12/11/2015 Question Time

Welcome, whether you're watching or listening, to our audience here,

Conservative Business Secretary, Sajid Javid.

Labour's Shadow Education Secretary, Lucy Powell.

Managing Editor of The Sun, Stig Abell.

And the writer and campaigner for transgender rights Paris Lees.

If you want to text or tweet, our hashtag is BBCQT,

Text comments to 83981, and press the Red Button to see what

Our first question from Matthew Smith, please. Has David Cameron

said his side 's way too low in his renegotiation of's membership of the

European Union. -- set his sights way too low. He has set his sights

too low, and he has missed, which is the tragic thing for him. The

difficulty he has for Europe, he is leading a bunch of Eurosceptics. The

difficulty for the Labour Party as they are led by a Eurosceptic. The

European situation is too big for British politics. We don't know how

to deal with it. The Tories and Labour are riven by it. Ukip have a

coherent policy but cannot get elected for love nor money. British

politics as it currently stands cannot deal with the European

question. The problem for David Cameron is that what he has set out

to try and achieve will not actually help the central problem on people's

mines, which is how we control immigration in this country. Nobody

is saying immigration is wrong. We are a nation of immigrants, but

people in this country have an entitlement when they look at their

elected representatives to say, you tell me what you believe in terms of

immigration and I will hold you to account on what you then deliver.

And that is absolutely impossible in the current political system. You

think immigration is at the heart of the debate in the referendum?

Nothing else? It is about sovereignty, our place in the world,

but it will boil down to immigration. Not whether immigration

is good or bad but whether we expect our politicians to offer an argument

about whether to control it and to what extent.

APPLAUSE Sajid Javid. The racial chip we have

with the EU today is not won the British people voted for 40 years

ago. -- the relationship. That is why we need fundamental reform. The

EU is on the wrong track. What David Cameron set out this week in more

detail are just the kind of changes that we want to see. For example, as

Business Secretary, I want business to do even better in Britain, to

create more jobs and growth. But we are held back with the EU as it is.

It is holding us back. It is not competitive enough. There is too

much red tape. Did he set his sights too low? No, we have an ambitious

package with four major parts to it. If we achieve that we can

fundamentally change the relationship. The only way we will

get traction and change is because we have called the referendum.

Without a referendum we would not be sitting round the negotiating table

with European partners even having this discussion. It is going to be a

bumpy road. I am not saying it will be easy to get this negotiation

done, but we are on the right track and we can get it done. You, in the

front. What Cameron has asked for is a complete let down, especially on

immigration. When we came here tonight we shut our front door to

stop anyone coming into our house. As a nation, we have left the front

door open to 450 million residents from the EU. Any of those can come

here at any time. Last year, over 600,000 people, and that is just the

official number, came into the UK. We cannot go on like this and the

only way to stop it, the only way to stop it is to ensure we have control

of our borders. The EU will not let us control our borders so the only

way we can do it is to vote to come out of the EU.

APPLAUSE Lucy Powell. I'm afraid I don't

agree with that last sentiment. I will be campaigning for an voting

for Britain to stay in the European Union because I think our membership

of the European Union makes us a more powerful, prosperous and secure

country. I share the frustration is that people have. We do need to

engage in reforming Europe, but reforming Europe should be an

ongoing process, not a one-off event. It should be something we are

demanding and getting and negotiating on and negotiating on an

ongoing basis. But the negotiations David Cameron has set out this week

say more about the negotiations he is having with his backbenchers than

about any real negotiations with Europe. What would you have had that

isn't there? Where he is at fault is that he is playing a high risk game

of roulette with the future of the country. He is unable to show the

leadership we need entering into this campaign about whether we stay

in Europe or not. He is not able to say which side of the fence he will

come down on in the referendum. Sajid Javid is here this evening,

the Business Secretary, supposedly championing British business

interests in the country. The vast majority of British businesses want

to remain in the EU. He is not able to say whether he will be

campaigning for us to stay in or not. This is the British government

only a few months away from one of our biggest decisions as a country,

and they are unable to tell you what they think about it.

APPLAUSE Sajid Javid, perhaps you can pick up

on that point. Do you know which way you will go? You once said you would

not shed a tear if we left the EU. Is that still your view? I think we

need fundamental change. If we don't get change, I think the costs of

staying in outweigh the benefits. That is why we need reform. So you

could see yourself breaking away from the Cabinet and David Cameron?

