:00:25. > :00:28.Good morning, welcome to The Big Questions, live from Michaelston
:00:28. > :00:30.Community College in Cardiff. I'm Nicky Campbell. The Sun on Sunday
:00:30. > :00:33.was launched today, despite many Sun journalists facing possible
:00:33. > :00:40.criminal charges and News Group still settling large pay-outs on
:00:40. > :00:44.hacked-off celebrities. Our first Big Question: Should we trust
:00:44. > :00:51.British journalism? The former MP Lembit Opik says the press unfairly
:00:51. > :00:54.destroyed his reputation and is now morally bankrupt. Last night there
:00:54. > :00:58.were a lot of very inebriated people in Cardiff's Mary Street and
:00:58. > :01:02.not just because Wales won at the rugby. Saturday night after payday
:01:02. > :01:07.and the police and ambulance crews were out from early.
:01:07. > :01:10.Our next Big Question: Does society pay too high a price for alcohol?
:01:10. > :01:14.This doctor says that, if we don't change our ways, 200 people will be
:01:14. > :01:17.dying an avoidable death from alcohol every week.
:01:17. > :01:21.Lent began on Wednesday. It's traditionally a season of
:01:21. > :01:24.repentance for past sins but it's become an excuse for a crash diet.
:01:24. > :01:28.Now some church leaders think we should have a less selfish aim.
:01:28. > :01:31.Our last Big Question: In Lent, should we repent for the planet?
:01:31. > :01:36.The Bishop of Swansea says we should each embrace our God-given
:01:36. > :01:41.duty to take care of his creation by changing our wasteful ways.
:01:42. > :01:50.Welcome, everyone, to The Big Questions.
:01:50. > :01:53.This week, the death of Marie Colvin while reporting from Syria
:01:53. > :01:58.for the Sunday Times showed journalism at its bravest and its
:01:58. > :02:01.best. But recently there have been many more incidents exposing the
:02:01. > :02:04.less honourable side of the press, from the dawn arrests of Sun
:02:04. > :02:06.journalists on suspicion of bribing police officers, to the large pay-
:02:06. > :02:16.outs to celebrities, politicians and some ordinary folk whose phones
:02:16. > :02:18.
:02:19. > :02:24.had been hacked. Should we trust British journalism? Lembit Opik,
:02:24. > :02:28.the Sun on Sunday launched today, and Rupert Murdoch hopes it will
:02:28. > :02:34.uphold the highest ethical standards to Fleet Street - do you
:02:34. > :02:40.believe him? I am sure he hoped that, but it is obvious his
:02:40. > :02:48.newspapers have not done so in the past. There are a number of people
:02:48. > :02:54.involved in the Sun, which are evidently linked, facing criminal
:02:54. > :02:59.charges. You can give people a second chance. Yes, but they have
:02:59. > :03:04.to learn that respect. I gave the press chance after chance, I think
:03:04. > :03:09.I was naive not to sue them when they were libelling mean repeatedly,
:03:09. > :03:13.and as a result of giving them those chances, they have used my
:03:13. > :03:18.good faith and I am still living with the legacy of that because a
:03:18. > :03:23.lot of people still believe the rubbish they wrote about me.
:03:23. > :03:26.what ways did they destroy your reputation? I am grateful to the
:03:26. > :03:31.audience for being generous because a lot of people believe things that
:03:31. > :03:35.were written about me in terms of my personal life, which have
:03:35. > :03:41.nothing to do with my performance as an MP. What was the biggest lie
:03:41. > :03:45.they told? Some of this is subject to legal proceedings, but for
:03:45. > :03:50.example they endlessly reported me as having broken up a relationship
:03:50. > :03:59.with one person am starting to go out with someone else, which was
:04:00. > :04:07.180 degrees wrong. That was your relationship with the cheeky girl.
:04:07. > :04:11.Yes, they also kept attacking me about my parliamentary expenses. My
:04:11. > :04:16.lawyer at the time wrote a letter to the Sun and they didn't even
:04:16. > :04:20.bother replying. I had a choice to either spend tens of thousands of
:04:20. > :04:23.pounds dragging the newspaper through the courts, when they
:04:23. > :04:28.obviously had a very experienced and well paid legal resource of
:04:28. > :04:34.their own, or just put up with it. I made the mistake of putting up
:04:34. > :04:38.with it, so I have not got that faith in the press. Until we have
:04:38. > :04:45.much stronger regulations, which mean that people who don't have
:04:46. > :04:52.hundreds of thousands of pounds to Stent in court -- to spend in court,
:04:52. > :04:59.until then these newspapers can carry on destroying people's lives.
:04:59. > :05:03.I guess the other side of it is that some people will argue, there
:05:03. > :05:12.he is, Lembit Opik is on Saturday night television dressed as a
:05:12. > :05:16.pixie... I don't think so! being photographed at Premiere
:05:16. > :05:21.openings, being photographed in magazines, what about that
:05:21. > :05:25.argument? Does that mean we don't want politicians who appear in the
:05:25. > :05:35.public eye, as well as complaining they can't reach out to the general
:05:35. > :05:35.
