Episode 20 Sunday Morning Live

In less than six weeks, restrictions on Bulgarians and Romanians

migrating to the UK will be lifted. The approaching deadline has

triggered a debate about the impact that will have here. On Sunday

Morning Live, we ask, is immigration good for Britain?

Good morning, I am Samira Ahmed. Also today, is talking proper a big

deal? Engine in Zephaniah takes issue with a school in the Midlands

which is banning slang -- Benjamin Zephaniah. Attempts by some schools

to ban slang is a kind of linguistic fascism. As the Church of England

takes an historic step towards the first female bishops, we ask, would

religions be better with female leaders.

And a pilgrim's progress. Nonbeliever Simon Reeve tells us how

he reacted to following in the footsteps of the faithful. It is

spectacular. Joining me this week, Vicky

Beeching, a theologian and broadcaster, Benjamin Zephaniah, a

celebrated poet, writer and actor, who has also spent many years in

China studying kung fu, and Angela Epstein, a freelance journalist who

describes herself as a non-feminist. We want to know what

you can think you can join us via Skype, on Twitter or by phone.

Who comes to live here and who can claim benefits is one of the biggest

debates at the moment. On January one, in common with other countries

in the European Union, written will be obliged to allow people from

Bulgaria and Romania to settle here. Migration Watch UK claims around

50,000 people a year could take advantage. The government won't get

involved in predictions but says it will restrict benefits for those

arriving here. A study by University College London said recent migrants

were less likely to claim benefits and live in social housing than

people born in Britain. So are immigrants good for Britain? We

visited one of the most diverse parts of the UK to see what impact

the case of immigration have had. Tower Hamlets -- decades of

immigration. Tower Hamlets is a densely populated area of the

capital and 50% of the people here are from black and ethnic minority

groups. One of the wonderful things about Tower Hamlets is that it is

constantly changing. Throughout its whole history it has been a home for

different waves of immigrants. That diversity in population means that

the city in religion, too, with different faiths rubbing shoulder to

shoulder. That has sometimes created tensions. To help prevent that,

local religious leaders have formed an interfaith group. Religious faith

can be a double-edged sword. It can be a real means of overcoming

hostility, difference, building community, building good relations

between different people. But also, it can be a tool of disaffection, it

can be misused and it can lead to difficulties. So that part of our

work is ensuring that that is not the case. People come to us at the

mosque saying, then you address this issue? Except these people don't

come to the mosque and that is why they are doing this. There is bound

to be some misunderstanding, particularly when communities don't

mix, when people don't really understand each other and see each

other as strangers, possibly intruders, somebody taking over

somebody else's territory, in the inverted commas. That is part of the

importance of interface. The potential arrival of a new wave of

immigrants from Bulgaria and Romania is not viewed with alarm. New

arrivals in the past have integrated here in unexpected ways. The Muslim

community, as it grew in this area, actually shopped in the Jewish

market, because the kosher food also comes within the category of how --

halal. You get an influx first, people will come, they will try to

make an living, they will go through the same struggles, there will be

some tension in the community and then it will phase out.

That is the debate we are going to be having at the start of this

programme. Angela Epstein, is immigration a good thing for

Britain? Carefully managed immigration can be very good for

Britain. Britain has a proud history of welcoming the rich and diverse

members of different communities from all over the world. There are

two very quick points, it has to be carefully managed so that

infrastructure, welfare services and other services that will be required

can support the waves of immigration. And I think people who

come to this country have to be prepared to integrate into British

life. They can maintain their own ethnic and communitywide

preferences, but they need to be able to be an integrated part of

British life and not be isolated from British life. It is the

question for our text and online vote. Is immigration good for

Britain? You can only vote once, go online to

vote for free. Benjamin, you will know that for

months and months, this has been a big issue and a lot of people feel

concerned. They have this idea that now immigration is becoming a

problem, do you understand that? They said that when the Polish

came. Is immigration good for Britain? Immigration is what Britain

is about. The Anglos, the Saxons, the Celts, they were all people who

came. I came from Birmingham, originally settled by a tribe called

the Burma tribe. You wouldn't know who they are now, they have

integrated. It takes time. Britain is made up of immigrants. Step

forward, who are the pure British people. There is no such thing.

