0:00:00 > 0:00:09pretty cold weekend. Keep up-to- date on the website. We are in
0:00:09 > 0:00:12
0:00:12 > 0:00:16London and welcome to Question Time. With me on the panel, the Defence
0:00:16 > 0:00:19Secretary, Philip Hammond. The former leader of the Liberal
0:00:19 > 0:00:24Democrats in the House of Lords, Shirley Williams. Labour's Alastair
0:00:24 > 0:00:34Campbell, who was head of communications for Tony Blair. Anne
0:00:34 > 0:00:45
0:00:45 > 0:00:50Leslie and the comedian and actor, We start with a question from Ben
0:00:50 > 0:00:53Roberts. In light of the latest step back in attempts to deport Abu
0:00:53 > 0:00:59Qatada, should the UK now simply put him on the first available
0:00:59 > 0:01:05flight back to Jordan. Anne Leslie? If we were France, we would. What
0:01:05 > 0:01:15is extraordinary is that France has signed up obviously to the human
0:01:15 > 0:01:16
0:01:16 > 0:01:22rights convention, but they threw thousands out. You want to adopt
0:01:22 > 0:01:27the French policy, do you? No, I'm not saying that. I know what I'll
0:01:27 > 0:01:34be accused of, being populist Daily Mail. Well, get on with it.
0:01:34 > 0:01:39going to. The reasons I'm going to get on with, is because I think my
0:01:39 > 0:01:42views actually do represent what most people in this country feel.
0:01:42 > 0:01:48Here we have a man who does not respect this country and quite like
0:01:48 > 0:01:53to destroy it, who is anti-semetic and incites violence and who has
0:01:53 > 0:01:58been called the right-hand man of Osama Bin Laden. He's living here
0:01:58 > 0:02:04in some comfort, as is his large family on our taxpayers' money. I
0:02:04 > 0:02:10am fed up with all this stuff about oh, well sending him back is going
0:02:10 > 0:02:18to destroy his human rights. No, he's the one who wants to destroy
0:02:18 > 0:02:23our human rights, because the only human right that does exist is the
0:02:23 > 0:02:29right not to be murdered or have loonies like him inciting murder. I
0:02:29 > 0:02:35would like him to be tried in a court. That is partly our system.
0:02:35 > 0:02:39It doesn't do that partly because our security services don't want to
0:02:39 > 0:02:44reveal, through intercept evidence and so on. To put it simply, you
0:02:45 > 0:02:52would put him on a plane back to Jordan? Yes I would.
0:02:52 > 0:03:01APPLAUSE Sorry. Abu Qatada is the perfect
0:03:01 > 0:03:11pantomime villain for the Daily Mail. The only person who surpasss
0:03:11 > 0:03:11
0:03:11 > 0:03:17him is abham. -- Abu Hamza. I think that if I can quote something,
0:03:17 > 0:03:23"Nothing can be more abhor rent to democracy to keep someone in prison
0:03:23 > 0:03:27because he is unpopular." Winston Churchill said that. He was not --
0:03:27 > 0:03:31he would not have approved of this. You can't send someone back to a
0:03:31 > 0:03:35country who has a track record of torturing people, or whose evidence
0:03:35 > 0:03:39is based on evidence gathered from torturing people. You create an
0:03:39 > 0:03:42industry for torture and a system whereby governments think OK we can
0:03:42 > 0:03:45carry on torturing because there is a system where we can convict
0:03:45 > 0:03:48people based on evidence gained from torture and the reverse is
0:03:48 > 0:03:52true. If you stop sending people back to the countries where they
0:03:52 > 0:03:55gather that evidence you stop that taking place. What do you do with
0:03:55 > 0:03:58them? Put them on trial in this country, or the worst thing
0:03:58 > 0:04:02possible is how do we think that sending them back to Jordan is
0:04:02 > 0:04:07going to make us safer from a security point of view? To have him
0:04:07 > 0:04:11in this country, being monitored is far better sending him where he can
0:04:11 > 0:04:17hang out with his Al-Qaeda mates and he has a huge grudge.
0:04:17 > 0:04:21APPLAUSE It struck me that all the things
0:04:21 > 0:04:25that Anne said could be applied to the leader of the BNP and by the
0:04:25 > 0:04:33fact he happened to be born in this country is it OK to let him stay
0:04:33 > 0:04:43here and let him incite all those things? Don't tell me that I am
0:04:43 > 0:04:43
0:04:43 > 0:04:47pro-BNP because I am not. I wasn't. It's a completely different issue.
0:04:47 > 0:04:52Philip Hammond. Well, firstly as I'm on the BBC I probably can't
0:04:52 > 0:04:55refer to him as an extremist. certainly can. Why not? I read in
0:04:55 > 0:04:59the paper the BBC had banned any reference. I wouldn't believe
0:04:59 > 0:05:04everything you read in the papers if I were you. I think the Daily
0:05:04 > 0:05:08Mail. Did you read it in the Daily Mail? No, he didn't. I think it was
0:05:09 > 0:05:16the Daily Telegraph. If you are telling me it's not true.
0:05:16 > 0:05:20Question Time you can say what you like. You read it too. I will say
0:05:20 > 0:05:24that overweight extremist belongs in a prison cell in Jordan. He's a
0:05:24 > 0:05:28Jordanian national. He has already been convicted in that country. We
0:05:28 > 0:05:32should send him back as quickly as we can. We are going through the
0:05:32 > 0:05:36process to try to see if we can get him back there. The Prime Minister
0:05:36 > 0:05:40has spoken to the king of Jordan this afternoon. A Home Office
0:05:40 > 0:05:45minister will be going out there next week. We are trying to see if
0:05:45 > 0:05:49we can establish with the Jordanians a set of assurances that
0:05:49 > 0:05:54will satisfy the court that we can send him back. This is not a good
0:05:54 > 0:05:59place for us to be. The best thing we can do - Which court are you
0:05:59 > 0:06:02trying to satisfy? The immigration appeals tribunal here to allow us
0:06:02 > 0:06:08to send him back. That will be the quickest, easiest and most
0:06:08 > 0:06:12effective thing to do to get him back to Jordan, and in a prison
0:06:12 > 0:06:18cell there. Why not - assuming you think you can do it that way, why
0:06:18 > 0:06:22not follow the example of Italy and France and simply send him back and
0:06:22 > 0:06:27say to the European Court of Human Rights, "It's our affair."? Because
0:06:27 > 0:06:32we are very clear that we need to reform the way the European Court
0:06:32 > 0:06:37of Human Rights works and David Cameron has made it very clear. It
0:06:38 > 0:06:42is not working effectively. It has 160,000 cases back-logged in its
0:06:42 > 0:06:47system. It is protecting these kind of people while not dealing with
0:06:47 > 0:06:54some of the really serious issues. Why not ignore it and show your
0:06:54 > 0:06:57mettle and ignore it? As long as we are part of a regime that we have a
0:06:57 > 0:07:05principal that the Government -- principle that the Government
0:07:05 > 0:07:09abides by the law. If we break the law we'll get into trouble. You say
0:07:09 > 0:07:16the French and Italians can get away with it? If the law is wrong,
0:07:16 > 0:07:20we should change it, but - Government signed a memorandum
0:07:20 > 0:07:25saying as long as you don't - we know you torture other people, but
0:07:25 > 0:07:32as long as you promise not to tour tour this one we'll let him go back.
