By-Election Special

:00:09. > :00:13.Tonight, as Britain launches air strikes against IS in Syria, join

:00:14. > :00:22.All quiet in the dark clouds over Westminster, but passions fly

:00:23. > :00:35.It is now time for us to do our bit in Syria.

:00:36. > :00:42.BBC Top Gun, Emily Maitlis watched the mid-air collision.

:00:43. > :00:49.After that marathon ten-hour debate, Britain's military have found their

:00:50. > :00:52.new target, Britain's Labour may have found their new

:00:53. > :00:55.World leaders jump in their planes and fly to Paris to discuss

:00:56. > :00:57.Climate Change, but how serious is the environmental threat?

:00:58. > :00:59.Meteorologist, campaigner, and brother of Jeremy, Piers Corbyn, is

:01:00. > :01:10.Global warming is a nonsense. We need to lose that loving feeling and

:01:11. > :01:17.stop the madness of the climate change gravy train. And as Labour

:01:18. > :01:23.wing man, Hilary Benn, drops a receipt other call bomb on his own

:01:24. > :01:32.party leader is there room for principles in politics? Zblnd Marin

:01:33. > :01:36.Alsopp is presented with her flying colours.

:01:37. > :01:43.I'm used to landing a good gig. Then this show came along.

:01:44. > :01:48.I feel the need, the need for This Week!

:01:49. > :01:53.A week in which the grim drumbeat of war is loud in the land once more.

:01:54. > :01:55.Our warplanes are in the skies over Iraq and Syria,

:01:56. > :01:58.and on the home-front we face the greatest terrorist threat ever.

:01:59. > :02:02.So naturally it was only right for 'Call Me Dave' to have a pop at the

:02:03. > :02:08.BBC, or the "enemy within" as it's known in the Downing Street bunker.

:02:09. > :02:10.Not because we've been especially traitorous - certainly no more than

:02:11. > :02:13.normal - but because the PM thinks we're not using the

:02:14. > :02:16.correct nomenclature when referring to the real enemy - and that this

:02:17. > :02:23.Clearly they didn't teach him the "sticks and stones"

:02:24. > :02:28.Anyway 'Call Me Dave' thinks that if we stopped calling

:02:29. > :02:31.the terrorists Islamic State or ISIL or ISIS and referred to them

:02:32. > :02:37.by the Arabic acronym Daesh we'd be doing our bit for the war effort.

:02:38. > :02:42.Put aside the somewhat pertinent fact that Daesh is simply Arabic

:02:43. > :02:47.Apparently it sounds like another pejorative word

:02:48. > :02:50.in Arabic and the PM think if we all say Daesh the beheaders

:02:51. > :02:53.will be so demoralised they'll throw down their weapons and crawl under

:02:54. > :03:00.So Daesh, Daesh, Daesh, Daesh, Daesh.

:03:01. > :03:06.Peace, sweetness and light return throughout

:03:07. > :03:16.If only Churchill had got the hand of this war business sooner.

:03:17. > :03:18.Speaking of pointless re-branding exercises, I'm joined on

:03:19. > :03:22.the sofa tonight by two Westminster statues of liberty - think of them

:03:23. > :03:25.as the 'free vote' and the 'free love' of late night political chat.

:03:26. > :03:27.I speak, of course, of #manontheleft, Alan 'AJ' Johnson

:03:28. > :03:34.and #sadmanonatrain, Michael 'choo choo' Portillo.

:03:35. > :03:39.Michael, your moment of the week? Another saying from the Prime

:03:40. > :03:45.Minister, when he described those who were going to vote against his

:03:46. > :03:50.motion as being terrorist sympathisers, it was an entirely

:03:51. > :03:54.inaccurate and unworthy remark. If it betrayed the real feelings, I

:03:55. > :04:00.think that is pitiful. But it was a shot in the foot. It derailed his

:04:01. > :04:05.own speech. He was called on then in the House of Commons to apologise. I

:04:06. > :04:08.believe he should have. Of course it meant at the end of the day that the

:04:09. > :04:12.accolades went not to him but to Hilary Benn.

:04:13. > :04:17.I think he deserved to lose the vote. Although, I must say, he won

:04:18. > :04:23.it by a handsome majority. That is what he set out to do. So I will at

:04:24. > :04:28.the end of this long sentence, say he must be congratulated on

:04:29. > :04:35.achieving a result that a week ago seemed miraculous. Was he badly

:04:36. > :04:41.aadvised to apologise? He must have known this was coming? It dominated

:04:42. > :04:47.reviews? People talk about David Cameron being advised. I knew him

:04:48. > :04:52.for 15 years as the advisor. He does not need anybody else's advice. He

:04:53. > :04:57.can issue it himself. Alan? It had to be the Hilary Benn

:04:58. > :05:05.speech. I know we will talk about Syria but to be in the claim we are

:05:06. > :05:10.that 15 minutes of elconsequence and you know, saying you can hear a pin

:05:11. > :05:17.drop, he had the chamber in the palm of his hand it is very difficult

:05:18. > :05:21.when packed. I saw John Barron who take as contrary view to Hilary

:05:22. > :05:26.Benn, standing up in the beginning to intervene, as did somebody else

:05:27. > :05:29.but as the speech progressed, they decided not to bother. It was the

:05:30. > :05:35.moment that kept them in their speech. That this was a speech not

:05:36. > :05:37.to be interrupted. However you feel about the vote, no-one can deny it

:05:38. > :05:45.was a masterful speech. Now, we don't feel the cold much

:05:46. > :05:49.here on This Week - Michael only needs to cross his legs and we all

:05:50. > :05:52.feel the heat, but in the interests of turning up the temperature in

:05:53. > :05:55.our draughty little studio, we're turning to this week's UN

:05:56. > :05:57.climate change talks in Paris. While there's broad agreement

:05:58. > :06:00.on the need to reduce the use of fossil fuels, there's more

:06:01. > :06:02.disagreement than the average shadow cabinet meeting about how best to

:06:03. > :06:05.meet carbon reduction targets. One man who thinks we're all getting

:06:06. > :06:08.too hot under the collar about climate change is scientist,

:06:09. > :06:10.long-term weather forecaster, and brother of Jeremy,

:06:11. > :06:12.Piers Corbyn - who thinks all this Here's his take of the week.

:06:13. > :06:24.temperatures is a myth. # It's getting hot

:06:25. > :06:27.in here # So hot # So take off all your clothes # I am getting

:06:28. > :06:31.so # I will take my clothes off. Despite the hype in Paris,

:06:32. > :06:38.the fact is there is no such thing The truth is

:06:39. > :06:49.the inter-governmental panel on Climate Change at the United Nations

:06:50. > :06:52.is a political, not a scientific body, and it even amends scientific

:06:53. > :06:55.documents before publication to # It's getting hot in here # So hot

:06:56. > :07:04.# So take off all your clothes # I The climate alarmism plastering

:07:05. > :07:09.the media and the so-called science put forward

:07:10. > :07:22.by the United Nations is fraudulent and what Sir David Aattenbrough

:07:23. > :07:25.says is a disgrace to science and And one thing we will ask him

:07:26. > :07:29.is just look at this graph. The upper curve is what their UN

:07:30. > :07:32.models predict. You can see that they fail

:07:33. > :07:36.and fail and fail again to show what The world now is cooling and our

:07:37. > :07:44.own scientific examination of soil activity shows it will cool even

:07:45. > :07:47.more rapidly in the next 20 years. When it comes to CO2 emissions, they

:07:48. > :07:52.are failing on their own terms. They are actually not cutting

:07:53. > :07:56.them but exporting them. They closed the British Steel

:07:57. > :08:00.industry to reduce CO2 in Britain, and it is regrown

:08:01. > :08:05.in India to make more CO2. So, let's be clear,

:08:06. > :08:12.the climate change energy charges on your electricity bill are actually

:08:13. > :08:17.a Poll Tax on the poor, which even causes people to die in winter

:08:18. > :08:20.when they cannot foot the bill. Huge profits are being made

:08:21. > :08:35.from carbon trading from expensive climate change

:08:36. > :08:41.grandiose projects, big oil benefits from price rises, banks benefitting

:08:42. > :08:52.from any trading, you do not! Ice-cream, tea, coffee, French

:08:53. > :08:57.baguette, we got it all here. Now is the time to start full debate

:08:58. > :09:00.in Britain on the future And from the Piccadilly Whip

:09:01. > :09:20.ice-cream stall in Tower Hill, to the Politically Whipped here

:09:21. > :09:24.in Westminster. Piers,

:09:25. > :09:34.what flavour did you bring us? Surely for you to be right, nearly

:09:35. > :09:39.all the world's leader, from the President of America, to the

:09:40. > :09:44.President of China, plus most of the world's climate scientists are

:09:45. > :09:51.engaged in a massive conspiracy to hood wink us, that cannot be right?

:09:52. > :09:57.Of course but that is not true of the so-called survey of climate

:09:58. > :10:02.papers, 0.3 stated from their work that CO2 had been the cause of

:10:03. > :10:06.warming. The other paper said nothing at all. But most of the

:10:07. > :10:10.world has signed on to this. All of the leaders have their own

:10:11. > :10:17.scientific advisors. Although they are arguing about what to do? They

:10:18. > :10:21.are appointed. It is the panel on climate change who appoint people

:10:22. > :10:24.that advise themselves, the IPCC is a political organisation, not a

:10:25. > :10:29.scientific one. Why can so many be hoodwinked? It is

:10:30. > :10:35.easily done. It has been done before. There are many things in the

:10:36. > :10:40.past, such as Galileo had a problem bringing forward the truth. John

:10:41. > :10:45.Harrison, had a problem to bring forward the truth for 30 years over

:10:46. > :10:48.how to measure latitude. And this is because of the entrenched interested

:10:49. > :10:53.groups. If you want to know what is actually

:10:54. > :10:56.going on, we can tell you. But the graph I showed, shows that the

:10:57. > :11:03.theory they put forward is not working.

:11:04. > :11:08.So, under the climate change Act, section 6, part two, it states

:11:09. > :11:11.clearly if the science changes, ie the information, then the measures

:11:12. > :11:14.have to change and should be discussed.

:11:15. > :11:20.So what it is saying is we must reopen the debate on climate change

:11:21. > :11:22.and not impose the charges which are closing British...

:11:23. > :11:27.INAUDIBLE You said, you claimed in your take

:11:28. > :11:30.that the world is now cooling. But that is not borne out by the land or

:11:31. > :11:36.the satellite temperature measure? It is. It is.

:11:37. > :11:39.Yes, it. But the past... Look at the graphs.

:11:40. > :11:44.The graphs you are seeing shows that.

:11:45. > :11:49.The temperatures now are on average about 0. 5 Celsius than they were 35

:11:50. > :11:54.years ago. No. No.

:11:55. > :12:00.But all of the satellite measurements I know show that the

:12:01. > :12:05.temperatures... Not the satellite measurements. So-called land

:12:06. > :12:10.measurements show increase but they are fraudulently chosen.

:12:11. > :12:16.You can go on the weather action.com website to see this.

:12:17. > :12:24.People argue about a pause, whether that is there but since 97, 98, we

:12:25. > :12:30.have had some of the warmest years on record? Some, yes.