I can see myself campaigning for reform, which is what I am doing

now. Can you see circumstances where you would break away? I will

campaign for reform and the decision will be made at the referendum. My

decision depends on the final package. As the Prime Minister has

said himself, nothing is off the table. Lucy says that she wants some

reform but we are only having a discussion about reform because we

are having a referendum. Your party did not want a referendum. That is

what you said before the election, and now you seem to want one. We are

having a referendum. You were against it. The negotiating position

on limiting in work benefits was a policy that the Labour Party adopted

ahead of the last election. What is the point of these policies without

a referendum? We were going around Europe as an opposition party, not

the government, and asking other countries in the EU commission if

they would negotiate on such a policy as David Cameron set out.

They were happy to have those conversations. They said, only a

year ago, at that point they had heard nothing from the British

government asking those questions. In opposition, the Labour Party was

having nose, stations before David Cameron was. Just like his manifesto

on benefits, David Cameron's statement on the European Union is

way too vague. I think he is going to use this referendum to destroy

workers rights and give us an option in without the social Charter, or

out, and therefore destroyed workers' rights, which is his and

Sajid Javid's gold. I don't think David Cameron has set

his targets too low. Let's take, for example, immigration. Immigration is

far too high, yes, we know that. But the immigrants, the migrants that

come into the UK, they play their part in society. They do the jobs

that the British people, that a minority of British people do not

want to do. By these reforms we are not bowing down to the European

Union. We are showing that we are Great Britain. We are showing we are

a democratic society. Immigration is too high. But the immigrants that

come into the country, they do work. I have looked at Mr Cameron's four

points. The first one talking about non-Eurozone countries having equal

access to the single market. Second, strengthening national parliaments.

The third, cutting red tape. We have heard it before. Tony Blair was

talking about cutting red tape ten years ago. The fourth point, denying

benefits to EU migrants for four years, it ain't going to happen.

Donald Tusk has said will very difficult. Jean-Claude Juncker,

resident of the EU commission, thinks it breaks EU law. The

president of the European Parliament and announced it within an hour of

Cameron saying it. The real point is what he has not asked for. There is

nothing about reduction of contributions, which are running at

?55 million each day. Nothing on the Common Agricultural Policy, pushing

the price... You said he is not going to get these points, so

presumably you will urge people to vote against. Hang on. What is the

answer to the question? He will try to perform the same trick as Harold

Wilson in 1975. They will get cosmetic changes, come to the

British people and say, isn't it a great victory? There is not gain to

be any harmonisation, no pooling of sovereignty. What happens after

that? We had a single European act which created the single market, we

have a flag, an anthem, the majority of laws made in Brussels. Stop

making a speech, Paul. I know you are used to making speeches. The

bottom line is this. The corn is on. Don't be fooled again like in 1975.

Let's rewrite that wrong. Well done, Paul. Will David Cameron learn a

trick from the SNP and have a second referendum if the first one fails?

Sajid Javid. There will only be one referendum. We need certainty,

business needs certainty and there will be one referendum. Paris Lees.

I feel sad hearing there is so much anti-European Union feeling in the

room, actually. I get it. I get that it is frustrating, the red tape and

everything. And of course there is deadwood that can be cut out with

bureaucrats and God knows who gives them authority or where they get

their budgets from. So, yes, we need to see some change. But I think

there is a more important point, which is that we are taking for

granted what we have got. Have we forgotten what Europe, as it stands

now, replaced. It replaced 300 years of us being at war with one another.

APPLAUSE We almost have the last one ended.

We live in an increasingly globalised world. It may sound

idealistic, but we all have to work together and pull together.

Ultimately, we do need a friend, it is up to the people to decide. I

really hope we decide to stay part of it because I believe in us coming

together and realising we are Europeans and can work for our

common benefit, in the same way that I want Britain to stay together and

I do not want Scotland to leave. I want us to be together, not

separate. APPLAUSE

Paris is right from an idealistic point of view, but Europe has not

solved the problem with Ukraine and Putin's warmongering, has not solved

the refugee crisis. At the time when you expect an organisation like the

EU to say, here are solutions, it has not managed to deliver them.

Russia is being very aggressive to Ukraine. That would not now happen

between Britain and France. That is how it was for hundreds of years. I

don't think that the EU stops wars. We will have lots more on this as

the referendum gets closer. Do you have any idea when it is going to

be? Before the end of 2017. I want to go back to the question. Where do

you stand on this? It was more of a question about the lack of democracy

within the European Union. You think that was the flaw in what Cameron is

suggesting he renegotiate? There is that and the contribution levels,

?12 billion per year, another ?2 billion balance of payments. Back in

1975 when we had a referendum, all of the members had a veto on any

legislation. That has changed in the years since. That would be a key

thing as well for me, it would be a good thing.

Let us go on. We have many questions. Simon Langford has a

question. Before we do that, I should tell you, Belfast, if you are

in Northern Ireland, Belfast next week, Question Time is going to be

there and the week after that, it's in your territory, Manchester. Very

good. Sorry you came here tonight, you can come back to Manchester!