There was a particular concern about these new groups, Bulgarians and

Romanians and I wonder if you can see why it there might be greater

concern about aspects of those groups. I think a lot of it is

largely scaremongering. These concerns have been raised through

the ages and it strikes me as similar to feel as we see in

immigration as in technology. People panicked when the TV came out,

social media is making people panic. We don't realise we are walking the

same road that generations have walked before us. We feel like

issues we are facing today and tomorrow are like the Armageddon and

they take on a scaremongering nature. I think we are overreacting

and we need to say this is nothing new. We have to take a pragmatic

approach. People are scared of being labelled as racists, because there

was a notion that because you don't want people to come, for practical

reasons, then it is xenophobic. We are living in a time of economic

austerity and it may be that the numbers don't add up, maybe they

will. Maybe the influx will not live up to the expectations and the

scaremongering expectations. I think there is probably a legitimate

concern that people are airing, that has to be addressed or

unacknowledged without us getting befuddled by the notion that it is

racist. My grandparents came to Britain at the turn of the century,

escaping from persecution, and Britain has a very fine heritage of

Christian compassion and welcoming in people who needed to have

sanctuary, and we should always uphold that. We have to understand

as well that if there are legitimate concerns, as lots of newspaper polls

have showed us, at least politicians should address it, if only to

reassure people, or to condemn the polls that are coming out, without

the fear of being labelled as racist. There is a concern that you

can't even talk about it without being labelled racist. I don't know,

if you start a conversation with, I am not a racist, but, most people go

on to say racist things. If you have a good and it will stand up on its

own. Most people who have concerns about immigration from other ethnic

minorities. It is clearly not racist. I hear Asian people and

Afro-Caribbean people talking about the Bulgarians and the polls, in a

way that was spoken about them. I call it the last of the boat

syndrome. What happened is, you are desperate to move your life on. You

come from the Caribbean or Tanzania, you get here, you suffer

racism, used goggle to assimilate, you get in and then you go, who else

is coming, I want to keep them out because now I am British. You have

learned it from the people who were before you. From one generation of

immigrants to the other. Is there a distinction between the idea of

people who might not be working and those who did work? There is a real

demonisation of people who have not arrived yet. We can make all kind of

speculations and there is a lot of little gameplaying, trying to win

votes by scaremongering. We don't know what is going to happen so

worst-case scenarios come out. I wonder whether part of it is about

what we consider to be enough, what we have got used to come as what we

expect in life in terms of finances and resources. And whether or not we

are used to so much that we need to realise, we need to lower

expectations and be more generous to others. If our expectations were not

so high about the services and the income we expect, maybe we would

have more to give away. I want to bring in a contributor from

Migration Watch UK, the campaigning group which has concerns about

borders. Thank you for joining us. Other EU countries are opening their

borders to Bulgarians and Romanians, too. What is the fear

about them all coming here? No fear. Before I say anything, can I just

say that your question lacks one small word, Mass. Is mass

immigration good for Britain? The answer is most definitely not. They

will come here, of course, even though we will be sharing the load

with others this time. Between 30 and 70,000 in our judgement. There

is a huge disparity between living standards and income levels in

Romania, Bulgaria and this country. Someone coming here who is on the

minimum wage will be something like four to five times better. A family

coming here will be anything up to nine times better off. Of course

they will come here. The key is suggesting we need to be more

generous and -- the key is suggesting. And maybe share

resources more. -- Vicky is suggesting. As I say, the word that

is missing is mass migration. It is not in anyone's interest. Frankly,

algorithms and Romanians I took to say exactly this and I wouldn't mind

betting that a large proportion of the viewers now feel the same way.

They would like to see the controls and restrictions continue beyond the

end of this year for Romanians and Bulgarians, I agree with them. Tell

me why some bug aliens and Romanians would like restrictions to remain --

why some bug -- Bulgarians. They believe there will be those who will

be taking advantage of whatever is on offer here. Benefits? There are

something like 2 million Romanians and Bulgarians in Spain and Italy,

there is unemployment there as we know, particularly among the young,

how many of those are going to be coming here as well? Benjamin, your

thoughts. We don't know the numbers and we can't just scaremongering. If

you have some concerns about people migrating here, why don't you have

concerns about people migrating from here? That have been two parts of

Estonia. They have said, you can't live here, all of the endless people

live here, they have bought up all the houses -- all of the English

people. People move around, it is what happens. I don't think they

will come here in big numbers. I am not an expert in this area. Is there

a concern about whether lots of skilled workers are the ones who

leave those countries, and perhaps it has costs for those countries?

People do what they want to do, and there has to be freedom of movement.

