:00:13. > :00:20.welcome to Question Time. And good evening to you at home and
:00:21. > :00:25.here in the audience, waiting to ask the questions of the panel, who do
:00:26. > :00:29.not know the questions until they hear them. Tonight, the Conservative
:00:30. > :00:33.International Development Secretary, Justine Greening. Labour's Diane
:00:34. > :00:39.Abbott, free to rebel after her return to the backbenchers. UKIP MEP
:00:40. > :00:45.and party spokesman on energy and industry, Roger Helmer. Chief
:00:46. > :00:50.Executive of the high-street chain next, sitting on the Tory benches in
:00:51. > :00:51.the House of Lords, Simon Wolfson, and singer songwriter, Mick
:00:52. > :01:08.Hucknall. Frances Traynor has the first
:01:09. > :01:11.question. Is the Ofgem enquiring into the big six a sign that the
:01:12. > :01:21.delivery of energy is too important to be left to the market. -- the
:01:22. > :01:25.enquiry. No. It is a huge mistake to assume that if you take something
:01:26. > :01:30.away from the market that the state will do a better job of it. I think
:01:31. > :01:34.the problem with energy is that everyone is looking at the 5%
:01:35. > :01:40.profits that are made by the energy companies and asking, is it too
:01:41. > :01:45.much? It might be but we might save one or 2%. They are missing the main
:01:46. > :01:49.point, what about the other 95%? What about the cost of fuel and
:01:50. > :01:54.generation? Here, there is a policy vacuum. This country does not know
:01:55. > :01:59.whether it is building wind turbines, or gas stations. We have
:02:00. > :02:04.to make up our minds. If we do that and invest as a nation, we will have
:02:05. > :02:08.cheaper generation. We could have cheaper, cleaner energy if we
:02:09. > :02:13.adopted gas. If we went for fracking, we could have cheaper,
:02:14. > :02:17.cleaner energy. There are all sorts of problems, and I know I am in
:02:18. > :02:20.Brighton, but what we must do as a nation is addressed that quickly and
:02:21. > :02:24.decide whether we are going for fracking. Because if we do, we will
:02:25. > :02:33.have cheaper, cleaner energy in the UK. When you say you know you are in
:02:34. > :02:37.Brighton, I am glad. The point about Brighton being that fracking is a
:02:38. > :02:41.big issue here. But what about the Ofgem enquiry? Is it a good idea?
:02:42. > :02:45.There has been criticism from some companies saying it will slow down
:02:46. > :02:52.delivery. What do you think as energy spokesman for UKIP? For a
:02:53. > :02:56.start, I find it extremely difficult to disagree with Simon. I think the
:02:57. > :03:01.old parties have done a brilliant job in deflecting blame from the
:03:02. > :03:06.political leaders who have created this mess, and instead focusing
:03:07. > :03:09.public blame on the utility companies. Simon has already said
:03:10. > :03:14.that typically they make a return of something like 5%. I do not know
:03:15. > :03:19.what Mix makes but I would not be surprised if it is not in the same
:03:20. > :03:23.ballpark. If you read the accounts, they are not making outrageous
:03:24. > :03:27.profits. There are in mind that we have run down our generating
:03:28. > :03:29.capacity, partly because of the European Union large combustion
:03:30. > :03:36.Plant directive, forcing us to close perfectly good coal plants. We have
:03:37. > :03:40.the nuclear fleet coming to the end of its life which needs replacing.
:03:41. > :03:45.We are facing a crisis situation and we need the industry to invest at
:03:46. > :03:50.least ?100 billion in order to keep the lights on. You cannot get an
:03:51. > :03:54.industry to invest these very large amounts of money, and at the same
:03:55. > :03:59.time do what Labour have done, which is to propose a price freeze, and
:04:00. > :04:03.indeed perhaps with an enquiry, and maybe we need one, but it does mean
:04:04. > :04:14.that investment decisions will be delayed for a considerable length of
:04:15. > :04:17.time. Diane Abbott. The question was, does the enquiry show that
:04:18. > :04:26.energy is too important to be left to the market? I would say yes. And
:04:27. > :04:30.the reason I would say that is because there are markets and
:04:31. > :04:35.markets. There is a market like an open-air market where you compare
:04:36. > :04:39.the price of apples, and there are rigged markets, cartels,
:04:40. > :04:44.conspiracies against the public. I believe the energy companies, and
:04:45. > :04:48.this is what Ofgem suspects, are engaged in a conspiracy against the
:04:49. > :04:55.public. Energy prices are the second highest expenditure that families
:04:56. > :04:58.face. Prices have shot up, gone up by about ?300. Profits for energy
:04:59. > :05:03.companies have gone through the roof. And what we find is that when
:05:04. > :05:10.the wholesale price of energy goes up, the energy companies put prices
:05:11. > :05:16.up. But when it goes down, they keep prices where they are. It is not a
:05:17. > :05:23.genuine market. It is rigged against the public and it definitely needs
:05:24. > :05:30.an enquiry. How is it read, if SSP have frozen prices and the others
:05:31. > :05:33.have not? This is the first time this has happened and I do not think
:05:34. > :05:38.it is disconnected from the fact that we have had a critique of
:05:39. > :05:43.energy prices for over 12 months. We think there should be a freeze while
:05:44. > :05:46.it is supported out. We think it is suspicious that generally they put
:05:47. > :05:50.prices up and down together. It is not a genuine market. It is a
:05:51. > :05:58.cartel. APPLAUSE
:05:59. > :06:04.I think it is good news that we have had energy companies referred to the
:06:05. > :06:08.Competition Markets Authority. It is time we got to the bottom of
:06:09. > :06:12.whether the competitive market is working for consumers and customers.
