:00:08. > :00:17.Tonight we are in St Austell, and welcome to Question Time.
:00:18. > :00:23.Welcome to you at home, welcome to our audience, who will be putting
:00:24. > :00:27.questions to the panel, who do not know the questions until they hear
:00:28. > :00:33.them from the audience. Conservative Matthew Hancock, former adviser to
:00:34. > :00:37.George Osborne, now a business minister. Labour's shadow work and
:00:38. > :00:40.be in is minister, Chris Bryant. Liberal Democrat MP sacked by Nick
:00:41. > :00:45.Clegg earlier this month, Jeremy Browne. Harriet Sergeant, who spent
:00:46. > :00:50.three years hanging out with gang members to write her book. And the
:00:51. > :00:54.campaign for the rights of people who have changed their gender,
:00:55. > :00:55.recently named the most influential person in the independent
:00:56. > :01:15.newspaper's pink list, Paris Lees. Steve White has our first question,
:01:16. > :01:21.Mr White. How will spending ?40 billion on HS2 benefits taxpayers in
:01:22. > :01:29.rural communities such as Cornel? Rural communities such as Cornwall,
:01:30. > :01:33.HS2 has had its initial financing approved today. I do not suppose it
:01:34. > :01:37.will to begin with, but we have to look at what it does for the whole
:01:38. > :01:40.country. If there is one thing that is wrong with the economy in this
:01:41. > :01:44.country, it is too focused on London and the south-east of England. We
:01:45. > :01:50.need to stretch the economic prosperity, if there is going to be
:01:51. > :01:53.growth, and it has got to stretch beyond that tiny little patch of
:01:54. > :01:57.London and the south-east. Apart from a thing else, in the interests
:01:58. > :02:01.of people who live in London and the south-east, because in areas like
:02:02. > :02:04.this or in my constituency in south Wales, the Rhondda, when you have
:02:05. > :02:08.dozens of people applying for a job, there are no jobs to go to, and
:02:09. > :02:12.people are being encouraged to move to where there are jobs, but they
:02:13. > :02:15.cannot afford to live there because house prices in London and the
:02:16. > :02:20.south-east are going through the roof. My argument is that HS2, I
:02:21. > :02:26.really want it to happen, I want to shrink the country, that it cannot
:02:27. > :02:32.just be spent ?42 billion and give a blank cheque. I worried that ?14
:02:33. > :02:36.billion of that, a third of the money, is actually the contingency,
:02:37. > :02:40.so I think we have been absolutely right to say there is no blank
:02:41. > :02:45.cheque here, we have to push down on the figures and make sure this is
:02:46. > :02:48.not just a great big train set for ministers to play with, it is
:02:49. > :02:56.actually about transforming the economy of the country.
:02:57. > :03:04.Matthew Hancock, is there evidence, apparently there is, in the
:03:05. > :03:08.transport department, that HS2 will actually take jobs from places like
:03:09. > :03:14.Cornwall, rural parts of Britain? Because they will go to the narrow
:03:15. > :03:19.channel that HS2 creates north and south in the country. No, because
:03:20. > :03:23.HS2 was part of a national infrastructure plan. I agree with a
:03:24. > :03:29.lot of what Chris said, and in fact I welcome the passion with which he
:03:30. > :03:34.said it, because HS2 is important, but it is important as part of a
:03:35. > :03:40.larger plan. For those who worry, like here in St Austell, that we are
:03:41. > :03:45.not investing in other places around the country, HS2 will only take
:03:46. > :03:51.about a quarter, just under a quarter of the budget for transport,
:03:52. > :03:55.and it connects our biggest cities. But that means that three quarters
:03:56. > :03:59.of the spending is available on transport for everywhere else in the
:04:00. > :04:04.country, for instance the upgrade is happening on the line from here to
:04:05. > :04:07.London, and in my constituency of West Suffolk, and elsewhere around
:04:08. > :04:12.the country. So we have got to make sure that we sort out these
:04:13. > :04:16.long-term problem that there has not been an infrastructure, and HS2 is
:04:17. > :04:20.part of that, but only as part of a national plan that makes you
:04:21. > :04:24.everywhere is better connected. Can you clarify one think you might is
:04:25. > :04:29.it coming straight out of the pocket of the taxpayer? Or is most of this
:04:30. > :04:32.money going to be met by government bonds being issued, in other words
:04:33. > :04:36.the actual damage to the Exchequer is much less than it would appear at
:04:37. > :04:42.first sight? Has this been decided? The amount that is paid for by the
:04:43. > :04:46.taxpayer has to be raised, and ultimately, even if it is borrowed,
:04:47. > :04:49.it has to be paid for. One of the things we have learned over the last
:04:50. > :04:53.few years is you cannot borrow on the never never as a country. But of
:04:54. > :04:58.course part of it will be paid for by people paying to go on the line
:04:59. > :05:02.once it is completed. That is my point, it will not necessarily come
:05:03. > :05:07.out, or 42 billion, of these people's pockets. It will be paid
:05:08. > :05:12.for by future profits? Is that part of the plan, why have you not made
:05:13. > :05:16.it clear? Part of it will be paid for by people, the passengers, but
:05:17. > :05:21.part of it is about spending infrastructure spending, but it has
:05:22. > :05:23.got to be part of increasing spending on infrastructure to
:05:24. > :05:28.improve infrastructure to every part of the country. The man in the
:05:29. > :05:31.second row from the back there. Are you going to privatise its?
:05:32. > :05:45.Eventually! It will be built by an awful lot of
:05:46. > :05:49.companies and the state, so in a sense, how do you build things in
:05:50. > :05:53.this country? You get people into builds them, the Olympics were built
:05:54. > :05:57.by hundreds of private companies, employing people locally and all
:05:58. > :06:01.around Britain. So, you know, we have got to make sure that it is
:06:02. > :06:06.built in the most cost-effective manner possible. Harriet Sergeant.
:06:07. > :06:11.The gentleman who asked the question originally asked exactly the right
:06:12. > :06:17.question, and HS2, unfortunately, is an example of what is going wrong
:06:18. > :06:24.today in politics. For a start, with the lack of transparency, the report
:06:25. > :06:29.that came out, and it was only through a special, you know, asking
:06:30. > :06:32.special investigation that we actually found out that the
:06:33. > :06:36.Government had suppressed the information, that there are 50 areas
:06:37. > :06:42.in the country which are not just going to not benefit from HS2, but
:06:43. > :06:48.they are actually going to be worse off. And one of those is Cornwall,
:06:49. > :06:58.and in fact the Cornish economy is going to be ?20 million worse off.
:06:59. > :07:01.So, you know, this is, again, going to be benefiting London businessman
:07:02. > :07:11.just so they can get some work quicker. Jeremy Browne, as a West
:07:12. > :07:14.Country MP, do you concur? I take completely the opposite view. I do
:07:15. > :07:18.not think it will benefit everywhere in the country equally, but no
:07:19. > :07:22.infrastructure ever does, unless it goes to every town in the country.
