many young people meeks universities impractical. in the u.k. parliament report access the ninth one in the three people said they wanted to go to universities but were not able to deutsch to the financial burden of living away from home, a figure that is set to skyrocket with proposals by the government to increase

university tuition fees to 9,000 pounds a year. what's more, past increases in the threshold were not and are still not enough to ensure that everyone who wants to study at universities can. crippling debt is launching out thousands of young people from their right to education and their right to a stable working future. the tax principle provides a safety net for those universities and the higher education standards for 28% of the u.k. graduates out of work but a quarter of graduates would insure that people in the situation would pay nothing until they are in the work and

even better, a person on an average salary of 13,000 pounds would be 37,000 pounds better off each month. it could be argued that the abolition of university tuition fees would benefit young people more, but contributing to a system that we benefit directly from is a contribution we must all be willing to make. the problem with the system is they are snapped up by the treasury and not used to fund the university's in line with the graduate tax would be the formation of an independent body. this organization would distribute tax revenue directly to universities. there is also a range of opportunities to compete globally. we hear arguments about the fact that because it is a university education they shouldn't ask us to pay for hours and that was

the basis for your decision. i am sure the politicians would love to be at the center of this debate in the spotlight but don't let them be. it would be in my view, quite frankly, to not in something we will inevitably game from the service provider. this is not the self-interest of business education but is the same quality of education for everybody. young person after young person, generation after generation. the simple logic is without money and without resources what does a university become? paid the money when you can come and no need to recruit debt and then pay when you can. is it right to accept year as the barrier to education? no. is it right after a little extra from higher earners?

absolutely. shouldn't universities be given the money they deserve? of course. as a country it is our duty to educate on the perspective courage of its it is our right to learn. next year there has been a 9% drop in the university application after a rise we were promised within happen. this debate is ongoing and it's time for us, the u.k. youth parliament to settle. today we must show our commitment to every young person we represent. beauts for fairness and education for better education and for sustained funding in education vote for this campaign. [applause] thank you.

to oppose the nation i call mr. hunton. [applause] >> thank you mr. speaker. a graduate tax is completely wrong. but so is the current tuition fee system. both these expect the students to pay for the higher education. they also charge students differing amounts for the same degree. government figures show that over their lifetime graduates earn on average over 100,000 pounds more than those without degrees. they therefore pay much more tax and as a result pay the cost of their higher education. our current system leads to the post. the nyt pays nothing for the degree in scotland.

and they pay $27 pounds for exactly the same degree. the nyp pays just over a total of 9,000 pounds wherever they choose to study. but the nyp pays a total of 9,000 pounds only if they chose to study in northern ireland. we are all a part of that united kingdom, but if you are english it's going to cost you. [laughter] [applause] it isn't fair and it isn't equal. so what do we do about this problem the? we must make a university degree a truly count. there are far too many people studying degrees that can't provide little and we wonder why graduate unemployment is rising.

we must reduce the number of university places and increase opportunities at the vocational colleges. if we do this it would truly return to being market excellence. this change would make the tuition fees and the graduate tax year relevant. all nyp should oppose this motion. i'd ask you to vote against the campaign. a graduate tax is not the way forward. that is why i am opposing it. we should be campaigning to take responsibility for their action. they never paid for their degree but they expect us to pay for hours. my generation, our generation. it isn't called an economic mess we are in. i suggest that each puts their money where their mouth is and pays for the degree they've already got. [applause]

[cheering] if they want to vote for a graduate tax they can pay it back. [laughter] so, ed miller band, you may win tonight, but your party betrayed generations of students. produced tuition fees. david cameron, i suppose paying for education is nothing new to you. [laughter] 27,000 pounds compared to the past of going and then there's nec clegg. you were elected promising to

scrap tuition fees. that went well, didn't it? [applause] so that 27,000 pounds from ed michaud dave and nick and they can't all afford it. i urge you to vote against the campaign. let's make a m p pay for their degree. thank you. [applause] i can only assume when alec stands for parliament it will be for the leader of the new reformed. [laughter] thank you very much indeed for that. can we have a speaker from

scotland on this matter? no? what about the young women here? >> will they be able to use a tuition fees to the english universities? tuition fees are considered a part as i am sure you and many people we represent will apply. i believe reform to the repayment of the fee is is a matter that should be thoroughly investigated. a graduate tax would totally alleviate the share creating a system that would fairly charge people for the benefit in their degree and also create a more active network of universities for all students no longer deterring them from high and academia and creating equal the opportunities that we have but

