:00:00. > :00:15.Too few of us understand how the EU works.
:00:16. > :00:21.The EU is meant to be a family of nations, a large,
:00:22. > :00:24.sprawling family speaking different languages, often unable to take
:00:25. > :00:25.decisions and frequently arguing over money.
:00:26. > :00:28.We've a packed studio of politicians, experts,
:00:29. > :00:31.and the public, to work out whether the EU is effective
:00:32. > :00:41.We ride the gravy train with John Sweeney.
:00:42. > :00:48.Each month the entire European Parliament moves from Brussels to
:00:49. > :00:52.Strasbourg, is here for a week, and then moves back to Brussels, in
:00:53. > :00:55.boxes like this. People say it's a fantastic waste of time and money.
:00:56. > :01:01.And does the EU spend money to suit other countries much
:01:02. > :01:11.The good French go and set fire to motorways and spread muck in the
:01:12. > :01:12.middle of Brussels, things if I did, I would be put away probably for
:01:13. > :01:16.life. Welcome to the fifth
:01:17. > :01:20.of our special programmes, aimed at helping you come
:01:21. > :01:22.to a decision on how to vote Tonight, we getting
:01:23. > :01:27.into the nitty-gritty. We won't be talking
:01:28. > :01:29.about the Third World War, or Hitler, we shall be focussing
:01:30. > :01:32.on some detail. We'll look at the money
:01:33. > :01:37.of ours that it spends, I wonder if anybody would
:01:38. > :01:42.argue the EU works well. Or will the Remain side simply argue
:01:43. > :01:44.that it doesn't work As usual, we have a politician
:01:45. > :01:49.on each side of debate. We have a supporting cast of experts
:01:50. > :01:52.and professionals who keep And we have our regular group
:01:53. > :01:56.of undecided voters. Well, they were undecided
:01:57. > :02:10.when we started but they're Voters, let's start with you. We're
:02:11. > :02:13.talking about the EU and Brussels. Do you feel you understand it? Any
:02:14. > :02:19.of you feel you know your way round? No. Detached. That's the word I
:02:20. > :02:28.would say. Any other words that come to mind? Fragmented. Inaccessible. I
:02:29. > :02:32.thought those might be some of the words.
:02:33. > :02:36.Grur Ireland originally -- you're from Ireland originally. Got quite a
:02:37. > :02:43.lot out of it, that's one of the places where all the money went.
:02:44. > :02:48.Yes, during the 80s we became the agricultural side of things. We did
:02:49. > :02:51.quite well. Arguably started the boom back then and became prosperous
:02:52. > :02:57.after that. It has been a good thing for us. Anding la, I know you're a
:02:58. > :03:01.para-- Angela, I know you're a parallel, do you see Brussels laws,
:03:02. > :03:07.are they sensible, well drafted? I find there's an influx of directives
:03:08. > :03:13.and of regulations, so I think we're overdosed with it frankly. Really?
:03:14. > :03:22.Yeah. What word Sian would you use? I would say gravy train. I would go
:03:23. > :03:26.along those lines. This sounds like the Remain side has persuading to do
:03:27. > :03:29.in the debate. There have been others that were more even handed.
:03:30. > :03:32.We'll see whether you change your views by the time we come to the end
:03:33. > :03:35.of the tea bait. -- debate.
:03:36. > :03:37.Now, let's start with the money side of things -
:03:38. > :03:41.Throughout the campaign, we have heard one figure oft repeated.
:03:42. > :03:44.It is that we spend ?350 million a week on it -
:03:45. > :03:47.there it is, you can see Boris Johnson attempting to angle
:03:48. > :03:49.grind it into oblivion at a Vote Leave media event.
:03:50. > :03:51.Actually, it's not the best measure of the cost,
:03:52. > :04:05.so what are the facts on the EU budget?
:04:06. > :04:15.Start with that famous figure, ?350 million a week. What does that mean?
:04:16. > :04:21.Here's this week's 350 million. Merci. First get it into a
:04:22. > :04:28.comprehensible scale, 5. ?5.30 a week for each person in the country.
:04:29. > :04:35.Here's this week's 5. ?5.30. Thank you. Ignore that, it's the notional
:04:36. > :04:41.full price of EU membership, we though get mates' rates, a deal
:04:42. > :04:47.called the rebate. Take that off and the cost is ?4 per week for each of
:04:48. > :04:52.us. Actually you only owe us ?4. That's our money the EU controls.
:04:53. > :04:57.We'd get that back if we left. But the EU spends a third of that here.
:04:58. > :05:08.Most of it goes on farmers and to some poorer regions. 1. 30 back for
:05:09. > :05:12.farmers and the poor parts of the country. Thank you. It's not clear
:05:13. > :05:19.how we would choose to spend that, but if you take it off, the net cost
:05:20. > :05:25.of the EU to Britain is ?2.70 per person, per week. What it is is not
:05:26. > :05:31.350 million a week, it's half that, 175. The EU budget overall primarily
:05:32. > :05:35.exists to take money from rich countries and give it to poor
:05:36. > :05:39.countries and to farmers. We're not poor and don't have so many farmers,
:05:40. > :05:48.so we end up putting in more than most. If you look at what we all put
:05:49. > :05:51.in, net per head, Britain makes the seventh biggest contribution, less
:05:52. > :05:57.than the Germans, more than the French. We're in the half of EU
:05:58. > :06:07.countries that pay in, half or just over take out.
:06:08. > :06:10.It would be nice to have ?5 billion to ?10 billion more
:06:11. > :06:12.per year to spend here - no doubt about it.
:06:13. > :06:14.But remember that most economists think we're
:06:15. > :06:20.If they're right, and if the economy grows faster IN the EU than out
:06:21. > :06:22.of it, then it's worth spending a few billion to get
:06:23. > :06:26.Let me just see if we can get our politicians
:06:27. > :06:28.to agree on the basic facts of the budget.
:06:29. > :06:31.For Remain, we have the Secretary of State for Energy
:06:32. > :06:35.And for Leave, the Ukip MP, Douglas Carswell.
:06:36. > :06:42.Good evening both. Kate Hoey said if we vote to leave we have 350 million
:06:43. > :06:46.we send to Brussels each week that can be spent on the NHS. It can't,
:06:47. > :06:51.can it? It's fair to talk about 350 million a week, let me explain why.
:06:52. > :06:55.If you look at the Office of National Statistics figures, last
:06:56. > :06:59.year we spent 19. 1 billion on money that we handed over control to
:07:00. > :07:03.Brussels. There are 52 weeks in a year, divide that per week and you
:07:04. > :07:11.get a figure slightly over the 350 million. It's money over which we've
:07:12. > :07:17.creeded control. -- ceded control. We get a rebate... We have a veto.
:07:18. > :07:21.It's up for grabs every few years. In 2020 it's up for grabs again.
:07:22. > :07:26.What Tony Blair was in charge, he handed half the rebate away. We
:07:27. > :07:29.don't have to, though, it's negotiated It's not just the rebate.
:07:30. > :07:35.The money is spent at the discretion of the EU not us. We would not have
:07:36. > :07:41.the rebate, we're not sending the rebate over. We don't even send it.
