important don't know the questions. first, the leader of the conservative party, the prime minister, theresa may. applause. thank you. thank you very much. thank you. good evening prime minister, yourfirst is from abigail. why should the public trust you when you have a known track record of broken promises and backtracking during your time as home secretary and prime minister? thank you david and thank you... applause. thank you for you coming to be an audience tonight, which is an important part of campaign. let me tell you about some of the things i did as home secretary. i said i would ensure we we re secretary. i said i would ensure we were dealing with extremist hate preachers and excluded more than any other before me. i said i would do something about stop and search, i don't think anybody should be stopped and searched because of the colour of their skin. i said i would be tough on crime and ensure our police and security services had the powers they need to do theirjob and i gave them those in the legislation that i put through. and i made sure that i put through. and i made sure that we kept the records of criminals and terrorists on the dna database. criminals and terrorists on the dna data base. diane abbot criminals and terrorists on the dna database. diane abbot wants to wipe them clean. no backtracking and no broken promises. what were you thinking of? you backtracked when you became leader of the conservatives and they haddest then immediately prime minister after the referendum. you said you wouldn't call an election and you did. you are here calling an election and refusing to take part in debates, refusing to take part in debates, refusing to take part in debates, refusing to answer people's questions, refusing to talk to jeremy corbyn and you backtracked on your social care policy and your entire manifesto has holes in it and everyone else can see that. well first of all... can ijust everyone else can see that. well first of all... can i just say, everyone else can see that. well first of all... can ijust say, i'm not refusing to take part in debates, because i'm here answering questions from you. that is what i think is important, it is not politicians arguing among each other, but listening and taking questions from voters. you mentioned about not holding, saying i wouldn't holding an election, you're right, i thought we needed a period of stability, but what became clear when he went through the article 50 process to trigger the process of leaving the eu and respect the will of the people was other parties wa nted of the people was other parties wanted to frustrate those negotiations and that will of the people that has been expressed in the referendum. it would have been easy, i could have said, i'm prime minister, why don't ijust stay easy, i could have said, i'm prime minister, why don't i just stay and hang on in thejob? i didn't do that, i have called an election, because of brexit. i was willing to do that, because i think this is a really important moment for our country. we have got to get this right. if we get it right, i'm optimistic for the british people, because i believe in the people, but we need to get it right. the woman there. who is it that contested you because labour have issued a whip to get people to vote for article 50. besides the liberal democrat who said they would like another referendum. don't know who has contested your leadership over brexit. we got the article 50 legislation through parliament. that was important and triggered the ability for us to start these negotiations and those negotiations by the way start just eleven days after election day. so whoever comes in as prime minister, whoever is the government, has to be ready to get the ball rolling and start the negotiations straightaway. but it was clear through the discussions that we had around that time, that the other parties did want to frustrate us and you say you, you talk about the liberal democrats, we have a situation where ifjeremy corbyn was to get into no 10, he would be being propped butty the liberal democrats and the scottish nationalist. you would have nicola sturgeon who wants to break euro country up and tim farron who wants to ta ke country up and tim farron who wants to take us back into the eu, the opposite of what the british people want. that being said, prime minister, one of the things that i would like to know is secretly do you regret calling this election, i'iow you regret calling this election, now the polls have moved against you. i'm a tory and i hop you win. but you must feel a little bit of ooh, a bit of remorse?|j but you must feel a little bit of ooh, a bit of remorse? i have been in politics a long time and i have a lwa ys in politics a long time and i have always said at any election the only poll that matters is the one on polling day. i think the british people when they're voting, people here and peopl watching have a simple choice about who do you trust to have that leadership to take us to have that leadership to take us to get the best deal for brexit in europe and who has the will and the vision notjust to take us through brexit, not just to vision notjust to take us through brexit, notjust to get on with the job of delivering brexit, but to ta ke job of delivering brexit, but to take us beyond and build a better future for the country. were you surprised the polls have gone from a lead of 20%, remorselessly done like that. i'm never surprised at what happens in elections. you accept you're that popular. i'm never surprised at things that happen in the campaign, the only poll i look at is the one on polling day. you called the election for your own political gains and it is not for the good of country. no, it is not sir, cani the good of country. no, it is not sir, can i just the good of country. no, it is not sir, can ijust say to you, as i've said, it would have been the easiest thing in the world for me, having become prime minister after the referendum when david cameron resigned to say, you know, the next election‘s not to 2020, this is a good job, i enjoy thejob, election‘s not to 2020, this is a goodjob, i enjoy thejob, i election‘s not to 2020, this is a good job, i enjoy thejob, i want to do it, in thisjob i do what i believe is best for britain. your party called a european referendum for the good of the conservative party. you called a general election for the good of conservative party and it will backfire on you! no i called... a general election because i believe that the british people have a right to vote and to say who they want to see leading them through the brexit negotiations. i believe they should have a prime minister with a determination to respect their will. my party is the only party that is going to respect the will of the british people, get on with thejob the will of the british people, get on with the job and deliver a successful brexit. we will come on to brexit in a moment. 0ne successful brexit. we will come on to brexit in a moment. one more point from you. i think it is a very different thing to debate a studio audience as in... debating the other leaders. i think there has been a lot of debating through the media, would it not give a more interesting debate having you say these things face to face to the other leaders and speak that way about the policies, rather than through tv and journalists? i think election campaigns should be about getting out and about, yes, answering questions from voters, talking to people across the uk in a variety of circumstances. and i'm afraid i think that that of actually having that interaction with voters is more useful for the voterses and the politicians. i think anyone who wa nts to politicians. i think anyone who wants to be prime minister should be out and about listening to people. i don't think seven politicians arguing among themselves is that interesting or that revealing. we will go on. we talked about the election. now brexit, barry could we have your question? good evening. if the eu start being awkward, why don't we just cut and run and pay no money at all? i have said that i think no deal would be better than a bad deal. i'm confident we can get a good deal. with the right plan for the negotiations. i think a good deal is in our interest and in the interests of the rest of the eu. but we have to be prepared to stand up for britain. we have to be prepared to go in there recognising that we are fwhot willing to accept a —— not willing to accept a bad deal. what isa willing to accept a bad deal. what is a bad deal. people are confused. can you explain what would be a bad deal? i think on the one hand you have got politicians in europe, some are talking about punishing the uk, what they want to see would be a bad deal and you have got politicians here in the united kingdom who seem to be willing to accept any deal whatever it is for the sake of getting a deal. i think the danger is they would be accepting the worst possible deal at the highest possible deal at the highest possible price. you sir? you always say you want to help britain, but brexit was voted by 52%. how do you serve the whole country ifjust 52% backed brexit? the first thing i would say is as i go around and talk to people, individuals, business representatives and others, ifind that actually the greater majority of opinion here in the uk is the decision was taken, the public chose to leave the eu. let's have a government that gets on with it and delivers a good deal. how i would respond for all of those who voted to remain and i voted to remain is to remain and i voted to remain is to say that now we must make sure we get the negotiations right, get that free trade agreement the co—operation and a special