:12:31. > :12:37.How is it called average? The reason peek is the same as, taking away the

:12:38. > :12:43.data fraud, the same as the peak in the late 1940s. Michael, you are a

:12:44. > :12:51.bit of a sceptic on global warming, do you go as far as Piers? I am not

:12:52. > :12:56.qualified, Piers is. So I do feel there is a bandwagon around this. I

:12:57. > :13:02.am so pleased to hear Piers on the BBC. At one point the BBC said that

:13:03. > :13:08.the debate was settled, they did not want to hear more of climate

:13:09. > :13:15.sceptics but even if one accepted there was global warming and it was

:13:16. > :13:19.man-made, the way to tackling that it is by human sacrifice in

:13:20. > :13:26.developed countries, I think Piers makes the point that it is exporting

:13:27. > :13:32.jobs and CO2 to other countries but in any case, the first thing you ask

:13:33. > :13:37.yourself is what is the cost of dealing with climate change? It has

:13:38. > :13:42.occurred in the past Human beings have to adapt to it. Assuming we

:13:43. > :13:46.have to adapt in the future, rather than preventing it, there is a huge

:13:47. > :13:49.loss of ability in believing we can prevent it. What are the

:13:50. > :13:52.consequences? We have not had the debate.

:13:53. > :13:58.That is what the Stern Report was about? You can argue with it, that

:13:59. > :14:03.is what it did. It is a laughing stock around the

:14:04. > :14:10.world. Human being have it in the frame of

:14:11. > :14:15.mind that we are evil. We are overindulging ourselves. That we

:14:16. > :14:20.must restrain ourselves. That capitalism is somehow involved in

:14:21. > :14:26.this. I think that the whole thing lends itself to his steera.

:14:27. > :14:33.Alan, what is your take? I would it were true if Piers is right, there

:14:34. > :14:39.is no global warming and but, like Michael, I am not qualified.

:14:40. > :14:43.To you agree we should open up the debate? This afternoon, I went to

:14:44. > :14:48.the House of Commons library and asked them. 97% of climate

:14:49. > :14:54.scientists say that climate change is real it is happening and that it

:14:55. > :14:57.is man-made. You will have to argue with the

:14:58. > :15:04.House of Commons... Here is the question. It is not a play upon your

:15:05. > :15:09.name. As I understand it is peer review that looks at the different

:15:10. > :15:13.scientific papers who reviewed your assessment? I have had many on this

:15:14. > :15:21.subject. On the question of, what I quote is

:15:22. > :15:26.peer review papers but on the question of action forecast so there

:15:27. > :15:33.are success rates, based on the solar activity.

:15:34. > :15:40.Your position is that the extreme end of keptism, it is denial. There

:15:41. > :15:48.are even climate scientists who disagree about the exact temperature

:15:49. > :15:54.consequences of CO2. But that is not you. You are innout right denial? We

:15:55. > :16:01.are saying that the CO2 has no effect. That is borne out by

:16:02. > :16:05.history. If you look at history, CO2 levels follows in changes of

:16:06. > :16:09.temperature, not the other way around. The temperature of the sea

:16:10. > :16:15.controls the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. The sea itself has 50

:16:16. > :16:19.times more CO2 in the than the atmosphere.

:16:20. > :16:24.Have you not managed to convince your brother? The situation in the

:16:25. > :16:28.Labour Party is that Jeremy has to follow Labour policy. The Labour

:16:29. > :16:33.policy includes to support the climate change Act.

:16:34. > :16:37.He dines out on his climate change credentials? He makes clear as the

:16:38. > :16:42.science changes, then the measures changes. So now is the time for

:16:43. > :16:46.debate. My brother is very much in favour of debate. Is support his

:16:47. > :16:51.leadership of the party, I look forward to more debate on the issue.

:16:52. > :16:56.Most climate change sceptics are on the right, where are you? I'm on the

:16:57. > :17:00.left. But there is more on the left. There is a Tom Harris from Canada,

:17:01. > :17:06.he says, look, there is no reason for being either left or right on

:17:07. > :17:12.the issue. We stand for scientific truth. There is a reason for being

:17:13. > :17:20.right or wrong, the danger is, I believe we have been through it with

:17:21. > :17:25.GM crops, with measles, Mumphs and rubella, whether people stopped

:17:26. > :17:30.innoculating kids, and it would be horrendous if 97% of the world's

:17:31. > :17:35.scientists are right about 2% warming. And we throw all of that

:17:36. > :17:41.aside and follow your conspiracy theory.

:17:42. > :17:49.Let's not get hung up on the 97%. What is science? I want to ask you,

:17:50. > :17:54.there is a lot of evidence around, that conflicts with what you have

:17:55. > :18:00.said tonight. But let us move on. How do you think that your brother

:18:01. > :18:04.is doing? Superbly. He has made a different situation in Britain

:18:05. > :18:07.where, you know, young people are participating more than ever in

:18:08. > :18:12.politics, and the Labour Party has the biggest membership ever and more

:18:13. > :18:14.people joined since he became the leader than membership of the

:18:15. > :18:19.Liberal Democrats. You don't think he is out of touch

:18:20. > :18:24.with main stream Labour opinion? There is a difference between

:18:25. > :18:32.Parliament and the party and the public. He is fighting for proper

:18:33. > :18:33.discussion and proper representation and proper accountability in the

:18:34. > :18:37.party. I support him.

:18:38. > :18:40.Thumbs up for the brother? Absolutely.

:18:41. > :18:43.Now it's late, fevered expectation in Oldham West Royton later.

:18:44. > :18:46.And if the idea of a by-election special isn't thrilling enough -

:18:47. > :18:48.waiting in the wings we have American super conductor,

:18:49. > :18:52.Marin Alsop is here to discuss 'principles' in public life.

:18:53. > :18:54.And don't forget, you can witness the "self-righteous certitude of

:18:55. > :18:57.the finger-jabbing representatives of the new and kinder politics".

:18:58. > :19:07.And Gordon Brown's world wide web sphere.

:19:08. > :19:10.Now, we're a festive lot here on This Week.

:19:11. > :19:14.As we speak, Michael's reindeer onesie is at the dry-cleaners.

:19:15. > :19:16.ready for our Christmas special, and Alan's full of nostalgia

:19:17. > :19:20.for his days as a Yuletide postman with Santa's sack.

:19:21. > :19:23.But with the atmosphere anything but festive in Parliament this week,

:19:24. > :19:27.we decided to try and get you in the mood and sent the BBC's

:19:28. > :19:32.Emily Maitlis down to the Natural History Museum Swarovski Ice Rink.

:19:33. > :19:43.This is her roundup of the political week.

:19:44. > :19:52.# It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas # Everywhere you go...

:19:53. > :19:55.So, here we are, then, December - like that, highly flammable,

:19:56. > :19:58.ever itchy, bundle of acrylic, otherwise known as the Christmas

:19:59. > :20:06.The season of good cheer, festive fun, dubious office party moments.

:20:07. > :20:13.But the mood has been a sombre one in Westminster.

:20:14. > :20:17.Since all the days of the week have been given names, Black Friday,

:20:18. > :20:19.Cyber Monday, we might as well call what happened yesterday,

:20:20. > :20:23.MPs were called to the House for a marathon ten-hour debate

:20:24. > :20:25.on whether Britain should join Allies, France and America,

:20:26. > :20:32.The action we propose is legal, it is necessary,

:20:33. > :20:35.and it is the right thing to do to keep our country safe.

:20:36. > :20:39.And my strong view is that this House should make clear that we will

:20:40. > :20:42.take up our responsibilities rather than pass them off

:20:43. > :20:46.and put our own national security in the hands of others.

:20:47. > :20:49.Public opinion is moving increasingly

:20:50. > :20:55.against what I believe to be an ill-thought out rush to war.

:20:56. > :20:59.And he wants to hold this vote before the opinion grows

:21:00. > :21:10.I know what you're thinking, this is all some elaborate conceit

:21:11. > :21:13.at the expense of the poor BBC licence fee payer,

:21:14. > :21:17.just to sneak in a few metaphors about skating on thin ice, don't

:21:18. > :21:26.rush me - I have plenty more cliches to get through before that one!

:21:27. > :21:28.And despite the length of the debate, some will worry that the

:21:29. > :21:38.On Tuesday night he told a group of Tory MPs not to vote against the

:21:39. > :21:46.air strikes with what he called a bunch of "terrorist sympathisers".

:21:47. > :21:52.That went down as well as a drone stall at a Stop The War rally.

:21:53. > :21:57.I cannot identify a single terrorist sympathiser among that list.

:21:58. > :22:07.Will he now apologise for his deeply insulting remarks?

:22:08. > :22:10.As for Jeremy Corbyn, he must have spent much of this week

:22:11. > :22:13.feeling like he was slithering around on some brittle seasonal

:22:14. > :22:21.He went to his parliamentary party intending to ask them to vote

:22:22. > :22:26.against the air strikes but he ended up having handed them a free vote.

:22:27. > :22:30.Now was this a question of Jeremy Corbyn not being left-wing enough?

:22:31. > :22:32.A question few would have dared asked before the age

:22:33. > :22:40.I wish I had, frankly, the self righteous servitude

:22:41. > :22:43.of the finger-jabbing representatives of our new and

:22:44. > :22:48.kinder type of politics, who will no doubt soon be contacting those of us

:22:49. > :23:01.During that marathon session, the faces of those on the frontbench

:23:02. > :23:07.How could Hilary Benn respond to Jeremy Corbyn's words,

:23:08. > :23:10.when he didn't agree with anything he was saying?

:23:11. > :23:16.He had waited his turn, a full ten hours and this was, for many, the

:23:17. > :23:24.A moment when he seemed to grow in stature, always courteous but listen

:23:25. > :23:30.again and you'll find a quiet rebuke to the Labour Party as you do.

:23:31. > :23:36.We are here, faced by fascists, not just their calculated brutality

:23:37. > :23:40.but their belief that they are superior to every single one

:23:41. > :23:47.And all of the people that we represent, they hold us in contempt.

:23:48. > :23:52.They hold our belief and tolerance and decency in contempt.

:23:53. > :23:56.They how old our democracy, the means by which we will make

:23:57. > :24:04.No sooner had Hilary Benn sat down than MPs started to talk up

:24:05. > :24:06.his chances of becoming the next Labour leader.

:24:07. > :24:10.But that wasn't what was worrying Number Ten this week,

:24:11. > :24:14.who have arguably had no less troublesome a time.

:24:15. > :24:17.Grant Shapps, the former Party Chairman was forced

:24:18. > :24:22.to quit after he failed to act upon allegations of bullying.

:24:23. > :24:25.This story has at its heart the appalling tragedy

:24:26. > :24:29.of one family, a young Conservative activist, who was found dead,

:24:30. > :24:34.This week I spoke to his father, Ray.

:24:35. > :24:37.It became a quagmire, almost like a dry rot affecting the

:24:38. > :24:43.Conservative Party in many ways with many people being affected adversely

:24:44. > :24:47.and other people who were doing the bullying and the intimidating.

:24:48. > :24:50.It became very clear to us that there they were being protected.

:24:51. > :25:03.Tonight all eyes will be on Oldham, which has gained peculiar prominence

:25:04. > :25:08.Because it is the first chance voters will have to

:25:09. > :25:12.give their say on the Corbyn Labour Party, on what has always been

:25:13. > :25:26.So will Ukip become the new Torvill and Dean of Oldham, or will Labour

:25:27. > :25:35.No, don't be crazy, I'm not on Dancing on Ice.

:25:36. > :25:47.Emily Maitlis at the Natural History Museum Swarovski ice rink.

:25:48. > :25:50.And with nothing better to do, we're joined in the studio by

:25:51. > :26:06.What got into Hilary Benn? Well, I have heard him make good speeches

:26:07. > :26:11.before, and he is a very eloquent speaker. In fact, he looks very much

:26:12. > :26:18.like his father, who was a great rate. But I suppose, come the hour,

:26:19. > :26:23.come the man. That was summing up ten hours of debate. It was his job

:26:24. > :26:28.to put the case, as we had agreed in a free vote, but the case for the

:26:29. > :26:33.motion, and I think he did it superbly. But your party can't go on

:26:34. > :26:37.like this. You cannot continue, on major issues, as important as the

:26:38. > :26:40.one under debate, in which the leader opens with one side of the

:26:41. > :26:43.argument and another leading shadow in which the leader opens with one

:26:44. > :26:48.side of the argument and another leading shadow how long can that go

:26:49. > :26:53.on? As I said in the debate, on a question of war and peace, which now

:26:54. > :26:57.Parliament decides on, actually even if there is a Whip it does not count

:26:58. > :27:03.for much because people make their own decisions anyway. The only way

:27:04. > :27:06.it counts as for the because nobody will go in front of their

:27:07. > :27:10.constituents to say, I voted this way, I did not believe in it but the

:27:11. > :27:17.whips told me to. You could not have done it if you were in government.

