:00:20. > :00:24.And a big welcome to you as always at home, and welcome to the audience
:00:25. > :00:28.who will question the panel, who do not know what those questions are.
:00:29. > :00:35.Our panel tonight, Conservative defence Minister, Anna Soubry,
:00:36. > :00:41.Labour Minister, Rushanara Ali, Plaid Cymru's leader in Westminster,
:00:42. > :00:43.Elfyn Llwyd. Freelance columnist Melanie Phillips and novelist and
:00:44. > :01:00.food critic Jay Rayner. I would like to start with a
:01:01. > :01:08.question from Cynthia Jennings. Why is RBS paying bonuses when they have
:01:09. > :01:14.lost money? The Royal Bank of Scotland, owned by
:01:15. > :01:21.us, 83%, lost billions this year, paying over half ?1 billion in
:01:22. > :01:30.bonuses. Why? Jay Rayner. Because they are bankers, and they behave
:01:31. > :01:37.like bankers. We need banks. We have always needed them, just not the
:01:38. > :01:40.kind we have got. The surprise that greets the bonus season when it
:01:41. > :01:43.comes round mystifies me, because it is what they have always done, even
:01:44. > :01:47.when losing large amounts of money. They will say, if we don't pay
:01:48. > :01:50.bonuses we don't get the right people and if we don't get the right
:01:51. > :01:55.people we want make any money. They do not make any money anyway, but it
:01:56. > :02:00.is the way the banking system works. We have to decide what kind of
:02:01. > :02:03.banking system want. We heard the RBS boss justifying the bonuses on
:02:04. > :02:11.those grounds, where are people going to go? Is there a huge demand
:02:12. > :02:16.for bankers? I suspect there is a huge demand. So it is justified?
:02:17. > :02:20.There is an argument but they are floating between each other. The
:02:21. > :02:23.main issue for RBS is that they have continued trying to have an
:02:24. > :02:27.investment banking arm at the same time as a retail banking arm.
:02:28. > :02:31.Investment banking is a nice phrase for playing bingo, which they have
:02:32. > :02:38.been doing with taxpayers money for a long time, but they are not very
:02:39. > :02:43.good at it. Are you shocked? The bonus culture is lost on me, if I am
:02:44. > :02:46.honest. I have never been paid a bonus in my life. Some might say I
:02:47. > :02:51.have never deserved one, but I never worked in a business where they paid
:02:52. > :03:04.bonuses, so it is lost on me. I am pleased we put a cap on the RBS
:03:05. > :03:10.bonuses. A cap of ?2000. So how is it spending ?500 million on bonuses?
:03:11. > :03:15.You can buy shares and cash them in. The cap is 200% of income. I am not
:03:16. > :03:19.going to sit here and defend the banks when they do these things
:03:20. > :03:23.which seem incomprehensible, but I will say that I have no doubt that
:03:24. > :03:26.the reputation of our banks is such, possibly with great merit, that they
:03:27. > :03:33.do have problems actually recruiting and often retaining people. So I can
:03:34. > :03:40.understand why they will pay out these bonuses. You, over there, sir.
:03:41. > :03:47.If you look at the banking industry in context, they have been bailed
:03:48. > :03:52.out to the point of 1.2 trillion. We are having austerity forced on us
:03:53. > :03:56.across Europe as a result of that. And the industry still hasn't been
:03:57. > :04:01.reformed. There is still no ring-fenced between investment banks
:04:02. > :04:06.and retail banks, and they are still able to engage in casino practices
:04:07. > :04:10.with our money. Bankers have also been responsible for fixing the
:04:11. > :04:14.LIBOR rate, mis-selling PPI, bringing small businesses to their
:04:15. > :04:19.knees through dubious selling practices on interest rate swaps. It
:04:20. > :04:22.is time we had some proper legislation in this country and
:04:23. > :04:23.across Europe to regulate the banking industry.
:04:24. > :04:40.APPLAUSE Cynthia Jennings, what do you think?
:04:41. > :04:43.I think, across-the-board, if nobody got paid bonuses and got paid a
:04:44. > :04:55.reasonable salary, then the bankers would not be able to jump up to
:04:56. > :05:00.wherever they want to go. I think for a government owned bank that was
:05:01. > :05:04.partially owned, bailed out by the taxpayer, it is completely
:05:05. > :05:09.irresponsible to give those sorts of bonuses. And at a time when you have
:05:10. > :05:13.people queueing in food banks, high levels of poverty, I think the
:05:14. > :05:16.government needs to step up and take action against this kind of reward,
:05:17. > :05:24.which is completely unjustified when everyone else is suffering in this
:05:25. > :05:34.country. How would you do it? Your party is in power. You had 13 years
:05:35. > :05:39.to regulate and sort out the banks. You should take some responsibility.
:05:40. > :05:43.We have done. We introduced a tax. We have taken the LIBOR funding and
:05:44. > :05:48.we have given it to charities connected with the wounded, injured
:05:49. > :05:56.Armed Forces personnel. We have taken tough action. Is that why,
:05:57. > :06:02.today, people are getting bonuses, a partially owned government bank,
:06:03. > :06:07.people are getting bonuses? What would your policy be? We have made
:06:08. > :06:11.it absolutely clear that there should be a tax on bankers bonuses.
:06:12. > :06:16.That money should be used to get young people back to work. Nearly 1
:06:17. > :06:19.million young people out of work, that is unacceptable. Your
:06:20. > :06:26.government should act to stop this irresponsible behaviour. You made 11
:06:27. > :06:31.sets of promises. I hate to come between these warring parties, but
:06:32. > :06:37.if I can be evenhanded about this, I think both the Labour Party and the
:06:38. > :06:41.Tory party are just very frightened, once in government, of driving money
:06:42. > :06:51.away, particularly from London. It is a source of great regret to many
:06:52. > :06:54.of us that much of the economic activity, we measure progress of
:06:55. > :07:00.this country by the wealth of the City of London. It has become a kind
:07:01. > :07:06.of fetish, that this is where we are strongest, in making money out of
:07:07. > :07:10.money. Isn't that true? What do you do about it if it is true and it is
:07:11. > :07:12.where our money comes from? It would be very nice if this country was
:07:13. > :07:21.making things again. APPLAUSE
:07:22. > :07:28.And not making money out of money. How do you achieve that? Hang on.
:07:29. > :07:32.Not for long. Why should it be not for long. This is a counsel of
:07:33. > :07:36.despair. I don't believe Britain can never make things again. I think
:07:37. > :07:40.there is unpleasant about the whole fat cat obsession. If someone has a
:07:41. > :07:44.lot of money, then he should not have it almost by definition. I am
:07:45. > :07:51.concerned about that but I also think that the RBS, as people have
:07:52. > :07:54.said, it is taxpayer money. The taxpayer has bailed out this bank.
