Episode 14

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:00. > :00:00.Today on The Big Questions: Trade v human rights,

:00:07. > :00:10.gender-neutral language, and what's Easter really about?

:00:11. > :00:30.Today we're live from Netherhall School in Cambridge.

:00:31. > :00:38.Welcome, everybody, to The Big Questions.

:00:39. > :00:41.This week, Mrs May and her ministers have fanned out across globe

:00:42. > :00:44.in search of new business for post-Brexit Britain

:00:45. > :00:47.from customers outside the European Community.

:00:48. > :00:49.The Prime Minister has been in Saudi Arabia,

:00:50. > :00:52.her Chancellor has been in India, and Liam Fox has been telling

:00:53. > :00:57.the president of the Philippines that we enjoy shared values.

:00:58. > :01:00.Saudi Arabia treats women as second class citizens

:01:01. > :01:03.and executes people for being gay or for not believing in God.

:01:04. > :01:06.They've also been accused of war crimes for bombing

:01:07. > :01:10.Yet Saudi Arabia is Britain's largest trading partner

:01:11. > :01:14.And just the day before meeting the International Trade Secretary,

:01:15. > :01:17.Liam Fox, Philippine President Duterte told an audience of young

:01:18. > :01:21.school children he was angry and would kill people

:01:22. > :01:26.Thousands have died since his election last year

:01:27. > :01:36.And Duterte has said he doesn't give a BLEEP about human rights.

:01:37. > :01:46.Should we trade with countries that abuse human rights?

:01:47. > :01:54.Jordan, it is perfectly straightforward from a moral

:01:55. > :02:01.perspective. We are doing business with a country killing thousands in

:02:02. > :02:05.Yemen. Barbaric human rights records of torture, execution of games,

:02:06. > :02:10.women cannot marry, they cannot travel, they cannot access higher

:02:11. > :02:17.education without the permission of a man. Two women were detained and

:02:18. > :02:25.72 days without charge in Saudi Arabia for driving. Why are we

:02:26. > :02:29.dealing with these people? When you put it in those terms, it is not a

:02:30. > :02:32.place I would want my daughter to spend time but it is also a

:02:33. > :02:37.complicated set of relationships between governments. Trade is just

:02:38. > :02:43.one of those levers. We have a defence and security arrangement

:02:44. > :02:50.with Saudi Arabia and others, we share intelligence. The judgment

:02:51. > :02:56.made by the authorities is that keeps us safer. If we look at the

:02:57. > :03:00.economic arguments as well, in the UK, 140,000 jobs in the defence

:03:01. > :03:08.industries exist in part because of our ability to trade overseas.

:03:09. > :03:15.Directly, 14,004 Saudi Arabia. For some people, that is not important,

:03:16. > :03:20.it is about the moral imperative, but in the complicated world we live

:03:21. > :03:28.in, broader, systemic issues about relationships need to be taken

:03:29. > :03:33.account of. Has a Ronan human rights -- has the human rights values we

:03:34. > :03:37.hold made a difference in Saudi Arabia? It is very difficult to

:03:38. > :03:42.tell. In the Middle East you tend to see a very conservative... This

:03:43. > :03:49.change is clay seal. Yes, and it is very narrow, leadership. Just two

:03:50. > :03:56.layers below you see young folk with Western values, we see more people

:03:57. > :04:00.educated than we have seen in the West, just here in Cambridge there

:04:01. > :04:08.are a number of Saudi graduates who are women. Andrew Smith, 140,000

:04:09. > :04:13.jobs. It is one of the most brutal, repressive regimes in the world,

:04:14. > :04:18.utterly complicit in the destruction of Yemen. In the two years since

:04:19. > :04:24.that began, the UK has sold ?3 billion of weapons. I have no doubt

:04:25. > :04:30.that is what the Prime Minister was doing there. In terms of jobs, jobs

:04:31. > :04:36.involving arms exports account for 0.2% of jobs in the economy. We do

:04:37. > :04:42.not want to see mass unemployment, we want to see these skills put to

:04:43. > :04:45.good use in good, productive, sustainable industries, not those

:04:46. > :04:53.that depend on war and conflict to turn a profit. It is not just those

:04:54. > :04:56.jobs, there are outer rings and outer rings beyond that of related

:04:57. > :05:01.industries. The arms industry is a keystone industry, not just

:05:02. > :05:06.components but technology and engineering beyond that. We've got

:05:07. > :05:14.to use the right figures. According to the area of space -- Aerospace

:05:15. > :05:19.groups it is 55,000 jobs. We need to use the right figure. That is only

:05:20. > :05:23.one third of the figures used regularly by government which

:05:24. > :05:26.includes procurement as well. In terms of the cost, we've got to

:05:27. > :05:32.think about what message it sent out. The message it sends to the

:05:33. > :05:36.Saudi regime was total support for its brutal rule. The message it sent

:05:37. > :05:40.out to those in Saudi prisons, those being tortured for their beliefs,

:05:41. > :05:48.was that their human rights do not matter. Isn't that the moral

:05:49. > :05:55.message? You just carry on, we want your money. My understanding was she

:05:56. > :06:00.was very robust, polite but robust in terms of her expectations in

:06:01. > :06:04.relation to the broader relationship between the two governments. It is

:06:05. > :06:11.important to remember that quite often this subject is projected as

:06:12. > :06:14.dodgy salesmen selling arms. That is not true. This is a significant

:06:15. > :06:19.government to government relationship, heavily controlled,

:06:20. > :06:27.companies sell weapons to the British government and the British

:06:28. > :06:33.government trade with countries. Financial services. Indeed. These

:06:34. > :06:37.are very fine judgments, nuanced judgments. It is not nuanced when

:06:38. > :06:44.you're thrown off a roof for being gay. Correct. I would not want my

:06:45. > :06:47.daughter to spend significant time in Saudi Arabia and I have a lot of

:06:48. > :06:55.respect for Andrew's position but this is a real world, complicated

:06:56. > :07:00.set of problems. Can we get away from it being complicated? I've got

:07:01. > :07:04.a degree, explain it to me. It is not complicated. We are selling

:07:05. > :07:08.weapons to people who are using it to abuse human rights. It does not

:07:09. > :07:12.matter how much money we make, I could make a lot of money as a hired

:07:13. > :07:17.assassin, it does not make it all right. It is not complicated, it is

:07:18. > :07:19.incredibly simple. Why are we letting have access to weapons when

