:00:00. > :00:13.Lord Sugar says politicians should face prosecution if they lie.
:00:14. > :00:16.He wants MPs to face the same scrutiny as business,
:00:17. > :00:29.On the apprentice, you admire a good salesperson, and a good salesperson,
:00:30. > :00:35.at times, has to embellish the truth. No, I'm sorry. Long term, a
:00:36. > :00:38.good salesperson has to tell the truth. Have you ever lied before?
:00:39. > :00:40.Only about the tooth fairy. Channel 4 is going ahead
:00:41. > :00:42.with the broadcast of tapes of Do the royal family
:00:43. > :00:45.deserve more privacy? And we debate the ethics of shooting
:00:46. > :00:59.animals for sport as a charity uses One of the first things we have come
:01:00. > :01:06.up with is a pheasant casserole and partridge curry.
:01:07. > :01:09.All that coming up - and Emma Barnett is here ready
:01:10. > :01:20.We want you to get in touch with your views on our
:01:21. > :01:23.You can contact us by Facebook and Twitter -
:01:24. > :01:25.don't forget to use the hashtag #bbcsml.
:01:26. > :01:27.Or text SML followed by your message to 60011.
:01:28. > :01:29.Texts are charged at your standard message rate.
:01:30. > :01:32.Or email us at sundaymorninglive@bbc.co.uk.
:01:33. > :01:35.However you choose to get in touch, don't forget to include your name
:01:36. > :01:41.so I can get you involved in the programme.
:01:42. > :01:44.For instance, you may have strong views about new genetic research
:01:45. > :01:45.on embryos which might help eliminate some
:01:46. > :01:51.But could it also open the door to designer babies?
:01:52. > :01:55.I'll be putting that to a leading scientist in the field later.
:01:56. > :01:57.But first, something else to get you talking.
:01:58. > :02:03.Well, Lord Sugar, a business leader and television star,
:02:04. > :02:05.says one way to improve that is to prosecute politicians
:02:06. > :02:11.I went to see him to find out more - and found myself facing him
:02:12. > :02:13.across a boardroom table just like in his TV series
:02:14. > :02:36.You're fired. You're fired. Lord Sugar, I want to start by
:02:37. > :02:43.asking you what you want to make it a criminal offence for a politician
:02:44. > :02:46.to lie? Because I think the ramifications of some of the
:02:47. > :02:56.promises or lives that they have made have endangered the population.
:02:57. > :03:01.It is as simple as that. As an example, the moving out of the
:03:02. > :03:05.European Union, I'm not sure that the majority of the electorate
:03:06. > :03:12.really understood the full ramifications of it. We were
:03:13. > :03:17.disastrously led into it by lies, big lies. Would you want politicians
:03:18. > :03:22.in jail? I would, I would put Gove and Johnson in jail for what they
:03:23. > :03:28.said. For what they promised in the referendum? It should be a criminal
:03:29. > :03:32.offence because they are responsible politicians who blatantly, and they
:03:33. > :03:36.cannot argue against this, printed a figure of ?350 million on the side
:03:37. > :03:41.of a bus and implied that is what we pay to the European Union every
:03:42. > :03:49.week, oh, and by the way, we will take that 350 and throw it in to the
:03:50. > :03:53.National help. But people will say, on The Apprentice, you admire a good
:03:54. > :03:58.salesperson, and a good salesperson at times has to embellish the truth.
:03:59. > :04:03.No, I'm sorry. Longer term a good salesperson has to tell the truth.
:04:04. > :04:07.They won't tell the bad points, they will see the positives of the
:04:08. > :04:10.product and the negatives... It is not for them to tell the bad side,
:04:11. > :04:17.it is for the person who is selling to ask questions... Is that not
:04:18. > :04:23.embellishing? Not really, you are not hiding anything. But you see how
:04:24. > :04:30.it is close to the line? It depends what kind of salesman you are
:04:31. > :04:34.talking about. If it is Del Boy and Rodney, you are right, they would
:04:35. > :04:36.break the rules. But Del Boy and Rodney are not politicians, they
:04:37. > :04:41.have not been voted by people to represent them and that is the
:04:42. > :04:49.difference. Have you ever lied before? Only about the tooth fairy.
:04:50. > :04:59.Really? The way you are smiling I don't think that is true! Somethings
:05:00. > :05:03.are effectively a lie, but no serious lies. Your business I'm sure
:05:04. > :05:07.it is perfectly sound but there are not that are not doing exactly the
:05:08. > :05:12.right thing, maybe telling lies, and you can get away with it in
:05:13. > :05:16.business, card you? It depends, not in a public company you can't. As a
:05:17. > :05:23.past chairman of three public companies, it was my obligation to
:05:24. > :05:27.write a chairman's statement to the shareholders that was audited by
:05:28. > :05:31.individual people and they would challenge me, how can you say that
:05:32. > :05:36.you are going to do this, how can you say you are going to do that?
:05:37. > :05:42.Very tight scrutiny. All I'm saying is that the manifesto should be
:05:43. > :05:46.vetted prior to them going public. Morally, should be vetted by
:05:47. > :05:49.independent people. But what you would get is a lot of bland
:05:50. > :05:53.manifestos because politicians are scared stiff of saying something
:05:54. > :05:58.that perhaps is not going to work? Economies change, things change. I
:05:59. > :06:02.have no problem with people in their election manifesto coming out with
:06:03. > :06:06.statistics. The only problem I have got is, get them right, get the
:06:07. > :06:15.numbers right. In the case of Mr Corbyn, when you say that you are
:06:16. > :06:20.going to try to cancel student fees, maybe think about re-funding, that
:06:21. > :06:26.statement is ?100 billion, you cannot make that statement because
:06:27. > :06:31.an auditor or an economist would advise, don't say that because you
:06:32. > :06:35.will never be able to pull it off. It could be argued, and he would
:06:36. > :06:40.argue, I didn't promise it, so it is not a lie, but come on, you are
:06:41. > :06:45.talking to 18, 19-year-old students who will take that as, well, I will
:06:46. > :06:50.have some of that, I will definitely have some of that. Let's talk about
:06:51. > :06:55.your fellow host of The Apprentice across the pond, Donald Trump. Is he
:06:56. > :07:02.not a great example of politicians in England getting more scrutiny
:07:03. > :07:05.than businessmen? He did what he likes, now he is getting more
:07:06. > :07:08.scrutiny. I think you are right, as a businessman he could just turn
:07:09. > :07:14.around and say, we are going to paint all our buildings green
:07:15. > :07:17.tomorrow, get on with it. In the White House of course he cannot just
:07:18. > :07:22.say, we are going to do this and do that, he has had if you slap backs,
:07:23. > :07:29.as we speak right now there is turmoil in the White House and yet
:07:30. > :07:33.Donald, he will go on Twitter and say, isn't life great, haven't I
:07:34. > :07:38.done well so far? Everything I promised has come true! In fact,
:07:39. > :07:42.actually, not really, you have not done anything yet, but he will write
:07:43. > :07:46.that down in a tweet and a lot of the population will believe it
:07:47. > :07:50.because he said it. You are overlord, of course. Would you
:07:51. > :07:58.consider a move into front line politics? Absolutely not. Why?
