:00:25. > :00:30.Thank you, good morning, welcome to The Big Questions from King Edward
:00:30. > :00:36.VI School in Southampton. All that is necessary for the triumph of
:00:36. > :00:40.evil is that good men or women do nothing. As Edmund Burke might have
:00:40. > :00:44.remarked, had he witnessed the fall-out from the clutch of
:00:44. > :00:49.scandals, Mid Staffordshire Hospital, Jimmy Savile, and perhaps
:00:49. > :00:53.the Liberal Democrats. Should there be a duty to expose wrong to link?
:00:53. > :00:57.This hospital whistle blower says creating a duty under law would
:00:57. > :01:01.enable anybody who covered up wrongdoing to be prosecuted. This
:01:01. > :01:05.care home whistleblower says it risks employees taking the blame
:01:05. > :01:09.while their manager is escape responsibility.
:01:09. > :01:15.Charitable status is worth a lot of money through tax exemptions, and
:01:15. > :01:19.the ability to recover income tax on donations. It is seen as a badge
:01:19. > :01:24.of authenticity by potential donors. But a Plymouth Brethren trust has
:01:24. > :01:28.failed to find favour with the Charity Commission. To all churches
:01:29. > :01:34.deserve charitable status? Peter Bone MP says the Charity Commission
:01:34. > :01:37.should not have the power to decide which religion is good or bad. This
:01:37. > :01:41.former but remember says this church should not be a charity
:01:41. > :01:47.because it is run purely for its members' benefit.
:01:47. > :01:52.A furnace of fire, weeping and gnashing of teeth, a place without
:01:52. > :01:58.rest, day or night. This is how the Bible describes how, which awaits
:01:58. > :02:01.those who reject Christ. Do not say you have not been warned. Does it
:02:01. > :02:07.exist? This former soldier says there has to be held in order for
:02:07. > :02:17.God to punish evil and be just. This psychologist says the idea is
:02:17. > :02:19.
:02:19. > :02:22.damaging, a form of social control. To everybody knew that nobody did
:02:22. > :02:27.anything, that is the cry went a scandal is brought to light. That
:02:27. > :02:35.is why the government is considering ideas like a duty of
:02:35. > :02:43.candour or the banning of gagging clauses. Should there be a duty to
:02:43. > :02:48.expose wrongdoing? Frank Furedi, you have a problem with this. Do we
:02:48. > :02:53.not have a right to know? We need to know when bad things happen, but
:02:53. > :02:57.if you turn whistle blowing into a duty of care, you professionalise
:02:58. > :03:03.it, he emptied of meaning that, and what happens under those
:03:03. > :03:07.circumstances is that it breeds institutional dishonesty. People
:03:07. > :03:12.begin to cover their tracks, they no longer feel free to openly
:03:12. > :03:19.discuss problems. Experience shows that when you incite people to
:03:19. > :03:24.undergo this ritual of complaining, the institutions use that do not be
:03:24. > :03:28.totally accountable. In the NHS, we need major reforms and a major
:03:28. > :03:36.change in culture, not Outsourcing the problem to individuals to
:03:36. > :03:39.complain about. Although it sounds good, it deprives the moral content
:03:39. > :03:44.of whistle-blowing. Historically, they did it because it was the
:03:44. > :03:49.right thing to do, they felt a strong conviction. If you turn that
:03:49. > :03:55.into a duty, it becomes a complainant charter. You will have
:03:55. > :04:00.groups of solicitors parasitic queue-jumping on the bandwagon,
:04:00. > :04:10.compensation claims. We will end up with a bad situation. Public
:04:10. > :04:11.
:04:11. > :04:18.institutions will be no better off. But to whistleblowers... Do they
:04:18. > :04:24.need further legal protection and back-up? In terms of my situation,
:04:24. > :04:28.I was raising concerns. It turns out I was blowing the whistle. What
:04:28. > :04:34.is not understood by yourself is the fact that when you have a duty
:04:34. > :04:40.of care to patients, patients are at the centre of your work. When
:04:40. > :04:45.you raise concerns, you expect them to be resolved. What happens is
:04:45. > :04:49.that the heavens open and backers come at you. We need a robust
:04:49. > :04:59.system to support the clinician to keep the patient at the centre of
:04:59. > :05:00.
:05:00. > :05:09.care. Does that mean not only legal protection for those that do what
:05:09. > :05:15.you did, but also essential for those who do not blow the whistle?
:05:15. > :05:21.What you see as an individual, when you begin to try to correct what is
:05:21. > :05:25.actually happening in terms of not being allowed to remedy the
:05:25. > :05:30.situation, the further you look into the system, you realise that
:05:30. > :05:34.on one hand it is saying you must raise concerns, on the other hand
:05:35. > :05:43.it says you will be for ever damaged professionally, personally.
:05:43. > :05:48.We need something a bit more robust. Whistle blower link can and does
:05:48. > :05:53.work, I am involved with a mental health charity, we work with
:05:53. > :05:57.clinicians, I can be a front of them, but also a protagonist, to
:05:57. > :06:03.make sure those services are being achieved. If we do not, it costs
:06:03. > :06:08.lives. We see it time and time again. It needs to be managed in a
:06:08. > :06:17.strategic manner. We are encouraged to bring up those failings, but
:06:17. > :06:20.which are not engaged when we do. What needs to happen? We need to
:06:20. > :06:24.make some serious changes to legislation. There has been a
:06:25. > :06:28.recent review of the public disclosure Act, which is supposed
:06:28. > :06:34.to be there to protect whistleblowers. In the vast
:06:34. > :06:39.majority of cases, it has let them down. The problem that you have is
:06:39. > :06:47.that the legislation does not prevent employers from singling out
:06:47. > :06:52.the individuals, because there is a set of rules, individuals do not
:06:52. > :06:58.know that prior to making a disclosure. There is not the
:06:58. > :07:05.protection, there is not enough comeback for the employers that to
:07:05. > :07:10.victimise their employees, but also, the comic aspect. -- colleague
:07:10. > :07:15.aspect. There is a lack of coherence, because one person has
:07:15. > :07:25.blown the whistle, they might be arrested or they feel uncomfortable.
