:00:00. > :00:00.Today on The Big Questions: the snoopers' charter.
:00:00. > :00:28.Good morning, I'm Nicky Campbell, welcome to The Big Questions.
:00:29. > :00:32.Today we're live from Hutchesons' Grammar School in Glasgow.
:00:33. > :00:39.Welcome, everybody, to The Big Questions.
:00:40. > :00:42.On Tuesday, the House of Commons will debate the "snoopers' charter",
:00:43. > :00:47.The bill will seek to define precisely what the security services
:00:48. > :00:49.and law enforcement can get up to online.
:00:50. > :00:55.New powers to examine a year's worth of our internet browsing history
:00:56. > :00:57.or to identify a journalist's sources are just two
:00:58. > :01:03.Big Brother will truly be watching you.
:01:04. > :01:07.Of course, the people whose job it is to keep us all safe have long
:01:08. > :01:09.been able to steam open letters and tap phones,
:01:10. > :01:14.provided they have the appropriate permissions.
:01:15. > :01:16.The argument goes that if we communicate in new ways,
:01:17. > :01:28.Will the snoopers' charter make us safer?
:01:29. > :01:36.Naomi McAuliffe, from Amnesty International Scotland, welcome to
:01:37. > :01:41.The Big Questions. You have deep concerns about this one. In what
:01:42. > :01:45.ways could it be abused? The concern is that there is no judicial
:01:46. > :01:50.oversight over this. Some of what they are taking on, they are putting
:01:51. > :01:54.in independent adjudicator on this, but the problem is that a lot of
:01:55. > :01:58.this surveillance already goes on. This was an opportunity in the bill
:01:59. > :02:02.to make sure there was proper oversight of it. So that when
:02:03. > :02:06.surveillance is being used, and it is being used, but it has to be
:02:07. > :02:10.targeted and used when there is reasonable suspicion of individuals
:02:11. > :02:14.as well, having mass and bold surveillance means that plenty of
:02:15. > :02:25.innocent people, in fact everyone, everyone sitting here and
:02:26. > :02:29.watching at home, will have their internet and communications looked
:02:30. > :02:31.at. And we need to think about the ramifications for that and the
:02:32. > :02:33.chilling effect that will have on how we communicate with each other
:02:34. > :02:37.and operate in society. The average person on the street is not going to
:02:38. > :02:41.have their material looked at by the Government. What this law says is
:02:42. > :02:44.that communication service providers, the people who provide
:02:45. > :02:49.your phone and internet, must keep that material for a year, so that
:02:50. > :02:52.should there be reasonable grounds, adjudicated by a Minister of State
:02:53. > :02:56.and by a judge, to determine that we need to look at that information
:02:57. > :03:09.because something has gone on, then they can look at that. The same way
:03:10. > :03:12.that you can go into someone's houses they have committed a crime
:03:13. > :03:15.with a warranty. It is not the same as that. This is an independent
:03:16. > :03:17.judges that we are talking about and we are asking for this independence.
:03:18. > :03:20.It is not the same as the warrant. A lot of these things would be signed
:03:21. > :03:23.off without that kind of oversight. The fact that it is this bulk
:03:24. > :03:29.collection of data means that it does cover everyone. Is that a
:03:30. > :03:35.euphemism? Bulk collection? Mass surveillance? There is a phrase that
:03:36. > :03:41.I want to explore. Anything that is contrary to economic well-being.
:03:42. > :03:44.That could be anti-fracking protesters, environmental
:03:45. > :03:49.protesters, animal rights protesters, antinuclear protesters.
:03:50. > :03:53.Peter, is that the concern? It is a big concern. A real problem with
:03:54. > :03:58.this legislation is that it purports to be targeted when in fact it is
:03:59. > :04:02.mass surveillance. The argument is it is not mass surveillance. But
:04:03. > :04:07.everyone in this room, everyone in the country will have their internet
:04:08. > :04:12.search histories, other forms of communication... What internet
:04:13. > :04:17.search histories? For some people that will be criminal it in, but for
:04:18. > :04:23.others, no names, it will be embarrassing! But for most just
:04:24. > :04:28.utterly boring. All of that information, it is being held by
:04:29. > :04:32.private companies already, by Google, Apple, big companies, being
:04:33. > :04:37.used to make profit. Somehow we trust them to get on with doing it
:04:38. > :04:40.but now we have a Government with the necessary rights to prevent
:04:41. > :04:48.crime to keep people safe who are not going to hold that data. Do you
:04:49. > :04:52.trust the state? I do, yes, because I know that the people deciding to
:04:53. > :04:57.make these decisions are elected officials, so that is already the
:04:58. > :05:03.first step. That the people you are choosing to represent you will be
:05:04. > :05:07.the people... I spoke to a former Home Secretary, a liberal minded
:05:08. > :05:11.man, who said no matter how liberal you are, if you sit in that desk as
:05:12. > :05:15.Home Secretary, some of the stuff that comes across your desk, you
:05:16. > :05:20.lose your notions of being liberal. No politician wants something to
:05:21. > :05:23.happen on his watch. It is just human nature. They call it a mission
:05:24. > :05:31.creep and it will go further and further. But you do have a series of
:05:32. > :05:34.checks along the way. The authority that is making the decision to
:05:35. > :05:39.conduct a piece of surveillance against an individual must justify
:05:40. > :05:43.that through a series of checks. That has got to be reviewed by a
:05:44. > :05:45.tribunal and should someone feel that surveillance power has been
:05:46. > :05:52.used against them unfairly, they can appeal. Again because this is the
:05:53. > :05:55.internet, we are talking globally. In America for example we have had a
:05:56. > :06:00.lot of Draconian laws brought in after 9/11 and they are trying to
:06:01. > :06:03.roll back on some of those surveillance programmes. From
:06:04. > :06:07.Amnesty International's point of view this goes beyond the British
:06:08. > :06:10.borders. We have been spied on by the British intelligence services.
:06:11. > :06:13.We know this because of a court case and they held our data too long and
:06:14. > :06:19.that was the only reason we knew about it, they broke their own
:06:20. > :06:22.rules. We get information from people around the world who are
:06:23. > :06:26.living in repressive regimes and who have had human rights violations
:06:27. > :06:28.against themselves or have documented that, and that
:06:29. > :06:33.information is being spied on and potentially passed on to third
:06:34. > :06:37.parties, that means there is a chilling effect on people will not
:06:38. > :06:40.pass on information. It affects lots of areas of life. Lawyers have said
:06:41. > :06:45.that if their communications with clients are being looked at, that
:06:46. > :06:49.would undermine the right to a fair trial. When elected politicians are
:06:50. > :06:53.communicating with constituents, similarly. If people think they are
:06:54. > :06:56.being listened into, they are less likely to give important
:06:57. > :07:00.information. APPLAUSE
:07:01. > :07:06.You are not looking at the other side of this. For a long time we
:07:07. > :07:12.have been able to look at people's telephones. Do we want the internet
:07:13. > :07:16.to be a wild West where we can post whatever we want, raped
:07:17. > :07:19.five-year-old, and do we trust Apple or Twitter more than the
:07:20. > :07:22.democratically elected Government? They will not at the moment release
:07:23. > :07:26.things even when there are good grounds for suspicion and this bill
:07:27. > :07:33.is trying to grapple with that new problem and I trust my Government
:07:34. > :07:38.much more than a commercial company. Fair enough but it is a false
:07:39. > :07:45.opposition. We don't have to trust Apple or the Government. We can have
:07:46. > :07:47.scepticism about books. We trust our security services to look after us
:07:48. > :07:51.and they need some information to do that. Sure they do but the worrying
:07:52. > :08:02.thing about this legislation that I don't think people understand, we
:08:03. > :08:11.understand that MI5 followed people... It is the spectre of the
:08:12. > :08:16.Stasi. Yes. If they can hold our data for a year, it gives them a
:08:17. > :08:23.time machine, not today, not yesterday, to go back nine or 11
:08:24. > :08:26.months. It is an immensely powerful tool of surveillance. Do we want
:08:27. > :08:31.this to be in operation in our society? We haven't had that debate.
