:00:42. > :00:45.Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:45. > :00:47.Downing Street is at war with Fleet Street this morning. The co-
:00:47. > :00:53.chairman of the Tory party denies describing activists as mad,
:00:53. > :01:02.swivel-eyed loons, as reported by the Times and Telegraph. That's our
:01:02. > :01:10.Top Story. A large part of the Conservative
:01:10. > :01:15.party would give the EU 'nil point'. But exactly where do the Lib Dems
:01:15. > :01:16.stand on Europe these days? Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Danny
:01:17. > :01:19.Alexander, joins us for the Sunday Interview.
:01:19. > :01:23.Could we have joint Conservative- UKIP candidates at the next
:01:23. > :01:26.election? Downing Street has rejected the idea. But some of the
:01:26. > :01:36.party's backbenchers favour a deal. Two MPs with opposing views go
:01:36. > :01:38.
:01:38. > :01:48.head-to-head. In London, a panel in the capital
:01:48. > :01:48.
:01:48. > :01:50.said the Government should raise And with me, Sunday's finest
:01:51. > :01:58.political panel - Miranda Green, Janan Ganesh and Nick Watt. They'll
:01:58. > :02:00.be tweeting like blood-crazed ferrets throughout the programme.
:02:00. > :02:03.Let's start with "loongate" or "swivelgate" or "it-wasn't-me-
:02:03. > :02:05.gate". The Conservative party has denied that anyone in Downing
:02:05. > :02:08.Street used the phrase "mad, swivel-eyed loons" to describe
:02:08. > :02:15.Conservative activists who are euro-sceptic and opposed to gay
:02:15. > :02:18.marriage. The claims appeared in the Times and the Telegraph, who
:02:18. > :02:26.ascribed the words anonymously but sourced them to a senior Tory who
:02:26. > :02:29.was in the PM's social circle. That sparked a Twitter storm which
:02:29. > :02:38.forced Andrew Feldman, a Cameron mate from his Oxford days whom he
:02:38. > :02:42.made co-chair of his party, to deny he'd said anything of the sort.
:02:42. > :02:45.This morning there's a stand-off between Downing and Fleet Street.
:02:45. > :02:53.Health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, was asked about the claims on the Marr
:02:53. > :02:58.Show this morning. The person who is alleged to have
:02:58. > :03:04.said that has denied it. I know the individual and trust him, he is a
:03:04. > :03:09.man of great honour. He don't think he said it? I don't, No. He don't
:03:09. > :03:14.think anybody else said it? Last year we were told the Prime
:03:14. > :03:19.Minister was saying it? It you look at his Prime Minister, so much of
:03:19. > :03:23.what he has done has been informed by the views and the opinions of
:03:23. > :03:27.hard-working, grassroots Conservative campaigners, whose
:03:27. > :03:32.views incidentally, are very much in tune with the vast majority of
:03:32. > :03:36.the British people. I would suggest this is toxic for
:03:36. > :03:42.Mr Cameron, because regardless of who said it, or if it was said at
:03:42. > :03:48.all, a lot of Tory backbenchers believe that is what Mr Cameron
:03:48. > :03:54.believes about his own people? was going to say, how we would
:03:54. > :03:58.Jeremy Irons know what Andrew Feldman said. It is toxic. It feels
:03:58. > :04:04.like the Andrew Mitchell a fair, where Andrew Mitchell denied
:04:04. > :04:09.calling the police plebs, but the perception was he had. Andrew
:04:09. > :04:13.Feldman denies these remarks. But the perception is, that is what the
:04:13. > :04:18.camera and elite think about the party. It is interesting what's
:04:18. > :04:22.Jeremy Hunt says. Nadine Dorries does not believe his denials. We
:04:22. > :04:28.now have a stand-off between two journalists who did hear these
:04:28. > :04:32.remarks, and Andrew Feldman, he says he did not say them. There is
:04:32. > :04:38.only three people who heard that conversation, those two journalists
:04:38. > :04:43.and Andrew Feldman, it is there a word against his. It is not a
:04:43. > :04:48.question of, if Andrew Feldman did not say this, somebody else said it.
:04:48. > :04:54.It is either he said it, or he didn't. There is nobody else
:04:54. > :05:01.involved which makes it a Downing Street, Leeds street battle? It is
:05:01. > :05:04.an inconvenient time for David Cameron. It is a simultaneous
:05:04. > :05:10.battle with the Conservative associations and with the press. It
:05:10. > :05:15.is quite interesting it is parachuted into the central
:05:15. > :05:18.functioning of the Government, who may have got them in this trouble.
:05:18. > :05:22.Peers and the Government don't have to face the electorate. They don't
:05:22. > :05:28.have local associations to do with, they don't have the machinery of
:05:28. > :05:33.the party. Their relationship with a electoral politics is absent.
:05:33. > :05:39.They often lack insight. As I'm not surprised. We will learn this
:05:39. > :05:46.morning, the Financial Times have done a profile of Mr Cameron a
:05:46. > :05:51.while back. Roughly the same sort of phrase appeared in that profile.
