:00:12. > :00:16.By good evening. Question Time tonight is in Birmingham. -- good
:00:16. > :00:22.evening. And a big welcome to our audience
:00:22. > :00:25.and to our panel, Conservative Party chairman, Grant Shapps,
:00:25. > :00:29.shadow energy secretary, Caroline Flint, deputy leader of the Liberal
:00:29. > :00:39.Democrats, Simon Hughes, Daily Telegraph columnist, Christina
:00:39. > :00:49.
:00:49. > :00:54.Odone. And poet and author, Thank you. Our first question from
:00:54. > :00:59.Des Michael Duff. Is the BBC's reputation about to be blown away
:00:59. > :01:06.by the Jimmy Saville debacle? the BBC's reputation about to be
:01:06. > :01:09.blown away by the Jimmy Saville debacle? Grant Shapps. This has
:01:09. > :01:12.been very, very concerning in the last week or two as this has come
:01:12. > :01:17.out. What is incredible is that this is something which appears to
:01:17. > :01:21.have taken place not just over the last few years, but over four
:01:21. > :01:26.decades, which means a lot of people must have been aware. And
:01:26. > :01:29.now it turns out there are 30 cases the police have said have come
:01:29. > :01:34.forward. Day-by-day, it seems unimaginable that people within the
:01:34. > :01:38.BBC did not know. There was that Newsnight report put together, but
:01:38. > :01:42.not dead, apparently because there was about to be a programme with
:01:42. > :01:47.three separate airings of a programme paying tribute to Jimmy
:01:47. > :01:50.Saville's life. -- it was not dead. I think the BBC knows there are
:01:50. > :01:54.questions to be answered. That is why the chairman, Chris Patten,
:01:54. > :01:59.came out yesterday, fairly firmly saying that somebody independent
:01:59. > :02:04.should be appointed to look at this. Absolutely agree that what happens
:02:04. > :02:09.it is to have been absolutely outrageous. -- what happened.
:02:09. > :02:11.are the issues for the BBC's reputation? Is it the broadcast of
:02:11. > :02:14.the celebratory programmes about Jimmy Saville when they knew that
:02:15. > :02:20.Newsnight had been interviewing people who alleged they had been
:02:20. > :02:24.abused? Or is it that nobody within the BBC over 40 years of the said,
:02:24. > :02:27.I think something is going wrong? think it is disturbing when you
:02:27. > :02:30.hear the number of people who have come forward from within and
:02:30. > :02:35.outside the BBC and have said, I knew something, I suspected
:02:35. > :02:38.something, or why was one of the victims in this. I think it is
:02:38. > :02:43.particularly disturbing that a programme paying tribute, a three-
:02:43. > :02:49.part programme, went out, three different programmes, just last
:02:49. > :02:53.Christmas, wasn't it, after it was already known that something was
:02:53. > :02:58.wrong, enough to have had a serious Newsnight programme made about it,
:02:58. > :03:02.and enough to have raised serious concerns. I think we need to know
:03:02. > :03:07.who knew what and when, and there are definitely questions that
:03:07. > :03:10.needed answering. Christina Odone. One of the biggest shocks is that
:03:10. > :03:17.it happened at the heart of the liberal establishment, in the
:03:17. > :03:24.hallowed halls of the BBC, which is cherished and trusted and respected.
:03:24. > :03:30.We are so comfortable and cosy with the BBC that we call her auntie. I
:03:30. > :03:35.think there were two levels of trust betrayed. One was by Jimmy
:03:35. > :03:40.Saville and his victims, young, under-age girls and I think one boy.
:03:40. > :03:47.But also us, the licence fee payers. And we feel we have been taken for
:03:47. > :03:53.a ride. And I think one of the interesting things is that BBC
:03:53. > :04:00.programme makers were very vicious and thorough in their condemnation
:04:00. > :04:05.of the Catholic church when they have their own gross child abuse
:04:05. > :04:12.scandals. And I think in fact what we could do is for the BBC to learn
:04:12. > :04:18.from the way that the Catholic Church mishandled its dealings of
:04:18. > :04:22.the child abuse cover-up, and we should have a very prompt and
:04:22. > :04:29.independent investigation. We should have a very public apology,
:04:29. > :04:34.not only by Chris Patten but by a the director general of the BBC.
:04:34. > :04:39.And we should have compensation for the victims, and a thorough clean-
:04:39. > :04:44.up of what looks like very filthy practices. And do you think that is
:04:44. > :04:47.happening, or do you think the BBC is dragging its feet? I think it
:04:47. > :04:55.has dragged its feet. Already we can say we should have already had
:04:55. > :05:03.a thorough clean-up of what has happened. The the question I have
:05:03. > :05:06.is, it is all well and good for the BBC with Jimmy Saville. What is the
:05:06. > :05:14.reputation of the various charities that he was associated with? Surely
:05:14. > :05:18.they will be tarnished with the same brush. Will there be something
:05:18. > :05:23.dumb thugs something done by which their charities Association can be
:05:23. > :05:28.moved away, because they'd may well lose donations because of
:05:28. > :05:36.association with him. Do you think it was a surprise to the hospitals
:05:36. > :05:43.where he worked? Without a doubt. In the back row. Should he not
:05:43. > :05:47.immediately lose his title? Should he lose his title? Benjamin
:05:47. > :05:53.Zephaniah. I think they are considering taking the title from
:05:53. > :06:00.him. I must say, when the story first broke, this is a bit of a
:06:00. > :06:03.confession. I jumped off the city and I said, I knew it. Seriously. I
:06:03. > :06:07.saw the documentary where somebody asked him about his feelings, and
:06:07. > :06:12.he had no feelings for anybody. They asked him if he could love
:06:12. > :06:17.anybody and he said, What Is Love? He had no emotional intelligence at
:06:17. > :06:21.all. He did not seem to care about anybody. I remember thinking, that
:06:21. > :06:28.is a very dangerous person. But it was a private thought and I could
:06:28. > :06:31.never have said that. He was raising millions for charities. I
:06:31. > :06:37.remember first going into the Catholic Herald and being told,
:06:37. > :06:44.there is this saint called Jimmy. And they will all bowled over by
:06:44. > :06:46.how brilliant he was, -- they were all bowled over. How he was
:06:46. > :06:53.tireless in his devotion to charities, especially charities
:06:53. > :06:57.dealing with young children. I have to say, I went through the
:06:57. > :07:00.children's homes. I knew kids who were abused. I never was. But at
:07:00. > :07:07.night I had to sometimes try to stop children from getting out of
:07:07. > :07:11.bed in the middle of the night and going to meet members of staff. And
:07:11. > :07:16.I remember a kid crying in front of me, begging me to let him go to be
:07:16. > :07:21.abused because he was so scared. And this addresses the point you
:07:21. > :07:25.have just raised. When we put people on a pedestal, and we beat
:07:25. > :07:30.them up so much, and Jimmy Saville was basically the BBC man through
:07:30. > :07:33.and through. They just become untouchable. And they can do good
:07:33. > :07:36.things in the community. Many people who abuse children do good
:07:36. > :07:42.things in the community. They do football, church, all of those
:07:42. > :07:47.things, to have access to these young people. So we put them on a
:07:47. > :07:50.pedestal and they become untouchable. Last night, my mother
:07:50. > :07:55.said, I don't believe anything like this about Jimmy Saville, I think
:07:55. > :08:02.he is a good man because of the good things he has done. What about
:08:02. > :08:06.the BBC's reputation? I remember in the 1980s going into an office in
:08:06. > :08:11.the BBC. If I could remember the person, I would say. This person
:08:11. > :08:16.was waiting to get a secretary. I said, what is she like? He said, I
:08:16. > :08:20.do not care, as long as she has big breasts. There was a culture at the
:08:20. > :08:26.time that allow that kind of thing and they just got away with it.
