Sponsored by

Pensioners: You won't have to sell your home to pay for care

PENSIONERS could be saved from having to sell their home to pay for residential care under a scheme being considered by the Tories.

David Cameron said forcing people who do not qualify for free care to finance it by losing their own house was "cruel".

__________________________

A nine-page special report on the Yorkshire Post's Sixty Against One event, at which David Cameron answered questions from an audience of 60 YP readers. To flick between pages, use the Next Page/Previous Page navigation links below each story.

To listen to the event in full, click here.

To watch video highlighgts, click the green PLAY button above.

__________________________

Instead those who save enough to pay for one or two years' care could be freed from any further costs, similar to a system in the US.

The innovative scheme emerged during a question session with Yorkshire Post readers yesterday where Mr Cameron pledged to address the existing "unfair" system with firm proposals before the next election. But he ruled out making residential care free for all.

The Tory leader also launched a blistering attack on the Government's plans to open one-stop "polyclinics" across the country – grouping GPs together in a large clinic with other health services – branding it the latest Whitehall "fad" and a "huge mistake" as he marked health reforms as a major political battleground.

During the 75-minute session at the Yorkshire Post offices he also welcomed Bank of England plans to free up money markets, said he wanted farming to be viable and admitted local road tolls may be necessary.

He also said using the term the "War on Terror" gave victory to Osama bin Laden, on education declared himself a "behaviour freak" and defended school league tables, while in lively exchanges he dismissed calls to withdraw from the European Union.

Mr Cameron said one of the "greatest unfairnesses" for elderly people was that people who had worked and saved hard and "done the right thing" but had assets of more than 22,250 have to pay for all of their care home places, which leaves many with no option other than to sell their home to pay the bill.

Charities including Help the Aged have been campaigning for a fairer system, with more than one third of care home residents estimated to have to pay their own bill.

Mr Cameron called for a reduction in means testing but said it would be unrealistic to abolish it completely in response to a question from reader Don Burslam, and said adopting the Scottish system of free care for all was too expensive.

"I think what we can do is look at schemes like they have in American states where you say to people during their lives 'look, if you put a bit aside to pay for maybe the first year, or year and a half, or two years of residential care, and if you do that the state will guarantee that's all you have to pay for'," he said.

"It's like a partnership scheme. If we did that then we'd be able to say to people if you do that you will not need to sell your house to pay for residential care. I think that's one of the cruellest bits of the means test and one of the ones I want to address in our next manifesto."

The Department for Health said the system of paying dated back to the 1940s and the threshold had risen in line with inflation, but added that a green paper on social care will be published at the end of May which will cover how care is paid for as people live longer.

Meanwhile, pressed by Yorkshire GP Amanda Robinson on the Government's polyclinic plans, Mr Cameron said GPs are "one of the great strengths" of the NHS and said it should be down to them if they wanted to group together in single health centres.

"I think the Government's plan for these top down polyclinics is the latest fad that's going to hit the health service," he said, citing restructuring of primary care trusts, the overspending on the NHS computer and closure of local maternity and accident and emergency units as other fads.

"This could mean we lose GP surgeries right around Yorkshire, right around the country," he said. "It's not necessary."

But he rejected calls for cancer patients to be given free prescriptions, saying there is no big pot of money to pay for it.

Mervyn Kohler, special adviser to Help the Aged, said: "It's great to hear the Conservatives talking about partnership schemes for funding long-term care. All political parties must be involved in this debate."

Sympathy over cancer dilemma

David Cameron admitted he was "tempted" to allow patients to pay for some of their treatment privately without losing their right to free NHS care after a plea by North Yorkshire cancer sufferer Colette Mills.

The Tory leader said he would look into her case after being read a question from Mrs Mills, 58, who was too ill to attend yesterday's event. She was refused permission to pay for private treatment with the drug Avastin as well as receiving chemotherapy on the NHS to treat her breast cancer.

Mr Cameron said Mrs Mills's case was "powerful" but admitted there was a "really difficult argument" over co-payment because of fears of a two-tier health service.

Asked whether it should be allowed, he said: "My temptation would be to say in cases where it means more treatment will be made, then yes we should, but I'm going to have to go and look at that case."BUSINESS AND THE ECONOMY

Chris Glen, from the Federation of Small Businesses: "We often hear the Government talking about the backbone of the economy, but they constantly seem to break that backbone with costs, regulations and then the massive increases in tax. I was wondering what you would do as a Conservative government."

