Episode 13 Sunday Morning Live

The Government's health watchdog says schools should be focusing on

whether children are happy. says schools should be focusing on

But with growing concern about bad behaviour, is it time to be tougher

- not softer - on bad behaviour? Welcome to Sunday Morning Live. I'm

Samira Ahmed. Also on today's programme:

Should bosses always pick the best person for the job? Or, as

broadcaster Simon Fanshawe argues, should employers value diversity

over ability? Always just hiring the best person for the job, it isn't

just bad business, it is bad ethics. If we want to perform at the highest

level of work, we have do hire diversity because they come up with

the best solutions. And he was one of the most popular

Popes ever, but does John Paul II deserve to be made a saint?

Joining me this week are broadcaster and writer Simon Fanshawe. Until

recently, he was Chair of the Governing Council of Sussex

University. Reverend George Hargreaves, a former

music producer and songwriter, now a religious minister, who ran a school

in London for ten years. And reality TV star and

businesswoman Katie Hopkins, who recently made headlines for saying

she wouldn't let her children play with those she considered to have

lower-class names. We want to know what you think. If

you have a webcam, you can join us via Skype. You

Schools are being advised that they should "systematically measure"

children's happiness levels to stop them going off the rails. That's

according to new recommendations from the National Institute for

Health and Care Excellence. The Campiagn for Real Education have

branded the latest proposal "ludicrous", saying that teachers

have a hard enough job already. The new guidelines come in the same week

teachers at a school in Birmingham are considering industrial action

after being forced to re-admit a pupil originally excluded because of

allegedly threatening other students with a knife.

So do children need more discipline? We went to a school in Nottingham

which come up with a novel way of tackling the issue.

Top Valley Academy has no particular problems with the behaviour of its

pupils, and one of the reasons could be this... Looking good, we have

three people in the same zone, working well as a team. The school

is holding former soldiers who have brought a military touch to the

playing fields. Teams, get ready, three, two, one, though. The

partnership with Commander Joes is very much a partnership led one, it

is tackling issues and barriers, which may be learning loss, poor

attendance, self confidence issues, self-esteem issues. The Commander

Joe programme, funded by the Department of education, is targeted

at children of primary school age upwards and aims to tackle any

potential problems by instilling useful values. Good, big jump. Looks

like we have a victorious team. One of the challenges that we have

is we are seen as a bit of a boot camp and a bad lads Army, which is

not the case, it is not the way to engage with people. It is about

being inspiring, approachable and letting young people want to learn.

Even though the sessions keep the pupils on their toes, they seem to

welcomed the taste of discipline. It has made me respect the teachers a

lot more and made me listen to other people. It is fun coming to school

and getting to interact with people more. Lots of my friends do it. It

just gets me in the mood for the next lesson. Academy principal Peter

Brown reckons the sessions with the former soldiers have resulted in a

positive affect on attitudes. It is summed up to him by one of his

pupils. When you are in it, you are in it. You don't get the chance to

drop out. That is a very powerful ethic for our pupils to actually

recognise, that sense of commitment to something. If they can transfer

that commitment to their work, to their own futures and destinies,

that is a very powerful tool. As we heard, Top Valley Academy only

has to deal with minor discipline issues. But the biggest teachers'

union, the NASUWT, says low-level disruption is growing and is

corrosive. George Hargreaves, you ran a school per ten years, what is

your idea that tough discipline... ? Train a child in the way they should

go and they will never depart from it, they need boundaries. That is

what discipline is about, it is not about beating up kids, it is setting

boundaries and there is security. That is what we found in our school.

That's the question for our text vote. Should teachers be tougher on

bad behaviour in schools? Text the word VOTE followed by YES or NO to

81771. Text will be charged at your standard message rate. Simon

Fanshawe, one wonders what we mean when we talk about being top and

what we mean by bad behaviour. The teaching union was saying it is this

low-level, general verbal abuse, lack of respect for teachers. That

is the heart of the problem. Who would be a teacher? I am not sure

zero tolerance works. I am not a teacher and I am not a parent... But

you were once a pupil. This is an objective and expert opinion?

Clearly coming you have to set boundaries, and if you clearly focus

on the problem is if it is a problem, you simply repeat that. In

the work we do, a lot of the times we use this notion of affirmative

enquiry. Instead of obsessing about the problem, you try to posit what

you want it to be like. We were in a school in Manchester recently. When

the riots happened in 2011, the teachers spanned out across the area

and visited every single family and they gave the parents and the

kids... Not one single child of them got involved in the riots. They are

trying this system where they are engaging, you heard it in the film,

engaging them and creating a positive atmosphere. So the idea of

coming down hard, it is kind of misplaced. What you want to do is

show the kids what is possible. I go to the completely opposite view. For

me, schools just become pandering institutions to what the children

want to do. Do they choose to show up? Do they choose to do their work?

