sought at the time? >> i didn't know the answer to -- i don't know the answer to that question. my point was that if you look at several of the recent opinions , which i have judge lynch: i am saying the procedures would be different which would be different in a district court or congress and terms of having a robust consideration, not just from what the government -- and whatever the judge can bring to bear in his or her own experience that to a real debate. mr. delery: what i think i can say is although these particular orders are not in the joint appendix here, among the declassified materials from the fisc our opinions reflecting reactions to compliance issues that were identified and steps

that the fisc took in response, which included orders that were not simply things that were proposed by the government, but that is a general recognition. >> you seem to assure us that there is a special needs problem. that is what you have let us know. you were pushed -- i see this with more than all due respect -- i am not saying it is a bad thing, but all of this stuff that we now know -- and we don't know what we do not know -- all this stuff we now know is as part of a political reaction to the understanding that this program was in practice. isn't that so?

aren't you arguing a good deal from material that was classified until a june ago and made public as a reaction to that? mr. delery: certainly, that is true that there is now information public, in the public realm, that had not been public before. but this program, and i think this is the critical aspect of the congressional design, was subject to article 3 review from the beginning by operation of the fisc which was a body that congress set up specifically to a congress that, just as the intelligence committees act as the channel for oversight of the executive branch from the congressional side, where you by necessity are dealing with classified information.

indiasncharliee -- judge sack: that there was some representative of the other side, if that representative of the other side was a pro bono amicus -- get gerald out in chicago and had argued the other side of things. i for one would find what you say -- i am not talking long now like i am out of school -- but i find this a lot more reassuring if it were subject to an adversary process. mr. delery: as your honor might be aware, among proposals

currently pending for a change to the program would include provisions that would allow for more than one option on the table, the kind of approach you are talking about. judge sack: for that i would look forward. mr. delery: if you look at the reasonable inquiry, for example i think -- and talents the factor that the supreme court has said should be balance -- there certainly is an overriding importance in preventing future terrorist attacks h. here, the intrusion, if any subject to this with argument, in the privacy of individuals is carefully -- to allow the examination of the data, to allow the edification of connections only on finding of reasonable suspicion, and that the other procedures that are in place.

so the statue oratory that statutory fisc imposed state regard -- safeguards -- as well as other entities in the executive branch. all of this we submit should leave the court if evaluating the fourth amendment question to include the program as it currently stands is reasonable because the fourth amendment -- in the test is whether it is an effective means of a combustion the interests. judge lynch: we all understand that. it looks like you are following appeared unless my colleagues have more questions, we have given you more time than we have given mr. abdo. unless you have things that you think are critical -- [indiscernible]

judge lynch: he will not be able to pick it up and rebuttal, since it has not been talked about in initial arguments any more than mr. delery talked about it in the standing argument. i do not know if we need to hear more about any of those things. i do not want to cut you off if there is something critical, you should know that you have not gotten to, we had given it probably more time than you will get in the supreme court, let alone the reasonable arguments -- i can assure you you will not see two of these. mr. delery: thank you very much. >> i do not know if you are limited to two minutes. we have and a very thorough

discussion of the issue, i believe, so i hope you will be able to be relatively brief and respond only to points that you have not had an opportunity to address so far. with that, guide. mr. abdo: a few points. the first is to respond of the discussion of ratification. that dock and is not a game of gotcha the question is whether there is an official completion of statute that congress was aware of an legislative on the basis of. that is not the case you. members of congress were not aware of the program. those who were were not provided analysis of the program, and then they were not allowed to discuss it with colleagues or constituents in a way to supreme court has always pointed to in past cases of ratification. the second point, to go back to an exchange relating to efficiency, and the question of efficiency, professor explained quite clearly that the

government could use targeted events in a nearly and continuous way if it is structured its arrangement with companies anyway, congress could provide for the mechanism. in the fact that congress has not yet provided for that mechanism is no bar to this court ruling it must. it was the case in that the supreme court ruled the government could not wiretap individuals without a warrant and it led to the enactment of title iii and that was the case in keith when the supreme court ruled that foreign intelligence surveillance, even justified by the need to gather intelligence, had the individualized. the third quick point is that smith is different from this case for a lot of reasons. it is not that the government is acquiring different types of information under the fisc program. it is not that the government is acquiring information about millions of individuals and not

just one, but that the government is acquiring information even with respect to a single person indefinitely. and not made clear, just a few years after smith, that when the government scaled up surveillance operation from targeted to drag that cannot the constitutional balance is different and needs to be addressed differently. i think judge broaddrick, you are right that the task now requires this court to test the applications of privacy expectations of this program and not what the supreme court decided in knox. the minimization procedures that the government relies on would be constitutionally superfluous if smith govern this case. he could collect the record without protections in place. they could store all of them indefinitely. they could query them for any or no reason at all, and build dossiers that they this kind building with no constitutional restriction. the final point is the government tries to explain why

it is only asking for an error ruling from this court, but the legal theories that it answers is a roadmap to a world in which the government routinely collects fast comedies of information about americans will done absolutely nothing wrong. i do not think that as well the congress envisioned when it enacted to 15, and not the world the framers envisioned when they crafted the fourth amended. if there are no questions -- judge lynch: thank you very much. we appreciate the arguments on both sides, which were extremely careful, thoreau, and learned, and we will take them under advisement. and eventually render a decision. thank you all very much. that is the last case on the calendar. the clerk will adjourn the court. clerk: court is now adjourned. >> reaction from capitol hill to the date's decision.

-- two today's decision. now remarks from marco rubio. mr. rubio: i think my colleagues have made and ask on point today in outlining details of how this program works. let me back up and point out why are we even having this debate other than the fact that it is expiring. that be created including by political figures that serve in this chamber that the united states government is listening to your phone calls or going through your bills as a matter of course. that is absolutely categorically false. the next time that any politician -- senator congressman, talkinghead whatever it may be -- stands up and says that the u.s. government is standing up and going through your phone records, they're lying. this just is not true. except for some very isolated instances -- in the hundreds -- of individuals for whom there is reasonable suspicion that they could have links to terrorism.

you know, those of us in this cull tire and in our society are often accused of having a short attention span. we forget that less than a year ago russian separatists shot down a commercial airliner armed by the russians, maybe even the russians themselves did t we forget it wasn't long ago that assad was using chemical weapons to slaughter people in sear yasm the world moves on. what wreeshed never forget is what happened here on the is 11th of september of the year 2001. there are moments that people always remember. they remember when president kennedy was assassinated. everyone in this room remembers where they were and what they were doing on the 11th of september of the year 2001. here leshere's the truth: if this program had existed before 9/11, it is quite possible that we would have known that the 9/11 hijacker was living in san diego and was making phone calls to an

al qaeda safehouse in yemen p. there's no guarantee we would have known. there is no way we can go back in time and prove it. but there is a probability that we could have. there is a probability that american lives could have been saved. this program works as follows: if we believe that an individual -- we meaning the intelligence agencies of the united states -- believes that there is an individual involved in terrorist activity a reasonable belief, and that individual might be communicating with people as part of a plot, they have to get an order that allows them access to their phone bill, and the phone bill boskly tells us when they called, what number they called and how long the call took. why does that matter? because if i know that subject "x" san individual involved in terrorism, of course you want to know who they are calling. you won't be as interested in the calls to pizzaer hut or the local pharmacy, but you would be interested in calls overseas or calls to other people because

