:00:00. > :00:20.Tonight, we are here in Hull City Hall. Welcome to Question Time.
:00:21. > :00:23.Good evening and a big welcome, whether you are watching on
:00:24. > :00:29.television, listening on the radio, in the audience, and to our panel.
:00:30. > :00:34.The Conservative Communities Secretary, Greg Clarke. Labour's
:00:35. > :00:38.Shadow Home Secretary, Andy Burnham. Former leader of the Scottish
:00:39. > :00:41.National Party, Alex Salmond. Writer and former director of the Centre
:00:42. > :00:46.for Policy Studies, Jill Kirby. The founder of one of the country's
:00:47. > :00:48.biggest hedge fund is, and the founder of a chain of academy
:00:49. > :01:05.schools, Paul Marshall. Thank you. Just before we go,
:01:06. > :01:10.remember, Facebook, Twitter, if you want to comment on what is said. You
:01:11. > :01:16.can text and pushed the red button to see what is said by others. Our
:01:17. > :01:22.first question from Philip Green, please. In light of remarks made by
:01:23. > :01:28.Ken Livingstone, is there an issue surrounding anti-Semitism within the
:01:29. > :01:32.Labour Party? There was a shout of yes. Let's hear what the panel says.
:01:33. > :01:36.The remarks were that Hitler was supporting Zionism before he went
:01:37. > :01:43.mad, he said this morning, and this afternoon he was suspended from the
:01:44. > :01:46.Labour Party. Alex Salmond. I think there is an issue about Ken
:01:47. > :01:52.Livingstone. I am in the position that I don't think that Naz Shah,
:01:53. > :01:56.who was the Labour MP whose suspension started all this, I don't
:01:57. > :02:02.actually think she should have been suspended. If you remember, she made
:02:03. > :02:06.an offensive tweaked two or three years ago, which was shameful and
:02:07. > :02:10.the wrong thing to do, and certainly anti-Semitic. But she made an
:02:11. > :02:14.apology yesterday in the House of Commons, a full sun, graceful
:02:15. > :02:18.apology. She has a young MP. Unless there is something I don't know
:02:19. > :02:23.about, some track record of this behaviour, which there does not seem
:02:24. > :02:27.to be, I don't understand why she was suspended. However, I certainly
:02:28. > :02:32.understand why Ken Livingstone was suspended. I should declare that I
:02:33. > :02:35.am a board member of the Holocaust Memorial Day foundation, which is
:02:36. > :02:39.working to get a suitable memorial to commemorate the Holocaust, so
:02:40. > :02:42.that future generations can understand why it was the most
:02:43. > :02:49.devastating event of the 20th century. Ken Livingstone has been in
:02:50. > :02:54.politics a long time, and he should know the great deal better than to
:02:55. > :03:00.use the Holocaust, or Hitler, as a debating point, or no more than
:03:01. > :03:09.people should use it as a joke. It is right above and beyond that.
:03:10. > :03:12.Tomorrow is the anniversary of the liberation of Dakar concentration
:03:13. > :03:18.camp. For Ken Livingstone, with all his experience, to make that point
:03:19. > :03:21.was shameful and I think he is rightfully suspended. However, we
:03:22. > :03:27.should be more generous to Naz Shah, the young MP who apologised. I think
:03:28. > :03:30.Ken Livingstone was rightfully suspended, Jeremy Corbyn did the
:03:31. > :03:33.right thing. If he needs to take further action against others in the
:03:34. > :03:34.Labour Party, I hope he has the guts to do so.
:03:35. > :03:43.APPLAUSE Andy Burnham, is there an issue
:03:44. > :03:47.about anti-Semitism in the Labour Party? If I thought for one second
:03:48. > :03:51.that I was a member of an anti-Semitic party, I would cut up
:03:52. > :03:55.my membership card right here, right now and send it back to them. That
:03:56. > :04:00.is what I would do. But I don't believe that is the case. Let me say
:04:01. > :04:04.what I think is the case. These allegations, when they surface, are
:04:05. > :04:07.not being dealt with properly and quickly enough. They need to be
:04:08. > :04:13.dealt with much more speedily in future. The second thing is that it
:04:14. > :04:18.is clear that some people in the party have made anti-Semitic
:04:19. > :04:19.comments. Like Alex, I find Ken Livingstone's comments ill-advised,
:04:20. > :04:27.deeply offensive, deeply distasteful. The question, and this
:04:28. > :04:30.is true for Naz Shah as well, were those comments made carelessly,
:04:31. > :04:34.inadvertently, or was their real intent behind the comments? That is
:04:35. > :04:39.why they have to be investigated and people have to have the chance to
:04:40. > :04:44.put their reasons. You have to allow that. That is why it is suspension
:04:45. > :04:49.is right now. But if anti-Semitism is found, then expulsion is what
:04:50. > :04:57.should follow. No ifs or buts. APPLAUSE
:04:58. > :05:05.Jill Kirby, of course Jeremy Corbyn says there is no crisis in the party
:05:06. > :05:10.and people who claim there is are nervous of the strength of the
:05:11. > :05:14.Labour Party and local level. Do you see it like that? It seems to me
:05:15. > :05:20.that this is a crisis brought upon Jeremy Corbyn in large part by his
:05:21. > :05:24.attitude towards the party, towards prejudices that our existing within
:05:25. > :05:28.the party. I am quite sure Andy does not hold them, but they are there
:05:29. > :05:34.within a party that can select and choose Naz Shah as a suitable
:05:35. > :05:39.candidate. Did no one look into her record? This wasn't just one
:05:40. > :05:42.retweet, as far as I am a stand it. There were other comments that she
:05:43. > :05:46.had been passing around. We all know the danger of social media, you see
:05:47. > :05:50.something stupid that catches your eye and you pass it on. But she had
:05:51. > :05:55.a track record. It was not one random thing. Andy Burnham says we
:05:56. > :05:59.have to ask whether there was intent. Someone who wants to be in
:06:00. > :06:04.public life, who visualises themselves having a responsible
:06:05. > :06:09.role, she chose to participate in a dialogue which involved likening
:06:10. > :06:15.sending the Jews to America in transportation. Would anybody in
:06:16. > :06:20.this room consider that a good thing to pass on, even in a moment of
:06:21. > :06:23.frivolity? You just don't do it, do you? The question was whether there
:06:24. > :06:31.is an issue around this within the Labour Party, or whether it is just
:06:32. > :06:34.one or two cases. I think there is. Yesterday, it was not until David
:06:35. > :06:38.Cameron pointed out that it was time for the whip to be withdrawn that
:06:39. > :06:41.the whip was finally withdrawn. This was out in the open and Jeremy
:06:42. > :06:45.Corbyn did not decide to do anything until it came up in Prime Minister's
:06:46. > :06:50.Questions. This is no kind of party management, is it? Ken Livingstone
:06:51. > :06:54.was brought back into the fold by Jeremy Corbyn as his special
:06:55. > :06:57.adviser. He already has a terrible track record of anti-Semitic
:06:58. > :07:03.remarks, as well as plain offensive remarks. I agree about Ken
:07:04. > :07:08.Livingstone but I don't think it is fair to say that about Naz Shah. I
:07:09. > :07:11.have no knowledge that she has done what you say she has done. She is
:07:12. > :07:16.somebody who made a mistake several years ago, she admitted it, she
:07:17. > :07:20.apologised, and I think we should give her a bit of slack. And
:07:21. > :07:28.certainly not attack her when she is not here to defend herself. Anyone
:07:29. > :07:31.who talks about a swarm of migrants is the last person to complain about
:07:32. > :07:35.racism! APPLAUSE
:07:36. > :07:39.Did you just say that careless racism was in some way excusable? I
:07:40. > :07:44.am sorry. racism was in some way excusable? I
:07:45. > :07:49.careless or otherwise. It is simply not on. I didn't say that, if that
:07:50. > :07:54.is what you not on. I didn't say that, if that
:07:55. > :07:56.what I said at all. People can inadvertently say
:07:57. > :08:00.can be read a certain way. It is often the case when people are
:08:01. > :08:05.commenting on the Israel- Palestine situation. I dislike the language
:08:06. > :08:12.used against Israel at times. Sometimes it can go over that line
:08:13. > :08:14.and appear anti-Semitic. It does not mean they are anti-Semitic, just
:08:15. > :08:22.that their comments appeared anti-Semitic. Let me make the point.