:05:51. > :05:57.He was one of the main briefers of a profile of the record, was Andrew
:05:57. > :06:01.Feldman? One of the damaging things about the story, whether Andrew
:06:02. > :06:07.Feldman has said it, whether David Cameron has said it, you can
:06:07. > :06:14.imagine both of them saying it's which reflects him and his friends'
:06:14. > :06:17.attitudes towards the grass roots, which is dismissive and it is
:06:17. > :06:22.reciprocated by the grassroots. We have known there is this
:06:22. > :06:27.disparaging view from Number Ten towards the party, and that view is
:06:27. > :06:30.more than returned. All we have learned over the past 48 hours is
:06:30. > :06:34.there is someone in Number Ten who is unprofessional enough to give
:06:34. > :06:42.expression to those private thoughts at a dinner, although it
:06:42. > :06:46.is private, things always get out. He was at a dinner of Conservative
:06:46. > :06:51.friends of Pakistan. It is important to remember it was not
:06:51. > :06:56.said at the dinner. He came out of the dinner, bumped into these
:06:56. > :07:00.journalists. One of the journalist said, that the vote went a very
:07:00. > :07:05.well, didn't it? He made the argument that it is not the MPs who
:07:05. > :07:09.are the problem, it is the pressure from their association. He made
:07:09. > :07:12.that argument and then the journalist said he made that toxic
:07:12. > :07:17.remark. Downing Street seems to be suggesting he made that remark at
:07:17. > :07:22.the dinner. No he didn't. Downing Street are suggesting someone else
:07:22. > :07:28.made the remarks. No there isn't. The press secretary did not hear
:07:28. > :07:32.the remarks and neither did the other two journalists at the dinner.
:07:32. > :07:38.So it is the two journalists who heard it, and Lord Andrew Feldman.
:07:38. > :07:42.This has appeared in the Times, the Telegraph and the Mirror. The Times
:07:42. > :07:48.and the Telegraph on great rivals and the Mirror has not colluded
:07:48. > :07:54.recently with either the Telegraph or the times. Either this was made
:07:54. > :07:58.up, they colluded, or something along these lines was said. What
:07:58. > :08:02.other possible alternative could there be? It does smack of
:08:02. > :08:07.extraordinary lack of self discipline by somebody at the heart
:08:07. > :08:11.of the David Cameron operation. Although some of the incredible
:08:11. > :08:16.outrage has been overblown. can't even blame having a drink,
:08:16. > :08:23.because he was at a dinner for the friends of Pakistan.
:08:23. > :08:26.We shall see what the papers come up with.
:08:26. > :08:28.Last night millions voted on one of the most important issues facing
:08:28. > :08:31.Europe - and result? Denmark won the Eurovision Song Contest with
:08:31. > :08:35.Only Teardrops sung by Emmelie de Forest. Back in Blighty it's
:08:35. > :08:37.sometimes hard to see the wood from the trees when it comes having a
:08:37. > :08:40.vote on our membership European Union. It's a question which can
:08:40. > :08:47.cause a lot of tears between Conservatives and their Lib Dem
:08:47. > :08:49.coalition partners. Under the coalition agreement,
:08:49. > :08:52.Liberal Democrats supported a law which would mean holding a
:08:52. > :08:59.referendum before any further powers could be transferred to
:08:59. > :09:02.Brussels. In January, David Cameron went further, promising a
:09:02. > :09:06.referendum in 2017 on whether to leave the EU if he wins a majority
:09:06. > :09:11.at the next General Election. Conservative MPs want that
:09:11. > :09:15.commitment enshrined in law, and on Wednesday over 100 of them said it
:09:15. > :09:19.should have been in the Queen's Speech. That is something the Lib
:09:19. > :09:23.Dems ones countenance. Another PM as ordered the drafting of a random
:09:23. > :09:27.bill that has been picked up by one of his backbenchers. Lib Dems are
:09:27. > :09:32.furious the Tory leadership is aiding and abetting its MPs in what
:09:32. > :09:36.they claim is undermining the coalition agreement. But the Prime
:09:36. > :09:41.Minister -- PMQs this week when Nick Clegg was standing in for Mr
:09:41. > :09:51.Carman, Tories accused him of going back on his own commitment to hold
:09:51. > :09:53.
:09:53. > :09:56.an in-out referendum. Was that man an impostor or just a hypocrite?
:09:56. > :10:02.Chief Secretary to the Treasury and senior Lib Dem, Danny Alexander,
:10:02. > :10:10.joins me now for the Sunday Interview.
:10:10. > :10:16.Have a look at this leaflet. It is a Lib Dem leaflet from 2008, and in
:10:16. > :10:19.its base smiling picture of a younger looking Nick Clegg. In this
:10:19. > :10:24.your party promised an in-out referendum. At the bottom you are
:10:24. > :10:30.urging people to sign a your position calling for an in-out
:10:30. > :10:35.referendum. It was just Lib Dem hot air? In the election and that
:10:35. > :10:39.leaflets, what we said on Wednesday, we said there should be a
:10:39. > :10:47.referendum the next time there is a major change in the European treaty.
:10:47. > :10:51.The next time that there is an attempted handover of power. He
:10:51. > :10:59.showed in your introduction, the European Union Act we passed last
:10:59. > :11:04.year. 100 days of Parliamentary time. It puts in place a referendum
:11:04. > :11:14.mock, so the next time there is a major treaty change at a European
:11:14. > :11:18.