:08:32. > :08:37.Do you trust the security services, Linda? Do you trust the Government?
:08:38. > :08:41.We had police officers forming relationships with environmental
:08:42. > :08:47.protesters... Yes. It is under the law. When crimes take place, you
:08:48. > :08:50.don't detect them immediately, the following week, the limit is the
:08:51. > :08:57.year, and that limit is put on this and it is reasonable. Is it a crime
:08:58. > :09:00.to be an environmental protester? There was infiltration by the police
:09:01. > :09:05.and they have relationships with these people and children and these
:09:06. > :09:09.women had no idea that they were police officers. That is a separate
:09:10. > :09:14.issue. It is about trusting the security services. You are making a
:09:15. > :09:18.false opposition. I am not saying that the state is never fallible,
:09:19. > :09:21.but to talk about the state, we have a democratically elected state that
:09:22. > :09:26.operates within the rule of law. It is different from other states. Not
:09:27. > :09:30.all states are at the same. This is what our objection to the bill is.
:09:31. > :09:34.It doesn't have the proper role of law in there, that we need to have
:09:35. > :09:45.independent justice to look over this. At the moment it is not
:09:46. > :09:48.independent and already so much going on and this bill is an
:09:49. > :09:50.opportunity to have that independence and make sure again
:09:51. > :09:52.that the surveillance that is going on is targeted and reasonable. What
:09:53. > :10:00.would satisfy you independent judges? You are saying that the
:10:01. > :10:04.justices are not independent. They are not. Their powers are being
:10:05. > :10:09.limited so they cannot look at all the evidence for why a warrant is
:10:10. > :10:13.being asked for, for example. If we use a lot of the legal mechanisms
:10:14. > :10:16.that we already have for being able to get a warrant to go into
:10:17. > :10:21.someone's house and apply this to the internet as well, then that is
:10:22. > :10:24.something that we should have. This is an opportunity to actually make
:10:25. > :10:28.sure that a lot of the activities going on can be properly overseen
:10:29. > :10:33.and we are missing that opportunity by having this rushed through within
:10:34. > :10:35.a couple of weeks. This is not just Amnesty International. We have had
:10:36. > :10:41.three parliamentary committees look over this and give huge feedback on
:10:42. > :10:46.it and how it needs to be redrafted. The definitions in it are watery.
:10:47. > :10:52.There is not enough specificity as to what we are talking about.
:10:53. > :10:56.Instead it is any activity can be monitored. Ultimately it comes down
:10:57. > :10:59.to how much we trust the security services and how much we trust they
:11:00. > :11:04.are protecting us and not overstepping the mark. Is it not
:11:05. > :11:08.human nature that if you can do something... We saw it in phone
:11:09. > :11:11.hacking as well. If you have the ability to do something, you do it
:11:12. > :11:16.more and more and you become somewhat possessed by the fact that
:11:17. > :11:20.you can do it. There is scrutiny of every step of the process and there
:11:21. > :11:23.is internal legal scrutiny when you are doing warrants and there is
:11:24. > :11:28.scrutiny at the level of the Secretary of State, and scrutiny by
:11:29. > :11:31.tribunal and then the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee
:11:32. > :11:38.looking at that and then there are elections. There are so many steps
:11:39. > :11:42.involved in this. 80,000 authorisations for access to
:11:43. > :11:49.communications data last year. This double lock system with ministerial
:11:50. > :11:57.approval, how will this mechanism work for that level of requests for
:11:58. > :12:01.access to communications? Do you prefer that Apple should not release
:12:02. > :12:07.any data? Apple is protecting criminals because it has a
:12:08. > :12:10.commercial interest. This is the San Bernardino case. They are not
:12:11. > :12:15.willing to decrypt it and release it. They have a sacred bond with
:12:16. > :12:19.their customers because they are commercial company and they want to
:12:20. > :12:23.make a profit. They have criminal customers and they will lose them if
:12:24. > :12:30.they sometimes release data. That is a really big problem. Is that not
:12:31. > :12:36.outrageous? I would say it is a problem that Apple and the FBI have
:12:37. > :12:40.decided to make public. It is a matter of principle. This is not the
:12:41. > :12:45.case of a dead terrorist whose phone needs to be unlocked... Can I
:12:46. > :12:50.finish? But you are not answering how you deal with that case. You
:12:51. > :12:53.don't care about that. You have proper judicial oversight. In this
:12:54. > :12:57.bill it is not explain to us how the system of judicial commissioners
:12:58. > :13:03.will cope with this enormous raft of requests for access. We will come on
:13:04. > :13:09.to you in a second because you are here to talk about this pertaining
:13:10. > :13:12.to abusive images of children and paedophilia and there could be
:13:13. > :13:23.important advances in investigating nosiness crimes in this bill. But
:13:24. > :13:29.first of all, this is core to the American psyche, life, liberty and
:13:30. > :13:34.freedom. Some people say we are less bothered about it in this country.
:13:35. > :13:37.If you are doing nothing wrong, there is no problem. Does anybody
:13:38. > :13:42.here care about it? Put your hand up and I would like to hear from you.
:13:43. > :13:45.Linda said rightly that the Government has got to operate within
:13:46. > :13:48.the law but this is the same Government that is looking at
:13:49. > :13:51.repealing the Human Rights Act. With that in mind we should be very
:13:52. > :13:59.sceptical about what the Government's agenda is. Who is
:14:00. > :14:07.worried about the internet browsing history? As an activist it raises
:14:08. > :14:11.concerns about how much freedom I have got to interact with members on
:14:12. > :14:15.a day-to-day basis. There is an economic impact on society, so that
:14:16. > :14:23.gives them the free rein to just go ahead. What is your name?
:14:24. > :14:27.Christopher Robson. Christopher, this phrase, counter to economic
:14:28. > :14:39.well-being, it is a catchall phrase. It is a catchall. It has a specific
:14:40. > :14:43.meaning. Now. It effectively allows them to get people who want
:14:44. > :14:50.large-scale disruption to the state. But fracking would be disrupting
:14:51. > :14:54.economic. I have heard politicians arguing that it is. Should they try
:14:55. > :14:59.to argue that, the tribunal is would deny that authorisation.
