The following is a list of episodes of Question Time, a British current affairs debate television programme broadcast by BBC Television.
Contents
Year overview · Presenters · Highest appearance makers Year: 1979 · 1980 · 1981 · 1982 · 1983 · 1984 · 1985 · 1986 · 1987 · 1988 · 1989 |
YouTube Encyclopedic
-
1/5Views:36 691 65313 532 535623 17839 659 1223 149 095
-
Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 01 "THE MORAL SIDE OF MURDER"
-
Peppa Pig Season 1 Episode 10 - Gardening - Cartoons for Children
-
Yash the ghost hunter ( Episode 1 ) | Hindi Paheli | Paheliyan | Riddles in Hindi | Mind Your Logic
-
How Do People Catch a Cold? 🤒 Ask the StoryBots FULL EPISODE | Netflix Jr
-
Odd Squad FULL EPISODE | O Games | PBS KIDS
Transcription
Funding for this program is provided by:
Additional funding provided by
This is a course about Justice and we begin
with a story
suppose you're the driver of a trolley car,
and your trolley car is hurdling down
the track at sixty miles an hour
and at the end of the track you notice
five workers working on the track
you tried to stop but you can't
your brakes don't work
you feel desperate because you know
that if you crash into these five workers
they will all die
let's assume you know that for sure
and so you feel helpless
until you notice that there is
off to the right
a side track
at the end of that track
there's one worker
working on track
you're steering wheel works
so you can
turn the trolley car if you want to
onto this side track
killing the one
but sparing the five.
Here's our first question
what's the right thing to do?
What would you do?
Let's take a poll,
how many
would turn the trolley car onto the side track?
How many wouldn't?
How many would go straight ahead
keep your hands up, those of you who'd go straight
ahead.
A handful of people would, the vast majority
would turn
let's hear first
now we need to begin to investigate the reasons
why you think
it's the right thing to do. Let's begin with
those in the majority, who would turn
to go onto side track?
Why would you do it,
what would be your reason?
Who's willing to volunteer a reason?
Go ahead, stand up.
Because it can't be right to kill five people
when you can only kill one person instead.
it wouldn't be right to kill five
if you could kill one person instead
that's a good reason
that's a good reason
who else?
does everybody agree with that
reason? go ahead.
Well I was thinking it was the same reason it was on
9/11 we regard the people who flew the plane
who flew the plane into the
Pennsylvania field as heroes
because they chose to kill the people on the
plane
and not kill more people
in big buildings.
So the principle there was the same on 9/11
it's tragic circumstance,
but better to kill one so that five can
live
is that the reason most of you have, those
of you who would turn, yes?
Let's hear now
from
those in the minority
those who wouldn't turn.
Well I think that same type of mentality that
justifies genocide and totalitarianism
in order to save one type of race you
wipe out the other.
so what would you do in this case? You would
to avoid
the horrors of genocide
you would crash into the five and kill them?
Presumably yes.
okay who else?
That's a brave answer, thank you.
Let's consider another
trolley car case
and see
whether
those of you in the majority
want to adhere to the principle,
better that one should die so that five
should live.
This time you're not the driver of the trolley
car, you're an onlooker
standing on a bridge overlooking a trolley car track
and down the track comes a trolley car
at the end of the track are five workers
the brakes don't work
the trolley car is about to careen into the
five and kill them
and now
you're not the driver
you really feel helpless
until you notice
standing next to you
leaning over
the bridge
is it very fat man.
And you could
give him a shove
he would fall over the bridge
onto the track
right in the way of
the trolley car
he would die
but he would spare the five.
Now, how many would push
the fat man over the bridge? Raise your hand.
How many wouldn't?
Most people wouldn't.
Here's the obvious question,
what became
of the principle
better to save five lives even if it means
sacrificing one, what became of the principal
that almost everyone endorsed
in the first case
I need to hear from someone who was in the
majority in both
cases is
how do you explain the difference between
the two?
The second one I guess involves an
active choice of
pushing a person
and down which
I guess that
that person himself would otherwise not
have been involved in the situation at all
and so
to choose on his behalf I guess
to
involve him in something that he otherwise would
have this escaped is
I guess more than
what you have in the first case where
the three parties, the driver and
the two sets of workers are
already I guess in this situation.
but the guy working, the one on the track
off to the side
he didn't choose to sacrifice his life any
more than the fat guy did, did he?
That's true, but he was on the tracks.
this guy was on the bridge.
Go ahead, you can come back if you want.
Alright, it's a hard question
but you did well you did very well it's a
hard question.
who else
can
find a way of reconciling
the reaction of the majority in these two cases? Yes?
Well I guess
in the first case where
you have the one worker and the five
it's a choice between those two, and you have to
make a certain choice and people are going to die
because of the trolley car
not necessarily because of your direct actions.
The trolley car is a runway,
thing and you need to make in a split second choice
whereas pushing the fat man over is an actual
act of murder on your part
you have control over that
whereas you may not have control over the trolley car.
So I think that it's a slightly different situation.
Alright who has a reply? Is that, who has a reply to that?
no that was good, who has a way
who wants to reply?
Is that a way out of this?
I don't think that's a very good reason because
you choose
either way you have to choose who dies
because you either choose to turn and kill a person
which is an act of conscious
thought to turn,
or you choose to push the fat man
over which is also an active
conscious action so either way you're making a choice.
Do you want to reply?
Well I'm not really sure that that's the case, it just still
seems kind of different, the act of actually
pushing someone over onto the tracks and killing them,
you are actually killing him yourself, you're pushing
him with your own hands you're pushing and
that's different
than steering something that is going to
cause death
into another...you know
it doesn't really sound right saying it now when I'm up here.
No that's good, what's your name?
Andrew.
Andrew and let me ask you this question Andrew,
suppose
standing on the bridge
next to the fat man
I didn't have to push him, suppose he was standing
over a trap door that I could open by turning
a steering wheel like that
would you turn it?
For some reason that still just seems more
more wrong.
I mean maybe if you just accidentally like leaned into
this steering wheel or something like that
or but,
or say that the car is
hurdling towards a switch that will drop the trap
then I could agree with that.
