03/09/2014 Newsnight


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines, presented by Laura Kuenssberg.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 03/09/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



- western lead remembers under pressure on multiple fronts. NATO


must make a decision on forces to protect Ukraine.


It feels like back to the future with NATO with all this talk of a


Russian threat, on that issue and ISIS, moving beyond strong words


won't be easy. Rich man, poor man, how long will Germany be prepared to


put up with less frugal neighbours in the eurozone. We will hear from


both sides. I think a party run by an out-of-touch elite. Are they


really? We will ask these two what they make of Douglas Carswell's


scorn for the Tory leadership. Ship and the rest.


Squeezing IS out of existence is David Cameron heaps, but deciding


how to do so presents a nightmarish set of decisions. Yet British


military action could be loser than we think. Newsnight understands that


ministers are already considering plans to join American air strikes


targeting IS in Syria, potentially without asking parliament first. Yet


a simple military response seems unlikely to deal alone with the


complexity of the problem. Achievable, perhaps, only by talking


to those who were previously our enemies. One former British


ambassador tells us tonight talking to Assad may be the only way. Er


James Foley and Sotloff, pictured here in life and not in the horror


of their death. A small dignity afforded to victims of a desperate


situation, one where the west appears impotent to further horror.


The next turn could be the spectacle of a British Jihadi killing a


British hostage. David Cameron said there would be no


kneejerk reaction. Today in parliament neither he nor Ed


Miliband even mentioned military intervention. If I may say the way


the leader of the opposition is approaching this is entirely right.


We should see this crisis as one where we are there to help the


people on the ground and the countries in the region that want to


solve this crisis. We should not see this as one where it is a


western-led intervention some how. Newsnight understands that the mood


behind the scenes is stiffening and there is a growing, if reluctant


realisation that Britain may have no option but to intervene militarily


in Syria. This new strategy is driven by three people, David


Cameron, a man called Hugh Powell, who has quietly become one of his


most cocilliaries and Alex Hammond the man at the front. There is a lot


mentioned at Whitehall that he should followies instincts than


those around him, which I think he should. When Alex Hammond says we


won't rule out air strikes by definition they are on the table? I


think so. The new hawkishness is coming out in COBRA meetings, Alex


Hammond harangued the generals over how to get the jets to the regions,


needing for time to iron their shirts. There are mini-COBRA


meetings convened by David Cameron. Who controls Syria is not easily


defined. This map shows how IS forces occupy a swathe of northern


Syria. The Free Syrian Army and al-Nusra have strongholds in the


west, Kurdish forces control parts of the far north and then there are


areas, including around Damascus where control is often ambiguous. If


there were air strikes they would likely be targeted around the IS


stronghold of Raqqa, where hostages are believed to be being held. As


well as other command and control centres co-ordinating the violence


in Iraq. He has taken his time about it, but


President Obama has finally started to privately lobby Governments,


including our Government, for military support. He believes that


you have to strike ISIS at source in Syria. But there is a problem, where


as in Iraq the Government has asked for help, that is not the case here.


So he is looking to build a broad coalition to help him legitimise any


air strikes. But what about shaking this hand? For some it is time to


think what was once unthinkable. A deal with Syrian President Assad.


The alternative to Assad at the moment is not a democratic Syrian


Government, but an Islamic state. That would not be in the wider


interests of the Middle East. So we have to hold our noses and talk to


Assad? I would say so, but I understand the difficulties.


Memories of last year's chemical weapons attacks by the Assad regime


are too fresh for the Prime Minister to consider that. But unlike a year


ago he no longer believes he needs the authority of MPs to authorise


immediate military action. Barack Obama, who arrived in Britain this


evening for tomorrow's NATO summit has made clear he's not going into


Syria on his own. I'm joined by Andrew Mitchell from the


Conservatives and the Labour MP, Peter Hain, both former cabinet


ministers and both who voted in favour of intervention in Iraq in


2003. Andrew Mitchell also voted in favour of military action in Syria


last year. And with us from New York is the political columnist and Obama


observer for Time Magazine, Joe Klein. Thank you for being with us.