:06:13. > :06:19.Do you think it is a possibility it is a cartel, acting against the
:06:20. > :06:23.consumer? We need to find out. If it is not working, then we need to take
:06:24. > :06:27.action necessary to make sure it does work for consumers, which is
:06:28. > :06:31.how markets are supposed to work. Over the last decade, we have seen
:06:32. > :06:36.fewer suppliers, so customers have had less choice. We have tried to
:06:37. > :06:41.cut some of the taxes that get added to the bills. We tried to make
:06:42. > :06:45.switching easier, so consumers can take advantage of the competition
:06:46. > :06:48.that is there. But we recognise there are serious questions about
:06:49. > :06:53.whether the market works effectively, which is what this
:06:54. > :06:57.enquiry can get to the bottom of. The second thing is around long and
:06:58. > :07:00.whether we are investing enough in our energy generation capacity to
:07:01. > :07:05.make sure we can keep the lights on. That is the other key part of
:07:06. > :07:09.this. It is good news for consumers today that we are finally going to
:07:10. > :07:13.get the right enquiry to understand whether this market is working
:07:14. > :07:20.effectively. If it is not, we need to take step to make sure that it
:07:21. > :07:23.does. I find the audacity of Diane Abbott quite extraordinary. It was
:07:24. > :07:26.her government and Ed Miliband as energy secretary that created the
:07:27. > :07:31.cartel that are putting up energy prices. You are responsible for it,
:07:32. > :07:36.and it is this coalition government that are sorting it out. You are not
:07:37. > :07:47.connecting me to Tony Blair, are you, by some chance? You are part of
:07:48. > :07:55.the same party. You voted with him. Very often I did not. Did you on
:07:56. > :07:59.that point? Don't hold me responsible for everything the last
:08:00. > :08:04.Labour government did. The truth is that the amount of switching has
:08:05. > :08:09.fallen in the past few. In 2009, energy prices fell by 45%, but
:08:10. > :08:15.household bills only fell 5%, and you are telling me it is not the
:08:16. > :08:18.cartel. Which would be criminal, wouldn't it? If it were a cartel, it
:08:19. > :08:27.would be criminal and people would end up in jail. I think politicians
:08:28. > :08:31.have to be careful what they wish for, because as part of the
:08:32. > :08:37.announcement yesterday, they also referred to the possibility of 500
:08:38. > :08:40.voluntary redundancies. Also, the GMB union today issued a statement
:08:41. > :08:45.where they said this review was bad for jobs, bad for investment and
:08:46. > :08:49.would not make a scrap of difference to the consumer. It also said that
:08:50. > :08:55.when it came to long-term energy policy, most politicians are
:08:56. > :09:02.useless. Well, there is an argument that most politicians are useless
:09:03. > :09:06.anyway. For the sake of this hour of Question Time, let's assume you have
:09:07. > :09:10.a purpose. The man on the far right. There was a staggering
:09:11. > :09:17.statement today on the five o'clock news from part of the energy
:09:18. > :09:22.companies. He said, this investigation will deter us from
:09:23. > :09:29.investing in gas generation. If Mr Putin turns off the gas, the lights
:09:30. > :09:38.go out as well. Mick Hucknall. What is your view of this? If it is true
:09:39. > :09:44.that freezing prices will mean 500 jobs lost, as the SS E say they are
:09:45. > :09:52.going to lose, what happens when Labour coming and freeze prices,
:09:53. > :09:55.there will be 5000 jobs lost? It is not good news about the job losses.
:09:56. > :09:58.You have to give credit to Ed Miliband for raising the issue in
:09:59. > :10:03.the first place, but I seem to recall that he was energy minister
:10:04. > :10:07.when these cartels were created. So it is a little bit this, a little
:10:08. > :10:11.bit that. The one thing I would say is that it would be nice, as a
:10:12. > :10:16.member of the public, to see politicians actually working hard
:10:17. > :10:19.for us to get these prices down. People are struggling and it is hard
:10:20. > :10:25.out there. They must do everything they can to put pressure on the
:10:26. > :10:30.energy companies to get these prices down. I am not, however, entirely
:10:31. > :10:35.convinced about the idea of a blanket freeze that just covers
:10:36. > :10:39.everybody, presuming that they really are all the same. I also
:10:40. > :10:43.wonder about what the implications are regarding energy companies on
:10:44. > :10:47.the European mainland, bearing in mind that I think the company that
:10:48. > :10:51.provides energy for me are actually French. So I don't quite know how
:10:52. > :10:59.that would work out, freezing it here. How does that impact mainland
:11:00. > :11:04.Europe as well. Can I come back with an important point. Amazingly, we
:11:05. > :11:09.think of Germany as being a wonderfully green country, but the
:11:10. > :11:12.Germans are actually now building or refurbishing 24 new coal-fired power
:11:13. > :11:16.stations and taking advantage of low-priced coal, because the world
:11:17. > :11:20.price is very low. Germany and the German economy will benefit from
:11:21. > :11:25.that. The thing that is driving up costs is green subsidies and
:11:26. > :11:29.excessive investment in renewables that are not delivering adequately.
:11:30. > :11:30.It is these decisions in Brussels and Westminster that are driving up
:11:31. > :11:37.the cost, not the companies. and Westminster that are driving up
:11:38. > :11:41.the cost, not the Coal is definitely not green energy. Also, fracking is
:11:42. > :11:44.not clean energy either. The problem this government has is that it has
:11:45. > :11:48.not invested in green energy, which it should do. We should take
:11:49. > :11:52.advantage of the fact that we are an island. Other countries in Europe
:11:53. > :11:55.are on track for supplying their whole countries with energy they
:11:56. > :12:02.have provided themselves, which is green. And it was great news this
:12:03. > :12:06.week that Siemens announced huge investment of the Humber that is
:12:07. > :12:12.going to create about 1000 jobs, and it is all around offshore wind. The
:12:13. > :12:16.biggest problem is that the same companies generate the power that
:12:17. > :12:20.sell it to us. They should be split up and they should not be able to
:12:21. > :12:22.sell it at an artificial high price to themselves, to then pass it onto
:12:23. > :12:47.consumer. You can join the debate. Let's go on to a question from
:12:48. > :12:55.Oliver Woodley. Our Nigel Farage and Nick Clegg part of Premier League
:12:56. > :12:58.politics or a carnival sideshow? I take it this is in light of last
:12:59. > :13:05.Mike's debate about in or out of Europe. Mick Hucknall, Nigel Farage
:13:06. > :13:08.and Nick Clegg, are they part of Premier League politics or a
:13:09. > :13:15.carnival sideshow? I don't know whether you saw last night. I did
:13:16. > :13:19.see it. There is an interesting scenario taking place here because
:13:20. > :13:22.it seems to me that at the next general election, from what we are
:13:23. > :13:26.seeing in the polls, it is quite unlikely that either the
:13:27. > :13:33.Conservatives or Labour will gain a majority. Therefore, they will have
:13:34. > :13:39.to climb into bed with somebody. It seems also that the Lib Dem poll
:13:40. > :13:44.ratings are ever diminishing and Nigel Farage is on the up. So what
:13:45. > :13:48.would be the scenario is the scenario of labour getting into bed
:13:49. > :13:50.with Nigel Farage, or Dave getting into bed with Nigel Farage, and how
:13:51. > :14:06.does Nick feel about that? Do you want to stay in the bedroom,
:14:07. > :14:14.Simon Wolfson? It depends on the nature of what goes on in the
:14:15. > :14:18.bedroom. It is very interesting, this debate. Debate is a good
:14:19. > :14:22.thing. Here you have two extremes. You have one party saying we must
:14:23. > :14:27.stay in and accept whatever Europe throws at us, and the other saying
:14:28. > :14:30.we must come straight out. The vast majority of British people, and
:14:31. > :14:35.certainly British industry, want something down the middle. We want
:14:36. > :14:39.to stay in the European Union, but we wanted to be about free trade,
:14:40. > :14:50.the free movement of goods, services and capital that create jobs. We
:14:51. > :14:53.don't want a superstate, a government of government, endless
:14:54. > :14:54.bureaucracy, and we don't want this huge imperial structure that will
:14:55. > :14:57.control our futures. The debate should be not at either end of the
:14:58. > :15:01.spectrum. It should be, how are we going to make sure we change the
:15:02. > :15:04.nature of the European Union to get the European Union that we want to
:15:05. > :15:11.stay in, not whether we stay in or out of the one that we have got.