:07:25. > :07:27.
:07:27. > :07:31.It gets real difficult. It makes the whole thing very complicated.
:07:32. > :07:38.You have considered the possibility of a complainant's charter?
:07:38. > :07:44.destroy organisations, because you what objecting to moral pressure.
:07:44. > :07:49.That has got a bad aspect to it. You can isolate individuals. Is it
:07:49. > :07:55.not acting professionally? Yes, but you need to have a bond, so they
:07:55. > :08:00.can work at strategies. I went to work in a care home, and add to
:08:00. > :08:03.that point, I thought I lived in a civilised, free country. I looked
:08:03. > :08:07.after people with Alzheimer's, some of them had no family, they were
:08:07. > :08:14.not able to bear witness to what was happening to them. They were
:08:14. > :08:18.deliberately tortured. In ways that will haunt me until the day that I
:08:18. > :08:22.die. I have seen people bending people's fingers back, to get
:08:22. > :08:26.pleasure from it. I thought if I went to the management of the
:08:26. > :08:30.company, something would be done. I did not realise that six other
:08:31. > :08:39.carers were also going and had been told not to speak to each other,
:08:39. > :08:44.and they needed to collect evidence. At that point, I thought that
:08:44. > :08:49.things would be put right. But what happened, our lives were made a
:08:49. > :08:55.living hell. I was bending down to attend to a lady and I was smashed
:08:55. > :09:00.with a chair. Other whistleblowers were spat at, we were assaulted, we
:09:00. > :09:04.went into work at 7:00am and were told to come back at midnight. No
:09:04. > :09:10.food was brought down because they started to use the residents to get
:09:10. > :09:15.to us. We had to walk with Fiat each day to go into work, and the
:09:15. > :09:21.law was not with us. You did the right thing, I have read your
:09:21. > :09:27.account, incredibly moving, the war veteran whose capita was full, the
:09:27. > :09:32.way he was treated. He said he wished he had never swum out to the
:09:32. > :09:36.boat that day when the boats came. He wished he had died at Dunkirk if
:09:36. > :09:45.he had known what he was given to face. I felt so ashamed of my
:09:45. > :09:50.country, that that is how we treat people. What you are describing it
:09:50. > :09:54.is what is happening now, that is the reality of the situation. The
:09:54. > :09:59.law is very unbalanced, so clinicians have a duty of care to
:09:59. > :10:07.the patient, they also have a duty to speak when they see things are
:10:07. > :10:13.not going correctly. When they speak, there are professional and
:10:13. > :10:17.personal consequences. The Baby P doctor was raising serious concerns
:10:17. > :10:24.about the system that she was working with as a clinician. And
:10:24. > :10:29.the potential for great damage and death to happen to patients. There
:10:29. > :10:35.is one word that we need in the law. A law is built on accountability at
:10:35. > :10:40.the top of an organisation. The man that we went to at the top of the
:10:40. > :10:45.company is now currently advising the CQC on how to inspect care
:10:45. > :10:51.homes. I would ask David Cameron to give the same level of protection
:10:51. > :10:57.to whistleblowers that is currently given to Sir David Nicholson.
:10:57. > :11:04.People at the top, if you say it whistle plovers are out of their
:11:04. > :11:08.job but the people at the top of promoted, what are you saying?
:11:08. > :11:15.Surely this is an argument for statutory protection and perhaps
:11:15. > :11:21.even legal duty, because perhaps we would not have had Zeebrugge or
:11:21. > :11:28.Piper Alpha it or Clapham Junction. People might have wished they had
:11:28. > :11:32.said something. We have a campaign. I would like to see the victims put
:11:32. > :11:37.at the heart of the law, because we should remember that people's lives
:11:37. > :11:43.are lost when a whistleblower is ignored. I did not know what a
:11:43. > :11:47.whistleblower was when I spoke out. For the watchword is protection.
:11:47. > :11:51.The question posed by the programme is whether people should be morally
:11:51. > :11:56.compelled or legally compelled. In my view, the answer has been
:11:56. > :12:04.provided. Many people are already feeling morally compelled to stand
:12:04. > :12:08.up. What stops there is the were full protection afforded to them.
:12:08. > :12:12.We see organisations and large employers attacking the whistle
:12:12. > :12:17.blower rather than addressing the issues that there is. There is also
:12:17. > :12:27.the issue, I was asked how much for silence, how much did I want? I
:12:27. > :12:28.
:12:29. > :12:34.said, you have not got enough money. Is that what you said? It was put
:12:34. > :12:39.more strongly than that! We are just talking about the whistle
:12:39. > :12:49.blower. We have bad organisations, they are going in the wrong
:12:49. > :12:50.
:12:50. > :12:54.direction. Instead of altering them, we say the solution lies in
:12:54. > :13:01.individuals have been the duty to blow the whistle. If you
:13:01. > :13:09.individualise the problem, you perpetuate the bad things. Is it
:13:09. > :13:13.not a fundamental moral principle? If that was your mother, like this
:13:13. > :13:19.woman described, or a relative, and they were in that situation, would
:13:19. > :13:23.it not be your bike to raise the alarm bell? How can you say that we
:13:24. > :13:29.should be allowed and this to continue? I am all for blowing the
:13:29. > :13:34.whistle. If you feel strongly, it is your duty. That is the way to
:13:34. > :13:39.change organisations. There is a difference between saying, this is
:13:39. > :13:46.what I must do, standing up and fighting it, and saying it, I have
:13:46. > :13:53.got this right given in law to complain. Whistle-blowing is not
:13:53. > :14:02.complaining. I did not know what a whistle blower was. If I had to go
:14:02. > :14:07.back and do it again, I would, because it would... Hello, Kevin.
