:00:00. > :00:20.and key Jeremy Corbyn ally, Diane Abbott.
:00:21. > :00:25.The Conservative MP new to the House of Commons in 2015, James Cleverly.
:00:26. > :00:29.The SNP Leader in Westminster, Angus Robertson.
:00:30. > :00:31.Daily Mirror Online writer Fleet Street Fox,
:00:32. > :00:38.And Geoff "I'm the only Conservative-voting comedian
:00:39. > :00:56.As ever, you can join the debate on Facebook,
:00:57. > :01:14.Just before we came on air, I had an e-mail from someone saying, please
:01:15. > :01:18.not Trump and please not Brexit. I have two disappoint you. Our
:01:19. > :01:24.audience overwhelmingly want to talk about Brexit and Trump. We start
:01:25. > :01:28.with a question from Kristel Tracey. Should our government turn a blind
:01:29. > :01:31.eye to Trump's controversial policies in the interests of
:01:32. > :01:41.renewing our special glacial chip with the US? James Cleverly. -- our
:01:42. > :01:47.special relationship. The short answer is no, we mustn't turn a
:01:48. > :01:51.blind eye, whether it comes from the President of the United States of
:01:52. > :01:54.America, or anyone else. We are long-standing friends of America,
:01:55. > :01:57.and they are long-standing friends of ours and we have to make the
:01:58. > :02:03.relationship with the elected head of state of that country work. But
:02:04. > :02:08.Theresa May has a reputation for straight talking, telling people
:02:09. > :02:14.perhaps untruths -- some truths that they don't like to hear. And I have
:02:15. > :02:16.no doubt she will have a very frank conversation with the President of
:02:17. > :02:22.the United States of America. But if you are hoping for some Love
:02:23. > :02:26.actually type moment, you will probably be disappointed because as
:02:27. > :02:31.friends and allies, we probably do our criticism in private and
:02:32. > :02:36.supportive comments in public. She did say on the plane to a reporter,
:02:37. > :02:43.haven't you ever noticed, opposites attract. So maybe you are in for a
:02:44. > :02:47.moment. Well, I am confident that the Prime Minister and the President
:02:48. > :02:51.will have a professional and close working relationship. Perhaps not
:02:52. > :02:55.quite as intimate as Tony Blair and George W Bush, but I am sure she
:02:56. > :03:00.will make it work. Let's deal with some of the problems in renewing the
:03:01. > :03:06.relationship. Diane Abbott, what do you think the Prime Minister should
:03:07. > :03:08.do? America is a long-standing ally and whichever party was in
:03:09. > :03:12.government would have to work with them on things on which we agree.
:03:13. > :03:19.But this is not so much a question of turning a blind eye to Donald
:03:20. > :03:25.Trump's policies, it is that we cannot turn a blind eye to his
:03:26. > :03:29.values. This is a man who, even compared with other right-wing
:03:30. > :03:32.Republican presidents, is quite extraordinary. This is a man who
:03:33. > :03:40.talks about grabbing women by the pussy. This is a man who wants to
:03:41. > :03:46.stop Muslims entering the US, all Muslims. And this is a man who says,
:03:47. > :03:52.contrary to everything, the army and the security services know, that
:03:53. > :03:58.torture works. What policies that Trump wants to put forward is
:03:59. > :04:02.primarily a matter for him and the American people. But on our values,
:04:03. > :04:08.I think British values that we should all share, I don't think we
:04:09. > :04:11.should give ground, even to get these so-called trade deals. Some
:04:12. > :04:23.things are not for sale. APPLAUSE
:04:24. > :04:32.Susie Boniface. In answer to the question, no, you
:04:33. > :04:37.don't turn a blind eye, and I hope she is keeping Trump at arms length,
:04:38. > :04:40.and not just out of grabbing distance but genuinely at arms
:04:41. > :04:45.length. We have to go and talk to him, deal with him. There are a
:04:46. > :04:47.million jobs in this country that rely on American firms, and a
:04:48. > :04:53.million jobs in America that rely on Tish firms. The trade is worth
:04:54. > :04:56.billions. Just because there is a slightly crazy man in the White
:04:57. > :05:00.House does not mean we should stop talking to him altogether. We have
:05:01. > :05:04.to keep it going for pragmatic reasons, for the interests of our
:05:05. > :05:07.citizens here and citizens abroad. But you have to consider how history
:05:08. > :05:13.will judge this further down the road. We are stuck in this first
:05:14. > :05:17.week of a fire hose of news, this astonishing stuff that keeps coming
:05:18. > :05:21.out of the White House. We have to think what will happen when it is
:05:22. > :05:25.over. At some point, Donald Trump will either be impeached, he will
:05:26. > :05:29.lose an election in four years, or he will leave after eight years,
:05:30. > :05:36.when he has to go gracefully, as Obama did. How do you think he will
:05:37. > :05:40.go? How is it going to end? I personally think the military will
:05:41. > :05:44.have to chisel his teeth out of the Oval Office desk to get him out. He
:05:45. > :05:49.will not go quietly, it will be ugly. In the long-term, history will
:05:50. > :05:55.look at Theresa May and say, was she a second Maggie, or a second Neville
:05:56. > :06:00.Chamberlain. As simple as that. Angus Robertson. People will reflect
:06:01. > :06:03.on the unseemly way in which she has been keen to be the first foreign
:06:04. > :06:07.leader to walk into the White House and meet President Trump. Every
:06:08. > :06:10.moderate mainstream politician in the world recognises that it is
:06:11. > :06:15.important to have a good relationship with the United States
:06:16. > :06:21.and with the office of the President of the United States. Do you think
:06:22. > :06:26.she should not have accepted the invitation? One moment. Do you think
:06:27. > :06:30.she should have rejected the invitation to go? On the basis of
:06:31. > :06:35.what has been said about torture alone, the Prime Minister should use
:06:36. > :06:38.her leveraged. We are told that Britain has a special relationship
:06:39. > :06:42.with the United States. If it does, I would hope it would be on the
:06:43. > :06:47.basis of two states that do not torture. If the President were to
:06:48. > :06:51.give an assurance that he will not go ahead with what he is actively
:06:52. > :06:57.considering, which is to reintroduce torture as a policy by the CIA, the
:06:58. > :06:59.reopening of black sites, and extraordinary rendition, the
:07:00. > :07:04.kidnapping of people and flying them around the world, if the UK has a
:07:05. > :07:08.special relationship, I would call on the Prime Minister to get an
:07:09. > :07:12.assurance that the US will not go ahead with torture, before meeting
:07:13. > :07:14.the President of the United States. APPLAUSE
:07:15. > :07:23.Let's hear from the audience. First of all, I think that special
:07:24. > :07:26.relationship got damaged so much over the last eight years under
:07:27. > :07:31.Obama that Theresa May has really got to go over and rebuild it. To
:07:32. > :07:36.say that we already have it is completely wrong. We don't have
:07:37. > :07:38.that. To even suggest that she should not go over and start
:07:39. > :07:43.building that relationship, especially when we have to look at
:07:44. > :07:49.future trade deals is just stupid. In your view it was destroyed under
:07:50. > :07:52.Obama because of what? That relationship over the last eight
:07:53. > :07:59.years is, Obama has never been that interested in the British people and
:08:00. > :08:07.British culture, especially. He has never been a fan. Before Brexit,
:08:08. > :08:12.back of the queue. Geoff Norcott. No matter what job you do, what side of
:08:13. > :08:16.the political divide you are, have some empathy with Theresa May that
:08:17. > :08:19.this was in her calendar. I don't think anyone is sitting there going
:08:20. > :08:29.two sleeps until lunch with the Trumps. It is something that she has
:08:30. > :08:34.to do, Brexit or no Brexit. The likelihood of a hard Brexit makes it
:08:35. > :08:39.even more imperative. As the nonpolitician and non-journalist,
:08:40. > :08:43.what would I do? He is notoriously thin-skinned. The idea that you can
:08:44. > :08:47.criticise him off the bat does not seem realistic. Germany are not
:08:48. > :08:51.getting a call back. The best thing they can do is to like his tweets
:08:52. > :08:56.and curry favour. How do you get a seat at the table? If it was me, I
:08:57. > :09:01.would just butter him up, compliment him. I would arrive and say, your
:09:02. > :09:07.hair looks great. Is it me, or is the White House bigger since you got
:09:08. > :09:11.here? If you want somebody to speak truth to power, you have to have the
:09:12. > :09:17.ear of power first. Then, down the line, couple of days, say, just dial
:09:18. > :09:20.it down on the hate speech. Of all world leaders at the moment, I think
:09:21. > :09:21.she is the person that could possibly do that.
