25/01/2012 am.pm

Good morning. Welcome to the programme. The spotlight is on

Scotland today but we will bring you up to date with the latest from

Cardiff Bay and Westminster. But we will be off to the Scottish

Parliament, as they outlined their plans for a referendum on

independence and we will be at premises questions. -- Prime

Joining me is Conservative Suzy Davis. We set up the top of the

programme we would be heading to the Scottish Parliament later. We

will be doing that later. We will start by discussing that issue.

Good morning. Alex Salmond is really setting the

agenda with this independence referendum. David Cameron tried to

get involved last week. He has lost control of it. I do not think that

is the conclusion. Alex Salmond is just about to launch the

consultation on independence for Scotland. He is motoring on with it.

One worrying thing that has come out of the recent discussion is how

we are losing the sense of Britishness and people in England

are starting to feel more English. That is perhaps an unexpected

consequence. It is inevitable. We hear that people in England say, if

Scotland want to go, let them go. And rightly so. It will happen if

that is the will of the Scottish people. I would like to see that

happen in Wales have it was the will of the Welsh people. Alex

Salmond is driving the agenda. David Cameron's intervention has

driven more membership towards the SNP. It will fan the flames. Some

people forget how irrelevant the Tories are in Scotland. They have

such a low following. There are more pandas in Edinburgh zoo than

Scottish Tory MPs. We tend to forget that.

We heard Elin Jones talking this morning, quotes from her, saying

that if Plaid Cymru were to win the next election and the one after

that, that would be a mandate to go for a referendum in Wales. It is

happening in Scotland. I do not see why it shouldn't happen in Wales as

top who would have imagined that Scotland would be no place in the

prospect of an independence referendum 10 years ago? Who would

have thought that Alex Salmond would remain as First Minister and

have an overall majority. The system was designed to make sure

that never happened. Anything is possible. We need to aspire to that

as a party and as a nation. Let's work towards it. When you hear it

statements like that, what do you think? That is a matter for Plaid

Cymru. I would like to pick up on the matter of David Cameron and

George Osborne representing the UK government. They are representing

the whole of Britain. It is one thing having a few but it is

another telling the First Minister of Scotland when he should or

should not hold a referendum. lies with the UK Government's what

is natural that the Prime Minister would be able to say something

about it. We are seeing it develop now as a narrative over this week

and recent days. There are implications for the whole of the

UK. We do need a strong and robust debate about what happens in

England. That has been the issue. It is happening in Wales and

Scotland and Northern Ireland but England carries on as if nothing

has happened. The more focus there isn't that, the healthier the

debate will be. I disagree a mark. The consensus has broken on the

sofa! We have heard what is happening in the Scottish

Parliament but what is on the agenda in Cardiff Bay?

First of all, questions to the ministers. Environment Minister

John go first and Housing Minister Huw Lewis. After that, an

interesting cross-party debate on pay-day loans. These loans that are

offered at very high rates of interest will -- interest. People

can get into trouble with them. The rates of interest can be as high as

4,000 %. People can get into tremendous difficulties. Wages are

not keeping pace with prices. There are more companies springing up.

They are easier to get loans. They are very accessible. Assembly

Members are concerned this is an increasing problem. They have got

together across the parties to address this issue and call on the

government and local authorities to provide for a PFI able alternatives.

-- viable alternatives. After that today, we have the Welsh

Conservatives wanting to talk about education. They feel pupils are not

being stretched sufficiently. They are concerned about a decline in

pupils achieving the top grade in examinations. Archer be interesting.

-- that should be interesting. Plaid Cymru one to talk about

Wales's international commitments in the area of climate change and

overseas help and that sort of thing and Simon Thomas is busy

again at the end of the afternoon. He is asking the question, can

Wales pay its own way? A we will catch up with you later

on. You can find out even more about what is happening in the

National Assembly on our Democracy Live online coverage. The address

is on the screen. We head up to London and find out

what is happening at Westminster. There will be some gloomy economic

predictions. The predictions for last year are out this morning.

The economy and the last three months of last year shrank by 0.2 %.

We are not quite in recession yet. The accepted definition of a

recession is two successive quarters. The previous quarter,

there was flat growth. By the skin of our teeth, we are keeping out of

recession. All eyes will be on the next set of figures in three

months' time. The political problem for jaw-jaw Osborne and David

Cameron is that they are -- they plan is to cut public spending

freeing up the private sector -- George Osborne.

These figures today show that it is not quite happening yet. You would

think that Ed Miliband would pick up on this at Prime Minister's

Questions. The feeling is that he has been doing that, picking up on

economic statistics. But not be making a great go of it. David

Cameron will be quite confident he can see of this attack. And

straight after premises questions, he is off to the World economic

Forum. That is described in some quarters as Glastonbury for

capitalists. He was supposed to have a cup of tea with Mick Jagger

but he has a diary clash now. He says he is not willing to be

associated with a particular political party. The government has

been under attack from the Church of all places and a benefit reforms.

The former Archbishop of Canterbury seems to be on the side of David

Cameron. Yes, better news for David Cameron. On Monday, the House of

Lords defeated the government on its plans for a cap on benefit. The

government wants to cup the total amount of benefit anyone can claim

in one year. Some Labour peers and bishops in the House of Lords felt

that was unfair and they manage to vote on amendments successfully to

remove child benefit from that calculation. That was a

disappointing defeat for the government. But today the former

Archbishop of Cape Dutch Canterbury has written in the newspapers

saying the government was right and it is irresponsible to allow people

to claim that the benefits and not work. -- lots of benefits.

Some better news for Downing Street. They were expecting questions on

the benefit policy. But David Cameron has some ammunition.

We'll be talking to some people about it later on. We have

mentioned Scotland. Alex Salmond is determined to make things difficult

for David Cameron. That is certain to come up. Yes, his ghost seems to

stalk Westminster at the moment. He wants to push ahead with plans for

a referendum. He wants a second question on whether the Scottish

Parliament should have extra powers. That is if the Scottish voters

reject the idea of independence. It is one of these rare areas where

there is a bit of consensus between David Cameron and Ed Miliband.

Neither wants to give unexamined too much attention by raising it. -

- Alex Salmond. We will find out soon enough. You

will take us through it in John Motson style!

We would like to hear from you. You can get in touch. The address is on

It is time to join Mark. Check the interest rate!