:27:18. > :27:21.It would have been difficult. The Cabinet would be deeply divided. And

:27:22. > :27:26.you are the opposition preparing for government, not a debating society.

:27:27. > :27:31.Which is the point that Diane Abbott made and in a way I agree. But she

:27:32. > :27:38.wanted a whipped vote. That is your point. I am asking how long you can

:27:39. > :27:43.go on like this. I would think on an issue like this you can do it, but

:27:44. > :27:49.on other issues you cannot. What was the Ukip position on air strikes? We

:27:50. > :27:53.were against, and we made that point clearly. We wanted a grand

:27:54. > :27:59.coalition, to see the issues and the whole dimensional and lead on this

:28:00. > :28:04.taken by the Arab states, with a UN mandate and with the superpowers in

:28:05. > :28:11.support. But didn't your only MP vote for air strikes? I understand

:28:12. > :28:15.he did, yes. He is our MP, he was there during the debate and will

:28:16. > :28:20.have listened to the speeches. He is his own man and voted accordingly.

:28:21. > :28:25.Your leader goes one way and you're only MP goes the other way. You are

:28:26. > :28:31.as bad as the Jeremy Corbyn Shadow Cabinet. We made our point in terms

:28:32. > :28:34.of the policy very clear. Douglas was up front, he was there at the

:28:35. > :28:41.time, he listened to the issues and voted accordingly. Did you sound out

:28:42. > :28:46.your members? He didn't contact me, if you are asking. Know, has the

:28:47. > :28:53.party sounded out its membership on this issue. I have no doubt some of

:28:54. > :28:56.our members will have contacted my colleagues. I can't actually answer

:28:57. > :29:02.your question because I don't know whether we consulted every member by

:29:03. > :29:06.e-mail or Twitter or whatever. John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor,

:29:07. > :29:11.said of the Hilary Benn 's speech, not necessarily in a helpful way,

:29:12. > :29:15.that although he thought it was a great speech it also reminded him of

:29:16. > :29:22.Tony Blair's speech, and he thought that was an example of great oratory

:29:23. > :29:26.leading to great mistakes. Did he have a point? Definitely. I remember

:29:27. > :29:30.that Tony Blair 's speech and I was overwhelmed by it, one of the best

:29:31. > :29:34.three speeches I heard in Parliament, and it helped me to vote

:29:35. > :29:38.for the Iraq war, which was a mistake. In Hilary Benn's speech,

:29:39. > :29:43.there was a rhetorical device, which was to describe the enemy as

:29:44. > :29:49.fascism. And of course, that immediately makes you think you are

:29:50. > :29:53.fighting the 2nd World War. But of course there are all sorts of ways

:29:54. > :29:57.in which that parallel breaks down. Even if the parallel were exact,

:29:58. > :30:00.which it is not, you are led to believe that the answer to dealing

:30:01. > :30:05.with fascism is to extend a bombing campaign which we have been involved

:30:06. > :30:09.in in Iraq into a bombing campaign which is already being conducted by

:30:10. > :30:14.other people in Syria. And you begin to see how the argument doesn't

:30:15. > :30:18.quite survive the confrontation with those facts. What was happening here

:30:19. > :30:23.was something very small, militarily. Quite significant, I

:30:24. > :30:28.think, diplomatically. That is the point that struck me. Of course, if

:30:29. > :30:32.the Americans and the French are doing this and Paris has just been

:30:33. > :30:37.attacked, there is the strongest moral and strategic case for getting

:30:38. > :30:40.alongside your allies. But for me, that is the long and the short of

:30:41. > :30:45.the case, and everything else you say about making Britain safe or

:30:46. > :30:50.whatever is exaggeration, hyperbole and completely unworthy and

:30:51. > :30:54.misleading. So the bombing has begun. Are you clear where we go

:30:55. > :31:01.from here? I am clear there are three elements. There is the Vienna

:31:02. > :31:05.peace process, the military action, and I go a long way with Michael on

:31:06. > :31:10.the basis that it is ludicrous for us to have been taking action in

:31:11. > :31:16.Iraq but not taking action in Syria, and there is the work going on to

:31:17. > :31:22.try to ensure that we get the Syrian Army to get these 70,000, 80,000

:31:23. > :31:28.people together. That was the weakest part of the argument, as was

:31:29. > :31:32.raised by many people. To me, it did not change the argument about why we

:31:33. > :31:38.should be contributing with our allies, given the bit that Michael

:31:39. > :31:41.left out, UN resolution 20 to 49, a unanimous decision of the UN

:31:42. > :31:46.Security Council, because that enables us to be part of all three

:31:47. > :31:51.parts, and the motion was clear. It was not about Syria and Assad, it

:31:52. > :31:55.was about Isil, and was very clear about the other elements that need

:31:56. > :32:00.to be taken as well. You alluded in your speech which we had a clip of

:32:01. > :32:06.about Labour MPs being abused and bullied because of their stance. How

:32:07. > :32:11.bad is the atmosphere? Well, it depends where you come. For Stella

:32:12. > :32:14.Creasy and people like that it has been terrible. I have been through a

:32:15. > :32:20.lot in my time, but it was a free vote, for goodness sake. When you

:32:21. > :32:25.look at the contrast with September 2014 when Ed Miliband led us through

:32:26. > :32:30.the lobby, 545 votes to 43, and that was about bombing in Iraq, there was

:32:31. > :32:35.none of this. If this is the new type of politics, bring back the old

:32:36. > :32:39.type, because, and I think this is what Hilary Benn was reminding

:32:40. > :32:42.people, the kind of view that thinks being on the left is always against

:32:43. > :32:46.military intervention, that that is what you do on the left, and if

:32:47. > :32:49.people do not agree with you, you have rang and scream at them for

:32:50. > :32:54.having the temerity to take a different point of view, then bring

:32:55. > :33:01.back the old politics. Have they been getting at you? Not yet, but

:33:02. > :33:06.there is time. Are Labour MPs right to worry about the selection? Yes.

:33:07. > :33:10.When they hear people like Ken Livingstone, who seems to be pretty

:33:11. > :33:15.influential now, when they hear other MPs saying, on your own head

:33:16. > :33:19.be it. This was a free vote, people were entitled to vote with their

:33:20. > :33:22.conscience. The idea that you only have a conscience if you are against

:33:23. > :33:26.military intervention but you have no conscience whatsoever, you are a

:33:27. > :33:30.red Tory, or whatever the terminology is, if you do, that is

:33:31. > :33:36.actually an affront to our democracy. It is not the party I

:33:37. > :33:41.have spent 40 years in. If anything, it reminds me of the late 70s, early

:33:42. > :33:45.80s, but I don't think we have got to that stage yet, where our motto

:33:46. > :33:50.was no compromise with the electorate. We are not at that stage

:33:51. > :33:56.but we have to be careful. There is the by-election tonight and John

:33:57. > :34:04.Pienaar is in Oldham at the count. John, they are still counting. Give

:34:05. > :34:07.us an update. You might have heard that crowd of Labour supporters

:34:08. > :34:11.cheering behind me. They have started celebrating already. We will

:34:12. > :34:14.get the result in about an hour, but Labour is going to hold the seat,

:34:15. > :34:19.and hold it better than they might have done and better than some had

:34:20. > :34:25.feared. There was talk of Labour possibly losing this stronghold seat

:34:26. > :34:28.at the beginning of this campaign. The UK Independence Party were the

:34:29. > :34:32.challenger, and they fought campaign from the beginning which was all

:34:33. > :34:39.about a referendum on Jeremy Corbyn. And it has played well their point

:34:40. > :34:42.of view, with many white, working-class British Labour voters

:34:43. > :34:46.who did not like Jeremy Corbyn saying he was not happy with shoot

:34:47. > :34:50.to kill for terrorists and any other number of damaging headlines in

:34:51. > :34:55.recent days and weeks. But Labour have had things going for them.

:34:56. > :34:59.There are a lot of ethnically Asian voters here, strong Labour voters,

:35:00. > :35:03.who have been turning out. A difficult demographic, that was how

:35:04. > :35:08.Nigel Farage delicately described it. On the ground, they had the

:35:09. > :35:13.strongest campaign, with Labour Party stall wards being reinforced

:35:14. > :35:16.by young ministers and new members, and Jeremy Corbyn tweeted a picture

:35:17. > :35:21.of himself talking to voters here, which went out about half an hour

:35:22. > :35:36.after the polls closed. How is that for commitment? Thank you. Let's

:35:37. > :35:40.hope we get the result in an hour. Did Ukip ever have much of a hope of

:35:41. > :35:44.winning this? We said we wanted to crack open the Labour vote. That was

:35:45. > :35:50.our game plan. We will be happy if we have, shall

:35:51. > :35:55.we say, done serious damage to the majority that Michael Meacher had

:35:56. > :36:01.previously. Whether we are talking about 3,000 votes, 2,000 votes,

:36:02. > :36:05.5,000 votes we have nibbled away at, who is to say. But we have been

:36:06. > :36:09.pleased with the result. We have been the story through the campaign.

:36:10. > :36:12.I think that we will be the story tomorrow.

:36:13. > :36:18.You could be a good second. Is there a sense since the election

:36:19. > :36:26.that Ukip has been in the doll drums? I don't think so. What has

:36:27. > :36:29.happened up until and soon after the general election, the battle plan

:36:30. > :36:35.from, let's say my political opponents was very much to target

:36:36. > :36:40.Nigel. Nigel all of the time. Less in so of terms of the party. The

:36:41. > :36:47.minute he did not win the seat in south Thanet, the pressure was off.

:36:48. > :36:50.When it comes down to it, eight months since the general election,

:36:51. > :36:54.it has been quiet, without the by-election, there would not be the

:36:55. > :36:56.interest in the political scene that there has been.

:36:57. > :37:02.We will let you go for the moment. Now, one thing that many fans

:37:03. > :37:05.of Jeremy Corbyn say is that whatever his views, you can't deny

:37:06. > :37:08.that he's a man of principle. So when Jeremy said this week that

:37:09. > :37:10.his opposition to bombing the Islamic State in Syria was not

:37:11. > :37:13.a matter of "pacifism but hard-headed realism", his fans

:37:14. > :37:16.must have felt a little let down. Because that's exactly the kind

:37:17. > :37:19.of thing Henry Kissinger might say, and where's the fun

:37:20. > :37:20.in hard-headed realism? So that's why we're putting

:37:21. > :37:23."principles" in this week's You don't like it, change

:37:24. > :37:29.the station, you don't like it, don't take photos, you don't like

:37:30. > :37:32.it, don't print in your newspaper. His outspoken views have hit

:37:33. > :37:35.the headlines but do we still admire new heavyweight world champion

:37:36. > :37:40.Tyson Fury for not throwing in the There is principle

:37:41. > :37:48.in opposing military action as there is principle

:37:49. > :37:52.in supporting military action. In the end it came

:37:53. > :37:54.down to a matter of conscience. In granting a free vote on Syria,

:37:55. > :37:57.did Jeremy Corbyn show that respecting others' views remains

:37:58. > :37:59.his guiding principle, even It certainly looks

:38:00. > :38:09.like a principled gesture. Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg,

:38:10. > :38:14.will give away 99% But is it a good thing

:38:15. > :38:18.when wealthy people pick their charities, or would it be

:38:19. > :38:22.better if they just paid more tax? Marin Alsop, the first female

:38:23. > :38:26.conductor of the Last Night of the Proms shows that a big gig also

:38:27. > :38:30.lets you make a point of principle. Inequality is one

:38:31. > :38:35.of the greatest challenges facing us today, whether it is gender, racial,

:38:36. > :38:40.economic, ethnic inequality. So how easy is it to stay true to

:38:41. > :38:43.your principles, especially if working in

:38:44. > :38:46.the public eye puts you at greater And we're joined in the studio

:38:47. > :38:55.by conductor Marin Alsop, musical director of the Baltimore Symphony

:38:56. > :39:09.Orchestra and the first woman to Welcome. Was there a point of

:39:10. > :39:14.principle for you to use that as a platform to say what you did? Well,

:39:15. > :39:17.especially being the first woman to do something like this, it was an

:39:18. > :39:21.opportunity to at least reference it.

