0:00:00 > 0:00:04We're in London and welcome to Question Time.
0:00:04 > 0:00:09On our panel tonight, the Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan
0:00:09 > 0:00:12Smith, Labour's deputy leader, Harriet Harman, the former leader
0:00:12 > 0:00:17of the Liberal Democrats, Ming Campbell, the General Secretary of
0:00:18 > 0:00:24the civil servant's union the PCS, Mark Serwotka and the businessman
0:00:24 > 0:00:34and star of dragon's -- Dragon's Den, Theo Paphitis.
0:00:34 > 0:00:41
0:00:41 > 0:00:47Excellent - forgive me for getting it mildly wrong. Our first question
0:00:47 > 0:00:53comes from Matthew Amos, please. With the Olympics only three months
0:00:53 > 0:00:56away, are the recent severe delays at Heathrow proof that our
0:00:56 > 0:01:01transport system cannot cope? delays that on Monday were three
0:01:01 > 0:01:08hours for people who were not coming in from Europe. This is one
0:01:08 > 0:01:13of my pet hates. Last Easter, I Tweeted a picture at Heathrow
0:01:13 > 0:01:17Airport, Gatwick it was, when I arrived from Spain after a family
0:01:17 > 0:01:20holiday. It took two and a quarter hours on the flight. It took three
0:01:20 > 0:01:25hours to go through border control. It is ridiculous. It's not the
0:01:25 > 0:01:32hardest thing in the world. You know how many passengers are coming
0:01:32 > 0:01:38into the man, so if you cannot man your borders, it is ridiculous. As
0:01:38 > 0:01:42a shopkeeper, I don't know how many people will come into my shop. I
0:01:42 > 0:01:47have flexiworking. I judge. We have experience. We make sure we serve
0:01:47 > 0:01:50people. If you the not serve them in a timely manner, they go
0:01:50 > 0:01:54elsewhere. How could we not know how many people were coming through
0:01:54 > 0:02:04and how many people we need to have at the border control?
0:02:04 > 0:02:04
0:02:04 > 0:02:09APPLAUSE OK, Iain Duncan Smith, you are our
0:02:09 > 0:02:15Government man tonight. How could we not know?
0:02:15 > 0:02:21It is not my responsibility. Check the pay rates before he employed
0:02:21 > 0:02:26them. No problems. Look, there is no excuse for queues, in some cases,
0:02:26 > 0:02:34up to two-and-a-half hours. Although I do understand these were
0:02:34 > 0:02:37the result as, of ever, aircraft running at the same time.... How do
0:02:37 > 0:02:40you mean aircraft arriving at the same time for different reasons?
0:02:40 > 0:02:46Because of the weather conditions or whatever. Some come in at times
0:02:46 > 0:02:51they were not expected to come in. You still have notice. Hang on, I
0:02:51 > 0:02:55want to come to this. When that happens we need, what Theo says is
0:02:55 > 0:02:59the flexibility. The Government has said within the border agency they
0:02:59 > 0:03:05will have a pool of 80 people, ready to move in immediately if
0:03:05 > 0:03:09that process happens. So there now in train a process which says that
0:03:09 > 0:03:13will change. 95% of all those going through Heathrow have gone through
0:03:13 > 0:03:15in under 25 minutes in the last three months. There are key moments
0:03:15 > 0:03:19which are unacceptable. The Government accepts that. They are
0:03:19 > 0:03:22trying to resolve that and make it right now. When it comes to the
0:03:22 > 0:03:26Olympics and the question on the Olympics is important. The
0:03:26 > 0:03:30Government is going to put another 400-500 people made available to
0:03:30 > 0:03:34make sure these delays don't happen, particularly during the Olympics. I
0:03:34 > 0:03:38accept it is not acceptable, but having said that, it is not only in
0:03:38 > 0:03:41the UK. It does happen elsewhere. Many times I have been to
0:03:41 > 0:03:46Washington, where you stand for two or three hours waiting to go
0:03:46 > 0:03:52through as well. The reality is it is not acceptable to have waits
0:03:52 > 0:03:55that long. We are doing our level best to make sure it will change.
0:03:55 > 0:03:59The majority going through Heathrow - I know the coverage does not want
0:03:59 > 0:04:04to lend itself to that - will go through in under 25 minutes. Maybe
0:04:04 > 0:04:08it is the fact that you have cut the staff? This has been going on
0:04:08 > 0:04:11for years, by the way. It is not just happening this summer. It is
0:04:11 > 0:04:16happening for years. The woman in the third row from the back?
0:04:16 > 0:04:21I was going to make the same point - haven't staff on border control
0:04:21 > 0:04:27been cut by 10% recently, so the staff that are drafted in for the
0:04:27 > 0:04:32Olympics are they just going to be employing the people whose jobs
0:04:32 > 0:04:38have been cut? Duncan Smith myth can appreciate this - I understand
0:04:38 > 0:04:42why we are cutting back and have to find savings, but this is a simple,
0:04:42 > 0:04:47core, public facility. It is all going wrong. This is indicative of
0:04:47 > 0:04:53what is happening here. It will happen across the borders. Can I
0:04:53 > 0:04:56answer that? Very briefly. It is due to reductions in staff. There
0:04:56 > 0:04:59are staff there to do it. The problem is not getting them to the
0:04:59 > 0:05:04desks in time. The border agency has to get the staff to the desks
0:05:04 > 0:05:11when they are needed. This does not go on all day. This is at a peek
0:05:11 > 0:05:19moment when you need to get your staff to the desks. If that had
0:05:19 > 0:05:22been in the sector they would say do it. My union represents the
0:05:22 > 0:05:26hard-working men and women at Heathrow and throughout the borders.
0:05:26 > 0:05:29I tell you what, this is a story for us all to understand. It is
0:05:29 > 0:05:33proof that politicians have told us, particularly this Government; you
0:05:33 > 0:05:39can cut jobs in the public sector because they are inefficient and
0:05:39 > 0:05:44nobody will notice. What this tells us is a 22% cut in staff in the
0:05:44 > 0:05:49border agency, 100 from Heathrow in the last year and when it all goes
0:05:49 > 0:05:53wrong they suddenly seem surprised. They are not just surprised they
0:05:53 > 0:05:58actually deny reality when Damian Green tells Parliament the queues
0:05:58 > 0:06:03are one-and-a-half hours, when we have seen statistics saying many
0:06:03 > 0:06:07queued for over three hours. The airports are now nationally exposed.
0:06:07 > 0:06:11Everyone knows they have cut too far. Britain looks embarrassed when
0:06:11 > 0:06:16people are queuing. Frankly the Olympics is a disaster waiting to
0:06:16 > 0:06:23happen. What people have not been told about is they are cutting jobs
0:06:23 > 0:06:27in Job Centres when unemployment is rising. They are cutting jobs in
0:06:27 > 0:06:31tax offices when there is much tax avoided. They are cutting jobs in
0:06:31 > 0:06:36local services, in the NHS in education. I hope that people
0:06:36 > 0:06:41finally wake up to these scenes... You have not mentioned the fact
0:06:41 > 0:06:48that your members in the Immigration Service are going on
0:06:48 > 0:06:54strike on Thursday - is that right? I am absolutely delighted to say
0:06:54 > 0:06:56500,000 next week, including all our members... They are striking
0:06:56 > 0:07:04because the Government is robbing them of their pensions.
0:07:04 > 0:07:08APPLAUSE Work more and get less. 20% of your
0:07:08 > 0:07:13total membership voted for the strike and you are going on strike.
0:07:13 > 0:07:19Two million people were on strike in November in this country. Your
0:07:19 > 0:07:24Government... Can you answer the point he raised? I am more than
0:07:24 > 0:07:31happy. 32% he said voted. They don't want to go on strike. Many
0:07:31 > 0:07:35work in the Job Centres don't want to. You are bullying them to go on
0:07:35 > 0:07:39strike. Maybe you should answer letters to your cleaners... They
0:07:39 > 0:07:44want to do their job. They are being pushed out because of you.