0:07:32 > 0:07:37It is far -- torture this one and we'll let him go back. It's far
0:07:37 > 0:07:41more sinceible to monitor him. made that point. I'm sure there are
0:07:41 > 0:07:47charges outstanding for him in other countries. Why aren't we
0:07:47 > 0:07:51seeking to deport him to these countries when he will be
0:07:51 > 0:07:54imprisoned? Shirley Williams? absolutely clear. In a civilised
0:07:55 > 0:07:58society you have to hold the line and one of the absolutely critical
0:07:58 > 0:08:02lines and we have signed the convention on torture, is that you
0:08:03 > 0:08:07do not allow people to have their lives decided by the act of torture
0:08:07 > 0:08:11on the part of those involved in the court. This man may well be
0:08:11 > 0:08:16very dangerous. He's been shut up here in Britain for six-and-a-half
0:08:16 > 0:08:21years. It seems to me to be a very long time. That is under the
0:08:21 > 0:08:25original legislation. What do you do? Quite clearly you hold a trial
0:08:25 > 0:08:29here in the United Kingdom. I agree with Anne on that, but not on the
0:08:29 > 0:08:34other part. You hold it here, where you cannot have evidence based on
0:08:34 > 0:08:38torture. It is possible in our courts to have some of the evidence
0:08:38 > 0:08:42held in private, so that if intelligence is sensitive and
0:08:42 > 0:08:46people might die because it's open, you have the judge and the two
0:08:46 > 0:08:50barristers, defence and prosecution, brought into the discussion about
0:08:50 > 0:08:55that information. The rest is as it ought to be, in the open. We should
0:08:55 > 0:09:00try him, because we believe in the courts. What would you try him for,
0:09:00 > 0:09:03encitement to hatred? He's already been in fact arraigned for a number
0:09:03 > 0:09:09of different issues, including terrorist acts in Jordan. Could you
0:09:09 > 0:09:13try him for the acts he's been found guilty of in Jordan here?
0:09:13 > 0:09:16could certainly try him for what he would be guilty of, which would be
0:09:16 > 0:09:22encitement to violence. How long would he go away for that? I have
0:09:22 > 0:09:25no idea, but quite a long time. If this man is involved in weapons and
0:09:25 > 0:09:29that kind there are other further sentences. The British Government
0:09:29 > 0:09:34is currently negotiating again with the Government of Jordan to see if
0:09:34 > 0:09:39they can get assurances about him not being tortured and evidence
0:09:39 > 0:09:42gotten by torture. Are you saying you wouldn't accept those? I would
0:09:42 > 0:09:45find it difficult. Jordan has always been willing to accept
0:09:45 > 0:09:49torture as a source of evidence. Alastair Campbell? The problem is
0:09:49 > 0:09:53that Shirley he should be tried here, but one of the points that
0:09:53 > 0:09:58the British judge, not a European judge, but the appeal judge made,
0:09:58 > 0:10:03was there was no evidence against him and he had been held for six-
0:10:03 > 0:10:07and-a-half years and as Shirley rightly says, the judge admitted it
0:10:07 > 0:10:12was far too long to be held without being charged. One of the many
0:10:12 > 0:10:20issues in this country that we do not have a sensible, rational
0:10:20 > 0:10:25debate about, is the European Court on human rights. -- of Human Rights.
0:10:25 > 0:10:30This idea that the French and the Italians say, "We are going to
0:10:30 > 0:10:33ignore it." Occasionally they may, but the worst offender and if Anne
0:10:34 > 0:10:38wanted to ally herself to Russia, which is the worst offender in this,
0:10:38 > 0:10:42well, most European countries actually do respect it. I think
0:10:42 > 0:10:46that the British Government is right, because the European Court
0:10:46 > 0:10:50of Human Rights is part of our law. This is a British immigration judge
0:10:50 > 0:10:55who said the guy couldn't be held any longer and now there are only
0:10:55 > 0:10:59two routes. One is security. He has to be kept under close security and
0:10:59 > 0:11:04it's ironic that some of the people who criticised us for the measures
0:11:04 > 0:11:08are now saying why can't we do more with him? The second is diplomacy,
0:11:09 > 0:11:14which is why it is right that David Cameron spoke to the Government and
0:11:14 > 0:11:19the minister goes. It would be awful when we fighting to defend
0:11:19 > 0:11:28our values to do something which would say we are descending to the
0:11:28 > 0:11:31values of somebody like he would support. A couple more points.
0:11:31 > 0:11:35think it's a really interesting conversation, whether he should be
0:11:35 > 0:11:40sent back or not, but what really an noise me is every five years we
0:11:40 > 0:11:44go to the polls in this country and we elect members of Parliament to
0:11:44 > 0:11:50represent us and we have elected a Government and they say they want
0:11:50 > 0:12:00to send the person away. Now, there are unelected judges in Strasbourg
0:12:00 > 0:12:00
0:12:00 > 0:12:08are saying to our elected Government saying we can't do that.
0:12:08 > 0:12:14And you there. Following on from the last speaker, why don't we have
0:12:14 > 0:12:18our own Bill of Rights and pull out of the UNHCR? The man over there.
0:12:18 > 0:12:23Whilst obviously the extradition is tricky, surely he shopbt be kept in
0:12:23 > 0:12:32a house in London, but locked -- shouldn't be kept in a house in
0:12:32 > 0:12:36London, but locked up elsewhere. may well be that this man is full
0:12:36 > 0:12:38of hate, owedious views, in which case he could right for the Daily
0:12:38 > 0:12:48Mail. LAUGHTER
0:12:48 > 0:12:51
0:12:51 > 0:12:57Watch it. We'll turn to that now. We have a question from Henry
0:12:58 > 0:13:05Allingham. Do you think in the wake of the phone hacking scandal heavy
0:13:05 > 0:13:08regulation of press the way forward or would it compromise the free
0:13:08 > 0:13:14press? In the light of everything we have been hearing from the
0:13:14 > 0:13:16Leveson Inquiry over the week. Shirley Williams? Absolutely not. I
0:13:16 > 0:13:22think State regulation would be something we would live to regret
0:13:22 > 0:13:27for a very long time. The freedom of the press is very tough. Anybody
0:13:27 > 0:13:32who is in public life, like several of us are, know how tough it is,
0:13:32 > 0:13:37because it means you can be shredded and often you feel it is
0:13:37 > 0:13:41unfair and you have been maltreated and all the rest. Don't
0:13:41 > 0:13:43underestimate we are in a democracy. It's the best possible source of
0:13:43 > 0:13:47making sure that there is no corruption, of making sure that
0:13:47 > 0:13:51people who cheat on their expenses are caught out. Of making sure that
0:13:51 > 0:13:55we have to be kept to the highest possible standards and heaven knows
0:13:55 > 0:14:00all of us need that. Whatever you do, don't tough the freedom of the
0:14:00 > 0:14:05press. The one thing you can do, I think, is to look to the media
0:14:06 > 0:14:10themselves and say, look, like doctors do with the professional
0:14:10 > 0:14:14councils, like lawyers do with the Law Society, you have got to set up
0:14:14 > 0:14:17your own structures and in those you have got to make sure that
0:14:17 > 0:14:21journalists feel they are obliged to tell the truth as far as
0:14:21 > 0:14:25possible and they are obliged not to use methods which are near
0:14:25 > 0:14:35criminal and sometimes actually criminal. For example, the kind
0:14:35 > 0:14:40that have been encountered by my There have been several inquiries
0:14:40 > 0:14:44into the press, one in the 06z, can't remember what it was called.
0:14:45 > 0:14:48There was an inquiry in 1990 -- '60s. There have been various
0:14:48 > 0:14:52inquiries into the standards of the press, on each occasion the press
0:14:52 > 0:14:56have said they'll put their house in order and have failed to do so.
