:00:00. > :00:00.Today on The Big Questions: doctors on strike, free speech on campus,
:00:07. > :00:23.and the future for Anglicans worldwide.
:00:24. > :00:27.Good morning, I'm Nicky Campbell, welcome to a new series of The Big
:00:28. > :00:35.It's great to see you. Good to be back.
:00:36. > :00:37.Today we're live from the University of Kent in Canterbury.
:00:38. > :00:38.Welcome, everyone, to The Big Questions.
:00:39. > :00:44.On Tuesday, junior doctors in the NHS will go out on strike,
:00:45. > :00:46.in protest at the changes in their working conditions planned
:00:47. > :00:50.It will be the first time in 40 years that doctors have
:00:51. > :00:55.And in 1975 it led to closures of many hospital
:00:56. > :01:02.In November last year, thousands of operations
:01:03. > :01:03.and outpatient appointments were cancelled, even though
:01:04. > :01:08.a planned strike was called off the night before.
:01:09. > :01:11.Nevertheless, 98% of doctors balloted support taking strike
:01:12. > :01:14.action in protest at an 11% pay rise and a restructuring of hours
:01:15. > :01:16.which they say will reduce their overall earnings and put
:01:17. > :01:25.Should doctors have the right to strike?
:01:26. > :01:33.Kate Andrews from the Adam Smith Institute, people argue that,
:01:34. > :01:36.ultimately, this strike is absolutely in the interests of
:01:37. > :01:43.patients and the interests of the NHS. Away from the intricacies of
:01:44. > :01:46.the arguments, as to the strike, the deals, the offers, you think it is
:01:47. > :01:54.actually immoral for doctors to strike. I think it is unethical and
:01:55. > :01:59.dangerous. There are consequences to every strike, when two workers
:02:00. > :02:03.strike, people are late to work, 20 just strike kids learn the alphabet
:02:04. > :02:07.later but when doctors strike they put lives at risk. I don't
:02:08. > :02:11.necessarily blame junior doctors, think they want to go to work, they
:02:12. > :02:15.want to wake up in the morning and help people. I blame the British
:02:16. > :02:19.Medical Association. It has become deeply political. They put out a
:02:20. > :02:23.statement online encouraging people to come and strike with them, come
:02:24. > :02:27.and pick it. In that statement they made it clear that this was the
:02:28. > :02:34.first step to achieving more strikes and more political objectives that
:02:35. > :02:38.are left wing. Why do you believe it is unethical? You say it is left
:02:39. > :02:43.wing and that is clearly from the Adam Smith Institute. Wider you feel
:02:44. > :02:48.it is unethical and 98% of doctors believe that ultimately it will be
:02:49. > :02:54.of the NHS. We will be speaking to patients in a minute. Unethical if
:02:55. > :02:58.you are putting lives at risks, this is what happens when you have a
:02:59. > :03:01.Napoli on health care, if you have one provider, bring everyone
:03:02. > :03:06.together and tell them to strike you are putting everything will patient
:03:07. > :03:09.under that monopoly at risk. It wouldn't matter if they were
:03:10. > :03:13.promoting a right-wing or a left-wing agenda, a medical
:03:14. > :03:16.Association shouldn't have political motivation. They should treat all
:03:17. > :03:21.patients of all beliefs. There should not be a political agenda.
:03:22. > :03:28.APPLAUSE Doctor Khan, ultimately, doctors
:03:29. > :03:34.striking, is that not against the calling and the mission and
:03:35. > :03:37.principles of being a doctor? It will be unethical and it would be
:03:38. > :03:48.against the principles of being a doctor if we did not strike! OK? 'S
:03:49. > :03:53.a lot of people have this perception they will be no doctors on strike
:03:54. > :03:57.days. Not the case. Only junior doctors are striking so there will
:03:58. > :04:02.be a lot of other non-junior doctors covering those services. Doctors
:04:03. > :04:06.have never put patient safety at risk and never will. And that will
:04:07. > :04:14.not happen on strike days. Yes, they will be logistical disruption...
:04:15. > :04:18.Junior doctors formed the majority. They do although other doctors will
:04:19. > :04:23.cover them. They will be no risk to patient safety. Research has been
:04:24. > :04:27.done on all strike action doctors have taken between 1970s expand 2003
:04:28. > :04:35.and what honesty does not increase. That is scientifically incorrect.
:04:36. > :04:40.Because operations are cancelled? There are lots of reasons, that may
:04:41. > :04:45.be one. The second thing is, if we want the NHS to survive, if we want
:04:46. > :04:49.an NHS where patients are treated safely it is essential that we
:04:50. > :04:52.oppose this junior contract. It will create an NHS where doctors are
:04:53. > :04:58.overworked and exhausted and that will put lives at risk. And if we
:04:59. > :05:04.continue to bleed doctors, if they continue emigrating do to the
:05:05. > :05:08.pressures, for example, one third of the entire workforce as emigrated in
:05:09. > :05:11.the last five years and thousands of GPs apply to work abroad every year
:05:12. > :05:16.and if that keeps happening the NHS will not survive. It is our absolute
:05:17. > :05:23.duty to carry out... APPLAUSE
:05:24. > :05:27.I want to clarify, you are asserting on live TV that when this strike
:05:28. > :05:31.happens you do not think single patient will be put at risk? Not one
:05:32. > :05:37.single patient whose health and life is but at risk? I want to be clear
:05:38. > :05:44.about that. It is outrageous. It is not true. As an academic I have
:05:45. > :05:53.looked at the evidence. It is clear that mortality does not increase
:05:54. > :05:58.with the strike. We will find out. I'm interested as a social policy
:05:59. > :06:05.academic and I also have long-term experience as a user of the NHS. Of
:06:06. > :06:10.the least desirable aspects of the NHS, that is, mental health
:06:11. > :06:14.services. I must be honest, who do I trust more comedy professionals I
:06:15. > :06:22.have worked with, or people who work with think tanks? Let's get down to
:06:23. > :06:28.basics. When we are talking about the NHS that you describe as a
:06:29. > :06:34.monopoly, loved public service, what we talking about is a relationship.
:06:35. > :06:39.The key relationship between us and doctors, or it could be social
:06:40. > :06:43.workers or it be nurses. A personal, often intimate, sensitive
:06:44. > :06:47.relationship. But there is always another party in this relationship
:06:48. > :06:52.which sets the tenor and provides the structure and makes possible the
:06:53. > :06:56.operation of a system and that is policymakers and politicians. And
:06:57. > :07:01.politicians have their own preoccupations. Their own party
:07:02. > :07:04.concerns. And I suspect looking at the fact that we have not had a
:07:05. > :07:09.strike like this for more than 40 years that this is the real problem.
