:00:10. > :00:15.Good evening. Tonight we are inside the Palace of Westminster where
:00:15. > :00:19.Parliament sits. We are here in Westminster Hall where over 350
:00:19. > :00:24.years ago, Charles I was try and for 900 years this place has been
:00:24. > :00:34.at the very heart of British history and tonight, of Question
:00:34. > :00:35.
:00:35. > :00:40.Welcome to our audience here who're shivering rather. There's no
:00:40. > :00:43.central heating in this place and 90 years ago there would have been
:00:43. > :00:47.braziers all around. Tonight it's cold. Welcome to the panel. Our
:00:47. > :00:50.panel, the Work and Pensions Secretary, Yate, the Shadow Home
:00:50. > :00:55.Secretary, Yvette Cooper, the former leader of the Liberal
:00:55. > :00:59.Democrats, Charles Kennedy, columnist on the Independent, Owen
:00:59. > :01:09.Jones and the businesswoman and star of Dragons' Den, Deborah
:01:09. > :01:17.
:01:17. > :01:20.OK, we'll warm up with a question from Roberto Campana, please?
:01:20. > :01:24.Should Parliament now consider amending sex discrimination
:01:24. > :01:28.legislation to cover the hutch of England? After the refusal to allow
:01:28. > :01:34.women to become bishop, should sex discrimination legislation which
:01:34. > :01:39.didn't cover the Church of England be amended? Deborah Meaden?
:01:39. > :01:44.staggered by what happened this week. I see both sides of most
:01:44. > :01:47.arguments and this argument I just absolutely do not get that at such
:01:47. > :01:53.a tiny portion of the church could say they don't want women to be
:01:53. > :01:59.bishops and for that to mean that the stay kus quo remains. I
:01:59. > :02:03.absolutely do not get it -- day kus quo. However, I'm also not sure
:02:03. > :02:10.that it's Parliament's place to intervene -- status quo. This is
:02:10. > :02:14.about a faith. This goes to the heart of many people, obviously,
:02:14. > :02:18.and I feel like it should be left with those people to sort it out.
:02:18. > :02:23.Actually, for me, the most important thing is, I think they
:02:23. > :02:30.know they made a mistake. How they deal with it is either going to
:02:30. > :02:34.mean that the faith has a church has a viable future or it's going
:02:34. > :02:39.to actually eat itself alive. And that would be an awful thing to
:02:39. > :02:44.happen. But I still don't believe it's Parliament's place to sort it.
:02:44. > :02:49.Charles Kennedy? Well, I think that first of all I don't agree with the
:02:49. > :02:54.decision that they arrived at and it's a rather curious electoral
:02:54. > :02:58.college that they have got that they'll have to look at. After
:02:58. > :03:03.years in this place as a Scottish Roman Catholic, I've always felt
:03:03. > :03:06.that I should not have too much to say and not cast votes on how the
:03:06. > :03:11.Church of England goes about... don't exactly have women priests do
:03:11. > :03:14.you? No, and I'm not in agreement about that in my own church as a
:03:14. > :03:17.matter-of-fact. There was a sensible set of exchanges in the
:03:17. > :03:20.Commons chamber a few yards from here this morning on this issue and
:03:20. > :03:24.I think what we'll see, I mean the new Archbishop coming in has
:03:24. > :03:29.probably got as rough an entry in front of them as the new Director-
:03:29. > :03:35.General of the BBC actually, you could vie for which is the worst
:03:35. > :03:42.stat scenario to a new big position in society. But he clearly wants to
:03:42. > :03:47.tackle it. It can't corrode his forthcoming period as Archbishop,
:03:47. > :03:53.the way it's dogged Dr Rowan Williams' period and the figures
:03:53. > :03:57.speak for themselves. One third of those administering the Anglican
:03:57. > :04:02.ministry within England are female. To say that there's, as it was
:04:02. > :04:07.rather well put by an MP this morning, there's a stained glass
:04:07. > :04:11.ceiling on the legitimate ambitions and progress of those women is
:04:11. > :04:14.ludicrous. But the point is that the church specifically got
:04:14. > :04:19.exemption from the sex discrimination act didn't it?
:04:20. > :04:25.not sure but I think... Frank Field wants that withdrawn but I think
:04:25. > :04:28.they did. Probably. By Parliament, they are given exemption. By
:04:28. > :04:33.constitutional right, they sit in the House of Lords and Leggett.
:04:33. > :04:36.So they are different from just any old church aren't they, they are an
:04:36. > :04:40.established church? If you look at it historically and there was
:04:40. > :04:44.discussions about this today, there isn't a great deal to be gained
:04:44. > :04:48.from Parliament, particularly the House of Commons and the decision-
:04:48. > :04:52.making processes of the Church of England getting into some big head-
:04:52. > :04:56.to-head and a stand-off. I mean do remember, the bishops, with very
:04:56. > :05:00.few exceptions, were arguing strongly in favour of this change,
:05:00. > :05:05.it was just an aspect of the layty that were opposed and were able to
:05:05. > :05:08.block it by a tiny majority. person second row from the back?
:05:08. > :05:11.Irbgs I agree with Deborah, I don't think it's Parliament's place to
:05:11. > :05:15.intervene, I think it's a decision for the church. I think Parliament
:05:15. > :05:20.should consider whether the bishops should remain in the House of Lords
:05:20. > :05:23.given this kind of opinion of the church. Owen Jones? I think the
:05:23. > :05:26.problem when we are saying it's none of our business is this - we
:05:26. > :05:30.have an established church. In terms of the problems we've got at
:05:30. > :05:34.the moment is, the church is unwilling to enter the 20th century,
:05:34. > :05:40.let alone the 21st. That doesn't mean as a society we can't enter
:05:40. > :05:43.the 21st century and follow the lead of many other advanced Western
:05:43. > :05:46.countries and disestablish the church. That would mean
:05:46. > :05:52.independence for the state and the church where neither can stick
:05:52. > :05:56.their noses in each other's business. Now, the church at the
:05:56. > :05:59.moment could argue legitimately, you know what right do I have to
:05:59. > :06:04.get into their affairs like 88% of the population, I don't regularly
:06:04. > :06:07.attend a church. So I think for me, the point to make is, actually if
:06:07. > :06:12.we disestablish the church, we protect the rights of people's
:06:12. > :06:17.private religious beliefs which is very important, with take religion
:06:17. > :06:21.out of the public life in that sense and defend it as a private
:06:21. > :06:24.matter then I don't think we'll have these sorts of problems. But
:06:24. > :06:31.as long as they remain established and the bishop's bench in the House
:06:31. > :06:35.of Lords remains preserved for men, it's all of our business.
:06:35. > :06:39.APPLAUSE You, Sir? The basis of Parliament is that the people who
:06:39. > :06:42.make the laws have to live under the laws. Therefore I think we
:06:42. > :06:45.should amend the legislation so that it covers the Church of
:06:45. > :06:51.England and they have to live under the law, like the rest of us.
:06:51. > :06:55.Duncan Smith, do you agree with that? One thing I would say is in
:06:55. > :07:02.line with my predecessor Norman Tebbit who also argued for
:07:02. > :07:04.disestablishment of the church. It's a rare agreement. I'm a
:07:04. > :07:08.Catholic like Charles. The Church of England is an established church
:07:08. > :07:11.and I accept that therefore that brings greater responsibility in a
:07:11. > :07:15.sense with regards to what it does inside Parliament but I'm rather
:07:15. > :07:19.with Debra on this point. I don't want Parliament to have to go and
:07:19. > :07:23.lay it heavy hand achos the -- across the church and dictate to
:07:23. > :07:26.the church what it should do. I think the reality for us is that
:07:26. > :07:29.the Church of England is going to get women bishops. The we is, how
:07:29. > :07:34.do they get there in the short- term? The vote by the way...
