19/05/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 19/05/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


There are more than 400,000 more people in work than a year ago -


but are most of those new jobs going to immigrants?


but will the raft of bills she announced do anything


to distract from the referendum debate raging in the Conservative


An Egyptair airliner with more than 60 people on board -


including one Briton - goes missing en route


from Paris to Cairo - we'll bring you the latest.


And what happens when MPs try their hand at stand-up comedy?


Unfortunately, Mr Speaker, in the medical context, PR does not stand


for public relations. But is shorthand for the top of examination


that involves putting on rubber gloves, applying gel and asking a


man to cough! All that in the next hour


and with us for the duration today - our own comic genius -


the General Secretary of the Trades Union Congress -


or TUC - Frances O'Grady. First this morning -


more than half of the new jobs created in the UK in last years went


to non-UK nationals from the EU - that's according to figures released


yeasterday by the Office The ONS said that 409,000 more


people are in work than a year ago The number of non-UK nationals


from the EU working in the UK increased by 224,000


to 2.15 million. So EU migrants made up


55% of the increase The figures have been seized


upon by those campaigning for us Former work and Pension Secretary,


Iain Duncan Smith, said "the truth is that it


is Brits on low pay - and those out of work -


who feel the consequences of Let's just look at some of these


figures a little bit. One in six jobs in the UK, 5.2 million out of a


total workforce of jobs in the UK, 5.2 million out of a


now held by people who were born abroad. Does that have no effect on


wages or the prospect? Not according to the London School of economics


report was published, which showed there wasn't any harm, but of course


people worry about wages. But I think is the real threat to


immigration, * of a Brexit. That may immigration, * of a Brexit. That may


these figures to get the TUC immigration, * of a Brexit. That may


created in the past year, but 80% of them want to people born outside the


UK. 80%. Does that have no effect on wages or


UK. 80%. Does that have no effect on need to be really


UK. 80%. Does that have no effect on workers aren't the


UK. 80%. Does that have no effect on they are the victims of low pay, and


UK. 80%. Does that have no effect on if we going to cause the causes of


low pay, we need to get tough on business greed, make sure people


have a proper living wage, that under 25-year-olds aren't excluded


from the higher minimum wage, that's the kind of action we need to take


and we need strong trade unions in areas like construction. Quite a few


and we need strong trade unions in unions are... I haven't got the


figure for you. You looked at unions are... I haven't got the


general counsel, you will see generations... I mean the ones who


have generations... I mean the ones who


years, they are not rushing to join unions. A lot of migrant workers are


in the areas of the economy where we find it hard to organise because


they are zero hours, high turnover, those are the root of the problems.


Let me get to the root of this, there are 2.2 million EU citizens


working in the UK. It has doubled in five years, it used to be just over


a million. Are you arguing that that huge increase in labour coming to


this country has had no effect on wages? I don't think there is any


evidence to show it has, but what I would say is that there are areas in


food companies, food manufacturing Company 's, construction site, hotel


and catering, where some bad employers have deliberately gone


over to Eastern Europe, hired labour on agency contracts and used them to


undercut pay. We know that has happened. So there are 1.7 million


people in this country looking for work but unable to find it. And you


telling me that arise in 1 million more EU citizens coming here to work


has no effect on their ability, the 1.7 million, to find work? What I'm


telling you is the real issue here is how to rein in those bad


employers who use workers from overseas to undercut local workers,


and undermined union agreements. People have been calling that the


years, I am trying to work out how given that we have just under 2


million people still looking for work, unable to find it, and over 1


million from the EE you alone, put aside those coming in from outside


the U, which is flat lined in recent years will stop that huge influx of


labour, unprecedented in our history in terms of size, has no effect on


those in this country, on low pay, or without a job? The real effect is


whether or not we get tough on greedy employers, whether reinvest


in our infrastructure so we create decent, well-paid jobs. But that's a


generalised thing. Because these numbers are huge. Let's take those


who have been doing low paid jobs. Romanians and Bulgarians have been


allowed to come here since 2014, unimpeded, that's when they became


full members of the free movement of labour. How many have come in since


then? A quarter of a million Romanians and Bulgarians now working


in this country. I think we can agree that most of them are doing


low paid work. Absolutely. Does that have no effect on the pressing the


wages of those of our citizens already on low pay? Only if you let


employers get away with it and politicians don't need let employers


get away with it. But even the last Labour government took almost nobody


to court for not paying the minimum wage, thinks there were about ten


convictions. And this government has introduced employment tribunal fees.


