12/06/2014 Question Time

welcome to Question Time. Good evening to you at home, to our

audience who will be putting the which the panel do not know until

they hear them. Conservative Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan

Smith, Labour boss Mac Shadow Welfare Reform Minister, Chris

Bryant, Liberal Democrat MP for Wells in Somerset, Tessa Munt, Salma

Yaqoob, who heads the stop the War campaign in Birmingham and Leeds

Hands Off Birmingham Schools, and the editor of Private Eye, Ian

Hislop. Alistair Webster is the first

question. Should Britain follow Barack Obama's lead and keep all

options open on Iraq? Iain Duncan Smith. This is a very dangerous and

difficult situation, with ISIS having moved across from Syria into

northern Iraq, into most soul, and further south, even taking the oil

refinery. I understand they have been held in check by the Iraqi

Armed Forces for the moment. I do not know quite what other

developments. This is a hugely difficult problem that has come out

of the back of the fighting in Syria, which has conditioned and

trained these soldiers to such an extent that they feel they can take

these bits of territory with impunity. It is a problem not just

for Iraq but for all of us, because I worry about the others that live

in Iraq, in the Borders, and also some of those in the autonomous

regions. For us, it is a problem of what we should and can do. I think

the Foreign Secretary, William Hague, has made pretty clear that we

do not intend to take any physical activity, to go in with boots on the

ground. That is essentially not going to happen. But I think where

Barack Obama is right, I think it is a fact that we need to give whatever

support we possibly can to this democratic and elected government in

Iraq. And if we don't show that in some form or another, and I don't

know quite what assistance they need, as they do have a large armed

force, and it is question of getting it doubly organised and led, but the

key thing is that we need to assure them and others in the region that

we will support this government in trying to re-stabilise this and

drive out that terrorist group. It is dangerous not just for Iraq, but

has the potential to destabilise the whole region, if a group of, as it

were, insurgent terrorists is able to take over a section of land and

hold it, it will encourage others to do much the same and we may see a

complete change in many of the Borders. When the Foreign Secretary

says we will support the United States in anything they decide to

do, does he mean that literally? If they decide on drones to attack, the

government would support it? Support does not mean you will do exactly

what they do. It means that if they want to make some effort to try to

help and support the Iraqi government. But you would agree with

anything that Obama decided to do? He is saying that we support their

endeavours to ensure they support the democratically elected

government in Iraq. If we do not now show and demonstrate that they have

support, whatever support is necessary within limitations, and

neither of them have said they will put soldiers on the ground, but it

is vitally important that this group does not succeed in so destabilising

Iraq now that you end up with terrorist activities, people being

harassed, beheaded, dealt with in some of these cities in some of the

brutal ways they have been doing in Syria, this cannot be allowed to

happen in Iraq. We have a reason and right to try to support this

democratically elected government and to get it stable. I know it does

not sound easy and the country here in Britain and others do not want to

get involved in further wars, and neither do we. But in this case, we

need to give them whatever assurance and support they need because what

is at stake here is an attempt by people to take over the country

against a democratically elected will of the public. We must stand

with the democratically elected government of Iraq. Salma Yaqoob. If

proof were needed about how disastrous the intervention in Iraq

was, today's news is proof of that. This is not just about Syria. The

roots of this takeover and the only point I would agree with Ian to Mike

probably is that this is a very, very dangerous group. -- I would

agree with Ian tonight. They now have their eyes set on Baghdad.

Let's not forget how this has come about. It is because the

democratically elected government is actually led by deeply sectarian

people, like Malachy, -- Nouri al-Maliki. The poor people are stuck

between two things. One, an Iraqi army who they do not trust, who

should be defending them against these jihadists. At the same time,

fearing the jihadists, who do have a very extreme and violent approach.