:08:26. > :08:29.the second row from the back. think there is something of a nasty
:08:29. > :08:34.taste to be left by the fact that if this investigation is to be
:08:34. > :08:37.pursued, basically we live in a society where everybody remains
:08:37. > :08:41.innocent until proven guilty and has the right to be tried in a
:08:41. > :08:46.court of law, that if the BBC is going to be seen to be supporting
:08:46. > :08:51.this, it is going to set a precedent to bring postern has
:08:51. > :08:59.convictions and allegations against other people have passed away, and
:08:59. > :09:02.the trauma that will cause to their families. -- posthumous convictions.
:09:02. > :09:05.It is not like he will be tried in a court of law because he is dead.
:09:05. > :09:09.The problem is every single day there are more people coming
:09:09. > :09:13.forward with things they witnessed, or happened to them. I do not think
:09:13. > :09:18.we can avoid that, or ignore it. As far as the reputation of the BBC,
:09:18. > :09:22.there are two aspects. One, still to get to the bottom of why the
:09:22. > :09:26.Newsnight report was squashed and the reasons for that. The second
:09:26. > :09:29.part of it is about looking at the BBC as an institution, and
:09:29. > :09:36.reflecting on whether there is more they should have done during that
:09:36. > :09:40.period. I am not just talking about Jimmy Saville. Liz Kershaw, the
:09:40. > :09:43.radio DJ, recounted that when she was broadcasting, male colleagues
:09:43. > :09:47.would literally come to her and put their hands on her breasts while
:09:47. > :09:51.she was broadcasting and could do nothing about it. When she raised
:09:51. > :09:56.it, she was told, that is part of what it is like, that is just what
:09:56. > :10:00.you have to put up with. There is an issue about addressing that.
:10:00. > :10:04.Wider in the BBC, it is recognising about when we put people on a
:10:04. > :10:07.pedestal. But also within institutions, whether a church
:10:07. > :10:12.institution, school, children's home, politics, the media,
:10:12. > :10:16.hospitals, wherever, how do we protect the most vulnerable in
:10:16. > :10:20.those institutions? And we don't allow the powerful to basically
:10:20. > :10:24.take complete liberties with the power that they have got. I think
:10:24. > :10:29.that is important. To bring it up to date, let's not believe this is
:10:29. > :10:32.something in the past. We have seen those young girls who were groomed
:10:32. > :10:35.into prostitution, and they raised their voice and the police did not
:10:35. > :10:40.listen to them, people did not listen in the community. Every day,
:10:40. > :10:42.they are women and men facing sexual harassment at work in
:10:42. > :10:46.different situations and often they are fearful of saying anything
:10:46. > :10:50.because they think they will be ridiculed and told they are too
:10:50. > :10:54.politically correct. It is here today. Maybe not the same as in the
:10:54. > :10:57.1980s, but it is here today, people feeling powerless when they are in
:10:57. > :11:07.a position where people more powerful than them keep them from
:11:07. > :11:08.
:11:08. > :11:13.raising their voice. We also have to question why so few
:11:13. > :11:17.people came forward. What does it say about society that they stayed
:11:17. > :11:24.silent for so long? And if they did come for, why were they not
:11:24. > :11:29.listened to? Simon Hughes. extraordinary thing is that
:11:29. > :11:35.apparently nobody went to the police over 40 years. I find that
:11:35. > :11:39.almost unbelievable. If somebody ever did go to the police and that
:11:40. > :11:44.comes up, that raises another set of really serious issues. Of course,
:11:44. > :11:47.there is a BBC issue, because a public broadcaster has an
:11:47. > :11:53.obligation to warn of the people who come to work for it and who, as
:11:53. > :11:56.visitors, to make sure that they are respected and not abused. -- it
:11:56. > :12:00.has a responsibility to all of the people. It is not going to be
:12:00. > :12:03.hampered in this case by a criminal prosecution because the man is dead,
:12:03. > :12:09.so they do not have to wait for the police, the CPS and all of these
:12:09. > :12:13.people. So the BBC can get on with things. But I have one equally big
:12:13. > :12:15.concern. Jimmy Saville appeared to go into hospital on a regular basis
:12:15. > :12:19.and other public sector institutions where there were
:12:19. > :12:26.honourable people. That, for me, is as worrying, that he apparently
:12:26. > :12:30.went about his illegal and disgraceful business there, and of
:12:30. > :12:35.their there were not complaints made, pursued or followed up. And
:12:35. > :12:38.the one place where everybody in this room would want people to be
:12:38. > :12:43.secured are the children's homes and the hospitals in our country,
:12:43. > :12:46.run by the state. We have to make sure schools and hospitals are
:12:46. > :12:56.safeguarded institutions. If they have failed, there is a serious
:12:56. > :12:59.
:12:59. > :13:05.issue about Leeds hospital, Stoke Somebody raised the point about the
:13:05. > :13:08.knighthood. Those expire when someone dies. I would be in favour
:13:08. > :13:12.of the forfeiture committee taking a close look at this because it
:13:12. > :13:18.cannot be right but somebody apparently keeps the title in front
:13:18. > :13:27.of their name when this is the reality of their lives. A couple
:13:27. > :13:31.more brief points. I like solutions rather than problems, so how do we
:13:31. > :13:34.move on and make sure this does not happen again? I think Jimmy
:13:34. > :13:39.Saville's celebrity status is a problem. He managed to get into
:13:39. > :13:43.these places and do this under that umbrella. I think the public sector
:13:43. > :13:48.needs support in ensuring that no matter what state as a person has,
:13:48. > :13:52.with any manager, is a liberty, a footballer, that they have the
:13:52. > :14:00.support to be able to whistle blower and talk and people will
:14:00. > :14:05.believe them. One more point. watching something on the BBC this
:14:05. > :14:09.morning, an interview with a lady that was saying, making an
:14:09. > :14:14.allegation against him. She said she told her parents and they shrug
:14:14. > :14:18.it off, he would not do that. I think there are serious issues with
:14:18. > :14:28.parents saying to a child that that would not happen. Something needs
:14:28. > :14:41.
