What you've said: 9 December 2004

Find out what you had to say about Question Time on Thursday, 9 December, 2004 from Plymouth.

The topics discussed were:

Defending property

IRA

David Blunkett's colleagues

Climate change

Nativity scene

General comments on the programme

The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received:

Defending property

Audience question: Does the panel believe that a change in the law is required to ensure homeowners have the right to defend their property with any necessary force?

You said:

There is no need to keep adding legislation. Reasonable force exists within law, but the existing law is not upheld within the courts whereby a burglar should be punished. Burglary is an intrusion upon people's lives and has a deep long lasting effect on its victims. The provisions are there within the Theft Act. It is government policy that is not allowing judges to hand down deterring sentences, thus causing civil unrest and a lack of faith in the judicial system.
Ian McVety, Lancaster

My attitude has not been changed by recent statements. If someone armed with a cudgel, knife or whatever, broke into my home and one of my grandsons' baseball bats was lying to hand, I would use it, as hard as I could.
Patrick Long

By allowing people to kill burglars in their homes, the government would be bringing back the death penalty without judge or jury.
Jennifer, Salisbury

INTERACT WITH QUESTION TIME Digital Satellite, Freeview and Cable viewers press red Text your comments to 83981 Read comments on Ceefax page 155 Send and read comments on the website Guide to getting Digital TV

Text: Who protects the elderly, the infirm, the easy targets? The law courts are the ones who are letting us ALL down.
David Swinton

Kilroy lives in a parallel universe if he thinks that, if we find an intruder in our house, we should have full rights to do what we want with him.
Simon, Chippenham

Text: Burglars shouldn't have to face a bloody good kicking. The poor lambs should be treated with respect.
Disgusted, Tunbridge Wells

I would smack the hell out of a burglar if he came into my house, no matter what the law says.
W Ali, London

A change in the law is a must. It is unbelievable that you can't defend yourself in your own home Joe, Margate

Text: Tony Martin should never have been imprisoned. The one who survived should have also been prosecuted.
Pete, Derby

Every man's home is his castle. Everyone should feel safe in their own home and it is up to the occupant to deal with intruders as they see fit. Intruders should be aware that they have NO rights when breaking and entering another's property.
Gillian Cargill, Dundee

Text: Why should criminals have more rights than victims?
Chris, Horsham

The Met Commissioner, Sir John Stevens, asked for a clarification in the law - not for a change in it. For Kilroy-Silk to misrepresent his views is predictable; for a shadow home secretary to do so is reprehensible.
Scott Matthewman, Aylesbury

Text: A change in the law is a must. It is unbelievable that you can't defend yourself in your own home.
Joe, Margate

My concern is that burglars carrying lethal weapons would proliferate Bob, Morpeth

What about when a burglar enters your home and runs away with some of your valuable personal belongings? If you have the opportunity to incapacitate the burglar by throwing something, chasing him or shooting him in the leg, where does the law stand there?
Kaustav Bhattacharya, Harrow, Middlesex

Text: I will use reasonable force if the burglar does the same.
Francis, Croydon

Anyone who enters your home without permission for the purpose of robbery or violence has no right to any compassion or redress to the law.
Owen Curran, Glasgow

Text: If someone is in my house uninvited, he has no rights. My land, my laws.
Damien, London

Just how many people are being slaughtered in order to change the law? Or will this go quietly away after the election...
Paul Rand, Durham

Text: Set a minimum seven year sentence for a dwelling burglary. It would deter them in the first place.
Gary Cowan, Hartlepool

I live in Chelsea and attend the same church as the recently murdered John Monckton. I sat next to them. We in Chelsea want policemen back on our streets, not the right to murder someone.
Susan Clarke, London

If you wanted to murder someone couldn't you just drag them to your house, kick your own door down then kill this person as if he was a burglar and get away with it?
Sid Stewart, Warrington

Text: I am 6 feet tall, well built, and of an angry temperament. I defy anyone to break into my home and property. I want the law to protect me, not the criminal!
Gordon A

I'm sure nobody wants to do serious harm to intruders in their home. We just want the right to defend our homes without having to think about how much force to use. When you are in that situation, you don't have time to weigh up your options.
Martin Brooks, Sheffield

Text: Simple. Law should state that when someone enters another person's property uninvited, they lose all rights.
Grant, Glasgow

Surely a defining point in this argument must be our trust in the police response time. If we can't guarantee that the police will be there when we need them, the public should be enabled to do the job that we pay the police to do, i.e. protect the public and apprehend criminals.
Karen Ellis, York

How about re-instating the "outlaw" concept? While breaking the law, the law breaker has no protection from the law...
Julian Taylor, Wantage

Return to the top of the page

---

IRA

Audience question: Is the IRA being unfair to the people of Northern Ireland by being unwilling to provide photographic evidence of weapons decommissioning?

