22/06/2011 am.pm

Good morning, welcome to the programme. It is like waiting for a

bus here at the Senedd this week. The government made for

announcements this week which gives us plenty to talk about. What will

the impact over the Welsh government's decision to put on

hold eight badger cull be? And we will be there for David Cameron and

Ed Miliband's Prime Minister's Questions.

And I will be discussing the route map on how Wales is funded.

Joining me, two newcomers to the sofa. One, a new AM and one, not so

new. It is the former Presiding Officer. First, controversial plans

for a badger cull in west Wales have been put on hold while at the

review is carried out. The Welsh government says an independent part

of experts will examine the science. It had been part of an attempt by

the previous Labour Plaid Cymru coalition to combat bovine TB.

The order is still in effect. What we have said is that we will not

have a call for the period of the review because we wish to be

informed by that review by independent exercise as to the best

way forward. We think that is the most responsible attitude in

dealing with what is a very, very difficult problem that has strong

feeling a rounded in the farming communities but also in the general

public. Let's gauge the feeling of a bit

too AMs on the sofa. What do you make of the decision yesterday?

Disappointment, I think, for Welsh farmers. How many scientific

reviews do we need? It is not so long ago that he agreed that we

plan a way forward. 92 days ago. And here we are back to square one.

It is a serious issue for the farmers. There is a concern that

the longer there is a delay before any cull happens, the longer that

TB can spread and fester? Of course. My concern is that we had three

votes which were identical. We had issues in the High Court but

clearly, the decision of that Assembly was to go ahead. Now that

we are a minority Welsh Labour government, they have decided to

tear up what was a basic part of the one Wales agreement without

concern for either the proper science for the milk industry are

for the environment. Quite frankly, I think it is a very bad example of

a successor government reneging on the job of the previous Cabinet. I

also lay blame on my own party. Were we still in government, I

promise you this would not have happened. That is the nature of

politics. Your party are turning up lots of things that the previous

Labour government did, that is the government's prerogative, isn't it?

It just demonstrates huge, indecisive Labour government in

Wales. Why is that? You will have to ask them. I suspect they have

new members questioning their policy. Why do you think his

decision has been taken? The usual excuses, but this was in the

manifestos and they had to do something. While I am concerned

about is what is happening to the Welsh science advice on this issue.

I will look forward to was the National Trust have organised just

over the water. I have no objection to looking for other ways of

controlling TB in badgers but I was convinced by the scientific

evidence, led by a very distinguished wealth -- Welsh vet.

She knows the signs of Environment will control and support. -- the

size of environmentally controlled. I wonder how many people who

complain about this know about the distress in farming families when a

herd is wiped out, sometimes more than once. I am convinced this is a

politically motivated short-term decision by a minister to delay

this matter. What has the chief scientific adviser got to

contribute? He is not a vet. We did ask him to come under he was not

available. I am sure this is a story that will run. We may walk --

talk about it again. Let's find out what is happening in the said.

The Oriel is very busy this morning. People are looking forward to this

afternoon. We start with questions to ministers. This time it is the

finance minister and the business minister. We will then have a

statement from the local government minister, coral Sergeant, on the

Boundary Commission. There is a debate on the controversial

technical advice note under which wind farms and the like are

established. We have seen protests outside the Assembly in recent

times on this. The Conservatives want that to be reviewed and what a

moratorium on projects like this until it just happened. -- What a

moratorium. There is a debate on transport. Conservatives favour

things are taking too long and costing too much. Things are likely

to get worse because we are expecting cuts to the capital

budget of about 41% over four years. That is the Budget from which roads

are funded. At the end of the afternoon, Plaid Cymru have a

debate on their idea for a not-for- profit company to raise investment

for roads, schools and infrastructure.

Mark explain what is going on in the Assembly is afternoon but you

can find out even more on the website.

That is the Senedd scene. What is the Westminster picture today?

Thomas can tell us was stopped --. We will talk about Carwyn Jones'

route map, his idea for the Assembly funding this morning.

There has been plenty of reaction here, what is the reaction in

Westminster? Yesterday, Carwyn Jones set out his wish-list, asking

for things like landfill tax, passenger duty, and so on. He asked

for parity at least on corporation tax. Welsh MPs were asking the

Treasury team about this yesterday and it was interesting to hear

George Osborne saying, well, he referred to the Calman Commission,

and made the point that went the Calman Commission was looking at

Scotland, three are before parties came to a consensus about Scottish

Power's. -- three out of four parties. Hopefully, Wales can do

this as well, they were saying. Before we have Prime Minister's

Questions in the Commons today, there are Scottish questions. Some

Welsh MPs have put down questions, asking about corporation tax and

asking whether that should be devolved to Scotland. This is to

raise the issue of whether it should be devolved to Wales as well.

A general feeling amongst Wales MPs who may be sceptical about further

Paris for the Welsh Assembly Government that they see merit in

this argument that Carwyn Jones is making, that corporation tax powers

handed to Edinburgh and Belfast should come to Cardiff as well.

That is one to watch this morning. Let's head abroad to Afghanistan.

There seems to be a suggestion that the Prime Minister is on a

collision course over it -- with are reduced over Britain's future

in the country? -- army chiefs. This all started last week when

some of the Navy and RAF achieves it told MPs privately that they

thought maybe the NATO mission in Libya was not sustainable beyond

September. Surprisingly, these remarks find their ways into the

paper! We were taken aback yesterday when David Cameron had

his monthly press conference. He was asked about this and he said,

sometimes every day newspapers and I think, you do the fighting and I

will do the talking. Not everyone thinks that is perhaps the best way

of having good relations with the military chiefs, although he is not

the first Prime Minister to run into this sort of problem with the

top brass. I am sure this will come up in Prime Minister's Questions.

It could get worse before David Cameron in that the general chief-

of-staff is a BBC documentary this evening were he suggests that the

timetable for withdrawing from Afghanistan could be changed. David

Cameron once British troops to come out by 2015. There is a opportunity

for made Bella band -- an opportunity for Ed Miliband to

suggest that David Cameron is not in control. Tory backbenchers are

unhappy that those generals have been straying onto political turf.

Let's go to assaults on the Government's decision to postpone

the badger cull. -- what are your thoughts?