they could be part of the plot as well. that's why this is such a valuable tool. and my colleagues have already pointed out if the i.r.s. wants your phone bill, they just have to issue a subpoena. if any agency of american government -- if your local police department wants your phone bill -- if you are involved in a civil litigation and they want access to your phone bill because it is relevant to the case, they can just get a subpoena. it is part of the record. the intelligence agencies actually have to go through a number of hoops and hurdles. that's fine. that's appropriate because these are very powerful agencies. i would further add that the people that are raising hysteria -- what is the problem we are solving here? there is not one single documented case, not one single documented case -- there is not one single case that's been brought to us as aen an example of how this is being abused. show us the story give us the name. show us who is this individual

that is going out and seizing seizing the phone records of americans improperly. there is no one example of that. inif there is, that individual should be nut jail. the solution not to get rid of a program at a time when we know that the risk of homegrown violent extremism is the highest its ever been. we u -- we used to be worried about a foreigner coming to the united states and carrying out an attack. then we were worried about an american traveling abroad and carrying out an attack. now we're worried about people that may never lead here that are radicalized on-line and carry out an attack. this is not a theoretical threat. just last weekend two individuals inspired by isis, tried to carry out an attack in the state of texas. one day -- i hope that i'm wrong -- but one day there will be an attack that's successful. and the first question out of everyone's mouth is going to be, why didn't we know about it? and the answer better not be because this congress failed to

authorize a program that might have helped us know about it. these people are not playing games. they don't go on these web sites and say the things they say for purposes of aggrandizement. this is a serious threat and i hope we reauthorize this bill. mr. burr: madam president i thank my colleagues for their participation, and i thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for their accommodation. and i would conclude by saying this. in the very near future, this congress will be presented two choices -- to reauthorize a program that works or to the roll back our tools to pre-9/11. i don't believe that's what the american people want. i don't believe that's what members of congress want. i urge my colleagues, become educated on what this program is what it does and more importantly, how effective it's >> saturday morning at 10:00 we're live from greenville,

south carolina. speakers include scott walker, ted cruz, carly fiorina, ben carson, and marco rubio. on sunday at noon, members of america's first families remember first ladies, daughters of jackie kennedy betty ford, and laura bush. on c-span2 on saturday night sexual assaults in the u.s. focusing on the college town of missoula, montana. sunday evening at 10:00, the first female four-star general talks about her life in the military. and on c-span3 saturday afternoon, remembering the liberation of nazi concentration camps with an interview of a person who as a teenager and escaped german persecution of jews by coming to the u.s. and

questioned hitler's personal driver. sunday afternoon at 2:00, the 70th anniversary of the end of world war two in europe. get our complete schedule at c-span.org. >> sunday night former bloomberg news reporter kate brauer. >> who are that th icklands? >> they are a family. a part-time butler works every week at the white house, and nine members of his family worked there. his uncle and -- were made had

butler, and he told me my uncles ran the white house. they brought him in when he was 17 years old in 1959 and he is still working there, and he disrupt how used to work in the kitchen. he was such a skinny guy. they were getting him ice cream to eat. a sign and greed of person who remembers -- a sign and breeze of person who remembers that. >> sunday night on c-span's " q&a." >> voters are finishing up with their choices and u.k.. in a few minutes, our simulcast of election night coverage, but first, a preview from today's "washington journal." host: this is one of the closest in decades. why is it so close, and how close is it? guest: hi, greta.

it is great to be with you. it is fascinating and riveting from afar. i am in cedar rapids iowa, covering another election in 2016, a presidential election or the primaries anyway. i think it is so close because the british public has lost confidence in the major political parties, the conservative party on the right and the labour party on the left. we have had five years of conservative, liberal democrat and coalition governments, and i think if you can poll to vote for none of the above, then they would probably win today. but what the eve of the election polls are showing is an extraordinarily tight contest with the conservatives on about 34%, labour on about 34% as well, and then going down the

list, the united kingdom independence party, this new movement, anti-immigration similar to your tea party here in some ways. you got the liberal democrats, you've got the scottish national party, which could be a huge factor because it looks like they are displacing the labour party in a traditional heartland of labour in scotland. what we are almost certainly going to see tomorrow is that no party will reach the magic number of -- there is actually some dispute over what the magic number is -- but 323 seats in the 650-seat chamber to get an absolute majority. you have a lot of horse trading, david cameron and conservative party leader trying to form a new coalition government or minority government, and you will have ed miliband, the labour leader, the opposition leader, trying to do the same, trying to cobble together some sort of arrangement which will form a government.

anybody that ays they know what will happen is not telling the truth. host: toby, what role could the scottish national party play then, given what you are talking about, if there is no clear majority? they will have to try to build a coalition here. what role could the scottish national party play? guest: the scottish national party is fascinating. they are only polling 5%. of course, they are outstanding in scotland. but in the u.k., they could get 48 seats. if you look at the way that works, the u.k. independence party is about 12%, and they are likely to get two or three seats. so the scottish national party are very much a socialist, left of center party, as is the labour party, so they will be a sort of natural alliance, if you like, between labour and the

scottish national party. however, the labour party that it will not go into the coalition would be scottish nationalists, so what you maybe get is under some kind of loose arrangements whether the scottish national party will prop up a labour party that has finished second and has got only the second highest number of seats behind the tories. if you add up the labour party seats and the scottish national party seats, that could result in some kind of government. it's very uncertain and would very vulnerable to a vote with no confidence or the scottish national party trying to exact a price too great for labour. it could be very, very unstable if you can get those two parties in partnership. host: toby harnden, how long does this take to straighten out? guest: well, we don't know. last time in 2010, it took about two days, and you had a parallel

sets of horse trading going on you had the labour party talking to liberal democrats, you had the conservative party talking to conservative democrats. you had the scottish national party sort of in the mix as well. in the end, it was the tories, conservatives, and the liberal democrats with a shared agenda a relatively stable arrangement, which had indeed lasted five years. this time, it looks like it will be much less tenuous -- or much more tenuous. it could take many, many days. the big date on the calendar is may 27 when the queen's speech which is when the new government's agenda is made out. but some people are saying we could even get a situation where that speech or queen is asked to make a speech in which you have a person in miliband or david cameron trying to become the new

prime minister, but not sure whether the queen's speech could be passed in the house of commons. host: toby harnden, thank you. appreciate it. guest: thank you. >> the arguments on what it means may have just begun. on the first strike at 10:00, we will give you results of our exit poll, an indication of how we might have voted and a curtain raiser for what might be a night of high political drama. welcome to itv's election 2015. announcer: tonight is likely to prove highly complex.

to help us make sense of this, from planet -- plymouth university and from the british election study at the university of manchester. >> that is a big question now that we will be able to tell at a glance in the coming hours. changing color as we call the results. he will be rushing up to work out if anyone might be able to form a majority in the new house of commons. >> on election night we have been first with results, and tonight we are live across the country. we will be talking to our leading politicians, but we have assembled some of the country's best analysts. >> unser and by some of the rightist political minds in the country. we will be discussing the predictions and the results. we are also joined by the giant

social media, twitter and facebook, who will give us insight into what you are talking about. we will look at how you voted and what that means for the next few days and the next few years. announcer: always opinions and results will be on our website along with analysis and reaction. in westminster, are cameras show the time is inching ever closer to 10:00. by law we cannot reveal our exit poll until we hear the first strike of that building we have spoken to thousands of voters in 141 polling locations in 133 third different constituencies. colin, absolute no pressure, but you got the exit poll on the nose last time. colin: nailbiting time for us.

