Episode 11 Sunday Morning Live

Welcome to Sunday Morning Live, I am Naga Munchetty. On today's programme

a series of five-day strikes over the next four months is the

prescription junior doctors have come up with to end the deadlock

between them and the government. We are asking is it unethical of them

do watch out on their patients? Some priests have revealed they have

married same-sex partners in defiance of church of England

guidelines, is the church behind the times on gay rights? The migrant

camp at Calais is swelling and campaigners are concerned about

vulnerable young people, is it time to allow more

migrants into the UK? And bestselling crime novelist Val

McDermid explains why the violence in her books is so important. The

way it spreads like a stone in a pond, the ripples affect people and

change their lives. The panel is here ready to go and so

is Tommy who will be showing all of your thoughts with us. Good morning.

Yellow good morning how are you? We want you to get in touch. If you are

getting in touch on Twitter or use the hashtag. Or you can call us.

If you are texting don't forget to put your name on the message.

Looking forward to hearing from you, I think we will get a lot of

comments, a lot of meaty subjects to get into. Let's meet our subjects,

Dr Rishi Dhir is a junior doctor, Peter Hitchens is a columnist for

the Mail On Sunday, Lemn Sissay is a poet and broadcaster, and Angela

Epstein is a journalist and commentator.

The Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt says planned strikes by junior

doctors from September 12th could lead to 100,000

The doctors are resisting the imposition of a new contract

and say they've been boxed into a corner by the Government.

With both sides locking horns, it's become the worst industrial

relations dispute in the history of the NHS.

The Hippocratic oath states, "First do no harm," but will this

latest move end up doing more harm than good?

Tommy has been out about to find out if people in London think

this strike will cure the contract dispute.

I am in Tavistock square in London outside the headquarters of the BMA,

we know that they are on the side of the doctors but how do the public

feel about doctors going on strike? If I was ill I would be disappointed

but I do feel doctors should be better paid so what is the solution?

I think there are some provisions where I don't think striking should

be allowed, you are talking about people's health. You can stop

doctors from using the right to strike. I think it's detrimental to

the welfare of a lot of people especially given the length of

hospital waiting lists. The morality is that people should be allowed to

strike. How does it make you feel? It makes me angry. You have to look

after patients. That is why I became a doctor, my family are all doctors,

we would not strike if it compromised patient safety. Shoot a

five-day strike be allowed? No, what about the patients, who will serve

them? People will be a let down. In the short-term, yes but in the term

tired doctors make mistakes. I think five days borders on dangerous. It's

a sad time for doctors, it's not something they want to be doing, I

think we should set up and think about what the future of the NHS is

going to be. That was the diagnosis

of the people Tommy met, We know the police are not allowed

to strike, why should doctors be allowed to strike? First of all

thank you for having me, it's important we can get our views

across. Why has it come to this? For me striking is a sad day for doctors

and patients and the public. It represents a failure of talks, a

failure of the government to listen. This has been there since the

contract was imposed on July the 7th, the announcement was that if we

couldn't reach a resolution on important points we would go with

industrial action. What concerns me is not the question of juju strike,

it's what are the ramifications if this contract goes through?

Short-term the strike will inconvenience a great deal of

people, there will be consultant cover throughout the days of strike.

