:00:06. > :00:20.Tonight, we are in Uxbridge. Welcome to Question Time. A special welcome
:00:21. > :00:26.to our audience who will be asking the questions, and to our panel who
:00:26. > :00:29.do not know what the questions are. Conservative Education Secretary,
:00:29. > :00:33.Michael Gove, Labour's Shadow Foreign Secretary, Douglas
:00:33. > :00:39.Alexander, cheap political commentator of the Daily Express,
:00:39. > :00:42.standing for UKIP in next year's European elections, Patrick
:00:42. > :00:43.O'Flynn. Journalist and financial analyst, Louise Cooper. And the
:00:44. > :01:05.writer Will Self. I would like the first question from
:01:05. > :01:12.Kay Bagon, please. Will read Ed's energy price freeze lead to power
:01:12. > :01:17.shortages and blackouts. -- read Ed. The truth is, we do not know at this
:01:17. > :01:20.stage. One thing that Ed Miliband got right is that energy prices at
:01:20. > :01:26.the moment are too high for a variety of reasons. He is right to
:01:27. > :01:30.draw attention to one of the worst examples of the way in which
:01:30. > :01:34.people's cost of living is under attack. He is also right to draw
:01:34. > :01:39.attention to the fact that the behaviour of the six major power
:01:39. > :01:43.companies has not been entirely admirable ever since they have had a
:01:43. > :01:48.chance to play the market in the way that they have. But I do worry that
:01:48. > :01:50.the proposal he has put forward to address the problem he has correctly
:01:50. > :01:55.identified is not as well thought address the problem he has correctly
:01:55. > :01:57.through as it should be. One of the impressions I had of the Labour
:01:57. > :01:59.Party Conference this week was that they came up with a number of ideas
:01:59. > :02:04.Party Conference this week was that which seemed OK at first sight,
:02:04. > :02:05.quite attract give, but when they collided with reality they started
:02:06. > :02:09.quite attract give, but when they to fragment. There was an idea about
:02:09. > :02:14.apprenticeships which turned out to be illegal under EU law. The very
:02:14. > :02:17.next day, when Ed Miliband was on the radio, he acknowledged that if
:02:17. > :02:23.there was a spike in oil prices, like in the 1970s, he might not be
:02:23. > :02:26.able to deliver his promise. He also acknowledged there was a problem in
:02:26. > :02:28.that energy companies might choose to hike prices before the election
:02:28. > :02:33.that energy companies might choose and ensure that when the freeze came
:02:33. > :02:37.in it was at a higher point. So it is right of Ed Miliband to focus on
:02:37. > :02:42.this problem, but I do not think that this answer really, so far as
:02:42. > :02:46.we can see at the moment, is a necessary and proportionate way of
:02:46. > :02:48.dealing with the problem. But are the oil companies scaremongering
:02:48. > :02:54.when they talk about the lights going off and no investment? You
:02:54. > :02:58.take a jaundiced view of that. I take it with a pinch of salt,
:02:58. > :03:04.because the way in which the major energy companies have behaved in the
:03:04. > :03:08.past does not give confidence in everything that they say. There are
:03:08. > :03:10.independent figures, including those who ran the Office of Fair Trading,
:03:10. > :03:17.who have raised profound concerns about it. They are interested
:03:17. > :03:23.parties. We should subject both sides of the debate to appropriate
:03:23. > :03:27.scrutiny. What are the Tories planning to do about it? We have
:03:27. > :03:32.already legislated to ensure that companies have to offer you the
:03:32. > :03:35.lowest tariff. Second, I think it is appropriate to consider how the
:03:35. > :03:39.market is structured. It is right to consider how we can perhaps --
:03:39. > :03:42.perhaps get more entrants into the energy market, more competition, and
:03:42. > :03:46.take advantage of the reserves of energy market, more competition, and
:03:46. > :03:50.shale gas which are under our feet, which raised the prospect, again, of
:03:50. > :03:56.significantly cheaper energy may be for the next 20 years. Louise
:03:56. > :04:03.Cooper, was this scaremongering, in effect, or do you think there is a
:04:03. > :04:08.risk of what was described? There is a lot of scaremongering. I always
:04:08. > :04:14.prefer to see fierce competition, than you give a nation. Regulation
:04:14. > :04:16.is never the best answer. Regulators always get far too close to the
:04:16. > :04:19.is never the best answer. Regulators companies they regulate. It has
:04:19. > :04:23.happened in the banking industry and looks like it is happening in the
:04:23. > :04:27.energy industry as well. The trouble is the level of experts for which
:04:27. > :04:32.you can pool is a very small amount. There is a very small amount of
:04:32. > :04:35.people who understand how the regulation works, and they tend to
:04:35. > :04:39.jump between companies and the regulators. That always happens. We
:04:39. > :04:44.need fierce price competition. Going regulators. That always happens. We
:04:44. > :04:49.back to the price increase, it has been astronomical. We have had
:04:49. > :04:54.almost a 40% price increase since 2007. Over the same time, average
:04:55. > :05:02.household income has barely gone up at all. So it is no wonder people
:05:02. > :05:05.look at their energy prices and do that energy bill shock thing, when
:05:05. > :05:10.you open the envelope and you go, how come it is that much? It is no
:05:10. > :05:20.surprise. What I find staggering is that it has taken the political
:05:20. > :05:29.class so long to catch up with it. RU four against the freeze? The
:05:29. > :05:37.proposed freeze? I am for a complete rethink of energy policy in the UK.
:05:37. > :05:46.I feel the Conservatives could easily steal a march on labour by
:05:46. > :05:52.removing VAT from fuel charges. -- Labour. When we have to eat, we have
:05:52. > :05:56.food, no VAT. When we have roof over our heads, no VAT on rent, so why
:05:56. > :06:03.not for fuel as well. They are the basics of life. To be fair to
:06:03. > :06:04.Miliband, his proposal is also to restructure the market. The idea is
:06:04. > :06:10.to split into energy providers and restructure the market. The idea is
:06:10. > :06:15.energy sources. But the real problem here is that energy is not tradable
:06:15. > :06:20.in the market in a way that you seem to feel that it is. It is not that
:06:20. > :06:25.kind of resource. That is why throughout the 20th century things
:06:25. > :06:28.like power and water increasingly came under nationalised systems,
:06:28. > :06:33.because they were perceived as generalised public goods. I do not
:06:33. > :06:37.want to get into and argued about the state versus the market, because
:06:37. > :06:42.it can be sterile. The problem with the proposals is that it leaves an
:06:42. > :06:47.artificial market. The way in which the six main energy companies have
:06:47. > :06:55.behaved, I cannot swear because I would get sued for libel, but it
:06:55. > :06:59.looks like one and it smells like one to me. There is a great deal of
:06:59. > :07:02.serendipitous concerted action on pricing which has led to a 40%
:07:02. > :07:10.increase, coincidentally, in shareholder profit over this period.