:07:59. > :08:04.Because it is a thankless, hopeless task. In my 70 years I have never
:08:05. > :08:10.heard a member of the public say, what a great Prime Minister we have,
:08:11. > :08:14.how good things are, isn't it nice, isn't it wonderful? I think they are
:08:15. > :08:17.nuts, they must be nuts to take that on. Lord Sugar, thank you very much
:08:18. > :08:19.indeed. OK, thanks a lot. So should it be illegal
:08:20. > :08:23.for politicians to lie, particularly Joining us now to discuss
:08:24. > :08:28.that are Peter Hitchens, And Gina Miller,
:08:29. > :08:43.a businesswoman and campaigner. Jena, you heard Lord Sugar there,
:08:44. > :08:46.should it be a criminal offence for politicians to lie? I think there
:08:47. > :08:49.are degrees of lie and there should be degrees of punishment. There
:08:50. > :08:54.should be punishment for politicians who lie, I see it a bit like a code
:08:55. > :08:57.of ethics or being a doctor, if a politician lies and breaks that code
:08:58. > :09:02.of ethics, they should be struck off and not be allowed to be a
:09:03. > :09:06.politician again. If it is a more serious lied then there is a
:09:07. > :09:11.consequence to the country and I think there should be ramifications.
:09:12. > :09:14.Gove and Johnson? The referendum is irreversible, but with general
:09:15. > :09:23.elections you just vote them out. I think Mr Gove in particular said it
:09:24. > :09:28.is fine to lie on the electable -- electoral Trail, and I think he
:09:29. > :09:32.should be facing consequences for that. Electoral lies are enormous
:09:33. > :09:35.for the country and they should be held responsible. Exploiting fear by
:09:36. > :09:39.lying has become more visible and there is far more of it in politics
:09:40. > :09:42.and that is worrying to all of us so we will have to bring in something
:09:43. > :09:48.that stops that flow and building up of lies that is happening. Peter,
:09:49. > :09:52.you are not known for your love of politicians, would you banged them
:09:53. > :10:00.up? Apart from the practical work ability of it, the selective victor
:10:01. > :10:04.'s justice which would follow if people were prosecuted by the
:10:05. > :10:08.Government, practices such as that, it is ridiculous for us to pretend
:10:09. > :10:13.that politicians are the only ones involved in dishonesty at elections.
:10:14. > :10:17.In the old saying it used to be said that people pretended to work and
:10:18. > :10:27.the Government pretended to pay them. In our elections, the
:10:28. > :10:30.politicians pretend to have these manifestos and we pretend to believe
:10:31. > :10:35.them and that is why we have got into the mess we have. Blatant lies
:10:36. > :10:39.are told by people bribing us with our own money and one of the reasons
:10:40. > :10:42.why democracy is going so rapidly down is precisely because of that
:10:43. > :10:46.soap to turn on politicians and blamed them for playing a game that
:10:47. > :10:50.we played with the same enthusiasm is ridiculous. You cannot bring the
:10:51. > :10:53.public, if they are all lying... You can certainly bring the public
:10:54. > :10:59.because the public's self-deception is one of the reasons why this
:11:00. > :11:02.country is in debt nationally and individually, we will not face up to
:11:03. > :11:05.the reality of the situation, we would rather be lied to them told
:11:06. > :11:09.the truth. If a politician went into an election and said, this is the
:11:10. > :11:13.real state of the country, we don't make and export enough, we have to
:11:14. > :11:17.increase income tax or council tax is very heavily to balance the
:11:18. > :11:19.national books, they would lose the election. Emma has a guest with
:11:20. > :11:21.years of political experience. I'm joined now by the former Tory MP
:11:22. > :11:30.and Cabinet minister Edwina Currie. Good morning. Let me correct you on
:11:31. > :11:36.something I said, I would not wish it to be known as a lie when you
:11:37. > :11:40.said I was a cabinet minister, Margaret Thatcher did not have any
:11:41. > :11:43.female cabinet ministers, I was a Government minister. Honest from the
:11:44. > :11:49.start! Should politicians ever be prosecuted for lying to the public?
:11:50. > :11:54.Well, they are under electoral law, it is an electoral offence. Phil
:11:55. > :11:57.Willis, for example, a Labour Government minister in 2010, fought
:11:58. > :12:03.an election with lies on his leaflets. Unfortunately his opponent
:12:04. > :12:10.was a millionaire businessman who took him to a electoral Court, the
:12:11. > :12:14.election was swept to one side and he was banned for three years from
:12:15. > :12:19.taking part in any election campaigns. So it can be done. Do you
:12:20. > :12:24.think those rules can be updating in light of something like the EU
:12:25. > :12:28.referendum where there was, as some people put it, a big lie on the side
:12:29. > :12:32.of above about how much money would come back into the NHS if we let the
:12:33. > :12:35.European Union, would you specifically put Foreign Secretary
:12:36. > :12:41.Boris Johnson in prison or have him prosecuted? Part of the problem in a
:12:42. > :12:44.fast-moving campaign is the speed of doing this, the lie is around the
:12:45. > :12:49.world before the truth has put its boot on and the cumbersome process
:12:50. > :12:52.as Peter Hitchens has just pointed out where you would have to have it
:12:53. > :12:55.checked and have lawyers and all the rest of it, by that time you have
:12:56. > :12:59.got the election done and voting has been done and people have taken the
:13:00. > :13:04.decision. Of course the best lies are the ones where there is an
:13:05. > :13:09.element of truth. I was a Remain campaign but it is true that we make
:13:10. > :13:12.a substantial net contribution to the EU and at some point in the
:13:13. > :13:23.future when we are out of it we won't be making that and that money
:13:24. > :13:26.might be available for other things. So you don't sound like you want to
:13:27. > :13:28.put Boris Johnson in the can yet, what about Jeremy Corbyn's promises
:13:29. > :13:31.about student debt? Alan Sugar misquoted him of it, what Corbyn
:13:32. > :13:35.said was that he would deal with student debt. You can read into that
:13:36. > :13:38.whatever you like but if you are talking to a bunch of students and
:13:39. > :13:42.young people they are likely to think, that will mean no student
:13:43. > :13:46.debt, it will mean no fees in future, that would be absolutely
:13:47. > :13:51.great, we will vote for that so a million of them did and some of them
:13:52. > :13:56.even voted twice which is of course another electoral offence. Let's
:13:57. > :13:58.stick with this for the moment, can you honestly say now you never lied
:13:59. > :14:03.while you were in politics? Of course I occasionally like that
:14:04. > :14:06.sometimes it was because the truth was so unpalatable that people find
:14:07. > :14:12.it very, very hard and sometimes you had to say to people, look, you are
:14:13. > :14:14.not going to like what I am going to tell you, particularly with
:14:15. > :14:18.constituents, but I won't lie to you, and they would then try to find
:14:19. > :14:23.somebody else for a second opinion because that is what they prefer.
:14:24. > :14:30.Peter Hitchens referred to... What is an example that you lied about?
