Young Voters' Question Time

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:11. > :00:16.The politicians have set out their stalls at the party conferences

:00:16. > :00:26.will young voters buy their policies? Welcome to Young Voters'

:00:26. > :00:29.

:00:29. > :00:33.With me tonight, the rapper wh says sometimes young people need to

:00:33. > :00:40.blaze up a fire, Speech Debelle. The business woman and winner of

:00:40. > :00:45.the Apprentice, Stella English. The story who is tipped to be the first

:00:45. > :00:51.black Prime Minister, Kwasi Kwarteng. Humza Yousaf. Voted the

:00:51. > :00:56.sexiest MP the newest Liver bird in Liverpool, Luciana Berger and the

:00:56. > :01:06.unionior minister who quit over tuition fees, Jenny Willott.

:01:06. > :01:09.

:01:09. > :01:13.So, hello there. Welcome to Young Voters' Question Time. We are live

:01:13. > :01:20.from Salford. Just down the road from the Tory party conference with

:01:20. > :01:24.a lively audience of young people. You see! They are ready to tackle

:01:24. > :01:32.our panellists from left, right and centre. You can get involved too

:01:32. > :01:37.via twitter. Just include the hash tag yvqt and it will come through

:01:37. > :01:41.right here. I will read out as many as I can. Let me hear the first

:01:41. > :01:47.question from Rory Anderson of Leeds University. My question to

:01:47. > :01:51.the panel is, I want to know if they think Meredith Kercher has

:01:51. > :02:00.received justice? Has Meredith Kercher received justice? Amanda

:02:00. > :02:07.Knox is on her way home to Seattle as we speak. Speech Debelle? Um, I

:02:07. > :02:12.don't... I mean, somebody's died, I'm not sure if there can really be

:02:12. > :02:19.justice, even if what happened yesterday didn't happen. I think,

:02:19. > :02:24.already somebody is already in jail for the murder. Rudy Guede is in

:02:24. > :02:29.jail. Exactly. I mean, to be honest, when I was watching the news

:02:29. > :02:34.yesterday, when they were revealing the verdict I kind of just felt

:02:34. > :02:38.like, looking at the family, like, it still just hurts, do you know

:02:38. > :02:42.what I mean? It still feels the same to them, regardless of whether

:02:42. > :02:47.she stayed in jail or not, I think that is probably how they would

:02:47. > :02:52.have felt. It still feels the same. Four years now since the murder?

:02:52. > :02:56.don't think four years makes a difference if that is the case. In

:02:56. > :03:01.erms terms of justice whether it was served, I'm not sure. That is

:03:01. > :03:05.something the family will be more in a position to answer. They said

:03:05. > :03:11.they are back to square one which is what Meredith's brother said

:03:11. > :03:15.today. There are unanswered questions. Italy's highest court

:03:15. > :03:20.said the murderer in prison for this did not act alone. They are

:03:20. > :03:24.saying who is it if it wasn't Knox incomes and Raffaele Sollecito.

:03:24. > :03:28.hasn't received justice because she was murdered. We don't know who the

:03:28. > :03:34.people were who were responsible for it. There was difficulty with

:03:34. > :03:40.this case because it was a massive media circus with Foxy Knoxy. The

:03:40. > :03:44.details of the case were obscured.. I'm not sure the family have

:03:44. > :03:48.received justice. Did it feel strange that you could watch that

:03:48. > :03:53.verdict? An incredible moment of human drama, wasn't it? You could

:03:53. > :03:57.watch the verdict being read out. They had a live satellite libg link

:03:57. > :04:03.to Amanda Knox' family. Were you comfortable being able to see that?

:04:03. > :04:09.I think this was quied quite odd. They have a different process than

:04:09. > :04:14.we have. There are talks of CAMRA in court in England? I wouldn't

:04:14. > :04:20.support that. Any thoughts on this from the audience? The gentleman at

:04:20. > :04:26.the back. I don't think there was justice. I think that it's just a

:04:26. > :04:30.clear example that somebody with enough money and enough time,

:04:30. > :04:36.you'll always be able to pick small little things in a case. I think

:04:36. > :04:41.that - I don't know what you mean, with enough money? What are you

:04:41. > :04:45.implied? They found that evidence might have been contaminated or...

:04:45. > :04:51.Ipg over four years you are going to find small parts of a case that

:04:51. > :04:57.might have been contaminated. I don't think that they should change

:04:57. > :05:01.the sentence after four years. I still think she did it. You are,

:05:01. > :05:04.basically, saying you think Knox and her ex-boyfriend, Raffaele

:05:04. > :05:09.Sollecito, are guilty is what you are saying? Yes. Two things about

:05:09. > :05:14.that. One, what you described there is the Italian system, the appeal

:05:14. > :05:20.system. Secondly, they have been found not guilty. That is the view

:05:20. > :05:23.of the court. That DNA evidence was undermined and dismissed, wasn't

:05:23. > :05:27.it? I think that the Italian justice system made a big song and

:05:27. > :05:33.dance about this and they got it completely wrong. I don't see how

:05:33. > :05:37.you can bang someone up for four years and then just suddenly

:05:37. > :05:42.overturn the decision for like a life sentence and sent them free

:05:42. > :05:47.completely. I think they handled -- handled the case completely wrong.

:05:47. > :05:52.Whether she did it or not, the fact I heard today that Amanda Knox is

:05:52. > :05:57.possibly getting a book deal from it. Hollywood movies. That is

:05:57. > :06:01.rubbing it in for the family. you were her and you had four years

:06:01. > :06:05.taken away and you had been through hell. Let us assume she is innocent.

:06:05. > :06:09.That is how she was found by the court. Wouldn't you want to profit

:06:09. > :06:16.from it? From the family's perspective for four years they

:06:16. > :06:19.thought she was a murderer. For her to be on television etc. To become

:06:19. > :06:23.a celebrity. What do you think? What about the fact there that she

:06:23. > :06:27.might make a load of money from that? I think that's untasteful.

:06:27. > :06:31.She will get compensation, I have no doubt for having time taken away

:06:31. > :06:34.from her life for what was a horrific experience. People have

:06:34. > :06:38.been miscarriages of justice have happened in Britain. It's been

:06:38. > :06:45.longer than four years. We have to recognise that miscarriages can

:06:45. > :06:49.happen. I agree with Kwasi, maybe the only time - Don't rub it it in.

:06:49. > :06:53.What this media circus can do is create witch hunts. That is

:06:54. > :06:58.dangerous. We have seen it time and time again, Rebecca Lleyton she

:06:58. > :07:02.went through a difficult time. It happens time and time again. Media

:07:02. > :07:07.in court rooms is a bad area. It's certainly you don't have in

:07:07. > :07:12.Scotland and something I don't think it should be introduced here.

:07:12. > :07:16.The SNP and the Conservatives don't agree, really? Amanda Knox some

:07:16. > :07:20.people think it's distasteful she can make money out of this.

:07:20. > :07:24.Apparently, her parents re- mortgaged their house to fund her

:07:24. > :07:29.appeal, what do you think about that? They funded a massive PR

:07:29. > :07:32.campaign which played out on televisions across the media.