:07:10. > :07:13.What a strange thing. But it is not -- but isn't it like other
:07:13. > :07:15.privatised industries? Haven't we got something going on in BT at the
:07:15. > :07:23.moment which sounds remarkably similar? I don't know. I will tell
:07:23. > :07:26.you one thing, whoever it is is lining their pockets over this, and
:07:26. > :07:30.we are talking billions. They are broadly not sitting in this
:07:30. > :07:39.audience. Probably in Martin eat, or something. Patrick O'Flynn? I mainly
:07:39. > :07:43.thought of this as Ed Miliband being cynical. You can have priorities for
:07:43. > :07:47.green energy, or you can have it for affordable energy, but you cannot
:07:47. > :07:53.have a priority for both, because we are at a stage where green energy
:07:53. > :07:57.demands enormous subsidies. It was Ed Miliband as energy secretary who
:07:57. > :08:02.started this whole process and was the force behind the climate change
:08:02. > :08:07.act, and persuaded the rest of the U2 adopt these eye watering lead
:08:07. > :08:13.tough carbon reduction targets. -- the rest of the EE you. There is a
:08:13. > :08:16.tacit deal that has been going on between the political class and the
:08:16. > :08:20.energy suppliers, which is basically, if you invest in our
:08:20. > :08:26.expensive and not yet reliable green sources of energy, we will turn a
:08:26. > :08:32.bit of a blind eye. You are against green? Not at all. I think it is a
:08:32. > :08:35.disproportionate response. It is astonishing that the political class
:08:35. > :08:39.has not reacted to the massive decline in living standards until
:08:39. > :08:43.now, and that Ed Miliband was the author of this process which
:08:43. > :08:48.Cameron's trendy Tories and the Lib Dems went along with. Now, Ed
:08:48. > :08:51.Miliband is standing back from the consequences of the process he
:08:51. > :08:57.instigated. Yes, let's develop green energy, but do it in a proportionate
:08:57. > :09:03.way, and not send people freezing to death in winter because they cannot
:09:03. > :09:07.afford the Energy Bill. Patrick is just wrong. The proportion of the
:09:07. > :09:12.rise in prices that can be accounted for by green energy is a small
:09:12. > :09:19.fraction. £110 per year, rising fast. What has happened is we have
:09:19. > :09:21.an energy market that is open. Six companies control 98% of supplies
:09:21. > :09:26.an energy market that is open. Six Britain's households. I do not think
:09:26. > :09:31.the public see this as a left-right issue, but as a right -wrong issue.
:09:31. > :09:34.They are sick of watching their bills go up regardless of what
:09:34. > :09:38.happens to the wholesale price for gas and electricity. In that sense,
:09:38. > :09:43.I think it is absolutely right to say we need to reset a market,
:09:43. > :09:48.ensure effective competition. In the meantime, there should be a 20 month
:09:48. > :09:51.price freeze, so we are not in the situation after the general election
:09:51. > :09:59.where people see bills rising ever higher ever month. -- every month.
:09:59. > :10:02.How do you create an effective competitive market when the sources
:10:02. > :10:08.of energy are priced beyond your control? You separate the generators
:10:08. > :10:12.from the retail. That does not solve the problem. One of the problems is
:10:12. > :10:15.that it is so OK quid in these the problem. One of the problems is
:10:15. > :10:20.companies it is difficult to tell where the price point is coming from
:10:20. > :10:24.within the companies. Secondly, we need an effective regulator because
:10:24. > :10:26.Ofgem is not operating effectively. We need a simpler tariff system, so
:10:26. > :10:31.Ofgem is not operating effectively. people know what they are signing up
:10:31. > :10:32.to. It is not rocket science. There has been a failure by the government
:10:32. > :10:35.to accept responsibility for has been a failure by the government
:10:35. > :10:43.fact that prices are going higher and higher. And it is not a recipe
:10:43. > :10:51.for economic ruin, as has been said? I am not sure that was said by
:10:51. > :10:59.an entirely reliable witness. You simply do not trust the big
:10:59. > :11:03.companies? You are playing... Centrica has one of the highest
:11:03. > :11:06.levels of profit -- profitability and one of the lowest levels of
:11:06. > :11:11.investment in terms of energy production in Britain. Peter
:11:11. > :11:15.Mandelson said the danger is Labour will be seen to be moving away from
:11:15. > :11:19.its business, its enthusiasm for business, that he thinks he
:11:19. > :11:23.developed successfully? If we go back to the high watermark of Tony
:11:23. > :11:27.Blair, Peter Mandelson and new Labour, there was a £5 billion
:11:27. > :11:31.windfall tax on privatised utilities in 1997. It is not inappropriate to
:11:31. > :11:36.windfall tax on privatised utilities take action when customers are being
:11:36. > :11:40.ripped off. Is this not simply a cheap election gimmick to win a few
:11:40. > :11:44.votes? Is it not time to come up with a credible answer to making
:11:44. > :11:49.affordable living? 20 months freeze, the problem will not just go
:11:49. > :11:58.away. We need a quality policy to help people in the long-term, not
:11:58. > :12:03.just the short-term. In fact, sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but I
:12:03. > :12:08.am. You are right that a lot of the increase since 2007 has been due to
:12:08. > :12:14.wholesale gas prices, because North Sea oil is declining. But going
:12:14. > :12:19.forward from now, the big increases will come from green tariffs. And my
:12:19. > :12:22.problem with this is that it has been a cosy arrangement between all
:12:22. > :12:28.three political parties and the energy companies. But they have not
:12:28. > :12:35.asked you, who have to pay for it. Nobody seems to have got the tacit
:12:35. > :12:39.approval from consumers who, by 2020, will be facing up to £300 each
:12:39. > :12:45.year more in their energy bills because of arena energy. Now, if you
:12:45. > :12:49.decide that is what you want, fine. But I think this has been a cosy
:12:49. > :12:58.stitch up, where ordinary people have not been asked, do you want to
:12:58. > :13:03.pay for this? We will go to another question. If you want to debate
:13:03. > :13:17.these issues, text and Twitter are at your command.
:13:17. > :13:24.A question from Emily Williams, please. Is Ed Miliband the right man
:13:24. > :13:27.for the job? Simple question. You did not say which job,
:13:27. > :13:31.incidentally. You mean Prime Minister? Yes. The main problem is
:13:31. > :13:35.incidentally. You mean Prime that when the alarm goes in the
:13:35. > :13:39.morning and that very complicated machine is meant to drop him into
:13:39. > :13:42.his trousers, it never seems to get it right. It is partly down to the
:13:42. > :13:46.his trousers, it never seems to get dog, who I have had my worries about
:13:46. > :13:52.four years. But I think that is a real problem. It is easy to ridicule
:13:52. > :13:58.four years. But I think that is a Ed Miliband for his close
:13:58. > :14:04.resemblance to Wallace from Wallace and Gromit, and I have just done it,
:14:04. > :14:09.because I enjoy doing it. I find him singularly uninspiring, actually. I
:14:09. > :14:15.watched his conference speech, because I was doing this programme.
:14:15. > :14:18.And apparently the media felt it was an absolutely inspiring performance
:14:18. > :14:21.and were impressed by the way he spoke without notes, so I thought I
:14:21. > :14:24.would give him the benefit of the doubt. I watched it on you Tube.
:14:24. > :14:27.Clearly, other people doubt. I watched it on you Tube.
