:00:26. > :00:28.Good morning. Thank you very much, indeed. Welcome to The Big
:00:28. > :00:31.Questions, live from King Edward VI School. I'm Nicky Campbell. This
:00:31. > :00:34.week the Bishops in the House of Lords battled against the
:00:34. > :00:39.Government's welfare reforms, and lost. They haven't given up their
:00:39. > :00:44.fight. Is it right to cap benefits? The Bishop of Southampton says it
:00:44. > :00:50.will hurt many vulnerable children. Tomorrow, Elizabeth II will have
:00:50. > :00:54.been our queen for 06 years. As a young woman of 25 she became
:00:54. > :00:58.Supreme Governor of the Church of England. Today's Britain is a more
:00:58. > :01:02.multi-cultural society with people of many more faiths and none than
:01:02. > :01:06.in 1952. Should a future monarch cease to be the Supreme Governor of
:01:06. > :01:13.the Church of England? Mohammed Ansar says the next monarch should
:01:13. > :01:17.have freedom of faith and not tide to the Anglican communion. On
:01:17. > :01:22.Wednesday, the steady 40 year decline of selection by academic
:01:22. > :01:27.ability in the English education system was quietly put into reverse.
:01:27. > :01:32.Existing grammar schools are now allowed to increase their intake of
:01:32. > :01:36.pupils provided they are in areas of rising population. Should
:01:36. > :01:39.grammar school education be allowed to grow. The journalist,
:01:39. > :01:49.Christopher Hitchens says Britain's future depends on them being
:01:49. > :01:53.allowed to exstand limitless and yaefr why. And yaefr where. In an
:01:53. > :01:57.open letter to the Observer, 18 Church of England bishops expressed
:01:57. > :01:59.their concern this a cap on benefits could "push some of the
:01:59. > :02:02.most vulnerable children in the country into severe poverty". Many
:02:02. > :02:09.working people take home far less than �26,000 a year to support
:02:09. > :02:12.their families. Is it right to cap benefits? Caroline Dinenage, the
:02:12. > :02:17.Conservative MP, you believe that it is immoral that some families
:02:17. > :02:24.are working their back sides off, as you put it, and taking home less
:02:24. > :02:29.than families doing nothing? Yeah. I really do. I represent a part of
:02:29. > :02:36.enge -- England which is not typical of the affluent south of
:02:36. > :02:41.England. People are on low average wages. Less than half a job per
:02:41. > :02:47.working adult and people having to commute some distance. The biggest
:02:47. > :02:51.town in Britain without a rail work. To get to work where they are
:02:51. > :02:58.earning less and enjoy lower standards of living than neighbours
:02:58. > :03:05.of theirs living off benefits. That is unfair that people who are doing
:03:05. > :03:10.the right thing should be penalised for doing so. Doing - what do you
:03:10. > :03:14.mean by doing the right thing? What about people on benefits, are they
:03:14. > :03:18.doing the wrong thing? Everybody aspires to want to work. Nobody
:03:18. > :03:24.wants to remain on benefits. For everybody who wants to work and
:03:24. > :03:29.they can't it's a tragedy for that that family. The longer you are on
:03:29. > :03:32.benefits the less likely you will have the self-confidence to get
:03:32. > :03:35.that job. People do want to work to support their families and feel
:03:36. > :03:40.they are contributing to society. You are worried about the children
:03:40. > :03:43.of the working poor? Yeah. What about the children of those on
:03:43. > :03:50.benefits, the vulnerable children who will suffer? Bishop Jonathan
:03:50. > :03:54.tell us about your concerns. There are common areas of agreement here
:03:55. > :04:04.that Welfare Reform Bill has important contributions to make. We
:04:04. > :04:09.welcome as a House of Bishop ops we welcome it's universalism and its
:04:09. > :04:15.readiness to tackle issues. When you drill down and ask different
:04:15. > :04:20.questions, not so much comparing you know, is it fair for people to
:04:20. > :04:26.get �26,000 for doing nothing? Here you are working terribly hard, that
:04:26. > :04:31.is an attractive argument, it's beside the point when 6 7,000
:04:31. > :04:39.households will be affected by the Welfare Reform Bill. 220,000 of the
:04:39. > :04:45.children in there are part of those households. Quite disturbingly, I
:04:45. > :04:50.think, research has shown, four out of ten disabled children live in
:04:50. > :04:59.poverty. The impact, which I'm not sure has been aired enough, the
:04:59. > :05:06.impact of the proposed Welfare Reform Bill would see 100,000
:05:06. > :05:12.disabled children lose 1,4lun a year if the Bill goes through
:05:12. > :05:17.unamended. The benefit will not be taken away with families with
:05:17. > :05:22.members of disability. I defy no- one not to live on a salary of what
:05:22. > :05:31.is effectively �35,000. �500 may sound sufficient, just looking at
:05:31. > :05:36.it cold and neat. If you are in the centre of London, or in parts of
:05:36. > :05:41.the south-east, rent, basic bills leaves you very little out of that.
:05:41. > :05:46.I believe that unamended the Welfare Reform Bill raises real
:05:46. > :05:51.issues of fairness towards the poorest in our society. Where are
:05:51. > :05:55.the children of people on welfare benefits more worthy of our care
:05:55. > :06:00.than the children of the working... I wouldn't want to set it in that
:06:00. > :06:10.way. That is the temptation to set it in that way. When the Prime
:06:10. > :06:10.
:06:10. > :06:18.Minister presented the policy, I'm troubled by the image... They get
:06:18. > :06:23.child benefit those on benefits will not. We could debate how the
:06:24. > :06:29.government uses taxpayers' money to subsidise the arms industry and all
:06:29. > :06:37.sorts of every things. That you roll your eyes at. They are
:06:37. > :06:43.creating jobs. They are being moved overseas. On the Welfare Reform
:06:43. > :06:47.Bill if the cap did what it said it would, I wouldn't have any trouble
:06:47. > :06:50.with it. We find it applies to unemployed families but part-time
:06:50. > :06:57.workers. If you are working 23 hours a week your benefits will
:06:57. > :07:02.still be capped at the same amount. Tax credits and council tax benefit.
:07:02. > :07:08.If you are offered a part-time job it wouldn't be in your interest to
:07:08. > :07:14.take it. It's a disincentive. it concern you the people who will
:07:14. > :07:18.suffer? I'm suspicious about when people talk about children, it's a
:07:18. > :07:23.sign of pop gand da. That is from The Children's Society. If people
:07:23. > :07:26.are running households, it's up to them to feed and clothe the
:07:26. > :07:31.children to put the children first. For them to say, children will do
:07:31. > :07:36.this, children will do that, it's child poverty. Also in the middle
:07:36. > :07:41.there are discussions of poverty. There is no poverty in this country
:07:42. > :07:46.by comparison with what the Bishop must well know goes on in Africa or
:07:46. > :07:52.Asia. We do not have people who actually cannot afford to eat, have
:07:52. > :07:57.no shelter, freeze to death. Have no access to medical care. What
:07:57. > :08:02.puzzles me about the bishop is that he and his colleagues on the bench
:08:02. > :08:07.seem to have mistaken the welfare state as the King doom of heaven.