People want to live in all sorts of places for various reasons. We have

to put in into context. We suffer in Britain from the notion of welfare

dependency. There probably is a strong argument there, there are

people that feel that the state owes them a living, that it is more

profitable to stay in bed than go to work. But equally a lot of people

just want to earn a living. We are a small island nation and we only have

a small number of services that we can offer them. Why do they want to

come? Are they coming here because they have small wages in their

countries? Or are we a soft touch? It is tapping into these concerns

that makes it such an inflammatory discussion. There's a huge amount of

talent that comes to this country but equally there may be people

coming here because they think the welfare state is a soft touch. I

want to bring in Macek, who works for Fife Council in Scotland and is

originally from Poland. Poland. I gather you moved here from Poland in

2003. You have heard a lot of concern about people moving here for

the welfare system. What's your at heard a lot of concern about people

moving here for the welfare system. What's your at towed -- attitude to

recent immigrants? Good morning. I have moved here to improve may

English and not the benefits. I've made a contribution to the economy

by paying taxes and by buying goods and services locally. That's what

most of the migrants do. In my work for the local authority on a daily

basis I contribute to the local society by helping local young

unemployed people in employment. And also outwith my work I'm involved in

charity, so I make a contribution to the local society, through a number

of charities, including Fife Migrants Forum, that I co-funded and

I chair, where we help local people from all different backgrounds,

including local people from indigenous communities through

setting up things like the collection point of the local credit

union, so local people can come and see this is a different side of

migrants that we are being given in the media. Sorry to interrupt you

and you are doing so much stuff and I detect a beautiful twang in your

accent. It is so nice. Some will say you are exactly what we want in

Britain but do you feel that some groups are not integrating maybe as

much as you? I'm not an exception among the migrant community. Many

people are doing the same and maybe more. In terms of the ability to

integrate, it doesn't depend on nationality, ethnicity or cultural

background. It depends on the level of barriers to integration, such as

lack of language skills, lack of education or lack of confidence.

These are barriers that some people may have, but they can be overcome

with some help, so I think probably what we have to look at is how to

help those people that are experiencing barriers to

integration. Alright. Because they are certainly coming here with the

will to integrate. Lovely. Thank you. I would like to bring in our

guest from Migration Watch, Alp. The will is there to integrate. They

might need a bit of extra help. It is that simple. I agree with so much

of what he just said. If problem is if you are trying to integrate

people, they become so much more difficult if you've got the sort of

numbers that you have had over the last 15 years or so. Of course I

want people to integrate. I'm a third generation immigrant myself.

Vicky, this integration is the one it boils down to. People look at

certain groups, not always recent groups, but certainly communities,

and say they seem to be living separate lives. Isn't that a

relevant issue? Possibly. Society is founded on everybody making their

own sacrifices. We don't always get what we want. Society works when

people are willing to lay down some of their preferences. My concern is

a lot of the debate is that there is a fear that people are coming here

to take from us. Are there groups and if you can say where they are

concerns for you We read a lot about communities tensions that arise

because certain groups want to live one way and other groups another. We

have an essential British national character which will be enhanced by

other community groups, people from different ethnic backgrounds,

including Jewish immigrants, my own background, can import into the

country and be integrated as a consequence of being here. My

grandfather came here at the turn of the century, a Russian imgrant. He

fought in the war and wanted to be nationalised. As much as he

maintained all his Jewish traditions by the same token he wanted to make

an active contribution to British life. I love his accents and I'm

going to touch on that later. Polish-Scottish, and that's Britain.

He is successful. If you say you want professional people to come

from these countries, you are going to drain the countries of those

professional people. I remember a Mayor of s of those professional

people. I remember a Mayor of a rand -- a Mayor of a city in Poland

coming to Peterborough and begging Polish people to go home, saying we

have jobs and you are the skillful people. I remember a female doctor,

she was a brain surgeon and she earned more money in England picking

potatoes than they would in Poland. How due feel about that then? Well,

I think we should... It sounds like it is good for Britain but bad for

those countries. On integration, look, in Tower Hamlets I remember

going to a building where there was a religious building, if you like,

and on one layer you could see a long time ago it was a Hugenot

church and then a German Protestant Church and then it became a

synagogue. And now it is ch and then it became a synagogue. And now it is

a mosque - the very same building. Communities get together and for

security you need to be around people like yourself. Once you get

financially stable and you learn the language, you move on. If you want

to make a film about multiculturalism, why not go to

Golders Green? We went to Tower Hamlets. Golders Green is

multicultural but they are very well-to-do. Yes. People move on. As

soon as they become more economically solvent, they move.