The latest figures aren't actually coming from Poland and Eastern


Europe or even so much from Romania and Bulgarians, they're coming from


what you might call the old E 15, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and


they might not be doing quite as low-wage work as some of the ones we


have been talking about. 250,000 in the last year, that has no effect on


our labour market? In itself that isn't the issue. I think what we


have to do is, why have we got 6 million workers in Britain earning


less than the living wage? Why haven't we got a decent industrial


strategy? If we keep on bringing labour in in this quantity, it'll be


a long while, you know enough about economics to know that if you


massively increase the supply of something as we have done in recent


years, the price falls. It does if you allow employers to get away with


it. It's not the case in every country that immigration drags down


wages, in fact the London School of economic support suggested it was in


the case here either. But where has mass immigration not put down wages?


In European countries, where do have strong collective-bargaining


coverage, where... What is the average rate of unemployment in the


Eurozone? It is 10%! Here is the basic economic. If you remove the


incentive from employers to use immigrant labour is cheap labour,


they stop sending people... No one has stricter labour laws than


France, they have the kind of label as you would like in the TUC. It is


almost impossible to hire and fire somebody. I think they are under


pressure. And you know why, because 25% of young French people are


unemployed and French wages have barely moved in real terms for years


and yet they have had, like us, a huge increase in immigration. There


isn't a shred of international evidence to suggest that by making


workers weaker, you improve employment opportunities. Why are


25% of young French/ unemployed? I know that French unions tell me that


as in this country, people feel the balance of power has gone too far in


favour of employers, and the rule solution is putting some power back


in the hands of working people. If everything you say is right, if this


huge rise in workers coming from elsewhere has had no effect on


wages, why wages only rising by 2%? We're still suffering from the


crash, the bankers crash, and the failure it was seven years ago. I


know! What has happened since in terms of getting to grips with...


But if this huge increase in labour has had no impact on the price of


labour, rye, eight years after the crash, on wages rising by 2% all


less? But it was the crash that really damaged wages and don't


forget, inequality was rising long before we had the crash. You can't


be happy they only rising by 2%? I am certainly not. If we don't get


back the demand in the economy, we won't get the economy moving. We


need money in people's pay packets to buy goods and services.


And if you want more analysis of these employment figures -


and what they tell us about migration, you can go


The question for today is who is the most powerful person


in Doncaster - well, according to the Doncaster


At the end of the show will, we give you the correct answer. What is One


Direction? Is that the street? There was lots of pomp


and circumstance - and plenty of bills were announced


but we had heard about most of what the Queen


said yesterday before - and by the end of the day


Conservative MPs were talking about its implications


for the EU referendum. There were 21 Bills in Her Majesty's


65th speech to Parliament. prisoners home on weekdays only


using electronic satellite-tagging Extremism was also


on the government's agenda, with a new civil order regime


to restrict extremist activity in England and Wales


and new powers of intervention to tackle radicalisation of children


in "unregulated education settings". And the Conservative plans


for a UK Bill of Rights before final proposals


are brought forward. But if the Government hoped


yesterday's Queen's speech would bring some respite from rows


about the EU referendum, as critics were quick to point out


that there was no sign And we're joined now


by the Leader of the House Let's start with prisons, something


you know something about in your previous role. Is allowing prisoners


to live at home joined the wickets of Justice? Depends on the second


stance. Where you have people who have been convicted of a sentence


early on, who might get a community sentence otherwise, it is important,


we know the link between offending and implement is massive, so if in


some situations the court judge that an individual is better off being


left to work during the week but to lose the liberty of times when they


wouldn't be at work, it's a different approach and could make a


difference. Different to the approach you had when you were


running prisons? I pursued a strategy of providing better support


for people through the gate on the left prison. Give me some examples


of how you did that. He said, life must be made harder for criminals.


