22/09/2016 Question Time

Welcome to this week's Question Time which comes from Sutton Coldfield.

Our panel tonight, Conservative MP and leading campaigner

Labour's Liz Kendall, who ran for the leadership last year

Newly re-elected leader of the Green Party, Caroline Lucas.

Liberal Democrat Health spokesman Norman Lamb.

And broadcaster and columnist Julia Hartley-Brewer.

You can join the debate on Facebook, Twitter, or text 83981.

The first question comes from Tom Leonard. When will the naysayers

stop naying and be positive and forward looking towards a bright

Brexit future. APPLAUSE

Caroline Lucas, if you are a naysayer, when will you stop naying?

I am just looking at the evidence and raising concerns about the fact

that, for example, this government seems to have no idea which

direction it is going. We had the referendum and we should listen to

what people said. I was on the Remain side and I am sorry the

majority went against us but I accept the result. People have had a

clear voice to say they want to leave but we are not clear where we

are going, and the government does not seem to be clear either. We had

three months over the summer with three different ministers giving

different versions of whether or not it would include free movement of

people, whether it would include the single market, whether we could have

the single market without free movement, and so on. There is a lack

of clarity and this really matters. If we don't have access to the

single market, if we are not in it, it has big questions about

environmental and is, workers' rights. I want to stand up for the

freedom of movement, an important principle that we benefit from and

we make the most of when we visit other places, too. I am worried that

it is not clear where this process is going and that is why I think it

is right to have a vote again on the issue... A second referendum? On the

issue of what the final deal looks like. This is not about rerunning...

Listen, the big rallying cry of the Brexit leaders was, give us back our

democracy. Why can't we have a democratic decision on which kind of

Brexit option is on the table? I do not want to rerun the 23rd of June.

I respect the vote, but I think if they lot of the campaign was about

democracy, why can't people be trusted to have a vote on whether

they want a hard Brexit, meaning no environmental protections, no

freedom of movement, no mention of the single market, which would have

a big impact... What aspect of the vote do you respect?

APPLAUSE I respect the fact that we are going

to have to leave the EU. I am deeply sad about it but I respect it. What

I want to have clarity over and I think it is right for the British

people to have a say over is whether it is a soft Brexit, which allows us

to still be members of the single market, and allows us to have

environmental protections, freedom of movement, or whether it is one

that injects us into the wilderness, where we will have businesses having

to pay hugely more to do business, where we do not have environmental

protections, and where people who live here now, who have made their

lives here in good faith from other EU countries still do not know if

they have a right to stay here. That is wrong.

APPLAUSE Tom Leonard, you asked the question,

is she a naysayer in your view? I'm afraid you are. What do you want to

see? We have been given a great opportunity to engage with the rest

of the world. Lots of countries out there that suffered under Soviet

oppression would have yearned for a situation like this, and it is time

to unleash our potential and engage with the rest of the world and

repair damaged relationships, such as the Commonwealth, where all the

growth is happening at the moment APPLAUSE

Are you arrest less at the pace of things developing, or are you happy?

I was not expecting any haste but I think Theresa May is treading

carefully and wants to be precise and clear-headed about it and see

what lies ahead before rushing into anything. Liz Kendall. Like

Caroline, I voted and campaign for Remain, in fact we shared a platform

together. But we lost. And I don't think there should be a second

referendum. I think we should respect what people have voted for.

I want to see Theresa May setting out clearly what Britain is going to

try and get out of these negotiations. And I don't want us to

give up on membership of the single market. It is absolutely vital for

manufacturing, for our financial services, but also for workers'

rights and environmental standards, preventing a race to the bottom. So

I want to see Theresa May making the strong case for British businesses.

Of course, we must also be opening up possibilities with countries and

trade negotiations across the world, but I think it would be a mistake

to... You are not allowed to do that in the single market. We can have

trade with other countries. You do already. I don't want to see us

giving up on the single market. You give up, therefore, on controlling

immigration. I don't believe that is the case. I know from my own

constituency, which voted Leave and from cities across the Midlands

where I campaign, that immigration was a massive concern. We have to

make that part of the conversation in this country and with our

European colleagues. I think some other countries, like Italy, may

well agree that reforms need to be made. They are saying huge problems

in those countries. So let's not give up on an ambitious negotiating

strategy which allows us to stay in the single market and make some

changes to freedom of movement, which is really why most people

voted for Leave. In the fourth row. We are one of the largest export

markets for Europe. Wider you think Europe is going to give up on us if

we have given up on them? -- why do you think Europe is going to give up

on us? All of Germany's cars are sold in the UK, so why would they

give up on us? Two members of the audience are right. Mr Leonard put

the argument better than I can. You are absolutely right, I am going to

reinforce his point. It is such an exciting opportunity, and the

opportunity is through leaving the customs union so we can trade freely

with the rest of the world. That means we have to come out of the

single market, which is the force of regulating us. The problem with the

single market is that means we effectively in the European Union.

