Episode 6 Free Speech

Hello and welcome to Free Speech. The show which makes your voice

heard in the national conversation. APPLAUSE.

Hello, I'm Rick Edwards. I'm Tina Daheley. And this is an audience of

Welsh people. We are in Cardiff. We have had months of Scotland and then

a lot about England. So we thought we'd head to Wales because we

believe in equality. And equally important as the audience here are

you guys at home. Send me your comments. If you disagree with any

of the points, let disagree with any of the points, let me know. So

please tweet as at BBCFreeSpeech or Facebook your comments. Here are the

addresses you need. Even if

addresses you need. out, other people will be watching

and tweeting and you can have a mini-debate online. Lots coming up.

Not least a film and the question - do we live in a sexist country?

Which we released a week ago on social media. That is coming up.

Before we do anything, I want to introduce our wonderful panel. They

are the founder of the Everyday Sexism Project, Laura Bates.

Compassionate conservative and comedian Omar Hamdi. Freelance

journalist Angela Epstein. And leader of Plaid Cymru, Leanne Wood.

That is The first question comes from the

leaderboard. All week viewers have been going to our choose your

question page on Facebook. If you go to Free Speech questions you will

see. People can click a like on the questions they want to see on the

show. This week, the question at the top of the leader-board. The

question is should the minimum wage have age bands.

In principle, there should be a going rate for the job. There should

not be a differentiation on the grounds of age. I think an important

principle should be if you work full time, a 40 hour week, your income

should be enough to live on. A living wage. At present we have too

many people living below the living wage, which means they work

full-time and struggle to make ends meet and often are reliant upon

additional state benefits to up their wages. My party, Plaid Cymru,

believes in a living wage, we believe 260,000 people in Wales

could get a pay rise if the living wage was introduced tomorrow. If

that were to happen it would save on the benefits bill and ensure people

who went to work full-time brought home enough money to live on.

APPLAUSE. Is that realistic? It is a fair

point. We have to make it profitable for young people to go to work. Give

them an incentive. People want to work, there is dignity in going to

work. The other problem about inequality in pay is that it sets a

dangerous precedent. How can you say, actually, young people should

be paid less for the same job? It stops the arguments about men and

women, able and disabled people. If you do the job, the job was done,

you should be paid for the job of work. If somebody is less

experienced and does not do the same amount of hours, OK. But we cannot

have an argument about inequality if we start with this because the

precedent will be set and we could use it the case law for anything

else. The panel talked about bringing down the benefits bill,

which concerns me. People are genuinely dependent on benefits.

There are people who do abuse the system, but I know people who have

left university who cannot find jobs. It concerns me it is not just

an issue in terms of page, but benefits also. If you are 18, it is

not a lot you get. I know people who are struggling financially. If they

were over 23, they would be entitled to ?70 per week. Can I make this

point about the benefits bill? It is easy for politicians to attack

people who claim benefits and I am not one of those politicians, I can

assure you. Does it make sense to pay people benefits because they are

not earning nothing works? That money should be paid as a wage and

people working full-time should not need additional top but benefits,

but people who rely state benefits should not be bashed in the way

politicians are happy to do that. What are our politicians trying to

do to solve this problem? So far I have seen nothing and I have been in

many minimum wage jobs. We are voting for people. Plaid Cymru is

not in coalition, we were up to 2011, but it is a Labour government

in Wales and the National Assembly for Wales does not have the power to

set the rate for the minimum wage. My party wants to see the assembly

having powers over that and other workers' rights issues. At the

moment, we do not have that. The majority of people claiming benefits

are people of pension age and they have paid into the system and

drawing out. Why do we have politicians still drawing state

pension when they have had good salaries throughout their lives? Why

do they not give it up and sacrifice that? It would be fair to say they

are not the highest earning people in the country so you could apply

that to other high earners. If I can go back to the original question

about young people being paid less, it is age discrimination. It is

amazing. The debate has lasted... We have had the few minutes people have

not said how can young people be paid less? How would we feel if it

were people between 60 and 63, 40 and 43, or something. We would think

that is mental. I do not think young people are particularly of low

value. They are not worth 20% less than older people, so it is

insulting. If we have the minimum wage, we know people do a lot, if we

have it, it has to be one size fits all and it has to be fair.