:07:42. > :07:44.Hang on, you know the rebate is paid a year in arrears. We are handing it
:07:45. > :07:50.over. We get it back the following year. It's quite legitimate to say
:07:51. > :07:55.we hand over control 350 million... Britain sends 350 million a we're to
:07:56. > :08:04.the EU. We don't send that because we don't send the rebate. Why did
:08:05. > :08:09.the Statistics Commission say it was potentially problematic to use that
:08:10. > :08:14.figure. It's 19. $1 billion... That doesn't confirm that figure. It puts
:08:15. > :08:18.that figure in for illustration. I brought this letter because it's
:08:19. > :08:22.over then cited and spun. The facts reinforce everything - Before the
:08:23. > :08:26.rebate, it would be 18 billion. It makes it clear that actually when we
:08:27. > :08:31.give all this money to Brussels, about 9 billion of it we never see
:08:32. > :08:37.it again. It subsidises Mr Juncker's jet or pay for tobacco farmers in
:08:38. > :08:41.Greece. Should we attach the same credibility to all the claims your
:08:42. > :08:46.campaign is making that you want us to attach to that one. It's factual.
:08:47. > :08:52.Every week we hand over - We get a rebate. We don't control that. What
:08:53. > :08:55.do you mean? We don't pay it. We couldn't spend that money on the NHS
:08:56. > :09:00.because we don't send it to Brussels. We're highly vulnerable
:09:01. > :09:04.because the rebate is not in control, no British Government can
:09:05. > :09:10.guarantee that. I was hoping we could get agreement on that one. It
:09:11. > :09:13.isn't 350 million by any normal view of it, it may not be a hospital
:09:14. > :09:19.every week or whatever the thing is, but it is a hospital every two
:09:20. > :09:22.weeks. Can I just comment on Douglas and his campaign's use of the 350
:09:23. > :09:26.million. It is misleading. I would urge you and your team to stop using
:09:27. > :09:31.it. The fact is we do spend money sending over to the EU, but it's not
:09:32. > :09:35.350 million. I think it's probably, after we account for the rebate and
:09:36. > :09:38.take into account what we receive back, it's more like about 17
:09:39. > :09:42.million a day. There is a cost, though. I wouldn't look at it in
:09:43. > :09:44.terms a hospital or schools. What really counts for strong public
:09:45. > :09:48.service ises a strong economy. If we're going to have a strong
:09:49. > :09:51.economy, we need to be in the single market. It's wholly misleading to
:09:52. > :09:55.look at this in terms of trying to net off the costs we pay into the EU
:09:56. > :10:00.against spending money here. A strong economy will deliver strong
:10:01. > :10:05.public services. I made that point for you. I don't want to pay much
:10:06. > :10:07.time on that debate. To help us drill down a little more,
:10:08. > :10:11.we thought we'd look at how Cumbria has been receiving
:10:12. > :10:17.European investment Hadrian's Wall runs through it
:10:18. > :10:22.into Northumberland. These days Cumbria gets a fair
:10:23. > :10:25.amount of cash, thanks to the EU. So would it, if we left
:10:26. > :10:31.the European Union? The EU budget is divided broadly
:10:32. > :10:34.into two big chunks. One big chunk that goes to farmers,
:10:35. > :10:36.through the common agricultural policy, and the other big chunk that
:10:37. > :10:39.goes to poorer regions and nations There's about ?4
:10:40. > :10:48.billion all together. A large chunk of which goes
:10:49. > :10:51.to farmers and the rest goes to poorer regions of the UK,
:10:52. > :10:54.for example, Cornwall, There's no question
:10:55. > :10:59.about whether we could afford to keep funding those
:11:00. > :11:02.sorts of projects. The question is whether we would
:11:03. > :11:07.choose to keep funding them once Let's start with the ?3
:11:08. > :11:21.billion or so we spend Lots of farmers have
:11:22. > :11:26.a very clear view. For me, for this farm,
:11:27. > :11:28.for where I am halfway up a hillside in Cumbria,
:11:29. > :11:31.it frightens me to death the thought The support I get from the European
:11:32. > :11:37.CAP keeps me farming here, keeps me producing food and keeps
:11:38. > :11:40.the countryside That's what we're paid for apart
:11:41. > :11:46.from producing food. A post Brexit Britain could afford
:11:47. > :11:49.to keep that going. I have absolutely no
:11:50. > :11:54.confidence that they will do. Every time there's been a CAP
:11:55. > :11:57.reform, no matter whether it's been Labour or Conservative Government,
:11:58. > :11:59.they've gone to Brussels to get The fact that French farmers
:12:00. > :12:05.are better lobbyists Absolutely, yes, the good French,
:12:06. > :12:10.they go and set fire to motorways and spread muck
:12:11. > :12:13.in the middle of Brussels, things if I did, I would probably
:12:14. > :12:16.be put away for life. Vote Leave have said,
:12:17. > :12:20."We would not cut agricultural subsidies if we leave
:12:21. > :12:23.the EU," but they're arguing against a consensus that
:12:24. > :12:26.includes most of Whitehall The UK has been, over the last
:12:27. > :12:33.decade, one of the main countries in the EU trying to reduce
:12:34. > :12:36.the common agricultural policy. My expectation would be that over
:12:37. > :12:39.the medium run we would reduce somewhat the amount of subsidies
:12:40. > :12:46.that farmers get. Maryport in Cumbria has won grants
:12:47. > :12:49.in the ?1 billion a year EU This fund is distributed by local
:12:50. > :12:56.British decision makers, but the cash must be handed out
:12:57. > :13:01.following EU rules. West Wales and Cornwall get special
:13:02. > :13:05.attention as our poorest regions, but Cumbria as a so-called
:13:06. > :13:08.transition region Recently with EU funding
:13:09. > :13:18.Love Maryport, a local group, trying to help promote the town,
:13:19. > :13:22.has received money. We've managed to do more finger
:13:23. > :13:26.posts, more maps and signage around The EU also put money
:13:27. > :13:34.into basic infrastructure like this dock bridge,
:13:35. > :13:37.the marina and even At initial set up in 1996,
:13:38. > :13:43.something called the European Development Fund provided me
:13:44. > :13:47.with about 30% of capital costs and more recently, the flag
:13:48. > :13:52.fisheries local action group provided me with nearly 50% grant
:13:53. > :14:04.on this new extension we're in now. But this EU regional funding
:14:05. > :14:07.is dwarfed by flows of UK public We transfer vast sums
:14:08. > :14:13.of money from richer parts of our country to poorer,
:14:14. > :14:16.sometimes subtly via welfare and public services,
:14:17. > :14:19.sometimes explicitly It's not fair to say that we left
:14:20. > :14:26.the European Union you would get For us in Maryport we receive
:14:27. > :14:31.funding from different streams. It's hard to say what
:14:32. > :14:33.the effect leaving Do you think we would have a similar
:14:34. > :14:42.grant structure if we were to leave? Maybe not similar, but I think
:14:43. > :14:44.the money could probably be Certainly there would be less
:14:45. > :14:49.bureaucracy involved. The effects of Brexit on regional
:14:50. > :14:52.funding might be very small, but lots of farmers are not sanguine
:14:53. > :14:57.about their subsidies. The critical selling point of Brexit
:14:58. > :15:00.for most people is that Britain That is precisely what
:15:01. > :15:09.worries most farmers. So let's focus on the budget
:15:10. > :15:24.and what we get back. Amber Rudd, you do have to admit it
:15:25. > :15:28.seems more sensible for us to spend money in the UK than for us to give
:15:29. > :15:32.it to Brussels for them to spend? I would say this is part of a package,
:15:33. > :15:36.part of the deal of being in the club is that we do send over a
:15:37. > :15:45.larger sum than we receive back and then part of the decision-making is
:15:46. > :15:49.made in the EU. The UK has a major role in deciding how that is spent.
