:00:16. > :00:21.We are in West Bromwich tonight, and welcome to Question Time. On
:00:21. > :00:26.the panel, the Justice Secretary, Kenneth Clarke, the Shadow Health
:00:26. > :00:31.Secretary, Andy Burnham, the general secretary of Britain's
:00:31. > :00:34.biggest trade union, then McCluskey, the economist Ruth Lea, and the
:00:34. > :00:44.Midlands businesswoman of the year, who runs a company that uses
:00:44. > :00:54.
:00:54. > :01:00.diamond drills to break-up concrete, You can use your diamond drills on
:01:00. > :01:06.the members of the panel! Let's have our first question.
:01:06. > :01:11.celebrities who avoid paying tax the moral equivalent of benefit
:01:11. > :01:19.cheats? That is a quote from Danny Alexander of the Liberal Democrats
:01:19. > :01:24.today about Jimmy Carr and his tax affairs. Ken Clarke, are they the
:01:24. > :01:28.moral equivalent of benefit cheats? Well, there is a difference between
:01:28. > :01:31.people who cheat legally and people who cheat illegally. Presumably if
:01:31. > :01:35.somebody has not broken the law, they are not guilty of any criminal
:01:35. > :01:38.offence. But I think the public probably disapprove of wealthy
:01:38. > :01:43.people who find ingenious ways with the help of brilliant accountants
:01:43. > :01:47.of really avoiding paying any tax, with the same sort of disapproval
:01:47. > :01:52.that they disapprove of people who fiddle their benefits. The question
:01:52. > :01:55.is, whether it is a fedora crime. I think at the present time, it is
:01:55. > :01:59.not surprising that people get angry when they discover somebody
:01:59. > :02:03.who earns a very large amount of money can get away with paying
:02:03. > :02:09.hardly any tax. Was it right of the Prime Minister to single out Jimmy
:02:09. > :02:12.Carr and to say that his behaviour was quite frankly morally wrong? Is
:02:12. > :02:16.it the business of the Prime Minister to give views about
:02:16. > :02:21.individual citizens? Adair a very large number of people agreed with
:02:21. > :02:26.the Prime Minister. -- I'd bet at large number of people. But was he
:02:26. > :02:29.right? He was singled out by the press. If the Prime Minister had
:02:29. > :02:32.named some well-known person out of the blue and gone into his tax
:02:32. > :02:36.affairs, no Prime Minister would do that, but it was suddenly all over
:02:36. > :02:42.the press. There was no denying that he had paid next to no
:02:42. > :02:47.taxation on a large income, so I think the Prime Minister's reaction
:02:47. > :02:51.was probably shared by a very large majority of the British public.
:02:51. > :02:56.When Lord Ashcroft's tax affairs were up for discussion in 3rd
:02:56. > :02:59.December years ago, David Cameron said, I am not possible for
:02:59. > :03:03.responsible for everybody's tax payments. It is a matter between
:03:03. > :03:06.them and the Revenue. I do not think he was saying he was
:03:06. > :03:09.responsible. He is the Prime Minister of a Government that has
:03:09. > :03:14.put a great deal of effort into tackling Tax abuse, which has gone
:03:14. > :03:17.on for years. We have brilliant accountants who try to keep one
:03:17. > :03:21.foot ahead of the Treasury. The Revenue's spend their entire time
:03:21. > :03:26.trying to block loopholes. George has finally managed to get, in the
:03:26. > :03:29.Finance Bill, which he has announced and we will do it, a
:03:29. > :03:34.general anti- abuse provision, which we have never been able to
:03:34. > :03:37.persuade Parliament to contemplate before. It will be easier to react
:03:37. > :03:42.when tax things are designed plainly for the purpose of getting
:03:42. > :03:45.away from the intention, the spirit of the bill, the bill passed by
:03:45. > :03:49.Parliament and put into the law. Obviously we must be more effective
:03:49. > :03:57.in dealing with tax abuse. We are putting in more effort than people
:03:57. > :04:00.have put into it for many years. Andy Burnham. Schemes like this are
:04:00. > :04:03.unacceptable and I am glad Jimmy Carr has recognised his mistake.
:04:03. > :04:07.But I think politicians need to tread carefully before commenting
:04:07. > :04:10.on individual's tax affairs. After all, it is our primary
:04:10. > :04:14.responsibility to ensure there are fair rules in place and loopholes
:04:14. > :04:18.are closed down. Probably all politicians should look at this and
:04:18. > :04:23.say, we should have done more. Before we rush after individuals we
:04:23. > :04:27.should get the tax rules in order. There are two things I would say
:04:27. > :04:30.about Mr Cameron. He has opened a can of worms for himself. The
:04:30. > :04:34.question I would ask, what is the difference between Jimmy Carr and
:04:34. > :04:38.Lord Ashcroft, other than that one is a major Tory donor who
:04:38. > :04:42.bankrolled the last Tory party election campaign? The second thing
:04:42. > :04:46.I would say is that he is in absolutely no position to dish out
:04:46. > :04:51.lessons on tax morality when he had a Budget just a few months ago that
:04:51. > :05:01.handed out �14,000 tax breaks to millionairess, at the same time as
:05:01. > :05:03.
:05:03. > :05:12.taking working tax credit of And taking benefits of disabled
:05:13. > :05:16.people. Where is the morality in that? The man in the back row.
:05:16. > :05:19.think time would be better spent on the abuses of large corporations
:05:19. > :05:23.and the amounts of money, the vast amounts of money they get away
:05:23. > :05:30.without paying, rather than individuals, which is insignificant
:05:30. > :05:35.in comparison. Ruth Lea. Going back to Jimmy Carr, I think he was so
:05:35. > :05:40.picked out because he was mocking a Barclay's Bank scheme for a 1% tax
:05:40. > :05:44.scam, and lo and behold, he was doing exactly the same thing. So I
:05:44. > :05:47.think there is a smell of hypocrisy round here as far as he is
:05:47. > :05:52.concerned. He has lost an awful lot of street cred, I would have
:05:52. > :05:56.thought, with his audience, and no wonder he has backtracked quickly.