It is good advice. I am joined by Simon Thomas. You are one of the

people that has brought this debate forward on pay-day loans. How do

they differ from other loans? are very short term available for

just a month. Literally from pay- day to pay-day. People do not

realise they are thousands of %. The interest rate is so high. It is

an extremely expensive way of borrowing money. People can get

into difficulties. Yes, very easy to get in two, 20 minutes on line

and you can get �500 into your bank account. You have to pay back that

money and you often find yourself taking out loans to pay back the

loans you took out the month before. You can get into a cycle of debt.

Times are very tough for many people. Are you seeing this issue

reflected in feedback from constituents? Absolutely. In advice

surgeries and advice bureaux as well. Personal debt is up. Personal

debt in the UK has gone up 50 % in the last year alone. People are

struggling. These companies are promoting

themselves on daytime television. They are easy to turn to.

They represent an extremely expensive way of borrowing money.

Presumably, people find them expensive. We should not assume

that everyone is ignorant. Absolutely. The small print is very

small sometimes. But nevertheless, they do have a place and a role to

play in the market. They are there as an option. But many people think

they are the only option and there are alternatives. It is about

informing people about the options. Is the main alternative credit

unions? That is a good alternative. But there are alternative paid a

loan companies. It is a lot of money but it is cheaper. There are

alternative credit unions. They operate like APD Loan Company. --

pay day. We need a real alternative for the people of Wales. It is

about financial inclusion, education, local authorities

helping their communities. It is about being aware of the cost of

these things. They are an option that we need to promote the

alternatives. I am particularly concerned about the number of

people commonly 16 %, they are borrowing in order to pay off loans.

They never actually pay off the loan. They are paying off the

interest and there are always in debt. Presumably, we do not know,

this is likely to get worse, we could be storing up real pain and

hardship for years to come in Wales. Absolutely. It is pain and hardship

for the individuals concerned but also of the committees. The

cheapest paid a lower interest rate is �2 million -- that is taken out

of the local common -- economy simply by the choice of lender that

you half. -- have. We need to see an end to the probation of these

Does more need to be done in terms of capping advertising and so on?

Interest rates that run into 4,000 % and so one needs action taken,

but we also needed because on the things we can do in our community

in Wales. A very interesting subject. I am sure people will look

at this debate with great attention. Thank you for joining us.

Still to come, we will be going live to the House of Commons for

Prime Minister's Questions at midday. Now, just how happy are our

children, and how can we measure that happiness? The issue of

children's subjective well-being has been raised in the House of

Commons. Our reporter has more. Here in the Commons, one Welsh MP

has raised the issue of what he calls a "children's subjective

well-being". Closing the day of business in the Commons yesterday,

he had an adjournment debate. What exactly do you mean by a

"children's subjective well-being"? It is how happy a child is from

their perspective. There are objective ways of measuring well-

being through statistics, but what is lacking is the subjective point

of view of the child. So you think that people should be interacting

more with children, asking children whether they are OK, more about

their feelings? Yes. In this day and age, children are under

tremendous pressure. Nearly 20% of 10-year-olds are obese. At any one

point in the UK, there are 1.2 million children with mental health

problems. There are millions of children living in poverty. These

are big issues, big pressures on a child, and we need to know how they

feel about these issues, and government both central and local

needs to develop and co-ordinate policies that will help those

children. Do we have the people that we can employ to do that kind

of work? Some of it is not about cost. I'll give you an example in

Denbighshire the local council is sending each school a pack of

recommended books that can help parents and teachers come to grips

with emotional distress, so some self help can cost as nothing. But

is one practical example. Wales is leading the way in many respects.

We introduced the foundation stage, learning through play at the age of

seven. We have a children's commissioner. Children need a voice

and they need their voice to be heard. We have Welsh solutions to

British and worldwide problems. you think there is a culture

problem - the idea that children should not be hired and just get on

with life? They should be seen and not heard! That used to be the case.

We have schools councils, we have the children's commissioner, but

the children's toys is still not been heard and it is not being

heard by decision makers -- the children's toys. -- voice. Do think

that you could be too sensitive and treat children with an attitude

that they are too precious, anyway? It is not right that 1.2 million

children at any one time, 20% of the children in the UK, will

experience mental illness. That feeds into adult Cost -- lives and

the additional cost to the economy. We need to sort this out at source.

A stable mind is a stable society. And you blame modern society -

technology, advertising, for the reason that these children are

suffering? It is a complicated issue. When I was growing up in the

60s I've spent five or six hours a day running around in my

neighbourhood near the river, but today children go on the computer,

play video games, watch television. It is not communicative. Their

social skills are being limited. They have not got that social

interaction. That is any part of the problem. The purpose of

advertising is to make a person feel dissatisfied with what they

have got. The image that they are promoting two young children is to

be slim, beautiful, intelligent, and that is not usually the case.

Some have got poor self-image because of advertising and because

of the media. What do you hope to achieve through raising this issue?

What do you want UK government to do? The Georgian Society produced

an excellent book last week jam- packed full of recommendations --

the Children's Society. I put down 36 questions and each of these

policy areas today will come up in Parliament and I hope that the

Government will report back and we will see how much pressure can be

put on them. We need to monitor what the Government are doing and

what they are not doing. Thank you. Time to go back to Mark in the

Aureole now. I am pleased to say that I am joined by Gareth Hughes.

-- let's talk about independence. Our guests have already been

talking about this, but it is having great ramifications here in

waves -- Wales as well as in Scotland. First of all, Alan Jones

saying that if Plaid were to win elections in 2016 and 2020 than

they would have a mandate for independence. It is amazing, isn't

it? This is the issue that Plaid had been talking about for so long.

Now they are talking about it and effectively they are saying that

perhaps there will never be a referendum. The success of Plaid

has not been at great, has it? If they had demanded, if they run to

elections than it would be a referendum because as a party they

want independence, and having won elections, clearly they would have

to give it to the people of Wales. But that is almost kicking it out

of the long grass, even out of this century! If things remain the same.