You told the House of Commons today that ISIS won't be beaten unless


there are air strikes in Syria, should the UK and the US be doing


this now? The only reason ISIS have been pushed back in northern Iraq is


because of the air strikes there. Otherwise they were running amock,


frankly, with all their mayhem and medieval barbarism, but their base


is in Syria as well. If they were to be pushed and there is no certainty


that this will happen out of Iraq by the Iraqi forces in the main, then


they will simply regroup in Syria. So there has to be action in Syria,


but I also said that it has to be with the engagment of the Assad


regime, however unpalatable that may be, also Iran and the Saudis as


well. You have to use this opportunity to try and get the key


regional players to tackle the fundamental fault line in this


region, which is the Shia-Sunni divide of which ISIS are the most


extreme on the Sunni side. On air strikes how can you be sure that


they wouldn't just destablise such a complex situation further. Simply in


terms of the geography. As we saw in Nick's report, they are spread out.


How could we be sure the strikes would be effective and what makes


this worse? You have to do this with great deal of care. The start of


your programme suggests we are rushing in tomorrow, I doubt that,


and I would counsel against it. It has to be done with great deal of


care, and not that Britain play cowboy in the region, but joins with


the regional force, ISIS is a bigger threat to them than us. You are


articulating the case for western air strikes alongside that


engagment, is that what your leader, Ed Miliband advocates? We are all


saying on the Labour side that something has to be done to stop


ISIS, that should include military action, not on our own and


unilaterally, not just rushing in. But supporting the Government if


they come up with a careful plan, including air strikes? If Ed was


consulted and it seemed a reasonable plan he would go along with it I'm


sure, but not grandstanding by the Prime Minister over Syria in August


like that, and he rightry lost that. You have made an eloquent case


arguing strongly that the UN has to be in the lead here? This is a


complex situation. I think that nothing should be taken off the


table, I agree with virtually everything Peter has said, but we


need to engage the regional powers and we need to engage more widely


than that. That is why I think it is exthrum important that Britain uses


its position as the current chair of the Security Council, uses its


position to try to galvanise the UN into taking action. This is not a


problem, it is a multifaceted problem, but it is not a problem


that will be resolved by action just by America and Britain and it is


certainly not a problem that will be resolved by smart weapons being


delivered from 12,000 feet. If you look at precedents where the UN has


tried to take intervention. Look what happened in Syria last year?


