and the reason the party has chosen to put health and care right at the centre is because the voters are saying that's one of their biggest concerns, if not the biggest. they worry about the health service, getting a gp, finding an nhs dentist. they're worried also about care for their loved ones. and we've been talking about social care, but we've also been talking about family care, a — because that's really important. there are millions of people looking after loved ones who don't get the support they deserve. and you've talked, you've talked about... and also my... ..your disabled son. ..my own personal experience, you know, my dad dying when i was four and then my mum became terminally ill when i was 12 and i nursed her with my brother until she died when i was 15. then my brothers and my nana and granddad looked after me, and then i looked after my nana when she became frail and elderly, and now i look after my son, john, who's got an undiagnosed brain condition, and it means he can't really walk by himself or talk. so i've been a carer much of my life, and that has informed me. and because i know there are millions of people who have stories, caring stories like mine, i think it's been really important to talk about that, too. yeah, you've talked, you've made people laugh as you've done those stunts, you've made many people cry as they watched your broadcast about caring for your son. you're not going to be prime minister — you've been clear about that — but you are making a big promise, that you could save the nhs. well, how, if you haven't got that sort of power? by winning the argument, and by making sure we have lots of liberal democrat mps. i think if people vote for their local liberal democrat candidate, they know they're going to get a local champion who's going to champion their local nhs, their local care. but they'll know that, i think, in this election, there'll be a lot of liberal democrats in the next parliament who are going to make this our number—one priority. well, we're going to talk about policy. we're going to talk about whether the numbers add up. but, first of all, let's talk about your record, because you do have a record. you were, of course, in that coalition government. there you are, sitting at the cabinet table... a bit younger. ..alongsidejeremy hunt — now the chancellor, was the health secretary — david cameron was the prime minister. and that government of liberal democrats and conservatives delivered huge cuts in spending on our public services. now, you've never criticised austerity. why not? well, there were tough decisions we made, and, you know, i had a choice, as did every liberal democrat minister, did i stay there or did i go? i think it could've been quite easy to go and criticise the government from the media studios and then potentially get re—elected, rather than losing my seat in 2015. i, as many other colleagues did, we rolled up our sleeves and tried to fight for the things we fought for. and we stopped the conservatives doing some things. the clearest example is on welfare. the budget after we left office and the conservatives running by themselves, george osborne cut the welfare bill by £12 billion, and we clearly stopped that. when you were in that cabinet room, the welfare budget was cut by £27 billion, a lot more than that £12 billion. when you were in the cabinet room, was the bedroom tax discussed? cos the bedroom tax was implemented when you were at the cabinet table. really happy to answer those. i mean, there was one, i think it was the second budget, the conservatives wanted to freeze benefits and freeze pensions when inflation was at 5.2%, and we said absolutely not. and we won. and there are other things that we did which helped people who were from poorer backgrounds. i'll give you one example, and the conservatives didn't want to do that, and we forced it. so free school meals for infants. george osborne didn't want to do that, but we forced it. so, you know, it was a tough time. you did do the bedroom tax as liberal democrats, you did do the benefit cap as liberal democrats, you did cut welfare by £27 billion. isn't the truth that you might always blame the tories, you often say, "i fought them every single day..." and i did. you spent the whole time in government working with the tories to deliver austerity. it was a joint enterprise, the liberal democrats and the conservatives, because at the time you argued it was right for the economy. well, i am not proud of every decision i had to take, but my point is if you wanted to change things, you had to roll up your sleeves and not quit. and we stood there and we sat there, and we argued our case. and i'm really proud of things we achieved. we wouldn't have quadrupled renewable power if the liberal democrats hadn't been there. we wouldn't have made britain the world leader in offshore wind. we wouldn't have legislated on mental health. we wouldn't have legislated on same—sex marriage. there were so many things... so there were things you achieved. ..that we achieved. the one you're very familiar with — you're reminded of all the time — is the fact that liberal democrats promised to curb student fees, and in fact you