Fair enough, it still seems
wrong in a way that it doesn't seem wrong in the
first case to turn, you say
An in another way, I mean in the first situation you're
involved directly with the situation
in the second one you're an onlooker as well.
So you have the choice of becoming involved
or not by pushing the fat man.
Let's forget for the moment about this case,
that's good,
but let's imagine a different case. This time
your doctor in an emergency room
and six patients come to you
they've been in a terrible trolley car wreck
five of them sustained moderate injuries one
is severely injured you could spend all day
caring for the one severely injured victim,
but in that time the five would die, or you could
look after the five, restore them to health, but
during that time the one severely injured
person would die.
How many would save
the five
now as the doctor?
How many would save the one?
Very few people,
just a handful of people.
Same reason I assume,
one life versus five.
Now consider
another doctor case
this time you're a transplant surgeon
and you have five patients each in desperate
need
of an organ transplant in order to survive
on needs a heart one a lung,
one a kidney,
one a liver
and the fifth
a pancreas.
And you have no organ donors
you are about to
see you them die
and then
it occurs to you
that in the next room
there's a healthy guy who came in for a checkup.
and he is
you like that
and he's taking a nap
you could go in very quietly
yank out the five organs, that person would
die
but you can save the five.
How many would do it? Anyone?
How many? Put your hands up if you would do it.
Anyone in the balcony?
You would? Be careful don't lean over too much
How many wouldn't?
All right.
What do you say, speak up in the balcony, you
who would
yank out the organs, why?
I'd actually like to explore slightly alternate
possibility of just taking the one
of the five he needs an organ who dies first
and using their four healthy organs to save the other
four
That's a pretty good idea.
That's a great idea
except for the fact
that you just wrecked the philosophical point.
Let's step back
from these stories and these arguments
to notice a couple of things
about the way the arguments have began to unfold.
Certain
moral principles
have already begun to emerge
from the discussions we've had
and let's consider
what those moral principles
look like
the first moral principle that emerged from the
discussion said
that the right thing to do the moral thing to do
depends on the consequences that will result
from your action
at the end of the day
better that five should live
even if one must die.
That's an example
of consequentialist
moral reasoning.
consequentialist moral reasoning locates morality
in the consequences of an act. In the state of the
world that will result
from the thing you do
but then we went a little further, we considered
those other cases
and people weren't so sure
about
consequentialist moral reasoning
when people hesitated
to push the fat man
over the bridge
or to yank out the organs of the innocent
patient
people gestured towards
reasons
having to do
with the intrinsic
quality of the act
itself.
Consequences be what they may.
People were reluctant
people thought it was just wrong
categorically wrong
to kill
a person
an innocent person
even for the sake
of saving
five lives, at least these people thought that
in the second
version of each story we reconsidered
so this points
a second
categorical
way
of thinking about
moral reasoning
categorical moral reasoning locates morality
in certain absolute moral requirements in
certain categorical duties and rights
regardless of the consequences.
We're going to explore
in the days and weeks to come the contrast
between
consequentialist and categorical moral principles.
The most influential
example of
consequential moral reasoning is utilitarianism,
a doctrine invented by
Jeremy Bentham, the eighteenth century English
political philosopher.
The most important
philosopher of categorical moral reasoning
is the
eighteenth century German philosopher
Emmanuel Kant.
So we will look
at those two different modes of moral reasoning
assess them
and also consider others.
If you look at the syllabus, you'll notice
that we read a number of great and famous books.
Books by Aristotle
John Locke
Emanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill,
and others.
You'll notice too from the syllabus that
we don't only read these books,
we also all
take up
contemporary political and legal controversies
that raise philosophical questions.
We will debate equality and inequality,
affirmative action,
free speech versus hate speech,
same sex marriage, military conscription,
a range of practical questions, why
not just to enliven these abstract and distant
books
but to make clear to bring out what's at stake
in our everyday lives including our political
lives,
for philosophy.
So we will read these books
and we will debate these
issues and we'll see how each informs and
illuminates the other.
This may sound appealing enough
but here
I have to issue a warning,
and the warning is this
to read these books
in this way,
as an exercise in self-knowledge,
to read them in this way carry certain risks
risks that are both personal and political,
risks that every student of political philosophy have known.
These risks spring from that fact
that philosophy
teaches us
and unsettles us
by confronting us with what we already know.
There's an irony
the difficulty of this course consists in the
fact that it teaches what you already know.
It works by taking
what we know from familiar unquestioned settings,
and making it strange.
That's how those examples worked
worked
the hypotheticals with which we began with their
mix of playfulness and sobriety.
it's also how these philosophical books work. Philosophy
estranges us
from the familiar
not by supplying new information
but by inviting
and provoking
a new way of seeing
but, and here's the risk,
once
the familiar turns strange,
it's never quite the same again.
Self-knowledge
is like lost innocence,
however unsettling
you find it,
it can never
be unthought
or unknown
what makes this enterprise difficult
but also riveting,
is that
moral and political philosophy is a story
and you don't know where this story will lead
but what you do know
is that the story
is about you.
Those are the personal risks,
now what of the political risks.
one way of introducing of course like this
would be to promise you
that by reading these books
and debating these issues
you will become a better more responsible
citizen.
You will examine the presuppositions of
public policy, you will hone your political
judgment
you'll become a more effective participant
in public affairs
but this would be a partial and misleading promise
political philosophy for the most part hasn't
worked that way.
You have to allow for the possibility
that political philosophy may make you a worse
citizen
rather than a better one
or at least a worse citizen
before it makes you
a better one
and that's because philosophy
is a distancing
even debilitating
activity
And you see this
going back to Socrates
there's a dialogue, the Gorgias
in which one of Socrates’ friends
Calicles
tries to talk him out
of philosophizing.
calicles tells Socrates philosophy is a pretty toy
if one indulges in it with moderation at
the right time of life
but if one pursues it further than one should
it is absolute ruin.
Take my advice calicles says,
abandon argument
learn the accomplishments of active
life, take
for your models not those people who spend
their time on these petty quibbles,
but those who have a good livelihood and reputation
and many other blessings.