:11:18. > :11:24.level, the British people have a vote. But that leaflet does not say
:11:24. > :11:27.that. The referendum pledge was not based on a major treaty change. In
:11:27. > :11:32.that leaflet it specifically dismisses the need for a referendum
:11:32. > :11:42.on a treaty change on the Lisbon. Mr Clegg attacks the Tories for
:11:42. > :11:45.
:11:45. > :11:51.only offering a limited referendum. He said only the Lib Dems will
:11:51. > :11:55.offer an in-out referendum. What we said in our manifesto was, the next
:11:55. > :12:00.time there was a major change in the European treaties, there should
:12:00. > :12:05.be a referendum. At a point, there would have been a discussion. That
:12:05. > :12:11.is what we said to the British people. And that is what we have
:12:11. > :12:14.legislated to make happen through the coalition Government. In 2010,
:12:14. > :12:21.by then you were linking a referendum to treaty changes. But
:12:21. > :12:25.that is not what the 2008 leaflet did. We did the opposite. Let's
:12:25. > :12:31.listen to Mr Clegg in 2008. three parties supported a
:12:31. > :12:35.referendum on the EU constitution at the last election. That promise
:12:35. > :12:39.must now be as be fulfilled. It should be fulfilled by asking the
:12:39. > :12:44.British people the real question - the question that matters to them.
:12:44. > :12:48.Should we stay in the European Union, or should we leave? Are we
:12:48. > :12:54.in, or are we out? It's the Conservatives were honest, they
:12:54. > :12:59.would ask that same question, too. There Opportunities and is
:12:59. > :13:04.breathtaking. Couldn't have been clearer. He said in 2008, the
:13:04. > :13:10.people deserve an in-out referendum, not linked to a treaty change. Why
:13:10. > :13:13.did he change your mind? One he said at the start of that, all
:13:13. > :13:17.parties promised a referendum link to a treaty change that have not
:13:17. > :13:21.been delivered. And the words are quite clear in the leaflet, they
:13:21. > :13:25.are quite clear in what he is saying. He attacks the Tories for
:13:25. > :13:29.linking it to treaty change. Why did you change your view we should
:13:29. > :13:34.have a simple in-out referendum to one when we only have one month to
:13:34. > :13:40.treaty change? That policy was brought forward at a time in 2008
:13:40. > :13:45.when there was a debate on whether there should be a referendum on the
:13:45. > :13:49.treaty. It was the same treaty other parties had promised a
:13:49. > :13:55.referendum and not delivered. But that is why we said it we had a
:13:55. > :14:01.chance to legislate. You are rewriting history. In 2008, Lib
:14:01. > :14:05.Dems stormed out of the Commons because you were denied a vote, not
:14:05. > :14:11.on treaty change, but you were denied a vote on holding an in out
:14:11. > :14:16.referendum. Your party said it was an outrageous affront to democracy.
:14:16. > :14:22.Now the Conservatives are offering an in out referendum, you say you
:14:22. > :14:32.won't support it. That is Opportunities and. That debate in
:14:32. > :14:33.
:14:33. > :14:37.2008 was about whether there should be a referendum or not. Your party
:14:37. > :14:41.moved an amendment to what the Conservatives were trying to do
:14:41. > :14:46.saying, let's have been in out referendum regardless of treaty
:14:46. > :14:50.change. Ed Davey got kicked out of the Commons, you felt so strongly.
:14:50. > :14:54.We put forward a promised there should be a referendum the next
:14:54. > :14:58.thing there is a major change in the European treaties. Why did you
:14:58. > :15:03.change your mind? The reason we don't think it is right to pursue
:15:03. > :15:08.in-and-out referendum at the moment, is firstly, it is the wrong
:15:09. > :15:14.priority for the country. We have spent in the last 18 months, 100
:15:14. > :15:18.days of Parliamentary time... was it the right priority in 2008?
:15:18. > :15:21.Just at a time when the economy showing more momentum. The
:15:21. > :15:25.Parliament and Government should be focused on jobs, growth and
:15:25. > :15:30.reforming public services. The idea we should drag ourselves through a
:15:30. > :15:35.debate on the European referendum now is wrong. I understand that as
:15:35. > :15:39.a point of view, but why didn't you have that point of view in 2008
:15:39. > :15:49.when you call for a referendum on the Net for any treaty change.
:15:49. > :15:54.2008 it was a specific response on the debate on should there be a
:15:54. > :15:59.referendum. In our manifesto, that treaty having been passed, we
:15:59. > :16:02.thought the right thing to do was to say... He dropped the idea of an
:16:02. > :16:07.in-out referendum. The next time there is a treaty that there should
:16:07. > :16:17.be a referendum. You changed your mind! Under any future Government
:16:17. > :16:17.
:16:17. > :30:24.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 846 seconds
:30:24. > :30:27.there would have to be a referendum Jacob Rees-Mogg is a Conservative
:30:27. > :30:31.MP who thinks a deal can be done with UKIP. He's in Somerset, and
:30:31. > :30:41.Jackie Doyle-Price thinks it would be a mistake, and she's here in the
:30:41. > :30:46.