:07:55. > :07:57.This bank and others have done a great deal of harm to the economy.
:07:58. > :08:04.Ordinary people have suffered. They seem to show no sense of not
:08:05. > :08:07.responsibility, but even a sense of acknowledgement of the enormity of
:08:08. > :08:13.what they have done. You, in the pink shirt. It is not just
:08:14. > :08:17.unacceptable that these people are doing this. It is unbelievable that
:08:18. > :08:21.they can display such immense greed. I would like to see the two
:08:22. > :08:25.governments, the former government and the current government, who
:08:26. > :08:28.failed to curb these people. They are a powerful group of people and
:08:29. > :08:32.they need both parties to work together to curb the greed of what
:08:33. > :08:36.is an extremely avaricious group of people who are the true villains of
:08:37. > :08:45.our depression. APPLAUSE
:08:46. > :08:50.It is one thing to say that the Labour government did not regulate
:08:51. > :08:53.against the banks for 11 years, but you still have not.
:08:54. > :08:58.You are in government now and you still haven't. I will pick up on
:08:59. > :09:03.Melanie's point as well. It is not that they have got a lot of money,
:09:04. > :09:07.it is that they do not deserve it. I would agree with you when it comes
:09:08. > :09:12.to RBS, but there is a mood in the country that no one who has a lot of
:09:13. > :09:16.money deserves it. And this is very subjective. At what point do we say
:09:17. > :09:21.a person does not deserve it? This is a dangerous road to go down. At
:09:22. > :09:25.the point at which a banker is earning 100 times the wage of a
:09:26. > :09:31.cleaner, that is when -- that is when we say it is enough. Who says?
:09:32. > :09:37.You? Who draws the line, and on what basis? We have vast inequality in
:09:38. > :09:43.this country. I can't believe you are backing bankers on this. There
:09:44. > :09:48.is huge inequality in this country. I am not backing bankers in these
:09:49. > :09:52.bonuses. Not the bonuses, but the huge pay that they get. It is
:09:53. > :09:59.indefensible. APPLAUSE
:10:00. > :10:04.Some people blame the banks for everything, but hearing news as we
:10:05. > :10:09.did today, I am not surprised. Because they are actually taking us
:10:10. > :10:12.for a ride. Part of my function is to try to negotiate with banks for
:10:13. > :10:17.small loans for small businesses in my patch. They are closing down
:10:18. > :10:24.viable businesses at the same time as they are pushing money into their
:10:25. > :10:28.bankers' pockets. If it is the argument that if you do not overpay
:10:29. > :10:33.them disgustingly they will work elsewhere, OK. The way to deal with
:10:34. > :10:36.that, in my view, is to have a pan-European ruling. All European
:10:37. > :10:40.countries come together and say, we are not having it. They want to make
:10:41. > :10:45.an X it for the Far East, good luck to them. Can I just say this. There
:10:46. > :10:49.has been an attempt to deal with them but it is not working. For
:10:50. > :10:55.example, HSBC have announced this week that they will be to bring
:10:56. > :11:00.similar bonuses to their top people, but calling it an extra salary. It
:11:01. > :11:04.will not be a bonus but an increase in salary. But if you do not do it
:11:05. > :11:12.on a pan-European basis, it simply will not work, in my view. I am not
:11:13. > :11:15.an advocate for bankers. None of my best friends are bankers. But I
:11:16. > :11:20.think we need to inject some realism. The whole of the global
:11:21. > :11:23.free market system is invested in banking. All your pensions and
:11:24. > :11:28.mortgages are invested in banking. We have built a system on banking.
:11:29. > :11:31.The idea that we would have it on a pan-European scale would not change
:11:32. > :11:38.anything. They will move to the States, to Switzerland. It might
:11:39. > :11:42.take an age to get an agreement but it is worthwhile otherwise they will
:11:43. > :11:46.continue to take us for a ride. If the European come together and
:11:47. > :11:50.discuss - I was in a conference in Athens fortnight ago discussing
:11:51. > :11:54.various things. Why don't we prioritise this issue and deal with
:11:55. > :12:07.it on a pan-European basis? We will move on because we have a lot of
:12:08. > :12:12.questions. You can join the debate. A question from Jonathan Sherwood.
:12:13. > :12:19.Should the deals made with the IRA still provide immunity from
:12:20. > :12:23.prosecution for alleged terrorists? This, in the light of the Downey
:12:24. > :12:30.case that came before the courts this week. Should the deals made
:12:31. > :12:34.with the IRA still provide immunity from prosecution? You will forgive
:12:35. > :12:37.me if I sound like the lawyer I used to be before I got elected, but it
:12:38. > :12:43.depends on the nature of the promise made. Downey should never, in any
:12:44. > :12:49.event, have been made anything like the promise he was made. Why? First,
:12:50. > :12:53.because there was clear involvement by him in an excerpt -- in an
:12:54. > :12:57.explosion that cause people to be murdered. In any event, there was
:12:58. > :13:00.also a warrant for his arrest because of the evidence against him
:13:01. > :13:05.for this attack and this awful crime. And there was a warrant out,
:13:06. > :13:09.and all they had to do, which I am assuming they did not do, and this
:13:10. > :13:13.is what this judge leading choir in will discover, they only had to find
:13:14. > :13:18.out from The Met whether or not there was a warrant outstanding
:13:19. > :13:20.against any of them. They should have made those checks. I am
:13:21. > :13:24.assuming they did and something happened, but if they had done and
:13:25. > :13:29.had got the proper information, then they would never have given him this
:13:30. > :13:36.letter that enabled him, therefore, to come to this country on the basis
:13:37. > :13:40.that there will was no warrant for his arrest. The Northern Ireland
:13:41. > :13:44.Secretary says these letters do not amount to immunity, exemption or
:13:45. > :13:47.amnesty from arrest. So what are they about? Your government has been
:13:48. > :13:56.issuing them as well as the previous one. There were two sets. The first
:13:57. > :14:01.set were issued in 2007-2008. Downey is one of those 183. These letters
:14:02. > :14:07.say to people that there is no reason to believe that there are any
:14:08. > :14:11.warrants out against you. Downey's position seems to have been in
:14:12. > :14:15.relation to the fact that, having come into this country, he is then
:14:16. > :14:20.arrested, and effectively, from what I can gather, the reason why the
:14:21. > :14:22.judge stayed the indictment, stopped the proceedings was because
:14:23. > :14:27.effectively the state had said to him, we will not arrest you if you
:14:28. > :14:32.come to the country. That is what you are doing with these other
:14:33. > :14:37.letters. The second set, I have not seen the content. That is what
:14:38. > :14:41.Theresa Villiers is referring to and we have to accept that she has seen
:14:42. > :14:46.the content and she says they do not amount to a promise not to
:14:47. > :14:51.prosecute. So what is the point of them? I do not know. It may be that
:14:52. > :14:55.these letters are different. Elfyn and I are both lawyers, so we have
:14:56. > :14:58.an understanding of the peculiarities and I accept it is
:14:59. > :15:02.often very difficult to explain and for people to understand how a
:15:03. > :15:06.promise by the state to a man like Downey, who was charged with very
:15:07. > :15:11.serious offences, evidence against him, we end up having to stay the
:15:12. > :15:23.indictment. The question was whether the deals made with the IRA should
:15:24. > :15:26.provide immunity from prosecution? As I understand it, and I was
:15:27. > :15:30.listening very careful to Dominic Grieve in the house the other day
:15:31. > :15:37.when he went through it very carefully, what he was saying was
:15:38. > :15:41.that these letters said that we are not currently interested in any
:15:42. > :15:47.misdoings that you might have done and that is about all. They were a
:15:48. > :15:51.snapshot in time. I agree with Anna. What we need to do, I do not think
:15:52. > :15:55.you can withdraw them, it is not relevant any more, but whether there
:15:56. > :16:02.is a case to investigate each and every one of these people again, I
:16:03. > :16:05.do not know. I want to say this. All the parties in Northern Ireland were
:16:06. > :16:09.furious about this and I can understand that because of the
:16:10. > :16:15.nature of the awful crime that this man is alleged to have perpetrated.