Is this what you had in mind? What I did was a continuation of what I


started in 2010. Buy into the situation where 50,000 prisoners a


year were walking out after short sentences with no guidance, support,


nothing, never get proper planning for release and support for 12


months after. One of the things I did was double the might of


education that young offenders get. You try to ban books coming into


prisons. That's a myth. That never happened. Now, where trying to do


more in adult prisons with people with no qualifications, mental


health problems. He is continuing a process with good, innovative ideas


about how we stop enormous levels of reoffending. Nearly 60% of


short-term prisoners and 50% of all prisoners reoffend within a year.


Who's fault is that? Some jails are not fit for purpose, Michael Gove


says, that must have happened on your watch. What I did was build new


prison wings, started the construction of a major new prison


which Michael is going to continue with. It is turning around Victorian


prisons some of which don't have space to build a workshop. Why are


they overcrowded and dangerous? Let's be clear, the prison


population is almost the same as it was in 2010. The number of places in


the system is almost exactly the same in 2010. Identix the premise


that the prison system is massively more overcrowded than it was in the


past. Why did Michael Gove say they are not fit for purpose? We have


seen footage inside some prisons where prisoners are running a mock.


Some of our prisons are well out of date, built in Victorian times. It


is not a question of overcrowding but out of date facilities. I built


a big new prison in Wrexham, we are building new wings in prisons.


Michael is moving ahead with nine new prisons. It is about bringing in


modern facilities that are fit for purpose so we send people back onto


the streets in better shape. Some other elements of the Queen 's


speech. The Bill of Rights. Will there be legislation in this


Parliament or is this going to be a consultation? Yermak row I'm


expected -- I'm expecting legislation to come forward in the


not too distant future. We have been told it will be a consultation. That


usually means another few years down the line before any issue in terms


of legislation is discussed. When you think the legislation will come


forward? In the not too distant future, after the period of


consultation. We're going to bring forward detailed proposals. We will


discuss them. Then we'll move on. You're going to scrap the Human


Rights Act brought in by Labour and leave the European Convention on


Human Rights? It's about rebalancing the relationship between our courts


and European courts. There is a number of ways you can strengthen


the powers of our courts. Wait for the consultation document to see


that. I'm intrigued. You can't change the supremacy of European


courts unless the UK leaves the European Convention on Human Rights.


Is that going to be proposed? We will have to wait and see. I am not


going to announce that today. We have set out plans to change the


balance between our courts and to change the nature of human rights


laws in this country to make our courts stronger. You will have to


wait for the detail. It would make our courts supreme over European


courts? It is to make our courts more superior over. The crucial word


is supreme? Are you going to make courts supreme? Millar you will have


to wait for the detail. I am not going to announce them today. It is


not a detail. It is fundamental. I will leave it for Michael when he


announces the consultation package. Can I check something quite


important. The European Court of Human Rights is written into the


Scottish devolution settlement, it is part of devolution. You cannot


change that. You cannot come out of it without the permission of the


Scottish parliament, which I think you know as well as I, you won't


get. You are just going up a cul-de-sac. What's written into the


devolution settlement is the wording of the convention. That's what I


just said. We have never said that we want to move away. The issue is,


over a lengthy period of time, courts have moved away from where we


believe human rights laws should be. Moved away from the spirit of that


convention. We seek to address that. We will pick over that with a fine


tooth comb. Were you disappointed that the sovereignty bill was not in


the Queens speech? It has to wait until after the referendum. I hope


it won't arise. I am campaigning to leave and if we do leave, the


question doesn't arise. The question of the referendum has basically


dominated. It was amazing how little was covered in the Queens speech in


terms of its dominance in terms of the referendum. You say that but we


are putting in place the remainder of our manifesto. We have delivered


almost all of the manifesto. We are creating life chances for people in


deprived backgrounds. There is a very strong and broad ranging


package. There was no sovereignty bill. You hope it won't arise.


People want to focus on higher education, skills, terrorism. We


have just passed a bill on immigration in the last few weeks.


It has been through the Lords and passed into law. What about


homelessness? That Bill wasn't there. We have just had a Housing


act passed into law in the last couple of weeks. All of this has


been a shout show to couple of weeks. All of this has


referendum. I don't think so. For example, the Digital economy,


referendum. I don't think so. For strengthening is a crucial part of


our economic future. That's in strengthening is a crucial part of


there. Measures to deal with adoption and care, really important.