:30:47. > :30:52.Jacob, you are a Conservative MP, a party member. It you wanted to
:30:52. > :30:58.support UKIP, why don't you just join it? I want to see a coalition
:30:58. > :31:02.between the Conservative Party and UKIP. We have a coalition with a
:31:02. > :31:06.party be broadly do not agree with, I would like a coalition with a
:31:06. > :31:13.party we broadly do agree with. You'd like the right to have a
:31:13. > :31:19.coalition with a party you broadly agree with? I want to see a
:31:19. > :31:28.majority Conservative Government. Having a coalition with anyone is
:31:28. > :31:36.not obtain in that objective. I find it quite lily-livered to talk
:31:36. > :31:40.it about pacts at this stage. first-past-the-post system all
:31:40. > :31:45.parties end up being coalitions. In the Conservative Party you have
:31:45. > :31:51.been light wing and a right wing. We have done deals in the past as
:31:51. > :31:56.the Conservative Party in the 19th century, and in the early part of
:31:56. > :32:00.the 20th century, to unite those who have a similar view on how the
:32:00. > :32:05.country should be governed. As long as we maintain a first-past-the-
:32:05. > :32:11.post system, which I support, we need to maximise our side of the
:32:11. > :32:14.political spectrum that will vote for you. If you don't do a deal
:32:15. > :32:19.with UKIP, don't you risk splitting the right of centre vote and
:32:19. > :32:26.letting Labour in? It Prix judges the fact that it is a right of
:32:26. > :32:32.centre vote. I don't think it is. They have taken votes from the
:32:32. > :32:36.Conservative Party. We are seeing UKIP bowling 20% of Poles in local
:32:36. > :32:41.elections and they are taking votes from more than just the
:32:41. > :32:48.Conservative Party. We need to be very confident about our own
:32:48. > :32:53.platform and go about selling it and not say, if you like, UKIP, you
:32:53. > :32:59.can vote for us anyway. If you don't have his arrangements with
:32:59. > :33:04.UKIP that you like, it late -- makes victory for your party in
:33:04. > :33:10.2015 less likely? The lesson of the 1980s, it you split one wing of
:33:10. > :33:18.politics, the other wing wins would be majorities. UKIP voters in
:33:18. > :33:25.opinion polls say 70% of them otherwise would have been
:33:25. > :33:29.conservative. 70% of the UKIP voters are identify a bleak
:33:29. > :33:33.otherwise conservative. UKIP is reaching out to some Thatcherite
:33:33. > :33:40.Conservatives that the party has not been able to reach recently.
:33:40. > :33:45.Are the Conservatives who want to do a deal with UKIP, on vague the
:33:45. > :33:50.swivel-eyed, loons, Mr Cameron's allies has supposedly been talking
:33:50. > :33:57.about? I am not abusing my colleagues. We are colleagues and
:33:57. > :34:04.Brad Conservatives. Do you see any swivel-eyed, loons among your party
:34:04. > :34:09.activists at times? When we fall out, we do use personal attacks
:34:09. > :34:13.against each other, but we are all Conservatives and we should all be
:34:13. > :34:19.out there working for Conservative Government. Are you one of the
:34:19. > :34:24.swivel-eyed, loons? I am close to Conservative associations. I have
:34:24. > :34:31.addressed over 50 of them and I am often in agreement with them. The
:34:31. > :34:35.reason I am in Parliament, is because I believe in it. I believe
:34:35. > :34:39.in Conservative principles which the wonderful activists and members
:34:39. > :34:44.of our party do. They have stuck with us through difficult times and
:34:44. > :34:48.deserve the greatest respect, admiration and support. You will
:34:48. > :34:52.know from the east the by-election and local elections, many people
:34:52. > :35:00.who had previously voted Conservative on now voting UKIP. It
:35:00. > :35:04.you want them back, you have to do something along the lines... Many
:35:05. > :35:09.people we want to vote Conservative of voting UKIP. UKIP are able to
:35:09. > :35:16.take votes from other parties, because the political debate is not
:35:16. > :35:20.about the issues regarding people who determined elections. We need
:35:20. > :35:24.to get out there and tell people we are dealing with immigration, we
:35:24. > :35:31.are dealing with welfare and then people have a positive reason to
:35:32. > :35:37.vote for us. Is it not a risk that if you go down the road that you
:35:37. > :35:43.would like to go down, you detoxified the conservative brand?
:35:43. > :35:47.You have become a backward looking, a right-wing party again? I always
:35:47. > :35:53.thought the idea of a toxic Tory party was nonsense. It showed a
:35:53. > :35:58.lack of confidence in our basic principles. What is exciting about
:35:58. > :36:03.the possibility of reuniting the right, in local elections, on a
:36:03. > :36:10.national level, 48% would have voted for two right wing parties.
:36:10. > :36:18.In South Shields Riggott between two right wing parties, 35% of the
:36:18. > :36:21.vote. That is up on the levels Margaret Thatcher was getting.
:36:21. > :36:27.Gay marriage coming up in the Commons next week. How will you
:36:27. > :36:32.vote? I had not decided. I had never been so conflicted about a
:36:32. > :36:38.piece of legislation. I have always been in favour of equality.
:36:38. > :36:44.have got to make up your mind. conflicted because I am in favour
:36:44. > :36:47.of a quality, but that bill is a mess. How are you going to vote?
