08/12/2011

Download Subtitles

Transcript

0:00:01 > 0:00:05First it was six weeks to save the euro, then 10 days, and now we are

0:00:05 > 0:00:14told 24 hours. We are on tenterhooks here in the King's Hall,

0:00:14 > 0:00:19Stoke-on-Trent. Welcome to Question Time.

0:00:19 > 0:00:24With me on the panel, Simon Wolfson, the boss of the high street chain

0:00:24 > 0:00:29Next, which has a turnover of several billion pounds a year. The

0:00:29 > 0:00:34Conservative MP and former banker, Claire Perry, historian and Labour

0:00:34 > 0:00:44MP Tristram Hunt, Mehdi Hasan of the New Statesman, and Constance

0:00:44 > 0:00:53

0:00:53 > 0:00:59Briscoe, one of Britain's first Thank you very much. The first

0:00:59 > 0:01:07question from Mike Petty. Does David Cameron have the necessary

0:01:07 > 0:01:11bulldog spirit to deal with the euro crisis? Mehdi Hasan? No, but

0:01:11 > 0:01:14not for the reason you think. I will come on in a moment to why I

0:01:14 > 0:01:19think he should not be going with a bulldog spirit to Brussels. He

0:01:19 > 0:01:22should be going to defend British national interest, European

0:01:23 > 0:01:27interests - we are a European country - and global interests,

0:01:27 > 0:01:30because if the euro fails we are on the verge of another global

0:01:30 > 0:01:34depression. We will see massive unemployment, all sorts of chaos

0:01:34 > 0:01:40which will make the 2008 crisis look like a walk in the park.

0:01:40 > 0:01:43Cameron, however, has failed - and it is not just him, all of the

0:01:43 > 0:01:46European leaders have failed to show visionary leadership - but our

0:01:46 > 0:01:50Prime Minister in particular at this moment of crisis is busy

0:01:50 > 0:01:54dealing with domestic problems, people like Claire and backbench

0:01:54 > 0:01:58Tory MPs who are causing all sorts of problems. And the way to think

0:01:58 > 0:02:02of the eurozone crisis is to imagine a car speeding towards the

0:02:02 > 0:02:06edge of a cliff, about to drive over the edge of a cliff. Angela

0:02:06 > 0:02:09Merkel is at the wheel, driving away, firmly steering ahead,

0:02:09 > 0:02:13Nicolas Sarkozy is next to her trying to read the map and give

0:02:13 > 0:02:18advice, and our Prime Minister is bound and gagged in the boot of the

0:02:18 > 0:02:20car, with absolutely no influence on what is going on. They are not

0:02:20 > 0:02:24interested in listening to him because he has little constructive

0:02:24 > 0:02:28things to say apart from, I want things for me and my party

0:02:28 > 0:02:33otherwise I am not going to play. Does he not have a veto? Isn't the

0:02:33 > 0:02:39implication that if they would all 27 to agree, he has a veto?

0:02:39 > 0:02:44don't know if he does. Do you think so? It depends what they come up

0:02:44 > 0:02:48with tomorrow. If one Britain against 26 other countries tries to

0:02:48 > 0:02:52operate a veto that blocks idyll, they will go ahead without us. The

0:02:52 > 0:02:55problem is that we have a Prime Minister who has not gone with any

0:02:55 > 0:02:58constructive mindset. They are not stupid in Brussels. Everyone is

0:02:58 > 0:03:01trying to sort out the biggest crisis in modern history and we

0:03:01 > 0:03:05have a Prime Minister whose backbenchers are telling him to go

0:03:05 > 0:03:08with bulldog spirit so they can bring back holiday rights and all

0:03:08 > 0:03:12of these rights that the Tory backbench have wanted back from

0:03:12 > 0:03:17Europeans for many years. It is just not a constructive attitude --

0:03:17 > 0:03:23attitude. The thing that Britain also has is a large contribution to

0:03:23 > 0:03:25the EU. We are one of the largest contributing economies. That, as

0:03:25 > 0:03:31well as David Cameron's dogged spirit towards solving this crisis

0:03:31 > 0:03:34will mean that we have a seat at the table. What we have now is not

0:03:34 > 0:03:38a constitutional crisis politicians have talked about in dark rooms for

0:03:38 > 0:03:41years. We have an economic crisis that is threatening to put the

0:03:42 > 0:03:45world back into a very, very dark place, let alone just the British

0:03:45 > 0:03:50economy. It is absolutely right that David Cameron goes out there

0:03:50 > 0:03:53and negotiates as hard as he can, both for those 17 countries to get

0:03:53 > 0:03:58together and sort themselves out, to make that experiment that has

0:03:58 > 0:04:02been going on work, that is in everybody does no interest in this

0:04:02 > 0:04:07country. But also to say - I do not think it is just Tory backbenchers

0:04:07 > 0:04:10who want to repatriate powers from Brussels, to correct you - they are

0:04:10 > 0:04:14all sorts of rules and regulations that are strung round the necks of

0:04:14 > 0:04:18businesses across the country that have come down from Brussels, that

0:04:18 > 0:04:22business people in my constituency say they want to get rid of.

0:04:22 > 0:04:26this the right moment to do that, when the eurozone is about to

0:04:26 > 0:04:32relapse? If you are in negotiation you say, if you want something from

0:04:32 > 0:04:35us, we want something in return. What powers is he going to come

0:04:35 > 0:04:40back to the UK with on Saturday having been in these negotiations?

0:04:40 > 0:04:46What can we look forward to? should come back next week and

0:04:46 > 0:04:49discuss it. It depends. We have a group of 17 who were trying

0:04:49 > 0:04:54desperately to work out a political structure that enables them to

0:04:54 > 0:04:59function and go forwards. There is a group of 27 who need to be

0:04:59 > 0:05:04involved in a broad consensus. does Labour want? What Labour wants

0:05:05 > 0:05:09is for the eurozone to work. Just that? We want the eurozone to work

0:05:09 > 0:05:13for Britain and to work for itself. Mehdi Hasan is right, the

0:05:13 > 0:05:17consequences of a collapse in the eurozone are terrifying. It would

0:05:17 > 0:05:23not just be a 10% loss of GDP perhaps on the Continent, but here

0:05:23 > 0:05:27in the UK we would lose up to 7% of GDP if the eurozone crashers.

0:05:27 > 0:05:32Should he negotiate, or should he just agree with Merkel and Sarkozy?

0:05:32 > 0:05:37We have concerns about working-time directives, about financial

0:05:37 > 0:05:43regulations. But the way to do that is not what Cameron has done, which

0:05:43 > 0:05:47is a very antagonistic diplomatic process. Our neighbour's house is

0:05:47 > 0:05:54on fire and Cameron's response is to work out what he can steal from

0:05:54 > 0:05:59the basement. I disagree. economy is tied to theirs. This is

0:05:59 > 0:06:02in the UK national interest. In Stoke-on-Trent, you know that it is

0:06:02 > 0:06:06getting creasing the economic team difficult. That is because of the

0:06:06 > 0:06:10collapse of markets in the eurozone. -- increasingly economically

0:06:10 > 0:06:13difficult. What Cameron should be doing is working out how to make it

0:06:13 > 0:06:17better rather than going in with this little England, Essex bulldog

0:06:17 > 0:06:24spirit, what can I get from these people? Rather than thinking about

0:06:24 > 0:06:31the broader perspective of the euro economy. What is this about Essex?