:07:34. > :07:39.many years has it been going on? The vote was complex. What
:07:39. > :07:42.fascinated me was that it broke. Some women bishops ended up voting
:07:42. > :07:47.against the motion alongside those who didn't want women bishops
:07:47. > :07:51.because they said those who didn't want women bishops had been granted
:07:51. > :07:56.too much licence so they didn't like it and so in other words,
:07:56. > :08:00.these things are never quite as simple as you think. I'm lost.
:08:00. > :08:04.we walked in as Parliament and hammered and Leggetted, we could do
:08:04. > :08:08.more damage. What about that man's point, you can't have bishops
:08:08. > :08:11.Leggetting in the House of Lords when the church has this kind of
:08:11. > :08:14.discrimination going on and they are there by right, but you say you
:08:14. > :08:18.don't want to disestablish the church? Put pressure on them to
:08:18. > :08:23.change their position. In the House of Lords, they need to have that
:08:23. > :08:28.greater equality. The Prime Minister said... What is the sharp
:08:28. > :08:32.prod? You need to get this done or it may be that we'd enter into your
:08:32. > :08:36.realm and start dog something, but we don't want to do it. They need
:08:36. > :08:39.to get their act together. It was such a small degree that would have
:08:39. > :08:44.been changed they would have got it through so there is a level of
:08:44. > :08:48.competence. One vote is enough as you know. Yes. Yvette Cooper?
:08:48. > :08:51.position would be more credible and the Prime Minister's position would
:08:51. > :08:55.be more credible if there were more women in the Cabinet, we have seen
:08:55. > :08:59.the number of women fall over the last three years.
:08:59. > :09:04.APPLAUSE I also think this was a dreadful decision by the Church of
:09:04. > :09:08.England. The vast majority of, not just the bishops, the clergy, but
:09:08. > :09:14.also members of the Church of England across the country, the
:09:14. > :09:18.diocese, supported women bishops, I think they were outmanoeuvred by a
:09:18. > :09:22.vocal minority. Yet we have the Queen as the Head of The church, we
:09:22. > :09:25.have some fantastic women priests, including the woman chaplain in the
:09:25. > :09:29.House of Commons who is excellent and I think it's just shocking that
:09:29. > :09:34.the church is effectively saying to those women it's OK to do the
:09:34. > :09:39.flowers, to sit on the pews, to do sermons occasionally, but you can't
:09:39. > :09:42.be a bishop, shocking, we have to have this changed within the next
:09:43. > :09:48.five years and not let it lie. APPLAUSE
:09:48. > :09:53.You, Sir, then you, then we'll move on? Well, doesn't this show that we
:09:53. > :09:58.shouldn't listen to the Church of England on anything. It's a
:09:58. > :10:01.flagrant kind of arm of the state, it's an all pervasive arm of the
:10:01. > :10:05.state and shouldn't be an arm of the state any more if it acts in
:10:05. > :10:10.this way. The point there is that most don't attend religious
:10:10. > :10:15.services, we are a diverse nation, services, we are a diverse nation,
:10:16. > :10:20.we have Muslims, Muslims, Buddhists, it's act Ronistic when other
:10:20. > :10:25.countries have separated church and state. Get on with each other's
:10:25. > :10:30.business without intervening in each other's affairs. The decision
:10:30. > :10:35.seems strange. All religions are full of anomalies and if we start
:10:35. > :10:39.Leggetting about this specific act, are we also going to Leggett that
:10:39. > :10:44.the Roman Catholic Church should have female priests or even go the
:10:44. > :10:48.length of Germany and start questioning whether Jewish parents
:10:49. > :10:55.are allowed to give their infant children unnecessary surgical
:10:55. > :10:58.operations at birth. In other words once you start do you have to
:10:58. > :11:01.examine... This is my point about the heavy hand of Parliament.
:11:02. > :11:05.Aagree for those who say there should be women bishops, but when
:11:05. > :11:09.Parliament moves into this arena, we are more likely to do more
:11:09. > :11:13.damage than good that,'s my concern, stamping on everybody's pwheefs
:11:13. > :11:16.when we are not the ones to lecture anybody about what to do, frankly -
:11:16. > :11:21.- beliefs. The woman there? I can't help but
:11:21. > :11:26.feel that the church is losing credibility when it claims it hand
:11:26. > :11:32.for quality but doesn't provietd equality opportunities for men and
:11:32. > :11:36.women who twoish follow a career in the church -- provide equality
:11:36. > :11:38.opportunities for men and women who wish to follow a career in the
:11:38. > :11:43.church. I believe in freedom of religion and we shouldn't tell
:11:43. > :11:46.people how to worship. The problem for the Church of England is it's
:11:46. > :11:50.our national church, it does the Coronations, state funerals, and
:11:50. > :11:53.it's part of our national life because we have 26 bishops sitting
:11:53. > :11:57.in the House of Lords. Parliament will be expected to pass any change
:11:57. > :12:01.to the rules of this Church of England. I don't think you can
:12:01. > :12:04.expect Parliament to pass unfair rules, discriminatory rules, that's
:12:05. > :12:07.why I hope the church will sort this out. If it doesn't, Parliament
:12:07. > :12:17.will have to work with the church in order to make sure that the
:12:17. > :12:19.
:12:19. > :12:29.national church can be fair to all. You can join this debate on Twitter.
:12:29. > :12:34.
:12:34. > :12:39.We have an anonymous blogger alled -- called bishop. A question from
:12:39. > :12:43.Paul Haydon, please? Should Britain forge a new looser relationship
:12:43. > :12:49.with Brussels? Should Britain forge a new looser relationship with
:12:49. > :12:52.Brussels? I ask you to speak with brevity because a lot of people
:12:52. > :12:57.have things to say. Iain Duncan Smith? What's happening in Europe
:12:57. > :13:00.at the moment is set for change. The Prime Minister spoke about this
:13:00. > :13:05.not so long ago. The reality is that the problems in the euro area
:13:05. > :13:09.is forcing those members of the euro area to decide to go deeper in
:13:09. > :13:12.in terms of fiscal union. They are now laying plans so that the
:13:12. > :13:16.taxation et cetera can be run and overseen centrally. They are
:13:16. > :13:20.talking about a banking union, all the banks and the various member
:13:20. > :13:24.states are part of the euro and they'll get closer tied together.
:13:24. > :13:29.It's a reality for those who're outside the euro, like Britain, and
:13:29. > :13:33.by the way, I thank God that we are outside the euro, the disaster for
:13:33. > :13:36.us had we been inside the euro, it's a marvel that we are not in
:13:36. > :13:41.the euro, thank God... APPLAUSE
:13:41. > :13:44.So we are seeing, I think, and William Hague's said this, a kind
:13:44. > :13:49.of re-alignment within Europe. The question isn't should Britain have
:13:49. > :13:52.a looser arrangement, it's that Britain outside by its very nature
:13:52. > :13:55.over the next few years will find that relationship will change and
:13:56. > :14:00.we need to negotiate, as the Prime Minister said, to make sure that we
:14:00. > :14:04.gain the advantages out of being in part of a trading bloc and
:14:04. > :14:09.cooperating where we need to, but not being sucked into deeper union
:14:09. > :14:13.where we don't want to be governed by Brussels or by anybody else.