0:07:44 > 0:07:49Let me get a word in. I worked in the office for 21 years. I have
0:07:49 > 0:07:54seen what your Government is doing in ruining one of our public
0:07:54 > 0:08:01services. You give tax cuts to the rich. They are forced to work
0:08:01 > 0:08:08longer and get less. It is a disgrace. APPLAUSE A woman at the
0:08:08 > 0:08:13very back there, in the black and white dress. Is the UK Border
0:08:13 > 0:08:18Agency adhering to international obligations to accept vulnerable
0:08:18 > 0:08:22asylum seekers and individuals? There is a whole policy issue in
0:08:22 > 0:08:27relation to asylum seeking. The issue of how you get through
0:08:27 > 0:08:30Heathrow is much more clearly in people's minds at the moment. It is
0:08:30 > 0:08:35quite right to be concerned about the Olympics, I have an interest in
0:08:35 > 0:08:38this because I am a member of the Olympic Board. There is no doubt
0:08:38 > 0:08:42that during this period this will be a showcase for Great Britain. If
0:08:42 > 0:08:47you are a showcase then you have to have something to put in the window.
0:08:47 > 0:08:51If getting into the country proves as difficult as it has in recent
0:08:51 > 0:08:54times, then that will be damaging to our reputation. No point in
0:08:54 > 0:08:59denying that. The other point though is why is this taking place?
0:08:59 > 0:09:03It is taking place because we have to ensure, because of the enhanced
0:09:03 > 0:09:07opportunities for terrorism, which the Olympics and other things give,
0:09:07 > 0:09:11that we have the most secure arrangements that we can and that
0:09:11 > 0:09:16we check people and we don't simply wave people through. If we were
0:09:16 > 0:09:22doing that by way of a policy it would not take a particularly
0:09:22 > 0:09:30intelligent terrorist to work out that would be a way to get into the
0:09:30 > 0:09:34country. Can we or not cope? We can. We must learn the lessons of what
0:09:34 > 0:09:39has happened in the last week. Flexibility, as Iain Duncan Smith
0:09:39 > 0:09:43said. Having hit squads which will turn up when things are difficulty.
0:09:43 > 0:09:47Just remember this, quite true, how many of you have been on an
0:09:47 > 0:09:52airliner which came in two hours later than it was supposed to
0:09:52 > 0:09:57because it was delayed in Benidorm or whatever. Of course they have
0:09:57 > 0:10:03their schedules. They cannot always keep to their schedules F you have
0:10:03 > 0:10:07three or four Boeing 747s with 240 people all arriving at the same
0:10:07 > 0:10:12time, you cannot guarantee.... are in the air for hours on end
0:10:12 > 0:10:18they don't they just turn up and say, I have turned up with 400
0:10:18 > 0:10:26passengers, can you take me in guv? They fly around waiting to come in.
0:10:26 > 0:10:30The man in the third row there. is quite hypercritical of the
0:10:31 > 0:10:36unions to blame the Government for disrupting front-line services and
0:10:36 > 0:10:40go on strike which will disrupt services even more. It is very easy
0:10:40 > 0:10:43for the Government to talk about more flexibility, but it is very
0:10:43 > 0:10:49difficult to have more flexibility when you are cutting staff and when
0:10:49 > 0:10:55they have got more to do. You cut staff before the last election in
0:10:55 > 0:10:58the.... Can you let me answer the question? They are doing tighter
0:10:58 > 0:11:02security checks. Well, fair enough. More people are coming here. We
0:11:02 > 0:11:06want people to come to do business here. We want people to come as
0:11:06 > 0:11:10tourists here. We don't want to make families, coming back from
0:11:10 > 0:11:14holidays, stand exhausted in a queue. If we want there to be tight
0:11:14 > 0:11:19checks and a good service at our airport, how can we do that when
0:11:19 > 0:11:23more people are coming when there are fewer staff? They have cut
0:11:23 > 0:11:27already 1500 from the UK Borders Agency. They have cut the UK -
0:11:28 > 0:11:32sorry they have cut hundreds and they are increasing that up to 1500.
0:11:32 > 0:11:36You know, you simply cannot ask them to do more with fewer staff
0:11:36 > 0:11:39and expect it to go all right. I do say to Iain Duncan Smith, you can
0:11:39 > 0:11:44carry on talking about flexibility all you like, but everybody
0:11:44 > 0:11:50recognises if you have fewer staff and have more people coming here,
0:11:50 > 0:11:54then you will have a disastrous shambles and that is a disgrace.
0:11:54 > 0:12:00APPLAUSE Hang on a second. Do you support
0:12:00 > 0:12:04Mark Serwotka's union on going on strike? Are you in favour? I hope
0:12:04 > 0:12:08there will not be a strike. I do not agree with what the Government
0:12:08 > 0:12:13tried to do on Civil Service pensions. It was not unsustainable.
0:12:13 > 0:12:16It is because they wanted to raid it to do a too far, too fast paying
0:12:16 > 0:12:20down of the deficit. Other unions with other departments have managed
0:12:20 > 0:12:26to settle. I hope that the Home Office, if they can get out from
0:12:26 > 0:12:35all the shambles they are under, can negotiate a settlement before
0:12:35 > 0:12:43next Thursday. Before the last election, your Home Office planned
0:12:43 > 0:12:47to reduce the border agency and staff. It was not as though he was
0:12:47 > 0:12:51talking about reduction and cuts, you overspend and we have a deficit.
0:12:52 > 0:12:56We have to get greater efficiency out of what we have got. It is one
0:12:56 > 0:12:59thing for Mark Serwotka who wants us to spend more. You cannot
0:12:59 > 0:13:04pretend that had you been in Government now you would not have
0:13:04 > 0:13:11tried to make greater efficiencys, and to pretend to the public is
0:13:11 > 0:13:16anything else is nonsense, it isant amount as to trying to pull the
0:13:16 > 0:13:22wool over their eyes. The woman there... APPLAUSE
0:13:22 > 0:13:26The person in the white shirt there. The man there. As Iain Duncan Smith
0:13:26 > 0:13:29said about the continuing problem with the queues and it wasn't this
0:13:30 > 0:13:34Government's fault that it has been going on for years, surely the
0:13:34 > 0:13:39union should take some blame, not just in this Transport Secretaryor,
0:13:39 > 0:13:43but you see strikes all the time, at least once every other reason.
0:13:44 > 0:13:49Surely the unions should stop these actions and work together working
0:13:49 > 0:13:59with the Government instead of constant strikes? Briefly answer
0:13:59 > 0:14:00
0:14:00 > 0:14:05Nobody loses pay without good reason. People's pensions have been
0:14:05 > 0:14:09robbed. 700,000 stand to lose their jobs, communities are facing
0:14:09 > 0:14:12massive assaults on their services while they see the richest people
0:14:12 > 0:14:16getting cuts in tax and see tax breaks for those at the top. Now, I
0:14:16 > 0:14:23think the strike we will see next week is going to be fantastically
0:14:23 > 0:14:25popular and I'll tell you why I think it. It will be fantastically
0:14:25 > 0:14:30popular because most people are glad that finally someone's
0:14:30 > 0:14:35standing up to this bullying Government and most people
0:14:35 > 0:14:39understand 24 hours of disruption is a small price to pay to save our
0:14:39 > 0:14:43services for generations to come. The person on the right on the
0:14:43 > 0:14:48gangway? What I would like to say is that I'm totally in agreement
0:14:48 > 0:14:52with what Mr Iain Duncan Smith has said because when the Conservative
0:14:52 > 0:14:56Government took over, they had no cookies in the cookie jar and they
0:14:56 > 0:15:01would have to be slashing here and there and they can't have false
0:15:01 > 0:15:05promises. They didn't give false promises. We look at Europe, entire
0:15:05 > 0:15:11Europe. You can see many, many countries are near to the brink of
0:15:11 > 0:15:16bankruptcy. Look at Greece, look at Italy and I can't remember the
0:15:16 > 0:15:21third one. But we are not in that level of deterioration. We have to
0:15:21 > 0:15:26do it. I think it's because of the security risks. We have to make
0:15:26 > 0:15:30that extra thorough check of each passenger because of the shoe
0:15:30 > 0:15:34bomber. It could be in the shoe, the person could have a bomb in the
0:15:35 > 0:15:39shoe. We need to check out which airline the delays are on, whether
0:15:39 > 0:15:45it's British Airways which has a lot of long hauls. Thank you very
0:15:45 > 0:15:48much. The woman in the fourth row? B Mark Serwotka's point, perhaps
0:15:48 > 0:15:53the delays while they're completely unacceptable, they're almost the
0:15:53 > 0:15:56nicer face of the cuts in the sense that we have got an Olympic-focused
0:15:56 > 0:15:59media and middle class people with a loud voice being able to talk
0:15:59 > 0:16:02about this frustration, whereas actually a lot of the people that
0:16:02 > 0:16:11are affected by the cuts are vulnerable people who aren't given
0:16:11 > 0:16:14the same opportunity and that space in the media. Very briefly?