we tried to go back to the same places we went tho in previous elections. what the exit poll does is give a probability of anyone party trying to give a particular seat. just an overall pattern to give us some idea how that night. announcer: you have spoken to thousands of voters. what has changed and what is your perspective on the exit poll we are about to get? one of the big questions of the night is how much this anti-westminster trend that we have seen in recent years is going to impact the result. it might do so in complex and fascinating ways. we will keep a close eye on how that impacts individual seats. announcer: it is hard to think there is quite so much tension around an exit poll, does

nothing has moved at any point. does that make it difficult for you to make these judgments. it is very pragmatic. colin: we have new changes in place. the s&p has been predicted to the campaign to do well in scotland. we have a new factor in england. that brings a new time of multiparty floaters and gives voters more choices. announcer: the snp -- you have predicted what they are doing. colin: so we can give a forecast how the snp will do. announcer: let's take a look at that famous clock. you are hearing the bell starting to bring their on the first strike at 10:00.

i can tell you what we are predicted. as i was saying, the political parties have put everything into this election campaign. they have fought hard. they have moved up and down the country, but the polls have not shifted barely an iota. [big ben rings] announcer: tories, 316 liberal democrats, 239 a very bad night for nick kellegg. if this is direct to the figure, an astonishing night in scotland . our exit poll numbers are going to sit there at the bottom of your screen. we will update predictions once actual results are in. it is worth seeing the constitutional position is clear enough.

david cameron just look prime and will remain so as long as he can win a confident vote in the house of commons. we are in a hung parliament territory. the question is, can he? >> is our first visit to the commons calculator. we can start having a look at how the mathematics might head up. we're looking at the exit poll figures we have just seen. you can see in the corner of our cube on that part of the screen the magic number to get up to is 326. on the exit poll predictions and assessments, let's put in the conservative figure. the exit poll of 316 and within that cube, they are short by 10. that's have a look at how the figures might move, and this is a matter of the mathematics at this stage. he just got these figures in and we would go to the liberal democrats and automatically you see that cube up to about 326.

this is our exit poll assessment of course. let's reset the cube and see how well the figures might add up for others. the first people we turn to, labour and the figure is 239. that leaves them short by the figure that you can see their of 87. us have a look at the astonishing figure we're seeing from the exit poll for the snp and that is one of 58. if there were a deal of any ship to be done, we could put that in our figures there. we see we are getting up to 297 but not the sort of numbers we saw on our previous speculation. we could perhaps look at the other of those who have spoken up in form of the anti-austerity alliance. you can see we're edging, not quite there yet. the greens could go in. if they get those seats, they could get up to 303.

starting to see how the mathematics are shaping. so much politics, it is staggering. tom: it is worth saying when we look at this, it is the liberal democrats -- are they going to be in a position question mark are they going to want to support the other parties? predictions are one thing, but it is results that matter, did the first in 40 minutes time. reese is on -- the race is on. these are life pictures of the counts where they are trying to beat the record, which stands at 42 minutes achieved in 2001. as we said, a huge amount to opine. nina: there were gasps in this room that the exit poll broke. facebook is analyzing your

areaction. a twitter q&a, and my first guest, daniel finkelstein. and miranda green,. when i turned to look at your reaction, your mouth -- >> it fell in the short term. over the long-term you will anticipate a party that was ahead on the economy would win elections. and i did think that ed miliband was not successful as a leader and was too far behind on the economy, had not sorted out the problem. i thought the conservative party would do better, and seems that it has. data-driven, you see what the danger is. i should still say that figure looks very low.

the conservative figure looks very high. the most punchy was saying 302 and i found that very optimistic. these are very high. one of the point -- nobody should assume if you score 316 you automatically gain government. even if the conservative party. this could incredibly optimistic figure, it still has to be the majority with that. >> that number for labour? >> is very low. i am not surprised to see labor lose seats. i expected they might lose seats because scotland is so awful. that seems very low. even if it is close to being right, and that means david cameron will end up as prime minister, the gap between labour and the conservatives is so large that it makes coming from second-place to have any kind of rolling government grade. >> even if the snp figure is

right, 58 seats, labour will not make it in any way in terms of damage. >> all today there has been a story of labour optimism. it shows how much everybody knows. out there in the field, they are thinking they are going to win and clearly a lot of them have not. there's a good reason to be shy of tories. this is a tall write, than the opinion polls we've been following have been horribly wrong. >> what about tories who have beat tories before but this time perhaps the polling figures were looking to see this coalition continue? >> not so keen. this is 10 liberal democrats.

it is hard to the membership in the coalition with 10 members of parliament that are absolutely wiped out like that. >> miranda: if the predictions are correct, nick clegg was saying we would be surprised by the results, but this exit poll -- what is he doing right now? miranda: is a terrible figure. it will be an absolute massacre. like my colleagues here i think i believe the underlying story of the exit poll and i believe the tories -- home and people not doing as well as they are expected to do today. i think that story is right and their losses -- but i do not think the scale of it feels quite right. we will have to see. that final tally, whether it is a total d disaster will make a big difference what the governor -- what the government

will be. >> the number is crucial because if the number is significantly wrong, that will change the nature of the government. miranda: if they have are spendable showing, they can be a part of government. nina: get a key question tonight is the scottish question. there is talk of them getting a clean -- of the snp in scotland. the number says 58. david is with me. if those figures are correct snp has a massive majority in scotland. david: one paul says a things would, and that has happened. but it represent if correct a tribe and a disaster for the

snp, a triumph because they have stopped everything before it in scotland, but those numbers, even the anti-tory alliance, it would not be enough for a majority. figures for the conservatives with them well in front and with a strong moral authority. nina: it looks like north of the border labour has been punished. why do you think that has come? do you think it is because of the referendum? david: a long-term trend. not as obviously in western sections. in 2010, the vote went up. it went down in england. the more recent phenomenon, and also personnel. they have been much more effective leaders of their party than anything labor has had in scotland including gordon brown. nina: lots more to talk about in terms of the snp numbers.

tom: to call this exit poll startling would be the understatement of the year today. colin, you better help us. you were vote involved in preparing it. what is the margin for error? colin: what you tried to do is you give a probability of any one party winning anyone see pete many of the seats are clear-cut. many of them are narrow from the various parties. the more partners there are in the picture, more narrow this gets can become. what is more important the day we have been looking at parts of the country, different types of seat scum and it begins to reveal things about what may be happening. the conservatives are doing as well as they did in 2010, and labour no better in 201o00. labour is doing better in the

northwest and in london in the far north, northeastern yorkshire. conservatives who won in 2010 had built up a reputation are benefiting from that. they've helped conservatives by 1% or 2%. the snp is a tsunami across the country. there's no way you can get out of that. everywhere the snp hester, and looks like they are going to be up to 30%. [indiscernible] if i can say a word or two about liberal democrats, who have done badly. that to where they were in 1970 45 years ago. and they had hoped their incumbents could hang on. it is to where the are sitting -- which has been the case in a number of areas, david heath for example, in those kinds of areas, and looks as if they have

not held on against labour on the seats they wanted 2010, and in the southwest and looks like the heartlands, the conservatives have benefit. tom: you are looking at nicholas sturgeon. for a good eye, but i think 50 seats is unlikely. i will come back to you in a second, but the home secretary joins me in the studio. clearly a good night for you on any analysis. to pick the politics for the moment a you do not look like you will get over the line. >> using a next up will, as a dentist's like a good result but it is only a poll. the identity counted. nobody can say what will be happening until we see those votes counted and those results come in. tom: were that to be the result this would be an external there really devastating night.