partnership, but that also we take this opportunity of brexit, new trade deals around the world, actually seeing how we can build a more prosperous, stronger and fairer britain. i think we can do that and i think we can do that, because i believe in britain and the british people. it is curious, over a year ago, when you were a remainor and david cameron got this wrong and he resigned, you got it wrong and remained to become prime minister. you said, remaining inside the eu makes us more you said, remaining inside the eu makes us more prosperous. you said, remaining inside the eu makes us more prosperous. yesterday you said brexit makes us more prosperous. i mean, what, where are you at on this? i set out carefully before the referendum why i believed we should stay in, and i said the sky will not fall in if we leave. what happened was the british people, who had been given the choice, parliament said it is your choice. they chose to leave. will we be less prosperous? we have got to make sure we can use the opportunities that come from brexit we have got to grasp the opportunities, but the thing that matters most in this is being willing to deliver on the will of the people. not saying, oh, you got it wrong, let's have a second referendum. but you voted, you have chosen, you want a government that will do it for you. if you voted for brexit you need to make sure you get it with a government who will deliver it for you. the people made the wrong choice by your book, because you were a remainor. so in your mind you must have thought, what are they on about. then you said, they will get rich fer they stay, if they leave they will be poorer. can you say say there is no difference we will get richer by leaving the same as we would if we had remained? 0r leaving the same as we would if we had remained? or will there be a price to pay. i said i thought there we re price to pay. i said i thought there were advantages on being in the eu. but i believe we must deliver on the will of the people and make sure we make a success of it. what i'm doing as prime minister is saying let's find the opportunities that will enable us to be more prosperous. too much of me. the man over there. you don't need to say good evening. we have be met. we are going to have the pay a divorce bill and it could be anything from nothing to a hundred billion. could you quantify in billions of pounds what is a good deal? we need to go through very carefully what, as part of the negotiation, what, as part of the negotiation, what rights and obligations the united kingdom has. secondly, because if i gave you a figure here tonight, for what i thought would be a good figure, that wouldn't be a very good negotiating stance when i'm sitting down if i'm prime minister in ii i'm sitting down if i'm prime minister in 11 days' time with the european union. it is his money you are spending? yes, it's all our money that is taxpayers money, david. you don't go into a negotiating sta nce you don't go into a negotiating stance saying — the thing i want out of this is, absolutely want out of this is, x. you can bet your bottom dollar you can can bet the other side doesn't want you to have x. i've been very clear, as indeed has the eu on recognising that we need negotiate to that new relationship with them. which will be about trade, but will be about other things, too. like co—operation on security and criminal justice. things, too. like co—operation on security and criminaljustice. they wa nt to security and criminaljustice. they want to start off by talking about the bill. i want one of the early discussions about the resipcle arrangement for eu and uk citizens. they have said we can't negotiate the trade deal before we negotiate the trade deal before we negotiate the bill. several have said we need to get on to the trade deal quickly. the woman at the back there. hello. hello. you saided that you think you can negotiate a good deal, but do you really think that you actually have any real leverage with brussels? well, yes, i do. one of the reasons i think we can negotiate a good deal is because, actually, a good deal, in trade terms, is not just of benefit to the uk, it's of benefit to businesses in the remaining countries remaining in the european union. this isn'tjust about us. it's actually about a relationship that matters to them as well as it matters to us. you over here, on the right. i'd like to pull you up on the comment about diane abbott's miscalculations you made a few minutes ago. philip hammond got £20 billion miscalculations a few weeks ago. applause well, what i will say is this, as i said earlier on, diane abbott wants to be home secretary and she wants to be home secretary and she wants to wipe the records of criminals and terrorists from the dna database. that would mean we could catch fewer criminals and fewer terrorists. you, sir, here. the man in the green. talk about brexit and remainers, i think the voting 52% to 48%, you lack the confidence in asking the public, the electorate, one more time because the voting was so in the middle, nigel farage made a big mess. michael gove led the electorate the wrong way. boris johnstone, they had bus, you know, pasted with nhs £350 million. we we re pasted with nhs £350 million. we were told lies. people who voted out prams they should be given the second chance. you should have the confidence to say, shall we have another vote? look, can i put it like this. over the years, in the european union, and it's the years, in the european union, and its european economic community, there have been a number of occasions where referendums have been held in countries. there was one in ireland, i think france is an example as well, where they voted against what the eu was suggesting. basically, the bureaucrats and the eu politicians turned round to those countries and said — you've got it wrong, have another vote we want you to come up with what we think is the right answer. now we know how much it will cost? you can come back in the minute. collectively people here in the uk said — that's not how to behave. if people have given their choice let's listen to the people and deliver it for them. on the wrong information. applause the wrong information. they weren't giving the right information to choose from. ok, you, sir. earlier this week, prime minister, you said you wanted the people of britain to trust you with regards to brexit and winning the election. how can the people trust you when you're manifesto is not giving them any detail as to figures or what you propose to do with all the things in government? well, what my manifesto... applause you are right, i use that word "trust" i use it because that's what politicians when we go out and ask people to vote for us, we are asking people to vote for us, we are asking people to vote for us, we are asking people to trust us in the role that we are being, want to be voted in to. if i look at our manifesto, what our manifesto has done is to be open with people about the great challenges that we believe that this country faces and that need to be addressed by whoever is in government. the we've been open about that. i've also been open that there will be some hard choices to be made in addressing those various challenges. you talk about figures in our manifesto, of course we already have budget that is have been set out in the autumn statement, as government, and in the spring budget. we've added some figures in various areas like our extra funding on the nhs and schools in the manifesto. but i think it's important that the next government sets out for people the really big issues that are going to have to be addressed by whoever is in government, and those those are in our manifesto. the one thing missing from your manifesto and seemed to cause a panic in the conservative party was the figures on what happens to people who have to fund their care happens to people who have to fund theircare in happens to people who have to fund their care in old age. we have a question about it from derek griffin. let's have that hchlt mr griffin. let's have that hchlt mr griffin. i'm wondering, with regards to social care, you kind of spend your whole life obviously working ha rd your whole life obviously working hard to build up a nest egg and have a pension and savings to be comfortable in your later life after you have retired. if it's going to be taken you have retired. if it's going to be ta ken away you have retired. if it's going to be taken away from you, again, if ca re be taken away from you, again, if care is ed intoed. why should you bother in the first place? a reminder that your manifesto said, £100,000 is all you would be left with. the figure that you are left with. the figure that you are left with at the moment is £23,000. we are actually quad ruin ruming that. you are sticking with £100,000. i thought you had changed that? no. i thought you had changed that? no. i thought you had changed that? no. i thought you were going to have an upper limit? the £100,000 is a flaw. there is a cap. you didn't mention it in the manifesto. that's the point. i will come on to that. i will answer the question i was asked, if i may. applause if we look at the situation at the moment, if you need care then if you've got more than £23,000 in saegs, you have to pay for that. if you need residential care the value of your house will be taken into account. so it's today that we see people sometimes having to sell their house in order to pay those bills. now, what we say is that the system we introduce, which is important because we need a sustainable system for the future giving the ageing population. if we do nothing, our social care system will collapse. we say we will ensure that