:00:00. > :00:20.given birth to a baby boy. Now, the week -- the Week in
:00:21. > :00:24.Parliament. Hello, welcome to The Week In Parliament. How much are our
:00:25. > :00:28.banks worth? That is the question that dominated PMQs. Surely he can
:00:29. > :00:31.say that for people earning ?1 million, a bonus of ?1 million
:00:32. > :00:35.should be quite enough? Where is the apology for the mess they made of
:00:36. > :00:38.RBS and the first place? As the European elections approach and
:00:39. > :00:41.after another week of toing and froing about our role in Europe, two
:00:42. > :00:44.think tanks give us their view on how the political debate is
:00:45. > :00:51.unfolding. And in the House of Lords chat room, the first lady leads a
:00:52. > :00:55.debate on the worldwide web. It is a small step for mankind, but a little
:00:56. > :00:59.leap for the Lords to have a whole 2.5 hours discussing the Web. First,
:01:00. > :01:03.Labour Leader Ed Miliband has challenged the government to block
:01:04. > :01:06.any attempt by RBS to pay bonuses of up to double a banker's salary. From
:01:07. > :01:09.next year, under EU rules, banks will only be able to pay bonuses
:01:10. > :01:14.that big if shareholders approve. In the case of RBS, the government is
:01:15. > :01:16.by far the largest shareholder. The Treasury believes that EU rules
:01:17. > :01:19.could be counter-productive because banks would simply pay bigger
:01:20. > :01:24.salaries instead, there is no way to claw that money back if things go
:01:25. > :01:33.wrong at the bank. Ed Miliband thought the PM should nip in the bud
:01:34. > :01:36.any talk of big pay-outs. RBS are talking to part of the government
:01:37. > :01:40.about the proposal to pay over 100% bonuses. He is the PM, the taxpayer
:01:41. > :01:47.will foot the bill, will he put a stop to it right now by telling RBS
:01:48. > :01:51.to drop this idea? I will tell him exactly what we are saying to RBS.
:01:52. > :01:55.It is this. If there are any proposals to increase the overall
:01:56. > :01:58.pay, that is, pay and bonus bill at RBS, at the investment bank, any
:01:59. > :02:07.proposals like that, we will veto it. What a pity the past government
:02:08. > :02:21.never took an approach like that! Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker. However long it
:02:22. > :02:29.takes. The questions will be heard. And the answers. Mr Ed Miliband. Mr
:02:30. > :02:31.Speaker, I am not asking about increases in pay and bonuses, I'm a
:02:32. > :02:35.very simple question about the proposal that is expected to come
:02:36. > :02:46.forward from RBS, which is to pay more than 100% bonuses on pay. Now,
:02:47. > :02:49.we know, when RBS is making a loss, when they themselves have been
:02:50. > :02:52.saying they have been failing small businesses, these kind of bonuses
:02:53. > :02:59.lead to risky, one-way bets, we know it should not be allowed to happen.
:03:00. > :03:02.When ordinary families are facing a cost of living crisis, surely can't
:03:03. > :03:09.say that for people earning ?1 million, a bonus of ?1 million
:03:10. > :03:12.should be quite enough? If he's not asking about the overall pay and
:03:13. > :03:17.bonuses at RBS, why on earth isn't he? That is what he should be asking
:03:18. > :03:20.about. What I have said very clearly a is that the enumeration, the total
:03:21. > :03:26.pay bill at that investment bank, must come down. I have to say, to
:03:27. > :03:29.get a lecture from the right honourable gentleman, when we had
:03:30. > :03:32.from them the biggest bust anywhere in the world at RBS, we had 125%
:03:33. > :03:36.mortgages at Northern Rock, we had all of the embarrassment about Fred
:03:37. > :03:50.Goodwin, he comes here every week to complain about a problem created by
:03:51. > :03:54.the Labour Party. Last week it was betting, this week it is banking. He
:03:55. > :04:00.rises up with all of the moral authority of Reverend Flowers. Where
:04:01. > :04:09.is the apology for the mess they made of RBS in the first place?