When Jewish people first came to Manchester, they all lived near the

railway station and as they improved they could afford better housing.

It's the same with the later waves of immigration in the '60s. You

lived where you got off the train and as your prospects improved you

moved beyond it. If we have this debate in a few years and see where

things have moved on. Thank you very much. And thank you to our

contributors via webcam. Our vote is still open. The question is

immigration good for Britain? Is mass immigration good for Britain?

You have 20 minutes before the vote closes.

Still to come on Sunday Morning Live, is Simon Reeve on the road to

salvation. You're going to Wong way, this is

the pilgrims' way to Canterbury. It is this way.

To Canterbury. It is this way. -- going to wrong way. Children at a

primary school in the West Midlands have been told to stop using slang

words from their Black Country dialect to halt what the school has

called a decline in standards. Phrases the include I core do that

and "it wor me". Some parents support the ban but others say it is

snobbish and insulting. I think it is disgusting trying to teach them

how to talk. In the classroom it doesn't help with reading, writing

and grammar. A We should be proud of our Black Country language. It is

the best and we are friendly. Because of the Black Countryisms

that we all use, which is fine, it makes it difficult for them to spell

the words as they should. . They should be allowed to do whatever

they want to talk. I can talk properly if I wannoo. Poet and

one-time poet himself Benjamin Zephaniah is a firm fan of slang.

Here's his Sunday stand. You cannot control the English

language. It is an ever evolving entity that cannot be tamed. No

matter how you file or how frustrating it can be, language will

not behave in the way we want. So let's stop worrying or centring,

accept that we'll never control it, and instead celebrate its freedom.

Attempts by some schools to ban slang is a kind of linguistic

fascism. What kids may suppress in the classroom will only burst out in

the corridors. I understand the concerns that some have and I

acknowledge that the scale of change seems to be growing. Maybe it is

down to immigration. Maybe it is that class thing. But nothing will

stop it. So embrace it. As long as you have a basic understanding of

the language and good grammar, the rest is open to change. Of course,

course, class has a huge part to play in this debate. The queen's

English, as it is called, is only really spoken by the ruling classes.

They don't seem to have accents. They were all educated in the same

way, so they sound the same wherever they live. Whereas the working

classes of Britain have strong regional accents and slang. So

historically, those that use slang were looked down upon and if we are

really honest it is still like that today. The English language will

change as the country changes. It always has done and it always will

do. Protectionism is futile. Once you've accepted that, you will

understand why this island language has such a truly global appeal. And

that is groovy. No, that's wicked. No, that's splendid. Benjamin can

definitely talk proper when he wants to. Do you agree with him?