have been in a coalition with you, even if the exit poll is way off, it looks like they are going to have a terrible night. opposes off the problems, i get over the line and form a majority. ms. may: those figures are anything like correct, and will be clear that labor will have lost. it would've got fewer seats on that basis than they did at the 2010 election. i think that is a very clear picture that will commence. this is early days. we're only just after the polls have closed. this is an exit poll. we will see what the results are. tom: if this exit poll is even vaguely in the right, this is an absolute revolution in scotland, is a not? would you accept that? ms. may: all the opinion polls we've been seeing throughout the campaign have suggested that the snp was going to do well in scotland. what -- tom: and then there is

revolution. ms. may: i think from all of us politicians, our message is obviously you can look at this exit poll results, but the votes have it to be counted. if those exit polls -- if that exit poll does come close to the result, clearly the snp would have taken significant numbers of seats, but also labour would have come second. tom: we need to be several about exit polls. nevertheless, the poll in scotland does it with a bit of a trend. you would have to knows that. all polls have suggested a direction of travel. we may have the prospect of a conservative government in westminster, but scotland going almost snp? you think those circumstances are inevitable? ms. may: when the referendum was

held in scotland, it came out with a result of staying with the united kingdom, and there were those in scotland including the snp, who talked about it being a once in a generation referendum. a clear decision was given by the people of scotland in terms of the referendum, where they wanted to be. they wanted to remain part of the united kingdom. tom: i was seeing pictures. there is usually a first seat to declare, and they are trying to be their record tonight. i never thought that counting could be exciting. going back to the question of whether or not you will form a government, you will say you would like to form a majority, and indeed the figures may move that way over the course of this evening. if they do not, are you confident you will be having other allies? ms. may: i'm afraid i'm going to point out that we want to wait

to see what the vote is being counted, and then obviously, and the prime minister is being clear, we won't do the right thing for the country. and you will have something of a decision tomorrow. tom: you have a sophisticated operation yourself. do you think we are right? do you think the exit poll is in the right ballpark? do you think this is way off, or about how well you have done? ms. may: what i have seen is i think there has been a high turnout. i do not know what the exit poll is suggested. after the election, people have been promoting how low turnouts have been. i think this will be a real change. tom: what do you think brought you home, if that is what ends up happening, or gave you what

gave you a good night? do you think it was the economy in the end? clearly, unless as we ascend exit poll is anonymously wrong and who knows how it pans out, but assuming it is in the right ballpark and you've had a good night, let's make that assumption, do you think it was the fear of the snp that eventually put a lost -- pushed a lot of people in england back? ms. may: if you look at opinion polls in terms of issues and leadership, what they have said is conservatives gaining on issues around economy and david cameron gaining on every measure in terms of leadership, including being in touch with people, decision taking, all of those issues. i think what our campaign has shown for this figures is as shown movement through the period of the campaign. the message on the economy has been a civil one. it has been about a choice for people. when they went into the polling

stations today cannot when they were considering the road, as to whether they wanted to build on the growing recovery that we have developed over the last five years, or for back -- or fall back into chaos that we have seen under labour. tom: some people have said your campaign was negative. you yourself, you have talked about the party's image in the past. do you think there's still work to be done in turnaround your image, that, yes, you were had on the economy leadership, but do you think your party still has an image problem? ms. may: no, i do not. i do not think we ran a negative campaign. if we have in running a negative campaign, we would not be out there talking about the policies such as cutting income taxes 430 million people -- tom: you believe that stabbing his brother in the back was the nicest thing he could have done

and there were times in the campaign that were not elevated? ms. may: everybody knows what ed miliband did to david miliband. we were sending out clearly what our vision of the future was. if you look at our manifesto but it says, part of the manifesto the the speech david cameron gave, it was about how we wanted to secure peoples forgers that's peoples futures, and deposited policies that we have set up for people, and the very positive message about future growth of the economy which would only come under the conservatives and the ability to maintain the progress we have started. tom: final question. you know what it is like on election day. the only thing we have got to go on is the exit poll.

dude you think -- is the mood in tory headquarters positive? ms. may: i have been out and about, knocking on doors talking to voters, reminding people about voters, encouraging them to go to the poll, my senses the very purposeful feeling about the party, a positive feeling around the party, but actually purposeful in terms of that message for people about the choice being placed at the election. we will see when the votes are counted whether the exit poll is accurate or not. i think the -- there has been a positive momentum in turn of people wanted to go out and vote, which is why high turnout could be one of the stories that we see from tonight. tom: a long time to wait for your content, but thank you. peggy very much for coming in to join us. as you so, counting his

underway in sunderland. when we will have results for sure? we will have results at 1:00 a.m.. belfast to carry around 2:00 in the morning. in wales, about a half an hour later at 2:30. the pace picks up to medically after that with a rush of english seats. in shuffle them we should learn nick klegg's fate around 3:00 a.m. we expecting ed miliband's results at 3:50. david cameron will hear his results round 4:30. will they be -- and there will be many more important seats to declare, including results in -- where a leader is hoping to become an mp..p. for the first

time. we should do that at 6:00 a.m. if exit poll is right, there is an astonishing night in store for scotland. judy? judy: especial battleground for scotland tonight because we've seen how the polls going over the last few months, and the figures assumption tonight. it is how scotland ultimately votes which could determine this big battle we have seen unfold over the coming hours. as predicted, the snp makes sweeping gains, it will be one of the stories of the night. our snp battleground will help you understand. here are all the 59 seats. these, labour-held seats, the majorities are so large we have had to group them together. let start off on this far end of

the battleground the six seats already held by the snp in the last parliament, the bright yellow icon next to the names. they are pretty safe tonight. the rest are now all snp targets. south perthshire is the easiest one to take. labour's is more than 5000, by no means a marginal but tonight is no normal night. one of the most senior m.p.'s is in a fight to hold inverness. inverness is on that list there. the conservatives have only one seat in scotland, and that is in dumbfrieshire. with douglas how gender down there in paisley, maybe getting pretty twitchy if that exit poll

proves correct. the outer reaches of the targets on the elder board -- battle board we can see jim murphy's seat at the top of that column, labour's historic bond with scotland. by the end of the night, there may not be many other seats color other than bright yellow. it is said to be quite a night. tom: that is an attorney board -- an extraordinary board. we've been predicting an earthquake, and it looks like we're getting one tonight. martin is in edinburgh. what is your sense of how things are going? martin: there was a poll up here that said snp would win all seats.

if exit poll is correct i will give it another bit of a kicking. if it is correct, they are not far off. i'm confident i was right in knocking that down because not only did nicolas sturgeon tweak thet that, they will win probably most of them. orkney and shetland, held by the current scottish secretary, and safe territory up there. i would mean that all those names julie talked about, danny alexander, douglas alexander all gone, charles kennedy, all gone. he has been in charge of northwest scotland as he was 23, and that was not yesterday. every thing else would be snp controlled.

