:00:09. > :00:21.welcome to Question Time. Good evening to you at home. Good
:00:22. > :00:27.evening to our audience, ready to ask questions of the panel. Lord
:00:28. > :00:34.Sugar's right hand man and star of The Apprentice, Nick Hewer. Liberal
:00:35. > :00:37.Democrat Minister, Susan Kramer. Labour's shadow front secretary,
:00:38. > :00:44.Douglas Alexander. Conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi. And journalist and
:00:45. > :00:48.commentator Isabel Oakeshott, who broke the story of Chris Huhne and
:00:49. > :01:01.Vicky Pryce's speeding points, that led to their downfall.
:01:02. > :01:07.Just before the first question, I should say that there is a page on
:01:08. > :01:10.loose in the room somewhere and we have not been able to track it down.
:01:11. > :01:15.If you see members of the panel docking, it is not because of verbal
:01:16. > :01:26.assault but because a pitch and keeps swooping around. -- a bird
:01:27. > :01:31.keeps swooping around. A question from Sam Smith, please. Should
:01:32. > :01:40.nurses be getting the 1% public sector pay rise? 600,000 nurses are
:01:41. > :01:47.not getting it. Should they be getting it? Douglas Alexander.
:01:48. > :01:51.Nurses across the country will feel let down by Jeremy Hunt breaking the
:01:52. > :01:58.word that was given to NHS staff by George Osborne when he announced his
:01:59. > :02:02.budget macro. NHS staff have seen pay cut after a pay cut four-year
:02:03. > :02:06.is. Of course there needs to be restrained in pay across public
:02:07. > :02:11.services in tough economic times. But I think it is simply wrong to be
:02:12. > :02:14.in a position where there was an unwanted, unannounced top-down
:02:15. > :02:19.reorganisation of the national health service that ended up costing
:02:20. > :02:24.?3 billion, which has put the NHS in a weakened financial position, which
:02:25. > :02:28.meant that ?1.4 billion alone was spent on redundancy payments within
:02:29. > :02:34.the NHS, which has now led to nurses being singled out in this way. I
:02:35. > :02:39.don't think it's fair or right. You would find the money, if you were in
:02:40. > :02:42.government? We would have met the commitment, but we would have done
:02:43. > :02:45.so without this top-down reorganisation which has led to
:02:46. > :02:50.six-figure checks being led to people who walk away. You can't
:02:51. > :02:53.understand the finances of the NHS today without realising that ?3
:02:54. > :02:59.billion was taken out for a reorganisation that benefited nobody
:03:00. > :03:00.but the 2400 managers in the NHS who are now earning more than the Prime
:03:01. > :03:08.Minister. APPLAUSE
:03:09. > :03:12.Nurses and doctors do an incredible job.
:03:13. > :03:18.If you just think that they now treat 1.2 million more people
:03:19. > :03:22.through Accident Emergency. They worked incredibly hard. The
:03:23. > :03:27.difficulty is that the wage bill for the NHS is ?50 billion. If you
:03:28. > :03:34.deliver a 1% across-the-board increase, that is ?500 million,
:03:35. > :03:39.approximately. What Jeremy Hunt is saying is that half of the staff in
:03:40. > :03:42.the NHS are going to get an automatic pay increase. It is called
:03:43. > :03:47.the incremental increase. Those people should not get the additional
:03:48. > :03:51.1%. Those who do not get the automatic increase should get the
:03:52. > :03:55.1%, and the managers on top page should not get any increase
:03:56. > :04:01.whatsoever. Under Douglas Alexander's watch, managers got a 7%
:04:02. > :04:06.pay increase while nurses got 3%. So a double increase under labour for
:04:07. > :04:13.them. One last point to make. We have ring-fenced B NHS in England.
:04:14. > :04:17.?12.7 billion more going into the NHS. You only have to look at
:04:18. > :04:22.Labour's management or mismanagement of the NHS. Look at Wales and what
:04:23. > :04:24.is happening there. Waiting lists are longer, they refuse
:04:25. > :04:29.investigations into hospitals with high death rates, because they just
:04:30. > :04:34.do not want to face up to the fact that they cannot manage the NHS.
:04:35. > :04:38.Douglas can do something about it. He can ask his Labour colleagues in
:04:39. > :04:48.Wales to come out and have an investigation, and to safeguard the
:04:49. > :04:57.NHS and spend more on it. Sam Smith, you asked the question. What
:04:58. > :05:00.do you think of those answers? I am currently under the hospital, and
:05:01. > :05:04.the nurses, the care that they provide, the attention to every
:05:05. > :05:08.patient, getting to know you whether you are in there for two days, a
:05:09. > :05:23.week, a month, the care is incredible. The 1%, they extremely
:05:24. > :05:27.deserve it. The blunt truth is that the NHS is broke and no politician
:05:28. > :05:31.wants to admit it because it is political suicide to say so. At the
:05:32. > :05:37.NHS is not sustainable in its current form. We have to get real
:05:38. > :05:42.here. Nobody is denying that doctors and nurses do an amazing job, but we
:05:43. > :05:47.cannot afford to keep on raising salaries. If we do, then we are
:05:48. > :05:50.going to have to cut jobs. It is as simple as that. If we cut jobs,
:05:51. > :05:57.patients are not owing to end up getting the level of care they
:05:58. > :06:02.deserve and expect. -- patients are going to end up not getting the
:06:03. > :06:06.level of care they deserve and expect. The buzz phrase from Tories
:06:07. > :06:12.has been that there are tough decisions to be made. What
:06:13. > :06:21.decisions? MPs are getting a higher pay rise next month. 1%. Apparently
:06:22. > :06:25.it would cost ?200 million. Compare that to the ?141 billion given to
:06:26. > :06:31.support the banks. But let's set that aside. Do you know what has
:06:32. > :06:35.happened? The nurses not getting 1%. The number of working households now
:06:36. > :06:40.below the poverty line has overtaken, at 6.7 million, the
:06:41. > :06:45.number of workless families. What worries me is that we are now
:06:46. > :06:51.creating a new official poor. And it may well be that nurses will fall
:06:52. > :06:56.into that group. And the new official Paul was illustrated
:06:57. > :07:02.yesterday. Pound land floated at ?3 a share, shares went up. Morrison's
:07:03. > :07:07.crashed today. Why? Because they are taking on the discounters because
:07:08. > :07:10.people are flooding the cheap supermarkets. There is a new poor on
:07:11. > :07:21.the march. I think we are back in Victorian times. Susan Kramer, is
:07:22. > :07:28.the correlation # the coalition creating a official poor? We are in
:07:29. > :07:31.times of austerity. We are finally seeing a recovery after we were
:07:32. > :07:35.handed a broken economy at the beginning of the coalition. It is
:07:36. > :07:40.finally recovering. I hope it will start feeding through to wages. Not
