:00:09. > :00:14.Not so much hot off the press, as straight from the morgue - the
:00:14. > :00:17.final edition of the News of the World. But before it was shut down
:00:17. > :00:27.we opened it up in our millions every Sunday. Has our appetite for
:00:27. > :00:40.
:00:40. > :00:45.Good morning, and welcome to Sunday Morning Live.
:00:45. > :00:48.So here's a question for you: Why did the hacks on the News of the
:00:48. > :00:52.World think private information was what we wanted to hear? Are we to
:00:52. > :00:56.blame for what they did? It's the big morality tale this week and
:00:56. > :00:59.this is your chance to take on the journalists yourselves. And with
:00:59. > :01:04.hypocrisy on our minds, is it wrong to fake religious belief to get
:01:04. > :01:07.your kids into a good school? Our guests are all headline-makers.
:01:07. > :01:11.You can read Peter Hitchens' column today in the Mail on Sunday,
:01:11. > :01:14.alongside pages of celebrity gossip. But he quit the Express because he
:01:14. > :01:18.couldn't stomach its new owner's other publishing interests. Paul
:01:18. > :01:21.McMullan, ex-News of the World, is a biter who got bit. Actor, Hugh
:01:22. > :01:27.Grant, secretly filmed him fessing up to phone hacking. Derek Hatton
:01:27. > :01:30.was hounded for 15 years by more than Murdoch's men. He was the
:01:30. > :01:34.Militant Liverpool leftie the whole media loved to hate.
:01:34. > :01:38.We want to know what you think. You can challenge our guests by webcam
:01:38. > :01:42.on Skype. This is your chance to give your views on twitter or by
:01:42. > :01:45.phone. Phone calls cost up to five phone. Phone calls cost up to five
:01:45. > :01:48.pence a minute from a BT landline. Calls from mobiles and other
:01:48. > :01:56.networks may cost considerably more. Texts will be charged at your
:01:57. > :02:00.Did you take your high horse when you heard about the News of the
:02:00. > :02:02.World this week, or take a good look at yourself? The paper might
:02:02. > :02:12.have been hacking people's phones but millions read the stories.
:02:12. > :02:13.
:02:13. > :02:16.Peter here thinks if you bought it you deserve it. Do you agree?
:02:16. > :02:21.Today is the death knell of the News of the World, mourned by its
:02:21. > :02:27.staff and perhaps up to 7 million readers. It is a paper that has
:02:27. > :02:32.been part of British culture for 168 years. We have been victims of
:02:32. > :02:37.a witch-hunt by some newspapers and I hope they are happy today as they
:02:37. > :02:40.dance on the grave of a British institution. But many say that
:02:40. > :02:44.institution has betrayed our trust by hacking the phones of murder
:02:44. > :02:49.victims and the families of dead soldiers. He even though we knew it
:02:49. > :02:56.was illegal, there was hardly an outcry when we discovered they
:02:56. > :03:00.hacked into celebrity phones. The gossip was a laptop. He it has been
:03:00. > :03:04.hard to make large portions of the population to care about it in a
:03:04. > :03:10.visceral way, because so many victims of phone hacking were rich
:03:10. > :03:15.or famous. Violating the privacy of murder victims, it seems, was a
:03:15. > :03:20.step too far. Before we cast the first stone, could the tabloid
:03:20. > :03:24.hacking scam will be our own fault? The tablets have bent and broken
:03:24. > :03:29.the law for decades and often they have uncovered genuine political
:03:29. > :03:33.scandals and brought down the powerful and political. But they
:03:33. > :03:37.have ruined families and dredge cutters for celebrity gossip and
:03:37. > :03:43.the public have loved every minute. Can we complain if they break the
:03:43. > :03:48.law to give us the gossip we crave? This week, are two because tabloids
:03:48. > :03:54.were slapped with contempt of court charges her over coverage of her
:03:54. > :03:58.Joanna Yeates's murder. But those details fascinated the public. Some
:03:58. > :04:02.say the reason we find ourselves in this situation is the press viewed
:04:02. > :04:06.itself as a buffer law and a toothless regulator, which could
:04:06. > :04:10.face the chop as well was not taming the beast. But all
:04:10. > :04:13.newspapers are fighting to survive because we are buying fewer papers.
:04:13. > :04:16.They're trying to compete with rumour and gossip on social
:04:17. > :04:21.networking sites which are not governed by the same laws as the
:04:21. > :04:25.press. Can we blame them for providing us with a scandal we
:04:25. > :04:31.queue up to buy? Many argue the cornerstone of democracy is a free
:04:31. > :04:35.press. But tabloid hold up a mirror to our own values. So should we
:04:35. > :04:40.have used them for sinking into the gutter and perhaps dragging some
:04:40. > :04:48.police and politicians with them? Or is our own appetite for sleaze
:04:48. > :04:53.to blame? Is it? I think it is. I was in a taxi coming here and the
:04:53. > :04:58.driver said, this phone hacking is dreadful isn't it? And they said,
:04:58. > :05:03.do you buy the paper? And he said, to be in since it stopped doing it,
:05:03. > :05:10.he does not buy it any more because there isn't much else in it. So he
:05:10. > :05:14.doesn't? It is not as hard-hitting as it used to be, not as subversive.
:05:14. > :05:18.That's the question for our text vote. Is an immoral Press our
:05:18. > :05:26.fault? If you think it is, text the word VOTE, followed by YES. If you
:05:26. > :05:34.think it isn't text VOTE followed by NO. We'll show how you voted at
:05:34. > :05:40.the end of the programme. Is that the case, Peter papers have to do
:05:40. > :05:43.it because the readers demanded? is not as simple as that. This
:05:43. > :05:48.country has gone through a huge educational decline and a huge
:05:48. > :05:51.moral decline in the past 50 years. At the same time you have the
:05:51. > :05:56.enormous influence of Rupert Murdoch, a man who is quite
:05:56. > :06:01.prepared to exploit this to the uttermost and to actually forced a
:06:01. > :06:05.lot of other papers to follow him down that path will stop you sound
:06:05. > :06:10.like you are of resolving journalists of any responsibility?
:06:10. > :06:15.Everybody is responsible for their own actions. If you want to know
:06:15. > :06:18.why this has happened, look at the News of the World 50 years ago it
:06:19. > :06:23.is mostly about trial reports of particular murders, usually
:06:23. > :06:28.domestic murders. Now it is about scandal and celebrity gossip. These
:06:28. > :06:32.things are not the same. The last edition of the News of the World,
:06:32. > :06:39.is it produces a museum of the British press on how totally
:06:39. > :06:45.different popular newspapers were, more literate, full of information.
:06:45. > :06:51.And there has been a transformation. Circulation has dropped?