0:16:14 > 0:16:18Alistair Darling had a programme of cuts, Labour has said in principle
0:16:18 > 0:16:23there should be cuts, but every time a cut is proposed in the House
0:16:23 > 0:16:27of Commons, Labour votes against it. So much so that Mark Serwotka
0:16:27 > 0:16:34described the Labour Leader in somewhat less than complimentary
0:16:34 > 0:16:37terms. Can I just answer that? must move on. Very briefly then. I
0:16:37 > 0:16:41know what your answer will be. After our response to the global
0:16:41 > 0:16:43crisis and incidentally it wasn't the Labour Government or
0:16:43 > 0:16:46insufficient regulation in this country which caused Lehman
0:16:47 > 0:16:56Brothers in America to collapse. may come to this so don't do too
0:16:57 > 0:16:57
0:16:57 > 0:17:06much all right. All right. If you want to join in tonight's debate: A
0:17:06 > 0:17:11question now from Jack McKell began, please? Is Rupert Murdoch fit to
0:17:11 > 0:17:15run News Corp? The majority decision made by the people
0:17:15 > 0:17:19investigating this. Harriet Harman? Actually, Ofcom which deals with
0:17:19 > 0:17:22broadcasting licences in this country is currently looking at the
0:17:22 > 0:17:26question of whether or not Rupert Murdoch is a fit and proper person
0:17:26 > 0:17:29to hold a broadcasting licence. That wasn't the question? I know, I
0:17:29 > 0:17:32have to say if I was making that judgment I would say he was not a
0:17:32 > 0:17:39fit and proper person and I back what the Select Committee has said.
0:17:39 > 0:17:42How can you have a situation where it's been agreed by everybody that
0:17:42 > 0:17:46the top legal executive, Rupert Murdoch's right hand man, the
0:17:46 > 0:17:50editor of the News of the World, everybody on that committee agreed
0:17:50 > 0:17:53that they had instinctively covered up instead of investigating, that
0:17:54 > 0:17:56they said there was only one rogue reporter when hacking was
0:17:57 > 0:18:01widespread and they misled the Select Committee. The question is,
0:18:01 > 0:18:05if that wrongdoing was at that high level in the company, how can you
0:18:05 > 0:18:13absolve the two people at the top? I think they bear responsibility,
0:18:13 > 0:18:17they are not fit and proper to run that company. Why do you think...
0:18:17 > 0:18:20APPLAUSE If the case if your view is so obvious, why do you think the
0:18:20 > 0:18:25four Conservatives on the committee refused to sign that off and said
0:18:25 > 0:18:31that they could have had unanimity but by putting this lauz in they
0:18:31 > 0:18:34failed to get it -- clause? There was unanimous agreement on the
0:18:34 > 0:18:38point about the top three executives but they didn't take the
0:18:38 > 0:18:41next step of agreing that those at the very top should be held to
0:18:41 > 0:18:45account. Why not? You will have to ask Iain Duncan Smith about that,
0:18:45 > 0:18:49but I think it's disappointing because I don't think you can say
0:18:49 > 0:18:54that the people at the senior levels were involved in great
0:18:54 > 0:18:58wrongdoing and the people at the top are somehow still all right to
0:18:58 > 0:19:02run the company. Let me give you an example. We have to allow everybody
0:19:02 > 0:19:06a chance to get in. Sorry. Ming Campbell, your Liberal Democrat
0:19:06 > 0:19:10voted to say he was not fit and it was the four Conservatives who said
0:19:10 > 0:19:15that was improper, shouldn't have been in there. What is your view?
0:19:15 > 0:19:18Mr Sanders is a man of considerable independence of mind and he clearly
0:19:18 > 0:19:21took the view that what was contained within the report was
0:19:21 > 0:19:26what was necessary to affect the nature of the evidence. Remember,
0:19:26 > 0:19:31not just the wordz of the evidence but the appearance of the people
0:19:32 > 0:19:35giving that evidence. It seems to me that if you were starting from
0:19:35 > 0:19:41scratch, if News International did not have any interest in a
0:19:41 > 0:19:44television company, but you knew everything you have known about and
0:19:44 > 0:19:47as a result of this report and they came in and made a fresh
0:19:47 > 0:19:52application, would you say they were fit and proper to be give an
0:19:52 > 0:19:55new licence? It was not fit and proper to exercise stewardship of a
0:19:55 > 0:20:01major international company, that's a different thing, it's not just
0:20:01 > 0:20:04about BSkyB? I accept that, but the focus in this country as to whether
0:20:04 > 0:20:11that international company should be entitled to continue to hold
0:20:11 > 0:20:16nearly 40% of the shares of BSkyB. I looked today on the Ofcom website
0:20:16 > 0:20:20and discovered that they've met four times since September, and the
0:20:20 > 0:20:23reason they've done it is because they have a continuing
0:20:23 > 0:20:27responsibility to check as to whether or not those who hold
0:20:27 > 0:20:32licences are fit and proper to hold them. It's a matter for Ofcom. I
0:20:32 > 0:20:33see absolutely no reason why a committee of members of the House
0:20:33 > 0:20:36of Commons with specific responsibilities for these matters
0:20:36 > 0:20:42should not have reached the decision they did.
0:20:42 > 0:20:47OK. The man in the checked jacket? What I want to say is, when we were
0:20:47 > 0:20:51little kids, our mum and dad used to say to us, don't tell lies,
0:20:51 > 0:20:54don't steal. That was something that we had to follow. But it seems
0:20:54 > 0:20:59that once you get into Parliament, that goes out the window, do you
0:20:59 > 0:21:03know what I mean?! Seriously. I look at people talking sometimes
0:21:03 > 0:21:07and I know that they're lying, all right. You can see that they're
0:21:07 > 0:21:10lying and talk about pull the wool over your eyes, they try to do it.
0:21:10 > 0:21:13I'm glad I came here today to say that because when I watch it on
0:21:13 > 0:21:18telly, it's like a film, do you know what I mean, it's not real but
0:21:18 > 0:21:24I'm just saying, people want to be more truthful, if not bring out lie
0:21:24 > 0:21:29detectors, do you know what I mean. All right
0:21:29 > 0:21:36APPLAUSE Iain Duncan Smith? The lie detector
0:21:36 > 0:21:41is switched on. OK, I'll sit back. A growth industry. Two things, the
0:21:41 > 0:21:44committee has its own rights to decide to say what it wants to say,
0:21:45 > 0:21:48it's not for anybody else to say they shouldn't. The key issues are
0:21:48 > 0:21:53first of all I think that the committee was looking more at the
0:21:53 > 0:21:58phone hacking scandal. That was what it was delving into, trying to
0:21:58 > 0:22:02figure out whether executives at BSkyB and within Murdoch's empire
0:22:02 > 0:22:06generally were telling the truth or lying when they were trying to
0:22:06 > 0:22:10protect themselves over the phone hacking scandal. That was the key
0:22:10 > 0:22:13area they were looking at. The concern is that they didn't
0:22:13 > 0:22:18actually discuss the whole idea about whether Murdoch was a fit and
0:22:18 > 0:22:23proper person to run a company. didn't they? There are other
0:22:23 > 0:22:27considerations. We know now that the idea that that should be
0:22:27 > 0:22:33included was down before Easter and they never debated it? That's for
0:22:33 > 0:22:39the chairman to decide. That's a choir chairman, Whittingdale.
