We are a


trade not a profession, learn on the job. What you just described is what


traders, a profession get a qualification that makes, a


profession get a qualification. It is different but it's not planned


internet. You learn best, I did that year out, learned best from being in


schools where as part of that there was lots of training in the school.


What really helped me to learn how to teach as far as I can was to see


other people teach and there's no alternative to getting in front of


people. It is not either or. Professional qualifications involve


on-the-job training. You are quite right. And if you do ask new


teachers, one wonderful thing is you have lots of newly qualified


teachers who actively want to go to the schools with the highest number


of challenges. What goes wrong, they do not stay for some reason. And one


of the things they say is that what they want most is a more experienced


teacher in that same subject. To help them plan classes and so on.


That is something some schools and Academies trust stew but it needs to


be done on a more widespread scale and we should consider whether we


pay them. I think I could walk into Nick's old school and teach a class


on political science or economic some. Without training. For a little


bit, at least. It would be much more difficult to go into a difficult


school and teach subjects without advice on how to handle these


children who have got all sorts of problems. But it is seeing the


really gritty experienced teachers doing it, seeing the real-life


interactions and seemed you do it, Nick talking about men touring


important things. There is something different about teaching, you have


to do it on the job. Trainee doctors get medical tuition and they go into


the water. The other key thing is leadership, if you get great


leadership, so we are setting up a leadership college because nothing


matters more than a headship. Then the teachers whilst an and they will


attract the best quality and retain them. You both agree on that, and


where can we see this report? On the Social Market Foundation website.


Thank you. Nick Clegg has talked his way out of


having his knowledge tested on the late Prince. Can you remember the


question for our quiz of the day. There's just time before we go


to find out the answer to our quiz. As we've been hearing,


Nick Clegg is a big music fan. But which '80s popstar did


he dress up as when he was Was it - a) Mick Jagger,


b) David Bowie, c) Freddie Mercury, Ziggy Stardust. We have a picture.


Thank you for the picture of David Bowie, I was going to say! It could


be anybody. That is very embarrassing, thank you very much.


Good job it is not late-night television.


And I will be on BBC One for This Week with Shelagh Fogarty,


Anne McElvoy, historian Susanah Lipsscomb, Michael Portillo,


Alan Johnson, Miranda Green and John Nicolson, from 11:45


And I'll be here at noon tomorrow with all the big


Download Subtitles