it would be astonishing if it did. snp will be reaching for the champagne, clearly. they would be wiped out completely as would the tories. tom: martin, this is a question we will come back to, i suspect tonight and tomorrow. do you think another independence referendum -- and a lot of interest people and welsh and hours people wake up tomorrow and take is that really scotland going, going, gone? martin: i'm not sure. when you come to that question, the more interesting figure will be the percentage support 40 snp. i do not think they are interested going near and referendum before they get results from the polling that chose support for independence over 60%. they want to be on absolutely safe territory before they start pushing for that. i think that perhaps along the way, let's see what your the ticket tonight. if they lost another referendum, that would be a gum.

they talked about a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. they would probably forget those promises if they go over 60%. that see what that figure is. tom: i have a hunch we will be talking to a lot in the evening but let's go up to nina in the opinion room. nina: let's go back to the two main parties. daniel finkelstein. i am joined by the former tory m.p. you're not confident. now you have seen those numbers, what is your reaction? >> i do not believe them. any response this exit poll involves believing the polling industry could get something wrong. we believed exit poll has got it wrong or would believe the polls that preceded it got it wrong. i put about 300 seats at the top level of my expectations, hopes

for the conservative party. i still do. i figure will be closer to 300 and that will be a surprisingly good result for the tories. nina: you called for a tory minority, thought it was going that way. matthew: i did, and was expecting a gun my face tomorrow money. nina: you said you might go green if it was bad numbers. was it that bad a night? but in terms of the number some what we have been mulling over the numbers, the possible combinations, it was never going to be that bad. >> i will work on the subject it is, it is a cast has to be -- it is a catastrophe for the polling industry, that for the labour party, and what it shows is labor has been consumed by scotland, by what happens in scotland. you cannot underestimate the bitterness.

they regard labor as akin to the red tory. what happened in england is that backlash in terms of the so-called threat on the snp the whipping up of england against scotland, and that was always -- they were worried by the process of the snp propping up a labour government. if this exit poll is correct and i will work from this option that is, the actions of labour in scotland forming an alliance with conservatives has consumed the entire national labour party, and has to be a very, very drastic response to those who are responsible for that. nina: is it just about scotland? what about the campaign itself and five yearscollins: it is not just about scotland.

it is a catastrophe as well for labor. even if you had all of it, you do not get anywhere close to the projected conservative number. it is more than that. there is another interesting aspect to those numbers. if matthew is right that the tory number is inflated, it is quite difficult to see where the government comes. it is quite possible that there is no government because the conservatives are still short the liberals collapse. it is quite possible if the numbers come down there getting to a territory where there is no government. there is no labour block they can do it either. we are not very far away from where there isn't a government. >> you have advised mei and john major, what would you advise david cameron?

>> it is very important not to get ahead of ourselves. only another eight or nine. you don't need to come back very much before they don't have the bark to form a government. the liberal democrats are much lower than anticipated. i think it is too early to reach conclusions, even though their incredibly striking. david cameron's back and has won the election. things could still be quite difficult. a long-term issue for the conservatives is to content -- consider why that isn't the case. why doesn't the conservative party get a majority. that is for another time.

the most important thing they have do now is wait to see what the numbers are and remember 316 is the majority. nina: what about ed miliband himself? did it come down to wanting to vote labour but not quite convinced that he was prime minister material? >> the total failure of his team to convey his message. the tories always had a clear shot but it was always repeated, the myth of overspending with the idea that it causes crisis. the myth that the overspending causes crisis was never rebutted. the failure to communicate was one factor. the total outright vilification

of ed miliband in the most intense personal attacks in any leader eclipsing neil kenneth. >> the issue with ed miliband was in the attack, the reason the attack came was that he didn't convince people. if you were running the labour campaign, you saw the conservative leader, which was obviously a weakness. you go for the weakness. naturallyspeaking it will try to highlight the effect that ed miliband would be the prime minister if you elected labour. >> that failure to communicate properly always started with ed miliband. he was all over the place and incoherent often. don't let off the hook the behavior of the british media. all of which have acted effectively as the media

campaign of the conservative party. >> i slightly agree with you on this. i think there is a real danger that the later -- labour party uses this as the get out clause. i think there will be some speaking in that labour party that they have been victimized. nina: we have adam down to the election sketch, only 20 minutes left in the whole campaign shift. good luck with that. a reminder that if you want to join any of the debate, we are on the #. tom: we are waiting for the result in sunderland south. we will go there as soon as we get it. it is a safe labour seat but it may give us some sense of how

things are going in terms of the votes beginning to divide. our exit poll we're predicting the conservatives 316, labour with 239, liberal democrats with a staggering 10. you can't to. -- you cap 2 -- ukip 2. it is hard to know what to throw at you, this is a complex scenario. >> we have always known that it would be very close in a great many seats across england, wales and scotland. that being the case, it is quite difficult to be certain if the exit polls are right. if the exit polls are right, it

shows that the coalition led by david cameron has more or less lost its majority. we will have to see if the new house of commons will give david cameron a majority. the exit polls are saying that is not potentially the case. i think it is much too early to say. tom: you probably didn't hear but we had phil collins sang a few moments ago that it is more than probable that we end up with no government. or theoretically, nobody obviously able to get a majority. you pointed out that david cameron would possibly need the liberal democrats and that gu p. clearly, you had a bad night and it is not realistic for ed miliband to be prime minister. >> i don't think that is clear. we don't know whether the polls are correct. i was interested to see earlier on that patty said he would eat

his hat. he thinks they are completely wrong. we know that the result would be close in the number of seats. we cannot be certain that the exit polls are right. if they are right, it would show that the coalition does not appear to have the backing. tom: what they show is even allowing for huge margin of er ror. >> we will see. the logic of who is the next prime minister is who the country has elected in terms of mp's to get a majority. it is about the composition of the house of commons and where a majority lies for a particular prime minister. we can obviously see what the polls are saying including in scotland.

we will have to see if they are right to the extent they are predicting. come back in a few hours. tom: thank you for joining us for mouth -- now. vincent is there. >> you know what tom, i do think i have ever been cannot room where i have had so much group focus. dozens of teenagers legging it from one and of the hall to the other. they have been recruited by the council to get the boxes off the ballot truck. these are no ordinary counters. they work in groups of two and three and each have a supervisor. in their day jobs they are tellers at banks and building sites, they are used accounting

large numbers of paper. no ordinary pieces of paper here. they're made of a slightly more lightweight paper. it is much easier for the counters to get their fingers through these ballots. the voters, are asked, once they cast their vote to fold it north to south so it makes it easier for the counters. there are a number of labor party officials looking extremely pleased with themselves. all three seeds in sunderland are very safe. the record -- it is the result that is important, but the speed with which it arrives. the record is 43 minutes past 10:00. i was told earlier by the man in charge that i should put their -- my mortgage on them beating that record.

we're two minutes from finding out if that was a good or bad decision i me -- by me. tom: we will be back in two minutes or not. i'm joined by the former leader of the liberal democrats. i will apologize in advance of we suddenly interrupt you. unless we are way off, this is a disastrous night for your party. >> i think it is very early to make judgments of that kind. not least of course because as we heard in the opinion room, there have been mistakes in the past. in co-1992 everyone thought neil had one and in fact john major had one. i would certainly agree that on the figures we have got this is disappointing. i have been told it is not consistent with the kind of intelligence they were getting back in the course of the day.