:14:07. > :14:10.We have to look away from the NHS, because whistle-blowing ought to be
:14:10. > :14:16.there, we have to look at the contortions of the entertainment
:14:16. > :14:21.industry about Jimmy Savile, how many people have said, for the last
:14:21. > :14:27.30 or 40 years, I knew he. To it, but I did not think I could say
:14:27. > :14:31.anything? You have to look at the consequences with Jimmy Savile to
:14:31. > :14:37.say, we need more protection for whistleblowers. There is another
:14:37. > :14:41.problem. When you go back to Staffordshire Hospital, you look at
:14:41. > :14:47.what has happened to the woman who set up to cure the NHS charity, she
:14:47. > :14:53.has been vilified locally, local citizens have taken against her,
:14:53. > :15:03.people who ought to have a better moral sense, and the problem you
:15:03. > :15:13.end up with the, you say, if I do not say anything, I therefore am
:15:13. > :15:23.
:15:23. > :15:29.part of the behaviour. That is Good morning. Good morning. I am a
:15:29. > :15:39.teacher. As a teacher, up we are trained a lot better now in child-
:15:39. > :15:40.
:15:40. > :15:49.protection. We have had growth in the way that we approach, the way
:15:49. > :15:54.we approach situations. I grew up in the 1970s. I watch Jim'll Fix It.
:15:55. > :16:01.I remember seeing that those girls looked very squashed up next to him
:16:01. > :16:08.and uncomfortable. As a child I did not consider, because I did not
:16:08. > :16:13.even know what child abuse was back then. As a society, we have grown
:16:13. > :16:19.up. We have come up with means by which we can deal with these
:16:19. > :16:25.terrible things that go on. It has taken a long time and we're not
:16:25. > :16:30.there yet in education, but there are procedures in place, not just
:16:30. > :16:39.rules. No buddies you would consider that if I thought a child
:16:39. > :16:43.was being abused, I should possibly not reported. APPLAUSE Somebody
:16:43. > :16:47.could be there when that chav was being abused and somebody would
:16:47. > :16:51.have to reported to you. Procedures and robust whistle-
:16:51. > :16:58.blowing policies are pieces of paper that you can stuff down your
:16:58. > :17:04.back if you are hit with a chair. But without accountability... You
:17:04. > :17:09.have mentioned Julie Bailey. She has been vilified. Every time you
:17:09. > :17:14.see the words, no single individual or organisation is going to be held
:17:14. > :17:22.to account, you know. Mid- Staffordshire can happen again,
:17:22. > :17:28.just like that. So can Jimmy Savile. If it is a legal duty, are there
:17:28. > :17:34.any problems with that? Will people tend to report everything that they
:17:34. > :17:38.see, everything they come across? was about to agree with a lot about
:17:38. > :17:44.what that gentleman said. Up until the point that he said it would
:17:44. > :17:50.lead to parasitic lawyers. I cannot help disagree with that bit. What
:17:50. > :17:55.is your profession? I am a lawyer. Whistle-blowing is a colloquial
:17:55. > :18:01.term. It means people that are willing to stand up in the face of
:18:01. > :18:06.wrong doing. They have a role in every society. A legal duty takes
:18:06. > :18:12.it from a moral duty that we would all encourage and creates a system
:18:12. > :18:22.that is divisive. It means, do we have to look over our shoulder
:18:22. > :18:24.
:18:24. > :18:28.before we do or say anything? It is taking the nanny state too far.
:18:28. > :18:36.Clinicians already have a legal duty to raise concerns and to a
:18:36. > :18:40.whistleblower. Managers in the NHS particularly do not have that legal
:18:40. > :18:46.duty. Right up the management structure there is no legal
:18:46. > :18:50.accountability. Why are we spending millions of pounds gagging people,
:18:50. > :18:55.preventing them from raising concerns where there is a danger
:18:55. > :18:59.and damage being caused to the population? If you do have that
:18:59. > :19:05.legal compulsion, is there a danger that people will stop speaking
:19:05. > :19:09.about things and start communicating with euphemisms?
:19:09. > :19:15.my university, lecturers no longer e-mail each other about what they
:19:15. > :19:21.think. We basically sound anodyne references when we send letters of
:19:21. > :19:30.reference. The real issue is where were these people in the 1970s?
:19:30. > :19:39.They had no voice. That is not true. There were a lot of people in the
:19:39. > :19:42.BBC... THEY ALL TALK AT ONCE There were lots of powerful people in the
:19:42. > :19:47.entertainment business who would now say that we knew about all this
:19:47. > :19:52.stuff that was going on. You are IBJ, as he had a radio
:19:53. > :19:59.programme, why did you not tell the world what was happening? The
:19:59. > :20:06.problem was a lack of moral courage. Procedure is not a substitute for
:20:06. > :20:11.moral courage. I would suggest that there has been grooming. We used
:20:11. > :20:16.this word with the Jimmy Savile situation. The population has been
:20:16. > :20:20.groomed into compliance. We cannot speak because of the sanctions. We
:20:20. > :20:26.have watched what happened to other people that have tried to speak out
:20:26. > :20:31.about things that are clearly wrong. Do you think there is a difference
:20:31. > :20:41.now it between people working in the NHS and the same situation 20
:20:41. > :20:42.
