:00:18. > :00:26.Tonight we are in Leeds, and welcome to Question Time.
:00:26. > :00:31.With me here on our panel the newly elected Respect MP George Galloway,
:00:31. > :00:35.victor of the Bradford west by- election. The Shadow Home Secretary,
:00:35. > :00:39.Yvette Cooper. Co-chairman of the Conservative Party, Sayeeda Warsi,
:00:39. > :00:49.President of the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron, and the Times columnist,
:00:49. > :00:51.
:00:51. > :00:57.David Aaronovitch. APPLAUSE
:00:57. > :01:07.Thank you vex. Our first question tonight from Peter Stevens please.
:01:07. > :01:11.Should we now take control of our justice system in the light of the
:01:11. > :01:17.farcical deportation of Abu Qatada. I think this has been farcical this
:01:17. > :01:20.week. It's been completely chaotic. I think, look, we all want to see
:01:20. > :01:23.Abu Qatada deported to Jordan as soon as possible, within the rule
:01:23. > :01:27.of law but as soon as possible. I think he should be kept in custody
:01:27. > :01:30.in the meantime. I think that's what everybody wants to see.
:01:30. > :01:34.There've been too many delays. Delays in the British courts and in
:01:34. > :01:39.the European courts. They should be reformed in order to speed up the
:01:39. > :01:44.process. But I think the problems we've seen this week was seems to
:01:44. > :01:47.have been a complete shambles of the Home Secretary's making. They
:01:47. > :01:51.seem to have got a basic deadline wrong about the timing of appeals
:01:51. > :01:55.to the European Court. The Home Secretary said it was Monday. The
:01:55. > :02:00.European Court said it was Tuesday. Why did nobody ring up to just get
:02:00. > :02:08.the basic facts right? I simply don't understand it. As a result of
:02:08. > :02:11.that we could now have Abu Qatada able to delay the deportation even
:02:11. > :02:14.further. We could have him more likely to be released back on to
:02:14. > :02:17.our streets, and even having the chance to sue the British
:02:17. > :02:21.Government as a result. I think that's chaotic, utterly
:02:21. > :02:28.irresponsible. I think the Home Secretary needs to provide answers
:02:28. > :02:32.pretty urgently and needs to get a grip of this shambles and sort it
:02:32. > :02:37.all out. APPLAUSE Sayeeda Warsi. Yes Peter,
:02:37. > :02:44.we do need reform, because we've been trying to deport this man
:02:44. > :02:49.since 2001. For nine years Yvette's Government tried and for two years
:02:49. > :02:53.we've been trying. So to try to make party politics out of this is
:02:53. > :02:59.slightly disen Jennous. The delay has been because the European Court
:02:59. > :03:03.of Human Rights has a backlog of about 150 ,000 cases. The purpose
:03:03. > :03:07.for which that court was set up is not the purpose in which it has
:03:07. > :03:11.been operating. Interestingly today there's been a conference taking
:03:12. > :03:15.place in Brighton in which we have used our chairmanship of the
:03:15. > :03:19.Council of Europe to get the other member states of the Council of
:03:20. > :03:27.Europe to agree some changes. One, for them to accept that the
:03:27. > :03:31.European Court of Human Rights has a subsidiary element. So there is
:03:31. > :03:36.the element of subsidiarity. What that means our courts will have the
:03:36. > :03:41.final say on how we protect the human rights of our population.
:03:41. > :03:45.coming to the point, has it been a shambles over this deadline, as
:03:45. > :03:51.Yvette Cooper says? The thing we won't agree on probably on this
:03:51. > :03:55.panel is whether the Home Office lawyers are right or whether Abu
:03:55. > :04:01.Qatada's lawyers are right. didn't she wait a day, as many
:04:01. > :04:11.people have said, if it is just a matter of a day? On Monday Yvette
:04:11. > :04:12.
:04:12. > :04:16.was saying you are taking too long. But if she had waited a day would
:04:16. > :04:21.she have been able to deport him think what would please people in
:04:21. > :04:25.this country is if we were to remove him. It took the previous
:04:25. > :04:31.Government nine years and they didn't achieve it. I'm confident
:04:31. > :04:36.we'll remove him fairly soon. Aaronovitch. There's a wonderfully
:04:36. > :04:40.comic aspect is to this. It goes two ways. Had we been two years ago
:04:40. > :04:43.we could imagine Yvette Cooper as the Home Secretary having exactly
:04:43. > :04:47.the same problem and Sayeeda Warsi saying about her what Yvette Cooper
:04:47. > :04:52.has just said about trim. It would've been completely... In
:04:52. > :04:56.other words, forget about the shambles, all this kind of stuff is
:04:56. > :04:59.always a shambles. Let's look at the issue itself. We do have,
:04:59. > :05:04.mostly, control over our own justice system, but the European
:05:04. > :05:08.Court of Human Rights was set up for a very good reason. It is a
:05:08. > :05:13.classic idea, a really good idea that everybody thought was a good
:05:13. > :05:17.idea at the time but has problems surrounding it now. This is part of
:05:17. > :05:21.the problem, it is an absurdity that somebody like Abu Qatada, who
:05:21. > :05:26.is under no threat if he goes back to Jordan, we've already got the
:05:26. > :05:31.assurances from the Jordanian Government that he isn't, cannot be
:05:31. > :05:34.deported from this country, given his record and what we know about
:05:34. > :05:38.him and given what successive Governments have been able to show
:05:38. > :05:45.the courts. So Sayeeda Warsi is right in this instance it shows a
:05:45. > :05:51.need for a reform to the ECHR so she's changes can be made more
:05:51. > :05:53.easily. But don't think it is going to be simple. If we find it easy to
:05:53. > :05:56.go against what the European Court of Human Rights says, there are
:05:56. > :06:02.people with much worse human rights records around Europe who would
:06:02. > :06:06.like to be able to do the same thing. These things are complicated,
:06:06. > :06:10.not simple. APPLAUSE $$TRANSMIT. Surely this is
:06:10. > :06:18.a problem for liberalism how long we'll continue to tolerate the
:06:18. > :06:23.intolerant in this country. OK. And the man in the fifth row. Italy
:06:23. > :06:32.deported a man back to Algeria I believe it was, despite an ECHR
:06:32. > :06:35.ruling, and all that happened to the Italian Government was a 2,5 00
:06:35. > :06:39.euros fine. Why didn't the Government just do that? George
:06:39. > :06:43.Galloway. The British Government has has in the past been ready to
:06:43. > :06:47.assist the United States in rendering people, one of whom is
:06:47. > :06:51.now suing the former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, because the
:06:51. > :06:58.British Government returned him to the torturer tables of Colonel
:06:58. > :07:03.Gaddafi. This was at the time of the kiss-in between Mr Blair and
:07:03. > :07:08.the Colonel. I'm sure that Colonel Gaddafi gave the kind of assurances
:07:08. > :07:14.that David Aaronovitch rather touchingly is ready to accept from
:07:14. > :07:20.the Jordanians. In fact, every Arab Government engages in torture. And
:07:20. > :07:26.every trial in an Arab court in any country is contaminated by this
:07:26. > :07:31.looming spectre of torture. That's why the European Court wants to be
:07:31. > :07:37.very clear that the assurances that David is ready to accept are worth
:07:37. > :07:43.the paper that they are written on. I ran into in a motorway service
:07:43. > :07:49.station just the other night some of the acolytes of this Abu Qatada.