No. For me, zero tolerance is all about saying you are at school, you

are here to learn and get on with it. I just want teachers to start

doing parenting lessons. If you don't know how to be a parent, don't

doing parenting lessons. If you be a children. We need to stop

saying we need to be more inclusive and support that behaviour. I am

tired of hearing support. Support late arrivals. Supports children

that don't want to learn. I'm tired of hearing support. We need much

less carrot and much more stick. In our school, we set boundaries. You

walk into our classroom, immediately, every child is on their

feet, good morning. These rules of behaviour. And they know what they

have to do what happens at children don't? What do you mean by being

Tupper? Yes is yes and no is no, there is an expectation. People in

our school expected the consequence that they did something wrong. First

and foremost, they are going to have to see the headmistress, my wife.

You don't want to see her, not that she is going to beat you, but the

mere fact that you have to go and see Pasteur Maxine, you don't want

that. We don't have that in schools any more. School I'm talking about

in Manchester, when you walk around that in Manchester... It is those

superficial opinions, yes, let's be tough and I am sick of support. What

you have got is you have to find a way of creating a community, an

institution, a group of people who agree and are dear to those rules.

Partly it is about social shame, so when a child is sent outside the

class, they feel the disapproval. Not just their headteacher and

fellow pupils but their parents and so forth. You have to find a way of

engaging. We had a vote today, Mun, at school, this is what my child

told me, on whether we should do homework or not. It is a silly

headteacher. It did happen, my daughter got to vote on whether they

did homework or not. That class chose not to have the homework. This

was six or seven-year-olds. Why did, let's call him, Brian, get to play

on the computer today? Because he didn't throw the brick through the

classroom window. This actually happen. -- happened. This is what is

happening in schools today. I want to bring in someone who works in

schools, Eileen Murphy, a behaviour management trainer. We know from

what Katie is saying and from generally in the newspapers, a lot

of parents feel there is a lack of generally in the newspapers, a lot

respect that has become normalised in schools. Do we need to reimpose

some old-fashioned notion of boundaries and sanctions? Yes, I

just find it interesting that the assumption, I have been listening,

and the assumption is that if it is the pupils who need some kind of

boundaries and they need to be taught respect. I do feel

passionately that, I agree with the army chap, it is about boundaries,

and it is about being inspiring to children. Children are great

imitators, so you should give them great to imitate -- something great

to imitate. I work with schools all across the UK and when teachers

change their behaviour and when they set out to catch children doing

something right, and do not focus so much and sanctions, catch them doing

something right and build on their strengths... May I ask, I caught

Brian not throwing the brick through the window so he was rewarded. Is

that not what you are saying? You have got to start somewhere. The

brain so that is a good place to start? He didn't throw a brick? That

is state schools for today. We worked in a secure unit. The staff

were all trained and the whole ethos worked in a secure unit. The staff

changed from sanctions and punishments to catching a child,

catching a young person, doing something right. Control and

restraint went down, I believe, 30%. Even the Home Office were impressed.

Very briefly, Eileen... Do finish Even the Home Office were impressed.

your point. There is something in it. If consequences and punishments

would work, they would have worked by now. I want to bring in Katie

Iran's, who is the vice president of the Campaign for Real Education.

