01/05/2014 Question Time

Tonight, we are in Leeds. Welcome to Question Time.

Welcome to you at home, to our audience who will be putting

questions to the panel, who do not know the questions until they hear

them. Labour's Shadow Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper. President

of the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron. UKIP's communities

spokesman, Suzanne Evans. Writer and chairman of The National Trust,

Simon Jenkins. And the Conservative MP Conor Burns.

The first question, please, from Martin Mullen. Should British high

schools have airport style security installed following the tragic

murder of Anne Maguire? This dreadful event earlier this week.

Should there be airport style security installed in schools, ,

Bourbons? Let me start by directly answering the question, no, I do not

think there should be airport style security in schools. This has been a

tragic, appalling incident in this school in this community. But we

make our worst laws in this country when we legislate on the back of a

very emotional situations. The worst thing politicians can ever say is

more I am going to legislate to ensure that ex never happens again.

If you see some footage in American schools, where it is like going into

a war is own to get into a classroom, I do not want to go down

that route. Can I say a word about the tragic event at Corpus Christi

College and the murder of Anne Maguire? The more one finds out

about it, the more poignant it becomes. 40 years of service to that

school, to different generations of new polls. Children of former pupils

coming to pay tribute to her. The fact that she was in school, helping

her students get the very best start in life, on her day off, the fact

that she was only one term away from retirement, all adds to the

poignancy of those events. I remember when my own headmaster

retired, and I dug out his retirement speech. I was educated in

a Catholic school. He talked about how, I hurt with you when some tried

periodically to bring the violence of society into the school

community. But the worst thing that we could do is to destroy that

school community by making it not a place of learning but a place of

fear. And can I say quickly, we have all, I imagine, thought about

teachers who have made a real difference to us. Anne Maguire's

murder touched a chord in the nation. And I hope that, through her

death, we will shine a light in the fact that in all the schools in this

country we are so blessed to have the dedication of so many teachers,

for whom teaching is not a job but a vocation that they dedicate their

lives to. APPLAUSE

So, the question is, should high schools have airport style security

after this murder. Simon Jenkins. No, of course they

should not. I agree with everything that has been said and the whole

panel will share that feeling at the moment. All that I would say in

addition is that the concept of fear as a driver of policy is really

dangerous. I am a Londoner and I see on the streets of London police with

guns all the time. They are there because someone, somewhere has said

there is a slight risk of a terrorist attack. All right, there

is a slight risk. Everyone goes about with slight risks attached to

life. If you give into that slight risk, given to the policy of fear,

you capitulate to it, you give into it. I don't think that is what we

should do. The one thing we can take from these tragedies is a reinforced

determination not to give into the politics and policies of fear. The

question was, should we have airport style security in schools, and I

absolutely agree that laws made in haste are bad laws. When I was 15

years old I went to a school exchange trip to France and spent a

week in a French school. I was horrified that there was a high

security fence around and security guards inside. It was such a

contrast to the beautiful rural school I was privileged to go to in

Shropshire. I thought, please may our schools in Britain never been

like this. The woman in the third row from the back. Instead of

police, maybe there should be a type of person, if any of the pupils have

concerns or any thoughts like that, maybe somebody there as a counsellor

in a school, instead of airport style security, because that will

just strike fear into pupils. Some different preventative measure.

Yvette Cooper. I also think it would be completely wrong to have airport

style security, not just in Corpus Christi, but in other schools as

well. Everybody has been struck by the outpouring of support, as well

as the grief, not just for Anne Maguire and her family, but for the

whole school. It is a tribute to the headteacher, to the school itself,

that they have worked so hard to support all of the pupils at such an

awful time with such a dreadful thing to happen. I think as a result

we should listen to the headteacher, listen to the community, and to what

they have said, which is that they want to keep the community a part of

the school because it is the community that supported them

through such a dreadful tragedy as well. We should hear their views and

support them. APPLAUSE

There are some schools with metal detectors at the gates, aren't

there? I think there is a big difference

between schools where they had problems, for example, with teenage

gangs over a considerable period of time, and where the headteacher

themselves says they think there are some safety issues that need to be

addressed, and a situation like this where nobody is saying that was the

circumstance at Corpus Christi. In fact, circumstances were very

different. I totally disagree with the fact that we should bring in

airport style scammers and all that. It is very intimidating. I happen to

work in the community and I knew Anne Maguire very well because I

also work with the church. The government should be bringing in an

intervention for these pupils. But nothing is being done to ensure that

the problems are resolved. The government is not doing anything.

There are so many cutbacks already within the Department for Education

which has made a very negative impact on the schools and

headteachers. Teachers have a problem time with the children.

Children don't listen any more, so we have to come in and intervene,

and it is not working. Teachers also should be guaranteed safety in the

school. Policies should come in to play on all these things. What are

your memories of her? She was a fantastic woman, very God-fearing.