You said:

I think that the people of Northern Ireland have waited for so long, and every time we're told the same thing. It is clear that Ian Paisley and Gerry Adams behave like children as they cannot put their differences aside. Every time they come close there is some stupid pathetic reason for why they can't agree on something and the people of Northern Ireland are left disappointed once again!
Becky, Bangor, County Down

Text: Paisley-like Arafat will always miss the chance for peace, blinded by hatred. The Christian concept of forgiveness is unknown to him.
Bill, Warrington

Text: It is totally unfair! Proof of decommissioning is required or how do we know they have disarmed?
James H, Swindon

Does Robert Kilroy-Silk actually know what has been happening in Northern Ireland? Pictures of weapons being destroyed are most likely not in any way humiliating - it's the fact that Rev. Ian Paisley said he would use them in a "process of humiliation" which is the point at hand.

The bottom line is that if Ian Paisley hadn't made those remarks, we would have a much stronger possibility of a peace solution this week. At 16, I think I can safely say as one of Northern Ireland's youth that most of us don't care about all of this rubbish - we just want peace for our own futures. The political parties seem to have lost track of that somewhat.
Dave McGuckin, Bangor, Northern Ireland

Are the IRA the only ones with guns? Randal, Armagh

Text: They were all supposed to have decommissioned ages ago. Another Tony Blair lie to the public .
Bret, London

Ian Paisley is a hypocrite. Having photographic evidence of arms destruction is not part of the Good Friday agreement. He is moving the goalpost at the last minute because, God forbid, there might be an agreement in sight. He is not the kind of man who could live with power sharing.
Karin Campbell, Tavistock

When two men can't even look at each other, what chance is there for the Northern Ireland peace talks? As for the photographs, can we see pictures of ALL weapons, on both sides, being dismantled?
Nicola Frost, Sheffield

Ed Balls was neither here nor there on the photographic issue in Northern Ireland. Why wouldn't he answer the question properly?
Jon Hawk, London, UK

Text: All the IRA wanted was a fair vote. That is frightening!
David, Ulverston

Let's not forget that there are plenty of Loyalist paramilitary arms which also need to be visibly eradicated. There are two sides to this process. Why not dispense with them simultaneously?
Mrs Thomas, Birkdale

Text: Can the weapons be deployed within 45 minutes?
David, Kettering

The IRA simply make the issue irresolvable, as always Ivan, Folkestone

As a Protestant living in N. Ireland, it makes me angry when I hear people saying that photographs are not important. For me, it is the only way I would believe that the people who have killed and maimed members of my own family were serious about stopping the violence. Well done to Robert Kilroy-Silk - one of the few British politicians who has the same view as most peace loving Northern Ireland Protestants.
David Kerr, Co Antrim

Text: Who says we don't negotiate with terrorists?
Nick, Yorks

The IRA/Sinn Fein may be ashamed about what they have done in the past (hence the reason to seek resolution), which is why they do not want everyone to forever have picture evidence of the terrible weapons they have used.
Naz, London

Text: The IRA simply make the issue irresolvable, as always.
Ivan, Folkestone

Ed Balls is living in an unreal world. This man has absolutely no idea of the Northern Irish frame of mind. This is the type of sickly sweet, free smiling English politician that both sides, Loyalist or Republican, have absolutely no time for. They will lead him a merry dance.
William Burden, Peel, Isle of Man

Return to the top of the page

---

David Blunkett's colleagues

Audience question: Does the panel agree with David Blunkett's assessment of his colleagues?