:08:07. > :08:13.They think that supporting the taxation of the poor to put money
:08:13. > :08:18.into the hands often of people who don't, or in some cases, won't work
:08:18. > :08:23.is in some way a Christian principle. As I recall it, St Paul
:08:23. > :08:26.said, "he who does not work, neither shall he not eat". The
:08:26. > :08:32.church are concerned with people who really and truly need
:08:32. > :08:39.assistance it should not be concerned with creating a huge
:08:39. > :08:43.welfare dependant... Of course, I'm grateful for the theological lesson.
:08:44. > :08:49.Any time. I often feel bishops need them. Jesus said he had come to
:08:49. > :08:54.give news to the poor. Yes. We were to love our neighbour. Yes. It's
:08:54. > :08:57.not propaganda to speak up for the vulnerable.
:08:57. > :09:02.APPLAUSE You are a Christian, Peter, the
:09:02. > :09:05.Bible is full of instructions to help the poor and those less
:09:05. > :09:09.fortunate? So we should. That is completely different from setting
:09:09. > :09:12.up a society in which people are paid not to work. Also a society, I
:09:13. > :09:16.have to say, in which we have deliberately created, this is
:09:16. > :09:20.something the church should be against, the church depends upon
:09:20. > :09:24.marriage of all things, a society which has created hundreds of
:09:24. > :09:29.thousands of fatherless families in which the children suffer endlessly
:09:30. > :09:35.from not having a father in the home. There are lots of hands going
:09:35. > :09:39.up. I will come to you in a minute. Ear other people who genuinely in
:09:39. > :09:43.this country can't be bothered working? I don't think it's about
:09:43. > :09:46.can't be bothered working. People were born into families where there
:09:46. > :09:50.has been generational unemployment. That is a problem of aspiration.
:09:50. > :09:54.They are cited in low educational attainment areas because nobody
:09:54. > :10:01.wants to work, the teachers don't want to go there, it's really hard.
:10:01. > :10:04.I don't think - I've never met anyone, who said to me, when I was
:10:04. > :10:09.younger I know what I'm going to be, I'm going to live on benefit. I
:10:09. > :10:15.will not have a car, not have a holiday. I will be demonised by a
:10:15. > :10:19.state that is has deserving and undeserving. Are you worried about
:10:19. > :10:24.the language here, the undeserving poor and deserving poor, the
:10:24. > :10:30.working poor? The hard-working families. I just... There are hard-
:10:30. > :10:34.working families? There absolutely are. Universial credit will hit
:10:34. > :10:39.680,000 households and they will lose money as well. They are low
:10:39. > :10:43.and middle income earners. We focus on the people on benefit. The real
:10:44. > :10:49.issue about the benefit problem, the real spend is housing benefit.
:10:49. > :10:53.A lot has been made of very big, people living in posh places. That
:10:53. > :10:58.is about private sector landlords charging large rents. Where will
:10:58. > :11:07.these people go? Where will they be relocated to when the average
:11:07. > :11:10.person losing �83 a week. That is as a result of selling off all the
:11:10. > :11:14.council houses. Absolutely. doesn't alter the problem that the
:11:14. > :11:17.cost of supporting this welfare state does not come out of the
:11:17. > :11:21.pockets of bankers and millionaires it comes out of the pockets of the
:11:21. > :11:26.next door neighbours of these people going out to work. They are
:11:26. > :11:31.often taking home less than the people they are subsidising this
:11:31. > :11:35.cannot conceivibly be right. lady there. Good morning. How about
:11:35. > :11:40.personal accountability? That is laid at the hands of parents, not
:11:40. > :11:44.children. Parents should not have children or even animals they
:11:44. > :11:48.cannot support. You can afford - if you can't afford - Take account of
:11:48. > :11:53.your own income and only abilities and parent children you feel you
:11:53. > :11:55.can give a good life to. You didn't like that? I don't like. That I
:11:55. > :12:01.feel really quite cross that actually we talk about the fact
:12:01. > :12:05.that will is no poverty in this country. I live and work in a
:12:05. > :12:09.deprived estate in Southampton. I see poverty every day much I see
:12:09. > :12:12.children sleeping on beds we wouldn't let our dogs sleep on.
:12:12. > :12:15.Mums going hungry to feed their children because they can't afford
:12:15. > :12:19.to live on the money that they are given. Yes, they are on benefit.
:12:19. > :12:25.Most of them can't get a job in the area that we live in. It's almost
:12:25. > :12:32.impossible to get a job. I really take offence that someone say that
:12:32. > :12:39.is poverty doesn't exist in this country. The slums of Bombay and
:12:39. > :12:44.see how people live there. Perhaps, take any of these people who this
:12:44. > :12:50.country complain they are poor and take them there and see what
:12:50. > :12:55.poverty is. We have a moral poverty which the bishops should address of
:12:55. > :12:58.people... Surrounded by crime and disorder and complete moral
:12:58. > :13:02.situation in which horrible things happen that bishops do nothing
:13:02. > :13:06.about. There was a case on BBC, lots of people have been discussing
:13:06. > :13:09.this case this week, as to how representative it is, a family they
:13:09. > :13:16.went through their budget. They are family who will have their benefits
:13:16. > :13:21.cut as a result of the welfare cap. I don't know if you saw it. �220 on
:13:21. > :13:26.shopping, 24 cans of larger, tobacco, the kids had mobile phones.
:13:26. > :13:32.They had Sky Sports. People get hot under the collar. You could argue
:13:32. > :13:39.that, in our society, are these essentials? No, they are probably
:13:39. > :13:43.not essentials. They might help someone to survive when they are
:13:43. > :13:47.living in poverty. I'm happy to accept that Africa and India have
:13:47. > :13:50.problems. Some people who are speaking here have never seen the
:13:50. > :13:54.problems in this country. They should live in these council
:13:54. > :13:59.estates and see what it's like to live on benefits. I don't think
:13:59. > :14:03.anybody is denying that we have issues of real poverty in some
:14:03. > :14:07.parts of our country. We are talking about cruelty of trapping
:14:07. > :14:12.families in a situation where they are worse off if they go to work.
:14:12. > :14:16.That is the reality of the situation. Immoral in a sense.
:14:16. > :14:22.People are put in a trap if they go out to work their families will be
:14:22. > :14:27.worse off financially. Good morning. Just to say, I understand how hard
:14:27. > :14:33.it is to get a paid job. I'm university student.. I understand
:14:33. > :14:43.how hard it's hard to fit around hours and things like that in jobs.
:14:43. > :14:49.I'm currently on seven voluntary jobs and one paid job. On top of my
:14:49. > :14:55.university studies so I'm working pretty much 24/7 and earning
:14:55. > :15:02.virtually nothing and there are people who are sitting at home,
:15:02. > :15:12.putting their feet up, waeching Jeremy Kyle earning �26,000. I
:15:12. > :15:22.
:15:22. > :15:27.I think it's 44%, I have the figure written down here somewhere, 46% of
:15:27. > :15:30.children in poverty have lone parents, that's your situation.
