 |
Chairman: Jonathan Dimbleby
PANELLISTS: Suzi Leather
Farzana Shaikh
Stephen Twigg
Shaun Bailey
FROM: Peter Chalk Centre, Exeter
DIMBLEBY
Welcome to the cathedral city of Exeter and to the university where we are in the Peter Chalk Centre as the guests of the politics department. The university has 14,000 students and is basking in its accolade as the Times Higher University of the Year for 2007-08. It's also been in the top ten for student satisfaction over every one of the last three years. With a network of 58,000 alumni in 150 countries it has plans for almost half a billion pounds of investment over the next few years.
On our panel: Dr Farzana Shaikh studied political science at Columbia University before coming to this country where she lectured variously at Cambridge and the London School - the LSE in London. She's now the director of the Pakistan Study Group at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, otherwise known as Chatham House.
Shaun Bailey was brought up on an inner London estate by his mother and says it was the support of his close knit family that allowed him to - I use his words - "escape his destiny". He's the author of a pamphlet entitled No Man's Land, published by the Centre for Policy Studies which analyses the crisis in the inner cities. He's also the co-founder of a charity called My Generation whose purpose is to do something practical about that crisis. He's been selected by the Conservatives to fight the London seat of Hammersmith at the next General Election.
Dame Suzi Leather has spent much of her professional life in the consumer movement, gravitating to the chair of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority and then to her present post as chair of the Charity Commission, the regulator and registrar of all charities in England and Wales.
Stephen Twigg rocketed to prominence in that long ago 1997 were you up for Portillo election in which he forced all of us to tear up the form book by claiming the scalp of the former defence secretary. He rose to become a minister of state before losing his seat in 2005. He's now the director of the Foreign Policy think tank and has already been selected for what should be - unless there's another spectacular upheaval - the safe Labour seat of Liverpool West Derby at the next election. [CLAPPING]
Our first question please.
LARPENT
I'm Andrew Larpent. Does the government deserve the loyalty and commitment it expects from its armed forces?
DIMBLEBY
This follows the remarks of the coroner in relation to the death of Captain James Philippson in which he said, amongst other things, that sending troops into a combat zone without their basic kit was - I quote - "unforgivable and inexcusable and a breach of trust between the soldiers and those who govern them". Suzi Leather.
LEATHER
Well I think that they're very lucky - the government is still very lucky to have the loyalty that it does have. And because I know the armed forces as well as you do I think it's predictable that that loyalty will continue. But as we've heard today and I think was particularly moving listening to Mr Philippson on the radio this evening talking about the loss of his son, many of our troops are being asked to do very - already extremely difficult things with inadequate equipment. And I think that eventually governments which continue to ask them to do that risk losing their moral authority. [CLAPPING]
DIMBLEBY
Shaun Bailey.
BAILEY
I think the words unforgivable where used and that's about right because you're asking men to ultimately give up their lives for the defence of all of us and to ask them to do that job and not provide them with the equipment is utterly disgusting. I think any job we ask the armed forces to do we should cover that commitment, their funding and the logistics behind them should be up to the task of what we're asking them to do because these are men who have willingly laid down potentially their lives for our own defence. And to break that duty of care is - as the words have been said before - unforgivable. [CLAPPING]
DIMBLEBY
Stephen Twigg.
TWIGG
I think the coroner's remarks are very, very powerful and I hope that the government will respond appropriately because I don't think any government, whichever party is in power at the time, should take for granted the professionalism and loyalty of troops, in particular with events over the past decade, starting in the Balkans, Sierra Leone and obviously more recently in Afghanistan and Iraq, a lot has been expected of British troops by the government and I just hope that we can have a serious public debate about how we can ensure in the future our troops are given the kind of support and equipment that they deserve, clearly there is a major failing in this case and there is a responsibility on the government to respond urgently to that to ensure that the right lessons are leant from it.
DIMBLEBY
The defence minister has been on air saying that he was extremely sorry about what happened but in the last two years things have dramatically improved but there will be some who think haven't we heard that over the years a great deal?
