:00:00. > :00:00.Welcome to Sunday Morning Live, I'm Naga Munchetty.
:00:07. > :00:09.On today's programme: For many, he was the most dangerous
:00:10. > :00:15.Anjem Choudary is now set for an extended stay behind bars.
:00:16. > :00:17.But does cracking down on extremists like him threaten
:00:18. > :00:24.And could he be more dangerous in prison than out?
:00:25. > :00:26.A new pregnancy screening test making it easier to detect
:00:27. > :00:30.Down's Syndrome looks set to be rolled out on the NHS.
:00:31. > :00:36.Critics say it will lead to more abortions.
:00:37. > :00:38.An MP calls for a dedicated Minister for Faith.
:00:39. > :00:48.And Tommy Sandhu meets Bollywood legend Anil Kapoor.
:00:49. > :00:53.150 films, over four decades in the business, where does your drive and
:00:54. > :01:02.energy come from? God. And fresh from his brush
:01:03. > :01:04.with Bollywood royalty, Tommy's here to share
:01:05. > :01:17.all your thoughts with us. Slumming it with us?! I have come
:01:18. > :01:19.down from Bollywood royalty to hang with you guys!
:01:20. > :01:24.You can contact us by Facebook and Twitter -
:01:25. > :01:32.don't forget to use the hashtag #bbcsml.
:01:33. > :01:35.Standard geographic charges from landlines
:01:36. > :01:42.Texts will be charged at your standard message rate.
:01:43. > :01:46.Or email us at sundaymorninglive@bbc.co.uk.
:01:47. > :01:54.And if you do get in touch, please don't forget to include your name.
:01:55. > :01:58.It is nice to know who you are! Absolutely.
:01:59. > :02:03.Chris Phillips is a former head of the National Counter
:02:04. > :02:06.Luke Gittos is a criminal law solicitor and author.
:02:07. > :02:08.Henna Rai is the founder of the Women Against
:02:09. > :02:10.Radicalisation Network, and Rabbi Doctor Jonathan Romain
:02:11. > :02:12.is a writer, broadcaster and minister of Maidenhead
:02:13. > :02:19.Britain's most notorious radical Muslim preacher,
:02:20. > :02:21.Anjem Choudary, has been convicted of inviting support
:02:22. > :02:34.For two decades, Choudary had been free to promote extremist
:02:35. > :02:36.views on our streets and screens whilst staying on the
:02:37. > :02:40.But after inviting support for Isis online, he finally went too far.
:02:41. > :02:42.So, where does this leave freedom of speech
:02:43. > :02:51.in Britain when it comes to religious extremism?
:02:52. > :02:55.Our first question of the week, how much freedom of speech should
:02:56. > :03:08.religious extremists have? Chris, what threat did Anjem
:03:09. > :03:13.Choudary pose? He is a remote global -- revolting man. He has done more
:03:14. > :03:17.damage to Muslim people within this country, he has caused enormous
:03:18. > :03:20.damage. Nobody actually knows how many people have died as a result of
:03:21. > :03:27.his words. I think the best thing ever is that he is locked up away
:03:28. > :03:32.from society. Look, happy to see him behind bars? Absolutely not. I think
:03:33. > :03:36.his conviction is an outrage. He has been locked up for what he thinks
:03:37. > :03:51.believes. The idea he has caused any damage at all is ridiculous.
:03:52. > :03:55.Don't think it is damaging when somebody invites people to support
:03:56. > :03:58.terrorists? Let's be clear what that means, he pledged support Isis in a
:03:59. > :04:01.pub with his mates and made a bunch of loonie YouTube videos. Which
:04:02. > :04:05.people watch and influenced by. We have freedom of speech and freedom
:04:06. > :04:10.of expression so that nutty ideas like Anjem Choudary's can receive
:04:11. > :04:13.the full ports of public scrutiny. All you do with censorship is push
:04:14. > :04:18.the idea is underground. The idea that he can cause the British state
:04:19. > :04:25.to fall into such a complete state of panic shows how laughable our
:04:26. > :04:32.anti-terrorism situation is. Henna, nutty ideas that are harmless? If
:04:33. > :04:36.only they were. We already know exactly how harmless Anjem Choudary
:04:37. > :04:40.has been. His group has been instrumental with the radicalisation
:04:41. > :04:45.of people who were the killers and murderers of Lee Rigby. He has
:04:46. > :04:51.destroyed countless families by infighting and encouraging young
:04:52. > :04:55.people to go to Syria. He is spreading venomous lies and vitriol
:04:56. > :05:00.about Islam which are baseless. He needs to be challenged. I admit
:05:01. > :05:04.that, he needs to be challenged. That is what organisations like mine
:05:05. > :05:08.do. At the same time, we need to protect those who are most
:05:09. > :05:11.vulnerable against this form of radicalisation, and telling them
:05:12. > :05:17.what the truth and the narratives are against this. Jonathan, as Henna
:05:18. > :05:29.says, this has gone on for more than 20 years. Why only now is something
:05:30. > :05:32.being done? Until now he has been very clever, he is a trained lawyer,
:05:33. > :05:35.so he knows how to sail close to the wind and stay just within the law. I
:05:36. > :05:37.suppose that is a credit to his cleverness, and to our liberal
:05:38. > :05:42.attitude. We have freedom of speech, that is very powerful. Much as I
:05:43. > :05:46.detest everything that Choudary stands for, I would detest even more
:05:47. > :05:50.for us to change our way of life that British values. That is partly
:05:51. > :05:56.on principle, because freedom of speech is so important to our
:05:57. > :05:59.culture. Frankly, we survived by it. The people did not have the freedom
:06:00. > :06:06.to challenge the elite on women's emancipation or slavery, for
:06:07. > :06:10.example, nothing would change. And how do you define an extremist? One
:06:11. > :06:15.person's sensible view is another's blasphemy. He crossed the line. The
:06:16. > :06:19.red line we had was inciting to violence. You can say reports of a
:06:20. > :06:24.defensive things, I don't want people to say they have the right to
:06:25. > :06:29.be offensive. But when he crossed the line of encouraging people to
:06:30. > :06:31.violence, then it was right. He crossed the line? He has been
:06:32. > :06:37.investigated for the best part of the decade, they had no evidence...