:15:12. > :15:20.Why wasn't your Party Leader there last night to put those views? It is
:15:21. > :15:24.very disappointing that the middle ground doesn't speak up. It is an
:15:25. > :15:27.indictment of the major political parties that they have allowed the
:15:28. > :15:31.fringe parties to take control of this issue. It is something - it is
:15:32. > :15:34.central to the future of this country. It is something that all
:15:35. > :15:41.the major parties should be talking about. Diane Abbott, do you think -
:15:42. > :15:47.should Ed Miliband have been there last night, and David Cameron? I
:15:48. > :15:52.don't know about Ed Miliband voting with Nigel Farage. What did you say,
:15:53. > :15:56.sorry? I'm not so sure of the relevance of Ed Miliband debating
:15:57. > :16:01.with Nigel Farage. I want to answer the question, at least, initially.
:16:02. > :16:06.They are not a sideshow, actually. The Lib Dems, in particular, are
:16:07. > :16:11.propping up a Tory Government. And what the debate was really about was
:16:12. > :16:15.a process by which the Lib Dems want to fool people that they are somehow
:16:16. > :16:20.separate from the Tories. It is a process of differentiation. People
:16:21. > :16:25.should not forget everything you don't like about this Coalition
:16:26. > :16:28.Government, the Lib Dems have equal responsibility. They shouldn't get
:16:29. > :16:33.away with pretending they have become these nice, cuddly, green Lib
:16:34. > :16:35.Dems after four years of propping up David Cameron.
:16:36. > :16:50.Yes, you, Sir? Whatever the debate was last night, we did learn one
:16:51. > :16:56.thing. We learnt that UKIP are against Europe. They are against
:16:57. > :17:08.immigration. They are against gay marriage, which is an outrage. So,
:17:09. > :17:13.what are they for? Robert Helmer? Well, in three words - freedom,
:17:14. > :17:17.democracy and prosperity. I would love to come back on Simon's point.
:17:18. > :17:26.I agreed with some of the things he said. The first point I would make
:17:27. > :17:30.is that given the poll which put UKIP at the top of the list, I don't
:17:31. > :17:34.think you can call us a fringe party. Tell us your views on
:17:35. > :17:40.same-sex marriage? We will come to that later. Leave him alone. I'm
:17:41. > :17:45.sure that will come up. It will all happen. The second thing I would say
:17:46. > :17:50.- what you want is a Europe of free trade where business can trade
:17:51. > :17:54.freely with Europe, where we are not governed centrally by undemocratic
:17:55. > :17:58.institutions. That is what we want. The only way to deliver it is to
:17:59. > :18:02.take Britain out of the European Union and then to negotiate a free
:18:03. > :18:06.trade agreement and that will give you the solution. What about the
:18:07. > :18:10.free movement of people? The free movement of people - this gentleman
:18:11. > :18:17.said we are against immigration. We are not. I was furious when Nick
:18:18. > :18:22.Clegg talked last night about pulling up the portcullis. Our
:18:23. > :18:26.policy is a policy of managed immigration based on numbers na are
:18:27. > :18:30.reasonable for our society and our welfare system and our schools and
:18:31. > :18:35.our hospitals to support and skills. We are not interested in
:18:36. > :18:38.nationality, colour, race, any of those issues. You can shake your
:18:39. > :18:42.head all you want. This is how it is. I would rather have a well
:18:43. > :18:47.qualified Indian software engineer coming here than an Eastern European
:18:48. > :18:53.with no qualifications. That is our position and we are quite clear on
:18:54. > :18:59.it. Answer me one question. Farage said last night that he attends the
:19:00. > :19:02.thing, he does debate but he doesn't vote. If you don't vote, what is the
:19:03. > :19:20.point of us voting for you? As I typically work 12 to 14-hour
:19:21. > :19:26.days, I'm not impressed by your suggestion that we do nothing. If
:19:27. > :19:31.you don't vote, why vote? What he said was he did not vote for more
:19:32. > :19:40.power for the commission - and nor do I. My voting participation record
:19:41. > :19:46.happens to be 8 .-something per cent. I have to tell you, it is
:19:47. > :19:50.above the average for the Liberal Democrat MEPs, too. We vote in the
:19:51. > :19:55.British interest, not in the Commission interest. Let's leave
:19:56. > :20:03.that for a moment. Justine Greening? The question - are Farage and Clegg
:20:04. > :20:07.a carnival sideshow? I enjoyed listening to the debate last night.
:20:08. > :20:12.The bottom line is it is going to be a sideshow until we get the chance
:20:13. > :20:18.to have a referendum. We can have endless debates on LBC. But we need
:20:19. > :20:24.to give people the choice. They are on BBC next week! I am looking
:20:25. > :20:29.forward to that. I had to tell you that. The bottom line is we have to
:20:30. > :20:34.allow people in our country for the first time in decades the choice on
:20:35. > :20:39.this and that's only going to happen if we can get over passing a law
:20:40. > :20:44.through Parliament that will give people that referendum that
:20:45. > :20:49.everybody wants. Otherwise we will never get beyond having a debate in
:20:50. > :20:51.Question Time. The only party in Parliament who is supporting that is
:20:52. > :20:56.the Conservative Party. There is only one Government after this
:20:57. > :21:01.election that will allow us, allow YOU, to have that debate and that's
:21:02. > :21:06.a Conservative Government. So we can have all the... To have the debate
:21:07. > :21:11.or the referendum? To have the referendum. A slip of the tongue to
:21:12. > :21:14.call it a debate. It is one of the most important debates our country
:21:15. > :21:21.needs to have. That is why we support giving the British people
:21:22. > :21:25.their support. The Labour Party and the Lib Dems voted against it and
:21:26. > :21:29.that is why it is not in law today. But we will try and we will pledge
:21:30. > :21:34.that we will have that referendum by 2017 if we are in power. I'm
:21:35. > :21:44.interested to know. Do the majority of people in Britain want a
:21:45. > :21:50.referendum? I don't know. What? Have a referendum. Or a Government
:21:51. > :21:56.inquiry! The woman in blue? I don't want a referendum because I want to
:21:57. > :22:01.stay in the EU. Hang on, you think a referendum would vote the wrong way?
:22:02. > :22:05.I'm concerned that after decades of EU-bashing from the media, that
:22:06. > :22:10.whether there is a referendum or not, the arguments, you know, they
:22:11. > :22:14.are so pie yased in favour of pulling out because of the mad
:22:15. > :22:18.straight banana stories that the press have been running and not
:22:19. > :22:23.talking about the benefits for working parents we have got from the
:22:24. > :22:29.EU. Justine Greening, you say you want a referendum. Would you vote to
:22:30. > :22:33.stay in in a referendum? I will see what the position is at the time.