David Cameron: "I think small businesses are suffering at the moment from excess tax and regulation and particularly the decision to increase the small business rate of corporation tax, we think that was a mistake and we think if you abolish some of the reliefs and allowances, you could get that rate back down again.

"But there is a more general thing, which is a culture that recognises and rewards small businesses and government and local government need to play a part in that. At the moment government gives far too much of its contracts and its procurement to big business and actually we ought to look at ways to open that up to small and medium sized firms and that is something local councils can do as well and something I'll be encouraging local councils to do if we have more of them after May 1."

Andrew Palmer, Deputy Regional Leader of the CBI: "We have seen reports this week that pharmaceutical company Shire has chosen to create a new international holding company in Ireland.

"The CBI is worried that an uncompetitive corporate tax system is spoiling the UK's attractiveness as a place to do business and other international mobile firms will follow Shire's path. What commitments can you give that a Conservative government will restore the UK's tax competitiveness?"

David Cameron: "We believe that you can get the headline rate of corporation tax down without spending money, but by abolishing some of the allowances, reliefs and tapers which have made the British tax system so complicated.

"Our tax code is now one of the most complicated in the world. Tollys Tax Guide is now actually longer than War and Peace and considerably less interesting to read.

"And so we do believe you could cut the headline rate of corporation tax which would help without that costing any money. But as well as just tax rates there is something else we have to get to grips with.

"I heard recently of an example, an IT company was considering whether to headquarter in the UK or Ireland. In terms of the UK it got sent a brochure with a picture of the House of Commons and a little booklet.

"In terms of Ireland, it got maps about where the business could go, how they'd help them through the planning system, how they'd help them link up with universities and colleges to get them the skilled labour they needed.

"I think we don't do enough to promote Britain to win the inward investment we need and to recognise that the decision for a business to invest is partly about tax, but it's also about 'is this a business-friendly culture?'.

"I think sometimes the Conservative Party has made a mistake here in that, of course government shouldn't be a burden to business, but government has got to be a service to business, so being a business-friendly government is not just about cutting regulations, cutting the taxes, getting out of the way, it's also about doing those things business need government to do and that is about infrastructure, it's about skills and really as I've explained, helping businesses to locate.

"I think this is a particularly important Yorkshire message, because there are still a lot of important manufacturing businesses in Yorkshire and when it comes to manufacturing and where they locate, infrastructure - roads, railways, skills are absolutely vital. An IT company, all it often needs is a thick broadband pipe and they can export their products anywhere in the world.

"If you're actually shifting goods around you have got to have the roads, the ports, the railways and I'm shifting Conservative economic policy by saying yes, we're still the low tax party, we're still the low regulation party, but I want us to be the skills, infrastructure, science-based party as well that understands the services business needs from government.

Jonathan Reed, Yorkshire Post Political Editor: "What's your reaction to the news the Bank of England is looking to free up the mortgage markets?"

David Cameron: "This is good news basically, I mean the fundamental thing the Bank of England is looking at is something we suggested, which is to say to the banks and the building societies we will swap the mortgage-backed securities which you're all very worried about, and that's why banks aren't lending to each other, we'll swap those for gilt-edged government debt, for bonds, if you can give us some guarantees and make sure the tax payer won't have to carry a loss.

"This is not a bail-out, this is the Bank of England using its ability and authority to and unblock the money markets, so it can be guaranteed there won't be taxpayer losses. It is a sensible thing to do.

"On its own it is not enough. I think in order to get the money markets and economy moving again there are a couple of other steps. I think we have got to stop the abolition of the 10p tax rate which is going to hit the low paid at exactly the moment that those families feel most vulnerable with mortgage rates and shopping bills going up.

"I think the other thing is we have got to do it to kick start the housing market. We've suggested cutting stamp duty for nine out of 10 first-time buyers and I think those two things together with a Bank of England plan for the money markets could make a lot of difference."TRANSPORT AND ENVIRONMENT

Malcolm Bingham, Head of Policy for the Freight Transport Association for the North of England: "We have recently seen the Secretary of State signalling the Government's intention to replace road widening with forms of active traffic management replacing full widening on the M1, the M62 in South and West Yorkshire.

