09/02/2017 Question Time

Welcome to Question Time and, tonight, we are in Torquay.

On our panel, the backbench Conservative MP who campaigned for

Remain and who this week, light and some of her pro Brexit colleagues to

jihadis. Claire Perry. The man who unsuccessfully challenged Jeremy

Corbyn for the Labour leadership last summer and now wants a second

EU referendum, Owen Smith. The Ukip deputy leader, who ran for London

last year, Peter Whittle. The singer, songwriter and socialist,

Billy Bragg. And the former Conservative politician who, since

leaving Westminster, has filled her time with writing novels, performing

in pantomime and even doing aged -- doing a remember full turn on

Strictly. Ann Widdecombe. Welcome to you all. Welcome to our

panel and to you at home watching. You can always join in this debate

have your say, either Facebook or Twitter or text us on 83981. Push

some red button somewhere and see what others are saying. Our first

question from Clare Sardari, please. What would the panel like to say to

the many unaccompanied refugee children in Europe now affected by

the curtailment of the Dubs scheme? That being the scheme to bring

unaccompanied children into the UK. 200 have been brought in and they

are only going to take 150 more. Originally, it was going to be

around 3000. Yesterday it was suddenly curtailed. Peter Whittle.

What I would say is that it seems hard. -- harsh. It is only going to

be 350 as opposed to 3000. But I think there are different issues and

we shouldn't confuse the issue of children who would come in under

this scheme with, if you like, the general flow of refugees and

therefore it is regrettable. I understand the reasoning, which is

that this attracts, if you like, people traffickers and what have

you, but I think that, in this case, it does seem somewhat harsh just to

curtail this very small amount. Clare's brutal question was, what

would you say to the ones not allowed in? What do you actually

say? It is very difficult. One has to be quite clear about this, and

you don't want to be lacking in compassion. Obviously, we've had

cases last year of minors or supposed miners unaccompanied who

were actually not my nose. Those sorts of people, that actually has

be looked at very carefully. We have to be very careful these days who is

coming into our country. It isn't a question of being not compassionate.

That is the case. I think, in this instance, what we are talking about

now with the Dubs law, if you like, is that it seems to have been rather

a harsh judgment. Billy Bragg. Tony Benn once said that the way the

government treats refugees is very instructive, because it's the way

they would treat the rest of us if they had half a chance.

APPLAUSE It seems to me to be a week where

the debate in this country has been somewhat coarsened in the way that

we've seen recently in the USA. Trying to get rid of John .co

because he spoke out, the Prime Minister accusing Jeremy Corbyn of

using alternative facts. -- trying to get rid of Jeremy Berkoff -- John

Berkoff. We have a duty to take in refugees from around the world and I

think that... APPLAUSE

These young people are stuck between a rock and a hard place. We lent on

the French got mud to clear the Calais jungle. These people have

nowhere to go. They can't go back where they came from, they can't

assimilate into France. Our government has said that we have

undertaken the Dubs Amendment, and Alf Dubs was a child refugee, that

we would take them in what I think it says something about the

closeness of the debate that is going on our country. We have some

real thinking to do in the coming years, not just about Article 50 or

whether we want to stay in the single market would join the

economic area. We have to ask ourselves what kind of people we

are. APPLAUSE

Are we going to turn away from our responsibilities to the world or are

we going to step up and do what we said we would do, and take all 3000

of these children? The person with their hand up. They haven't said

they will stop taking refugees. They are still saying they will take

thousands from the refugee camps, which is much safer for the children

and puts them at less risk. But these children are already here. And

they are in France, a safe country. APPLAUSE

I understand the concern and I talked to the Home Secretary about

this yesterday pulled to clarify, there was never a number made. The

government committed to make sure that every child that came who may

have gone through the most horrific situation would be given as much

support as they could possibly have from local councils, and the

councils have come back and said, this is the number we can support.