0:06:31 > 0:06:36It is British bulldog, not Essex bulldog. It was a mental alignment.

0:06:36 > 0:06:39He was asked the question by an MP from Essex. There is a swathe of

0:06:39 > 0:06:45the Conservative Party in Essex, Kent, who hate the European Union

0:06:46 > 0:06:51and want to use this as an opportunity to detach us. Nonsense.

0:06:51 > 0:06:55Let me hear from the man up there. As recent figures have shown that

0:06:55 > 0:07:00the public and even the Labour Party itself have very little

0:07:00 > 0:07:03confidence in Ed Miliband and the Labour Party's record on the

0:07:03 > 0:07:07economy in general, does the Labour Party have any credibility on this

0:07:07 > 0:07:12issue at all? It has profound credibility because we have been

0:07:12 > 0:07:16proved right on the big economic questions over the last two years.

0:07:16 > 0:07:25You cannot really trust a man who would stab his brother in the back,

0:07:25 > 0:07:29can you? Let's get real. Don't come here and

0:07:29 > 0:07:35tell us it is terribly cosy when you are prepared to do various

0:07:35 > 0:07:38members of your family down. That is the first point. Secondly, in

0:07:38 > 0:07:43relation to what should David Cameron do, it is very difficult

0:07:43 > 0:07:48for him because, of course, he has two overriding objectives. The

0:07:49 > 0:07:53first is that he should not give away any more power in this country.

0:07:53 > 0:07:58The second is that he should protect the City of London. They

0:07:58 > 0:08:03are the two overriding objectives. In addition to that, he should do

0:08:03 > 0:08:10what he has done very well. He should sit, defensively, on the

0:08:10 > 0:08:15fence and encourage the 17 members of the eurozone to sort out their

0:08:15 > 0:08:20mess. They should be given every single encouragement. Surely the

0:08:20 > 0:08:24priority is the UK economy, not the City of London, not just the banks.

0:08:24 > 0:08:28You have had your say, let me finish. Having said that, we need

0:08:28 > 0:08:35to realise that we now have what is called the Merkozy miracle, in

0:08:35 > 0:08:40relation to Sarkozy and Merkel, who have issued a threat to this

0:08:40 > 0:08:46country. What they have said is that if the 27 members of the EU do

0:08:46 > 0:08:50not agree, they will go ahead with the 17 members of the eurozone.

0:08:50 > 0:08:55What would your reaction be to that? How do you think Cameron

0:08:55 > 0:09:01should react? In relation to that, Cameron should firstly make it

0:09:01 > 0:09:08absolutely clear that there should be no realignment of a treaty. We

0:09:08 > 0:09:14should not, for example, giveaway... Let me take a step back. If we have

0:09:14 > 0:09:21an alignment. What is an alignment? If we have a treaty of 17, they

0:09:21 > 0:09:24will have a strong fiscal union... Which is what Cameron says he wants.

0:09:24 > 0:09:28That is part of his problem because he has been provoked -- promoting

0:09:28 > 0:09:31that for a very long time in opposition and now that he is

0:09:31 > 0:09:38leader he has been hoisted by his own petard. What is it that you

0:09:38 > 0:09:46think he is doing right and what is he doing wrong? Is he being the

0:09:46 > 0:09:49bulldog? He cannot be a bulldog, can he. That is complete nonsense.

0:09:49 > 0:09:52Yona today in Marseilles the centre right parties got together to have

0:09:52 > 0:09:56a meeting about the euro. Guess which party was not there, the

0:09:56 > 0:10:06Conservative Party, because Cameron pull them out to win a leadership

0:10:06 > 0:10:11election. He is there at the moment, actually. He is there this evening.

0:10:11 > 0:10:19Why was he not there? Because he pulled his party out. Why? To

0:10:19 > 0:10:22appease Euro-sceptic backbenchers. I think Mehdi Hasan said something

0:10:22 > 0:10:32interesting, that they are not stupid in Brussels. I have to say I

0:10:32 > 0:10:33

0:10:33 > 0:10:36disagree with that. It was Brussels that designed this

0:10:36 > 0:10:40insane monetary system that could never have worked in the first

0:10:40 > 0:10:46place, that is unravelling before our eyes. They designed it and now

0:10:46 > 0:10:49they have got to sort out the mess. Ironically, I have to say, I

0:10:49 > 0:10:53support the Prime Minister's attempts to help them. We should be

0:10:53 > 0:10:57under no illusion as to what would happen if the euro were to unravel

0:10:57 > 0:11:00the overnight in a disorderly fashion. It would harm everyone,

0:11:00 > 0:11:04everyone in this room, every business in Britain. The reason is

0:11:04 > 0:11:09simple. Our banks have lent a lot of money to people in southern

0:11:09 > 0:11:14Europe. If those countries drop out of the euro and devalue their

0:11:14 > 0:11:19currency, our debts to them will also be devalued and they will have

0:11:19 > 0:11:23to take a right down. Those debts are our savings. We cannot afford

0:11:23 > 0:11:26to see the banking system sees up again, because if the euro

0:11:26 > 0:11:30collapses in a disorderly way, what we will see is something infinitely

0:11:30 > 0:11:34worse than what we saw when Lehman Brothers collapsed. Having said

0:11:34 > 0:11:38that, we need to face up to another profound reality, and that is that

0:11:38 > 0:11:44whilst we have got to fix this patient while it is in intensive

0:11:44 > 0:11:46care, long-term the euro cannot survive. And it cannot survive for

0:11:47 > 0:11:50a very simple reason, and that is nothing to do with the financial

0:11:50 > 0:11:55markets, it is to do with the labour markets. Over the last 10

0:11:55 > 0:12:00years, Greek wages have risen 30% relative to German wages. That

0:12:00 > 0:12:04means that they are structurally and competitive. They are locked

0:12:04 > 0:12:08into 16% unemployment, Spain into 20% on employment. Fiscal union

0:12:08 > 0:12:11will not solve that. All that it will do is to guarantee ongoing

0:12:12 > 0:12:16unemployment in southern Europe and ongoing taxation in northern Europe

0:12:16 > 0:12:26to pay the unemployment benefits. Long-term, Government has to think

0:12:26 > 0:12:30about harvesting is dismantled. -- how this thing is dismantled.

0:12:30 > 0:12:37Wolfson, you have offered �250,000 to anyone who can, but the answer

0:12:37 > 0:12:44to this question. We have 150 people here waiting to win. The

0:12:44 > 0:12:49woman in the third row and then the man behind. In answer to you, I

0:12:50 > 0:12:53wonder how David Cameron got into the boot of that car. And if he is

0:12:53 > 0:12:59in the boot, cardi come out and do what other sensible economists are

0:12:59 > 0:13:04trying to do, focus on Africa and other places? Even if we go with

0:13:04 > 0:13:12this new treaty that I am sure he will be bullied into, there is no

0:13:12 > 0:13:17guarantee it will work. What if it does not work? Then we are stuck.

0:13:17 > 0:13:22That is a vital point, because the emerging markets, India, China,

0:13:22 > 0:13:26Africa, they are interested in the UK as part of the European Union.