the core. [applause] >> what about the young man here, please? >> thank you, mr. speaker. education, education tony blair in this very room. no decide how by nick leggitt in his constituency. these politicians say that education is a universal right to young people. in my lifetime i've seen it increased to 3,000 pounds and then again to 9,000 pounds. somebody four months younger than me has to get -- we are told everyday by politicians the situation we are in a moment about the situation. we can't afford to be. yet when i come out with the university i don't see 27,000 pounds worth of debt. the tuition fee is going to pay less per month not as much per

month as they did under the 3,000 pounds. yes i still have to pay 27,000 pounds of my own money for an education for any western politician would say we have the right to. it doesn't make any sense. granted the politician didn't have to pay for their university fi we shouldn't have to either. [applause] >> the young man back here, please. >> i live 10 miles from the border so i'm very keenly aware of the differences between the nation's. the scottish liberal democrat allowed to do in favor of the tuition fee right in england and

completely one of the things constituents about know this year public transport. because of the massive debt they would incur and a graduate of tax is not the solution would cause far more problems i will just give you a few. all students in the union must be treated in an equal way to those in the country this means an english student for example the same grants and fees at the nature of that country and teach national languages on either of those countries while all of the country's teaching question there are many more students coming to england and britain going to other countries.

this current system has to be repaid and get back with the student leaves the u.k. it is possible and there is no tax system that would be impossible to correct to move the e.u. nationals when they return to their own country without reaching. this applies to the u.k. if they graduate and move abroad how the government already essentially got my degree for free. this would incur the highest paid salaries to move abroad so they could avoid this tax. also if i didn't complete my experience do i get a graduate tax? there are disincentives for someone who is with a poor degree instead of getting a market they could drop out a few weeks before the finish. they don't have to be graduate tax. finally, this would not abolish debt.

students still need to pay for a combination. so they will still graduate with a debt that needs to be paid off alongside our graduates. i believe the system has all the benefits of a graduate tax without these major flaws of the white don't agree with the rise in the tuition fees and i would urge my fellows to go against this ridiculous proposal and the risk of serious financial implications for the universities in the future. there are much better options instead of the current tax. [applause] >> what about the young woman in the back row with a yellow top and a jacket around it? >> yes indeed. you. [laughter]

>> i'm rebecca. they point out the graduate tax would get rid of debt. we'll throw around the word a bit like it is the worst thing ever but there are different kinds of debt. governing and spending thousands of pounds is unhealthy debt that is not going to benefit in the future but if you make the calculation the university is going to need you can get the job you want, the salary you want then surely that is a calculation you should make and invest in that and you should think okay i'm going to have to cut back slowly. we've raised it now. you pay that back each month so should you look at that and go i'm going to earn this investment in my future. [applause]

>> thank you. what about the woman in the third row. thank you. spry climate nicole and i represent dublin. it has been proven going to the university and getting a degree and 12,000 pounds if you think about it this more than one year of your degree paid off. if you think about how they pay graduate tax that only covers your tuition fee. it doesn't cover the food and living cost that you incur when you go to a university. i do not propose that you go against what we propose that we should change it and make it known it shouldn't say no tuition fee is additional so say no to university costs and tax should incur all the cost that you develop. [applause]

>> thank you. the gentleman from northern ireland. >> i would like to reiterate my colleague's plight. i believe that education in the university should be cut but saved for the hard-working, the top and the diligent. money should be pumped into vocational courses from the long war. those who figured the debt of the tuition fee the pen is mightier than the sword opportunity for all of us. [applause] specs before very much. what about the young woman in the front. >> one thing straight. the proposal of the graduate tax is by the you see you essentially an exercise in rebounding and at the end of the day does not filter the astronomical rise in feed, cable and other graduate tax politicians on the claims with the fees that we would all be subjected to from september,

