0:00:01 > 0:00:06Tonight, we've come to Huddersfield and welcome to Question Time.
0:00:06 > 0:00:10On our panel here, the Euro-sceptic Conservative backbencher who twice
0:00:10 > 0:00:14challenged for the leadership of his party, John Redwood. The
0:00:14 > 0:00:20Liberal Democrats Transport Minister, Norman Baker. The
0:00:20 > 0:00:25economist Rachel Reeves, now an MP. The comedian and writer, the star
0:00:25 > 0:00:35of Peep Show and many other programmes, David Mitchell and the
0:00:35 > 0:00:43
0:00:43 > 0:00:48television presenter, Fern Britton. Thank you. Now let's take our first
0:00:48 > 0:00:54question, from Irene Harrop, please. Why shouldn't we let Greece just go
0:00:54 > 0:01:00bust? John Redwood? Well, I think Britain
0:01:00 > 0:01:05should make it very clear that we tonight wish to be any part of the
0:01:05 > 0:01:09attempted bail out. The Government in part is doing that. If Greece
0:01:09 > 0:01:13has to go bankrupt, some would say she is already because she cannot
0:01:13 > 0:01:17meet her bills in the normal way, it is best if it is managed. My
0:01:17 > 0:01:21worry is they are going to cobble together another package of loans
0:01:21 > 0:01:24which Greece cannot afford. They will enforce more horrible
0:01:24 > 0:01:29austerity on the Greek people, which they don't want. There could
0:01:29 > 0:01:33be more political riots and trouble in Greece. Later on there'll be a
0:01:33 > 0:01:39bankruptcy, when more has been lent and false hopes created. Your
0:01:39 > 0:01:42answer is let them go bust now? would say manage the crisis now.
0:01:42 > 0:01:46That means doing something different to what Mrs Merkel and
0:01:46 > 0:01:49Sarkozy would want to do. My advice would be to go for a different plan.
0:01:49 > 0:01:54You need a plan to manage the debt. They will not be able to repay all
0:01:54 > 0:01:58on the terms which it has been granted. You need to have some
0:01:58 > 0:02:02proposals which will allow growth in the Greek economy. The current
0:02:02 > 0:02:06lethal mixture of cuts and no devaluation is going to mean more
0:02:06 > 0:02:10trouble for Greece in the months ahead. They'll borrow more in the
0:02:10 > 0:02:14first six months of this year than they did last year as a whole. They
0:02:14 > 0:02:17are meant to be on a programme to slim the deficit. The plan is not
0:02:18 > 0:02:24working. They need to do something else. Should they get out of the
0:02:24 > 0:02:28euro, go their own way and be on their own and save all this
0:02:28 > 0:02:33trouble? If you look back at what happened to Lehman Brothers when
0:02:33 > 0:02:36they collapsed, that was one bank on Wall Street, in America. The
0:02:36 > 0:02:41repercussions were felt around the world. I fear that if Greece
0:02:41 > 0:02:45collapses, if it defaults on its debt, if it leaves the euro, that's
0:02:45 > 0:02:48not just going to have ramifications for people in Greece.
0:02:48 > 0:02:53It'll have massive ramifications for people in the UK. Half of our
0:02:53 > 0:02:56trade is with Europe. Our banks have exposure to banks across
0:02:57 > 0:03:01Europe. I think that while we shouldn't contribute to any bail
0:03:01 > 0:03:05out for Greece, I think a solution does need to be found if we're not
0:03:05 > 0:03:10going to have another global crisis. I would echo what John said. You
0:03:10 > 0:03:16know, Greece has been forced down this route of austerity. They've
0:03:16 > 0:03:21had to come back for a second bail out. Unless Greece starts to ren
0:03:21 > 0:03:25rate growth it will not be able -- generate growth it will not be able
0:03:25 > 0:03:30pay back this either. If the economy is stuck in recession it
0:03:30 > 0:03:34will not grow again. That is what we're having here in the UK. This
0:03:34 > 0:03:38is an attack on the UK Government? Greece had a bail out a year ago.
0:03:38 > 0:03:43It's had to come back again because the first didn't work. It said cut
0:03:43 > 0:03:46spending, increase taxes and you'll get out of these problems. Well,
0:03:46 > 0:03:51the Greek economy continues to shrink. They are not able to pay
0:03:51 > 0:03:55back their loans. What they need and Britain needs is a strategy for
0:03:55 > 0:03:58jobs. If we're condemning more people to the strap heap and
0:03:58 > 0:04:02there's not jobs available it will be harder to pay back the loans and
0:04:02 > 0:04:08deficit. We need a strategy for jobs in this country, but also for
0:04:08 > 0:04:13Greece. APPLAUSE
0:04:13 > 0:04:16We come to our third politician - Norman Baker, you're in the
0:04:16 > 0:04:20Government. They are there in Europe trying to decide what to do.
0:04:20 > 0:04:26What would you do? Should we let them go bust? The answer is it
0:04:26 > 0:04:32would be very unwelcome. It would have repercussions for the UK and
0:04:32 > 0:04:36more widely as well. But, the fact of the matter is, this is a
0:04:36 > 0:04:40eurozone problem, essentially, primary rilly, it is for the
0:04:40 > 0:04:43eurozone countries, who have that currency to sort out initially. I
0:04:43 > 0:04:48don't think we should be any part of any bail out. It is not our
0:04:48 > 0:04:54currency to deal with. Also we have an interest in making sure that
0:04:54 > 0:04:59Greece doesn't go down the pan. If it did, it would destabilise the
0:04:59 > 0:05:03our and cause problems with our trade, with oh -- the euro and
0:05:03 > 0:05:07cause problems with our trade. It is in our interest to have a stable
0:05:07 > 0:05:12euro and stable European Union. I hope the European Union countries
0:05:12 > 0:05:16in the eurozone are able to find a package, which not only makes sense,
0:05:16 > 0:05:19which does create jobs in Greece, which the Greek people recognise as
0:05:20 > 0:05:24making sense and are prepared to accept. Part of the problem has
0:05:24 > 0:05:28been the reluctance of some in Greece to recognise the need for
0:05:28 > 0:05:32severe measures. Surely Greece needs to be given money by other
0:05:32 > 0:05:38euro countries if they are going to survive or she needs to pull out so
0:05:38 > 0:05:42she can devalue and compete herself back into prosperity. Would we with
0:05:42 > 0:05:47some who gave money? No. If you need a single currency you need a
0:05:47 > 0:05:52single currency to back it up. about the stabilisation. We should
0:05:52 > 0:05:58not go near using that. We can stop doing it, do you say? It is
0:05:58 > 0:06:02majority voting t thing you dislike so much - it's majority voting. We
0:06:02 > 0:06:06could be compelled. Britain has to be extremely tough and say, we
0:06:06 > 0:06:10don't think this applies any more. There'll have to be changes in the
0:06:10 > 0:06:14treaties and arrangements. Britain has a veto on those. We need to use
0:06:14 > 0:06:18that opportunity to say we're not paying those bills and if you want
0:06:18 > 0:06:22a single currency you have to have a single country to back it up and
0:06:22 > 0:06:31send money to poor parts of the areas which are suffering because
0:06:31 > 0:06:36of the single currency. Aidan O'Brien? I wish I could -- Fern
0:06:36 > 0:06:41Britton? I wish I could understand it as well as you all do. We are in
0:06:41 > 0:06:48this all together as world citizens, let alone partners, at least work
0:06:48 > 0:06:52the EU. Earlier John was talking to me about the EU and the IMF. Now
0:06:52 > 0:07:01the IMF has obviously some cohesion with the EU.