Are When Remain supporters say they want to stay in the single market,

that is code for saying they do not like the referendum result. If we

are leaving, we have to be out of the single market. Your point on

trade is spot on. We have a deficit with the European Union of up to

?100 billion a year. We are the major customer for the European

Union of any country in the world. Whilst we are still in the EU, the

biggest customer is the US. Once we are out, it will be us. All of those

German car manufacturing companies, Irish beef is almost all bought in

the UK. Are the French going to stop selling us champagne because they

are cross with us? It is very unlikely. They all have too agreed

together. When you go to these countries itemising why people would

want to have a trade relationship with us, you forget that when it

comes to the EU, all of them have to agree. We have already seen the

Czech Republic and Slovakia and others who are saying they will not

accept anything that does not accept that we need freedom of movement for

them to be here. Your idea that we can pick off these countries does

not work. If they do not allow us to get free movement of people and say

they will not trade for us, a million jobs in Germany that relate

to selling manufacturing products to the UK, that is quite an important

economic factor. If they say that, we fall back on WTO rules, which is

an average 2.4% tariff. The pound has fallen by about 15%, more than

wipes out the tariff. The economic opportunity is huge. As you said, we

need to be looking at the world. The next 100 years will not be about a

sclerotic failing European Union, but about China, India and Brazil.

That is our opportunity. APPLAUSE

Norman, I will come to you in a moment. We have heard from a couple

of members of the audience who voted to leave. Anybody who voted to

remain who feels... Yes, do you feel upset by what is going on and wish

the government would get on with it? I think there needs to be some

decision on what it is going to look like. You say we need to get out of

the single market. There are people who voted to leave who want to stay

in the single market because nobody knew that was what they were voting

for. We need clarity of what this looks like, so we can then decide if

it is what we want, or not. Do you think the Government knows what they

are heading for? The Government does not appear to have a clue what they

are heading for. Norman Lamb. Indeed, we are told the Cabinet is

split on whether to stay in the single market. This is actually

quite important that our economic interests. I voted and campaigned

for Remain, but I accept the result. I thought you wanted another

referendum. Well, we want a referendum, and I think this is as

important for those who voted to leave as those who voted to stay, on

the deal that is done. Because who knows what they will negotiate? We

have no idea where the Government is going on this. They have not said

anything. We do not know whether they will try to stay in the single

market, or leave. These are fundamental issues. We have a load

of people working, for example, in our health service and care

services, who come to work in this country, about 80,000 in care

services from other parts of the European Union. What is their

future? What happens to future people who want to come and work in

care services, in the NHS or any other part of our economy? In all of

this, it is really important not to lose sight of the fact that whilst

there are concerns about immigration, immigration is also

incredibly important for our country, and we should, for a start,

guarantee although is people who are already hear the right to remain. I

think leaving them in the lurch is outrageous.

APPLAUSE Julia Hartley-Brewer, can you

address the idea of a second referendum on the terms negotiated?

Does that sound democratic in the way that Caroline and Norman

suggest? I have some news about the second referendum. That vote on the

23rd of June, that was the second referendum.

APPLAUSE We keep being told that we have no

idea what is going to happen, we haven't got a clue. We didn't have a

clue back in 1975, those who got a vote what was going to happen. We

did not have a clue at all of the times when there were major changes

in our relationship to the EU without anyone bothering to ask the

British people. It is amazing how many people who love the EU did not

think democracy mattered for all those decades, when they were

handing over the democratic powers of our Parliament to another body

oversees. APPLAUSE

So you get loud applause for that, but my question was, if you believe

that much in democracy, why not have a third referendum? If anyone on

this panel had mentioned we would need another referendum to decide

things afterwards before we actually have that, absolutely. But

Parliament voted, MPs voted to have a referendum and the Government set

out leaflets at our expense, 9 million quid, saying that the

Government would enact our decision. Every time there is a vote to do

with the EU, the EU does the same thing. If you don't vote the right

way, we make you do it again. It happened in France, it happened in

Ireland, it happened in Denmark. This is not going to happen here.

You are scared of it, aren't you? If MPs try to stop this happening, I

will be first in the queue with my pitchfork outside the houses of

parliament. APPLAUSE

But it should not, David, be a stitch up by members of the Cabinet.

You cannot leave it to Parliament to go against the wishes of the British

people. It should surely be the British people who decide on the

final deal. Let me just say this. I'm not sure I trust Boris Johnson,

for instance. He stood in front of that campaign bus with ?350 million

to the NHS, and it is not going to come. He lied to the British people.

The woman there in the front? I think anybody who says that we

didn't know what we were getting into, it's not right. As a young

person I was told if we voted leave my future was down the drain. I felt

it was already down the drain with all the previous decisions. I

thought this was a chance for Britain to say we can take

responsibility for ourselves. Politicians say this went wrong

because of Europe previously. APPLAUSE.