You can make your point via phone, text or online. Online. Vicky? I

disagree with Benjamin. I do think slang is great but educating kids is

about teaching them context, about equipping them to navigate different

social situations. I think slang is a personal preference. In ethical

ethical and theological terms, there'll be times when we need to

modify the way we express ourselves. I think kids need to be taught that

they will come across a diverse body of people and situations in life

where they have to step outside that comfort zone. So for me it is like

the gears in learning to drive. You need lots of gears to navigate lots

of different terrain. It doesn't minimise or lessen second gear that

you have fifth gear. You need to know what's appropriate. The head

teacher said, all the staff from that school, all the staff from the

Black Country, there are times when we need to use formal language, when

presenting or writing a letter. It is to get the best possible results

from our children. This is not an attack on local culture. But, they

feel they need it. I want to use a different metaphor. It is a true

story. Somebody I know bought a very expensive painting by somebody that

is well known. It stood on the wall for a while and it started to peel

off, because they didn't know how to treat the base, the canvas and to

prime it. They didn't know the basics about painting. It is

important to know the basics of language. I'm not saying you

shouldn't teach that. That. You should teach good grammar and how

the language works. Once you understand how the language works,

it helps you understand other languages. Languages. I speed a bit

of Urdu and Chinese, because Anand the language. But if you only stuck

to the language and you banned slang and regional accents, you wouldn't

get poetry or music or the literature we are so proud of. You

would ban that Polish guy from speaking with a Polish-Scottish

accents. Is it about making everyone peek the same way? A kind of

linguistic fascism, to send letters home to say you shouldn't use these

phrases. I object to the use of the word fascism. There is an using

earness to use this definition when something is banned or not is an

using earness to use this definition when something is banned or not

acceptedment -- or not accepted. We are an island nation. But in school

it is a dereliction of an educationalist's duty not to teach

children. They have to know about basic literacy. Slang can be a

beautiful thing and poetic but they have to learn about context. If they

are writing, they need to be taught that using inverted commas, using

direct speech. I'm not saying don't do, that but you don't ban slang. It

is important to understand words. Isn't the idea that they just have

to, maybe it is only on people out of the South East that they have to

separate their regional dialect from RP. We have to be careful not to mix

up accents with slang. Studies have shown that most young people know

when it is appropriate to use different types of language. Aren't

the teachers saying that they don't? If they don't, they need to teach

them better. I love teachers, this is not a slur against teachers. But

I'd do think once you teach them the basics, you can say, if you are

showing them literature, you have to explain what Shakespeare was doing

because that is a certain type of accent. I want to bring in my guest

from Dudley in the West Midlands. Is this about regional dialects slang

as opposed to accent? Is there a point, that you need to be able to

separate the way you speak locally from formal English informal

situations? -- in formal situations. Definitely, it does depend on

context and the situation that you are in. I think would pick up

multiple forms of language through socialisation as we are growing up.

It is about the way we adapt and adjust instinctively depending on

the situation itself. Can you give me some examples of slang where you

can see where the score might want to ban them? On their list, it says

a few damaging phrases, I personally don't see them as damaging, it is

just part of our dialect. It is just the way we speak around here. People

should be proud of the background and their roots. And accent and a

dialect is all part of your identity, and identity and being

unique is key to an individual. Lindsay Johns joins us now, you

teach young people in Peckham the difference between standard English

and slang, I gather. If we are talking about youth speak at opposed

to a regional accent, how many politicians are trying to Street up

the way they talk, why should young people told you should not be able

to talk the way you talk naturally? Whether you like it or not, language

is power. I'd tell my young people that words are the best weapons they

can have in their arsenal. We have a jerk tolerant policy to street slang

because the sad truth is, it makes the young people who use it sound as

if they have had an exceedingly painful frontal lobotomy. It makes

them sound stupid and uneducated. Why does it make them sound

uneducated? Is that not an unfair judgement? I don't think so. Young

people's opportunities and job prospects are affected by the way

they choose to speak. I want the young people I meant to be taken

seriously, with the power to make decisions that can affect their

lives, for example in college and job interviews. We should only be

judged on the calibre of our minds and contents of our hearts but we

don't live in an ideal world. The way you speak, the more the people

in positions of authority and power will take you seriously. Street

slang is spectacular self sabotaged because it renders young people

unintelligible and therefore often unemployable by mainstream adult

society. It leads to marginalisation,

disenfranchisement. I want Benjamin to respond to those points. Self

sabotaged? When I was young, Street slang was survival. We wanted to

exclude people from conversations, include people, it is what young

people do. I have to stress, I am not against young people having a

good education and understanding the language but to ban slang... You

have to teach them when it is appropriate. You cannot make music

sounding like the Queen. The only person who speaks the Queen's

English is the Queen and a few other friends. The of the country is full

of regional accents. Is it about class, everybody has to aid the way

a minority talk -- ape the way. We have just seen the word selfie added

to the dictionary but it is language that does include. You said some of

it is inclusive of special interest language can leave people on the

outside. Jonathan Greene is a slang lexicographer and author. We're

talking about real people's lives being affected, if they don't have

the articulacy of people who speak a different kind of standard English.

Benjamin said that virtually everything I could say, possibly

better. Slang is the register of the English language committees like

dialect, leg received pronunciation, posh language, BBC,

it is just one more type. James Murray made this clear in 1884, the

first editor of the dictionary. From what it is worth, I know 1700

different words for lovemaking. I would not recite them in a formal

interview. As Benjamin said so rightly, if you go into a formal

interview and if you don't know how to behave in that context, you have

to be taught. It has nothing whatsoever to do with slang. I can't

bear this snub is approach to the discussion --

we have to accept that linguistic and literary interests come from

social media. The art of conversation is buying, they hardly

read books any more. -- art of conversation is dying. Literacy is

the passport to self advancement. Because they only know how to

convert through digital media, and how to reduce words, not spell them

properly, we are talking about schools arming them with the tools

that they need and they have to understand that if banning slang in

a lesson is one way of advancing that knowledge as the standard

English, then so be it. It doesn't mean that out in the corridor,

somebody will be policing them. It depends what the lesson is about,

why can't the lesson be about slang? You are doing against yourself, that

is context. I said context is very important. If somebody has dialogue

and they use slang, are you going to ban the novel, band that chapter?