:14:27. > :14:33.catching up because it had a colossal 2000 hit 's, which is very
:14:33. > :14:37.high for you Tube! Much higher than people photocopying their buttocks
:14:37. > :14:41.on the office machine. What I felt watching him at the party conference
:14:41. > :14:46.was that there are these stand out policy ideas, and that is to be
:14:46. > :14:51.welcomed, actually. He seems to have a lot of friends. He talked to his
:14:51. > :14:55.friends a lot. Judging from what Damian McBride has been saying about
:14:55. > :14:59.the Labour Party, there were not actually a lot of friends there, so
:14:59. > :15:04.that may be a reality problem. He seemed to be banging on the same
:15:04. > :15:09.kind of drum, the same centrist drum that is the problem that we all feel
:15:09. > :15:15.there is with the political class. One nation Labour, it is all about
:15:15. > :15:21.Britain, Britain can do better, all about growth and economic
:15:21. > :15:26.performance. We can have him as Prime Minister. It is not actually
:15:26. > :15:30.that difficult a job, you know. People rather overstate it. It is
:15:30. > :15:37.much easier than going to the moon and getting cheese. Cameron or
:15:37. > :15:40.Miliband? On the whole, I would give Miliband a shot at it. I would. I
:15:40. > :15:45.would be more inclined to vote for Miliband a shot at it. I would. I
:15:45. > :15:49.him, simply because there are actually some policy ideas. Finally
:15:50. > :16:01.stirring in Labour's hinterland. Patrick O'Flynn? No, he is the wrong
:16:01. > :16:07.man. This is a leader and a party that would take us deeper into the
:16:07. > :16:11.European Union. It won't give us a referendum on getting our
:16:11. > :16:17.sovereignty back. It won't have any cap on immigration. It won't really
:16:17. > :16:22.do the tough stuff on welfare reform. It says it will have an
:16:22. > :16:26.overall cap but has not identified any single cut in working-age
:16:26. > :16:31.benefit that it is for. On a whole range of policies, it is not capable
:16:31. > :16:34.of governing the country in the national interest. Whatever you
:16:34. > :16:39.say... Is it the party or the man that you are criticising here? They
:16:39. > :16:43.are almost the same thing. She a comfort blanket for Labour
:16:43. > :16:49.activists, isn't he? He is quite crafty at finding populist ways of
:16:49. > :16:51.making left-wing ideas sound palatable to a large number of
:16:51. > :16:55.making left-wing ideas sound people. Whatever you say about Tony
:16:55. > :16:59.Blair - and I have said some unkind things - at least he identified that
:16:59. > :17:04.what the public wants to see is a party prepared to challenge its own
:17:04. > :17:08.weaknesses and Labour's number one weakness was its refusal to control
:17:08. > :17:13.immigration at all. Its number two weakness was its total inability to
:17:14. > :17:22.keep a control on the Welfare Budget. Three - this belief in tax
:17:22. > :17:30.and spend and they called it Ken's Years. Let's not have the whole
:17:30. > :17:34.manifesto! LAUGHTER Douglas Alexander? I think Ed will be an
:17:34. > :17:39.effective Prime Minister. You surprise me by that answer(!) Let me
:17:39. > :17:44.explain why I make that case. For the three years since he became the
:17:44. > :17:48.Labour Leader, he's argued more convincingly than anybody else. We
:17:48. > :17:53.do face a cost-of-living crisis. He's talked about the squeezed
:17:53. > :17:57.middle. This week, what we saw in Brighton were some very concrete
:17:58. > :18:02.policies directed towards addressing those concerns. My challenge to
:18:02. > :18:06.Michael would be if he's as confident as he is that David
:18:06. > :18:10.Cameron would be a better Prime Minister, then will he agree on
:18:10. > :18:13.David's behalf to debate Ed Miliband in the final three weeks of the
:18:13. > :18:18.David's behalf to debate Ed Miliband general election when it comes in
:18:18. > :18:24.2015? Don't get us all excited this early. Do! Do you want to see these
:18:24. > :18:28.debates again? Debates are a good thing. The more we can engage
:18:28. > :18:34.voters, the better. That ain't quite the answer to the question. Do you
:18:34. > :18:38.want to see... The one thing I have learned is don't make promises on
:18:38. > :18:43.behalf of the Prime Minister without asking him first. The precise nature
:18:43. > :18:47.of the debate - there are lots of different people who have lots of
:18:47. > :18:54.different views. The principle that there should be a debate, then I
:18:54. > :18:59.agree with that. You are running scared. I think having a debate
:18:59. > :19:05.about having a debate is a boring debate myself! Just... What is the
:19:05. > :19:10.answer? You approve of debates? Absolutely. You would approve of
:19:10. > :19:16.candidates for the prime ministerial job to be debated in these type of
:19:16. > :19:21.debates? Some people thought that... Did it do a lot of design? I don't
:19:21. > :19:27.think it did. David Cameron won two out of three. The precise design for
:19:27. > :19:31.the debate - there is only one thing I would insist on, and that is that
:19:31. > :19:34.you chair them, David. That is creepy. That is really creepy. I
:19:34. > :19:40.didn't get where I am today without creepy. That is really creepy. I
:19:40. > :19:45.knowing who to suck up to! What about UKIP? Should they be in the
:19:45. > :19:51.debate? We were asked about Ed Miliband. Now you are asking about a
:19:51. > :19:56.debate. I'm debating with UKIP as well. I'm happy to debate myself on
:19:56. > :20:01.any platform at any time on any issue. What I'm not going to do is
:20:02. > :20:05.commit anyone else. Miliband? I thought you were going to get round
:20:05. > :20:08.to that. I don't think Ed Miliband is the right person to be Prime
:20:08. > :20:13.Minister. It is not because I don't admire him. I do think he has
:20:13. > :20:19.formidable gifts. He is intelligent. He's a personable figure who clearly
:20:19. > :20:24.has a talent which many politicians don't have for being able to convey
:20:24. > :20:26.complex ideas in ways that engage the public. He ran the best
:20:26. > :20:30.leadership campaign any of the public. He ran the best
:20:30. > :20:35.candidates during the Labour Leadership election and he beat
:20:35. > :20:39.David Miliband and he deserved to do so. Even though my politics would be
:20:39. > :20:43.closer to David Miliband's. Ed Miliband was the most professional
:20:43. > :20:47.and compelling figure. But the big problem with Ed Miliband is that
:20:47. > :20:51.having secured the leadership of the Labour Party, he hasn't taken it
:20:51. > :20:56.decisively in a different direction from the direction that it was under
:20:56. > :21:01.Gordon Brown. There's no indication, as Patrick suggested, that he
:21:01. > :21:04.recognises that the Labour Party borrowed too much, taxed too much
:21:04. > :21:08.and spent too much. There is no indication that he recognises that
:21:08. > :21:11.there are difficult decisions that have to be made about public
:21:11. > :21:17.spending that will require him to face down internal and external
:21:17. > :21:21.critics. He hasn't courted unpopularity in his own party by
:21:22. > :21:25.showing a degree of courage towards internal critics and critically, I
:21:25. > :21:33.listened to the speech for an hour and 15 minutes - just a second,
:21:33. > :21:39.Douglas. He is allowed... The critical thing is... Why have we...