:15:50. > :16:01.Sometimes people underestimate the role of the UK in influencing the
:16:02. > :16:04.shape of the EU decision-making. Presumably, we could administer all
:16:05. > :16:08.those things ourselves, there would be no great loss because we would
:16:09. > :16:11.save money? That is certainly true. There is a compromise position which
:16:12. > :16:16.is if you are a member of a club and you have decided the club has
:16:17. > :16:20.benefits for you, there will be additional bureaucracy. Overall, is
:16:21. > :16:25.it a good thing? Is it adding to the strength of the economy? The answer
:16:26. > :16:28.is yes. Do you, would you spend as much on farmers as the EU does if we
:16:29. > :16:34.had the choice over that money ourselves? As was said earlier, we
:16:35. > :16:38.have been explicit, the UK, that we would like to see the amount
:16:39. > :16:44.reduced. That is across the EU, that is not just for the UK. That would
:16:45. > :16:48.be a good reason, you are saying it would be a good reason to leave
:16:49. > :16:52.because we would be able to cut our farmers' subsidies in a way that we
:16:53. > :16:56.can't when we are in the EU? No, because I'm saying I want to have a
:16:57. > :17:00.level playing field for everybody. Farming is incredibly important for
:17:01. > :17:03.the UK. I don't want us to have a different subsidy to the rest of the
:17:04. > :17:08.EU. Having a level playing field makes sure our farmers remain
:17:09. > :17:14.competitive. Douglas Carswell, we vote for Brexit, we get the money
:17:15. > :17:17.back, how would you use the power, the freedom you have got? Some great
:17:18. > :17:24.projects receive funding from the EU. If we were outside, if we had
:17:25. > :17:28.control over the money ourself, we could spend more. I think it is
:17:29. > :17:32.wonderful that we have put money towards farmers. Because they are so
:17:33. > :17:36.efficient they are discriminated against by the Common Agricultural
:17:37. > :17:42.Policy. Our farmers are way down the league table in terms of the per
:17:43. > :17:49.acreage payment. You would give farmers more money or less money? I
:17:50. > :17:54.would want to see us use the capacity to put more money into
:17:55. > :17:56.farming, perhaps to do slightly more environmentally protective things,
:17:57. > :18:01.but that would be my own personal choice. We certainly can't spend
:18:02. > :18:06.?350 million a week on the NHS because you have spent it on farm
:18:07. > :18:12.subsidies? I'm not writing a future budget... You can't double-count it.
:18:13. > :18:17.You asked me for my personal view. If, for every ?1 we put in, we get
:18:18. > :18:20.less than 50p back. If we had control of our own money, we could
:18:21. > :18:25.spend it better than we are spending it now. Your feeling is, because we
:18:26. > :18:33.heard the farmers says the French are better at lobbying than we are,
:18:34. > :18:38.so we like being in the EU because that keeps subsidy levels up. Every
:18:39. > :18:41.year we give the Common Agricultural Policy ?4.6 billion. We get ?2.9
:18:42. > :18:45.billion back. We could do better. Our panel tonight consists
:18:46. > :18:47.of Sir Stephen Wall, our former Permanent Representative
:18:48. > :18:48.to the EU. Minette Batters, Deputy President
:18:49. > :18:51.of the National Farmers' Union. We also have Dia Chakravarty,
:18:52. > :18:54.Political Director of Her organisation is not taking
:18:55. > :18:58.a political position, Our final panellist is Tara Palmeri,
:18:59. > :19:12.a Brussels-based journalist Because we are on agriculture, I
:19:13. > :19:16.should bring you in, Minette Batters. What is your fear of
:19:17. > :19:20.leaving, what happens to farmers and the budget that goes to them? I
:19:21. > :19:25.think you have to look at it in the wider context. It all remains in
:19:26. > :19:28.politicians' hands, we have to look at the fact we do not have a
:19:29. > :19:35.ringfenced department. We have never had in the last 20 years any form of
:19:36. > :19:39.robust food policy. We have 65 million people in this country to
:19:40. > :19:44.feed so a robust food policy, farmers produce 62% of UK food
:19:45. > :19:48.supplies, but it's got to be a Common Agricultural Policy. We
:19:49. > :19:52.cannot be disadvantaged in the marketplace. Most of our farmers
:19:53. > :19:57.would much prefer to farm without subsidy. It is there to protect them
:19:58. > :20:00.from market failure. We have an ongoing retail price war so huge
:20:01. > :20:04.challenges for farmers that are producing food. What is curious
:20:05. > :20:08.about this conversation is, for the last 30 years I thought I had been
:20:09. > :20:13.brought up, almost fed a diet on the CAP is a waste of money and getting
:20:14. > :20:20.rid of it was one of the reasons to get out of the EU. I'm hearing all
:20:21. > :20:24.of you, Douglas, Minette, Amber, you are in favour of money going to
:20:25. > :20:27.farmers? I think it is important to emphasise that if we vote to leave,
:20:28. > :20:33.we will continue to support our farmers. The CAP has been reformed,
:20:34. > :20:37.it has been reformed a lot over the past years. There's been much more
:20:38. > :20:45.focus on environmental strength within farming. Your average dairy
:20:46. > :20:48.farmer - we have talked a lot about milk - your average dairy farmer is
:20:49. > :20:53.receiving a support payment of ?25,000. Your average dairy farm
:20:54. > :21:00.costs ?40,000 per month to run that business, without taking any wages
:21:01. > :21:06.out so that puts it into context that you have a small amount of
:21:07. > :21:08.money. Dia Chakravarty, you are from the Taxpayers' Alliance, you are
:21:09. > :21:13.meant to be arguing against all forms of public spending? The few
:21:14. > :21:19.things I have heard so far is Amber saying whatever the amount is that
:21:20. > :21:23.we are sending out, we are sending out more, look at the gross number
:21:24. > :21:27.or the net, we are sending out more than we are receiving. By coming
:21:28. > :21:33.out, that means we have a bigger pot of money to play with. I have also
:21:34. > :21:39.heard Minette put a passionate argument for the farmers. I don't
:21:40. > :21:42.understand why we can't put that argument to our Westminster
:21:43. > :21:46.politicians such as Amber and Douglas, so if you were to come out
:21:47. > :21:50.of the EU, why couldn't we make those arguments to the Westminster
:21:51. > :21:53.Government and make sure our farmers have what they need? Why does the
:21:54. > :21:57.decision have to be made in Brussels? We will be doing that. We
:21:58. > :22:01.would be making the case to Westminster... You fear the money
:22:02. > :22:03.wouldn't come to you if you had to argue it to the Westminster
:22:04. > :22:09.politicians? We haven't got a ringfenced department. We haven't
:22:10. > :22:13.had a food policy. Amber has said there has been a Government policy
:22:14. > :22:17.to look at lowering supportive payments. Would we have that