Will be there once the referendum is over? Of course.


Will be there once the referendum is for government for the next 12


Will be there once the referendum is months. Of course it will carry on.


We will be negotiating to leave the European Union at the same time, I


hope. It is necessary to progress with a domestic programme that will


benefit with a domestic programme that will


European Union. Will you still be in the Cabinet after the European union


if we vote to remain? the Cabinet after the European union


They always say that the Cabinet after the European union


it happens to be true. Can't we be honest about the sovereignty bill.


It was to buy off Boris Johnson and he has ratted on you so there will


no be no sovereignty bill. On one thing I agree, I hope there won't be


a sovereignty bill because I hope we will be leaving


Now, the Shadow Home Secretary and former


Labour Leadership Candidate Andy Burnham has announced his bid


to become Labour's candidate for Mayor of Greater Manchester.


Here he his launching his campaign at a speech


Our own party, you've heard me say this before, has been too


London-centric down the years and, consequently, we've left a situation


people out there, haven't felt that we are responding properly


What I want to do, in launching this campaign today,


is develop a distinctive brand of Northern Labour.


Give Labour a stronger Northern voice that speaks


to the people out there and I think that's what


And Andy Burnham joins us now from Salford.


Welcome to the programme. Why are you abandoning Westminster? Because


I think I can do more to change this place, greater Manchester, and


indeed politics in this country by making the statement. Westminster,


over the centuries, has left us with an unequal country. I would go as


far as saying, it has failed the north of England. We have a very


uneven distribution of resources, life chances and power. I don't see


that Westminster is going to change that. There is an opportunity to


rebalance the country by making this decision I think I'm sending a


statement that this country needs to change and we need to rebalance it,


south to north. That's at the heart of my campaign. You don't even think


a Labour government would do that rebalancing? It did. I'm here in


Salford, media city is just over the way. We did many things to change


the media power of the country. I remember, many in the BBC weren't


keen but we were right to do it. To try and rebalance the way that the


country worked and bring different voices onto the airwaves. There is


only so much you can do. The inequalities in England are very


deeply entrenched. That's why am saying that we need a campaign for


an equal England. It is an balanced between north and south and we've


known that for many years. Now, there really needs to be a moment of


change. You don't have much confidence in Labour's ability to


win the next election because you said the party did things to change


the balance but you don't believe they're going to be in power in 2020


and you have decided to leave Westminster and go your own way. I


don't see it at all, how you can claim that, the point I make today


is that Labour needs to revitalise in the North of England. We need a


distinctive Northern voice if we are to connect with voters here. There


is a worry that we are losing our group with some voters here. They


feel that we are to London centric. You've heard me say that many times


over the years on your programme. In my view, I can do more to help the


party by making this statement, by working now to revitalise Labour in


the north. I think that can do more to build towards 2020 election


victory. Jeremy Corbyn have spoken about this in much detail. I gave


him a commitment to work with him to build the Labour Party coming out of


the last election. I have been doing that in the Shadow Cabinet but we


have agreed that I can move into this role to continue this process


of rebuilding and strengthening labour in all parts of the country.