Russia would surely veto any kind of move towards this by the United


Nations, would they not. What gives you any hope at all that Putin, in


his current mood, would be supportive? Well the United Nations


is a hugely frustrating organisation as I wrote in this piece today. They


were virtually complicit in the genocide that took place in Rwanda,


but when the United Nations moves, when it gets it right it confers an


awesome authority on the decisions that it is able to take. And this is


such a major problem now in the Middle East that we need the sinews


of the United Nations heavily involved in any resolution that will


take place. It won't happen overnight, it will take a lot of


negotiation, the great powers will move the position they are in during


that time but not something that will be resolved in short-term. Even


if the United Nations were able to get some agreement, as you


acknowledge, it would take a long time. With the Prime Minister saying


that right now this is a direct threat to the UK, are you willing to


put British safety and what happens here, the threat to our streets in


the hands of a tangled, frustrating bureaucracy like the UN? Absolutely


not. Of course Britain, as part of NATO, may play a role, but I think


that the United Nations confers an authority, the United Nations is the


right organisation for us now to try to make significant progress and


Britain has a key role to play through our diplomatic region and


our role in the United Nations in trying to galvanise opinion across


the region and the world focus on this very serious problem. Does


President Obama have any faith in the UN being able to grasp this


problem? I think he would like to have faith in the UN, but I don't


think that any rational observer in the region can really have all that


much faith. Although I agree that we should make that move. There are


other moves that are far more important and those involved, the


regional players there are on Iraq, which has already said that they


wish to co-operate with us. The Arab League, I think that as one of the


guests in London said that ISIS is a threat, a greater threat to the


region than it is to us and I would hope that we would be able to put


together a regional coalition with US, UK and some European support to


take action in this case. But measured action. I think it is


really clear, it has to be really clear to the American and British


public that we are not talking about a cowboy, George W Bush, send in


huge numbers of troops and overrun Iraq again type of operation. For


this to work it has to be very targeted air strikes and the use of


special operators on the ground. How close, therefore, given what you


describe as President Obama's ambition for a coalition of the


willing, if you like. How close do you feel he is to actually making a


decision that he must act? Because the view of so far has been


prevarication, real difficulty with taking a decision? Well I think that


you have to remember that even George W Bush took over a month to


react to 9/11. And the Afghanistan operation really should be a model


here. Because it was very few boots on the ground, the strategic and


tactical use of air power and against a rather weak a less


daunting enemy than ISIS. It was an action that went on for years and


years and years? And that is in part because it didn't remain a targeted,


measured, Special Forces-led effort. I mean a lot of that has to rest on


both Presidents, Bush who increased the troop levels and Obama who


significantly increased the troop levels in Afghanistan. I think that


the era of you know western powers launching massive assaults on


Islamic countries really has to end. It has ended. Andrew Mitchell if


action were to be taken without a vote in parliament what do you think


the reaction would be? We have all cast our minds back to this time


last year with the vote in parliament, could it happen without


a vote taking place? I don't think you require a vote for certain types


of military action. I think the Government would be wise to ensure


that any action they take is supported by parliament, it would be


a big mistake to ignore parliament in this. Peter Hain, possible


without a vote in parliament? It depends what it is, if it is a


question of rescuing hostages we don't need a vote in parliament, if


it is a wider attack we do. The elephants in the room here is the


Assad regime, there is an unwillingness and so far in London


to recognise that Assad is in place, we don't like him, he is a


Barrettous dictator -- barbarous dictator, but he's backed by 40% of


his dictate to they might not like him but they fear ISIS more. You


have to engage with him and you can't resolve the Syrian conflict


without doing that. Should David Cameron be talking to Assad? We have


reached a position where it is impossible to say no to almost any


option in dealing with this very complex and difficult problem. Thank


you very much. For a brief moment today it looked as if one of the


west's other foreign policy knots might have started to untangle.