:22:18. > :22:25.mechanism to back us? I have also heard that it's been a mechanism
:22:26. > :22:28.EU-wide, the idea is to bring CAP down EU-wide so you will have to
:22:29. > :22:34.make the argument at the Brussels level. Why not make those arguments
:22:35. > :22:40.here? Douglas? In the clip there was some talk about the importance of
:22:41. > :22:44.regional funds. Surely, if Albania, Macedonia, Turkey, Serbia all join
:22:45. > :22:46.the EU in the next few years, is there going to be scope in the
:22:47. > :22:50.budget for continued regional funding? I think that is a real
:22:51. > :22:55.cause of concern. You have gone on to where I wanted to go, which is we
:22:56. > :23:07.have looked at agriculture. Most people here are in favour of
:23:08. > :23:13.agricultural subsidies. The money that we get back is spent on our
:23:14. > :23:16.agriculture. All the money we give effectively is spent on helping
:23:17. > :23:22.poorer nations? That is not necessarily always the case. 70% of
:23:23. > :23:29.the budget goes on helping other countries? 1.4 million went to the
:23:30. > :23:36.Swedish King's farm. 1.5 million is a lot of money. Amber Rudd, what is
:23:37. > :23:43.the right amount for Britain to give in overseas aid, development aid to
:23:44. > :23:50.Eastern and Central Europe? The UK has its own target. This is on top
:23:51. > :23:59.of that. It is done by negotiation. The EU together put in a ?1 billion
:24:00. > :24:02.fund to stop the Ebola virus... I'm talking about the the development
:24:03. > :24:07.aid we give to Eastern Europe, to the countries in the EU, we are
:24:08. > :24:11.chucking money basically... I don't think we are chucking it. I would
:24:12. > :24:15.take issue with the point that we had a certain amount to play with.
:24:16. > :24:20.There is a cost to being in the EU. We think it is about, I would say,
:24:21. > :24:24.not the ?350 million, but that delivers us to membership which
:24:25. > :24:31.makes sure our economy is stronger so we don't have ?5.8 billion to
:24:32. > :24:35.play with, we have a much more successful and stronger economy. We
:24:36. > :24:40.can't look at the cost here. OK. Give me the benefits of us giving
:24:41. > :24:44.money to Poland and to Lithuania and Estonia, they are getting a lot of
:24:45. > :24:49.money out. We are putting in. Explain to our panel of voters what
:24:50. > :24:52.is the benefit of us putting money in on top of the development budget
:24:53. > :24:56.that we have for poorer countries to give to them? The benefit is about
:24:57. > :25:02.being in the single market. By being in the single market we have access
:25:03. > :25:08.to 500 million other people, we have access to an enormous amount of
:25:09. > :25:13.trade potential. Food... This is like a subscription that you have to
:25:14. > :25:17.pay to get some other benefits. It is good to be part of the single
:25:18. > :25:21.market and what I object to in terms of the Leave campaign is it is
:25:22. > :25:26.unclear what the alternative is. It is perfectly possible to have market
:25:27. > :25:33.access to the single market to trade with the single market without
:25:34. > :25:38.subsidising the free jet travel of Jean-Claude Juncker, Greek tobacco
:25:39. > :25:42.farmers. It is money we never see again and it is spent on things that
:25:43. > :25:46.are not a priority for us. I don't want to get into an argument - we
:25:47. > :25:54.did the single market one a few weeks back. I'm trying to work out
:25:55. > :25:58.whether there are benefits to us from Poland developing and from the
:25:59. > :26:01.Czech Republic and Lithuania. You are not trying to make that case,
:26:02. > :26:05.Amber Rudd. You are saying that is the price you have to pay. I can
:26:06. > :26:10.make the case in terms of my own department. We want to make sure
:26:11. > :26:13.that we support Poland for instance and making sure that they make some
:26:14. > :26:17.changes for moving away from coal. We want to make sure we address our
:26:18. > :26:23.climate change commitments within the EU. This is in the UK's
:26:24. > :26:26.interest. Having additional influence within the EU, which we
:26:27. > :26:34.can use by being part of this group and being a net donor is helpful to
:26:35. > :26:38.the UK. Sir Stephen Wall? When Portugal emerged from dictatorship
:26:39. > :26:43.in the 1970s, it was almost taken over by communism. Thanks to the
:26:44. > :26:46.offer of membership of the EU, proper democracy, liberal democracy
:26:47. > :26:50.was established in Portugal. The same thing happened in Spain. The
:26:51. > :26:53.same thing has happen in the countries of Eastern and Central
:26:54. > :27:02.Europe who weren't guaranteed after the fall of communism to become
:27:03. > :27:06.stable democracies. Are we... It is a decision that everybody has to
:27:07. > :27:11.make. One aspect of this debate is, do we think it is worthwhile in our
:27:12. > :27:15.national interests supporting the stability and democracy of those
:27:16. > :27:21.countries? That was the case I thought you were going to give,
:27:22. > :27:26.Amber. Douglas Carswell... Are we seriously suggesting we are giving
:27:27. > :27:33.?350 million every week to Brussels to stop communism in Portugal? We
:27:34. > :27:36.are not giving ?350 million a week and on your point about the rebate
:27:37. > :27:42.being vulnerable, Margaret Thatcher, your leader of the party you used to
:27:43. > :27:49.belong to, when she negotiated it, she ensured it can only be changed
:27:50. > :27:54.if we want it to be changed. Sometimes it is really funny how the
:27:55. > :27:59.Remain side has come across as inward-looking. Amber talks about
:28:00. > :28:03.how we need to have a level playing field for other people to be able to
:28:04. > :28:09.take part, poorer countries, et cetera. You have said how it can be
:28:10. > :28:14.a benevolent thing encouraging democracy abroad. If you look at
:28:15. > :28:21.countries outside the EU, Bangladesh, that side of the world,
:28:22. > :28:25.the EU doesn't look like a level playing field advocating nice clubs.
:28:26. > :28:30.It likes like a cartel of rich countries. For years, the EU has
:28:31. > :28:34.kept farmers completely out of this nice little club that we have here.
:28:35. > :28:40.I don't really like hearing the Remain side saying, we are also
:28:41. > :28:47.benevolent. For a lot of countries who are not part of the EU...
:28:48. > :28:51.Commonwealth countries have privileged access to the EU market
:28:52. > :28:55.and the EU is the world's largest overseas aid donor so we are
:28:56. > :29:01.doing... Why can't we have trade rather than aid? We have 50 free
:29:02. > :29:04.trade agreements around the world. I will give Minette a right of reply
:29:05. > :29:09.on the specific allegation that we don't have much trade in agriculture
:29:10. > :29:15.because it is true, farmers are an important lobby in the EU, and the
:29:16. > :29:21.idea of free trade is like extracting teeth to get through...