:07:23. > :07:28.It will have a disproportionate benefit, but then so does dualling
:07:29. > :07:33.the A30 have benefit for people in this area. I support HS2 because it
:07:34. > :07:38.is absolutely crucial to our future economic prosperity as a country
:07:39. > :07:42.that we have a massive uplift in our infrastructure and our ability to
:07:43. > :07:46.transport people, goods and services to market and between cities faster
:07:47. > :07:50.than we do at the moment. Let me make two very quick points. One is
:07:51. > :07:54.an historical point, and there were lots of layers when -- naysayers
:07:55. > :07:57.when Brunel built the first tunnel under the Thames, people saying, we
:07:58. > :08:02.have managed perfectly well with boats for hundreds of years, this is
:08:03. > :08:06.a vanity project. No doubt when the M1 was built, people were
:08:07. > :08:10.protesting. But if we did not have a motorway network, our country would
:08:11. > :08:15.be in a much worse position than it is in terms of our society, but also
:08:16. > :08:18.the economy. My second is a global point. If you go to countries like
:08:19. > :08:26.China, what is very striking is the massive, massive infrastructure that
:08:27. > :08:29.is happening, airports, high-speed rail, motorway capacity. They are
:08:30. > :08:32.either doing that because they are stupid and have a wish to waste
:08:33. > :08:36.their money, or possibly, and my view is this, they are doing it
:08:37. > :08:39.because they realise that in order to be globally competitive, they
:08:40. > :08:43.need to have a modern infrastructure. A lot of our
:08:44. > :08:46.infrastructure dates back to the Victorian era, and I want us to have
:08:47. > :08:51.a can-do spirit in this country, not a card to spirit, and make sure we
:08:52. > :08:58.have infrastructure fit for the next 100 years. Jeremy, very briefly, do
:08:59. > :09:07.you accept the figure that Harriet used, which was KPMG, the freedom of
:09:08. > :09:15.information request, Cornwall will be ?20 million worse off. Is that
:09:16. > :09:18.wrong? I think those figures are hard to quantify, to a degree they
:09:19. > :09:23.are plucked from the air. If we are a more prosperous country, we will
:09:24. > :09:28.raise more money to pay for public services in Cornwall and the rest of
:09:29. > :09:32.the country. We are not arguing against HS2. But there is not enough
:09:33. > :09:37.infrastructure across the rest of the country, and may be the priority
:09:38. > :09:45.now needs to be not HS2, but other places that have not got any
:09:46. > :09:50.infrastructure in place. Paris Lees. Absolutely! I am a Nottingham girl,
:09:51. > :09:53.and actually, Harriet, it is not just going to benefits London
:09:54. > :09:58.businessman. I read in the paper that it will boost the economy of
:09:59. > :10:02.Nottingham by 5%, and what the lady said is quite right - we should be
:10:03. > :10:07.doing it all over the country, and the French have had high-speed rail
:10:08. > :10:12.since before I was born, they have been travelling at 200 mph since
:10:13. > :10:16.1981, I'm surprised they are not all dizzy. I just think, why can't we do
:10:17. > :10:20.that in this country? It is not about whether we can do HS2, we can
:10:21. > :10:23.do anything we put our minds to it, but let's do it properly and get it
:10:24. > :10:28.around the rest of the country as well. Can I just say briefly? What
:10:29. > :10:37.is embarrassing is how long it took to get a just happen. France were
:10:38. > :10:43.going at 200 mph, but under the tunnel it was 30 mph in Britain. But
:10:44. > :10:46.to make sure that these things happen, given that it will take a
:10:47. > :10:52.long time to build, we have got to make sure, if you believe it, that
:10:53. > :10:55.major parties stay onside, as well as for infrastructure to everywhere
:10:56. > :10:59.else. Passenger numbers are already at capacity, they are set to
:11:00. > :11:08.double. Are you complaining about the Labour position? We are going to
:11:09. > :11:11.build infrastructure... We need parties who say this to support to
:11:12. > :11:22.get out and supported and vote for it. Do you believe they will support
:11:23. > :11:25.its? I certainly hope so. You are making it a party political thing.
:11:26. > :11:31.You either think it is a good idea or not, what has that got to do with
:11:32. > :11:35.political ideology? Two people have asked... Two people have now at wing
:11:36. > :11:39.what the Labour position is, and I thought I expressed it at the
:11:40. > :11:42.beginning. We are in favour of it but it is not a blank cheque. We
:11:43. > :11:46.have got to have financial discipline and big things like
:11:47. > :11:49.these, we cannot spend 42 billion on one project without considering the
:11:50. > :11:53.other parts of the country that might need electrification and so
:11:54. > :12:00.on. So of course, we are in favour, and, Matthew, you said, why didn't
:12:01. > :12:05.Labour vote for it? Labour MPs in the House did vote for it. Those
:12:06. > :12:10.that were there, there were not very many. Not your leader and not your
:12:11. > :12:14.Shadow Chancellor. Is this not what is wrong with HS2? We are two years
:12:15. > :12:20.away from an election, and it has become a political football. We have
:12:21. > :12:25.Labour wanting to show the sort of voters in the cell that, actually,
:12:26. > :12:29.they are good with money, so they are suddenly becoming very careful
:12:30. > :12:33.with money. The Conservatives are desperate to Woo voters in the
:12:34. > :12:38.north, so they are pushing for this train. Why aren't we being given a
:12:39. > :12:41.little bit more choice? If you have a large sum of money and you are
:12:42. > :12:46.trying to improve your life, surely you make a list of things that you
:12:47. > :12:51.possibly could spend it on. Why are we just being told this one think
:12:52. > :12:56.Schumacher I want to bring in... I want to bring in some members of the
:12:57. > :13:00.audience of the point that was raised about places that are not
:13:01. > :13:06.directly in line with HS2, then we will move onto the next question.
:13:07. > :13:12.Just to say, Mr Brown, I distinctly reading in the Liberal Democrats'
:13:13. > :13:15.manifesto at the last general election that the Lib Dems would
:13:16. > :13:20.reopen disused rail lines that were closed down in the Beeching axe in
:13:21. > :13:25.the 1960s. We don't need HS2, because we have got disused rail
:13:26. > :13:29.lines here in Cornwall, in rural areas that need to be reopened so
:13:30. > :13:33.that it gets people off the roads and away from using cars, and using
:13:34. > :13:38.public transport, because I use it every day, it is late, it is
:13:39. > :13:44.expensive, God knows how much it costs the taxpayer to pay for rail
:13:45. > :13:46.cars and buses, but you need to reopen these disused rail lines.