:21:39. > :21:44.? Could I make my final point? My point point is this. I watched the
:21:44. > :21:49.speech for one hour and 15 minutes. He didn't mention the thing that
:21:49. > :21:53.drew me into politics once. He didn't mention schools, education,
:21:53. > :21:56.social mobility, he didn't mention how we can take the next generation
:21:56. > :21:58.and improve their life chances. Why? how we can take the next generation
:21:58. > :22:02.When Tony Blair became Leader of the how we can take the next generation
:22:03. > :22:07.Labour Party, he said his party was committed to education, education,
:22:07. > :22:10.education. Why was there a vacuum at the heart of what he said? I think
:22:10. > :22:14.the reason is that he is not prepared to confront the people in
:22:14. > :22:18.his own party who are holding back progress, who are enemies of
:22:18. > :22:22.promise, he is not prepared to the say to his activists, "You were
:22:22. > :22:29.wrong on education and Tony Blair was right." Your time is up. Douglas
:22:29. > :22:33.Alexander? What I take from Michael's very long answer is you
:22:33. > :22:37.are quite worried. You are worried about the fact that we have said in
:22:37. > :22:43.relation to party reform there will be fund fundamental party reform. --
:22:43. > :22:48.fundamental party reform. In relation to public expenditure, we
:22:48. > :22:50.said we wouldn't borrow. We have accepted the envelope to 2016 that
:22:50. > :22:53.has been set by this Government accepted the envelope to 2016 that
:22:53. > :22:54.because of the difficulties being created by the economy today. In
:22:55. > :22:57.because of the difficulties being relation to opportunities for young
:22:57. > :23:02.people, you need to explain why the number of youth apprenticeships on
:23:02. > :23:05.your watch is going down. Ed offered a solution to that in terms of
:23:06. > :23:11.arguing for more apprenticeships. What is your policy on schools? Why
:23:11. > :23:14.didn't Ed Miliband mention it? It is a public service question. It will
:23:14. > :23:17.take us some time. There isn't a public service question. It will
:23:17. > :23:23.anything there so it won't take us any time at all! This is it. This is
:23:23. > :23:28.their policy on schools. You prefer David. What has Ed done that David
:23:28. > :23:34.might not have done, or do you think David would have been better? He's
:23:34. > :23:37.taken steps on party reform that Gordon Brown didn't countenance. We
:23:37. > :23:40.have a consistent lead in the Gordon Brown didn't countenance. We
:23:41. > :23:43.opinion polls. He's accepted that we got some things wrong. I am going to
:23:43. > :23:48.go to some members of the audience. got some things wrong. I am going to
:23:48. > :23:53.You, Sir? I think this discussion is taking us back to that point about
:23:53. > :23:56.why so many people feel alienated from politicians and the political
:23:56. > :24:00.process. I think a big thing for people is principle. There's always
:24:00. > :24:06.a sense, which ever leader we are talking about, that what they are
:24:06. > :24:11.sitting there doing is making that calculation, "How electoral is this
:24:11. > :24:16.point of view?" What gives you that feeling? The only principles we have
:24:16. > :24:19.heard so far tonight are hammering immigrants and asylum seekers and
:24:19. > :24:22.heard so far tonight are hammering hammering people most disadvantaged
:24:22. > :24:24.on benefits. The person who may not have the most political power, but
:24:24. > :24:29.on benefits. The person who may not commands a great deal of interest
:24:29. > :24:33.from the public is Caroline Lucas. She herself, over the issue which
:24:33. > :24:37.our friend sees as a solution, fracking, has come the way of the
:24:38. > :24:40.police for her determination to have an active democratic role in our
:24:40. > :24:50.society, which is what most people want. You, Sir? My question to
:24:50. > :24:55.Douglas - why is David Miliband, he is lacking in enthusiasm, he is not
:24:55. > :25:01.grabbing the public... David or evidence? I do beg your pardon, Ed.
:25:01. > :25:06.His popularity in the ratings is right down. Could you explain why
:25:06. > :25:09.that would be as an opposition leader? When you come into
:25:09. > :25:14.opposition, with the second worst result in 80 years, the public are
:25:14. > :25:17.not going to engage with you directly. It is a fixed-term
:25:18. > :25:20.Parliament for five years. Thirdly, we have had a Coalition for the
:25:20. > :25:24.first time in decades. There is we have had a Coalition for the
:25:24. > :25:28.going to be a strong focus on David Cameron and Nick Clegg. As the
:25:28. > :25:32.Parliament moves towards the end of 2015, or the end of the Parliament
:25:32. > :25:35.in 2015, people who were perhaps not willing to give Labour a hearing at
:25:36. > :25:39.the beginning, they are now realising the change they voted for
:25:39. > :25:43.has not improved their lives. The question that will dominate the
:25:43. > :25:47.general election in months is a question that Ronald Reagan first
:25:47. > :25:52.asked, are you better off than you were four years ago? For the first
:25:52. > :25:55.time in many decades, in 38 out of 39 months under this Government,
:25:55. > :26:01.people have seen prices rising faster than their pay, average
:26:01. > :26:05.workers are £1,500 worse off than they were in 2010. They have voted
:26:05. > :26:14.for change, but their lives have got worse. Do you think you will be able
:26:14. > :26:19.to put behind you the squalid revelations of McBride on Brown,
:26:19. > :26:24.Blair and those years, which you were so intimately involved in? It
:26:24. > :26:27.is a poisonous postscript that is already behind the Labour Party, the
:26:27. > :26:34.way that Ed Miliband leads the Labour Party, even his fiercest
:26:34. > :26:35.critics would recognise it is different than what was going on
:26:35. > :26:39.critics would recognise it is the past. You knew the kind of
:26:39. > :26:41.things he was saying? I didn't know the detail. I knew he briefed
:26:41. > :26:45.against me. Gordon Brown knew the detail. I knew he briefed
:26:45. > :26:49.he was saying? Well, listen, you would have to ask Gordon Brown. But
:26:49. > :26:55.I don't want to leave this hanging. Gordon Brown, if you recommended
:26:55. > :27:00.McBride should be sacked, you had... A number of us did. Gordon Brown has
:27:00. > :27:06.been silent, he must have known that there was this corrupt influence,
:27:06. > :27:12.force at the heart of his power? I sought his dismissal. Why that was
:27:12. > :27:17.not accepted, you would have to ask Gordon. You said there were a group.
:27:17. > :27:22.Who were the group? I know Ed Miliband did. Just the two of you?
:27:22. > :27:25.Alistair Darling did as well. Three? Anymore? Sorry, this is a political
:27:25. > :27:28.programme and we have other things Anymore? Sorry, this is a political
:27:28. > :27:33.to go to. The interesting thing about this is what you are saying is
:27:33. > :27:38.that in effect, Gordon Brown knew what was happening and you have
:27:38. > :27:42.described it as despicable, but the man who was Prime Minister knew this
:27:42. > :27:45.was going on and took no steps? You would have to ask Gordon. OK. To me,
:27:45. > :27:50.you talk about political would have to ask Gordon. OK. To me,
:27:50. > :27:53.disengagement and the whole Damien McBride thing illustrates to me why
:27:53. > :28:00.people have become politically disengaged. It's truly abhorrent.
:28:00. > :28:05.Truly abhorrent. These are elected representatives who we have put
:28:05. > :28:09.there, who we pay for to work hard for our country, for the betterment
:28:09. > :28:13.of our country. We all have different political views as to what
:28:13. > :28:17.is the best for our country. That is what a democracy is. To me, I read
:28:17. > :28:26.it and I'm aGrasse. This, to me, is one of the reasons why I think voter
:28:26. > :28:34.turnout is so low. -- I'm aghast. They are on the same team. It is
:28:34. > :28:43.despicable. Why are you so aghast. Do you never switch on... Am I wrong
:28:43. > :28:49.not to watch The Thick Of It? You are living in a naive world. I think
:28:49. > :28:53.it is widely known that politicians brief against each other, stab each
:28:53. > :29:02.other in the back. It is showbusiness for ugly people.