:22:34. > :22:37.What we have said is we want to try and renegotiate to get a better deal
:22:38. > :22:40.for Britain. We have been unhappy about the direction that the EU has
:22:41. > :22:45.been going over recent years, so we need to get through that, do our
:22:46. > :22:50.negotiation and people should have their choice. The woman in blue? I'm
:22:51. > :22:54.one of quite a small percentage of people in this audience who had the
:22:55. > :22:59.chance to vote because I'm a lady of a certain age. Quite honestly, I
:23:00. > :23:05.voted for a Common Market. That's the way it was sold to me. It made
:23:06. > :23:08.sense, I'm part of Europe, good trading agreements, friends just
:23:09. > :23:14.across the Channel. I did not vote for what we have today. I certainly
:23:15. > :23:22.want a referendum. How would you vote? I would - well, there's no...
:23:23. > :23:25.Would you wait to see? I think that David Cameron is perfectly right to
:23:26. > :23:28.try and renegotiate some of the things that the British people
:23:29. > :23:32.aren't happy about. Once he's done that, give the people the chance to
:23:33. > :23:39.vote. It's an insult in a democracy not to. OK. The person up there with
:23:40. > :23:44.the red shirt on? I saw a poll that the EU was not in the top ten of
:23:45. > :23:48.issues that are important to people coming up to the next election. Why
:23:49. > :23:51.have a referendum on the EU but not on the other important decisions
:23:52. > :23:55.that we elect a Government to make for us such as education, or
:23:56. > :24:01.reforming the NHS? Why pass the buck on that one issue? I think what we
:24:02. > :24:04.all recognise is that on the other issues - health and education -
:24:05. > :24:09.people get chance to vote on the kind of approach they want at a
:24:10. > :24:14.general election. As the lady said, we have had such a huge change... We
:24:15. > :24:21.can do that anyway. If we want to come out of Europe, we can vote for
:24:22. > :24:23.UKIP. The reason we want a referendum is because it's a
:24:24. > :24:28.fundamental constitutional question. But you say why don't we concentrate
:24:29. > :24:33.on British issues? The point is that Europe decides a great majority of
:24:34. > :24:37.them. Why do we have high-energy prices? Because of the European
:24:38. > :24:46.climate and energy package. Why do we have unemployment? That is what
:24:47. > :24:50.you want. You can twist your argument in that way because that is
:24:51. > :24:56.the message you are trying to put across. Simon Wolfson? What we are
:24:57. > :24:59.seeing in Europe is a seismic shift in the democratic control, the
:25:00. > :25:03.British people have over their Government. It is absolutely right
:25:04. > :25:09.that on something so important, even if it doesn't poll, if a poll
:25:10. > :25:13.doesn't notice it, it is about what is really important to this country
:25:14. > :25:17.and its democratic future. If we are going to commit ourselves to
:25:18. > :25:21.becoming part of the European Union super state, the people of this
:25:22. > :25:25.country should have a choice. Simon Wolfson, do you believe in the
:25:26. > :25:29.renegotiation, or do you think this is a way of having a referendum and
:25:30. > :25:33.the cover is that there will be a renegotiation? You won't remember,
:25:34. > :25:36.but the earlier referendum, Harold Wilson said there had been all these
:25:37. > :25:41.changes. People who looked at it said there hadn't been many changes.
:25:42. > :25:44.It was an opportunity to get a "yes" vote from the British people? I'm
:25:45. > :25:48.optimistic about Britain's ability to change Europe. The thing that
:25:49. > :25:50.gives me the encouragement is doing so much business on mainland Europe
:25:51. > :25:55.and talking to businessmen and people in Europe. What we don't see
:25:56. > :25:59.here is that a lot of the people in Europe, in Germany, in France, in
:26:00. > :26:04.Italy, are also thinking exactly the same thing. They never voted for a
:26:05. > :26:08.European super state. We have this one chance now to renegotiate and
:26:09. > :26:13.turn Europe into something better. We should take it. You, Sir? If we
:26:14. > :26:21.had a referendum in 2017 and we vote to come out of the EU, won't that be
:26:22. > :26:26.the end of UKIP? Can I answer that gentleman's question? The gentleman
:26:27. > :26:29.towards the back asked why have the Tories going on about this
:26:30. > :26:38.referendum when it is not in the top ten. I will tell you why. Cameron is
:26:39. > :26:44.being held hostage first of all by an anti-Europe bunch of backbenchers
:26:45. > :26:48.and they are running scared of UKIP. I'm not opposed to a referendum in
:26:49. > :26:51.principle. Our position is we won't give a referendum unless there is a
:26:52. > :26:55.chance for a pass. If you are pro-European, you ought to be able
:26:56. > :27:02.to think you can win. Cameron is being held hostage to a bunch of
:27:03. > :27:06.really, I think, obsessive Tory backbenchers and men like him. It is
:27:07. > :27:12.a cynical device to kick the issue into the long grass until after the
:27:13. > :27:18.general election. That is completely wrong. We shall see. Let's go on to
:27:19. > :27:25.another question. Alexander Reynolds? Is the Help to Buy Scheme
:27:26. > :27:29.fuelling another unsustainable housing price boom? The Help to Buy
:27:30. > :27:34.Scheme and the Government giving help to people with their mortgages.
:27:35. > :27:38.We have also had the freedom not to take annuities and people are going
:27:39. > :27:43.to buy houses that way, too. Mick Hucknall, you are a property owner,
:27:44. > :27:47.in quite a big way. What do you think? Is there an unsustainable
:27:48. > :27:56.house price boom going on in this country? I don't know. Right. Sorry
:27:57. > :28:01.I asked! But the impression I get, the Help to Buy Scheme is at least
:28:02. > :28:03.getting people on to the property ladder. And for somebody just
:28:04. > :28:10.starting out to buy their first house, I can see that that is surely
:28:11. > :28:13.a good thing. Justine Greening, what do you make of the complaints there
:28:14. > :28:18.have been and the concerns expressed? I see the Prince of Wales
:28:19. > :28:21.yesterday talking about the dangers of London house prices that are
:28:22. > :28:26.rising so much that talented young individuals starting their careers
:28:27. > :28:30.will be driven away from London? I think we have had a problem with the
:28:31. > :28:34.level of London house prices and partly across the country. We have
:28:35. > :28:38.had 20 years of not enough homes being built for people so we don't
:28:39. > :28:44.have the level of supply that we need. Housing starts - we had more
:28:45. > :28:48.houses built last year than any time since 2007, so that is coming back
:28:49. > :28:55.on stream. By how many? It is easy to say "more" and it's a thousand or
:28:56. > :28:59.two. How many more than 2007? We have seen 200,000 homes built.
:29:00. > :29:03.Compared with 2007. What was the figure then We had no housing starts
:29:04. > :29:08.by the time the recession hit. If you look at affordable housing as
:29:09. > :29:11.well, we have seen 150,000 affordable homes built over the
:29:12. > :29:16.course of this Parliament, more to come. And the bottom line is that is
:29:17. > :29:19.part of it. But the fundamental issue, for lots of young people in
:29:20. > :29:23.Britain today, they want to get on the housing ladder now. It makes
:29:24. > :29:28.sense to help them get that deposit to be able to buy their first home.