:07:10. > :07:14.So can we really gets down to the basics, which is who, in the event
:07:15. > :07:20.of a problem, would you trust, as somebody needing help, a politician,
:07:21. > :07:26.or a junior doctor? APPLAUSE
:07:27. > :07:30.Audience, raise your hands, let's get a quick feel on the general
:07:31. > :07:36.ethical principle of this strike. Gentleman in the black, what would
:07:37. > :07:40.you like to say? The fact that doctors have decided to strike, it
:07:41. > :07:46.is not something they take on lightly. Surely that shows the
:07:47. > :07:52.severity of the situation. And you, Sir, in the brown jacket, good
:07:53. > :07:56.morning. Good morning. The BMA is not a political organisation. The
:07:57. > :08:00.politicisation of this issue has been pushed by the government which
:08:01. > :08:04.has politicised every public sector worker, they have every reason to
:08:05. > :08:07.strike and the fact that they are a monopoly is a good reason because
:08:08. > :08:15.they have got no other way to turn, they can't leave their job unless
:08:16. > :08:20.they go abroad. When the firemen strike the army steps in. With
:08:21. > :08:27.doctors, there's no cover. Let's hear from the patients. Of which you
:08:28. > :08:33.are also one! Anyone else? I be with you in a second. The guy in the
:08:34. > :08:38.black shirt? It's Mr Case of morality. If you have workers, no
:08:39. > :08:44.worker in every sector ever will be able to operate where you say, it is
:08:45. > :08:49.our rules and you have no power to negotiate. The power to negotiate is
:08:50. > :08:55.very different from the right to strike. Striking is part of
:08:56. > :08:59.negotiation, it always has been, part of the negotiation process. If
:09:00. > :09:03.you can't say, I've got as much value as any other worker, we are
:09:04. > :09:06.saying that these people are not important enough to be allowed to
:09:07. > :09:15.strike! APPLAUSE
:09:16. > :09:18.Gerry O'Brien? You've been on the church of England is an odd for 30
:09:19. > :09:24.years. You have considered many issues. I'd like to ask a practical
:09:25. > :09:28.question of the doctors. The purpose of the strike is that you take
:09:29. > :09:32.action that hurts someone who is in a position to do something about
:09:33. > :09:36.your grievance. If you work for a department store, if you go on
:09:37. > :09:40.strike customers go elsewhere and shareholders lose dividends and
:09:41. > :09:47.managers lose bonuses, and you hope something good will come of it. Is
:09:48. > :09:50.the NHS comparable? Doctors go on strike they won't put the minister
:09:51. > :09:54.who could do something about it, they won't hurt the management of
:09:55. > :09:58.the hospital who will still get bonuses, they will put patients,
:09:59. > :10:03.people in no position to do anything about their grievances. So the
:10:04. > :10:07.concept of doctors striking is wholly misconceived because their
:10:08. > :10:15.primary concern should be for the welfare of the patient. It will
:10:16. > :10:18.cause delays and inconvenience. And put pressure on the government. We
:10:19. > :10:23.are having this discussion as a result so it has created awareness,
:10:24. > :10:27.clearly. It will not put patient safety at risk. There are lots of
:10:28. > :10:34.non-junior doctors in the NHS like me who will cover their services.
:10:35. > :10:38.Patient's lives will not be put at risk. Junior doctors have never put
:10:39. > :10:44.patient safety at risk. The government is continuously, has been
:10:45. > :10:48.continually stoking fears among the public. They even used the Paris
:10:49. > :10:52.attacks, the big terrorist attack in Paris when a lot of people died,
:10:53. > :10:57.people were grieving and the government decided this was a great
:10:58. > :11:02.opportunity, a great chance to stoke fear against doctors by suggesting,
:11:03. > :11:07.insulting us by suggesting that we might not coming to treat patients
:11:08. > :11:15.if, God forbid, something like this happens. Peter, be with you in a
:11:16. > :11:19.second. That is the depth to which the government has sunk. And worst
:11:20. > :11:24.of all they have manipulated research to support this completely
:11:25. > :11:29.ill-conceived idea of a seven-day NHS, saying that mortality rises if
:11:30. > :11:37.they are not enough doctors on weekends. That is simply not true,
:11:38. > :11:43.as the author of the study says. Gerry, and Peter, I have you on my
:11:44. > :11:46.list. I can hardly believe my ears, Doctor proposing this course of
:11:47. > :11:50.action on the grounds that it will not harm patients? Should we not be
:11:51. > :11:57.doing something that will enhance the outcome for patients like being
:11:58. > :12:00.on duty and doing the job? We were chatting earlier over coffee and you
:12:01. > :12:05.said you actually supported what they were saying and what they
:12:06. > :12:08.needed for a better NHS. So you are supportive of the reasons for
:12:09. > :12:13.striking but you do not think they should strike because of the ethical
:12:14. > :12:18.principle that we are discussing. Because at the end of the day they
:12:19. > :12:22.are doing something which is fundamental to people's lives and it
:12:23. > :12:26.is putting people at risk. Kate has made the point so I will not labour
:12:27. > :12:32.it. You cannot say with any degree of confidence that this will not put
:12:33. > :12:37.patients's lives at risk if you go on strike. That's nonsense. The
:12:38. > :12:41.point we are all missing is that we don't pay junior doctors in. The
:12:42. > :12:44.evidence is there. The problem is that we are still approaching it
:12:45. > :12:49.with a narrow-minded view. We still believe that throwing money at the
:12:50. > :12:54.problem is the answer, that we need to spend more of our tax money on
:12:55. > :12:58.the NHS. We have tried this for years and years and years and it
:12:59. > :13:03.does not work. We need to think about how we run our services. You
:13:04. > :13:06.can't have free health care at a point of service at every turn. It
:13:07. > :13:13.doesn't work economically. It can't be funded in that way. We need to
:13:14. > :13:18.move the whole debate. We move from a specific strike of a group of
:13:19. > :13:22.people in the health service too, we no longer should have the founding
:13:23. > :13:26.principles of the NHS, that it is a free service that is universal!
:13:27. > :13:30.Let's go back to the relationship I started with, the one we know, which
:13:31. > :13:35.you are hopping on, between patient and doctor. Let's remember the other
:13:36. > :13:39.element in that relationship, the politicians. Politicians don't offer
:13:40. > :13:43.much in the wake of medical care. Their responsibility is to make sure
:13:44. > :13:46.that the system works. Not necessarily into with their
:13:47. > :13:52.particular ideology but the system works. When we reach crises as we
:13:53. > :13:56.have done here, that tells me that the politicians are failing in their
:13:57. > :14:00.job. The real failure is not of junior doctors or of all the other
:14:01. > :14:05.people working long hours as you rightly say, at an adequate wages
:14:06. > :14:08.but of the people running this society. We vote them in to run it
:14:09. > :14:12.and they are failing in this instance.