0:13:26 > 0:13:30We cannot succeed on the post- colonial bilateral relationships

0:13:30 > 0:13:34that this Government things it can build. We are part of a big trading

0:13:35 > 0:13:41bloc and we need to make it work. David Cameron is not doing that

0:13:41 > 0:13:44because he has to appease the Tory party. The bank has messed up the

0:13:44 > 0:13:48country in 2008, Cameron is going over there to protect the bankers

0:13:48 > 0:13:52of the City of London yet again. The area of North Staffordshire has

0:13:52 > 0:13:55been crippled. There is no manufacturing, no jobs here, and

0:13:55 > 0:14:00the last big employer, the public sector, they are battering them as

0:14:00 > 0:14:10well. I think it is a disgrace that dip -- that Europe is dragging us

0:14:10 > 0:14:12

0:14:12 > 0:14:16I speak as someone who worked in financial services 10 years ago. I

0:14:17 > 0:14:21have been sanitised by motherhood since then, so it was a long time

0:14:21 > 0:14:25ago. It is not just bankers. It is Britannia Building Society, that

0:14:25 > 0:14:30very important local business. These are financial services

0:14:30 > 0:14:34companies, all of whom are currently subject to 49 pieces of

0:14:34 > 0:14:39European regulation and legislation. What we need to do, of course we

0:14:39 > 0:14:41need to rebalance the economy. should not deregulate them and

0:14:41 > 0:14:46allow the kind of liberty is that they took advantage of them brought

0:14:46 > 0:14:52down the economy with. They should be regulated by British economists

0:14:52 > 0:14:57and politicians. We are part of the global market. You speak about

0:14:57 > 0:15:04regulation, HSBC were robbing old people have their pensions and

0:15:04 > 0:15:09their money. Nobody is accountable for that. Nobody is accountable for

0:15:09 > 0:15:19that. Why have none of the top bankers been accountable? Do you

0:15:19 > 0:15:21

0:15:21 > 0:15:25want Europe and Brussels making One at a time, please. The most

0:15:25 > 0:15:29important win macro is that every time the Conservatives talk about

0:15:29 > 0:15:37the national interest, they are really talking about the City of

0:15:37 > 0:15:40London, the same City of London that caused this crash. There was a

0:15:40 > 0:15:45report out today that the banking crash cost us five years of growth.

0:15:45 > 0:15:48For the last few weeks, we have had Conservative MPs mocking the Labour

0:15:48 > 0:15:54Party because they are funded by the trade unions. The Conservative

0:15:54 > 0:16:00Party gets 50% of its funding from the City of London. That is why it

0:16:00 > 0:16:10is their interest. If he wrong to defend the City from more taxation?

0:16:10 > 0:16:15Yes. How much taxation do they provide to the UK? The financial

0:16:15 > 0:16:18transaction tax could raise EUR59 billion. It is supported by Bill

0:16:18 > 0:16:25Gates and a lot of important people. It is a tax which would help

0:16:25 > 0:16:28prevent another crisis, and our Government wants no part of it. It

0:16:28 > 0:16:36could raise �20 billion for people in this country. That is what

0:16:36 > 0:16:42Cameron is going to stop. I wish he wouldn't. It is easy to beat the

0:16:42 > 0:16:46banks up. Sarkozy is not doing this for ideological or altruistic

0:16:46 > 0:16:52reasons, he is doing it because the British banks will end up paying

0:16:52 > 0:16:5635% of that tax. Britain will end up paying tax to Europe if that tax

0:16:56 > 0:17:04is introduced. The judge from the next another important point about

0:17:04 > 0:17:08manufacturing. Inasmuch as southern European countries' currencies are

0:17:08 > 0:17:13overvalued, Germany's currency is undervalued. Germany are

0:17:13 > 0:17:17undercutting UK prices by 15 to 20% as a result of this absurd military

0:17:17 > 0:17:22structure, which is another reason why we have to say, we need to

0:17:22 > 0:17:27think again. I will take a second question on this and come back to

0:17:27 > 0:17:31what many see as the number of the party for the Conservative Party.

0:17:31 > 0:17:41Roger Thomas has a question. If you are tweeting tonight about this,

0:17:41 > 0:17:49

0:17:49 > 0:17:54and you want to join in, remember Roger Thomas. If the EU treaty is

0:17:54 > 0:17:59amended, will David Cameron be forced to hold the referendum?

0:17:59 > 0:18:03the treaty is amended, which Angela Merkel once, will David Cameron be

0:18:03 > 0:18:08forced to hold a referendum? Claire Perry, you know what Cameron said

0:18:08 > 0:18:11in 2007, a cast-iron guarantee that he would hold a referendum on any

0:18:11 > 0:18:19EU treaty that emerges from the negotiations that were going on

0:18:19 > 0:18:23them. Will he be forced to hold one now? One of the first things hour -

0:18:23 > 0:18:28- us new backbenchers were asked to get involved with was an act of

0:18:28 > 0:18:31parliament that meant this was never David Cameron's decision. The

0:18:31 > 0:18:35decision on referendums will never be in the gift of a political party.

0:18:36 > 0:18:40It is enshrined in law that if any treaty suggests that we should

0:18:40 > 0:18:44transfer powers to Europe, which was done several times with various

0:18:44 > 0:18:49treaties over the last 20 years, it will automatically be put to a

0:18:49 > 0:18:52referendum. It is not David Cameron's decision or the decision

0:18:52 > 0:18:56of backbenchers. I have always thought a referendum would be a

0:18:56 > 0:19:00good thing, because the AV referendum was a chance for the

0:19:00 > 0:19:03British people to get involved in some complicated arguments and

0:19:03 > 0:19:08understand the facts. The problem with the debate about Europe is

0:19:08 > 0:19:14that it happens in a fact free vacuum. So you are in favour of

0:19:14 > 0:19:19one? But the problem is, or what is the question? I think we have to be

0:19:19 > 0:19:23involved in the European trading bloc. The question is, we will have

0:19:23 > 0:19:27a referendum on certain powers. Do people think it is appropriate to

0:19:27 > 0:19:30transfer power to Brussels? Not, should we be in the EU? The notion

0:19:30 > 0:19:34of saying whether we should be in or out of a trading bloc is

0:19:34 > 0:19:39redundant, but let's have the facts in front of the British people. We

0:19:39 > 0:19:42have been denied the opportunity for decades. This is why people

0:19:42 > 0:19:49have become heated about this, because they are frustrated. We

0:19:49 > 0:19:53have never had the chance to have a democratic vote. Tristram Hunt?

0:19:53 > 0:19:59Technically, there is no need for a referendum, because it would be a

0:19:59 > 0:20:07consolidation of powers within the euro 17. It will not be a transfer

0:20:07 > 0:20:12of powers from the UK to the Eurozone. The problem is, David

0:20:12 > 0:20:18Cameron pandered to the Euro- sceptic part of his party. He made

0:20:18 > 0:20:27them promises about repatriation and referendums. A nudge and a wink.

0:20:27 > 0:20:30How do you know this? I read his speeches, to my horror. He wants to

0:20:30 > 0:20:37hold on to that part of the party, so they think they will get a

0:20:37 > 0:20:41referendum. Six weeks ago, he was talking about repatriation.

0:20:41 > 0:20:46Throughout his time in terms of the leadership of the party, he said we

0:20:46 > 0:20:49sceptics at the Mansion House speech a few weeks ago. His entire

0:20:49 > 0:20:53language is hostile to Europe. This is holding his coalition together.

0:20:53 > 0:20:58It is no surprise that they think they should have a referendum. I

0:20:58 > 0:21:02would not be in favour of a referendum on this, because look at

0:21:02 > 0:21:06the situation in Greece. There was a massive crisis about the Eurozone.