:06:51. > :06:53.Circulation has dropped recently. I think the reason is because the
:06:53. > :06:58.fall in educational standards and reading is falling out of fashion
:06:58. > :07:04.as an entertainment. How many people under 30 read for pleasure
:07:04. > :07:07.anymore? I'm not offering an excuse, but if you want to see an
:07:07. > :07:11.explanation, you cannot just say it is the papers. People have
:07:11. > :07:16.developed appetites for things which the papers satisfied. The
:07:16. > :07:19.basic problem remains this, if you want to have a free press, it has
:07:19. > :07:23.to be independent. To be independent it has to be
:07:24. > :07:27.commercially set successful. To be commercially successful it has to
:07:27. > :07:33.be popular. These things are popular, so we buy them in our
:07:33. > :07:38.droves? The companies spend billions every year on advertising.
:07:38. > :07:42.No they employee advertising agents, they employ experts and consultants
:07:42. > :07:46.to advertise. When they advertise their make money and we buy the
:07:46. > :07:54.products. If that did not work, they won't do it. They wouldn't
:07:54. > :07:58.spend billions. I am sure, if an advert on page 53, half way down is
:07:58. > :08:02.going to convince us to buy the product, then certainly, headline
:08:02. > :08:07.after headline, after headline will make us buy the product. So the
:08:07. > :08:10.newspapers have a massive influence in the way we think. If we took up
:08:10. > :08:15.the celebrity gossip and the stuff based on the allegedly illegal
:08:15. > :08:22.methods, would we still buy these papers? Will we have a taste for
:08:22. > :08:27.the alternative? Paul says, a taxi- driver said it is not the same
:08:27. > :08:33.without it? You will meet another taxi driver tomorrow and he will
:08:33. > :08:37.say the opposite. It is not just sleaze. The famous comment from the
:08:37. > :08:43.worst Gutter paper that has hit the face of this country, the Sun
:08:43. > :08:48.newspaper, will stop they were very proud to say we influence people to
:08:48. > :08:53.vote in a particular way. When it goes wrong, it is your fault. You
:08:53. > :08:57.cannot have your cake and eat it. Those who say you are what you eat,
:08:58. > :09:02.you are what you eat in terms of the propaganda as well. That is not
:09:02. > :09:07.really true. Once a month, the News of the World has done a credit
:09:07. > :09:12.where the story. I think naming and shaming, I remember writing, and I
:09:12. > :09:17.was proud of that. Conceivably, by putting a picture up of a
:09:17. > :09:24.paedophile, they may have saved the child's life. Maybe a couple of
:09:24. > :09:31.children. But, the next week we have a Premiership footballer has
:09:31. > :09:35.A3 in a bed, whatever! Y one is important for the other, you need
:09:36. > :09:41.to sell 5 million copies so when you have a genuine political
:09:41. > :09:44.scandal, people will read it. If you only sold 100 copies, no one
:09:44. > :09:50.would know the deputy Prime Minister had been lying to his wife
:09:50. > :09:55.and to the electorate. You do need the titillating nonsense, if you
:09:56. > :10:00.like. Do you think people would buy the paper just to read those
:10:00. > :10:03.political stories? If you want to read that kind of thing you would
:10:03. > :10:09.buy the Independent. How many people by the Independent? Hardly
:10:09. > :10:13.anybody. The only reason that is true that over the years the likes
:10:13. > :10:17.of Murdoch have but billions into ensuring we are convinced that what
:10:17. > :10:25.we want to read is the sleaze and everything else. In real terms, how
:10:25. > :10:30.many people would rather think about Ryan Giggs or anybody else in
:10:30. > :10:33.terms of their sporting prowess, rather than what they did outside?
:10:33. > :10:38.Tiger Woods, I used to love watching him play golf. Then the
:10:38. > :10:41.press did this big thing on the women he had. Suddenly I cannot
:10:41. > :10:48.watch him playing golf. I would rather watch him play golf than
:10:48. > :10:53.read about the women he has been with. Was that the media's fault?
:10:53. > :11:00.He has to apologise to his wife, but not to me. I do not occur. I
:11:00. > :11:04.just want to watch him play golf. Peter? I know nothing about golf.
:11:05. > :11:09.If the question is being made to simple and you have to remember it
:11:09. > :11:13.is true, that if you publish a newspaper purely composed of
:11:13. > :11:17.important political stories, not many people would read it. If you
:11:17. > :11:21.look at the Murdoch empire, the Times, I don't think it has made
:11:21. > :11:25.any money in modern history and it is being subsidised heavily by the
:11:26. > :11:30.other papers. We get a very powerful and important serious
:11:30. > :11:33.newspaper, financed by popular journalism which is a strong
:11:33. > :11:39.argument for having popular journalism alongside it. I don't
:11:39. > :11:45.think you could have a major popular paper unique to this
:11:45. > :11:50.country, a popular press that is influential in politics. Although
:11:50. > :11:55.it is not perfect, it keeps politics immensely cleaner.
:11:55. > :12:00.wonder why you see the Times is a powerful, important paper, clearly
:12:00. > :12:06.it is I like it. The Sun newspaper is more powerful because what is
:12:06. > :12:12.the readership of that? It is about 7 million. The readership of the
:12:12. > :12:21.Times it is a tiny amount. But one could not function without the
:12:21. > :12:24.other. It is business, it is not the reader's fault. They need a
:12:24. > :12:29.multi-million selling tabloids to form their other businesses, is
:12:29. > :12:39.that your point? To say it is the reader's false is like saying we
:12:39. > :12:39.
:12:39. > :12:44.are not responsible for what we do. -- fault. What it is true to say,
:12:44. > :12:48.readers have changed. And that is because society has changed, in my
:12:48. > :12:53.view very much for the worse. cannot say you have had no
:12:53. > :12:57.influence in that, Peter. Newspaper, here at the year have made a
:12:57. > :13:03.difference, not only in terms of what they write as journalists, but
:13:03. > :13:07.the way they behave. Twenty-five years ago 6,000 print workers were
:13:07. > :13:12.thrown out of News International. The very same journalists or their
:13:12. > :13:21.forefathers were brought in a cross picket lines to produce newspapers
:13:21. > :13:28.which would decry those people. They were brought in again 6,000
:13:28. > :13:34.print workers. They have to take responsibility. This has nothing to
:13:34. > :13:40.do with the subject under discussion, absolutely nothing. I'm
:13:40. > :13:45.not making a great moral case for myself, I have done what I can.
:13:45. > :13:50.say it decline in education, morals and society and perhaps Derrick's
:13:50. > :13:54.point is to what extent does your newspaper and other papers Malta
:13:55. > :14:00.that? I think we try to fight against it. The reason I work for
:14:00. > :14:06.the paper I work for now, is because I care about that. That is
:14:06. > :14:13.the Daily Mail? It is the Mail on Sunday. And they are separate
:14:13. > :14:23.newspapers. Same owners? To what extent are the media for moulders
:14:23. > :14:23.