:07:32. > :07:36.that a bad thing We have forgotten Meredith Kercher. Meredith Kercher

:07:36. > :07:40.was the daughter and the sister to the Kercher family. That should be

:07:40. > :07:46.the focus of this discussion not what happened to Amanda Knox.

:07:46. > :07:50.Back out to the audience. Gentleman there, in the red top. I think that

:07:50. > :07:55.the prosecutors made a massive mistake in the way they went about

:07:55. > :07:59.pleading their case. It became a case of character assassination

:07:59. > :08:03.rather than presenting the facts. They used that to cover the fact

:08:03. > :08:08.they had little forensic evidence. 50 pieces of forensic evidence were

:08:08. > :08:14.flawed. The way they went about it didn't help them. Police and

:08:14. > :08:18.prosecutors came up with this sex game theory, didn't they?? The Foxy

:08:18. > :08:24.Knoxy thing didn't work in their favour. This became a bigger story

:08:24. > :08:28.partly because of her looks, didn't it, in the end? It's the media. The

:08:28. > :08:32.media have control - We watch the media. We are not even, like, half

:08:32. > :08:37.of the time we are not given the choice whether to watch. It's in

:08:37. > :08:41.our face all the time. It's rape, murder on the front pages. Whether

:08:41. > :08:46.this comes to play in the actual court deciding on who is guilty or

:08:46. > :08:49.not. One more question and move we will move to our next topic. The

:08:49. > :08:55.lady there. Surely with the amount she changed her story that in

:08:55. > :09:00.itself is a crime against the courts? OK. Jenny quick comment

:09:00. > :09:03.from you on this. Well, I think, what it has shown up is significant

:09:03. > :09:08.differences between the way the media relates to court cases in

:09:08. > :09:13.Italy from the way we would have it here. Eagree with the gentleman who

:09:13. > :09:16.said it was a circus the way Amanda Knox was portrayed and the way

:09:17. > :09:19.prosecutors were speaking in the media. I think it did completely

:09:19. > :09:23.overshadowed what happened to Meredith Kercher. And, the thing

:09:23. > :09:27.that has upset me this week is that you would think the entire trial

:09:27. > :09:31.was about - the entire thing was about Amanda Knox and her boyfriend

:09:31. > :09:34.whether or not they were guilty or innocent. Completely forgotten the

:09:34. > :09:39.original crime that took place. I think that the Kercher family have

:09:39. > :09:44.shown the most amazing resilience and dignity throughout it.

:09:44. > :09:48.Particularly, this week. APPLAUSE

:09:48. > :09:52.They were impressive at their press conferences. In a strange way, even

:09:52. > :09:57.Raffaele Sollecito got for got continue became about Amanda Knox

:09:57. > :10:04.largely, didn't it? Stella a comment from you on this. I think

:10:04. > :10:07.the mere fact that what we are all discussing is Foxy Knoxy and her

:10:07. > :10:11.media persona just is really test month to the fact that the whole

:10:11. > :10:15.thing went wrong, from my point of view, morally. We shouldn't be

:10:15. > :10:20.talking about that. It should be about what happened and why and

:10:20. > :10:26.everything else. So, unfortunately, I think, from the point of view of

:10:26. > :10:32.taste, the media has played a role here which has knead very

:10:32. > :10:37.distasteful. Thank you. Our next question. You can tweet us at: That

:10:37. > :10:42.is if you want to get involved tonight. Thomas Gore, a student for

:10:42. > :10:47.our next question. My question is, how is it fair that the Scottish

:10:47. > :10:51.gefplt can charge English students �9,000 per annum in tuition fees

:10:51. > :10:56.from next year when Scottish students don't have to pay a penny?

:10:56. > :11:00.I have a feeling this will blow up. You are from the SNP? Absolutely.

:11:00. > :11:06.The Scottish government gets money, pocket money a block grant where by

:11:06. > :11:11.it has to take care of those who live in Scotland. You are impeding

:11:11. > :11:15.the view of the young gentleman. Bethey English Scots, Irish Scots

:11:15. > :11:18.those living in Scotland don't pay a single penny we in the Scottish

:11:18. > :11:23.Government believe that education has to be based on the ability to

:11:23. > :11:26.learn not the ability to pay. If we could extend that...

:11:26. > :11:29.APPLAUSE If we could extend that and other

:11:29. > :11:33.policies like our free prescriptions charges to cover

:11:33. > :11:36.English students and the rest of the UK students, by God, we would.

:11:36. > :11:41.I wish we really Co on that point shall I respect Jenny for the

:11:41. > :11:45.position she took, it must have been a difficult position - When

:11:45. > :11:51.she quit Yes. Those Lib Dems who did the opposite. Scottish MPs

:11:51. > :11:54.voted for tuition fees even though it doesn't cover Scotland. That is

:11:54. > :11:58.the biggest betrayal in recent modern British political history.

:11:58. > :12:01.Those people - it should be - as young people it should be your duty

:12:01. > :12:08.as young people when the next general election comes you should

:12:08. > :12:12.make sure it's them out of jobs and not you. In Scotland the students

:12:12. > :12:16.don't have to pay tuition fees an English student going there would

:12:16. > :12:20.have pay. Northern Ireland student or Welsh student. Anyone from the

:12:21. > :12:24.EU would have to pay. In Wales they are getting a subsidy? There are

:12:24. > :12:28.not enough Welsh university places. EU students would wouldn't have to

:12:28. > :12:33.pay? It's currently illegal. We are trying to work with the European

:12:33. > :12:37.Commission to change it. Your thoughts on this. Surely, it should

:12:37. > :12:40.show that Scottish MPs shouldn't be allowed to vote on English matters

:12:40. > :12:43.that only affect English citizens? Absolutely.

:12:43. > :12:47.APPLAUSE Can I make a point on. That I'm a

:12:47. > :12:52.Welsh member of Parliament, so it's not - it doesn't apply quite the

:12:52. > :12:57.same in Wales. It isn't quite as simple as that. I have constituents

:12:57. > :13:01.I represent the area that covers car div University, University of

:13:01. > :13:06.Glamorgan and so on. I have English students living there at Cardiff

:13:06. > :13:09.University and Welsh students living there. I have constituents

:13:09. > :13:14.who come under the Welsh and English system. It affects people

:13:14. > :13:22.living in my area as well. It's the same for Scottish MPs. None of it

:13:22. > :13:27.is quite as cut and dry at first glance it might be. The guy who

:13:27. > :13:31.said Scottish MPs shouldn't be voting on English matters. Which

:13:31. > :13:37.way did you vote? For tuition fees. They were introduced by the Labour

:13:37. > :13:41.government in 2004 the debate was about the level. Is it fair English

:13:41. > :13:48.students will have a bigger debt for the rest of their working

:13:48. > :13:54.lives? Absolutely not. Than Scottish students Yes. The cap on

:13:54. > :13:59.Welsh students is just over 3,000 the rest is subsidised. It sounds

:13:59. > :14:02.unfair. The burden on the taxpayer was so big that we couldn't have a

:14:02. > :14:08.system which I had, because I am just about old enough to remember

:14:08. > :14:12.that, where it was entierly free. Free education? Did you just say it

:14:13. > :14:16.was unfair? I said it's unfair the disparity between Scotland and

:14:16. > :14:24.England, yes. That is an issue for the Scottish Government. They will

:14:24. > :14:31.have to subsidise. Loads of hands up. Gentleman there in the glasses.