:07:20. > :07:26.they are going to kill innocent people with them? We need to stop. I

:07:27. > :07:32.will be with you in a second. I want to bring Davies in. You are sitting

:07:33. > :07:43.beside Kate, who has entered the fray. You can turn to your left. I'm

:07:44. > :07:49.always on the left. Let me make a bold prediction and save the that a

:07:50. > :07:54.majority of the people watching this programme get it, on the one hand,

:07:55. > :07:57.these things are true, it is a very problematic country, but they

:07:58. > :08:01.understand that on the other hand Britain has needs in the world, they

:08:02. > :08:08.are very reality -based things around conflict, with the

:08:09. > :08:13.intelligence sharing with the Saudis has saved lives, Saudi stability is

:08:14. > :08:19.a factor in the Middle East at the same time as these grievous things

:08:20. > :08:25.go on... Is that the same as saying, you used the phrase, Britain has her

:08:26. > :08:29.needs. We were discussing prostitution on this programme a

:08:30. > :08:36.couple of weeks ago. You may laugh but isn't there an analogy, you're

:08:37. > :08:41.going to a brothel where women are being abused because you have your

:08:42. > :08:44.needs. There is not an analogy at all because the country cannot deal

:08:45. > :08:51.on the basis of the personal in the same way as you deal in

:08:52. > :08:54.international affairs. The British government has shown a fantastic

:08:55. > :08:59.example of this in action. Michael Gove cancelled a contract with the

:09:00. > :09:03.Saudi prison system because it is a part of Saudi Arabia that is deeply

:09:04. > :09:08.problematic and we should not engage in. The government still sells

:09:09. > :09:13.weapons because Saudi Arabia does have an important need to fulfil in

:09:14. > :09:24.the region. Therefore, we are in a relationship that is conducive. The

:09:25. > :09:32.Saudi regime is committing war crimes and we know that for a fact.

:09:33. > :09:43.The bombing in Yemen has resulted in thousands of deaths. It is actually

:09:44. > :09:46.against the policy. The truth is, the UK has been providing military

:09:47. > :09:52.support to the Saudi regime for years. It is not a phenomenon on

:09:53. > :10:01.that is new. It has allowed these human rights abuses to continue. The

:10:02. > :10:05.UK is just as complicit and that is why we need to totally reformulate

:10:06. > :10:13.the way that the trade regime is imagining. If we don't sell it,

:10:14. > :10:20.China would sell them. They care nothing of human rights. Do we not

:10:21. > :10:23.have some kind of impact? The UK Government is showing that it cares

:10:24. > :10:31.nothing about human rights by exporting these weapons to Saudi

:10:32. > :10:42.Arabia and Israel. Like Israel? Indeed. Would you like -- would you

:10:43. > :10:50.compare them? War crimes are war crimes and it should be prohibiting

:10:51. > :10:55.the export of these weapons to countries committing war crimes.

:10:56. > :11:04.That would lead us on to a massive debate and I want to acknowledge

:11:05. > :11:15.that with our viewers at home. Last time we were on, we had that. But I

:11:16. > :11:19.mark what you said with interest. A number of politicians who come to

:11:20. > :11:22.hold the position of Secretary of State for Defence have said, I will

:11:23. > :11:28.profoundly review the relationship we have with Saudi Arabia and we

:11:29. > :11:32.will probably withdraw some of our licences. As soon as those

:11:33. > :11:36.politicians from both sides of the debate have arrived in office

:11:37. > :11:45.they've reviewed the relationships and kept it. That is a matter of

:11:46. > :11:49.record. It is disingenuous. Part of the problem with arms trade is there

:11:50. > :11:59.is so little transparency so that one of the things we've seen, there

:12:00. > :12:04.is evidence of governments ministers knowing of war crimes being

:12:05. > :12:11.committed and approving those exports anyway. We need

:12:12. > :12:19.transparency. Who would you deal with? You mentioned Israel. Many

:12:20. > :12:25.will argue it is a democracy. Other people have mentioned China. Maybe

:12:26. > :12:30.we cannot trade with China. Beyond that, in terms of human rights

:12:31. > :12:38.abuses, who else, who would you trade with? It is a question of how

:12:39. > :12:46.we approach our trade relations with any country. Protection for workers,

:12:47. > :12:52.human rights, instead of corporations, it is something we

:12:53. > :13:03.have as a policy where we approach all of these things at the centre.

:13:04. > :13:09.Did you have your hand up? Is there any evidence that trade sanctions

:13:10. > :13:15.improve human rights in these countries? Not so much a question

:13:16. > :13:19.but I am utterly shocked by the fact that we're still talking about

:13:20. > :13:28.funding either regimes or trading with countries who have a really

:13:29. > :13:36.horrible record of human rights, the key question is, a lot of countries,

:13:37. > :13:41.we should move away from that discourse which is about needing

:13:42. > :13:46.business, when we see how many people are displaced and the refugee

:13:47. > :13:48.crisis we deal with nowadays, people lending at the bottom of the

:13:49. > :13:56.Mediterranean Sea. Surely we've got to think carefully as to what sort

:13:57. > :14:05.of world we want to live in. We should still export arms to

:14:06. > :14:08.countries... We would be crying outrage but we are not crying out

:14:09. > :14:14.rage long enough in my opinion. Anyone else?

:14:15. > :14:23.Good morning. Quick point? We keep hearing about human rights

:14:24. > :14:25.violations, but human rights according to which organisation?

:14:26. > :14:30.Different countries have different understandings of what human rights

:14:31. > :14:34.means. So you are saying there should be relativism and other

:14:35. > :14:39.countries should have different human rights values? According to

:14:40. > :14:41.what frameworks are we talking about human rights? International

:14:42. > :14:50.humanitarian frameworks. Let's hear from that lady. We condemn children

:14:51. > :14:54.who witness bullying and don't speak out. Providing weapons to bully

:14:55. > :15:01.people and cause mass wars, we are just as bad as the children who

:15:02. > :15:05.don't speak out. What is the strategic thinking behind having

:15:06. > :15:14.this relationship? The one with Saudi Arabia. What some of the

:15:15. > :15:18.people have been saying about war crimes is not correct. Look at it

:15:19. > :15:23.like this. You want to stop some of the terrible things you see on your

:15:24. > :15:26.television screens, about the Syrian civil war, whatever else. You don't

:15:27. > :15:30.want to send your own troops to die to do it and you need allies. Allies