:15:30. > :15:36.is, yeah. Further down the line how are these benefit cuts going to
:15:36. > :15:39.affect your life? And your little girl? I have finished being
:15:39. > :15:43.homeless, I was homeless for a long time and I finally got a property
:15:43. > :15:47.with very little help from my council, but within the next year
:15:47. > :15:51.when I am in a small one-bedroom in Tottenham, the cheapest area in
:15:51. > :15:54.north London at the moment, but in a year or two when I need a two-
:15:54. > :16:00.bedroom for my daughter I won't be able to afford living in London
:16:00. > :16:04.where I am based, where my network is. Everything is here for me. The
:16:04. > :16:07.courses I want to do to go on to university to better myself which I
:16:07. > :16:11.can't afford to do now because of child care costs are in London F I
:16:11. > :16:15.move out of London I will have nothing. I would like to say that
:16:15. > :16:20.the propaganda that you talked about, where the media and such
:16:20. > :16:25.like talk about children, it is not propaganda. It is really not
:16:25. > :16:29.propaganda. I didn't choose to - you know, same with the - what you
:16:29. > :16:32.were saying about people who can't afford to have children. When I
:16:32. > :16:37.fell pregnant I was with my partner and we were settled and happy and
:16:37. > :16:41.had good money behind us. I didn't expect to become a single mother.
:16:41. > :16:44.After my bills are paid I can afford to eat two or three days a
:16:44. > :16:54.week. So you are telling me that the cap is going to help the
:16:54. > :16:59.country, it's not. Peter Hitchens, what should she do? It's none of my
:16:59. > :17:04.business what she should do. It's not just me. I don't know... There
:17:04. > :17:07.are tens of thousands of families in the UK in the same position.
:17:07. > :17:10.It's rude of me to start offering you advice on how to run your life,
:17:10. > :17:13.it's your life. On the other hand, there is a limit to the extent to
:17:13. > :17:18.which other people can support new your circumstances. They can keep
:17:18. > :17:22.the wolf from your door, they can make sure you have you have shelter.
:17:22. > :17:25.A civilised society looks after the most vulnerable people. To what
:17:26. > :17:30.extent? I want to be one of those people in society that cares for
:17:30. > :17:35.other people in a time when they need help. Good. I don't want to be
:17:35. > :17:39.someone who pays towards landlords charging hundreds of thousands of
:17:39. > :17:42.pounds for housing benefit. I do worry about what's going to happen
:17:42. > :17:44.happen to those people. I am worried about the families that are
:17:44. > :17:49.going to have to move out of those properties somewhere else. Where
:17:49. > :17:53.are they going to go? What cost is it going to be to our society to
:17:53. > :17:56.rip families away from their support systems? You make perfectly
:17:56. > :18:00.good points, and I agreed about the housing benefit problem, I am not a
:18:00. > :18:06.supporter of this Government, the Government is largely grandstanding
:18:06. > :18:12.here, it loves being tacked by the bishops, it make it is look
:18:12. > :18:15.Conservative. The destruction of fatherhood and abolition of
:18:15. > :18:18.marriage by several successive Conservative and Labour governments
:18:18. > :18:21.which the Tories will do nothing about. The bishops won't do
:18:21. > :18:25.anything about either. That's the real issue. I am not here as a
:18:25. > :18:29.defender of the Government. think the society changes have led
:18:29. > :18:33.us here have been disastrous. Mohammed, you are of the opinion
:18:34. > :18:38.that the consequence of this, albeit perhaps an unintended kopbs
:18:38. > :18:42.kopbs kopbs -- kopbs kwepb shall we say, is going to be a form of ethic
:18:42. > :18:46.cleansing, what do you mean? wrote an article on this recently.
:18:46. > :18:51.We have to put this debate in a wider context. The Prime Minister
:18:51. > :18:56.talked recently about saying he felt that these measures were both
:18:56. > :18:59.right and fair. I think, firstly, on that first issue of rightness
:18:59. > :19:04.and fair fairness you have to look at these things happening. We are
:19:04. > :19:08.talking about 100, 200, �300 million a year, when we are
:19:08. > :19:14.spending on Trident, tens of billions on... The saving in the
:19:14. > :19:17.welfare budget by 2015 is going to be George Osborne hopes �18 billion.
:19:17. > :19:21.At a time when we are spending hundreds of billions and in fact
:19:21. > :19:24.trillions of pounds bailing out bankers there are serious questions
:19:24. > :19:29.about hitting the poorest in society. However, the point I want
:19:29. > :19:32.to come to is that who are the poorest in society, firstly? And
:19:32. > :19:38.let's try and define this. Iain Duncan Smith came out on 23rd
:19:38. > :19:42.January and he did the press junket and was clear about saying we have
:19:42. > :19:48.impact assessments that address these need areas and we can look
:19:48. > :19:51.clearly at who these are affecting. Actually, if you look at something
:19:52. > :19:56.that was in October last year, the Government is absolutely clueless.
:19:56. > :20:00.It says we are going to disproportionately hit black and
:20:00. > :20:04.minority ethnic groups and within that subset if you divide it...
:20:04. > :20:07.Bigger families as well. If I can say they've been clear, which is
:20:07. > :20:13.firstly these measures are designed to hit especially the housing cap,
:20:13. > :20:17.are designed to hit larger families, they're designed to hit families
:20:17. > :20:22.who are living in wealthier areas. Now we know in this country that
:20:22. > :20:25.75% of Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities are on or below the
:20:25. > :20:31.poverty line, that's compared to 20% f you like the white, British
:20:31. > :20:34.community. Now, we also know that Muslim families, for example, and
:20:34. > :20:42.ethnic minority families have a much younger age structure. The
:20:42. > :20:45.average age within the Muslim and Asian skphaoupbt about 26,. It
:20:45. > :20:48.doesn't take too much of a stretch to ask the question what is the
:20:48. > :20:52.consequence?. The consequence is going to be this Government is
:20:52. > :20:56.driving forward a programme, and I use this carefully, ethnic
:20:56. > :21:02.cleansing of our streets in high value areas to push ethnic
:21:02. > :21:04.minorities out and as Iain Duncan Smith says, we want to let
:21:04. > :21:08.commuters in. I am not the spokesman for the Government, it
:21:08. > :21:11.seems to be highly unlikely that low as my opinion is of David
:21:11. > :21:15.Cameron, that he is embarking on a project of ethnic cleansing. It may
:21:15. > :21:17.be an unintended consequence of the policy but it isn't what he is
:21:17. > :21:21.trying to do. I take massive objection to this statement
:21:21. > :21:24.designed to hit your welfare changes are designed to hit people.
