15/11/2012

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:01:12. > :01:17.Thanks so much. I said there had been a by-election and the polls

:01:17. > :01:21.had closed but we don't know the result. So many of you voted here

:01:21. > :01:25.so we don't know the answer. The question comes from cur disBaker,

:01:25. > :01:30.please. The winning party in Corby's come out winner the general

:01:30. > :01:34.election in the last few years, will today's result come out the

:01:34. > :01:41.same? Will the result of today's by-election be the result of the

:01:41. > :01:45.Every time a Government fights a by-election particularly in a

:01:45. > :01:48.marginal seat, it is always an up hill battle and we have said it

:01:48. > :01:52.will be a struggle to hold on to this seat. It has been the case in

:01:52. > :01:55.Parliament year after year after year. Labour lost by-election when

:01:55. > :01:58.they were in Government, medium- term and we lost by-election when

:01:58. > :02:03.we were in Government medium-term. We have got a first rate candidate

:02:03. > :02:09.here. She campaigned hard. We have had a good team. I hope we have

:02:09. > :02:12.fought a campaign that will give us a chance to have another

:02:12. > :02:18.Conservative MP. If we are not successful, that doesn't mean we

:02:18. > :02:22.can't win the next election. Louise Mensch said she thinks this

:02:22. > :02:26.by-election is a judgement on her and not on the Tory Party, but

:02:26. > :02:30.saying it is her fault, do you think that's true? It is always

:02:30. > :02:36.going to be the case that a local electorate will be unhappy when

:02:36. > :02:40.they get a change medium-term. I would never condemn someone in

:02:40. > :02:42.Louise's position, a parent. Many people feel let down, but at the

:02:42. > :02:46.same time if you are a parent yourself, you know sometimes you

:02:46. > :02:50.have to put your family first. The man up there with his hand in

:02:50. > :02:55.the air. You, sir. She came to this constituency on

:02:55. > :02:59.the back of someone else's hard work and she said she was going to

:02:59. > :03:05.do things, she never done them. So I was glad and grateful to see her

:03:05. > :03:05.APPLAUSE Harriet

:03:05. > :03:05.Harriet Harman.

:03:05. > :03:06.Harriet Harman. Well,

:03:06. > :03:08.Harriet Harman. Well, I

:03:08. > :03:13.Harriet Harman. Well, I think this is a very important by-election and

:03:13. > :03:16.I think all eyes will be on the Corby result because it is right in

:03:16. > :03:21.the middle of England and it is very like all the different parts

:03:21. > :03:25.of England in that it has got people who are quite well off and

:03:25. > :03:27.comfortable, but are worried about things like what is going to happen

:03:27. > :03:31.to young people and are their standards of living getting

:03:31. > :03:37.squeezed, but it has got people who find it quite a struggle to make

:03:37. > :03:42.ends meet. So it is a very diverse community that is very typical of

:03:42. > :03:46.large parts of England. So I hope that they will have listened to the

:03:46. > :03:53.message that Ed Miliband put out, that one nation message, I hope

:03:53. > :04:03.that they will have elected Andy who I think would make an excellent

:04:03. > :04:04.

:04:04. > :04:06.MP for Corby, one to which you are entitled.

:04:06. > :04:16.APPLAUSE And you have your ear close to the

:04:16. > :04:18.

:04:18. > :04:21.ground. Before I go to Nigel Farage, do you think UKIP have done well?

:04:21. > :04:23.They say it might be their best Westminster result ever? Some

:04:23. > :04:26.people are saying jokingly that the Tories have split the UKIP vote, I

:04:26. > :04:29.don't know. We should never second- guess the voters actually. At the

:04:29. > :04:32.end of the day people have gone in with their secret ballot and we

:04:32. > :04:34.will have to wait and see, but it is a very important result for us

:04:34. > :04:38.and all eyes will be on it. Nigel Farage. Well, Labour are

:04:38. > :04:42.going to win. I think that is clear because the Tory vote will collapse

:04:42. > :04:46.in Corby because of Louise Mensch and because people don't like being

:04:47. > :04:53.forced to vote in elections that they see to be unnecessary, but

:04:53. > :04:57.also because there is a collapse of confidence amongst traditional

:04:57. > :05:02.Conservative voters in David Cameron who they see as another

:05:02. > :05:06.Social Democrat. Is it going to be right, they said,

:05:06. > :05:11.every general election the past 30 years, Corby has been the

:05:11. > :05:15.bellwether? Not necessarily because there is change taking place in

:05:15. > :05:18.British politics. Think of Scottish politics with the SNP going from

:05:18. > :05:23.being a small party to being a majority. Look at Northern Ireland,

:05:23. > :05:27.with the DUP went from a tiny back street party party to being the

:05:27. > :05:32.biggest party in Northern Ireland. We are going through change in

:05:32. > :05:39.English politics. I think the feeling amongst millions of vote

:05:39. > :05:43.voters that these three parties are indistinguishable from each other

:05:43. > :05:47.on most major issues, attitudes towards climate change and wind

:05:47. > :05:51.turbines all over our country and that's why the UKIP vote is going

:05:51. > :05:55.up. People are looking for a fresh alternative and I would not think

:05:55. > :06:05.because Labour win tomorrow that guarantees anything for 2015. We

:06:05. > :06:07.

:06:07. > :06:08.are living in a period, I think, of great change in English politics.

:06:08. > :06:12.APPLAUSE I think Nigel Farage has actually

:06:12. > :06:17.hit it on the head. A lot of people are disillusioned with the Tories

:06:17. > :06:24.and Labour and to a lot of people UKIP is lick a breath of fresh air.

:06:24. > :06:34.OK. Well, you are the great wizard of political manipulation and man

:06:34. > :06:37.ufrg and you did Thatcher's victory in 87 and the Major one in 91. So

:06:37. > :06:41.do you think the Tories fought a good election here? I think the

:06:41. > :06:47.Conservative Party will be well and truly menched actually and I don't

:06:47. > :06:52.think it was not a time for spin in this particular case. It was a

:06:52. > :06:54.time... No place for you? unfortunately not. We were not

:06:54. > :07:03.particularly involved in this. No, the Conservative Party have to take

:07:03. > :07:07.it on the chin. I think yes, Louise Mensch, anyone is allowed to

:07:07. > :07:10.withdraw their labour. I think she signed up for five years. She could

:07:10. > :07:14.have anticipated her problems with her children. She did two. She had

:07:14. > :07:24.a contract and a commitment and she let the people of Corby down. I

:07:24. > :07:43.

:07:43. > :07:45.think she was more interested in Louise Mensch than she was in Corby.

:07:45. > :07:47.APPLAUSE And so I think it would be very

:07:47. > :07:50.different come the general election, that will be strategy B when it

:07:50. > :07:52.comes to that, but for this particular - in this particular

:07:52. > :07:55.instance, the people of Corby feel let down by the Conservative Party

:07:55. > :07:57.and not the local candidate, but the Liam with the expenses scandal

:07:57. > :08:00.and I am not surprised that some of the other parties will do better.

:08:00. > :08:02.The man in green there. Louise Mensch shares a lot of

:08:02. > :08:03.characteristics with Nadine Dorries that they put themselves first and

:08:04. > :08:07.their principles second. She is still eating testicles in

:08:07. > :08:12.the jungle! Tessa Munt. We had a good candidate,

:08:12. > :08:14.a lady called Jill Hope, but I suspect this will be something that

:08:14. > :08:17.polarizes between the two main parties.