:05:56. > :06:00.But I would certainly say there is still obviously quite a lot of tax
:06:00. > :06:05.avoidance. There is no question about this. Ken Clarke has
:06:05. > :06:09.mentioned the anti-avoidance rule that George Osborne introduced in
:06:09. > :06:13.the Budget and I say, good luck to the Revenue to try and track this
:06:13. > :06:20.stuff down him, because the Revenue must be losing up to �5 billion
:06:20. > :06:23.each year, and that is your money and my money. I am sure that under
:06:23. > :06:27.those circumstances we wish the Revenue all the best in tracking
:06:27. > :06:30.these people down. But is it morally wrong to use a tax
:06:30. > :06:34.avoidance scheme that is legal because the Treasury has not got
:06:34. > :06:38.around to banning it? It is difficult because part of me says,
:06:38. > :06:42.yes, it is morally wrong. I pay more than my share of taxes and
:06:42. > :06:51.ironically the people who pay 50% of tax, they pay a lot of tax as
:06:51. > :06:55.well. How do you pay more than your share? You are very sharp tonight,
:06:55. > :07:01.David! I just think it was the turn of phrase. I was feeling slightly
:07:01. > :07:05.sorry for myself. Put it this way, I pay my share of tax. I do think
:07:05. > :07:08.Jimmy Carr and everybody else who is avoiding tax through some clever
:07:08. > :07:13.scheme because of their accountants, I think they should be paying their
:07:14. > :07:17.tax as well. The man in the third row. Up in areas of deprivation,
:07:17. > :07:23.like here in Sandwell, and other parts, it is galling that people
:07:23. > :07:26.like Jimmy Carr, and people there who do not pay their taxes, we have
:07:26. > :07:36.to hear stories of people spending time and effort avoiding paying
:07:36. > :07:39.taxes. It is calling. -- it is a galling thing. I think it is
:07:39. > :07:45.morally reprehensible and the Prime Minister and the Government were
:07:45. > :07:49.right to expose and respond to the Times newspaper's article. But
:07:49. > :07:53.unfortunately there is a big whiff of hypocrisy. Our colleague at the
:07:53. > :07:58.back made the point about corporate tax avoidance. We have been saying
:07:58. > :08:04.for years that tax avoidance is a serious problem. Independent fiscal
:08:04. > :08:08.bodies tell us that the Treasury loses up to �40 billion a year
:08:08. > :08:12.through tax avoidance. �40 billion. That is absolutely staggering. The
:08:12. > :08:14.Government, although they are making these noises in response to
:08:14. > :08:19.the type of investigative journalism that we have seen in the
:08:19. > :08:22.Times, they are absolute -- actually being hypocritical. Ken
:08:22. > :08:30.Clarke says that more effort is being put into closing these
:08:30. > :08:33.loopholes and collecting tax. That is absolute nonsense. Her Majesty's
:08:33. > :08:39.Revenue and Customs are currently about to lose a third -- a further
:08:39. > :08:45.10,000 jobs, the very people who we are looking to to collect the tax.
:08:45. > :08:49.Tax compliance officers actually collect �630,000 a year on average.
:08:49. > :08:53.And his Government is about to make them redundant. So it is hypocrisy
:08:53. > :08:58.for the Government to say one thing, pass things through Parliament, but
:08:58. > :09:03.with no effort whatsoever to tackle what is an absolute disgrace, and
:09:03. > :09:07.that is the super rich and the corporate giants who do not pay tax.
:09:07. > :09:11.We have got chief executive officers of major companies who pay
:09:11. > :09:21.less tax than the cleaners who actually clean their buildings.
:09:21. > :09:22.
:09:22. > :09:26.It's a disgrace! But if what these people are doing
:09:26. > :09:31.is illegal, it does not matter how many tax inspectors you have. They
:09:31. > :09:38.will say, it was legal. It is the law that needs changing. Yes,
:09:38. > :09:42.absolutely. Tax avoidance is legal. Not tax evasion. Heaven knows how
:09:42. > :09:46.much we lose their. Tax avoidance is a serious problem and we need a
:09:46. > :09:50.Government that has the courage to close the loopholes. And we need
:09:50. > :09:54.staff to collect it and not be made redundant. That is why members will
:09:54. > :09:57.be on strike on Monday, 50,000 of them, to defend their jobs and
:09:57. > :10:07.bring to the public's attention that we are being ripped off on
:10:07. > :10:08.
:10:08. > :10:14.this tax avoidance. Julie White. Back to Jimmy Carr. As you said,
:10:14. > :10:22.was it legal? Yes, he was following every rule in the book. Is it moral,
:10:22. > :10:28.No, it was not. He has withdrawn it, hasn't he. As you said, I think
:10:28. > :10:33.David Cameron has opened up a huge can of worms. Because K2 is not the
:10:33. > :10:38.only scheme out there. And also, with Jimmy Carr, there are another
:10:38. > :10:41.1000 people in there. How many Tory backbenchers, how many people that
:10:41. > :10:46.support David Cameron will come out of the woodwork? I do not think we
:10:46. > :10:50.have heard the last of this, I can tell you that. The other thing is,
:10:50. > :10:55.as you said, Jimmy Carr has withdrawn and said he will be a
:10:55. > :11:02.good boy from now on. Was that because David Cameron said so, or
:11:02. > :11:07.was it Twitter? There's a question to ask their. You are a business
:11:07. > :11:12.woman. Don't you do your best to keep to the lowest level of tax
:11:12. > :11:17.that your business pays? Do you not take advice from accountants?
:11:17. > :11:21.take advice. It would be great if we could get 1%, but we do not. We
:11:22. > :11:28.take advice. We try to take tax breaks if we can, but not down to
:11:28. > :11:33.as low as 1%. That is like nothing. The man in the front. The only
:11:33. > :11:38.reason Jimmy Carr is upset is because he has been found out.
:11:38. > :11:43.why was he pointed out first? I know that it was leaked. I would
:11:43. > :11:47.hate to have anything leaked about myself. Why was he pointed out?
:11:47. > :11:57.man in the second row from the back. Pre-Jimmy Carr has apologised. Is
:11:57. > :11:59.
:11:59. > :12:02.If he had not been exposed, perhaps he would still be doing what he is
:12:02. > :12:05.doing. You have to hope it is genuine and he is reflecting on
:12:05. > :12:09.some of the reaction. I want to come back to the point that the
:12:09. > :12:13.gentleman made. It seems there is an elite that are living by
:12:13. > :12:16.different rules to the rest of us. They have not been watching what is
:12:16. > :12:23.going on in the last couple of years. They are paying accountants
:12:23. > :12:27.to take them out of tax. We read that top pay rose by 12% last year.
:12:27. > :12:30.My constituents would find that absolutely unacceptable. Why are
:12:30. > :12:34.they still able to pay themselves well above the odds, well above
:12:34. > :12:38.what everybody else is getting? The statement that we are all in it
:12:38. > :12:43.together rings more and more hollow every day that goes by. The
:12:43. > :12:45.Government came forward with top pay proposals this week. Watered
:12:45. > :12:50.down, completely ineffectual and nothing like what Vince Cable
:12:50. > :12:55.originally promised. This discussion has taken a peculiar
:12:55. > :12:59.turn. Nobody has said that something should not be done about
:12:59. > :13:03.tax abuse. Everybody has been saying that for as long as I can
:13:03. > :13:09.remember. The idea that recruiting a few 1000 tax inspectors will
:13:09. > :13:12.solve it is simplistic. The idea that some party political point,
:13:12. > :13:16.when we succeeded a government that did not trouble the super rich for
:13:16. > :13:21.the slightest in the 13 years it was in power, is faintly ridiculous.