But the original act stated that we would take 3000. The Dubs amendment

wasn't accepted? I would hate for criticism of this policy to

overshadow what we should all be proud of, that this government has a

fantastic track record in this region. We are spending the biggest

humanitarian aid package we have ever spent and that is being in

Syria pulled we will take 20,000 Syrian people over the course of

this Parliament and I am proud to say that we have Syrian families in

my constituency. I suspect that these children, coming here with no

family support, often escaping from traumatic circumstances, will have

to have incredible support and care from the local council, quite

properly, and the councils have said that if the number they can

adequately support. Let's not make this an enemy of what we should be

proud of, which is an incredibly good international track record of

supporting people from the world's toughest regions. I'm afraid that I

do think that the sensible ways to take refugees, including children,

are from the camps around Syria, because that is where the problem

is. We know that those people have been absolutely displaced by that

war and I think that is an entirely sensible policy. It is true, and the

Home Secretary made this clear, that councils have said... When a child

arrives here, this isn't the end. That's the beginning. The child then

has to be looked after, found a home for, properly educated, properly

looked after, and all councils are saying is, at the moment, they feel

they have reached a point beyond which they don't want further

burdens. It doesn't mean that, in the future, some similar programme

couldn't be reinstated. Let me say this about France. I'm pretty fed up

with France. The fact is that those people in the camps at Calais spent

all their time trying to get unlawfully into Britain, when they

could apply quite lawfully to stay in France, which is a safe country,

and a signatory to all of the refugee Convention is that we are a

signatory to. APPLAUSE

Owen Smith. Clare, I would say sorry on behalf of the British people for

what I think... APPLAUSE

What I think is a shameful day for our country. As Billy said a minute

ago, Alf Dubs, who put his name to this amendment, I worked with him in

Northern Ireland and he is a great man, somebody who was a refugee and

came to this country as part of the kinder transport. He is clear that

we need to do this and I am absolutely clear that we need to

take more of these refugees. What did you say to the council? I rang

my council leader tonight and asked Rhondda Cynon Taf council in south

Wales how many of these children they'd been asked to take. They have

taken four. They could take four or five times that. They have not been

asked to take any of the vulnerable families. I don't believe for a

minute that it is true that the councils are ringing up a Home

Office, saying they can't afford to take any more, and it certainly is

not true of my council. There was a number that was talked about 3000

was very widely understood to be the number we hoped to take as a result

of the concession that we had to ring out the government kicking and

screaming, and they are reneging on the promise that may made -- they

made. There are 30,000 unaccompanied children in Europe, fleeing

persecution. Billy is right. We've got to make some decisions about

what sort of country we want. I want to bring Clare in, because he set an

interesting thing, that his council hasn't been asked and could take

five times as many. In Wiltshire, we have taken in Syrian families, but

we have taken in children, minors on their own. I would be interesting to

clarify that and, if it's the case, I will feed that back. But there is

a difference between a child coming here as part of a family and a child

coming who has no family members here, doesn't speak the language and

may have been persecuted. A lot of abuse. There is a of abuse. We can

go back to the government and ask them to review the numbers. But

checking the allegation that Owen has made is clearly desirable. Let's

hear from some of the audience. In the run-up to World War II, we took

to 10,000 Jewish children unaccompanied. Why can't we do

similar numbers now? It was a moment of pride for our country, and yet we

are saying only 350. We didn't have the resources then that we have now.

We were about to enter a world war. And we are not about to enter one

now. Why can't we take on more children? Peter, briefly. It isn't a

comparable situation. The kinder transport were fleeing almost

certain death, murder by the state. That is quite different to the

situation we have got in Europe at the moment. Children leaving Syria!

Children who are leaving... It is absolutely not just Syria. The point

is that I would agree that this particular thing with the Dubs

children is harsh. There is no point trying to make general point about

Britain's harshness. We are a compassionate country and the

refugee situation generally is quite different to what we are talking

about. The woman over there. I'll come to you then. Yes, I have huge

empathy for anybody who wants to come into this country who is at

fear for their life, but what about our NHS? What about social care? We

are absolutely on our knees. We cannot take any more people. And

you, sir. Is it not completely wrong that Theresa May is willing to turn

her back on child refugees but willing to lay out the red carpet

for somebody who is...? Ann Widdecombe, we may come too late

later. We usually get round to Trump before the programme is over. It is

a fact that there has been evidence of people trafficking. If you are

taking Syrian refugees from the camps on the Syrian border, you know

that that is not the case but, if they have come through Europe,

sometimes several countries, and they have ended up in the camps at

Calais, quite if you of them will have been trafficked, they will be

exploited, not the children, the adults will be exploiting the

situation. All the Home Secretary is saying is that there have been

representations from councils, that we have a huge duty to those

children when they come in, and so we have to make sure that we get it

right of who we bring in. APPLAUSE

Briefly, if you would, because we have many questions. My council

asked for volunteers to help with settling the refugee children and

now they have told us that they are inundated with volunteers to help

and they haven't got any children. Which council is that? Devon County

Council. Really? Obviously, two points have been raised of great

importance that need checking. We must go on, because we have many

other questions. We're in Glasgow next week

and the week after we'll be in Stoke-on-Trent, on the night

of the by-election in that city. James Sharples, please. Is it fair

to refer to people who back Brexit as Jihadis? This is Claire Perry

sitting on my right here, this is her quote. The tone of these debates

sometimes borders on the hysterical. I feel sometimes I'm sitting with

colleagues who're like Jihadis in their support for a hard Brexit. No

Brexit is hard enough. They are saying be gone your evil Europeans,

we never want you to darken our doors again. Anne Widdecombe, what

do you make of that? If there was anything hysterical, it was project

fear during the Brexit campaign. APPLAUSE.