:14:31. > :14:36.What Kwasi done has cut the ladder so we cannot climb the ladder of

:14:37. > :14:42.suck kes -- success we will not be where you are today because of what

:14:42. > :14:47.you have done. I will collate a few points, right. We will come back to

:14:47. > :14:54.My opinion on the matter is that the British Government and the

:14:54. > :15:00.British economy created a derth in opportunity by driving every single

:15:00. > :15:07.young person in England and Britain through university and not creating

:15:07. > :15:11.vocational opportunities and making boy technics -- polytechnic

:15:11. > :15:15.universities, and creating a... It's a Labour policy to get 50% of

:15:15. > :15:20.people into university and that was a mistake is what you are saying?

:15:20. > :15:23.The economics don't work. The market will not support a majority

:15:23. > :15:27.of young people who have professional degrees. There needs

:15:27. > :15:32.to be more of a balance. OK, the gentleman in front of you. I have

:15:32. > :15:39.to be honest, Kwasi, I disagree, there is no need to put this

:15:39. > :15:45.massive burden on students. can't be afforded. Tax bankers. Why,

:15:45. > :15:48.why...? Can I come back to that. Why are you taxing students?

:15:48. > :15:55.your objection to the principle of fees generally, or the level?

:15:55. > :16:00.level. �9,000 a year is just unrealistic for the majority of

:16:00. > :16:04.young people. You are willing to pay, you are not saying it - some

:16:04. > :16:08.people are saying it should be free. I am willing to pay, but not a

:16:08. > :16:13.level where the majority of people - education should be a right for

:16:13. > :16:21.everyone. Sure. Many people cannot afford the level that your

:16:21. > :16:25.Government has put in place. More have gone for the �9,000 level.

:16:25. > :16:28.People only start paying back when they start earning �21,000 a year.

:16:28. > :16:34.It's still a debt that hangs over them, like a mortgage. The interest

:16:34. > :16:37.on that is �7 a month, which is a lot of money but for the quality of

:16:37. > :16:43.an education, the price of education I think it's a price

:16:43. > :16:48.worth paying. I think a lot of people would agree with me. If I

:16:48. > :16:55.went to university for �9,000 and the rest of my life never earned

:16:55. > :16:59.above �21,000 I would feel a bit short-changed. APPLAUSE.

:16:59. > :17:03.Speech Debelle, Stella English, neither of you went to university,

:17:03. > :17:07.did you? I didn't and I think - I didn't have the opportunity to do

:17:07. > :17:10.it. I don't think it's something that one should have to think about

:17:10. > :17:16.whether they can afford it or not. I think we have got a whole

:17:16. > :17:20.generation of people that need to be educated, they're our future.

:17:20. > :17:23.They can't afford until they don't pay back until they're earning

:17:23. > :17:26.money. We are talking about here people are worried about getting in

:17:26. > :17:31.debt, they're thinking about how they're going to cope going forward.

:17:31. > :17:35.Why should they have to think like that? Exactly,ed problem is that

:17:35. > :17:39.it's - I don't think it boils down to whether they can afford it or

:17:39. > :17:44.can't. If you have a situation where a generation of people feel

:17:44. > :17:48.like now they're some sort of, you know, to a certain extent like an

:17:48. > :17:53.enemy, to the point they feel they have to go out and riot, know what

:17:53. > :17:56.I mean, because of a decision that's been made that puts them in

:17:56. > :18:01.a position that isn't good. I don't think a generation of people in our

:18:01. > :18:06.country should feel like that. I think that's a problem. Whether

:18:06. > :18:11.they can afford it, necessarily or not, I don't think we can afford to

:18:11. > :18:15.make them feel like there's a level of hopelessness in their future. I

:18:15. > :18:19.think that's probably the biggest debt that's going to have to be

:18:19. > :18:24.paid there. You think it's unfair because there are certain people

:18:24. > :18:27.will feel that and other people would never feel that way. It boils

:18:27. > :18:31.down to how we feel as society and I don't think we can afford to let

:18:31. > :18:36.young people feel as though they're not going to be part of it. A lot

:18:36. > :18:41.of hands up. We go to the lady with blonde hair up there. Good evening.

:18:41. > :18:45.Hi, I was going to say the average age of the first-time house buyers

:18:45. > :18:49.is 37, which is obviously shockingly high and David Cameron

:18:49. > :18:53.said this was appalling but when you are charging us that much to go

:18:53. > :18:57.to university how can you expect us to get into the property ladder, to

:18:57. > :19:02.get into society and earn the high figures? I don't think it's

:19:02. > :19:08.something that can be justified. The average repayments are about �6

:19:08. > :19:12.a week, they're low. It doesn't matter. When you go to any new

:19:12. > :19:19.agreement people will want to know whatets you have got. -- what debts

:19:19. > :19:24.you have got. It might not seem like much to people on the panel.

:19:24. > :19:27.The The tuition fees have only gone up. They went up a few years ago

:19:27. > :19:31.and that was a lot to some people. There's a lot of people aren't

:19:31. > :19:35.willing to pay at the risk of going through university and not getting

:19:35. > :19:40.a job at the end of it. It's a big risk for people to take and a lot

:19:40. > :19:44.of people wouldn't. On this point, at the Labour Party conference last

:19:44. > :19:48.week Ed Miliband, your leader, was talking about tuition fees and it

:19:48. > :19:54.seems there have been a policy U- turn, where he was against putting

:19:54. > :19:58.them up, right. And now he is saying they do support a �6,000

:19:58. > :20:01.tuition fees. That's not what he said before. What Ed Miliband said

:20:01. > :20:07.at our conference only last week was that right now we could put

:20:07. > :20:12.fees down to a cap of �6,000, rather than �9,000. An increase

:20:12. > :20:17.from where they were. In terms of what we can promise and deliver,

:20:17. > :20:20.someone mentioned the bankers, if we introduced a bankers' bonus

:20:20. > :20:25.bonus - forgive me, if we didn't cut the corporation tax of banks,

:20:25. > :20:28.it's gone from 29% to 23% and bankers are benefiting from that.

:20:28. > :20:34.If we scrap that for banks and allocated that to tuition fees we

:20:34. > :20:38.could reduce the cap to �6,000 and the point is we can't make promises

:20:38. > :20:41.we can't keep. We saw that with the Lib Dems at the last election.