:14:41. > :14:43.We followed the example of David Cameron in one thing and we've
:14:43. > :14:50.Cameron in one thing and we've started tweeting this week, like he
:14:50. > :14:54.says he has. We now have a Twitter panellist.
:14:55. > :15:00.Tonight the columnist is Toby Young. If you do tweet, you will know what
:15:00. > :15:05.I'm talking about. If you don't, you can remain the blissful
:15:05. > :15:08.ignorance. Another question, from ignorance. Another question, from
:15:08. > :15:14.Laura Howard, please. Is George Osborne discriminating against the
:15:14. > :15:22.under 25s with his proposal to remove housing benefits? Benjamin
:15:22. > :15:26.Zephaniah, is it unwarranted discrimination? I think it is
:15:26. > :15:31.discrimination and very dangerous. What happens when you take away the
:15:31. > :15:35.benefit of these people. You are going to push them back into the
:15:35. > :15:41.homes where some were abused, you are going to push them on to the
:15:41. > :15:46.street. We are just forcing them to go into situations which they don't
:15:46. > :15:50.want to go in. Nobody wants, well, I believe very few people are
:15:50. > :15:55.people that want to just live off benefits for the sake of it. Young
:15:55. > :16:00.people, especially now, need a hand. We can't keep putting pressure on
:16:00. > :16:06.them to go out and get jobs, when there are no jobs. You can't push
:16:06. > :16:14.people into the swimming pool when you have taken the water out of the
:16:14. > :16:17.swimming pool. APPLAUSE What the Government was trying to do was
:16:17. > :16:21.save �1.8 billion I think in housing benefit, and this was one
:16:21. > :16:26.of the ways of doing it. Grant Shapps. This is a proposal for the
:16:26. > :16:30.future. It is not something for right now. This is as a result of
:16:30. > :16:36.the difficult spending environment, there needs to be savings in future.
:16:36. > :16:43.Sorry, does it make it different that it is for the future? No, it
:16:43. > :16:49.is that figure is not now, it is for the future, �10 million from
:16:49. > :16:53.the benefits bill. The benefits and pension is �200 billion. One pound
:16:53. > :16:57.in three that the Government spends in this country. It is an enormous
:16:57. > :17:00.amount and can't go unchecked forever there. Has to come a point
:17:01. > :17:05.where if you are a young person and you have studied and you are
:17:05. > :17:08.probably now at home living back at home and you're working, you are
:17:08. > :17:14.probably saving up for that first flat. You are probably not going to
:17:14. > :17:19.do it by the time you are 25. What we are saying is if you are not in
:17:19. > :17:22.work you shouldn't be in an advantage because you are on
:17:22. > :17:29.welfare rather than in work. Somebody has to pick up the tab for
:17:29. > :17:33.this and it's the taxpayer who is having to pick up the tab for
:17:33. > :17:38.taxpayers for people who have to live at home and carry on working.
:17:38. > :17:42.There'll be exemptions, people who've come out of care and people
:17:42. > :17:48.with other troubled backgrounds will be exempt. But I do think it
:17:48. > :17:58.is right on the balance of fairness to all, that we do check the
:17:58. > :17:59.
:17:59. > :18:03.welfare bill and don't let it rise inexorably. Giving charitable aid,
:18:03. > :18:08.charity should begin at home. We need to look at the elderly, the
:18:08. > :18:14.aged, and instead of trying to take money away from them. Look at what
:18:14. > :18:18.we are spending overseas. Not everybody else jumps up and sends
:18:18. > :18:22.their troops abroad or donates tens of billions. Are you against any
:18:22. > :18:26.cuts in the welfare bill? We need to be prudent at the moment,
:18:26. > :18:31.because of the economic state. However, it seems to be we are
:18:31. > :18:41.always penalising those with the least amount, and that's wrong.
:18:41. > :18:44.APPLAUSE OK. Can I go back to Grant Shapps and say how he thinks it is
:18:44. > :18:48.fair that my grandparents and parents have paid tax all their
:18:48. > :18:54.lives it is not against me not to be allowed to have benefits when a
:18:54. > :18:59.European family from the EU can have those same benefits but I'm
:18:59. > :19:04.having mine taken from me? How is that not discrimination? APPLAUSE
:19:04. > :19:09.My view is this should be fair on everyone. On the aid budget point,
:19:09. > :19:14.I think it is �10 billion. The welfare budget is �200 billion.
:19:14. > :19:24.It's a huge budget and it has gone up and up. We can't go on spending
:19:24. > :19:30.�1 in �3 on welfare. I don't want you to be in a disadvantaged person.
:19:30. > :19:34.A young person watching this probably can't afford to buy their
:19:34. > :19:37.own house. This is about fairness to the taxpayer as a whole. Your
:19:37. > :19:41.parents are having to go out and earn the money. We don't want to
:19:41. > :19:46.put people in a better position when they don't work. The answer of
:19:46. > :19:50.course is to have more people in work. That's why it is good that
:19:50. > :19:54.unemployment has been falling in the last six months. Simon Hughes,
:19:54. > :19:58.will the Liberal Democrats oppose this move that was announced at
:19:58. > :20:04.conference? Grant made clear it is not a done deal across the
:20:04. > :20:07.coalition. I, as proposed, would not agree to it. I'm very clear
:20:07. > :20:12.about it, for the reasons that prompted the question. I have a
:20:12. > :20:16.made who works for Centre Point, the charity working with young
:20:16. > :20:22.single people who can't stay at home. I asked him for four figures
:20:22. > :20:26.today. There are 385,000 youngsters under 25 claiming housing benefit.
:20:26. > :20:30.17% are employed. They use it to top up their employment. If they
:20:30. > :20:35.didn't have it, they probably couldn't afford to stay where they
:20:35. > :20:40.are living and they would probably have to give up their work. On that
:20:40. > :20:44.basis it seems unintelligent. 7% are sick or disabled, so they are
:20:44. > :20:48.not going to be able to go to work and the money won't make any
:20:48. > :20:52.difference. Half of them have dependent children. Are you really
:20:52. > :20:57.saying that we should be depriving a 23-year-old mum of the money she
:20:57. > :21:01.needs to keep the roof over the head of her two little ones? Lastly,
:21:01. > :21:07.I'm for collecting more money from the people who are very well off in
:21:07. > :21:13.this country. There are loads of people... APPLAUSE Who still have
:21:13. > :21:17.most of the wealth. 1% of this country own about 15% of the wealth.