:07:49. > :07:53.An Jim Chaudhry and his crowd. And their low malevolence is indeed a
:07:53. > :07:58.shadow over the country. But the presence of these people here is
:07:58. > :08:03.not a reason for us to act like a rogue state. Because if we act like
:08:03. > :08:09.a rogue state, for a start we'll have to stop lecturing other people
:08:09. > :08:13.as rogue states. We have to follow the rule of law. It is clear from
:08:13. > :08:17.Yvette Cooper's Stirling performance in the House of Commons
:08:17. > :08:22.today that not only is the Home Office not fit for purpose, but
:08:22. > :08:29.Theresa May is not fit for the job of Home Secretary, and she should
:08:29. > :08:32.be sacked or resign. APPLAUSE Tim Farron, I saw Theresa
:08:32. > :08:36.May say she takes responsibility for the decision that has been
:08:36. > :08:43.taken. Does that mean she would resign if it turns out to have been
:08:43. > :08:50.the wrong decision? I have no idea. Do you think she should? I take the
:08:50. > :08:54.view that there is an Olympic-Stade screw-up here. What I am certain of,
:08:54. > :08:58.Abu Qatada should be deported. He should be on a plane as quickly as
:08:58. > :09:03.possible, but that the rule of law should be applied. If Governments
:09:03. > :09:12.can't abide by the rule of law why should anybody else? I was really
:09:12. > :09:16.impressed by Prime Minister stolen burg of Norway's recently. He said
:09:16. > :09:20.you deal with terrorism, you deal with threats of your freedom and
:09:20. > :09:23.democracy by having more democracy, more freedom and more openness. You
:09:23. > :09:28.deal with people like Abu Qatada, who are a threat to our country,
:09:28. > :09:31.who do want to undermine our democracy, not by closing up and
:09:31. > :09:37.behaving like he would, but by being more democratic and abiding
:09:37. > :09:41.by the rule of law. APPLAUSE We must not be a rogue
:09:41. > :09:45.state and we must have more democracy, but when virtually every
:09:45. > :09:50.elected person we have wants to get rid of this man and we are
:09:50. > :09:53.prevented by unelected people in Strasbourg, it does call into
:09:53. > :10:02.question things about our sovereignty. That's a different
:10:02. > :10:05.issue thrown into the midst of this issue thrown into the midst of this
:10:05. > :10:09.which must be addressed. discussions are about that, that
:10:09. > :10:13.ultimately it should be our courts to decide on the human rights of
:10:13. > :10:17.our citizens, and the only time the European Court of Human Rights
:10:17. > :10:20.should get involved is when there's a substantial issue of
:10:20. > :10:24.interpretation. It will happen. There has been agreement between 47
:10:24. > :10:28.member states today and we think the implementation will take place
:10:28. > :10:31.by 2013. This has been a huge step forward. This has been leadership
:10:31. > :10:36.by the Prime Minister and this Government saying we have
:10:36. > :10:41.chairmanship of the European Council, let's use it and do
:10:41. > :10:45.something good for our nation. talk about sovereignty. It's a fair
:10:45. > :10:49.point, but why is it this Government or those of any colour
:10:49. > :10:54.are so quick to bow to our relationship to the United States,
:10:55. > :10:59.as a young lad in Yorkshire has been extradited without question
:10:59. > :11:05.for effectively file sharing while Abu Qatada gets this treatment?
:11:05. > :11:09.APPLAUSE Do you want to... You served with Jack Straw, do you want
:11:09. > :11:14.to reply to the point Jack Straw made about Jack Straw? I don't know
:11:14. > :11:20.the details. Neither does he. He's forgotten. Tony Blair has forgotten
:11:20. > :11:24.too. I do and you are wrong. There was no question of him being put on
:11:24. > :11:30.a plane, as you were suggesting. The security services told the CIA
:11:30. > :11:34.where he was. They collaborated in the rendition of someone to
:11:34. > :11:39.Gaddafi's torture table. I know you like to defend Tony Blair but
:11:39. > :11:44.surely this is indefensible even by you They collaborated with the
:11:44. > :11:49.rendition of somebody who was an Al-Qaeda supporter. And he was, in
:11:49. > :11:53.2005. And we rendered him to Gaddafi. It is interesting that you
:11:53. > :11:58.never understand the problems the Government faced at that time. I
:11:58. > :12:05.thought you were a journalist. Are awe journalist of a servant of the
:12:05. > :12:10.Blairs? I am a critic of everybody who deserves to be criticised. One
:12:10. > :12:17.of the things that was interesting about you earlier is you talked
:12:17. > :12:21.about the Jordan Government when you have got down to the business
:12:21. > :12:28.of licking the backside of Bashar al-Assad...
:12:28. > :12:35.APPLAUSE Listen. Listen. George, hold on. Let him finish the point.
:12:35. > :12:41.It was quite a long point. You said Syria had Bashar al-Assad as the
:12:41. > :12:45.President. When I first met David Aaronovitch he was a Marxist
:12:45. > :12:49.Leninist, licking the backside of Lenin and Stalin. He worked for
:12:50. > :12:55.Tony Blair and now for Rupert Murdoch, so I'm not sure the
:12:55. > :13:01.company people keep is your strong suit. Have I ever gone up to a
:13:01. > :13:10.dictator and said, "You are a wonderful man?" Yes. Have I ever
:13:10. > :13:15.spoken about the indefatigability of the Soviet union? Are awe
:13:15. > :13:19.Communist? I was Communist but you are still to the left of me, George.
:13:19. > :13:25.APPLAUSE I was in the Labour Party. He was in the Communist Party.
:13:25. > :13:35.We'll go on to another question. If you want to join the debate or
:13:35. > :13:41.
:13:41. > :13:51.Was the "Bradford Spring" just a spot of unseasonable political
:13:51. > :13:51.
:13:51. > :13:57.weather or climate change? Sayeeda Warsi. Well, I think first
:13:57. > :14:01.of all we have to accept that over 18,000 people Jack came out and
:14:01. > :14:05.voted for George Galloway and none of the political parties should
:14:05. > :14:09.begrudge him that, so congratulations on winning Bradford
:14:09. > :14:13.west. It is right that when the electorate come out and vote for
:14:14. > :14:18.somebody in such numbers, that in a way is democracy at work.
:14:18. > :14:23.We would have loved to have won that seat rather than you, but what
:14:23. > :14:28.I think was happening in Bradford West was the people of Bradford
:14:28. > :14:33.saying that for decades we have had Labour as our Member of Parliament.
:14:33. > :14:37.We have been ruled predominantly by a Labour council. And really
:14:37. > :14:41.nothing's got better. It was a lashout at the Labour
:14:41. > :14:51.Party to say, you can't take us for granted any more.
:14:51. > :14:52.