Jacob, you haven't answered the point about a third referendum, we

have to call it because we did have one back in the 70s. Is there not an

argument democratically for looking at the package that's negotiated by

the Conservative Government in allowing the audience here and

everybody else in the country on saying whether it's the right

package? If the package were rejected, does that mean we then

remain in the European Union, and is it therefore a reversal of the

referendum we've already had? If it is, it's completely pointless and it

shows contempt for democracy and... I agree. Delighted. Excellent, come

on? On that point, I don't think if you had a hard Brexit let's say that

was on offer in a referendum and voted against it, I don't think the

consequence of that should be the status quo, in other words you

pretend 23rd June didn't happen. You are sending a message to two back to

the Government to get something better. OK, so you have a perpetual

referendum until finally the termsdeparture are agreed. I'm not

frightened of the British election rat, they get things right, as they

did on 23rd June and I think if you voted again you would vote the same

way in larger numbers because you would think it was content to...

More, more, more... What is interesting... More

audience. Thank you. APPLAUSE.

. More audience, please. You, madam?

There are two clear things that can happen now that we have left. The

one way is, we stay in the single market, the other is that we leave.

Both of those involve leaving, but they are two completely different

scenarios and everyone who voted Leave would have thought of both.

Isn't it fair to give the British public a say in this? Absolutely.

The woman in white? So, my question would be, if the British electorate

are responsible enough to decide to leave the European Union Are they

responsible enough to decide how we leave it?

Hear, hear, well said. You in the checked shirt? Has nobody

had a crystal ball when the referendum took place, nobody knows

the long-term impact of Brexit and I think therefore another referendum

will give the British public the same dilemma and they'll just be

voting on the basis of chance rather than fact.

So the three wise men will decide, happy with that? They'll have more

information than the wider general public. . Don't believe that.

Everybody trusts them, do they? The woman in orange? All the talk about

greater clarity over what the Government's planning to do - I

negotiate contracts for a living and if I had to go into negotiations

with the other side knowing what my tactics and baseline positions were,

it would make my job a whole lot more difficult. That seems to be

what we are asking Theresa May to do.

The problem is for many companies, so the Japanese Government says that

Japanese companies who employ 140,000 people in the UK want to

know about what tariffs they may or may not be paying, what the

regulation system will be and whether it will be consistent across

Europe, whether they'll still be able the get workers across Europe

if they need them. That will determine long-term investment

decisions for the future. So companies, manufacturing companies

in our financial services need clarity. You mean the Prime Minister

should say what's happening now? Or should Article 50 be there now? No,

it's more important we get this right and take our time to do it.

You said the Japanese are impatient? No. What they want to know is, what

is the deal that might be coming forward. How can they know? Because

the Government's not having those discussions with people, whether

they are the financial services or the manufacturing companies, they

don't know what is happening and they need to. If you run your own

business, the thing you want above all is certainty for the future and

they are not getting that now. I'm going to move on. Brexit will come

back week on week until the negotiations are complete and then

we'll have Norman Lamb back. We're in Boston, Lincolnshire

next week and Neath, Come and speak your mind,

I'll give the details at the end. Second question from Ted Woodley

please? If Jeremy Corbyn win this is weekend, is it time the MPs who

oppose him either sign up to his programme or move aside?

APPLAUSE. Liz Kendall you are not a supporter

exactly, what do you think? Well, I voted for Owen Smith in this

leadership election and I hope that he wins. But whoever is elected on

Saturday needs to unite our party and take the fight to the Tories.

But I don't think that you get unity by telling people they have to

support you. You get it by showing that you can lead a strong and

effective team, that you can set credible policies that are right for

this century, not the last, and that you can actually convince the public

to support you, not just your members. We have got a mountain to

climb as a Labour Party if we want to get elected in 2020. Over 100

seats that we'd need to win. We can only do that if we really talk to

the public and not just ourselves. It's easy to talk to people who

already agree with you. It's much tougher, as I discovered during the

referendum campaign, to talk to people who disagree. But we have to

do that if we want to get back into Government and put our principles

into practise. Does that mean you would or wouldn't sign up to Jeremy

Corbyn's programme? Well, I disagree with Jeremy on many issues,

particularly around defence and our membership of things like NATO. I

think it's very important that Labour remains a strong party on

defence. Whoever is elected, I don't think that I would put myself

forward to serve in the Shadow Cabinet. We have got some great

people who can take the fight to the Tories, but we also need I think to

do some serious long-term thinking about the future of our party and

what we've got to offer to the country. That's what I'll be

focussing on in the coming years. APPLAUSE.

You asked the question, what is your view? I'm not a member of the Labour

Party but I do support a lot of Jeremy Corbyn's socialist policies.

