:00:07. > :00:11.Just one child in ten say they learn the facts of life from their
:00:11. > :00:15.parents. And our teen pregnancy rates are the highest in Europe. So,
:00:15. > :00:25.why are we still so troubled by the thought of more, and earlier, sex
:00:25. > :00:40.
:00:40. > :00:45.Good morning, and welcome to Sunday Morning Live. A quarter of
:00:45. > :00:48.teenagers say they don't get sex education in school. Isn't the
:00:48. > :00:56.classroom the best place to banish ignorance about sexual behaviour?
:00:56. > :00:59.No, says family rights campaigner Lynette Burrows. I don't believe
:00:59. > :01:09.the state should teach children about sex and I would go to prison
:01:09. > :01:09.
:01:09. > :01:11.for this belief. Get those binoculars out - the government
:01:11. > :01:14.wants us to inform on illegal immigrants, welfare cheats and
:01:14. > :01:24.Muslim extremists. Is snooping on each other really the duty of a
:01:24. > :01:29.
:01:30. > :01:34.good citizen? Betty Driver said there would have to shoot her to
:01:34. > :01:44.get rid of her, so with a crisis looming, should we follow our
:01:44. > :01:46.
:01:46. > :01:49.example? My guests this week have never been shy about telling others
:01:49. > :01:52.just what they think of them. Douglas Murray hotly defends his
:01:52. > :01:55.right to be right-wing, and has been so critical of Islam he needs
:01:55. > :01:58.a police guard in Holland. Francis Beckett is a historian and
:01:58. > :02:00.playwright who writes tips on how to enjoy a happy retirement. His
:02:00. > :02:04.father was interned during the war as a fascist sympathiser. Lynette
:02:04. > :02:08.Burrows is the author of Fighting for the Family. She's a mum of six
:02:08. > :02:11.and runs a school in her own house. And we want to hear what you think.
:02:11. > :02:15.Call in now to challenge our guests on Skype. Or give your views on
:02:15. > :02:17.Twitter or by phone. Phone calls cost up to 5p/min from a BT
:02:17. > :02:19.landline. Calls from mobiles and other networks may cost
:02:19. > :02:21.considerably more. Texts will be charged at your standard message
:02:21. > :02:24.rate. Research this week suggests our
:02:24. > :02:27.teenagers aren't getting enough sex education in school. The Dutch say
:02:27. > :02:30.their teenagers have sex later, fewer pregnancies and less STDs
:02:30. > :02:40.than ours because they have sex education earlier - as young as
:02:40. > :02:41.
:02:41. > :02:49.four. But if we go Dutch, Lynette Burrows says she'll go bananas. And
:02:49. > :02:54.I don't believe the state should teach children about sex and I
:02:54. > :02:58.would go to prison for this belief. For years we have been told that
:02:58. > :03:02.sex education for children was absolutely necessary to stop the
:03:02. > :03:06.miseries of unwanted pregnancy, abortion and sexually transmitted
:03:06. > :03:11.disease. But now it is generally accepted that this approach has not
:03:11. > :03:14.worked. And this is probably one of the reasons why they want to widen
:03:14. > :03:18.it down to primary school children. I think parents have an absolute
:03:18. > :03:23.right to protect their children from this sort of education, which
:03:23. > :03:28.is so unhealthily obsessed with destroying childhood innocence in a
:03:28. > :03:34.way that is reminiscent of Peter fear. To me, anybody who wants to
:03:34. > :03:37.talk dirty to little children is a danger to them. Children have a
:03:37. > :03:41.natural modesty which is a protection for them. After all, how
:03:41. > :03:45.are they to know the difference between a stranger in a classroom
:03:45. > :03:51.showing them dirty pictures and a dirty old man in the park showing
:03:51. > :03:53.the same pictures. Who is the predator? When a child is older and
:03:53. > :03:58.does biology in secondary school they will learn all about
:03:58. > :04:01.reproduction at a time when it has some relevance and purpose to it.
:04:01. > :04:06.The government isn't good at organising anything, with the
:04:07. > :04:09.possible exception of the army and the public drains. Let's not
:04:09. > :04:15.therefore prepared -- pretend that they are capable of replacing
:04:15. > :04:25.parents. What do you think of those views? That is our text vote this
:04:25. > :04:33.
:04:33. > :04:39.morning. The school sex-education We will show you how you voted at
:04:39. > :04:43.the end of the programme. Francis, what you make of what to Lynette
:04:43. > :04:47.said about teachers taking away the innocence of our children. I think
:04:47. > :04:52.that's the most ghastly load of rubbish other heard in my life.
:04:52. > :04:57.very tolerant of you. It is extraordinarily intolerant that to
:04:57. > :05:01.say that teachers are a bit like paedophiles, an appalling thing to
:05:01. > :05:06.say. The state must come in on matters like that. The state does
:05:06. > :05:14.have a role. You say it cannot have a role in educating children, well,
:05:14. > :05:20.there are a number of things. If you decided that children want to
:05:20. > :05:23.be taught to read and write, the state would step in. The state
:05:23. > :05:28.would step in and say, I'm sorry, Lynette, your children are going to
:05:28. > :05:33.be taught to read and write, and rightly so, because we know that
:05:33. > :05:37.our prisons, well over 50 % of the population of prisons are people
:05:37. > :05:45.who cannot read and write and whose reading and writing ages below that
:05:45. > :05:48.of 11. This is totally irrelevant. In exactly the same way, our
:05:48. > :05:51.children think they cannot grow up properly without being able to read
:05:51. > :05:57.and write, they cannot grow up properly without understanding sex.
:05:57. > :06:02.Lynette, is it the same right? it is not the same right. That is
:06:02. > :06:06.ridiculous. There is no way you can teach sex in an impersonal way as
:06:06. > :06:12.to teach mathematics or literature. It is something very personal and
:06:12. > :06:16.it depends how it is taught. When a child is five or six years old it
:06:16. > :06:19.is absolutely abhorrent to have somebody come in there and talk to
:06:19. > :06:24.them about things that they have no interest in or knowledge about. It
:06:24. > :06:27.is far too young. I'm not saying you should do it at no age, but I
:06:27. > :06:34.wouldn't have teachers do it anyway. Look what they have done to
:06:34. > :06:39.literature and poetry. Music. They can ruin anything. Why do we want
:06:39. > :06:42.to give them sex education? You're better at it than most. Most
:06:42. > :06:46.teachers have worked out in the wake that children learn compared
:06:46. > :06:53.to that parents happen. That is funny with the literacy rate so
:06:53. > :06:59.very high. Something has gone right. They are actually not very high.
:06:59. > :07:03.They are very highly elitist -- illiteracy rates in prison.
:07:03. > :07:08.Children leave school at 11 and move over and are illiterate.
