17/01/2014 The Week in Parliament

given birth to a baby boy. Now, the week -- the Week in

Parliament. Hello, welcome to The Week In Parliament. How much are our

banks worth? That is the question that dominated PMQs. Surely he can

say that for people earning ?1 million, a bonus of ?1 million

should be quite enough? Where is the apology for the mess they made of

RBS and the first place? As the European elections approach and

after another week of toing and froing about our role in Europe, two

think tanks give us their view on how the political debate is

unfolding. And in the House of Lords chat room, the first lady leads a

debate on the worldwide web. It is a small step for mankind, but a little

leap for the Lords to have a whole 2.5 hours discussing the Web. First,

Labour Leader Ed Miliband has challenged the government to block

any attempt by RBS to pay bonuses of up to double a banker's salary. From

next year, under EU rules, banks will only be able to pay bonuses

that big if shareholders approve. In the case of RBS, the government is

by far the largest shareholder. The Treasury believes that EU rules

could be counter-productive because banks would simply pay bigger

salaries instead, there is no way to claw that money back if things go

wrong at the bank. Ed Miliband thought the PM should nip in the bud

any talk of big pay-outs. RBS are talking to part of the government

about the proposal to pay over 100% bonuses. He is the PM, the taxpayer

will foot the bill, will he put a stop to it right now by telling RBS

to drop this idea? I will tell him exactly what we are saying to RBS.

It is this. If there are any proposals to increase the overall

pay, that is, pay and bonus bill at RBS, at the investment bank, any

proposals like that, we will veto it. What a pity the past government

never took an approach like that! Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker. However long it

takes. The questions will be heard. And the answers. Mr Ed Miliband. Mr

Speaker, I am not asking about increases in pay and bonuses, I'm a

very simple question about the proposal that is expected to come

forward from RBS, which is to pay more than 100% bonuses on pay. Now,

we know, when RBS is making a loss, when they themselves have been

saying they have been failing small businesses, these kind of bonuses

lead to risky, one-way bets, we know it should not be allowed to happen.

When ordinary families are facing a cost of living crisis, surely can't

say that for people earning ?1 million, a bonus of ?1 million

should be quite enough? If he's not asking about the overall pay and

bonuses at RBS, why on earth isn't he? That is what he should be asking

about. What I have said very clearly a is that the enumeration, the total

pay bill at that investment bank, must come down. I have to say, to

get a lecture from the right honourable gentleman, when we had

from them the biggest bust anywhere in the world at RBS, we had 125%

mortgages at Northern Rock, we had all of the embarrassment about Fred

Goodwin, he comes here every week to complain about a problem created by

the Labour Party. Last week it was betting, this week it is banking. He

rises up with all of the moral authority of Reverend Flowers. Where

is the apology for the mess they made of RBS in the first place?

David Cameron. Now, there is no escaping the subject of our

relationship with Europe. It was back on the agenda in the week when

95 conservative MPs signed a letter demanding that Parliament should

have the power to veto EU law unilaterally, a proposal the Foreign

Secretary William Hague dubbed unrealistic. Meanwhile, the

Chancellor George Osborne gave a speech warning that the UK could be

forced to quit the European Union if the organisation does not change.

All this, on the back of the row about them free movement of workers

across Europe and arrivals of migrants into the UK from Romania

and Bulgaria. The biggest economic risk facing Europe does not come

from those who want reform and renegotiation. It comes from a

failure to reform and renegotiate. It is the status quo which condemns

the people of Europe to an ongoing economic crisis and continuing

decline. A few hours later, Mr Osborne got a reply on the subject

of free movement in the EU. The free movement is one of those basic right

citizens enjoy. And if you look at our Europe barometer, it is also the

right that they cherish most. I would like to make it very clear

that it is a right that is not up for negotiation. So, not exactly a

meeting of minds. Well, let's try and find a little light among the

heat. With me is a representative from the think tank Open Europe and

Peter Wilding, director of the cross-party campaign group British

Influence. Pavel, do you think that Britain is winning any allies inside

the EU on this issue of free movement? The way I would put it,

the UK definitely has potential allies on this issue, depending how

it frames the argument. I don't think there is any support among the

governments of Europe to fundamentally rewrite the rules on

free movement itself, by which I mean the right of EU citizens to

travel to and work in any other member states. But there could be

supporter and clarifying and reforming the rules around things

like access to benefits and those kind of issues. Peter, do you think

that Britain could have a bit of support or sympathy on this idea of

free movement, but what countries in the EU really don't like is the way

that the argument is being couched? Absolutely. What he said there, the

difference between the statements, and the fact that we are not getting

our statements through. We are not getting our message through because

our code is, essentially, very cleverly created to alienate people

rather than attract them to our concept. I can illustrate that.