:20:41. > :20:44.There's so many students in my constituency that feel let down

:20:44. > :20:47.because they made promises they couldn't keep. Now we need to

:20:47. > :20:53.regain trust with the British public and ensure that what we

:20:53. > :20:59.promise is what we can deliver. Some tweets have come in. One says:

:20:59. > :21:02.I want to go to uni and not live in debt. Matthew is impressed by the

:21:02. > :21:07.wonders of devolved Government, the Scots in my opinion, wisely, spend

:21:07. > :21:10.the money on higher education as an investment. Another says: The

:21:10. > :21:16.English Government should try to be like Scotland, but they're not. A

:21:16. > :21:19.lot of people won't now go to uni. Kenny says well done for showing it

:21:19. > :21:24.isn't Scotland's fault, the English Government want to give their

:21:24. > :21:32.students a huge financial burden but it's strange how the UK's taxes

:21:32. > :21:39.subsidise Scottish tuition fees. Do they? There's a formula and under

:21:39. > :21:45.that Humza would know, each person has to get more... That's true.

:21:45. > :21:53.It's the investment. Let me come back to two points - I will come

:21:53. > :21:57.back. Under the formula you are? we gave 9.4%, we gave that in tax

:21:57. > :22:02.money and got less in spending how is that a subsidy? Let me come back

:22:02. > :22:06.to the affording point. Politician after politician saying we can't

:22:06. > :22:11.afford it, but why don't you try not spending �100 billion on

:22:11. > :22:15.replacing nuclear weapons and Trident? Billions of pounds on

:22:15. > :22:19.wars? Why don't you try spending the money on higher education

:22:19. > :22:24.instead of money on that? Exactly what your tweet says, it's about

:22:24. > :22:34.where you choose to spend your money. Nuclear weapons are these ar

:22:34. > :22:35.

:22:35. > :22:40.cane cold war relics. Young people don't like the nuclear deterrent,

:22:40. > :22:45.who would have thought! Let's have a few points and move on to the

:22:45. > :22:50.next question. You look very enthusiastic. From a graduate's

:22:50. > :22:55.point of view, I graduated a few years ago under the old system and

:22:55. > :22:58.I am on about �18,000 a year, I wouldn't be paying anything back. I

:22:58. > :23:02.am paying about �30 a month back which is a lot of money for me, I

:23:02. > :23:05.would be paying less back under the new system. I would prefer the new

:23:05. > :23:10.system even though you will be paying back more in the long run

:23:10. > :23:13.it's more affordable. The main issue is maintenance, that's what I

:23:13. > :23:18.found cost me the most money at university. I had to get a part-

:23:18. > :23:23.time job because I had to pay maintenance and rent and going out

:23:23. > :23:26.having a few beers. Books, that's what you spend money on. The

:23:26. > :23:35.tuition fees, that's what you pay for after you graduated. Right so

:23:35. > :23:38.your real cost is your drink bill! One point, the gentleman here with

:23:38. > :23:41.the beard. I found it hard to respect decisions made by

:23:42. > :23:49.politicians who didn't have to pay for their education at university

:23:49. > :23:52.and how can they empathise with us making us pay �9,000? APPLAUSE.

:23:52. > :23:57.This generation of politicians didn't have to pay tuition fees and

:23:57. > :24:01.these guys are. Let's move on to other questions. Can I come back on

:24:01. > :24:05.one thing, I don't agree with Tuesday and volted -- tuition feess

:24:05. > :24:11.and voted against them. One positive thing, students will have

:24:11. > :24:14.a much bigger stay - universities will have to pay more to what

:24:14. > :24:16.students want out of their course. We have to see how much more

:24:16. > :24:20.influence students, because they're paying, will be able to have over

:24:20. > :24:24.universities, over the courses and be able to change universities to

:24:24. > :24:27.give them more what they want and I hope people take the opportunity to

:24:27. > :24:32.use that power that they will now have to get what they want from

:24:32. > :24:36.universities. You are reducing investment in higher education so

:24:36. > :24:39.students will pay �9,000 but reducing the money that goes to

:24:39. > :24:47.universities so you are not getting a better quality education in

:24:47. > :24:51.return. We are going to move on. We are going to Megan Caulfield, I

:24:51. > :24:55.believe. A law student, what's your question, please. Other than on a

:24:55. > :25:01.political level, how can you justify the sentences given to this

:25:01. > :25:05.year's rioters? OK, here we go back on riots. How can the sentences be

:25:05. > :25:09.justified? There are remarkable stats relating to this. Here in the

:25:09. > :25:13.Manchester area, those that were convicted of organising riots or

:25:13. > :25:17.looting commercial properties were given eight years and above. Eight

:25:17. > :25:24.years and above. So, a very dramatic sentence. Who would like

:25:24. > :25:30.to go first? I will. Stella, you are smiling at me. I think that's

:25:30. > :25:37.ridiculous. Why is it ridiculous? Because if you look at the broad

:25:37. > :25:43.range of crimes that go on that is just not proportional... Organising

:25:43. > :25:47.a riot is not a serious crime? this the Mafia, organised crime? We

:25:47. > :25:55.are talking about - I thought it was looting and know what I mean,

:25:55. > :25:58.if you are talking about those crimes in the riots, then no, it

:25:58. > :26:04.wouldn't justify. If you were to set fire to a building that would

:26:04. > :26:07.be regarded as arson. Regardless of organised crime. People who got

:26:07. > :26:12.convicted of arson again here in the Greater Manchester area got six

:26:12. > :26:16.years and upwards. Those who looted commercial property and those were

:26:16. > :26:21.seen as ringleaders got eight years and above. There were tough

:26:21. > :26:24.sentences but I will explain why Lordship. You -- you don't think

:26:24. > :26:29.too tough? I am trying to explain what the thinking is. There was a

:26:29. > :26:34.breakdown of civil order and people were generally scared about what

:26:34. > :26:37.was going on. The idea was to try and get a very strong message out

:26:37. > :26:41.to the public that this sort of behaviour wouldn't be tolerated. We

:26:41. > :26:44.haven't seen riots for 30 years on this scale. It was quite terrifying

:26:44. > :26:48.for people. And the public generally wanted to see that

:26:48. > :26:54.justice was done. Now these were tough sentences and some people

:26:54. > :26:59.would say they were too tough. But I think the right message went down

:26:59. > :27:04.and restored faith in our justice system. When did we start

:27:04. > :27:11.sentencing to please the public? The most important thing...

:27:11. > :27:15.August. It's quite important for the public as a whole to feel safe.

:27:15. > :27:18.They don't determine determine sentencing because they're angry?

:27:18. > :27:22.There has to be confidence in the system. Once there isn't confidence

:27:22. > :27:25.in the system, then you can lead to breakdown and in a way that was

:27:25. > :27:29.what happened in the riots. People said that they didn't think the

:27:29. > :27:35.sentences would be tough enough and that's why they went on the streets.

:27:35. > :27:38.And to keep order as well. It was civil order. Anyone here think

:27:38. > :27:40.that's right, those sentences I already mentioned, it's a good

:27:40. > :27:48.thing that the sentencing was that harsh on the people that organised

:27:48. > :27:54.riots? The gentleman there. I think the problem with it, I mean, it's

:27:54. > :28:01.important to have sentenced the two half-wits who tried to start riots

:28:01. > :28:03.in... The Facebook ones? Yeah, it was like, I didn't feel necessarily

:28:03. > :28:09.comfortable with that being the case but they could have caused a

:28:10. > :28:13.lot of damage but four years is a lot. They never left their bedrooms.

