:00:18. > :00:23.welcome to Question Time. And good evening to you watching at home.
:00:23. > :00:26.Good evening to our audience, and to our panel, Conservative Northern
:00:26. > :00:32.Ireland Secretary, Theresa Villiers, her Labour shadow, Vernon
:00:32. > :00:37.Coaker, the Democratic Unionist party MP at Westminster, Ian paid is
:00:37. > :00:40.in, education Minister in Northern Ireland, John O'Dowd of Sinn Fein.
:00:40. > :00:50.Gay rights campaigner, Peter Tatchell, and Maajid Nawaz, former
:00:50. > :01:03.
:01:03. > :01:08.Islamist radical now runs an How is the UK going to protect
:01:09. > :01:17.itself from the style of terror attack scene in Woolwich yesterday?
:01:17. > :01:22.Maajid Nawaz. The sad fact is that we are unable to predict such terror
:01:22. > :01:25.attacks. We are unable to stop somebody who has already adopted an
:01:25. > :01:30.ideology of hate from going into their kitchen, as Al-Qaeda has
:01:30. > :01:32.encouraged them to do for many years now, since their operational command
:01:32. > :01:37.has been weakened due to the constant onslaught against their
:01:37. > :01:40.leadership. We are unable to stop somebody going into their kitchen,
:01:40. > :01:46.pulling out a butcher knife, walking onto the street and attacking random
:01:46. > :01:48.passers-by. That is the sad state of affairs. In dealing with that
:01:48. > :01:53.situation, we cannot reasonably expect the security services in this
:01:53. > :01:57.country, the police, to be able to detect every individual who is
:01:57. > :02:01.hell-bent on engaging in this sort of action. So what do we do? There
:02:01. > :02:06.is another option ahead of us. The answer lies in a question which I
:02:06. > :02:12.would pose to everyone. Do we ever wonder why there are not thousands
:02:13. > :02:16.of young people joining a line to apply for membership to, or to join
:02:16. > :02:21.organisations that subscribe to Soviet coming as today? The reason
:02:21. > :02:26.why they do not, despite the fact that the same frameworks could be
:02:26. > :02:30.used to interpret foreign-policy grievances today, by viewing them
:02:30. > :02:33.through the Soviet Communist Stalinist lens, the reason there are
:02:33. > :02:36.not thousands of young people queueing up to join soggy at coming
:02:36. > :02:43.as is because it is no longer fashionable, trendy, no longer a
:02:43. > :02:47.brand. - macro Soviet communism. The way forward is to make the ideology
:02:47. > :02:54.of Islamism, not the same as Islam, to make it as unfashionable as
:02:54. > :03:04.commie and as has become. Did you join because you were -- because it
:03:04. > :03:05.
:03:05. > :03:10.was fashionable? How many years ago? I am 35 now, despite my silver
:03:10. > :03:13.fox look. At 16, there were two things that I was facing. One was
:03:13. > :03:16.violent racism on the streets of Essex 's, and I include
:03:16. > :03:21.institutional racism from Essex police force. Much has changed since
:03:21. > :03:24.then but this was the days before the Stephen Lawrence enquiry and the
:03:24. > :03:29.MacPherson enquiry concluded there was institutional racism in English
:03:29. > :03:33.police forces. The second thing was the Bosnian jump -- genocide. Those
:03:33. > :03:38.two things came to a head for our generation and it meant that the
:03:38. > :03:44.trend of our era in the 90s in the UK, if you wanted a form of
:03:44. > :03:46.resistance ideology, you would join the Islamist ideology. Why would
:03:46. > :03:53.Afghanistan not provide the same basis that you were attracted by
:03:53. > :03:57.when you were 16? At the moment, it is. I am trying to say that the way
:03:57. > :04:00.forward, because it is so difficult to predict these attacks when they
:04:00. > :04:05.are as amateurish as this, when someone gets a meat cleaver and
:04:05. > :04:09.attacks somebody on the street, it is so difficult to stop or predict.
:04:09. > :04:12.The way forward is to stop the recruitment flow. How you do that is
:04:12. > :04:19.to make the ideology as unfashionable as communism has
:04:19. > :04:22.become. That requires civil society activism on the grassroots,
:04:22. > :04:25.challenging the validity and credibility of that ideology,
:04:25. > :04:30.promoting alternative symbols and leaders, promoting alternative
:04:31. > :04:34.narratives. The most interesting thing you said was the reason is
:04:34. > :04:38.that you were attracted, which seemed to be paralleled. And the
:04:38. > :04:42.summary seems to be that there is not very much that you can do about
:04:42. > :04:49.individual acts like this. Do you agree with that? Or is there
:04:49. > :04:53.something government can do? There is action that government can take
:04:53. > :04:57.and is taking to combat terrorism in all its forms. It is sad that we are
:04:57. > :05:01.discussing this issue in a place that has suffered so much at the
:05:01. > :05:05.hands of terrorists and has worked so hard to move on from that, but
:05:05. > :05:11.where still police officers and prison officers and members of the
:05:11. > :05:13.military face a daily risk from domestic terrorism. But we have a
:05:13. > :05:19.multistranded approach to combating the evil people responsible for
:05:19. > :05:23.terrorism. We need to give all the support we possibly can to police
:05:23. > :05:25.and security services in stopping these attacks in their tracks. We
:05:25. > :05:28.need to be utterly vigilant in bringing to justice those
:05:29. > :05:33.responsible, and we also need to combat the poisonous narrative of
:05:33. > :05:37.hate that these terrorists feed off. To demonstrate that our arguments
:05:37. > :05:40.are the strong ones, that we are a vibrant, forward-looking, inclusive
:05:40. > :05:46.democracy and we will not be deterred by these kind of attacks.
:05:46. > :05:50.It only serves to unite us in our condemnation of the horrific scenes
:05:50. > :05:54.we saw on the streets of Woolwich. Would you like to see the powers
:05:54. > :05:59.that allegedly the Liberal Democrats prevented you imposing to snoop on
:05:59. > :06:06.Facebook restored as a result of this? There is ongoing debate about
:06:06. > :06:14.this draft red -- legislation. Presumably it will be speeded up
:06:14. > :06:18.because of this. We will continue to talk to our coalition partners. It
:06:18. > :06:23.is difficult to get the balance but -- between protecting our security
:06:23. > :06:27.and protecting our Civil Liberties. So you are not arguing for what I
:06:27. > :06:36.thought the Tory party of the coalition was arguing for, the
:06:36. > :06:40.ability to tap into Facebook? You are saying you do not want that?
:06:40. > :06:46.am very supportive of that. It would help in commenting terrorism, but we
:06:46. > :06:53.have to the issue right. John O'Dowd, our British soldiers
:06:53. > :06:57.legitimate targets? First, mice and that these to the family of the
:06:57. > :07:02.young man who lost his life yesterday in a terrible incident. --
:07:02. > :07:06.my sympathies to the family. I certainly do not want to see death
:07:06. > :07:11.on the streets of London any more than on the streets of Afghanistan
:07:11. > :07:16.or Iraq. There is no justification for what happened in my opinion. But
:07:16. > :07:21.I am also conscious that there are four suspects currently in custody.