:08:17. > :08:21.Do you think she will keep her deposit? I hope so.

:08:21. > :08:26.Do you think she will come before or after UKIP? I don't know about

:08:26. > :08:35.that. I don't know what is going to

:08:35. > :08:38.happen. She is full of hope! We were a very small party once.

:08:38. > :08:42.People said you could get the Liberal Democrats into the back of

:08:42. > :08:46.a taxi and that wasn't many years ago and for small parties it takes

:08:46. > :08:50.a long time to grow. In answer to what Nigel said, I think it will be

:08:50. > :08:54.a long time to the point where he has got, there are 57 of us in

:08:54. > :09:00.Parliament, we have been good at by-elections in its past, I don't

:09:00. > :09:04.think we are meant to win this one, but we had a good fight and a good

:09:04. > :09:14.candidate. Let's leave the by- election and we will get the result

:09:14. > :09:17.

:09:17. > :09:27.tomorrow. A question from Robert Anderson. Should we put put Abu ka

:09:27. > :09:27.

:09:27. > :09:33.tadder on a plane to Jordan. Nigel Farage? We put Christopher

:09:33. > :09:37.Christopher Tappen on a plane to America. We put a young lad on a

:09:37. > :09:41.plane to Greece where he was left to rot in appalling conditions and

:09:41. > :09:47.released without charge. We are happy to send our citizens off all

:09:47. > :09:57.over the world and yet, we are so terrified of the European Court of

:09:57. > :09:59.

:09:59. > :10:00.Human Rights in Strasbourg, an an organisation which was...

:10:00. > :10:02.APPLAUSE Which was set-up after the war with

:10:02. > :10:05.good intentions, but has far out reached its purpose. Look, there

:10:05. > :10:08.are many other European countries who are members of that court who

:10:08. > :10:12.choose from time to time to ig ignore its judgements. We have a

:10:12. > :10:15.promise from a Jordanian Government. They have changed their

:10:15. > :10:18.constitution to say say that he will not be tortured if he is sent

:10:18. > :10:22.back to Jordan and it is time the British Government showed a little

:10:22. > :10:32.bit of backbone and said to hell with the European Court of Human

:10:32. > :10:37.Rights and yes, put him on a plane. There is only problem with that

:10:37. > :10:41.argument. It was actually a British court in which he succeeded. It was

:10:41. > :10:46.a commission of a British court and when he went, when this case went,

:10:46. > :10:50.I mean it has been four times since January into court. He knows our

:10:50. > :10:55.court system inside out and on the three previous occasions, three of

:10:55. > :10:58.which were the European Court of Human Rights, he lost and it is one

:10:58. > :11:02.British court, the Court of Appeal that he lost in and it was only

:11:02. > :11:07.this week when he went into the British immigration commission

:11:07. > :11:12.appeals that he actually lost. Now what I find extraordinary is that

:11:12. > :11:17.we find ourselves in a situation where this man is walking the

:11:17. > :11:21.streets between 8am and 4pm and I am not sure why it is since we are

:11:21. > :11:25.quite convinced from all sorts of different sources that he has been

:11:25. > :11:30.involved in bomb plots, he has been involved in terrorism of one sort

:11:30. > :11:35.or another. He has been preaching against the liberal elite which has

:11:35. > :11:40.benefited him, he has been living here since 1993 and he chose to

:11:40. > :11:43.come here... Do you think he should be put on a plane to Jordan?

:11:43. > :11:47.should be arrested now. If there is any chance that he will be left

:11:47. > :11:55.here and not go back to Jordan, the time has come for us to arrest him

:11:55. > :11:59.and run him through or court system under a charge.

:11:59. > :12:03.Chris Grayling? You are Justice Minister, you are Lord Chancellor,

:12:03. > :12:06.you are involved in this. What's your view? This is about a British

:12:06. > :12:10.court and tempting though it maybe and I would like to see the back of

:12:10. > :12:13.him as soon as possible, but for Government ministers, police

:12:13. > :12:17.officers, immigration officials, court officials, to ignore a ruling

:12:17. > :12:21.by a UK court would be a deeply dangerous step and one we can't

:12:21. > :12:25.take. Equally, it was the court that released him on to the street.

:12:25. > :12:29.We are clear, we disagree with the legal decision. We will appeal

:12:29. > :12:31.against the legal decision. We are working behind the scenes to take

:12:31. > :12:38.whatever action we can to make sure he leaves the country as soon as

:12:38. > :12:42.possible. I am clear, where Nigel Farage is right, that I also think

:12:42. > :12:46.that the Human Rights framework which operates in Europe moved a

:12:46. > :12:52.long way away from the original views of its creators back in the

:12:52. > :12:56.1950s at a time when Stalin was in power and when people were sent to

:12:56. > :13:01.prison without trial. One of my tasks is to find a framework that

:13:01. > :13:06.will work for the future and to put it to the electorate at the next

:13:06. > :13:10.election. I would like to get it through sooner, but there is not a

:13:10. > :13:20.majority in the House of Commons at the moment. Were the courts right

:13:20. > :13:24.

:13:24. > :13:27.I disagree with the verdict and we will appeal against it.

:13:27. > :13:31.disagree with the verdict but don't judge him to coming to that

:13:31. > :13:35.conclusion? Judges have a right in an independent judiciary to reach

:13:35. > :13:38.the verdicts they believe are right according to law. That's a

:13:38. > :13:42.principal we have to hold sacrosanct because it doesn't apply

:13:42. > :13:45.in other parts of the world. We can still appeal against them, but if

:13:45. > :13:49.you walk away from the independence of judges in a court to form their

:13:49. > :13:54.view of what is right under the law, you move to a place that lots of

:13:54. > :13:58.people in the world have to live in where there is no justice.

:13:58. > :14:04.APPLAUSE So it's the law you think is wrong?

:14:04. > :14:07.Yes. Would you like to see us leave, as I think you did once imply - the

:14:07. > :14:12.European Court of Human Rights - you said once, not ruling it in or

:14:12. > :14:17.out? That'S exactly my position at the moment. One of my key tasks is

:14:17. > :14:23.to set out an alternative strategy for the Hythe framework in Europe.

:14:23. > :14:27.We cannot carry on the way we are - - human rights framework. I'm not

:14:27. > :14:30.ruling anything in or out because I'm new in the job. The Attorney

:14:30. > :14:33.General saying no question of us withdrawing. You have to win him

:14:33. > :14:37.over? I'm responsible for delivering the strategy at the

:14:37. > :14:43.moment, I'm ruling nothing in and nothing out. So you will have to

:14:43. > :14:45.win him over. You are senior to him aren't you? I don't know where the

:14:46. > :14:48.hierarchys fit. I will take colleagues with me but there are

:14:48. > :14:56.strong views in the Government with this. The Prime Minister says he's

:14:56. > :14:58.completely fed up. Is there a problem, Harriet Harman about

:14:58. > :15:04.leaving the European Court of Human Rights or abandoning the

:15:04. > :15:08.conventions of it? I think that we shouldn't leave the European

:15:08. > :15:13.Convention on Human Rights. I think the European court, I completely

:15:13. > :15:15.agree with Chris when he says he shouldn't criticise judges in this

:15:15. > :15:18.country and it would be inappropriate for him to do that

:15:18. > :15:21.but I think the European court have made a ruling under the European

:15:21. > :15:25.convention which is causing a problem. It's causing a problem in

:15:25. > :15:30.this country and it's causing a problem in a lot of other European

:15:30. > :15:34.countries as well. We've got a situation where this man is not a

:15:34. > :15:38.British citizen, everybody agrees that he is what is describe as not

:15:38. > :15:42.condeuce toif the public good and should not be entitled to stay here

:15:42. > :15:47.and that's butting it at its mildest, yet we can't deport him

:15:47. > :15:52.because there's a fear that if he's deported to Jordan, he'll be put on

:15:52. > :15:56.trial and evidence will be used that will be on tained via torture.