:21:17. > :21:21.10% own half the wealth in this country. Come on, if we wanted a
:21:21. > :21:26.society where we pay off our debts and cut the money, let's collect
:21:26. > :21:31.money from people who can afford to pay, not take money from youngsters
:21:31. > :21:35.who are struggling with all the other pressures and trying to bring
:21:35. > :21:40.up their kids and survive. Do you think Nick Clegg will agree with
:21:40. > :21:45.you and make this an issue, a dividing you? The coalition and
:21:45. > :21:50.refuse? Nick does agree with me. Sorry, so the Liberal Democrats
:21:50. > :21:54.phalanx in Government is going to say no? We are have not signed up
:21:54. > :22:00.to cutting housing benefit. won't? I don't imagine for a moment
:22:00. > :22:08.that we will. I will come back to you. Cristina Odone. I think Simon
:22:08. > :22:17.is thinking that Nick is going to stand up to David in a way that he
:22:17. > :22:21.didn't over university fees. APPLAUSE I can't quite see that
:22:21. > :22:27.that one going. But I also think another thing. I think most young
:22:27. > :22:31.people are motivated by a sense of fairness rather than a sense of
:22:31. > :22:36.entitlement. I do agree that it is very hard to be one of the 3
:22:36. > :22:43.million graduates who are forced to go back and live at home, even
:22:43. > :22:49.though they are working really hard, and to know that there's 210,000
:22:49. > :22:56.people between 16 and 24 who automatically got a council home. I
:22:56. > :23:01.think that is very unfair. Cristina, they don't automatically get a
:23:01. > :23:07.council home. They are automatically eligible. No. You are
:23:07. > :23:11.wrong. Single people... I did my homework. Single young adults are
:23:11. > :23:14.not automatically eligible for a council authority in any authority
:23:14. > :23:21.in England. There are lots of automatic eligibility. One of the
:23:21. > :23:25.interesting things is that I've got friends who are between 16 and 24.
:23:25. > :23:29.Most of them my stepson's friends, and they are saying this is not
:23:29. > :23:36.fair. They are also saying, I don't think I'm entitled to have a home
:23:36. > :23:43.of my own the moment I come out of university. Lots and lots of kids
:23:44. > :23:49.are prepared to share rooms, to go back home and live with mum and dad.
:23:49. > :23:55.You're only entitled to the money on a shared room basis up to the
:23:55. > :24:00.age of 35. Honestly, if you are single. Caroline Flint? I'm afraid
:24:00. > :24:03.this is another one of those ill thought through policies on a back
:24:03. > :24:09.of an envelope which is about disguising the fact that their
:24:09. > :24:12.economic plan is failing. APPLAUSE They are having to find �10 billion
:24:12. > :24:18.to plug the gap their deficit plan, because the truth is this year they
:24:18. > :24:23.are having to borrow 22% more. That's about �800 a second more
:24:23. > :24:28.borrowing, because it is failing. They've restricted growth. That's
:24:28. > :24:32.going down to something like minus 0.4% for 2012, the IMF announced
:24:32. > :24:37.that. Clearly with 1 million young people unemployed, if they think
:24:37. > :24:40.this is the answer, it is a joke. As Benjamin said, let's talk about
:24:40. > :24:45.people rather than statistics. An awful lot of these young people
:24:45. > :24:49.have been in situations where they've come out of the care system
:24:49. > :24:53.or are leaving abusive situations at home. A large number are young
:24:53. > :24:57.parents. Some of them are young people who've got on their bike and
:24:57. > :25:01.moved away from home to find work, but because the work is so lowly
:25:01. > :25:06.paid they are having to get supplement with housing benefit is.
:25:06. > :25:13.Issue here shnot this policy. It is to look at the reasons why young
:25:13. > :25:18.people, whether they are parents, young people who've left for work,
:25:18. > :25:22.need housing benefit. Give them the help to get into work and not rely
:25:23. > :25:26.on housing benefit. That's the answer. Both Caroline and I have
:25:26. > :25:29.been Housing Ministers at different times. One of the things that
:25:29. > :25:36.happened under the previous administration, housing benefit
:25:36. > :25:40.itself, the bill itself, doubled. The working poor happened to claim
:25:40. > :25:42.it. Up to �21 billion. I hear what you are saying, that you don't like
:25:43. > :25:52.this future example of how it could be trimmed. But the question is,
:25:53. > :25:53.
:25:53. > :25:58.when are you going to agree with even 1 penny off the deficit?
:25:58. > :26:03.That's ridiculous. We said we would halve the deficit over this
:26:03. > :26:08.Parliament and that would include a 12% cut in policing, not 20%. Cuts
:26:08. > :26:12.in the education budget and elsewhere. The truth is your plan
:26:12. > :26:19.by going too far too fast has restricted the economy. You are
:26:19. > :26:25.having to borrow more. You are not way on target. We would be rattling
:26:25. > :26:30.like Greece if today if we carried on. I think again the Government is
:26:30. > :26:33.penalising the most vulnerable, which is the young people. APPLAUSE
:26:33. > :26:39.If you have a deficit from the benefit system you should go back
:26:39. > :26:45.to the bankers and get our money back from them. Your Government put
:26:45. > :26:48.us into this situation. Shouldn't we sort out the
:26:48. > :26:54.unemployment figures before talking about decreasing the welfare
:26:54. > :26:57.budget? How do you mean by sort out? Unemployment figures are far
:26:57. > :27:01.too high to even consider dropping the welfare budget. We've got
:27:01. > :27:06.record unemployment. Why don't we try to get people back into work
:27:06. > :27:10.before taking their benefits away from them without any jobs?
:27:10. > :27:14.APPLAUSE Welfare takes up a lot of spending in the UK at the moment,
:27:14. > :27:19.so it does need to be reviewed, but a lot of people in this country
:27:19. > :27:23.think that those on benefits just sit at home and don't need them.
:27:23. > :27:26.But a large majority of people in this country do need benefits.
:27:26. > :27:29.There should be an education. There's a small minority, there's
:27:29. > :27:33.not the jobs out from, so unemployment does need to be looked
:27:33. > :27:36.at before spending. A lot of people think we can't good out to work, it
:27:36. > :27:40.is better off to get benefits, because that will pay more than the
:27:40. > :27:44.jobs are paying out there. Following from that man's point,
:27:44. > :27:47.you need to target unemployment before you target the cutting
:27:47. > :27:51.spending og welfare. But you also need to make sure that the system
:27:51. > :27:57.doesn't mean that it is better for you not to work. You earn more if
:27:57. > :28:00.you don't work than if you work. That is the problem. I definitely
:28:00. > :28:03.agree with that. It is a social thing as well there. Needs to be
:28:03. > :28:07.education with your parents. If your parents are staying at home
:28:07. > :28:11.and giving the impression that it is better to stay at home because
:28:11. > :28:15.you will earn more, there needs to be education there. And legislation
:28:15. > :28:20.in schools and things where people need to be more aware of this.
:28:20. > :28:25.want to go to another member of the audience. You keep on mentioning
:28:25. > :28:31.that we are all in this together and let's make things fair. So
:28:31. > :28:37.let's start moving to the other end. Mention the mansion tax. Please
:28:37. > :28:41.mention the things about covering up the loophole tax avoidance.
:28:41. > :28:47.Let's look at the other end of address issue, where we can find
:28:47. > :28:53.money and not just focusing on the vulnerable end, the welfare end.