:07:21. > :07:25.If they are charged, they will have two face a jury trial and we should
:07:25. > :07:29.be very careful about what we say about whether these people, or
:07:29. > :07:34.others, may have been connected to an organisation, whether this was
:07:34. > :07:39.terrorist related, or whatever the motivations were. From the Irish
:07:39. > :07:43.experience we have to learn to allow the police to do their job, away
:07:43. > :07:48.from media agendas, political agendas, or any other agenda. Allow
:07:48. > :07:51.the police to do their job and justice to prevail in these
:07:51. > :08:00.circumstances. That is how you combat many of the issues which you
:08:00. > :08:04.referred to. Where people believe there is a system in place which
:08:05. > :08:07.will lay and deal with their fears, ensure that they are treated as
:08:07. > :08:12.equal citizens going forward, that will attract people from joining
:08:12. > :08:16.these organisations. This term of radicalisation, I am always
:08:16. > :08:24.conscious that we refer to members of the Muslim community as
:08:24. > :08:28.radicalised. We never hear of Christians being radicalised.
:08:28. > :08:32.sitting in Belfast, where over 600 British soldiers were killed in
:08:32. > :08:37.Northern Ireland, some on the mainland and some here. Do you
:08:37. > :08:40.think, as an act of the people who oppose what the British government
:08:40. > :08:45.is doing in Afghanistan, the killing of a British soldier on the streets
:08:45. > :08:49.of Woolwich is justified, in the way that Sinn Fein justify the killing
:08:49. > :08:51.of people here in Northern Ireland? Sinn Fein did not justify the
:08:51. > :08:56.killing of people here. There was a conflict which raged and Sinn Fein
:08:56. > :09:01.was involved in bringing to an end. We brought a conflict to an end
:09:01. > :09:05.because we entered a peace process. The answer is that I do not believe
:09:05. > :09:12.it was justified. I do not believe the death of that young man was
:09:12. > :09:14.justified. Lee Rigby was a father with a two-year-old son and he was
:09:14. > :09:20.brutally and hellishly murdered in front of the pool on the streets of
:09:20. > :09:24.Woolwich. It must be condemned, and I am glad there has been no
:09:24. > :09:29.equivocation in the condemnation of his brutal and evil murderer. I am
:09:29. > :09:34.glad we are discussing this in Belfast to Mike, because we see the
:09:34. > :09:39.parallel. 25 years ago, a short way from here, we would have seen the
:09:39. > :09:43.murder of two soldiers, dragged from their car by Republicans and
:09:43. > :09:50.butchered in front of people. I am glad those days are over here, and
:09:50. > :09:53.there are things we have to learn. Between 2005 and 2013, the number of
:09:53. > :09:57.terrorist murders in Northern Ireland stands at six people. The
:09:57. > :10:02.number of terrorist murders on the mainland presently stands, during
:10:02. > :10:06.the same period of time, at 57 people, and 700 murdered. Ten years
:10:06. > :10:11.ago I would not have believed I could have said that statistic, but
:10:11. > :10:15.it is turned on its head. That is a wake-up call that we have moved on
:10:15. > :10:19.in Northern Ireland, and we have two ensure we learn from our experience
:10:19. > :10:24.and pass it to the rest of the citizens of the UK. Three things we
:10:24. > :10:27.should do. Respect for the rule of law. We have to have leadership to
:10:27. > :10:31.say it at every given opportunity. We have to get people within the
:10:31. > :10:35.community that have been radicalised to say it and to show that they have
:10:35. > :10:45.turned from it. And we have to give up people within these communities
:10:45. > :10:46.
:10:46. > :10:49.who have been radicalised and bring them to justice. You talk about
:10:49. > :10:53.making the argument, very good arguments. If I am a young
:10:53. > :10:58.Palestinian or Saudi, I hear these ideas. I am walking down my street
:10:58. > :11:01.and it hit her plastic lid and I think, who is paying for those
:11:01. > :11:07.bullets, who is paying for that soldier? Saudi Arabia is backed by
:11:07. > :11:10.the West. It is contradictory if I am in the Middle East looking for
:11:10. > :11:17.democracy and my masters are dictated by those in the West. Do
:11:17. > :11:20.you not find your argument contradictory? I do not think it is
:11:20. > :11:23.contradictory to say that all of us condemned terrorism wherever it
:11:23. > :11:26.occurs and there can be no justification for it on the streets
:11:26. > :11:31.of our country. That is what the Muslim Council written very quickly
:11:31. > :11:35.came out and condemned it. In this country, in our democracy, if you
:11:35. > :11:41.want to change things, there is a way of doing it. You can
:11:41. > :11:45.legitimately protest and try to bring about change. I do not think
:11:45. > :11:49.there is anyone at all in our country who would see what happened
:11:49. > :11:53.on the streets of London yesterday, or has been seen sometimes
:11:53. > :11:56.throughout Northern Ireland, and turn around and say in any way
:11:56. > :12:01.anything that happens anywhere can possibly justify that. We have to
:12:01. > :12:04.stand up and say it is wrong and we will condemn it. That is the first
:12:04. > :12:14.thing you do with any of these outrages and that is all people
:12:14. > :12:18.throughout Northern Ireland and the UK will thank you as well. You said
:12:18. > :12:24.the Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack. Why did they
:12:24. > :12:28.have to do that? That one person who did that act, it was horrific and I
:12:28. > :12:33.think we can all agree on that, that one person does not represent all
:12:33. > :12:36.Muslims. In the same way, when the tragedy happened in Norway a few
:12:36. > :12:45.years ago, all white people did not have to apologise for what that
:12:45. > :12:51.white person had done. So the Muslim Council should have stayed silent?
:12:51. > :12:56.am saying it is not as simple as people are making it out to be.
:12:56. > :13:03.think we have a big problem with Islamism. Not Islam the religion,
:13:03. > :13:09.but political Islam. People who have turned their hardline interpretation
:13:09. > :13:12.of Islam into a political movement which seeks to have state power and
:13:12. > :13:18.has suppressed democracy and human rights around the world. Globally,
:13:18. > :13:20.the main victims of Islamism are Muslim people. In Pakistan, Iraq,
:13:20. > :13:27.Afghanistan and elsewhere, the number one victim of Islamism is
:13:27. > :13:32.fellow Muslims. In terms of the government was my response, I do not
:13:32. > :13:35.think the government response is anywhere near adequate. I think the
:13:35. > :13:39.government pays lip service but in reality it does very little to
:13:40. > :13:45.counter the ideas. I think in a democracy, countering the ideas is
:13:45. > :13:47.the way we will defeat Islamism. Right now we have in our
:13:47. > :13:54.universities many different Islamist style organisations who openly
:13:54. > :13:57.recruit, who hold public meetings on university campuses, where they
:13:57. > :14:06.advise and encourage anti-Semitism, the killing of women who have sex
:14:06. > :14:09.outside of marriage, attacks on gay people. There are people who are
:14:09. > :14:12.hosted by universities. Some universities host gender segregation
:14:12. > :14:17.where women are forced to sit separately from men at these
:14:17. > :14:23.meetings. You think the chancellors at the University should just ban
:14:23. > :14:28.them? They should not tolerate gender segregation and those who
:14:28. > :14:32.advocate violence should be prohibitive. But those who do not
:14:32. > :14:36.advocate violence, I think they need to be challenged. The ideas need to
:14:36. > :14:39.be challenged. The government needs to fund and empower people within
:14:39. > :14:44.the Muslim community who are standing up against these extremists
:14:44. > :14:50.but who are not getting sufficient support. I did a proposal recently
:14:50. > :14:53.to counter extremism, and the way in which anti-Semitism, homophobia and
:14:53. > :14:58.misogyny are the gateway to extremism. That is how it begins.