:14:23. > :14:27.I think there is a lack or loss of professionalism in journalism now.
:14:27. > :14:32.Journalists are the symptoms, not the disease. The other things
:14:32. > :14:35.talked around the issue are about the massive, the ties Asian of
:14:35. > :14:39.everything. If you think about why journalists are not professional
:14:39. > :14:45.any more, it has come out of your discussion that they are always
:14:45. > :14:50.trying to give what the readers will want to buy. By think true
:14:50. > :14:54.professionalism requires more of a sense of objectivity and
:14:54. > :14:57.independence values -- I think. Journalists do not have those
:14:57. > :15:04.Independent values any more. They have been taken over by the market.
:15:04. > :15:07.Peter? I think that is simply untrue. There are huge amounts of
:15:07. > :15:10.journalists with values to stand up for them and state them in
:15:10. > :15:15.newspapers. If you want to find a spectrum of independent critical
:15:15. > :15:19.opinion, and a very broad and combative one, you have to look a
:15:19. > :15:23.long way to find anything better than you will find in the huge
:15:23. > :15:29.variety of the competitive, independent British press. I am not
:15:29. > :15:33.saying we are perfect, but on that basis it is good. I therefore
:15:33. > :15:38.challenge will viewers to open up a newspaper and dour content analysis
:15:38. > :15:42.about how much his personality driven, celebrity driven, about
:15:42. > :15:47.American foreign policy it will be a segment on what Condoleezza Rice
:15:47. > :15:50.or Michelle Obama is wearing. It is not about Concepts or factual
:15:50. > :15:58.information. Journalists are now part of the entertainment industry.
:15:59. > :16:01.They are not conceptual writers. Your course are part of that same
:16:01. > :16:05.industry by appearing on the programme, but that is not
:16:05. > :16:09.invalidated by that. We all have to get our views across the way that
:16:09. > :16:15.appeals to people. It does not mean that views cannot be honestly
:16:15. > :16:19.stated and have integrity. As far as I am able to talk to you, it is
:16:19. > :16:24.in the medium of soundbites, and I am as guilty as you of that but I
:16:24. > :16:29.am not kidding myself that anything you or I is saying is particularly
:16:29. > :16:35.conceptually profound all well developed. Speak for yourself! I
:16:35. > :16:38.think quite hard about what I say. Andy Flanagan is director of the
:16:38. > :16:47.Christian Socialist Movement. If media magnates are selling us what
:16:47. > :16:51.we want, is it bus that lacks self- control? -- is it us. I think we
:16:51. > :16:57.need to take a long, hard look at ourselves. We have been blaming
:16:57. > :17:02.other people, bankers, politicians, the media and it has been said the
:17:02. > :17:08.axis of evil runs through the heart of every individual. We all need to
:17:08. > :17:12.take a long hard look at ourselves. In reality, in these times, we are
:17:12. > :17:17.more likely to know about the private lives of the soap operas
:17:17. > :17:22.than our actual neighbours. A few years ago Robbie Williams said Let
:17:22. > :17:27.Me entertain You, and we all said fine, thank you very much. It is
:17:27. > :17:33.almost inevitable that hour only interaction with society is as
:17:33. > :17:37.consumers, we will struggle and we will be passive. They are good
:17:37. > :17:41.examples of people standing up and saying we are not consumers,
:17:41. > :17:45.looking at the London citizens and churches up and down the country to
:17:45. > :17:50.say that community is more than about receiving it is about giving
:17:50. > :17:54.as well. Graham, you are a commercial litigator and represent
:17:54. > :17:58.commercial victims of phone hacking. When people read about these
:17:58. > :18:03.allegations they were very shocked. But of course, they had read the
:18:03. > :18:11.stories as well. Is it hard to blame them when that material is
:18:11. > :18:16.dangled in front of them? I believe our popular tabloid media have,
:18:16. > :18:20.since Fleet Street moved away from Fleet Street, she slowly but surely
:18:20. > :18:24.weaned the public on to a sugary sweet diet of sensationalist
:18:24. > :18:30.reporting in order to sell more newspapers. That sort a
:18:30. > :18:35.straightforward manner ties in of sensationalist stories was made to
:18:36. > :18:40.sell the papers, so slowly and gradually we were directed toward
:18:40. > :18:45.what would sell more papers in order to fulfil the business model
:18:45. > :18:50.that the various newspaper groups decided would be more effective for
:18:50. > :18:54.them. They reduced their newsroom staff and porting pre-packaged
:18:54. > :18:58.stories from various suppliers. -- they brought in pre-packaged
:18:58. > :19:03.stories. That is probably the source of the situation we find
:19:03. > :19:08.ourselves in when newspapers like the News Of The World have found a
:19:08. > :19:17.business model that produces a very stark and clear return on their
:19:17. > :19:22.investment for the cheapest cost. Paul? I am a journalist, and I
:19:22. > :19:27.simply keep the Journal of the day. I go out and see things, talk to
:19:27. > :19:34.people and I write it down. But equally... You do have a choice
:19:34. > :19:37.about what she cover though? and No. The Daily Mirror is a
:19:37. > :19:43.mirror of our times. We don't make it up, we see it and be right about
:19:43. > :19:48.it. I suppose I have been doing this for about 20 years now, and at
:19:48. > :19:51.times I have done quite a lot of kiss-and-tell stories where the
:19:51. > :19:59.girl does a story about a footballer or a celebrity, and I
:19:59. > :20:03.have actually been quite shocked, I am from Northern Ireland at the
:20:03. > :20:10.moment and it can be quite puritanical, but it is like there
:20:10. > :20:17.is no shame. I was doing a story with one girl and I remember she
:20:17. > :20:23.asked if I wanted to know about how she had sex with her brother. And
:20:23. > :20:29.by did not even though it did not add to the story anyway. Funnily
:20:29. > :20:39.enough, that particular angle of the story did not matter. One I did
:20:39. > :20:39.
:20:39. > :20:45.write fairly recently, and I don't want to libel anyone...