:14:31. > :14:33.Anything major that you regret? For example I represented a coal mining
:14:34. > :14:37.constituency, it was obvious the pits were going to close, they had
:14:38. > :14:41.been worked for many years, they were worked out, dangerous, heavily
:14:42. > :14:45.subsidised to keep people there. We were going to have to find something
:14:46. > :14:48.else for people to do. It was not at the time of the miners strike when
:14:49. > :14:53.these men were at work, unpalatable thing to stand up and make speeches
:14:54. > :15:00.about, but in the aftermath of the miners strike when people realised
:15:01. > :15:03.change had to come, that was the approach that I took and indeed we
:15:04. > :15:07.got Toyota so we were successful. Thank you for that. Not palatable,
:15:08. > :15:11.you don't say the truth at the time. Sometimes the truth is more harmful.
:15:12. > :15:16.Good time to bring in our lying expert! You have written a book
:15:17. > :15:22.about lying, did you lie in the book? I lie about everything! Our
:15:23. > :15:27.politicians worse than the general public? If anything they probably
:15:28. > :15:31.lie less than the general public because whatever they say is exposed
:15:32. > :15:36.to a unforgiving scrutiny and they have to be very careful about what
:15:37. > :15:39.they say. I think the reason we start to think of them as a bit
:15:40. > :15:42.shifty and dishonest is that they are always guarding themselves
:15:43. > :15:48.against any possible situation where they could be lying and the fact is
:15:49. > :15:52.people like all the time, we all like all the time, that is a big
:15:53. > :15:57.thing when I talked to psychologists who study this for a living for my
:15:58. > :16:00.book, they have various theories of how mining works and why people like
:16:01. > :16:08.that what all agree is that people lie habitually and it is part of
:16:09. > :16:11.daily life, so one psychologist found this figure which is that
:16:12. > :16:17.people lie three times within ten minutes of meeting each other, so we
:16:18. > :16:21.only met a few minutes ago I have probably told a few porkies! Another
:16:22. > :16:22.one found that people lie on average twice a day, which is probably
:16:23. > :16:33.right. The lies which really make people
:16:34. > :16:36.angry are the lies that are told to damage the innocent persons, bearing
:16:37. > :16:40.false witness, or lies to gain advantage over other people in
:16:41. > :16:46.fairy. Those lives matter and they are told in politics and business as
:16:47. > :16:51.well. Are business people worse than politicians? You have painted quite
:16:52. > :16:56.a good picture politicians. I think just as bad, if not worse. I work in
:16:57. > :17:01.business and the idea that business is more honest than politics is
:17:02. > :17:07.ridiculous, I think. Business people exaggerate and prevaricate all the
:17:08. > :17:12.time, so do we. People in all walks of life have risen to the top who
:17:13. > :17:16.have sticks and carrots as to why they are lying. For some it is
:17:17. > :17:21.advancement, sometimes the stickers that you will be sacked or not
:17:22. > :17:27.promoted. I expect politicians to be better. I don't want them to be
:17:28. > :17:32.lying. What I think is very worrying is the increase in lining and how
:17:33. > :17:39.visible it is, playing on people's fears. When you lie in politics and
:17:40. > :17:43.you exacerbate people's fears, it is not responsible and you have do have
:17:44. > :17:48.some checks and balances when it comes to lying back creates fear.
:17:49. > :17:52.Politicians have been lying for years, Jonathan Aiken, Jeffrey
:17:53. > :17:56.Archer. When Winston Churchill was asked about lying he said I have
:17:57. > :18:01.lied many times for my country but less frequently to my country, that
:18:02. > :18:04.is the difference. The public and the media are lot more connected
:18:05. > :18:09.through social media, so we can share our views of he was lying, it
:18:10. > :18:14.goes on social media and everybody sees it. We could not do that
:18:15. > :18:21.before. The public are partially to blame. Looking at the end of 2016,
:18:22. > :18:24.only 50% of the population trust politicians, but how vocal are they
:18:25. > :18:31.add saying I don't trust you? They are willing to take the lie because
:18:32. > :18:35.it is easier, perhaps. Five years of moaning that politicians always lie,
:18:36. > :18:43.30 seconds in the polling booth to vote for the same people. We have
:18:44. > :18:47.had an awful lot of stuff about the referendum campaign, as a supporter
:18:48. > :18:50.of this country leaving the European Union I completely accept that the
:18:51. > :18:56.Leave campaign behaved disgracefully in some of the things they did, but
:18:57. > :19:00.so did Remain. Both sides. The whole thing began with Ted Heath telling
:19:01. > :19:05.an enormous whopper about how joining the then Common Market would
:19:06. > :19:07.not affect British sovereignty and independence, a complete and
:19:08. > :19:13.absolute falsehood and the row has rested on but ever since. The idea
:19:14. > :19:21.it is one-sided or new is incorrect. I think both sides lied. Who will
:19:22. > :19:26.decide he was lying and he was not? Who will decide weather or not the
:19:27. > :19:30.promise about the NHS is a lie? Will that be decided in the courts? The
:19:31. > :19:34.people who voted on that basis do not necessarily think that, you have
:19:35. > :19:38.that view. The way we punish politicians for lying is by putting
:19:39. > :19:44.them out of office, once we have decided they are dishonest... Let's
:19:45. > :19:48.get social media. Hopefully we do fact checking at the BBC as
:19:49. > :19:53.journalists. Something that Edwina Currie said with regards to Phil
:19:54. > :19:55.Willis, the CPS did not go ahead without prosecution.
:19:56. > :20:00.One person on Twitter says manifestos can be made legally
:20:01. > :20:04.binding as situations might change. Robert says lying occasionally is a
:20:05. > :20:08.requirement of politics. We had to be realistic that nobody will ever
:20:09. > :20:11.meet every single manifesto pledge promised. Bob says politicians get
:20:12. > :20:25.away with all sorts of behaviour that would see the rest of us in
:20:26. > :20:30.court. If we lied at work we would be sacked. Paul says prosecute
:20:31. > :20:36.politicians for lying? We would have to build a new prison after every
:20:37. > :20:39.election. Thanks for that, Paul, we like the practicality.
:20:40. > :20:45.Peter, how can we make politicians more honest? A more educated
:20:46. > :20:49.electorate is what you need. The real crisis of our country is in the
:20:50. > :20:52.collapse of education since the destruction of the grammar schools
:20:53. > :20:56.in the 60 's, since when people have been taught what to think but not
:20:57. > :21:00.how to think. If you can't think, how can you possibly judge whether
:21:01. > :21:05.somebody should be elected into Government? Have you ever told a big
:21:06. > :21:14.lie in your job? You are really called out in my job if you lie in
:21:15. > :21:17.print club. I have lied in person, no doubt. Your body language was not
:21:18. > :21:23.good. You can doubtless find it if I have. Yes or no? I think we all tell
:21:24. > :21:28.lies to some degree, in the investment world when you tell the
:21:29. > :21:33.truth there is a price to pay, you get less votes, less customers but
:21:34. > :21:36.it is the right thing to do. It is about the conditions that
:21:37. > :21:41.politicians operating, it is not that they are particularly bad at
:21:42. > :21:43.lying. No light, we are out of time. Thank you for joining us.