That is a description. The question is whether Britain should support

the American president and keep options open. I don't think

President Obama knows what he's going to do. It is so confusing. In

Syria, they are backing the very people they are fighting in Iraq. So

for them to expect hacking when they do not know what they are doing

themselves, and they have two -- they have to take full

responsibility. They should accept that the intervention in Iraq, not

only was it $1 trillion being wasted, thousands of American lives

and hundreds of British lives lost, and 100,000 Iraqis, the fires that

you started then, there is no Al-Qaeda in Iraq. There is Al-Qaeda

in Iraq now. APPLAUSE

. You voted for the war in Iraq. Both

Iain Duncan Smith and I did. That is why they are desperate to say that

Iraq has nothing to do with it. At least own up to that. I have not

said anything yet. One of the disastrous mistakes made, whatever

you think about going in in the first place, one of the big mistakes

made by American and British forces in Iraq was that we decided to

dismantle the security forces, the police and the army, because we said

it was run by Saddam Hussein's allies, and what that created was a

terrible power vacuum. Actually, you saw the collapse of law and order in

the country. Of course, it has been very difficult to bring back police

and security services that can ensure security in the country at

the moment. Yes, you are right in one sense, that we do bear a degree

of responsibility. I think in this country, of course it is in our

interests that there should be a secure country there, and that ISIS

should not prevail. But I think, when you bear in mind the 179

British servicemen and women who died in Iraq, that the threshold for

our possible intervention is very, very high in the public mind. That

is to say, I think most people in this country would say, just as

Robert Gates, incidentally, has already said to Clinton, as I

understand it, the former Defence Secretary in the United States of

America, that we would need our heads examining if we were to be

thinking about putting Western troops in the field at the moment in

Iraq. The White House apparently tonight said that Obama is not

considering boots on the ground, that is not what he is talking

about. What did British servicemen and women die for? This is not the

democratic Iraq which we were told was worth the sacrifice. Let's stick

to the point. That is the point. You are all describing the situation

since we invaded Iraq. The question is what should happen now, in the

crisis tonight, whether Britain should support Obama in anything he

chooses to do. I don't think Britain should support America in anything

she chooses to do. We have a foreign policy of our own. We have to act

with our allies and to try and make sure, primarily through diplomatic

means and so on, that there is a secure Middle East. This is not just

an issue, Ian is right, not just an issue about Iraq, but about Syria

and the whole area. But I think that nonetheless the line that Robert

Gates is said to have said to Obama, namely that you would have to have

your heads examining if you were really thinking about putting troops

on the ground in Iraq at the moment, is right. The man on the right. I

think Chris is absolutely right. We really are at a very high level of

need to get troops on the ground. I don't think, frankly, after 2003 and

everything that happened, I don't think the people in this room all

the country will stand for it for a very long time. You asked this

question. You don't think anything should be done. I would not say that

nothing should be done, but I think it has to get far beyond where we

are tonight for the British public to accept our Armed Forces going in

on the ground again. Ian Hislop. The problem is we had a vote over Syria

in the House of Commons, and I think problem is we had a vote over Syria

with the support of the British people we said, we are not going in

again. We do not know who we are supporting, it is too confused and

we have no idea what we are doing. This has spilt over. Our record in

Iraq is not glorious and people laughing king, why on earth would we

do this again? You talk about destabilising the region. It is

pretty unstable. What we are witnessing is something horrific.

You say what should we do. The answer is that we are not going to

do anything. We laid off 1000 troops this morning.

APPLAUSE .

The British Army is not going to be going in. The only power that can do

anything in this place is America. It is entirely up to them whether

they do anything or not, but given what happened last time, most people

will think we are not going to help by going in. Would we help by

providing armaments, as the Americans have been doing? What

happened with the Iraqi army is that we gave them the armaments and they

ran away and left them behind, so they are now in the hands of the

jihadists. There is this huge stretch of land which a small army

of jihadists talk. Everyone said the Iraqi army was trained and we could

leave now. We said that because we wanted to get out. They are

obviously incapable of defending the country. It is a mess, and I despair

at the idea that we will do something, because we want. -- we

will not. Firstly, I would say it does not seem we have been asked if

we would like to intervene. I do not think there is any stomach for any

intervention of that sort. If we go back to the Syrian vote last

September, the whole point was that we were not going to make the

situation any better by bombing people, or supplying arms. I think

it is absolutely mad to think we might escalate. The other thing that

happened as a result of the Syrian vote was that actually, for once, we

led America. It was at that point that Obama started considering

talking to Congress about whether Congress was going to go ahead with

this. And I think France as well. The National Assembly started to

consider whether they ought to be consulted. Actually, Putin seized

the opportunity because in the end we ended up voting for nothing. We

decided not to decide anything. I was opposed to military action in

Syria. I would not have voted for military action in Syria, mainly.

Tessa has made an important point that, for once, the democratic will

of the people of this country was represented in Parliament. That

showed the influence of the anti-war movement who were sidelined at the

time, that all those people who came out and marched and felt the moral

is, the impact was made now, because people know the appetite is not

there, for the right reasons. If ordinary people got it right, we

have to ask why did the political elite get it so wrong?

APPLAUSE And this would apply even if there

was the possibility or the threat of Baghdad falling equally to ISIS?