:16:16. > :16:19.Having said that, evidence is now coming out that the policing board
:16:20. > :16:24.in Northern Ireland, which is comprised of every party in the
:16:25. > :16:32.Northern Ireland political system, were aware of these letters some
:16:33. > :16:37.time ago. In fact, back in 2010, if not before. So, it is not something
:16:38. > :16:45.which has suddenly been sprung on them. The question is, should they
:16:46. > :16:48.provide immunity? The point of the letter at the time was an
:16:49. > :16:54.interpretation of the peace agreement, where they said, at this
:16:55. > :17:00.moment in time, we are not interested in you as being a
:17:01. > :17:05.potential... Why would you write that to someone? It was in order to
:17:06. > :17:11.carry three parts of the Belfast agreement. Nothing anybody in this
:17:12. > :17:14.room says tonight will make the pain of people who have lost someone in
:17:15. > :17:20.the trouble is any better, nor will it make it any worse. -- the
:17:21. > :17:26.Troubles. It is a deep and dark wound. But war is hard, peace is
:17:27. > :17:30.even harder. At a time when the negotiations were going on, those
:17:31. > :17:34.who issued these letters thought they had a chance. The thing that is
:17:35. > :17:38.slightly distressing, if this had never come to light, if there had
:17:39. > :17:42.not been the warrant held by Scotland Yard, if this turned up 20
:17:43. > :17:46.years down the line, it would end up as a footnote to the history of
:17:47. > :17:53.peace in Northern Ireland. Justice is an important thing but so is
:17:54. > :17:58.peace. You in the spectacles. Perhaps it is not Peter Robinson who
:17:59. > :18:04.should be resigning but the people who drafted the letters in the first
:18:05. > :18:09.place. I'm just wondering, if you are creating a peace process, you
:18:10. > :18:13.have to be able to trust the other side's word. The second that we
:18:14. > :18:17.start going back against promises that are made, how will we ever
:18:18. > :18:21.create peace in the future if no one is going to trust our government?
:18:22. > :18:27.Despite what Theresa Villiers said, you think these letters are promised
:18:28. > :18:35.not to prosecute. I cannot say what the letters say, we have not seen
:18:36. > :18:38.them. Downie said what they said. If the letters themselves state that
:18:39. > :18:42.there is a promise against prosecution and I am not saying that
:18:43. > :18:46.they do, obviously, the situation is a disgusting situation in the first
:18:47. > :18:52.place, if that is what the letter says, if we as a country are ever
:18:53. > :18:55.going to negotiate peace, people have to be able to believe in the
:18:56. > :18:59.promises we make. The second we start going against those promises,
:19:00. > :19:09.our credibility as a peacemaking country is destroyed. Do you agree
:19:10. > :19:17.with him, Melanie? I do not agree with this gentleman because the
:19:18. > :19:22.arguments here are making -- he is making, is that the end justifies
:19:23. > :19:26.the means. You do bad things in the case for the greater good. The
:19:27. > :19:32.greater good was peace in Northern Ireland. But you can see from
:19:33. > :19:35.today's amazing jitteriness from the government, and the threat of the
:19:36. > :19:41.dissolution of the power-sharing executive, that the piece is very
:19:42. > :19:46.fragile, it is conditional. The fear is that if this power-sharing
:19:47. > :19:50.executive collapses, we will go back to violence. It is like a sort of
:19:51. > :19:54.protection racket. The point about these letters as I understand it is
:19:55. > :19:58.this, it is not a promise, it is not immunity... I want to pick up one
:19:59. > :20:02.thing because I think you are missing the point. It is not just
:20:03. > :20:07.about the peace in Northern Ireland, it is a large issue. We deal with
:20:08. > :20:11.international incidents, terrorist organisations all round the world.