:36:47. > :36:51.am a Roman Catholic and I believe it is the right of the Church to
:36:51. > :36:55.define marriage, not the right of the state. I shall vote in
:36:55. > :37:05.accordance with the Roman Catholic Whip. Are you taking your whip from
:37:05. > :37:06.
:37:06. > :37:12.the Pope? On this matter, I am forced up isn't that treason, a
:37:12. > :37:16.reparation it has not been treason since 1989. I did not realise that
:37:16. > :37:19.Act covered you. Thanks to both of useful stop
:37:19. > :37:22.You're watching the Sunday Politics. Coming up in just over 20 minutes.
:37:22. > :37:32.I'll be looking at the week ahead with our political panel. Until
:37:32. > :37:37.
:37:38. > :37:42.then, the Sunday Politics across Welcome from us. We will be
:37:42. > :37:46.clarifying with a top City Hall official, how far the mayor is
:37:46. > :37:52.prepared to go to give London local authorities, including his own,
:37:52. > :37:58.more freedom to tax and spend. Joining us is Andrew Rossendale,
:37:59. > :38:03.and Stephen Reid, the Labour MP for Croydon North. John Tali, chairman
:38:03. > :38:08.of the Metropolitan Police Federation. We want to talk about
:38:08. > :38:11.water cannon and the Met indicating it would like to have water cannon
:38:11. > :38:16.and the Home Secretary saying, we will look at that idea. Would you
:38:16. > :38:20.support that question mark in principle, yes. They are used in
:38:20. > :38:24.Northern Ireland and the Continent. The circumstances of when they are
:38:24. > :38:29.used need to be looked at. My concern is how much it will cost.
:38:29. > :38:34.We are losing a lot of officers and money is tight. Would it have been
:38:34. > :38:40.good if it was available for the rioting in Croydon? Croydon was one
:38:40. > :38:44.of the areas that was it the worst. A lot of people living in areas
:38:44. > :38:50.that were hit, would have liked to have seen a water cannon used if it
:38:50. > :38:55.could have been helpful. I don't want water cannon introduced as an
:38:55. > :39:02.alternative to the police officers Lee Mead on the streets. Andrew,
:39:02. > :39:05.Time for it? Absolutely, we need to show we do not tolerate that
:39:05. > :39:10.behaviour on ostrich. Water cannon should be used when necessary and
:39:10. > :39:15.when it is effective in helping the police tackle those situations.
:39:15. > :39:19.you happy it is safe? That is not for me to decide. The police can
:39:20. > :39:23.make that decision. But it should be an option should the need arise.
:39:24. > :39:27.Recent changes by the Crown Prosecution Service, mean there is
:39:27. > :39:32.a presumption against prosecution police involved in accidents on
:39:32. > :39:36.their way to an emergency. But the cost of compensating others
:39:36. > :39:42.involved unfixed in vehicles is running into hundreds of million
:39:42. > :39:46.pounds a year. Road safety campaigners are concerned.
:39:46. > :39:50.Joseph is a successful singer. Last year when cycling across this
:39:50. > :39:56.bridge in Hackney he was knocked off his bike by a British Transport
:39:56. > :40:01.Police vehicle travelling up to 60 mph. He was injured and the police
:40:01. > :40:06.officer found guilty of dangerous driving. The police in London are
:40:06. > :40:10.involved in 12 collisions every day on our roads, once every two hours.
:40:10. > :40:15.The police point out they are meted responsibility for half of those
:40:15. > :40:19.collisions and a lot of them will be minor. When they are not, the
:40:19. > :40:23.human cost is enormous and we have found out, the financial costs are
:40:23. > :40:26.considerable. Police data obtained by this programme has found over
:40:27. > :40:31.the last three years, three- quarters of all compensation
:40:31. > :40:36.payouts by the Met has been a result of a police collision on the
:40:36. > :40:40.roads. An average bill to the taxpayer of �1.7 million a year.
:40:40. > :40:45.Although there has been a fall in compensation payouts in the last
:40:45. > :40:51.two years, road-safety campaigners say it is too high. It is a huge
:40:51. > :40:58.amount. �7 million goes into the road deaths investigation unit. It
:40:58. > :41:04.invests all fatal crashes and life- changing injury accidents. This man
:41:04. > :41:08.is trying to drive for the police emergency services. The police
:41:08. > :41:13.driver training in this country is a widely recognised as the best in
:41:13. > :41:18.the world. A lot of other police forces will come to the UK to learn
:41:18. > :41:22.skills and training techniques. To start with, when a police officer
:41:22. > :41:28.or ambulance driver for the first time is put into the driving seat
:41:28. > :41:32.of that vehicle with an instructor, they will find it quite a challenge.
:41:32. > :41:37.That instructor will probably knock their driving skills back to basics.
:41:37. > :41:44.To understand the level of driving expected, it is my turn to learn
:41:44. > :41:51.the way they do it. He's off the gas a little bit. It is hard and
:41:51. > :41:55.that is driving beneath the speed limit. After about three weeks of
:41:55. > :41:59.this testing and then an assessment, the police are given special rights
:41:59. > :42:04.when they drive, so they can break the speed limit, and if they hit a
:42:04. > :42:08.red light, they give way, rather than stock. Even with those powers,
:42:08. > :42:15.if they drive carelessly and Dame Risley, it is a criminal offence.