:14:13. > :14:18.Where do you stand on the key issue of a referendum, when would you
:14:18. > :14:21.want that to be held? My view about that is that the Prime Minister
:14:21. > :14:24.said the other day legitimately, it will be a referendum. The question
:14:24. > :14:29.is, what will you be asking about and that's the point. No good
:14:29. > :14:32.saying we want a referendum, the point is, it should be about what
:14:32. > :14:37.that relationship is about, in other words when we are clear about
:14:37. > :14:41.where this is going to end, we need to ask the public, is that what you
:14:41. > :14:45.want, that relationship, the looser relationship, is that where we
:14:45. > :14:51.should be or would you like to have something different. Before the
:14:51. > :14:54.next election? I think timing is not the issue. It's a germane
:14:54. > :15:00.issue? It's secondary. The key thing is what is the question.
:15:00. > :15:04.Everyone wants a referendum and I say what over, it's not being in or
:15:04. > :15:07.out, it's about the relationship. We'll have a relationship with
:15:07. > :15:13.Europe regardless because we trade and cooperate with them. The ideas
:15:14. > :15:17.in a blissful place that's About a referendum about Europe we
:15:17. > :15:21.need a debate not just about the disadvantages and problems but the
:15:21. > :15:29.advantages of being part of the enormous market that is Europe.
:15:29. > :15:35.APPLAUSE Charles Kennedy? Well, obviously define a looser
:15:35. > :15:40.relationship. Those that say a looser relationship is lets leave
:15:40. > :15:44.the formal structures of the European Union. To a certain extent
:15:44. > :15:49.I would subscribe to this word. A looser relationship means you have
:15:49. > :15:53.more democracy in Europe, more transparency, more decentralisation
:15:53. > :15:58.away from Brussels across the nation's and indeed the regions of
:15:58. > :16:03.Europe. So we can all pay lip service to looser. But Ian and
:16:03. > :16:09.myself are of a vintage in this place. We go all the way back to
:16:09. > :16:14.the battles of Maastricht 20 years ago. As he will recall, I was the
:16:14. > :16:18.Lib Dem European spokesman at the time. I voted in favour of a
:16:18. > :16:25.referendum then on the Maastricht Treaty. We need to lance the boil,
:16:25. > :16:28.and so did Ian. And you want a referendum now? Why not now before
:16:28. > :16:32.the election? Because there isn't a practical proposition. If there was
:16:32. > :16:37.a new treaty for example, that represents a proposition. That
:16:37. > :16:42.doesn't appear to be. What about the question, would you like to be
:16:42. > :16:46.in or out? Whether it was on Maastricht or the single currency,
:16:46. > :16:51.which Tony Blair baulked at, or as yet some unforeseen further
:16:51. > :16:55.development, which will take place. We all know in our hearts the
:16:55. > :16:59.argument will come down to do you want us in or out? That's a good,
:16:59. > :17:03.honest argument we need to have. This issue, and I'm strongly in
:17:03. > :17:07.favour of Britain taking a leading role at the top table in Europe,
:17:07. > :17:13.this issue has bedevilled successive Prime Ministers and
:17:13. > :17:16.Governments and it has just got be resolved. It seem as very short-
:17:16. > :17:20.term point of view to say we need a looser relationship with Europe.
:17:20. > :17:26.Over the next 20 or so years Britain is going to struggle to
:17:26. > :17:29.find itself in an internationally more competitive economy, so we
:17:29. > :17:35.need to forge stronger relationships with Europe so we can
:17:35. > :17:38.remain a significant nation. And you Sir? I do not understand
:17:38. > :17:44.why politicians constantly pussyfoot about this. The nation
:17:44. > :17:48.wants a referendum. This is critical, it is costing us a lot of
:17:48. > :17:52.money. We want somebody to lead us and for the issues to be properly
:17:52. > :17:55.debated. It makes me that I politicians in Britain are the same
:17:56. > :18:00.as politicians in Europe. It's a these cosy club and everybody can
:18:00. > :18:05.get a nice bit of expense and salary. Listen to the people and do
:18:05. > :18:08.something about it. It's not good enough. APPLAUSE Deborah Meaden, do
:18:08. > :18:12.you, is that a picture you recognise of political life? Well,
:18:13. > :18:16.I have to say that in terms of referendum, if we are going to ask
:18:17. > :18:20.the question, there needs to be a lot more debate. When go about
:18:20. > :18:25.everyday life, most people don't like Europe, because of the things
:18:25. > :18:28.that they encounter. Quite small issues they encounter every day -
:18:28. > :18:32.health and safety this, we've got to do this and that, and that's
:18:32. > :18:36.crazy. And actually the bigger picture, which is that over 50% of
:18:36. > :18:41.our exports go within the EU, that they create hundreds of thousands
:18:41. > :18:49.of jobs for us. And when we say it's expensive, that the cost of
:18:49. > :18:54.running the EU, the people in Brussels is about 6%. That is not
:18:54. > :18:57.crazy. 6% of their budget, it is not crazy. If we are going to have
:18:57. > :19:00.it, I think we are going to have a debate, but if we are going to have
:19:00. > :19:05.a referendum there needs to be a lot more debate and information so
:19:05. > :19:08.that people are making their decisions on the actual facts and
:19:08. > :19:13.what's right and best for this country, and not the frustrations
:19:13. > :19:19.that I feel, and everybody feels on a day-to-day basis, oh silly health
:19:19. > :19:26.and safety rules, that is not the basis on which to make this
:19:26. > :19:32.decision. APPLAUSE Did you vote for this proposal for a cut in the
:19:32. > :19:36.budget this time, real cut? Would you like to see a referendum? You
:19:36. > :19:40.are obviously quite anti-European if you want that. I think it is
:19:40. > :19:43.pro-European to argue for reforms on things like the European budget,
:19:43. > :19:47.because at a time of austerity for a lot of people right across Europe,
:19:47. > :19:51.and certainly in Britain as well, if other budgets are being cut I
:19:51. > :19:56.think that Europe should take its fair share of the cuts, in
:19:56. > :20:00.materials of the European budget. Otherwise you allow Europe to
:20:00. > :20:05.become discredited and to become pointless and out of touch with the
:20:05. > :20:11.countries that contribute to it. just saw a flock of European pigs
:20:11. > :20:18.fly past the window. APPLAUSE The fact of the matter is, Labour have
:20:18. > :20:21.done this consistently, I remember John Smith held the Labour Party
:20:21. > :20:25.together over Maastricht because of the Social Chapter not because of
:20:25. > :20:28.the pro-Europeanism. He had more splits in the Labour Party on
:20:28. > :20:32.Europe than were evident. The Labour Party walked through
:20:32. > :20:38.division lobbys with the right-wing of the Conservative Party...
:20:38. > :20:42.Charles, you walked through with the right wick of of the
:20:42. > :20:47.Conservative Party every single week. To increase tuition fees and
:20:47. > :20:51.VAT hike. You do it every time. cannot accuse me on tuition fees. I
:20:51. > :20:57.was a party leader. I was against them. I spoke against them under
:20:57. > :21:02.the coalition and I voted against them, so get your facts right.