:39:22. > :39:25.It is ouch a key element, I'm always asked about it. So it seemed

:39:26. > :39:31.opportune to speak about it. Because of you being the first woman

:39:32. > :39:35.to do this, it was therefore, you are regarded as legitimate for you

:39:36. > :39:40.to say things about gender and equality? Definitely. It would have

:39:41. > :39:46.been inappropriate for me not to reference it when everybody was

:39:47. > :39:53.talking about it. It is pathetic it can be 2013, 2015, and still have

:39:54. > :39:57.firsts for women, huh? Did anybody say, just conduct the music, don't

:39:58. > :40:02.get involved? They have said that to me for years. But I think it is

:40:03. > :40:07.important when one has an opportunity to stand up for,

:40:08. > :40:11.especially for the generations to come, and for the future, young

:40:12. > :40:17.people need to see that there are runts for them. I think.

:40:18. > :40:23.As people become more successful, is it more difficult to hold on to

:40:24. > :40:26.principles as you have done, or to use the bully pulpit, to take

:40:27. > :40:32.advantage of the fame and the position to get across the

:40:33. > :40:37.principles that you believe in? It is ironic as my work is all about

:40:38. > :40:42.not using language it is all about gesture. Yet gesture can be

:40:43. > :40:47.principled as well with a lot of connotations. But I really feel as

:40:48. > :40:52.an ambassador for the arts that it is my responsibility to speak up

:40:53. > :40:59.about the arts, especially. Looking at politics on both sides of

:41:00. > :41:05.the Atlantic, could our politics do with more principle? How do we

:41:06. > :41:10.define principle? That is a big question.

:41:11. > :41:15.I believe that principle is born out of study and self-examination and

:41:16. > :41:19.education, not just out of spouting some kind of fanatical belief.

:41:20. > :41:24.Did you get a good reaction to what you did? Yes. I only heard about the

:41:25. > :41:31.good reactions, so. I'm sure that there are some people who, that, you

:41:32. > :41:36.know, don't think women should have the same opportunities, otherwise we

:41:37. > :41:40.wouldn't be living in the world we live in today with inequality. So I

:41:41. > :41:45.think it is important to move through these things. Most of the

:41:46. > :41:52.reactions were positive. Because there are so few, I think I am

:41:53. > :41:56.right, of the major Symphony Orchestras, so few female conductors

:41:57. > :42:01.you have provided a role model? As I started conducting more and more. I

:42:02. > :42:06.thought that there would be a lot more women on the podiums of the

:42:07. > :42:11.world. Then ten years went by, 20, 25, if I don't try to change the

:42:12. > :42:15.landscape, I'm not sure who is going to do it.

:42:16. > :42:20.If you are well known, you have a reputation but stick to your

:42:21. > :42:24.principles, there is a risk you alienate part of the people you are

:42:25. > :42:32.trying to appeal to? I suppose but it depends. Principles at the

:42:33. > :42:38.expense of what? My principles are very, very personal. My personal

:42:39. > :42:42.principles, I don't think I am spouting. I really am standing up

:42:43. > :42:47.for the future generations. All children in my opinion should have

:42:48. > :42:57.access to art it brings out the best in humanity it is a microcosm of

:42:58. > :43:00.goodness exists, what brilliance exists and all children need that

:43:01. > :43:03.opportunity it is my job to speak for that.

:43:04. > :43:10.You certainly did that on that last night that is for sure. What is next

:43:11. > :43:15.in your musical career? Lots of things. I am director with Sao Paulo

:43:16. > :43:19.and with the BBC symphony tomorrow night.

:43:20. > :43:23.Keeping them in shape? Or maybe the reverse.

:43:24. > :43:27.I have heard they are a rowdy bunch being from the BBC.

:43:28. > :43:39.So far, so good. What are you conducting tomorrow? A

:43:40. > :43:40.piece by Pytor Ilyich Tchaikovsky. And it is taking place? At the

:43:41. > :43:44.Barbican. Now that's not your lot for tonight,

:43:45. > :43:47.folks, because we're giving Lou Lou's a miss tonight, despite

:43:48. > :43:50.it being Alan Yentob's leaving party, and despite the promise

:43:51. > :43:52.of Camilla Batmanghelidjh cutting Instead, we're heading back to the

:43:53. > :43:56.count in Oldham for the very latest. And in a few moments Michael and

:43:57. > :44:00.Alan will be replaced by a proper political panel with the staying

:44:01. > :44:04.power to keep going till dawn, MPs with bladders of steel, who will

:44:05. > :44:08.make John Bercow's 11 hours in the Speaker's chair during the debate

:44:09. > :44:11.on Wednesday look lightweight. It's a miracle Michael and Alan both

:44:12. > :44:18.last the 45 minutes quite frankly. But first, it has been

:44:19. > :44:21.a cold December campaign in Oldham. We sent Adam Fleming to

:44:22. > :44:28.find out how it went. The story of Oldham is the story

:44:29. > :44:31.of its grand old town Hall. It was built in the middle

:44:32. > :44:36.of the 19th century, when Oldham was Then the industry disappeared,

:44:37. > :44:42.and it started looking a bit tatty round the edges

:44:43. > :44:46.before being abandoned altogether. Now, it's being turned

:44:47. > :44:50.into a seven-screen cinema. This corner of the north-west

:44:51. > :44:52.of England, where the population is about a quarter

:44:53. > :44:55.Pakistani and Bangladeshi, has been Michael Meacher retained it

:44:56. > :45:00.at the general election with Labour's candidate is the leader

:45:01. > :45:06.of the local council, but he had to answer a lot of questions about his

:45:07. > :45:12.leader, because it is the party's He's a very honest man,

:45:13. > :45:16.a man of principle and substance There is big stuff happening

:45:17. > :45:22.in the world at the moment, Syria, There's no doubt that people

:45:23. > :45:27.will raise that on the door. It's on the news every night

:45:28. > :45:30.when people come home from work and What I'm really pleased

:45:31. > :45:38.about is just how warm It's quite upbeat, and the challenge

:45:39. > :45:42.for us is to make sure people Ukip mention Jeremy Corbyn

:45:43. > :45:46.as often as they can. This is the third by-election

:45:47. > :45:48.in this area for their candidate, What is with this

:45:49. > :45:58.presidential podium? That is for when

:45:59. > :46:01.our leader comes up to support me. I wouldn't dare present from there

:46:02. > :46:04.when I know Nigel is coming up. It's not that three by-elections

:46:05. > :46:07.have gone to your head and you've I'm going to see the doctor after

:46:08. > :46:12.this one because I must be mad. I'm doing it

:46:13. > :46:14.because I really believe in what we stand for and what we're trying to

:46:15. > :46:17.do to get our country back. The Tories were beaten

:46:18. > :46:20.into third place by Ukip in May. This time their leaflets

:46:21. > :46:24.were resolutely local. It's a local plan, a three-point

:46:25. > :46:27.plan, based on issues that affect people every day and have

:46:28. > :46:30.an effect on their everyday lives. First of all it is tackling

:46:31. > :46:32.crime and anti-social behavior. Secondly, better public

:46:33. > :46:36.transport and more investment. Thirdly, cleaning up our streets,

:46:37. > :46:40.dealing with the blight of potholes, While the Lib Dems campaigned at the

:46:41. > :46:45.local mosque on a national picture. We were the only party

:46:46. > :46:47.in parliament that stood up Thankfully, the Tories have now

:46:48. > :46:55.come on board with our campaign But we are still concerned that

:46:56. > :46:59.there is 12 billion cuts in welfare. And the Green candidate,

:47:00. > :47:03.who is deaf and speaks through an interpreter, took me to a local

:47:04. > :47:06.spot that is about to be built on. This is being planned now to build

:47:07. > :47:11.a warehouse and houses, so this whole area is going to be

:47:12. > :47:16.affected with more traffic. It will create employment

:47:17. > :47:19.but the people that live in this local area are really going

:47:20. > :47:24.to miss this beautiful environment. They all want to represent

:47:25. > :47:26.an area of the north-west of England where Winston Churchill began

:47:27. > :47:28.his parliamentary career. It's also claimed to be the place

:47:29. > :47:31.where fish and chips were invented. There's even

:47:32. > :47:35.a blue plaque commemorating it in the town centre, which gives me

:47:36. > :47:39.an idea for a by-election quiz. When was the last time you went to

:47:40. > :47:43.a chippy and what did you have? Three days ago, fish,

:47:44. > :47:46.chips and peas. There's one next door here and I

:47:47. > :47:52.have to stop myself going in there because I could definitely

:47:53. > :47:55.do fish and chips every day. I have a terrible diet

:47:56. > :47:58.so I eat far too many chips. Is it a very green thing,

:47:59. > :48:00.fish and chips? What we need is

:48:01. > :48:10.a mixed balanced diet with lots Did you know that mushy peas

:48:11. > :48:17.count as one of your five a day? If I'm honest, there's more

:48:18. > :48:19.appetite for fish and chips here We'll find out who tastes victory

:48:20. > :48:29.in a few hours' time. Welcome to viewers on the

:48:30. > :48:32.BBC News Channel to a This Week And joining for the duration,

:48:33. > :48:36.Labour's Shadow Cabinet minister, The Financial Secretary to

:48:37. > :48:44.the Treasury, David Gauke. And the Lib Dem Chief Whip

:48:45. > :48:54.in the Lords, Dick Newby. Welcome all. Let's go back up to

:48:55. > :48:59.Oldham to look in the hall. The counting is going on it looks like

:49:00. > :49:03.it has pretty much come to an end. We may not be here all through the

:49:04. > :49:08.night. We may get the result quickly. We are told that the

:49:09. > :49:15.turnout was 40%. Higher than expected. Higher than has been at

:49:16. > :49:18.by-elections. And the BBC's Political Correspondent, John

:49:19. > :49:29.Pienaar is in no doubt that Labour has won this seat.

:49:30. > :49:34.And of course, Jon Ashworth there should have been no doubt in them

:49:35. > :49:37.winning? No, of course. If the reports are true, we have held on

:49:38. > :49:42.comfortably. It is a tremendous result. A reflection of the

:49:43. > :49:46.brilliant candidate we have in Jim McMahon. He is going to have a great

:49:47. > :49:52.future in Westminster. He is going places. He has been running the

:49:53. > :49:56.council. Doing great things there. A national figure in the local

:49:57. > :50:01.government community. The LGA, so on. He will have a great future in

:50:02. > :50:08.Westminster. What are you being told, how big is

:50:09. > :50:12.the victory? I have been picking up on Twitter, that there are

:50:13. > :50:18.suggestions of 7,000 majority, 10,000 majority. But it is only off

:50:19. > :50:22.Twitter. It could be wrong. But if that is the margin of the victory it

:50:23. > :50:30.is a good victory. Let's go to Paul Nuttall, good

:50:31. > :50:36.morning to you. Have you lost? I can't hear a thing.

:50:37. > :50:43.Paul Nuttall can you hear me? Andrew, it is really muffled.