0:07:01 > 0:07:09Pots of cash, does it? Do we inject money into the IMF which helps them
0:07:09 > 0:07:13It is lend 30 in the first package. The real crime was a European
0:07:14 > 0:07:19political elite tried to force countries as diverse as Greece and
0:07:19 > 0:07:24Portugal in with Germany and France - I mean, who thought that was a
0:07:24 > 0:07:28good idea? David Mitchell? probably thought that was a good
0:07:28 > 0:07:33idea, to be honest. APPLAUSE
0:07:33 > 0:07:38I mean I wasn't directly consulted, but I would have gone along with it.
0:07:38 > 0:07:42I felt that by Sod's law the fact we were staying out of the euro
0:07:42 > 0:07:45would mean it would turn out to be a good thing. Are you going to
0:07:45 > 0:07:49apologise now? All of those decisions I made back then, I
0:07:49 > 0:07:53withdraw. But I think this decision about what we do now, or what
0:07:53 > 0:07:56Europe does know is one of those decisions with -- now, is one of
0:07:57 > 0:08:01those decisions we should take with hind site later. If it turns out
0:08:01 > 0:08:05that Greece is going to go bust any way and essentially they are going
0:08:05 > 0:08:10to default and that will trigger a global crisis, then we have to have
0:08:10 > 0:08:18it at some point, we might as well before we have injected billions
0:08:18 > 0:08:24and billions uselessly. If we can stop it becoming an Leighmen's
0:08:24 > 0:08:33brother, we -- a Lehman's brothers, we might find it money well spent.
0:08:33 > 0:08:37I have no idea. Do you? They've had a horrible black market for many
0:08:37 > 0:08:40decades. They have avoided paying taxes A lot of the Greek people are
0:08:40 > 0:08:44being taxed properly. That is nothing to do with us. That is
0:08:44 > 0:08:49their Government sorting their own people. We have been brought in to
0:08:49 > 0:08:52bail them out. I don't think it is right. You, Sir, on the left?
0:08:53 > 0:08:56don't feel that Rachel Reeves ought to have been in Mr Brown's
0:08:56 > 0:09:00Government and talking about lending money. If he had been more
0:09:00 > 0:09:06prudent we would not have been in the position we are now too.
0:09:06 > 0:09:13APPLAUSE She only came in after the election.
0:09:13 > 0:09:19She could not have been. Let my say -- me say, this was a global crisis.
0:09:19 > 0:09:25Every country has seen, as a result, the budget deficit and debt
0:09:25 > 0:09:28increase. When the crisis hit our debt was the second lowest in the
0:09:28 > 0:09:32G7. David Cameron and the Conservatives supported plans until
0:09:32 > 0:09:362008. The massive increase in the deficit and debt was due to
0:09:36 > 0:09:42irresponsible decisions by bankers in the UK, but also globally. That
0:09:42 > 0:09:48is why we've got the mess, not just in the UK, but around the world now.
0:09:48 > 0:09:52This wasn't global...: APPLAUSE Places like Australia, Canada,
0:09:52 > 0:09:57India, they coped well. This was a western crisis, particularly acute
0:09:57 > 0:10:03in the United Kingdom, because the Government grossly overspent and
0:10:03 > 0:10:07because they didn't regulate the banks properly.
0:10:07 > 0:10:11It seems there is a fundamental weakness in the euro, which covers
0:10:11 > 0:10:15such a diverse range of countries, where individual economies are not
0:10:15 > 0:10:19able to either devalue or set their own interest rates, which are two
0:10:19 > 0:10:23major tools for recovery. Let me go back to the question now
0:10:23 > 0:10:29and then we'll move on. There are a couple of points I just want to
0:10:29 > 0:10:36raise. My question is about Greece, not the mess we're in or not in.
0:10:36 > 0:10:41It's.: When you say, you know, we're not in the euro, so we can
0:10:41 > 0:10:46effectively opt-out, or it's not our problem, however we did put
0:10:46 > 0:10:51money into Ireland - if I'm not mistaken. They're in the euro. On
0:10:51 > 0:10:55the news, we hear of Greece selling their assets, selling all their
0:10:55 > 0:10:59companies, their buildings. What happens when they've sold up?
0:10:59 > 0:11:03There'll be no more buildings, no more institutions to sell. So,
0:11:03 > 0:11:10they're not going to be able to raise any money to pay anybody back.
0:11:10 > 0:11:14Surely it is better to bite the bullet now! The idea of the euro
0:11:14 > 0:11:18was you'd have a number of countries together. If one got into
0:11:19 > 0:11:22trouble there was prowess there for others to help out. That would
0:11:22 > 0:11:28provide stability, so they would help each other out. I recognise
0:11:28 > 0:11:32there are two sorts of countries in the euro, those performing well and
0:11:32 > 0:11:37those less well. It is a tension within the euro. A lot of our trade
0:11:37 > 0:11:43with Ireland, it's one of our biggest trading partners, there's
0:11:43 > 0:11:50long historical relationships there. It is in our interest to make sure
0:11:50 > 0:11:53the Irish economy recoverers. far down the line? Spain next?
0:11:53 > 0:11:57Portugal next? While we are worrying about our own little bit,
0:11:57 > 0:12:02the euro's going to take us to the cleaners.
0:12:02 > 0:12:05Do you have any consolation for the lady? She is right. The scheme is
0:12:06 > 0:12:11very badly constructed. It's going to lose a lot of money and destroy
0:12:11 > 0:12:16a lot of jobs and livelihoods. I am very worried. In this country as
0:12:16 > 0:12:21well? They do owe.... No, not in this country. They owe it to us to
0:12:21 > 0:12:26hammer out a solution to the underlying problem. Greece is
0:12:26 > 0:12:31insolvent. She doesn't need another loan. She needs to do something
0:12:31 > 0:12:41more fundamental than borrow more money. We must move on. If you
0:12:41 > 0:12:44
0:12:44 > 0:12:48A question please from Sharika Saeed.
0:12:48 > 0:12:58Would the panel be happy to accept a lower pension, have to work
0:12:58 > 0:12:59
0:12:59 > 0:13:03longer to get it and pay more for it? The predicament of many people.
0:13:03 > 0:13:13Fern Britton? I have thought about this a lot. I am in that category
0:13:13 > 0:13:17
0:13:17 > 0:13:22that I will be one of the women who As a feminist, we have fought a
0:13:22 > 0:13:30long battle to receive the same money for the same job as a band.
0:13:30 > 0:13:35That hasn't, as we know, happened 100%. Some kind of benevolent
0:13:35 > 0:13:39sexism has allowed women to retire a little bit earlier. Now that has
0:13:39 > 0:13:47been turned on its head. Maybe as feminists we have to bite the
0:13:47 > 0:13:50bullet and take the rough with the smooth. I'm not sure. I think
0:13:50 > 0:13:53they're Ratu issues. There is the issue of what is happening to the
0:13:53 > 0:13:57state pension for women and the issue of public sector pensions.
0:13:57 > 0:14:00Let's concentrate on the state pension average and what is
0:14:00 > 0:14:04happening there. I totally agree that it is right that the state
0:14:04 > 0:14:08pension age for men and women is equalised. As we live longer, we
0:14:08 > 0:14:12know we will have to work longer before we can get the state pension,
0:14:12 > 0:14:15if it is going to be affordable. If we are going to make changes to the
0:14:15 > 0:14:18state pension age, you have to give people the time they need to
0:14:19 > 0:14:22prepare for that change. That change should be spread across all
0:14:22 > 0:14:25of us, it should be that one particular group has to wait much
0:14:25 > 0:14:29longer before they get they state pension. The problem with the
0:14:29 > 0:14:34Government proposals is that 500,000 women will have to wait for
0:14:34 > 0:14:39up to two years longer. These were men, aged 56 and 57 now, just a few
0:14:39 > 0:14:43years away from retirement, that is what I think is particularly unfair.