:05:35. > :05:41.public? Look at how many people watch X Factor, or I'm a celebrity
:05:41. > :05:46.- look how many people watch that. What I was trying to do was to
:05:46. > :05:50.reach out in an unconventional way. It doesn't say anywhere in the Book
:05:50. > :05:55.of journalism that you can libel people just because they go on
:05:55. > :06:01.those sort of programmes. I can understand what you are saying, but
:06:01. > :06:04.if you are going to tar the media with one brush, that is a mistake
:06:04. > :06:08.because we'll it to the good journalist in this country. There
:06:08. > :06:15.are some rogues, I understand that, but we have got to be very careful
:06:15. > :06:20.here because we need a free press in this country. We need that. You,
:06:20. > :06:24.for the record, live near to where I used to live so I know the media
:06:24. > :06:31.locally, but nationally you did caught some of it as well. You were
:06:31. > :06:36.right to do that, you got a lot of coverage, but if you are going to
:06:36. > :06:41.talk about the Leveson Inquiry, that we start to lose... This is
:06:41. > :06:46.throwing the baby out with the bathwater? It indeed. Why hasn't
:06:46. > :06:51.the Prescott the licence to destroy his reputation? It doesn't have
:06:51. > :06:57.that licence. Britain is the libel capital of the world. Everyone
:06:57. > :07:02.comes here to sue. Our journalists in that sense, their research light
:07:02. > :07:10.on them all the time. I hear what you are saying about the cost of
:07:10. > :07:15.bringing a libel action, and at the moment there is a government
:07:16. > :07:22.looking at that. The bottom line is you are a bit of a shrinking violet,
:07:22. > :07:29.I know, and I think it is fair to say that it was a bit of a two way
:07:29. > :07:34.interaction, that you did enjoy at the coverage. That is no excuse if
:07:34. > :07:44.errors were made, they should not have been. If you were maligned,
:07:44. > :07:44.
:07:44. > :07:49.you should have sued. It is easy for you to say that. Where do I
:07:49. > :07:55.find �50,000 to Suva Sun? Where does it say in the Book of ethics
:07:55. > :07:58.that I should find out my ex- partner had a miscarriage in a
:07:58. > :08:08.headline from the News Of The World? Where is the morality in
:08:08. > :08:08.
:08:08. > :08:12.that? That wasn't journalism, that was the moral disgrace.
:08:12. > :08:18.journalism in this country lost its moral compass? A hit has always
:08:18. > :08:23.been the case that there have been good and bad journalists. If you
:08:23. > :08:28.are a footballer, who is having a fling with Nicky Campbell or
:08:28. > :08:33.something, you would expect... have taken an injunction out about
:08:33. > :08:38.that! And you are talking about this off the record to a tabloid
:08:38. > :08:42.journalist, it is very possible they would betray your dirty secret.
:08:42. > :08:48.On the other hand, if you were talking to me, a broadsheet
:08:48. > :08:57.journalist, I would keep your confidence. There are good MPs and
:08:57. > :09:06.bad MPs. A broadsheet journalists are different? Peter Burden, you
:09:06. > :09:10.just said no. Last year, two young girls went undercover and made
:09:10. > :09:14.Vince Cable say all sorts of things he shouldn't have done but you
:09:14. > :09:21.could have expected him to do that in that circumstance - that was
:09:21. > :09:31.pure trickery. You are saying the broadsheets don't do that, they do.
:09:31. > :09:35.There is a public interest lying. We found out from that expose that
:09:35. > :09:41.the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry was waging a personal
:09:41. > :09:48.more against Rupert Murdoch. think it was common knowledge.
:09:48. > :09:52.you, maybe, but it was news and I think they did a good job. For they
:09:52. > :09:58.could have asked him what he thought. And they would have told
:09:58. > :10:03.him? What went wrong here was that he said it was off the record,
:10:03. > :10:09.quite evidently said it was off the record, that used to be a sacred
:10:09. > :10:14.commitment. Those journalists violated that. And even more
:10:14. > :10:22.serious point here - when you are an MP you feel you should have a
:10:22. > :10:26.relationship of trust with your constituents. Every MP now has to
:10:26. > :10:30.be cautious about what they say to their constituents. The Press
:10:30. > :10:34.Complaints Commission made it clear it was not acceptable so it was not
:10:34. > :10:39.a public interest point purely to embarrass Vince Cable, it was
:10:39. > :10:48.deeper than that. I think the Telegraph did permanent damage with
:10:49. > :10:54.its relationship to politicians. Padraig Reidy? There is a moral
:10:54. > :10:58.panic here. If you look back at the press in the 30s, they did
:10:58. > :11:03.disgraceful things, but James mentioned the public interest and
:11:03. > :11:08.that is vital. For example, people are saying it is terrible that
:11:08. > :11:12.people pay for stories. Is it really that terrible? Think of the
:11:12. > :11:16.expenses story, that was a lot of money handed over for private
:11:16. > :11:21.information. Would anyone say that was not in the public interest?
:11:21. > :11:28.Certainly not. We need to be very careful when we are talking about
:11:28. > :11:35.ethics, but the story is that the core. Who judges what is in the
:11:35. > :11:38.public interest? Ultimately the editor is the judge. He will always
:11:38. > :11:43.decide in his own favour. He will always decided is in the public
:11:43. > :11:50.interest to find out about any tittle-tattle, and that will give
:11:50. > :11:58.him, in his view, a licence to intrude, to life, to trick, I'm
:11:58. > :12:04.afraid. The system is not working, and the system is not working - yes,
:12:04. > :12:09.we have bad journalists, and we always have had, but the law on
:12:09. > :12:18.libel for example does not inhibit these people. We have had a
:12:18. > :12:22.sequence of shocking libel cases involving a lot of papers.
:12:22. > :12:27.Madeleine McCann's family, Christopher Jefferies, they were
:12:27. > :12:31.mum stirred in a serial fashion. In each case the papers were sued,
:12:31. > :12:36.they pay damages, but they didn't learn any lessons. Something is
:12:36. > :12:42.broken here. What is the moral justification for lying about
:12:42. > :12:50.people? There is none, and people should not lie. Journalists should
:12:50. > :12:56.not lie about other people. There is a carriage -- caricature of
:12:56. > :13:00.going on here about journalists. There are plenty of examples
:13:00. > :13:07.recently of journalists on broadsheet papers making up
:13:07. > :13:13.interviews and hacking into e-mail accounts. This is not a tabloid
:13:14. > :13:21.issue. We must not forget that we have absolutely got to have the
:13:21. > :13:26.people of this country engaged with the conversation, engaged with news
:13:26. > :13:31.and politics. You will not get that if investigation is somehow closed
:13:31. > :13:36.down, made more difficult. Journalism will become a couple of
:13:36. > :13:41.hundred 1000 people in Islington, sitting around tables with
:13:41. > :13:45.chattering classes. Everyone else will get their news from Facebook
:13:45. > :13:53.and everywhere else. That is not what should happen. Better a free
:13:53. > :13:55.press than a docile press. A former Chief Constable, I saw your hand
:13:55. > :14:03.shooting up, but we are going into the territory whether the law
:14:03. > :14:07.should be broken to get a story - should it? If no, I am going to say
:14:07. > :14:12.that I defend the press and it is right that we have a free press to
:14:12. > :14:18.raise public issues, but the moment you need to cross the legal
:14:18. > :14:21.boundaries, actually and you have found something that says there is
:14:21. > :14:26.something very wrong here, there are other organisations that should
:14:26. > :14:32.deal with it. It is not for the journalists to hack people's phones,
:14:32. > :14:37.go through their dustbins, go through those sort of things. I am
:14:37. > :14:41.not sure journalist do that very much, because in my experience of
:14:41. > :14:44.40 years of policing, journalists are becoming increasingly lazy.
