22/05/2014 Question Time

Election Night, voting closed at 10.00pm. We will soon have the first

results. Tonight we are in Radlett and welcome to Question Time.

And good evening to you at home, to our audience here who will be

putting questions to our panel who, as ever, do not know what those

questions are until they hear them. The Conservative Justice Secretary,

Chris Grayling, Labour's Shadow Education Secretary, Tristram Hunt,

the Liberal Democrat former Home Office Minister, Jeremy Browne,

UKIP's Deputy Chairman, Neil Hamilton, the blogger, Jack Monroe,

whose book about feeding her family while living on benefits became a

bestseller, and the television presenter and property expert,

Kirstie Allsopp. Thank you very much. Our first

question is from Prisha Jobanputra. Does the increasing support for the

UKIP indicate underlying racism? Increasing support for UKIP. Does it

indicate underlying racism? Jack Monroe? Thanks(!) Well, I don't know

enough about UKIP to be able to demonise them as an entire party.

But the signs are worrying. The signs that so many of their members

have come out as racist or homophobic, have come out with large

blunders through the press. There was one UKIP candidate who said gay

people shouldn't be allowed to have or adopt children, which stuck in my

mind as a gay people with children. To come back to the question, a lot

of UKIP candidates and people who claim to represent UKIP are racist,

are loudly racist and their policies appear to be racist. I would say

yes, it hints at underlying racism. But it plays on people's fears. No

party is going to say, "I'm a racist party." It talks about Britain and

British jobs and nationalism and extreme nationalism in a way that

sells it as quite as an attractive proposition for people who don't

know where else to turn. Tristram Hunt? I think UKIP and the

rise of UKIP and votes for UKIP is about a politics of anger and a

politics of alienation and whether they are racist or not, what we have

to do is deal with the issues. The question was does the increasing

support indicate underlying racism? They are guilty of inflammatory,

ugly language. I have met lots of people on the doorstep who will be

voting UKIP, who are not themselves racists. And that is why their

politics speaks to this broader crisis we are seeing. Not just here

in the UK. The fringe parties are getting votes across Europe. So, our

solution in the Labour Party is to respond to this on policy terms and

politics. In terms of the activism you see on the streets of England

today, having conversations with voters. We have double the number of

activists on the streets today. We don't want to know about Labour. We

are talking about UKIP. We will come to Labour later on. We will beat

them on their policies. Whether it is the minimum wage, or whether it

is rents, or zero hours, that is how you deal with the alienation and the

anger. Calling them names doesn't always get you to the right place.

You have to engage with the politics. You said they were

inflammatory and ugly. Their language is inflammatory and

language. Neil Hamilton? It is very dangerous to fling racism around in

a casual way. That is a very nasty thing. In certain circumstances,

it's against the law. And UKIP is certainly not a racist party. If

UKIP is racist, so are the 80% of the British public who agree with

UKIP's line on immigration according to opinion polls. The Labour Party

has very, very belatedly apologised publicly for its disastrous error in

having an open door immigration policy in the period when it was in

office between 1997 and 2010, when 3.2 million net addition to our

population came about because of immigration producing all sorts of

strains on public services, health, schools, transport, et cetera, et

cetera. UKIP is not a cause, but a symptom of these problems. If it

hadn't been for the failure of the establishment parties to control

immigration into this country, then I don't suppose UKIP would have come

into existence. Most of the concern that's been voiced during this

European elections campaign, something which the Labour Party

never want to talk about... We are delighted to talk about Europe. Let

me finish my answer. We will come on to Europe. I'm more than up for

that! Perhaps a bit later. It is the Labour Party's failure after 2004 to

impose transitional controls which existed over most of the rest of

Europe on Romania... OK. The issue of racism, Neil, can you address?

But the issue is that people confuse being concerned about immigration

with being a racist. That is the main point that I want to make, that

you do not have to be a racist to be concerned about immigration.

??FORCEDWHI Do you -- do you agree with that? To a certain extent, yes

and no. Any of the political parties, there is going to be that

element of racist element in there. My point is, the whole point of this

race relations and everything, it was messed up in the 1950s, after

the Second World War when we asked the people to come over and help us.

Race relations, which those people received was never addressed. We are

now living the back of what's happened because of UKIP. Because of

people coming from the Caribbean? They weren't addressed, they weren't

integrated properly. They played on people's fears. There are going to

be groups which will be playing off the fears. I personally think - I

can agree with what a lot of white Britons think because they think

people are coming and taking their culture. As much as I want to

respect my culture, you have to respect the people where you are as

well. The woman in yellow? One of the reasons that I think people call

UKIP a racist party is because unlike the mainstream parties, where

we hear about all their policies, all we ever hear in conjunction with

UKIP is immigration, Britain, not in Europe.