:13:47. > :13:50.Especially down here and in other areas of the country, rather than
:13:51. > :13:54.spending billions of pounds of taxpayers' money on HS2 when you
:13:55. > :14:03.could reopen the Victorian infrastructure that was used back
:14:04. > :14:08.then. Thank you. Yes, I think, just briefly, it is another example of
:14:09. > :14:13.state-sponsored capitalism. I think it is crony capitalism, and I think
:14:14. > :14:20.it is a folly. OK, and you in the front, I will take one more point. I
:14:21. > :14:24.travel extensively in Western Europe on the high-speed trains. Quite
:14:25. > :14:32.frankly, I find it shameful that the UK has fallen so far behind, when we
:14:33. > :14:44.invented the railway, and I fully support HS2, and I hope there are
:14:45. > :14:49.going to be more high-speed lines. One last point. It's good that
:14:50. > :14:53.money's being invested to create jobs and you get people saying not
:14:54. > :15:00.in my back yard and you get people saying, it's not close enough to my
:15:01. > :15:11.home. It's interesting that Labour are at last pulling in the purse
:15:12. > :15:27.strings. A question from Harry Samuels. Are bullying tactics used
:15:28. > :15:36.by Unite at Grangemouth mouth? Should there are restrictions on
:15:37. > :15:40.what unions can do? I think what we have seen there is quite
:15:41. > :15:45.extraordinary. We have had a mother and small child beseiged by the
:15:46. > :15:55.union members standing outside with loud speakers, telling the
:15:56. > :15:59.neighbours that this man is evil, having posters sent to his family
:16:00. > :16:05.saying he's on the wanted list. This is just a man who happens to be a
:16:06. > :16:07.director of a company, a company that also, I believe, is one of
:16:08. > :16:11.Labour's biggest financial supporters. You sort of think if
:16:12. > :16:19.that's how Labour's treating its friends, how is it treating its
:16:20. > :16:23.enemies? I really believe you can't possibly have this kind of
:16:24. > :16:27.behaviour. It's a dreadful advertisement for trade unionism and
:16:28. > :16:34.that the politicians must condemn it. What do you make of what Len
:16:35. > :16:38.McCluskey said, was we need no lectures from Cameron the original
:16:39. > :16:41.bulling done bully and talking about faceless directors who make
:16:42. > :16:47.decisions to close down factories and put families out of work, they
:16:48. > :16:53.need to understand they can't just disappear into leafy suburbia. They
:16:54. > :16:56.are not faceless, they've got families and those families are
:16:57. > :17:01.children under five who have been attacked. Chris Bryant. I think
:17:02. > :17:05.Harriet's absolutely right, the bullying of families - bullying is
:17:06. > :17:08.not on full stop. I think the kind of culture that sometimes we have in
:17:09. > :17:12.Parliament, which looks like we are all bullying one another, doesn't
:17:13. > :17:19.help when teachers are trying to explain why it's bad in schools
:17:20. > :17:23.actually. And I'm sure there are plenty who can say I behaved like a
:17:24. > :17:29.bully in Parliament as well, so I accept it. There is a small round of
:17:30. > :17:34.applause there. Yes! I do think that sometimes directors of companies
:17:35. > :17:37.need to understand that in particular if they're big
:17:38. > :17:40.monopolies, they have a responsibility to society. I thought
:17:41. > :17:45.it was shameful this week that in the House when you had the people
:17:46. > :17:48.from the big six energy companies only one of them sent their Chief
:17:49. > :17:51.Executive. All of the chief executives should have been there.
:17:52. > :17:55.If you're in charge of the company and frankly if you're earning
:17:56. > :17:59.millions of pounds and many of these people have doubled their wages in
:18:00. > :18:02.the last two or three years, then I think you have to take
:18:03. > :18:12.responsibility for your actions and that means that sometimes you do
:18:13. > :18:16.have to be up there and out there. What did you make of the way that
:18:17. > :18:21.Unite handled the Grangemouth affair, because it seemed to me they
:18:22. > :18:26.called the employers' bluff and then the employers called their bluff and
:18:27. > :18:33.then everything was conceded just like overnight? Was it a good
:18:34. > :18:37.negotiating tactic? I've only ever been engaged in one event when
:18:38. > :18:42.Burberry wanted to close its factory in the Rhondda. I was opposed to it
:18:43. > :18:50.and I was working with Leighton Andrews and the GMB. We always knew
:18:51. > :18:56.there was a danger in the end we would have to ask for peace. But we
:18:57. > :19:00.managed to quadruple the amount of support given to the workers and we
:19:01. > :19:07.got ?1.5 million given to the local community to set up a new charity.
:19:08. > :19:11.Talking about Len McCluskey. Jack Straw senior Labour member says that
:19:12. > :19:17.he put internal union politics before the interest of the members.
:19:18. > :19:22.Are you with Jack Straw or McCluskey? I'm sticking with my
:19:23. > :19:27.point, I'm afraid. You could be courtious enough to answer mine. I
:19:28. > :19:30.was going to say, which I think answers your question, which is I
:19:31. > :19:33.think it looks to me as if they overplayed their hand dramatically
:19:34. > :19:39.and consequently they would have been better to have done what we did
:19:40. > :19:45.in relation to Burberry and the GMB and I'm a proud member and I will
:19:46. > :19:48.not have anybody try to deny that individual trade union members who
:19:49. > :19:57.are formally tea ladies in schools and all the rest, have a perfect
:19:58. > :20:02.right to have their voice heard. Paris Lees. I'm a campaigner and I
:20:03. > :20:06.do feel a lot of sympathy for the union in this, because they
:20:07. > :20:10.obviously just want to try to make positive changes, but I think it's
:20:11. > :20:16.better to focus on positive engagement, rather than the tactics
:20:17. > :20:21.they've used. We see it all the time, groups that have very good
:20:22. > :20:26.causes and their aims are noble, but they use the tactics that don't win
:20:27. > :20:32.people over. I guess in response to the question, do we need
:20:33. > :20:37.legislation? Well, they're either harassing this family or they're
:20:38. > :20:41.not. I think we already have laws if place for that and I think -- in
:20:42. > :20:46.place for that and I think bring it under regulation of the press. But
:20:47. > :20:56.we have laws in place, so why not enforce them? The man in blue. The
:20:57. > :21:02.idea that we have the faceless directors is poppy cock when we have
:21:03. > :21:07.the faceless union executives who in this case nearly shut down a factory
:21:08. > :21:14.employing 800 people just because they wouldn't shift on their
:21:15. > :21:18.demands. It was down to about a 50/50 vote on the matter. The idea
:21:19. > :21:23.that 51% and union executives who were putting pressure on their
:21:24. > :21:28.members, to shut down a factory and make 800 people lose their jobs, I
:21:29. > :21:31.think is awful. You asked the question. You asked the original
:21:32. > :21:35.question. Do you think further restrictions on unions are required?