:20:12. > :20:15.If we are saying in this one case it is acceptable to say promises we
:20:16. > :20:19.made to create peace can be broken just before they have come to light
:20:20. > :20:24.in a certain way, all of a sudden, any promise we make in the future
:20:25. > :20:27.becomes incredible so you can therefore not create peace. The
:20:28. > :20:33.point I was going to make is it is not a promise. As I understand it,
:20:34. > :20:37.it was a nod and a wink to keep the peace process on track, nod and a
:20:38. > :20:43.wink to a set of individuals who were on the run. They are called on
:20:44. > :20:48.the runs. Why were they on the run? Because they were suspected of
:20:49. > :20:51.terrorist activity. This letter said it explicitly, at this moment in
:20:52. > :20:56.time, there is no evidence against you and we are not seeking any
:20:57. > :21:00.evidence against you. In the case of John Downey, this was incorrect. The
:21:01. > :21:08.Metropolitan police were seeking him. But that to one side. They are
:21:09. > :21:12.saying, a nod and a wink, chaps, you can basically live your lives, we
:21:13. > :21:17.are not coming after you. The question is is that acceptable? I
:21:18. > :21:22.would say it is not acceptable. Justice denied can never produce a
:21:23. > :21:28.just society. The piece is conditional. There is still a threat
:21:29. > :21:32.of violence. You say promises must be kept and I agree with you and
:21:33. > :21:36.that is why this case was thrown out. The promise was made to this
:21:37. > :21:41.man John Downey. He thought he would come to England without a problem
:21:42. > :21:45.and that is why the judge said, you cannot carry on with the trial. But
:21:46. > :21:51.the promise was made behind the backs, as far as one can see, behind
:21:52. > :21:57.the backs of parties to the peace process. They would never have
:21:58. > :22:02.accepted it. In April 2010, there was a meeting of the Northern
:22:03. > :22:06.Ireland policing board were these were, this matter was raised and at
:22:07. > :22:13.that meeting there were three members of the DUP. They did not
:22:14. > :22:20.discuss it with others. Hang on a second, I want to hear from
:22:21. > :22:23.Rushanara. Clearly, a mistake was made in this case. With the review
:22:24. > :22:30.that has been announced today, it has got to look into this issue. I
:22:31. > :22:34.would know that if I was a family member of the victims I would want
:22:35. > :22:38.justice. But at the same time, we have to recognise that the Northern
:22:39. > :22:42.Ireland peace process has secured freedom from terrorism, freedom from
:22:43. > :22:49.conflict and we have got to keep our eye on that issue, because as a
:22:50. > :22:51.country, as a nation, we are better protected because of it. The
:22:52. > :22:54.injustice that these families have faced needs to be addressed and that
:22:55. > :23:02.is what the enquiry will need to look at. You, sir. Just one question
:23:03. > :23:12.here, can we afford to put our troops in danger, by making promises
:23:13. > :23:16.not to prosecute? Because our troops who are out there today, their
:23:17. > :23:20.families who are out there today, are we going to make similar
:23:21. > :23:24.promises with the government in power today or governments in the
:23:25. > :23:32.future? Are you against the promises being made, no amnesty of any kind?
:23:33. > :23:36.Is it peace at any cost? I think everyone has had to say so I am
:23:37. > :23:44.going to move on. We have many questions. Jean Holloway, please. Is
:23:45. > :23:46.it not time that Harriet Harman came out and apologised for her links
:23:47. > :23:59.with the Paedophile Information Exchange? Melanie Phillips. I think
:24:00. > :24:03.it is a good development what happened today, that Patricia Hewitt
:24:04. > :24:06.who was running the National Council for Civil Liberties, during this
:24:07. > :24:12.period when the Paedophile Information Exchange was associated
:24:13. > :24:18.with them, has said very clearly that it was wrong, we were naive, we
:24:19. > :24:21.should not have had them as part of the National Council for Civil
:24:22. > :24:24.Liberties and I apologise. If Harriet Harman had said that at the
:24:25. > :24:30.beginning, there would be no story. This whole furore ER I'm afraid has
:24:31. > :24:36.been fuelled by Harriet Harman going of the deep end, being the raises,
:24:37. > :24:41.accusing the newspapers of accusing her of stuff they had not accused
:24:42. > :24:47.her of and above all, do denying that there was a problem with the
:24:48. > :24:50.National Council for Civil Liberties having the Paedophile Information
:24:51. > :24:54.Exchange is one of its members. I am at bit baffled about why she did not
:24:55. > :24:59.to say what Patricia Hewitt has said today. It is an interesting
:25:00. > :25:03.historical issue and I think it has some relevance to today, that
:25:04. > :25:10.progressive opinion in those days, and I remember, I remember when they
:25:11. > :25:15.were associated and I remember the unease around that whole issue at
:25:16. > :25:20.the time. But there was then a climate, on the progressive side of
:25:21. > :25:25.politics, on the left, which was assessed with rights. And it did not
:25:26. > :25:29.draw a distinction between the rights of adults and the rights of
:25:30. > :25:33.children and the whole issue of sex was mixed up with rights and
:25:34. > :25:37.everyone had a right to everything, and children had rights. The whole
:25:38. > :25:41.thing was framed in terms of rights. We find it hard to
:25:42. > :25:46.understand this. I am old enough to have lived through it. It was a kind
:25:47. > :25:51.of madness. I thought it was mad at the time. Children, in my view, do
:25:52. > :25:55.not have rights to sexual activity. We as adults, have a duty to
:25:56. > :26:00.children to protect them while they were children. This was the terrible
:26:01. > :26:05.confusion of the time. I think that confusion has bled into all kinds of
:26:06. > :26:14.attitudes which persist today. We today have this great anxiety, now
:26:15. > :26:20.about paedophilia. Then it was not called paedophilia. Then it was
:26:21. > :26:26.called... Love among children. It was presented in the most disgusting
:26:27. > :26:32.way. But the point was, progressive circles accept it, because it was
:26:33. > :26:35.all bound up, and the Paedophile Information Exchange gentleman, Mr
:26:36. > :26:38.O'Carroll, said perfectly correctly, and I remember this at the time, he
:26:39. > :26:43.said the problem was not that Harriet Harman supported
:26:44. > :26:48.paedophilia, not that she supported the PIE. In fact, she came onto the
:26:49. > :26:52.scene in the NCCL quite late on in this saga. The problem was it was
:26:53. > :26:57.mixed up with the whole gay rights agenda and people could not talk
:26:58. > :27:03.about paedophilia without talking about gay rights. Jay Rayner. If you
:27:04. > :27:06.think Harriet Harman, Patricia Hewitt and Jack Dromey back in the
:27:07. > :27:11.70s thought paedophilia was a really good thing, then hold them in utter
:27:12. > :27:15.contempt, never vote for the Labour Party again, throw them out.
:27:16. > :27:19.Personally, I can't help but see this as just the Daily Mail taking
:27:20. > :27:25.its revenge on a bunch of people they do not like. The 1970s was a
:27:26. > :27:29.strange time. You were on the left back in the 1970s as we all
:27:30. > :27:33.remember. My memory goes back that far. This is not about the rights
:27:34. > :27:36.and wrongs of paedophilia which we know is an obscenity and the way
:27:37. > :27:42.things were done in the 70s is bizarre. It is about the Daily Mail
:27:43. > :27:47.paper. The nearest we have to aid Paedophile Information Exchange is
:27:48. > :27:56.the Daily Mail website and its pictures of kids. It is true. I just
:27:57. > :28:03.think we need to understand this as another bit of anti-left, and to
:28:04. > :28:13.Labour propaganda by the Daily Mail. -- antilabour propaganda. You have
:28:14. > :28:17.not said whether she should apologise and is her reluctance to
:28:18. > :28:23.apologise because they see the Daily Mail as an antilabour organ. The
:28:24. > :28:28.story was in Private Eye many years ago, it is not new. The editor of
:28:29. > :28:33.the Daily Mail sees it as a great way to have a go at people in the
:28:34. > :28:38.Labour Party. You go back to the 70s, there are lots of things we
:28:39. > :28:42.could apologise for. The Daily Mail could apologise for supporting the
:28:43. > :28:50.black shirts back in the 30s if they like. It would be childish to ask
:28:51. > :28:55.them to do so. This story has only come out because of the Jimmy Savile
:28:56. > :28:57.affair. This is why it has been brought to our attention. It is
:28:58. > :29:02.nothing to do with the Daily Mail. They may have made an issue of it.