:04:10. > :04:14.David Cameron. Now, there is no escaping the subject of our
:04:15. > :04:17.relationship with Europe. It was back on the agenda in the week when
:04:18. > :04:20.95 conservative MPs signed a letter demanding that Parliament should
:04:21. > :04:22.have the power to veto EU law unilaterally, a proposal the Foreign
:04:23. > :04:25.Secretary William Hague dubbed unrealistic. Meanwhile, the
:04:26. > :04:29.Chancellor George Osborne gave a speech warning that the UK could be
:04:30. > :04:33.forced to quit the European Union if the organisation does not change.
:04:34. > :04:36.All this, on the back of the row about them free movement of workers
:04:37. > :04:45.across Europe and arrivals of migrants into the UK from Romania
:04:46. > :04:48.and Bulgaria. The biggest economic risk facing Europe does not come
:04:49. > :04:52.from those who want reform and renegotiation. It comes from a
:04:53. > :04:56.failure to reform and renegotiate. It is the status quo which condemns
:04:57. > :05:08.the people of Europe to an ongoing economic crisis and continuing
:05:09. > :05:12.decline. A few hours later, Mr Osborne got a reply on the subject
:05:13. > :05:15.of free movement in the EU. The free movement is one of those basic right
:05:16. > :05:19.citizens enjoy. And if you look at our Europe barometer, it is also the
:05:20. > :05:23.right that they cherish most. I would like to make it very clear
:05:24. > :05:30.that it is a right that is not up for negotiation. So, not exactly a
:05:31. > :05:36.meeting of minds. Well, let's try and find a little light among the
:05:37. > :05:39.heat. With me is a representative from the think tank Open Europe and
:05:40. > :05:46.Peter Wilding, director of the cross-party campaign group British
:05:47. > :05:49.Influence. Pavel, do you think that Britain is winning any allies inside
:05:50. > :05:54.the EU on this issue of free movement? The way I would put it,
:05:55. > :05:58.the UK definitely has potential allies on this issue, depending how
:05:59. > :06:01.it frames the argument. I don't think there is any support among the
:06:02. > :06:04.governments of Europe to fundamentally rewrite the rules on
:06:05. > :06:07.free movement itself, by which I mean the right of EU citizens to
:06:08. > :06:16.travel to and work in any other member states. But there could be
:06:17. > :06:18.supporter and clarifying and reforming the rules around things
:06:19. > :06:26.like access to benefits and those kind of issues. Peter, do you think
:06:27. > :06:29.that Britain could have a bit of support or sympathy on this idea of
:06:30. > :06:33.free movement, but what countries in the EU really don't like is the way
:06:34. > :06:37.that the argument is being couched? Absolutely. What he said there, the
:06:38. > :06:42.difference between the statements, and the fact that we are not getting
:06:43. > :06:45.our statements through. We are not getting our message through because
:06:46. > :06:48.our code is, essentially, very cleverly created to alienate people
:06:49. > :06:54.rather than attract them to our concept. I can illustrate that.