:21:24. > :21:29.They're not designed to hit anybody. What they're designed to do is - I
:21:29. > :21:34.mean, we get caught up in... Iain Duncan Smith he said, this was two
:21:34. > :21:38.weeks ago, he said very clearly, we want to move large family who is
:21:38. > :21:43.are on benefits out of areas where commuters can live. Unintended
:21:43. > :21:47.consequence? I really don't think so. Actually if a family is living
:21:47. > :21:50.in an expensive area with very high house prices, then they would do
:21:50. > :21:53.what any normal working family would do, move to a cheaper area
:21:53. > :21:56.where house prices are more affordable, that's what anybody
:21:56. > :21:59.would do. Do you agree people should only have the amount of
:21:59. > :22:03.children they can afford? grandmother would say children
:22:03. > :22:07.don't ask to come, the children come and you must deal with them
:22:07. > :22:10.and they must all be loved. These changes are not designed to hit
:22:10. > :22:13.anybody. What they're designed to do is make sure people are well
:22:13. > :22:17.looked after, that nobody is better off living on benefits than they
:22:17. > :22:20.would be if they were going out to work. This is about social
:22:20. > :22:26.engineering and we have to be very clear about that. We have to leave
:22:26. > :22:30.it there, thank you all very much. If you would like to have your say
:22:30. > :22:34.about that debate you can log on to our website and you will find links
:22:34. > :22:37.to continue the conversation online. We are also debating live from the
:22:37. > :22:40.King Edward VI school in Southampton, should a future
:22:40. > :22:44.monarch cease to be Supreme governor of the Church of England?
:22:45. > :22:49.And should we expand grammar school education. Tell us what you think
:22:49. > :22:52.about those topics or send us your ideas for future debates or
:22:52. > :23:01.comments you would like to make about the programme.
:23:01. > :23:06.If Catherine of Aragan had born Henry VIII a surviving son there
:23:06. > :23:12.would probably never have had a Church of England with a monarch at
:23:12. > :23:16.its head and if the Stuarts hadn't had a predilection for Catholicism
:23:16. > :23:21.parliament wouldn't have ruled that English monarchs had to be one of
:23:21. > :23:25.Protestant faith. Should a future monarch cease to be the Supreme
:23:25. > :23:34.governor of the Church of England. Bishop Jonathan, good morning, how
:23:34. > :23:40.are you! Nice to see you. Make the case that in the 21st century
:23:40. > :23:44.multicultural Britain the monarch should be the Supreme governor of
:23:44. > :23:47.effectively the state sponsored religion? Well, you have to know a
:23:47. > :23:53.little bit about what the Church of England's vision is. And that's to
:23:53. > :23:57.be present in every community, to be the Church for all in every
:23:57. > :24:00.situation. We have talked about those in poverty, those on the edge
:24:00. > :24:05.of society. But those who make difficult decisions for us in
:24:05. > :24:08.business, and commerce. The Church of England's vision is to be the
:24:08. > :24:13.Church serving the nation. It's not so much privilege, but a
:24:13. > :24:18.responsibility that we take really seriously. I think people caught a
:24:18. > :24:23.little bit of that seeing Rev, in the second series, the really
:24:23. > :24:28.attractive figure of the parish priest who is struggling in prayer,
:24:28. > :24:31.trying to build community wherever he can find it, challenging those,
:24:31. > :24:35.speaking truth to power. It seems to me if that's something like the
:24:35. > :24:39.vision of the Church of England rooted in prayer, community,
:24:39. > :24:44.service of others, reminding the whole nation actually we are there
:24:44. > :24:50.for those who are not our members, if I can just press on, if that's...
:24:50. > :24:57.You can do all that, why do you need the Queen or King? The monarch
:24:57. > :25:01.in her life... Or his life. Knowing where we are now, she embodies that
:25:01. > :25:06.principle of prayerfulness, of care and service of others and of duty.
:25:06. > :25:14.At a time when our society is threatened with fragmentation I am
:25:14. > :25:18.always looking for an integrating focus. I think the monarch, as the
:25:18. > :25:22.Supreme Governor of a Church that is established... Why does the
:25:22. > :25:29.monarch need to be religious? is a complex constitutional issue.
:25:29. > :25:34.A simple question. I would say if we are prayerful and open and ready
:25:34. > :25:38.to serve, and this is a vital element of being a monarch,
:25:38. > :25:43.particularly in our nation, which has such deep roots in the
:25:43. > :25:46.Christian tradition. Speaking truth on to power, that's what you should
:25:47. > :25:51.support this, being a Christian, because it puts faith at the very
:25:51. > :25:54.centre of the constitution and of national life, but you don't.
:25:54. > :25:57.don't. Faith should be at the centre of politics, Christians
:25:57. > :26:00.should be at the centre of politics, that's different I think to being
:26:00. > :26:04.at the centre of power, because as Christians we need to be prepared,
:26:04. > :26:10.as you say, Jonathan, to speak truth to power. It's hard to do
:26:10. > :26:16.that from a position of privilege. As a Christian I would want to say
:26:16. > :26:21.why if our loyalty is to God, to the holy spirit f we recognise
:26:21. > :26:25.Christ as our King, Lord, why are we exalting a human being in this
:26:25. > :26:29.way? Why indeed in the 21st century are we suggesting that an unelected
:26:29. > :26:33.monarch on a basis of an accident of birth should be the head of
:26:33. > :26:41.state? Do we not trust ourselves as a people enough to run ourselves,
:26:41. > :26:46.rather than rely on this... On the people we elect, we probably
:26:46. > :26:49.shouldn't trust ourselves. We will do Republicanism another day, we
:26:49. > :26:52.have done it before. This is a multicultural society. It's a
:26:52. > :26:55.mistake for it to be a multicultural society and it's bad
:26:55. > :27:05.for everybody that it's become multicultural because it's becoming
:27:05. > :27:09.a place where nobody belongs... The fact that this is a society founded
:27:09. > :27:12.upon the principles of the sermon on the mount of the ten
:27:12. > :27:15.commandments... You keep interrupting, that's another thing
:27:15. > :27:18.you out not to do if you are that Christian. I will I will wait until
:27:18. > :27:23.you finish. Society founded upon the principles of the sermon of the
:27:23. > :27:25.mount and ten commandments makes it what it is and one of the reasons
:27:25. > :27:29.why so many people from other countries have come here to
:27:29. > :27:31.preferences in places where they first came from because of its
:27:31. > :27:35.enormously civilised aspect, because it possesses that wonderful
:27:35. > :27:37.thing freedom under the law, which is so rare on the surface of the
:27:37. > :27:43.planet which derives from that religion. It's absolutely right
:27:43. > :27:46.that the Christian religion should be at the heart of our Government.
:27:46. > :27:51.One particular type of Christian religion. It's actually the
:27:51. > :27:55.brilliant thing about Anglicanism it's fantastically inclusive. Don't
:27:55. > :28:04.laugh. It's very, very important. It's a broad Church. Absolutely
:28:04. > :28:11.right. It doesn't turn anybody away. Why C of E and why trust the
:28:11. > :28:15.monarch to be this ideal? A Catholic priest, you see doing
:28:15. > :28:18.exactly what you say in another programme. Any King or Queen can't
:28:18. > :28:26.fulfil that function that is performed by a parish priest,
:28:26. > :28:30.because she has her own duties and her humanness. It needs to be
:28:30. > :28:33.unpicked about, to be Supreme Governor, does not in fact mean to
:28:33. > :28:40.be the supreme authority in the Church of England. It's a
:28:40. > :28:46.figurehead. A person you are describing that doesn't exist in
:28:46. > :28:53.our future monarch, perhaps. would hope that it does. I would
:28:53. > :28:57.hope it does for the common good and because I believe that the
:28:57. > :29:01.Christian ethic and vision she embodies is vital at a time when we
:29:01. > :29:07.are turning towards individualism and we are exploring how a vision
:29:07. > :29:12.of consumerism is perhaps not all it was set out to be. What about
:29:12. > :29:18.Catholicism, how about that? last in the 21st century we now
:29:18. > :29:23.have the situation where if the heir will be male or female, that's
:29:23. > :29:27.got to be a good thing. It is a good thing. I am not convinced,
:29:27. > :29:30.when you find yourself in possession, few people are lucky
:29:30. > :29:33.enough to be, something very old and very beautiful which works you
:29:33. > :29:37.should be very careful about messing around with it. If you
:29:37. > :29:41.start knocking down walls and changing things you will often find
:29:41. > :29:51.the whole thing falls down, be careful. Why spit on your luck, if
:29:51. > :29:59.