Ukraine and Russia appeared to have agreed a ceasefire, within hours it


emerged it wasn't really a deal at all. The Ukrainian Prime Minister


scoffed at it, there was no agreement on territory at all. NATO


leaders will tomorrow have to try to deal with that as well as the crisis


in the Middle East. We're there ahead of the meeting in Wales. In


terms of IS what chance do you think there is of any coherent, cohesive


agreement in the next few days? Well, if there is going to be such a


discussion it is going to be on the margins of this, it is not actually


on the agenda of this summit, just before we came on air, I spoke to a


couple of people in the British Government who both said to me that


there has been no request for example to join American air strikes


in the region. Now of course these kinds of requests might come in such


informal discussions, if they did it would be far easier for the UK to


say yes in the case of Iraq, Syria remains hugely problematic I think


for the British Government in a legal, diplomatic, political and


military sense. So it could still be a while, I think, before we see a


common line emerge. In terms of Ukraine, which originally was the


main issue they were going to have to deal with, we saw today with the


unravelling of the ceasefire it really seems as if Putin is still


setting the agenda here. The west is scrabling to catch up? Well, and you


might say also the President of Ukraine also trying. He was the one


who let the hare run this morning announcing on Twitter that the


ceasefire had gone into effect. Then the Russians came out including his


own Ukrainian Prime Minister and started to pull the thing apart. We


don't know what is happening, it is true at some point many people


believe that Mr Putin will try to freeze the conflict, hold on to the


gains s that the recent introduction of Russian forces has allowed them


to make in Ukraine. All that have is something that the leaders are going


to discuss for much of tomorrow and what they can do about it. That too


is an area where I don't think they are getting strong leadership from


the United States, for example on the issue of should they arm


Ukraine, the answer is they are not ready to take that step. That does


leave Mr Putin still calling an awful lot of the shots and trying to


waken the hope of the ceasefire in a week where there have been threats


of further EU economic sanctions on Russia. No doubt we will hear from


you tomorrow. There are, not surprisingly, nerves among Ukraine's


near neighbours, a little earlier I spoke to Radoslaw Sikorski, the


Polish foreign minister I started by asking him whether he thought a


Ukrainian ceasefire was possible this week? It would be very good if


the fighting stopped and if a political settlement could be


reached. But I think we have had statements from the Kremlin before


which didn't check out. Also we have to remember that President Putin has


proven to be an agile tactition. But he has underestimated the effect of


the loss of confidence that we have in his words. Do you trust Putin? I


think it was comrade Lenin who said "trust and verify". In terms of


where this is all taking place, it is in your neighbourhood, how


worried are you about the extent of Putin's ambition, does Poland feel


threatened? Poland is indeed a neighbour of both Russia and Ukraine


and obviously when neighbours quarrel it is of concern. We would


like the decolonisation of the former Soviet Union to proceed more


smoothly. It is very difficult for a former colonial power to acknowledge


the existence and the right to existence of a former protege. But


the sooner it happens the better for the citizens, even of the former


Metropolis, let alone the former colony. It looks like an awful lot


more than Putin having difficulty acknowledges the decolonisation of


the former Soviet Union. It looks like quite the reverse that he's


actually trying to extend his power? President Putin has indeed stated


his aims rather frankly in his annexation speech of the Crimea. But


it is so bold and so brazen that many in Europe still can't believe


it is for real. Do you believe it is for real? Yes. NATO's proposals


appear to be rapid response force of several thousand troops to protect


Eastern Europe. That potentially means NATO troops, Polish troops in


direct combat with Russian forces since the end, then the aftermath of


a Second World War. Are you aware of the significance of that, what would


that mean? Well you have NATO bases, you don't think they threaten


anybody, everybody understands it is not strength that invites


aggression, it is weakness that invites aggression, as the


Ukrainians are finding out to their cost. So NATO belatedly


strengthening its eastern flank is at last beginning to level the


security across the NATO treaty area with the hope of preventing what you


have just described. Minister, thank you very much indeed.


