:00:00. > :00:11.On today's programme: Sam Allardyce claims entrapment by journalists
:00:12. > :00:13.caused him to lose his job as England manager.
:00:14. > :00:20.The first baby with three parents thanks to advanced medicine
:00:21. > :00:26.The Archbishop of Canterbury says the Church has not done enough
:00:27. > :00:28.to counter anti-Semitism in the past.
:00:29. > :00:33.What can be done to tackle it in the future?
:00:34. > :00:36.And actress Michelle Collins tells Nikki Bedi why a play about wartime
:00:37. > :00:43.refugees has a resonance with today's migrant crisis.
:00:44. > :00:51.People need to know the consequences of what happens to people and the
:00:52. > :01:01.trauma it can cause. And separation from your parents.
:01:02. > :01:03.Our panel is here, ready for the off and so is Tommy
:01:04. > :01:16.Good morning. Now that Naga's hair from last night is no longer
:01:17. > :01:21.trending on Twitter, we can move onto other subject matter is, if
:01:22. > :01:25.that OK! You can get in touch on Facebook and Twitter.
:01:26. > :01:27.Don't forget to use the hashtag #bbcsml.
:01:28. > :01:31.Standard geographic charges from landlines and mobiles
:01:32. > :01:40.Texts will be charged at your standard message rate.
:01:41. > :01:43.Email us at sundaymorninglive@bbc.co.uk.
:01:44. > :01:49.And if you do get in touch, please don't forget to include your name.
:01:50. > :01:52.Absolutely. We like to know the names of our viewers.
:01:53. > :01:58.Max Mosley is the former head of Formula 1 and a privacy campaigner.
:01:59. > :02:01.Edwina Currie is a former Conservative Cabinet minister.
:02:02. > :02:04.Lord Digby Jones is a crossbench peer in the House of Lords.
:02:05. > :02:07.And Chris Davies is a former sports writer for the Telegraph
:02:08. > :02:09.and committee member of the Football Writers' Association.
:02:10. > :02:15.Instead of sitting on the England manager's bench, Sam Allardyce
:02:16. > :02:18.is sitting on a deckchair this week after being caught in
:02:19. > :02:23.Big Sam stepped down after being captured on a secret
:02:24. > :02:26.camera appearing to advise a group of supposed businessmen
:02:27. > :02:32.about getting round Football Association transfer rules.
:02:33. > :02:35.He accepted it was an error of judgment but was clearly unhappy
:02:36. > :02:37.about the way his international career has been booted
:02:38. > :02:40.into the stands, saying entrapment has won.
:02:41. > :02:44.Allardyce's spectacular fall from grace follows another high
:02:45. > :02:46.profile newspaper hidden camera operation that showed the then
:02:47. > :02:48.chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee Keith Vaz
:02:49. > :02:57.So did they both deserve to be exposed in this way
:02:58. > :02:59.or is this form of journalism just plain sensationalism?
:03:00. > :03:05.First Tommy, who's been doing some of his own digging.
:03:06. > :03:12.It's me, Tommy. But you wouldn't know because I am undercover with my
:03:13. > :03:16.secret camera in Leeds to see what the famously straight talking people
:03:17. > :03:24.of Yorkshire think about journalistic sting operations. What
:03:25. > :03:28.are we doing? It looks like me and you are a massive giveaway. They are
:03:29. > :03:33.going to know. Can we just do it normally? I think it is pretty
:03:34. > :03:37.immoral, to be fair. It should be more broadcast to the public. I
:03:38. > :03:41.don't think it is right. I think it's fine as long as the truth comes
:03:42. > :03:47.out. I don't care how it is done as long as the truth comes out. They
:03:48. > :03:50.will do anything for the story, the newspapers, but two wrongs don't
:03:51. > :03:56.make it right. It is hard because you don't know whether liners. When
:03:57. > :04:02.you are a role model it is important to be as transparent as you can be.
:04:03. > :04:06.-- you don't know where the line is. Do journalists have a responsibility
:04:07. > :04:10.to tell us what celebrities are up to? Yes, that is what they are paid
:04:11. > :04:14.for, to tell the truth and let the public know. To an extent. It
:04:15. > :04:19.depends what the story is. If they are splitting somebody who is doing
:04:20. > :04:24.something wrong, then yes, but if it is fabricating things for the
:04:25. > :04:29.newspaper, that is wrong. What do you think about sting operations?
:04:30. > :04:32.Sam Allardyce said entrapment had won but I think that is arrogance
:04:33. > :04:36.because the public deserved to know about it, without a doubt. If you
:04:37. > :04:40.are going to live your life in front of the cameras, you have got to deal
:04:41. > :04:44.with everything that comes with it. Don't we have a right to know?
:04:45. > :04:51.Figureheads in the public eye, we need to know what they are like. Not
:04:52. > :04:54.at all. It is their personal life. They might not be doing well for
:04:55. > :04:56.people who look up to them but we don't need to know that. They are
:04:57. > :05:00.doing their job and what happens behind closed doors has nothing to
:05:01. > :05:04.do with us. Wide array of use from the streets of Leeds. What does the
:05:05. > :05:10.panel think? We are asking whether journalistic stings are cool. It is
:05:11. > :05:14.good to establish the rules journalists have got to adhere to
:05:15. > :05:18.when carrying out this investigation, Chris. Entrapment is
:05:19. > :05:22.against the law. We cannot coerce somebody to commit an act they would
:05:23. > :05:25.not otherwise have committed. There are no actual rules just guidelines.
:05:26. > :05:29.This is I to professional journalists say if you are going on
:05:30. > :05:34.an underground sting like this there should be some information. You
:05:35. > :05:38.cannot go on a fishing information. If you have got word of a drug
:05:39. > :05:43.smuggling ring, paedophile ring, something against the law, that is
:05:44. > :05:47.5-star journalism. It is interesting that the Football Association have
:05:48. > :05:51.never charged a high profile manager for homophobic and racist text
:05:52. > :05:56.messages that he said, because they said he had a reasonable right to
:05:57. > :06:00.privacy. There was a very high ranking football administrator who
:06:01. > :06:04.sent a sexist email. He was not charged because they said he had a
:06:05. > :06:09.reasonable right to privacy. Sam Allardyce had no idea he was being
:06:10. > :06:14.filmed. That is the whole point, isn't it? Yes, he was careless, but
:06:15. > :06:17.he wasn't breaking any laws and secondly, didn't he have a
:06:18. > :06:21.reasonable right to privacy? Throwing the question out there.