people are able to protect more of their savings, the £100,000. that they will also not have to sell their house during their lifetime to pay for their care bills. i also wa nted pay for their care bills. i also wanted a system that was fair across the generations. i believe this is, too. we said in our manifesto we'd consult on the details. i heard the scaremongering that came out after our manifesto was published and i set out one of the details that, aspects that would have been in the consultation which is about having a cap on the absolute level there. is a floor of £100,000. you can protect £100,000 and we will consult on what should be the cap of the level of ca re costs. should be the cap of the level of care costs. funny thing to leave out the cap, it's rather important for people. £100,000 you keep, but whether you get rid of half a million or £250,000 or that, the ma nifesto million or £250,000 or that, the manifesto told you nothing. then you sidly said — oh, there will be a cap. 0dd sidly said — oh, there will be a cap. odd to leave that out, wasn't it? no. we set out the principles in our manifesto. which is what i set out in the answer. it's crucially that it's fair across the generations. we enable people to have the knowledge and the comfort of knowing they won't have to sell their house in their lifetime to pay for their care bills. you want to come back on it. obviously, from a personal perspective, you are saying about the caps. myself and my wife, for instance, we are actually both disabled. statistically, as we get older, we are maybe more likely needing to use that care. are there any safeguards or guarantees or something that we will not be left bankrupt in our retirement, basically, purely because of a condition we have no control over yes. applause what i want to do, in relation to the details of the hole i, how it actually works, including the level of the cap, is to consult, consult with people, consult with voters. also consult with organisations, charities and others working with older people, so that we ensure we get that right. i think that's a fairway to do it rather than just producing a figure now. i think it's important to have that consultation. consultation. applause you, sir. if you can tell us what the floor is now, why can't you tell us the cap? applause because, we're talking about two different things, aren't we? 0n the floor, i think it's important that we give people the protection of their savings, which is greater than it is today. that's why we've set that figure at £100,000. 0n the cap, as to where you set that figure as to the absolute figure that people pay, an amount that people pay, i think it's right we have that consultation. we will consult, as i'vejust consultation. we will consult, as i've just said to barry, with individuals, but also with organisations that deal with these issues. charities that work with older people to make sure we get that at the right level. ok. victoria — let's go on to another question. we had a cap of £79,000, why can't we start with something around that figure? in the manifesto we said we weren't following the andrew dilnot proposals. there were two reasons why. the first is that those tended to protect people who we re those tended to protect people who were wealthier but didn't protect people on modest incomes. it required payment out of taxation. i actually think that if you're going to be fair across the generations we don't ask young people to be having their taxes increased in order to pay for the social care costs of somebody who may... people who may be sitting on a very significant value in their house. applause vick tore yo davey. working as a nurse for 26 years, do the tories expect our support in the light of another 1% pay increase? applause what we're looking at, in terms of the national health service, and ensuring that we can provide the national health service in the future, is, if wejust look national health service in the future, is, if we just look at how much money is now being spent on the nhs. in the fine five years to 2020 we will be spending half a trillion pounds on the national health service. we are putting more money in at the moment and we will continue to put more money into the future into the nhs. it is important that we recognise, as you well know asa that we recognise, as you well know as a nurse, the demands on the nhs are increasing all the time. we recognise the work that the nhs staff do, but — recognise the work that the nhs staff do, but - nurses get paid less and less? nurses get an increase. 0bviously some other payments as well. no, no. 1496 0bviously some other payments as well. no, no. 14% decrease 0bviously some other payments as well. no, no. 1496 decrease since 2010. don't tell us we're getting a pay rise. let the person speak. i agree with that. my wage slips from 2009 reflect exactly what i'm earning today. how can that be fair in light of the job we actually do? i recognise the job that you do. then why hasn't it changed before now then? we have had to take hard choices across the public sector in relation to public sector pay restraint. we did that because of the decisions we had to take public spending under control. it wasn't under control under the last labour parliament. i'm being in honest in short—terms terms of saying we will put more money into the nhs. there isn't a money tree we can shake that provides for everything that people want. applause you come in. you say you will cut, you're cutting nhs spending, but you will cut tax for the rich? applause we're not actually cutting nhs spending, we're putting in fact record levels of funding overall into the national health service. we will continue to increase the funding for the national health service in government. other countries spend way more on their health service than we do, but we're giving it out for free. so why are we spending less? well, it's not... the figures do vary. it's not the case that all other countries are spending more money on their nhs than we are. we are putting more funding into the nhs. we are putting and we will continue to do that. i also want to do some other things in relation to the nhs. we have put into a requirement that mental health should be given parity of esteem with physical health in the nhs. i think there's — more money is going into it, there is more for us to do. in our manifesto we've set out a whole package of what we can do on mental health. it's notjust about the money that's going into the nhs, which will increase, its about ensuring that we're dealing and addressing the issues we need to. i think mental health is something that's been put to one side for too long and not been given the attention it deserves. back to the attention it deserves. back to the nurses for a moment. do you think it's fair that the nurses get just the 1% increase year in, year out, regardless of inflation. they get poorer. some of them we are told go to food banks. is that fair, do you feel, do you sleep happy at that? the public sector has been restrained in its pay to 1% increase. of course, the rthere will be those working within the nhs, nurses and others who will get progression pay increases. are they not a special you sir? you mentioned mel tall you sir? you mentioned meltall -- mental health, does that include the work capability assessment with the mental health? because i have just failed that assessment. so have i. just through mental health. you say your bit too. you're sitting together by chance? by chance. basically, on mental health is is is important that the nhs a shamble. i asked for help, my i have been waiting a yearand asked for help, my i have been waiting a year and a half for this andl waiting a year and a half for this and i have suffered in part because of the work capability assessment. and let me tell you... i'm a partially sighted, i have mental health problems and also i have other issues, jaw issues i went into my assessment and asked in detail about suicide attempt and i came out crying. the nurse had forgotten to measure my eye sight. she found time to you know insult me by asking for these upsetting details. let the prime minister answer. i'm not going to make excuses for the experience you had. that is why it is important you had. that is why it is important you have to deal with mental health. you have raised with two issue. 0ne is mental health issues in the nhs and the work capability assessment. we do look at improving what, how that assessment has taken place. i know that the issue of mental health is particularly difficult to address in term of those work capability assessments. 