:15:31. > :15:35.are not perfect. United Kingdom has had to fight against radical Islam

:15:36. > :15:40.across the world with allies that are not perfect. Saudi Arabia is a

:15:41. > :15:46.source of radical Islam. Absolutely. And there is the problem of duality

:15:47. > :15:49.with one of the things they do in spreading ideology and the things

:15:50. > :15:53.they do in providing a modicum of stability in the Middle East

:15:54. > :15:57.fighting against the spread of the Iranian revolution in that way. But

:15:58. > :16:00.at the end of the day unless you are willing to send your own troops to

:16:01. > :16:03.go into all these different theatres, you are going to have to

:16:04. > :16:07.work with allies that are not perfect. I am convinced that your

:16:08. > :16:11.viewers understand that the morality that this country has and the west

:16:12. > :16:16.as God, which is better, unquestionably better, the quest for

:16:17. > :16:20.democracy and justice, has got to live in accordance with the

:16:21. > :16:25.realities of a very imperfect world. -- the west has got. Saudi Arabia

:16:26. > :16:31.does provide a modicum of stability in the Middle East. Do you provide

:16:32. > :16:37.that -- do you buy that? It doesn't provide stability for journalists

:16:38. > :16:41.who are tortured and it doesn't provide stability for women. Saudi

:16:42. > :16:44.Arabia is one of the most oppressive regimes in the world. I want to come

:16:45. > :16:53.back to the point about intelligence Schering. We are UN bound to share

:16:54. > :16:56.intelligence with Saudi Arabia. If there was any suggestion from a

:16:57. > :16:59.panel that Saudi Arabia would not share intelligence on the grounds

:17:00. > :17:02.that they could not buy billions of pounds of weapons every year, and

:17:03. > :17:06.they would knowingly allow terrorism to happen on the streets of London

:17:07. > :17:09.because we were not selling them weapons, anyone who thinks anything

:17:10. > :17:18.like that has a low opinion of the regime than I do. I just want to

:17:19. > :17:19.move on to the Philippines. Roderigo du tout, Liam Fox said he shares our

:17:20. > :17:39.values. -- President to Duterte. He has killed millions of

:17:40. > :17:43.people. How does a mass murderer share our values? I don't think he

:17:44. > :17:48.does but I do think that Liam Fox had a job to do in terms of forging

:17:49. > :17:52.relationships and there is a very complicated reality in forging those

:17:53. > :17:56.relationships. I personally don't think that Duterte shares our values

:17:57. > :18:00.and that cannot be said to be the case. Why do we condemn people like

:18:01. > :18:07.Robert Mugabe who are of no use to us but just as Venus? These are the

:18:08. > :18:10.double standards that ruin our reputation across the world. That is

:18:11. > :18:13.the problem. It is not double standards. It is strategic decisions

:18:14. > :18:16.about the needs of this country and plurality. The audience might not

:18:17. > :18:19.like it but the people in the country understand that we have

:18:20. > :18:25.strategic needs and we want to bring them in unison with our values. One

:18:26. > :18:32.man's double standard is another's strategic decision. Is this

:18:33. > :18:35.complicated? Should we trade with countries? The answer it is a

:18:36. > :18:38.separate discussion and we have got to be very careful as we enter the

:18:39. > :18:42.post-Brexit world and we earn our place in the world that we don't

:18:43. > :18:50.engage in a race to the bottom in the name of trade. But the broader

:18:51. > :18:53.question is should we trade with countries that abuse human rights? I

:18:54. > :18:57.used to be the correspondent in China, the four years, for the Daily

:18:58. > :19:04.Telegraph. I covered lots of human rights abuses. The Nobel Peace Prize

:19:05. > :19:10.laureate is still in jail in China. But when China opened up we made a

:19:11. > :19:16.Faustian bargain. We agreed to trade with China and it has not delivered

:19:17. > :19:22.the reforms that we hoped. But it has transformed lives in China,

:19:23. > :19:29.trade. It is not that long ago. 1959 to 1961, 40 million Chinese died in

:19:30. > :19:32.a famine. So if you look at it that way, trade has brought incredible

:19:33. > :19:36.things. Environmental degradation but incredible benefits. Should we

:19:37. > :19:40.trade with the United States? That country had a state sanctioned

:19:41. > :19:45.torture programme in Guantanamo Bay. This is very complicated stuff. I

:19:46. > :19:48.firmly believe that trade is not a panacea but it does bring real

:19:49. > :19:53.benefits to people around the world and it brings us closer together

:19:54. > :19:56.because it makes our interests much more deeply entwined and it actually

:19:57. > :20:01.makes it harder for countries to fall apart. We are seeing that now

:20:02. > :20:04.with the United States. The positive aspect of globalisation. I think

:20:05. > :20:08.that trade can be and should be a positive thing and the way we make

:20:09. > :20:13.sure it is... It is true that trade impacts on all of us, in other

:20:14. > :20:17.countries and here. We need all the friends we can get? We can make sure

:20:18. > :20:29.that we keep high standards, environmental standards, health and

:20:30. > :20:32.safety standards, protection for workers and human rights at the core

:20:33. > :20:35.of our trade and that is how we can ensure that trade has a positive

:20:36. > :20:38.effect on all of us in this country and abroad. If we start saying that

:20:39. > :20:41.those things need to be add-ons if we can cram it into the trade

:20:42. > :20:44.agreement, that is how you ensure there will be a race to the bottom.

:20:45. > :20:45.We need to re-vision how we approach trade. Thank you all very much

:20:46. > :20:48.indeed. If you have something to say

:20:49. > :20:51.about that debate log on to bbc.co.uk/thebigquestions

:20:52. > :20:52.where you'll find links to join We're also debating live this

:20:53. > :20:59.morning from Cambridge would gender-neutral language

:21:00. > :21:01.be better for mankind? And have we lost the real

:21:02. > :21:04.meaning of Easter? So get tweeting or emailing on those

:21:05. > :21:07.topics now or send us any other ideas or thoughts you may

:21:08. > :21:15.have about the show. This week, columnists

:21:16. > :21:17.in tabloids and broadsheets alike were fulminating

:21:18. > :21:19.against the University of Hull. Students on a religious activism

:21:20. > :21:27.course had supposedly been told they would lose marks if they didn't

:21:28. > :21:32.write in gender-neutral language. For example, they shouldn't write

:21:33. > :21:34.about what he or she might do but rather what they would do,

:21:35. > :21:37.even if there's only one So I am not a he but

:21:38. > :21:42.a they or an it. So no firemen, chairmen,

:21:43. > :21:49.policewomen or stunt women. Would gender-neutral language

:21:50. > :22:11.be better for mankind? A stimulating, provocative question.