There was a completely cynical attempt to scare people into voting

remain. I'm very proud of the British people that they turned

round and said, no, actually, we are going to go with what we believe is

right and voted Brexit. I was a Brexiter, I still am. I do not

consider myself any sort of Jihadi, but I don't believe that Claire does

either. I quite agree. James, I mean, please, I'm really glad to

clarify that this was a specific point made for colleagues who have

fought a guerrilla war, if you like, on this for 40 years who now will

countenance no conversation... Who were you referring to? I wouldn't

dream of doing that, but the point is... I am sitting with colleagues

who're like Jihadis, you said, and you won't say who they are? Using

the phrase Jihadi, it was a long and heated debate, but given what they

can and do in terms of atrocities, that was not a well chosen way to

say it. We are all Brexiteers now, the country voted for it, there is

overwhelming support for it. No thanks to you. Overwhelming support

for the House of Commons. What do you mean, we are all Brexiteers, are

we all Brexiteers now? No, we are not. The country voted for it, we

are going to come out of the current relationship with Europe, but that

does not mean in my view that we have given anybody carte blanche to

come up with a dreadful deal for the UK. The problem with some who've

campaigned for many years on this, is that they don't want to have that

conversation. OK. Why is it 40 years of a guerrilla war instead of 40

years of a steadfast campaign. There was a 40-year fight to abolish

slavery, there was a 40-year fight to get out of Europe and there's

nothing wrong with that. Billy Bragg? I'm not sure I would have

used that turn of phrase but there is certainly a strain among the more

convinced Brexiteers that the rest should shut up and just let 'em get

on with it. I'm afraid I don't think democracy is worth the name

democracy if it can't change its mind. I think when we voted on this

in June, the prospect of leaving the European for those people who voted

for them, but the prospect of leaving the European Union and going

out on to the high seas, the seas looked relatively calm going out

towards the US particularly, that seemed a relatively good idea. But

now if Brexit means Trump as it may well do, I really think that... It

means the world. ALL SPEAK AT ONCE.

Brexit means the world. If the Brexiters let us speak, we might be

able to possibly put our point of view across.

My point is this... OK. Peter whittle? Can I just finish my point?

Briefly. You've made it. As we look out across towards the Atlantic, the

seas are becoming so rough that some levers are starting to feel like

chief Brady in Jaws and they may be thinking, you know what, we need a

bigger boat. The some point that the European relationship... Thank you,

Billy. Peter? This is absolute nonsense. This is an alternative

reality. The fact is, if you want real nastiness, if you want real

viciousness, then you should have been on the campaign like I was. I

was on the River Thames, if you remember, that famous incident where

Bob Geldof came with his millionaire friends, he made signs and swore at

fishermen who'd come because they were trying to protect their living.

That was the real nastiness and extreme it. . -- extremism. The

woman in the red dress? Something Anne said earlier. She said the

British people said that they wanted Brexit, but when you say British

people, I think you're missing out the amount of under 16s that

actually didn't get a vote. I mean, I'm 17, I was 16 when the referendum

happened. I really didn't want to leave the EU and it's still

happened. People like me aren't very happy about it. If your side of the

argument had won, you would be expecting us to accept that and to

get on with it. APPLAUSE.

Nigel Farage said if it was 52-48 against, the battle would have

carried on. You would you would expect us to accept it. I expect

them to accept it. Bill aye Bragg said democracy is about being able

to change your mind and we did. There was a referendum in 1975. And

I changed my mind. We should be able to leave. That doesn't mean it stops

now. The point is democracy is an ongoing debate. Now that Article 50

has been triggered, we are going to have a two-year debate about what

kind of Europe we are going to be part of. Don't expect us to siton

our hands and be quiet because you won. No, hold on. Owen Smith hasn't

spoken yet. Owen Smith? Thank you. I was sat in the debate opposite

Claire when she made her remark and I'm quite par tomorrow a bit of

blunt speaking but even I blanched. She's apologised for it now. She

has, it was in debate and it was meant to be a joke. The point she

was make was well made in as much as this has been a 30-year Civil War

within the Tory party. What about your party now? If you let me say a

few words, the reason we have ended up with a referendum and the

outcome, is the Tory party, it was to settle a war within the family.

No, it wasn't. Unfortunately, we have ended up with the awful set of

circumstances we now face which is either the rock hard Brexit, us

being out of the single market and the customs union. Or worse, what we

now now is likely to happen if we don't get a good deal, simply

falling out of the European Union on world trade. It cost this country

?45 billion, the last GDP. You said it was to solve a problem in the

Tory party. Are you saying the 52% or whatever it was, the figure that

voted to leave, that they shouldn't have had their voice heard, that it

was only because of some problem in the Tory party that the issue arose

and we would have been happy to carry on with 52% against what you

were doing? I'm saying the reason we ended up with a referendum was David

Cameron needed... We are not talking about the reason, what about the way

people voted? You asked about whether we ended up with a

referendum because of the Tory party, my answer to that is yes. I

didn't say that, I said would you have ignored the feeling expressed

if there hadn't have been a referendum? If Labour won the last

election, we wouldn't have been having a referendum on this

absolutely complicated, multifaceted incredibly important... Did you want

a second referendum, you don't accept the result? We ended up with

a choice that was bindery where a lot of people were lied to and let

down by the nature of the debate. You are not in the House of Commons.