0n the nhs, and the other things we want to do with mental health, one of the things i wa nt to mental health, one of the things i want to do is ensure better support in schools to have individual members of staff trained in schools who are able to better identify mental health problems and know how to address them. i was talking to a young woman who said in school no one know what is to do with mental health problems. so she suffered as a result. if we can give people the support they need at an earlier stage it is betterfor support they need at an earlier stage it is better for everybody. but as i say, i make no excuses for the experience you have had. the woman in orange. it is fair to say mental health funding is one of your sound bites, but you were filmed when a lady challenged about her benefits you gave an answer and it concerned me the prime minister apparently doesn't understand the difference between a learning disability and a mental health condition. in fact when the lady first spoke to me she talked about learning difficulties and mental health. theish yup she had —— the issue she had was about learning difficulties. these are areas where we need to ensure we have the ability for people's needs to be identified as early as possible and then the support goes all. all the evidence is, the earlier you can get that support to somebody and identify an issue, then the better it is for that individual, but also the better it it with be. that is why on mental health i'm keen to get more support in terms of training in schools and there are other things i wa nt to schools and there are other things i want to do, including in the work place. too often i think there is discrimination in relation to mental health in the work place i will bring ina health in the work place i will bring in a new mental health act and change the equality legislation. robert, let's have your question. change the equality legislation. robert, let's have your questionlj robert, let's have your question.” will be voting tory, but i'm not happy with the foreign aid budget and why we are giving money to north korea. can you explain that? well we... ...i korea. can you explain that? well we... ithink the korea. can you explain that? well we... i think the commitment we have given is important, for two reasons, first, we are one of the... we are the fastest, second fastest growing in the g7 last year and one of the most significant economies in the world. i is right we say we help those people who are less well off than we are in the developing countries. there are millions of children, millions of girls being educated who would not be educated without the foreign aid money we are giving. but it is about something else. it means in certain states it is possible to help to develop the economy, the governance of the state and that is of benefit to us in protecting us as a united kingdom for a range of reasons. if we can stabilise some certain countries thatis stabilise some certain countries that is going to be better for us stabilise some certain countries that is going to be betterfor us in terms of security for example. robert do you want to come back? look at individual countries and payments. but north korea... that is one of the worst places going surely. it is not somewhere that... iwould... surely. it is not somewhere that... i would... suggest that is someone holds out as a paragon of virtue. what they have been doing in terms of its missiles and its nuclear situation and you know we had another missile test a few days ago, we are clear that we want to see those changes in north korea and it is important for china to be influencing those. does north korea receive money from the aid budget? the gentleman suggested it did. i don't know the details. £4 million in 2015. you sir? so you're the prime minister of the country and you don't know where that foreign aid is going to, whether to the government or to benefit the people? if we are putting money into, when we put money into country, we change the way we spend the foreign aid. in the way we spend the foreign aid. in the past the aid was often given to governments and you know the stories of the way the money was spent. so work through organisations helping people and the money is targeted on things like education on health, on welfare of people and support for the people who are the most vulnerable. brief one. you spoke of foreign aid money. can you explain why it is that a great deal more of our largesse that goes to the rest of world is not in the form of british manufacturers rather than of cash. it is easier to avoid having a field hospital pocketed than it is a few million of cash and it is also the case that if this money fed its way through british manufacturing there would be less contention concerning the sums. can you answer briefly? yes. first some of money we are talking about is not about buying kit in the sense of things that would be manufactured here. if you're talking about education, it is about providing the facilities where children who would not otherwise be educate rd being educated. we do give support for countries in ways other than just money. so there is some countries where we are, our military are working on things like field hospitals and providing those directly. if we want to improve british manufacturing around the world, that is why i want to ensure we get good trade agreements around the world when we leave the eu. sallyjones please. the world when we leave the eu. sally jones please. state schools are underfunded and teachers are overworked, so why are you putting money into grammar schools? stick with the grammar schools. sally, what we are doing, the grammar schools will be within the state sector, they might be free schools, they maybe other types of schools. we wa nt they maybe other types of schools. we want a diversity of education, because education is so important. i wa nt every because education is so important. i want every youngster to get the best start in life and that means every youngster getting the education that is right for them. we are putting more, you said we are putting money into possibility for grammar schools, yes, but we are increasing the overall amount that goes into schools and ensuring there is a fairer distribution of the money. but i believe it is important that if we know there are good schools, at the moment we have a law that says you can't set up any more of these types of school, despite the fa ct these types of school, despite the fact that they're good. i think that's wrong and we should allow new schools to be set up to ensure every child gets the education that is right for them and the best possible start in life. in the school i work m, start in life. in the school i work in, by 2020, every child in that school will receive 898 pound per year less than under a labour government. why do you care less about the children than a labour government? i don't care less about the children. you're saying the per child, per pupil has fallen. you made the point. there are two things i want to do. i do care about education. as i have said, i think it is important for every youngster to get the best start and we will be put gt more into schools and ensuring the pupil people are upil premium is there. at the moment, there are some seems that get twice there are some seems that get twice the amount. and we want to make sure no school sees a budget cut. but getting a good quality education isn't just about money getting a good quality education isn'tjust about money going into schools, it is encouraging people to come into the teaching. we will give student loan help and we see creativity in education and we are can say in this country, that how far you go can say in this country, that how faryou go in can say in this country, that how far you go in life depends not on where you come from, but it depends on your talents and abilities and your willingness to work hard. we have a couple of minutes left. mandy hall. . why haven't you sent a letter to donald trump condemning his decision to withdraw from the paris agreement. something the presidents of france and jermi have done. i have spoke on the donald trump and told him the uk believes in the paris agreement and we didn't wa nt in the paris agreement and we didn't want the united states to leave it. the g7 leaders sat around the table and told donald trump that the six of us told him we believed the agreement was an important international agreement and we wa nted international agreement and we wanted the united states to stay in it. i spoke to him last night about this. what what did he say? he said he has taken the decision because he thinks it is in the best interests of america. i say that the paris agreement is important for us globally, that is why the uk supported it and is continuing to supported it and is continuing to support it. you're negotiating our departure from the eu, wouldn't bit sensible to go along with france and germany and italy, instead of you saying you were disappointed. germany and italy, instead of you saying you were disappointedm ills is not a question of whether we go along with somebody else. we take independent decisions. i told donald trump our views and we remain committed to the paris agreement. we continue to think it is important for dealing with climate change. well, that ends the first half of this programme. prime minister, thank you very much. thank you very much, david. now, would you please welcome the leader of the labour party, jeremy corbyn. applause good evening, good evening mr corbyn. 