:07:41. > :07:44.for millions of families across the country who are struggling to pay
:07:45. > :07:48.the bills, seeing their wages fall, as Nick has suggested. It is an
:07:49. > :07:51.insult to them to suggest you deserve a lap of honour and
:07:52. > :07:55.congratulations when there is a cost of living crisis affecting nurses,
:07:56. > :08:00.affecting a range of public sector workers and private sector workers,
:08:01. > :08:08.too. You are creating circumstances where there are millions of in work
:08:09. > :08:15.poor. Rebuilding the economy is absolutely vital. It means we have
:08:16. > :08:20.to continue to be tough on the deficit and that is an ugly reality
:08:21. > :08:25.but it is the only way out of this. Why are you borrowing ?198 billion
:08:26. > :08:33.more than your government predicted three years ago? That is not
:08:34. > :08:37.success, it is failure. We can go on arguing about the economy, but is
:08:38. > :08:41.what clear is that it was broken when we came there. There was a
:08:42. > :08:45.financial crisis. But the point was that your government so overspent
:08:46. > :08:53.that there was no contingency, no caution, no way to cope with the
:08:54. > :09:02.crisis. And we cannot go back to that situation. The second row from
:09:03. > :09:06.the back. It is disingenuous for the coalition to claim this is about
:09:07. > :09:11.saving 200 million from the NHS budget when they wasted 3 billion
:09:12. > :09:16.needless NHS reform. The truth is they are trying to set up the NHS
:09:17. > :09:21.for privatisation by demoralising staff and trying to encourage people
:09:22. > :09:26.out of the NHS. What do you say to the point that the NHS is bust? It
:09:27. > :09:29.is not. It will be in existence as long as there are folk with the
:09:30. > :09:43.faith to fight for it. That is the truth. I talk to politicians all
:09:44. > :09:49.day, every day, and almost every Tory MP privately admits that they
:09:50. > :09:56.believe the NHS is unsustainable. That is not to say that it is not
:09:57. > :10:01.going to be surviving, but it will have to be reformed. Can I come in
:10:02. > :10:05.on that? Saving it requires reforming it, and that is what the
:10:06. > :10:09.money has been spent on. If you want it in the future, you have to go
:10:10. > :10:18.through some of the difficult steps for reform because that is how we
:10:19. > :10:27.save it. Do you mind not shouting out? Wait until you have a
:10:28. > :10:30.microphone. We have to make sure the NHS is sustainable. Nurses are
:10:31. > :10:35.brilliant but that is point out that the people who are not getting the
:10:36. > :10:39.1% are getting a 3%. And in this time, when it is really tough for
:10:40. > :10:43.absolutely everybody, and most people are seeing only the most
:10:44. > :10:47.minimal increase in their wages, it is not unexpected that within the
:10:48. > :10:51.public sector people have to face some of the same constraints that
:10:52. > :11:00.everybody in the private sector is facing. That is the reality. I just
:11:01. > :11:04.worry. I made my point about the official poor. When I first came to
:11:05. > :11:10.London in the 1960s, to the borough of Westminster, there were key body
:11:11. > :11:15.trust buildings. -- Peabody trust buildings. On the lintel it had, for
:11:16. > :11:18.the poor and criminal classes. I just worry that there is a
:11:19. > :11:23.combination of poverty and criminality that is creeping into
:11:24. > :11:27.the public psyche, into some of the more right wing press newspaper
:11:28. > :11:33.groups. I don't understand what you're saying. Are you for against
:11:34. > :11:38.the 1% pay increase? Is it too low? I think it should be more. Inflation
:11:39. > :11:45.is 2%. Let's try and at least keep pace with that. What do you say to
:11:46. > :11:50.that? What I say is that if you are going to increase pay, it is the
:11:51. > :11:55.equivalent, the 450 million it will cost across-the-board, of 14,000
:11:56. > :11:58.nurses. You have to decide whether you let go of nurses. The gentleman
:11:59. > :12:04.at the back talked about the NHS. I am ploughed -- proud of the NHS
:12:05. > :12:07.being free at the point of delivery. It is the best health service in the
:12:08. > :12:12.world and I shout about it all the time. We have made sure there are
:12:13. > :12:16.more clinicians making decisions, not managers. Under Douglas, he
:12:17. > :12:20.talks about the shameful way we have treated it, but they gave managers
:12:21. > :12:25.double the pay rise of nurses and clinicians. That is shameful. That
:12:26. > :12:31.was 2008, at the height of the crisis. A company you are a
:12:32. > :12:34.nonexecutive director is profiting from the health service while you
:12:35. > :12:39.are serving as a member of Parliament. That is a good point and
:12:40. > :12:42.I'm glad you asked, because the company was delivering the same
:12:43. > :12:48.service under your administration. In fact, the founders are donors to
:12:49. > :12:52.the Labour Party. I have been a nonexecutive director since before I
:12:53. > :12:57.became a member of Parliament. Do not try and play dirty tricks with
:12:58. > :13:03.this. Take out the politics and talk about the facts. This is very open
:13:04. > :13:07.politics. What are you accusing him of? I am asking him to be clear as
:13:08. > :13:11.to his motivation because every time we have a Conservative government
:13:12. > :13:14.the argument bubbles up that we cannot afford a National Health
:13:15. > :13:19.Service. I don't believe we can afford not to have a National Health
:13:20. > :13:24.Service. We saved it in the past and we will have to save it again. The
:13:25. > :13:32.NHS is not safe in your hands. I have to go to the audience. My
:13:33. > :13:35.question is, why bother going through the show rather than
:13:36. > :13:40.independent Pay Review Body when the government won't take their advice?
:13:41. > :13:42.We have the office of financial reforms ability which the government
:13:43. > :13:47.insist they need for clarity and openness, yet they won't take the
:13:48. > :13:55.advice of the independent Pay Review Body. When independent pay review is
:13:56. > :13:58.recommend large pay rises for MPs I think they are wrong and I am
:13:59. > :14:09.willing to counter it. I think you have to take responsibility. A
:14:10. > :14:14.couple of days ago the national office of statistics released a
:14:15. > :14:19.report looking at the bottom 5% of the private and public sector. The
:14:20. > :14:23.private sector was 13% lower wages than the private sector. You talk
:14:24. > :14:27.about a new poor being developed. Look at the private sector! They are
:14:28. > :14:31.in a worse state. Surely we should be doing more about that. Douglas
:14:32. > :14:35.Alexander, do you want to answer that specific point?