Thank you. Now tomorrow the head of the


European Central Bank might, just might get out his chequebook to sign


off a few enormous promises of money. Because, let's face it, there


doesn't seem to be much chance of the eurozone's economies staggering


back to health on their own. For how long for the countries who have got


their act to go will Germany give cash to those who are more willing


to spend it. We have been hearing both sides of the story. This is


Italy. At the moment it is casting a shadow over Europe's economy. There


is no better example of this economic malaise than here in


Naples. In 2011 a scandal involving rubbish


collection in Naples briefly captured the world's attention. A


combination of bad management, corruption and poor public finances


led to an unprecedented build-up of rubbish in the streets. Eventually


people started to burn it in protest. Three years on, Naples


still has a rubbish problem. And Italy's economy is no better. A you


don't have to spend much time in Naples to see that in large parts of


Italy any talk of economic recovery feels pretty meaningless, but this


isn't a problem which began in 2010, it is much more long running than


that. Italy has now entered a triple-dip recession, in fact the


economy is no bigger than it was in 2000. Unemployment is 12. 5%, and


Government debt is climbing, it currently stands at a huge 130% of


GDP. But the biggest worry is what is happening with prices. They have


started falling. The country has entered deflation. Falling prices


suck demand out of the high street. They push down wages as profits


fall, and they make debt harder to repay. Italy is already in


deflation, there are fears that may soon spread to the rest of the


eurozone. Italy has a toxic cocktail of deflation, high unemployment and


high youth unemployment, that is the recipe for another lost decade. For


the past five years there has been only one quarter in which we had


positive growth and even before the crisis before 2007 there has been


very low growth. We have long-running problems, at least two


decades old in terms of a high public debt, low capital formation,


high corruption, high public spending, high taxes and very high


unemployment rates at the moment. Italy's economy faces a whole host


of problems. Some of the reforms the Government is trying to implement


will begin to address the long-term issues. But they won't do much for


this country in the short-term. And that's the problem. The kind of


things which could give Italy the shot in the arm it needs are opposed


by the eurozone's largest economy. Germany's horrified by what it sees


in Italy. Here things are very different, unemployment is low, the


budget is in surplus, and growth has been strong. This is the Town Hall


in Munich, one of the healthiest and most productive cities in Europe. In


the past 15 years German economic success has been based on two


pillars, a decade of flat real wages gave it one of the most competitive


economies in the world and the creation of the euro locked in


export markets across Europe. Germany's politicians and public are


terrified that they might have to bail out other countries. The


general view is that places like France and Italy just need more


reform. Italy has basically done nothing over the last five years. So


there have been no reforms, the political environment in Italy is


very difficult, you know. The Government is changing every six


months and so there is no clear strategy for this country to get out


of the crisis. There is a reason Germans are uncharacteristically


animated by this. What happens in Europe affects their economy. You


can see this in the traditional barometer of the German economy, the


car industry, which was badly hit by the crisis in Europe. Overall the


German economy actually contracted in the second quarter of this year.


Selling high-value products like these cars to the big emerging


economies has provided Germany with some insulation against the European


crisis. But with Russia and Brazil in recession, and India and China


slowing, that protection is starting to wear thing. We are not in a


recession yet. Even if the second, third quarter would be negative


again, we at least here in Germany would not talk about a recession.


This would be rather, you know, a technical or a slowdown of the


economy. Tomorrow the European Central Bank will announce its


latest policy steps, it is in a difficult position. The kind of


policies which might provide support to countries like Italy are fiercely


opposed in Germany? That's the fundamental problem, cities like


Munich and Naples, with very little economies, have been placed in the


same economic block. The question is can European politicians find a way


to make this work with me now from the chief economics commentator at


the Financial Times, the economist from the University of Sussex. And


the senior economist at Berenberg Bank. Thank you for coming in.


Martin Wolf, firstly these problems are tub born and arguably long-term


if the eurozone can't get its act together what is the worst case


scenario? I have just published a book written viewers can get a good


view of things by reading it. The worst that could have happened, I


don't think it is very likely, is that it breaks up. I think it is far


more likely is what I have described as the bad marriage scenario. That


is to say the costs of break-up are incredibly high, they see and


understand that enough will be done to keep it together, and enough is


consistently done to keep it together. Both by the policy makers


and Governments and the European Central Bank which has acted very


powerfully in the past, and might get act powerfully again. They have


done enough to keep it together, but not enough either collectively, they


have to do some things together, or individually to make this really a


prosperous union. They are in my view likely to remain, the most


likely by far is just in a very uncomfortable relationship. What are


the consequences for the continent of staying in a terrible marriage,


as you cry it, very unhappily, what does it mean in brass tacks? I'm


assuming that there are obviously political and social consequences


which others can probably talk more about than I can. I have spent


recently the summer in Italy it is clear this is a very depressed


country. They have experienced really five years of recession and


the economy is now about as big as it was 15 years ago. Unemployment is


very high, youth unemployment is very high. A lot of people are


leaving. It is a very depressed state. But remember at the same time


that this is an ageing continent, I tend to think that very old people


and elderly people will not start revolutions, the young are


remarkably acquiescent. That is an astonishing thing for me. There is a


reasonably, overwhelmingly probable that they will go on like that.


Isn't the question though for Italy, France and Spain, is they could get


out of an unhappy marriage if they went about some serious reform and


actually showed discipline? I think it depends what kind of reforms we


are talking about. So Italy remember is a country that only Haiti and


Zimbabwe have grown less than Italy in the last 20 years. Zero


productivity growth in the last 20 years. My real problem, even with


the report we have just heard is the diagnosis of what the differences


between say a country like Germany and Italy is just wrong. Then the


medicine has been wrong and the patient has been getting sicker. In


what sense? How do you increase your competitiveness, what does it mean?