:07:08. > :07:14.stick with the teacher's ability to teach sex education. Douglas,
:07:14. > :07:18.Francis describes the way Lynette has described sex education
:07:18. > :07:22.teaching as ghastly. Do you think there is an age when it is
:07:22. > :07:26.appropriate to teach sex education to children, or do you have a
:07:26. > :07:30.concern? I think it is a bit ghastly as well. But there is a
:07:30. > :07:35.truth somewhere, and we are doing something badly wrong, and that is
:07:35. > :07:41.fairly obvious with the highest teenage pregnancy rates. Obviously
:07:41. > :07:44.it is not working, and I would say that the answer that tends to be
:07:44. > :07:49.coming up with is therefore you should teach it earlier and earlier.
:07:49. > :07:52.I don't think it is the stage at which we teach sex education, I
:07:52. > :07:57.think it is what you are teaching and how well you're doing it that
:07:57. > :08:01.matters. If we look at the comparison with the Netherlands
:08:01. > :08:05.where sex education can start as young as four. A can, but it
:08:05. > :08:11.doesn't very often. And the average age where people engage in sexual
:08:11. > :08:15.activity is higher over there and the teen pregnancy rate is lower,
:08:15. > :08:19.is that because of the age, or the Netherlands get it right with the
:08:19. > :08:23.content. I think they get it right within their society. The Dutch
:08:23. > :08:26.society has different tolerances and laws and we do and you have to
:08:26. > :08:29.adapt it to your situation. In Britain we are obviously getting
:08:29. > :08:33.something wrong and we have to change it. I think bringing it
:08:33. > :08:37.forward is not the answer. Nor is the answer that school should not
:08:37. > :08:41.teach anything about sex to children. Why don't we talk to a
:08:41. > :08:49.sex education teacher. Alice, presumably you are best placed to
:08:49. > :08:52.tell us what goes on in the classroom. Do you think there is an
:08:52. > :09:01.age at which you are going to get the message across best two young
:09:01. > :09:05.children? I think it needs to be done from an early age, but at an
:09:05. > :09:11.age appropriate level. My toddler is 20 months old and I'm currently
:09:11. > :09:15.pregnant and she knows there is a baby in mummy's tummy. That is
:09:15. > :09:19.technically sex-education but it is a level suitable for her. And when
:09:19. > :09:29.she starts to ask questions, I will answer those questions. But keeping
:09:29. > :09:33.it at a level that his age She is talking about her own child.
:09:33. > :09:36.We are not talking about sex education is caused. Children have
:09:36. > :09:41.always learned where babies come from, the cat, the dark, their
:09:41. > :09:44.mother. It is not railroaded on them by a stranger in a class full
:09:44. > :09:49.of other children which might be completely wrong. If you are
:09:49. > :09:53.talking about your own children but you do teach sex education. Lynette
:09:53. > :10:01.has described teachers talking to children about sex as showing them
:10:01. > :10:06.dirty pictures. What sort of material do you use? No dirty
:10:06. > :10:14.pictures for a start. It really does depend on the age group and
:10:14. > :10:19.what we are teaching, but most of it focuses on relationships,
:10:19. > :10:23.biology and focuses on just young people being able to make safe,
:10:23. > :10:30.informed choices when they are ready. Ie teaching five year-old, 6
:10:30. > :10:34.Paroles, teenagers? -- are you teaching? -- six-year-olds.
:10:34. > :10:40.specialise in secondary, so the group's I workers tend to be over
:10:40. > :10:44.the age of 14. -- the group's I work with. But there is some work
:10:44. > :10:50.all the way through. Let's be very clear, the majority of parents want
:10:50. > :10:54.schools to teach sex education, around 84 %. The majority of young
:10:54. > :11:01.people are demanding more and better sex education from schools.
:11:01. > :11:04.They also want parents to deliver its -- it, but they want to save
:11:04. > :11:11.space that is in their parents to discuss the issues. So we need to
:11:11. > :11:15.meet their needs. Alice, stay with us. Nick is from the Campaign for
:11:15. > :11:20.Real Education. You have a problem with some of the material used to
:11:20. > :11:26.teach sex education. Absolutely. I know a lot of children are unhappy
:11:26. > :11:32.with sex education and parents would rather leave it to someone
:11:32. > :11:36.else, but parents don't appreciate how explicit a lot of sex education
:11:36. > :11:40.materials are. Even primary school children are taught explicit
:11:40. > :11:44.details of male and female genitalia which they do not need to
:11:44. > :11:49.know. Sex education are also covers heterosexual and homosexual
:11:49. > :11:52.practices in a notch and -- non- judgemental way which is too
:11:53. > :11:57.explicit and unnecessary. Psychologists say that if children
:11:57. > :12:01.are introduced to such things before they are ready it can
:12:01. > :12:05.interfere with their natural development and desensitise their
:12:05. > :12:09.children and destroys their childhood. You cannot beat age
:12:09. > :12:13.explicit in a class of 20 or 30 children because children develop
:12:13. > :12:20.that's -- different ages and it should be up to parents to decide
:12:20. > :12:24.when the children are ready, not for schools to deliver it. Nick, I
:12:24. > :12:27.was surprised that you are complaining that homosexuality was
:12:27. > :12:31.taught in a non-judgmental way. I would have thought that that was
:12:31. > :12:37.exactly the way in which all sex, including homosexuality or to be
:12:37. > :12:42.taught. To complain children are being left there to make up their
:12:42. > :12:49.own mind and it is non-judgmental is a bad thing is very odd. Not a
:12:49. > :12:57.tall. The whole purpose of bringing up children by parents and teachers,
:12:57. > :13:00.to teach them in education, but also moral values and family values.
:13:01. > :13:09.Because the Dutch are more religious than we're and strong on
:13:09. > :13:14.Up you are talking about your moral than these. I don't think there is
:13:14. > :13:18.anything wrong with homosexuality in terms of my moral values. Maybe
:13:18. > :13:22.you don't. Opinions vary, and it could be up to the individual the
:13:22. > :13:25.parents to decide, not schools. Exactly, it should be up to the
:13:26. > :13:32.individual and it should be left up to the individual child to make up
:13:32. > :13:41.his or her mind on moral issues. seven years old? Not at all. You
:13:41. > :13:51.are trying to get non-judgmental is imposed on every. You cannot impose
:13:51. > :13:54.