:29:59. > :30:04.you have something that works so It works. I'm a fan of Christianity.
:30:04. > :30:10.I wish Christians would follow it more, perhaps. What we do have to
:30:10. > :30:15.recognise though is, this is 2012. We are living in a modern society,
:30:15. > :30:20.with lots of different faiths and cultures and creed. People also of
:30:20. > :30:24.no faith. The difficulty we have, it's a huge difficulty, is this.
:30:24. > :30:27.Firstly, I don't believe anybody should be above the law. Nobody
:30:27. > :30:32.should be above the law. There should not be a religious
:30:32. > :30:37.requirement for you to be able to take a position that actually a Jew,
:30:37. > :30:47.a Christian, Buddhist, a Muslim should be able to do. Skrientolgs,
:30:47. > :30:49.
:30:49. > :30:53.whatever? Whatever. Imagine a Mormon being Head of State. We are
:30:53. > :30:58.a long time away from the glorious revolution. Freedom of faith for
:30:58. > :31:05.the monarch. An interesting point? The trouble is we are touching
:31:05. > :31:07.towards turning it into a heritage industry debate. The monarch is the
:31:08. > :31:14.Supreme Governor of the Church of England. Mohammed will not be
:31:14. > :31:16.applying for the Chief Rabbis job. Why shouldn't an Anglican be the
:31:16. > :31:21.Supreme Governor of the Church of England? Not least because that is
:31:21. > :31:27.good for the Church of England because, as the bishop said, it
:31:27. > :31:31.keeps it open, outward looking caring for a lot of place, in which
:31:31. > :31:38.Catholic priests don't do. What if the monarch does not want to be an
:31:38. > :31:41.Anglican? If the monarch doesn't want to be an Anglican that is a
:31:41. > :31:49.constitutional crisis. Which is a separate conversation. If you want
:31:49. > :31:56.to open up the Head of State to all that comes... If Diana was alive
:31:56. > :32:01.today and she had married Dodi Fayed, William's step faith weir
:32:01. > :32:06.have been a Muslim. If he had converted to Islam he is unable to
:32:06. > :32:10.be the Head of the State. We cannot have a situation in this day and
:32:10. > :32:14.age, the Islamic position is there is no compulsion in religion and
:32:14. > :32:20.belief. That I think is a good template for Muslims and non-
:32:20. > :32:26.Muslims to abide by. The monarch should have freedom of choice of
:32:26. > :32:31.faith. In Saudi Arabia - This isn't Saudi Arabia. This is Southampton.
:32:31. > :32:34.It's important one should recognise in Saudi Arabia Christianity is
:32:34. > :32:41.effectively illegal. Christians can't even go to Mecca. Islam
:32:41. > :32:46.saying there is no compulsion in religion. It's illegal to leave
:32:46. > :32:53.Islam under Sharia law and it should result in the penalty of
:32:53. > :32:58.death. You have a - I'm not going to let that stand. You have a very
:32:58. > :33:04.- Which would be worse, if the Queen or the King is a Roman
:33:04. > :33:10.Catholic or atheist, which would be the worse scenario for you? I would
:33:10. > :33:14.not want the King or Queen of England to be an atheist. It's the
:33:14. > :33:21.Christian religion and the law which stands upon it. The law does
:33:21. > :33:30.stand upon religion that makes the King, King and the Queen Queen.
:33:30. > :33:35.Make a point. I'm an Anglican I love multi-cultural Britain.
:33:35. > :33:43.APPLAUSE I think in 100 years time it makes
:33:43. > :33:49.no sense at all to have the Queen as an Anglican, Head of the Church.
:33:49. > :33:53.But I don't see why, now is the time to change. I think the real
:33:53. > :33:57.advantage of changing... We are talking about the future, not now.
:33:57. > :34:01.We are talking about the next Queen, the next monarch. I wouldn't want
:34:02. > :34:08.to change that for the next monarch. The only point of changing is if it
:34:08. > :34:12.reduces tensions to change. Now, I believe what is missing is that the
:34:12. > :34:18.different cultures within Britain, especially our Church of England,
:34:18. > :34:21.Angelaism, are not making their cases strongly enough. I think they
:34:21. > :34:25.hide behind... That is an interesting point. It could be
:34:25. > :34:30.liberating, couldn't it, Bishop Jonathan, for the Church of England
:34:30. > :34:39.if you were taken out of the equation. You could be more
:34:39. > :34:44.definite. You could be... More fire in your belly. More people watching
:34:44. > :34:49.this programme right now than will attend a Church of England service
:34:50. > :34:54.today? I don't know what your viewing figures are. Watching
:34:54. > :35:01.something is very different from being there. We are not asking the
:35:01. > :35:05.Queen to be the next DG are we? Issues are mixed up here. 900,000
:35:05. > :35:12.people will ataend Church of England service today. It's vital
:35:12. > :35:18.to say that I disagree with Christopher Hitchens on multi-
:35:18. > :35:22.culturalism. I think diversity brings richness and I believe that
:35:22. > :35:27.the Anglican community and the nation is one of those hidden tress
:35:27. > :35:31.uers. We work under the radar, quietly present in every community.
:35:31. > :35:39.I would be very reluctant to see that whole vision, the church for
:35:39. > :35:43.the nation, not the church in a privileged position, but the
:35:43. > :35:49.church... It could be a vibrant successful growing church.
:35:49. > :35:56.Church of England of remarkable people in it doing great work. Some
:35:56. > :36:01.people are pushing adges. The Catholic Church, juicish
:36:01. > :36:04.communities and lots of others are doing great work. There is a
:36:04. > :36:09.difference between an organisation doing great work across the country
:36:09. > :36:19.and one having a privileged position. As Christians, Peter
:36:19. > :36:19.
:36:19. > :36:22.talks about the Sermon on the Mount, he didn't... What do you speak?
:36:22. > :36:26.bishops can sit in the House of Lords and vote on legislation. I
:36:26. > :36:31.may agree with their votes on the Welfare Reform Bill, I still...
:36:31. > :36:38.What would you like to say? support the Church of England's
:36:38. > :36:42.right to elect its own Supreme Leader, can you choose whoever they
:36:42. > :36:47.want if they want to be your leader. The reason we have a problem here
:36:47. > :36:52.is because of the Church of England and the state institutions. That is
:36:52. > :36:57.what we into need to unpick and look at why the Church of England
:36:57. > :37:01.historically has had a privileged position in institutions of state.
:37:01. > :37:10.Society has moved on. There are lots of other religions and people
:37:10. > :37:14.of different faiths and no faith that need to be represented equally.