Health education in England is able to contact the BMA is that any

incident is declared doctors will return from the picket lines but the

fact is this contract, not only the doctors themselves but the

government 's own risk register has shown it's completely unsafe. It's

understaffed and underfunded and politically motivated. We are

talking about the ethics of doctors striking at this moment, is there

not an alternative considering the responsibility you have two keep us

safe? Absolutely and I take that on board completely. When you talk

about the Hippocratic oath, the amendment to it back in 1997

actually said it is the responsibility of doctors to stand

up against laws which will compromise the health of their

patients. You talk about the ethical dilemma, this contract has been

shown, to give the viewers an explanation, at the moment we have

seven days emergency care so if you come in at any time of the night,

weekends, you are seen by a doctor with anything like a heart attack,

injury, etc. What they are talking about is stretching five days of

non-emergency... I am going to interrupt... I am trying to talk

about the ethical dilemma, if you stretch those things without funding

it will lead to patient harm and patient death. I will be actively

complicit in endorsing a contract which not only I know does harm, as

a doctor of ten years experience in the NHS, but also that the

governments own risk register has shown does harm. Angela your son is

training to be a doctor, hearing what Dr Rishi has said it do you

agree? I think it's unfair to be a spokesperson for my son as he is not

here, or let what happens in 1's own family influence the response to the

question. I think as a whole doctors should hang their heads in shame, it

is morally repugnant to strike. Patients cannot timetable when the

cartel and I know that myself because I have experienced Apache

weekend here, I had a threatened miscarriage and I had to wait until

Monday to find out if the baby was still viable or not. I am sure other

people have experienced this. We cannot halve emotional blackmail,

the police cannot strike because if you have a public service upon which

people's lives depend you cannot withdraw Labour just because you

think you are not earning enough. Doctors by and large, and it's a

noble profession, you deserve the salaries you get because of the

training involved in acquiring that. But you will have secure pensions

and a decent salary at the end of your training. A lot of people

worked seven days a week. The chance to reply. A couple of points you

made, you said if I get ill, people cannot control when they get ill,

you are referring to emergency which runs seven days a week. Secondly you

have said this is an issue about pay, I have a year to go before I

become a consultant, the junior contract discussion does not affect

me, if anything striking I will lose out on pay. I agree in one sense

because I read an interesting article of yours last year, the 30th

of November 2015, you wrote in the Telegraph, why should patients wait

to see doctors and you about your experience with your son 's clinic

when you are having to wait long periods of time. Your closing

statement mentioned how can the government pushed through a

seven-day service, is that the priority and we should be looking to

strengthen the five-day nonemergency service and I absolutely agree. They

are not mutually exclusive. I had a situation where I spent three

minutes per patient and that is not good care, it is not safe. We got

lucky at times, if you are not going to increase the funding and the

auxiliary staff to run a seven-day nonemergency service, you need

nurses, diagnostician is. This is not about striking and whether it is

right or not. I should add that the junior doctors leaders recommended

the deal which they are now striking against back in May. They said it

was acceptable. So it's odd that they should now be calling strikes

against it. It is quite well-known there is strong division among the

junior doctors leaders and indeed among doctors as a whole about

whether the strikes should go ahead. The argument is not about the things

you say, we know there are many problems with the health service,

the argument about whether it is moral for you to go on strike and

what you do on your job is provide Mercy. Is there any stage you can

see I will not provide mercy though you are in pain because I want more

money. The answer has to be no. You say how sorry you are to go on

strike but if you are so sorry why do you support the strikes? Let's

get the opinion of Lemn There is no great news story of deaths due to

sit striking... I have spent my life trusting doctors. I was for many

years and industrial correspondent and I covered strikes all the time.

There was an ambulance driver strike and I was assured by my friends who

were trade union leaders in the ambulance dispute that there would

be no risk to actual emergency cover. The day the strike began I

witnessed somebody being struck by a car in North London. I called an

ambulance, the 999 operator said to me there will be no ambulance

because of the strike, the patient will have to wait at least an hour

lying in the road. I saw this happen. This kind of strike is

dangerous, does cause misery. There was an article in the habit imposed

were a science journal proved that when doctors go on strike more

people, less people died, you can research that. We have got

Jacqueline Haworth in our Manchester studio who is also a junior doctor,

Peter you mentioned division amongst junior doctors, it will be

interesting to get your view if you will strike and if you support it?

Many junior doctors feel strike action is the last resort. Many

doctors feel that to go on strike is our last option against this

bullying which is going on by our employer. Nobody can deny, junior

doctors have been creative in their pursuit of a contract. We have had

campaigns, we have marched and rallied and had set in protests and

none of it has worked. We are still getting this contract which will be

a significant pay cut for a number of junior doctors. For junior

doctors like me sorry, for junior doctors like me who are mothers, who

have gone on maternity leave, who are part-time and who are working in

an intensive and highly anti-social hours specialities, we will have

significant pay cuts. Going forward a doctor who makes the same choices

as me will have to work for two years. You spoke about protests and

sit will you go on strike now? I need to defer my decision until

September the 12th because I do have concerns, we all have concerns. It

was mentioned before that the BMA recommended the deal and I think the

BMA or junior doctors and the general public and explanation about

this. Our leader went around the country, held a series of road shows

which were written and approved by NHS employers to say how great the

contract was. It was delivered to the timescale, we had no choice, all

the information came one-sided and we still rejected the deal, 58%

rejected the deal. OK, Dr Rishi it was a referendum, there was no, I

give the analogy of Brexit, our current Prime Minister and former

Prime Minister said we should stay in the EU but they have respected

the will of the voting public to carry that through. The BMA

represent us as the membership. I want to go back to what Peter said,

you are saying it's about money. I believe money is certainly an issue

within the context of recruitment and retention but what I am saying

is we are at a situation where we have 20% gaps on rotors. We are in a

position where there is 20% less applications to medical school. We

are struggling. At a major trauma hospital... All the time you change

the subject. THEY TALK OVER EACH OTHER I am surprised that two

columnists are not trusting the same doctor they would take their

children to if they were ill. This strike is happening by people that

we entrust our children and our lives to and when they stand up and

say there really is something wrong our instinct is to say you just want

money and I don't believe that's true. Angela?