:13:21. > :13:28.It is, I'm afraid, question of lawyers, of tax law. It is in the
:13:28. > :13:32.Budget. Before there was any fuss or any Raul, there has been a
:13:32. > :13:36.significant step, a genic -- a general anti- abuse provision. It
:13:36. > :13:39.means that the law does not have to in detail. If you contradict what
:13:39. > :13:44.Parliament intended, the Revenue will get the money. We have to pass
:13:44. > :13:49.it, and I am sure the Labour Party will not a pose. And we have to
:13:49. > :13:54.then enforce it. It is tricky. They are clever, these accountants. But
:13:55. > :13:58.we are putting effort into it. But these are knockabout. So we are
:13:58. > :14:04.making. What is the difference between Jimmy Carr and Sir Philip
:14:04. > :14:07.Green? Philip Green who owns Top Shop should have paid �285 million
:14:07. > :14:13.worth of tax last year to the Treasury to look after our schools
:14:13. > :14:19.and our roads. How much did they pay? Nothing. Why? Because his wife
:14:19. > :14:24.owns the company, who happens to be domiciled in Monaco. No tax. What
:14:24. > :14:28.did the Prime Minister do? Did he castigates Philip Green? No, he
:14:28. > :14:38.invited him in to advise the Government. There is a whiff of
:14:38. > :14:39.
:14:39. > :14:44.hypocrisy. Action speaks louder This idea of which individuals we
:14:44. > :14:50.like and which we don't is populist nonsense. What's morally wrong,
:14:50. > :14:54.even when it's legal, is a really aggresive tax scheme which is
:14:54. > :14:59.plainly using something for tax- evasion purposes for which it
:14:59. > :15:02.wasn't dined. These fiddles around Gordon Brown's film grants when the
:15:02. > :15:06.people putting their money into it couldn't care less about films or
:15:07. > :15:14.where they are made are the ones that will get strict tures. This
:15:14. > :15:21.will probably turn out to be what this comedian's contributions went
:15:21. > :15:27.into. If you put a money into a charitable trust and put it into
:15:27. > :15:33.Romania you save an awful lot of tax. Don't encourage people. You're
:15:33. > :15:42.costing the Treasury billions. he say Romania? The woman in the
:15:42. > :15:47.third row in. I agree with Ken, we should stop focusing on individuals
:15:47. > :15:51.and all the opportunities they have to illegally avoid tax, not if it
:15:51. > :15:56.was Jimmy Carr, Gary Barlow, not the people but the opportunities
:15:56. > :16:01.that exist for them to do what they do. OK. The woman in the fourth row
:16:01. > :16:05.in the back. I think what's morally wrong is that the people who are
:16:05. > :16:11.the lowest paid in this country are paying the highest proportion of
:16:11. > :16:18.tax and are not able to find ways of employing people to fiddle their
:16:18. > :16:21.tax. OK. I will take one more point. The man in orange. If MPs are the
:16:21. > :16:26.most notorious public figures for tax evasion how is the public
:16:26. > :16:30.supposed to trust them to sort this out? Why do you think they are?
:16:30. > :16:33.They are always in the news for tax evasion aren't they? They are not
:16:34. > :16:41.setting a great example are they? APPLAUSE We had better move on, we
:16:41. > :16:46.have a lot of questions tonight. If have a lot of questions tonight. If
:16:46. > :16:51.you are tweeting tonight and it is clearly more powerful tonight than
:16:51. > :16:57.the television or anything else. We welcome tweets. If you prefer,
:16:57. > :17:00.you can still text us 83981 but that apparently is dying a death
:17:00. > :17:06.quite soon. Our next question is quite soon. Our next question is
:17:06. > :17:13.from Craig hill please. Should the UK scrap GCSEs and return to O-
:17:13. > :17:23.level-style exams? This would be England wouldn't it, because
:17:23. > :17:26.Scotland and Wales are different. Michael Gove announced this
:17:26. > :17:31.apparently today, somewhat to the surprise we are told of people in
:17:31. > :17:33.Cabinet who didn't know it was coming up. Andy Burnham? When I was
:17:33. > :17:38.Shadow Education Secretary I remember saying that coalition
:17:38. > :17:44.education policy reminded me of a film Back To The Future that.
:17:44. > :17:48.Starred a man called Michael who was trapped in the 1950s that.
:17:48. > :17:52.Begins to provide a good summary of this current Secretary of State.
:17:52. > :17:59.Firstly his policies are backward- looking. He brought forward an
:17:59. > :18:09.English baulk lariat a year or so ago which found -- baccalaureate a
:18:09. > :18:14.year or so ago which found room for Hebrew but not England ICT. The
:18:14. > :18:23.second thing... Don't read your notes. He focuses on Oxbridge and
:18:23. > :18:29.the top 30% to the detriment of the 70%. APPLAUSE I think this policy
:18:29. > :18:34.would cement that. It would be divisive, it would create winners
:18:34. > :18:40.and losers at a young age and make some kids second class citizens. I
:18:40. > :18:45.cannot accept that some kids are second class citizens at 13 or 14.
:18:45. > :18:50.It speaks volumes that this was leaked on a day when people were
:18:50. > :18:54.taking their GCSEs. APPLAUSE I you just would say this to broaden it a
:18:54. > :18:59.bit. And I speak about my own party too here. I think politicians of
:18:59. > :19:04.all sides haven't focused anything like enough on the 50 or more per
:19:04. > :19:08.cent of young people not planning to go to university. That must be
:19:09. > :19:12.corrected. We must do more to raise the aspirations of those kids. I'm
:19:12. > :19:16.not against GCSE reform. I'm not against making it more rigorous. I
:19:16. > :19:20.think one exam board is good, but it makes me laugh that competition
:19:20. > :19:25.amongst exam boards is a bad thing but amongst schools is a good thing
:19:25. > :19:28.that. Seems to be a contradiction with Mr Gove. A unified
:19:28. > :19:32.qualification is the right thing. This latest proposal - I will
:19:32. > :19:36.finish on this - is more evidence of a man with a plan for some
:19:36. > :19:39.schools and some children, not all schools and all children. He gets
:19:39. > :19:48.feted by the right-wing press as the great reformer, but what I see
:19:48. > :19:55.when I look at him is an old- fashioned elitist. APPLAUSE
:19:55. > :19:58.Julie White? Well, I just see it so complicated, it must be so
:19:58. > :20:02.frustrating for students, parents and teachers. I can only talk on
:20:02. > :20:06.the business side of it. As a business person employing, I want
:20:06. > :20:11.to know when someone arrives in front of me and they've got a grade
:20:11. > :20:16.B and it is not an A in another exam board or a C in another exam
:20:16. > :20:20.board. It is frustrating. I think we should make a decision, stick
:20:20. > :20:25.with it, simplify it have one example board and really stick with
:20:25. > :20:31.it. Do you trust, one of the complaints is they say businesses
:20:31. > :20:37.can't trust the GCSE results that come through? One of Gove's idea is
:20:37. > :20:43.that the O-level is a more rigorous academic test. It would give me a
:20:43. > :20:47.better clue. An A would be an A, a B and so on. I feel they are
:20:47. > :20:52.messing around with children's education and that's what will be
:20:52. > :20:58.taking this country on. We are just meting around with their education.
:20:58. > :21:03.You sir on the gangway. It is the latest bad idea from Mr Gove which
:21:03. > :21:07.started with the withdrawal of millions of pounds of money from
:21:07. > :21:12.Sandwell for investment in its schools. APPLAUSE The man in the
:21:12. > :21:16.front row. I would like to ask you, Andy Burnham, what you and your
:21:16. > :21:22.colleagues would do different. You've opposed every single Tory
:21:22. > :21:27.measure so far in this Parliament and to be a credible opposition you
:21:27. > :21:30.need credible policies. You haven't got it and it is not good enough.