0:14:56 > 0:15:00People like me who've raised our head above the parapet in this are
0:15:00 > 0:15:04not there of our own volition, but because we are perhaps more media
0:15:04 > 0:15:08savvy than some of the more hapless victims of this. What was your
0:15:08 > 0:15:12complaint for people who've come in? My phone was hacked and I was
0:15:12 > 0:15:16tail and lots of private information was, information I got
0:15:16 > 0:15:19from the police, but I had to go through the courts, I'm fortunate
0:15:19 > 0:15:22enough to have enough money to pursue the press on this, but the
0:15:22 > 0:15:26fact is, they had their opportunity to put their house in order, they
0:15:26 > 0:15:31failed every time and said if it was a child saying I'm going to
0:15:31 > 0:15:35behave and you said I'm going to send you to bed if you misbehave
0:15:35 > 0:15:42one more time and they keep misbehaving and you don't send them
0:15:42 > 0:15:48to bed, you would be a bad parent. The point is, this is about, is the
0:15:48 > 0:15:53story justified, is the story in the public interest? Nine times out
0:15:53 > 0:15:56of ten they are not in the public interest. I'm in favour of good
0:15:56 > 0:16:00journalism that investigating in terms of the public interest.
0:16:00 > 0:16:04That's important, it should be protected. In fact, I even go so
0:16:04 > 0:16:07far as to say if you are doing a story of public interest exposing a
0:16:07 > 0:16:11great corruption, you would even be justified in hacking if that's
0:16:11 > 0:16:15always in the public interest but time and again it's not, it's about
0:16:15 > 0:16:19who is sleeping with who. It's used as a smoke screen by much of the
0:16:19 > 0:16:24press to justify what they're interested in which is satisfying
0:16:24 > 0:16:28their shareholders by selling newspapers. Heavier regulation?
0:16:28 > 0:16:31think the press should not be, I think they should be allowed to put
0:16:31 > 0:16:36their house in order but there should be a backup system or some
0:16:36 > 0:16:41kind of regulation which the BBC has to have. Ann Leslie? As you
0:16:41 > 0:16:48know, I'm a huge admirer of you as a comedian and I said to you before
0:16:48 > 0:16:56hand... You did That one of your less well regarded programmes,
0:16:56 > 0:17:04which is brilliant, but I'm afraid people like you and Alastair, on my
0:17:04 > 0:17:13right, do not know what damage they're doing to this country.
0:17:13 > 0:17:19gosh. Well, you did. 40 years on the Daily Mail and you talk about
0:17:19 > 0:17:24doing this to the country. I'm not on the Daily Mail. May I say that
0:17:24 > 0:17:28the BBC is so fond of their balance in programmes, they've chosen two
0:17:28 > 0:17:38people who're bitterly against the newspaper I used to work for and
0:17:38 > 0:18:12
0:18:12 > 0:18:14did so for 35 years, mostly as a correspondent.... Sorry, Not 40, I
0:18:14 > 0:18:17Beg Your Pardon. You were always a lousy journalist. Can You Get To
0:18:17 > 0:18:19The Issue, You Have The Floor? The issue I've forgotten now because my
0:18:19 > 0:18:21mic fell off. Right, no... Heavier Regulation Of
0:18:21 > 0:18:23The Press? Because I've been a foreign correspondent for, you know,
0:18:23 > 0:18:26over 30 years, worked in over 70 countries, the trouble is,
0:18:26 > 0:18:28everywhere I go, in some of the less savoury countries in this
0:18:28 > 0:18:30world, the Minister of Information will always say I'm in favour of
0:18:31 > 0:18:33the press but I'm in favour of a responsible press. Right, who
0:18:33 > 0:18:36decides what is a responsible press? Believe you me, it won't be
0:18:36 > 0:18:38comedians, it won't be film stars, it will be people who are in power,
0:18:38 > 0:18:41very rich people who completely decide what is responsible. That is
0:18:41 > 0:18:46why this country is known as the libel capital of the world, because
0:18:46 > 0:18:51all sorts of oligarchs and foreign criminals come and sue here because
0:18:51 > 0:18:57they know that the Libel Laws actually discriminate against the
0:18:57 > 0:19:03free press. I feel the real danger is that the free press, which is,
0:19:03 > 0:19:09whatever you say and however much you jeer at me, it is a guarantee
0:19:09 > 0:19:14of democracy because nothing can get away from the press, including
0:19:14 > 0:19:19bent MPs who actually expose the bent MPs, the press, who exposed
0:19:19 > 0:19:23the phone hacking, the press. press did not expose the phone
0:19:23 > 0:19:28hacking. The press singularly failed... Steve hold on, let
0:19:28 > 0:19:32Alastair Campbell have a say. You scoffed at that remark, why?
0:19:32 > 0:19:39question was about a free press. I passionately believe in a free
0:19:39 > 0:19:46press. Oh, God, yes. We do not have a three press when it's controlled
0:19:46 > 0:19:49by three very senior men. What the Leveson Inquiry is showing is
0:19:49 > 0:19:53something that some of us in politics have been worried about
0:19:53 > 0:19:57for quite a long time which is a media culture that is frankly
0:19:57 > 0:20:02debasing the culture of this country. And we are seeing
0:20:02 > 0:20:06journalists, and I was a journalist and I'm glad Ann Leslie thinks I
0:20:06 > 0:20:11was a lousy journalist, if she thought I was good, I would be
0:20:11 > 0:20:14ashamed of myself. Can I just say... Can I just finish. The Leveson
0:20:14 > 0:20:20Inquiry shining a light on things that we have known about, the phone
0:20:20 > 0:20:22hacking scandal for me is just the tip of the iceberg. The really big
0:20:22 > 0:20:27changes are newspapers where stories are only allowed if they
0:20:27 > 0:20:30fit the agenda of that paper, where the fusion of news and comment is
0:20:30 > 0:20:34virtually complete, where the commercial interest of the
0:20:34 > 0:20:38newspapers are reflected through their news coverage and... How on
0:20:38 > 0:20:45earth do you change this? You may not be able to change it all, but
0:20:46 > 0:20:49what you can do... By regulation? What is the question Henry
0:20:49 > 0:20:53Allingham put? Lord Leveson is asking the right questions, when we
0:20:53 > 0:20:57talk about statutory regulation, the PCC is, has been a joke and
0:20:57 > 0:21:01always will be a joke because you cannot trust these people to
0:21:01 > 0:21:05regulate themselves. Parliament has to set up a system of regulation
0:21:05 > 0:21:11which is independent of politicians and independent of media interest.
0:21:11 > 0:21:17That is not a difficult thing to do. But in your words, it regulates the
0:21:17 > 0:21:23difference between news and comment, it makes sure that the newspapers...
0:21:23 > 0:21:27No, the I am saying that is what has happened to our newspapers, not
0:21:27 > 0:21:29that that's what I want. We do not have in this country with the
0:21:29 > 0:21:35exception possibly of the Financial Times, we do not have newspapers
0:21:35 > 0:21:39that now see their job as the per purr vaiing of news, then the
0:21:39 > 0:21:43comment alongside it. I'm saying I'm in this debate, not just to get
0:21:43 > 0:21:45money out of phone hacking which I did along with Steve yesterday but
0:21:45 > 0:21:49to make sure the country understands the reality of what
0:21:49 > 0:21:53happens in our media. They are seeing a bit of it at the Leveson
0:21:54 > 0:21:57Inquiry. My worry is that when the inquiry reports that the Government
0:21:57 > 0:22:01then will not actually want to legislate for a new system of
0:22:01 > 0:22:05regulation because by then, they'll be getting nearer to election and
0:22:05 > 0:22:10it will suit them. One question very quickly - I agree with what
0:22:10 > 0:22:14you said - why is it then that in our own country both Labour and the
0:22:14 > 0:22:19Conservative Party have repeatedly appeared at every single social
0:22:19 > 0:22:23occasion? I agree with that. you guilty of this? We were and I
0:22:23 > 0:22:28said to, when I went to the Leveson Inquiry a few weeks ago, I said
0:22:28 > 0:22:31that from about 1999-2000, I was arguing with Tony Blair and other
0:22:31 > 0:22:34ministers, we were identifying that this was a problem for our culture,
0:22:34 > 0:22:38therefore for our country. Therefore, we should do something
0:22:38 > 0:22:41about it. Tony's view, which I completely respect, was that
0:22:41 > 0:22:45actually, we got a pretty good press most of the time, the public
0:22:45 > 0:22:49certainly thought we did and if we took on the press at that time they
0:22:49 > 0:22:53simply wouldn't understand. To answer your question, were we at
0:22:53 > 0:22:57times too close to the media, the answer is yes. The reason is
0:22:58 > 0:23:04because, if you do have them in full cry out to kill you, then
0:23:04 > 0:23:09that's not a very nice place to be. I'll bring you in later. The man
0:23:09 > 0:23:12with the purple pullover? One of the things that for me has been
0:23:12 > 0:23:17shocking out of the Leveson Inquiry so far is the all too cosy
0:23:17 > 0:23:21relationship between our police forces and the media. It seems to
0:23:21 > 0:23:25me that as public servants, we should have a bit of regulation on
0:23:25 > 0:23:29the police force actually. That is the next stage of the Leveson
0:23:29 > 0:23:33Inquiry. The woman on the right? concern, I very much support what
0:23:33 > 0:23:38Alastair said, is that the press has far too much power really and
0:23:38 > 0:23:40we saw both politicians and the police crumbling in front of that.