:09:22. > :09:32.APPLAUSE Do you think that Putin and Trump's
:09:33. > :09:35.special relationship will supersede Theresa May and Trump's special
:09:36. > :09:42.relationship? That is a very good question. Angus
:09:43. > :09:48.takes a nobly naive position. I adore him for it. But ultimately,
:09:49. > :09:52.President Trump is going to make international relationships he
:09:53. > :09:55.believes are in the best interests of the United States of America. If
:09:56. > :10:01.we are not sat across a table with him, if the Prime Minister is not
:10:02. > :10:04.sat across a table with him, as our primary military ally, our second
:10:05. > :10:09.largest trade partner, making our relationship work, he will look
:10:10. > :10:12.relationships. And it is entirely feasible that one of those
:10:13. > :10:18.relationships might be between him and Vladimir Putin. He already has
:10:19. > :10:22.that. And it is not a relationship I am massively comfortable with. Is
:10:23. > :10:35.she going to come back with a trade deal, Diane Abbott? Susie said that
:10:36. > :10:39.we should not stop talking to him. Nobody is talking about stopping
:10:40. > :10:42.talking. That is exactly what I said at the beginning. But on this
:10:43. > :10:47.question of trade deals, which everyone is using as an excuse why
:10:48. > :10:52.we have two suck up to him, let's be clear, this country has hardly any
:10:53. > :10:56.trade negotiators, echoes most of our trade negotiation is done
:10:57. > :11:02.through the EU. And remember Trump's slogan, America first. We will get
:11:03. > :11:06.trade deals, all right, but what sort of trade deals? Trade deals
:11:07. > :11:07.which will open the NHS to American corporate health.
:11:08. > :11:14.APPLAUSE Trade deals which will drag down our
:11:15. > :11:17.environmental standards. We will get deals, but whether
:11:18. > :11:23.people will like them when we get them is another thing. You are
:11:24. > :11:27.saying that Theresa May should say what they want to hear but that is
:11:28. > :11:31.my problem with her. Be it with Brexit, she is just saying what she
:11:32. > :11:35.thinks we want to hear but not telling us what is happening. She
:11:36. > :11:39.will do it with Trump, go over there and do some toing and froing about
:11:40. > :11:42.what she thinks we should hear but not the decisive. I would like a
:11:43. > :11:47.Prime Minister who is telling me what is going on, where she stands,
:11:48. > :11:53.instead of playing her cards all over the table. If it was you, what
:11:54. > :11:57.would you say? I would be strong on my values. We are not this week
:11:58. > :12:02.country that has to suck up to America. We have to stand for what
:12:03. > :12:06.we believe in, the climate change, anti torture, we can't hide away.
:12:07. > :12:11.But you have a million jobs that depend on him being in a good mood
:12:12. > :12:14.with us. Half of our Trident missiles we rent from America. I
:12:15. > :12:20.would love it if we could go over there and the Prime Minister could
:12:21. > :12:26.go, no, stop, we are Britain, pack it in, we are not going to kiss your
:12:27. > :12:33.big, white, wrinkly bomb. That is enough. Sounds like the kind of
:12:34. > :12:37.language he would understand. I have two agree with the gentleman on the
:12:38. > :12:41.left who spoke about the culture that had been created under Barack
:12:42. > :12:47.Obama. Now we are focusing on the ideas of immigration and Mexico and
:12:48. > :12:53.the wall. Do you not think this culture of apathy was built up under
:12:54. > :12:58.Barack Obama because of his flip-flopping on issues like gay
:12:59. > :13:03.marriage? As an openly gay man, I found it bizarre that a Harvard
:13:04. > :13:09.professor was sitting there, having to, in 2008, have the faculty
:13:10. > :13:14.supporting that kind of human rights. Do you not think he created
:13:15. > :13:18.a culture of apathy in the US that ultimately led to Donald Trump
:13:19. > :13:26.anyway? I am wondering why people that we got George W Bush Mach two.
:13:27. > :13:31.There is one other question on Trump from Charles Harris. If the
:13:32. > :13:34.government policy in the UK is to reduce illegal immigration, why is
:13:35. > :13:41.Donald Trump's wall so controversial?