:22:12. > :22:14.Emma, you are neither male nor female, right? I identify as

:22:15. > :22:20.non-binary sty and neither male nor female and in correspondents I use

:22:21. > :22:24.that day or them pronoun. So you think that gender roles damage

:22:25. > :22:29.society and we need to think about language carefully. Yes. Things are

:22:30. > :22:32.codified in the language we use that we use language to construct society

:22:33. > :22:37.and what is true is a huge variance of gender presentation and gender

:22:38. > :22:43.identity in humankind. Not simply men and women. Yes, humankind, not

:22:44. > :22:47.mankind. I wouldn't say mankind because humankind is more accurate.

:22:48. > :22:57.In the same way as me using they and them is more accurate descriptor as

:22:58. > :23:00.my identity. What about Homo sapiens? I very rarely used

:23:01. > :23:05.scientific language in my life. It means wise man. We need to look at

:23:06. > :23:09.the abolition of language to support gender neutrality and that is for a

:23:10. > :23:12.number of reasons. Firstly it stops the assumption that the most

:23:13. > :23:18.important people in the room are men or that the only people in the room

:23:19. > :23:22.are men. And it does include that wider spectrum of gender. There is a

:23:23. > :23:26.wonderful quote where gender and language should be comfortable and

:23:27. > :23:30.fair. She is referring to German which is one of the most strictly

:23:31. > :23:35.gender codified languages in Europe. What happens in German? German has a

:23:36. > :23:38.grammatical gender and agenda pronominal system. They have

:23:39. > :23:43.gendered pronouns and nouns, supported by the wider grammar of

:23:44. > :23:45.the language. But actually the German date is encouraging

:23:46. > :23:52.lecturers, professionals and industry to use gender neutral

:23:53. > :23:58.language. -- the German state. Like the university of Hull, universities

:23:59. > :24:01.in Germany are using gender neutral language because it includes

:24:02. > :24:06.everyone and gives that space for trans people that are neither male

:24:07. > :24:09.nor female. This is a question of sensitivity. Courtesy is all very

:24:10. > :24:16.well but you are encouraging people to use certain words. My problem is

:24:17. > :24:21.when language is policed. If we think about the first series of Star

:24:22. > :24:26.Trek, it opened with to boldly go where no man had gone before, and

:24:27. > :24:30.then it was to bother go where no one has gone before. Nobody cared. I

:24:31. > :24:34.am bothered by the split infinitive! But nobody cares about gender

:24:35. > :24:39.neutralisation. Nobody cares about that sort of stuff. They don't. What

:24:40. > :24:48.they really care about... Put your hand up if you care. They are mad!

:24:49. > :24:52.Let me make my point. Those things, it humankind, mankind, they are

:24:53. > :24:58.interchangeable, synonymous. We are talking about people, a minority of

:24:59. > :25:02.activists, who seek to have people disciplined or sacked because they

:25:03. > :25:06.are imposing certain language. That is the imposition of light which are

:25:07. > :25:11.not the revolution. It depends on the context. You might want to use

:25:12. > :25:13.gender neutral language to self-described as you might then

:25:14. > :25:17.tell your employer and friends that and if they continue to use the

:25:18. > :25:21.wrong lag which, that is a mark of disrespect towards the person and a

:25:22. > :25:26.lack of willingness to engage. -- the wrong language. They should be

:25:27. > :25:37.disciplined in a can professional context. You hear what they said,

:25:38. > :25:42.would that be the correct use of language? Yes, the singular they has

:25:43. > :25:47.existed for a very long time. But it would be rude? Yes, I think that is

:25:48. > :25:51.dehumanising but some people might self select to use it but in general

:25:52. > :25:55.that is dehumanising. The suffragettes would be appalled about

:25:56. > :25:59.this, wouldn't they? They want women to be noticed and out there. They

:26:00. > :26:04.want women to achieve and for other women to know that they have

:26:05. > :26:07.achieved. It is really about self-determination, isn't it? People

:26:08. > :26:11.should decide how they are going to identify. But I don't know how you

:26:12. > :26:24.are going to identify. Then I will tell you. I tell you my name and you

:26:25. > :26:27.call me by the name that I give you and I could give you my gender

:26:28. > :26:29.pronoun. It is pretty simple and it doesn't need to be such a

:26:30. > :26:32.complicated thing. I think it is very important to respect the way

:26:33. > :26:34.people identify. But it isn't simple. The gender neutral pronouns

:26:35. > :26:42.that are being invented, they are being imposed on people. But

:26:43. > :26:48.language is evolving and is not static. Sure, but the distinction I

:26:49. > :26:53.am trying to make is between language evolving and pushing

:26:54. > :26:57.something onto people. But there is no distinction. Over time language

:26:58. > :27:04.changes and there were terms used a couple of years ago that were used

:27:05. > :27:08.to refer to people of mixed race such as mulato are nowadays people

:27:09. > :27:11.don't understand the term and quite rightly because it was obnoxious

:27:12. > :27:16.that we have got rid of it. As time goes on, we have the freedom to

:27:17. > :27:19.choose. People argue about political correctness but this is grammatical

:27:20. > :27:23.incorrectness. But there are places where it is very important. You

:27:24. > :27:29.mentioned the term chairman. Companies still refer to as chairman

:27:30. > :27:32.and that is not necessary. It sends a message out to young women that

:27:33. > :27:37.they are not qualified to apply for the job. It may be a very subtle

:27:38. > :27:44.message and it might not be what the person intends but can we do better?

:27:45. > :27:48.Yes. Should we? Yes. Brilliant. What about people who are non-binary,

:27:49. > :27:56.gender fluid? We are all male and female. Yes, of course. We are all

:27:57. > :28:02.male and female. Transgender people? There is a tiny minority of people

:28:03. > :28:06.with intersex conditions. Add a tiny minority of people who have some

:28:07. > :28:13.condition with a female brain and the male body. Apart from this, we

:28:14. > :28:18.are all male and female. The attempt to suggest that there is a third

:28:19. > :28:23.gender is, as far as I am concerned, and ideological and political

:28:24. > :28:26.project. It doesn't exist. The words male and female have existed

:28:27. > :28:31.throughout history. Throughout the world. Men are people with he needs

:28:32. > :28:38.his, women are people with joining us. It is as simple as that. I

:28:39. > :28:45.refuse to refer to this woman, who is clearly a woman as they, because

:28:46. > :28:50.that would be an ideological, political system. How can you say

:28:51. > :28:54.that? Because she is! Everybody watching this programme can see that

:28:55. > :29:03.she is a woman. That is definitely your problem. No! You are asking me

:29:04. > :29:09.to engage in an ideological, political system which I disagree

:29:10. > :29:12.with. I think we are male or female. But choosing what somebody is called

:29:13. > :29:21.is not imposing an ideological system. I am off for a cup of tea!