The nub of the issue is whether striking is ethical. There are lots

of ways that you considering the table and negotiate, but the issue

here is whether the withdrawal of the labour whether members of the

public are a captive audience, is that morally unacceptable? On any

level, I don't see how it can be. Peter is right with this, I am

sorry, mea culpa, the hairshirt aspect, there is always an

anecdote... Mothers working anti-social hours, juggling, it's

difficult. Lots of people do jobs whether domestic circumstances don't

necessarily marry with their profession. It is about a choice

that you make. If you choose to go into medicine, this is a choice that

you make, it is not an easy job. Jacqueline, do you think striking is

ethical? Angela used the word moral. As I mentioned before, NHS

employers, they are only empire. If we want to work as junior doctors in

the UK, we don't have the option that consultants do to work in the

private sector, we have no choice but to work on the NHS. But when you

become a consultant, you will do. I have been a junior doctor for nine

years, I have another nine years left. I have a young family that I

want to play for now, I need to pay a mortgage now. This junior doctor

contract is about saving money for the Government on mothers, part-time

workers, those doctors already working evenings, weekends and

nights, working the hardest. They will lose the most money from these

contracts. There are lots of working mothers. We are asking if it is

ethical. Is it ethical to bully and employee? Let's get the views of our

audience on whether it is ethical to strike.

As with the studio and people in the street and the texts, people are

split, they want to support the doctors but are worried about

patient safety. Terri says, I still support the junior doctors even

though my double operation is scheduled right in the middle of one

strike in October. Stephen says they are using the same

rights as most of the unionised workers. One being bullied or

cornered into something they don't agree with, withdraw your labour.

This is a democracy, it is their right. Rose says I am losing

patience with them. From what I have heard, they are losing the support

of some of the public. Mick says, a worker is a work, it

does not matter what they are being paid to do. If their employer abuses

the relationship, they strike. Pat says it is ethical, sorry,

unethical, when they accepted a good deal not that long ago.

Lemn, your view, is it emotionally... Will we see doctors

losing the support of the public? That is the tone of some comments?

The public is being pushed into a car being told facts like the

doctors are using the public and they will not get the servers that

they needed the strike happens, that is not true. People are not dying

because this strike happens. Those doctors care for the people that

they look after and they will not jeopardise lives by this strike. And

when a doctor stands up and makes a point about how he feels about his

work, or her work, I will listen, because he is the person who looks

after... Do you listen to the doctors that object to the strike? A

poll came out this weekend suggesting a large number of junior

doctors do not feel bound to this strike. You are arguing against

yourself. We have had a mandate, 90% of people... That dates from

November last year and is completely outdated, because since then a deal

has been negotiated, which doctors were urged to accept. By one

individual, Johann Malawana E. Angela, you accuse us of being

morally reprehensible, you said about diversifying the issue and

asked if it is morally or ethically right to strike. But as to be taken

to the context of why we are striking. I feel I am almost in an

unfair advantage, I have worked in the NHS for ten years so I know what

cuts are like. We are patients, so we have even a greater stake. We all

use the NHS, I am a patient too. I feel in a position to talk to you

about what has happened when services have been cuts, we have

seen maternity and A services closed. That is a different

argument. Let me put a simple question to you, if a steelworker

goes on strike, the steel is not made. That is all that happens. When

the strike ends, the Steelers made. When you go on strike and people are

in pain, they are in pain for longer and with less hope of being cured

and treated than if you were not on strike, that is irrecoverable, that

will happen. There is no moral difference. It is self-evident. Do

you really think there is no moral difference between a steelworker and

a doctor going on strike? Do you really think that? Thanks very much

for making that point. My pleasure. But what is the answer? That is the

nub of the issue. Is there an equitable variety... Lets give Rishi

the chance to answer, briefly. The contract is being imposed on four

weeks, there is an alternative. Is it morally ethical, did you feel you

are morally correct to strike when you risk putting patients in pain?