If it was the case that military intervention was something that was

going to help, of course, if it was about saving lives, genuinely, there

may be an argument. But what we have seen in reality, not an academic

argument, we have seen we had an intervention and it did not result

in a democratic, plural estate, great equal society. Sectarian

tensions have been unleashed, the genie is out of the box. It is not

as unpleasant as... You should redirect your energies somewhere

else. The jihadists are a threat to everybody, right. This is not going

to be solved by America or Britain, but in the region. It has to be in

Iran, Saudi Arabia. Ironically, I predict now that people will say, we

might need Assad to control those extremists. This is how messy the

situation is, and we cannot pretend we do not have a direct

responsibility. I would not leave the future to Assad, which is where

your argument leads. I am talking about real politic, the fact that he

was going to control these people, you able to fight back. I am not any

support of Assad, but I am talking about the fact that the rebel forces

were at one time being armed by our government. And now it is coming

back. At a really high level. It has to be

done at a reasonable level. Now the sectarian violence has been

unleashed we have to bring the region together. The man in yellow

up there. Then I will come to you. Why does the panel believe the

troops that we trained have dropped their weapons and run off? Iain

Duncan Smith. There was quite a good piece on the BBC today about what

was going on around Mosul. And, a lot of the problem is not just that

they turned and ran, because the the confusion was that a lot of them

simply did not want to engage in firing and shelling their own

people. There was a real problem about their morale at that stage.

Since then, they have been able to be stabilised and

Since then, they have been able to be stabilised now they know what

they are fighting. The problem was, they were simply, for some reason

or, I do not know, completely unprepared for what crossed the

border and came at them. I want to second this. The talk about whether

the British will put boots on the ground. That I do not believe will

happen. There is enough boots on the ground. The Iraqi army numbers a

million people. How do you help them to restabilise their position? What

help do they need to get so they can start to drive the people back. They

don't need us as soldiers to enter the ground. What they do need is, if

necessary, financial support. They will need support in munitions, I

don't know. The point is, this, whatever else you say, by the way,

whatever else its failings, as Churchill said, this is at least an

elected government. If we do not support somehow, I do not mean - one

second, you had a long say. Ian is right, no way we will put boots on

the ground. For all their failings this was an elected government. We

need to stand by them in some way or another, otherwise what comes after

that. We are being given here is some terrible imposition of people

who do not allow women to go to school. Who do not want them to have

the vote. Who make them sit-in places they don't want to be,

prepared to torture and brutalise people. If that is what we would

rather see in Iraq, you can count me out. For all it is failings I think

we to support this democratically-elected government.

APPLAUSE You had your hand up. Do you want to

speak? It's important when you consider intervention to see what

the vested interests would be. The last time we intervened we thought

there were vested interests with intervention in Iraq. This time we

see it as a right of care. We see concerned refugees I think we should

intervene with the support of America, not militarily. The back at

the back. There is no appetite for war, surely there is no appetite to

stand back and watch these things happen. Maybe support

avoid troops on the ground later. Nobody wants to go to troops on the

ground. What support Nobody wants to go to troops on the

to see? Financial Nobody wants to go to troops on the

for - For the government? Is I agree. We bomb them from the air,

don't go in from the ground, afterwards it falls apart and the

sectarian groups attack each other and we just watch.

APPLAUSE You, sir. The problem is the borders are

all in the sir. The problem is the borders are

put there by the league of nations, Iraq shouldn't be a country as it

is. So many, as we have heard, different groups there. Kurdistan is

another one, I hear people who work with me who say, "I'm a Kurd from

Kurdistan" that is not there at all. These borders were put up years ago

they shouldn't be where they are. You will not accept their redrawing

by ISIS? I would totally agree with you on that. Look at what happened

historically, we should learn from history, should we not? This

country, when it was running its Empire drew lines on the map of all

sorts of parts of the world and took no account of people and the way in

which people moved or grazed their animals or faith. What happened with

the war in Iraq, there was a civil war. We intervened. And, we did our

bit and pieces. We did not plan, at all, really, for adequate - We

intervened first then there was a civil war. Sorry. Yes. It has never

been a happy situation, has, it between Sunnis and Shias. We are

back to the situation where we have civil war, the

back to the situation where we have adequate. You sir on the right

there. I can recall the advice to the President before the invasion he

said, "if you go into Iraq again it will be like a mammoth going into a

tar pit." Politicians waited for a second time. They didn't give a damn

about the foot soldiers and my comrades who had to go there. Now

the mess that is created by our comrades who had to go there. Now

have taken place. You sir, three along. As

have taken place. You sir, three borders have been moved so many

times within the region, there are so many tribes, ethnic groups that

are completely alien to each other. We have the modern time of

are completely alien to each other. modern weapons, there is one thing

that you haven't discussed at all, it's crude oil. We have not

discussed oil. You, sir, it's crude oil. We have not

discussed oil. in the yellow shirt. Two of you. I will go to you. I

served in Basra with the RAF. Politicians start wars, not

soldiers. The politicians need to read the history books and learn

from history and their mistakes. You served in Basra? I did. What do you

make of what is happening now? Like history repeating itself. It really

is. Does it make you despair of what happened before? Is I'm proud of my

country. I'm proud of my service to my country. You know but the Iraqis

have to help themselves. You canle only help them so far. OK.