:13:54. > :13:58.Teachers in school have enough to do with raising academic standards
:13:58. > :14:04.in English maths and sciences which we need to be ever to compete
:14:04. > :14:07.internationally. You know, since sex education is more prevalent
:14:07. > :14:10.there is no doubt that sexually transmitted diseases have increased
:14:10. > :14:16.dramatically and we also have very high teenage pregnancy rates
:14:16. > :14:20.compared with other countries. Sex education and the idea you can have
:14:20. > :14:24.safe sex which is put forward in a sex-education lessons, children are
:14:24. > :14:28.more less told that we know you will experiment so here is how to
:14:28. > :14:32.do it as safely as possible. It undoubtedly encourages some
:14:32. > :14:38.youngsters to experiment before they should. Nick, thank you. Let's
:14:38. > :14:41.talk to someone with a different view. Rabbi Dr Jonathan is from a
:14:41. > :14:46.school's organisation which does not support faith schools. What do
:14:46. > :14:51.you make of this idea that sex education comes without a moral
:14:51. > :15:00.framework which is something that offends some of the guests we have
:15:00. > :15:05.I do not think that is true. Sex- education is not about promiscuity.
:15:05. > :15:10.It is factual information about your body and how it works. It is
:15:10. > :15:13.equipping children for life, as much as knowing about history or
:15:13. > :15:19.geography. Some parents may be very good at communicating to their
:15:19. > :15:22.children about sex but others are ignorant, or embarrassed. Some have
:15:22. > :15:31.warped judgment. Even a Lynette into that that when she was talking
:15:31. > :15:36.about dirty pictures, which are not a dirty a tall, just descriptive.
:15:36. > :15:40.Parents have rights. If they have a particular view, such as being for
:15:40. > :15:46.against contraception, let them discuss that at home, but let them
:15:46. > :15:50.not deny children knowledge of how the body works in the first place.
:15:50. > :15:53.Schools can maybe go that extra step by having parallel classes,
:15:53. > :15:58.offering classes for parents so that parents know what their
:15:58. > :16:02.children are knowing and can discuss it when they come home, and
:16:02. > :16:07.filling in the gaps. Many parents do not have that basic knowledge.
:16:07. > :16:12.No one is suggesting that parents are not going to be involved with
:16:12. > :16:16.the child's said to education, so whatever they learn in class, the
:16:16. > :16:20.parent is still the primary influence. -- sex education. I do
:16:20. > :16:23.not know if you have seen any of these programmes, but they are very
:16:23. > :16:27.graphic and crude. Most parents would not talk to their children
:16:27. > :16:33.like that. The point about the misquoted Dutch experiment is that
:16:33. > :16:39.it is not compulsory in Dutch schools at all. It varies very
:16:39. > :16:43.wildly. Sex education is not compulsory in UK Primary Schools.
:16:43. > :16:49.If they get pregnant, they're given to their families, and they do not
:16:49. > :16:57.get any benefit. As the old adage said, of what you pay a lot for,
:16:57. > :17:00.you get a lot of. No other country has such graphic sex education and
:17:00. > :17:04.gives children accommodation and allowance when they get pregnant.
:17:04. > :17:14.They are just given back to their families. That is why it is low,
:17:14. > :17:16.
:17:16. > :17:21.I'm sure. Lily is 20, you went to a Catholic girls' school. What we are
:17:22. > :17:26.taught in sex education? Sex- education was relatively non-
:17:26. > :17:31.existent. -- what were you tot. It was Catholic orientated so it
:17:31. > :17:37.consisted mainly of chastity and pro-life talk. It was very
:17:37. > :17:42.different to what Lynette is saying. It was not in any way explicit.
:17:42. > :17:52.What do you feel you missed out on? If we are discussing the fact that
:17:52. > :17:53.
:17:53. > :17:59.introducing children to early May be a risk, do you feel that? I feel
:17:59. > :18:03.like I was misinformed. Not misinformed, but lacked information,
:18:03. > :18:09.and there were things held back from us that maybe people had
:18:09. > :18:15.different experiences of, different education, because it was Catholic
:18:15. > :18:19.orientated, we were not given some facts. We missed out information. I
:18:19. > :18:22.was lucky enough that I had a relationship with my mum that I
:18:22. > :18:27.could speak to her about these things and it is good that Lynette
:18:27. > :18:30.does with her children but not everyone is that lucky. It can be
:18:30. > :18:40.an awkward and embarrassing conversation, so I think it should
:18:40. > :18:41.
:18:41. > :18:46.be left to teachers. The what is your view? Lilley says that she was
:18:46. > :18:53.lucky because her parents were able to discuss this openly. What do you
:18:53. > :18:57.make of the point that some parents may want teachers to teach us.
:18:57. > :19:00.think sex-education blows up as an issue every now and then. One thing
:19:00. > :19:02.issue every now and then. One thing that is certain, even though the
:19:02. > :19:05.that is certain, even though the discussion is clear, is that it is
:19:05. > :19:08.discussion is clear, is that it is never about children. It is always
:19:08. > :19:12.about adult values and our inability to agree on them. What is
:19:12. > :19:16.happening at the moment, in the way that the sex-education discussion
:19:16. > :19:20.has been shaped his a strong tendency to blame parents. But at
:19:20. > :19:27.the same time, not trusting parents to be the solution. In this case,
:19:27. > :19:30.we're told that some parents do not talk to children about sex or bad
:19:30. > :19:34.lot of parents lack the skills or confidence to talk to the road
:19:35. > :19:38.children. I think that is clearly not true. There may be a strong
:19:38. > :19:40.minority of parents who do not want to talk to their children and that
:19:40. > :19:46.to talk to their children and that is their decision. In the younger
:19:46. > :19:55.years of a child's wife, it is important that is respected. The
:19:55. > :19:59.most unhealthy aspect of this discussion is that we have moved
:19:59. > :20:05.beyond a concern with the fact of life. What is happening is that the
:20:05. > :20:09.fact that are important, we have moved into a different direction.
:20:09. > :20:12.Experts are claiming that they can tell us the best way to live our
:20:12. > :20:17.relationships and very intimate relationships, and how to relate to
:20:17. > :20:27.people sexually. I do not think there are experts that know that
:20:27. > :20:28.
:20:28. > :20:37.better than families and young people themselves. Douglas, this is
:20:37. > :20:46.not a value-free lesson, is it? Or can it be? It can be, under broad
:20:46. > :20:51.terms. The simple biology, as it were, should be taught as biology.
:20:51. > :20:55.Leave that until the stage at which they can understand that, and need
:20:55. > :20:59.to know that. The need to know basis, that is important. The
:20:59. > :21:03.reason why people are worried about fight Urals being taught sex
:21:03. > :21:07.education is because they think, why do they need to know? But when
:21:07. > :21:11.you do need to know about the biology, of course you have to be
:21:12. > :21:16.taught that, and you can be told that as fact. It is not opinion,
:21:16. > :21:22.how babies are made. But then you come on to the other part of the
:21:22. > :21:26.issue, the non biological part, about how you have loving
:21:26. > :21:31.relationships, and I think that can be done in a values freeway, or a
:21:31. > :21:34.way in which everyone can agree, to imbue children with the idea that
:21:34. > :21:37.what of relationship they have or aspire to, it should be one in
:21:37. > :21:43.which they care for people and respect people. I do not think
:21:43. > :21:50.anyone could disagree on very broad parameters like that. Francis, you
:21:50. > :21:53.have listened to the evidence. have, and I think it is very ought
:21:53. > :21:58.to complain about the number of teenage pregnancies on the one hand
:21:58. > :22:03.and at the same time seek to deny children knowledge of contraception.