:13:42. > :13:47.Well, the impossibility of building it. They have already said, there
:13:48. > :13:53.may be some fences. I think that's a good metaphor. I think that, you
:13:54. > :14:00.know, the idea, I mean, I'm sure we will get onto this, I voted Leave,
:14:01. > :14:04.and I think there is a dialogue around having controls on
:14:05. > :14:07.immigration and there is a rampantly xenophobic dialogue that Donald
:14:08. > :14:13.Trump is entering into. I think what the war has become is a metaphor for
:14:14. > :14:18.a state of mind with him. -- the wall. I think that's the problem. If
:14:19. > :14:21.it was just one of the other, but the whole package with Donald Trump
:14:22. > :14:30.is he is alarmingly xenophobic. It's not just about relationship with
:14:31. > :14:35.Mexicans. It's about stopping all Muslims going to the United States,
:14:36. > :14:42.and what worries me is that we are seeing a very intolerant language
:14:43. > :14:47.coming into politics. Whoever was responsible at whatever point, it
:14:48. > :14:49.isn't a new thing, unfortunately, xenophobia and narrow-mindedness,
:14:50. > :14:53.but there is a lot of it in politics. It seems to me, when we
:14:54. > :14:57.are talking about the policy of Donald Trump or the debate on these
:14:58. > :15:01.islands, I think, regardless of where we stand, in our case on
:15:02. > :15:06.different sides of the argument on Brexit, I think it holds all of us
:15:07. > :15:11.to make sure that the language we use reflects the values that most
:15:12. > :15:14.people share, which is that we are welcoming of people, especially who
:15:15. > :15:20.have come here in need, and just to reflect on this in a second in this
:15:21. > :15:24.city, 1 million people who live here come from other European countries,
:15:25. > :15:29.and they work in our NHS and they work in our private sector. They are
:15:30. > :15:34.our neighbours, they are taxpayers, and the language that I sometimes
:15:35. > :15:38.hear about people, and then themselves feeling that they are
:15:39. > :15:42.being told to go home, I think it is something that should give all of us
:15:43. > :15:45.concerned, regardless of where we sit on the Brexit question or Donald
:15:46. > :15:56.Trump. APPLAUSE
:15:57. > :16:00.The man next to you. Sorry, is Theresa May in a position to
:16:01. > :16:04.negotiate with Trump? A lot of things have been mentioned. What
:16:05. > :16:09.about Trump's green light given to Israel, whereas in Palestine a lot
:16:10. > :16:14.of homes have been demolished, and they are using the illegal
:16:15. > :16:20.occupation, land is a quiet on the illegal occupation, to build 4500
:16:21. > :16:26.homes. -- land acquired. Are you saying that because of that Theresa
:16:27. > :16:30.May shouldn't to him? Theresa May isn't in a strong position to speak
:16:31. > :16:33.to him because we have got Brexit and she is looking for a trade deal
:16:34. > :16:37.with Trump. The gentleman mentioned that she will speak to him and tell
:16:38. > :16:46.him about the British values, but what about, will she speak to him
:16:47. > :16:50.about the Palestinian cause? I don't have the running order of what they
:16:51. > :16:56.are going to discuss, and it would be impossible in any one meeting,
:16:57. > :17:00.particularly an introductory meeting, to cover the full gamut of
:17:01. > :17:06.home affairs, but there is a lovely bit of transcription from when the
:17:07. > :17:13.United States of America sent troops to Granada, which was actually
:17:14. > :17:17.sending American troops on to British soil, to all intents and
:17:18. > :17:19.purposes, and got a dressing down by Margaret Thatcher. There is a
:17:20. > :17:25.wonderful transcription of what was basically a one-way hairdryer
:17:26. > :17:28.conversation, where Margaret Thatcher told President Reagan in no
:17:29. > :17:32.uncertain terms how displeased she was. That is what a special
:17:33. > :17:36.relationship means that it doesn't been one-way traffic. It means that
:17:37. > :17:40.we as the UK can speak frankly to the United States of America through
:17:41. > :17:47.its president. I think that's important. You remember that, when
:17:48. > :17:51.Winston Churchill met Truman and started talking about... I wasn't
:17:52. > :17:56.there. You will have read about it. Maybe not. When they started talking
:17:57. > :18:01.about the special relationship, Truman said, to Churchill's dismay,
:18:02. > :18:05.we will pass that our advisers, so it may not be all it is jacked up to
:18:06. > :18:12.be. The woman on the gangway. No doubt that Brexit and the Trump
:18:13. > :18:17.presidency will affect immigration, it's something that relates to me.
:18:18. > :18:21.With all the media talking about how bad Trump is, I'm trying to look at
:18:22. > :18:27.it from this person. What is saying from his? Everybody is looking at
:18:28. > :18:33.strengths and weaknesses. The good thing he is saying is, America
:18:34. > :18:37.first. Every country's leader should look after their country first.
:18:38. > :18:43.Regarding immigration and the wall, developing countries, immigration,
:18:44. > :18:46.mostly be corrupted leaders are the driving force for immigration in the
:18:47. > :18:52.first place. Immigration isn't the solution for everybody. I think he
:18:53. > :18:55.is saying, I am hoping what he's saying, is message come across to
:18:56. > :18:59.the world, that you have to look after your own people. It doesn't
:19:00. > :19:05.mean closing the country, so then dealing with what you are good at.
:19:06. > :19:10.That is one more point. So you are not wholly opposed to what doing. He
:19:11. > :19:15.seems a very honest person. But he has said is clear. There is no
:19:16. > :19:21.hidden agenda. If you look at the details, we may be able to deal with
:19:22. > :19:29.him. One more point from you, sir. I think we are missing the point of
:19:30. > :19:32.the visit, really, and I don't think Theresa May is going over there
:19:33. > :19:37.because she is a cheerleader of Trump's values. We are about to go
:19:38. > :19:41.into a big negotiation with the EU and it pays to be a shrewd... If you
:19:42. > :19:44.are going out to see a customer, you want to be through the door before
:19:45. > :19:49.the rest of the competition, so Theresa May once to go and see
:19:50. > :19:52.Donald Trump before other nation heads, because we are about to go
:19:53. > :19:57.into a big negotiation with the EU and we would rather have the US
:19:58. > :20:03.behind us, talking on a high level, about a trade deal.
:20:04. > :20:08.APPLAUSE Shall we go on to question, I think?
:20:09. > :20:14.No, you have a quick say. Britain has just come naively, I think,
:20:15. > :20:19.opted out of the world's biggest trade deal, the single market. Do
:20:20. > :20:28.the panel think she will ever get as good a deal from Trump as we had in
:20:29. > :20:31.the single market,? Well, it takes us to the issue of Brexit. Let's
:20:32. > :20:38.have a question from Sophie Petzal, please. Regarding Article 50, do
:20:39. > :20:43.local MPs have a moral duty to vote with their conscience, even if it
:20:44. > :20:47.goes against the majority of their constituents? The issue being that
:20:48. > :20:51.the Supreme Court said that Parliament had to decide. It
:20:52. > :20:56.couldn't just face the decision on the referendum. So do local MPs have
:20:57. > :21:01.a duty to vote with their conscience, even against the
:21:02. > :21:04.majority of their constituents? I am in the fortunate position that I'm
:21:05. > :21:08.going to be voting in the same direction, I think, is 62% of the
:21:09. > :21:14.electorate in Scotland would wish the two, who voted to remain in the
:21:15. > :21:18.EU. The reason why I will vote against what the government is
:21:19. > :21:21.proposing, and incidentally, I brought it along, because I don't
:21:22. > :21:28.know if people are aware how flimsy this thing is. This is it. What is
:21:29. > :21:32.your point? Brevity can be a good thing. On the biggest decision
:21:33. > :21:35.potentially since the Second World War, to be giving a green light to
:21:36. > :21:41.leaving, as the gentleman suggested, the biggest trading bloc in the
:21:42. > :21:44.world for an uncertain future, regardless of whether we voted
:21:45. > :21:52.remain or leave, we need a bit more detail than one side of paper. Can
:21:53. > :21:56.you read it to ask? By way of comparison, in Scotland, people here
:21:57. > :22:00.will be aware, we have a debate in the vote two years ago on Scottish
:22:01. > :22:04.independence, and the proposal involving white paper. This is it. I
:22:05. > :22:11.brought it along. You might agree or disagree. There were 650 pages. I
:22:12. > :22:15.think we deserve that level of detail on such a big issue. Please
:22:16. > :22:19.don't start reading that out because we will be able might! But please
:22:20. > :22:26.read out a White Paper, because that is in the labelling Bill. It won't
:22:27. > :22:31.take long. Clause one, power to notify withdrawal from the EU. The
:22:32. > :22:35.Prime Minister may notify under article X, Y and Z the UK's
:22:36. > :22:40.intention to withdraw from the EU. It goes on that this act may be
:22:41. > :22:46.cited as a EU deadlock as the European Union withdrawal act 2017.