:21:30. > :21:35.That's a fair challenge. We are rebuilding an opposition. It
:21:35. > :21:39.wouldn't be right for us to come out straight and see here are our
:21:39. > :21:44.policies when we are only a year or two out of Government. When I was
:21:44. > :21:49.shadow secretary I proposed a UCAS- style system for apprenticeships. I
:21:49. > :21:53.wanted kids to be able to apply for apprenticeships in the same way
:21:53. > :21:58.that kids on the academic route can apply for university. I want them
:21:58. > :22:03.to have the same sense of ambition when they are in year eight or year
:22:03. > :22:10.nine at school. That's what I was talking about when I said focus on
:22:10. > :22:16.the 50%. Can you advise the rest of your colleagues from prancing
:22:16. > :22:22.around the BBC studios and saying you have to wait for our manifesto.
:22:22. > :22:27.Angela Eagle said yesterday you have to wait until 2015. It is not
:22:27. > :22:32.good enough. The man in the check shirt. An issue I would like to
:22:32. > :22:39.highlight here, the only reason I can see that we are reverting back
:22:39. > :22:43.to the O-level system is that GCSEs are easy. I worked damned hard for
:22:43. > :22:49.my GCSEs... APPLAUSE And for someone to tell me they are easy is
:22:49. > :22:56.ridiculous. And he wants to reform A-levels and make them harder? If
:22:56. > :23:01.he wants to sit them for me... APPLAUSE I'm going to try and
:23:01. > :23:06.defend Michael Gove. I'm not sure I will be the most popular person in
:23:06. > :23:12.the building. What he is generally trying to do is raise educational
:23:12. > :23:16.standards across the board. Less reliance on modules and the 16-
:23:16. > :23:21.year-old examination as well. To have a harder - I take your point
:23:21. > :23:25.that the GCSEs is not a give away - but have harder exams at 16 so that
:23:25. > :23:30.people would be better equipped to go on to A-levels. There are a lot
:23:30. > :23:34.of criticisms in schools that the GCSE doesn't always equip the
:23:34. > :23:38.pupils well fluff to go on to A- levels. There's a big gap of
:23:38. > :23:42.ability and standards between the GCSEs and the A-levels. I think he
:23:42. > :23:50.is trying to push up the O-levels to get near tore the A-levels.
:23:50. > :23:56.about these steered away from O- levels? I heard Ken baker this
:23:56. > :24:00.morning. He is keen on technical academies. It picks up on what Andy
:24:00. > :24:04.Burnham said about the apprenticeship scheme. You have to
:24:04. > :24:08.think carefully about the people who aren't going to go down this
:24:08. > :24:12.new route. Look at Germany, Switzerland and Austria. These
:24:12. > :24:19.countries explicitly stream people very carefully but they are very
:24:19. > :24:24.carefully worked out sul buses for sifrt people's apt tueds --
:24:24. > :24:32.syllabuss for different people's apt tueds. They regard technical
:24:32. > :24:36.ability and craft skills almost as well as academic skills.
:24:36. > :24:41.reality is that what he has done strikes me as nothing short of
:24:41. > :24:45.arrogance. The image of this Government being out of touch is
:24:45. > :24:50.once again demonstrated. Like the young gentleman there, I've got a
:24:50. > :24:54.15-year-old daughter. To suggest that GCSEs are easy, and that young
:24:54. > :24:59.students today don't work hard is an absolute disgrace. What's being
:24:59. > :25:04.done here is unbelievable. Not even his Cabinet colleagues know about
:25:04. > :25:10.it. We've got the Liberal Democrats, part of the coalition, who are
:25:10. > :25:15.saying, Nick Clegg is indicating he is going to block it. The arrogance
:25:15. > :25:19.of Michael Gove knows no boundaries. It is a second class ti tore second
:25:19. > :25:22.class citizens and it is a disgrace. If there is going to be
:25:22. > :25:26.improvements in our educational standards they should be properly -
:25:26. > :25:31.ed with the professions and with all parties. Hundreds of thousands
:25:31. > :25:36.of young people like my daughter are now going to be demotivated as
:25:36. > :25:41.they go in to take GCSEs that they are already getting told are going
:25:41. > :25:47.to be told are second class qualifications. How does that help?
:25:47. > :25:53.APPLAUSE Alright. Ken Clarke, just to pick up on what Mr Clusclus said.
:25:53. > :25:57.Did you know -- on what Mr Len McCluskey said, did you know about
:25:57. > :26:01.this? It's a good old-fashioned leak. I don't think anybody outside
:26:01. > :26:06.the Department for Education knew much about it. Was that the first
:26:06. > :26:10.time you saw it? Mr Gove is the best leaker in Whitehall. How do
:26:10. > :26:14.you feel about the Secretary of State for Education leaking to the
:26:14. > :26:17.Daily Mail and not telling you? the Secretary of State for
:26:17. > :26:21.Education leaked it I would feel strongly, but I don't think he did.
:26:21. > :26:24.It is not the first leak we've had in British Government. This has
:26:24. > :26:27.been worked out in the Department for Education. When it is finished
:26:27. > :26:31.it will then go to a Cabinet Committee, the chairman is Nick
:26:31. > :26:35.Clegg and the deputy chairman is me. Will it be considered collectively.
:26:35. > :26:40.What I like about the noises about it, because the leaker knows what
:26:40. > :26:44.he or she is talking about when they talked to the Daily Mail, I
:26:44. > :26:50.think most people have agreed that the ideas of the exam boards
:26:50. > :26:57.competing in the way they do has to be stopped, because it is annoying
:26:57. > :27:00.for people who worked for a good GCSE find you could get a good
:27:00. > :27:05.result if the teachers hold a conference and know what the
:27:05. > :27:09.answers should be. Are you defending your GCSEs? I think the
:27:09. > :27:17.issue with exam boards is a farce. How can one grade be different to
:27:17. > :27:25.another? An A is an A. The idea of actually apresentistships for
:27:25. > :27:30.example, of course we are increasing, boosting the number of
:27:30. > :27:33.apprenticeships, paying more money towards them, even in these
:27:33. > :27:37.difficult times, and real apprenticeships, offered by
:27:38. > :27:41.employers, not calling it an apprenticeship if you go to a
:27:41. > :27:49.further education college on a course. A lot of things need to be
:27:49. > :27:53.done and we need to give the best ones proper status. A Rolls-Royce
:27:53. > :27:56.apprenticeship is as good as a degree. We need more of these.
:27:56. > :28:04.you will remember, it was Margaret Thatcher's Government that
:28:04. > :28:12.introduced GCSEs. And it was Keith Joseph as Secretary of State. He
:28:12. > :28:15.said it will do more than O-levels to stretch the Abe lest pupils, it
:28:15. > :28:19.will grade candidates better than now and be clear tore candidates,
:28:19. > :28:24.their parents and employers than the current system, and it will be
:28:24. > :28:27.more cost effective. Why are you going backwards? Because a quarter
:28:27. > :28:30.of a century later, many Secretaries of State, a lot of time
:28:31. > :28:35.has passed, it hasn't been developed in that way, it is not
:28:35. > :28:37.providing that. The key thing with this is we are in a terrible
:28:37. > :28:42.economic crisis, the worst sufferers are the young. The people
:28:43. > :28:46.who are really getting the rough end of there recession are people
:28:46. > :28:51.about to leave school or university. One of the things we have to face
:28:51. > :28:55.up to is our education standards are no longer world class. We are
:28:55. > :29:02.not fitting enough of these people for a modern height high-tech
:29:02. > :29:07.economy. To hear, when we talk about restoring academic standards
:29:07. > :29:11.in academic subjects, to hear people saying it is elitist is 1960.