:29:22. > :29:25.It is just not true to say that on a biological level we are only male or

:29:26. > :29:29.female. Being intersex, which is a combination of 32 different ways of

:29:30. > :29:33.chromosomes being defined is as common as being red haired but that

:29:34. > :29:38.is physiological. Gender is socially created and it is separate to your

:29:39. > :29:42.body. You may have a female perceived body and be female and you

:29:43. > :29:45.may not. I do not present in masculine or androgynous way because

:29:46. > :29:50.I question the idea that to be non-binary I have got to masculine

:29:51. > :29:56.eyes my appearance. To say that you refuse to use my pronouns or refer

:29:57. > :30:00.to me as a gender that I am as one of the greatest acts of disrespect

:30:01. > :30:03.that I am forced to ensure on a daily basis. You have no empathy and

:30:04. > :30:07.respect for people like me and the wider trans community and that

:30:08. > :30:37.diminishes my respect for you as an individual.

:30:38. > :30:45.Occasionally there are those who are more difficult to identify but it

:30:46. > :30:48.refers to another situation. Someone must agree with Michael Grubb who

:30:49. > :30:58.wants to say something? You're in the grey jumper? Do they want to say

:30:59. > :31:04.something? I am a female. It is my belief system and that is fine. The

:31:05. > :31:07.idea that you're seeing if this person chooses to say that they are

:31:08. > :31:12.they that you cannot engage with that because of your belief system,

:31:13. > :31:15.we live in a culture where lots of people have lots of different

:31:16. > :31:22.beliefs, as is very clear on today's show. We cannot say I have this

:31:23. > :31:27.belief system and therefore I am going to impose it on everyone. You

:31:28. > :31:37.cannot do that. They have a particular... There you go! They

:31:38. > :31:55.have a belief system. You cannot impose yours on them. In a minute. I

:31:56. > :31:59.am not sure what to say. I don't mind. Call me anything you want. We

:32:00. > :32:06.are complicating things too much. Somebody once said politicians treat

:32:07. > :32:12.symptoms and leaders treat disease. If the problem we are concerned with

:32:13. > :32:17.is gender inequality, let's fix equal rights for women in the

:32:18. > :32:20.workplace, not stigmatise people who are transgender. We are placing too

:32:21. > :32:30.much weight on something that is petty in my opinion. We need to

:32:31. > :32:47.focus on more important things. Is this worth personning the barricades

:32:48. > :32:59.for? You've had marriage proposals from it, you've had a lot of respect

:33:00. > :33:04.when you ridiculed religion. I did not ridicule it I made a point about

:33:05. > :33:11.the fallacy. You are sensitive about gender but not about religion. You

:33:12. > :33:16.don't want to offend anyone about gender. I completely disagree with

:33:17. > :33:22.you. I am firm about gender and I am a massive campaign against gender

:33:23. > :33:26.discrimination, all of this stuff. One of the powerful things about it

:33:27. > :33:36.is I can send in my CV and put my initial at the top and I have not

:33:37. > :33:40.got to write Mr or Mrs. Their are-2-mac things. There is what

:33:41. > :33:47.should be very small, do we address people in the way that they want to

:33:48. > :33:54.be addressed? You have said I am disrespectful to religion. It is

:33:55. > :34:00.suggested. If somebody says to me, I am Reverend Jones, I call them

:34:01. > :34:07.reverence. That is what they want to be called. So I call them that. If

:34:08. > :34:16.somebody says they want to be called they are Ms or Mickey, I call them

:34:17. > :34:23.what they want to be called. Oh well put. It is a matter of courtesy.

:34:24. > :34:27.Courtesy is extremely important and if people are in a dialogue with

:34:28. > :34:33.gender constructs we need to respect really come from. But we need to be

:34:34. > :34:37.allowed to ask questions, is there a relevance between personhood and

:34:38. > :34:41.biology? Am I going to start feeling that womanhood is being abolished in

:34:42. > :34:48.the way that I understand it if I cannot refer to myself as she? Who

:34:49. > :34:54.is talking about you not being able to refer to yourself? The whole

:34:55. > :34:59.point is it should be fluid and fear, this is not about everyone

:35:00. > :35:03.being gender neutral. It does not take anything away from you and if

:35:04. > :35:13.it does that poses meaningful questions. It is not like the French

:35:14. > :35:24.Revolution. This is actually a matter of choice. There is something

:35:25. > :35:27.further behind. We all know if you want to abuse people you must first

:35:28. > :35:38.abuse the language. Is it an abuse of language or a revelation of the

:35:39. > :35:42.human person. If there an importance to male and female or not and if we

:35:43. > :35:47.cannot have that conversation in a respectful way we might be including

:35:48. > :35:54.the abolition of male and female as we understand it. Is the project to

:35:55. > :35:58.create neutrality dangerous in some way? If we cannot ask that question

:35:59. > :36:04.without being shouted down that is alarming. Are we dealing with the

:36:05. > :36:11.abolition of man and women in a profound way? I think we are. There

:36:12. > :36:18.are lots of useful things about not presenting as male or female in a

:36:19. > :36:23.job application. But... This idea that there is an imposition. Some

:36:24. > :36:31.people might say councils are universities are doing it. Some

:36:32. > :36:35.people might be afraid to embark on a sentence and walk-through

:36:36. > :36:41.eggshells in case they say the wrong thing. It is not liberating, it is

:36:42. > :36:44.constricting, isn't it? It is liberating for people who are

:36:45. > :36:48.vulnerable. People who are afraid of saying the wrong thing and using the

:36:49. > :36:56.wrong terminology, that is OK. This is not asking people to be well

:36:57. > :37:03.versed, it is asking you to embrace a piece of learning and knowledge,

:37:04. > :37:07.accept that communities have existed forever and have been propped up by

:37:08. > :37:12.language constructed in other parts of the world. Ask questions. Do your

:37:13. > :37:18.own research. It is OK to make mistakes. The bad thing is to make a

:37:19. > :37:28.mistake, refuse to accept that you've made it and refuse to learn.