:08:23. > :08:28.You have to investigate it, and if you find they meant it, then they
:08:29. > :08:34.have to go. That is the bottom line. Let's hear from one or two members
:08:35. > :08:37.of the audience. At the moment, we are asking whether there is
:08:38. > :08:41.anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. What issues is the party actively
:08:42. > :08:47.tackling to not allow members who are going to voice that, especially
:08:48. > :08:51.members in public office? So what is your assertion, that Labour is too
:08:52. > :08:54.easy on who it allows in? What measures will Labour take to
:08:55. > :08:58.discourage people from joining the party and representing the party
:08:59. > :09:04.discourage people from joining the Parliament? You, sir, over there. I
:09:05. > :09:08.wonder how forgiving Andy and Alex would be if it was a member of Ukip
:09:09. > :09:11.who had said these things. APPLAUSE
:09:12. > :09:18.I do think this is a serious moment. What we know about anti-Semitism
:09:19. > :09:24.over the years is that it is a virus. It is never suppressed,
:09:25. > :09:28.eradicated completely. It emerges from time to time in different
:09:29. > :09:33.countries and at different moments in different guises. As soon as it
:09:34. > :09:35.appears, it has to be crushed very decisively, because it will happen
:09:36. > :09:38.again and again. APPLAUSE
:09:39. > :09:46.I think this is an important moment for Labour. I am sad that the Labour
:09:47. > :09:52.Party, whose traditions have always been to combat racism, should be
:09:53. > :09:58.going through this. I think it is right that Jeremy Corbyn should be
:09:59. > :10:00.required to act absolutely decisively. If you don't, and you
:10:01. > :10:04.see it in other decisively. If you don't, and you
:10:05. > :10:11.world, if you let it fester it will grow and be even worse in the
:10:12. > :10:14.future. Paul Marshall. This is an issue which is important to me
:10:15. > :10:18.personally because last year I discovered that my wife's family
:10:19. > :10:27.lost quite a few members in the Holocaust. So it is not a trivial
:10:28. > :10:31.matter for me. And I think that the views that were expressed by Ken
:10:32. > :10:38.Livingstone are part of a wider worldview. This is what I find
:10:39. > :10:41.worrying. It is shared by Ken Livingstone, John McDonnell and
:10:42. > :10:46.Jeremy Corbyn, and that view is rooted in anti-American is and
:10:47. > :10:53.support for victims, as they see them, of all kinds, whether it be
:10:54. > :10:56.Hamas, Hezbollah, the IRA. Part of that worldview is also opposition to
:10:57. > :11:03.Israel. They are all linked together. It finds expression in
:11:04. > :11:10.what they call anti-Zionism. If you look on the web, you get the use of
:11:11. > :11:15.a word which is increasingly used as a form of anti-Semitism, a different
:11:16. > :11:19.way of saying Jewish. It is quite the real and, as Greg has said, and
:11:20. > :11:25.it is very much within the London clique of Labour leadership. It is
:11:26. > :11:29.dangerous for the Labour Party and for the country and it has to be
:11:30. > :11:34.rooted out. To link to a subject which will no doubt come Ken
:11:35. > :11:38.Livingstone said last week that if we voted for Brexit he would think
:11:39. > :11:39.about emigrating. That might be a solution to everything.
:11:40. > :11:48.APPLAUSE I am not defending what these
:11:49. > :11:55.politicians have said, but three times over the past year I have seen
:11:56. > :12:00.in a political context anti-Semitism used as a political tool. In the NUS
:12:01. > :12:04.presidency, in the young NEC, and now. Anti-Semitism is not the same
:12:05. > :12:12.as disagreeing with what Israel do. It is not the same thing.
:12:13. > :12:15.I want to move on, but I want Andy Burnham to answer the question from
:12:16. > :12:20.over there, which was, is Labour doing enough to stop people joining?
:12:21. > :12:25.And you know the attacks on Labour from the board of the pity of
:12:26. > :12:29.British Jews on Jeremy Corbyn. Various people have had to resign
:12:30. > :12:34.for other anti-Jewish remarks. What is being done to stop this? The
:12:35. > :12:39.gentleman said we have been too forgiving. I am not, actually. I
:12:40. > :12:44.think it was right to suspend Naz Shah, unlike Alex. Find it, and
:12:45. > :12:48.rooted out, no question about it. What is the party doing? We are the
:12:49. > :12:54.party that for decades has promoted equality, has fought discrimination.
:12:55. > :12:59.Jeremy Corbyn has done that all his political life, if you look at his
:13:00. > :13:04.record. So the party has to get better. I don't think it has been
:13:05. > :13:08.good enough. Why has he been so slow? I don't know, it should be
:13:09. > :13:11.quicker. I would like to see quicker and more decisive action taken. He
:13:12. > :13:18.has taken action but it could be quicker. I just want to be
:13:19. > :13:22.absolutely clear about this. I would resign tomorrow if I thought I was
:13:23. > :13:26.in a party that was promoting anti-Semitism. I thought the point
:13:27. > :13:29.was made very well, there is a world of difference between criticising
:13:30. > :13:33.the actions of the Israeli government and questioning whether
:13:34. > :13:37.Israel should exist. It is when people got over that line that they
:13:38. > :13:39.veer into the realm of anti-Semitism, and at that point you
:13:40. > :13:43.have to take a very different approach. But you have to be careful
:13:44. > :13:53.before you label somebody anti-Semitic racist. -- anti-Semitic
:13:54. > :13:59.or racist. I want to go onto the next question from James Blake
:14:00. > :14:07.please. Who else should be held to account over Hillsborough and the
:14:08. > :14:11.ensuing cover-up? Greg Clarke. Well, I think all of us were appalled at
:14:12. > :14:18.what we saw in terms of the stories that are coming out of that inquest,
:14:19. > :14:23.and the incalculable injustice, the decades and decades for which people
:14:24. > :14:28.have not known the truth about what happened to their nearest and
:14:29. > :14:32.dearest. But when it comes to accountability, and the first thing
:14:33. > :14:32.I want to say is to praise Andy Burnham.
