:00:00. > :00:13.Would you want National Heritage living next door? You
:00:14. > :00:22.Would you like Nigel Farage living next door, we find out what UKIP's
:00:23. > :00:26.plans are and unsavoury foreigners. Everything you wanted to know about
:00:27. > :00:34.Europe and were afraid to ask, these three shed light on the lumbering
:00:35. > :00:45.workings of Europe. And we have the pervert's guide to Europe in this
:00:46. > :00:49.cornucopia of all things European. Some of the latest opinion polls
:00:50. > :00:54.suggest that when we vote in the elections to the European Parliament
:00:55. > :01:00.later this week a party which has never won a general election might
:01:01. > :01:03.come top of the poll. Other polls show different predicted results and
:01:04. > :01:08.there is many a slip, but we seem to be in unchartered waters. Before we
:01:09. > :01:15.talk to the extraordinarily shy and retiring leader of UKIP, Nigel
:01:16. > :01:16.Farage, we trace how we got here. The other parties may have been
:01:17. > :01:21.making plans for Nigel Farage, The other parties may have been
:01:22. > :01:28.those plans aren't obviously working. According to some polls his
:01:29. > :01:34.party could be heading for outright victory, first place in Thursday's
:01:35. > :01:38.European Parliament elections. Although 40% of people say UKIP is
:01:39. > :01:41.out-of-touch with modern Britain it is all about the past, et cetera,
:01:42. > :01:46.even more people, around half say that UKIP is raising issues that
:01:47. > :01:53.other parties don't really want to talk about. That's not to say his
:01:54. > :01:57.campaign has gone flawlessly, a string of members, activists and
:01:58. > :02:02.candidates going off message, and some pretty uncomfortable interview,
:02:03. > :02:08.like this on LBC. I made a comment that wasn't intended to say any more
:02:09. > :02:14.that I felt uncomfortable about the rate and pace and change. It was you
:02:15. > :02:19.found it uncomfortable about people around you speaking foreign
:02:20. > :02:25.languages, your own wife speaks Germany, are you uncomfortable. What
:02:26. > :02:31.about not wanting to live next door to Romanians. What about if a group
:02:32. > :02:34.of Romanian men moved in next door to you. What about a group of German
:02:35. > :02:38.children? You know that to you. What about a group of German
:02:39. > :02:42.same. What is the difference? We want a debate on quantity and
:02:43. > :02:47.quality as well. That led to a full page advert in the Telegraph
:02:48. > :02:50.attempting to put his comments in context, he was tired and hadn't,
:02:51. > :02:55.pressed himself well he told interviewers. He was definitely
:02:56. > :02:57.right to apologise, they were offensive comments and a racial
:02:58. > :03:01.slur, I don't think he should have said them, he's certainly right to
:03:02. > :03:05.say sorry. Is he a racist? I think he has said in recent days some
:03:06. > :03:10.pretty unpleasant things, even he himself has had to admit he got it
:03:11. > :03:14.wrong, and so I will leave others to judge. What I have heard from some
:03:15. > :03:17.of the candidates, some of the donors to the party, there is a
:03:18. > :03:21.succession of pretty appalling things. Will this big party
:03:22. > :03:25.condemnation make any difference to the enthusiasm of UKIP's potential
:03:26. > :03:29.supporters. There is nothing we are saying here that isn't true. Someone
:03:30. > :03:30.who has studied the rise of the party believes it is
:03:31. > :03:37.counter-productive. parties and commentators are not
:03:38. > :03:39.going to get anywhere simply framing UKIP as racist party. Those European
:03:40. > :03:42.countries that have UKIP as racist party. Those European
:03:43. > :03:50.right parties for 20, 30 years realised this long ago in the
:03:51. > :04:04.right parties for 20, 30 years early 90s, you simply
:04:05. > :04:07.right parties for 20, 30 years organisation or is it not, but why
:04:08. > :04:09.is it that the British working-class have never
:04:10. > :04:12.is it that the British working-class our politics. Will this anger
:04:13. > :04:17.translate into seats at the general election next year? Don't be so sure
:04:18. > :04:20.say the pollsters. The main thing is because everybody gets terribly
:04:21. > :04:26.excited about the result its, particularly if UKIP managers to
:04:27. > :04:31.come out a-- manages to come out ahead, and the odds of that is going
:04:32. > :04:35.down. But main leaders get trounced in the European elections and go on
:04:36. > :04:38.to win stonking elections. That is what Mr Blair was good at and the
:04:39. > :04:43.Conservatives have done it as well. It doesn't have much relation to
:04:44. > :04:47.what will happen next year. Nigel Farage a can at least claim to have
:04:48. > :04:51.won one battle, the other politicians are now taking
:04:52. > :04:53.won one battle, the other seriously. And the man himself is
:04:54. > :04:59.won one battle, the other with us now. Your slogan, "we want
:05:00. > :05:02.our country back", back from whom? It is given away. We are governed
:05:03. > :05:07.from Brussels, everyone is in denial, whether it is where our
:05:08. > :05:10.legislation is made who decides whether Pfizer
:05:11. > :05:12.legislation is made who decides AstraZeneca, how to control of
:05:13. > :05:16.farming or what is left of our fishing. These are not decide by men
:05:17. > :05:21.and women we vote for in general elections. What is your problem with
:05:22. > :05:27.Romanians? I have no problem with Romanians, I have a big problem with
:05:28. > :05:34.Romania. I have visited the country, communism failed a few years ago,
:05:35. > :05:39.and it hasn't made the transition to western democracy. There are a
:05:40. > :05:43.minority there of Roma treated unimaginably, and the country is in
:05:44. > :05:47.the grip of organised crime. Joining the European Union for them meant
:05:48. > :05:52.richer pickings. I have no problem with Romanians coming to Britain on
:05:53. > :05:55.work permits, taking part in life here. But I have a huge problem with
:05:56. > :05:59.our Border Agency and police not being able to stop known criminal
:06:00. > :06:05.gangs coming through Dover. But you don't go on about any other
:06:06. > :06:12.nationality apart from Romanians in the manifesto, here it is page 2, an
:06:13. > :06:19.open-door to crime, 22,000 Romanians held for crimes in London, you don't
:06:20. > :06:26.say that about Poles? Pro-rat a the are you -- pro-rata the Romanian
:06:27. > :06:28.problem is more serious, because it is organised crime and people
:06:29. > :06:32.trafficking and young teenagers brought to London and made do all
:06:33. > :06:35.sorts of things. As a civilised country we shouldn't allow that to
:06:36. > :06:39.happen in London or elsewhere. Let's have a look at your advertisment in
:06:40. > :06:44.the Telegraph this morning, when you said in that advertisment that 7% of
:06:45. > :06:47.crimes across the EU are committed by Romanians, do you want to
:06:48. > :06:53.withdraw that now and apologise or wait a couple of minutes? It is 7%
:06:54. > :06:57.of criminal networks across the European Union are from Romania.