:14:13. > :14:22.What about it costs the taxpayer nearly ?300,000 to train each NHS
:14:23. > :14:29.doctor to NHS foundation level 2. And it costs the taxpayer every year
:14:30. > :14:32.to pay the PFI, ?1.5 to ?2 billion. There's 80 billion quid of money
:14:33. > :14:36.going to fund money companies from the NHS because of cross-party
:14:37. > :14:42.failure as a system of funding public services. This isn't a finger
:14:43. > :14:45.pointing at the Tories or they Liberal Democrats or at Labour. All
:14:46. > :14:50.those political parties have failed. That's where the real money is being
:14:51. > :14:55.wasted and it never enters the headlines. PFI is hugely
:14:56. > :14:58.controversial but of course because of those expensive hospitals,
:14:59. > :15:01.because of the needs of patients we need to be having a 24-7 health
:15:02. > :15:06.service and you need doctors at the top of their game and absolutely
:15:07. > :15:10.well rewarded, after all that training, much of which they've paid
:15:11. > :15:14.for being at university paying for their fees. We are in a different
:15:15. > :15:19.world from a while ago, one might say. So doctors absolutely need to
:15:20. > :15:23.be looked after? Yes, but not out of the public purse, because it is not
:15:24. > :15:28.affordable. It is nonsense to think that it is. Every other country in
:15:29. > :15:32.the world that we talk about, Germany, Australia, all these places
:15:33. > :15:35.manage to successfully run a healthcare service which is
:15:36. > :15:43.available to people at all livings of society without it costing a
:15:44. > :15:47.bomb. Why are we the only country in the top ten of GDP that couldn't do
:15:48. > :15:50.this properly? Come on. It is not about the left-wing or the
:15:51. > :15:53.right-wing, but as the British public we've failed to have this
:15:54. > :15:59.debate properly and ask ourselves honest questions. You cannot have
:16:00. > :16:03.the service where the incentives aren't there for the responsible of
:16:04. > :16:05.the general public to take responsibility for their open
:16:06. > :16:11.health. Take responsibility for their own health? Yes. If you have
:16:12. > :16:17.free healthcare provision, what's the impetus on you to say I'm not
:16:18. > :16:24.going to consume 20 bottles of wine a week, because I'm not going to
:16:25. > :16:28.expect Joe Bloggs or Susan Jones to pay for my lifestyle. It was the NHS
:16:29. > :16:33.which helped us to reduce massively the rates of smoking and the
:16:34. > :16:36.appalling costs put on public services by private smoking
:16:37. > :16:40.companies. Let's remember. That's entirely debatable. Good morning.
:16:41. > :16:47.Hi. You are suggesting here it sounds like you are grouping a lot
:16:48. > :16:52.of NHS users as time wasters, which I think is ludicrous. And the word
:16:53. > :16:55.harm or hurt was used when talking about doctors striking. I believe no
:16:56. > :17:05.doctor would ever strike if they thought it would harm the public.
:17:06. > :17:08.APPLAUSE. Back to Gerry. No doctor would strike if he thought white
:17:09. > :17:13.harm the public? I would very much hope that no doctor would, but the
:17:14. > :17:19.purpose of being a doctor is not not to cause harm, it is to go good.
:17:20. > :17:23.What if they believe striking will ultimately be doing good because it
:17:24. > :17:28.will be in the interests of patients and it will be in the midterm, long
:17:29. > :17:33.term, evening short-term interests of the NHS is this they believe they
:17:34. > :17:37.are doing it for the best possible reasons, not selfish reasons I would
:17:38. > :17:41.respectfully suggest that the people they might hurt or disadvantage
:17:42. > :17:45.would not be those who are in a position to change their terms and
:17:46. > :17:48.conditions of service. What they need is something that's far more
:17:49. > :17:53.focused at the people that are able to do that. Kate? Two points. The
:17:54. > :17:57.first is that even just a few months ago the OECD pointed out that the
:17:58. > :18:01.NHS provides poor to mediocre care compared to the rest of the
:18:02. > :18:04.developed countries, and in comparison to their healthcare
:18:05. > :18:11.systems. It is not just patient any more strucking from the NHS and its
:18:12. > :18:14.aability to... It is punishing doctors because it is not able to
:18:15. > :18:18.pay them at salaries they most likely deserve. By not acknowledging
:18:19. > :18:22.that you are doing more harm to junior doctors than good. The
:18:23. > :18:25.majority of the public is on your side when it comes specifically to
:18:26. > :18:30.junior doctors and wanting to support their pay, and Jeremy Hunt
:18:31. > :18:34.and the BMA have come to many agreements but the BMA and the
:18:35. > :18:39.junior doctors are walking out over tiny points. Why don't you ask for a
:18:40. > :18:43.referendum? If you believe so strongly people support junior
:18:44. > :18:48.doctors in the NHS why don't you ask for something more peaceful than a
:18:49. > :18:52.strike? Ask the public to come to a vote on it. We've got too many
:18:53. > :18:56.referendums. But this one affects people's lives. There are other
:18:57. > :19:00.options than striking. What's the pay for a junior doctor, ?23,000 a
:19:01. > :19:04.year, that's after the university fees, the long hours. Huge
:19:05. > :19:07.responsibility and a very young age, arguably as much responsibility as
:19:08. > :19:11.any consultant. People's lives in their hands. Do you really think
:19:12. > :19:15.?23,000 is enough? I don't think those are the premises by which we
:19:16. > :19:20.measure whether somebody should be paid more or not. What you want is
:19:21. > :19:27.the west people in the job and you pay the market rate for that. Our
:19:28. > :19:30.junior doctors are leaving the profession in droves because they
:19:31. > :19:35.are not paid enough money. It is what you have to pay them to have
:19:36. > :19:43.good doctors doing the job well. Recruitment and retention. That's
:19:44. > :19:47.the reality. A last word. I would fully unreservedly accept a
:19:48. > :19:51.referendum. I'm sure the vast majority of people would support
:19:52. > :19:54.doctors over the spin doctors that we have.
:19:55. > :20:00.APPLAUSE. On-lines On a second point, in terms of the efficiency of
:20:01. > :20:04.the NHS, a Commonwealth Fund Study that was done showed that the NHS is
:20:05. > :20:11.the most efficient healthcare system in the world. No it isn't. The OECD
:20:12. > :20:17.study that Kate referred shows that we have below average levels of
:20:18. > :20:20.funding as compared to other developed countries, the lowest
:20:21. > :20:26.level of funding in the whole of the G7. Kate's dissenting over the
:20:27. > :20:30.Commonwealth Fund Study. Maybe that's a conversation we can have
:20:31. > :20:32.afterwards. I can't wait. Thank you all very much indeed for your
:20:33. > :20:36.contributions with. APPLAUSE.
:20:37. > :20:38.If you have something to say about that debate,
:20:39. > :20:41.log on to bbc.co.uk/thebigquestions and follow the link to where you can
:20:42. > :20:47.We're also debating live this morning from Canterbury: Should
:20:48. > :20:54.And can the Anglican Communion stay together?
:20:55. > :20:57.So get tweeting or emailing on those topics now or send us any other
:20:58. > :21:05.ideas or thoughts you may have about the show.