APPLAUSE -- can only help them so far. We

have a number of other questions to get through. You can join in the

debate, text Twitter: A question from Avril Wright,

please. Will Michael Gove's spot checks in schools eliminate

extremism? Will Michael Gove's spot checks eliminate extremism, Ian

Hislop? Well, I hope so. It was an unedifying spectacle, two members of

the Cabinet blaming each other for a problem that is fairly serious.

Luckily, Ofsted have gone in. They have put in their reports, 21

schools, five of them are in special measures, 11 need improving. There

is evidence there they found extremely worrying. Yes, something

needed to be done. It is being done. The evidence there is worrying of

that sort of fundamental attempt to take over schools. What was the

evidence? Lots of words were used, what was the evidence? The evidence

was a culture of fear, intimidation, segregation going on, curriculum

which was not allowing for biology, girls doing music, drama. There is a

huge amount of it - Teachers were being - 20-odd whistleblowers who

got gagging clauses who complained. The idea it is a political puttup

job. The council received 200 complaints about these schools from

parents and teachers. No-one did anything at all until it blew up we

watched the Cabinet throwing chunks of blame at each other. It's not - I

don't think we should be distracted by that story. Something was going

badly wrong. Your movement is called Hands Off the Schools. Let's have

local accountability to have these schools take the same line as

schools in all the rest of the country. That's the sort of

schooling that I think works and stops extremism coming in.

APPLAUSE I said at the beginning you headed a

new movement called Hands Off Birmingham Schools, what is your

reply S-I agree schools should reflect the local accountability.

The one that is have been put into special measures were academies.

They were actually governed from Whitehall. All this blame gamesome

very unedifying. The most important point - I'm from Birmingham. I have

gone into Park View School, met with the teachers and the staff and the

parents. One thing that has not been really banged on about, which is

really important, the whole thing was this Trojan Horse letter, which

was found to be faked. The whole thing was about an extremist plot -

It's not fake. Of course they were looking for it. There was ant plot.

There was a badly organised attempt by lots of individuals. So what!

There was no extremism found. That is not true. That is not what they

said. Simply not what they said. They are two separate reports. They

did not find What do extremism. You call extremism? People worried there

was security issues a threat to this country. People are having -

Extremism is different to terrorism. There was clearly instances of

extremism. Nobody found any plots to mount some kind of terrorist attack,

definitely. Indeed. I think the very fact, for instance, that girls and

boys were treated differently in some of these schools is a sign of

extremism. We shouldn't put up with that in British schools.

APPLAUSE I think that there is - Hold on a

second. Can you answer exactly what Chris Bryant said. Do you think

there was a problem in any of these schools that needed any attention?

I'm sure there were governance issues, as there are with any large

organisations. I had people come to me to talk about the fact they had

felt intimidated. Yes, these issues need to be addressed. Let us not

talk it through the lens of extremism - Sorry. Please, the

schools have been smeared here. They have actually challenging through a

judicial review. The segregation question was in PCE not in lessons.

There were a group of pupils with special needs - I'm sorry. I will

bring you in. What is it you - you said there was a problem. What is

the problem before Ian replies? Governance issues What do you mean

by "governance issues" If there was a white middle-class area they would

have been called "pushy parents" the impression across the country in

Birmingham there were Muslim parents trying to get faith through the back

door. The reality is this - I want to hear the answer to that. What is

the objection that you have on the way things were being done? They

don't want a faith school. They are happy - Sorry. You must come to the

point. It's not fair. What is it - It's not fair on the schools that

have been - You have said there was a problem. All I'm asking you...

What was the problem? What do you think the problem was? I'm telling

you, Park View, Sikh gentleman is the principal. Assistant principal

is an abg Nossic. How can accuse this school - There is no problem?

In terms of the cultural isolation - What is the problem? The schools

were outis standing, not just because of the high academic

results, they are socially inclusive. Christmas was never

banned. No, no, sorry. You had a chance. Have you been to the schools

or talked to the teachers? No Ofsted inspectors went in. Did

APPLAUSE Iain Duncan Smith. You said there

was something wrong. I gave you a chance to answer. You now say there

is nothing wrong. Iain Duncan Smith. The issues were not about extremism.

Governance issues. Ian, when he started, was absolutely right. The

purpose of having an organisation like Ofsted is that they are

independent of politicalcle intervention - They are not

independent now? I'm sorry. They are independent they do not take their

direction. They were asked to take - Why did they do - Do me a favour.

They went and looked at these schools they did not find they were

all wrong. That is the point. There were six schools, four that were

academies and two under local authority educational control. In

those six schools they have felt there was enough intimidation of

governors, of the head teachers, and of things happening and practice

happening in those schools that led them to believe there was a danger

of those children in those schools being conditioned in a way that was

not in line with how schools should operate. They are not faith schools.