:15:00. > :15:10.Jim is an ex-copper. You've trodden over many people's human rights in
:15:11. > :15:14.your time, I'm sure. Absolutely. Policing has changed, the way people
:15:15. > :15:19.commit crimes has changed, so the security services have to react and
:15:20. > :15:24.adapt to that. You gave an interesting figure of 280,000
:15:25. > :15:29.searches on request for information. Two years ago when Strathclyde
:15:30. > :15:33.Police were still on the go, they carried out stop and searches and
:15:34. > :15:40.carried it on when Police Scotland came on the place. In the first year
:15:41. > :15:55.they carried out 640,000 times. Times. In theory that was 640,000
:15:56. > :16:00.cases when the police thought there was something suspicious, and it was
:16:01. > :16:04.only 5%. If you are getting a very small return, the people making
:16:05. > :16:08.these requests, are they making it from the right point of view or
:16:09. > :16:12.because they can? Judge a lot of people are saying it is a waste of
:16:13. > :16:19.time, resources, money and effort. It should be far more targeted.
:16:20. > :16:24.Alison, I did promise. Let's talk about paedophilia online and also
:16:25. > :16:30.communications through social media and beautiesive images of children.
:16:31. > :16:33.Are you encouraged that we can tackle more effectively that
:16:34. > :16:38.wickedness through this Bill? I think that aspect is really
:16:39. > :16:42.important. We all live our lives digitally and no more so than
:16:43. > :16:46.children. They spend a large amount of their time online. It is crucial
:16:47. > :16:50.that we make sure that legislation keeps pace with that. When we talk
:16:51. > :16:54.to children we say, remember that the internet is real life and it has
:16:55. > :16:58.real life consequences, and we have a responsibility to make sure that
:16:59. > :17:03.that's as safe as possible and that people can't go online and target
:17:04. > :17:07.children and young people without any consequences or any fear of
:17:08. > :17:12.detection. How will this Bill help? I think what it does do is it allows
:17:13. > :17:17.the police to properly investigate a crime, in the same way that if
:17:18. > :17:22.something, if a child is missing or a child is at risk the police would
:17:23. > :17:25.ask people that that child had been uld ask people that that child had
:17:26. > :17:32.been in contact with - how were they, what did they say, how did
:17:33. > :17:36.they present, where were they going? When that's online, we have to make
:17:37. > :17:39.sure it is the most important and we give as much powers as we can for
:17:40. > :17:46.the police to investigate it... APPLAUSE. I suppose another point
:17:47. > :17:50.would be that the police all want to some of crimes and make the world a
:17:51. > :17:55.better place, certainly the majority of them. They don't have time to
:17:56. > :18:00.snoop and look at people's records or phones who are not actually,
:18:01. > :18:04.where there isn't a risk or where there isn't a young person or
:18:05. > :18:09.vulnerable person there, so I don't think this will turn into being a
:18:10. > :18:13.snoopers' charter. This will turn into having targeted resources when
:18:14. > :18:20.children are at risk. Quite a lot of people say on the other side of the
:18:21. > :18:23.argument this is terrorism, paedophilia, the moral battering
:18:24. > :18:28.rams, and a lot of other people... I've got nodding going on over here.
:18:29. > :18:31.Here. The two of you. Do you buy that argument? Again, there are very
:18:32. > :18:37.good reasons for there to be surveillance and it should
:18:38. > :18:41.definitely be used and targeted. You can to the but. But almost
:18:42. > :18:51.immediately it is used for other things. Sojourn lists are told they
:18:52. > :18:53.have to give over their sources. Trade unionists, environmental
:18:54. > :18:59.campaigners, whatever. Once you have those laws you can use them for
:19:00. > :19:05.anything. Exactly. Some hands shooting up. I agree with what
:19:06. > :19:11.Alison says. I have a daughter, who is 13, but I can be perceived as
:19:12. > :19:16.being cruel, because I won't allow her to have full access to these
:19:17. > :19:19.things. Social media and their own age limits and restrictions. As
:19:20. > :19:24.parents we have to limit what they can do. Their access is very much
:19:25. > :19:29.out there, but I do think the charter would protect them in a way
:19:30. > :19:34.but it could go out of control easily. On that as well, children
:19:35. > :19:38.are quite vulnerable to this too. Children do act very unwisely
:19:39. > :19:41.online. They might be posting things that they probably shouldn't. They
:19:42. > :19:45.might be looking at things they probably shouldn't. If they are
:19:46. > :19:50.getting potentially criminalised for this or it stays with them
:19:51. > :19:55.throughout their lives, they need to be protected from that. That's a
:19:56. > :19:59.separate category of law and defining what those behaviours are,
:20:00. > :20:05.especially for minors interacting with other minors. Or a 17-year-old
:20:06. > :20:09.interact ing with a 15-year-old. That's potentially a crime. That's a
:20:10. > :20:13.problem isn't it? It is a problem but it is two separate issues. We
:20:14. > :20:15.can't have that risk of the what we need to do is make sure that
:20:16. > :20:21.children know how to use the internet. It's a real place, it has
:20:22. > :20:24.consequence cans. How do you use it safely? How do you protect your
:20:25. > :20:29.information? That's really important. We can't use that as an
:20:30. > :20:34.argument to stop being able to keep children safe. Fascinating. We are
:20:35. > :20:38.to leave it there. Sorry. There's two more debates, you might have a
:20:39. > :20:38.chance then. Thank you all very much indeed.
:20:39. > :20:43.APPLAUSE. If you have something
:20:44. > :20:45.to say about that debate, log on to bbc.co.uk/thebigquestions,
:20:46. > :20:48.and follow the link to where you can We're also debating live this
:20:49. > :20:56.morning from Glasgow: Should And later, do religions need
:20:57. > :21:02.a carrot and a stick? So get tweeting or emailing
:21:03. > :21:04.on those topics now, or send us any other ideas
:21:05. > :21:06.or thoughts you may have Yesterday, at the Liberal Democrats'
:21:07. > :21:15.Spring Conference in York, delegates overwhelmingly voted
:21:16. > :21:19.to allow cannabis to be sold legally to adults in specialist,
:21:20. > :21:23.regulated shops. The Lib Dem leader, Tim Farron,
:21:24. > :21:27.claimed the policy could raise ?1 billion in tax revenue
:21:28. > :21:30.and would wrest control of the trade out of the hands of gangsters
:21:31. > :21:34.and unregulated dealers. So, should there be a legal
:21:35. > :21:46.supply of cannabis? Jim Duffy, ex-cop ex-spokesman for
:21:47. > :21:50.law enforcement against prohibition. Why do you want to legalise it?