You blame the way they put themselves forward? That's mainly,

if not all, they talk about. Alright. That is not... I will come

back to you. That is may be all that is broadcast or talked about... I

have done dozens of public meetings up-and-down the country over the

last few weeks. You will find that UKIP has a full range of policies

and... What are those policies? Chris Grayling? If you would like to

give me the rest of the programme... No. I think it's really... I have a

copy of it here to read... The last manifesto? Yes. He didn't know what

was in it. This was the manifesto. The other 400 pages were discussion

documents that were published at the same time. Chris Grayling? It is

really important that we don't conflate a legitimate argument about

levels of immigration with a discussion about race. We are a

multi-cultural society. We have been a multi-cultural society for a long

time. The issues around immigration are to do with the ability of the

country to absorb people with the implications for school places, for

the Health Service, for the veilibility of -- availability of

housing. We recognise the practical pressures it places on this country.

That is a very different thing to talking about race. OK. What about

UKIP? The question was whether UKIP's report indicates underlying

racism? I don't believe fundamentally this is a racist

country, though there is racism in this country. OK. Can I go back to

Prisha Jobanputra? There is underlying racism. My kids

experience it. I experience it. It is very soft. Unless you are an

ethnic in this country, you don't realise. Especially if your colour

is different, you don't realise. It does exist.

Kirstie Allsopp? I think it does exist. I think you are right. I

think that in comparison to other countries, we do reasonably well

here. I think that Brits, as a whole, are - we are liberal people

and there was a very, very funny comedy show on Radio Four where

there was a black comedian talking about Brits trying to get it right

and I think a lot of the time, people in this country are sensitive

to other people's feelings and cultures and we try and get it

right. I am very proud of that. The problem about the UKIP question that

you raised is it is not just racism, it sexism, it is homophobia.

I think Chris is right when he says we must not confuse concern about

immigration, which I see in my work with people worried about housing a

lot, with racism. At the same time, we have to say it loud and clear,

there are supporters of UKIP who are profoundly sexist, racist and

homophobic. And that is something we see on an almost daily basis. There

was a UKIP funder, who was on Channel 4 News, and he sat there and

he said openly... He is not a member of UKIP. He had given you money,

Neil. And he said he didn't believe there was such a thing... Don't take

money from people... You are dodging the question. You are talking about

your view of particular people who represent as you say UKIP. The

question was does the increasing support - and we know that is

running at 25% - does that indicate - we will know tonight what it is -

does that indicate underlying racism? Are you saying people who go

for UKIP... The people who go for UKIP are turning a blind eye to some

of the people who support UKIP. They are turning a blind eye. They are

concerned about the things Jack and Chris spoke about. They are turning

a blind eye to certain sup porters of UKIP supporters of UKIP. When the

leader of a National Party comes out on a national radio station and

describing the difference between Germans living next door and

Romanians living next door, comes out with the answer, "You know what

I mean," That can represent underlying racism in a party.

The Conservatives in 2005 had the advertising slogan, "Are you

thinking what we are thinking?" We have had the vans from the Coalition

Government cruising multi-cultural parts of London saying, "Go home if

you are illegal here." We had nine Labour councillors who resigned

accusing their own party of "institutional racism." There is a

lot of it about. Jeremy Browne? I want to talk about UKIP rather than

throw insults at them. On one level, there is a perfectly legitimate

argument for a political party that thinks we should leave the European

Union. The choice that you would have had today would have been much

more limited without UKIP being on the ballot paper. They are

reasonable to talk about the restrictions or lack of restrictions

on freedom of movement within the European Union. I disagree. When it

comes to globalisation, our best prospects of being successful are to

be outward-looking and internationalists. There is a

legitimate opposite view and that is the view that UKIP put forward. That

is not just what UKIP represent. I think the political classes if you

like, and the media elite, need to understand the state of mind of

quite a lot of people, particularly beyond London who are voting for

UKIP. Some of them may be racist and sexist, I'm sure some of them are.