:14:44. > :14:54.What about the discs with MPs' expenses that were stolen - should
:14:54. > :15:00.
:15:00. > :15:06.I am well aware from my own experience, and I am not personally
:15:06. > :15:11.involved in the experience with the discs, that information has been
:15:11. > :15:15.bought from sources. The information has been obtained
:15:15. > :15:21.illegally and bought. The person who bought it new that it was
:15:21. > :15:24.illegally obtained. There is a moral dilemma. If that information
:15:24. > :15:34.is life-and-death, it should go to those organisations that are paid
:15:34. > :15:34.
:15:34. > :18:37.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 183 seconds
:18:37. > :18:42.to deal with it. It should not be If you look at all the chatter
:18:42. > :18:47.happening around the Leveson enquiry, people are coming up with
:18:47. > :18:51.terrifying ideas about monetary regulation and heavy fines. This is
:18:51. > :18:57.the kind of thing that my organisation campaigned against. We
:18:58. > :19:07.have come out very vocally against Hungry, which is looking at lost to
:19:08. > :19:08.
:19:08. > :19:12.license journalists and newspaper owners. The press takes the
:19:12. > :19:17.authority away from the state and brings it back towards the people.
:19:17. > :19:23.We can open up these stories. The establishment will hold on to these
:19:23. > :19:30.things. We're back on the air just now, so apologies for the break-up
:19:30. > :19:39.to the satellite signal. Lembit Opik is now responsible -- Lembit
:19:39. > :19:46.Opik is now ready to respond. has been censored! The press has
:19:46. > :19:52.destroyed the reputation of Parliament. It is the MPs. The fact
:19:52. > :19:58.that you think that proves the problem. There are 650 MPs, most of
:19:58. > :20:02.whom never appeared in any of these stories. They were working 100
:20:02. > :20:08.hours a week trying to represent their constituents and you act as
:20:08. > :20:13.if it is a given that Parliament destroyed its own reputation. I
:20:13. > :20:18.could not afford to take on the big newspapers. Here is the big crunch
:20:18. > :20:21.and this is what the viewer has to decide. If they think there is
:20:22. > :20:26.nothing wrong with the fact that people like me could not afford to
:20:26. > :20:32.take on the press, I have one of the best libel lawyers in the
:20:32. > :20:35.country now, but she is pretty expensive. If people think that the
:20:35. > :20:40.press can say whatever they want and people like me cannot fight
:20:40. > :20:48.back, if you think that an individual should have to be rich
:20:48. > :20:53.to get justice, then we need a change. APPLAUSE What was the lie
:20:53. > :20:58.they told about your expenses? They made up this story about the
:20:58. > :21:06.fact that I had wasted lots of parliamentary money by having an
:21:06. > :21:10.electrician come from Wales to fix a problem in London. Daegu claim
:21:10. > :21:20.for a �2,500 plasmid television? Yes, but that is not the issue that
:21:20. > :21:24.
:21:25. > :21:28.I am speaking about. -- did you claim for a plasma TV? The press
:21:28. > :21:31.think they can say whatever they want knowing that most of the
:21:31. > :21:38.people in this room could not afford the legal representation.
:21:38. > :21:42.APPLAUSE For the past two years, my organisation has been running a
:21:42. > :21:47.strong campaign backed by the Liberal Democrats on exactly the
:21:47. > :21:51.point you address, on making the libel laws favour for journalists
:21:51. > :21:56.and people who may be the victims of defamation.
:21:56. > :22:02.We want to make it cheaper and fair for everyone. We have some
:22:02. > :22:07.agreement. Bishop John, it is great to see on the programme. Have you
:22:07. > :22:12.seen the Sun on Sunday? I know you have because we were discussing it
:22:12. > :22:15.earlier on as we had a cup of coffee. You saw Kelly Rowland
:22:15. > :22:21.almost naked on page three and then the column by the Archbishop of
:22:21. > :22:27.York. He was saying that this is Britain's favourite newspaper,
:22:27. > :22:31.seven days a week. What do you think of his involvement? I am not
:22:31. > :22:36.impressed, and quite frankly astonished that he is saying it,
:22:37. > :22:41.having seen the content of the paper. Driving down this morning we
:22:41. > :22:49.were told that this was to be a family newspaper and that it had a
:22:49. > :22:54.bias towards women and so on. If having a have naked person on page
:22:54. > :22:57.five is good for women, well, I wonder. I am astonished that the
:22:57. > :23:07.archbishop is contributing to it and I think he ought to change his
:23:07. > :23:10.
:23:10. > :23:15.mind. APPLAUSE He could be the next Archbishop of Canterbury.
:23:15. > :23:18.They are a talent spotter. Is it a problem that so-called
:23:18. > :23:24.sophisticated and intelligent people can read the newspapers that
:23:24. > :23:30.we get and take it with a pinch of salt? That his extraordinary
:23:30. > :23:34.snobbery. Lots of people had a gap in their lives as a result of the
:23:34. > :23:44.News Of The World being killed, and vindictive campaign by the Guardian.