That is how we will win in 2020. Jeremy Corbyn, from a London


constituency, is he to London centric and as a result his Labour


Party? I don't personalise it. The party has been to London centric


over many years. It goes back a long time. It doesn't help that Jeremy


Corbyn is seen as a London metropolitan elite. It wouldn't help


persuade the people you want? I don't think that is right. If you


look in our big cities, the big cities really rallied around Jeremy


Corbyn in the leadership election and he won well in the North as well


as in the south. He has got a very big mandate and people want a


different kind of politics. He was absolutely right about that. I want


to work with him to build that. Is he right on immigration when he says


that we should have more migrants and refugees coming? I have said


over many years that immigration is overall a good thing. That is the


argument that Jeremy makes. I make this point, from a Northern 's


perspective, what we hear on the airwaves on programme's like yours


is the London take on immigration, that it is a purely good thing about


driving the economy. That has left people in the North feeling that


politicians aren't speaking to them. In the former industrial


communities, there are pressures on public services, undercutting of


wages, and the failure of the Labour Party to address those issues about


a decade ago has given us a feeling that we are out of touch in parts of


the North. I want to change that and corrected. That is part of why I am


making this move. Is Jeremy Corbyn addressing that issue in the right


way for northern constituencies like yours? I thought it was absolutely


brilliant, I think, a fortnight ago when he challenged David Cameron in


the House of Commons to support a European proposal to stop the


undercutting of skilled wages. It was his first question at PMQ 's


couple of weeks ago. Cameron squirmed and wouldn't tell us


whether his MEPs would back it. Absolutely, Jeremy Corbyn was


raising the right issue and it's an issue that Labour needs to talk


about more. Labour movement can be a good thing but don't let it undercut


the wages of skilled workers across the North of England. It was


brilliant that he took that issue directly to the Prime Minister. Andy


Vernon, good to talk to you. Thank you very much.


The lesson of London is, if you want to win, have a top-class candidate


and if you lose, you have a dirty campaign. So the better the


candidates, the Queen of the fight... I think Andy is great and


no doubt there will be other great candidates as well. I think it's an


opportunity and Boris Johnson, and now Andy Burnham, there could be


elected mayors of our major cities, we go more like the Americans, the


French or Italian roots, they then become springboards, into national


politics. The Prime Minister of Italy was my of Florence before and


Boris Johnson is now going international politics, big-time


bust up -- mayor of Florence. It gives them experience as well. It's


no bad thing in terms of the calibre of our political leadership,


regardless of party, for people of our political leadership,


have that executive responsibility and some big ambition in terms


have that executive responsibility their party. Because they are


directly elected. Most of us living in the UK


are willing to open which ranks


27 countries based on people's readiness to let refugees


live in their countries, towns, neighbourhoods and homes,


in a so-called China tops the list of 27


countries in the survey, followed by Germany,


and then the UK. And coming in


at the bottom - it's Russia. Around the world,


10% of people would let But that figures rises


to 29% here in the UK. 47% of people in this country


would welcome refugees And a big majority of


people in Britain, 87%, say refugees should be allowed


into the country. Meanwhile,


66% of people around the world think their governments


should do more help those fleeing We're just trying to make connection


there with him. Let me come to you first, Kate, were you surprised that


we came third? I wasn't surprised by the results at all, we decided to do


this poll because we kept being told by governments around the world that


people don't want to give support and a refuge to people fleeing war


and persecution, and that's not what we see, it's not what we see in this


country and not what we see in many parts of the world. So we thought,


let's do a poll, let's test this, let's see what comes from the pole.


What we get there is 20 out of 27 countries where over 75 people say


that refugees, people fleeing war and persecution, should get support


-- over 75% of people. I think it's interesting that China came first,


people were answering that question in a country with little experience


of refugees but answering it from the heart. Have taken very few


refugees in recent years? Yes, but this country that came second is


Germany, which has taken in a lot. What you're getting is a response


from the heart in terms of China, people have little experience of it


but saying all the more cynical interpretation would be taken say


yes because they know the government would never allow it. We're talking


to ordinary people through a polling company. People are very careful


what they say in a country like Germany. The Dilma Rousseff --


China. How do we know whether to believe them or not, when they said


they would accept refugees in their home? It is a poll, they are


answering what the poster has asked them. What we see at Amnesty, people


campaigning with the local councils, asking them to take refugees,


particularly keen and angry about this government's policy in terms of


refugees from Syria, where we have taken 1300. 1300 in a crisis of 5


million across the world. Last year this country took in about 20,000


refugees, it's not right to say it's 1000... It's a lot less than Sweden,


per capita, Gregg Gillis, and a lot less than Germany. -- a great deal


less. I was talking about people from Syria where the government has


announced a programme... From the camps, not the people already in


Europe. The numbers here in the UK are very, very small. It is Sweden


and Germany in Europe who are taking something like 50% of refugees


across Europe. So our country is doing very well, actually, in


providing resources and providing support for people in the region,


it's not doing well in terms of the people here who needs help. What we


are saying is that all countries who could afford it should provide


support for people from the region and also ticking people... Some of


the most vulnerable. And what we need is a global response, so the UN


is meeting next week and again in September... Can't even get a


European response! So how could you ever hope to get a global response,


when even the EU has not managed to come up with a concerted United


response? I know, and it is appalling that the EU has left


Germany and Sweden and others to do the things that they have done and


nobody has joined in, but it doesn't mean we should stop demanding... It


is the biggest refugee crisis since the end of the Second World War.