TWIGG
Of course and people will be sceptical about that and nothing is going to rectify the tragic loss for the family concerned. I hope there have been those improvements over these past two years but we know from listening to those involved in our armed forces at a senior level, as well as at other levels, that there is still concern and I certainly as a supporter of the government and a Labour candidate will want to see the Labour government responding very fully in ensuring that we don't have unnecessary tragedies due to lack of equipment in any of the places where British troops are deployed.
DIMBLEBY
Dr Farzana Shaikh.
SHAIKH
Well I think that you know I couldn't improve on any of this but I certainly think that as someone who's followed the conduct and military operations of British troops in Afghanistan in extremely difficult terrain this is the absolute least that can be said, that the government does need to provide absolute security for its troops as I said working in very difficult circumstances, particularly at a time of course when these troops are under enormous political pressure, conflicting political pressures and when the British government has had to really work hard to make a case for British troops and NATO troops generally to remain engaged in conflicts like Afghanistan.
DIMBLEBY
Andrew Larpent, do you believe that the government deserves the loyalty and commitment it expects?
LARPENT
Well I know from my own experience that soldiers will go to war if they're asked to do so with whatever they have ...
DIMBLEBY
You are a soldier?
LARPENT
Yes. And they will make the very best use of the equipment that they have but they do need to know continually that they have the support of their government behind them but more important than the government actually is the support of the nation and it is up to us all to make sure that our politicians respond and continually ensure that our servicemen and women are looked after in the best possible way that they can. [CLAPPING]
DIMBLEBY
The circumstances surrounding the death of James Philippson were really quite extraordinary were they not because they were sent in without even machine guns, they were outgunned, as his father said so passionately, outgunned by terrorists - the British Army. Was there no possibility that senior army officers would say look you cannot go in and do this under these circumstances because the risk is too high?
LARPENT
I don't know the circumstances of this particular incident but of course soldiers will find themselves in very difficult situations the ones that they did not expect and they will react in the instinctive way that they should and that they're trained to do with the equipment that they have at the time. We must make sure they've got whatever they need.
DIMBLEBY
Thank you very much. If you have thoughts about that Any Answers after the Saturday broadcast of Any Questions may be for you, the number to ring is 08700 100 444 and the e-mail address any.answers@bbc.co.uk. Our next question please.
EMMERSON
I'm Robin Emmerson. Is deference to multiculturalism more of a threat to British security than the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
DIMBLEBY
This is - springs from the report from the Royal United Services Institute saying that, amongst other things, Britain's a soft touch for home grown terrorists because of deference to multiculturalism. Stephen Twigg.
TWIGG
I - I don't think so, I think that multiculturalism has become one of the terms that has in a sense changed in meaning in terms of the political debate and I think the original concept of having respect for different culture, different communities, recognising the diversity of our modern society is still a principle that I'd defend and I do not regard that as something that leads to terrorism in any way. Clearly we do have a set of issues with extremist Islam. It is a form of Islam that is utterly rejected by most Muslims in this country but there is an issue there that we do need to address and address in a way that is open, that is based on evidence, that isn't sensationalist and that's what I hope we'll do. I'm not convinced this report that's come out today is going to assist in having a proper balanced and fair debate that can take that matter forward.
DIMBLEBY
Dr Shaikh.
SHAIKH
Well my own view is not having had the chance to read the report at any great length but I've certainly listened at length to what the author - one of the main author's of the report - Professor Gwyn Prins has had to say about the report - and I have quite serious misgivings about it, not least the tendency I think here sort of an attempt that comes dangerously close to equating culture with terrorism. I'm also particularly concerned with the suggestion that somehow we need to start thinking more closely about a risk of a threat. I mean when does a risk become a threat? And as we've seen recently in the case of these young boys who were hauled in front of the court for having downloaded material on the internet ..
DIMBLEBY
An issue we may come to so let's not go there right now.
SHAIKH
Okay but I mean it borders on the risk of what has come to be known as thought crimes and I'm simply not convinced by this report.
DIMBLEBY
The country's lack of self confidence, they write, amongst other things, is in stark contrast to the implacability of its Islamist terrorist enemy within and without. We look like a soft touch, we are indeed a soft touch from within and without. Suzi Leather.