:14:52. > :14:57.Yvette Cooper. On the last point, it has not been a predominantly
:14:57. > :15:03.Labour council in the last few years. It has in the last couple of
:15:03. > :15:07.years, but before that there have been Conservatives. How long have
:15:07. > :15:13.you held the seat for? Let's go back to the question, because this
:15:13. > :15:17.was a bad result for us, of course. It was obviously deeply
:15:17. > :15:21.disappointing for Labour as well. We have a lot of what -- a lot of
:15:21. > :15:26.work to do in Bradford and we will do that. We lost the seat to
:15:26. > :15:32.Respect in Tower Hamlets in 2005. We did a lot of work there to win
:15:32. > :15:36.back votes and trust and that was successful. I think Labour has won
:15:36. > :15:40.the votes back in Tower Hamlets. We have to do that again in Bradford.
:15:40. > :15:44.We have to recognise that we did not do enough to engage with young
:15:44. > :15:49.voters in the Asian community in Bradford, but also Muslim women as
:15:49. > :15:54.well. We have to do a lot more than that. I think we also have to
:15:54. > :15:59.recognise that only four out of 10 voters voted for any of the major
:15:59. > :16:02.parties. So for Sayeeda Warsi to make this a party political thing
:16:02. > :16:05.for the Labour Party, it is true it was disappointing for us because we
:16:05. > :16:08.wanted to win Bradford West and we want to do so again, but for the
:16:08. > :16:13.Conservatives this was a target seat at the last election and their
:16:13. > :16:17.vote was just completely decimated. So it is a challenge to wall of the
:16:17. > :16:21.parties. The parties in Government saw their votes collapse. Those
:16:21. > :16:25.votes did not come to Labour. We know that the first step is to show
:16:25. > :16:30.what a nightmare this Government is for Bradford, for the whole of
:16:30. > :16:35.Yorkshire and the damage that it is doing. That is not enough to win
:16:35. > :16:38.back votes for Labour. What does it say about Labour that it loses its
:16:38. > :16:43.majority to George Galloway and he gets the majority of 10,000 votes
:16:43. > :16:47.and your vote goes down by nearly a quarter, 20%? What does it say
:16:47. > :16:51.about Labour? We talk about it as a tactician, but is there something
:16:51. > :16:58.more fundamental? Ed Miliband has already been back to Bradford to
:16:58. > :17:01.talk to people, to listen to people... That will have helped!
:17:01. > :17:05.have been through this before in Tower Hamlets and we were
:17:05. > :17:10.challenged their, and we had to work, again, as we will have to do
:17:10. > :17:14.in Bradford. There are local factors and also some wider factors
:17:14. > :17:18.about politics generally and about people's frustration about politics,
:17:18. > :17:22.people wanting to see change, about people seeing terrible things
:17:22. > :17:26.happening as a result of the economic problems and so on. They
:17:26. > :17:29.want to see something different. We have to show people that politics
:17:29. > :17:37.can make a difference, the Labour Party can make a difference, and
:17:37. > :17:39.that means setting out alternatives as well. David Aaronovitch. George
:17:39. > :17:43.Galloway essentially did at Bradford what the Liberal Democrats
:17:43. > :17:49.have been doing for years but now they are in Government, so they
:17:49. > :17:52.cannot. He is a modern Liberal Democrat, I suppose. What is that?
:17:52. > :17:56.Testing the support for the major parties at a by-election and
:17:56. > :17:59.discovering that a lot of parties do not like them at the time of the
:17:59. > :18:06.by-election. Actually, voter support for the two main parties
:18:06. > :18:10.has been falling since the 1950s. I was at the wire Forest in 2001 when
:18:10. > :18:13.Dr Taylor won the Independent support. I felt at that election
:18:13. > :18:17.that quite often is a halfway credible candidate could come along
:18:17. > :18:20.in one of these seats, often they would pick up the votes. And then
:18:20. > :18:24.there are there particular ways in which George Galloway appealed to
:18:24. > :18:30.the voters of Bradford, which was an additional element in that by-
:18:30. > :18:34.election. Which were what? George knows. When you have a campaign
:18:34. > :18:38.leaflet saying, God knows who is a Muslim and he knows who is not,
:18:38. > :18:44.instinctively, so do you, signed George Galloway, you think, how
:18:44. > :18:48.does he know that God knows who is a Muslim? Did God appear to you in
:18:48. > :18:58.tablets of stone? Was it written in fiery words on a stone wall, or was
:18:58. > :19:00.
:19:00. > :19:08.Stalin was your God, God is my God. There is only one god, I believe.
:19:08. > :19:11.You do not. We will both soon find out. The Bradford Bulls have won
:19:11. > :19:16.four games in a row since I was elected. They even be the Leeds
:19:16. > :19:20.Rhinos, and I was there. Bradford City football club even one last
:19:20. > :19:28.Saturday, and that is a very rare event. So we have changed, to pick
:19:28. > :19:35.up the point of the questioner, the political weather in Bradford.
:19:35. > :19:39.did Blackburn do? We are coming to Blackburn next, don't worry. Yvette
:19:39. > :19:44.Cooper talked for quite a long time about what the lessons for Labour
:19:44. > :19:52.were, but she did not actually say anything. Let me short cut this for
:19:52. > :19:54.her. The reasons that Labour voters do not find a new Labour credible
:19:54. > :20:00.is because they caused a succession of wars in which more than 1
:20:00. > :20:06.million people died, supported by David Aaronovitch, by Yvette Cooper
:20:06. > :20:11.and by the leadership of New Labour, because all three of the major
:20:11. > :20:14.parties support the war in Afghanistan, all three of the major
:20:14. > :20:19.parties support austerity, as they describe it, which means poor
:20:19. > :20:24.people paying the price for the crimes and mistakes of rich people
:20:24. > :20:28.and powerful people in running the economy and the Government. Most
:20:28. > :20:34.Labour voters say no to all those propositions. And until Labour
:20:34. > :20:37.becomes Labour again, until they can find the vocabulary and express
:20:37. > :20:42.the values that made Labour great, which changed this country, that is
:20:42. > :20:48.why I was in it for 30 years -- 36 years, when Abramovich was a
:20:48. > :20:52.communist, I was in it for 36 years, because I believed in labour. --
:20:52. > :20:55.David Aaronovitch. And I want to persuade people to be able to
:20:55. > :21:04.believe in Labour again. They will have to be Labour for that to
:21:04. > :21:08.happen. Do you want briefly to answer that point. Simply to say
:21:08. > :21:13.that Respect prosecuted as arguments in Tower Hamlets in 2010
:21:13. > :21:17.and they lost. Labour won those constituencies by talking about
:21:17. > :21:20.actually do things, I think, that matter to people, which is the fact
:21:20. > :21:26.that people are losing their jobs, the fact that we should not have a
:21:26. > :21:30.plan which involves taking more from children than it does from the
:21:30. > :21:35.bank's... Was it Afghanistan that turned the corner for him,
:21:35. > :21:43.Afghanistan, Iraq and the decision on war? People have strong views
:21:43. > :21:47.about this. Is that why he won, as he claims? Respect have spent a lot
:21:47. > :21:53.of time campaigning on those issues. We know that, but was it the
:21:53. > :21:57.turning point, the decisive issue? Why don't you condemn the war? You
:21:57. > :22:02.will do yourself a lot of good. Look into the camera and say, I
:22:02. > :22:06.condemn the invasion of Iraq, and I condemn the invasion of Afghanistan.