:20:45. > :20:51.certainly do not want you to libel anyone. Someone in the programme
:20:51. > :20:57.Big Brother, a guy this time, had a three in a bed with two girls and
:20:57. > :21:01.they were quite sweet, they had nice families, were fairly middle-
:21:02. > :21:06.class and the details they were prepared to tell me, I was just
:21:06. > :21:11.writing them down, and it was so intimate that you wondered if they
:21:11. > :21:17.had no shame. I'm sorry, Paul, but those girls did not wake up one
:21:17. > :21:22.morning and thought they had a great idea here. They did. They
:21:22. > :21:25.said can we have �10,000 please! The reason they got into the
:21:25. > :21:30.position was they had seen it newspaper after newspaper, year
:21:30. > :21:34.after year, particularly since a whole Wapping things started, they
:21:34. > :21:38.saw that that is what you do today to get a few quid. Because they
:21:38. > :21:41.have seen it, and if it hadn't happened in the past, they wouldn't
:21:41. > :21:46.have talked to you. They wouldn't have known they could get 10 grand
:21:46. > :21:50.for it. We have mentioned footballers and the programme Big
:21:50. > :21:54.Brother in this discussion and various showbiz people. This is not
:21:54. > :21:58.just a matter of newspapers. Newspapers did not invent Big
:21:58. > :22:03.Brother, television did, and the modern football industry was
:22:03. > :22:06.invented largely by television and indeed stoked up very much by
:22:06. > :22:14.satellite TV and this whole business of football millionaires.
:22:14. > :22:17.To blame this on the press is absurd. But the press get a lot of
:22:17. > :22:22.money out of programmes like Big brother's -- big brother because of
:22:22. > :22:26.the money around it. Newspapers operate in a society where other
:22:26. > :22:30.things happen, which they can't necessarily control. But quite
:22:30. > :22:34.rightly people are getting excited about packing into the phones,
:22:34. > :22:39.particularly about some of the instances which are now being
:22:39. > :22:44.exposed. Remember, what is the power in this country that can
:22:44. > :22:48.record your phone calls? That is the government. They are the people
:22:48. > :22:54.who are ultimately a far greater threat to people's privacy than
:22:54. > :22:59.anything the press can do. If you have a week -- a weak and feeble
:22:59. > :23:04.Press, as they do on the Continent, you have a dormant -- you have a
:23:04. > :23:07.week ago of -- stronger government. If you have a muzzled press, you
:23:07. > :23:11.have an unregulated government. just want to go back to the money
:23:11. > :23:17.aspect of the story. Paul, if you had not offered money, do you think
:23:17. > :23:20.you would have got the same access and level and detail? For no, 100 %.
:23:21. > :23:24.I know they wanted to book a holiday and they needed a bit more
:23:24. > :23:30.money. I remember saying this isn't very good and only worth a couple
:23:30. > :23:36.of grand, and they went, OK, maybe we did it five times a night. I
:23:36. > :23:41.said, is that all? I think we got to a ludicrous figure of 17 times
:23:41. > :23:47.over. I said, you're just making it up. How can you tell the difference
:23:47. > :23:53.if people are incentive vised by money? It is a big carrot to dangle.
:23:53. > :23:58.�10,000 of it is a great one, �500 if you didn't do much. Graham, if
:23:58. > :24:02.you are still with us, is that part of the problem, the money involved?
:24:02. > :24:06.It certainly is. I am sitting here shaking my head, listening to what
:24:06. > :24:11.Paul saying, and it is so clear that they are dangling the cash in
:24:11. > :24:16.front of these girls and manipulating them. This is all part
:24:16. > :24:19.of the business model, to promote the newspaper and to get the girls
:24:20. > :24:23.to reveal more and more. Yet he sits there surprised that they
:24:23. > :24:30.would embellish all life, because that is what they are doing with
:24:30. > :24:37.the story. -- embellish for life. And then he willingly publishes a
:24:37. > :24:46.story which is a breach of privacy. The Big Brother member actually
:24:46. > :24:50.loved it. You are trying to rationalise and justify... The is a
:24:50. > :24:56.guy living his life in public and two girls selling -- saying he did
:24:56. > :25:02.it 17 times a night. Once again, a News Of The World journalist is
:25:03. > :25:07.seeking to justify their position by enlightening the public on
:25:07. > :25:12.something you don't need to know about. The responsibility, that one
:25:12. > :25:18.word, seems to evade you. That is the problem which is a cause or a
:25:18. > :25:23.root of the cause of the problem with that News Of The World. They
:25:23. > :25:27.lost sight of where the line was drawn over accountable
:25:27. > :25:32.responsibility and the sale of newspapers. That is the problem.
:25:32. > :25:37.Let's speak to Neil Hamilton who had a horrific experience at that
:25:37. > :25:44.hands of some papers when false accusations were made against you.
:25:44. > :25:49.Would eliminating money for stories help? The case to which you refer
:25:49. > :25:55.was my wife and I were both accused of participating in a rape, which
:25:55. > :26:01.is completely untrue. And the girl who made up these allegations and
:26:01. > :26:08.subsequently was sent to prison for perjury sold her story to the News
:26:08. > :26:12.Of The World, via Max Clifford, for �50,000. She was entitled to
:26:12. > :26:17.anonymity as an alleged victim of a sex offence, but she sold that
:26:17. > :26:23.anonymity to the News of the world for money. So money is at the root
:26:23. > :26:28.of a lot of these problems. We all know that when people have a story
:26:28. > :26:34.to sell, a newspaper will decide that this isn't sexy enough, let's
:26:34. > :26:40.make it sexier. That is what happens very often. Take the famous
:26:40. > :26:44.case of David Muller and Antonio Sanchez, who was supposed to have
:26:44. > :26:53.us had sex with her in a Chelsea football kit, which is of course
:26:53. > :26:59.untrue. The lurid detail is untrue. The true responsibility lies with
:26:59. > :27:03.the editors and journalists. Neil, we have a bit of a break-up on the
:27:03. > :27:08.line and we are in danger of telling only half the story.
:27:08. > :27:13.Funnily enough, that story came from a phone hack. Oh, am I giving
:27:13. > :27:17.something away. Actually, I probably shouldn't say that.
:27:17. > :27:22.has almost admitted that he has sat down with a girl -- Paul has almost
:27:22. > :27:25.admitted that he has sat down with a girl and said if you give me more,
:27:25. > :27:30.I will give you more money. Somewhere along the line the truce
:27:30. > :27:36.will go. It is so distorted it does not become the truth anymore. I am
:27:36. > :27:41.not surprised at that, and it is not just you. People are -- over
:27:41. > :27:47.years and years have seen stories that have been totally distorted
:27:47. > :27:51.where the truth is almost unrecognisable, but in the past
:27:51. > :27:56.that Lord didn't exist or they did not have the money to go to court.