0:21:06 > 0:21:11George Papandreou offered a referendum on the whole thing went

0:21:11 > 0:21:16into meltdown and it got nowhere. We need action over the next two

0:21:16 > 0:21:25days to save the Eurozone. Now is not the time for a referendum.

0:21:25 > 0:21:31agree. We do not want a battle over a referendum. You, sir? If you give

0:21:31 > 0:21:36the British people the arguments to support being pro EU, at least give

0:21:36 > 0:21:40them the credibility to understand them and make a reasoned judgment.

0:21:40 > 0:21:44The politicians do not want a referendum, because they do not

0:21:44 > 0:21:53trust us to come up with your answer. But it does not necessarily

0:21:53 > 0:21:57affect the UK. What is going on in terms of the debate tonight and

0:21:57 > 0:22:01tomorrow will not necessarily affect UK power relations. You will

0:22:01 > 0:22:05have a consolidation of powers amongst the Eurozone. We are not in

0:22:05 > 0:22:10the euro, and I agree with that. If there was a chance of joining the

0:22:10 > 0:22:14euro, then we should have the referendum. That is a seismic

0:22:14 > 0:22:18political decision. He says you will only have a referendum if you

0:22:18 > 0:22:28think you will win it. I am always interested in what the public say.

0:22:28 > 0:22:30

0:22:30 > 0:22:33But you will not let them have a vote. I will. But not now. If David

0:22:33 > 0:22:38Cameron goes to the European summit and comes back with a referendum,

0:22:38 > 0:22:47it just shows the weakness of his leadership. If we leave the inner

0:22:48 > 0:22:56sanctum of the Eurozone, we will be a weaker nation for it. We are not

0:22:56 > 0:22:59in the Eurozone. I think that is right. Which bits? What he said. I

0:22:59 > 0:23:03do not think the politicians trust us to be honest enough and

0:23:04 > 0:23:08straightforward enough to give them the sort of decision they want. If

0:23:08 > 0:23:11they do decide to hold a referendum, they will have to budget for least

0:23:11 > 0:23:16two of them because if we have the nerve to give the answer Europe

0:23:17 > 0:23:26does not like, we will have referendums until we give the

0:23:27 > 0:23:29

0:23:29 > 0:23:35Do the panel think that David Cameron ought to make a decision?

0:23:35 > 0:23:39He does not appear to want to be a part of the club. All he wants is

0:23:39 > 0:23:44the financial benefits in relation to business, but he does not want

0:23:44 > 0:23:49any benefits or any of the complications and obligations that

0:23:49 > 0:23:55go with Europe. You either want to be a member of the club, or you

0:23:55 > 0:23:59don't. Absolutely. If that is what the Prime Minister wants, or the

0:23:59 > 0:24:04financial benefits of a free market, free movement of people, free

0:24:04 > 0:24:08movement of capital, and not the absurd regulation and rules and red

0:24:08 > 0:24:15tape that go with being part of the EU, then that is the right thing to

0:24:15 > 0:24:18go for. Why should we accept a host of regulation in this country? In

0:24:18 > 0:24:24order to have the economic benefits of being part of a trade union? I

0:24:24 > 0:24:31am in favour of being part of the EU, but not in favour of the chores

0:24:31 > 0:24:35they give our industry. Before we leave this and go to another

0:24:35 > 0:24:42subject, can ask all of you, do any of you think it will be reasonable

0:24:42 > 0:24:51for the Prime Minister to come back with nothing, simply having helped

0:24:51 > 0:24:57the French and Germans restore the strength of the euro? Yes. I think

0:24:57 > 0:25:00that is probably the safest course for him. He has the Euro-sceptics

0:25:00 > 0:25:04on one side, he has the EU and his national audience. The best thing

0:25:04 > 0:25:10for him to do is to come back and say, I told them to sort out the

0:25:10 > 0:25:13mess, and they promised me they would do it, and then to appease

0:25:13 > 0:25:19Angela Merkel and Sarkozy and make sure they do not have an inner

0:25:20 > 0:25:24sanctum from the 27-15 and make sure they do not have the central

0:25:24 > 0:25:28economic bank getting involved with the 17th so that they can then buy

0:25:28 > 0:25:35bonds and have quantitative easing. Come back empty-handed, and

0:25:35 > 0:25:41everyone will be happy. A couple of things. You said people never had a

0:25:41 > 0:25:49chance. They haven't. They can vote in every general election. UKIP and

0:25:49 > 0:25:52the BNP offer a way out, and they do not get many votes. This week,

0:25:52 > 0:26:00Iain Duncan Smith said he should hold a referendum. Owen Paterson

0:26:00 > 0:26:05said we should hold a referendum, and the mayor of London said so.

0:26:05 > 0:26:09This so what? They all think it is David Cameron's decision. Downing

0:26:09 > 0:26:13Street has been slapping them down or wick. I'm at tonight that there

0:26:13 > 0:26:20is a Conservative MP and a Conservative peer. No cabinet

0:26:20 > 0:26:23members. They know they cannot come out here and say no referendum. The

0:26:23 > 0:26:28Prime Minister dabbled in all this rubbish. The one thing that

0:26:28 > 0:26:38everyone here would ask that you guys do is to pull together and get

0:26:38 > 0:26:39

0:26:39 > 0:26:47us through this. Absolutely right. And Tristram, get your leader to

0:26:47 > 0:26:54stop yapping like a little poodle. I do not think that is fair. Well,

0:26:54 > 0:27:01you wouldn't. Not in public. private. Your leader wants to go

0:27:01 > 0:27:06into the euro. Ed focused on the political crisis that David Cameron

0:27:06 > 0:27:09faces this week. It is find that he comes back with nothing and he has

0:27:09 > 0:27:15helped our European partners and shown he is a good European, but

0:27:15 > 0:27:20instead, he has made promise after promise that he will use any treaty

0:27:20 > 0:27:29renegotiation to repatriate powers. Here is a treat you renegotiation,

0:27:29 > 0:27:33Prime Minister. Referring to Mehdi Hasan, we were supposedly given the

0:27:33 > 0:27:38opportunity of a vote on Europe in a general election as soon as the

0:27:38 > 0:27:42party who got in power -- as soon as the party got in power, it was

0:27:42 > 0:27:47dropped. Let me agree with what you were saying. It is extraordinary

0:27:47 > 0:27:51that we have had this conversation about the euro, and three of our

0:27:51 > 0:27:59panellists have spent more time talking about party leaders and the

0:27:59 > 0:28:04currency. To be fair, that was what we were asked. We will take a brief

0:28:04 > 0:28:09break and divert to Liam Hodgkinson. Is it right for the Government to

0:28:09 > 0:28:12double deal -- to double up the Olympic ceremonies budget? It was

0:28:12 > 0:28:16announced this week that the budget for the Olympic Games

0:28:16 > 0:28:21controversially increased by �40 million, enough to pay for 1000

0:28:21 > 0:28:25teachers, I am told, or double the grant they gave this year to end of

0:28:25 > 0:28:30life care in the hospices. Constance, do you think it is

0:28:30 > 0:28:34right? No, this is another example of the extraordinary waste that the

0:28:34 > 0:28:39Government is prepared to get into, wasting taxpayers' money. They set

0:28:39 > 0:28:49a budget, they go beyond it and then glibly say, we are going to

0:28:49 > 0:28:53

0:28:53 > 0:28:58increase it. It is scandalous. That is my view. Simon? And the eyes of

0:28:58 > 0:29:02the world will be turned on Britain when the Olympics come up. Over 1

0:29:02 > 0:29:12billion people will be watching. The thing they will focus on most

0:29:12 > 0:29:12

0:29:12 > 0:29:18are the opening and closing ceremonies. It strikes me as

0:29:18 > 0:29:22extraordinarily penny-pinching to say that we are prepared to have a

0:29:22 > 0:29:25second great Olympics and for the world to see its like that for the

0:29:25 > 0:29:29sake of what sounds like a lot of money, but in the context of the

0:29:29 > 0:29:35government spending �600 billion, is a drop in the ocean. What do we

0:29:35 > 0:29:40want the world to think of us? We have four powers to tell the world

0:29:41 > 0:29:44what Britain is about, and we are not prepared to spend �40 million?