"The freight industry has generally been supportive of things like hard shoulder running and other forms of active traffic management, but not at the expense of road widening where it is actually needed. We wondered, what is the Conservative position on necessary road infrastructure improvements on the strategic road network and does Mr Cameron have a view on the measures being adopted by ministers and indeed the department of transport?"

David Cameron: "I think the Government made a great mistake when it got in in 97 when it cancelled every scheme for widening, for bypassing, for dualing. The road programme came to a juddering halt. It has now restarted again but it is very patchy and sporadic and while I have been absolutely clear that we do have to have a greener environment and we do have to prioritise environmental policy, to me there is no contradiction between having a green policy but one that says there are areas where you need road widening schemes, you need bypasses, you need dualing. Stationary traffic is more polluting than moving traffic and the needs of our economy are such that we need to have the arteries of the economy working properly. So I do support widening schemes, dualing schemes, bypass schemes, and what I have said to my Shadow Transport team is get round the country and draw up a list for me of all the schemes that need to be green lit and work out how we can pay for them by the time of the next election.

"That's not to say, and the Freight Transport Association might be disappointed, we're going to be able to write out some lovely big cheque and just dip into a big bucket of money and just pay for this. It does mean there may well be some additional road tolls and some local road pricing measures in order to deliver these things, but they will be delivered.

"What I think is wrong about the Government's scheme is that I don't think the eye-in-the-sky national pricing idea is a runner. I think connecting a local toll with a local road is something that business can and would support and I think we should see many more of such schemes. Widening, dualing, bypasses, there are many needs and we need to meet them and we have to recognise, very clearly, about how they are going to be paid for, so that is what we should do.

"I also think the Government is making a mistake by tying so much money into congestion schemes. They are always saying to councils, 'you can have some money for transport improvements, but only if you introduce congestion charging'. I don't think that's right. I think we should trust the local councils more to work out what is right for their areas.

"We must deal with the unfairness of the foreign lorries that are coming into Britain, making up more and more of our freight transport and not having to pay anything like the same sorts of bills that our lorry drivers do in Britain, I think that there's a fundamental unfairness. That's why we long campaigned for a Brit-disc scheme or some kind of alternative and we're looking very carefully at how we can try and level the playing field. Otherwise people are just filling up with cheaper diesel on the continent, coming to Britain, doing a huge amount of freight work, taking jobs away from British drivers, and it's not on a level playing field and that's not fair."

Jonathan Reed, YP Political Editor: "Is that something you'd expect to have a firm policy on by the time of the next election?"

David Cameron: "In terms of what I've asked Theresa Villiers to do on the road schemes is to look at the key areas, the key bottlenecks. Places like, if you go to the North East, the problems with the lack of a western bypass on the A1 and the widening of the A1. You know, this has been a long-running problem and it's taken so long to get it dealt with. Now, much better, I think, to be able to say to people, look, okay, this is a scheme we would go ahead with, here are the tolling arrangements or here are the road pricing arrangements we would enter into, but you will get it. And I think what we've had from this Government is so many delays on these road schemes and we've got to speed them up."

Jonathan Reed, YP Political Editor: "A project like Leeds Supertram, which the Government has turned its back on, is that something that would be on the table for consideration again?"

David Cameron: "It's on the table. On the large civic schemes like Supertram, the extension of Manchester Metro, things like that, I've got Michael Heseltine with a group looking at all of those, working out which ones are affordable and which ones are not, which we will be very clear about in our manifesto before an election. I think that's the right time to do it. We don't know now which ones the government might go ahead with, so we are doing the work and when it comes to an election, we will be able to lay it out and say right, here are the ones we can do, here's what we can't do."

Gordon Bridge, Chief Executive of AS Manufacturing, Rotherham: "We have a lot of successful manufacturing businesses here in Yorkshire but one of our major concerns is the security of supply of power. We are seeing power rationed in many many overseas countries and I certainly feel, along with a number of others that it is only a matter of time before it is rationed here. We believe that nuclear power is the only answer and we have been lobbying for an accelerated programme. What will the conservative party do if it gets into power?"

David Cameron: "One thing that you have just said that I would disagree with is the idea that nuclear is the only answer. I think you've got to be very careful not to put all of our eggs into any one basket.