:06:38. > :06:41.Until the very end. They never had any evidence that he actively
:06:42. > :06:45.incited anyone to violence, which is why they charged him in the way they
:06:46. > :06:47.did. In today's culture, people say they believe in free speech, but
:06:48. > :07:02.when it comes down to difficult cases like Anjem Choudary,
:07:03. > :07:04.they are happy to see people locked away for what they think and
:07:05. > :07:07.believe. This is whether Western values get compromised, people
:07:08. > :07:09.pretend to believe in freedom of speech, but people will say, not in
:07:10. > :07:11.his case. This conviction was one offence of inviting support for
:07:12. > :07:17.so-called Islamic State, contrary to section 12 of the terrorism act
:07:18. > :07:21.2000. There is an offence. But you love to have your freedoms, you love
:07:22. > :07:26.to walk around the streets. Because of this man, there is so much danger
:07:27. > :07:33.in society across the West, because of his actions, inciting people in
:07:34. > :07:39.his group to kill people. Do you think that Michael Ida Barger was an
:07:40. > :07:44.ordinary man, then he watched videos of Anjem Choudary and became an
:07:45. > :07:52.extremist?! -- that Michael Adelaide show. That he has been manipulating
:07:53. > :07:57.vulnerabilities and making people believe this is the true path of
:07:58. > :08:02.Islam, when it is not. He has presented a false expression of
:08:03. > :08:13.Islam. As far as freedom of speech, he does not allow it for women,
:08:14. > :08:18.other sex, he calls out other sects as heretics, he has called me one
:08:19. > :08:24.because I Shia believe. -- he does not allow it for women or other
:08:25. > :08:28.sects. This keeps happening, because he does not believe in free speech,
:08:29. > :08:32.we should not allow him to have it. He's eight years arguing that belief
:08:33. > :08:37.in democracy, free speech and freedom of thought was artificial.
:08:38. > :08:42.-- he spent years. In convicting him of these ludicrous offences, he has
:08:43. > :08:46.been proven absolutely right. He is right when he says that belief in
:08:47. > :08:50.freedom of speech only goes so far. Improving him right, we have given
:08:51. > :08:56.him the status of a Mahtre amongst those who listen to him. -- in
:08:57. > :09:05.proving him right, we have given him the status of a martyr. We hear that
:09:06. > :09:09.the Government plans to isolate people convicted of terrorism
:09:10. > :09:13.offences. He has said he plans to radicalise more people in prison.
:09:14. > :09:16.There are a large group of vulnerable people. Sometimes you
:09:17. > :09:21.could call them the mad, bad and sad. Very small numbers, but just
:09:22. > :09:25.one of them turning into a terrorist because of his actions and words is
:09:26. > :09:30.too much, we have to do something about it. We have a prison and
:09:31. > :09:35.policing system that is at full stretch. It has been unable to deal
:09:36. > :09:39.with the radicalisation within prisons until now. It is pleasing to
:09:40. > :09:45.hear that it reporters, that has reviewed this and has come out with
:09:46. > :09:49.good ideas. We expect the Government to announce tomorrow, Jonathan? If
:09:50. > :09:54.there was a murderer in prison, you would not give him razor blades. His
:09:55. > :09:59.weapon is words. The last thing we want to do was give him, literally,
:10:00. > :10:04.a captive audience. So some form of isolation, may be within a limited
:10:05. > :10:09.circle of fellow jihadis, not exposing him to hundreds of people
:10:10. > :10:15.who could become radicalised. When you hear about prison conditions and
:10:16. > :10:23.you hear that people go into prison and become more criminally inclined
:10:24. > :10:30.aster, the situation in place is not good or strong enough to contain
:10:31. > :10:33.that? It has not been strong enough, anyone in the prison service would
:10:34. > :10:38.tell you their problems. It is mostly caused by underfunding, not
:10:39. > :10:43.having enough staff, having really out of date prisons. There is very
:10:44. > :10:47.little rehabilitation going on. Somebody charismatic like him can
:10:48. > :10:50.talk to people, he is very communicative. People are looking
:10:51. > :10:55.for somebody to grab hold of, he can offer them a new way, but that way
:10:56. > :11:00.is to commit murder. We must not beat about the bush, he is
:11:01. > :11:05.responsible for people dying across the world. It is very important that
:11:06. > :11:10.we focus on that. The guy in Nice could get into a van, having become
:11:11. > :11:14.radicalised. He did not pick that up from the Internet, he would have had
:11:15. > :11:18.breaches of one form or another turning him into something he was
:11:19. > :11:24.probably not before that's -- he would have had preachers. So we are
:11:25. > :11:29.now saying -- is that we are now saying that Anjem Choudary is
:11:30. > :11:34.responsible for all terrorism? Saying that the killers of Lee Rigby
:11:35. > :11:38.or the man from Nice just watched his videos, it is ridiculous. They
:11:39. > :11:42.are disturbed individuals with nothing else to live for, they are
:11:43. > :11:46.suicidal more than anything else. When this becomes a medium to attack
:11:47. > :11:51.freedom of speech, we realise we are taking the most deranged individuals
:11:52. > :12:00.in society and reorganising our whole way of life around them. That
:12:01. > :12:04.is so dangerous. When you take these isolated, deranged individuals about
:12:05. > :12:10.barometers for running society, all freedoms will be put into question.
:12:11. > :12:14.It will not just be people like Anjem Choudary ending up in prison.
:12:15. > :12:17.What about the argument that mentally ill individuals who can be
:12:18. > :12:22.influenced by simply like Anjem Choudary, what about the
:12:23. > :12:26.responsibility on somebody like him who has the power to influence
:12:27. > :12:30.people through the power of speech to incite people to radicalism and
:12:31. > :12:33.violence? When you directly encourage somebody, believing they
:12:34. > :12:39.will carry out violence, that crosses the line. We have had that
:12:40. > :12:44.since time the memorial. The point with the Terrorism Act is that it
:12:45. > :12:47.introduces a new offence of inviting support for a group, it criminalises
:12:48. > :12:51.people for what they believe and say, that is what happened with
:12:52. > :12:56.Anjem Choudary. If you do not stand up for him, you do not believe in
:12:57. > :13:01.freedom of speech. I think you had 20 years of freedom and he dug his
:13:02. > :13:06.own hole. Although I think Choudary is 100% responsible for his own
:13:07. > :13:11.downfall, maybe we need to look into ourselves as well and say, why did
:13:12. > :13:23.these people believe in his message? Maybe we have not been vociferous
:13:24. > :13:25.enough in promoting democracy and freedom of speech. Interestingly
:13:26. > :13:27.enough, some of that has gone towards social media. Twitter and
:13:28. > :13:30.YouTube have been active in trying to remove some but not all of his
:13:31. > :13:34.accounts. He stayed a certain side of the law, Henna? He was a
:13:35. > :13:39.manipulative individual, he knows how to manipulate the system. We
:13:40. > :13:44.need to understand that we're not turning around and saying we will be
:13:45. > :13:50.isolating people like him, this is an isolated incident. It is not. We
:13:51. > :13:54.see preachers like those on a daily basis, people vulnerable to that
:13:55. > :14:00.kind of vitriol and narrative coming to us for help, thinking, is this
:14:01. > :14:05.the right expression of Islam? The responsibility is on all of us to
:14:06. > :14:08.combat this. This is why organisations like mine saw
:14:09. > :14:11.important in countering this. We are asking how much freedom of
:14:12. > :14:12.speech religious extremists should have.
:14:13. > :14:14.You've been sending us your texts and tweets on this.
:14:15. > :14:18.Let's hear some of your reactions from Tommy.
:14:19. > :14:23.There is an extreme split in the messages, people saying the
:14:24. > :14:26.extremists should have no freedom and others say the errant I'd like
:14:27. > :14:30.everyone else. Robert says Garin title to exactly the same amount of
:14:31. > :14:34.freedom is anyone else under the law. -- they are entitled to exactly
:14:35. > :14:38.the same amount. Alan says none whatsoever, it should
:14:39. > :14:42.be banned and he should be deported, along with his followers.