:21:51. > :21:54.Well, the war on drugs has been going on in this country and across
:21:55. > :21:59.the world for years. We started the war on drugs in 1971. It's been an
:22:00. > :22:04.unmitigated failure. We lost. We lost. It is Unwinnable. It hasn't
:22:05. > :22:08.been won in any country anywhere in the world. What we have at the
:22:09. > :22:11.moment is a system where we've handed over control of the drugs
:22:12. > :22:16.market to criminals, and the criminals will decide what the drugs
:22:17. > :22:21.are, what they are cut with, what the purity will be, what their
:22:22. > :22:26.strength will be. They'll decide if they sell them, or give them away to
:22:27. > :22:29.your kids or grand kids. They don't ask for ID. All they are interested
:22:30. > :22:33.this is the money. That's what drives the drugs industry and we
:22:34. > :22:37.haven't been able in the 32 years I was in the police we didn't make a
:22:38. > :22:43.blind bit of difference. We started in 1975 when I joined talking about
:22:44. > :22:47.tenner bags. I left in 2007 and we are still talking tenner bags. If
:22:48. > :22:51.inflation had kept place a tenner back would have been ?147, but that
:22:52. > :22:56.didn't happen. Everyone in this audience will know that at this
:22:57. > :22:59.moment in time drugs have never been more plentiful, cheaper or easier to
:23:00. > :23:06.get. We need to do something different.
:23:07. > :23:10.APPLAUSE. So you want to make, in the terms of the criminal hierarchy,
:23:11. > :23:14.the Government the dealer and the multinationals the "Mr Big"s? No,
:23:15. > :23:18.what we want to do is legalise, regulate and control the market. The
:23:19. > :23:26.market for cannabis, ecstasy? The debate just now is about legalising
:23:27. > :23:32.cannabis. If you chose to sniff it, snort it, injects it or take it into
:23:33. > :23:36.your body through the orifice of your choice, you should be allowed
:23:37. > :23:40.to do that. As long as you have an uncontrolled market it will be run
:23:41. > :23:45.by criminals. It will cost lives. It kills people across the planet. It's
:23:46. > :23:48.killed 100,000 people in Mexico in the last eight years in the drugs
:23:49. > :23:56.war between the cartels and the Government. They are fighting over a
:23:57. > :23:58.plant that grows in the ground. Recovery resources, Deirdre Boyd,
:23:59. > :24:03.the war has been lost. Take it out of the hands of the criminals. Money
:24:04. > :24:09.for the Government. Help for addicts. Proper understanding. Drugs
:24:10. > :24:15.that are not as dangerous and are not cut with toxins, properly
:24:16. > :24:22.produced, the legitimate market. The war on drugs has been lost that's a
:24:23. > :24:28.quicksand foundation. For example, deaths from alcohol are ten times
:24:29. > :24:33.those from illicit drugs. Deaths from tobacco are 100 times those
:24:34. > :24:37.from illicit drugs, which would indicate that this is working. And
:24:38. > :24:41.the other thing is, Jim is correct in that the illicit market will
:24:42. > :24:44.always undercut the legal market. You regulate for the over 18s and
:24:45. > :24:50.then you have the traffickers targeting the under 18s even more.
:24:51. > :24:55.You regulate for potency and you empower the traffickers to offer
:24:56. > :25:01.even more potent products. In fact if you look at the statistics, this
:25:02. > :25:05.is not theory now, as a lot of the legalisation lobby does, the
:25:06. > :25:12.statistics from Colorado and other states that are legalised marijuana,
:25:13. > :25:15.you will find that the potency has increased if, hospitalisations have
:25:16. > :25:21.increased. Poisoning of children has increased by 80%. Drug-driving has
:25:22. > :25:27.increased. If we come back here to the UK, we have the appalling
:25:28. > :25:33.(Inaudible) experiment about 12 years ago and there was a ten-year
:25:34. > :25:37.follow-up. A rigorous empirical follow up. If you were starting now
:25:38. > :25:43.you wouldn't make alcohol legal would you? It is one of the most
:25:44. > :25:48.dangerous drugs isn't it, but if people can enjoy a wee drink, why
:25:49. > :25:50.shouldn't they be able? We've been speaking about personal liberty in
:25:51. > :25:57.the previous debate. Why shouldn't they be able to enjoy a wee joint?
:25:58. > :26:01.Why add to that problem? If we had such a problem, why add to that
:26:02. > :26:05.problem. Eric? I think it is really important to consider what the Lib
:26:06. > :26:10.Dems have actually decided to support. Support. They've received a
:26:11. > :26:15.considered report which is restrictive in terms of its
:26:16. > :26:19.recommendations. It would take the drug out of the hands of criminals.
:26:20. > :26:24.It would mean supply would have to take place in elected shops, with
:26:25. > :26:27.licences, with a separation between the producer and the retailer. So
:26:28. > :26:32.the same people would not be producing and retailing. It would
:26:33. > :26:38.mean that young people who are having a joint are not likely to go
:26:39. > :26:43.prison for five years. It would mean that young people who are sharing
:26:44. > :26:50.cannabis with their friends are not liable to be going to prison for
:26:51. > :26:54.supply of up to 14 years. But Eric, they don't anyway. We've got a
:26:55. > :26:58.nonsensical situation at the moment with the drug laws. What I think.
:26:59. > :27:02.Are there positives for young people? Of course. The reason why
:27:03. > :27:07.people use drugs is because they enjoy them. At least for some of the
:27:08. > :27:14.time that's why they use them. What the report considers is that this is
:27:15. > :27:19.not... It is like alcohol. It is not an ordinary... Drugs are not an
:27:20. > :27:22.ordinary commodity. They have potential risks, they have potential
:27:23. > :27:25.harms. The point is what we are doing at the moment is not reducing
:27:26. > :27:32.those harms but contributing to them. It is dogs proportionate.
:27:33. > :27:36.APPLAUSE. And we need to try something new, that's the point. The
:27:37. > :27:40.Government exists to keep the Government safe and secure and to
:27:41. > :27:43.allow them the freedom to have prosperity and other freedoms.
:27:44. > :27:50.There's a cost to enforcement of law. And it is a significant cost.
:27:51. > :27:53.It is a hard calculation to make, but the calculation is: What is the
:27:54. > :28:03.cost of enforcement versus the benefit to society? In this case it
:28:04. > :28:07.may be... ?54 billion it costs us. It may allow marijuana to be
:28:08. > :28:14.supplied under a Government licence. It is a net benefit of society of
:28:15. > :28:19.reducing the cost of doing that. It is a fundamental reframing of the
:28:20. > :28:24.issue, so it is a public health issue. Rather than protecting the
:28:25. > :28:27.most vulnerable of society. One of the most important roles of
:28:28. > :28:34.Government. It is not just about cost. It is about harm. Laxmi, I
:28:35. > :28:40.will be with you in a moment. Can I come back to you, I want to pick up
:28:41. > :28:45.on Jim's points. No, frankly. Eric, I will come to Laxmi. We want to
:28:46. > :28:50.hear about the possible harm angle. Let me remind people, you are a
:28:51. > :28:56.consultant child and adolescents psychiatrist. Where is the research,
:28:57. > :29:01.is it definitive, the damage to young minds and developing brains.