I find what's happened with the growth in the Labour Party

extraordinary. The growth in the membership? Yes. I just can't see

how it's compatible having politicians, with respect like Liz

Kendall who, in my opinion represent the past, the period of the Labour

Party, one of their worst periods was the Tony Blair time. We won

three general elections. No, you lost over four million votes during

that time. The gap between Richard poor ballooned during New Labour's

time. There is a whole load of young working class people who see Jeremy

Corbyn as, not perfect but offering something different and having a

different view of politicians in general. That has toe be welcomed.

APPLAUSE. And do you think that...

APPLAUSE. Do you think like the leader of

Unite Len McCluskey, he said that people in the Labour Party who tend

to oppose Corbyn should be deselected and not stand for Labour?

Shifted out by their constituencies? I would support the call for

mandatory reselection. I wouldn't necessarily say that you should

target people you don't like, I think you should have a democratic

discussion in a democratic organisation, such as the Labour

Party, and I don't think being an MP should be a job for life.

APPLAUSE. Neither do I, Sir, but, you know, we

already have a process for reselection of MPs. Nobody has a

right to be a Labour candidate or Labour MP, a divine right. All

Labour MPs have been selected by a relatively small number of members

and then a much wider number of members of the public. That is a

serious responsibility on Labour members and to actually tell the

public that they don't have The Right to Choose someone who they

already think is the best person to represent their area, I think would

be a really serious issue, especially if it's for internal

factional issues. If they want to have their say, they can join the

Labour Party and take part, if they don't want to have their say, they

don't have to take part, it's a free country.

Julie Hartley-Brewer? The thing about democracy, you have Her

Majesty's opposition and the reality is the Labour needs to make a

decision whether it wants to be a serious alternative Government in

waiting or a Friday night Marxist Book Club, it can't be both.

APPLAUSE. The reality is that you ask Labour

Party members to vote for socialism, imagine everyone's surprise, they

vote for socialism, but the British people aren't going to vote for a

socialist Government. It's never going to happen. It's absolute

pie-in-the-sky politics to think it will happen. The reality is, Jeremy

Corbyn couldn't lead the Labour Party to victory in an egg and spoon

race right now. APPLAUSE.

Very good hard-working sensible MPs like Liz Kendall who talk about the

real issues affecting real people with proper substantive ideas for

how to actually solve some of the problems that are affecting the

working class voters dream of course a socialist utopian future or you

are falling by the wayside, that's a horrible mistake. I don't know what

the Labour Party should do, they are facing deselection for speaking the

truth or they are going to face losing their seats in 2020. What I

can suggest is, go and get another job, there are vacancies on Bake

Off! APPLAUSE.

Liz, if Jeremy Corbyn wins the election again, you want the party

to unite, then you are saying you won't serve under him in the Shadow

Cabinet in the next breath, which is it? You can serve the Labour Party

in many ways. I think we doe, as a party, need to do some serious

thinking Whant we offer for the future, how we make the economy work

and Public Services fit for the future and what Britain's role is in

the world, especially post-Brexit. You can serve in different ways and

I would say that for many years on the Brexit, overminute held his firm

principles and never gave up on them. That is why everybody likes

him and is getting behind him, exactly for that reason. So do I, I

do not just change my opinion on what I believe in just because

things are tough and I'm sure overmist wouldn't ask me to do

anything any different. Norman Lamb? In direct answer to your question, I

think it's incredibly difficult for those MPs because there are

irreconcilable differences within the Labour Party and what do they do

in terms of their conscience? Do they support a leader who they don't

believe in? Or do they continue to campaign for something else? I used

to be a lawyer, irreconcilable differences seem to me to be grounds

for divorce and I suspect that ultimately that's what will happen

here. But I think the really worrying thing for democracy is that

there is nothing holding the Government to account. That's really

important, whether you are a Conservative, a Labour supporter, a

Liberal Democrat, you need to have accountable Government. If you have

no real challenge, you get arrogance and complacency. If the Tories just

assume that they'll win in 2020, it's disastrous in terms of good

Government. So there is a crying need I think for something new to

emerge. I wonder what it will be. Hold on a second, Tim Farron claims

he gets these texts from Labour MPs who're thinking of coming over, but

we haven't seen any come over. Is it Liberal fantasy this? I don't know,

I haven't seen the texts, but I do think there are lots of discussions

that go on in Parliament. People talk to each other. There is no

sense that people are going to be splitting in the Labour Party, let

me make that clear. What my message is to many Labour members worried

about what is happening is, don't split and we won't quit. David,

surely those who want an alternative to the Tories, surely we have to

focus on how we build a progressive force that in 2020 stands a chance

of winning an election against the Tories. It's a despair to assume the

Tories will be in power for the foreseeable future. You, Sir? If

Jeremy does win, you are going to have a miserable time over the next

few years in the party. Stop smiling!