ripped up that promise and they were tripled. if there's somebody watching now who's angry about austerity and angry about the level of student fees, why should they trust ed davey? well, they were very difficult decisions, that's true, and that was probably the most difficult one. and the liberal democrats got punished. i lost my seat along with many, many colleagues, and we've had three tough elections. and i've had time to really reflect on that, and there are two big lessons i've learnt from that experience more broadly. the first is don't promise something you can't deliver, and as leader with the manifesto for a fair — that you've got on the table there — i've made it clear that everything in there can be delivered, practical, costed and so on, so that was the first lesson. we will come to that. yeah. the second lesson was we needed to rebuild trust because, as you say, people might say, "well, why can we trust him?" we needed to really work on that. and when i became leader, in my acceptance speech, i said we needed to wake up and smell the coffee, and we needed to talk to people in their communities to find out what their problems were and make sure we had answers for them. yeah. and that's what we've done. and i think, through this parliament, whether it's the parliamentary by—elections we've won in conservative heartlands, whether it's the local elections we've won where we've performed extremely well, pushed the conservatives to the third place this may... you think you're winning trust back. yeah, i think we are. well, and we're going to come to the detail of what is in here in just a second, but let me raise another question you're often asked, but it's important because it goes to the heart of trust again. one of yourjobs in government with the conservatives was to be minister for the post office. there you are at a conference talking about the post office in government, "on your side", it says critically. now, we haven't the time now to go into the detail of this. you'll do it at the post office inquiry, but you met alan bates, he was the leader of the campaign for justice for the sub—postmasters. he alerted you to what turns out to have been a huge miscarriage of justice. the simple question is — why weren't you on his side? why were you on the side of the establishment, of the post office? when i met alan bates, i took his issues very, very seriously. he had a whole set of questions about the horizon computer system. probably the most infamous is the fact that he believed that the post office had remote access, could get into the horizon system in the sub—post office of a sub—postmaster. and so i took his concerns and problems really seriously, and i put them to my officials and to the post office. and this, i think, will come out in the inquiry. and i was given categorical assurances, nick, categorical assurances that first of all independent it specialists had checked the system and assured that it was working incredibly well in other areas, that the trade union the national federation of sub—postmasters said it was ok, that the courts had examined itand... so you're saying you were lied to? yeah, and i... and i think what people might wonder is you must have known somebody was lying. either alan bates wasn't telling the truth or the post office wasn't telling the truth. and even though you said you were in government on your side, you believed the people with power. you didn't believe the little guy. well, to be fair... that was a mistake, wasn't it? well, to be fair, i went to the national federation of sub—postmasters, who were democratically elected by sub—postmasters, and i put this issue to them. and in other meetings, they really didn't like the post office, they were criticising them, so i thought that they would criticise the post office on horizon if there was a problem. but they said, no, there wasn't a problem. and so... you've talked about learning just a second ago, what you learnt. are you saying to people watching now, "if i were in power, i would behave differently?" or are you saying, "i did everything i could've done?" well, i've certainly reflected on it, and i think there's two things we need to learn. because when you're in government and doing many, many things, you assume that people are telling you the truth when you ask them questions. and if people don't... that was a mistake, wasn't it? well... the courts were lied to, manyjudges were lied to, many lawyers, other ministers, the media, the sub—postmasters were lied to. it was a conspiracy of lies that only was found out seven years after i left office in the 2019 high court case. yeah. and so what i take from this — this is a really important point — the scandal of horizon, but the scandal of contaminated blood, the scandal of hillsborough and other scandals have seen this conspiracy of lies. so maybe you shouldn't believe what you're told... well... ..by powerful people and you should believe what you're told by the people who are the little guy. well, listen, the little guy needs more protection, that is right, so how do we do that? i think there are two ways. first of all, we pass a new law for a duty of candour, so every public official — be they a police officer, be they in the nhs, be they in the post office or wherever — if they don't tell the truth and it's found out, they'll go to prison. secondly, the reason why we actually unpicked... the lies were unpicked at the post office seven years after i left office, was by a whistle—blower. and so we've said in that manifesto we want to strengthen the protections for whistle—blowers, have an office for the whistle—blower. understood. so the little guy gets that support. ok, let's turn to the future. let's turn to what's in your party manifesto. some of the big issues, now the biggest perhaps for any party aspiring to influence government or to be in it one day is tax and spend, isn't it? definitely. and you will have heard the experts say there's a conspiracy of silence about the tough choices ahead. now, you've been honest, you want to put tax up, you've said you want to put taxes up on the banks and the energy companies, the water companies, the tobacco companies, the tech giants. i put it to you that it is simply not credible to say to people, "you can have everything you want, all the promises in here, and all we'll do is tax the bad guys, the people you don't like," nobody�*s going to believe that. well, i think what we've set out is absolutely believable and credible. and i do think the banks are making huge profits, record profits, and they can afford to pay a bit more. and we're only saying to take the tax burden on banks back to what it was in 2016. i do think that the energy... the oil and gas companies, at least, have made huge profits because putin illegally invaded ukraine, pushing up the price of oil and gas. i think they can afford to pay a bit more. you know taxes on businesses are never victimless, are they? the institute for fiscal studies told us, "all taxes on business are ultimately felt by real people." either these businesses are going to put the bills up so we'll pay it as consumers, or they'll cut dividends to shareholders — sounds remote, but it'll affect all our pensions — or they'll squeeze the pay of their workers. i'll put it to you again, it isn't credible to say, "i can turn everything round, i can save the nhs, but none of you will pay a penny." well, i still dispute them, i'm afraid. the oil and gas companies, for example, they are making windfall profits that neither they, their executives, their shareholders expected to make because of an illegal war where putin is killing innocent ukrainians. i think there is a moral obligation to have that windfall tax. well, there is a windfall tax, isn't there? you see, i was looking through this list of bogeymen that you say you'll tax — popular taxes, because nobody likes banks or energy companies at the moment — and the only bad guy you're not promising to tax, so far as i can tell, is darth vader, voldemort and dr evil. it's just a list of people you know the public don't like. they'll pay the price, you don't have to. well, let's...let me give you a reason why we're not going to ask people to pay higher taxes. it's because the conservatives have shoved up taxes to record levels, and people are really feeling the pinch, nick. higher energy bills, higherfood bills, higher mortgages, higher rents... the question here isn't whether it pays the bills, as you set out in here. well, i'm happy... so let's take out health, that you talked about... i'm very happy to talk about that. 0k. but let's be clear why we're not raising taxes on ordinary people, because they're at record levels at a time when people are feeling the pinch. so i think it's absolutely incumbent on any party to say, "look, we do need to sort out the nhs, we do need to sort out the schools and so on," but we can't ask ordinary people to pay, because they're already paying too much. but they may well pay because, as the ifs have said, they may pay because the interest rate they get on their savings is less if you tax the banks, and the bills will go up if you tax the energy companies. now, the key to this is whether the sums all add up. and as i say, you've had some credit for saying, "we'll spend more on the nhs than other parties," the big parties, at least, have said. but you've also said you'll give us a lot more. we're getting free personal care, it'll be easier to see the gp, and so on. what i simply want to ask you is where is the money for the problems that are already there? the junior doctors are on strike now. your extra money doesn't pay for a pay rise for them, does it? it doesn't pay for a pay rise for nurses. it doesn't pay for the long—term nhs workforce plan, which you're committed to. really happy to take that on. first of all, i think doctors and people working across the nhs would realise that if the liberal democrat ideas got in, that they had politicians who are really taking the problems in the nhs seriously and i think they would really, really welcome that. 8000 new gps in the next parliament, everyone would see the benefit of that across the nhs. well, if you got — the money might all go on repairing the buildings, paying the nurses, paying the doctors and the workforce plan. i'm happy to come to that. on our costings, which you're referring to, we've been