It means having productive companies and being able to produce the kind


of goods that the world wants to buy, both products and services. So


Germany wins procurement contracts in the UK, Seimens recently, not


because they paid their workers less during the whole the reforms, but


because Germany over the last decade has been investing massively in


precisely those areas that make you competitive. Except if you look at


who is doing well now look at the UK and other countries in northern


Europe where there have been reforms and changes, If you look at private


business investment in the UK it is scary. But the economy is growing


here? First of all it depends, we want to look at something more than


just a quarter. And I think, at least, that the UK is growing


because of debt-driven consumption and Mark Carney is right to worry


about that. Tomorrow the European Central Bank boss takes to the stage


and has a big opportunity to write off some IOUs to get everybody


spending again, what do the markets want him to do? The markets since


the speech a couple of weeks ago expect him to do big things, pretty


much something as big as he did in 2012 when in London he announced


what is called ONT, these potentially unlimited bond purchases


which were actually never activated but which changed the whole eurozone


story from a downward spiral to at least for a while an upward spiral.


They expect a big message from him. If he doesn't deliver it could be


short-term trouble in the markets tomorrow. I think it is unlikely he


will deliver what the markets hope a huge bond-buying programme, he is


preparing the ground but it would be astonishing if he would be, it would


be a game-changer economically, politically is another matter. The


extend of the unhappy marriage, surely it is time for the ECB to


take bold action and get out the big bazuka again. In the eurozone we


have double trouble, on the one hand we have inflation far below the


target. Clearly there is a point for the ECB to do more. They had already


made some announcements in June but things got worse. What got worse has


nothing to do with deflation, it has to do with something that happens


outside the eurozone with the Ukraine crisis, that is not squarely


in the remit of the Central Bank t increases the pressure on the ECB to


do more. In terms of getting out of this, whatever the ECB does tomorrow


or in October, is it actually possible for them to write blank


cheques and give IOUs and get out of this crisis in this sway or is it


fundamentally the problem that there are countries in northern Europe


where the economies are so different to those in southern Europe that


something much more radical has to happen? Think of the US that


underwent a $4 trillion quantitative easing cycle, that is not what is


making today the US grow at a 3% rate, it was the fiscal stimulus


that stimulated that. I think quantitative easing is important


mainly to calm down the financial markets, but what gets your real


economy growing, what gets jobs and good jobs, high-quality and


well-paying jobs in the future which is what Portugal, Italy, Greece and


Spain need, is not quoting which also -- quantitative easing which


also ends up in the banks but serious spending both public and


private sector spending. Today we have record level hoarding rates in


Europe. I think it is 1. 5 trillion euros-worth being hoarded. Huge


amounts spent on boosting stock prices. Do you agree with that? In


the long run I would agree with this, but we need competitiveness


quickly and growth quickly. I think these things will not deliver


quickly enough. Do Germans have the patience for this? I think the


Germans have shown throughout the crisis that they are ready to help


the other countries. In return for reforms. We have demonstrated that


we can get countries reforming and deliver results. Countries like


Spain, Portugal, Greece, Ireland, the countries that had a package


financed by German tax payers are now growing rapidly, some countries


almost as fast as the UK. I think he can do things but he won't, but he


can do things which will help a little, but he can't fix the


problems identified. There are huge structural problems and huge


competitiveness problems and they are going to be taking years and


years to solve. But the structural problems are not just about labour


market rigidites and corruption, it is actually again about investment,


until you have proper public and private sector investing and R and


human capital formation and education, training you will not


have... Thank you all very much. It can be pretty impole light to leave


a party early. It is certainly downright rude to trash the host


after you have gone. That seems to be what Douglas Carswell is intent


on doing. Telling Newsnight the party he had been in for years until


just last week was run by out-of-touch elites, but having left


the Conservatives to run for UKIP, he now has to persuade people in


Essex his new found boldness is worth their vote. Things go up and


down in politics, but the basic picture stays the same, occasionally


the whole political system is thrown up in the air. In Essex right now


there is a by-election doing just that. As we visit UKIP's campaign is


under construction, quite literally. I see the plumbing and heating has


arrived. Hello Douglas. Welcome. The team, plumber and all are digesting


another opinion poll. This one gives Carswell a 32% lead. Can we talk


about the type of party you have joined, you talked about having a


five-year-old daughter and you have seen what feminism has to offer.