What we have seen in recent months is that this issue across the UK

has developed at an extraordinary pace, partly due to what is

happening in Scotland. Do you think that whatever happens whoever wins

that Plaid Cymru rates will have an impact on how the issue develops in

Wales over the next 10 years? think Plaid's members would want it

to be something that is central to the concern of whoever is leader. I

am not sure that Lord David Ellis Thomas would want it to be the

centre point of his campaign, and I am not sure that Simon Thomas would

wanted. They regard it as an irrelevant issue. The other two

women that are standing, clearly they would put it in there. I am

not sure they think it's irrelevant, but they just don't put it as much

as Alan Jones. If you asked Dafydd Elis-Thomas, he has strong views

and it is not about independence. It is about some other kind of

state. He said there is no such thing as a mythical thing,

independent. Simon rightly says there are more important issues,

but it is there somewhere on a back burner. The other two candidates

will put it forward. But a thick Plaid members themselves wanted to

be there, and of course it is an issue that will be there because it

is going to be in all the national papers because of Scotland. And it

is an issue for the Welsh government and for Labour. Carwyn

Jones this week calling for a convention on the future of the UK.

He would not have been doing that six months ago. No, clearly if

Scotland went out of the union then it would have a big ramifications

for Wales, England and Northern Ireland. If he is coming from that,

he is now pushing it a bit file a - - further and say no, even if

Scotland stay in, we do need to look at the relationship between a

devolved government in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and

England. Why? Because the English themselves are getting less

stressed about the whole issue - it seems that the Westminster

Parliament is looking after Wales and Scotland's interests and not

the English interests, so there is a pressure there. There has been a

commission set up for the West Lothian question. I think Carwyn

Jones is going with the flow, and yes, it is the latest stage in a

journey. He is concerned, isn't he? My reading of that press conference

the other day is that events are happening that are going to have a

greater effect on Wales and there is a risk we could be left behind.

Rhodri Morgan said something similar this morning. Again, it is

keeping pace with these developments. Yes, they are trying

to set the agenda over, but I think they are following the agenda and

following that independence agenda that has been dictated to in

Scotland as we speak. But Carwyn Jones does not want independence.

No, but you look at Elin Jones talking about a referendum on

independence when Plaid is elected in two successive governments, that

may not happen then, but certainly, if there was a change to the

constitution of the UK and we went down the Carwyn Jones route, who is

actually heading us towards some kind of federal system here, then

that would have to be put to the Welsh people because we have had

referendums on small constitutional changes and this would be a major

one. If there was a referendum on that there would have to be a

question on independence, I'm sure. It is quite baffling. But they said

devolution would open Pandora's box, they were not joking!

We will be going to the Commons any minute now. Let's see what our

guests think. On a day that Alex Salmond is launching this

constitution, we hear that the economy has shrunk in the last

quarter by 0.2%. That is the really big story, isn't it? Yes, and it

underlines the fact that the current status quo is not working.

Beautifully weaved in there! asked the question and I am

answering it. That is why many to change the status quo. We do need

to focus on jobs, health, the basic issues that of David concern to

people, but I am coming from a standpoint where I see moving

towards independence as a means of enabling Wales to get to grips with

those issues by having their hands on the macro economic levers, for

example, to get to grips with some of the basic structural issues in

our economy. Frankly, Osborne and Cameron at Westminster are not

addressing these issues. The economy is stagnating. Is that not

because of the world economy? if it were that, it is still not

the policies that I in the best interests of Wales and the economy

of Wales, so I honestly feel that we need to make -- to a situation

where we have the tools to do the job. If we don't have the tools,

Rickard expect anyone else to look after us. -- we can't expect.

think it is more important that the majority of people who were

watching your programme today, these figures are disappointing but

not a surprise. Osborne said that things will get difficult before

they get better. This is part of a story that has already been planned

for, I think. There is a different government hit in Wales already.

Devolution has started, and yet Wales is at the bottom of all the

economic indicators. If you are talking about devolution working,

we need to see some evidence at this stage that the people who have

got law-making powers are making the best of them and trying to

improve our economy. There is plenty of evidence, of course. If

you look at the 10 richest nations in the world, six are smaller than

Wales. An optimum size of our 3 million population would give us

that flexibility as a small nation to be able to react to the changing

economic climate. Being shackled to the City of London at the moment

summed up does not work in our favour. I'm sure the Scottish

question will come up later, but there is agreement between David

Cameron and Ed Miliband which suggests it is going to be

difficult for members of Plaid Cymru or the SNP did get their

voices heard on this issue. Which again underlines how irrelevant

Wales is becoming in Westminster, and that is feeding the frustration

that people in Scotland and Wales are feeling, and it is something

that had the should be addressed through a devolved settlement. That

is, of course, the increasingly clear view of people in Wales on

fiscal economy -- autonomy in terms of devolution of policing and so on.

These are issues where the will of people is ahead of people like

Carwyn Jones's arguments. Carwyn Jones called for a constitutional

convention the other day. He spoke about that convention protecting

the UK, not just looking at the future of the UK. Obviously what

happens in Scotland is going to have a profound effect on what

happens in Wales. How realistic do you take the threat of Scottish

independence? Personally, I don't think it will come to fruition.

That's why I think Alex Salmond has been more than happy to accommodate

the D Lomax question. It is only a couple of weeks ago that he was

wittier -- reiterating the SNP situation. It has been amazing how

happily Alex Salmond has been prepared to accommodate this

question. Carwyn Jones has called for this convention to look at the

different settlements that are evolving in the UK. But he fails to

tell us what he wants to see. Three times he was asked to state it are

-- to outline what he would like to see as the constitutional future of

Let's head over to the House of Commons. We will back at -- be back

afterwards. We will have a cup of tea.

MPs just finishing off the northern Ireland questions. You can see the

premises in his place, ready to go. He will be starting in a minute --

Prime Minister. This morning, I had meetings would

be Minister and others and in addition to my duties, I would have

further such meetings later today. The Prime Minister frequently

claims he is not complacent about the tragedy of youth unemployment.