:37:14. > :37:19.Successive governments have repeatedly sought to increase the
:37:19. > :37:26.representation of other religions in the House of Lords. They are so.
:37:26. > :37:31.They don't have a set number of automatically elected bishops.
:37:31. > :37:38.is a fair point. Anybody who lives anywhere in England has a right to
:37:38. > :37:48.the ministry of England. They have the right to be bap advertised,
:37:48. > :37:51.
:37:51. > :37:58.married there. They may not want it. Maybe they don't. The monarch does
:37:58. > :38:04.not have the right to choose choose their faith. Who will crown the
:38:04. > :38:08.next monarch. At the Coronation the monarch stake takes an oath of
:38:08. > :38:12.allegiance to God, under God and crowned by the Archbishop of
:38:12. > :38:17.Canterbury. If we say they can have any faith at all, under what
:38:17. > :38:21.authority are they there? How have they the right to speak in anyway.
:38:21. > :38:28.What about the defender of all faiths that Prince Charles put
:38:28. > :38:34.forth? I would like to say that religion politics. Like the bishop
:38:34. > :38:44.should talk about the politics for the welfare of the public. The same
:38:44. > :38:44.
:38:44. > :38:53.as Islam (inaudible) we should go on that basis. Like Islam. It was
:38:53. > :39:01.the help of the Jews, Christians. They knead one state. The
:39:01. > :39:07.constitution of Madena. We should put humanity first and monarchy
:39:07. > :39:11.should be abolished. Humanity should be put forward. That is a
:39:11. > :39:14.republican question. The point is the Church of England is there for
:39:14. > :39:18.everyone and you have the right to their ministry as much as anyone
:39:18. > :39:21.else. Actually, because we are there for everyone, we are more
:39:21. > :39:27.engaged with whole communities. We are supporting in all sorts of ways
:39:27. > :39:33.that other churches can choose to do if they want, but we are not a
:39:33. > :39:36.holy club for the like minded, we are there for everyone. I wish it
:39:36. > :39:41.was. Can you go to Anglican Churchs where they will be open and
:39:41. > :39:46.inclusive and they will welcome you in. You go to other Angela ka can
:39:46. > :39:54.churches if you are gay or bisexual they will say you can't be like
:39:54. > :39:59.that and follow God. And another church, if you have a wheelchair
:39:59. > :40:06.you there won't be a ramp to get. In if we were living up to sermon
:40:06. > :40:16.on the mount, as Peter suggested, sorry I interrupted you was Britain
:40:16. > :40:18.
:40:18. > :40:26.a Christian country when it was involved in the slave trade? He has
:40:26. > :40:31.to come clean he is an anarchist Christian with suspicions of the
:40:31. > :40:38.state. The facts on the ground is that the Church of England is the
:40:38. > :40:42.larger provider of youth services in the country. We need to take
:40:42. > :40:50.that seriously as a source of social capital even before you do
:40:50. > :40:55.God. The Queen gives this power. There should be a diamond dividend
:40:55. > :40:59.of volunteering instead of a new yacht. Thank you very much. If you
:40:59. > :41:03.have views about our debate long on to bbc.co.uk/thebigquestions.
:41:03. > :41:09.Follow the links to where you can continue the discussion online. Or
:41:09. > :41:13.send us your views about our last big question. Should we exstand
:41:13. > :41:18.grammar school education? If you would like to be in the audience
:41:18. > :41:25.you can e-mail us at: We are in Oxford next week, Cambridge on
:41:25. > :41:30.February 19th and Cardiff the week after that. Academy schools are
:41:30. > :41:33.able to select for aptitude in music, drama, sport and technology,
:41:33. > :41:39.almost anything, but academic potential. That was phased out
:41:39. > :41:41.along with the grammar schools in the '60s and '70s. Those few
:41:41. > :41:48.remaining counties that retained grammar schools are being allowed
:41:48. > :41:54.to increase their intake. Should we exstand grammar school education?
:41:54. > :41:58.You think we should not. It's interesting the way that social
:41:58. > :42:03.mobility dshes since they were faced out how social mobility
:42:03. > :42:06.declined. Look at the people at the top of society, so many come from
:42:06. > :42:11.private schools? Absolutely not true. This idea that the grammar
:42:11. > :42:15.school provided social mobility is a myth. Is it? We are socially
:42:15. > :42:21.mobile society now than we ever where during the days of the dram
:42:21. > :42:27.ar school. The Foreign Secretary went to a comprehensive school.
:42:27. > :42:31.Robert Peston the Financial adviser for the BBC went to a comprehensive
:42:31. > :42:36.school. 60% of people now going to Oxford went to state schools. This
:42:36. > :42:40.is twice, more than twice as many went when we had the grm ar schools.
:42:40. > :42:44.The grammar schools actually destroyed education for about 90%
:42:44. > :42:50.of the population. Only 25% of people went to grammar school. The
:42:50. > :42:54.other 75 went to secondary mod erns. They were allowed to leave at 15
:42:54. > :43:00.can no qualifications. They left with nothing. Those 25% in most
:43:00. > :43:05.areas that went to grammar schools, 10% succeeded because the other 15%
:43:05. > :43:09.were put in the B stream, C stream and were given a deep sense of
:43:09. > :43:16.failure. The comprehensive system works. It works better than grammar
:43:16. > :43:22.schools ever did. It wasn't the great key to the secret of social
:43:22. > :43:26.mobility, it's a myth? Opposite. No brainer actually. Is it? Good
:43:26. > :43:30.schools, grammar schools turn out better results. Better results
:43:30. > :43:34.equal mobility. It is a complete nonsense to suggest that people
:43:34. > :43:38.going to grammar schools actually don't include a very significant
:43:38. > :43:42.proportion, 13% of people on free school meals. What we cannot afford
:43:43. > :43:47.now. The tired old arguments I heard, they depress me immensely,
:43:47. > :43:51.what we can't afford is not getting the very top qualifications so we
:43:51. > :43:56.can can compete in the world market with China and the rest of them.
:43:56. > :43:59.Now, one statistic, I will leave it it at that. Which is deadly. I
:43:59. > :44:03.never heard anyone answer this one and therefore I have never heard
:44:03. > :44:09.them refute the grounds. There are only 164 grammar schools left in
:44:09. > :44:17.this country. There are nearly 3,000 comprehensives. The 164
:44:17. > :44:21.grammar schools in 2006 produced over half the A* and top A-levels
:44:21. > :44:30.in the top subjects which are going to get us somewhere in the world.
:44:30. > :44:33.Over half, 3,000 comprehensives If you are going to cream off
:44:33. > :44:37.people at the age of 11 that you assume are going to be the
:44:37. > :44:40.cleverest, then obviously you should be able to get good
:44:40. > :44:46.results... Don't have any grammar schools at all, there is no
:44:46. > :44:53.creaming or selection. 3,000 comprehensives have the whole
:44:53. > :45:01.ability range in them, why can't they equal 164 grammar schools? O.
:45:01. > :45:05.Because they are not... They're not genuine in the same areas of
:45:05. > :45:10.grammar school, if you have already creamed off what you consider to
:45:10. > :45:15.be? How can you cream off from a grammar school within 100 miles of
:45:15. > :45:20.you? By using the 11-Plus and what happens then... You are missing the
:45:20. > :45:24.point. They're not there. The only 32LEAs with any selection in them.
