25/04/2016 Victoria Derbyshire

Hello, it's Monday, it's 9 o'clock, I'm Victoria Derbyshire,

This morning: is freedom of speech at British universities

Hi, I'm Tom, a student in London - universities should be

Hello, I'm Hannah. Identity we should shy away from debate.

And this morning we won't be shying away from any debate.

An exclusive survey for this programme suggests that most

students support a controversial policy called "no-platforming"

which aims to prevent people with views that might be offensive

Hello, I am Peter Tatchell. And NUS officer refused to share a platform

with me because she said I was transferred big and racist. When I

asked for evidence, she could not find any.

This morning we're joined by a group of 50 students from universities

right around the UK, including members of the NUS,

the National Union of Students - and by people who say they've been

prevented from speaking at universities by the NUS.

If you're a student, were a student once -

do get in touch with your own views and we'll feed your experiences

You can e-mail us, to eat or use the hashtag Victoria live.

Hello, welcome to the programme, we're live until 11 this morning.

We'll bring you the news in a moment - but our debate this morning -

is free speech at British universities under threat?

Let's go for a quick unscientific snapshot of views -

say yes or no loudly, if you feel worried that too

many people are silenced and prevented from speaking

OK, we'll delve deeper of course into those views with members

of our audience who've joined us on the 7th floor here

at the BBC but first a summary of today's news with Joanna.

The High Street giant BHS is on the verge of collapse,

Efforts to find a buyer for the retailer, which has been

struggling with debts and a large pension deficit,

BHS could go into administration as early as today -

the biggest retail casualty since Woolworths eight years ago.

It was once one on the biggest names to light up the High Street.

But over the years, many customers have switched

And now the future of BHS is in doubt.

In a letter to staff obtained by the Mirror, Dominic Chapple,

it's not always the strongest that survive, it's the ones that can

adapt the quickest and I don't think BHS has adapted quickly enough to

British Home Stores opened its first shop in Brixton in London in 1928.

In the 1980s it merged with Mothercare

And in 2000 Sir Philip Green paid ?200 million for BHS to be part

But he wasn't able to turn the country around and sold it

for ?1 to a little-known consortium called Retail Acquisitions.

A year later the new owners have been unable to

The company has debts and a large hole in its pension fund

But some of that may be covered by a government-backed scheme.

But how do shoppers feel about the once household name?

It doesn't necessarily appeal to someone of my age,

or even younger ones, it is stuck in a retail no man's land.

I would miss it, I would definitely miss it.

USDAW, the union that represents shop workers,

says it is urging BHS to begin a dialogue

with them and BHS staff now fear

whether a once bright light on the high street is set to go out.

We can go to Catriona Renton on Oxford Street in central London

outside the PHS store there today. Is it opened today?

The story is not due to open until 9:30am. We have heard that the

company will go into administration at some point today. We have heard

that Administration tas have been appointed, a company called Duff and

Phelps. I have spoken to a number of people on their way into work this

morning. Many of them very upset who did not want to speak. We did speak

to a woman who has worked here as a shop assistant for 30 years. She

said the only thing she has heard about this is what she has seen and

read in the media. All of this have come as a shock to workers. 11,000

people very anxious now about the future of their jobs. The

administrator has been appointed. If they find a buyer, all well and

good. If they do not then that could spell the collapse of BHS and it

would be the biggest retail collapse since Walworth back in 2008, when

30,000 people lost their jobs -- Woolworth. We are expecting a formal

statement later to confirm what we have already been told this morning,

that the company, British Home Stores, once one of the biggest

names on the high Street, is to go into administration. 11,000 workers'

jobs are at risk and they will be anxious to find out more. They will

have an opportunity to speak to the management later today. Thank you.

The government is considering proposals to avert a backbench

rebellion over forcing all state schools in England

to become academies - by allowing local councils

The move comes amid mounting disquiet among some Conservative MPs

and councils over plans to force schools to opt out of

A group representing 37 largely Conservative local authorities has

warned that there is a risk that turning all state schools

into academies will fail to raise school standards.

Our political guru Norman Smith is in Westminster for us.

Is this a potential U-turn? I think it is indicative of the colossal

pressure that Nicky Morgan the Education Secretary is now under.

Not only from opposition parties but from Tory backbenchers, from

Conservative run local councils, from Tory former Education Secretary

's and the Education Select Committee, absolutely huge, huge

pressure. She is trying to find a way round this. What seems to be

emerging as this compromise plan which would basically allow

successful local authorities to say OK, we will become an academy, we do

not have to cede control of our schools, we will set ourselves up as

academies. The counteraccusations is what it sounds like, you will be

rebranding local authorities, they will just call themselves academies.

What Nicky Morgan's people say is not quite. This would only be open

to the most successful education authorities. Secondly, schools would

still have to want to opt in. It is no good school saying will become an

Academy chain and no one opting in. The hope is this might avert

potential result of Tory backbenchers. What will be critical

as whether Nicky Morgan will put this in next month's Queen's Speech.

It could be embroiled in a whole Euro row and people deciding to

settle scores and vote against the changes. Thank you.

The Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt, has warned that tomorrow's planned

walkout by junior doctors in England will put patient safety at risk.

If it goes ahead, it will be the first time in the history

of the NHS that junior doctors have walked out of accident

and emergency units, urgent maternity services

13,000 scheduled operations have already been cancelled.

The BMA says Mr Hunt should withdraw his threat to impose

The Royal College of Surgeons has called for both sides

Two thirds of students support certain groups and individuals

being banned from speaking at student unions because of

the opinions they hold - according to a survey commissioned

Over the past few months there's been an increase in the number

of people who've been told they can't speak at universities

because of their views on topics like sexuality,

The survey suggests that many students believe

the National Union of Students is right to bar speakers, as part of

its so-called "no platforming" policy.

Do stay with us for that debate in the next few minutes.

We'll be discussing this - and debating freedom of speech -

with an audience of 50 students, as well as people who say

The case for Britain remaining part of the European Union will be set

Theresa May will say membership improves the UK's

It comes in spite of previous criticism she has made about

The Justice Secretary, Michael Gove, who is part of the Leave campaign,

says the UK faces a migration "free-for-all" if it

French police are investigating the death of a British man and two

of his children in a car accident on a motorway near Dijon.

A woman and a third child have been seriously injured.

The family's car hit a safety barrier on the A39 motorway

The police are looking into the possibility that the man

Calls for older children to be routinely given the Meningitis B

vaccine will be debated by MPs today.

Campaigners want under-11s to be vaccinated

as well as newborn babies, who are the most at-risk group.

The government says that's not cost-effective.

Helena Lee's report contains some images which viewers

Faye Burdett, a healthy two-year-old before she contracted meningitis B.

She struggled for 11 days with the disease in hospital.

Her parents chose to release this photograph of her when she

was extremely unwell, to raise awareness.

Faye died on Valentine's Day this year.

It was that image that helped push the disease into the spotlight

and turn an online petition calling for all under 11s to be given

the vaccine into the most popular petition in parliamentary history.

Meningitis B is a rare virus but it can lead to death

At the moment, babies under one are vaccinated against it

The UK is the first country in the world to add the jab

to its routine childhood vaccination programme.

The government says it understands people's concerns but it has no

plans to extend the programme to older children.

Campaigners, though, hope today's debate will put

pressure on MPs to agree that that needs to change.

That is the summary of the news. More at 9:30am.

On Facebook Keith says people are only allowed to speak if they share

the same views. Who are the real fascists? There was a sharp intake

of breath there. Another person says hypocrisy of

students gagging and no-platforming people.

Most students do support the idea of banning people who hold

controversial views on subjects like race, rape, transgender issues, the

Holocaust and others. Now the sport. I'll start this bulletin as I've

started many in recent Now they're just five

points from an historic Much was made of them

being without their top scorer Jamie Vardy yesterday,

who's serving a suspension. But they didn't seem to miss him too

much, as they thumped Swansea 4-0. In fact, the man that replaced

Vardy, Leo Ulloa, scored two So that puts Leicester eight

points clear of Tottenham Also on the scoresheet

for Leicester was Riyad Mahrez. The Algerian international has

impressed all season, averaging a goal every other game,

and last night he won the PFA The prize was presented to him

by his boss, Claudio Ranieri. And because the ceremony

was in London, just hours after the game, the Leicester

players had to travel by helicopter Izzy Christensen of Man City

won the women's award. Let's hear from Riyad Mahrez. I am

happy. You are the first African player to win the award, that has

got to be a great achievement? There were big players in the Premier

League, Drogba never won it. It is an honour to be the first African.