The First Minister has laid out his route map for the way it Wales

should be funded in the future. He favours borrowing and taxation

powers. I have got a couple of guests, but

there is also a quiet here, so you will know what it is. I am joined

by the Labour AM for Pontypridd, and the Plaid Cymru AM, Mr Jones.

We covered a range of things yesterday. Carwyn Jones was to see

reform of the Barnett formula, additional borrowing Paris for

Wales, at landfill tax, stamp duty, the aggregates luvvie, -- levy, air

passenger duty to vault. What did you make of this? This was a

complete replacement for Barnet. We have a very unfair if Formula which

means it needs to be changed as quickly as possible. -- funding

formula. Borrowing is the most important issue. There are dangers

from robbing revenue to finance borrowing. We are looking at income

streams. There is a consensus on Barnet. The First Minister referred

to it. There may be disagreements around the edges but everyone in

the Chamber wants to see it reformed, don't they? That is true

but where have they been for the past 12 years? When they were in

London they could have done something about it but they refused

to acknowledge that Barnett was even unfair and it was only after

we established an inquiry... Is it is gone now? But what is the

official view of Ed Balls in this? If they say that the Labour Party

agree on this, that would give it legitimacy but at the moment, there

is no indication that the Labour Party in the UK has changed its

view. We are all supportive of a change for Barnet because that is

what we have been arguing for for 12 years. I would say the same

about taxes. If you look at the Labour Party manifesto, and it

Carwyn Jones keeps referring to it, the only thing about tax raising

powers there is is that we will not seek to gain any Paris in terms of

income tax. We have shifted rapidly and the policy seems to be whatever

Northern Ireland and Scotland once, we wanted as well even if we do not

really want it. Do we want -- let's move on to borrowing. Yann Lyn

Jones identified a key problem yesterday. If you want to borrow

money you have to pay it back. think in the housing field, there

is a guaranteed housing -- income stream and we could have a much

more radical programme using different mechanisms. How do we pay

back in the future? You pay it back because you have an income stream.

We are talking about affordable housing of the generation of people

who will never get on to the mortgage ladder, that is what we

are concerned with. It is a guaranteed industry. That is what

private companies do and there is no reason why December lit --

Assembly could not do something similar. I made these points in my

election campaign. Income tax is a particularly complex problem for

his. We have said in our manifesto that we are not going to go for

income tax powers. There are put it -- particular problems would it.

we need to go for income tax raising powers, when the government

have made it clear they do not want What we don't have a that clear

vision from the First Minister up. We should be looking at it and

seeing it as part of a longer term process. A whole range of things to

digest there. Thank you very much. Still to come on AM-PM:

We'll be going live to the House of Commons for Prime Minister's

Questions. That's at midday. Before that, we'll take a look back

at some of First Minister's Questions in the Senedd yesterday.

Under the new guidance from the new Presiding Officer, Rosemary Butler,

the three opposition party leaders get the chance to question Carwyn

Jones in turn. Plaid Cymru's Ieuan Wyn Jones was up first. He accused

the First Minister of being short on policy detail, in particular on

health. What I am finding it's strange

about this is that it is only one I'm asking you questions about it

that you are telling us what your health policies. Isn't it the

responsibility of the Government to come to this Assembly and actually

tell us what their policy agenda is rather than expecting leaders of

opposition parties to drag it out of you week after week after week.

Can I say to you, First Minister, that it is a major challenge to

deliver the health policy you have set out in your manifesto because

we already know that in real terms, despite the fact that in cash terms

it stands to the Budget, in real terms there are going to be cuts.

We are seeing waiting lists getting longer, the centralisation of

services in district general hospitals, within health boards,

and Wales is behind the game on cancer care and stroke care. Can

you really tell us what your agenda is going to be to deal with those

issues over the next five years? The budget he criticises is the

budget he supported in government. He cannot have it both ways. He

says we have no policy, I would be happy to send him a copy of our

manifesto. He will see their the commitment to GPs' services. I

don't think it is fair to say that somehow this is something we have

kept secret. Let's deal with this seriously. Let's really deal with

this seriously. I have made it clear to you that I am prepared to

defend the Budget I agreed in government with you as long as I

know what policies you are going to deliver to make sure that you can

keep within that budget. Let's put that to one side. I have made it

clear that I am very happy to be supporting that budget, provided I

know what you are going to deliver. The problem is, I don't know what

you're going to deliver. You are not prepared to come to this

Assembly with a programme for government that we can challenge

and scrutinised. I don't think it is the responsibility of opposition

leaders to drag out of you week after week what you are going to do

on health service. Let me ask you a question about your delivery. Are

you going to be coming to your Assembly before you set up that

delivery unit, the policy you expect that delivery unit to

monitor? But delivery unit will be there to make sure that the

Government's programme is followed through. That is why it is there.

Secondly, you will know from the Government's manifesto what our

plans are for health. That is quite clear. We have published a

programme for legislation last week, a comprehensive programme, and we

will publish a fuller programme in terms of our plans for legislation

before the summer recess and I think that puts us in a good

position in terms of presenting a programme for the people of Wales

in all areas, combining our manifesto with a fiscal statement

which will be made this afternoon. Of course, I understand you're

going to make a statement on fiscal powers. You have made an initial

statement on legislation. But I specifically tackle due today on

health. I see that you want to talk about other issues. Let me

concentrate on health. 40 % of your budget is going to be spent on

health in the next five years. You have not given me, today, what I

would describe as a comprehensive policy agenda to deliver against

that for a five-year term. I am asking you again, because otherwise

we are going to rapidly come to the belief that your policy cupboard is

entirely bare. How are you going to tell us, are you going to set out

on the floor of this chamber a comprehensive programme to deliver

better healthcare for the people of Wales, yes or no? Yes, it is in our

manifesto. We want to make sure that accident and emergency waiting

times are reduced, that ambulance hand over times are reduced, that

we are upgrade in the ambulance fleet in time, that waiting times

continue to drop, that we can be compared favourably with England

when it comes to referral for treatment times. We also want to

make sure that we don't see hospital overcrowding but it is

important that we have a programme that issue was the security and

long-term future of all our hospitals and that is something we

have been working on and the Health Minister will bring forward these

proposals so that the Assembly is fully aware that what we have in

our manifesto is what we are doing. Kirsty Williams. Does it remain

your government's policy to rule out the use of all private

facilities to treat NHS patients, regardless of value for money or

the standard of service they provide? We have no plans to

privatise the health service. you explain to the chamber and the

people of Wales why you are planning NHS patients from

receiving free NHS IVF treatment at the popular, successful and good

value for money clinic at Singleton Hospital in Swansea? It is

important that people have an opportunity to have IVF treatment

with that is possible but in England we know it has been stopped

across the board. We want to make sure in Wales that we are in a

position where we are able to offer IVF treatment with that is possible.