:06:58. > :07:01.That isn't what you said, it was 7% of crimes? What I could have gone on
:07:02. > :07:07.to say and perhaps should have gone on to say was that 90%, 90% of card
:07:08. > :07:12.skimming across the entire European Union is caused by gangs from
:07:13. > :07:17.Romania and Bulgaria. Let's have a look at it. I know what it says. It
:07:18. > :07:27.says 7% of crimes? It was simplified. It was wrong? Well, it
:07:28. > :07:32.was criminal networks not crime. According Europol it is wrong? If
:07:33. > :07:36.they say it is wrong, 7% of criminal networks across Europe are Romanian.
:07:37. > :07:44.That is not the same of 7% of crimes? You haven't challenged me on
:07:45. > :07:50.the arrests and 92 ATM crime. There is no figure that is reliable and
:07:51. > :07:54.obtainable on that at all, you quote a policeman in a television
:07:55. > :07:59.documentary, don't you? Yes, and actually the figure... That is
:08:00. > :08:02.unverifiable? The figure that has been used is quoted by every
:08:03. > :08:07.national newspaper. And until today it has not been questioned. We can
:08:08. > :08:11.argue about figures but... These things matter? Do we or do we not
:08:12. > :08:14.have a problem with organised criminal gangs coming into this
:08:15. > :08:19.country, and the one country in the grip of it worse than anybody else
:08:20. > :08:23.is Romania. No that is not true. According to Europol the most
:08:24. > :08:28.dangerous set of gangs are actually Italian? There are 60 million
:08:29. > :08:34.Italians and there are 21 million Romanians, it is a question of
:08:35. > :08:38.scale, on a pro-rata basis, unarguably, the biggest problem, not
:08:39. > :08:42.just for Britain, but it is felt in Spain, France and elsewhere, it is
:08:43. > :08:45.coming from Romania, it gets to the heart of what do we want our
:08:46. > :08:50.relationship to be with countries like Romania or Bulgaria or whatever
:08:51. > :08:54.it may be. My argument is we want to trade with them, be friendly with
:08:55. > :08:58.them, be completely open for their people to come here on work permits
:08:59. > :09:02.and work here and take part in the life of our country. Surely common
:09:03. > :09:06.sense says we should have quality control at Dover and elsewhere and
:09:07. > :09:10.be able to stop known criminal gangs from coming into Britain. Let me ask
:09:11. > :09:14.you a very simple question, do you think it is the responsibility of
:09:15. > :09:21.politicians to do whatever they can to diminish and discourage racism? I
:09:22. > :09:25.certainly do. And I think that actually what uncontrolled
:09:26. > :09:28.immigration to Britain has done has bred a new form of racism. I have
:09:29. > :09:33.seen all over the country, I talk to people who say, I hate to say this,
:09:34. > :09:37.I have never felt like this, but I'm beginning to feel a degree of empty
:09:38. > :09:41.towards communities I'm living with, such is the pace of change in my
:09:42. > :09:46.communities. You really think what you have done in the last few days
:09:47. > :09:50.has helped discourage racism? Let's put it like this, if what I just
:09:51. > :09:54.said to you twice, if we had Romanians coming to Britain, on work
:09:55. > :10:00.permits, with the necessary checks, then nobody would feel if a group of
:10:01. > :10:02.Romanian men moved in next door that there would be a problem. So
:10:03. > :10:07.relations between communities would be better, not worse. And you would
:10:08. > :10:11.be more alarmed by a group of Romanian member moving into the
:10:12. > :10:16.house next door than a group of Pole, Italian, Nigerians or Somalis?
:10:17. > :10:22.This is not my comment. My comment, the question was would people be
:10:23. > :10:28.concerned if a group of Romanian men moved in next door. Let me be clear,
:10:29. > :10:33.I did not want this to dominate. You said Romanians? No, the question
:10:34. > :10:37.asked me about Romanians and I tried to bat the question away. I didn't
:10:38. > :10:42.want to have this debate, and I regret using the word that I did. I
:10:43. > :10:46.regret not taking it on. Here is your manifesto, page two of the
:10:47. > :10:49.manifesto starts banging on immediately about Romanians? There
:10:50. > :10:53.is a crime problem. Should we not have quantity control and quality
:10:54. > :10:58.control into Britain. This the S nationality you talk about? Because
:10:59. > :11:02.pro-rata that is the most intense problem. I agree with you, I think
:11:03. > :11:06.actually if we have people who come to Britain and commit crime we
:11:07. > :11:11.should be able to get rid of them. We can't even do that. If we can do
:11:12. > :11:15.that we should be able to stop them reentering the country, and under
:11:16. > :11:20.European rules we can't do any of those things. Can we look at one or
:11:21. > :11:24.two other pledges in the manifesto, you want more grammar schools? Not
:11:25. > :11:28.in the European elections. Local councils you do? Certainly, I will
:11:29. > :11:34.be fighting for that and campaigning for that. You want to restore
:11:35. > :11:39.abolished bus routes, you want to reduce business rates, these are
:11:40. > :11:43.commitments? These are promises for what UKIP councillors will campaign
:11:44. > :11:47.for on councils. Will campaign for? Of course, until you win control of
:11:48. > :11:51.a council, and we're not going to win control of council this year.