:14:58. > :15:02.These people do not do this overnight. They start by imbibing
:15:03. > :15:05.offensive hostile views towards Jewish people, gay people, women,
:15:05. > :15:10.and towards fellow Muslims who do not share their hardline
:15:10. > :15:13.interpretation. And if we challenge that kind of ideology at the
:15:14. > :15:21.grassroots, we will stop them progressing to the next stage, which
:15:21. > :15:27.is to condone the horrific events we have seen many parts of the world.
:15:27. > :15:31.Maajid, is that an interpretation you accept? Word for word. 100%. We
:15:31. > :15:36.were involved in the same proposal. But the role of universities being
:15:36. > :15:41.wimpish about clamping down on these things, is that true? I don't think
:15:41. > :15:46.it about being wimpish. There's a level of ignorance out there.
:15:46. > :15:50.Really? No, about what the difference is between
:15:50. > :15:57.multiculturalism and respecting different cultures and Islamism and
:15:57. > :16:00.the role of Islam. Just to pick up on a point made about the West and
:16:00. > :16:04.the United Kingdom supporting other nations. I don't think this is the
:16:04. > :16:10.time for anybody to be trying to score any political points, because
:16:10. > :16:15.this was an absolutely horrific act that happened and was perpetrated by
:16:15. > :16:20.two deranged loners. Can I just say, the cub scout leader who stood up to
:16:20. > :16:23.this man is an inspiration. The best way that we should not doubt our own
:16:23. > :16:30.democracy and rule of law, because then we are playing into the hands
:16:30. > :16:33.of the people that seek to do us harm.
:16:33. > :16:37.APPLAUSE I think at times such as this you
:16:37. > :16:44.should always be in a position to question democracy and the rule of
:16:44. > :16:48.law. You should never deny you have that regard. Regardless of whatever
:16:48. > :16:54.action anybody else takes, you should challenge yourself and
:16:54. > :16:59.challenge that your democracy and rule of law is fit for purpose. With
:16:59. > :17:04.regards to tackling extremism, of whatever grade, I would be concerned
:17:04. > :17:08.if we talked about banning meetings, but you should challenge those
:17:08. > :17:15.behind those meetings and force them to explain their ideology against
:17:15. > :17:20.yours. I wasn't saying meetings should be banned but I don't think
:17:20. > :17:28.on University campuses they should be able to have meetings... It is
:17:28. > :17:35.about applying that existing policy. One of the guys speaking to the
:17:35. > :17:42.camera mention mentioned one of his motivations been the troops in
:17:42. > :17:48.Afghanistan, and you mention mentioned radicalise radicalisation
:17:48. > :17:52.by Bosnian. It is inevitable if the West continues to pursue an
:17:53. > :17:57.aggressive policy? APPLAUSE
:17:57. > :18:03.I believe very strongly that there is nothing in UK foreign policy that
:18:03. > :18:07.could possibly justify or excuse this horrific act. He wasn't is
:18:08. > :18:12.saying that. He was saying radicalisation will happen if you
:18:12. > :18:16.have Government policies that a group of people strongly oppose, and
:18:16. > :18:22.is that inevitable? No, I'm much more optimistic than some of the
:18:22. > :18:28.audience are on this. I think it is possible to persuade people that
:18:28. > :18:32.Islam Islamism of an extreme form is destructive and should be abandoned.
:18:32. > :18:39.There are a range of UK Government programmes that we are undertaking.
:18:39. > :18:44.The crucial thing is to engage with the Muslim community in our efforts
:18:45. > :18:51.to reradicalise the small number of individuals who espouse these brutal
:18:51. > :18:55.and vile things. Fundamentally disagree with this chap's point. I
:18:55. > :19:03.will tell you why, because if you are right we have the rule of
:19:03. > :19:07.jungle, not the rule of law. We have to get back to the rule of law. This
:19:07. > :19:12.country has free speech. We demonstrated in response to that
:19:12. > :19:17.crime, the police officers. In the United States those guys would have
:19:17. > :19:20.been not only shot but shot dead. I look forward to them being brought
:19:20. > :19:24.to the courts, held responsible for their crime and punished for their
:19:24. > :19:31.crime. That will be the biggest lesson for the perpetrators of the
:19:31. > :19:35.crime. In relation to this murder in Woolwich yesterday, there are a lot
:19:35. > :19:39.of eloquent expressions are coming across here tonight. Indeed Boris
:19:39. > :19:43.Johnson has said his rousing rhetoric on the matter, quite well
:19:43. > :19:48.in fairness, however, the security forces were allegedly aware of these
:19:48. > :19:51.perpetrators. They were on the radar, to use the quote. Surely the
:19:51. > :20:00.Government and the police were caught on the hop, and unfortunately
:20:00. > :20:03.they are going to be caught on the hop again. Vernon Coaker? Clearly
:20:03. > :20:08.whenever anything happens the police and the intelligence services look
:20:08. > :20:13.at what's happened, how it has happened and what they need to do to
:20:13. > :20:17.try to prevent it happening again. You are right to raise that, but at
:20:17. > :20:20.the present time we must not do anything that impedes to work of the
:20:20. > :20:26.police and intelligence services trying to see what went on and see
:20:26. > :20:30.what they need to do in the future. I think at the heart of your
:20:30. > :20:34.question is the, it goes back to earlier questions, we need to
:20:34. > :20:38.understand what it is that leads one or two individuals to turn from
:20:38. > :20:42.hearing radical preachers preaching things that we ourselves would
:20:42. > :20:46.fundamentally disagree with, what moves one or two individuals to move
:20:46. > :20:50.from that to do the wicked and terrible acts that we saw on our
:20:50. > :20:53.streets yesterday. That's the challenge for the police and the
:20:54. > :20:58.intelligence services. Let me add one other thing. When you say that,
:20:58. > :21:02.Northern Ireland saw exactly that didn't it? A massive collision of
:21:02. > :21:06.political ambitions and aim which is led to violence for many years. You
:21:06. > :21:10.can't be that surprised. You don't have to ask questions about it, it
:21:10. > :21:14.is here in this part of the United Kingdom, you can find out about it.
:21:14. > :21:18.What I was saying in this instance the intelligence service, what they
:21:18. > :21:24.need to try and understand is how some people move from attending
:21:24. > :21:27.radical mosques and hearing radical preachers and one or two moved from
:21:27. > :21:31.that and stay within the ambit of the intelligence service and moving
:21:31. > :21:34.to that violence. Let me add one important that is really important.