:14:43. > :14:47.Mick says they should have freedom of expression until they reach the
:14:48. > :14:58.point where they step over the line into inciting hatred.
:14:59. > :15:00.Vincenzo says that religious freedom is fine, encouraging hate, violence
:15:01. > :15:03.and terrorism has nothing to do with religion and is, rightly, against
:15:04. > :15:05.the law. Sarah says that if it offends our sense of decency, that
:15:06. > :15:06.is where the line should be drawn. Lots of people questioning whether
:15:07. > :15:18.liners. We have a tradition in Islam saying
:15:19. > :15:21.freedom of speech is only correct if it is just and if it is preventing
:15:22. > :15:28.harm. So the responsibility lies with us to work out where that harm
:15:29. > :15:31.is. People like Anjem Choudary and his acolytes are consistently
:15:32. > :15:36.encouraging acts of violence and manipulating young people by lies to
:15:37. > :15:42.go to Syria and carry out acts of violence here in this country. This
:15:43. > :15:48.is why my organisation is so important. We keep mentioning your
:15:49. > :15:53.organisation. You said something a little bit dangerous, when you said
:15:54. > :15:58.deciding if people's views are just. But who decides who is just? We
:15:59. > :16:03.don't want to go down the route of America where Donald Trump said we
:16:04. > :16:09.must prosecute papers that don't tell the truth. Whose truth, his?
:16:10. > :16:13.Unfortunately there's a right to say things that I hate, loathe and
:16:14. > :16:19.detest, but I must allow people that freedom. Luke, is there a line in
:16:20. > :16:26.your mind that you can define as one you don't cross? Incitement. If you
:16:27. > :16:29.go out and encourage someone to commit violence, we've always
:16:30. > :16:34.recognised that as a criminal offence, but Anjem Choudary never
:16:35. > :16:41.did that. The reason he was charged under the Terrorism Act is they
:16:42. > :16:43.couldn't receive he had ever encouraged someone.er massively
:16:44. > :16:48.overestimating the influence of Anjem Choudary. I think most Muslims
:16:49. > :16:53.see him as a bit of a windbag spouting nonsense on the internet. I
:16:54. > :16:58.don't think he's had any influence really. Most people see him as a
:16:59. > :17:03.windbag. Of course they do. He is a windbag. He is ridiculous. However,
:17:04. > :17:08.there's a percentage of people who react to what he is saying and will
:17:09. > :17:13.go and kill people. I love Liberals who say we must do this and that,
:17:14. > :17:17.but they go quiet when a terrorist attack has happened, like it has
:17:18. > :17:20.nothing to do with me at this stage. He has incited people. People that
:17:21. > :17:24.have followed him have gone off to commit murder. We don't knee how
:17:25. > :17:31.many people have died as a result of his actions. Luke, I want you to
:17:32. > :17:38.comment on Chris's comment that Liberals go quiet when terrorism
:17:39. > :17:42.happens. We have to advance our idea of western democracy more
:17:43. > :17:44.vociferously, to have more freedom of speech. That's the answer. Thank
:17:45. > :17:51.you. One in every 1,000 babies in the UK
:17:52. > :17:54.is born with Down's syndrome. Now a new test to detect that
:17:55. > :17:57.condition and others before birth looks set to be
:17:58. > :17:59.rolled out on the NHS. Supporters of the technique say it
:18:00. > :18:02.will give parents more choice and be The campaign group Don't Screen Us
:18:03. > :18:07.Out says the programme will result in "a profound increase
:18:08. > :18:09.in the number of children with Down's syndrome screened
:18:10. > :18:12.out by termination". Samanthi Flanagan went to find out
:18:13. > :18:15.more about the new test and to see what life is like living
:18:16. > :18:28.with Down's Syndrome. It won't even fit you. Maybe give it
:18:29. > :18:34.back. Why? Because she's older than you. Sarah Gordy has been a
:18:35. > :18:38.professional actor, dancer and model for 15 years, appearing in various
:18:39. > :18:43.BBC dramas, including Call The Midwife. I went to meet her and her
:18:44. > :18:46.mother, Jane, at their home in Sussex. This is another
:18:47. > :18:52.professional. You don't have to do any more takes for her than you do
:18:53. > :18:55.for another actor. You've got this fantastic acting career, you model,
:18:56. > :19:00.you dance and you have Down's syndrome. Does that define you? Of
:19:01. > :19:04.course not. It doesn't affect me in any way. Way. When I'm working and
:19:05. > :19:10.concentrating on my acting work, it doesn't affect me at all. It's not a
:19:11. > :19:16.big deal. I'm an actor and woman first. In the late '70s screening
:19:17. > :19:22.for Down's syndrome wasn't as advanced and Jane didn't know she
:19:23. > :19:29.had the condition until Sarah was born. The paediatrician told me what
:19:30. > :19:34.Down's syndrome was and it was a terrible shock, as far as I could
:19:35. > :19:38.see she was the strongest and most beautiful baby in the nursery. If
:19:39. > :19:42.you had been able to have a test that would have told you she had
:19:43. > :19:47.Down's syndrome, what difference would it have made to you? I suppose
:19:48. > :19:51.I would have looked up and found out what Down's syndrome met. To be
:19:52. > :19:58.completely frank, I don't know what I would have done. I went to King's
:19:59. > :20:03.College Hospital in London to meet this professor, a world-renowned
:20:04. > :20:09.expert or foetal med sin, who explained the simpler blood test.
:20:10. > :20:16.The number of babies with down identified by the new test is 99%.
:20:17. > :20:20.More importantly, instead of having to do an unnecessary invasive test
:20:21. > :20:26.in 5% of the population, like the previous test, we only need to do an
:20:27. > :20:32.unnecessary invasive test in 0.1% of the population with the new test.
:20:33. > :20:38.Down's syndrome campaign groups are worried that a higher rate of
:20:39. > :20:45.diagnoses in prenatal tests might lead to more abortions It is a
:20:46. > :20:50.woman's decision and not to guilt trip her. Women are in different
:20:51. > :20:55.situations. I could afford to give up work. There's a lot of women who
:20:56. > :21:00.can't. I can't turn around to a woman and tell her what is saintly
:21:01. > :21:05.thing is to do. She has to make her own decision. There are some parents
:21:06. > :21:11.that want to know. There are others that don't. Our responsibility is to
:21:12. > :21:17.respect their views. What Sarah would like to have is for our
:21:18. > :21:25.industry to start looking at people who are different as part of society
:21:26. > :21:28.and not just a medical condition. They are part of life. It's just
:21:29. > :21:33.more interesting. Samanthi Flanagan there with
:21:34. > :21:35.Sarah Gordy and her mother, Jane. So our question is: Do parents
:21:36. > :21:37.need to know everything Joining the panel now
:21:38. > :21:40.are Lynn Murray from Don't Screen Us Out,
:21:41. > :21:54.and Evan Harris, a medical He was a member of the Medical
:21:55. > :22:00.Ethics Committee. What are your concerns? Our concerns are around
:22:01. > :22:04.the recommendations, that say there'll be 25 less miscarriages a
:22:05. > :22:09.year as what's seen as a more efficient test added to the pathway
:22:10. > :22:14.for screening, while there'll be 102 more babies with Down's syndrome
:22:15. > :22:18.detected. We have very high abortion rates around that, so overall
:22:19. > :22:23.there'll be a greater loss of life. It will lead to a reduction in the
:22:24. > :22:28.community of people with Down's syndrome. That makes life more
:22:29. > :22:31.difficult for them. There is already discrimination within the system.