:20:42. > :20:51.years ago, in terms of their ability to speak out? Yes. In the
:20:51. > :20:56.past, people were dad. -- people were stopped from speaking. There
:20:56. > :21:01.had been a system designed that would stop people from speaking. We
:21:01. > :21:07.need laws that go right to the top. We have said to David Cameron about
:21:07. > :21:11.this, holding people accountable right to the top. APPLAUSE Thank
:21:11. > :21:13.you for your contributions. If you have something to say about that
:21:13. > :21:16.debate, log on to bbc.co.uk/thebigquestions and
:21:16. > :21:20.follow the link to where you can join in online. Or join in the
:21:20. > :21:27.discussion on Twitter. We are also debating live this morning, do all
:21:27. > :21:30.churches deserve charitable status? And does hell exist? Tell us what
:21:30. > :21:36.you think about those topics or send any general comments you would
:21:36. > :21:38.like to make about the programme. In a letter turning down an
:21:38. > :21:41.application from Plymouth Brethren elders, the Charity Commission said,
:21:41. > :21:44.there is no presumption that religion, generally or at any more
:21:44. > :21:52.specific level, is for the public benefit, even in the case of
:21:52. > :21:54.Christianity or the Church of England. So the Tory MP Peter Bone
:21:54. > :21:57.has sponsored a Private Member's Bill to reintroduce the presumption
:21:57. > :21:59.that all religious institutions are of public benefit and therefore
:21:59. > :22:08.eligible for charitable status. Do all churches deserve charitable
:22:09. > :22:12.status? Good morning. Good morning.
:22:12. > :22:19.think we should reinstate this default position that if it is
:22:19. > :22:25.religious it is good? Almost. The presumption. That is what it was
:22:25. > :22:29.before 2006. Ed Miliband brought this Act through Parliament and he
:22:29. > :22:33.stated that it would not affect any current religious institutions.
:22:33. > :22:38.That legislation was aimed at creating independent schools, not
:22:38. > :22:44.religion. But the Charity Commission has decided to
:22:44. > :22:48.reinterpret the will of Parliament. They withheld charitable status
:22:48. > :22:53.from the Church of Scientology in 1999. You would support that
:22:53. > :23:03.position? There is a presumption, but if there are religions that are
:23:03. > :23:08.
:23:08. > :23:12.just fronts, that would not apply. There will be the private member's
:23:12. > :23:22.bill at the end of March. I'm going to see the Minister about this
:23:22. > :23:30.tomorrow. We will put in three stipulations into the legislation.
:23:30. > :23:39.There will be three Test. Test No. 1? If, for instance, you provide
:23:39. > :23:45.prayer. If prayer is open, that would take the box. Education, that
:23:45. > :23:50.would be one. If you provided money to charities, that would be another.
:23:50. > :23:54.There is a whole series of Test we are putting in. The problem with
:23:54. > :23:57.the current legislation is that public benefit is not defined,
:23:57. > :24:02.which is why the Charity Commissioners have been able to
:24:02. > :24:08.reinterpret the lot. This could all applied to a religion that might
:24:08. > :24:12.believe that children are possessed by evil spirits, for example.
:24:13. > :24:17.always told by left-wingers that they believe in freedom of religion,
:24:17. > :24:21.but when the question comes, they do not believe it, they want
:24:22. > :24:28.religion to be performed in a particular way. This is not about
:24:28. > :24:36.freedom of religion. This is about religion saying, we want privilege,
:24:36. > :24:41.we want special rides. Believe what you want, because belief is only
:24:41. > :24:47.belief, 80 is not fact. I have no problem with people believing
:24:47. > :24:56.something. In Liverpool, some people believe Everton are the
:24:56. > :24:59.greatest football team in the world. But do not tell me that you want
:24:59. > :25:05.tax breaks are a special position in society merely because you are
:25:05. > :25:10.religious. That has to be wrong. Francis Davis, of what is your
:25:10. > :25:17.problem with this? The allegedly exclusive Plymouth Brethren, they
:25:17. > :25:24.have spent over �1 million on legal expenses and PR, it is said.
:25:24. > :25:28.Clearly this is a valuable prize, charitable status. Are they not
:25:28. > :25:33.spreading the word of Christ? thing about the law is that
:25:33. > :25:37.religion is not just an idea, it takes an institutional form.
:25:37. > :25:43.Religion can choose to be a private company and some will choose to be
:25:43. > :25:47.a charity. What comes with that his financial benefits. The definition
:25:47. > :25:52.has been negotiated with the Charity Commission and it is on
:25:52. > :25:57.their website. All the mainstream churches live with that and our
:25:57. > :26:04.passing through it successfully. In every community we have a series of
:26:04. > :26:08.fringe groups where the leader of the Church's car has got messed up
:26:08. > :26:13.in the accounts. You cannot tell the difference between the accounts
:26:13. > :26:19.of the members and the accounts of the Church. In the case of the
:26:19. > :26:24.exclusive brethren, not the normal Plymouth Brethren, they do not use
:26:24. > :26:30.the internet, they do not let their children go to university. In
:26:30. > :26:34.Australia and New Zealand they fund the Conservative Party. You do not
:26:34. > :26:39.want charitable funds being applied for political purposes that are not
:26:39. > :26:46.transparent because there is not the scrutiny of a regulator.
:26:46. > :26:53.Richard, you were born into the Plymouth Brethren. Yes, the
:26:53. > :27:03.exclusive brethren. Why should we be worried? On most issues I would
:27:03. > :27:04.
:27:04. > :27:11.be on the same place as Peter Bone. He and I are both right wing Tories.
:27:11. > :27:19.But in the case of the exclusive brethren, we are speaking about a
:27:19. > :27:23.cult. It does more harm to society then good. I agree with Peter Bone
:27:23. > :27:28.that there ought to be a presumption that religious
:27:28. > :27:35.organisations clearly provide a public benefit. What does their
:27:35. > :27:39.leaders say? Their current leader is an Australian furniture salesman.
:27:39. > :27:48.His ministry, which she has published, says that you should hit
:27:48. > :27:53.the world. There are people who have said similar things. People
:27:53. > :27:58.like Abu Hamza. Was he to say that in a public place, we might
:27:58. > :28:08.consider arresting him. For me, the exclusive brethren are one of those
:28:08. > :28:08.
:28:08. > :28:12.special cases. How has this affected you? I have not seen my
:28:13. > :28:19.family since 1980. I was excommunicated from my family, my
:28:19. > :28:26.job, my home. I cannot even have a cup of tea with my mother, if you
:28:26. > :28:36.can call that Christian. You are the lawyer of the exclusive
:28:36. > :28:37.