But I think some of them object to being told the whole time by that

elite what they should eat, what they should drink, what they should

say, what they should believe in. I think Nigel Farage for quite a lot

of those people is just a big two-finger stuck up to what they

feel is an out of touch elite. They may be unreasonable, but the

politicians in the other parties need to spend a bit of time

reflecting if there is a protest vote why people are wanting to

protest and not just bandy all of those people as being racist. Some

of them I suspect are, but there is an onus on the establishment

politicians to think what we can do to reconnect with the people. Why

aren't they coming through... Why doesn't the Liberal Democrat Party

appeal to people like that? I would like us to. Maybe we will come to

talk about the Lib Dems as well. Maybe we will, maybe we won't. What

is your answer? I think all politicians or a lot of

politicians are guilty of not having the clarity and the appearance of

authenticity that say Nigel Farage has, or for that matter Alex Salmond

or even Boris Johnson. Quite a lot of politicians, you may like or

dislike them, but people have a sense with them that they are tell

you what they fundamentally believe in. Quite a lot of the mainstream

Westminster politicians look like they are telling you what you want

them to say and that's not the same. Pf

APPLAUSE I notice you didn't mention Nick

Clegg in your list of people who speak their mind. Well, do you want

me to enlarge? No, I just didn't hear him mentioned It's made the

most significant decision in my lifetime in British politics, which

is to leave my party and to contribute to the rebuilding of our

country. The man in spectacles there? The mainstream politicians

are telling us, telling the NHS what they think the nation wants to hear,

by pandering to the UKIP support that seems to be coming through. If

UKIP have succeeded in anything, to my mind they have succeeded in

bringing out the worst in people and their approach to politics. I don't

think you can simply dismiss those who're going to vote for UKIP as

just wrong-headed, misguided, the wrong heads in British society. They

have genuine grievances about the nature of our economy, how it's

delivering for working people, the mayture of our politics and what we

have to do as politicians is come up with policy solutions to them, have

the conversation with them, engage with them and not write them

National Audit Office that way. I don't think that's right -- write

them National Audit Office that way. I think perhaps policies need to

change. That to me says you lack the courage and conviction. No, no no.

And challenge what you could be saying because it's very, very

dangerous. Challenge what they are saying through policies. Are there

any specific UKIP supporters in the audience who'd like to speak? I

heard a lot from the panel and the audience. I get very tired as being

a member of society who's fearful and vulnerable. I'm a very well

balanced member of society, OK. I don't need to be told who I'm voting

for, whichever political party it may be may be wrong. Every single

party has issues with some of their members and I'm not excusing UKIP

for the members who're involved in it because I agree with Mr Hamilton,

racism is totally wrong. I get tired of being told I'm a fearful member

of society and I don't quite understand. The problem is that some

of the issues that UKIP hit on transpire into local problems. For

example, I live in Bishops Stortford, there are people who've

lived in the town for 20, 30 years, who cannot get them into particular

schools, immigration has a net effect on the town and they are the

issues that people want to discuss, engage with in a very, very balanced

way. So you don't want lectures from politicians on what you are thinking

and why you are thinking it? No, because for all the main political

parties, up in come from the moral high ground.

APPLAUSE. That is precisely the point I was

making, it's a discuss about practicalities in terms of

immigration, it's about things like school places. Our job I think is

not to throw mud in all directions, it's to earn people's support by

setting out their agenda. But isn't that throwing mud? UKIP is now

regarded, according to David Miliband as mainstream political

party. Ed would that be? I always... LAUGHTER

I mean Mr Ed, of course! Millions of people will tonight vote or have

already voted for UKIP. I think it's the most grotesque libel upon

millions and millions of decent working people in this country that

they should be derided as home Phoebes, sexists, racists. The

people who're voting for UKIP are doing so because they are worried

about the future of their country and the pressures on their own

lives. Mass immigration of the kind we have experienced is unprecedented

in the whole of British history. More people came into this country

in the 2010 alone between the 900 years between 1066 and 1950. Are you

sure? ! Absolutely certain. That sounds a very dodgy statistic to me.

On the migration website. It's an entirely independent think-tank. Sir

Andrew Green, the chairman of it, is a former ambassador and he's a man

of complete integrity. If you disagree, you can disprove it. I'm

just querying it. Who can deny problems that have been caused by

the scale and speed of immigration that's happened in the last 20

years, it's caused massive wage compression, the GMB claims wages

are at the bottom of the pay scale by 15%. This is not something

recognised only by supporters of UKIP, it's recognised throughout the

political spectrum, except by a lot of the mainstream politicians

failing to give voice to people. Jack Munro? You have got your

Migration Watch website that counts how many people come into the

country. Do you have a facility that counts how many doctors leave this

country, how many nurses, how many people, skills and trained... You

can't talk about a net figure when you don't know how many people have

left. You can. No, you can't. I don't want to argue this here, we

have had the question of racism. I want to get through three or four

questions tonight if we can. You can text or Twitter us:

The red button will tell you what other people are saying. A question

from Dave recallings, please? Will the latest rise in house prices

leave a generation with no prospect of owning their own home? The house

price rise much bigger in London than outside in the UK, than

everywhere. Will it leave a generation with no prospect of

owning their own home? You'd better answer this one, Kirstie, you know

the answer. I don't know the answer and that's the problem. There is not

a simple silver bullet which will shovelth solve this problem and

politicians that are looking for headlines get it wrong again and

again. There are lots of issues. Firstly, we need to build more, but

it isn't just about building more. I support right-to-buy, but we should

have built homes as we sold homes. Secondly, we have to look at a whole

load of other issues which people never talk about in relation to

housing. Many, many more people went to university last year than did 25

dwraertion. -- years ago that. Means people are coming into their early

20s with debt, they are coming into work later. We may be living longer,

we may have more time at the end of their life, but the period of time

in which we can marry and have children is still the same as it

was, as a woman your fertility drops off a cliff age 35. Now, I see so

many families in real pain because they have gone to university, they

have started work later, they're average age of buying a first home's

now gone almost over 30, only 6% of first time buyers are in their 20s.