She played instruments, she loved every pupil. She treated everybody

as if they were her own children. She had a passion to ensure that

every child succeeds in the school. APPLAUSE

I feel that teachers are under that much pressure with statistics,

targets. They are so pressured into trying to

make the school look good based on what the government is making them

do, they do not have time to go back to the drawing board and look at the

basic needs that children are wanting, because they are too busy

trying to get the stats are up, like exams. In a couple of weeks my

daughter is doing her exams. In year six, everything is about the exams

and teachers do not have the time to be looking at the emotional

well-being of children and the government needs to address this.

Tim Farron. I know that is not the question, but you could not be more

right. We need to value teachers and allow them to teach and not spend

half their time doing things that are about ticking boxes and

conforming to league tables and so on. It is a huge distraction and has

been a wrong direction for education policy for 30 years. But to answer

Martin's question, of course there should not be airport security or

anything like it in our schools. It is hugely tempting when something as

heartbreaking and bewildering as this takes place, for somebody who

lives the kind of lives that we do in politics, to come up with a nice,

simple, neat solution, and I haven't got one. I haven't got one. In the

24-hour media world we live in, there is a desire to keep the story

going, find another way of talking about it, keep it fresh. Let's

instead stand in solidarity with the family and with Corpus Christi and

recognise this as an appalling tragedy. For those of us who are not

from Leeds and did not know Corpus Christi College until this moment

and what a wonderful school community it is, what a dreadful way

to find out. We have found out what an outstanding community it is, how

fantastically people have stood with one another, what leadership the

headteacher has shown, and what tremendous love and affection people

at the school have shown. I am certain that Anne Maguire would be

proud of all of you. APPLAUSE

You asked the question originally. What do you think? There should be

some form of added security at schools but I do think that airport

style security is a bridge too far. Maybe somebody like a police

community support officer. Or maybe somebody children can go to if they

have any concerns, not just to protect children but teachers as

well. And you on the right, sir. I doubt if airport style security

would be effective. It is quite easy to take a piece of plastic into the

school, or a piece of sharpened bone would have the same effect as a

knife, so airport style security would be a waste of time. OK, let's

go on. Just a reminder that you can join

the debate on text or Twitter. Let's take a question now from

Carolyn Booth-Jones, please. In light of recent news, is it fair to

describe UKIP as a racist party? Is it fair to describe UKIP,

represented here by Suzanne Evans, as a racist party? Tim Farron. I

wouldn't say so. Clearly, there are individuals in UKIP who have come to

the fore with opinions that would make the BNP wince. And you have the

French National front reaching out to UKIP. I guess there is a sense

where that would be a source of great embarrassment, but that is

wrong to start playing the man rather than the ball. It was Barbara

Roche from Labour who did this. My take is that in one sense the UKIP

position, particularly on the European Union, is clear, and I kind

of respect it, actually. If you want to leave the European Union, and I

think it would risk several million jobs on our ability to tackle

climate change, threaten a union that has helped keep peace in Europe

for over 50 years, it would stop us catching criminals across borders,

but if that is what you want, you know who you should vote for. If you

believe those things are bad and it would be anti patriotic to do those

things, I hope you will support the Liberal Democrats instead. The

questions about these remarks which have led to people being suspended

from UKIP, like saying Lenny Henry should go back to a Black Country

and all the rest, does that make you think it is a racist party, or just

one that attracts them? Those individuals are guilty of racism and

have made appalling quotes and have appalling back history, including

the guy who was on the party political broadcast the other week.

We should be very careful in not trying to dismiss an entire

political party. First of all, it is unfair. Having said that, UKIP up to

account for some of the people they put up on their behalf, who have

some of the most objectionable views. I will come to Suzanne Evans

in a -- Yvette Cooper. This was described as a racist campaign by

Barbara Roche, former Labour Immigration Minister. Do you agree?

It is not racist to talk about immigration, to say you are worried

about immigration, it is not racist to say you feel strongly about

leaving Europe. I do think it is racist to say that Lenny Henry

should leave the country because of the colour of his skin, as one of

the Enfield candidates did say. APPLAUSE

And there are other UKIP candidates who have said things I believe are

racist. The old candidate who said that

mosques should be pulled down. There is a Walsall candidate who has said

Mo Farah cannot be British. We should challenge that race is where

ever we hear it and UKIP should do so, too. The right and responsible

thing for UKIP to do is to expel those candidates, take them off the

ballot paper and not to be asking people to vote for them. If they do

that, we can have a sensible conversation about the serious and

legitimate issues, whether around Europe, around immigration,

important issues. But they should not be marred by candidates pursuing

divisive views. Just before I come to UKIP, what Barbara Roche said was

that they are deploying the language and tactics used by openly racist

parties like the BNP. Is that an accurate description? I have

criticised the government for their go home adverts which they did last

summer, which I think Drew on the language of the National Front.