:15:56. > :16:01.You don't have a problem with that? I don't think we should deport

:16:01. > :16:05.people if they'll be tortured or evidence which is obtained by

:16:05. > :16:09.torture will be moved but I'll tell you what I think is the worry. OK,

:16:09. > :16:13.we need to make sure we can get an agreement with Jordan with an

:16:13. > :16:18.agreement by the courts and we can deport him. The worry is, as Tessa

:16:18. > :16:22.said, he's walking around free. Actually, we did have a system in

:16:22. > :16:25.the past whereby if somebody was not a British citizen and we wanted

:16:25. > :16:29.to deport them but hadn't got through the processes, at least we

:16:29. > :16:33.could keep them in detention. The problem is, it's not only worrying

:16:33. > :16:38.people in terms of his dangerousness, but the cost as well

:16:38. > :16:42.of having to monitor him. I think what needs to happen is that all

:16:42. > :16:46.the countries in Europe for whom this judgment of the European court

:16:46. > :16:50.is causing difficulties should go back to the court and say, think

:16:50. > :16:56.again, this is not just about terrorism or torture, this is about

:16:56. > :17:00.our own immigration processes and you must let us decide who we allow

:17:00. > :17:03.to walk around in this country and not tell us that he's got to be

:17:03. > :17:09.free in this country. APPLAUSE

:17:09. > :17:13.What about Italy and France have done in the past in just sending

:17:13. > :17:17.him off? I don't think we should be having a country where we disobey

:17:17. > :17:24.the law, we have to obey it and the law must make sense.

:17:24. > :17:27.You, Sir, on the left there? Just curious. See if you go to the Court

:17:27. > :17:30.of Appeal, you have got to eventually remove him, because

:17:30. > :17:34.realistically you are going to set a precedence and anybody that comes

:17:34. > :17:38.to this country, they are going to come here and do as they like

:17:38. > :17:43.because we are a soft touch, everybody in Europe knows it.

:17:43. > :17:46.APPLAUSE You in the middle with the tie,

:17:46. > :17:51.young man? Foreign nationals engaged in terrorist related

:17:51. > :17:54.activitys in this country shouldn't be allowed to walk around freely

:17:54. > :17:58.along our British streets. They're a threat to society, they should be

:17:58. > :18:03.locked up, yes. APPLAUSE.

:18:03. > :18:08.The man over there on the right, you, Sir? Two things. One it makes

:18:08. > :18:11.us look weak as a country and secondly, why don't we ask Jordan

:18:12. > :18:18.to demand him back and then give him back. It might sound very

:18:18. > :18:21.simple, but surely there's got to be a way.

:18:21. > :18:26.Moray MacLennan? I'll introduce a small note of dissent in this

:18:26. > :18:29.because I read the things you read about this man and what he's done,

:18:30. > :18:33.Osama Bin Laden's right hand man, and on top of that today that he's

:18:33. > :18:37.costing us �5 million a year and wants a bigger house because the

:18:37. > :18:41.�400,000 one isn't big enough and all those reasons why you feel like

:18:41. > :18:46.putting him on a boat and sticking him out in the mid Atlantic

:18:46. > :18:50.somewhere. The only question I have, and I know I'm supposed to answer

:18:50. > :18:55.questions - we say he's breaking the law and smoub arrested - why

:18:56. > :18:59.has he never been convictd? He hasn't even been charged with

:18:59. > :19:03.anything for ten years -- and should be arrested. I read all

:19:03. > :19:05.these things but I've never read about the police taking any action

:19:05. > :19:11.against him and I would like to understand why not. It's a slight

:19:11. > :19:19.sense of unease. All right. Chris Grayling, before

:19:19. > :19:23.you answer, let me quote what the judge said in March, 2004, way, way

:19:23. > :19:28.back. "He was heavily involve and was at the centre in the UK of

:19:28. > :19:33.terrorist activities associated with Al-Qaeda, he's a truly

:19:33. > :19:38.dangerous individual". Why under Labour nor Conservative, has it

:19:38. > :19:43.been not possible to prosecute him? The Jordanians do want him back to

:19:43. > :19:46.try him and that pre-dates the legislation that the last Labour

:19:46. > :19:49.Government introduced sensely that now allows us to try people here

:19:49. > :19:54.for alleged terror offences wherever they take place in the

:19:54. > :19:56.world so we can't use that law to apply in this particular case. I

:19:56. > :20:01.don't know whether there's been sufficient evidence to bring him

:20:01. > :20:07.before a court in the last ten years, in this country. If there

:20:07. > :20:11.was and if there has been, I would wish that to happen. You have to

:20:11. > :20:14.have enough evidence to charge someone. You may believe someone,

:20:14. > :20:21.but unless you have the evidence to bring someone before a court,

:20:21. > :20:25.charge and convict them, we didn't do it in this country. It's the

:20:25. > :20:32.Jordanians who want him and we have to help get him back there as

:20:32. > :20:35.quickly as possible. If people are to be trusted with voting in

:20:35. > :20:39.commissioners, why can't people be trusted not to kick this man out

:20:39. > :20:44.the country or not, why can't the people decide instead of leaving it

:20:44. > :20:48.to politicians? Well, for the law in fact. Referendums. Well, in a

:20:48. > :20:51.sense, you can't take the European Court of Human Rights issue and

:20:51. > :20:54.separate it out from the European Union issue. I'm interested to hear

:20:54. > :20:59.what Chris Grayling is saying, but actually they are both one and the

:20:59. > :21:02.same thing. They are not. They are not. This is what you get, the

:21:02. > :21:06.political class lining up telling you they're separate things. They

:21:06. > :21:10.don't want you to know that you cannot remain a member of the

:21:10. > :21:13.European Union if you say no to the European Court of Human Rights.

:21:13. > :21:16.I pause you a second. There's a difference between joining the

:21:16. > :21:20.European Union, in which case you have to subscribe to it, as I

:21:20. > :21:24.understand it, but what about leaving? Are you kicked out of the

:21:24. > :21:28.EU, are you saying Britain would be kicked out if Abu Qatada was sent

:21:29. > :21:34.back? I'm saying if Chris Grayling is serious in saying that he wants

:21:34. > :21:36.to consider whether we remain part of the ECHR or not, he's by

:21:36. > :21:41.implication saying maybe we'll leave the European Union. If we had

:21:41. > :21:50.a referendum on EU membership, this would be a central part of the

:21:50. > :21:53.whole debate. No-one wants to talk about it. Every time you are on

:21:53. > :21:57.this programme, we debate whether should be a referendum. Good things

:21:57. > :22:04.- absolutely! Not this time. There should be one. I know you do. The

:22:04. > :22:07.woman at the back there, then I'm going on, the very back row?

:22:07. > :22:10.Just wondering whether or not the lack of evidence being provided is

:22:10. > :22:15.a result of the fact that some of the evidence obtained could have

:22:15. > :22:19.been done through illegal phone hacking? And may not be there...