Chris says some dialects can be pretty impenetrable outside their

locality, it is not about class, it is being understood. Karen says we

should not use language that excludes others, whether it is slang

or overly formal. And Jemima says kids are bright enough to know the

difference between slang and talking proper. Dennis says let local accent

be retained and used because they are part of the colour of our

English outage. You have been voting at home, is

immigration good for Britain. The vote is closing so please don't text

as your vote will not count but you may still be judged. We will bring

you the result at the end of the show. -- may still be charged.

The Archbishop of York says it is not time to crack open the champagne

just yet, but it looks as though there will soon be women bishops in

the Church of England. The General Synod of the church this week pave

the way for a big change following years of bitter dispute. So why is

it such a big deal for women to become bishops, or indeed leaders in

religions? In the unity of the holy spirit, we

all stand before you in earth and heaven.

There have been women priests in the Church of England for almost 20

years. But making the move upwards to Bishop has been barred so far.

That now looks set to change after Wednesday's historic vote. 378

against eight. The decision still has to be rubber-stamped at another

meeting next year. But many Anglicans hail it as a significant

victory. Among those celebrating is Archbishop Tutu from South Africa,

who was in London this week. We have always got to thank women for their

patients. -- they have been extraordinary in their generosity to

us and then, when we have been blind. -- to ask men. But let's not

say you P! --! There will be an independent

arbitrator to settle disputes. It is not just the Church of England which

has been debating the role of women. This reverend will become the first

female bishop in the Church of Ireland next week. The Vatican

firmly quashed recent rumours that the Pope was considering creating a

female cardinal as nonsense. Outside of Christianity, other religions

have shown movement of attitudes to women as leaders. There were female

rabbis in nonorthodox Judaism, and in Islam, women have prayers in

mixed congregations in the UK, although not in mosques. Would all

of religion benefit from being led by women? Or would such a rolling

back of tradition and a step too far? -- be a step too far?

Here you are, a strong, opinionated woman, don't we need more people

like you running religions? I get to be irritated by the fact that this

has become almost apolitical argument. This is not about

discrimination and women should accept that but it has become an

argument for modern secular feminism to beat its chest about. We almost

objectify women because we are using them as a tactical ploy to encourage

people to go to church with I am not a shareholder in the chair

judgement, being Jewish, I don't go to the services. -- in the church

argument. You wrote thousands of years of tradition and historical

interpretations of the Scriptures. Yes, female rabbis, but they played

around with a lot of Jewish law as well. That is denuding the religion,

deconstructing the religion and not giving us something to pass onto

generations. I would love to know what you base that on, in terms of

Judaism and Christianity, you look at the ancient stories, the

heroines, people who were lauded by the apostles. Deborah was the judge

of the entire nation, she commanded the Army. She was leading everybody

over the priests. We are not deconstructing a religion, we are

excavating, we are going to restore men and women to their rightful

place. Genesis says men and women were created equal in the image of

God. As our token man in today's discussion, Benjamin, what do you

make of it? In any other field, the idea that women can't hold positions

of leadership would be remarkable. In most major religions it is still

a huge deal. Not just positions of leadership, not so long ago there

were debates about women running panel shows and talk shows. Still

going on, believe me! I think it is very sad, I am not really into

religion. I believe in God without religion, I'm countered that from a

Rastafarian path. My belief is that religions... I was going to say

man-made, they are made by people. The real thing is having a

relationship with God. If you believe God is about equality and

treating everybody equal, I don't understand why there is such a fuss

about having women priests. It just makes full a good multiculturalism,

I don't mean that in terms of race now, just in the way that the church

operates and communicates with its people. I would like to bring in the

director of From, and Anglican organisation and a lay member of the

General Synod. -- the director of Reform. You are opposed to women

bishops. People are asking, why? Most people in society at large

think it would get more bums on seats in churches, if nothing else.

I am not against women bishops but I do think that we need to ensure that

our churches are free to follow the way in which they believe the Bible

teaches. I believe the Bible teaches that we need men and women in our

churches, but we need women who are submitting to the men. You

personally don't support women bishops in your own view of

Christianity? That is right, I would not want to have a woman leading my

church but I want women involved in the leadership of churches. It is an

argument that one hears in many religions, that women do have a

status, not that they are not equal. What do you make of those arguments?

I think they are insidious. Everything from me about the work of

what Jesus did in his death and resurrection was to retain the good

parts of creation and lose the bad parts. I look at genesis, the fall,

the fact there is this hierarchy instigated between men and women.