Not the best, but the first, so I am very happy!

Crystal Palace will take on Manchester United in the FA

It's a first final appearance in 26 years for Palace,

He sealed the 2-1 win against Watford yesterday.

The final is on the 21st May at Wembley.

In Scotland, Celtic are close to a fifth

straight Premiership title, but the fans aren't happy.

Fans with banners, protesting against the club's board and the way

This was ahead of yesterday's 1-1 draw at home to Ross County.

Leigh Griffiths gave Celtic the lead with his 38th goal

But just look at all those empty seats in the background.

Stewart Murdoch equalised for County.

Celtic are now nine points clear at the top, but their players left

the field to boos and jeers from their supporters.

Leicester's footballers look increasingly likely

to win their first Premier League title, but the city's rugby union

side failed in their attempt to reach the European Champions Cup

final as they were beaten by French side Racing 92 in their semifinal

The formidable boot of Dan Carter helped Racing to a 19-16 win

and prevented an all-English final in Lyon on May 14th,

with Saracens winning the other semifinal against Wasps.

This morning - is free speech in British universities under threat?

Over the last year or so, an increasing number of people have

been told they can't speak at universities because of views

they hold on issues like sexuality, transgenderism, race or rape.

Officially it's called no-platforming - that's

when a person or organisation is banned from speaking

But many people and groups say they're being silenced in other ways

- simply not being invited to speak, or making it almost impossible

Last night, King's College, London withdrew an invitation

for Boris Johnson to speak because of suggesting

President Obama's "part-Kenyan" ancestry could have

Supporters of "no-platforming" say universities should be places

where students feel safe, and that the voices

of the most vulnerable people should be prioritised.

But critics say it's a violation of freedom of speech

and is being used to oppress people with sometimes mainstream views.

Richard Brooks is the vice-president of the National Union of Students.

No, I don't think so at all. The NUS no-platformed policy was born out of

the 1970s when fascists and racists came onto campuses. There are

organisations on the no-platformed -esque, which is democratically

decided at the conference every year, and it's all about making sure

students feel safe. It's different to a safe space policy which is

essential to the idea that everyone has freedom of speech, but some

people have more equal rights than others and we are making sure the

marginalised groups get their views heard. Both of those policies are

democratically decided. They are progressive and sensible and are not

part of the wider debate of censorship and freedom of speech

that a lot of people use when their views are not necessarily given the

platform they think they deserve. So not everyone does have freedom of

speech? I think everyone does have freedom of speech, but the platforms

are different. I don't think you could say you have no-platform, and

then take out a 2-page spread in the new statesman saying you don't have

a platform. We believe free speech is under threat from many

directions. Personally I believe the NUS policies have have concrete

effects on the no policy where these people cannot be challenged. It is

undermining the circumstances, where we don't believe students from the

best universities in the country have the ability to expose these

views as fascist and on progressive. A quick point of clarity, in US

no-platform policies for NUS if events. A lot of the things we might

discuss today are decided on a critically but locally within

student unions and the students there. The NUS doesn't have carte

blanche to go to someone and say, you can't speak, certain campus.

That's not our decision and we don't have that power. My name is Chelsea

from city University. While student unions should have the ability to

determine who they want to speak at their colleges, students should also

have the ability to debate with who they want, and that's how you form

your opinions about the world. My name is Ahmed, and I'm executive

member of the Muslim student council. I think there are groups

that promote fascist, racist and intolerant ideologies that would be

damaging to student life and society at large. So it's right that some

groups should be banned? What would be happen if they would be allowed

to speak? I think it would put students at risk. I feel there could

be a group that puts me at risk, so if I was running for Islamic Society

president. If there was a neo-Nazi group, like National Action Centres

Back Which Is No-platformed By The Nus, I Would Feel At That And My

Security Is At Threat. As A Student I Would Rather Have The Opportunity

To Challenge That Person In Person And Tell Them Why I Disagree With

Their Opinions Rather Than Just Assume I Am A Victim, Or I Will Be

Made Vulnerable By Their Presence. Applause

As It Is, We Already Live In A Society Where A

can we talk a bit about this nebulous idea of harm we are talking

about? It should be specific. No-platforming in the 1970s was

about preventing people coming onto campus who would cause fights and

violence. We are now talking about harming a nonspecific way. What do

you mean by harm? You say you could potentially be at risk. We have had

cases at Kings College, for example a few months ago there were Muslims

students who had their hijabs pulled off. That has not been highlighted.

Groups with fascist and racist ideologies can cause

life-threatening concerns. Students in the University of Birmingham who

have National action students, who are not organised, but our

spray-painting fascist ideologies across the university that need to

be monitored. Over the next hour you could hear views that might be

considered offensive. but it's important to hear some

of those views in order to debate whether freedom of speech

is actually under threat. As always, you can get in touch

with us throughout the programme. All texts will be charged

at the standard network rate. As you can see, we've got a group

of around 50 students or so, as well as some individuals who say

they've been silenced in one way or another

by university student unions. Whether you're a student

or not, this is a debate about the principle

of freedom of speech And a Comres survey commissioned

for this programme suggests that almost two thirds of students

support the no-platform policy. Sarah has been no-platformed,

because it means you are out of touch. Because two thirds of

students in this survey back this no-platforming policy. I was

no-platformed by one group, but I was then invited by another group.

But no-platforming is intellectual cowardice, it's refusing to have a

discussion. You heard what Ahmed said. There is violence and

racialised violence against women, which is horrendous, but he said

there was one particular speaker on campus who could have been prevented

that would have been preventing that violence. You can't make the debate

about preventing some people... You are preventing debate and failing to

tackle the violence. I think when you call it intellectual cowardice

because you believe in free speech, if you believe in it that much, why

are you not in Liverpool demanding you can buy a copy of the Sun of an

independent news agent customer that's a form of no-platforming as

well. I'm a human rights campaigner. I think the intention behind

no-platforming and safe space policies is often honourable and

commendable, to protect weak and vulnerable students. That is fine.

The way it's being widely interpreted, it has gone too far.

Too far for who? Atheist, secular and humanist societies across the

country have attempts to close down their meetings because some people

find their challenge to organised religion offensive. The head of Hope

not hate, the head of the antifascist and anti-racist

organisation, a hero of the British left, there was an attempt to ban

him from campuses because he was said to be anti-Muslim. He has never

been that, but he did not advocate extremists. The fact they try to

block him shows how this policy is completely and utterly wrong.

Richard Brooks on the NUS is shaking his head. There is a difference, and

this is something I would clearly like to say, there is absolutely a

difference between no-platform, a democratically decide policy about

organisations, and what has happened in a number of examples, including

yours and Nick. Essentially there was a house party, you were not

invited, and that has nothing to do with no-platforming, that was the

fact there was a conversation happening and you were just not

invited. It's not the same as no-platforming. But you are saying

there is a culture of the silencing being extended. There was an attempt

to specifically stop Nick from speaking out of a false Alex

allegation that he was anti-Muslim. To treat a progressive left winger

in this way from left-wing students is an abomination. It's not

left-wing policies, it's McCarthyism. I'm a National student

Officer for NUS. I was involved by business in the organising of the

Arab conference. It's not true, not a single external organisation was

involved in the organisation of the conference. Every singer person

there was personally affected by racism or fascism, or was part of

the NUS on it elected people stop not a single other person was

invited to take part. To take it out of context, that just because an

individual was not invited to an event, the NUS doesn't have the

problem with them, is ludicrous. Nick is a man of great honour and

integrity who has taken incredible personal risks against fascism and

racism. I work for Hope not hate. I completely agree with Peter and what

he's saying. From what we have understood, there was a discussion

about Nick being Islamophobic, and some of the work of Hope not hate

being Islamophobic. Everybody in the organisation found that incredibly

offensive. There are different Aurtenetze ear. That argued there,

if it is true, it is ludicrous and not worth debating, Nick is not

Islamophobic. It was a specific antifascist tactic, which was a

defence of freedom of speech, shutting down those who were

attempting to get tail the freedoms of others. The terms fascism is used

very widely, meaning it is used to broadly. It has also been

extrapolated out to where we oppose people who are offensive. That was

never the point of no-platforming or the antifascist policy. The policy

was to defend freedom of speech and delegitimise those people who

were... Spiked is an online magazine to campaign for Freedom of speech

across University campuses. The idea that the NUS 's Democratic is

frankly laughable. The main question I want to come back to,

no-platforming being a specific thing and going to far. If you

believe of freedom of speech, no-platforming always went too far.