:11:52. > :11:56.How do you propose to pay for it? Most of the councils are up by
:11:57. > :12:01.thirds, we won't be controlling any councils of that there is no doubt.
:12:02. > :12:07.But this is what UKIP councillors will be campaigning for. How will
:12:08. > :12:13.the promises be paid for? Why would having grammar schools cost more
:12:14. > :12:18.money? Restoring abolished bus routes certainly would, and business
:12:19. > :12:22.rates would cost too? That would depend, our high streets are full of
:12:23. > :12:25.shops not paying business rates, there is an argument that says if
:12:26. > :12:30.you get business rates right you maybe get more revenue. We have had
:12:31. > :12:34.this in the past. You also promised to get rid of the so called spare
:12:35. > :12:38.bedroom tax, that of course is a Government, that is central
:12:39. > :12:44.Government? Yeah. How would that be paid for? At the moment, it wouldn't
:12:45. > :12:48.be any cost at all, but frankly it hasn't even been implemented.
:12:49. > :12:53.Councils can't do that, this is just a lot of airy fairy eye-catching
:12:54. > :12:58.nonsense? We want to cut public spending in this country,
:12:59. > :12:59.nonsense? We want to cut public will come up and these are
:13:00. > :13:04.commitments to will come up and these are
:13:05. > :13:09.do. Our job in a general election is to show how we can cut the budget.
:13:10. > :13:12.do. Our job in a general election is Foreign aid is a very good start.
:13:13. > :13:14.European Union contributions are a very good start, we are getting near
:13:15. > :13:19.2% cuts, there very good start, we are getting near
:13:20. > :13:23.throughout the public sector, since 1997, the fat cat salary, the growth
:13:24. > :13:26.of middle management, the vast growth
:13:27. > :13:28.of middle management, the vast areas we
:13:29. > :13:29.of middle management, the vast What sort of response are you
:13:30. > :13:35.getting on What sort of response are you
:13:36. > :13:40.number that do, across a very wide spectrum, this is fascinating but
:13:41. > :13:45.all Labour voters and nonvoters and Lib Dem voters along with ex-Tories,
:13:46. > :13:49.amongst those who support us has been very strong. Strong to the
:13:50. > :13:53.point that about 60% of our voters out on Thursday say they will vote
:13:54. > :13:57.for us at a general election, in a by-election, in local elections.
:13:58. > :14:03.Amongst those not well disposed to UKIP I have to say that the
:14:04. > :14:07.campaign, the singling out of some of our own idiots who have said
:14:08. > :14:11.silly things on Twitter and Facebook, stupidities that have been
:14:12. > :14:18.held up to represent the view of the party have, I'm afraid, led to a
:14:19. > :14:22.growing number of people despising UKIP a believing that we are a
:14:23. > :14:24.racist party which we most certainly not. Do you feel hurt by that? Yes I
:14:25. > :14:35.do, and I feel you know. In week there have been 17 councillors
:14:36. > :14:37.from a Lib Dem, Labour and Conservative
:14:38. > :14:40.from a Lib Dem, Labour and arrested for a variety of
:14:41. > :14:47.everything from child pornography and assaults, you
:14:48. > :14:49.everything from child pornography Yet someone who has joined
:14:50. > :14:51.everything from child pornography slipped through the net
:14:52. > :14:58.everything from child pornography told the truth on
:14:59. > :15:03.has damaged in the minds of some people what UKIP is. I can't stand
:15:04. > :15:05.that. As party leader you have to take responsibility? Yes, but I
:15:06. > :15:10.can't micromanage everything. If you take responsibility? Yes, but I
:15:11. > :15:17.were interviewing Clegg, Cameron or Miliband. , you wouldn't ask about
:15:18. > :15:23.stupidities of people out there. If you can't run your own party how can
:15:24. > :15:27.we trust you with anything bigger? We do run our party, everyone saying
:15:28. > :15:32.offensive things we will boot out and make the process of becoming a
:15:33. > :15:34.candidate tougher. These charges, levelled at us because of what
:15:35. > :15:40.others have done, levelled at us because of what
:15:41. > :15:44.had a former BNP activist and Labour have had BNP defectors, we are
:15:45. > :15:48.threatening and challenging the establishment, they very scared to
:15:49. > :15:52.what we can do to their vote on Thursday. They have really clubbed
:15:53. > :15:56.together and tried to hurl as much abuse at UKIP as they K-FOR those
:15:57. > :16:00.that don't like u they really don't like us, they have been pretty
:16:01. > :16:05.offensive towards us in many cases, but actually for those who support
:16:06. > :16:10.us it has almost stiffened their resolve. How many more nutcases in
:16:11. > :16:15.the party? I have given you 17 from the three established parties
:16:16. > :16:18.arrested in the last week! I have to say I have just spent
:16:19. > :16:23.three-and-a-half weeks in the length and breadth of the UK. I have met
:16:24. > :16:30.runs of our candidates standing for council, and I think we have a
:16:31. > :16:35.fantastic group of people. We have a team building, an open membership.
:16:36. > :16:38.You have homophobes in the party? You name people who haven't,
:16:39. > :16:43.particularly those over the age of 70 who were brought up at a time
:16:44. > :16:51.when they were taught at school this was wrong. What about Roger Helmer?