0:23:40 > 0:23:45It was only really the Guardian that reported the facts and what we
0:23:45 > 0:23:50need to do is reduce the concentration of media power. I
0:23:50 > 0:23:57mean, you know, why Rupert Murdoch was ever allowed to get so much
0:23:57 > 0:23:59power, I think that's really... Hear, hear. Philip Hammond? On the
0:23:59 > 0:24:03point that Alastair was making about the closeness of politicians
0:24:03 > 0:24:07to the media. That of course is why the Prime Minister has set up a
0:24:07 > 0:24:10regime now where contacts with proprietors and editors are
0:24:10 > 0:24:15reported, they are publicly registered, contacts by all
0:24:15 > 0:24:21ministers and the Prime Minister. Is that why Andy Coulson was
0:24:21 > 0:24:24appointed to Number Ten? So people know what was going on. I saw Andy
0:24:24 > 0:24:27Coulson as a man that should not be at the heart of Government. That's
0:24:27 > 0:24:31what motivated me to take my legal action because the Government
0:24:31 > 0:24:34wasn't doing it job, nothing about News International. The Prime
0:24:34 > 0:24:42Minister's been very clear about the appointment of Andy Coulson, he
0:24:42 > 0:24:45made that appointment in good faith, Andy Coulson repeated assurances in
0:24:45 > 0:24:48a House of Commons Select Committee under oath and the Prime Minister's
0:24:48 > 0:24:52made it clear that if it turns out he was misled, then he will
0:24:52 > 0:24:56apologise for that. Look, the point I want to get back to is what the
0:24:56 > 0:25:00Leveson Inquiry is doing. It's looking at two different things.
0:25:00 > 0:25:04It's looking at illegality and despite what Steve says that
0:25:04 > 0:25:07hacking might be justifiable, hacking is now illegal. It cannot
0:25:07 > 0:25:11be justified. We have to be very clear that the press is not allowed
0:25:11 > 0:25:17to break the law. But it goes beyond that. We have to have a
0:25:17 > 0:25:27debate about within the law, what the pressethically can and can't do.
0:25:27 > 0:25:28
0:25:28 > 0:25:33-- press ethicly can and can't do. I don't share Shirley's view but on
0:25:33 > 0:25:37the other hand, I would be... the Government would have to set
0:25:37 > 0:25:40that up. I would be wary of Alastair's view that there needs to
0:25:40 > 0:25:43be a statutory scheme. Leveson will come forward with a set of
0:25:43 > 0:25:48recommendations. That is what the inquiry was set up for. He will
0:25:48 > 0:25:53also look at the relationship between the police and the media.
0:25:53 > 0:25:59Let's see what Leveson says. He'll be reporting on ethics in September
0:25:59 > 0:26:01of this year. Can I ask you one question. Then let's decide.
0:26:02 > 0:26:07things you have identified, you say phone hacking, bribing the police,
0:26:07 > 0:26:13these are things that are illegal, I mean why do they need to look at
0:26:13 > 0:26:20it? Bribing the police is clearly illegal. Phone hacking is clearly
0:26:20 > 0:26:24illegal? Phone hacking is clearly now illegal. The PCC took, bought
0:26:24 > 0:26:28the line from News International that it was one rogue reporter,
0:26:28 > 0:26:31bought it hook line and sink, they didn't question it at all,
0:26:31 > 0:26:37Parliament didn't, the Met police didn't, the media didn't question
0:26:37 > 0:26:41it. It was left to individuals and a few newspapers to pick away at
0:26:41 > 0:26:44this scam. The few individuals who did take action managed to get the
0:26:44 > 0:26:48ball rolling. All the original litigants should have a monument
0:26:48 > 0:26:53built of them in the shape of a giant can opener because they were
0:26:54 > 0:27:01the people who did it. APPLAUSE The man there? It would be
0:27:01 > 0:27:06wrong to restrict the freedom of the press, but surely the best way
0:27:06 > 0:27:10to control it is for people like us to stop buying rubbish like the
0:27:10 > 0:27:13Daily Mail. Very good point. Philip said, when we talk about statutory
0:27:13 > 0:27:18regular lace, I don't mean regulation that the Government then
0:27:18 > 0:27:21runs, but the Government, the PCC was set up by Parliament, it was a
0:27:21 > 0:27:25Government proposal that Parliament voted on, surely we can have
0:27:25 > 0:27:33Parliament having to decide what the system of regulation is, and
0:27:33 > 0:27:36then it's run as an pnth -- independent media. We have heard
0:27:36 > 0:27:39the Government's close to the press, they've been close to the police,
0:27:39 > 0:27:43we have heard that the Government have been close to the investment
0:27:43 > 0:27:48banking sector. When will the Government learn its lesson?
0:27:48 > 0:27:58Leslie, do you want to finish off? Simply, I do object to taking moral
0:27:58 > 0:27:59
0:27:59 > 0:28:09lessons from Alastair Campbell. you, darlings, so sorry about that.
0:28:09 > 0:28:10
0:28:10 > 0:28:16The dodgy dossier. Oh, blah. Don't say oh blah. The judge described
0:28:16 > 0:28:20him as unreliable. Giving me or the Daily Mail moral lessons. Get used
0:28:20 > 0:28:26to it because I'll keep banging on about it. Better get used to me
0:28:26 > 0:28:33banging back. Bang back, but your newspaper was the most putrid
0:28:34 > 0:28:39product on the shelves every day, day after day. I want to get away
0:28:39 > 0:28:44from the tiff which is great fun. This is an absolutely central
0:28:44 > 0:28:47serious issue, that between the police and some journalists, from
0:28:47 > 0:28:52different newspapers, there is all together too cosy a relationship
0:28:53 > 0:28:56and it's one in which they exchange tips to one another. I'll tell you
0:28:56 > 0:29:00who I think is up to no good and you in return will prince it and
0:29:01 > 0:29:06give me a bit to get on with. It's the most dangerous thing you can do.
0:29:06 > 0:29:10The police have to be divorced from any possible relationship that
0:29:10 > 0:29:13means that they can get financial advantage out of providing tips to
0:29:13 > 0:29:16the newspapers, that's part of the problem. It's got to be addressed.