2010. they admitted that we already pay the budget tax and what in fact pay more. an example, the university would pay 36,871 pounds if the government implemented the 5% tax on their earnings over 25 years. on the previous instance it would pay 10,000 pounds. is it safe to say that this disadvantage of lonnae demise is exactly why no other country in the world is in the system please oppose this motion. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. >> what about the young man -- yes in the row in the second to the back. please. >> thank you very much. >> i represent sutphen. like many i was aghast when i heard about the increasing fees and i strongly oppose it passed in this chamber. however, now we indicate i've looked at it more closely and if

on in the coming out of the university in the realistic salary of 30,000 pounds i would pay just over 60 pounds a month. this is very affordable for people and possible to live on the 21,000-pound threshold amount so anymore that you are paying on top of that is a price worth paying for the degree the you get. the cost of the adversities and tuition fees. these are paid up front. this isn't what stops anyone from going to the universities. what people need to look at is the cost associated with living away from the first time for many of us. more help with means to be given to the students but that is not what this debate is about if we were to switch to a graduate tax all it would do is increase cost for a country that doesn't frankly have any money at the moment any way because the administration could switch system isn't worth the benefit of the graduate tax which is why

i think we should oppose this motion for the national campaign. [applause] >> element ago wales was referred to in passing and if we did have a speaker from whales that would be great. >> i think we have to meet the campaign that education is needed [inaudible] if you want to make perfect you have to need [inaudible] people need to be told how to deal and the same goes for anti-poverty. people need the education to sort these things out. well okay. there's not much to pay at the end of the month if you or any reasonable salary and if you are

making that much getting a job he wanted you want to pay it any way because it says you only have to pay when [inaudible] [applause] there's a young man we wish to contribute to this bixby for mr. speaker. if i may say being a young five-year-old child we are making it through because we want you to achieve your best, everything with no tax to pay. what has happened our government system a young person is now going into university and paying tax becoming in debt. what we are doing we are destroying and strapping young people's future.

the only people that can afford this are rich people and if i may say one more thing a lot of people that are from other countries in europe become to england they don't have to pay the 9,000-pound to vision fi however if you are from england and you are a young person you are to pay the 9,000-pound tuition fee directly and even though this loan by the government i think it isn't the right thing the reason being even though say a person has to subjects which caused 9,000 pounds they will pay back that loan by the time they are in their late 50s. we need to put something else forward and secure the future of young people in universities for years to come and david cameron i urge you don't struck young people's future. think about young people coming and think about people that do

not have much money as yourself and put them first and put young people first and that is why i'm here today to support young people. [applause] >> thank you for that impassioned speech. i would like to hear somebody from this side. yes. it was you with the red tie that i had in mind. >> i am of the nyp mentioned in the speech. 25% of young people [inaudible] this means one in every four people in my constituency will

not have the opportunity to fulfil their potential. in the u.n. it says higher education should be accessible for on all based on ability, not ability to pay. access for fraud isn't based on ability. it's based on the ability to pay which is wrong. people say that they fear the debt. they see their payments at home to get loans to pay the bills and put food on their tables and the stress of their parents are having and think i don't want that. i don't want that stress. i want a better life, so i will not go to the university.

but is doing this country a disservice. 12% less people in this country so education this year. that means there's plenty 12% of lawyers, teachers and people from elsewhere in cambridge that will be educated. from the other area is very low and seriously meeting to be improved and this would be greatly to encourage markets in cambridge. [applause] >> can i have someone speech from the northwest? what about the young woman right in the very back row. yes, you, looking down. >> i am from the northwest. i would like to address the

tuition fees from the poor and the rich and further divided we are going to have the degree and increase in the scholarship was developed more and people would be allowed to enter the university in the expectation. [applause] >> thank you. >> i would like to hear someone from the east midland in the debate. what about the young woman right in the back row. thank you. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i'm from the east midland. i believe that universities should be seen as an investment. everyone has the opportunity to go to universities and once you get a degree, you will be earning extremely more money because of your degree, you will be able to pay off your feet.

i'm sure the u.k. tax paid off would agree that we've already pay enough taxes. would anyone want to be paying any more after the degree that they should be seeing investing in? if you can't get a job after degree then maybe you shouldn't be getting a degree in the first place. maybe you should be going into vocational education that will help you more with your future. i don't think that graduate tax is the right way for word. we need to fix the system and in perfect and educate our young people more so they know what opportunities they have to get the best of their education. anyone can figure of the ability anyone can pay off their fees after the degree if they get a job. thank you. [applause] we are pleased to be joined by

steven gilbert, a member of parliament i'm glad i got that right, and the very appropriately by the conservative member of parliament from exxon in the northeast of england, and that is very fitting because we need now to hear from a young person from the northeast. who have we got? yes, the young man at the back. >> i would like to raise an issue with the gentleman who says we have the sort of independent quality and the last thing we want. the last thing i want for the students is the task having income tax and pension contributions the west thing i want is another graduate tax because the problem is the tax on jobs.