"I want to really give you a proper answer to this question. In terms of nuclear, what government ought to be doing is actually clearing out the way the barriers to power stations being built. So we said we'll reform the planning system so it doesn't take 15 years like it did with Sizewell. We'll give you a straight answer on waste and where the waste would go, we'll change the rules so you need to get approval for the site rather than endlessly having to go through, over and over again the same argument they'd already been through. We'll clear the barriers out the way, but what I won't do as Prime Minister, I will not offer any sort of blank cheque to the nuclear industry or any other industry and say we will meet your clean-up costs, we will provide you with some back-stop, a cheque-guarantee from the taxpayer, I do not think that would be sensible at all. If nuclear can pay its way as part of the mix, I'd clear the barriers out of the way and allow the nuclear industry to come forward, I think that's the sensible thing to do.

"But, going back to the first thing I said, I wouldn't put all my eggs in that basket. The nuclear industry says it can come forward and build those stations. If it can, all well and good, but I think we need a more fundamental change to our whole energy system. Today it's a very 1940s, 1950s setup. A big national grid, big power stations plonked down in various parts of the country, lots of them here in Yorkshire, feeding into the grid and all of us taking our electricity off the grid. It makes us very reliant on big sources of fuel, whether that is coal, or whether it is nuclear. We ought to have a much more decentralised energy system which other countries have adopted because they are worried about being so in-hoc either to nuclear or to coal or to foreign oil.

"Places like Holland, places like Scandinavia, places like Germany now have what are called feed-in tarriffs, where if a business or a school or a small micro-generator wants to generate electricity they can sell back any surplus to the grid and I think this would be a huge change because then, if you imagine this decentralised energy world, when a new business wants to set up, when you build a new factory, when you set up a new school, they'll be thinking, well, what sort of solar panel shall I fit? What sort of combined heat and power could I put in place, what kind of heat pump exchange could... because, of course, any energy I don't use for myself, I can sell back to the grid and make a profit; and suddenly you get a big change in the way we think about energy, not just thinking what's the government going to do to make sure that we've got secure energy for the future, but what can we all do to have a more decentralised system.

"In Germany - the last part of a long answer - there is one town, Freiberg, that has more solar power than the whole of the United Kingdom. Now it's not that much sunnier in Germany than it is in Britain, even on a day like today in Yorkshire. So we need a really big change in the system. We'll certainly get the barriers out the way as far as nuclear is concerned, no massive subsidy, but let's have a decentralised system which is a much better long-term guarantee in the unstable world in which we live."

HEALTH

GP Amanda Robinson: "I'm concerned about the welfare of the NHS and its future. What is the Tory party hoping to do? I'm particularly concerned that we're being compelled to open Darzi centres. In this city we already have the biggest trust in Europe, two walk-in centres, minor injury units and 400 very good practices. Why would we want yet another huge polyclinic and is your government going to do anything slightly different?"

David Cameron: "Yes we are. This is going to be one of the big issues of the coming weeks and months. I think the Government is making a huge mistake here. Primary care and general practitioners are one of the great strengths of the current health service.

"There's much we need to change in the health service, but GPs as the custodian of the health service are the people who help guide you through the health service and I think they give a very good service.

"I think the Government's plan for these top-down polyclinics is the latest fad which is going to hit the health service though. The health service has already suffered so much from fads over the past 10 years.

"Fad number one was when they decided 'Let's reorganise all the structures of the health service and let's get rid of the Yorkshire Health Authority and introduce primary care trusts'. But then they got rid of the primary care trust. We've had an enormous amount of structural reorganisation.

"Fad number two was the NHS computer, when 30bn and counting was spent on the enormous machine. Fad number three, which you suffered here in Yorkshire, was when the small maternity units and accident and emergency units were closed because of some research cooked up in Whitehall which now looks flimsier and flimsier as some of the units are being saved.

"Finally, fad number four was the Darzi fad which stated that GPs have to go into polyclinics which could mean we lose GP surgeries right around Yorkshire and right around the country. It's not necessary. If in some cases GPs want to come together and have larger practices to provide more services, then that's the sort of bottom-up change which can happen organically. What shouldn't happen though is change being imposed from above as a new fad and a new assault on the NHS.