:21:36. > :21:39.I think the idea of what Unite have called leverage I think it's
:21:40. > :21:44.sickening to be perfectly honest, that groups of thugs can go around
:21:45. > :21:48.and, as Harriet said, accuse the people of being evil and put wanted
:21:49. > :21:54.posters through the door, so yes, I think the further restrictions need
:21:55. > :21:59.to be in place. Matthew. I think this shows the tremendous gap
:22:00. > :22:07.between most trade union members, who are hard working and pay their
:22:08. > :22:11.dues and want to be represented and the leadership and in this case, the
:22:12. > :22:15.extreme leadership and I agree strongly with what Harry said there,
:22:16. > :22:21.that holding to ransom a planting that one tenth of the Scottish
:22:22. > :22:27.company, after political reasons is outrageous in order to have this
:22:28. > :22:32.intern fale debail -- intern fale debate within -- internal debate
:22:33. > :22:36.within the Labour Party. It's amazing that the man who is in
:22:37. > :22:39.charge of this and led the action, is still the chairman of the local
:22:40. > :22:44.Labour Party. It's extraordinary. We have got to support union members
:22:45. > :22:47.and I'm a strong supporter of trade unions, but when they're leadership
:22:48. > :22:55.behave like this, then they need to look at themselves hard in the
:22:56. > :23:01.mirror. Lady there. What frightens me is the next step is a branch of
:23:02. > :23:04.the Ku Klux Klan getting on anybody who they don't agree with and
:23:05. > :23:11.attacking their families. If they attack me, I would have been out
:23:12. > :23:15.there sorting them. I think it's really easy to condemn the tactics
:23:16. > :23:20.and they are wrong, but what about the violence that the Tories are
:23:21. > :23:24.doing to people with mental health issues, people with disability? Like
:23:25. > :23:28.you say, people that wear suits and stuff. They are hurting the people
:23:29. > :23:35.of this country every day. And they are not getting condemned for it.
:23:36. > :23:39.Jeremy Browne. Well, I support constructive trade unions and they
:23:40. > :23:42.can make a real positive difference on behalf of the people they
:23:43. > :23:46.represent and the company that they interact with and if you look at the
:23:47. > :23:53.British car industry, it has gone from strength to strength, with
:23:54. > :23:57.manufacturing doing well for decades and that's in part because the
:23:58. > :24:02.unions have had a constructive attitude to inward investment and
:24:03. > :24:05.the best interests of members and the workforce. That's different from
:24:06. > :24:09.what has happened in this case and I can only observe that the Unite
:24:10. > :24:14.union is out of control. It has let power go to its head. It's the
:24:15. > :24:22.biggest funder of the Labour Party. It selected its own candidate for
:24:23. > :24:24.Labour leader over and above the Labour leaders and members of
:24:25. > :24:28.Parliament and the behaviour generally I agree with Jack Straw, I
:24:29. > :24:33.think that they are running out of control, teR trying to influence
:24:34. > :24:38.Labour selections. The Falkirk selection remains an outstanding
:24:39. > :24:43.sore, unresolved and the unions have to get back to what they exist to
:24:44. > :24:46.do, to advance the day-to-day interests of members. When they get
:24:47. > :24:53.it right they can make a difference, but they've got it wrong. But one
:24:54. > :24:56.thing they've got absolutely right is that you've got three politicians
:24:57. > :25:02.here and we are all virtually identical. We come from the same
:25:03. > :25:07.kind of back gruned, we have got -- background and we have -- two of us
:25:08. > :25:11.have the same hair colouring and there are too many working-class MPs
:25:12. > :25:17.and I support the campaign to try to get more working-class people into
:25:18. > :25:20.Parliament. You don't boost that by intimidating children. Of course you
:25:21. > :25:25.don't. I have said that behaviour is absolutely awful. But I do support
:25:26. > :25:28.trying to change the kind of people who get elected to Parliament and
:25:29. > :25:33.that's what the Labour Party was originally founded to try to do and
:25:34. > :25:38.we failed on that recently. I fully accept that. However - that's why I
:25:39. > :25:43.have an apprenticeship system in my office. You are attacking the whole
:25:44. > :25:48.basis of the Labour Party. Maybe you should stand down in the Rhondda and
:25:49. > :25:52.make way for somebody more suitable. At some point I will. I'll stand in
:25:53. > :25:55.your place. You can stand in my place. You can comment on the issues
:25:56. > :26:17.by text or twitter. We'll move on. From Glyn Rowatt.
:26:18. > :26:22.With wind turbines and solar-power fields are we seeing any benefit in
:26:23. > :26:28.energy costs? You have turbines down here and solar panels in the West
:26:29. > :26:33.Country. Are we seeing any benefit in energy costs, which is the big
:26:34. > :26:39.issue of the month. Jeremy Browne? We are seeing a direct benefit in
:26:40. > :26:42.terms of energy costs from wind generation because it's a more
:26:43. > :26:47.expensive form of electricity generation, but I think it's
:26:48. > :26:54.important that we diversify and modernise the way we produce energy
:26:55. > :26:58.in this country. In 10, 15, 50 years time from now, some of the countries
:26:59. > :27:03.in the world will have made that transition a will have modern
:27:04. > :27:07.technologies which enable them to have the energy requirements they
:27:08. > :27:11.need for industry and households, but compatible with protecting their
:27:12. > :27:15.environment and the global environment an others won't have.
:27:16. > :27:20.It's important that we do make that transition, but all new technology,
:27:21. > :27:24.which it comes on tap, is in its early stages more expensive and gets
:27:25. > :27:31.developed and improved over time. I'm not saying that wind turbines or
:27:32. > :27:34.solar farms are the solution to all of our problems, or energy needs and
:27:35. > :27:41.I think some of the solar farms in particular have been cited in bad
:27:42. > :27:45.areas -- sited in bad areas and they industrialise the countryside, and I
:27:46. > :27:48.don't think they're farms in any recognisable sense, but they're the
:27:49. > :27:52.equivalent of building a new housing estate on a field without having the
:27:53. > :27:57.benefit of people living in the houses. You would rather have
:27:58. > :28:03.houses? The regulation. Maybe houses with solar panels? If I was going to
:28:04. > :28:07.have fields of solar panels, I would have new-build houses and on factory
:28:08. > :28:11.roofs and other areas before I put them on arable land. My point is, I
:28:12. > :28:17.think having a reasonable proportion of energy mix from renewable sources
:28:18. > :28:25.is a desirable objective and we should pursue that. To cut to the
:28:26. > :28:31.current issue, do you think it fair and right that energy consumers
:28:32. > :28:35.should be paying for these expensive ways of predeucing electricity at
:28:36. > :28:42.the moment -- producing electricity at the moment? Would you like to see
:28:43. > :28:46.them funded by taxation? One way or the other people will pay for them.
:28:47. > :28:51.It's not quite true. Well, it is. No, because if you don't pay income
:28:52. > :28:55.tax you wouldn't pay for it. Income tax is a small proportion of the
:28:56. > :28:59.total taxation for the Government. I think there are a whole range of
:29:00. > :29:06.measures which are paid for. A lot are to do with loft instalation, for
:29:07. > :29:11.people on low incomes. I'm not doing a list. All I'm saying is I think
:29:12. > :29:15.energy reduction is important as well. More efficient use of energy.
:29:16. > :29:20.The whole range of measures to make us a better and more efficient
:29:21. > :29:30.country and how we use and generate energy and that is part of that.