:27:57. > :28:01.-- that law didn't exist. These things go on, and it is not the
:28:01. > :28:08.sort of journalism I like or want to read and other people feel the
:28:08. > :28:13.same way, but if you want to ask how did the MP expenses San --
:28:13. > :28:16.scandal get involved, so money changed hands. -- get exposed. It
:28:16. > :28:20.is not always as simple as you would like. Sometimes an
:28:20. > :28:24.independent press will do things you don't like, but if it is
:28:24. > :28:27.independent, that is the way it is going to be. And if you don't want
:28:27. > :28:33.an independent press then see how you like the kind of society where
:28:33. > :28:35.power is not called to account. It is not as independent as I was like
:28:35. > :28:39.it to be that it is a good deal more independent than any other
:28:39. > :28:44.national press I can think of anywhere in the world. Rory
:28:44. > :28:47.Greenslade joins us. -- Roy Greenslade joins us. I beg your
:28:47. > :28:54.pardon, we do not have Roy Greenslade but we hope to get him
:28:54. > :28:59.in a moment. To make a quick point, you remember the Sunday Sport, he
:29:00. > :29:04.went out of business but came back again. In the early 1990s it was
:29:04. > :29:08.really popular with its silly stories about a bus being found on
:29:08. > :29:12.the moon and then a bus found on the Moon with a wheel clamp. But
:29:12. > :29:15.that particular edition sold half- a-million copies, which was more
:29:15. > :29:25.than the Independent and the Observer combined. You know, what
:29:25. > :29:27.
:29:27. > :29:32.What does that say about the people buying the product? It is
:29:32. > :29:36.distressing about the level of education in our society. The one
:29:36. > :29:41.thing Fleet Street has failed at over the past 50 years, is
:29:41. > :29:46.campaigning to do something Steve's -- serious about the state of
:29:46. > :29:55.education in this country. Have you done anything illegal to get a
:29:55. > :30:01.story? No, who did get a story in Bucharest, which I suspect was
:30:01. > :30:09.illegal, but nobody minded. Under Romanian Communist law it was
:30:09. > :30:13.probably an offence. You have been very honest... I have a lawyer
:30:13. > :30:21.telling me to stop implicating myself. Our you concerned about
:30:21. > :30:27.being arrested? I am, I have not been home for about five days, that
:30:27. > :30:35.is why I am still wearing the same suit. The police have asked me into
:30:35. > :30:41.Scotland Yard, not as a witness to arrest me. They did not just say,
:30:41. > :30:47.come involuntarily, it was like you will come in tomorrow. But I have
:30:47. > :30:51.not. They have astute to come in tomorrow. Or they had previously
:30:52. > :30:56.asked you? I have had three requests to go to Scotland Yard to
:30:56. > :31:01.be interviewed under caution which require them arresting me as I
:31:01. > :31:07.walked through the door. I am staying away. I don't think I have
:31:07. > :31:11.done anything that deserves a rest. I am not going to say I have broken
:31:11. > :31:16.the law lots and lots, because they will listen to the tapes. All I
:31:16. > :31:22.have ever tried to do is write a well-researched and truthful
:31:22. > :31:26.articles about what is going on in the world around me. It sounds a
:31:26. > :31:32.bit flippant, what better way to get to the truth and hear it from
:31:32. > :31:37.the horse's mouth perhaps on their own messages. It is a cracking line.
:31:37. > :31:41.I am not going to see them because I don't think I should be arrested.
:31:41. > :31:45.If anybody else in any other walk of life wouldn't last for five
:31:45. > :31:48.minutes because journalists get away with it. We are just trying to
:31:48. > :31:55.do something good, why should you be arrested because you have
:31:55. > :32:01.strayed into Ngorongoro Crater area. Corruption has been councils, which
:32:01. > :32:06.you'll know all about. You don't even know why out me and what I
:32:06. > :32:10.have done. Don't go making it up. But you have done that all of your
:32:10. > :32:16.life, why change now? We will leave it there and with Paul's
:32:16. > :32:23.circumstances hanging in the her, is a moral press of fault? It is
:32:23. > :32:33.the question we are asking at the moment. If you think it is, tex the
:32:33. > :32:35.
:32:35. > :32:39.You only have around five minutes before it closes.
:32:39. > :32:44.Late on the programme - would you lie about your religion to get your
:32:44. > :32:48.children into a good school? And should you have to? We will be
:32:48. > :32:58.speaking to a vicar who says faking it is fine because it gives her a
:32:58. > :33:01.
:33:01. > :33:06.better chance of converting you. Before we let Paul go to face the
:33:06. > :33:10.future, we will ask what else has been spinning our guests moral
:33:10. > :33:15.compasses this week? Peter, you will read about the funeral
:33:15. > :33:22.corteges of soldiers killed in Afghanistan? Yes, when the RAF base
:33:22. > :33:27.at Lyneham closes in September, the dead coming back from Afghanistan
:33:27. > :33:30.will come through Brize Norton. The route that has been proposed to go
:33:30. > :33:37.to the John Radcliffe Hospital now takes them away from any high
:33:37. > :33:41.streets. They are on a bypass and suburban roads, which they could go
:33:41. > :33:45.through the town next to Brize Norton. I am suspicious as to why
:33:45. > :33:49.this is happening. The Government may be taking an opportunity,
:33:49. > :33:53.because they have not liked what has been happening at Wootton
:33:53. > :33:57.Bassett, which was a genuinely spontaneous demonstration of grief
:33:57. > :34:04.and respect. I feel strongly they should be held to account for this
:34:04. > :34:10.and asked repeatedly why it is these possessions won't be able to
:34:10. > :34:13.go down a high street. The there is an official explanation is that it
:34:13. > :34:20.is to urban and taking too many speed bumps which would be
:34:20. > :34:25.inappropriate. There are speed bumps on the bypass route. The
:34:25. > :34:31.Wootton Bassett roots went through narrow streets. It is a much
:34:31. > :34:36.shorter tries from Brize Norton than it was from Lyneham. Every
:34:36. > :34:40.excuse has been put up for this, market traders in Carterton would
:34:41. > :34:44.object for example. It has been knocked down in practice. If the
:34:44. > :34:49.Government is going to have the nerve to send people off to get
:34:49. > :34:54.killed, it it shouldn't have the nerve to prevent people expressing
:34:54. > :35:00.their grief over it when it happens. There is a report out that we will
:35:00. > :35:05.have to work into we are 70. Is it too long? I am frowning because
:35:05. > :35:10.possibly we might have to work a lot longer. Not because anybody
:35:10. > :35:15.says so, it is an inevitability. People are campaigning saying we
:35:15. > :35:21.shouldn't be working until we are 66, but people in the 30s, 40s will
:35:21. > :35:28.have to work a lot longer. One person in every 100 will soon reach
:35:28. > :35:34.100. At the same time, one in three, ten-year-olds are obese. We are not
:35:34. > :35:39.fit enough, the NHS will collapse. There are so many ways to keep fit,
:35:39. > :35:43.there are the gymnasiums, the Government's Back to Work scheme.