There is a difference between freedom to move and freedom to

claim. The government is not doing anything to dispute freedom of

movement. Why should they? There are 2.5 million Britons living in

Europe. They are trying to get allies to benefit tourism. And they

have allies. The problem is, the moment Britain speaks in the

language it speaks, it loses those friends. That is a problem of

foreign policy and I think it is the most important thing generated from

those clips. Labour has accepted there needs to be some change on

this as well, where does that leave us? I think it leaves us in a

situation where there is generally cross-party agreement in the UK

between the Tories, Labour and the Liberal Democrats. Obviously there

are differences in tone and emphasis. I think this is something

in particular that the EU Commission would do well to heed. I think this

also has not gone when observed in other member states. Let's turn our

attention to a few wider points. Neither David Cameron nor George

Osborne are talking about us leaving the EU in this instance. Is it

because all Prime Ministers and ministers, after a while, realise

they have to take a rather pragmatic approach to Europe and it is the

only way they can deal with that? Britain is one of the top three

countries in Europe. Britain therefore has a capacity to lead the

agenda in Europe if it gets the allies to do so. Britain has always

had a clear idea of what it wants. It wants a free market, a single

market, it wants democratic reform and it wants Europe to step up to

the plate, certainly against global competition, certainly in favour of

European security. The problem we have is that we do not make those

messages clear, we do not attract allies for them in a tone that will

keep them as allies. British Prime Ministers find themselves in a

battle between what is not only pragmatic, but right, against their

internal audience, part of the Conservative Party and Fleet Street.

Unfortunately, that is a terrible dilemma for any PM to be in. They

truly do will be able to bridge that gap. A true leader will be able to

do that. Do you think we discourage you have to accept the European

Union works at two speeds, if not more, because all of these countries

need different things? I wouldn't put it in terms of speed. That

assumes everybody is going in the same direction, albeit at different

speeds. What I would say is we need a more flexible Europe, where

different countries can get together to do different things. I think the

single currency is a good example of that. There are a team members now.

There are other member states, ten are not, some will join, I think,

but not in the immediate future. Others, like the UK, will most

likely never join. I think in that sense we need to talk about what the

most important thing in Europe is, which we would say is the single

market. If you have that as the core of Europe, then member states are

free to cooperate on other issues as and when they see fit, be it

environmental protection, crime and justice, whatever. But that can be

more, as and when member states agree, when they want to. This is

the economic argument, and I agree with it. He mentioned 18 states that

are now in the Euro. These Euro members wish to control the European

Union against our interests. But I would also say there are 18 member

states who signed a letter written by the PM, asking for the completion

of the single market and the liberalisation of sectors which are

going to create jobs for our kids and grandkids. So, there is, as he

said, a series of streams in European opinion. The key problem,

and I think this is a major mistake from politicians, Fleet Street and

downwards, is that we think Europe is all about economics. It is about

economics and politics. You can achieve these things, but not

without political leadership. We talk about this being an economic

union, we have to complete the single market, but, as politicians,

they have to create reform with allies to achieve that objective. In

the second part, we seem not to be able to do that. Is that because

there are a lot of politicians in this country, for example, who very

much see the EU about being about economics and nothing else? They are

quite happy with a large free trade area, but that is what they want?

NATO is about defence, but also about politics. You cannot divorce

the two. The problem is, as you quite rightly say, there is a

tendency, a considerable number of politicians, say it is all about

economics. It is, but the fact of the matter is that if you are going

to try to create alliances to deliver the economic achievements

you want, that is politics. The problem is, if you are shaking hands

with the people that could be your allies and then telling them, in no

uncertain terms, that you simply disagree with them and, frankly, you

don't want their immigrants here and you don't want to deal with their

government, in particular ways, that is not going to achieve the

objective. What to you think the letter we saw from the 95 MPs has

done to this debate? I think it has illustrated that there are a lot of

people in the Conservative Party and in the country more generally, who

are hungry and impatient for reform. I think the MPs who signed that

letter have come from other ideal backgrounds within the Party, but

the key issue is that they want reform to be delivered and they want

the British Parliament to be able to have a bigger influence on EU

policy, which is something that we hope everyone would agree with. It

is not possible to have a single Parliament to have a veto, but

certainly we think there should be stronger mechanisms for national

parliaments to be able to block and review legislation. We think that is

the strongest way of strengthening the democratic legitimacy of the EU.

Peter, briefly, is that a fair assessment? Superficially it seems

to be that way, and I would agree that national parliaments must

increase their capacity to scrutinise EU legislation better,

and indeed using existing opportunities in the EU Treaty, the

Green card than yellow card, to stop legislation. -- green card and

yellow card. But it would be a kind person who looks at the 95 - in

fact, less, because some MPs found themselves on the letter without

their consent - this is all about positioning in the Conservative

Party after the European elections. After the election is the

Conservative Party could enter a very difficult period akin to 96-97

under John Major, were a good part of the Party wants to carry on

reforming but a significant minority wants to see the Party joined with

UKIP as the better off out Party. Thank you very much for coming in to

see us. Back now to Westminster. At PMQ's, David Cameron was challenged

over documents dating back to 1984 suggesting there might have been

British involvement in the Sikh Golden Temple at Amritsar. Hundreds

died as Indian troops tried to put down a rebellion. A Labour MP wanted

a year from conservatives who were in government at the time.