These are people until recently were calling women "sluts"? When you


discover people with those noxious views you have to make sure they


know it is intolerable, you cannot have people who hold those views


seeking public office or helping others seek public office. Carswell


is feared in this by-election because of how well he already knows


the electorate. He's not Conservative any more? I know, but


he's a Conservative at heart, oh I'm on camera. Are you a Conservative at


heart? I'm a free market Gladstonian liberal. 'S independent. I'm


independent. I don't mind the UKIP thing to stop these foreigners


coming in basically. Too many and this euro thing I don't think we


should be dictated to by them either. You don't quite agree with


her on the foreigners' point? We need to control our borders.


Controlling our borders doesn't mean not letting anyone in. We have too


many haven't we. Have we got too many? We have a shortage of GPs, if


you can get a good GP to come to this place and deliver healthcare,


it shouldn't matter where they come from. He would like to have Ed


Miliband as Prime Minister? You heard it your safe, how different


are Ed Miliband and David Cameron. Do you think Ed Miliband is really


free market? Is George Osborne that free market, look at the gene


market, look at the nationalised banks. They are not really that


different. . The seat was Labour in Clacton until Carswell turned it


Tory, remaining Labour supporters are flirting with UKIP, the question


is whether a UKIP fronted by Carswell can now attract these


one-time Labour voters. Do you usually vote Labour? I have voted


Tory? Are you disappointed with the Government? Yes. Are you going to


come back to Labour this time? Yes I am. I'm local boy, that would be


great, I will leave you one of the leaflets. What are you saying to


people who say they were Labour and thinking of going to UKIP. Why stick


with Labour? What is the difference between UKIP and the Tories, the


same policies and the same sessions and the same people now. If you are


not that way inclined and you are usually a Labour voter stick with


Labour, because you know the Government has left Clacton behind.


There is no economic recovery here. But the difficulty for you is if


there is a Douglas Carswell victory, a UKIP victory, that will help Ed


Miliband won't it? I don't know. I want Labour to win the election, if


that helps Labour win the election then all well and good. You are a


sacrificial Lambert? I wouldn't put it like that, we are fighting for


every vote in Clacton. No love lost in Tory HQ, they haven't chosen a


candidate but they were changing the locks when Newsnight visited, a bit


late, this horse has already bolted. Strange though it may sound, there


was basically no Tory activity by the seaside, no liberal or Green


candidate selected either. Back in London I was able to ask one


euro-sceptic minister whether Carswell had been right or indulge


gent? I think it is DLEEP counter-productive what he has done.


I'm sure the voters in Clacton are seeing what is going on


internationally. They want strong and firm Government which is what


they have right now. They will be more concerned with the future, the


economic security of hard-working families, about jobs, international


security. For the next election you have them saying they will vote to


go out of Europe, MPs saying that, they are going out? I think it is


about the economic future of the country. If we talk about UKIP right


now a vote for UKIP is effectively going to lead to a Ed Miliband-led


Government. Carswell has up in his UKIP HQ a poster ofdy and Gladstone.