:28:13. > :28:17.They need to be proportional, something like a year of community

:28:17. > :28:21.community service for being a lunatic but someone who breaks

:28:21. > :28:24.stuff needs a lot more. It all needs to be within proportion. If

:28:24. > :28:28.you do something really bad that needs to be a hell of a lot longer

:28:28. > :28:36.than someone who just thinks about or tries to encourage others. Maybe

:28:36. > :28:42.a community sentence. Thank you. Who thinks the sentences are about

:28:42. > :28:48.right? The gentleman there. Both of you can speak. As a guy from

:28:48. > :28:52.Salford who was witnessing my local area, I think it's right, because

:28:52. > :28:55.it puts people off. But also an added sentence on top of that was

:28:55. > :29:05.the fact all those people who cleaned up afterwards deserve

:29:05. > :29:06.

:29:06. > :29:10.credit for what they did and it rubbed in how terrible they were.

:29:10. > :29:15.There was a Lidl burned down in Salford. Bricks thrown at

:29:15. > :29:18.firefighters. Gentlemen there. think it's absolutely ridiculous

:29:18. > :29:22.that the Conservatives can go on about how the big society, because

:29:22. > :29:25.that was an explosion of the big society. The people who the

:29:25. > :29:29.Conservatives are creating the underclass of people who if they

:29:29. > :29:32.were in jobs they would not have rioted. They simply would not have

:29:32. > :29:36.done. It's ridiculous how the Conservatives are going oh no, this

:29:36. > :29:41.is all to do with social order and breaking social order and we need

:29:41. > :29:44.to punish them. We need people to be rehabilitated because that is

:29:44. > :29:49.proven to work better than punishing them by just throwing

:29:49. > :29:52.them in prison and locking away the key. It's ridiculous. APPLAUSE. Are

:29:52. > :29:55.you saying, to break that down, that's an example of the big

:29:55. > :29:59.society, people going out and rioting? This is the big society

:29:59. > :30:02.where people are extremely annoyed at the Government, at the coalition

:30:02. > :30:05.and Labour can't really talk, because they didn't help in their

:30:05. > :30:10.13 years of Government. They did not help the people of Great

:30:10. > :30:14.Britain. You really think those people rioting were thinking about

:30:14. > :30:18.David Cameron and Nick Clegg? Not in particular, they didn't think I

:30:18. > :30:23.will smash into this shop because of David Cameron. Of course they

:30:23. > :30:27.didn't. You are saying it was politically motivated. If they had

:30:27. > :30:32.good jobs and in square jobs and if they had -- square jobs and people

:30:32. > :30:36.around them who supported them they would not have rioted. It's it's

:30:36. > :30:46.Conservative Party's fault that those people didn't have a job.

:30:46. > :30:49.The fact they are sending them to to prison for eight years will be a

:30:49. > :30:54.strain on the prison system thesm are forming gangs, as you have

:30:54. > :30:57.heard on the news. The families are getting evicted. Where are you

:30:57. > :31:02.going to put those families? Evicting those problem families

:31:02. > :31:08.will not sort the problem out. member of your family rioted you

:31:08. > :31:13.might lose your social housing, which has happened. What would you

:31:13. > :31:19.do for people who rite rioted? would imprison them I wouldn't give

:31:19. > :31:23.them eight years. What would you give them? Lower than that. Hard to

:31:23. > :31:28.think of a year. Three if they were ringleaders. It will be a huge

:31:29. > :31:34.strain the amount of people they arrested. You said it's a strain on

:31:34. > :31:40.the prison population you would still put them in prison anyway.

:31:40. > :31:44.You accept a message has to be sent? Yes. What rewe are dealing

:31:44. > :31:50.with here is an interference in the judicial system by -- by the

:31:50. > :31:55.political system. I don't think so. I agree. To the lady there, second

:31:55. > :32:00.from back row. Megan's question was on a non-political level bg how can

:32:00. > :32:07.you justify the sentences. How can you just a sentence depending on

:32:07. > :32:11.what is going on in politics? If you want a coherent system when you

:32:11. > :32:15.know what the sentence is people will get for the crimes, you have

:32:15. > :32:20.to know what you will get for doing the crime. The judges listened to

:32:20. > :32:26.what the politicians said. They shouldn't do that? Yeah they should

:32:26. > :32:32.don't that. The lady behind. It has nothing to do with the Big Society

:32:32. > :32:35.and David Cameron's plan. We can't give credit to the rit rioters. It

:32:35. > :32:41.wasn't organised. It was young people stealing Tesco value rice

:32:41. > :32:46.for the fun of it. The sentencing issue is different to the politics

:32:46. > :32:50.and should be dealt with in different ways it's a legal issue

:32:50. > :32:57.sentencing nothing to do with politics. They may have nicked down

:32:57. > :33:02.rice, miss Selfridges was burnt down. It was diverse. The

:33:02. > :33:06.sentencing needs to reflect that. It can't be one long sentence.

:33:06. > :33:11.There were no riots in Scotland. That is not because it's the land

:33:11. > :33:15.of milk and honey and everything is pure. We have plenty of problems.

:33:15. > :33:19.Taking the sentencing point. There can't and shouldn't be inconsistent

:33:19. > :33:24.cyst in sentencing. If Kwasi denies there was any political

:33:24. > :33:30.interference in that, that is ridiculous. You can go with that

:33:30. > :33:36.line of thought if you wish. You have to ask the question, why were

:33:36. > :33:39.people rioting? There were opportune criminals. Our Police

:33:39. > :33:43.Service work with the gangs and work with the young people. They

:33:43. > :33:48.say, if you want to have a life of crime, go on and have a life of

:33:48. > :33:54.crime we will come after you. Here are the opportunities. Here is the

:33:54. > :34:00.Keating. Do people in England have any of that? You are not telling me

:34:00. > :34:07.that people in England were rioting because the educational maintenance

:34:07. > :34:11.was taken away? People didn't riot in Wales, why not? Lots of places

:34:12. > :34:17.in England where there weren't riots. It's to do with community

:34:17. > :34:22.relations and policing and so on. One of the concerns I have about

:34:22. > :34:26.sentencing, a lot of people involved in in this have criminal

:34:26. > :34:30.records and have been in prison. Sending them to prison for longer

:34:30. > :34:35.and longer doesn't work. We need to look at what does work. One of the

:34:35. > :34:39.early speakers talked about pay back to the community, looking at

:34:39. > :34:46.community sentences. I think we should look Mott more at restorive

:34:46. > :34:49.justice making people realise the impact they have had on their

:34:50. > :34:53.community and make improvements to their local. That has been shown to

:34:53. > :34:58.be successful than sending people to prison. Sending people to prison

:34:58. > :35:01.when they are much less likely to get a job at the end of it, their

:35:01. > :35:08.families will be broken down and can't get good housing they will be

:35:08. > :35:15.in a position - A long-term to serve eight years. If you have a

:35:15. > :35:18.criminal record you find it harder to get work and rehabilitate

:35:18. > :35:23.yourself afterwards. Some of the looters were ten years old? There

:35:23. > :35:26.is a big issue with parenting, with educational opportunities. That has

:35:26. > :35:31.been mentioned already. Putting money into deprived areas. There

:35:31. > :35:34.are interesting projects that have been looking - working closely with

:35:34. > :35:39.families and helping the specific families, problem families in an

:35:39. > :35:48.area. We need to do more of that across the UK. Some tweets that

:35:48. > :35:54.have come in. We are live on BBC Three. Our address is: Jemma Fox,

:35:54. > :36:00.sentences are not in proportion with other crimes, maybe the other

:36:00. > :36:05.sentences are wrong. Another one, the sentencing was ridiculous

:36:05. > :36:08.regarding the riots. Everyone knows the prison system in England

:36:08. > :36:16.doesn't work. Another one, sentencing policy has always been

:36:16. > :36:19.to please the public. You are a Liverpool MP. I am, yes. Young as

:36:19. > :36:23.ten? There were lots of young people right across the country.