If the alternative is to risk causing patient death, which it will

be at this contract comes in. Thank you very much for all your comments.

We have had an unprecedented amount of interaction from the viewers this

morning, thank you very much. Not surprisingly, it is a very emotive

subject. Jacqueline, many thanks for your time. Thank you.

Still to come on Sunday Morning Live...

Children at risk - campaigners have called

for the Government to allow 400 young migrants eligible

Val McDermid started her working career as a journalist -

now she makes up stories for a living.

Val, sometimes called the Queen of Crime, is a Scottish novelist

She was the first state-educated Scot to be accepted

into St Hilda's College at Oxford University,

Hardeep Singh Kohli now talks to her about that -

Now, Val, you have just published your 30th novel, you have sold 11

million books? 15 million now, apparently. Did you ever imagine as

a little girl inker coldly that this is where you might be? No. I wanted

to be a writer from the point that I realise that people got paid money

for writing books. I must have been about nine or ten, reading The

Chalet School books, where one of the characters grows up and becomes

a writer, and it said about getting a check from your publisher. You get

paid! You don't just do it out of love?! The cliche would be, given

the sort of fiction that you write, let you had a tortured childhood,

and all full-time, it was restrictive, that could not be

further from the truth? I had a very own traumatic childhood, my parents

were deeply in love with each other, we had a very nice life. We had no

money, but we had the beach and the woods and a good family. We did

things together. -- I had a very non-traumatic childhood. It was the

sense that it was important to stay in touch with what nourishes you,

which is your roots. It is hard to write with a sense of yourself if

you don't have your feet firmly planted on the ground. You were the

first state educated Scotswoman to go to St Hilda's. I can't imagine

there were many folk in Fife that were at Oxford or Cambridge? I did

not really realise that the time, but only years later at a college

reunion, someone said to me, you were tremendously exotic! They have

clearly never been to Kirkcaldy! I did not feel exotic, I felt like an

outsider in lots of ways, but, for me, it was a huge culture shock. The

obvious things like I could not speak the language, they did not

understand what I was saying. Again, because I was brought up with this

notion that I was as good as anybody else and I should call no man my

master, I very much at the view that I had every right to be there. --

very much had the view. Your series of non-dash-macro novels

about the psychologists were made into the hit television series Wire

Rimmed The Blood. -- Wire In The Blood. How was it for

you watching the characters you created, being realised through the

eyes and the voices of others? The first thing you have to do is let it

go. You know it will not be the book, it has to be different. The

grammar of television storytelling is very different to what I put in a

book. But I think I was very well served by the adaptations, because

they took the book very seriously, they made it out of love and

respect, I think that shows on the screen. Move!

Your work has been criticised for being graphically, graphically

gruesome at points. I think you are dealing with the kind of thing is

that human beings do to each other, and there is a kind of moral duty on

you to be honest about what that is, not to be glib about it. These

things exist, what happens out there in the world is far worse than

anything I have put on the page. I am very conscious that when I am

writing this kind of book it is necessary to be direct about what

violences and the way it contaminates peoples lives, the way

it spreads out like a stone thrown into a pond, the ripples affects

people, they changed their lives, they make them deeply, deeply

unhappy. If you're going to do this, you have to do it very carefully. I

try to stay on the right side of economy, if you like, to say enough

to make the reader understand that this is something appalling and

grim, without glorying in it. And sends you portray quite a godless

side of humanity. -- sometimes you portray. Have you had a faith

yourself, have you looked elsewhere to a God? I grew up in the Church of

Scotland, my parents were both churchgoers and arrived a great deal

of satisfaction from their face. I think at some point in my teens, it

seems to me not to be an explanation for the way the world works. And so

I would say that I am pretty firmly in the agnostic leaning towards

atheism camp. Humanist? That would probably be the closest to where I

am in spiritual terms. I have problems of organised religion, I

think it has been the source of many of our problems down the centuries.

I have no problem with individual faith and spirituality, but these

institutional bodies, like any institution, it becomes about

preserving the institution. Do you imagine retirement, do you ever

think about stopping writing and doing other things? I can't imagine

it. Writers mostly don't retire, we tend to go on until we drop. If you

are very lucky, your brain still keeps fizzing and the ideas still

keep sidling into the back of your head. Why would you want to stop? I

think I would drive my family completely insane if I stopped

working. Val McDermid, it has been an

absolute pleasure, as always. It has been a delight, thank you.

Val McDermid - ready to produce another crimewave.