0:14:43 > 0:14:47These women don't have huge private pensions. Many of them have taken
0:14:47 > 0:14:51time off to bring up a family. Many of them are now caring for elderly
0:14:51 > 0:14:59parents or grandchildren. To moved the goalposts for the second time,
0:14:59 > 0:15:09so close to the retirement date, that is what I think is unjust. So
0:15:09 > 0:15:11
0:15:11 > 0:15:14move that, yes, but give fair In general terms we have to
0:15:14 > 0:15:17recognise that we are all living longer, which is a very good thing.
0:15:17 > 0:15:21The number of working people, compared to the number of
0:15:21 > 0:15:24pensioners, the ratio is changing. There were nine people working by
0:15:24 > 0:15:29every pensioner in 1926. There are three people working for every
0:15:29 > 0:15:32pensioner now. Clearly, the system is becoming different to manage and
0:15:33 > 0:15:35unbalanced. It has to change. If we want to have decent pension
0:15:35 > 0:15:38arrangements for the future for people, to make sure there is a
0:15:38 > 0:15:42decent pension to live on, we have to make sure sufficient money is
0:15:42 > 0:15:46there. That means raising the pension age. It's something that
0:15:46 > 0:15:52all three parties have historically recognised. Rachel raises a
0:15:52 > 0:15:57perfectly fair point about the way it might affect women who are 57 or
0:15:57 > 0:16:02thereabouts. My understanding is that there are 33,000 people in
0:16:02 > 0:16:04that category, 1% of the women affected that are badly affected.
0:16:04 > 0:16:08The Work and Pensions secretary Iain Duncan-Smith said this week
0:16:08 > 0:16:12that he recognised there was an issue there, and was willing to see
0:16:12 > 0:16:15if anything to be done to ease that problem. I think we are trying to
0:16:15 > 0:16:19approach this matter in a sensible and sensitive way. There is nothing
0:16:19 > 0:16:23particularly dogmatic about this. It's an issue that I hope all three
0:16:23 > 0:16:31parties can work together to bring forward proposals on. That includes
0:16:31 > 0:16:38the point racial has raised. -- Rachel. Sharika Saeed, were you
0:16:38 > 0:16:41thinking about women that are about 57, that were going to be affected,
0:16:41 > 0:16:45or people in public sector pensions? In public sector pensions.
0:16:45 > 0:16:52The people going on strike in a week's time and others? David
0:16:52 > 0:16:55Mitchell? Basically, there is a regrettable financial reality
0:16:55 > 0:17:04underlining nests that, ultimately, because people are living longer
0:17:04 > 0:17:07and because more of the population have retired, we need to pay them a
0:17:07 > 0:17:11out for less time. But that doesn't mean that it isn't horribly unfair
0:17:11 > 0:17:14for people that have planned their lives expecting to retire for a
0:17:14 > 0:17:17certain time and spend a certain amount of money, suddenly it is
0:17:17 > 0:17:22like climbing a mountain and you realise that there is another climb
0:17:22 > 0:17:25to go. That is very unfair. Obviously, there are very unfair
0:17:25 > 0:17:30things in the whole situation. The average age of death is going up,
0:17:30 > 0:17:35but not at the same rate in all sectors of society. For some people,
0:17:35 > 0:17:39they can retire at 66 and expect 20 years of pleasure. For other people,
0:17:39 > 0:17:45they would be very lucky to get that. For less lucky people, they
0:17:45 > 0:17:49would be lucky to get that... If that makes sense! I think what this
0:17:49 > 0:17:53highlights is how unfair our society is in lots of ways. You
0:17:53 > 0:17:57can't make the pensions is unfair because society is unfair. Society
0:17:57 > 0:18:00isn't fair on women that have taken time out to raise children and
0:18:00 > 0:18:04don't qualify for the same pensions as men. It's not fair on people
0:18:04 > 0:18:07that work hard for low wages in areas of the country where life
0:18:07 > 0:18:12expectancy is not going up, who have to retire later and pay more
0:18:13 > 0:18:16or pensions and will not enjoy a long retirement. Really, the core
0:18:16 > 0:18:26of the unfairness is not the cake - - pensions, it's a myriad of other
0:18:26 > 0:18:28
0:18:28 > 0:18:32For those of us that work in the private sector, we have already had
0:18:32 > 0:18:36these imposed on ourselves anyway. We already have to work longer, pay
0:18:36 > 0:18:39more. For me, it's the simple fact that we have to get with the Times
0:18:39 > 0:18:48and the public sector has to catch up with the reforms that have
0:18:48 > 0:18:51already happened in the private The point about biting the bullet,
0:18:51 > 0:18:58may be that we should have the same pension ages as men, I think we
0:18:58 > 0:19:03should all have also have the same pay as men, so when it does come to
0:19:03 > 0:19:08retiring we are on the same pay bracket. Equality of pay has to be
0:19:08 > 0:19:12100% now, it's ridiculous. John Redwood? As a well-paid City public
0:19:12 > 0:19:17sector worker, I think I should work longer and make a bigger
0:19:17 > 0:19:21contribution to my attention. Your viewers will be delighted to know
0:19:21 > 0:19:25that is what is going to happen. Subject to the electors, because
0:19:25 > 0:19:27they might disagree, I think some of us are willing to go one for a
0:19:27 > 0:19:32little bit longer because we understand people are living a lot
0:19:32 > 0:19:35longer and that it is not affordable to offer people 20 years
0:19:35 > 0:19:40plus at the decent pension rates we would qualify for, when people
0:19:40 > 0:19:45thought it would be 10 or 15 years when that they were planned. Do you
0:19:45 > 0:19:51get a final-salary scheme? Yes. Does anybody else get final-salary
0:19:51 > 0:19:56here? You know that the public sector is going to go over to an
0:19:56 > 0:20:01average scheme. I haven't seen the details of what the changes are
0:20:01 > 0:20:06going to be. I think we are, David. You are not going to be protected?
0:20:06 > 0:20:09I don't think so. We certainly have the highest contribution rate in
0:20:09 > 0:20:13the public sector, which is entirely appropriate. Public sector
0:20:13 > 0:20:16schemes are a lot more generous than most private sector schemes.
0:20:16 > 0:20:19Most private sector schemes have been closed down, the final salary
0:20:19 > 0:20:23ones. We do have to do something about it, it's right that the
0:20:23 > 0:20:26Government is going to do something to protect people on low earnings.
0:20:26 > 0:20:32They shouldn't be hit, it should be those on better earnings. We have
0:20:32 > 0:20:36to take a series of measures to make things affordable. The woman
0:20:36 > 0:20:40in the orange... Apricot? I don't know what colour it is. You, madam.
0:20:40 > 0:20:46While I agree with equality for women, and the person down here
0:20:46 > 0:20:50that spoke for equality on pay also, I also agree with some of the
0:20:50 > 0:20:54things David has said about unfairness in society. I thought
0:20:54 > 0:20:59that equality was about changing those unfairnesses, not increasing
0:21:00 > 0:21:03them. Also, it's not about equalling those in the private
0:21:04 > 0:21:09sector, because the pay is not equal in the private sector as it
0:21:09 > 0:21:16is in the public sector. So, why should the pensions be the same
0:21:16 > 0:21:19question that is that true? lower. On average, it is lower.
0:21:19 > 0:21:24says it is lower in the private sector. The private sector has
0:21:24 > 0:21:29recently overtaken, after a good period of years of growth. The man
0:21:29 > 0:21:34in spectacles, on the 4th row? public sector problem built up
0:21:34 > 0:21:39gradually. It deserves a gradual submission. It is political
0:21:39 > 0:21:44ineptitude that has not caused a gradual improvement over the last
0:21:44 > 0:21:4920 or 30 years. This knee-jerk reaction is just too harsh. This is
0:21:49 > 0:21:54all parties, you're talking about? The woman on the right. What about
0:21:54 > 0:22:00people in their 60s, who at work as prison guards? A 60 year-old prison
0:22:00 > 0:22:08guard trying to hold back a violent 20 year-old inmate, how does that
0:22:08 > 0:22:12work? In terms of what? Because he is a public sector worker. And he
0:22:12 > 0:22:17has to stay working? He has to keep working in his 60s, dealing with
0:22:17 > 0:22:20that the 20 year-old. I think it's always been accepted that there
0:22:20 > 0:22:24will be exceptions to this for hazardous and difficult tasks.