:35:43. > :35:49.But we still have this obesity. I cannot believe the people who are
:35:49. > :35:53.saying, I cannot lose weight. Some people cannot, but the vast
:35:53. > :35:56.majority of them are lazy and greedy. People have to be told
:35:56. > :36:02.clearly they will have to work longer, and they have to be fitted
:36:02. > :36:12.to do that for the sake of anybody. That is very right wing. If tis
:36:12. > :36:12.
:36:12. > :36:18.realistic. It is not about right or left. How long do you think you'll
:36:18. > :36:24.have to work? I want to work for ever. Until you drop? Without
:36:24. > :36:29.question. Peter? People do jobs they would like to retire from, but
:36:29. > :36:34.I am very lucky and I do not want to stop it. Could you there to
:36:34. > :36:39.carry on working with the pressure you are under? I retired at 40 and
:36:39. > :36:44.bought a pub. But I still generalise every now and again.
:36:44. > :36:51.Working in a pub is working isn't it? I suppose it is, it is quite
:36:51. > :36:59.hard work as well. Estranged reason for eviction? Why do I do the silly
:36:59. > :37:09.one? This is out of the Sun newspaper. The man faces eviction
:37:09. > :37:09.
:37:10. > :37:15.for singing in his flat and humming. I have been practising how loud you
:37:15. > :37:22.can do it. And she did be a reason for addiction? No, councillors are
:37:22. > :37:32.not some times and will do anything to waive their bit of power. It
:37:32. > :37:40.reminds me about one of the last stories I wrote. A lady had about
:37:40. > :37:48.four cleaners and in their contract, and I saw them, it said "yew bark
:37:48. > :37:53.forbidden from humming Elvis Presley's songs in the House".
:37:54. > :38:00.Humming is annoying, so maybe you should be evicted for it after all?
:38:00. > :38:03.We have been asking is an immoral press our fault? The poll is
:38:03. > :38:12.closing as you could still be charged and we will bring you the
:38:12. > :38:17.result at the end of the programme. Think of the fees, drop to your
:38:17. > :38:23.knees. A common catchphrase at middle-class dinner parties. A
:38:23. > :38:28.fierce parents -- parents are trying to get their kids into a
:38:28. > :38:36.decent school. Derek Hatton says you should do anything for your
:38:36. > :38:40.children's education and the churches deserve it. Is he right?
:38:40. > :38:45.Faith schools are some of the best and most popular in the country and
:38:45. > :38:48.many parents will do anything to get their kids into them. Some
:38:48. > :38:54.atheists and agnostic parents are prepared to drop to their knees and
:38:54. > :38:56.fake a face if it gets their child a chance of a better future. Some
:38:56. > :39:03.of our most high-profile politicians say they are not
:39:03. > :39:12.religious but sent their children to these schools. Do you believe in
:39:12. > :39:14.God? No, I don't. Some people think it is hypocrisy to about two a God
:39:14. > :39:20.you don't think exists. Some schools include a wide range of
:39:20. > :39:23.pupils, but church schools give places based on things like how
:39:23. > :39:28.often parents go to church, volunteering and how early children
:39:28. > :39:33.are baptised. Some parents complained it makes it easier for
:39:33. > :39:36.rich families to get in because they can give up more of their time.
:39:36. > :39:41.The Church issued guidelines saying school should admit more poor
:39:41. > :39:44.children from different faiths and races. Some parents say it is not
:39:44. > :39:50.fair you need faith to get your child through the door of the best
:39:50. > :39:54.Church cools. There is evidence more mixed schools help stop racism
:39:54. > :39:58.and segregation. We want the best for our children but very few can
:39:58. > :40:02.afford to send them to private school. Does this make getting on
:40:02. > :40:10.your knees to a Boyd fees acceptable?
:40:10. > :40:20.What do you think? -- avoid the fees. We are joined by the Reverend
:40:20. > :40:20.
:40:20. > :40:26.Joanna Jepson. Paul has left the room, if not the building.
:40:26. > :40:31.Is it OK to fake it? You're getting them through the door? What people
:40:31. > :40:37.are being asked to do is not fake it, but attend and become part of a
:40:37. > :40:41.church. Certainly from where I am sitting, Church of England, to get
:40:41. > :40:45.your children into the local church school, parents need to attend the
:40:45. > :40:50.church. It is not my place to be ditching their motives for doing
:40:50. > :40:55.that. Derek Hatton, you are on a fierce, if you have the chance of
:40:56. > :41:01.getting your children into a fantastic, Ofsted outstanding
:41:01. > :41:06.writer school, would you go to church? If it was not so serious,
:41:06. > :41:09.it would be very funny, this topic. You have a church, over the years
:41:09. > :41:15.who have been losing numbers by their millions and now the only
:41:15. > :41:20.people who go to church, when they are born, when they get married and
:41:20. > :41:25.when they died. The first two are being ignored, so it is only the
:41:25. > :41:29.latter. The Church is thinking at last there is a way of getting them
:41:29. > :41:37.in. They don't care about the truth, but it is just to get them through
:41:37. > :41:41.the doors. That is not accurate. answer your question, yes, if I had
:41:41. > :41:46.kids of that age and the only good school was the church school, as
:41:46. > :41:49.far as I'm concerned, I would laugh at the church school and say, I
:41:49. > :41:55.will tell the lie because it does not matter. Because you have told
:41:55. > :41:59.lies for all those decades. cannot answer for other particular
:41:59. > :42:03.faiths, but where the Church of England is concerned, as the
:42:03. > :42:10.established face of this country, the deal is, everybody in the
:42:10. > :42:15.country has a priest and a church. Now, we are there to minister to
:42:15. > :42:19.people of all faiths and no faith. It is not down to us and it is not
:42:19. > :42:24.part of our Ministry to say you cannot be a part of this church. If
:42:24. > :42:30.I was to judge the motives of anyone, including myself on
:42:30. > :42:35.particular Sunday mornings in church... Derek Hatton says not
:42:35. > :42:40.only would he come, he would laugh at the church. But that says more
:42:40. > :42:44.about his character. I don't know so much about Church of England
:42:44. > :42:49.schools, but many people I know who go to Catholic Church has to play
:42:49. > :42:54.the game, their Catholic Church knows very well that game is being
:42:54. > :42:59.played. That is why I don't think it says more about me, it is about
:42:59. > :43:05.the church. The Church is encouraging it. They are
:43:05. > :43:13.encouraging people. It is an opportunity to fulfil the Ministry
:43:13. > :43:17.for the local community. Peter, you are religious? It is concerning
:43:17. > :43:21.that a Fleet Street journalist is more concerned about a vicar.