:28:53. > :28:58.Grant Shapps? I agree with you. Simon mentioned how much the
:28:58. > :29:01.wealthy are paid, the top 1% of earners account for almost 30% of
:29:01. > :29:08.all income tax receipts in this country. I absolutely agree with
:29:08. > :29:13.you. Those with the broadest shoulders should bear the largest
:29:13. > :29:17.contribution. You are giving millionaires a �40,000 tax rebate.
:29:17. > :29:23.The mansion tax. This is what's happening. The mansion tax I think
:29:23. > :29:27.would quickly become a homes tax. It boo quickly turn into ordinary
:29:27. > :29:32.homes. It will require the rebanding of everybody's homes.
:29:32. > :29:39.Anyone who has saved hard and worked hard all their lives will
:29:39. > :29:43.suddenly be called having a mansion. It would become a homes tax. As
:29:43. > :29:47.soon as the Inspector gets there and revalues all the homes,
:29:47. > :29:50.everyone watching this will find their homes would be rebanded into
:29:50. > :29:53.paying more. I do agree with you that the wealthiest need to pay the
:29:53. > :30:01.most. They are. Under this Government. Even under the last
:30:01. > :30:05.Budget they ended up paying over �1300 more as a result. While 2
:30:05. > :30:09.million people have taken out of tax entirely and 24 million people
:30:09. > :30:19.are paying less tax as a result of that increase in the tax-free
:30:19. > :30:27.
:30:27. > :30:32.The system does not encourage responsibility. A lot of people
:30:32. > :30:37.that I was a school with had a child and got house immediately. At
:30:37. > :30:46.the end of the day, it is out of my pocket, so why should we continue
:30:46. > :30:49.I have no truck with people who think that being on benefits when
:30:49. > :30:53.they are of working age is a choice they should be able to make for
:30:53. > :30:58.life. It is why I said when I was a minister that when we were looking
:30:58. > :31:03.at young people in social housing, or other housing but out of work,
:31:03. > :31:06.we should focus on making sure they got training and education. But
:31:06. > :31:11.also the carrot and stick to say, you have an obligation to find work.
:31:11. > :31:15.I have no problem with that. What I have a problem with his with coming
:31:15. > :31:19.up with a policy that already various Conservative ministers are
:31:20. > :31:24.saying, we have to deal with this group, and it is unravelling the
:31:24. > :31:28.day-by-day, as some answer to issues around welfare reform. It is
:31:28. > :31:31.trying to find an answer to plug a gap in an economic plan which is
:31:31. > :31:36.not working. Talking of welfare reform, I think we should focus on
:31:36. > :31:39.things like fraud. In the last year of the Labour Government, we had
:31:39. > :31:43.the highest success rate in detecting fraud in the benefits
:31:43. > :31:48.system. It is only right to do that, just like we should deal with the
:31:48. > :31:53.fraud at the top of society by bankers and elsewhere. Before we go
:31:53. > :31:57.on, Simon Hughes, do you accept that the mansion tax is a dead duck,
:31:57. > :32:01.now do you have heard what Grant Shapps and George Osborne said at
:32:01. > :32:05.the conference? It looks as if the Tories are not going to agree. We
:32:05. > :32:09.think it is a good policy because houses do not move. You can tax
:32:09. > :32:14.them fairly quickly. You are going to end up agreeing on less and less
:32:14. > :32:17.as the parliament goes on. Coalition, by definition, is a
:32:17. > :32:21.coming together of different parties. We have agreed on lots of
:32:21. > :32:25.good things. We agreed on taking lots of people out of tax. We
:32:25. > :32:30.agreed on increases to the state pension, really important. There
:32:30. > :32:34.are things we disagree on. I want more wealth taxes, people to pay a
:32:34. > :32:37.mansion tax. But that does not mean to say, to pick up the gentleman at
:32:37. > :32:41.the back, or that I do not want people who are striving to be
:32:41. > :32:48.encouraged. My mum and dad married on no money in the bank at all. My
:32:48. > :32:54.dad got up at 4am to going brew beer, he was ace driver. Thug he
:32:54. > :32:57.was striving. My uncle ran a chemist's shop, he got up every
:32:57. > :33:03.morning and ran his own business all his life to make sure he had an
:33:03. > :33:08.income for him and his daughters and his wife. I am certain we do
:33:08. > :33:12.not want to DIS incentivise people for working instead of not working.
:33:12. > :33:16.If you cannot help youngsters, who may not have run at home, may have
:33:16. > :33:19.fallen out of their parents. There are all sorts of reasons why kids
:33:19. > :33:24.cannot be at home. If you do not hold them, you are more likely to
:33:24. > :33:28.have a generation that do not work. The if you show them compassion,
:33:29. > :33:37.you make them strive and turn them into a success and have them not on
:33:37. > :33:41.the dole. I am clear about that. You in the T-shirt. Briefly.
:33:41. > :33:46.think there is a large focus on the top earners being taxed and that is
:33:46. > :33:51.correct and needs to be addressed 100%. But there is a point that has
:33:51. > :33:55.been sadly ignored, although it might be unpopular with some people.
:33:55. > :33:58.There is a large percentage of his country that works in trade and
:33:58. > :34:04.other occupations that is consistently paid in cash.
:34:04. > :34:09.Consistently. And degeneration of funds that could be generated from
:34:09. > :34:15.that sector itself is enormous. -- the generation. And the fact that
:34:15. > :34:25.it is ignored it, and we are cutting housing for young people,
:34:25. > :34:28.think it is nonsense. Why is it not addressed? And you, sir. Why are
:34:28. > :34:37.young people, just starting out in life, being turned into the biggest
:34:37. > :34:44.victims of this financial crisis? The changes to tuition fees, the
:34:44. > :34:48.removal of the EMA, the potential threat to working tax credit. These
:34:48. > :34:52.are talented, brilliant young people feeling absolutely hopeless.
:34:52. > :34:56.There is that 17% that Simon mention, those that are in work who
:34:56. > :35:00.are young who could, if they lose housing benefit, become even more
:35:00. > :35:04.hopeless. They are those striving for work who, without housing
:35:04. > :35:07.benefit, could become even more hopeless. There is a hopeless
:35:07. > :35:13.generation already and the ironic thing is that it was not their
:35:13. > :35:23.greed and carelessness that put us in his place in the first place.
:35:23. > :35:26.
:35:26. > :35:31.Where is it written that at the age of 24 you should have your own
:35:31. > :35:36.flat? On the Continent, nobody, but nobody dreams of that, except for
:35:36. > :35:41.the children of millionaires. And certainly not at the expense of the
:35:41. > :35:44.state. In fact, we have just come back from Rome, where there was a
:35:44. > :35:48.whole street of cars parked with newspaper on the cars because these
:35:48. > :35:58.were young people having it off, because at home they have mum and
:35:58. > :35:58.