For me, that is completely undone by the resurrection. In 3.2 to it says

there is no Jew or Greek, no male or female, all are one in Christ and

Jesus. And that new Testament paradigms is saying we are restored

back to that Genesis equality, male and female, note different in power

or all, you are gifted to do what ever you can do and that is

reflecting the true image of God -- in power for role. Anything that

suppresses that is allowing what happened to Jesus to continue. To

put a label on it is horrendous. What made me sad about what Suzi

said is that women submit to men. Let Benjamin finish. I'm the man

here and it goes against everything that we are trying to tell our young

girls, that you don't have to submit to men. Angela, we look back, there

were slaves in the Bible. There were slaves at the time of the core rant

no-one is saying there should be slaves now. People say it is the

same for women, why define their status by a biological factor, and

that modern society doesn't have to rule our lives. The women you quoted

from the Old Testament were hugely respected. We are not talking about

women being devalued in religion. In Judaism they can give spiritual

advice and hold seminars. Why can't they lead us then? It is part of the

historic tradition. It is the oldest religion, 5,000 years old, if it is

cocontinue, it must continue in a form... What about slavery? It is a

fatuous argument to equate slavery with women who want to become

Bishops or Rabbis. If you are a woman in the Church of England,

their entire ministry, their vocation, has been cut off. I want

to briefly let Suzi respond to these concerns. It is ridiculous to

to briefly let Suzi respond to these it is really important to say that

we are not, that submission is something you can only do freely.

This isn't about subordination or suppression but a free

This isn't about subordination or It is about asking men to take

self-sacrificial responsibility in their families and in the church

family. That's something our society desperately needs. Thank you. I want

to bring in a different perspective from the Incluesive Mosque

to bring in a different perspective Initiative. Plenty of people have

views about what Islam has to say about the views women. You allow

prayers to be led by women. What reaction have you had from men?

Firstly in Islam ritual prayer is such an integral part of a Muslim's

religious experience, and we believe Muslim prayer is a direct connection

to God soft. The leadership role in prayer, though it is functionary, is

symbolic when we say it that only men can do it. For me we see there

is a days parity between God's justice as revealed in the Koran and

the Muslim scripture and the social experience of women in mosques and

in prayer spaces in the UK and in the world today. So briefly, are men

positive about this? Do you think you are making head-way with getting

leadership roles? I think we've had fantastic support from both men and

women. We've got a Twitter account, a Facebook account. The majority of

the comments are positive saying thank God you are here, we lover to

see what you are doing. I realise it is not as simple as that but we've

had a fantastic response. Thank you. Benjamin, it is not all going to be

solved with a Twitter account but it is an interesting start. When they

come along, religions are, they are always revolutionary. Judaism, Islam

was very revolutionary. People had this idea it was oppressing women.

It was liberating women at the time. If you were in that recently and a

you were born a girl, they would kill you before Islam came along in

certain parts of Asia. Churches have to be revolutionary now. I think got

wants us to be revolutionary. You you can look at the things that in

their day was revolutionary, like women. The way Jesus taught women

was incredible. Women weren't able to get the education that would

enable them to become Rabbis. Angela, you don't think your status

today, to be out of the home and to be allowed to be a prominent person

in life, you don't think that the status of women has changed? We are

politicising this. Women are exulted in Judaism. We were respected for

what we do. What do you think your status would be in a theocratic

state? It doesn't bother me that my communal leaders are men. I don't

feel -- a Rabbi has a critical role in the community. The problem with

the equality debate is it always wants to equate men lem with the

equality debate is it always wants to equate men and women - sorry

about the cliche, but about the level ate men and women - sorry

about the cliche, but about the level playing field - this

discussion is about history and traditional interpretation. I take

the point. No, but we are going to ALL TALK AT ONCE

Other panellists suggest, what is the way forward? Can you see a time

where women hold leadership roles in faiths. Maybe the economic crash

wouldn't have happened if more women were running those institutions?

Women and men are different but it doesn't mean they can be, that they

can not be equal. It doesn't mean there's going to be a feminist

revolution if a woman is running a mosque. But it will mean it will be

a more representative organisation. And that can only be good. Briefly.

There's so much work for feminism to do. If this is about God and

creating, people in his image to fulfil their potential, religion

should be leading the way. We're not disenfranchised by it. There is no

clamour in Jude aidism for female Rabbis. I suspect this is an issue

we'll still be debating in a few years.

For centuries pilgrimage was one of the greatest adventures on earth

involving risking life and limb in epic journeys across this country

and aboard. Simon Reeve follows in the footsteps of the early pilgrims.