:22:32. > :22:38.When these reputations were made we should have been looking more around
:22:39. > :22:41.the ethics of one of we are doing. D Harris, how worried should we be
:22:42. > :22:46.that this will lead to more abortions? There is no evidence that
:22:47. > :22:57.that will be the case. The aim of these is to make the am any
:22:58. > :23:02.iocentesis test more specific, so it is done less off. So far it hasn't
:23:03. > :23:06.shown an increased abortion rate, because everyone who is likely to
:23:07. > :23:22.want to know is already having a less specific test. Campaigners say
:23:23. > :23:26.90% of babies pretest ready aborted. I don't think that is right. Even if
:23:27. > :23:30.it did increase the abortion rate, that's still giving people the
:23:31. > :23:34.choice. It is absolutely nothing. I want to make this clear. Nothing to
:23:35. > :23:38.do with the way people with Down's syndrome, who can live happy and
:23:39. > :23:42.fulfilled lives, no doubt hat, are treated. It is just to allow parents
:23:43. > :23:46.to have a safer choice if they want to terminate. No-one is suggesting
:23:47. > :23:49.that anyone who wouldn't want to make that choice should have these
:23:50. > :23:54.tests. It is entirely up to the patient. Henna, many parents say
:23:55. > :23:58.they feel they wouldn't be able to cope with a child with a disability.
:23:59. > :24:03.Should they have the right to terminate a pregnancy? Again, that
:24:04. > :24:06.is entirely up to the individual. I can't speak on behalf of parents,
:24:07. > :24:12.because each parents knows what their own challenges are when bring
:24:13. > :24:17.up a child. What I can say is having come from a family where I had an
:24:18. > :24:22.uncle who had Down's. We lost him last year to dementia and
:24:23. > :24:27.Alzheimer's, but he lived an extremely fulfilling life. Despite
:24:28. > :24:30.when we were growing up in the '70s and '80s there was little or no
:24:31. > :24:35.support given to people with Down's syndrome. We never truly understood
:24:36. > :24:39.what his condition was coming from an Asian background, as it wasn't
:24:40. > :24:44.one of those things understood and spoke about. At the same time he had
:24:45. > :24:49.a fulfilled life. He married, he had a child. He became a grandfather
:24:50. > :24:53.before he died. He had seen every possible opportunity. When he passed
:24:54. > :24:59.away he had almost 1,000 people attend his funeral just because of
:25:00. > :25:03.his own social persona. Jonathan, you've advised people and counselled
:25:04. > :25:06.people in this situation and seen both sides when it comes the the
:25:07. > :25:10.decision making and the agony that parents go through. Yes, the key
:25:11. > :25:17.word is that people have got the options. There is no down that
:25:18. > :25:21.Down's syndrome people can leave fulfilled, especially the children,
:25:22. > :25:24.loving, loyal and affectionate, but there is an enormous difference
:25:25. > :25:29.between a life that already exists and one that's in potential. Parents
:25:30. > :25:31.do have the right to know if people can leave fulfilled, especially the
:25:32. > :25:33.children, loving, loyal and affectionate, but there is an
:25:34. > :25:35.enormous difference between a life that already exists and one that's
:25:36. > :25:38.in potential. Parents do have the right to know if their parents have
:25:39. > :25:40.-- if their child has Down's syndrome. Some will love it to
:25:41. > :25:43.piece. Others will say I cannot bring up this child either on
:25:44. > :25:46.emotional grounds, or some will say on moral grounds. What is the point
:25:47. > :25:48.of bringing into the world a child or adult that cannot sustain itself,
:25:49. > :25:52.that will never live independently? We can allow parents to make that
:25:53. > :25:56.distinction. They are the ones that are going to carry the burden and
:25:57. > :26:00.the responsibility. And yes, they may have a very happy household to
:26:01. > :26:05.begin with, but eventually they'll have to give up that child to a care
:26:06. > :26:09.institution and worry about nothing being able to visit and what will
:26:10. > :26:13.happen after they have had died. There's a big burden. We can't
:26:14. > :26:19.discuss on behalf of people, when it's they who have to look after
:26:20. > :26:22.that child. Lynn, surely by informing adults, people are
:26:23. > :26:26.entitled to make their own decisions, and to come to a
:26:27. > :26:29.conclusion that perhaps they are not adequately equipped to brick up a
:26:30. > :26:36.child with a disability. Surely that's not wrong? Key word there,
:26:37. > :26:41.information. You've got two different views there, one a lived
:26:42. > :26:46.experience and another an outdated idea of Down's syndrome. In the NHS
:26:47. > :26:50.many people are having terrible experiences in the screening system.
:26:51. > :26:56.That's a fact. Someone this year had a diagnosis at 36 weeks and was
:26:57. > :26:59.offered a determination. The information that the NHS gives in
:27:00. > :27:03.genetic counselling after these tests is more accurate these days.
:27:04. > :27:07.Of course, as you know, the picture for any individual with Down's
:27:08. > :27:12.syndrome is highly variable. The extent to which they have physical
:27:13. > :27:16.problems, congenital heart problems, that's variable and the extent to
:27:17. > :27:20.which they have learning difficulties is different. Every one
:27:21. > :27:23.is different, every person born. What you seemed to be saying before
:27:24. > :27:28.is instead of providing more support through the state and through the
:27:29. > :27:31.NHS and through social care for children with, and adults with
:27:32. > :27:36.Down's syndrome, we need to have more of them, because you indicated
:27:37. > :27:39.that screening more out would leave them isolated, the ones that
:27:40. > :27:43.remaybe. I think that's the wrong approach. I think to require more
:27:44. > :27:48.women to not have the choice and to go through unnecessary invasive
:27:49. > :27:52.tests and have unnecessary miscarriages is not justified by
:27:53. > :27:56.your concern to not screen out the campaign. Our campaign is not around
:27:57. > :28:02.choice. Our campaign is asking the Government to do the right thing. A
:28:03. > :28:06.suggestion that scientists have produced a new test. That's great.