0:29:44 > 0:29:48When they draw up the budget, they knew precisely what the cost would

0:29:48 > 0:29:53be for a first rate Olympics. What it is suggesting, that we

0:29:53 > 0:29:56negotiated something that was second or third rate? So you think

0:29:56 > 0:30:06it was sleight-of-hand that they would not let us know at the

0:30:06 > 0:30:08

0:30:08 > 0:30:13beginning? That is what is being Britain is not about singing,

0:30:13 > 0:30:16dancing and fireworks. There is more to us than that and we are in

0:30:17 > 0:30:23tight financial times. Surely we should be showing that we can pull

0:30:23 > 0:30:29our belt him. How would you start the Olympic Games? Just by having

0:30:29 > 0:30:33the 100 metres final? Simon Wolfson says it is penny pinching. What is

0:30:33 > 0:30:37penny pinching is that Stoke-on- Trent council have closed the gym

0:30:37 > 0:30:41to save �50,000, when hundreds of people who are disadvantaged and

0:30:41 > 0:30:51overweight could join for free. How many more of those Nationwide will

0:30:51 > 0:30:54

0:30:54 > 0:30:58have to close so that we can have What I was going to say is that you

0:30:58 > 0:31:01talk about penny pinching and I agree with the gentleman down there.

0:31:01 > 0:31:06�40 million might be a drop in the ocean in terms of the Government

0:31:06 > 0:31:11budget, but it is a huge amount of money. Think about 1000 teachers. I

0:31:11 > 0:31:14am a trainee teacher. Maybe not 1000 teachers, the 1000 support

0:31:14 > 0:31:19workers who do a vital job in schools, lots of those jobs are

0:31:19 > 0:31:23going. That is hurting the education system in this country.

0:31:23 > 0:31:33�40 million to people on low income is a massive amount of money. A

0:31:33 > 0:31:38

0:31:38 > 0:31:42massive amount of money. Claire Perry, do you support this? As I

0:31:42 > 0:31:45caught the very good train service to Stoke, there is a big clock in

0:31:45 > 0:31:49Trafalgar Square that ticks down to the Olympics and I noticed it was

0:31:49 > 0:31:53265 days left. It will be a fantastic event. The eyes of the

0:31:53 > 0:31:58world will be on us. Like the royal wedding, we do is incredibly well

0:31:58 > 0:32:02and it is good for our economy. But in some cases, I agree. When money

0:32:02 > 0:32:07is tight, surely the thing to do is to say, that is the amount of money

0:32:07 > 0:32:10we have, how far can we make it stretch? Could you not go to

0:32:10 > 0:32:15suppliers and say, let's get together, this is great for Britain.

0:32:15 > 0:32:18How about we get those double- decker buses for free? I want every

0:32:18 > 0:32:23penny to be spent incredibly carefully and wisely at the current

0:32:23 > 0:32:26time. It might be a good investment, we can look after the event, but I

0:32:26 > 0:32:35am disappointed that at this late stage we're chucking more money at

0:32:35 > 0:32:42it. Has anyone come to Next asking for money? We are sponsoring the

0:32:42 > 0:32:45opening and closing but I am not allowed to say that on TV. If you

0:32:45 > 0:32:50are sponsoring the opening and closing that explains why you think

0:32:50 > 0:32:55it is the important part of the Olympics! We are sponsoring it

0:32:55 > 0:32:59because we think it is important. You are one of the Chancellor's

0:32:59 > 0:33:02biggest cheer leaders when it comes to cuts. A year ago you wrote to

0:33:02 > 0:33:07the Telegraph saying the cuts were important, would revive the economy,

0:33:07 > 0:33:10it would not damage the recovery. You were wrong. You wrote that

0:33:10 > 0:33:14calling for cuts and then use a �40 million is a drop in the ocean and

0:33:14 > 0:33:18penny pinching, when public services are being closed,

0:33:18 > 0:33:21teachers' pay, all of these issues. I do not understand how the Prime

0:33:21 > 0:33:26Minister can tell us about austerity and the need to share the

0:33:26 > 0:33:30pain, etc, and when he is shown a video, as he was earlier this week

0:33:30 > 0:33:33and he says, I do not like that, yes we will go to �41 million extra

0:33:33 > 0:33:38at the drop of a hat. The money is always there when you need to find

0:33:38 > 0:33:41it. �41 million for the Olympics, �4 billion a year for Afghanistan,

0:33:41 > 0:33:51but when it comes to the public sector workers and the poorest

0:33:51 > 0:33:54

0:33:54 > 0:33:57people, it is never a drop in the As part of the Government cuts,

0:33:57 > 0:34:02they cut school sports funding which was part of the Olympic

0:34:02 > 0:34:09legacy. I cannot understand how they justify spending an extra �40

0:34:09 > 0:34:13million on a glorified party. The people of this great city have

0:34:13 > 0:34:18raised a very good point in terms of the reductions that we have had

0:34:18 > 0:34:28to take in terms of funding across the city. It seems to me like a

0:34:28 > 0:34:30

0:34:30 > 0:34:36case of one rule for Government and Tristram Hunt, this is your

0:34:36 > 0:34:40constituency. Without bidding for their vote, an irresistible

0:34:40 > 0:34:44temptation, what is your view on the �40 million extra being spent

0:34:44 > 0:34:48on the Olympic opening? I would not have so much of a problem if some

0:34:48 > 0:34:53of that �40 million came to Stoke- on-Trent on May 30th and May 31st

0:34:53 > 0:34:58next year when we have the flame come through the city and we will

0:34:58 > 0:35:01show off to the world. I ask you not to do that! There is a very

0:35:01 > 0:35:08brilliant book called austerity Olympics about the last time the

0:35:08 > 0:35:13Olympics was in London in 1948. It was after World War II. And about

0:35:13 > 0:35:18how they created a brilliant account of Britain, how they ran an

0:35:18 > 0:35:21absolutely brilliant Olympics on a shoestring. They celebrated the

0:35:21 > 0:35:26spirit of Britain very successfully, celebrated the spirit of

0:35:26 > 0:35:29Commonwealth very successfully by cleverly managing it. There is this

0:35:29 > 0:35:33lovely quote, we have no money, therefore we will have to think.

0:35:33 > 0:35:37That is what I wish the Olympics would do, because they are throwing

0:35:37 > 0:35:46money around. You can see it in London and it is a total waste of

0:35:46 > 0:35:50money. I would much rather have a smart, stylish, sophisticated,

0:35:50 > 0:35:56clever Olympics, than the bloated when we are having. Because we will

0:35:56 > 0:36:00not be able to outdo Beijing. This is going to be a different Olympics.