:42:15. > :42:19.The chances of that happening just got smaller. Two weeks ago, the CPS
:42:19. > :42:29.changed their guidance on road traffic offences to be more lenient
:42:29. > :42:32.
:42:32. > :42:37.According to some, that is a mistake. It is wrong, they should
:42:37. > :42:41.look at the primary cause of the problem. Is it more dangerous? Is
:42:41. > :42:46.it safe and his London better for those chases? I think probably not
:42:46. > :42:50.at times. Although sentencing guidelines may have changed, I
:42:50. > :42:55.think the debate about where to draw the line is going to go on.
:42:55. > :43:00.Do you think some of your officers perhaps on not taking thicker they
:43:00. > :43:05.should question mark I disagree with that. Police driver training
:43:05. > :43:10.and continual assessment and the standards of the officers is very
:43:10. > :43:13.strict. Only recently an officer in Hampshire was prosecuted for
:43:13. > :43:19.dangerous driving following a pursuit where there were no
:43:19. > :43:23.accidents. He was acquitted, and I am pleased for that. In pursuits,
:43:23. > :43:28.it is often found the police officers on not to blame, but in
:43:28. > :43:32.accidents more generally, the figures show about 50%, there are
:43:32. > :43:39.big questions about the officers? When they are going to emergencies
:43:39. > :43:48.generally, are they Reckless, haphazard? Absolutely not. There
:43:48. > :43:54.would be a human cry if police officers to an emergency 10-15
:43:54. > :43:58.minutes later than they would have done had they used their sirens and
:43:58. > :44:02.blue lights. Because of the nature of that, there will be accidents.
:44:03. > :44:08.It happens in every walk of life, including the other emergency
:44:08. > :44:12.services. There will be cases when the driver is at fault. But in a
:44:12. > :44:17.great majority of cases, there will be not. Do you think you needed a
:44:17. > :44:21.change for the CPS to make this presumption to not take action,
:44:21. > :44:27.protect emergency service drivers? Shouldn't they just based it on the
:44:27. > :44:30.evidence? Section two of the Road Traffic Act, dangerous driving,
:44:30. > :44:36.presumes everyone should be charged if the make-up of the offence is
:44:36. > :44:40.committed. What the CPS had said is, it may not be in the public
:44:40. > :44:47.interest to prosecute in every case. We are pleased for that and we have
:44:47. > :44:52.asked the DPP to look at it, and the people of London would prefer
:44:52. > :44:57.to see their officers arriving promptly and safely than not at all.
:44:57. > :45:02.Would you agree with that? I agree entirely with what John has said.
:45:02. > :45:07.The police are there to do a job. Emergency services had to rush to
:45:07. > :45:11.end incidents if it is taking place. I would feel happier to allow them
:45:11. > :45:15.the combatants to get on with their business, rather than be afraid to
:45:15. > :45:20.go faster in order to be there on time. Otherwise we could be in more
:45:20. > :45:24.trouble. If you are going to an emergency situation, you will have
:45:24. > :45:29.to drive faster than the speed limit. That is more dangerous, so
:45:29. > :45:33.there needs to be a change. The case of Sean Reeve, who died
:45:34. > :45:38.after being restrained by police in Brixton five years ago, the
:45:38. > :45:43.Federation's role has been questioned. An independent report
:45:43. > :45:48.criticised the report of the IPCC and how it investigated the role of
:45:48. > :45:53.the officers involved. Clear them and found there was no case. But
:45:53. > :45:57.also criticisms of the federation during his inquiry, says he played
:45:57. > :46:07.an inappropriate role. Your representatives sat in on
:46:07. > :46:07.
:46:07. > :00:33.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 846 seconds
:00:33. > :00:36.interviews, and answered questions. In a moment we'll look ahead to the
:00:36. > :00:43.big stories that will dominate politics next week with our
:00:43. > :00:48.political panel, but first the news at noon.
:00:48. > :00:51.Good afternoon. The former Foreign Secretary, Lord Geoffrey Howe has
:00:51. > :00:56.Sir David Cameron appears to be losing control of the Conservative
:00:56. > :01:00.Party, and running scared of his Euro-sceptic MPs. His comments had
:01:00. > :01:05.been dismissed by Jeremy hands, he says David Cameron is tackling a
:01:05. > :01:11.difficult issue and has already delivered much in chasing Britain's
:01:11. > :01:15.relationship with the youthful stop this was Geoffrey Howe in 1990,
:01:15. > :01:18.telling Parliament why he had quit the Government, because he
:01:18. > :01:24.disagreed with the then Prime Minister over Europe.
:01:24. > :01:28.That is why I have resigned. years later in an intervention, he
:01:28. > :01:33.is attacking another Prime Minister from his party over the UK in the
:01:33. > :01:43.EU. In an interview with the Observer, the veteran peer has
:01:43. > :01:53.