There are really important issues in society which aren't just related to

housing. We have to address those. We can't just talk about the

physicality of houses. Yes, more high streets should have property,

residential property above them, yes we should build above all single

storey out of town units. You can make some wonderful housing

developments. There is some wonderful technology where you can

build pods and put them on top of single storey units. I don't

understand why you can't address housing as a single issue, that's

what young people want, a house for their family? But the evidence is

showing that isn't what young people want. They don't want houses? They

don't want to settle and get a mortgage as early as they have

previously. Society has changed. That is part of problem. It's not

simply that houses are very expensive, they are very expensive

in the south and the south-east, but there are areas around the country

where the prices are not as high as they are near Radlett where young

people are not enth engaging with the process. Yes, they are very high

in Radlett. People have to lay their home somewhere? They are renting.

The thing of wanting to leave school, perhaps get a post-A-level

job, stay at home, save up, that has changed. So there isn't a housing

crisis? Of course there is a housing crisis in the south-east. But the

housing crisis is not simply about money, lending and lack of housing.

It's about many wider issues. Tristram Hunt? We have a national

obsession with property going back hundreds and hundreds of years and

Kirstie has added to it very successfully. In a good way! And

that's not going to change. Owning your own home and wanting to improve

your home and wanting to buy a bigger home is a worthy aspiration

and it's proving harder and harder. There is a demand you and supped my

problem. We have had a government policy which has promoted further

demand with the Help To Buy. Are you in favour of the Help To Buy? Yes

that, made a real influence, I'm not convinced that you need a Government

subsidy for ?6020,000 houses. I don't think that's necessary think

best use of money -- ?600,000. We have a supply problem. We need to

build more houses, get local authorities to put pressure on the

developers to unlock some of the land. We need the garden cities and

now tons. Aagree with densify and development on building upwards but

we also I think need to look after those who do rent and have some

proper policies for those who're being absolutely hammered on the

rental charges and tenancies and we in the Labour Party have again some

substantial policies on that because, to trourn the earlier

discussion that,'s how you deal with the crisis of politics, come up with

policies to help people. As a homeowner, it's not just about those

getting on the ladder. If the interest rate rise comes, it's going

to force people in their homes out of them because they won't be able

to make their mortgage payments because they are going to be

spending so much more on the properties and everyone talks about

the people trying to buy, but what about the people who've already

invested all their savings, working day and night to try and make the

payments and they are going to find themselves trying to gate rental

because they can't pay for their own home. When you took out your

mortgage, did you think interest rates would stay at a low level? I

was told to get a fixed rate because the rates would go up almost

immediately that. Was four years ago, thank God I didn't because I've

saved a fortune, but all that money's gone because everything else

costs a fortune as well. If the rate does come in at a higher level, I

will lose my house. You, Sir? I bought my house three years ago on a

fixed rate on my own so I've got another two years on my property. I

took a fixed rate because if the interest rates changed, like the

gentleman pointed out, I would be ruined because I had my fixed income

on myself. I've got another two year, I'll prove move and buy a

bigger house, my partner is moving in with me, but the luck there is

I've only paid what I can afford to pay. My mortgage is fixed. Can I

ask, when you move, will you have to pay stamp duty at 3%? Ly Bill buying

a more expensive home. That's a disgrace. That's one of the things

can Government should do to help. The only way you will make a real

difference is by bileding on green belt land and in places like this,

the answer from the nay bours unfortunately is no. We do not need

that. The answer from the neighbours is not my my doorstep. Would you

like green belt land to be built on? Not on my doorstep.

Chris Grayling? It's a difficult balance to find. We need more

houses, no question. We have young people who're struck tolling get on

the housing ladder because not enough houses are being built. It's

clear that we need more. We'll have to be smart and innovative and

Kirstie's right in some things she's proposed. If you fly over London you

can see scope within the boundaries of London to build additional

houses. The mayor is setting out plans to accept up the levels of

developing in London. At the same time, it's important we don't end up

destroying the countryside, in the south-east particularly with y the

pressures are great. It takes smart decision-making by the local

authorities, we have given them more control. I can see spots many my own

constituency where development could happen and place where is nobody

would want to it happen at all. Smart local decision-making, inknow

vasive thinking in inner city areas about making better use of the land

we have got, doing things Kirstie talks about, but there is no

alternative to but to build more houses, and affordable houses.

On the issue of the green belt, is your plan planning to say we should.