:06:22. > :06:28.Lord Digby Jones, should he have lost his job? Probably thought they
:06:29. > :06:33.did the! Do I want my national football team run by a bloke that
:06:34. > :06:38.stupid? -- probably through stupidity! I understand he did
:06:39. > :06:42.actually say about the money side of it subject to FAA approval. He said
:06:43. > :06:48.he wouldn't agree to it without the consent of the FA and no deal was
:06:49. > :06:54.struck. But the fact that he is in the role that he is in, a role
:06:55. > :06:57.model, a leader, all those words, to start mouthing off about the Duke of
:06:58. > :07:04.Cambridge and his predecessor in the job, that sort of thing clearly
:07:05. > :07:12.isn't in any way illegal or anything else, but it is stupid. Is that
:07:13. > :07:16.reason enough to lose your job? For that? I wouldn't. What annoys me
:07:17. > :07:22.about it all is who is going to pay for all of this again? The poor fans
:07:23. > :07:28.industry, and the people on the vox pop there, they are paying through
:07:29. > :07:33.the nose at the grounds, paying the Sky as BT subscriptions, being
:07:34. > :07:38.priced out of the game and all of this money will be to pay this man
:07:39. > :07:42.?1 million to sit on a deck chair because he has been stupid. But does
:07:43. > :07:47.all of that mean he deserved to be done? You are absolutely right. If
:07:48. > :07:51.there was due reason to think that he had been at it in some way, yes.
:07:52. > :07:58.If there wasn't reason to think he had been at it, then no. Edwina, Sam
:07:59. > :08:04.Allardyce has said he was the victim of entrapment. Yes, but two wrongs
:08:05. > :08:10.don't make a right. His behaviour, what he was being encouraged to talk
:08:11. > :08:13.about, and which he willingly talked about, was wrong in footballing
:08:14. > :08:17.terms, I understand, and the fans would not have been happy about it
:08:18. > :08:21.and it would have been against FA rules. If you are a senior guy in
:08:22. > :08:24.the FA, you have got to behave yourself. Entrapment is not a
:08:25. > :08:29.comfortable thing to be involved in by any means, but they don't cancel
:08:30. > :08:33.each other out. He was wrong to say what he said. It goes with the
:08:34. > :08:38.territory. If you are a public figure of any kind. It is not a
:08:39. > :08:42.question of being illegal or not. It is a question of the rules of the
:08:43. > :08:45.organisation you are in or the public perception of the
:08:46. > :08:53.organisation you are in. That is why Keith Vaz finds himself accused not
:08:54. > :08:57.breaking the law but of hypocrisy. Because he is in public life? Not
:08:58. > :09:03.just that but because he has been the chairman of the Home Affairs
:09:04. > :09:06.Select Committee, and that means you take a view on all sorts of these
:09:07. > :09:12.issues and he has been very upfront in taking a view. If that is the
:09:13. > :09:14.view you take, and then you are clearly caught doing something
:09:15. > :09:20.completely different, it questions your integrity. OK, so when it comes
:09:21. > :09:23.to Sam Allardyce and Keith Vaz, we are talking about their roles and
:09:24. > :09:28.what they have spoken about in relation to their jobs. Max Mosley,
:09:29. > :09:31.you won a privacy case against the News of the World when it exposed
:09:32. > :09:37.intimate details of your private life. What is your take on this? I
:09:38. > :09:43.think first of all it is a nonstory because the ?400,000, he quite
:09:44. > :09:47.clearly said he had to check that with his employer, and the other
:09:48. > :09:51.thing he is accused of, is saying how to get around the rules but it
:09:52. > :09:55.depends on context. If you think rules are stupid, and apparently he
:09:56. > :09:58.thinks the third party ownership rule is stupid, you are perfectly
:09:59. > :10:03.entitled to say it is stupid and this is how you can get round it. It
:10:04. > :10:08.was a nonstory first of all, and secondly what the journalists did,
:10:09. > :10:13.was effectively make fraudulent misrepresentations to him. They
:10:14. > :10:22.pretended to be something they were not. He could actually sue them for
:10:23. > :10:27.fraudulent misrepresentation. I think it is quite wrong to your
:10:28. > :10:32.somebody into saying something when it was clearly a fishing expedition.
:10:33. > :10:38.They did not extract from him any information which would justify a
:10:39. > :10:42.story of that kind. Chris, what are the rules for the journalists? You
:10:43. > :10:46.have explained the rules journalists have got to adhere to. The editor,
:10:47. > :10:51.what would he or she have been saying to the journalists, if Max is
:10:52. > :10:55.saying this is a fishing expedition and entrapment? The journalists were
:10:56. > :10:59.never named, interestingly. It was by the investigations team in the
:11:00. > :11:03.Daily Telegraph, which is unusual. The editor would not have given any
:11:04. > :11:07.guidelines. This is the story we have got, they would have said. I
:11:08. > :11:12.respect what you have said but where is the line in the sand where we can
:11:13. > :11:19.reasonably expect to let our guard down and talk to people? The answer
:11:20. > :11:25.is there isn't one! There is a distinction. Max is here to
:11:26. > :11:29.demonstrate it. What you do in your private life, if it has no bearing
:11:30. > :11:34.whatever on whatever your job is, that is your private life and you
:11:35. > :11:40.can prove that and that is upheld in court. With due respect to you for
:11:41. > :11:46.doing it like that. But if what you are caught doing, whether it is by
:11:47. > :11:48.sting or entrapment or whatever, if what you are caught doing directly
:11:49. > :11:55.contradicts what you say in your public life, then you are in
:11:56. > :12:01.trouble. Sam wasn't contradicting anything he does in his public life.
:12:02. > :12:11.And in contrast, the boss of Lloyds bank, if you weeks ago, he had been
:12:12. > :12:14.in Singapore, maybe Hong Kong, with somebody who wasn't his wife. That's
:12:15. > :12:18.his business, exactly. We can all have a view on whether that is right
:12:19. > :12:25.or wrong but Lloyds bank stuck with him. That doesn't go with being CEO
:12:26. > :12:28.of a major multinational bank and everybody can have an opinion but
:12:29. > :12:35.they stuck with him. But should the FA have made your point? These guys
:12:36. > :12:42.entrapped this man, we are standing by him. That is an interesting
:12:43. > :12:47.point. Lloyds bank stuck with their man and the FA didn't, regardless of
:12:48. > :12:51.how it came to public knowledge. A different pattern of behaviour. They
:12:52. > :12:58.are not equivalent. Different patterns of behaviour entirely. What
:12:59. > :13:01.is the difference? What Sam Allardyce was talking about, it's
:13:02. > :13:07.totally appertains to the job he was doing. If you are the head of the
:13:08. > :13:14.FA, you are supposed to uphold its rules. I see that. I completely
:13:15. > :13:18.disagree. The FA should have stuck by him. One of the fundamental rules
:13:19. > :13:21.if you are running a big sports association is to stick by your
:13:22. > :13:25.officials unless they do something wrong. If they do something wrong,
:13:26. > :13:29.you fire them immediately, and if they don't, you stand up for them
:13:30. > :13:33.and the FA should have stood up for him and encouraged him to sue the
:13:34. > :13:45.Telegraph ought to seek because he could sue for it.