:14:36. > :14:39.We should be levelling up, not levelling down. That is why we
:14:40. > :14:43.introduced the national minimum wage. Why I welcome the fact that
:14:44. > :14:48.the minimum wage is rising. And it is why we need to see a living wage
:14:49. > :14:52.introduced by companies in the private sector as well. Does that
:14:53. > :14:57.answer your question? Not really. We are talking about pay rises at the
:14:58. > :15:06.moment. No-one in the private sector has been for some time... . The
:15:07. > :15:12.bankers are. You cost every family ?3,000. You cannot sit here and not
:15:13. > :15:17.apologise in the first place. APPLAUSE
:15:18. > :15:22.Let's stick with this gentleman's point. How many bankers are there as
:15:23. > :15:26.a po portion of the wofrk -- proportion of the workers of
:15:27. > :15:31.Britain. He says most people in the private sector aren't. Of course
:15:32. > :15:38.they are not bankers but... . Aren't getting pay rises. I am much against
:15:39. > :15:42.bankers getting high wages and bonuses as anyone else. I am talking
:15:43. > :15:45.about the low wages in the private sector, which you keep going on
:15:46. > :15:50.about the bankers. Yes, we want to do everything we can for the
:15:51. > :16:03.bankers. What about the low wages in the private sector? They need more
:16:04. > :16:12.help than... We can pontive kat all we like. The country is bust. It is
:16:13. > :16:18.not rubbish. We are bust. If we talk about the NHS, why are we talking
:16:19. > :16:24.about people who failed trusts in the national health and allowing to
:16:25. > :16:28.spend ?11 million to get rid of whistle-blowers? There's nothing
:16:29. > :16:34.that happens to these people. He's still got his ?1.5 million pension
:16:35. > :16:41.pot and salary. Who said rubbish when he said the country was bust?
:16:42. > :16:46.It is rubbish. The reason we are in difficulty in this country, the NHS,
:16:47. > :16:49.the country as a whole, we're having to have austerity shoved down our
:16:50. > :16:54.throat all the time and be told the NHS is bust, is because we are owed
:16:55. > :16:58.billions in unpaid taxes, as the gentleman at the back was trying to
:16:59. > :17:02.make that point earlier. If the Government were to recoup the money
:17:03. > :17:06.that is not paid in this country, in unpaid taxes, the NHS doesn't need
:17:07. > :17:10.to be bust. Education could improve. Everything in this country could
:17:11. > :17:15.improve, not alone be sustained if those taxes were paid. Nadhim Zahawi
:17:16. > :17:21.Duke of Yorks you want to answer that -- Nadhim Zahawi Duke of Yorks
:17:22. > :17:26.you want to answer that point? -- do you want to answer that point?
:17:27. > :17:34.I said what I mean is that she is right we have to bear down on tax
:17:35. > :17:39.avoidance schemes. That's not what she said. You bear down on tax
:17:40. > :17:43.avoidance. That is what you do. In every year of this Parliament, the
:17:44. > :17:48.rich will pay more taxes than every Year of the 13 years of Labour and,
:17:49. > :17:51.we have got deals in place with Switzerland and with other
:17:52. > :17:56.countries, where people cannot hide their money. That is how you get tax
:17:57. > :18:00.into the coffers. You also have to make sure that what you do with that
:18:01. > :18:08.money is responsible. That's the difference here. We have Dougy
:18:09. > :18:11.talking about a money tree. Their track record says they pay managers
:18:12. > :18:16.more than they pay nurses. That's the difference.
:18:17. > :18:22.The woman up there in the back row. Not the second back row. Yes? Is the
:18:23. > :18:25.NHS unsustainable or simply under-funded? That is what I want to
:18:26. > :18:30.know. They are not given enough money and that is why they are
:18:31. > :18:34.broke. It is not just because it has magically spent all its money it is
:18:35. > :18:43.not getting the funding. One point is, the NHS is absolutely
:18:44. > :18:48.institutionally inefficient. As a patient - I have three children. I
:18:49. > :18:51.am in and out a lot. I constantly see examples of unbelievable
:18:52. > :18:55.inefficiency. You only have to look at the fact there are basically no
:18:56. > :19:00.electronic patient records, which means half the time you have to get
:19:01. > :19:04.tests repeated. Once at the GPs, once at the hospitals and then again
:19:05. > :19:08.because they have lost the results. If they could tighten up on the
:19:09. > :19:14.inefficiency, I am sure that would free up a lot of money - enough to
:19:15. > :19:18.give our nurses a decent pay rise. There are huge changes in the NHS
:19:19. > :19:22.that make it more efficient. Instead of older people being sent home
:19:23. > :19:25.where there is nobody to look after them, because there's been no work
:19:26. > :19:29.with the local authority for their care, getting ill again and coming
:19:30. > :19:32.back into hospital, that is changing and changing dramatically because of
:19:33. > :19:36.the change in working. We are starting to bear down on those
:19:37. > :19:40.people who do not show for their appointment. I mean, the millions
:19:41. > :19:46.that costs over a few years is phenomenal. Now you have got a text
:19:47. > :19:50.messaging system. You have got doctors identifying what are the
:19:51. > :19:53.services they most need in their community and who should provide it,
:19:54. > :19:57.because they are doing the commissioning. You go through these
:19:58. > :20:03.changes and you start to get a service that can work, because I
:20:04. > :20:07.think the NHS is worth keeping, worth protecting. It remains as a
:20:08. > :20:12.public service. It is free at the point of use, but we have to
:20:13. > :20:16.recognise, at a time of austerity, we keep putting more money in it,
:20:17. > :20:22.but we have to spend it efficiency. It is jobs and this time around...
:20:23. > :20:29.We are talking about a battle over money, wages n the NHS. Before we
:20:30. > :20:35.leave this topic, I want to take a question from Kira Dhaliwal.
:20:36. > :20:39.Do we need more union leaders like Bob Crow?
:20:40. > :20:44.Who died on... APPLAUSE
:20:45. > :20:48.Who died on Tuesday and was of course a defender of his section of
:20:49. > :20:57.the economy. Nick Hewer?
:20:58. > :21:03.My word. What actually upset me was the lorry loads of sant moanous
:21:04. > :21:07.tribute tributes pouring in for Bob Crow and thinking actually down in
:21:08. > :21:12.the village of Westminster and over at City Hall there were people
:21:13. > :21:16.downing pints, thinking, thank goodness we won't have to deal with
:21:17. > :21:20.Bob Crow again. Those who know Bob Crow say he was the great greatest
:21:21. > :21:25.guy on earth. His members must have adored him because he did a
:21:26. > :21:31.fantastic job for them. He did such a good job, the Tube drivers were
:21:32. > :21:36.almost of pricing themselves out of a job, because apparently there was
:21:37. > :21:42.a move to get driverless trains. They loved him for all the right
:21:43. > :21:46.reasons. I would ask, is it the exclusive duty of a union leader to
:21:47. > :21:50.look after his members only? Is there a greater responsibility for
:21:51. > :21:54.the public good, over and above the interests of their members? And, I
:21:55. > :22:00.don't know how many booking-class staff were at the heart of that
:22:01. > :22:04.strike, but he brought London to a grinding halt day after day. I would
:22:05. > :22:09.argue there was a better way to deal with it. I think it is wrong to
:22:10. > :22:15.bring a capital city to its knees. Would workers in the NHS benefit
:22:16. > :22:21.from having somebody like Bob Crow negotiating on their behalf? I am
:22:22. > :22:26.shurp now he's gone the -- I am sure now he's gone, there are a number
:22:27. > :22:29.springing up, saying right, we'll have a crack at. This look how he
:22:30. > :22:35.was Lorded for looking after his members. If a new Bob Crow came out
:22:36. > :22:41.for the NHS, he could do a good good for his members, but what would he
:22:42. > :22:46.do for the nation? I don't think strike is the way forward with the
:22:47. > :22:56.National Health Service. I didn't know Bob Crow. He was not a member
:22:57. > :23:00.of the afrilliate afrilliated -- affiliated. He didn't use his
:23:01. > :23:06.members for a battering run for his politics. He was an effective trade
:23:07. > :23:13.unionists, sometimes using serious threats. Ultimately he was a
:23:14. > :23:17.deal-maker. That is what you see with organisations he dealt with. We
:23:18. > :23:20.need effective deal-makers, representing people in the kind of
:23:21. > :23:25.economy we have been talking about. To have somebody in the business
:23:26. > :23:29.environment, on your side, talking about pay, conditions, hours. All of
:23:30. > :23:33.the things so many people feel exploited about in today's economy.