0:22:24 > 0:22:29There are tasks that are not as severe as you are suggesting in
0:22:29 > 0:22:32prisons, so it might be a distribution of duties. And the
0:22:32 > 0:22:38public sector worker in the fire service and I already pay 11% of my
0:22:38 > 0:22:43wage to a pension scheme. Its proposed I pay another 3% over the
0:22:43 > 0:22:47next three years, starting from next April. I'm sick of being... I
0:22:47 > 0:22:51feel like I am being treated like a second-class citizen, it that this
0:22:51 > 0:22:54problem we have got is actually the public sector's fault when it isn't.
0:22:54 > 0:22:59You need to go after some of the private sector, I'm not saying all
0:22:59 > 0:23:09of the private sector, but the people that God is in the mass --
0:23:09 > 0:23:14got us in the mess in the first Let me say, it is absolutely not
0:23:14 > 0:23:18about attacking the public sector. It absolutely isn't. I hope we have
0:23:18 > 0:23:21all got tremendous respect for those that work in the fire service,
0:23:21 > 0:23:25police, ambulance and all of the other emergency services, indeed
0:23:25 > 0:23:27the teachers and everything else. What it is about is recognising
0:23:27 > 0:23:31that there is a problem with funding pensions in the public
0:23:31 > 0:23:34sector and we have to address that. The gentleman at there is quite
0:23:34 > 0:23:37right to say that it has been left on the back-burner for 20 years,
0:23:37 > 0:23:42when it should have been addressed earlier. We have tried to get
0:23:42 > 0:23:46cross-party agreement. John Hutton, former Labour minister, has drawn
0:23:46 > 0:23:51up the proposals. By and large, the Government has agreed to adopt them.
0:23:51 > 0:23:54We are trying to get a fair deal, protecting the age is already in
0:23:54 > 0:23:57place, for people that have accrued their pensions up to now, a fair
0:23:57 > 0:24:02deal for the future that balances the need to make sure we can afford
0:24:02 > 0:24:06it and that somebody get a decent patient -- pension. There is no
0:24:06 > 0:24:10negotiation, is there? Danny Alexander has more or less said,
0:24:10 > 0:24:16this is what we are going to do, like it or lump it. He hasn't said
0:24:16 > 0:24:20that. He was taken out of context. That must be his arrogant character.
0:24:20 > 0:24:25We are basing our proposals on the Labour minister, John Hutton. We
0:24:25 > 0:24:29are trying to get cross-party consensus. John Hutton, the man who
0:24:29 > 0:24:32did the report, said that the Government need to get back around
0:24:32 > 0:24:36the negotiating table and that any solution needs to be negotiated.
0:24:36 > 0:24:40The gentleman from the private sector who says that it is right
0:24:40 > 0:24:44that the public sector reforms, that is absolutely right. But what
0:24:44 > 0:24:47the Government are trying to do, it seems to me, his force a solution
0:24:47 > 0:24:52on the public sector, whereas what they should be doing is getting
0:24:52 > 0:24:55around the negotiating table. Nobody wants strikes next week.
0:24:55 > 0:24:58People in the private sector who rely on public services do not want
0:24:58 > 0:25:03strikes. I taught to dinner ladies, teachers in my constituency, they
0:25:03 > 0:25:07want to go to work and do their job next Thursday. But they also feel
0:25:07 > 0:25:11that the Government, as you said, is pre-empting negotiations and
0:25:11 > 0:25:14forcing the deal rather than negotiating. Rather than going to
0:25:14 > 0:25:17television studios, as Danny Alexander did last Friday and say
0:25:17 > 0:25:21what the outcome of the negotiations was going to be, he
0:25:21 > 0:25:24needs to sit down with people under fire service, with teachers, and
0:25:24 > 0:25:34negotiate a deal. That is what people and the public sector want,
0:25:34 > 0:25:34
0:25:34 > 0:25:38and what people in the private Just before we leave this, John
0:25:38 > 0:25:42Redwood, as a Conservative backbencher, you are nodding in
0:25:42 > 0:25:46agreement with what Rachel Reeves is saying. You think the Government
0:25:46 > 0:25:49haven't handled it properly? think they need to negotiate
0:25:49 > 0:25:52earnestly and sensibly with their workforce. I think it's difficult
0:25:52 > 0:25:55to read it through the media, better to do it face-to-face.
0:25:55 > 0:25:59Myself, having some experience of industrial relations in other
0:25:59 > 0:26:03contexts, I think the media is often wonderful for the media, but
0:26:03 > 0:26:08not helpful for the negotiations. I would ask them to sit down in
0:26:08 > 0:26:10private with their employees and respect them. Can I just add, I
0:26:10 > 0:26:14agree with that but I think the Government has been quite cynical
0:26:14 > 0:26:21recently in the way it has encouraged people to demonise the
0:26:21 > 0:26:24public sector. David Cameron has made them out as being bureaucrats.
0:26:24 > 0:26:30In the way the conversation has happened, people are saying, I am
0:26:30 > 0:26:34in the public sector, I am in the private sector, never the twain
0:26:34 > 0:26:38will show respect for each other. I think that's a shame and it's not
0:26:39 > 0:26:42the right approach. It needs to be properly negotiated. At times, the
0:26:43 > 0:26:46Government has tried to make public opinion turned against the public
0:26:46 > 0:26:56sector and make people think of people and the public sector as
0:26:56 > 0:26:58
0:26:58 > 0:27:03Do you accept John Redwood's rebuke about the way this is being handled
0:27:03 > 0:27:06by the coalition? I don't. I accept that there is a perception that is
0:27:06 > 0:27:10happening. I think there is a willingness to negotiate properly
0:27:10 > 0:27:14and sit down with people. I also don't expect -- accept that there
0:27:14 > 0:27:18is an attempt to demonise the public sector. It is very important
0:27:18 > 0:27:23in this country and keeps our society together, why would we want
0:27:23 > 0:27:33to demonise it? Let's go on to another question from Jackie Grant.
0:27:33 > 0:27:33
0:27:33 > 0:27:40British troops are pulling out daily -- early out of Afghanistan.
0:27:40 > 0:27:49374 men and women died in vain? troops are pulled out early? Is
0:27:49 > 0:27:55that it, will 374 men and women have died in vain? Well, I think
0:27:55 > 0:27:59the situation in Afghanistan is, in many ways, a very regrettable one.
0:27:59 > 0:28:04People talk about the reason we went in there, in a very confused
0:28:04 > 0:28:09way. We talk about rebuilding Afghanistan as a country, which
0:28:09 > 0:28:12wasn't the reason we went in there. We went in there to fight global
0:28:12 > 0:28:16terrorism. I'm not sure whether that is what we should have done,
0:28:16 > 0:28:21to fight global terrorism. I'm not sure that has done any good. Now we
0:28:21 > 0:28:25are there, you see a country with a lot of problems and I am sure that
0:28:26 > 0:28:28our troops and the American troops are doing their best to make it a
0:28:28 > 0:28:33better country. Whether that is an appropriate role for Western
0:28:33 > 0:28:38countries, or doing any good in terms of our initial aims of
0:28:38 > 0:28:43fighting terrorism, I don't know. Should we stick there? Or should we
0:28:43 > 0:28:48start withdrawing, like the American president is proposing?