:21:44. > :21:46.Next week marks what some describe as the glorious 12th -
:21:47. > :21:49.the official start of the shooting season for red grouse in the UK,
:21:50. > :21:51.during which hundreds of thousands of the birds are shot
:21:52. > :21:55.The day is often marked by protests from animal rights campaigners.
:21:56. > :21:58.But a charity has begun a scheme to use game birds such as pheasant
:21:59. > :22:00.and partridge to provide meals for people in need.
:22:01. > :22:03.The former England cricket captain Sir Ian Botham says he plans
:22:04. > :22:07.to donate 10,000 birds from his shooting
:22:08. > :22:18.Wendy Robbins went to find out more about the scheme.
:22:19. > :22:26.Shooting birds in the UK. All it has long been a controversial subject.
:22:27. > :22:31.However it remains a firm and legal fixture in our countryside and a big
:22:32. > :22:35.part of life in Rowell communities. I caught up with Sebastien Green,
:22:36. > :22:40.who organises shoots. I know the shooting season is soon to begin,
:22:41. > :22:43.can you take me through broadly what happens on a shoot? Ago there are
:22:44. > :22:48.various forms of shooting, it can be driven shooting where birds are
:22:49. > :22:53.driven towards people who shoot, there is walked up shooting where
:22:54. > :22:58.people who shoot the birds will walk towards them. The shooting community
:22:59. > :23:02.contribute ?2 billion towards the rural economy, it is quite
:23:03. > :23:06.significant. Tim Woodward is a former commodity
:23:07. > :23:12.broker who left his job in the City last year as he wanted to set up a
:23:13. > :23:17.charity to help tackle food poverty. Sebastien suggested a way to achieve
:23:18. > :23:23.that. Sebastien told me about this idea he had of really utilising meet
:23:24. > :23:29.to feed people in need. We started exploring that idea. -- utilising
:23:30. > :23:33.meat. How do you feed people? We went to be by charities and asked
:23:34. > :23:37.what they do not have. They said they get a lot of low nutritional
:23:38. > :23:41.value products but they are missing really good protein and meat. We
:23:42. > :23:46.looked at a wide array of meat and the first thing we came up with is a
:23:47. > :23:51.pheasant casserole and a partridge curry. What made you think about
:23:52. > :23:56.that? In the countryside at the moment there is a wide availability
:23:57. > :24:00.of those two meats, the price has come down in recent years and we
:24:01. > :24:06.thought we might appeal to people in those environments to help us by
:24:07. > :24:12.maybe donating their meat to us. The charity is looking to donate
:24:13. > :24:18.125,000 meals this year. TV chef Tim Adams is their food adviser. The
:24:19. > :24:21.nutritional value of game meat is, generally speaking, higher than
:24:22. > :24:25.comparable farmed meat. High in protein, exceptionally low in fat by
:24:26. > :24:31.comparison to fund meat because it has had a longer life, grown over a
:24:32. > :24:34.greater period. It is more nutrient dense, partly because it is moved
:24:35. > :24:40.around a lot and partly because of a more varied diet. I was interested
:24:41. > :24:49.to know what it was about this charity that attracted him. I am
:24:50. > :24:52.proud to be part of the Country Food Trust and what they are doing, there
:24:53. > :24:55.are a lot of hungry people for what different reasons. When you look at
:24:56. > :24:58.that problem and you say we want to feed them, how can we help, you
:24:59. > :25:03.start looking for low value products to feed them, and I am talking about
:25:04. > :25:07.monetary value, not nutritional value. One of the no-brainers at the
:25:08. > :25:14.right time of year is game meat. Pheasant and partridge particularly,
:25:15. > :25:18.available in a very short period of time that become incredibly cheap.
:25:19. > :25:22.You can give it away to people who are hungry.
:25:23. > :25:26.Game meat might be nutritious but for some people there are big
:25:27. > :25:31.ethical questions about killing birds for sport. Some people feel,
:25:32. > :25:35.this is their concern, that what you are doing is taking something
:25:36. > :25:39.distasteful to them, shooting birds for sports, and making it acceptable
:25:40. > :25:43.by giving to charity in the way you are doing. I think that you could be
:25:44. > :25:47.made but it did not cross our minds when we started. Clearly some people
:25:48. > :25:52.are very much against shooting and some people are very much in favour,
:25:53. > :25:57.and a large sector of people might not have a view. As a charity we are
:25:58. > :26:01.not lobbying for against. If you have an issue with shooting
:26:02. > :26:05.that is your right, campaign about it and fight for a change in the
:26:06. > :26:10.law. But don't in the meantime stop is taking a low value commodity with
:26:11. > :26:12.a very high nutrient wealth and giving it to people who are hungry,
:26:13. > :26:15.don't mix those two arguments. Wendy Robbins with an example of how
:26:16. > :26:19.birds shot for sport can be used But hunting and shooting remain
:26:20. > :26:22.controversial and can generate strong passions both
:26:23. > :26:26.for and against. So let's discuss - is it ethical
:26:27. > :26:29.to shoot animals for sport? Joining us now are Phillippa King,
:26:30. > :26:32.the director of The League Jim Barrington is from
:26:33. > :26:38.the Countryside Alliance. Bonnie Greer is a
:26:39. > :26:42.playwright and novelist. And Peter Hitchens
:26:43. > :26:49.the journalist is still with us. Philippa, starting with you, is
:26:50. > :26:52.there some good coming out of shooting in terms of feeding people
:26:53. > :26:57.who do not have enough food or food with lots of protein in it, then
:26:58. > :27:01.surely that is better in your eyes? I would argue that people who go to
:27:02. > :27:06.food banks need the basics like bread, milk, cheese, sugar and
:27:07. > :27:11.flour. There is another dark aspect to this that in 2012 the Food
:27:12. > :27:15.Standards Agency put out a warning that people should not eat too merge
:27:16. > :27:22.game bird that has been shot by lead. Let's can cause brain injuries
:27:23. > :27:26.and nervous system problems. -- lead can cause. It is great people want
:27:27. > :27:30.to help people going to food banks, not a problem. The charity said they
:27:31. > :27:34.tested their first production run for traitors of lead, results were
:27:35. > :27:38.very low and well within the EU regulations and they will continue
:27:39. > :27:42.to test each production run going forward. In terms of the food you
:27:43. > :27:47.mentioned, the food banks, none of them had a great deal of protein. So
:27:48. > :27:54.people using food bank should not eat meat? Ago but is not my point at
:27:55. > :27:57.all. But testing them,, I am really pleased they are testing but the
:27:58. > :28:04.Food Standards Agency says you should not eat too much game bird
:28:05. > :28:07.shot by lead. About charities that give food to children or pregnant
:28:08. > :28:11.women, they are thinking about these things and they are within the
:28:12. > :28:17.regulations. In the shooting season there was
:28:18. > :28:26.100,000 birds shot a day. They are reared to be shot, in the most awful
:28:27. > :28:30.circumstances. They are in message toe mesh cages, they are not
:28:31. > :28:39.indigenous birds, lots get chipped in. -- they are in mesh cages. This
:28:40. > :28:44.board, again, is this a sport? It is not a level playing field. Jim, you
:28:45. > :28:49.used to be part of the organisation of Philippa is in bits you have
:28:50. > :28:53.changed sides? I looked up the facts. When you start to portray
:28:54. > :28:59.something is just killing for sports, then it gives people who do
:29:00. > :29:03.not have much to do with that activity a skewed view. This has a
:29:04. > :29:08.utilitarian outcome, as so many forms of shooting and hunting do.