:45:24. > :45:28.You expect grammar schools to do better, of course, because they're
:45:28. > :45:33.not mixed ability. They're not working with mixed ability. What
:45:33. > :45:42.about kids in 3,000 comprehensives? They're not getting it. What about
:45:42. > :45:47.children who are 80% who are jettison. The secondary modern
:45:47. > :45:51.schools perform extremely well. For example, on average, the secondary
:45:51. > :45:56.modern schools in this country are actually producing better results,
:45:56. > :46:00.for example, in the comprehensives in Bristol and there is no creaming
:46:00. > :46:05.in Bristol at all. People subjected to an 11-Plus exam from a deep
:46:05. > :46:08.sense of failure. There are lots of people out there who spent their
:46:08. > :46:12.lives getting over the fact they were told they were a failure at a
:46:12. > :46:16.young age. Do they have a deep sense of failure, if someone has
:46:16. > :46:20.they will behave like a failure? Lots of people have a deep tpepbs
:46:20. > :46:23.sense of failure, including many thousands of children who after 11
:46:23. > :46:27.years of state education in this country emerge and find nobody will
:46:27. > :46:30.employ them because their education has been so bad, because people -
:46:31. > :46:35.hang on, you have had a long say, because people like you destroyed
:46:35. > :46:38.the only access to good education which the non-rich people in this
:46:38. > :46:40.country have. You talked about selection, there is there is
:46:40. > :46:44.selection in this country in state education, it's selection by money.
:46:44. > :46:47.If you can afford to live in the catchment area of the better
:46:47. > :46:51.comprehensive, if you can afford to live in the right postcode you can
:46:51. > :46:57.get selection, but if your children happen to be academically bright
:46:57. > :47:01.and you can't they don't. They will do very well. Middle-class children
:47:01. > :47:07.with... They will not. They do very well even in very difficult schools
:47:07. > :47:12.in the area. Less well - they do a good deal less well. We have more
:47:12. > :47:15.young people now wanting to go to university... You interrupt me so
:47:15. > :47:20.much I suspect you don't want it to be heard, I don't blame you.
:47:20. > :47:23.don't mind. Because it is actually overwhelming and people like you
:47:23. > :47:27.who actually believe in good education for the poor should be on
:47:27. > :47:29.my side, because it is exactly your campaign which has destroyed access
:47:29. > :47:39.to good education for the poor people in this country and you
:47:39. > :47:40.
:47:40. > :47:44.should be ashamed of it. gentleman back there, good morning.
:47:44. > :47:47.I think grammar schools themselves aren't exactly a bad thing but we
:47:47. > :47:52.looking at the wrong end of the argument. My friend here, he went
:47:52. > :47:57.to a grammar school, I went to a very bad state comprehensive.
:47:57. > :48:01.Caroline can justify that, shoo is my MP and when I left it was a 30%
:48:02. > :48:06.pass rate. Very bad teachers, my teacher now, the other day she was
:48:06. > :48:10.in the Daily Echo because she was a trouble shooter head teacher and
:48:10. > :48:13.she is now head teacher of the worst school in England. Anyway,
:48:13. > :48:17.basically I think when you say about grammar schools offer these
:48:17. > :48:20.children these grades and that grades and offer opportunities, I
:48:20. > :48:28.agree to some point but I think a lot of it comes down to the
:48:28. > :48:33.individual and the ethics instilled in them. Culturism capital
:48:33. > :48:40.capitalalism. The fact is you can put a child in any school I think
:48:40. > :48:43.and my flatmate who lived in the same room as me at university, you
:48:43. > :48:46.he went to Royal grammar school in Guildford, his dad was a
:48:46. > :48:50.millionaire and he got worst grades than me. I had no help. I had to do
:48:50. > :48:56.it myself and I think a lot of success in life you will not have a
:48:56. > :48:58.lot of that extra help in grammar schools, praoeuf schools. It --
:48:58. > :49:07.private schools. It doesn't matter, if you want to succeed, you will
:49:07. > :49:17.succeed, doesn't matter where you go. Is that true? The argument is
:49:17. > :49:19.
:49:19. > :49:23.there is a better - a child that does not have that culture capital
:49:23. > :49:26.at home but is clever will have a better chance in life if they go to
:49:26. > :49:30.grammar school and experience something now them, which is a kind
:49:30. > :49:34.of this is what people argue, the love of learning and so forth?
:49:34. > :49:37.haven't got the missionary zeal against grammar schools as my
:49:37. > :49:41.colleague here has, but I think that they were of a time and that
:49:41. > :49:44.time is no longer. Actually we need to address other things, just
:49:44. > :49:47.expanding the opportunity of existing grammar schools to allow
:49:47. > :49:50.more children in I don't think it's going to necessarily do much but I
:49:50. > :49:54.would be against trying to bring back the grammar school system. We
:49:54. > :49:58.never really did crack... Where is the logic? Those were built in a
:49:58. > :50:03.time where 20% of people we wanted to funnel, the best brains, to go
:50:03. > :50:07.to university. Now 50% of people are going to university. Not to the
:50:07. > :50:11.best universities. Oxbridge, the vast majority come from five
:50:11. > :50:15.schools, four of which are private, and the fifth is a 6th form
:50:15. > :50:18.education college in Cambridge. issue is what are we preparing
:50:18. > :50:21.children for. Until you get a credible alternative to university
:50:22. > :50:24.for children of that age which we don't have in this country, you
:50:24. > :50:29.will continue to funnel them into universities and they can't albeit
:50:29. > :50:31.top. There isn't enough places for all the top. When you have 50% of
:50:31. > :50:35.children going to universities they can't all go to the best ones.
:50:35. > :50:40.Actually what you need to do is concentrate on how you get better
:50:40. > :50:44.education and to say that you can select on music or on art or sport
:50:44. > :50:48.actually isn't true. It's only 10% you are allowed. There is selection.
:50:48. > :50:53.I don't think there is much... Selection on faith, as well. Yes,
:50:53. > :50:57.faith you can go more than 10%. But I think the key issue here is
:50:57. > :51:01.actually what are we doing across education and going back, as nice
:51:01. > :51:04.as it would be, to days when council estates were full of the
:51:04. > :51:07.deserving poor, and 20% went to grammar school is not very helpful.