So Calicles is really saying to Socrates
quit philosophizing,
get real
go to business school
and calicles did have a point
he had a point
because philosophy distances us
from conventions from established assumptions
and from settled beliefs.
those are the risks,
personal and political
and in the face of these risks there is a
characteristic evasion,
the name of the evasion is skepticism. It's
the idea
well it goes something like this
we didn't resolve, once and for all,
either the cases or the principles we were
arguing when we began
and if Aristotle
and Locke and Kant and Mill haven't solved these questions
after all of these years
who are we to think
that we here in Sanders Theatre over the
course a semester
can resolve them
and so maybe it's just a matter of
each person having his or her own principles
and there's nothing more to be said about
it
no way of reasoning
that's the
evasion. The evasion of skepticism
to which I would offer the following
reply:
it's true
these questions have been debated for a very
long time
but the very fact
that they have reoccurred and persisted
may suggest
that though they're impossible in one sense
their unavoidable in another
and the reason they're unavoidable
the reason they're inescapable is that we live
some answer
to these questions every day.
So skepticism, just throwing up their hands
and giving up on moral reflection,
is no solution
Emanuel Kant
described very well the problem with skepticism
when he wrote
skepticism is a resting place for human reason
where it can reflect upon its dogmatic wanderings
but it is no dwelling place for permanent settlement.
Simply to acquiesce in skepticism, Kant wrote,
can never suffice to overcome the restless
of reason.
I've tried to suggest through theses stories
and these arguments
some sense of the risks and temptations
of the perils and the possibilities I would
simply conclude by saying
that the aim of this course
is to awaken
the restlessness of reason
and to see where it might lead
thank you very much.
Like, in a situation that desperate,
you have to do what you have to do to survive.
You have to do what you have to do you? You've gotta do
What you
gotta do. pretty much,
If you've been going nineteen days without any food
someone has to take the sacrifice, someone has to make the sacrifice
and people can survive. Alright that's good, what's your name? Marcus.
Marcus, what do you say to Marcus?
Last time
we started out last time
with some stores
with some moral dilemmas
about trolley cars
and about doctors
and healthy patients
vulnerable
to being victims of organ transplantation
we noticed two things
about the arguments we had
one had to do with the way we were arguing
it began with our judgments in particular cases
we tried to articulate the reasons or the
principles
lying behind our judgments
and then confronted with a new case
we found ourselves re-examining those principles
revising each in the light of the other
and we noticed the built-in pressure to try
to bring into alignment
our judgments about particular cases
and the principles we would endorse
on reflection
we also noticed something about the substance
of the arguments
that emerged from the discussion.
We noticed that sometimes we were tempted
to locate the morality of an act in the consequences
in the results, in the state of the world that
it brought about.
We called is consequentialist
moral reason.
But we also noticed that
in some cases
we weren't swayed only
by the results
sometimes,
many of us felt,
that not just consequences but also the intrinsic
quality or character of the act
matters morally.
Some people argued that there are certain things
that are just categorically wrong
even if they bring about
a good result
even
if they save five people
at the cost of one life.
So we contrasted consequentialist
moral principles
with categorical ones.
Today
and in the next few days
we will begin to examine one of the
most influential
versions of consequentialist
moral theory
and that's the philosophy of utilitarianism.
Jeremy Bentham,
the eighteenth century
English political philosopher
gave first
the first clear systematic expression
to the utilitarian
moral theory.
And Bentham's idea,
his essential idea
is a very simple one
with a lot of
morally
intuitive appeal.
Bentham's idea is
the following
the right thing to do
the just thing to do
it's to
maximize
utility.
What did he mean by utility?
He meant by utility the balance
of pleasure over pain,
happiness over suffering.
Here's how we arrived
at the principle
of maximizing utility.
He started out by observing
that all of us
all human beings
are governed by two sovereign masters,
pain and pleasure.
We human beings
like pleasure and dislike pain
and so we should base morality
whether we are thinking of what to do in our own lives
or whether
as legislators or citizens
we are thinking about what the law should be,
the right thing to do individually or collectively
is to maximize, act in a way that maximizes
the overall level
of happiness.
Bentham's utilitarianism is sometimes summed
up with the slogan
the greatest good for the greatest number.
With this
basic principle of utility on hand,
let's begin to test it and to examine it
by turning to another case
another story but this time
not a hypothetical story,
a real-life story
the case of
the Queen versus Dudley and Stephens.
This was a nineteenth-century British law case
that's famous
and much debated in law schools.
Here's what happened in the case
I'll summarize the story
and then I want to hear
how you would rule
imagining that you are the jury.
A newspaper account of the time
described the background:
A sadder story of disaster at sea
was never told
than that of the survivors of the yacht
Mignonette.
The ship foundered in the south Atlantic
thirteen hundred miles from the cape
there were four in the crew,
Dudley was the captain
Stephens was the first mate
Brooks was a sailor,
all men of
excellent character,
or so the newspaper account
tells us.
The fourth crew member was the cabin boy,
Richard Parker
seventeen years old.
He was an orphan
he had no family
and he was on his first long voyage at sea.
He went, the news account tells us,
rather against the advice of his friends.
He went in the hopefulness of youthful ambition
thinking the journey would make a man of him.
Sadly it was not to be,
the facts of the case were not in dispute,
a wave hit the ship
and the Mignonette went down.
The four crew members escaped to a lifeboat
the only
food they had
were two
cans of preserved
turnips
no fresh water
for the first three days they ate nothing
on the fourth day that opened one of the cans of
turnips
and ate it.
The next day they caught a turtle
together with the other can of turnips
the turtle
enabled them to subsist
for the next few days and then for eight days
they had nothing
no food no water.
Imagine yourself in a situation like that
what would you do?
Here's what they did
by now the cabin boy Parker is lying at the
bottom of the lifeboat in a corner
because he had drunk sea water
against the advice of the others
and he had become ill
and he appeared to be dying
so on the nineteenth day Dudley, the captain, suggested
that they should all
have a lottery. That they should
all draw lots to see
who would die
to save the rest.
Brooks
refused
he didn't like the lottery idea
we don't know whether this
was because he didn't want to take that chance
or because he believed in categorical moral
principles
but in any case
no lots were drawn.