Obsessed about landscape, all we need to do is build on 2-3% of land

and we solve the housing problem. There was a lot of stick levelled

for this. I could wander around my own constituency and find areas of

open land where most people would say it's possible to develop. Half

of an old mental hospital for example. Equally, there are other

parts of my constituency where it would be mad to build houses, it's a

part of the rural heritage. Is Nick flight the way he's putting it? He's

expressed his own views. The woman at the back there? I would

like to agree with Kirstie Allsopp's point on Stamp Duty thresholds. The

Government could assist by increasing the thresholds so people

who that tax was never designed to catch are taken out of it. I agree.

There are a number of areas of taxation where I would love to see

change. We are still dealing with a huge public deficit and there are

things we can't do right now which I'm sure many people would love to

be able to do in the future. It is not about a reduction. If you remove

the slabbing at ?2 250,000. Instead of putting in money to p can

right to Buy, the Government should have given more money to the housing

associations to build affordable houses and secondly, particularly in

areas where there is very high demand from overseas buyers like

London, the Government should restrict the right for non-residents

to buy in those areas. I'm talking about Denmark and Switzerland where

that happens. A reform we introduced at the end of our period in

Government was to allow councils to use their rental income to start

building again. I think Kirstie Allsopp is right. One of the great

errors under Right to Buy was not to use that money then to invest in

housing stock and build... Jack Monroe? Kirstie Allsopp said the

housing crisis isn't about money and lending. My housing crisis is about

money and lending! I have ave had a period of unemployment for 18

months. I have been in full-time work for ten years. I don't own a

home. I have never been able to own a home. Today I decided to see what

- knowing I was coming on here - to try to take out a mortgage with my

bank that I have banked with for ten years. I put in my salary and I put

in the average price of a two-bedroom flat and I got an error

message that told me that at 0% interest I would never pay that

mortgage off in my lifetime. And I went oh, that is a little bit

rubbish. I work hard and I work long hours and I can't afford to buy

myself a home. It's a bit of a Tory obsession with a property-owning

democracy with David Cameron talking about deep, natural instincts to own

your own home. I don't have a natural instinct to spend 100% of my

wages on my mortgage, I want somewhere to live. I have lived in

rented accommodation for ten years and I agree that people need homes,

not necessarily houses. Living on a short tenancy where you can get

booted out at six months, that is the thing we need to be looking at.

We need to address two million on social housing waiting lists and ask

when Thatcher sold off the social housing and ringfenced so people

can't buy anymore, why we have two million people waiting for

affordable housing. The answer to the original question

is yes, in many cases. The social contract between the generations is

being broken and there is a shortage of social housing and housing to

buy. That is mainly because there is a constant upward pressure on

demand, the population is growing strongly, the population has gone up

by 4.5 million in the last decade. That is almost the population of

Scotland. But also a lot more people are living on their own. One in 25

houses were occupied by a single adult, now it is one in four. All of

those have an upward pressure. The Government can take measures on

Stamp Duty, Help to Buy, but the only way it can be addressed is to

increase the supply. If we want to restore that link, that social

contract between the generations, and it is not just young people,

there's a lot of middle-aged people now who are unable to buy as well

and have difficulty because they can't get a mortgage between the age

of 65. If you come into your 40s and you haven't managed to buy at that

stage, you might be struggling. If we want to do something fundamental

about that, the biggest part of the answer is building more homes. OK.

Neil Hamilton? I still live in a house at the age of 65 which is

largely owned by the building society. And it is true that in

Britain, compared with other European countries there is a much

higher rate of homeownerships. There is the desire to, as I think David

Cameron is quite right, there is a desire in people wanting to own

their homes. . The population has increased by 4.5 million in the last

20 years. Yes, and sit going to increase by another million in the

next five years. The Office of National Statistics published the

figures today which showed that net migration into Britain... Listen,

you groan. Net migration is in addition to the existing population.

That is a city the size of Manchester that we need to build in

the course of the next five years in order to accommodate that alone.

There's - the Government has put 375 billion into the economy through

quantitative easing and that is driving prices up. The employment

effects of that stimulus works through. It then finds its way out

into other areas. The gentleman in the front row is right, that the

elephant in the room in the property market is what happens when interest

rates go up from their record low where they have been resting now for

several years? When the Bank of England has to raise its interest

rates from 0.5% to 1.5%, it is only a 1% increase, but it is an increase

of three times the existing rate and that is going to produce massive

problems for people. Thank you. I'm going to go on. We are over halfway

through this edition of Question Time. Question from Shirley Herbert?

Is Prince Charles right to compare Putin to Hitler? When you say that,

are you saying is it a correct comparison? Or is he justified in

his position in making it? Or both? I'm saying both. You are saying

both? Tristram Hunt? Well, I think it was a private conversation, which

was picked up by some creepy Daily Mail journalist, hiding behind a

pillar. I don't generally believe everything that is written in the

Daily Mail - which is a good rule for life!