If they wanted to be faith schools they should have applied for faith

schools. There are special checks over faith schools. They did not

have this. This is organising it through the back door. It was right

to send Ofsted in. It's right Ofsted made their decision. There was a

problem, extremism. There was a problem in these schools am we have

have to stand by it. No matter what you say about those schools those

letters from 200 parents show many, many people out there were very

worried. We were right to act. good argument to just get rid of

faith schools altogether? I have a problem with the fact that

Ofsted went into Park View School two years ago and found it to be

outstanding and inclusive, and now they are finding it inadequate for

reasons of inclusion and the potential extremism. You don't think

things can change in two years. I think Ofsted is being used as a

political football by Michael Gove. They go in and do what they are told

by Michael Gove. I would also like to observe that the whole system has

been set up such that unelected, unaccountable trusts now run these

schools, if they are academies. It is a recipe for corruption, cronyism

and Watt two of them are local authority schools, but Park View

Educational Trust now runs three schools. It is basically controlled

by four people who, when one of them will leave, they will appoint their

own replacement. It is a corrupt system, it is corruptible. We need

to change it and bring local authorities back into the move and

make schools accountable once more. APPLAUSE

. I am not sure local authorities are

necessarily the answer. I am open to that suggestion. The local

authorities failed in this particular case to pick up and deal

with the problems identified. But they have no power any more, having

been taken out of the loop by Michael Gove and your government. I

think there should be some sort of local accountability. The situation

here is that the children in this area have been failed, abysmally.

They have been failed by the governors, by the school, the local

authority, and actually the system, to a degree. I think one of the

problems is that Michael Gove's plan was that any school that had an

outstanding report would automatically not be inspected for

five years, and a good report would mean no inspection for three years.

That is Paton three rubbish. What needs to happen is clearly these

children, all children in this country, if the tax involved in

funding their education, they are entitled to a full curriculum and

they should not be excluded. There should be no segregation. There are

so many problems that have come out of this. I have the Ofsted letter

here and it is packed with problems. It showed that staff were

marginalised and forced out. So many different things happened. But the

safeguarding issue that you were not happy to identify, it seems to me

that what it said in this letter is that pupils, nobody felt pupils were

safe from the risk of radicalisation. What schools are

for, surely, is for children to be prepared for the reality of life and

work in our society. And it seems highly likely that the children in

Birmingham, and this very small area, the five schools that have

been identified, four of which might have their funding taken away, if

that was to happen, we would have 3000 pupils in an area that is in a

two mile corridor of one mile whip. Where would those children go to

school? This is not actually a new problem. The idea of schools

teaching dangerous ideas was brought up when we first introduced

education for everyone, and we had a debate about whether they should

learn the state religion of Anglicanism, or the basics of each

faith and freedom to choose. Since then, we have had a system to check

and make sure they are not being indoctrinated. And the system will

work if it is allowed to work. If we have people getting hysterical and

worried, it will not be allowed to work and to do the job it was made

to do, which is to prevent our schools being destroyed by

extremists. I have an ancillary question. Michael Gove has spoken

about teaching British values in schools. Do these really exist? This

goes to the heart of what extremism may be and what Tisch values may be.

-- British values. I would like to answer the first question of whether

Michael Gove's spot checks will do the job. I completely agree that we

have had over 100 years of being able to run schools in a way where

faith may be taught but nobody is indoctrinated. Of course, that

should be a fundamental principle and the British value of the way we

run education. We all want to know not only that our own children but

our nephews and nieces and the children of everybody in the street

and town where we live are getting the best possible education that we

are all paying for. My anxiety is that Michael Gove's policy has

basically meant, by creating these free schools and encouraging so many

to become academies, you now have a large number of schools in the

country for whom there is nobody to go to if you are complaining about

the headteacher and the governors. The only person you can go to his

Michael Gove. And I don't think you can run 4000 schools from a desk in

Whitehall. APPLAUSE

. And Ian just says, and you all

applauded, but Ian said that we were right to act. Yes, it was good that

some action was eventually taken but the Department for Education,

Michael Gove and his team were informed of this in 2010 and did

nothing for years. The reason we have ended up having this are

unhelpful row about whether extremism is involved is because

Michael Gove and Theresa May had a battle between each other which went

on in an unseemly way for weeks and weeks, and neither of them took

action when it should probably have been done. Of course there should be

a system of local accountability, because local people, on the whole,

will have a better idea. That is why I believe you should have in every

area a director of school standards, who makes sure, as that gentleman

says over there, that the fundamental British value, that it

is not wrong to be devout, Conservative, to have Conservative

views, but it is wrong to separate girls and boys in class, to put

girls at the back of the class, or to treat girls -- to treat girls

differently in school. Why'd you call it an unhealthy row? It is

unhealthy to have one member of Cabinet briefing against another.