:29:31. > :29:37.Question going back to the question, what the scale wind
:29:38. > :29:41.turbines here? In Cornwall, we have seen especially in our beautiful
:29:42. > :29:47.countryside, there is a mass of wind turbines going up, and more recently
:29:48. > :29:51.these fields of solar panels, and all we do see is an increase in
:29:52. > :29:56.energy costs, and we are not actually seeing any benefit as a
:29:57. > :30:02.ratepayer in this county, yet we seem to have masses and masses of
:30:03. > :30:10.turbines and solar panel fields. Matthew Hancock. Well, wind farms
:30:11. > :30:13.are, we're told, there to save the environment, but put them in the
:30:14. > :30:21.wrong place and they ruined the natural environment. So, you know,
:30:22. > :30:26.we have got to have a mix of energy supplies, but we have got to do it
:30:27. > :30:31.in a sensible way that is consistent with what people want locally, and
:30:32. > :30:35.if there is a development, then there is something in it for the
:30:36. > :30:41.people whose view can be affected and in some cases ruined. And we
:30:42. > :30:45.have seen over the last few weeks the landing of a deal to build the
:30:46. > :30:50.first nuclear power station for years, which is low carbon, of
:30:51. > :30:56.course, and that will mean that it is cheaper than wind turbines, and
:30:57. > :30:59.if we get that going, then we won't need to build nearly so many wind
:31:00. > :31:05.turbines and ruin the beautiful views we have right across the
:31:06. > :31:09.country. Paris Lees. I tell you what, these companies are making a
:31:10. > :31:13.profit out of something that we all need. We would all agree now that
:31:14. > :31:18.you need heat, you know, you need electricity to watch this show. The
:31:19. > :31:21.gas isn't going to last for ever. Why should anybody be making a
:31:22. > :31:25.profit out of something we all need? It does not make any
:31:26. > :31:30.difference to you, when you turn the light on, who provide your
:31:31. > :31:33.electricity or who is providing your gas. Why don't we renationalise it,
:31:34. > :31:44.and if we are making any profit out of it...
:31:45. > :31:58.The man in the dark blue than. I take my power from one of the
:31:59. > :32:05.smaller companies that is based in Chippenham. They have 100% renewable
:32:06. > :32:08.energy. They have a wind farm in North Cornwall, and my bills have
:32:09. > :32:13.never been cheaper, and quite frankly the region neuronal energy
:32:14. > :32:17.has already... The rest of the market has already caught up with
:32:18. > :32:26.these 100% renewable providers. Can you give us the name and address?
:32:27. > :32:30.Will it reached... They distribute, as Paris said, it does not matter
:32:31. > :32:37.who provide your electricity, but you used to pay a premium, but the
:32:38. > :32:40.market has caught up. Can you get it in the Rhondda? You certainly get
:32:41. > :32:45.wind farms in the Rhondda, and there has been a lot of local opposition,
:32:46. > :32:54.and I actually like the look of wind farms. I am sorry, I find it
:32:55. > :32:57.quite... I am quite amused that this audience gave him an enormous round
:32:58. > :33:03.of applause for renationalise winning everything, Len McCluskey
:33:04. > :33:07.would be delighted. There are two things here, we must take climate
:33:08. > :33:10.change seriously, otherwise there is a real danger that the world's
:33:11. > :33:16.waters will rise and that will be a problem for the whole of the world.
:33:17. > :33:20.Secondly, you know, energy... In the end, the energy that we are using at
:33:21. > :33:25.the moment is not renewable. It is going to run out, it is going to get
:33:26. > :33:29.even more expensive in 30 or 40 years' time, so we have got to have
:33:30. > :33:32.other means of energy onstream. I support all of that, but there are
:33:33. > :33:36.things we could be doing about energy prices now, we could have a
:33:37. > :33:44.price freeze, that is what Labour is committed to if we are elected in
:33:45. > :33:49.2015. Secondly, I think we need to reject not just the market in Europe
:33:50. > :33:53.on energy, and not just in the UK, sorry, but across the whole of the
:33:54. > :33:59.UK. Energy prices in Europe are going down by 1.7 the set, whilst
:34:00. > :34:02.they are going up in the UK by 7.7% on average, but they are lower in
:34:03. > :34:07.the UK than they are elsewhere in Europe because the market there is
:34:08. > :34:13.rigged as well. We need a completely new approach to the way we organise
:34:14. > :34:17.the energy market across Europe. The man in the spectacles, the man with
:34:18. > :34:22.the spectacles there. Did you have your hand up? No, the woman behind
:34:23. > :34:28.you. It looked like it was your arm, her arm coming out of your
:34:29. > :34:31.shoulder! Yes. The big six energy companies are essentially a cartel
:34:32. > :34:36.that can charge whatever prices they like. They hold the consumer in at a
:34:37. > :34:40.contempt, the House of Commons in at the content, they did not even send
:34:41. > :34:45.their chief executives. We have a situation where it is being run for
:34:46. > :34:52.greed and profit, and everyone in this room is paying the price. The
:34:53. > :35:01.woman in the... Yes, in orange there. Looking at renewable
:35:02. > :35:05.alternatives, why have we got a wave have that is not being connected?
:35:06. > :35:09.Why aren't we doing more about wave power when we are an island
:35:10. > :35:13.surrounded by water? Harriet Sergeant, what do you make of the
:35:14. > :35:18.point that was made about this being a cartel? Do you think it is a
:35:19. > :35:23.cartel? I think it is not just the six big ones as well. First of all,
:35:24. > :35:26.I would like to say that I was around when everything was
:35:27. > :35:30.nationalised, and I can tell you it was pretty dreadful. I mean, you
:35:31. > :35:35.know, you have to wait six months for a phone line, the trains were
:35:36. > :35:39.awful, so I am not a huge fan of nationalising everything again, but
:35:40. > :35:48.I also don't think that the marketplace is working.