:01:53. > :01:58.If the results of such a referendum was to suggest a detachment from
:01:58. > :02:03.the European Union, it would be of grave effect. Because our presence
:02:03. > :02:07.there has influenced to rock the world. It has been a week when the
:02:07. > :02:12.Tories appear to have obsessed about Europe. Lord Lawson's said
:02:12. > :02:16.the UK should leave now. Then more than 100 of his own MPs voted
:02:16. > :02:22.against the Prime Minister over a lack of plans for a referendum law.
:02:22. > :02:29.Everyone has said he is in meltdown. At the top, every senior Tory has
:02:29. > :02:33.said they are in agreement. He is so been seen to do something with
:02:34. > :02:39.our relationship with Europe difference. David Cameron has
:02:39. > :02:43.promised to Rhigos did the UK's terms of Premiership -- membership.
:02:43. > :02:46.What we want him to do now is get on with the negotiations. We think
:02:47. > :02:52.the new relationship has to be based on trade, not uncommon
:02:52. > :02:56.Government will stop the Prime Minister is caught between a rowing
:02:56. > :03:00.gold cards and his own MPs. To some he is only the struggling to keep
:03:00. > :03:05.it together. A former employee of the internet
:03:05. > :03:08.giant, Google says he is providing evidence to the tax authorities
:03:08. > :03:14.about how the company avoided paying corporation tax in Britain
:03:14. > :03:20.by using its offices in Dublin to finalise deals. Barney Jones he
:03:20. > :03:24.worked at Google until 2006, claims at that time, as some deals was
:03:24. > :03:28.still completed in Britain. Google says it cannot comment on specific
:03:29. > :03:35.allegations but maintains it complies fully with UK tax law.
:03:35. > :03:40.The fuel is taking place of a politician in Imran Khan's Movement
:03:40. > :03:45.for Justice Party he was shot dead yesterday. She was shot dead
:03:45. > :03:49.outside her home on the evening of a partial re-run of the elections.
:03:49. > :03:53.The police are investigating whether her death was politically-
:03:53. > :03:56.motivated all the attempts of an attempted robbery.
:03:56. > :04:06.They work together for four decades leaving their mark on British
:04:06. > :04:09.
:04:09. > :04:13.comedy. Today, Eric Morecambe and Ernie Wise are being cut memorised.
:04:13. > :04:20.That's all the news for now, there will be more news on BBC One at
:04:20. > :04:30.6.00pm. Now back to Andrew. Maxine, thank you. So more trouble
:04:30. > :04:31.
:04:31. > :04:40.for David Cameron over same sex marriage. The fall-out from a Nigel
:04:40. > :04:49.forage going to Edinburgh. And the evils of tax avoidance. All
:04:49. > :04:53.questions for The Week Ahead. David Cameron has this game
:04:53. > :04:59.marriage vote coming up again and this row over the swivel-eyed,
:04:59. > :05:07.loons, it all plays into that? does. Several of the constituents
:05:07. > :05:14.have written to high command in protest at the remark. But also its
:05:14. > :05:19.equal marriage Bill is the thing that really irritated the
:05:20. > :05:26.Conservative associations. That is what they say has resulted in a
:05:26. > :05:33.haemorrhaging of membership a way to UKIP. It all plays into this
:05:33. > :05:39.narrative, which is gaining speed in some self-serving quarters, that
:05:39. > :05:43.Mr Cameron is losing control of his party? The compound effect of this
:05:43. > :05:48.story and remarks allegedly made by an Number Ten insider is what
:05:48. > :05:54.matters. Individually they are not too bad, but put them together it
:05:54. > :05:58.smells like a leader losing control of his party. David Cameron is
:05:58. > :06:03.advancing a controversial piece of legislation, so takes the political
:06:03. > :06:09.damage coming with that. Because he is not putting a case for it, or
:06:09. > :06:16.his face and voice, he is almost embarrassed by the bill. So you
:06:16. > :06:20.have a situation, it is an esoteric issue for a lot of voters, but it
:06:20. > :06:25.commands particular support from the voters the Tories need, namely
:06:25. > :06:31.young people. It softens out the Tory message which is crime,
:06:31. > :06:36.immigration and welfare. There is political utility eat -- to it, but
:06:36. > :06:44.you only claim it it you put your face and voice to the campaign. He
:06:44. > :06:49.hasn't. It is 2008, the period when he was chasing after my newspaper
:06:49. > :06:55.and the Observer. We say he does not control his party, these are
:06:55. > :07:00.votes are not rebellions, they are free votes. Yet free votes are
:07:01. > :07:06.turning into trouble for David Cameron. Europe is trouble, because
:07:06. > :07:10.the coalition is divided. Equal marriage next week, ministers can
:07:10. > :07:17.vote as they once, but Philip Hammond and Question Time attacked
:07:17. > :07:21.his Government for died -- devoting too much time. But also he could
:07:21. > :07:25.probably have got away with this without too much of a row if the
:07:25. > :07:31.economy was growing at 3% and the Tories were five points ahead in
:07:31. > :07:37.the polls? And, they still harbour resentment against their leader for
:07:37. > :07:41.not winning an outright majority. The irony is, at the more we have
:07:41. > :07:46.these rebellions, that are not really rebellions, the less likely
:07:46. > :07:50.it is they will win and out right majority at the next election.