0:28:48 > 0:28:51think we have set a timetable to leave. The American President has
0:28:51 > 0:28:56haste and to that somewhat. My feeling is that we probably do need
0:28:56 > 0:29:00to leave because it's not a country that it is our role to rebuild. I
0:29:00 > 0:29:05hope we will have done more good than harm at the end of that. But I
0:29:05 > 0:29:15don't really know. John Redwood, the implication in the question is
0:29:15 > 0:29:16
0:29:16 > 0:29:21Well, I hope it will prove not to be so. We'll only know how good it
0:29:21 > 0:29:24was after we've withdrawn and see what kind of political society
0:29:24 > 0:29:28exists in Afghanistan. I am sure it was well intended. Our troops have
0:29:28 > 0:29:33been brave and loyal. They have done enormously positive work. I
0:29:33 > 0:29:36would not want to detract from that commitment they have made. I am one
0:29:36 > 0:29:40who wants us out as quickly as possible. I want the Government
0:29:40 > 0:29:45here and in America to get on with it. There must be a limit as to how
0:29:45 > 0:29:50much training we need to give the forces. The right people to police
0:29:50 > 0:29:55Afghanistan are Afghans. We have spent a lot of time and trouble
0:29:55 > 0:29:59training their army. Can we please get out of there as quickly as
0:29:59 > 0:30:05possible? You imply by that that''ve done as much as we can do
0:30:05 > 0:30:12- is that what you feel? Some of the servicemen, Richard Dannatt,
0:30:12 > 0:30:16for example, is saying he says this is not done for political reasons.
0:30:16 > 0:30:20Implying it. And Obama because he has elections coming up next year?
0:30:20 > 0:30:25There'll always be brave and talented soldiers what will say we
0:30:25 > 0:30:31could do a good job if we could carry on and the Afghans are not
0:30:31 > 0:30:36perfect yet. That is true. I don't deny the honesty of the advice they
0:30:36 > 0:30:41are giving. The best is the enemy of the good. Let the Afghans get on
0:30:41 > 0:30:47wit. Do the best job we can and get out and leave it to these large
0:30:47 > 0:30:53forces the Afghans have. Fern Britton? It's a very dangerous
0:30:53 > 0:30:59place. Your question was did those 374 servicemen and women die in
0:30:59 > 0:31:03vain. If I was a parent I would say, God, I hope not. We know how brave
0:31:03 > 0:31:08those people are. However, if my child was fighting there now, I'd
0:31:08 > 0:31:13be saying, can you please get out yesterday, because I want you home.
0:31:13 > 0:31:19That's a purely personal, you know, feeling about it. I think it boils
0:31:19 > 0:31:23down to, obviously we hope we've trained the Afghan police force
0:31:23 > 0:31:27well enough to look after themselves. It boils down to money.
0:31:27 > 0:31:33We can't afford it. We saw the price of Libya today. I was working
0:31:33 > 0:31:36out, it's something like �3 million a day - the conflict in Libya has
0:31:36 > 0:31:41cost us already. We were told that was only going to cost, just in the
0:31:41 > 0:31:47tens of millions, it's now in the hundreds and there's no real end in
0:31:47 > 0:31:51sight. We said we'd be there six months. We've done three months.
0:31:52 > 0:31:55Can we afford this? Can we afford any of it this? Are we talking to
0:31:56 > 0:32:01these people. We talk about, there are negotiations happening. But
0:32:01 > 0:32:06talk is so much cheaper and easier and friend liar and, I know this
0:32:06 > 0:32:11sound a little bit wishy-washy, but surely it's better than going in
0:32:11 > 0:32:19and bombing civilians, killing our own troops with friendly fire and
0:32:19 > 0:32:25everything else. APPLAUSE
0:32:25 > 0:32:30The figures seem to be imcome pabl. It is interesting to note it is 374
0:32:30 > 0:32:36servicemen. What about the hundreds and thousands of innocent Afghanis
0:32:36 > 0:32:39who have died? What about them? APPLAUSE Norman Baker? Every
0:32:39 > 0:32:44Wednesday in the House of Commons, we hear the Prime Minister stand up
0:32:44 > 0:32:51and read out the names of British soldiers what've died in action,
0:32:51 > 0:32:54whether in -- who've died in action, whether in Iraq or Afghanistan. It
0:32:54 > 0:32:58is people making the ultimate sacrifice for this country. He does
0:32:58 > 0:33:03not read out the Afghan nationals or Iraqis, of whom there are
0:33:03 > 0:33:07frankly more. Equally we need to bear those in mind. Any Parliament
0:33:07 > 0:33:12needs to think seriously because it commits its troops to military
0:33:12 > 0:33:17action. Has it been worth it? Have they died in vain? I hope not. We
0:33:17 > 0:33:22are told by our military advisers that the surge has been successful,
0:33:22 > 0:33:27that the transfer of power has now, is now taking place, seriously to
0:33:27 > 0:33:30the Afghan forces T conditions are right to do so. John Redwood is
0:33:30 > 0:33:34right. We went there and we don't know whether it is right until we
0:33:35 > 0:33:40have left the country. The Government has said we want all
0:33:40 > 0:33:44combat troops out by 2015, at the latest. I share the view of many,
0:33:44 > 0:33:48saying the sooner we can leave and have the conditions right for the
0:33:48 > 0:33:55Afghans to run their own country, the better. The man in the second
0:33:55 > 0:33:59row from the back there? Fern said about talking to these people. I
0:33:59 > 0:34:03believe the Afghan Government and American Government are starting
0:34:03 > 0:34:07talks with the Taliban. As they are sending in suicide bombers are they
0:34:07 > 0:34:10the sort of people who can sit around a table and talk about
0:34:10 > 0:34:15ending it peacefully. And the British Government is talking to
0:34:15 > 0:34:19them as well. Rachel Reeves? those 374 lives aren't going to
0:34:19 > 0:34:23have been given in vain, then we need to negotiate a solution with
0:34:23 > 0:34:27people in Afghanistan. That means that the Government in Afghanistan,
0:34:27 > 0:34:31as John said training the police and army, but it means talking with
0:34:31 > 0:34:35those people who we might not share their values. We might not agree
0:34:35 > 0:34:39with everything they do, but if we want to make sure there is a stable
0:34:39 > 0:34:44future in Afghanistan, we ned to be talking to people who use -- need
0:34:44 > 0:34:49to be talking to people who used to be our enemy. You don't make peace
0:34:49 > 0:34:59with your friends. You make peace by talking to those people you
0:34:59 > 0:35:03disagree with. APPLAUSE Second row from the back? It seems as though
0:35:03 > 0:35:07we are putting a price on people's lives. When we went into war, we
0:35:07 > 0:35:12knew it would cost us a lot of money. Now it has gone on longer
0:35:12 > 0:35:18than what we anticipated. We are pulling out because, as Fern said,
0:35:18 > 0:35:24you know, the money, the money implication. How can we justifyably
0:35:24 > 0:35:29put our money on a person's live, by withdrawing? Do you mean we
0:35:29 > 0:35:35should find the money to stay there until the job is done in the sense
0:35:35 > 0:35:39that the military want to see the job done? I think so, yes. You do?
0:35:39 > 0:35:45I realise that people are losing their lives. There'll always be a
0:35:45 > 0:35:49first and always be a last. It's the ones inbetween and you know,
0:35:49 > 0:35:56their lives are very, very crucial at the time when they lost them,
0:35:56 > 0:36:00unfortunately. If we pull out now, all that is lost.
0:36:00 > 0:36:05Weapons of mass destruction - at the end of it, you found out he
0:36:05 > 0:36:09doesn't have any weapons of mass destruction. You walk into
0:36:09 > 0:36:13Afghanistan. Start killing them. You say you should negotiate. You
0:36:13 > 0:36:18should negotiate in the first place before going into Afghanistan and
0:36:18 > 0:36:26killing so many people. APPLAUSE The man in the black jacket.