Can he tell the House why his youth contract schemes has still not

started? It is going to make a big difference to -- differ as to young

people. It will over the course of the coming years, it will provide

160,000 places for people. That will be far better than the failed

future jobs fund. In some cases, it had over 97 % of its jobs place in

the public sector. It'll be up and running this year and will make a

bid -- big difference to young people. Today is the anniversary of

the great Scottish poet, Robbie Burns. Does the Prime Minister

agree with his impassioned plea for the unity of our nation when he

says in his poem, the Britons still, to Britain are true, among

ourselves, United. Ungrateful for her question. And

the point she makes is a good one - - I am grateful. Burns Night will

be celebrated not just across Scotland but across the whole of

the United Kingdom and in many parts of the world. When I hear the

Scottish nationalists who are so keen to leave the United Kingdom,

yet so anxious about having representation, I remember Robbie

Burns's words. Mr Speaker, we are 18 months into

his government and today's figures show our economy is not growing, it

is shrinking. What has gone wrong with his economic growing --

economic plan? These are extremely difficult economic times. These are

disappointing figures. They are not unexpected figures. They are what

the Office of budget responsibility for August. I will be frank. They

reflect three things. They reflect the overhang of the debt and the

deficit that we have to deal with. They reflect be higher food and

fuel prices. They put a squeeze on household income. They also reflect

the crisis in the euro-zone that has risen. The forecast for France,

Germany, Spain, Italy, for the end of last year, as greater decline or

in many places, a greater decline. This is the year we have to take

further action to get our economy moving. The most important thing is

to have a credible plan to get on top of the deficit.

Mr Speaker, people are fed up with his excuses. He blames the euro-

zone. Growth has been flat climbing in our economy since well before

the euro-zone crisis. Since his spending review in autumn 2010.

What has characterised, Mr Speaker, the government's approach through

of this period, total arrogance. In his first Budget, the Chancellor

painted a glowing picture of what his policies would deliver for a

our economy. He said this, his policies would deliver a steady and

sustained economic recovery with falling unemployment.

We have a shrinking economy and the highest unemployment in 18 years.

How bad do things have to get in our economy to shake him out of his

complacency? As usual, he writes the question before he listens to

the answer. I did not just say this is an issue of the euro-zone. It is

debt and deficit, squeezed household incomes, the issues

affecting many other economies. He talks about our policy but we

remember his policy, no more boom and bust. He gave us the bill --

the problems we are having to recover from. There is not one

ounce of complacency. The a cut in corporation tax, we have to scrap

the job tax, we are investing record sums in their

apprenticeships. All do. They must be heard. The Prime Minister.

party opposite only has one answer and that is to deal with a debt

crisis by borrowing more and adding to debt. That is his answer and it

would wreck our economy and interest rates and make things much

worse. He says there is not one ounce of complacency but he and his

Chancellor of the byword for self- satisfied, smug complacency and

that is the reality. He is failing not just on unemployment and growth

but on borrowing as well. Because of his failure on growth and

unemployment, he is borrowing �158 billion more than he forecast. And

now we know, he said unemployment would fall, it is not, he said the

economy would grow, it has not. He said we are all in this together,

we are not. When will this Prime Minister face up to the fact that

it is his policies that are failing our country? The economy grew last

year but he cannot find it in himself. There are more people in

work today than there were at the time of the last election. But we

were given... We were given a clear instruction yesterday at 5 o'clock

in the afternoon, the Shadow chancellor said, the government

should listen to the IMF and change course. At 7 o'clock in the evening,

the IMF told us, we do not think that fiscal consolidation adds to

the problem. Fiscal consolidation is part of resolving the problems

facing the UK economy. That is the truth. There are two parties in

this country taking responsibility for clearing up the mess. There is

one party refusing to take responsibility for causing the mess.

Can the Prime Minister tell the House when the committee will be

sitting to consider stripping this man of his ill-deserved knighthood?

The committee will be meeting, as I understand it, this week. It will

be considering all of the evidence, including, as I have said before,

the Financial Services of quality report into RBS and what went wrong.

-- authority. Does the Prime Minister agree that in Scotland,

the people have the right to approve their own constitutional

future as they see fit? This is an issue for the people of Scotland

and I think we should bring forward the date when we put the question

to the Scottish people. Ideally hope that they want to remain in

the United Kingdom. Options for further devolution, Options for

Change is across the United Kingdom are matters for all of the United

Kingdom. May I a put it to the Prime

Minister that for Britain to commit still more funds to the IMF would

in effect be providing a subsidy to Germany because it is still not

fully supporting its own currency while benefiting from its

appreciation. That is an important point. Of

course, the IMF managing-director is in London today. Our message is

clear. They should not be a question of committing further IMF

funds until the euro-zone itself standing behind its own currency.

The speech made in Germany last night was clear. The role of the

IMF is to support countries and not currency zones. This government

supports that decision. Last September, the Prime Minister

said about his flagship health bill and I quote, we have the Royal

College of GPs, the physicians, the nurses, people working in the

health service, supporting the changes we are making. Can the

Prime Minister give the house an update on the support for his bill?

I have certainly learned that when it comes to the NHS, you should

always expect a second opinion. Or even a third opinion. But there are

thousands of GPs across the country not just supporting our reforms,

they are actually implementing our reforms.

Let me give him just one example of a supportive a GP. Order!

Honourable Member should not be yelling out. The question was asked

and the answer will be given. I think they want to hear from this

one particular GP who hails from Doncaster. He said this when he was

the acting chairman of the commissioning group. He said this,

becoming one of the first national pathfinder areas is a real boost

for Doncaster. I think what is good for Doncaster is good for the rest

of the country! How out of touch as he about what

is happening in the NHS? -- is he. The latest survey says 98 % of GPs

want the Bill returns -- reformed. The Royal College of Nursing has

said the turmoil of the ceiling with the reforms is now greater

than the turmoil of stopping them. -- continuing.

We have to take our nurses and doctors with us. Mr Speaker, if he

wants to hear the voice of doctors and nurses why doesn't he listen?

He seems to be out of touch with what is happening in Doncaster!

Miliband is of course the MP for Doncaster.

Let me tell him what is happening in the NHS. 4,000 extra doctors

since the election. 100,000 more patients treated since the election.

In-patient and out-patient waiting times lower than they were at the

election. �7 billion already saved. At the

same time, we have got hospital acquired infections Abbey lowest-

ever levels. That is what is happening. If we listen to him, we

would be cutting spending in the NHS, and the NHS would be getting

worse, not better. Waiting lists are, morale is down

and his own help select committee, majority Conservative health

committee, what do they say about this? They say and I quote, it will

be disruption and distraction that hinders the ability of

organisations to release Saving. This is a bill nobody wants. It is

opposed by the doctors, the nurses and the patients. Before the

reorganisation. That is what he said. Isn't it time he kept at

least one promise? Put aside his pride and arrogance and a drop this

unnecessary and unwanted bill. I know that he panics and backs

down at the first sign of a trade unions say No But this government

does not. If you introduce choice, transparency, competition, if you

say that the private and voluntary sectors should pay greater role,

you face a challenge. But that is what doing the right thing you

sometimes all about. Lettin remember what his Health Secretary

said when he was in government. He said about GP commissioning, the

change will put power in the hands of local GPs to drive improvements

in their area so it should give more power to their elbow than they

have a presence. That is what I Following the Piper Alpha disaster

in and will see, this company developed a safety regime for

offshore oil and gas which is now threatened by the EU. Will he do

his best to persuade the rest of the EU that what we need is...