The next day
there was still no ship in sight
so a Dudley told Brooks to avert his gaze
and he motioned to Stephens
that the boy Parker had better be killed.
Dudley offered a prayer
he told a the boy his time had come
and he killed him with a pen knife
stabbing him in the jugular vein.
Brooks emerged from his conscientious objection
to share in the gruesome bounty.
For four days
the three of them fed on the body and blood
of the cabin boy.
True story.
And then they were rescued.
Dudley describes their rescue
in his diary
with staggering euphemism, quote:
"on the twenty fourth day
as we were having our breakfast
a ship appeared at last."
The three survivors were picked up by a German ship.
They were taken back to Falmouth in England
where they were arrested and tried
Brooks
turned state's witness
Dudley and Stephens went to trial. They didn't
dispute the facts
they claimed
they had acted out of necessity
that was their defense
they argued in effect
better that one should die
so that three could survive
the prosecutor
wasn't swayed by that argument
he said murder is murder
and so the case went to trial. Now imagine
you are the jury
and just to simplify the discussion
put aside the question of law,
and let's assume that
you as the jury
are charged with deciding
whether what they did was morally
permissible or not.
How many
would vote
not guilty, that what they did was morally
permissible?
And how many would vote guilty
what they did was morally wrong?
A pretty sizable majority.
Now let's see what people's reasons are, and let me
begin with those who are in the minority.
Let's hear first from the defense
of Dudley and Stephens.
Why would you morally exonerate them?
What are your reasons?
I think it's I think it is morally reprehensible
but I think that there's a distinction between
what's morally reprehensible
what makes someone legally accountable
in other words the night as the judge said
what's always moral isn't necessarily
against the law and while I don't think that
necessity
justifies
theft or murder any illegal act,
at some point your degree of necessity does
in fact
exonerate you form any guilt. ok.
other defenders, other voices for the defense?
Moral justifications for
what they did?
yes, thank you
Year overview
Year | Episodes | Transmission dates |
---|---|---|
1979 | 13[1][fn 1] | 25 September – 18 December |
1980 | 32[2] | 15 January – 18 December |
1981 | 31[3] | 15 January – 17 December |
1982 | 31[4] | 14 January – 16 December |
1983 | 32[5][fn 2] | 13 January – 15 December |
1984 | 35[6] | 12 January – 20 December |
1985 | 29[7] | 10 January – 12 December |
1986 | 35[8] | 9 January – 11 December |
1987 | 33[9] | 15 January – 10 December |
1988 | 35[10] | 7 January – 15 December |
1989 | 37[11] | 12 January – 14 December |
1990 | 34[12] | 18 January – 13 December |
1991 | 35[13] | 10 January – 5 December |
1992 | 33[14] | 23 January – 10 December |
1993 | 34[15] | 14 January – 9 December |
1994 | 35[16] | 13 January – 15 December |
1995 | 32[17] | 12 January – 14 December |
1996 | 33[18] | 11 January – 19 December |
1997 | 33[19] | 23 January – 18 December |
1998 | 33[20][fn 3] | 15 January – 17 December |
1999 | 37[21][fn 4] | 14 January – 16 December |
2000 | 36[22] | 13 January – 14 December |
2001 | 38[23][fn 5] | 11 January – 6 December |
2002 | 37[24][fn 6] | 10 January −12 December |
2003 | 35[25] | 9 January – 11 December |
2004 | 37[26] | 8 January – 9 December |
2005 | 35[27] | 6 January – 8 December |
2006 | 36[28] | 12 January – 7 December |
2007 | 37[29] | 11 January – 13 December |
2008 | 36[29] | 17 January – 11 December |
2009 | 37[29] | 15 January – 10 December |
2010 | 40[29] | 14 January – 9 December |
2011 | 39[29] | 13 January – 8 December |
2012 | 36[29] | 12 January – 13 December |
2013 | 38[29] | 10 January – 12 December |
2014 | 36[29] | 9 January – 11 December |
2015 | 41[29] | 8 January – 17 December |
2016 | 39[29] | 14 January – 8 December |
2017 | 41[29] | 12 January – 14 December |
2018 | 39[29] | 11 January – 13 December |
2019 | 42[29] | 10 January – 13 December |
2020 | 37[29] | 9 January – 10 December |
2021 | 39[29] | 6 January – 16 December |
2022 | 37[29] | 13 January – 15 December |
2023 | 37[29] | 12 January – 14 December |
2024 | to be determined | 11 January – to be determined |
Presenters
Presenters | Date | No. of episodes |
---|---|---|
Robin Day | 1979–1989 | 303 |
Robert McKenzie | 1980–1981 | 3 |
Ludovic Kennedy | 1982–1983 | 4 |
Bernard Levin | 1984–1985 | 2 |
Sue Lawley | 1984–1987 | 5 |
Donald MacCormick | 1985 | 9 |
Peter Sissons | 1989–1993 | 149 |
David Dimbleby | 1994–2018 | 914 |
John Humphrys | 2009 | 1 |
Nick Robinson | 2017 | 1 |
Fiona Bruce | 2019– | |
Victoria Derbyshire | 2022 | 1 |
Highest appearance makers
Panellists | Affiliation | No. of appearances[30] | Average per year | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Kenneth Clarke | Conservatives | 59 | 1.6 | 1982–2019 |
Shirley Williams | Labour (before 1981) Social Democrats (1981–88) Liberal Democrats (1988–2021) |
58 | 1.6 | 1980–2015 |
Menzies Campbell | Liberal Democrats | 47 | 1.6 | 1987–2017 |
Harriet Harman | Labour | 45 | 1.3 | 1981–2015 |
Charles Kennedy | Liberal Democrats | 44 | 1.4 | 1983–2015 |
Clare Short | Labour | 38 | 1.2 | 1980–2011 |
Paddy Ashdown | Liberal Democrats | 36 | 1.1 | 1983–2016 |
Roy Hattersley | Labour | 1.2 | 1979–2010 | |
Nigel Farage | Conservatives (until 1992) UKIP (1993–2018) Brexit Party / Reform UK (2019–present) |
35 | 1.8 | 2000–2019 |
Episode guide
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Notes
- ^ Note Genome lists 14 episodes but Election Question Time aired 4 May 1979 is not considered part of the series.