Why are you planning NHS patients from receiving free IVF treatment

at the very popular, the very successful, and a value-for-money

service at the clinic at Singleton Hospital? And if you do not believe

it is Barry for money, -- value for money, it is the Government's

intention to open a new unit, could I ask you to publish the business

case behind that new unit? clinic in Swansea is a private

clinic run by a private organisation. It is important that

we realised that we're it is possible to do so that IVF

treatment is provided on the NHS, but there are difficulties with IVF

treatment, particularly certain difficult indeed to provide

treatment for infertile women who need to have egg donation. The

number of egg donors has dropped dramatically because of a changing

the law that was quite recent. It is never as easy as providing IVF

services. Denise to be an assessment by doctors of the

ability of people to benefit from those services and sometimes that

is not clear. It can be very difficult for individuals to accept.

Maybe I could assist the First Minister who seems to be completely

in the dark about the decisions the Government has made. The unit at

Swansea is a private clinic, with which the NHS in Wales has a

contract to deliver free NHS treatment. Your government has

ceased that contract, therefore, NHS patients who previously

received a free service from that clinic will not be able to do so.

Let me help you again, your previous government also

commissioned a new clinic for Neath Port Talbot. I am amazed you don't

know anything about the history of this particular case. Will you

published the business case behind the decision to end that contract

with Swansea and to build the new unit and to guarantee to patients

that the 75 % success rate for couples under the age of 35 will be

maintained in the new facility? For patients and couples who cannot

afford to go private, they should not be able to have a second-rate

service. Why are you planning patients from going to Swansea? How

much is the new clinic costing? And what is the guarantee that those

people who cannot afford to go private will enjoy comparable

success rates to those in the private sector? You know nothing

about it. Leader of the Welsh Conservatives. 77,000 people in

Wales have been claiming out-of- work benefits for more than 10

years. Ed Miliband claims that these people are shirkers. Does the

First Minister agree? I certainly have many things I disagree within

terms of politicians in London, particularly the Conservative MP

who said the minimum wage should be lower for disabled people. That is

something I have not had condemned from that side of the House.

still don't know whether he agrees or disagrees with his leader in

London. We heard last week that the private sector has created more

than half a million extra jobs in the UK in the last 12 months.

Clearly, the UK government's policy is working. The Welsh government

needs to play its part, given the UK government is holding to its

side of the bargain. Like health, there was nothing on job creation

in the legislative statement last week. Why was that? We have a plan

to make sure that 4,000 young people have training places. It is

the first pledge we put forward. It replaces the future jobs fund the

party opposite got rid of, destroying the hopes of many young

people. We will bring forward plans that will improve the life chances

of our young people, give them a chance of an apprenticeship, give

them a chance of training, which was removed by the party opposite.

Before we go to Prime Minister's Questions, what did my guests make

of First Minister's Questions? How do you find the new set of with the

leaders are all grouped together and they take their turns?

someone who was dead against it for 12 years, I think it works really

well, because it gives them an opportunity to have a run. The only

danger I suspect is because the First Minister is an sited on these

questions and he may not get such quality answers as you would if the

questions were tabled. That is from a boring, retired Presiding Officer.

How have you found it? As a new boy, I find it quite exciting. I think

it is very good that these questions come as a surprise to the

First Minister. He has got to think on his feet and I think that is

what role should be. From my point of view, as someone who watches it

every week, and I don't know how many people do, it does make for a

livelier exchange. As does the fact there are three opposition leaders

questioning the First Minister, whereas before there were only too.

It adds to the variety of it. Yesterday was a very good example

of that. How are you finding watching from the backbenches?

not on the backbenches, and end in seat 41, the ideal location. I can

see my Conservative colleagues opposite very clearly. And do you

think, taking the party politics out of it if that is possible, the

fact that the First Minister now has to answer three lots of

questions from opposition leaders, maybe keeps him on his toes more?

Open questions are good, and the fact they are grouped together

means there is a run their, which used to happen in previous Assembly.

The two opposition leaders used to club together a bit and gang up on

some repeat questions and they think this is a lot better. We're

going to go over to Prime Minister's Questions shortly.

can't get any better. Anything they can learn from the Assembly? Yes,

they can get themselves dedicated seats which would make it look like

a proper Assembly with people scrutinising government, but I am

not supposed to say that. What we get from Prime Minister's questions

often, we hear the heckling and that kind of thing, we don't hear

it so much on the television from the Assembly but that does not mean

it does not go on. It does go on and that is something I have been

quite surprised about. The microphones do not seem to pick it

up and transmit it but I can assure you it does go on. Can it be off-

putting? Not at all, I enjoy it. a Presiding Officer, you would have

come down hard on anyone heckling. I over-reacted to most of the

heckling because, as you say, it is not come through the microphones.

Let's cross now to Westminster and our correspondent, Tomos

I am here in the designated seats. We are just before David Cameron

get a chance to answer MPs' questions.

It is a decision of the Scottish Government to proceed. Order!

Questions to the Prime Minister. Question number one. I was unaware

it was anniversary for the Speaker, happy anniversary. I am sure the

House will wish to join me in playing tribute to three talented,

brave and dedicated soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice

overseas for the safety of British people at home. We send out our

deepest condolences to their families, friends and colleagues.

This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others

and in addition to my duties I will have further such metres later

today. I thank the Prime Minister for the response and can I

associate my constituents with the tribute he has just paid. 80 we go,

the Chancellor delivered his first Budget. -- a year ago. Given on the

government's assessment, the efforts will have a insignificant

impact on child poverty, can I recommend the Prime Minister

watches the BBC documentary, about his poor KIDS, to know how the

other half lives. I will look at that programme. Even in a difficult

time this government put more money into Child Tax Credits for the

poorest families. We have frozen council tax and we have taken steps

to help working families. The budget and subsequent Budget,

neither of them raised Child poverty because of the steps that

we take. We inherited a complete party -- mess from the party

opposite but we are dealing with it in a way that protects families.