:21:06. > :21:10.Universities used to be centres for debate, places where any topic
:21:11. > :21:13.could be discussed provided speakers from all sides were invited to take
:21:14. > :21:18.Learning to argue was all part of a university education
:21:19. > :21:26.Now freedom of speech is often at odds with the new concept
:21:27. > :21:31.of "safe spaces", where people can be reassured that their views,
:21:32. > :21:33.circumstances and lifestyle choices will always be treated with respect
:21:34. > :21:45.Should universities foster free speech?
:21:46. > :21:54.Payton, it is good to see you. Thank you for coming in. You would
:21:55. > :22:01.describe yourself as gender fluid, non-binary. That's right. And you
:22:02. > :22:04.were pretty outraged by Germaine Greer's comments about transgendered
:22:05. > :22:09.people. I would like to start with your telling us and explaining to
:22:10. > :22:14.people who are maybe not acquainted with the term. What is a safe space?
:22:15. > :22:19.Tell us about this concept The problem with safe spaces is there is
:22:20. > :22:27.no universal idea of what a safe space constitutes. Basically,
:22:28. > :22:36.fundamentally it means that any student that has, that is for
:22:37. > :22:43.example a different, of a different sexuality or transgender or have
:22:44. > :22:48.mental health issues. Any student that would suffer from oppression
:22:49. > :22:51.because of those reasons, they are not further harmed by the
:22:52. > :22:59.university. It is about the university taking care of those
:23:00. > :23:03.students. Not harmed or offended, they should not have to be
:23:04. > :23:08.confronted by people who might cause them more anxiety? Yes. It is not
:23:09. > :23:14.offence so much that's brought up a lot. We are not talking about
:23:15. > :23:18.offence really. There's a difference between someone saying something
:23:19. > :23:22.horrible about your mother and someone fundamentally dehumanising
:23:23. > :23:26.you because of a characteristic that you can't control. That's what we
:23:27. > :23:30.are talking about, not being upset because someone called you a name.
:23:31. > :23:34.We are talking about language and behaviours and attitudes that
:23:35. > :23:39.contribute to a dehumanisation of a group of people. So those who would
:23:40. > :23:45.come on to campus and say such things which would not offend but be
:23:46. > :23:48.so contrary to the values and lifestyles of certain groups should
:23:49. > :23:53.be stopped from going on to campus and speaking? A lot of people assume
:23:54. > :23:58.that I'm pretty hard on something like that. But it is a much more
:23:59. > :24:03.complicated issue than people lend to. Yes. I think that, to a point,
:24:04. > :24:09.and I think that everyone has their own personal line on this... Let's
:24:10. > :24:16.talk about Germaine Greer and her comments on transgendered people.
:24:17. > :24:20.Your problem with that? When you've got Germaine Greer, a respected
:24:21. > :24:26.author and academic, and on women's studies. She said a transgendered
:24:27. > :24:31.person is essential through sex they were born into and is not the one
:24:32. > :24:38.they choose to become, or if choose to become is the right expression.
:24:39. > :24:42.You think that was outrageous? It is not outrageous on its own, it was
:24:43. > :24:47.kind of disrespectful. It is not for her to police other people's
:24:48. > :24:55.expresses and their feelings. But when she is comparing transpeople to
:24:56. > :25:02.rapists and murderers for example, that's fundamentally wrong. She said
:25:03. > :25:07.a transgendered person should be considered to be a man. And she
:25:08. > :25:13.described that hand-shake as a rapist grip. So go along and
:25:14. > :25:19.robustly debate. Marshall your arguments, challenge these people
:25:20. > :25:25.and bring them enlightenment, have them there, free speech, no
:25:26. > :25:30.boundaries, anything goes. Lots of people say that but no-one believes
:25:31. > :25:41.that. Fern believes it. I believe it too. Fundamentally, and on the note
:25:42. > :25:48.of of Jermaine year, she said things about FGM as well. Unless we hear
:25:49. > :25:53.them, we can't combat them. A free market of ideas. With the Germaine
:25:54. > :25:57.Greer thing as it blew up, information was lost in the fray,
:25:58. > :26:01.but what happened in that situation is we had initially I sent an e-mail
:26:02. > :26:06.to the University and we tried to open communications between the
:26:07. > :26:10.University, the LGBT association and the women's officer and the feminist
:26:11. > :26:16.network to try and either change it to a panel or maybe have some
:26:17. > :26:22.transawareness events alongside it we were told that isn't happening.
:26:23. > :26:27.So there is no panel, no transgender awareness events. She turns up,
:26:28. > :26:31.gives a speech. Isn't the ultimate choice, don't go? Sure, but when the
:26:32. > :26:38.university, part of what they advertise about themselves is that
:26:39. > :26:41.they were top of the Stonewall Gay By Degree safe space for LGBT
:26:42. > :26:53.members, that's something they advertise. So you've got
:26:54. > :26:58.transpeople... The whole point is that university should be a space
:26:59. > :27:01.where you create ideas and have those conversations. University
:27:02. > :27:08.selling themselves on certain things, take them off the list of
:27:09. > :27:13.Stonewall but don't shut the door to people that can enlighten and
:27:14. > :27:17.empower by having conversations. There is nothing more dehumanising
:27:18. > :27:19.to me when somebody deprives me of the choice to listen to whoever I
:27:20. > :27:25.want to. APPLAUSE. There is nothing more
:27:26. > :27:30.dehumanising than to have the assumption that you and I or anybody
:27:31. > :27:36.in the room lacks the moral resources to listen to people. What
:27:37. > :27:41.about transgendered people on the bus, they get abuse all the time,
:27:42. > :27:47.why should they get it on campus. White supremacists from the far
:27:48. > :27:51.right or Islamist far right coming on, people with appalling views, on
:27:52. > :27:56.campus. I hope that you and I have the moral resources to deal with
:27:57. > :28:00.Islamist radicals. Rather than force them underground and pretend they
:28:01. > :28:04.don't exist in the way we are doing at the moment because we are scared
:28:05. > :28:09.to debate them. I would rather they were brought out in the open and we
:28:10. > :28:14.can demonstrate that a moral and open society has more authority than
:28:15. > :28:20.this attempt on free speech. People on campuses are acting as the mirror
:28:21. > :28:24.image of the rally haddists who said, these from boundaries, you
:28:25. > :28:27.cannot go behind that. All these people creating regulations and
:28:28. > :28:33.rules about behaviour, what's appropriate behaviour, it is to me a
:28:34. > :28:36.totalitarian impulse which is changing the university not a
:28:37. > :28:41.fundamental way. It is well meant but for the first time in a century
:28:42. > :28:46.young people can no longer experiment with ideas. No longer
:28:47. > :28:51.feel the freedom of searching for a quest for knowledge. But to be
:28:52. > :28:56.clear, white supremacist there is would think people who are not white
:28:57. > :28:59.are inferior and in some cases a lesser species. Species. Would be
:29:00. > :29:06.happy with people like that on campus? I am a free speech, I would
:29:07. > :29:13.argue with them and debate their ideals. I would like to hear your
:29:14. > :29:17.perception on this. Well, I am agreeing with Frank here, because it
:29:18. > :29:20.is patronising to decide on other people's behalf that they should be
:29:21. > :29:25.protected from certain views. APPLAUSE. Can I give a example.