Nicholas Chamberlain made the news yesterday when he revealed he had

been in a long term relationship with his male partner.

Hardly a big story, you'd think - but Nicholas also happens to be

the Bishop of Grantham and is the first bishop

in Britain to openly reveal he is in a gay relationship.

Bishop Chamberlain said he had been honest about his sexuality

My sexuality is part of who I am. I never sought to make it a secret. My

focus on priority has been on my ministry, on serving God and God's

people. And I do that, as I always have, as a gay man.

Also this weekend, 14 gay and lesbian clergy couples called

for greater acceptance within the church.

In an open letter to the College of Bishops, some have revealed

for the first time that they have married.

That's in direct defiance of the Church's guidelines,

which allow civil partnerships but not marriage.

So, is the Church behind the times when it comes to gay rights?

Joining the panel now are Father Andrew Foreshew-Cain,

who organised the letter which was sent to the College

of Bishops Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is a journalist and author.

And Alison Ruoff is a lay member of the Church

-- Alison Ruoff is a former member. Why did you send this letter? We

want the promise to support our bishops as we move forward. The

Church of England has finished two years of conversation about human

sexuality, the bishops will be thinking about what is next. As

members of the Church of England, married gay and lesbian people, we

wanted them to be encouraged and to lead the Church forward in a

positive direction that would include gay and lesbian people. That

is what we want. Peter we are asking if churches are

behind the times? The point of churches is to be behind the times.

As far as I see it this is another wind-up designed to lure

conservatives into an elephant traps or they come out shouting say you

cannot do this or that and then they are made to look foolish, like

bigots and homophobes. This is another of these thorny battles

which hardly affects anybody. If the church were worried about this they

would not have given up on gay marriage. Once you have given that

up anything goes and it has. For me it's not an issue and yet another of

these occasions where the church is being lowered into an argument it

doesn't need. Father Andrew, is this a wind-up? It is about enabling the

church to be honest about itself and what people believe about themselves

and God and the relationship with him and to live their lives as

faithful Christians in this country. This is a very serious and important

issue to us as gay and lesbian people, it's part of our whole lives

and our experience of ourselves. Is the church as accepting of civil

partnerships, why did you feel the need to get married? I believe in

marriage and I want to be married to my husband which I know I am. Civil

partnerships were a second-best which was offered to the gay and

lesbian community and I believe in equality is a quality, it's not a

separate water fountain for you to have whilst I keep that one, it's

all we have the same thing. Yasmin Alibhai-Brown do you think the

church 's liberal enough? The Church of England is considered fairly

liberal. I admire the church, I think they are pioneers when it

comes to, especially sexual rights and sexual preferences and love and

so on. No other faith, no other part of the Christian faith has been

quite as enlightened. I think it's a bit like the Labour Party now, those

who want to go on with this extraordinary example they are

setting and those who cannot live with it, mainly African bishops and

others, who are much more conservative. I think a split is

inevitable. But I have admired the church for a very long time and

sometimes wished people in my faith, leaders in my faith learnt something

from them. Alison Ruoff, we had the Bishop of Grantham becoming the

first bishop to declare he is in a gay relationship, it says something

if senior leaders are reluctant to say they are in a gay relationship.

I think it says a lot but I am sorry, I did not know about it but

that doesn't mean anything. I just think the house of Bishops, you

talked about the College of Bishops which is all bishops, the house of

Bishops are the dioceses and the archbishops, I think they are

cowardly and not prepared to stand up for Bible truth. It is plain

that, sexuality is wrong. Marriage is between a man and a women. Mainly

for having children. May I? I think there are a variety of

interpretations of scripture and you hold a conservative traditional one.

It could not be clearer. There is a lively debate in the people of the

church of England and more widely about what the Scripture means and

how they are applied. We both know well that 40 years ago the same

arguments you are now making were made about women in the ordained

ministry. Women in the ministry, it's not... It's not quite so clear

and you cannot equate the two. Homosexual marriage, it is

absolutely clear as anything in Scripture and the church is

definitely going to go to a split if it carries on. We have an Archbishop

of Canterbury who, very nice man as indeed all the bishops are, but they

like to be liked and they like to be loved and he is not prepared to

stand up and say no we will not go down this route. Which is incredibly

sad for the Church of England and for the nation. Yasmin you are

shaking your head. It is not sad, look at what is happening in Uganda,

the bishops rejecting homosexuality in the way they do, there is now the

most terrible persecution of gay people. I would never go with that.