Robert Smith is stuck for his words at the moment. Sorry, Mr Speaker.

Not regulation but a directive which can be implemented flexibly.

I think I Honourable Friend makes an important point. I well remember

the Piper Alpha disaster and the huge suffering and loss of life

that caused. Since that day we have put in place a world-leading system

of regulation, and I will do everything I can to support the

climate change secretary to make sure that we get a result in Europe

that means we can go on with the right regulations for the North Sea.

On 2nd May 1920 10 the Prime Minister said the test of a good

society was how it cared for the frail and vulnerable, even more

important in difficult economic times. Will the Prime Minister not

be defending the basic sense of decency of the British people if he

persists at next week with proposals to take away up to �94

per week in employment and support allowance from up to 7,000

recovering cancer patients across the country? What our plans

envisage is actually more people with cancer receiving the greater

level of benefit and fewer people will actually phase the interview.

That is the case. There are two types of employment and support

allowance. On the support group, you get that money for ever for as

long as you need it, as long as you are unable to work. Many people

with cancer will go straight into that group, and quite right too.

I know that my right honorable Friend is aware that Coryton oil

refinery in my constituency went into protective administration

yesterday and, while the future is uncertain, it is by no means bleak.

Does my right Hon will Friend agree with me that what is now needed to

protect the 1000 jobs the refinery at provides is the full support of

customers and suppliers and for accurate reporting of the situation.

Will the Prime Minister agreed to ensure that I meet with all

relevant ministers to discuss what further action the Government can

take to secure or... Order. Honourable Friend is right to raise

this issue and to mention the importance of the customers and

suppliers and the role that they play. I will certainly make sure

that he meets with ministers as appropriate. The key thing is the

role of the administrator, and the administrator has made it clear

that its priority is to continue to operate the refinery operations at

Coryton and other sites in the UK while the financial position is

clarified and the restructuring options are explored. We are

confident that the administrator is doing all it can, but we will keep

on the placed -- case will -- case. The existing controls on the

movement of terrorist suspects lapsed today, which includes the

case of suspected CD of the who Mr Justice Owen said "relocation is a

necessary measure to protect the public from an immediate and real

risk of a terrorist related attack". Could the Prime Minister therefore

tell the House why his government supported that relocation at the

court hearing last year, but has still -- since legislated to remove

it and to give freedom to suspect CD and others like him to come to

London in the run-up to the Olympic Games? Most people across this

house realise that the Control Order regime needed reform. It did

not have public confidence and nor did it have confidence of many

people in the police security services. We have reformed it, we

have worked with the security services and put in all resources

they believe are necessary to make sure our country is kept safe.

Following the renewable energy subsidy review, will the Prime

Minister assured tax payers that this government will focus its

support on technologies that are cost-effective and reliable, rather

than inefficient costly large scale onshore wind farms? My right

honorable Friend will know that the renewable obligation banding review

has just closed, and it was proposing targeting only the most

cost-effective onshore wind farms, recognising that it is now one of

the mature and cheaper technologies, and we should, as he says, increase

support for an expansion in a sustainable biomass generation

which is cost effective and will help us to meet our renewables

target. On Friday, Holocaust Memorial Day commemorates the

liberation of the concentration camp at Auschwitz. What can the

promise to do to ensure that all of our society understand the

depravity of the era of Nazi evil and learn the lessons of it for the

present? I think the Honourable Lady, who has a long record of

supporting this cause, speaks for the whole nation in raising the

importance of it. I met with representatives of the Holocaust

Education Trust yesterday, and met with a Holocaust survivor whose

story was truly inspiring about what he had seen and gone through

as a young boy, and then coming to Britain and becoming an Olympic and

Commonwealth contender. It was a fantastic story. We need to make

sure that these stories are told in all of our schools right across the

country. That is the work of the Holocaust Education Trust and it is

worker I strongly support. I wonder if the Prime Minister is aware that

if one takes the whole of Lancashire, the average household

income after tax is a little above �26,000. While my constitute --

constituents want a fair day for those who deserve benefits, they

also want a fair deal for those who work. The Honourable Gentleman

speaks for many people when we say that the proposal for a cap on

benefits of �26,000 is fair. It is a cat that allows people to receive

�500 a day. His constituents -- a week. His constituents ask

themselves, is it right that my heart and taxes, when I am learning

-- earning less than that money, is going to support people on

benefits? I must say how disappointing it was that after the

Labour Party said it would support a cat the announcement was made on

the BBC and we were all told that they would support it, but in the

Other Place they voted against it. What a complete act of hypocrisy.

Can the Prime Minister explain why ministerial advisers and senior

civil servants continue to attend networking events with lobbyists

who paid several thousand pounds to attend, despite the fact that the

Cabinet Office had deemed this to be a breach of the Civil Service

Code and had previously issued a ban on attendance? Unlike under the

previous government, there is a proper system for declaring the

interests of special advisers and ministers. But did not used to be

the case. It is now the case. benefits cut will affect the

disabled and those claiming tax benefits. Does he not agree that my

constituents deserve to know they have a government that is on the

side of families who did the right thing and support their local

communities? The Honourable Gentleman speaks powerfully about

this issue, and that is where a benefit cap is fair. He is also

important to recognise that we are excluded from that cap those

entitled to working tax credit, household with someone claiming

disability living allowance, and there will always be a hardship

fund, a grace period, a way of helping those families to cope with

this cap and to make sure, where possible, we get people into work.

The real shame is that there are so many millions of children who live

in households where nobody works and, indeed, that number doubled

under the last government. Prime Minister has said "it would

be a personal failure of bangs decrees lending to businesses". And

yet businesses are still not getting what they need from the

banks. Have the banks betrayed the Prime Minister or have their Prime

Minister betrayed businesses? have put in place at the Merlin

agreement which actually lead to an increase in bank lending last year.