:13:46. > :13:51.-- for deceit. You have been the victim of a sting so what goes
:13:52. > :13:55.through your mind? We are different. What went through my mind was that I
:13:56. > :13:58.would sue them because they have done something that they have no
:13:59. > :14:02.right to do and they have told lies and I would sue them. Its reaction
:14:03. > :14:07.is to go to Spain, which is sensible, but in this situation,
:14:08. > :14:14.attack immediately. That is the way I approach it. If you are in public
:14:15. > :14:22.life, like Keith Vaz, a minister, an MP, the head of the bank, the head
:14:23. > :14:27.of the sports association, your automatic thought is to behave, be
:14:28. > :14:31.whiter than white. You are under obligation to behave as well as
:14:32. > :14:38.possible. I was never a Cabinet minister. I apologise. Margaret
:14:39. > :14:41.Thatcher never had any female Cabinet ministers but I have given
:14:42. > :14:44.up correcting that because it is trivial and a long time ago. But you
:14:45. > :14:49.have got to behave as well as possible and that goes with the
:14:50. > :14:53.territory. The number of time I have said to aspiring parliamentary
:14:54. > :14:57.candidates, are you serious about being an MP? Get rid of that
:14:58. > :15:02.Facebook page, take down the photographs of you falling over
:15:03. > :15:07.drunk. Behave better. Why? Because the public expects it of you. Have
:15:08. > :15:13.you never let your guard down? Frequently! I have had after-dinner
:15:14. > :15:16.drinks with Sam Allardyce and football writers, and believe it or
:15:17. > :15:26.not football writers respect privacy. Dan has told us a lot more,
:15:27. > :15:30.worse if you like. -- Sam. But he realised he was talking to friends
:15:31. > :15:32.and he knew that. Surely at a dinner party you can't just say, nice
:15:33. > :15:44.weather we are having lately. You don't know who is wired or
:15:45. > :15:49.taping it. When I arrived at the CBI I was told on day one, never think
:15:50. > :15:53.anything is off the record. Even if the person says to you, this is off
:15:54. > :15:58.the record, it will not be. To be fair, over the last 16 or 17 years
:15:59. > :16:02.of being in public life, I have found that a lot of journalists
:16:03. > :16:05.respect off the record, actually. But the problem is that you don't
:16:06. > :16:17.know who else is listening. It is not the person you are talking to,
:16:18. > :16:20.it is somebody else. Especially in public places. My wife always says
:16:21. > :16:22.it is not the person you are talking to, what about the other table over
:16:23. > :16:26.there? To be fair to journalists, lots of them respect off the record.
:16:27. > :16:32.I had a lot of off the record conversations when I was doing
:16:33. > :16:36.motorsport at the top level. Without it, good journalists would lose an
:16:37. > :16:41.awful lot of information. They rely on off the record conversations. You
:16:42. > :16:44.knew the journalists you could and could not trust, those of the record
:16:45. > :16:49.conversations were very important both to get your point across and
:16:50. > :16:53.for them to understand. The particular problem for Allardyce
:16:54. > :16:57.has been that there has been such concern and sport about cheating and
:16:58. > :17:02.corruption, rules are established, often quite new, about the rules
:17:03. > :17:06.about transfer, for example, to try to keep the whole sport clean and to
:17:07. > :17:12.respect the wishes of the people watching and paying for it.
:17:13. > :17:18.I wonder if that is reflected in the FA's decision to not stand by him?
:17:19. > :17:23.As I understand it, one newspaper said he will get ?1 million out of
:17:24. > :17:26.this, in terms of his payoff. There will be rules according to Lott. I
:17:27. > :17:31.guess he would have been given half an hour to talk to his lawyer first,
:17:32. > :17:36.and the lawyer would have said, if you are going, there will be a deal,
:17:37. > :17:40.you will not say anything, the FA will not say horrible things about
:17:41. > :17:45.you and there is excellent at those pounds changing hands. Open and
:17:46. > :17:51.legitimate in terms of the settlement. But that is one reason
:17:52. > :17:55.he has gone to Spain. -- the FA will not say arable things and that will
:17:56. > :18:01.be a certain amount of hundreds of thousands of pounds changing hands.
:18:02. > :18:06.Let's find out what the audience has been saying. I think this will star
:18:07. > :18:10.of opinions. Tommy? Not much sympathy for Big
:18:11. > :18:11.Sam, people are saying that things are necessary but not necessarily
:18:12. > :18:59.moral. Not much sympathy there, Chris?
:19:00. > :19:05.There is not. I think the downfall of Sam is that he was perceived to
:19:06. > :19:10.be greedy by negotiating a ?400,000 fee to go to Singapore and Hong Kong
:19:11. > :19:15.to speak. I have to reiterate, that deal was never struck. He was
:19:16. > :19:20.talking about a contract that never existed with two people who, in
:19:21. > :19:25.effect, did not exist. He said I will not do anything until I run it
:19:26. > :19:31.past the FA. Everybody in life tries to maximise their earnings. Other
:19:32. > :19:33.football managers and footballers have contracts here, there and
:19:34. > :19:38.everywhere. We seem to want the England manager to be a cross
:19:39. > :19:42.between the Pope and Mother Teresa, it is unreasonable. It is not
:19:43. > :19:47.unreasonable. He was being paid 3 million quid a year to behave
:19:48. > :19:53.himself. And be a responsible person. He did not misbehave, he had
:19:54. > :19:57.a private conversation with people he thought were in a private circle.
:19:58. > :20:03.I have said things in private that I would hate to see in public. Nothing
:20:04. > :20:08.wrong with them but they would be harassing. Is it not the duty,
:20:09. > :20:13.because we are coming to the end of this discussion, of newspapers and
:20:14. > :20:19.journalists to hold people to account in public life? 100%, yes,
:20:20. > :20:23.but they should not use fraudulent means, lies, deception and secret
:20:24. > :20:28.cameras when people do not know they are being filmed and think they are
:20:29. > :20:33.in a private situation. They should not do that, when they do, they
:20:34. > :20:36.should be held to account in court. But the end justifies the means if
:20:37. > :20:40.there is something that is criminal or something major.
:20:41. > :20:45.Bear in mind all the others who have been attacked by the same Sting, who
:20:46. > :20:49.said, no way, we will not do this. Every time is a story about members
:20:50. > :20:53.of Parliament or former ministers getting caught accepting money for
:20:54. > :20:57.whatever, the ones that don't get published for all the others that
:20:58. > :21:04.the newspaper approach you said, absolutely no way. If they had asked
:21:05. > :21:07.if he would take a bribe to do all sorts of different things, they did
:21:08. > :21:11.not asking that. That is the question they should have asked and
:21:12. > :21:15.I am sure the answer would have been no. Chris, this is the way of the
:21:16. > :21:20.world and newspapers will continue doing this? Yes, and they will bring
:21:21. > :21:23.down people like Lord treason, the chairman of the football
:21:24. > :21:29.Association, who was basically a Parliamentary blogger -- with a
:21:30. > :21:35.Parliamentary blogger talking about referees being bribed, she sold it
:21:36. > :21:40.to a newspaper. It was just a man's chat in private, so he thought.