Instead of ordering the Siddle service to investigate, why does the

Prime Minister not just ask Lord Geoffrey Howe and Lord Brittan

whether they agreed with Margaret Thatcher and whether it had anything

to do with the Westland Helicopters deal at the time? I fear the

honourable gentleman may have gone one conspiracy theory too far on

this one. It is important to get to the bottom of what happened and that

is why I have asked the Cabinet Secretary to lead a review. He will

establish the facts, the process is under way. I wanted to be fast, and

the findings will be made public. It is no secret we are all getting

fatter, but who is to blame? There were calls in the week for more to

be done to cut the amount of sugar we eat, but one Tory peer said he

knew who was really responsible. Does the government not accept that

people ought to know that if they stuff themselves silly with high

calorie, rubbish foods, they will get fat? It is their responsibility

and all of the forums and other nonsense are merely trying to force

people from the consequences of their own stupid actions. Familiar

farmland birds are disappearing from the rural landscape according to

conservation bodies. Latest estimates say numbers of such

species as scarred that Michael Starling 's, turtledoves and

lapwings have fallen by 50% from the 1970s.

The main reason is intensification of farming methods. Changing crop

patterns have led to a lot of winter stubble. The main feeding habitats

of many birds such as buntings have therefore disappeared. Greater use

of pesticides and herbicides have removed critical food resources. And

of course the loss of hedges and other seminatural habitats has

combined with intensive grassland management to take away vital

habitats. Peers who break the rules of the

House faces new sanctions. The chairman of the Committee's Lord

Sewel said there were only currently two available punishments. Peers can

be asked to apologise or they can be suspended. The Lord's do not have

the power to expel errant members and Lord Sewel pointed out those

suspended at the start of the House would be a way for far longer than

those suspended at the end of the session.

The remedy proposed is the introduction of two new sanctions.

The first would prevent peers from claiming any financial support by

way of expenses or allowances from the House. The second sanction would

prevent peers using the facilities of the House. Neither of these

sanctions would prevent the peer from taking part in the proceedings

of the House in the chamber or its Committee. These sanctions could be

used in addition to suspension from the House or as an alternative to

suspension. Unlike suspension, the sanctions could be applied for a

period extending beyond the end of a Parliament. They would be applied

for a fixed period, and therefore are not equivalent to expulsion.

They would not be retrospective. The question is that this motion should

be agreed to. As many as a rather that opinion will see content. The

contents have it. This year marks the 25th anniversary

of the world wide web. It was marked by a debate in the House of Lords

led by the government's former digital champion.

I now find the web usage numbers not even surprisingly huge any more. 2.4

billion people worldwide use the web. It took 38 years for the

television to reach 50 million users. It took 14 years for the

radio. It took four years for the web. It took ten months for Facebook

to reach 50 million users. We will need to fill one million technology

sector jobs by Twenty20, which is looking nearly impossible from the

current workforce. And, more depressingly, the number of women in

the UK technological sector is falling as an overall percentage. If

current trends are not reversed only 1% of the sector will be female by

2014. We have allowed a situation to develop where it is legal for

multinational, multibillion-dollar industry to holy, in perpetuity on

the intimate and personal details of children. -- to completely. We know

that this space is moving so fast we do not really know what may happen

to it in the future. A number of years ago I held the second book to

be printed in Scotland in my hands in the National library of Scotland,

printed in 1509, and today I had it in my pocket, along with the Magna

Carta and the US declaration of Independence, and Anne Frank's

diaries, and a fair few of the movies the noble lord Lord Puttnam

produced. The noble lady mentioned Thailand, I was there just after

Christmas. -- Taiwan. We have also heard

Sherlock Holmes mentioned today. You may think this is an incongruous

link, but when I was in Taiwan using the free Wi-Fi system for anyone,

local resident or tourist, I was reading the South China news were

2.8 million people the previous day had watched the new addition of

Sherlock on their version of YouTube.

Ahead of that debate, Emma Murray spoke to Martha Lane Fox and asked

how significant it was that peers were to spend the afternoon talking

about the web. It is a small step for mankind but a

leap for the Lord's to have a hold two and a half hours discussing

technology. I am interested in trying to keep the agenda around

tech a bit more dominant in Lord's discussions. There will be very

interesting people that run the BBC through to people that run the

health service through to people that run the Siddle service talking.

You have been on hand as a technology guru for peers in the

House of Lord, would they be lost without you?

Really not come and I think that is an overestimation of my skills. We

set up a digital champion 's network and I have had some interesting

questions, as different as how can I open the attachment on my blackberry

through to what is a that -- exactly is an iPad? There is a huge spectrum

of talent in the Lords, some will never want to touch screen, others

are many more competent than me. There are many people in the country

of a certain age who hide from technology, is this a mistake?

I have met so many people who are 80, 90, very old or in their middle

to older age group that said the internet has transformed what they

can do, reduce loneliness, so I reject this notion you are ever to

hold two try something. Martha Lane Fox on the anniversary

of the world wide web in a week dominated by our relations with our

neighbours in Europe. After a night where we have seen

some heavy showers we have the rain pushing its way northwards, that

stays with us throughout the day on Saturday but by the time we get to

Sunday it should have started to clear away so although there may be

one of two showers around overall it looks like the