LEATHER
I think I would characterise this report, which I should make clear I haven't read from start to finish, more as a position report rather than a research report. But it seems to me that it's just fundamentally flawed. The report claims that we don't take terrorism seriously, that we're a soft touch for terrorists, that we somehow have a flabby attitude to criminal extremism. Nothing could be further from the truth. Indeed the government is often criticised for having too firm a line on this. So I just think this is an absolute nonsense. I see nothing in this report that in any way reflects the reality of Muslim community leaders that I meet in my work for the Charity Commission, I meet people who really are passionately committed to this country and to the communities that make it up. And nor do I see the sort of tensions all over the place that the report seems to suggest there are. I think whether it's Hindus or Buddhists or Muslims or Sikhs or Christians, faith communities in this country are committed to Britishness and it's very false to put this dichotomy between faith and patriotism.
DIMBLEBY
What do you make of the [CLAPPING] what do you make of this statement from the report: "The UK presents itself as a target, as a fragmenting post-Christian society." "And is" - I quote again - "increasingly divided on its history, national aims, values and political identity." Does that ring any bells or not at all?
LEATHER
I think there is a tiny grain of truth in that I think - I think it's fair to say that we have a less strong sense of pride in our country and a less strong sense of patriotism and citizenship in Britain than many other cultures do, much less than the United States, much less strong than some of our European counterparts, notably France and Germany. I don't know where that comes from, maybe we do have a kind of shadow of colonial guilt. And I think unless the indigenous society maintains a strong sense of its own identity then it's much easier for it to feel threatened by apparently strong expressions of cultural identity than from elsewhere.
DIMBLEBY
Shaun Bailey.
BAILEY
I would say for me that I haven't read the report at any length either. Firstly let's separate out multiculturalism and terrorism because they certainly aren't the same things. I think when people talk about multiculturalism it has changed and in the beginning it was right - someone like myself, who's black, would benefit greatly from that - but it's gone too far and many people think multiculturalism means that external cultures are taken first and above our own and that on a daily basis bothers and annoys people. And that means that when a report such as this comes out and makes these very emotive points people are willing to hear them because their start point is different. I think when you talk about how we treat terror, I think some of the government's approach to terror has been wrong, I think some of it has generated more problems than it's solved. The 90 days people without charging etc., Guantanomo Bay which obviously isn't - our government isn't responsible for but haven't been vocal enough in saying that's wrong - these are things that generate terror. [CLAPPING]
DIMBLEBY
When you talk about our own culture, what do you mean by our own culture?
BAILEY
As a nation we are weak, we have become crippled, we are scared to talk about what's good, there is no Great Britain anymore, people are terrified at supporting Britain and say the way we do things is the correct way, the right way. A little while ago I read a survey asking teachers if they would promote Britishness amongst their students and they said no because of Britain's dodgy colonial past. But most powerful Western nations have a past with some darker moments in it. Until we gain some confidence and say our British way is the correct way we will always feel threatened by the outside world.
DIMBLEBY
That sounds [CLAPPING] that sounds, Stephen Twigg, as if he's endorsing quite a lot of what the RUSI report is saying in terms of the flabbiness and failure and lack of self confidence in the British identity?
TWIGG
I think I basically agree with what Suzi said about this, I mean I think there is a sense in which there isn't a sufficient confidence about a concept of Britishness and I think it's quite possible to say that we are British but we also welcome the fact that we have various faiths, various cultures within our society. And there is no reason at all why that should make us anymore vulnerable to terrorism. And I think if we look at France, I mean I think actually in many ways we are streets ahead of France in terms of some of the issues of community cohesion and integration in this country compared to the French. I do think we could learn some lessons from the Americans, who do have an ability on this issue at least domestically to say look you're American, you have a loyalty to a concept of being American but you can be a black American, you can be a Latino American and so forth. I think that is something we could learn from. But I think the leap that the authors of this report, which none of us have actually read, but from the news coverage of the report, is just a leap that I don't think is borne out by evidence that somehow you can jump from a supposed flabbiness in our national identity to us then being a soft touch on terrorism, I just don't think the evidence supports that.
DIMBLEBY
Our next question please.
CLAYSON
Michael Clayson. By releasing five students who possessed extremist materials has the Court of Appeal struck a blow for freedom or made it even harder to prevent terrorism?