:50:44. > :50:47.All right, Paul. Let me see if I can speak clearly and you can hear me.

:50:48. > :50:55.Have you lost the by-election? Ah, OK. It looks as if Labour have held

:50:56. > :50:59.this seat it looks as though we have also increased our vote share. It

:51:00. > :51:07.looks as though we have halved their majority. So on the whole it is not

:51:08. > :51:10.a bad night for Ukip. Equally not a great night for the Labour Party as

:51:11. > :51:15.their majority would have been halved.

:51:16. > :51:24.I understand you said to another Channel you accused Labour of,

:51:25. > :51:29."Engaging in dangerous identity politics in Oldham West." What did

:51:30. > :51:33.you mean? Because the Labour Party focussed the campaign on a

:51:34. > :51:39.particular part of the community. To get a block vote. I have never seen

:51:40. > :51:46.anything like this in terms of postal voting. The postal vote went

:51:47. > :51:50.up 15% on the day. I have to congratulate the Labour Party for

:51:51. > :51:56.running a successful postal vote election. But it throws up the

:51:57. > :52:00.question of democracy. Why bother having polling days? The election

:52:01. > :52:05.was probably over a week before the election took place. I think we have

:52:06. > :52:11.to go back to a system where people sign up for postal votes. You are

:52:12. > :52:15.either in the Armed Forces, or working on rigs it is a frontal

:52:16. > :52:22.democracy. What is wrong with getting people to

:52:23. > :52:26.vote by post? What is wrong with Labour organising its postal vote.

:52:27. > :52:31.All of the parties try to organise that'll a their postal vote as well

:52:32. > :52:35.as getting the vote out on the day? Well, we have had problems in Tower

:52:36. > :52:39.Hamlets with this, in Birmingham. I can foe see more problems to come in

:52:40. > :52:44.the northern seats in the years to come. I think that now is the time

:52:45. > :52:48.to say enough is enough. Let's go back to the old system where the

:52:49. > :52:54.voters decided on election day and not a week before the election takes

:52:55. > :53:00.place. But let me be clear, you are not accusing anybody of wrongdoing

:53:01. > :53:04.here? No, I'm not. I am saying that the system is broken, that the

:53:05. > :53:10.system is wrong, that the system is unfair. Of course it give as great

:53:11. > :53:15.advantage to the encumbant and those who run the council. They know where

:53:16. > :53:19.their voters are. I have to congratulate the Labour Party for

:53:20. > :53:25.ensuring that the postal vote goes up 15% in a day. I have never seen

:53:26. > :53:29.anything like it. There are boxes coming out, postal votes whereby

:53:30. > :53:33.Labour are getting 99% of the vote. You have said it twice now in the

:53:34. > :53:37.short interview, you said it with a smile on your face. Is there a

:53:38. > :53:51.hidden meaning? Sorry, I didn't catch that. You have

:53:52. > :53:56.emphasised, twice, the size of the Labour postal vote and how it has

:53:57. > :54:00.gone on so much Labour's way, with a smile on your face, as you

:54:01. > :54:08.congratulate them. What is the real meaning you are trying to give us? I

:54:09. > :54:14.am saying it with sarcasm. I think the system is broken, wrong and

:54:15. > :54:19.undemocratic, and we should simply go back to the old system where the

:54:20. > :54:22.election is decided on election day, and not a week before when there is

:54:23. > :54:28.a lot of campaigning to calm and people have already voted. I think

:54:29. > :54:31.it is wrong and if the Conservative government had anything about them

:54:32. > :54:36.they would instigate some sort of investigation into this system. I

:54:37. > :54:39.would suggest by the end of that investigation they would do away

:54:40. > :54:44.with it altogether and we would go back to a system befitting of a

:54:45. > :54:49.great democratic country. On the matter of identity politics, I take

:54:50. > :54:55.it you are referring to the British -Asian vote in the constituency,

:54:56. > :55:00.about 25%, voting strongly Labour, and it would seem they have come out

:55:01. > :55:03.for Labour this time. All parties try to maximise support in

:55:04. > :55:09.particular communities. What is wrong with what Labour has done?

:55:10. > :55:13.Well, look, if you focus your campaign on one particular part of

:55:14. > :55:18.the community, I think you will end up in hock to that community,

:55:19. > :55:23.particularly if your MP has been elected off the back of postal votes

:55:24. > :55:29.from within that community. I think it is wrong and an affront to

:55:30. > :55:32.democracy. I am not criticising the people here, Andrew, I am

:55:33. > :55:36.criticising the process of postal voting on demand which was brought

:55:37. > :55:42.in by Tony Blair to push up the turnout in elections. Actually, what

:55:43. > :55:45.it has done, as seen in Tower Hamlets and Birmingham, is to give

:55:46. > :55:51.an open goal to those who want to cheat the system. I was asking about

:55:52. > :55:56.identity politics. It is surely not an affront to democracy that British

:55:57. > :56:02.Asians in the constituency have voted in large numbers for a local

:56:03. > :56:05.candidate, not a British-Asian himself, but a well-known local

:56:06. > :56:11.candidate with a long council record. That is not an affront to

:56:12. > :56:15.democracy, is it? The affront to democracy is that huge numbers of

:56:16. > :56:21.people in this constituency have voted by post, and a big number have

:56:22. > :56:26.voted a week before, over a week in some cases, before the election has

:56:27. > :56:34.taken place, and there was a lot of campaigning time lost as a result. I

:56:35. > :56:38.believe that is grossly unfair. A big chunk of the vote within the

:56:39. > :56:43.Asian community has come from postal vote it, and I don't think that is

:56:44. > :56:48.actually fair to smaller parties like ourselves, to insurgent

:56:49. > :56:54.parties, because it plays into the hands of the incumbents and those

:56:55. > :56:58.who run the council. Thank you for joining us live from Oldham, where

:56:59. > :57:02.the count seems to have come to an end and we expect the result very

:57:03. > :57:06.shortly. Paul Nuttall already conceding that Ukip have not managed

:57:07. > :57:11.to take the seat from Labour, although they may well have reduced

:57:12. > :57:14.the size of Labour's majority. Jon Ashworth, what is your response to

:57:15. > :57:21.Paul Nuttall's remarks on postal votes? I am deeply offended. I

:57:22. > :57:25.represent Lester, a hugely diverse city, and I am proud of the

:57:26. > :57:31.diversity of Leicester. I think people know what he was trying to

:57:32. > :57:35.suggest there. I was trying to get him to spell it out. Would you like

:57:36. > :57:40.to? He would not because he knows the reaction he would have got but

:57:41. > :57:44.we know what he was driving at. For him to be saying there is an issue

:57:45. > :57:49.that has gone on in Tower Hamlets, or in Birmingham, I think that is

:57:50. > :57:55.pretty shoddy. If Ukip have lost, he should not be whingeing, suggesting

:57:56. > :57:58.something untoward has gone on. Is it your view that he is implying

:57:59. > :58:05.that somehow there has been some, what word should I use, fiddling of

:58:06. > :58:10.postal votes? Is that what you think is being implied? I think he is

:58:11. > :58:14.trying to make some pretty shoddy suggestions, when actually, if Ukip

:58:15. > :58:17.have not won it is not because there are some big postal vote fiddle that

:58:18. > :58:21.has gone on but because people have not voted Ukip because they do not

:58:22. > :58:26.agree with their policies and do not believe their candidate is the right

:58:27. > :58:33.man to represent them. Is that not belong in the short of it, Diane? I

:58:34. > :58:36.don't think so. We have a two broadsheets, one in November and

:58:37. > :58:40.another one today, making the point that they are not Ukip members,

:58:41. > :58:45.let's be clear on that. They were out talking to individuals who were

:58:46. > :58:48.intending to vote. I will paraphrase one of the remarks, which was along

:58:49. > :58:55.the lines of, do you know who you are going to be voting for? I

:58:56. > :59:01.haven't been told yet, was one of the answers. That is an anecdote,

:59:02. > :59:05.isn't it? You could say that. The other aspect that I understand has

:59:06. > :59:08.happened with the postal vote, the particular community we are talking

:59:09. > :59:13.about, and I'm not denigrating them, they have typically had low turnout.

:59:14. > :59:16.The point Paul Nuttall was making was that this has gone up, I don't

:59:17. > :59:22.know what proportion, but it sounds like at least doubling. We know the

:59:23. > :59:28.overall turnout but we don't yet know the turnout in the British

:59:29. > :59:36.Asian community. He was saying there were more postal vote than usual.

:59:37. > :59:39.Let me make myself even clearer. An issue in terms of not only the

:59:40. > :59:44.proportion of turnout in that particular part of the constituency

:59:45. > :59:47.but also the proportion, and a significant increase in the

:59:48. > :59:53.proportion of postal vote from the community as well. What is your view

:59:54. > :00:00.on postal vote? There is a place for them. We are reforming the system in

:00:01. > :00:05.terms of individual registration. This was the first by-election

:00:06. > :00:08.fought under individual registration and there were 3000 fewer registered

:00:09. > :00:15.voters than there had been in the general election. I think that was a

:00:16. > :00:20.necessary reform and I think it is part of getting it right. Are the

:00:21. > :00:25.rules on postal vote is tight enough? My experience is yes, but I

:00:26. > :00:32.have no particular experience of Oldham. I did think that interview,

:00:33. > :00:38.to put it kindly, smacks of sour grapes from Paul Nuttall. What is

:00:39. > :00:42.your view on postal votes? I think they are a sensible part of the

:00:43. > :00:45.system. We have to make sure they work but for Ukip to argue that they

:00:46. > :00:49.lost the election badly because of postal votes, they are just bad

:00:50. > :00:53.losers. They have lost the argument is, cannot mount any argument in

:00:54. > :00:57.certain parts of the community because of their overall stance.

:00:58. > :01:04.Cannot blame the postal voting system for that, they have to look

:01:05. > :01:08.to themselves. Bad losers? I would I joined the Eastleigh scenario, which

:01:09. > :01:14.was an election I've fought. On that day, and it would not be read

:01:15. > :01:18.different today, I won on the day, but the postal vote was the eventual

:01:19. > :01:22.defeating tactic. I think that Paul was quite right in terms of

:01:23. > :01:27.mentioning that it is almost a replication of that, repetition of

:01:28. > :01:32.that. That does not mean it was an improper result. One of the reasons

:01:33. > :01:36.Labour had more postal vote is here and we had more in Eastleigh is

:01:37. > :01:40.because you are a new party and had not had the time to build up the

:01:41. > :01:46.number of postal votes. That is a fair system. You are wrong. Go back

:01:47. > :01:51.to what happened in Eastleigh. A huge number of postal votes very

:01:52. > :01:55.early in the by-election, within days, and then over the space, and

:01:56. > :02:00.it is not dissimilar here, over the space of time we then gathered in

:02:01. > :02:04.terms of momentum, but those initial, and this is the point he

:02:05. > :02:08.was making, that initial group of individuals who voted by post, they

:02:09. > :02:12.had not heard the different campaign messages. The election was not just

:02:13. > :02:15.about postal vote but we have aired the subject. I want to show you a

:02:16. > :02:31.leaflet from the campaign. The only problem is that that is not

:02:32. > :02:39.from Labour news. There is no party on it at all, but the name at the

:02:40. > :02:43.bottom is the Ukip agent. Is that proper politics? It is exactly, if

:02:44. > :02:48.you like, what we have learnt from our political opponents. We were

:02:49. > :02:54.putting out messages on that leaflet which reflected exactly what we were

:02:55. > :02:57.getting back from constituents. You are implying that is from some

:02:58. > :03:04.organisation within the Labour Party. No. What we are saying is a

:03:05. > :03:08.whole series of messages which, if you were to ask any individual out

:03:09. > :03:12.there what they associate with the Labour Party, it would be

:03:13. > :03:18.uncontrolled mass immigration. Under Tony Blair that started the rot in

:03:19. > :03:21.terms of that. Axing the Armed Forces, look at the Strategic

:03:22. > :03:27.Defence Review from their time in government. Nothing that the cuts of

:03:28. > :03:31.the current government in the Strategic Defence Review. I

:03:32. > :03:35.appreciate that point. All of the points might be fine, but if you

:03:36. > :03:41.think they are right, why didn't you put your Ukip logo on them rather

:03:42. > :03:44.than the Labour logo? This goes back to the point we have discussed, we

:03:45. > :03:49.are complying with electoral law because the imprint at the bottom of

:03:50. > :03:52.the leaflet tells the voter... I am sorry, Andrew, I am only

:03:53. > :04:00.highlighting exactly what has been said. It is a slight of hand. I

:04:01. > :04:03.don't agree with that. I thought you were going to say you did not

:04:04. > :04:09.disagree, because it so obviously is. At the bottom, if you read the

:04:10. > :04:15.small print, which no one ever does, you find out, and it does not even

:04:16. > :04:19.say Ukip, I don't think. You would have to know it was the Ukip agent.