:29:09. > :29:12.Not all, but they can't all be lumped together as Chris Packham
:29:13. > :29:19.seems to do with his animal rights agenda. It has a benefits. You had
:29:20. > :29:24.to look at that benefit and equally you have to look at the
:29:25. > :29:29.consequences. If you stop these activities. It benefits humans, what
:29:30. > :29:35.about the birds who are pretty much battery hens? That is a debate.
:29:36. > :29:38.Personally I do not eat meat, but when people are eating literally
:29:39. > :29:43.billions of intensively reared birds, to say that shooting free
:29:44. > :29:49.range birds, which is what this is... They are not free range...
:29:50. > :29:53.When they are out they are. They have many conservation benefits
:29:54. > :29:59.which provide and keep a unique part of the countryside, the heathland.
:30:00. > :30:02.Bonnie? We need to separated. It is wonderful to feed people, you
:30:03. > :30:08.shouldn't say they should not eat gross, they should eat what they
:30:09. > :30:12.need to. It is a cover for so-called sport, which is about people running
:30:13. > :30:17.around the countryside in funny costumes and screaming.
:30:18. > :30:24.There was nothing wrong with it, but don't tie on some kind of book about
:30:25. > :30:29.people eating as a result of it. It is not about eating, it is about
:30:30. > :30:35.doing what they want to do, but you should not connect the two. This is
:30:36. > :30:43.itself a cover for a class war campaign. It is not about class war.
:30:44. > :30:46.Let's keep a sense of proportion, millions, possibly billions of
:30:47. > :30:52.chickens reared in the most disgusting conditions, pigs as well,
:30:53. > :30:55.in this country and other countries, cattle, to be fed. The proportion of
:30:56. > :31:04.this in comparison to the amount of shooting is vast. But there are
:31:05. > :31:10.regulations. If you let me finish my point I can shut up afterwards. Here
:31:11. > :31:14.is the point, I have enormous respect for vegetarians and
:31:15. > :31:19.freedoms, I am not want, but if someone who is a vegetarian or begin
:31:20. > :31:22.can object to the shooting of game birds, anybody who makes a fuss
:31:23. > :31:27.about a very small number of game birds being shot and says nothing at
:31:28. > :31:32.all about battery and factory produced meat which they willingly
:31:33. > :31:35.eat, says nothing about conditions in many slaughterhouses which
:31:36. > :31:38.provide the meat to eat, seems to me to be missing the point and losing
:31:39. > :31:42.all sense of proportion and attacking something they don't do
:31:43. > :31:51.while leaving something alone which they do do. Ayew a vegetarian? No,
:31:52. > :31:54.I'm not. You said a small amount of birds, it is about 35 million birds
:31:55. > :32:00.a year which are reared and shot, they don't have the regulations that
:32:01. > :32:05.farm animals do, we have all seen... Regulations are really helpful to
:32:06. > :32:10.the chickens. We all know those regulations due to be tight end but
:32:11. > :32:14.we are talking about people going out for pleasure to shoot animals on
:32:15. > :32:19.a mass scale at which about 30 or 40% don't get shot cleanly because
:32:20. > :32:29.when people have adrenaline going in a sporting environment, study
:32:30. > :32:32.showed... Let Philippa speed. About 100,000 birds a day are shot and
:32:33. > :32:41.most of those go into the pit, not the pot. They are just disregarded.
:32:42. > :32:43.Let's eat more of them. For people that just do that for enjoyment for
:32:44. > :32:44.one day. Let's bring in Emma now,
:32:45. > :32:47.who has a guest who is firmly I'm joined now by Diggory Hadoke,
:32:48. > :33:04.an author and hunter. What animals do you shoot? All sorts
:33:05. > :33:06.of things since I first had a gun at eight years old, I started with
:33:07. > :33:11.rabbits around local farms, progressed to a shotgun later in
:33:12. > :33:18.life shooting pheasants and pigeons again around the farms. By the time
:33:19. > :33:23.I was about 30 I started getting involved in driven game shoot and
:33:24. > :33:31.while fouling and I also shoot deer on bases in Scotland, mainly row and
:33:32. > :33:34.red deer. I hunt in Africa as well. The African side of things is
:33:35. > :33:39.slightly separate, we will get onto that the moment. Would you say what
:33:40. > :33:45.you do you do as a sport, as fun? Read a rather lame article in the
:33:46. > :33:49.Guardian this week which criticised me as an apologist for shooting and
:33:50. > :33:52.I would say I am an advocate of shooting, I don't think there is
:33:53. > :33:57.anything to apologise for. Shooting is a great sport and it is a sport
:33:58. > :34:01.which has been part and parcel of English country life for as long as
:34:02. > :34:05.we have had society. Many things have been part and parcel of English
:34:06. > :34:06.life that we have got rid of, which are no longer appropriate. If you
:34:07. > :34:27.say it is a sport you understand why some people may feel
:34:28. > :34:29.uncomfortable about your sport? I think some people live very
:34:30. > :34:32.different lives. If you have grown up in the countryside and hunt for
:34:33. > :34:35.utility and sport it is a normal part of everyday life. If you are
:34:36. > :34:37.based in an urban environment it seems utterly alien to you and you
:34:38. > :34:39.cannot understand it but ignorance should not be a basis for banning
:34:40. > :34:41.things which numbers show are beneficial and healthy. You
:34:42. > :34:44.mentioned you have been out to Africa which speaks to trophy
:34:45. > :34:48.hunting, I don't know what you hunted out there but how do you
:34:49. > :34:53.defend that, what did you hide? I have hunted all sorts of things in
:34:54. > :34:55.Africa, I have been out to shoot pigeons over sunflower crops where
:34:56. > :35:01.the annual sunflower crop loses about 30% of what is grown to
:35:02. > :35:07.predation by pigeons and guinea fowl so I have been out to shoot those...
:35:08. > :35:11.You don't go to Africa to shoot pigeons, what were the big game
:35:12. > :35:14.targets? I have been to Africa to shoot pigeons on many occasions, it
:35:15. > :35:20.is a very good thing to do and a good sport. I have also hunted
:35:21. > :35:25.buffalo in Tanzania, I have been on as a journalist and accompanying
:35:26. > :35:31.Hunter on an elephant hunt in Botswana, a lion hunt in Tanzania,
:35:32. > :35:34.numerous opportunities to hunt buffalo and things so I have
:35:35. > :35:37.reasonable experience of hunting in Africa for all sorts of things. You
:35:38. > :35:43.don't have any empathy with people who have an issue with that? Well,
:35:44. > :35:47.again, lots of people have emotional reactions to all sorts of things and
:35:48. > :35:51.have a personal moral objection to them, which is fine, but don't try
:35:52. > :35:57.to impose them on other people. I don't think... I think in order to
:35:58. > :36:02.object to something and call for a ban on it, you need to show that it
:36:03. > :36:09.does harm and all empirical studies show hunting in Africa does a lot of
:36:10. > :36:14.good and really areas where hunting is the conservation strategy of
:36:15. > :36:18.choice, often the only one that works. Diggory, you have put your
:36:19. > :36:22.view across there, thank you for sharing it this morning. Always good
:36:23. > :36:25.to hear what you were thinking at home, thank you for getting in
:36:26. > :36:29.touch, I'm sure more responses will come in, but Paul says, when you
:36:30. > :36:32.deliberately raise these birds with the intention of shooting them for
:36:33. > :36:36.sport then yes, it is absolutely pathetic.