Once public attitudes are encouraged in a certain way, the great thing

about this church, every single religion that I know of has this ban

on homosexuality and has all sorts of things. These were historical

religions in historical times and places. The good thing about faith

which moves and changes and adapts is that it means something to the

people. Peter? It cannot move and change because of what it is based

on. You think it is nonsense but I don't, faith is based on what

Christians in this case believed to be the Word of God. You are missing

my point before I have made it, which is characteristic of you but

wait a second. I will refer to the words of Christ himself referred to

in the Gospels, the Church of England portrayed it in the 1960s,

millions of people's lives have changed as a result of the collapse

of the Christian churches and society on the issue of lifelong

marriage. It's an enormous issue affecting almost every family in the

country and every school and most every aspect of life. But nobody

says anything about it whilst we argue about a tiny minority issue as

to whether bishops can or cannot be homosexual which doesn't interest me

in the slightest. This is just not about just bishops. I was in a

meeting were similar claims are made and gay people were blamed for

poverty on council estates. I did not say anything remotely like that.

Because we want to be in faithful long-term committed relationships

which is a good thing, surely? But that made us responsible for the

breakdown of heterosexual marriage. That is nonsense. All we are arguing

is that we should be allowed to have our relationships honoured,

respected. We are joined by Tracey Byrne from the Lesbian and Gay

Christian Movement, you have been hearing what we have been talking

about, your feelings on the churches attitude towards gay people and

marriage is? Thank you for having me, I believe it's time for the

church to move ahead. What I would not agree is that this is about

following the fashion of the land. It seems to me it is time for the

church to move for a number of reasons, not least because

significant numbers of people are being harmed by the current position

and some of the views some people have been expressing. People are

being harmed, put off the Christian faith. The Lesbian and Gay Christian

Movement has numerous examples of people who say I cannot continue to

belong to a church like that. I don't find it attractive or

authentic. It's an urgent issue for the mission of the church. Let me

pick up on the point being made that this is causing harm and putting

people off the Christian faith? That might be so but if the Bible was

taught faithfully week by week by every cleric in the church we would

not be in this mess but it is not. God is a God of love and nothing of

his, not of the other side of his character comes in which is about

how he wants like to be conducted, what he wants which is best for all

of us which is marriage between a man and a woman. And that we live by

the Bible. Do you think gay marriage should be banned? It is not

relevant, it is not marriage. I am married. You have gone against the

church. I followed my conscience as a Christian. But you decided to

break the rules. Can you imagine the pain you are causing by speaking

like that? We are not being seen as human beings with feelings. We are

seen as some kind of issue, problem. We want to be ourselves, and live

the lives we wanted. Why be a cleric then? Because I believe in Jesus

Christ. I want to sure that faith. If the teachings and principles were

there in the first place why do you feel the need to go against those?

You knew what was laid down as the law, the rules, what makes you think

you want to change it from within? I asked my husband to marry me on

Valentine's Day 2014, we had dinner, I got down on one knee and asked him

to marry me. The bishops had not said they were going to ban us from

marrying, they did it the next day and I had already said on Facebook

that he said yes. Nobody had any idea, it was out of the blue. Then I

realised it was more important for me to do the right thing by my

husband because he wanted to marry me and our relationship. What would

you say to someone in the clergy who wants to get married now and the

rules are in place? I would urge caution because the church

persecutes people who marry in a very significant way. What you mean

by persecution? Discipline? It refuses to acknowledge people who

are already married, it refuses to consider people who were not give

explicit assurances that they will never marry which is bizarre. If you

ask a 20-year-old what you will do for the next 60 years you have to

promise to never marry which is unkind and unrealistic. Let's find

out what the viewers have been seeing, thank you for getting in

touch. A lot of messages saying the church is behind the times and it's

about showing love for all. Interesting thoughts, Alison, one of

the messages I think it was from Juliet seeing the church needs to

open its arms. It feels as if when Andrew speaks it doesn't. I would

take issue with that in as much as we would welcome anybody and

everybody but to be fair and truthful in teaching the Word of

God. Somebody said the Bible is irrelevant, we have not moved on.

The Bible says Jesus Christ is the Lord of yesterday, today and the

future. That is scripture. I just feel we cannot try and say we have

moved on, it isn't irrelevant. God 's Word is the authority. Peter? And

will get his way, -- and you will get his way. I did not say it's a

good thing but it will happen. This is the trend of the times, by that

time the Church of England will have no relevance. I am going to

interrupt all of you simply because I am being told we are out of time.