:16:52. > :16:55.70. That's an excuse? Just think about this, he was brought up in a
:16:56. > :17:01.traditional biblical upbringing, he lived as a young man in the country
:17:02. > :17:05.where home sexual behaviour was an impressible offence, so this
:17:06. > :17:10.generation were taught to believe this was wrong. And I think for many
:17:11. > :17:15.people of that age and older, they still find it difficult, Roger has
:17:16. > :17:20.said he is now relaxed about it and his views have moved on. Social
:17:21. > :17:24.attitudes do change. Yes they do. We shouldn't demonise people. They have
:17:25. > :17:31.particularly changed on a subject like race, would it be OK to be a
:17:32. > :17:35.racist atp 0? -- at 70? No and actually you would find very few of
:17:36. > :17:38.those f you went to France, Germany or elsewhere, right across Europe,
:17:39. > :17:42.you would find racist attitudes, this country has been the most
:17:43. > :17:46.relaxed country in the whole of the western world, when it comes to
:17:47. > :17:55.different cultures, different religion, offering refugee status,
:17:56. > :17:59.my family, came into that category. But Roger is classic of that
:18:00. > :18:05.generation, but he's now accepting that the world has moved on. When
:18:06. > :18:12.someone like Mr Helmer says that people find homosexuality viscerally
:18:13. > :18:16.repulsive, that is not right? No, he wrote that 12 years ago as a
:18:17. > :18:20.Conservative, when he was a Conservative. Now he's UKIP you do.
:18:21. > :18:24.He was a younger man? He was, but still born in the same year, but it
:18:25. > :18:28.is interesting as I say he was a Conservative. If you are a
:18:29. > :18:32.Conservative backbencher all of this goes unnoticed, if you are UKIP is
:18:33. > :18:36.any capacity it becomes a big story. Let me ask you one personal
:18:37. > :18:42.question, you explained away some of your difficulties last week by
:18:43. > :18:45.saying you were very tired? Well, do you know something, often you get
:18:46. > :18:48.into interviews with aggressive interviews, you know the sort of
:18:49. > :18:53.people I'm talking about, and they will fire a series of questions at
:18:54. > :18:57.awe, I wry to avoid conflict in that interview. I try to avoid getting
:18:58. > :19:01.into the crime figures and everything else by saying you know
:19:02. > :19:05.what I mean. And I regret saying that because that gave people the
:19:06. > :19:10.impression that I was saying, a nod and a wink, we don't really like
:19:11. > :19:14.Romanians. And I regret doing that, but I do absolutely insist we must
:19:15. > :19:18.have a proper debate about this, and we must get back control of our
:19:19. > :19:27.borders. But your health is OK? My health is fine. Yeah. Nigel Farage,
:19:28. > :19:29.thank you. More than any other exercise of democracy in this
:19:30. > :19:33.country elections to the European Parliament are probably the ones
:19:34. > :19:36.which most perplex us. Who are these men and women asking for our
:19:37. > :19:42.support, and what will they do if they get it? The electoral system is
:19:43. > :19:45.some weird method named after an obscure Belgian, how many people can
:19:46. > :19:51.explain properly what the European Parliament does. Worry no more, our
:19:52. > :19:54.policy editor Chris Cook will explain everything you wanted know
:19:55. > :19:57.about Europe but afraid to ask. Not everything but a start at least.
:19:58. > :20:08.First, who are we voting for and what do they cost us?
:20:09. > :20:11.The European Union is fatastically complicated, that is why we decided
:20:12. > :20:17.to strip things down a little. We would lay is bare. We asked for your
:20:18. > :20:27.questions about the EU, and boy, did you send them in. We can deal with a
:20:28. > :20:32.lot of them by answering one big question, what exactly is the
:20:33. > :20:38.European Parliament? That's a very good question. The European
:20:39. > :20:44.Parliament is officially the EU's most important institution. That's
:20:45. > :20:47.because it is directly elected. It doesn't have the right to start new
:20:48. > :20:52.legislation. In that respect it is less powerful than our parliament in
:20:53. > :20:55.Westminster, for example. The European Parliament can only amend
:20:56. > :21:00.or block things that come through from the commission, that's the EU's
:21:01. > :21:06.executive. Now that means that it acts as break or accelerator on what
:21:07. > :21:10.the EU does as a whole. So whether you want more or less of Europe, the
:21:11. > :21:15.European Parliament really matters. That means that this week's
:21:16. > :21:25.elections to pick Britain's 73 MEPs really matters too. So why don't we
:21:26. > :21:28.talk about it more? Part of the reason is you don't get the same
:21:29. > :21:32.intrigue you get at Westminster, with Governments falling and
:21:33. > :21:35.forming. Who would want to watch a house of cards set in Strasbourg,
:21:36. > :21:39.whatever happens the European Parliament will puff along, dealing
:21:40. > :21:43.with whatever legislation it gets sent.