0:22:39 > 0:22:43he goes along with the consensus in the committee. He's allowed the
0:22:43 > 0:22:48committee to reach a majority verdict. All I know is that they
0:22:48 > 0:22:51divided because, the Conservatives there felt they never discussed
0:22:51 > 0:22:54this issue at any stage, therefore they could not reach a conclusion
0:22:54 > 0:22:57on any other facts, there was no other evidence brought to them and
0:22:57 > 0:23:00they never asked that question of anybody. Do you think he's fit to
0:23:00 > 0:23:03run the international corporation? This report has come up with very
0:23:03 > 0:23:07serious problems and issues surrounding him and all we've heard
0:23:07 > 0:23:10from the Leveson Inquiry so far shows that we should all have major
0:23:10 > 0:23:14misgivings about the way the companies were run. My only krpbl
0:23:14 > 0:23:18about this is, Ofcom's job is to reach a conclusion about this --
0:23:18 > 0:23:24concern. They will be the ones that ultimately decide. The only thing I
0:23:24 > 0:23:27say about politicians is, it's very easy for us to get up and make
0:23:27 > 0:23:31allegations about people protected by Parliament. We need to be very
0:23:31 > 0:23:36careful about that. That's why we set up independent bodys soOfcom
0:23:36 > 0:23:39and other companies can decide. woman in the second row from the
0:23:39 > 0:23:44back? I run my own company and as far as I know, if there's something
0:23:44 > 0:23:50that goes on in my company that is not right, I have to take
0:23:50 > 0:23:54responsibility for it. It should be the same. Theo Paphitis, do you...
0:23:54 > 0:23:58APPLAUSE Do you agree with that and do you
0:23:58 > 0:24:03think as a result of this, Murdoch is fit to run a big business?
0:24:03 > 0:24:06I'm afraid as that old saying with great power comes great
0:24:06 > 0:24:10responsibility and the Murdoch empire has had incredible power in
0:24:11 > 0:24:15the United Kingdom for many years. It has to exorcise responsibility
0:24:15 > 0:24:20with that power. The things that we are now discovering have gone on
0:24:20 > 0:24:24wouldn't be acceptable anywhere so there has to be the correct
0:24:24 > 0:24:28authorities within the land that will take that decision. Whether
0:24:28 > 0:24:34that committee was the right committee to take the decision...
0:24:34 > 0:24:38It wasn't taking a decision, it was expressing an opinion. When
0:24:38 > 0:24:40Parliament does more than an opinion. You can't take that
0:24:40 > 0:24:44lightly. It was an incredible statement to make. It might be
0:24:44 > 0:24:47correct but did they look at all the evidence properly and come to
0:24:47 > 0:24:51the right decision? If they were set up to take that particular
0:24:51 > 0:24:54decision that the Murdochs weren't fit to run a company, not just a
0:24:54 > 0:24:58media company, any company, that's a different thing all together.
0:24:58 > 0:25:06There's no question in my mind what went on could not possibly be
0:25:06 > 0:25:10acceptable in any company and the lady over there is absolutely right.
0:25:10 > 0:25:14APPLAUSE The woman in pink in the front?
0:25:14 > 0:25:17Surely the point is that the Murdoch empire has this power
0:25:17 > 0:25:21because the political leader gave us that power. Isn't the real point
0:25:21 > 0:25:26that the people like Jeremy Hunt, Tony Blair and David Cameron are
0:25:26 > 0:25:28not fit and proper people to run a country?
0:25:28 > 0:25:34APPLAUSE Mark Serwotka, that'll probably be
0:25:34 > 0:25:41music to your ears? I have to say, when I heard the verdict of the
0:25:41 > 0:25:45Select Committee, I cheered. My reaction was, at last we've got
0:25:45 > 0:25:48some brave people prepared to say what many of us have thought for
0:25:48 > 0:25:51years and I want to pay tribute tonight to Tom Watson and the work
0:25:51 > 0:25:54he's done over the years to expose this, the Labour MP. When you look
0:25:54 > 0:25:59at the things Rupert Murdoch has done in this country, it's
0:25:59 > 0:26:03extraordinary. Since 1988, we know declared he's had 75 meetings with
0:26:03 > 0:26:06the British Prime Minister, 31 with Tony Blair, David Cameron's on nine
0:26:06 > 0:26:08and rising, I don't know if that includes all the ones through the
0:26:08 > 0:26:12back door, but he's had real influence over our politics. In
0:26:12 > 0:26:17fact, Tony Blair flew 25 hours around to Australia to get his
0:26:17 > 0:26:20backing. He's a person who has refused to allow free and
0:26:20 > 0:26:27independent Trade Unions to operate in his company, he's a person who
0:26:27 > 0:26:30in his newspapers give us the disgraceful headline 30 years ago
0:26:30 > 0:26:32Gotcha glorying in the death in the people on the other side of the
0:26:32 > 0:26:37world, who call people defending the mining communities like the
0:26:37 > 0:26:45ones that I care for... I don't want to stop you in the middle of
0:26:45 > 0:26:49your well-prepared list. But do you or do you not feel he's fit to run
0:26:49 > 0:26:52a company? He's absolutely not fit. Not just because of his political
0:26:52 > 0:26:55record because anyone who presides on law-breaking an industrial scale
0:26:55 > 0:26:59deserves everything they get and I saw all power to the Select
0:26:59 > 0:27:04Committee for exposing him. couple more points. The person in
0:27:04 > 0:27:09the striped pullover, then I'll come to you, yes? The point I would
0:27:09 > 0:27:14like to make is that I think the answer to the question why do the
0:27:14 > 0:27:19Conservatives on that committee not adhere to this unfit is because
0:27:19 > 0:27:25they are shame facedly unable to actually say anything against the
0:27:25 > 0:27:29rich and powerful. You know, they're just always tram thing the
0:27:29 > 0:27:33-- tram pling the rich. I'm a guardian reader and a lawyer and
0:27:34 > 0:27:38when I looked at this report, there was no evidence whatsoever taken on
0:27:38 > 0:27:43the issue of whether Rupert Murdoch was fit to run an international
0:27:43 > 0:27:47company. To me, the inclusion of this clause was simply for Tom
0:27:47 > 0:27:52Watson's personal vanity and has destroyed what would have been a
0:27:52 > 0:27:56credible report with cross party support and is an absolute disgrace.
0:27:56 > 0:28:04APPLAUSE. On that note, thank you, we'll go
0:28:04 > 0:28:13on to another question. This one from Amandine Breton.
0:28:13 > 0:28:20impact will a socialist victory in the French presidential election
0:28:20 > 0:28:26have on France. And as you can hear, I'm French. Did you vote? Yes.
0:28:26 > 0:28:29impact will a socialist victory in France have on the euro crisis?
0:28:29 > 0:28:36This is big potatoes. Mark Serwotka? This is another thing
0:28:36 > 0:28:40I've been getting excited about. And Cardiff City play in the play-
0:28:40 > 0:28:44offs tonight, I hope they beat West Ham. The reason I've been excited
0:28:44 > 0:28:48is this - what a breath of fresh air it is that a socialist leader
0:28:48 > 0:28:53in an election has made central to his election campaign that it's
0:28:53 > 0:28:56time we took on the markets, it's time we stopped allowing markets
0:28:56 > 0:29:00and financiers to determine social policy, give us Prime Ministers in
0:29:00 > 0:29:03countries without elections and it's time we said people should run
0:29:03 > 0:29:07countries and make decisions, not bankers and those who have no
0:29:08 > 0:29:13interest in the society that we have.