:22:47. > :22:49.What is more interesting is the explanatory notes. On one of the
:22:50. > :22:52.biggest issues we are facing, it goes on to say that this bill is not
:22:53. > :22:59.expected to have any financial implications. Now, regardless of
:23:00. > :23:03.where you work on this debate, on such a big issue, we are expecting
:23:04. > :23:08.parliament to spend less days scrutinising such a big issue with
:23:09. > :23:13.no White Paper having been presented to parliamentarians or members of
:23:14. > :23:16.the public to scrutinise. I think this isn't the way to go about
:23:17. > :23:20.making a big decision, which is why I will not be supporting the
:23:21. > :23:29.government on the issue. James Cleverly. That bill, the Article 50
:23:30. > :23:37.Bill, which is designed to do nothing more than to start the
:23:38. > :23:42.negotiating process, as 133 words and Angus criticises it for not
:23:43. > :23:46.having enough words. Well, a bit of legislation enabling women to become
:23:47. > :23:49.members of Parliament and 70 words. Are you suggesting that didn't have
:23:50. > :23:54.enough words in it either? What this is about is starting a process, a
:23:55. > :23:59.process that has been discussed at length on the floor of the chamber
:24:00. > :24:04.of the House of Commons, in pubs and people's homes all over the country
:24:05. > :24:09.for months and months. This is the start of a process. There will be a
:24:10. > :24:15.White Paper. You are comparing and enabling Bill to a White Paper. You
:24:16. > :24:19.are intentionally mixing the things that you are comparing one to
:24:20. > :24:26.another. There will be plenty of time to debate. When will we get the
:24:27. > :24:33.White Paper? It's a two-year process. When will we get the White
:24:34. > :24:39.Paper? I don't know. On such a big issue... Where is the White Paper?
:24:40. > :24:44.This is about starting the negotiating process. What about the
:24:45. > :24:47.question from Sophie, do MPs have a duty to vote with their conscience
:24:48. > :24:55.or with the majority of their constituents? That is a simple one.
:24:56. > :24:58.MPs should always vote in the way that they believe to be in the
:24:59. > :25:03.interest of the country as a whole, and of their constituents. You of
:25:04. > :25:08.course must vote with your constituents. That's not the same
:25:09. > :25:14.thing. Do you know better than the constituents who voted other venue
:25:15. > :25:19.in your constituency? Are you their representative? -- who voted other
:25:20. > :25:24.venue. We are representatives, not delegates. This point has been
:25:25. > :25:29.debated many times. MPs have to vote in accordance with what they
:25:30. > :25:36.genuinely believe to be right, by their own consciences. We are not
:25:37. > :25:43.there to be the delegates of our constituents, and there will be
:25:44. > :25:50.times when we vote in what you might know not to be a popular decision in
:25:51. > :25:53.your constituency, but which you believe to be right, and that is the
:25:54. > :25:58.duty of MPs. ... The man in the middle. I think the government is
:25:59. > :26:03.inherently not wishing to give Parliament as a whole a say in the
:26:04. > :26:07.most important decision to go before this country in generations. The
:26:08. > :26:11.hallway that the government has gone about it in terms of keeping their
:26:12. > :26:15.cards close to their chest, Brexit means Brexit, it is all sound bites
:26:16. > :26:20.and we now have a White Paper with as many words as you could put in a
:26:21. > :26:24.tweet and it's frankly abysmal. I want to come back to the issue of
:26:25. > :26:28.how people should vote. Diane Abbott, the Labour Party is in some
:26:29. > :26:35.confusion over this issue. No, I wouldn't say that. I am in a lot of
:26:36. > :26:40.confusion over this issue. I have always voted with my conscience and
:26:41. > :26:47.often paid a price for that, not least within my own party. But, on
:26:48. > :26:58.the issue of the referendum, we have to be mindful that MPs voted to have
:26:59. > :27:08.a referendum, and to say that because the vote went the wrong way
:27:09. > :27:12.we are going to ignore the votes of millions of people up and down the
:27:13. > :27:19.country, I think that would be a blow to democracy.
:27:20. > :27:26.APPLAUSE I know that I support Remain. I know
:27:27. > :27:29.that most people in this part of London supported Remain, but what
:27:30. > :27:34.does it say to people in the north-east, the Midlands, the north,
:27:35. > :27:37.former coal-mining areas, if you say, you voted and we are going to
:27:38. > :27:42.ignore you? I am very concerned about this type of Brexit. Brexit
:27:43. > :27:47.under Theresa May, in accordance to Tory values. I will make the point
:27:48. > :27:51.that Angus makes. I was in Parliament for the debate on the
:27:52. > :27:58.Maastricht Treaty, which was just a revision to the EU Treaty. We
:27:59. > :28:02.debated that for 42 days. We are going to get five days to debate
:28:03. > :28:07.coming out of the EU altogether. That demonstrates to me how arrogant
:28:08. > :28:10.Theresa May is, how much she doesn't want to involve Parliament, how much
:28:11. > :28:20.she wants to bulldoze things through. But I repeat, however I
:28:21. > :28:23.feel about Leave, particularly Tory Leave, there is a democratic issue,
:28:24. > :28:30.and the Labour Party is clear about that. So the Labour Party, led by a
:28:31. > :28:38.man who, when he was a backbencher, despite the Labour Party whip 428
:28:39. > :28:44.times, is imposing a three line whip to vote for Article 50. -- defied
:28:45. > :28:48.the Labour Party. And various people say they are not going to do it.
:28:49. > :28:53.What is going to happen, more resignations from the Shadow
:28:54. > :28:57.Cabinet? I repeat, we are here in London saying that we can just
:28:58. > :29:03.ignore what people outside the capital and the big cities think. I
:29:04. > :29:08.think that real democracy sometimes means accepting difficult decisions.
:29:09. > :29:12.We will be fighting to get the best Brexit we can. We will be fighting
:29:13. > :29:16.first and foremost to do something for the 30,000 EU nationals living
:29:17. > :29:21.in this country which have a terrible shadow of uncertainty over
:29:22. > :29:24.them. We want their situation regularised. We will be fighting for
:29:25. > :29:29.regular reporting back and for a meaningful vote at the end of it.