:22:03. > :22:06.children knowledge of contraception. Our schools are designed and we
:22:06. > :22:10.expect them to bring our children up to live in the world, not just
:22:11. > :22:15.to read and write, but to teach them all these things. One of the
:22:15. > :22:22.things you have to know, as you grow up, is about sex and
:22:22. > :22:24.relationships. It seems simply appalling to hive that off from
:22:24. > :22:28.everything else that the child needs to know, to say, you can
:22:28. > :22:34.teach them about everything else but you must not teach them about
:22:34. > :22:37.that. To do that is a symptom of unhealthy obsession. The as another
:22:37. > :22:42.thing we have not touched upon. Today, children find out about
:22:42. > :22:49.these matters earlier than my generation did or anyone else's
:22:49. > :22:52.generation. -- there is another thing. The funny thing is, you talk
:22:52. > :22:56.about her parents are not able to tell their children about sex,
:22:56. > :23:03.presumably that has not changed. And yet we have rising teenage
:23:03. > :23:09.pregnancy and disease. The youth think that it is the wrong sort of
:23:09. > :23:12.education to say to children that this is a subject that is
:23:12. > :23:19.completely different, that it needs to be centres of the handled.
:23:19. > :23:27.Children have this Russian roulette attitude towards sex, would they
:23:27. > :23:35.throw everything at it. -- sensitively handled. An e-mail: "I
:23:35. > :23:41.agree with Lynette. Sexual -- teenage pregnancies occur in
:23:41. > :23:48.children with low aspirations. By the time of sexual education, most
:23:48. > :23:52.children know about sex." June, from Glasgow, says: "We would not
:23:52. > :23:58.start in front of children at four years old teaching what is
:23:58. > :24:02.appropriate for teenagers. At the early ages, it is about respect."
:24:02. > :24:12.We would like to know what do you think. His sex-education bad for
:24:12. > :24:21.
:24:21. > :24:25.The polls will close in 20 minutes. This week, the underwear boma
:24:25. > :24:29.admitted trying to blow up a plane with explosives hidden in his pants.
:24:29. > :24:37.It is thought he was radicalised when studying in London. The
:24:37. > :24:43.Government asks lecturers now to inform students expect of --
:24:44. > :24:49.suspect of extremism. Is that the stuff of the bleak world of Tinker
:24:49. > :24:53.Tailor Soldier Spy? Are asking us to protect our shores from foreign
:24:53. > :24:57.enemies is nothing new, but this week, David Cameron wants us to
:24:57. > :25:01.turn our focus on our neighbours. want everyone in the country to
:25:01. > :25:06.help with this, including by reporting suspected illegal
:25:06. > :25:12.immigrants to our border agency. is not just immigrants. They want
:25:12. > :25:18.us to report on suspected Muslim extremists, welfare cheats and even
:25:18. > :25:21.people who dump litter. Is this vital to keep us safe? Or will it
:25:21. > :25:27.make us suspicious and fearful of neighbours, colleagues and friends
:25:27. > :25:35.and family? Of the underwear boma, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, pleaded
:25:35. > :25:38.guilty this week of attempting to block the train. -- plane. The
:25:38. > :25:42.Government has asked lecturers to inform on their students if they
:25:42. > :25:46.think the same thing is happening to them. Lecturers say that that
:25:46. > :25:50.would damage the trust between teacher and student and point out
:25:50. > :25:54.that radical thinking can be a right of passage for young,
:25:54. > :25:59.enquiring minds. But if the goal is preventing terrorism, should we all
:25:59. > :26:02.inform on each other's views? And what about benefit cheats and
:26:02. > :26:08.illegal immigrants? If they are taking public money, do we have a
:26:08. > :26:16.duty to report them? Should we rise to the challenge and do our bit? Or
:26:16. > :26:21.will it make Britain feel more like Cold War Russia? If you have a
:26:21. > :26:28.webcam, make your point on Skype, or join the conversation on Twitter
:26:28. > :26:31.or e-mail. Is this a throwback to eastern Europe in the cold war?
:26:31. > :26:38.at all. Anyone who knows what happened during the Cold War can
:26:38. > :26:43.possibly make that comparison. Informing on neighbours? As far
:26:43. > :26:46.shopping illegal immigrants, which is what David Cameron asked for, I
:26:46. > :26:49.think this is a question of citizenship. If you pay into the
:26:49. > :26:56.system, and there are people here illegally who have never paid into
:26:56. > :27:00.the system, of course they are costing everybody. Your duty as a
:27:00. > :27:04.citizen should not be so much of a problem, to stop that. As for
:27:04. > :27:09.reporting on people who might well be becoming terrorists, again, if
:27:09. > :27:13.you think somebody is likely to beat the sort of person who would
:27:13. > :27:18.go and blow something up, who would not take interest? When the IRA was
:27:18. > :27:23.at its height, who would not, if they saw a suitcase, look around
:27:23. > :27:27.and say to everybody, whose is this? That was not spying on people,
:27:27. > :27:32.it was just being a good citizen. Otherwise, what do you do, get off
:27:32. > :27:37.the train and leave the rest to it? Responsible citizenry? I think this
:27:37. > :27:40.as a parallel with the banking crisis. Certain bankers and
:27:40. > :27:46.institutions borrowed lots of money and then they are in trouble and we
:27:46. > :27:50.are asked to bail them out. This is the same. The Government has been
:27:50. > :27:59.negligent in its border controls. It knows it has 500,000 illegal
:27:59. > :28:03.immigrants, Melanie Phillips wrote a book about 3000 cells of Muslim
:28:03. > :28:07.extremists in London. They should get rid of those before they turn
:28:07. > :28:11.on the citizens and say, you do the job. It is not an either-or. We
:28:11. > :28:15.could agree that the Government has lost many illegal immigrants and
:28:16. > :28:20.still want to help them. Are you suggesting we should not help and
:28:20. > :28:24.punish the Government? It is a bad thing to ask citizens to spy on one
:28:24. > :28:30.another. This is not the same as what you're saying about a back
:28:30. > :28:35.left on the train. That is common sense. Sniffing around, making
:28:35. > :28:41.inquiries... Nobody has been asked to do that. That is wrong. Nobody
:28:41. > :28:45.has been asked to spy on anyone. The Government has asked that where
:28:45. > :28:49.people are in a position of supervision over young people and
:28:49. > :28:52.they see somebody becoming the type of person -- the type of person
:28:52. > :28:57.whose radical and the here than espousing views that will lead to
:28:57. > :29:01.mass murder then they should say something. Francis, you are in a
:29:01. > :29:05.university and you here somebody saying something controversial,
:29:05. > :29:11.perhaps, about the Taliban or of high-def, would you feel it was
:29:11. > :29:15.your duty to report them? I would feel it was my duty not to, because
:29:15. > :29:18.all adhering is an opinion. You're suggesting that what we might end
:29:18. > :29:24.up doing is saying well, this person seems to hold an opinion
:29:24. > :29:29.that is rather similar to that of the Palestinian Authority or rather
:29:29. > :29:34.similar to someone else, so we must report them to police. That is a
:29:34. > :29:41.short road to Stalin's Russia. What concerns me is that of course to
:29:41. > :29:45.write to say that if you see an unattended suitcase you or I would
:29:45. > :29:49.have reported that, but reporting a suitcase is entirely different to
:29:49. > :29:55.reporting a human being. The difficulty you get when you are
:29:55. > :29:58.reporting human beings is that it is open to vengeful people, it is
:29:58. > :30:04.open to becoming a way of paying off scores. That is what happened
:30:05. > :30:09.under Stalin. Let us talk to a human being who got reported.