0:36:26 > 0:36:33what point will we sit down and negotiate with Al-Qaeda?... Given
0:36:33 > 0:36:37the basis we negotiate with our enemies - it's a rude, ludicrous
0:36:37 > 0:36:41situation. We ended up negotiating the IRA in Northern Ireland. They
0:36:41 > 0:36:45had a clear political objective. Obviously their methods were
0:36:45 > 0:36:51completely unacceptable. They had a clear objective, therefore there
0:36:51 > 0:36:55was a national policy to negotiate with. Al-Qaeda - they seem to want
0:36:55 > 0:37:00to simply behave in a way that blows themselves up, blow other
0:37:00 > 0:37:04people up. Their objective seems to be the destruction of western
0:37:04 > 0:37:08civilisation. It cannot be negotiated in the same way. There
0:37:08 > 0:37:13is a difference between Taliban and Al-Qaeda. He said Al-Qaeda.
0:37:13 > 0:37:17other gentleman next to you was talking about Taliban. There is a
0:37:17 > 0:37:21vast and long spectrum of Taliban members, Al-Qaeda members and some
0:37:21 > 0:37:26of them are probably the majority are reasonable enough to sit and
0:37:26 > 0:37:30talk with, I am hoping. The woman there in green? I was thinking,
0:37:30 > 0:37:33what about the other people who are not part of the Taliban? Are we
0:37:33 > 0:37:40just abandoning them? There are an awful lot of people who don't agree
0:37:40 > 0:37:44with the Taliban and they want us to stay. Are we just walking out on
0:37:44 > 0:37:48them? We have to remember our aim is to leave Afghanistan as a more
0:37:48 > 0:37:52stable country which can govern itself, which can sort out all its
0:37:52 > 0:37:56disagreements by word and arguments rather than by bombs and bullets.
0:37:56 > 0:38:00It is a difficult task. I don't see how you can do it until you talk to
0:38:00 > 0:38:03all the groups. You will not like some of them. They will be hostile
0:38:04 > 0:38:08to others. They will not have an established civil society until
0:38:08 > 0:38:12they can deal with those things by argument rather than bombs.
0:38:12 > 0:38:17last point from the man there? country has an amazing army. Isn't
0:38:17 > 0:38:27it time the Government realise we cannot just solve the problems and
0:38:27 > 0:38:27
0:38:27 > 0:38:31invade these countries. The cost implications, for example. Let's go
0:38:31 > 0:38:39on. Is David Cameron a saviour by suggesting the U-turn is a strength
0:38:39 > 0:38:42of strength? APPLAUSE
0:38:42 > 0:38:48David Cameron, in his press conference at Downing Street said,
0:38:48 > 0:38:53in reference to the dropping of the proposal to give 50% remission of
0:38:53 > 0:38:58sentence if you pleaded guilty, he said that a U-turn would be a sign
0:38:58 > 0:39:05of strength. John Redwood, do you see it as a sign of strength?
0:39:05 > 0:39:09good U-turn is a sign of strength. One U-turn.... Deserves another.
0:39:10 > 0:39:14You turn if you want to.... If you have too many of them then your
0:39:14 > 0:39:20critics will be hostile and say, why don't you make up your mind in
0:39:20 > 0:39:27a sensible way. They've had NHS reforms, the forests, milk, books,
0:39:27 > 0:39:31cutting down on two deliveries to one of waste. Too many. I would
0:39:31 > 0:39:36suggest they have a period without U-turns. I think it would be much
0:39:36 > 0:39:40welcome. I think the latest one on sentencing, which is presented as a
0:39:40 > 0:39:43U-turn - a little unfair - they consulted on an idea. Practically
0:39:43 > 0:39:48everybody, including the judges, and a lot of Conservative
0:39:48 > 0:39:51backbenchers told them it was not a wise idea, so they went back to
0:39:52 > 0:39:55what they inherited. The Justice Secretary was famously clear in
0:39:55 > 0:40:03that interview when he talked about rape and serious rape. He said, in
0:40:03 > 0:40:06a case where a judge thinks it's right and where the charged man has
0:40:06 > 0:40:11shown contrition, isn't making things worse, he can get a half off.
0:40:11 > 0:40:15He was committed to that policy, so it is a U-turn. It was presented
0:40:15 > 0:40:18later as discussion. Actually Ken Clarke wanted it. I think Ken
0:40:18 > 0:40:23Clarke is trying to do some brave and good things. The idea of trying
0:40:23 > 0:40:29to get drugs out of prison is superb. It is amazing how many
0:40:29 > 0:40:34drugs there are in prisons. 70% of all offenders use drugs before they
0:40:34 > 0:40:38go into prison. It would be great if he can do that. He is spending
0:40:38 > 0:40:43time thinking about decent programmes so they can work and get
0:40:43 > 0:40:46the habit of work in prison. They might not commit offences again.
0:40:46 > 0:40:51Our prisons are not working properly. There are too many people
0:40:51 > 0:40:55in them. Too many of them go back in. There'll be more in them now as
0:40:55 > 0:41:03a result of the Government's refusal to give the 50% cut.
0:41:03 > 0:41:07aim of the policy.... The aim is to stabilise the population. There are
0:41:07 > 0:41:11things going on, one area that lots would agree is to get the
0:41:11 > 0:41:15foreigners out of prison. Why when we could send them home and say we
0:41:15 > 0:41:19don't want them back. There's something interesting you have just
0:41:19 > 0:41:24said is that the Government consulted, people said it was a bad
0:41:24 > 0:41:28idea. If the Government didn't consult and did a U-turn that would
0:41:28 > 0:41:33be different. It's two different sides. Can the Government consult
0:41:33 > 0:41:37people or can't they? It depends how you consult, does it. Norman
0:41:37 > 0:41:44Baker? Have you done U-turns? Transport Minister, I'm always
0:41:44 > 0:41:49doing usm turns. I know that U- turns can be a sensible manoeuvre.
0:41:49 > 0:41:53Illegal? Only if you have a no U- turn sign up. The reality is that
0:41:53 > 0:41:57we've had Governments, often we elected minority of the vote,
0:41:57 > 0:42:02ramming through policies, which the majority of the people don't like,
0:42:02 > 0:42:06then telling the people they there is no alternative, we must carry on,
0:42:06 > 0:42:11you must bring this policy through. Then you end up with a disaster,
0:42:11 > 0:42:15three or four years down the track, like the poll tax which you have to
0:42:15 > 0:42:18change. It is better. Of course it is better get the policy right in
0:42:18 > 0:42:23the first place, so there's no need for a U-turn. If you get the policy
0:42:23 > 0:42:27in a way that needs to be changed, it is better to do so, having
0:42:27 > 0:42:31listened to people, having consulted. Having been open as a
0:42:31 > 0:42:38Government, as this Government is, as a coalition Government, as a
0:42:38 > 0:42:43matter of fact. To admit that and then make changes. It is a sensible
0:42:43 > 0:42:47man who can admit he's wrong, or woman, admit they are wrong and do
0:42:47 > 0:42:50a U-turn. The weakness lies in the fact that the Prime Minister
0:42:50 > 0:42:57allowed this to get through in the first place. Ridiculous!