DIMBLEBY
Demonstrating in passing incidentally, Farzana Shaikh, that panellists on this programme do not know the questions in advance. You can carry on almost where you left off.
SHAIKH
That's true, that's true. Well this was obviously a very, very difficult - difficult case and I think that for most of us - I mean when I actually saw this - this judgement being delivered I sort of felt - I had to grit my teeth and I had to say well yes they probably did download material that could potentially have - been threatening, posed a security risk but on balance - on balance, after all, in this country the law will only convict for a crime committed. And while - and that's really what I suppose one has to go by. We cannot, I think, living in this country pretending to subscribe to civilised laws give sanction or licence to laws that would prosecute individuals for what are essentially thought crimes, that comes close to [CLAPPING] a police state.
DIMBLEBY
Shaun Bailey.
BAILEY
If the downloading of this material constitutes a crime or not I think is quite easy for our courts to decide. What people need to understand is why people would find that terrorising because I would ask the question - why, what next, what was intended for those materials, where were you going to go with them, who were you going to give them to? Now for the Appeal Court to say it's not a crime, they didn't commit a crime and the Appeal Court has said as much, but I would wonder what drove those people to do that and if we're going to combat terrorism we need to understand that first and try to have an intervention that says that you wouldn't want to download this material because like anything you download, especially amongst young people, it's distributed - you wouldn't download it and keep it to yourself.
DIMBLEBY
But against that background, in response to the question, do you believe that it was a blow for free speech or do you think it will make combating terrorism more difficult?
BAILEY
It won't make combating terrorism any harder or any easier to deal with and yes it is about our free speech and we have that as a notion in our nation so it was the right thing to do but it still poses the question - what next.
DIMBLEBY
Suzi Leather.
LEATHER
I find this an extraordinarily difficult question really. I think if the law does - does make this distinction the rule of the law is a fundamental underpinning of our democratic system and it's no more more important for that to be tested than in these difficult terrorist cases. I think it - in some respects it's quite confusing that being in possession of material in some areas of law is a crime, you know if you're in possession of child pornography that is a crime but in this other field it isn't. So I think for many people this will be a very confusing judgement.
DIMBLEBY
Is that the distinction there could conceivably be because people of perfectly good will with no urge to commit any offence at all feel the need to understand the - what is actually being travelled across the internet in relation to terrorism and that to deny, for instance, academics or others the right to see that and may turn into a crime would cause a - pretty well disrupt an ability to communicate seriously about the issues do you think?
LEATHER
I simply think it's quite difficult to see that there is - that you would have this - this information, these images, these ideas and be completely innocent about it, I just think that's a difficult thing to believe.
DIMBLEBY
But you can't - you can't download extremist material without having a glint in your eye, as it were?
LEATHER
It's possible I suppose to conceive of academic reasons for wanting to do this, there may be people in the audience here who would want to do this for academic reasons but I just think it's quite difficult to view this as a completely innocent act. But if the law says that it should be regarded as such it's very important that the rule of law is upheld.
DIMBLEBY
Stephen Twigg.
TWIGG
I think everyone's answer to the question, and mine would be included, demonstrates how difficult this whole area is and I would say in a sense in self criticism having been part of the government there is a tendency in government to react to crises with legislation and legislation is sometimes the correct response but it isn't always. And I think that what we need to do now in taking forward the whole debate on these sorts of questions is far more of an emphasis on winning hearts and minds and perhaps less of an emphasis on the use of legislation. On the specific instance of this case I mean I feel quite similarly to Suzi, I think it's very, very difficult, I wasn't in court, I haven't studied the detail of the case but I think in the light of that being the law it's in some ways a surprising judgement but that's why we are a democratic society, the courts quite rightly decide these things and I completely respect the decision that the court has taken.
DIMBLEBY
Michael Clayson, you asked the question, do you have an answer to it?
CLAYSON
I think like everybody I feel terribly conflicted. I think we do need to respect the fact that the vast majority of our Muslim neighbours are totally law abiding and peaceful people but it worries me sometimes that it's almost as if we forget that two years ago over 50 people died in London and other attempts have been made since to kill other people and there's a balance that needs to be struck and I think it's important we get it the right way.