:06:55. > :06:58.There is a difference between freedom to move and freedom to
:06:59. > :07:03.claim. The government is not doing anything to dispute freedom of
:07:04. > :07:06.movement. Why should they? There are 2.5 million Britons living in
:07:07. > :07:16.Europe. They are trying to get allies to benefit tourism. And they
:07:17. > :07:19.have allies. The problem is, the moment Britain speaks in the
:07:20. > :07:24.language it speaks, it loses those friends. That is a problem of
:07:25. > :07:31.foreign policy and I think it is the most important thing generated from
:07:32. > :07:34.those clips. Labour has accepted there needs to be some change on
:07:35. > :07:37.this as well, where does that leave us? I think it leaves us in a
:07:38. > :07:40.situation where there is generally cross-party agreement in the UK
:07:41. > :07:42.between the Tories, Labour and the Liberal Democrats. Obviously there
:07:43. > :07:46.are differences in tone and emphasis. I think this is something
:07:47. > :07:51.in particular that the EU Commission would do well to heed. I think this
:07:52. > :08:04.also has not gone when observed in other member states. Let's turn our
:08:05. > :08:06.attention to a few wider points. Neither David Cameron nor George
:08:07. > :08:12.Osborne are talking about us leaving the EU in this instance. Is it
:08:13. > :08:15.because all Prime Ministers and ministers, after a while, realise
:08:16. > :08:19.they have to take a rather pragmatic approach to Europe and it is the
:08:20. > :08:22.only way they can deal with that? Britain is one of the top three
:08:23. > :08:25.countries in Europe. Britain therefore has a capacity to lead the
:08:26. > :08:29.agenda in Europe if it gets the allies to do so. Britain has always
:08:30. > :08:32.had a clear idea of what it wants. It wants a free market, a single
:08:33. > :08:35.market, it wants democratic reform and it wants Europe to step up to
:08:36. > :08:38.the plate, certainly against global competition, certainly in favour of
:08:39. > :08:41.European security. The problem we have is that we do not make those
:08:42. > :08:46.messages clear, we do not attract allies for them in a tone that will
:08:47. > :08:49.keep them as allies. British Prime Ministers find themselves in a
:08:50. > :08:51.battle between what is not only pragmatic, but right, against their
:08:52. > :08:59.internal audience, part of the Conservative Party and Fleet Street.
:09:00. > :09:04.Unfortunately, that is a terrible dilemma for any PM to be in. They
:09:05. > :09:36.truly do will be able to bridge that gap. A true leader will be able to
:09:37. > :09:39.do that. Do you think we discourage you have to accept the European
:09:40. > :09:42.Union works at two speeds, if not more, because all of these countries
:09:43. > :09:45.need different things? I wouldn't put it in terms of speed. That
:09:46. > :09:48.assumes everybody is going in the same direction, albeit at different
:09:49. > :09:51.speeds. What I would say is we need a more flexible Europe, where
:09:52. > :09:54.different countries can get together to do different things. I think the
:09:55. > :09:57.single currency is a good example of that. There are a team members now.
:09:58. > :10:01.There are other member states, ten are not, some will join, I think,
:10:02. > :10:04.but not in the immediate future. Others, like the UK, will most
:10:05. > :10:08.likely never join. I think in that sense we need to talk about what the
:10:09. > :10:11.most important thing in Europe is, which we would say is the single
:10:12. > :10:14.market. If you have that as the core of Europe, then member states are
:10:15. > :10:17.free to cooperate on other issues as and when they see fit, be it
:10:18. > :10:20.environmental protection, crime and justice, whatever. But that can be
:10:21. > :10:32.more, as and when member states agree, when they want to. This is
:10:33. > :10:35.the economic argument, and I agree with it. He mentioned 18 states that
:10:36. > :10:38.are now in the Euro. These Euro members wish to control the European
:10:39. > :10:41.Union against our interests. But I would also say there are 18 member
:10:42. > :10:45.states who signed a letter written by the PM, asking for the completion
:10:46. > :10:48.of the single market and the liberalisation of sectors which are
:10:49. > :10:54.going to create jobs for our kids and grandkids. So, there is, as he
:10:55. > :10:59.said, a series of streams in European opinion. The key problem,
:11:00. > :11:02.and I think this is a major mistake from politicians, Fleet Street and
:11:03. > :11:07.downwards, is that we think Europe is all about economics. It is about
:11:08. > :11:10.economics and politics. You can achieve these things, but not
:11:11. > :11:13.without political leadership. We talk about this being an economic
:11:14. > :11:16.union, we have to complete the single market, but, as politicians,
:11:17. > :11:23.they have to create reform with allies to achieve that objective. In
:11:24. > :11:31.the second part, we seem not to be able to do that. Is that because
:11:32. > :11:34.there are a lot of politicians in this country, for example, who very
:11:35. > :11:38.much see the EU about being about economics and nothing else? They are
:11:39. > :11:41.quite happy with a large free trade area, but that is what they want?
