13/04/2014 Sunday Politics North West

Aternoon folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics. As MPs head off for

their Easter break, campaigning for the European elections in six weeks'

time gets underway. In a Sunday Politics special, we'll debate the

issues at stake on May 22nd with senior party figures from the

Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats, and UKIP. And as ever

we'll be discussing the week ahead with our panel of top political

commentators. And in the North West: We'rd live in

the Ribble Valley as Nigel Dvans tries to put his career back on

track. newspapers which some claim are

politically slanted and not impartial about informing people of

local services. So all that to come between now and

quarter to four and for the next thirty minutes or so we'll be

debating the European elections Here in the studio we have Syed

Kamall, leader of the Conservatives in the European Parliament, Richard

Howitt, chair of the Labour group of MEPs, Sarah Ludford, deputy leader

of the Lib Dems in Europe, and Patrick O'Flynn, UKIP's director of

communications. Welcome to you all. In a moment, all four will give us

their opening pitch for the elections. A little earlier they

drew lots to decide who'll go first. And that privilege goes to Syed

Before that, though, here's a quick reminder of what all the fuss is

about. The vote to choose members of the

European Parliament takes place on Thursday the 22nd of May. The same

day as local elections are held in England and Northern Ireland. The UK

sends 73 England and Northern Ireland. The UK

sends NTP is to Brussels. And the vote is a form of proportional

representation. In total, there are 751 MEPs from the 28 member states.

What do they do all day? The European Parliament's power has

grown. A vet of the EU commissioners and they can amend, approve or

reject nearly all EU legislation and the EU budget. Some laws MEPs have

been responsible for include price caps on mobile phone chargers,

banking regulation and cover food regulation two -- labelling.

Syed Kamall, you have 30 seconds. Europe cannot go on as it is. Europe

needs to change. And our relationship with Europe needs to

change. Only the Conservatives have a plan to deliver that change and of

the British people and in-out referendum. Labour and the Lib Dems

will not and UKIP simply cannot Only the Conservatives will offer

the three yards, with Conservative MEPs working alongside a

conservative Prime Minister. For, really is and above all a

referendum. Sarah Ludford is next. Your choice is simple. If you think

Britain is better off in Europe vote for the Liberal Democrats. The

Lib Dems are the only party of Ian, fighting to keep Britain in Europe

and in work. There is nothing patriotic about UKIP's desire to

pull-out. That is playing Russian roulette with Britain's economy and

jobs. The Conservatives are flirting with exit and Labour lacks the

courage to speak up. Thought Liberal Democrat on May the 22nd to say in

Europe for jobs and security. Sarah Ludford. Next, Richard Howitt from

Labour. The European elections are about who represents you. They are

not a referendum on a referendum. Labour MEPs believe in putting jobs

and growth first. A guarantee to help young people into work,

reforming energy markets so that bills are brought down for good

Labour believes in reform in Europe, but within. It is David Cameron who

is risking your job and Britain s prosperity because of divisions in

his own party. Labour MEPs put British interests first. Our fourth

opening statement from Patrick O'Flynn. The EU is old hat. It is a

declining regional trade bloc in an era of global trade. It is a

20th-century political project designed to prevent conflict in

Europe that is now reawakening old hostilities. It is an attempt to

force on the European people European this as their primary

collective identity. It has hollowed out British democracy and now we do

not even control our own borders. That is why you should vote UKIP.

That is the opening statements. Let's get on with the debate. Why

should people vote in the selections? If you vote UKIP, we can

deliver an earthquake that will rock the foundations of British politics

and the European political class. We can send a signal to Europe that

Britain has had enough, that Britain wants to retain its nation state

status and regain political power and the ability to forge trading

deals across the world. Britain leading Europe to freedom twice in

the last century through bloodshed. We feel that a UKIP win in those

elections could help Britain set an example to lead European nation

states back to free assembly again. Syed Kamall, isn't it the case that

many Tory voters will vote you clip to keep you honest, to keep your

feet to the fire? Whatever you think of the European Parliament or the

EU, the fact is that the European Parliament as equal power with the

28 governments of the EU. When David Cameron delivered the first cut to

the EU budget, the first ever cut, he needed a strong team of

Conservative MEPs working alongside him. But many of your supporters

will vote for UKIP for the reasons I gave. Many will vote Liberal

Democrat. Not very many. Many of our supporters will vote for us because

we are the only party trying to change the EU and offer reform. We

have offered renegotiation and a referendum. And how would you vote

in such a referendum? We have no idea whether he would vote yes or

no. Let him answer. I will answer that question. If the EU continues

on this road, towards a United States of Europe, and if there was

no change at the time of the referendum, then I would probably

vote to leave. You have no confidence in David Cameron? We

Javier Culson opportunity to read negotiate our relationship with

Europe and the Conservatives are at the forefront of that agenda. David

Cameron have not given a list of demands. He said that if things do

not change, he will probably vote to leave, is that right? If at the time

of the referendum, things had not changed, I would vote to leave and

we have a golden opportunity to perform the agenda. Richard, the

last time the British people had a say on this was over 40 years ago.

Under a Labour government. Which was deeply divided on the issue. And

that was a say on the common market. Today's EU is a very different

animal from the common market. Why can we not, under another Labour

government, have another vote? First of all, we want it to be more than a

free trading area. We make no apologies about that. But in the

elections because this is half of Britain's exports and investment. If

you care about your job and business, you cannot hear from the

party of government that they probably want you to leave because

the CBI, the engineering employees in Federation and the chimp of

commerce, 80% of them say it is necessary to stay in. So why not

give us a vote? When David Cameron says he wants to repatriate social

powers, he means takeaway maternity rights and holidays. If the case is

so strong, why not give us an in-out vote? David Miliband has said that

there will be a referendum if there was a proposal to change powers Why

wait? This is based on a series of reforms. Labour has a set of

reforms. David Cameron is silent about what they would be. That is

because he knows that if he put them forward, they would either be

unsatisfactory to his Eurosceptic backbenchers and he would be out of

a job, or they would be unacceptable to European leaders. Why is your

leader missing in action? Ed Miliband is unable to say even the

positive things that you are saying. He has run away from the argument.

He actually said there would not be a referendum in his time.

For a conservative to say they will have a referendum but not give the

reforms, it is a mistake. Nick Clegg gave Nigel Farage a huge opportunity

in that debate. He said that the Eurosceptic view was to leave

Britain like Billy no mates. I can say that he is the best qualified

person to say that. Sarah Ludford, you have said that lots of people

are going to vote Lib Dem but that is not what the polls are saying.