tom: tell us what the intelligence was that they were getting. >> they were not predicting numbers, but -- these figures are right out of balance. with the figures which the posters have been predicting. tom: we have to approach this with some humility. i do remember five years ago we had the same conversation about the liberal democrats would surely have done better than the polls suggested. what doesn't seem is that you have paid a very heavy price. >> you need to sit back and digests. two possibilities. one is that david cameron and

nick clegg are able to put together on young agreement like last time and the other is at liberal democrats might say it we want to go back and retreat and steady our nerves and rebuild from the bottom again. is much too early to determine which of these is the more likely. the interesting thing is -- let me finish this point. don't forget, there are 650 violators taking place. one could well see regional and local variations, which of course an exit poll never picks up. >> if you are on 10, 15 or even 20, for a party at 57 after the last election you would agree that it's an absolute disaster. is it really conceivable that you would want another go

around? surely that seems impossible on these numbers. >> it is above my pay grade. of course it is disappointing. we had do very much better than that. tom: what i'm saying is if this is even vaguely the right ballpark it is politically impossible for you to consider supporting the tories again. is that realistic? >> the last time we went to coalition, we needed to stabilize the economy and the circumstances left by the outgoing labour government. that job has not yet been finished. there is still work to be done. we have argued that certainly illumina should should be a priority.

not -- illuminating should be a priority. that is a very strong liberal democrat position. one that nick clegg argued for throughout. he has been extraordinarily resilient. people were talking about the monster ring -- monstering of ed miliband. some of the same from nick clague has been worse. we'll have to wait and digest. tom: jane, are you surprised if this figure turns out to be accurate or is this how you have seen that movement of votes. jane: summary have been arguing

that the liberal democrats would be saved by the effect. we have seen in many cases incumbents are not that a fitting, that people are really wanting to punish. in that sense we have to stand back and wait for the results and we will see whether the incumbency effect is turning into something. but i am not entirely surprised that this result is lower than many of the posters have been talking about for some time. tom: your exit poll, with others, taking a bit of a pounding? >> it is not my exit poll. what we have been seeing and as i said it has been muddled every which way and every seat

circumstance the liberal -- liberal democrats have been suffering. one of the things that people thought about liberal democrats in scotland was something they know only too well was they had a number of very safe seats which they thought they could count on. so the liberal democrats projected seat shares affected by this time between the s&p and scotland. interesting to hear. >> that happened to labour as well. opinion polls suggesting. tom: they may well lose. >> scotland, if i may say so, is

quite different. there is a kind of sunol me effect -- tsunami effect. tom: it is impossible to imagine how that could have been resented -- prevented. >> in the seats i represented we have people helping. we knocked on 13,000 doors. we don't know that result but it is not the one that these opinion polls suggest. it does suggest, no matter what you do, in some circumstances it does work. >> we are still watching where the have missed their record. let's talk about scotland. what is happening in scotland is a revolution. what do you think is being driven by and even be didn't hear martin keisler sang he didn't think it made another independence referendum inevitable.

>> is part of the debate she got booed because she tried to dodge the question. the case for anti-austerity being firmly advocated. but the truth of the matter is, on the doorstep, a lot of attendant saying if we do well tonight and we want to have another referendum. 2016 is the next set of elections for the scottish element. it is not difficult to understand or anticipate. they do well in the scottish parliamentary elections. she will find it very hard to hold back the tide of opinion within her own party. tom: do you think it is inevitable, if it happened again, that scotland would decide to go.

if this poll is right it is a staggering sweep of pop and -- scotland. scotland becomes a one-party state. >> that is on young expression i was told not to use but i agree with you. >> it does open up a raft of possibilities. on health and education the scottish government's performance has been very poor. the number of reports came out making exactly that point. they do not have to defend a record. one thing is it becomes wholly dominated by the smp, to the extent that has not previously been the case. tom: we are seeing -- hearing some news from sutherland but in the seats are not ready to be declared that we are calling it a labour hold in scotland and

sunderland south. we can see someone talking there. >> i dave smith acting returning of his or give notice of the total number of votes for each candidate for the houghton and sutherland -- sunderland south constituencies. u.k. independence cardy -- party , 8218. stuart thomas hay, the conservative party candidate 7105. jim murray, liberal democrat 791. bridget mae phillipson, labour

party, 21,000. [cheers and applause] -- 21,218. alan michael david robinson, the green party 1095. tom: that is a labour hold not in the least surprising. what we are seeing is a massive increase in code the ukip vote on that seat. a huge increase in the ukip vote. we will unpick that in a moment with colin and jane but i am joined in the studio with colin mendelson. not a brilliant night for your

party. >> if the exit poll is correct it would seem all three main parties have lost this election. some more than others. liberal democrats in particular. there are many seats where the results will be very close indeed. it has already as you know been an alternative exit poll published by yougov that gives a completely different set of numbers. >> not very helpful for you. tom: not very helpful for anyone i would say. just supposing for the sake of argument that the exit poll is correct, as a veteran observer, what happens? you may have heard phil collins earlier suggesting that you

almost get to the position where nobody can sensibly form a majority. >> david cameron and the conservatives have yet again failed to win the general election. mr. cameron lost the one in 2010 and seems to have lost this one again. the conservatives have not won a general election outright for 23 odd years. if they want to form a government, they have to get that from other parties. it remains to be seen whether the liberal democrats will have the numbers to supply them with that majority. it is inconsiderable out. tom: what happens next if these figures are even vaguely correct? david cameron continues to stay he waits to see if he can test it? what happens next? >> i think the liberal democrats will be very severely divided.

they have paid a colossal price for serving in this coalition. a price from which it will take them a very long time to recover. what do they do? do they do as campbell was suggesting retreat, regroup and rebuild? or do they throw their lot in again with the conservatives? in many parts of the country they have been rejected. what they are proposing to do over the next five years rejected. severely. if they do do that, it is too difficult to say how they will end up as anything like a viable political party at all. i think quite apart from the policy differences, not just the

severity of the further austerity that the conservatives are imposing, but of course also with the-year-old, -- with the euro with a liberal democrats do not support the referendum and nick clegg said he will not be part of any government that anticipates withdrawing from the european union. both the numbers and the political reality, the divisions within the party, a lack of serious overlap will make it difficult indeed for the liberal democrats to go back to the conservatives. tom: on blunt terms, is it really conceivable that ed miliband could be prime minister? >> on these numbers and the exit poll, very difficult indeed. i don't really see that, just as i don't see it being straightforward for david cameron either. tom: if the gap were that big

is it conceivable -- we talked a lot about legitimacy and a lot of people say it is a numbers game. but when the cap between the two major parties could beat this big, does that rule ed miliband out of being prime minister? >> the numbers in themselves do not rule out his becoming prime minister. what britain is looking for and what the parties have to provide is a stable and durable government. that will not come necessarily from the party that is first with the greatest number of seats. that is very clear from our president and convention and any interpretation of how we apply the unwritten constitution. it is not the party who comes first, it is that combination of parties who can create the

stable administration. tom: speaking of ed miliband, do you think he will survive as the labour leader if david cameron does walk into downing street at the end of it? >> i don't think he should for this reason. he has performed magnificently during the campaign. tom: you haven't always been his biggest fan. >> coming from me, i think mean something. i think they've made a mistake in driving down expectations of ed miliband. the press set out to trash him. they lowered the bar of expectations so far that ed miliband managed to neatly step over it and surprised people. he has come across very

passionate man and committed man. tom: you wouldn't want to see him fight another election even if he doesn't become prime minister in this one? >> before we talk about the next one, what we have to do for this election is find a government for our country which provides that stability and durability that we need from any administration. tom: on the question of scotland the enormously impressive s mp performance in scotland. do you think scotland is effectively on its way out of the union? it looks like a devastating night for your party. >> something i can to an earthquake has taken place. politics will not be the same.