:11:42. > :11:45.NATO is about defence, but also about politics. You cannot divorce
:11:46. > :11:48.the two. The problem is, as you quite rightly say, there is a
:11:49. > :11:51.tendency, a considerable number of politicians, say it is all about
:11:52. > :11:55.economics. It is, but the fact of the matter is that if you are going
:11:56. > :11:59.to try to create alliances to deliver the economic achievements
:12:00. > :12:03.you want, that is politics. The problem is, if you are shaking hands
:12:04. > :12:06.with the people that could be your allies and then telling them, in no
:12:07. > :12:09.uncertain terms, that you simply disagree with them and, frankly, you
:12:10. > :12:12.don't want their immigrants here and you don't want to deal with their
:12:13. > :12:25.government, in particular ways, that is not going to achieve the
:12:26. > :12:29.objective. What to you think the letter we saw from the 95 MPs has
:12:30. > :12:32.done to this debate? I think it has illustrated that there are a lot of
:12:33. > :12:36.people in the Conservative Party and in the country more generally, who
:12:37. > :12:39.are hungry and impatient for reform. I think the MPs who signed that
:12:40. > :12:42.letter have come from other ideal backgrounds within the Party, but
:12:43. > :12:45.the key issue is that they want reform to be delivered and they want
:12:46. > :12:48.the British Parliament to be able to have a bigger influence on EU
:12:49. > :12:57.policy, which is something that we hope everyone would agree with. It
:12:58. > :13:00.is not possible to have a single Parliament to have a veto, but
:13:01. > :13:03.certainly we think there should be stronger mechanisms for national
:13:04. > :13:08.parliaments to be able to block and review legislation. We think that is
:13:09. > :13:19.the strongest way of strengthening the democratic legitimacy of the EU.
:13:20. > :13:24.Peter, briefly, is that a fair assessment? Superficially it seems
:13:25. > :13:27.to be that way, and I would agree that national parliaments must
:13:28. > :13:28.increase their capacity to scrutinise EU legislation better,
:13:29. > :13:32.and indeed using existing opportunities in the EU Treaty, the
:13:33. > :13:46.Green card than yellow card, to stop legislation. -- green card and
:13:47. > :13:50.yellow card. But it would be a kind person who looks at the 95 - in
:13:51. > :13:53.fact, less, because some MPs found themselves on the letter without
:13:54. > :14:00.their consent - this is all about positioning in the Conservative
:14:01. > :14:02.Party after the European elections. After the election is the
:14:03. > :14:06.Conservative Party could enter a very difficult period akin to 96-97
:14:07. > :14:09.under John Major, were a good part of the Party wants to carry on
:14:10. > :14:21.reforming but a significant minority wants to see the Party joined with
:14:22. > :14:29.UKIP as the better off out Party. Thank you very much for coming in to
:14:30. > :14:32.see us. Back now to Westminster. At PMQ's, David Cameron was challenged
:14:33. > :14:35.over documents dating back to 1984 suggesting there might have been
:14:36. > :14:40.British involvement in the Sikh Golden Temple at Amritsar. Hundreds
:14:41. > :14:47.died as Indian troops tried to put down a rebellion. A Labour MP wanted
:14:48. > :14:52.a year from conservatives who were in government at the time.