:23:44. > :23:47.I am glad those people have got their newspaper back. Was it a
:23:47. > :23:57.vindictive campaign against the News Of The World? The News Of The
:23:57. > :23:57.
:23:57. > :24:01.World was killed by its own journalists. APPLAUSE Peter Burden.
:24:01. > :24:06.The News Of The World set out to do everything it could to make people
:24:06. > :24:10.feel uncomfortable. They went after it targets deliberately to expose
:24:10. > :24:15.them in a way which would entertain and titillate those few million
:24:15. > :24:19.people that buy the paper every week. There was a deliberate
:24:19. > :24:25.decision to do it, and they used whatever methods they could to do
:24:25. > :24:31.it. They were very good at it. I gather that this newspaper does not
:24:31. > :24:36.have such a big budget, they have cut down on their hacking budget in
:24:36. > :24:40.order to employ Glenn Mulcaire. That is outrageous. The News Of The
:24:40. > :24:46.World did some of the best investigative journalism at that
:24:46. > :24:52.this country has ever seen. Within a few months of being killed, a
:24:52. > :24:56.deed the Pakistani cricketer exposure. That kind of journalism,
:24:56. > :25:02.that kind of investigative journalism, it is hard to find
:25:02. > :25:08.funding for it. I think the Sun on Sunday is a very effective product,
:25:08. > :25:12.but even it does not have that edge of investigative journalism that
:25:12. > :25:19.the News Of The World had. I am terrified that that journalism will
:25:19. > :25:24.be lost in this country. I hope that maybe an extra 500,000 people
:25:24. > :25:29.will be buying a newspaper today that would not have otherwise.
:25:29. > :25:35.there are so many civil actions, with more to come, is that not a
:25:35. > :25:41.massive Steyn? I am speaking about the readers who deserve a newspaper.
:25:41. > :25:46.People in this country are not getting newspapers. Politics and
:25:46. > :25:52.news are just going to be chatter around by a few people who argue on
:25:52. > :25:58.The Andrew Marr Show. It will be politicians and journalists who all
:25:58. > :26:02.know each other. We want millions of people looking at newspapers. If
:26:02. > :26:06.this newspaper means that we will have more people buying and reading
:26:07. > :26:10.newspapers, it is good for this country and journalism. We have to
:26:10. > :26:16.leave it there, but give yourself so round of applause for taking
:26:16. > :26:20.part in that first debate. APPLAUSE If you want to have your say, log
:26:20. > :26:25.on to our website, bbc.co.uk/thebigquestions.
:26:25. > :26:31.There are ways to continue the discussions online. We will also be
:26:31. > :26:37.debating, does society pay too high a price for alcohol, and she'd we
:26:37. > :26:41.repent in Lent for the planet? Tell us what do you think, please, and
:26:41. > :26:45.send us your ideas for future debates or any comments about the
:26:45. > :26:50.programme. Politicians have always had a love-
:26:50. > :26:56.hate relationship with the demon alcohol, and I do not mean in the
:26:56. > :27:00.bars of the House of Commons. It raises �9 billion in tax revenue
:27:01. > :27:04.for the Chancellor every year, but it poses high cost for the police
:27:04. > :27:11.and the health service, and everyone else who has to clean up
:27:11. > :27:17.the damage caused by drinkers. Dr Kieran Moriarty, a liver specialist,
:27:18. > :27:21.good morning. Last night in Cardiff city centre are there were
:27:21. > :27:27.celebrations after the rugby result, but extraordinary scenes,
:27:27. > :27:32.ambulances from 7 o'clock, looking after people who were injured as a
:27:33. > :27:39.result of excessive drinking. There is damage to society and bear
:27:39. > :27:49.bodies, but what kind of damage is this drug being? In financial terms
:27:49. > :27:50.
:27:50. > :27:54.it is costing the UK economy about �55 billion every year. Estimates
:27:54. > :27:58.range between 25 and 55. You are speaking about crime and social
:27:58. > :28:03.disorder. That is what the Government focus on, but it has a
:28:03. > :28:10.massive effect on family breakdowns and all forms of abuse within the
:28:10. > :28:15.family. Workplace absenteeism, 17 million days each year are lost
:28:15. > :28:21.from alcohol. But the main thing I want to focus on is the effect on
:28:21. > :28:26.the National Health Service. It cost about 2.7 billion each year.
:28:26. > :28:33.What about accident and emergency departments? That is the
:28:33. > :28:36.consequence, at the weekend, and on Friday, they are war zones. A large
:28:36. > :28:42.proportion of patients have an alcohol problem and it influences
:28:42. > :28:48.the care of people who were there without alcohol problems. There are
:28:48. > :28:54.assaults on other people and staff. What my colleagues see is the
:28:54. > :29:01.effect on the in patience. Our liver ward is full of patients that
:29:01. > :29:06.have alcohol-related liver damage. They are in their twenties, and 30s,
:29:06. > :29:12.and we're now seeing teenagers. There has been a 600 % increase in
:29:12. > :29:18.liver deaths over the last 40 years. During this time, deaths from other
:29:18. > :29:23.conditions have fallen. What do we need to do? We need prevention and
:29:23. > :29:31.treatment. The prevention measures will come up in the debate, but I
:29:31. > :29:37.will focus on the treatment side, which is largely ignored. We have
:29:37. > :29:44.written two papers in the British Society of Gastroenterology. The
:29:44. > :29:51.main focus of these is that we need to have nurses in our hospitals.
:29:51. > :29:56.Alcohol specialist nurses. People must -- people trust and confide in
:29:56. > :30:03.nurses. It has been shown that for every pound you spend on nurses or
:30:04. > :30:09.any treatment for alcohol, you save the nation �5. Our hospital has
:30:10. > :30:15.started a world first this weekend, because our Lead Nurse has started
:30:15. > :30:19.working seven days a week routinely, seen the patients who came men on a
:30:19. > :30:29.Friday and Saturday night, and the earlier you see the patients, the
:30:29. > :30:31.