it is lucky enough to have an education to get a job and i think that's to have a graduate tax to have a job. thank you. [applause] >> i am very sorry but time is against us and we have other debates, so we do now need to wind up the debate and to conclude i would call poppies temmins peery [applause] >> thank you mr. speaker. hello. to start i have something for you all to think about. under the current tuition fee system when a student uses companies to cover the cost as many do, when they graduate they will pay 9% of their earnings with a salary of 20,000 pounds. now if you are paying a percentage of your urning as a contribution to establishing the

views and who it's benefited from it is quite like an attack. thinking about it this way, the two systems are remarkably similar. the difference is the weight of tax and the threshold therefore the amount you pay back will be different. we know we need to pay some things toward the cost of the university education but which is the best way to contribute. we've gone from one extreme to the other over the years from paying nothing to paying close to 9,000 pounds on what we as the u.k. parliament has to question now is the graduate tax is the right next step. well it could be especially therefore having a graduate tax system to open up the possibility to those who've never even dreamed about.

as covered earlier it was discovered by the national union of students to graduate because 30,000 pounds would be better off each month. however, this could also be a step backwards for the fact under divergent tax system there is no set value meaning to people in the same cost could end up paying different amounts for it. so many would question the fairness has showed earlier what they've paid. the truth is that is an equally low tax. especially on a day like this. many members gave the excellent reasons whether we should have a tuition fee or graduate tax system and what i realize is that there is no clear-cut answer to this. your job now as the u.k.

parliament and people is to vote on what you think is right. there are brilliant cases for this debate on the major campaign and ultimately it's up to you. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you. we move now to the consideration of the third motion of the day and of course the last of the morning session related to bullying and was printed on the motion i would call mr. david crone. [applause] >> hostility is not inherited. antagonism is not genetic. the tendency to torment and the

inclination to intimidate are not by human nature but a learned behavior. the poisonous source of all intolerance, prejudice and discrimination is ignorance, preconception and divergence. to tackle bullying when it is flourishing and in full bloom and should be nothing more than a final result in the adversity. to cause it's rude to rot before it has effects is a true victory in the name of a quality. simply punishable might believe that instance of suffering but won't challenge that. to simply discipline and individual that particular problem won't eradicate the undertones.

just simply penalizing for marking a person with a disability might close that chapter of ridicule but won't solve that ignorance of the condition. a quality can only be obtained through education. ecology can only be secured when school's foster closer which is characterized by respect. when the extended curriculum encourages young people to embrace the characteristics that make them each unique yet value future that brings them all together. humanity. suspension from schools is a short term plaster that cannot fully cover the deep wound of misunderstanding and ignorance. rehabilitation and education is what we needed. despite recent work that still remains in the intensity of the

problem from school to school and policies are often directed blamed without the full support of parents students and professionals. no piece of legislation and discussion so why should the rules about schools be treated any differently? how can a matter in the wellbeing of children and young people be left to chance? some may think that bullying is a mask for what is actually hurtful criminality and gender children may not realize how frivolous words are naturally the origin of a punishable crime. it is a attack is unacceptable and warrants consequence so why would this make it any less severe? we would cry if they overlook

the heat crime so why overlook to close from? why should it be permitted in private? research has shown six in ten is between ten to 14 would commit at least one crime by the age of 24. put simply, if we do not immediately highlight and tackle the issue they risk falling into an embrace of oil and ongoing cycle of illegalities and in more nullity. there appears to be a separation between what some schools define as bullying and what others decide is not. despite research that suggests it is an issue three times its prevalence figures show they've been in almost half of all instances of bullying. to remain silent of spoken

tolerance and to ignore the issue will allow it to the balloon and intensified. more than 60% of the cases the students said nothing was done and every potential instances recognized and prevented and every transpired incident is challenged and questioned we cannot begin to strive the community for young people until every child can rely on every member to tackle a free situation with convictions, confidence and concern we cannot claim to seek aid zero tolerance approach to bullying. the current situation is reliant on the charities and a growing number of teenage suicide with dwindling confidence and increasing so floating young people are by the policies we have now. 170 donelson, to and from school

because they are being bullied. they transport energy with the foundations of it all is second education, and if we want the 170,000 dead people at school on monday the first step is to make this issue our priority. thank you. [applause] >> david, thank you for that terrific start to this important debate. before i oppose the information, i note in passing we have now been joined by the liberal democratic member of parliament. the liberal democratic and chief mr. alistair carvel. sure yourself. [applause] >> thank you. to oppose the notion. [applause]