I am sorry because we could carry on this conversation, I wish you all

the best, thank you for being part of this panel.

The sight of migrants being rescued after desperate journeys

across the Mediterranean are, sadly, a familiar

So too are the conditions at the so-called Jungle

On Friday, campaigners claimed they had identified almost 400

refugee children living there who are vulnerable

and at risk, but are eligible to come to the UK.

The Government, however, remains resolute that there can be

Figures from the United Nations indicate that 2016 has been the

deadliest year on record for refugees crossing to Europe over the

Mediterranean. Pictures of the three-year-old Syrian boy washed up

on the beach brought the world's attention to the crisis. Since the

death of and average of 11 men women and children are perishing every

single day over the last 12 months. Campaigners say that almost 400

refugee children living in the so-called jungle migrant camp in

Calais are eligible to come to the UK to join their families. A protest

outside the Home Office on Friday urged the government to take action.

It was attended by faith leaders and high profile activists such as

Juliet Stevenson. It strikes me as very, very tragic that hundreds more

children have lost their lives whose names we don't know. His photographs

were not taken. Who knows what their destiny would have been if they had

had a chance to live. At a cabinet meeting last week ministers agreed

that serious curbs on immigration were essential. However Home

Secretary Amber Rudd says the UK is on track to resettle 20,000 Syrian

refugees by 2020. Germany expects to take in 300,000 refugees this year

alone. The charity refugee action says the UK must go further and

faster. We are rejoined now by poet

and broadcaster Lemn Sissay, and by journalist and columnist

Angela Epstein. Yasmin, have we done enough to help

the migrants in Calais? No, we have not. When Cameron was in power, he

said we would take 4000. That was about 18 months ago. We have not

taken any of those. But the children are the biggest worry, and some of

them actually have relatives here, some of them have homes to come to,

and many Syrians I know, particularly Syrian families, have

offered to foster these children. So I don't understand how we can sign

up to a treaty which we signed up to... Lets not talk about migrants,

we are talking about refugees. People from Syria, most of them,

well, we know, they are basic refugees -- they are refugees by the

basic definition of what refugees. Peter? They are not refugees because

they long ago reached a safe country in the shape of Turkey. What they

became when they left Turkey and tried quite reasonably, and I don't

in any way denigrate their ambitions to move to a more prosperous part of

the world, but what they became when they left Turkey was migrants. They

seek to come here. There are legal ways of coming to this country

involving applying for entry under legal forms, you can do that or you

can set up an illegal camp in France and put moral pressure on states to

let UN and let you jump the queue. It is unfair on the people who have

gone through the process properly. What about the children? Sorry,

Yasmin, let me just... I'm sorry, I had to correct this... What about

the children fleeing Syria, fleeing violence and persecution, in this

so-called Jungle camp? Why are they there? Why are they in this place

known to be dangerous and squalid? It's their fault? How did they get

there? I think anybody with a shred of humanity would weep bitterly at

the sight of any child, particularly the most vulnerable in society,

being in this desperate situation. Our knee jerk moral responses that

we had to help, but we have to have a manage response. For example,

there are a lot of comparisons with the Kindertransport whether British

God offered refuge to Jewish children during the Second World War

-- the Kindertransport, whether British government offered. But

support had to be offered by private individuals or organisations to act

as a guarantor for the children who came here. They were fully in

desperate circumstances. Nobody is suggesting that children should be

left to fend for themselves. I agree with Peter, Turkey or where they

come to from Syria and beyond is a very long way from Calais. From a

cultural position, if someone is to be in that terrible position us to

become a refugee, which is obviously different from being an economic

migrant, surely there needs to be some placement in a country that is

somehow culturally more similar so that even if that is for a short

space of time, the reabsorption will be better afterwards. So are you

saying that people who want to fully or go to another country, we have to

determine which countries they go to. People have been migrating...

People have always migrated. I migrated the moment I came out of my

mother's womb into the open air. Migration is that the heart of who

we are as natural human beings. My patriotism, my love of being

British, I was born here in the villages of Lancashire, is

exemplified by how open I am to people coming to this country. It is

a different station. I am strengthened, not weakened, by

people coming to this country. Countries do not have a limitless

capacity... What is the limit, Peter? I would say it is defined by

what we can take in the form of housing, employment, public

services, health services, schools, and also, this is very important, in

our ability to absorb when people come from other cultures, they will

absorb and integrative given the chance. But if there is a constant

flow, a constant flow of migration, it is much harder for existing

migrants to integrate, and for the country to integrate them. Many of

the people most concerned about the level of migration that this country

is currently undergoing people who migrated here in the past and see

their own position made worse. We are talking about refugee children.