Unfortunately, this is your government which is doing it. When

they were put up, the Labour opposition were silent and that of

the Liberal Democrat to speak out. Those adverts were going round for

months. You have Liberal Democrat ministers in the Home Office. It was

two or three days. Unfortunately, that is not true, Tim. Trying to be

outside the government when you are voting for every single thing that

the government does just will not wash.

The Labour spokes people, who were questioned about those racist vans,

saying nothing because they were worried it would put off their

voters I remember them saying. It was outrageous that any government -

This is a fiction. It's also a distraction. We should bring UKIP

back into this fight and leave the two of you for a moment. Suzanne

Evans. Thank you. No, UKIP is not a racist party. I would certainly not

be in it if it were. Neither does it attract racists in particular. We're

currently running in the European elections at 38%. So that means a

good sort of, just over a third of this audience, if you are a typical

audience of the British voter, will be voting for UKIP. Technically that

means you could be called racist. I know you're not. I know you're not.

You know that you are not racist either. The problem that we've had

is that UKIP has risen phenomenon Ali. We are being put under a huge

amount of scrutiny. I have no problem with scrutiny. Everybody who

stands for election for UKIP or any other party, I'm sure my colleagues

would agree, must be subject to scrutiny. We cannot expect to stand

for public office unless we are fit for public office. It has to be a

fair playing field. How many of you in this audience know that seven

councillors in the London borough of Harrow, all black minority ethnic

councillors resigned from the Labour Party because they thought it was

racist and discriminated against them? Hands up how many know that

practically none of you. Maybe you should address it is to Miss Cooper.

You would like to ask the audience. You can't ask the audience. Nobody

put their hand up. Nobody knows that. A serious issue. It didn't

make the national headlines or the lead story on the broadcast news.

Barbara Roche, who we talked about, set up this campaign group. We know

people being through our candidate's Twitter accounts. They are not doing

it to other parties. Do you want to answer the charge. Do you know about

this? There is always scrutiny of candidates. There rightly should be.

Our view in the Labour Party is, where we have the suggestion of

racism it should always be challenged. That is my point about

what UKIP need to do. They need to ex-compel candidates expresses

racist views. We do oond we have expelled all of them. That is not

correct. I hope you do quickly. We can move on to a serious debate

about the issues. The danger is that this row is preventing us from

discussing what I think are genuine issues and concerns that people

have. Some of them have been hijacked by UKIP, when there are

important things, whether it is about immigration or the need for

controls on immigration or to tackle the concerns that people have about

the way that cheap migrant labour is exploited, to under cut wages and

jobs. We need to deal with those sorts of issues. If we don't, then

it's easy for a party like UKIP to build up anger rather than provide

answers. It's answers that I think we need. We need to have a debate.

By refusing to tackle these issues when you were in government for 13

years. Barbara Roche and cross-party campaign that Barbara set up. No

longer Labour? She is a Labour Party member. It was a cross-party

campaign. My point is you need to have a serious debate about the

issues and deal with individuals. OK. You, sir. My certain is that

we've been talking about vetting candidates, however, obviously,

there have been several in just recent history UKIP candidates. My

question would be, how can we be sure that you are vetting your

candidates? These aren't just views expressed in meetings that people

have reported on. This is on social media. And, how - my question is,

how did they get away with it? In the first place? Yes. The idea of

vetting political candidates for being fruitcakes fascinates me. You

wouldn't have many candidates left, some of the ones I know. I don't

think it's a crime to be a fruitcake. I sympathies with

Suzanne, they are under extraordinary scrutiny at the

moment, all fringe parties tend to be. The thing I worry, the word

"racist" it is like a law that says when you begin to lose an argument

you mention Hitler, when you lose an argument you mention racism. A

dangerous way trying to resolve a reasonable political debate. The

reasonable political debate to my mind is about the nature of British

borders and immigrants into this country. How far we can handle

particular numbers of immigrants. What is the nature of citizenship in

Britain? Real questions, which are not related to race. I don't think

it helps the debate about them, which many people have been

concerned about for a long time now, largely ignored by the major

political parties, to say the people who do raise them are racist. That

is wrong. OK. The woman there, on the left and in black-and-white.

Yes. I'd like to read you a bit from the UKIP leaflet that came through

my door. Speed up. Let's have it. "These are anxious and trouble times

as crisis has fold crisis. Our politicians are doing nothing in the

face of dangers rearing up around us. Violent crime erupts in our

cities. It goes on" it's the politics of fear. Everything we hear

that comes from UKIP. APPLAUSE

To answer the question directly. I don't think UKIP is necessarily a

racist party. Although I think they have racist people in it. As they

emerge they are dealing with them. That is clear. The guy who talked

about Lenny henny going back to a black country. I was reminded after

Lenny Henry's comments after Enoch powels speech where he offered him

?1,000 to go home. Which was generous as a ticket to Birmingham

cost ?10. My worry about UKIP is not that are a racist party, they are an

ineffective party. We saw what happened when we elected people from

the European parliament have not turned up and done the job. David

Cameron negotiated in the council in the E EU Summit a cut of 34 billion

to euros. Nigel Farage and seven other UKIP MEPs failed to turn up to

support the resolution that implemented that cut. I think they

are a vent for protest. They are whipping up anger. Speaking to some

of the worst fears and frustrations of austerity and concern about

immigration. I think the sooner that they actually spark the mainstream

parties, as Yvette says rightly, to engage in the arguments seriously

the better. The sooner they will recede to where they came from.