What we now have in place is a massive credit easing programme

that the Chancellor announced in the Autumn Statement. That will be

taking this here and make sure that the banks are doing what they ought

to do in a free enterprise economy, and that is to lend to businesses

large and small. I am sure there will be families with children that

may have difficulties with the new benefit regime. However, would the

Prime Minister care to comment on the feelings of elderly couples

that have spent their entire life working for this country, paid into

the spare its -- state pension system, and are now existing on

about �7,000 a year, rather than �26,000 a year? My Honourable

Friend makes a very good point, and the fact is, if you look at the

figures today, there are still families in London who are

receiving housing benefit worth over �50,000 a year. Each one of

those families is taking up the hard earned taxes of many working

people earning far less, who would not dream of living in houses like

those. The point he makes about pensioners is right, and I am proud

of the fact that this government will be increasing the basic state

pension by �5 a week starting in April because we believe in dignity

and security for our pensioners in old age. What does the Prime

Minister made of the National Audit Office's slating of his flagship

work programme? They said that the Government has overestimated the

number of people it will put back to work. This is not so much a work

programme as a doesn't work programme. Instead of just reading

the press release, he ought to read the report! Actually it praises the

Government for introducing a scheme in such a short period of time. But

the basic issue that the National Audit Office is making is the work

programme is not putting taxpayers' money at risk, it is putting the

providers at risk. But as a different way of doing things. It

is about payment by results, it is about getting better performance,

it is about value for money - things that his government never

provided. Like my Honourable Friends who work extremely hard for

modest salaries, given that many people think that the benefit cap

should be set at a lower level than �26,000, does my right Hon will

Friend agree with me that the party opposite is completely out of touch

by voting to make it higher? Honourable Friend makes a good

point. Let me remind the right honorable Gentleman what he said.

This was in 20th January 12. On the Today programme, "I am not against

the Cap". If he isn't, then why couldn't he get his Labour peers to

vote for it in the House of Lords? What is he, weak, incompetent, or

both? On 14th December I asked the Prime Minister about cutting

benefits for disabled children and he replied "first of all, we are

not cutting benefits for disabled children.". I wonder whether he has

checked his facts since that time and discovered that on that other

December his coalition members in the Lords voted against the

protection of benefits for disabled children under the new Universal

Credit, resulting in a loss of �1,300. I will give the Prime

Minister another go - how does this fit in with "we are all in this

together"? I think the Honourable Lady is wrong. The money is going

into universal credit for the most disabled told an and that is not

being cut. But isn't it interesting that all of the questions we get

from all other members opposite are always about calling for more

spending. They have learned absolutely nothing about the mess

they landed this country in. British Airways have announced

plans to take over BMI. Although this is being challenged under

competition rules, what assurances can the Prime Minister give that

the landing slots at Heathrow for keep regional airports such as

Aberdeen will be protected if this is allowed to go ahead? This is an

important point. I will look into this issue about landing slots. I

know how important this issue is for regional airports, and I will

It is not what the reforms do at all. What the reforms do is ensure

that you can have some private sector and voluntary sector

activity going on within the NHS. Before... Why doesn't he listen to

what his own secretary said? His Health Secretary said this, the

private sector but his capacity into the NHS for the benefit of NHS

patients. -- puts. Says they have gone into government -- opposition,

they are totally irresponsible. I stand by what you said in 2007!

Pity what you -- that you cannot stick by it. Is the Prime Minister

aware of mind -- the brutal murder of my constituent in Germany last

year. Will the Prime is to make sure the government does everything

possible to support his mother in dealing with the financial cost she

now faces to see justice for her son?

My Honourable Friend is right to raise this case. I offer my sincere

condolences to the family. I know what a distressing time it will be

for her. The Foreign Office will do everything it can to support her

and her family. I have been quite impressed by what the Foreign

Office has done in cases like these. They do show the sympathy and

understanding. 25 % of constituents have Sculley told diseases. --

skeletal. Will be Prime Minister agree to see representatives with

me in the near future? I will certainly look at the case. One of

the poise of the NHS reforms, it is not yet fully understood, the idea

of having the public budgets properly ring-fenced in each area.

Art will be able to help with many of these. -- that. Nobody should

earn more in benefits than hard- working families. Does the Prime

Minister not agree with me it is a damned disgrace that the Labour

Party is trying to wreck this important measure? Moderation!

Moderation in the use of parliamentary language.

It is an important point. This is an important decision that the

House of Commons has got to make. We were told the Labour party would

support a cap on benefits, they have said that repeatedly and yet

when the challenge comes, they duck the challenge and refused to

support it. They will have another chance when the legislation comes

back to this house. It is no use shaking your head. People in this

country will not understand why they are taking a decision. Point

of order. That is Prime Minister's Questions over for another week. A

pretty varied show this time around. Plenty of MPs wanting to challenge

diva Carmen on -- David Cameron on NHS policy. Apologies for the

swearing. I am not going to swear! We will

see what our guests have to say. We will come on to discussing welfare

later on. Let's look at the NHS in England.

We hear it mentioned in the Chamber often enough by Carwyn Jones, he

attacks your party for what he thinks you're doing in England. It

was coming under fire from Edna the ban. The Prime Minister was

floundering a bet -- Ed Miliband. We should be talking about the NHS

in Wales, it is facing its own problems. Ed Miliband mentioned

waiting times. But they are worse in Wales. They should be

concentrating on that. It is fair to say there is

consternation about it. We had examples of doctors supporting what

the government is doing in England. But some leadership has got to be

taken on this. That is what we are getting from the UK government.

This has actually come from the GPS originally. The government is

falling for one ideas that came from grassroots level.

These changes, it seems to me, are not receiving wholesale support

from the NHS staff in England. We have got a mention about the

private sector involvement. What do you think? Frustration. We are

talking about the NHS in England. Without harking back to the fact

that there is he diverges happening, it is maybe not being reflected as

it should be, Welsh MPs contributing to a debate about the

NHS in England but interestingly, when it comes to the discussion

about privatisation, Carwyn Jones has made it clear in Wales that the

Labour government in Wales would not support that. But interestingly,

while for Labour MPs voted in favour of exactly that. - Welsh.

Carwyn Jones was defending the Welsh point of view without

criticising his own MPs. We saw again last week, Welsh Members of

Parliament voting in favour of reducing the budget for the Common

Agricultural Policy. In Wales, they have made it clear it would be

detrimental to the interests of Welsh farmers. It is becoming

increasingly difficult for Carwyn Jones to say he is speaking on

behalf of the Labour Party in Wales. His MPs are voting for examples of

policies that go against the grain of what he wants to do in Wales.