:30:09. > :30:12.Arrested and finally released without charge after downloading
:30:12. > :30:19.the Al-Qaeda Manual for research at University. You were reported to
:30:19. > :30:28.police by a staff member, but did they have a duty to inform on you
:30:28. > :30:32.if you're downloading the Al-Qaeda Firstly, the Al-Qaeda up training
:30:32. > :30:39.manual sounds dangerous, it is actually available in WH with 49
:30:39. > :30:42.per and 99. Do they have a duty to report? -- it is available in WH
:30:43. > :30:48.Smith. The problem with the security agenda is that it is not a
:30:48. > :30:52.crime is being committed, it is people using emotive and on
:30:52. > :30:58.occasion prejudiced understanding to use indicators that are very,
:30:58. > :31:03.very ambiguous and then refer that on to higher powers or the state.
:31:03. > :31:09.That is very, very dangerous. In the case of my arrest and release
:31:09. > :31:13.without charge, it shows when you provide that responsibility to
:31:13. > :31:16.administrators and managers who are trained in to our sessions on how
:31:16. > :31:22.to report someone as a suspected terrorist will not, you are
:31:22. > :31:27.treading on extremely dangerous territory. No one doubts mistakes
:31:27. > :31:31.have been made and more will be made in the future. No law and its
:31:31. > :31:34.pursuit is ever perfect. But there have been cases here which have
:31:34. > :31:38.nothing in them. But on the other hand there have been cases where
:31:38. > :31:41.people have not reported situations when they have been people who
:31:41. > :31:46.conspire to carry out terrorist actions. There was conviction of a
:31:46. > :31:49.student in Scotland he was looking at beheading videos on his
:31:49. > :31:53.university computer and nobody reported him precisely because they
:31:53. > :31:58.feared that if they did they would be accused of being prejudiced in
:31:58. > :32:02.some way. That person was someone who went on to be convicted for
:32:02. > :32:05.terrorist acts. But of course, mistakes will be made and have been
:32:05. > :32:10.made, but we should not return this is something it shouldn't concern
:32:10. > :32:14.us. The individual Douglases referring to was actually acquitted
:32:14. > :32:18.even though he was convicted under the Terrorism Act. He was
:32:18. > :32:25.eventually acquitted and released and it was declared to be a
:32:25. > :32:29.miscarriage of justice. I just like to clarify that. Let me ask you,
:32:29. > :32:34.you were cleared, released without charge. But if you were sitting
:32:34. > :32:39.alongside somebody at their computer and they were looking at
:32:39. > :32:44.videos, because there are videos available to of atrocities, and
:32:44. > :32:49.they were murmuring things about being supportive, would you think,
:32:49. > :32:55.that's fine? We are in a university, that is OK, or would you have
:32:56. > :33:03.concerns and would you feel their duty to alert somebody to that?
:33:03. > :33:06.will not, and I say this live on TV, I will not report any one unless I
:33:06. > :33:10.have evidence that they are involved in an act of criminality
:33:11. > :33:14.or in conspiracy to commit one. As simple as that. We have a common
:33:14. > :33:19.law system in this country which is more than suitable and equipped to
:33:19. > :33:23.deal with people committing crimes or inciting people. We should be
:33:23. > :33:27.using this to the full extent rather than going into an extremely
:33:27. > :33:31.ambiguous agenda and recommending people merely on the views they
:33:31. > :33:37.profess. We must remember that those views, as morally
:33:37. > :33:45.reprehensible as they may be, are not illegal. To criminalise that,
:33:45. > :33:51.especially in a university context, is damaging. The Muslim director of
:33:51. > :33:57.an organisation called Capital a century is here. -- Sentry. You
:33:57. > :34:03.want people to report on people if you suspect their views might be
:34:03. > :34:08.dodgy. Is that one way to describe it? But some say unless there is
:34:08. > :34:15.direct evidence of criminality, that is not anyone's duty. I think
:34:15. > :34:19.the government when it talks about the prevented to view these are
:34:19. > :34:25.alluding to tackling the motivation that drives somebody to carry out
:34:25. > :34:29.terrorist attacks. If we can't do that, we might as well pack up and
:34:29. > :34:33.do nothing. There are university organisations which promote the
:34:33. > :34:38.heat speakers and preachers who are actually promoting things like
:34:38. > :34:42.killing homosexuals, suicide bombings which are theologically
:34:42. > :34:46.justified, people in favour of domestic violence and attacks on
:34:46. > :34:51.British troops. If we do not tackle the motivation behind the things
:34:51. > :34:55.which drive the pathway to someone being radicalised through terrorism
:34:55. > :35:02.we will have more problems. Here lies one of the key problems. We
:35:02. > :35:09.are not talking about thought police or opinion, we are talking
:35:09. > :35:13.about organisations in universities where students, at least half a
:35:13. > :35:17.dozen members who have been charged or waiting to be charged or
:35:17. > :35:22.terrorism. We have preachers who are practising and preaching on
:35:22. > :35:26.campus without being challenged. That is where we need to focus.
:35:27. > :35:30.you don't need to spy on people in order to expose that sort of thing.