:04:20. > :04:25.If you were to flick to the other side of the leaflet you would see

:04:26. > :04:30.the Ukip messages. On one side, and this is absolutely what every

:04:31. > :04:32.candidate does, you sell your own messages, put your own campaign

:04:33. > :04:38.messages across. And on the other side, you try to undermine the key

:04:39. > :04:44.messages of your opponent. Do you think Jeremy Corbyn was a factor in

:04:45. > :04:48.this election. On that leaflet, it is classic dirty tricks. You did a

:04:49. > :04:51.spirited defence but that is dirty tricks, trying to con the electorate

:04:52. > :04:54.into thinking they have a leaflet from the Labour Party with

:04:55. > :05:01.outlandish claims about what the Labour Party is going to do, but it

:05:02. > :05:07.is not true, is it? Was Mr Corbyn an issue in this by-election? When I

:05:08. > :05:09.was in Oldham a week ago we were getting a warm reception on the

:05:10. > :05:15.doorstep and people were supporting him because of the work he has done

:05:16. > :05:21.for the town. He was a strong local candidate. Very strong. I got no

:05:22. > :05:26.negativity about Jeremy Corbyn. Actually, it was all about local

:05:27. > :05:31.issues. He only turned up once, so you will hardly get negativity when

:05:32. > :05:36.your own leader won't go along. He was going to go a second time but

:05:37. > :05:40.then the Syrian vote came. We are told the result is going to come in

:05:41. > :05:43.about three minutes, so we might not need the strong coffee to see us

:05:44. > :05:48.through the night. Did the Conservatives really fight this

:05:49. > :05:52.campaign at all? Yes, we have a good local candidate fighting for every

:05:53. > :06:00.vote but it is not an easy seat for us, not one you would expect the

:06:01. > :06:05.Conservatives to win. In these urban northern seats, Ukip is now the main

:06:06. > :06:11.challenger to Labour. In by-elections, it tends to suit Ukip

:06:12. > :06:17.well. And in the general election, too. In the north-west of England,

:06:18. > :06:22.Conservatives won 22 seats. Ukip did not win any. We came second in 120,

:06:23. > :06:28.which is not a number you should ignore. He came first in one across

:06:29. > :06:35.the country and none in the north-west of England. Give us time.

:06:36. > :06:40.I suspect, Dick Newby, we will not see any indication available revival

:06:41. > :06:48.tonight. I don't think we would expect a Lib Dem revival to start

:06:49. > :06:52.here. You had 19% in 2010, but you have lost it all. That followed what

:06:53. > :06:59.happened everywhere in the general election. In a by-election, where

:07:00. > :07:03.you go in fourth, it is very unusual in that situation to build very

:07:04. > :07:09.much, but we used it to train a lot of new people and it is part of our

:07:10. > :07:14.fightback to get people working in by-elections as we have done in this

:07:15. > :07:17.by-election. Would it be fair to say since the general election for both

:07:18. > :07:24.the Lib Dems and Ukip, it has not been a great time? Well, we have

:07:25. > :07:28.done extremely well in local council by-elections, winning a whole sheath

:07:29. > :07:33.of them in London and the south-east in the summer. We won a by-election

:07:34. > :07:38.up in Loch nest about a month ago, and we won an election down in

:07:39. > :07:41.Torbay equally three or four weeks ago. We have been winning

:07:42. > :07:45.by-elections the length and breadth of the country and that is the way

:07:46. > :07:50.we will make our fightback. It could be a long fight back because it is

:07:51. > :07:55.not showing in the national polls. It will not be, because we have

:07:56. > :08:00.virtually no MPs. We will win the vote by the in local areas, as we

:08:01. > :08:10.have done in the past. Let's look at the Lib Dem leaflet.

:08:11. > :08:15.It does not refer to how you are doing in the by-election but to the

:08:16. > :08:20.number of councillors on Oldham Council. What has that got to do

:08:21. > :08:30.with anything? It is a statement of fact. Not a statement of fact as to

:08:31. > :08:36.who is going to win the election! You are trying to imply here that

:08:37. > :08:39.Labour is ahead and the only party that can beat them, because they are

:08:40. > :08:45.a good, strong second are the Lib Dems. You could fire lit under

:08:46. > :08:50.fantasyland politics, couldn't you? It points out we are the 2nd party

:08:51. > :08:56.on Oldham Council, a demonstrator will statement of fact. It is

:08:57. > :08:59.another sleight of hand. It is reminding people that on Oldham

:09:00. > :09:06.Council, the Liberal Democrats are the 2nd party. Where do your

:09:07. > :09:11.councillors come from in Oldham? They come from the other part of

:09:12. > :09:19.Oldham. Which is not up for election today. That is true. So it is even

:09:20. > :09:23.more nonsense. Every Lib Dem councillor on the Oldham Council

:09:24. > :09:30.comes from Oldham in, a separate constituency, held by Labour as

:09:31. > :09:35.well. This by-election was Oldham West, where you have not got

:09:36. > :09:40.councillors in the Oldham Council. You are just making it up as you go

:09:41. > :09:46.along. It is a statement of fact, the number of councillors on Oldham

:09:47. > :09:51.Council. Why would that be relevant to a by-election in Oldham West? It

:09:52. > :09:56.demonstrates that the Lib Dems are active and have been successful in

:09:57. > :10:01.elections in Oldham. Part of the same borough. So how many

:10:02. > :10:07.councillors do you have from Oldham West? At the moment, we don't have

:10:08. > :10:13.any. So, what would you say was worse, John Ashcroft, the Ukip one

:10:14. > :10:21.or the Lib Dem one? Definitely the Ukip one. I love to see a Lib Dem

:10:22. > :10:28.bar chart. I think that is great. Fair play to you, but your leaflet

:10:29. > :10:32.was disgraceful. They normally have Lib Dems winning here and they have

:10:33. > :10:43.not won anything for how long? Your MPs wiped out, one MEP. The Lib Dems

:10:44. > :10:48.used to control Oldham Council. But largely from the eastern part of the

:10:49. > :10:52.constituency. I think we have done that to death, giving our viewers a

:10:53. > :10:55.knowledge of Oldham politics they have not had four-year is, probably

:10:56. > :11:01.since Churchill held the constituency. I covered that

:11:02. > :11:06.by-election, too. Let's go to our newsroom where we are joined by John

:11:07. > :11:09.Curtice, professor of politics at Glasgow's other University, the

:11:10. > :11:14.University of Strathclyde. Your thoughts. We have had lots of talk

:11:15. > :11:18.in advance of the by-election about how big a majority Labour might get

:11:19. > :11:25.and what would constitute a bad result. We now know the turnout is

:11:26. > :11:31.up 40%, two thirds of what the turnout was in May. Given that

:11:32. > :11:35.Labour got just over a 15,000 majority in May, if they end up with

:11:36. > :11:40.around a 10,000 majority tonight that will mean that they are just as

:11:41. > :11:43.far ahead of Ukip as they were back in May. That is the first point, the

:11:44. > :11:49.majority we are interested in. The 2nd thing is that we usually expect

:11:50. > :11:55.the principal opposition party to gain votes in by-elections.

:11:56. > :11:58.Governments struggle in by-elections, oppositions do well.

:11:59. > :12:02.On average, in the last parliament, Labour, even though they did not win

:12:03. > :12:05.the general election, increased their share of the vote in

:12:06. > :12:09.by-elections by an average seven percentage points. If we take that

:12:10. > :12:16.as what we might expect, they ought to go up from 55% last time, up to

:12:17. > :12:20.62% tonight. One caveat, Michael Meacher did rather well in this

:12:21. > :12:25.constituency last May, his vote going up by ten percentage points,

:12:26. > :12:30.among the top 50 Labour performances in the country, so Labour might not

:12:31. > :12:34.expect to increase that much. 10,000 majority, anything like 60% of the

:12:35. > :12:39.vote, it would be possible to say that is basically what you would

:12:40. > :12:42.expect from Labour in a by-election. Much of the speculation has been

:12:43. > :12:46.about Labour doing worse, but without the vote would go down and

:12:47. > :12:51.we wait to see whether that is true or not. Given the nature of that

:12:52. > :12:58.speculation, if Labour are at 50-55%, I think the Jeremy Corbyn

:12:59. > :12:59.supporters will declare victory. Because of the exaggerated

:13:00. > :13:11.expectations of Labour doing badly. If Ukip becomes a decent second in

:13:12. > :13:15.terms of sharing the vote, can they take much comfort for that, or have

:13:16. > :13:20.they just come second for the second time? This is a constituency where

:13:21. > :13:26.we know a section of the electorate are willing to vote for a far-right

:13:27. > :13:32.candidate. This was a constituency in 2001 when

:13:33. > :13:38.Nick Griffin, the former leader of the BNP got 16% of the vote. That

:13:39. > :13:44.was regarded as a shock. Ukip did well in the seat in May, just over

:13:45. > :13:50.20% of the vote it may be that they profit from, if not squeezing the

:13:51. > :13:54.Labour vote, as a lot of speculation tonight was about but that the

:13:55. > :13:59.Conservative vote may collapse, that could help Ukip to narrow Labour's

:14:00. > :14:05.majority even if Labour's shore of the vote is as good as it was six

:14:06. > :14:14.months ago. Is Dick Newby right to seek comfort

:14:15. > :14:19.in Lib Dem revival in the local by-elections? He has pointed it out.

:14:20. > :14:22.But also right to point out that at the moment, that the Liberal

:14:23. > :14:30.Democrats' performance is still around. The 7, 8% that they got in

:14:31. > :14:37.the UK general election but so far no sign of a Lib Dem rerevival.

:14:38. > :14:40.Even if they came second, it would be a reminder to the Liberal

:14:41. > :14:46.Democrats, that once upon a time they were the past masters in get

:14:47. > :14:49.the protest vote in the by-elections, and during the last

:14:50. > :14:53.by-elections much of that was taken by Ukip, it will not be easy for the

:14:54. > :14:58.Liberal Democrats to reclaim that Mantell. So still a lot of work for

:14:59. > :15:02.the Liberal Democrats to do before we begin to think of them once again

:15:03. > :15:07.as significant players in British politics.

:15:08. > :15:11.Thank you very much, John Curtice. This by-election is taking place at

:15:12. > :15:16.the about five months or so after the election. Not a lot of activity.

:15:17. > :15:23.There. The counting has stopped, as you can see. So we are expecting it

:15:24. > :15:29.in a couple of minutes but mind you we were told a couple of minutes ago

:15:30. > :15:32.to expect it in a couple of minutes. So, don't hold your breath! Now a

:15:33. > :15:42.look at the polls, the natural picture. This is the November poll.