:29:29. > :29:32.That is what help to buy is all about. I think we are right to fix
:29:33. > :29:36.not only the underlying problem of a lack of supply, but making sure that
:29:37. > :29:41.young people who want to buy their home now have got the support to do
:29:42. > :29:45.that. The Help to Buy Scheme has made sure that 50,000 people have
:29:46. > :29:51.been able to do that. OK. We will see more over the coming months. The
:29:52. > :29:58.question is whether there is an unsustainable housing price boom.
:29:59. > :30:05.How is it in Brighton? The man on the back row? No, it is a woman! I
:30:06. > :30:11.can't see which the arm is attached to! I now see it is YOUR arm? Two
:30:12. > :30:15.things. Firstly, where are the affordable houses you are talking
:30:16. > :30:18.about? They are not in Brighton. They are probably not in the South
:30:19. > :30:23.East. And, secondly, there is not just a problem with buying houses,
:30:24. > :30:27.the rent prices in Brighton are a disgrace and we have had so many
:30:28. > :30:34.problems even trying to find a house that we can live in that's perfectly
:30:35. > :30:37.healthy, there's such problems with mold, landlords don't do anything
:30:38. > :30:40.about it. We have to fight to get everything dealt with. Where is the
:30:41. > :30:43.support for people in rented accommodation? Especially
:30:44. > :30:46.considering I'm going to be in rented accommodation for the rest of
:30:47. > :30:54.my life because I will never be able to afford a house.
:30:55. > :31:03.And over there on the left. You have just made the argument that the
:31:04. > :31:06.reason house prices are going up is because there are too few homes.
:31:07. > :31:11.There is another argument to say that there are too many people and
:31:12. > :31:14.that demand is purely driven by the amount of people and the amount of
:31:15. > :31:20.people that have come into the country in a very short space of
:31:21. > :31:24.time. So a question of recent immigration. It has to have a
:31:25. > :31:27.bearing. No one seems to want to talk about it but you can't have
:31:28. > :31:34.millions of people arriving that need roofs over their heads. The
:31:35. > :31:38.first thing to say is that there is no question that Help To Buy is
:31:39. > :31:43.driving a housing bubble. This is what economists are saying, what the
:31:44. > :31:47.Bank of England is saying. And when I say hey housing bubble, house
:31:48. > :31:52.prices in London and the south-east are ridiculous. If in a borough like
:31:53. > :31:55.Hackney nobody on an average wage has any hope of eyeing a house,
:31:56. > :32:03.there is something wrong with the housing market. -- buying a house.
:32:04. > :32:07.The idea that immigrants cause high housing prices, I do not go along
:32:08. > :32:11.with an argument that blames immigrants for every social ill, but
:32:12. > :32:17.there is a specific issue in London which is super wealthy non-domiciled
:32:18. > :32:21.buyers buying homes off plan in central London, holding them empty,
:32:22. > :32:24.driving up house prices, driving the middle classes out of the centre and
:32:25. > :32:30.into areas like Hackney and Battersea, driving up house prices
:32:31. > :32:34.there. So you are reaching a situation where people on average
:32:35. > :32:39.wages cannot afford to live in zones one and two. It is not sustainable.
:32:40. > :32:45.How do you recruit teachers and doctors in the centre of London if
:32:46. > :32:50.they can't afford homes? The growth that this government is boasting
:32:51. > :32:53.about is built on a housing bubble. It will necessarily pop. The problem
:32:54. > :32:58.with this artificial housing bubble, it also affects rentals.
:32:59. > :33:04.Rental prices in London and the south-east are ridiculous. I think
:33:05. > :33:06.the Tories have stoked an artificial bubble to win the next general
:33:07. > :33:21.election but we will pay the price with a broken housing market. And
:33:22. > :33:25.did that answer your point? On the second point that Diane Abbott
:33:26. > :33:29.raised, I agree. I know the people. I am in shipping and I know people
:33:30. > :33:32.all around the world. There are people that buy houses and flats in
:33:33. > :33:37.London for millions of pounds. They might visit for a couple of weeks in
:33:38. > :33:42.the summer. In other countries they call it closed shutters. There is no
:33:43. > :33:45.one living there. These are driving up prices. Local people should be
:33:46. > :33:52.living in those places, not people looking at it as an investment.
:33:53. > :33:55.Firstly, what is affordable housing? You always go on about it
:33:56. > :34:01.but what is the price bracket? Secondly, do any of you want to live
:34:02. > :34:07.in these houses? I never hear anything about MPs saying, I will
:34:08. > :34:11.stay in this one. Lead by example. We used to have tax relief and now
:34:12. > :34:17.we have Help To Buy. It is helpful that Justine tells us we are up to
:34:18. > :34:21.200,000 each year. Commentators who understand the market are saying we
:34:22. > :34:25.need 350,000, so we have a long way to go. It is basic economics that if
:34:26. > :34:31.you stoked demand by helping people to have the funding but you do not
:34:32. > :34:34.stoke up the supply, prices increase. Eventually, there is a
:34:35. > :34:39.bigger incentive to build more houses. Diane Abbott is right about
:34:40. > :34:44.foreign money coming into London. Much of that will be Russian money.
:34:45. > :34:47.In that context, I was reading that the European Union has given 2.7
:34:48. > :34:53.billion of our money over the last 20 years to the Commonwealth of
:34:54. > :34:57.Independent States. I suspect some of that money is coming back into
:34:58. > :35:01.the London property market, that which is not going into diesel in
:35:02. > :35:08.the tanks of Mr Putin. But you cannot get away from the fact that
:35:09. > :35:12.if you had substantial immigration, it increases housing demand. That is
:35:13. > :35:19.a plain fact. You cannot have more people without more housing demand
:35:20. > :35:23.so that is a factor. What about Help To Buy and annuities being exchanged
:35:24. > :35:29.for buy to rent? Are those factors you would remove from the market if
:35:30. > :35:33.you could? The idea of getting rid of the rules around and annuities is
:35:34. > :35:39.a good idea. The question is why it has taken so long to get there. And
:35:40. > :35:49.its affect on the housing market? It would probably be to allow money to
:35:50. > :35:53.trickle and allow people to get on. Prices have obviously skyrocketed of
:35:54. > :35:57.late. One thing that has not changed is stamp duty rates, which certainly
:35:58. > :36:03.stopped a lot of people from getting on the ladder because the bill is
:36:04. > :36:07.horrendous. So the question is, has Help To Buy caused the bubble? The
:36:08. > :36:11.answer is that it has not caused it but it is just making it a lot
:36:12. > :36:14.worse. What has caused it is a chronic shortage of new homes in
:36:15. > :36:21.Great Britain. House prices going up, there is a large section of
:36:22. > :36:24.society that owns their own homes that thinks it makes the whole
:36:25. > :36:28.country richer. Of course, it doesn't. All that it does is make
:36:29. > :36:34.those people who have homes richer at the expense of those who do not.