You wanted Salma Yaqoob to be quiet while you were speaking. You should

offer the same courtesy to others. In the 1980s, my sister was a

teacher at a comp and seven Birmingham and one of the main

problems was that Muslim boys did not want to be taught by females.

The girls were removed from class, not allowed to do dancing, swimming

or any of those things. This has been going on for a long time. We

have not acted much over it. It is perfectly reasonable to try to take

some action now. I am actually against any faith school being

funded by taxpayers money. I am not here to advocate for more faith in

schools. For example, there is a Jewish orthodox school in Stamford

Hill. What would you say to the fact that Ofsted inspectors, female

inspectors, are told they have to cover themselves, not allowed to

wear colours, especially red, and yet they are funded by the state? A

Catholic school had a successful applicant to take over as head

teacher and was told, because you are not married and are in a

relationship, you cannot be the headteacher. If they are privately

funded, fine, have your religious views, but do not impose them. All

schools in this country, whether privately or publicly funded, need

to operate at the same set of standards because that is about one

of the British values we have. But that is not happening. We should be

treated equally under the law. Our education system, privately or

publicly funded, should enhance people's ability to prosper. These

things were not happening in Birmingham, but they are happening

in other faith schools. The man in the third row from the back. On the

point about how effective Ofsted can be, I think in general it does work,

but when there is this culture of fear, it is an extreme case. A story

has come out about someone wanting to approach Ofsted but being so

scared they had to do it in a supermarket car park. Something is

clearly wrong with that system of governance. Chris, while it is fun

to lash out at the coalition, surely it is the Labour run City Council

who should have it is the Labour run City Council

long time ago. Let's come to it is the Labour run City Council

illuminated by the voters of Newark. Is the result of the Newark

by-election the end of the Lib Dems? Who

by-election the end of the Lib Dems? Chris Bryant. Look, they did very

poorly. They didn't even come fourth or fifth, but six, behind the

candidate standing about the closure of the Newark hospital. It was

interesting that although David Cameron visited the constituency

four times in the by-election, he did not visit the hospital where he

closed the Accident Emergency in 2011, and we know why. It was

interesting in Newark because historically a lot of people have

voted Liberal, rather than Liberal Democrat, in Newark. I met a lot of

them who were now going to vote Labour. I met some who were going to

vote UKIP, actually. I think many of them felt let town because they felt

vote UKIP, actually. I think many of Democrat all those years, they were

voting for a fundamentally different style of doing politics. And in the

end, the classic instance that was brought up time and again was

tuition fees. The party went into the last general election

tuition fees. The party went into troubled them. We now know

tuition fees. The party went into senior figures in Nick Clegg's team

knew senior figures in Nick Clegg's team

scrapping Jewish and fees. senior figures in Nick Clegg's team

when people start to go, frankly, so you would not be able to go into

coalition with them at the next election because he would not be

able to trust them? I love you, David. In my mind, the real

opponents are not the Liberal Democrats. The real opponent is over

there, the Conservatives, the people who have made this country a place

where 2 million people need food bank hand-outs. It is not fast as

other parties to talk about the Liberals. I will leave Tessa to talk

about her own party. If you don't want to talk about it, don't. But

you have to answer the question. You can't just talk about Tory party

policy. You could defend them! I am going to defend them now. But let me

get to that at the end, if you don't mind. I will not go on as long as

Chris. I want to say very simply that we won the by-election, and I

have to say we were told by lots of people that UKIP would sweep us away

and this would be a major success for UKIP. We won by a larger amount.

I am enormously pleased because a huge amount of effort went into it.

You ran the Labour campaign and it is one of the worst results of any

by-election Labour has fought. You went Aqua 's. You don't half talk

rubbish sometimes. I delivered leaflets in the

constituency because I wanted my candidate to win. You are both

creating space for the Liberal Democrats. Stop it! You for they

campaign and Labour went Aqua 's. -- they went backwards. You are a

walking advert for UKIP. One thing is for sure, there will not be a

coalition after the election between us! A tough decision was taken by

the Liberals to join the coalition at the beginning. They did it, as my

party did, for the sake of the country, to try to make sure we got

the deficit down and the economy going. All that I can say is that,

yes, the Liberals have taken a pretty heavy hit for some of that.