:28:37. > :28:41.brethren. And so this charge of it being a cult? -- answer. It is not
:28:41. > :28:47.a term that I recognise from my personal experience of my dealings
:28:47. > :28:53.with them. We must be very careful not to personalise this. You had
:28:53. > :28:58.the same issue in the debate last week about there being an important
:28:58. > :29:02.differentiation between doctrine and practice. But let's move on
:29:02. > :29:08.from that. There is a fundamental difficulties here in that things
:29:08. > :29:13.are being sent very specific they and out of context. Certainly the
:29:13. > :29:18.Ministry I have looked at, particularly that statement, it is
:29:18. > :29:27.about the moral separation from evil in the world, it is nothing to
:29:27. > :29:31.do with physical our personal abuse. I have seen it are lots -- I have
:29:31. > :29:37.seen lots of ministries that speak clearly about compassion. We must
:29:37. > :29:41.not take things out of context. I should also say that I have not
:29:41. > :29:51.been a member of the Plymouth Brethren. I am not from within that
:29:51. > :30:00.
:30:00. > :30:06.community, so I cannot speak about There are examples and cases where
:30:06. > :30:14.the law has to step in and say that this does not provide public
:30:14. > :30:24.benefit, and there is a lack of benefit to the wider public. I have
:30:24. > :30:25.
:30:25. > :30:29.an experience of the Plymouth Brethren. I did not find them to
:30:29. > :30:34.peak ferry inclusive. They take their children home at lunchtime
:30:34. > :30:38.because they cannot eat with other children. My son at five years old
:30:38. > :30:45.invited one of his Plymouth Brethren friends to his birthday
:30:45. > :30:50.party. I tried to dissuade him from inviting him, because I knew he
:30:50. > :30:54.would not come, but we send the invitation, and he did not come up.
:30:54. > :31:02.I had to say to Michael, he cannot come because he cannot eat with you.
:31:02. > :31:07.I helped in the class, any activities related to the
:31:07. > :31:12.television, I had to sit with him and two other activities. I find
:31:13. > :31:20.them to be not inclusive, very exclusive, and on Sportsday, they
:31:20. > :31:26.cannot partake. From what we are hearing, why should these people
:31:27. > :31:31.get taxpayers' money? A lot of the things I heard, I do not recognise
:31:31. > :31:39.as being true. If you believe religion should be allowed to do
:31:39. > :31:44.certain things,... You can say the same for Andrew Hunter. -- appear
:31:44. > :31:49.Hansa. If you are a terraced, you should be arrested under terrorist
:31:49. > :31:54.laws. If you are a paedophile, you should be arrested for paedophilia.
:31:54. > :32:00.You should not have your charitable status taken away. The commission
:32:00. > :32:03.will be one of the first to be able to identify that there is a risk to
:32:03. > :32:07.security from a particular religious community. That is why it
:32:07. > :32:13.used to have a specialist unit that attract those parts of communities
:32:13. > :32:22.that were a risk. That was cut when the new government arrived. Where
:32:22. > :32:28.would you draw the public benefit line? We need a historic
:32:28. > :32:36.perspective. The presumption was that any religion is better than no
:32:36. > :32:44.religion when the laws were set up originally. In 1600. That is fair
:32:44. > :32:49.enough. 1601, sorry! In that context, religion was presumed to
:32:49. > :32:57.be the Church of England. And it was presumed to be good. The issue
:32:57. > :33:01.about public benefit is who will say what it is? Who will define it?
:33:01. > :33:05.We have had the situation that, because of various procedures, the
:33:05. > :33:09.Catholic adoption agencies have closed down because they have been
:33:09. > :33:13.put in the position to say, we cannot do what we want to do
:33:13. > :33:19.because of the way the law is now defined. That seemed to be the
:33:19. > :33:26.problem. The situation we should have is that it is innocent until
:33:27. > :33:34.proven guilty. The churches provide 27 million person hours of
:33:34. > :33:40.voluntary work outside of churches a month. It is costed out to �3.5
:33:40. > :33:46.billion to the UK economy. These are people volunteering. Feature
:33:46. > :33:55.rich network got it in 2010. -- Druid network. There should be a
:33:55. > :34:01.lot of tests. That sounds like a no. Innocent until proven guilty. You
:34:01. > :34:09.can investigate, but the idea that people should have to prove they
:34:09. > :34:16.risk things beforehand,... 1175 religious organisations got
:34:16. > :34:21.charitable status, one of them was refused. That is the Preston down
:34:21. > :34:29.case. If this is a conspiracy by the left-wing Commission, they are
:34:29. > :34:32.doing a poor job of it! And that coming from a right-wing Tory!
:34:33. > :34:37.People do a huge amount of good things in the world. They have a
:34:37. > :34:42.lot of good feeling for their fellow man, they do not need
:34:42. > :34:48.religion to achieve that. They took that because they are citizens. I
:34:48. > :34:55.am a psychotherapist and psychologist, I am nice! I am so
:34:55. > :35:03.pleasant to people, I do not ask for a tax break. The churches of
:35:03. > :35:08.the largest voluntary organisation, by another. -- partner. The issue
:35:08. > :35:14.it is that they should not be taxed for it. They give their time and
:35:14. > :35:20.money voluntarily, why did you put a tax? It is hard enough. You do
:35:20. > :35:24.not pay income tax, you get tax relief on donations... It is hard
:35:24. > :35:29.enough to get leaders Ford youth organisations, why put an extra
:35:29. > :35:35.hurdle? It is hard enough to get work as a counsellor, I get taxed
:35:35. > :35:42.for giving out. Nobody says, you are doing good work, you are making
:35:42. > :35:46.a difference, we will give you a bit back. They do not do that. I
:35:46. > :35:50.have a fundamental problem, a church might do some good things
:35:50. > :35:55.come up I have no doubt that some judges do terrifically good things,
:35:55. > :36:00.but that is not the whole of the enterprise. They say they want
:36:00. > :36:06.special rights and financial brakes. If you run a soup kitchen, I have
:36:06. > :36:14.no problem with that soup kitchen being declared a charity. But do
:36:14. > :36:19.not make the whole edifice tax free. What if we were to say that there
:36:19. > :36:25.are particularly religious views that are bad for public? For
:36:25. > :36:32.example, the Catholic Church saying that contraception is bad. That has
:36:32. > :36:36.serious repercussions. People die because of that. I am not to say
:36:36. > :36:44.they are bad organisations, but if they were a charity, these views
:36:44. > :36:50.would not be supported. We are speaking about tax in a negative
:36:50. > :36:56.way. But it is effectively a pot for everybody. That needs to be
:36:56. > :37:02.taken into account. It is part of the payment of every individual
:37:02. > :37:08.towards the Great Society. Should we have this presumption that all
:37:08. > :37:14.religions are good for society, thereby they should get tax breaks?