:29:22. > :29:25.Trade, whether we like it or not, is negotiated in blocks. That is a
:29:26. > :29:30.fact. The South America countries, a deal has been on the table for 15
:29:31. > :29:36.years and what has held a lot of that back is the potential for
:29:37. > :29:44.80,000 tonnes of beef to come on to our marketplace which the EU is
:29:45. > :29:47.protecting and we will be doing the same in the UK. There is an element
:29:48. > :29:53.of saying we can do it here well enough. We want to protect that. You
:29:54. > :29:57.look at other trading blocks, the Pacific trading blocks you have USA,
:29:58. > :30:03.Canada, New Zealand, all working together as a block. The Canadian
:30:04. > :30:05.trade deal could seven years and there are still sensitive
:30:06. > :30:06.agricultural products in there. Trade takes a long time to
:30:07. > :30:15.negotiate. We've covered agriculture, there are
:30:16. > :30:19.arguments to be had on that. Stephen gave us an interesting point about
:30:20. > :30:23.stability in Europe. That's what we get by putting money in and
:30:24. > :30:28.developing those eastern and Central European economies. Do you recognise
:30:29. > :30:32.that or not? If you look at the growth rates in the eurozone they
:30:33. > :30:37.have stability. I'm not sure that's the stability you want. That would
:30:38. > :30:41.still be there if we weren't in the EU, the euro would still exist. Do
:30:42. > :30:45.you think it's a good use of British public money to help economies in
:30:46. > :30:49.Europe that are coming from fascism or Communism? No, I never think that
:30:50. > :30:54.government to government subsidy is a good way of developing countries.
:30:55. > :30:58.In you want to encourage development you have to encourage people to take
:30:59. > :31:02.part in a network of specialisation and exchange called globalisation.
:31:03. > :31:07.What the EU tends to do is subsidise the growth of big regulatory
:31:08. > :31:10.restrict of bureaucracy. That's why the single market countries happen
:31:11. > :31:14.to be the countries not growing particularly fast. Do you not think
:31:15. > :31:17.that the EU has been good for the likes of Spain, Portugal, let's
:31:18. > :31:21.leave Greece out of it for the time being. Indeed. Spain, Portugal and
:31:22. > :31:28.the countries of eastern and Central Europe? If you're a young Spaniard
:31:29. > :31:32.growing up today unemployment is sky high. Yes maybe 30 years ago, there
:31:33. > :31:38.was a lot in it. But it's ultimately a question for Spanish people to
:31:39. > :31:42.decide. I'm not sure that it's the benevolent force that many eurocrats
:31:43. > :31:47.like to think of it as. Is that because of the euro specifically?
:31:48. > :31:51.Everything from monetary policy to subsidies tend to go wrong. In not
:31:52. > :31:57.one S size fits all. You look at the UK. Not in the eurozone. Out of the
:31:58. > :32:02.Schengen zone. We can have the best of both worlds. The less Europe the
:32:03. > :32:06.better. No, within the confines of the club each country can engage
:32:07. > :32:10.with it as they choose to do so. It's difficult balance. But it's one
:32:11. > :32:15.that protects our peace and prosperity. Audience, you've heard
:32:16. > :32:19.the first half of this discussion about the budget, how the money is
:32:20. > :32:25.spent. A lot on agriculture. A lot on poorer countries. Any thoughts?
:32:26. > :32:29.Any responses to what we've heard? Let me ask you a question to warm
:32:30. > :32:33.you up, how many feel it is good that British taxpayers, through the
:32:34. > :32:41.EU give money to the development of countries in eastern and Central
:32:42. > :32:45.Europe? You do basically. You were looking hesitant there. Don't be
:32:46. > :32:51.pressured bit others. No, I had to think about it. I know you work for
:32:52. > :32:57.a charity. Do you get money from the EU? Yes, we get donations from the
:32:58. > :33:02.European social fund. That's helped us carry out our work in Britain.
:33:03. > :33:07.Without that money, we would not be able to support as many vulnerable
:33:08. > :33:12.people that we do. But you're only in the UK, as a charity? Yes. Why do
:33:13. > :33:18.you get it from the European social fund? That's how it's distributed.
:33:19. > :33:24.Wouldn't it be better if you just got it from the UK Government? I
:33:25. > :33:30.guess the EU's made the social fund, it's made a priority. We support
:33:31. > :33:34.vulnerable older people. The EU has made that a priority with the
:33:35. > :33:38.Government, if the money wasn't there, would the Government make
:33:39. > :33:41.older people the priority? The reason that regions and local
:33:42. > :33:43.authorities compete for this money is because it includes counterpart
:33:44. > :33:47.funding from the national Government. They don't believe,
:33:48. > :33:50.probably rightly, they would get that funding were it not for the
:33:51. > :33:54.framework of those projects. The fact that they have behind them, as
:33:55. > :33:57.it were, the power of the European Union, gives them bargaining
:33:58. > :34:01.strength of central Government. That's why they fight to keep this
:34:02. > :34:06.money. I wonder how much of that funding will be available once
:34:07. > :34:11.Albania, Montenegro, Macedonia and Turkey join the EU. They can't join.
:34:12. > :34:16.We spent ?2 billion preparing them to join. So I think they will. They
:34:17. > :34:20.can't until they fill the cons, A, the ebbing no ammic conditions of
:34:21. > :34:26.membership and democratic conditions of membership. Every member state
:34:27. > :34:28.has to agree they will join. Let's call a halt to future expansion.
:34:29. > :34:30.Let's move on. If the EU wants to be
:34:31. > :34:32.thought of as well run, it doesn't just need
:34:33. > :34:34.to spend money wisely. It needs institutions that
:34:35. > :34:37.are effective, rational and efficient that focus
:34:38. > :34:40.on the right things. Now here's the problem: often big
:34:41. > :34:42.organisations are more bureaucratic They find it harder to be lean
:34:43. > :34:48.and mean and on the case. They have to take account
:34:49. > :34:50.of more competing interests. And let's face it, the EU is pretty
:34:51. > :34:53.big, with its 508 million Well, we wanted to send John Sweeney
:34:54. > :35:01.to Brussels to find out - but he chose to go to Strasbourg
:35:02. > :35:08.instead. Bienvenue a la train
:35:09. > :35:13.de sauce European. Or, in English, welcome
:35:14. > :35:38.to the European gravy train. What's happening is so crazy it's
:35:39. > :35:44.worth making the point again. Each month, the entire
:35:45. > :35:48.European Parliament moves from Brussels to Strasbourg,
:35:49. > :35:51.it is here for a week, and then moves all the way back
:35:52. > :35:54.to Brussels in boxes like this. People say it is a fantastic
:35:55. > :36:02.waste of time and money. This is the labrynth
:36:03. > :36:05.where the elected representatives of half a billion people and 28 nation
:36:06. > :36:20.states meet to talk euro shop. There's a simple problem, I don't
:36:21. > :36:26.know what any of the MEPs look like. I don't know who they are. But we've
:36:27. > :36:32.heard a tip-off that they wear their badges like this and they're blue.