:29:02. > :29:08.LAUGHTER Is that OK? Can I say one thing? It is easy to generalise. The
:29:08. > :29:11.stuff we read in the papers is horrific. I knew Douglas before I
:29:11. > :29:16.got involved in politics. One thing I know about Douglas is he doesn't
:29:16. > :29:22.countenance behaviour like that. He would never do it. It's wrong to tar
:29:22. > :29:26.all politicians with the same brush. Douglas is incredibly talented and
:29:26. > :29:30.it is wrong to say that all politicians behave in that way and
:29:30. > :29:31.it is right when there are folk who believe in things and who are
:29:31. > :29:36.it is right when there are folk who willing to put their reputation on
:29:36. > :29:42.the line as Douglas has to acknowledge that.
:29:42. > :29:52.So you've had no collection -- no connection with this issue on
:29:52. > :29:55.Twitter? This business of a Freedom of information search being denied
:29:55. > :29:57.by your department when it was revealed you were using private
:29:57. > :29:59.e-mail accounts to revealed you were using private
:29:59. > :30:06.government business, that is nothing to do with you? You are not involved
:30:06. > :30:14.in of that? I am not on Twitter. You had better edit your Wikipedia page,
:30:14. > :30:19.then. I will leave that to Chuka Umunna. You are not managing
:30:19. > :30:23.information on yourself in the public arena very affect Tivoli,
:30:23. > :30:29.because it makes you out to be a little master of the dark arts,
:30:29. > :30:31.actually. I mean, I have never heard such ridiculous and spurious
:30:31. > :30:34.sanctimony emanating from a politician in all my born days. You
:30:34. > :30:39.sanctimony emanating from a are well-known for it. Well, you are
:30:39. > :30:42.well known for playing to the gallery, populist position taking
:30:42. > :30:45.well known for playing to the and for trying to denigrate
:30:45. > :30:48.politicians. I am standing up for a politician, different party against
:30:48. > :30:52.the sort of cynicism you pedal in the hope it will make you popular
:30:52. > :30:55.with this audience, more people will buy your books and you will have a
:30:55. > :30:59.stronger characteristic. And as far buy your books and you will have a
:30:59. > :31:00.as I am concerned, you are the king of cheap shots, and I am not going
:31:00. > :31:06.as I am concerned, you are the king to join you. Very sweet, the idea
:31:06. > :31:13.that people will buy my books more because of anything I say on
:31:13. > :31:17.Question Time. I think in the circumstances, Ed Miliband is doing
:31:17. > :31:20.a pretty good job but it is all down to credibility, credibility with the
:31:20. > :31:23.public and also within the Labour Party. It stems from the lack of
:31:24. > :31:26.credibility in the process in which he was elected, when he defeated
:31:26. > :31:30.credibility in the process in which David Miliband on the basis of the
:31:30. > :31:35.block vote. That needs changing. Do you think that has a lasting effect?
:31:35. > :31:40.I think it does. It goes to the core of the system. I think
:31:41. > :31:43.I think it does. It goes to the core accepted the rules under which the
:31:43. > :31:48.leadership contest was fought. We are not going to reopen it. In that
:31:48. > :31:51.sense, the reforms that Ed has set out are the right ones. It is
:31:51. > :31:57.remarkable how Michael Gove keeps hammering on about Labour's
:31:57. > :32:00.education policy when you yourself are the only Secretary of State for
:32:00. > :32:02.education who has actually been given a vote of no-confidence by the
:32:02. > :32:09.education who has actually been National of teachers. There is so
:32:09. > :32:16.much criticism against your new national curriculum. Michael
:32:16. > :32:21.probably regard that as a badge of honour, and I would agree with him.
:32:21. > :32:23.But Michael is certainly a more consumer orientated, parent
:32:23. > :32:29.orientated Secretary of State van Ed Balls, and I think that is a good
:32:29. > :32:30.thing. But I do agree that you will not bring back academic selection in
:32:30. > :32:34.thing. But I do agree that you will the state system to grammar schools
:32:34. > :32:45.so that ordinary kids can give the old Etonian is in your party a run
:32:45. > :32:48.for their money. On that note, with Michael Gove, it shows that he is
:32:48. > :32:53.not whipped by the unions. They do not want to change. I have seen
:32:53. > :32:56.education standards drop. My colleagues are dropping out of
:32:56. > :33:00.school. It is ridiculous, and the teachers cannot do anything. The
:33:00. > :33:06.unions want to take power away from the schools itself. But the reforms
:33:06. > :33:10.for better standards, they want to chuck that in the bin. So it is
:33:10. > :33:12.actually a good thing that the unions have said they do not like
:33:12. > :33:22.you, because everybody else has made everything worse. A question from
:33:22. > :33:24.Tina Rich. What has the government learned from the siege in Kenya, and
:33:24. > :33:32.Tina Rich. What has the government can the British public feel
:33:32. > :33:42.confident it could not happen here? The ghastly events in Nairobi.
:33:42. > :33:48.Louise Cooper. In an environment of austerity and cuts, I think what it
:33:48. > :33:55.has reminded us of is the importance of our security policy. And this is
:33:55. > :34:02.probably one of the few areas, big cuts in defence, actually we need to
:34:02. > :34:06.maintain spending in this area. I think terrorism is possibly a war
:34:06. > :34:11.that will never be won. It is a war that we find very difficult to
:34:11. > :34:18.fight. It is going to go on for some time, possibly forever. Which is not
:34:18. > :34:21.a very positive message. Like I said, we need to invest in the
:34:21. > :34:27.technology that enables us to fight it as best as we can. I think in so
:34:27. > :34:35.many ways we have to rely on our political class to balance the need
:34:35. > :34:40.to protect us, but also the freedoms that we enjoy in this country. And
:34:40. > :34:44.that balance is a very difficult thing to achieve, and I think the
:34:44. > :34:49.only way we, as an electorate, have two say, actually, you have got the
:34:49. > :34:55.ala -- the balance wrong, is at the Allott box. We have had our
:34:56. > :34:59.political disagreements this evening but the government has got its
:34:59. > :35:04.response to the Kenyan tragedy right in offering immediate assistance in
:35:04. > :35:08.terms of security support for the Kenyan government in what was a
:35:08. > :35:13.horrendous situation. In terms of, could this situation happen here,
:35:13. > :35:21.you can never have 100 cent certainty when it comes to security
:35:21. > :35:25.issues. -- 100%. That is why there has to be vigilance, but we can feel
:35:25. > :35:30.confident and pride in the work of the police in the UK and in our
:35:30. > :35:33.intelligence agencies. It is inherent in the work of intelligence
:35:33. > :35:37.agencies that they conduct their work in the shadows, free from the
:35:37. > :35:42.glare of publicity, but every day they are working hard to keep us
:35:42. > :35:46.safe. It is in the nature of these organisations, Al-Shabab in Kenya,
:35:46. > :35:51.Al-Qaeda in other circumstances, that they work across international
:35:51. > :35:53.borders. It is vital that we have intelligence sharing operations
:35:53. > :35:58.across borders with other law enforcement agencies. The final
:35:58. > :36:01.point I would make is that it is not simply a job for intelligence
:36:01. > :36:04.agencies. One of the things we have learned over the last difficult
:36:04. > :36:09.decade is the important role for teachers, spiritual leaders,
:36:09. > :36:14.parents, leaders in trying to counter radicalisation in the UK.