You can't make a speech. But very briefly, why not a second

referendum, you don't believe people got it right? I think Brexit will be

a disaster for the economy and we need to think much harder about what

it's going to look like for our children and for my constituents.

Peter whittle? Owen, on this programme, last year, you said

exactly, and I've got the quote here, that basically you would

actually ignore the vote, you would absolutely ignore the vote. Again,

we've got Claire here basically part of a political class is doing

everything it can to delay and prevaricate and the fact is - let me

finish... Everybody is asking to get in. Now you've got to be brief. Anne

next? You are treating people like they are stupid, they knew exactly

what they were voting for. APPLAUSE.

This is a condescending argument we are having now. Anne? Owen's

position is very clear. We will have a referendum if you don't give us

the answer we want we'll have another one.

APPLAUSE. Claire? We have a mandate. We have a

process, we have a strong leader. Actually, as time goes on, I'm

increasingly convinced we can get a good deal. And by the way, the one

Ukip MP in the House of Commons hasn't bothered to speak on this

issue in any of the hours of debates we've just had. He doesn't want to

talk to politicians, he is not interested, it's grandstanding. The

woman in the second row, let us hear from some members of the audience,

and then you? I think we'll only get true democracy when we get out of

the EU. For thousands of years, Britain has ruled in a wonderful

way. We've been alighted to the world. Now that we are trying to get

out of this stupid EU organisation, all this sort of thing that Owen

Smith keeps saying which I'm absolutely sick of hearing, you

whinging all the time, accept it, Owen.

APPLAUSE. The Remoaner in Chief. My title

apparently. The woman sitting here? Thank you. Could I please just urge

everyone to stick to the question and practical ways that we can deal

with the situation that is inevitable. Brexit is happening and

I think on both sides I know you are doing fantastic points but please

could you not say that, oh, this is why Trump is in power or that...

It's ridiculous. Or go over the Brexit arguments again. Could we

focus on how we are going to do this.

APPLAUSE. All right. I'm going to move on

because we have got many other questions. Yes? We are going to have

a special programme about the negotiations I think - I'm not sure

yet if we can get the right people together - to talk about your point

about where we go from here. But it's 25 minutes into the programme

and we haven't mentioned the subject the BBC has been talking about all

week. I didn't want to do it at the top because all the news bulletins

seem to do it at the top, which is the NHS, but Sarah Bell, your

question? If one of your elderly relatives was rushed into hospital

tonight, how confident are you that they would get a bed or a stretcher

in a corridor? Owen Smith? Well, one of my elderly relatives was rushed

into hospital in Wales not that long ago and she's had excellent care and

I think the vast majority of people who go into the NHS - I was there

with my son a couple of weeks ago in A, he got excellent care. That is

not to say that everybody does and there is quite clearly a massive

crisis in the NHS, in particular in respect of A, we've got far too

many people waiting far too long in all parts of the UK. We've clearly

got a problem of under-funding in the NHS. It's going backwards. The

gap between our competitor nations across Europe, what they spend on

health versus what we spend, the getting larger unfortunately. That

is only going to be compounded, I'm afraid, by the extra costs we are

going to have in this country, in my view, as a result of Brexit. So I'm

not confident everybody gets a good deal but we need desperately to

invest in our NHS and turn it around. We could do that but we need

to get much more radical, in my view we need to start thinking about new

ways to find additional resources for the NHS, stop hearing the Tories

tell us that they have pumped in all this extra money - they haven't, we

are going backwards and we need to do something about it.

APPLAUSE. Anne Widdecombe, is it true that one

of the figures that emerged this week, that the NHS costs ten times

what it costs I think 60 years ago, in other words it just goes like

this and this and this? Yes. That is what I would like to address. You

have made my point for me. I didn't mean to do that. I really do want to

make the point which is this - it's high time that we had in this

country a mature debate about how we are going to fund health in the

future. APPLAUSE.

We really need a grown-up debate, no political cowardness or posturing.