whether that leads to the scotland exit from the united kingdom, too early to say but i hope not. the labour party has been squeezed by two national parties. scottish national parties with the result of this loss of seats, but also by the english nationalism. this has been whipped up by david cameron literally -- deliberately. that has been a painful squeeze for the labour party and there are many labour party activists and candidates and members across england who have worked so hard in this election. i have seen it in many constituencies who will feel quite sorely cheated out of the

result that they worked for and expected by what happened in scotland. tom: i have a feeling this is a conversation that may continue for some weeks. we are going up to rejoin nina in the opinion room but first let me tell you about what is happening at the bottom of the screen. you can now see seats with a one next to labour. will update with more results. nina: i am joined by twitter's global head of politics. fascinating night so far. >> the conversation today has been phenomenal. more people tweeting about the election than the royal baby last saturday. when the exit poll came out, the conversation had changed. labour had been driving that conversation in red and now conservatives in blue driving that conversation. after that release nearly half

of all the tweets were about david cameron. nina: we don't know what they are saying whether it is negative or positive, but at the moment, the tories are driving the conversation online colin:. >> for most of the day 2% to 3% of the conversation behind ukip all day. in the last half-hour, more talk about coalition closing in on snp as being the third in line to try that commerce asian tomorrow. nina: thank you for flying in from washington. i'm also joined by graham sharp. >> what was previously the favorite was a labour minority. the new favorite is a 5-6 conservative lib-dem conservative -- coalition again. david cameron is at one to 10 to remain prime minister and ed

miliband six to four to resign. nina: so the polls we have seen are less or more accurate than the betting market. what is your reaction to that? >> we really need to see the results when they come in to determine who has won and lost but at the moment we have been happy because people placed their bets on the opinion polls. nina: joining me now is miranda green, jenny and isabel. jenny, you are a friend of ed miliband, what is he thinking right now? jenny: i'm sure he is looking at them and thinking i will not believe anything until i get the results. these results are so much at all with the hundreds of polls he had during the campaign. someone has done something wrong. they haven't changed their predictions at ugov. so one way or another, somebody

has got their predictions way out of line. all you can possibly do at the moment is to hold tight and not start giving anything away until you know what those number seats actually is. nina: phil says all majority seats are lost. he says it is all over for ed miliband. jenni: i think it is impossible to tell. i think there would be a lot of unhappiness within the party. 316 for the tories would be unprecedented move for a governing party which is very unpopular for a lot of its time in office to suddenly gain seats. something else about that others say the lib dems are in a week position.

but the tories will need those votes. it is much better to depend on the lib dems than the dup. and the lib dems have the most to lose. if these results are right it would have to be the tories courting the victims desperately to say, please come back to government. we can make it worth your while. nina: if nick clegg keeps his seat, how will he sell that? to say we can do it again? >> i feel quite confident in predicting you will not get another rose garden. even at the very highest level of the lib dems, there is a lot of wariness. you can see why.

we think that 10 figure is really low. but even so it is absolutely right that the lib dems played a high price. there is something about this toxic tory brand that rubs off on people and that has been a real problem. you've seen the local government wiped out and it is a huge decision to go against it again. it is actually write what she says but the practicality of putting another and coalition together is difficult because this time the element of surprise is lost. nick clegg successfully consulted the party and democratically approved it. would that happen this time? cameron has to ask his old -- his own bench to approve a deal and could cameron even do a deal? >> i think cameron could do a deal with the lib dems again.

if you only have 10 mps, they cannot all be manipulative. it would limit their influence within government as you would have fewer ministers. would nick clegg really be able to argue 50% representation? there are all of those mechanical questions. >> we should wait and see because as with labour the lib dems should not be throwing everything up in the air right now. tom: ed balls, the shadow chancellor is waiting to speak to us. good evening.

not a very brilliant night for your party. mr. balls: there has only been one result so far and that was a labour majority which went up there in clearly the exit poll has caught everybody by surprise because it jives with all of the different opinion polls we have seen today. it is still very early days. we need to see what happens when the actual results come in. even if the exit poll is right that means the conservative liberal democrat majority has been entirely wiped out. let's wait and see because as i said i'm not sure this will turn out to be right. there are some very close constituencies. we thought a very close campaign and if the exit poll is off by 20 seats suddenly david cameron will not be able to put together

a majority. still early days. tom: before get to the significant politics, the tories tried very hard to take your seat from you. you have been very confident of holding your seat. you might have a fight on your hands. how confident are you that holding your seat? mr. balls: i have had a fight on my hands for the last eight years. we thought it very hard in 2010. we have been campaigning in my constituency on the issues that matter from the nhs to tough controls on emigration as we have been doing across the whole of the u.k.. we fought a great campaign. the mood of the day has been very good very at good oh -- very good. a very good campaign.

against the conservative campaign and the ukip who have been nonexistent. tom: let's talk big picture. even if the poll is significantly out it does look as if there will be a very big gap. today the conservative party hasn't had a very good evening. we were talking about how unusual it is to have them push as the number of seats gets up. it may be and it may not be, but it does seem as if the gap between you is big and you have this revolution taking place. perhaps now we can talk frankly. is it conceivable that given the gap, you can actually be in downing street on the basis of this enormous revolution in scotland? i imagine there will be a fair amount of ill feeling between you and the snp. mr. balls: there are lots of

points in that question. section by section. david cameron said the test for him was to win a majority and even on the exit poll he fails to deliver the majority. the second thing is, the exit poll is based on a complete collapse in the lib dem voter representation. it would show that the live dems have paid a huge price for being in the conservative coalition. we don't yet know if it will be right. we've known all along that what has been happening in scotland as been very challenging indeed and i am very much hoping the bottom of that -- that a lot of colleagues in scotland will be returned. we've been warning all along that the vote for the s&p risks conservatives coming back into power. as you know, people decide in a

general election, they vote and elect the mps and it is what happens in the house of commons that makes a difference. can he put together a majority to be able to govern them. the tory liberal democrats majority disappears. he would have to reach out to other, maybe the smaller parties from ulster. if the exit party -- exit poll is off by even 10% suddenly, david cameron cannot get a majority. if he cannot get a majority, then constitutionally it would fall to the leader of the opposition to become the prime minister and to see that he can get the queen esther speech

through the house of commons. so far we only have one mp elected but even in the basis of the exit all, -- exit poll david cameron esther ability to hold majority -- david cameron's ability to hold the majority is on knifepoint. tom: colin and jane, we have been trying to get back to you. tell us what you read into that. colin: the first thing to note is a modded -- conservative swing. this swing in the northeast from conservatives to labour's is only 4%. the other thing to note --

they went to a humiliating fifth place this time. tom: let's bring up the graph of which you speak. colin: they got 14% down, i-12 percent, humiliating result. jane: the really striking thing here is you cap is surging ahead. -- ukip is surging ahead. you can understand the result if you understand the way it is surging across the country. ukip did really well. we expected it to go a little bit higher. ukip coming in second-place in houghton and sunderland, we did not expect that. ukip comes in third in terms of the national share.

what could be happening tonight is that ukip voters may be voting against labour candidates. we might see ukip voters going back to the tories where it is a competition between conservatives and lib dems. if they recognize they will not get nigel for roche to number 10 they would rather -- nigel for rofarage, they would rather have -- they would love that we have the kind of exit poll prediction. like i say, this is an area we did not expect that kind of search. this could be one of the factors on the night. that might be a really important part of the picture. tom: we are just waiting for sunderland central. let's listen.