:36:35. > :36:37.It makes the rich richer and transfers wealth from young to old,
:36:38. > :36:43.stops people moving from north to south. It is extremely damaging. The
:36:44. > :36:49.answer is amazingly simple. Take some of the 92% of this country that
:36:50. > :36:55.is open land and build homes that people want to live in. I think the
:36:56. > :36:59.gentleman made an excellent point. Don't build the homes, little boxes
:37:00. > :37:04.that people don't want to live in. Build nice homes that people want to
:37:05. > :37:08.live in, and do it optimistically. We have a terrible problem in this
:37:09. > :37:13.country in that people assume that new buildings are somehow going to
:37:14. > :37:17.be awful. They don't have to be. We can build fantastic homes. We can
:37:18. > :37:22.break the price bubble, and we don't need Help To Buy making the
:37:23. > :37:27.existing, encouraging people to buy overpriced houses. It is all very
:37:28. > :37:31.well saying build, but how do you do it as a government? We need a
:37:32. > :37:34.fundamental review of planning laws. If you look at the new housing
:37:35. > :37:41.estates, travel on the motorways and you will pass brand-new houses built
:37:42. > :37:45.right beside motorways. We are allocating the wrong land. If you
:37:46. > :37:49.ask why that land has been allocated heap will say, it is no good for
:37:50. > :37:54.agriculture because the cows will not be comfortable there. So you
:37:55. > :37:58.want building on green belt, building on the South Downs,
:37:59. > :38:04.building on all the places that other people would want to leave as
:38:05. > :38:10.countryside? 1% of the country, and not the most beautiful countryside,
:38:11. > :38:13.but the ugly flatlands. The land that is drenched in pesticide. Take
:38:14. > :38:20.that and turn it into beautiful homes for people. Whilst I agree
:38:21. > :38:26.with Help To Buy, I think the annuities thing has been not
:38:27. > :38:30.involving young people in the decision to release annuities. I may
:38:31. > :38:36.never own a house because I am only 21 and I may never be able to afford
:38:37. > :38:39.to. If you let people with large pension savings have all of their
:38:40. > :38:44.money to buy houses, all that I will end up doing is end up renting from
:38:45. > :38:55.people who already have houses. I do object to that because I should have
:38:56. > :39:03.the right to buy a house in my life. Marilyn Balmer, please. The first
:39:04. > :39:07.gay marriage will shortly take place in Brighton. Why do we need to
:39:08. > :39:14.change the definition of marriage that has existed for thousands of
:39:15. > :39:20.years, when equality already exists? This coming Saturday, I think it is,
:39:21. > :39:24.all over Britain. You said we would come to this, Roger Helmer, so what
:39:25. > :39:29.is your view of gay marriage, and is there a need to change the
:39:30. > :39:33.definition of marriage? It would be churlish not to send good wishes to
:39:34. > :39:38.those who intend to tie the knot, no doubt in Brighton, at the weekend.
:39:39. > :39:42.That said, we have to remember that there are many millions of our
:39:43. > :39:46.fellow citizens who are deeply uncomfortable with a change to a
:39:47. > :39:51.treasured institution which has been at the basis of society for a very
:39:52. > :39:56.long time. Not just many millions of our fellow citizens, but also faith
:39:57. > :40:02.groups who are extremely concerned. As a party, we opposed the change.
:40:03. > :40:07.The change has now happened. Our concern now is the combination of
:40:08. > :40:10.same-sex marriage and the European Conventionn on Human Rights. Because
:40:11. > :40:13.the government has given certain assurances that faith groups will
:40:14. > :40:18.not be obliged to conduct ceremonies which are against their conscience.
:40:19. > :40:22.We are not content with those assurances. We are sure there will
:40:23. > :40:30.be cases brought to the European Court and there will be rulings in
:40:31. > :40:34.favour of same-sex marriages amongst faith communities. Yes,
:40:35. > :40:37.anti-discrimination is a fine thing, but freedom of conscience is also a
:40:38. > :40:48.fine thing and those principles seem to me to be in conflict in this
:40:49. > :40:52.case. Mick Hucknall. I think of loving people that want to spend the
:40:53. > :40:56.rest of their lives together, that it is a beautiful thing. And if they
:40:57. > :40:58.want to show commitment by being married and being able to look at
:40:59. > :41:07.their neighbours who are also married, then I struggle to see what
:41:08. > :41:13.the problem is with that. It is a noble thing. The idea that you look
:41:14. > :41:18.into someone's dies and you say, I want to spend the rest of my life
:41:19. > :41:22.with you, I want to be married to you. Isn't that lovely? Why is that
:41:23. > :41:31.so bad? APPLAUSE
:41:32. > :41:39.Can we hear from Marilyn Balmer, who asked the question. I feel it is
:41:40. > :41:42.very wrong. I am a committed Christian and I think it is against
:41:43. > :41:52.everything that we know. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and the
:41:53. > :41:58.procreation of children. Diane Abbott, do you have sympathy with
:41:59. > :42:02.her view? I am afraid not. I think it is a wonderful thing that people
:42:03. > :42:04.in Brighton will be able to have same-sex marriage is a wonderful
:42:05. > :42:06.thing that people in Brighton will be able to have same-sex marriages
:42:07. > :42:10.this weekend. It's something I have campaigned for all my political
:42:11. > :42:15.life. I campaigned for it when people sneered and jeered and said
:42:16. > :42:22.it was an extremist position. And I've lived to see the notion that
:42:23. > :42:25.who you love, you can marry become mainstream. Even the Tory Prime
:42:26. > :42:31.Minister was supporting it. I think it is wonderful. This stuff about
:42:32. > :42:36.the government does not own marriage, actually, marriage is a
:42:37. > :42:40.legal concept. No one is saying the churches have to recognise same-sex
:42:41. > :42:45.marriage. No one is saying that, and UKIP are trying to scare people. But
:42:46. > :42:48.it is a legal concept and the government of this country is
:42:49. > :42:54.entitled to say that people can have same-sex marriages. Why should you
:42:55. > :43:00.love your somebody will your life and then not be able to have it on
:43:01. > :43:04.the by the name of marriage? You talk about your conscience, but what
:43:05. > :43:08.about people's lives, what about the people they love, what about their
:43:09. > :43:12.relationships? I think it is one of the few things that David Cameron
:43:13. > :43:15.pushed for that I would support him on. I campaigned for it for years
:43:16. > :43:23.and I think it's a great thing. APPLAUSE
:43:24. > :43:29.Just before we go to the other members of the panel, Roger Helmer,
:43:30. > :43:35.you were talking about the complications which might ensue.
:43:36. > :43:42.Are you yourself against the concept of gay marriage? I am very
:43:43. > :43:47.uncomfortable with it. I don't understand the word uncomfortable.
:43:48. > :43:54.Are you for against it? I would have voted against it, had I been in a
:43:55. > :43:57.position to do so. Justine Greening. I think it is fantastic people of
:43:58. > :44:01.the same-sex have the choice to get married now if they want to. I do
:44:02. > :44:04.not see why their relationship should be less than anyone else. If
:44:05. > :44:07.people want to make a commitment to one another that is a fantastic,
:44:08. > :44:11.amazing thing and they should be allowed to get on and do it. I never
:44:12. > :44:19.thought I would say this, but I totally agree with Diane Abbott. Why
:44:20. > :44:22.did we have to go through the rigmarole of civil partnership, if
:44:23. > :44:28.you believe in marriage? Why didn't we go straight to marriage? Why did
:44:29. > :44:32.we start with civil partnership? When we look back, it will have been
:44:33. > :44:37.seen as an important step on the way to true equality. But I think we did
:44:38. > :44:39.the right thing putting the bill to parliament. Parliament voted for it
:44:40. > :44:42.and I'm delighted that over the course of the next few days the
:44:43. > :44:52.first same-sex marriages will be taking place. I have been invited to
:44:53. > :45:00.one myself. The person on the left. I came out 30 years ago and I am so
:45:01. > :45:04.proud to be a British person who is able to celebrate equal marriage,
:45:05. > :45:08.because I think it's a wonderful achievement and I'm proud to be
:45:09. > :45:21.British. I think it's amazing. It is well over June, but I'm very proud.