Can the Prime Minister confirm this country will not contribute towards

the great delight other than what we contribute to the IMF? -- the

great deal out. We sit on the IMF board and have responsibilities. I

am clear that we are not involved in the first Greek bail-out, we are

not members of the eurozone and we will not become members of the

eurozone as long as I am here. I do not believe the European financial

mechanism should be used for Greece and we have made clear that is not

appropriate and it should not happen. Can I join the Prime

Minister in paying tribute to the fallen soldiers this week. They all

serve their country with dedication and bravery and our hearts go out

to their family and friends. Mr Speaker, Armed Forces Day is coming

up this Saturday. That is an opportunity to remind us all of the

service provided by the armed forces in Afghanistan, Libya and

around the world. It is a moment to recognise the service they provide

and the honour and courage for the country. We support the mission in

Libya but in the last week both the First Sea Lord and the Commander in

Chief Air Command have raised concerns over the prospect of an

extended campaign. Can the Prime Minister assured the House that

sufficient resources are in place to retain Britain's part in the

mission of the current rate of engagement? Can I joined the Right

Honourable Gentleman in paying tribute to our armed forces and

particularly I am looking forward to Armed Forces Day on Saturday,

where we will celebrate the contribution they make to our

national life and the enormous amount they do to keep us safe. In

terms of the mission in Libya, similar to Afghanistan, it is

funded out of the reserve so it does not put additional pressures

on the defence budget. I have sought assurances and receive them

from the Chief of Staff, General Sir David Richards, that we are

capable of keeping up this operation for as long as it takes.

I would argue that the pressure is building on Colonel Gaddafi. Time

is on our side, not his. When you look at what is happening in Libya,

when you see a strengthening of the revolt, you see more people

deserting Gaddafi's regime, growing unpopularity of his regime and are

her opposition holding time -- holding strong, you see that time

is on our side and it will come to a satisfactory conclusion. I agree

that we should keep up pressure on the Libyan regime. We provide full

support for the mission. Concerns have been expressed by members of

our armed forces. Do they not point to something important, they need

to look again at the Strategic Defence and Security Review,

precisely to make sure we have the right capability and focus? The

Foreign Secretary described the Arab spring as a more important

event than 9/11. The report last year does not mention Egypt, Libya

or Tunisia. Should we not look at the review again to make sure that

we can sustain the conflict in Libya? I am grateful for the

question because it is important. One of the reasons for having a

national security council is to ask if we have the right strategy. We

have had a review of the national security and Defence Review over

the last year. That strategic Defence Review put in place

mechanisms in case we are fighting to conflict at the same time. Also,

it put in place and the necessity of flexible aren't forces. So,

exactly what we are dealing with in Libya. It does seem to me strange,

having not having had one for 10 years, one thing to reviews in one

year. We have got the right flexibility in our armed forces.

They provided magnificent services in Libya. So much of the new

equipment we are looking to half in terms of drones and things like

that would be more helpful to have now have. Far from being the wrong

strategic posture, it is right to put it in place. It will come as

news to the wider defence and security community that there has

been a review of the original Strategic Defence and Security

Review. If there has indeed been a reduces the Arab spring, why

doesn't the Prime Minister publish the results? Let's consult with

experts who know about these issues. There is clear concern across the

military about these issues. Let me ask the Prime Minister, in all

sincerity... SHOUTING. When our military chiefs raised concerns

about the conduct of our military operations it is not the right

thing to say, you do the fighting and I will do the talking. I

thought it was very crass and high- handed. I have a huge respect for

the people who run our armed services. They are professional

people. They are involved in the National Security Council and

drawing of the strategic Defence Review. The only point that I have

tried two -- tried to make is that when we are in conflict, you must

think carefully about what you are about to say. Can I ask the Prime

Minister if he is aware of the decision abruptly made to close the

Passport Office, which has obliged 86-year-old boy -- a six year-old

boy to make a 600 mile round trip for an interview? And will look

closely at this. In the modern age we have all sorts of ways of

carrying out interviews that do not involve people having to travel to

a passport office so what matters is having an efficient service so

people can get the documentation they need to go on holiday. Given

the number of a U-turn as the Prime Minister has made, including on

sentencing, NHS reform, Forestry sell-off and skills, it is a wonder,

but where Pinau have the France... SHOUTING. -- where he now have the

front. I did not catch all of that. That is the trouble, it is...

in the reminder to the backbenchers to keep quiet so the Prime Minister

can hear. I think his second bed of the question was about the

important point of women and pensions. I think it is right to

have equal men's and women's pension age at 65 and that is going

ahead. It is also important to raise the pension age to 66. People

are living longer. That is a good thing but we have to make sure we

can pay for easing future pensions. The alternative seems to be to

stick your head in the sand and end up with a situation where you

either cut pensions or build up debts for our children. The

government is taking decisions but I think they are the right ones.

Does the Prime Minister agreed there is still too much trouble in

sport and the events will tackle prejudice in sport today? I am

delighted to be hosting a party for the LGBT community in Downing

Street today. There are very few out players in all sport. I applaud

those who are coming to my party tonight. I hope it will recognise

schoolchildren -- help schoolchildren to recognise that

homophobic bullying is an acceptable. If the Prime Minister

is serious about tackling the issue of farmers, why is he -- runaway

fathers, why is he making it harder for single mothers? We are going to

go on funding a Child Support Agency mechanism. I do not think it

is wrong to ask people to contribute to that. Tax payers are

currently putting in a huge amount of money and they will go on

putting it in. Asking people to pay towards costs I do not think

reduces the impact at all. People who walk away from responsibilities

and do not fund children, that should not be allowed to happen.