:22:06. > :22:11.You can do the predictable rhetoric about the wars doors to I could do
:22:11. > :22:18.predictable rhetoric back again and talk about dictators and so on. A
:22:18. > :22:23.good thing that gets us anywhere. Why not just Iraq, condemn it.
:22:23. > :22:27.view is that we were wrong about Iraq. That is not the same thing,
:22:27. > :22:33.we were wrong. Like you were wrong about how you park your car. 1
:22:33. > :22:37.million people died. I listened to you. I think in Afghanistan it is
:22:37. > :22:43.right that we are part of the mission of 40 countries preventing
:22:43. > :22:46.Afghanistan from being a terror haven. But I think people across
:22:46. > :22:49.the country want to know what Respect, what Labour and the
:22:49. > :22:53.Conservatives will do about their jobs, living standards and the fact
:22:53. > :22:58.that they feel squeezed at the moment. They want people to stand
:22:58. > :23:03.up for them. We need to stand up for them. We did not do enough in
:23:03. > :23:07.Bradford, but we will do so and we are doing so across the country.
:23:07. > :23:11.want one or two members of the audience. You are not doing enough
:23:11. > :23:17.to stand up for people every day, Yvette Cooper, and that is the
:23:17. > :23:20.problem. This was not a protest vote. What this was about, as a
:23:20. > :23:24.public sector workers and trade unionist, was people rejecting the
:23:24. > :23:29.austerity and the cuts agenda, fast cuts, slow cuts, we do not want
:23:29. > :23:33.them. We want no cuts. That is why people voted for George Galloway. I
:23:33. > :23:36.would like to say one more thing - I hope when it comes to May 3rd and
:23:36. > :23:39.people get the chance to vote, we will not be talking about making
:23:39. > :23:47.Bradford British, we will be talking about making Britain like
:23:47. > :23:51.Bradford. Back to the original question, it was a staggering
:23:51. > :23:56.result. I spend an evening there on the Tuesday before hand. Should you
:23:56. > :24:01.not have gone a bit more, because you lost your deposit? If I had
:24:01. > :24:07.gone even more, we would have done even worse. You went for one
:24:07. > :24:17.evening as president of the party? Is that all? It was a long evening.
:24:17. > :24:17.
:24:17. > :24:21.I think I met all of our voters! Hats off to George and his team. I
:24:21. > :24:25.do not buy a lot of the explanations as to why he won. I
:24:25. > :24:28.did not see much comment on austerity on any of the leaflets.
:24:28. > :24:31.It was a foreign affairs election by and large, but it was a
:24:31. > :24:35.brilliant campaign and it was something he deserves credit for.
:24:35. > :24:39.It was exciting in British politics to see a different campaign that
:24:39. > :24:42.motivated people. Why did it happen? For the last 50 years
:24:42. > :24:46.people have been losing their allegiance to the main political
:24:46. > :24:50.parties, and that is good. It means politicians have to work harder for
:24:50. > :24:56.your vote. It is not comfortable for politicians but it is good for
:24:56. > :24:59.you. It is bad news for the three main parties. What it shows us,
:24:59. > :25:03.what George shows us and what Alex Salmond shows north of the border,
:25:03. > :25:06.there are times when people want to vote against the Government parties
:25:06. > :25:14.will stop if you give them the chance to vote against Labour, too,
:25:14. > :25:19.they will bite your hand off. Directed at George, is it true that
:25:19. > :25:27.in the press there was 100-1 against you becoming, winning that
:25:27. > :25:31.seat? 200-1. And some people but �1,000 on it. People put money on
:25:31. > :25:39.that debt, so you were obviously going to get all of the people who
:25:39. > :25:44.had backed at the bookies. And the other thing was, is it true that
:25:45. > :25:48.you canvassed within the mosques in Bradford? Absolutely. In the
:25:48. > :25:54.mosques, churches, among white people, black people, I canvassed
:25:54. > :25:58.for every vote. And you one. We heard that. Pre-by-elections are
:25:58. > :26:01.different to the general election and I don't think George will be
:26:01. > :26:09.grinning like the cat that got the cream by the time the general
:26:09. > :26:12.election comes. The only invasion I am decrying is the invasion of
:26:12. > :26:21.George Galloway into a city he knows nothing about that has enough
:26:21. > :26:25.problems without him in it. Do you want to enlarge on that? I feel
:26:25. > :26:28.like he is a Yes, yes, yes politician who will not keep his
:26:28. > :26:37.promises and it will not be hard for Labour to win the seat again,
:26:37. > :26:41.because he will let everybody down. The man on the gangway. I can see
:26:41. > :26:44.that getting into Bradford, George, has got you back into government,
:26:44. > :26:48.but what are you going to do for Bradford? There is a hole in the
:26:48. > :26:51.ground which used to be a plan shopping centre. There is a big
:26:51. > :26:57.pond, and one of the major buildings is crumbling. What are
:26:57. > :27:00.you going to do to Bradford to make yourself stay there? If you look at
:27:00. > :27:06.the local papers since I was elected, you will see page after
:27:06. > :27:09.page of local issues. The one. I agreed with that Yvette Cooper made
:27:09. > :27:14.was that actually the Tories are responsible for the hole in the
:27:14. > :27:18.grounds. It was them that target. The Tories were in power in
:27:18. > :27:22.Bradford City Council until the last couple of years. But two
:27:22. > :27:26.cheeks of the same backside - nothing has changed in Bradford.
:27:27. > :27:33.There is mass unemployment, youth unemployment has tripled in a year
:27:33. > :27:38.and risen by 40% in 12 weeks. The poverty that stalks Bradford West
:27:38. > :27:42.is a disgrace to both of these major parties. And that is why we
:27:42. > :27:46.were elected. I think we can leave Bradford because we have
:27:46. > :27:51.established that you won and we do not want to run the campaign all
:27:51. > :27:57.over again. Another question from Ryan McDonagh. Is it fair that
:27:57. > :28:02.parents of truants children should have fines directly taken from
:28:02. > :28:06.their child benefit? This is the proposal from the Government's
:28:07. > :28:11.adviser that this is how fines should be recovered, straight from
:28:11. > :28:16.child benefit. Tim Farron, is this a coalition policy that you approve
:28:16. > :28:20.of? Definitely not. The Government have turned down that aspect of
:28:20. > :28:23.Charlie Taylor's report. It is right that Government should accept
:28:23. > :28:28.those parts of the report that make a difference, but when all is said
:28:28. > :28:32.and done there is a huge coincidence between poverty, high
:28:32. > :28:35.levels of poverty and high levels of truancy in this country. If you
:28:35. > :28:40.deal with it by taking benefit money from the parents of children
:28:40. > :28:43.who play truant, you will just make the situation absolutely worse. The
:28:43. > :28:48.Government is doing one thing which is already helping to tackle
:28:48. > :28:51.truancy, and that is the crippled - - pupil premium, making sure kids
:28:51. > :28:54.from the poorest backgrounds, those schools get the most money. That
:28:54. > :28:57.helps with attainment and attendance, but the notion that you
:28:57. > :29:07.should punish by taking money of the poorest parents in the country
:29:07. > :29:08.