:36:23. > :36:27.One of the dangers we are falling into is that the government are

:36:27. > :36:35.demonising young people. That is not very helpful. Demonising young

:36:35. > :36:42.people? When have they done that? We heard today from the Justice

:36:42. > :36:47.Secretary about a feral underclass. There are people in my community

:36:47. > :36:52.who joined the clean-up. Jenny picked up on restorive justice.

:36:52. > :36:55.With. We need to look at ways to ensure we have effective

:36:55. > :36:59.rehabilitation. We want to ensure if people commit a crime they are

:37:00. > :37:03.punished for trk it's about how we support those people to make sure

:37:03. > :37:08.they don't commit crimes again. Intervention that is Jenny talked

:37:08. > :37:12.about are being cut down. Whether that is through the Early

:37:12. > :37:18.Intervention Grant, within the justice sector the justice budget

:37:18. > :37:22.cut down by 23%. Those frontline police officers and frontline

:37:22. > :37:27.probation officers and prisoners who are supposed to be there to do

:37:27. > :37:35.that work are already pressed. My fear is what will happen going

:37:35. > :37:39.forward. Another question. Is it time for the UK to leave the dying

:37:39. > :37:46.EU and use the money we save to tackle our economic issues at home

:37:46. > :37:51.Is it time to pull out of the EU altogether. Here we are in Salford

:37:51. > :37:55.down the road from the temperature conference, is it something of an

:37:55. > :37:58.issue at the conference? Let us go to Kwasi? There are big issues

:37:58. > :38:02.about our relationship with the EU, no doubt about it. People on the

:38:02. > :38:07.streets are saying, certainly in my constituency, are saying, what will

:38:07. > :38:10.we do about the EU? That is a discussion we should have. If you

:38:10. > :38:14.look at the eurozone and the greater political intergration we

:38:14. > :38:19.are seeing there, there is a debate to be had in this country about our

:38:19. > :38:25.relationship with the EU. It cost �230 for every household to be in

:38:25. > :38:30.the EU. Is that a good deal? will look at that bien line byeline

:38:30. > :38:34.especially in austerity times as we are now. You don't want to you will

:38:34. > :38:37.pull out altogether but repatriate some powers. Repatriate powers.

:38:38. > :38:42.seems to be a bigger issue for Conservative Party members than it

:38:42. > :38:48.does for the public at large. Why is it such an issue? It's also an

:38:48. > :38:54.issue, this is beared out by older voters, people under 30, 35% of

:38:54. > :38:57.them think, come out of the EU, people over 60, it's 60%. Yes. It

:38:57. > :39:01.is an issue for all the parties certainly within the Conservative

:39:01. > :39:04.Party, you are right - Why are they obsessed with it? I don't think

:39:04. > :39:07.people are obsessed with it. If you look at where we are, in terms of

:39:07. > :39:13.the economy, every country in Europe is cutting back its budget,

:39:13. > :39:16.trying to spend less. The EU is spending more money as an

:39:16. > :39:22.organisation, year-on-year. That can't be rielt right. People have

:39:22. > :39:26.issues. Could we exist outside the EU? That is a big almost a

:39:26. > :39:29.philosophical question. Of course we could exist without the EU. I

:39:29. > :39:35.don't believe - We wouldn't all die? Or the skies would fall in the

:39:35. > :39:40.moment we left. That is not on the table. We should debate and have a

:39:40. > :39:47.discussion about the basis - think we would do. 60% of our trade

:39:47. > :39:52.is with Europe. You could set up a single market. Three million jobs

:39:52. > :39:57.in the UK depend on Europe. They will still trade with us. If we

:39:57. > :40:02.left they wouldn't stop trading with us. Do you think we should

:40:02. > :40:06.pull out of the EU? Gentleman there. Go on. I think the cost is just far

:40:06. > :40:11.too much to justify really. The amount of parliamentary time that

:40:11. > :40:17.is wasted by the EU, the amount of judicial time that is wasted by the

:40:17. > :40:23.UEU is unacceptable. Judges having to refer to the European courts of

:40:23. > :40:27.justice for rulings on what they can and can't do with renches to

:40:27. > :40:31.peoples' crimes or the relationship between The Human Rights Act and

:40:31. > :40:38.the European Convention on Human Rights. It's ridiculous. Why is it?

:40:38. > :40:42.Why don't you like human rights? I have got myself confused there. I

:40:42. > :40:45.prefer sovereignty of the state rather than sovereignty of the

:40:45. > :40:50.European Union. I would prefer our Parliament to be able to do what it

:40:50. > :40:57.thinks is right for the state than what it thinks is right for the EU.

:40:57. > :41:00.Are you a member of the Conservative Party? No. No, I'm not.

:41:00. > :41:04.People always complain about Europe but don't complain about America

:41:04. > :41:11.when you lose sovereignty to America or NATO. They complain

:41:11. > :41:15.about it with Europe, why? What is wrong with Europe? They are going

:41:15. > :41:19.for a Federal system where they want to include as part as one

:41:19. > :41:23.state. I want to correct you on one point the European Convention of

:41:23. > :41:27.human right isn't from the EU that separate. One day the human race is

:41:27. > :41:33.going to become to the part where we have to accept we are a world of

:41:33. > :41:39.one people much we are one planet. I know I sound like a hipy now.

:41:39. > :41:46.sound like John len lon. We will have to get along. The human race

:41:46. > :41:50.will evolve beyond this planet. We will have to get along and live.

:41:50. > :41:54.Ail agains aside - I'm not separate from you. You are not separate from

:41:54. > :41:57.anyone else in the world. You're not that special. You're not that

:41:57. > :42:06.special from the rest of the world. Two points, there one, you are not

:42:06. > :42:10.special. Two, that's it. We just need to get along. Basic logic. Why

:42:10. > :42:14.hasn't any politician thought of that?! The gentleman there at the

:42:14. > :42:21.back. I think it's quite a strange situation that we have really. I

:42:21. > :42:24.mean, obviously, you know, all the countries in Europe being closely

:42:24. > :42:30.intergrated is a good thing because of the history of Europe and the

:42:30. > :42:33.wars and conflicts we had in the past. You might say that is a long

:42:33. > :42:38.time back, Second World War is two or three generations ago. People

:42:38. > :42:42.are still alife live who thought fought in that. Winston Churchill

:42:42. > :42:47.was in favour of a United States of Europe which I'm not personally. I

:42:47. > :42:50.think we have to find a way to work together. I'm not saying there are

:42:50. > :42:57.not problems with the EU, of course there are. It's better overall to

:42:57. > :43:02.work within that, to change it, rather than sitting on the outside

:43:02. > :43:08.- If we pull out there will be another world war? I'm not saying

:43:08. > :43:12.that. Back to the pan el. Stella, you are a business woman. You have

:43:12. > :43:19.done trading with Europe. EU, do we pull out? It's a difficult question.

