12/11/2015 Question Time


David Dimbleby presents topical debate from Stoke-on-Trent. The panellists are Sajid Javid MP, Lucy Powell MP, Paul Nuttall MEP, Paris Lees and Stig Abell.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 12/11/2015. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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.




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




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.


David Dimbleby presents topical debate from Stoke-on-Trent. The panellists are Conservative business secretary Sajid Javid MP, Labour's shadow education secretary Lucy Powell MP, Ukip deputy leader Paul Nuttall MEP, writer and campaigner Paris Lees and managing editor of The Sun Stig Abell.

Download Subtitles