:29:11. > :29:15.I remember students coming out with that type of thing years and years
:29:15. > :29:21.ago. You need qualifications, vocational and academic, genuinely
:29:22. > :29:27.match up to what our competitors in Asia and Singapore are going to
:29:27. > :29:32.provide. Is it not going to happen? Nick Clegg found us a leak...
:29:32. > :29:40.said it is not going to happen, that he is against it. It will come
:29:40. > :29:45.to a committee which he chairs. It is true usually when you get a leak
:29:46. > :29:50.of something you don't want to leak it comes from somebody inside your
:29:50. > :29:56.department who doesn't like what you are doing. If Nick is alarmed
:29:56. > :30:00.by what he has seen in the Daily Mail, he will be chairing the
:30:00. > :30:10.committee. I will be there and we'll talk about raising academic
:30:10. > :30:10.
:30:10. > :30:17.standards in this country and The woman in pink, and then the
:30:17. > :30:22.woman below. Reverting to the old- style O levels and emphasising on
:30:22. > :30:30.how difficult they are will put off youngsters carrying on with
:30:31. > :30:36.education. So what is the point in that? And you? From my experience,
:30:36. > :30:40.I did not learn to write until I was 16. What worries me about the
:30:40. > :30:45.proposals is that you can think it is elitist but at 14 you are making
:30:45. > :30:50.a judgement about someone. People develop at different levels. I was
:30:50. > :30:56.very lucky in 1969 and I went to a good further education college in
:30:56. > :31:01.London, and I spent five years there. I did O-levels, GCSEs, A-
:31:01. > :31:04.levels, I went to South Bank Polytechnic. I am the first in my
:31:04. > :31:09.family to get a degree. I could have been written off, like a lot
:31:09. > :31:13.of young people. What worries me with the education system today, if
:31:13. > :31:17.you are selecting a 14 and saying, somebody has more hands-on
:31:17. > :31:22.experience, someone is more academic, you are not actually
:31:22. > :31:26.giving the opportunity to people to develop. You need a system which is
:31:26. > :31:30.flexible enough that will develop people, and as people get older
:31:30. > :31:34.they develop in different ways. And you can combine academic and
:31:34. > :31:44.practicality. In fact, you need to do both.
:31:44. > :31:45.
:31:45. > :31:49.I would like to make two points. The first is about schools picking
:31:49. > :31:54.easy GCSEs to teach. There is a lot of pressure on schools to do well
:31:54. > :31:58.in league tape -- league tables. The teaching of students to pass
:31:58. > :32:02.exams. If they do not do that, they will not do well in the league
:32:02. > :32:06.tables. The second point is that the Government approach on reform,
:32:06. > :32:10.I agree that changes need to be made but it is more of a top-down
:32:10. > :32:14.approach. We are looking at reforming A-levels and GCSEs but
:32:14. > :32:18.you should focus on early-years and making sure primary school kids
:32:18. > :32:25.leave with reading and writing skills to do well in later life.
:32:25. > :32:31.The man in the white shirt. There is a bigger issue than that. We
:32:31. > :32:36.have to stop these kids, in future years, taking any sort of belief in
:32:36. > :32:42.their GCSEs they are going to be taking. The year 9 pupils now will
:32:42. > :32:52.be in total flux come 2014. They will not know what they are doing.
:32:52. > :32:53.
:32:53. > :32:57.The present pupils will not value their GCSEs. The transition from O-
:32:57. > :33:02.levels to GCSEs did not have that effect. That is an argument for
:33:02. > :33:06.never changing anything. The point was very good about primary and
:33:06. > :33:09.early-years. We have seen the biggest rise in class sizes over-
:33:09. > :33:13.thirties in primary schools because there is a shortage of primary
:33:13. > :33:18.places all over the country, but Mr Gove is throwing all of the Monir
:33:18. > :33:22.free schools, not putting the money where it is needed. Disgracefully,
:33:22. > :33:26.the money was taken off Sandwell earlier in his Government. I have
:33:26. > :33:31.been to some of those schools and they are struggling. That money
:33:31. > :33:36.should have gone are here. I think the lady put it perfectly. It is
:33:36. > :33:40.nudges and winks back to grammar schools. As somebody who came
:33:40. > :33:42.through the comprehensive system and went to Cambridge, I believe
:33:43. > :33:46.passionately in the comprehensive principle. Yes, it can be improved
:33:46. > :33:56.and we need more aspiration, but let's not have been whittled away
:33:56. > :33:59.
:33:59. > :34:04.by these reforms From Mr Gove. -- let us not have it whittled away.
:34:04. > :34:09.It must be frustrating for teachers and children. We learnt the basic
:34:09. > :34:14.things in life, reading, writing and adding up. Starting from there
:34:14. > :34:18.we have seen, in the Black Country, you had all of the pupils'
:34:18. > :34:22.developing, educated from that to become millionaires. Surely you
:34:22. > :34:28.start from the beginning, reading, writing and adding up. So you are
:34:28. > :34:34.with Michael Gove? Start at the beginning, with the basic skills.
:34:34. > :34:39.Reading, writing, adding up. Start from there and then progress. The
:34:39. > :34:46.it must be so frustrating now. Each Government has different ideas, and
:34:46. > :34:50.where are the kids today? I agree with the lady at the back. We do
:34:50. > :34:55.not put enough emphasis on vocational qualifications and the
:34:55. > :35:00.fact that somebody who may not be brilliant, literally, at literacy,
:35:00. > :35:02.but who is remarkable with their hands, we have not enough people in
:35:03. > :35:06.the construction industry. We are trying to develop skills and
:35:06. > :35:09.apprenticeships and give people a chance in construction. It was not
:35:09. > :35:13.consider glamorous but it is an essential part of the economy going
:35:13. > :35:17.forward. If we do not start to invest in what we need in future we
:35:17. > :35:26.will find ourselves back to the labour shortages that we had 20
:35:26. > :35:29.years ago. Nodding in agreement. Yes, I am in construction. We were
:35:29. > :35:34.talking earlier and we were saying that people are coming into
:35:34. > :35:37.apprenticeships because they think it is a second class thing. But it
:35:38. > :35:44.is not. It is amazing. If you get into a company like mine, a true,
:35:44. > :35:47.old fashioned apprentice. You come, you learn the trade, mentored by an
:35:47. > :35:52.older Diamond driller. You can get a bonus, the same as the older
:35:52. > :35:57.workers. And you are guaranteed a job, because I have invested in you,
:35:57. > :36:05.you know the process from start to finish, and I am doing the
:36:05. > :36:10.apprenticeship course. I got one Shia see in religious education and
:36:10. > :36:15.I am running a multi-million-pound company. -- a GCSE. I am taking the
:36:15. > :36:19.course because I want to see what my men are doing, I need to see it.