:23:34. > :23:36.It is important. The important work that trade unions often do away from
:23:37. > :23:40.the headlines and away from the cameras is often one of the best
:23:41. > :23:45.kept secrets in Britain. Do you think the nurses are badly led to
:23:46. > :23:50.get this deal which the Government? I think the circumstances in the NHS
:23:51. > :23:57.are different. Public service workers, least of all, want to be
:23:58. > :24:00.striking. I think Bob Crow if his ilk were engaged in NHS
:24:01. > :24:06.negotiations, I think it would be the patients who would suffer,
:24:07. > :24:10.because evidently he was a self-promotionalist who took,
:24:11. > :24:15.particularly London, to a very difficult place. There was a lot of
:24:16. > :24:18.people whose businesses suffered significantly. Who had nothing to do
:24:19. > :24:24.with the infrastructure arguments taking place. The manner in which he
:24:25. > :24:28.engaged on that was frankly destructive. What do you think? I
:24:29. > :24:33.work in London. When the strikes were happening, I was there. Yes, it
:24:34. > :24:36.was very hard. You have to kind of pull together, get to work, or work
:24:37. > :24:43.from home. Do whatever you need to do. The reason for the strike was
:24:44. > :24:47.needed. At the end of the day, the Mayor of London was, is still going
:24:48. > :24:52.to close down ticket offices, going to lose jobs so, a strike is
:24:53. > :24:59.sometimes necessary to draw attention to the public and it did
:25:00. > :25:01.across the UK. I was on the board of Transport for London with Bob. I
:25:02. > :25:06.worked with him for a period of time. There is an area in which
:25:07. > :25:10.Douglas is right. He is someone you could do a deal with. Many of the
:25:11. > :25:15.strikes that Bob led were unnecessary. I reckon when where you
:25:16. > :25:19.called a strike it meant you were near an agreement. He had the last
:25:20. > :25:22.throw with the strike to get a bit more out. I can understand that is
:25:23. > :25:27.good for his members. In the end, you look at the kind of changes at
:25:28. > :25:31.Transport for London, there virtually is not a job that looked
:25:32. > :25:36.like the job it was ten years ago. He was somebody who, in a sense,
:25:37. > :25:40.took his members along with that. But I wish he had been rather less
:25:41. > :25:44.eager to publish the British public with these strikes. I think we could
:25:45. > :25:49.have come to the same agreement without it, frankly.
:25:50. > :25:55.I would only just add that there were actually no plans for any
:25:56. > :25:59.compulsory redundancies. Like you, I travel in London. When the strikes
:26:00. > :26:05.happen, they are hell for anybody who tries and moves around London.
:26:06. > :26:09.Bob Crow brought London to its knees. He put a gun to our heads
:26:10. > :26:12.over a plan that was not going to force anybody out of work in the
:26:13. > :26:17.first place. I did not agree with those
:26:18. > :26:26.practises. I have to say that Bob was passionate about his members. I
:26:27. > :26:30.suspect that the heavenly choir will be on double time at weekends. We
:26:31. > :26:34.have to keep on moving. Joining the debate, as you know From home by
:26:35. > :26:53.text or Twitter. Keep at the Tweeting.
:26:54. > :27:03.Simon Vintner, please? Has Ed Miliband made an electoral mistake
:27:04. > :27:07.by not promising to match David Cameron's offer of an in/out
:27:08. > :27:12.referendum? Well, I think this is a cold, hard
:27:13. > :27:19.political calculation by Ed Miliband. I think it is an absolute
:27:20. > :27:24.insult to voters. I think that Ed Miliband's calculation is that he's
:27:25. > :27:27.not going to actually win over any, or substantially extra votes, by
:27:28. > :27:31.offering a referendum, because when you look at the polls, they show
:27:32. > :27:37.that the EU is not anywhere near the top of people's concerns.
:27:38. > :27:41.However, I think that most people in this country would like a say on
:27:42. > :27:45.whether we're in or out of Europe. It is decades since we have been
:27:46. > :27:51.asked the question. What is it that politicians are afraid of? Why can't
:27:52. > :27:54.they trust us to have a say? I think that Ed Miliband should just be bold
:27:55. > :27:57.enough to let people have their say on that issue.
:27:58. > :28:12.APPLAUSE Do you want to come in - the man in
:28:13. > :28:18.the yellow tie? What worries me is that the next incoming Government
:28:19. > :28:23.will negotiate with the European Union. It will come back and say, we
:28:24. > :28:28.have a fantastic deal, we don't need to have a referendum. The other
:28:29. > :28:32.worry is that if they are forced to have a referendum, Brussels will
:28:33. > :28:37.then come in and say, we didn't like the answer to that question, you'll
:28:38. > :28:42.have to ask it again. Like they did in Southern Ireland and around.