:21:41. > :21:44.Every time I meet somebody I will check them for a while. I think we
:21:45. > :21:49.should let journalists pick the England manager next time excavation
:21:50. > :21:50.that is another discussion. Thank you for your comments, please keep
:21:51. > :21:53.them coming in. Still to come on
:21:54. > :21:55.Sunday Morning Live. Harris J, who's been called
:21:56. > :21:57.the Muslim Justin Bieber, Still to come on Sunday Morning
:21:58. > :22:00.Live: Harris J, who's been called the Muslim Justin Bieber,
:22:01. > :22:04.is here to show us why his American doctors have helped create
:22:05. > :22:06.the world's first baby through a controversial three parent
:22:07. > :22:08.method, using a new technique to prevent the mother passing
:22:09. > :22:13.on a hereditary disease. Meanwhile, the Nuffield Council
:22:14. > :22:16.on Bioethics this week warned about the possible impact on society
:22:17. > :22:19.of the spread of gene editing, and said this research needs
:22:20. > :22:33.urgent ethical scrutiny. The baby that is being brought to
:22:34. > :22:37.world attention is now five months old. His faces blurred because his
:22:38. > :22:42.parents, from Jordan, wants to remain anonymous. He was born using
:22:43. > :22:46.a procedure overseen by American doctors in Mexico, because there are
:22:47. > :22:51.no roars there to prevent it. The nucleus of the mother's egg was
:22:52. > :22:54.removed, leaving behind faulty DNA and structures known as
:22:55. > :23:00.mitochondria. It was put into a second woman's egg, containing only
:23:01. > :23:11.healthy mitochondria, which was fertilised. The embryo had the key
:23:12. > :23:13.genes and a minute amount of DNA from the donor.
:23:14. > :23:16.Student Rachel from Manchester knows all too well the anguish that
:23:17. > :23:19.hereditary disease can cause. My family discovered we had a
:23:20. > :23:24.history of mitochondrial disease when my aunt passed away. We never
:23:25. > :23:29.knew why, but you had multiple miscarriages and stillbirths. It was
:23:30. > :23:33.absolutely devastating. It led to my mother than having to be tested, she
:23:34. > :23:36.was found to be a carrier. Although Rachel does not know her
:23:37. > :23:42.personal future, she recognises the breakthrough.
:23:43. > :23:48.For me, I would be happy to foster, I would be happy to adopt. But it is
:23:49. > :23:54.also about having bad choice, having that option, about living without
:23:55. > :23:58.the fear of passing on such a cruel disease -- it is about having that
:23:59. > :24:03.choice. Three-person IVF is legal in the UK
:24:04. > :24:06.but is not being done yet. A team in Newcastle is close to applying for a
:24:07. > :24:12.licence using a slightly different technique to that one in Mexico. It
:24:13. > :24:18.is not creating designer babies, it is not a slippery slope, it is not
:24:19. > :24:23.about a Frankenstein fear. What this is is about eliminating disease. For
:24:24. > :24:29.me, it is far less ethical to have a potential treatment to cure a
:24:30. > :24:31.disease, to mitigate suffering and to not use it than any of the
:24:32. > :24:33.concerns that have been voiced. So is this new scientific
:24:34. > :24:35.breakthrough the key Or is it an interference
:24:36. > :24:39.with nature that will give us Is biomedical science
:24:40. > :24:42.going too far? We are joined now by
:24:43. > :24:45.Sarah Norcross, head of the Progress Education Trust,
:24:46. > :24:47.and Dr Helen Watt, senior researcher Frankie very much. -- thank you very
:24:48. > :25:00.much. Also joining us from our Nottingham
:25:01. > :25:10.studio is Dr Jagbir Jhutti-Johal, Welcome. First, Sarah, how should we
:25:11. > :25:16.respond to the report that a three parent baby has been born? This baby
:25:17. > :25:21.has been born in Mexico, we were sort of expecting the first baby to
:25:22. > :25:27.be born in the UK because we have actively legislated to permit this
:25:28. > :25:30.to happen here. In Mexico there is no legislation or regulation around
:25:31. > :25:35.this. The doctor who has done this has only published an abstract about
:25:36. > :25:39.his work, so the details about how it has gone about are sketchy at the
:25:40. > :25:44.moment. Hopefully all is as it seems and this is a really good news
:25:45. > :25:51.story. You are very positive about this. Helen, what causes for concern
:25:52. > :25:56.about in terms of ethical biomedical advancements? Several, really. We
:25:57. > :26:01.have to look at how this baby was achieved. Obviously, any birth is
:26:02. > :26:05.wonderful, but this baby had four MBO siblings, one of whom died
:26:06. > :26:11.early, three of whom got deselected, so we are talking about quality
:26:12. > :26:17.control. At what stage? At a very early stage... When you say
:26:18. > :26:22.something like that, are we talking about foetuses... We are talking
:26:23. > :26:27.about embryos, but we all began as embryos. We have to be honest about
:26:28. > :26:33.what is involved. And not airbrush the woman who provided an egg to
:26:34. > :26:36.create this baby. She is very much a second biological mother. We already
:26:37. > :26:41.know with surrogacy you can have more than one biological mother,
:26:42. > :26:44.even though it is argued they have no genetic connection, this woman
:26:45. > :26:50.has some genetic connection and is providing all of the egg apart from
:26:51. > :26:57.the nuclear DNA. We need to know about her, what she paid to do this,
:26:58. > :27:01.why did she do this? Is it right to produce new human beings with more
:27:02. > :27:06.than one biological mother? We heard from Rachel in the film a little
:27:07. > :27:09.earlier. She spoke about her condition and say she does not want
:27:10. > :27:13.to mess with science, she does not want to have super humans, she just
:27:14. > :27:18.wants to be able to have a child that is free of a hereditary
:27:19. > :27:23.condition. That is a very natural thing to want. But I would like more
:27:24. > :27:27.focus on existing human beings who have these conditions. There is some
:27:28. > :27:32.very interesting ways being developed for treating this very
:27:33. > :27:36.condition. The couple were worried about this condition. We should
:27:37. > :27:40.focus on patients who need treatment, rather than manufacturing
:27:41. > :27:44.babies by this very novel way. It is not a normal way of conception.