:30:31. > :30:36.What do we need to do? In practical terms, what should the government
:30:36. > :30:41.do? I think we should bring in minimum pricing. The evidence is
:30:41. > :30:49.clear that, if you increase the price of alcohol... And I will give
:30:49. > :30:56.you an example. My son bought a great of beer, but I couldn't drink
:30:56. > :31:00.that so they gave it away. It is cheaper than fizzy pop. We saw the
:31:00. > :31:04.disgraceful scenes in the parliamentary bars, and we have
:31:04. > :31:14.seen the relationship between alcohol and the state. If you want
:31:14. > :31:18.to pay for university, you have to drink alcohol, you can't be part of
:31:18. > :31:23.the university team until you are part of that. We really have to
:31:23. > :31:27.start understanding that it is incredibly damaging, but it isn't
:31:27. > :31:34.just about students and young people, it is also, as a Baptist
:31:34. > :31:38.minister I have buried people who have died of cirrhosis of the liver,
:31:38. > :31:42.law-abiding citizens, but they have drunk too much. For I think this
:31:42. > :31:49.whole argument about minimum pricing is a non starter because no
:31:49. > :31:57.one knows what minimum pricing means. Nobody in central government
:31:58. > :32:04.has come out and said, "This is what it means". 30p a unit? This
:32:04. > :32:09.could stop people freeloading, drinking before they go to the pub.
:32:09. > :32:16.First of all, we are talking about a small minority of the total
:32:16. > :32:21.drinking population. 50 years ago, the relationship between spirits
:32:21. > :32:28.duty and beer duty is that spirit duty was for are times the amount
:32:28. > :32:38.of beer duty. Then two Labour councillors who wanted to defend
:32:38. > :32:45.the Scottish drinking industry, what is driving this problem now is
:32:45. > :32:50.access to cheap spirits. It is not cheap beer, it is cheap alcohol.
:32:50. > :32:54.That is quite wrong. Most of the patients that icy in the deprived
:32:54. > :33:01.parts of the country, they are drinking strong lager and strong
:33:01. > :33:07.cider. That is what they are drinking. They can drink for �2.99
:33:07. > :33:14.3 litres of this stuff, which is 27 units. I have had children in
:33:14. > :33:20.drinking 55 units a day, 400 units a week. There are two parts to your
:33:20. > :33:24.argument, the first is the cheap alcohol. The drinks industry as a
:33:24. > :33:32.whole does not want that. The second part is social deprivation.
:33:33. > :33:40.That is a national problem, not alcohol industry problem. That is,
:33:40. > :33:44.hang on, let me have my moment, the issue is of social deprivation. We
:33:45. > :33:52.talk about alcohol-related deaths. Statistics show that in 2009,
:33:52. > :33:58.alcohol deaths overall had gone down in the UK. Let's take it one
:33:58. > :34:02.point at a time because you will have chance to come back, Simon. Is
:34:02. > :34:08.it about social deprivation? There is a link, and that is
:34:08. > :34:13.throughout Britain. It is not just to do with alcohol. If you live in
:34:13. > :34:18.certain parts of the country, you die earlier, and it is not just
:34:18. > :34:22.drinks related. We tend to see heroin as an addictive drug, people
:34:22. > :34:26.give up heroin but can't give up alcohol. I have seen people drink
:34:26. > :34:31.when it is literally hurting them inside because of their condition,
:34:31. > :34:36.and they still carry on drinking. It is a very pernicious drug and we
:34:36. > :34:40.have to accept that. The people will always want to get out of
:34:40. > :34:48.their box. They will choose the path of least resistance, so if
:34:48. > :34:51.beer is cheap, they will go for that. We recognise there for a
:34:52. > :34:55.minority of people alcohol is a real problem. You are going to get
:34:55. > :34:59.a liver specialist saying something must be done, you will get an
:34:59. > :35:03.alcohol campaigners saying something must be done, but if you
:35:03. > :35:09.look at the historical record, at prohibition for example, when
:35:09. > :35:19.government moves into regular always create more problems than it
:35:19. > :35:19.
:35:19. > :35:24.solves. The same where the government comes in to regulate --
:35:24. > :35:29.saying that is completely false. I work in a homeless hostel. People
:35:29. > :35:35.have serious alcohol problems, and they are trying to recover from
:35:35. > :35:41.that, and we can make it as sterile as we can in relation to alcohol,
:35:41. > :35:46.obviously no alcohol in the hostel. People might not see friends they
:35:46. > :35:52.usually drink with, but it is streamed rule on adverts constantly,
:35:52. > :35:57.they even sponsor television programmes now, it is ridiculous.
:35:57. > :36:07.Why it needs to be done? I would like to see advertising bound on
:36:07. > :36:08.
:36:08. > :36:13.alcohol. It would make it easier for people to recover. -- banned.
:36:13. > :36:17.It is that situation at school where the whole class gets get
:36:17. > :36:27.behind because one person is naughty, and that is what you are
:36:27. > :36:28.
:36:28. > :36:31.talking about. The ease people die. I am going to answer your position.
:36:32. > :36:37.I am going to answer from a personal point of view. My father
:36:37. > :36:42.was an alcoholic, the son of a brewer, and when he gave up alcohol
:36:42. > :36:48.for the last 25 years of his life, he never once thought to make the
:36:48. > :36:55.comments you have made that I should not drink. Hang on a moment,
:36:55. > :37:00.we have to put this issue... I have not quite finished. I want to put
:37:00. > :37:07.this into Total perspective. The drinks industry is that one with
:37:07. > :37:13.you. We don't want to push alcohol upon people that don't want it. You
:37:13. > :37:18.can raise your eyebrows, but I can assure you that is the case. We are
:37:18. > :37:27.responsible. What we also need to understand is we are a major
:37:27. > :37:34.employer in this country. The pubs in this country are envied the
:37:34. > :37:40.world over. We employed tens of thousands of people. Good morning.