:14:33. > :14:49.APPLAUSE Andy had a difficult time some years
:14:50. > :14:52.ago and used that experience, when he was meeting the relatives, to
:14:53. > :14:58.have an absolute determination to get justice. For those of you that
:14:59. > :15:02.saw the scenes in the House of Commons couple of days ago, it was
:15:03. > :15:10.incredibly impressive, and Alex spoke as well. The unity of purpose,
:15:11. > :15:15.in making sure that the lessons can never be forgotten and justice is
:15:16. > :15:20.done. The question is, who should be held to account? I think we now have
:15:21. > :15:25.the truth through these verdicts. What we now need to see is justice.
:15:26. > :15:32.And that requires the criminal investigations that are now going on
:15:33. > :15:35.to continue. Obviously, it is a matter for the prosecutors. But I
:15:36. > :15:40.think everyone would accept that there needs to be consequences, and
:15:41. > :15:45.that a criminal case is proved from what has been a very clear verdict.
:15:46. > :15:53.I think if you are holding people to account, the Sun newspaper, to not
:15:54. > :15:57.even print it on their front-page, I honestly ask how Rupert Murdoch can
:15:58. > :16:04.sleep at night. It's utterly, utterly inhuman. You, Sir, in the
:16:05. > :16:09.second or third row there? Kelvin McCain still to say he's a victim of
:16:10. > :16:14.the police is something else. I was at Hillsborough, survived the
:16:15. > :16:20.crush and climbed over the fences on to the pitch. I feel a victim of
:16:21. > :16:24.South Yorkshire Police. Who other than South Yorkshire Police? They
:16:25. > :16:28.have not yet been held accountable. They have had an inquest where a
:16:29. > :16:33.decision's been made but there hasn't been accountability through
:16:34. > :16:36.the criminal courts and it's only when criminal accountability arises
:16:37. > :16:40.and senior officers who're in charge on the day and successive senior
:16:41. > :16:45.officers who've been involved with South Yorkshire Police since 1989 up
:16:46. > :16:48.until today's date, until they are held accountable in the criminal
:16:49. > :16:50.courts, there is no accountability and that has to happen for justice
:16:51. > :16:59.to happen. APPLAUSE.
:17:00. > :17:04.As everyone knows, Andy Burnham, you were very close to this, in pursuing
:17:05. > :17:07.the demand for a proper inquiry. What is your answer to the question
:17:08. > :17:12.of who should be held to account? Well, nobody has yet, so there's a
:17:13. > :17:16.lot of people now who need to be held to account and accountability,
:17:17. > :17:20.in my view means, prosecutions. That's what needs to follow. Because
:17:21. > :17:24.think about it, how on earth did this country get to a situation
:17:25. > :17:28.where people, ordinary people who did nothing more than wave their
:17:29. > :17:32.loved ones off to a match, how did we have a situation yes they ended
:17:33. > :17:38.up in a courtroom 27 years later begging for justice and pleading for
:17:39. > :17:41.the reputations of their sons, daughters, brothers and sisters? How
:17:42. > :17:44.on earth did that happen? You have to hold the whole establishment to
:17:45. > :17:52.account, in my view. APPLAUSE.
:17:53. > :17:57.You have to hold politicians to account on all sides. No politician,
:17:58. > :18:01.many my view, did the right thing in the early days, no-one comes out of
:18:02. > :18:07.this with any credit credit but it's the South Yorkshire Police that has
:18:08. > :18:10.to be held to account. This police force has consistently put
:18:11. > :18:13.protecting itself before those who suffered harm an horror at
:18:14. > :18:17.Hillsborough. They have perpetrated a 27-year cover-up that was advanced
:18:18. > :18:20.in the committee rooms of the House of Commons and in the press rooms of
:18:21. > :18:23.Downing Street. Shamefully, they carried on that cover-up in the
:18:24. > :18:28.courtrooms in Warrington, spending millions of pounds of public money
:18:29. > :18:34.rerunning discredited lies. That is the level of change that we need to
:18:35. > :18:37.see here, we need to see real change and accountability at South
:18:38. > :18:41.Yorkshire Police. I don't blame the ordinary men and women who tried to
:18:42. > :18:44.help on the day, the policemen and women, or indeed those on the
:18:45. > :18:47.streets trying to keep South Yorkshire safe today but by God they
:18:48. > :18:54.have been let down by the leadership of that force over the many years.
:18:55. > :18:58.APPLAUSE. Real change there. As the gentleman
:18:59. > :19:05.said, the media has to be held to account too. Because that
:19:06. > :19:09.front-page, those lies were told at Liverpool's moment of greatest
:19:10. > :19:12.grief. My constituent who came home after his friend had died at
:19:13. > :19:15.Hillsborough picked up that newspaper and was told he was to
:19:16. > :19:20.blame. That is why Liverpool has felt this so deeply for all of these
:19:21. > :19:25.years. We need to see people held to account. We need Leveson too so we
:19:26. > :19:29.have a proper framework for accountability in terms of police
:19:30. > :19:32.and press relations. If I could say one last thing as a positive, I hope
:19:33. > :19:37.Hillsborough will change the country. I want to change the law so
:19:38. > :19:39.that police officers can't retire to escape misconduct proceedings and
:19:40. > :19:47.keep their pensions. APPLAUSE.
:19:48. > :19:52.But I also want - last point, David - I also hope that the country will
:19:53. > :19:59.look differently at Liverpool now. The fight that has been mounted. For
:20:00. > :20:02.years, they were looked down upon by many people, called self-pity City
:20:03. > :20:08.by Boris Johnson, but do you know what they really are, solidarity
:20:09. > :20:14.city, red and blue together! And, in the end, those values of Liverpool
:20:15. > :20:17.have shone through. Liverpool has prevailed, the families have
:20:18. > :20:23.prevailed in all adversity and that's the final thing I would say.
:20:24. > :20:27.When I used to go round the country, people would say why can't they move
:20:28. > :20:33.on, they are whinging Scousers. The story at the end of the day is, do
:20:34. > :20:35.you know what, those whinging Scousers just happened to be right.
:20:36. > :20:40.Hear, hear. APPLAUSE.
:20:41. > :20:43.You, Sir? I would just like to correct Mr Clark, I don't think the
:20:44. > :20:46.Hillsborough families have waited for decades and decades to learn the
:20:47. > :20:50.truth. I think they knew the truth all the time. They did. What they
:20:51. > :20:55.have had to wait for is for the establishment to be forced to face
:20:56. > :21:01.up to the truth and I would say thank goodness for the families of
:21:02. > :21:04.the Hillsborough disaster and thank God for the Liverpudlians.
:21:05. > :21:09.APPLAUSE. God for the Liverpudlians.
:21:10. > :21:12.Let's say thank God to the jury system in this country too.