Sticking to constitutional issues, moving away from the NHS, there was

not as much discussion on the independence question for Scotland

as we may have thought. But there was one question from the SNP.

predictable question and a predictable answer. It has not

enhanced the debate in any respect. Yes, it was raised. I think an SNP

is obliged to raise that issue, when given the opportunity. The

Prime Minister is obliged to answer. No surprise. Only one of the

Scottish MPs mentioned it. You're not one to mention it any more!

We are going to mention it some more, and surprisingly. Later on,

some members of the House of Lords have given the coalition Government

a bloody nose over the issue of welfare reform. I promise you

earlier a trip to Scotland to hear about the plans for a referendum on

independence. I like to keep my promises.

Good afternoon. Hello.

We have had lots of stuff overnight, the kind of things that Alex

Salmond has been saying. You have been up there for a couple of hours.

What are the other party saying in Scotland that we are maybe not

hearing? I now have all the answers. People are waiting to cheer what

Alex Salmond has to say this afternoon, spelling out his plans

to members first and then a trip up to Edinburgh Castle to spell out

what I suppose are fairly grand plans from the SNP's point of view.

He did reveal some things in his speech in London yesterday, a

speech aimed at eight different audience. But having to concede a

But the sense you really get from being in Scotland is this is very

much at the start of a long debate and questions being asked and

worked out, let alone answer has been given.

Is there an acceptance in Scotland this is the main issue? While this

constitutional debate goes on, people still need public services.

Do people accept that maybe the run of the country needs to take a

backstage? I think you have pointed to

something that is quite different. It is different in Wales. In

Scotland, there has been a feeling that what the SNP has managed to do

is take the fear out of the debate on independence. They do not slam

their door in the cases of SNP politicians any more. They can say,

I do not agree with independence but let me hear about your other

policies. In Wales, the cart and horse are the other way around.

Independence is raised and the argument is put, we do not care

about that at the moment. We have more important things to worry

about. It is very different. But there is an acceptance that

independence or further devolution for that matter -- matter would be

for a purpose. One of the things that Alex Salmond will have to do

is explain what would independence mean. What does it amount to? Does

it mean more money, less money, neutral? What does it mean as far

as public services are concerned? Those questions have not been asked.

Final question, Alex Salmon gave a big hint in his speech that he

would like to see this question on the referendum ballot paper -- Alex

Salmond. Explain to us what it is. It sounds like an energy drink,

somebody said. Essentially, it is independent but stopping short of

that by way of saying there is more fiscal power, Scotland would be

responsible for raising cash and not just bending it, -- spending it,

defence and so one would remain at Westminster. People are still

trying to work out what that is good. It can mean a number of

things to a number of people. It was quite a clever explanation to

say, I want independence but if he thinks that is the way to get a yes

vote, he says if that is what civil society, that is where the debate

is an people want to see that on the calling-card, perhaps it should

be there. -- polling card. We will have more on Wales Today

this evening. The UK government says it will go ahead with plans to

reform welfare payments. Our a Porter has been discussing

the issue. -- reporter. The thorniest issue in Parliament

at the moment is to do with the government's plans to reform

benefits. The House of Lords has shown their opposition to the

government's plans this week by voting against the government's

plans. What are your opinions were the

cars to the changes in benefits? needs reform and improving. But

where I disagree, it is one size fits all. We clearly saw this week

when we attempted to... If people will be made homeless, that it

happened. Mike German and his colleagues voted against us on that.

The bishop said that child allowances should not be taken into

account. I agree with him on that. These are the most honourable

people in our society. They have to bear the burden and the problems.

Mike German and his colleagues voted against that. One size fits

all is not the answer. Go -- the government are trying to target

those people that do not want to work and are living on benefits.

They are in some cases living a better life than those people going

out to work. We do have people like that and it should not be allowed

but targeting children as a result of that? I cannot accept that.

you consider there are people living on benefits in the same road

as a very rich music star, you The government is saying they will

guarantee nobody will be made homeless. I voted against a Labour

amendment which would intervene... You voted for that. You expected

from the Tories, but the lip of doing the Tories' dirty work is a

bit much. The answer is, people will not be made homeless. There

will always be a place for people to live. People may have to move

and that is part of the process, but you must remember that people

on benefits, it is not the best life they could possibly have. If

you lock people into a benefits structure, it is going to avoid all

aspiration of wanting to work. We know that has been in built for a

small number of people in our society and we have got to change

that pattern and give people hope and aspiration. There will be no

one left homeless, guaranteed. is what we have always done. But

the idea that guarantees will be made about people not being made

homeless - my colleagues would have prevented that that the voter is

that measure. It was wrong. It was wrong to prevent people becoming

homeless. That is what you did - you allowed -- voted to allow the

Government that if people become homeless there is now intervention

to prevent this happening. And then what happens? It becomes another

cost on the state because then the state is obliged to provide him as

people with accommodation. I think there are people who understand

that we have to make these decisions, but the crucial thing is,

will there be intervention on the Government to ensure that no one

mates -- gets home us? You bet your life they will. We have had all

this rhetoric, we are not just going to take a Labour amendment

which put a blanket policy in place, which is just the sort of thing

that has caused the trouble in our society. We must treat people as

individuals, and that work will continue to work so that people

don't have to languish on benefits and that no one takes him benefit

more than the average people in our society. I am collaborating with

the Tories in order to do this. We expect the Tories to do it, but the

Liberals - you should be ashamed of yourselves. When the most

vulnerable people are taking home in benefits the average earnings of

people in this country, then half the people are the most vulnerable,

that is what you are saying. voted against the bishops amendment

which would have protected children. How do you protect children. There

are people in society who will not work, but the idea that you then

make the children of those parents vulnerable by taking away support I

think is just morally wrong. have given a guarantee that no one

will be made homeless. That is the Government's guarantee. There will

be help and assistance to make sure that the most vulnerable children

are protected. We will certainly not have to go down a route with a

blanket policy so we raise the level of cap and people can get

benefits amounting to more than the average earnings in this country.

Most working people struggling to make ends meet will recognise that.