:36:37. > :36:40.Shooting birds is OK, say someone else, but only if birds are allowed
:36:41. > :36:44.to shoot back! Another one, Chris says, there is a
:36:45. > :36:48.reason we are the top of the food chain, it means we can eat whatever
:36:49. > :36:53.we want. Very interesting debate there. Even
:36:54. > :36:57.more interesting seeing your reaction, Bonnie! He says you are
:36:58. > :37:08.just being emotional. This guy obviously like shooting, fine, but
:37:09. > :37:12.the thing is, the question with the birds, giving birds to homeless
:37:13. > :37:15.people, that is why it is OK to do that, those are two different point.
:37:16. > :37:20.It is good to feed people, nothing wrong with that, but to have a
:37:21. > :37:24.sport, and I'm not going to go out banning people from doing that, but
:37:25. > :37:30.just as a general question, to have a sport on a built-up island, OK,
:37:31. > :37:36.where it is completely almost urbanised and people are rushing
:37:37. > :37:40.around with shotguns in costumes on horses and dogs that they breed, it
:37:41. > :37:46.is absolutely ridiculous, and at the end of the day, we are going to talk
:37:47. > :37:53.about it like that, that is what it is. You have got ten seconds. You
:37:54. > :37:56.are portraying this as something it is not, this is wildlife management,
:37:57. > :38:02.all of these activities have a benefit. You always hear what people
:38:03. > :38:06.dislike but never what they are for. I gave you ten seconds and I have to
:38:07. > :38:09.stick to that, we are out of time, thank you all very much indeed.
:38:10. > :38:12.Still to come on Sunday Morning Live...
:38:13. > :38:19.Marine Baig visits the community that welcomes people
:38:20. > :38:33.A major scientific breakthrough was announced this week
:38:34. > :38:35.as scientists discovered a way of editing embryos to remove
:38:36. > :38:43.faulty DNA that causes life-threatening genetic conditions.
:38:44. > :38:45.The study gives a glimpse into the possible future
:38:46. > :38:47.of medicine, where genetically inherited disabilities
:38:48. > :38:52.But it also provokes deep questions as to the ethics involved
:38:53. > :38:57.Here to discuss this latest breakthrough
:38:58. > :39:00.and the issues that arise from it is Professor Darren Griffin,
:39:01. > :39:06.an expert in genetics from the University of Kent.
:39:07. > :39:12.So this week is a big week in the world, can you explain in simple
:39:13. > :39:17.terms what was discovered? Basically we have had a procedure called
:39:18. > :39:22.preimplantation genetic diagnosis for about 25 years and that involves
:39:23. > :39:25.the creation of a number of embryos and then the selection of those
:39:26. > :39:29.thought to be unaffected with genetic disease. What is different
:39:30. > :39:35.with this procedure is that it would take embryos that are thought to be
:39:36. > :39:38.affected and the technology can correct that genetic defect so it
:39:39. > :39:43.can put in a normal gene where there was previously an abnormal one. And
:39:44. > :39:48.in this instance it removed heart disease? Yes, a particular type of
:39:49. > :39:51.heart disease as a genetic component, you may recall the
:39:52. > :40:04.footballers have her number, something similar to that. -- the
:40:05. > :40:07.footballer Fabrice Muamba. There will be concerned that this could be
:40:08. > :40:10.misused in a way that would not be good for us as humans, who would be
:40:11. > :40:15.eligible for the treatment and how would it work in day-to-day life? Is
:40:16. > :40:20.it just those going through IVF? By and large these would be people at
:40:21. > :40:24.risk of transmitting genetic diseases, so a classic example would
:40:25. > :40:28.be cystic fibrosis in Caucasian populations, one in 20 of us have a
:40:29. > :40:33.copy of the faulty cystic fibrosis gene. So if you knew that you could
:40:34. > :40:38.go to your doctor before procreating, if this was to become
:40:39. > :40:43.law, and they, I would like to make my babies with the help of doctors
:40:44. > :40:51.and have the gene removed? What can happen already if they can go to an
:40:52. > :40:56.IVF clinic and the embryos, one or two embryos are selected and at the
:40:57. > :41:00.moment people can have embryos selected that are free from the
:41:01. > :41:04.disease, what would potentially be different in future if this ever
:41:05. > :41:10.came to pass is if they found none of those were genetically normal
:41:11. > :41:13.then one of those found to be abnormal could potentially be
:41:14. > :41:18.corrected. What about the ethics of this? Let's say everybody was
:41:19. > :41:24.eligible in some way, because there is concern which people could get
:41:25. > :41:28.access to this and they could be a rich super race, we don't really
:41:29. > :41:33.know the ramifications of removing the gene, putting warning, changing,
:41:34. > :41:38.editing DNA. We have a number of issues, first of all the issue of
:41:39. > :41:43.ethics itself, should we be meddling with embryos at all? At the moment
:41:44. > :41:50.in the UK and the US, many other countries have legislation on this,
:41:51. > :41:56.it is illegal to manipulate an embryo and go on and... Do you agree
:41:57. > :41:59.with that? At the moment I think it is absolutely right because we have
:42:00. > :42:03.safety concerns that need to be addressed so the procedure itself
:42:04. > :42:07.can cause off target affects that need to be properly investigated and
:42:08. > :42:13.one thing I am a huge advocate for is proper research before these
:42:14. > :42:18.things go into clinical procedures. Then we need to consider the ethical
:42:19. > :42:21.framework, yes on the one hand should we manipulate embryos at all,
:42:22. > :42:26.but equally on the other hand, if we have the ability to do this and
:42:27. > :42:31.there are families in need of it, is it ethical not to do it? This is the
:42:32. > :42:36.framework. There is concern, I know it is a phrase used often with any
:42:37. > :42:41.advance we hear about, designer babies, creating them, what issues
:42:42. > :42:44.that poses? I thought you might mention that. Designer babies is a
:42:45. > :42:50.phrase you hear a lot and I give public talks and I have bitten the
:42:51. > :42:55.bullet and tongue in cheek call it that now... But it is a serious
:42:56. > :43:01.concern. I have mixed feelings about the phrase but yes, there is a
:43:02. > :43:05.concern about the way that we mitigate -- and the way that we
:43:06. > :43:09.mitigate that if we have lawyers who work on social policy, philosophers,
:43:10. > :43:12.ethicists, all of whom need to be involved in the debate considering
:43:13. > :43:16.all of the pros and cons, the safety, the ethics of doing it, the
:43:17. > :43:22.ethics of not giving it, then we come to review whether society, we
:43:23. > :43:26.have the human fertilisation embryo authority formed many years ago and
:43:27. > :43:31.by and large this sort of work is highly, highly regulated. So at the
:43:32. > :43:34.moment you are aware of the issues but they need much more
:43:35. > :43:38.investigation and that is where we are at the moment? Absolutely, and
:43:39. > :43:42.the thing gives it is highly regulated and long should it remain
:43:43. > :43:43.so. We will keep talking about it, I'm sure. Professor Darren Griffin,
:43:44. > :43:46.thank you. Tonight Channel 4 will broadcast
:43:47. > :43:48.a controversial documentary about Princess Diana which has been
:43:49. > :43:51.called a betrayal of privacy. The programme uses recordings made
:43:52. > :43:54.by the princess as part of a voice coaching course and reportedly
:43:55. > :43:55.reveals intimate details This month sees the 20th anniversary
:43:56. > :44:04.of the death of Princess Diana Channel 4 says the tapes
:44:05. > :44:11.are an important historical source and, though made in private,
:44:12. > :44:13.the subjects covered So whatever the rights and wrongs
:44:14. > :44:17.of this case, do the royal family Joining me now are Graham Smith,
:44:18. > :44:21.the chief executive of Republic. Robert Jobson is the royal editor
:44:22. > :44:26.of the London Evening Standard. And Bonnie Greer is
:44:27. > :44:38.a playwright and novelist. Robert, you have been covering the
:44:39. > :44:43.Royal family for 30 years or so, is this an invasion of privacy?