Going back to the question of politicians giving up state

pensions, why should they cover politicians who work as hard as any

other person, have to give up the pension they earned through the work

of their lives? They get a huge expense allowances

and other allowances that normal people do not have. Why are they not

worthy of their state pension? Why are others more worthy? We pay

politicians and our taxes pay politicians, so why should we pay

them a state benefit as well? It is nice to think that Tony Blair is go

into a bank and getting a pension! -- going into. I want to talk about

the cost to small businesses and businesses in general if you got rid

of age bands. We are talking about young people so we should not

discuss politicians. People looking for younger workers because they

have to to pay them less, which keeps their profits higher, and I

think the politicians are missing a trick. If they took that away and

young people and the same, they have less responsibility in general and

can spend more, they have more free money that would come back into the

tax bracket and into the government to use. -- earned the same. To use

it for the NHS or to do other things. Young people should not be

treated any different. If they are doing the job they should be paid

the same as an adult. The lady here. You said it could be damaging to

some businesses. You could give incentives to businesses to take on

young people in other ways such as paid apprenticeships, which needs to

be improved in Wales. At the moment apprentices are paid next to nothing

to do a lot of work and do not get the support students do at college.

There is an issue with businesses and young people and how they are

employed. The suggestion that they could suffer, that needs to be

addressed by government and politicians. The lady in the green.

The under 18s, it is to encourage them to not to go to work and stay

in education, but over 18, it is your decision to do full-time work.

You might want to get your 40 hour job and earn a living wage. What is

the difference between an 18-year-old and 21-year-old? Once

you are 18 you are an adult and you should be able to earn your wage.

Laura, youth unemployment is almost three times higher than overall

unemployment. Is it not reasonable to have an incentive for employers

to take on young people by having them paid less? It is right we

should have incentives to take on young people but I do not see why it

should be at the cost of young people themselves. There should be

other ways to give them incentives. The gap between 18-year-olds and

21-year-olds, it seems to be in a nice young people who do not go to

university. -- penalising young people. It is important not to

generalise. We said young people have a greater disposable income,

but we have to think about young parents. This could be penalising

young parents, young single mothers young parents, young single mothers

children. To be penalised for their age seems unfair to me.

How would you give an incentive to businesses to take on young people?

The young lady was right about apprenticeships. You have to look at

your professional life, it is like a trajectory. You do not want to look

back in three years and still be there, you want to go that

everybody wants to go to university. Not everybody is capable. They need

a trade, they need to find a purpose in life and be rewarded. The issue

with age discrimination, we have not used the word exploit. There is the

risk we exploit young people because by definition if they are paid less,

somehow they are worth less. If they are doing technically the same job,

they might get the grubby end of the job stop we need people on a career

path, so that they might be at the rubbish end of their CV, but they

will move on will stop that is why any work structure, that says, do

the rubbish now, we probably started doing the office dogsbody stuff, but

it is a means to getting onto the next stage. Structured progression?

What is happening online? We have been running this question. We have

had some answers already and I will get to those. Is it right to have a

lower minimum wage? Only 17% of the online audience think yes. Comments

coming in already, Sean said most of the population at that age still

coming in already, Sean said most of live with parents and do not have to

bring in as much money because they do not have to pay the bills. There

is a forest of hands. She said when she was 17 she worked

for ?3.40 and hour and she survived. -- an hour. Another from Ross, he

says we need a lower minimum wage of ?6 an hour. How would you respond to

says we need a lower minimum wage of that? The point about exploitation

is good. One of the that? The point about exploitation

having different pay rates is if you are an exploitative

having different pay rates is if you easiest thing to do is take on a

young easiest thing to do is take on a

and when they easiest thing to do is take on a

the rate would go up you sack them and take on another young person who

is cheap. That is something we should be opposed to. What about

businesses who say they cannot create jobs if the wage goes up? I

remember this debate in the 1990s when the minimum wage was

introduced. Many businesses, including the CBI, said businesses

would be put out of business and would not be able to afford to do

this. As far as I am aware, that did not happen. I can understand their

concerns but I think previous experience would tell us that did

not materialise. A couple of comments. The person on Twitter was

saying, I lived at home and reside on ?3 20 or whatever it was. ?3.40.