:14:53. > :14:55.Instead of ordering the Siddle service to investigate, why does the
:14:56. > :14:57.Prime Minister not just ask Lord Geoffrey Howe and Lord Brittan
:14:58. > :15:00.whether they agreed with Margaret Thatcher and whether it had anything
:15:01. > :15:08.to do with the Westland Helicopters deal at the time? I fear the
:15:09. > :15:14.honourable gentleman may have gone one conspiracy theory too far on
:15:15. > :15:17.this one. It is important to get to the bottom of what happened and that
:15:18. > :15:22.is why I have asked the Cabinet Secretary to lead a review. He will
:15:23. > :15:28.establish the facts, the process is under way. I wanted to be fast, and
:15:29. > :15:33.the findings will be made public. It is no secret we are all getting
:15:34. > :15:37.fatter, but who is to blame? There were calls in the week for more to
:15:38. > :15:40.be done to cut the amount of sugar we eat, but one Tory peer said he
:15:41. > :15:43.knew who was really responsible. Does the government not accept that
:15:44. > :15:46.people ought to know that if they stuff themselves silly with high
:15:47. > :15:55.calorie, rubbish foods, they will get fat? It is their responsibility
:15:56. > :15:58.and all of the forums and other nonsense are merely trying to force
:15:59. > :16:10.people from the consequences of their own stupid actions. Familiar
:16:11. > :16:15.farmland birds are disappearing from the rural landscape according to
:16:16. > :16:17.conservation bodies. Latest estimates say numbers of such
:16:18. > :16:20.species as scarred that Michael Starling 's, turtledoves and
:16:21. > :16:21.lapwings have fallen by 50% from the 1970s.
:16:22. > :16:28.The main reason is intensification of farming methods. Changing crop
:16:29. > :16:31.patterns have led to a lot of winter stubble. The main feeding habitats
:16:32. > :16:43.of many birds such as buntings have therefore disappeared. Greater use
:16:44. > :16:46.of pesticides and herbicides have removed critical food resources. And
:16:47. > :16:48.of course the loss of hedges and other seminatural habitats has
:16:49. > :16:50.combined with intensive grassland management to take away vital
:16:51. > :16:54.habitats. Peers who break the rules of the
:16:55. > :16:56.House faces new sanctions. The chairman of the Committee's Lord
:16:57. > :17:00.Sewel said there were only currently two available punishments. Peers can
:17:01. > :17:05.be asked to apologise or they can be suspended. The Lord's do not have
:17:06. > :17:08.the power to expel errant members and Lord Sewel pointed out those
:17:09. > :17:12.suspended at the start of the House would be a way for far longer than
:17:13. > :17:16.those suspended at the end of the session.
:17:17. > :17:22.The remedy proposed is the introduction of two new sanctions.
:17:23. > :17:25.The first would prevent peers from claiming any financial support by
:17:26. > :17:32.way of expenses or allowances from the House. The second sanction would
:17:33. > :17:42.prevent peers using the facilities of the House. Neither of these
:17:43. > :17:45.sanctions would prevent the peer from taking part in the proceedings
:17:46. > :17:48.of the House in the chamber or its Committee. These sanctions could be
:17:49. > :18:01.used in addition to suspension from the House or as an alternative to
:18:02. > :18:04.suspension. Unlike suspension, the sanctions could be applied for a
:18:05. > :18:08.period extending beyond the end of a Parliament. They would be applied
:18:09. > :18:14.for a fixed period, and therefore are not equivalent to expulsion.
:18:15. > :18:18.They would not be retrospective. The question is that this motion should
:18:19. > :18:25.be agreed to. As many as a rather that opinion will see content. The
:18:26. > :18:30.contents have it. This year marks the 25th anniversary
:18:31. > :18:33.of the world wide web. It was marked by a debate in the House of Lords
:18:34. > :18:36.led by the government's former digital champion.