:43:21. > :43:25.Church schools are good, and because they are, they are
:43:25. > :43:30.oversubscribed so they have to select in some way. What you are
:43:30. > :43:35.saying in this process of selection, you are prepared to accept people
:43:35. > :43:39.as far as you know, or very much accept -- suspect are pretending to
:43:39. > :43:43.be Christian believers, so they can get their children into a better
:43:43. > :43:47.school. The school is better because it is a Christian school,
:43:47. > :43:52.that is why it is better. The people sending their child there
:43:52. > :43:55.know that. But they are saying we will be a fierce, even though the
:43:55. > :43:59.school is run on a fierce principles, which are everywhere,
:43:59. > :44:03.they are no good. They want to send their children to Christian schools,
:44:03. > :44:09.they want to ride free on the benefits of Christianity without
:44:09. > :44:12.believing in it. It is unpleasant and it is so fundamentally bad to
:44:12. > :44:17.be dishonest in front of your children. Why don't you talk to
:44:17. > :44:21.someone who did that, Andrew Penman, you faked it and wrote a book about
:44:22. > :44:31.it. You're a fierce, your wife is agnostic, isn't it hypocritical to
:44:31. > :44:36.want your children to go to a I did not enjoy a second of it. I
:44:36. > :44:39.went to church under duress for three or four years. Over the other
:44:39. > :44:44.side of my road was a state Anglican primary school where half
:44:44. > :44:47.of the places went to people who were the children of Anglicans. In
:44:47. > :44:52.other words, it was not a community school at all, it discriminated
:44:52. > :44:58.against the children of parents who were not Anglican. Discriminated in
:44:58. > :45:01.favour of the parents to work, which is a different thing. It was
:45:01. > :45:05.a church school. You must remember these church schools are there
:45:05. > :45:10.because the church set them up before the state could be bothered.
:45:10. > :45:16.The state still give 100 % of the running costs though. And those
:45:16. > :45:26.running costs come from the taxes. The do not come from the church.
:45:26. > :45:27.
:45:27. > :45:32.Derek, can I ever finish a sentence. Everybody stop! It definitely helps
:45:32. > :45:35.if one person speaks. I had not finished my sentence. The taxes
:45:35. > :45:38.come from Christians as well as others. They are entitled to have
:45:38. > :45:42.any education like anyone else. There are a lot of Christian
:45:42. > :45:49.schools in the country whose laws, traditions, Customs and morals are
:45:49. > :45:54.based on Christianity and on which you run. It makes sense to invite
:45:54. > :45:58.people who are going to contribute at home to support what the schools
:45:58. > :46:02.are trying to give in terms of spiritual nourishment and personal
:46:02. > :46:06.development, and the whole coherence that the face message
:46:06. > :46:13.gives. It makes sense to do that, because of the faith communities
:46:13. > :46:20.don't do that, nobody else will, or indeed can. And true, how did you
:46:20. > :46:28.fake your face? I went to church each Sunday. -- had LD Duke take
:46:28. > :46:33.There was some favours cause that seemed to be run by basket cases
:46:33. > :46:40.that should be shut down. We would not get all of the state schools
:46:40. > :46:44.the same as. The subscription numbers speak for themselves.
:46:44. > :46:49.these schools better because they are Christian but because they are
:46:49. > :46:52.oversubscribed and able to select who they get through their doors?
:46:52. > :46:55.The they are oversubscribed because they are good and people recognise
:46:55. > :47:03.there is a coherence to what is being offered that other schools do
:47:03. > :47:06.not provide. I will mention something to you that the Bishop of
:47:06. > :47:10.Oxford said. Church schools need to remember what they are for, and
:47:10. > :47:15.they are not necessarily for nice safe Christians in a nice safe
:47:15. > :47:21.places. They are supposed to offer the ministry to everybody and
:47:21. > :47:27.people of all faiths and local people like Andrew. Not just local
:47:27. > :47:32.religious people. If I had it my way, I would be encouraging parents
:47:32. > :47:36.to come to church, but not discriminating against the children
:47:37. > :47:42.and their family's faith. But for the teachers, I would insist that
:47:42. > :47:48.the teachers subscribe to the face to make it a coherent place. But do
:47:48. > :47:53.you think it is right that the schools get 100 % of their running
:47:53. > :47:59.costs from the government and can then turn round and demand that 50
:47:59. > :48:02.%, and if they said 90 % of the total costs were from the state,
:48:02. > :48:10.and 10 % were from the church, then you could argue that there was
:48:10. > :48:16.fairness. Derek, the government does not have any money. That comes
:48:16. > :48:21.from taxes, from people earning. The majority of people in the
:48:21. > :48:30.country are not churchgoers. That does not mean they do not want this
:48:30. > :48:34.You have been involved in the running of schools, so these their
:48:34. > :48:41.benefit of children not from a fate to go to a fate school? Is there
:48:41. > :48:44.are benefiting children lying about it? -- a Faith's School. A I find
:48:44. > :48:47.the conversation laughable. Let's forget about the religion itself
:48:47. > :48:54.for a moment and think about the parents in your studio talking
:48:54. > :49:00.about the fact that the Church is not deserving. What a great premise
:49:00. > :49:05.on which to educate your own children, on a life. And if your
:49:05. > :49:12.son says he cheats on your exam, he could say that his whole presence
:49:12. > :49:16.in the school is a lie. Can you blame parents for wanting the best
:49:16. > :49:20.for their children and if the best is a local fetes call them wanting
:49:20. > :49:24.them to go there? I can't blame children for wanting their parents
:49:24. > :49:31.to have -- parents for wanting their children to have a good
:49:31. > :49:35.education. I know that faith schools are working up trying to
:49:35. > :49:45.catch up to the overall standards, but religion itself is not a free-
:49:45. > :49:49.for-all. Any sort of school has to involve the criteria of the school.
:49:49. > :49:55.It is important that the rabbi is making a distinction between
:49:55. > :49:59.religion and faith. You can fake religion, but she cannot fake faith.
:49:59. > :50:02.From the point of view of the priest, who were my to judge the
:50:02. > :50:10.condition of any one of my congregation's heart and spirit
:50:10. > :50:16.before God? -- who am I to judge. You cannot legislate for that.