I am 19 and living at home. I have a job that does not pay much. If... I

am supposed to be saving up for university. And various other things

I would like to be able to pay for. Especially university because I do

not want to take out ?9,000 a year in student loans. If I am earning

less than somebody who is 21, somebody on the minimum wage, it

makes me more dependent on the student loans at a later date and at

the mercy of my family and my parents I am living with. Looking

for the generosity of your family? Yes. If we are talking about the

minimum wage, say we were to raise this, would that affect the tax

boundary? People in and under ?8,000 per year get the personal allowance,

so should we lower the personal allowance as well? You wouldn't be

better off then, would you? You want to be better off from a measure that

would equalise. You can do different things with tax allowances but I

don't think it should be related to the rate of the minimum wage.

I think we are going to move on now. Before our next question, a reminder

that our next show in two weeks will be in Dover, when we will be talking

about immigration. Two weeks after that, we are in London and inviting

anyone with a mental health issue to join us in the audience. Alistair

Campbell will be here. The address should be at the bottom of the

screen. Our next question starts with this film.

Shouldn't you be in the kitchen? Don't get your knickers in a twist.

What do you say to a woman with two black eyes? Should have listened the

first time. Smile, love, it might never happen. How can you trust

something that bleeds once a month and doesn't die? It is just banter!

Why are you always angry? You wouldn't dress like that if you

didn't want people to look. She won't shut up. Get your tits out,

you look like a total freak, I bet you would do anything. Let a man do

it, love. Why don't you just sit there and look pretty. I would

absolutely ruin her. You would look really pretty a few lost a bit of

weight. She was asking for it. That has really resonated with our

audience, we had 200,000 views this week just for that. Do we live in a

sexist country? Laura. Yes. OK, that's enough! Elaborate. Obviously

I am being flippant but the evidence is overwhelming. It doesn't matter

whether you look at anecdotal evidence, if you look at the number

of people who came forward in just a few days, the anecdotal evidence

floods into my website. We have over 80,000 people' experience. Or

whether you look at figures like the fact that 30,000 women per year lose

their job because of maternity discrimination, that a poll this

week just show that 47% of university students experiences

groping, two women per week in the UK are killed by a current partner,

I could go on and on. I don't see how you could argue otherwise.

You said a moment ago about two women per week being killed by a

partner or a former partner, that has been found false according to

government statistics. Mike Buchanan of the political party Justice For

Men And Boys has asked you to rescind that statement. I would

advise anyone to Google Mike Buchanan and loko at the rebuttals

made of his work. He makes fun of people who talk about feminism but

doesn't make any logical points against. I think it is really

damaging on a national platform like this to try to suggest that a

national figure, widely respected and accepted, like this one is

incorrect. It is dangerous to go around suggesting figures like that

are not true. That is the official figure. What confuses me about this

question is that we have taken the term sexism and we are lumping a lot

of things together into one big steaming pot. Any conscientious

civil minded member of society should absolutely balk at domestic

violence, insulting, vile behaviour. It doesn't matter if the man says

it, if a woman says it, collectively we should object to that. The

question you asked was if this is a sexist society. We are not talking

about if it is a society that propagates domestic violence. To

suggest we are sexist society suggests there is no scope for women

to make inroads into all areas of professional life. To throw a few

statistics back, and bear in mind you can make statistics work any

which way you want, politicians will tell you that better than me...

Sorry! Cheap gag. But the point is that women regularly... Sorry, girls

regularly outperform boys at school. There are more women going to

university now than men. My own son has just started a course at

university. 70% of the course is women, it is a medical course. They

all needed really high grades to get on that course. Why are we not

running of the company 's then? -- all of the companies. Let me tell

you why, there are two good answers. Either because they don't want to or

because they cannot. That is condescending. The problem with the

sexist debates is that it degenerates

personal. It is not helpful. Like it or not, biology makes us different.

It doesn't make us better or worse, it makes us different. I'm sorry,

but when you have children... You may not want to... I didn't mean you

personally. Once a woman has children, she may find that all the

greatest plans she had for pursuing her career, she will be challenged

biologically by the way she feels. We live in a meritocracy, but I

don't know about you and the women in the audience, I don't want to get

the job because I am fulfilling someone's female quota. I want to be

the best person for the job. That is Angela's experience. The lady here.