I do also think we should be careful about the inevitable comparisons

with Hitler. Hitler was a man of world historic evil and we have this

shorthand whether it was Saddam Hussein, or Putin, connecting them

instinctively to Hitler. When you look at this language of aggrieved

patriotism, when you look at the contempt for international bodies,

there are uncomfortable echoes from the past. It is also noteworthy that

so many fascist and Neo-Nazi parties across Europe are supporting Putin.

The difference today is to the 1930s, is what we can do about it.

And Russia can be addressed in some of its instincts by international

economics. What is happening to the Russian economy is terrifying as a

result of these interventions. We need to keep the diplomatic pressure

on and on the day of the European elections, it is significant that

the way we are going to deal with President Putin, the way we are

going to deal with his aggression, is through the European Union which

makes the case for a strong, diplomatic lead within Europe. We

can't do it on our own anymore. We need that diplomatic presence

through Europe. And can you answer the other half of Shirley's

question? Is it right for the Prince of Wales now taking on more and more

duties that the Queen did to be on an official visit to Canada and say

this? There were a lot of journalists around? Is he right or

wrong to make that kind of remark? It was a private conversation with

an elderly Canadian lady over a cup of tea and who knows what context

within which it took place. Again, I do not take as sacrosanct the

writings of a Daily Mail hacker. Chris Grayling? I think it is wrong

to report private conversations. We shouldn't end up in detailed

discussion about them. We don't know what was said. There is nothing

recorded. There's no quotes. It is a hearsay comment. I think people,

even members of the Royal Family, have a right to private views. Of

course, it is not right for a member of a constitutional monarchy to

enter into a public debate, but that is not what is suggested to have

happened here. I think members of the Royal Family need to be able to

have conversations in private. We shouldn't get into commenting about

them. As regards to what is happening in Russia, it is wrong. We

have had for the last 70 or 80 years a body that has had a pretty good

record in resisting actions at the Russian end which are not

appropriate. It is called NATO. NATO, our partnership with the

United States of America, the unified Western world should be

willing to make it clear to the Russians that what is happening is

not acceptable and we should be willing to stand by the Ukrainians

who are facing a threat that they do not deserve. The man in the second

row from the back? I think NATO has literally forced Putin to an extent

into protecting Russia. Equally, Churchill 80 years ago said that

appeasement of Hitler was going to be a terrible thing and was proved

right. Putin is there to establish Russia as a power it was ten or 15

years ago before glasnost. We have to be very, very careful how we

react to him. I think he's not 100% personally. He's a power maniac. He

wants Russia to be as Russia was. Is the comparison with Hitler a fair

comparison? In my view, yes. If we ignore him and hide as we did 80

years ago, we could have a problem in Europe. There are Neo-Nazis. You,

Sir? Prince Charles is right to make statements private or public of a

political nature on the basis that for years he has been vetoing

legislation which hasn't got to Parliament. He is a public figure.

He is a political figure. Therefore, we have a right to hear what he

thinks before he becomes a King. In terms of Prince Charles saying it,

he should. Is the comparison sound? There are lots of similarities. You

are right, the point is we can change things now. Things are

different. We have to be firm against Putin on the basis that if

you are not firm against fascists, bad things happen. Neil Hamilton? I

think it is absurd to categorise this as a private conversation

because the heir to the throne having a conversation with somebody

he has never met in his life before, it is not private because he can't

control the use of whatever he might have said afterwards. We is all

experienced similar situations. -- we have all experienced similar

situations. One does have to be careful how one expresses oneself in

situations like that. He was foolish, if I may say so, to get

embroiled in such a discussion in Canada. As has happened, it was

bound to have diplomatic implications for Britain. He is a

constitutional figure. But he's got the right to make his views known as

the gentleman in the second row was saying within the system and does

so. He's an intelligent, sensitive, well-informed person. But his

constitutional role precludes him from playing a public part in issues

of that kind. I do think also it's wrong to compare Putin with Hitler.

Hitler was a man who wanted to take over the entire continent of Europe

by violence and to oppress the populations in order to impose the

will of Germany as the master race. Putin is an autocratic Nationalist.

It is true, but to compare him with Hitler, who wanted to wipe out the

Jewish race , million Russians died in the Second World War. -- 26

million Russians died in the Second World War. And we might dislike

Putin, but nevertheless, there is nothing we can do about him. He is

the President of Russia. We certainly don't have the military

means to stop him doing what he wants to do. Ukraine didn't exist as

an independent country for hundreds of years apart from three years in

the 1920s until the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Crimea, which is

now part of Russia again, was only given to Ukraine in 1954, 98% of the

people of Crimea... Let's curtail this.