:36:19. > :36:22.Why can we not follow Germany or Switzerland? An apprenticeship is a
:36:22. > :36:26.fantastic thing. There should be more people doing it. There are
:36:26. > :36:36.lots of kids getting on the bandwagon of apprentices and they
:36:36. > :36:39.are falling off. There are so many hands up. I take issue with Andy
:36:39. > :36:42.Burnham who was sitting there nodding to one of those comments.
:36:42. > :36:46.The problem with apprenticeships was that the last Labour Government
:36:46. > :36:52.pushed and pushed my generation that you had to go to university,
:36:52. > :36:55.get as many people to university as possible. What was wrong with only
:36:55. > :36:58.the best people going to good universities and taking the country
:36:58. > :37:02.forwards, rather than people going to do hairdressing at university,
:37:02. > :37:10.which they could have done at college or at school? They get lots
:37:10. > :37:14.of debt for nothing. I have a vested interest, not only
:37:14. > :37:17.because I have two grandson's in state education, but I am also
:37:17. > :37:22.chair of governors at this college. I know that every child is
:37:22. > :37:25.different and we get lost in this argument about whether it is
:37:25. > :37:29.vocational, or whether it is academic. This college, among many
:37:29. > :37:33.others, does both sides of things. Whether you want to be a motor
:37:33. > :37:37.vehicle engineer, a dental nurse, or whether you want to follow the
:37:37. > :37:41.path into academia, that is fine. You can cater for everybody, but it
:37:41. > :37:44.is wrong to say that everybody should be treated the same because
:37:44. > :37:48.we are not the same. Our children are not the same. Let's make sure
:37:48. > :37:52.we give them a breadth of opportunity. Next time you want a
:37:52. > :37:57.plumber, it is no good looking to somebody who is great at cracking
:37:57. > :38:00.codes. We have to get the balance in society right. If we celebrate
:38:00. > :38:04.those differences, we will have a more rounded society and will not
:38:04. > :38:13.have a lot of the problems we currently have.
:38:13. > :38:18.And are you in support of Michael Gove and the proposals for
:38:18. > :38:24.reintroducing O-levels? What we had seen so far is the headline. As Ken
:38:24. > :38:28.Clarke said, this has some distance to travel. GCSEs have been in place
:38:28. > :38:32.for 30 years. Any system needs to be looked at again, possibly
:38:32. > :38:36.revised. If we need to move with the times and compete with the rest
:38:36. > :38:39.of the world, we have to take the right sort of actions. I cannot
:38:39. > :38:45.tell me whether I am in favour until I see the whole argument set
:38:45. > :38:51.out. -- I cannot tell you. Let's move on because we have other
:38:51. > :38:55.questions. We have a question from Kanti Patel. Do I have more chance
:38:55. > :38:59.of attending a state banquet than of seeing banks increasing lending
:38:59. > :39:08.to small businesses? You are thinking of the Mansion House
:39:08. > :39:12.banquet. Julie White. Are you critical of the banks? Are they
:39:12. > :39:18.lending money that you need? They are not lending money, let me tell
:39:18. > :39:22.you. I have a company that is growing, 20% a year on year, but
:39:22. > :39:29.they are not lending. They are looking in the past, on the balance
:39:29. > :39:32.sheet. We know what we have been through. 2008-2010 was horrendous
:39:32. > :39:37.for the construction industry. They are always looking backwards. They
:39:37. > :39:42.want to look forward now. We are all looking positive. It was great
:39:42. > :39:45.that the Government was boosting 145 billion into the economy for
:39:45. > :39:49.the banks to lend, but why are they not watching what is coming out the
:39:49. > :39:54.other end? They are not watching what the banks are sending out to
:39:54. > :40:01.small businesses. Half the time, they give you products that you do
:40:01. > :40:05.not want and there is no way you can actually take them. So we need
:40:05. > :40:08.them to start lending to us companies to grow, to employ, to
:40:08. > :40:16.bring on apprentices and get the economy going.
:40:16. > :40:23.You were Chancellor of the Exchequer once. You cannot order
:40:23. > :40:27.the banks to lend to businesses, can you? What do you do? No, you
:40:27. > :40:31.cannot. We might get on to the macro-economic questions later. If
:40:31. > :40:36.you come to this country and you ask, what is the biggest single
:40:36. > :40:39.problem facing us trying to get our economy to recover, it is that the
:40:39. > :40:43.banks are not providing credit to small businesses. Every small
:40:43. > :40:47.business will tell you it is very difficult to get working capital,
:40:47. > :40:53.New Investment for start-ups, very difficult. Why are they scared of
:40:53. > :40:56.doing it? They are sorting out their balance sheets, easier ways
:40:56. > :41:00.of making bigger margins. You give them low-cost loans and they
:41:00. > :41:05.actually have to rebuild their own balance sheets. So you cannot make
:41:05. > :41:09.it happen? We have an agreement and a kind of hip the figures. We just
:41:09. > :41:16.announced, at the Mansion House, actually, Georgia announced his
:41:16. > :41:21.latest idea. We have tried credit easing and it has had some effect.
:41:21. > :41:24.-- George announced his latest idea. Now, the Bank of England will make
:41:24. > :41:27.available money with conditions attached that they would get it if
:41:27. > :41:31.it is used for lending to small business. You still need the bank
:41:31. > :41:38.to decide whether the small business is viable. It is no good
:41:38. > :41:43.losing money on over-optimistic schemes. This is a monster scheme.
:41:43. > :41:53.I have put in for that and they have come back and so that I am too
:41:53. > :41:55.
:41:55. > :41:59.good. Is that the credit guarantee scheme? Yes. They have said you are
:41:59. > :42:08.too big for it. The new one is still being designed. It was
:42:08. > :42:18.announced 10 days ago. It is a colossal sum of money. But will you
:42:18. > :42:23.get there? You say it is better, but... It will not get there. Let's
:42:23. > :42:28.consider having our own British Investment Bank. We have poured
:42:28. > :42:38.hundreds of billions of pounds into the banks. We owe no RBS and Lloyds,
:42:38. > :42:40.
:42:40. > :42:45.so let's turn it into a British Julie has had to move to a Swedish
:42:45. > :42:50.bank in order to help her develop. There are thousands of great
:42:50. > :42:54.entrepreneurs like her who want to stimulate the economy. The
:42:54. > :42:58.announcement at Mansion House by the Governor of the Bank of England
:42:58. > :43:02.that there is �100 billion that they are going to make available
:43:02. > :43:06.was an admission that the Government's strategy is failing.
:43:06. > :43:10.There is no growth in our economy. If the banks will not lend, we need
:43:10. > :43:16.to take control of the banks because we own them. We have put
:43:16. > :43:21.hundreds of billions of pounds, and we should be investing in companies
:43:21. > :43:26.like Julie's and many, many others, to invest in British communities,
:43:26. > :43:33.British jobs, British manufacturing. That is the way to get us kick-
:43:33. > :43:38.started on growth. In the white shirt. Up I would not want the
:43:38. > :43:42.Government to look after any more money. I certainly would not want
:43:42. > :43:47.anything to do with the Government with money. I have seen the
:43:47. > :43:52.catastrophe over the road with the building called the Public. This
:43:52. > :43:59.building was made by private money, made on time, on budget, and look
:43:59. > :44:04.at it, perfect, no problem. All that we want is a situation that
:44:04. > :44:08.works. Let's just get business to run things, not politicians.