:21:34. > :21:38.Of course it is a policing and intelligence service response, but
:21:38. > :21:41.it is also the work that goes on in the different communities. Working
:21:41. > :21:45.with different organisations, with communities, with individuals, with
:21:45. > :21:48.schools, with the universities, to work with them to try and have a
:21:48. > :21:51.better understanding of what's happening. That's been shown true in
:21:51. > :21:57.Northern Ireland and it will be shown true in the whole of the UK in
:21:57. > :22:05.dealing with this threat. I think we should go on. We've only one woman
:22:05. > :22:09.on the panel and we will go on to another question. I would like to
:22:09. > :22:15.contradict John O'Dowd. If you look on the websites people are very
:22:15. > :22:21.angry indeed. It only takes build-up of that anger to explode intoed a
:22:21. > :22:27.calisation of anybody. Potentially it is there, if attacks continue on
:22:27. > :22:32.the country. The reason I raised that. The difficulty is this, you
:22:32. > :22:39.are only dealing with one part of the equation, with the radicalised
:22:39. > :22:43.Muslims. Their attacks in England last night taking place by far right
:22:43. > :22:49.groups who are largely Christian, if not all Christian, but largely
:22:49. > :22:54.white. Who radicalised the man who stabbed the 75-year-old man in
:22:54. > :22:59.Birmingham last week, a 75-year-old man. If you don't deal with the
:23:00. > :23:03.entire equation you are not going to answer the question. I'm not sitting
:23:03. > :23:08.here condemning Christians or HMS, but in each element of our society
:23:08. > :23:16.there are people on the extreme side of it. You need to deal with them
:23:16. > :23:19.all or you lose the entire situation.
:23:19. > :23:29.APPLAUSE Another question. Before we do, you
:23:29. > :23:38.
:23:38. > :23:43.can join in the debate tonight by If you are listening on BBC Five
:23:43. > :23:51.Live tonight, welcome. The debate will carry on when we have finished
:23:51. > :23:55.here. Another question. This one is from Alan Scott.
:23:55. > :23:58.Is Parliament taking steps to introduce same sex marriage, is it
:23:58. > :24:06.time for the Northern Ireland Assembly to follow suit?
:24:06. > :24:10.APPLAUSE It seems to be not quite so popular
:24:10. > :24:15.in the Parliament here as in the Parliament, well it is not the
:24:15. > :24:22.Parliament here, the Assembly here. Ian Paisley, you had better kick off
:24:22. > :24:25.on this. Why ever should I? Look, I'm unapologetic on this, I take a
:24:25. > :24:29.very traditional view on marriage. I know it is very unpopular nowadays
:24:29. > :24:32.and I will be accused of being a dinosaur and being behind history
:24:32. > :24:38.and the rest of it. But I believe marriage is fundamentally about
:24:38. > :24:43.children. It is about creating children, who in turn create society
:24:43. > :24:48.and create family and society and create stability in that way. That's
:24:48. > :24:53.my interpretation that I have of it. I know I will be vilified now for
:24:53. > :24:57.having that view. No doubt I will be accused of being homophobic and
:24:57. > :25:00.close to be racist and everything that is nasty and bad in the world,
:25:01. > :25:04.because it is a traditional Christian view. The reason
:25:04. > :25:08.Christians are vilified about this view is because we are to be be
:25:08. > :25:11.scared off from expressing that point of view. But I will express it
:25:11. > :25:15.proudly and honestly. It is how frankly the majority of my
:25:15. > :25:19.constituents feel. Over the last year-and-a-half I received a postbag
:25:19. > :25:23.on this issue, especially whenever the Prime Minister turned from his
:25:23. > :25:28.position of not having this in his manifesto to suddenly making it a
:25:28. > :25:30.primary party policy for the Parliament. I received some 3,000
:25:31. > :25:37.individual contacts from constituents saying to me, you must
:25:37. > :25:41.stand up against this. I received five letters of opposition to it. I
:25:41. > :25:46.must say, that is only a vox pop in my own constituency, I believe I'm
:25:46. > :25:50.in tune with the people who sent me to Parliament to say to Government,
:25:50. > :25:54.think again about. This it is divisive. It has divided your own
:25:54. > :25:57.Parliament, your own party. Indeed I walked through the lobby with more
:25:57. > :26:00.Conservatives than Theresa was able to walk through the lobby with on
:26:00. > :26:05.this point. It is ripping people apart. We've seen in the last
:26:05. > :26:10.election that the UKIP made significant inroads and chalked up
:26:10. > :26:18.this divisive policy on that road. I'm not opposed to homosexuals. I
:26:18. > :26:28.believe that homosexuals have... You Sarah Palin pretty repulsed -- you
:26:28. > :26:28.
:26:28. > :26:34.say you are pretty repulsed. ALL TALK AT ONC I would never
:26:34. > :26:38.bulldoze David. In that case let me give you this quote, I am pretty
:26:38. > :26:45.repulsed by gay and lesbianism, I think it is wrong. You can't then
:26:45. > :26:51.say you are not against. I was talking about the actions, not the
:26:51. > :26:58.specific individuals. I'm repulsed on occasion by other individuals as
:26:58. > :27:00.well who are not homosexuals. Immoral and obnoxious, you say. You
:27:00. > :27:04.do stand by that? APPLAUSE
:27:04. > :27:09.I'm entitled to those views and indeed I will be challenged by them
:27:09. > :27:14.and accused of have having opposition You said you weren't
:27:14. > :27:17.against gay relationships and now it seems that you are probably. Are
:27:17. > :27:21.said I'm not against individuals. Parliament has now put this forward.
:27:21. > :27:25.It goes to the next session of Parliament with regards to the House
:27:25. > :27:29.of Lords. It will be interesting to see what comes back to us.
:27:29. > :27:33.Parliament is incredibly divided by it. We've got to recognise that it
:27:33. > :27:37.wasn't in any manifesto. There was no significant mandate and I can't
:27:37. > :27:41.for the life of me understand why this Government has decided to
:27:41. > :27:45.champion it at this particular time. No doubt it is an unpopular point of
:27:45. > :27:50.view. APPLAUSE
:27:50. > :27:56.Not entirely. Peter Tatchell? think the British people have spoken
:27:56. > :28:03.very clearly. All the opinion poles show that 71% of the British people
:28:03. > :28:08.believe that gay couples should have the right to marry in civil
:28:08. > :28:14.ceremonies and Register Offices. In total, 58% of religious people also
:28:14. > :28:19.agreed that gay people should be able to get married if they wish. Of
:28:19. > :28:23.people intending to vote Conservative at the next election,
:28:23. > :28:27.57% of would-be Conservative voters support equal marriage too. I think
:28:27. > :28:33.you would be hard pressed to find any issue in British public life
:28:33. > :28:37.where so many people were in favour. Your point, I'm sorry and sad that
:28:37. > :28:41.you've got these intolerant views but that's your right. Thank you.
:28:41. > :28:46.But in a democracy we are all supposed to be equal before the law.