:21:02. > :21:07.coalition Government is deeply damaging. It is opportunism on
:21:07. > :21:12.Europe .. Which will come back to bite them and I make that
:21:12. > :21:19.prediction. Isn't the reality that Labour in Government saw budget
:21:19. > :21:23.rises of over 50%? �2 billion cut off our own rebate and gave it away
:21:23. > :21:27.for nothing, and yet suddenly in opposition you seem incredibly keen
:21:28. > :21:32.on cutting the budget. I don't see where this came from. You promised
:21:32. > :21:38.a referendum, you didn't give the public a referendum. All of sudden
:21:38. > :21:44.you want a referendum, you want to cut the budget, you are jolly Euro-
:21:44. > :21:48.sceptic pool.. I don't think the public believe a word of it. Aren't
:21:48. > :21:53.those three things you rather like in your opposition heart? The Prime
:21:53. > :21:58.Minister is out trying to get that deal. It's the Conservatives that
:21:58. > :22:02.wanted a referendum. Why didn't you vote for it? If the Government
:22:02. > :22:05.supports a reduction in the EU budget y did they not support
:22:05. > :22:09.something the Labour Party put forward not just recently but in
:22:09. > :22:13.July. We've argued for it consistently. I think it's the
:22:13. > :22:18.right thing to do. Where I disagree with Ian and he is undermining the
:22:18. > :22:21.things we need from Europe, is the fight against crime. He wants us to
:22:21. > :22:23.pull out of the European arrest warrant, which is what helped us to
:22:23. > :22:28.bring terroristings back to this country to stand trial in Britain.
:22:28. > :22:33.I think a looser relationship which makes it harder to fight crime is
:22:33. > :22:37.deeply damaging for Britain. You have to argue for the right, the
:22:37. > :22:40.sensible reforms, but stay in Europe rather than walk away.
:22:40. > :22:44.think the problem is as a country we've been denied a proper debate
:22:44. > :22:50.about this. The reason is this. Any criticism of the EI is seen to
:22:51. > :22:54.automatically place you on the frothing at the mouth, swivel-eyed
:22:54. > :22:59.xenophobic right, and that is wrong. I think arguments about democracy
:22:59. > :23:04.have been surrounded to the right. For example the Council of
:23:04. > :23:08.Ministers which wields huge power, only directly accountable to each
:23:08. > :23:13.nation who sends Ministers to the Council of Ministers. Even when you
:23:13. > :23:17.get to the treaties themselves, often they've enshrined free market
:23:17. > :23:20.dog match. It may well be the British people embrace that - I
:23:20. > :23:24.don't think they do. But it should be up to the British people. One
:23:24. > :23:28.example. The majority of the British public want to
:23:28. > :23:34.renationalise the railways. In fact even most Conservative voters want
:23:34. > :23:38.the railways brought back into public ownership. The EU directive
:23:38. > :23:43.91-440 which enforces competition on the railways, could prevent that
:23:43. > :23:50.from it's place. So let's have a proper debate about. It is not
:23:50. > :23:53.about if you criticise it you want to make it democratic, you don't
:23:53. > :23:58.want to enshrine liberal economics, especially in the eurozone, where
:23:58. > :24:02.you are seeing the catastrophe of austerity. A modern European nation
:24:02. > :24:05.like Greece being dismantled with the support of the people in the EU.
:24:05. > :24:09.The European Central Bank enforcing those policies. It is not
:24:09. > :24:13.accountable. It doesn't even publish its minutes. So let's have
:24:13. > :24:18.an argument about making it democratic and having a Europe that
:24:18. > :24:23.runs in the interest of working people, not the people at the top.
:24:23. > :24:28.Deborah Meaden? Very quickly let's make sure that debate is about
:24:28. > :24:32.what's right for this country in the EU and not who did what, in
:24:32. > :24:36.terms of if political parties. don't trust the political partys?
:24:36. > :24:40.To be honest, listening to a debate about you said this, you said that,
:24:40. > :24:44.many years ago. I see heads nodding and I'm not surprise. That's the
:24:44. > :24:49.kind of thing that sends glazed looks on to the voters. This is not
:24:49. > :24:54.the point. Plaus plau If I ran my business -- APPLAUSE $$TRANSMIT. If
:24:54. > :24:58.I ran my business, constantly trying to find out who did what in
:24:58. > :25:01.the first place, instead of saying, it doesn't matter. What matters now
:25:01. > :25:07.is what's the right decision for this country, whether or not we go
:25:07. > :25:17.into the EU. APPLAUSE OK. Sorry, we are in the EU. You know what I
:25:17. > :25:19.
:25:19. > :25:22.meant. A slight correction there. Alex Klinger please.
:25:22. > :25:29.Do you think Israel was justified combing Gaza after months of rocket
:25:29. > :25:34.attacks on Israeli civilians? College? Well, tinge line the
:25:34. > :25:38.British Government have taken -- Charles Kennedy? Well, I think the
:25:38. > :25:44.line the British Government has taken is that they have a right to
:25:44. > :25:48.defend themselves. Pointing out that if our society, our country,
:25:48. > :25:53.was suffering an external threat of this type, well, you can imagine
:25:53. > :25:56.the discussion on a programme like this. There would be an
:25:56. > :25:59.overwhelming public clamour to know why the Government of the day
:25:59. > :26:06.wasn't doing something about that. Having said, that it is quite clear
:26:06. > :26:11.that this is no means to a solution at all. And that the two sides
:26:11. > :26:14.therefore have got to under some kind of international auspices sit
:26:14. > :26:19.down and now move beyond the ceasefire, thank goodness that
:26:19. > :26:24.appears to be in position, appears to be holding, and try and make
:26:24. > :26:31.progress. The Palestinians are not justified in doing what they've
:26:31. > :26:35.been doing, but equally Israel's response is a council of despair.
:26:35. > :26:39.It won't resolve Israel's legitimate security programmes, but
:26:39. > :26:42.what the Palestinians and the extremists Hamas have been doing
:26:43. > :26:48.won't meet the legitimate demands of the Palestinians either. We have
:26:48. > :26:51.to get back to sane, rational talks based on 1967 boundaries and a two-
:26:51. > :26:57.state solution. That is going to be a very difficult thing to make
:26:57. > :27:03.progress on given what's happened, and nearly 150 mainly innocent
:27:03. > :27:07.civilians dead as a result of this dreadful episode that we all
:27:07. > :27:13.deplore. Owen Jones. I am disappointed by that response,
:27:13. > :27:19.Charles, in all honesty. APPLAUSE Let's be clear what happened.
:27:19. > :27:23.Firstly the whole idea that Gaza, that Hamas broke the ceasefire, is
:27:23. > :27:27.not true. In fact it was broken after in October Israel killed 15
:27:27. > :27:30.Palestinian fighters, they shot dead a mentally disabled
:27:30. > :27:35.Palestinian, killed a 13-year-old in an intrusion. When there was an
:27:35. > :27:39.attempt to get a ceasefire, negotiations were ongoing, that is
:27:39. > :27:42.when they assassinated Ahmed Jabari, ending the ceasefire talks. It is
:27:42. > :27:47.often said, and Barack Obama made this point, what country on earth
:27:47. > :27:53.would tolerate rockets being fired at them? I ask you this. What
:27:53. > :28:00.people on earth would tolerate a siege which stops basic supplies
:28:00. > :28:04.getting in... APPLAUSE An occupation. A 45--year-old brutal
:28:04. > :28:08.occupation, illegal settlements all over the West Bank, which are in
:28:08. > :28:14.total violation of international law, and what we've seen in the
:28:14. > :28:19.course of this onslaught are the deaths of 158 Palestinians. At
:28:19. > :28:23.least 30 children. I don't want to just throw statistics around, but
:28:23. > :28:28.one example of one of those children. Omar, 11 months old, a
:28:28. > :28:33.little boy, the son of a BBC journalist. He was killed in a so-
:28:33. > :28:38.called targeted strike. We all want a secure and lasting peace. When we
:28:38. > :28:42.have Israeli Ministers like the interior Minister calling for Gaza
:28:42. > :28:48.to be sent back to the Middle Ages. Another Minister calling for a
:28:48. > :28:53.Holocaust to be inflicted on Gaza. When we have the son of Ariel
:28:53. > :28:58.Sharon who wrote in the Jerusalem Post talking about how Nagasaki and
:28:58. > :29:03.hor or ma were possible solutions to be inflicted. When we have those
:29:03. > :29:09.people we went get a secure peace. But for Arabs and Jews alike to end
:29:09. > :29:14.the occupation, the siege of Gaza, dismantle the settlements and have
:29:14. > :29:24.a just settlement for the people and have a region for Arabs and
:29:24. > :29:25.