LAUGHTER. So why not have a break-away party?

Why would I leave my own party? You can't put your message across. A

left-wing Labour Socialist Party is not what we want. I'll always fight

for the Labour Party. You don't go into politics for an easy life. If

you have principles, you stick to them. We need to surely build

something up. Progressive parties who work together. You could work

with the Greens, the SNP. I don't want and believe there would be an

electoral pact with other parties. I've always thought if on particular

issues you agree, so Caroline and I campaigned together on Remain and

I've worked with Norman on getting a decent funding deal for the NHS and

if you agree on particular issues, try and work together, the public is

sick of people shouting at each other. Caroline Lucas, your go?

Thank you. To two back to the question, I think if he wins it's

absolutely crucial for the party to unite behind him for the reasons

Norman said. We have seen the Government getting away with huge

amounts in terms of rolling back the state, privatising the NHS, going

away with the Brexit, ignoring climate change, they are making the

lives of my constituents in Brighton very, very miserable. So you are

saying that... Liz has to sign up to Jeremy Corbyn's programme. That is

the question? I think Labour and Liz Doohan to

sign up for that. There is not much difference between what Owen Smith

is saying on a vast number of policies and what Jeremy Corbyn is

saying. I think, as well as uniting, Labour needs to be bolder. The

chances of Labour winning the next election with an outright majority

are vanishingly small. Therefore, we do need to look at ways of seeing

how we can do better for our constituents by working more closely

together. I want to lay a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn to say that what he

should be doing, if he wants to do politics differently, as he says, is

to embrace electoral form. Let everybody's vote count all year

round and then we might get the kind of politics we need. In the second

row up there on the right. Any leader whose method of uniting the

party is to say that unless you agree with me, you have to leave, is

not fit to be a leader and certainly not fit to be the Prime Minister.

Jacob. Thank you. I agree with Norman Lamb's point, which I think

is spot-on, that good government needs strong opposition. I like it

from a narrow party political point that there is a hopeless opposition.

But I value the constitution even more than I value narrow party

political points. And I have a sneaking admiration for Jeremy

Corbyn. I think he is an amazingly honest and straightforward

politician who says what he thinks. But... But what he thinks is both

dangerous and unelectable. APPLAUSE

It would be dangerous for our national security, it would ruin our

economy. It is a really dangerous programme for the nation. And

sensible people like Liz Kendall cannot, in good conscience, go on

the front bench with that sort of programme. If Labour is to win

elections, it needs to win seats like mind, which was a Labour seat

until 2010 with a marginal boundary changes. I happen to think if Liz

Kendall were leader of the Labour Party, I would face stiff

competition at the next election. If Jeremy Corbyn is leader, my majority

will go up, and that is a bad position for British politics to be

in. We don't want that. We need serious opposition. It is really

good for government. It makes government think about things more

carefully. It is the proper process. But Jeremy Corbyn cannot be that. He

is destroying the Labour Party, in my view, and that is a short-term

political advantage for us. The man spectacles. A lot of working-class

people are on zero-hours contracts. Jeremy Corbyn's ten pledges include

an end to those. Many working-class people are in poor quality, high

rent, privately owned housing. Jeremy Corbyn has said half a

million council houses. What of Jeremy Corbyn's ten pledges can Liz

Kendall possibly object to? APPLAUSE

At the last general election in 2015 we pledged to end the zero-hours

contracts, building more homes, tackling poor quality rented

accommodation. You ask what I disagree with. I said earlier on, in

answering the question at the beginning, that I believe in

multilateral disarmament. I think you can't just hope that other

countries give up their nuclear weapons. Putting peace at the heart

of foreign policy is not withdrawing from Nato, not unilateral

disarmament. I think he does believe... You think, you do not

know. I was on many hustings with him where that is what he said. The

submarines without missiles. Is that... He actually made that a free

vote. We have to keep moving because we have so much to talk about. Do

you mind? If you can do a brief answer. Although Jacob says he is a

nice man and consistent, the atmosphere in the Labour Party, with

the abuse of particularly female members, I find absolutely horrific.

Christopher Webb, to round this off. Your question. Is Theresa May under

any pressure to call a general election in the spring? Jeremy

Corbyn says he is putting the Labour Party, if he wins, on a footing

phrase bring general election. Is May under any pressure to call one?