0urfirst question good evening, good evening mr corbyn. our first question to you comes from ciaran hepworth, please. why should the british public trust you and your pierce to negotiate brexit? why should the british public trust you and your pierce to negotiate brexit? thank you for inviting me here tonight. i' very sorry this is not a debate this is a series of questions. i think it's a shame the prime minister hasn't taken part in a debate. we're very clear on brexit. a referendum took place, a decision was reached. we're leaving the european union. secondly, we will immediately legislate in office to guarantee rights of eu nationals to remain in this country. secondly, we will negotiate with the european union to guarantee trade access to the european markets and protection of the conditions that we've achieved through eu membership because it's crucial to protect our manufacturing industry. your point about our negotiating team, we have a great team. we've a great team of very experienced people. keir starmer is one of the leading lawyers of this country. i think i can trust keir starmer with negotiations more than some other people who are undertaking those negotiations. plagues plus 0n question time last night your international trade secretary said that britain would absolutely, absolutely, was his autonomy would be poorer after leaving the eu, do agree with that? i don't necessarily think we would be poorer. i hope that we will retrain as i said, the trade access. i hope also we will have a labour government that will be investing in a growing economy in this country and challenging the terrible levels of inequalities that exist in this country at the same time. you, sir. david cameron went to the eu and asked for a few concessions, he got nothing because they knew that it would stay — he would want to stay in the eu. if the eu understands your position, that no deal is a bad deal, then you've got no chance. applause i've made it very clear we accept the results of the referendum. i think it's important to go from that point. i've made the point also about the need for trade access to the european union and there is of course an interest in that on both sides of the channel. most of our big manufacturing companies have supply chains here and in europe and vice versa, there is a mutual interest in this. but we're not appreciate preaching these negotiations with threatening europe by setting up some kind of low—tax haven for big corporations in this country. we're instead saying, we wa nt to country. we're instead saying, we want to condition that trading relationship outside the european union, but i think a sensible relationship with them is very important. i will approach those negotiations to build up a trust which gives us that sensible relationship in the future. applause what exactly do you think the british people meant who voted to leave ? british people meant who voted to leave? what do you understand by leave? what do you understand by leave the eu? what does it actually mean to you to leave the eu. what is it that matters in that? we withdraw from the treaty of rome. we we withdraw from the 1972 decision made by the british government of that time tojoin with by the british government of that time to join with the european union. it means that there is no longer a legislative authority over uk law within the eu or a parliamentary consent for it. it means we have to have an independent and separate relationship with the european union. i think we've got two years to negotiate it and i can't wait to get started to make sure that we do retain manufacturing industry and service industryjobs in britain that are so essential to our economy and our economic growth. threatening will not work. is your aim to remain... applause is youraim applause is your aim to remain in the single market do. you think that's possible? our aim is to have a tarrif—free trade access to europe. we should put it in those terms rather than anything else at this stage. the far side. no, the man over there. he hasselbaink spoken already. thank you. will you rule out doing a deal with nicola sturgeon in the event of a hung parliament because you will be negotiating as you would expect with the eu at that time? —— has. negotiating as you would expect with the eu at that time? -- has. we are fighting this election to win. we are mounting a fantastic campaign in order to get that message across of how different our society and our politics could be. we are contesting all the constituencies. we are not looking to do deals with anybody. we are not forming a coalition government. i want to form a labour government with a majority to carry out this amazing programme which can give so much hope and opportunity to so many people. applause thank you. that was the answer i expected, it is wasn't the answer to my question. i thought your question... i thought your question was about deals. i said no deals. 0k. was about deals. i said no deals. ok. i will go to somebody else. you, sir, there, in the blue shirt. given the absence of the european court of justice how will you uphold government accountability post—brexit on environmental issues for example. air pollution we are breaching limits. the european court ofjustice hold us to account. what will happen when we leave the eu?” wa nt to will happen when we leave the eu?” want to ensure the environmental protocols are adopted into uk law. i think it's very important to do that. it's also absolutely crucial for the future of all of us, that we have agreements with all of europe, be they part of the eu or not, on air pollution, on air quality, on sea pollution and protection of our seas and our natural environment. i'm very determined to achieve that. since you raise the subject, i utterly deplore donald trump's decision to withdraw from the paris climate change i would sign a letter with any other leader that would deplore that straightaway. applause let's come home for a moment. steve rudd your question, please.” let's come home for a moment. steve rudd your question, please. i run a small local business, i'm faced with the possibility of higher corporation tax rates, obviously we've eluded to the uncertainty that brexit will create over the next couple of years. today you talked about creating jobs. i wonder how i can have confidence that those jobs, iasa can have confidence that those jobs, i as a small business, can create those jobs? i don't know how big your small business. micro business. this big, that big? i employ five people. it's a small business, but it could grow. good. let's hope it can grow. but not in uncertain terms. what are your problems with the proposals that labour is making? rising corporation tax and the uncertainty of brexit and outcome of brexit. planning ahead basically is my problem. we have the personal taxation issues that create other issues further down—the—line. taxation issues that create other issues further down-the-line. i'm sure you recognise there are huge problems in the funding of our public services, health, education and these have to be addressed and dealt with. we have a fully costed and fully funded manifesto here. that will cost, yes, and we will raise corporation tax up to 26p by the end of the parliament. that will be actually 2% lower than it was in 2010 and will actually be less than the g7 average. what it will also do is not raise corporation tax for small and medium businesses by that amount. some will have no rise whatsoever. we have had very interesting and very good discussions with a lot of small businesses about their problems of accessing capital. their problems of growing because banks don't like them and aren't interested in them and the need to have an investment strategy for this country. so on top of that, we will also be forming a national investment bank to improve infrastructure all across the country and develop new, hi—technology industries which, i think, are the future of this country. unharness — let the people with the skills actually develop the jobs and develop the industries in this country. so, yes, we are asking the very biggest corporations to pay a bit more, but i tell you what, i think it's worth it. it's worth it so that any young person can go to university and not leave with debt. it's worth it to make sure school head teachers don't have to collect at the school gate in order to pay the teaches' salaries. i think it's worth it for a better society in which everyone can achieve something. plagues plus jack, please. to come back to you. i'm also working — i'm linked to an accountancy firm. we deal with large businesses as well as potential clients and existing clients. my choice, basically, my choice of my clients is a conservative government and a labour government and the difference, as you say, 2%, looking european—wide. it's a 9% difference between what the conservatives are proposing for corporation tax for larger businesses and what the labour government is proposing. larger businesses and what the labour government is proposing! fair question. all of your clients i'm sure irrequire workers at various times they require skilled workers at various times. if we as a society don't look at the problems throughout our school and education system and invest in it properly, where are the skills workers going to come from tomorrow? where are going to be the consumers of tomorrow? i think it's time that we looked at inequality in our society and used public investment in order to improve services and give real chances to everybody. poverty is a waste. people who can't get the education they want and the qualifications they want, we all lose. it's a question of whether the community gets together to support everybody or we just let the rich get richer and the rest suffer. applause what's the overall increase in the tax take that labour, if it comes to power, would expect? what kind of percentage on the current tax take? £48 billion. what percentage is it that at the moment? it's a small proportion of the total. the point i'm making is that what we've got here is funding of it through corporation tax, funding of it through some new taxes. 