0:29:16 > 0:29:21Before we leave that, we talked about the Daily Mail and phone
0:29:21 > 0:29:26hacking and the rest of it, I want to quote what the editor of the
0:29:26 > 0:29:29Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday said, "having conducted a major
0:29:29 > 0:29:32internal inquiry, I'm as convinced as I can be that there's no phone
0:29:32 > 0:29:39hacking on the Daily Mail, I don't make that statement lightly, no
0:29:39 > 0:29:43editor, the editor of the Guardian or the Independent, no doubt
0:29:43 > 0:29:53Alastair Campbell or Steve Coogan can say otherwise". If you want to
0:29:53 > 0:30:09
0:30:09 > 0:30:14comment on these things and you are Another question. Syria is
0:30:15 > 0:30:21massacring it's own people. How bad does it have to get before the
0:30:21 > 0:30:26Government takes action? Alastair Campbell you were deeply implicated
0:30:26 > 0:30:32in the invasion in require rack. Your answer? I have a lot of
0:30:32 > 0:30:35sympathy, because this is a really difficult situation. There are no
0:30:35 > 0:30:41easy answers. Every single choice is ugly. You can stand out and
0:30:41 > 0:30:45people are going to carry on getting killed. You can try to
0:30:45 > 0:30:49build the diplomatic support for action. You could then take that
0:30:49 > 0:30:53action and you have no way of knowing where that is going. Action
0:30:53 > 0:30:58being military? I think the mistake has been made in effectively ruling
0:30:58 > 0:31:04it out, because it may come to that in the end. All you can do at the
0:31:04 > 0:31:08moment is to try to get the diplomatic situation in a better
0:31:08 > 0:31:12place. That looks very difficult, because the UN resolution which the
0:31:12 > 0:31:16Russians vetoed had already been watered down and wasn't terribly
0:31:16 > 0:31:23strong or calling for military action, let alone regime change,
0:31:23 > 0:31:28other than to Bashar Al-Assad's deputy. You have a very complicated
0:31:28 > 0:31:35and volatile situation. Turkey, which is feeling the power more.
0:31:35 > 0:31:38You have Lebanon alongside with Hizbollah and Iraq and ir -- Iran
0:31:38 > 0:31:43and there is a real danger and people talking about spilling into
0:31:43 > 0:31:48a civil war, I think there's one ready and there is a danger it
0:31:48 > 0:31:51becomes a proxy war with the Russians defending and the Saudis
0:31:51 > 0:31:56and the Qataris trying to involve the British and French and
0:31:56 > 0:32:02Americans. I think it is horrible to watch at the moment, but we have
0:32:02 > 0:32:05to be a little cautious, because there is a danger that we go in,
0:32:05 > 0:32:12you won't be able to get the support for the action. There isn't
0:32:12 > 0:32:16the same UN support that there was for Libya or in Iraq. That was
0:32:16 > 0:32:21there. Therefore, in relation to Syria, if you are not careful and
0:32:21 > 0:32:28make the wrong move now and you are talking about a really major
0:32:28 > 0:32:32situation in the most dangerous region in the world. As Defence
0:32:32 > 0:32:38Secretary, do you countenance in the way that Alistair explained,
0:32:38 > 0:32:45military action in Syria or do you absolutely rule it out as an impoct
0:32:45 > 0:32:53as Jack Straw, when he was -- impossibility, as Jack Straw said,
0:32:53 > 0:32:57when he was in the Foreign Office. Syria has a large army. It is well
0:32:57 > 0:33:02disciplined. It is possible that that would fall apart if civil war
0:33:02 > 0:33:06really takes hold, but at the moment they have 325,000-strong
0:33:06 > 0:33:10armed forces. They are well disciplined and well led. They've
0:33:10 > 0:33:18got large amounts of Russian weaponary, including very modern
0:33:18 > 0:33:24air defence systems. This is a for mid-ible military power. --
0:33:24 > 0:33:30formidable military power. The question needs to be addressed to
0:33:30 > 0:33:34the Chinese and Russian governments. Since they vetoed the UN Security
0:33:34 > 0:33:38Council resolution in October, about 2,000 Syrians have been
0:33:38 > 0:33:45massacred. Since they vetoed a resolution earlier this week,
0:33:45 > 0:33:48scores more have been massacred. They bear a very heavy burden of
0:33:48 > 0:33:53responsibility. Russia is heavily involved in Syria. It has a lot of
0:33:53 > 0:33:57leverage in that country. The Russians needs to -- need to feel
0:33:57 > 0:34:04the pressure from the rest of the world. 13 out of the 15 nations on
0:34:04 > 0:34:11the council, Arab nations, Latin Americans, Africans, all supported
0:34:11 > 0:34:17the move for a resolution and greater sanctions. You are saying
0:34:17 > 0:34:25that NATO can't do anything? That France and America and the Arab
0:34:25 > 0:34:28countries and ourselves, as in Libya, can't do? That's a very
0:34:28 > 0:34:35strong term. The United States is world's greatest military power,
0:34:35 > 0:34:39but Alistair is right, Syria is a strong military country and you are
0:34:39 > 0:34:43not talking about a small policing action. You would be talking about
0:34:43 > 0:34:47a very major military conflict and I don't think anybody wants to
0:34:47 > 0:34:49contemplate that at this time. What people want to do is get the
0:34:49 > 0:34:55international community aligned with the Russians and Chinese on
0:34:55 > 0:35:02board, with the rest of the international community, to start
0:35:02 > 0:35:07tightening the noose on this despicable regime. You spoke about
0:35:07 > 0:35:10the Government massacring its own people and the strength of the Army,
0:35:10 > 0:35:17but those are parallels with Iraq. Is the true difference the amount
0:35:17 > 0:35:20of oil that Iraq and Libya have, that Syria doesn't have? Shirley
0:35:20 > 0:35:24Williams? I think there might be something in that, but I'm going to
0:35:24 > 0:35:29make a different point, if you may. In this particular case, we tried
0:35:29 > 0:35:33to go the UN route and it was blocked. In the case of Iraq, we
0:35:33 > 0:35:37tried to go the UN brute and decided to get around it. Let me be
0:35:37 > 0:35:42quite precise, I think the real danger of Syria is that it could
0:35:42 > 0:35:50spiral into a war between the Sunni and Shia throughout the whole of
0:35:50 > 0:35:54the Arab world. What that means is that you are in great danger of
0:35:54 > 0:35:58sending off a powder keg into one of the most fragile regions of the
0:35:58 > 0:36:03world. What does that mean? I don't think it means you sit by and do
0:36:03 > 0:36:08nothing. I think it means you have to press for the Arab League and UN
0:36:08 > 0:36:11to get people into Syria, to insist that they enter, to give full
0:36:11 > 0:36:14coverage of what is going on and to draw conclusions from it, but I
0:36:14 > 0:36:18tend to agree with Philip that I think the idea of a military
0:36:18 > 0:36:21intervention at the moment could actually be more explosive than the
0:36:21 > 0:36:25method of going through the international community and it's
0:36:26 > 0:36:31what we should do. I guess I'm still not satisfied, because a lot
0:36:31 > 0:36:36of that sounds like what I remember reading about Iraq. That was fairly
0:36:36 > 0:36:39explosive and in the same area of the world as well. The Chilcott
0:36:39 > 0:36:43inquiry hasn't reported, but when we talk about the lessons from Iraq,
0:36:43 > 0:36:48I suspect the big lesson is the aftermath and I think that is what
0:36:48 > 0:36:54we are talking about here, that it is all very well to say let's take
0:36:54 > 0:37:00out the President. What comes thereafter, that could be worse.
0:37:00 > 0:37:05Anne Leslie. For once I agree with Alistair. That is amazing! It's
0:37:05 > 0:37:10awful. Because I have worked a lot in the Middle East and I still have
0:37:10 > 0:37:18a lot of contacts there, and I know a lot of the Arab ambassadors and
0:37:18 > 0:37:22we talk about it endlessly, the problem with Syria is that the
0:37:22 > 0:37:28horrors of the Bashar Al-Assad regime are great. But the one
0:37:28 > 0:37:32virtue it had was that it secular. As we know, religious and ethnic
0:37:32 > 0:37:39minorities are better protected by secular governments, however nasty
0:37:39 > 0:37:44they are, because they don't care about religion, that is why. Than
0:37:44 > 0:37:49sectarian ones that is. It is absolutely the case that there is
0:37:49 > 0:37:57now increasing sectarian divisions in Syria. In Syria the regime is
0:37:57 > 0:38:01Alawites. It's a minority sect. It's about power. It's not that
0:38:01 > 0:38:07interested, as I know in the religion, for various reasons. It's
0:38:07 > 0:38:14because it is a sect of Shia, but it has no legitimacy in any forum,
0:38:14 > 0:38:20including religion, but the problem is if I were a Christian or Jewish
0:38:20 > 0:38:26or druids or Kurdish, I would be running for the exit right now.