0:29:13 > 0:29:16What impact will a victory have on the euro crisis? A victory for
0:29:16 > 0:29:20Holland will give people hope and inspiration for people across the
0:29:20 > 0:29:24continent in Greece, Spain, Portugal and I hop here, to say
0:29:24 > 0:29:29austerity isn't working, we need investment and growth, not cuts,
0:29:29 > 0:29:32unemployment and misery. I hope he wins and I hope it electric triifys
0:29:32 > 0:29:42politics across Europe which will be one of the best things to happen
0:29:42 > 0:29:44
0:29:44 > 0:29:48Well, it will be interesting. If he starts putting taxes up in France,
0:29:48 > 0:29:53maybe the rich French will come over here and pay UK tax. The
0:29:53 > 0:29:59reality is we're a free market society. The fact that that market
0:29:59 > 0:30:03has been, let's say abused in the past decade or so, with the help of
0:30:03 > 0:30:07various Governments on the way. You cannot just look at it and say,
0:30:07 > 0:30:15it's a free market, it's the bankers. It's the Governments that
0:30:15 > 0:30:19borrowed all the money. They regulated the banks. If the FSA did
0:30:20 > 0:30:24the work they should have done, people would still be in jobs. My
0:30:24 > 0:30:30worry is that no-one has actually accepted responsibility for what
0:30:30 > 0:30:35happened. Even now politicians - I look at you guys - it's always
0:30:35 > 0:30:43"It's him, it's her." Will someone accept responsibility and do what
0:30:43 > 0:30:47is right for the country rather than Party Politics? In the context
0:30:47 > 0:30:52of the crisis we're in and the Government policies that are being
0:30:52 > 0:30:56pursued what is the right thing for the country? We have to worry about
0:30:57 > 0:31:00jobs. Jobs are key. They give confidence to people to lead their
0:31:00 > 0:31:04lives normally, spend money. We're a consumer society. We need that
0:31:04 > 0:31:11confidence. That's got to be the first thing we should think of.
0:31:11 > 0:31:19Secondly, access to finance. I am fed up of hearing from banks, "oh,
0:31:19 > 0:31:24we definitely bapbt to end." -- want to lend." On the other side
0:31:24 > 0:31:31the FSA are saying, after the Government are telling them to lend,
0:31:31 > 0:31:35"You need to increase your capital ratios." That means you cannot lend
0:31:35 > 0:31:38ratios." That means you cannot lend as much. It is ridiculous. It is a
0:31:38 > 0:31:43basic common sense economy. That is what we need.
0:31:43 > 0:31:48APPLAUSE Iain Duncan Smith, as the Cabinet
0:31:48 > 0:31:51minister here, what is going on in Cabinet? Do you think it will
0:31:51 > 0:31:58change policy in France? Will it change the relationship between
0:31:58 > 0:32:03France and Germany? Will it be an easing up of the restrictions being
0:32:03 > 0:32:07imposed? It is difficult to predict what he'll actually do. Of course
0:32:07 > 0:32:13in every election, often some politicians make plans and say they
0:32:13 > 0:32:21will do all these things. They say they will come out and raise tax.
0:32:21 > 0:32:24He says anything... It is playing into the hands of the man of the
0:32:24 > 0:32:30checked suit, who said all politicians lie. If he does any of
0:32:30 > 0:32:35that it will have a shock wave effect in Europe. It will cause,
0:32:35 > 0:32:39could cause major ruptions with Germany right now. The European
0:32:39 > 0:32:44Central Bank will find itself in difficulty. The reality is that we
0:32:44 > 0:32:48are in this crisis - that is to say most of the economies in Europe are
0:32:48 > 0:32:51either in recession or close to recession, because they owe too
0:32:51 > 0:32:56much money. They cannot raise the money enough in taxation and by and
0:32:56 > 0:33:00large, most of the economies are not productive enough and not
0:33:00 > 0:33:07competing well enough with other nations around the world. If the
0:33:07 > 0:33:12idea of Holland is he comes in now with a set of deficits, to spend
0:33:12 > 0:33:18huge amounts of money, raising it from taxpayers, he will put a
0:33:18 > 0:33:22further burden on the taxpayers of France. London is one of the
0:33:22 > 0:33:26largest French cities in Europe. A lot of French people will want to
0:33:26 > 0:33:30come to London. Maybe he's right in that respect. The problem will be
0:33:30 > 0:33:34that the European economies will be saddled with more debt w a greater
0:33:34 > 0:33:40level of deficit. They will not emerge from this recession. We rely
0:33:40 > 0:33:43as much on Europe to trade. We will be very badly affected if this goes
0:33:43 > 0:33:47badly wrong. Austerity is necessary because we have to try and get the
0:33:47 > 0:33:52debts down. If we get them down, then Governments can be in a
0:33:52 > 0:33:57position to help ease that and spend more. Right now Holland is
0:33:57 > 0:34:01fighting the wrong battle, frankly. I think it would be a good thing if
0:34:01 > 0:34:07he's elected. What it will put is at the heart of Europe a voice for
0:34:07 > 0:34:11the argument for jobs and for economic growth. We need to pay the
0:34:11 > 0:34:16deficit down, but the way to pay the deficit down is not by having
0:34:16 > 0:34:20your economy stagnate. The way to pay the deficit down is not to have
0:34:20 > 0:34:26more people unemployed, claiming unemployment benefit, as well as
0:34:26 > 0:34:31the tragedy of young people feeling they have been thrown on the scrap
0:34:31 > 0:34:36heap before they have begun. If he speaks up alongside the Prime
0:34:36 > 0:34:40Minister of Denmark, to say jobs must be the number one priority,
0:34:41 > 0:34:47jobs and economic growth and the austerity is self-defeating because
0:34:47 > 0:34:55it is city felling the economy. It will be a thoroughly good thing, so
0:34:55 > 0:34:59I hope that is what happens. I am all for jobs. I have said this to
0:34:59 > 0:35:03Gordon Brown when he was Chancellor. Jobs are key. They have to be key.
0:35:03 > 0:35:08We have to have efficiencies alongside jobs. You cannot just say,
0:35:08 > 0:35:10jobs at all costs. We have to accept there have to be
0:35:10 > 0:35:16efficiencies within the public sector, otherwise we cannot afford
0:35:16 > 0:35:21to pay for them. There is only so much money.
0:35:21 > 0:35:28Ming Campbell would you welcome a socialist victory in France,
0:35:28 > 0:35:32perhaps because it would modify what the coalition is doing? No, I
0:35:32 > 0:35:35would not welcome a socialist victory, because I think the
0:35:35 > 0:35:40agreement struck in Brussels would then have virtually no chance of
0:35:40 > 0:35:44being implemented. There is doubt about that agreement because it is
0:35:44 > 0:35:48possible that in Ireland the Government will not get the
0:35:48 > 0:35:52majority for the referendum. If that collapses then as Iain Duncan
0:35:52 > 0:35:56Smith has pointed out, his direct impact upon us, the majority of our
0:35:56 > 0:36:00trade is with the eurozone. If it is not buying, then who will we
0:36:00 > 0:36:04sell to? It is important to us, as for example the United States
0:36:04 > 0:36:09economy. That began to show some signs of life, but has fallen back
0:36:09 > 0:36:14again in the last couple of months. We are in a very, very fragile
0:36:14 > 0:36:18condition. Where I agree with Theo is on this question of jobs and of
0:36:18 > 0:36:22banks. Like every other constituency MP, I have had people,
0:36:22 > 0:36:28good people in my surgeries saying, look we have a perfectly good
0:36:28 > 0:36:33business, but the bank is holding us to ran some. We ought to direct
0:36:33 > 0:36:40more from the centre the policies of those banks, of which we owe,
0:36:40 > 0:36:45what? 80%? To ensure what they are doing is consistent, what they have
0:36:45 > 0:36:50done now is consistent with austerity. Now we must persuade
0:36:50 > 0:36:53them that austerity and growth can march together and if they don't we
0:36:53 > 0:36:58will not get the rebalancing of our economy.