I completely agree with you. I am 16 at the moment, I have noticed that I

am witnessing more and more sexism. There is an area in my street which

I avoid because I get wolf whistled. I am an aspiring film-maker and

earlier this year I attended a class aimed at 16-18 -year-olds. In that

class there were two male directors who are very successful and I asked

them both what I can do to achieve the best I can in this industry and

they both said to me you have got to make relationships with other

people, and by that I don't mean sleeping around. I was with two boys

of my own age, neither of them received that advice. He was

basically assuming that because I was a female, my first thing I would

do in a professional situation would be to sleep with someone to promote

myself. I haven't even entered the world of work yet. That has given me

an insight into thinking that what is between my legs will determine

how well I do in the industry and that is ridiculous. What is your

experience as a that is ridiculous. What is your

How have you found it? that is ridiculous. What is your

politics as there should be. It is a man's world, no doubt about that.

Even in our National Assembly in Wales there are

Even in our National Assembly in many more women in the cabinet. We

were at one many more women in the cabinet. We

institution which is something I am very proud of, but nonetheless there

is definite sexism within the world of politics. If you look at the

House of Commons, of politics. If you look at the

look at the benches to see the gender imbalance. I just wanted to

come back on one of the points that was

come back on one of the points that outperforming boys in school, girls

outperforming boys in university, but then what we don't see is women

heading organisations, becoming the chief executive. Whichever sector

you look at, it is men that dominate at the top on the boards and the

rest of it. I'm afraid, until that situation is reversed, we have to

conclude, situation is reversed, we have to

Laura said, we have to conclude situation is reversed, we have to

we live in not only a sexist society but

we live in not only a sexist society homophobic society, a just society.

There is a lot of discrimination out there that we should not be prepared

There is a lot of discrimination out that, how do we go about reversing

it? Angela just said she doesn't want to

get a job because of a quota. I think Angela said there are two

reasons why women don't get to the top, one is that they don't want to

and another is that they cannot, and I would say there are lots of

institutional barriers stopping women from reaching the top. You

don't think it is a meritocracy? I definitely don't think it is.

Having children does have something to do with it. Who provides the

majority of the childcare in society? I don't, in my own family,

my partner provides the childcare, otherwise I wouldn't be able to do

the job that I do, but in the average family in the average

community it is women who take that job. Not just looking after the

children but looking after elderly relatives as well. One idea that

seems to be purported a lot is that yes, we live in a sexist society,

but it showed in the video that people tend to believe sexism only

works one way, so the video only featured women. Nobody talks about

male genital mutilation, if you get circumcised, man up... Men are

expected to do heavy lifting. It works both ways. This isn't about a

gender war. Look at this panel, we have an antifeminist woman and a

feminist man, how mental is that! Only on BBC Three would you have

such a random panel as this. Non- feminist. Sorry. Men are the victims

of patriarchy and sexism, even though, let's not be silly, the

majority of the time it is women on the receiving end. Let's hear from

some men who are getting in touch from home. You are talking about the

film we showed before when people are giving examples of everyday

sexism, this proves people are always moaning. A lot of this is

banter being misunderstood, I guess women have no sense of humour. And

another one, Eddie, who says, one I get all the time - what do you

expect, he is only a man. It is crazy. Within seconds of introducing

the debate, and well done to doing the show, I would not have done this

when I was 18, but the debate descended to if you look at the

statistics... I wouldn't have done this when I was 18, I was in my

bedroom. We were talking about different types of discrimination.

If we said, is their racism in the UK? He would not have people saying,

actually, I think those black people just like to moan. We would never do

that. There is something about our culture that has made sexism just a

bit of banter. If somebody had said black people like to moan, somebody

would have said that is a criminal offence. With women, it is, it is

just the lads. I like your enthusiasm, but try not to wallop

me. If we look at the view in terms of the way it is a one-way journey.

There are advertising campaign is built on a culture of women looking

at men. A certain fizzy drink, women stop... They stop at their lunch

break because the window cleaner will take his shirt off and open

this drink. Women on hen nights queue up to see the Chippendales.