But I think and hope, I don't know and I still want to win in the seats

in which they oppose us, but I will say this for our coalition

colleagues. I think people will look back and say, we took a disastrous

economy that had crashed and got it moving again, got people going back

to work. Things are not perfect but they are much better than they

were. Tough decisions were taken and they played their part in that. I

want a Conservative government elected, but I think they should

take some credit. Douglas Alex -- Danny Alexander. There was an away

day he didn't invite you to. I don't remember him saying this. What? I

saw something on a website earlier - You could become the largest party

in British politics by 2025? You never know. That is very optimistic

view, I suspect. Over optimistic, do you think? Possibly, yes. Is it the

end of you I don't think so at all, actually. I think, very gallant of

you to say we have taken a hit. No question of that, for going into

coalition with the party who I have spent most of my political life

opposing, I'm afraid much we did that for the good of the country.

Had to do that. I would just remind you that Liberals all over the place

have said we will work with people. We do. We worked across councils we

have worked with both parties. If we got to the point, after the election

where we said, no, sorry, which don't want to have power. Who are

the Liberals that are abandoning you in places like Newark? Well, Newark

was not one of our top hotspots, I have to say. European elections? If

you look at what happened in the council elections... Yes, where we

have MPs, actually we did rather well. If you take Nick Clegg's

constituency, he got 38%, everybody else got lower. We bring our own

particular brand of, I think, care to the coalition. That... We have

made absolutely certain there are things we have stopped and things we

have done. I put into the frame the stuff about tax thresh holds. That -

that was something that Mr Cameron said, right up prior to the

election, it was absolutely mad - Can I ask you a question. No. Ask

you a little question. No, you can't. I want to bring that man in

there. He has had his hand up for so long it will fall I think off. , in

answer to the person's question, I don't care if it is the end to the

Liberal Democrats, good riddance to you for going into coalition with

people like Iain Duncan Smith who is systemically taking down public

services in this country and destroying people's lives. I would

say this. Just as a last point. One more point. That if people really

care about politics in this country, really care, then they should turn

up in London, on Saturday 21st June with the People's Assembly against

Austerity and show the political elite and the political class, that

are sat around that table, there is more to life than your grubby

politics and and your austerity. All right. Ian Hislop. I have to say, I

mean the fate of the Liberals will be up to the electorate. The reason

there was a coalition was because nobody won. Not the people you

support, not him. There was an undecided vote. There had to be a

coalition. The Liberals have been. They have been unpopular because

they were largely a protest vote. The protest vote was, up until the

Newark by-election taken over by UKIP. I think, in the words of the

Guardian we have seen "peak UKIP" it may be be that protest vote people

have thought, we have done that vote. They have two policies. We

know what they are. They keep telling us - drink more, smoke. Not

true! Immigration and leave Europe. You can't really have them in as a

government. You need people with other policies. I have a feeling

UKIP's protest vote will decline. Come the next election, whatever

happens, the Liberals will recover somewhat. The one slight worry is

that they will try one of those other botched coups we will end up

with someone you have have never heard of by mistake as leader when

Nick Clegg leaves. Just a warning! Do you feel part of the Lib Dems

decline is their stance on Europe claiming to be the party of "in"

maybe people don't want that? People in this country, 13 million people,

who are now below the poverty line. One million people in one of the

richest countries in the world face the indignity of relying on food

banks. My full-time job is mental health. I have seen how people have

become suicidal. I have had to counsel people who lost their loved

ones who said they didn't want to be a burden on their own families

because the support has been taken away. These are real issues. It has

been done in the name of austerity. We had this drive of people being

called "scroungers" half the people on benefits are pensioners - You

answer your own questions. Yes. The wages are not paying enough. Did you

say 30 million - 13 million. I'm sitting next to Iain Duncan Smith

who quite happily labels the poor people as "scroungers." I have never

labelled them as scroungers. When you claim ?39 for a breakfast -

Honestly - You have taken taxpayers' money that is what I call

scroungers. What a load of nonsense. OK. You had a chance to answer the

question in point. You have supported Iain Duncan Smith's

bedroom tax. Your party has in parliament. You voted for it every

single time. Now you have said you in the general election you will

have a manifesto pledge to get rid of the bedroom tax. Can you help us

get rid of it now? Absolutely. You will. I vote with the Government

because I'm a loyal member of the Government. If it comes to

something... Forgive me, there are a number of changes that we need to

make. There are certain things - take, for example, in my area -

Bedroom tax. Will you vote against it? You introduced the same thing

when you were in power - That is a lie. You introduced the fact that

people could not have spare room for private-sector - We did not do it

respect row spectively, which is what you did. That is the cruelty.

It was first introduced in 1989 by a Conservative Government. You

introduced. People are paying ?14 a week. Rewriting of history.

introduced. People are paying ?14 a entitled to our manifesto as we

approach the next general election. What we have

approach the next general election. problem somebody, I can't remember

which one of you, sorry, problem somebody, I can't remember

the fact about tuition problem somebody, I can't remember

reality is, if we had lot are in favour of tuition fees,

you lot are in favour of tuition lot are in favour of tuition fees,

fees, we weren't going to form the whole Government

fees, we weren't going to form the that. We have

fees, we weren't going to form the realistic. Want rid of the bedroom

tax next year, you could vote to get rid of it. Let's take another

question. I hope it's not on the bedroom tax. It's from Robert Loads.