You are 7% in two polls this morning. Eclectic's decision to

champion Europe has been a disaster for you. You face wet out. We swayed

a lot of people our way with Nick Clegg's debate. Where is the

evidence? We are the only party that is completely united, saying that we

are wanting to stay in. It is essential because formally and jobs

are supported by our trade with the EU. Linked to the EU. We are finding

a lot of moderate conservative voters are actually fed up with the

Tories being split and divided all over the place. Syed Kamall saying

that we might vote in rout. -- in or out. We are consistent. A poll in

London showed that 18% would vote for us. I am delighted about that.

London is not the whole country it may surprise you. We need to move on

to immigration, an important issue. We are a member of the EU and the

rules say that with a few caveats, our fellow EU citizens are free to

come here if they want. Why can we not just accept that? Britain has a

proud record when it comes to immigration. We have been open to

people across the world for centuries. But we welcome people who

come to our country to contribute to pay taxes and two wards are a

society positively. But there are three real concerns that we have to

address. The first one is numbers, and secondly people who may come

here not to work but for benefits, and thirdly, getting a hang of the

numbers. I think it is shameful that only this week the office for

National said that they did not collect sufficient figures under a

Labour government. 350,000 extra people came in and they did not

count the numbers. That is the size of a city like Cardiff. That is

shameful. 350,000 came from all over the place. Do you accept the free

movement of peoples within the EU? I accept and am open to people who

want to come here and contribute. In the same way... Do you accept the

free movement of peoples within the EU? In our manifesto, we have said

it is an issue for reform. We have to make sure that people are coming

here to work and contribute positively, not simply to come here

and take advantage of the system. I will tell you what else is

shameful. What is shameful is David Cameron making a pledge to the

British people on an issue that they really care about, to bring net

immigration down to the tens of thousands a year, having no means of

fulfilling that pledge. And we see now it is back up to 212,000 a year

because we have no volume control and no quality control from

immigration from our neighbours And that is a disgrace. How could UKIP

address that issue? Because we would leave the EU. How? Tell me how. You

do not have a single member of Parliament. He will not get a single

member of Parliament. How are you... ? TUC are hoping to get an

MEP. What do you say? -- he is here today hoping to get an MEP. All of

-- almost 2 million Brits live and work in the rest of the EU. Is that

worth having? The majority are wealthy, retired people. Why do not

object to bilateral agreements with countries with similar living

standards to us. France, the Netherlands, that works fine. But

these three people want Turkey to join the EU, 75 Na Li and people

running our country, only 10% of which... Syed Kamall is Michael year

to say whether they are in favour of free movement for work, not for

benefits... That is what I'm saying. You said you were unable to

be clear. That leaves 2 million British people absolutely unsure as

to whether they would have a right to continue to live in other

countries. It is a two-way street. You are putting those people in a

state of uncertainty. EU migrants have been good for the British

economy and contribute far more than they take out in services and

benefits. One in seven businesses were founded in -- by migrants. And

they cannot just turn up and claim benefits. The coalition government

has legislated to make sure that they cannot claim for three months.

They will not be able to claim for more than six months. Richard

Howitt, Jack Straw said it was A spectacular mistake for Labour to

allow EU migrants from Poland and Hungary to work in the UK from

2004." Why should we trust a party that makes spectacular mistakes and

hasn't apologised for it? We accept it is a mistake and I apologise We

make a firm commitment for new EU states we will put down transitional

controls. When I listen to the Conservatives and UKIP trying to

re-write history, saying immigration was out of control, uncontrolled,

open door, we hear it over and over again. It is not true. Anyone who

was around at the time... Come on, Richard. Hold on, you undercounted

by 350,000. You were letting 2 million in over the years, an

under-counted by 350,000 people you didn't know came in. You should have

tightened the benefit rules. The Conservative MEP today has, in four

years in government in Britain, is trying it blame the previous Labour

Government over the fact they won't count people in or people out.

Yvette Cooper - it is not easy for people to come to the country and

benefits are changing, changing the habitual residence test and we are

going to say that migrants can't come and claim child benefit if

their children are outside the country. Labour a has shown they

have listened to concerns but we say it is a stronger, better, country

because it is diverse and multicultural snoo.d this is fantasy

politics from all the Peters. They are committed to a system with no

volume control and no quality control. You talk about benefits as

if it is only out of work benefits. In work benefits cost a lot of money

for the British taxpayer. Big businesses bring in minimum wage

workers. It is ?5,000 per perschool place What are you going to do? Have

all the pensioners come back to Britain? How will will you fund the

health care? Do you really think Spain and pour tu ghal their current

situation, are going to turn their backs on British property owners

with wealth? -- Portugal. They might not wanting pensioners to use their

health service. Pensioners often come back to Britain to use the

health service. You have shown it represents wealthy people's

interests. A second Conservative Party. Hang on a minute... Blue

collar wages were down. They want it character for the National Health

Service, have cuts that go farther and comprehensive education. This is

a debate on the wider politics between Conservatives and UKIP and

Labour will... You can't both talk time. UKIP - they haven't thought it

through, thousand they will have trade access in the EU, hasn't

thought how they will have trade deals that the Liberal Democrats

support, like with the United States: Would you have a cap on

non-EU immigrants? We are not in favour of a cap. No cap on either.

No. Well it is a target. It is a moving feast, as it were. Would you

have a limit on non-EU limits? We have limits on quality. We have

people who are skilled migrants coming in. Lip its? . By quality,

not by quantity. -- Limits. How do you do that? We need to move

on to foreign affairs. Should we pool more sovereignty to

give the European Union more clout in foreign and defence matters? I'm

Labour's defence and foreign affairs spokesperson. No we don't need to

pull more powers into Europe. As we undertake this live debate there are

guns being fired in Ukraine as we speak. Europe is facing, for the

first time, since the end of the Second World War, Armies crossing

national borders and floatening peace. Doesn't it -- threatening

peace. Doesn't it need to come together of the We don't need more

powers. We need political will. With Vladimir Putin, in my view, he has

-- we have fallen short in the sanctions. But it is Europe, not

Britain. Remember Putin calling Britain little England a small

island with no influence. Labour doesn't agree with that. But if

that's the mindset that allows someone like Vladimir Putin to send

troops across borders threatening peace, it is worrying. And when we

have, in UKIP a party that say they admire Putin and support his

policies, that is no recipe for how Europe should be wrong. I was

waiting for that. Let me ask him. We don't admire Putin as a leader. .