They are allowed to cat call, throw things at them. Can you imagine if

it happened the other way around? Yes! I am talking about an

advertising campaign where a woman stopped to have her fizzy drink and

revealed herself in a wet T-shirt. The Flake advert was supposed to be

beautiful and romantic. Nobody from Cadbury series here to defend

themselves! -- Cadbury's is here. Laura. I would try to give you back

a list of examples when women are objectified, but we would be here

all night. Those comments online, it is about attitude. It is about the

way society treats women and we have these discussions. It is about the

tendency to dismiss these ideas. We are talking about issues as diverse

as sexual harassment, domestic violence, rape. People are saying,

don't you have a sense of humour? It is ridiculous to say only a few

women are top directors of the top companies in the UK because they do

not want to. I object to this stoking up, we are all militant

women together, I think you strike an own goal. It is

counter-productive to put it to some kind of militant response. I never

suggested that sexual objectification, domestic violence

were not issues. Modern day feminism seems to edit as it listens and that

way it becomes counter-productive. There are genuine sexist things in

society that we have to fight against, but you cannot put issues

of domestic violence alongside whether a woman should feel

objectified if somebody calls her "love" or wolf whistles at her. It

depends whether she feels threatened. We have to define very

carefully the difference between not having a sense of humour and feeling

threatened when there are issues of personal safety at risk. That is

what feminism does not do. Feminism tackles these as a spectrum. If we

see women as second-class citizens and teach young girls to think it is

OK for men to shout about their breasts. A naked woman on page three

of the biggest selling national newspaper... Of cours... -- course.

Please let me finish. I am suggesting there are connections. I

am not saying that someone looks at page three and commits assaults, it

is not so simple. But we have to look at the context in which we see

an epidemic of domestic violence against women. We have to look at

attitudes and the fact that we live in a society that sends messages

about women and their role in society from a younger age. Those

ideas are also at the root of some of the bigger problems. We can check

online. We were talking about banter. This person says her

16-year-old is the word rape regularly at school and it is

dismissed as banter. -- hears the word rape. We have to be clear about

what is used as banter. There is a difference from somebody calling me

petal... And a 16-year-old using rape like a dismissive term. What if

it was the racist equivalent of petal? That is different. Why is it

different? It is 50% of the country waging war on the other 50%. Even if

you want to separate the things from things you do not see as serious,

why should we not be able to fight things at every level? Why should we

not tackle sexism and sexual harassment in the street? There is a

difference between that and looking at things that are almost trivial.

And trivialising the big things we need to fight for to ensure

equality. The campaign, for example, last year, about having more within

on banknotes, which was a spectacular waste of time and

energy. Make sure women have the same number of banknotes in their

pockets as men, yes, but sometimes modern day feminism spoils for an

argument to look for. I want to come to the audience. Banter I have with

colleagues and friends. I do not get banter from strangers on the street.

I hate walking down the street and being told to smile, it might not

happen. You do not know what my life is like. This is symptomatic of the

bigger picture. If we do not stop street harassment we will not stop

anything else. The gentleman here. Look at the suffragette movement

when people lost their lives all women to vote. -- for the right

when people lost their lives all women to vote. I think it is wrong

when people lost their lives all that calling someone babe on the

street is trivialised. You need to look at the bigger picture. People

died for equality. The question about living in a sexist country, we

have identified in many ways in which women suffer from sexism but

there is nothing talking about the way men, for example, there is like

the homeless people, there is a way men, for example, there is like

saying in some cases people who have children, for example, they need

support. Your gender should not make you vulnerable. It is your

circumstance that makes you vulnerable.

The lady here. With the militant side of feminism, if that does not

work, when we look at feminism people seem to be

work, when we look at feminism both sides of the same coin.

work, when we look at feminism sexism because of sexism towards

women. Men get told to man up. Because feminism is shown as

something bad. Women do well in school because school has become

feminised and girls are expected to do well and as a result

feminised and girls are expected to boys do not put as much effort into

it, because they see it as something they should not be doing. It is the

same coin, it is just the flip side of it. Is that something you think

about as well, Laura? That is a good point. Sexism has a negative impact

on everybody. We have stories that come into the project, we had one

from a man who asked for paternity leave and was ridiculed and was

denied it. In the same week a woman was denied promotion because she was

considered a maternity risk. Those are people suffering to size up the

same coin. -- two sides. An outdated gender stereotype making things bad

for men and women. This is not against men, it is people against

prejudice. Tina. Let us have a look what is happening at home. If it

works, if it doesn't. The question is, do we live in a sexist country?

81% of people watching say yes. Some of the comments, men getting in

touch. A positive message from Alex. This country has evolved fast and a

lot of women dominate and is buyer. -- and inspire. More can be done but

let's appreciate the progress. Another one, more girls are

university than boys because if girls do not get a degree they are

more likely to be in low-paid work. And a question for Angela. How would

you feel if somebody did your job and was paid more? I would be

outraged. It comes back to what I was saying at the beginning of this

discussion. What has happened is that originally the sexism and

feminism seem to be bywords for each other. But this is a collective

responsibility for society. If there is genuine injustice, men and women,

we have two address them. -- to address them. We cannot look at

sexism as some kind of brand of feminism, something tailored towards

women. Just as I said I do not want female short lists, which is why I

would be appalled if somebody was paid more than me. But if we look at

the debate and look at unfairness against women, it irritates because

some people think it is women not understanding that men have issues.