Next year is the centenary of the death of Robert Falcon Scott on the

Antarctic. Does my Right Honourable Friend recognise that this brave,

historic some of Plymouth left a significant scientific legacy which

is still helping to form the world's environment. Agenda?

thank my honourable friend for raising this issue. I am pleased

that so much is going on to celebrate this. It is not just the

scientific discoveries that are important. It is the inspirational

figure, the adventurer and explorer, the sense of duty and adventure

that he had, that inspires young people today. The Prime Minister

has been forced to abandon his original plans on sentencing. Will

he now changed his mind on the proposal to prevent police holding

the DNA of those arrested but not charged with rape? We will look

carefully at the issues of DNA. I have to say to the Right Honourable

Gentleman, we inherited an unacceptable situation with eight

DNA database that had grown out of control and without proper rights

for people. We put in place a better system. There is always room

for improvement. We made a big step forward from the mess we were left

by the last government. It is a bit late to be looking at the proposals

in the House of Commons at the report stage. Many explain his

policy to the Prime Minister. -- let me. Around 5,000 people

arrested on suspicion of rape each They have gone on to commit further

offences and been convicted as a result of the DNA being held on the

national database but his proposal is that those arrested are not

charged, the DNA would be disposed of straight away. Why is it right

to discard the DNA of those arrested but not charged with rape?

I know there is some concern... Order! The answer of the Prime

Minister will be heard. understand, Mr Speaker, there is

some worry that in this government we talk to each other. This is

clearly not the case. The Shadow Chancellor raises this issue and it

is perfectly clear that the Shadow Chancellor and the leader of the

Labour Party don't speak to each other at all. I have at the proof.

This week he made a huge announcement on a massive and VAT

cut and yet it was only... Let's focus on an answer to the question

and then we will move on. Ed Miliband. Mr Speaker, let me give

this lesson to the Prime Minister. It will be better to talk to his

colleagues before they put forward the policy, not afterwards. Instead

of listening to the Home Secretary, why doesn't he listen to Andrew

Conway from pre-crisis. "with the reporting of raids on the increase

and conviction rates still shockingly low, the evidence this

database provides is vital. The more of this data we hold, the more

chance we had of catching rapists. This really is a no-brainer.".

Isn't this another policy on crime that is careless, not thought-

through and out of touch? Why do we think again? If he actually

understood the policy, he will know that the police are allowed to

apply to keep DNA on the computer. What we tend to find with his

questions is that he comes up with some idea, gets it completely wrong

in the House of Commons, and we'll find afterwards he has given us a

partial picture. That is what his questions are all about. Not

surprising he does not want to talk. The answer of the Prime Minister

must be heard. I am not surprised he does not want to talk about the

issues his party has been putting forward this week because I don't

suppose he knew about them. Order! The House needs to simmer down and

take whatever tablets are necessary. As a parent, I am appalled that the

party opposite support burdening our children with ever more

unsolicited debts that the party opposite are putting forward with

their reckless raft of tax cuts and spending commitments on which the

VAT cut is the latest. The proposed to put 5% cut. The Speaker is cross

because Labour policy is not the Prime Minister's responsibility.

There are 400 avoidable deaths from epilepsy and related conditions. My

bill asks for two things. An immediate referral to a tertiary

specialist and in education support for children with an assessment so

that they can fulfil their potential. Could the Prime Minister

me with me, the Joint Epilepsy Council, to see how we can progress

these provisions which will not only save costs but, more

importantly, save lives? I would be delighted to meet with her and with

Helen Cross, y'know well, who works at Great Ormond Street's, who is a

brilliant clinician. I am keen to improve the support we give to

people with epilepsy. One of the steps we are taking is putting in

place more personal budgets and more single assessments which I

think will help of epilepsy. My understanding is that while there

are many good things in her Bill, there is concern it could have too

much of a medical approach to special educational needs. I know

many professionals have concerns about it. Could my right honourable

friend tell the House whether and, if so, what the results have been

of the Government's assessment of what a proposed cut in VAT were two

to the British economy at this stage of the cycle? I do think my

right honourable friend raises an important point, which is to began

and funded cut to VAT right now when the concerns are about debt

and deficit would be the height of insanity. What is now clear is that

Labour's plan B stands for bankruptcy. The Prime Minister for

equally tells us that we are all in this together. Can he explain why

banks are being rewarded with a 2 million pound tax put on their

obscene bonus pools and parents of disabled children are being

penalised with a benefit cut of �1,400 a year. How is that fair?

What this government has done is put in place a �2.5 billion bank

Levy, raising more than Labour's bonus tax, every single year. If

members opposite want to see irresponsible people who are

earning a lot of money pay proper taxes, perhaps they could explain

this. Why did they vote against the measures on disgraced earnings in

the Finance Bill that would raise �800 million from people who are

giving loans to themselves to dodge taxes? -- disguised earnings.

we should not be making your natal contribution to the Greek bela,

does the Prime Minister not agree that we have something that would

regenerate the Greek economy and put right a 200 year wrong...

don't agree with the honourable gentleman. Order! I want to hear

the Prime Minister's views on marbles. The short answer is that

we are not going to lose them up. Is the Prime Minister aware that

670,000 people, two-thirds of whom, according to his government's

equality impact assessment, have a disability, we lose up to �13 a

week because of his changes in housing benefit under occupancy

rights. Isn't this a complete betrayal of his Chancellor's

promised not a balance the budget on the backs of the poor? I have

looked carefully at this issue and I know there are concerns. The

point I make is this, I think it is right that we Reform Housing

Benefit, the costs have got completely out of control under the

last government, rising to 22 billion. I think it is right that

housing benefit reflects the size of a family rather than the size of

a house, but we have made an exception for people who have

carers so that that is taken allowance for in the housing

benefit. But it is not good saying you are in favour of welfare reform

and cutting the cost of welfare but never been able to find a single

part of the bill you agree with. Will the Prime Minister join me in

welcoming the new report by the Paediatric mobility reform group,

MAI will chair is my shoes, showing how we can, through partnership,

deliver wheelchairs which transform young people's lives. Will he make

with me to discuss how the Government might take this forward?