:27:45. > :27:49.Edwina, you were a minister of health, we got that bit right,
:27:50. > :27:53.didn't we? You are aware about how the public reacts and is concerned
:27:54. > :27:58.with technological and biological advancements. What is your view? We
:27:59. > :28:02.talked about it in great detail in the 1980s, I am sure Digby will
:28:03. > :28:08.remember, when this science became possibility. We debated this in the
:28:09. > :28:12.House of Commons on a free vote, many others spoke to constituents to
:28:13. > :28:16.find out what they felt. The feeling I conveyed back to the House of
:28:17. > :28:21.Commons was that, actually, if the science is available, we should do
:28:22. > :28:24.it in the United Kingdom, under UK law, we should make it possible in
:28:25. > :28:29.the National Health Service so people can have it without having to
:28:30. > :28:33.pay for it, and we should monitor it very carefully, setting up clear
:28:34. > :28:40.ethical rules. That is the way we have done it in the UK for over 30
:28:41. > :28:43.years, I think, to great acclaim. It enabled us to have the sort of
:28:44. > :28:48.scientists in Britain who are able to do this very well, and with very
:28:49. > :28:55.broad public support. Three cheers for the Brits,
:28:56. > :28:59.actually. If you do transparently, you can regulate it. Unlike the
:29:00. > :29:05.Mexican... Sketchy was the word you use. It is open and transparent
:29:06. > :29:09.here, and regulated. There is a feeling of, yes, let's go to the
:29:10. > :29:14.frontiers of science and let the Brits do that but, at the same time,
:29:15. > :29:18.it is done with a hawk eye from legislation. The point is that there
:29:19. > :29:23.is a massive difference, this is where regulation comes in, a huge
:29:24. > :29:27.difference... I don't agree with you, if someone says I have a
:29:28. > :29:30.genetic flaw in the bloodline, I want children but why am I bringing
:29:31. > :29:37.them into the world if I know this will be a problem? That is different
:29:38. > :29:42.to I would like Juan that is blonde, blue-eyed, to win the World Cup and
:29:43. > :29:48.be a star of University Challenge, can I have that DNA? There is a
:29:49. > :29:51.massive difference. There was a difference, but quality control is
:29:52. > :29:55.quality control. We see this deselection of embryos treated very
:29:56. > :30:00.much more like products not human lives. That is a concern. What we
:30:01. > :30:04.are likely to do in this country is a worse kind of mitochondrial
:30:05. > :30:08.replacement where you combine two embryos, killing them in the
:30:09. > :30:13.process, to create a third. I don't think the UK should be complacent.
:30:14. > :30:23.We have a regulator, but it is very permissive. Let's bring in Dr Jagbir
:30:24. > :30:25.Jhutti-Johal from the University of Birmingham, you have listened very
:30:26. > :30:26.patiently. You have considered the ethical issues around biomedical
:30:27. > :30:36.advancements? It is a complex topic, firstly, and
:30:37. > :30:41.when we think about it from a religious perspective, the dynamics
:30:42. > :30:47.get even more conjugated. Looking at it from a Sikh perspective, there is
:30:48. > :30:50.no consensus yet on whether this is acceptable or not. But we would take
:30:51. > :30:58.our understanding and interpret the teachings from our holy book and
:30:59. > :31:03.guru. It is interesting that two viewpoints will come out in the
:31:04. > :31:12.discussion. One is the acceptability of such advancements. Have they
:31:13. > :31:14.occurred as a result of God's will? And these advancements and
:31:15. > :31:20.treatments alleviate pain and suffering. But then we also have
:31:21. > :31:27.another side to the question. If these advancements are being used
:31:28. > :31:37.for inappropriate use, as was mentioned earlier, DNA for cosmetic
:31:38. > :31:44.babies, this type of child. So viewpoints vary. We do have a view
:31:45. > :31:51.that the embryo is a living being. As soon as conception takes place, a
:31:52. > :32:01.living being is formed. So for us the destruction of the embryos is an
:32:02. > :32:04.issue. That is a concern. We also understand that this sometimes has
:32:05. > :32:10.got to be done to alleviate further pain and suffering. How much should
:32:11. > :32:16.medical advancements take into consideration the religious opinions
:32:17. > :32:22.and religious thought? Well, scientists and researchers and
:32:23. > :32:28.doctors don't work in a vacuum free from religion or their own moral
:32:29. > :32:30.principles. They're probably have different views themselves about
:32:31. > :32:36.what works they should do and where they should go with this. I want to
:32:37. > :32:42.respond to something that Helen said really. These embryos are not being
:32:43. > :32:46.treated as products. Parents are going there wanting to have a
:32:47. > :32:52.healthy baby. They are not looking for a perfect baby. They just want a
:32:53. > :32:56.happy, normal family. What we consider to be normal. And they are
:32:57. > :33:02.making very difficult decisions about what they do. Maybe they don't
:33:03. > :33:05.have any embryos that are free from disease and that is a problem for
:33:06. > :33:11.them. There is no compulsion in this. There have been countries and
:33:12. > :33:14.environments in the past, in the 1930s, where there was compulsion
:33:15. > :33:20.where people that were regarded as defective were done away with and we
:33:21. > :33:23.are million miles away from that. People are coming into this
:33:24. > :33:27.environment, making choices, taking into account the religious and
:33:28. > :33:30.ethical issues concerned, and they are well aware of the problem is
:33:31. > :33:34.that the doctor here has mentioned, that it involves some kind of
:33:35. > :33:38.destruction. Sometimes they make different choices. One of the ways
:33:39. > :33:45.to avoid having these repeated genetic problems, don't marry your
:33:46. > :33:51.cousin. This can happen in many communities. Yes, but that is an
:33:52. > :33:57.extreme. I work with cancer charities and the genetic line on
:33:58. > :34:02.certain cancers is there. A lot of pain and suffering goes on in this
:34:03. > :34:08.world because of the genetic defect that causes a mutated cancer. But
:34:09. > :34:14.you are so right in saying it is not compulsory. Nobody is saying you
:34:15. > :34:18.will. What I do want however in a globalised economy, a globalised
:34:19. > :34:20.medical world, I don't want to be in a position where people in this
:34:21. > :34:25.country say they are going to do this anyway and they are going to
:34:26. > :34:30.Mexico. I would rather it was I am going to do this anyway and I am
:34:31. > :34:32.going to Britain. That is the point. Whatever the regulation, there will
:34:33. > :34:55.always be people who don't meet the requirement and could go
:34:56. > :34:58.elsewhere. We have got to set a standard here. Of course but I would
:34:59. > :35:00.rather have a standard set in a legal, open, transparent way, rather
:35:01. > :35:03.than forcing people to go to other jurisdictions to do it, which it
:35:04. > :35:05.would be. What our viewers saying because this has generated a lot of
:35:06. > :35:34.opinion? There is concern about the slippery slope.