DIMBLEBY
Would you like the law to be - the 2000 Act to be modified, so that it would be in order to meet what you are saying that it would be actually illegal as with child pornography, which Suzi Leather touched on, make it illegal to download that material?
CLAYSON
I think we need to err on the side of caution. We're a society that's being challenged and we have to protect people.
DIMBLEBY
Thank you. [CLAPPING] We'll go to our next question please.
ROONEY
Sarah Rooney. Does the Olympic spirit extend to protecting human rights?
DIMBLEBY
Shaun Bailey.
BAILEY
I think is ...
DIMBLEBY
Stephen Spielberg in your mind I'm quite sure.
BAILEY
Yeah to Stephen Spielberg and as an individual he's made a stance and I congratulate him on that, having the courage of his convictions. But what I would say - if we continue to disengage with China how do we expect them to move on? China is not a small nation in the corner that we're going to bully into seeing things our way. There's an upper limit to how much we should take from China but when we don't engage, when we boycott their Olympics and we send all these messages across the sea they see it as Western arrogance. And in order to forward the agenda we have to show them how and why they should operate that way - operate the way we do, particularly human rights and some of that is going to need engagement, continually telling the Chinese off will not work, I just don't see it as working. We'll paint them into a corner and they'll quite happily stay there.
DIMBLEBY
So if - if athletes themselves individually decide to boycott or if they decide to exercise what would be here a freedom of expression to protest in Beijing and the Olympics what would you think of that?
BAILEY
If an individual athlete decides not to go that's fine, I think that's your conviction you should do that but it's very easy to sit here in our comfortable Western life and be very lofty about China but I guarantee you continually confronting them [indistinct words] and the Chinese will not respond to embarrassment, if we think we're going to embarrass them into accepting our version of human rights we're wrong, it's not going to happen.
DIMBLEBY
And supporting the Olympic Games couldn't just be seen as a PR operation for China, as opposed to deciding not to confront but simply doing it, says we take you as you are and we have no objection?
BAILEY
No the world's more sophisticated than that. We'll go to the Olympics, we'll do what we do and when China transgress again we'll have whatever confrontation with them we will because why is the Olympics a special thing - if the Olympics weren't there would we be less or more concerned about the human rights - it's not about the Olympics, it's about human rights.
DIMBLEBY
Farzana Shaikh.
SHAIKH
Well again you know a tough one but on this question of a boycott, I mean you know I remember in 1980 it was Britain did boycott the Moscow Olympics in protest against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and at that time - at that time it was felt that you know this was - this was par for the course. But speaking for myself personally I probably wouldn't favour a boycott, I mean like sanctions I feel that they always end up hurting the wrong people. But having said that I don't quite agree with Shaun, I think it is possible to put pressure on the Chinese and I do believe that the Chinese are and can be made to feel embarrassed, I don't - while I wouldn't favour a boycott I mean I don't see why we should necessarily lighten the pressure and continuously keep in the public eye China's very poor human rights record ...
DIMBLEBY
What leads you to your view that you can successfully pressurise China?
SHAIKH
Well I believe that although China gives the impression of a country that is impervious to international criticism it isn't - it isn't actually as insensitive as all that, I've always believed that the Chinese do politics quite differently and they are - they are very likely I believe to be embarrassed by what has happened. They are, after all, seeking some kind of international approval and sanction, I mean they are - they now regard themselves as being in the big league. And there's no reason to continue to believe that you know they would - they would conduct themselves like a pariah state, China has become very much a part of the international establishment.
DIMBLEBY
So if you were yourself an athlete and you were selected for one or other of the teams, the British team, would you boycott it or would you go, given what you've just said?
SHAIKH
Well I wouldn't - I wouldn't boycott it, I would go but like the Dafur group I would probably seize this opportunity to make a speech that I felt might embarrass China. [CLAPPING]
DIMBLEBY
Stephen Twigg.