:21:13. > :21:14.Let's say thank God to the jury were the people who, in the end,
:21:15. > :21:16.were able to give a clear decision and it's not a system
:21:17. > :21:20.were able to give a clear decision any further in Europe I think than
:21:21. > :21:27.in the UK. It's a very important system of arriving at justice. I
:21:28. > :21:34.think all credit to that jury too. Of course, you can see how this
:21:35. > :21:38.began partly because people on the whole want to trust the police, we
:21:39. > :21:43.wanted to trust the police, we still want to trust the police because
:21:44. > :21:47.they carry our lives in their hands. It was difficult to begin with
:21:48. > :21:52.probably for many people to accept that the police could have acted in
:21:53. > :22:00.this way. But of course, we see also from an initial attempt at cover-up
:22:01. > :22:04.how it ballooned and how one lie developed and developed rather than
:22:05. > :22:05.admitting quickly I made a terrible mistake, someone said I didn't do it
:22:06. > :22:11.or I did something different and mistake, someone said I didn't do it
:22:12. > :22:17.tried to pass the blame on and so deceit swells into this huge thing
:22:18. > :22:18.20 years on which is still being unravelled. That is a terrible
:22:19. > :22:23.thing. Thank unravelled. That is a terrible
:22:24. > :22:24.arrived at the truth in the end. Thank you.
:22:25. > :22:33.APPLAUSE. Thank you.
:22:34. > :22:38.Had the police not acted, we might have found out a bit sooner, all the
:22:39. > :22:41.other people implicated like the sellers of tickets for that ground
:22:42. > :22:47.that knew these people couldn't have been accommodated, the health and
:22:48. > :22:50.safety issues, so many things that eventuallily been corrected but
:22:51. > :22:53.because the police didn't act as they should have done at the start,
:22:54. > :22:59.these things happened. The woman there? Would the panel
:23:00. > :23:02.agree that for Bernard Ingham, who had so much to say at the time, the
:23:03. > :23:07.fact he's refused to apologise since, that he should have his
:23:08. > :23:11.Knighthood stripped? APPLAUSE.
:23:12. > :23:17.Mrs Thatcher's press secretary, Bernard Ingham? I can't speak to the
:23:18. > :23:22.Bernard Ingham situation but looking at it first of all, I want to pay
:23:23. > :23:26.tribute to Andy as well because, as the outsider on the panel, I'm not a
:23:27. > :23:29.politician, everybody likes to knock politicians, this is one of the
:23:30. > :23:34.great examples of a politician really doing great work and fighting
:23:35. > :23:39.for justice and I pay tribute to him.
:23:40. > :23:44.APPLAUSE. Looking at it today, it's a massive
:23:45. > :23:50.injustice that's been done and it's blighted the families for their
:23:51. > :23:59.whole lives. Looking at it now though, there's a danger that we go
:24:00. > :24:02.from one massive blame on the Liverpool families and fans to
:24:03. > :24:07.massive blame on South Yorkshire Police. There are new young recruits
:24:08. > :24:11.in South Yorkshire Police that are coming in, they are idealistic, they
:24:12. > :24:16.want to serve their country and do public service, so the issue is, as
:24:17. > :24:20.you said, who is to, it's the leadership of South Yorkshire Police
:24:21. > :24:28.through several generations and, for me, as a person looking at it, the
:24:29. > :24:33.real rottenness at the core of it is determination to distort the truth,
:24:34. > :24:39.to mislead on all levels. Looking at the TV footage, John Motson, five or
:24:40. > :24:43.ten minutes after the crushing started, was saying that the fans
:24:44. > :24:48.had broken the gates down. So he'd been fed that. He was fed a lie and
:24:49. > :24:52.it started five minutes in. Then the Sun newspaper, they were fed lies
:24:53. > :24:57.about pick-pocketing and so on and so forth. So there was a systematic
:24:58. > :25:01.way and of trying to manipulate the press. You saw a similar thing with
:25:02. > :25:05.Cliff Richard which was a very shocking thing. It was through a
:25:06. > :25:09.media exercise, bringing the media in to make themselves look good
:25:10. > :25:14.before a man had been actually found guilty or charged with anything.
:25:15. > :25:17.That for me, it's the top of the South Yorkshire Police where there's
:25:18. > :25:21.been rottenness to the core for many years. Alex Salmond? Paul's
:25:22. > :25:26.obviously right. No-one blames the young officers going into the South
:25:27. > :25:28.Yorkshire Police or for that matter the young officers who were at
:25:29. > :25:34.Hillsborough, many of whom were trying to do their best to save the
:25:35. > :25:39.fans on the day. What happened on the day caused 96 lives,
:25:40. > :25:45.bereavements for 96 families, but what happened on the day wasn't
:25:46. > :25:47.intended. The police made bad decisions, they were culpable,
:25:48. > :25:53.according to the jury, a jury who were allowed to hear the truth,
:25:54. > :25:56.unlike the first jury. It was unlawful and therefore probably
:25:57. > :26:02.criminal. But it was tragic and unintended. The real point is what's
:26:03. > :26:07.happened over the last 27 years, wasn't unintended, it was a
:26:08. > :26:12.conspiracy, it was deliberate manipulation and lies and deception
:26:13. > :26:17.that have kept these 96 families over the last 27 years fighting this
:26:18. > :26:21.agony supported ably by politicians like Andy.
:26:22. > :26:24.Now, the point about Andy and Theresa May, the current Home
:26:25. > :26:29.Secretary, is that they are the first people in responsibility to
:26:30. > :26:36.answer the family's call and shame on the predecessors of handy and
:26:37. > :26:41.Theresa May who, despite, as the gentleman said, overwhelming
:26:42. > :26:44.evidence, the initial report put responsibility with responsibility
:26:45. > :26:47.and despite that, the families were unable to get justice. So what
:26:48. > :26:52.should be done? Well, what should be done is, the people who were part of
:26:53. > :26:55.the conspiracy should be tried. They should be tried for purgery, they
:26:56. > :27:02.should be tried for perverting the course of justice.
:27:03. > :27:08.APPLAUSE. They should be tried for conspiracy
:27:09. > :27:12.to pervert the course of justice with exemplary penalties that these
:27:13. > :27:15.offences carry. Secondly, and equally as important, what happened,
:27:16. > :27:20.why it took so long, was that these families had to go into hearing
:27:21. > :27:25.after hearing, court after court, and they were not badly represented,
:27:26. > :27:29.but there was a huge inequality between the representation available
:27:30. > :27:32.to these families and the institutional representation paid
:27:33. > :27:38.for by public money which was available to South Yorkshire Police.
:27:39. > :27:45.That's the imbalance, that's the injustice, that's the unfairness
:27:46. > :27:48.that has to be rectified if what comes out of Hillsborough is this
:27:49. > :27:52.never happens again. The woman there, then you and then you Andy?
:27:53. > :27:56.You talk about accountability, Andy, what about the accountability of the
:27:57. > :28:02.people that decided to put those fences up, to put them like cattle,
:28:03. > :28:05.for want of a better word, and if them fences hadn't have been up,
:28:06. > :28:09.there wouldn't have been as many people that died? There had been a
:28:10. > :28:16.warning in the north, particularly with South Yorkshire Police. The
:28:17. > :28:22.miners can tell you straightaway. That goes right to the heart of
:28:23. > :28:26.Government. It really is time that now we go backwards again and look
:28:27. > :28:29.at the mistakes that were made there because again, there was a
:28:30. > :28:33.conspiracy made and actually, there's a real class issue here that
:28:34. > :28:39.needs to be addressed. APPLAUSE.