Jack Munro? When I heard the news about what Prince Charles said about

Putin, I did a little hurray inside and said, a lot of us are thinking

it and he comes out with some clangors, but actually for once, he

hit the nail right on the head. History tells us if we shy away from

fascism or smooth-talking bully boys with, you know, that come and try

and implement their regimes and policies and ideas that are nothing

more than snake horn merchants selling something that's really

quite horrible and the guise of a sharp suit or decent policy, before

you know it, they are bigger than you can deal with. What we need to

do with people like Putin who I've become about five inches of in my

life and am still getting over it, what you need to do is stand up to

them, tell them what they are and not be afraid of standing up to

them. APPLAUSE

When did you come within five inches of him? At the G8 Summit. T.- I

think that while this comparison may be true, maybe not true and people

will have different opinions on whether Putin is like Hitler, what

has changed is what the rest of the world is and now with structures

like the United Nations, there's a lot less chance of something of a

Hitler size and scale happening again. With regards to Prince

Charles, everyone in this room and in the world is entitled to their

own opinion and whether or not it's a private conversation, we should

all say what we want and that's his upon and we have differing opinions

and he has as much right as anybody else to say it.

Jeremy Browne, sorry, there are six of us here and I'm stopping you.

When it comes to admiration of Putin, I'm nearer the Prince Charles

end of the scale than I am the Nigel Farage end of the scale.

APPLAUSE But I do think the Hitler

comparisons are overblown. It's likely Hitler will have won the

Second World War without many millions of Russians dieing in the

cause of stopping themth him. We have to be careful about banding

around the Hitler comparisons. But Putin's nationalism is a concern and

a threat in the time that we live and I agree with the last person who

spoke about the need to make sure we have an outward looking, engaged

nationalist stance and we use the United Nations and the European

Union and NATO and other institutions to make sure that we

keep world order in Europe and further afield.

Have you spoken already? You, Sir? I think Tristram Hunt is naive and

people are naive about the power of the UN, the EU. Putin signed a

treaty with China to supply gas. I don't think he's too worried about

what the West think act chillily and I would compare him nor Stalin than

Hitler. Kirstie Allsopp? As Russia's economy

is comparable to that of Italy, perhaps the comparison should be

with Mussolini. We all think of Russia as a scary thing and I think

Sir, you may be wrong, because I think what Tristram said about the

economic sanctions is something that's hopeful. The Graz prom deal

happened with China but they haven't released the figures of that deal,

we don't know whether it's more beneficial to China or Russia. As

far as the Prince Charles question shows, he isn't traditionally

allowed to express his opinion. The young man in the checked shirt said

everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I don't think in Prince

Charles's case he is. I feel very sorry for him in that respect, it

must be immensely frustrating, but 99% of the time he gets it wrong. He

may have slipped up this time, but I think one other thing. It was very

mischievous reporting which didn't benefit any of us. Did you say 99%

of the time he gets it wrong? Yes, I'm a big fan. You meant right? Did

I say wrong? Oh, my God, I meant right!

LAUGHTER APPLAUSE

That 's the quickest retraction I've ever heard.

We'll go on to a last question from Debra Dobrin, please? In south-west

Hertfordshire, 222 children did not get one of their choice of secondary

schools. Should you have to send your child to a school that you

haven't chosen? School places, to the heart of Is, not just in South

West Hertfordshire, but many parts of Britain. Should you have to send

your child to a school you didn't choose? Jeremy Browne?