:36:33. > :36:36.What are we doing here and why aren't we in Brussels? Oh, that's a
:36:37. > :36:40.good question. We should be in one place. Of course, it is a waste ever
:36:41. > :36:45.money. Now that the European Union we have financial problems. The
:36:46. > :36:49.Parliament has moved to Strasbourg for a week. Yes, yes. Is that a good
:36:50. > :36:56.use of European taxpayers money. Not at all. The Strasbourg shuffle costs
:36:57. > :37:02.the European taxpayer ?130 million a year. The euro MPs have voted
:37:03. > :37:08.against the move, but they're blocked by a French veto. Hard wired
:37:09. > :37:09.into the rule book of the EU. I track down a French MEP to challenge
:37:10. > :37:53.him. - as best I can. For the critics Strasbourg is a
:37:54. > :37:57.handy metaphor for the entire European project - over the top,
:37:58. > :38:03.needlessly expensive and ever so very disconnected. Ukip's Mike
:38:04. > :38:07.Hookham is one such. Here he is in the chamber, denouncing the folly,
:38:08. > :38:12.as he sees it, of Europe's open-border policy. On the other
:38:13. > :38:22.hand, you could argue this empire lets its critics have their say.
:38:23. > :38:27.Afterwards, I track him down. Hi, John Sweeney from Newsnight. Mike
:38:28. > :38:31.thinks the EU is a monster and so... At the moment, I'm campaigning to
:38:32. > :38:39.make myself redundant on the 24th. There's a para-Dom there. How's --
:38:40. > :38:42.paradox there. How's it going? It's looking favourable at the moment.
:38:43. > :38:48.Then I will slip back into obscurity, where I came from. Mike
:38:49. > :38:59.takes me to his office, a room he barely inhabits. Oh, wow. This is
:39:00. > :39:03.your empire. This is it. I've got another office in Brussels,
:39:04. > :39:07.basically the same as this. If Britain must choose between Europe
:39:08. > :39:15.and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea. Do you agree
:39:16. > :39:20.with that? Yes, I do actually. But for people like Mike, who think
:39:21. > :39:26.that real clout lies with the European Union, not the nation
:39:27. > :39:31.state, consider this paradox, that the only reason Europe goes to
:39:32. > :39:34.Strasbourg every month is because of the power of one state to override
:39:35. > :39:40.the wishes of Europe as a whole
:39:41. > :39:42.John Sweeney in the European quarter of Brussels.
:39:43. > :39:44.No-one accusing him of going native, I suspect.
:39:45. > :39:46.Right, for the next part of the discussion -
:39:47. > :39:50.does the EU work or not - a union so unwieldy that it can't
:39:51. > :39:59.You were actually, because you report on these affairs, you were in
:40:00. > :40:05.Strasbourg yourself last week, it? -- was it? Yes, the regular track to
:40:06. > :40:10.Strasbourg, five-hour train ride, with all the trunks. I find it to be
:40:11. > :40:15.fascinating the entire system, just because I come from the United
:40:16. > :40:19.States and we're 50 states, but we're a federalist system. It takes
:40:20. > :40:23.eight-and-a-half months to pass legislation through the House and
:40:24. > :40:25.Senate. Whereas in the European Parliament with eight different
:40:26. > :40:30.political parties, 28 different member states, it takes about 22
:40:31. > :40:34.months to get legislation to pass. It's a lot slower. It is more
:40:35. > :40:38.bureaucratic in that sense. In a way, some will say that's great
:40:39. > :40:42.because it means that you're not forced legislation that hasn't been
:40:43. > :40:45.fully communicated, talked about, passed from the council to the
:40:46. > :40:50.Parliament, but at the same time, I can see where there's a lot of
:40:51. > :40:53.frustration when you're trying to be forward looking and entrepreneurial
:40:54. > :40:57.and a forward-looking Europe, it seems like it's holding it back a
:40:58. > :41:01.bit, because of all the compromise. What lesson do you take from the
:41:02. > :41:07.fact that Europe can't sort out such a basic peace of -- piece of house
:41:08. > :41:11.keeping as this ridiculous Strasbourg move, no-one supports it.
:41:12. > :41:14.We certainly don't. It's about the political decision that's were made
:41:15. > :41:17.at the time. That's why the French object to it now. It reflects the
:41:18. > :41:21.fact that it's a compromise, the European Union. We have to look at
:41:22. > :41:25.whether it works for the UK or not. It's right that we're doing that
:41:26. > :41:29.now. There are elements of it that are imperfect to say the least. It's
:41:30. > :41:35.interesting because one thing you might take from it is you just don't
:41:36. > :41:38.want to create or be in such an unwieldy organisation. We don't have
:41:39. > :41:42.to be in it. It is very unwieldy. We don't have to be in it. Don't we
:41:43. > :41:47.have to weigh up what the benefits are? Why throw the baby out with the
:41:48. > :41:50.bath water? This is imperfect, the business of going from Strasbourg to
:41:51. > :41:55.Brussels, absolutely. Then you have to look at the report that treasure
:41:56. > :41:59.gave us today -- treasury gave us today if we're out of the EU we
:42:00. > :42:04.could have a 36 billion black hole. It's pros and cons. The UK doesn't
:42:05. > :42:07.have a strong role in the European Parliament. The Tories are no longer
:42:08. > :42:11.part of the largest political group. So they don't have the same sort of
:42:12. > :42:17.power when they're trying to negotiate for these kind of, you
:42:18. > :42:20.know, government wastes going on. The last Strasbourg I was at, they
:42:21. > :42:24.spent time talking about how to create a gym inside the Parliament.