:28:40. > :28:44.To you briefly? One of the impressive things that's come out
:28:45. > :28:49.this week is the agreements between Andy and the Home Secretary that all
:28:50. > :28:53.of these abuses need to be looked into and Theresa May made a
:28:54. > :29:02.commitment to Andy Burnham across the floor of the House of Commons
:29:03. > :29:07.that, not just orgrieve but the other scandals that have affected
:29:08. > :29:10.the North Yorkshire police force, the Rotherham child abuse scandal
:29:11. > :29:18.for example, these all need to be looked at very seriously. For a Home
:29:19. > :29:21.Secretary to be unflinching in being willing to confront these shocking
:29:22. > :29:25.questions that have been unresolved, I think it's a step forward for the
:29:26. > :29:30.way that we run our country. You wanted to say a brief word? I do, in
:29:31. > :29:34.agreeing with everybody on the panel. Why have we now got this
:29:35. > :29:38.verdict, 96 unlawful deaths? It's because what the lady said, there
:29:39. > :29:40.was a complete disregard for football supporters' safety in that
:29:41. > :29:44.period. Let's remember, this was four years after the Bradford fire,
:29:45. > :29:49.four years after the Bradford fire and yet we had those pens and
:29:50. > :29:52.fences. I was an Everton supporter at Hillsborough the year before and
:29:53. > :29:56.it was the worst afternoon I'd ever had at a football match in the
:29:57. > :30:00.central pens. I looked at my brother's head for the whole game
:30:01. > :30:05.because I didn't want to lose him, that's how bad it was. It is class,
:30:06. > :30:09.just to finish, an us and them. It needs to go wider now. It's about
:30:10. > :30:13.power. The lady mentioned Bernard Ingham, yes, he called the Liverpool
:30:14. > :30:18.supporters a tanked up mob straight after as part of the cover-up. There
:30:19. > :30:25.is an elite in politics, in the police, in the legal system, in the
:30:26. > :30:29.media too, that collude together to exorcise power over ordinary people.
:30:30. > :30:32.That's the story of Hillsborough, but you have to have the other story
:30:33. > :30:36.as well, if you are going to know the full truth about Hillsborough.
:30:37. > :30:39.If we are never going to let this happen again, you have to
:30:40. > :30:44.fundamentally rebalance the system in the way Alex Salmond is saying
:30:45. > :30:46.and give ordinary people the ability to get truth and justice when they
:30:47. > :30:54.need it. APPLAUSE.
:30:55. > :31:00.We are in Manchester next week and Aberdeen the week after that.
:31:01. > :31:06.Details of how to apply are on screen. You can apply on the
:31:07. > :31:12.website, or give us a call. Let's go onto Linda Robinson. If we stay in
:31:13. > :31:17.the EU, how can immigration be controlled, to ensure jobs and
:31:18. > :31:19.services are not stretched to collapse? Paul Marshall. It can't.
:31:20. > :31:32.APPLAUSE The EU has a unique approach to
:31:33. > :31:36.movement of peoples. Every other free trade zone in the world has no
:31:37. > :31:41.requirement about free movement of peoples. And the EU has an
:31:42. > :31:50.ideological commitment to free movement of people, which means we
:31:51. > :31:54.get at the moment about 250 up to 300,000 immigrants a year from the
:31:55. > :31:58.EU, which we can't do anything about. That means that Theresa May
:31:59. > :32:04.is having to restrict other kinds of immigrants from other places that we
:32:05. > :32:08.actually need. In Hull, the immigrant population has tripled in
:32:09. > :32:16.the last 10-15 years, mostly from the EU. That existing situation is
:32:17. > :32:22.now being compounded on a massive scale by a second mistake by Angela
:32:23. > :32:30.Merkel, which is to invite a huge number of migrants from the Middle
:32:31. > :32:34.East and Africa, which has created a very large historic waves of
:32:35. > :32:41.immigration. If you think about the population forecast for the world in
:32:42. > :32:44.the next 20-30 years is to go from 7 billion up to 10 billion. Most of
:32:45. > :32:46.those extra people will be in Africa, will have mobile phones, and
:32:47. > :32:48.we'll be hearing Africa, will have mobile phones, and
:32:49. > :32:51.the EU. So we have a Africa, will have mobile phones, and
:32:52. > :32:56.in the whole debate about migration. Africa, will have mobile phones, and
:32:57. > :33:04.As you say, that is already putting Africa, will have mobile phones, and
:33:05. > :33:06.within the EU, Africa, will have mobile phones, and
:33:07. > :33:11.of policies, you can't do anything Africa, will have mobile phones, and
:33:12. > :33:12.about it. I take it you are voting Brexit. You got it.
:33:13. > :33:19.APPLAUSE I can't believe what I've just
:33:20. > :33:26.heard, in all honesty. Everybody in I can't believe what I've just
:33:27. > :33:31.Africa will have a mobile phone and will be able to tell each other how
:33:32. > :33:38.amazing it is in Europe! What a ridiculous statement.
:33:39. > :33:40.amazing it is in Europe! What a lot of places, coming through
:33:41. > :33:44.amazing it is in Europe! What a to our country, are doing it because
:33:45. > :33:48.they are desperate? They are not doing it because they are having a
:33:49. > :33:49.little chat on Facebook about how amazing this
:33:50. > :33:56.little chat on Facebook about how ridiculous thing to say.
:33:57. > :33:59.little chat on Facebook about how doing it because they are desperate.
:34:00. > :34:02.A large number of the migrants into Europe are actually the wealthier
:34:03. > :34:09.group of migrants, whether from Syria or from Africa. And a lot of
:34:10. > :34:17.them do have access to mobile phones. Syria is a war zone. Yes. So
:34:18. > :34:21.you are telling me the majority of people coming from Syria are doing
:34:22. > :34:26.so because they are wealthy? The majority of people coming from Syria
:34:27. > :34:30.are in fear of their lives. The majority coming from Syria to Europe
:34:31. > :34:38.are the ones who can afford to pay the fees to get in. The ones who are
:34:39. > :34:44.poor... What about the 3000 children that are coming alone from Syria?