:51:07. > :51:11.I also think that we have proven time and again the argument that
:51:12. > :51:19.you can pick people at 11 and that's their destiny, actually is
:51:19. > :51:23.pretty false, it doesn't work. Roger. Sitting next to an excellent
:51:23. > :51:26.Conservative MP for a area, her party says we all think grammar
:51:26. > :51:29.schools are wonderful but you can't have any more of them F that makes
:51:29. > :51:33.any sense, I can't think of anything excellent in society we
:51:33. > :51:36.don't want more of and the other two parties would love to destroy
:51:36. > :51:40.them. The truth is grammar schools perform in a high level. They
:51:40. > :51:43.perform for the people who have the ability to go to, no one is
:51:43. > :51:46.suggesting we go back to the old system, everyone goes in at the 11-
:51:46. > :51:51.Plus. We are suggesting grammar schools should be there and those
:51:51. > :51:56.whose parents who want to put kids in have that opportunity. That is
:51:56. > :51:58.moving on, that's modern. The alternative is totalitarian, it's
:51:58. > :52:01.to say there will only be comprehensive schools because if
:52:01. > :52:05.you take your kid out of that we say it no longer is comprehensive,
:52:05. > :52:10.so you can't have the school you want. That's Marxism, frankly. We
:52:10. > :52:16.want diversity anagramer schools are part -- and grammar schools are
:52:16. > :52:20.part of it. My wife would kill me if I didn't at least highlight and
:52:20. > :52:22.advocate the education system recognised in the world as being
:52:22. > :52:26.one of the best systems of education, now you can argue about
:52:26. > :52:31.the population size, you can argue about taxation... You can argue
:52:31. > :52:36.about culture. The evidence on that. Hold on. It's a complex argument,
:52:36. > :52:40.because I am arguing as an ex- grammar schoolboy, not in this neck
:52:41. > :52:44.of the woods, Hertfordshire nonetheless, I loved and benefited
:52:45. > :52:48.massively from my grammar school education. I am a big fan of
:52:48. > :52:54.grammar schools. I think grammar schools should be allowed to exist
:52:54. > :52:58.within a mixed educational system. I think in this country it does
:52:58. > :53:00.work actually t does work within a certain framework. However, we have
:53:00. > :53:05.to look at the kind of selection that goes in grammar school and I
:53:05. > :53:10.don't want to be a one-trick pony but within grammar schools we had a
:53:10. > :53:14.system where certain boys were sifted off for fast-tracking
:53:14. > :53:18.towards Oxbridge and even though we had ethnic minority students there
:53:18. > :53:23.who were fantastically capable, not me, obviously others, but capable
:53:23. > :53:26.but for some reason they weren't selected for the fast-tracking and
:53:26. > :53:31.a chamber choir was all white. you want to be in the choir?
:53:32. > :53:38.Tpheufs the chair. -- I was in the choir. Didn't last very long.
:53:38. > :53:45.are off the subject here. I want to something which was said earlier,
:53:45. > :53:50.in the late 1960s according to the Franks report, more than 60% of
:53:50. > :53:56.undergraduates came from state schools. It dived after, and it's
:53:56. > :54:00.begown climb again thanks to extraordinary social measures and
:54:00. > :54:03.concessions and rules rules forcing Oxford to take them. In the days of
:54:03. > :54:06.grammar schools they got in there in their own right because they
:54:06. > :54:09.were educated and state school pupils and you destroyed that. The
:54:09. > :54:12.other point that needs to be made, the argument is against grammar
:54:12. > :54:16.schools don't actually argue because they know they were good,
:54:16. > :54:19.they say the secondary moderns were bad. I am not going to argue
:54:19. > :54:22.whether they were bad or not, in many cases they were a good deal
:54:22. > :54:25.better than the comprehensives which replaced them. If something
:54:25. > :54:30.is wrong with the system you fix the bit that's wrong. You don't
:54:30. > :54:34.destroy the bit that's working and you destroyed the part that was
:54:34. > :54:38.working and saddled everyone with something that wasn't working. We
:54:38. > :54:48.fixed the bit that was wrong by bringing in comprehensive schools
:54:48. > :54:51.because 75% who went to secondary moderns... The Labour manifesto of
:54:51. > :54:54.1964 which launched this whole thing promised grammar school
:54:54. > :54:58.education for everyone. Now truly and honestly do you think that's
:54:58. > :55:04.what we got? Yes, I most certainly do. You must be completely and
:55:04. > :55:08.utterly deluded. I am not. Let's bring Francis in. I taught for
:55:08. > :55:12.years and the education those kids are getting is just as good as any
:55:12. > :55:16.I got. Francis, what is going wrong? What is going wrong we are
:55:16. > :55:18.going from centralised plans and it seems people in London have a
:55:19. > :55:23.particular set of educational challenges and want to impose their
:55:23. > :55:26.concerns on the rest of the country. If kids in Thanet or the Valley
:55:26. > :55:34.Want a platform to get out of poverty through a grammar school
:55:34. > :55:38.fantastic but next to that let Eton have funded places, let initiatives
:55:38. > :55:41.like coop schools come in, so in a particular patch local decision-
:55:41. > :55:45.makers can transform the conversation, not some bland group
:55:45. > :55:49.of folks sending messages down from London saying it's all like our bit
:55:49. > :55:53.of London where we are worrying about access. You, Sir. We are
:55:53. > :55:57.talking about one specific education situation, which is
:55:57. > :56:00.grammar schools but we already said we live in a multicultural world.
:56:00. > :56:03.Surely we should adopt all forms of education which are suitable for
:56:03. > :56:08.all types of people. I went to a grammar school and I failed. I
:56:08. > :56:11.couldn't do it because I wasn't educationally able to cope. I also
:56:11. > :56:14.know people who went to secondary modern who also failed because they
:56:14. > :56:18.didn't get the education they required and would have probably
:56:18. > :56:20.better in my place. We ought to be talking about increasing education
:56:20. > :56:24.across the board and putting the right money in that actually makes
:56:24. > :56:30.the difference. What about the children who will go through life
:56:30. > :56:35.knowing they didn't get to the grammar school? Well, how does one
:56:35. > :56:40.tackle failure everywhere and does one expect a uniform level of
:56:40. > :56:48.success they undertake? Life is absolutely full of selection. I
:56:48. > :56:52.didn't end up on this programme by by being pulled in off the street.
:56:52. > :56:55.I am not advocating the old system, I am advocating if you want to go
:56:55. > :57:02.to a particular institution, whatever it may be, you meet their
:57:02. > :57:05.criteria to get in. You get in. It's an early age. And you were an
:57:05. > :57:12.Ofsted inspector, I mean, not everyone can be an inspector, but
:57:12. > :57:21.not everyone can be an MP. Well, maybe. But it's an awfully early
:57:21. > :57:25.age at which to have that sword of Damacles. It's correctable, you can
:57:25. > :57:28.have a go at grammar school at 11, you may not actually be ready. It
:57:28. > :57:33.doesn't mean to say if you are at 13, you should have been let in at
:57:33. > :57:37.11. Of course at 13 you can get in, at 16 you can transfer. A quick
:57:37. > :57:47.point. The selection house prices, streaming in schools, the lot,
:57:47. > :57:50.
:57:50. > :57:53.let's work with a broad platform... Select by ability, not by money.
:57:53. > :57:58.Don't select by money. Those taking the 11-Plus now have all been
:57:58. > :58:02.tutored. You can't pass 11-Plus without a private tutor and you are
:58:02. > :58:05.tutored for two years before you take the exam. Poor families can't
:58:05. > :58:09.afford to have private tutors. Therefore, the number of poor
:58:09. > :58:14.people who go to grammar school is very few. They're all privately
:58:14. > :58:17.tutored. The tiny survival of a few grammar schools, if we had grammar
:58:17. > :58:20.schools all over the country that wouldn't be the case but you are
:58:20. > :58:27.against that. We have to leave it there. Thank you all very much for