:28:46. > :28:50.I object to the fact that you want to impose your particular religious
:28:50. > :28:55.faith and interpretation of religious faith on the rest of us.
:28:55. > :29:03.No I don't. Using the law of the land. You are saying that because
:29:03. > :29:08.you believe homosexuality is wrong, or obnoxious and repulsive you want
:29:08. > :29:13.to impose it on the rest of us. you can get married tomorrow, Peter,
:29:13. > :29:17.but not to a man. I think most people will see through that, but
:29:17. > :29:22.anyway. The point is, in a democratic society we should all be
:29:22. > :29:28.equal before the law. That includes the right of heterosexual coups to
:29:28. > :29:31.have a civil partnership. I supported the moves to open up civil
:29:31. > :29:39.partnerships to heterosexual couples and I'm sad and disappointed that
:29:39. > :29:45.the Government, which claims it is legislating equality for gay people
:29:45. > :29:55.in law won't have civil partnerships for straight people. That isn't
:29:55. > :29:57.
:29:57. > :30:00.consistent. When you talk about marriage, the main thing about
:30:00. > :30:04.marriage being the creation of children, that is a slap in the face
:30:04. > :30:14.to any couple who choose not to have children, or who cannot have
:30:14. > :30:16.
:30:16. > :30:19.children. You are shaking your head, but it is. Do you want me to answer?
:30:20. > :30:24.When you are talking about the issue of equal marriage that was tearing
:30:24. > :30:32.apart parties, the real thing that tears people apart is when our
:30:33. > :30:37.politicians are getting on a public platform and telling young lesbian,
:30:37. > :30:41.gay, bisexual and transsexual people that being gay is obnoxious and
:30:41. > :30:46.repulsive and disgusting. I feel sorry for you that you have those
:30:47. > :30:50.views. You have made your point. I want to come back to the Northern
:30:50. > :30:55.Irish issue and the element in it, with John O'Dowd. What is going on
:30:55. > :30:58.in the assembly? Parliament in Westminster has not yet passed, and
:30:58. > :31:02.it has to go to the House of Lords, but what is going on here and how
:31:02. > :31:06.can Northern Ireland stop something that happens in Manchester? If you
:31:06. > :31:11.go there and get married, and come back here, will you be told you are
:31:11. > :31:14.not married? My party brought forward recently about to the
:31:14. > :31:19.assembly calling for equal marriage which was defeated on the basis that
:31:19. > :31:24.the system here can work on the toes. D U P used their veto. I think
:31:24. > :31:30.that was the wrong to do. I fully support the right for a loving
:31:30. > :31:34.couple to have -- to get married. Ian concentrates on the sexual act
:31:34. > :31:39.and this sort of thing. Concentrate on the fact that there is a couple
:31:39. > :31:43.in love. Concentrate on the fact that there is a couple in love who
:31:44. > :31:48.want to come together under that marriage ban now. I think we should
:31:48. > :31:52.be supporting them in doing that. I respect his point of view. I am not
:31:52. > :31:57.going to label him with anything, but I would say to him that he is
:31:57. > :32:02.standing in the way of the wishes of the vast majority of people. I get
:32:02. > :32:06.mail bags of letters to, from both sides of the argument. I get mail
:32:06. > :32:09.bags from people concerned about it for a variety of reasons and
:32:09. > :32:18.supportive for a variety of reasons, but if there are two people in love,
:32:18. > :32:22.we should allow them to get married if they so wish. Here here. When I
:32:22. > :32:24.was 15, growing up in Essex, as I have mentioned before, if somebody
:32:24. > :32:34.had said the president of America would be black, the most lithic
:32:34. > :32:37.rapper would be white -- prolific rapper, and the Conservative Prime
:32:37. > :32:46.Minister would legalise gay marriage, I would have laughed. That
:32:46. > :32:50.tells us, Ian Paisley Jr, that you are yesterday's news, basically.
:32:50. > :32:53.Because the president of America is black and one of the most prolific
:32:53. > :32:57.rappers is white. The world has turned upside down, whether you like
:32:57. > :33:02.it or not, and the Conservative minister has forced through gay
:33:02. > :33:09.marriage equality. And what you just said almost sounded like, I am not
:33:09. > :33:13.racist, Mark -- my best friend is black, but... You have the right to
:33:13. > :33:16.your opinion but it is the equivalent of me, as I used to say,
:33:16. > :33:20.sitting here promoting bigotry, homophobia, anti-Semitism, wanting
:33:20. > :33:24.to kill women because they had sex before marriage and saying, these
:33:24. > :33:29.are my opinions and I want to lobby to bring them about. The fact is
:33:29. > :33:32.that they are bigoted opinions. You did not want to say it, but I will.
:33:32. > :33:37.They are bigoted opinions and they need to be challenged. You have the
:33:37. > :33:41.right to speak, but I have a right to challenge those views.
:33:41. > :33:45.Absolutely, and I accept your position. And what you said to Peter
:33:45. > :33:48.was below the belt. Frankly, you have the right to those opinions but
:33:48. > :33:53.do not have the right to stop somebody else expressing themselves
:33:53. > :33:57.in their own way, so long as they are not harming you, not entering
:33:57. > :34:05.your bedroom and forcing you to sleep with a man. Do not force them
:34:05. > :34:12.to sleep with a woman. Is there anybody here who would side with Ian
:34:12. > :34:19.Paisley's view? Because we do not want a 1-sided argument. I do not
:34:19. > :34:25.have hate in my heart. I do not have anger or vilification in my heart. I
:34:25. > :34:30.do not have anything against anyone else. But throughout centuries, the
:34:30. > :34:35.traditional understanding of marriage has intrinsically and
:34:35. > :34:41.inherently being between a man and a woman. That is how I understand it.
:34:41. > :34:46.I do not hate anyone, gay, black man was limp. I am not angry, but I
:34:46. > :34:49.think you have two understand, and I speak on the half of millions of
:34:49. > :34:55.people, that we understand traditional marriage as between a
:34:55. > :35:02.man and a woman. And to redefine something so fundamental is
:35:02. > :35:07.tantamount to trying to redefine dogs so that it includes cats. Do
:35:07. > :35:16.not have a go at me because I am not angry against anyone. I am standing
:35:16. > :35:25.up for what I believe is the traditional way of marriage.
:35:25. > :35:35.Conservative party would once have taken exactly that view. I am a
:35:35. > :35:36.
:35:36. > :35:39.former sliver lied to loony, for the record. -- swivel eyed loony.