It's meant to be an indivisible liberty that is meant for all. To

see people like Nick being at the sharp end of it, it's your own way

is coming back to. Freedom of speech is for everyone, trusting students

to be able to challenge views and take them on. The idea we are

hearing today that students are so vulnerable, they are protected from

fascists, and also from feminists, racists and sombreros, that is the

legacy of the no-platforming... Sombreros? University of Birmingham

and University of East Anglia banned them because they are apparently

racist. Tom-tom you talked about the idea you are a sensitive flower and

need to be protected. That's not what anybody saying. To address the

point made about harm at the front. You're concerned about freedom of

speech, it's never been an absolute right. Let's not pretend it has

because that's frankly patronising. There are people who are incredibly

vulnerable who feel very specific types of harm. Tell the family of

trans people, the families of queer people who have committed suicide

because of the likes of people who invalidate their identities like

Julie. None of you have read anything that

I have written. How dare you name me personally when you are talking

about people committing suicide? How dare you! All I am saying is

opinions you have expressed have invalidated the identities of trans

women. That is a specific harm, Sarah, that you just dismissed. That

is really dangerous to say... Let's pause for one second. Stop! Tom, you

finish your sentence. There are people who frankly have fallen

behind and unfortunately, despite the fact we are very appreciative of

Peter Tatchell, and everything you have worked incredibly hard for, and

nobody would deny that, however, that does not mean the you and

others like you are removed from criticism.

APPLAUSE Let them respond! Do introduce

yourself. Nobody should be above criticism. I am Julie Bendall. I

read an article 13 years ago in the Guardian for which ever more I have

been a monster. I said in the article that it is not all right for

a man to decide that he is a woman and go and counsel rape victims at

an organisation where the actual service users said they felt

uncomfortable with this trans person counselling them when they have been

raped. That is beside the point. 13 years ago I wrote an article. I have

been a feminist campaigner which has meant that I have avoided for many

women real harm, and I am talking about rape and murder, not just the

offence they may feel. For 36 years I have done this work. Don't be

cross with me, we are going to the news because it is time and I will

come back to you after the news and sport. We will hear more from Peter

Tatchell, human rights campaigner who says he has potentially been

silenced by students, and of course from Julie Bindel. First, Joanna

with a summary of the news. The High Street giant BHS

is on the verge of collapse, Efforts to find a buyer

for the retailer, which has been struggling with debts and a large

pension deficit, have BHS will go into

administration this morning - the biggest retail casualty

since Woolworths eight years ago. Our correspondent Catriona Renton is

on Oxford Street. You said the store would be open at 9:30am. What has

happened? The store has opened and we have seen a steady stream of

people going in and out. We have heard in the last couple of hours

that the company is going to go into administration, that the

administrators have been appointed. It is a company called Duff and

Phelps. We know there were attempts to get potential investors to sort

out a financial deal, attempts to get Sports Direct to buy all or part

of the company but that has failed. The business is going to go into

administration. We will expect a formal announcement later today.

That will leave the 11,000 workers across the UK stores feeling very

anxious about their jobs. We spoke to some workers this morning. Some

were too upset to speak. Others said all they have heard was what was in

the media. They are looking for some clarity about what their futures

will be. If the administrators fail to find a buyer that will mean the

collapse of British Home Stores and that will be the end of trading for

a company which has been working for the last 88 years, and it will be

the biggest retail collapse since Woolworth in 2008 when 30,000 jobs

were lost. Thank you. The government is considering

proposals to avert a backbench rebellion over forcing all state

schools in England to become academies -

by allowing local councils The move comes amid mounting

disquiet among some Conservative MPs and councils over plans to force

schools to opt out of A group representing 37 largely

Conservative local authorities has warned that there is a risk that

turning all state schools into academies will fail

to raise school standards. The Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt,

has warned that tomorrow's planned walkout by junior doctors in England

will put patient safety at risk. If it goes ahead, it will be

the first time in the history of the NHS that junior doctors have

walked out of accident and emergency units,

urgent maternity services 13,000 scheduled operations have

already been cancelled. The BMA says Mr Hunt

should withdraw his threat The Royal College of Surgeons has

called for both sides Two thirds of students support

certain groups and individuals being banned from speaking

at student unions because of the opinions they hold -

according to a survey commissioned The survey suggests that many

students believe the National Union of Students is

right to bar speakers, as part of its so-called "no platforming"

policy. Yesterday, Kings College London

withdrew the right for Boris Johnson to speak after he made about

President Obama's Kenyan ancestry. Peter Tatchell has given his view.

The way it has been reported, it has gone too far. Some 80 societies have

had to close down their meetings because some people find the

challenge to organised religion offensive. There are a number of

examples where essentially there was a house party, you were not invited.

That is nothing to do with no-platform, that is just there was

a conversation happening about something and you were not invited

to come. It is not the same as they know platform. If I wanted to run

for a society president and I felt there was a group which might put me

at risk, for example an Islamic society president, I will

automatically feel at risk and my security is at threat. I would

rather have the opportunity to challenge that person in person and

tell them why I disagree with their opinions, rather than to assume I am

a victim. That's a summary of the latest BBC

News - more at 10:00. Chris has said university is a place

to challenge views not shy away from the bait. Another person says safe

space policies have gone too far. They have an awful future.

More on this to come but first Jess with the sport.

Leicester City are five points from an historic,

They thrashed Swansea 4-0 yesterday, despite being without

They're now eight points clear of Tottenham who play tonight.

And the good news keeps coming for Leicester,

their striker Riyad Mahrez has won the PFA Football of the Year Award.

The Algerian international has impressed all season,

He accepted the award from Claudio Ranieri. I am very happy. You are

the first African player to win the award, that has got to be a great

achievement as well? I did not know that. There were big players in the

Premier League. Drogba never won it. Yahya. It is good to be the first

African. Not the best, but the first, so I am very happy! Crystal

Palace are through to the first FA Cup semifinal in 22 years.

Connor Wickham scored the winning goal.

Celtic are close to a fifth straight Premiership title.

But ahead of their 1-1 draw with Ross County yesterday,

the fans held up banners to show their anger at the club's

board and how they're running the club.

The bravest sporting performance of the weekend surely came

from Kenya's Jemima Sumgong in the London Marathon She fell

with four miles to go and cracked her head on the road

No matter - Sumgong got back up, dusted herself down and came

She admitted she was surprised to win.

That is all the sport for now. I will be back at ten.

Thank you, Jess. We want to discuss issues which various feminist

commentators have made about transgender women. You may hear some

views you do not agree with and they will be challenged. The point is not

to talk about what they have said and the merits of their arguments,

it is to debate whether or not they should be silenced for having those

views. Julie Bindel was in full flow of defending herself when I rudely

interrupted her to go to the news and sport. Do continue. I am a

feminist campaigner and have been for 36 years. I speak at many

universities in the UK and outside it, it usually always on violence

against women and children. 13 years ago I wrote an article which some

transgender activists took offence at and since then it has been

witchhunt against me. I am no-platform to buy some committees

in the NUS and I am constantly described as being like Hitler, I do

know why. It is always Hitler and not some mid-range dictator. Are you

offended? It is deeply offensive but we do not have the right not to be

offended. I don't mind if students don't invite me. I do not get paid

for it. Other students get fed up that I am not invited. I get more

e-mails from feminist students and others who say we want to hear you

express your views on how to end men's violence against women and

children. This is in a context where I go to universities if the NUS do

not know platform A. If they get out of bed on time, they picket and

scream and shout. They have not read my article but they allow

pornographers who are deeply misogynist and offensive

walk-through, they allow Muslim clerics who believe in stoning women

to death and in female genital mutilation and in all kinds of other

human rights atrocities. They allow them on campus and I am banned by

some of them. Why? We asked a number of trans students to come along

today and they would not. They would not be in the same room as you.

Payton quid did come along -- Payton Quinn. What would you like to say?