:28:43. > :28:48.I don't think any of our politicians, political parties, have
:28:49. > :28:55.got the nerve to say no to Brussels. You don't trust David Cameron
:28:56. > :29:00.either? No. The last two promised a referendum and have reneged on those
:29:01. > :29:04.promises. There's no way he'll get a fantastic deal. He knows that. We
:29:05. > :29:08.all know that. Europe is not interested in really giving us many
:29:09. > :29:13.concessions. David Cameron cannot get out of that pledge. If he is
:29:14. > :29:14.Prime Minister after 2015, he'll have to honour that pledge, without
:29:15. > :29:26.a doubt. Douglas Alexander, the question
:29:27. > :29:33.was, as Ed Miliband made an electoral mistake not matching David
:29:34. > :29:38.Cameron's offer? Unsurprisingly, I don't think so. I think the defining
:29:39. > :29:42.issue of the next general election is not going to be Europe. The
:29:43. > :29:46.defining issue is going to be the economy. In terms of what Ed
:29:47. > :29:52.Miliband said this week, he said, what are going to be our priorities
:29:53. > :29:55.if we are elected in 2015. It is about tackling the cost of living
:29:56. > :30:00.crisis, protecting and rebuilding the NHS, making sure there are jobs
:30:01. > :30:04.for young people. Some people would have different priorities but we
:30:05. > :30:08.were being open and candid in saying those would be the defining
:30:09. > :30:12.priorities. I do recognise, as the gentleman said, that to a certain
:30:13. > :30:15.extent people have reached the limit of their tolerance in thinking more
:30:16. > :30:19.powers are going to be handed to Brussels without people having their
:30:20. > :30:23.say. That is why, as well as setting up an agenda for change in Europe,
:30:24. > :30:27.to make it work better for the UK, Ed Miliband said they will be a
:30:28. > :30:31.legal lock written into the laws of the UK that if there is a transfer
:30:32. > :30:36.of sovereignty from the UK to the European Union in future, there will
:30:37. > :30:40.be an in-out referendum. But we will also open in saying we are not
:30:41. > :30:44.planning to transfer powers in the course of the next parliament. But
:30:45. > :30:47.given the uncertainties about how the eurozone will develop, the past
:30:48. > :30:54.experience of powers passing to Brussels, we want people to have the
:30:55. > :30:57.assurance that it is written in. So you believe the majority of the
:30:58. > :31:03.country wants to stay in the EU as it is, so you will not bend to the
:31:04. > :31:07.demand for a referendum? These polls come and go. There was one at the
:31:08. > :31:16.beginning of the week suggesting the majority of people want to stay in
:31:17. > :31:21.the EU. Why not just ask them? I think the gentleman at the back is
:31:22. > :31:27.right to be cynical. When you work Europe minister, they gave up a ?7
:31:28. > :31:36.million -- ?7 billion rebate. He is cynical about Cameron as well. I
:31:37. > :31:41.know. Allow me to get there, David. Keep moving. Vapours I did over a
:31:42. > :31:47.50% increase in the budget of Europe. And most importantly, the
:31:48. > :31:51.Lisbon Treaty was signed without a referendum. Therein lies the
:31:52. > :31:54.problem. The only party that can deliver a referendum is the
:31:55. > :31:58.Conservative Party. The Labour Party does not want one, the Lib Dems
:31:59. > :32:04.don't want to have one, although it was in their manifesto, clear-cut,
:32:05. > :32:08.and UKIP cannot deliver referendum. So the only party that can deliver
:32:09. > :32:13.it is the Conservative Party. We have promised it. I disagree with
:32:14. > :32:17.Isabel when she says that Europe is not serious. Germany is serious
:32:18. > :32:20.about wanting us in Europe and serious about talking about the sort
:32:21. > :32:27.of settlement that we want out of Europe. The stability that you
:32:28. > :32:30.provide for the British people is by laying this to rest in a referendum,
:32:31. > :32:42.because we trust the British people, which is why I am so proud
:32:43. > :32:45.to be British. It amuses me, really, that we are so besotted with
:32:46. > :32:51.Europe. I stick with Douglas on the fact that when the time comes at the
:32:52. > :32:54.next election, the British public, generally speaking, will be more
:32:55. > :33:01.concerned about the economy and everything else. I am lucky enough
:33:02. > :33:06.to own a shared in France. Do you think the French were worrying about
:33:07. > :33:17.Europe. You own a shared in France? What kind of shared? The point is
:33:18. > :33:23.that the Europeans are not fretting about this. All that we seem to do
:33:24. > :33:27.is worry about Europe. I am absolutely a European and I pray we
:33:28. > :33:31.stay in Europe. The only concern, I think, that you are going to face
:33:32. > :33:37.when it comes up, is that the greatest fear for the voters in
:33:38. > :33:40.Europe will be the fact that this country is getting terribly crowded.
:33:41. > :33:52.But I think it's getting terribly crowded with the right people. EU
:33:53. > :33:57.immigrants are great. As opposed to what? What are the wrong people?
:33:58. > :34:01.Those that are coming not to work. Let me put it this way, anybody who
:34:02. > :34:06.is prepared to get off their backside in Latvia or anywhere else,
:34:07. > :34:09.learn a language, come here and work and make a success and make a
:34:10. > :34:24.contribution and pay taxes, that is OK with me. I think the way that the
:34:25. > :34:28.Conservatives have said an opt in, opt out referendum has simplified
:34:29. > :34:31.the issue. And the fact that there is not enough transparency between
:34:32. > :34:35.the relationship of the EU and Britain, and the British public
:34:36. > :34:39.don't know it. It is just a political tool of the Conservative
:34:40. > :34:42.Party to say this, to gain euro-sceptic voters, when it should
:34:43. > :34:45.be showing the public what the relationship is, how integrated we
:34:46. > :34:52.are and what particular areas it is in. Do you want to see a
:34:53. > :34:57.referendum? Would you like to have a vote? You were not born when the
:34:58. > :35:00.last one happened. I would particularly want to see a
:35:01. > :35:06.referendum with more specifics, rather than a basic question. What
:35:07. > :35:13.about the? Gesture Mark I agree with what Isabel said. I think there is a
:35:14. > :35:19.whole generation of voters who would welcome a proper debate on the issue
:35:20. > :35:23.and a vote at the end of it. Susan Kramer, it is your partners who are
:35:24. > :35:28.promising a referendum, but you obviously side with the Labour Party
:35:29. > :35:34.on this one. We welcome Labour joining us on this one. I want
:35:35. > :35:38.reform in the European Union but you can't negotiate it if you have one
:35:39. > :35:42.foot out the door. The only effective place to negotiate changes
:35:43. > :35:44.when you are committed and in, and we think that is crucial. I also
:35:45. > :35:50.agree that the first thing we have to do, the economy needs focus, not
:35:51. > :35:54.two or three-year is of nonstop Europe discussion. But, and I think
:35:55. > :35:59.this matters a great deal, I think we have to go out there campaigning
:36:00. > :36:03.and doing what this lady says, talking about the positives of
:36:04. > :36:08.Europe, the fact that 3.5 million jobs in this country, when we need
:36:09. > :36:11.every job, are dependent on our relationship with Europe. Half of
:36:12. > :36:17.our trade goes to Europe. People say we could sell to China, but that is
:36:18. > :36:22.a bloody tough thing to do. Europe is the place where we can most
:36:23. > :36:29.easily sell and grow. You look at the various companies and their
:36:30. > :36:35.leaders. Everyone of says, I come to Britain because it is the base from
:36:36. > :36:41.which I consult the whole single market. That is the argument we have
:36:42. > :36:45.to make. So are the Tories making a mistake? Do you think the electorate
:36:46. > :36:50.will turn their backs on UKIP and the Tories in favour of the
:36:51. > :36:54.Liberals? I am more concerned that companies will turn their backs on
:36:55. > :37:00.Britain. You are not worried about the electorate, because you are in
:37:01. > :37:03.the House of Lords? I think it is absolutely key that companies are
:37:04. > :37:07.looking at Britain, becoming uncertain about whether they should
:37:08. > :37:13.invest here in future. We need those jobs. But what about Cameron and
:37:14. > :37:20.UKIP? Are they on to a hiding to nothing by offering a referendum?