:29:25. > :29:29.Jews as a whole. You, Sir? I think part of the
:29:29. > :29:33.problem is that people like Owen should actually keep their noses
:29:33. > :29:39.out of something that they have no intimate knowledge of and that they
:29:39. > :29:44.jump on the bandwagon of this anti- American, ultra--left Israel
:29:44. > :29:48.bashing that is fashionable at the moment. You know, it's all very
:29:48. > :29:52.well for people on the panel and at home to sit in their suburban arm
:29:52. > :29:56.chairs with no actual knowledge, intimate knowledge of the conflict.
:29:56. > :30:01.Sorry, can I just come back to that. I'm disappointed you didn't
:30:01. > :30:07.engaidge with a single argument I put across -- engage. Let him
:30:07. > :30:13.finish his point. Terms are banded around as if they are factually
:30:13. > :30:19.correct. What did I get wrong? word pre-1967 territory is banded
:30:19. > :30:24.around as a given fact whereas pre- 1967, Jordan controlled the West
:30:24. > :30:32.Bank and Gaza, not the Palestinians. What is your view on the question
:30:32. > :30:35.of whether Israel yuz justified? was justified. I'm not a person who
:30:35. > :30:38.whole heartedly agreed with the policies of every Israeli
:30:38. > :30:43.Government but I think there is a lack of understanding by a lot of
:30:43. > :30:47.people in Britain and in the West generally when people have no
:30:47. > :30:51.knowledge of the history and the complexity of the conflict. You,
:30:51. > :30:57.Sir, up there? I think that gentleman is completely ignorant.
:30:57. > :31:00.He hasn't asked a single question Owen put to him.
:31:00. > :31:05.APPLAUSE Why is it that President
:31:05. > :31:10.Ahmadinejad of Iran, when he said something about blowing Israel into
:31:10. > :31:14.the Middle Ages that it received such wide scrutiny and America are
:31:14. > :31:19.threatening to possibly even go into Iran in the future, but when
:31:19. > :31:23.the Israeli minister seds it, it falls on deaf ears -- says it.
:31:23. > :31:27.Duncan Smith? Let's take a pace back for a second. This is a
:31:27. > :31:31.tragedy whichever way you cut it on other side. People killing each
:31:31. > :31:34.other, seeing civilians and children being killed. That's a
:31:34. > :31:40.complete and utter tragedy and there's never any excuse for that.
:31:40. > :31:46.The reality is, how to get out of it. When you say no excuse, do you
:31:46. > :31:52.mean the bombing was unjustified? The question is, did Israel get
:31:52. > :31:57.rocketed first, and in which case did they retailiate? My thought is
:31:57. > :32:01.that the West, America, us, Europe, we took a pace back. For the last
:32:02. > :32:05.couple of years, we've done nothing about the Middle East, let's be
:32:06. > :32:10.honest. We got fixateed on the Arab Spring and we completely forgot
:32:10. > :32:14.that at the heart of this still lies a very deep problem between
:32:14. > :32:19.Palestine and Israel. Hamas in the Gaza Strip refused to acknowledge
:32:19. > :32:24.Israel's right to exist. Israel refused to deal with them in Gaza
:32:24. > :32:29.until they do that and also until they take responsibility for the
:32:29. > :32:34.rockets et cetera. So each is taken deeper in entrenched positions. My
:32:34. > :32:37.point here is one thing that may well come out of this which is
:32:37. > :32:40.really important. Egypt we worried about has taken a front and centre
:32:40. > :32:46.place which is a very, very good thing. Leadership from the
:32:46. > :32:49.President of Egypt, he's got this thing rolling again, we've got
:32:49. > :32:52.actually intriguingly Israel and Hamas having to recognise each
:32:52. > :32:55.other by both on the one hand agreeing to take responsibility for
:32:55. > :33:00.the rocket attacks and on the other side agreing to open the borders.
:33:00. > :33:03.That may be the beginning of a start of a change and we should
:33:03. > :33:07.actually pledge ourselves in the West with America and the American
:33:07. > :33:12.President to get behind this and now real ie find a solution to the
:33:12. > :33:17.two state problem and get both sides talking to each other,
:33:17. > :33:22.agreeing to acknowledge that each has the right to exist and saying,
:33:22. > :33:29.now is the time to settle this, otherwise there could end up being
:33:29. > :33:38.further bloodshed. You, Sir? Is it up to Israel and
:33:38. > :33:43.Palestine to determine whether Palestine has statehood? In what
:33:43. > :33:46.sense? Doesn't it go through the UN? Yvette Cooper? I think this is
:33:46. > :33:49.a very important point because I agree with a lot of the points that
:33:49. > :33:52.Iain's made about the tragedy that has been unfolding and the
:33:52. > :33:56.importance now of having a ceasefire, but a ceasefire is not a
:33:56. > :33:59.peace process and we've got to have a peace process. There is no
:33:59. > :34:03.military solution that is going to work here, given the history of
:34:03. > :34:07.what has happened in Israel and Palestine, but also the importance
:34:07. > :34:11.of us getting towards the two-state solution and having a meaningful
:34:11. > :34:15.set of negotiations to do that. I think that the debates that have
:34:15. > :34:19.been put forward for the UN are really important. This is an
:34:19. > :34:22.opportunity for the UN to give greater recognition to the
:34:22. > :34:25.Palestinian Authority. I hope the UN will do that and the British
:34:25. > :34:29.Government will change its position and support the recognition of the
:34:29. > :34:35.Palestinian Authority because I think that is an opportunity to
:34:35. > :34:39.support a political and diplomatic process to reach peace, rather than
:34:39. > :34:43.the violence, the rocket ataxes and bombing that we have seen. Do you
:34:43. > :34:47.think the Foreign Secretary was wrong to lay the blame on Hamas for
:34:47. > :34:51.this? I think the danger - look, the immediate trigger of what
:34:51. > :34:55.happened obviously was about the rocket attacks on Israel and of
:34:55. > :34:59.course Israelis should be able to live in security and not have to
:34:59. > :35:02.endure the fear from rocket attacks. Than, I think the wider cause, we
:35:02. > :35:05.have to accept the wider cause of what's been happening in the last
:35:05. > :35:09.few weeks which has been the failure to have a proper peace
:35:09. > :35:14.process, the failure to have a long-term sustained negotiation
:35:14. > :35:18.towards a two-state solution, the failure to see progress for the
:35:18. > :35:24.inaction against the illegal setmentments that have been taking
:35:24. > :35:26.place, as well as the wider issues and long-term commitment --
:35:26. > :35:30.settlements. We haven't taken that seriously enough, it's our
:35:30. > :35:35.opportunity to do this now. The woman in the fourth row? Give
:35:35. > :35:38.than there are now over half a million Israelis living within the
:35:38. > :35:42.West Bank, I wonder whether anybody feels the two-state solution is
:35:42. > :35:48.viable? Is it time to have a te bait about a different type of
:35:48. > :35:52.solution? -- debate. Deborah Meaden? I want to go back to
:35:52. > :35:55.something the gentleman said over there. The truth of the matter is,
:35:55. > :35:59.I don't live there and I don't know. I can form opinions, reading
:35:59. > :36:04.through the news who started this, who caused all that, whose fault it
:36:04. > :36:09.was, you know, trust me, we'll never understand that, we are in a
:36:09. > :36:14.cycle that has to be broken and it's not going to be a military
:36:14. > :36:21.answer to this. But I think what the ceasefire's done is, it's
:36:21. > :36:27.hopefully created space so that you don't have to have these debates in
:36:27. > :36:30.this state of high tension, so that it says everybody stop for a minute.