:35:39. > :35:42.supporter of marriage as an institution. I think it keeps
:35:42. > :35:46.couples together and supports families, and I simply did not think
:35:46. > :35:53.I could justify denying access to that institution merely on the
:35:53. > :36:00.ground of someone's sexuality. I was very struck when I was in Derry
:36:00. > :36:03.Londonderry a few weeks ago, where there was a lecturer and Sir Ian
:36:03. > :36:08.McKellen gave the lecture. He pointed out how over the last 30
:36:08. > :36:12.years, bit by bit, the legal discrimination against the gay
:36:12. > :36:17.community has been dismantled, but there is this last bastions that had
:36:17. > :36:21.yet to be dismantled, and that was the law on marriage. It is a
:36:21. > :36:26.difficult issue and I respect people's views. It is vital that no
:36:26. > :36:31.religion, no faith is compelled to conduct same-sex marriage, but it is
:36:31. > :36:34.a vital step forward in removing any stigma that could be attached to gay
:36:34. > :36:39.relationships, and it sends a strong signal to young people who may be
:36:39. > :36:44.grappling with their sexuality, who may be confused, seeking acceptance
:36:44. > :36:51.that it is OK to express themselves in whatever way they want to. It was
:36:51. > :36:55.a good day's work when the House of Commons voted for this. We were once
:36:55. > :36:59.told Northern Ireland was as British as Finchley, but Northern Ireland is
:36:59. > :37:03.being left out of this same-sex marriage bill. Either we have the
:37:03. > :37:09.same rights and liberties as people in Finchley, or not. We are British,
:37:09. > :37:17.or we are not. What is the position, that the assembly will not vote, or
:37:17. > :37:22.it has voted? Maria Miller made a statement in the house. She made it
:37:22. > :37:26.when questioned about Northern Ireland, that a marriage in
:37:26. > :37:30.England, a same-sex marriage in England, when those people if they
:37:30. > :37:34.were to move to Northern Ireland it would be recognised only as a civil
:37:34. > :37:39.partnership. What is the difference anyway? We were told it was a matter
:37:39. > :37:42.of words. Campaigners are campaigning for the right to be
:37:42. > :37:48.married. No one is talking about imposing this on any of the
:37:48. > :37:52.churches. Hold on. If you are married as a gay couple, married in
:37:52. > :37:55.England and you come to Northern Ireland, and suddenly it is a civil
:37:55. > :38:04.partnership and not a marriage, in what sense is it different? What
:38:04. > :38:10.does it mean? It is in relation to inheritance. Inheritance is there in
:38:10. > :38:16.a civil partnership. It is tax breaks. I don't think anybody knows
:38:16. > :38:23.this. You need to ask Maria Miller because it is Conservative party
:38:23. > :38:28.policy, introduced on Monday night. I think people should be able to
:38:28. > :38:31.choose. If same-sex marriage is available to couples in England and
:38:31. > :38:35.Wales and Scotland, it should be available to people in Northern
:38:35. > :38:39.Ireland. What I would say to the Northern Ireland executive is to
:38:39. > :38:43.think again and actually allow that to happen. This is about love, about
:38:43. > :38:46.equality before the law. People in Northern Ireland should have the
:38:46. > :38:54.same rights as everybody else across the rest of the UK and that is what
:38:54. > :38:58.I want to see happen. You are saying it is about love and equality, but
:38:58. > :39:03.how can you have something that is defined as a same-sex marriage? How
:39:03. > :39:09.do you define that when the definition of it does not add up. It
:39:09. > :39:14.is not equal. Ian Paisley Jr actually made a point that you have
:39:14. > :39:19.a male and a female. Mail and mail is not equal to male and female.
:39:19. > :39:22.That does not add up. You are talking about love. You can commit
:39:22. > :39:28.adultery with a woman because you love her but it does not make it
:39:28. > :39:32.right. When you boil it all down to this, it becomes a moral issue. And
:39:32. > :39:36.you are talking about what churches say, or what they should do. A
:39:36. > :39:41.problem with the churches, and it is interesting that when you read in
:39:41. > :39:45.the Bill, some of the legislation about how churches should deal with
:39:45. > :39:49.this, part of the problem is that you are not going to get churches to
:39:49. > :39:55.step into some wing where their creed, their doctrine says clearly
:39:55. > :39:58.that that is not what you do. When you talk about equality, you cannot
:39:58. > :40:04.have equality simply because of the definition of same-sex marriage
:40:04. > :40:08.compared with heterosexual marriage. Can I remind everybody that the main
:40:08. > :40:14.marriage law in this country, the 1949 marriage act does not stipulate
:40:14. > :40:19.that marriage partners have to be male and female. The ban on same-sex
:40:19. > :40:22.marriage was only introduced in this country in 1971. Until that time
:40:22. > :40:27.there was no legal impediment to people of the same-sex getting
:40:27. > :40:34.married. So this discrimination is relatively recent. Marriage has
:40:34. > :40:38.evolved. Centuries ago it used to involve child brides and polygamy.
:40:38. > :40:44.Until recently, rape was legal in marriage, a man could rape his
:40:44. > :40:48.wife. Marriage has evolved and this is part of the revolution. My final
:40:48. > :40:54.point to Ian is this. Are you telling me that you have looked your
:40:54. > :40:57.own do you gay members in the face, members who are in same-sex
:40:57. > :41:03.relationships, and you have told them you would not countenance them
:41:03. > :41:07.having equal rights? Have you told them that? I have told them I
:41:07. > :41:11.believe there is equality but the law should be like this. They are
:41:11. > :41:15.entitled to disagree with me. That is the beauty of this democracy. If
:41:15. > :41:21.I am wrong on this issue, Parliament will vote that way. If I am right,
:41:21. > :41:26.it is my conscience that I have to answer for. When did you say
:41:26. > :41:32.same-sex marriages were taking place, until when? They were not
:41:32. > :41:37.taking place but there was no legal impediment until 1971. Why did
:41:37. > :41:46.nobody take advantage of it? They tried, and that is why the law was
:41:46. > :41:50.introduced. They tried.Not many, but there were a few cases.
:41:50. > :41:59.cannot use tradition as a sole justification for anything. Slavery
:42:00. > :42:04.was a tradition for many thousands of years. We have moved aeons that.
:42:04. > :42:09.Second of all, I would like to ask Ian Paisley, what aspect of allowing
:42:09. > :42:13.gay people to get married and enjoy the same legal privileges as anyone
:42:13. > :42:21.else who wants to get married, what aspect of that prevents you or
:42:21. > :42:26.anyone else practising traditional marriage? This is the vilification.
:42:26. > :42:28.If you have this point of view, you can be scared from making it. I am
:42:28. > :42:33.for the interpretation of traditional marriage between a man
:42:33. > :42:36.and a woman. That is what I believe and that is what I think marriage
:42:36. > :42:40.should be. If you want to call your same-sex relationship something
:42:40. > :42:46.else, that is fine, but do not call it marriage, because that is not
:42:46. > :42:51.what it is. Invent a new word for it. Call it what you want, but do
:42:51. > :42:56.not call it marriage, something that it is not. It is not a marriage of a
:42:56. > :43:01.man and a woman. The question was that you feel threatened as a
:43:01. > :43:05.married person. What aspect of allowing other people to get married
:43:05. > :43:12.prevents you or anyone else practising marriage in the
:43:12. > :43:22.traditional sense. I do not feel threatened. Do I look like a guy
:43:22. > :43:24.
:43:24. > :43:30.under threat, mate? A little bit, yes.