:50:16. > :50:20.Peter, you endorsed the point that the Rabbi makes. It is so
:50:20. > :50:24.fundamental. People learn by example above all. If they see
:50:24. > :50:27.their parents cheating, they will learn to cheat. It is the most
:50:27. > :50:32.extraordinary are responsible thing to do to cheat in this way,
:50:32. > :50:37.particularly to cheat for advantage, which is a particularly nasty form
:50:37. > :50:40.of it. The punishment that these parents deserve this for their
:50:40. > :50:45.children to grow up as Christians and to forgive them for the
:50:45. > :50:48.terrible things they have done. is not cheating if the churches
:50:48. > :50:54.opening up their ministry and service to families to say, Look,
:50:54. > :50:59.we have something to offer and we are here to serve you. I think of
:50:59. > :51:04.my god-daughter who did not grow up in a church-going family. When she
:51:04. > :51:10.was 12 years old she went to do a school project in her local rural
:51:10. > :51:14.church and ended up being so interested in its -- in it, and she
:51:14. > :51:17.got the whole family going to church, and at the age of 12 she
:51:17. > :51:25.decided to be baptised and confirmed and is now a committed
:51:25. > :51:28.Christian. To make a point to Joanna, the difficulties here is
:51:28. > :51:34.that they might be intended advantages for the Church, but it
:51:34. > :51:37.is impossible for a minister of the Church to bear false witness or say
:51:37. > :51:42.that it is all right to do so. That is pretty high in the Commandments
:51:42. > :51:48.that you cannot do that. John Cox is a former director of education
:51:48. > :51:53.for faith schools and a retired Archdeacon. John, is it useful to
:51:53. > :51:59.have them in that even if their parents do not believe, or is it
:51:59. > :52:06.simply a falsehood that you find offensive? I find it difficult
:52:06. > :52:09.about the integrity of the person, but it -- to have children from
:52:09. > :52:12.none of face for families is part of the distinctive nature of the
:52:12. > :52:16.Church in England's schooling. They are there for the community as well
:52:16. > :52:23.as the members of the Church. And part of the distinction of the
:52:23. > :52:28.Church of England school is that it is open and inclusive to those of
:52:28. > :52:32.no faith, other faiths and that faith. So why do parents feel they
:52:32. > :52:39.have to fake this in order to get in? Because they want their best
:52:39. > :52:43.education for their children. But the facts rather less than half of
:52:43. > :52:48.Church of England schools have control on their admissions policy.
:52:48. > :52:56.The rest are covered by local authority admissions. Derek Hatton
:52:56. > :53:00.is wrong to say that the Church Schools do not pay anything. I said
:53:00. > :53:07.that 90 % of the total cost comes from the government and they paid
:53:07. > :53:14.10 %. They paid 10 % of the capital costs. Neil Hamilton is still with
:53:14. > :53:20.us in his role as a former faiths school teacher. Is discriminating
:53:20. > :53:26.on the basis of faith keeping standards up and are the fate
:53:26. > :53:31.schools worried about losing the pushy parents? -- faith schools.
:53:31. > :53:35.I am entirely in favour of faith schools and I think they give a
:53:35. > :53:40.moral grounding two children. I am not against the Church
:53:40. > :53:43.discriminating in favour of its own at all. In a country where the
:53:43. > :53:47.education system was entirely funded by individuals themselves
:53:47. > :53:51.rather than by the state, this would not be an issue. But because
:53:51. > :53:56.the state takes so much from us in taxes people cannot afford to do
:53:56. > :54:04.that, so the issue of public policy is there, but otherwise people
:54:04. > :54:08.would not see this as a problem at all. Teaching by example, I am a
:54:08. > :54:12.great believer in that, but I do not think that the lying to get
:54:12. > :54:18.into a school comes from that. The vast majority of churchgoers know
:54:18. > :54:22.very well that parents are playing the game, and if one of my kids
:54:22. > :54:26.came home and said he cheated in an exam and I would not say it was the
:54:27. > :54:35.same thing. Of course it is not the same thing. What that shows is the
:54:35. > :54:38.bankruptcy of that type of argument. You would not like being told it
:54:38. > :54:43.was the same thing because it would put the responsibility on you, but
:54:43. > :54:45.it would still be true, and it is not really possible for the church
:54:45. > :54:49.schools to put these people through some kind of Inquisition to
:54:49. > :54:53.discover if they really believe. It is not the fault of the school or
:54:53. > :54:58.the vicar, it is only the fault of the parents and I stress this again,
:54:58. > :55:03.if people think a theism is so wonderful, set up a few schools,
:55:03. > :55:07.and see if people want to come to them and if if they get
:55:07. > :55:11.oversubscribed, we will know that atheist schools are fantastic. We
:55:11. > :55:15.know that Christians schools are better because they are Christian.
:55:15. > :55:22.There are plenty of non-religious schools that are oversubscribed.
:55:22. > :55:30.The that is not the point being discussed here. In this particular
:55:30. > :55:33.case, it is in very many communities that if you want a good
:55:33. > :55:38.primary education, it is the church schools that provide it. That is
:55:38. > :55:44.not a coincidence. We should be celebrating that. Underneath all of
:55:44. > :55:48.this is a kind of paranoia about the place that faith has in our
:55:48. > :55:53.society altogether, and I think there is a greater discussion to be
:55:53. > :55:59.had about that. Why can't you be generous enough to just celebrate
:56:00. > :56:04.the good that Christian faith and the Church brings to our society?
:56:04. > :56:09.cannot celebrate what church schools can do to people. It breeds
:56:09. > :56:16.a discrimination and hatred. That is nonsense. That is absolute
:56:16. > :56:22.nonsense. One parent in Northern Ireland was throwing stones at a
:56:22. > :56:29.child. That is not faith, that is human nature hiding behind a
:56:29. > :56:33.smokescreen of religion. I want to let you know that your survey votes
:56:33. > :56:37.are in. At the beginning of the programme we asked if an immoral
:56:37. > :56:45.press is our fault? While we have been discussing, you have been
:56:45. > :56:54.voting. You told us, 71 % of those who sent us a text said yes, it is
:56:54. > :56:58.our fault. 29 % say no. So 71 % of people take it on the chin, Derek.
:56:58. > :57:02.It is one of those surveys that happens and they go one way or
:57:02. > :57:06.another. An awful lot of people don't want to accept that it is
:57:06. > :57:09.somehow their fault for reading it. Just as they have been fed up time
:57:09. > :57:16.and again that they should read that nonsense and lies, equally,
:57:16. > :57:21.when it comes to saying it was their fault, I have no problem with
:57:21. > :57:25.that. We need to be thinking about what we collude with and there are
:57:25. > :57:30.questions of power, integrity and responsibility, and we have to ask
:57:30. > :57:36.ourselves at this break point, are we going to collude with the next
:57:36. > :57:41.publication? The press cannot moralise Society on its own. The
:57:41. > :57:46.press can help, and some of it does try and then it gets criticism when
:57:46. > :57:51.it does, and we get accused of moral preaching, but the more we do,
:57:51. > :57:54.the better it will be for everyone. You can continue that debate on our
:57:54. > :57:58.website. Thank you to all of you who have taken part today. My
:57:58. > :58:02.thanks to Peter Hitchens, Derek Hatton and the Reverend Joanna
:58:02. > :58:06.Jepson in the studio. And to Paul McMullan who joined us earlier.
:58:06. > :58:10.Please do not text or call the phone lines, they are closed, but