TWIGG
Since 2005 I've been working with Aegis Trust, which is a genocide prevention charity that's been doing a lot of work on the Darfur question and my main feeling this week is that I think Stephen Spielberg has succeeded in getting the issue of Darfur on to the political agenda. One of my concerns has been that through the last few years where at least 200,000 people in Darfur have lost their lives, two and a half million people displaced from their homes and yet it hasn't featured as high on political debate in this country as I think that level of death merits. And I think China does have a responsibility, they are the main trading partner. I've been involved in talks directly with the Chinese embassy in London to put pressure on them and I welcome what Stephen Spielberg has done this week. That doesn't mean that I'm advocating a general boycott, I think the example from 1980 is a very good one, it wasn't an effective way of putting pressure on the then Soviet Union to change its policy in Afghanistan. I think there are various different way in which different individuals can respond to this. But the main thing is for China to recognise that public opinion, not only in the West Shaun, I mean Shaun talked about sort of Western values and Western arrogance but actually there's passion about this across the globe, not just in the West, and I think if China hears that - Farzana is right - they will respond to that. So the more opportunities there are for that message to be got across globally to China to do something about Darfur the better that that will be. And to come back to the question I think that's absolutely in keeping with the spirit of the Olympics. [CLAPPING]
DIMBLEBY
Dame Suzi Leather.
LEATHER
One of the things that I admire so many charities for including the Aegis Trust is their determination to speak out on behalf of people who have no voice. And it's clear that there is and continues to be tremendous suffering in Darfur, so well down Spielberg, is what I say. I don't think you can separate politics from sport, you particularly can't separate the Olympics from politics, which is at least as much about chauvinism as it is about sport. I tend to think that if countries want the kudos of holding the Games it means they are in the international community, it means they have to listen to what matters to people in the international community. I personally rather hope that there are rather a lot of very polite, very well behaved, very peaceful protests. [CLAPPING]
DIMBLEBY
Let me just ask our audience here informally. I'll give you sort of three options. Should British athletes boycott, should they go but make their criticisms of the Chinese government publicly, as Farzana was just suggesting, or should they just treat sport and politics as if they're separate? Who think that the British athletes should boycott these Olympics in China, would you put your hands up? Who thinks that they should go but make a noise about it when they're there? That is hugely in the majority so far. Who thinks they should just go and do what they do well? That's the second most popular. But way out in front is that they should make their views known when they get there. We'll go to our next question please.
FEARNSIDE
Matthew Fearnside. The American politician Adlai Stevenson once said that democracy cannot be saved by supermen. What hope is there that democracy can be saved for the people of Pakistan?
DIMBLEBY
The election in a very few hours from now. Stephen Twigg.
TWIGG
Well I think it's a very, very tough challenge and I think clearly there are very serious questions over how free and fair the election will be. The election has been much delayed, we had the period of emergency rule. And I think all of us who care about democracy have to hope that there is that freedom and fairness in the election, that the outcome will be respected by the armed forces in that country. And I think one of the big question is where Musharaff will be after these elections and whilst I think we have to treat polls in any country with care and particularly in a country like Pakistan the polls are now pretty clear that the majority of people in Pakistan want to see an end to Musharaff's involvement in politics and I think that would be a positive outcome if that is the will of the people of Pakistan. I think it is a very tough challenge but I hope we do see a really good turnout of people in Pakistan, that there isn't interference, I know that this will be a very highly monitored election, so hopefully that will limit the infringement of freedom and fairness and that whatever democratic outcome there is that government is able to get on with the job of governing Pakistan.
DIMBLEBY
Dr Farzana Shaikh.
SHAIKH
Well I don't think anyone is under any illusion that we are going to be handed democracy in Pakistan as a result of these elections, deeply flawed and extremely controversial. The structures for free, fair and transparent elections simply do not exist at this point in time in Pakistan. In fact the only thing that is transparent about the elections are transparent ballot boxes imported from China. But I think what can be said is that while many in Pakistan remain deeply disenchanted, deeply disillusioned about what these elections will bring there is some expectation that they will shift the political ground enough for Pakistan to begin the process of repairing some of its damaged political institutions.
DIMBLEBY
Is that possible if - Stephen Twigg touched on the very low support that the person has in public polls, 14% or whatever it is - if he emerges through this flawed election process as the leader once again is that possible the outcome that you hoped for - the chink of light that you would like to see?
SHAIKH
Well precisely, I mean that is what is at issue because I think many people no longer believe that what we will see in the next two days on Monday are parliamentary elections in Pakistan. I think what people are going to go out and vote for or think they will be voting in is nothing short of a referendum, a referendum on Musharaff's performance in office. And I think there is a real risk that this referendum will turn against him because there is every sign now that his very political survival is at stake.