:29:08. > :29:11.to deal with truancy is counter- Is it consultation or has it been
:29:11. > :29:15.turned down? I understand that at this stage it is something that's
:29:15. > :29:21.been put forward. As far as I'm aware it is up for consultation.
:29:21. > :29:25.But I will stand corrected. Tim may know something that I don't know.
:29:25. > :29:33.It hasn't been fully accepted. on a second. It's been put forward
:29:33. > :29:40.as a proposal. You said it's been turned down. It's been turned down
:29:40. > :29:46.expressly those aspects of fining parents of truanting chairman.
:29:46. > :29:52.that right? I'm not sure about that. But you are the co-Chairman of the
:29:52. > :29:56.party. They are doing the sums! Every child that doesn't go to
:29:56. > :30:01.school and spends days or hours out of school is destroying their
:30:01. > :30:05.future. Therefore we have to do two things. First of all we have to
:30:05. > :30:09.inspire kids. We have to have the kind of schools that kids want to
:30:10. > :30:14.go to. If you look at the academy programme, which has been extended
:30:14. > :30:18.by hundreds of schools, which are school where is the head teacher
:30:18. > :30:23.has the freedom to be able to set the uniform, set the parameters of
:30:23. > :30:29.the kind of school and the feel that that school has, attendances
:30:29. > :30:33.in academies is a lot higher than in schools that don't become
:30:33. > :30:37.academies. We've seen an emergence of free schools, and you have one
:30:37. > :30:41.in Bradford West, where in one of the most deprived communities a
:30:41. > :30:45.free school has been set up paid for by the state. The kind of
:30:45. > :30:50.education that those kids are getting is the type that most
:30:50. > :30:55.people... We get the point. Are you in favour of the parents of
:30:55. > :30:59.truanting children being fined, and if they are not paying the fines,
:30:59. > :31:07.having it deducted from child benefit? No, but what I am in
:31:07. > :31:11.favour of is relinking the concept of responsibility between child and
:31:11. > :31:15.parent. It is not right that parents can say, it is not anything
:31:15. > :31:22.to do with me. You can answer the question, are you in favour of
:31:22. > :31:23.fines for parents of truanting children? I am in favour of parents
:31:23. > :31:28.taking responsibility, whether it is financial responsibility or
:31:28. > :31:33.responsibility to say they need to get their kids to school. Look, we
:31:34. > :31:39.cannot... Hold on, I think we've got the answer from. I come to you,
:31:39. > :31:44.Yvette Cooper. I think if parents want to avoid fines they should
:31:44. > :31:49.raise their children properly and send them to school. Yvette Cooper,
:31:49. > :31:53.do you approve of fines on parents of children who truant? It is one
:31:53. > :31:57.option in certain circumstances but there have to be safeguards in
:31:57. > :32:01.place. You've got to get children into school. The they play truancy
:32:01. > :32:04.or if they are not in school, that will harm them for the rest of
:32:04. > :32:09.their lives. The disadvantages they will face will follow them decade
:32:09. > :32:13.after decade, so I do think we should take every action we can to
:32:13. > :32:17.get children back into school that. May involve support, it may involve
:32:17. > :32:19.support for the family as well as the child. It may in certain
:32:19. > :32:23.circumstances where parents are refusing to take any responsibility
:32:23. > :32:28.for their children or refusing to do the things that you need parents
:32:28. > :32:31.to do as well also involve having court systems and having fines. The
:32:31. > :32:36.problem with the issue of focusing on child benefit, I think that is
:32:36. > :32:41.in danger of being a very difficult and unworkable and there are no
:32:41. > :32:45.safeguards in place, in the way it was proposed, if the parent was
:32:45. > :32:49.doing everything they possibly could and was already suffering and
:32:49. > :32:52.living in poverty and struggling. What the Government is doing is
:32:52. > :32:57.they are hitting child benefit for everyone. They are hitting the
:32:57. > :33:02.value of child benefit, cutting the tax credit. Whether they are doing
:33:03. > :33:07.the right thing as a parent, all families are losing out. I think
:33:07. > :33:11.the policy of taking money from parents of truanting children is
:33:11. > :33:17.just a lazy policy. It is simplistic and populist. There are
:33:17. > :33:20.many reasons why children might truant. Including bullying and many
:33:20. > :33:24.other reasons. I think it is much more complex the problem than is
:33:24. > :33:27.appreciated. It can't be involved by this measure. You have to look
:33:27. > :33:31.at what kind of education is provided. In current trend is to
:33:31. > :33:34.narrow that to a more academic education. More and more young
:33:34. > :33:42.people are going to find that that sort of schooling does not suit
:33:42. > :33:48.them and they are not going to turn APPLAUSE I find it really
:33:48. > :33:52.disappointing that people from let's say disadvantaged backgrounds
:33:52. > :33:56.having experienced the lack of education themselves don't
:33:56. > :34:00.encourage their own children to get that education, which is the next
:34:00. > :34:04.step up to a better career. Do you think the fines that were
:34:04. > :34:08.introduced eight years ago by a Labour Government are the right
:34:08. > :34:14.approach? I think they are an approach. I don't think there is
:34:14. > :34:18.one particular policy that is going to solve everything. OK. But as I'm
:34:18. > :34:24.sure Yvette Cooper knows from the last years of Labour, they must
:34:24. > :34:27.have tried this in their own Ed cation secretaries and failed
:34:27. > :34:34.hisably. I'm sure under the last Conservative Governments, they
:34:34. > :34:41.failed miserably as well. I'm told that absent teism isn't as bad as
:34:41. > :34:45.it used to be. That's always a good thing. But I think you need a
:34:45. > :34:48.comprehensive array of policies rather than focusing on one thing.
:34:48. > :34:52.George Galloway. The Tories are so strongly in favour of children
:34:52. > :34:55.going to school that they've cut the EMA, the education maintenance
:34:55. > :35:00.allowance, that would have allowed working class children and poor
:35:00. > :35:04.children to stay on at school and have some small amount of income to
:35:04. > :35:09.help them. They are so? Favour of school that they asked the House of
:35:09. > :35:14.Commons this week to celebrate the latest unemployment figures. Even
:35:14. > :35:18.though... Truancy is the question, George. It showed 1 million young
:35:18. > :35:22.people. That's one of the reasons why the schools and truancy is as
:35:22. > :35:27.they are. Because children cannot see the benefit of sticking in at
:35:27. > :35:32.school, because unemployment for more than 1 million of them is what
:35:32. > :35:38.comes after school. But the idea that a family so dysfunctional that
:35:38. > :35:42.the parent can no longer control their child will be helped by
:35:42. > :35:47.taking their ever-shrinking child benefit away is something that only
:35:47. > :35:55.Mr Blair or Mr Cameron could have come up with and both of them did.
:35:55. > :35:59.APPLAUSE When I was at school about 100 years ago there was a bald man,
:35:59. > :36:03.if you didn't go to school, the man was knocking on your door and would
:36:03. > :36:10.take you there. That might be an alternative to reinstate that
:36:10. > :36:14.profession. Did that happen to you? No! David Aaronovitch. I disagree
:36:14. > :36:19.with Tim about this in a major way. This is not a moral issue at all.