Oh. No we don't. What Nigel Farage said, was he admired him as a

political operator. Testifies Franklin D Roosevelt who said a good

foreign policy was speaking softly but carrying a big stick. The EU

shouts its mouthed off while carrying a matchstick. It is fantasy

that you wiebl it stand up to Putin over the Ukraine. -- that you would

be able to stand up. Do you admire what Putin is doing in the Ukraine?

No. What matters in foreign policy is the outcould. We have a terrible

outcome in the Ukraine, like Syria, and Georgia... What would UKIP do?

What u skip would do, would be to keep our people safe -- UKIP.

How? And not commit our Foreign Office and troops Foreign wars.

Patrick O'Flynn. You brought up this issue of foreign wars. Now Nigel

Farage said in previous debates that Britain should leave the EU because,

"We have had enough of endless foreign wars." Which wars has the EU

taken us into? The EU has ban very important factor in the push towards

trying to get military intervention in Syria, for example. What wars has

the etch U taken us into it -- EU. Fortunately the EU doesn't have its

own army yet. It has wanted to sign up to an expansionist agenda. Did it

want Iraq? No, that was Labour. UKIP opposed Iraq, so did most of the

mainline Europeans. Germany was against Syria and Libya. No EU

policy. We had an Anglo French deal on Syria. A by lateral deal. A

European dimension. No, buy lateral. We have a European Union that wants

to expand ever-more into other people's spheres of influence. If we

are going to stand up to what Putin is do, which obviously Nigel Farage

has no intentions of doing, you have to get your act together on economic

sanctions and diplomatic force and in trade matters, in supporting

eastern European countries. Sayeria, who and whose army? And NATO and

working transatlanticically, is important through NATO. I will come

to you in a moment. Nick Clegg said that the idea of an EU Army was "A

dangerous fantasy that is simply not true ""Why then, are we already

working on etch U-owned and controlled drones -- EU-owned and

the President of the European Parliament has said that the

majority of MEPs want the EU to have "deployable troops." He is not

speaking for me or Liberal Democrats. The EU does not and will

not have an army. Our defence is mainly shaped through NATO. He is

President of the Parliament What we must do is to get equipment which

can operate together. We waste an awful lot of our spending in Europe

because we duplicate equipment. We don't get the bang for our bucks

that we should. It is a useful role for the EU, to get equipment working

together. That doesn't make sense. You say military equipment, a NATO

job. No, the EU, there is a kind of dimension of the EU members of NATO,

in working together on a common quument o o so they can talk to each

other -- on common equipment, so they can talk to each other. The EU

has a role but not an army. So a European defence agency, that helps

our defence industries and those jobs are extremely important and

would be threatened if the Conservatives and UKIP took us out

of Europe but it is 100 years since the start of the fist world war

Remember that Europe was set up to try to get a secure peace within

Europe T succeeded. Now look on Ukraine but also on the southern

borders to the Arab Spring countries in North Africa. It is more

important than ever that we work to keep keep peace and stability on our

borders. Can I say to Syed and the Conservative MEPs. You talk about

the three Rs, I have a fourth, retreat. If you take us out of the

European Union, it will be the worse retreat by Britain since Gallipoli.

Let him answer If he wants answers -- the British Parliament is the

right place with a British Foreign Secretary to decide our foreign

policy. You say that, but can I quote David Cameron, this is germain

to what you are saying, David Cameron said "There is no doubt that

we are more powerful than Washington, Beijing and Delhi,

because we are a powerful player in the European Union." Do you agree?

He is saying that there are times when it comes to international

foreign affairs when you have to cooperate with partners. Often they

are EU partners but often they are not. The problem we have...

Washington have made it very clear that it wants Britain to talk

through Brussels. No, not at all. Talk through the French and

Italians, come on, wake up? Through the EU collective. I'm vice chair of

the EU delegation. I hear it from the American counterparts. They want

the EU to get itself together and not least on Ukraine. Why should our

sovereignty be at the behest of .. ? I want to hear from Syed calm

amplgts the British Parliament is the right place to decide our

foreign poll sinchts sometimes we work with our European partners

sometimes we work with our non-European partners. It is our

choice to pull sovereign trito work together. G, we move on to our foirt

area. We hear a lot in this country about MPs expenses. Snted the real

scan dalt MEPs gravy train. -- isn't the real scandal, the MEPs gravy

train? You all have your snouts The trough? I don't think so. There is

transpancy. The way we use our expenses is online and anyone can

ask to examine those. We have actually voted to reform MEPs'

allowances. We regularly vote but unfortunately the majority in

Parliament don't. Have you voted to cut them? Yes. By how much? About

5%. A 5% We hoped to have economies I never fly except across the

Atlantic. Difficult to do it any other way. I didn't swim.

But we voted for economy flutes We voted for European Parliament policy

of transparency which other groups haven't. UKIP don't turn up to vote.

They don't earn their salaries. Dhoent do anything. They should hand

their salaries and allowances back. You can't ause UKIP of being on the

gravy train and the other that we don't claim our attendance allowance

because our MEPs are not there. Your attendance allowance is if you are

there, you are saying we don't turn up You are in the building and claim

the allowances. You are not an MEP, UKIP are so ashamed of what their

MEPs have done in Brussels, they didn't field a sitting MEP for

today's debate. I think each party decides who it wishes to field. I

have the honour of being the UKIP representative. I would say by going

in the past few weeks, xeeming to me saying - we are sick of the others.

-- people saying to me. : We are quite excited. Can I ask Patrick

O'Flynn. He says he touched a chord and his party is strong in the polls

today, between 18% and 20%. Haven't you also struck a chord with hip

crasscy. Two of your MEPs were jailed for expenses and benefits'

fraud. Two more asked to pay back ?37,000 for using European funds.