:28:07. > :28:10.But you have to look at the ethics of that in the 21st century. It is
:28:11. > :28:13.unethical not to offer it. It is interesting talking about the
:28:14. > :28:19.ethics. What this conversation leads to, Jonathan, is the idea of
:28:20. > :28:23.so-called designer babies, and anything being screened out, not
:28:24. > :28:28.just Down's, but any disability to the point where parents are choosing
:28:29. > :28:34.on eye colour. Exactly, and people who talk about this as a step
:28:35. > :28:38.towards designer babies or eugenics are hijacking the event. That's
:28:39. > :28:41.about colour of eyes, hair, IQ. The only debate is whether they go to
:28:42. > :28:45.Oxford or Harvard. We are talking about a child that may or may not
:28:46. > :28:49.survive, may or may not have the skills to even sustain itself and be
:28:50. > :28:53.independent. That's a different debate, so we should put that to one
:28:54. > :28:56.side and say we are not going to start designing children. We are
:28:57. > :29:00.talking about, do you want to bring into the world, rather, do you want
:29:01. > :29:05.to force parents to bring into the world against their will a child
:29:06. > :29:11.that cannot sustain itself? I think they should have the option to say
:29:12. > :29:13.yes please or no, thank you. Many of you have been sending your thoughts
:29:14. > :29:56.on this. Test says we don't need to know
:29:57. > :30:01.trivial things like gender and eye colour but we need to know the key
:30:02. > :30:06.health issues. Heather says I have a very bright
:30:07. > :30:10.17-year-old who has Down's syndrome and I hate having to explain to her
:30:11. > :30:15.why so many people think it is something to be avoided at all costs
:30:16. > :30:19.and why so many people think that people with her condition should not
:30:20. > :30:24.exist. Henna under what circumstances is it
:30:25. > :30:30.acceptable to decide on abortion because of a disability? I think it
:30:31. > :30:34.is all down to individual circumstances. I can't answer when
:30:35. > :30:40.it is acceptable, because my moral compass is different from somebody
:30:41. > :30:44.else's and I would not want to start judging people on whether their
:30:45. > :30:48.choice or their decision is right, correct or incorrect. What I can
:30:49. > :30:52.draw from my own experiences of having an uncle who had Down's
:30:53. > :30:57.syndrome, having nieces and nephews who has Down's syndrome, having a
:30:58. > :31:01.nephew who is autistic, there is nothing stopping but individual from
:31:02. > :31:05.attaining opportunity and living a fully sustained and independent
:31:06. > :31:10.life. The opportunities are there if we are open to them. There needs to
:31:11. > :31:15.be greater information available and greater support, I admit that. At
:31:16. > :31:21.the same time there is nothing to prevent that child from excelling in
:31:22. > :31:25.their life. Lynn? I just wanted to say but I don't think we should
:31:26. > :31:30.dismiss anything. Let's not talk about eugenics or anything like
:31:31. > :31:34.that. You are talking about designer babies... I think it suits people to
:31:35. > :31:39.think that some people are not happy about test. I am not unhappy about
:31:40. > :31:48.the test, it can be implemented, if done properly, including this one.
:31:49. > :31:52.It will lead other things. The first step is that this is the first thing
:31:53. > :31:56.they can screen for, in a few years they will be screening for other
:31:57. > :32:02.things? Are you against abortion in general? No, we are about the
:32:03. > :32:07.discrimination that has come out of screening. This is the implication,
:32:08. > :32:10.how the NHS or how the medical system and the Government system, in
:32:11. > :32:16.looking after people with disabilities, how that moves on.
:32:17. > :32:21.Lynn says it is a slippery slope. It is a slippery slope to testing for
:32:22. > :32:26.conditions which are not serious medical conditions. The law does not
:32:27. > :32:30.allow abortion in those cases, it is unethical for doctors to provide
:32:31. > :32:34.tests were things like gender when they believe that the patient is
:32:35. > :32:38.asking about that test in order to access an abortion. The law and
:32:39. > :32:44.medical ethics operate. The fact that this test has to go to the
:32:45. > :32:47.National screening committee for approval based on safety and
:32:48. > :32:52.effectiveness is what prevents this alleged slippery slope. This
:32:53. > :32:58.decision is not being made lightly? I think it has not taken all the
:32:59. > :33:02.legislation into consideration. We have the equality act, if you change
:33:03. > :33:07.a public service you have ensure there will be no negative impact on
:33:08. > :33:13.vulnerable. Would you like there to be a law, as there is an gender,
:33:14. > :33:17.Lynn, which I want to make clear, that you cannot decide on an
:33:18. > :33:21.abortion because the child has Down's syndrome? That is not what
:33:22. > :33:25.the campaign is about. I know, but this is the distinction, if you say
:33:26. > :33:29.that this new test is damaging and means people will make this choice,
:33:30. > :33:33.if this choice was taken away it would not be damaging, it would not
:33:34. > :33:37.go down the slippery slope you are concerned about? MPs that people
:33:38. > :33:41.have written to this year are not aware of the fact that people with
:33:42. > :33:46.Down's syndrome are being aborted under the grounds of the abortion
:33:47. > :33:51.act, so I suppose the abortion act is pretty hazy. Who is to say what
:33:52. > :33:55.we will abort people for? The abortion act is pretty clear in this
:33:56. > :34:01.area. The principle is that you cannot force a woman to go through
:34:02. > :34:04.pregnancy and give birth to a child with serious medical conditions.
:34:05. > :34:09.Down's syndrome is clearly not at the most serious end of that, it is
:34:10. > :34:14.very variable, but most live fulfilled lives now. It is very
:34:15. > :34:19.important that parents given the diagnosis prenatally are given the
:34:20. > :34:25.correct information. The NHS says go to the Down's Syndrome Association
:34:26. > :34:31.Websites... It does not always say that. If you go to the NHS Choices
:34:32. > :34:35.website, there is very clearly a link. You have some examples of when
:34:36. > :34:39.you have spoken to parents who went through this and the information
:34:40. > :34:45.they were given and how they were treated? It goes both ways. I know
:34:46. > :34:49.of a family in my own community in Maidenhead, they had an
:34:50. > :34:53.amniocentesis, the old-fashioned method, it was a perfectly normal,
:34:54. > :34:57.healthy child, except the amniocentesis damaged him. So this
:34:58. > :35:02.poor child had a whole series of operations throughout its childhood
:35:03. > :35:05.and teens, it was only in adult herds that it became relatively
:35:06. > :35:11.fully functioning. This will prevent that sort of thing. -- only in
:35:12. > :35:17.adulthood. Amniocentesis will only be done in more specific cases.
:35:18. > :35:20.Other parents, when they had a diagnosis of a severely disabled a
:35:21. > :35:26.Down's syndrome child said, look, we cannot bring it up and they opted
:35:27. > :35:29.for termination. I had to support them. That is the woman who will
:35:30. > :35:34.carry it was seven, eight, nine months and look after it for 40 or
:35:35. > :35:40.50 years, they have the right to know. Evan, with these tests will we
:35:41. > :35:44.get to a point that there are no children born with disabilities?