:44:08. > :44:11.what do you do, going back to the question, if the banks will not
:44:11. > :44:17.lend the money to people like Julie all the businesses who are talking
:44:17. > :44:20.about? They have got to lend them the money. Something has got to
:44:20. > :44:30.change because we cannot keep talking about what the answer is
:44:30. > :44:34.but then not giving them money to I think you are right not to want
:44:34. > :44:38.the Government to do too many things directly. We all agree that
:44:38. > :44:41.small businesses do struggle to get loans from the banks, especially at
:44:41. > :44:45.an interest rate that they can afford. There are regulations on
:44:45. > :44:50.the banks, becoming tighter and tighter. They have to hold more and
:44:50. > :44:55.more capital, they have to shrink their balance sheets because of the
:44:55. > :45:04.Troubles over the financial crisis of 2008 and that makes it harder
:45:04. > :45:12.for banks to lend. They haven't shortened their bonus My turn. The
:45:12. > :45:17.Government obviously recognises this and so does Sir Mervyn King.
:45:17. > :45:21.Ken Clarke mentioned the loan guarantee scheme, it is early days.
:45:21. > :45:26.What about the �100 billion announced at the Mansion House.
:45:26. > :45:30.is called Funding for Lending. This is what you are referring to, Ken.
:45:30. > :45:35.The idea that the Bank of England will lend cheap money to the
:45:35. > :45:38.commercial banks. It could be 3-4% lower than otherwise would be the
:45:39. > :45:43.case, which would be a terrific fillip for small businesses. And
:45:43. > :45:48.the commercial banks on commercial criteria will lend to small
:45:48. > :45:52.businesses. Is it going to work? haven't got the details yet but it
:45:52. > :45:57.is as good as it gets, because it is the Bank of England behind it.
:45:57. > :46:03.And it is a sizeable amount of money. An extraordinary amount of
:46:03. > :46:08.money. An extraordinary amount you say. Yes. We are missing the point
:46:08. > :46:14.in that I think the reasons why banks won't do it are twofold. One,
:46:14. > :46:18.they would be held accountable for some of the disastrous things they
:46:18. > :46:23.do and it might eat into their bonuses, and we couldn't have that,
:46:23. > :46:26.could we! I'm a social entrepreneur and work
:46:26. > :46:29.with Mo other social entrepreneurs who find it difficult to find
:46:29. > :46:35.capital, because the banks don't understand what the social economy
:46:35. > :46:39.is around and about. Sorry, for the sake of clarity, what kind? We are
:46:39. > :46:45.businesses that put into the economy but we make sure the
:46:45. > :46:50.outcomes of our work has a social good to it. What's your business?
:46:50. > :46:54.work with young people, the intermediate labour markets, retail,
:46:54. > :46:59.ground maintenance and catering, a number of things in the Black
:46:59. > :47:04.Country. I've approached our social enterprise partnership and they've
:47:04. > :47:09.agreed to take a risk to create social enterprise zones across the
:47:09. > :47:13.Black Country area. Part of that model is we release capital, get
:47:13. > :47:19.businesses working with each other. Public sector, private sector and
:47:19. > :47:24.civil society working together to make sure that business is good.
:47:24. > :47:27.Are you short of cash? Are you offering? We are always short of
:47:27. > :47:30.cash, because the banks, I have a good relationship with them, but
:47:30. > :47:34.trying to get them to understand what the social economy is about is
:47:34. > :47:39.a difficult model for them. So you have to try to get money from
:47:39. > :47:43.elsewhere and it is more expensive than a high street bank. OK. Andy
:47:44. > :47:48.Burnham? I hope somebody in the Treasury is sitting listening to
:47:48. > :47:52.Julie tonight, as maybe it will shake them out of their complacency.
:47:52. > :47:55.What she says really has to be heard. I will be at the Lee
:47:55. > :48:01.Business Forum tomorrow morning and there'll be the same complaints
:48:01. > :48:05.again. They will all be saying, we can't get any support from the
:48:05. > :48:08.banks. These companies have been here a long time. They've got a
:48:08. > :48:13.solid track record. The banks know who they are. They understand their
:48:13. > :48:18.business, so why are they still not lending to them? Small businesses
:48:18. > :48:23.must feel so frustrated. It must look like the voice of big business
:48:23. > :48:27.is heard in Government but never the small business. Len McCluskey's
:48:27. > :48:32.business about the banks, the country sorted them out a few years
:48:32. > :48:38.ago. They said we understand the effect on the economy if they don't,
:48:38. > :48:44.lit drag them down But they are suiting themselves and it is not
:48:44. > :48:49.acceptable. We say how can the banks do it? We own a large chunk
:48:49. > :48:52.of the banks, we have the Merlin agreement, and we were promised the
:48:52. > :48:57.money would come through but it never has. The one thing I would
:48:57. > :49:03.say, you mentioned what's going on with the LEP. I thought this
:49:03. > :49:07.Government was cavalier in wiping away good things that were working.
:49:07. > :49:12.Advantage West Midlands, the RDA, was a good thing, to bring
:49:12. > :49:17.investment in. Why just wipe it away. Splim it down a bit, refocus
:49:17. > :49:21.it a bit, but taking it away has set all of the regions back. They
:49:21. > :49:29.said because Labour did it we are just going to get rid of it.
:49:29. > :49:32.APPLAUSE We only have under ten minutes left. I want to take this
:49:33. > :49:42.one from Harry Roberts please. doctors right to strike, or should
:49:43. > :49:48.
:49:48. > :49:52.Yes they were. The doctorings are the lathe es in a number of public
:49:52. > :49:56.sector workers who veryjected the Government's attempt to steal money
:49:56. > :50:00.out of the pension funds. The Government's plans are to make
:50:00. > :50:04.public sector workers pay more, get less and work longer. There is no
:50:04. > :50:08.legitimacy for it, because the pension funds that are there to
:50:08. > :50:12.govern what public sector workers get are sustainable. That argument
:50:12. > :50:15.that the Government put forward at the beginning of this campaign,
:50:15. > :50:21.that it wasn't affordable, because blown out of the water. I have no
:50:21. > :50:26.doubt that there'll be people on this panel who will want to attack
:50:26. > :50:31.doctors and public sector workers. We shouldn't demonise public sector
:50:31. > :50:35.workers. They are the people who teach our kids, heal our sick, care
:50:35. > :50:39.for our elderly and vulnerable, encourage our youth, clean our
:50:39. > :50:44.streets, collect our refuse, the very people who create the
:50:44. > :50:47.civilised fabric of the communities in which we live. They didn't cause
:50:47. > :50:53.this crisis. Private sector workers and ordinary people didn't cause
:50:53. > :51:03.this crisis. It was the spivs and the speculators. APPLAUSE It was
:51:03. > :51:06.the spivs and the speculators, the greedy fat cat bankers and CEOs in
:51:06. > :51:15.boardrooms who caused the crisis. The Government should be attacking
:51:15. > :51:19.them, not decent men and women. APPLAUSE Are you saying that there
:51:20. > :51:25.is no financial problem at all with public sector pensions? There is no
:51:25. > :51:29.financial problem whatsoever. The deal cut in 2008 with the then
:51:29. > :51:38.Labour Government, pensions is highly economy kaicted. Actuaries
:51:38. > :51:42.go into -- highly complicated. Actuaries go into depth and all the
:51:42. > :51:47.schemes that cover public sector workers are in surplus. All the
:51:47. > :51:51.Government are doing is they are simply stealing out of workers'
:51:51. > :51:57.back pockets. Why? We heard all this stuff about gold plated
:51:57. > :52:03.pensions. In the NHS the average pension is �4,000. The same in
:52:03. > :52:08.local government. Doctors work eight years to get, do any of us
:52:08. > :52:13.trust our doctors here? I suspect we all do. They work hard. They get
:52:13. > :52:17.a decent pay. They put into a pension scheme so they can have
:52:17. > :52:22.dignity in requirement. They didn't cause it. Len McCluskey, thank you.