:37:40. > :37:46.First of all, as a Muslim in the Koran it says there is a good side
:37:46. > :37:50.of drinking alcohol but there are a lot of negative and wrong sides
:37:50. > :38:00.associated with it. Isn't it the time for the British Society to
:38:00. > :38:06.
:38:06. > :38:12.sacrifice the individual enjoyment for safer and healthier society?
:38:12. > :38:17.Why not? Expand a little bit. value individual freedom, that is
:38:17. > :38:24.what makes this country great. Barbara, what about when you were a
:38:24. > :38:27.top cop? Imagine we had gone into that kind of world the lake
:38:27. > :38:37.describes and there was very little drinking in this country - would it
:38:37. > :38:47.have made your job easier? It would have reduced demanding -- demand on
:38:47. > :38:52.
:38:52. > :38:57.policing certainly. You mentioned Mary Street, people out drinking,
:38:57. > :39:02.and it would have reduced demand. We are out there to pick people up
:39:02. > :39:12.before they get into that danger zone, before they need to go to A&E
:39:12. > :39:16.so we tree -- treat them on the street. We are not stopping people
:39:16. > :39:21.drinking, and looking at the earlier debate, I don't think the
:39:21. > :39:27.father of that world year-old, who when I spoke to the child and he
:39:27. > :39:33.told me his father had bought him some lager for his birthday, that
:39:33. > :39:39.he would have resisted that if it cost more. There is something about
:39:40. > :39:43.behaviour and educating people in that behaviour. Culture. Absolutely.
:39:43. > :39:49.If people were to drink less, we could never police people drinking
:39:50. > :39:58.in their own home, or people drinking in the park behind trees
:39:58. > :40:05.and that sort of thing. We wouldn't want to but we want to keep people
:40:05. > :40:09.save so we can reduce demand on policing. Tim? Advertising
:40:09. > :40:16.contributes to that culture, and the brewer over here were saying we
:40:16. > :40:22.don't want to sell people to -- alcohol to people who don't want it
:40:22. > :40:29.- do you understand addiction at all? Of course, but if people want
:40:29. > :40:34.alcohol they will find it wherever. By D regulating the industry, we
:40:34. > :40:38.have now opened up problems that means any corner shop can sell
:40:38. > :40:43.anything to anyone. If you ask the police, one of the biggest issues
:40:43. > :40:49.on a Saturday night in Cardiff, is that people are arriving in town
:40:49. > :40:53.already drunk. They have already taken the cheap supermarket alcohol.
:40:53. > :40:57.And Alastair Campbell this week said he regrets the relaxation of
:40:57. > :41:03.the licensing hours under the last government. I watched his programme
:41:03. > :41:10.on Monday on Panorama, and I was shocked to hear that 100 people a
:41:10. > :41:14.week are dying from liver disease. I think we have got to look at the
:41:14. > :41:20.cause. I think people have a problem with coping mechanisms. On
:41:20. > :41:24.that programme, Alastair Campbell said, coupled with alcohol, that
:41:24. > :41:27.triggered his mental breakdown. We have a lot of people in this
:41:27. > :41:32.country struggling from mental breakdown because they have
:41:32. > :41:35.financial problems and relationship problems. I would love to get
:41:35. > :41:41.involved with the government department to discuss coping. There
:41:41. > :41:46.are people in this country who can't cope. They don't know how to
:41:46. > :41:50.deal with financial problems. I have a lot of respect for Alastair
:41:50. > :41:58.Campbell after that programme. He turned to alcohol as a coping
:41:58. > :42:02.mechanism. We heard the point about treating people on the street, the
:42:02. > :42:06.London Ambulance team dealt with 30 people the night before the
:42:06. > :42:16.programme, and all of those were professionals from the city. The
:42:16. > :42:24.cost of the alcohol, with the you are paying �40 a bottle or not, it
:42:24. > :42:31.is a coping mechanism. On the other hand, for millions of people in
:42:31. > :42:36.this country it is an innocent pleasure. Somebody you know turned
:42:36. > :42:41.water into wine! Isn't it just the tiny minority spoiling it for
:42:41. > :42:48.everyone else? I think you are right. There is a saying hard cases
:42:48. > :42:51.make bad law. What one wants to see his responsibility, responsibility
:42:51. > :42:57.in terms of the way the press operates, responsibility in terms
:42:57. > :43:03.of the way readers operate and what they buy. I was on the other side
:43:03. > :43:06.of the fence some years ago because I was a criminal defence solicitor,
:43:06. > :43:14.spent several years doing that, and one of the most regular defences my
:43:14. > :43:24.clients would come up with, "I was drunk, I didn't know what I was
:43:24. > :43:28.doing". It is very easy to simply target the drinking because,
:43:28. > :43:34.underlying it in many cases, apart from the middle classes drinking
:43:34. > :43:39.themselves into a stupor in city centres, there is the element of
:43:39. > :43:43.deprivation. Thwart other pleasure perhaps to some people half? Why
:43:43. > :43:49.deprive them? What we need to do is try to bring into people's minds a
:43:49. > :43:54.greater sense of personal responsibility. How do we do that?
:43:54. > :44:00.And also, if we were starting now and alcohol was an illegal drug, I
:44:00. > :44:04.wonder how much attraction those who were wanting to legalise it
:44:04. > :44:09.would have. For a vision in America increased the amount of liver
:44:09. > :44:16.disease. Regulation seems to work. I am in agreement with the book
:44:16. > :44:20.about the fact that you are allowed to make stupid decisions, otherwise
:44:20. > :44:25.we will be telling people how to live. For a lot of people,
:44:25. > :44:29.alcoholism is not about the alcohol, it is a form of self- medication.
:44:29. > :44:35.If you don't use alcohol, you will use something else. If you go
:44:35. > :44:40.abroad, you can buy a litre of wine for less than �1. They don't have
:44:40. > :44:50.the same problem. By simply trying to stop people being able to afford
:44:50. > :44:53.