:29:30. > :29:39.Mainly fighting each other, Diane. No. If you're not... If you're not
:29:40. > :29:46.in London, you sound as if you are sneering about what people genuinely
:29:47. > :29:52.think. After the Leave vote itself, your view of some Leave voters
:29:53. > :29:55.wasn't exactly complimentary, as a vote against wanting to see less
:29:56. > :30:00.foreign people on the street, if I recall the quote. I'm glad to hear
:30:01. > :30:05.that you have adjusted your position. As a working-class voter,
:30:06. > :30:10.and I want to speak up, as a working-class Leave voter, I'm not
:30:11. > :30:15.furious all the time, I don't dislike foreign people and I would
:30:16. > :30:18.like the issue of the new EU nationals to be resolved
:30:19. > :30:21.satisfactorily. The reason why the approval of Theresa May is so high
:30:22. > :30:25.at the moment is this is all about trying to take the pulse of the
:30:26. > :30:29.country, and Theresa May is trying to work out what the majority think.
:30:30. > :30:32.I think it was a medical vote to leave the EU and the idea that you
:30:33. > :30:37.would make that vote but somehow want to stay in the colours of the
:30:38. > :30:38.EU, the single market, the custom union, freedom of movement, that
:30:39. > :30:50.seems illogical to me. I want to hear from some more
:30:51. > :30:54.members of the audience. Personally, I think Brexit is going to be the
:30:55. > :30:59.death of the Labour Party because Jeremy Corbyn hasn't got a clue what
:31:00. > :31:09.he's doing. He doesn't even keep you guys informed. Susie Boniface.
:31:10. > :31:15.Yesterday, Paul Blomfield was asked what Corbyn's stance was, and he
:31:16. > :31:21.said he didn't know. And that is your Brexit secretary. It's crazy.
:31:22. > :31:26.To go back to Sophie's question about whether MPs should vote with
:31:27. > :31:30.their conscience, this isn't a conscience issue like abortion or
:31:31. > :31:34.something. This is an issue where the public have all made their
:31:35. > :31:37.feelings known, and regardless of how we voted, and regardless of how
:31:38. > :31:42.much the Labour Party disagrees on what day of the week it is, we are
:31:43. > :31:46.going for Brexit, whether we like it or not. What is in our best interest
:31:47. > :31:50.is for that to go as well as it can do and for us all to get the best
:31:51. > :31:55.deal out of it. For that to happen, we have to have a maximum scrutiny
:31:56. > :32:01.in Parliament. So detail is a good idea. However, right now we do not
:32:02. > :32:07.have any detail. No one has a clue. Can I finish my point? If anyone in
:32:08. > :32:10.this room is divorced, or has a divorce in their families, someone
:32:11. > :32:15.has issued a notice that they are going to divorce the EU. No one has
:32:16. > :32:19.had the financial forms out yet, compared pensions, discussed
:32:20. > :32:24.custody, and you are already asking the children where they want to go
:32:25. > :32:28.and who they want to live with. You can't decide now. This is the start
:32:29. > :32:31.of a long process. To have a conscience vote now is immaterial
:32:32. > :32:39.because it is further down the road. It's the detail you need to vote. It
:32:40. > :32:41.is almost a trend within the SNP party to not accept the outcomes of
:32:42. > :32:48.referendums. APPLAUSE
:32:49. > :32:55.I voted to remain but by except that the outcome was to leave, and I
:32:56. > :33:02.don't think that MPs can then change the decision was made by millions of
:33:03. > :33:05.people democratically. Angus Robertson, is the SNP really
:33:06. > :33:12.just heading towards divorce from the UK on this issue? First off, I
:33:13. > :33:16.totally recognise there was a majority across the UK to leave the
:33:17. > :33:21.EU. There was a majority in England and in Wales. There was a majority
:33:22. > :33:24.in Scotland to remain in the EU, which is why the Scottish Government
:33:25. > :33:28.is working hard to reach a compromise with the UK Government to
:33:29. > :33:35.find a deal that can satisfy all of us. I think, on such a big issue, it
:33:36. > :33:40.behoves the British Prime Minister and Scotland's First Minister to try
:33:41. > :33:43.and find that arrangement. That is why more information has been
:33:44. > :33:46.published on this by the Scottish Government than from the UK
:33:47. > :33:53.Government to date. That is where things are now. What happens when
:33:54. > :33:56.the UK Government then says, I am sorry, we are not prepared to
:33:57. > :34:00.respect the result in Scotland, to work with the Scottish Government,
:34:01. > :34:06.to find a solution that satisfies everybody across these islands? It
:34:07. > :34:09.is like saying we have to recognise the people of London who voted
:34:10. > :34:15.exactly the same way. APPLAUSE
:34:16. > :34:23.Why Scotland? What about London? I support the
:34:24. > :34:27.case by the Mayor of London that the UK Government should negotiate with
:34:28. > :34:31.the importance of the City of London in mind, so that a deal can be
:34:32. > :34:34.reached that is not disadvantageous to the city, or similarly for the
:34:35. > :34:39.car industry in the North of England. We know there will have to
:34:40. > :34:43.be an arrangement for Northern Ireland, and that is no laughing
:34:44. > :34:48.matter, because it is super important to get a deal that works
:34:49. > :34:51.for Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. We need to recognise there
:34:52. > :34:56.are different priorities in different parts of these islands. At
:34:57. > :34:58.this stage, before getting to an independence referendum issue, the
:34:59. > :35:02.Scottish Government is aiming to try and reach an agreement with the UK
:35:03. > :35:07.Government. And I hope the UK Government is prepared to do that.
:35:08. > :35:12.How long until another Scottish referendum, which you look as though
:35:13. > :35:16.you are heading for? If there is going to be a Scottish referendum it
:35:17. > :35:19.is because the UK Government has not been prepared to work with the
:35:20. > :35:24.Scottish Government, which has an elected mandate to try and reach
:35:25. > :35:29.this heel. I think that is why the UK Government should work with the
:35:30. > :35:35.Scottish Government. Angus come EU said that Theresa needs to find a
:35:36. > :35:39.deal. You said that Theresa needs to renegotiate a special elation chip
:35:40. > :35:42.for London. You have then said you will not vote through the enabling
:35:43. > :35:47.legislation which enables her to start a negotiating process. How is
:35:48. > :35:50.she meant to find a deal and negotiate on behalf of London and
:35:51. > :35:56.the devolved administrations when you will vote against the bill that
:35:57. > :35:59.enables her to do so? How can we possibly give the green light to a
:36:00. > :36:03.Prime Minister who is not prepared to give us any details of what she
:36:04. > :36:09.is prepared to negotiate? If she were to outline the fact that she
:36:10. > :36:15.can... Actually sit down and have the gauche nations. Which she can't
:36:16. > :36:18.do. The Prime Minister was saying she will meet with devolved
:36:19. > :36:22.governments on Monday and that is a good thing. But we need to see some
:36:23. > :36:27.progress. Why would we allow her to have carte blanche to do whatever a
:36:28. > :36:30.UK Tory government wants to do without us having any assurances
:36:31. > :36:38.that she will negotiate in our interests. The woman in the second
:36:39. > :36:43.row from the back. Angus mentioned majorities but forgot to mention one
:36:44. > :36:47.specific majority, which is that the majority of Scottish people voted to
:36:48. > :36:51.stay in the UK, and the UK as a whole voted to leave the EU, and
:36:52. > :36:52.Scotland needs to accept that result, just like London.