:36:14. > :36:23.That is a job which does not end and in which we all have a role to play.
:36:23. > :36:30.Is it a job which is gaining ground? Or losing ground? Counter
:36:30. > :36:34.radicalisation? We have genuine concerns, and I still have
:36:34. > :36:37.concerns, that most of the counter radicalising work done in Britain is
:36:37. > :36:44.done by the police. We used to have a system where if there was a
:36:44. > :36:46.significant Islamic population in a a system where if there was a
:36:46. > :36:50.local authority area they would be funding for the local authority to
:36:50. > :36:52.work with local mosques, community leaders and other organisations to
:36:52. > :36:57.help good people in communities across the country counter the
:36:57. > :37:02.dangerous effects of young people being radicalised. Alas, that money
:37:02. > :37:06.has been cut back. It is not a cheap point, but it is important because
:37:06. > :37:11.we continue to face a threat of young people being radicalised
:37:12. > :37:15.either within communities or online. It is being reported, Michael Gove,
:37:15. > :37:23.that some British citizens were involved in this attack. First of
:37:23. > :37:26.all, is that true? I do not know. We know that six fish people died, but
:37:26. > :37:35.all, is that true? I do not know. We there have been different claims
:37:35. > :37:39.made. -- six British people died. We do know there have been British
:37:39. > :37:45.citizens who have gone abroad to train with radical groups, and we
:37:45. > :37:48.know that some of them have subsequently been involved in the
:37:48. > :37:54.plotting and execution of terrorist atrocities. So it is plausible, but
:37:54. > :37:57.I do not know. What do you think could be done, or could be learned
:37:57. > :38:04.from what has happened not just there but in other parts of the
:38:04. > :38:09.world? By a British government, by a Secretary of State for education?
:38:09. > :38:12.There are two specific areas. There are specific issues to do with
:38:12. > :38:18.security, intelligence and resilience, making sure we learn the
:38:19. > :38:22.terrorists took over and penetrated the shopping centre, and how the
:38:22. > :38:25.Kenyan support -- the Kenyan security forces dealt with it. We
:38:25. > :38:29.can learn from any country that has been the victim of a terrorist
:38:29. > :38:33.atrocity about how to make public spaces safer. There is a broader
:38:33. > :38:40.lesson, countering a poisonous narrative which has a witched young
:38:40. > :38:44.minds worldwide. And that is that -- that is that democracy is somehow
:38:44. > :38:52.the enemy of Islam and the only way you can prove yourself to be a true
:38:52. > :38:55.follower of the profit is by following a litter clean radical
:38:55. > :38:56.follower of the profit is by version of Islam, which finds
:38:56. > :39:01.expression in the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Qaeda and all these
:39:01. > :39:05.other extremist organisations. And we need to take it on. And it is not
:39:05. > :39:11.just a matter for people within them British Muslim community. The
:39:11. > :39:14.overwhelming majority have no time for these people, but we need to
:39:14. > :39:19.take on that narrative as well, and we need to point out that we have
:39:19. > :39:27.intervened abroad to liberate Muslims from tyranny, and that also
:39:27. > :39:30.we continue to provide, not least on the borders of Syria, humanitarian
:39:30. > :39:34.assistance to people in terrible circumstances. Unless we engage
:39:34. > :39:39.positively in that argument and support voices within the British
:39:39. > :39:42.and global Muslim community who believe in peace and draw proper
:39:42. > :39:51.spiritual nourishment from their religion, we will always be on the
:39:51. > :39:57.back foot. If it turns out that the so-called White widow is involved,
:39:57. > :39:58.the former British citizen, is it not worrying that someone like that
:39:58. > :40:04.can disappear off the radar, being not worrying that someone like that
:40:04. > :40:12.that her previous partner was involved in the 7/7? It is more than
:40:12. > :40:17.worrying. We should also remember the victims of the atrocity in
:40:17. > :40:22.Pakistan, where the Christian minority suffered a mass murder this
:40:22. > :40:23.week. And we should not forget Christian minorities across the
:40:23. > :40:28.world living in predominantly Christian minorities across the
:40:28. > :40:32.Islamic countries. We do not tend to dwell on what is happening to them,
:40:32. > :40:38.but what a terrifying existence they live. On the White widow and the
:40:38. > :40:43.various atrocities across the world in which we find a petition
:40:43. > :40:47.connection, that really is shameful. -- Abe Ritt -ish connection.
:40:47. > :40:53.Journalists like Melanie Phillips were warning of this phenomenon, and
:40:53. > :40:58.thus not taking seriously the radical Islamic scene that was going
:40:58. > :41:04.on in our own capital city. The birds are coming home to roost here.
:41:05. > :41:10.People like me maybe go on about the trendy liberal left a bit too much,
:41:10. > :41:15.but in this instance there was a cultural norms set up over the last
:41:15. > :41:20.40 years of crude multiculturalism, which held that there should be no
:41:20. > :41:21.effort to integration at all. I do not want a society where everybody
:41:21. > :41:26.has to eat roast beef on Sunday not want a society where everybody
:41:27. > :41:31.go to the football on Saturday, but we do need to work harder on
:41:31. > :41:35.establishing a common culture of values that we all subscribed to,
:41:35. > :41:39.whether it is equality between the sexes, freedom of speech, respect
:41:39. > :41:44.for everybody's right to self-determination. There is a huge
:41:44. > :41:50.decades long chasm which, for reasons of political correctness,
:41:50. > :41:54.has had terrible consequences. We need to be much more proactive. The
:41:54. > :41:57.last government took some steps and this government is carrying them on,
:41:57. > :42:05.but we have a long way to go on that score. Oh, well, as far as I am
:42:05. > :42:14.aware, the Kenyan army were involved in cross border measures against
:42:14. > :42:17.Al-Shabab, and your government would never do that, launch a military
:42:17. > :42:21.incursion in a foreign country and then be surprised if there is
:42:21. > :42:24.terrorist fallout? That does not happen around here. I find it very
:42:25. > :42:28.difficult to sit here and listen to happen around here. I find it very
:42:28. > :42:36.all of this, actually. I find it physically painful. Because, yes, it
:42:37. > :42:42.is a terrible thing that happened in Kenya, and terrorism is in no way to
:42:42. > :42:46.be condoned. But to drag it down to this domestic political battlefield,
:42:46. > :42:49.where I am harder about terrorism than you, I would do this, I would
:42:49. > :42:55.do that. We live in this excessively than you, I would do this, I would
:42:56. > :42:58.survey the society already. I am not taking a pop, aiming at the approval
:42:58. > :43:01.of the gallery, because you may taking a pop, aiming at the approval
:43:01. > :43:05.catch call me, but the only thing that boosts these guys up is sitting
:43:05. > :43:07.here and saying, more guns, more power, more
:43:07. > :43:14.here and saying, more guns, more is will we need. Nobody says that.
:43:14. > :43:16.Yes, we do. You are not even a politician and you are saying we
:43:16. > :43:23.need to spend more money on security. She was the only one who
:43:23. > :43:29.said it. You do not believe there should be more money on security?