:44:53. > :44:59.alcohol, you are ignoring the fact Young people say that they're going
:44:59. > :45:04.out to get smashed, they're going to be sake at the end of it. That
:45:05. > :45:14.is learned behaviour. That is culture. Culture is what you learn
:45:14. > :45:17.from a previous generation, from a previous family. APPLAUSE 80s down
:45:17. > :45:27.to our generation, what is going on today.
:45:27. > :45:33.
:45:33. > :45:38.APPLAUSE It always goes too quickly. If you have views on that debate,
:45:38. > :45:45.log on to bbc.co.uk/thebigquestions. You can continue the discussion
:45:45. > :45:50.online. Our last big question is should we repent in Lent for the
:45:50. > :45:57.planet? If you would like to be in the audience for a future show,
:45:57. > :46:02.please get in touch. Next week we are in York, doing two shows, won a
:46:02. > :46:06.special edition asking is fundamentalism undermining faith?
:46:06. > :46:11.We are in Leicester the following week and Birmingham the week after
:46:11. > :46:15.that. Lent used to be a time for
:46:15. > :46:21.repentance and purification in readiness for Holy Week when we
:46:21. > :46:26.remember Christ's suffering on the cross. Today, Lent starts with
:46:26. > :46:31.eating pancakes and giving up booze until you can gorge yourself again
:46:31. > :46:41.on Easter Sunday. Campaign groups would like us to share are much
:46:41. > :46:42.
:46:42. > :46:45.bigger Lenten ambition, to save the planet. Bishop? There is a
:46:45. > :46:52.caricature or of the Church of which says, here come the
:46:52. > :46:56.Christians, they must be against it. They are against everything. Lent
:46:57. > :47:03.has that kind of historical echo against it, that it is all negative
:47:04. > :47:08.and about misery. That is not accurate. Lent was about self
:47:08. > :47:14.discipline, but it was actually self discipline that would
:47:14. > :47:22.hopefully benefit you and others. The word Lent itself comes from an
:47:22. > :47:27.old English word meaning to lengthen. Is it pre-Christian?
:47:27. > :47:33.You have Lent happening during the spring when things are starting to
:47:33. > :47:38.come to life again. One of the things that you can do as part of
:47:38. > :47:44.self discipline is deny yourself. Fine, you may feel a bit better if
:47:44. > :47:49.you have given up something. I think you have given up something?
:47:49. > :47:54.That was a private conversation before the programme! You will be
:47:54. > :48:03.hearing from my criminal lawyers! Yes, I have given up drink for a
:48:03. > :48:08.while. These journalists, honestly. Really, what we ought to be doing
:48:08. > :48:15.in Lent, been serious about it, is looking at positive things we can
:48:15. > :48:20.do for our self and others. Speak about the planet? Operation know
:48:20. > :48:25.and those who support it have signed a declaration saying that
:48:25. > :48:28.during the period of Lent, church leaders are to give a lead in
:48:28. > :48:38.helping people to think seriously about the issues that affect the
:48:38. > :48:41.
:48:41. > :48:47.planet. -- Operation Noah. Perhaps I can focus on repentance.
:48:47. > :48:53.It means bringing about change, change in our attitude towards the
:48:53. > :48:57.fragility of the environment. I drove over the Brecon Beacons today.
:48:57. > :49:04.It is awful to think that they may be gone in several years' time.
:49:04. > :49:10.that our fault? I do not believe it will be gone. What is going to
:49:10. > :49:20.cause the Brecon Beacons to go? environment of the Brecon Beacons
:49:20. > :49:23.
:49:23. > :49:27.will change radically. You are very peaky this morning. -- picky.
:49:27. > :49:33.you're saying to me now that you believe that global warming is down
:49:33. > :49:36.to man, I am saying that there is no evidence to prove that. I am an
:49:36. > :49:41.individual who has a view and I believe that the public in the UK
:49:41. > :49:46.have been hoodwinked by a lot of politicians with this nonsense
:49:46. > :49:52.about where the climate change a shoe is. We know the climate is
:49:52. > :49:56.changing but I do not believe it is down to man. We're finding that
:49:56. > :50:02.energy companies are having to charge extra money to individuals
:50:02. > :50:05.because they are buying this green energy in. In mid-Wales there is a
:50:05. > :50:14.massive issue in Montgomeryshire where there are going to pick
:50:14. > :50:18.pylons down the Severn Valley. -- put. I think this is all part of
:50:18. > :50:23.the natural cycle, but what am trying to say is that the issue
:50:23. > :50:27.about the green taxes will ruin this country. People are finding it
:50:27. > :50:33.hard to pay their electricity bills. You will have massive subsidies
:50:33. > :50:37.going on to these operators who have land and the wind farms. They
:50:37. > :50:44.are all signed up to this project and it is totally wrong. Jane
:50:44. > :50:47.Davidson, is it down to man? What is interesting about the way that
:50:47. > :50:53.John came in on this debate is that the Bishop of Swansea was speaking
:50:53. > :50:59.about wider issues in the context of the planet. The operation he was
:50:59. > :51:03.speaking about does not speaking anyway about wind farms. It is
:51:03. > :51:12.looking at issues around the problem that we need to be more
:51:12. > :51:17.careful. Is this problem and make? Well, we should be more thoughtful
:51:17. > :51:25.about what we do in the context of the planet. His climate change man-
:51:25. > :51:29.made? Yes, I contribution to climate changes man made. What you
:51:29. > :51:34.have to lay cat in the context of the massive amount of evidence from
:51:34. > :51:38.climate scientists across the world, from scientists of other
:51:38. > :51:44.disciplines working independently from each other, and finding
:51:44. > :51:50.similar outcomes. I am not a scientist. There are probably not
:51:50. > :51:55.many scientists in this audience today, but our job, whether or not
:51:55. > :52:00.you're a politician or I came mother, you should say, are there
:52:00. > :52:08.things that we can do to make our future better? Can we be
:52:08. > :52:14.responsible? The bishop be speaking about the Church making a positive
:52:14. > :52:19.contribution and I agree that that should be the job of the Church. I
:52:19. > :52:26.have been looking at at the operation document which is a mix
:52:26. > :52:32.of junk science and politics. I believe that church should be about
:52:32. > :52:38.God and not some New Age religion. Let me read you and example. It
:52:38. > :52:45.says, in the future, Christians may be called on to receive into their
:52:45. > :52:51.communities refugees forced to leave their lands to climate change.