Your campaign is against measuring happiness in schools, as NICE are

suggesting. Why do you think it is ludicrous that we should put more of

a focus on the positive? What we should put a focus on is the purpose

of education, and that is that teachers should teach the children

in an ordered way. The teacher should be an authority, but that's

the person who passes on the knowledge but also the person who

controls the class. If you do that properly, the children will do well,

they will respond and will learn and they will behave and they will get

the reward of not just a pat on the back for not throwing a brick

through a window, but the reward of learning and understanding and

increasing their knowledge and increasing their judgement of how

you should behave. That is not only different to what the last

contributor was saying, yet you call the idea of measuring happiness

ludicrous. Do not measure the happiness, measure what children are

learning. Teachers should be teachers, they should not be

therapists. They shouldn't be parents. The teacher's job is to

teach and if you do that well, you will have happy, well-behaved

children. Can I get a word in? I want to buttress what Eileen said

about catching children doing things well. In life general, catch

everybody doing good things. A part of our ethos at our school was not

everybody doing good things. A part just the boundaries but also the

rewards. We would give Ed Merritt slips, there would be a merit tuck

shop. If you did well, you got rewards. There is this concern about

what is being rewarded and whether there is too much focus on

disruptive children, for not being disruptive. I think that is true,

but I do not think the logic of too much attention on the disruptive

kids is what I was trying to say. It is that if continue to concentrate

on problems, you see the whole thing in a negative light and what

impressed me in Manchester, in a school which has reduced their

permanent exclusions to zero, and fixed exclusions to a tiny amount,

what impressed me about them was they were setting about, but the

parents and the children together, to create a positive atmosphere in

parents and the children together, the school. So instead of abscess

ing about the children and Brian throwing a brick through a window,

-- obsessing, they were creating a positive school in which children

wanted to do well. And the evidence shows that works. That is the key

point. Katie can chat on in this way that you always do, but if you look

at the evidence across schools, what George is saying, it works. Being a

mother, I understand what goes on in schools. I think the Campaign For

Real Education are making a vital point. Schools have become housing

centres, health centres, paid intuition centres. What schools need

to do is go back to what Katie is saying, which is become schools

where teachers teach and children do what they are told. The best way you

can become a school is by setting boundaries, catching kids doing well

and by rewarding them, and they will become happier human beings. I want

to bring in the president of the teaching union. With your members

like to see tougher discipline and tougher punishments? That would be

the easy solution. I have been listening carefully to the

discussion, and I would like to take it right back to why children are

doing low-level disruption in the classroom. It is the view of our

members that it is the underlying problem of the test culture and the

restricted curriculum. As professionals, if we were allowed to

turn teaching and learning into enjoyment in the classroom,

disruptive behaviour would drop to some extent and standards would

rise. I was interested to see the gentleman at the beginning of the

programme, the man from Commando Joes. He was giving those children

focus and enjoyment which they were returning. Thank you. We can see all

these great examples of individual skills and strong leadership, but

some schools, especially smaller ones, there is almost the

self-selection of who goes there. Lots of the concerns are in schools

where even a small proportion of children in one class can disrupt

the learning of others. I am agreeing with you. I think there is

a false stack to me. The question is, how do we achieve a situation in

which children can learn. Exclusion is in secondary schools have gone

down significantly. We had a policy of no exclusions. We even put it in

our local paper. We had a private school. I want to give credit to my

late wife, who was actually the principle. She ran the school and

she ran it as a disciplined matriarch. We did not have

exclusions. We had a diverse range of evils. -- children. If I can give

you one anecdote, a boy was very disruptive. When we got to the writ

of it, it was because he could not hide his tie. His brother had been

teasing him. It is not that simple. You love your stories, but you do

teasing him. It is not that simple. not like George's. Headmasters will

tell you that they are not allowed any more to exclude children beyond

certain bounds. It is an incredible frustration for them. I would

exclude children that do not follow the rules. If you bring a knife into

school, you're not coming back into the school again. This is all about

school, you're not coming back into the lowest common denominator. We

need to focus on brilliance, not her performance. You have former Labour

ministers and Michael Gove saying that this is the concern that

ministers and Michael Gove saying tenants have, that the system is

about the lowest common denominator. All of these methods of possible

encouragement, perhaps it is time to go back to something more

old-fashioned? It started with a culture that takes it out of your

brain. You should not be bringing knives into school. The examples

Simon gave was that teachers were playing a part, going to teachers'

homes. There was no trouble in the riots. So teachers are no social

workers? You're trying to create a situation in which children learn.

You're trying to equip them to be citizens in the world. That is the

point of the school education. They need to understand how to live in

the world. In order to do that, you need to teach children not just when

the Battle of Hastings was, but teach them the way to live with each

other, work with each other and be good citizens. The way you do that

is create a community. That is true whether you're being a boss in a

company or the head of the school. You try and raise the aspirations of

the whole school. We have to leave it there. These people are not

social workers, they are teachers. A couple of your comments. One viewer

says he is 24 and when he was at school, they still had to stand up

when a teacher entered the room. An anonymous one, I am a teacher and

children know the difference between behaving and not behaving. You have

to be fed and firm. And Janet says that teachers need to be consistent

in their approach to boundaries. Many do not set boundaries reward

good behaviour. Our votes is still open on this. Should teachers be

tougher on bad behaviour in schools? You can only votes once.