:43:20. > :43:25.I think, you know, it's very problemic. We are in the situation

:43:25. > :43:29.we are in now and I think to think about pulling out... You know, what

:43:29. > :43:33.are the repercussions of it? Is it something we can really do? I don't

:43:33. > :43:38.know. A lot of polling shows, Wyles it's a big issue for a lot of

:43:38. > :43:44.Conservatives, which it is, for the public at large it's a long way

:43:44. > :43:54.down their list, it comes in number eight behind NHS, education and

:43:54. > :43:54.

:43:54. > :43:59.defence. Do you care? I just don't really have an opinion on, it to be

:43:59. > :44:04.honest, do you know what I mean? And... There is nothing wrong with

:44:04. > :44:08.not having an opinion. Yeah, do you know what I mean? I just - I don't

:44:08. > :44:12.have an opinion on it, to be honest. There are a lot of other things

:44:12. > :44:16.that - That might be the problem for the Conservatives. They are

:44:16. > :44:19.going on about it, that is how people think. Given the economic

:44:19. > :44:23.difficulties we have had this issue has become much more important. We

:44:23. > :44:27.are, at the moment, giving Europe a lot of money. When the times were

:44:27. > :44:36.good, people didn't really in the that. Now, people are much more

:44:36. > :44:40.aware of it. Jenny? I agree with Luciana, it would be catastrophic

:44:40. > :44:45.to business and job fs we pulled out of the EU. It's true that we

:44:45. > :44:47.could. We could, but we would lose a huge amount of trade. It's

:44:47. > :44:51.possible for businesss to carry on trade if anything we weren't in the

:44:51. > :44:55.EU. We have huge advantage, we don't have to have tariff barriers.

:44:55. > :44:58.We have a level playing field for British businesses who operate on

:44:58. > :45:02.the same rules as the businesses across the rest of Europe which

:45:02. > :45:06.gives us a massive advantage against people who are not within

:45:07. > :45:11.the European bloc. As a group, the European states are much more

:45:11. > :45:15.powerful. We have much more powerful voice globally as we ever

:45:15. > :45:20.would as individual countries. That is not to be forgotten. It's very

:45:20. > :45:23.important that we make sure that we get good value out of the eurozone,

:45:23. > :45:26.out of the rest of Europe, that we support them and make sure the

:45:26. > :45:31.eurozone and the current crisis doesn't bring down the rest of the

:45:32. > :45:35.Let's move on to another question from David Hughes, a member of

:45:35. > :45:41.Greenpeace. Yesterday George Osborne said we are not saving the

:45:41. > :45:45.planet by cutting our country out of business. Have the Tories back-

:45:45. > :45:51.pedalled on their pledge to become the greenest Government. You guys

:45:51. > :45:56.are all from Greenpeace? Yeah. Thought so. Are you angry, because

:45:56. > :46:02.that was one of the big deals from yesterday's George Osborne's speech.

:46:02. > :46:07.He said we are going to cut emissions no slower and no faster.

:46:07. > :46:11.Are you angry? Before he came in he pledged he would be a green ally

:46:11. > :46:15.and that was one of the the reasons he won votes. He's gone back on

:46:15. > :46:19.that, at the conference it's all come out his opinions. What is

:46:19. > :46:25.wrong with that as a statement, we won't go slower or faster.

:46:26. > :46:28.Shouldn't he be showing leadership. He is going on about innovators and

:46:28. > :46:33.leadership, he is just we will do it how they do it. David Cameron

:46:33. > :46:36.did say this would be the greenest Government when the coalition was

:46:36. > :46:43.formed. Britain's total emissions about 2% of global emissions, China

:46:43. > :46:47.and America together about 40%. George Osborne's point was let's

:46:47. > :46:53.not bankrupt companies or the country when actually we can't make

:46:53. > :46:58.that much difference. We can't save the world because we produce 2% any

:46:58. > :47:01.way? I come back to my point, I don't think it's right to refer to

:47:01. > :47:05.exact figures when it's about setting an example to other

:47:05. > :47:12.countries. The gentleman there. we are only saving a certain amount

:47:13. > :47:17.we should be looking at no why don't we save the world, we should

:47:17. > :47:22.no matter what the cost. It's not just about the savings, it's what

:47:22. > :47:25.you can make. I don't think it's just about the economics. It's our

:47:25. > :47:30.generation that's going to have to pay for the consequences, and our

:47:30. > :47:37.children. What about the money you can make. Scotland as an example,

:47:37. > :47:46.we have climate change targets. 100% of our electricity to be

:47:47. > :47:49.produced, we are a third there. 16,000 jobs in the renewable sector.

:47:50. > :47:54.Mitsubishi investing �100 million. Look at the opportunities. We have

:47:54. > :47:57.the opportunity as a country where we are to be the world leaders in

:47:57. > :48:03.renewable technology. Let's seize that opportunity and be leaders,

:48:03. > :48:07.not fall back and lose that money. APPLAUSE

:48:07. > :48:12.you are a Conservative, what happened to this? No one is going

:48:12. > :48:15.to say we are going to stop being innovators in renewable energy.

:48:15. > :48:18.What George Osborne, the point he was making, was that he is not

:48:18. > :48:24.going to tax British business to try and save the world when we

:48:25. > :48:28.can't save the world. As you said it's only 2%. It's a shift, the

:48:28. > :48:34.point these guys are making, it's a shift. Your Government were going

:48:34. > :48:39.to be the greenest ever, actually let's prioritise... What he said is

:48:39. > :48:48.what we can do will not affect the global picture. We are not going to

:48:48. > :48:52.run... We will give up? We are not. It would extend the logic of his

:48:52. > :48:55.argument. It's not what he meant, that's not what I mean. We are not

:48:55. > :49:01.going to tax British business for the sake of a goal we can't achieve

:49:01. > :49:08.ourselves. OK. You are a shadow Minister for energy and climate

:49:08. > :49:11.change. Yes, I am. Firstly, it's 2% but it's also, that doesn't include

:49:11. > :49:14.our imports so there's more emissions we generate from

:49:14. > :49:17.importing things from other countries. It's not just it's a

:49:17. > :49:20.moral obligation, I think that we need to play our role, this

:49:20. > :49:24.Government should be showing leadership as we previously did

:49:24. > :49:26.under the last Government. Ed Miliband and the work he did in

:49:26. > :49:30.Copenhagen was held by the Green groups and businesses as well.