:22:19. > :22:23.Harriet Harman, what is your view of that, you were a lawyer? Is

:22:23. > :22:27.there evidence that can't be used in court? It's perfectly possible

:22:27. > :22:32.to answer Moray's question, to have a very strong view that this person

:22:32. > :22:36.is not somebody you want to be entitled to be in this country. The

:22:36. > :22:39.people who're British citizens are entitled to be in this country. The

:22:39. > :22:44.people who're not British citizens, we have a discretion as to whether

:22:44. > :22:48.to allow them to be here, and actually, we can say we don't want

:22:48. > :22:51.him here, even if he's not actually committed criminal offences, we

:22:51. > :22:56.know enough about him, we think we know enough about him to think that

:22:56. > :23:03.we do not want to have him here, but it might fall short of enough

:23:03. > :23:08.evidence that would be the basis on which he could be convicted. It's

:23:08. > :23:12.not our discretion then, is it? Well, that's the problem. The court

:23:12. > :23:15.is saying that actually, you can decide you don't want him here, but

:23:15. > :23:20.actually, you are stuck because you can't actually send him back to

:23:20. > :23:25.Jordan. We have to go back to the European court sand say, you are

:23:25. > :23:29.causing a whole load of countries a problem, not just us, we've got to

:23:29. > :23:32.decide our own immigration policy and therefore if they can't be

:23:32. > :23:36.deported because that would risk torture, at least they could be

:23:36. > :23:41.detained and we wouldn't feel unsafe and it would be cheaper than

:23:41. > :23:44.having all the surveillance of him. So we could have him detained here?

:23:44. > :23:49.Yes and he could go somewhere if he wanted and he couldn't walk around

:23:49. > :23:59.in the streets. Another question. You can join this debate on Twitter.

:23:59. > :24:08.

:24:08. > :24:17.Careful how you use twiether these You can also text us to see what

:24:17. > :24:21.other views are saying. Question from David Cremonesimi.

:24:21. > :24:31.Shouldn't we be spending more time discussing how we can better

:24:31. > :24:32.

:24:32. > :24:35.protect children than worry about who is running the BBC? APPLAUSE

:24:35. > :24:38.Moray MacLennan? Yes, I think we should, especially with the news

:24:39. > :24:44.tonight it appears that this may be the tip of the iceberg and there

:24:44. > :24:50.are going to be, I would estimate, thousands of people coming forward.

:24:50. > :24:54.This is not something new. Clearly it goes back decades. It's

:24:54. > :24:59.interwoven though with the BBC debate and the BBC debate is one,

:24:59. > :25:04.in my view, that needs to be about a culture at the BBC that allowed

:25:04. > :25:09.this to happen and a culture and a process and structure that allowed

:25:09. > :25:13.the Newsnight programme to go out. That should be the focus of the

:25:13. > :25:18.debate with the BBC, is how to rectify that. There's a phrase

:25:18. > :25:23.which is used in retail which is called "Value crystallises in the

:25:23. > :25:27.store" and that means nothing has value unless it improves the

:25:27. > :25:31.customer's experience in the shop and I think that should be the

:25:31. > :25:34.ruthless application of that to the BBC, that anything that doesn't

:25:34. > :25:40.contribute to the integrity and the quality of the programme on the

:25:40. > :25:43.management side of things should be done away with. That is the test

:25:43. > :25:47.that should be applied. Value crystallises in the programming.

:25:47. > :25:50.There isn't a problem, in my view, with the quality of the programming,

:25:50. > :25:54.the journalism. You travel around the world, not only is it admired

:25:54. > :25:57.still everywhere, it's actually a tool for democracy and it's one

:25:57. > :26:02.thing that is way ahead of any other country and it should not be

:26:02. > :26:08.cut back or sliced up. It should be strengthened, it should maintain

:26:08. > :26:16.its ambition, but it needs to be split, in my view, between the

:26:16. > :26:18.Editor in Chief, the creative side of things if you like and the

:26:18. > :26:22.director-general and the only positive things that's coming out

:26:22. > :26:25.of this as far as the abuse cases are concerned are there are clearly

:26:25. > :26:29.thousands of people out there and the listening to the moving

:26:29. > :26:33.interviews that they give, I heard them on the radio where after

:26:34. > :26:38.decades they've actually felt that they can talk about this and the

:26:38. > :26:42.relief of that that gives them and how that makes them feel is perhaps

:26:42. > :26:48.the only positive aspect to come out of this. Were you asking

:26:48. > :26:53.whether the media as a whole is too obsessed about the BBC and has lost

:26:53. > :26:56.sight of the fact that there's been child abuse? The answer was all

:26:56. > :27:00.about the BBC. We are doing an independent review on the BBC, it's

:27:01. > :27:05.not the culture of the BBC that's the problem, it's the culture in

:27:05. > :27:10.this country at how we protect our children, they are not being

:27:10. > :27:13.protected and we should have a review into looking at how we

:27:13. > :27:17.protect children. Harriet Harman? It's very important that we think

:27:17. > :27:21.again and think very carefully about how we protect children and

:27:21. > :27:25.learn lessons. I think that what we are going to get is, as Moray says,

:27:26. > :27:30.this is the tip of the iceberg, there's going to be hundreds of

:27:30. > :27:35.people who've lived with the awful fear and guilt and suffering and

:27:35. > :27:41.all the tortured feelings of what's happened if you've been sexually

:27:41. > :27:45.abused as a vulnerable child. There's going to be inquiries into

:27:45. > :27:48.why the Department of Health put Jimmy Savile in the position of

:27:48. > :27:52.trust in Broadmoor, who happened about why the police didn't

:27:52. > :27:56.prosecute or investigate why the CPS didn't prosecute what happens

:27:56. > :27:59.at Leeds general infirmary, as well as the BBC. I think that, as well

:27:59. > :28:04.as just having fragmented investigations around the country,

:28:04. > :28:08.we do need to have an overall inquiry really understanding the

:28:08. > :28:12.lessons of what went wrong. I hope nobody will think, oh, that

:28:12. > :28:16.happened then, it couldn't happen now, and all we've got to do is

:28:16. > :28:20.think about the awful things that happened to those victims then and

:28:20. > :28:24.try and make things better for them. We've got to do that. But we've not

:28:24. > :28:30.got to be complacent and think that that sort of thing doesn't happen

:28:30. > :28:36.now. I think there's been actual weakening of the child protection

:28:36. > :28:39.system recently or potentially. For example, there's the rules in

:28:39. > :28:42.relation to vetting and barring, you know, whereby you have to check

:28:42. > :28:45.people's criminal records before they are allowed to work with

:28:45. > :28:50.children have been slightly relaxed. We've got a situation where many

:28:50. > :28:53.social workers who've got responsibility for children have

:28:53. > :28:57.now got bigger case loads and can do less investigation. We've just

:28:57. > :29:01.got a new law which is that if somebody makes an allegation

:29:01. > :29:06.against a teacher of child abuse, that has to be kept secret. It

:29:06. > :29:09.can't be made public until there's actually a charge. So I think that

:29:09. > :29:13.we've been moving a bit in the wrong direction, we do have to

:29:13. > :29:19.listen to children, we do have to take it seriously. As far as the

:29:19. > :29:23.BBC is concerned, I agree with Moray, I think the BBC, having got

:29:23. > :29:27.it very disastrously wrong on this, showing a tribute programme to

:29:27. > :29:31.Jimmy Savile when they had in the building evidence of his abuse,

:29:31. > :29:34.that was terribly wrong. Then implicating somebody in child abuse

:29:34. > :29:39.who it turns out wasn't guilty of it. I mean that was terribly wrong.