0:36:00 > 0:36:04And why would we want to? Most opening and closing ceremonies are

0:36:04 > 0:36:14deeply over the top and vulgar and excessive. A couple more points

0:36:14 > 0:36:14

0:36:14 > 0:36:18from the audience. Have you spoken already? No. Britain's

0:36:18 > 0:36:22international image, more reserved, uptight and modest, is not really

0:36:22 > 0:36:28showing what Britain is, if we are going to start saying we are all

0:36:28 > 0:36:31dancing and high-flying. It just shows the world we are not being

0:36:31 > 0:36:37responsible, especially since 2012 is meant to be the worst financial

0:36:37 > 0:36:44year before we get back to 2008 levels in 2013. But people are

0:36:44 > 0:36:53excited about the Olympics. Who has got Olympic tickets? Who has got

0:36:53 > 0:36:58Olympic tickets? MPs, civil servants... I applied like everyone

0:36:58 > 0:37:03else online and I got the weightlifting. I am very excited.

0:37:03 > 0:37:08We got the wrestling. I went into the bidding for Olympic tickets and

0:37:09 > 0:37:15could not get them. But I am a Londoner Olympics ambassador.

0:37:15 > 0:37:20is going to be another round of tickets, I hope. I am going to be a

0:37:20 > 0:37:28London Olympics ambassador, and I have seen a lot of the plans they

0:37:29 > 0:37:33have made for the Olympic park itself. Personally, I do not think

0:37:33 > 0:37:3940,000 is enough. I think it is way too much. I think it is a vanity

0:37:39 > 0:37:45project. What are you going to do as ambassador? Meeting and greeting

0:37:45 > 0:37:54foreign dignitaries. What, in that uniform with the stripes? No. We

0:37:54 > 0:38:01have not seen the uniforms yet. Have you seen it? No, but I know

0:38:01 > 0:38:09that it involves a trilby. We had better move on. I have lost my

0:38:09 > 0:38:14questions. Here we are. Has Britain become less compassionate towards

0:38:14 > 0:38:21the unemployed? This is a question, I think, based on this report that

0:38:21 > 0:38:25came out this week, which show that whereas in 1983, these questions

0:38:25 > 0:38:32have been asked every year since then, 35% of people thought

0:38:32 > 0:38:35unemployment benefits were too high. But now, 54% of Britain believes

0:38:35 > 0:38:40unemployment benefits are too high and that it discourages the

0:38:40 > 0:38:44unemployed from finding jobs. That was the finding. So have we become

0:38:44 > 0:38:50a less compassionate society towards the unemployed? Claire

0:38:50 > 0:38:54Perry. One of the statistics I thought was very positive this week

0:38:54 > 0:38:58was that giving to charities is at record levels. More people are

0:38:58 > 0:39:02giving to charity than at any other time, so why do not think we are

0:39:02 > 0:39:06having compassion fatigue. What I think we are seeing is that people

0:39:06 > 0:39:09are sick to death of a something for nothing culture, whether it is

0:39:09 > 0:39:14bankers at the top, or benefit scroungers at the bottom, people

0:39:14 > 0:39:17are fed up with that. But if you are on jobseeker's allowance,

0:39:17 > 0:39:22getting �67.50 a week, that is not a huge amount of money. The problem

0:39:22 > 0:39:26is that people get left on benefits for a really long time, not enough

0:39:26 > 0:39:30effort is made to get them back to work. In this constituency,

0:39:30 > 0:39:34unemployment has been going up essentially for years, as the jobs

0:39:34 > 0:39:37are harder and harder to come by it. But I think people are fed up with

0:39:37 > 0:39:41the notion that you can sit on benefits your whole life. We have

0:39:41 > 0:39:45to get people back into work and show that we are doing things in a

0:39:45 > 0:39:49compassionate and a fair way. Mehdi Hasan, people like you attack us

0:39:49 > 0:39:54every week for being somehow heartless and mean. We have

0:39:54 > 0:39:58operated benefits back over 5% so that pensioners will get more in

0:39:58 > 0:40:01their pension pots this year than ever before and unemployed people

0:40:01 > 0:40:06will see benefits go up. Those are people really struggling at the

0:40:06 > 0:40:09moment. Do you think the majority of people in this country,

0:40:09 > 0:40:14according to this survey, are wrong to think that unemployment benefits

0:40:14 > 0:40:19are too high and discourage people from finding jobs? There is a trap

0:40:19 > 0:40:22in the system where if you go on to benefits and you lose your job, the

0:40:22 > 0:40:26system traps you. The welfare state has stopped being a trampoline and

0:40:26 > 0:40:31has started to be a mattress that smothers UN keeps you in there for

0:40:32 > 0:40:36ever. If you're a single mum with kids, it is very difficult to go

0:40:36 > 0:40:40out to work. Right now, you lose childcare benefits very early on in

0:40:40 > 0:40:45the work process. It is difficult to find flexible work. We make it

0:40:45 > 0:40:49really hard for people to get off benefits. I do not think that is

0:40:49 > 0:40:58right at all. I think we spend far too much time subsidising people

0:40:58 > 0:41:03who really do not want to work. That is the first point. All right?

0:41:03 > 0:41:07In this country we have a something for nothing attitude. The disparity

0:41:07 > 0:41:16between those who go out to work and those who stay at work is not

0:41:16 > 0:41:19significant enough. And we have got to why isn't up. -- we have to wise

0:41:19 > 0:41:23up. My view is that too many people are on benefits and they can go out

0:41:24 > 0:41:27to work, and we should encourage them to do so. This malarkey about,

0:41:27 > 0:41:32this is really terrible and we need to soak them into this big sponge

0:41:32 > 0:41:36paid for by the taxpayer, I'm afraid that is nonsense. People who

0:41:36 > 0:41:40genuinely cannot work should be assisted and helped. There are

0:41:40 > 0:41:45plenty of those about. Having said that, there are others who choose

0:41:45 > 0:41:54not to work and we should find them and encourage them to go out to

0:41:54 > 0:41:59work. How many? I have no idea. Your other politician. You tell me.

0:41:59 > 0:42:04I do not think it is so much the six to �7.50 on jobseeker's

0:42:04 > 0:42:08allowance that is the problem, it is the cost of living, the rent of

0:42:08 > 0:42:13�400 or �500 a month when the average wage in this area is

0:42:13 > 0:42:17something like �12,000 a year. We have housing costs spiralling out

0:42:17 > 0:42:22of control because there is not enough for affordable accommodation

0:42:22 > 0:42:26for people. And the housing stock that is empty, about 90% of that is

0:42:26 > 0:42:30privately owned and the Government can do nothing about that. That is

0:42:30 > 0:42:33where the problem needs to be sorted out. What is your reaction

0:42:33 > 0:42:38to the finding that a majority of people think unemployment benefit

0:42:38 > 0:42:44is too high and is stopping people working? I think they do not

0:42:44 > 0:42:48realise. I am actually of the view that if you take your jobseeker's

0:42:48 > 0:42:54allowance and the council tax and your living costs, your rent or

0:42:54 > 0:42:59mortgage, I think everyone should work for a couple or three days a

0:42:59 > 0:43:04week. If you look at �500 a month, plus benefit, plus council tax,

0:43:04 > 0:43:06probably a couple of days a week, it comes to the minimum wage. If

0:43:06 > 0:43:12the Government set up manufacturing tab companies and people could work

0:43:12 > 0:43:16there, get people back into work, but give people some skills as well.