0:38:26 > 0:38:30That's because once we start deciding who we are going to back,
0:38:30 > 0:38:37obviously I don't back the regime, they are a disgusting bunch, but if
0:38:37 > 0:38:41we decide that we are going to back the freedom fighters, which ones?
0:38:41 > 0:38:48The minorities and I know this because I'm heavily involved with
0:38:48 > 0:38:53them, are so scared of what is going to happen when either we, or
0:38:53 > 0:38:58the Arab League go in and get rid of Assad. Your view is that we
0:38:58 > 0:39:02shouldn't take, so to speak, decisive action? No, I'm afraid not,
0:39:02 > 0:39:07because one of the troubles with the West, we are always thinking
0:39:07 > 0:39:15we'll go in and humanitarianly. I have worked in Bosnia and in Iraq.
0:39:15 > 0:39:22We always make a mistake and we don't improperty matters. Libya
0:39:22 > 0:39:26included? Yes. The man there. There's a lot of agreement here on
0:39:27 > 0:39:30being cautious and I think that's a good sign, because we have seen how
0:39:30 > 0:39:36the sledge-hammer approach works and so I'm glad to see that,
0:39:36 > 0:39:39because we can't stied by while people get killed -- stand by while
0:39:39 > 0:39:45people get killed. Something has to be done, but just to say it is
0:39:45 > 0:39:50difficult is not enough. I think that the MoD, Foreign Office and
0:39:50 > 0:39:55the policy makers need to find something good to do. Something to
0:39:55 > 0:40:00do which will protect people, which will prevent a civil war breaking
0:40:00 > 0:40:07out and which will help to support the Syrian people. Do you have an
0:40:07 > 0:40:12idea? We are working with the Arab League and one of the good pieces
0:40:12 > 0:40:16of news here is that the League has finally woken up, after decades,
0:40:16 > 0:40:20they are now engaging in trying to do with the problem in an Arab
0:40:20 > 0:40:24country. You might not think they've been very effective so far,
0:40:24 > 0:40:27but compared with the past, this is Monday humanityal and that is
0:40:28 > 0:40:31extremely good news. Db monumental and that is extremely good news.
0:40:31 > 0:40:36William Hague was in New York trying to rally support behind the
0:40:36 > 0:40:38UN Security Council resolution. That work is on-going. Everybody
0:40:39 > 0:40:43that comes through London is getting lobbied by us on Syria. We
0:40:43 > 0:40:47are determined to make maintain the pressure for a consensus to do
0:40:47 > 0:40:50something about Syria in the UN and through sanctions and other
0:40:50 > 0:40:55pressures. There is a problem with this, because when you do take
0:40:55 > 0:40:59action, as Anne said you may have a situation that is worst. That
0:40:59 > 0:41:03involves us all having a crystal ball and being able it see what
0:41:04 > 0:41:09would have happened had we not intervened. I think back to the I'm
0:41:09 > 0:41:14a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here and the massacre of the -- Srebrenica
0:41:14 > 0:41:16and the massacre of the men and boys and poun talking about
0:41:16 > 0:41:21something awful happening. -- Paddy Ashdown talking about something
0:41:21 > 0:41:24awful happening and it did and then we did something. Then we end up in
0:41:24 > 0:41:30an imperfect situation and you don't know whether it would have
0:41:30 > 0:41:37been better to do nothing, so I think it's - We intervened in
0:41:37 > 0:41:40Kosovo and that worked out pretty well. I went out there and it is a
0:41:40 > 0:41:44terrible sight. Paddy Ashdown was there with me. We proposed that
0:41:44 > 0:41:50there out to be a Government intervention and that I think went
0:41:50 > 0:41:55a very long way to save the Albanians. It did. Had it happened
0:41:55 > 0:41:59earlier it would have been better. Military action may be a large
0:41:59 > 0:42:04resort, but given the fact that the Defence Select Committee has this
0:42:04 > 0:42:08week said that as a result of the SDSR cuts the UK armed forces would
0:42:08 > 0:42:13not be in a position to take on a similar conflict to Libya, so would
0:42:13 > 0:42:17the UK be able to get involved with the UN militarily, even if it did
0:42:17 > 0:42:22come down to that? The Select Committee didn't say that. It posed
0:42:22 > 0:42:25a question. It asked the question about whether as we move through
0:42:25 > 0:42:30the process of transformation of our armed forces, restructuring
0:42:30 > 0:42:35them, we would be able. Your answer to the point. Yes, we would be able
0:42:35 > 0:42:40to do Libya again, but I've already said, Syria is not Libya. That's a
0:42:40 > 0:42:44much bigger challenge and the truth is, there is only one nation that
0:42:44 > 0:42:51could really effectively contemplate military action and
0:42:51 > 0:42:54that is United States. The defence review under Liam Fox was a
0:42:54 > 0:43:02spending review, not a defence review and the Arab Spring wasn't
0:43:02 > 0:43:09mentioned. You left us with a black hole in the defence budget. I think
0:43:09 > 0:43:14we know where this is going. A question from Vic Loveday. If we
0:43:14 > 0:43:22believe in innocent until proven guilty, was it right for the FA to
0:43:22 > 0:43:26strip John Terry of the captaincy of England? And for Fabio Capello
0:43:26 > 0:43:30to resign as a result? Philip Hammond? Well, I think the point is
0:43:30 > 0:43:34that when you are under the kind of pressure that someone is under when
0:43:34 > 0:43:39they are facing criminal charges it is very difficult to do your day
0:43:39 > 0:43:44job effectively. I think - Chris Huhne are you talking about or the
0:43:44 > 0:43:49footballer? APPLAUSE
0:43:49 > 0:43:53I was talking about the football, but the analogy hadn't escaped me.
0:43:53 > 0:43:59We have a long-established principle in politics that somebody
0:43:59 > 0:44:02who is facing a criminal charge, even if they are protesting their
0:44:02 > 0:44:06innocence, quits their job and protests their innocence and fights
0:44:06 > 0:44:10the case. Simply because, the distraction of being involved in a
0:44:10 > 0:44:16criminal proceeding inevitably means you are not able to give your
0:44:17 > 0:44:21whole commitment to the job you are doing. I think if the leaders of
0:44:21 > 0:44:31England football made that decision, that's a decision for them to make.