The Health Service was set off on three completely false premises we

may seem silly now but did not at the time that, as we all got

healthier, demand would decline. That was the first one. That the

demographics would stay roughly the same. We have now got 15,000

centenarians. And that we'd be able to meet a very large proportion of

it from what was then called the stamp, the national insurance. All

those three principles have proved wrong. Now we've got a choice. Every

single Government with the exception of the Callaghan Government, every

single Government since the war has increased spending on the NHS in

real terms. We have committed another ?10 billion. And it's never

enough because demand heads towards infinity with each surge of medical

and surgical science. We need a grown-up debate. What the options

are, have a look at what some other countries do and all the spending

isn't public spending, Owen. Have a look at what other countries do,

debate what we could do, then we can debate out of those options the most

likely and then we can debate how to get there from here. I said all of

this in 1998 and if we'd started then we might have a different

Health Service now. Billy Bragg. I feel sure they would

get the best service possible, because I think the staff and NHS do

an incredible job under very difficult circumstances. We put them

in an invidious position where they have to make life and death

decisions and tell families that they are not where they should be

because we need better funding. You have to ask yourself what the

priorities of the NHS are. In Torbay, they have cut 32 beds from

Torbay hospital. There are 34 beds in the community hospitals in

painting, Dartmouth, bogey Tracey Ashburton. The reason given for

closing the beds in Torbay hospital was that they are sending the care

into the community, which is a good idea, but you'd think, at a time

when there is a lack of beds in the National Health Service, they would

do that but keep up the beds to take up the slack, but they haven't. So

is this just a cost-cutting exercise? If so, then we have to ask

ourselves why the British government spends a lower percentage of GDP in

the European Union average on health, less than Germany and

France. What do the French and Germans do that allows them to spend

more money than we do, despite the amount of money that has already

been spent? If an elderly relative went in, they would be part of the

unprecedented demand we have seen, 2.5 million more people went to A

this year. The NHS has never been busier and never had as much money,

and we will spend half ?1 trillion over this Parliament on the NHS. I

have to say, I am with Ann. For too long we have sat in our silos

shouted at each other. Clearly more money is important, and the NHS

asked for ?10 billion and they were given it, but we have too many

people going in the front door. We know that 30% of those going to A

could be held in a different way. And too many people stay in

hospital. One thing to be proud of is that your council has one of the

best rates in the country of not leaving people stuck in hospital.

What about pharmacies? What about GPs and social care? There is all

this money circulating in the system, and frankly it is time to

stop treating the NHS is like a political football and treated as a

precious national asset. You can't just keep spending to infinity. You

have to use that money wisely to make sure that those who really need

it get it. What I wish you would do if you were leader is come and have

a conversation about the right way. This is our most precious national

asset and we have doubled to -- we have to improve and protect it. The

truth is that the percentage of GDP went up under Labour from 6% to 8%,

and it's gone down. It has gone down. Has it not gone up? When

Labour came to power... Ann Widdecombe said there was never

designed to be this kind of service, and that's the problem. When Labour

came to power, 39 billion was being spent. When we left, it was 112

billion. And you haven't solved the problem. It's gone down as a net

proportion of GDP. That is what happens every time we talk about the

NHS. That always say they spend more, Labour say they don't. If a

pain in the butt. The truth actually is not in either of those

contentions. If you look at the figures, which I have looked at

every week, neither side is making the point accurately. The woman in

green. Yes, you. I am gravely concerned, as Billy was saying, that

we have the closure of four local hospitals. I grew up in Dartmouth. I

have many relatives that have been treated in that hospital. In Torbay?

Dartmouth cottage hospital, as they became elderly and need care. It's a

long way to travel for them to get to Torbay, a long way for relatives

to travel. Personally, I would be very keen on paying extra money in

to preserve that. -- extra money in taxes. You in the front. Obviously,

with elderly people moving down from everywhere else in the country,

coming down to Devon, shutting small hospitals is probably going to be a

big mistake. Obviously, they can't get too big hospitals, only small

hospitals in my grandad, who only passed away a couple of years ago,

could only get to Dartmouth because he couldn't make the journey to

bigger hospitals. To Torquay? Yeah, Dartmouth hospital. The only light

Dartmouth hospital so he wanted to go there. That was where the

treatment was. -- he only liked. The argument always is that, as

treatment gets more sophisticated, you need bigger and better

hospitals. You need both. Can I ask the lady who asked the question, you

said, would I be confident if an elderly relative, I had to take them

into hospital? I would be confident in the quality of service but I

think what you're talking about is the fact that we might have the --

we might have to face being on a stretcher in a hallway for a long

time because of the enormous strain. I have just been in Cumbria. They

are closing a maternity ward there of a hospital, which means that

women who are about to give birth are going to have to travel 40

miles. That could be a matter of life and death. I would say this.