:29:39. > :29:43.But actually, the BBC is still loved, still trusted, a period of

:29:43. > :29:53.stability and sorting it out needs to happen but I think the BBC will

:29:53. > :29:55.

:29:55. > :30:01.Let's come back to the point about child abuse, Chris Grayling there

:30:01. > :30:08.has been a tendency to pull back from the control particularly

:30:08. > :30:11.Michael Gove and the decision to keep private the information?

:30:11. > :30:16.would refute that. Let's take the example of a teacher. What we have

:30:16. > :30:21.had in our schools many, many occasions is a pupil making an

:30:22. > :30:25.allegation against a teacher of violence which maybe untrue. And

:30:25. > :30:28.that teacher is thrust into the public eye and their career is

:30:28. > :30:33.ruined on-the-spot. Even though they may have done nothing, they

:30:33. > :30:37.have been charged with nothing, we think we need to provide protection

:30:37. > :30:41.for those teachers. Not that those incidents shouldn't be

:30:41. > :30:44.investigateted, but it is unfair to expose people to allegations if

:30:44. > :30:49.they are guilty of nothing and if those allegations are going to ruin

:30:49. > :30:52.their career. That's the change we have made. Now look, in terms of

:30:52. > :30:57.the broader question, I am with you. One of the reasons, it would be

:30:57. > :31:04.easy this week, having had the BBC in the position it is, over the

:31:04. > :31:08.appalling allegations made about Lord McAlpine, it would be easy to

:31:08. > :31:13.say we will pull back in terms of new inquiries. I am responsible for

:31:13. > :31:18.one of those, the judge-led inquiry into what took place in North Wales.

:31:18. > :31:22.To make sure the previous judge-led inquiry covered all the issues and

:31:22. > :31:25.looked at all the aspects of the complaints about child abuse. I

:31:25. > :31:29.think that inquiry should continue. Whoever was involved in it, we have

:31:29. > :31:32.evidence from a victim that suggests that the full picture was

:31:32. > :31:36.not brought forward at the time. We need to get to the truth. Not just

:31:36. > :31:41.so we have closure for those people involved, but so lessons are

:31:41. > :31:45.learned. One of the lessons of the last few months with the horrible

:31:45. > :31:49.incidents we have seen in Bradford of young girls being groomed by

:31:49. > :31:52.gangs of men, it proves it can and still does happen today so we need

:31:52. > :31:57.to make sure that we learn lessons of the past to make sure it doesn't

:31:57. > :32:00.continue in the future. You see what Chris has just said...

:32:00. > :32:03.Briefly Harriet. Whenever an allegation is made, it

:32:03. > :32:09.is very difficult for the person against whom an allegation is made

:32:09. > :32:13.if it is a false allegation, but what Chris is doing is picking out

:32:13. > :32:16.children and saying that because they are likely to be making a

:32:16. > :32:19.false allegation against their teacher of sexual abuse, therefore,

:32:19. > :32:24.you should have special arrangements to protect the teacher.

:32:24. > :32:29.The point is where does the balance of risk lie and you must... This

:32:29. > :32:32.might be just a clip around the ear in the classroom and what happens

:32:32. > :32:35.if there is an allegation of violence against a teach near the

:32:35. > :32:38.classroom, whether or not it is true, that teacher finds themselves

:32:38. > :32:43.in the public eye. Sometimes in the newspapers. We don't want to see

:32:44. > :32:47.the careers of descent teachers destroyed on allegation, unless the

:32:47. > :32:50.allegation are proved to be true. This applies to sexual abuse as

:32:50. > :32:54.well. Does it apply to sexual abuse as

:32:54. > :32:57.well? It applies to all violence in the classroom and it is not

:32:57. > :33:00.unreasonable to give our teachers protection unless they are they are

:33:00. > :33:07.proven to be guilty of something. The point has been taken. The woman

:33:07. > :33:10.at the back there. Just to clarify. You think it is OK

:33:10. > :33:19.for teachers to clout their students around the ear then?

:33:19. > :33:23.didn't say that. You just said that. If there has

:33:23. > :33:27.been an allegation and if it is not certain that allegation is true, it

:33:27. > :33:30.should not be the case that the acsays are made publicly because

:33:30. > :33:34.whether or not it turns out to be true, in that situation the

:33:34. > :33:38.teacher's career is ruined. No, but you just said if it was

:33:38. > :33:40.just a clout around the ear... shouldn't face their career being

:33:40. > :33:46.ruined. You said if it was just a clout

:33:46. > :33:50.around the ear suggesting... didn't say that at all.

:33:50. > :33:56.You did just say that. We weren't talking about an

:33:56. > :33:59.allegation of child abuse, it it could be an allegation of any kind.

:33:59. > :34:04.I am glad you don't think we should have violence in the classroom.

:34:04. > :34:10.The woman on the left. On the far left. Yes. There is a massive flaw

:34:10. > :34:14.in the CRB system. I have... Criminal records checking, yes?

:34:14. > :34:20.have six CRBs covering me to work in one town because it is done

:34:20. > :34:25.every two years. I could go out and be very violent because you can't

:34:25. > :34:31.catch me for another year-and-a- half. How about it comes a live

:34:31. > :34:36.system and I have a PIN card, you take my card and number and find

:34:36. > :34:42.out what I did yesterday. The woman at the back?

:34:42. > :34:47.I do believe that we should support vulnerable young students, children

:34:47. > :34:52.and young adults, but how can can we when the support services are

:34:52. > :34:56.cut? I work in a school and there is hardly any services left out

:34:56. > :35:01.there. Tessa Munt, do you believe that the allegations that we have

:35:01. > :35:04.taken our eye off the ball on the business of sexual abuse is

:35:04. > :35:09.justified? That somehow there is more that can be done? There is an

:35:09. > :35:12.awful lot more that can be done. I grew up at a time when there was no

:35:12. > :35:17.ChildLine and I think probably most of the children in most of our

:35:17. > :35:20.schools would know about ChildLine and they would understand and a lot

:35:20. > :35:26.of them call ChildLine to know that there is somebody on the end of the

:35:26. > :35:30.line there. One of the things I would like to say. Firstly,

:35:30. > :35:36.violence, all violence is unacceptable whether that's child

:35:36. > :35:40.to child, adult to adult, adult to child. That's the first thing that

:35:41. > :35:45.I would say. The BBC, if I go back to your question, David. The BBC

:35:45. > :35:50.has to be commended on one thing particularly and that is it has

:35:50. > :35:54.dealt with one victim, a member of the House of Lords, with speed and

:35:54. > :36:00.somehow they have come to an arrangement today where he will be

:36:00. > :36:06.paid �185,000 plus his costs. Now I heard him speak very emotionally

:36:06. > :36:13.about the anger and the hurt that had been caused to him by what had

:36:13. > :36:20.happened to him through Facebook and Twitter and inference. I don't

:36:20. > :36:25.know how anyone can possibly forget the anger and hurt that has been

:36:26. > :36:31.caused to countless number of young people in all of this because where

:36:31. > :36:36.that member of the House of Lords, if he is not guilty, who is? And

:36:36. > :36:40.what is happening about checking what is happening with all of that?