>> the total number of votes for each candidate. is as follows. >> julie from the labour party 20,959. [cheers and applause] 20,959. rachel featherstone from the green party 1706. brian foster, ukip 7997.

adrian page, liberal democrat 1105. jeffrey townsend, conservative party, 9780. joseph young 215. julie has been elected to serve. tom: julie elliott is back there. it looks as though it is been a very significant -- it looks like a fairly significant ukip vote. >> ukip only coming third here. not a staggering swing from conservative to labour, compared with what people were expecting. but there again are the liberal

democrats in fifth place. just under 3% now. >> it is early days but this looks like part of the night. shocking results for liberal democrats creeping up. jane: one of the things i expected to see was lots of shifts to labour. we wouldn't expect labour to be doing as badly as the exit poll looks like it is. that's what we are seeing a little bit here. we are not sing that really large shift but certainly some of our days have been predicting early on it it is possible there have been some significant last-minute changes. about 20% of people said they made up their mind in election day. here is a look at what people decided. how they would vote for hand.

we saw a really significant difference and i hope we can show you some data later. and a really growing sense that people are seeing just how close the race would be. what we know is that fundamentally, it can change the voting. it can have a profound impact. tom: we talked about cliches early on, here is another one. shares. it looks like a lot of the liberal democrats have gone to ukip. that is probably unlikely. there is a lot of voting going around but certainly the two results from sutherland suggests so far that the conservatives

are not being hammered by ukip. if that is the case in the south of england. julie: another of our graphics toolkits to show you. the evidence has been written large on this battleground. those results in the key constituency have come in. other conservative targets can have a little scroll through there. most of it boasted labour in 2010 identified by the red icons next to the name of the seat. some of these seats held by

other parties, yellow for lib dems greens in brighton pavilion. the dividing line on the battleground is the labour targets. mostly you can see the conservatives won in 2010. all of the seats are arranged according to how easy they are. the further away the seat is from that center line, the harder it is to gain. that one lost last time by 42 votes. if you cross to the top of the labour list, how the conservatives one last time by 54 votes. we will be able to tell just at

a glance, when these results role in if it is labour or the conservatives turning their targets into gains and whether the leader is mr. miliband or mr. cameron tonight. bit by bit, when the results come rolling in it will become clearer as we roll later into the night. it will give us a snapshot of how it is going. tom: we didn't really have a total lib dem wipeout board. it seems obvious to me of how many of the seats you're talking about our live dem seats. julie: it helps to take a little bit look in them at we can bring in matt and take him round to the top of that conservative target list tonight. if there are going to beat losses, there are plenty on the conservative target and of the battleground. nick clegg headed there straightaway when the campaign started.

he was at a hedgehog petting zoo or something. [laughter] but this is held on a tiny margin. 175 votes from last time. a bit further down, dorset standing down. one when imagine that would be a reasonably straightforward gain. we are down to that southwest part of the liberal him a kratz with many of them -- liberal democrats with many of them on the face of it losing seats. somerton and froom where the incumbent is standing down. he has been there since 1997, standing down automatically makes that seat more vulnerable. the golden area around london might be vulnerable, too. lots to look for.

on the basis of the exit poll tonight. tom: i am joined by john wooding dale -- wittingdale. a key figure in the committee the most important organization in the tory party. tell me how things are going to pan out. >> so far, it appears the conservative party is having a good night. the exit poll is very encouraging. i would like to have seen a conservative majority, but even to have a result just short of that represents an improvement. it plainly means that david cameron will continue as prime minister. tom: you have been a parliamentarian for a long time the you think you can go over the line on the numbers we are looking at? >> i think if the exit poll is correct or in the region that it

suggests in some ways it will be easier. the conservative party will be just a few seats short. the liberal democrats have always said they wanted to talk to the party with the most seats in parliament and that appears to be the conservative party. we also have a lot in common with the democratic unionist party. it would be certainly feasible for us to reach an arrangement but we have to see what the numbers suggest. tom: do you have some fellow feeling for liberal democrats echo they sat alongside you all these years and it looks like they may have been all but wiped out as a result. >> we will have to wait and see but the liberal democrats have been very clear. they said to us in the past that they believe it is right that they should talk to the party which is the biggest in parliament. the party that receives the most support from the reddish people appears to be -- i hope they

take the same attitude. if we are this close to achieving an overall majority than there are other permutations. i would hope that certainly little democrats might consider supporting him. tom: you know as well as i do that david cameron isn't always popular with his back benches. is he safe as leader if these are the numbers? >> if david cameron's prime minister, we will be celebrating the fact we have a continuation of conservative government and all conservative mp's will support him. he will a produced the result which exceeds expectations. tom: thank you very much. a while until your results are announced. kevin joins us live now from "the mirror." always a nightmare putting a

newspaper to bed with the results far from clear, what are you putting on your front page? >> the front page tomorrow, the first edition is based on the exit poll and it is five more damned years. as you know we called for a vote for the labour party. a lot of the other papers went with the conservatives. you look at the other opinion polls and you heard the intelligence coming from the ground from the parties, you would not have predicted what we have tonight from the exit poll. that is a pretty sensational result. tom: is your general sense that the feeling is it might be correct? does no one know? >> i think they are shellshocked. they are worried it is correct.

if it is correct -- david cameron didn't get an overall majority, but he would be the first serving prime minister since margaret thatcher to increase the number of seats while they are in power. 316 is close to the finishing line because it is 323 not 325. that means a lot of huge momentous events for britain including that referendum on the european union. tom: if these numbers are correct, is that the end of ed miliband as head of the labour party? >> if they are correct, yes it would be the end of ed miliband. i think you only get one chance. neil kenneth got 1 -- two chances, i can get was a mistake in 1992, if ed miliband has failed and lost more seats in scotland than it gained in

england and scotland, then it will be curtains. if that is accurate, i think he would know himself that he failed. he had a very good campaign, in many ways better than david cameron. labour was more professional and more disciplined. he has been subject to some real vitriolic, personal, nasty abuse by the tory papers, but he would have expected to make gains. tom: i have to interrupt you i'm sorry but we will go straight to washington and sunderland west. >> i hereby give notice that the total number of votes for each candidate for the washington and sunderland west constituency is as follows. eileen, u.k. independence party 7321. [applause] conservative party candidate

7033. gary stephen duncan, socialist coalition 341. dominic haney, a liberal democrat 993. sharon hodgson, labour party 20,478. [cheers and applause] tom: that is sharon hodgson back in washington and sunderland west. similar to the other votes we have seen in sunderland central and houghton and a sunderland south.

i'm joined in the studio by o'donnell, we will look at the exact details later, but joined by the former cabinet secretary. you must slightly pity your successor. he is a couple kidded situation. that exit poll has -- if we are in the world where the conservatives are clearly in a dominant position and david kamman looks to have won enough seats to get there either he could run a minority or think about getting together with what remains of the liberal democrats. anchor: this is one of those difficult nights to unpick. if the liberal democrats are on