What was the size of the sample in the UK? 1000. The only reason I ask


is it is different from the private polling of the political parties,


especially on the conservative side. One of the reason I believe the


government has taken a hard line is that polling shows it wouldn't be


popular. But look at public opinion, that has made the government changes


mind on taking people from Syria, public opinion that said we should


take children when the government was trying to say that defeated,


again and again, our government, our politicians underestimate people in


this country. Some of the private polling I've been told is very


different from your poll but we will never know the difference is, let me


bring in Stephen, migration spokesman for Ukip who has been


listening to most of this. This polling would suggest that we are


rather generous country, that we realise our obligations to refugees


and we should take more in. What you say? I think the polling is right to


suggest that people in Britain have always been welcoming the genuine


refugees, we have accepted those in the past, and we are kind and


generous nation. I am not so sure that a poll of 1000 people, I


haven't seen exactly what type of people they were, what class of


individuals... We assume it is a reasonably robust potent it has 1000


people by a reputable polling company, with no polls often don't


get it right but it must give a fair snapshot of opinion. It would


suggest that if the government lived up to the humanity and the record of


the British people, it would be prepared to take more refugees, not


talking about migrants, more refugees. What would be wrong with


that? Again I emphasise, even if you look at Ukip's policies in the past,


we said we had to have our responsibilities to the UN


agreements we have signed but this year I think we will accept 38,000


genuine asylum seekers into this country and I think we spent, with


the government, over a billion helping out those in Lebanon decided


to take in 38,000 mile and you have seen recently those we're going to


accept as well, with the children. So the country has accepted its


responsibilities but up and down the country, there was a huge difference


between those who feel we should accept more genuine asylum seekers,


that I feel on the doorstep. Because there is a clear problem on the


country between those who understand asylum and economic migrants and


until we deal with the economic migrant issue, people will always be


confused. The record show that if you are welcoming to refugees in


this country, with the children in the 1930s, these people grow up in


the country that has accepted them and they have children themselves,


they become the biggest supporters, the most patriotic people of their


adopted nation and they are always grateful and becomes hugely proud of


what happened to them, wouldn't that be a plus for the nation? Of course,


I grew up with... There is a difference between saying they are


supportive of us and whether the country can wear the economic cost


of accepting more. Every government has the responsibility to assess the


cost of bringing in more people, of which there can be benefits, and


also the cost to the country as a whole and whether we can afford it.


We have that debate on this show many times to show that low wages


and job displacement when we have masses of migration, we need to have


a balanced. Let me just come back to you for a reaction, in general, it


is you understand it, because I hadn't seen this, that we will allow


in 38,000 refugees this year? We have spontaneous arrivals of


refugees and the have spontaneous arrivals of


small. What we're talking about here is a global crisis, the biggest


refugee crisis is a global crisis, the biggest


Second World War stop we can continue in the way that people are,


governments are, continue in the way that people are,


dangerous situations and see all of that, or the can ask our government


to use its political capital and experience to work with other


governments globally and say we need something on a bigger


governments globally and say we need addresses this problem. I think you


both. -- It took off from Paris


just after 11pm last night, but about 20 minutes before


it was due to land in Cairo , Egyptair flight MS804 disappeared


from radar screens and lost contact The Airbus A320 had


66 people on board - mainly Egyptian and French nationals


but also one Briton. The latest is a statement from the


Greek Defence Ministry which says the plane swerved sharply at 90


degrees and then fell abruptly by 22,000 feet. It was cruising at a


normal altitude of 37,000 feet. So this is a very different story to


what was originally being looked at this morning, which was the idea


they had been some sort of catastrophic incident on board,


possibly an explosion. This would steer us in a different direction.


But one aviation analyst is talking about is whether there was some kind


of fight in the cockpit on board, some kind of struggle between the


crew themselves or between one of the passengers or more and the crew.


There were no distress calls, and there was nothing to indicate the


time the plane left, the Greek flight information region, have


passed into the Egyptian region, to indicate there was anything wrong.