Jacob Rees-Mogg. I don't think so. I think we would win by such a large

majority if we were to have won that there is not huge pressure coming

from outside. No Leader of the Opposition ever says he doesn't want

a general election because it looks as if you are frightened if you

won't win. However much it would be a disaster if you have one. I don't

think she is under pressure. What about pressure from inside? Go for

it! I think we would look deeply opportunistic if we went for one in

the spring. I do perish the thought because I think the electorate is

pretty high-minded. If they thought we were taking an unfair advantage

by bringing forward an election over our Labour opponents, that would

harm our chances and we would do less well. If the left push for it

and demand and agitate, we would win comfortably so I would not be wholly

opposed to us giving in to that pressure if it came, but I don't

think it will. In the middle. We can't keep having elections and

leadership changes and members of the opposition cabinet resigning. We

need a time of stability where there are no changes, where everybody can

just get on with their jobs. APPLAUSE

I don't ever remember such a nasty and divisive time in politics. I

don't mean what is happening within my party. I mean some of the anger

and division over the EU referendum. And real leadership is actually

about trying to find the things that people have in common, what unites

us, rather than what divides us. That is the leadership we need, not

just in my party but in the country, because things feel fractured and

divisive between those who voted Remain and Lees, pro-and

anti-immigration, young and old. Would an election clear the air? I

think you have to have a reason for a general election, rather than

trying to wipe the opposition out. To be honest, I think the Tories are

all over the shop on Brexit. They are trying to take us back to the

1950s with proposals on grammar schools. They have cut inheritance

and capital gains tax. That is my view and I don't think they have the

leadership the country needs in future and I will always be prepared

to make that case. I don't think that Theresa May has a mandate for a

particular version of Brexit, as I have said, so a general election

could clear the air on that. It is wrong that we have a government

elected on 24% of the eligible vote. The idea that that is democratic is

wrong. I would like a general election but please can we have it

under proportional representation? Just wave a wand. Julia

Hartley-Brewer. I don't think there is any pressure, certainly not from

the Labour Party and none from the Tories, who are sensible. We have a

fixed term Parliament act for a reason, to stop giving Prime

Minister that control and power over when they call elections. This idea

about her needing a mandate, we don't elect prime ministers, we

don't have a presidential system, we elect a Parliament and the leader of

the largest party gets to form a government. Let's stop pretending

that is not our system. I suspect she is under quite a lot of pressure

from some Tory strategists to have an election. The temptation to go

soon, to destroy the Labour Party, must be quite considerable. And

there is a case for it, because of the need for a mandate for the

negotiations, but we have ready discussed that so we will not go

back on that again. But overall, I think it is unlikely we will have

one. If we do have one, it should, as Caroline says, be on a fair

voting system. Because at the moment, the last... We had a

referendum on the EU and you voted against it. Over 25% of people voted

Green Party or the Lib Dems and there are ten MPs, 425%. That is

unacceptable. Chloe Jones, please. Should we pay more in taxes for the

sake of the NHS? The NHS has recorded a record deficit of ?2.5

billion, nearly. Julia Hartley-Brewer. Should we put up

taxes for the NHS? I don't think it is a question of whether we should.

I think we are going to have two. The question is should we. We can

either agree that we stop providing all of the care from cradle to

grave, and we stop funding IVF, that has been in the news today about

couples unable to get the IVF that they are entitled to, we stop

funding new cancer drugs. More treatments, more drugs coming onto

the market every day that cost vast amounts more. We either decide to

spend less on that, or we decide we are going to stop treating people

who bring on their own problems, people who are obese, people who

smoke. We can make those different choices, or we can city say we pay

more tax to pay for what is needed. I think we need a debate about this.

I would like to think we can take this debate out of politics and make

it a sensible debate about the real choices. Here is the debate and you

have a chance to say where you stand. I don't think we have a

choice unless we stop getting older and fatter. You are not saying what

you think. Norman Lamb said a penny on income tax would raise ?45

billion a year. RUSI of that? No, I think it should come out of general

taxation, but yes, we should spend more. We spend a smaller percentage

of GDP than France and Germany, which is why we have the waiting

lists, etc. Whether we need to raise taxes to increase the amount of

money Government and has to spend is a different issue. We could use the

magic money tree, but I am not sure it exists! Norman Lamb. The NHS, and

the care system, care for elderly and disabled people, is on its

knees. We see more and more operations being cancelled. There

was news today that there are tens of thousands more operations

cancelled than the official figures suggest. Endless people delayed

discharge in hospital. I have a nine-year-old who may have autism,

and his parents were told he would have to wait three years for a

diagnosis, at the age of nine. This is a disgrace. And we are spending a

significantly lower proportion of our national income on health than

most other European countries. Where would you divert from to pay for

health? We need to think about extra taxation and I would be prepared to

pay it. The question is, how important is it that we get care for

our elderly mum or dad in their hour of need? How important is it that a

teenage girl with an eating disorder gets treatment when she needs it?