super, super cautious in two ways. first of all on the taxes we've increased. we've taken account of what's called behavioural change, if companies or individuals say, �*right, i'm going to act to do it differently�*, and so we've got very low estimates for the tax revenue we'll raise and i think we're being ultra—cautious. secondly, some of the spending we're doing will produce savings in the future and we've not included those in our costings. let me give you the big one... the spending is the issue, not the tax, even the savings, it's the spending. well, this is really important actually. free personal care, which is expensive and we've shown how we'll get the money for, the institute of public policy research says by 2031, that will give the nhs £3.1 billion of savings every year. we haven't included that in our costing, so we've been very, very cautious, nick. 50 billion is the cost of the workforce plan. ultimately, you're promising to spend a fraction. let's move on if we could, though, cos one way... ok, i've got a bigger answer i'd love to give to you, though. forgive me, it's only because i know you'll want to talk about the economy, because, of course, one way that people can pay for their promises — notjust tax or borrowing — but making the economy perform better, and everybody who's sat in that chair has wanted to say that that's what they want to do. now, when keir starmer was in that chair, the labour leader, he said, "look, i'm going to have to make enemies", his phrase, "i'll have to make enemies in order to get the economy moving again, to reform the planning system, to get people building." do you agree that you need to make enemies to build houses, to have development, to get the economy moving? well, i certainly think you need to reform the planning system. the current planning system isn't building the homes we need, and it's not doing it at pace and it's frankly doing it to the developers�* tune. i've called it a developer—led planning system. and there's a different approach, and it has been tried elsewhere. i can show you that it's worked elsewhere — it's a community—led approach. what does that mean? it means you build houses that the community needs, more affordable ones in the right places, and crucially you have the infrastructure — both the social infrastructure, the gps and the schools, and the physical infrastructure, be that the transport or the water infrastructure for example. and so our approach is a very different one, i'm really proud of it and... community—led is an interesting phrase, because where liberal democrats lead their communities, where they've got councils, where they've got members of parliament, again and again, they oppose development. the lib dems are blocking plans for a new town at an airfield near henley with 3000 homes. when there were proposals to build thousands of homes near your constituency in surrey, you said the numbers were eye—watering. when your deputy, daisy cooper, was told there'd be thousands of new homes built in her st albans constituency, she opposed those plans. so you talk about community—led, but when the lib dems lead communities, they lead them to block development, don't they, not to allow it? nick, for every example you've got, i've got an example which proves the case that i'm making and against yours. let me give you some examples, if i may. first of all, my wife, in my own area, she's a housing portfolio holder on kingston council. we have the largest council house building programme in a0 years, a community—led approach. what about the examples i gave you? well, let me — well, you... they're not wrong, are they? each of those is true. nick, i don't know about the individual ones, but... well, you know about yours and you know about daisy cooper's. but hold on... and surely you know about 3000 new homes near henley? well, if i may, you've given me some examples, i'm giving you counter—examples. that is how this debate goes on, and i'll give you another counter—example. if you look at liberal democrat—run south cams district housing in cambridgeshire, they're being criticised by local conservatives for building too many houses. no—one�*s saying you never build houses, they'd say you generally lead the opposition. no, but...but, nick, ithink that... let's return to your manifesto. but, nick, hold on, sorry, i think that's wrong, i just think what you've said is wrong, and i can give you counter—examples and our approach of community—led... no time to give them the lot now, but give me... finish your thought. our community—led approach, one of the reasons i like it is it actually says to people who are already living there, don't worry, there'll be more gps, so the gp that doesn't, can't give an appointment now won't have another thousand patients. that's why a community—led approach will see more houses built. sorry to rush you, but i want to come to something else that you know is important, although i wonder whether you're prepared to make enemies in order to deliver it. you're passionate in your view that brexit was wrong. your predecessor used to say bollocks to brexit, whereas we searched through this manifesto, you have to get to page 112... i'm glad