:35:58. > :36:02.dad. And that is what happens. Having what off? They cannot have a
:36:02. > :36:08.private life at home because they are living with their parents, and
:36:08. > :36:18.that is taken completely for granted. Gopinath! Enough,
:36:18. > :36:28.
:36:28. > :36:33.I know, I have seen that. Seriously, as the lay person on here, it is
:36:33. > :36:37.interesting listening to everybody bandying figures about. But, Grant
:36:37. > :36:43.Shapps, you have to understand that no matter how you spinet, in this
:36:43. > :36:46.week of your conference, to young people out there, the world looks
:36:46. > :36:52.exactly like that man was saying. The young people are being bashed,
:36:52. > :36:56.and they did not have anything at all to do with this economic crisis.
:36:56. > :36:59.I would say one thing to those young people, we are on the side of
:36:59. > :37:02.the vast majority of young people who are working hard and try to get
:37:03. > :37:06.on in life. They need a break and I think this is the most important
:37:06. > :37:10.issue for them. We need a system which is fair to everybody, not
:37:10. > :37:16.just some. Hillary could win as a radical suggestion that might
:37:16. > :37:24.change things. Should Boris Johnson challenge David Cameron for the
:37:25. > :37:33.leadership of the Tory party? Benjamin Zephaniah. Would that
:37:33. > :37:37.changed everything? Do you see any of Boris Johnson? I think not. I
:37:37. > :37:47.cannot believe I am thinking about who I would prefer to lead the Tory
:37:47. > :37:47.
:37:47. > :37:52.party. Boris Johnson said the Chinese... Thinking about our
:37:52. > :37:56.relationship with people abroad. He said the Chinese have no culture.
:37:56. > :38:01.This ancient culture, that goes back for thousands of years, and
:38:01. > :38:05.their culture is based on copying Western culture. He calls black
:38:05. > :38:13.people pick enemies. He said the problem with Africa is that the
:38:13. > :38:23.British are not there. He may seem like a buffoon, a clown, but he is
:38:23. > :38:25.
:38:25. > :38:28.a very, very dangerous person, in my honest opinion. In London, there
:38:28. > :38:32.was an annual festival called Respect, which is bringing young
:38:32. > :38:35.people together with music and poetry and everything else. One of
:38:35. > :38:43.the first things he did when he got into London was to stop it. He did
:38:43. > :38:50.not want to see that kind of unity. I heard somebody in the Tory
:38:50. > :38:58.conference, a Tory supporter, I think, that really is worth
:38:58. > :39:04.repeating. He said, could you trust Boris with his finger on the
:39:05. > :39:10.nuclear button? It is all right for a joke, but could you trust him
:39:11. > :39:15.with the lives of everybody in Western Europe? I think not.
:39:15. > :39:20.somebody who has to share eight- page with Boris Johnson in the
:39:20. > :39:23.Daily Telegraph on Mondays, I have to say, even I have to look at his
:39:23. > :39:30.column before I look at mine, because he is that witty, that
:39:31. > :39:40.funny, that brilliant. Would I trust him? Forget the finger on the
:39:41. > :39:43.
:39:43. > :39:49.thing. Would I trust him in a cab, which I trust him... Would die
:39:49. > :39:55.trust him to be on time? -- would I trust him? He is a force of nature.
:39:55. > :40:01.I think we would never be bored. We would always be on the edge of our
:40:01. > :40:09.seats. We would be laughing a lot. We would be the laughing stock of
:40:09. > :40:19.the world. The Olympics were a pretty impressive event. And Boris
:40:19. > :40:23.was the Mayor of London who made it happen. He did. The point about
:40:23. > :40:33.this question, presumably, was that you saw the reception he got from
:40:33. > :40:37.the Tories. He was a rock star. question is, would the Tory party
:40:37. > :40:43.do better under Boris Johnson as leader? In other words, should he
:40:43. > :40:47.challenge for the sake of the party? No, I think because the Tory
:40:47. > :40:52.party is going through one of the most difficult of economic times,
:40:52. > :41:00.they should stick to their present leader, not have the kind of
:41:00. > :41:05.factionalism, the kind of civil war that would be entailed in a Boris
:41:05. > :41:11.opposition. It is a shame, but let's see what happens next time
:41:11. > :41:17.around. Because the Tory party is so messed-up, Boris looks exotic.
:41:17. > :41:23.Is that what you meant? I do not think they should be a change at
:41:23. > :41:29.the moment. I agree with Christina Odone. I think Boris Johnson is
:41:29. > :41:34.riding on the crest of a wave, in view of the success of the Olympics.
:41:34. > :41:38.I actually think Boris mentioned Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and Tessa
:41:38. > :41:43.Jowell, as well as others, in terms of the success of the Olympics, so
:41:43. > :41:49.I do not think you can give it all to Boris on that one. He was
:41:49. > :41:55.generous. He actually was generous in terms of all the people who took
:41:55. > :41:59.part to make the Olympics are a success. Importantly, I would
:41:59. > :42:05.imagine that there is part of me that things when people like Boris,
:42:05. > :42:10.long, you should either put up or shut up, basically, in terms of his
:42:10. > :42:13.challenge. He is clearly a thorn in David Cameron's side. But I think
:42:13. > :42:18.the politics of this, demonstrated this week at the Conservative
:42:18. > :42:22.conference, is that Boris is about being the messenger for more right-
:42:22. > :42:26.wing policies. And what happens in terms of the Tory party when Boris
:42:26. > :42:31.appears, Cameron has to start moving more and more to the right,
:42:31. > :42:35.to feed that need within the Conservative Party. And that is why
:42:35. > :42:40.this week we saw a lot of the things that David Cameron talked
:42:40. > :42:43.about when he was opposition leader, to get into the centre ground, to
:42:43. > :42:46.take the nasty out of conservatism, that was very much given a low
:42:46. > :42:50.profile against other policies like the one we have just discussed, to
:42:50. > :42:54.show that they are on the right of British politics. Boris, David
:42:54. > :43:01.Cameron, to be honest they both represent a type of politics which
:43:01. > :43:05.I do not think is good for Britain. Isn't this whole saga just making
:43:05. > :43:10.fun of a whole idea of a mayor? Many places around the country have
:43:10. > :43:14.been voting on a mayor. Is it just the position to put the old
:43:14. > :43:19.buffoons school friend, or is it away to get into parliament? It is
:43:19. > :43:24.not actually a place anyone would aspire to. You do not sound
:43:24. > :43:29.convinced. Well, I did think so, but this saga has changed it all
:43:29. > :43:33.around. I think the only way the
:43:33. > :43:38.Conservative Party would get back in in 2015 is to have Boris, and
:43:38. > :43:43.maybe a zip wire straight into Downing Street. The woman in the
:43:43. > :43:48.centre. Do you think Boris Johnson would want the job as Prime
:43:48. > :43:54.Minister? Grant Shapps. Can you answer the question? It is
:43:54. > :43:59.impossible to know what Boris thinks. Why? Because he comes up
:43:59. > :44:07.with lots of different views. disagree with the gentleman who was
:44:07. > :44:11.not sure about the job of the mayor. The position is fabulously
:44:11. > :44:14.successful. People would have seen the Boris bikes everywhere, they
:44:14. > :44:21.would have seen that he has done things for London, got rid of the
:44:21. > :44:24.ridiculous bendy bus that used to block every road. We do not want a
:44:24. > :44:30.eulogy to Boris Johnson. He might actually challenge you for the
:44:30. > :44:34.leadership one day, more to the point. Now, now! Do not say that to
:44:34. > :44:38.me. I know it is an embarrassing thing to be tipped to do, but you
:44:38. > :44:45.are one of those tipped as a potential leader. Let me stick with
:44:45. > :44:52.the question for a moment. Not too long. His term runs until 2016. He
:44:52. > :44:57.has said he will see out the term. I want to trade a couple of quotes
:44:57. > :45:00.from Boris. My favourite one is one where he says, there is no such
:45:01. > :45:10.thing as disasters, only opportunities, and each opportunity
:45:11. > :45:18.