:37:14. > :37:22.We need to be sent to the debate on this issue. First, the Charities
:37:22. > :37:26.Act recognises that advancement of religion is considered to be a
:37:26. > :37:34.public benefit. It is at least a benefit for the members of that
:37:34. > :37:39.religion. First of, if the Charity Commission have decided to move
:37:39. > :37:46.away from that and introduce a new interpretation, contrary to what
:37:46. > :37:49.the statute says, that is a grave concern, and that is an issue of
:37:49. > :37:58.legislative responsibility and the Palace that we give our
:37:58. > :38:03.parliamentarians. 1000 Christian related organisations achieved
:38:03. > :38:09.charity status. There is a serious concern, people are beginning to
:38:09. > :38:15.talk about good religion and bad religion. They are creating some
:38:15. > :38:23.kind of benchmark. The threat is an ignoble litany of hucksters and con
:38:23. > :38:31.men in religion. At the moment, we have an unofficial parliamentary
:38:31. > :38:35.committee, which comes together. Perhaps our legal friend can give
:38:35. > :38:42.us more advice. In relation to the Plymouth brethren, they have said
:38:42. > :38:47.they will take anonymous evidence. What this committee has said is
:38:47. > :38:54.that, we will call for evidence from former members of the Plymouth
:38:54. > :39:00.brethren to ask if they have been mistreated. They have said, we will
:39:00. > :39:05.take evidence from people, anecdotally, and we will ask people,
:39:05. > :39:11.have you suffered harm? If so, this will be collected together and used
:39:11. > :39:21.to attack religious organisations. That is dangerous. But it is to do
:39:21. > :39:22.
:39:22. > :39:28.with specific organisations. That is not true at all. In this
:39:28. > :39:35.situation, you have got rules about public benefit. That part is set
:39:35. > :39:43.low. The suggestion that Peter Bone says is already enshrined in law.
:39:43. > :39:48.You on wronged. You are absolutely wrong. Why print in a Bill to
:39:48. > :39:52.change something that already exists? It would not be the first
:39:52. > :39:56.time! It replicates the tests that the Charity Commission already
:39:56. > :39:59.carries out to discover whether an organisation is for the public
:39:59. > :40:07.benefit. The bite you are setting is higher than the public benefit
:40:08. > :40:12.test. I am not going to support you, because the important thing is that
:40:12. > :40:16.there is one law for everybody. Every religious organisation and
:40:16. > :40:21.charity currently has to do the same thing, they have to prove
:40:21. > :40:26.their public benefit in the same way. There are the same roles.
:40:26. > :40:30.cannot be defined, that is the problem. Parliament had a look at
:40:30. > :40:39.whether to define it, and it decided it was so complex, so
:40:39. > :40:43.difficult,... That is not correct, because my bill had the biggest, or
:40:43. > :40:48.the second biggest, parliamentary majority this century. I had
:40:48. > :40:53.different people voting for that bill. Parliament thinks the
:40:53. > :40:57.commission has re- interpreted what we want. We are going to have to
:40:57. > :41:04.leave it there, but thank you for taking part in that particular
:41:04. > :41:11.debate. You can continue that one online. Follow the link to the
:41:11. > :41:16.online discussion, and send us your views, does Hell exist? If you want
:41:16. > :41:23.to be in the audience for a future show, e-mail us. We are in St
:41:23. > :41:28.Albans, Londonderry and York in the coming weeks.
:41:28. > :41:33.Matthew chapter 25 reveals how the sump of man will come, surrounded
:41:33. > :41:43.by the Holy Angels, and will provide the nations of the world.
:41:43. > :41:45.
:41:45. > :41:54.As a shepherd divides the sheep from the Kurds. -- goads. Does Hell
:41:54. > :41:58.exist? Pope Benedict, the soon-to- be former Pope, said that it is a
:41:58. > :42:03.physical place of burning and suffering and torment and
:42:04. > :42:08.punishment. You believe it exists? Definitely. Whether it is physical
:42:08. > :42:15.is a matter we do not know. It is a moot point. But it definitely
:42:15. > :42:21.exists. Why? There is definitely evil in this universe. I believe in
:42:21. > :42:28.a guard who is loving and just, and for there not to be held where evil
:42:28. > :42:33.can be punished, it is impossible - - not to be Hell. The only way to
:42:33. > :42:41.avoid it is to accept Christ's death on the cross as your payment
:42:41. > :42:46.for your personal sins. If you accept Jesus, you can avoid Hell?
:42:46. > :42:53.God created everything, so he must have created Hell. He created the
:42:53. > :42:58.means of torture. It is a punishment of evil. He would not be
:42:58. > :43:02.loving and just if there was no punishment. We have been hearing
:43:02. > :43:07.horrible things about torturing pensioners and people in care. We
:43:07. > :43:12.all get the sense of moral outrage that such things can happen. God
:43:12. > :43:22.would not be laughing and just if he allowed that to go unpunished. -
:43:22. > :43:26.