:18:37. > :18:40.I now find the web usage numbers not even surprisingly huge any more. 2.4
:18:41. > :18:45.billion people worldwide use the web. It took 38 years for the
:18:46. > :18:56.television to reach 50 million users. It took 14 years for the
:18:57. > :19:03.radio. It took four years for the web. It took ten months for Facebook
:19:04. > :19:06.to reach 50 million users. We will need to fill one million technology
:19:07. > :19:12.sector jobs by Twenty20, which is looking nearly impossible from the
:19:13. > :19:14.current workforce. And, more depressingly, the number of women in
:19:15. > :19:19.the UK technological sector is falling as an overall percentage. If
:19:20. > :19:29.current trends are not reversed only 1% of the sector will be female by
:19:30. > :19:31.2014. We have allowed a situation to develop where it is legal for
:19:32. > :19:35.multinational, multibillion-dollar industry to holy, in perpetuity on
:19:36. > :19:44.the intimate and personal details of children. -- to completely. We know
:19:45. > :19:52.that this space is moving so fast we do not really know what may happen
:19:53. > :19:56.to it in the future. A number of years ago I held the second book to
:19:57. > :19:59.be printed in Scotland in my hands in the National library of Scotland,
:20:00. > :20:02.printed in 1509, and today I had it in my pocket, along with the Magna
:20:03. > :20:05.Carta and the US declaration of Independence, and Anne Frank's
:20:06. > :20:15.diaries, and a fair few of the movies the noble lord Lord Puttnam
:20:16. > :20:17.produced. The noble lady mentioned Thailand, I was there just after
:20:18. > :20:29.Christmas. -- Taiwan. We have also heard
:20:30. > :20:33.Sherlock Holmes mentioned today. You may think this is an incongruous
:20:34. > :20:36.link, but when I was in Taiwan using the free Wi-Fi system for anyone,
:20:37. > :20:39.local resident or tourist, I was reading the South China news were
:20:40. > :20:41.2.8 million people the previous day had watched the new addition of
:20:42. > :20:48.Sherlock on their version of YouTube.
:20:49. > :20:51.Ahead of that debate, Emma Murray spoke to Martha Lane Fox and asked
:20:52. > :20:55.how significant it was that peers were to spend the afternoon talking
:20:56. > :20:59.about the web. It is a small step for mankind but a
:21:00. > :21:03.leap for the Lord's to have a hold two and a half hours discussing
:21:04. > :21:07.technology. I am interested in trying to keep the agenda around
:21:08. > :21:13.tech a bit more dominant in Lord's discussions. There will be very
:21:14. > :21:15.interesting people that run the BBC through to people that run the
:21:16. > :21:24.health service through to people that run the Siddle service talking.
:21:25. > :21:28.You have been on hand as a technology guru for peers in the
:21:29. > :21:30.House of Lord, would they be lost without you?
:21:31. > :21:35.Really not come and I think that is an overestimation of my skills. We
:21:36. > :21:38.set up a digital champion 's network and I have had some interesting
:21:39. > :21:41.questions, as different as how can I open the attachment on my blackberry
:21:42. > :21:46.through to what is a that -- exactly is an iPad? There is a huge spectrum
:21:47. > :21:51.of talent in the Lords, some will never want to touch screen, others
:21:52. > :21:54.are many more competent than me. There are many people in the country
:21:55. > :21:58.of a certain age who hide from technology, is this a mistake?
:21:59. > :22:02.I have met so many people who are 80, 90, very old or in their middle
:22:03. > :22:05.to older age group that said the internet has transformed what they
:22:06. > :22:13.can do, reduce loneliness, so I reject this notion you are ever to
:22:14. > :22:17.hold two try something. Martha Lane Fox on the anniversary
:22:18. > :22:18.of the world wide web in a week dominated by our relations with our
:22:19. > :22:34.neighbours in Europe. After a night where we have seen
:22:35. > :22:38.some heavy showers we have the rain pushing its way northwards, that
:22:39. > :22:41.stays with us throughout the day on Saturday but by the time we get to
:22:42. > :22:46.Sunday it should have started to clear away so although there may be
:22:47. > :22:48.one of two showers around overall it looks like the