:45:18. > :45:22.is a fresh opportunity for renewed Right! I think his sense of humour
:45:22. > :45:27.is terrible. I canned understand why a group - I don't know how many
:45:27. > :45:33.people are in the Tory conference, found that mop, brush thing funny.
:45:33. > :45:37.If that was left to market forces and he was in a comedy club...
:45:37. > :45:42.been to hundreds of party conferences and the fourth or fifth
:45:42. > :45:47.day you will laugh at anything. Simon Hughes? No, he shouldn't
:45:47. > :45:51.challenge, is the short answer to your question. Look, I understand
:45:51. > :45:55.why Boris is so important to the Tory Party. They want won an
:45:55. > :46:01.election outright since 1992, which they won with Sir John Major. Not
:46:01. > :46:06.quite the same. But you haven't won one for 85 years. No, that's true,
:46:06. > :46:12.but we are on the way there. It takes time. I can see why the
:46:12. > :46:15.Tories think anything that excites, but no. The nuclear button is the
:46:15. > :46:21.bottom line question. Yes he's made a contribution in London, but
:46:21. > :46:31.bluntly for the Olympics it was other people - Tessa Jowell, Seb
:46:31. > :46:33.
:46:33. > :46:37.Coe, a range of people. He has to serve out his term. My judgment is
:46:37. > :46:41.will he deliver the affordable housing that my constituents want
:46:41. > :46:46.in London? Will he honour the promise before the election that no
:46:46. > :46:51.police station will close? I will judge him on his actions, not his
:46:51. > :47:00.speeches. He is very funny, it is light relief for the Tory Party
:47:00. > :47:07.conference, but in my view he is not material for the leader of the
:47:07. > :47:12.party. Des pit what Benjamin said, the quotation or -- despite what
:47:13. > :47:17.Benjamin said, the quotation, should he be considered as Prime
:47:17. > :47:24.Minister or the next Mayor of London, the remarks he made about
:47:24. > :47:28.the Chinese. You don't think he should be? What do you think?
:47:28. > :47:32.think one of the reasons bore sis so well liked is he is not part of
:47:32. > :47:36.the coalition and is able to speak his mind freely and challenge what
:47:36. > :47:42.the Government propose. Tinge problem with Boris, if you like, is
:47:42. > :47:46.also that he does have this sort of approach that is almost the anti-
:47:46. > :47:52.politician's politician. I can see that. And I can see, I watched him
:47:52. > :47:57.this week on the TV, and I could see how he could touch the right
:47:57. > :48:02.buttons and come off almost like the Peter Ustinov of politics, for
:48:02. > :48:05.those hof you who are old enough to remember him. We should not
:48:05. > :48:10.underestimate Boris and his political philosophy. It is very
:48:10. > :48:15.right-wing. We shouldn't be lulled into a false sense of security that
:48:15. > :48:20.this guy with a bumbling persona, quite amusing on occasion, even
:48:20. > :48:24.though Benjamin doesn't think. So he has some pretty extreme right-
:48:25. > :48:31.wing views. He is very keen on supporting the bankers. So you
:48:31. > :48:36.would rather have Michael Green? Again we are into fantasy politics.
:48:36. > :48:40.I also think that if it got down to seriously voting for him as Prime
:48:40. > :48:46.Minister, outside the M25 I don't think he would have that much
:48:46. > :48:51.popularity, in Yorkshire or Birmingham. APPLAUSE
:48:51. > :48:58.If we had Michael Green, alias Grant Shapps as Prime Minister, I'm
:48:58. > :49:06.told we could give him $200 to buy software and we would make $20,000
:49:06. > :49:16.in 20 days or get our money back. You shouldn't believe everything
:49:16. > :49:16.
:49:16. > :49:21.you right -- read. I've read in the last few weeks I am a Jehovah's
:49:21. > :49:29.Witness. I'm too late to give you $200. It is closed. How many people
:49:29. > :49:37.did you have to pay back and how many made $20,000? For viewers who
:49:37. > :49:42.are not aware, before I was in politics, I used to write business
:49:42. > :49:52.publications under the pen name Michael Green. I always remembered
:49:52. > :49:52.
:49:52. > :49:58.what the slogan vote blue get green really means. Now we all know it.
:49:58. > :50:02.Are you really rich? No. Benjamin, my wife has spent the last few
:50:03. > :50:09.months asking me where this $28 million is hidden. Sadly we still
:50:09. > :50:15.have to work to pay the mortgage each month. Sadly you had to pay
:50:15. > :50:20.back so many $25 each months. find it interesting, they were
:50:20. > :50:30.businessmanuals, advising people on how to run their businesses. I
:50:30. > :50:35.understand when you are... You are running a business with an assumed
:50:35. > :50:41.name. Hello, I'm running a business. Give me your money. Bye-bye.