:36:53. > :37:08.APPLAUSE The man in white.
:37:09. > :37:12.What I want to know is, dodgy Diane kept saying there will be a Tory
:37:13. > :37:22.Brexit that she does not like. What is a Labour Brexit? A Labour
:37:23. > :37:28.Brexit... Let me finish. First of all, a Labour Brexit would put jobs
:37:29. > :37:31.and the economy first. What is that? If you let me finish, a Labour
:37:32. > :37:35.Brexit would put jobs and the economy first. It would be a huge
:37:36. > :37:40.blow for manufacturing and the City of London if we come out of the City
:37:41. > :37:47.of London and also completely out of the customs union. It will be. We
:37:48. > :37:50.are putting jobs and living standards first. Theresa May is
:37:51. > :37:55.putting the issue of immigration first, which brings me to what Geoff
:37:56. > :37:59.said. He hinted something about immigration. Let me just say this,
:38:00. > :38:06.there is no question that some people voted to leave about
:38:07. > :38:12.immigration. But you made a blatant statement. I don't disagree that
:38:13. > :38:17.some people did, but it was a blanket statement. Stop saying, let
:38:18. > :38:22.me make, and just make the point. Just in order to get through the
:38:23. > :38:26.topics. Let her speak. There is no question some people voted on the
:38:27. > :38:30.immigration issue, and also no question that we saw a rise in
:38:31. > :38:34.racist attacks, including in this city, in the wake of the Brexit
:38:35. > :38:37.vote. On the question of immigration, the audience will
:38:38. > :38:40.forgive me, as the daughter of immigrants, if I remind them that
:38:41. > :38:48.immigrants have made London a great city. Nobody is disputing that. We
:38:49. > :38:52.will defend them, including EU migrants, although it is a very
:38:53. > :38:57.negative climate to say these things. We have been round that
:38:58. > :39:04.course several times. Not always when you are on the panel, but
:39:05. > :39:07.often. I think we should move on. We are two thirds of the way through
:39:08. > :39:11.the programme, and because of the woman who rang up to say, please,
:39:12. > :39:14.not Brexit or Trump, I think we should try something else.
:39:15. > :39:16.We're in Wallasey next week, and the week after
:39:17. > :39:37.Should GPs be able to charge certain patients for procedures or aspects
:39:38. > :39:41.of care? It was a suggestion that made the news today from a GP in
:39:42. > :39:45.Oxfordshire that family doctors should be able to charge for evening
:39:46. > :39:51.and weekend appointments, as a way of helping the financial problems of
:39:52. > :39:57.the National Health Service. Geoff Norcott. Yes, I think they should. I
:39:58. > :40:02.know it is unpopular, I know what a religion the NHS is. There were some
:40:03. > :40:06.statistics today that there are 14 million missed appointments every
:40:07. > :40:11.year. To say there is not an obvious solution is not an excuse to do
:40:12. > :40:13.nothing. You should not have a hall of shame outside the surgery where
:40:14. > :40:18.people speculate on what you might have gone there for. But you should
:40:19. > :40:23.do something pragmatic. When you talk about reforming the NHS, people
:40:24. > :40:28.hold up Sweden and Northern European health services as an example. A lot
:40:29. > :40:32.of those countries pay for a share of their health care as well. This
:40:33. > :40:36.is a unique time of people having a bigger population in this country,
:40:37. > :40:44.greater life expectancy. To think you can carry on doing what you did
:40:45. > :40:49.before seems naive. Are we heading for a paid for National Health
:40:50. > :40:53.Service? It is not paid for. The question was about GP out of hours,
:40:54. > :41:00.right. Whether patients should pay for certain aspects of their care.
:41:01. > :41:04.The report I read was about GP out of hours surgery but I think it is a
:41:05. > :41:08.reasonable place to start. Possibly with the same exemption is that you
:41:09. > :41:12.have for dental care. If you are pregnant, unemployed or elderly,
:41:13. > :41:18.obviously you are exempt, but it seems reasonable that people should
:41:19. > :41:21.contribute. Are you talking about just out of hours stuff, or when
:41:22. > :41:25.people are very drunk and get ill as a result of their behaviour?
:41:26. > :41:31.Something like that, or not attending appointments, missed
:41:32. > :41:34.appointments. Certain aspects. This doctor's idea was that you would pay
:41:35. > :41:38.for evening and weekend appointments. Yes, but they also
:41:39. > :41:45.mentioned about certain things like vasectomies and removing moles. The
:41:46. > :41:49.thing is, there is one issue where someone says it sounds like a good
:41:50. > :41:53.idea. You have a 24-year-old who has fallen over in Accident Emergency
:41:54. > :41:57.because he is drunk. Why doesn't he pay for his care? Someone wants to
:41:58. > :42:03.go at 9pm to the GP because they are busy at work, why can't they pay for
:42:04. > :42:08.it? Where do you draw the line? When do you say someone's behaviour has
:42:09. > :42:10.got them in hospital? Do you charge a diabetic who has not regulated
:42:11. > :42:16.their blood properly for going to hospital? I have a condition where I
:42:17. > :42:21.sometimes have epileptic seizures caused by insomnia and anxiety. If I
:42:22. > :42:27.get into 80s and have a seizure, do I have to pay for it because I
:42:28. > :42:31.caused it? And do you think everyone who wants to go to the doctors at
:42:32. > :42:34.evenings and weekends is automatically working in a good job
:42:35. > :42:37.the rest of the time? Perhaps they are shift workers, not that well
:42:38. > :42:42.off, perhaps they can't afford to pay more. So I don't think we should
:42:43. > :42:46.be paying for that, but I do think as a nation we have to pay more for
:42:47. > :42:49.our NHS. It is the lowest cost health care almost in the world for
:42:50. > :42:54.what we are getting. We are not putting enough in. All of the
:42:55. > :42:57.politicians from the main parties think it is anathema and political
:42:58. > :43:02.death to suggest we should pay more for that. I think if they just said,
:43:03. > :43:05.a penny more on income tax and you will have a perfect NHS that will
:43:06. > :43:09.look after you much better, most of us would be fine with it. I think
:43:10. > :43:13.they should just do that. APPLAUSE
:43:14. > :43:18.I am tired of hearing that the reason the NHS is failing is because
:43:19. > :43:23.we are living longer. We live longer because we have a
:43:24. > :43:26.good NHS. When will the government stop hiding behind newspapers and
:43:27. > :43:29.let everyone know it is the PFI schemes and the funding of social
:43:30. > :43:38.care that is causing these problems at the moment? You, sir, with the
:43:39. > :43:41.glasses. I sort of despair at the tone of the debate, because it
:43:42. > :43:46.sounds good in principle, it really does. It would take a lot of boxes
:43:47. > :43:50.but would be a bureaucratic nightmare maintaining that type of
:43:51. > :43:55.system. The biggest thing to talk about, talking to the politicians,
:43:56. > :44:00.is PFI. What is going on with that? We bailed out the banks, maybe now
:44:01. > :44:08.we should bail out the NHS, because it is getting bad. What is it about
:44:09. > :44:13.PFI, private Finance initiative, that you object to? Interest rates.