:21:44. > :21:48.And it is just weird, it is multilingual, some MEPs have
:21:49. > :21:57.ten-times as many voters as other MEPs, in moves, every month the
:21:58. > :22:01.whole parliament goes to have Strasbourg for two days. That costs
:22:02. > :22:05.200 million euros a year. The next question is how much do MEPs
:22:06. > :22:18.actually get paid? That question came through a lot. The short answer
:22:19. > :22:22.95,482 euros a year. They get perks, a generous pension, and when all the
:22:23. > :22:29.voters decide it is time for them to stop being an MEP, they get a
:22:30. > :22:34.handsome payoff. How much are they worth those extra bits? Complicated,
:22:35. > :22:44.to a man of 45 years old elected, the pension and the payoff are worth
:22:45. > :22:51.equivalent of 45,000 euros in cash. That brings it up to ?100,000. And
:22:52. > :22:56.there are allowances, for every day that MEPs turn up at the parliament
:22:57. > :23:08.at the get 304 euros of subsitence allowances. It is a very comfortable
:23:09. > :23:14.life. With us now are the editor of Reuters and the author of the
:23:15. > :23:20."in-out question", Stephaine Flanders and Tim Stanley historian
:23:21. > :23:24.and columnist. The number of us voting will be low, most of us not
:23:25. > :23:32.voting I suspect, why is that do you think? I think we don't know who our
:23:33. > :23:37.MEPs are. They are second rate politicians, not to say that all MPs
:23:38. > :23:41.are first rate politicians. And despite what people like Nigel
:23:42. > :23:44.Farage was telling you just now, although the European Parliament is
:23:45. > :23:49.more important than it was, it is not nearly as important as our
:23:50. > :23:54.voting for our MPs at Westminster. Stephaine, do you think the way that
:23:55. > :23:58.the economic crisis has been handled has made things worse? I
:23:59. > :23:59.the economic crisis has been handled have ended up with a situation where
:24:00. > :24:05.certainly within the eurozone have ended up with a situation where
:24:06. > :24:08.the eurozone crisis is have ended up with a situation where
:24:09. > :24:10.ways more integration, more have ended up with a situation where
:24:11. > :24:17.towards a more federal Europe. Yet have ended up with a situation where
:24:18. > :24:21.less of as a result of the crisis is more integration and
:24:22. > :24:24.less of as a result of the crisis is powers. Hugo is right, that all the
:24:25. > :24:31.key decisions are at powers. Hugo is right, that all the
:24:32. > :24:34.exciting summits where David Cameron stands up for our rights, and Angela
:24:35. > :24:39.Merkel will have a set-to stands up for our rights, and Angela
:24:40. > :24:42.French President. I don't think anyone is taught that anything
:24:43. > :24:46.important happens at the European Parliament. There is a paradox
:24:47. > :24:48.important happens at the European everything and dominates our lives,
:24:49. > :24:51.and the fact that everything and dominates our lives,
:24:52. > :24:54.out for it is irrelevant. I don't think
:24:55. > :24:58.British people it is irrelevant. I don't think
:24:59. > :25:00.European. If you grow up in continental
:25:01. > :25:01.European. If you grow up in European countries you feel an
:25:02. > :25:02.European. If you grow up in investment in the project. People in
:25:03. > :25:05.Britain see the European insurance scheme. It is good we are
:25:06. > :25:09.a member of it because it insurance scheme. It is good we are
:25:10. > :25:13.us out if things go wrong. I don't think people feel the connection
:25:14. > :25:17.with it they do with the ordinary MPs and the British parliament. I
:25:18. > :25:21.agree with you there, but I think there is apathy across Europe for
:25:22. > :25:26.the elections. If you look last time around we only had a turnout of 35%,
:25:27. > :25:30.Europe as a whole it was about 43%, it was a bit better but not as
:25:31. > :25:37.though all the French and Belgians and Dutch and Portuguese were going
:25:38. > :25:41.out in their 70-80%. I think the problem is the European Parliament,
:25:42. > :25:44.really we shouldn't have had a European Parliament that was
:25:45. > :25:49.directly elected, we should have stuck with a system where there was
:25:50. > :25:55.a European assembly where national MPs were sent to it. That was how it
:25:56. > :25:58.was until 1979. Less and participation, extraordinary. They
:25:59. > :26:05.had a connection with the constituents? And people know OK who
:26:06. > :26:10.their MPs are, I like what Boris Johnson has said, we should go back
:26:11. > :26:14.to the system of national MPs being sent to the European Parliament and
:26:15. > :26:16.they should be chosen by lottery. But also the national politicians
:26:17. > :26:20.would have to take responsibility for some of the decisions being
:26:21. > :26:25.taken. Again I think it is particularly true in the eurozone
:26:26. > :26:28.countries and less so here. Part of the problem in the last couple of
:26:29. > :26:33.years this perception, a true perception that really important
:26:34. > :26:37.decisions about that will further intergrate the eurozone countries
:26:38. > :26:42.with each other are being taken by Government, but without any real
:26:43. > :26:48.accountability by the Government. The public are carefully not given
:26:49. > :26:53.choice on this, that is an elite project. The Government is chosen by
:26:54. > :26:58.the people, the system where the Government have a lot of say over
:26:59. > :27:05.who Europe operates is a good thing. We know who Cameron is, and the
:27:06. > :27:10.Germans, Merkel, and it is natural the political leaders are having the
:27:11. > :27:15.biggest say. I'm impressed that you are in favour of less democratic
:27:16. > :27:18.participation. The problem is it is so big and there is a sense of it
:27:19. > :27:22.controlling everything, but it is the problem of distance and if
:27:23. > :27:25.national Governments surrender sovereignty to it, people don't feel
:27:26. > :27:30.they have the personal relationship you have with your MP and a much
:27:31. > :27:34.smaller parliament within your own country. This is part of the revolt
:27:35. > :27:38.against Europe, it is not just Britain flirting with UKIP this
:27:39. > :27:43.week, there are a whole range of parties far worse that Mr Nigel
:27:44. > :27:48.Farage's, but they will do well because everyone is rejecting the
:27:49. > :27:51.powerful and big system. No understand why you want it to have
:27:52. > :27:55.more democratic power, then you will immediately say it is too powerful.
:27:56. > :28:02.I don't think it can ever reach a point of democratic participation
:28:03. > :28:05.that will make it legitimate. You guys can argue about something else,
:28:06. > :28:09.because the argument that we couldn't leave the European Union
:28:10. > :28:13.without suffering serious economic damage is key, set against that is
:28:14. > :28:17.what it costs us to belong to this club. Time to bring back the man
:28:18. > :28:27.with the mechanical arms, Chris Cook, the is the EU good for our
:28:28. > :28:31.bank balance. Are you sitting comably, here is a question --
:28:32. > :28:43.comfortably, here is a question that came up, is the EU very wasteful? In
:28:44. > :28:49.2012 the EU spent 139 billion euros, 5% was frittered away in error, it
:28:50. > :28:54.doesn't mean it was stolen or wasted it means the proper processes
:28:55. > :29:00.weren't used. How much does it cost, in 2013 our subsidy to the EU came
:29:01. > :29:06.to ?14 billion. We get stuff back for that. Not least about ?5 billion
:29:07. > :29:10.in cash. I say cash, it was really more like a gift voucher, you have
:29:11. > :29:19.to spend it on certain stuff. Nonetheless it brought down our net
:29:20. > :29:24.contribution to ?8. 5 billion. Is it a good deal? If the UK economy were
:29:25. > :29:27.1% larger because of our membership of the EU, and all the trade
:29:28. > :29:33.benefits it brings, it would probably pay for itself, so does it?