Trans-students do feel they were targeted and it is fair to believe

that and you accept your views were quite contentious and I understand

what the purpose was of the original article goes you are highlighting

violence against women and children and feeling unsafe. I assume you do

not believe that trans women are equal to other women. You do not

know my views. Do you think it is offensive to describe them as men in

dresses or having a quick fix sex change? I know it causes offence. I

find it offensive when I am likened to Hitler. The vile misogyny I have

had levelled against me. There is no such thing as a safe space. What we

need to do is talk to each other and find a way where we can progress the

arguments. My argument is a feminist one which goes back to the 1960s

which is there is no such thing as a female brain or a male brain and it

is not the case that you like pink or blue. Can I paraphrase you saying

that trans women are not bona fides women? I did not say that at all.

Does the nature of the language that Julie Bindel has used over the years

make you feel intimidated or threatened? This is where we need to

talk about political correctness and bringing it back to the sense that

it was first used in modern usage. Do you feel threatened? Personally,

I den. I know other trans-people who feel threatened because that sort of

language and attitudes are definitely mirrored within their

personal lives. Threatened in what way? Their sense of identity. There

are people I know who have been physically attacked because using

some of the certain slurs against trans people, that they are not who

they believe they are stopped but Wembley but they Julie Bindel's

opinion is just another opinion? Yes, but it is an opinion that a

number of people do not subscribe to and don't want to hear. But that is

the nature of opinions. But when you talk about the scope of the debate,

what you have to consider is the free market is considered by

consumers. If a group of people do not want to hear that opinion they

are free to do so. I get e-mails all the time, I do speak at lots of

universities, by the way. But I get told all the time, it is when I --

when the NUS have a stranglehold. Students are member of the NUS. You

have not been no-platform to buy the NUS will stop if so I would not be

able to be sat next to you right now.

Student unions are collections of students based on values and

no-platforming policies and safe space policies are decided

democratically by students and student officers. I don't understand

how this issue is up for debate around student unions, when it isn't

around trade unions, and any other public sector, civil sector

societies base, because people think they have the right to speak to

students, and you don't. I don't believe that at all. Let me tell you

that I think it was 2009, and repeated in 2011, the NUS LGBT

caucus voted at their conference to no-platform me, and the motion read,

Julie Bendall is vile. Is it a good thing to support the rights of

minorities not to feel intimidated and threatened, which is what Caton

says, some of her trans friends feel. I was a lesbian born into a

working-class committee and I'm a feminist campaigner, so I constantly

campaign against very dangerous under very dangerous circumstances.

But you don't seem to support the rights of these minorities. Trans

students. It's ridiculous, of course I support the rights of trans

students not to be threatened, murdered, raped and harassed. It's

ludicrous to suggest something I said about gender 13 years ago has

resulted in the suicide of trans people, when men who do the

attacking, are also attacking trans people. Those of us deemed different

in society, such as myself as a lesbian and feminist, and I find it

so offensive that you dare to say that I have been anyway provoked the

suicide of trans women, and you did say that. It is true! Grow up! I'm

the general secretary of the student union of Manchester. We did not

no-platform Julie, but we didn't allow her to speak truly safe space

policy. What does that mean? It's a policy that says in our building,

the four walls we have in the student union, we want to make it

acceptable for everyone, and also make sure that all voices, whether

they are LGBT, disabled, black, trans, have a voice, because we know

in society that they are marginalised and do not have a

voice. That's the key thing. We don't live in a false bubble. Are

you saying that by effectively silencing Julie, what you are doing

is creating more freedom of speech for those minorities who might feel

less confident or more vulnerable? Yes, because we stand on the stage

and say that we should be there to challenge them, the power to

challenge somebody who is a key notes to speaker sat behind the

table, who is attacking somebody... We're not taking it out of context.

These groups of students live in the real world where they are attacked,

abused, on social media and physical abuse. We're not living in a bubble.

It annoys me when you have middle-aged people on Twitter saying

that we are ridiculous and stupid. That's very insulting. You are

saying that this generation who have more progressive views than you are

idiots because we don't think the same way. I don't agree with you, so

I will use the space that I have and the autonomy our students have given

us to govern it the way we want to. You will hear middle-aged people on

Twitter say that the zoomable Ewenny get into the real world you will

face extreme opinions that you will not like and you have to get on with

it. There is not a safe space in the real world. That's ridiculous

because we do live in a real world. We are creating what you want in our

spaces. Peter Karmis you have campaigned for LGBT rights, and

sometimes been beaten up for doing so, and over many years. He has

signed a letter calling for greater freedom of speech on campuses. He

has been accused of holding racist views. Peyton, as a student you felt

the letter was trans-phobic. Can you tell Peter why. I'm not a student,

but I can see why people can take that opinion, because there are a

lot of people who you were talking about when you talked about

no-platforming of certain individuals. There were a lot of

people who were no-platformed for what some people believed were very

important reasons. Why sign a letter calling for greater freedom of

speech, why is that trans-phobic in itself? The problem is, it's looking

at it from a wider viewpoint, the idea that you are supporting that

students shouldn't be able to criticise or ask for a weight within

the University. Whether you agree with that's what you do not, that's

how people perceive it. The Observer I signed did not contain a single

word of criticism of trans people, did not oppose trans equality, and

did not incite harassment of those people. The people I named in those

I disagree with on trans issues and disagree with them. I have

criticised them. Could somebody read into that that you want activists,

speakers, to be given platform that University who do not believe trans

women are the... Is there anyone who does see it that

way? The problem with some of the views that are put forward, they are

very often described as, I'm just putting an idea out there. Usually

the reason why people are no-platformed is because of the

language they have used and the fact it is dehumanising. To pretend that

doesn't happen is to ignore the entire 20th century. I totally agree

that there are views of anti-trans activists that are offensive and

wrong, and I have criticised them. I debated against Julie on Radio 4.

Some people say that I won that debate. That wouldn't have happened

if we said that Julie just couldn't speak. On the other point, even

though I say that people should have the freedom to speak, I think all

baguettes should be protested and challenged. I supported protests

against Jermaine Greer and others. But Jermaine Greer is not a bigot.

She might have used the views you disagree with but she is not a

bigot. She spent her life fighting for equality. I supported a protest

against her. I don't think people with offensive views should be given

a free pass. They should be protest against an challenged, and the best

way to do that is through open debate. If you censor people and ban

them, and get suppressed, the ideas are not defeated. Who agrees that if

you censor people or ban them, the idea gets suppressed and that is not

as a surly a good thing Eastham? One of the things we have moved away

from is that this is a university. It's not the real world, but it's

the place where you would expect to hear dangerous ideas and not be

frightened of them, people would go into thinking you feel vulnerable

and you will feel uncomfortable, vulnerable, and everything will be

scary. Because ideas that have changed the world historically over

many years, have fought racism, got us equality, they were offensive,

dangerous and scary to those people who heard them. Somebody said that

maybe it's because I'm middle-aged. I actually think that's insulting

your generation. There are many young people at universities who are

walking round on eggshells because there is a broader climate off, you

can't say that. You try to say some thing that goes against the line,

it's not just no-platformed, it's a broader sense or is climate where

people genuinely think, if I say that, I will be cold trans-phobic,

Islamophobic, any number of phobic Coral. That climate in universities

is the betrayal of a generation. If you are a victim, calling out saying

you can't cope, it's actually positive, you are behaving just like

children, and what's worse is that the safety first cult, you got told

by teachers to be scared of everything, I'm saying to grow up,

the world is scary, but it's much more fun if you go out and have a

good time and fight it. Who disagrees with Claire and wants to

talk to her about it? You say that ideas that have changed the world in

the past and people have been scared of them, isn't no-platforming one of

those ideas? The good thing about no-platform is that it simply just

stops you hearing things. If you don't want to hear things... I don't

know how any of us would make our minds up. I don't know how you would

know you don't agree with me, or I would know what I think about

no-platform unless I hear the views of it. That's the irony of this

conversation. How will we work out what we think about anything? Don't

you possibly believe you might change your mind? As an older

person... I know that I have changed my mind loads of times. Because

somebody had the courage to look me in the eyes and tell me I was all

the well wrong. I thought, oh my God, what will I do. I read the odd

book, thought about it, felt uncomfortable, and changed my mind,

and I'm sure I will do again. That's why you need free speech. Lots of

people want to come back to you and we will get to them because we have

plenty of time this morning. An e-mail from Michael at Lancaster

University, who disagrees with the idea of no-platforming. Regardless

of your individual opinions, universities should be a place where

opinions are heard and debated in an open forum. Freedom of speech is

being undermined and I don't believe the NUS is representative of the

vast majority of students. Heather says, these poor delicate flowers

will find it difficult to deal with the real world. I suggest students

study history to find what hiding 1's head in the sand can do. Vicky

says that the idea that trans-women being referred to as men is

outdated. Peter says that the debate this morning is I opening. We have

achieved something, this morning. Lots more discussion to come. News

and sport in a second, but the weather before that.