:37:29. > :37:33.You work for the Daily Telegraph. Next week you should convince your

:37:34. > :37:43.editor to use gender neutral language. It generally does use

:37:44. > :37:48.gender neutral language. Language is organic. It reflects the society

:37:49. > :37:53.that it comes out of. Ultimately, is they going to stick? I doubt it.

:37:54. > :37:57.That is not how most people see the world. We are kind of right on the

:37:58. > :38:03.margin. I'm the father of two daughters. I think firefighter is

:38:04. > :38:10.better than fireman. If my girls want to work in the Fire Service

:38:11. > :38:14.that is terrific. I don't think we should get hung up. If you want to

:38:15. > :38:24.tie yourself in knots, the arbiter of that will be, people will accept

:38:25. > :38:28.it on the basis of common sense. Are quite happy, singular of they and

:38:29. > :38:36.them has been in the English language for quite some time. It

:38:37. > :38:52.takes more time to say and is a Frankenstein sentence. I love that

:38:53. > :38:57.phrase. We must not lose sight of the fact that language refers to a

:38:58. > :39:02.reality. As a writer I feel that is very important. I think there is

:39:03. > :39:10.something very serious at stake, if we start eroding concept of male and

:39:11. > :39:18.female, which is happening. Is it happening? If we get to a point

:39:19. > :39:22.where the women's rights movement cannot talk about the experience of

:39:23. > :39:28.women that is a problem but I don't see that being under threat. There

:39:29. > :39:32.is much more of an issue out there right now with expectations about

:39:33. > :39:36.men and women and I think it is better for men and women and

:39:37. > :39:41.everyone who does not feel like they fit into those categories if we say,

:39:42. > :39:46.let's not have a way that men and women behave, let's talk about how

:39:47. > :39:49.people are, and wherever you are comfortable in that, great. Great

:39:50. > :39:59.news for people who have been excluded from jobs. We've got to

:40:00. > :40:08.leave it there. We are going to talk about Easter next. You can join in

:40:09. > :40:13.the debates online. Tell us what you think about our last question. Have

:40:14. > :40:22.we lost the meaning of Easter. You can e-mail us. It is Easter next

:40:23. > :40:25.Sunday and the London Marathon takes place the following Sunday but we

:40:26. > :40:33.are back on the 30th of April and you can apply to be in the audience

:40:34. > :40:37.for the live edition of our pre-recorded special on

:40:38. > :40:42.humanitarianism. Then we will be in Salford for a programme on

:40:43. > :40:46.globalisation. And London on May the 28th. That is for a special on

:40:47. > :40:49.genetic engineering. Who would have thought an Easter egg

:40:50. > :40:52.hunt could become so controversial? The Prime Minister even

:40:53. > :40:57.interrupted her sales mission to Saudi Arabia to chastise Cadbury

:40:58. > :41:02.and the National Trust for downplaying the significance

:41:03. > :41:05.of Easter in promotions for egg hunts on Trust

:41:06. > :41:06.properties next weekend. The Archbishop of York said

:41:07. > :41:09.it was like spitting on the grave of the firm's Christian

:41:10. > :41:12.founder, John Cadbury. But Cadbury was a Quaker,

:41:13. > :41:20.who do not celebrate either And the name Easter derives

:41:21. > :41:24.from the Germanic Pagan goddess Eostre, whose lights at dawn may

:41:25. > :41:27.or may not have been carried by hares but who certainly

:41:28. > :41:33.represented spring fecundity. Yet to many Christians,

:41:34. > :41:35.Easter, which commemorates the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

:41:36. > :41:37.is the most important Have we lost the real

:41:38. > :41:49.meaning of Easter? I will start with you, Sarah. I saw

:41:50. > :42:08.you trying to come in and I did not have a chance to come to you. It is

:42:09. > :42:13.about fecundity, basically. Your -- it is a lovely manifestation of

:42:14. > :42:17.fertility and fecundity. Our question is writing off the back of

:42:18. > :42:25.it? In Easter there has always been a celebration of spring and renewal.

:42:26. > :42:29.Many scholarly debates and for hundreds of years it has been used

:42:30. > :42:37.at the resurrection day. But what it brings in the Christian sense is the

:42:38. > :42:44.renewal of humankind. Nature is a renewed in springtime. But Easter is

:42:45. > :42:50.the biggest invitation that has been issued to humankind which is to be

:42:51. > :42:53.called into the life of God. So the resurrection when Jesus comes back

:42:54. > :42:57.from the dead, he does not just come back as a human person who is divine

:42:58. > :43:08.comedy comes back as what we will be. It is a sign of who we will

:43:09. > :43:14.become. So it is either of no significance or it is the most

:43:15. > :43:23.significant of all. The rising of the pagan god is the original so you

:43:24. > :43:29.can see how this tags onto it. There is a prefiguring in pagan tradition

:43:30. > :43:39.of Christian celebration but there is also Passover. The most important

:43:40. > :43:44.thing about it, obviously if you're French or Spanish you would be

:43:45. > :43:50.calling it something else, which refers to that. The important thing

:43:51. > :43:57.about it is Christ is sacrificed so that we can enter into the life of

:43:58. > :44:04.God. The dues were taken into freedom. You know the four cups that

:44:05. > :44:14.are drunk at the Passover feast... Can we come back to that? If we do,

:44:15. > :44:23.I will hold you to that thought. Let's not go into the origins. I

:44:24. > :44:29.know that you disagree with these. Should it be about Jesus dying on

:44:30. > :44:35.the cross? The point is as human beings we look at our natural world

:44:36. > :44:40.around us and we see the natural cycles of birth, death and rebirth.

:44:41. > :44:43.All the fates have a concept of that and a celebration of that. Easter

:44:44. > :44:51.happens to be the Christian version of that. There are other pagan

:44:52. > :44:58.faiths that celebrate this renewal of life. It seems that we should

:44:59. > :45:05.celebrate that we have these same concepts.