- ^ Note Genome only lists 29 episode due to Radio Times Printing dispute.
- ^ Note Genome only lists 32 episodes due to 16 April 1998 being unscheduled.
- ^ Note Genome only lists 36 episodes due to 15 July 1999 being unscheduled.
- ^ Note Genome only lists 37 episodes due to 13 September 2001 being unscheduled.
- ^ Note Genome only lists 36 episodes due to 28 March 2002 being unscheduled.
- ^ 19 May 1983: During the 1983 general election campaign Conservative Foreign Secretary Francis Pym said on Question Time that he thought landslide victories did not produce successful governments. He was later sacked by the Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.
- ^ 22 July 1989: This was the last edition of Question Time under Robin Day's chairmanship, programme included brief highlights of the past ten years.
- ^ 18 October 1990: This edition was originally scheduled to feature four panellists of Tony Benn, Margaret Ewing, Andrew Neil and Malcolm Rifkind. However both Tony Benn and Andrew Neil were late to arrive, so Menzies Campbell and Magnus Linklater took their place, but eventually both Benn and Neil arrived 20 minutes into the programme. Thus this was the first edition to feature six panellists.
- ^ 22 November 1990: Broadcast on the day of Margaret Thatcher's resignation. Transmitted in two parts with two different panels.
- ^ 17 January 1991: Special Question Time concentrating on events and questions around the Gulf War, and split into two sections, with two different panels.
- ^ Dr Ann Robinson, head of policy unit at the Institute of Directors.
- ^ Rhiannon Chapman, director of the Industrial Society.
- ^ Alf Gordon, Welsh Develop Corporation.
- ^ Esther Leneman, French radio and television journalist.
- ^ Yvonne Barton from British Gas.
- ^ Dr Sheila Lawlor from the Centre for Policy Studies.
- ^ Dr Marie Stewart an Equal Opportunities Consultant.
- ^ 20 January 1994: This edition was notable for a confrontation between Jeffrey Archer and David Starkey over the age of homosexual consent.
- ^ 12 May 1994: Edition following the death of Labour Party leader John Smith, which sees panellists depart from the usual political debate to pay tribute to Smith instead.
- ^ 1997: In the build-up to the 1997 General Election, the three main party leaders answered questions from a studio audience.
- ^ 25 February 1999: This edition concerned the findings from the Stephen Lawrence enquiry.
- ^ 1 July 1999: The Leader of the Opposition William Hague was the sole panellist in this special Question Time programme
- ^ 8 July 1999: Tony Blair was the sole panellist in a special Question Time programme
- ^ 14 October 1999: Australian Republic Referendum special.
- ^ 2 March 2000: London Mayoral Election debate
- ^ 15 May 2001: Wales Question Time with Plaid Cymru leader Ieuan Wyn Jones. Presented by David Williams.
- ^ 15 May 2001: Scotland Question Time with SNP leader John Swinney. Presented by Anne McKenzie.
- ^ 30 May 2001: During the 2001 General Election campaign, the main political party leaders faced questions from a studio audience.
- ^ 5 July 2001: 2001 Conservative Leadership special
- ^ 13 September 2001: Filmed two days after the 11 September 2001 attacks. The BBC received more than 2,000 complaints for its strong anti-American sentiments from audience members.
- ^ 21 February 2002: Noted for Ian Hislop's attack on Mary Archer.
- ^ 12 September 2002: Special edition from New York, one year on from the World Trade Centre attacks.
- ^ 20 March 2003: Broadcast on the day of the outbreak of the Iraq War .
- ^ 24 April 2003: Special edition from Abu Dhabi which discussed the consequences of the war in Iraq .
- ^ 29 January 2004: This edition focused on the publication of the Hutton Report.
- ^ a b c d e f School's edition
- ^ 28 October 2004: 2004 US Presidential Election special.
- ^ 3 February 2005: This show included a successful marriage proposal from an audience member to his girlfriend, the programme's first in its 25 year history.
- ^ 10 March 2005: This edition of Question Time was in China as part of the BBC's China Week.
- ^ 28 April 2005: 2005 General Election special
- ^ 26 May 2005: French EU constitution referendum special edition.
- ^ 7 July 2005: Special edition from Johannesburg. This was broadcast on the day of 7 July 2005 attacks in London.
- ^ 3 November 2005: 2005 Conservative Leadership special
- ^ 9 February 2006: 2006 Liberal Democrats Leadership debate
- ^ 30 March 2006: Special edition from Moscow in time for the G8 conference in Saint Petersburg.
- ^ 22 March 2007: Iraq special
- ^ 10 May 2007: This edition focused on Tony Blair's legacy after 10 years as Prime Minister.
- ^ 14 June 2007: Labour Deputy Leadership special
- ^ 11 October 2007: Noted for Kelvin MacKenzie's attack on Scotland. The BBC received 350 complaints and MacKenzie's comments drew widespread criticism in both Scotland and England.
- ^ 15 November 2007: 2007 Liberal Democrats Leadership debate
- ^ 24 April 2008: This edition featured the three main candidates in the London mayoral election race .
- ^ 23 October 2008: This was the 1000th edition of Question Time.
- ^ Phil Woolas was to appear on the panel but it was feared he would be too controversial.
- ^ 30 October 2008: 2008 US Presidential Election special.
- ^ 26 March 2009: Noted for Eric Pickles' 'explanation' of his part in the expenses debate.
- ^ 21 May 2009: Focussed on the MP expenses scandal. Also, this edition was broadcast at the earlier time of 9:00 pm.
- ^ 11 June 2009: Was originally supposed to take place in Llandudno and feature Dom Joly as a panellist.
- ^ 25 June 2009: A cat was loose during the recording of this episode and is seen behind Julia Goldsworthy at various times.
- ^ 22 October 2009: Notable due to appearance of BNP leader Nick Griffin. Worldwide press coverage, and record viewing figures – 7.9 million.
- ^ 12 November 2009: Hosted by John Humphrys after David Dimbleby was hit by an animal on his farm.