95%, 95% of the people of this country will pay no more in tax, vat or national insurance, the others will be asked to pay a bit more. i think it's the right thing to do because it does gives us a growing economy. the figures for the country as a whole for the economy as a whole is nearly 10% increase in tax take by the government. we have a question from jack rouse, please. where is jack. speak away. hi, jack. is labour's manifesto a realistic wish list or is ita manifesto a realistic wish list or is it a letter to santa claus applause iurge applause i urge you to read. it i think it is a serious and realistic document that addresses the issues that many people in this country face. we've been brave enough to put it out there with all the policies that are in it. how we deal with the school funding crisis. how we make sure pre—school, all children, two to four, get 30—hours childcare per week or opportunities for pre—school play and education. how we bring back the educational maintenance allowa nce back the educational maintenance allowance so that youngsters who be would be deterred from staying on at school or going on to get a—levels or other qualifications. those who can get into university won't end up with deaths of £50—£60,000 at the end of it. this is nothing unusual in many other countries in the world. i think it's time for us to invest in our future. the other crisis i mentioned, david, is the question of health, the question of mental health and the question of social care. if we don't address it, what happens what happens is, more people suffer. what happens is, more women, usually, give up work to care for those who cannot be cared for because we are not putting enough money in it. those with a mental health crisis suffer alone and don't get the help and support that they want. we have to respect the needs of people and, frankly, challenge all of us to say — if we want to live in a society that genuinely ca res live in a society that genuinely cares for all, we've got to be prepared to deal with issues of inequality and pay for it. i'm prepared to do that. ok. it's a question of funding it. i'm thinking of la st question of funding it. i'm thinking of last time labour were question of funding it. i'm thinking of last time labourwere in government they left a note at the chancellor's office saying, "we've no money left. " applause what i would say is, for the past seven what i would say is, for the past seve n yea rs what i would say is, for the past seven years of austerity that austerity has hit public sector workers with a 1% cap. it has hit all our schools and public services. it has caused a housing crisis. do you know what, the very richest in our society have got richer. there's been more and more tax giveaways at the top end and more and more charges at the other end. it's time to rebalance it. our manifesto is a serious, well thought out document that i believe is getting a lot of support and people are very excited about the idea of how we can do things differently. applause the woman here, in the third row. you say this manifesto is serious and well thought out and you speak about creating an equal society, free from racism and anti—em'tisism, how can i believe a word of this when you, as party leader, have failed to expel one of your own members, ken livingstone, for his anti—semitic remarks? members, ken livingstone, for his anti-semitic remarks? there is no place for anti—semitism anywhere in our society, certainly not in our party. members have been suspended, if they've committed any remarks — he's not been held to account — those that have done that are suspended. we have a process that is independent of me within the party which investigations these and makes a decision on it. i deplore racism in anyform a decision on it. i deplore racism in any form whatsoever. the way in which the jewish in any form whatsoever. the way in which thejewish people have suffered down the centuries, the holocaust and all that went through it, was the most appalling stain in the history of mankind and i believe we have to fight racism in any form with every fibre of our being. a society that cannot challenge racism isa society that cannot challenge racism is a society that is heading for devision. i will not tolerate it in our party or anywhere else. do you wa nt to our party or anywhere else. do you want to come a back on that? if it is important, how can you just suspend him and not expel him? he has been suspended and further investigations may or may not happen after the election. but he is suspended from membership. but he is suspended from membership. but he is suspended so that the investigation can take place. the woman on the gang way. i heard you commented that black and ethnic minorities have been locked under the conservatives and you plan to unlock. how do you plan to do it? i didn't fundamentally hear the question. there was a camera right in front of you. there was a comment that i read about you purporting that black and ethnic minority's potential has been locked under the conservatives, how would you free up or unlock it or help? the issues are of poverty in britain, the issues are of differential levels of spending in inner city areas compared to other areas and there are serious issues about the number of young black people, particularly young men, who end up in youth custody or those that end up in mental health institutions. i think we have to look seriously at levels of racism within our society, if you like racism that is almost of an institutionalised nature and one issueis institutionalised nature and one issue is consider how difficult it can be for somebody with an african name or a muslim name to get a short list to get a job interview. 0ne suggestion, it is a suggestion, is we should have blind applications forjobs where there is no name involved and just a description of your qualifications so there can be afair your qualifications so there can be a fair assessment of that person. because we are a multiethnic multicultural society. if it doesn't treat everybody equally and give everybody a decent chance, then we end up with poverty and discrimination and divisions. i want to see a country that comes together and is not divided by poverty or by discrimination. we may come back to education and the economy in a moment. but let's have a question from adam. if britain were under threat from nuclear weapons how would you react? i would do everything i can to ensure that any threat is actually dealt with earlier on by negotiations and talks. so that we do adhere to our obligations under the nuclear non—proliferation treaty and we encourage china to resolve the issue in north korea and follow the lead president 0bama took in doing a deal with iran that would in them not developing their nuclear capability. i think the idea of anyone ever using a nuclear weapon anywhere in the world is utterly appalling and would result in the destruction of lives and communities and environment for millions of people. i would be engaged to ensure that danger didn't come about. i would be aware of other dangers we face. cyber attacks hit our nhs, the terrorist attack in manchester shows the danger of terrorism. we have to be secure here, we have to protect our society and our country, but we also have to engage in the rest of the world to make sure we don't have huge ungoverned spaces such as in libya that can become the basis of terrible events that will take the lives of many other people. we have to deal with those issues here and globally. that is the function of a responsible government. your party is committed to renewing trident, is are there circumstances you would use the weapons. the party has committed to renewing trident and was taken by the party and parliamenty would use the idea of using the weapon would be a failure in the world's diplomatic system. there has to be no first use and programme of engagement to bring about disarm: it won't happen easy. you can't count ennance a world where we would be destroyed. you would you use it in retaliation? the weapon is there and i would say no first use of the weapon. and i think that has to be the basis on what we do. adam does that answer your question? i find it concerning you wouldn't commit to doing that. it is our safety that we have to look out for. what annoys me is trident isn't just for a jeremy corbyn government, many decades into the future. so when you are making the decision whether to support this, it is not just for right here and now it is threats we could face in the future. fair point. but we have to do everything we can, obviously to protect ourselves, but the best protection is having good and reasonable relationships with the rest of world so we don't descend into a mentality where there are military blocs starting threatening each other and i'm determined to do everything can i to bring about a more peaceful world. i spent a lot of my life with un and other organisations trying to bring about principle of no first use and disarmament and bringing about peace around the world. that is something we can all work for. i think we have to recognise that there is deep inequality and injustice in the world but the threats are of cyber security and terrorism and the other threats are of environmental disaster around the world and large numbers of people fleeing from environmental disaster in effect environmental disaster in effect environmental refugees. that is why i was so disappointed president trump's decision in view of what had been achieved by people working together. we only have one planet. let's get together and live on it and not destroy it. we we just come —— can wejust and not destroy it. we we just come —— can we just come back to the nuclear issue. you are prime minister. you have said you would have no first use and wouldn't countenance our deterrent, which your party is restoring, you would haven't a first use. and it raises the question, he said under direct attack, would you use it in retaliation? as prime minister, you're speaking to the country about what you would do with the most expensive defence weapon that we have. are you saying you would never use it. people tell me the first effective use of it is not the use it because it is there. sorry, you're dodging the question. are you saying there are no circumstances under which you would use it. any circumstance where anyone is prepared to use a weapon is disastrous for the planet. that is why there must be a policy of