:43:29. > :43:33.The anti-terrorist structure in place is seen as an unreservedly
:43:33. > :43:36.good thing. We are stopping one pot each month on average from taking
:43:36. > :43:42.place in our country. Surely that has to be money well spent. Do you
:43:42. > :43:49.know what, I do not actually believe that. It is a heresy. I do not
:43:49. > :43:53.believe that. Do you know what, I do not want my child dying because my
:43:53. > :44:01.belief that the government is lying to me was actually wrong. I do not
:44:01. > :44:07.want to take that risk. My family are very precious to me. Lets not
:44:07. > :44:10.speak from the high moral ground of your own anticipated future loss.
:44:11. > :44:14.Why do we have to live in a society in which this debate about terrorism
:44:14. > :44:20.completely conditioned everybody's mentality? Why don't we look at the
:44:20. > :44:24.objective reality, which is that what you were saying, Patrick is
:44:24. > :44:28.such a crude example of mental division and confusion about these
:44:28. > :44:31.things. We can give humanitarian aid to refugees in Syria. But on the
:44:31. > :44:33.things. We can give humanitarian aid other hand, we want to start
:44:33. > :44:39.things. We can give humanitarian aid dropping bombs on Damascus. That is
:44:39. > :44:43.a classic double bind. Why can't we just be the sort of country that
:44:43. > :44:45.gives the humanitarian aid and leaves the bombing of foreign
:44:45. > :44:48.countries and wandering around the place with guns, and being big Dick
:44:48. > :44:58.militarists? Michael Gove, do you want to come in
:44:59. > :45:03.on this? I can't believe - I was listening to Will there. Why? Don't
:45:03. > :45:12.you know the sort of things that I say, Michael? I do now. Do you think
:45:12. > :45:16.that 9/11 and 7/7 were fictions? No. Have you taken the trouble to talk
:45:16. > :45:17.to anyone in the security or intelligence services about the
:45:17. > :45:22.to anyone in the security or plots that have been disrupted? Have
:45:22. > :45:29.you listened to the transcripts from those reported to have bombed
:45:29. > :45:33.nightclubs because girls are slags. I'm staggered that you can treat a
:45:33. > :45:38.serious subject with the flipness that you have had. It is not flip at
:45:38. > :45:43.all. We will leave the audience to decide. I don't doubt some of these
:45:43. > :45:48.plots have been foiled by our Security Services. Good. What I'm
:45:48. > :45:50.talking about is the terms under which we live, the kind of society
:45:50. > :45:53.talking about is the terms under we want to live in. Do we want to
:45:53. > :45:58.live in a society that ups its sense we want to live in. Do we want to
:45:58. > :46:04.of anxiety? This woman sitting here on the panel who is anxious about
:46:04. > :46:09.her children being killed by terror. I live in London. You should be
:46:09. > :46:15.anxious about your children being knocked down and killed by a car.
:46:15. > :46:22.You, Sir? I think what happened in Kenya was unacceptable. As you all
:46:22. > :46:27.understand, Al-Shabab has claimed they have conducted that exercise.
:46:27. > :46:35.Kenya has suffered. Kenya is the only country that is hosting an
:46:35. > :46:40.equivalent of a million Somalis who have been displaced by the war in
:46:40. > :46:45.Somalia. Kenya has gone into Somalia to restore, to restore and to get
:46:45. > :46:50.rid of Al-Shabab. That will have made us suffer here in on. I think
:46:50. > :46:59.our Government, the British Government, has not done enough to
:46:59. > :47:02.support materially the Kenyan government to rid Kenya of
:47:02. > :47:10.Al-Shabab. That is what this Government needs. We need more
:47:10. > :47:17.support, more resources. I don't agree with what you have said. Those
:47:17. > :47:26.people are evil. They don't represent any faith on this Earth.
:47:26. > :47:30.APPLAUSE I'd like to take one more point from
:47:30. > :47:38.the woman in the second row from the back? Does anybody else not find it
:47:38. > :47:41.shocking that as soon as we start to have a conversation about terrorism
:47:41. > :47:45.that Michael and Douglas started talking about Islam? It seemed to me
:47:45. > :47:48.that this Government is always peddling Islamophobia, blaming
:47:48. > :47:55.violence on everything. Is it not surprising that one in four people
:47:55. > :47:59.are always suspicious of Muslims? Why can't we talk about terrorism
:47:59. > :48:04.without bringing Islam into it? There is a fairly obvious answer to
:48:04. > :48:19.that question. It was an Islamist terrorist attack and it tends to be
:48:19. > :48:23.these things. OK. Do you radicalise Islamic youth in this country? You
:48:24. > :48:29.are not on the right territory. This university has the highest ethnic
:48:29. > :48:37.minority student body in the country and it is very proud of it. Are you
:48:37. > :48:42.trying to conflat being - look, you don't know what you are talking
:48:42. > :48:46.about in this area. We have had enough, frankly. I haven't had
:48:46. > :48:51.enough. Let's take it outside, where you like to do your thing. Alright,
:48:51. > :48:55.gentlemen. We will move on. We have time for one more question. It is
:48:55. > :49:00.from Charlotte Jones, please. It is a question that affects everybody in
:49:00. > :49:06.this room. Following on from Ed Balls' speech this week, and the
:49:07. > :49:21.heavy criticism for the HS2 project, isn't it about time this Government
:49:21. > :49:25.scrapped HS2? APPLAUSE HS2 of course being the high-speed
:49:25. > :49:33.railway line that is planned from London, it goes through Ruislip and
:49:33. > :49:38.sets off and will set off, if it is built, to the North, to Birmingham
:49:38. > :49:43.and to Manchester and points beyond. Patrick O'Flynn? My party is against
:49:43. > :49:49.HS2 and wants it scrapped straightaway, completely. Alright.
:49:49. > :49:53.Can I say, we have a clear position on it. I think Ed Balls was very
:49:53. > :49:56.cynical because he's kind of sitting on the fence, but the effect of what
:49:56. > :50:00.he said will make it very hard for the project to make much progress
:50:00. > :50:04.he said will make it very hard for anyway over the next couple of
:50:04. > :50:08.years. I think it is an enormous vanity project. The money could be
:50:08. > :50:11.better spent on ten large projects or 20 medium-sized projects updating
:50:12. > :50:15.our whole public transport infrastructure. It is the wrong
:50:15. > :50:26.project. The Cost Benefit Analysis hasn't been done correctly. It is
:50:26. > :50:31.ludicrous. Michael Gove? I don't think we should scrap it. It is the
:50:31. > :50:36.right decision for Britain. On Patrick's point, of all places in
:50:36. > :50:41.Uxbridge it is going to be a contested proposition. At best. But
:50:41. > :50:47.on Patrick's point about investing in other transport infrastructure,
:50:47. > :50:49.he is right. We should invest in oth transport infrastructure and this
:50:49. > :50:54.Government is. Three times as much public money is going into other
:50:54. > :50:59.transport schemes as HS2. The reason why we need another rail line on the
:50:59. > :51:02.west coast is that the capacity constraints under which our rail
:51:02. > :51:07.system operates means we need another line. If we didn't have HS2,
:51:07. > :51:09.they would re-create the existing West Coast Main Line with all the
:51:09. > :51:12.problems, the lack of speed, West Coast Main Line with all the
:51:12. > :51:16.lack of capacity that we have already witnessed. One of the sad
:51:16. > :51:19.things in this country is that every time a major infrastructure decision
:51:19. > :51:23.has come forward, there have always been people who have tried to find
:51:23. > :51:30.reasons to say no. They have always tried to find a rare bird, they have
:51:30. > :51:37.always tried to find reasons if this work goes ahead, the money could be
:51:37. > :51:41.better spent elsewhere. I think that building High Speed 2 would also
:51:41. > :51:44.ensure that we can take goods and individuals around this country more
:51:44. > :51:47.quickly and more efficiently, it would also ensure that the
:51:47. > :51:51.inequalities that exist in our country, with the South
:51:51. > :51:54.disproportionately wealthy, disproportionately a place for
:51:54. > :52:00.inward investment, that could be redressed because it would bind the
:52:00. > :52:03.nation and it would make the North and Scotland easier places in which
:52:03. > :52:07.inward investment could be attracted. Point made. The woman
:52:07. > :52:13.here? Can I say don't you want to spend the money on more teachers and
:52:13. > :52:17.books and schools? We are. You can't spend the same money twice, Michael.