:35:49. > :35:57.Matthew Hancock, as a representative of the Government, and is those two
:35:58. > :36:02.points, are the six a cartel, and are they not doing their job in
:36:03. > :36:06.energy? In energy specifically, we had the news that we would be having
:36:07. > :36:09.a competition review to look into the question of making the market
:36:10. > :36:15.more competitive, and I was about to agree with you, sir, because the
:36:16. > :36:20.answer do this is to go for the competitive, new, small energy
:36:21. > :36:25.companies which often have lower prices. I, in fact, switch to one of
:36:26. > :36:29.the smaller energy providers, and we are making it much, much easier to
:36:30. > :36:33.switch, because at the moment it can take weeks to switch, and we are
:36:34. > :36:37.going to bring that right down so that it is easy to switch and so
:36:38. > :36:42.that, instead of having a market where it is... It is not easy to do
:36:43. > :36:50.any thing to do with these people, you cannot even get them on the
:36:51. > :36:53.phone. Have you looked at a gas bill? Exactly, and what we need to
:36:54. > :36:57.do... Can you understand your gas bill? They hold your money! We need
:36:58. > :37:00.to make it easier to switch in order for everyone to take the decision
:37:01. > :37:04.you did and go for what is the cheapest option, or the option that
:37:05. > :37:08.works best for you. Can you explain why it is that the
:37:09. > :37:13.big 60 their prices so high? If you have switched to a smaller, cheaper
:37:14. > :37:20.place, why are the big six raising their prices by 10%? I think that
:37:21. > :37:24.the big six do not think enough people are going to switch, so they
:37:25. > :37:28.do not think that it matters what happens. And that is a problem, and
:37:29. > :37:34.we have got to sort it out. This big six thing is quite new. 15 years
:37:35. > :37:39.ago, there were more than a dozen energy companies, and that dwindled
:37:40. > :37:43.and dwindled, and the big six arrived, and we have got to make
:37:44. > :37:48.sure we get more competitors, so that more people can drive down
:37:49. > :37:51.prices, drive down the profits of these companies by allowing
:37:52. > :37:54.switching. But we have to do something about the fact that the
:37:55. > :37:58.companies are too big because they are doing all the different elements
:37:59. > :38:01.of the market, and we have got to do something about senior executive pay
:38:02. > :38:07.in these industries where there is a monopoly. I think the chairman of
:38:08. > :38:14.ScottishPower now gets ?10 million per year. The chief executive of
:38:15. > :38:17.E.ON, 4.2 million euros. It is not that I'm saying people should never
:38:18. > :38:21.earned those amounts, but I am complaining about that while prices
:38:22. > :38:32.have gone up, their salaries have doubled, and that is not on. An
:38:33. > :38:34.interesting thing from Labour, you sound like Peter Mandelson, no
:38:35. > :38:42.objection to people earning ?10 million per year? It might be
:38:43. > :38:47.justifiable in some industries if someone is really talented, but it
:38:48. > :38:52.is not acceptable in this kind of... How can anyone possibly do anything
:38:53. > :38:56.that is work that? If Pavarotti managed to sell 10 million tickets
:38:57. > :39:01.for his opera, I don't object to that, but what I do object to is
:39:02. > :39:04.when it is made out of enforcing price rises on ordinary people who
:39:05. > :39:09.will then have to make a choice between heating and eating. One more
:39:10. > :39:14.point. Lot of the price increases are due to the green taxes. The
:39:15. > :39:17.regulator approved a 10% increase in transmission costs of electricity,
:39:18. > :39:24.but most people here probably do know that. That is the reality of
:39:25. > :39:27.it. You know, it is all right to say we nationalised things, but I
:39:28. > :39:31.remember walking along Southgate high street and looking in the
:39:32. > :39:37.window to see when the lights went out. We would love to renationalise
:39:38. > :39:42.things, Paris, but we can't afford it, we haven't any money. As a
:39:43. > :39:47.Labour Cabinet minister said before he left government! Briefly, if you
:39:48. > :39:52.would. Could Mr Hancock identified the smaller, cheaper company that he
:39:53. > :39:57.has transferred to? We would all like to join it. I'm not sure I
:39:58. > :40:04.would like to advertise one of them. There are seven new companies. Ed
:40:05. > :40:16.Miliband was attacked on the name of a company at Prime Minister's
:40:17. > :40:20.Questions. It is called Ecotricity, there are seven new companies, and
:40:21. > :40:25.it is great that they should grow. Su McConnel. Why is Chris Grayling
:40:26. > :40:30.in so much of a hurry to privatise the probation service that he is
:40:31. > :40:37.prepared to put the public at risk? Paris Lees. I made a very stupid
:40:38. > :40:44.mistake when I was 16, and I went to prison, just a week after my 18th
:40:45. > :40:49.birthday. Were it not for the probation service, which helped me
:40:50. > :40:54.get back on track and... I remember when I was inside that, I think the
:40:55. > :40:57.statistic that is bandied about, two thirds of first-time offenders end
:40:58. > :41:01.up back inside within two years of being released, and that was really
:41:02. > :41:06.depressing, and it really made us feel that the odds are stacked
:41:07. > :41:10.against us. So I think, for young people, you know, there is a lot
:41:11. > :41:14.that needs to be done in terms of rehabilitation, and I'm not saying
:41:15. > :41:18.that it is perfect, but the probation service do a very good job
:41:19. > :41:24.at the moment. What did they do for you? They helped me back, they
:41:25. > :41:28.managed my transition back into society, they helped me find work,
:41:29. > :41:32.they helped me extend my curfew so that I could work as well as go to
:41:33. > :41:35.college in the daytime. Practical help, they helped find a family
:41:36. > :41:38.member that you can go and live with, and they work really hard and
:41:39. > :41:45.actually care about the people they are working with. My worry is that
:41:46. > :41:47.if we privatise it, when have we privatise something where it has led
:41:48. > :41:58.to a greater service for people and more care for people? It just
:41:59. > :42:03.doesn't, you know? Matthew Hancock. The problem of repeat offending is
:42:04. > :42:07.an enormous one, and the chances of somebody coming out of prison and
:42:08. > :42:12.going back into prison are extremely high, and they are far too high. And
:42:13. > :42:15.making sure that we care for people properly and support them and they
:42:16. > :42:19.come out of prison is so important. For instance, the delay from being
:42:20. > :42:26.released to getting your first benefits check often pushes people
:42:27. > :42:31.back into crime because they are desperate. I think the question is,
:42:32. > :42:35.why are you privatising the probation service? I am answering
:42:36. > :42:38.the question, because I think what Chris Grayling is doing and
:42:39. > :42:44.proposing is that people have support when they are in prison, and
:42:45. > :42:47.that support stays with the same people as they leave and then stays
:42:48. > :42:51.with them afterwards, and then that the people who support them are then
:42:52. > :42:56.paid according to how successful they are at keeping people out of
:42:57. > :42:59.prison. Making sure we get the incentives right on the probation
:43:00. > :43:03.service is really important, because the vital thing here is to follow
:43:04. > :43:08.the evidence of what works, what works internationally, because
:43:09. > :43:12.crucially... There has been assessments of the probation service
:43:13. > :43:16.in the UK, and overwhelmingly it has been as good and exceptional, but
:43:17. > :43:21.no-one was talking about those words. There are undoubtedly
:43:22. > :43:26.exceptional probation officers. A lot of them. But the amount of
:43:27. > :43:31.people who go back into prison, having been in prison, is far, far
:43:32. > :43:36.too high, and we need to learn from around the world about what works...
:43:37. > :43:43.Is privatisation going to help that, though? If you say you want to
:43:44. > :43:46.give incentives to do better in the probation service, why can't that be
:43:47. > :43:51.done within the government run probation service? It can be done
:43:52. > :43:55.within any organisation that can provide the service and the level of
:43:56. > :43:59.care, and that is what is important. Why can't the current probation
:44:00. > :44:03.service do that? I'm sure many people in the current service can,
:44:04. > :44:07.but what matters is not whether the probation service reports directly
:44:08. > :44:10.to the justice minister, what matters is whether it works in
:44:11. > :44:17.keeping people out of prison once they have left. Harriet. I have
:44:18. > :44:21.prevented a gang, and I have known them for about five years, and I
:44:22. > :44:24.knew them from when they were 16, and as they have gone through
:44:25. > :44:27.various systems, I have sort of seeing things through their eyes,
:44:28. > :44:32.and one of them is the criminal justice system. Paris has obviously
:44:33. > :44:38.had a very good experience of probation, but I have to admit that
:44:39. > :44:42.I have not. And I have found that these young boys go to prison, they
:44:43. > :44:48.come out, and we must remember that under the age of 25, you have 75%
:44:49. > :44:52.reoffending rates within one year. Well, certainly, my boys would have
:44:53. > :44:56.reoffended within the first day that they came out of prison, because
:44:57. > :45:01.when teenage boys go to prison, they get a lot to eat, they grow out of
:45:02. > :45:05.all their clothes, and they would have robbed them the very first day.