:37:21. > :37:25.You can do a lot of things. Just answer the question. It may well be
:37:26. > :37:31.extremely popular. So they might get back in on that basis. There are
:37:32. > :37:35.European elections coming up. We are fighting for in in that campaign.
:37:36. > :37:42.UKIP are fighting for out. It gives people a real choice. But it might
:37:43. > :37:45.well be popular. When we say we are fighting for in, we know it is not
:37:46. > :37:49.something, if you go out and do polling, that is likely to bring a
:37:50. > :37:51.load of new votes, but it is something you have to do if you
:37:52. > :37:57.believe in the future of this country. I am actually pro-Europe,
:37:58. > :38:02.but it is exactly this kind of debate that the mainstream parties
:38:03. > :38:05.seem afraid to have with the electorate, putting it to a vote. If
:38:06. > :38:10.there are so many good reasons for being part of the EU, as I believe,
:38:11. > :38:15.why is everyone running scared of putting the issue to bed once and
:38:16. > :38:20.for all? If there were a referendum, you think people would vote yes. I
:38:21. > :38:28.don't know, but I would personally vote yes. The man below. We used to
:38:29. > :38:35.build boats, until, a little while ago, when I received a call, trading
:38:36. > :38:41.standards officer. I don't want to interrupt, but where is this getting
:38:42. > :38:46.us? The trading standards officer had new regulations from Europe. RU
:38:47. > :38:50.yes or no to Europe as a result of this? He was going to say no because
:38:51. > :38:55.he didn't know the first bloody thing about it, and it killed our
:38:56. > :39:01.business. And if you go to Europe, the attitude from European people is
:39:02. > :39:13.regulations for Europe... They don't bathe them. -- they don't obey them.
:39:14. > :39:17.I am pro-European but I get tired of the debate which says people will
:39:18. > :39:21.not buy our goods because we are not in Europe. Rolls-Royce engines sell
:39:22. > :39:32.around Europe because they are the best engines in the world. The
:39:33. > :39:36.gentleman makes an excellent point. Look at the automotive sector. In my
:39:37. > :39:39.area, the West Midlands, we have Jaguar Land Rover. We now
:39:40. > :39:44.manufacture more cars than ever before in this country. One car
:39:45. > :39:49.rolls off the manufacturing lines every 20 seconds, and it sells
:39:50. > :39:53.around the world, and of course into Europe. Before I became a politician
:39:54. > :39:58.I bought businesses in Germany and across Europe. There is not a single
:39:59. > :40:01.market in Europe. The only real single market is benighted States of
:40:02. > :40:06.America, where you manufacture a single product and sell it across
:40:07. > :40:14.the whole of America. -- the United States of America. If the referendum
:40:15. > :40:18.comes along, would you vote yes or no? I would want to see what we
:40:19. > :40:22.negotiate. The priority is to negotiate first, like any good
:40:23. > :40:26.business. Secondly, let's have the debate, let's go out and talk about
:40:27. > :40:30.this and weigh up the advantages of being in the under a new settlement,
:40:31. > :40:46.versus pulling out. The British people deserve that. If you want to
:40:47. > :40:48.sell around the world, is it better to be trying to negotiate free-trade
:40:49. > :40:53.agreements with a country like China, 1.4 billion people, when you
:40:54. > :40:59.are part of a single market of 500 million, or a single market of 60
:41:00. > :41:03.million. Let me finish, please. The relative negotiating strength of the
:41:04. > :41:06.United Kingdom, relative to being part of the European Union, in
:41:07. > :41:11.opening new markets for British exports would be much less if we
:41:12. > :41:15.were outside Europe. But what is the error that David Cameron has made?
:41:16. > :41:20.13 months ago he made a commitment that there would be an in-out
:41:21. > :41:24.referendum in the UK by 2017. He did so when he believed there would be
:41:25. > :41:28.big constitutional treaty changes in Europe at that time. He said, at
:41:29. > :41:33.that point I will try and get a bet Asch macro a better deal for the UK.
:41:34. > :41:40.That might have worked. But when they now look at the evidence, no
:41:41. > :41:46.other European country is saying, on that timetable of 24 months from the
:41:47. > :41:48.general election in 2015, will there be the redesign of the European
:41:49. > :41:52.Union that David Cameron has promised his backbenchers to
:41:53. > :41:56.deliver. The reason he made that speech is not because he suddenly
:41:57. > :41:59.has a democratic impulse. It is because he is terrified of his
:42:00. > :42:06.backbenchers and of Europe. -- of UKIP. That is bad for Britain. We
:42:07. > :42:10.need changes, but not a John Major style government with the Tory party
:42:11. > :42:22.obsessed about Europe to the extent of the exclusion of the economy the
:42:23. > :42:25.health service and other priorities. As an ex-constituency chairmen, I
:42:26. > :42:31.left the Conservative Party because of exactly this. Negotiate this
:42:32. > :42:35.brand-new deal that will be marvellous. It will all be all
:42:36. > :42:40.right. That is what I am worried about, that you will try to convince
:42:41. > :42:44.the British public that we have this fantastic new Deal and everything
:42:45. > :42:50.will be marvellous. Did you leave the Conservative Party for another
:42:51. > :42:53.party? I just became totally disillusioned. I have voted
:42:54. > :42:59.Conservative all through my Army career and the rest of my life.
:43:00. > :43:04.Until this thing over Europe. Don't forget, when you talk about outside
:43:05. > :43:08.parties, Britain, England turned its back on the Commonwealth at that
:43:09. > :43:14.time. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, all of these countries. Not
:43:15. > :43:19.only did they buy from us, they also fought with us in two world wars. We
:43:20. > :43:25.are now in bed with Germany and France, two of the countries that,
:43:26. > :43:32.we have been at war with Germany twice in one century. Now we are
:43:33. > :43:39.depending on them for a living. We can't go further down that road,
:43:40. > :43:46.because those two questions were the most popular. This next is the third
:43:47. > :43:50.most popular. It is being asked by Lucy Monkhouse. Cambuslang shims
:43:51. > :43:54.proposed by the EU on Russia be realistically applied, and what
:43:55. > :44:01.would be the consequences for the UK. -- can the sanctions being
:44:02. > :44:14.proposed. Can they be realistically applied? Whenever they are, I think
:44:15. > :44:22.our friend Vladimir is having a chuckle. I don't think he cares.