:52:17. > :52:23.Education spending has been protected. We could have a debate
:52:23. > :52:27.about how effectively it is being spent. Efbl in very tough times,
:52:27. > :52:34.when there have been some incredibly tough decisions, we have not only
:52:34. > :52:40.been able to protect... HS2? Louise Cooper? Cost Benefit Analysis? I'm
:52:40. > :52:44.been able to protect... HS2? Louise letting you into a secret. It is not
:52:44. > :52:53.that great a secret. Economic models are rubbish. APPLAUSE Are you in
:52:53. > :52:58.favour of it being scrapped? It cost £42 billion, they will come out with
:52:58. > :53:04.a Cost Benefit Analysis that is greater than £42 billion. Should it
:53:04. > :53:08.be scrapped? I think the money in austere times could be better spent
:53:08. > :53:17.elsewhere. The chap at the very back? I travel a great deal by train
:53:17. > :53:20.and one thing I notice is that on most of the long distance rail
:53:21. > :53:25.routes there is a train every hour, or there are two trains an hour. I
:53:25. > :53:30.can't believe that making those existing routes run a train every 15
:53:30. > :53:34.minutes, every 20 minutes isn't vastly cheaper than building a new
:53:35. > :53:38.massive railway line. I would also comment, I happen to be a pilot, I
:53:38. > :53:43.fly myself on business, there are routes in this country where I can
:53:43. > :53:47.fly myself in my own airplane to a meeting cheaper than going by
:53:47. > :53:53.second-class rail. And for as long as that is the case, we don't want
:53:53. > :53:57.to be spending a vast amount more money on additional railway lines.
:53:57. > :54:01.Is Labour coming, trying to come out from under this HS2 project with
:54:01. > :54:05.what Ed Balls said at the Conference? It may disappoint
:54:05. > :54:10.members of the audience, but we support a North-South railway. It is
:54:10. > :54:15.sensible to say the cannot be a blank cheque for this project. Last
:54:15. > :54:19.month we saw the project cost go from £32 billion to £42 billion. Any
:54:19. > :54:23.responsible opposition should be saying you have to properly
:54:24. > :54:28.scrutinise the cost. Do you support £42 billion? The new chap has been
:54:28. > :54:32.appointed today. He has to look at the £42 billion. We are not clear as
:54:32. > :54:37.to why we have seen the inflation we have seen. That is why Ed Balls was
:54:37. > :54:42.right. To an audience here of people who are directly involved, would you
:54:42. > :54:46.be saying the likelihood is we will go for it? That depends on the
:54:46. > :54:50.costs. We see the merit in taking forward this project, but it can't
:54:50. > :54:55.be on the basis of it costing ever larger sums. Let me explain why I
:54:55. > :54:59.support it. One of the reasons train fares are going up is because of the
:54:59. > :55:03.level of congestion on the railway. The West Coast Main Line that people
:55:03. > :55:06.see as an alternative was built in 1837 for Queen Victoria's
:55:07. > :55:12.Coronation. Are we saying when most of the train paths going out of
:55:12. > :55:15.Euston at peaktimes are now full, that we are relaxed at the prospect
:55:15. > :55:19.of Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds and that we are relaxed at the prospect
:55:19. > :55:24.London not having greater connectivity? There is an issue of
:55:24. > :55:26.congestion that cannot simply be addressed by existing train fleets.
:55:26. > :55:29.There is a question in terms of whether this is an affordable
:55:29. > :55:33.project given the uplift in finance that we have seen recently. It is
:55:33. > :55:39.right that it should be explored. OK. The woman in the pink? We know
:55:39. > :55:43.how much it is going to cost, or at least how much it is going to cost.
:55:43. > :55:50.No, the benefit of it is up in the air. Who knows what the economic
:55:50. > :55:53.benefit is. When are we going to see some robust numbers? When I spend
:55:53. > :55:57.benefit is. When are we going to see money, I want to know what I'm going
:55:57. > :56:00.to get back from it. You, Sir? This will be the biggest vanity project
:56:00. > :56:05.ever brought forward in this country. All it is for vain
:56:05. > :56:10.politicians to put their name to it and then years later, they will
:56:10. > :56:16.think, "What a great project." It will be unattainable, it is not
:56:16. > :56:19.going to be effective, it will be too expensive. There will be things
:56:19. > :56:23.like video Conferencing which allows people to talk to each other. They
:56:23. > :56:32.don't need to travel by train. You, Sir? Would the Labour Party tell us
:56:32. > :56:39.before the next election what their final view is on this and stick to
:56:39. > :56:44.what they say? I expect we will set out our position when we see whether
:56:44. > :56:50.this £42 billion is robust enough. Will Self? It is the same companies
:56:50. > :56:53.who costed the Olympics so well! They have already trousered £50
:56:53. > :57:01.million in consultancy, of your money, by the way. It is - you wait
:57:01. > :57:06.for a high-speed service to come along and then it is the wrong one.
:57:06. > :57:10.The arguments that are presented by the panel don't add up in my mind.
:57:10. > :57:14.It seems to me the problem with our rail infrastructure goes way back
:57:14. > :57:19.into the depths of time and into the reliance we placed on road. Where we
:57:19. > :57:22.lagged behind on our continental cousins was that they saw that
:57:22. > :57:25.freight should be carried by train and we didn't and the Government is
:57:25. > :57:29.still in the pocket of the road lobby. There is a lot of weird stuff
:57:30. > :57:35.going on at the Department of Transport over massaging figures on
:57:35. > :57:40.car use. So, you know, it is all weird. The cost, there are not going
:57:40. > :57:47.to be these robust figures, but don't be all NIMBYISS about it, it
:57:47. > :57:53.is a crap idea where ever you live. Time is up. We have to stop there.
:57:53. > :57:56.Birmingham next week. Grant Shapps and Yvette Cooper will be on the
:57:56. > :58:03.panel. The week after that, Cambridge. So Birmingham next week,
:58:03. > :58:05.Cambridge the week after. Go to our website - www.bbc.co.uk/questiontime
:58:05. > :58:21.- or call: My thanks to our panel and to our
:58:21. > :58:28.audience here. Thank you all very much indeed for coming to Brunel
:58:28. > :58:30.University in Uxbridge. From Question Time, good night.