DIMBLEBY
And just one more thing. The - we heard a very senior military official, intelligence official, who's just retired - a general who's just retired - who said that they were under instructions to rig the ballot by playing around with the electoral role, by pre-stuffing the votes etc. Not easy to ignore that information from that source.
SHAIKH
Absolutely not, absolutely not and just this morning we've had of course the release of extremely damaging evidence from human rights watch, which showed - well which actually produced a recording of the current attorney general admitting that these elections would be massively rigged, advising prospective parliamentary candidate to forget about putting himself forward as a candidate for the Pakistan's People's Party and Sharif's faction of the Muslim League but rather to plump for the pro-government Pakistan Muslim League Q because that is the party that he believed was going to be able to rig sufficiently in order to ensure the best chances for this candidate. Damning evidence if ever there was any.
DIMBLEBY
It's a pretty bleak prospect. Musharaff has said that after the election he will forbid the protests or demonstrations. What do you foresee if he somehow through these ruses that you've been explaining - and there's a specialist on Pakistan - what would happen if he tried to do that?
SHAIKH
Well I think there is a very serious risk of mass unrest and agitation in Pakistan at the moment. I think the opposition parties are expecting, despite allegations and suspicions that these elections are being rigged, to be returned with significant majorities. The question is what sort of majorities do these parties expect? Years of military and authoritarian rule in Pakistan have seriously distorted the electoral market in Pakistan and it's very difficult to predict the outcome of these elections. But I think certainly speaking for the former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif who I think sees himself very much as a contender for Prime Ministership now that Bhutto is out of the way, he is definitely banking on these - on these elections to be completely flawed, he's seeking to delegitimise these elections and probably call his protestors out on the street in an effort to call new elections that will be deemed to be fairer and freer.
DIMBLEBY
Shaun Bailey.
BAILEY
I'm no expert on Pakistan but for me it sounds like they're on a journey. Let's just hope this is the first step in them taking a move towards democracy because the picture sounds pretty bleak. I originally heard that there was 3,000 mediators, observers, there and I thought well maybe this will be fair and open. But the doctor here has given us the impression that's far from the truth.
SHAIKH
It's only - it's only 1,500 observers of which 500 are journalists because the government restricted the number of observers entering Pakistan to monitor these elections. And those that are there in fact have very heavy restrictions on which constituencies precisely they can visit, they need prior permission and it's not always forthcoming.
BAILEY
Well again I could only say let's hope this is a first step, let's hope that armed forces don't come out heavy handedly after the ballots have come in, let's just see.
DIMBLEBY
Suzi Leather.
LEATHER
I was struck listening to Farzana how important academic expertise and academic freedom is and we are [CLAPPING]... we are extraordinarily fortunate I think in this country to be able to attract academics of this calibre to help us understand complexities which otherwise I think it's quite difficult - difficult sometimes through the media to get to the sort of truth that Farzana is talking about. It's obviously foolish to be very optimistic about what will happen next week and of course we have before us what happened in Kenya only very recently. My judgement is that at best this is the start of a very, very long process and I think the difficulty of moving from military rule, from zero sum politics, to true multi-party democracies is inevitably a very long and intricate process.
DIMBLEBY
Thank you. If you have thoughts about that then Any Answers, the number is 08700 100 444 after the Saturday broadcast of Any Questions. And the e-mail address any.answers@bbc.co.uk, in which case, if you do on this subject, phone us or e-mail us you'll be making your own contribution, as it were, to Radio 4's Uncovering Pakistan season. Our next question.
WHITE
Sue White. How does the panel think universities can encourage more applications from less well off candidates?
DIMBLEBY
Shaun Bailey.