:35:35. > :35:44.They want to see that monitoring is done. OK. Your reaction to the
:35:45. > :35:49.comments? I totally agree with those comments. If we were to use the Sikh
:35:50. > :35:53.teachings of God's will, we could say these medical developments that
:35:54. > :36:00.have occurred have occurred as a result of God's will, wanting to
:36:01. > :36:04.alleviate pain and suffering within society, so it is within God's
:36:05. > :36:13.divine plan. Sarah, you were nodding to the reactions then. People
:36:14. > :36:19.sympathetic to science helping wannabe parents. Absolutely. I
:36:20. > :36:24.recognised one of the names of the people who have tweeted in, who has
:36:25. > :36:27.lost members of the family to mitochondrial disease. It will not
:36:28. > :36:31.bring them back but it will help other families avoid the loss and
:36:32. > :36:34.suffering and surely that must be what people want. Edwina referred to
:36:35. > :36:39.the 80s. Do you remember when you were health minister? I think you
:36:40. > :36:43.did this rightly, but do you remember Dolly the sheep and all of
:36:44. > :36:47.that? I remember reading articles that within ten years we would be
:36:48. > :36:53.breeding a super-team of footballers or something. We have got to get
:36:54. > :36:58.this into context. What the government and all parties have done
:36:59. > :37:05.over many years in this country is to do it incrementally. You have got
:37:06. > :37:07.to do it with public support. The tweets and responses their show
:37:08. > :37:14.quite strong public support for doing something good with science.
:37:15. > :37:17.Final word, Helen? Nobody is opposed to the ethical use of technology but
:37:18. > :37:22.it has got to respect human life and parenthood. We are fragmenting
:37:23. > :37:28.motherhood this way, before the baby is even born. We have got to be
:37:29. > :37:32.honest about what we are doing. Just because something is chosen by
:37:33. > :37:40.parents, we should be encouraging children to be accepted
:37:41. > :37:44.unconditionally. That is very easy to say. When you know you are
:37:45. > :37:48.pregnant with a child that you know will be seriously disabled or will
:37:49. > :37:52.have a life-threatening, painful, life limiting illness, I can't make
:37:53. > :37:57.that choice for that family. When they know that the next one has got
:37:58. > :38:01.exactly the same chance of that happening, I can't make that choice.
:38:02. > :38:08.And actually it is very hard. I wouldn't force anybody to have a
:38:09. > :38:12.disabled child. What about a disabled human being who already
:38:13. > :38:17.exists? And not producing new human beings who we are already planning
:38:18. > :38:25.to quality control? I have to end it there. So sorry. Thank you for your
:38:26. > :38:28.comments as well. Thank you to the doctor for joining us. Time to
:38:29. > :38:32.change gear and take a trip to the theatre.
:38:33. > :38:35.Michelle Collins is a well-known face on British television,
:38:36. > :38:41.having graced the cobbles of Albert Square in EastEnders
:38:42. > :38:44.as Cindy Beale, and pulled pints behind the bar of the Rovers' Return
:38:45. > :38:45.in Coronation Street as Stella Price.
:38:46. > :38:48.But her latest venture is on the stage at the Chickenshed
:38:49. > :38:50.Theatre in London in the play Kindertransport, which is based
:38:51. > :38:53.on the mission to bring Jewish refugee children to Britain
:38:54. > :38:57.Nikki Bedi went to talk to Michelle about that and her earlier career.
:38:58. > :39:02.I said where are my children? I've just been to the house and there is
:39:03. > :39:09.nobody there. Where are they? They are safe. They are with Cathy. It is
:39:10. > :39:15.an atlas I was given at 21, one of the few things that was saved in the
:39:16. > :39:25.fire. Thanks, it is lovely. Right, come on. A lot to get through. So
:39:26. > :39:30.not one but two of the UK's biggest soap operas. First of all
:39:31. > :39:35.EastEnders, than Coronation Street. Might we go for a hat-trick? Could
:39:36. > :39:41.there be a third? I don't think so. I think two is quite enough. It is
:39:42. > :39:45.great being in a soap, it is fantastic, but I suppose for me it
:39:46. > :39:49.is not the be all and end all. I like to be versatile. I don't want
:39:50. > :39:54.to get trapped into one corner really. If we go back in time a
:39:55. > :40:02.little bit too when you are trying to get into drama schools, that was
:40:03. > :40:04.a struggle, wasn't it? Yes. I did a two the drama course after school
:40:05. > :40:11.with the aim of auditioning to drama school. And I've tried for 11 or 12.
:40:12. > :40:19.It isn't cheap to apply and I got turned down by every single one.
:40:20. > :40:23.What got you through that? I had a real hunger. Having come from a
:40:24. > :40:28.privileged sort of background, none of my family in the industry, I just
:40:29. > :40:31.knew I really wanted to do it and I say to young people today, you have
:40:32. > :40:39.got to have that feeling inside, that hunger. I was quite a shy
:40:40. > :40:44.person and I think acting is cathartic for me, which I think it
:40:45. > :40:48.is for a lot of people. I know there was a period when you were touring
:40:49. > :40:53.with some incredible people in a band and then that fell apart. From
:40:54. > :40:59.what I understand, you then hit a crisis point. You had no control
:41:00. > :41:03.over your life so you were controlling your eating and you had
:41:04. > :41:08.disordered eating. Yes, I have talked about that and I think it is
:41:09. > :41:12.important to talk about that. I felt a feeling of rejection and a bit of
:41:13. > :41:17.failure. We blame ourselves, don't we? Yes, I stopped eating really. It
:41:18. > :41:21.was the only way I could control myself. I went to a job interview
:41:22. > :41:25.and the casting director rang up my agent and asked if there was
:41:26. > :41:31.something wrong with me. That gave me a real kick up the... Whatever! I
:41:32. > :41:37.decided to get it under control. For me it was keeping fit, going to the
:41:38. > :41:40.gym, so taking control but in a much healthier way. Do you feel like
:41:41. > :41:45.somebody is watching over you and taking care of you? I do. I don't
:41:46. > :41:49.particularly like to talk about religion. I went to Sunday school as
:41:50. > :41:53.a child. My next-door neighbours were lovely and took us to church
:41:54. > :41:57.and my mother had a lying on a Sunday morning. She won't mind me
:41:58. > :42:03.saying that! We went to the Baptist church over the road and we went
:42:04. > :42:07.camping with the church and I met some lovely friends. But I didn't
:42:08. > :42:13.carry on going to judge. I am not a believer but I do believe... I
:42:14. > :42:19.suppose I believe somebody is up there and looking over you. You can
:42:20. > :42:23.have them framed and stuck on the wall for all I care. It is Ian I
:42:24. > :42:28.believe, not you. I want to know what he has been going around
:42:29. > :42:31.saying. Playing Cindy Beale really changed your life. It was an
:42:32. > :42:37.absolutely massive show in those days. Overnight, you are getting fan
:42:38. > :42:42.mail. It is bizarre. You are in people's living rooms, 18 million,
:42:43. > :42:47.20 million people are watching you on TV. The public took hold of Cindy
:42:48. > :42:52.Beale and just loved her. To me she was a very complex character. They
:42:53. > :42:55.said she was a man eater, this and that, but people still loved her
:42:56. > :43:01.character and I don't know why. People love a bad girl. I hate to
:43:02. > :43:06.think what she will do to you. Stephen isn't your son. I can't lie
:43:07. > :43:16.to you any more. You are not Stephen's father. Ian! We are
:43:17. > :43:20.sitting on the stage and a very warm lights at the Chicken shed Theatre
:43:21. > :43:25.because you are starring in a production of goods transport. A lot
:43:26. > :43:30.of people will be familiar with that movement of Jewish children to the
:43:31. > :43:34.UK all those years ago. Tell us about the play and why you wanted to
:43:35. > :43:38.be in it so much. It is set in the past and the present and there are a
:43:39. > :43:42.lot of parallels. I play a woman called Evelyn now in her 50s who
:43:43. > :43:47.came over to England from Hamburg at the age of nine, just before the
:43:48. > :43:53.war. Her parents had packed her off. It is fictitious but it is based
:43:54. > :43:57.loosely on events and people Diane Samuels met. Essentially it is about
:43:58. > :44:02.the holocaust and what happened when the children were sent over and how
:44:03. > :44:07.horrific it was. It is really about separation and mother - daughter
:44:08. > :44:12.relationships. What about being German? Germany spat me out and
:44:13. > :44:14.England took the inn. I love this place, the language, the
:44:15. > :44:21.countryside, the buildings, the sense of humour. Even the food. This
:44:22. > :44:26.is an important player in the times we are living in. People need to
:44:27. > :44:30.know what went on. They need to know the consequences of what happens to
:44:31. > :44:39.people and the trauma it can cause, and separation from your parents.