:35:31. > :35:34.If somebody writes that they think every man ought to beat his wife up,
:35:34. > :35:43.you don't really need a spy to say, hang on, there is something
:35:43. > :35:47.difficult fear. What we are talking about his way you suspect something,
:35:47. > :35:54.as we spoke a few moments ago. He simply downloaded some material for
:35:54. > :36:02.research purposes that might have been used by someone with malign
:36:02. > :36:06.intent. That seems to be the danger. May I ask you a question? If we
:36:06. > :36:10.have preacher's coming on campus and saying that women should be
:36:10. > :36:13.beaten and saying attacks on British troops are justified and
:36:13. > :36:17.saying to young, vulnerable Muslims, without being challenged, that if
:36:17. > :36:24.you don't believe in these use you're not a Muslim, what should we
:36:24. > :36:27.do about it? Nobody is arguing that you leave those preachers alone. No
:36:27. > :36:32.one is arguing that you do not report those preachers. What we are
:36:32. > :36:39.arguing is that the students they talk to must be presumed innocent
:36:39. > :36:45.and we should not be trying to to turn up their lecturers into police
:36:45. > :36:49.spies over them. I think the people sitting in on these lectures or
:36:50. > :36:55.speeches, if they started spouting the same views, we need to do
:36:55. > :37:00.something. If we don't, we will see other bombers, people blowing
:37:00. > :37:03.themselves up on the streets of London. What you are suggesting is
:37:03. > :37:06.once we have people espousing similar views to the creatures we
:37:06. > :37:15.just sit back and do nothing. I think that is nonsense and we have
:37:15. > :37:20.The point is this. Everyone is in a pickle on this issue because it is
:37:20. > :37:24.to do with Muslim students. Turn it around for a month. Imagine if a
:37:24. > :37:29.society in the University week-in, week-out, invited members of the
:37:29. > :37:32.BNP as the only spokes people to students on campus, not as one
:37:32. > :37:36.point of view or challenged point of view, but the only people. The
:37:36. > :37:42.BMP happens to be a legal organisation, likes of the
:37:42. > :37:46.preachers, but they are a vile, bigoted racist organisation and we
:37:46. > :37:49.were absolutely report people preaching races and on campus and
:37:49. > :37:54.we should do it in this case as well, but people are scared of
:37:54. > :38:03.tackling it because it is races and coming from Muslims. We have a
:38:03. > :38:06.couple of other guests. We have the Student Federation of rigs up --
:38:06. > :38:13.Islamic Society representative here. What would you do if you heard
:38:13. > :38:19.someone exposing these use? -- espousing of these views. I think
:38:19. > :38:23.the law protects us. If we find someone who is planning to do
:38:23. > :38:28.something through violence, we report them. But we are looking at
:38:28. > :38:31.the pathways and routes to extremism which are very ambiguous.
:38:31. > :38:41.You have to have substantial evidence in order to convict
:38:41. > :38:46.
:38:46. > :38:51.someone of extremism and in many Colonel Mike Dewar, is this
:38:51. > :38:56.informing? Is it spying? Does it put people in tricky situations
:38:56. > :39:02.that they are not qualified to deal with? I don't think anyone suggests
:39:02. > :39:08.we try to replicate the East German state or Stalin's Russia. I don't
:39:08. > :39:12.think we are say we are informing. It seems to me a relatively simple
:39:13. > :39:17.issue and some of your speakers are suggested this. Let me interrupt
:39:17. > :39:22.you. You say no one suggests it. One TEC says I grew up in communist
:39:22. > :39:25.eastern Europe and I left in 1968 and we were scared to say things in
:39:25. > :39:31.public in case our neighbours inform dollars. Is this going the
:39:31. > :39:35.same way? What if your neighbour doesn't like you? I am giving you
:39:35. > :39:38.my view, and I am saying that I do not believe that the government or
:39:38. > :39:44.any thinking person is suggesting that we replicate those conditions.
:39:45. > :39:48.The answer is No, not in democratic Britain. That having been said, our
:39:48. > :39:52.responsibilities are quite clear and it is a matter of judgment. As
:39:52. > :39:56.one of your earlier speakers were saying, sometimes we will get it
:39:56. > :40:01.wrong and sometimes innocent people will be reported incorrectly but if
:40:01. > :40:07.we have good reason to believe that life is threatened or that people
:40:07. > :40:12.are inciting hatred or planning a crime, we have to be sure, and
:40:12. > :40:18.sometimes we will be wrong, but there is no harm in society if we
:40:18. > :40:22.report wrong doing. It seems to be fairly logical and simple. We are
:40:22. > :40:26.creating a black and white issue which will always be blurred.
:40:26. > :40:31.Mistakes will be made but we must do our best as responsible sitter
:40:31. > :40:35.if we think young men or women or students have been unduly
:40:35. > :40:41.influenced by a preacher and are adopting those views and becoming a
:40:41. > :40:45.danger to society. We have to make a judgment. We have concentrated a
:40:45. > :40:49.lot on preventing terrorism, but this also applies to benefit cheats,
:40:49. > :40:53.illegal immigrants. Someone who describes themselves as an angry
:40:53. > :40:59.old age pensioner in Devon, says, I would gladly grass and anyone who I
:40:59. > :41:03.think is a threat to society or costing me as a taxpayer. I suppose
:41:03. > :41:08.basically my opinion is that since the government caused this whole
:41:08. > :41:12.problem with a very unthought out result of mass immigration it is up
:41:12. > :41:19.to them to get it right, not to turn on to the citizens and asked
:41:19. > :41:22.us to get it right. It is not an either or situation. The government
:41:22. > :41:27.can improve its own record and individuals can play their part.
:41:27. > :41:33.But this is about laws already in place being broken. There are laws
:41:33. > :41:38.in the country against incitement. When people speak at camps as --
:41:38. > :41:42.compasses -- campuses and there are known inciters of murder and sexual
:41:42. > :41:48.minorities, that cannot be something which people turn a blind
:41:48. > :41:52.eye to. Because they are turning their eye to the law. Coming up,
:41:52. > :42:02.the government is considering plans to link our pension age to the life
:42:02. > :42:03.
:42:03. > :42:13.expectancy. Is it our duty to give a bag goals of a retirement. --
:42:13. > :42:27.
:42:27. > :42:31.Allah be the golden dream of an ice One man's story dominates moral
:42:31. > :42:35.moment. Liam Fox's palette of taking his best friend to work with
:42:35. > :42:40.him, was that a misguided bit of loyalty or a moral blip. Francis,
:42:40. > :42:45.he fell on his sword eventually. That is what makes it a moral
:42:45. > :42:50.moment rather than immoral. People talk about sexual scandals in
:42:50. > :42:55.politics, but the real scandals in politics are always about money. It
:42:55. > :43:00.seems to me that eventually he had to do that. There was a situation
:43:00. > :43:05.where he had an adviser who was not paid as a political adviser or by
:43:05. > :43:10.the country or the Conservative Party, but paid by people who make
:43:10. > :43:15.money out of the defence of the country, the Ministry of Defence,
:43:15. > :43:20.the people who sell arms. He was taking this adviser by himself to
:43:20. > :43:23.meetings with heads of state, foreign generals. Clearly
:43:23. > :43:29.indicating to those people that this was somebody who the Minister
:43:29. > :43:33.trusts. This man was, in fact, a lobbyist. I have nothing against
:43:33. > :43:38.lobbyists and I have nothing against political advisers, but you
:43:38. > :43:41.can't mix the two. You've got to be one or the other. Douglas, you are
:43:41. > :43:47.in the unique position in the studio in that you know the
:43:47. > :43:50.individuals involved. As it happens, I know Adam Werrity and Liam Fox
:43:50. > :43:53.and I think they are both very decent and honourable people and I
:43:53. > :44:00.think they have had a week of having their reputation and lives
:44:00. > :44:03.completely trashed by the press. I do think it is worth saying that
:44:03. > :44:07.there was some blurring of the boundaries which should have been
:44:07. > :44:16.looked at and should not have gone on this far, but the way in which
:44:16. > :44:21.this week the press has reported this as Liam Fox becoming the story.