you've read it all, though. ..until brexit is mentioned in there. now, you just say, we're not going back in, but we do want better trading. are you prepared to make enemies and pay the price for that? cos the eu's chief negotiator, until recently, michel barnier, is clear — there's a price if you want access to our market and the price is free movement, you have to allow immigration all the way around the eu. would you pay that price? well, i don't think the single market, with free movement and labour, is going to happen in the next parliament. what i do think is going to happen is a good trade deal, certainly if liberal democrats had our way, and while i respect michel barnier, i've spoken to other european politicians, for example my oppo in the german liberal party who's the chancellor of the exchequer or the equivalent of the chancellor of the exchequer in germany, so a rather important german politician. but you can get, you say, better trading without more migration. yeah, let me take you through this cos it's what he's told me. he said there's a trade deal to be had which would fall short of the single market, which will tear up some of the red tape the conservatives have covered our businesses in, will get rid of some of the delays and some of the costs, help our farmers, because it's mutually beneficial. it will fall short of the single market... yeah, but in here, it says you want a form of free movement and you want it now. now, it's got a different name, you call it the youth mobility scheme. very happy to talk about that. and it means that anyone under 35 can come from any country in the eu, and they can come and work here and they do it for up to three years. so is your message, at a time when migration is at a record high, is your message to the electorate young polish plumbers can come, young romanian builders, young lithuanian lorry drivers, they can come here, they can work for three years cos we think that is the price we're willing to pay to get better relations with the eu? no, that's not my message. i think immigration needs to come down, but let me take you through the youth mobility scheme you've rightly referred to. we currently have a youth mobility scheme in operation with korea, with japan, with australia and a number of other countries... not with europe. ..but not with europe. so a young person can apply from korea to come to the uk, from japan, from australia, and have this two—year visa. forgive me, sir ed, plumbers don't come from japan to getjobs, do they? well, let me... builders don't come from korea to getjobs. this change, yes, would mean easier travel for young british people and they'd be very pleased about that, no doubt, but it would also mean people would come from eastern europe to britain at a time of high migration to dojobs. is that something you're happy to defend? let me defend and explain what the system is, because it's a capped system. it's not free movement of labour. the way the youth mobility scheme works at the moment forjapan or australia or wherever is that a certain number of visas can be given to young people, and that's what we envisage with the european dimension. we'd obviously have to negotiate it, but that's what we mean by that. and i think that's really, really sensible. it means that you can control things, but it also means our people, our young people, have that wonderful freedom and it means that when there are specialist people, they can come. yeah, you're not, i think contradicting my summary of it, you're just saying, well, there's a bit of a gap. the scheme is very different from the one you described, to be fair. let's turn to something that throughout your life in politics, for you, for liberal democrats, to something you've wanted, which is voting change, voting reform. would it be fairer if nigel farage and nigel farage�*s party got many more seats, given that in the past, he's had millions of votes, this election he's likely to get millions of votes — is that the change you are prepared to see? well, the liberal party and the liberal democrats for over 100 years have supported fair votes, and the reason we do is because millions of people vote — they're going to vote onjuly 11th — and because their vote only counts in their constituency, it's not going to impact the future government, the future parliament and we think that is wrong. so — i'm coming to your question — we believe in fair votes and therefore you take the democratic response, and if that means parties who i don't agree with or i don't share anything in common get more mps, so be it. that is democracy. so nigel farage should, under your voting change — or people like him — should get more representation in the house of commons. there might be people who look around at the politics of europe, who look around at the divisions in europe and the extremism in europe, who don't find the idea of changing to a different sort of voting scheme very attractive. well, the polls suggest that more people are finding it attractive, actually, despite what you say, nick, and, moreover, here's the point — as a democrat, i want to debate with people who i disagree with. i've done that all my life, and you only