There are Conservative councillors who made offensive comments? We all

have people in our parties. Is the only party that will not allow

former members of the BNP to join. One lied last week. We kicked him

out straightaway. The Conservative have a former BNP member standing as

a candidate. The Lib Dems have someone convicted of a racially

aggravated assault. We don't have the monopoly of the stupidity. You

are ahead of the field. No. Let me come back to that.

APPLAUSE The man up there with the beard on,

I mean beard, not on! Not suggesting you came in disguise. We are talking

about racism as if it should be a big issue in today's world. We are

all human beings, we are equal in society. Different cultures and

different nations made Great Britain today what it has been over

centuries. United Kingdom regardless of anyone's colour or beliefs. If we

work together we are human beings at the end of the day in a peaceful

society. APPLAUSE

UKIP is not classed as a racist party, then that's fine. Do you not

tend to agree the way you go about your campaign provokes the general

public to be racist. I recently heard when Nigel Farage was visiting

Wales the visit had to be stopped because of UKIP supporters and

fellow people arguing over racism? No. No. Can I just answer that.

Briefly? No. I mean, Nigel Farage is possibly being stopped from speaking

at public meetings at the moment because of antifascist groups which,

frankly, are among the most facist people I have encountered. There is

a hard wing in this party of anti-UKIP feeling people who want to

pleat completely shut down the debate. They will not allow free

speech. These people have no interest in democracy. That is

something that UKIP stands for fundamentally. All right. A couple

could of quick figures. We have fielding 2,235 candidates in the

local elections on 22nd May. More than we've ever fieldled before. The

amount of people that have been caught out doing something wrong so

far, it's about 0.3%. Let us put that into context. In 2011, 0.61% of

members of parliament were in prison. We are doing a lot better

than MPs in the House of Commons. Less non-statistics. A point from

you in the middle there. The time it took UKIP to respond and condemn the

Lenny Henry tweet say it is all. They are bigots and use scare

tactics to try and get votes. One hand up there. I will take from you

as well. We will then move on. If UKIP are coming across as a racist

party due to a few members saying some racist comments, does it mean

that Labour are all fraudsters after the (inaudible) scandal? Is

Absolutely. We are four months off an incredibly important vote as to

whether the United Kingdom stands together. UKIP are focussing on

fear, and it makes it more likely this country will fragment. We are

better together full stop. The mistake UKIP made was to go for

immigration. It was about Europe. UKIP is about Europe, not

immigration. Immigration is, in a sense, the politics of fear. That is

the last thing you want in politics. Immigration is what people in this

country tell us they are concerned about. 60% of black minority ethnic

community people say they are worried about. We are politicians we

cannot ignore 70%, the major - We should be talking about immigration.

We should be talking about immigration. We should talk about

everything. This election is about Europe. It's right to talk about

immigration. It's something that people are concerned about. We said

that we, in the Labour Party, got things wrong in Government in

immigration. - Are you saying immigration is not a European issue?

Of course, it is. Electing members of the European parliament. I'm keen

on elections being on what the election is about. It's about

electing a member of the European parliament. If it was about electing

members Members of the European Parliament do you think members

would take it as seriously as they seem to be. I come back to the

question about the politics of fear. People are afraid of things. One of

the reason why I admire UKIP in this sense is they had the guts to say,

you suppressed this debate for a quarter of the century. We raised

the questions and will give you a party you can vote for. I respect

this. This particular election, I care about Europe one way or

another, I'm sorry if actually the election is no longer about Europe.

It is about immigration and the tendency to couch that in racist

terms. Let us move on to another question. Thank you very much. Peter

Pickard, please. Let us get into this other topic. Will Ed Miliband's

proposals on rent help or hinder the rental market? The proposals made

today by Ed Miliband to control rents and make rental agreements

last for three-years to cap the increase in rents and all the rest

of it. His aim being to cut the cost of living for people, nine million

living in rental accommodation. Has he stolen a march, Tim Farron, with

this on the coalition's policy? I don't think. Is it a good idea? Some

of what he said today is a good idea. Some of it really isn't. He

has shown he has identified the problem, Peter, but not understood

it. The reason why private rents are high is because of a lack of supply.