0:42:57 > 0:43:01APPLAUSE It is logical to make a decision
0:43:01 > 0:43:06after you have consulted with people. Not make a decision and
0:43:06 > 0:43:16then consult and go, oh, I've made a mistake, and then change your
0:43:16 > 0:43:17
0:43:17 > 0:43:22Let me just say, is it a sign of strength? Well, what is a sign of
0:43:22 > 0:43:27strength is to talk to the people who do decisions are going to
0:43:27 > 0:43:30affect, then decide what your policy is going today. On NHS
0:43:30 > 0:43:34reform, on sentencing, on forests, the Government made up its mind, it
0:43:34 > 0:43:37announced the policies. Then when they heard direction of their
0:43:37 > 0:43:47people, they changed their mind. I don't think that is a sign of
0:43:47 > 0:43:55
0:43:55 > 0:44:00strength, but I do welcome the David Mitchell? I wouldn't say U-
0:44:00 > 0:44:03turn was a sign of strength, is not necessarily a sign of weakness. In
0:44:04 > 0:44:08all of these cases, the public consultation is quite a blunt
0:44:09 > 0:44:14instrument. It basically means, how loud have the media screamed about
0:44:14 > 0:44:17this? We are eight democracy where the main consultation is supposed
0:44:17 > 0:44:22to be the General Election. After that, people are supposed to govern
0:44:22 > 0:44:26as they see fit, if we don't like it, we throw them out. I don't feel
0:44:26 > 0:44:31that... I'm all right with politicians taking a view and doing
0:44:31 > 0:44:34that. If it's wrong, someone else can put it right. I don't see the
0:44:34 > 0:44:38role of the politician to be just to listen, I want them to have some
0:44:38 > 0:44:41views and some convictions. Some of their views, it might not seem a
0:44:42 > 0:44:48good idea. Maybe they will subsequently be proved right. With
0:44:48 > 0:44:52this section will never find out. They would just go, hang on, the
0:44:52 > 0:44:56papers turned against us, we will U-turn as a sign of strength, and
0:44:56 > 0:44:59we'll never know if it might have been a brilliant idea. You think
0:44:59 > 0:45:03the U-turn was from listening to what the press said, rather than
0:45:03 > 0:45:08the public as a whole? Obviously some of the public agreed with what
0:45:08 > 0:45:17the press said. But what is the system, how do they know? Do you
0:45:17 > 0:45:20put your head outside of Parliament and listen for cheering or going?
0:45:20 > 0:45:22It's almost a danger issue of democracy, that you elected
0:45:22 > 0:45:26government for five years, except what they do without complaint and
0:45:26 > 0:45:29then elected new one. I think a proper democracy is one where
0:45:29 > 0:45:33people have a chance to input and contribute during a parliament so
0:45:33 > 0:45:42that we hear those voices. If the Government is going off-track, they
0:45:42 > 0:45:52can say so loudly and clearly and reverse the judgment. And do that
0:45:52 > 0:45:55
0:45:55 > 0:45:59on everything? Have you listened on tuition fees, as Liberal Democrats?
0:45:59 > 0:46:05Let me say this, my party got our manifesto wrong on tuition fees.
0:46:05 > 0:46:08Let me say that bluntly now. No, we did. Actually, we did listen, the
0:46:08 > 0:46:13policy on tuition fees at the end is much better than it was at the
0:46:13 > 0:46:19beginning. Which isn't to say it is perfect. The NHS, coming back to
0:46:19 > 0:46:22that, the question is, do you want the NHS to have the U-turn that it
0:46:22 > 0:46:27had, which now has a much better policy, having listened to the
0:46:27 > 0:46:30public, the doctors, the medical profession? Or would you have had a
0:46:30 > 0:46:33his ploughing on ahead, listening to nobody and saying, well, we are
0:46:33 > 0:46:37the Government but we are not going to listen to anyone? He tried to
0:46:37 > 0:46:42listen to people when they have legitimate complaints and just
0:46:42 > 0:46:45policy. There have been too many baulks already commits coming
0:46:45 > 0:46:49across as weak leadership. While Margaret Thatcher got the poll tax
0:46:49 > 0:46:54wrong, she got a lot of things right. She came across as a strong
0:46:54 > 0:47:01leader, whether you agree with her or not. That has divided the
0:47:01 > 0:47:06audience! The woman in pink? seems clear to me at times that the
0:47:06 > 0:47:16liberal... De MPs, they are enjoying the fact that they are now
0:47:16 > 0:47:16
0:47:16 > 0:47:19in power and forgetting what their Our U-turns symptomatic of a
0:47:19 > 0:47:24coalition government, as opposed to a government with a strong mandate
0:47:24 > 0:47:28that can push through its own policies? Norman Baker? On that
0:47:28 > 0:47:37last point, pushing through policies when you why elected on a
0:47:37 > 0:47:39minority of a vote is not necessarily very democratic.
0:47:39 > 0:47:44Sometimes the majority of parliament, in their heart of
0:47:44 > 0:47:47hearts, the majority of the public disagree with what is being done.
0:47:47 > 0:47:52In the coalition government, nobody wins, we didn't win the election,
0:47:52 > 0:47:55the Conservatives didn't, so we have to compromise. 65% of our
0:47:55 > 0:47:59manifesto is being delivered, that is what we were able to negotiate
0:47:59 > 0:48:06when we went to the Conservatives after the election. The woman on
0:48:06 > 0:48:10the left? One or two baulks suggests a government that listens.
0:48:10 > 0:48:12Any more than that suggests that the ministers that put them forward
0:48:12 > 0:48:15don't know what they are about. That's quite worrying with a
0:48:15 > 0:48:18government. I think a lot of the people making the policies don't
0:48:19 > 0:48:25know what they're talking about, otherwise they would not have so
0:48:25 > 0:48:29many U-turns. The man in the brown jacket? There may be a case for
0:48:29 > 0:48:33occasional U-turns. I think the lady that was not for turning had a
0:48:33 > 0:48:36damaging and detrimental effect on our society, mainly. I agree with
0:48:36 > 0:48:39David Mitchell, it would be refreshing to have a government
0:48:39 > 0:48:48that had the courage of its convictions, that believed in
0:48:48 > 0:48:51something and followed through on that. You, sir? I think that she
0:48:51 > 0:48:55needs to listen to people, he needs to know what people are going
0:48:55 > 0:49:00through. It's not just having a big idea alone. On the U-turn, I think
0:49:00 > 0:49:04there is a right time that the Lib- Dems also have a U-turn as well,
0:49:04 > 0:49:08because it might be good for the country. Have a U-turn, you know.
0:49:08 > 0:49:11Which way do you want them to turn? Have a U-turn and think about
0:49:11 > 0:49:17people. At the moment, they are not representing that, thinking about
0:49:17 > 0:49:21people. Just one point, Norman Baker, there was an interesting
0:49:21 > 0:49:25thing that David Cameron said on Tuesday. There has been all this
0:49:25 > 0:49:30argument about 50% reductions in sentencing if you pleaded guilty.
0:49:30 > 0:49:34He certainly put it forward and said we are consulting. But when
0:49:34 > 0:49:38Tuesday came, the Prime Minister said, I'll quote him, the 50%
0:49:38 > 0:49:41sentence would be too lenient, the wrong message would be sent to the
0:49:41 > 0:49:44criminal and it would erode public confidence in the system. Surely
0:49:44 > 0:49:47that is the kind of thing that should have been thought out before
0:49:47 > 0:49:52the position was ever put to the public for them to give their
0:49:52 > 0:49:56opinion on? It seemed so categoric. He's not saying, having consultants
0:49:56 > 0:49:59-- consulted, we think this, that and the other. He says it is too
0:49:59 > 0:50:02lenient, the wrong message would be sent out. Did he not know that
0:50:02 > 0:50:06before? I don't think he did, otherwise it would not have got us
0:50:06 > 0:50:10are. There was a reason for pursuing the policy, which has been
0:50:10 > 0:50:13long-standing, I think the Labour government introduced it, a
0:50:13 > 0:50:18discount on the tariff for pleading guilty. It was proposed to have an
0:50:18 > 0:50:22extension of that. It became a clear when it was made public that
0:50:23 > 0:50:27the public were concerned about that. John Redwood, would you agree
0:50:27 > 0:50:32with that? Or do you think they slipped up on this one? Clearly,
0:50:32 > 0:50:36they didn't see the significance of this when they launched it. What
0:50:36 > 0:50:39happened was a blanket discount for all kinds of crimes and sentences
0:50:40 > 0:50:43was offered. Naturally, their critics picked out the most
0:50:43 > 0:50:49difficult ones, where none of us agreed with it, and they
0:50:49 > 0:50:55immediately saw the point and said, well, we won't do it banned. -- do
0:50:55 > 0:51:01it then. A last question from Katie Frank? Why should circuses still
0:51:01 > 0:51:07subject animals to such abuse? There is a context for this, an MP
0:51:07 > 0:51:11today, a Tory MP, Mark Pritchard, moved, to his surprise, I think,
0:51:11 > 0:51:17his motion was accepted, that there should be a ban on wild animals
0:51:17 > 0:51:21performing in English circuses. Rachel Reeves? I think that, in the
0:51:21 > 0:51:26end, the right decision was reached today in Parliament. Wild animals,
0:51:26 > 0:51:29as Katie mentioned, will not be able to perform in circuses because
0:51:29 > 0:51:32of the bill that was passed today in Parliament. I think that is
0:51:32 > 0:51:36excellent news. There was a consultation started by the last
0:51:36 > 0:51:44Labour government. 10,000 people responded, 94% thought it was wrong
0:51:44 > 0:51:47to have wild animals in circuses. With a Conservative MP, Liberal
0:51:47 > 0:51:50Democrat, and a Labour MP, they took a bill to the house of Commons.