:44:21. > :44:27.By Friday people said he had become the story. He became the story
:44:27. > :44:37.because people kept making him the story. Which people had made him
:44:37. > :44:40.
:44:40. > :44:46.It wasn't the newspapers they kept it going. Liam Fox kept it going by
:44:46. > :44:50.drip-feeding information. He was continually giving as little
:44:50. > :44:54.information as he could. He said boundaries have been blurred, not I
:44:54. > :44:59.had bird -- blurred the boundaries. It should be the same role. It
:44:59. > :45:02.would be no good for a rioter to go to court and say actually the
:45:02. > :45:08.boundary was blurred between my television set and their television
:45:08. > :45:13.set. Most things claim this week have not improved and most will not
:45:13. > :45:16.be. There has been sheer speculation thrown out in this case.
:45:17. > :45:20.The point I would make is that we do, as a country, have to make
:45:21. > :45:25.decisions about what we expect from our politics. Do you think anything
:45:25. > :45:29.went wrong here? Do you think Liam Fox and Adam Werrity did anything
:45:29. > :45:34.wrong? I cannot see anything myself yet but there might be things to
:45:34. > :45:39.come out. People are complaining when government have too many
:45:39. > :45:42.advisers paid by the taxpayer. They complained when Nick Clegg had
:45:42. > :45:45.unpaid people being exploited working for politicians. And there
:45:45. > :45:53.is only other one way to do this, which is the somebody to be paid by
:45:53. > :45:57.Liam Fox has had three paid advisers. You might need more than
:45:57. > :46:02.three. You like to think that those in charge have moral guidance.
:46:02. > :46:07.You're talking about judgment. It is not whether somebody's adviser
:46:07. > :46:11.is paid or not paid, it is judgment. There is a perception that
:46:11. > :46:15.government is far too close to big business at the present time. It is
:46:15. > :46:20.only a couple of weeks ago that a four or something rather said that
:46:20. > :46:25.actually, Economics in Europe is governed by Goldman Sachs. This
:46:25. > :46:32.perception is damaging. But he was a very good Defence Secretary and I
:46:32. > :46:35.think it is a tragedy that he was gone. Finisher., briefly. He may
:46:35. > :46:42.have been a very good Defence Secretary but it is interesting
:46:42. > :46:48.that Adam Werritty was Firstly or a health lobbyist, then suddenly
:46:48. > :46:51.became a defence lobbyist when Liam Fox moved to Defence. That may have
:46:51. > :46:58.been an error of judgment but he has shown terrific judgment at the
:46:58. > :47:02.Ministry of Defence. You have been voting in our text poll. We asked,
:47:02. > :47:12.his school sex-education bad for our children? That forties now
:47:12. > :47:14.
:47:14. > :47:19.closed. -- that vote is. Betty -- Betty Driver died this weekend aged
:47:19. > :47:25.91, a model of working right until the end. More of us will still live
:47:25. > :47:29.to be 100, so should befall her example and get rid of retirement?
:47:29. > :47:34.-- should we follow her example. Betty Driver who played Betty
:47:34. > :47:39.Williams in Coronation Street died aged 91 yesterday. She said she
:47:39. > :47:44.would never retire. I love working. I will never retire. They will have
:47:44. > :47:51.to shoot me to get rid of May. tributes pour in, should we follow
:47:51. > :47:56.her example? When the state pension was introduced one century ago,
:47:56. > :48:00.life expectancy was 50. Most people never lived to retire at all but
:48:00. > :48:06.now we are live in to 80 and more of us will soon reach 100. Should
:48:06. > :48:09.we sit around on a pension for more or than 30 years? Most people would
:48:10. > :48:16.say they have paid their dues and deserve to retire but would we be
:48:16. > :48:19.happier and the country wealthier if we all worked until we dropped?
:48:20. > :48:23.The NHS is struggling to cope with the cost of looking after the
:48:23. > :48:28.elderly. If we want peace and free health care, should we not be
:48:28. > :48:33.prepared to work longer to pay for it. Public sector pensions at,
:48:33. > :48:38.including those for MPs, are going to cost us more than �33 billion by
:48:39. > :48:44.2016. Our children's taxes may eventually have to go up to pay for
:48:44. > :48:50.them. The Government got rid of compulsory retirement this month,
:48:50. > :48:55.so that we can all work as long as we like. Is it our duty to work
:48:55. > :49:03.until we drop, to pay the country's bills? Or, after working for
:49:03. > :49:08.decades, do we all deserve a rest? Join in by webcam, phone, text, e-
:49:08. > :49:12.mail or online. When would you like to give up working? I don't suppose
:49:12. > :49:17.I never shall. It is like asking an actor or a priest or a cellist when
:49:17. > :49:21.they're going to stop. They are never going to, because their work
:49:21. > :49:24.is their life. For most people, their family is their life. Should
:49:24. > :49:28.we abolish retirement for everybody? There are so many jobs,
:49:28. > :49:35.and acting is not one of them, that are dirty and unpleasant and people
:49:35. > :49:39.do it because they have to keep their family are fed, and it is
:49:39. > :49:42.highly paid. It is fair to offer them retirement. It is a business
:49:42. > :49:48.transaction. You pay a certain amount in so that you can take a
:49:48. > :49:52.certain amount out. That ought to be sacrosanct. If you want to go on
:49:53. > :49:59.working, you ought to be allowed to. You might well have skills and was
:49:59. > :50:04.then that is still valuable. that is everybody's choice. The
:50:04. > :50:09.default age has been abolished, but should we make people work longer?
:50:09. > :50:15.No. That is at the centre of this, nobody is arguing that you should
:50:15. > :50:18.stop people working who want to work. I would certainly want to
:50:18. > :50:24.work. I would argue that the economic necessity to work should
:50:24. > :50:30.be removed from people once they get older than I am now. Not too
:50:30. > :50:35.much older, I hope. They should be able to enjoy a retirement. It is
:50:35. > :50:39.not that retirement is a time to lie down and put on your slippers,
:50:39. > :50:42.people going to the University of the Third Age and things like that,
:50:42. > :50:49.where what they do is useful and interesting, things that they have
:50:49. > :50:55.never been able to study before. It seems to me that if we're going to
:50:55. > :51:00.have a decent society, that sort of retirement should be right. Europe
:51:00. > :51:08.retired teacher, Sheila, but you still do voluntary work. -- You are
:51:08. > :51:15.a retired teacher. Are you an advocate of continuing to work?