:29:34. > :29:36.A new study by the London School of Economics, estimates that Britain
:29:37. > :29:40.has done very well out of its EU membership. They worked out about
:29:41. > :29:44.15% of our economy comes from selling stuff to Europe. They also
:29:45. > :29:49.estimated that in the best case scenario, if we were to leave, our
:29:50. > :29:54.economy would shrink by just over 2%. That is about a year of normal
:29:55. > :29:58.economic growth. One consequence of being an EU member is we have to
:29:59. > :30:03.follow a lot of EU rules. And some people believe that if we were freed
:30:04. > :30:08.from that obligation we would be able to deregulate and be
:30:09. > :30:12.competitive when it comes to selling to the fast growing countries of
:30:13. > :30:17.East Asia and South America. There is a wrinkle, if we could deregulate
:30:18. > :30:22.to pursue the distant markets it is more likely we would be kicked out
:30:23. > :30:28.of a lot of markets in Europe. So trade with Asia would have to sky
:30:29. > :30:32.rocket to make up for it. That raises the question of just how much
:30:33. > :30:38.the EU's rules and regulations costs the UK. The EU regulates an enormous
:30:39. > :30:42.amount. But the real weight varies with your business. For example, if
:30:43. > :30:46.you are a graphic designer you probably won't have much effect. But
:30:47. > :30:50.if you sell chemicals it will have an enormous weight. So you often
:30:51. > :30:53.hear estimates for the proportion of British laws that come from
:30:54. > :30:58.Brussels, or the cost of European regulation. But in truth, the effect
:30:59. > :31:02.of the European Union is very varied, it is really reshaping our
:31:03. > :31:10.society, it is helping some businesses and it is hurting others.
:31:11. > :31:16.Why can't we get straight answer on this? Part of the reason it is by
:31:17. > :31:23.definition a meaningless question. We have no idea what a post-EU
:31:24. > :31:26.scenario would be. No-one has any incentive to tell the truth. We
:31:27. > :31:29.don't know what a negotiation would look like. If we don't know what the
:31:30. > :31:34.situation afterwards would look like, how you could possibly compare
:31:35. > :31:37.with the situation now, it is an inherently impossible task. The
:31:38. > :31:41.truth is clear from an economic standpoint, we have had enormous
:31:42. > :31:45.benefits from being in the EU. You could never say what without it but
:31:46. > :31:48.we have had enormous benefits. The problem and slight of hand that
:31:49. > :31:52.politicians are being caught out on is we have tended to talk about how
:31:53. > :31:56.we like the single market and we just don't like the bureaucracy and
:31:57. > :32:01.Britain is always in favour of the single market and we have benefitted
:32:02. > :32:05.from that, but the single market is the free movement of people,
:32:06. > :32:08.difficult politically, the free movement of goods requiring a
:32:09. > :32:12.significant set of rules to have the market. It is those rules people
:32:13. > :32:16.don't like and consider to be EU bureaucracy, and free movement of
:32:17. > :32:20.capital we sort of like but we worry about the City. At the heart, the
:32:21. > :32:24.awkward thing, the reason why these arguments about Europe have become
:32:25. > :32:27.very difficult for supporters of our membership of the EU, is that
:32:28. > :32:31.actually we're not sure if we are in favour of this stuff any more, the
:32:32. > :32:36.stuff that was at the core of our argument for membership? I'm in
:32:37. > :32:40.favour of it. The four freedoms Stephaine has spoken about have
:32:41. > :32:46.enriched our economy and society. I make no apology for being in favour
:32:47. > :32:52.of free movement of people. The people who have come to Britain who
:32:53. > :32:59.have got about 2. 3 million of them from t rest of the EU. They are
:33:00. > :33:02.young, hard working and paying their taxes and arriving at a time when
:33:03. > :33:06.educated in their home country, we are not paying for their education.