Families all over this country are being let down by the NHS. We were

let down in terms of mental health in my family. So I am prepared to

pay extra if necessary to ensure we have a decent, efficient and

effective NHS and care system. APPLAUSE

Third row from the back. Firstly, shouldn't we use the money that the

Conservatives want to make a seven-day service by using that

money to perfect the five-day service as it stands? Norman Lamb

referred to some problems of being discharged, etc. Abandon the

seven-day favour of going back to the five-day? We need to make sure a

patient is safe whenever they fall ill. We can't have a situation where

if you fall ill on a Saturday or Sunday, or later at night, you are

at more risk. There are real risks sometimes, particularly with

out-of-hours services which in rural areas are often threadbare. But all

of this stuff about the strike being because we needed the seven-day NHS,

let's make sure people know that the junior doctors are already working

seven days a week. APPLAUSE

Jacob Rees-Mogg, you were part of the campaign that said there would

be ?350 million a week more to spend. That is what I read on the

bus. That is what the bus said. It was an opportunity, it did not say

they would. We will let Jacob answer. Should we pay more tax?

Clearly, the impression was given that Brexit would mean more for the

NHS. We should not pay more tax because we are already taxed to the

historic limit of taxation in the economy. If you look at figures

going back to the 1970s, the tax take to GDP varies between 34% and

38%. If you look at the Treasury Redbook, we're heading towards 38%.

It is a question of allocating the expenditure where you think the

priority is, which is why the Government has decided, as requested

by the head of the NHS, to allocate an extra ?10 billion to the NHS,

which as it happens coincides with the net saving from leaving the

European Union, but that is a side issue, and has brought forward 6

billion of that into this financial year. That is very important. The

NHS does need more money and the Government is providing it, but

there is not actually room for increasing the total tax burden on

the United Kingdom. So it is a question of how you spend the money

we are already taking in taxes, and then your priorities. And yes, once

we have left the European Union and are no longer making contributions,

that is money that could be allocated to the NHS. Do I think

that is a good idea? Yes, I do. APPLAUSE

Liz Kendall, do you accept 38% of GDP in tax is the maximum and

therefore there is no room for increasing it? No, I absolutely

believe we need to put more into the NHS and social care, crucially, and

that the fairest and most efficient way to do that would be through more

taxes. I think there are other options too. But look, the truth is,

we are living for longer, we will need care and support. Yet we have a

million people who get no help with the basics of daily living getting

up, washed fed and going to the toilet. One in three family carers

have to give up work or reduce their hours to look after their loved

ones. That makes no economic sense. Everybody knows the problem, what

would you do to solve it? This week I joined with Norman and Dan

Poulter, a former Conservative minister, to say we need immediate

action in the Autumn Statement and then we need a proper independent

cross party commission on the long-term funding for health and

social care. Where would you take the money from, Liz? I think that we

should pay more in our taxes, I think we also need to look at very

difficult questions about whether the wealthiest older people who have

the means may be able to contribute more. I think that Winter Fuel

Payments should be restricted, for example, to the poorer. You can't

ask working age people to pay all of the costs that we are going to need

to put into the health and social care system. What normally happens

is, when any politician raises these questions, they're screaming

headlines and all hell breaks loose. That's why I think we need this

cross party commission to set up something sustainable for the

future. Caroline, I'll come to you in a moment. One or two members of

the audience. You there on the right? I think it's an easy answer.

I think you stop fining hospitals for under-performing on targets that

are impossible, stop telling them they are subject to rigorous cost

improvements because you have got to save money and stop saying to

clinical groups you have got to find resources elsewhere. I worked with

the NHS in 23 years, I left in February and I'm devastated by the

mess it's in. What exactly are you saying you would do? Abandon

targets? No, I don't think you abandon targets, you abandon any

fine that comes by failing that target.

Caroline Lucas? I want to simply say that we are the sixth richest

country in the world and we ought to be able to fund our Health Service

and social care service so that our older people in particular are not

left facing a question of whether or not they can afford a cancer

treatment or a young person affording IVF treatment. We should

be able to have a proper, sustainable health system. That

means putting more money into it because the figures from the King's

Fund are shocking, saying in the last Parliament the annual real

increase was the smallest in real terms since the Second World War in

terms of money going into the NHS. Would you put up taxation? I would

be happy to put that up to pay for that. But do you agree with Jacob

that there's no more money to put taxes up? I would be very worried if

I agreed with Jacob. In the news today the 43p cancer drug is not

available, because it's not clear which part of the NHS will fund it.

That's down to Lansley's hated health and social care Act which has

marketised the NHS so much more, it's fragmented it so much more,

nobody knows about which bit is going to be paying for which

treatment. It's a complete chaotic mess so please can this Commission,

as well as looking at the funding for the NHS, please roll back that

privatisation, that marketisation under Andrew Lansley. It's not

worked and it's not serving people of this country.

APPLAUSE. You, Sir? Green shirt. I think for

me, the answer's quite clear. I mean there's large corporations which

avoid massive amounts of money and all that money could go straight to

the NHS. I don't understand why is Government is not doing anything to

do with the large corporations. There is billions of pounds. You,

there? I have an NHS funded IVF baby and I for one would pay more tax to

make sure that everybody else has that opportunity.