:45:06. > :45:11.I did not find the probation system at all helpful. They were just
:45:12. > :45:14.simply... For example, they have ?40 when they come out, and the
:45:15. > :45:22.probation sends them all around the place, and that ?40 goes almost by
:45:23. > :45:27.the second day. What is your impression of the effect of
:45:28. > :45:33.privatisation? What do you think it would be? I'm actually quite keen,
:45:34. > :45:38.because last week went to see a charity that would be affected by
:45:39. > :45:43.this, St Giles' Trust Charity, who use a lot of ex-offenders in their
:45:44. > :45:49.charity to help mentor. They would be one of the sort of charity who
:45:50. > :45:54.would now be useful. We must remember, this is only low and
:45:55. > :45:57.medium-risk. The high-risk prisoners would remain with probation. They'll
:45:58. > :46:02.go into the jails and see them right at the beginning of their sentence,
:46:03. > :46:05.because what goes wrong is there's no overall structure for these boys.
:46:06. > :46:10.They come out and there's nowhere for them and no job. This is what
:46:11. > :46:17.will be done and they'll be judged on whether they succeed. How do you
:46:18. > :46:28.think companies like G4S and Serco are going to take care of people
:46:29. > :46:32.given their current practises? It's a question I would like to hear
:46:33. > :46:35.Jeremy Browne on, because he was, until earlier this month, the Home
:46:36. > :46:38.Office minister in the coalition for the Liberal Democrats. Presumably
:46:39. > :46:44.this issue came up. Were you in favour of it? What is your answer to
:46:45. > :46:46.the lady there? It's run by the Justice Department, not the Home
:46:47. > :46:50.Office, but there is overlap. I am in favour, because as a couple of
:46:51. > :46:54.members of the panel have already said, the biggest problem that we
:46:55. > :46:59.have to try to crack is is re-offending and we are up at around
:47:00. > :47:03.80% for young men coming out of prison within a year. Obviously,
:47:04. > :47:07.that's bad for those individuals, because we want to try to
:47:08. > :47:10.rehabilitate them and make a constructive contribution to society
:47:11. > :47:15.and it's bad for all of us, because they may break into our houses or
:47:16. > :47:19.cars or whatever it might be. This is an absolutely crucial area that
:47:20. > :47:25.we need to try to get to grips with. I think if we can find new ways to
:47:26. > :47:28.make services work better and more effectively, particularly for those
:47:29. > :47:35.groups of people, then why shouldn't we? Why do we think that one size
:47:36. > :47:39.fits all? I have been to prisons in the last year as a minister and
:47:40. > :47:44.there are some very imaginative works being done. There are large
:47:45. > :47:47.numbers of prisoners who have Miss Used -- misused drugs and some of
:47:48. > :47:51.the work being done with them, so they have a service which runs
:47:52. > :47:54.through from when they're in prison and on release continues to support
:47:55. > :47:58.them when they're released, have had some very good results. There's been
:47:59. > :48:05.a lot of pilot studies in prisons about what can be done to try to
:48:06. > :48:12.help prisoners in terms of seeing their families. The issue is
:48:13. > :48:20.privatisation. I want to go back to the question. Are you getting the
:48:21. > :48:27.answers that satisfy you? I'm not. I'm very tired. I'm very, very tired
:48:28. > :48:31.of hearing this coupling of the fact we have an acknowledged and rated
:48:32. > :48:34.excellent Probation Service and the Government keep mentioning this
:48:35. > :48:40.problem with young men coming out of prison and re-offending and the
:48:41. > :48:43.rate. The Probation Service rated excellent have never had
:48:44. > :48:49.responsibility for that. You have your little trial. You have the
:48:50. > :48:52.pilot, we do the work extremely well and it's not fair to producing the
:48:53. > :49:03.statistic about young men out of prison when they've never been the
:49:04. > :49:11.responsibility of the Probation Service. I think the lady is right.
:49:12. > :49:14.We all accept the re-offending and governments have not managed to
:49:15. > :49:20.crack it. It doesn't have anything to do with the privatation of the
:49:21. > :49:24.Probation Service. I say to Harriet and Jeremy, who have talked very
:49:25. > :49:27.warmly about the work that certain charities have done, I think
:49:28. > :49:36.charities should be the added bit. They shouldn't be doing it instead
:49:37. > :49:40.of the Government. There are lots of reasons for re-offending. In my
:49:41. > :49:46.constituency, as every constituency MP gets, you get quite a lot of
:49:47. > :49:49.people who you see five years later again and have problems, but the
:49:50. > :49:54.reasons for re-offending might have something to do with the fact there
:49:55. > :49:58.is one million young people unemployed under 25 and the fact
:49:59. > :50:03.that it's impossible for many people to get housing under the age of 25
:50:04. > :50:07.and a whole series of social issues let alone the failure to deal with
:50:08. > :50:13.the massive drugs problem that there is in the country. I just thought
:50:14. > :50:17.this lady here asked a very good question that really put the finger
:50:18. > :50:21.on the point for what is the weak part of this. That those big
:50:22. > :50:26.companies G4S, they are the only ones at the moment who can afford to
:50:27. > :50:30.invest upfront, because if you're going to judge a company by how if
:50:31. > :50:34.they can stop someone re-offending within a year, you have to put a lot
:50:35. > :50:39.of work and a lot of money upfront to do that. So, the small charity
:50:40. > :50:45.obviously can't do that and that's a weakness. What I'm hoping is that
:50:46. > :50:49.the big companies will use the small charities, because you need to have
:50:50. > :50:56.individuals. I think it's a little bit - Maybe I'm being too
:50:57. > :51:01.optimistic. G4S did such a good job for the Olympics. A gree, it's a
:51:02. > :51:10.problem. -- I agree, it's a problem. We'll go on to one more question
:51:11. > :51:17.from Craig LunT. Is anyone served by a creation of a regulator which no
:51:18. > :51:20.journalists will join. This is a Royal Charter agreed by the Queen
:51:21. > :51:25.and everybody in the House of Commons and by no newspapers. What
:51:26. > :51:33.is the point of it all? Paris Already ee section -- Paris Lees? I
:51:34. > :51:36.campaigned for better media representation for transgender
:51:37. > :51:42.people and I'm also a journalist, so I'm trying to establish myself in a
:51:43. > :51:46.media that I'm trying to reform. I can honestly say that the idea that
:51:47. > :51:49.this industry can regulate itself is like expecting a pack of wolves to
:51:50. > :51:57.regulate its own hunt. It's just not going to happen. Clearly, they'll
:51:58. > :52:00.never sign up to something that the Government has come up with. You