Back to Manchester. Simon Langford's question, please? Was Jeremy

Corbyn's bow at the Remembrance Day parade on Sunday really that

insufficient and disrespectful or are certain factions of the media

using any excuse to bully him? -- APPLAUSE

I guess it's the any excuse to bully him part of the question. Paris

Lees, what do you think? Oh, poor old Jeremy Corbyn! He seems like a

nice guy and Stig I don't think you believe in all the stick you have

been giving him. I don't know, I just think Margaret Thatcher Tony

Blair, we have had some right nutters running the country over the

past 30 years. Jeremy Corbyn stands for peace, people and a fair, more

equal society. Do I believe everything that he stands for - no.

Do I think he's got all the answers - no. But there is no doubt now that

he represents a different way of doing things and I think that's

clear from the fact that there are clearly certain people in

institutions with vested interests in maintaining the status quo who

really don't like Jeremy Corbyn. The Labour Party. So whatever you think

about him. Quite. I think he should be more pragmatic. I'm probably more

New Labour than Jeremy Corbyn if I got invited to a bruvy council I

would probably go. The Queen would have nice tea and cakes and things

so I would go and have a laugh. But I think we've got a question now,

haven't we, you know, we can either keep voting in the same people and

getting the same sort of people and outcomes, or we could try something

different. I don't know, I just think that Jeremy Corbyn seems like

a nice man, the kind of teacher everybody takes the Mick out of when

they start school and then by the end of it everybody loves him so I

don't know, I think he's had a rough deal.

APPLAUSE Lucy Powell, is he being bullied, by

the Labour Party? I think the first thing to remember is what

Remembrance Sunday is all about, it's a time we pay our respects to

those who gave their lives for their country for our country and who

fought for freedoms around the world and lost their life in so doing and

we should never forget what Remembrance Sunday is about. I think

for a national newspaper to politicise such an event in the way

they did with their front-page on Monday was frankly despicable and I

think the people who disrespected the veterans on Remembrance Sunday

was the Sun newspaper and the Sun journalists when they decided to put

together that front-page on Sunday afternoon.

APPLAUSE Stig, your newspaper's quote was

requests pass cyst Corbyn refuses to bow, nod in my name".

Two Labour MPs talked about their view of Jeremy Corbyn. Graham Jones

saying they were not giving sufficient respect so it was a

story, people were talking about it. -- pacifist. You may well take the

view that what he was doing was fine and other people may take the

opposite view. The problem Jeremy Corbyn has is, the reason people are

scrutinising him is that he is in a difficult position when he seeks to

become part of the establishment. He doesn't believe in the monarchy, the

Army, or a deterrent in terms of Trident. He believes the death of

Osama Bin Laden was a tragedy. He's got perfect rites to have those

believes. That's not actually what he says,sth, that's not at all what

he said. It's because of the stances he's said. You may well take the

view what he said was perfectly fine and the way he conducted himself was

perfectly fine. Labour MPs on that day didn't take

that view. He's in an extraordinary position.

APPLAUSE You, Sir? I would like to say that

it's not a case of bullying, it's a case of respect. I noticed it on TV,

compared to everyone else that was doing a decent bow and even I sort

of nod and bow when I see a hearse go by on a daily basis and it's not

bullying at all. What about you on the gangway? Hi,

sorry. It's all right. You make the point about not sufficiently

respectful. Respect is a personal thing. Respect isn't something that

you should have to bow down to some sort of Al mighty respectometer.

Respect should be a total personal feeling. Jeremy Corbyn thinks he

respected sufficiently, that's fine by me.

OK. APPLAUSE

The woman at the very back row. Yes? I wonder why it wasn't covered that

he stayed behind to the end of the procession, didn't go in for a meal

with the other dignitaries to talk to the veterans. He sent a

hand-written brief which was very personal then went on to his own

constituency to attend another memorial service. Do you think he's

being bullied is the point? I think he's being vilified, bullied and the

Murdoch press is trying to indoctrine ate the rest of the

country into electing another Conservative.

APPLAUSE I'll come to you first in red, here?

I would like to put it to Stig who works for the Sun, how respectful

are you to people many general? I mean, for instance, that photograph

of him at the cenotaph bowing his head, right next to it is the

picture of a scantily dressed woman. How respectful is that? !

It might have gone so far in the other direction now that these

people who're attacking him might be doing Corbyn a favour. He's an

underdog and there is no doubt he's been powered upon, so it will be

interesting to see the effects of this.