The free marketeer won three elections while the then Tory Party


was split. Carswell might split it again. There is a full list of


candidates for Clacton available on the BBC website. We will return


there before the election to speak to the others. The impact of


Carswell's defection has reached way beyond the corridors of Westminster


or the streets of Clacton. This week resulting in an extraordinary spat


over the future of the party on the newspaper columns and blogs of


Conservative commentators. Parris pass has been busy predicting a


schism in the party. He says it is inevitable and that Carswell and his


crew should go to UKIP by all means stay there. Also with us is the


prominent backbencher, Bernard Jenkin, a well known euro-sceptic


who take as rather different view. Firstly to you matters Matthew


Parris, surely the Tory Party can't afford to send a big chunk of its


grassroots, Carswell and others and people on the very euro-sceptic or


anti-euro wing of the party and just do without their support. They can't


afford that can they? It wouldn't be such a big chunk as people might


have you believe, but there would be 30 or 40 and they would go. The


alternative is that they give the impression of dragging the


Conservative Party to the right and if the Conservative Party is


reported to have dragged to the right the loss that we would have in


the centre, the loss that we would have from floating voters and the


loss that many of us would have in what we believe would be


incalculable. You say losing 30 MPs wouldn't be a big deal. At the last


election the Conservatives didn't even man to get a majority, that is


really important isn't it? I don't think 30 MPs are going to cross the


floor. I don't think any more MPs are going to cross the floor, but


what I do think is the Conservative Party steadfastly and in an


unpanicky way needs to project an image of moderation, the moment we


stop doing that and start flirting with the right as a party we have


lost it. Bernard Jenkin, do you deny that beyond Douglas Carswell and as


Matthew would suggest a small group of people there is a genuine


disconnect between the leadership and the grassroots? In most parties,


particularly parties in Government there is always a tension between


the grassroots and the party leadership, because the party


leadership's perspective is inevitably different from the


grassroots. What is happening here is big. The one thing we are all


agreed about, listen to your previous package about the state of


the eurozone. The European Union is in a terrible mess and even George


Osborne is now saying that the problems of the eurozone are so


preoccupying the eurozone they are sidelining the concerns of member


states like the United Kingdom. Doesn't that mean the people in your


party have to concentrate in making the current relationships work


rather than doing what Douglas Carswell has done and walk away from


it completely? I have no brief for Douglas Carswell, I believe his


action has been catastrophically bad for the country and the things he


says he believes in. What is happening in the Conservative Party


is we need to modernise our relationship with the European


Union. It has always been the case that very often the backbenches have


been ahead of where the establishment needs to be and we


have seen that in every major development of policy down the ages.


Matthew Parris that sounds reasonable to you doesn't it? It is


an act of treachery what Carswell has done. I'm not going to start


calling names, it is odd, politicians often accused of being


uncivil to each other, you are a journalist now Matthew you can throw


these brickbats around, I think it is just destructive and silly. You


won't describe it as an act of treachery, he has wrapped himself in


the Tory colours and elected as a Tory. I think he has made a


terrible, terrible error and I'm not defending it, I think he's wrong and


I think he will deeply regret what he has done. Will the rest of the


party also regret being dragged further to the right and end up in a


schism with the party split into two? I think this is a nonsense,


most of the country wants a different relationship with the


European Union. Most of the Conservative Party wants a different


relationship with the European Union. And so does the Prime


Minister. And he will try to negotiate that and the result of his


negotiation will be put to a referendum. So we have to support


him, don't we as Conservatives? We have to hope that's going to win. Do


you really hope's going to win the election? I'm rather hurt by that


accusation, we have known each other for a great many years but I really


want to win this election, I really think it will be a disastrous result


for this country if we don't win the election. That is why I'm furious


with what Douglas Carswell has done. Isn't the best way. Calling him a


traitor isn't the best way. Isn't the best way to bring about what you


say you want, which is a resounding victory for David Cameron to support


him up to the hilt. I do support him. Up to the hilt. I regularly


talk to him and I support him. But the problem we have got is we


haven't actually got a policy on what our relationship with the


European Union should be, that's a perfectly legitimate argument. Today


we had the port services regulation stopped in committee because we


couldn't even get the papers that the European Union is discussing


that we're meant to be scrutinising on the port services. It will cost


hundreds of thousands of jobs in this country, the unions and


industry against the directive, this is a mad way to legislate. We have a


good flavour of the debate inside the same party that you support.


Thank you both for coming in. That is it for tonight. Do you remember


John Redwood's mimed Welsh National anthem, the US Ambassador to the UK


has tried to learn the language ahead of the summit in Newport. He


has bravely published this video about how he has got on. Take a


look, and good night. Hello, how was that. A longer "o". But just one


"l". Hello (in an accent) I forgot it. (Speaks Welsh). All Welch people


say z-e-eta we would say Z-a-t-a. Good evening a check on the weather


for Thursday, to be honest for a lot of us Thursday is going to be


similar to what we had on


Download Subtitles