0:44:31 > 0:44:34
0:44:34 > 0:44:38I think Fabio Capello slightly Alastair Campbell, do you think
0:44:38 > 0:44:42Fabio Capello overreacted or were the football people right to make
0:44:42 > 0:44:46Terry stand down? I fear I may have missed something of a scoop on
0:44:46 > 0:44:50Sunday because I was sitting behind Fabio Capello... You are not a
0:44:50 > 0:44:53journalist, so it doesn't matter. Thank you, Ann. I was sitting
0:44:53 > 0:44:57behind Fabio Capello at the Chelsea and Manchester United game and he
0:44:57 > 0:45:02had a testy conversation with the FA General Secretary and I realised
0:45:02 > 0:45:06then this was all going on. Now, whether it's right, let's park John
0:45:06 > 0:45:09Terry for one minute. What is absolutely not right is for the FA
0:45:09 > 0:45:13to announce that John Terry is being stripped of the captaincy if
0:45:13 > 0:45:16that's not been cleared and approved, in my mind, by the
0:45:16 > 0:45:20manager, because the manager is the most important person in any
0:45:20 > 0:45:25football team. It does appear that this happened without any recourse
0:45:25 > 0:45:29to him. So I think, I'm afraid... He suspended Terry earlier? He had,
0:45:29 > 0:45:33but... Without telling them? ultimately, the manager has to
0:45:33 > 0:45:37decide who the Captain is and if the FA think he should be stripped,
0:45:37 > 0:45:39then at least he has to be brought into that conversation. I also
0:45:39 > 0:45:43happen to think it doesn't matter who the England manager is because
0:45:43 > 0:45:47there are only two English players we get into the Spanish or German
0:45:47 > 0:45:52team so they are not going to win Euro 2012 and we might as well just
0:45:52 > 0:45:56get used to that now. You are another football fan, Steve Coogan,
0:45:56 > 0:46:02what do you make of this? You are wrong there, David. I'm from
0:46:02 > 0:46:07Manchester, so... I thought you were a Seagulls supporter? No, I
0:46:07 > 0:46:12have to say, I'm very forceful about this, I have no view on this
0:46:12 > 0:46:18whatsoever. APPLAUSE
0:46:18 > 0:46:22Good for you. It's very rare that a Question Time panellist is quite so
0:46:22 > 0:46:27honest. Shirley Williams? I don't think I'm being dishonest, I'm well
0:46:27 > 0:46:33trained in football by my grandsons, I know nothing about it. What I
0:46:33 > 0:46:36would say, very quickly is that the issue of racism on the terraces is
0:46:36 > 0:46:41very serious, it's also true therefore that I think the FA is
0:46:41 > 0:46:45right to take a strong line on that. I don't think it was appropriate
0:46:46 > 0:46:50for Capello to step in in the way that he did. I also think very
0:46:50 > 0:46:55strongly that it's high time that the football system cleaned itself
0:46:55 > 0:46:59up. It's got precisely two senior executive who is are black on the
0:46:59 > 0:47:03entire system of senior executives. It I think has been fairly lax in
0:47:03 > 0:47:09allowing people to shout their heads off in some cases against a
0:47:09 > 0:47:14player who happens to be black or brown. I think football's done a
0:47:14 > 0:47:18very good job on racism actually. I'm not saying it hasn't but there
0:47:18 > 0:47:23are fans who come who use some very racist language and all I'm saying
0:47:23 > 0:47:27is, I think the FA should be supported, supported in taking a
0:47:27 > 0:47:30very strong line. It's a strong line but let's remember the
0:47:30 > 0:47:37allegations against John Terry are denied by him and they come to
0:47:37 > 0:47:41trial in July. He's been suspended. The man with the beard there?
0:47:41 > 0:47:45don't think so much he should be stripped of the captaincy. I'm
0:47:45 > 0:47:52certain if those allegations were against me, I would be suspended in
0:47:52 > 0:47:57my job until proven not guilty, so why has he been chose snn I've been
0:47:58 > 0:48:04to you before, Sir, the man with the white beard? Hasn't the FA done
0:48:04 > 0:48:08a good job, it's actually got rid of a �6 million a year failure who
0:48:09 > 0:48:12couldn't speak English and has got a chance now to get Harry Redknapp
0:48:12 > 0:48:19in hopefully on the cheap. think it was all a device? Could
0:48:19 > 0:48:23have been. Somebody there, I can just see a hand at the back on the
0:48:24 > 0:48:29right there. Alastair, which two players will go into the squad?
0:48:29 > 0:48:34Cole and Rooney. Only because the other one has a broken leg. I agree
0:48:34 > 0:48:42with Steve over there, I'm not interested in football... Fine,
0:48:42 > 0:48:45move on. No! APPLAUSE One of the skill sets of a foreign
0:48:45 > 0:48:49correspondent was to know about British football because everywhere
0:48:49 > 0:48:52you go around the world, people wanted to know, you know, in China
0:48:52 > 0:48:57people would ask me about Man United, they are mad about it, so I
0:48:57 > 0:49:03would have to mug up on it. I really don't care. However, one
0:49:03 > 0:49:07thing I would like to ask the footie fans here is, why don't
0:49:07 > 0:49:12footie fans get hysterical about the enormous amount of money that
0:49:12 > 0:49:16Fabio Capello was getting, what, �6 million, for failure, running a
0:49:16 > 0:49:21third rate team, couldn't even speak English as one of the
0:49:21 > 0:49:26audience pointed out, yet they get into a terrible state about people
0:49:26 > 0:49:31like Stephen Hester. I mean, I'm not in favour... APPLAUSE
0:49:31 > 0:49:39I think you are off on to a different question there. You had
0:49:39 > 0:49:45nothing to say about the suspension. I like what Ann said. Thank you,
0:49:45 > 0:49:55Ann. Why should this sound unexpected from the Daily Mail. Lay
0:49:55 > 0:50:01lay Moran? Last question? Should Andrew Lansley and his NHS Bill be
0:50:01 > 0:50:06take -- be "taken out and shot". The Jeremy Clarkson solution to the
0:50:06 > 0:50:10problem, a political problem of whether Andrew Lansley's screwed up
0:50:10 > 0:50:13with the NHS Act and it was apparently said by somebody at
0:50:13 > 0:50:17Number Ten or quoted in the Times as being said by somebody from
0:50:17 > 0:50:20Number Ten. It's the politics of it. Shirley Williams, I know you began
0:50:20 > 0:50:25against, you then said you get reassurances, do you think
0:50:25 > 0:50:28Lansley's mishandled the whole thing? To a great extent, but let
0:50:28 > 0:50:32me say very clearly he's right about one thing. I'm somebody who
0:50:32 > 0:50:35believes very deeply and I think it's true, that the NHS is the most
0:50:35 > 0:50:39remarkable Health Service in the world, probably. It's been
0:50:39 > 0:50:43tremendously praised by the OECD and others who can't be seen to be
0:50:43 > 0:50:47just political voices. Having said that, I think where Lansley is
0:50:47 > 0:50:51right in in saying there has to be major changes because we are an
0:50:51 > 0:50:54ageing society because thank God because of the NHS, more and more
0:50:54 > 0:50:59chronically sick people are surviving into their '70s and
0:50:59 > 0:51:02beyond. Therefore it's got a real crisis facing it. Now, quite
0:51:02 > 0:51:04straightforwardly, my own view is the only way to deal with that
0:51:04 > 0:51:08would have been originally to make some reforms in what was then the
0:51:08 > 0:51:12structure of the NHS. Was it necessary to have a new Act?
0:51:12 > 0:51:15don't think it was. Why would they have done that? I think because he
0:51:15 > 0:51:20believed that the changes I'm talking about, these big, big
0:51:20 > 0:51:22challenges, could only be met by changes in the structure. I don't
0:51:22 > 0:51:25entirely agree, that's why we fought like mad in the House of
0:51:26 > 0:51:29Lords for weeks on end to make it clear that the Secretary of State
0:51:29 > 0:51:31has to remain responsible for a comprehensive Health Service, we
0:51:31 > 0:51:36have got that through in the House of Lords, we have an all-party
0:51:36 > 0:51:39basis for that, which is important. I think there are more things to be
0:51:39 > 0:51:43fought for, competition policy has to be, in my view, very much
0:51:43 > 0:51:46contained. I think issues about conflicts of interest have to be
0:51:47 > 0:51:51addressed. We'll discuss this in the House of Lords in the next few
0:51:51 > 0:51:54weeks. You give Lansley a clean bill of health so to speak? No.
0:51:54 > 0:51:58you think he should be sacked? because I think he was right about
0:51:58 > 0:52:01the changes that are needed. The responses to the changes should
0:52:01 > 0:52:05have been closer to where we were with the original NHS but there
0:52:05 > 0:52:10were changes that need to be made. Why did you abstain on the Bill?