"We won't go ahead with that top-down plan. Our plan is to put GPs at the heart of the NHS and say that your GP is the person who helps you to choose where you have your treatment and that the money should follow the patient.

"The hospitals should also be more independent with all of them being foundation trusts so we have a proper functioning modern internal market for a health service but with GPs functioning as the people to guide you through it.

"We should also be doing more to encourage a form of GP fundholding. I was at a GP surgery the other day and asked them what they would do if they could keep more of their own money and hold more of their own budget. They replied they'd have more mental health practitioners and more physio. This is what we should be doing - trusting the GPs and measuring them on outcomes in terms of health instead of endlessly reorganising them and forcing them into Darzi polyclinics.

"The trouble with any big nationalised business is that it is always at the whim of a minister with a great idea. The health service has suffered so much from this and we've had so many changes and lost so many services because a pen in Whitehall has decided we want to do it this way instead of that way. Real change is actually organic and bottom-up and develops from what works rather than from a pen of a minister in Whitehall."

Mitzi Blennerhassett, medical writer and member of Yorkshire Cancer Network User Partnership Group: "The financial cost of cancer can devastate whole families. Apart from other financial burdens, the new prescription charge of 7.10 per item means the ongoing cost to a cancer out-patient for drugs and medicines can easily exceed 20 and may continue for years. Would a Conservative government restructure the NHS to create a viable, sustainable system and, as a priority, ensure every cancer patient's treatment is free at the point of delivery?"

David Cameron: "It's a very good question. I can't promise to change the structure of prescription charging because to do so would be to take money out of the NHS. I think, right now, budgets are going to be very tight and the NHS has been used to increases of around seven per cent a year. We're in a much tighter environment now though because the Government has run out of money and so the increase is going to be more like four per cent a year. Doing anything which would take money out of the NHS, however worthy it may sound, would therefore not be a good idea.

"I can't make a promise about prescription charges. I would certainly be happy to look at it but I think anything that overall reduces the money available to the NHS is not going to be sensible. I think one of the things which we can do, working with the cancer charities, is to open up the health service in terms of how it manages people with cancer and particularly people with terminal cancer. I spent some time with people at Marie Curie Cancer Care who are running some very interesting pilots in Lincolnshire where they are actually taking over the managing of people who have got terminal cancer and the whole transferring of people from hospital to hospice and to helping them, if it's appropriate to die at home. I think it's an enormous amount which these voluntary bodies can do working in partnership with the NHS and we are only just scratching the surface of what they can deliver in terms of really high quality care.

"I would love to be able to sit here and say we'll cancel the charges but it would mean taking money out of the NHS and there's not a big pot of money. In so many ways we don't have a free NHS. I've spent a lot of time at hospital this last week with my little boy and getting a high amount of parking tickets outside the hospital and that's one without a car park. There are so many attendant charges, car park charges and other charges. It's very easy to say we'll scrap this and scrap that but in the end you leave a deficit in the NHS which you have to make up on somewhere else. It's going to be tight so I can't do that."

Patient Colette Mills, read by YP Political Editor Jonathan Reed: "I have secondary breast cancer which is progressing. I would have liked to meet you to show you I am a living human being and not a statistic but my cancer has progressed again and I am unable to attend.

"Last year I appealed to my PCT to co-pay for Avastin which would have prolonged my life and improve its quality. Due to the actions of the PCT I lost that opportunity and my cancer has progressed. Why do some trusts and PCTs allow co-payment and funding of cancer treatments which are not approved by NICE? Co-payment takes the financial burden off the NHS and the emotional and psychological strain of doctor/patient relationships. How can doctors recommend treatment when they know that their employers won't fund it?

"When will the Government stop hiding behind the facade and NICE approval of policies which don't work and admit it is down to finances. Me and thousands of women like me are condemned to an early death because of these finances. We are not statistics. We are human beings who have a lot to contribute to society as mothers, sisters and wives.

"Long term, keeping us well has to be more cost-effective than waiting for each traumatic progression and then putting a sticking plaster on the wounds. Please speak up for us. We deserve better. I have devoted my working life to the NHS and this is how it repays me."

David Cameron: "That is an incredibly powerful case. There are two issues there. There is the issue of whether we have a good enough system for the licensing of the new treatments, getting them into operation and then funding them for patients. You get a lot of complaints as a Member of Parliament for the delays and the bureaucratic procedures of nice evaluations.