It's Jermaine to this community. A fascinating Should parents point. Be

arrested because their children are overweight? The story behind this.

We can't name, and musn't name the parents or the child. This is an

arrest that was made here in King's Lynn a couple of months back of two

parents on the grounds that their child, five foot high, 11 years old,

weighed 15 stone. The parents were arrested for child

weighed 15 stone. The parents were cruelty. Ian Hislop is it right to

arrest parents because their child is overweight? The police said it

was a joint examiner countries with social services and it was

absolutely last resort. I don't know the circumstances of the case. It's

horrific. The I thought the situation was summed up by one

detail they said - to encourage him to do examiner countries he should

play more games on his Wii machine. More games on a screen. The there

was a piece of fear of machines and more of the screen. It will hit the

health service and mental health. Other problem, last time I was on

this show, there was an argument about attempting to regulate the

manufacturer's of the fizzy drinks, as we are meant to call them, and

those things with a far too much sugar. They have fantastic lobbying

access to this government. They had fantastic lobbying access to the

last Government. The Government never doing anything. This morning

they said, we have to stop this and reduce the sugar levels in these

things. That is the action the Government should take. The police

ariesing two parents because their child is deemed to be overweight? I

don't know the exact circumstances. They said they did it as a measure

of absolute last resort. Maybe that was justified. They have been

released on bail, haven't been charged. Iain Duncan Smith, what do

you think of that. We haven't got much time? As I understand it, again

it was a matter of last resort. It was in conjunction with social

services that - clearly what was happening, the parents were simply

not doing what they (inaudible) I don't know what their problem was. I

don't know if there was difficulties at home. The health of the child was

obviously clearly deteriorating. I guess, as a last resort, you have to

have that process that says you need to step in at some foint protect the

child. You would step in to protect the child if you thought it was

being abused in foreway. You could argue at this point, it was so so

excessive, social services allowed the police to step in to stop the

police. The truth is, I think there was probably reason for this. I

would support it in that case. We have an. Epidemic of obesity. I

accept in this Government we have to do something, like Ian said, doing

something about fizzy drinks and getting people to do more examiner

countries and facing up to the fact we are overweight Assad nation. One

or two of our kids is now obese. Arresting parents I don't think

necessarily is the answer. It sounds in this particular case, I don't

know the full details of, it seems to my mind you want to make sure the

child is protected and well taken care of and educate the parents.

There is a first responsibility is on on us and our families. I look at

the example of smoking. We know that smoking is bad. The Government has

taken steps, for example, not allowing it in public spaces, that

has reduced the illnesses which are linked to smoking. You don't arrest

parents whose children smoke? Exactly. This Government - we want

to do something about it, it is so in awe of the lobbyists when, for

example, our children have breakfasts with 10 spoons of sugar

it's hard for parents to take full responsibility when Government

doesn't do its bit because of the - No. There is plenty of information

about nutrition these days. I do believe that the parents should be

held It can responsible. Become a police matter? Is Absolutely. All

right. You have 30 seconds each. As a last resort the police have to

become involved. At one point he was a 12 stone, and an 8 stone child.

Something could perhaps have been done earlier. The other thing I

would say, free school meals for young children and generally, where

we put kitchens into schools they should be double use and go back to

teaching young people properly how to prepare a good wholesome

nutritions meal. I agree the other thing is food labelling. There is no

shortage of information. I will have to stop you. The single most

important thing is the protection of the child. That should be paramount

over any other consideration. I hope that is what happened in this

situation am we do have an epidemic of obesity and die beet -- diabetes.

So many local authorities are closing swimming pools, sport

centres and youth centres all the places where people might engage in

sport. That will be counter productive. The police knocking on

your door and arresting mother and father, that is all right? You know,

none of us knows the details of what happened - You know that happened?

We know that happened. We don't know what led to that moment. I'm very

reluctant to criticise the police in that We have situation. To stop. Our

time is up. Next week there isn't a Question Time because of the World

Cup. It's Japan against Greece. Really? You laughed, I didn't. I

didn't laugh. It's a week off! After that we are back in Wolverhampton

the following week and Croydon. If you would like to come to

Wolverhampton or Croydon the address is on the screen.

Wolverhampton or Croydon the address is on the screen. And the telephone

number, I always forget unless I read it out: I'm being attacked by a

fly. So are you now. My thanks to the panel here and all of you who

came here to King's Lynn to take part. From the Corn Exchange, until

Thursday week, good night. There is Question Time Extra Time on

BBC Radio 5 Live now. Next on BBC One, This Week.