:29:03. > :29:08.Do you think it is legitimate to raise it? Because of that case there
:29:09. > :29:13.is no investigating back to that time which is why the story is out
:29:14. > :29:23.now. I did the Daily Mail have done a good job bringing it out. Anna
:29:24. > :29:28.Soubry. I do think Harriet Harman has handled badly. If she had come
:29:29. > :29:33.out and done all that the story would have gone away. It says a lot
:29:34. > :29:37.more about our attitudes. I am really not interested, if I may say
:29:38. > :29:41.in the fight between the Daily Mail and Harriet Harman, they can sort it
:29:42. > :29:45.out themselves, but I do not think she and Jack Dromey have done
:29:46. > :29:50.themselves any favours. I think it says more about the enormous change
:29:51. > :29:55.during my lifetime and the time at the bar towards child abuse and
:29:56. > :29:59.paedophilia. There is a much greater understanding, not only what an
:30:00. > :30:03.awful wicked thing it is, but the appalling damage it does to
:30:04. > :30:07.children. I have read some of those documents and Melanie is right. You
:30:08. > :30:11.have to read some of those documents that say there is not much harm if
:30:12. > :30:15.it is done to a child. It is the stuff of madness. The other thing we
:30:16. > :30:23.now know about paedophiles is Howard could be coming they are. I suspect
:30:24. > :30:26.Elfyn like I, have had the misfortune of representing
:30:27. > :30:29.paedophiles. I can assure you, I do not like to stereotype but I think
:30:30. > :30:34.we can with paedophiles, the things they do are bad and evil enough in
:30:35. > :30:38.themselves, but their wickedness and cunning, the way that they will in
:30:39. > :30:44.the their way into the affections of a child or a mother, that they will
:30:45. > :30:48.then commit this horrible abuse, and it is sickening, but it is a
:30:49. > :30:57.terrible perversion of that child as well. What do you make of the
:30:58. > :31:04.documents submitted in 1976 to Parliament which said activities
:31:05. > :31:11.willingly engaged in with an adult do not do any identifiable damage?
:31:12. > :31:16.Appalling. Absolutely disgusting. There is no point saying it was
:31:17. > :31:22.different in the 1970s. It was disgusting them, and it is
:31:23. > :31:27.disgusting now. Rushanara Ali, come to the defence of Harriet Harman. I
:31:28. > :31:32.have listened very closely to what everyone is saying here and it is
:31:33. > :31:36.clear that PIE was a vile organisation that tried to
:31:37. > :31:40.infiltrate and successfully infiltrated NCCL at that time. All
:31:41. > :31:44.of the things that people have said highlight the manipulative nature of
:31:45. > :31:50.paedophile organisations and paedophiles. But let's be clear,
:31:51. > :31:54.Harriet Harman has spent a lifetime campaigning for women and children
:31:55. > :31:58.and their rights. And the idea that she would condone and paedophiles is
:31:59. > :32:03.completely wrong and baseless. And there is not a shred of evidence to
:32:04. > :32:09.suggest otherwise. That is why I agree with Jay, that there is a
:32:10. > :32:13.political angle to this, there is a dimensional which is that the Daily
:32:14. > :32:17.Mail has a campaign against certain senior figures in the Labour Party.
:32:18. > :32:21.First it was Ed Miliband, an attack on his father, and now Harriet
:32:22. > :32:29.Harman. These allegations are baseless. Harriet has set out her
:32:30. > :32:35.role in NCCL. We have to remember that when a paper goes this far in
:32:36. > :32:38.attacking someone, despite her record, despite the work she has
:32:39. > :32:43.done championing children's rights, that worries me deeply. She could
:32:44. > :32:47.have said these things. I paid tribute to a lot of the work she has
:32:48. > :32:51.done and I pay tribute to your last government for its work on rape and
:32:52. > :32:58.enabling children to give evidence. That is why I think she has handled
:32:59. > :33:03.it badly. Tricia Hewitt apologised. Shami Chakrabarti apologised. Why
:33:04. > :33:11.didn't she apologise? Harriet has expressed regret. With respect,
:33:12. > :33:17.there is a difference between Shami Chakrabarti, who has an officer of
:33:18. > :33:21.Liberty, who has probably justifiably apologised. You are
:33:22. > :33:29.dealing with Harriet Harman who, at the time, was a fairly junior lawyer
:33:30. > :33:33.acting for the NCCL. She did not actually say we will affiliate to
:33:34. > :33:37.the PIE, or whatever. But she was there as a lawyer. It would have
:33:38. > :33:40.been better if she had said, I was a junior lawyer and I had nothing to
:33:41. > :33:46.do with affiliating them but it was a big mistake and I regret that
:33:47. > :33:51.mistake. But asking her to apologise is like asking me to apologise for
:33:52. > :33:58.the First World War. I will take one more point from the man at the back.
:33:59. > :34:01.Isn't there two points here? One, you put yourself in public office,
:34:02. > :34:05.you have to accept whatever is written about you. Secondly, you
:34:06. > :34:11.tell me any politician that will stand up and apologise when they are
:34:12. > :34:17.wrong. They don't. Yes, they do. If they don't, they should. They will
:34:18. > :34:21.find an excuse, always, never apologise to the public. Anna
:34:22. > :34:31.Soubry, have you ever apologised? Yes. For what? I am sure I have
:34:32. > :34:36.because I make so many mistakes. What you said about Nigel Farage,
:34:37. > :34:45.did you apologise for that? I did. We won't repeat it. Repeat it,
:34:46. > :34:48.please. We will not. Politicians do apologise. Trust me, the Daily Mail
:34:49. > :34:56.also is horrible things about Tories. Melanie has often said
:34:57. > :35:00.horrible things about me. They have not attacked the dead father of a
:35:01. > :35:09.Conservative leader. Let's move on. Has Britain lost control of its
:35:10. > :35:13.borders? Presumably in light of today's news that net immigration is
:35:14. > :35:22.up 200,000. Would that be right? Yes. Well, I don't think it has lost
:35:23. > :35:25.control, but everybody thought there would be an influx from within the
:35:26. > :35:31.European Union. There is free movement, after all. We must also
:35:32. > :35:35.remember that there are hundreds of thousands of British people in other
:35:36. > :35:39.countries within the European Union as well, so it works both ways.