:43:30. > :43:37.I think the position that is taken by Ian Paisley and other Unionist
:43:37. > :43:41.politicians on this is hypocritical. We see it in relation to gay
:43:41. > :43:44.marriage and other things, like abortion legislation. They go on
:43:44. > :43:47.about how much they value British citizenship and Northern Ireland's
:43:47. > :43:52.place in the union right up to the point where that clashes with their
:43:52. > :43:56.personal prejudice, up to the point where somebody tries to exercise a
:43:56. > :44:01.right that is available across the water, and then the mask slip 's,
:44:01. > :44:10.and you see that they are British went it suits them and they are
:44:10. > :44:14.Ulstermen when it does not. subtext of those opposed to same sex
:44:14. > :44:17.marriage is they don't belief gay people are fit and worthy, and that
:44:17. > :44:27.is pro foundly and deeply offensive. APPLAUSE
:44:27. > :44:28.
:44:28. > :44:30.We move on. A question from Aubrey Calderwood, please. Is the Republic
:44:30. > :44:40.of Ireland a safe haven for international corporate tax
:44:40. > :44:41.
:44:41. > :44:44.avoidance? John O'Dowd? Listening to the events happening in the Senate
:44:45. > :44:48.and information coming forward on Europe, it is up to the Irish
:44:48. > :44:53.Government to answer that question. If Apple is right they have a
:44:53. > :44:57.special arrangement with the Irish Government to pay 2% corporation
:44:58. > :45:03.tax, that's scandalous. The ordinary citizens in the republic are under
:45:03. > :45:06.severe pressure from austerity cuts which mean that many, many people,
:45:06. > :45:11.their lifestyles are crumbling before them. They are losing their
:45:11. > :45:15.homes, all their worldly possessions and hope, which is the most
:45:15. > :45:19.devastating impact of this. I think the Irish Government have a lot of
:45:19. > :45:22.questions to ask in relation to this. But there is a question for
:45:22. > :45:30.the international community, the European Commission and hopefully
:45:30. > :45:36.the G8 when they come to these shore. If corporation corporations
:45:36. > :45:43.can set up ghost companies to funnel through billions of doll, a I think
:45:43. > :45:48.they were alleging that $30 billion went through one of those companies
:45:48. > :45:56.in the Republic, that's disgraceful. You want Northern Ireland to become
:45:56. > :46:00.a tax haven? No, we want corporation tax here at the same rate. The
:46:00. > :46:03.corporation tax in the south is 12%. Apple are alleging they have a
:46:03. > :46:09.special arrangement with the Irish Government of 2%. Some are
:46:10. > :46:14.suggesting zero. 5%. That is not the arrangement. We can't corporations
:46:14. > :46:19.paying a fair share of tax, the tax which is set through legislation.
:46:19. > :46:25.You want a lower tax rate than the rest of the United Kingdom, correct?
:46:25. > :46:33.I want to set up an economy here separate to the United Kingdom.
:46:33. > :46:36.could unite with Dublin and therefore keep... No It is unfair
:46:36. > :46:41.to... Ordinary citizens in the south of Ireland are being nailed over
:46:41. > :46:44.tax. They are losing their homes had, losing their worldly
:46:44. > :46:48.possessions, and the worst thing they are losing is hope for the
:46:49. > :46:53.future. Multinational corporations are using it as a base to funnel
:46:53. > :46:59.through billions of pounds and dollars, whatever currency they are
:46:59. > :47:04.operating in. And that is not right, it is not proper and it should be
:47:04. > :47:07.brought to an end. Theresa Villiers? I don't think the problem is the
:47:07. > :47:12.rate of corporation tax in the Republic of Ireland. The problem is
:47:12. > :47:17.how big business is gaming the system to aggressively avoid paying
:47:17. > :47:21.their fair share of taxes. The UK Government is committed to a
:47:21. > :47:25.competitive tax system. We are reducing corporation tax but we want
:47:25. > :47:29.to make sure that big business actually pay their fair share.
:47:29. > :47:34.That's why David Cameron is putting it firmly and squarely on the agenda
:47:34. > :47:37.for the G8. That is the only way we will deal with this problem, if we
:47:37. > :47:42.act internationally together to crack down on this aggressive
:47:42. > :47:48.avoidance. And change the law? They are only obeying the law aren't
:47:48. > :47:57.they? Google say you make the rules and we obey them and if we can get
:47:57. > :48:00.away with this amount of tax, so be it. If we do it unilaterally it is
:48:00. > :48:04.going to be much more effective to do it internationally. It is very
:48:04. > :48:13.difficult to deal it with the problem completely on a unilateral
:48:13. > :48:18.basis. You would first of all try to do it internationally. I think any
:48:18. > :48:21.Government worth its salt seeing the way big corporations are
:48:21. > :48:24.aggressively avoiding paying their fair share, any Government should
:48:25. > :48:29.say we are not having that. It is not fair. Companies are making
:48:29. > :48:33.billions of pounds of profit in the UK and rerouting that into other
:48:33. > :48:37.countries. In my own constituency and throughout the land you see
:48:37. > :48:42.sometimes people pursued by HMRC for a few pounds. They are threatened
:48:42. > :48:47.with court, threatened with action. And we see big corporations actling
:48:47. > :48:51.according to a completely different set moral code. I think people think
:48:51. > :48:55.it is unacceptable. They want something done about it. What we
:48:55. > :48:58.should see at the G8 and at the European level is action at an
:48:58. > :49:03.international level to say to companies, enough is enough, you pay
:49:03. > :49:10.the fair share of tax, stop trying to avoid it, and I think if we did
:49:10. > :49:15.that, people would accept it. But let me say this, if the G8 or others
:49:15. > :49:22.can't do it, the Government should take action on their own. I said
:49:22. > :49:28.David Cameron but it was Ed Miliband who would take action. What action
:49:28. > :49:37.could they take against Google who are acting in Dublin? It is hot air
:49:37. > :49:40.isn't it? I make this prediction. With him to go to Google and say
:49:40. > :49:46.what you've done is wrong and to say the UK Government will look at what
:49:46. > :49:54.rules they will introduce, the I make this prediction, you will see
:49:54. > :49:57.lots of big companies paying tax. The morality will affect them.
:49:57. > :50:03.Customers will tell them and we should see that done as soon as
:50:03. > :50:05.possible. I think that's what people think across the board with that.
:50:05. > :50:13.APPLAUSE Peter Tatchell? What we are talking
:50:13. > :50:21.about is a global problem. The tax justice network estimates that
:50:21. > :50:25.between 21 and 32 trillion US dollars hidden in tax havens. 21 to
:50:25. > :50:29.32 trillion US dollar as hidden in US tax haven which is Governments
:50:29. > :50:37.have allowed corporations and individuals to use and exploit.
:50:37. > :50:43.Christian Aid did a report which suggested that every year a minimum
:50:43. > :50:52.of 160 billion is lost in pricing transfer trickery and falsified
:50:52. > :50:55.accounts. In those two mechanisms $160 billion US lost in tax revenue
:50:55. > :51:01.worldwide. We do need Government action at an international level.