:29:26. > :29:30.Please. There was a case in March of last year where a Muslim speaker was
:29:31. > :29:37.booked to come with appalling views about women, about gays and so on.
:29:38. > :29:42.The feminist student group, the LGBT group, the atheists wanted to go and
:29:43. > :29:47.challenge him but the meeting was cancelled and they were prevented
:29:48. > :29:54.from challenging him and stand up for themselves. It is patronising.
:29:55. > :30:02.With you in just a second. I want to come to Grey Sergeant. Let me remind
:30:03. > :30:06.people about student rights, there was a situation with one
:30:07. > :30:19.controversial group, Cage, which was going to hold a meeting describing
:30:20. > :30:28.Jihadi John, the nickname of the Islamic State be had, as a beautiful
:30:29. > :30:31.young man. Tell us what happened. Basically, the National Union of
:30:32. > :30:35.Students, senior figures in the union, had been touring the country
:30:36. > :30:41.with Cage, outlining a bit about their history. We see their fees as
:30:42. > :30:44.divisive and inflammatory, yet we believe they have a right to free
:30:45. > :30:49.speech and they are entitled to come onto a campus. The problem is that
:30:50. > :30:53.often these groups, not just this one, and others, they come on and
:30:54. > :30:57.they share a platform with other people who agree with everything
:30:58. > :31:03.they say. There is no robust debate or challenge. And often they can be
:31:04. > :31:07.an vile ands were students to not feel able to stand up and challenge.
:31:08. > :31:15.I've attended six or seven of these meetings. Did anyone challenge them?
:31:16. > :31:20.At one event one person and challenge them. I was only there to
:31:21. > :31:28.report on the issue. What did this person say? A young Muslim woman
:31:29. > :31:38.from Tower hamlets, stood up, and asked the panel, this young woman
:31:39. > :31:42.said, I can see a lot of the criticism, what I want to know is
:31:43. > :31:45.what you would put in place to deal with radicalisation, because there
:31:46. > :31:51.is clearly a problem. She was met with a deafening silence and she was
:31:52. > :31:55.laughed at by the panel. She left pretty after that. Not an
:31:56. > :31:59.environment that promotes debate. When we talk of free speech of
:32:00. > :32:04.course universities should foster it but also go to extra efforts to post
:32:05. > :32:12.a debate and make sure platforms are balanced. Nimco, sorry, Rose, with
:32:13. > :32:17.you in a second, and anyone else in the audience, please put your hand
:32:18. > :32:20.up and will come to you. Is there a situation whereby we should ensure
:32:21. > :32:24.that people are challenged and given the confidence to do that in the
:32:25. > :32:33.right environment? It is essentially a safe space. I agree. It is the
:32:34. > :32:38.university, if they are going to put somebody on a panel to challenge
:32:39. > :32:42.them, what I find interesting about this debate with Germaine Greer and
:32:43. > :32:47.everything else, it's the gender issue, men are allowed strong views
:32:48. > :32:50.and not women. I do not agree with what Germaine Greer says although
:32:51. > :32:55.ultimately I think they should have the platforms they are allowed to
:32:56. > :32:59.have. What is quite ironic is, the things you are trying to stop other
:33:00. > :33:02.things people are fighting for across the world. Students in China,
:33:03. > :33:08.Africa, would kill for the freedom of speech. What about university
:33:09. > :33:18.meeting talking about rape, should men be there? Yes, I think it
:33:19. > :33:22.depends on the context. We have had this conversation about safe spaces,
:33:23. > :33:27.if women who are survivors of rape are there, I don't think men should
:33:28. > :33:31.be there. That's quite different to open conversation around the
:33:32. > :33:41.subject. There is a gap between the experience and the issue. Rose? Men
:33:42. > :33:44.need to hear first-hand the damage they are causing. We can't ban them.
:33:45. > :33:49.Universities are meant to be places of learning where we can challenge
:33:50. > :33:53.and explore. So I would be deeply concerned if we are moving to a
:33:54. > :34:03.situation where we say, we can't have this debate because it's going
:34:04. > :34:10.to be offensive... If members of the Ku Klux Klan were flown in from
:34:11. > :34:16.Alabama? I would be there! How do we get them to hear another view, to
:34:17. > :34:23.listen? They've got to be learning. I think rape is different. At the
:34:24. > :34:27.last general election Ukip got enormous coverage on many platforms
:34:28. > :34:34.whereas the Green party got minimal coverage. It is interesting. Forget
:34:35. > :34:39.the Ku Klux Klan. Some of the people we are talking about, whether male
:34:40. > :34:43.or female, are very powerful people. And if people stand up as you have
:34:44. > :34:47.done you will be dismissed as a boring old twit. I think there is a
:34:48. > :34:51.need for safe space but and been involved in such a situation where
:34:52. > :34:58.we invited Katie Hopkins, the right-wing journalist who described
:34:59. > :35:03.asylum seekers as "Cockroaches" to a debate at my university. Students,
:35:04. > :35:08.when she was introduced, turned their backs on her and very
:35:09. > :35:14.respectfully walked out of the room. How can you do that respectfully? It
:35:15. > :35:18.was more respectful than some of the faces that Katie made to the rest of
:35:19. > :35:23.the panel! But I think she should have been there. My personal feeling
:35:24. > :35:26.is that what the students did was right for them but increasingly we
:35:27. > :35:31.will encounter these sort of divisions and conflicts, and if we
:35:32. > :35:36.want to challenge them with got to learn new ways of doing it
:35:37. > :35:42.effectively. But the students did not challenge it. As she said
:35:43. > :35:48.afterwards, it was the event, what she wanted and she became the news
:35:49. > :35:52.story afterwards, not them. The tragedy is that there are meetings
:35:53. > :35:57.like the one you describe, the Cage one, the tragedy is that people shut
:35:58. > :36:00.up and look at their shoelaces, they are embarrassed to stand up and I
:36:01. > :36:04.think we need a bit of courage. There is an English tradition of
:36:05. > :36:08.heckling. You don't have to be experienced in that! I think we need
:36:09. > :36:13.more people going to these meetings, and instead of pushing them and we
:36:14. > :36:17.need to expose their ideas in front of the audience. We won't always win
:36:18. > :36:23.the argument but at least we will disrupt them enough to make an
:36:24. > :36:26.impact. What I am scared about is that, on campuses, unless people
:36:27. > :36:31.agree with you you don't open your mouth. People are living in
:36:32. > :36:36.segmented sections. Not having debate. The old traditions of
:36:37. > :36:41.university radicalism where you argue until 4am and sometimes you
:36:42. > :36:45.get outraged yet you still argue, and the creative dynamic that that
:36:46. > :36:51.brings you is being lost. APPLAUSE
:36:52. > :36:57.I'm just thinking about my university days, I didn't do that
:36:58. > :37:00.until 4am! It is interesting, Kate, after your introduction, a lot of
:37:01. > :37:11.people are close to the opposition on this. -- Peyton I think a lot of
:37:12. > :37:16.people agree on this. Free speech is important, yet there needs to be a
:37:17. > :37:19.variety of opinions. It was difficult to get hold of people for
:37:20. > :37:32.this debate who were against free speech. You don't find people who
:37:33. > :37:37.are against it. This is the thing, as has been mentioned before, people
:37:38. > :37:41.are afraid to stand up. For example, with Germaine Greer there wasn't a
:37:42. > :37:46.single transgender person I know who went to that debate because, at the
:37:47. > :37:50.end, doing a small question and answer session, somebody asked
:37:51. > :37:54.question about whether she believed that demonising language leads to
:37:55. > :38:01.violence against transgender people. And the entire audience were booing
:38:02. > :38:11.at that woman. Universities are for learning. I would be worried about
:38:12. > :38:14.wrapping students in cotton will and trying to protect them from ideas
:38:15. > :38:18.they might find offensive, and popular. If you put moderators in
:38:19. > :38:26.place and turn discussion into a debate that's the best way to go
:38:27. > :38:30.about the problem. If I can, Abha, let me go to the audience, I always
:38:31. > :38:38.deferred to a gentleman in a dog collar! We do have laws against
:38:39. > :38:45.inciting hatred. They are too seldom used but they are there. I don't see
:38:46. > :38:51.why people can't see this. And we invite these horrible people to come
:38:52. > :38:57.and state their views. That's no way to talk about our front row!