:44:23. > :44:29.Let me tell you, I had the pleasure of driving along the Ukraine, along
:44:30. > :44:33.the shore of the Black Sea, through those millions of acres of
:44:34. > :44:43.cornfield, which no doubt he's also looking at. I drove straight up to
:44:44. > :44:49.the Siberia. The one thing that hit me time and again was the patriotism
:44:50. > :44:53.of the Russian. I found myself in an old collective farm n the middle of
:44:54. > :44:58.nowhere. It was the end of summer and the old boys were stripped to
:44:59. > :45:02.the waist and looking at their tomatoes and they asked me, I think
:45:03. > :45:09.they asked me where I was from. I told them and they beat their chest
:45:10. > :45:14.and they said "Russia." The power, the patriotism and they are Putin's
:45:15. > :45:18.boys. They want their Russia back. They are getting it back and there's
:45:19. > :45:22.nothing we can do about it. The Russians will take as much pain as
:45:23. > :45:27.you can throw at them. You think it is fun living through a Russian
:45:28. > :45:30.winter or in Leningrad during the two-year siege. They are used to
:45:31. > :45:35.hardship. They have long memories and they will endure it. A couple of
:45:36. > :45:39.year, three years - they will wait it out. You don't think the West,
:45:40. > :45:43.the EU and the United States should do anything at all? They can do what
:45:44. > :45:48.they want. Do you think they should do anything at all? Yes, they
:45:49. > :45:56.should. All I am saying is, it will not work. There's no shooting going
:45:57. > :46:01.on. They are talking about having a word with the rich oligarchs and
:46:02. > :46:08.taking their visas away. They may well say to Mr Putin, be reasonable,
:46:09. > :46:13.they are putting us under pressure. He'll say, "Tough luck." I think he
:46:14. > :46:16.has set his course and will not back down. Labour supports the coalition
:46:17. > :46:22.on this. What do you say to what Nick says? I don't think it is clear
:46:23. > :46:27.what course he has yet set. We don't know whether his ambitions extend to
:46:28. > :46:31.the eastern Ukraine. That is critical because if he were to take
:46:32. > :46:34.similar military action in the eastern Ukraine, then we have a
:46:35. > :46:41.shooting war on the European continent in a way that I think
:46:42. > :46:44.would be devastating and far more costly than any economic costs that
:46:45. > :46:47.would be considered in terms of action by the European Union or the
:46:48. > :46:51.Americans. So, what actually does the international community need to
:46:52. > :46:56.do? You are right, this is a difficult issue. You are right,
:46:57. > :46:59.David, this is an issue beyond Party Politics. William Hague and the
:47:00. > :47:04.Prime Minister are struggling along with other western leaders to come
:47:05. > :47:09.up with an appropriate response. First of all, you are trying to
:47:10. > :47:14.change theal lus of risk in Putin's mind, so he says if I pursue my
:47:15. > :47:17.ambitions, actually the costs and consequences will be serious. That
:47:18. > :47:21.doesn't involve Western Forces fighting in Ukraine. I think he
:47:22. > :47:25.needs to realise there would be costs and consequences. What would
:47:26. > :47:30.they be? There was a meeting today, I understand between John Kerry and
:47:31. > :47:34.the Russian Foreign Minister, is if this referendum, this illegal
:47:35. > :47:46.referendum takes place in the Crimea on Saturday, European foreign meet
:47:47. > :47:50.-- ministers will meet. Travel bans inwith anyone to invade the Crimea
:47:51. > :47:52.and asset freezers. That is important. One of the
:47:53. > :47:57.characteristics of the Russian economy is a huge element of capital
:47:58. > :48:02.flight. People have moved money out of Russia into Western Europe. In
:48:03. > :48:08.that sense, those 2,000 or so oligarchs and senior elites are
:48:09. > :48:14.fatherful. They have put -- are fearful. They have put their money
:48:15. > :48:19.into Western Europe. Do you they think would take the risk of not
:48:20. > :48:24.being the place where they put their money, which keeps the City going
:48:25. > :48:31.and would risk this by having sanctions? Unless we have bans, what
:48:32. > :48:34.we need is a graduated hierarchy of steps to try and make sure that a
:48:35. > :48:37.difficult situation doesn't get worse and we don't end up in
:48:38. > :48:42.shooting. The final point I would make would be he does actually care
:48:43. > :48:46.about what is called soft power, about Russia's reputation in the
:48:47. > :48:50.world. He has just spent on the Russian Olympics. He does have an
:48:51. > :48:55.interest in being respected. I think to economically and diplomatically
:48:56. > :49:01.isolate Russia is necessary because the alternative is worse. A Russian
:49:02. > :49:06.emboldened with further ambitions. What would be the level of fear
:49:07. > :49:11.among central European countries that Putin would do this again? What
:49:12. > :49:15.would be the judgment of our allies about the willingness of Europe to
:49:16. > :49:21.take action when it takes place on its doorstep, if we cannot
:49:22. > :49:24.contemplate economic or diplomatic measures?
:49:25. > :49:30.You made the point this is all useless. What do you say to what
:49:31. > :49:36.Douglas Alexander said? He said check the 200 oligarchs into a room
:49:37. > :49:40.and say, you have been very naughty and we'll have to freeze everything.
:49:41. > :49:47.What will they do? Go back and have a little coup or what? What can they
:49:48. > :49:51.effectively do? I agree with everything Douglas has said on this.
:49:52. > :49:56.I think there are two very clear messages that need to be sent to
:49:57. > :50:02.Putin. The first is, this is not a tug-of-war between us and you over
:50:03. > :50:08.the Ukraine. This mustn't be a serve row sum game. One must recognise
:50:09. > :50:13.that Russia has deep interests - a gas pipeline, a 15 billion bailout
:50:14. > :50:19.promised to the Ukraine. At the same time, you cannot allow Russia to
:50:20. > :50:25.effectively annex part of the Ukraine. We promised the Ukraine
:50:26. > :50:31.when the Soviet Union fell abart and Belarus and Ukraine gave up its
:50:32. > :50:34.massive nuclear arsenal, that their integrity would be maintained.
:50:35. > :50:40.Everyone signed up, including Russia. The point that Nick makes is
:50:41. > :50:45.a good one. I would say this on his point - the world has changed. When
:50:46. > :50:49.Russia invaded Hungary, how much do you think their Stock Market fell
:50:50. > :50:55.by? Zero - because they did haven't a Stock Market. When they invaded
:50:56. > :51:01.the Crimea, the Stock Markets fell by 10%. That will begin to hurt
:51:02. > :51:07.Putin at home. Are you saying it would prevent him taking over the
:51:08. > :51:11.Crimea? Get him out of Crimea? You hurt him by having diplomatic and
:51:12. > :51:15.economic sanctions and you escalate those, by the way, of course it will
:51:16. > :51:19.hurt us in the UK. That was the question, what effect it would have
:51:20. > :51:24.on us here. But I think that cost will be much greater if we do
:51:25. > :51:32.nothing and allow him to get away with annexation of the Crimea.