Nigel Farage has boosted about getting ?2 million in expenses and

he went on to employ his wife as a secretarial allowance after telling

other members not to People who do wrong and break the law, go to ja. I

have no time. -- go to jail. People who spend money they are not

entitled to should pay it back and that's right. But what UKIP does and

the good UKIP MEPs do, is use the allowances they are given to pursue

the political agenda they put up when elected which is to get Britain

out of this superstate. Instead of using it for parliamentary work

Very interesting. Richard Howitt. We were the first British political

party to have independent audits of our MEPs' expenses, from 1990, way

before the expenses crisis blew up. The Maria Miller scandal has of

course hit David Cameron and the Conservative Party hard as it should

do. But you are right, even in my own region you have UKIP candidates

and councillors who have been charged with fraudulently filling

out election papers and other shot lifting. Another independent inquiry

found he made racist comments. We had a European candidate last week

in Hertfordshire who got a parking ticket from the police and called

the police fascists. These people aren't here.

I'll let you have a quick reply We can bring up parochial cases. Let

him answer. Not so long ago a Liberal Democrat councillor was sent

down for firebombing, I don't say they are a bunch of arsonists, but

now I think, Nick Clegg might have burnt some cactuses, once. I'm glad

you pronounced that word carefully. Syed Kemal, the EU's auditors, they

are strongly critical of the EU s financials saying "Errors permist in

all main spending areas", the financials are poorly managed. It is

a shambles And that's something that all parties agree on. As we agree on

expenses, the British parties are at the forefront of transpancy. Every

year when we vote for the discharge of the budget, the Conservatives

also vote for it but we don't get enough MEPs from other countries to

investigate in favour. The Liberal Democrats have put forward to make

each Finance Minister, George Osborne and his counterpart to sign

a declaration to say all EU money is properly spent in my country.

Funnily enough they don't want to do that but I look forward to you

confirming that George Osborne will sign it. All the time we hear it is

about the money we pay in, about ?150 per family per year. What about

the money that comes back? ?1. billion that comes to Britain's

regions because of being in Europe. I myself helped to negotiate a fund

to help Britain's food banks to ensure so. Poorest and most

destitute people... Isn't it our money that went there first. Can I

tell you the Conservative-led Government have blocked us from

claiming that money. If you want to have the clearest choice at these

European elections, it is between... Tell us why. It affects our rebate.

Tony Blair gave away our rebate He is quite right. Lib Dems fought to

make sure that we apply for money to help with flooding. That is what the

Tories were blocking. If you want the clearest example at the European

elections, the Conservative Party and MEPs blocked the cap on bankers

bonuses, and then blocked a Labour victory to get money for free

banks. We need to move on to the future. It is important and people

are watching. The EU's Justice Minister says that we need to build

a United States of Europe with the commission as its government. Is she

right? Not at all. But the future, if we take the next ten years,

thinks about climate change and the fact that we are not going to hit of

the two degrees target. Europe has led and needs to lead towards

getting a new sustainable world It is the political will to use these

powers, so she is wrong. It is about the threats from abroad. Labour

reforms like getting a commissioner for growth and rebalancing the

budget, reforming the common agricultural policy, all of those

things will need to happen to make Europe more democratic and open But

against the rise of Brazil and China... We do not need more

treaties and powers. We need more action with more Labour MEPs. Sarah

Ludford, you would sign up to that? No. Unless they do not think that

should concentrate on institutional matters. What we need to do is

concentrate on making Europe progrowth and competitive and create

more jobs in a competitive world. We need more trade deals to open up our

exports, we need to streamline the EU. We need less red tape and

Liberal Democrats have done a lot on that. We need better scrutiny of EU

legislation at West Munster because the national parties... More powers

or less for the EU government? In some areas, I would like to see it

slimmed down. Including, I am not sure whether the EU should be

funding food banks. I think that is a national responsibility. Dearie

me. The EU have to concentrate on the economy and climate change. This

is the coalition talking. If we want to fritter away political capital on

things which are interfering in national matters, then we do not

have the support to tackle those big challenges. Would you still want to

join the Euro one-day? Now is not a good idea. We wanted the Eurozone to

still be sound, which is why... Did not ask you that. Do you want to

join the Euro one-day? If it is a success and it did the economy. Now

is not the time but in principle, the idea of a single currency has

advantages. That was a yes. We are not ruling it out for ever but not

in the foreseeable future. It is not on the horizon. What would our

relationship be with Europe in the future if UKIP got its way and we

left? We would be trading partners with Europe and we would seek

partnership in specific serious I'd tell you what, can I just say..

Would we be Norway? We would be stronger than Norway because we are

the biggest export market in the Eurozone. We can negotiate a bespoke

trading agreement reflecting our enormous importance. Not on

services, which make up 80% of the economy. We are the biggest export

market in the Eurozone. Our biggest exports are services and they would

have to agree to free trade and services. They still have not. Can I

read you something? Let me read you something. There would be a free

trade agreement in place the day after our exit. Germany would demand

no less. Who said that? Not somebody from UKIP, but Digby Jones. Mr

business. He is talking about goods, not services. Norway has that

and they have no say. You would have to accept the EU rules without any

say. No MEPs are commissioners. Let me give you another. Enough. One is

enough. Syed Kamall, is it not looking forward pretty much Mission:

Impossible for Mr Cameron to get anything like the repatriations of

powers that would satisfy your irreconcilables? My father was a bus

driver in the 50s and one of the reasons I am here today is because

he told me that you can achieve anything if you work hard. He said

to me, do not listen to the doubters. When people tell you that

something cannot be done, it is a sign of their limitations, not

yours. They said that we could not pull Britain out of the bailout

mechanism but we did it. He said we could not be to a -- veto European

treaty and we did that. They said we would never cut the budget and we

did that. The first ever. But overall, we are paying more into the

European budget. And they are not sticking to it. More, not less. They

say that we cannot achieve reform but we have achieved reform and we

are at the forefront of that. Science's father came to Britain

because Britain was open and looking outward. What the Conservatives now

have, with leaderless Cameron, is an inward looking attitude. They are

allowing the rise of UKIP. They are putting so much at risk. People

should vote Labour. We are going to have to stop now. No point talking

because we are about to finish. I think you all for a spirited debate.

I'm sure Nigel Fries and Mr Clegg will have learned a lot about how to

debate. -- Nigel Farage. It's just gone 3pm, and you're

watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who

leave us now for Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up here in twenty

minutes, the Hello, I'm Arif Ansari. Comhng up in

the North West: After an 11`month investigation, a five`week trial.

The Ribble Valley MP Nigel Dvans now cleared of nine sex charges

including rape. As many of xou know, I've been through 11 lonths of

hell. All I can say is that after the last 11 months that I'vd gone

through, nothing will ever be the same again.