Yes, the situation has changed in this country. People live longer, so

we've got to deal with it. We've got to adapt the National Health

Service. I mean, probably expand it. We need a properly integrated

National Health Service and social care service, integrated. And I

would say this as well. It is a matter of priorities in this

country. What I find at the moment morally reprehensible is that we are

facing a situation in this wonderful institution of the NHS at the same

time that we are sending abroad about 12 to ?16 billion a year in

foreign aid. I would like to see that going into the National Health

Service. So Ukip's policy is to abolish foreign aid? No, we would

reduce it. It is ring-fenced at the moment. It is done by an act of

Parliament, but you can repeal those. You have got that and you

have also got for getting on for ?2 billion in health tourism. These

things have to be looked at and clamped down on. Is Ukip's policy to

abolish overseas aid or not? Not completely, we would bring it down

to about the rug .2%, so part of it would go into the NHS, about 3

billion and rising. -- about 0.2% of it would go into the NHS. The rest

would go into social care. The NHS and social care should be

integrated, as I know from my own experience with my elderly parents,

when I was dealing with the NHS and the local authorities and it was

very bureaucratically difficult. You are looking dubious. Yes, you were.

The National Audit Office reported this week that the health and social

care integration is not necessarily the silver bullet that they say it

should be. They have invested 5 billion and they have lost money,

because, you know what? Admissions have increased and the savings

haven't been there. I have worked in the NHS for over 40 years. Saving

money, that's my job in procurement. We have got a wonderful procurement

group within the south-west of England, and we invest millions of

pounds back into the NHS, but the bureaucracy against us from getting

good value for money. -- the bureaucracy prevents us. Briefly,

how do you mean? There are so many layers of bureaucracy now. I have

been in the NHS for 40 years. Every year, especially since 1986, when

general management came into the NHS, management has increased layer

overlay. To get a decision made within this south-west area in which

I work takes months. Sometimes even years. So it isn't possible to get

that quote of efficiencies...? And do you think the answer is more

spending...? No. When Andrew Lansley reorganised, we were hopeful that he

would reorganise bureaucracy and eliminate. Instead, he has created

another wave. I don't think the man behind you is green. The problem

with the NHS is there is far too much money wasted spent an

administration, there is poor management, but also it is the

general public. You have people turning up at A that don't

necessarily need to be there. Not only that, as a country, since the

Olympic Games in 2012, we had this little part of the opening ceremony

going on about the Olympic Games. There was this wonderful parade of

people wandering around the Olympic ring. I tell you what, if we had as

many doctors and nurses on our boards as there were people parading

around that ring, that could be a problem solved. -- doctors and

nurses on our wards. The other thing is, why don't they start going

abroad, recovering some of the money? People coming over here for

cosmetic surgery, things like that, it's all going on. A lot of money

could be got back. You on the left. I'd like to divert this to the

deputy leader of Ukip. Paul Nuttall, your leader, said he'd like to

privatise the NHS. No, he didn't. This is total fantasy. He actually

praised the Tories for bringing a whiff of privatisation. All right.

Let him answer. Paul made some suggestions about certain aspects of

the NHS procurement and suchlike, a few years ago. Since then, first of

all, he has changed his mind on that. Secondly and more importantly,

we have never had that as our policy. In our 2015 manifesto, we

dedicated to the NHS being free at point of delivery. That has always

been the case with Ukip and it will carry being the case. The manifesto,

in 2015 considered the best, actually it was the only one that

was fully costed. The woman there and then we will move on. Even if we

cut foreign aid, for example, if we really want to integrate social care

along with the NHS, we really want to keep up with growing demand,

surely we have to raise taxes quite significantly in order to fully

costed this? From reading the Conservative manifesto, they are the

party of low taxes, so surely there will be an incentive for them not to

raise taxes and therefore not carry out these proposals suggested on the

floor. There is a fundamental problem we have to face with the

NHS, and it's to do with all of us. We have voted continuously over the

last 30 years for parties, Labour and Conservatives, I am afraid,

saying, we are going to have great NHS and great social care and low

taxes. We have kid ourselves. As soon as we wake up from that dream

and recognise we will only get the services we pay for, we can start

sorted out. No, you can't go first. Billy, taxes. 1p on income tax

raises? We are spending what on the NHS? And it's not going to solve all

the problems. You can do all that has been mentioned, more taxes,

reducing foreign aid, getting on top of health tourism, and you still

won't solve the problem, folks. We need a proper debate about the

long-term. How much does 1p on income tax rates? 1.5 billion. And

corporation tax, how much would be raised from that? All right, Claire.

The NHS in Wales is run by the Labour Party. Oh, come on... No,

wait. Political football! Offside! I don't want to see the NHS used as a

political football. Owen, that is the stay list political argument.

North of the border, the NHS is run by the SNP. In Britain, its run at

Westminster. Every seat in England, in every part of the UK, we are

facing the same pressures. We can argue all that we like about how

much money is needed, which party would spend more, who has got the

right numbers. Ann is right. If we want an NHS that will be there when

we all need it and works for the millions of staff who work in it,

sometimes working in horrific conditions, we have to grow up and

have a proper debate and stop waving party flags around. It will be a

miracle if it happens! I'm going to go on.

The chances of an unpolitical debate about the NHS is about as... Well, a

question from Justin Chan, please. Should Donald Trump be allowed to

address the House of Parliaments? Claire Perry? That's really unfair.