:34:45. > :34:48.Are they wealthy? The ones who are poor are the 2 million refugees are
:34:49. > :34:52.sitting in Lebanon, the 1.5 million sitting in Jordan and the 2 million
:34:53. > :34:57.on the Turkish border. They can't afford to come to Europe. Let's go
:34:58. > :35:02.back to Linda's question, which was if we stay in the EU how can
:35:03. > :35:08.immigration be controlled to ensure jobs and services are not stretched
:35:09. > :35:12.to collapse? It can't, in an absolute sense, of course. This
:35:13. > :35:18.debate between the lady and Paul is the very nub of the argument. Other
:35:19. > :35:24.people who have been responding in this huge migrant crisis, are they
:35:25. > :35:28.people who have been pulled in by information about the wonderful life
:35:29. > :35:33.they have had in Europe, or are they people rushed out by civil war and
:35:34. > :35:37.desperation? I agree with the lady, they have been pushed out and are
:35:38. > :35:46.fleeing for their lives, and that is why so many have died. In a week
:35:47. > :35:50.when the House of Commons, to its shame, refused what the House of
:35:51. > :35:54.Lords suggested, to take in 3000 unaccompanied children, in an
:35:55. > :35:57.atmosphere where 10,000 children have already gone missing, in terms
:35:58. > :36:04.of we don't know where they are, who are clearly in danger... I am sorry,
:36:05. > :36:08.but the sort of logic and argument you have put forward is the excuse
:36:09. > :36:12.for why so many of these members of Parliament went through the lobbies
:36:13. > :36:20.and denied the right of even 3000 children to come to this country for
:36:21. > :36:25.safety and security. The question, Linda's question is about long-term
:36:26. > :36:31.immigration. As you know, the official figures estimate 3 million
:36:32. > :36:37.more EU migrants up to 2030. I think that is the question you were
:36:38. > :36:42.asking. She is nodding. Not the specific interest of refugees from
:36:43. > :36:48.Syria. With respect, Paul took us very much onto that subject. I would
:36:49. > :36:54.argue a different position in terms of people. We were talking earlier
:36:55. > :36:57.about the Jewish community. And I mentioned I was on the Holocaust
:36:58. > :37:02.Memorial Day trust. One of the things that trust and foundation is
:37:03. > :37:05.doing is not just having a memorial so that people remember the
:37:06. > :37:10.Holocaust, but celebrating the achievements of the people who came
:37:11. > :37:15.to this country, fleeing the terror of Nazi Germany, and the
:37:16. > :37:19.achievements of their descendants. I come from a country which has not
:37:20. > :37:23.suffered from immigration, but has suffered over the last century and a
:37:24. > :37:28.half from immigration. And all of the Scots who have left have made
:37:29. > :37:32.profound differences to the countries they have gone to,
:37:33. > :37:37.achieved great things. So I don't like or accept the argument that
:37:38. > :37:46.immigration is a bad thing. I think immigration is a good thing, and I
:37:47. > :37:49.think strong societies have the ability to take the talents and
:37:50. > :37:53.abilities of people and make our country better, so I don't accept
:37:54. > :37:57.the premise. You are talking about a different question. Do you think the
:37:58. > :38:01.3 million people who would come from Europe into this country over the
:38:02. > :38:07.next ten years are people bringing talents we cannot supply in this
:38:08. > :38:10.country? Aren't they people who would come because obviously if we
:38:11. > :38:13.have a living wage which is more than double what they can earn in
:38:14. > :38:18.Romanian and Bulgarian, of course they will come if they get the
:38:19. > :38:22.chance? They are not coming for the benefits, then? Because that was the
:38:23. > :38:26.previous argument, they were coming for the benefits. Iden thing they
:38:27. > :38:33.are. I don't understand a Government that on the one hand is introducing
:38:34. > :38:44.a living wage to beat all those wages... I don't understand the
:38:45. > :38:50.government at all! The government can't sustain that. Are they
:38:51. > :38:56.answering the question you asked? No. My question is that I have no
:38:57. > :39:00.problem with the lady here about political or any other asylum. That
:39:01. > :39:05.is our heritage and we should continue doing that. I have worked
:39:06. > :39:11.in industries, HR and training, where I have worked with a
:39:12. > :39:13.production line that has been put up the -- predominantly Eastern
:39:14. > :39:18.European, to the extent that one of our employees who was British went
:39:19. > :39:22.off with to trash -- depression because nobody spoke to him in his
:39:23. > :39:26.own language for a ten hour shift. He was totally and utterly isolated.
:39:27. > :39:31.These people are great, they work hard. You cannot say they are coming
:39:32. > :39:35.for benefits because they are not. They are coming because they want to
:39:36. > :39:40.work. The trouble is that we do not have an infinite amount of jobs. We
:39:41. > :39:46.do not have an infinite amount of NHS or housing. We are a small
:39:47. > :39:52.country. Something has to give. APPLAUSE
:39:53. > :39:58.We are sitting here in the city of Hull, one of the cities of the
:39:59. > :40:02.nation that has always been connected with the world. Its
:40:03. > :40:06.prosperity, magnificent buildings like that, were based on being open
:40:07. > :40:13.to the world and trading with the world. Very recently in this city we
:40:14. > :40:17.had major investment. Everyone knows that Siemens are investing ?1
:40:18. > :40:21.billion in this city. That will involve some people from Germany
:40:22. > :40:25.coming to work here, just as people from Hull will go and work in
:40:26. > :40:31.Germany. That has been part of the way, through generations, that we
:40:32. > :40:37.have succeeded as a trading city. I think it would be a big mistake for
:40:38. > :40:40.the United Kingdom, as Siemens have said, as well as for them is a firm,
:40:41. > :40:47.if we turn our back on that tradition. We are about to have a
:40:48. > :40:50.referendum. They are investing in the full knowledge that there is a
:40:51. > :40:56.risk of this country deciding to leave Europe. Siemens is not going
:40:57. > :40:59.away. Siemens has come knowing that that is a possibility. This is
:41:00. > :41:06.nonsense to suggest that these things won't happen if we leave the
:41:07. > :41:11.EU. The figure of 3 million new immigrants by 2030, are you happy
:41:12. > :41:15.with that? That was a figure the office for National Statistics have
:41:16. > :41:19.published before. The Government, rather than to use a different
:41:20. > :41:24.figure that they had estimated for the purpose, they said, we want to
:41:25. > :41:28.reduce immigration, but we will use the figure that is out there. You
:41:29. > :41:33.are happy with that? That would be all right? You answer her question
:41:34. > :41:37.about schools and the National Health Service. Theresa May has been
:41:38. > :41:44.clear that we want to bring down the levels of immigration, but in terms
:41:45. > :41:48.of putting that model out, responsibly, we have reviewed the
:41:49. > :41:52.figures... Because she knows she can't. She herself has said it is
:41:53. > :42:02.harder to control immigration being in the EU. Very honestly, Theresa
:42:03. > :42:05.May made clear that with the EU policy she cannot control
:42:06. > :42:09.immigration, and she can't control who comes in. The living wage is six
:42:10. > :42:14.times what it is in Romanian and Bulgarian. It is very attractive to
:42:15. > :42:16.them. Our immigration quota gets filled up with low skilled workers
:42:17. > :42:20.and we are not able to filled up with low skilled workers
:42:21. > :42:21.nurses, teachers, the IT programmers that the economy needs.
:42:22. > :42:32.APPLAUSE You, sir. 3 million people coming in
:42:33. > :42:36.from basically Eastern Europe in the next ten years is the equivalent of
:42:37. > :42:43.building tens cities the size of Nottingham. How can the country cope
:42:44. > :42:46.with doing that? It is impossible. I will go directly to the Lady's
:42:47. > :42:54.question, because you need an answer. I think it is in the
:42:55. > :42:54.interests of the country to stay in Europe.
:42:55. > :43:02.APPLAUSE However, I do recognise the general
:43:03. > :43:07.concern about immigration. I hear many of the things you have said in
:43:08. > :43:10.my constituency. You wanted something practical, didn't you? My
:43:11. > :43:16.answer would be, look at protecting skilled wages. Why are production
:43:17. > :43:22.lines the way you have described? Because companies go abroad and
:43:23. > :43:26.bring people in. If there were European rules that protected the
:43:27. > :43:30.wages of the skilled workforce, there would not be that incentive
:43:31. > :43:35.for them to go around and bring people into undercut the skilled
:43:36. > :43:40.wage level. That is my vision of Europe, a social Europe, a people's
:43:41. > :43:43.Europe that works for everybody. To put it in context, we have to
:43:44. > :43:49.remember in this debate some of the points that Alex Wright be made.