The details are the screen. -- you can only vote once. You have around

20 minutes before the vote closes. New figures released this week show

that two thirds of women in England are now in employment. Women's

rights groups say that the figures are encouraging, but did its

progress to be made as men still make up the majority of the top 10%

of earners. Earlier this month the Home Office minister Damian Green

said the police must make more use of equality laws to increase the

number of black and other ethnic minority officers serving. Simon

Fanshawe you says that all employers should stop simply hiring who they

think is the best person for the job and should recruit as diverse

workforce as possible. This is his Sunday Stand. Just get the best

person for the job as the unarguable maxim at work today. But while

companies are running around appointing usually the best man for

the job, they have missed out on the fact that very little of what we do

at work we do on our own. The complexity of problems at the

multifaceted challenges that businesses face need to be tackled

by teens. Teams have a single intelligence, like you and I, but

here is the thing, the highest performing teams are made up of not

just the highest performing individuals, but people from diverse

items. I mean a diversity of approach, method, background, where

they come from, whether that is gender, race or disability. If

recruiters want to achieve the best results for business, they should

not lightly appoint the best person for the job, what should do

liberally create diverse teams. That liberally create diverse teams. That

is why we need to draw staff from a wider talent pool. Hiring the best

man for the job is not just that business, it is bad ethics. You have

to hire to the level of skill required for the job. That is right.

I do not want an architect who does not know the difference between a

load airing beam and the flying buttress. But in order to perform to

the highest level of work, we to recruit diverse teams. I am looking

forward to hearing what Katie and George have to say on this. You can

join in by webcam, phone, or by e-mail. Katie, Simon saying it is

not just ethics, it is about good is no sense. There is a story into

the's sandy times, if you have of heard of your Board of Directors

women, the company performs better. The government did a survey that

said that that sort of thing did not make a difference. We can bounce

surveys batted one another. We need to reward performance and pay on

results. Diversity is a load of nonsense. Why on earth would you

recruit on gender? You are going to recruit the best person for the

job, the person that can bring the best commercial advantage to your

job. I completely disagree with quarters. We have quarters for fish

and milk. I am not a fish. All-female short lists are wrong. If

you are recruited just on the basis that your woman, I call that

offensive. I do not want to work with people that are there just

because they represent diversity. How do you respond to that, Simon?

What is interesting about this whole way of thinking is that if you look

at the problems we are faced with, both in business and politics, they

are very multifaceted and complex. What is interesting about the way in

which the teams that have to face these problems, what is interesting

is that all the evidence suggests that if you have a team of people

that has a diversity of approach and discipline, and yes, identity, you

get better results. Let me give you an example. You may remember the

Enigma code, they were cracking the code. It was because the Germans use

the war. They did not just have people who were involved in computer

science, logic, whoever, they also had historians and experts in German

literature. This comes from a great book. It tells this story, there was

an expert in German history. This person said to one of the

codebreakers, I think that the Germans will always sign of these

coded messages by rank. It is a characteristic of German culture.

They started to use that understanding of German culture. If

I have a broad range of talent and understanding of German culture. If

identity, you get better performance. The keyword he said, it

was an expert. Did you hear what I said in the film, you have to

recruit... said in the film, you have to

THEY ALL SPEAK AT ONCE Let George make his point. It is

evidence. All the evidence does not say this. I have also been in

business. I have run a factory. You have to hire the people that you

need. As a black person, I do not go for positive discrimination. I like

to think that I am on this show because I am good at what they do.

If we're going to have and, let's have an argument about what I am

saying. I have not talked about positive discrimination, and I have

not talked about hiding just because people are black or because people

are women. We are going to argue about the position that I am

actually pitting. -- putting. You're saying that if you take into account

that able have the skills, you should be looking for the most

diverse workforce you can have. I need to move it on. I would like to

bring in a couple of contributors. This doctor researchers levels of

racism. What is the reality for people from minority groups who are

trying to get jobs, particularly at high levels? There are many surveys

and many pieces of evidence, not just 12-mac. Ethnic minorities in

Britain continue to experience disadvantage in the labour market. A

Department for Work and Pensions survey found that people with

foreign sending names had to send in prices many CV is to get an

interview as people with traditional British names. The unemployment rate

for black young men is 50%. We have just done a massive survey where we

ask April about the experience of discrimination. We found that 60% of

people have a feed of discrimination and half of black people said that

he had personally experienced discrimination in the labour market.