:51:15. > :51:18.You're still paid to work? I am still pay to work, yes. I retired
:51:18. > :51:22.the summer before last when I was 60, and then I decided that I would
:51:22. > :51:27.like to go back and use my experience and skills with
:51:27. > :51:31.disturbed children who are no longer able to cope with education.
:51:32. > :51:36.I am paid for it and I enjoy it but that was my choice. You're using
:51:36. > :51:44.the skills that you have built up, and you're still being paid to work.
:51:44. > :51:51.You worry wonderful example of why people are able to carry on. So why
:51:51. > :51:55.not argue that they should carry on? You're contributing. The fact
:51:56. > :51:59.is I do not think people should be forced. That was my choice. My
:51:59. > :52:03.health is good and I like being in the classroom. There are other
:52:03. > :52:07.people who would like to do otherwise, because their health is
:52:07. > :52:13.maybe not so good or the need to spend time with all the appearance
:52:13. > :52:17.or grandchildren. They want to spend their time doing other things.
:52:17. > :52:23.If we link pension age to life expectancy, one organisation has
:52:23. > :52:29.said that somebody who is 70 now will not be retiring until they are
:52:29. > :52:33.77 in the year 2071. I could believe that. Is that a good thing?
:52:33. > :52:38.It might just be fact, something that we have to find a way around.
:52:38. > :52:43.Events may make sure it happens. When the welfare state started,
:52:43. > :52:51.most men were expected to live once you're over their retirement age.
:52:51. > :52:59.Now it is around 15 years plus. -- won here over their retirement age.
:52:59. > :53:04.This is a huge change. Economically, we will not be able to pay for more
:53:05. > :53:08.people living longer. In America, by 2030, the number of people who
:53:08. > :53:15.won in retirement will have doubled, but the number of people in work
:53:15. > :53:21.will have only gone up by 18%. You cannot support the retirees on that.
:53:21. > :53:26.James's from the Spectator. When do you expect to stop working? When I
:53:26. > :53:30.drop. I do not think I will have any option. I love the idea that I
:53:30. > :53:32.might be able to enjoy a retirement like my parents enjoy, where they
:53:32. > :53:36.like my parents enjoy, where they go regularly on lovely holidays
:53:36. > :53:41.abroad and play golf and have some money to give two grandchildren.
:53:41. > :53:46.This is a model that will not work any more. As Douglas says, we have
:53:46. > :53:48.to deal not with what ought to be but what actually is. Is it the
:53:48. > :53:54.but what actually is. Is it the case that teachers can retire very
:53:54. > :53:58.much earlier than the average retirement age? Yes, you can retire
:53:58. > :54:02.at 55 if you choose to. But you have to bear in mind several things.
:54:02. > :54:09.If you retire early, you get your pension according to that date. You
:54:09. > :54:15.do not get the full pension. The same is true if you give up, as I
:54:15. > :54:20.did, full-time teaching to work with children, then those years are
:54:20. > :54:23.missed out. It has to be made clear that in terms of teachers' pensions,
:54:23. > :54:28.they are funded by the Teachers' superannuation fund. This is not
:54:28. > :54:32.taxpayers' money, this is our money. We have paid as we were working
:54:32. > :54:40.into a pension fund. That is the money that we are paid out of. It
:54:40. > :54:44.is our money, not taxpayers' money. Can I make another point? We are
:54:44. > :54:48.looking at 40% of young people being unemployed. The highest
:54:48. > :54:52.graduate unemployment figures we have ever seen. These are the
:54:52. > :54:56.people who need jobs, who want jobs and should be trained and given
:54:56. > :55:04.that opportunity, not all people forced to work past when they would
:55:04. > :55:09.like to. Sheila, tell me, if I am right, about this. A teacher who
:55:09. > :55:14.retires at 55, the pensioners at a level where that they will have a
:55:14. > :55:18.thin time of it if they do not work again? That is right. They will be
:55:18. > :55:22.able to cope but it will not be luxurious. It is not the sort of
:55:22. > :55:27.retirement that the chap from the spectator was talking about.
:55:27. > :55:33.but if that is what people choose, then I think that is the right that
:55:33. > :55:39.everyone should have. We have strong unions who fight for rights.
:55:39. > :55:49.Let us go back to you. If you carry on working, you will be blocking a
:55:49. > :55:53.
:55:53. > :55:55.job, James. Sorry, but at least two of your panellists are living in
:55:55. > :55:58.of your panellists are living in cloud cuckoo land. We feel that we
:55:58. > :56:03.have paid our dues and we ought to have a lovely retirement but you
:56:03. > :56:07.have to deal with the reality. In the 50 years since the war we have
:56:07. > :56:12.been living in a ponzi scheme. There is no money available to
:56:12. > :56:18.support people to be able to retire at 55. They are going to have to
:56:18. > :56:22.keep working, whether they like it or not, regardless of whether they
:56:22. > :56:26.are blocking imaginary jobs for younger people. Older people can
:56:26. > :56:31.provide good skills into the labour market. They are wiser, more
:56:31. > :56:34.experienced. It is not a bad thing but we have to deal with this.
:56:34. > :56:39.me take that point. I cannot lead me take that point. I cannot lead
:56:39. > :56:42.to because we are almost out of time. Thank you so much. Our work
:56:42. > :56:49.here is almost done but we have to tell you the result of the text
:56:49. > :56:53.poll. His sex-education bad for our kids? Here is what you told us. 55%
:56:53. > :56:57.of those of you who tested in said of those of you who tested in said
:56:57. > :57:04.that yes, it is bad for children. 45% say no, it is not. Actually,
:57:04. > :57:09.Lynette, roughly balanced. More on my side. Most people think what I
:57:09. > :57:13.think, that children do not need it, given by a stranger, where you
:57:13. > :57:19.cannot monitor it. Almost anywhere else except for pornography, of
:57:19. > :57:25.course, you can get it. Surprised by the results, Francis and
:57:25. > :57:31.Douglas? Not particularly surprised. It does not change my view that if
:57:31. > :57:40.parents refused to provide full sex education for their children, they
:57:40. > :57:44.are depriving them of a human right that children have to be brought up
:57:44. > :57:48.properly and to be taught the things they need to know. Rubbish.
:57:48. > :57:58.You have 10 seconds. It is not about whether they should be, it is
:57:58. > :57:58.
:57:58. > :58:00.what and when. That is what it is four. Thank you for taking part.
:58:01. > :58:04.four. Thank you for taking part. Lynette Burrows, Francis Beckett
:58:04. > :58:08.and Douglas Murray. Do not text or call any more because the form