Weather watchers have been doing us proud. The variety of weather across

the UK. We have had snow showers across Aberdeenshire. Beautiful

start to the day across Cumbria. Wonderful sunrise with showers

across Cumbria and Lancashire. A picture from Cornwall with a lot of

cloud around but it will thin and break through the day. Where we have

had showers this morning in England and Wales, particularly in Central

and western areas. Showers across northern Scotland and this line is a

weather front. As it comes south the colder air will filter in behind it.

It will be rather windy. The proximity of isobars across the

Northern Isles. Looking at gusts to gale force coming from the north and

accentuate in the cold feel. Through the day the rain will push south.

Looking at gusty winds across Scotland. A mixture of rain, sleet

and snow at lower levels as well, across the Highlands and Grampians.

Across southern Scotland, northern England and Ireland, bright sunny

spells but with the odd shower and still windy. The weather front

continuing southwards, taking showers with it. But it will dry out

across Wales and south-west England and if you stay out of the wind, it

will not feel too bad. As we go through the evening and overnight,

it's still windy down the north-east coastline and three Scotland.

Looking at blizzards in the mountains. Some showers filtering

down toward East Anglia but move away from that and you are back to

colder conditions and clearer skies. We are looking at some frost. Where

you have frost and clearer skies, tomorrow morning is where we will

start with sunshine. Still blizzard conditions across the Highlands and

Grampians. Wintry showers getting down towards East Anglia and into

East Anglia. And it is very gusty, eccentric in the cold feel. Move out

towards the west, we look at a mixture of sunshine and showers.

Even in areas exposed to northerly or north-westerly wind, we could see

a wintry component in those showers. Tomorrow will feel colder than

today. As we head into Wednesday, it the eye so bores are starting to

swing around so we are looking at something more northerly and

westerly. -- the isobars. The impact on the temperature, for the rest of

the week it will remain cold. You can tell that by looking at the

blue. Heading towards the weekend, something less cold coming our way,

but it will not be mild. For the week ahead, it will stay chilly,

sunshine with blustery showers, and the risk of frost overnight

continues. Hello, it's Monday it's 10,

I'm Victoria Derbyshire, This morning: is freedom

of speech at Free speech is supposed to be for

everyone. That means trusting students, challenging views. But

what we have heard that they are so vulnerable, they have to be

protected from fascists but also racists and some brow rose. That is

not what anyone is saying. You are concerned about your freedom of

speech. That has never been an absolute right and let's not pretend

it has. That is patronising, frankly. A survey suggests most

students support a controversial policy known as no-platform in which

-- no-platforming. I find it offensive when I am likened to

Hitler. The vile misogyny I have had levelled at me. There is no such

thing as a safe space. What we need to do is talk to each other. We have

also heard from people who in the past who say they have been

silenced. We do live in the real world. We know there is not a safe

space. We are trying to create safe places.

For the next hour, we're joined by a group of 50 students

from universities right around the UK, including members

of the NUS, the National Union of Students - and by people who say

they've been prevented from speaking at universities by the NUS.

If you're a student, were a student once -

do get in touch with your own views and we'll feed your experiences

Sorry, we played some music over you then but if you want to get in

touch, it you can on Twitter. Now it is time for the news with Joanna.

The High Street giant BHS is on the verge of collapse,

Efforts to find a buyer for the clothing and homeware chain,

which has been struggling with debts and a large pension deficit,

BHS, which has 164 stores, will go into administration

It's the biggest retail casualty since Woolworths eight years ago.

Our correspondent Sophie Long is on Oxford Street

This BHS is open and you would be forgiven for thinking it is business

as usual. We know it is not and the company will go into administration

and we are expecting a formal announcement later this morning. The

man who owns the BHS said in a letter to his 11,000 staff that he

was sincerely sorry and that they would be paid their wages this

month. That will come as little compensation for people who work

here. With respect to one lady who has worked here for 30 years and she

said she was devastated and she said they had had very little

communication from management. We know that BHS is likely to go into

administration later this morning. Thank you.

Plans to allow local councils to form their own academies

are being considered by the government.

It's to avert a backbench rebellion over forcing all state schools

The move comes amid mounting disquiet among some Conservative MPs

and councils over plans to force schools to opt out of

A group representing 37 largely Conservative local authorities has

warned that there is a risk that turning all state schools

into academies will fail to raise school standards.

And Labour says allowing councils to run their own academy chains

would still amount to a 'costly upheaval for thousands

Government sources have launched a scathing attack on junior doctors'

leaders in England - accusing them of trying to secure

the dismissal of health secretary Jeremy Hunt,

and staging 'a political strike' tomorrow.

If it goes ahead, it will be the first time in the history

of the NHS that junior doctors have walked out of accident

and emergency units, urgent maternity services

13,000 scheduled operations have already been cancelled.

The BMA says Mr Hunt should withdraw his threat

Nearly two-thirds of university students believe the National Union

of Students is right to have a "no platforming" policy, a survey

The policy means people or groups on a banned list because of

the opinions they hold on topics such as sexuality,

transgender issues and race - are not given a platform

to speak at student unions across the country.

Yesterday, King's College London withdrew its invitation

The feminist campaigner Julie Bindel has been no-platform after an

article she wrote. She has been likened to Hitler. They allow

misogynist Sue walk-through, they allow Muslim clerics who believe in

stoning gays to death and female genital mutilation. They allow them

on campus and I am banned by some of them. We have to remember that

student unions are collectives of students based on values and no safe

spaces -- and that safe spaces are decided democratically by students

and officers. I don't understand why this debate is up around student

unions when it is not around trade unions, just because people think

they have the right to speak to students. No, I don't. The way it

has been widely interpreted, it has gone too far. Atheist, secular and

humanist Society are having attempts to close down their meetings because

some people find their challenge to organised religion offensive. There

is absolutely a difference between no-platform, Democratic policy and

what has happened from a number of examples which have been given which

is essentially, there was a house party, you were not invited. That is

nothing to do with no-platform, that is that there was a conversation

about something happening and you were not invited to come so it is

not the same as a no-platform. The case for Britain remaining part

of the European Union will be set Theresa May will say

membership improves the UK's It comes in spite of previous

criticism she has made about The Justice Secretary, Michael Gove,

who is part of the Leave campaign, says the UK faces a migration

"free-for-all" if it Calls for older children to be

routinely given the Meningitis B vaccine will be debated

by MPs today. Campaigners want under-11s

to be vaccinated as well as newborn babies,

who are the most at-risk group. The government says that's

not cost-effective. That's a summary of the latest BBC

News - more at 10.30. Thank you. A comment from Shelley.

Lots of National Union of Students leaders sharing a platform with

Peter Tatchell and Julie Bindel. What no-platform? Trans people are

attacked by people who are quoting Julie Bindel and by black people

quoting Enoch Powell. Give neither airtime. A tweet from Clare says

Julie Bindel comes across well. Other people have tantrum like

views, yes, I am middle-aged. And this comment from Jackie says it

is ridiculous to suggest Julie Bindel attacks minorities.

More on this to come but first Jess with the sport.

It's becoming a familiar story these days, Leicester City have won again.

Now, they're just five points from an historic, first

Much was made of them being without their top scorer

Jamie Vardy yesterday, who's serving a suspension.

But they didn't seem to miss him too much,

In fact, the man that replaced Vardy, Leo Ulloa

So that puts Leicester eight points clear of Tottenham,

Also on the scoresheet for Leicester was Riyad Mahrez.

The Algerian international has impressed all season,

averaging a goal every other game, and last night he won the PFA

The prize was presented to him by his boss Claudio Ranieri.

And because the ceremony was in London, just hours

after the game, the Leicester players had to travel by helicopter

Tottenham's Dele Alli was voted the young player of the year -

and Izzy Christensen of Man City won the women's award.