You said:

Blunkett is just like the shoplifter who got caught then offered to pay.
Kath, Sheffield

Text: Can we trust a word from an adulterer?
Nik, Essex

Text: Blunkett has reached the end of his fantasy road.
Paul, Hull

The behaviour of those in public office should be above reproach, privately and publicly Angela, Bognor

Text: Blunkett should resign. He has ruined two relationships and expects to be treated differently!
Will, London

I think a clear overview of his colleagues is something that should be respected. It is typical of anything seen in the normal workplace and I am pleased to see it in use in parliament.
Paul Cardus, Tamworth

Text: It's a wonder Blunkett has time for anything with all his philandering !
David, Swinton

Text: The behaviour of those in public office should be above reproach, privately and publicly.
Angela, Bognor

Text: Blunkett should stay and do some more damage to his party.
Andy, Liverpool

Text: David Blunkett should be served with an Asbo for harassment.
Dave, Sunderland

I am appalled to find myself in the position of agreeing with Kilroy-Silk. But the very fact that Blunkett paid back the money for the rail ticket indicates he admits that he stole from the public. How can we have a self-confessed thief in charge of law and order?
Mark Walters, Southport

Text: Blunkett had an affair with a married woman. He should get the sack for his stupidity.
Lee, Swansea

Text: If I stole money from my employer I would be sacked!
Emma, Leeds

Text: Blunkett is as big a hypocrite as the rest of Blair's cronies!
Rob, Kent

Text: Blunkett has made a spectacle of himself.
Steve, N. Yorks

Return to the top of the page

---

Climate change

Audience question: Is Tony Blair serious in his ambition to lead the industrialised world, including President Bush, in tackling the climate issue successfully, or does he just "talk a good game"?

You said:

Food should not be brought thousands of miles using precious fossil fuels when we can produce it in the UK if only the public would pay the real cost of production.
James Moon, Liskeard

Text: I believe air traffic is the biggest polluter so why's nothing been done to address this?
Chris, Dorset

Climate change is the natural progression of this planet and nothing we do will change it Chris, Brighton

Text: We're all guilty of contributing to climate change, not just politicians.
Steve R, Hants

Text: Until the US takes climate change seriously the rest may as well try knitting porridge.
Nick, Lancs

Text: Climate change is the natural progression of this planet and nothing we do will change it.
Chris, Brighton

Text: Energy policy rigorously implemented in UK - ignored everywhere else.
Dave, Staffs

Text: There's no evidence global warming is man-made. Bush is right for once.
Peter, Yorks

Return to the top of the page

---

Nativity scene

Audience question: Is Madame Tussaud's nativity scene sacrilege or just festive humour?

You said:

Quite frankly having David Beckham and Posh Spice as Mary and Joseph is simply appalling. Two positive role models I could accept, but the Beckhams presented as the parents of Christ I find offensive. I can see the funny side of having the likes of Bush and Blair dressed as the "wise" men, but again since both these men took us into an illegal war, I find it rather close to the knuckle. If such a mockery was made of other religious figures there would be huge outcry - I just wonder sometimes who comes up with such ideas.
Andrew Hall, Glasgow

Return to the top of the page

---

General comments on the programme

You said:

The programme may be longer but last week's show had only 6 (or maybe 7) questions. Not much in an hour. But that might be fine if the questions were actually being answered, but the poor handling of the panellists meant that their time to speak was very uneven.

Matthew Taylor was almost ignored and Germaine Greer who talked succinctly and to the point, barely participated. Ed Balls' discomfort was interesting, but overused, and why are some panellists given a second chance to "answer"? They rarely do, so why does Dimbleby let them ramble onto their own hobby horses? Also when did QT change to having so much comment from the audience? Don't most of them come to have questions answered?
Maryann Turnbull, London

It seems appropriate that on the day Robin Butler made his scathing comments about the influence of advisers and political appointees in the Blair government, Ed Balls should make such a lightweight contribution to the panel. How has this man ever got as far as he has? On the other hand, Oliver Letwin proved yet again why he is the only hope for the Tories ever getting back into government.
Philip Duly, Haslemere, Surrey

Please tell me how you manage to select almost 100% anti-government audiences for your programme. Also, other than the government representative, the panellists are also anti-government. How can you produce such a one-sided programme that should be a fair debate.
W. Rose, Harwich