:36:30. > :36:34.Actually, I suspect we were pretty guilty of causing all of this at
:36:34. > :36:40.some point, you know, so it's not about who caused all of this. Now,
:36:40. > :36:43.if people can get their mind wrapped around that, because I can
:36:43. > :36:48.promise you, that for every reason, that's why we bombed yeah but we
:36:48. > :36:52.did that because you did it, this can go on for the last 100 years
:36:52. > :36:56.and until we get our mind wrapped around the fact that it cannot be a
:36:56. > :36:59.military solution, there has to be an tend to the block aids, the
:36:59. > :37:03.whole rhetoric. People need to be able to pass in and out of the
:37:03. > :37:06.country, they need to be able to trade and until we get our minds
:37:06. > :37:10.round that, there will be no solution. I have to say, what other
:37:10. > :37:15.country on earth would be allowed to flout international law in the
:37:15. > :37:19.way Israel's done for decades... Answer her question? Well, the key
:37:19. > :37:26.point there... You heard what she said which was the number of people
:37:26. > :37:29.who've now settled in the West Bank make the two-state solution
:37:29. > :37:32.practically impossible? You could have a federal solution. That seems
:37:32. > :37:35.far fetched but they said that about South Africa back in the day.
:37:35. > :37:39.Otherwise you have to dismantle the settlements, enforce international
:37:39. > :37:43.law, but what has to happen, because the point is Britain
:37:43. > :37:47.supports, as other Western countries do, they've supported an
:37:47. > :37:51.armed Israel to the teeth, they're not acting as honest brokers, they
:37:51. > :37:54.have to use the pressure to force Israel to give in and give justice
:37:54. > :37:58.to the Palestinian people. A couple more points to the
:37:58. > :38:01.audience then we'll move on. The person in the back row? The only
:38:01. > :38:05.reason we are having this conversation is because rockets
:38:06. > :38:09.were fired. I mean I'm not saying I'm an expert but I've spent time
:38:09. > :38:12.volunteering in UN schools in the West Bank and what I've seen there
:38:12. > :38:16.is children growing up in environments where they don't get
:38:16. > :38:23.taught politics. They draw pictures of soldiers when they draw their
:38:23. > :38:26.homes and they see their brothers at night getting imprisoned. What
:38:26. > :38:32.are these children growing up understanding? What do we have for
:38:32. > :38:36.the future? Thank you. On that point, the clock's against us so
:38:36. > :38:40.I'll move on to a question from Chloe Heaver, please? Why should
:38:40. > :38:44.prisoners who've shown they cannot abide by the laws be given a say
:38:44. > :38:52.into how society is run. In other words, should prisoners be given
:38:52. > :38:56.the vote as is being proposed. Yvette Cooper are you favour in --
:38:56. > :39:00.in favour? I thought it was reasonable for prisoners to forego
:39:00. > :39:03.their vote because if you have committed a serious crime, you lose
:39:03. > :39:06.your liberty, have restrictions on your right to a family life and
:39:06. > :39:10.during that period, I think you should also forego your right to
:39:10. > :39:15.have a say in who the law-makers of the land are because you have
:39:15. > :39:18.broken the law in such a significant way. So I think it's
:39:19. > :39:24.proportionate, I think it's the European court who said that they
:39:24. > :39:27.think the ban on prisoner voting is indiscriminate, it's a blanket ban.
:39:27. > :39:30.I don't think it's indiscriminate, it's discriminating because you
:39:30. > :39:34.lose your right to vote in proportion to your sentence which
:39:34. > :39:38.is decided in the courts and which is in proportion to your crime.
:39:38. > :39:43.That's why I've always supported it. You've lost me there. You say that
:39:43. > :39:47.you lose your right to vote in proportion to the length of the
:39:47. > :39:51.sentence? -- sentence? Yes, in other words while you are in prison.
:39:51. > :39:54.It's not proportionate to the length of sentence. Yes, it's not
:39:54. > :39:59.indefinite, but when you are released, you get your right to
:39:59. > :40:06.vote back because you've served your time. So the European Court of
:40:06. > :40:10.Human Rights saying it's illegal for us to do this, you would flout
:40:10. > :40:13.their injunction? I think that the - I mean I disagree with the
:40:13. > :40:18.court's judgment. I think in fact by making this a decision, it's in
:40:18. > :40:22.the spirit of the convention, the European convention which I think
:40:22. > :40:25.is important. We did sign up to it and we have international
:40:25. > :40:27.obligations. Having a proportionate ban is in compliance with the
:40:27. > :40:31.European convention. I think what the Government is trying to do here
:40:31. > :40:36.is to find a way through where we now have a debate in Parliament, we
:40:36. > :40:40.try and set out detailed legislation because the court's
:40:40. > :40:42.rightly criticised us for not having had detailed legislation
:40:43. > :40:46.before the Parliament and discussed that in some detail. I hope we'll
:40:46. > :40:50.be able to do that and take that back to the court and convince the
:40:50. > :40:55.court that that is in compliance with the convention and in the
:40:55. > :40:57.spirit of... Just to collar fierbgs you are Shadow Home Secretary for
:40:57. > :41:01.Labour -- clarify, you are Shadow Home Secretary for Labour, are you
:41:02. > :41:07.saying no vote for anyone while in prison, is that Labour's position?
:41:07. > :41:09.The legislation sets out a series of options. I'm asking what your
:41:09. > :41:12.view is? Our long-standing view has always been that prisoners
:41:12. > :41:16.shouldn't have the right to vote whilst in prison and that continues
:41:16. > :41:20.to be our view. We'll have to look at what the Government recommends,
:41:20. > :41:23.what its legal advise is, we have asked the Government to show us
:41:23. > :41:25.what its legal advice is, but that's our position and we'll work
:41:25. > :41:32.with the Government on the Parliamentary process to try and
:41:32. > :41:42.get this legislation right. woman with the red pullover on?
:41:42. > :41:50.by the MPs in the British Parliament defying the rule set by
:41:50. > :41:55.the European court to... The court saying they must give prison terse
:41:55. > :41:59.vote? Are they not setting a bad example to society like about
:41:59. > :42:05.breaking the rule of law, especially because of the
:42:05. > :42:13.considering it's to do with prisoners? Setting a bad example by
:42:13. > :42:19.not doing what the European court wants? Dominic Grieve and Chris
:42:19. > :42:29.Grayling today talked about this. In reality we've always been a law-
:42:29. > :42:29.
:42:29. > :42:37.awiding nation and stand by our law-abiding -- law abiding nation
:42:37. > :42:40.and stand by the law-abiding things. What was announced out today is
:42:40. > :42:45.that what they've asked us to do is, we should have placed legislation,
:42:45. > :42:50.they say, in front of the House to decide what we will do about their
:42:50. > :42:55.judgment. So today, he said that we will essential Le place legislation
:42:55. > :43:01.in front of the -- essentially place legislation in front of the
:43:01. > :43:05.House, no votes for prisoners under six months intered and prisoners
:43:05. > :43:08.between six and four years. So we are saying to Parliament,
:43:08. > :43:12.Parliament is sovereign and it will decide. The British people elected
:43:12. > :43:15.Parliament to make decisions about their laws, not the Convention on
:43:15. > :43:19.Human Rights, that is where it should stand. At some point,
:43:19. > :43:22.Parliament will get that option, when they vote on it, that position,
:43:22. > :43:25.the Government's position will be that Parliament's sovereign
:43:25. > :43:29.decision stands and my personal view has been that I've never been
:43:29. > :43:39.in favour of seeing prisoners goat the vote. I think if you commit
:43:39. > :43:42.