disarmament through a multilateral policy. that is the ideal, but what about the reality, where you're faichlsed with a prospect —— faced with a prospect that you may have to use it. i'm asking for a simple answer. the reality is that we have to obviously try to protect ourselves we would not use it as first use and if we did use it, millions are going to die. you have to think this thing through. i would decide on the circumstances at the time. you sir. would you use it as second use? 0r time. you sir. would you use it as second use? or would you allow north korea or some idiot in iran to bomb us and then say, we had better start talking. you would be too late. of course not. of course i would not do that. you would allow them to do it. of course not. how you'd stop them. that is why i made the point about the need for president 0bama's agreement with iran to be up held and to promote disarmament in korea. that is difficult. impossible. well... impossible. you up there. your asking a massive wish with with one of biggest arsenals. i would rather use it than not use in today's day and age. do you want to comment on that? all right. anybody. the woman there. yes. let's stick with this. i have a question regarding human rights. before i don't understand why everyone seems so keen on killing millions of people with nuclear weapons. i think it is worth moving on. and not about murdering people. iwant it is worth moving on. and not about murdering people. i want to ask about immigration. you sailed you wa nt about immigration. you sailed you want to reunite families that have been forced apart by theresa may's policies. myself and my husband is recording this in america, he was deported in december and recording this in america, he was deported in decemberand he recording this in america, he was deported in december and he was told he was too highly educated. he invested a lot in this country. would you consider reducing the financial fresh hold for family migration to be in line with the national minimum wage or living wage. our manifesto has addressed this, it is painful some of the decisions that are made where the arbitrary level of income is chosen and couples are split up and family and couples are split up and family and people like the person you're talking about have invested a huge amount of time into the country and are removed. we all lose. the family lose, the children lose, we lose as a society. we will change the immigration laws so that there can be properfamily immigration laws so that there can be proper family reunion. immigration laws so that there can be properfamily reunion. that has been to be rights and sensible. are you in favour of reducing immigration over all? what i think will happen is this. that we have managed migration from outside europe, that is based on family reunion and skill needs. we have free movement from the eu that ends when we leave the eu. we will have to be managed migration from europe and royal recognise those who have migrated to the country has made a huge contribution. what i think will happen is there will probably be some reduction in european migration, because we will prevent there being recruitment of groups of low paid workers from central europe to come here to undermine existing conditions that are often not very good, and damage the life chance of people in the country and not be good for those who have been brought in. we will end overseas only recruitment and ends arrangements where people are brought into the construction industry in particular. and we have another issue, that is the skill shortage and problem in britain, we have not invested in industrial training, not invested in skill training or in training more doctors or more nurses. and until we do, we have got a big problem and our whole approach is about investment for the future. i'm thinking of what your brexit secretary or shadow brexit secretary said, there has been a huge amount of immigration and people are concerned and it should be reduced. when people voted brexit, do you think immigration was at the forefront of their minds.” think immigration was at the forefront of their minds. i think it was a big factor. it was a big factor. there is also an issue that communities and local government are often not sufficiently funded to deal with groups of people coming in and we would restore what gordon brown had in 2009, that is a migrant impactfund. brown had in 2009, that is a migrant impact fund. now another question. we talked about nuclear weapons, one thing that worries me is the changes in the minimum wage. i read your manifesto and you're planning on increasing it to £10. the plan for the national living wage forecasts say up to 60,000 people could lose their jobs. say up to 60,000 people could lose theirjobs. so firstly, how many jobs, have you been given as to how manyjobs will be lots if it goes up —— lost manyjobs will be lots if it goes up — — lost if manyjobs will be lots if it goes up —— lost if it goes up to £10 and how will you help three million businesses who employ many people on the minimum wage and already struggle to do that. fair point and fair question. there were a lot of similar concerns and predictions which turned out not to be the case. in fact, there was not any substantial number of job to be the case. in fact, there was not any substantial number ofjob — no, mrcore win, not any substantial number ofjob — no, mr core win, the reason that happened because the wage increases we re happened because the wage increases were so small. if you look at the economic comments around that time, the wage increases were so small, all the commentators said that. this isa all the commentators said that. this is a massive wage change. there is such a bigger margin of error now in your policies than what was brought in 1999. i will come back to your point. what we're proposing is £10 an hour by 2020. that would be a living wage. that would reduce the department of work and pensions bill somewhat because you would be reducing in work payments to people being paid more. there are many big companies that could well afford to pay it and shouldn'tjust be paying the minimum wage. there are companies like i suspect yours, small companies that would have problems, we fully recognise that. we would therefore work with them. either to give them tax relief or support in order to make sure that the living wage, the real living wage, was paid. but they didn't close down as a result of it. as a society we have six million people earning less than the minimum wage. a million people on zero—hours contracts. we have wage levels as proportion of national income falling at the present time. i think more money in the pockets will mean people are better off, but it will also be an economic boost itself. i absolutely recognise the problems for small and micro businesses. that's why there would be a pathway to it from them with support from the government to achieve it. ok. edward. i will come to those, i want to hear from edward edward. i will come to those, i want to hearfrom edward robbins. mr corbyn mentioned the issue. edward robbins. put your hand up. where are you, there. good. zero—hours contract provide an ease way for students like myself to get casual, flexible work, how will scrapping these contracts affect us? labour policy to scrap zero—hours contract? first of all, zero—hours contract for manile people mean a lifetime of stress and a lifetime of great difficulty. imagine what it's like if it was your sole source of income isa if it was your sole source of income is a zero hours contractjob. you wake up in the morning, look at your mobile phone to see if your employer wants you that day or week. you don't know what your income will be. i understand the point about stu d e nts be. i understand the point about students and others. some employers say, ok, we need people in a bar, in a shop, in a packaging place those kind of enterprises, we will pay you x number of hours per week on a flexible basis so that you will have an average pay of 10—hours per week. that means those people are loyal to the company. those people know what their income is going to be. that seems to me a much fairer way of doing it. you have some security of what it's going on. some employers do that in towns with a large student population with students and it works quite well. what's your reaction? well - i'm not going stop you working. it's ok. yeah. i was talking more about coming from us having the option for students and us to go to employers and say shall we want to work this time and this time and not just we want to work this time and this time and notjust getting told we want to work this time and this time and not just getting told you are working this many hours this week. working when you choose, really? is yes. the so-called gig economy. riding for delivery services? yes. i think the agreement should be that you come to a didiscussion with the employer. i can work for three hours on monday, six hours on a thursday, two hours a week, something like that. that's my work pattern. it's not simple to manage for any employer. i fully understand that. it does give the security to the individual and gives the employer workers who will be loyal to that employer. you, sir, at the back there. why have you never regarded the ira as terrorists? applause i have deplored all acts of terrorism by anybody in northern ireland or anywhere else. i think the good friday agreement was a huge achievement brought about when both communities recognised their shared but different pasts and brought about the idea of a power—sharing government in northern ireland. i think that was an enormous achievement. it's been copied elsewhere in