Paul Nuttall? I missed the bow. I was at the cenotaph in Liverpool, at

the remembrance service, and I've also missed it because, as you can

guess from my accent, I'm from Liverpool and you very rarely see

the Sun! For obvious reasons... APPLAUSE

Look, this is just a total none-story, let's be frank about all

of this. Whether he bows or not is unimportant. As far as I'm

concerned, you know, I think there's far more worrying things about

Jeremy Corbyn and that's his views on the IRA, his views on Hezbollah

and ham mass, wanting to give the Falklands back to Argentina -- ham

mass. Hamas. And to have the General come out on

the Marr show on Sunday and say he'd be worried if Jeremy Corbyn becomes

Prime Minister, do you know what, so would I, he'd leave us without a

nuclear deterrent and not allow us to sit at the top table in the

world. APPLAUS

Lucy, can we pick up that point. There was a curious moment, because

Nicholas Houghton said he was worried and Jeremy Corbyn said this

was quite improper for a General to say this, and then Labour's own

Shadow Defence Secretary said, I think he was absolutely fine to say

that and she believes it, you know, it's a curious party which is so

divided on such a serious issue? That's not the sequence of events.

Maria responded first and she was on the same TV programme he was. But

look, I think that, I don't happen to share the same view as Jeremy

Corbyn about the maintenance of our nuclear deterrent, I think it's

important that we continue to have that. But I absolutely defend his

right to open up a debate about it. He is a politician, it's not for the

Chief of the Defence stamp and the Head of The Army to go on national

television and talk about Jeremy Corbyn's suitability as Prime

Minister or policy discussions about nuclear deterrent... Test the best

qualified. We live in... We live in an elected democracy where the

people decide through their elected politicians what our policies are

about whether we go to war, about what capabilities we have and need

and what our policies are. It's for the Chief of Defence Staff to carry

out the policies. Is it for you a deal breaker if Jeremy Corbyn would

activate or say whether he'd be prepared to say it's not a deterrent

or not, are you indifferent? It's an incredibly important issue. Which

side are you on, are you in favour of having the deterrent? Yesp How

can you be in a party of someone who is not in favour? The vast majority

of... Perfectly obvious point, but how do you go into an election with

a leader that says he's not if favour of nuclear deterrents with

the party members who say they want them? There is an important debate

to have. You were elected on the mandate. When you were elected not

that long ago you said, as a party, we believe in the Trident deterrent,

now you are a party whose leader says it's not. Imp elected on one

set of beliefs and you are moving away from it or your leader is, and

that's an extraordinary position to be in. The Labour Party, what can

you do, people support him and his policies and we can't ignore it, you

have to respect the fact he's popular and principled whether you

agree with him or not. So Sajid Javid, popular and principled? On

the point about the General, he shouldn't be involved in politics

but this General wasn't. He was pointing out our deterrent works

every second every hour of every day by deterring and if you have

someone... APPLAUSE

If you have someone who wants to be Prime Minister, remember Jeremy

Corbyn is the alternative Prime Minister, that's what he is, so he

should be scrutinised. If you have someone who says I would never press

the button under any circumstances, it's not a deterrent any more. Hang

on, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, the Chief of Defence

Staff by saying what he'd said, it would worry me if that thought was

translated into power, ie I wouldn't use the deterrent, is interfering in

politics. It's not because he's asked a question about if there is

someone that says I'll never press the button, what happens and his

answer is, that it means it's no longer a deterrent. From that point

on, it's no longer a deterrent. It won't deter anyone. Hang on, hang

on, hang on. You are not saying there can't be a Government that

wins an election on a unilateral disarmament? Of course if that's

what the British people vote for. He's not saying that. The point is,

it wasn't a hypothetical debate he was having. This is the live issue

because Jeremy Corbyn's set out a position and so he was Wading into

that debate and that political debate. There was no question of

that, it was a clumsy intervention into politics which is not what he

should be doing, he's the Chief of the Defence Staff. We are not an

Army-run country. One of our most decorated Generals answering a FC

chill question. He was Wading into it. The first duty of the Government

is to protect the people. Therefore I would be concerned if they didn't.

Can you remember the original question, is he being bullies is the

point? There are a lot of things, as you have just seen, that I don't

like about Jeremy Corbyn's views but the bow I think was absolutely fine.