We can disagree about what to do about it, but it is not fair to say

that there are 12 surveys that suggest this is a problem. There are

multiple surveys. On merit versus diversity, I think that Simon's

point is a fair summary of what the research shows. But I would

characterise that is showing that there is not a trade-off between

merit and diversity. Most efficient companies require diversity. That is

the academic point. It is also about the behaviour of companies. They are

not doing it for business reasons, they are doing it because they are

obliged to, because they are going to be forced to, because there are

quotas. If you look at the pool that they are going to fish from four

females, at board level, it is tiny compared to the amount of men there

are, and that is why there are the ratios you see. We mainly because

they have children and they don't ratios you see. We mainly because

return to boardrooms. It is simply a reflection of the way we live our

lives and to try to artificially skew them through social policy is

wrong. Do you have a response? Yes, it is fair to say that the

traditional way that... I would say, is it the effective way to get a

board decision? When you have complex problems in our society,

when problems come up that do not fit the right way of thinking, when

the financial problems happen, everybody thought the same way... We

can make British business successful overseas. We can have the

arguments, but business are doing this to be competitive in the UK

market and externally. I wanted to respond to the racism point. Sure,

there is racism out there. The best way to overcome racism is to be

better than the guy next year. Even if they skew the view and say, I can

make you money. So you are not even recruiting fairly. I hear this from

a lot of people minority backgrounds, they have to be better

to get treatment. They have to be better to get the job. I said better

than the other person, it could be another black person. When people

see that you are going to get the job done, they may have had some

skewed thinking, and I have heard all sorts of things, you are

different from black people, you have a skewed idea, I'm good at what

I do. Yes, racism does exist, I am a black guy, 50 odd years old, but I

I do. Yes, racism does exist, I am a have overcome it by being good at

what I do, and that is what I tell the youths that you talk about in

east London, be better than the next guy. Simon? Absolutely. There is a

talent pool out there and to develop it, some people need more

encouragement and some will get it anyway. Katie says it is reflecting

the way the world is. It is and I don't like it. I want to reflect the

way the world could be. There is a lot of talent we are wasting and if

way the world could be. There is a you look at the way there is a glass

ceiling, particularly for lack people and women into being on board

and a senior manager. It is not to do with the lack of talent, it is to

do with other forms of perception. If you look at what the blocks are

to the development people's potential and try and do something

about them, what you then do is realise people's potential, which is

the business we are all in. I haven't once mentioned quotas or

positive discrimination, is what people like Katie always go down,

because it is the easiest argument. What I'm talking about simply is the

development talent. So when we work on our businesses... You have made

that point. You look at the functioning of boards that have a

multiplicity... you have made these points, I will bring did some

others. -- bring in. Most employers would probably say there are equal

opportunities in their company for everyone. Is it working? Good

morning, I have been listening to the debate and I would say it is not

working, and employers know it is not. I have heard it is said that it

is being actively worked on. Some simple things that employers are

doing is recognising that they value people through different

perspectives. They also ensuring that people have some kind of

awareness around, it has been well researched by people like to recruit

people like themselves. If you are comfortable, experienced... And it

is looking at what happens at the process. There may be lots of

applications and in the end, after all of the interviews, you will

applications and in the end, after probably have some white men get the

job. The line is a poor quality one, so we have to leave it there. I want

to bring in Alex Stevenson, from politics .co.uk. I hope you can hear

us. There are countries like Norway that do use quotas, and they say

they make a big difference, especially to the quotas of women.

They do not have legal status here but do you think they could have a

social value in key jobs in key sectors? Clearly, it is desirable in

Norway or anywhere else for us to have as diverse a workforce as

possible, but the problem is, the moment you start deviating away from

the basic principle of meritocracy, then you are creating a distortion

which solves nothing. There is a real urge here to try and find a

short cut to these big, social problems that we need to tackle to

try and improve diversity in this country, or Norway, or wherever.

This is just papering over it, it is a cosmetic solution which does not

tackle the problem at source. Katie first. There are a few things here.

I think quotas are not the way to go, I'm clear about that and let's

not step away from the fact that businesses are not here to change

the world, businesses are not here to simply have a different kind of

ethical perspective on things. Businesses are here to generate

profit for shareholders. That is what matters and we are forgetting.

What about the crash, a narrow heard of a mostly men from a certain

background and look at the mess they left us with? It is easy to flip

back to that example and say this is the reason we need diversity. I

think what we need to respect is the fact that we need to maintain

business strategies focused on return the shareholder investment.