He talks about the effect on him. My journey takes me from the north of

England to Canterbury and then through France into northern Spain.

Across the Alps to Italy and on to the eternal city of Rome. I travel

east into Turkey, across the Mediterranean, into the Holy Land

and on to my, into the Holy Land and on to my final destination -

Jerusalem. It is a gob smacker, a breath takerawayer. I think the

reason people are going on pilgrimages now is because they are

looking for some sort of purpose and meaning in our life that is lost

from even in everyday religious experience but certainly from

everyday life for secular folk like me. And that was part of what

fascinated me and drew me to this subject in the first place, the idea

that our ancestors aren't all that different from us. They wanted to

get out and about and have an exciting time, frankly. 700 years

ago Lincoln was one of the largest cities in Britain. It was also a

major centre of pilgrimage, with travellers coming from across the

land to it have it one of the great wonders of the age. This is

spectacular. Just imagine the holy shock a Medieval pilgrim would have

felt arriving here for the first time and seeing a building of this

size. This scale. The sense of achievement that you get from

completelying what we -- completing what we might term a pilgrimage can

be enormous. If you have trekked now in the 21st century across northern

Spain for example, then arriving in Santiago de-Kos Ella, as tens of

thousands of people are doing every year is an event in your life that

you are never going to forget. Look at it. The light streaming down. It

looks ethereal. I feel as a person without faith in the presence of

something holy. It was very moving for me as a nonreligious person, or

at least a person whose faith has lapsed to be allowed the opportunity

to get up close with the fundamental beliefs and hopes of us really. I

was very keen to learn about the more rigorous, tougher aspects of

pilgrimage and find out how our hardy ancestors did it. There are

numerous accounts of Pym grimes crossing the Alps who lost their

companions to exposure. The snow can be 10 feet deep in winter. In the

10th century even an Archbishop froze to death here while making a

pilgrimage to Rome. I met some incredibly ribald characters along

the journey. One of the people who springs to mind in a chap called

David. An American. He was a former drug addict. I met him wearing

biblical outfit in a biblically inspired village inside the modern

town of as if wreath. L outfit in a biblically inspired village inside

the modern town of as if wreath. -- of Nazareth. Nazareth. My own path

was self-centred and it led me to the point of death, with an overdose

on drugs. I was dying in a hospital. Look at you now. I'm a little bit

heavier and healthier. It has led me from wearing pants to a dress every

day. There were several moments on the journey when I became very

emotional. So much of who we are, that is where it is from. And that

is an incredible thing. My family and friends and for travellers. I

think a journey in and of itself can be a magnificent thing. I think from

the journeys I've been doing for the last few years, I myself have got a

great sense of identity and meaning from them. I think that's what a lot

of us are looking for in our lives. I think pilgrimage can offer that,

whether you're a believer or not. That's on 9 o'clock on Tuesday 3rd

December on BBC Two. You've been voting on is asylum and

immigration good for Britain? William says the NHS can't cope with

the people here already, why why bring in more? Penny says we can't

support any more people. Karen says Eastern European migrants will be

coming to work hard, not claim benefits. And Matt says immigration

has made Britain. I couldn't think of anything worse than living in a

homogenised monoculture. There is this concern there. It is a shame.

In the Christian tradition good says there is an impetus on us to welcome

the foreigner or stranger and that is the sign of a good society. If we

are that closed in our mind set, that worries me. It is a

self-fulfilling prophecy. Certain fear factors are being repeddled and

that could be the fear of austerity and what will happen come January

and people are looking to the here and now rather than can immigration

help our society. The ones you read were about the new wave of what's

going to happen next year. Somebody talked about the NHS. If immigration

is bad for Britain, is the NHS bad, is our bus service that bad? Are our

nurses that bad? Is our language that bad? Immigration is what made

Britain. I think people shouldn't queues the issues and be frightened

by what can happen in the future. We've got to manage things like

we've got to manage our lives. Thank you all very much indeed. Thank you

to everyone who has taken part in the discussions, to my webcamers, to

Beeching beef, Benjamin Zephaniah and Angela Epstein. And thank you

for your texts and calls. The text and phone lines are closed but

continue the conversation online. The links are on our we are site.

That's it for Sunday Morning Live for this series. Next week Fern

Britton meets Susan Boyle. From me, Samira Ahmed, and all of us on the

Sunday Morning Live team, thank you for your company. Goodbye.

But you're saying the scale of theft is huge.

The African Union claims that corruption alone