You have had your say, can I talk? Actually, we are. We are talking

about refugee children. Address my point.

ALL TALK AT ONCE. Peter, I need to talk. So do I. Why are they

refugees? Yasmin is responding. Just repeating something that is not

true. Let me remind you that when Jewish people came, the papers said

they were aliens, the word alien came into use when Jewish people

were coming over. What is the point? You are not making any sense. Alfred

Dubs has said consistently and persistently, we have not taken the

refugees that as Europeans, whether in the EU or not, we have a

responsibility to take. And the Government has said it will take

20,000 from Syria. But they have not taken them, that is the point. We

are breaking word. Yasmin uses the word responsibility, which is key to

the discussion. We are using words like crisis and responsibility. We

are not talking about economic migrants looking for prosperity in

other countries. We talk about moral responsibility, but with

responsibility comes the ability to be able to provide accordingly. If

you do not have a managed response, or the protocol in place, and it is

all very well saying Cameron... And you are right, the promise has not

been honoured, but there has to be the structure in place before we go

about... Who's fault is a manage response? If we have refugees coming

here and there is not a managed response, why are we blaming the

refugees and while we're not calling the Government two accounts, calling

the education system to account, children's services to account?

Those are the places where we should be asking to provide... We should be

blaming the own Government which is created by several unnecessary and

stupid wars the conditions under which people fleeing from

Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and to Libya, where we destroyed the

existing government. There is a heavy responsibility on our

government and those who supported it. But they are not refugees once

they have reached a safe country. Let's hear from the viewers, we are

talking about whether we are doing enough. You have been having

reactions on the other subjects as well, Tommy? It has been meaty. Lots

of sympathy for immigrants but lots of people are saying what kind of

stretch will it be? I am sure Yasmin would agree.

Yasmin, France is a safe country. The children in Calais would be safe

there. But they have families here. 350 them, as Alf Dubs has said, have

family connections to this country. How can we have a refugee policy,

and I agree with you that, you know, when families are able to vouch for

those children and look after them, what is holding this back? We have

not done our duty by them. Angela? This might be a curveball, we have

an overburdened foreign aid budget. Why don't we spend it on helping a

foreign situation, if you like, in a broader sense. There has to be money

in the pot to do this. We are spending... Sending money to the

Indian space programme, I know that is often used as an example, but we

have to have a protocol. If the husbandry is there and it can be

done properly... It is one of the very few things that I praise this

Government over, it spends large amounts on helping refugees from the

Syrian wall near to where their homes are in the hope they can come

home, which is much more sensible than what they are currently doing,

encouraging people smugglers and falling for their public relations.

If the entire Jungle emptied tonight and everybody in its came to

Britain, within three weeks it would be there again in the same place.

People smugglers carry on... Lemn, we have 30 seconds. I pride myself

on being British and on openness and the fact that we have constantly had

immigration in this country as part of what keeps us alive and healthy.

Thank you for your thoughts, Lemn, Peter, Angela and Yasmin, to all of

you today, it has been amazing how you have been getting into a gent

taking part. Two players out is Shaun Escoffery, singing a song from

his new album, Evergreen. Live Your Life. Here we go.

# Uni glove. # Nobody loves you.

# You need touch. # Nobody feels you.

# You need soul, but nobody hears you.

# But nobody hears you, nobody's near you.

# You need site, but there's no want to guide you.

# Uni glides, but darkness surrounds you. -- you need lighter.

# You need to add, when it feels like you're choking.

# And nothing is working. # You've got to your life.

# Be happy with who you are. # Be happy with who you are.

# Don't waste time. # Be happy with what you got.

# Don't worry about what you are not.

# You tears when no words can be spoken.

# You need joy, when everything's broken.

# Uni 's heart, when it feels like you're falling.

# And no one is calling, no one is calling.

# You know everyone loses their way. # Trysting in things that just fade

away. # Happiness is just a breath away.

# So just breathe. # And live your life.

# Year. # Who you are, who you are.

# Don't waste time, don't waste time.

# What you got. # Livio, live your...

# Be happy with who you are. # Be happy with who you are.

# Don't waste time, don't waste time. The rig be happy with what you

got, don't worry about what you're not.

CHEERING AND APPLAUSE I think they liked it.

With your favourite Radio 2 presenters, and an amazing line-up