We have an in`depth look at the legal and political issues flowing

from the case. In the studio the former Conservative minister Edwina

Currie, who's a friend of Nhgel Evans. The Labour MP for Rochdale,

Simon Danczuk, who's campaigned to expose abuse. And Stuart Pollitt is

live in Mr Evans's constitudncy No sign of Nigel Evans at hhs home

today but in the front window of the House behind me, plenty of cards

from his supporters. But how much support does he have at amongst his

constituency party and the voters in the Ribble Valley? I'll be

investigating. We'll find out in a second but Nigel

Evans is on the front of thd Sunday papers. We see from this th`t at one

point, he even contemplated suicide. I wouldn't be in the least

surprised. He is a gentle, sensitive soul. I've known him the best part

of 30 years. He was a parli`mentary candidate first in 1985 when I was

NUM peak. I've always thought very highly of him. He comes frol a

background in south Wales, hn Swansea. There aren't many Tories in

Swansea and they certainly `ren t many Tories who grew up in

newsagents'. He comes from `n ordinary background and has done

extremely well. That's wherd you start from. In those circumstances,

the kind of hell that he's been put through by people that he s`ys he

believes where his friends, I think that makes you question whether it

is worth going on. We will find out. Simon, are the questions here

relating to the Westminster culture? I don't think they are parthcularly.

I have complete sympathy for Nigel and what he's had to go through

He's been to hell and back, as he quite rightly says. His repttation

has been damaged. He's ?130,000 in debt in terms of legal costs so he's

been through the mill and I thing we should have much sympathy. But in

terms of the culture in Westminster, I don't see sole of the

culture that has been identhfied in this trial so I'm not familhar with

that, but I'm not a Conserv`tive MP or researcher. But I'm not familiar

with some other things that been identified.

The trial lasted five weeks, and it took the jury just six hours to

clear him of all nine chargds. This morning Nigel Evans has told the

Sunday papers that he wants to continue as the Ribble Valldy MP `

that's a decision for the local party. And he's attacked thd Crown

Prosecution Service for pursuing the case at all. Euan Doak reports on

the legal process that left the MP fighting to survive. Order! Do you

understand? Nigel Evans has been a fixttre of

the Ribble Valley political scene for many years and, for the past

year, has felt under siege. All I can say is that after the l`st 1

months that I've gone through, nothing will ever be the sale again.

He'd been supported during the case by friends from across the political

divide, and by his own local party. What's your reaction to what

happened over the last year? I think very disappointing, really,

that the case was brought. H do feel, having been there for much of

the trial, I thought the evhdence was very flimsy. Nigel expl`ined to

me right at the outset that the evidence that he'd seen, yot know,

didn't really amount to anything. The jury at Preston Crown Court took

just six hours to dismiss one charge of rape, five of sexual ass`ult one

of attempted sexual assault and two of indecent assault. Headlines then

focused on the legal process that brought him there. Here in the heart

of the Ribble Valley, Nigel Evans has been supported by both his

Conservative association and his constituents. Now attention is

turning to whether the prosdcution should have been brought in the

first place. The case against Mr Evans was based on the rape charge

and then supported by historic allegations. His lawyer argtes his

public profile influenced the decision to prosecute. I thhnk

there's been a culture recently of not wanting to be seen to sweep

things under the carpet and sometimes the brave decision is to

actually not prosecute. And I think in this case, it was obvious from a

fairly early stage, even at the police station, that the rape

complaint was weak. The CPS say the case was treated on merit, not on

personality. Across the board, we don't care who the complain`nt is,

we don't care who has been complained against. We look at the

evidence. The evidence is what drives us. The evidence is what we

respect and scrutinise and we allow only those cases where therd is a

realistic prospect to go to court. Nigel Evans says nobody wins after a

case like this. As the cracks appear in the trust for the Crown

Prosecution Service, support for Nigel Evans still appears to be

holding. To help us better understand some of

those issues, we're joined by the legal affairs analyst Joshu`

Rozenberg. Joshua, good to have you back on the programme. Did the CPS

do anything wrong? Well, thdy certainly don't think so. Alison

Saunders, who heads the CPS, said that the test, as you heard in that

report, is whether there is a realistic chance of a conviction.

She says there was. Of course there are many reasons why there lay be

enough evidence on paper to support a conviction. But the jury has to be

sure that cases proved beyond reasonable doubt. They were not so

convinced in this case and that s why they acquitted. But that doesn't

necessarily mean that the ddcision to bring the prosecution was wrong.

On the other hand, there is something to be said for thd

argument that these days thd prosecution service lean perhaps too

heavily, especially in sexu`l cases, in favour of bringing across the

kitchen. `` bringing a prosdcution. Nigel Evans clearly feels that they

were wrong. What do you think? I think they're trying to makd amends.

I think this CPS is trying to make amends for the times when they have

prosecuted high profile people who have been involved in sexual

assaults. We're in the BBC. Jimmy Savile is an obvious one and Cyril

Smith is another. But you c`n't try, almost by copying a case. You have

to try each case on its merhts but they did do it on its merits and

they came to the conclusion that it was right to prosecute. I fdel sorry

for the police officers that investigate this case. They are done

that they do and damned if they don't. But to portray Nigel Evans,

as a 57`year`old male in a senior position as a sexual predator, it

just became laughable if yot knew Nigel Evans. That was the

difference. Sometimes the allegations look obvious and you

think, "yes, that person has been..." You don't always know

people. Part of the evidencd has to be, how have they behaved up to that

point? What kind of impresshon do they make? What kind of character do

they have? If you haven't got friends at evidence and you only

have complained that may be made through anger, through jealousy

that may have been attempts of blackmail. There are whole host of

other possible emotions and motives that can bring a case to cotrt.

Simon, the role of the CPS? I think they've had a difficult job to do.

I'm the first to criticise `ny agency that is failing but hn this

instance, I think they prob`bly did what they thought to be the right

thing. It's not for the CPS to determine whether this guy hs guilty

or not but for the jury and that's why they pushed it forward to

court. That's ultimately whdre it belongs so we don't want to throw

the baby out with the bath water. Joshua, did the CPS undermined their

own case by bringing forward three so`called victims who came to court

and said, "we don't think wd are victims and we don't know why this

is being prosecuted" ? It isn't up to witnesses, even alleged victims,

to decide whether a cases proved. It's their job to give eviddnce and

if the case is made out, thd court decides. I don't see why it

undermines one charge to brhng a separate charge. These are separate

charges and it's possible that any defendant could be convicted of one

of several charges they facd and it doesn't weaken one charge shmply to

bring others. But, Joshua, these aren't battered wives who c`n't make

decisions for themselves. These are adult men who look back on this

incident and basically said they had lasted off by the following week.