"In a health system you have to have something like NICE. You have to have a body which basically evaluates the treatment and the drugs to say whether this is something we should be using or whether it is something which is unapproved and so shouldn't be used. NICE or an equivalent body is therefore necessary. It would be good if it were quicker and I think once NICE has said 'Yes' then PCTs and others should go ahead and grant those treatments more quickly. I think that can definitely be done.

"A second tough issue is co-payment. There are all sorts of issues here. On the one-hand I totally see Colette's point. If you are willing to make a contribution, then that means that the drug is going to you and is helping you and is costing the taxpayer less. I totally see that argument. On the other hand we do have a generally free health service that is open to all with treatments delivered on the basis of need and not ability to pay. It's part of our British identity that when we get ill we don't have to get a chequebook out at the hospital. We are treated as we need. There is a real difficult argument here about whether we should allow co-payment in these cases or not.

"My temptation would be to say that in cases where it means more treatment will be made, then yes we should, but I am going to have to go and look at that case. I am going to take that e-mail though to talk to Andrew Langsley about it and get an e-mail back to her about our approach to this issue as I think it's a really, really difficult problem and one which I can't just give a straight or flip answer to now.

"Speeding up the process will make a big difference though and even more than that our problem still is that we are not identifying breast cancer early enough. Even though we have better screening programmes we are still having delays between the identification of a problem and action being taken. It is that early action being taken which can make the big difference."

THE EU

David Quarrie, area sales rep: "What I and millions of other English people cannot understand is why you would rather be in Europe than in power? Eighty per cent of the people want to vote on the Lisbon Treaty and 75 per cent of British people want out of the European Union. Do you want a landslide victory and to come into power and do things which you've been talking about for the past hour? If you make that central Conservative policy number one and get Britain out of Europe, you will win a landslide."

David Cameron: "On the Lisbon Treaty and the European Constitution, we have led calls for a referendum on it and we have voted on it in the House of Commons again and again. I've raised it with the Prime Minister again and again because I don't think it's right for the British Government to take away powers from Parliament and invest them somewhere else without asking the British people first. As I've said, and as William Hague has said, with any future treaty, where any power is being passed from Westminster to Brussels, there should be a referendum as there should be a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

"I don't want to leave the European Union though and I'll tell you why. This is a trading nation. Yorkshire relies on traded goods and on businesses which can trade all over the world and particularly in Europe. We export more per head of the population than America, Japan or other countries. We are a trading nation and Europe is a very important market for us. The single market is very important for us and if we are not in the European Union, we would not be able to have a say over what the rules of the single market are. That is the primary reason for being a member of the European Union.

"I used to work in the television and video business. If you wanted to set up television stations around Europe and if you wanted to sell television programmes around Europe, the rules were written in Brussels but at least we had a seat at the table and we could knock down some of the nonsense which the French, the Germans and the others wanted to put in the rules. Leave the European Union and you still have to meet all the rules if you want to sell your programmes but you've got no say in what they are.

"It might make you feel good for five minutes to say to cut ourselves off from the bureaucracy but it would be bad for Britain. We have to stay in there and we have to fight for the sort of Europe we want which is a Europe that doesn't just stop when you hit the old countries of Eastern Europe but goes right the way up to Turkey and is in association with like-minded nation states which believe in democracy.

"It is a Europe which stops passing so many rules and regulations but focuses on a big single market so it will be prosperous and wealthy and one where we will co-operate on things that we care about like a good environment, like helping the poorest countries in Africa and like making sure we are a competitive part of the world. That's the responsible thing to do and that is what I will fight for. It's not always easy but it is the right thing to do.

"Pulling out wouldn't stop us trading but we'd have no say over the rules. If we want to be a country that trades on the level we do, we've got to have a say. We do have an influence. If you look at the rules of the single market - if we weren't there, then they could bend them against us and there'd be absolutely nothing we could do about it. We'd be sitting here and there'd be people from different businesses and industries asking why we were completely powerless and not able to negotiate a good agreement so they could sell their goods and services in Europe.

"If you look at what is happening in Europe, the French and the protectionists are losing the argument. Britain has always been a trading nation. We have fought for trade over centuries and always believed in free trade. Other countries are actually moving in our direction on the free trade issue and it would be mad for us to leave and cut ourselves off at this moment."