:36:40. > :36:46.Because that, I can't remember of the name of the gentleman, Stephen

:36:46. > :36:50.something, the young man who made the allegations, clearly he had

:36:50. > :36:53.made a mistake and there were all sorts of problems around that, but

:36:53. > :36:59.somebody did that to him and that needs to be tracked down and we

:36:59. > :37:05.can't forget that. The other thing I would say, as a mother, I taught

:37:05. > :37:08.my children to show respect for their elders, good manners and be

:37:08. > :37:13.graceful to people who are older than them and better than them, but

:37:13. > :37:18.what they needed to learn and what I tried to teach them is that trust

:37:18. > :37:26.is something that is earned and that's a very different thing.

:37:26. > :37:31.Nigel Farage? I think David's question is the right question in a

:37:31. > :37:34.sense because we started off talk being the appalling sex abuse of

:37:34. > :37:39.young children, but the BBC has become the story and it dominated

:37:39. > :37:44.things. The BBC, how we run the BBC, how it is managed, it is very, very

:37:44. > :37:52.important. But the nub of your question look, the BBC are by no

:37:52. > :37:55.means a monopoly. In trusted institution where abuse has taken,

:37:55. > :37:59.we have seen this happen in churches and it has been happening

:37:59. > :38:04.all over the place, but the question is, there are lots of bad

:38:04. > :38:06.things that happen in the world, but how do we deal with them?

:38:06. > :38:09.During the Labour years we moved into a situation where the

:38:09. > :38:13.Government said we are going to do everything we can to protect people

:38:13. > :38:17.and this includes young children and so we move into a system where

:38:17. > :38:22.people get accused of things and even if they are completely

:38:22. > :38:30.innocent, there has has become a remember versal of the burden of

:38:30. > :38:35.proof. Now, we have seen what happened to Lord McAlpine. He had

:38:35. > :38:38.these allegations made against hem and he will get compensated, but

:38:38. > :38:42.how many other people out there lose their jobs? How many other

:38:42. > :38:45.people out there are forbidden from working with children again on the

:38:45. > :38:49.basis that accusations get made, but are not backed up by firm

:38:49. > :38:52.evidence. We must be very, very careful as a society that we do not

:38:53. > :39:02.do away with the principle that everybody is innocent until they

:39:03. > :39:06.

:39:06. > :39:08.are proven guilty and that to me is even more important.

:39:08. > :39:10.APPLAUSE I will take one more point, you

:39:10. > :39:12.sir? As a consultant paediatrician, I spend a lot of my time

:39:12. > :39:14.unfortunately having to deal with the assessments. You mentioned

:39:14. > :39:16.sexual abuse, the other categories are emotional abuse and physical

:39:16. > :39:20.abuse and neglect is the biggest thing that causes the problem for

:39:20. > :39:23.the children here the reason we are getting neglect is the children in

:39:23. > :39:27.this country are getting poorer. We need to start start thinking about

:39:27. > :39:37.supporting the families and the children and the Government has to

:39:37. > :39:38.

:39:38. > :39:39.change the policies to allow that to stop happening.

:39:39. > :39:46.APPLAUSE I am going on to another question

:39:46. > :39:56.because time passes. John Morris? Should we be boycotting tax dodging

:39:56. > :40:26.

:40:26. > :40:28.Well, on Monday, we heard the Public Accounts Committee of the

:40:28. > :40:31.House of Lords hearing from Amazon, Starbucks and Google saying they

:40:31. > :40:33.barely paid any tax and being asked by the chairman or being told by

:40:33. > :40:35.the chairman, "We are not accusing you of being illegal, we are

:40:35. > :40:37.accusing you of being immoral." Should we therefore stop using what

:40:37. > :40:40.we think are companies that are behaving immorally. Harriet Harman

:40:40. > :40:43.do you go to Starbucks? I decide that had I will not go to Starbucks

:40:43. > :40:46.because I am so angry about what they are doing about not paying

:40:46. > :40:49.their tax. I was passing a shop the other day in South London called

:40:49. > :40:53.Star Bikes and it is a bike shop and they had a big sign staying

:40:53. > :40:56.Star Bikes and underneath it said, "We pay our taxes." You have got

:40:56. > :41:00.the coffee shop, the independent coffee shop on the corner, trying

:41:00. > :41:05.to make a go of things and they are going under cut by a big global

:41:05. > :41:09.company that is not paying their taxes. You have got John Lewis

:41:09. > :41:13.saying that if Amazon continues to not pay their taxes, John Lewis

:41:13. > :41:17.will end up going out of business. What people feel so angry about is

:41:17. > :41:21.this idea and I can't remember what American person said that taxes are

:41:22. > :41:27.for the little people. It is really important that big companies pay

:41:27. > :41:31.their taxes as well as small buns, but -- small ones, but as well as

:41:31. > :41:35.people doing selective boycotts, we have got to have more transparency.

:41:35. > :41:39.We have got to change the company law to make sure that companies

:41:39. > :41:43.cannot tell shareholders, "We are making loads of profits, please

:41:43. > :41:50.let's have a high share price." But tell the tax person that actually

:41:50. > :41:55.they are not making any profits. We can't have corporate, a cloak of

:41:55. > :42:00.confidentiality and also companies that are doing business with the

:42:00. > :42:05.Government like contracts for PFI or privatisation, they should be

:42:05. > :42:09.open and paying their taxes. What do you make of Starbucks operating

:42:09. > :42:15.14 years and never making a profit? They are making a profit, but are

:42:15. > :42:18.concealing it in other countries where they pay less tax. People say

:42:18. > :42:23."the Government is spending more money. That makes things worse."

:42:23. > :42:27.Here is an argument where if you spend a bit more money, you can

:42:27. > :42:30.save money. HMRC, the Government inspector of taxes need to be

:42:30. > :42:39.properly resourced as well as backed up by the law so they can

:42:39. > :42:42.get after these people and make sure they pay their taxes.

:42:42. > :42:52.Moray MacLennan? Well, it is an interesting one this because a

:42:52. > :42:58.couple of those are my clients. OK. But if they were - Google has

:42:58. > :43:03.been our client and Amazon as well. If they were to come to me for tax

:43:03. > :43:08.advice I would say to them to do the right thing. Not for which

:43:08. > :43:11.means paying a fair rate of tax and to take that attitude because not

:43:12. > :43:15.and I wouldn't get into the vagaries of morality, I don't think

:43:15. > :43:20.that they need to particularly or the law. I would just say that it

:43:20. > :43:24.is good business. I think that it is good business for them to put

:43:24. > :43:28.their customers before shareholders because that will be good for

:43:28. > :43:33.shareholders and in many of these companies, because there are others

:43:33. > :43:37.like Apple and Facebook that pay pay lower rates of taxes.

:43:37. > :43:40.Wouldn't they have to put up their prices? They would pay more tax

:43:40. > :43:43.overall. It would be a low percentage, but the risk is higher

:43:43. > :43:46.that they will lose money in the longer term because of what the

:43:46. > :43:50.gentleman said. Most of these companies know the power of social

:43:50. > :43:53.media. They know that reputations can turn on a sixpence and things

:43:53. > :43:57.can turn bad and I think that it would be good business for them

:43:57. > :44:00.therefore, to do the right thing and pay tax and it would be good

:44:00. > :44:10.for shareholders and good for the customers and that's what I would

:44:10. > :44:11.