:42:25. > :42:30.They're concerned with having their chauffeurs. The whole Parliament or
:42:31. > :42:34.the Tories? I'm talking about the entire Parliament. If there was more
:42:35. > :42:39.UK influence inside the Parliament, maybe some of this waste could be
:42:40. > :42:43.effectively cut out. That's down to us. Dare I say it, it was David
:42:44. > :42:47.Cameron who decided to take the Conservatives out of the largest
:42:48. > :42:52.centre-right group. It's up to the electorate, who voted 24 Ukip MEPs
:42:53. > :42:54.who take little part in the proceedings, and therefore aren't
:42:55. > :42:58.representing the interests of their constituents. As a large member
:42:59. > :43:03.state, we have 10% of the membership of the European Parliament. They
:43:04. > :43:06.directly elected have co-responsibility in passing the
:43:07. > :43:11.laws of the European Union. On those laws, the single market runs and we
:43:12. > :43:15.have the social protections which are controversial, but nonetheless,
:43:16. > :43:19.I would argue those protections are important for workers in Britain as
:43:20. > :43:26.around the urine. What lesson do you take from this? This ridiculous need
:43:27. > :43:31.to move to and fro illustrates how the European project is beholden to
:43:32. > :43:35.vested interests. You know, Britain is only a very small minority voice
:43:36. > :43:39.in these institutions. We've got less than 10% of the votes in the
:43:40. > :43:43.European Parliament. We have 8% to 12%, depends on how you measure it,
:43:44. > :43:46.of a say in the Council of ministers decisions. This is why we're
:43:47. > :43:51.constantly outvoted. We don't have much of a say. We're a minority
:43:52. > :43:56.voice in the ibs -- institutions. S no the the only organisation that --
:43:57. > :44:01.it's not the only organisation that wastes money and has these responses
:44:02. > :44:06.to individual interests. I guess the question is - is it worse than
:44:07. > :44:10.others? Tara, we come back to you. The United States know what's they
:44:11. > :44:13.call pork barrel politics, which is you just waste a lot of money
:44:14. > :44:20.because a senator can be persuaded to vote for a bill if he gets a
:44:21. > :44:24.bridge in his town. You get many international organisations that are
:44:25. > :44:28.wasteful, some might say the UN S the European Union is unique in
:44:29. > :44:31.being an international institution that insists upon making
:44:32. > :44:35.legislation, insists upon compulsion. It's not just about
:44:36. > :44:36.cooperation. Is it worse and more wasteful than other large
:44:37. > :44:43.institutions of the same type? I happen to represent an
:44:44. > :44:46.organisation which thinks that the UK Government is pretty wasteful,
:44:47. > :44:53.would like to cut out a lot more of the waste that is inherent in the
:44:54. > :45:03.system. National Audit Office says the UK Government loses 0.02% of its
:45:04. > :45:07.annual budget to fraud. For the EU, it is ten times than what it is in
:45:08. > :45:12.the UK Government. That is one example that I have plucked out. I'm
:45:13. > :45:17.not going into the... Your group believe the UK is wasting ?100
:45:18. > :45:25.billion a year? I don't think that is necessarily true. We do think
:45:26. > :45:34.there is... It is ten times more, ten times more. It is 0.02% compared
:45:35. > :45:38.to 0.2%. It is atrocious. The error rate in European spending is about
:45:39. > :45:44.the same as the American federal budget, which is still too high.
:45:45. > :45:50.Douglas says laws are forced on us. These are laws which are made by
:45:51. > :45:56.elected ministers and directly-elected politicians. It
:45:57. > :46:04.wasn't the European Parliament that had the duck house scandal. As for
:46:05. > :46:09.this idea... Let's focus on that one. People do say that is because
:46:10. > :46:18.there is less scrutiny and that is a rather good example. The scrutiny
:46:19. > :46:22.comes from the European Court of Auditors, who have, since 2007,
:46:23. > :46:26.signed off the accounts, always with qualification and the European
:46:27. > :46:33.Commission takes action where mistakes have been made, or if there
:46:34. > :46:39.is evidence of fraud. We have been on the side of getting what we want
:46:40. > :46:45.in about 85% of legislation. You have been outvoted 72 times. Let's
:46:46. > :46:53.take that figure, 85%. I thought it was 87%. Do you agree with that
:46:54. > :47:02.figure that we were outvoted 12-15% of the time? We are easily the most
:47:03. > :47:13.outvoted country in the EU. Do you buy what Stephen said? 72 times we
:47:14. > :47:21.have been outvoted. Is it 85% or not? I don't know the answer to
:47:22. > :47:29.that. The figure has gone up over time. Now, it is 12%. They are not
:47:30. > :47:34.as politically strong... How can you quibble with the figure if you don't
:47:35. > :47:45.know what the real figure is? I do know 72 times we have been outvoted.
:47:46. > :47:53.Germany is outvoted 5% of the times. How often does it never go to a
:47:54. > :47:57.vote? All because we persuaded other people that our way is the right
:47:58. > :48:07.way. We are one of the most influenceal players on the EU. Tara,
:48:08. > :48:12.sometimes we look at the US and think they can't even pass a budget.
:48:13. > :48:19.You have lived in both. You look at both. Compare and contrast US
:48:20. > :48:25.effectiveness to EU effectiveness? It is a lot of political bickering
:48:26. > :48:31.back-and-forth. That is the US. It is all about politics. Here, it is
:48:32. > :48:40.also about national interests and about politics and it's a lot about
:48:41. > :48:46.money as well. There are eight political groups and there used to
:48:47. > :48:50.be, the EPP and the SND, so those two groups used to be the strongest.
:48:51. > :48:53.They are losing their power, so now it's a coalition. That is their only
:48:54. > :48:58.way to push through legislation. They have to pre-cook everything.
:48:59. > :49:03.They have this dinner once a week and they talk about what can we get
:49:04. > :49:09.through the House because you have Ukip and the Euro-sceptic groups and
:49:10. > :49:13.you also have the Liberals and the Tories so it is harder for them to
:49:14. > :49:17.get a majority vote to push things through. So in a way it's become
:49:18. > :49:23.like Washington in the sense that it's a lot of back-door dealings to
:49:24. > :49:27.push things through. Is that not an inevitability of a large
:49:28. > :49:31.organisation, do you buy that? I certainly buy that. Lobbyists love
:49:32. > :49:35.it. Not sure it is a good thing, though. We have 28 different
:49:36. > :49:39.countries trying to pull this off. No wonder it takes time. This is a
:49:40. > :49:43.very ambitious project. But it does work. It does deliver benefits for
:49:44. > :49:47.everybody involved. If you look at the things the European Union is now
:49:48. > :49:52.focussed on, completing the single market in services that is an agenda
:49:53. > :49:56.written in London. Everything that has been done on the environment,
:49:57. > :50:00.absolutely supported and encouraged and led by successive British
:50:01. > :50:04.Governments. Amber may correct me, but it looks as if the European
:50:05. > :50:07.Union is developing an energy policy, building up our independence
:50:08. > :50:12.from Russia, that is what Britain has been campaigning for. This
:50:13. > :50:16.idea... I spent five years doing this stuff and we are in there every
:50:17. > :50:19.single day pushing for our interests. If you make a good
:50:20. > :50:24.argument and you work the system, then you can represent your national
:50:25. > :50:30.interest in a really effective way. The UK and German co-author the most
:50:31. > :50:35.legislation. The UK and German. Does that not suggest we are being rather
:50:36. > :50:41.influenceal? Let's not take the word of diplomats who have spent their
:50:42. > :50:45.lives immersing ourselves in the system. We have 10% of the votes in
:50:46. > :50:52.the European Parliament. We have less than 12% of a share in the
:50:53. > :50:58.votes of the European Council. We are continually finding key things
:50:59. > :51:08.imposed on us, despite the fact that we find objectionable. If we vote to
:51:09. > :51:13.remain, we have to put up with everything that comes our way. Your
:51:14. > :51:21.campaign rubbishes people who are experts. The example that Stephen
:51:22. > :51:24.gave, it will be able to deliver us lower prices and more secure energy.
:51:25. > :51:33.Isn't that what British consumers want? UK energy costs are higher...