Mark Stuart, political analyst and author: "I take the complete opposite view of David Quarrie. I'm a fan of Douglas Hurd, Kenneth Clarke, Michael Hesseltine, and pro-European. Your problem has already been illustrated by this exchange. Your problem comes when you get into government. How are you going to deal with the fact that about one quarter of your MPs want to leave Europe altogether?"

David Cameron: "That's not true. There are a small number of Conservative members who want to leave the European Union. There always has been. There are also a small number of Labour MPs like Austin Mitchell who want to leave the European Union. The vast majority of Conservative MPs are completely united in wanting for a more open, flexible and trading Europe.

"We don't need new treaties. The last thing Europe needs right now is another treaty. Even Gordon Brown thinks we don't need another treaty. I would certainly not sign any treaty that passed any powers from Westminster to Brussels without asking the British people in a referendum. That's a very, very clear commitment. I don't think there are further powers that need to be passed from Westminster to Brussels. Indeed there are powers that need to come back from Brussels to Westminster.

"The second point I want to make is that when it came to the great debates on the Lisbon Treaty which Gordon Brown thought was going to tear the Conservative Party apart, the truth is the party that was most united in the House of Commons was the Conservative Party. The party that was most divided was the Liberal Democrats which had an extraordinary split and lost four members of the Shadow Cabinet because they mishandled things so badly. The Labour Party was very badly split too. The Conservative Party is very united in wanting a Europe of nation states that trade and co-operate and that is what the vast majority of people in the country want. They do want us to be in the European Union but they want powers to be returned to Britain and they want it to be open and flexible in the way that I've suggested."

EDUCATION

Dorothy de Lashley Cook: "I'm a retired school teacher. Commentators and media populists often refer to good schools. If by this the inference is a good educational environment that promotes education standards where all pupils are motivated to attain success academically, how do you define good educational practice?"

David Cameron: "I've a very clear view. A good school is easy to recognise. It is one where, first of all, there is good discipline and order and where behaviour is strong. I think that absolutely comes first because if you don't have good discipline, order and behaviour then you can't teach anyone anything and people won't learn anything.

"I'm a Conservative with both a big and small C when it comes to education. I think this is absolutely key. That is why we have said that the headteacher has got to have control over the school. If they want to exclude a pupil they shouldn't be overruled by an appeals panel external to the school. They should be able to introduce binding home-school contracts where they say what way the child must behave in order to attend there and the way the parent has got to back up the school before sending their child there. I'm a behaviour freak when it comes to schools. I think it is the most important thing and the first thing I look at as a parent when I walk into a school is whether it has that safety, discipline, order and behaviour. That is number one.

"Number two is whether it encourages aspiration. Does it encourage children to reach for the sky and do all they can and be all they can? There you should look at things broader than results but it is important that we publish these results.

"I know some teachers complain about league tables but I don't agree. I think it's good that parents can see what results a school is achieving, one year compared to the next and one school compared to another. There is a great school near where I live which posts these results up on the door outside together with all the information such as how many children have free school meals and how many have English as a second language. A good school is one that is open and transparent about its results, successes and failures and one that really encourages children to reach for the stars. I think all of us know that you recognise a good school when you see it and so much of it is about the leadership which the headteacher can provide.

"It is tragic that a South Yorkshire school has had to install metal detectors but it is necessary. The Government announced cookery lessons and metal detectors in the same week so I don't know how they're going to get their cooking implements into the school.

"I think there is a larger problem which is the endless interference from Whitehall. The main problem is that the metal detectors in some cases will be necessary because of what has happened in some of our communities but it is a sign of failure and we need to recognise that.

"We need to recognise that we need a re-civilisation of our society. Parents have to do a better job in bringing up their children. We need to have stronger communities where the police are out there on the streets searching for the guns and knives and taking them out of circulation. We need to make sure anyone caught with a knife receives a stiff automatic penalty and that schools feel that it shouldn't be necessary to have metal detectors because we don't live in that kind of country. Right now though, we do.

"Also, class sizes are smaller than they used to be, which is good. It would be great to make further progress but, as important as that, is setting by ability. I would encourage all schools to set by ability in almost every single subject. It is logical and sensible that if you leave very bright children in a class with lots of other children they get bored and switch off. I think setting and teaching by ability is as important but the more we can get class sizes down the better.