:52:51. > :52:57.-- through climate change. This came from our prediction that was
:52:57. > :53:00.made in 2005 that by 2010 there would be 50 million climate
:53:00. > :53:07.refugees from islands like the Maldives which were being
:53:07. > :53:14.overwhelmed by the sea. Bishop, can you tell me how many climate change
:53:14. > :53:22.refugees came into 1010? I am afraid I cannot. Have I guess?
:53:22. > :53:26.not willing to guess. I can tell you, there were none. Why are you
:53:26. > :53:36.promoting junk science? Why are you stoking public fear about something
:53:36. > :53:39.
:53:39. > :53:46.that is not happening to the world? I have mentioned the operation, but
:53:47. > :53:51.that is not the issue. It is probably fair to say that mankind
:53:51. > :53:58.is not entirely responsible for climate change that we are seeing.
:53:58. > :54:02.That is acknowledged, but I think it is also a incontrovertible that
:54:02. > :54:09.mankind is contributing to an acceleration of that change, and
:54:09. > :54:15.also... APPLAUSE Surely it is desirable to do all we can to save
:54:15. > :54:21.the species? Yes, preserving water. Preserving
:54:21. > :54:27.tigers. But resources have been diverted into this brand new
:54:27. > :54:33.religion, which is the global warming religion. That is nonsense.
:54:33. > :54:40.You can say it is nonsense but you have probably been too busy writing
:54:40. > :54:43.sermons to do the research. For it is incontrovertible that we have
:54:43. > :54:53.increased the amount of carbon dioxide. That must be making a
:54:53. > :54:54.
:54:54. > :54:59.difference. THEY ALL TALK AT ONCE Listened to me for a minute.
:54:59. > :55:07.I do have a scientific background, and the point gaze that as with any
:55:07. > :55:13.household, if you think as the world at -- a few think of the
:55:13. > :55:17.world as a household, it is important how we use our resources.
:55:18. > :55:25.What we're getting from the church on the question of how to save the
:55:25. > :55:29.planet is sensible housekeeping for us as a species. Anyone who watches
:55:29. > :55:36.any major programme of on television can see that the
:55:36. > :55:41.Antarctic is melting. That means that some islands will be sinking.
:55:42. > :55:47.There is also a fine night changed? Resources are finite in absolute
:55:47. > :55:54.terms. There is this idea that we must preserve scarce resources. At
:55:54. > :55:59.the moment, under Britain, we have massive reserves of gas. In America
:55:59. > :56:05.this has transformed the economy and the price of gas in America has
:56:05. > :56:15.been reduced by 50 %. But getting it as it transforms the
:56:15. > :56:16.
:56:16. > :56:20.environment? THEY ALL TALK AT ONCE There is nothing in the agenda of
:56:20. > :56:23.things that we ought to be doing to address the threat of climate
:56:23. > :56:30.change. We ought to be doing these things
:56:30. > :56:36.anyway. We need to respect our environment. Our resources are not
:56:36. > :56:40.infinite and we need to be sparing. We need to think about younger
:56:40. > :56:49.generations not yet born who need this planet. We are wrecking it and
:56:49. > :56:54.we should stop. APPLAUSE The science was mentioned before.
:56:54. > :56:59.The bottom line is that people will remember that the University of
:56:59. > :57:04.East Anglia was doing this project and they fiddled the data. These
:57:04. > :57:10.people were very responsible people, apparently, and they manipulated it
:57:10. > :57:14.because they did not like what they were seeing. This is very complex,
:57:14. > :57:22.but I am very unhappy about this master plan that will have us
:57:22. > :57:28.paying taxes. The scientists were vindicated by four independent
:57:28. > :57:32.inquiries. What we are seeing from people who want to argue this case
:57:32. > :57:37.is particular circumstances rather than the big picture. The big
:57:37. > :57:45.picture is that the world does have finite resources, that is sensible
:57:45. > :57:50.and logical. If we carry on being the kind of wasteful, faultless
:57:50. > :57:55.society that we have been and are continuing to be, then the
:57:55. > :58:00.resources will be depleted more quickly. If we're going to look
:58:00. > :58:07.after future generations, we need to make sure that how we use our
:58:07. > :58:10.resources are not just an economic issue, which is what you are doing,
:58:10. > :58:18.but that it is also an environmental and socially just
:58:18. > :58:23.issue as well. APPLAUSE People have done their research and read up on
:58:23. > :58:27.this. Emotional appeals are no good. If
:58:27. > :58:31.Lembit Opik had been in the House of Commons last week he would have
:58:31. > :58:37.heard the world's greatest atmospheric physicist speaking
:58:37. > :58:46.about how there is no evidence whatsoever for a catastrophic man-
:58:46. > :58:53.made climate change caused by carbon dioxide. I do not think that
:58:53. > :58:59.the world is going to end. If it does, all of this is irrelevant. I
:58:59. > :59:04.reserve the right to say that I told you so now. In terms of what
:59:04. > :59:09.you're saying, the word catastrophic is crucial. We are
:59:09. > :59:14.clearly effecting our environment. Common sense tells us that if you
:59:14. > :59:19.have a highly polluting factory, people get ill around the factory.
:59:19. > :59:26.This is about been responsible. That is what the churches trying to
:59:26. > :59:31.do. Unfortunately, I meteorite is about to strike us and I have to
:59:31. > :59:37.say, sorry about the transmission fault earlier on. Next week we are