:35:40. > :35:45.Didn't the Prime Minister say he would get it down to tens of
:35:46. > :35:51.thousands. Yes. What has gone wrong? I don't know. I don't sign up to his
:35:52. > :35:54.agenda and don't have any truck with the Conservative Party on this
:35:55. > :35:58.issue. I think there is room for inward migration and if we are to
:35:59. > :36:01.allow free movement within Europe, it works both ways and we need
:36:02. > :36:05.people to come in and work in various jobs that, actually, local
:36:06. > :36:13.people don't want to take up. APPLAUSE
:36:14. > :36:17.Of course, we benefit from it. But to answer your question, it seems to
:36:18. > :36:21.me that there is something radically wrong in the thinking of the Prime
:36:22. > :36:24.Minister and the border agency, if he was thinking that it's going to
:36:25. > :36:29.come down to tens of thousands in the next couple of years, when it's
:36:30. > :36:37.actually gone up to 200,000, just as bad as it was under the Labour
:36:38. > :36:43.government. You said just as bad. In his terms. Are you in favour or
:36:44. > :36:49.against it? I am not against it. You did use the word bad. You are quick
:36:50. > :36:55.today, David! If we are going to have free movement, it works both
:36:56. > :36:59.ways, that is the point. What do you think? If you look at the figures
:37:00. > :37:03.superficially, it is frightening but if you do the maths in terms of
:37:04. > :37:06.extrapolation it is not as bad as you think. The main concern is that
:37:07. > :37:12.the Southeast will get clogged up and infrastructure and transport
:37:13. > :37:16.will get stasis. David Cameron's whole policy on migration, trying to
:37:17. > :37:20.stop it, was dog whistle politics for the rump of his party and its
:37:21. > :37:25.xenophobic fears. I live in Brixton, south London, which has one
:37:26. > :37:28.of the highest proportions of visible ethnic minorities in Western
:37:29. > :37:32.Europe. I am used to a city which has many nationalities. The great
:37:33. > :37:36.thing about people who migrate is that they usually do it for good
:37:37. > :37:41.economic reasons. They want to work. To come up with a facile
:37:42. > :37:44.version of that, I am delighted with the arrival of Polish painters and
:37:45. > :37:48.decorators because they turn up on time, do a good job and then they
:37:49. > :37:53.leave. Unlike the British ones. These are people who are energetic,
:37:54. > :38:02.want to be here and want to work. They get paid and they pay into the
:38:03. > :38:08.tax kitty and we benefit from it. As the daughter of someone who came
:38:09. > :38:14.here in the 1960s labour shortage, I recognise the positive contribution
:38:15. > :38:20.people make to our country. And the strength in our diversity. And we
:38:21. > :38:26.saw that in the 2020 Olympics, the best show on earth. We thrived in
:38:27. > :38:30.our diversity. But there are major concerns about jobs, about youth
:38:31. > :38:35.unemployment. I see that in London and around the country. What's
:38:36. > :38:40.important is that we need confidence that the immigration system is going
:38:41. > :38:44.to work for both our economy, but also making sure people feel secure,
:38:45. > :38:49.people don't feel that change is happening too fast. That's a big
:38:50. > :38:53.challenge. That means we have to focus on making sure people who are
:38:54. > :38:57.able to work in our own country get the jobs they need, but at the same
:38:58. > :39:03.time it's a give-and-take, as Elfyn has said already. If we want a free
:39:04. > :39:08.and open Europe, where we benefit, 50% of our trade is with Europe,
:39:09. > :39:14.that means we will need to accept a level of freedom of movement between
:39:15. > :39:18.our countries, both people coming in and out. But that has to happen in a
:39:19. > :39:22.sensible way. We have to have a sensible approach to immigration.
:39:23. > :39:27.What brought your family from Bangladesh? My father came here in
:39:28. > :39:34.the 60s during a labour shortage, his skills shortage. He worked in
:39:35. > :39:39.manufacturing. He worked in the catering industry and later he
:39:40. > :39:44.worked, in fact, for a company in the east End of London that made
:39:45. > :39:54.hosepipes, garden hose pipes, which went bust, sadly after the ban on
:39:55. > :39:58.hosepipes. You talk about having to be careful about immigration. Did he
:39:59. > :40:02.find problems when he came in the 60s? Yes, he experienced huge
:40:03. > :40:06.amounts of racism and discrimination. I am proud to live
:40:07. > :40:12.in a country where that is ancient history now and written is a much
:40:13. > :40:20.more open and inclusive society. -- Britain. Melanie and I would not be
:40:21. > :40:29.here if it was not for economic migration because we are descendants
:40:30. > :40:36.of migrants into Britain. And me. Jay is entirely correct, but I think
:40:37. > :40:39.describing people who have concerns about the level of immigration,
:40:40. > :40:42.speaking as the granddaughter and great-granddaughter of immigrants,
:40:43. > :40:46.describing people with concerns about immigration in terms of dog
:40:47. > :40:49.whistle and xenophobic is a great insult to the millions of people who
:40:50. > :40:54.have genuine and decent concerns about this.
:40:55. > :41:01.APPLAUSE Because, you and I both know, and
:41:02. > :41:05.probably everyone around this table knows that immigrants bring a great
:41:06. > :41:09.deal to the party, to the National party. They have contributed
:41:10. > :41:14.enormously in all kinds of ways to our society, for the better. But we
:41:15. > :41:21.are not talking about immigration in the abstract. We are talking about a
:41:22. > :41:25.situation where if you have such large numbers coming in that public
:41:26. > :41:30.services are simply overwhelmed, and, as somebody has said, it is
:41:31. > :41:33.bottom heavy, so much concentrated in the south that it creates an
:41:34. > :41:38.economic imbalance, using the cards do it. How many towns the size of
:41:39. > :41:42.Peter Brewer or whatever have we got to construct in the next few years
:41:43. > :41:48.to accommodate the numbers coming in? The real problem is not a
:41:49. > :41:52.question of ethnic minorities. It is not a question of wonderful Polish
:41:53. > :41:58.builders. We can all swap these stories. The issue is this, to do
:41:59. > :42:02.with the European Union. The European Union's founding principle
:42:03. > :42:05.is the free movement of labour. The European Union is founded on the
:42:06. > :42:09.principle that basically national boundaries have to give way for the
:42:10. > :42:14.greater good. We can all have a discussion about that founding
:42:15. > :42:20.principle, but the fact is that the countries of the European Union are
:42:21. > :42:25.variously in difficulties over this principle. Chancellor Angela Merkel
:42:26. > :42:29.said today, freedom of movement remains one of the greatest
:42:30. > :42:34.achievements of the EU and should be preserved. So it's not going to
:42:35. > :42:38.change. This is the problem with being a member of the European
:42:39. > :42:41.Union. Mr Cameron pretends that he is going to solve this while
:42:42. > :42:48.remaining a member of the European Union. If he calls it a dog whistle,
:42:49. > :42:53.you are whistling in the dark! I am not sure of the analogy, but I think
:42:54. > :42:57.politicians should be honest with us. If you sign up to a club whose
:42:58. > :43:00.founding principle is the free movement of peoples, that is the
:43:01. > :43:09.rule you accept. If you don't want it, you have to get out. There isn't
:43:10. > :43:17.an alternative. I think Elfyn made a very good point, that he said that
:43:18. > :43:21.people don't want to do the job that immigrants are coming in to do. If
:43:22. > :43:29.they don't want the job, they lose their benefits. It's as simple as
:43:30. > :43:34.that. There was a person arguing with you. We are sending the wrong
:43:35. > :43:37.messages with these jobs. We are educating our children that if you
:43:38. > :43:41.start at what we class as a lower job it is not the right thing for
:43:42. > :43:45.you. We should be saying to our children, they are jobs that you can
:43:46. > :43:48.strive to better yourself, can learn and move on, but we are dismissing
:43:49. > :43:56.them as jobs that are not worthwhile taking. Jobs for the Polish, in
:43:57. > :44:05.other words. Any jobs. It is a job to move on from. In the checked
:44:06. > :44:09.shirt at the back. It is not a matter of people not wanting to do
:44:10. > :44:14.the jobs but the fact that they are advertised abroad and not in the UK.