Well, it's easy to say no you shouldn't have to send your child to

a school you didn't choose. The question then is, how do you try and

make sure that the supply of school places in popular schools matches up

to the ambitions of parents to send their children to those schools. I

think the problem that we have had is that we have a very statsic

system where schools are maintained which are unpopular, local

authorities try and allocate children to unpopular schools and

what we need is a more dynamic system where schools that are very

popular can expand or they can open up new campuses, if you like, new

versions of that school that more providers can come in and provide

schools as well. And that the good schools, if you like, the popular

schools, can flex up to meet parental demand. So I think the era

of command and control Government ministers telling everybody that the

Government knows best about what's your children's education should

look like, that era is coming gradually to an end and what we need

to do is try and insert more choice for parents into the system. I think

it's difficult to do that. There is limited finance. It's easy to say in

theory than it is in practise but that is the direction we should be

doing. What is your view? Everyone talking about free schools and the

opportunities that are available to have the infrastructure that we

require, but then we have a free school that was supposed to be built

down the road to us and I would say that everything was put in its way

to prevent that school from being built. There is a dire need for the

infrastructure to meet the requirements of every locality and

it's not about immigration before we hear that it's all about

immigration, it's about us needing to build houses on brown field land,

but there's no point building houses without providing a school and a

hospital and all the other infrastructure that's needed. What

about the free school? You know more than me, but there are lots of

planning issues. I'm a member of a free school that was meant to open

in September and unfortunately it didn't open, mainly due to the site

issue and we are waiting to hear this month if the site that we've

chosen is actually available. It's owned by the Department of Health

and the issue that's holding it up at the moment is that they are

saying that the land is worth X amount and they are not willing to

reduce it. So it will be sorted but in principal you are in favour of a

free school? Of course, yes. Tradition front Hunt, are you in

favour of it? Niall favour of you getting together as parents and

community activists and teachers to set up a new school where we need

places and if you need places, good club to you, the Government's let

you down, I know about this site and the Government's botched it up 100%

and it's a scandal what's happened to your community. 24% didn't get

their choices of secondary schools, compared to the average of 5% in the

UK. Is free schools the answer to this? From Labour's point of view,

are you in favour of it It can be part of the answer because a free

school is not the only school in the world, you know. They are maintained

schools, they are a voluntary controlled schools, and free schools

can be part of an answer in the right place. And when you set up

your school, I want you to have qualified teachers in it,

transparency, accountability, make sure that your admissions code is

reflective of the local environment. Look, the...

How would you describe it? The first job of a Government when it comes to

education policy is to have enough places and then to have the teachers

to teach in those schools and on both of those issues, we've got a

Government failing on the job and we saw last week that they had raided

?400 million from the basic needs budget in order to fund some of the

free schools where we don't need the places. So where you need the

places, the crisis you're facing is as a result of the misallocation of

funds by this Government and you should hold them to account on it

APPLAUSE Chris Grayling? Well. You are

dancing on the Head of A pin over the schools issue, one week you

oppose them, the next week you support them. He's misrepresenting.

You have said your bit. It's a basic point. A dangerous ideological

experiment is what you said about them. A dangerous ideological

experiment and yummy mummies, yes. Now allow Chris Grayling to answer.

So we are in aniedle of the immigration issue, a babyboom and we

are seeing in my constituency big pressures on primary places that

will feed through to secondary places shortly. You have got the

secondary issues here. We are spending ?59 billion on creating new

school places -- ?5 be. We are spending money yes on new free

schools -- ?5 billion. We are putting money into expanding schools

and maintaining schools, putting money to be free schools sothey can

open is the right mix. It's a challenge at a time when the number

of applicants toer places has surged in the way it has in the last few

years. We want your free school to open, Michael Gove will want your

free school to open. Where there are problems are places around the

country, we'll do our best to fill them up. It's always a challenge.

The annual round of applications, I know as a constituency MP over 13

years is the most difficult thing the community deals with. There's

never a simple answer. All the Government and local authorities can

do is to do their best with the help of parents groups like yourselves

and free school movements, we can meet the short-term needs but create

something that's vibe ant and help raise standards.

-- vibrant. Should you have to send your child toll a school that you

don't choose? Well, I used to live in Southend and applied for foyer

different school place force my son in Superior Court end on sea and got

the third school place on my list which was about three-and-a-half

miles away and would have pose add massive problem for me as a then

single parent walking my son to school or getting the bus every

morning. I don't live in south end, my son has a place in a local school

thank God after a lot of harassing phone calls. Should your child have

to go to a school you don't choose, if it was that or not send your

child too school at all, I would ask about your responsibility as a

parent, would you send your child to a different school? I went tot the

not ideal school that my parents didn't really want to send me to and

I think I turned out all righted, I'm on Question Time, you know!

APPLAUSE I only got four GCSEs.

Kirstie Allsopp. Jack and I are the only people on this panel that

didn't go to university. I went to ten different schools and I'm on

Question Time. Neil Hamilton. Were you expelled

nine times 1234 Never expelled. I'm interesting to hear Tristram say

he's in favour of free schools where needed but who is he to decide what

the needs are. Surely it's the parents and the children. It's

public money. ALL SPEAK AT ONCE

That's been the fault of the British education system in my lifetime

actually, the that parents for too long have been excluded virtually

from the process and what Michael Gove is doing at the Department for

Education is a breath of fresh air and it's part of the answer to the

problem. The woman there, very, very quick

point? I was part of the education panel at Hertfordshire County

Council for four years and I have great sympathy for the South West

Hertfordshire people. Actually, the truth is, in a lot of cases, people

have to get their children into a school that they didn't chewth

choose, but actually they are very good. There was one in Hemel

Hempstead, it's a fantastic school but people don't want it because

historically it wasn't good so people need to give the schools a

bit of slack really. OK. We've got to stop.

Our hour is up. If you stay with BBC One and come with me in a moment to

election nights studio, we'll have the beginning of the results from

the local elections. As for Question Time, next week we are going to be

coming from inside the new Terminal 2 at Heathrow Airport. Piers Morgan

and Joey Barton, the footballer, are going to be on our panel.

I don't know who else we'll get to agree to come, but there it is.

The week after the that, we are going to be the n Llandudno in

Wales, so Heathrow or Llandudno, your choice. Apply via the website.

My thanks to the panel and to all of you who came to take part in the

programme in Radlett. See you begin, I hope, in five minutes' time. Bye.

This summer, BBC TWO takes a look at the Brazilian superstars

See what life is really like in the favelas.