We have to work collectively. Only by working in tandem can we address

inequality. Do you feel alienated by feminism as a movement? It doesn't

speak to me at all. The young man mentioned the suffragettes. My old

school, I went to a girls' school. I was taught, I came from a modest

background, aim high and work hard and if you do you can get what you

want. That is the message I give my daughter. It is not about thinking a

man can do what you cannot do. You are a person, prove you can do the

job and go ahead and do it. The lady here. I think what you're

missing is the reason why you have a part of this sexism on both sides. I

thought a word that would be used was lad culture. It is in Eton

college where they have their little groups and they are told they have

to do that. The reason why there are more politicians in the top area is

not because the women are not getting the education, it is because

people at that level have the mindset that you cannot let somebody

else do that because it has always been a man's position. That is an

interesting point. The main problem I have with what you said, Angela,

was to do with women's biology. Somehow women are programmed a

different way. I said we are different. It doesn't make us

unequal. I would like to say that is not found by academic research, with

academic research... -- founded. I am not saying nature does not have

an impact on how we are, but I am a primary school teacher. Yesterday, I

had a conversation with a six-year-old girl. I said to her,

what did you do at the weekend? She said she went to a football party

but the girls did not play. That is not a natural thing to happen.

Society has made people think that is a natural thing to happen, but

research shows it is not a natural process we have come to.

I know a lot of women, professional women, highly educated, been

successful, who have thought differently when they have had their

families. I have met women in all spheres of professional life. Kids

do what they want to do. I have a daughter who has three older

brothers. There are footballs, the paraphernalia of boys around the

house, and she is empowered by her choice to play with her dolls or

play football with her brothers. Kids today are so sophisticated,

they do what they want to do. If girls do not want to play football,

it is probably because they do not want to play football. We will leave

it there. Good debate. Simon Thomas. What you want to ask? Do you think

Wales should have the same powers as Scotland? Topical. Omar. Of course

Wales should have the same powers as Scotland. It has been long overdue

that Wales and Scotland and Northern Ireland, it has been long overdue

for Wales and Scotland to forge their own identity. I do not know

why we have been holding back. I think Wales is Scotland with an

inferiority complex! We should get rid of it. Look at this amazing

building, the music and culture and history and poetry and comedy.

Everything. It is about time we went for it. Are you in favour of

independence? Yes. I think Plaid Cymru has the approach to this. It

works for England, as well. Just like Wales and Scotland have to stop

viewing themselves as the junior partner of England, it is about time

England realised they are not a colonial power. They should discover

themselves. If there was English identity you would not have vacuums

for people like the English Defence League. We are not a country that is

ready to be independent. I am proud of being Welsh. We know that we

still rely on England full lawmaking powers and we rely on England to

provide some sustenance of money to us and the Welsh would not be daft

enough to break the union as it currently stands until we have more

devolution of powers to look after ourselves. Would you agree that

Wales is not ready for independence? I don't think it is. If you go back

to the 1997 devolution referendum, the turnout was about 50.4%.

I am a politics student, the figures are ingrained! As leader of Plaid

Cymru, do you think there has been a lot of change since then? More

people are interested in further devolution and independence? I do

think people are interested, and I accept the point you make - more

people in Wales would be nervous about us moving to independence more

quickly and that is because our economic position is not the same as

Scotland's. That doesn't mean we cannot get to that point and I think

we should have the ambition and the plan to have a successful economy,

and when we have that then our people can take the choice that

people in Scotland took last week. The principle that the people

closest to a decision are the best people to make that decision is one

I I think we can probably all agree with. -- one I think. The same goes

for Scotland too. They are presided over by a government in Westminster

that neither country have voted for. The cuts that have been meted out by

the Coalition in London are not good for our people, particularly in our

poorest communities in Wales or Scotland, so that is the debate they

had in Scotland last week. I was there, it was a fantastic debate,

85% of the people turned out and nobody was engaged in the process.