:52:01. > :52:04.will never find a solution that's good for everybody, but there needs
:52:05. > :52:09.to be somethin They're meant to be self-regulating for 300 years I read
:52:10. > :52:14.in the Daily Mail, but it's not working. Ofcom does it. Television
:52:15. > :52:19.does it. What makes newspapers so special? And can I say actually it's
:52:20. > :52:22.been really refreshing to see Ed Miliband taking on the Daily Mail. I
:52:23. > :52:27.was surprised because people are terrified of taking on the
:52:28. > :52:35.newspapers. Ever since then in Prime Minister's questions he had rope in
:52:36. > :52:43.his penis and it's done him the world of good. Broadly speaking, I
:52:44. > :52:52.agree with Paris! Including about the last mitt? Your obsessed? I
:52:53. > :52:56.think ordinary members of the public know that the PCC and the system
:52:57. > :53:00.we've had didn't work. The people of Hillsborough were not served. They
:53:01. > :53:04.couldn't get a correction out of the Sun or use the courts because no
:53:05. > :53:10.criminal offence had been committed when it said that fans had stolen
:53:11. > :53:15.from dead people's pockets and all that stuff, all of which was untrue,
:53:16. > :53:20.because the PCC didn't work. What I want is a very simple thing which is
:53:21. > :53:24.a system whereby people - newspapers have to correct it when they've got
:53:25. > :53:27.it wrong. Did you vote for the Royal Charter? I can't remember whether
:53:28. > :53:33.there was a vote, but I campaigned for this for so long now. Do you
:53:34. > :53:37.think it's fair that under the crime and courts act courts are told that
:53:38. > :53:41.publishers who don't belong to it Royal Charter, which none of them
:53:42. > :53:46.wish to belong to, will have to pay not only their own legal fees but
:53:47. > :53:50.the fees of people who sue them and for a fund to have no case, so
:53:51. > :53:57.everybody can sue without risk of losing money themselves and the
:53:58. > :54:01.prior for will have to pay? Is that bullying of the press? The press
:54:02. > :54:05.sometimes bully as wellment Yes, some of the most vulnerable members
:54:06. > :54:09.of the society, who don't have the money to take them to court, like
:54:10. > :54:13.the rich celebrities. It's a very good point. What Lord Leveson tried
:54:14. > :54:18.to do and what the charter tries to do is tries to say that there should
:54:19. > :54:21.be a fair system and it's up to the newspapers whether they sign up, but
:54:22. > :54:26.there will be incentives. It is that if they sign up to the Royal Charter
:54:27. > :54:31.system then there will be a cheaper way of arbitration. All the
:54:32. > :54:35.hyperbole and exaggeration and tosh that the newspapers have come out
:54:36. > :54:41.with in last fortnight is frankly not doing favours. Harriet. I right
:54:42. > :54:46.for the Dale why mail and the Sunday Times, so I'm not on these people's
:54:47. > :54:50.side. I think we should judge institutions by how they feel with
:54:51. > :54:56.their scandals and we have had scandals in the press. That is all
:54:57. > :55:01.clear. How have they dealt with their scandals? We have two editors
:55:02. > :55:10.on trial. We have eight journalists on trial in the courts. The News of
:55:11. > :55:14.the World no longer exists. But let's talk about how other
:55:15. > :55:19.institutions have dealt recently with their scandals. We'll look at
:55:20. > :55:26.the BBC. Let's look at bankers. Let's look at the NHS. What happens
:55:27. > :55:32.there? Aren't their people when things happen, they are rotten
:55:33. > :55:43.apples, are they in jail? Are any of them on trial? I don't think so.
:55:44. > :55:46.Jeremy Browne. I'll respond directly. I'm in favour of free
:55:47. > :55:51.speech and expression and free press, but it's not a completely
:55:52. > :55:56.unconditional freedom and that freedom comes with responsibilities.
:55:57. > :56:00.We also ought to protect weak people, vulnerable people from the
:56:01. > :56:04.effects of the powerful. The powerful can be the State and it can
:56:05. > :56:08.be companies, but it can be groups of organisations including
:56:09. > :56:12.newspapers. The winds of change are blowing through large parts of our
:56:13. > :56:16.country. We know it in Parliament, where it's happened. It's happening
:56:17. > :56:20.in the trade unions and elsewhere. The days of self-regulating and
:56:21. > :56:23.don't you worry about too much, and we're not having transparency or
:56:24. > :56:27.openness, I think those days are going. Not just in the media, but
:56:28. > :56:30.across the board in services, companies and Parliament. I think
:56:31. > :56:39.the media have to realise that they have responsibilities. I have to
:56:40. > :56:43.move you on. Matthew Hancock, the stalemate is between a Royal Charter
:56:44. > :56:49.and the press, what will happen? What the public want to see is the
:56:50. > :56:52.press freedoms that we have had for years and that rightly are there to
:56:53. > :56:58.make sure that politicians are held to account, that our country is run
:56:59. > :57:02.in a fair and transparent way. But with safeguards to make sure that
:57:03. > :57:07.the vulnerable are protected and that victims are supported and that
:57:08. > :57:11.those who can't fight back have a voice in this, but I would not want
:57:12. > :57:16.that to overrule the fact that we have a fantastic thing in Britain,
:57:17. > :57:20.which is we stand up to the over-mighty and fight back against
:57:21. > :57:25.the hierarchy and it's that freedom that the press argue so passionately
:57:26. > :57:31.for that even though it affects me negatively as a politician, because
:57:32. > :57:35.they have a go at all -- And expose your expenses? Absolutely, which
:57:36. > :57:40.wouldn't have happened without a free press and that makes me proud
:57:41. > :57:47.to be British. The press are the hierarchy. We are talking about 500
:57:48. > :57:50.of the most elite, pampered, privileged overwhelmingly white and
:57:51. > :57:59.heterosexual, old-boys club that went to eation and Cambridge. ! Are
:58:00. > :58:05.you talking about the BBC or the NHS? I wish the Prime Minister would
:58:06. > :58:12.do it again. We must stop. Our our is up. We'll be in Boston in
:58:13. > :58:16.Lincolnshire. It's the town with the highest proportion of Eastern
:58:17. > :58:26.European immigrants in the UK and we'll have Nigel Farage of UKIP
:58:27. > :58:30.there. And Anna suebury for the Tories and the week after that we'll
:58:31. > :58:35.be in Brighton and if you can come either to Boston or to Brighton, the
:58:36. > :58:43.rules are always the same, the number is on the screen:
:58:44. > :58:51.If you're listening to this on BBC radio live the debate goes on. But
:58:52. > :58:57.from us here, my thanks to the panel, to all of you who came here
:58:58. > :58:58.tonight to take part in the programme, until next Thursday, good
:58:59. > :59:00.night.