- ^ 4 March 2010: Episode including Carol Vorderman as one of the panelists. She was slated for her performance, which the New Statesman's James MacIntyre described as "one of the worst by any panel member I have ever seen" because of her "clichéd, shrill, pub-boring, parochial approach" and because "she trotted out sluggish conventional wisdom at every turn".
- ^ 11 March 2010: The show's first ever women-only audience, this was to mark International Women's Day.
- ^ 7 April 2010: Broadcast brought forward a day due to a golfing tournament.
- ^ 15 April 2010: Held after the first election debate in Manchester, focusing on domestic policy
- ^ 22 April 2010: Held after the second election debate in Bristol, focusing on International Affairs
- ^ 29 April 2010: Held after the third election debate in Birmingham, focusing on the Economy and Taxes
- ^ 13 May 2010: First Question Time following the 2010 general election and the formation of the coalition government between the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats.
- ^ 27 May 2010: An appearance was expected to be made by a Liberal Democrat member of the Cabinet but would only appear under the condition Alastair Campbell was replaced by a Labour front-bencher. The BBC chose to have Campbell remain a panellist.
- ^ 16 September 2010: Labour Leadership Special
- ^ 30 September 2010: Sayeeda Warsi was due to appear, but Shapps took her place at the last minute.
- ^ 19 May 2011: Episode after Ken Clarke's controversial views on rape unfolded after an interview on the radio station BBC 5 Live.
- ^ 11 August 2011: Scheduled at the last minute following the riots in London and across England.
- ^ 15 March 2012: Last minute replacement for Charles Kennedy who missed his train.
- ^ 26 April 2012: This edition was originally to be a London Mayoral Election Debate, but contenders pulled out as the BNP candidate was taking part.
- ^ 17 May 2012: Last minute replacement for Brian May who was ill.
- ^ 31 October 2013: Journalist and presenter Paris Lees becomes the first openly transgender panellist to appear on the programme.
- ^ 14 November 2013: The venue was changed from an episode scheduled for Brighton after BAE Systems announced the closure of shipyards in Portsmouth.
- ^ 21 November 2013: The panel only consisted of 3 guests as Joan Bakewell and Tim Stanley were unable to make it due to transport issues.
- ^ 5 December 2013: This episode was moved to a later time slot on BBC Two due to news coverage of the death of Nelson Mandela replacing normal BBC One programming.
- ^ 12 December 2013: This episode was originally scheduled for Swansea, but following the death of Nelson Mandela, it was broadcast from Johannesburg to debate his legacy.
- ^ 23 January 2014: This episode had four panelists in order to have an equal number of people who are for and against Scottish independence.
- ^ 30 January 2014: Matthew Oakeshott was a last minute replacement for Charles Kennedy.
- ^ 6 March 2014: Episode in which an audience member stormed out mid-show after engaging in a heated debate about immigration with panel member David Aaronovitch.
- ^ 6 March 2014: Aleksander Nekrassov, a former Kremlin adviser, was a last minute addition to the panel because of events surrounding the 2014 Crimean crisis.
- ^ 10 July 2014: This was the final edition of Question Time to air before the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, and the first to include no politicians among its panelists.
- ^ 2 October 2014: Julian Huppert was a last minute replacement for Menzies Campbell, who had been scheduled to appear on the panel.
- ^ 11 December 2014: Edition in which Russell Brand described Nigel Farage as a "pound shop Enoch Powell", a reference to the politician who made the infamous 1968 Rivers of Blood speech.
- ^ 5 February 2015: The edition in which Galloway was asked about the rise in antisemitism in the UK, and whether he bore some responsibility for its increase. Galloway's appearance on the programme was criticised ahead of its broadcast by several individuals and groups, including Times of Israel columnist Alex Klineberg because of Galloway's outspoken views on Israel. Galloway said he was set up, and that chair David Dimbleby apologised to him privately over the tone of the question.
- ^ 26 March 2015: This edition was broadcast live following the first TV debate between David Cameron and Ed Miliband by Sky and Channel 4 in the Battle for Number 10 debate.
- ^ 30 April 2015: 2015 General Election Special. Aired at 8 pm, rather than the usual 10:45 pm.
- ^ 8 May 2015: Post 2015 General Election Special. Aired at 8:30 pm, rather than the usual 10:45 pm. A UKIP representative was invited to join, but the party was unable to send one.
- ^ 25 June 2015: Giles Fraser was a last minute replacement for Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis who was scheduled to be on the panel.
- ^ 17 September 2015: Episode in which newly appointed Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell apologises for a 2003 speech in which he called for members of the IRA to be honoured for the bombings that brought the British government "to the negotiating table" during the peace process, and for a joke he made in 2010 about wishing he could go back in time to assassinate Margaret Thatcher.
- ^ 15 October 2015: Edition in which audience member Michelle Dorrell berates Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Amber Rudd about government plans to cut child tax credits for working families, highlighting concerns about the proposals and forcing the government to defend its position.
- ^ 19 November 2015: First edition broadcast after the November 2015 Paris attacks. Was originally scheduled to be held in Belfast, with Theresa Villiers, Peter Hain and Gráinne Maguire on the panel, but was changed to London.
- ^ 28 January 2016: This edition was dedicated to Charlie Courtauld, a former editor of the show, who had recently died.
- ^ 4 February 2016: Paul Nuttall was a replacement for Nigel Farage who got stuck in traffic.
- ^ 15 June 2016: Michael Gove was the sole panelist in a special edition of Question Time where he made the case for the UK to leave the EU. Was broadcast at the earlier time of 18:45.
- ^ 19 June 2016: David Cameron was the sole panelist in a special edition of Question Time where he made the case for the UK to remain in the EU. Was broadcast at the earlier time of 18:45.
- ^ 26 June 2016: Post-Brexit special, the panel was divided 50/50 on those who supported Brexit and those who supported Remain. Was broadcast live at the earlier time of 18:30.
- ^ 8 September 2016: 2016 Labour Leadership special. Was broadcast at the earlier time of 21:00.
- ^ 29 September 2016: Richard Burgon was a last minute replacement for Emily Thornberry, after the latter flew to Israel to attend the funeral of former Israeli President Shimon Peres, who had died the previous day.