Well, that was not how it looks to the CPS from the statements that

they gave to the police. Thdy may well say in court that what they

said to the police doesn't necessarily represent the ftll truth

but the CPS has to go on police statements and they judged ht on

that basis. One final point. Nigel Evans is saying today that he feels

the CPS should pick up his ?130 000 legal bill. What do you makd of

that? Well, he was elected to Parliament as a Conservativd MP and

it's the present Conservative led Coalition that abolished thd ability

of people facing criminal charges to get anything back. Even now they can

only get back what they would have got if they paid for legal `id

lawyer so it's really up to Parliament. I do think it is unfair.

I think he's right about th`t but it is Parliament that decided that

acquitted defendants wouldn't get their costs back. Thank you very

much. Well, it was an extraordinary trial.

The most serious criminal charges facing a sitting MP in living

memory. Nigel Evans had his personal life picked over in public. "Nothing

will ever be the same again," he said. I've been looking back over

his political career and trxing to assess the impact of this trial

Order! Order! Nigel Evans w`s Deputy Speaker of the House of Comlons

Witty, popular and respected. But one evening last May, his office

warned him detectives were on their way. Allegations of rape and sexual

assault filled the newspapers. But he began life modestly. Not in the

headlines but behind the cotnter, working at the family newsagent in

Swansea. His passion, though, was politics and by 1987, he was already

addressing the Conservative party conference in Blackpool. Out will go

left wing bias. Out will go pro`gay teaching. Sexuality would play a

major role in his story but first, he fought the 1991 Ribble V`lley

by`election with celebrity support. A very friendly looking chap! But it

wasn't enough to overcome the poll tax. I'm an ex`Tory voter and I

wouldn't vote for them again. The Tories are in trouble tonight in the

Ribble Valley by`election. Ht was a crushing defeat but Nigel Evans

bounced back the following xear Nigel Evans goes in. Michael Carr

had a brief tenure in Ribbld Valley. The new MP was promoted, johning the

shadow cabinet in 2001. But some of the allegations of inappropriate

behaviour stemmed from around this period, and all were lubric`ted by

drink. Very drunk, very heavily intoxicated, a high functioning

alcoholic. But his friend who runs a pub next door says that was unfair.

He does live next to a pub but that doesn't mean to say that he spent

all his time in the pub. He comes for breakfast but he doesn't have a

pint. He comes for a coffee. In no way does he have a drink problem.

But drink was a factor in 2009. A 22`year`old Westminster worker was

staying in the constituency. One night, Mr Evans made an unw`nted

pass. The man complained to the Chief Whip. What happened at that

meeting is disputed but certainly it had the potential to end thd MP s

career. The whips ordered Mr Evans to curb his drinking and urged him

to come out publicly as gay. You only came out of hiding when the

guns started to train on yot instead of what you planned. By now Nigel

Evans had left the Shadow C`binet and was serving on Commons

committees. In 2010, he was elected Commons Deputy Speaker. Orddr! Do

you understand? And later that year he publicly announced he was gay.

Any regrets at all? Yeah. I should have made this announcement a long

time ago. Some of this case revolved around his informal attitudd to

Westminster staff. Among thd many who did work experience with him was

Georgina Phillips, now at Lhverpool University. Nigel was reallx lovely.

He was really encouraging to get me involved, making sure I saw

different offices, making stre I wasn't on my own at any point. He

was really great. Back at Westminster, the Conservative MP Dr

Sarah Wollaston had heard about the 2009 incident in Pendleton `nd

pressed the man to speak to her The Westminster researcher refused to

confirm the details but aftdr he heard about the alleged rapd, he

changed his mind. Dr Wollaston took him to see the Commons Speaker John

Bercow. Mr Bercow took legal advice and refused to get involved but his

secretary sent a message to Dr Wollaston. "the Speaker intdnds the

police are informed and it's for you to encourage the men to comd

forward". Nigel Evans didn't know it but a discreet police inquiry was

going on. That inquiry led to Mr Evans's life being intimately

exposed. The Clitheroe news`gent who stood against him in 1991 s`ys his

customers have been disgustdd. We've got a lot of older customers.

There's a lot of families around here. It's quite an affluent area.

People are pretty much appalled The jury took just six hours to dismiss

all nine charges but Nigel Dvans said he knows the rape allegation

will live with him for the rest of his life.

And we're also joined now bx Christine Hamilton, the wifd of

former Tatton MP Neil Hamilton. Christine, thanks for joining us.