:45:06. > :45:10.Rather than involving ourselves in squabbling over who is festival

:45:11. > :45:17.proceeded who's and which came first, the chicken or the egg? Is

:45:18. > :45:22.fecundity and fertility imported? At this time of year, the earth is

:45:23. > :45:27.growing and you can see the plants growing with renewed vigour, and

:45:28. > :45:30.what we are doing as human beings is looking at the natural world and

:45:31. > :45:37.seeing ourselves reflected in that. We want a new projects, to spring

:45:38. > :45:42.clean, to celebrate life. You could have been John four cups, you see, I

:45:43. > :45:51.did it, and you can bent on creme eggs. Will you be having an Easter

:45:52. > :45:57.egg? Not sure. If you look at the southern hemisphere, Easter does not

:45:58. > :46:00.begin spring. The idea of the spring equinox, the full moon, it happens

:46:01. > :46:09.to work with European countries where Christianity evolved. And the

:46:10. > :46:15.Middle East. In South Africa they are going into winter in April. What

:46:16. > :46:19.I do want to say about Easter is that for Christians there is a

:46:20. > :46:21.belief that new beginnings are possible in life after periods of

:46:22. > :46:26.hardship and struggle and the dark Knight of the soul. There is a new

:46:27. > :46:29.beginning in your life and used it symbolises the possibility that new

:46:30. > :46:34.beginnings can happen and I think that is what Christians want people

:46:35. > :46:38.to know and that is an important value to keep hold of in our

:46:39. > :46:44.society. It is interesting to have a theological debate about where it

:46:45. > :46:48.all comes from. I think most of your viewers at home are wondering when

:46:49. > :46:52.they get their Easter egg. The fact is that Jesus did not emerge from an

:46:53. > :46:59.egg and neither did any of the pagan deities. At a fundamental

:47:00. > :47:03.evolutionary level! As long as these things are optional, fine. If people

:47:04. > :47:05.want to celebrate by going to church, the synagogue, the mask,

:47:06. > :47:11.pagan events, whatever they want to go to, fine. But the problem always

:47:12. > :47:17.comes in when it becomes compulsory. You should do this or that. Like in

:47:18. > :47:20.Saudi Arabia? Exactly. And like a lot of the places we have talked

:47:21. > :47:24.about where religion is not optional and religion has always got to be

:47:25. > :47:28.optional. If you want to spend the long weekend with your family eating

:47:29. > :47:31.chocolate and hopping around the garden like a rabbit, I don't know

:47:32. > :47:36.what it means but have a great time. And if you want to spend it doing

:47:37. > :47:43.something else, it should be your choice. I find the pagan origins of

:47:44. > :47:48.the word Easter very interesting because when you study anthropology

:47:49. > :47:55.you notice how Christianity comes in to different cultures and they do

:47:56. > :48:02.adopt the different culture, and translated Christianity into the

:48:03. > :48:06.symbols of that culture. That has perhaps slightly happened in this

:48:07. > :48:11.country. The fact is that we have had a Christian Easter for hundreds

:48:12. > :48:15.of years. I also feel that Christianity is a fundamental part

:48:16. > :48:19.of western civilisation. A lot of the things that we take for granted,

:48:20. > :48:24.like Easter, but a lot of the things to do with human rights, they are

:48:25. > :48:32.rooted in Christianity. And I do think that we should acknowledge our

:48:33. > :48:36.Christian roots. Many of us don't have Christian roots. I think

:48:37. > :48:47.western civilisation does have very Christian roots. Sexism is rooted in

:48:48. > :48:52.Christianity. Christianity is... Wait a minute! We have been around

:48:53. > :49:02.as a species for hundreds of thousands of years. What would you

:49:03. > :49:07.like to say? Are you a quicker? -- Quaker. The reason that John Cadbury

:49:08. > :49:11.would not have rolled in his grave is because Quakers believe that

:49:12. > :49:17.every day is holy and Christmas and Easter are no more holy than the day

:49:18. > :49:26.that we are on today. So chocolate everyday! The reason that the church

:49:27. > :49:31.opens up the season of Lent... I don't think that lady has finished.

:49:32. > :49:35.Sorry about that. The idea that every day is God's day means that we

:49:36. > :49:40.should be living that way and respecting God in everyone every

:49:41. > :49:45.day. What a better world that would make it. I wish we could leave it

:49:46. > :49:55.there but we have got another nine minutes! I might have to talk about

:49:56. > :49:59.the four cups! Peter? This is a really important point. What you are

:50:00. > :50:04.hearing here is essentially a lament for the decline of the church. Less

:50:05. > :50:08.than 5% of people in this country go to church. We are nominally

:50:09. > :50:12.Christian country but actually we are not really. What you are hearing

:50:13. > :50:17.here is a lament for the fact that not enough people go to church and

:50:18. > :50:21.subscribe to belief in the resurrection and a narrow Christian

:50:22. > :50:24.version of Easter. But to take the Lady's point here, if I bring my

:50:25. > :50:28.family together and we enjoy the daffodils and the roast lamb and

:50:29. > :50:33.hunting the odd Easter egg, does that bring more like or darkness to

:50:34. > :50:37.the world? It brings more like that we should ultimately embrace that.

:50:38. > :50:40.Which is not to say that the Christian side shouldn't celebrate

:50:41. > :50:47.solemnly. The lady there with the brown top. Hello? I think we missed

:50:48. > :50:50.the fundamental point. It is about putting your disco pants on and

:50:51. > :50:54.sharing and celebrating commonality is because in society today it seems

:50:55. > :50:58.to me that we concentrate more on what divides us than what brings us

:50:59. > :51:02.together and that is what we need to be looking at. That is definitely a

:51:03. > :51:08.theme that we have picked up on in the other debates as well. We are

:51:09. > :51:11.imposing linguistics and let's just dispense with that. What is

:51:12. > :51:15.important is what we are describing and talking about. What we have got

:51:16. > :51:19.here amongst many of the faiths is a concept that we all share, the idea

:51:20. > :51:24.of renewal of life and growth. Who doesn't want to celebrate that?

:51:25. > :51:29.Whether you are atheist or of faith or otherwise. It relates back to

:51:30. > :51:36.what you were saying about language. It is the language that we choose

:51:37. > :51:39.for people as a matter of courtesy. Do you see the connection? There is

:51:40. > :51:43.some connection in allowing space for everyone and however they wish

:51:44. > :51:46.to practice their particular faith. There is often contention at the

:51:47. > :51:49.heart of religious debate about to has the most right and who will

:51:50. > :51:57.ultimately succeed in whatever cosmic battle there is about life,

:51:58. > :52:01.death and rebirth. Ultimately it is giving people the linguistic

:52:02. > :52:03.flexibility to enjoy whatever practices they have, because it is

:52:04. > :52:07.counter-productive to have a continuing fight than to celebrate.