:44:14. > :44:19.A lot of these were signed by both Labour and the Coalition Government.
:44:20. > :44:23.I don't know what the status is. I don't know if anyone has taken out a
:44:24. > :44:29.payday loan. I haven't. What you hear what they are like. I think the
:44:30. > :44:33.comparison of PFI being like payday loans over the NHS, I think that is
:44:34. > :44:35.what is going on and we need to bailout. The government can borrow
:44:36. > :44:49.money and a lot cheaper than PFI. Going back to the idea of paying for
:44:50. > :44:55.specific aspects of health care, what about those that have a lack of
:44:56. > :45:00.economic resources? Are they denied the necessary care? There is a point
:45:01. > :45:03.that has been missed about this. The question was asked about NHS GPs
:45:04. > :45:09.because, at the moment, if you want to have private procedures, whatever
:45:10. > :45:13.they may be, you can do that. Let's not lose sight of the fact that you
:45:14. > :45:18.have that option if you want. I go back to this question. It's about
:45:19. > :45:21.that then that we value, I think all of us on the panel value a National
:45:22. > :45:27.Health Service. We understand the pressures it under. Do I believe
:45:28. > :45:32.that GPs being able to charge their patients within the NHS is the thin
:45:33. > :45:39.end of the privatisation wench? I absolutely believe that that is what
:45:40. > :45:44.it is and I'm not in favour of that happeneding. We should have a public
:45:45. > :45:50.NHS free at point need. You, with the red tie on. I think there two
:45:51. > :45:56.different issues. The first issue is that, if you have to go on and
:45:57. > :46:00.evening or weekend, because you can't do any other times, then you
:46:01. > :46:06.have the right because you contribute to the National Health
:46:07. > :46:10.Service. On the other hand, if you want that service for other reasons,
:46:11. > :46:13.for example, you are drunk or because you miss the appointment,
:46:14. > :46:19.then you should be treated differently. If you miss your
:46:20. > :46:25.appointment and you don't phone in advance to cancel it, then yes, you
:46:26. > :46:27.should be given a first warning, second warning then, I'm sorry, you
:46:28. > :46:31.are at the back of the queue. To show a bit of commitment and
:46:32. > :46:36.appreciation to the fact that you are receiving the service. Diane
:46:37. > :46:41.Abbott, what do you think of that point we have often heard that about
:46:42. > :46:45.people who don't turn up? There have been schemes to deal with this like
:46:46. > :46:49.texting and reminding people, but on the general point that people paying
:46:50. > :46:56.for GP services, I'd be against it for this reason. Jeff talked about
:46:57. > :47:01.exemptions, but the people you would put off going to see their GP are
:47:02. > :47:07.exactly the people that should go and see their GP, the elderly, the
:47:08. > :47:15.poor, people with children. Let me take one issue, cancer. We have the
:47:16. > :47:20.worst cancer out turns in Europe because people get diagnosed late.
:47:21. > :47:23.It seems to me, if you start charging, the danger is that people
:47:24. > :47:28.will put off going to the GP and will be diagnosed with serious
:47:29. > :47:33.issues like cancer even later. People often go to the GP about one
:47:34. > :47:37.thing and the GP discovers another thing. Anything that puts people off
:47:38. > :47:42.going to their GP cannot be good for health outcomes in this country.
:47:43. > :47:45.APPLAUSE I was glad you referred to the
:47:46. > :47:53.dental system, because I went to see my dentist earlier this week and had
:47:54. > :47:58.a tooth extraction under the NHS, costing ?53. This is an indication
:47:59. > :48:04.of the direction of travel. This is where we are going. People have been
:48:05. > :48:08.talking about the idea that there are moves to privatise the NHS.
:48:09. > :48:11.Actually, this process has been going on for quite a long time, and
:48:12. > :48:16.that's the direction we are moving and I think we need to be alive to
:48:17. > :48:21.the real forms that this will take. It's not going to be done at a
:48:22. > :48:24.stroke, openly. It's going to be done bit by bit and gradually
:48:25. > :48:31.acclimatising us the idea that we have to pay for this and that. And
:48:32. > :48:35.is that a good idea? Know, an extremely bad idea and it's the way
:48:36. > :48:42.we get led blindly into a position that most of us do not want. James
:48:43. > :48:46.Cleverly. You might want to make a note of this in your diary, because
:48:47. > :48:54.it's not going to happen very often, but I agree with Diane on this one.
:48:55. > :49:00.The thing that concerns me about this proposal, remember, it's a
:49:01. > :49:02.proposal that came from an NHS professional, not from the
:49:03. > :49:06.government or a Conservative politician, is that it would, like
:49:07. > :49:12.Diane says, put off the very people. I have sat in an ambulance call
:49:13. > :49:16.centre, call handling centre, and I have listened to the kind of calls
:49:17. > :49:20.with people demanding that an ambulance gets sent to them because
:49:21. > :49:26.they have got a broken finger, and they get very direct. And what is
:49:27. > :49:31.remarkable in its absence are the voices of the elderly, who are often
:49:32. > :49:38.very conscious that they are imposing on others. Diane is right.
:49:39. > :49:43.If we allowed the impression to be created that you shouldn't go to the
:49:44. > :49:46.GP if you feel unwell or you are concerned about your health, I think
:49:47. > :49:51.it would have a dire consequence, so on this one, I think the answer is
:49:52. > :49:58.simple. They should not be charges. I want to go on to last question.
:49:59. > :50:02.Ross Curtis, please. Given the recent strike chaos and announcement
:50:03. > :50:07.of an increase in fares, should the railways be nationalised? Southern
:50:08. > :50:11.Rail, affecting a lot of people in London, have been on strike for
:50:12. > :50:18.weeks and weeks, and the Tube has been on strike again, so should the
:50:19. > :50:21.railways be nationalised? Yes, but with one caveat, which is that the
:50:22. > :50:24.government effectively is running Southern at the moment and they are
:50:25. > :50:29.not doing a terribly good job of it. They have given the franchise to
:50:30. > :50:35.Govia Thameslink and they have guaranteed that company ?1 billion
:50:36. > :50:37.per year. They are taking all the financial hits of the strike
:50:38. > :50:43.themselves, the government, ie us, the taxpayer, so all of the strikes
:50:44. > :50:48.and fair penalty repayments and everything else is coming out of our
:50:49. > :50:54.pockets, not the train operators. They are guaranteed their money. So
:50:55. > :50:56.nationalising wouldn't make any difference? We should nationalised
:50:57. > :51:00.because it would be better than now but we have to have it run by
:51:01. > :51:06.somebody competent, and that isn't this government. Certainly not Chris
:51:07. > :51:11.Grayling. I think the strike chaos, just today on the central line in
:51:12. > :51:14.London there was a strike. Even though I vote Conservative, I
:51:15. > :51:21.respect the right of people to form unions and to take strike action.
:51:22. > :51:25.But there are no socialists when you are waiting 25 minutes for a Tube.