0:43:16 > 0:43:26You are saying people do not want to work. I know loads of people on

0:43:26 > 0:43:28

0:43:28 > 0:43:36benefit who want to work but there Why is it that working tax credit

0:43:36 > 0:43:41has been frozen and yet jobseeker's allowance is to be increased by

0:43:41 > 0:43:475.2%, if you want to encourage people to work? You think there was

0:43:47 > 0:43:50a bad decision. I think you want to make every single move possible in

0:43:50 > 0:43:55terms of the tax and benefit system to make sure people are doing the

0:43:55 > 0:43:59right thing, which is what working tax credits was about. It was about

0:43:59 > 0:44:03supporting those on low wages to go to work and to stay in work, rather

0:44:03 > 0:44:08than having a lifetime on benefits. This is a particular problem with

0:44:08 > 0:44:12generations of workless people. Those who were out of work in the

0:44:12 > 0:44:15minds in the steel industry in the 1980s and were stuck on incapacity

0:44:15 > 0:44:20benefits, and their children and grandchildren have not worked. We

0:44:20 > 0:44:24need all of those Brits back into work. The problem is, as the lady

0:44:24 > 0:44:27suggested at the back, what we do not have at the moment is a growing

0:44:27 > 0:44:31economy for jobs, either in the manufacturing sector all the

0:44:31 > 0:44:35services sector, which will provide an avenue towards that. We need the

0:44:35 > 0:44:40tax and benefit system to work to help people get into work, but we

0:44:40 > 0:44:47also needed jobs. What do you say about the 5.2% being given to those

0:44:47 > 0:44:50on unemployment benefit, that it distorted... I think the system is

0:44:50 > 0:44:55flawed, because what happened was they take one month's inflation

0:44:55 > 0:44:59figure of 5.2% and they apply that for the entirety of benefits for

0:44:59 > 0:45:04the next year. They should take the year-long Abridge and apply that.

0:45:04 > 0:45:08You would have endorsed a lower figure. Yes, I would have endorsed

0:45:08 > 0:45:12a lower figure to make sure it was more competitive to work. But I

0:45:13 > 0:45:22would not have attacked working tax credits. The Chancellor is too

0:45:23 > 0:45:29

0:45:29 > 0:45:37generous. My point is more nuanced Our unemployment benefits too high,

0:45:37 > 0:45:42or our wages to low? -- is it that unemployment benefits are too high,

0:45:42 > 0:45:45or is it that wages are too low? I know people who say, why should I

0:45:45 > 0:45:49go to work and lose my benefit for �10 a week more? There is no

0:45:49 > 0:45:54incentive for some people. It is the system that needs overhauling.

0:45:54 > 0:46:03We are told it will be overhauled by successive governments, and it

0:46:03 > 0:46:08never is. Explain more - do people come to you looking for a dog and

0:46:08 > 0:46:12then say, why should I work? Yes, because when I say the wages I can

0:46:12 > 0:46:16offer them, they will lose all their benefit. I can't offer them a

0:46:16 > 0:46:19wage they might want or need, but it is so close to the benefit that

0:46:19 > 0:46:27there is no incentive for them to come, because they lose everything.

0:46:27 > 0:46:31Why should they lose everything? Just when they are keen to go to

0:46:31 > 0:46:39work, and if they get into work, they will advance themselves, but

0:46:39 > 0:46:47they lose everything. So you would lower the benefits are so that work

0:46:47 > 0:46:52pays better? The instead of losing all the benefits, lose some of them.

0:46:52 > 0:46:57I totally agree. All the parties who look at this subject agree that

0:46:57 > 0:47:03there is an incentive issue. So why don't they do something about it?

0:47:03 > 0:47:09Let me come in on a factual point and the original question about

0:47:09 > 0:47:16unemployment benefit. I wonder how many people who were told the

0:47:16 > 0:47:21unemployment benefit of �67.50 then thought it was generous. There is a

0:47:21 > 0:47:26lot of misinformation in this debate. A lot of housing benefit

0:47:26 > 0:47:30goes to people in work. It does not just go to jobless people. It is

0:47:30 > 0:47:35for people in work on low wages who cannot afford to get by. Constance

0:47:35 > 0:47:41thinks people are just sitting on sponges, but she does not know how

0:47:41 > 0:47:50many. I am not a politician. Then you should not make generalisations.

0:47:50 > 0:47:54You are avoiding the question. I am answering the question. We are

0:47:54 > 0:47:58compassionate to unemployed people because there are 2.7 million

0:47:58 > 0:48:02unemployed people in this country, a 17 year high. There are 500

0:48:02 > 0:48:12people chasing every job. People here are saying they should go out

0:48:12 > 0:48:15

0:48:15 > 0:48:19and get work. How do you squeeze five people into one job? Simon

0:48:19 > 0:48:23Wilson, I do not know -- Simon Wolfson, I don't know how many

0:48:23 > 0:48:27people you employ, but what is your view of this? I agree with Mehdi.

0:48:27 > 0:48:33In my experience, there are far more people applying for jobs than

0:48:33 > 0:48:39there are jobs to give. Of course, Constance, there are people who

0:48:39 > 0:48:42play the system. And the system played more than any other is

0:48:42 > 0:48:45disability benefits rather than employment benefits. But to say

0:48:45 > 0:48:51that piperade deliberately staying unemployed because they have the

0:48:51 > 0:48:54luxury of �67.50 a week to spend is absurd. It is absolutely absurd and

0:48:54 > 0:48:58it is not in touch with reality. A lot of people are looking for jobs,

0:48:58 > 0:49:03and there are not enough jobs to go round. That will remain the

0:49:03 > 0:49:06situation for quite some time. We need to make sure the government

0:49:06 > 0:49:10routes out the people who are taking advantage of the system,

0:49:10 > 0:49:13because they are taking money away from those who deserve it. Then we

0:49:13 > 0:49:17have to make sure that people who are unemployed are getting enough

0:49:17 > 0:49:22money so that they can feed themselves and look after

0:49:22 > 0:49:28themselves. But don't we also need a proper industrial and economic

0:49:28 > 0:49:34strategy to grow the economy and bringing jobs? But we are talking

0:49:34 > 0:49:37about benefits at the moment. gentleman's point is spot-on. It

0:49:37 > 0:49:41should always be that work pays more than being on benefits, and

0:49:41 > 0:49:46right now we have disincentives where if people go to work, they

0:49:46 > 0:49:50lose too much. It is another politician's promise, but we should

0:49:50 > 0:49:54have more cross-party consensus on this, getting people into work.

0:49:54 > 0:50:00This is what we are planning to do with the universal credit, so that

0:50:00 > 0:50:06work always pays more than being on benefits. I want to hear from

0:50:06 > 0:50:10members of our audience. The woman up there? I was just going to say,

0:50:10 > 0:50:13you say there are no jobs or very few, but there are, it is just that

0:50:14 > 0:50:21you have to look for them and there is no incentive to look for them.