:29:02. > :29:04.Where are we on that? It is more definitive than the arguments that
:29:05. > :29:11.it is there for enjoyment, let seas a wee joint. I don't think anyone
:29:12. > :29:15.was as explicit as that. It is stunning to hear how we are
:29:16. > :29:18.normalising something where we don't potentially know the harm that they
:29:19. > :29:22.cause. APPLAUSE. I know the harm because I
:29:23. > :29:26.deal with, through the forensic child team, the young people that
:29:27. > :29:29.come through with mall adaptive, abusive backgrounds, with no
:29:30. > :29:35.opportunities, nothing else to do but is it around, and their form of
:29:36. > :29:40.fun is smoking cannabis. All of us, our brains have developed. For me it
:29:41. > :29:46.has stopped, at the age of 21. The people that use cannabis are your
:29:47. > :29:50.15, 16-year-old young people. And there is deaf evidence to suggest if
:29:51. > :29:55.you are using recreationally or chronically it will have an impacts
:29:56. > :30:00.on your ability to problem some of. Your ability to make impulsive
:30:01. > :30:04.choices, or not. Your ability to form decisions, and your
:30:05. > :30:09.concentration. If you think about the links going on for jobs, for
:30:10. > :30:14.entry into the criminal justice system, there's a risk there. On top
:30:15. > :30:18.of that... Please let me finish. The you've got the real risk of
:30:19. > :30:26.psychosis. If you smoke cannabis you are up to six to 10 times more
:30:27. > :30:30.likely to have a psychotic episode. Whilst my esteemed friend there said
:30:31. > :30:34.it is not fun for young people to be in prison, it is no fun for them to
:30:35. > :30:35.be detained under the mental health contact in a hospital ward.
:30:36. > :30:48.APPLAUSE. The constituent of cannabis that
:30:49. > :30:53.causes the most harm is THC. In the 1990s it was about 4% and now it is
:30:54. > :30:57.14%. It is an uncontrolled and unregulated market and what the Lib
:30:58. > :31:02.Dem proposals suggest is an opportunity to have different
:31:03. > :31:10.strengths. You can shift the market towards the least harmful types.
:31:11. > :31:18.What about skunk? People always want skunk. Not necessarily. They have it
:31:19. > :31:22.because... It is psychoactive and hallucinogenic. And that is how the
:31:23. > :31:30.dealers sell it. If you have control, regulated market, you can
:31:31. > :31:34.reduce the THC content. It can be more protective. What is the need
:31:35. > :31:38.for a regulated market for something on enjoyment and anxiety reduction
:31:39. > :31:43.when there are other ways to reduce anxiety and other ways to enjoy
:31:44. > :31:50.yourself. Nobody is suggesting drug use is a good thing. Nobody is
:31:51. > :31:54.suggesting that. Anxiety is often a symptom of social disadvantage and
:31:55. > :31:57.lack of opportunity. If we address those things for our young people
:31:58. > :32:05.today, they don't need to go into a drug cafe and smoke. I am Aqua
:32:06. > :32:14.nobody is disagreeing with you on that. Do you drink? What is the
:32:15. > :32:24.difference? That is not fair. The point about drinking... Don't drink
:32:25. > :32:30.on Laxmi's behalf. My brain has fully developed. So is OK for an
:32:31. > :32:34.adult to smoke? I am a child and adolescent psychologist so I don't
:32:35. > :32:38.know about the harm to an adult's physical health. But certainly I do
:32:39. > :32:43.think there are other ways of managing anxiety, regulating your
:32:44. > :32:49.behaviours and not lying in a hospital ward. Thank you very much
:32:50. > :32:56.indeed. Audience, first of all. Katie? And Eric is looking angry. I
:32:57. > :33:02.will be back with Eric as well. I always look like that! On the mental
:33:03. > :33:08.health angle, the research is about heavy use, age of onset, how often
:33:09. > :33:13.the person is using, and also the debate is a necessarily simple to
:33:14. > :33:19.say that is the only option for or against. Decriminalisation would be
:33:20. > :33:22.another option, so taking the criminalisation out and the
:33:23. > :33:26.Government is doing that with the psychoactive substances act that
:33:27. > :33:30.will come in force in April so that legal highs will be legal for
:33:31. > :33:33.possession. We are already doing it, and this is highlighting the
:33:34. > :33:39.disparity between existing and new drug laws. It is time for change.
:33:40. > :33:45.Anyone else in the audience? Back there and then I will come down to
:33:46. > :33:49.John. We have had a lot of discussions about cannabis and all
:33:50. > :33:52.the detrimental effects. I don't think anyone is contesting the
:33:53. > :33:57.detrimental effects you can get from smoking things like cannabis. The
:33:58. > :34:01.issue comes from how we prevent that impact happening to young children.
:34:02. > :34:06.For example, when it comes to smoking and alcohol, how do we
:34:07. > :34:10.prevent damage of children, people who are vulnerable, with smoking and
:34:11. > :34:15.alcohol? We educate them. In schools we say, fine, we understand some of
:34:16. > :34:18.you smoke and drink and we know that people smoke cannabis. The issue is
:34:19. > :34:23.properly educating people so they know that if they are going to smoke
:34:24. > :34:27.the joint, how they can protect themselves from his detrimental
:34:28. > :34:31.effects. All we do at the moment is tell them it is illegal so don't do
:34:32. > :34:35.it. We don't tell them how to go away and protect themselves from
:34:36. > :34:40.smoking and the detrimental effects that have been discussed. Thank you.
:34:41. > :34:47.John, former cannabis use and addiction support worker. Hello.
:34:48. > :34:55.With regards to heroin, the Government spends ?326 million on
:34:56. > :35:01.methadone, and how to treat people. If the Government is waging a war,
:35:02. > :35:05.which they are not, who is pushing the agenda with drugs? Is it to make
:35:06. > :35:11.more money because they can't tax the poor any more than what they are
:35:12. > :35:20.doing? Do you think that would be something, putting their hands of
:35:21. > :35:28.the multinationals on cannabis, would that be the agenda? Yes.
:35:29. > :35:31.Working for a charity, they have to support the people in housing
:35:32. > :35:37.schemes, picking up the pieces, the wrecked families. People will always
:35:38. > :35:43.take drugs. Yes but it starts with cannabis and does not necessarily
:35:44. > :35:50.stop there. Is it a gateway drug? Yes, a gateway to doing other
:35:51. > :35:54.things. People say it is only a gateway drug... You on. It is a
:35:55. > :35:58.gateway for the people that you are buying the drug from. You talked
:35:59. > :36:01.about Colorado. What is being recommended by the Lib Dems is
:36:02. > :36:06.nothing like the Colorado experiment. It is much more similar
:36:07. > :36:10.to the Uruguay experiment. It is very restrictive. It is making sure
:36:11. > :36:14.that the policy does not make the same mistakes that we have made with
:36:15. > :36:19.the way we regulate alcohol, which is a really harmful legal drug.