:51:34. > :51:38.No! You are thinking of the climate change regulation, which is very
:51:39. > :51:46.worrying... I'm not attacking the climate change agenda... The energy
:51:47. > :51:51.union is a good example... Can I raise another point about the
:51:52. > :51:55.democratic effectiveness. Amber Rudd, it must worry you, for
:51:56. > :52:00.whatever money is spent, and however well the British argue their case,
:52:01. > :52:05.the truth is, people don't really connect, do they, to the EU? The
:52:06. > :52:09.vote in the European Parliament has diminished every election there's
:52:10. > :52:14.been since 1979. I don't think most people will be able to name the
:52:15. > :52:19.European political forces that Tara was talking about, the EPP, these
:52:20. > :52:29.are completely remote. I suspect if I asked you to explain the
:52:30. > :52:34.co-determination system for passing legislation... I'm obviously loving
:52:35. > :52:43.to answer that question(!) If I told you the House of Lords prayed
:52:44. > :52:46.against an SI one morning, not everybody would follow that. One of
:52:47. > :52:49.the benefits that will come out of this campaign might be more
:52:50. > :52:52.information for people who are involved in the EU and need to
:52:53. > :52:55.understand more about it. I hope perhaps after this, after I hope we
:52:56. > :53:00.all vote to remain, we can have a stronger involvement in the EU and
:53:01. > :53:04.more clarity. The European Parliament is directly-elected by
:53:05. > :53:10.the citizens. It doesn't have a Second Chamber unelected as we have
:53:11. > :53:13.the House of Lords passing laws. The Commission is the unelected... The
:53:14. > :53:17.European Commission propose legislation, they don't adopt
:53:18. > :53:25.legislation. The legislation is adopted by elected ministers... The
:53:26. > :53:31.only people in the system who can propose legislation, they are people
:53:32. > :53:36.who were unelected at the ballot box. How can that be right? They are
:53:37. > :53:41.appointed by governments who are elected. It is like the American
:53:42. > :53:49.system... I'm sure Charles I would approve! The Americans elect
:53:50. > :53:53.Presidents... No, they appoint their executive... The one body that
:53:54. > :53:58.initiates legislation is unaccountable, that could be the
:53:59. > :54:02.problem. The whole point of this construct was to balance the
:54:03. > :54:07.interests of large and small, to ensure there was a body that would
:54:08. > :54:13.look at the interests across-the-board. And to ensure the
:54:14. > :54:18.small countries weren't bullied by the larger countries. You are right,
:54:19. > :54:20.as somebody who wants to hold politicians to account, I know
:54:21. > :54:24.working in Westminster that it is difficult enough to hold people like
:54:25. > :54:28.Douglas and Amber to account. Nothing personal. Our system is bad
:54:29. > :54:33.enough. All I'm hearing is, we have things that we need to correct in
:54:34. > :54:37.our system. That doesn't mean I go and get yet another even more
:54:38. > :54:42.complicated and more remote system into the equation and give up that
:54:43. > :54:49.much control that I might or might not have over it. It doesn't make
:54:50. > :54:52.sense to me. Sometimes I think they are purposefully obscure and opaque
:54:53. > :54:58.and some of the language that they use is, like, not exactly... It is
:54:59. > :55:04.difficult to understand. For anyone to understand. Douglas? Look
:55:05. > :55:09.objectively at how the European project has failed to respond, it's
:55:10. > :55:14.failed to respond to the economic challenges. It is a failing project
:55:15. > :55:20.by any objective criteria. Do you think 28 disparate countries with no
:55:21. > :55:24.Parliament, no Commission and no Council would have responded to
:55:25. > :55:28.those shocks better than the system we have got at the moment? If you
:55:29. > :55:32.look at what happened with monetary policy, having the ability to make
:55:33. > :55:36.your own policy works better. If we want to take back control, that
:55:37. > :55:40.would be much safer than if we remain part of this failing project.
:55:41. > :55:46.Are you hoping the whole thing dismantles in the end? Are you
:55:47. > :55:49.hoping there will be no EU? If I was Austrian or German, I might have a
:55:50. > :55:53.different perspective. The safe thing to do is to take back control.
:55:54. > :55:58.This is a failing project and it is failing because of these cumbersome
:55:59. > :56:02.institutions. Can I come in there? We have talked about the
:56:03. > :56:10.complexities of keeping all the EU member states together. You cannot -
:56:11. > :56:14.the single market, we are the largest, most powerful trading bloc
:56:15. > :56:18.in the world. If you trade... It is crucial to this argument. If you
:56:19. > :56:23.take us out and we are negotiating that trade on our own, as a single
:56:24. > :56:29.unit, it will be enormously challenging... We have a couple of
:56:30. > :56:34.minutes. Essentially, the Remain side does come back to put up with a
:56:35. > :56:39.lot of the imperfections. But, as ever, let's give the final
:56:40. > :56:41.word to our undecided panel - some thoughts from you on what
:56:42. > :56:50.you've been hearing this evening. We have talked about democratic
:56:51. > :56:57.remoteness and decision-making effectiveness. Any feelings? To make
:56:58. > :57:01.everything seem a little less complicated, things are coming down
:57:02. > :57:04.to whether we want to focus our own power within our shores or to
:57:05. > :57:08.leverage the power we have across Europe. I don't know if that is a
:57:09. > :57:12.bad thing. Which side are you tipping towards? I'm tipping towards
:57:13. > :57:15.being able to leverage across the EU. It will influence what happens
:57:16. > :57:22.in our shores as well as around them. Yes? There is a way to get the
:57:23. > :57:27.best of both worlds. That is what Lewis was saying. Leverage the power
:57:28. > :57:34.of the EU, allow legislation to be done centrally but allow autonomy to
:57:35. > :57:44.customise that for the local regions. We all use mobile phones.
:57:45. > :57:50.Samsung develops them centrally and we configure them locally. So you
:57:51. > :57:54.should be able to make legislation, laws, standards centrally within
:57:55. > :58:02.configuration parameters where each of the 28 states can configure it.
:58:03. > :58:07.Any others who have heard anything today who started out as a panel
:58:08. > :58:11.rather cynical about Brussels and what it stood for. Any of you come
:58:12. > :58:17.out of this discussion feeling more positive about the way Brussels... ?
:58:18. > :58:23.What I have come to understand is, it is better to be in a stronger
:58:24. > :58:27.union and be part of a union that can save Europe over a long time and
:58:28. > :58:32.basically on the economy and try to do it that way rather than exiting
:58:33. > :58:33.and going into unknown and not knowing what is going on in the
:58:34. > :58:38.future. We are coming to the end. The mechanics of
:58:39. > :58:40.the EU in discussion. It's amazing how little most people
:58:41. > :58:41.understand about it - for the Remain side,
:58:42. > :58:43.that means we have to get For the Leave side, it simply
:58:44. > :58:47.tells us why the things But I'm afraid that's
:58:48. > :58:51.all we have time for tonight. But you may have been wondering how
:58:52. > :58:55.they reacted in Brussels when they heard that Boris Johnson
:58:56. > :58:57.was comparing the European Union By pure good fortune,
:58:58. > :59:03.the exact moment the news broke in the Commission Offices
:59:04. > :00:29.WAS caught on camera. Hello. Time to get a check on the
:00:30. > :00:33.weather for the next few days. The morning on Tuesday is not looking
:00:34. > :00:38.bad at all. Plenty of sunshine there. The cloud will increase and
:00:39. > :00:43.by the last part of the morning, into the afternoon, we are in for
:00:44. > :00:44.some rain. So, after a wet start in Northern Ireland, the rain will come