:36:19. > :36:23.This is an issue about what works. The gentleman was right, truancy
:36:23. > :36:27.has not increased. It has stabilised and has been at a stable
:36:27. > :36:30.level. The problem that's identified here is there is a core
:36:30. > :36:33.truancy which is incredibly difficult to get at. It is very,
:36:34. > :36:37.very hard to reach. It is very difficult to persuade people. The
:36:38. > :36:41.question we have to ask ourselves is this: do we think by society
:36:41. > :36:45.effectively saying we think so lowly of the behaviour of not
:36:45. > :36:50.getting your children to school that we are prepared in a sense to
:36:50. > :36:56.stick ma ties it and make you suffer financial hardship because
:36:56. > :37:00.of it? Now, it has to be said that during the '60s and '70s crime
:37:00. > :37:04.rates went up in Britain and America partially because we had
:37:04. > :37:09.given the message out that we must be much more understanding, that it
:37:09. > :37:12.is alright to rebel and to be criminal. We spent a lot of time
:37:12. > :37:17.trying after that to get the message over that actually crime
:37:17. > :37:21.wasn't OK. We went in for "zero tolerance" policies and said we
:37:21. > :37:25.wouldn't tolerate crime at low levels. We started talking about
:37:25. > :37:29.antisocial behaviour. Gradually crime came down. More serious crime
:37:29. > :37:33.has come down. Do we think this is likely to work? That's the only
:37:33. > :37:37.question that really matters. It is not a moral question but whether or
:37:37. > :37:40.not you will end up helping or harming those children by ago that
:37:40. > :37:45.that action? Frankly I would like to see the evidence on it, because
:37:45. > :37:50.I don't know. APPLAUSE Let's go on. Let's return
:37:50. > :37:55.to the big event of the last month. Wendy Fletcher, your question,
:37:55. > :38:03.please. Is the Budget proving to be omnishambolic? Omnishambolic - the
:38:03. > :38:09.quote from The Thick Of It. Pasties, caravans, churches and charity and
:38:09. > :38:13.the rest of it. Tim, do you think it is omnishambolic, this Budget?
:38:13. > :38:17.Or do you think George Osborne, your Chancellor, brilliantly
:38:17. > :38:21.conducted and thought through every measure that was put to the House
:38:21. > :38:25.of Commons? Well put. The Government is so committed to
:38:25. > :38:30.fairness that they are method Ilkley and systematically making
:38:30. > :38:34.sure that we offend absolutely everybody. But we've run out of
:38:34. > :38:41.easy options, let's be honest. The big ticket item in the Budget was
:38:41. > :38:46.the lifting of 23 million people's income tax, removing the income tax
:38:46. > :38:50.for the 2 million lowest paid people and cutting the income tax
:38:50. > :38:54.of 23 million next lowest paid. It was well trailed in advance. Lost
:38:54. > :38:59.during and now we are talking about smaller things. The reality is
:38:59. > :39:04.these are all difficult things. We did the easy things early on. This
:39:04. > :39:10.Government inherited a Bassett case and had to take tough decisions. We
:39:10. > :39:17.did the easy stuff earlier on. �15 billion Labour was going to waste
:39:17. > :39:19.on ID cards, we scrapped that. Now there is no easy stuff left. The
:39:20. > :39:27.Budget was redistributed from the rich to the poor. That's the big
:39:27. > :39:31.news as far as I'm concerned. Yvette Cooper. This is just rubbish.
:39:31. > :39:37.You've got a Budget in which pensioners are being asked to pay
:39:37. > :39:42.hundreds of pounds more whilst millionaires are being able to pay
:39:42. > :39:45.�40,000 a year less. How can that be redistributive from rich to
:39:45. > :39:51.proper? It is going to other way around. It is taking money from the
:39:51. > :39:56.poor and giving it back to the rich. APPLAUSE
:39:56. > :40:00.If that was true I would be with you on that. Tim is trying to claim
:40:00. > :40:04.credit for a pension rise, buts because pensions are going up in
:40:05. > :40:09.line with inflation and inflation is high. 75P rise? Pensions would
:40:09. > :40:13.have gone up like this regardless. The Government has done nothing to
:40:13. > :40:17.push up pensions. What they have done is taken money away. The so-
:40:17. > :40:22.called granny tax is taking money from pensioners in order to give it
:40:22. > :40:25.to the richest people in the country. Clearly the donors to the
:40:25. > :40:28.Conservative Party have been having the kitchen suppers with David
:40:28. > :40:32.Cameron and George Osborne. The shocking thing about what Tim is
:40:32. > :40:37.doing is the Liberal Democrats are signing up to every word of it.
:40:37. > :40:43.that was true I would be with you, but it is not true. The rich are
:40:43. > :40:48.going to be paying five times more than they would lose or gain from
:40:48. > :40:53.the 50 pence rate going, which I wasn't happy about anyway. That is
:40:53. > :40:59.a seriously redistributive Budget. This is the biggest increase in the
:40:59. > :41:05.rate of the pension... You are kidding yourself. What do you say
:41:05. > :41:10.to the point... Millionaires will not get �40,000 back as a result of
:41:10. > :41:17.this Budget? Do you think that's untrue? The 50p rate going down to
:41:17. > :41:22.45 is something I do not agree with. It it was price that George Osborne
:41:22. > :41:28.exacted for the Liberal Democrats getting 23 million poorer people
:41:28. > :41:32.out of paying income tax. Part-time workers on the minimum wage are
:41:32. > :41:37.having to pay thousands of pounds more because they are not on enough
:41:37. > :41:41.to pay tax, but you are taking their tax credits. It is shocking
:41:41. > :41:45.and disgraceful what the Liberal Democrats signed up to. I have
:41:45. > :41:50.enough form on this, shall we say, when it comes to sometimes not
:41:50. > :41:56.following the Government line. If that was true I would not... I
:41:56. > :42:01.would agree with you. Was it a shambles, yes? The Budget was a
:42:01. > :42:05.shambles. Tim has said it was a shambles. He said there was stock
:42:05. > :42:08.market really good stuff there but nobody noticed it because of all
:42:08. > :42:16.the other stuff George Osborne stuck in there. Thatna was always
:42:16. > :42:23.the definition of In The Thick Of It of a shambles. And Tim had to
:42:23. > :42:28.say all the good bits were Liberal Democrat bits and the bad bits were
:42:28. > :42:32.the Tories. Yvette says the million airs benefited when at the moment
:42:32. > :42:39.Labour is incredibly worried. The self-same millionaires having to
:42:39. > :42:44.pay tax on their charitable donations. It is a toss-up as to
:42:44. > :42:47.which of you, Baroness Warsi or you, Yvette, is toughest on the
:42:47. > :42:50.millionaires. At the same time the granny tax was probably the one
:42:50. > :42:54.measure in the Budget which had to be taken, because the big problem
:42:54. > :42:58.we don't have in this country is richer pensioners. Our problem long
:42:58. > :43:03.term is poorer teenagers and poorer young people. That's the problem
:43:03. > :43:07.that's coming up at us. That's the problem the Budget has to deal with.