"It is also important to have small schools. Some schools have got so big that the children get lost in them. The Mayor of New York split up his large schools into four small schools to drive the standard of education. They shared the same facilities but had an individual identity and individual headteacher and suddenly you rebuild that relationship between the headteacher, parents and pupils. What I want most in a primary school is one where the headteacher knows my child's name and they're not part of some enormous mass. You want your child to go somewhere where they can feel warm and safe and loved and identified."

COMMUNITIES

Dr Abdul Malik, President of the Ahmadiya Muslim community in Bradford: "How will your policies on the war on terror differ from the current Government's policies, keeping in mind the feelings of Muslim nations and British Muslim communities?"

David Cameron: "I don't tend to call it the war on terror because in some ways we do Bin Laden's work for him. He wants a global Jihad linking up the worries and concerns that Muslims have anywhere in the world against the US. We shouldn't try to be fighting a straightforward global Jihad like that, we should be breaking up the problems of the world and dealing with them, whether it's Israel and Palestine, or India and Pakistan over the Kashmir region.

"Having said that, it's very important that we recognise that at the heart of the problem we face is some disaffected people in Britain, a minority of a minority, but none the less they do exist, they do want to blow us up and do us an enormous amount of harm. They are radicalised in a perversion of the true faith of Islam and we don't do anyone any favours pretending that it would all be okay if British troops came home from Iraq or it would all be fine if we weren't fighting in Afghanistan. Those people blew up the twin towers before the invasion of Iraq so we've got to recognise the problem is a perversion of Islam that has poisoned the minds of a small number of Muslims including in this country and we have to do every thing we can to find, imprison, prosecute and defeat those people.

"I think that means taking a much tougher line on groups that promote violence like Hizb ut Tahrir. I'd like to see them banned. It means taking a very tough line with those foreign nationals who come over here and preach hatred. I'd like to see them deported. It means as a society we have to more to include British Muslims into the mainstream of society and say we are a successful multi-racial country which gives people a real choice of isolating the extremists and bringing people into a cohesive whole. I think the real failure for a long period in our country was the state multi-culturalism idea of treating different groups differently. I'm a one-nation Conservative, we're all British citizens, we all have more in common with each other, we're not part of a racial group that should be treated separately, let's treat people as one country and then do more to isolate and defeat extremists.

"Some of the things the Government is doing will actually make it worse. I think banging people up for 42 days before you charge them is not necessary and will actually radicalise people. I don't think ID cards help, they're hugely expensive at a time where there's no money in the kitty. I can think of dozens of things I'd prefer it spent on. We have a different approach from the Government but we're very hard-headed in knowing that we have to isolate and defeat the extremists."

Paul Cockcroft, Royal Society of St George, Leeds city branch: "Hard working English taxpayers are helping provide Irish, Welsh and Scottish residents with free health care provisions, improve public services and free tuition fees, yet how are the English workers rewarded for this hard labour? England is currently at the bottom of the European table for public holidays. I'd like a yes or no - if the Conservatives get elected will they grant a new public holiday to celebrate St George's Day?"

David Cameron: "We don't have a proposal today to grant another bank holiday. I've got one or two MPs who are very passionate about this who've been beating a path to my door and I'm very happy to have a look at it. There was an argument that we should do something with the May bank holidays or have a Trafalgar day and I'm very happy to have a look at that.

"But let me say something to you that you won't like - I want to be Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, not just England. I think we're stronger by having England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland united.

"We've said let's look at the Barnett Formula but don't be under the misapprehension that there's a giant pot of money that, if we had it back, we could build all the roads we need in Yorkshire. It's not true. If we got rid of the Barnett Formula we'd have to put a needs-based formula in place where the money went to regions that have greater deprivation and some of those would be in Scotland. And let's not feed into the grievance culture which says the English are some put-upon minority having a miserable time. This is the greatest country in the world, being born English is winning the first prize in the lottery of life. We're stronger as being part of the United Kingdom. It's a great example of progressive civic nationalism. I want to be Prime Minister of all the United Kingdom, not embittered England that says let's split ourselves off from our partners with whom we've achieved so much over the years. And on that note, thank you very much for having me."

• Email to a friend
• Print this page