:35:45. > :35:49.That everyone is healthy? It is extremely unlikely. Not all
:35:50. > :35:55.disabilities and serious medical conditions can be detected, for a
:35:56. > :36:01.start. Would that be the goal? Madson is moving on to ensure that
:36:02. > :36:05.more people have choice, OK? -- medicine is moving on. So you have
:36:06. > :36:09.the option not to bring a child is known to be suffering from reduced
:36:10. > :36:13.life expectancy, children are born who very sadly died within weeks or
:36:14. > :36:22.months of birth because they have a syndrome. This test does not just
:36:23. > :36:26.detect Down's syndrome but Edwards syndrome and other syndromes which
:36:27. > :36:30.have very reduced life expectancy is for the children. Secondly, there
:36:31. > :36:33.will be parents who, because of their beliefs against abortion, for
:36:34. > :36:37.example, or because of what they feel is their ability to manage,
:36:38. > :36:43.they will either not have the test or they will have the tests but
:36:44. > :36:47.decide not to terminate. Lynn, the final word? We do not mind a test
:36:48. > :36:52.being implemented, but the campaigners around the ethics of the
:36:53. > :36:58.21st-century, before introducing any more tests. Thank you for your
:36:59. > :37:01.comments. And thank you for getting involved.
:37:02. > :37:04.Actor and producer Anil Kapoor rose to fame as a massive Bollywood star,
:37:05. > :37:06.but he made the transition to Hollywood too with films like
:37:07. > :37:12.His latest venture is an Indian television version of
:37:13. > :37:16.Tommy went to meet Anil to talk about that and the hugely successful
:37:17. > :37:44.Smile, you'll be fine! 150 films, over four decades in the business,
:37:45. > :37:51.where does this drive and energy come from? God. Really? Absolutely.
:37:52. > :37:55.I feel ultimately it is the Almighty who blesses you, there are people
:37:56. > :37:59.much more talented, more good looking and more hard-working.
:38:00. > :38:04.Somewhere, I feel, very, very grateful. Why do you feel that you
:38:05. > :38:10.are blessed? Why has God chose a new? It is not that, of course.
:38:11. > :38:15.There is no substitute to hard work and it's a combination of so many
:38:16. > :38:19.other things. I have travelled all over the world, especially in India
:38:20. > :38:26.there is so much poverty. That is why I feel very, very blessed.
:38:27. > :38:32.That is something shown in Slumdog Millionaire. Do you think that is
:38:33. > :38:36.still a case now, that is still the world in India, two extreme worlds?
:38:37. > :38:40.Yes, obviously we are all trying our best and trying to see that the gap
:38:41. > :38:46.between the haves and have-nots becomes less and less, but it is a
:38:47. > :38:51.long way to go. When did you realise you had made it? When I did my first
:38:52. > :39:06.film as a young man in Hindi, which made me a bankable commodity. The
:39:07. > :39:13.film was called Seven Days. It gave me a expose here De Jager exposure
:39:14. > :39:18.in India and worldwide. It became a cult classic. A very bloody does not
:39:19. > :39:22.know, you play somebody with invisible powers. I remember
:39:23. > :39:26.watching it in thinking, this is amazing, I have never seen anything
:39:27. > :39:32.like it. I was actually the lead, and half the time I was invisible.
:39:33. > :39:35.So for more than 50% of the film you are not visible, you are putting
:39:36. > :39:49.your own money into it, but I believed in it.
:39:50. > :39:55.I think what makes you view is that you don't really take yourself that
:39:56. > :39:58.seriously? There is a phase in your life when you have to have that
:39:59. > :40:03.drive and that feeling that you were the best. And the time comes when
:40:04. > :40:06.you really become successful and you get a little bit of success, that is
:40:07. > :40:10.the time you should not take yourself seriously, that is one of
:40:11. > :40:16.the reasons for my longevity. You have had an amazing career in Indian
:40:17. > :40:20.cinema, then Slumdog lands, then Tom Cruise and Mission: Impossible, has
:40:21. > :40:24.that felt strange? People say there was a time when you were the biggest
:40:25. > :40:28.star of India, there were times when you were really down. I don't
:40:29. > :40:34.remember them. You just get it in the morning and do your next film,
:40:35. > :40:39.the next job. I have been very successful. There has never been a
:40:40. > :40:44.dearth of work. For me, work is very important, I had to keep working,
:40:45. > :40:48.working, working. You are an opportunity taker, which is really
:40:49. > :40:55.where 24 came from, and the Indian version. Telus about how useful that
:40:56. > :40:59.opportunity, how it came to mind? 24, I was shooting the international
:41:00. > :41:09.version in Los Angeles, I read the scripts. I said, I have been reading
:41:10. > :41:12.quite a few Indian scripts, but in this genre, I think it is the mother
:41:13. > :41:21.of all thrillers, I had to do this in India.
:41:22. > :41:28.You are a machine when it comes to your fitness and how you treat
:41:29. > :41:33.yourself physically? I feel God has given me 24 others to enjoy myself,
:41:34. > :41:38.physically, mentally and intellectually, so why don't I give
:41:39. > :41:45.one at a half two I to myself, not my wife, my children, my friends, my
:41:46. > :41:50.work. That is my time. It is like a re-creation, being physically fit.
:41:51. > :41:54.So I give that two hours only to myself. That makes me happy. Then I
:41:55. > :42:00.can make everybody happy, because I am happy. That is what I think
:42:01. > :42:06.everybody should do. With all the experience and wisdom you have, what
:42:07. > :42:10.advice would you give a younger you? I would definitely give more time to
:42:11. > :42:18.myself, you know? And to my family. There were certain things which I
:42:19. > :42:24.did... No problem, let's do it. Then other things that I did because I
:42:25. > :42:30.needed the money. Why? So you have this thing can't not always be so
:42:31. > :42:36.Russian your decisions -- so you have to think and not always be so
:42:37. > :42:42.rush in your decisions. I would love to live the same life again. If you
:42:43. > :42:48.were 22 years old now, could you be a star? Can I ask you a question?
:42:49. > :42:53.What do you think? Personally? Without a doubt. Thank you so much.
:42:54. > :42:58.You know that, because I am a big fan. He would not have dared say
:42:59. > :43:00.anything else! Now, you might not have
:43:01. > :43:02.noticed it but Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth is the new minister
:43:03. > :43:04.with responsibilities But Lord Bourne is also responsible
:43:05. > :43:08.for overseeing community cohesion, race equality, troubled families,
:43:09. > :43:09.domestic refugees, travellers' policy and is in charge
:43:10. > :43:12.of the Syrian refugees programme. Two of his predecessors,
:43:13. > :43:14.Eric Pickles and Baroness Warsi, And this week Labour MP
:43:15. > :43:17.Jonathan Reynolds, who is part of a Christian group in Parliament,
:43:18. > :43:23.called for a beefing up of the role and a stand-alone
:43:24. > :43:25.Minister for Faith. Is religion in danger of becoming
:43:26. > :43:27.sidelined in Government? And if so, would that
:43:28. > :43:29.be a bad thing? We are joined now by
:43:30. > :43:31.Labour MP and barrister Yasmin Qureshi, and Theo Hobson,
:43:32. > :43:46.a writer and theologian. Let's start with you, Yasmin, why do
:43:47. > :43:49.we need a Minister for Faith? For three reasons. Firstly if you look
:43:50. > :43:53.at the way that religion is taught in schools across the country, it is
:43:54. > :44:00.very hit and miss, the content is also very hit and miss. It is
:44:01. > :44:02.important, I think, that the material is good material and
:44:03. > :44:08.consistent throughout the whole country. Secondly, I think it is
:44:09. > :44:13.important because we need to have accurate representation of religion.