:15:43. > :15:50.The averages. The Conservatives are nine points

:15:51. > :15:54.ahead at 39%. Labour second at 30%. The Conservatives up a little bit on

:15:55. > :15:59.the actual result. Labour down a little. The Lib Dems at 7% that is

:16:00. > :16:04.roughly what they got at the election.

:16:05. > :16:13.So, showing 13%, what you got in the election. And the Greens down at 3%.

:16:14. > :16:18.Not a huge change. I suppose if you want to give a little credit to the

:16:19. > :16:23.Conservatives, given the reductions in the Labour Party, you should be

:16:24. > :16:29.doing better? It is nice to be doing better.

:16:30. > :16:33.They are going on stage, carry on talking, David Gauke.

:16:34. > :16:38.We are doing than we were at the point of the general elections. And

:16:39. > :16:43.better at the opini polls as. A fair point.

:16:44. > :16:48.OK. Let's go over to Oldham now to

:16:49. > :16:58.Oldham West. Over now to Oldham West Royton to

:16:59. > :17:02.hear the result. For election of a member of party for Oldham West

:17:03. > :17:06.Royton, I do here by give notice that the number of votes recorded

:17:07. > :17:14.for each candidate at the said election is as follow.

:17:15. > :17:27.The official Monster Raving Loony Party, 141.

:17:28. > :17:41.Bickely, John, Joseph, the Ukip UK Independence Party, Ukip, 6487.

:17:42. > :17:51.. #3w6789 roughey, Jane, Liberal Democrats, 1024. Daley, James Barry,

:17:52. > :18:10.the Conservative Party candidate, 2596.

:18:11. > :18:27.Harth, Simeon, Green Party, 249. Jim McMahon, Labour, 172... The 23478 of

:18:28. > :18:33.papers APPLAUSE.

:18:34. > :18:58.The number of papers, ballot papers rejects was as follows.

:18:59. > :18:59.C, 1 ah 1. D 174, I do declare that Jim McMahon is elected Parliament

:19:00. > :19:19.for Oldham West Royton. So, there we have the Labour

:19:20. > :19:26.supporters there. Jubilant that Labour has held the seem

:19:27. > :19:31.By a comfortable majority too, about 10,000. Let's hear from the new MP

:19:32. > :19:37.for Oldham West Royton, Jim McMahon.

:19:38. > :19:43.Genuinely, the result is staggering. I think.

:19:44. > :19:49.I never imagined that I would be standing here as an MP for the town

:19:50. > :19:54.that I live in, that I love and that I have fought hard to get a better

:19:55. > :20:00.lot for. When your neighbours and friends come out and support you on

:20:01. > :20:06.this scale, it genuinely is overwhelming.

:20:07. > :20:11.I was thinking throughout the campaign, and tonight, that Michael

:20:12. > :20:14.will be watching over, I was so scared of letting Michael down, I

:20:15. > :20:27.can't tell you. APPLAUSE.

:20:28. > :20:29.And I'm glad that together we have delivered a result that Michael

:20:30. > :20:39.would be proud of. APPLAUSE.

:20:40. > :20:43.It's quite a lot of people to thank, I can't genuinely say everybody by

:20:44. > :20:47.name. We have had thousands of people from all over the country

:20:48. > :20:52.come to Oldham West to make sure that Labour had a good result

:20:53. > :20:57.tonight. But for our party staff, for the volunteers, for the

:20:58. > :21:05.councillor, the MPs, MEPs, working day and night to make sure that we

:21:06. > :21:12.got a good result tonight. I should thank Carol and the team, Oldham

:21:13. > :21:17.Council. Is if you have not heard it is the best council in the country.

:21:18. > :21:24.We have been able to prove that this is how an election count should be

:21:25. > :21:28.done so. To you the staff, the team and Carol here, we appreciate all of

:21:29. > :21:33.the hard work that has gone on here. I came into politics as I wanted to

:21:34. > :21:40.make my little bit of the world a better place. Jack, my son, and

:21:41. > :21:45.Harry are the reasons why I consider doing this. I want to ensure that

:21:46. > :21:51.they can live in an Oldham that they can be proud of. I think we have

:21:52. > :21:54.come a long way. APPLAUSE.

:21:55. > :22:00.We have come a long way together but there is a long way still to go. We

:22:01. > :22:05.have laid the foundations for a positive future for our town and one

:22:06. > :22:08.to be proud of but yes to fight for investment, jobs, resources and I

:22:09. > :22:12.think that together we have the mandate to do that. I see what the

:22:13. > :22:17.Tories are doing. I see the Tories taking money from towns like Oldham,

:22:18. > :22:22.I am sick to death of it. The reason I am making the shift from being a

:22:23. > :22:25.council leader to being an MP is that I recognise for Oldham to do

:22:26. > :22:42.well, we need a Labour government. APPLAUSE.

:22:43. > :22:46.I've been able to do what I have done because of Charlene Jack and

:22:47. > :22:52.Harry, giving me the support in the background, doing what I have done.

:22:53. > :22:56.I have loved every minute being a council leader in Oldham. I have no

:22:57. > :23:00.separation anxiety at the thought of moving on but for awful the staff

:23:01. > :23:04.that work, all of the council, you are like my family. This was a

:23:05. > :23:08.really difficult decision to make in moving on. But you need to know, I

:23:09. > :23:13.will always be here, championing the case and the work you do. I think

:23:14. > :23:16.you make a world of difference to a quarter of a million people who need

:23:17. > :23:36.us, so thank you. APPLAUSE.

:23:37. > :23:42.So, there we go. Jim McMahon, 35-year-old. Son of a truck driver

:23:43. > :23:46.from Manchester is now the new Labour MP for Oldham West Royton.

:23:47. > :23:52.He is the leader of the Oldham #k0u7b8 there. It covers the west

:23:53. > :23:56.and the east parts of the city and the surrounding area. He has been

:23:57. > :24:00.give an hug by his wife to congratulate him.

:24:01. > :24:05.No other speeches, the only one we got was from him. The majority was

:24:06. > :24:12.comfortable. Not as big as Michael Meacher but then the turnout was

:24:13. > :24:23.lower. Michael Meacher won in May by 14700. Jim McMahon won by 1825 on a

:24:24. > :24:28.lower turn out. The turn out today was 40%. So in terms of the

:24:29. > :24:32.percentage of the majority it is pretty high. We can get John Curtice

:24:33. > :24:38.to do the number crunching in a moment. As that is going on, we have

:24:39. > :24:49.had a tweet from Nigel Farage, the leader of Ukip who says: Evidence

:24:50. > :24:55.from an impeccable source that today's postal voting was bent.

:24:56. > :24:59.We have no idea, of course what that actually means in practice, no doubt

:25:00. > :25:06.that will be substantiated as the time goes on. Of course, we have

:25:07. > :25:12.heard from his deputy, Paul Nuttall who has been making a big issue of

:25:13. > :25:16.the postal vote. So there we have it, Labour hold the first

:25:17. > :25:21.by-election of the Parliament. Holding it comfortably.

:25:22. > :25:27.Jon Ashworth, your reaction? Really pleased. I think you saw from the

:25:28. > :25:30.speech that Jim gave, he is a figure of great integrity. He will have a

:25:31. > :25:36.great impact at Westminster. A great result. He was fighting the

:25:37. > :25:43.by-election on the local issues, on the stuff that the area needs,

:25:44. > :25:47.Oldham needs. Talking about the issues that are affecting the people

:25:48. > :25:53.on the doorstep. You mean Ukip? Yes. I am made up for

:25:54. > :25:59.him. Really pleased. It is fair to say, he is more your

:26:00. > :26:06.kind of Labour than Jeremy Corbyn's Labour? What, a northern

:26:07. > :26:11.working-class lad? Yes. And in the centre of party? I am not

:26:12. > :26:18.sure that the labels help. They do when they are embarrassing!

:26:19. > :26:22.Look, he spoke out loyally about his support for Jeremy. Jeremy is the

:26:23. > :26:27.leader of the Labour Party. We have won under his leadership. And won

:26:28. > :26:31.with a bigger share of the vote than Michael Meacher. The calculations

:26:32. > :26:38.are that he has won with a 52% share of the vote. Michael Meacher got 55%

:26:39. > :26:44.of the vote. But let's go to the man who knows the real story of these

:26:45. > :26:49.numbers. Let's go back to our nan the newsroom, John Curtice. There is

:26:50. > :26:53.John Curtice there. He is maybe still doing the number crunching.

:26:54. > :27:01.John, can you go through the numbers now? I nake, the Labour vote, up on

:27:02. > :27:08.what Michael Meacher got. Well above 60%, nearly 65%. Nothing

:27:09. > :27:12.spectacular. This is the kind of performance you expect an opposition

:27:13. > :27:18.party such as Labour to achieve in a seat it was defending in the

:27:19. > :27:22.Parliament. But what it is true is that the expectations set by many a

:27:23. > :27:27.journalist in advance of the by-election was that the Labour

:27:28. > :27:34.majority would plummet and Labour's share of the vote to fall. Given

:27:35. > :27:47.that the expectations were set. Then this result is something whereby the

:27:48. > :27:53.Jeremy Corbynisters of the Labour Party will take this positively.

:27:54. > :27:57.On the other side, they will argue that Jim McMahon was locally

:27:58. > :28:01.popular. Well-known. That the credit goes to him. But the truth is that

:28:02. > :28:09.for the time being, the speculation that Jeremy Corbyn may be going

:28:10. > :28:14.sooner rather than later on the grounds he has been dangerous, all

:28:15. > :28:22.of that speculation will be on hold now until at least the New Year.

:28:23. > :28:28.And the share of the votes Labour got 62.2% share. Up 7. 5% on the

:28:29. > :28:34.general election under the late Michael Meacher. Ukip coming second

:28:35. > :28:39.with 23.3% of the vote. Up 2. 7%. I would suggest. A disappointing

:28:40. > :28:44.result for Ukip. They would have hoped to have done better. The

:28:45. > :28:54.Conservative voting collapsed in half. They got 9.3% of the vote,

:28:55. > :28:58.down 9. 6. The Lib Dems 3. 7. Actually, there is no change for the

:28:59. > :29:03.Lib Dems. The greens down a little bit there. Let's put the figures up

:29:04. > :29:10.on to the screens to see the result of the by-election. There are the

:29:11. > :29:19.votes themselves. 17,000 compel 322. Giving Labour a

:29:20. > :29:25.66.2% share. No-one came close.

:29:26. > :29:29.I suggest that is not a strong second, you are 11,000 votes behind.

:29:30. > :29:34.It is a pretty poor result, given your expectations? Not in terms of

:29:35. > :29:40.expectations, it is another very good second. We have, you have

:29:41. > :29:45.made... Let's, can I just make a point.

:29:46. > :29:52.You got 23% of the vote, the winner 62% of the vote.

:29:53. > :30:00.I don't know what Nigel means with his tweet about the postal vote. If

:30:01. > :30:03.we factor in the postal vote, that may account for the fact that Labour

:30:04. > :30:07.has seen there's go up by the amount that it has. Ukip have still taken

:30:08. > :30:32.their vote share up. Not a great result, when you see

:30:33. > :30:37.that chart. It is not a good second. It is second, and I have no problem

:30:38. > :30:41.with second. We still increased our vote compared to the general

:30:42. > :30:44.election, and look what we have done to the Conservative vote, which

:30:45. > :30:49.should have been the challenger if some pundits were to be believed. I

:30:50. > :30:58.cannot member any pundits saying that. Talking about George Osborne

:30:59. > :31:02.trying to say... He is not a pundit! The Conservatives tried to

:31:03. > :31:27.make the point that they would take on Labour in these places.