:43:50. > :43:54.Immigration is not a one-way street, as sometimes presented. There are
:43:55. > :44:01.millions of British people around Europe, working abroad, as my dad
:44:02. > :44:07.did. Also, they are net contribute is. That is totally dishonest.
:44:08. > :44:11.People coming in are net contributors. They add to the
:44:12. > :44:15.British economy. As you rightly said, the refugee situation is
:44:16. > :44:19.entirely within our control because we are outside Schengen. If we left
:44:20. > :44:24.the European Union and wanted trade benefits, we would have to accept
:44:25. > :44:29.free movement. I am fed up with the lines being given by the Government,
:44:30. > :44:36.and joining in with... Talk about elites. We are being browbeaten into
:44:37. > :44:42.thinking that life will stop when we leave the EU. It has to be when, not
:44:43. > :44:46.if, because we cannot control our future, cannot control our borders.
:44:47. > :44:53.David Cameron wants to pave the way from Ankara in Turkey to Brussels,
:44:54. > :44:57.so that Turkey can join the EU. 75 million people. Turkey is bordered
:44:58. > :45:02.by Syria, Iran and Iraq. Do we think that will improve our security
:45:03. > :45:06.situation? Do we think there is a possibility that we will know who is
:45:07. > :45:12.at large in an enlarged Europe? This is crazy? But the politicians who
:45:13. > :45:15.are telling us we can't leave Europe, five minutes ago were saying
:45:16. > :45:19.they were worried about this. Theresa May is worried about this.
:45:20. > :45:24.In that case, go with what you believe and leave?
:45:25. > :45:28.We must have some kind of discipline of question and answer, not
:45:29. > :45:33.everybody speaking over everybody because then nobody can hear. The
:45:34. > :45:38.man in the blue shirt, I would like to go back to him and then maybe
:45:39. > :45:43.Greg Clark could answer it, you put the question? Yes. You are looking
:45:44. > :45:47.at three million people coming in, so it's the equivalent of building
:45:48. > :45:52.ten cities the size of Nottingham in that time span and all the drains on
:45:53. > :45:56.social services, health, schools, that will go with the ten cities.
:45:57. > :46:03.How are we going to cope with doing that? Basically, they're economic
:46:04. > :46:08.migrants from Europe and they are going to be a massive drain on
:46:09. > :46:13.society. You are the communities minister, the Secretary of State, so
:46:14. > :46:16.what is your answer? Two things; first of all, as part of the
:46:17. > :46:21.negotiation, we have for the first time the ability to require people
:46:22. > :46:24.to contribute to the benefits system before they can... That is a very
:46:25. > :46:32.significant change. The second thing goes to the point that the lady made
:46:33. > :46:36.earlier about many people working, coming from Eastern Europe to do
:46:37. > :46:42.jobs that other people from this country haven't been doing. What
:46:43. > :46:47.we've had is the introduction of the national living wage and the
:46:48. > :46:53.increased pay can help make those jobs more attractive for people here
:46:54. > :46:58.that haven't been doing them in the past. There's a question that needs
:46:59. > :47:03.to be answered by Jill and Paul, if we do leave the European Union, what
:47:04. > :47:07.are we going to do? Are we going to require visas from people from Spain
:47:08. > :47:13.and France to come into this country? You know perfectly well, if
:47:14. > :47:19.we don't choose to... But... There are a good many countries who should
:47:20. > :47:26.have to do that. Paul, you take this? We can either choose to have
:47:27. > :47:30.them or not. What is the proposal? There doesn't need to be a proposal.
:47:31. > :47:34.We need to know what it would be like. Which countries do you want,
:47:35. > :47:38.within the European Union, to prevent people from coming from,
:47:39. > :47:42.France, Spain, which ones? It's not a matter of the countries, it's
:47:43. > :47:45.whether people have the skills that we need, because they'll bring
:47:46. > :47:51.something to this country we can't provide at home. Other civilised
:47:52. > :47:53.countries can operate such systems perfectly well, we simply don't have
:47:54. > :47:59.the choice at the moment and can't get it. I want to go back to our
:48:00. > :48:03.audience. We have heard from a number of people worried about
:48:04. > :48:07.immigration and presumably also voting Brexit because of it. I would
:48:08. > :48:12.like to hear, because I know you are fairly evenly divided, from people
:48:13. > :48:18.who'd like us to remain. A few hands go down. You, Sir?
:48:19. > :48:23.The man in the pale blue behind you. I'm undecided on the remain or
:48:24. > :48:27.leave. I want to refer back to Jill's point about the 75 million
:48:28. > :48:30.Turks coming into the UK. That's scare morning saying 75 million
:48:31. > :48:35.people are going to come here. That's not going to happen and for
:48:36. > :48:39.Turkey to join the EU, they have to fill 20 conditions and the reality
:48:40. > :48:49.they have only fulfilled three at the moment so that reality is a long
:48:50. > :48:54.way off. I think if he's got a mobile phone to phone his relatives
:48:55. > :48:57.here - I think that is a an offensive remark used by the
:48:58. > :49:03.gentleman there. As a migrant, life is not easy in the UK. The
:49:04. > :49:07.misconception that we hear all the time when in the streets or when we
:49:08. > :49:10.talk to people, that we are here for the benefits, we are here for that,
:49:11. > :49:14.we are all here or we move around the world to better our lives,
:49:15. > :49:19.that's the bottom line about immigration. Everyone moves where
:49:20. > :49:25.they can see that they can make a better life for themselves. So the
:49:26. > :49:29.whole EU referendum for me or for my colleagues, other immigrants, is a
:49:30. > :49:35.referendum on immigration because, if the numbers were not shown to be
:49:36. > :49:39.as big as they are, I don't think we'll be having the EU referendum.
:49:40. > :49:43.What is your own, just if I may, your story, when did you come to
:49:44. > :49:48.Britain? I think the personal story would be for another day, but I
:49:49. > :49:55.think... All right. But the issue is, there is a misconception. I
:49:56. > :49:58.don't know what remark you are referring to, but I presume it's the
:49:59. > :50:01.remark about the large scale migration. Is it about everybody
:50:02. > :50:10.having mobile telephones? There is a lot of that goes on.
:50:11. > :50:18.There are two issues that are being conflated here. One is the large
:50:19. > :50:22.scale migration that is now starting which is an economic phenomena, and
:50:23. > :50:27.the other is the refugees' link to Syria and the Middle East and
:50:28. > :50:32.they're very different issues. In my remarks, I referred to the risk of
:50:33. > :50:38.large scale economic migration. All migration is economic migration. No,
:50:39. > :50:41.it's not. Let me explain. Wars disrupt economy and livelihoods so
:50:42. > :50:44.when that happens, people move to places where they are safe to
:50:45. > :50:48.continue their lives because, I'm telling you this because I'm an
:50:49. > :50:55.immigrant so you are not a migrant, you can tell me what life is about.
:50:56. > :50:58.So at the end of the day, I think there needs to be factual arguments
:50:59. > :51:05.in regards to these issues. OK. We've only got six or seven
:51:06. > :51:12.minutes left. Just one point about the economy. Greg Clark, will we be
:51:13. > :51:17.better off, richer as a society, if we stay?