:43:07. > :43:13.In that sense the Government was right to. Get a whole lot of things
:43:13. > :43:19.right and then to throw it away in the 50 pence tax increase and you
:43:19. > :43:24.look like the rich person's party and you by association the rich
:43:24. > :43:32.person's party adjunct, that is my definition of a shambles. Sayeeda
:43:32. > :43:38.Warsi. On that point. The cut from 50 to 45 %. Well this, isn't a
:43:38. > :43:43.decision that was taken in terms of how we had to give money to the
:43:43. > :43:49.rich or the poor. What I want to see is to take more money from
:43:49. > :43:53.people who earn more money. The way you do it... So you cut from 50...
:43:53. > :43:56.The way did you that is by making sure that you set your tax at a
:43:56. > :44:01.level which actually attracts people to come into this country,
:44:01. > :44:05.set up their businesses here, create jobs here and pay their
:44:05. > :44:09.taxes here. Right now the 50p tax makes us the highest higher-rate
:44:09. > :44:14.tax understand the G20. We live in a global world. We can't expect
:44:14. > :44:15.London or the UK to live separate from the rest of the world. When
:44:16. > :44:19.people look at business opportunities they look at the
:44:19. > :44:25.United States, France, Germany. They look at the UK. And businesses
:44:25. > :44:29.will not come to those places where they feel that we run a high-tax
:44:29. > :44:32.economy. I'm confident that by reducing the right to 45 we'll gain
:44:32. > :44:41.more investment, more jobs, more opportunities for the future and
:44:41. > :44:51.therefore more tax for our coffers. Why are you against it, very
:44:51. > :44:52.
:44:52. > :44:57.To be honest, I think she is wrong on this point. In the end, it was a
:44:57. > :45:02.coalition budget. I took the view that 50p did not raise a vast
:45:02. > :45:06.amount of money, but what it did do was to send a signal that the
:45:06. > :45:09.wealthiest must pay their fair share. Whilst the Liberal Democrats
:45:09. > :45:19.may have quintupled the amount of money we get from other sources,
:45:19. > :45:19.
:45:19. > :45:23.nobody knows. There seems to be coalition on that side of the table
:45:23. > :45:30.between the various people who say that the default setting is that
:45:30. > :45:35.the rich must be Robert to support the poor. Hear me out. -- the rich
:45:35. > :45:38.must be robbed. The point is, how long comeback go on before you have
:45:38. > :45:42.the situation that Baroness Warsi is talking about where the rich say,
:45:42. > :45:48.have had enough of this, you cannot have a default setting that
:45:48. > :45:52.whenever we need more money we dip into the pockets of the rich.
:45:52. > :46:00.George Galloway. You do not have to be a pasty eating granny with a
:46:00. > :46:04.caravan to conclude that this has been a disastrous Budget. Few
:46:04. > :46:09.budgets survive the publicity of the day after, but this has been
:46:09. > :46:13.cataclysmic and shambolic. And we have seen it here. These two people,
:46:13. > :46:20.in case you did not know, are in the same Government together. In
:46:20. > :46:24.fact, they do not agree, apparently, on very much. But Tim, you are very
:46:24. > :46:27.impressive, much more impressive than Nick Clegg. I don't know why
:46:27. > :46:31.they don't replace him with you. But you are committing electoral
:46:31. > :46:37.suicide keeping this lot in power with a Budget like that, because
:46:37. > :46:43.the whole country can see that this is a big dog of 23 millionaires out
:46:43. > :46:47.of 29 in the Cabinet. -- a Government frock. People are so
:46:47. > :46:51.filthy rich that they do not even know their wealth. George Osborne
:46:51. > :46:54.thought he was not paying the higher rate of tax. If he is not,
:46:54. > :47:00.he should be behind bars, because his income, as can be easily
:47:00. > :47:05.discern, is in the upper tax bracket. This rich man's Government
:47:05. > :47:10.is being kept in power by you. If not for you, they would be out
:47:10. > :47:13.there. That is not true. You lost your deposit in Bradford, you are
:47:13. > :47:17.losing your deposit all over the country, you are going to be
:47:17. > :47:23.annihilated at the next general election. Get out of bed,
:47:23. > :47:27.metaphorically speaking, with these people. Do yourself a favour.
:47:27. > :47:32.you lost the last election in 2010, there was an election result and
:47:32. > :47:36.the arithmetic left us with two options. 1, sit on our hands and
:47:36. > :47:40.let David Cameron go to the country with a massive Tory majority, or
:47:40. > :47:43.else do a politically difficult thing, which is hard for us but
:47:43. > :47:47.better for the country. This Government is surely Moorgreen,
:47:47. > :47:57.more fair, more liberal for as being in it. Do I expect to get any
:47:57. > :47:57.
:47:57. > :48:00.credit for it, we will wait and see. And even the things the Budget was
:48:01. > :48:04.supposed to do, the things George Osborne and Nick Clegg promise to
:48:04. > :48:09.do, support jobs, growth, get the economy rolling, none of that has
:48:09. > :48:13.happened either. The grand promises they made when the coalition came
:48:13. > :48:17.together, when Tim Farron and Sayeeda Warsi, Proms as they were
:48:17. > :48:20.making, they are not being delivered. Instead we have over 1
:48:20. > :48:26.million unemployed and the economy stalled when the US economy is
:48:26. > :48:31.growing twice as fast as the British economy. There is so much
:48:31. > :48:34.hypocrisy in your position. Let me give two examples. Before the
:48:34. > :48:38.general election you wanted to put up national insurance, you are now
:48:38. > :48:42.asking for a freeze on it. Before the general election, you had a
:48:42. > :48:46.fuel escalator tax in place which you were going to put in year one
:48:46. > :48:48.year. Now you want to cut it. You are completely hypocritical in the
:48:48. > :48:53.position you took before the general election and the position
:48:53. > :49:00.you are taking now. He made a mess of the country and you are now
:49:00. > :49:03.being opportunist in opposition. -- you made a mess of the country.
:49:03. > :49:10.would like to say that the last election, which produced the
:49:10. > :49:15.coalition, was not in fact not a strong vote for the Conservatives,
:49:15. > :49:25.it was a damning vote for Labour. I think if you talk about the Liberal
:49:25. > :49:25.
:49:25. > :49:35.Democrats going into oblivion, so does Labour. OK. And the man behind
:49:35. > :49:38.you. I was thinking about Baroness Warsi. I think Investment is not
:49:39. > :49:43.coming into the country because there is no growth in this country.
:49:43. > :49:50.We still have 0.5% income tax with the Bank of England, and inflation
:49:50. > :49:54.is growing, not coming down. What did you think of the Budget?
:49:54. > :49:58.thought it was a shambles. They have not got their ideas straight.
:49:58. > :50:02.The economics of austerity is not going to work. We need to generate
:50:02. > :50:07.growth, increased the interest rate and get some money into the economy
:50:07. > :50:13.and get growth going. De Labour Party proposed a tax on
:50:13. > :50:17.bankers' bonuses which would have created �2 billion towards getting
:50:17. > :50:20.some of the 1 million young people back into work. Why have the
:50:20. > :50:25.Government not introduced this? Is it more important to please a few
:50:25. > :50:30.rich bankers, or to enable this generation not to be the next lost
:50:30. > :50:39.generation? Do we not think the reason growth
:50:39. > :50:42.has not occurred in this country is because of the fear that the crisis
:50:42. > :50:46.in the European Union is going to affect the British economy in the
:50:46. > :50:56.long run anyway? That is the priority, you think. We have five
:50:56. > :50:58.