the world as a way forward. i don't approve of any terrorism of any sort or any terrorist acts of any sort. it only divides communities and kills people. they killed a lot of people. applause does that answer the question for you? they did kill a lot of people, didn't they? all deaths is wrong. all killing is wrong. we have to develop and we did in northern ireland, i ventionly, develop and we did in northern ireland, iventionly, a develop and we did in northern ireland, i ventionly, a very effective peace process. i think we should pay tribute to those in the unionist community as well as those in the nationalist community for coming together to bring about that peace process. it was a truly remarkable experience. you, sir. yes. you didn't want to speak. i thought you had your hand up. you have the microphone over your head. you are all right. you said you didn't support the ira. you have also support hamas and other terrorist organisations. how do you expect the british people to vote for you to go into number ten when you sat down and supported them? we've seen you. i've not supported any of those organisations. what i've said, i'm sure you will probably agree with it, if you're to bring about a peace process anywhere, be it the middle east, be it in ireland, be it in a different situation, say columbia, or anywhere else. there has to be a coming together. you were talking to them when they were killing our people, women and children. you were talking to them. there has to be. i was talking to representatives of the republican movement, yes. so was the government at the same time. ian paisley was indeed thrown out of parliament when he told margaret thatcher she was actually talking to them. do you know what, i voted that ian paisley shouldn't be thrown out of parliament because i thought his voice should be heard in parliament. you have to bring about a peace process by talking to people that you don't agree with. if you just talk amongst your friends, you're not going to get a peace process. applause are you done? you keep poking the man in front of you me, again. you keep poking him. do you want to peak? are you keep poking him. do you want to peak? are you trying to speak?” keep poking him. do you want to peak? are you trying to speak? i can do. ok. you've talked to these people in the past. you talked, when you talked about the nuclear option, talking is where you want to go. david often said at the end of programmes, tell the public to press the red button are you saying you will never, ever, underany circumstances, press the red button? we discussed this at some length about the aspirations we all have. i don't want to be responsible for the destruction of millions of people, neither do you. we have to work for a world where they're not available and not used. the man with the beard over there. yes. to bring it back to economics. it's all very well for a socialist to stand there with his nice little red book and say we're going to fund these lovely programmes by taking more money from big business. what is your plan for the economy when thoses businesses say keep your high taxes we will go elsewhere? you look at the businesses we are talking about they are actually doing very well. they have done extremely well over the past six years because their tax has been cut a great deal. i think we have to look at the problems of our public services. we have to look at theissues public services. we have to look at the issues of what kind of economic future we have. we cannot go on being a low waged economy, under spending on our public services, investing less than any other industrialised country in our future. i would industrialised country in our future. iwould much industrialised country in our future. i would much prefer that we develop a national investment bank and strategy, regionally based, to improve rail, broadband, road communications. that we improve investment in our industry for the future. we have a lower proportion of manufacturing industry than germany. we have a lower level of productivity than germany. we have a lower skill base than germany. successive german governments, irrespective of which party it is, have been prepared to invest in their struck and future. we should think about that and improve the economy of our own society. do you know what, that would lead to better economic growth. it would lead to better opportunities for everybody. i think this is an offer that's important and i think this is an offer that's importantandi i think this is an offer that's important and i think it's time that we actually invested in our future rather than presided over our decline. he's saying... ifi understood him, he's saying businesses may scarper under the weight of extra taxation, what do you do then? there is the issue with brexit anyway. businesses are saying, stay or go, if you say they have to pay more tax what is their incentive to stay? it will be less anywhere than in the major industrial countries in western europe anyway. the crucial thing, you are right to raise it, has to be gaining tariff—free access to the european market on a basis on which they can continue. if airbus are in this country, as they are, they manufacturer aircraft parts, they manufacturer aircraft parts, they manufacturer satellite parts and the final assembly takes part in toulouse. if we don't have that tariff—free toulouse. if we don't have that ta riff—free access toulouse. if we don't have that tariff—free access to the european market are they going to stay? would they want to stay? ask yourself that question. you could say the same for many other big manufacturing enterprises. that is why the crucial thing has to be maintaining that economic relationship with europe outside membership of the european union. that is the best way of guaranteeing jobs and growing manufacturing economy in britain. you will have a government that is investing alongside them to improve skill levels and improve communications within this country. 0ne communications within this country. one from you. about security earlier, and a few months ago you we re earlier, and a few months ago you were quoted on — well, you said on television that one of the things you would do if you were successful until coming into government was perform a strategic defence review. now — perform a strategic defence review. now - we have to be quick. we went through a strategic defepts review. why do we need one? every government that comes into office does a strategic defence review. there are issues about shortage of ships in the navy, ear issues about fridaying gets there is a crucial issue of cyber security and attacks that has taken place on us. a crucial issue about terrorist attacks. i don't believe you make society safer by getting rid of 20,000 police officers as this government has done since 2010. applause hannah lindsey, please. very quickly though. is it right to scrap union tersy —— university tuition fees?fl billion, a £ quarter of your entire spending. why university fees?” think we should investment in education for the future and i do think that abolishing university tuition fees means that anile young person as then got the chance to go to university if they can get in. the process of applications at the moment, a number of working—class stu d e nts moment, a number of working—class students are dropping and from poorer communities is dropping. i wa nt to poorer communities is dropping. i want to see real access for everybody. i think that's the right thing to do. it would not be unusual in many other parts of the world to do this. listen, as a young person i had the offer of free education. i didn't take it up. that was my choice, i'm not complaining about it. i don't think it's up to me and my generation to pull up the ladder on the generations coming behind. i want to see an education system that really does work for all so that every child can develop to theirfull that every child can develop to their full potential irrespective of their full potential irrespective of their background and their life chances. mr corbyn we have to stop you there. thank you very much indeed. i've got so much more to say! your time is up. that brings us to the end of this edition of question time. thank you all for coming here to york to put questions to the two party leaders. we will be back on sunday for our second leaders programme, nicola sturgeon of the snp, tim farron of the liberal democrats. that's at 5.55pm on bbc one on sunday. until then, from york, good night. welcome to the university of york. i'm in the spin room when we have been watching the debate. 45 minutes each of hard grilling by members of the public for the prime minister and for the labour leader, jeremy corbyn. what's come out very clearly is that theresa may is still under pressure to detail exactly what she hopes to get for britain out of brexit, while mr corbyn was pressed on whether he'd press the nuclear button, his plans for corporation tax, in the labour party. they weren't easy questions by any means, and theresa may will be 45 minutes each of hard grilling by members of the public for the prime minister and for the labour leader, jeremy corbyn. what's come out very clearly is that theresa may is still under pressure to detail exactly what she hopes to get for britain out of brexit, while mr corbyn was pressed on whether he'd press the nuclear button, his plans for corporation tax, and other controversies such as anti—semitism in the labour party. they weren't easy questions by any means, and theresa may will be hoping it will have some impact in the conservatives favour after a week of disappointing polls. let's speak to labour's joint general election coordinator chief,