It's blindingly obvious. Amongst the things that, you know, the Labour

Party should be embarrassed about with its 13 year in power they built

fewer council houses than Margaret Thatcher. That took some doing. That

is why rents are as high as they are. The answer is to build

affordable homes. How do you do that? Identifying new fresh places.

It is about regenerating the north of England in a way which will be

making advantage of what is Britain's largest untapped resource,

which is much of the north of this country, this part of the United

country, this part of theUnited United Kingdom. In favour of a rent

cap? No, I'm not. In theory a great idea, in practice you will crush

supply. You will put people out of homes who would have been in homes

otherwise. You reduce rent by increasing supply. You do that by

allowing Housing Associations just want to be allowed to bory against

the value of their stock. We need 300,000 houses a year. We will not

do it by tinkering. Ed Miliband is wrong if he thinks the housing

crisis is caused by too much regulation. It's caused by not

enough building. OK. So it is the wrong problem that Ed

Miliband is going for. I don't think so. We have to do both. We need to

build houses. We need far more homes and we need to help the 9 million

people in rented accommodation across the country. Tim can sound

indignant, but the reality is that under this government we have had

the lowest level of house-building. We build more than you did. I did

not interrupt you. The lowest level of house-building since the 1920s,

and that is the consequence of what this government have been doing.

Yes, we need to build more homes but we also need to help people who

cannot wait for homes to be built and are living in rented

accommodation, often with children. If you go back a few decades,

families with children would think they would be maybe in social

housing, maybe in their own homes having bought them. Many people now

are really struggling, if they don't have the bank of mum and dad to rely

on, to be able to buy their own home and get on the mortgage ladder. They

are in rented accommodation with their kids, never knowing whether

the landlord might say, sorry, you have to move out, or, sorry, I am

going to put the rent up, and they have to move away from their

children's school, a neighbour who does the baby-sitting. That

insecurity is really damaging for families. That's why I think you

need longer term tenancies, three-year tenancies, and a ceiling

on the rent increases that landlords can apply during that three-year

period. All right. I think Yvette Cooper is being disingenuous. You

can't turn on the volume of house-building on and off like a

switch. It takes time. It was the great recession Labour brought in

that brought the collapse in house-building and the number of

houses being built, and that is starting to recover. What do you

think of stopping rent increases? I am with Tim Farron. The issue is the

supply of housing, not about how much. It seems the Labour policy is

concerned about energy prices, and says, let's cap it, that's the

solution, but does not address the underlying issue. Actually, whilst

Ed Miliband was in power, he brought in these green taxes that raised the

cost of energy. The man behind you. We need to build more houses, not

come out with the gimmicks that Labour seems to all the time.

APPLAUSE .

We talk about the rental culture as if it is wrong and in places like

France it is normal to rent for most of a person's life. I also accept

there is a need for accommodation that is affordable. However, one of

the things we missing is that the developers are wanting to do their

new builds, and these are not affordable houses but expensive

houses, on land that was formerly green belt. That is going to be

destroyed for ever. There are places in many of the city centres, old

Brownfield sites, that are ready to be redeveloped to make affordable

homes for people who can live near where they work, and that will not

happen in the outer suburbs. All it will do is make developers more

wealthy and it will destroy our heritage, our children's and

grandchildren's heritage, for ever. APPLAUSE

There is a difference of opinion between Simon Jenkins for The

National Trust, wearing his National Trust at, and the Conservative Party

on the planning of this. Conor Burns, you answer first. Lets

answer the question about the proposal by Ed Miliband. I often

worry that what can appeared to be very good politics for a party can

be very bad policy for the country. I fear that when a politician comes

forward with a very simplistic answer to what is a very compensated

problem, it is probably the wrong answer. Remember back to the Labour

Party Conference when Ed Miliband was in Brighton and he appeared on

the soapbox in the town centre and was asked, are you going to bring

back socialism. His reply to that was, that is what I'm doing, sir. We

are seeing a trend in some of these rather populist announcements. The

gentleman referred a moment ago to the energy price freeze. No freeze

before the freeze, no freeze guaranteed after, pure populism. We

saw the suggestion he might nationalise land, take it away from

private developers. I think this one is a bad idea, too. This is a

compensated problem. We have to catch up from the fact that the last

Labour government built fewer houses than any government since the 1920s.

And we are trying to do that. We have over ?19.5 billion of public

and private money going into housing. The number of first-time

buyers is that a five year by and construction is at the highest level

since 2007. But the point the gentleman made, you cannot simply

turn on the tap and say, I want to develop 100,000 houses next year.

But you turned it off. The government turn off the tap. I did

not interrupt you. David is going to get very bored! When the

Conservative Party left office, net immigration was 48,000 people into

the country. At the end of the Labour government, it was 233,000.