APPLAUSE. You in the white? Can I just say, I

think there is a simple answer, believe it or not, to this. The NHS

chief executives earn huge fantastical salaries and quite

honestly, some of them can't cut the mustard. Absolutely.

APPLAUSE. Hang on, and if they reduced some of

those ridiculous salaries that we'll never even dream of, that money can

well go towards mental health - that is really what's needed here.

CHEERING AND APPLAUSE. Yeah!

And you, I said I would come to you? The woman in yellow, your turn?

Briefly? I've got at the moment a husband on dialysis three times a

week and my feeling towards the NHS at the moment is that two thirds of

the money goes towards salaries, pensions, bonuses and perks and the

rest is on the patients because dialysis patients are having their

time reduced that they need to live because nurses have to go home. It's

happened to my husband and it's happened to a heck of a lot on the

unit. They reduce the time so that the nurse can go home. So who is the

NHS working for? The patient or the staff?

I'm sorry, but that is what is happening.

Just picking up on the lady's point. We've got to ends the rewards for

failure. The Chief Executive of southern health has a remuneration

package close to a quarter of a million, he's been put into a job.

Sidelined into another job. Three weeks ago and she wasn't even

interviewed for it. At the same time, mental health patients lose

out. They are suffering discrimination within our NHS. They

do not have the same right to get treatment on time. Patient first. We

need to end that. Jacob, you say they are giving enough money to the

NHS but we are planning to spend a reducing amount of our national

income on health at a time when demand is rising rapidly. That makes

no sense whenever you are on the political spectrum. Let Jacob answer

that, then one more question before we end. Briefly? The only way to

provide more money for the Mays is to grow the economy. If you just put

taxes up you risk shrinking the economy. It is an absolute wrong

thing to do. This 38% limit was not reached when Harold Wilson was Prime

Minister at 98%. Focus on prevention... Increasing taxation is

absolutely not the answer. All right. We've got You are talking

about the bureaucracy. At the moment we are spending... Well, we have

halved... Let's have some order here. Liz, stop, please, if you

would just for a moment. You have your say? Cut the bureaucracy and

all the layers of bureaucracy that contracts have to go through. If you

get rid of all of that, all the hoops people have to jump through,

then maybe that would free up a lot of money. We've got a couple of

minutes left. A very distinguished panel here. An election coming up in

the United States, debates on Monday, we have a question from

Thomas Swindon burn, two minutes to answer you but let's hear your

question. What impact would a President Trump have on the UK? Very

brief answers. You can't give a short answer really and make sense

but Jacob, you were said to be a supporter of Trump. You were saying

that you would vote Republican. It's not wise for politicians to be rude

about potential foreign leaders. I think... I think he could be

President... It would be a total disaster.

CHEERING AND APPLAUSE. And it is overwhelmingly in the

British national interest to get on with the President of the United

States, whoever that is, in a dangerous world. Our most important

allie is the United States. We are not picking that President, it's

being picked by Americans, according to their own democratic processes. I

have confidence in the American people to choose their own

President. It's not for me to second guess them. But it is for the

British and in the British interest to get on with whoever is the

President of the United States. APPLAUSE.

Julia Hartley-Brewer. Very quickly? I have to say, we have had lots of

health concerns about Hillary Clinton. I would sooner vote for her

in a coma than Donald Trump wide-awake.

APPLAUSE. I think we have to start a new

civilisation somewhere else. Caroline Lucas? It's a devastating

prospect and this idea that we need the get on with the President of the

US whoever they are, we seen what happened when we did that with

George Bush and the outcome wasn't very good so...

APPLAUSE. Liz Kendall? He said he doesn't want

to allow Muslims in the country, he said he's going to build a wall

against the Mexicans, he wants to turn his back on the world. It would

be a disaster for the world For us? And for us, yes, because we stand up

for the values of facialness and we do not have the kind of casual

racism we seed from Donald Trump. Norman Lamb? It's so bad that even

George W Bush is voting for Hillary Clinton, for foodness sake. You Mr

Swingburn? We have always had a special relationship with America

and also the EU and it's time we had a special relationship with the

world. Hear, hear. On that happy note, we end.

We're in Boston, Lincolnshire next week.

Boston had the highest Brexit vote in the UK at 75.6%.

With us we'll have Priti Patel for the Tories, Emily Thornberry

for Labour, Bonnie Greer and Rod Liddle.

We'll be in Neath, South Wales the following week.

Come and join us, Boston or Neath, go to our website,

If you are listening tonight on Radio 5Live, welcome back!

And the debate goes on there in Question Time Extra Time.

From Sutton Coldfield, until next week, Goodnight

50 years ago, they became superstars in astronomy,

They represent the most productive period astronomy has ever had.

And now, they're taking an anniversary trip.