That is what is key. It is not about changing the world. George. This

idea has done a lot of damage, particularly in the Afro-Caribbean

community. In the 1970s, the big thing was you had to look after the

women and the black people. So what you had was that a black woman had

the best chance of getting a job. That is a very sweeping assertion.

On the subject, you speak to black men from that world... Can you sum

it up into a sentence which among it is dangerous, that is a sentence.

This is about removing the barriers from potential. And secondly,

businesses are in business to perform at the highest possible

level in order to return shareholder value. That actually is about ethics

and diversity, because that's precisely get the business to

perform at the highest level because it uses the talent at its disposal

to the best possible way. I want to read a couple of comments.

Christopher says nobody is going to strive to be the best they can be if

they think they can get it through ethnicity or gender. This one says

people tend to recruit in their own likeness but in my experience, Track

Record is the best predictor for performance. Shelley says there is

an assumption that ability is applied to a point. We need to

overcome the old boys network. Thank you to everyone taking part in the

discussion and you have been voting at home on our question this

morning, should teachers be tougher on bad behaviour in schools? The

lines have close now, so please do not send a text, because it will not

count but you may still be charged. We will have the result at the end

of the show. Now, almost as soon as he died in 2005 at the age of 84,

there were called from Catholics for the Pope John Paul II to be made a

saint. Tomorrow, Pope Francis is due to announce the news they are

waiting for, the official date for the canonisation ceremony. There is

no doubt that Pope John Paul is an important figure in the history of

the Catholic Church, but some people are concerned that sainthood could

the Catholic Church, but some people be too great in that perfection.

the Catholic Church, but some people Pope John Paul II was the most

travelled person ever, making more than 100 foreign trips during his 27

year papacy. His effect on the millions of people who came to see

him was plain. The crowd's delight is unqualified. Pope John Paul has

made the papacy more personal than ever before. Becoming a saint can

often be a long, drawn-out process, but chants of "santo subito" could

be heard at his funeral Mass in 2005. Pope Benedict the 16th waved

the traditional five-year waiting period, and allowed the

investigation into Pope John Paul's life and virtues to begin

immediately, a process applauded by many prominent Catholics. So maybe a

fast track but not a careless track. I'm sure that everything will be

fast track but not a careless track. done to ensure that the kind of

moral certainty that is required, that somebody lived a holy life, and

there is an inexplicable cure that has been brought about through their

intercession. Two verified miracles are required for progress to the

final stage of becoming a saint, canonisation. The first attributed

to John Paul II was that of a French nun's recovery from Parkinson's

disease. The second was the healing of a seriously ill woman from Costa

Rica who had prayed to the late Pope of a seriously ill woman from Costa

for his intercession. Others have clearly been deeply affected by his

ministry. TRANSLATION: Saint John Paul II from

our hearts, the last time he was here, I stood close to him on the

straight and thank goodness that is grace, here we are again.

But critics say he does not deserve a sainthood, after overseeing the

church during a period which clergy sexual abuse was covered up and his

strict adherence to Catholic teaching on issues such as abortion

and contraception. Marriage must include openness, and the gift of

children. Openness to accept children from God is the gift. So

does John Paul II desire to become a saint? Or, as some argue, is this a

sign that the Catholic Church is out of touch with modern society?

How do you feel about Pope John Paul II becoming a saint? We would like

to hear from you. You can join in by webcam, or make your point by phone,

text or online, and we are joined from Catholic Voices by James new

number, a trainee doctor. -- James Newman. Why do you think this is?

Speak in a semi-people wanting to become a saint. Since he died in

2005, people have been calling for him to be canonised. At his

funeral, he had the largest attendance...

What are the qualities that he has vision Mark he trained to be

appraised --?

He trained to be a priest under the Nazi occupation, against that, and

his values came through in everything he did and said. Are the

key values that stick out for you? It is hard to be specific but things

over arch his whole thing. He was so behind the workers movement, and he

was arguably the main force in bringing down European communism.

But he also argued strongly for workers rights, fairer pay and

better conditions for workers, and it was something from his

upbringing. Having to work for the Nazis in a labour camp, he did

understand what bad labour conditions were and wanted to create

social justice. We are talking about someone being canonised as a saint,

what are your views on it, Simon? I'm caught in a difficult position,

because not being religious, I think it is very sweet but a bit of mumbo

jumbo. I have great respect for faith, I cannot tell Desmond Tutu he

is stupid, but I do find the institution of the Catholic Church,

as distinct from your personal fave, I find the institution of the

as distinct from your personal Catholic Church highly difficult. If

you look back, you wait five years for the process of canonisation,

Benedict took five weeks to start this process would John Paul II.