0:50:21 > 0:50:25The minimum wage for a student is �3 or something. A job I used to

0:50:25 > 0:50:30have, because it was a few hours, they would give me small hours, so

0:50:30 > 0:50:34whatever I earned, I would pay in expenses just to get there. So I

0:50:34 > 0:50:40did not see the point in going. the gentleman over there? I do

0:50:40 > 0:50:44believe there are jobs. I manage a company in Stoke-on-Trent, and we

0:50:44 > 0:50:49have doubled the workforce in the last year. But unfortunate leak, a

0:50:50 > 0:50:54lot of people do not stick around. For every four people we take on,

0:50:54 > 0:50:58only one or two remain after six months. These are a young people of

0:50:58 > 0:51:0317 and 18 who should be relishing the opportunity. It is not clear-

0:51:03 > 0:51:11cut. What kind of business are you? A manufacturing company. That is

0:51:11 > 0:51:15part of the cultural legacy of worklessness. You, sir? This is a

0:51:15 > 0:51:19symptom of failing government policy, year on year. Instead of

0:51:19 > 0:51:22quantitative easing and putting billions of pounds into the banks

0:51:22 > 0:51:29for them to save for a rainy day, they should invest in local

0:51:29 > 0:51:34businesses. Like the gentleman at the front said, they should make it

0:51:34 > 0:51:39a more affordable way to increase wages and incentivise people to

0:51:39 > 0:51:45work. Then the circle of prosperity returns. A couple more questions?

0:51:45 > 0:51:48The woman in red? Even if hundreds of jobs were made, it is not fair

0:51:49 > 0:51:52on young people. People at the age of 17 are getting turned down for

0:51:52 > 0:51:58lack of experience. How do you expect young people to gain

0:51:58 > 0:52:01experience if you are not giving us a chance? As well as the cuts in

0:52:01 > 0:52:05the educational maintenance allowance. Would it not be better

0:52:05 > 0:52:15to stop forcing older people to work longer to free up jobs for the

0:52:15 > 0:52:17

0:52:17 > 0:52:23younger people? OK. A lot of people have hands up, but I want to move

0:52:23 > 0:52:26on. We have a question from Liz Fletcher. Does the lack of

0:52:26 > 0:52:31recognition in female sporting achievement in the BBC Sports

0:52:31 > 0:52:34personality awards reflect sexist reporting practices in the media?

0:52:35 > 0:52:38This was a big story about the failure of any women to come

0:52:38 > 0:52:42through to the personality awards, but also at a time when people are

0:52:42 > 0:52:45talking about women's role in business and in public life, the

0:52:45 > 0:52:53number of women who appear on Question Time panels, all sorts of

0:52:53 > 0:52:59things. Constance Briscoe? It was regrettable that there were no

0:52:59 > 0:53:05women in that award, but it is typical. Unfortunately, that is

0:53:05 > 0:53:09what we should expect at the moment. It seems to me that you have a role

0:53:09 > 0:53:13in the media if you are, for example, very pretty and of a

0:53:13 > 0:53:18certain age, and it is early in the morning, you get attractive women

0:53:18 > 0:53:25as presenters. As the day rolls on, you get people like me of a certain

0:53:25 > 0:53:29age that they do not want, because we are past our sell-by date.

0:53:29 > 0:53:35pleaded with you to come! We are delighted to have you. And I am

0:53:35 > 0:53:41delightful to be here. delighted. But having said that, if

0:53:41 > 0:53:51you are a bloke of a certain age, you do not have a sell-by date. The

0:53:51 > 0:53:53

0:53:53 > 0:53:57I don't know about that! It is a bit like a good bottle of wine,

0:53:57 > 0:54:02they just get better and better with age, whereas if you are a

0:54:02 > 0:54:06woman, you have no chance. The serious point is, it really is

0:54:06 > 0:54:11about time that there were more women, not just in the media, but

0:54:11 > 0:54:15dealing with serious issues during peak times during the day.

0:54:15 > 0:54:22Sometimes I do think I would much prefer to be an elderly white

0:54:22 > 0:54:30gentleman aged around 70, because I would have more opportunities.

0:54:30 > 0:54:35Claire Perry, it was not the BBC who chose these. It was editors of

0:54:35 > 0:54:39sporting newspapers. They at is a bit of an excuse. I have two

0:54:39 > 0:54:43daughters, and one of the hardest things is to get teenage girls to

0:54:43 > 0:54:49go out and exercise and play team sports. Little boys have no problem

0:54:49 > 0:54:55playing football, but getting girls to do anything is difficult. Who

0:54:55 > 0:55:01here knew that we have a world- beating women's cricket team at the

0:55:01 > 0:55:11moment, or that the women's rugby team of world-class? It is never

0:55:11 > 0:55:11

0:55:11 > 0:55:17reported. There are amazing women out there. I have seen the women

0:55:17 > 0:55:22competing. One of the most depressing images is the fantastic

0:55:22 > 0:55:27cyclists and swimmers we have have to pose ins Dante underwear shots

0:55:27 > 0:55:32to get any sort of -- they have to pose in scanty underwear shots to

0:55:32 > 0:55:39get any recognition. It is appalling. The BBC should cover the

0:55:39 > 0:55:43fantastic women's sporting events we have out there. Simon, just

0:55:43 > 0:55:47under 14% of FTSE 100 poor positions are held by women. What

0:55:47 > 0:55:52is your take on women's role? You have heard the comment about 73-

0:55:52 > 0:55:57year-old men who can stay in work. One day, you will be 73 and you

0:55:57 > 0:56:01might be in a job. I do not agree with Constanze, because I do not

0:56:01 > 0:56:05think the media is representative of the whole of society. In my

0:56:05 > 0:56:10business, we have a huge number of senior female executives who are

0:56:10 > 0:56:14picked entirely on merit. In the law, you must see that women are

0:56:14 > 0:56:17being picked on merit. But the world is changing. If you look at

0:56:18 > 0:56:24the main board of the company I work for, there is one woman on the

0:56:24 > 0:56:27board. On the layer beneath that of 22 directors, nine are women. That

0:56:27 > 0:56:32reflects that women in the workplace are beginning to be

0:56:32 > 0:56:36treated not just as equals, but are being -- being promoted on the

0:56:36 > 0:56:40basis of merit, which is right and makes good business sense. You

0:56:40 > 0:56:50would be an insane business not to promote the best person, whatever

0:56:50 > 0:56:51

0:56:51 > 0:56:56colour, race, creed or sex they are. Why has it taken so long? Unlike

0:56:56 > 0:57:01Constance, I have never wanted to be a 73-year-old white man, but I

0:57:01 > 0:57:07understand the point. No disrespect, David. There are advantages for

0:57:08 > 0:57:15certain sections of the population. Sport, media and business are male

0:57:15 > 0:57:23dominated areas. I did not realise it was 27 publications which chose

0:57:23 > 0:57:30the award nominees, and all of the editors are men. That included Nuts

0:57:30 > 0:57:34and Zoo magazine, well-known sporting publications(!) The

0:57:34 > 0:57:38Manchester Evening News chose Patrick Vieira, who is retired,

0:57:38 > 0:57:43while Rebecca Adlington lost by one vote getting on the shortlist. The

0:57:43 > 0:57:47only way you will change things, which might be unpopular to say, is

0:57:47 > 0:57:51through quotas and positive discrimination. We don't like to

0:57:51 > 0:57:57say it, but that is the only way you get progress, otherwise we have

0:57:58 > 0:58:01these discussions year after year. As I remembered, the last female to

0:58:01 > 0:58:05win Sports Personality of the Year was Paul Zara Phillips, and the

0:58:05 > 0:58:09next day her horse collapsed and she was not able to ride in the

0:58:09 > 0:58:13Olympics. So it might be a blessing if this does not affect our sports

0:58:13 > 0:58:17stars. Our time is up. Apologies to those with hands up. I have already

0:58:17 > 0:58:27being tipped off for overrunning, as is the way with Question Time.

0:58:27 > 0:58:34

0:58:34 > 0:58:44This is the last programme of the year. We will be back in the year.

0:58:44 > 0:58:47