:44:40. > :44:45.How tragic that can be. The UK took in how many Jewish children? 10,000?
:44:46. > :44:48.Something like that. There is a stark contrast between the way as a
:44:49. > :44:52.country we dealt with refugees back then. My grandfather was a refugee
:44:53. > :44:57.from Antwerp. I don't think we think enough about it and we are not doing
:44:58. > :45:01.enough about it. I don't know the solution, I really don't, but we
:45:02. > :45:02.can't just sit back and let it happen. Is your daughter going to
:45:03. > :45:24.come and see the play? I hope so. Do you get nervous? Dead nervous,
:45:25. > :45:26.all the time. I am nervous but sort of excited about it. May you go from
:45:27. > :45:28.strength to strength, Michelle Collins. Thank you. Nice to meet you
:45:29. > :45:31.after all this time. And you. Michelle Collins - we wish her luck
:45:32. > :45:33.with Kindertransport. Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish
:45:34. > :45:35.New Year begins today. Hopefully it will be better
:45:36. > :45:37.than the last 12 months in which recorded anti-Semitic
:45:38. > :45:40.incidents went up by 11% in the UK. Meanwhile, the Archbishop
:45:41. > :45:42.of Canterbury says Christians need to be deeply repentant
:45:43. > :45:43.about anti-Semitism In an essay for the Holocaust
:45:44. > :45:47.Educational Trust, Justin Welby calls on all faith groups to be
:45:48. > :45:50.honest in exposing what he calls We are joined now by Imam at
:45:51. > :45:58.Leeds Mosque and interfaith advisor Qari Asim and Deesha Chadha,
:45:59. > :46:01.who is a council member of Faiths Forum of London
:46:02. > :46:13.and the Hindu Forum of Britain. Edwina, I will start with you. Your
:46:14. > :46:19.reaction to Justin Welby's essay. I will have to correct you again. Ross
:46:20. > :46:22.Fisher and is tomorrow, it is the Muslim New Year today. -- Rosh
:46:23. > :46:28.Hashanah is tomorrow. Justin Welby's comments are terribly
:46:29. > :46:32.platitudinous. All this stuff about there are good Jews, yes, and how
:46:33. > :46:40.the Christian faith has been at fault, yes, then he talks about
:46:41. > :46:44.meeting the Chief Rabbi. I was left feeling, and...? There was an
:46:45. > :46:49.emptiness about it, which is a shame. Different religions over the
:46:50. > :46:53.years have had a bad history with Judaism. What would be wonderful
:46:54. > :46:58.would be a recognition, first of all, that Christ chose, if this is
:46:59. > :47:04.your belief, too, is a member of the Jewish community, he was born Jew
:47:05. > :47:10.and born and brought up in this community. He had a bar mitzvah, the
:47:11. > :47:17.whole setup. That is recognised by Islam. It is not recognised by
:47:18. > :47:21.Christianity. There were Christian groups that are recognised and
:47:22. > :47:25.valued Judaism and the old Testament because that was the background to
:47:26. > :47:29.the start of Christian at -- Christianity. But modern
:47:30. > :47:34.Christianity does not... I am very pleased he has done this, not only
:47:35. > :47:38.is anti-Semitism disgusting, even more disgusting is the denial that
:47:39. > :47:43.goes on by people that don't think they are. There has been
:47:44. > :47:48.anti-Judaism, firstly because of their religion in the Middle Ages,
:47:49. > :47:52.then because of their race all the way up to 1945, now it tends to
:47:53. > :48:01.centre around Israel. There has always been a cause to be
:48:02. > :48:05.anti-Jewish. If we acknowledge that anti-Semitism is really insidious in
:48:06. > :48:08.our free society, and it is that disgusting. Because after they
:48:09. > :48:13.finish with the Jews, they will come after you and me, believe me. It
:48:14. > :48:18.ain't stopping there. That really worries me. They will come after you
:48:19. > :48:22.guys. I am a lapsed Anglican Brummie, I don't have a dog in this
:48:23. > :48:27.fight in terms of you guys, but if we don't stamp on this and
:48:28. > :48:35.acknowledge the disgust that it is, they will be after you and me next.
:48:36. > :48:39.For that, I'd applaud him. You said this is happening already? The
:48:40. > :48:43.Archbishop was my comments are very courageous and timely, I think it is
:48:44. > :48:47.moving on, the deep-rooted prejudices about each other's
:48:48. > :48:53.faiths, political opportunism and racial tensions fuelled times by
:48:54. > :49:01.politicians and certain parts of the media. If you compound that,
:49:02. > :49:04.post-Brexit, what is happening with that, people are expressing their
:49:05. > :49:12.deep-rooted prejudices about each other openly, and I think the Brexit
:49:13. > :49:18.vote has legitimised some of those concerns about people from different
:49:19. > :49:22.communities. In terms of anti-Semitism, anti-Muslim hatred,
:49:23. > :49:28.religious hatred towards faith minorities, it needs to be
:49:29. > :49:32.challenged and debated openly. What is your view, Deesha Chadha? When
:49:33. > :49:37.Edwina said that, it opened the dialogue, but so what? With
:49:38. > :49:40.something like interface work it moves very slowly. You are
:49:41. > :49:44.negotiating between your faith, those of other peoples, their
:49:45. > :49:53.relationship with one another as well. That dialogue is a stepping
:49:54. > :49:58.stone, it is a very slow process, but what I really applaud him for is
:49:59. > :50:03.putting it out there, putting it on the table and saying that we have to
:50:04. > :50:08.go further and question ourselves in terms of our own profiles, what we
:50:09. > :50:12.believe, what are prejudices are, and try to work together to resolve
:50:13. > :50:18.it. Sorry, Digby. Edwina, it is a start?