0:36:58 > 0:37:01APPLAUSE Relevant to this, we had a speech by the Governor of the Bank
0:37:01 > 0:37:09of England last night. We have a question on that, which ties into
0:37:09 > 0:37:12everything we are talking about. Alex Rubin has the question. Meryvn
0:37:12 > 0:37:17King blamed a failure of imagination to understand that the
0:37:17 > 0:37:22economic bubble would burst. Is he right that no-one is to blame?
0:37:22 > 0:37:26He said that no-one is to blame - Iain Duncan Smith? The banks - is
0:37:26 > 0:37:31he right to say no-one was to blame. As the gentleman there said
0:37:31 > 0:37:40politicians spend their time saying it was Labour's fault, the Tories
0:37:40 > 0:37:44fault - whatever. Meryvn King said, "We all got it wrong." We were
0:37:44 > 0:37:48spending too much and we were too far in debt and also in personal
0:37:48 > 0:37:53death. We should have shouted it from the rooftops? He went on to
0:37:53 > 0:37:57say that they had taken the responsibility for looking after
0:37:57 > 0:38:00the banks away from him into another organisation, the FSA. The
0:38:00 > 0:38:05FSA completely failed to do anything about the way that the
0:38:06 > 0:38:10banks were capitalised or the fact that they were actually borrowing
0:38:10 > 0:38:14money at the rate they were. The point he was making is, yes there
0:38:14 > 0:38:17was a failure of those in charge. There was a failure of the way the
0:38:17 > 0:38:22regulation was set, which led to chaos between different bodies. We
0:38:22 > 0:38:27have put this back with the bank and say, you are responsible, not
0:38:27 > 0:38:30another body, they cannot blame you, you cannot blame them, you will
0:38:30 > 0:38:34take responsibility for how the banks are run. It is true what he
0:38:34 > 0:38:39said, that as a result of all of that, in having two bodies
0:38:39 > 0:38:43regulating this, the problem then arose that neither took full
0:38:43 > 0:38:47responsibility and the chaos that ensued. Here I want to make this
0:38:47 > 0:38:51point, I find it strange that Harriet Harman talks about spending
0:38:51 > 0:38:54with regards to France, but her own plan in Government is a deficit-
0:38:54 > 0:38:58control and a reduction of the deficit, not what France is doing
0:38:58 > 0:39:02and it was as a result of the failure of the last Government to
0:39:02 > 0:39:07get the regulation right, that hugely no-one took responsibility
0:39:07 > 0:39:11for monitoring the banks. He is right about that. I want to come
0:39:11 > 0:39:15back to the point about France because he will be a breath of
0:39:15 > 0:39:19fresh air across Europe. He's arguing that if you want to solve
0:39:19 > 0:39:24the economicry sis then you have to tax the rich. -- economic crisis,
0:39:24 > 0:39:28then row have to start to tax the rich. If the Labour Party in this
0:39:28 > 0:39:31country started to use these arguments they would be popular and
0:39:31 > 0:39:35not in the mess they are in at the moment, allowing the Tories getting
0:39:35 > 0:39:42away with what they are doing. When Theo talks about the rich coming
0:39:42 > 0:39:47into Britain, we have the rich in Britain. We have many. Is this
0:39:47 > 0:39:51country getting richer? No. It is not. The rich 5% are taking the
0:39:51 > 0:39:56wealth out of this country and hiding it in tax havens. That is
0:39:56 > 0:39:58why we are taking strike action next week because we want to defend
0:39:58 > 0:40:04our jobs, defend the public services.
0:40:04 > 0:40:10APPLAUSE The man, four along from you, there. Yes?
0:40:10 > 0:40:13You, Sir. I kind of disagree with that point there because if you
0:40:13 > 0:40:18just taxed the rich you takeaway the incentive of young people like
0:40:18 > 0:40:22myself who wish to further myself in this country and become a
0:40:22 > 0:40:29successful entrepreneur of tomorrow. Instead I will take myself to
0:40:29 > 0:40:32another country, with the freedom in the EU, even if I need to study
0:40:32 > 0:40:38another language in order to make the best for myself and my family.
0:40:38 > 0:40:46I don't think just increasing the taxes on rich. It's like saying,
0:40:46 > 0:40:49we're going to tax success. APPLAUSE And you, Sir. What that
0:40:49 > 0:40:57gentleman has just said I could not disagree more with.
0:40:57 > 0:41:00APPLAUSE The idea that he has ideas of
0:41:00 > 0:41:04entrepreneurship, but is not willing to pursue them in Britain
0:41:04 > 0:41:09because he'll get taxed too highly and therefore he'll go elsewhere,
0:41:09 > 0:41:13it says more about him than it does about the tax system.
0:41:13 > 0:41:15APPLAUSE The man up there. I would like to say on the point of
0:41:15 > 0:41:18the previous Government and the Bank of England not doing enough,
0:41:19 > 0:41:22was it not a case of happy ignorance from the Labour Party for
0:41:23 > 0:41:26a long period of time that they were happy to ride the wave of
0:41:26 > 0:41:30bankers getting us a lot of money in the short-term, not saving
0:41:30 > 0:41:37enough for the times when there could have been a crunch and when
0:41:37 > 0:41:43it came, there was no plan. Fixing the -- not fixing the sun when the
0:41:43 > 0:41:46-- not fixing the roof when the sun shown argument. You yourself
0:41:47 > 0:41:50support deficit controls in this country? It is true to say neither
0:41:50 > 0:41:55the Bank of England or the Financial Services Authority, nor
0:41:55 > 0:42:02the Treasury foresaw that the banks didn't know what they were doing
0:42:02 > 0:42:07with their credit default swaps, sub-prime and actually there was a
0:42:07 > 0:42:11lack of transparency and lack of understanding that the banks were
0:42:11 > 0:42:15heading towards the edge of a cliff and they had to be saved from
0:42:15 > 0:42:19falling off it before they took the economy with it. As for Iain Duncan
0:42:19 > 0:42:22Smith going on about there wasn't enough regulation, when he was
0:42:22 > 0:42:26leader of the Conservative Party they were calling for more
0:42:26 > 0:42:29regulation and actually he's now complaining and saying we were
0:42:29 > 0:42:35spending too much. He didn't complain about the investment in
0:42:35 > 0:42:38our hospitals and in our schools and in our public transport and
0:42:38 > 0:42:44also before the financial crisis hit, the Tories were saying, we are
0:42:44 > 0:42:49spending, our spending was about right and quite tough. When it came
0:42:49 > 0:42:53to the financial global crisis, if we had stood back and not rescued
0:42:53 > 0:42:57banks and not invested in the economy through capital spending in
0:42:57 > 0:42:59public works, then unemployment would have been much higher and
0:42:59 > 0:43:04businesses would have been shrinking ever more. That is now
0:43:04 > 0:43:08what is beginning to happen with this Government. Well, the banks
0:43:08 > 0:43:12had to be rescued. If they had not then the economy would be in free-
0:43:13 > 0:43:18fall. That is why I am very supportive of the proposals from
0:43:18 > 0:43:27the commission about dividing what you and I might describe as
0:43:27 > 0:43:37domestic banking from investment banking, but there was someone
0:43:37 > 0:43:38
0:43:38 > 0:43:43shout from the rooftops, his name was Dr Vince Cable. The boom was an
0:43:44 > 0:43:50unsustainable property boom. What do we know? They always adjust. It
0:43:50 > 0:43:55was based on a ridiculous level of personal debt. �1.5 trillion at one
0:43:55 > 0:44:01stage. When you had mortgage companies offering not 100%
0:44:01 > 0:44:05mortgages, but 110% and plus of course the derivatives to which
0:44:05 > 0:44:09Harriet Harman has referred. These were based on selling people in the
0:44:09 > 0:44:14United States houses or mortgages which they could never afford to
0:44:14 > 0:44:19pay. So the notion that no-one is to blame will not stand up. Perhaps
0:44:19 > 0:44:29it is easy to say, it's not so much no-one is to blame, but everyone is
0:44:29 > 0:44:31
0:44:31 > 0:44:35to blame, but with the soul Mark Serwotka? Wshed remember who
0:44:35 > 0:44:39is suffering. The people who're suffering with the ones that
0:44:39 > 0:44:44definitely did not create this crisis. We should remember. Isn't
0:44:44 > 0:44:47it a strange old world where the people who've done well, have
0:44:47 > 0:44:51always made loads of money, privatised their profits, then as
0:44:51 > 0:44:57soon as they get in a mess, we bail them out. Then we are expected to
0:44:57 > 0:45:01pay for it with our jobs, communities and services whilst
0:45:01 > 0:45:08rich people still do quite nicely. What I would stay is this, nobody
0:45:08 > 0:45:15in Britain is talking about taxing the rich at 70, 80, 90%, we start
0:45:15 > 0:45:20with the richest people in Britain avoiding paying �120 billion worth
0:45:20 > 0:45:25of tax, that is actually due. They get away with blue murder. Anyone
0:45:25 > 0:45:32in the audience can't avoid paying tax because you get pay as you earn,
0:45:32 > 0:45:37but when you get rich, you laugh your way to the bank and we have to
0:45:37 > 0:45:41pick up the pieces. What I would say to Iain and pick up on Theo's
0:45:41 > 0:45:46point is this, austerity clearly is not working because what we get
0:45:46 > 0:45:49with that is rising unemployment, more misery, the economy is
0:45:49 > 0:45:55contracting and I think it's not rocket science to thauns the best
0:45:55 > 0:46:00way to get out of this mess is not set ourselves a ridiculous deadline
0:46:00 > 0:46:05of clearing the debt in three years, it's to take a longer term view and
0:46:05 > 0:46:09to say when 4.8 million people need a council house, when people are
0:46:09 > 0:46:13desperate to have investment in schools, whn communities see people
0:46:13 > 0:46:16out of work chaiming welfare when they should be in work, paying tax
0:46:16 > 0:46:22and improving our society, we should take a longer term view,
0:46:22 > 0:46:28based on the what's good for all of us, the 99%, not the richest 1% at
0:46:28 > 0:46:33the top. You there, Sir? I believe there are
0:46:33 > 0:46:37two points here that haven't been mentioned yet. Number one is greed
0:46:37 > 0:46:42and number two is stupidity. Greed because there isn't fr a need to
0:46:42 > 0:46:46have hundreds of millions of pounds or a billion pounds or whatever.