:43:26. > :43:34.- loving and chest. The camp is specific about Hell -- Koran. There
:43:34. > :43:41.are pretty gruesome punishments. It is all there. It is not fun! It is
:43:41. > :43:49.reality, is it? One of the things that we have lost in recent times
:43:49. > :43:54.in this post industrial world is the concept of what is not seen. We
:43:54. > :43:58.have become very rational, and one of the things that religion
:43:58. > :44:03.particularly this is it keeps the door open, to issues of the
:44:03. > :44:08.spiritual realm, and different realms of existence. The Prophet
:44:08. > :44:13.Mohammed likens the realm of the unseen as if somebody put their
:44:13. > :44:21.finger into an ocean, and having taken your finger out, the water on
:44:21. > :44:26.your finger is the experience of the realm of the sea. There is a
:44:26. > :44:34.difference between the Islamic you and the Christian view. We do not
:44:34. > :44:40.believe that Hell is a place of eternal damnation, of fire and
:44:40. > :44:45.brimstone, I am not saying that there are not nice things, but from
:44:45. > :44:50.the Islamic theological perspective, it is somewhere where people would
:44:50. > :44:55.go, it is like a penitentiary, he would serve out a term, you would
:44:55. > :45:05.become spiritually cleansed, and you move to a place of final abode.
:45:05. > :45:15.
:45:15. > :45:20.The model that Islam has is far If you except bite cheeses into
:45:20. > :45:24.your life, and you go to heaven, but people that you love very much
:45:24. > :45:31.and want to be with are in hell, it is not being in heaven going to be
:45:31. > :45:37.a torment? It will not. Because I will be with Jesus. The person ally
:45:37. > :45:44.of the most is Jesus. What about these people in your life? I do not
:45:44. > :45:50.love them as much as cheeses. you become uncaring about them?
:45:50. > :45:56.would not. Can you not see that being in heaven would be a torment?
:45:56. > :46:04.I cannot see that. Is there a chance they will get out of hell?
:46:04. > :46:09.No. Sir you stop caring about those that you love? No. The people I
:46:09. > :46:14.care about now, I tell about cheeses now, because I know that
:46:14. > :46:19.when they die it is too late. It will not be awful thinking about
:46:19. > :46:26.them because I will be so happy where I am. They will have chosen
:46:26. > :46:30.their own pad. That is their choice. It seems to me that religion always
:46:30. > :46:36.reflects what man wants. For example, if you think you have done
:46:36. > :46:42.good, you will go to heaven. If you think someone has done band, they
:46:42. > :46:47.will go to hell. Lots of people say that they believe in hell because
:46:47. > :46:52.there is evil in the world. When you teach your children about a
:46:52. > :47:00.place where they will burn for the rest of eternity, you are teaching
:47:00. > :47:04.someone a principle that is quite damaging to them. APPLAUSE I am not
:47:04. > :47:10.religious, so whether it there is a hell spiritually does not concern
:47:10. > :47:15.me, but how can we say that there is not a hell on earth with the
:47:15. > :47:25.Holocaust, and when it comes to HIV and things like that.
:47:25. > :47:25.
:47:25. > :47:30.There are plenty of glimpses of hell. That is a good point. I think
:47:30. > :47:36.it is important that not all religions have the same perspective.
:47:36. > :47:42.In terms of that the perspective of my religion, life is not seen as a
:47:42. > :47:48.linear process. Life is a cyclic process. There is an unlimited
:47:48. > :47:52.number of lives that you may go through. Hell is considered to be
:47:53. > :47:57.more of the state of mind, as state of being that you may experience
:47:57. > :48:03.that you may experience when you're here on this earth, which is a
:48:03. > :48:13.short amount of time. The suffering that you experience Kruger lives is
:48:13. > :48:22.
:48:22. > :48:31.the process of spiritual regeneration. -- through your lives.
:48:31. > :48:39.You believe that unless people embrace Jesus, they are for help. -
:48:39. > :48:45.- hell. It seems to me that in the Bible as a whole, you have the way
:48:45. > :48:52.that Abraham was received through faith. Paul, after Jesus, says that
:48:52. > :49:00.that is the way, through faith in what God has done. Abraham believed
:49:00. > :49:06.in God. It seems to me that those who live according to God's way,
:49:07. > :49:13.they receive a gift. There are many people whose here about cheeses and
:49:13. > :49:17.say that I always knew that, but I never knew his name. There will be
:49:17. > :49:22.people who will represent the fate of Abraham and his receiving of
:49:22. > :49:28.grace. It is not to do with anything we have done because we
:49:28. > :49:33.are all under the same condemnation. So we can be as altruistic as we
:49:33. > :49:42.like, we can do wonderful things, but if we do not accept cheeses, we
:49:42. > :49:47.are destined for hell? I am horrified at hell. The great news I
:49:47. > :49:57.have got for you is that there is no such place as hell. It does not
:49:57. > :49:58.
:49:58. > :50:04.exist. APPLAUSE I think that hell is a human construct of social
:50:04. > :50:09.control. It was invented by people to
:50:09. > :50:15.terrorise the citizens. I did an exercise with a group of
:50:15. > :50:22.professionals a few years ago. We started off by saying, Build Your
:50:22. > :50:27.Paradise island. Five teams each produced their paradise island. One
:50:27. > :50:35.team, in the middle of their island, there was a prison. That is really
:50:35. > :50:40.important. We used hell for exclusion. The Roman Catholic
:50:40. > :50:44.Church defines hell as exclusion from the presence of God. We have
:50:44. > :50:52.heard about the Plymouth Brethren, they exclude people from their
:50:52. > :50:58.community. What is that about, exclusion from the presence of God?