:45:22. > :45:25.-- it is well over June. Love has no gender, colour or creed,
:45:26. > :45:30.and for you to think about religion when it comes to love is wrong,
:45:31. > :45:35.because love is not religion, and it's not wrong to love someone. It's
:45:36. > :45:40.wrong to allow the Catholic church to allow people to be abused and not
:45:41. > :45:45.be reprimanded about it. That is wrong. To love someone is not wrong.
:45:46. > :45:48.People are murdered because they are gay across the world and I think we
:45:49. > :45:49.should embrace love and be happy that people can embrace each other
:45:50. > :46:00.and be free to do so. Simon? I think there's very little
:46:01. > :46:08.to add to what the vast majority of people have already said, other than
:46:09. > :46:13.that to the lady in the audience who said no-one owns the word
:46:14. > :46:17."marriage". If people love each other, it makes sense to allow them
:46:18. > :46:23.to use the word we have had the privilege of using for many years.
:46:24. > :46:27.This is a non-issue in this century. APPLAUSE
:46:28. > :46:32.Marilyn Balmer put the question and said she wasn't in favour of gay
:46:33. > :46:37.marriage. Anybody else in the audience support what Marilyn said?
:46:38. > :46:47.We have heard a lot of talk about love. Marriage is not about love, it
:46:48. > :46:50.is part of it. Marriage is about a child -centric institution. What do
:46:51. > :46:55.you say when we have had the coalition for marriage, have
:46:56. > :46:59.garnered over 660,000 signatures of people saying, "We are uncomfortable
:47:00. > :47:04.with this, we don't want this to come in." The Government has
:47:05. > :47:10.completely ignored a huge swathe of the population. Marriage is about
:47:11. > :47:15.children. That is the main purpose. Why do people want the state, if two
:47:16. > :47:20.people want to get together and we have civil partnerships, why do you
:47:21. > :47:24.need the state to mandate your relationship? Why do you need the
:47:25. > :47:31.state to mandate your relationship? Hold on. Answer the person sitting
:47:32. > :47:34.next to you. Why do we have to have something different? If you accept
:47:35. > :47:39.gay people in this country, why can't you accept us being married?
:47:40. > :47:42.It is not - when you get married to someone, you are thinking about
:47:43. > :47:46.making a vow to this person for the rest of my life. I want the whole
:47:47. > :47:47.world to know that I love you. That is what it is about. It is not about
:47:48. > :47:57.children. It's not. APPLAUSE
:47:58. > :48:04.When you look - Robert Helmer is quite right here. When you look at
:48:05. > :48:09.the legal implications of this, it isn't set in stone that there aren't
:48:10. > :48:12.going to be legal challenges. I know the Church of England is
:48:13. > :48:17.particularly worried. There are certain gay couples who are saying,
:48:18. > :48:23."I haven't got what I want yet, I'm going to challenge the Church of
:48:24. > :48:27.England." We will end up seeing disestablishment. You should argue
:48:28. > :48:34.for disestablishment on its own merits. Do you approve of gay
:48:35. > :48:40.couples adopting children? Having children, or not? I'm not sure from
:48:41. > :48:46.what you say. I think when it comes to the issue of children, obviously
:48:47. > :48:53.I'm not saying that gay couples can't be good parents and can't be
:48:54. > :48:58.good and loving parents, no, but I think there is something very wrong
:48:59. > :49:02.about gay couples having children to order. Where you have a child, you
:49:03. > :49:08.have a biological mother and you have a biological father. Let her
:49:09. > :49:10.speak. When you have a child, you have a biological mother and you
:49:11. > :49:18.have a biological father somewhere. Now, when you have a gay couple,
:49:19. > :49:23.they are deliberately excludeing one of the child's parents and every
:49:24. > :49:27.single child has a right to a relationship with its biological
:49:28. > :49:31.mother and father. Alright. One more point from you, you are saying no,
:49:32. > :49:37.no, no. I know families where there are two gay people and the parents,
:49:38. > :49:41.the father is involved as well in the upbringing of the child. Can I
:49:42. > :49:45.say that I have been with my partner for 32 years and I'm a member of the
:49:46. > :49:48.Church of England. I bitterly regret that the Church of England is not
:49:49. > :49:53.accepting gay marriage. You have a definition of marriage that has been
:49:54. > :49:57.come over the centuries, but when it first started it was a very
:49:58. > :50:01.different thing from what we talk about marriage now. I do not believe
:50:02. > :50:06.that God frowns on my love for my partner. I believe God is happy.
:50:07. > :50:20.OK. We've got time for one more question. Bruce Byrne? With the
:50:21. > :50:26.general election over a year ago, was the recent Budget a turning
:50:27. > :50:31.point in the fortunes of the Conservative Party? Diane Abbott,
:50:32. > :50:35.there was a lot of criticism of Labour's response and a lot of
:50:36. > :50:39.praise for the Chancellor and the opinion polls showed Conservative
:50:40. > :50:42.and Labour closer rather than further apart after the Budget. Is
:50:43. > :50:47.it a turning point in the fortunes of the Conservatives? There is no
:50:48. > :50:51.doubt, politically, it was a very clever Budget. You have David
:50:52. > :50:54.Cameron with people being able to cash out their pension pots. David
:50:55. > :50:59.Cameron is bribing people with their own money, which is always clever!
:51:00. > :51:04.In the short-term, they have got a bounce out of it. I don't think it
:51:05. > :51:08.is a turning point. If people think about the past four years and what
:51:09. > :51:12.this Coalition Government has done, whether it's scrapping the Education
:51:13. > :51:16.Maintenance Allowance, whether it is the cuts on disabled people and
:51:17. > :51:19.other benefits, if people really think about this Coalition
:51:20. > :51:24.Government, I think there is no question about what is going to
:51:25. > :51:28.happen on the general election. Are you a supporter of the way Ed
:51:29. > :51:33.Miliband is preparing for this election? Are you one of those
:51:34. > :51:41.Labour members who are rather critical of the way things are
:51:42. > :51:47.going? I'm 101% supporter of Ed Miliband. When he comes to make
:51:48. > :51:50.decisions about the programme we are going into the general election
:51:51. > :51:55.with, they will be bold decisions, not nonsense. How can you say that
:51:56. > :52:01.when last night you rebelled against the decision that he had made to
:52:02. > :52:10.support the Tories there you are out on your own, rebel Diane Abbott once
:52:11. > :52:15.again? I'm 101% supportive of Ed Miliband, but just occasionally
:52:16. > :52:26.whether it's Syria, or whether it's the welfare cap, I like to give him
:52:27. > :52:30.a nudge in the right direction. OK. Mick Hucknall, you have funded the
:52:31. > :52:36.Labour Party, are you still a supporter of Labour Party and Ed
:52:37. > :52:40.Miliband? We are in an interesting scenario here. Diane mentioned the
:52:41. > :52:44.Blair administration. The Blair administration won three elections
:52:45. > :52:51.with a massive majority because New Labour grabbed the centre ground.