- ^ 3 November 2016: Businessman and UKIP donor Arron Banks was originally scheduled to be on the panel, but was replaced by Charlie Wolf.
- ^ 10 November 2016: First edition broadcast after the 2016 United States presidential election. All of the questions focused on Donald Trump winning and what it would mean internationally.
- ^ 24 November 2016: Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell was scheduled to make an appearance, but he was taken ill so he was replaced by Chris Leslie.
- ^ 9 March 2017: Kezia Dugdale was a last minute replacement for John McDonnell, who couldn't make it due to missing a flight.
- ^ 27 March 2017: Britain after Brexit special.
- ^ 25 May 2017: This edition was due to be broadcast from Belfast but was moved to Salford following the Manchester Arena bombing.
- ^ 2 June 2017: 2017 General Election Specials. Broadcast at the earlier time of 8:30 pm
- ^ 5 June 2017: Leader's Special (Election 2017) Was due to be broadcast at 5:55 pm on 4 June but was postponed for a BBC News special following the 2017 London Bridge attack – the programme was moved to 9:00 pm the next day. Was presented by Nick Robinson instead of David Dimbleby.
- ^ 9 June 2017: Post 2017 General Election Special.
- ^ 22 June 2017: Believed to be the first time a member of the audience has been told to leave the programme for repeatedly heckling the panel.
- ^ 23 November 2017: This edition was only 40 minutes long as an audience member fell ill, and was unable to be safely recovered.
- ^ 1 November 2018: Giles Watling was a last-minute replacement for Liz Truss after her train was delayed.
- ^ 13 December 2018:This was the last Question Time chaired by David Dimbleby.
- ^ 10 January 2019: This was the first edition hosted by Fiona Bruce.
- ^ 30 May 2019: While appearing on this edition, the Liberal Democrats deputy leader Jo Swinson confirms that she will put her name forward in the party's forthcoming leadership election.
- ^ 19 November 2019: General Election special. Filmed 18 November 2019
- ^ 22 November 2019: General Election special. Broadcast at the earlier time of 19:00
- ^ 19 January 2022: Edition devoted to discussing issues relating to the health service.
- ^ 22 June 2023: An edition marking the seventh anniversary of the EU referendum in which the audience was made up entirely of Leave voters.
References
- ^ "Question Time 1979". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1980". BBC Genome. Retrieved 12 November 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1981". BBC Genome. Retrieved 12 November 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1982". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1983". BBC Genome. Retrieved 12 November 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1984". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1985". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1986". BBC Genome. Retrieved 12 November 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1987". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1988". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1989". BBC Genome. Retrieved 12 November 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1990". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1991". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1992". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1993". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1994". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1995". BBC Genome. Retrieved 12 November 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1996". BBC Genome. Retrieved 12 November 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1997". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1998". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 1999". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 2000". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 2001". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 2002". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 2003". BBC Genome. Retrieved 28 October 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 2004". BBC Genome. Retrieved 12 November 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 2005". BBC Genome. Retrieved 12 November 2017.
- ^ "Question Time 2006". BBC Genome. Retrieved 12 November 2017.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r "BBC One - Question Time - Episode guide". BBC. Retrieved 20 January 2023.
- ^ "Question Time (1979– ) Full Cast & Crew". IMDb. Retrieved 25 June 2017.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London". BBC Genome. 13 March 1980. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London". BBC Genome. 20 March 1980. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 2 April 1981 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 2 April 1981.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 20 May 1982 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 27 May 1982 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 27 May 1982.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 3 June 1982 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 3 June 1982.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 10 March 1983 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 10 March 1983.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 5 April 1984 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 5 April 1984.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 12 April 1984 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 12 April 1984.
- ^ "Question Time", 18 October 1984. BBC Genome
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 7 March 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 7 March 1985.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 14 March 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 14 March 1985.
- ^ a b "Question Time – BBC One London – 21 March 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 21 March 1985.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 4 April 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 4 April 1985.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 18 April 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 18 April 1985.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 25 April 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 25 April 1985.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 2 May 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 2 May 1985.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 9 May 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 9 May 1985.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 16 May 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 16 May 1985.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 23 May 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 23 May 1985.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 30 May 1985 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 30 May 1985.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 15 January 1987 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 15 January 1987.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 22 January 1987 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 22 January 1987.
- ^ "Question Time – BBC One London – 8 June 1989 – BBC Genome". genome.ch.bbc.co.uk. 8 June 1989.
- ^ Sissons, Peter (2012). When One Door Closes. Biteback. ISBN 978-1-84954-075-9.
- ^ "ANOTHER VOICE – Proposals for the removal of a cancer from the body politic". The Spectator Archive. 2 March 1991. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 63971. London. 21 March 1991. p. 25.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64129. London. 19 September 1991. p. 21.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64141. London. 3 October 1991. p. 21.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64147. London. 10 October 1991. p. 19.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64153. London. 17 October 1991. p. 23.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64171. London. 7 November 1991. p. 25.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64171. London. 14 November 1991. p. 25.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64183. London. 21 November 1991. p. 23.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64201. London. 12 December 1991. p. 25.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64260. London. 20 February 1992. p. 20.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64314. London. 23 April 1992. p. 12.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64320. London. 30 April 1992. p. 22.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64326. London. 7 May 1992. p. 22.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64332. London. 14 May 1992. p. 20.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64344. London. 28 May 1992. p. 16.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64350. London. 4 June 1992. p. 22.
- ^ "Book Discussion on Question Time". C-Span. 28 October 1992. Retrieved 6 November 2014.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64512. London. 10 December 1992. p. 43.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64904. London. 17 March 1994. p. 43.
- ^ "Television and Radio". The Times. No. 64946. London. 5 May 1994. p. 47.
- ^ "Episode dated 18 May 1995". 18 May 1995 – via www.imdb.com.
- ^ "Episode dated 3 April 1997". 3 April 1997 – via www.imdb.com.
- ^ "Episode dated 8 May 1997". 8 May 1997 – via www.imdb.com.
- ^ "Episode dated 15 May 1997". 15 May 1997 – via www.imdb.com.
- ^ "Episode dated 22 May 1997". 22 May 1997 – via www.imdb.com.