0:46:46 > 0:46:49That's what's driving people like the gentleman there to pay as
0:46:50 > 0:46:53little tax as possible so they can get as much as possible, which is
0:46:53 > 0:46:57not needed. Second is stupidity, it's stupid to get yourself into
0:46:57 > 0:47:02debt like people on low wages do. They get a mortgage they can't
0:47:02 > 0:47:06afford. This thing wouldn't have happened. If the people in America
0:47:06 > 0:47:09didn't get the mortgages and go subprime, but the advertisers were
0:47:09 > 0:47:13saying, get this mortgage now, people should have thought, can I
0:47:13 > 0:47:16afford this and if they couldn't, they shouldn't have got nit the
0:47:16 > 0:47:22first place, they shouldn't be freedy and they should think first
0:47:22 > 0:47:26and we'd be better off for that. The woman in the front. It's not
0:47:26 > 0:47:29just people on low wages who took out the mortgages and there were
0:47:29 > 0:47:34some relatively wealthy middle class people who also suffered both
0:47:34 > 0:47:38in terms of perhaps being a bit stupid taking out large mortgages
0:47:38 > 0:47:43who've lost their mortgages and jobs as well, it's not just low
0:47:43 > 0:47:48paid people who've lost their jobs, there are a lot of people living
0:47:48 > 0:47:53nice lives whose lives have been turned up side down by losing their
0:47:53 > 0:47:57jobs as well. Theo Paphitis? I've heard some things and some people
0:47:57 > 0:48:02don't live in the real world. When I lived in a tenement block, my mum
0:48:02 > 0:48:06had to decide whether we could have electricity or food, she was a
0:48:06 > 0:48:09single parent. Electricity had to go so we could afford food. Those
0:48:09 > 0:48:13were the things that were driving me to become a success. I've got to
0:48:13 > 0:48:16tell you, a long, long time ago, I could stop work, I didn't need any
0:48:16 > 0:48:19more money, you are absolutely right. I don't get out of bed in
0:48:20 > 0:48:23the morning because I'm going to make money, I get out of bed in the
0:48:23 > 0:48:27morning because I have got a social responsibility, I love what I'm
0:48:27 > 0:48:31doing, I love working with people and I want to make a success of
0:48:31 > 0:48:35myself, my family and everybody that is around me that I work with.
0:48:35 > 0:48:40That's what drives me. It's not about making billions and trillions
0:48:40 > 0:48:46of pounds and I've got to tell you, this ridiculous notion that the
0:48:46 > 0:48:51reduction of 5p in income tax makes any difference to anybody paying
0:48:51 > 0:48:5550% is nonsense. I don't know why you guys did it because it's given
0:48:55 > 0:49:00so much ammunition to people who just don't understand. Listen,
0:49:00 > 0:49:03people who are successful and have a social conscience give a huge
0:49:04 > 0:49:07amount of money away way above what they are going to save by the 5p
0:49:07 > 0:49:12tax rate and you know what, they are likely to give it away because
0:49:12 > 0:49:17it's spent more wisely than giving it away to the Exchequer.
0:49:17 > 0:49:21APPLAUSE Not wanting to let you just briefly
0:49:21 > 0:49:24off the question that was put, who do you blame? Do you think Mervyn
0:49:24 > 0:49:27King is right to say no-one was to blame, it was a failure of
0:49:28 > 0:49:32imagination, or do you have people and organisations that you hold
0:49:32 > 0:49:36responsible for the crash? Last time I heard a statement like
0:49:36 > 0:49:41Mervyn King's was a certain football club chairman that says he
0:49:41 > 0:49:47was living the dream. That seems to me exactly what was going on. The
0:49:47 > 0:49:51reality was the Emperor had no clothes on. In 2006, it was
0:49:51 > 0:49:54blatantly clear then that with the personal debt we had, with the
0:49:54 > 0:50:00country's debt, the pension deficits that existed, it couldn't
0:50:00 > 0:50:05go on. And, you know, it could be foreseen. Quite a few of us foresaw
0:50:05 > 0:50:10it and quite a few of us... just Vince Cable? No, quite a few
0:50:10 > 0:50:15of us cashed out in 2006 and decided that this could not go on,
0:50:15 > 0:50:18it was obvious, it was Government. Someone mentioned greed and
0:50:18 > 0:50:22stupidity over there and I certainly agree with that as well.
0:50:22 > 0:50:25The man in the third row? I think it's important to remember that
0:50:25 > 0:50:28when we attack the banks and bank, as a whole, there are thousands of
0:50:28 > 0:50:33hard working people in our financial sector who aren't always
0:50:33 > 0:50:36paid great wages and we forget that if there are a few bankers at the
0:50:36 > 0:50:40top, it's not really the ones who work very long hours and work very
0:50:40 > 0:50:44hard and have helped our country and our economy get stronger in the
0:50:44 > 0:50:48recent years. My father grew up in poverty, he was adopted and he's
0:50:48 > 0:50:52paid his taxes all his life and now as a result I've had a great life
0:50:52 > 0:50:55thanks to him and it's people like that and people who have worked in
0:50:55 > 0:51:00the financial sector very long hours who're being attacked by all
0:51:00 > 0:51:03sections of the press and political parties just because a few at the
0:51:03 > 0:51:05top give their profession a bad name.
0:51:05 > 0:51:05APPLAUSE We've
0:51:05 > 0:51:05We've got
0:51:05 > 0:51:06We've got time
0:51:06 > 0:51:10We've got time for
0:51:10 > 0:51:14We've got time for one more question from Louise Ingham, please.
0:51:14 > 0:51:21Has the London Mayoral election campaign become an embarrassing
0:51:21 > 0:51:26mud-slinging affair which has lost sight of the real things affecting
0:51:26 > 0:51:29London. The mud-slinging of course being between Boris and Ken?