I am happy. You are the first African player to win the award,

that has got to be a great achievement as well? I didn't know

that. There were big players in the Premier League, African. Drogba

never won it. The IR. -- Yahya will stop I am not the best, but the

first, so I am very happy! Crystal Palace are in their first FA

Cup Final for 26 years. They beat Watford 2-1 yesterday,

thanks to this man Conor Wickham They'll play Manchester United

in the final In Scotland, Celtic are close

to a fifth straight Premiership Fans protested before their game

yesterday, at the way the board This was ahead of their 1-1 draw

at home to Ross County. Leigh Griffiths gave Celtic

the lead with his 38th goal But just look at all those empty

seats in the background. Stewart Murdoch equalised for

County. Celtic are now nine points clear

at the top, but their players left the field to boos and jeers

from their supporters. Britain's Anthony Joshua will make

the first defence of his IBF world heavyweight champion

against unbeaten American Joshua won the title

from another American, Charles Martin last month

and will face Brazeel on June 25th Brazeel was beaten in the first

round of the London 2012 Olympics. Joshua went on to win

the gold medal. The bravest sporting performance

of the weekend surely came from Kenya's Jemima Sumgong

in the London Marathon. She fell with four miles to go

and cracked her head on the road No matter - Sumgong got back up,

dusted herself down and came She admitted she was

surprised to win. I think a few other people might

have been surprised as well! That is all the sport for now.

Thank you, Jessica. Good morning and welcome to

the programme. This morning, we're asking

whether free speech in British universities under

threat? I don't think we have got anywhere

near answering that question. So far we have heard one students say that

potentially their physical safety could be at risk. They could be

threatened if offensive speakers are allowed to take a platform at the

University. We have also heard from others who say if you cannot hear

from challenging, scary views and debate though that University, than

where can you? With us is a group of around 50 students and people who

say they have been silenced by student unions because they hold

views which others they are offensive. Don't we have the right

to hold offensive views and the right to be offended by them. Would

we agree with that? Tom Scott from the University of Essex. We surveyed

a representative sample of the British public on whether to ban

them or not ban them from UK campuses. 75% of the UK public

wanted to ban at least one speaker. The problem is they all differed on

which speaker to ban. Once you go down that road used at getting into

fights. We have heard that today, I want to ban the Speaker, I want to

ban that speaker. It becomes a ban first rather than an absolute. Your

survey was across the British public. Our survey was specifically

opt on 2000 British students. Two thirds of them supported the NUS

no-platforming policy. We gave ten specific examples and at least 75%

wanted to ban one or more of the speakers but they wanted to ban

different speakers. Some wanted to ban climate change deniers, others

wanted to ban Islamic clerics, others ambassadors. I think part of

this is with UK law being very unclear. On one hand you have the

education act of night in 86 we have the education act of 1986

guaranteeing free speech but then there is another present agenda. It

is totally contradictory. The 1986 act enshrined is free

speech, the right to freedom of speech, giving universities and

obligation. Apologies for butchering that a little bit. But then a number

of other legislation is seen to say, wait, not this speaker, wait, you

have to do... Prevent is the government programme to take

extremists out of society and re-educate them. People who are

defined as extremists by the government. That's the crux of the

debate, who do we define as extremists? Students say one thing,

governments might say another, it's dependent on your point of view who

is an extremist. You have to take more of an absolute position. We

will talk more about Prevent. We can look at the history of

no-platforming at universities which goes back to 1974 when it was first

introduced. It was inspired in part

by the rise of racist groups like the National Front

and by the Conservative MP Enoch Powell who'd given a speech

in the late 60s - which became known as the "rivers of blood" speech -

which was anti immigration We must be mad -

literally mad - as a nation. In total six groups

are officially banned. They include the British National

Party, the English Defence League, Hizb Ut-Tahir - a radical Islamist

group which supports the introduction of a caliphate,

an Islamic state, in the Muslim world; and a group called the Muslim

Public Affairs Committee - a civil liberties group with a focus

on non-violent jihad, or struggle. We wanted to hear from MPAC today

and they were willing to join us - but the National Union of Students

won't debate with or appear alongside one

of the groups they've banned. We asked if they would leave

the room whilst we spoke to MPAC but they said they wouldn't appear

on the same programme as them. Richard Brooks -

vice-president of the NUS When we originally agreed to the

debate two months ago, the first time any member of staff at the NUS

was aware ten threw would be around was late on Friday. We have

democratically decided a policy of no-platforming at the National

conference, the names of those six organisations, it says we cannot

sure a platform with them, or debate with them because there views are

seen as offensive and extremist. That's our policy. What is it about

MPAC? I can't remember exactly when they were originally decided to be

part of the no-platform policy. It was 2004. I imagine it was because

they were seen as threatening or dangerous to a nub of students on

campus, probably Jewish students. They have been accused of being

anti-Semitic and extremist. They say they reject that absolutely. They

say to lump them in with with other extremist groups is totally unfair

because they are not extremist at all. They would love the chance to

talk to you or anyone else from the NUS to explain why they feel they

have been smeared, and that the ban is totally unfair. Nick Griffin

doesn't think he's an extremist either. Anyone who you put forward

that their views are extreme in some way, they would say they are normal

speakers of the ordinary people. Nick Griffin was on question Time. I

watched it. Do you know what happened to the BNP vote after that?

Before they are at they had about 240,000 votes, and after it went

down to about 20 4000. What do you think of that? The fact the support

collapsed. -- 20 4000. If -- 24000. I want to defend the NUS policy of

no-platform. I specifically think the aim of the policy is to stop

organising fascists and racists from being on campus. The reason we have

this is because when they came onto campus from the 1970s to the 1990s,

they attacked officers and students on campus. Bringing up the point of

Nick Griffin, I think specifically for fascist, and although I like the

BBC, I think it's a mass campaigning by students and the NUS against

making sure people turned out to vote against Nick Griffin, that

broke the back of what he did. Also that organisation didn't build. In

France, the Front National, the sister organisation of the BNP,

there is no no-platforming policy in France, and Marine Le Pen is

threatening to become a very powerful person. We should defend

the no-platform policy in Britain. Are there people here who believe

that no group, irrespective of their views, no group should be banned

from speaking at universities. Yes? I'm a student at Kings College. It's

interesting the NUS keep saying they are a democratic organisation. They

were elected with less than 0.01%... Can I bring you back to the point,

why you think no group should be banned. I think their thoughts

should be challenged. When you have groups like the NUS who are elected

by so few people, who decides what can be said. Who's making those

decisions? You would want to see Islamic extremists speak at

university? I would like to see them challenged. Maybe don't invite them,

but they shouldn't be stopped from coming. If a society wants them,

that's fair enough and we should challenge those views. I'm a

graduate from the University of Liverpool. Just a couple of comments

about the NUS representatives who say it's nothing to do with us, we

didn't banned those organisations, it was the individual unions. They

support the safe space Wallasey that facilitates the culture around the

country on campuses of banning several different speakers,

progressive speakers, feminists, and it facilitates that culture. The

idea of safe spaces, the idea of campuses being safe spaces... Why in

inverted commas? They will never create a safe space everyone, there

will always be different opinions, but what it says is that outside

campus, the rest of society is unsafe and dangerous. They are views

we should not engage with. Ukip, three million-plus votes in a

general election. Our student union say that we don't speak to you, you

are xenophobes and racist. That will not change things. It will not

change wider society, it will be a self-righteous cocoon that will not

change a thing. I work for index on censorship, a free expression group.

We spend a lot of time during this debate on using words that people

seem to have different definitions about, so when we say no-platform or

safe space, or even harm, one of the problems is that there has been an

ever expanding definition of what is harmful, or what causes threats or

is threatening. People who actively inside violence, and where there is

a credible and imminent threat, then there is a threat and they should

not speak. However, many groups who are offensive, and we talk about

Marine Le Pen and national front, and I'm French so I feel I can

respond to this, yes, the far right is growing across Europe. If we are

not given the opportunity to challenge their views and ideas, if

we cannot immediately expose their bigotry and intolerance and

prejudice, we cannot win the fight against them. This lady over here.