What did Nigel Evans mean when he said life would never be thd same

again? Exactly that. And thd idea that he can just pick himself up and

go on with his life as if nothing has happened is completely

ridiculous. This is the hugd damage that something like this dods to an

innocent man. And of course the CPS has to investigate any complaints

that they get but there has to be a certain amount of balance. They ve

said that they don't make any difference between a normal person

and a member of Parliament or a celebrity but I do not think that

there are any circumstances in which this case would have been brought if

Nigel had not been an MP and in the public eye. In your case, there were

complaints made against you which the CPS dismissed and said that they

were groundless. If that was happening today, do you think it

might have been different? Well what happened in our case in 20 1,

there was one person who sahd that my husband and I had taken part in a

break of serve. We'd never let her in our lives and one of the people

who was in the shadows who sold her story to the News of the World was

Max Clifford. She sold her `nonymity for ?50,000, which brings md to this

business of anonymity, which I feel very strongly about. Our nales

should never have been in the newspaper. We were never ch`rged and

there's no reason why our n`mes should have been out there. And you

feel that that has hung over you, do you? I wouldn't in a million years

compare what we went to, whhch was very short ` a matter of wedks `

with the sheer living hell that Nigel and people like Bill Roache

have been through. I do not compare it at all but life will nevdr be the

same again. The point is th`t we all want the same thing. We all want no

guilty person to go unpunished but we all want not a single innocent

person to have to go through what Nigel has gone through. The

difficulty is finding the b`lance. Thank you, Christine. Edwin`, did

Nigel Evans behaved inappropriately? Well, that in the end, was ` matter

of opinion and the jury took the view that whatever he did w`sn't

criminal for top absolutely. We can all be judged on whether we behaved

appropriately or inappropri`tely, especially at a Christmas p`rty

especially if we've had a drink especially if you are slightly

vulnerable person, as anyond who is gay or has perhaps come out... They

are quite shy about it and not very sure about it. It's also quhte clear

that the jury took very serhously the defence point that you lay

regret afterwards what has happened. In Christine and Neil s

case, nothing happened. In this case, something happened. You may

regret it. Mr Evans slept whth a 21`year`old student who he knew

professionally. Which the student afterwards regretted but, as the

defence put it, and I think it's total common`sense for the jury to

have taken on board, regret is not rape. Justice has been done and we

should have some relief frol that but my concern is that the CPS in

months and years gone by, h`ve not suggested prosecution when clearly

should have done. That's wh`t I mean by, we shouldn't throw the baby out

with the bath water. Public figures in years gone by have got away with

committing abuse when they shouldn't have done because the CPS wouldn't

encourage prosecution. I don't want us to take a step backwards so that

the CPS are reluctant to take cases forward. You mentioned Jimmx

Savile, quite rightly, and Cyril Smith. You mention in your lemoirs

Peter Morrison, the former LP for Chester and suggest he was `

paedophile. Never prosecuted. A Conservative MP, very close to

Margaret Thatcher, never prosecuted. How did he get away with th`t?

You've got to remember that the law was different at the age of consent

was 21, so that if somebody was sleeping with somebody who was 8,

which would now be Beagle, ht would have been a crime at the tile. So

how do people get away with it? Sometimes because the peopld who are

their victims don't see thelselves as victims and, again, are content

to continue. Not everything results in a complaint or stop it doesn t,

of course stop Christine Halilton, thank you very for your timd.

Let's get some reaction frol the constituency now. Our reporter

Stuart Pollitt is in the Ribble Valley. Stuart, have you bedn able

to gauge reaction among Mr Dvans's voters?

It is pretty quiet this aftdrnoon. No sign of Nigel Evans himsdlf. But

he's been the MP here since 199 and said this morning that he does want

to carry on as MP but as he said on the steps Preston Crown Court,

nothing will ever be the sale again after this trial. So how much

support does he retain amongst the voters? This is a selection of what

some of them think. He's a great local MP. He works really h`rd for

the people of the Ribble Valley and I'd like to see him continud.

Obviously, it does throw up a few concerns as to his character. But at

the end of the day, the justice system in this country has found him

not guilty so the guy is innocent. He handed in his resignation as the

Speaker, didn't he? I said then that he should have resigned. I don't

think is entirely blameless from some of the behaviour that H've

read, but, then again, none of us are white as snow, are we? Lixed

opinions there and I'm joindd by the Conservative leader on Lanc`shire

county council. How much support does Nigel Evans have amongst the

constituency party? From my point of view, lots. The support has never

waned at all. Anybody who knows Nigel knows absolutely that these

charges were a fabrication `nd, obviously, we were concerned but it

really came as no surprise to us that they were all thrown ott. He

was found innocent of the charges but what about some of the behaviour

that came out in this trial? I'm thinking about heavy drinking at

Westminster, for example. Whll that be damaging amongst voters? I was in

the court on most days and heard much of that evidence and to me it

wasn't so much exaggeration, it wasn't true. The chief whip felt the

need to get involved at one point. I've no Nigel Evans for over 20

years and been in his company many, many times, both here in thd

village, elsewhere in the constituency and in the House of

Commons. I can honestly tell you I've never seen him drunk so it s an

exaggeration and the things that were being said are not the Nigel

Evans I know. Thank you verx much for joining us. It remains to be

seen whether Nigel Evans dods get the backing of his constitudncy

party and then win the seat at the election.

Thank you for that. Simon, what lessons do we draw from all this? I

think the CPS need to stay firm but in terms of Westminster, perhaps

there is a need for more pastoral care around staff and MPs. Ddwina,

can Nigel Evans pick up where he left off? Oh, yes. He came hnto

court with an excellent repttation amongst his constituents and his

party, his local people. We're very solid up north. We say it as we find

it and he is a very good MP. I've no doubt his colleagues in the Commons

will agree. Thank you both very much indeed. We know that Nigel Dvans

wishes to continue as the MP for the Ribble Valley.

risk. We have run out of time. - particular candidates. Back to you,

Andrew. The sun's out, Ed Balls has run the

London Marathon, and MPs leave Westminster for their Easter break.

Let's discuss what's coming up in the Week Ahead.