:33:07. > :33:09.They are not so old they are a burden on the National Health
:33:10. > :33:13.Service. That is the economic advantage of them. On top of that
:33:14. > :33:17.there is a cultural enrichment we have from having all of these
:33:18. > :33:22.nationalities coming to London. And there is also the freedom our people
:33:23. > :33:27.have to go and work and live across the channel. Don't forget there are
:33:28. > :33:32.2. 2 million, almost as many Brits living, about a million of them in
:33:33. > :33:36.Spain. So the free movement, the treaty of Rome that set off
:33:37. > :33:39.Spain. So the free movement, the the biggest charters
:33:40. > :33:41.Spain. So the free movement, the that the world
:33:42. > :33:43.Spain. So the free movement, the is a
:33:44. > :33:46.Spain. So the free movement, the looking like? I
:33:47. > :33:47.Spain. So the free movement, the possible, the things we want like
:33:48. > :33:52.proper controls over borders freedom to say no to people coming
:33:53. > :34:00.in. We won't be given that, we only have the support
:34:01. > :34:06.benefit tourism of Holland and Germany. Stephaine is right talking
:34:07. > :34:11.about leaving the EU, we are talking hypotheticals, but there are facts
:34:12. > :34:14.that suggest we can flourish. Still the sixth largest economy in the
:34:15. > :34:20.that suggest we can flourish. Still world, and only 10% of the GDP
:34:21. > :34:25.dependant on Europe, and we sell more to them than they us. It is
:34:26. > :34:27.dependant on Europe, and we sell interesting Norway and Switzerland
:34:28. > :34:34.outside with the EU trade more with the EU than we do. There are certain
:34:35. > :34:38.fundamental economic factors. They are small country and they trade
:34:39. > :34:43.more than big countries as a proportion of their GDP. That is a
:34:44. > :34:46.statistical quirk you have mentioned. A new
:34:47. > :34:48.statistical quirk you have would mean complying with a lot of
:34:49. > :34:53.the same rules. Lots of would mean complying with a lot of
:34:54. > :34:58.we need to be out from it. But one argument euro-sceptics are dubious
:34:59. > :34:59.about if we left lots of regulations would disappear, and we would have
:35:00. > :35:01.about if we left lots of regulations to sign up because we need the
:35:02. > :35:08.business. America and China needs to investor in Britain is not the EU
:35:09. > :35:17.but America. Stepping outside means investor in Britain is not the EU
:35:18. > :35:26.lot of that trade is with Britain. give them access to the whole single
:35:27. > :35:30.market with 500 million people. This idea that we could be like the
:35:31. > :35:35.Swiss, it isn't a good argument. Take the City, you may not like the
:35:36. > :35:37.City, but it is 10% of our economy, financial services. If we were
:35:38. > :35:42.City, but it is 10% of our economy, wits land we would -- Switzerland we
:35:43. > :35:45.wouldn't have a passport, we have now a passport, our firms
:35:46. > :35:48.wouldn't have a passport, we have city can offer services right across
:35:49. > :35:51.the EU. If we were like Switzerland they couldn't. The Swiss have
:35:52. > :35:58.the EU. If we were like Switzerland a passport for their banks for years
:35:59. > :36:03.and the EU has denied it. If we put ourselves off from the City we will
:36:04. > :36:11.be... . The Financial Transaction Tax they want to put on. Only ten,
:36:12. > :36:15.one jumped out. If that happens it affects competitors doesn't it? Not
:36:16. > :36:20.much, the Financial Transaction Tax, I'm against it, but it has been
:36:21. > :36:27.diluted every month. Not only falling from 11-10%, it is confined
:36:28. > :36:31.now to shares and other derivatives it looks like our own stamp duty but
:36:32. > :36:36.at a lower rate. I'm not saying it is a good thing, but a damp squib.
:36:37. > :36:39.I'm more or less on your side on this. But surely you have to accept
:36:40. > :36:44.it is much harder to make these arguments now, it sound more like an
:36:45. > :36:48.elitist argument, it is wonderful being in London having lots of
:36:49. > :36:53.national toes, but the city is good for large arts of the south-east and
:36:54. > :36:58.parts the UK. But I think it has become a much more respectable
:36:59. > :37:03.intellectual argument to be outside. You can't deny that? It is not just
:37:04. > :37:08.the city, we can talk about the car industry it depends how much damage
:37:09. > :37:14.we suffer depending on how much we come out with and what the arangment
:37:15. > :37:18.is. Some people want us just to rely on our webship of the World Trade
:37:19. > :37:23.Organisation. If we were part of the World Trade Organisation there would
:37:24. > :37:32.be tarrifs on exports, taxes on all cars we export to the EU. Those
:37:33. > :37:36.taxes would be 0%. I'm not saying that is the only scenario, but that
:37:37. > :37:41.is what a credible euro-sceptic, Nigel Lawson is arguing for. I have
:37:42. > :37:45.to cut across you there. Can you store it up for later. We come to
:37:46. > :37:50.the most charged issue of all, the EU is all about open borders.
:37:51. > :37:54.Freedom of trade and freedom of movement. The European Union was not
:37:55. > :37:58.sold to us as a way of bringing large numbers of foreigners to this
:37:59. > :38:07.country, to work and live without let or hindrance. That is what has
:38:08. > :38:15.happened. On to your third block of questions, ready for it A number of
:38:16. > :38:18.pro-European viewers asked why talk about Europe as a thing that is done
:38:19. > :38:21.to us. We have MEPs in the parliament and ministers in the
:38:22. > :38:26.council. A large part of that sense comes down to one issue, European
:38:27. > :38:33.immigration and the feeling we never really had a vote about the extent
:38:34. > :38:37.of it. EU citizens can, of course, work in EU country and some people
:38:38. > :38:42.dislike the idea of not controlling our borders on principle. Others
:38:43. > :38:52.don't really mind. Let's take a look at some of the numbers. At the 2011
:38:53. > :38:55.census 2. 7 million people were registered born in another country.
:38:56. > :38:59.When people talk about European immigration they don't mean French
:39:00. > :39:03.and German people, they are thinking people further east. Since the fall
:39:04. > :39:07.of the Iron Curtain the European Union has been spreading east, it
:39:08. > :39:13.now includes portions of the former USSR itself. These new EU members
:39:14. > :39:17.are much poorer than Britain, a manufacturing worker in Poland can
:39:18. > :39:24.only expect to earn one quarter as much as their counterparts in
:39:25. > :39:27.Britain. That creates a pull drawing people into the UK. There are a
:39:28. > :39:32.million people living in the UK born in the so called A 8 countries,
:39:33. > :39:41.those are the nations that join the EU in Eastern Europe in 2004. It
:39:42. > :39:53.takes them to other rich European nations. But back in the year --
:39:54. > :39:57.2000, there was a disproportionate share. They are big numbers, but
:39:58. > :40:02.academics don't think there is a link between imdrags and employment
:40:03. > :40:07.nor crime. It is worth mentions immigration isn't a one-way street.
:40:08. > :40:11.1. 8 million British people have gone to live elsewhere in the EU.