0:51:51 > 0:51:56At the last minute, the Government decided to accept that, not to vote
0:51:56 > 0:52:01it down. I think that's good news. I think it is wrong, frankly, for
0:52:01 > 0:52:05elephants, lions, tigers, to perform for our enjoyment. I don't
0:52:05 > 0:52:08think many people do get enjoyment out of it. But I think it's
0:52:08 > 0:52:15barbaric, in a civilised society, to treat animals like that. I think
0:52:15 > 0:52:19the right decision was made. completely agree. It is upsetting
0:52:19 > 0:52:25when wild animals, some of which are endangered, are made to do
0:52:25 > 0:52:29things which are not natural to them. You know, I don't know...
0:52:29 > 0:52:33Personally, I find dressage a bit weird as well. Do we want to
0:52:33 > 0:52:37explain that for the benefit of viewers? It is an Olympic sport
0:52:37 > 0:52:41which involves horses doing things which I consider to be very
0:52:41 > 0:52:47unnatural. That probably sounds worse than it is now. I'm sure it
0:52:47 > 0:52:51is absolutely... For The Record, I'm sure it's fine and the horses
0:52:51 > 0:52:56are the Bennett. Today, they look confused. John Redwood, what do you
0:52:56 > 0:53:01make of what the backbencher said? Were you in the house? Did you hear
0:53:01 > 0:53:05what he said? I heard what he said, but I was coming to Question Time.
0:53:05 > 0:53:08He said he had been threatened by Number Ten and told yesterday that
0:53:08 > 0:53:11the Prime Minister would look upon it dimly if he went ahead with the
0:53:11 > 0:53:15debate. He said, I may just be a little council house lad from a
0:53:15 > 0:53:19poor background, but that background gives me backbone. I was
0:53:19 > 0:53:24offered incentive and reward and then it was ratcheted until last
0:53:24 > 0:53:28night I was threatened. What is that about? Is he telling the
0:53:29 > 0:53:32truth? This is an insider whip story. Who knows what would say
0:53:32 > 0:53:38when they are trying to persuade somebody to do something they don't
0:53:38 > 0:53:42want to do? Why were they so fussed about it? I don't know, I think the
0:53:42 > 0:53:46right answer has been reached. I have always hated animal cruelty. I
0:53:46 > 0:53:50think it is wrong to take big cats and try and tame them in cages. It
0:53:50 > 0:53:54is not a bill, it is a motion that has been passed, an instruction to
0:53:54 > 0:53:58the Government to come forward with legislation. I hope they do so. I
0:53:58 > 0:54:02hope that, perhaps by voluntary subscription, we can raise some
0:54:02 > 0:54:08money so that the animals can have a decent retirement in a safe
0:54:08 > 0:54:12location. There are not many of them, I'm pleased to say.
0:54:12 > 0:54:17according to the RSPCA. We need to think about compensation and so
0:54:17 > 0:54:21forth. A great end to this tyranny, we need to stop it. You can't talk
0:54:21 > 0:54:25out my question, what on earth is Number Ten doing directly ringing
0:54:25 > 0:54:28up a backbencher and threatening him? He says he was contacted by
0:54:28 > 0:54:34Number Ten. I don't imagine the Prime Minister himself spoke to
0:54:34 > 0:54:39this little backbencher. Let's hope it was a mistake. Why? Why are they
0:54:39 > 0:54:45so keen... After all, they didn't throw out the vote and try to vote
0:54:45 > 0:54:48the motion down. It was at the very last minute! I think there was
0:54:48 > 0:54:51intention originally to vote it down. I think it wise not to want
0:54:51 > 0:54:55Parliament has had a great day. Surely, they must have been
0:54:55 > 0:55:00something behind it? There was another agenda, why on earth would
0:55:00 > 0:55:05they be strong-armed? It's the performing elephants will be again.
0:55:05 > 0:55:10There was one news channel, I will not mention which, the one that you
0:55:10 > 0:55:20sometimes workforce... Channel 4, that is it. I had forgotten. There
0:55:20 > 0:55:21
0:55:21 > 0:55:25There was something about someone in Witney, who had an interest in
0:55:25 > 0:55:35animals in circuses or something. They denied it. I don't think it
0:55:35 > 0:55:36
0:55:36 > 0:55:39could possibly be that. Nearly has I'm delighted by today's decision.
0:55:39 > 0:55:43I spent many years in opposition tried to get a ban on wild animals
0:55:43 > 0:55:48in circuses. It's not just the performing and humiliation, it's
0:55:49 > 0:55:51also the fact that you cannot keep animals sensibly of that nature in
0:55:51 > 0:55:54conditions were you are in a travelling circus. You can't give
0:55:54 > 0:55:58them the space to exercise and perform in a natural way. I think
0:55:58 > 0:56:01it is a really good move and I'm delighted it has all-party support.
0:56:02 > 0:56:05I hope it can go forward as soon as possible that legislation.
0:56:05 > 0:56:10woman up there, then I'll come to you. While I think it's a nice
0:56:10 > 0:56:13thing that they have voted against animals being in circuses, why are
0:56:13 > 0:56:16we wasting so much time and money on discussing things like this when
0:56:16 > 0:56:22there are so many bigger issues, like the stuff we have talked about
0:56:22 > 0:56:28tonight, that is supposed to be voted in Parliament? We voted them
0:56:28 > 0:56:32in, not animals. Just to be clear, the motion this afternoon was
0:56:32 > 0:56:35raised by a backbench committee. We allow time in the House of Commons
0:56:35 > 0:56:41to allow backbenchers to decide what to debate, it is their choice.
0:56:41 > 0:56:48It did follow a big debate on hospitals of great interest to us.
0:56:48 > 0:56:51You, sir? Did the same wing threatened David Cameron on the 50%
0:56:51 > 0:56:55U-turn on prison sentences? I don't think he would have done. I think
0:56:55 > 0:56:58it's very important to the animals concerned, I think they would think
0:56:58 > 0:57:02it is important. If we think that animals should not be caged for
0:57:02 > 0:57:07people's enjoyment, why should we not go one further and talk about
0:57:07 > 0:57:11zoos as well? A brief point for new question are can I just agree with
0:57:11 > 0:57:16Mr Redwood? I think it's been a fantastic day in Parliament. The
0:57:16 > 0:57:19Bill before was about children, children's heart surgery. The
0:57:19 > 0:57:24stopping and thinking a little bit more about that consultation
0:57:24 > 0:57:34process. But children and animals all in one day, today was a great
0:57:34 > 0:57:36
0:57:36 > 0:57:40day in Parliament. Democracy at its Well, we have to free these caged
0:57:40 > 0:57:50animals on the panel now. Question Time is going to be in Birmingham
0:57:50 > 0:57:57
0:57:57 > 0:58:01next week. The week after that we My thanks to all of our panellists