I saw the bow, I didn't think there was any problem with it. This week,

we have heard people saying is he going to kneel in front of the

Queen, is that disrespectful, I went in front of the Queen a few years

ago, I never thought in my life as a child I would ever get to meet the

Queen never mind join the Privy Council, I almost fainted by seeing

her. If someone wants to show that respect in a different way it

doesn't matter as long as they are respectful. A lot of things I don't

like about him but he's respectful. The woman at the very back? I don't

think I say this very often but I whole heartedly agree with Richard

Dawkins in what he said about the Sun headline being scandalous and

shameful. I found it disingenuous to hear Stig trying to defend the

position around the Sun. You in yellow with the hat on? If you are

going back to disrespect, during the actual proceedings, David Cameron

had a poppy photo-shopped on to him earlier in the day and Boris Johnson

was caught talking during the minutes' silence. Both those things

were widely reported. It wasn't widely reported in the same way that

you widely reported Jeremy Corbyn, what a nasty person he is. It's a

horrible way to treat a person and it's not just the Sun, it's a great

many of the national newspapers having a go at him. While I'm

speaking, shut up, right. APPLAUSE

I don't think you can tell a panel member to shut up, but finish your

point. It is not just the Sun, it is the whole Murdoch empire that has

taken against Jeremy Corbyn. It is unfair and it is bullying. If it

happened in the street, you would be arrested. Again, you say the

criticism comes from the Sun, but it came from people in his own party,

from people watching the TV. We reported what people said. On

Wednesday we had David Cameron mocked up as a jelly on the front

page. One of the things the Sun does is try to capture where the debate

is. When it came to Cameron, it is not a plot about Corbyn. We think

Cameron's position on the EU is ridiculous. On tax credits, we think

the Tory party have shamed themselves as a party in their

stance. While we do report on things in a colourful way, we picked up on

what people were saying, people in his party and people watching on

television. APPLAUSE

Carol Hawkins, please. With council budgets cutting social care and

A's struggling, will the NHS fail this winter? We heard it is not

achieving its targets. Sajid Javid. No, it won't. It is going to be

difficult. It has been from any winters now. It will certainly be

challenging. The NHS is one of the most difficult organisations to run,

no matter who is in power. But the one way to make sure it can deal

with these challenges, not just winter, but the growing challenge of

an ageing population, more and more medicine and treatments that we want

the NHS to provide and we all want it to stay what it is, a world-class

service, free at the point of use. We will only do that if we keep

making sure it has enough resources, first of all, and we can only do

that if the economy is strong. That is why we are able to commit it will

get ?8 billion extra every year. Why does it have a deficit of 1 billion

this year? Does not. NHS Trusts have an overall deficit of 1 billion.

Some might have deficits, somewhat have surpluses. It would -- or is

will be challenging. There is not a financial problem as long as we keep

the economy strong. This feedback into, if you keep the economy strong

and prioritise the NHS, you have to make difficult decisions elsewhere.

That is what we have done and that is what will keep the NHS strong.

What are you talking about? The NHS was created when Britain had no

money. We had just been at war and everybody decided to pull together.

It is absolute nonsense. There is -- there was a report last year which

rated Britain's health care top out of 11 western countries. At the

bottom came the US. There are countries like Canada and

Switzerland in there and we came out the best. There is money, we just

need to put it in and make sure it is run properly. The NHS is the best

thing we have in this country. To say we don't have the money and we

have to focus on the economy, we need to focus on the NHS. The money

is there if we want it. I said we prioritise the NHS. How? We only

have the money if we keep the economy strong. That is why we are

the only party at the election that signed up to the Simon Stevens plan

to find efficiencies and keep putting money in. What do you mean

by finding efficiency? Further adding privatisation. You are

running it down. Standards are going down. Simon Stevens says the quid

pro quo of the 8 billion put in was that you find ?22 billion of

savings. Are you finding those with A levels missing their target,

5000 patients in beds who should be discharged, ambulances missing their

targets? It doesn't sound as though it is working. I am the first to

accept the NHS has challenges. Of course it does. When you are trying

to have an organisation with over 2 million employees that is trying to

offer a service free at the point of use, it will. We have a growing

population, greater need all the time. There is no government that

has not had issues with the NHS, but one thing I do know is required is

that it needs more money each year and you will only have that if you

have a strong economy. APPLAUSE Schlein I thought I wasn't

going to talk tonight but when you mentioned the NHS, it upsets me. I

work in the NHS and it is cut upon cut upon cut. I never see any money

coming in. Everyday I go to work it is about cutting something having

higher targets. It is unbelievable, the amount of stress in the NHS.

Most people I work with cannot wait to leave. The woman in yellow. Reed

you confidently said the NHS is not going to have a crisis this winter,

so what do you think about Jeremy Hunt having lost touch with 45,000

junior doctors? APPLAUSE

The NHS is in a terrible crisis. It is the 2nd year on the run and it is

over budget by ?1 billion in the first quarter. Ambulance targets are

being missed, A units are missing targets. 111 is just a joke. There

is a problem with the NHS and it is a long-term problem, a structural

problem. It is too big, there are too many managers.