:31:28. > :31:34.Not that any of that means very much, but the Conservatives are

:31:35. > :31:39.nowhere, is the correct description, isn't it? Obviously we have gone

:31:40. > :31:44.down and that is disappointing but it is not an unusual result for a

:31:45. > :31:49.governing party in a by-election, particularly when you have the

:31:50. > :31:53.incumbent party and then the main challenger was clearly Ukip. It

:31:54. > :31:58.still causes a problem, that your party, styling itself as the party

:31:59. > :32:02.of the workers and one nation, you still have a major problem, and you

:32:03. > :32:06.have been dining out on the northern powerhouse as well, you still have a

:32:07. > :32:12.problem with urban voters in the North. The northern powerhouse is

:32:13. > :32:18.about transforming the Northern economy, which is a project for many

:32:19. > :32:21.years. This is about trying to make a difference over decades, in terms

:32:22. > :32:27.of improving the economic performance of northern cities. It

:32:28. > :32:30.is not about getting a short-term lift in a by-election. We will

:32:31. > :32:35.concentrate on fulfilling our manifesto commitments and that is

:32:36. > :32:38.the right thing to do. In terms of share of the vote, the best we can

:32:39. > :32:46.save for the Lib Dems is that it hasn't got any worse. We were not

:32:47. > :32:53.squeezed. Your vote was down substantially. It is always clearer

:32:54. > :32:59.by-elections to the front two contestants are and everybody else

:33:00. > :33:04.gets squeezed. People concentrate on the winner and number two. It has

:33:05. > :33:11.been known for people to put out the election leaflets which say it is a

:33:12. > :33:16.two horse race, with a bar chart! Let's go straight to tonight's

:33:17. > :33:21.winner, Jim McMahon, leader of the local council and now the MP for his

:33:22. > :33:28.constituency of Oldham West and Royton. Thank you for joining us on

:33:29. > :33:33.this BBC by-election special. Why do you think you did even better than

:33:34. > :33:38.Michael Meacher in terms of share of the vote? Well, we put in a lot of

:33:39. > :33:42.work, we had volunteers from up and down the country lending support. We

:33:43. > :33:47.had a positive campaign when others focused on negative issues. People

:33:48. > :33:51.want to know the hope and vision for the future and I think we were able

:33:52. > :33:56.to put that across. My track record as council leader fighting for

:33:57. > :34:00.Oldham clearly played out. Genuinely, I have been overwhelmed

:34:01. > :34:06.by the support from local people. Nigel Farage, and also the deputy

:34:07. > :34:14.leader of Ukip, Paul Nuttall, have been questioning if not explicitly,

:34:15. > :34:20.the validity of the postal vote. Do you have anything to say about that?

:34:21. > :34:24.I think Ukip just need to understand that people have the right to vote

:34:25. > :34:28.for the party that best represents their interests. I can say with

:34:29. > :34:33.confidence that we represent every community in Oldham and they came

:34:34. > :34:38.out and supported Labour. What kind of Labour MP you going to be? Are

:34:39. > :34:46.you going to be a centrist? It is fair to say you are not a Corbyn

:34:47. > :34:52.Easter. I am Jim from Oldham, I want to be a good constituency MP and

:34:53. > :34:56.represent the town I love. You said you were worried about letting down

:34:57. > :35:05.Michael Meacher. If he was still here, he would be thinking you had

:35:06. > :35:09.done your party and your town proud. We still miss Michael. This was a

:35:10. > :35:13.big election for us and we are still grieving the loss of a friend. There

:35:14. > :35:18.was a lot of pressure to get a good result for his memory. If he was

:35:19. > :35:23.looking down on us today, he would be pleased that people came out and

:35:24. > :35:26.supported Labour. If the by-election had been last week and you had one

:35:27. > :35:33.as you did tonight, would you have voted in the Syrian vote with Jeremy

:35:34. > :35:37.Corbyn or Hilary Benn? This isn't about individuals. This is about

:35:38. > :35:41.what is right and whether people are satisfied with the case that has

:35:42. > :35:45.been put. I put on record last week that if I had had the vote for

:35:46. > :35:49.Syria, I was not convinced that David Cameron fully made the case,

:35:50. > :35:55.because I have been concern, like other people have been, about what

:35:56. > :36:00.the end is for that. I could only read what was in national papers.

:36:01. > :36:04.But that was my position. Thank you for being with us for our first

:36:05. > :36:09.interview, hopefully one of many when you get to the Westminster and

:36:10. > :36:17.we see you on the Daily Politics. Nigel Farage is still tweeting, now

:36:18. > :36:21.saying, as a veteran of over 30 by-elections I have never seen such

:36:22. > :36:26.a perverse result. Serious questions need to be asked.

:36:27. > :36:30.Well, Mr Farage, if you have any information which would allow us to

:36:31. > :36:34.ask serious questions, we would be delighted to do so. That may be a

:36:35. > :36:38.developing story overnight and into the morning. Jon Ashworth, I would

:36:39. > :36:42.suggest Jeremy Corbyn will be over the moon about this result, and that

:36:43. > :36:47.any of your colleagues in the parliamentary party thinking that Mr

:36:48. > :36:51.Corbyn will not be long with you as leader are going to have to think

:36:52. > :36:55.again. He will be over the moon and he should be, a very good result for

:36:56. > :36:58.the Labour Party. We increased our share of the vote and we have an

:36:59. > :37:03.excellent new member of the Parliamentary Labour Party. He

:37:04. > :37:08.should be over the moon, as I am, that the Labour Party has done well.

:37:09. > :37:16.And Mr Corbyn is here to stay as your leader. He was just elected two

:37:17. > :37:19.months ago by party leaders! Any option the Parliamentary Labour

:37:20. > :37:24.Party may have thinking he is simply an interim leader, this by-election

:37:25. > :37:28.gives them no comfort whatsoever. What Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party

:37:29. > :37:30.has been doing is showing that when we take on the government over tax

:37:31. > :37:37.credits, they were forced to back down. We were running campaigns

:37:38. > :37:40.against the police cuts, and they backed down on that. Jeremy

:37:41. > :37:45.Corbyn's Labour Party is pushing hard against the government, talking

:37:46. > :37:48.about the issues that affect people on a daily basis. Jim McMahon was

:37:49. > :37:52.talking about the issues that affect people on a daily basis and he has

:37:53. > :37:58.one, and that is a lesson for all of us in the Labour Party. We are

:37:59. > :38:02.agreeing this was not a recovery for the Lib Dems, but it is not much of

:38:03. > :38:07.a recovery for Ukip either. You are still in the doldrums. I would

:38:08. > :38:10.accept that if our vote has gone down but it has gone up. I am more

:38:11. > :38:17.than happy with the fact that we have gone up, even only 3%, as your

:38:18. > :38:21.chart showed. To us, that is not a party in the doldrums, it is a party

:38:22. > :38:26.still going places. We had volunteers campaigning, we were not

:38:27. > :38:30.sing people in like the Labour Party were doing. You might want to

:38:31. > :38:33.denigrate our leaflets, but some of the stuff you put out, some of the

:38:34. > :38:40.comments today, pretty appalling stuff. Regretfully, politics is a

:38:41. > :38:46.dirty game. It is what is starting to turn people off. That aspect in

:38:47. > :38:50.terms of elections has not gone away. Maybe we should be careful not

:38:51. > :38:55.to read too much of national significance into this. We began

:38:56. > :39:00.today with you saying this has been very much local election, in that

:39:01. > :39:03.most of the candidates were local. The Ukip candidate was pretty local

:39:04. > :39:09.as well, the Conservative candidate was from the area, too. And local

:39:10. > :39:13.issues, and the fact that the Labour candidate had been head of the local

:39:14. > :39:19.council, all of that added up to an election in which local issues were

:39:20. > :39:23.strong. Local issues were a big part of this by-election. In the last

:39:24. > :39:27.parliament we were winning by-elections, increasing the share

:39:28. > :39:31.of the vote, and going on to lose. Ukip did not do as well as they

:39:32. > :39:35.should have, but it is clear they are still doing reasonably well in

:39:36. > :39:38.northern Labour seats. The problem at the last election was it meant we

:39:39. > :39:43.lost a number of Labour Tory marginals because of the increase in

:39:44. > :39:46.the Ukip vote. So we still have work to do to convince people who have

:39:47. > :39:51.drifted away from Labour to come back to us. I am celebrating this

:39:52. > :39:55.result but we still have work to do in the Labour Party. And it turned

:39:56. > :40:00.out not to be a referendum on Jeremy Corbyn. This was an election

:40:01. > :40:05.campaign about the local issues, Jim's record and the campaigning he

:40:06. > :40:07.was doing at the beginning of the campaign against tax credit cuts

:40:08. > :40:16.that George Osborne was at that point set on implement in. Is Ukip

:40:17. > :40:23.not in danger, given the number of seats it is second in in the North

:40:24. > :40:25.of England, in urban areas in particular, in danger of replacing

:40:26. > :40:31.the Conservatives as the 2nd party in the North? I do think that is

:40:32. > :40:37.right. There are a number of places where they are second my very safe

:40:38. > :40:40.Labour seats. We have seen an example of a by-election where they

:40:41. > :40:44.have not been able to make the breakthrough today. There may be

:40:45. > :40:47.other occasions where they will get close, but they haven't done that

:40:48. > :40:53.today. I come back to the general election result. We won 22 seats in

:40:54. > :40:57.the north-west of England, a large number of seats in Yorkshire, an

:40:58. > :41:01.extra seat in the north-east of England this year. You can look at

:41:02. > :41:08.the Heywood and Middleton by-election result. You are winning

:41:09. > :41:13.elections, like the Lib Dems, are you? We won the last general

:41:14. > :41:19.election, is my point. We did well in the North of England compared to

:41:20. > :41:22.what expectations were. Ukip did not win a single parliamentary seat,

:41:23. > :41:26.even though they did well in the Heywood and Middleton by-election in

:41:27. > :41:32.October last year. But they did not break through, did not win any seats

:41:33. > :41:36.from Labour. And the reality is that the next government will either be a

:41:37. > :41:41.Labour government or a Conservative government. In the end it is

:41:42. > :41:44.difficult for Ukip to win, unless it is an overwhelmingly white

:41:45. > :41:52.constituency. That is the blunt truth, isn't it? In the Heywood and

:41:53. > :41:58.Middleton one, the ethnic vote was only 5%. Here it is between 25% and

:41:59. > :42:02.30%, largely Pakistani and Bangladeshi. If they come out to

:42:03. > :42:07.vote, you do not do well. You are specific in the appeal you are

:42:08. > :42:12.making. I am not going to try and argue against you on that, Andrew.

:42:13. > :42:15.We have admitted over and over again that there are certain

:42:16. > :42:19.constituencies, certain parts of the population where we do not appeal to

:42:20. > :42:22.them politically. Having said that, even in newspaper coverage in the

:42:23. > :42:26.last couple of weeks there were incidents cited where if you want to

:42:27. > :42:31.talk about summary from a Muslim background, they were saying they

:42:32. > :42:34.were going to vote for us. It is a slow process. We are not expecting

:42:35. > :42:43.to suddenly take John's seat in Leicester South. That is probably

:42:44. > :42:47.realistic. Give us a final thought. Lots of for that ability, very early

:42:48. > :42:51.in the parliament, the parties who work hardest on the ground winning

:42:52. > :42:56.votes, vote by the, are those who will do well in the longer term.

:42:57. > :43:02.That is why Labour did well tonight. They did indeed. Labour held on

:43:03. > :43:08.comfortably to the Oldham West and Royton constituency in yesterday's

:43:09. > :43:11.by-election. That is it from our by-election special programme. Thank

:43:12. > :43:12.you to our guests and to everyone who joined in. Joe will be here

:43:13. > :43:15.tomorrow with the Daily There once was a sprout

:43:16. > :43:18.with love to give Looking for friends

:43:19. > :43:24.to spend Christmas with Said, "I love Christmas pudding

:43:25. > :43:28.and would not go without