:38:58. > :39:09.LAUGHTER We can deal with it, so what are we
:39:10. > :39:15.afraid of? Universities have two conformed to a law that will prevent
:39:16. > :39:20.incitement to hatred on campus. There are laws in place. I'm very
:39:21. > :39:25.much against banning people from campus but if people have a criminal
:39:26. > :39:27.record of inciting hatred, or members of proscribed terrorist
:39:28. > :39:39.organisation there can be grounds that they can be banned from campus,
:39:40. > :39:43.or a debate can be enforced. You draw the line at the BNP. One more
:39:44. > :39:49.comment before our next fascinating debate. The lady in the back row, a
:39:50. > :39:54.quick comment? In spite of having experienced severe discrimination in
:39:55. > :39:58.the education system because of my mental health I do hope that when I
:39:59. > :40:02.go to university I will be able to debate with people on issues like
:40:03. > :40:07.mental health, extremism. To deny someone the right to talk about an
:40:08. > :40:09.issue is absurd. Thank you all. APPLAUSE
:40:10. > :40:12.You can join in all this morning's debates by logging
:40:13. > :40:14.on to bbc.co.uk/the big questions and following the link
:40:15. > :40:20.Or you can tweet using the hashtag bbctbq.
:40:21. > :40:23.Tell us what you think about our last Big Question too: Can
:40:24. > :40:24.the Anglican Communion stay together?
:40:25. > :40:27.And if you'd like to be in the audience at a future
:40:28. > :40:36.We're in London next week, Edinburgh on 24th January,
:40:37. > :40:46.This week, here in Canterbury, all the leaders of the Anglican
:40:47. > :40:48.churches around the world are getting together.
:40:49. > :40:50.Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, wants them to think
:40:51. > :40:57.Can they still hope to speak with one voice for their 85 million
:40:58. > :41:04.Given they all follow their own ideas on women,
:41:05. > :41:07.gay people and biblical interpretation, is there any point
:41:08. > :41:08.in pretending they're as one?
:41:09. > :41:13.Can the Anglican Communion stay together?
:41:14. > :41:27.Gerry O'Brien, 35 years and the Synod. 135 senior Anglicans have
:41:28. > :41:33.sent this letter to Archbishop Justin Welby, saying, we as a Church
:41:34. > :41:36.duty to the LGBT members of the body of Christ around the world. It goes
:41:37. > :41:40.on to say that we have not loved them as we should, we have treated
:41:41. > :41:44.them as a problem rather than brothers and sisters in Christ to be
:41:45. > :41:49.embraced and celebrated, not made to feel like second-class citizens.
:41:50. > :41:56.They call for the church to repent. Do you repent? It is an interesting
:41:57. > :42:03.letter that has been sent by these 105 people. You skipped over the
:42:04. > :42:10.question, do you repent? I don't want to sound like a preacher... !
:42:11. > :42:14.All of us can agree with that letter to a point where we come to a
:42:15. > :42:20.sticking point. We obviously repent of the way that we have treated
:42:21. > :42:24.people badly, the thing about the church is, we accept everyone. We
:42:25. > :42:29.want everyone to come and share what God has to say. Because our preface
:42:30. > :42:33.that the holy spirit will change people from being rebels against God
:42:34. > :42:41.to falling into line with what he wants. Are you a rebel against God
:42:42. > :42:44.if you are a gay man who once a fulfilling physical relationship
:42:45. > :42:50.with his partner and you are also a priest, are you a rebel against God?
:42:51. > :42:54.The point is that we all rebels against God, that is what the
:42:55. > :43:01.Anglican Church said! The only difference is the way in which
:43:02. > :43:07.Willie Bell. -- we rebel. One problem is the Uganda churches, or
:43:08. > :43:11.in southern Sudan, what some would see as socially regressive
:43:12. > :43:16.attitudes, one Nigerian church elder said, sexuality was a perversion of
:43:17. > :43:22.human dignity. These churches in Africa, are the strongholds of
:43:23. > :43:29.bigotry? Rather strong words. Perversion of human dignity are
:43:30. > :43:32.strong words. Those churches are sticking to the Christian faith and
:43:33. > :43:35.they are growing which is more than we are doing in England. We are
:43:36. > :43:41.losing members like it's going out of fashion. There, there is growth.
:43:42. > :43:46.One bishop said to me his biggest problem was that he's planting so
:43:47. > :43:53.many new churches that he can't find enough people to take the service. I
:43:54. > :43:56.wish we had that problem in England. Supporting the criminalisation of my
:43:57. > :44:03.sexuality, is that sticking to the church teachings? The
:44:04. > :44:06.criminalisation of sexuality, that is something that governments do and
:44:07. > :44:09.not churches. It is not the business of the Church, what is criminal and
:44:10. > :44:17.what is not. We can say what we believe is God 's will. Davis
:44:18. > :44:22.Mac-Iyalla wants to come in here. I disagree with my brother in many
:44:23. > :44:26.areas. The church has not embraced everybody. The church has not
:44:27. > :44:30.welcomed everybody. APPLAUSE
:44:31. > :44:34.The church has not given a place to everybody. If they did we would not
:44:35. > :44:39.have the debate that we are having today. The church has shut its door
:44:40. > :44:44.against some sections of its members, the gay, lesbian, the
:44:45. > :44:47.bisexual, the transgender people. I don't know what effect this meeting
:44:48. > :44:53.will have because we had this discussion again and again, and if I
:44:54. > :44:57.had one word for them as they meet in Canterbury it is that they should
:44:58. > :44:58.listen to the holy spirit and welcome everyone and show proper
:44:59. > :45:05.Christian principles. Catechist.