If you are going to welcome a number of new people into your country, you

have to make sure you have a houses and infrastructure and all the

things that people need when they come to live in the UK. So you're

planning Minister is right to want to build more on greenfield sites to

get the thing moving. That is the Tory policy on this. If he were

here, you could ask him. He ain't, so I'm asking you. Some of the stuff

we are encouraging with localism and encouraging councils take the lead,

in Bournemouth I am seeing town centre that elements mixing retail

and residential and getting the town centre moving. That is the sort of

thing I want. Simon Jenkins. The idea that you increase rented

accommodation by capping the rent is absurd. That is illiterate

economics. I have to say I am mildly in favour of some safeguards for

tenants, but the idea that you solve the problem by capping rent is like

Castro, it is absurd. What do you mean by that? He fixed all of the

rent in Havana and no house has been restored for about 30 years. If you

want to wreck the housing market, cap the price. Coming back to the

question on housing, you will never build your way out with house price

rises by simply allowing the fields to let rip. It is stupid. It

destroys what we value about the countryside, it is not necessary, it

is caving in to a particular powerful lobby, the house-building

lobby. They all want the same thing, rural sites for 300 volume units of

housing. It is the most damaging thing to the countryside we have

seen since the last war. It mustn't happen. But the resource, the real

resource far housing in this country is in cities in underused property.

There is a vast store of empty rooms. We have more empty rooms in

Britain than any country in Europe. We are so hysterical about

house-building because the lobby wants us to do that. Every week you

will see a story about a chronic shortage of house-building. It is

house Restoration we should be concentrating on. That is the green

thing to do. Use existing city sites which are empty, where people now

live, people want to work, people want to move from under the property

into one that fits their needs. Make the urban housing market fluid. That

is the way to solve the housing crisis.

APPLAUSE Try and find some younger people in

the audience who may be stuck in them entered accommodation, may

choose to live in them to the accommodation.

Oh, you put your hands down immediately. I think the problem is

nothing to do with supply, but the type of housing. In Leeds, we have

around 27,000 people on the council waiting list. We need more council

houses. Both the Conservatives and Lib Dems have been selling off the

housing, some of the right to buy schemes. We need a maths building

programme of council housing, to take public sector housing back

under public control. That is how we can control the rent.

I want to make a point to the Conservative MP. When you try to

pass the blame for current things to the Labour Party about immigration,

it just makes me want to turn off. But to the gentleman that asked

about housing, surely Ed Miliband should be concentrating on helping

people get a mortgage and buy a house, rather than focusing on the

rental market. You, in the front. Everyone keeps mentioning turning

off the tap, turning it on for building houses and it can't be

done. That is why we need more security measures for people in

rented accommodation at the moment. Suzanne Evans. I don't want my

countryside to be concreted over. APPLAUSE

. At the moment we need to build one

house every seven minutes to keep up with supply. Like it or not,

migration is a factor in that. Net migration is still 212,000 each

year, despite the fact that David Cameron promised to get it down to

tens of thousands. I don't think he's going to be able to fulfil his

manifesto promise by 2015 unless he shuts down the borders but everyone

outside the EU, and I certainly don't want to see that happen. --

shuts down the borders for everyone outside the EU. Homelessness is now

caused in the main by the ending of private tenancies. But this

reactionary policy brought in by Ed Miliband today, which has already

been described by experts as possibly one of the most stupid

policies ever invented, it really is not the answer. Before we leave

this, Yvette Cooper, is this one of the most stupid policies ever

invented, and Simon Jenkins says this was Castro -like, and would

bring housing to disrepair if it was put through. It would mean nothing

was built and repaired and the place would become like Cuba. The problem

is that nobody on the panel is suggesting answers for people in the

entered accommodation who find themselves in really insecure

tenancies, and find that the landlord can suddenly increased

their rent way above the local market, way above inflation. The

normal tenancy, since Margaret Thatcher introduced it in the 1980s,

the tenancy that most people can get is a six month tenancy. After that,

you could be asked to move by your landlord with very short notice.

What we are saying is the normal tenancy people should get is a

three-year tenancy, to give people some security. The rent would still

be negotiated, just as normal. The government would not set the rent,

the council would not, it would be the normal market negotiation about

what the rent would be. But in those three years, you would have some

limits on the increases in the rent landlord could introduce, so that

you could not just suddenly yourself being exploited, or unable to stay

in the area where your kids are going to school. I think that is

sensible intervention in the housing market because it is a way of

helping people with the cost-of-living crisis that is really

squeezing people. It is all very well to say it is like Castro, but

if people are not providing answers, I think they are letting people

down. Simon Jenkins, you are not providing answers. The answer is to

free up the urban housing market, make it tax deductible to let out

your spare room. Spare rooms are the problem, not housing in the

countryside. Millions of spare rooms which ought to be liberated into the

market and then rent will come down. One more point from the man in the

second row from the back. It is comments like this that stop young

people being interested in politics. It is an anomaly to say that this is

going to help people in any kind of way. Surely this is the male of --

the nail in the coffin, the cost-of-living crisis, this piece of

spin which Labour has drawn out which has failed. Why do you think

it won't work? Because the economy is on the up. Everything that has

been said over the last three years regarding the economy is untrue.