:43:42. > :43:48.crimes you lose the right to decide If Parliament votes for the option
:43:48. > :43:52.to say no-one in prison should have the vote you would stick with that?
:43:52. > :43:56.It is not defying. What they want you to do is legislate on the basis
:43:56. > :43:58.of what their decision was. Parliament however is sovereign and
:43:58. > :44:03.Parliament at the end of the day makes final decisions about the law
:44:03. > :44:08.of this land. That is the reality, so we will make a decision about
:44:08. > :44:11.that. I also believe Parliament, a point we forget about, Parliament
:44:11. > :44:15.is sovereign. Everybody out here elected us to make the decisions.
:44:15. > :44:19.We should make the decision in Parliament and that decision should
:44:19. > :44:24.stand. OK. Do you not think maybe there is an argument that if you
:44:24. > :44:29.have been in prison, particularly for a longer time, that as part of
:44:29. > :44:36.your rehabilitation shoe be encouraged to be involved in
:44:36. > :44:39.society? APPLAUSE And if you are released within six months if
:44:39. > :44:43.there's a general election or something like that, that you are
:44:43. > :44:48.allowed to partake in the election. What do you think? I think a
:44:48. > :44:53.proportion of people who end up in prison end up in prison or commit a
:44:53. > :45:00.crime because society isn't working for them. If you take away their
:45:00. > :45:04.right to vote, in terms of people on remand or there for less than
:45:04. > :45:10.six months, they have no impact on society in the future. Charles
:45:10. > :45:16.Kennedy, if it comes to the vote, people with six months only, people
:45:16. > :45:20.four years, or absolutely no anyone in prison can't have a vote. How
:45:20. > :45:26.would you vote? I will make my mind up finally when the committee
:45:26. > :45:30.that's now going to look at this, it is a terrible mouthful, but it's
:45:30. > :45:34.a prelegislative committee, in other words they have hearings,
:45:34. > :45:39.everybody under the sun with contribute their thoughts, from
:45:39. > :45:43.absolutely no votes for anybody to some partial exemptions from such a
:45:43. > :45:47.ban et cetera. It makes sense, and we've just agreed to do that today
:45:47. > :45:52.in the House of Commons. Let's see what comes back. I think myself...
:45:52. > :45:58.You mean you are just going to listen to what people say? What a
:45:58. > :46:03.terrible thing for an imagine to do, to listen to collective wisdom and
:46:03. > :46:07.come to a decision. Herely make myself unpopular in front of
:46:07. > :46:11.millions of people. I do not support a blanket ban on people in
:46:11. > :46:17.prison not being allowed to vote, which is the basis of this European
:46:17. > :46:23.ruling. I think that there can be a degree of sensible divergence from
:46:23. > :46:27.that, which I think at the end of the day in years to come will
:46:27. > :46:31.square this circle between the House of Commons and Strasbourg.
:46:31. > :46:36.There's positive reasons are y those on shorter sentences
:46:36. > :46:39.shouldn't be denied the right to vote as part of their
:46:39. > :46:44.rehabilitation process. Deborah Meaden? I am clear on this, I do
:46:44. > :46:47.think they should lose the right to vote. I don't think it stops them
:46:47. > :46:51.from engaging in the political process. You can discuss it in
:46:51. > :46:55.prison and hope that when you enter society again you can take part
:46:55. > :46:58.that. There is a but the. That is half of the argument. The other
:46:58. > :47:04.half says I think it is a very dangerous route to pick and choose
:47:04. > :47:11.what we do and don't agree with under the Human Rights Convention.
:47:11. > :47:14.Not only, we actually, whether we feel it or not, live in a pretty
:47:14. > :47:22.protected environment, but what signal does that send out to some
:47:22. > :47:26.of those countries out there who really need protection under that,
:47:26. > :47:31.under human rights protection? We consider ourselves, we think the
:47:31. > :47:35.world looks to us, not completely but we do consider o'er influential
:47:35. > :47:39.in the world and I think we are. I think picking and choosing in terms
:47:40. > :47:44.of human rights is wrong. That worries me. In those two arguments,
:47:44. > :47:54.when I weigh those up, I think we should stick to it. I know you're
:47:54. > :47:56.
:47:56. > :48:02.going to talk about the legality of it. He's not. The man there.
:48:02. > :48:07.prisons are going to be given a vote, isn't there a danger that
:48:07. > :48:13.politicians should start appealing this demographic. Is there not a
:48:13. > :48:20.chance that policys could be catered towards some sort of vote?
:48:20. > :48:24.Would you get the prisoners' vote? Owen Jones. I would be surprised if
:48:24. > :48:29.MPs start rocking up to Pentonville and asking people how they are
:48:29. > :48:33.going to vote. A really important point about the European Court of
:48:33. > :48:37.Human Rights. It is separate from the EU. Lots of countries signed up
:48:37. > :48:41.to it with pretty poor human rights records, such as Russia for example.
:48:41. > :48:47.How can we put pressure on those countries to abide by the European
:48:47. > :48:50.Court and improve their human rights record if we start picking
:48:50. > :48:54.and choosing? It is not a blanket ban. People are worried about
:48:54. > :48:59.murderers and rapists getting the right to vote. I'm not somebody who
:48:59. > :49:03.lives in some sort of out of touch ivory tower. I've been a victim of
:49:03. > :49:08.crime many times. I've been violently mugged and Burrelled.
:49:08. > :49:11.to the point. The really important point is people on short-term
:49:11. > :49:15.sentences. We are trying to rehabilitate them, integrate them
:49:15. > :49:19.back into society, what better way of doing that than giving them the
:49:19. > :49:24.right to vote and making them citizens again connected with
:49:24. > :49:32.society. APPLAUSE I'm sorry to hurry you all along, but we've got
:49:32. > :49:35.time for one more question. Debbie Wild. Under the benefit cap,
:49:35. > :49:45.should large unemployed families priced out of London move to
:49:45. > :49:47.
:49:47. > :49:52.cheaper areas, or should councils subsidise them? Deborah Meaden.