:44:14. > :44:17.When I say accurate, in the sense that perhaps there needs to be a
:44:18. > :44:20.body of experts of all different faiths, and non-faiths as well, that
:44:21. > :44:25.is really important. When the wrist reference made to a particular
:44:26. > :44:29.original group, then that is accurately reflected -- when there
:44:30. > :44:33.is a reference made. In recent years you have seen people who visibly
:44:34. > :44:36.look as if they might represent a particular faith are coming under
:44:37. > :44:41.increasing attacks. Whilst the criminal law is that and the police
:44:42. > :44:47.and the agencies are dealing with these things, we need to look at why
:44:48. > :44:51.sometimes this sort of hate is coming from, why the need to attack.
:44:52. > :44:55.Finally, for me, it is really important that this is not about
:44:56. > :45:02.trying to encourage people to have faith, it is not about proselytising
:45:03. > :45:06.any particular religion, it is about recognising that like we have a
:45:07. > :45:09.minister for equality, and Minister for women, it is recognising that
:45:10. > :45:11.there is a vulnerable group, we need to look at it from that perspective.
:45:12. > :45:23.Evan, is it necessary? Firstly, if you want to deal with
:45:24. > :45:27.the inadequacy and variability of religion in our school, stick it in
:45:28. > :45:31.the curriculum and don't allow religious schools to design and
:45:32. > :45:35.inspect their own institutions. You don't need a Minister for Faith. If
:45:36. > :45:41.you want to deal with integration, fine. Government policy throughout
:45:42. > :45:44.departments should be about integration and tackling
:45:45. > :45:48.Islamophobia and hate crime associated with it. Calling someone
:45:49. > :45:54.a Minister for Faith, not even a Minister for Faith and belief, which
:45:55. > :46:00.would cover 50% of the population who aren't religious is bizarre. Is
:46:01. > :46:03.it a Minister for inheritable, competing but mutually exclusive
:46:04. > :46:07.unshakeable beliefs in the supernatural? Is it a Minister
:46:08. > :46:11.that's designed to promote the segregation that occurs in faith
:46:12. > :46:15.schools? That's what previous faith Ministers have done. Baroness Warsi
:46:16. > :46:21.and Eric Pickles have been clear. They say as Minister of faith our
:46:22. > :46:25.job is to make sure people feel for confident in their faith. Good for
:46:26. > :46:29.them but that's not the Government's role. The Government shouldn't have
:46:30. > :46:34.a role in promoting religious privilege. I think it was a mistake
:46:35. > :46:38.for Cameron to create a high profile Minister for Faith position. It was
:46:39. > :46:45.a cynical bit of gesture politics really. I think he did it to balance
:46:46. > :46:48.out his gay marriage plans so that, really it was Minister for
:46:49. > :46:54.reassuring religious Conservatives that the Government's on their side.
:46:55. > :47:00.In a sense also a Minister for pretending that religion is simple
:47:01. > :47:03.and united and a nice benevolent force, evading the issue that we
:47:04. > :47:09.have problems with extremism and so on. That the Minister of faith,
:47:10. > :47:14.especially Baroness Warsi, really just picked a fight with secularists
:47:15. > :47:20.and made culture war worse. It was a low point in recent times when she
:47:21. > :47:24.came out insulting secularists and saying that the Government should
:47:25. > :47:29.simply promote faith rather than secularism. That sort of thing is
:47:30. > :47:35.just divisive. Jonathan, you are shaking your head. Yes, I think it
:47:36. > :47:40.is a sensible move. It is not to promote faith, and I'm happy to have
:47:41. > :47:48.faith and belief. It is there to take account of it. Nietzsche said
:47:49. > :47:53.God is dead, when it's the other way around. Faith is important to
:47:54. > :47:57.people. Their religious culture in whiches not only the way they live
:47:58. > :48:03.at home but their workplace, interpersonal relationships. The
:48:04. > :48:06.public sphere. We need to take account of faith in legislation. Let
:48:07. > :48:10.me give two examples. On the one hand it might be positive, so for
:48:11. > :48:16.instance the Government recognising religious beliefs about death and
:48:17. > :48:22.developing noninvasive post-mortems. On the other hand it says no, we do
:48:23. > :48:28.not believe in polygamy, we are not going to allow it. You don't need a
:48:29. > :48:33.Minister for Faith. Of faith. For faith in order to make sensible
:48:34. > :48:37.public policy. There is 600 members of Parliament who are capable of
:48:38. > :48:42.logical thought. The history of this role has been to use it to promote,
:48:43. > :48:50.for Government to promote belief in God, and to attack people who don't
:48:51. > :48:55.believe in God. Baroness Warsi went to a theocratic dictatorship, the
:48:56. > :49:03.Vatican... Let me make this minute. Briefly please,ev van. She did not
:49:04. > :49:10.argue about the antigay practices and beliefs of that religion, the
:49:11. > :49:14.anti-women practices and belief, the cover-up of child sexual abuse. She
:49:15. > :49:18.used it to attack secularism. I think this sends us down the
:49:19. > :49:23.American path, which we want to avoid. Yasmin. I think you can't
:49:24. > :49:31.define the whole ministry by the fact of one person who occupies that
:49:32. > :49:34.office and what she chose to do with that. Eric Pickles was no better.
:49:35. > :49:38.What it is a chance to look at is what I can do. I'm not talking about
:49:39. > :49:45.it from the point of view of pushing faith or religion down anyone's
:49:46. > :49:49.throat. I'm looking at it from (Inaudible). Yes you can change the
:49:50. > :49:54.National Curriculum, you can do this as politicians, you can say why do
:49:55. > :49:58.we need a Minister for Women, or one for disabilities? You will get a lot
:49:59. > :50:03.of pressure on one representative to embody the Government or state's
:50:04. > :50:07.position on religion. That's impossible in our context, as we
:50:08. > :50:11.have secular, universal, humanist values that unite us as a country.