:51:18. > :51:24.Yes, we will, and you LAUGHTER. . Just need to look at the
:51:25. > :51:29.respective commentators from the Bank of England, to the OECD, to the
:51:30. > :51:33.leaders of our trading partners right across the world, not just in
:51:34. > :51:40.Europe. Is this your strongest argument for voting? I think it's
:51:41. > :51:44.very clear from everyone that's... Like Mark Carney got his forecast
:51:45. > :51:49.right? ! Access to markets and prosperity. If we were to take this
:51:50. > :51:54.big risk of leaving the EU. And Jill better off or not? The OECD is
:51:55. > :51:58.funded by the EU. Nobody knows what growth is going to be in the next
:51:59. > :52:06.quarter, let alone 15 years ahead. Nobody can forecast. Nobody knows? I
:52:07. > :52:10.think we shall be... Brexit with your fingers crossed? No, I think
:52:11. > :52:14.we'll be better off because we'll be free to make decisions which are in
:52:15. > :52:24.our own interests as strong world power. Jill says it as though we'll
:52:25. > :52:30.go back to... ?350 million million every week. Jill says it as though
:52:31. > :52:35.we'll go back to what we were. No, we don't want to go back anywhere, I
:52:36. > :52:38.want to go forward in freedom. Britain's history after the war,
:52:39. > :52:43.Britain was an outward lacking nation. If we leave, who'll be the
:52:44. > :52:47.happiest, Russia or America, I can tell you now it will be Russia. The
:52:48. > :52:51.patriotic case is to stay in to be true to Britain's past.
:52:52. > :52:56.APPLAUSE. And secondly. No, not secondly. Who
:52:57. > :53:10.shouted out rub snish you can add to the point? Was it you? No. You? OK.
:53:11. > :53:14.I'm in. That's a rubbish argument, Andy. It would lead, not just to the
:53:15. > :53:17.break-up of Europe, it would lead to the break-up of Britain because
:53:18. > :53:26.there'll be a demand for a second referendum. We have got Alex Salmond
:53:27. > :53:30.here. We've got a question from David Reid. Will Brexit lead
:53:31. > :53:36.inevitably to the break-up of the United Kingdom? Your call, Alex
:53:37. > :53:41.Salmond? We've heard it from Andy, I agree with Andy. If you had a
:53:42. > :53:45.situation where, and it looks like Scotland are going to vote very
:53:46. > :53:48.strongly in fave, if you are in a situation where Scotland is dragged
:53:49. > :53:52.out of Europe against the will of the Scottish people, then that would
:53:53. > :53:57.be a change in material circumstances that would justify
:53:58. > :54:01.another referendum. You might say, oh, well, I'm going to campaign to
:54:02. > :54:07.bring about that situation, well, I'm not. I believe, like Andy, that
:54:08. > :54:11.these islands' future is, as a European country, and we should do
:54:12. > :54:15.that because it's the best thing. But if the cards fall, as you
:54:16. > :54:19.describe, Sir, there would be another Scottish referendum and this
:54:20. > :54:23.time I think that yes would win it. One last thing, I'm the last person
:54:24. > :54:27.in the world, having gone through that referendum experience two years
:54:28. > :54:31.ago, to have any respect for project fear, whether it comes from the Tory
:54:32. > :54:35.government or project fear, whether it comes from the Brexiters, but
:54:36. > :54:40.whatever else you do, make up your minds, not on the hideous things,
:54:41. > :54:44.the plagues of Egypt that will descend on this benighted country if
:54:45. > :54:48.it does one thing or the other, make up your mind on principle, on who
:54:49. > :54:51.you believe that we should share things with the other countries of
:54:52. > :54:54.Europe or whether you believe there are advantages in doing something
:54:55. > :55:07.else. Don't believe the scare mongers on either side. Paul? I may
:55:08. > :55:12.not speak for all the people in favour of Brexit, but if Scotland
:55:13. > :55:24.did leave the United Kingdom, in my regard, that is a win-win. Alex is a
:55:25. > :55:28.very canny politician and he managed to negotiate an even better subsidy
:55:29. > :55:34.for Scotland than they previously had. Scottish people get ?1200 per
:55:35. > :55:38.person more than English people. You don't like refugees or Scots,
:55:39. > :55:44.anybody else you don't like? I like... Do you like people in Hull?
:55:45. > :55:47.I like everybody who stand on their own two feet. You used to like
:55:48. > :55:53.Liberal Democrats, but not any more? ! The Scots need toe stand on their
:55:54. > :55:57.own two feet, they have a ?15 billion deficit. Alex Salmond, I've
:55:58. > :56:02.always taken to be a man of his word. During the Scottish referendum
:56:03. > :56:07.campaign, Alex said as First Minister very clearly that this was
:56:08. > :56:11.a once in the lifetime referendum in Scotland and that people needed to
:56:12. > :56:14.bear that in mind. We knew that the Government was committed to having a
:56:15. > :56:19.referendum on the EU, he didn't mention it at the time, I think that
:56:20. > :56:23.he should be consistent with the position that he took. All right.
:56:24. > :56:29.During the general election of last year... We have got to stop, Alex,
:56:30. > :56:36.we have run out of time. We won 56 out of 59. You said it was a once in
:56:37. > :56:38.a lifetime. This isn't a once in a lifetime referendum because
:56:39. > :56:43.everybodith everybody that votes in, they can vote again if it doesn't
:56:44. > :56:47.work out. If you vote in, you've got another chance? I want to go
:56:48. > :56:51.straight to the question. I commend Alex on his honesty her, gave a very
:56:52. > :56:55.honest answer there before. For the people sitting at home watching this
:56:56. > :56:58.programme tonight, I think in my view, he's just given them the
:56:59. > :57:02.single biggest reason to go out and vote in because if you love Britain,
:57:03. > :57:05.if you want it to stay together, vote for it to remain in the
:57:06. > :57:15.European Union as a partnership and vote for it so that it stays
:57:16. > :57:20.together as a British partnership. APPLAUSE.
:57:21. > :57:23.The voice in my head tells me we are overrunning our hour and Andrew Neil
:57:24. > :57:32.will be very, very cross with us. Good, good. Win-win!
:57:33. > :57:38.So we have to stop. Sorry to those who couldn't get in. Thank you for
:57:39. > :57:42.so many hands being up, sorry we can't do more than the hour. Perhaps
:57:43. > :57:46.you should come to Manchester next week all of you, we'll start all
:57:47. > :57:51.over again. We have the former Chancellor Nigel Lawson, the boss of
:57:52. > :57:54.Ryanair making a rare appearance on Question Time, Michael O'Leary, and
:57:55. > :58:00.that's in Manchester and we are in Aberdeen the week after that. If you
:58:01. > :58:05.want to go to either of those venues, go to our website, or call
:58:06. > :58:10.us. If you are listening own Radio 5 Live and you can bear more, the
:58:11. > :58:14.debate goes on until the early hours, but here it comes to a halt,
:58:15. > :58:19.well in the studio it does, no doubt it will go on outside. My thanks to
:58:20. > :58:22.the panel and to all of you who came to Hull. Until next week on Question
:58:23. > :58:28.Time, good night.