People are getting wealthier. It is spin like the cost-of-living crisis

which is spiralling out of control. I think a lot of people are not

feeling it. This is a funny question. Ron Fallows. Quickly. Are

the panel breathing a I sigh of of relief at the news that Jeremy

Paxman is to leave Newsnight? The politicians on the panel, I assume?

I have no dog in this fight, myself. I don't think Simon Jenkins does.

I'm gutted. I have been on Newsnight a couple of times. I've never been

interviewed by Paxman. I better hurry up. I haves missed out. His

strengths are in his expression on his face when people are answering

the questions, as much as it is the questions themselves. Yeah. I think

everybody will miss Jeremy Paxman. I think he is an institution. I have

been too busy about worrying to play alongside a legendary Dimbleby. Good

answer. Very flattering and quite right. David there is a vacancy,

come on. On Newsnighting? You have to stay up all night. He should make

way for an older man. I'm disappointed. Who can forget the

time he was questioning Michael Howard he asked him the same

question 12 times and Michael Howard still didn't answer. Fantastic. We

immediate people like that to give us... I watched that. It was on

today. It wasn't the same question. It was cleverer than that. The same

question put slightly differently a lot of the time. It wasn't sitting

there muttering the same old thing. Very good interview. In the middle

of he said, "I don't want to be rude, but I have to ask this again.

" "I'm not trying to be funny or anything... Miss Miss He is less

polite now. I have been on Newsnight. Great to be there. I was

able to tweet the mortal line "I survived Paxman." We can go back to

the state of the economy in general. We can take a question, important

stuff. Libby Tinworth, please. Do the panel think steps should be

taken to protect workers on zero-hours and temporary contracts?

Does the panel think, say it again... Do the panel think steps

should be taken to protect workers on zero-hours and temporary

contracts? Which is, as we know, a lot of it about at the moment. What

is your view, Libby? I think the Government should put something in

place to support businesses so that we can, the workforce can have peace

of mind. Things like rent much you don't know where you will be from

week-to-week. If you can afford to live. Peace of mind for the

workforce and make people want to get out there and enjoy working.

What would you do, abolish the zero-hours contracts? Yeah. I think

it definitely needs looking at. It's very hard to live not knowing where

you are going to be and how much money you will bring into the family

home. It's something that needs to be minimised, taken back. How long

have you been on a temporary contract, zero-hours contract? Since

August last year. Right, Conor Burns? Look, I think probably

anybody on the panel who is a member of parliament will tell you that

possibly the most distressing case that comes to you is someone who

wants to work, and can't find the dignity of work. I have had a number

of those since I was elected in 2010. Let us be clear, for some

people, particularly those unemployed for some time, sdeer

ehours contracts can better and can be a route back into full-time

employment -- secure owe hours. Students, a lot of them welcome the

flexibility that gives them to do part-time work. Should the

Government do something about it? The answer is, this Government is

doing something about it. This Government launched a consultation,

the Department for Business, they have had over 30,000 responses. We

have been talking to people on zero-hours contracts, talking to

businesses. We have been talking to trade unions. That consultation

closed on 14th March, the Government will come forward with a response

soon. Now, that is something. We are, unlike the previous government,

looking at it. We recognise there is a problem. We need to tackle those

for whom zero-hours contracts are not the right thing. Can you define

what the problem is. How can you have a contract if it doesn't say

anything about how long you work? How can you be under a contract if

they are not under obligation to offer you work. It's like when you

had in ports. People would turn up in the morning to see if there was

work available for that day. For a lot of people that is an

unsustainable way to organise their lives. It's not unsustainable. It's

completely immoral. When we encourage people to come off

benefited and get into work we need to put the incentives in place to do

that. When they cannot guarantee their income under those contracts,

for whom these are not suitable, there are people, students and

others, for whom they are suitable. The Government is doing something.

The previous government didn't do. They grew under the last Labour

government. We can wait and see what the consultation says. What are the

workers saying they will will do be available any time. When ordered to

come they will come. Otherwise they won't get work at all, that is the

deal, is it? Yeah. They won't get travel expenses. Waiting hours

between shifts. It's unacceptable to treat people like this. Yes, there

might be the few tiny minority for who it works. Libby summed up the

situation very well. It really does have to change. What has been

forgotten in this debate. We can directly chart the increase, massive

increase, in the use of zero-hour contracts from the time that the EU

agency workers regulations were introduced into this country. That

meant that temporary employees, after 12 weeks, had to be on exactly

the same term and conditions as a full-time employees. Big businesses

didn't like this. Zero-hours contracts was a way of getting

around that particular piece of EU legislation. That's why they have

rocketed. Once again, we have the EU to blame for this one.