:44:44. > :44:49.LAUGHTER Is it an invasion of privacy?
:44:50. > :44:54.Possibly. Possibly. Would you like to see these tapes? I have seen
:44:55. > :44:59.them. I have seen the show. If you wanted to watch the tapes, if you
:45:00. > :45:04.have a phone or a home computer you can do it now. If you lived in
:45:05. > :45:08.America you would have already seen most of this. The actual programme
:45:09. > :45:12.which Channel 4 allowed me to see because I was commentating on it for
:45:13. > :45:20.the national newspapers is good, it is very well made and Diana is the
:45:21. > :45:23.person that brings light to the rather sombre mood of the film. But
:45:24. > :45:28.the principal... Once they were sold by Peter settle into NBC, they have
:45:29. > :45:33.been licensed by Channel 4. It is as technical as that. It goes back to
:45:34. > :45:39.the Paul Burrell court case. Paul Burrell gathered all this stuff, put
:45:40. > :45:43.it into a loft, that led to a case that collapsed. It was left to
:45:44. > :45:57.Scotland Yard to return these tapes to their rightful owners. It went to
:45:58. > :46:01.Peter Setland, was it morally right? Is it right that those tapes are
:46:02. > :46:07.being shown on national television? Yes, if you don't like... You are a
:46:08. > :46:12.journalist, you would say that. If you don't like it, they have been
:46:13. > :46:16.seen on television at MBC, it is in the computer, turn over, they will
:46:17. > :46:21.not have that many viewers anyway. You don't have to watch it. You
:46:22. > :46:32.asked whether it is moral for Channel 4 to screen it, I think it
:46:33. > :46:34.is in the public interest, I think it is intrusive. Those poor young
:46:35. > :46:40.men... Who have just made their own film. Let's let Christina speak.
:46:41. > :46:44.Dated, and we all know that Diana was a very troubled woman -- they
:46:45. > :46:49.did. We know she had an eating disorder and she was so insecure she
:46:50. > :46:53.had all kinds of crushes on members of staff, basically, because she was
:46:54. > :46:58.so lonely and very unhappy. We know that. Facing the 20th anniversary of
:46:59. > :47:03.her death we could have a bit more respect for somebody who probably
:47:04. > :47:09.died, essentially, because of prurient press interest into her
:47:10. > :47:14.private life. And a drunk driver. Yes, but... There is no question her
:47:15. > :47:19.life was made an absolute misery by the paparazzi pursuing her. We could
:47:20. > :47:25.do more honour to her memory. Bonnie? In law there is something
:47:26. > :47:29.called expectation of privacy, which applies in this situation. She was
:47:30. > :47:35.with a therapist and it is like this all, if we go to our doctor or
:47:36. > :47:44.therapist we expect privacy. This was the situation. So she spoke in
:47:45. > :47:47.that atmosphere. That is what is immoral, if we are going to use that
:47:48. > :47:51.word. It goes back to the original seller of the tape. If we look at
:47:52. > :47:55.it, we have participated in it. We have the right to do it but we are
:47:56. > :48:01.participating in the invasion of privacy. She did not, unfortunately,
:48:02. > :48:06.live very long. We do not know what her impact on history will be, if
:48:07. > :48:12.any, but it is a private tape and it is not right. It was the boy 's cut
:48:13. > :48:16.-- voice coach and she spoke to. Crostini are touched on William and
:48:17. > :48:23.Harry, they are normal people with normal feelings, I have spoken to
:48:24. > :48:27.them. I would not want my dead mother's tapes to be released, would
:48:28. > :48:31.you? Historians and journalists have described the Royal household is
:48:32. > :48:36.more secretive than the CIA and MI5. The idea of giving them more secrecy
:48:37. > :48:40.is back to front. It is not a private family, it was not the
:48:41. > :48:44.journalists, it was the monarchy, institution and the Royal household
:48:45. > :48:48.who caused the trauma for Princess Diana. There is a public interest in
:48:49. > :48:52.judging this institution, which is largely shielded behind a fairly
:48:53. > :48:56.sympathetic press and official secrecy to look about the closed
:48:57. > :48:59.doors and safe who are these people? Who is the Queen who is running this
:49:00. > :49:13.institution? Who are the people around them? Why do we
:49:14. > :49:15.have the right to private details? It is a public institution, the
:49:16. > :49:18.Queen as head of state, the Royal household are on the public payroll.
:49:19. > :49:21.All the public... Gory details? I do not think we should have the
:49:22. > :49:24.monarchy at all, there is no separation between private and
:49:25. > :49:27.public. The family has been constitutional eyes than they
:49:28. > :49:37.exploit their own private life for their own game. I don't have an
:49:38. > :49:41.argument about that birds Victoria's youngest daughter burned all of her
:49:42. > :49:45.diaries. These are public people but I would dispute whether Diana will
:49:46. > :49:50.wind up in the historical record or not, she did not live long enough,
:49:51. > :49:53.we do not know. This might be of interest to know about the future
:49:54. > :50:00.king and the future king after that, then maybe. It is just not history.
:50:01. > :50:07.It is a young woman... St Kitts will not learn about Princess Diana in
:50:08. > :50:11.100 years? -- so kids Will not learn? I don't think that Princess
:50:12. > :50:17.Diana's opinion of their husband and son, who will both be the monarch...
:50:18. > :50:24.We might want to judge King Charles, the next king, who is this man?!