:36:20. > :36:30.There are a lot of recommendations about price, availability,
:36:31. > :36:32.marketing, and restricting it, plain packaging. There are opportunities
:36:33. > :36:35.to intervene. If it is being regulated, shops only sell this one
:36:36. > :36:39.product. There would be trained staff within the shops who would
:36:40. > :36:46.have the opportunity to intervene. Within that framework, can you see
:36:47. > :36:49.it being acceptable? For over 18 is? I will not get into the legalisation
:36:50. > :36:53.debate because I don't think it is good for my patients to say which
:36:54. > :36:58.way of the fence I am sitting. That is not my purpose here today. My
:36:59. > :37:03.purpose is to suggest there is definite evidence that there is
:37:04. > :37:08.harm. I totally agree with you. Regulation is a public health issue,
:37:09. > :37:16.as you said, but I could never say to my patients, well, it is in the
:37:17. > :37:20.shops and I am choosing to use it. When I talk to young people who take
:37:21. > :37:29.drugs, it is not a punitive approach, I don't tell young people
:37:30. > :37:32.they cannot smoke up or take drugs. It is giving them information so
:37:33. > :37:39.they can make informed decisions as adults. It is about... The oath I
:37:40. > :37:46.took as a doctor is to put out that the harm and research to suggest the
:37:47. > :37:52.harm. There are alternative ways to get a buzz or get a high. Go for a
:37:53. > :38:00.run, get a cat, be happy. As a dog lover, I think cats should be
:38:01. > :38:06.illegal! I don't! What would this mean for policing, freeing up
:38:07. > :38:09.resources? There is incredible pressure on police resources across
:38:10. > :38:14.the country and in Scotland the Government will not reduce the
:38:15. > :38:17.number of police officers below 17,000, but they want us to save
:38:18. > :38:22.millions of pounds from the budget, so police are limited in what they
:38:23. > :38:32.can do. It would be a bonanza for the police. Only where they have
:38:33. > :38:36.made a conscious decision not to prosecute people when they have
:38:37. > :38:41.drugs for their own use. It frees up court and prison time. One third of
:38:42. > :38:46.the prison population in Scotland is in for nonviolent drug offences.
:38:47. > :38:51.Could transform society in a positive way? Yes. We have 7000
:38:52. > :38:58.deaths from alcohol and none from cannabis and 13,000 from tobacco.
:38:59. > :39:03.Can I give the statistics and not just the theory. In the UK and the
:39:04. > :39:07.US, less than 1% of offenders are in prison for possession of cannabis
:39:08. > :39:10.alone. We're not talking about the tweaking of that. Statistics came
:39:11. > :39:16.out last week for Washington state, and the taxes that have been taken
:39:17. > :39:21.in don't even cover the cost of regulation. It is costing more.
:39:22. > :39:25.Thirdly, the statistics that have come in from Colorado show there is
:39:26. > :39:32.a higher potency than anywhere else in the USA. It is a false dichotomy
:39:33. > :39:35.to do the argument about alcohol versus marijuana because again the
:39:36. > :39:38.research indicates that people that smoke pot of five times more likely
:39:39. > :39:43.to have an alcohol problem and having the two together is
:39:44. > :39:48.horrendous. The fifth one, the fourth dichotomy of prison or
:39:49. > :39:57.treatment, we don't have a good treatment system here. Half of the
:39:58. > :40:03.rehab in this country closed... Thank you. A lot of young Muslim men
:40:04. > :40:10.around the country smoke quite a lot of weed. Is it yes or no in the
:40:11. > :40:15.Koran? There is nothing in the Koran about it at all. Medicinal use could
:40:16. > :40:18.be a possibility. In the 13th century Islamic scholars
:40:19. > :40:28.discussed... Medicinal use could be OK. Yes. What if you enjoy it? No.
:40:29. > :40:32.Because it is harm for other individuals. If you take it
:40:33. > :40:38.medicinally, you would also enjoy it. If you look at it, the primary
:40:39. > :40:42.issue is medicinal use. Muslim scholars have discussed it since the
:40:43. > :40:51.13th century, the difference between alcohol, narcotics and anaesthetics.
:40:52. > :41:03.I cannot tell a lie. Can I have some more cocaine? I am having difficulty
:41:04. > :41:06.articulating myself! The issue is about recreational drugs. You are
:41:07. > :41:11.opening up a can of worms when you allow recreational use of marijuana.
:41:12. > :41:18.So have a cat because didn't the profit cut off his sleeve because
:41:19. > :41:27.the cat was there with her kittens? Lovely. Thank you very much indeed.
:41:28. > :41:33.You can join in all of this morning's debates by logging on and
:41:34. > :41:37.following the link to the discussions.
:41:38. > :41:39.Or you can tweet using the hashtag bbctbq.
:41:40. > :41:41.Tell us what you think about our last big question too:
:41:42. > :41:43.Do religions need a carrot and a stick?
:41:44. > :41:46.And if you'd like to be in the audience at a future show,
:41:47. > :41:52.After a break for Easter we're in York on 3rd April for a live show
:41:53. > :41:55.and in the afternoon we will be recording a special
:41:56. > :42:03.Then we're live from Bath on 17th April.
:42:04. > :42:05.These days many churches downplay the idea of eternal damnation.
:42:06. > :42:09.They describe it as an absence of God, with heaven being a blissful
:42:10. > :42:12.But in the Bible, Jesus was very clear about hell,
:42:13. > :42:15.describing it in one parable as a "blazing furnace,
:42:16. > :42:19.the place of wailing and gnashing of teeth."
:42:20. > :42:22.Those who cause offence and whose deeds are evil will be thrown
:42:23. > :42:26.But the good and the righteous will have eternal life,
:42:27. > :42:31.The message is: never forget, you have a choice.
:42:32. > :42:38.So, do religions need a carrot and a stick?
:42:39. > :42:48.I will be with you in a minute. The profit about the cat is a fabricated
:42:49. > :42:54.one but I will get over it in time. That heaven is real, isn't it? You
:42:55. > :42:59.believe it is. Yes. Jesus said, not let your heart be troubled and
:43:00. > :43:03.believe in God. I believe in my father's house and if it were not
:43:04. > :43:12.so, I would have told you and I go to prepare a place for you. Tell him
:43:13. > :43:16.about Jesus. I have and he believed everything I said. If he embraces
:43:17. > :43:21.Jesus can he get to heaven? Of course. You talked about the
:43:22. > :43:25.righteous in the introduction. Righteousness is not doing good.
:43:26. > :43:37.Righteousness is a gift from God when he put your faith in Jesus. We
:43:38. > :43:42.are all born sinners? Yes. None of us is doing good. The best of us is
:43:43. > :43:45.way below. That is why we have the Old Testament, to give us a
:43:46. > :43:50.measurement. This is what God expects and our levels of way below
:43:51. > :43:57.and we need a saviour. Last time Alex was on, he ended up standing up
:43:58. > :44:03.and preaching to the congregation. What is heaven like? Is it real? Is
:44:04. > :44:10.there a reality to it? Yes, it talks about heaven and a new word. What
:44:11. > :44:14.goes on? It says in Isaiah 65, a vision in the Old Testament, that
:44:15. > :44:21.they are building houses, ploughing the fields, but there is the absence
:44:22. > :44:24.of sin. And the presence of God. And there is peace and bliss. It gives
:44:25. > :44:29.you all these kind of things. I don't think we will be sitting on a
:44:30. > :44:35.cloud watching angels with wings firing arrows. We will be building
:44:36. > :44:42.houses. Very likely. We should do more of that here on earth! I agree
:44:43. > :44:47.and the Bible would agree. Shaykh, there are descriptions in the Koran
:44:48. > :44:50.talking about heaven, beautiful people beautiful youths, beautiful
:44:51. > :44:56.handmaidens, trees and figs and rivers of wine. I don't know, it
:44:57. > :45:00.sounds like a polluted river. It sounds very sensual from a male,
:45:01. > :45:02.heterosexual point of view. Is that what it is like or is it a
:45:03. > :45:21.description to get people on board? Hadith, Islam has the most pictorial
:45:22. > :45:29.description of paradise. It does. One of the earlier speakers... In
:45:30. > :45:35.the here-after scholars talk about the fact it was culturally informed.