:50:19. > :50:27.Getting the conversation going, as Digby said earlier? He has not been
:50:28. > :50:34.the first person to start this... Here's the Archbishop of Canterbury.
:50:35. > :50:41.He is the arch... Dare I say that? I am suspicious of people who write
:50:42. > :50:44.the right things but are not... Why is it slow process? After 9/11 we
:50:45. > :50:49.were living in Surrey, it happened on Tuesday, on the Friday we were
:50:50. > :50:55.invited to the mosque, and we went to. And by week, my husband was a
:50:56. > :51:02.counsellor, the mayor. We went. We stood shoulder to shoulder to say
:51:03. > :51:07.that maybe the people who did this terrible atrocity were Muslims, but
:51:08. > :51:13.we are all together. We weaken society as a whole if we allow or
:51:14. > :51:17.condone racism and prejudice. Anti-Semitism is a disease on us
:51:18. > :51:21.all. What I would love to see right now, using this as a springboard,
:51:22. > :51:28.your faith on the streets more saying, not in my name. I really
:51:29. > :51:32.would. I don't see much of it. That is the issue. I would really like
:51:33. > :51:36.Tabak composition of the record. Muslims are saying at all the way
:51:37. > :51:40.from the muftis of Egypt to other parts of the Muslim world, and in
:51:41. > :51:46.this country demands are saying it but it is not being heard, or
:51:47. > :51:51.perhaps it is not on our screens -- and in this country imans are saying
:51:52. > :51:56.it. You need to demonstrate with placards, that is how you get on
:51:57. > :52:04.telly. We are moving away from protest to engagement. The other one
:52:05. > :52:09.I want, and it is especially the Labour Party, there are some amazing
:52:10. > :52:13.histories of good quality Jews in the Labour Party over the decades.
:52:14. > :52:19.Why are they letting it happen? It is no good Corbyn saying, I deplore
:52:20. > :52:23.this, it is disgusting. I think he means it, that is not the point.
:52:24. > :52:27.They have had to suspend some Momentum woman a couple of days ago
:52:28. > :52:31.because of comments she made. You don't just have this stamp it out
:52:32. > :52:34.but you have to publicly go there, I learned a long time ago, don't
:52:35. > :52:40.listen to what people say, watch what they do. Deesha Chadha? Is
:52:41. > :52:46.loose the politicians are acknowledging that there is a
:52:47. > :52:50.problem. -- at least the politicians are. Labour has taken a soft
:52:51. > :52:54.approach, it is like, we have this report in writing, we are saying it
:52:55. > :53:02.is not acceptable and this is how people in the party should behave.
:53:03. > :53:04.They hate America so they go anti-American, anti-Israel,
:53:05. > :53:10.anti-Jewish. He has to get called in saying that America is fine, Israel
:53:11. > :53:15.is OK. They are confusing a latent prejudice about something secular...
:53:16. > :53:20.Digby, I want to move this conversation. Jeremy Corbyn said at
:53:21. > :53:23.the Labour Party conference, let me be absolutely clear, anti-Semitism
:53:24. > :53:26.is an evil. So he should do something.
:53:27. > :53:30.Tommy? Everyone agrees that everybody has the right to live
:53:31. > :53:32.without prejudice, some people say they don't want to accept the blame
:53:33. > :54:04.for previous generations. Thank you very much, Tommy. I
:54:05. > :54:09.Edwina, I saw it. Briefly... Steam out of the is. It is not a question
:54:10. > :54:13.of guilt, it is a question of responsibility. That includes
:54:14. > :54:18.identifying those saying anti-Semitic stuff and confronting
:54:19. > :54:22.it. You had to confront it. Communities need to come together to
:54:23. > :54:27.have a deeper understanding of each other's faiths, but also each other
:54:28. > :54:33.as communities. We need to have hawkish vision and responsibility,
:54:34. > :54:40.civic responsibility, as well as politicians and media owning up.
:54:41. > :54:43.Deesha Chadha? It is beyond anti-Semitism, and now affects other
:54:44. > :54:47.communities and religious organisations. The thing I want to
:54:48. > :54:54.say is that people feel affected, they need to report these incidents.
:54:55. > :54:59.That is incredibly important. Digby? I think programmes like this
:55:00. > :55:05.happen, and it is good. This is where it starts. It now needs to go
:55:06. > :55:09.out, to call it what it is. Take it to the awful people doing this,
:55:10. > :55:14.whatever their religion or party. I never thought he would have this
:55:15. > :55:19.wonderful country of ours, this tyrant place where people have come
:55:20. > :55:24.over centuries because we have these values, I never thought in 2016 we
:55:25. > :55:28.would need this conversation -- this wonderful country about this, this
:55:29. > :55:32.tyrant place. We have to be vigilant, if we let this out of the
:55:33. > :55:34.bottle again we will be back in 1939 before we know where we are. Thank
:55:35. > :55:38.you for your thoughts and comments. That's just about all
:55:39. > :55:41.from us for today, Tomorrow is the start
:55:42. > :55:43.of the Islamic New Year and to mark # Every time that
:55:44. > :56:11.I need you by my side # Every time I lose my way
:56:12. > :56:13.in life # You're my circle of life,
:56:14. > :56:15.compass and guide # And it's me you're depending on
:56:16. > :56:22.tables finally turn # I'll always be there,
:56:23. > :56:49.like you've been there # I swear, I swear
:56:50. > :57:00.me closer, I'll be right over # It don't matter where
:57:01. > :57:07.I am # I'll always care for you,
:57:08. > :57:12.go anywhere for you # I swear, ooh
:57:13. > :57:24.I'll be right over # And your feelings hit a wall
:57:25. > :57:30.when I just don't want to talk # The love you've raised
:57:31. > :57:35.inside this family # Everything that I do
:57:36. > :57:38.is to make you proud # I just want to say
:57:39. > :57:41.it, and say it loud # You're my heat when I'm
:57:42. > :57:43.cold # The place I call
:57:44. > :57:47.home, and always will be # I promise anytime you call me
:57:48. > :57:59.I'll be there for you, for you # I'll always be there,
:58:00. > :58:07.like you've been there # I swear, I swear
:58:08. > :58:19.I'll be right over # It don't matter where
:58:20. > :58:24.I am # I'll always care for you,
:58:25. > :58:31.go anywhere for you