:44:11. > :44:15.advice them to do. I do believe that what makes people

:44:15. > :44:19.angry, is the fact that these companies are big. All eyes in the

:44:19. > :44:24.world are on them. So when they are avaiding tax, everyone is seeing

:44:24. > :44:29.that -- evading tax. When a local person, someone who has a low

:44:29. > :44:32.income fails to pay even �100 in council tax, they are taken to

:44:32. > :44:37.court and charged, even regardless of whether they have money or

:44:37. > :44:42.they've been ill, they are not able to afford it, but you put your eyes

:44:42. > :44:49.so much on the person who is earning little money or nothing at

:44:49. > :44:54.all and push them all the way when the big fish in the sea is

:44:54. > :44:56.overlooked. So it is a Government problem that has got to be looked

:44:56. > :45:00.into. APPLAUSE

:45:00. > :45:04.All right. What can be done about big companies that behave not

:45:04. > :45:08.illegally, as was made clear, but immorally and take the tax

:45:08. > :45:12.somewhere else that by rights should be here in this country?

:45:12. > :45:16.think firstly it's important to say the big fish are not being

:45:16. > :45:20.overlooked. We increased the tack from organisations and individuals,

:45:20. > :45:25.wealthy individuals sheltering finances in tax last year by a

:45:25. > :45:31.third, we have put resources into the Inland Revenue to chase after

:45:31. > :45:36.people who may not be paying taxes. I rather agree with Moray that the

:45:36. > :45:39.power of individual consumers but social media is enormous. I worked

:45:39. > :45:43.in the corporate reputation field before being an MP. Believe me, I

:45:43. > :45:46.know the damage that can be done to a corporate reputation if you find

:45:47. > :45:51.yourself in a position where the public feel you are getting it

:45:51. > :45:55.wrong. If you look at the example of Nike, going through a difficult

:45:56. > :45:59.patch because of their problems in Asia, working additions of their

:45:59. > :46:03.workforce. What we must not do is tar all companies with the same

:46:04. > :46:07.brush. The truth is, something like half corporation tax we receive in

:46:07. > :46:11.this country comes from foreign- owned companies, so do not believe

:46:11. > :46:15.all foreign-owned companies are trying to avoid tax in the UK and

:46:15. > :46:18.managing their affairs so they do not pay it. There may be some that

:46:18. > :46:22.manage their affairs in a way people disapprove of, but we

:46:22. > :46:28.mustn't tar them with the same brush. But you need the revenue.

:46:28. > :46:33.Would you encourage people to switch from star bucks to Costa

:46:33. > :46:40.because you get the revenue? I have no doubt people will make their

:46:40. > :46:47.minds up without the help of a politician. They'll look up to you.

:46:47. > :46:53.I don't go to Starbucks. Why not? It's a cop out. What about Amazon?

:46:53. > :47:02.I've shopped at Amazon and also John Lee wis.

:47:02. > :47:09.The man there? -- Leigh Lewis. a Starbucks franchise holder which

:47:09. > :47:14.means it's my business, I pay my royalties, I pay my taxes, I employ

:47:14. > :47:19.19 people, people start avoiding, what am I going to do, I'm going to

:47:19. > :47:23.go out of business. The fact is that people don't understand

:47:23. > :47:28.franchising and the vast majority of Starbucks stores in the UK are

:47:28. > :47:32.franchised. You pay your taxes? pay royalties to Starbucks, what

:47:32. > :47:36.they do beyond it, that is the question. We pay our taxes locally,

:47:36. > :47:40.we pay our people and everything else, and there's not a great deal

:47:40. > :47:46.left at the end of it. OK. Thank you very much.

:47:47. > :47:50.APPLAUSE Some members on the panel haven't

:47:50. > :47:53.spoken. Nigel Farage? The answer of course is that people won't boycott

:47:53. > :47:59.Starbucks and in the run-up to Christmas they'll be going on

:47:59. > :48:03.Amazon and buying their books, but I'm astonished to hear Harriet

:48:03. > :48:08.talking and to hear Chris talking. They've forgotten something. The

:48:08. > :48:12.reason this is happening is because we are part of a European single

:48:12. > :48:17.market and that's how it works! APPLAUSE

:48:17. > :48:21.That's how it works. The European agreement - don't shake your head -

:48:21. > :48:24.you are the enthusiast and you don't know how it works. The

:48:25. > :48:29.European single market with other countries including Switzerland set

:48:29. > :48:33.up a tax agreement years ago that said effectively, we are now all

:48:33. > :48:37.Nkunda triand if you are a big corporation, you can choose the

:48:37. > :48:43.European jurisdiction in which you choose to pay your tax, surprise

:48:43. > :48:47.surprise people are mostly opting for Ireland, Luxembourg or

:48:47. > :48:51.Switzerland because they are the cheapest jurisdictions. That is why

:48:51. > :48:53.it's happening district council simple.

:48:53. > :48:57.APPLAUSE In Switzerland, you could always

:48:57. > :49:02.set up in Switzerland outside the EU? But it's part of the economic

:49:02. > :49:06.area and this tax deal. If you left the EU, as you would like people to

:49:06. > :49:09.vote to do, companies could still operate from Switzerland and not

:49:09. > :49:16.pay tax? Well, that would depend if the British Government wanted to do

:49:16. > :49:20.a resip Rickal deal with Switzerland or not. We'd have two

:49:20. > :49:25.choices. If we ran our own tax policy properly, we could have our

:49:25. > :49:29.own tax rates or we could do what Dublin have done, try to undercut

:49:29. > :49:31.the others, have a cheaper tax rate and get business to Britain that

:49:31. > :49:37.way. I think as of next year or maybe

:49:37. > :49:41.the year after, we'll have the corporation tax going down to 22%,

:49:42. > :49:46.that will be the cheapest in the G7 and fifth in the G20. Not sure

:49:47. > :49:51.where we are going with that. Luxembourg and Ireland are cheaper.

:49:51. > :49:55.But we will be the cheap nest the G7 when we get to that point. I

:49:55. > :49:59.would like to go back to the question that John raised.

:49:59. > :50:03.Boycotting companies does work as long as we know we are basing it on

:50:04. > :50:09.fact. In Totnes in the West Country, there was a planning application

:50:09. > :50:13.deemed as being aggressive and lots, thousands of people, wrote to their

:50:13. > :50:17.local council and said, we don't want this particular coffee outlet

:50:17. > :50:20.in town because there were 49 independent coffee retailers in the

:50:20. > :50:23.town already. They got their planning permission but the

:50:23. > :50:28.publicity around that was so poor that they've now withdrawn from

:50:29. > :50:33.going into that town. So people power does work. When you've got

:50:33. > :50:38.companies like Starbucks who poor loves, you know, they are so poor

:50:38. > :50:43.and running this charity so well, they are actually going to open up

:50:43. > :50:47.another 200 drive- thrus and will have more shops in the next few

:50:47. > :50:50.years, I don't believe that's the case. They are buying their coffee

:50:50. > :50:56.very expensively from themselves in Switzerland. What we should be

:50:56. > :51:00.doing to these companies is saying, somehow we have to get a meckism to

:51:00. > :51:05.they pay some tax on UK sales -- mechanism. A sales tax on coffee

:51:05. > :51:11.then. Let us go on. We've got five minutes or so before we have to end

:51:11. > :51:19.this programme. A question from Abhai Rajguru, please?

:51:19. > :51:25.Who is wrong? Hamas or Israel? Who is wrong - Hamas or Israel?