So whatever took place at very suddenly, with no warning but at the


moment there doesn't appear to have been in the explosion. It could be


some significance in affected was a flight from France and Egypt, both


countries have many terrorist enemies in the middle east, is that


a fair point? People are looking at the possibility, I hope it doesn't


prove to be true, that somebody with access to air side Charles de Gaulle


airport could have placed at device on-board, there was no freight on


board the plane but remember last year, Islamic State's Sinai province


of village was able to get a device on-board a Russian jet and blow it


out of the year. -- out of the air. 60 were laid off after the Paris


attacks in the number because of fears they had sympathies with


so-called Islamic State, or Islamic extremism. That is something the


French internal Security ministry will be looking at.


The latest information implies there was some action on the plane,


swerving to avoid something? What do you avoid at 30,000 feet? There are


no reports of other aircraft at immediate vicinity. It appears to be


something on board that caused the pilot to plunge this plane down into


the sea. Frank Gardner, thank you very much for bringing as


up-to-date. Interesting developments. Anything that happens


will be on BBC news throughout the day.


The voice of big business has been pretty dominant in the EU


When the country was last asked its view on European


integration, in the referendum of 1975, the trade unions


Now most of them are urging their members to vote to remain,


Unions love placards so surely the referendum


Unite, the largest union is advising its 1.4


Unison is doing the same for its 1.3 million members.


The GMB recommends 600,000 members vote to stay and so does


USDAW - all four were registered as official campaigners so they can


While the next biggest union is the Royal


It is neutral but has produced a fact sheet for


Some individual trade unionists support the group Another


Europe Is Possible which is avoiding David Cameron and big business, it's


about to start a nationwide speaking tour featuring people like the


Shadow Chancellor, who make a radical, workers'


Four weeks paid holiday entitlement, the


right to maternity leave, protection on the hours we work


and improved rights for agency workers, secured across Europe.


All things won by the workers movement that the EU now


helps protect and all things that the Tories


It's a turnaround from the 1975 referendum on whether to remain


in the European Economic Community, when the bulk of trade Unions wanted


Such a turnaround was the subject of an academic conference this week.


From the perspective of 1975, the EEC looks more like a


free-market venture, something that could actually stop


socialism being pursued in one country, and that was


a big reason for hostility towards it on the left of the political


Some trade unionists here still feel that way, though.


This is a meeting of Left Exit which is


Unite are in favour of staying in the European


I think the European Union is increasingly fascist in the way it


overrides national governments, look what happened in Greece.


I want more immigration, I want more solidarity


and I don't think that the borders of Europe were made to help ordinary


people, they were made to help the bosses.


This campaign is supported by the RMT, ASLEF and the Baker's


Union fancy the idea of a Lexit, too.


And remember TUSC, the trade union and socialist coalition which


They are on the Leave side as well, and even applied to become


And Dave Nellist who you saw at the end of that piece joins


Why are you campaigning to leave? The European Union is set up


essentially for big companies. Its stature is on a continental scale,


it promotes privatisation, we've stature is on a continental scale,


seen postal services, water, electricity, rail, other forms of


transport go. Increasingly, in its court of Justice ruling is it


undermines trade union collective-bargaining and right to


strike. I think all socialists should vote no on 23rd June. We


think Brexit would be a big gamble with jobs, rights and people's


livelihoods as well. Look at some of our best organised manufacturing


companies, automotive, chemicals, a whole range of companies who


critically depend on investment because we are a member of the EU.


If we come out, we know what will happen in respect of those


investment decisions. We will see good jobs replaced by worse ones,


investment decisions. We will see assuming we hold onto them. There is


investment decisions. We will see a big issue over workers


investment decisions. We will see live in the here and


investment decisions. We will see rights, holiday pay,


investment decisions. We will see rights are dependent on membership


of the EU. Do you trust this government


of the EU. Do you trust this unions to protect those rights? The


OECD, unions to protect those rights? The


planet have a unions to protect those rights? The


index. The UK is 31st out of 34. unions to protect those rights? The


came long before the EU. I would Francis


came long before the EU. I would say, 28 of the heads of government


make the policies in the UU, most of them are conservative and favour


austerity. I don't think we them are conservative and favour


put our faith in Tory governments in Europe. It is true to say that much


employment Europe. It is true to say that much


originated here. Most of the important ones are. Take


originated here. Most of the Dave said, was done before the EU.


originated here. Most of the the EU. It has helped millions of


women the EU. It has helped millions of


about austerity? Take the the EU. It has helped millions of


Greece. Do you think they were treated fairly? Absolutely not. We


don't think the EU is perfect. As a trade union movement, we have a


responsibility to figure out what's in the best interests of workers.