:51:26. > :51:29.Even Jeremy Corbyn would be throwing down his red book in disgust. I
:51:30. > :51:33.suppose I can speak for the normal person. It's very hard, with this
:51:34. > :51:39.strike action continuing, there is a sympathy well that could run dry
:51:40. > :51:45.eventually, and I think that's beginning to happen. The woman up
:51:46. > :51:50.there. East Coast was run by the government for many years and they
:51:51. > :51:57.did a very efficient and comfortable service and paid millions back to
:51:58. > :52:02.the Treasury. Now, it's run by Virgin and the Treasury doesn't
:52:03. > :52:07.benefit any more. Ross, what do you think? Obviously, as you can tell
:52:08. > :52:15.from the accent, I'm not from here. I was going to talk about Southern
:52:16. > :52:19.foot about East Coast, as the lady said, tonight, if I had to go home
:52:20. > :52:28.tonight after the show, it would cost me ?150 for a single ticket to
:52:29. > :52:36.get to Durham. ?150. Look at the franchises that have run East Coast
:52:37. > :52:45.for the last 20 years. Would it be cheaper if the government run it in
:52:46. > :52:50.the long it could be. Is then not talk of Southern Rail being taken
:52:51. > :52:55.back into...? It's worth remembering certain things. Ross, I'm a bit
:52:56. > :53:06.older than you buy a couple of months, maybe. Don't flatter
:53:07. > :53:09.yourself! But I'm old enough to remember, and Geoff is a
:53:10. > :53:13.professional comedian, when the staple of the British comedy circuit
:53:14. > :53:20.was the dire performance of British rail. The idea that somehow the
:53:21. > :53:27.government running big entities like the rail service is an automatic
:53:28. > :53:32.guarantee of success, I think, unfortunately, is not the case. So I
:53:33. > :53:35.think that is a simple solution to a complicated problem and not the
:53:36. > :53:39.right way forward. One thing also worth bearing in mind is that the
:53:40. > :53:42.bit of the railway system which is run in the public sector, Network
:53:43. > :53:49.Rail, has been one of the problems in many of the difficulties we have
:53:50. > :53:53.had with rail around the country. I think Chris Grayling is absolutely
:53:54. > :53:57.right to say that Network Rail and the franchise holders now have to
:53:58. > :54:02.work properly in an integrated way to reduce the delays, to get better
:54:03. > :54:07.quality services. That is a step in the right direction. I just don't
:54:08. > :54:10.buy the idea that bringing the railways back into national
:54:11. > :54:16.ownership will make them any better than they are at the moment, but I
:54:17. > :54:21.suspect it would make them worse. On Southern, I think the situation is a
:54:22. > :54:24.scandal. It has been a scandal for a long time and I think, at the very
:54:25. > :54:30.least, Southern should be handed over to Transport for London. I know
:54:31. > :54:35.there was a dispute today, but generally Transport for London as a
:54:36. > :54:38.whole does not have the problem is that Southern has. I live on the
:54:39. > :54:44.London Underground route, and it is immaculate, run by Transport for
:54:45. > :54:47.London. On the general questions of the railways and ownership, somebody
:54:48. > :54:51.said, what does the Labour Party stand for? One thing that we stand
:54:52. > :54:56.for is bringing the railways back into public ownership. We believe it
:54:57. > :55:02.could be done at minimum cost of each franchise falls due bringing it
:55:03. > :55:07.back into the public. The truth is, under the current system, at the
:55:08. > :55:12.very least, millions and millions of public money is being spent to
:55:13. > :55:18.subsidise private operators, so what do we stand for? Bringing railways
:55:19. > :55:21.into public ownership. I think we need to make a decision on this
:55:22. > :55:24.because, at the moment, it is not acceptable. There is a breakdown in
:55:25. > :55:29.communication. What commuters have been going through in the last few
:55:30. > :55:33.months, almost a year, it can't carry on. Whether it is taken back
:55:34. > :55:37.by the government or something else, somebody has to change the
:55:38. > :55:44.situation. Unless it does just go on. You, sir. And then I will
:55:45. > :55:50.continue. Just slightly rewinding the tape, does America really care
:55:51. > :55:55.about our relationship with America? It seems to me... I thought we were
:55:56. > :56:00.talking about the railways. This woman who rang up and said, please,
:56:01. > :56:05.not Trump and Brexit, she will not like what you are saying! No, I
:56:06. > :56:11.think... Lets stick to this. We only have a minute or so left. Sorry you
:56:12. > :56:16.didn't get in early. Yes, you, the woman there. Rein I think a real
:56:17. > :56:22.concern is that provision wasn't made for failures of the franchises.
:56:23. > :56:25.We are talking about it being brought back under public control.
:56:26. > :56:32.Diane's point is that that would have to happen when the franchise
:56:33. > :56:34.falls due. I heard there would be no service for six months for us to
:56:35. > :56:40.take back control of those franchises. It seems to me there is
:56:41. > :56:45.an immediate problem and a potential medium-term solution, because we are
:56:46. > :56:47.mixing up to things, the Southern issue and also the ongoing strike
:56:48. > :56:53.action in London that people have raised. On the first point, I think
:56:54. > :56:57.that everybody wishes for better industrial relations, so the efforts
:56:58. > :57:00.being made to try and encourage people to get together, I totally
:57:01. > :57:04.agree there is a right for people to be represented by their trade union,
:57:05. > :57:07.and it is right that Transport for London is trying to provide the most
:57:08. > :57:11.efficient service and I think we need to support the London mayor in
:57:12. > :57:15.trying to get improved industrial relations together. That is a
:57:16. > :57:20.solution to something we may be able to gain in the short term. On the
:57:21. > :57:24.medium-term issue, on the franchise holders and are they providing
:57:25. > :57:29.adequate service? Lily in the south of England that is not the case. I
:57:30. > :57:33.don't want to get involved in English politics, because it a did
:57:34. > :57:37.the -- it is a devolved issue in Scotland, but I would suggest you
:57:38. > :57:41.should be open to allowing public sector bids and, if they can provide
:57:42. > :57:46.a better service, one should be open to that, but that will not fix the
:57:47. > :57:49.short-term problem that so many of us who spent time in London are
:57:50. > :57:55.having to suffer. You have had your hand up for some time. This is
:57:56. > :57:57.exactly why we shouldn't privatise the NHS, because it will not make
:57:58. > :58:03.any difference to the service. APPLAUSE
:58:04. > :58:05.Thank you for that. Our time is up. We have got to stop.
:58:06. > :58:07.We're in Wallasey next week, and the week after
:58:08. > :58:11.To come and take part in our audience, in Wallasey
:58:12. > :58:18.or Torquay, go to our website, or call 0330 123 99 88.
:58:19. > :58:20.If you are listening tonight on Radio 5 Live, the debate goes
:58:21. > :58:31.My thanks to our panel, to all of you who came here to this part of
:58:32. > :58:35.north London to take part in tonight's programme. Many thanks to
:58:36. > :59:11.you all. Until next Thursday, from Question Time, good night.
:59:12. > :59:14.It's just pain, but it doesn't feel like pain,