win the debate — and i believe in this election we're winning the debate on things like health and care and sewage and the cost of living — you only win the debate if people who don't share your views are there to debate with you. you would... so i'm happy, it doesn't matter where they're from, it could be from any party, to be frank with you, i'm happy to debate with them. you are happy to debate with the likes of nigel farage. you no doubt have seen the controversy there is now. do you regard him, do you regard his supporters as racist? listen, i don't share any values, the liberal democrats don't share any values with his party and him. i'm — in this election, though — want to make sure people understand what our values are because i think when they do, when they listen to us and hear us and get the chance, i think it will be...we�*ll be winning a lot more votes. one of the problems in modern politics, actually, is if you are... say something outrageous, you get covered. when you say something that's sensible and reasonable that actually has a solution for people's problems, you don't get covered. there's a problem i would suggest with how the media covers politics in some ways, so... you want to stay silent about nigel farage because you think it's what... you think that's what he wants, condemnation from people like you? i want to talk about liberal democrats in an election because i don't get enough time to talk about this. well, you've got about a minute left, and you've had almost half an hour to talk about it... we could go on longer if you like. ..like all the leaders, including mr farage, of course. you'll be well aware, and it's depressing for all of us who believe in politics, that there's been a collapse in trust in politics and politicians. it's a tough question, but it's one i think you've reflected on, that given your role that we've discussed in austerity, the broken promise on tuition fees, the failure to stop the post office scandal when some people think you had the chance to do so, are you the man who can help restore trust in politics? well, that will be the voters�* decision, and what i say to the voters is look how we�*ve developed the party. the fact that we�*re talking about the nhs and care, your issues, the fact we�*re talking about the cost of living crisis you suffered, the fact we�*re talking about the environment and things like sewage, listen to us and come and vote for us, please. sir ed davey, leader of the liberal democrats... thank you very much. ..thank you very much indeed forjoining me. that�*s the last of my leaders�* interviews. you can catch any of them again on iplayer. just search for election 202a. it�*s a big decision we�*ve all got. the choice is yours. goodnight, and thank you for watching. good evening. last week the leaders of the country�*s four largest parties got to the question time treatment. tonight in burlingham, it is time to test the ideas of adrian ramsay of the green party, of england and wales, and nigel farage of reform uk. applause each of our two guests will face 30 minutes of questions from our audience who represent a mix of political sentiment including many who are still making up their mind, and supporters of the greens as well as reform. first up is the co—leader of the green party adrian ramsay. after half an hour it will be the turn of nigel farage, the leader of reform uk. as always, you canjoin in what will no doubt be lively conversations on social media. let�*s get going. please welcome our first guest, adrian ramsay. applause thank you very much, go to see you, fiona. the rules for you, as they will be for nigel farage, quite simple, you will not be interrupted if you can keep your answers reasonably brief, to the point, and actually answer the question, that is what you are here for. myjob is to make sure that you do. let�*s take our first question, to make sure that you do. let�*s take ourfirst question, please.

Related Keywords

Everything , Voters , Chance , Chair , Pitch , Something , People , It , Politics , Questions , Haven T , Hasn T , Best , Advance , Notice , Roller Coasterfor You , One , Government , Liberal Party , Power , Seat , Member Of Parliament , Roller Coaster , Social Care , Manifesto , Health Service , Heart , Interview , Deal , House Of Commons , Health , Reason , Nhs , Biggest , Gp , Concerns , Dentist , Centre , Loved Ones , Support , Family Care , Plumbers Don T , Millions , Dad , Experience , Son , Brother , Nana , Brothers , Mum , Granddad , 12 , Four , 15 , John , Stories , Carer , Brain Condition , Elderly , My Life , Promise , Prime Minister , Broadcast , Stunts , Sort , Liberal Democrat , You Haven T , Mps , Candidate , Lots , Argument , Parliament , Election , Champion , Lot , Policy , Priority , All , Course , Cabinet Table , Record , Coalition Government , Talk , Let S , Numbers , Alongsidejeremy Hunt , Conservatives , Spending , Austerity , David Cameron , Chancellor , Services , Cuts , Choice , Minister , Decisions , Things , Colleagues , Sleeves , Media Studios , 2015 , Example , Cabinet Room , Budget , Welfare Bill , Welfare , Welfare Budget , George Osborne , 7 Billion , 12 Billion , 2 Billion , 27 Billion , Tax , Cos , Pensions , Benefits , Inflation , Backgrounds , 5 2 , Liberal Democrats , Didn T , Benefit Cap , Free School Meals , Infants , Isn T , Truth , Enterprise , Tories , Point , Economy , Decision , Case , Liberal Democrats Hadn T , Leader , Wind , World , We Wouldn T Have Legislated On Mental Health , We Wouldn T Have Made Britain , We Wouldn T Have Legislated On Same Sex Marriage , Somebody , Ed Davey , Student Fees , Fact , Level , Elections , Many , Two , Three , Is Don T , Table , First , Broadly , Lessons , Trust , Lesson , Problems , Communities , Acceptance Speech , Coffee , Detail , By Elections , Second , Place , May , Conservative Heartlands , Question , Post Office , Yourjobs , Conference , Side , Alan Bates , Inquiry , We Haven T , Campaign , Sub Postmasters , Justice , Weren T , Miscarriage , Establishment , Issues , Horizon System , Access , Infamous , Set , Horizon Computer System , Office , Officials , Sub Postmaster , System , Nick , Trade Union The National , Assurances , Areas , It Specialists , Courts , Itand , I , Wasn T , The Truth , Little Guy , Issue , Mistake , Federation , Meetings , Problem , Horizon , There Wasn T A Problem , Media , Ministers , People Don T , Lawyers , Manyjudges , Conspiracy , Lies , Scandal , Blood , High Court , Hillsborough , 2019 , Seven , Guy , Scandals , Protection , Listen , Ways , Official , Police Officer , Wherever , Candour , Law , Duty , Tell The Truth , Whistle Blower , Prison , Let , Some , Protections , Taxes , Experts , Spend , Tax Up , Choices , Conspiracy Of Silence , Banks , Energy Companies , Promises , Water Companies , Tobacco Companies , Tech Giants , Profits , Nobody , Guys , Energy , Tax Burden , 2016 , Price , Businesses , Companies , Oil , Gas , Us , Least , Business , Ukraine , Institute For Fiscal Studies , Pay , Consumers , Bills , Dividends , Workers , Windfall Profits , Penny , None , Everything Round , Windfall Tax , Obligation , Putin , War , Executives , Shareholders , Innocent Ukrainians , List , Bogeymen , Bad Guy , Darth Vader , Evil , Don T Like , Don T Have To , Voldemort , , Pinch , Energy Bills , Levels , Mortgages , Rents , Higherfood , 0k , 0k , Savings , Schools , Have , Interest Rate , Ifs , Parties , Personal Care , Saying , Add Up , Key , Credit , Money , Rise , Junior Doctors , Strike , Doesn T , Nurses , Doctors , It Doesn T , Plan , Workforce , Politicians , Gps , Ideas , Seriously , Everyone , 8000 , Workforce Plan , Costings , Buildings , Benefit , Behavioural Change , Account , Estimates , Tax Revenue , Individuals , Doing , Big One , Institute Of Public Policy Research , 3 1 Billion , 1 Billion , 2031 , Cost , Fraction , Cos One Way , Answer , 50 Billion , Way , Everybody , Sat , Borrowing , Better , Houses , Phrase , Planning System , Order , Enemies , Labour Leader , People Building , Keir Starmer , Homes , Development , Approach , Community Led Approach , Developer Led Planning System , Developers , Elsewhere , Tune , Space , Infrastructure , Ones , Water Infrastructure , Places , Transport , Community Needs , Community Led , Councils , Members Of Parliament , Constituency , Plans , Thousands , Eye Watering , Dems , Town , Proposals , Lib , Airfield Near Henley , Surrey , 3000 , Daisy Cooper , St Albans Constituency , Examples , Housing Portfolio Holder , Wife , Area , On Kingston Council , Peach , Council House Building Programme , Debate , Counter Example , Hold On , Daisy Cooper S , Henley , South Cams District Housing , Return , Opposition , Cambridgeshire , But , Ithink , Reasons , Thought , Can T , Patients , Appointment , View , Bollocks , Predecessor , Page , Brexit , 112 , Trading , Movement , Eu , Market , Single Market , Labour , Immigration , Michel Barnier , Chief Negotiator , Trade Deal , European , Think , Oppo , German , Exchequer , Politician , Equivalent , Costs , Farmers , Delays , Red Tape , Youth Mobility Scheme , Country , Anyone , Form , Name , 35 , Message , Electorate , Thigh , Plumbers , Young Romanian Builders , Polish , Lorry Drivers , Relations , Lithuanian , Number , Countries , Person , Australia , Operation , Korea , Japan , Change , Builders Don T , Visa , Travel , To Getjobs , Uk , Forgive Me , Yes , To Britain , No Doubt , Dojobs , Visas , Dimension , Movement Of Labour , Freedom , Scheme , Bit , Life , Summary , Gap , Nigel Farage , Votes , Voting Change , Seats , Voting Reform , 100 , Counts , Onjuly 11th , 11 , Democracy , Share , Voting , Response , Anything , Idea , Voting Scheme , Representation , Divisions , Extremism , Who , Democrat , Polls , Sewage , Views , All My Life , The Cost Of Living , Matter , Controversy , Values , Supporters , Party , Racist , Silent , Solution , Leaders , Left , Condemnation , All Of Us , Tuition Fees , Role , Collapse , Failure , Man , The Party , Eve , Restore Trust , Vote , Sir , Environment , Crisis , Interviews , Last , Iplayer , Election 202a , Got , 202 , Question Time Treatment , Burlingham , Green Party , Adrian Ramsay , Of Reform Uk , Wales , England , Applause , Audience , Mind , Guests , Greens , Sentiment , Mix , 30 , Social Media , Cup , Turn , Co Leader , Conversations , Reform , Rules , Get , Guest , Fiona , Answers , Myjob , Ourfirst Question ,