0:51:29 > 0:51:33Harriet Harman? I think there is a pity there hasn't been focus on the
0:51:33 > 0:51:38important things that the Mayor does that will affect people in
0:51:38 > 0:51:43London. Can you name add candidate for that? The question is whether
0:51:43 > 0:51:46the actual conduct of the campaign has been embarrassing? That's what
0:51:46 > 0:51:49I'm trying to answer, what that is this campaign been about - it
0:51:49 > 0:51:53should have been about the promise that Ken Livingstone had to cut
0:51:53 > 0:51:55fares, about the protection of police numbers, about recreating
0:51:56 > 0:52:01the Educational Maintenance Allowance, making sure that energy
0:52:01 > 0:52:05prices were lower anden suring there was better childcare. Instead,
0:52:05 > 0:52:08there's been massive personal onslaughts and I hope Londoners
0:52:08 > 0:52:12will have seen through that and vote ford policies that will
0:52:12 > 0:52:15improve their lives and not been destructive by the mud-slinging we
0:52:15 > 0:52:20have seen from Boris Johnson and his team. Do you think Ken
0:52:20 > 0:52:25Livingstone was the right choice? The polls have not closed yet.
0:52:25 > 0:52:29polls have closed when this programme goes out. No, I'm sorry,
0:52:29 > 0:52:35I absolutely am not going to second guess the result when the polls
0:52:35 > 0:52:39actually haven't closed. If I ask you in an hour's time, you will
0:52:39 > 0:52:43give a different answer? We'll know the actual answer, I hope people
0:52:43 > 0:52:48are voting for Ken Livingstone and Labour and the GLA as well. Was Tom
0:52:48 > 0:52:52Watson right to say hold your nose and vote Livingstone? No, and
0:52:52 > 0:52:56actually I didn't hear him say that, but if he did, it was wrong. I
0:52:56 > 0:53:04think that Ken's had great policies for London and I think that he's
0:53:04 > 0:53:07just not - just what London needs for the next Mayor. Iain Duncan
0:53:07 > 0:53:12Smith? I think it's a great mistake by Labour to pick Ken Livingstone
0:53:12 > 0:53:17because he's been a disaster for London and he would have been and
0:53:17 > 0:53:20I'm pretty certain that he doesn't get back in and I hope he doesn't.
0:53:21 > 0:53:24Boris has been good and gives a real sense that London can do
0:53:24 > 0:53:29better. He represents the real aspiration of lots of Londoners.
0:53:29 > 0:53:33They often like him because, just like the gentleman says over there,
0:53:33 > 0:53:37he says what he thinks. That's aggravating to me, but he does.
0:53:37 > 0:53:44He's a breath of fresh air and you are going to get more sense out of
0:53:44 > 0:53:48him than anything else. When did he last aggravate you? He's always
0:53:48 > 0:53:51coming in to aggravate me, I like him very much, we are good friends
0:53:51 > 0:53:56but we don't always agree. If you give Boris Johnson the facts,
0:53:56 > 0:54:01challenge him on something, he'll make his policies fit the facts, in
0:54:01 > 0:54:06the the other way around. It got into a slanging match because Ken
0:54:06 > 0:54:11Livingstone was under pressure over his own tax ludicrous position, we
0:54:11 > 0:54:13find he didn't pay his tax as well. Under that pressure, he decides to
0:54:13 > 0:54:18lay an allegation at Boris Johnson's door saying he didn't pay
0:54:18 > 0:54:22his tax. That's why it descended into a slanging match. Boris
0:54:22 > 0:54:26Johnson was clean about his taxes and published his own tax position
0:54:26 > 0:54:32and that's right. So disaster for Labour to have Ken I hope and it
0:54:32 > 0:54:37would have been a diss a tr for London so let's hope Boris Johnson
0:54:37 > 0:54:41gets elected. -- disaster. Mark Serwotka, what do you think?
0:54:41 > 0:54:44whole concept of having mayoral elections can descend into
0:54:45 > 0:54:48personality problems and don't focus on the realish yous. When we
0:54:48 > 0:54:52looked at the issues, I have no doubt that what Ken Livingstone
0:54:52 > 0:54:55argued to cut fares, that we need more affordable houses and people
0:54:55 > 0:54:59keeping our communities safe, that people in London were worried about
0:54:59 > 0:55:02education for their kids and they were in despair, I think he was
0:55:02 > 0:55:05absolutely right. I think as the Labour candidate, and I'm not a
0:55:05 > 0:55:09member of the Labour Party, I think the good thing about Ken
0:55:09 > 0:55:13Livingstone is he says things that are not always popular, even with
0:55:13 > 0:55:17his own leaders, he says them because he means it. I think it
0:55:17 > 0:55:22would be a tragedy if when London has the chance to go to the polls
0:55:22 > 0:55:26given everything that's going on, if it re-elects, a Mayor who's very
0:55:26 > 0:55:30rich who's built 86 affordable houses in his entire term as London
0:55:30 > 0:55:35Mayor, who is a good laugh and can entertain people, but actually will
0:55:35 > 0:55:39give the wrong signals to people in despair, I hope Boris Johnson has
0:55:39 > 0:55:43been voted out, I hope Kenwynes but I want to see the politics in
0:55:43 > 0:55:50London and nationwide transformed to our issues are centre stage, not
0:55:50 > 0:55:53the circus we often see from the made ya.
0:55:53 > 0:55:57Theo Paphitis? I don't live in London so I don't get the
0:55:57 > 0:56:02opportunity to vote for Boris or Ken but I did think it was slightly
0:56:02 > 0:56:06embarrassing watching both of them, instead of dealing with the major
0:56:06 > 0:56:12issues that a great City like London's got having a go at each
0:56:12 > 0:56:19other in a lift like that. Who won anyway? We won't know until...
0:56:19 > 0:56:23meant the punch up... Sir Menzies Campbell? It wasn't a
0:56:23 > 0:56:27good advertisement, as Mark said. That's not to argue that having
0:56:28 > 0:56:31Mayors in large cities is not necessarily a bad thing. But I
0:56:31 > 0:56:35think this particular contest has damaged that whole concept. There
0:56:35 > 0:56:43was one person though who was talking about all the things which
0:56:43 > 0:56:47Harriet and Mark described as being and he was talking, for example,
0:56:47 > 0:56:53about crime... That's the Liberal Democrat candidate we should
0:56:53 > 0:56:58explain? Everyone knows who he is. Just helping you. Very kind of you!
0:56:58 > 0:57:02Perhaps you had to do a little homework yourself. Brian Paddick
0:57:02 > 0:57:09knows about crime because for 30 years he was a policeman, started
0:57:09 > 0:57:13off as a bobby and finished off as an Assistant Deputy Chief Constable.
0:57:13 > 0:57:17He knows about these issues and if we hadn't had this personality
0:57:17 > 0:57:20clash, some of this rather extraordinary language that's now
0:57:20 > 0:57:24apparently acceptable in political terms too, then perhaps the
0:57:24 > 0:57:27arguments that Brian Paddick's been putting and the arguments that the
0:57:27 > 0:57:31independent candidate has been putting would have had a better
0:57:31 > 0:57:33chance of being heard. Too late for the pitch I'm afraid since this
0:57:33 > 0:57:37programme will be broadcast after the polls have closed Harriet just
0:57:37 > 0:57:41in case you thought you might be able to influence things at the
0:57:41 > 0:57:45last moment. I'm afraid our time is up, our hour is over. It goes fast.
0:57:45 > 0:57:49Sorry to those who had your hands up. We are in Oldham next week, we
0:57:49 > 0:57:52have Caroline Spelman, Chris Bryant, Mary Beard, Professor of Classics
0:57:52 > 0:57:58and television presenter on the panel and the week after that, we
0:57:58 > 0:58:05are in Cardiff. So if you want to come, either to Oldham or Cardiff,
0:58:05 > 0:58:10you can join the panel, no, quiz the padge and join the audience,
0:58:10 > 0:58:14you can call us -- panel. My thanks to this panel and to all of you who
0:58:14 > 0:58:17came here to take part in this. Next on BBC One, the election