:52:52. > :52:55.Now, Ed Miliband has a problem here, now. Because the coalition has
:52:56. > :52:59.grabbed that centre ground, you look at the polls and they are virtually
:53:00. > :53:03.neck-and-neck. If I were Ed Miliband, I would be very worried at
:53:04. > :53:07.this stage, in the lifetime of a Government that the opposition can
:53:08. > :53:12.only just manage neck-and-neck. I see Ed Miliband's problem in a way.
:53:13. > :53:16.He must be perhaps thinking that well, I can't go to the middle
:53:17. > :53:22.ground because the coalition have got the middle ground. I can't go to
:53:23. > :53:27.the right of the coalition, clearly, because I'm Labour. So where do I
:53:28. > :53:34.go? So, I can see that the it would be natural for him to have to veer
:53:35. > :53:39.towards the left. But then the problem comes whether or not a
:53:40. > :53:42.left-wing Labour Party would ever gain a majority to get into
:53:43. > :53:47.Government. I have news for you. Excuse me... He is not veering to
:53:48. > :53:52.the left. If he was, I would be the first one to... He could veer to the
:53:53. > :53:57.left. I didn't say he was. I'm trying to imagine. You would be the
:53:58. > :54:01.first to support him if you were, is that what you were going to say? It
:54:02. > :54:07.was. I'm trying to imagine his scenarios. If I was to look at the
:54:08. > :54:11.polls now, I would be thinking this is not very good right now, what am
:54:12. > :54:15.I going to do? I wouldn't be surprised towards the end, as we
:54:16. > :54:22.come closer to the election, that he might start to try and grab some of
:54:23. > :54:28.the centre ground back and Ed, Labour, may end up morphing into New
:54:29. > :54:33.Labour all over again. You can't deny the success of those three
:54:34. > :54:38.election victories. Robert Helmer? It was a clever kf budget. It was
:54:39. > :54:43.politically astute. This coalition was created in order to resolve the
:54:44. > :54:46.problem of the debt and they said that at least they would get rid of
:54:47. > :54:51.the deficit by the end of the Parliament. I believe the deficit
:54:52. > :54:55.next year is anticipated to be around ?100 billion. People get
:54:56. > :54:59.confused between debt and deficit. Deficit means the rate of increase
:55:00. > :55:02.of the debt so when we say the deficit next year will be ?100
:55:03. > :55:05.billion, that means the British national debt will increase, it is
:55:06. > :55:09.like your credit card, it is the amount you add to the credit card in
:55:10. > :55:15.the course of a year. I'm interested by this discussion of where Labour
:55:16. > :55:20.is going. Labour is ceasing to be the party of working people as it
:55:21. > :55:26.used to be. It is becoming the party of the public sector, of a
:55:27. > :55:33.Metropolitan do-gooder, leftist, elite. It is losing the traditional
:55:34. > :55:36.working-class vote. I tell you where that working-class vote is going, I
:55:37. > :55:42.have campaigned in Rotherham, I have talked to Labour voters and they are
:55:43. > :55:48.coming to us. And when we have - in my dreams and on election day, that
:55:49. > :55:52.is what is happening. More than half of our support doesn't come from
:55:53. > :55:55.former Conservatives, it comes from Labour, even some Lib Dems and
:55:56. > :55:58.especially from people who haven't voted for ten or 20 years and
:55:59. > :56:03.suddenly see something that makes sense that they want to vote for.
:56:04. > :56:05.Justine Greening? I think people can see through the Budget. We are
:56:06. > :56:10.working to a long-term economic plan. That's meaning that the
:56:11. > :56:15.deficit is starting to come down. It means that unemployment is coming
:56:16. > :56:19.down. Employment is going up by 1.3 million jobs, that is 1.3 million
:56:20. > :56:24.people who have now got a pay packet coming in at the end of every week,
:56:25. > :56:28.month, financial security. They are seeing us invest in skills and our
:56:29. > :56:33.schools, they are seeing us taking the steps wherever we can... Is it a
:56:34. > :56:36.turning point? I think people are starting to see we have this
:56:37. > :56:39.long-term economic plan, but by contrast, Labour don't have
:56:40. > :56:45.anything. They don't know what Labour stands for. They do think Ed
:56:46. > :56:50.Miliband's weak. They think he is politically opportunistic. George
:56:51. > :56:53.Osborne isn't? Four years into the Parliament, when he had to stand up
:56:54. > :56:58.and respond to George Osborne's Budget, he had nothing to say. That
:56:59. > :57:02.is because he has no policies. The Lib Dems will benefit as well,
:57:03. > :57:06.because this is their Budget as much as yours, yes? We worked in
:57:07. > :57:10.coalition with the Lib Dems. We have been two parties working together to
:57:11. > :57:18.fix the mess left by the Labour Party. We are well on track to do
:57:19. > :57:23.that. That's an answer we have heard many times. Simon Wolfson? I don't
:57:24. > :57:27.know if it is a turning point in political fortunes. We are at a
:57:28. > :57:32.turning point in the economy. A very important milestone has been passed.
:57:33. > :57:36.Wage inflation has caught up with and just overtaken inflation. For
:57:37. > :57:42.the first time in six years, people are no longer getting poorer. That
:57:43. > :57:49.is an amazing turning point. Now, the question for me is not what will
:57:50. > :57:53.the Tories get elected because they have got us through the recession.
:57:54. > :57:57.The real question is what are either party going to do about making sure
:57:58. > :58:00.the recovery is as strong and as fair as possible? That is the
:58:01. > :58:05.question we should be looking to David Cameron and Ed Miliband for.
:58:06. > :58:11.What are they going to do in the next five years? I'm sorry to those
:58:12. > :58:15.who have got your hands up. Our hour has come to an end. So that is it
:58:16. > :58:19.for Question Time this week. Next week, we have - first, there is the
:58:20. > :58:26.second Farage-Clegg debate which will be on BBC Two on Wednesday.
:58:27. > :58:30.Then Question Time on Thursday comes from Bristol with Vince Cable among
:58:31. > :58:36.our panelists. The following week, we will be in West London. So if you
:58:37. > :58:41.can come to Bristol or West London, apply to our website -
:58:42. > :58:43.www.bbc.co.uk/questiontime. Or call the number.
:58:44. > :58:51.If you are listening to this on Five Live, you can continue the debate on
:58:52. > :58:56.Question Time Extra Time. From here in Brighton, my thanks to my panel.
:58:57. > :58:59.Until next Thursday, good night.