APPLAUSE Hold on. Under Labour, between 97,

and 2010, the NHS budget troubles. But the number of managers grew

within the NHS by 58%. -- the NHS budget troubles. There are 50,000

not qualified to in the NHS. -- there are 50,000 people who work for

the NHS who are on over ?100,000 a year. Is it the porters, the nurses,

the ambulance to arrive is it the porters, the nurses, the ambulance

to rivals? Of course not. And the PFI deals are saddling the NHS with

a debt of ?2 billion every year. APPLAUSE

I am a social worker in a Children's Hospital local and every day I work

alongside health, care, education. My son is a police Sergeant and my

daughter-in-law is a teacher. This government are decimating our public

services. APPLAUSE

It is about time you realised what your government is doing. Do you

know that in Staffordshire there is a two-year wait for a paediatric

assessment? Children waiting two years under your government. It is

shameful. You have made comments in the past that you would like more of

the NHS privatised. Actually, I don't think most people in this

audience and this country do want to see the NHS privatised. I am going

to finish. The reason we are top of that league table in terms of health

care and the US is at the bottom and we are not in a breaking bad

situation is because we have nationalised health care. So you --

would you like to make clear your position on privatising the NHS?

What I was talking about specifically is procurement. In some

cases you have the NHS paying over 30 times the cost for drugs. How is

privatisation going to help that? I thought it might be a good idea to

bring in a private company to get bang for our buck in this area. The

bigger problem is that we are allowing over 300,000 people into

this country every year. You cannot plan for an NHS when there are too

many people in the country. Shame on you. We would not have an NHS

without doctors coming from different countries. We should be

training up our own. Shame on you, Paul.

I would like to agree with the audience and not Paul Nuttall. The

first thing to say is my husband is an Accident Emergency doctor, so I

live and breathe what is happening in the NHS. He will tell you, as he

tells me, that the NHS is absolutely on the brink of crisis. Sajid Javid,

you are being very brave to suggest we are not going to have a crisis

this winter. The reason we did not have that kind of traditional crisis

in the last couple of winters is because we had very mild weather. My

husband will tell you that it is when things get cold that things get

really difficult. Why do we have such a crisis in the NHS? It is not

straightforward. First of all, the resources are not there. Sajid Javid

said the government have pledged 8 billion, but they have not seen a

penny of that yet and we are some way off getting that money. The

really big challenge for accident, emergency and hospital care at the

moment is the huge numbers of elderly patients coming in who

should be being looked after at home and in the community. But we have

seen an absolute decimation of social care in this country.

APPLAUSE As David Cameron himself is now

admitting, the cuts to local government are having a devastating

effect. The problem just goes elsewhere, and it is moving to

front-line National Health Service. We have also seen top-down

reorganisation of the NHS which we did not need to see, which has now

put competition at the heart of the NHS. For example, the tender in

Greater Manchester for the Ambulance Service, the patient transport

service, had to go out to competition. It was awarded by some

narrow measure to a bus company. That company has now had to pull out

of the operation because they fiddled the numbers and got bonuses

they should not have got. We had a terrible bus company running the

ambience was there. Going to the broader point, when we were going

through the election campaign, my memory is that Labour was proposing

less extra money for the NHS than the Conservatives.

APPLAUSE No. We were proposing a cash

injection of 2.5 billion this year. What about each year? And we

proposed resources to social care. You have proposed, and we have yet

to see the money, and Simon Stevens, head of the National Health Service,

called you up on this. You proposed 8 billion by the end of this

Parliament, in five years, and you have yet to say where that will come

from. That does not help the deaf is it the NHS faces now and does not

help the crisis the NHS is facing. It is made up money. Why did Labour

cut NHS spending in Wales? APPLAUSE

You know as well as I do that the budget agreement in Wales is all

about devolved budgets and there are different issues. I am incredibly

proud of what the Labour Party did in 13 years of government, which was

bring the NHS back from its knees and created a world-class service.

You ask anyone who works in it. And what the Conservative government are

doing now, with junior doctors, just speaks absolute volumes. They have

no respect for the people on the front line. There are voices raised

against that. Everywhere is in debt from the last government through PFI

deals. Ridiculous. Two people in the very back. The woman first. I am a

local GP and the reason I am jumping up and down is that I do not know

how Sajid Javid can talk about resource into the NHS. General

Practice Committee which delivers 90% of NHS care, now does so on 8%

of the budget, which is a 20% disinvestment over the last five

years. As a result, we are now absolutely on our knees. In our

local paper today is a local practice that looks after 12,000

people, about to close because they have been trying to recruit to

replace their GPs that are retiring, and they can't do that. They have

been advertising for in excess of a year. Practices are poaching doctors

from one another to just survive. Do you have more confidence in Paul

Nuttall's version of how things should be done, or Lucy Powell? Or

do you have no confidence in anybody? Nobody ever holds the

providers to account. Private companies come in with the lowest

bid. When you pay peanuts, unfortunately, you get monkeys.