We will get more of what we have just seen. Let's look back on the

debate. What did we learn from the argument is? That it is going to

bore and irritate whole lot of people, this election campaign. Four

parties shouting at each other about things that most people do not know

much about. They know very little about how the European Parliament

works, what an MEP is supposed to do. A lot of heat and not a lot of

light. I've updated well, all of them, but the net effect is not

going to encourage people to go out and vote and not many do. One thing

that struck me was that on Europe, the Labour and Lib Dem positions are

not that far apart. They are pretty much the same. And yet the knocks

lots of each other. I suppose they feel that they had to do that

because that is the format. I'd agree with Polly. Their word UKIP

and the Tories to attack two we try to make it exciting, and we know the

issues are important. But people out there have not heard of these

individuals. It is not very exciting. That is worrying because

these are huge national questions for us. We need to find a way of

making it more fun. People may not know these MEPs, they may not know

the detail of the debate, but it is an issue on which people have strong

opinions. It is a visceral thing for many people. Especially on the

immigration issue. The debate took off and became more vociferous at

that point. To a large extent, you wonder whether not only this

European election but the eventual referendum will be a referendum on

the issue of immigration and free movement. If we did not learn much

from the argument, the thing we did learn is that the structure of these

televised debate influences the outcome. One of the reasons that

Nigel Farage did well in the debate is that in a two-man debate, each

man has as good a chance as the other. If it is four people, one man

can be ganged up on. Patrick O'Flynn did well for a man who is not an

elected politician yet. At times, 40 came under attack and did not hold

the line as well as you would expect. Does that create a perverse

incentive for the main parties to agree to a four way debate before

the general election? I do not think the David Cameron has nearly as much

to worry about from a televised debate in the run-up to the

elections than his spin doctors believe. When you put him up against

Ed Miliband, and we have not actually seen Ed Miliband in that

format, I think he will come off all right. This is an election which the

polls would have us believe that the battle for first place is between

UKIP and labour. It certainly is. Obviously, it is neck and neck and

we will not know until we are closer. And it matters a lot to both

of them. If Mr Miliband does not come first, that is not good news

for the main opposition at this stage. Except to some extent all of

the people will put it to one side and say that this is a bizarre

election. A plague on both your houses, let's vote UKIP. It is not

clear how much that translates into the next election. It is not too

disastrous for Labour. It would be better if they came first. If Mr

Miliband comes first, not a problem, but it becomes second and UKIP soars

away, what are the consequences I think there is a widespread

expectation already at Westminster that UKIP is very likely to come

first. If Ed Miliband fails to come first, there will not be a great

deal of shock in the West Mr village. Else think what is

remarkable about Ed Miliband is that despite consistently poor personal

leadership approval ratings, the overall Labour poll is consistently

very high. We have seen that budget blip, it seems to have taken us back

to where we were before. Leadership is not everything. Mrs Thatcher was

miles behind James Callaghan but in the end, it was the party politics

that mattered more. If Mr Cameron comes third and the Tories come

third, maybe a poor third, is it headless chicken time on the Tory

backbenchers? It has often been said that the Tory Party has two modes,

complacency and panic. You will see them shift into panic mode. By June,

I think. Many of the stories in the sun will be about David Cameron s

personal leadership and his grip on the party. There will be pressure on

conference by the time that comes around. It is a natural consequence

of being the incumbent party. The Lib Dems are 7% in two of the polls

today. It was widely thought that in the first and second debates, Nigel

Farage won both. In retrospect, was the challenge strategy a disaster

for Mr Clegg? I do not think it was because he had nothing to lose. But

he is lower in the polls than when he started. He has not lost a great

deal. The polls were quite often that low. I think it was a good

thing to do. It raised his profile. It made him the leading party in.

That may be a difficult place to be. That is how you end up with 7%

in the polls. The reason he is fighting with Labour is that he

knows very well that all he has to do is to get his votes back that

have gone to Labour and labour have to fight hard to make sure that they

do not go back. Every party looks to where it is going to get it

support. If it is a wipe-out for the Lib Dems, and they lose all their

MEPs, not saying that is going to happen but you could not rule it out

for, are we back in Nick Clegg leadership crisis territory? One of

the astonishing things about this Parliament is the relative absence

of leadership speculation about Nick Clegg will stop at the first couple

of years, his position seems tricky, but maybe that is because

Chris Hughton is gone and he was the only plausible candidate. This cable

is not getting any younger, to put it delicately. That was not delegate

at all! And we have reached a desperate stage where Danny

Alexander is talked about as a candidate. That was not delegate

either! Maybe he is holding onto power the lack of alternatives. If

they ended up with no MEPs at all, and a less than double digits

score... With Danny Alexander, it is clear that Scotland, one way or

another, will be moving further away. You could not have the leader

of a national party be a Scot. But he does not have the following in

the party. I'm glad you're liberal attitudes to immigration extends to

me. I would not have been here for 43 years. There will be leadership

talk after that holes. It has been bubbling in the background, but you

have to talk to the grass roots activists. -- after the polls. The

grass roots activists are despairing. If things are bad, they

lose their network of activists who they need to fight the next

election. I think you mean, not that you could have a Scot, but that it

would be more difficult to have a Scot from a Scottish constituency.

Absolutely. I think a Scottish constituency, so many things will be

different. Or to hold the great offices of state. Let's come onto

the Crown Prosecution Service is. It is an English institution. Where

does the CPS and after losing yet another high-profile case come this

time Nigel Evans? They had nine counts against him and they did not

win on one. It is obviously very embarrassing. They will have a bit

of explain to do but I guess the threshold for bringing these cases

is high. There has to be considered at least a 50-50 chance of actually

winning the case. We do not know what went on behind the scenes when

they weighed up whether to bring the case. Nigel Evans makes an

interesting point about whether it is legitimate to bundle together a

number of stand-alone relatively weak accusations, and when you put

them together to militantly, the CPS uses that to make a case. Is that a

legitimate thing to do? He was a high-profile figure, not just

because he was a Tory MP. He was the deputy speaker of the House. And yet

the CPS are certainly the police, to begin with they did not have that

many people to testify against him. And then they trawled for more. You

wonder if they would have done that if it was not for the fact that he

was a public figure. The trouble is, they are dammed if they do and

dammed if they do not. Particularly with politicians and the reputation

they have these days, if there is any suggestion that they let

somebody off because they are a high-profile politician, and they

are saying that about Cyril Smith, that is the accusation. A strange

story. Most unlikely and very bizarre. But that is the accusation.

If there is any with of that, I can see why the CPS says, we better let

the courts try this one. Also, they are in trouble overrated cases

because their success rate on bringing people to court for rape is

so thin. When it looked as if his accusers were not really accusing

him, it looks quite weak. You cannot help but feeling that they are

falling over backwards now in high-profile cases because of their

abject and total failure over Jimmy Savile. I think this is exactly the

kind of case that happens when you are trying to make a point or redeem

a reputation or change a culture. All of these big things. As opposed

to what criminal justice is supposed to be about, which is specific

crimes and specific evidence matching those crimes. The CPS has

no copper a fleet joined in this list of public and situations that

has taken a fall over the past five or six years. We have had

Parliament, the newspapers, the police will stop I think this is as

bad a humiliation as any of those because it is Innocent people

suffering. You are the most recent, being a lobby correspondent in

Westminster, and we now see on Channel 4 News that basically,

Westminster is twinned with Sodom and Gomorrah. Yes. I know. Is this

true? It is all rather the red. I do not move in those circles. And you

were in the lobby at one stage? Not that long ago. Is it right. Is it

right to be twinned with Sodom and Gomorrah? I'll ask him for his

opinion. Being technically a member of the lobby, I can observe some of

this stuff. And what surprises me is that journalists, when the complain

about Sodom and Gomorrah, write themselves out of it. It is as if it

is just MPs. We are unalloyed and unvarnished. Actually, the fact is

it has always been a bit like Sodom and tomorrow. Of course it has.

Think about how we have had wave after wave of stories and scandals.

But less of it recently. It was I think that attitudes have slightly

changed. I'll also think that if you get 650 people in any organisation

and you put that much scrutiny on them, you will find an awful lot

going on in most people's officers of a scurrilous nature. Even in the

BBC In 2013, the public voted for

a portrait of At times he's interesting,

at times he's very funny,