:44:15. > :44:19.Really? There has been a lot of truth in that. Under the last
:44:20. > :44:22.government we had completely unfettered migrants coming in from
:44:23. > :44:27.the European Union. There were agencies advertising in Poland and
:44:28. > :44:33.other countries. We have sought to make sure we don't do that and it is
:44:34. > :44:39.not allowed. I saw adverts today for theme park ride operators in the
:44:40. > :44:49.mania. How did you see an advert in the mania today? I went on a
:44:50. > :44:53.Romanian job site. On the internet. Some of you will have remembered the
:44:54. > :44:56.scare stories put out by other political parties and you will know
:44:57. > :45:00.it has not been the case. The reality of it is that the majority
:45:01. > :45:05.of people, overwhelmingly, the majority of people who come to our
:45:06. > :45:11.country come here to work and contribute. You are happy with
:45:12. > :45:16.200,000, not worried. Let me finish. Get to the point. You want me to get
:45:17. > :45:22.to the point you want me to make. Get to the point of the question. We
:45:23. > :45:27.have regained control of our borders when it comes to non-EU. We have had
:45:28. > :45:31.a significant drop in the number of people coming from non-EU countries.
:45:32. > :45:34.We have done a good job there, particular in getting rid of the
:45:35. > :45:39.phoney colleges, which were supposedly having people who were
:45:40. > :45:42.students. We have done that well. We have also made sure that we have not
:45:43. > :45:46.have the supposed flood of immigrants coming in from Romania
:45:47. > :46:00.and Bulgaria. Those have proven to be scare stories. Just two points.
:46:01. > :46:06.Maybe one. People are trying to make out that the British youngsters do
:46:07. > :46:11.not want the jobs. I have got a youngster who does want a job. He
:46:12. > :46:17.has got the same problem that this man said, the British youngsters do
:46:18. > :46:21.want to work. The agencies are bringing in loads and loads of
:46:22. > :46:31.people from these different countries and they are working on
:46:32. > :46:36.contract to these companies and they do not employ them full-time.
:46:37. > :46:41.Part-time workers are cheaper. One area that I am familiar with is
:46:42. > :46:46.agricultural work and seasonal work like fruit picking. They said they
:46:47. > :46:50.gave up five years ago and they could not get a workforce here which
:46:51. > :46:56.is why the advertised abroad because people did not want the work here.
:46:57. > :47:01.My son has a applied for three or four jobs, he is on skilled but he
:47:02. > :47:05.cannot get a job because the agencies of filling the jobs with
:47:06. > :47:11.remaining and Polish and various other immigrants that are coming in.
:47:12. > :47:18.Agencies bring them over. What kind of jobs are you thinking of? I am
:47:19. > :47:22.thinking of unskilled Labour. That is partly true. There is some truth
:47:23. > :47:28.in what you say, sir, definitely. But there is the other side of the
:47:29. > :47:31.coin as well. I know of many catering establishments in mid and
:47:32. > :47:38.North Wales who cannot fall of Norma NATO get local people involved in
:47:39. > :47:42.catering. -- love or money get local people involved. They do not want
:47:43. > :47:50.the hour for the pay. I am not making it up. The young people from
:47:51. > :47:57.that or Poland take the jobs. Accept that but you realise these agencies
:47:58. > :48:03.are buying the jobs up in bulk. You made the point and the man there? I
:48:04. > :48:08.do not think immigration is a problem. I think integration is the
:48:09. > :48:12.problem. In this capitalist society there is competition for jobs. If
:48:13. > :48:16.immigrants want to come over and compete for the jobs, fair game, I
:48:17. > :48:25.do not think there is a problem with it. No problem? I wanted to return
:48:26. > :48:31.to the comments the gentleman made earlier about his son. I see, every
:48:32. > :48:35.day I meet young people, nearly 1 million young people are unemployed,
:48:36. > :48:40.and we need to make sure that we do not lose another generation because
:48:41. > :48:51.they are not getting the help they need. We have youth unemployment
:48:52. > :48:55.falling now. The gentleman said his son needs help. What is important is
:48:56. > :49:01.the government steps up and addresses this issue. Let me finish.
:49:02. > :49:07.Because otherwise you end up with this false if you like, conflict.
:49:08. > :49:12.Sometimes there is a genuine issue. I saw it during the Olympics when my
:49:13. > :49:16.constituents, young constituents were struggling to get jobs and the
:49:17. > :49:21.companies that were contracted did not reach out enough to local
:49:22. > :49:26.people. We have a government that needs to take responsibility and
:49:27. > :49:29.encourage companies to recruit locally first. So you want to stem
:49:30. > :49:34.the flow of immigration is what you are saying? You want to stem the
:49:35. > :49:38.flow of immigration by encouraging people to employ local Labour first
:49:39. > :49:42.so they would be no demand for people from Bulgaria or remaining? I
:49:43. > :49:46.am saying we need to do more to help our young people get back to work
:49:47. > :49:52.and at the same time we have to make sure that as part of the European
:49:53. > :49:57.Union, we have a responsibility for free movement of Labour, just as our
:49:58. > :50:04.people can move between countries. We have a responsibility to young
:50:05. > :50:10.people. My biggest concern is every aspect of education and health is
:50:11. > :50:15.overcrowded. We cannot afford to have all these people coming in
:50:16. > :50:21.here. And use there with the moustache and the beard. You can
:50:22. > :50:24.talk all day about these different stories about immigration. The
:50:25. > :50:31.bottom line is immigration benefits this country. It is evident that
:50:32. > :50:35.immigration is a benefit to this country. You can scaremonger as many
:50:36. > :50:39.people as you like, it will not work. The real reason this country
:50:40. > :50:47.is going down is because of the bankers who take the massive bonuses
:50:48. > :50:54.and people who do not pay tax. And the woman there. Why with an
:50:55. > :50:59.increase in our population are we having a deep crease in our health
:51:00. > :51:05.services? In Wales you have a problem with your health service.