APPLAUSE There are hundreds of people across

this country facing their future without a GP. The problem has been

animated by this conversation. The NHS, which was an idea of the Labour

Party, is too big an issue to be given to politicians to squabble

over. APPLAUSE

The NHS has a 30 year problem, as we get older, live longer, have more

illnesses that require treatment. It cannot be solved in an electoral

cycle, by Health Secretary 's who are there for one or two years with

an eye on the next job, it cannot be solved by people squabbling over who

they think could give more than another. It needs somebody to say

this is an existential crisis for something we feel strongly about in

this country. It needs to be a cross party effort to say, we need 30 or

40 billion, let's find the right figure and get an agreement to spend

it and find ways to stop wasting it. APPLAUSE

Can you seriously imagine parties agreeing on the huge amount... No, I

can't. It means taxation levels and spending levels? I can't imagine it

but there is a moment in which we have to look at, is it worth people

arguing about who said they would give more to the NHS or not. Or is

the argument for the next 30 years when pop laces are going to live

until 100, 120, one in three diagnosese of diabetes, this is an

extestential crisis and politicians may not agree, but not to treat it

as a football to kick around would be a very good beginning.

APPLAUSE You? Briefly if you would. Can I back up

the point that the GP made. There is a real crisis, I've a daughter who's

a junior doctor, a son who will be a doctor, they are not going to be

saying in this country to work under those circumstances. On the 8th

December there'll be a strike unlest Jeremy Hunt...

APPLAUSE And you on the right there? I'm

really worried about this mantra, keep the economy strong - that the

Government uses because we hear it continually, we have heard it about

Tax Credit cuts and the Health Service, we hear it about education

and I feel it's a way of the Government distancing itself from

the consequences of the cuts that it's making and its policies. We

have heard recently David Cameron himself wasn't fully aware or

appreciative of the problems within his own locality, his own council

and what they were struggling with. And somehow you have got to

understand what your policies are causing people to suffer in their

lives today. APPLAUSE

I understand what the lady is saying and politicians don't say we'll keep

the economy strong because they are obsessed by the economy and that is

it. If we don't have a strong economy, we don't have jobs for our

young people, we don't have jobs for anyone, we don't have growth, we

don't have opportunities, we won't be able to raise the taxes that are

required to pay for the schools to pay for the nice, to pay for the

defence of our country, to pay for welfare for vulnerable people. That

all requires money. And that means a strong economy. That means you've

got to be competitive. You've got to have low taxes, low regular laying,

you have got to trade with the rest of the world, there's no way out of

that. Countries who've tried it have ended up like Greece and what's

happened with Greece's NHS? APPLAUSE It trickles down. The man

with the yellow handkerchief in his pocket? Does anyone know the cost of

building hospitals. PFI. ?445 million under PFI we have been

charged ?2.7 billion. All the PFI contracts aparts from one were put

in during the Labour administration, a total of ?11. 8 million, the cost

of buildings, ?79 billion to be paid back. The contracts should be

renegotiated. There must be some obscure EU regular laces because we

are enabled to do it. And they were all Labour... The

woman waving her hand in the second from back row? You say that you are

going to start putting ?8 billion into the NHS every year which hasn't

happened yet, but one of the big problems in the mace is lack of

staffing and there are so many things you are doing at the moment

that is going to decrease that staffing. You want to decrease

immigration which the NHS gets a lot of skilled workers from the EU to

work in the NHS and without them we wouldn't be able to be there. The

junior contracts are pushing junior doctors away, there's been a

decrease in medical school applications this year and an

increase in junior doctors wanting to work abroad. I'm a medical

student and I don't want to stay in England if these plans go through.

What did you say? She's getting trained by us, by our taxes and now

she's saying she doesn't want to work in this country.

APPLAUSE All right. I think you will find she's probably in about ?50,000

worth of debt once she finishes. APPLAUSE

We are obviously deep into the NHS and cuts and somebody was talking

about the state of the combhi so I just want to keep on that topic but

with a different question from Rachel Taylor, please?

Can we really afford to send ?500 million to help with the migration

crisis when there are so many cut backs happening here?