>> mr. speaker, the house is and always will be a very serious issue yet this is something the government, schools and society as a whole are all very aware. schools in scotland are strongly recommended to have an antibullying policy with every single school in england, wales and northern ireland is required by law to have a policy against bullying. members of parliament this issue is being addressed. this campaign proposes they should focus on making schools change the antibullying policies in the process that involves both students and professionals

and the antibullying policies seems like a good move but if the way they deal with bullying the problem we are compassionate creatures. we feel for the victims and punish accordingly. but i ask you a campaign on zero tolerance towards bullying makes one harmful assumption that the victims will overcome the often horrifying obstacle of telling someone about their suffering. research shows for 30% of just ten to 14-year-old sutphen subject to bullying did not tell anyone that the kid been bullied. these are the most vulnerable children that must be helped. schools are already dealing

with. the motion ignores this. despite the flaw of the notion already outlined whether or not a teacher act for an eventual incident of bullying that the witness or even if they implement the policy it is not something that tests they can tackle has too often suffered from nigh eve ambition and not delivered results on its campaigns. my friends, it is time that we tackle an issue that we convict. we must find the root cause of bullying, not the recurring symptoms. the root cause of the issue is far deeply ingrained in society for the u.k. to make any impact. surely this issue lines in the

way the we are brought up three the the way that we are educated. more than that, the we that we can go through our lives being a part of society encouraged to compete with one another in schools and where the danger this social hierarchy that we seek to the degree where intention is and systematically harming another human being seems acceptable. it is bullying, not how we deal with it. members, we must vote in a campaign we can all bring about real change. do not let this unachievable motion pass. thank you. [applause] >> great pressure on time for

extreme brevity in speeches if we can deliver that and we will be able to get a reasonable number of people in. i'm looking in the first place somebody from the mist west mckibben thank >> thank you mr. speaker. the main cause i think a certain type of bullying's background. i'm looking at an area where i've had the privilege to learn about other people's cultures not all young people have this opportunity therefore i believe should be to encourage young people to respect and learn. thank you very much. [applause] >> the woman in the second row. >> thank you mr. speaker.

i think your own education i'm sure everyone in this room can think who has experienced bullying if that is the case surely the government initiative are asking young people have to go to school and they shouldn't be penalized and punished when they are. we should stand for as young people both as in our campaign because we can make a difference thank you. [applause] schaenman what about the woman here in the second row with a long blond hair. >> im m lee carter from the southwest. we are u.k. why he and the are the voices of young people. so surely we should have this as a mean campaign as we want to tackle this and help because we want to help all of the used.

we want to help the young people in this society and we want to make things better, not just things like the tax, we want it to help people have a more enjoyable life and going to the university's surely we need to help people before they get their when they are in a situation they can't deal with and we need to make it more comfortable for them so they can go forward in their life positive with a positive future. [applause] >> it's time for another speaker from london. okay. let's have the young man in the second row. >> bullying is causing a three-pronged approach. they are working with the community. we all know the bullying at any

level simply leads to the division within the poor communities. more needs to be done by all parties to ensure that it stands out at the level. during this the amount of bullying that i saw [inaudible] it escalates. for example the education [inaudible] attacking homophobic and bullying this was announced in july, 2011 in the child regardless of the ground believes with sexual orientation can be happy tall times of their life especially in the school is in their interest they will be the benefactors no longer a

problem and more efficiently. if we act today it will be a happier tomorrow and to a more productive economy will be safer and happier. [applause] >> a voice from scotland. is there a voice from scotland? may be wanting to contribute. >> thank you. though local authorities create a policy at the schools and the task to work with all of these authorities to work on one large project and would be a great thing to see but i don't think