APPLAUSE Jennings Simon Jenkins. This is now

huge. It's not a small matter. As with the rent, capping rent control.

You legislate into the free market at your your peril. There are ways

to ease the pain of zero-hour contracts. There have to be minimum

standards expected of people. Travel expenses, The National Trust have a

lot of these. National Trust have a lot of zero-hour contracts?

Everybody does in this business. Everybody does. You are talking as

if it were - where do you all work? People working in service industries

are on these sort of contracts. Can you make them as fair and painless

as they can be? Many people don't want to work full-time. Many people

are happy to be called in when the sun shines. You want two or three

times your staff when the sun is shining when it rains. You have to

be sensible about this. I think it ease fair for the Government to

regulate fairness and humanity in employment. That is fine. The idea

you can get away from a massive source of employment for young

people is ridiculous and counter productive.

APPLAUSE The woman here. Yes. I don't think

it's as zero-hour contracts that are the problem. They provide huge

flexibility to the economy. It's the employers are exploiting them and

making the workers lives hell. Are you on one yourself? I'm not on one.

I know people who are on one. You are on one? Yeah. What is your view?

They should be kept, certainly. It was the break into the industry, as

you mentioned. The way into a job. That right. I got a contracted place

from that. I mean, obviously, as you mentioned, it might have been my own

case, not sure on the figures. I'm not into that. It worked for me.

Yvette Cooper? Why is it so often the only route into a job? Why is it

that so many organisations, as Simon refers to, are seeing zero-hours

contracts as normal? They should not be normal. There should be areas

where there are seasonal fluctuations there may be areas

where people have retired who want to work on flexible contracts. For

them to expand so much, so substantially in such a short period

of time, I think is a very serious problem about the way in which the

labour market is working. There is a series of problems, there is a big

problem for people who are told they have to be available. Telling

somebody they have to be available, but not guaranteeing them work is

completely wrong and completely exsplotive. People can't plan

holidays or anything. They can't get things like Working Tax Credit. They

don't know how much they will be earning in a particular week. There

is also a problem where people are kept on zero-hours contracts when

they are working regular hours. They are working week after week after

week after month after month on regular hours contracts, and not

given the employment support that they should be in those regular

hours. I think that is not fair on people too. That also ought to be

addressed. At the moment, there is no suggestion that the Government

seems to be addressing that issue, about what happens to people on

long-term regular hours. They should do that as well. How do you know

until we published our review. The woman there in the fourth row. I run

a business that provides services for the care sector. The care sector

is almost exclusively zero-hour contracts. I think sometimes it's

very easy to hit employers over the head with a hammer about them. The

reason zero-hours contracts came out because local authorities who

contracted out their services for care refused to pay for block

contracts. So now they say you can employ a workforce. You don't know

how many people you need. You don't know when you need them. Local

authorities pay for services by the minute.ful it's very - they won't

pay for time. Local authorities will not pay employers to pay their staff

for travel time. They won't make allowances for training. They won't

pay anything other than contact time. They have engineered the need

for zero-hour contracts. Could the law be changed so they can't do

this, in your view? You can't interfere with what employers do. I

agree with you there. What they should, it is all about funding.

Particularly in essential services like care, it's about getting the

funding right so that we can provide the proper services in jobs for

people who provide those services. OK. Tim Farron. A whole different

question there really. You are working in a profession that is

dealing with and providing services for the most vulnerable people in

this country. Millions of us, there will be millions more of us as the

years go on, yet it needs to be - we have seen with the abuses that have

been spoken about. Which of course are entirely a minority of cases. We

need our care sector to be as funded as esteemed as much as people who

work in the NHS, for example. On the issue of zero-hours contracts. You

make the point, Simon makes the point, when the Government legislate

and regulate, and it should, we need to be very careful we don't throw

the babies out with the bath water. There is a range of things to get

right. People on sdeer ehour contracts, not because it is

convenient for them, it's convenient for the employer. It exploits the

employee. You do not have zero rent or bills. To have zero-hours and not

know when you won't have income that week when you might be eligible for

benefits one week and not the next. And all the heartache that builds

in. That is something we must restrict.

APPLAUSE Got to stop, I'm afraid. Our hour is

up. Next week we will be in Southampton. Panel, Shirley

Williams, from the Liberal Democrats. Grant Shapps, Chuka

Umunna Labour's Business Secretary and, guess who, Nigel Farage, leader

of UKIP. The week after that we will be in Coventry. Come to Southampton

and Coventry, apply the usual way. The website address is there The

telephone number: If you are listening to this on 5 Live, it goes

on with Question Time Extra Time, it doesn't go on in Leeds, that ends

this edition of the programme with my thanks to the panel and all of

you who came to take part. Until next Thursday, from Question Time,

good night. APPLAUSE