:51:33. > :51:36.I am with Nick 100% about how Putin may think about the world and he has
:51:37. > :51:41.got to rise back to of global fame. It is a cycle of history. We need to
:51:42. > :51:44.be careful about sanctions and the comment was made about the Russians
:51:45. > :51:48.being the most strategic chess players in the world. They make no
:51:49. > :51:52.move without the other four being in place. You mention about the energy,
:51:53. > :51:57.you know the gas pipelines into the UK and Europe would be enough to
:51:58. > :52:02.stop any sanctions having an effect. You, Sir? The chairman, or chief
:52:03. > :52:07.executive of Black Rock mentioned the power of the capital markets in
:52:08. > :52:14.removing 10% of the Stock Market value. You also mention the Ukraine
:52:15. > :52:19.removed the nuclear arsenal to get protection from NATO. Do you think
:52:20. > :52:24.they made the wrong call? They should not have trusted NATO and the
:52:25. > :52:29.West? Do you reckon they would have still been in the same situation? I
:52:30. > :52:37.tell you what worries me is it seems both sides are getting locked into a
:52:38. > :52:41.stalemate. When you look at - Putin has moved Russian soldiers into the
:52:42. > :52:47.Crimea. I cannot see any way that he can, without losing face, which is
:52:48. > :52:52.something that he dares about enormously, remove his troops
:52:53. > :52:57.without having taken control of the Crimea. So, I think if this is a
:52:58. > :53:02.chess game, he's got himself into a situation where his capacity to be
:53:03. > :53:11.able to move is incredibly limited. That's on the side of the West and
:53:12. > :53:14.the interim Ukrainian Government - sanction sanctions, it is hard to
:53:15. > :53:19.see how they can be effective enough, even if we try and escalate
:53:20. > :53:25.them to try and change this picture. At any moment, that is a sum event
:53:26. > :53:29.could trigger a behaviour in the Ukraine, where people who have been
:53:30. > :53:33.incredibly self-controlled and who have resisted turning to the gun
:53:34. > :53:37.might suddenly spark an event. You know, you just think of the echoes
:53:38. > :53:41.of the First World War, where people, with the best will in the
:53:42. > :53:45.world, tried to manoeuvre around a situation and ended up in the most
:53:46. > :53:50.horrific kind of conflict. I am behind every move that we can try
:53:51. > :53:54.and manage. I thought John Kerry hit it spot-on, by trying to constantly
:53:55. > :54:00.recognise Russia's genuine interests, by not trying to demean
:54:01. > :54:06.Putin in any way, but to try and make it clear that we have to see
:54:07. > :54:10.deescalation. I am really worried by this situation. I have to say, I
:54:11. > :54:15.agree with Nick. Basically, I hardly feel that we have the moral ground
:54:16. > :54:19.on telling Russia who to invade, et cetera, considering we went into
:54:20. > :54:23.Afghanistan, Iraq. How dare we start to say, you cannot go into that
:54:24. > :54:28.country! You cannot interfere with them, when we are doing it and
:54:29. > :54:35.America themselves! APPLAUSE
:54:36. > :54:41.I think the other problem we have is that the way the world sees us and
:54:42. > :54:46.any bad guy in the world sees us, has been massively compromised by
:54:47. > :54:50.our inability to intervene effectively in Syria. Putin has seen
:54:51. > :54:56.that Cameron couldn't even get a vote through the Commons for
:54:57. > :54:59.intervention in a case where thousands, tens of thousands,
:55:00. > :55:09.hundreds of thousands, possibly, of civilians are being starved, shot
:55:10. > :55:14.So, to let me finish, if we cannot even intervene, where there are
:55:15. > :55:19.clear atrocities taking place against civilians, what can we
:55:20. > :55:25.possibly do here? What do you say to his point? The gentleman there? I
:55:26. > :55:31.feel we don't have the moral ground. Basically, as you said, we have
:55:32. > :55:35.mucked it up, so many times sticking our noses in. I think Russia is
:55:36. > :55:38.wrong. I feel for the Ukrainian people. To go around and think we
:55:39. > :55:42.can tell other countries what to do when we have done the same thing
:55:43. > :55:46.over the years! This man here in the blue and then
:55:47. > :55:51.we have to stop. Does it show it was prudent of the Government to reduce
:55:52. > :55:57.our afternooned forces in the light of an uncertain world? We had a ?38
:55:58. > :56:01.billion black hole in the Ministry of Defence that we inherited. We had
:56:02. > :56:06.to make tough decisions. I think the decisions were the right ones to
:56:07. > :56:09.make sure that we can deliver a force that can react to situations
:56:10. > :56:15.around the world. I think this situation is very different, by the
:56:16. > :56:18.way. I think, in terms of both procurement, hardware, we are in a
:56:19. > :56:23.better place today than we have ever been. The head of the Army is
:56:24. > :56:30.warning about moral disengagement and the reduction of disarmament...
:56:31. > :56:33.I am an ex-soldier. My friends are leaving. They want to go. They are
:56:34. > :56:38.fed up. So, is it true - you got the Army
:56:39. > :56:44.now saying look at what is happening in the Ukraine, you should not have
:56:45. > :56:48.cut the Armed Forces this much? I don't think you could argue that
:56:49. > :56:52.even if we had double or triple the armed forces that we have, that that
:56:53. > :56:56.would be the key difference to the Ukraine. The United States has
:56:57. > :57:00.enormous military resources. That is not what is at play in this
:57:01. > :57:04.situation. It is trying to find a way out of a circumstance in which a
:57:05. > :57:09.Russian leader has backed himself into a corner and it is hard to see
:57:10. > :57:13.a way out that doesn't totally violate... You think he has backed
:57:14. > :57:16.into a corner? I do. I understand what we are talking about the double
:57:17. > :57:20.standards with Iraq. We need to understand who we are dealing in
:57:21. > :57:23.Vladimir Putin. I don't think he cares what we have done. He'll do
:57:24. > :57:28.what he wants and no-one will stop him. You don't think he is backed
:57:29. > :57:32.into a corner, in other word? I don't think he is scared of being
:57:33. > :57:38.backed into a corner. Thank you. Our time is up. Next we'll be in
:57:39. > :57:41.Warrington next Thursday. It is the day after the budget, so we'll have
:57:42. > :57:48.the Chief Secretary of the Treasury here to explain what is going on and
:57:49. > :57:57.Andy Burnham for Labour and the crime writer Val McDermott too. The
:57:58. > :58:02.week after we'll be in Brighton. You either live near one of them or you
:58:03. > :58:06.can commute back and forward. Apply via our website. The address is on
:58:07. > :58:11.the screen, as ever. And the telephone number.
:58:12. > :58:16.And, as ever, if you are watching on BBC Radio 5 Live, you can continue
:58:17. > :58:20.the debate with Question Time, extra time. Thank you to all of you on the
:58:21. > :58:23.panel who came here and thank you who came to take part in this
:58:24. > :58:26.programme here in Nottingham. It is very good to have had you here. I
:58:27. > :58:34.hope you'll watch the programme next week. From all of us on Question
:58:35. > :58:41.Time, until next thurks good night. -- Thursday, good night.