I really cannot be bothered to watch future programmes. I am fed up with the Labour party representatives launching into a party political broadcast bearing little or no relevance to the question.
John Finch, Guildford

One of the few points which irritate me during your otherwise excellent programmes is when the audience is allowed to participate and are referred to as "The woman in the..." or "The man in...." I find the (perhaps more old-fashioned) form "The lady in..." or "The gentleman in..." much more polite and pleasing to the ear. Technically there is little difference, but it does tend to enhance the level of debate when the speakers use the richness offered by the English language to its full potential. Either that or my teachers in England were too conscientious!
W. S. L. Kowalski, Zoeterwoude, The Netherlands

Fascinating to see Mr Kilroy-Silk talking so passionately about "Freedom of Speech", when he was so rude to one member of the audience that she was unable to make her point. Who is the hypocrite?
Chris Hall, Devon

Good questions, very lively, good audience. The programme this week was better than usual, probably because the panel had strong opinions and there was no real government line. Ed Ball was very weak. This is what makes a good programme, a good argument. The recent one from America was excellent. I still miss Robin Day.
Gordon Haughie, Manchester

I don't think I've seen a panel more polarised in their views before. It was obvious that the Labour party would not field a more "high powered" candidate to answer the issues raised in this week's news and this helped the other parties come together. I thought Ed Balls performed well in the circumstances, although I did not agree with his position.
S Mcgregor, Bury St Edmunds

I thought DD showed weak chairmanship in allowing an experienced public speaker like Silk to harangue a young female speaker from the audience. After all without the audience, there would be no Question Time.
Robert Stannard, Penrith

Text: Kilroy for president!
Bob, London

Please, no more Kilroy. Enough!
Zane Kassam, London

Why oh why do you have whingers like Germaine on this programme? I normally watch every week but I've turned the TV off until This Week comes on because that woman is on the screen.
John, London

Text: The best panel for ages will be staying with this crew tonight!
John and Pauline, Devon

Text: Oliver and Germaine are always on! New panel please.
Mark, London

Can you stop that horrible Kilroy from haranguing the audience. David Dimbleby should exercise some control.
Paul Hayes, Manchester

Text: Kilroy talks more sense than the rest put together.
Laura, London

Is it my hearing or is there something wrong with the tape of the theme tune to "Question Time"? It sounds vaguely as if it is being played at the wrong speed.
Glyn Haggett, Milton Keynes

Text: Please someone sink the ship.
Shirley, London

Text: Cut the gas by half. Ban the panel from talking.
Bex, Plymouth

Ed Balls says he is not an expert on the subjects discussed on tonight's programme, says he doesn't have an opinion... what the hell is he doing in politics?
David, Manchester, UK

Text: Kilroy is being out-smugged by Letwin.
Nigel, London

Kilroy Silk strikes again. I wish he would not say that he was a Catholic - he gives us and any other group he belongs to a bad name. On tonight's programme he started to brow-beat a young female member of the audience when asked about Northern Ireland.
Razza, Glasgow

Text: Man the lifeboats! Kilroy hot air alert.
Graham, Manchester

Ed Balls lives up to his name. Robert Kilroy-Silk is weird and slightly scary.
Robert Goldsmith, Guildford

Text: Robert is the only member of your panel who tells it as it is and does not waffle.
Colin

Text: Why is Germaine wearing Bob Geldolf's hair?
David Idehill

Text: I applaud Ed Balls for his achievements in the face of adversity.
Bob Nipple, Preston

I presume that the objectives of Question Time require that panel members are able to contribute with some degree of civility, respect for others views, and with some sense of reflection on what has been said. Why, then, do you give airtime to the reactionary and inflammatory views of R Kilroy Silk? It can't be because he is a specialist in any way, or wields any influence, or has any credible political platform! So why do you let him undermine the show?
Richard Rogers, Bristol

Text: Is Kilroy's skin looking better after his mud pack?
C Mac, Glasgow

Text: The ultimate deterrent? Germaine's nest of hair.
Steve, Edinburgh

Return to the top of the page

---

Disclaimer: The BBC will put up as many of your comments as possible but we cannot guarantee that all e-mails will be published. The BBC reserves the right to edit comments that are published.