:45:06. > :45:10.APPLAUSE. Don't you have to get in line with the modern world? I
:45:11. > :45:15.entirely agree with you that the church may not have treated all
:45:16. > :45:21.sorts of people, not just LGBTIs in a way that we shouldn't have done,
:45:22. > :45:27.but the point is we are here to call all men everywhere to fall into line
:45:28. > :45:32.with what God wants. Well, how do we reconcile that? I was born and
:45:33. > :45:39.raised in Nigeria and Nigeria has 14 years imprisonment a law that
:45:40. > :45:44.criminalised LGBT people, where the Church of ninia says we need this
:45:45. > :45:50.law to put these people in place. How do you criminalise people, put
:45:51. > :45:55.people in prison because of their sexuality and you call yourself a
:45:56. > :46:01.Christian. Should we split? I think it would help, the split has gone on
:46:02. > :46:04.from a long time. The last Lambeth Conference the Nigerians weren't
:46:05. > :46:10.there or the Ugandans weren't there. This division has been going on and
:46:11. > :46:14.I don't know what the outcome of the meeting will do. There are people
:46:15. > :46:18.who've made up their minds, the African church has made up their
:46:19. > :46:23.minds. There'll be a walkout. Well let them walk out. Reverend Rose
:46:24. > :46:31.Hudson-Wilkin, so over? I hope it is not over. I hope that we can really
:46:32. > :46:35.begin to see ourselves as a family. Every week throughout the Anglican
:46:36. > :46:42.Communion we stand there and say, we are the body of cyst. The body of
:46:43. > :46:47.Christ. We can't say that with integrity and say you, because you
:46:48. > :46:51.believe X or Y, you've got be out. That's wrong. We don't choose our
:46:52. > :46:57.family members. We are part of that family. Indeed. If you have some
:46:58. > :47:03.people from one Church saying that homosexuality is a perversion on
:47:04. > :47:07.human dignity and other people from another section of the Church saying
:47:08. > :47:13.it is absolutely a part of the human condition and people should be able
:47:14. > :47:15.whether they are gay to have fulfilling, not celibate
:47:16. > :47:19.relationships, but fulfilling relationships. We need to stay
:47:20. > :47:24.together and we need to listen to each other. Even though like in an
:47:25. > :47:29.ordinary family we may not agree certain things, but we are still
:47:30. > :47:34.related. But Ruth... Can I just say one more thing on this? You can. If
:47:35. > :47:38.we as a. In church cannot sit together at the table and stay at
:47:39. > :47:43.the table together, the what hope is there for Syria? What hope is there
:47:44. > :47:49.for the Middle East? If we don't practise it ourselves, the Bishops
:47:50. > :47:57.are meant to be a focus of unity. If we cannot show that unity by staying
:47:58. > :48:01.together, even though we disagree... As we've been saying on this
:48:02. > :48:10.programme for a decade and it is getting worse. I will come to you
:48:11. > :48:19.Davis, Ruth? The provinces have made a third order issue into a first
:48:20. > :48:24.order schism attic issue. It is a third world order. Homosexuality?
:48:25. > :48:29.No, this debate about the split. It is one that has really come about
:48:30. > :48:33.because of what's happening in the American Episcopal Church. I would
:48:34. > :48:38.like to quote the Pope. It is not for me to judge on this issue. It is
:48:39. > :48:42.unbelievable to me that the church which has such a vital mission in
:48:43. > :48:47.the world and has such a lot of good to do is tearing itself apart over
:48:48. > :48:51.what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. The Church
:48:52. > :48:54.shouldn't be doing this. Imagine the Church which said, our doors are
:48:55. > :48:59.open to everybody, we are going to be at the front of this debate. We
:49:00. > :49:03.are going to marry everybody who wants to get married, as the Church
:49:04. > :49:07.of England once did in this land. Everybody in this country, whatever
:49:08. > :49:11.their religion, was entitle bid, is entitled still, whatever their
:49:12. > :49:17.religion, to marry. Whatever their gender, whoever they want to marry,
:49:18. > :49:20.of whatever gender. They were, the until the law was passed which now
:49:21. > :49:23.prevents the Church of England of marrying the same sex. Should that
:49:24. > :49:26.change? I believe it should. But the Church of England at the moment is
:49:27. > :49:32.having conversations whether it wants to go down this path. Imagine
:49:33. > :49:37.if the Church had been foe forefront of this debate and not weighing it
:49:38. > :49:41.down. Gerry, shoe have been at the forefront of this debate, saying
:49:42. > :49:47.people of the same gender should be able to marry each other. We are the
:49:48. > :49:52.bellwetherers, we are the hope for the future. But the argument is if
:49:53. > :49:57.the law of the land say one thing, should the Church of England roll
:49:58. > :50:01.over and conform? Who are we serving, God or men? It seems there
:50:02. > :50:05.are people who would say that what God wants may not be what
:50:06. > :50:14.contemporary society wants. That's a possibility. How do you know what
:50:15. > :50:18.God wants? How does the Church know what God wants is this they look in
:50:19. > :50:23.holy scripture. That's where you find it. It is difficult the
:50:24. > :50:27.understand. How does the Church derive its authority. Does it change
:50:28. > :50:30.with the times and adapt and therefore its teachings change in
:50:31. > :50:37.accordance with what people believe in the day? Or are we much closer to
:50:38. > :50:41.the scripture. It is not really clear what you are following. You've
:50:42. > :50:44.put your finger on the Church of England, there are those who feel
:50:45. > :50:48.the Church of England should adapt and change its views according to
:50:49. > :50:52.the society it lives in. And there are others who say no, the Church
:50:53. > :50:58.should stick to what they understand Jesus Christ said and that it is
:50:59. > :51:02.therefore not negotiable. To actually combine those two view
:51:03. > :51:06.points. What about Old Testament stuff about stoning women and that
:51:07. > :51:11.business? I think you need to read your New Testament. The Old
:51:12. > :51:15.Testament. You need to read your Old Testament in context. You may find
:51:16. > :51:22.it doesn't mean quite what you think it does. It is very difficult for us
:51:23. > :51:27.to say let's look at this bit of scripture and that bit of scripture.
:51:28. > :51:33.There was a time when the Church held strongly that black people were
:51:34. > :51:38.not intelligent and could not do certain things. To some extent they
:51:39. > :51:42.do still believe that. The reality is, if we are the body of Christ
:51:43. > :51:45.together, with very to live as though we are the body of Christ.