:45:36. > :45:43.It was catering for a society within which, even in this society. If you
:45:44. > :45:46.say Islam is culturally informed don't you open a can of
:45:47. > :45:52.pomegranates? No, as people of faith you have to accept that reality,
:45:53. > :45:58.what does that inform you about God and his attributes. At the end of
:45:59. > :46:02.the day paradise and hellfire are manifestations. Scholars talk about
:46:03. > :46:07.the worst punishment in hellfire is the fact that tur humiliated in the
:46:08. > :46:12.presence of God. That God has given you the facility to think and to do
:46:13. > :46:16.this things that you do on Earth. There are good people on Earth and
:46:17. > :46:20.bad people on Earth. Are there good people in hell? I don't think so. At
:46:21. > :46:27.the end of the day there's two issues here. One is to state your
:46:28. > :46:29.position as the religio to say your religious path is superior in terms
:46:30. > :46:34.of dealing with social issues, spiritual issues. But the director's
:46:35. > :46:39.cut, which is God's decision on the day of judgment, means that anybody
:46:40. > :46:44.of faith, anybody who believed in God or even argues with God in their
:46:45. > :46:49.hearts is accepting gods. Can an atheist go to heavy no-one You have
:46:50. > :46:53.to ask atheists, are they troubled by God? My answer to that is they
:46:54. > :46:59.are troubled by God, which means they think God exists. There you go
:47:00. > :47:05.Gordon, with you in a minute. Is this at the heart of it, Abrahamic
:47:06. > :47:12.religions, 2 carrot and the stick, to keep you on the straight and
:47:13. > :47:17.narrow. I think it has done a lot of harm, a ritualistic vision of Heaven
:47:18. > :47:21.and hell. It gives the impression that God is some kind of tyrant and
:47:22. > :47:30.if you do the slightest thing to upset him, he is going to zap you
:47:31. > :47:34.and put you in a place of torment. You are right, it is absolutely
:47:35. > :47:39.there in the scriptures. I believe it. So do lots of people. You
:47:40. > :47:45.believe what? Heaven and hell. And in this country the number of people
:47:46. > :47:49.who believe in Heaven and hell has gone up since the '60s, not gone
:47:50. > :47:55.down, and not just religious people. I have faith. If you believe in
:47:56. > :47:59.Heaven and hell it says if you choose to do right or wrong it is
:48:00. > :48:03.not just an arbitrary choice. There's something important about
:48:04. > :48:10.our moral decisions that is weighty and they have consequences. Why not
:48:11. > :48:15.a moral decision to do right and to do good by your fellow beings, to
:48:16. > :48:21.make a legacy for your children in the here and nowt without any carrot
:48:22. > :48:28.and stick, just for proper reasons. I completely agree with you. You.
:48:29. > :48:32.Religions go wrong when they take away people's responsibility. If you
:48:33. > :48:36.think it is the right thing, it is not like saying vanilla ice cream is
:48:37. > :48:42.better than raspberry. It is about who we are as human nature, about
:48:43. > :48:48.how the world is made, means this is the right way to be. It is met if a
:48:49. > :48:55.physical. It is that these decisions really mean something, it is not
:48:56. > :49:00.just a arbitrary matter. You are a humanist, troubled by God, as we
:49:01. > :49:07.hear. Carrot and stick. What do you think about Heaven and local? As a
:49:08. > :49:13.humanist we reject supernational explanations for the natural world.
:49:14. > :49:17.It leads me to think it is almost a simplistic idea of immediate reward
:49:18. > :49:20.or punishment for doing good. I would question how morally good
:49:21. > :49:25.something is if you are only doing good because of that promise of
:49:26. > :49:31.reward or punishment. APPLAUSE. And we can be objective
:49:32. > :49:36.about how to be good and co-operate with people around us. The sense of
:49:37. > :49:40.the wellbeing of those around us if what we do negatively impacts on
:49:41. > :49:44.their wellbeing, that cannot be good. We don't require these
:49:45. > :49:51.external judgments to tell us how can we relate to them? So
:49:52. > :49:56.psychologically, the carrot and stick approach, it was a form of
:49:57. > :49:59.social control, an easy way for people to and that things, doing
:50:00. > :50:04.right and doing wrong. Some people say it is treating us like children.
:50:05. > :50:07.If you have children you say, if you do that again, you're going up
:50:08. > :50:12.stairs, or I will take your mobile phone away from you. Is it an
:50:13. > :50:17.approach to us as if we were little children? As a parent that approach
:50:18. > :50:22.only works for so long. They soon learn to get round it. It is about
:50:23. > :50:27.saying, people are already living their lives the way they are. We are
:50:28. > :50:30.increasingly seeing people moving away from a religious perspective.
:50:31. > :50:33.In Scotland now nearly one in two people say they don't have a
:50:34. > :50:39.religion. That's not necessarily the same as saying they are humanist or
:50:40. > :50:43.atheist but the idea of being followers of a faith. People are
:50:44. > :50:49.generally good. People are looking after one another. People are
:50:50. > :50:52.contributing to charities. They are looking to the they find a wall net
:50:53. > :50:59.the street, most people will return it. So they don't need the carrot
:51:00. > :51:05.and stick. Belief in Heaven or hell isn't diminishing instantly. Where?
:51:06. > :51:11.In Britain. Religion yes, but not belief in Heaven and hell. You can
:51:12. > :51:14.trivialise us and say it is about treating us like children. But it is
:51:15. > :51:20.about a sense of justice. That's what lies at the heart of it. People
:51:21. > :51:23.wonder, if people do these horrific things, we were talking about
:51:24. > :51:28.paedophilia, what happens to them? We don't know but we have a kind of
:51:29. > :51:35.hope and faith that's not the end of the story. They won't be rewarded.