:49:52. > :49:56.my goodness. I was hoping... can pass and let Iain Duncan Smith
:49:57. > :50:05.answer it if you like and come back. Shall I do that and then I will
:50:05. > :50:09.respond to it. Iain Duncan Smith? The cap is about putting the
:50:09. > :50:12.benefit cap rather than the housing cap, a limit to the amount of money
:50:12. > :50:17.that somebody on benefits can receive. The limit is �35,000 a
:50:17. > :50:22.year gross, �26,000 net, which is essentially average earnings. That
:50:22. > :50:25.is a cap that says they can't earn more than that. There are some
:50:25. > :50:32.exemptions, people on Disability Living Allowance, war widows,
:50:32. > :50:38.people on working tax credits. Those who are not work and not in
:50:38. > :50:43.those compaempingss. There's already -- exemptions. I don't
:50:43. > :50:46.think there is any need for people to be transferred outside. There is
:50:46. > :50:51.housing inside London and the South East that Acomb dates them. The
:50:51. > :50:56.reality is we are in touch -- Acomb dates them. The reality is that we
:50:56. > :51:01.are in touch with the councils, and have money to make sure they are
:51:01. > :51:05.tidied over if they have kids in school. This cap is about saying
:51:05. > :51:08.look, when people work out and they get to average earnings, it is
:51:09. > :51:11.Haditha we end up paying benefits to people at way higher because
:51:11. > :51:16.they live in very expensive accommodation in difficulty parts
:51:16. > :51:21.of London and the South East. So the cap is fairness to taxpayers as
:51:21. > :51:25.well as being fairness to benefit payers. APPLAUSE Yvette Cooper, do
:51:25. > :51:30.you agree with that? I think that there is an issue about making sure
:51:30. > :51:34.you are not spending a huge amount of money on the large houses in the
:51:34. > :51:38.highest-cost areas, where large families do need larger housing. I
:51:38. > :51:43.think that it is right to have restrictions on the level of
:51:43. > :51:48.benefits that are paid out and on the pay. Made by the. The but I
:51:48. > :51:51.think the problem with the way the is doing this is that the full
:51:51. > :51:55.consequence, not just of the measures that Ian is talking about,
:51:55. > :52:00.but a series of other changes they are making, are pushing up
:52:00. > :52:05.homelessness. We've seen a 50% increase in the number of families
:52:05. > :52:09.with children, living in bed and breakfast accommodation. They can't
:52:09. > :52:15.and sit and have a meal at a table. They are eating food on their laps,
:52:15. > :52:18.with no privacy. It is really bad for the kids growing up. Completely
:52:18. > :52:23.Government policy is it that Iain Duncan Smith has introduced that is
:52:23. > :52:27.causing that? I think a mix of them. Housing benefit changes but also
:52:27. > :52:31.the benefit cap. The combination of the way it is introduced.
:52:31. > :52:36.doesn't start until April. combination of the mix of changes
:52:36. > :52:39.the Government is introducing, it is crazy if we end one welfare
:52:39. > :52:43.reforms that end up costing the taxpayer more. That's what shoe
:52:43. > :52:47.change. We must keep moving here. This is a good debate. I think the
:52:47. > :52:51.introduction of the benefits was a good thing in the first place, but
:52:51. > :52:54.hate become absurd to think that someone who is not working and
:52:54. > :52:59.getting benefits should earn more than someone who is. I think the
:52:59. > :53:04.cap is reasonable, it is appropriate. APPLAUSE Owen Jones?
:53:04. > :53:09.Firstly, the reason that this whole debate has become so toxic is a
:53:09. > :53:16.cynical deem onisation of campaign of people on benefits by this
:53:16. > :53:25.Government. APPLAUSE What they are do, and you can nod your head as
:53:25. > :53:29.much as you want. I was shaking my head. People have just final anger.
:53:29. > :53:34.The working poor, the working poor against the unemployed over
:53:35. > :53:42.benefits. Not-disabled people against disabled people. �26,000 a
:53:42. > :53:49.year is hardly impoverishing somebody. Average earnings Owen...
:53:49. > :53:53.Housing benefit is not going into their pockets. Answer Iain Duncan
:53:53. > :53:58.Smith's point. �6,000 a year. Housing benefit is not going into
:53:58. > :54:01.the pockets of tenants. It is lining the pockets of wealthy
:54:01. > :54:07.landlords charging extortionate rents because successive
:54:07. > :54:10.Governments, new Labour included, got rid of council housing. It is
:54:11. > :54:20.not just about disabled people and the cap. If there is anything I
:54:20. > :54:26.want tow remember. Disabled people are compefrpted from the cap.
:54:26. > :54:32.exempted from the cap. Don't go off on to some other agenda. Tenancy
:54:32. > :54:38.question about unemployed families. -- Answer the question about
:54:38. > :54:43.unemployed families. The housing benefit is lining the pockets of
:54:43. > :54:49.landlords. Charles Kennedy? Well, I don't doubt Owen's sincerity on
:54:49. > :54:54.this matter, but I hope he would accept I'm not somebody who can
:54:54. > :54:59.readily be labelled as part of a terrible conspiracy to single owl
:54:59. > :55:03.groups of society and blame them for all their ills. I think Yvette
:55:03. > :55:13.has eLeeds United to this, the housing benefit system has
:55:13. > :55:16.burgeoned to such an extent that even without the need for an
:55:16. > :55:23.austerity package any Government here today of what of political
:55:23. > :55:27.persuasion would have to address it. Indeed Labour were doing so.
:55:27. > :55:33.don't agree with Sarah Teather, your former Minister, who said the
:55:33. > :55:37.welfare cap was immoral? I think when politicians start using words
:55:37. > :55:42.like immoral, I would probably leave that for Anglican Bishops.
:55:42. > :55:46.What surprises me about her comments, I don't know if she's
:55:46. > :55:53.clarified this. She is entitled to her view. I don't think what Iain
:55:53. > :55:58.Duncan Smith is doing is immoral. I don't think what he did in terms of
:55:58. > :56:04.his Centre for Social Justice was immoral... Don't shout out. Madam,
:56:04. > :56:08.please don't shout out from the back. Please don't shout out. Let
:56:08. > :56:15.him speak. I'm not complaining at all, madam. This is the home of
:56:15. > :56:21.free speech. Can I hardly disagree with that can I? APPLAUSE We can't
:56:21. > :56:29.hear what she was saying anyway. Deborah Meaden? I want to pick up
:56:29. > :56:35.about a point, you talked about the deem onisation of people on benefit
:56:35. > :56:40.-- demonisation. We are, welfare benefit happen to be a very sad,
:56:40. > :56:47.awful truth of the moment. Truth is that this country, the same as any
:56:47. > :56:53.company with any budget, has got so much money to spend. I think it is
:56:53. > :56:57.very wise to make sure that we allocate, sorry, I think it is very
:56:57. > :57:03.wise to make sure that we have a cap on benefits, but I also think
:57:03. > :57:07.it is very wise to make sure that those people who are at the very
:57:07. > :57:11.neediest get that money, the right people get that money. And that's
:57:11. > :57:15.what we need. APPLAUSE But at the moment what you're getting is
:57:15. > :57:19.you've got working families who are losing thousands of pounds in their
:57:19. > :57:25.tax credits. That's working families, at the same time as
:57:25. > :57:29.millionaires are getting a �40,000 tax cut. That is what's unfair.
:57:29. > :57:33.Most new claimants of housing benefit are in work. They don't
:57:33. > :57:37.have the money to pay extortionate rents. If we stimulate the economy
:57:37. > :57:41.and create jobs, but it's a point that has to be made about the
:57:42. > :57:46.treatment of disabled people in this country. There are two names I
:57:46. > :57:52.want to give Iain Duncan Smith. Brian McCard dhal, paralysed down
:57:52. > :57:58.one side, blind in one eye and couldn't speak. He died one day
:57:58. > :58:02.after being fit for work by Atos. Let me tell you something. I didn't
:58:02. > :58:07.hear you screaming about 2.5 million people, nobody saw them for
:58:07. > :58:11.over ten years, not working, with no hope and no aspiration. We are
:58:11. > :58:16.changing their lives. I'm proud of that. Getting them off benefit is
:58:16. > :58:21.what we have done. I'm afraid our time is up. I know, can I see you
:58:21. > :58:25.want to speak, but we've got to speak. Our hour is up. That is the
:58:25. > :58:30.story of Question Time. We always have to stop just when things are
:58:30. > :58:37.getting going. Thank you to Parliament for being our host, this
:58:37. > :58:43.is part of Parliament Week that we are here in Westminster Hall. Next
:58:43. > :58:49.week Swansea. Our panel is going to include the singer Charlotte Church
:58:49. > :58:54.and the former executive editor of the News of the World, Neil Wallace.
:58:54. > :59:02.The following week we are be in Liverpool. Put questions to the