I know the charity well, they to a brilliant job. I will arrange a

meeting for him. The point I would make on the edges is, it is exactly

where the health reforms with greater choice and greater

opportunity to choose for GPs and patients, should come in. So that

people get the wheelchair of their choice at the time of need, rather

than at the moment, we have got to take what you are given. In four of

the last five years, there have been no mistakes made in the

setting of school examination papers. Since 16th May this year,

they have been 10 such mistakes. What does the Prime Minister intend

to do for those among the 250,000 young people affected who lose

either at the University of choice or the university at all because of

this staggering incompetence? is not an acceptable situation. I

have discussed it with the Education Secretary of state this

morning who has discussed it with the watchdog caught taking the

toughest possible action to regard this failure and make sure it does

not happen again. The Prime Minister will be aware that the

former labour Secretary of State, Lord Hutton, has despite current

proposals on a pension reform as the best chance we have of

delivering a sustainable system which is fair to scheme payers and

the taxpayer, but does my right honourable friend agree with me

that when it comes to these major long-term issues, will he seek the

support of both sides of the House for his proposals? I thank my

honourable friend for the question and the way he puts it because the

point is this, I think the Hutton report is a good report and this is

not about attacking or downgrading public sector pensions, it is about

making good public sector pensions affordable into the long term. It

is respecting all of the accrued rights that people have. I think we

need to win the argument on the basis of fairness that it is right

for the tap their -- taxpayer to put money into public sector

pensions but we need to know it is affordable for the long term. Hits

I hope that the party opposite will take a responsible view and

recognise that we need to make this change for the long-term good of

our country. 18 months ago, one of my constituents required knee

surgery and he was pleased to hear he only had to wait six weeks. He

now meets another operation and has been told he has to wait 10 months.

He is in agony and unable to walk. He is understandably angry and

wants to know is this what the Prime Minister meant when he said

the NHS was safe in his hands? will take up the individual case

because, the fact is, we have not changed the waiting list targets

which have been in place for a long time, in particular the 18 the

targets which is part of the NHS constitution. Average waiting times

have actually come down in recent months. The lesson is this, if it

was not for the Government putting in �11.5 billion extra, many the

party opposite does not support, you would see all waiting times

going up. On 18th July last year, the economics secretary to the

Treasury stated with regards to the decision to sign Britain up to the

euro-zone bail out mechanism, "while these decisions were taken

by the previous government, this government judges them to be an

appropriate response to the crisis". Does this remain at the

Government's position? I know my honourable friend is pursuing this

issue with his normal dog-eared tenacity. The fact is, the last

Government's signed us up to obey European financial mechanism which

we are still having to pay out under. What this government has

done is to get us out of it by tough negotiation in Brussels so we

won't have to contribute after 2013. Can I associate myself with the

Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition's condolence for

those soldiers who have fallen in Afghanistan. Those who serves are

the Lions of our country and we must do everything they can to

repay the debt of gratitude we owe them. The October 2010 Esti Sr has

been overtaken by events and the world is now a fundamentally

different place. Will the Prime Minister to the right thing for the

armed forces and the country and order a new chapter to this now

outdated reveal? -- review. I think the idea of reopening the defence

review at a time when our armed forces are engaged and doing such a

fantastic job is actually the wrong one. What the defence review was

all about was making sure that we have flexible armed forces so that

they can be committed to different parts of the world and they have

got the backing they need. It was about getting rid of the main

battle tanks in Germany and putting money -- money into the forces of

the future. That is what the defence review is about. Libya

shows it is working and I think we should stick with it. Will my right

honourable friend welcome the campaign for high-speed rail for

campaigning outside Parliament to bring thousands of much needed jobs

to the Midlands and the North to help address the North-South divide

and will he confirm that he will come to Yorkshire? I can happily

confirm all of those things. I do believe, if we are serious about

tried to rebalance our economy, to make sure we get growth across the

country and not just in the south- east, the time for high-speed rail

has come and that is why it has my strong report -- support.

Secretary of State for Wales says she's prepared to be sacked because

of the Government policy on high- speed rail. Will the Prime Minister

take up a very kind of a? -- offer? In one year as Welsh Secretary, she

has secured something that in 13 years, your has never achieved,

which is the electrification of the An agoraphobic man from

Middlesbrough it set up his own illegal loans company because he

received so much in benefits. The judges said he received a

staggering amount on benefits. Does it not show the welfare system is

Brogan and will the Prime Minister and redouble efforts to reform it?

The people who send us you want us to sort out the welfare system.

They wanted to be there for people who genuinely need help but they

also want to make sure that if you are offered a job you should not be

able to leave -- led a life on welfare. What a pity that the party

opposite did not have the guts to back it. Most people know that

Rochdale is the home of corporation. Next year is the United Nations

International Year of co-operatives. Will the Prime Minister consider

visiting Rochdale for the purposes of showing support to new dualism

in the 21st secretary. I am a strong supporter of corporate tents

and Mutual's. They have a role in the economy and the public services.

We will make some announcements about that in the months to come.

Earlier this year the Prime Minister demonstrated the strength

of character to talk about the issue of multiculturalism. I try to

combine the best of my Indian values with British values. Would

the Prime Minister agree we can learn a lot from Indian people?

pay tribute to my Honourable Friend and the work he does on this issue.

It is vital that we build a stronger national identity and

people clearly feel that yes, of course you can have all sorts of

different religious and cultural identities, but it is important we

build a strong British identity and he is living proof of that.

Tomorrow the European parliament will decide whether to increase the

you's carbon reduction target to 30% by 2020. -- E u's. According to

reports, it will be very close but it will not pass if just one

Conservative eat -- MDP about her of twenty-five will vote. Will the

Prime Minister confirm that all of his MEPs will honour this? We are

committed to the 30% target and nothing will change that. I will

work on my MEPs if she promises to work on her is, who in recent

months have voted for a higher EU budget, new EU taxes and an opt-out

on the working time directive. They even voted against scrapping first

class air travel for MEPs. Perhaps she would like to fly over and gave

them a talking to? With the National Audit Office estimating

the cost of reoffending to the economy of �10 billion per year,

does my Right Honourable Friend agree that we need to reduce or

fending levels -- or sending levels? I agree with my Honourable

Friend, who has considerable experience in this area. Each

prison place costs �45,000 and half of prisoners reoffend within a year

of getting out, half or on drugs and 10% are for a nurse who should

not be in this country in any event. -- foreigners. We should reduce

costs by reforming prisons rather than cutting sentences. Order!

The speaker brings an end to be questioned time in which the Prime

Minister sidestepped the question about Cheryl Gillan threatening to

resign if there is a high he's been to -- high-speed rail link through

her home in Buckinghamshire. We will pick up on what was being

suggested about the idea of the electric line to Cardiff. David

Cameron take credit for doing that. He has come under cred -- attacked

for not electrifying as far as Swansea? He came to Swansea in

April. He did not dismiss the fact that it would come at to Swansea

provided we can put together a business case. It depends if Carwyn

Jones could put together a good business case. By an enthusiastic

and will speak my mind to Westminster. -- I am enthusiastic.