:51:36. > :51:39.It says your decisions as a human are connected to every other human
:51:40. > :51:42.in your society. You are not making moral decisions for yourself, but
:51:43. > :51:48.for the society and the collective that you are in. You can conduct a
:51:49. > :51:53.war because you believe it's in the interests of society. Isis think
:51:54. > :51:57.they are doing the right thing. The message of all the Abrahamic faiths,
:51:58. > :52:01.it says you are not a moral island. You are connected. Therefore you
:52:02. > :52:09.have to make decisions with that this mind. There is an Octoberive
:52:10. > :52:14.standard. That's the way we behaved before the Abrahamic faiths as
:52:15. > :52:19.foragers looking after each other, making sure there was a cohesive
:52:20. > :52:26.group. But they believe many afterlife as well. It was a way
:52:27. > :52:31.of... Yeah. It seems fundamental to humans to believe there is something
:52:32. > :52:35.that is not just us arbitrarily deciding to do this. Especially with
:52:36. > :52:40.rates of infant mortality. It would be a way of dealing with it. It is
:52:41. > :52:44.objective, not just subjective. I would disagree and say it is
:52:45. > :52:48.absolutely a human instincts to hope there is something beyond the
:52:49. > :52:53.reality that we have. But I fear that a lot of people miss out on the
:52:54. > :52:57.wonder and awe of what have now. Just to go back to the point. We
:52:58. > :53:00.don't have to look back at history to see how people lived without the
:53:01. > :53:05.Abraham ache faiths. We can look around the world now and see how
:53:06. > :53:10.people live. People are relating to each other in good ways without this
:53:11. > :53:14.idea of Heaven and hell. Carrot and stick. Pastor? I would say
:53:15. > :53:19.absolutely. Heaven and hell, if you don't know about it and you are
:53:20. > :53:24.living in a society, yes you can have a happy society. But if there
:53:25. > :53:31.is such a place in Heaven and hell and in Christ that's been revealed
:53:32. > :53:37.to us in the world of the Lord. By the way it is not mentioned in the
:53:38. > :53:42.Old Testament. Most of the prophets were humanists. Jesus talked about
:53:43. > :53:47.hell a lot. And about the lake of fire. And paradise. This day will
:53:48. > :53:53.you be with me in paradise, he said to the thief on the cross. But we
:53:54. > :53:58.are not talking about, when you are talking about heaven and hell
:53:59. > :54:01.Emmanuel Cant said with all the injustice in the world and all the
:54:02. > :54:06.failures in the legal system there is has to be somehow, somewhere
:54:07. > :54:12.where it is sorted out, and I liked that. That gripped me as a young
:54:13. > :54:17.guy. I believe, you see the instinct within us. I believe that's a
:54:18. > :54:23.God-given instinct, that we have a hope... A Gordon-given instinct. To
:54:24. > :54:27.get back to the idea that we don't always get it right in this life,
:54:28. > :54:31.therefore there's a chance to get it right after. That's should be a call
:54:32. > :54:35.to us to get it right now. Absolutely.
:54:36. > :54:41.APPLAUSE. What we want in this life is not what we are getting. You know
:54:42. > :54:46.that mismarriages of justice are without number. If I'm suffering
:54:47. > :54:50.injustice and I go to my grave absolutely grieving that I was
:54:51. > :54:54.accused and I didn't get justice whatever, there is nevertheless
:54:55. > :54:59.within me this fought, one day, it will be put right. But if you're
:55:00. > :55:04.dead you won't be worrying about it any more. No. We've all been dead
:55:05. > :55:08.before. No, after death the judgment. Who are you or anybody to
:55:09. > :55:15.that when we die that's the end of it? If it is the end of it. Jesus
:55:16. > :55:20.rose from the dead and came back. If it is the end of it and this is it,
:55:21. > :55:25.does that make sense to you? Yes it does, because if it is the end of
:55:26. > :55:30.it, what have I lost? Nothing. I've had a great life. I've enjoyed it.
:55:31. > :55:35.I'm a humanist with a small h, I want justice. Justice. I want
:55:36. > :55:40.kindness. But if I'm right and there's a hell or a Heaven, but what
:55:41. > :55:45.about our atheistic friends? They are going to burn. Should they'll go
:55:46. > :55:49.to hell. If I only accept that to ensure that I get into Heaven,
:55:50. > :55:55.surely God will know that I didn't do it for the right reasons, that
:55:56. > :56:00.I'm only doing it to secure my insurance policy.
:56:01. > :56:06.APPLAUSE. Nobody... The thing is, it is not about Heaven and hell, Nicky,
:56:07. > :56:11.at the end of the day. At the end of the day it IS about Heaven and hell.
:56:12. > :56:16.Yes, this discussion is. God is a God of love. He didn't make hell for
:56:17. > :56:22.folks here. He didn't make hell for you and I. Who did he make it for?
:56:23. > :56:26.Satan and his angels. You can snicker. But he made it for someone
:56:27. > :56:29.didn't he? Yes, of course he did. That's because we have the free
:56:30. > :56:33.choice. Even Satan had a free choice. He was an all-powerful
:56:34. > :56:38.being, yes, so hell's been made for him. Listen, Jesus died on the cross
:56:39. > :56:44.and went to hell. Took that punishment, the wrath of dad on your
:56:45. > :56:48.behalf, Nicky, because he loved you Jesus died on that cross. He talked
:56:49. > :56:54.about hell more than Heaven. Why? Because he was going there to take
:56:55. > :56:58.your punishment. That's the whole gospel Are you preaching later? Into
:56:59. > :57:03.no. What time are you preaching? 12 o'clock. Shall we all go everyone?
:57:04. > :57:07.It is going to be good. Not far from here. Lynda? If you put it like that
:57:08. > :57:18.it takes away our responsibility, because if Jesus died for you, like
:57:19. > :57:23.the von Ribbontrop repenting when he was going to be hanged, everyone can
:57:24. > :57:27.say, oh, it's going to be fine. But you would know as a professor would
:57:28. > :57:31.know as a professor that's not a belief - that's a cop-out. You've
:57:32. > :57:36.got to belief in your heart. But as sin serious it doesn't matter what
:57:37. > :57:41.we do. The Pastor is stealing your fire, your hellfire. I don't think
:57:42. > :57:45.so. We have a concept of what is good and that's metaphysical. That's
:57:46. > :57:49.what pushes us to do things. The concept of paradise is there. It is
:57:50. > :57:53.a carrot but at the end of the day in our faith you intend that actions
:57:54. > :57:57.are the things that push you into God's pleasure. Is everyone in
:57:58. > :58:03.paradise a Muslim? Everyone accepts God. Does it mean you are a Muslim?
:58:04. > :58:07.It means you've submitted your will to God. It means fighting against
:58:08. > :58:10.paedophilia, fighting against injustice If you are a person on
:58:11. > :58:19.that side and you know there's a God, on the day of judgment God will
:58:20. > :58:24.not overlook your actions. There are one scriptural source that says
:58:25. > :58:29.that. What aboutisties? Tural source that says that. What aboutisties? --
:58:30. > :58:33.what about atheists. Gordon, the Shaykh and the Pastor are waiting
:58:34. > :58:35.for you. Thank you oryour contributions.
:58:36. > :58:38.As always, the debates will continue online and on Twitter.
:58:39. > :58:40.Next week we're in Brighton, so do join us then.
:58:41. > :58:42.But for now it's goodbye and have a great Sunday.
:58:43. > :59:03.In the last five years, homelessness across the UK has soared.
:59:04. > :59:06.So this is where you sleep every night? Yes. Hm.
:59:07. > :59:08.As part of BBC1's season of Sport Relief,
:59:09. > :59:11.our four celebrities continue to experience life on the streets.
:59:12. > :59:15.And things are about to get even tougher.