:52:22. > :52:27.I want to ask Ken Clarke to comment on this. On the question, we'll
:52:27. > :52:32.find out tomorrow about 9 out of 10 doctors will have decided that this
:52:32. > :52:36.was one of the more silly things the BMA decided to do for a very
:52:36. > :52:41.long time. We do all respect our doctors. I strongly suspect the
:52:41. > :52:45.vast majority of doctors did not take action, which can only have an
:52:45. > :52:48.adverse effect on patients. They turn up to get paid and they don't
:52:48. > :52:57.treat the pensioners and they expect tow sympathise with their
:52:57. > :53:00.claims on their pensions? Why did they vote for it if you say
:53:00. > :53:04.(Inaudible) Because like the last Government they thought it would
:53:04. > :53:08.back down when threatened by doctors, which is when they got
:53:08. > :53:12.their colossal pay and pensions settlement through. It hasn't
:53:12. > :53:17.worked. Len McCluskey says there is no problem. I'm afraid I was trying
:53:17. > :53:22.to keep a straight face during that. If we don't, we should have tackled
:53:22. > :53:27.public sector pensions a long time ago. If we don't tackle it and make
:53:27. > :53:34.it fair now, all we are doing is piling up a bigger problem. It is
:53:34. > :53:40.no good looking at today's payout, it is going up astronomically. On
:53:40. > :53:45.funding obligations, Get your facts straight. As part of the GDP, which
:53:45. > :53:49.is what the pension schemes are based on, and the actuaries and
:53:49. > :53:54.experts in pension, not only is it affordable, but it is coming down.
:53:54. > :54:03.We have a fundamental disagreement on that. Lut me bring Andy Burnham
:54:03. > :54:08.in. If you were a self employed person and you bought the pension
:54:08. > :54:11.it could cost you �1.5 million to �2 million per person to get that
:54:11. > :54:17.pension commitment for their retirement when it comes. They've
:54:17. > :54:21.all been having to cut back. They will still be more attractive than
:54:21. > :54:26.private sector pensions by far. We are getting back to sanity, common
:54:26. > :54:30.sense and it has to affect doctorers just as much as it has to
:54:30. > :54:34.affect nurses, teachers and everybody in the public sector.
:54:34. > :54:38.Andy Burnham? I don't think the strike was justified. I said so
:54:38. > :54:43.clearly, because in the case of doctors, obviously there's a direct
:54:43. > :54:48.impact on vulnerable people and on patients. It always would have to
:54:48. > :54:53.be an absolute last resort, extreme measures. I don't think those
:54:53. > :54:57.criteria were met. Having said that, I'm not here to have a go at
:54:57. > :55:00.doctors. I completely understand how they feel and how angry they
:55:00. > :55:05.feel. When they came into Government this was a Government
:55:05. > :55:12.that was going to listen to doctors. Doctors were going to be at the
:55:12. > :55:18.centre of things. They've sought confrontation with their pension
:55:19. > :55:23.and more than that... Do you think there's a problem? We did make
:55:23. > :55:26.changes in 2008. Of course, as the population ages we need to look to
:55:26. > :55:31.the long term to make it sustainable. The point where you
:55:31. > :55:35.cut me off, the point I was going to make, the doctors have warned
:55:35. > :55:40.David Cameron about the dangers of NHS reorganisation. What are we
:55:40. > :55:45.seeing now? Crude, random rationing across the NHS. There was a report
:55:45. > :55:48.that operations are being... Hang on, we only have a couple of
:55:48. > :55:57.minutes. They said they would listen to doctors and they didn't.
:55:57. > :56:02.Are you on their side? The NHS, the they said the NHS is like a
:56:02. > :56:06.supertanker heading for an iceberg. Parents unforgivable what David
:56:06. > :56:10.Cameron has done to the NHS. If we had listened to doctors we wouldn't
:56:10. > :56:15.have the NHS in a very dangerous situation as we have right now.
:56:15. > :56:19.sorry to rush you but we are coming to tend. Doctors have to realise
:56:19. > :56:23.which child they love, the pension or the patient? I can't believe
:56:23. > :56:29.we've got to this situation. Yes we are all working hard erpblgts,
:56:29. > :56:33.working longer for less -- working harder, working longer for less
:56:33. > :56:37.money. I'm sorry, it is hard out there. They are a pillar of the
:56:37. > :56:44.community. I think that we should reward them well, but come on, this
:56:44. > :56:50.is the real world. Ruth Lea? Picking up on what Julie has been
:56:50. > :56:54.saying, the doctors, and I am a great respecter of doctors, the
:56:54. > :57:00.doctors are well paid, especially after the 2004 settlement, and they
:57:00. > :57:06.are extremely well pensioned. If you retire at 60 on a �120 a year
:57:06. > :57:14.salary, you have a pension of �48,000 a year. Who else has that
:57:14. > :57:18.in this room? A tax-free lump sum of �140. When you talk about paying
:57:18. > :57:25.in, the point is that these pensions are 80% of their pensions
:57:25. > :57:31.are paid for by the taxpayer.. 80%. We know what the public finances
:57:32. > :57:36.look like. Those are the facts Len. Bless them. Although I love the
:57:36. > :57:40.doctors well, they are well positioned. Even after these
:57:40. > :57:43.changes the Government's proposed they will be extremely well
:57:43. > :57:48.pensioned in comparison with people in the private sector. I'm sorry, I
:57:48. > :57:52.have to stop. We are only allowed one hour by BBC One and our hour is
:57:52. > :57:57.one hour by BBC One and our hour is up. So apologies. We are going to
:57:57. > :58:02.be in Luton next week. We'll have the actor and comedian Tony
:58:02. > :58:12.Robinson on the panel, Justin Greening for the Conservatives,
:58:12. > :58:17.
:58:17. > :58:23.Tessa Jowell for Labour. The week after that we'll be in Derby.
:58:23. > :58:30.Dame Tessa Jowell I must say. never use titles on Question Time.