:51:46. > :51:54.There are times when we'll have to adapt. The main thing is we need to
:51:55. > :51:58.be embracing altogether. Gerry said you need to read the scripture and
:51:59. > :52:05.put into it context. But so many people are reading the scripture and
:52:06. > :52:15.putting it into a different context. In Africa there's a wave
:52:16. > :52:19.putting it into a different context. In Africa there's a -- literalism
:52:20. > :52:24.and taking it as read. That's what I mean about taking it into a first
:52:25. > :52:30.order. In today's context as well as the context of the past must be
:52:31. > :52:35.debated. But those differing views should not be allowed to determine
:52:36. > :52:40.the future of a Church of England which is not declining, unlike Gerry
:52:41. > :52:44.said. It is marginally declining. There is much debate... Does the
:52:45. > :52:51.Church of England lead the Anglican union? No, what should happen is the
:52:52. > :52:55.Archbishop of Canterbury and other primates form a more federal model
:52:56. > :52:59.like the Swedish and Lutheran churches are run on. That would
:53:00. > :53:03.allow a form of leadership. They could remain in Communion with
:53:04. > :53:10.Canterbury as they are now. Agree to disagree. Yes, with a looser federal
:53:11. > :53:15.structure. The gentleman there, good morning. The idea that the Church
:53:16. > :53:20.need not follow the laws of the land is fine if it doesn't want to go its
:53:21. > :53:24.own way, but if the Church of England wants to that view it should
:53:25. > :53:28.disestablish and get its Bishops out of the House of Lords. That's the
:53:29. > :53:35.point, you can't have your cake and eat it. As an outsider, I find it
:53:36. > :53:43.quite bizarre that the debate exists at all. Both sides, the Conservative
:53:44. > :53:46.and the progressive, are reading their biles and picking out the bits
:53:47. > :53:50.they want. The progressives the sermon on the mount, the
:53:51. > :53:55.conservatives look at the Old Testament and pick out bits and
:53:56. > :54:00.pieces. What no-one has asked is what is the will of God? Both sides
:54:01. > :54:04.claim they know the will of God. Both sides are no doubt acting in
:54:05. > :54:08.good faith. But it seems to me what it actually shows is the sheer
:54:09. > :54:12.bankruptcy of the Church of England at the moment and Christianity in
:54:13. > :54:17.general. It is not bankrupt, believe you me! Morally bankrupt, are
:54:18. > :54:22.intellectually bankrupt, because they don't come to a clear answer.
:54:23. > :54:27.David, you need to forget the ebbs and flows of social change and the
:54:28. > :54:31.fickleness and values and look to the fact that tur united under your
:54:32. > :54:35.God and Jesus Christ your saviour and you should embrace Gerry and
:54:36. > :54:39.Gerry should embrace you. And we should all have a cup of tea. Gerry
:54:40. > :54:44.and I have been embracing ourselves for a long time.
:54:45. > :54:51.LAUGHTER. But the truth is that the worry is that why is it so important
:54:52. > :54:56.for those who the Church look up to in all that is going on in the
:54:57. > :55:00.global world to focus on sex, sex, sex, sex? Why is sexuality the most
:55:01. > :55:09.important problem for the Church? APPLAUSE. And gender. And gender as
:55:10. > :55:15.well. I think also I am worried, the Bishop of Nigeria will be here as
:55:16. > :55:23.well as others from Africa. I wish I could look them in the face and ask
:55:24. > :55:28.them which LGBT members did they invite. They don't want to talk to
:55:29. > :55:31.LGBT people in their churches, don't want to know them, and they come to
:55:32. > :55:38.this international forum and speak for us. Gerry said these are vibrant
:55:39. > :55:43.churches. That is not true. In ninia the Pentecostal Churches a
:55:44. > :55:48.increasingly losing membership because people are fed up and young
:55:49. > :55:52.people are going to more churches where it is happy clappy. The
:55:53. > :55:56.Nigerian church is not growing. There was a lot of debate over the
:55:57. > :56:03.claimed figures for the Anglican Communion. Some have suggested it is
:56:04. > :56:09.far from 85 million, but is as few as 45-50 million. In the England it
:56:10. > :56:13.is how you define an Anglican. The number here is the number of
:56:14. > :56:18.baptised people. But the number of church goers is around 1 million.
:56:19. > :56:22.Not declining but still... I would dispute the earlier point that the
:56:23. > :56:30.Church of England is not moral, has lost its moral basis. I think under
:56:31. > :56:35.the present leadership of Justin Welby it is incredibly more. It is
:56:36. > :56:38.making moral arguments on poverty, on war, the terrorism threat facing
:56:39. > :56:42.the West. The Church has a fantastic leader in that and he needs to be
:56:43. > :56:46.given a chance to lead on this issue and to help put this issue to bed,
:56:47. > :56:50.if you like. So that the Church can move on with what's really
:56:51. > :56:54.important. The Church of England as the established Church has a role to
:56:55. > :56:59.play in this country. It should be one of uniting people, not dividing
:57:00. > :57:05.them. Rose, will you be talking to some of these Bishops from Nigia? If
:57:06. > :57:12.you had the chance. If I had the chance, I would say to them, Jesus
:57:13. > :57:19.Christ gives us the wonderful image of the wheat and the tiers. The
:57:20. > :57:25.wheat is sewn and the workers say let's get rid of the tears, and the
:57:26. > :57:31.masters says let the wheat and the tears grow together until the day of
:57:32. > :57:36.harvest. What is the urgency with parts of our Church to pull up and
:57:37. > :57:40.separate? Just leave it be. The day will come when our Lord will do
:57:41. > :57:46.whatever separation he needs to do. We don't have to. Heaven and hell.
:57:47. > :57:50.Not necessarily Heaven and hell. I'm just saying that there ought not to
:57:51. > :57:55.be any urgency on our part to rip up what we have. Let the wheat and the
:57:56. > :58:00.tears grow together. If it was good enough for our Lord it ought to be
:58:01. > :58:05.good enough for us. It is a life and death issue in Africa when it comes
:58:06. > :58:08.to LGBT issues, there are people being killed in Uganda and Nigeria,
:58:09. > :58:14.so you can't be ignoring these issues. I do not want to ignore it.
:58:15. > :58:22.Absolutely not. I do not want it ignored. When he said should you
:58:23. > :58:27.repent and say I'm sorry we were killing our brothers... Absolutely,
:58:28. > :58:32.I'm in favour of that. I don't want us to be silent on it, but it's not
:58:33. > :58:37.the only issue. We have been enjoying the benefits of free speech
:58:38. > :58:38.this morning. Thank you very much indeed.
:58:39. > :58:41.As always, the debates will continue online and on Twitter.
:58:42. > :58:43.Next week we're in Peckham, South London.
:58:44. > :59:06.because we're out on a big rock in the middle of the North Sea.
:59:07. > :59:09.They think this isn't part of real life.