:49:30. > :49:33.Actually it's the opportunity and the fact is that within, the

:49:33. > :49:37.transition from a high carbon to low carbon economy could create

:49:37. > :49:40.hundreds and thousands of jobs across the UK and we are already

:49:40. > :49:43.seeing companies going to other countries like Germany and China

:49:43. > :49:47.where there is the opportunity and they are making the investment in

:49:47. > :49:52.low carbon technologies in infrastructure for charging for

:49:52. > :49:57.cars, and if we don't - it's a tragedy this Government is letting

:49:57. > :50:02.down the country on making that investment. Because of the

:50:02. > :50:05.challenges... What George Osborne said yesterday is a tragedy? Yes.

:50:05. > :50:10.don't think this is what's happening. I would be disappointed

:50:10. > :50:13.if it was going to happen because the potential is phenomenonal. We

:50:13. > :50:17.have, this is one of the windiest countries in the world, we have

:50:17. > :50:21.huge tidal ranges. There's potential for renewable

:50:21. > :50:25.technologies and it can generate hundreds of jobs and the Government

:50:25. > :50:30.is investing in significantly in this area. We are going to be

:50:30. > :50:34.creating 1,000 apprentices in renewables and with the green new

:50:34. > :50:39.deal it's generating 100,000 new jobs. It might not be enough, but

:50:39. > :50:42.it's not saying, at least let's say we are not doing anything. Some Lib

:50:42. > :50:47.Dems must have been uncomfortable with what George Osborne said.

:50:47. > :50:50.have to confess I am one of them, I don't agree with the idea that it's

:50:50. > :50:52.either or. You don't have to be either friendly or good for the

:50:52. > :50:56.sraoeur. Being good for the environment and investing in that

:50:56. > :51:01.can be good for business as well. come back on that. We are going to

:51:01. > :51:06.move on to one more topic. We covered that. Let's go on to Mark

:51:06. > :51:13.Scarborough. Should Britain follow Denmark's example and impose a fat

:51:13. > :51:23.tax to help tackle obesity? LAUGHTER. A fat tax? This has been

:51:23. > :51:23.

:51:23. > :51:27.brought in, in Denmark. The tax is on food with more than 2.3%

:51:27. > :51:37.saturated fat. It costs the NHS �4.2 billion a year of obesity at

:51:37. > :51:38.

:51:38. > :51:46.the moment. Recently I read this it's 1.00am pwhrapbs service

:51:46. > :51:53.service --am pwhrapbs service had to buy new ambulances. Should we

:51:53. > :51:57.bring in a fat tax? I am a student nurse and I deal with an awful lot

:51:57. > :52:01.of people who are suffering really significant health problems because

:52:01. > :52:06.of their weight and because of their lifestyle. What I found from

:52:06. > :52:09.talking to them is that people don't realise the effects that

:52:09. > :52:13.being overweight can have on you. Everyone knows you can have a heart

:52:13. > :52:17.attack and join problems but they don't realise the effect on other

:52:17. > :52:22.bits of your body, increasing chances of cancer and respiratory

:52:22. > :52:26.problems. The answer is not to change the affordability of food or

:52:26. > :52:31.the sraeupblt of -- availability of food but is to paint a realistic

:52:31. > :52:35.picture of what a lifetime of obesity can do to you. If you make

:52:36. > :52:39.the food more expensive fewer people will buy it and eat it.

:52:39. > :52:43.depends entirely on your income. If that was the case you would see a

:52:43. > :52:47.return to diseases of lifestyle which diabetes used to be but isn't

:52:47. > :52:53.any more. Who thinks it's a good idea? Put your hands up if you

:52:53. > :52:58.think we should have a fat tax? The gentleman in the front row from

:52:58. > :53:04.Greenpeace. Well, smokers generate more money than the NHS spends on

:53:04. > :53:09.treating them, surely they could do the same with fatty foods.

:53:09. > :53:15.should turn a profit out of people's obesity? Not turn a profit,

:53:15. > :53:21.but we should bring down smoking tax a little bit, but relative tax.

:53:21. > :53:28.Speech Debelle, what do you think? I think investing in food education

:53:28. > :53:33.would probably be a better idea. I notice there's a lot of people that

:53:33. > :53:37.seem to be overweight and from having conversations with them

:53:37. > :53:41.about food they don't actually know about food groups and which are the

:53:42. > :53:49.right types of food to eat and which are not the right type to eat.

:53:49. > :53:53.That's food education and I don't think that as much TV programmes

:53:53. > :53:57.and we have, you can see different fat from different angles and stuff

:53:57. > :54:02.or their bones, that doesn't seem to be working. Talking about those

:54:02. > :54:08.programmes and it's just entertainment. I think food

:54:08. > :54:12.education, you know the programme I am talking about? OK. What the

:54:12. > :54:17.nurse is saying at the back of the room as well, we are, I believe,

:54:17. > :54:20.the fattest nation in Europe, the fattest nation in Europe.

:54:20. > :54:23.Something's got to be done, tax? The distinction between smoking and

:54:23. > :54:28.eating is you choose to smoke, whereas you have to eat. We have to

:54:28. > :54:34.be careful not to punish families... You don't have to eat really fat

:54:34. > :54:37.food? The challenge is it's cheap tore buy food with more fat --

:54:37. > :54:44.cheaper to buy food with fat. We have to make sure we can't put a

:54:44. > :54:48.tax on people that can't afford the food that they get. APPLAUSE.

:54:48. > :54:51.I am not sure I would go the whole hog, as it were, to go for a fat

:54:52. > :54:57.tax. But I understand that people have to take responsibility for

:54:57. > :55:02.their own choices and you can't endlessly bail people out if they

:55:02. > :55:05.just keep doing the wrong things. So having a fat tax is saying well

:55:05. > :55:09.actually, if you are going to buy this food you have to pay extra.

:55:09. > :55:12.it's a good idea. I think the principle is a fair one, not sure I

:55:12. > :55:18.would bring it into this country, I don't think it's right but I

:55:18. > :55:21.understand... How can it be a good principle and not right? I think

:55:21. > :55:29.the idea of making people responsible for their own actions

:55:29. > :55:32.is a good one. It's not just fat people that buy fattening foods, so

:55:33. > :55:38.if you put a fat tax on a chocolate bar it's not just fat people that

:55:38. > :55:42.are going to eat chocolate. I think it's a - it punishes everyone for a

:55:42. > :55:47.minority or even a majority's decisions and at the same time I

:55:47. > :55:51.can see the logic in it and it's better than investing in things

:55:51. > :55:54.that don't teach people anything. Stella? What it might do is just

:55:54. > :55:57.make people think about what they're actually eating, which is

:55:57. > :56:03.what you are trying to say. Whether it's the best way of doing it or

:56:03. > :56:07.not I don't know. Glasgow, the place is associated with fried Mars

:56:07. > :56:17.bars, but I agree in this time of austerity it's not a good idea,

:56:17. > :56:18.

:56:18. > :56:22.though more in food education certainly would be welcome. That is

:56:22. > :56:29.it for this edition of Young Voters' Question Time. Thank you

:56:29. > :56:32.very much to the panel and thank you to our audience. Thank you! And

:56:32. > :56:35.thank you to those of you who joined in on Twitter. I am back

:56:35. > :56:41.with a new show from 17th October, it's about unemployment, it's about