:50:58. > :51:01.minutes left. Another question. it right for British drivers to
:51:01. > :51:05.participate in the Bahrain Grand Prix won a pro-democracy movement
:51:05. > :51:11.is raging? This is the row over whether the Grand Prix on Sunday
:51:11. > :51:14.should take place with the pro- democracy demonstrations going on.
:51:14. > :51:19.And the Indian team apparently today had to take refuge because
:51:19. > :51:23.their car was firebombed on the way back from practice. George Galloway.
:51:23. > :51:30.There is blood on the tracks and anyone who drives over them, anyone
:51:30. > :51:33.who sponsors the team striving over them will never be forgiven. -- the
:51:33. > :51:39.team's driving over them. And the massacre in Bahrain, because it is
:51:39. > :51:43.a massacre, in proportion to the population, which is very small, is
:51:43. > :51:49.bigger than the death-rate in any of the Arab revolutions. If it were
:51:49. > :51:53.in Egypt, it would be the equivalent of 12,000 dead people.
:51:53. > :51:57.And yet the king of Bahrain is coming to Windsor Castle at our
:51:57. > :52:03.expense to take luncheon with the Queen to celebrate her Diamond
:52:03. > :52:07.Jubilee. David Cameron entertained that King in 10 Downing Street and
:52:07. > :52:14.now Formula One, in the peculiar form of Bernie Eccleston, the
:52:14. > :52:19.former funder of Mr Blair and New Labour, thinks it is fitting to run
:52:19. > :52:22.a sporting event through the flames that nearly engulfed the Indian
:52:22. > :52:28.team today, and across tracks stained with the blood of people
:52:28. > :52:34.that asking for a vote, asking to be able to elect their government.
:52:34. > :52:40.The Prime Minister of Bahrain has been the Prime Minister since 1960,
:52:40. > :52:46.before the Beatles. And the Beatles are 40 years gone. He has been the
:52:46. > :52:52.Prime Minister for 52 years, and nobody elected him. OK, so you want
:52:52. > :52:57.it cancelled. The FIA takes the decision about where it should take
:52:57. > :53:00.the Grand Prix, not the Government. We can give advice in relation to
:53:00. > :53:05.the political situation and in relation to the security situation
:53:05. > :53:08.and we have seen challenges around the security situation. But the
:53:08. > :53:12.Government cannot stop British drivers taking part in a Grand Prix.
:53:12. > :53:16.That has to be their decision. Just like we cannot stop businesses from
:53:16. > :53:23.operating there and travellers from going. What about the visit to
:53:23. > :53:28.Windsor Castle and the relationship with David Cameron? The decision
:53:28. > :53:34.will be keen to attend the Queen's Diamond Jubilee is a decision taken
:53:34. > :53:38.by the Royal Family. -- for the King to attend. That is not true,
:53:38. > :53:42.the Prime Minister advisers on these matters. I accept that, but
:53:42. > :53:46.it is a decision that ultimately has to be taken by the Royal Family.
:53:46. > :53:48.And if it is a decision, if the Queen has decided that on her
:53:48. > :53:54.Diamond Jubilee she would like certain people present at a
:53:54. > :54:01.celebration, then I really think we can stop being mean about it and
:54:01. > :54:06.allow the Queen to have her Diamond Jubilee. If it was not for the
:54:06. > :54:10.Formula One, would we be even discussing this? Also, with the
:54:10. > :54:16.race going ahead, it will probably get more publicity than it would
:54:16. > :54:23.without it. This is a hideous moment for me because I agree with
:54:23. > :54:26.every word George Galloway said. Every single word. The Formula One
:54:26. > :54:29.Grand Prix is being used by the Bahrain government as a major
:54:29. > :54:33.signal to the international community and its own people that
:54:33. > :54:38.everything is all right in Bahrain, when everything is not all right in
:54:38. > :54:43.Bahrain. There are basic denials of democratic rights, the imprisonment
:54:43. > :54:46.of human rights campaigners and so on. There are Artillery at the
:54:46. > :54:50.moment parked on the roundabout where the demonstrations used to
:54:50. > :54:55.take place. The Bahrain government is stopping journalists getting in,
:54:55. > :54:59.by using all kinds of strange bureaucratic means to cover this.
:54:59. > :55:02.At the same time, a former head of the Metropolitan Police, John Yates,
:55:02. > :55:07.is acting as a shield for the government by saying everything is
:55:07. > :55:11.lovely, the water's lovely, everybody should come on. Police
:55:11. > :55:15.that we could do, politicians could say to Formula One, look, this
:55:15. > :55:20.would be better not happening. And not only that, but with regard to
:55:20. > :55:30.the gentleman's point, say publicly why you are not going. Say that
:55:30. > :55:30.
:55:30. > :55:36.this is not a place where we want to raise at the moment, OK. Yvette
:55:36. > :55:39.Cooper, what would your advice be? I think it should not go ahead, I
:55:39. > :55:43.do not think British drivers should go. I think the Formula One should
:55:43. > :55:50.not go ahead in Bahrain for exactly the reasons that David and George
:55:50. > :55:54.have talked about, and the fact that you have violent
:55:54. > :55:59.demonstrations -- demonstrations by democratic protesters who have been
:55:59. > :56:04.violently suppressed. Although it should be a matter for the sport to
:56:04. > :56:07.decide rather than the Government, I do think Government ministers can
:56:07. > :56:11.express an opinion. I think all of us on the panel can express an
:56:11. > :56:18.opinion and it should be very clear - this should not go ahead. It
:56:18. > :56:23.would send the wrong signal. Windsor Castle and the Jubilee?
:56:23. > :56:27.Government has diplomatic relations that it has to use, to set out
:56:27. > :56:30.policies in order to put pressure on governments. I think they have
:56:30. > :56:34.to be very careful how they handle this. I think they need to maintain
:56:34. > :56:40.the pressure on the Bahrain regime. I think they need to consider very
:56:40. > :56:43.carefully how they handle that and the way in which they do so.
:56:43. > :56:48.answer the question, the race should be cancelled because the
:56:48. > :56:52.very fact that the FIA are taking the formula One race there endorses
:56:52. > :56:56.and legitimises the regime. Many of us were involved in the movement in
:56:56. > :57:00.the 1970s and 1980s to help to end apartheid, which was about
:57:00. > :57:04.boycotting the regime, through cultural and sporting boycotts. It
:57:04. > :57:09.was hugely powerful in making sure we brought down, collectively,
:57:09. > :57:12.internationally, that appalling regime. You do not give succour to
:57:12. > :57:22.tyrants by taking a wealthy roadshow there to make it look as
:57:22. > :57:23.
:57:23. > :57:27.if we endorse them. We must stop. Next week, we moved to Romford, a
:57:27. > :57:32.week away from the local elections across the UK and the big battle
:57:32. > :57:35.between Boris and 10 in London. And the week after that we will be in
:57:35. > :57:45.Stratford in east London. If you want to romp -- come to Romford or
:57:45. > :57:46.