:51:01. > :51:06.And I don't see it from the G8, the G20, the IMF and World Bank. I don't
:51:06. > :51:13.see them taking the initiative. We need those big institutions to take
:51:13. > :51:19.a stand and not to constantly be blackmailed by big business. That's
:51:19. > :51:25.what big business does. Big business says, if you don't give us what we
:51:25. > :51:29.want, we'll close down the plant and move abroad. That's a form of
:51:29. > :51:34.economic blackmail. These people are damaging this country and every
:51:34. > :51:37.country. We need to call them out. If they truly love this country or
:51:37. > :51:43.every country in which they reside, they should pay their fair share
:51:43. > :51:47.ofta. It is in their own self interest, because the the world
:51:47. > :51:53.economy goes bottom up they will lose much more. Because they are not
:51:53. > :51:58.paying enough tax? This should and would, they should pay tax, but why
:51:58. > :52:03.should they if they are not forced to? They can't all lose customers.
:52:03. > :52:10.I'm saying politicians have got to force them. Google is right.
:52:10. > :52:15.Dublin will be saying we can get all this business here. What Dublin said
:52:15. > :52:20.and what we are arguing is there should be a 12% corporation tax.
:52:20. > :52:24.There is a special arrangement between the Dublin Government and
:52:24. > :52:27.major corporations to pay less. That's totally unjust and unfair.
:52:28. > :52:33.What we are hearing is cloud-cuckoo economics. These companies whether
:52:33. > :52:37.we like it or not are obeying the law. They are residing and they are
:52:37. > :52:40.getting tax advice, the best place to reside your business in this
:52:40. > :52:46.instance is the Republic of Ireland. If the tax regime is change there
:52:46. > :52:49.had to attack them they will move to Hong Kong, where it is 10%, or to
:52:49. > :52:55.Canada where it is something else else. We do need an international
:52:55. > :52:58.agreement where people will obey the law. Us in Northern Ireland and us
:52:58. > :53:03.the United Kingdom, is reduce the corporation tax to below Northern
:53:03. > :53:09.Ireland, 10%, and your take-up of tax will increase and we'll have
:53:09. > :53:12.more money to spend and the British public. This is something which your
:53:12. > :53:18.Government failed to do and which the current Government is failing to
:53:19. > :53:25.do. What was the rate you want, 10%? I would like it to be 10%. Is that
:53:25. > :53:29.fair for the rest of the UK? No, for the whole of the UK. Maajid? I think
:53:29. > :53:35.we've got Google, Amazon, Apple and Starbucks, these are big American
:53:35. > :53:40.companies. The we just wonder who pays taxes and who doesn't. When
:53:40. > :53:49.you've got these companies that are acting within the law, then what
:53:49. > :53:56.needs to happen, as Nick Clegg said toer Mick Schmidt and as Ed Miliband
:53:56. > :54:01.said, if the law was change changed they would change because it doesn't
:54:01. > :54:06.make sense. The tax laws as they stand are antiquated and out of
:54:06. > :54:10.date. They must be reformed. That must be could with efforts
:54:10. > :54:13.internationally. If we reduce corporation tax rates in the UK on
:54:13. > :54:16.the assumption that we are not competitive and we are judging
:54:16. > :54:19.competitiveness with only the economic value that comes from it,
:54:19. > :54:23.what we are doing is underestimating what the United Kingdom provides to
:54:23. > :54:27.the market. Companies may want to move to Hong Kong but I don't Hong
:54:27. > :54:32.Kong has the level of people pro efficient in the English language
:54:32. > :54:37.that the United Kingdom has. And the many other skills of the European
:54:37. > :54:44.Union and the history of the United Kingdom are assets this country has
:54:44. > :54:48.beyond the corporation tax rate. APPLAUSE
:54:48. > :54:52.I take the point about it being an international issue but at the same
:54:52. > :54:56.time the UK Government needs to be asking questions of institutions it
:54:56. > :55:02.has control over. We bailed out banks in London and the UK
:55:02. > :55:09.Government has to ask whether we bailed them out just to help large
:55:09. > :55:12.companies avoid tax. OK.Surely the reason why there is no scandal of
:55:12. > :55:19.the tax avoidance in Northern Ireland is because we don't have a
:55:19. > :55:26.lot of big business. Surely that's the real scandal. The fact that we
:55:26. > :55:31.just have this dearth of industry that's left us below the UK. That's
:55:31. > :55:36.why we need the tax rate to get the businesses in here. And you, Sir.
:55:36. > :55:40.is interesting you mentioned corporation tax being 12%. These
:55:40. > :55:46.instances of Google and Apple are special deals that people wouldn't
:55:46. > :55:51.know about. It is interesting Eric Schmidt's response to Ed Miliband,
:55:51. > :55:55.and it was supposed to be less than 1% was the accusation. He said we do
:55:55. > :56:01.want to pay tax but you have to draw the line somewhere or it could be
:56:01. > :56:07.three or four times amount. Even at four times amount of less than 1%
:56:07. > :56:13.could be only 3%. It is one tenth of what the standard sort of tax that a
:56:13. > :56:18.normal working person would pay. They need to get a reality check,
:56:18. > :56:23.Schmidt and Tim Cook. I agree with much of what you just said. The key
:56:23. > :56:27.thing is people just didn't know how much of this was going on. I
:56:27. > :56:30.honestly think one of the biggest things we can do is make this much
:56:30. > :56:34.more transparent so people can see what's going on with the companies
:56:34. > :56:37.and the big corporations, in terms of the amount they are getting in
:56:37. > :56:42.profit and the amount they are paying in tax and how they are
:56:43. > :56:47.arriving at that amount. I think people have been genuinely shock
:56:47. > :56:51.shocked by... At what the Labour Government failed to spot? No. If
:56:51. > :56:57.you look at it the last Labour Government introduced a number of
:56:57. > :57:01.things about transparency. What I'm saying is if we shine a light on
:57:01. > :57:09.this practice I think you will get the big corporations to change. It
:57:10. > :57:15.is millennium moral. I want to hear from frank Allen. When will the
:57:15. > :57:22.recession end and get us back to the good old days? I wanted to ask you
:57:22. > :57:26.what the good old days were? Your view? In my day it was always good.
:57:27. > :57:33.That's worth going back to. We have to stop there. We are going to be in
:57:33. > :57:36.London next week. We have Alan Johnston for Labour, Diane James for
:57:36. > :57:40.UKIP and Julian Fellowes, the creator of Downton Abbey on the
:57:40. > :57:45.panel. The week that have we'll be in Blackburn. If you would like to
:57:45. > :57:51.be in Blackburn in a fortnight or be in Blackburn in a fortnight or
:57:51. > :58:00.London next week go via our website. That's the easiest way. If you have
:58:00. > :58:09.been listening on 5Live you can continue the debate. It is presented
:58:09. > :58:18.by Steven Nolan and John Pienaar. LAUGHTER Why? It is the Nolan they
:58:18. > :58:25.are laughing at. He is called Steve Nolan. He can't help it. I don't
:58:25. > :58:28.think that's what he is known for. He's big over here. He is certainly
:58:28. > :58:33.big! APPLAUSE
:58:33. > :58:38.Big over there too. And he is on 5Live tonight. And you will be on