:50:25. > :50:28.Let's listen to Graham. We have a right to know who our head of state
:50:29. > :50:35.will be, we should really have a right to choose. Then what? And then
:50:36. > :50:40.get rid of them. Robert? You were talking about President Trump, an
:50:41. > :50:44.elected man. Your country has annihilated this man. You don't want
:50:45. > :50:49.him to be President, you look into everything about his life. Can you
:50:50. > :50:56.criticise us for wanting to know the saying? I did not say criticise, I
:50:57. > :51:03.am talking about her intent. She was advised... Listen to Bonnie, Robert.
:51:04. > :51:10.She was in a therapeutic situation. She was not. Listen to Bonnie. All I
:51:11. > :51:15.have read... She was not. Robert, you had to listen to her. You might
:51:16. > :51:20.have more information, but most people would believe to be true...
:51:21. > :51:25.Alexia this information. Number one, he is not a therapist, he is an
:51:26. > :51:30.actor. She was advised not to give him those tapes, number two, and she
:51:31. > :51:36.did. Her bodyguard said give it back to her, he did. It was after the
:51:37. > :51:42.Burrell case that Scotland Yard decreed that the tapes belonged to
:51:43. > :51:48.Setland, who sold them, he is immoral, no one else. Christina?
:51:49. > :51:52.Diana was a human being. We are talking about at moral issue. She
:51:53. > :51:57.was a human being with the right to a certain amount of privacy. What a
:51:58. > :52:02.very unhappy woman said to a voice coach in private about her six life
:52:03. > :52:06.is not necessary for us to know about and I think it is an absolute
:52:07. > :52:09.abomination and disgrace. That is all we have time for, thank you. She
:52:10. > :52:13.said a lot more than that... The L'Arche community began
:52:14. > :52:15.in France more than 50 years ago. It enables people with learning
:52:16. > :52:18.difficulties to live and work with others in an environment
:52:19. > :52:20.that is supportive and inclusive. There are now 146 L'Arche
:52:21. > :52:22.communities in 35 countries, and Marine Baig has been to visit
:52:23. > :52:33.one in Kent. I am in Canterbury, Kent, and I have
:52:34. > :52:44.got here just in time for breakfast. I will be joining Elenor, Chris,
:52:45. > :52:49.Scott and Vitak. I am helping with toast. This is supported
:52:50. > :52:53.accommodation run by the faith -based charity L'Arche. Most of the
:52:54. > :52:58.charity's residents have learning disabilities, although not all.
:52:59. > :53:05.Scott is completing a degree at Bristol University when he developed
:53:06. > :53:12.a rare and limiting brain condition. # All the lonely people
:53:13. > :53:18.# Where do they all belong? Wow! You did a history degree? What
:53:19. > :53:31.university? Bristol. How old were you? 1987. It left him needing 24
:53:32. > :53:39.hour support from the charity's staff and volunteers.
:53:40. > :53:44.# You can dance... Not all the residents require full-time care,
:53:45. > :53:48.some are semi-independent. Caroline lives in her own self-contained
:53:49. > :53:55.flat. How do you find living here independently compared to...? Very,
:53:56. > :54:00.very different speakers here is just me and one other assistant, over
:54:01. > :54:07.that there are seven, seven people and three or four macro live in. Do
:54:08. > :54:11.you find it better? Much better. I have my own kitchen, my sitting
:54:12. > :54:18.room, dining area, I can come and go when I want, come back when I want.
:54:19. > :54:23.Everyday, residents are involved in work or activities, as I am about to
:54:24. > :54:29.discover in the workshop. Hello, I am Marine. Lovely to meet
:54:30. > :54:37.you. They sell much of the Kraftwerk and
:54:38. > :54:42.receive a share of the profits. I am doing needle felting. I have
:54:43. > :54:51.ever done that before. Will you teach me? -- I have never done that
:54:52. > :54:56.before. I have a needle, I am pricking it and making sure it stays
:54:57. > :55:04.in. You get one of these, choose the colours that you want. OK. I love
:55:05. > :55:11.being creative, making things. It is really not as easy as it looks. I am
:55:12. > :55:23.getting better at this. I did tell you, didn't I? You were right!
:55:24. > :55:31.L'Arche was found in France in 1964. This particular community was
:55:32. > :55:35.founded ten years later and was the first in the UK. One of its earliest
:55:36. > :55:41.residents was Peter. Pictured here on the right in 1975.
:55:42. > :55:47.He was supported by a volunteer called Maggie, pictured in the
:55:48. > :55:55.middle. They became firm friends. That is you, Pete, looking at the
:55:56. > :56:01.cameraman. It is where L'Arche started, I was visiting for the
:56:02. > :56:06.first time. More than 40 years later, Maggie and Pete are still
:56:07. > :56:11.close friends. Pete, we have been friends since 1975, because that
:56:12. > :56:15.supper evening in the garden was when I first visited. You have been
:56:16. > :56:20.a really good friend to me. I would say that one of the reasons I like
:56:21. > :56:27.having you as a friend all this time is because you let me be myself. You
:56:28. > :56:30.do. I have come to meet them both to find out what it is about L'Arche
:56:31. > :56:36.that made their friendship so special. Nice to meet you. Thank
:56:37. > :56:45.you. Can you believe you have been friends for so long? We always hit
:56:46. > :56:57.it off. Pete has a great wit. What do you like about Maggie? You make
:56:58. > :57:03.me a cup of tea. You make me a cup of tea! How has L'Arche helped you?
:57:04. > :57:07.It struck me that it was fun. There was not understand them, we were
:57:08. > :57:13.human beings in the same community learning from other.
:57:14. > :57:18.Now Pete and I are meeting up with Caroline, Elenor, Chris and Scott
:57:19. > :57:23.and other members for a barbecue. While the food is cooking, I catch
:57:24. > :57:27.up with Louise Carter, a national coordinator at L'Arche. We are ten
:57:28. > :57:31.communities in the UK and probably support around 300 people with
:57:32. > :57:35.learning disabilities in different ways. We are Christian ecumenical
:57:36. > :57:39.communities but we welcome people of all faiths and none, and it is
:57:40. > :57:49.people with disabilities that drive and shape community life in their
:57:50. > :57:50.desires and hopes for how they want to live.
:57:51. > :57:53.Now time for food. Potato salad? Caroline is on salad and I am on
:57:54. > :57:56.sweetcorn. I have been privileged to make some wonderful new friends here
:57:57. > :58:02.and now there is nothing more to do than seeing the afternoon away.
:58:03. > :58:07.# We're all going on a summer holiday
:58:08. > :58:11.# No more wary for a week or two # Fern and laughter on a summer
:58:12. > :58:13.holiday # No more worries for me and you
:58:14. > :58:16.# For a week or two... That's nearly all
:58:17. > :58:18.from us for this week. But Emma will be carrying
:58:19. > :58:20.on the conversation online. Yes, I'll be talking
:58:21. > :58:22.to Robert Jobson about his nearly three decades of work covering
:58:23. > :58:24.the royal family. Log on to
:58:25. > :58:26.facebook.com/bbcsundaymorninglive In the meantime, from everyone
:58:27. > :58:33.here in the studio and the whole