You are asking me to criticise the speaker commit Harry carry as he's

the person who can speak in the chamber. The question is, should he

be allowed to speak, you can do what you want with it? It's not Mr

Speaker's entire decision. I'm interested to hear what he's got to

say because I cannot imagine a person to be less fit to be the

leader, personally, but it's not my decision, I didn't vote for him.

It's my decision, I want to hear what he has to say. Maybe he will

think Parliament is a civilising influence. A motion has been put

down because John Bercow said he was strongly opposed to Trump speaking

and there's been a motion put down by one of your colleagues, a vote of

no-confidence because of his wholly inappropriate comments. How will you

vote? I have to say, Mr Speaker has done some incredibly important

things for Parliament. How will you vote... It's a much more modern

place. I don't know yet, I shall have a look at the motion. I think

for us to try to remove a speaker over something that he said would

actually be really rather drastic and he's entitled to his opinion,

perhaps he shouldn't have expressed them on this particular issue. Owen

Smith, the other MP here? I don't think Trump should be given the

honour of addressing both Houses of Parliament, I think it's very

unusual for him to be offered that in the first couple of days of his

presidency, normally US Presidents don't get to do that until they've

been in the job for a little while. To be honest, I think it's more

important than that, I wholly support what the speaker of the

House of Commons said this week, I think Trump is someone who has

unfortunately proved himself to be a racist and a misogynist and not in

favour of the rule of law and I think we are better than that and

therefore we shouldn't be affording him that honour.

You in the third row? I think it's really important for someone like

John Bercow who has a voice in this country to stand up for what is

right and to oppose racism and sexism. So I don't think he should

have a vote of no-confidence. OK. At the very back, the second row from

the back with the dark hair? No, don't look at him, it's you. I would

like to say, I completely disagree with Owen Smith and regardless of

what we think about Donald Trump, at the end of the day she the President

of the most powerful country in the world.

APPLAUSE. With whom we share a special

relationship and very briefly, I think it was John Stuart-Milne who

said if the whole world minus one were of the country opinion, the

whole world would have no right to silence that one person than that

one person would have the right to silence mankind.

APPLAUSE. Impressive. I'll use that in the

next debate on Brexit. Impressive. Follow that if you can. I'll try.

Very impressive. In answer to what you say, I'm not even sure that he's

actually expressed or the White House has expressed a desire that he

particularly cares about doing this. The question is about the speaker

really. I fundamentally disagree on two levels. The speaker is in a

great office of state, he's meant to be neutral. It's a bit like the

Queen turning round and saying I don't like the look of him, I don't

think I'll have him on a state visit. We wouldn't imagine the Queen

doing that. It's actually a very, very important point that he's

neutral and he's broken that. Also what I don't like is the fact that

of the sheer inconsistencies, because a few years ago, he welcomed

a man from Kuwait who bans Israelis and imprisons gays and all the rest

of it. We talk about racism and sexism and all the rest of it.

Basically, this sort of outrage we are seeing from the speaker and what

he said is extremely selective, so you either do it with everyone or

you do it with nobody, frankly I think...

APPLAUSE. OK. Billy Bragg? I agree with

speaker Bercow, I don't think you need to be a Monarchist to be

offended by the sexist remarks he made about Princess Diana, nor do

you need to be a Latin American to be offended by the racist remarks he

made about Mexican people. APPLAUSE.

One of the things that - I'm afraid it is the point Peter because...

Neutral. He's the speaker of the House of Commons. It's also his job

to decide, he has a veto on who speaks in the House. He doesn't. He

does actually. He was asked his opinion and, as John Stewart-Milne

said, he had the right to say what he's going to say. I'm going to

finish by saying that by inviting Donald Trump to address Parliament,

we are normalising that behaviour. I think if we are going to make a

stand on this issue, we have to do it as the people. I'm disappointed

that Theresa May went running over there, held his hand and offed him

to shake hands with the Queen. I think he's put her in an invidious

position. He's the President of the United States! It's ridiculous.

If we share values with Trump, we need to stand up and show him what

those values are that we all stand together for.

APPLAUSE. The man in the white shirt? You,

Sir? Well, there's clear inconsistency here because we had

the President of China here in 2015. What did he say about Princess

Diana, do you know? Pardon? What did he say about Princess Diana, do you

know what he said? The point I'm making is that if the President of

China can come here and he has an appalling record towards humanity,

why can't Donald Trump? Anne Widdecombe, please? Right, first of

all, the speaker should not have made the comments he made, John

Bercow can say anything he likes but the speaker is constrained by

commission and by the demands of his office.