0:52:10 > 0:52:12didn't. I thought you abstained on the Bill last night? One issue, the
0:52:12 > 0:52:17issue of whether mental and physical health should come
0:52:17 > 0:52:23together and in the light, having found out about this, that we had a
0:52:23 > 0:52:28precise answer from the minister ah very decent man indeed which said
0:52:28 > 0:52:34he'd take it back and I don't think that was... When you were at Number
0:52:34 > 0:52:38Ten, you had ministers "taken out and shot" metaphorically speaking.
0:52:38 > 0:52:41Would you have Andrew Lansley changed? No, that's over the top.
0:52:41 > 0:52:45I'm surprise head got a round of applause for the idea of taking him
0:52:45 > 0:52:49out and shooting him. I don't think this is about Andrew Lansley. Let's
0:52:49 > 0:52:53go back to the general election. David Cameron, when he was busy
0:52:53 > 0:52:55decontaminating the brand, as he called it, he made two clear
0:52:55 > 0:52:59statements on the National Health Service. He went up on the big
0:52:59 > 0:53:02posters "I will cut the deficit, not the NHS", he's failing on the
0:53:02 > 0:53:07deficit and there are cuts going through the NHS as we speak in
0:53:07 > 0:53:09every part of the country. He also said, you have and he got a massive
0:53:09 > 0:53:14round of applause at the Royal College of Nurses for it, he said
0:53:14 > 0:53:18there will be no top down reorganisation. This is the biggest
0:53:18 > 0:53:22reorganisation since its inception. A Bill three times longer than the
0:53:22 > 0:53:26Bill that brought in the National Health Service way back when. I
0:53:26 > 0:53:30think that those two things alone, the cuts, and when Shirley talks
0:53:30 > 0:53:34about the competition, we are talking here about a free market
0:53:34 > 0:53:37free-for-all that is going to pit doctor against doctor, hospital
0:53:37 > 0:53:41against hospital, Trust against Trust, and this is now, I believe,
0:53:41 > 0:53:45a fight for the future of the National Health Service, it's why
0:53:45 > 0:53:49it's not You have a very short memory. It shouldn't be taken out
0:53:49 > 0:53:56of shot, but they are destroying the National Health Service. Who do
0:53:56 > 0:54:02you think brought in competition? We brought in the use of thery vat
0:54:02 > 0:54:08sector... Yes. In the interest of the National Health Service patient.
0:54:08 > 0:54:14This is using the NHS to boost the private sector. You gave them 14%
0:54:14 > 0:54:23extra. It's now gone to 50%. Philip Hammond? You should vote against
0:54:23 > 0:54:26this Bill, sure Shirley, vote against it. The private sector had
0:54:27 > 0:54:30a special advantage. All right, all right, hold on, everybody. Philip
0:54:30 > 0:54:33Hammond? I want to say for the record as a former Shadow minister
0:54:33 > 0:54:38that Alastair did used to take ministers out and have them shot
0:54:38 > 0:54:45and they used to talk to their opposite numbers in the opposition
0:54:45 > 0:54:49once he'd done it. I don't know who that was? Andrew Lansley... Who he
0:54:49 > 0:54:52said? I'm not going to tell him, they'll be shot again! Look,
0:54:52 > 0:54:56Shirley is absolutely right, the National Health Service is our
0:54:56 > 0:55:01greatest national asset, we know from opinion polling that people
0:55:01 > 0:55:07regard it as the most important thing. Has the politics been well
0:55:07 > 0:55:14done? It absolutely required reform. This is a massive undertaking, a
0:55:14 > 0:55:19restructuring of the NHS to allow it to work. The whole point about
0:55:19 > 0:55:23this restructuring is that it's built on clinical groups, GPs...
0:55:23 > 0:55:29That's happening already. It's a bottom up structure. Has the
0:55:29 > 0:55:35politics been Weldon, that is the point -- well done, that is the
0:55:35 > 0:55:39point? The BMA says they are against it, they were against the
0:55:39 > 0:55:43creation of the Health Service in the first place. What Andrew
0:55:43 > 0:55:47Lansley's done is very diligently listened to what people are saying,
0:55:47 > 0:55:54including what Shirley and her colleagues have been saying and
0:55:54 > 0:55:57incorporated hundreds of changes to the Bill to um prove it, the NHS
0:55:57 > 0:56:03future forum taking the views of health professionals and patients
0:56:03 > 0:56:10across the country. But they become more against it. The opposition and
0:56:10 > 0:56:16the Health Service... Well... have a minute or two. Tony Blair
0:56:16 > 0:56:19did reform of the Health Service. One at a time. Steve Coogan, then
0:56:19 > 0:56:23Ann Leslie, then we'll have to stop. When it comes to the Tories doing
0:56:24 > 0:56:26reform with the NHS, despite the involvement of distinguished people
0:56:26 > 0:56:31like Baroness Williams next to me, I view it with great suspicion, I
0:56:31 > 0:56:36think they don't lake the NHS because it's one of the few
0:56:36 > 0:56:41remaining legacies of people who believe in... Don't tell me I don't
0:56:41 > 0:56:46believe in it. I didn't say that. Of course I know you believe in it.
0:56:46 > 0:56:51I'm saying that it's the Tories, not your good self-. I'm saying
0:56:51 > 0:56:56when Tories are involved in reforming the NHS, I don't trust
0:56:56 > 0:57:00them, it's like putting Harold Shipman in charge of your local
0:57:01 > 0:57:06surgery. Ann Leslie? Well, I'm like Steve,
0:57:06 > 0:57:10I'm not a comedian -- unlike Steve I'm not a comedian, however, no, I
0:57:10 > 0:57:15mean, I've been in and out of hospital more or less constantly
0:57:15 > 0:57:20for two years. I have a lot of experience of the Health Service
0:57:20 > 0:57:25and the private service. All I can say is that, as I lie there,
0:57:25 > 0:57:30drugged to the eye balls, often inaccurately because the nurses are
0:57:30 > 0:57:35not angels, they're, well, I'm not going to say anything more, I just
0:57:35 > 0:57:39feel that after all the years I've been alive because Shirley has
0:57:39 > 0:57:44pointed out, she and I are very old ladies, I'm terribly bored with a
0:57:44 > 0:57:49whole lot of politicians saying, we are going to save the NHS. When I
0:57:49 > 0:57:56heard Ed Miliband say, we have three months to save the NHS, my
0:57:56 > 0:58:03heart sank. I remember your boss, Tony Blair, saying, 24 hours to
0:58:03 > 0:58:06save the Health Service. It's a good job because we did save it.
0:58:06 > 0:58:11You didn't. All right. Ann... Satisfactory levels within the
0:58:11 > 0:58:17National Health Service and record low waiting times. All I'm saying
0:58:17 > 0:58:22is it never ever is completely saved. And what Andrew Lansley has
0:58:22 > 0:58:26been doing and the way he's been doing it. No good at being a star
0:58:26 > 0:58:30on television, that's the problem. He doesn't want to be. You would
0:58:30 > 0:58:37better be, unlike Ed Miliband. Proper reform of the NHS. The GPs,
0:58:37 > 0:58:41RCN, never argue with a nurse. BMA... She'd argue with a nurse.
0:58:41 > 0:58:44She just insulted the entire nurses profession. We have talked about
0:58:44 > 0:58:47the NHS before and a lot of you have things you want to say but I
0:58:47 > 0:58:52can't overrun our time because we've done our hour and just have
0:58:52 > 0:58:56to stop and that's how it is. We are going to be in Nottingham next
0:58:56 > 0:58:59week. We've got Ken Clarke, the Justice Secretary and John Prescott
0:58:59 > 0:59:03only panel, should be quite a scene, and the week after that, we are
0:59:03 > 0:59:07going to be in Tunbridge Wells. If you want to come to Nottingham or
0:59:07 > 0:59:14Tunbridge Wells, you know how to do it. The number is on the screen. Or
0:59:14 > 0:59:17you can apply to the website. My thanks to all of you on the panel