:50:12. > :50:15.But that's on a basis of Christian religion especially, and other
:50:16. > :50:19.religions come into it. One person, however well meaning, can't sum that
:50:20. > :50:23.up and say I represent this whole tradition. It is necessarily a
:50:24. > :50:29.dialogue with different backgrounds. Can I just finish, what I'm trying
:50:30. > :50:32.to say is you can redefine what a department is supposed to do. You
:50:33. > :50:37.can say that this department has been set up, or this Minister's
:50:38. > :50:42.responsibility will be A, B, C and D, and in that you can say this is
:50:43. > :50:46.not about promoting God or faith. I think just because previous office
:50:47. > :50:48.holders have used it for that purpose, you can redefine the
:50:49. > :50:52.functions of the department and make it more about the issues that I talk
:50:53. > :50:59.about, which is important. A Minister for Women is not in itself
:51:00. > :51:03.divisive. Men could say why not? There is clearly a role for
:51:04. > :51:06.Government, I think we would all agree, on tackling equal pay and
:51:07. > :51:14.violence against women. But there is no role for Government in a western,
:51:15. > :51:16.secular dibble democracy for promoting a religion or religious
:51:17. > :51:24.belief over nonreligious belief. That's what a Minister of faith, for
:51:25. > :51:27.faith, is supposed to do. My interpretation of what the Minister
:51:28. > :51:33.for Faith is about is not about promoting a religion or God. I'm
:51:34. > :51:39.happy with the (Inaudible) faith and belief. Communities then. Fine, you
:51:40. > :51:43.can call it by whatever name you want it. Call it communities or
:51:44. > :51:46.people. ALL TALK AT ONCE. It is
:51:47. > :51:51.understanding what matters to millions of people in this country
:51:52. > :51:55.and what drives them. I would be happy if either of you two, liberal
:51:56. > :52:00.secularists, were to be the Minister. Or a liberal Christian.
:52:01. > :52:05.They understand what makes it tick and drives the legislation properly,
:52:06. > :52:09.and works toward social cohesion. Ot about what they should be doing? We
:52:10. > :52:13.spoke about radicalisation earlier. If there is an effort to focus on
:52:14. > :52:17.radicalisation as the Minister for Faith, would you see that as
:52:18. > :52:22.positive? That's obviously an important role for someone. What I
:52:23. > :52:27.think might be needed is a Minister for values. The universal values
:52:28. > :52:31.that really do bind us together, whatever religion you are from, or
:52:32. > :52:37.non-religion you are from. I think we've got a problem in this country
:52:38. > :52:43.of being too quiet about what does unite us. I would call it humanism
:52:44. > :52:46.from a nonreligious point of view, although it's not antireligious it
:52:47. > :52:52.acknowledges that religion feeds into it understand we have a basis
:52:53. > :52:55.of religion that our secular humanist values are based on. I
:52:56. > :52:59.think that needs promotion and talking about. Instead we get this
:53:00. > :53:03.division of religion versus secularism that's unhelpful. If we
:53:04. > :53:07.had a Minister in thissy who said what we are going to do is get rid
:53:08. > :53:11.of segregation in state schools, where children are not allowed into
:53:12. > :53:14.their local state-funded school because their parents have failed to
:53:15. > :53:21.pretend to be of the right religion. That we get rid of the idea that we
:53:22. > :53:25.have an established church which by its dogma is antigay, because it
:53:26. > :53:30.doesn't allow practising homosexuality among the Bishops. It
:53:31. > :53:35.has only recently moved into the 20th century on women Bishops. We
:53:36. > :53:38.have reserved places in Parliament. That's the agenda, no promoting
:53:39. > :53:41.religion. It is interesting you are promoting a Minister for values.
:53:42. > :53:48.That will resonate with many of our viewers. We can find out now. It is
:53:49. > :53:52.a waste of money. That's what people are saying. That religion has no
:53:53. > :53:57.place in politics. Sharon says ban religion in public. Faith should be
:53:58. > :54:01.a private matter and it should not interfere with day-to-day work. Man
:54:02. > :54:08.that saying it could be a good thing if it it is for the right purposes
:54:09. > :54:14.and has a real value. Euan says it won't work unless everyone is
:54:15. > :54:19.prepared to unite under a secularist culture and preserve their faith.
:54:20. > :54:22.And this one, it's time to ditch the special advantages that so-called
:54:23. > :54:27.faith gives to people in authority. The Lords and Government should be
:54:28. > :54:30.secular. And findly, I think people who come to settle in any country
:54:31. > :54:34.should want to integrate into its society. If the role of this
:54:35. > :54:38.Minister of faith is to help people do that, it is great. A variety of
:54:39. > :54:43.views there. Yasmin, we only have one minute. We heard that it's the
:54:44. > :54:47.promoting advantages, special advantages. No, that's not what it
:54:48. > :54:52.is about. The way I'm looking at it is the fact that there are issues,
:54:53. > :54:56.as the Rabbi said, about religious people, but this is not about
:54:57. > :55:00.religion. This is where a lot of people have misunderstood. It is not
:55:01. > :55:04.about promoting religion. I'm not looking at it as promoting any
:55:05. > :55:09.religion or religious ideology. What I'm saying is that religion does
:55:10. > :55:15.exist and it's the way it is taught in schools. It should be accurate.
:55:16. > :55:19.Accurate. And in the media. But scepticism in schools. If there's a
:55:20. > :55:24.Minister for teaching sceptical inquiry... Please let Yasmin finish.
:55:25. > :55:29.I'm happy with that. I'm just saying there is a need there for a Minister
:55:30. > :55:35.of faith, values, beliefs, whatever you want to call it. I'm not talking
:55:36. > :55:38.about Judeo Christian faith, but not faiths as well. I'm talking about
:55:39. > :55:44.people who don't have a faith either. I think there is a rise of
:55:45. > :55:47.prejudice against people who do have faith of some sort. Or have visible
:55:48. > :55:52.representation. That's the kind of thing we need to look at. Just as we
:55:53. > :55:58.have a Minister for equality and disability, look at disadvantaged
:55:59. > :56:02.people. Yasmin Qureshi, Dr Evan Harris, Theo Hobson and Dr Jonathan
:56:03. > :56:04.Romain, thank you. We could say more but we don't have time.
:56:05. > :56:06.That's just about all from us for today.
:56:07. > :56:11.Many thanks to all our guests and to you for taking part.
:56:12. > :56:14.As we near the end of Britain's most successful Olympics of all time,
:56:15. > :56:16.we mark it with a special performance from Kelly Oliver, whose
:56:17. > :56:19.song Rio was inspired by the Games host city.
:56:20. > :56:39.# Walking on the street, lost in a sea of people living.
:56:40. > :56:45.# And walking on the beach, lost in a sea of sunlight beaming.
:56:46. > :56:51.# I would say, "Oh, thanks for having me."
:56:52. > :57:03.# Filling my heart with dreams and memories.
:57:04. > :57:08.# Walking round the town, hearing all the voices come
:57:09. > :57:15.# And the sound of a people praying to the Lord on the mountain.
:57:16. > :57:22.# I would say, "Oh, thanks for having me."
:57:23. > :57:39.# Filling my heart with dreams and memories.
:57:40. > :57:42.# I would say thanks for the rhythm and the music.
:57:43. > :57:45.# I would say thanks for the fire and the magic.
:57:46. > :57:48.# I was your guest, a travelling girl.
:57:49. > :57:52.# But you'll stay with me as I walk this world.
:57:53. > :57:57.# For the passion, the dreams and the prayers.
:57:58. > :58:22.# Walking on the street, walking to the beat of a people dancing.
:58:23. > :58:25.# Music in the heat, and we meet and we feast
:58:26. > :58:37.# I would say, "Oh, thanks for having me."
:58:38. > :58:45.# Filling my heart with dreams and memories.
:58:46. > :58:51.# I would say, "Oh, thanks for having me."
:58:52. > :58:55.# Filling my heart with dreams and memories.