It is about connecting Wales and brainee it to Swansea and about

onward connections to Western Wales. It is an important feature of our

transport system. I do not know when you made of the session. It

was very noisy. The Speaker had a very busy afternoon. What did you

make of the content? I did not make much of the content and I thought

the performance was worse. I would give it three. This is how it is,

unfortunately. That was raucous and noisy, no sense. It is not designed

to do that. You have a parliamentary Chamber which was

restored in the 1950s and the decision was taken then not to make

it big enough for the members. The problem I have got on the occasion,

which is only about three or four times a month, when I get to the

other place, is that it is getting equally raucous there. Gone are the

days that the Lords were sleeping on the benches? The problem is that

there is not a proper Speaker. Everybody would shout across as to

who should be called next. It is very unseemly, compared with the

tidy way we do things there. have stood for or a seat in

Parliament. Do you think you would not mind giving it a go now? I am

very happy with my situation. It is quite silly, isn't it? We did not

learn much. No, I thought it was very noisy. We are far more

disciplined here. In terms of the noise and heckling, the Speaker has

been here. Do you think that he took anything away from here? Stuff

that he could implement? The most important thing about the National

Assembly is that he's in the round, everyone is visible and can hear

each other. -- that it is. We have dedicated seats and microphones. On

the Presiding Officer's desk there is a button which swishes everyone

off. -- switches. The question of maintaining order by having to

shout, the problem is everybody shouts because that is the only way

they can get heard. But you cannot redesign the Chamber? It should be

a Parliament of England and then we can have a proper, a federal

building somewhere in the West Midlands or even in York. Obviously

there will be things in common but there is a house of Lords for that

as well. The Chamber was not designed for this and this is the

problem. It comes out when will carry on for the foreseeable

future. Coming up, the politics of water, who should decide how and

when water from Welsh reservoirs can be pumped two parts of the UK,

and the stigma of free school meals. We have already heard about the

decision to postpone a badger cull in it North Pembrokeshire. I am

with Peter Black of the Liberal Democrats. We asked the -- John

gritters to come on the programme but he was unable to. You are

enabled -- glad it is not going ahead? It was the wrong decision at

the time and it has divided my community. It would not have

tackled the main problem, which is it would have exacerbated the

spread of TB. We need other measures. The fact that the

environment minister has taken the decision to pull back and look at

this all over again is very welcome indeed. Hopefully we can find a

solution which will be acceptable for the whole community. He has not

really taken a decision, though, he has just kicked it into the long

grass. It is not resolved. government was so far advanced

towards the, that at some stage, it was going to have to be finding a

way out. Setting up the independent review with the best mechanism by

which a government which is subject to judicial review would take on

board the issues which have been raised with him, and start looking

at controlling TB a fresh, particularly around kettle --

cattle, we can look at other diseases. Sometimes you get

different answers. Who is to say this review will carry a definitive

emphasis on power? Will people listen to this? I think the problem

is people have not been listening to the scientists. If you look at

the independent review the outcome was that a badger cull would

actually spread the disease outback -- outside the area and cause more

problems than it started. They all may have good results from a

vaccination trial. They know that where vaccination has been used,

74% of badgers are in disease free and you can build on the life cycle

and eradicate TB from the Population in a five-year period.

Vaccination will be looked at his grip and hopefully you can get --

in this group. We heard this morning that the Finance Minister

is not going to attend a meeting at the select committee and has said

this in very brisker terms. What do you make of this? We are looking

inward investment which is an important subject. Although the

minister is accountable to the Assembly, the Assembly holds a lot

of leavers. The UK Government is also very important in terms of

economic development in Wales. If the Welsh Select Committee can't

produce a report which will help the Welsh Assembly government we

need to support that. -- can produce. We need to give them

evidence. Should they compel her to attend? I think they should.

That was amazing, a politician gave a five second and into second!

There are concerns over drought in parts of England. Last week Boris

Johnson suggested pumping water from Wales to drought-stricken

areas. That has resurrected a debate on who should decide on such

matters. Our political correspondent joins us from Bangor.

What is the background to this intervention? Essentially, the

context is the article by Boris Johnson in an edition of last

week's Telegraph. There is a drought in the south-east of

England. One of the ideas advocated by the mayor of London to alleviate

the situation, at a crisis in some parts, wants to pump water from

Wales. Essentially it is rather more than an issue about water. It

is the latest in an episode about the whole nature of political

control over Wales's natural resources. As you say rightly, it

has opened up a Pandora's box of political memories from two

generations ago, when Liverpool City Council flooded the village --

a village to supply water to that part of the UK. There is an

immediate resonance to the comments. There is also political memory as

well. We are going to here from Lord wiki in a moment. Why is he so

insensitive? He is saying that the situation that happens was in the

face of opposition from all aspects of Welsh public life yet Liverpool

City Council flooded the village. He hoped, he said, that the

National Assembly would stop such a situation in the future. There is

an obscure calls -- clause which we draw attention to about five years

ago, which gives the Secretary of State the powers to intervene. That

concerns the Lord and that is what When the valley was drowned, there

was uproar, and the belief was that existence of the National Assembly

should be enough to safeguard Wales from that ever happening again. The

question arises now as to whether clauses in the 2006 government of

Wales act mean that the London ministers have a veto over the

National Assembly for Wales in this matter and therefore could insist

on drowning valleys in Wales to meet the need for water. That

happened two generations ago, why bring it up again now? I remember

when I went down to the area a few years ago, I interviewed

descendants of people who had been moved out of their homes, many of

them were kids when it happened. They were not talking about

historic events, those events start a whole generation. It's got a hold

community, it's Cardiff political memory. They were not talking about

events that happened two generations ago, they were talking

about events that could have happened last week. Globally, as

well, the whole way that we deal, the management of natural resources,

is coming higher and higher up the political agenda. Earlier this week,

we saw Carwyn Jones staking a claim for powers over wind farms in. In

Scotland, the same argument about natural resources. If the issue is,

how are they managed and who benefits from them? Globally, we

see the issue of water specifically becoming a very contentious issue,

given the fact that we are now living in an age of climate change.