We've worked hard on this, looking at the evidence and our guidance to


workers is, don't gamble with your jobs, don't gamble with your right,


vote to remain. Even Yanis Varoufakis is backing the UK to stay


in. Not that he has got a vote. All sorts of people are backing people


to stay in but they tend not to be friends of working people. Look at


the direction Europe is travelling in. Particularly on legislation, the


undermining of collective bargaining. Look at Rotherham, a


Croatian company brought in construction workers on half the


European Union rate and were forcing down wages. That is the way that the


European Union is going. We need strong unions to fight that. Giving


them a vote of confidence on June the 23rd is not doing that. Workers


have two combine a cross borders. That is the only way we will get a


fairer deal. Thank you very much. Now, earlier we talked about


the content of the Queen's Speech, No, not the ermine or


the horse-drawn carriage, but the two Commons speeches that


are supposed to be funny - or at least, funnier than the one


delivered by Her Majesty. Traditionally two backbench MPs


are chosen to open the debate in the lower chamber


with an amusing speech, with the Prime Minister and Leader


of the Opposition expected One of the backbenchers


was Conservative MP Phillip Lee. Here's a flavour of


yesterday's action - including Jeremy Corbyn channelling


the captain of Dr Lee's As the house knows, I am


a practising doctor. Unfortunately, Mr Speaker,


in a medical context, PR does not stand for public relations,


but is shorthand for the type of examination that involves putting


on rubber gloves, applying gel, and If I may give my right honourable


friend the Prime Minister If in the future he finds himself


speaking at a medical professional dinner, under no circumstances


should he tell the audience that in his life before politics,


he was into PR and that he found the work


very stimulating. As captain of the Old Grumblers'


Cricket Club, I rarely had to handle as obstinate


and disruptive a character Who stubbornly refused to stand


in any conventional field placement and very openly demonstrated


a disdain for team sports, command structures, and presumably


this led him to the logical career He is also, I am told,


an ardent fan of Queens Park Rangers,


but we won't say too much about that because at least one of my teams


is joining him Chuckles all round. Philip Lee joins


us from Central Lobby. Patrick Kidd is with is in the studio. Were you


nervous? How long did you spend writing this? Where did you get the


joke? It all came from my office. It was an internal job. I was nervous.


I had been in my sick bed for a few days so I was happy that it went OK,


considering. Were you happy with the reaction of Jeremy Corbyn and Mr


Cameron? I knew where that was coming from. The current captain of


the team is from Islington and Highbury. I guessed it was going to


be tough on me but it was good humoured. How did it compared to


similar occasions? I thought it was very good. It is daunting to get up


and make those jokes. There was one about the Sutra.


Jeremy Corbyn doesn't have a reputation for mirth and he was very


funny. It's a shame he spoke at an extra 35 winners. There were good


jokes all round. Who writes the jokes in your speeches? There are


not necessarily lots of them but they are really good quality. Philip


Lee, did you get a good reaction afterwards? I really did. I had


people hugging me which was disconcerting. And they were just


Tories! I had a good response from both sides of the house and I was


glad to make people laugh but I said some serious things as well and it


was good to get that over as well. Is this good for an MP's career to


get noticed? You've been in the house for five years and you made a


really big mark. I'm not sure. About five of the people who have seconded


the speech over seven years are no longer members of Parliament. So,


who knows? This might be the last time we see you! Well, it's been


nice having you on the programme. We may not see you ever again. Thank


you. Just time to get the answer to the


quiz. I'd get one direction. I think you'll find it's Ross Jones, the


mayor. Interestingly, Ed Miliband has slipped to number 40. There you


go, the power list in Doncaster. That's it. Back tonight on BBC One


with this week after question Time. Here tomorrow on BBC Two at noon.


Try to join us. Goodbye. Soak up the atmosphere at the most


famous flower show in the world. from the RHS Chelsea Flower Show


2016. You look lovely, Mum.


Go on, do a twirl.


Download Subtitles