:07:50. > :07:55.Equal marriage is meant to appeal to the centre ground, Europe is
:07:55. > :08:01.meant to appeal to the right. He cannot get a formula. It is the
:08:01. > :08:07.formula Margaret Thatcher had. So we are looking at more minority
:08:07. > :08:12.coalition administrations. Remember the famous movie, Mr Smith went to
:08:12. > :08:18.Washington. Let's look what happened when the UK pleader went
:08:18. > :08:28.to Edinburgh. Immigrants are welcome here, you are not welcome
:08:28. > :08:34.
:08:34. > :08:37.here. He had to be protected by the police. Yes, the UKIP leader had to
:08:37. > :08:42.be protected by police as he was jeered at by an angry crowd after
:08:42. > :08:48.retreating to city centre pub for his own safety. This was a group of
:08:48. > :08:58.hard-left activists and gave him a bad time. It was interesting they
:08:58. > :08:59.
:08:59. > :09:06.were shouting, "racist scum, go home". What is that about? This was
:09:06. > :09:10.not the SNP, it was people on the far left, on the extreme wing of
:09:11. > :09:16.the independence movement. I spoke to Lord Forsyth, the last
:09:16. > :09:22.Conservative Scottish Secretary. I spoke to a former Labour Scottish
:09:22. > :09:27.minister and George Galloway, hardly a fellow traveller of
:09:27. > :09:33.Conservative and Labour. They also have the same thing, this is quite
:09:33. > :09:38.an ugly side to some elements of the national debate. They say these
:09:38. > :09:44.people are on the periphery, they are not the SNP. So this
:09:44. > :09:52.highlighted that. If that happens in Edinburgh, what would have
:09:53. > :10:00.happened in Glasgow? I can imagine him leaving physically damaged.
:10:00. > :10:05.Might take on it... Don't fall for this, Edinburgh is the soft city
:10:05. > :10:10.and Glasgow is the hard one. Trainspotting was set in Edinburgh.
:10:10. > :10:20.As awful as it was to see a Democratic politician intimidated,
:10:20. > :10:22.
:10:23. > :10:27.he did not strike me as a Scottish thing. UKIP are playing in the big
:10:27. > :10:31.league and will have to prepare better. You said he was protected
:10:31. > :10:36.by the police, but not protected very well. They will have to
:10:36. > :10:40.organise themselves better. dominated the media in Scotland on
:10:40. > :10:43.Friday night. He played it to his advantage in the end. Now, is
:10:43. > :10:50.avoiding tax evil? Here's what happened when Google appeared
:10:50. > :10:56.before a Parliamentary committee on Thursday.
:10:56. > :11:00.You are company that says you do no evil, but I think you do. Tax is
:11:00. > :11:06.not a matter of choice, it is following the laws that other,
:11:06. > :11:11.internationally. I think Ed Miliband will make a speech about
:11:11. > :11:18.it this week. Outraged, but I don't see anybody coming up with a
:11:18. > :11:23.solution to get them to pay their taxes? They made do evil, but they
:11:23. > :11:28.don't do evasions. So it is not just avoidance, but aggressive tax
:11:28. > :11:32.avoidance. The Prime Minister will be hosting de G8 Summit in Northern
:11:32. > :11:37.Ireland next month and he is putting tax avoidance and
:11:37. > :11:40.aggressive tax avoidance on the agenda. There has been a whistle
:11:40. > :11:45.blower from Google saying he has evidence and e-mails which says
:11:45. > :11:49.Google is generating billions of pounds of revenue in the United
:11:49. > :11:53.Kingdom and running it through its Dublin office. It looks like it is
:11:53. > :11:57.avoidance. But is it a gross of avoidance? If it is, then I think
:11:57. > :12:00.they might find the authorities will be looking closely at them.
:12:00. > :12:04.These companies shouldn't be surprised to be approached in this
:12:04. > :12:08.spirit by the whole of the political class in this country.
:12:08. > :12:13.People are paying their taxes and struggling to pay bills, they get
:12:13. > :12:17.angry? Both the Prime Minister and the Chancellor had used the
:12:17. > :12:21.language of morality in speeches about this issue. And the
:12:22. > :12:26.newspapers such as the Times had gone through to expose them in
:12:26. > :12:33.investigations. The executives should be more prepared. It used to
:12:33. > :12:37.be the evils of big oil companies, the capitalist companies. He's
:12:37. > :12:42.cuddly, New Age companies like Google and Starbucks have turned
:12:42. > :12:47.out to be just the same? It is some of the morally pretentious
:12:47. > :12:51.campaigns they used to run about 10 years ago. There is outraged on the
:12:51. > :12:55.left on the right, but I means the left and the rights of both wrong.
:12:55. > :13:00.If you are not breaking the law, then it is up to politicians to
:13:00. > :13:04.change the law to take into account these loopholes. Would you want to
:13:04. > :13:10.live and an economy where businesses pay the tax public
:13:10. > :13:16.pressure wants them to pay. If you cannot predict what your revenues
:13:16. > :13:21.are going to be, it is a precocious system. Until Google and Starbucks
:13:21. > :13:26.are violate real laws, there is a limit as to how angry you can be.
:13:26. > :13:29.We shall see if anything happens out of all of this outrage. That's
:13:29. > :13:33.all for today. Parliament is going into recess next week, and so are