I'm a politics and international Asians student. In response to the

comments just made, we're forgetting to address incidents such as... The

former commander-in-chief of the Israeli navy who was complicit in

torture of Palestinians and has not gone through a just trial. He was

invited to Kings College. In this regard I'm for no-platforming

because the audience that was allowed to listen to his speech was

selected in accordance with the agreement of his speech. How are you

supposed to challenge those views in University when you are not allowed

to sit in the same room as him? He is not here to defend in South, nor

do I know whether that is true about Kings College. -- himself. Should

there be any limits on freedom of speech? I think free speech is one

of the most important and precious of all human rights. Some of the

most important thinkers in history, Galileo, Charles Darwin, Karl Marx,

they caused great offence in their time. I think the criteria in

restricting free speech has become narrowly defined. If somebody makes

false, damaging and harmful allegations against a person, such

as they are a rapist or tax fraudster. If they encourage,

threaten, abuse or harass, inside violence, that is also a red line.

Beyond that, I think we have to listen to points of view, not accept

them, but to listen and challenge those points of view. That's the key

thing. Bad ideas are best defeated by better ideas, not by censorship.

Should there be limits on freedom of speech? My name is Matthew and I'm

president of the philosophy and religious studies is IT at Kings

College. I was hoping somebody would come onto the topic of human rights.

-- religious studies Society. There is a right to freedom of speech and

I agree with that. If you bring into that, you have a right to be free

from harm or violence, how do we cope with institutional violence

towards minority figures, and we have to look in the case of minority

groups, it's the minority group themselves who should define what is

harmful to them. So if you believe someone is being racist to you,

that's enough? If you believe someone is being offensive because

of views on trans, that's enough? I wouldn't say that's enough, but I

think it's a crucial point of information we need to consider. For

example if there were transgender students, or people in the community

who felt some comments were transferred, because it's the

minority they are involved in, they will have more of an insight as to

why it's offensive. The comments made earlier about the sombrero,

this is not something that's in our culture, it would be eight minority

of, for example, Mexican students in the UK, and it would be their

opinion if it was... At Goldsmiths College, the Islamic Society decided

that an Iranian commonest and feminist who has a critic of

organised religion, particularly of theocracies like Iran and Saudi

Arabia, and the way some extremists advocate the killing of female

adulterers, gay people, and they tried to stop her is saying that it

was violating their safe space because her views were offensive.

But she was able to speak? She was invited again. She was allowed to

speak, but throughout this, fascists screamed and jabbed in a face and

try to is a test she was somehow against the human rights. -- and

tried to suggest. Peter Tatchell, some people said you were racist,

would you like to respond to that and reference what it was about? I

simply say, where is the evidence? There is no evidence for that claim.

I have asked my accusers and none of them can provide any evidence. This

is what is particularly offensive about some aspects of student

politics today. People make false and baseless allegations to try to

discredit their opponents without any evidence. Is there anyone here

who has evidence Peter Tatchell has held racist views? It mirrors the

far right, it's exactly the tactic of the far right to if a man smear

and lie about other people. Does anyone here have evidence Peter

Tatchell has expressed racist views? I'm Tom and I'm a student in London.

I think what was said about Peter Tatchell and how he hasn't really

benefited Islamic, Muslim, trans and black people, activists, whatever,

it was more about the fact he's very quick to wade into debates about

shutting down Islamic speakers, but when it comes to other people, he's

fine. As long as you agree with him, you will not shut you down.

Nonsense! That's what it comes down to. The reason nobody came back and

his accusers didn't come back is because he had silenced them. What

happened was a private e-mail was sent and Peter Tatchell smeared

himself publicly and ended up outing a member of the NUS. Frankie, for

that, he should be ashamed of himself.

This is exactly the dirty smear tactics which is so objectionable

about student politics today. I did not out Fran. She was the LGBT

officer. She had been an LGBT protests. She had been spoken in the

press as an out LGBT person. Secondly, on your point about hate

preachers and Islamist. I have never argued for the banning of anybody,

simply because they express hateful views. It is only when they endorse

violence that I have sought to seek to get them banned. That applies to

Islamist preachers, Christian preachers, far right experiments and

so on. It is not true that I have singled out the Muslim community,

and in fact, my organisation, the Peter Tatchell

foundation is the only organisation in this country which has an

organisation called LGBT Muslim solidarity, to build bridges between

the LGBT community and the wider Muslim community, on the basis that

we should unite against all hate. After the news and sport we will

look at who else potentially should be banned from universities because

of their views, Katie Hopkins, Prince Charles, Stephen Fry, the

list could go on. Here is Joanna. The High Street giant BHS

is on the verge of collapse, Efforts to find a buyer

for the clothing and homeware chain, which has been struggling with debts

and a large pension deficit, BHS, which has 164 stores,

will go into administration It's the biggest retail casualty

since Woolworths eight years ago. Plans to allow local councils

to form their own academies are being considered

by the government. It's to avert a backbench rebellion

over forcing all state schools The move comes amid mounting

disquiet among some Conservative MPs and councils over plans to force

schools to opt out of A group representing 37 largely

Conservative local authorities has warned that there is a risk that

turning all state schools into academies will fail

to raise school standards. And Labour says allowing councils

to run their own academy chains would still amount to a "costly

upheaval for thousands Government sources have launched

a scathing attack on junior doctors' leaders in England -

accusing them of trying to secure the dismissal of health

secretary Jeremy Hunt, and staging 'a political

strike' tomorrow. If it goes ahead, it will be

the first time in the history of the NHS that junior doctors have

walked out of accident and emergency units,

urgent maternity services and mental 13,000 scheduled operations have

already been cancelled. The BMA says Mr Hunt should

withdraw his threat Nearly two-thirds of university

students believe the National Union of Students is right to have a "no

platforming" policy, a survey The policy means people or groups

on a banned list because of the opinions they hold

on topics such as sexuality, transgender issues and race -

are not given a platform to speak at student unions

across the country. In France, the front National, the

sister organisation of the BNP, there is no no-platforming policy.

We should defend it. That's a summary of the latest

news, join me for Thank you, a couple more messages.

David slows this leads to a tiny minority of views. Another person

says I am feeling depressed. If your current gathering is representative

of students then the future looks weak. If anybody says blue to any of

your lot, they will be running home to money for a hug. Another view

says they should discuss the subject they are banning. Ryan says Richard

Brooks the no-platform policy Democratic is laughable.

More on that to come but first Jess with the sport...

Now, they're just five points from an historic, first

Much was made of them being without their top scorer

Jamie Vardy yesterday, who's serving a suspension.

But they didn't seem to miss him too much,

In fact, the man that replaced Vardy, Leo Ulloa

So that puts Leicester eight points clear of Tottenham,

Also on the scoresheet for Leicester was Riyad Mahrez.

The Algerian international has impressed all season,

averaging a goal every other game, and last night he won the PFA

The prize was presented to him by his boss Claudio Ranieri.

Crystal Palace are in their first FA Cup Final for 26 years.

They beat Watford 2-1 yesterday, thanks to Conor Wickham

They'll play Manchester United in the final

Britain's Anthony Joshua will make the first defence of his IBF world

heavyweight champion against unbeaten American

Joshua will face Brazeel on June 25th

Hello. The election of the National Union of Students new president has

been overshadowed. She has called her old University Birmingham

something of a Zionist outpost. Some say she should be Ben Thompson for

some of her views. As you would expect, we invited her on to our

programme today and she said No. Her vice president Richard Brooks is

here. How was what she has said in the past less offensive than what

some organisations have said. You do not know platform individuals, you

know platform organisations. The second thing is we disagree on a

number of different things. I supported someone else. She has been

elected democratically by the largest student gathering in the

world. I think she has been put under an intense amount of scrutiny

compared with a white man. There are concerns from Jewish students and

she is trying to address those concerns. What I would say to a

number of people, there are three months still to go until she starts

her presidency. I for one, despite that I did not vote for her, will

give her the opportunity to prove that she can be the president she

wants to be. Hello. I'm George Harrison, a student at the London

School of economics. Do you support the new President? If you were on

the outside looking in you would be worried about the future of students

but the NUS is a joke. There are only a couple of hundred people who

are allowed to vote for the president, it is not a brilliant

mandate. I do think we should be worried about the NUS. Who does

support the new president? I also did not vote for her but I do trust

the democracy of the NUS. There were eight from my union because it is

big. It is a representative sample of students from around the UK. 800

people is a lot of people. Who does not support them? I am heading up

Cambridge's campaign to disaffiliate from the NUS. Why? I think the

election of Miley is concerning. She has gone some way to addressing the

concerns of Jewish students about anti-Semitic comments, but it is --

she was endorsed by somebody from MPAC. She replied on Facebook with

thanks and a smiley face. Further to that, we have been talking about how

this is not about necessarily it is the right weather and not to be

offended, it is about safety. People are talking about safety and harm.