:51:06. > :51:08.And the problem you have is you have a Welsh Assembly that is not doing
:51:09. > :51:17.the job it should be doing with your health services. They haven't met an
:51:18. > :51:19.A targets since 2009. It is a Labour-controlled Welsh Assembly, it
:51:20. > :51:24.is failing you, it is not spending the money, you have people on
:51:25. > :51:31.waiting lists and I hope the people in the rest of the country look at
:51:32. > :51:38.what Labour does with the NHS, compared with what we do in England,
:51:39. > :51:43.you can trust the NHS in our hands, we have increased the amount of
:51:44. > :51:49.money, the budget has gone up, I promise you that. Ever heard of mid
:51:50. > :51:56.Staffordshire? That was not on our watch. Weight, everyone. That was
:51:57. > :52:02.not the question but since the lady there raised it, just briefly, from
:52:03. > :52:05.Labour's point of view, you are under constant attack in the House
:52:06. > :52:10.of Commons for what has happened here in Wales and the way the Welsh
:52:11. > :52:15.Assembly has cut back on the NHS. What you say? First of all, let's
:52:16. > :52:18.look at the situation in Wales. There are 3 million people and the
:52:19. > :52:22.Conservative Party keeps comparing the rest of the country with Wales.
:52:23. > :52:30.There are clearly issues and the Welsh Government is dealing with
:52:31. > :52:37.that. Let's focus on, let's look at the context. I am not going to say
:52:38. > :52:43.that there is an improvement to make. You almost better than
:52:44. > :52:50.anybody. -- there is not an improvement to make. Under this
:52:51. > :52:53.government's watch, a back door privatisation effort and they do not
:52:54. > :52:58.like to talk about what they are doing in the rest of the country but
:52:59. > :53:12.the NHS is being decimated. Anna's parties responsible for that and she
:53:13. > :53:15.and her party... I do not want to be unkind but obviously, I know the
:53:16. > :53:23.more about the Welsh health service than you do. But I say that with
:53:24. > :53:27.respect. Point number one, our colleague in Westminster has said
:53:28. > :53:37.that at least six hospitals in Wales have disturbingly high mortality
:53:38. > :53:43.rates and should be investigated. So far, nothing is happening. In the
:53:44. > :53:47.First Minister's own constituency, a lady was dealt with terribly in a
:53:48. > :53:53.hospital. Her medicine was poured away and she subsequently died. He
:53:54. > :53:57.had known about that since 2010, 2012 are not done very much about
:53:58. > :54:02.it. The short fact is, you may save there is only 3 million people but
:54:03. > :54:11.the 3 million Wales deserve as good a service as anybody else.
:54:12. > :54:20.The point is, I will give you one statistic, a snapshot, for people
:54:21. > :54:26.waiting for surgery heart in England, there are 60 people. In
:54:27. > :54:31.Wales, it is 185 and rising. That is not good enough. Do you agree with
:54:32. > :54:38.all this? You feel Wales is hard done by? I think the health service
:54:39. > :54:42.Wales is appalling. I know about it because I have worked on it and I am
:54:43. > :54:46.a victim of it. It is absolutely outrageous. The length of the
:54:47. > :54:52.waiting lists, the standard of care when you actually get in bed
:54:53. > :54:56.clutches, my biggest fear is actually becoming ill and growing
:54:57. > :55:02.old because it is appalling. Who do you blame for this? I am not a great
:55:03. > :55:06.fan of the Welsh Assembly, I did vote against it. I think the money
:55:07. > :55:10.that was spent to build the Senate in the beginning and the money it
:55:11. > :55:14.takes to maintain this structure with the Assembly Members, all that
:55:15. > :55:28.money could be going into health and education. Could I direct this
:55:29. > :55:34.question to Rushanara? You say it is being sorted out why are people
:55:35. > :55:39.you'll being sent to England to get treatment? It is important that the
:55:40. > :55:42.Welsh Government text responsibility and this issue is addressed. What is
:55:43. > :55:50.important is we recognise, the national government keeps using
:55:51. > :55:56.Wales to divert attention from the wider problem and crisis facing the
:55:57. > :56:00.NHS. That includes an A crisis up and down the country, in
:56:01. > :56:08.constituencies across London, where I am based and there are big issues
:56:09. > :56:14.for the NHS. Has the money being cut in England on the same scale as it
:56:15. > :56:25.has in Wales? The figures suggest a 10% cut in Wales and a slight
:56:26. > :56:32.increase in England. Though Welsh amount has declined. What is
:56:33. > :56:40.important is we focus on recognising that our NHS and the staff in the
:56:41. > :56:46.NHS overall should not be attacked. In Wales, A have not hit their
:56:47. > :56:49.targets since 2009. The Welsh Assembly have the power to make a
:56:50. > :56:57.big difference to the NHS Wales and are not using it. We have to come to
:56:58. > :57:01.a close. A point from you, sir. Makes me laugh that you try and
:57:02. > :57:05.blame the current government for the problems. In Wales we have a
:57:06. > :57:16.stranglehold by the Labour Party. It is about time that Wales woke up and
:57:17. > :57:20.stopped voting the Labour Party in. And very briefly, I will take a
:57:21. > :57:25.point from you but it has to be quick, please. I think we have a
:57:26. > :57:28.lackadaisical Labour government happy to blame the Tories in
:57:29. > :57:34.Westminster and the Tories who do not give a dam about Wales because
:57:35. > :57:41.they will not get any milage here. We need an alternative. On which
:57:42. > :57:45.note we come to the end of our hour. Next week we will be in
:57:46. > :57:53.Barking in East London. We will have Michael Heseltine on the panel,
:57:54. > :58:01.Rachel Rees, Simon Hughes and Amanda Patel. A week after that we will be
:58:02. > :58:08.in Nottingham. If you would like to come to barking or Nottingham, then
:58:09. > :58:13.come to our website. If you are listening on radio five the debate
:58:14. > :58:18.goes on. Here in Newport, thanks to our panel. Until next Thursday, from
:58:19. > :58:23.all of us here, good night.