:52:08. > :52:12.My particular faith is Buddhism, as we celebrate the birth of blood at

:52:13. > :52:20.this time again, so religions around the world are tied to this part of

:52:21. > :52:26.the season. -- the birth of Buddha. To me it is much simpler than all of

:52:27. > :52:31.this. Experts are becoming less important in this country. They are

:52:32. > :52:37.saying that Christians between 2010 and 2050 will decrease to 45%. If

:52:38. > :52:44.the true meaning of Easter is really the Christian meaning and companies

:52:45. > :52:47.will target the 100%, then surely the meaning of Christianity will

:52:48. > :52:50.also decline and that will happen across other Christian countries,

:52:51. > :52:59.like the Netherlands and France. We will go over there. Hello. I do

:53:00. > :53:04.believe that each holiday that comes from a religious holiday comes to

:53:05. > :53:11.remind us about the spirituality that we have lost at which brings us

:53:12. > :53:14.together. I think dividing us by Christians and Buddhism and

:53:15. > :53:20.everything else is just culture. At the end of the day we are all

:53:21. > :53:27.spiritual beings. When a holy day comes called Easter, it reminds you

:53:28. > :53:30.to be kind, and... To look out for your fellow human beings? Why not do

:53:31. > :53:35.what the Americans do with Christmas and have happy holidays? Instead of

:53:36. > :53:40.happy Easter. Would you go with that. I don't think you would. I

:53:41. > :53:45.wouldn't. This expression of looking out for your fellow human beings and

:53:46. > :53:48.being kind to each other. This is rooted in Christianity, love your

:53:49. > :53:55.neighbour as yourself. It is! It predates religion. No, it doesn't.

:53:56. > :53:59.There are different parts of the world which don't have a Christian

:54:00. > :54:06.basis and they don't have it actually the same moral structure --

:54:07. > :54:13.exactly the same moral structure. Even if it were the case that

:54:14. > :54:16.Christian somehow behaved better because of this, the idea are

:54:17. > :54:20.behaving better because you are terrified of an all-powerful deity,

:54:21. > :54:31.that is not morality, that is fear. That is no way to behave. The Quaker

:54:32. > :54:38.lady. Sorry to call you that! I don't know your name. My name is

:54:39. > :54:48.Trish. Yes, I am getting that voice in my head telling me that. The

:54:49. > :54:52.golden rule is found in almost every religion that predates Christianity

:54:53. > :54:55.and is subsequently Christianity. Treating one another with respect as

:54:56. > :54:58.if there is that of God in each person is the way we should be

:54:59. > :55:10.living and respect for everyone is necessary. I am really surprised

:55:11. > :55:14.that of the three debates this has been the most heated! Does anybody

:55:15. > :55:19.really care? I am interested to know. Any Christian here, does

:55:20. > :55:23.anybody care about chocolate eggs and a giant rabbit promoting

:55:24. > :55:28.childhood obesity? Really, why does that matter? Because it might mask

:55:29. > :55:34.the importance of that great invitation that we have received to

:55:35. > :55:39.be brought out of the slavery of sin and into the light of Christ where

:55:40. > :55:48.he gives us the power to enter into a divine life. I want to spread the

:55:49. > :55:52.love. When consumerism becomes our God, that is a problem, and we just

:55:53. > :55:58.want the story to be heard and the news to be known. I think if people

:55:59. > :56:03.knew it, they would be at peace. Quiet, everyone. Andrew? I just want

:56:04. > :56:06.to comment briefly on the irony of the fact that Theresa May was

:56:07. > :56:15.defending the integrity of Easter eggs while she was trying to sell

:56:16. > :56:22.weapons to a country that abuses human rights. Slam dunk! The fact of

:56:23. > :56:29.the matter is that Jesus was crucified by an empire that cared

:56:30. > :56:33.more about trade than human rights. So all things are interrelated, is

:56:34. > :56:36.that what we are saying? Easter is not about bunnies and eggs and I

:56:37. > :56:40.worked on a farm and there is nothing glamorous about them.

:56:41. > :56:47.Cadbury is a great company but what I care about is an Easter Christian,

:56:48. > :56:51.if I can call myself that, Cadbury is paying corporate tax and not

:56:52. > :56:54.using child labour in the production of cocoa and that is what I care

:56:55. > :57:02.about, not the bunnies. Even though I like bunnies. We are interweaving

:57:03. > :57:06.all the debates and I am liking this. We will bring it all together

:57:07. > :57:10.at the end. Can I quickly argue a point about what the lady at the

:57:11. > :57:15.front was saying about moral behaviour and Christianity being

:57:16. > :57:22.interlinked? Two points. Surely that is just human nature anyway? Also I

:57:23. > :57:27.have known a lot of religious people use it as an excuse to justify

:57:28. > :57:31.themselves, whether or not it is gossiping about their neighbours, or

:57:32. > :57:35.if you go to a more extreme version where they just use religion as an

:57:36. > :57:40.excuse. Religion and morality, we have been there before and we will

:57:41. > :57:44.go there again and we have done a little bit today. John? 54 million

:57:45. > :57:54.people die every year. About 3 million of those is through obesity

:57:55. > :57:59.and type 2 diabetes. 650,000 people died violently every year. Only

:58:00. > :58:05.130,000 of those through what we would conceive as warfare. That is

:58:06. > :58:12.too many, agreed. But it seems to me that sugar may be more lethal for us

:58:13. > :58:20.than gunpowder. Interesting point. How long have we got? Ten seconds on

:58:21. > :58:24.the four cups. The fourth cup was brought into the land that is

:58:25. > :58:29.promised. Jesus didn't drink it. He went out and he drank it and he was

:58:30. > :58:33.crucified. That was the drinking of the fourth cup, he was crucified.

:58:34. > :58:36.The good news is that in spite of sugar we all die and the news is

:58:37. > :58:40.that we can live forever with God and that is the meaning of

:58:41. > :58:45.Christianity. I am a man of my word! Thank you for watching.

:58:46. > :58:47.As always, the debates will continue online and on Twitter.

:58:48. > :58:51.We're not on next week because it's Easter but we'll be back from York

:58:52. > :59:06.Have a great Sunday and enjoy your Easter.

:59:07. > :59:09.PHONE RINGS 'Police emergency.'

:59:10. > :59:13.Every two minutes, someone in Britain is reported missing.