John Paul II's record on the whole cover up around the child abuse

scandal is questionable. We don't know what his role was and we don't

know what he should or shouldn't have done. It does seem to me that

know what he should or shouldn't the Catholic Church would do itself

a favour and waited a little bit and bottoms that out. You did say that

he had great respect for all people as individuals, except if you were

gay. So I take personal exception to canonising someone who contributed

to making people's lives hell by his attitude to homosexuality and the

use of contraception, condoms, and being responsible for millions of

deaths throughout the world. I will let James respond. I understand that

a lot of terrible things have been done to gay men and women in

history, but it is very fashionable to paint to pre-single catholic in

history... No, the Vatican. I respect your personal faith.

history... No, the Vatican. I Throughout history, the Catholic

Church was often rescued -- was often a refuge for gay men. Gay men

with often become monks priest to skip. The Catholic Church was one of

the biggest advocates of decriminalisation of homosexuality.

He condemned the toad right. It is the role of the Vatican I am getting

at. Can I let George Cumming? I want to talk about the saints. According

to the Bible is, -- according to the Bible, Christians are saints. I am a

saint, you do not need to be canonised. What about me, and my

condemned to hell? Our faces that if you do not believe in the Lord Jesus

Christ... THEY ALL SPEAK AT ONCE

Your elevated to a higher level. Let me get back to the question. Do you

have an issue with the idea of since? This is the issue that I

have, the way that Catholics canonise. There are certain things

that have to happen before you become a saint. You have to perform

to miracles that can be attributed to some deep rain to you as a dead

person. Am I right? That, to me, goes totally against Scripture. The

Scripture tells us that there is only one mediator between man and

God. This is a theological distinction that you do not believe

in. Absolutely, but it is a very important one. It is almost a

dividing line between Catholics and Protestants. This is about status

and money again. That is quite a cliched thing to say. It is about

celebrating the life of one man who made a great difference to a lot of

people. Just to address your point in general, it is not to say that he

is somehow, he is part deity, part God, it is to say that saints are

something which people use in order to give them focus. You might ask a

friend to pray for you on your behalf, like you might ask a priest.

It is the fact that one of the things that John Paul II did during

his tenure as Pope, he canonised more people than any other pontiff

before him. The idea of doing that was to try and get a great diversity

of saints in the world. So that people of all countries and races

could have somebody is or all model to look up to. I want to address

this issue with the help of the Dominican sister. We were having

this discussion about the idea of making a human ascent. Many people

are uneasy with the idea, that they are implying that they are somehow

perfect. Is that not a dangerous thing to say about any human being,

however great their achievements? I do not think it is. It is not the

Catholic Church that is making anyone ascent, but has made his

saints through the corporation. In the process of canonisation, the

church is recognising that those people are saints, and with God. It

is not a question of deserving. Nor are we saying that they are perfect.

There is something deeply ironic in our society that seems to think that

There is something deeply ironic in sports stars, pop stars, actors, so

many people live these charmed lives and are these charmed lives and

argues perfect models. They are not perfect. If anything, we take them

from a great height and we pulled them down. To be a saint is to be

merciful, loving, compassionate, to follow the will of God. It is to

allow God to make you perfect. Thank you. I would like to bring in an

independent catholic priest. I think you may be able to work out why she

is an independent catholic priest! Many Catholics have been calling for

John Paul to be a saint since he died. Argue one of them? No, I am

not. I think this is a celebrity culture driven sainthood. There is

nothing dispassionate here. Pope John Paul II opposed of the idea of

the devil's advocate in the making of saints. There is nothing

dispassionate. More time should be taking. I truly believe that he is

in heaven, he was a very good man. James outlined a lot of the

extraordinary stuff he did in Poland. He is in heaven with

homosexuals, people who have used contraception, people of all faiths

homosexuals, people who have used and none. They are loved and in

heaven together. The sooner we start realising that the better. Thank you

so much. James, you're a medical student. There is this issue about

the verification of two miracles. Do you really believe in miracles,

having this spiritual cause rather than medical? It depends what you

mean by miracle. I do not think it is anything supernatural. People get

better all the time, but that does is anything supernatural. People get

not mean it is not a meaningful thing. Many Catholics would believe

it is a supernatural thing, but I do not. I want to ask, what makes it a

miracle if it is not supernatural? I assume that if it is a miracle, it

has to be outside medical science? That is the current line. I am not

the best person to talk about this. It is a genuine question. Something

that is miraculous, I would say that anything -- I would say that anyone

who gets better against what science expects, that is miraculous.