If we could have a debate like that in Wales, the apathy we have seen I

think we would be able to stem, and we would be able to generate an

interest in politics, the like of which I have never seen before in

this country. I am a very proud Welshman. As a global community we

are supposed to be coming together, why would you want to be coming

together, why would you want a breakaway? Last week the debate in

Scotland was being framed around Scotland given the opportunity to

join the world community. It is not a case of breaking up or separating,

it is voting yes to become a member of the world community as a nation

state in its own right. I work in America sometimes and I'm sick of

people asking me where America sometimes and I'm sick of

and I say Wales, next to England. You would still

and I say Wales, next to England. will help. It won't

and I say Wales, next to England. America's geography, trust me! I

think in this disturbing America's geography, trust me! I

at large, we are union... Do you feel like that about the European

Union? That is feel like that about the European

conversation. It is typical politicking to kick in Europe every

so often when it suits the range of the debate. I'm talking about the

UK. We have men who fought together in the second and First World War in

this country. We have to look at what our communities need. I don't

understand the need for borders and separation. I am from Manchester and

they are talking about devolving powers to Manchester. I think we

have to have a fair, and equal society. We are united kingdom, we

are country. There are borders in Europe. If you want to simplify it,

that is up to you because you started off talking about the needs

of the Welsh people. I think we are much stronger as a

union and Westminster house to understand that there may be needs

in the broader communities of Wales that need addressing but I don't

think we should be breaking up the union. I completely disagree about

the independence. I don't think we should go independent. Scotland is a

country that has natural resources like oil and therefore that would

make them rich if they were to go independent, whereas Wales doesn't

have natural resources. We have coal. We used to! We never kept the

money from it. I don't think we should go independent because it

would send us into debt. I am English and personally I love Wales

and I would be gutted if they left the union but I can completely

understand where it is coming from because I think a lot of us don't

feel represented by the Westminster government and it is just not

working. We are being led by Westminster instead of being led by

the entire union. What are people saying online? Should Wales have the

same powers as Scotland, 73% say yes.

This is a question for you, Leanne. Is it really representative of the

people in Wales, independence, when 70% of people didn't want to go for

it in a recent poll? No, and I think those polls ask people if they want

to become independent now and I understand the reticence of that

because of our economic situation but that doesn't mean we shouldn't

aspire to have a more successful economy. Independence is normal, it

is the state that most countries in the world are in, and we are the

anomaly. I would like to say I am English and I am studying in Wales

and I love Wales. What does the panel think of having a federalised

United Kingdom? Rather than is being independent. -- it being. That would

work if the constituent parts were equal, but given that one part is so

huge, then there would be a big power imbalance so that could be

difficult. Do you think that if you want to have an independent Wales

that it would be fair for people if England took part in some kind of

referendum to find out if you should stay or not. No, I think they should

have a debate about what they want for their political arrangements and

if that results in an English parliament or regional bodies within

England, then that is a matter for people in England, but I think Wales

should decide what happens in Wales, just as Scotland decided about the

future of Scotland. I lean as well towards this idea that togetherness

is something beneficial, especially on a world stage, but it is easy to

say that when you are English. If that is something we want, if that

is something we feel is beneficial for all of us, then I think we have

to make sure countries like Wales and Scotland have the devolution and

powers they need to do what is right for them. I was shocked to discover

earlier on that Wales has less devolution of those powers. If we

want the benefits that come from standing alongside Scotland and

Wales, we need to give them the powers they need for it to

beneficial for them. I want to go back to what you said

about World War II, when you were talking about men fighting together.

I just want to use it as an example of everyday sexism because you

completely ignored the contribution that the women of this country but

also the other countries who had to take over men's jobs and had to come

out of the house and childcare and all the things they had done until

that point. That is a spectacular example of what my problem is with

feminism. I need a very generalised point about them going out to battle

together. -- I made. I didn't in any way suggest women had not made an

important contribution to the war effort. That is very unhelpful. Back

to the point about Wales and devolution. Scotland and England has

a youth Parliament, why can't Wales have one? They have recently got rid

of the national voice for young people. Children and young people

should have an Assembly, why can't we be exactly like England and

Scotland? I agree, there needs to be a forum for young people. It is

unacceptable that a system like that exists in England and Scotland and

it doesn't exist in Wales. Unfortunately that is all we have

time for. We will be back in a fortnight on the 7th of October in

Dover. Please don't forget our choose our audience questions. We

know the acronym is unfortunate! For now, goodbye. We will see you in

two.