:51:25. > :51:29.Nigel Farage? There's fault on both sides. I've always tried to defend

:51:29. > :51:33.Israel and their right to have their nation and I sympathise with

:51:33. > :51:40.them because they're surrounded by countries, in some cases, that want

:51:40. > :51:43.to obliterate them from the face of the earth. If they respond to

:51:44. > :51:47.whatever provocation they get by assassinating a leader figure on

:51:47. > :51:51.the other side, they can't be surprised if rockets appear.

:51:51. > :51:54.differ from the Foreign Secretary? I do on this. That they have

:51:54. > :52:00.principal responsibility? I do on this, and there's always fault on

:52:00. > :52:10.both sides in a fault like this. I did find it deeply ironic though on

:52:10. > :52:10.

:52:10. > :52:12.the news tonight, we were hearing the peace envoy Tony Blair saying

:52:12. > :52:18.we should have peace in the Middle East and I couldn't work that out

:52:18. > :52:21.for the life of me how we get that. Is the Government right or wrong to

:52:21. > :52:26.say Hamas bears principal responsibility for this crisis?

:52:26. > :52:31.There's terrible suffering in Gaza, no doubt about that, but they were

:52:31. > :52:38.wrong to be sending rockets into southern Israel which were actually

:52:38. > :52:42.sent in before the assassination. But we totally condemn that and and

:52:42. > :52:46.the retaliation by Israel is not going to bring peace anywhere

:52:46. > :52:52.nearer, it's not going to make the Israelis feel any safer which they

:52:52. > :53:00.are entitled to feel safe within their borders and it's not going to

:53:00. > :53:04.bring the rocket attacks are not going to bring peace or ease the

:53:04. > :53:08.suffering. We need a renewed itch tus behind one of the biggest

:53:08. > :53:12.international diplomatic failures. We need to broker a peace deal

:53:12. > :53:16.between Israel and Palestine -- impetus. We must have a two-state

:53:16. > :53:20.solution. If people give up hope, they'll resort more to violence.

:53:20. > :53:24.The new administration, the new Obama administration and the new

:53:24. > :53:28.Secretary of State, when they come in America, must make this a

:53:28. > :53:33.priority. But why do you think that William Hague sided so strongly

:53:33. > :53:37.with Israel against Hamas and was that condusive to a ceasefire and a

:53:37. > :53:41.settlement, in your view? Well, Chris will interpret what William

:53:41. > :53:48.Hague said. You are the Leader of the Opposition, you heard what he

:53:48. > :53:52.said? But we strongly condemn what Hamas did. Sending rockets into

:53:52. > :53:57.civilian places in southern Israel is totally wrong. But we think that

:53:57. > :54:01.the Israelis too should not just be restrained but they should end the

:54:01. > :54:04.retaliation and we should instead have a diplomatic effort. Chris

:54:04. > :54:07.Grayling, perhaps you would... APPLAUSE

:54:07. > :54:10.Perhaps you could throw light on what the Foreign Secretary said?

:54:10. > :54:14.Harriet and I would both agree on this. What seems to have started

:54:14. > :54:18.what took place was a series of rocket attacks, very large number

:54:18. > :54:22.of rockets sent into civilian areas in southern Israel. That's not

:54:22. > :54:25.going to help create a lasting peace in the Middle East, so

:54:25. > :54:29.clearly we see Hamas as bearing a substantial part of the

:54:29. > :54:32.responsibility for what's happened. What has to happen now is, we need

:54:32. > :54:35.to get both sides to stand down, we need to return to negotiation. At

:54:35. > :54:39.the end of the day, it's in everyone's interests in Israel,

:54:39. > :54:42.Gaza, other parts of the Middle East that, we secure a lasting

:54:42. > :54:46.solution. We'll never get a lasting solution if there's violence taking

:54:46. > :54:50.place in the area. We have got to get both sides to stand down and

:54:50. > :54:56.have to get round the table again. That is what Harriet Harman said.

:54:56. > :54:59.What William Hague said was that Hamas has principal responsibility

:54:59. > :55:03.for the current crisis. I'm asking you, as a member of the Tory

:55:04. > :55:08.Government, why he said that and what it's intended to achieve in

:55:08. > :55:12.this context, to point the finger so very clearly? Because we have to

:55:12. > :55:17.start by a recognising that the firing of rockets into civilian

:55:17. > :55:21.areas seems to have started this from Gaza, something that none of

:55:21. > :55:25.us could do about it other than condemn. What we have to do, and

:55:25. > :55:29.there'll be efforts to try to get both sides to stand down, round the

:55:29. > :55:34.table and to restore a peaceful solution, that's all we can seek to

:55:34. > :55:40.do. You in the fourth row? Do you not think Israel are making their

:55:40. > :55:44.intentions clear by calling up 30- ,000 odd reservists? Yes, I think

:55:44. > :55:51.this has the potential to escalate and escalate and escalate and I

:55:52. > :55:56.think clearly our place is to urge restraint. We have to recognise

:55:56. > :56:02.that our Middle East peace envoy ought to be there and not making

:56:02. > :56:12.phone calls for John Prescott. I say that. I don't mean that in a

:56:12. > :56:13.

:56:13. > :56:21.political party pant way, he has a role to play and shob -- I don't

:56:21. > :56:25.mean that in a flippant way, we he has a role to way. You can wage war

:56:25. > :56:30.but you end up having to talk peace and you have to keep negotiating.

:56:30. > :56:35.We need people there who can talk and bring the sides together if

:56:35. > :56:38.they possibly can and to de- escalate what's happening.? Moray

:56:38. > :56:41.MacLennan? In this particular incidence you could say that Hamas

:56:41. > :56:46.bears more of the blame but the problem with this is that it's a

:56:46. > :56:49.chain reaction and to two back to the original limp, you go back 60

:56:49. > :56:55.years and it's a fruitless exercise I think, just to echo what some

:56:55. > :56:58.other people have said, this is the only way potentially, because it's

:56:58. > :57:02.looking worrying, especially looking at the news tonne ierbgts

:57:02. > :57:08.it could get out of control in the Middle East which is more unstable

:57:08. > :57:18.than ever, is to use Obama, his skills, charisma and power to

:57:18. > :57:24.perhaps get people sitting down and de-escalate the -- is the only hope.

:57:24. > :57:27.You, Sir, just briefly? Don't you think the continuation of building

:57:27. > :57:32.illegal settlements on Palestinian land is something to do with it?

:57:32. > :57:38.They ignored what Obama was saying, they are antagonising them all the

:57:38. > :57:42.time? Briefly, Moray? I think so, but trying to depick who did what

:57:42. > :57:45.to whom when is a fruitless exercise and won't actually get to

:57:45. > :57:49.the only desirable outcome right now which has to happen quickly I

:57:49. > :57:53.think given the news as we heard about the mobilisation of troops

:57:53. > :57:58.which is to just stop it and get people around the table. It's look

:57:58. > :58:01.bing like than likely tonight. Thank you very much. Next week we

:58:01. > :58:05.are in Westminster Hall as part of Parliament Week and we'll have Iain

:58:05. > :58:12.Duncan Smith for the Conservatives, Yvette Cooper for Labour, Charles

:58:12. > :58:16.Kennedy for the Liberal Democrats, and the star of Dragons' Den, Debra

:58:16. > :58:19.Meighan. The week after that, we'll be in Swansea. If you can come to

:58:19. > :58:23.the grand setting of Westminster Hall or to Swansea the following

:58:23. > :58:31.week and put questions to our panel, go to the website in the usual way

:58:31. > :58:36.or call the number on the screen. My thanks to our panel here, to all