:40:12. > :40:15.What effect does our EU membership have on all these numbers? Of course
:40:16. > :40:20.it increases them. It is not easy to say by how much. Remember Britain is
:40:21. > :40:24.a very open country, two thirds of our foreign born population comes
:40:25. > :40:28.from outside. So we shouldn't assume there wouldn't be immigration to
:40:29. > :40:31.Britain if we weren't EU members. Even so it is the issue that most
:40:32. > :40:37.people associate with the European Union. It is the explanation for why
:40:38. > :40:44.a lot of people feel there is a democratic deficit between them and
:40:45. > :40:47.Brussels. On past form most of us won't bother to vote in the
:40:48. > :40:50.elections to the European Parliament, and it is important to
:40:51. > :40:55.recall that most of the politicians in the parliament, the overwhelming
:40:56. > :40:59.majority aren't British. And nor are they overwhelmingly any other
:41:00. > :41:06.nationality. They are chosen by the many millions of voters of the EU in
:41:07. > :41:10.28 countries. One of them is the Shrove convenientian philosopher
:41:11. > :41:20.here tonight. Will you vote? No. Why not? Because I'm very pro-European,
:41:21. > :41:25.but I'm very critical of what Brussels and its bureaucracy stands
:41:26. > :41:30.for. I think that the lesson to the politicians should be as large as we
:41:31. > :41:35.can imagine boycott of votes, not to abolish Europe but to awaken it in a
:41:36. > :41:42.way. What has gone wrong? What is going wrong, I will answer it with a
:41:43. > :41:45.question, Freudian question, what does the woman want? Nobody knows
:41:46. > :41:50.that, but the question what does Europe want? I claim that it is
:41:51. > :41:55.obvious that at least three Europes are fighting. On the one hand it is
:41:56. > :42:02.the predominant what Brussels today stands for, Europe, it is just an
:42:03. > :42:06.efficient technocratic idea. We are entering the multisensory world so
:42:07. > :42:11.we have to be well organised to compete with other power centres and
:42:12. > :42:20.so on. I think that will not work. It is not good enough. Then we have
:42:21. > :42:26.what we saw at the beginning of our programme tonight. That is to say
:42:27. > :42:30.let as call it the populist anti-immigrant reaction. I think
:42:31. > :42:35.that first let's not underestimate them, they really do formulate some
:42:36. > :42:42.awe THNTic anxieties, fears of the people, but I think that the tragedy
:42:43. > :42:46.is they are just channelling in this direction fears which are not really
:42:47. > :42:53.generated by the poor Romanians and whoever. Yes, ordinary working-class
:42:54. > :42:57.people, leaving anxiety, but it is more about where global capitalism
:42:58. > :43:04.is, healthcare no longer functioning whatever you want, and so on so on.
:43:05. > :43:08.The logic of global capitalism is the problem, that is moving in a
:43:09. > :43:17.certain direction, outsourcing and so on. I think that in other words,
:43:18. > :43:22.in this sense I'm still a leftist. I think that the votes for this
:43:23. > :43:30.nationalist anti-immigrant parties are the votes which should have been
:43:31. > :43:36.leftist votes. Only a more radical new left can save Europe, I think.
:43:37. > :43:41.Because I think and as some kind of radical leftist I'm totally
:43:42. > :43:45.pro-European. I think Europe has introduced something which is
:43:46. > :43:51.incredibly important for the entire humanity. Greek democracy could
:43:52. > :43:56.straddle the European modernity. In all of this we have an idea of a
:43:57. > :44:01.community of equal people living in freedom in solidarity. I will not go
:44:02. > :44:08.in this poetry, I'm saying that this basic European legacy, I see it
:44:09. > :44:13.today threatened by global capitalism. Take China and
:44:14. > :44:17.Singapore, until now we could have said that capitalism and democracy
:44:18. > :44:22.go together. In the sense that even if we have 20 years of dictatorship
:44:23. > :44:26.in South Korea, when things start to function you have a demand for
:44:27. > :44:32.democracy. I doubt if this is still the case. The most... You are
:44:33. > :44:35.talking about China now? China, Singapore, South Korea, there is a
:44:36. > :44:41.new capitalism emerging and I don't think we can dismiss it. Let's go
:44:42. > :44:46.back to Europe for a moment or two, is there any way that you can
:44:47. > :44:51.imagine of forging some sort of European identity, so
:44:52. > :44:54.imagine of forging some sort of questions of migrants and an
:44:55. > :44:56.imagine of forging some sort of between nations no longer exist. We
:44:57. > :45:04.are talking something that is incredibly long-term here aren't we?
:45:05. > :45:12.It is no so easy, I will tell you why. Let's be serious. Do, let's.
:45:13. > :45:21.The problems we are facing today, are global problems, ecology, who
:45:22. > :45:26.will regulate biogen metrics, who will regulate the flow of financial
:45:27. > :45:30.capital and intellectual property. Global capital isn't today it is
:45:31. > :45:38.calling for some kind of global regulation. This is maybe worldwide
:45:39. > :45:43.our biggest challenge. I think the European way to do it while keeping
:45:44. > :45:49.the European legacy alive, equality and all that stuff we usually
:45:50. > :45:55.designate as welfare state. If it will not be done in the European
:45:56. > :46:00.way, it will be done in a much nastier way through some kind of
:46:01. > :46:06.universalised what we call capitalism and so on. I think this
:46:07. > :46:11.is a serious threat, even if we still have democracy, isn't it that
:46:12. > :46:14.they are becoming more and more insubstantial.
:46:15. > :46:18.Thank you. That's it, I will be back tomorrow with an interview with the
:46:19. > :46:24.former Italian Prime Minister, billionare and convicted fraudster,
:46:25. > :46:31.Silvio Berlusconi. Do you have a particular problem with Angela
:46:32. > :46:40.Merkel? Is it true you called her a BEEP lard cars? Well more of that
:46:41. > :46:44.tomorrow, also tomorrow, the Royal Opera House will be streaming a live
:46:45. > :46:52.performance on the Internet for the first time, it is La Traviata,
:46:53. > :46:55.performed by husband and wife Eileen Perez and Steven Costello. Here is a
:46:56. > :47:03.review.