- ^ "Episode dated 2 April 1998". 2 April 1998 – via www.imdb.com.
- ^ "Entertainment | Wives ratings beat Question Time". BBC News. 29 April 2005. Retrieved 20 May 2011.
- ^ "Piers Morgan to appear on Question Time in Peterborough | Peterborough Telegraph". 13 January 2017. Retrieved 20 January 2023.
- ^ "One Programmes – Question Time, 12/03/2009". BBC. Retrieved 20 May 2011.
- ^ "Eric Pickles on Question Time 26/03/09". YouTube. 18 September 2008. Archived from the original on 20 December 2021. Retrieved 20 May 2011.
- ^ "Question Time – MP: Long hours justify second home claim". BBC News. 27 March 2009. Retrieved 20 May 2011.
- ^ "Programmes | Question Time | Frank Skinner Question Time debut". BBC News. 30 April 2009. Retrieved 20 May 2011.
- ^ "This week's panel". 11 November 2009 – via news.bbc.co.uk.
- ^ MacIntyre, James (5 March 2010). "The ghastliness of Carol Vorderman". New Statesman. Progressive Media International. Retrieved 30 December 2014.
- ^ "'Question Time' to broadcast from prison – Broadcasting News". Digital Spy. 12 May 2011. Retrieved 20 May 2011.
- ^ a b c "Question Time – Future programme venues". BBC News. 3 August 2010. Retrieved 20 May 2011.
- ^ "BBC Question Time visits St Andrews". The Courier. 16 March 2012. Archived from the original on 22 March 2012. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
- ^ "Iain Colquhoun garners applause on Question Time for claiming there are too many politicians". Grimsby Telegraph. 24 March 2012. Archived from the original on 26 March 2012. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
- ^ "London mayor candidates quit debate over BNP". 20 April 2012. Retrieved 26 April 2012.
- ^ "Question Time to host special edition for Scottish teenagers". 4 May 2013. Retrieved 16 May 2013.
- ^ Roberts, Scott (1 November 2013). "Harriet Harman and John Prescott heap praise on Paris Lees in Question Time debut". Pink News. Archived from the original on 4 November 2013. Retrieved 8 November 2015.
- ^ "Shipbuilding decision protest to be staged as Question Time is aired at Portsmouth Guildhall tonight". Portsmouth News. Johnston Press. 14 November 2013. Retrieved 15 November 2013.
- ^ a b Gentchev, Nicolai (6 December 2013). "Question Time to broadcast from South Africa". BBC Media Centre. BBC. Retrieved 9 December 2013.
- ^ "Tonight's Question Time comes from Dundee". The Courier. 23 January 2014. Retrieved 23 January 2014.
- ^ Bennett, Asa (7 March 2014). "Question Time Audience Member Walks Out In Immigration Row". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 29 January 2015.
- ^ "Question Time prepares for take off at Heathrow". BBC News. BBC. 16 May 2014. Retrieved 17 May 2014.
- ^ "BBC's Question Time panel in Inverness 'a UK first'". BBC News. BBC. 10 July 2014. Retrieved 10 July 2014.
- ^ Hooton, Christopher (12 December 2014). "Russell Brand calls Nigel Farage 'poundshop Enoch Powell' in BBC Question Time debate". The Independent. Independent Print Limited. Retrieved 12 December 2014.
- ^ "George Galloway accuses BBC over Question Time 'set-up'". The Guardian. 6 February 2015. Retrieved 13 February 2015.
- ^ Klineberg, Alex (28 January 2015). "George Galloway And The Jews (What Could Go Wrong?)". The Times of Israel. Retrieved 14 February 2015. See also Question Time George Galloway in Finchley controversy.
- ^ "John McDonnell apologises 'from the bottom of my heart' for IRA comment". The Guardian. 18 September 2015. Retrieved 19 September 2015.
- ^ Quinn, Ben; Perraudin, Frances (16 October 2015). "Cameron responds to Question Time tax credits complaint". The Guardian. Retrieved 16 October 2015.
- ^ Williamson, Marcus; Dimbleby, David (3 February 2016). "Charlie Courtauld: Inspirational journalist who revitalised Question Time then joined The Independent on Sunday". The Independent. Independent Print Limited. Retrieved 5 February 2016.
- ^ "Traffic jam thwarts Nigel Farage again as he misses Question Time". The Guardian. 5 February 2016. Retrieved 5 February 2016.
- ^ Doran, Sarah (25 May 2017). "Manchester attack: Amber Rudd and mayor Andy Burnham to take part in BBC Question Time special live in Manchester". Radio Times. Retrieved 27 May 2017.
- ^ Buchan, Lizzy (4 June 2017). "BBC debate between Nicola Sturgeon and Tim Farron postponed". The Scotsman. Johnston Press. Retrieved 4 June 2017.
- ^ Demianyk, Graeme (23 June 2017). "BBC Question Time: David Dimbleby Kicks Plymouth Audience Member Off Show". Huffington Post UK. Huffington Post. Retrieved 23 June 2017.
- ^ Demianyk, Graeme (23 November 2017). "Question Time cut short as woman falls ill". Huffington Post UK. The Huffington Post. Retrieved 23 November 2017.
- ^ "BBC One - Question Time - Join the Question Time audience". BBC. Retrieved 20 January 2023.
- ^ "Jo Swinson confirms Liberal Democrat leadership bid". BBC News. BBC. 30 May 2019. Retrieved 30 May 2019.
- ^ "Happy 40th anniversary, Question Time! - BBC". BBC. Archived from the original on 20 December 2021. Retrieved 27 September 2019.
- ^ Waterson, Jim (17 March 2020). "BBC to broadcast Question Time without an audience". The Guardian. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- ^ "Minister Confronted With Damning Graph On NHS Funding During Question Time". HuffPost UK. 20 January 2023. Retrieved 20 January 2023.
- ^ Burke, Dave (22 June 2023). "'Cowardly' Tory ministers 'refuse to appear on Question Time Brexit special'". Daily Mirror. Retrieved 22 June 2023.
- ^ "BBC One - Question Time - Upcoming Locations". BBC. Retrieved 21 March 2024.
- ^ "Join the Question Time Audience".