We have been talking about the NHS, the cutbacks and all the rest of it,

can we afford to send ?500 million which has been promised to help with

the migration crisis, Paul Nuttall? We should be helping with the

migration crisis and sending money. I do hope that that cash though will

come out of the ?12 billion worth of foreign aid that we send out every

single year. Do you approve of the friend aid? I would approve of it in

places where there are starving children or there's ebola or the

migration problem. I would support that. What I don't support is

foreign aid going to countries richer than ourselves. I want you to

consider, that's ?235 25 million every single day that leaves these

shores. Do you know last night, 100,000 kids had to sleep in hostels

in B In the week of Armistice, 8,000 ex-servicemen slept rough last

night. Do you know what, that's your taxation. That should be spent here

in our country on our people, on our transport network, on our schools

and on the NHS. Stig Abell? Do you want to come in

on this, I heard you say "well said"? Speak your mind? I honestly

believe we are spending too much on foreign aid. I do believe that we

have to pay for the migrant crisis, especially the people coming from

Sir yarks but we also have to realise the amount of pressure it's

putting on our country on all Public Services, not just the Health

Service, it's the policing, the benefits system, you name it and

it's putting pressure on this vast amount of people. -- coming from

Syria. If we got rid of tremendous dent we'd have ?167 billion which

would be... APPLAUSE

And we'd be unsafe. It would be like Ukraine. Keep me in false eye lashes

for a bit. Do I think that we are giving too much money - we are a

really rich country. In the light of the cutbacks? I know, but it's this

idea isn't it, you know, that like there aren't enough council houses,

you know and that people shouldn't be allowed to buy the council

houses. I'm quite for that, we just need to build more council houses.

The thing is, it's not a case of should we or shouldn't we give aid

to other countries. Take it from the rich people, your friends, or the

people who're Getting let off from being taxed. We took what we wanted,

split up the land and everything and were built on colonialism. So we are

now going to say you can't have anything back. You in the middle?

The terms of foreign aid, we need to act to spend more. There are crises

going on constantly around the world not getting national attention.

There is plenty of money that yes OK isn't going to work, probably should

go, to say get rid of Trident is going to give us a massive national

security error in this country. We have massive terrorist threats going

on and you want to disrupt the one process that's keeping us safe, it's

preposterous and stupid. How is it keeping us safe?

Stig? Nobody objects to the notion of foreign aid, we are a wealthy

country, we have to have our responsibility as part of a

globalised world to help people. No-one in their right mind would

ever question that. They'd question how we've arrived at an arbitrary

figure. It has to be ?12 billion, which is 0.7%. That means you have

to find things to spend money on at the end of your budget so you are

not responding to crises or spending the money where it's needed, you are

trying to make a balance sheet work, which is an appalling way to deal

with humanitarian issues around the world. If you are sitting there as

Chancellor of the Exchequer now, you have a commitment to the 0.7%

because your parties agree it. If you don't have that, you are sitting

there with the Chancellor, you have all the problems with the welfare

and NHS... You should be expected to prioritise. You can even say, we'll

have a maximum of 0.7%, but we'll prioritise against that. When facing

cry says, when people are sleeping rough, we may move that number. You

are binding yourself to an arbitrary figure. If that meant ?12 billion

was spent beautifully wisely and saved desperate people in the world,

that would be a great thing but it actually means accountants get at it

and say, at the end of the year we make sure we spend it and quick fix

things because that's where the money can go.

Lucy Powell? Look, what these issues are always are, is very emittive.

What are the two main principles that should guide you about how you

spend Government money within the envelope that you have available to

you -- emotive. The first thing is whether it's the right thing to do

for the country or not, whether it's the right thing to do, the second

thing is whether in the long run it helps you save money and deal with

other problems that may come up the track. In the case of foreign aid, I

think it meets both those requirements because, not only is it

the right thing to do, but in the long run it will help deal with

people wanting the leave the country. No-one wants to leave their

home country without good reason and, for many of the people who're

now travelling in terrible circumstances half way around the

world with their small children in really dangerous circumstances,

they're dog so because they are living in fear of where they are

living and they are living in terrible war and terrible

circumstances -- they are doing so. We should be taking action as a

country to try and help persuade those people to stay in their home

countries or settle themselves there. I'm going to have to stop you

because I'm coming to tend and I want to bring Sa individual Javid

in? We are a proud nation. We have a responsibility to help the most

desperate people in the world -- coming to the end.

APPLAUSE The Syrian refugees are exceptionally desperate right now

and it's right we provide them with shelter, food medicine. If we don't

help there, this could be a problem on our doorstep, a much bigger

issue, so it's both moral and practical.

APPLAUSE I'm sorry to say, time's up.

That was quick. It was quick. It always goes quick. We can't do

extra time. You are in Belfast next week, you can come there. Manchester

the week after that. The details are on the screen on how to apply. Next

week in Belfast, we have Theresa Villiers, Peter Hain and the

comedian and writer Rory Maguire, the week after that we are in

Manchester. If you want to come to Belfast or Manchester, go to the

website or call the number. This debate carries on on Five Live. My

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

Stoke-on-Trent. From all of us here, good night.