:50:58. > :51:03.The true nature of God is awesome love and also Morsi. It is a
:51:03. > :51:07.physical experience? It is a physical experience, but to
:51:07. > :51:12.emphasise the external dimension is to run away from things that we
:51:12. > :51:18.know about. You can be in church loving cheeses and let people go to
:51:18. > :51:25.prison camps. That is not good enough. There are glimpses of hell
:51:25. > :51:28.today. An abuse victim who sport has failed them systemically. He
:51:28. > :51:35.will be replaced by a bunch of cardinals who have failed them on
:51:35. > :51:39.child abuse. They are living through it hell systemic Lee.
:51:39. > :51:44.things are indeed not meant to be part of this world. That is why you
:51:44. > :51:52.are calling them a living hell. It is the consequence of saying that
:51:52. > :52:02.we have things like that. In that sense, cheeses is a contract lower,
:52:02. > :52:07.
:52:07. > :52:11.doing the deal in church. -- Jesus. I am disgusted by her
:52:11. > :52:16.interpretation. You're projecting your views and beliefs and you are
:52:16. > :52:22.saying that if you do not stick to that, you are going to hell. How
:52:22. > :52:28.dare you put these profanities into this arena. She is not rejecting
:52:28. > :52:34.anything on you. She is, she is using that language. The problem
:52:34. > :52:39.that I have with hell is the condition for entering it. As you
:52:39. > :52:44.said, it is about accepting Jesus Christ as you Lord and saviour.
:52:44. > :52:49.There are plenty of people who do not accept Jesus as their Lord and
:52:49. > :52:53.saviour, great people. It seems unfair that you can leave your
:52:54. > :53:02.whole life doing bad things and still get into heaven, simply
:53:02. > :53:09.because you accept Jesus Christ. understand his professional opinion,
:53:09. > :53:13.but I would rather believe the words of Jesus about the future.
:53:13. > :53:22.Jesus is the one who speaks the most about the kingdom of God that
:53:22. > :53:29.is coming, the new kingdom of heaven and earth. So Gandhi is
:53:29. > :53:34.getting tortured now? No. It is not up to us. You have got to look at
:53:34. > :53:40.it the other way on this. You hear about many people who have been the
:53:40. > :53:44.victims of terrible injustice, a terrible wrong doing. They say that
:53:44. > :53:53.justice must be done, not only through the courts, but violence
:53:53. > :53:57.and all sorts of things. The law says that vengeance is mine. If you
:53:57. > :54:05.remove the possibility that there is any final sorting out, then you
:54:05. > :54:10.leave it all down to the justice that people want in this life.
:54:10. > :54:13.group is Anglican mainstream. There was an e-mail sent to the Bishop of
:54:14. > :54:20.Buckingham who has been very supportive of gay marriage from a
:54:20. > :54:25.member of your group. He said, he is beyond reach, gave him up to
:54:25. > :54:30.Satan for sifting. That is not necessarily from a member of our
:54:30. > :54:35.Group, but it is someone who has real concerns about those issues.
:54:35. > :54:40.It is reported from your good? Maybe that has been misreported.
:54:40. > :54:47.The scripture tells us that there is a new world coming and Jesus is
:54:47. > :54:55.waiting for us there. I was brought up in it the Plymouth Brethren.
:54:55. > :54:59.Frankly, I left. I would rather take the risk of going to hell than
:54:59. > :55:06.a going back to that. It is difficult to determine if there is
:55:06. > :55:12.a hell. As a Christian, I believe that Jesus Christ rose from the
:55:12. > :55:16.dead. If he did rise from the dead, as he is the only person in
:55:16. > :55:23.humankind to experience the after life. Therefore I trust his
:55:23. > :55:33.testimony. How can we have an all loving God, who in his powerful
:55:33. > :55:33.
:55:33. > :55:39.nature creates a hell? I do not think enough attention is given two
:55:39. > :55:43.more are Indians is backed its of life after death. We are defining
:55:43. > :55:49.life that is current and only of this world. That is an assumption
:55:49. > :55:53.that we have made based on more Christian perspectives. I am not
:55:53. > :56:02.saying that one is better than the other, but there are other thoughts
:56:02. > :56:08.out there. From the perspective of my religion, where spiritual beings.
:56:08. > :56:14.Somebody mentioned Hitler. We still breathe the air of Hitler, and we
:56:14. > :56:21.share that. I like the idea that if you do it wrong and you go there,
:56:21. > :56:29.did is an appeal system? You are saying that that is it, they is no
:56:29. > :56:37.way out. Yes, it is final, no second chances. No court of
:56:37. > :56:44.justice? No. God does not want people to go there. He sent Jesus
:56:44. > :56:48.so that we do not have to go there. There is no sin in heaven.
:56:48. > :56:54.challenges people to live in a better way in the society that we
:56:54. > :57:01.have, while we're in this life. You'd do not need Gardyne Jesus for
:57:01. > :57:11.that, you need Jean-Paul Sartre. -- you do not need God and Jesus for
:57:11. > :57:12.
:57:12. > :57:17.that. He said that Hell is other people. He said that people need to
:57:17. > :57:22.be freed to make good choices. is hard to believe that hell is not
:57:22. > :57:26.a religious device to control people, when in the Middle Ages
:57:26. > :57:30.people could pay to have their since taken away from them. That
:57:30. > :57:36.happen because people did not properly understand the work of
:57:36. > :57:44.Jesus Christ, coming to us to bear are MACS in for us. You made the
:57:44. > :57:50.point about deathbed conversions. The FIFA on the Cross said, Lord,
:57:50. > :57:56.remember me when you come in your kingdom. Jesus said, it today, you
:57:56. > :58:04.will be with me in paradise. That is the immense love of God, and the
:58:04. > :58:08.grace and Morsi. Is it only Muslims in heaven? And not at all. One of
:58:08. > :58:13.the things from Islamic tradition is that there have been a chain of
:58:13. > :58:18.revelations from different profits. The Koran is the final part of that
:58:18. > :58:21.jigsaw puzzle. Thank you for taking part. As ever, the debates will