APPLAUSE. And he has state visits are a matter

who the Queen invites on advice of her Government and John Bercow's

made it clear that he shouldn't have said what he said without at least

consulting the speaker of the Lords which he should do. This is both

Houses of Parliament, not just one, so I think John was and I'm not

attacking John, he's done a lot of things, I'm not sure modernisation

is one of them, he's done a lot of important things but he got this one

wrong. If somebody like the Chinese President, I'm very glad you

mentioned him because I was certainly about to, I mean who

actually you know imposed forced abortion and things like that? We

are not normalising that when we have the President here, so why are

we normalising what Donald Trump stands for? This is the

democratically elected President of the United States. Indeed. One of

our biggest allies. APPLAUSE.

You up there? Wasn't it around the fact that the Chinese are bringing

investment into Britain or Saudi Arabia were bringing investment into

Britain, isn't it that they want Trump's money in Britain. Hope so.

And so it isn't around whether or not people have a good record on

human rights, it's about bringing money into the UK. A good thing or

bad thing? It's not necessarily a bad thing. Life is what it is but

let's not be hypocritical. Hear, hear, well done. You've got a

president who's putting us at the front of the queue when it comes to

trade agreements. You are holding your nose when it suits you. All

right, fine. I have reservations about Trump, it's not really the

point. The point here is that he's very favourable to this country,

he's made it very, very clear, the guy before him said we were going to

be at the back of the queue, right, this one is putting us at the front

of the queue. That's a huge, huge opportunity. Lost money on

enterprise though. A last question from Melvyn Jones, please?

Does David Beckham deserve a Knighthood?

I have to say, in 2002, we had this same question about Mick Jagger. Has

he got one? He did get one, yes. I won't say what it said, it was very

scurriless. I don't know about David Beckham, let us go into this one.

Billy Bragg, I don't know what the issue is? The issue is honour, I'm

not in favour of that system anyway, I don't think anybody should get a

Knighthood. What does he want, he played for England, you know. I

mean, he scored a goal in 2001 against Greece when we were 2-1 down

deep into extra time. He scored with a free kick and got us into the

World Cup finals, what more does he want? I had to choose between those

things, I would go for playing for England. Don't we feel sorry for him

though having his e-mails hacked, I wish I could read these things out

but not on this programme! . I wouldn't mind if he gets a

Knighthood. I object to the fact that he wants it rather too much. I

think the great joy of the honours system is when Mrs Smith or Mrs

Brown opens that wonderful envelope, is offering her an MBE and she's

absolutely overwhelmed by it and never expected it and I think that

is what our honours system is. APPLAUSE.

You? The point is, who wants it more, David or Victoria? She got an

OBE. She wants to be Lady Beckham. What do you think? You don't have

strong views but you had your hand up? I have strong views, I just

don't believe in having honours because I think people do what they

do, they make money out of it and fantastic lives and all the rest of

it. MBEs, little people? Did he even write the e-mails because I don't

think he did. There is a lot of stuff going on around fake news and

half-truths and all of that. Do you think this is fake news? I don't

know. Do you think it is? I don't think it's fake news. Juliet Collie

wanted to know if anybody had been taken in by fake news or been the

victim of fake news? How would I know? Well, from what you might read

in the papers, you presumably know what is true about yourself and what

is fake? Let's not get extestential. I do actually agree with Anne about

the unsung heroes. That is terribly important for people to get honours

for the sort of work they do. Beckham we are talking about, with

60 seconds left. Actually yes I thinkth I think he should, basically

they are great ambassadors actually for this country, I really do. ? Do

you? Yes. 60 seconds, not just for you, but to split up. Owen Smith?

You get ten and you get 15. Go on? Yes is the short answer, he was a

great English captain, great English player, very cultured right foot. I

think he's also done loads for charity in the years since he left

and I think many other sports people who've done less have got

Knighthoods so why not? You in the multicoloured football shirt there?

I think people should be recognised for the work that they do, so I do

believe in the honours system but when stories come out about David

Beckham it does make a mockery of it. Because he complained about not

gelling one? Essentially he wanted it for publicity rather than the

work he does. It's a decision for the committee who take all that

stuff into account. One of the proudest stuff I get to do is

writing supports for people who've worked with children or animals for

a service where they can be recognised for honour. I think Anne

Widdecombe would be a marvellous addition to the House of Lords. I

do. I'm sorry. We need some more women.

In view of her pantomime career, she should be a Dame first. Straight to

Baroness. We need Lord Billy! Time's up!

APPLAUSE. . He'd never take it. This list of

flat trihas to sfop. Our hour is up. We are in Glasgow next week, then in

Stoke-on-Trent on the night of the by-election the week after that. If

you would like to come to Glasgow our to Stoke, there on the screen is

the address. You can write to the e-mail address or call us on that

telephone number. If you have been listening to all of this on Radio 5

Live, the debate goes on until the early hours on Question Time extra

time. But here, my thanks to our panel, to all of you who came to

Torquay from Dartmouth and wherever. Thank you all for coming and from

Question Time until next Thursday, good night.