In Africa, in drought-stricken areas, tribes in areas of action --

Africa go to war so it is a very contentious political issue. Now we

will see what our guests think about that. Is it worth raking up

the ghost of the past? It is not a ghost. We have had visitors

visiting the Environment Agency facility. The water belongs to

Wales. We had visitors from China recently looking at the amazing

catchment control and management of water resource that the reservoir

and the down flow along the river, with the extraction to Wrexham and

Chester and then on to Liverpool provides. I don't know who advises

Boris Johnson on his environmental policy, but you can't mix water.

There are water quality issues with transport. -- transfer. I have got

no object in, whether it is wind energy always energy or water, from

Wales, been used elsewhere provided there is proper return. That is the

question I was going to put to you. If other areas of the UK need water

and it is in plentiful supply here, why not supply it? I could not

agree more. We are the United Kingdom and if we have got it, why

not? What did you make of the Plaid Cymru Assembly Member, he put the

question to the First Minister and described Boris Johnson as saying

he wanted to steal Welsh Water? is a passionate issue but I think

that is going to the extreme. Boris is Boris and he will use all sorts

of adjectives. I think it is more important to say that the days of

drowning land areas for water resources, there are lots of

reservoirs about, those days are over for all sorts of environmental

reasons. But there are key issues about the conservation of water

resource. There was talk of a veto. I am afraid, I interpret the

Government of Wales Act 2006 rather differently. Throat -- the water

resource of Wales is managed by the Environment Agency of Wales and

therefore it is accountable to the National Assembly and Welsh

ministers. Even more so if the proposals for the Environment

Agency to be reorganised within Wales with the Countryside Council

and the Forestry Commission, which is on the agenda now, with that.

An Assembly Member is calling for a fingerprint recognition system to

be introduced in a bid to end the stigma associated with claiming

free school meals. Mark's in the Oriel with more.

I am joined today by the Labour Assembly Members for Mid and West

Wales, Joyce Watson. We went to school the other day, a very

interesting visit to school in Burry Port to look at how school

dinners are changing. At the moment, some of our children are being

stigmatised because they came free school meals. Is that right? That

is right, because they are identified by a system of payment,

they have a ticket lorry token that they have to produce in order to

get their meal. Side by side, immediately, you can see the

differential between those who have money in their pocket to pay and

those who clearly don't have. they are picked on because of that?

They are segregated by virtue of who they are and that has

absolutely nothing to do with their circumstances. Visually, they are

immediately different. They belong to different social class. As a

consequence, they are teased and they are victimised because they

have got to produce a ticket to get their food. For so the answer to

this, you are saying, is a system where you can't identify who

receives free school meals and who does not? These systems are in

operation, they are available, and you can do wait biometric system

which takes a fingerprint lorry thumbprint and is the system we see

in the report, -- Burry Port, but it is done discreetly so you would

not know whether they have told their own cash into that system or

whether they had the �2 a day free school meal entitlement. No child

in that room we'll know. No member of staff in that room we'll know.

And the children and staff are very clear that they have made the

problems a thing of the past. But it is quite costly. It does cost

money, depending on which system you have. There is an alternative

card system. But I don't think, when we are talking about for

generations later producing tickets that we can simply say it is bound

to cost. I think it has got to be said it is down too well. Where

there has been it will, they have moved forward with this.

Carmarthenshire, my area, his will was going to be 50 % plus

comprehensive schools using the systems. In Pemba shock -- in

Pembrokeshire, there are only to school. I know there is a

commitment to roll-out this kind of process by 20th September 12.

You're looking for that commitment to be met a. We cannot use an

archaic system which just causes segregation in the dining room.

Thank you very much, Joyce Watson. Time for a final chat with my

guests. The Education Minister, Leighton Andrews, has told BBC

Wales that the University of Wales has let itself and the country down

after it was advised to review its links with overseas colleges by the

higher education watchdog, the Quality Assurance Agency. You are

the President of Bangor University so you have got an academic hat on.

These are very strong words from the Minister. Yes, they are. He has

a strong way with words of attacking high education and I'm

not sure it is always the best tactic. We have our own degree-

awarding powers but we study, along with Swansea, Aberystwyth and

Cardiff, part of the University of Wales when it was a proper federal

university. It is still a would degrees in Wales but it also

markets itself outside. -- it does still award degrees. I think the

time has come for the brand of the University of Wales to be gradually

phased out. All universities of Wales should be identified in terms

of the regions their working. -- work in. Wales is a proud country

and its reputation abroad is a valued. Do you think this does

damage? It is about integrity at the end of the day. These degrees

have got to be seen as good qualifications from Wales. I agree.

There is another government minister in the news today. Peter

Black answered a question earlier and Edwina Hart has quite bluntly

refused an invitation to go and give evidence to the Welsh Affairs

Select Committee. You know Edwina Hart quite well. You stood against

her in elections. Quite a brisk letter she sent to the committee

chaired. What you make of her decision not to go and give

evidence on inward Investment in Wales, which is part of her brief?

I think she should go. The style of the response is Edwina Hart. I did

stand against her in 2007 in the assembly election. In fact, there

has never been any dialogue between us and I think that is probably

because I got eight 10.8 % swing against her. There would be any

dialogue after you mentioned that. What you make of this decision?

am a very close friend of Edwina Hart and she is a very determined

lady. There is an important issue of accountability here. She is

putting up a stand. I would not like to be the present Serjeant-at-

Arms at the House of Commons going to fetch Edwina Hart to give

evidence. What about the idea of Minister is going to give evidence?

Then it should be both ways. Either let's have it done properly or

let's have a principle that ministers are accountable to the

Assembly where they serve. Is there not an idea, you are going to be on

the business committee, or the Enterprise Committee rather, could

Edwina Hart: to the committee and get something back to benefit her

in her role? I think it would be positive. I am disappointed she is

not going. They will not be a Welsh Affairs Select Committee much

longer. -- they will not be. Sooner rather than later it will disappear,

I would think. But if ministers are called to go and give evidence in

other areas, for instance, there was a cross-border report, other

committees might do something similar. There is no border between

England and Wales. They are the matches. This is an open country. I

don't like the attitude of the Welsh Affairs Select Committee.

Cross-border? We should be looking for collaboration and co-operation.

It is not for rate UK Select Committee to call a Welsh Minister

to try to pick holes in the policy of the previous Minister. Very

briefly, can you see Edwina Hart being compelled to go? Knowing her