that it would be possible to do and i think it may be better if they are elsewhere. thank you. [applause] >> how about the northeast of england. anybody from the northeast? what about the young woman. >> northeast england. he said as an organization they can make a difference. welcome to me just because the scale doesn't mean we shouldn't try? is that the truth and it proves to me how much is invested in our society that we do not believe in ourselves. thank you. [applause] >> what about east mcminn? i would like to look at a specific issue. >> your name is? >> [inaudible] >> i would like to talk about a

specific issue on lesbian and gay and transsexual bullying. it is disgusting someone should be picked on for their orientation. we heard earlier the 65% the society it is one of the only campaign between the campaign and we need a national young people to be supporting in the campaign young people provide further time fourth because of these matters and it cannot continue. thank you. [applause]

anybody from northern ireland? >> this year the number of children along and in the depression or suicidal thoughts increase by 300 per cent since last year and among these many one on a scale of bullying 87% of the northern irish l gb are doing is not enough to help the bullying. they do not have any significant way that i urge you to load the importance of the measure. [applause] wasden mcwhorter about this guy there. yes.

>> [inaudible] we need to. we are all [inaudible] believe school suspension is the wrong way to get through it. however this is one opportunity we can use and for the wrong reasons which can be bullied bring back the titles to say get rid of the story. we should be doing this. we should be doing this all together. bring back the work and get rid of it. [applause] >> somebody from the northwest.

>> [inaudible] people who didn't 21 about their experience of cyber bullying it could lead a young person spiraling into a depression and their grades may drop significantly. the problem is almost impossible to teach and unless it actually comes forward but still even when students do how they are supposed to figure of who is bullying is behind the computer screen it would take the effort by parents and other because they can argue it is in this

duty. they could contend taking control as an undue burden on them so to think about this and can we actually do any more. [applause] >> thank you. >> thank you. >> we have been joined, i can't see him now but he was here a moment ago. stephen, thank you for coming and supporting. we may see him again in a few minutes. >> to speak in wales. yes, the woman in the back holding her hand up. yes, indeed. thank you. >> i believe there are two types of bullying. it is hard to hide and with the

exclusion to speak out [inaudible] it should be the campaign. [applause] >> to we have here from the east of england? yes? >> when someone holds with somebody is overrated to be honest, and i think that we need to change what we define as bullying. yes there is a problem with bullying but i think that comes down to the parental control and not enough discipline. [applause] >> i am sorry that we've run out of time.

we have managed to accommodate each region in each of the three debates with the exception of the first debate but no one in northern ireland want to speak on the first debate and we have accommodated every region. i know it is never enough and i'm afraid that's right and to conclude the debate i now call mr. robert littleton. [applause] >> thank you, mr. speaker. bullying is a terrible practice that should never be tolerated. that is something which i think everyone in this room and indeed in this country can agree with. what we are looking at today is the way we deal with bullying. this notion proposes greater competition between people, a teacher and professionals and suggests there should be an increase in the amount of training and support available.

during the last 30 minutes we've had some interesting inspirational and very passionate views about the most controversial topics today but the key aspect you must consider when you cast your vote is whether you think we are doing enough already to tackle this issue and if you consider it to be the most crucial problem facing young people who've put us here today bullying is a widespread issue and it has great consequences on the individual's over one-third of young people experienced bullying or discrimination during that childhood. that is about six rows of people in the chamber. enough people to fill two will double decker buses.

is there enough people to consider this the most prominent issue facing young people today? as we have heard there are also many reasons one shouldn't be as the top priority. there are a number of antibullying lobby is already in place to come from this issue throughout the u.k.. by law and an antibullying policy. bearing that in mind, is it still necessary for us to make this our number one campaign. another issue is that bullying legislation is extremely difficult to generalize across the whole country as each region were nation would have its own specific problems and solutions dealing with bullying. surely what did they not be foolish to create one rule for the whole of the u.k. as we are proposing? another problem is that it's

changed greatly over the last couple of years with the development over the new age of bullying in the form of cyber intimidation when you cast your vote today you must ask yourself will this notion deal with the prevention of cyber bullion as well? your decision today could have enormous consequences. your vote could change 1,000 lives or it could just change one life. either way, you can make a difference. so, please, we ought both sides of the argument and come to a conclusion. should we have a zero tolerance approach towards bling in schools? thank you. [applause] >> thank you. that concludes the morning session. the parliament will now adjourn until one thanks 30 p.m.