Tory populist nonsense. The Liberal Democrats have sold out just for

power. They have sold out their consciences and the people of Wales

will recognise that come the next election. They don't give a damn

about the poorest and most disadvantaged. What we will

guarantee is that we will help people to get back to work, help

people to live properly. We have no growth in the economy! When we left

power, the economy was growing. economy has had the biggest deficit

in my whole lifestyle -- lifetime. Labour -- Labour has left us with

one trillion pounds worth of debt at the moment. We have to put it

right. People like John can say what will keep the money, keep

spending, and we will be in the bottom of the train as far as our

country is concerned. -- drain. Of course we have to repay our debts,

we all know that. Labour are not opposed to the cuts, they say. They

want no cuts - that is the position of Labour. Why doesn't he talked to

his party leader and find out what an -- Ed Miliband wants for his

country. Do you agree with Ed Balls? Where are the jobs these

people are going to have? You have sold out for a share of power.

Liberal-Democrats in Wales should be ashamed of themselves.

should be tried -- trying to be consistent with your party policies.

This is just endless rhetoric and people will understand the fairness

of what the Government is doing. Thank you both very much.

It seems that the Lords are taking it easy there in Westminster!

Hopefully we will have a bit more of a mature debate perhaps on the

sofa here. Let's look at the issue of the benefit cap, this figure of

some �500 a week. Is it a good thing or a bad thing? I am glad the

Lords have taken this decision and I am disappointed with the

discussion we had there because it was too focused on selling at full

power and so on. Let's bring this debate back to the people who are

dependent on this money for their day-to-day livelihoods. There are

people, of course, and regrettably am sure there will always be people

who tried to play the system, but we should not punish everyone with

that same label. That is unfair, and to penalise the children is a

retrograde, to say the least. As a your against the cap? I am, yes.

think it is accepted that a cap is a good idea. I know that Labour

Party will be inconsistent on where that cap should be set, but �500 a

week is more than quite a lot of people who are working get, and I

am sure there will be people watching this programme who will

recognise what has saved. If you are talking about fairness, it is

not about hitting the most vulnerable. People with disability

living allowance in the family will not be affected by this cap, and

neither with families earning the tax credit. This should encourage

them back into work. Also, with the childcare element, that will also

be excluded as well. The other thing I wanted to mention is that

people living on pensions at the moment with no control over their

income and reliant on interest rates being as low as they are,

they are having to cope, so why should somebody be doing better

than them were made to date have the opportunity to work? What do

you think these changes, what effect do you think they have on

the public perception that your party is hitting the vulnerable?

There is a sense of that, isn't there? My understanding is that the

majority in Britain actually approve of these plans. They

approve of the whole fairness agenda. Perhaps not the people who

were receiving the benefits? depends which benefits you are

talking about. There will all -- always be some people who play the

system in this country. You can see why there is an enthusiasm for

fairness across the board here. danger is that we will be seeing

people, particularly in parts of London, being forced out of their

houses because there would be able to afford the rent, and that will

mean people being shifted to areas where they just aren't any jobs for

them to take up. We must leave it there for now. In the meantime,

time to go back to Mark. I am joined by the Labour am for the

rich South. We are talking about a document your party produced. We

have had all these already. Why did you feel the need to put them into

a single document? It is a progress report. It is a progress report and

it is mapping out the future. Ice is the first time I have ever heard

criticism for a progress report. had merely said that we have heard

what we is in it before. We are trying to make sure that we

communicate effectively in a way that journalists cannot

misunderstand, in a way that our opponents cannot misrepresent our

aims. We have set out what we have achieved in the past eight months.

�40 million rolled up for small and medium-sized enterprises will bring

on board 500 community support officers, we are making sure that

moves to have easier access to doctors' surgeries come on line, so

it is a progress report as well as our plans for the next four years.

Quite unusual to make these progress reports, particularly when

there is no election on the horizon. Have you been stung by critics who

say you are not delivering? There is nothing revolutionary about this.

This is about good and effective and responsible government. It is

about making sure we communicate regularly with the people that we

serve. It is important that people know it is not all doom and gloom

from the UK coalition government, that we can make things different

for Wales. In these times in particular, making sure we get our

message out is really important for public confidence and optimism.

would argue that there is a bit more aspiration then detail in her.

If we look at house and, for example, you talk about how you

want to provide more Herms and there is no target. When I asked

the first minister about that yesterday, he did not have an

answer either. �9 million has been made available for more affordable

homes. We can actually gone to buy affordable homes in terms of the

cost of bills. The key in this is that there are 22,000 empty hands

at the moment. The Housing Minister has rightly said aside �5 million

to bring on board does, so potentially, we could bring on a

large proportion of those, whether we bring all of them into use I

don't know. It is difficult to tell because some homes are empty for

various reasons, but we put money where it is required and we target

those homes. I understand there are those difficulties around the edges,

but can you give an approximation? I should imagine we will be able to

get those figures very soon. The key thing is that you can predict

based on local authorities. Wrexham, for example, has been effective

bringing to use empty homes, and there is any 190 now in Wrexham

County Borough, whereas in other local authorities there are several

thousand. We can produce estimates, or we hope we can produce estimates.

That is complicated. GP opening hours. Are you just going to up

until 6:30pm, because that is the evidence to the health committee,

whereas you have given the impression it will go to 7pm or 8pm.

The key is that there is consultation on this. Doctors'

surgeries can be open correctly and as accessible as possible both in

the evenings and on weekends. will have to see where that gets.

Thank you for joining us. Sorry we could not get through more of your

document. Thank you. We will get some

reaction to what Ken Skates has had to say there. He would suggest that

the Government is delivering plenty and doing lots. The document was

slim. Market is wrong, there is a big election on the horizon. In May,

the local authorities will be choosing their councillors. What do

you think this document is for? There have been accusations that

Carwyn Jones is leading a do- nothing government. Is this a

response to that criticism? Yes, it is clearly an attempt to relaunch

the Government. They are aware of their criticisms. I had been him

nine months and I have not heard a single piece of legislation, no new

capital spend, so what have they been doing with that time?

Obviously, producing glossy brochures. Do you regret that may

be you should have much -- should have had more to do? First

Minister's Questions has become a disappointing experience as new

Assembly Members. Are you enjoying your time here? I am enjoying it,

yes, but I do feel frustrated. We spent many years to become an

elected politician to make a difference, and then you get there

and hit the buffers and nothing happens. The criticism that this is

a do-nothing government is perfectly valid. The fact they felt

obliged to produce this suggests to me that they are conscious that is