THEY ALL SPEAK AT ONCE It has to be immediate and

sustained. Immediately been cured of an aneurysm, immediately been cured

of parkinsonism is, -- Parkinson is, I would call that a miracle. Yes,

but it is a natural process. Let me bring back sister Karen. To

outsiders, people look at this issue of miracles. How should we regard

them? Adi purely spiritual healing is? I believe it is God working

through the intercession of someone looking -- someone like Paul John

Paul. Wait I disagree with sister Karen is this intercession through.

You do not need this, you go through Christ. If you ask your friend to

pray for you, that is what the saints are. They are friends. Just

let her finish, because we cannot hear. What were you saying, we know

these people are in heaven. There are millions of other people there,

absolutely. But these are the people that we know that God has allowed

his grace to work through. Why do we need them when we know Jesus is in

heaven? Is there not something to be said, Simon, in a way, people of a

different face or no faith could learn something from celebrating

lives that are great, and taking some sort of kind of spiritual

sacrifice? I feel like I in the most peculiar debate. It is a medical

student Colin something a miracle, we are talking about having with the

Pope is trotting around in heaven with people who are gay and to have

used condoms. I think this is about the elevation of a truly great man

in the interests of bolstering a very big, global institution, the

Vatican. I do make that distinction. People regard this as a PR job.

Certain people do. I think you're speaking from the perspective of

someone who is not a Catholic. There speaking from the perspective of

are millions of people who take a great deal from this. It is not to

are millions of people who take a do with bolstering an institution.

It is about people like me and Catholics in the rest of the world,

in poor Africa. I have to stop you fresh second. Simon, you need easier

this other contributor, Anette Murphy, who joins us. She met the

Pope. For you, it was a profound experience. Can you tell us why?

Yes, it was looking -- it was like looking into the eyes of God, the

Father. I experienced a great love that penetrated into my heart. He

was kind, gentle and this holiness just exuded through him. I had a win

from childhood, from the loss of my own father, and it was like looking

into the eyes of God, the Father. That fatherly mess of God. I gained

great strength from that. Thank you. Thank you so much. We will not get

everyone to agree, but I think it was important to get a range of

peoples experiences and the reasons that people feel strongly about

this. A couple of your thoughts from home. Mary says he'd is a good man.

-- E was a good man. He was one of the first to travel the world.

Another says, I find the concept of canonisation unacceptable. Robert

says that he thinks he should be made a saint for the work he has

done for the people. Thank you for all your comments. We have to end it

there. Your votes in. We asked at the start of the programme, should

teachers be tougher on bad behaviour in schools? This is what you told

us. 96% said yes, they should. James, your closest here to

us. 96% said yes, they should. remembering your schooldays. People

feel very strongly about this. What is your view on this? It is a

difficult question to answer. You have to understand the individual

pupils in question. You cannot say you have to be tougher on all pupils

in the country. There are some cases where yes, you do have to be

tougher, but there are other cases would it would be inappropriate. It

is striking a balance. I agree with what George said. It is about

boundaries and creating a community that has high standards. James is

absolutely right. What you have to do is understand how each individual

pupil and family can aspire to that level of performance. You saw how

strongly people feel about this issue. Absolutely. Every parent I

have spoken to, parents that apply to get into school, it a fee-paying

school, it is this discipline aspect that is at the heart. They felt that

the state schools were failing. That is what Katie was getting at. They

wanted their children to come to a place where the sort order. People

worry that there is this the divide, that if you can afford it, do pay

for discipline. The school I was referring to in Manchester, it was

in something of a stately and a half ago, and it now has a great

headteacher. The day I spent there was astonishing. The headmaster will

go into the classrooms, and everyone stands up, good morning, sir. But

you have parents that have made that decision. Just to say, this is a

school that is in the whose date of Manchester. Last brief word to you.

school that is in the whose date of We are in Hackney in the East End of

London. We would love to have gotten into the State Academy programme,

but Michael Gove would not allow us. We have to leave it there. Thanks to

everyone who has taken part today. Also to my guests in the studio,

Reverend George Hargreaves, Simon Fanshawe and James Newman, as well

as Katie Hopkins who joined us earlier. Don't text or call the

phone lines any more. They are now closed. But you can continue the

conversation online. The links are on our website. And that's it for

this week. From me, Samira Ahmed, goodbye.