At an event that she attended in 2014, she said nonviolent struggle

against the State of Israel was not enough. She endorsed violent

struggle against the state of Israel. A close friend of mine who

is a student at Cambridge University, in his summer holidays a

couple of years ago, he was around the corner from a rocket which

detonated in Tel Aviv. Watches that was, with mainstream Zionist

outlets, resistance is am -- resistance... Any claim to be

supporting the NUS' general idea is that safe space is important is

rendered laughable by her failure to live up to the standards of her

organisation. I want to read you a Facebook post from the union of

Jewish students. This is from Russell. He says he has made it

clear to her that the anger Jewish students possess after her election

result cannot disappear after just a few meetings. She needs to properly

distance herself from her past rhetoric, issue sincere apologies

and also commit to avoiding any flirtation with anti-Semitic

stereotypes in the future. Without these steps, Jewish students will

feel they are unable to engage with the NUS under her leadership. I was

stopped from speaking on violence against women because I had said,

along with many Muslim born feminist colleagues of mine, that the full

face veil was a symbol of women's oppression. Which I think is a

totally reasonable argument. I wonder what would happen if I said

it was a Muslim enclave. As a poet -- as she said Birmingham was a

Zionist outpost. Shows the sloppy thinking of these students. Sloppy

thinking at the NUS? I want to clarify a couple of important

things. Firstly, she did not vote against or condemn a motion

condemning Isis. She Major came back to make sure the wording was

accurate and did not condemn all Muslims -- she made sure it came

back. And secondly, comments around the Zionist them are around the

Palestinian and Israeli struggle, they are not around Judaism. I think

people who continually deliberately misconstrue her language as

anti-Semitic are failing to engage with her and the debates and

concerns of many students on campus is that we talked to every day. When

she said Birmingham University is something of a Zionist outpost, what

are you saying she actually was meaning? I am not here to explain

that. The point is that there is a difference between arguing for the

freedom of Palestine and arguing or attempting to in anyway offend or

limit Jewish students. She has commented since her election and she

is trying to set a really high standard and how we can conduct the

Israel Palestine debate without falling into these traps which cause

further divisions which we constantly try and avoid. It would

be good for her to come and we did invite her but she said no. Have

some students from Kings. There is a student think tank which has

withdrawn an invitation to Boris Johnson to speak in terms of the

leaving the EU referendum campaign because of his comments on Friday

about President Obama and his part Kenyan ancestry and whether that

made him anti-British. What do we think about with the withdrawal of

that invitation? Including the debate with Malia, it

shows that no-platforming is used to make a political point. We have

rules against inciting racial hatred and violence, and it's the law.

Everything beyond that is arbitrary. The for banning people like Boris

Johnson and Peter Tatchell, is nothing more than a political

statement. Boris Johnson hadn't accepted that invitation anyway. I

think the best way to prove him wrong would to put him in front of a

bright and articulated bunch of students who would do that. I think

it comes down to a ridiculous notion. If you're going to withdraw

an application from Boris Johnson, do we say that because Boris has

offended somebody, there will be no platform for the entire Conservative

Party, or if Jeremy Corbyn offends a student, we then ban the entire

Labour Party? Who gets to decide what is the offence in University? .

Somebody who hasn't spoken... The fact that we even know about these

people means they have a platform. The fact student unions have a right

and can keep that right to withdraw an invitation at any point they want

to, but be clear that the vast majority of external speakers

invited are allowed to speak. If a student comes to me, and I'm from

the University of Liverpool, if they student comes to me or a group comes

to me and say they are concerned about a speaker, we will put

measures in place to mitigate any levels of harm. And they will last

case scenario we might have to withdraw. What do you mean by

potential harm? Violence? That's the individual's decision. What do they

say to you when they say, I'm worried about potential harm? A huge

variety of things. Like what? They might feel threatened, under

pressure, they might have mental health issues meaning they can't

partake in the debate. They don't have to come, but we try a number of

different measures to make sure they feel like they can't partake in

those activities in the same way every other student can do. That's

as far as it goes, but if somebody wants to withdraw their invitation,

they can do and that's their right. I'm a student at LSE. I think what

Boris Johnson said was stupid, personally. Coming back to the point

made earlier by Richard, the whole situation being like a house party,

getting invited. Universities are not house parties, they are public

institutions of learning where you are meant to challenge views. For

people to establish walls to protect you from stupidity like Boris

Johnson, it's ridiculous. I understand these policies are made

to protect people like me, and I'm a gay man with a disability, but I

don't want to... Thank you very much, but I don't need your

protection. I don't need to be protected from MPAC. It's not just

me, people might say, I might say that because that is my live

experience. It's not just me saying it. I've talked to black and

minority ethnic eagle, trans people, women, other oppressed minorities in

my universities, and they say the same thing. -- ethnic minority

people. There might be people who are gay men, with a disability, who

do not have your confidence, who might feel that by having a speaker

who would make them feel potentially threatened, it would further

marginalise them. Why not protect them from hearing that? The point of

going to university... I've lived my entire life being called defective,

all sorts of horrible things on the basis of both my civility and

homosexuality. The reason I can say this on my show now, and I'm an

actor as well, and that's beside the point! It's because I've had the

experience of having to fight against people like that.

Unfortunately I've not had a life protected from people who call me

defected or a crime against humanity. One priest wanted to

exorcise me. I thought it was an extremely detaining situation. The

idea we need to be detected from things, I have a problem with that.

-- need to be protected. We are coming to the end of the programme.

I want to bring in imaging. It was thought you were violating a safe

space at Edinburgh. What did you do? This. I raised both hands in the

air. What happened? A safe space complaint was made, the only

complaint made all year then, and students voted for me to stay. Is

that an example of the policy working? Exactly. When somebody made

a complaint you were violating safe space by raising both arms, what did

you say and think? I thought it was ludicrous but was willing to hear

what they had to say. I didn't know what I had done the specifically at

that point. The complaint was made anonymously. Even though you were

not forced out of the meeting, there was an attempt to eject her simply

because she raised her arm. That was deemed to be a violation of the safe

space policy. They are entitled to that opinion, but not to eject you

from the meeting. But I wasn't ejected. But they tried, some people

wanted to try to eject you. But that was their right. For the next few

minutes, we are going to put some scenarios to the test and ask you

whether the following people should be banned from speaking at

universities because of their views. Jeremy Corbyn... You know who he is,

the leader of the Labour Party, once described Hamas, the militant

Islamic movement, who believe, sexuality should be punished by

death, as our friends will stop should Jeremy Corbyn be banned? That

was unanimous. No. Katie Hopkins has said various things that people

potentially find offensive. She makes a career of it, like comparing

migrants to crutches. like comparing migrants

to cockroaches, saying "Show me pictures of coffins,

show me bodies floating in water, play violins and show me skinny

people looking sad. I still don't

care." City should she the band, yes or no?

Yes, no. This is what happened when she was at Brunel University last

year. What do you think about the way the

students reacted? APPLAUSE A quick word, turning their backs

and walking out? Some imagination but utterly cowardly. I think we

have to have the debate. That rate was about welfare. It was a really

important discussion. There were lots of views on the table, not just

Katie Hopkins. They want a simple black and white and is to how we

sort out welfare in this country. That was an opportunity to learn

something, listen, not just to people like 80 kids. We can all use

stunts like that, but it's not moving politics forward. We will not

fight for a better world that way, and we will not be able to develop

our own intellect that way. -- people like Katie Hopkins. It is not

an NUS emotion, it's not a game, it's not for or against. She called

immigrants cockroaches. I can't stand either, but that's not the

point. It's a tactic you can deploy. It's not one I advocate. I think it

was immature. I'm suggesting a broader climate... This is really

serious. We live in a world in which many people from this country,

British beeper, young people, they are joining Isis. We live in a world

where there is war and all sorts of challenges. I'm suggesting that your

generation has a lot on your plate. We live in a climate where freedom

is being eroded daily. If you are part of the generation snowflake,

get rid of the stuff they can toughen up, because you have to