:50:41. > :50:46.must end with a serious question. Annie Sheen, please. Shouldn't the
:50:46. > :50:53.abortion limit be a matter for the morality of individual women and
:50:53. > :50:59.not Jeremy Hunt? APPLAUSE The new Health Secretary, who said
:50:59. > :51:03.he personally favoured reducing the abortion limit to 12 weeks and the
:51:03. > :51:07.Prime Minister saying he thought 22 instead of 24. The question, is
:51:07. > :51:11.should this be a matter for the morality of individuals and not for
:51:11. > :51:15.Jeremy Hunt? We had a number of people saying it shouldn't be a
:51:15. > :51:19.matter for men at all. Caroline Flint. This issue is one of those
:51:19. > :51:25.matters where there is usually a free vote in Parliament. I think
:51:25. > :51:30.that's right. But I think at the heart of this issue is when does it
:51:30. > :51:35.begin to matter that you override a woman's decision that she wants to
:51:35. > :51:40.make over whether to continue a pregnancy or not? What worries me
:51:40. > :51:44.about this discussion in the last week is that a lot of information
:51:44. > :51:52.is put into the public domain that presents a picture that doesn't
:51:52. > :51:58.bear any relation to reality. The truth is 91% of terminations or
:51:58. > :52:04.abortions happen before 12 weeks. 7% between 13 and 19 and less than
:52:04. > :52:11.1.5% between 20 and 24 weeks. Those that do take place over 20 weeks
:52:11. > :52:14.are for a whole number of reasons, connected to young girls who come
:52:14. > :52:19.forward or circumstances in terms of testing and screening. And also
:52:19. > :52:24.matter that change that create a huge matter of concern to that
:52:24. > :52:31.woman. I would say to the women in the audience and at home, this is
:52:31. > :52:34.not an easy issue for any woman to take. What worries me in this
:52:34. > :52:37.debate is an idea that women are casually applying to have a
:52:37. > :52:41.termination. The other point on the science, this is really important,
:52:41. > :52:45.because Jeremy Hunt said he felt the evidence suggested it should be
:52:45. > :52:49.reduced to 12 weeks. The Royal College of Obstetricians and
:52:49. > :52:53.gynaecologists, the royal college of nursing, the British Medical
:52:53. > :52:57.Association, have reaffirmed what they said in 2008. There is no
:52:57. > :53:01.scientific evidence to suggest that the viability of a foetus between
:53:01. > :53:07.20 and 24 weeks has changed. There is no evidence that that has
:53:07. > :53:11.changed. When we have these debates and it is puts into the public
:53:11. > :53:17.domain in the way it is, that people are bandying around that
:53:17. > :53:20.they know the evidence, particularly politicians, it does
:53:20. > :53:25.undermine access to safe abortions and for women to choose. There
:53:25. > :53:30.should be that option. APPLAUSE
:53:31. > :53:35.The notion was that a foetus at an earlier age had a better chance of
:53:35. > :53:42.surviving. I wand to ask should be should be should be, do you have a
:53:42. > :53:47.view about what the - dish want to ask Annie Sheen, do you have a view
:53:47. > :53:51.about what the limit should be? shouldn't change. I don't agree
:53:51. > :53:55.with Jeremy Hunt. 24 weeks. I completely agree with Caroline. A
:53:55. > :53:58.woman who decides to have an abortion at any time in her
:53:58. > :54:08.pregnancy, it's a terrible thing to have to decide to do. We should
:54:08. > :54:09.
:54:09. > :54:17.have a health policy that allows that breth of individual choice for
:54:17. > :54:20.women. All the way up until what? don't work in the health profession.
:54:20. > :54:25.Really my question was more about that it should be the woman's
:54:25. > :54:30.choice and that the policy should reflect that. And that Jeremy Hunt
:54:30. > :54:37.and other politicians shouldn't be politicising this when perhaps it
:54:37. > :54:43.shouldn't need to be. We need to be brief. I think that unfortunately
:54:43. > :54:50.politics does come into it, because we need a legal framework within
:54:50. > :54:57.which to work the abortion line. I think that unlike Caroline, there
:54:57. > :55:04.is plenty of medical, scientific breakthroughs that show us that a
:55:05. > :55:11.foetus is viable between 20 and 24 weeks. That they survive at 20
:55:11. > :55:15.weeks. There are thousand thousands of Britons alive who've not only
:55:15. > :55:22.survived but thrived as premature babies who were born between 20 and
:55:22. > :55:28.24 weeks. What are we saying about them? What's your view? My view is
:55:28. > :55:32.that we should certainly review the law, because medical science has
:55:32. > :55:37.shown us that the way it stands doesn't make sense. You are not
:55:37. > :55:42.against abortion at all? As a Catholic I'm against abortion, but
:55:42. > :55:48.as a citizen I do not expect the laws to reflect my religious views.
:55:48. > :55:52.But I do think that the law should take into account medical science.
:55:52. > :55:59.Benjamin Zephaniah? As a man I think I have, I should have no say
:55:59. > :56:06.in the way that a woman chooses to deal with this issue, unless I am
:56:06. > :56:11.attached to that woman. I have known a lot of women, quite a few
:56:11. > :56:16.women who've had abortions. Never in the history of me have I seen a
:56:16. > :56:20.woman celebrating, great, I've had an abortion. It is always under
:56:20. > :56:25.some very drastic circumstances. Absolutely. Just to answer the
:56:25. > :56:28.question. She said, the lady said she is happy with 24, because she
:56:28. > :56:33.doesn't know any better and that seems to be working now. I think
:56:33. > :56:39.that's right. A man has just said he thinks it should be cut to 12 or
:56:39. > :56:42.whatever it is. We shouldn't listen to him. He was only giving his
:56:42. > :56:47.personal view. That's why we shouldn't listen to him, it is only
:56:48. > :56:54.his personal view. Unless there is some amazing scientific
:56:54. > :56:58.breakthrough. There is! We have a minute or two left. I want to bring
:56:58. > :57:04.Simon Hughes and Grant Shapps in. As a Christian, my starting point
:57:04. > :57:07.is that abortion is not a desirable thing to happen. Nobody says that.
:57:07. > :57:11.David Steel was brave and made it legal in this country, which was
:57:11. > :57:16.the right thing to do. I have checked as a man and somebody who
:57:16. > :57:21.votes on this in Parliament on a free vote. For me the one test is
:57:21. > :57:24.viability. You shouldn't allow abortions after lives can continue
:57:24. > :57:31.independently. For me I agree with Caroline, the medical evidence that
:57:31. > :57:36.I have seen and I've talked to the hospitals locally to me, Guy's
:57:36. > :57:42.Hospital and elsewhere, it is 24 weeks or very near it. It may be 23,
:57:42. > :57:46.it might just be 22, that for me is the margin. We should have
:57:46. > :57:53.evidence-led decision, not prejudice-led decision. Grant
:57:53. > :57:58.Shapps? As Simon says it is a free vote in Parliament. When I voted on
:57:58. > :58:01.it I voted I think down to 22. Possibly down to 20. I was really
:58:01. > :58:06.looking carefully at the medical evidence to try to identify whether
:58:06. > :58:09.there was a trend. It looks like babies can survive slightly earlier
:58:09. > :58:12.nowadays. In terms of the Government's position, we don't
:58:13. > :58:17.have one. We are not seeking to bring forward a vote. There isn't a
:58:17. > :58:21.Government position on it. It will always be a free vote as far as
:58:21. > :58:24.we're concerned. I think there should be a proper period of time.
:58:24. > :58:28.I'm surprised to discover that in Northern Ireland it is just nine
:58:28. > :58:34.weeks, which is very short indeed. And the Health Secretary was simply
:58:34. > :58:40.expressing his view. He was asked how he voted and he said how he
:58:40. > :58:43.voted. Apologies if you haven't had a chance to speak. We are going to
:58:43. > :58:47.be in Easterhouse next week and the week after that in Slough. If you
:58:47. > :58:52.week after that in Slough. If you would like to take part visit our