BAILEY
I'm a firm believer that academic achievement starts at home. I come from a community that's let's just say not performance spectacular when it comes to academics and I sometimes think some of the government's plans for schools and the like have actually stopped people coming to university. For instance I worked at a comprehensive school where we did combined science, which probably meant I would have got into this university if I applied, it's little things like that. And also I think when we talk about children, education, we're slowly going down the route of paying them to study and we shouldn't pay children to do things that are for their own benefit and that should be the norm. I think we should encourage them, we should them that studying is a lifelong vocation, it's fun. I often say to the people that I work with - some of my boys are listening to this programme tonight and it's an education for them, but make no mistake it's an education for them. And I always say to them remember education is not just about you getting a job because our schools have turned into sausage factors - they're about the exam results, there's no critical thinking there, they train them to pass exams. [CLAPPING] And I like to make the point to my boys that you should educate yourself because you'll live longer, you'll be happier and you'll be healthier. We should do a lot more to develop the individual, not just only their academic prowess. When I got to university I was quite stunned at what went on because I went to a sausage factory school, as far as I'm concerned, you know all the societies and all the rest of that, that's as an important a part of your university education as any of the academics. [CLAPPING]
DIMBLEBY
Thank you. Suzi Leather.
LEATHER
Well I do think that the problem of under representation of young people from less well off backgrounds is hugely important. I'm pleased that the proportion of children from lower class backgrounds coming to university has risen in the last 10 years. But much much more needs to be done clearly. Actually I do think sometimes it's a good thing to pay kids to go to university, we have to ensure that there are not financial barriers to children from poorer families going to university. And I think the kind of example that this university is setting, which this October was given £2.2 million in bursaries to children from poorer families to ensure that they can benefit from the kind of quality of education here is terribly important. But look the real problem is what's happening in our schools because overall only forty six and a half percent of our children are getting five GCSEs A-C. And if you look at kids on free school meals it's only 22%. And it's really, really important that we look at what is happening in schools. And the problem of relative deprivation happens very, very young so the kind of advantage that the brightest kids, at three year olds even, from poor backgrounds they've lost that advantage by the time they're seven when the less bright better off kids have already overtaken them. So we have to put the effort in early, we have to encourage kids to stay on at school after 16. We know that if kids do do A Levels the vast majority of them are able to go to university but the fact that we have the lowest participation or one of the lowest participations of 17 year olds in education of all OECD countries I think is something to be ashamed of - to feel shameful of.
DIMBLEBY
Stephen.
TWIGG
Jonathan, I was recently at Cardinal Heenan's secondary school in Liverpool preparing for their industry day, where they will be giving good advice to their 13 and 14 year olds about the different career options, for some it'll be university, for others it won't be university. I think universities have a big role to play, some universities do much better on this than others, so clearly there is good practice that can be learned from one university to another. But I do in the end agree with what Suzi and Shaun have said - it is down to schools. Some schools do really well on this, others do not. And if we're going to break the link between poverty and class background and how well people do in education later on the school is probably the most important place for achieving that.
DIMBLEBY
Farzana.
SHAIKH
Yes, well obviously - I mean education is an expensive proposition, I mean there's no secret about that. But what intrigues me is that even the government has moved to make available, for example, bursaries for under privileged the kids the process of application is so bureaucratic, so tendious [CLAPPING] I mean I know from [indistinct word] my own son that most kids are simply discouraged, I mean I don't blame them.
DIMBLEBY
I'm going to - we can easily continue that but I just want to squeeze in one more question.
FERNEY
Gemma Ferney. If any of the panel had received a Valentine card from someone in the public eye from whom would they have liked to have received it?
DIMBLEBY
Suzi's looking to the heavens. Suzi Leather.
LEATHER
My husband is sitting in the third row.
DIMBLEBY
He's very much in the public eye right here.
BAILEY
My wife is listening in.
DIMBLEBY
Farzana.
SHAIKH
Ooh ...
DIMBLEBY
Someone in the public eye.
SHAIKH
Someone in the public eye.
DIMBLEBY
Who would you liked to have received it from, it doesn't have to imply anything that you wouldn't want it to imply. It would have been nice to get something from this person.
SHAIKH
Well I don't know about - about a Valentine but I would like to receive a sweet word from Nelson Mandela, yes.
DIMBLEBY
Very well.
TWIGG
This question's always the horrible one, isn't it, the last question and I think ..
DIMBLEBY
And you can't say Michael Portillo either.
TWIGG
That's a good idea. My partner's probably also listening at home so I'd better be careful, that might start a few rumours going so I'd better not say Michael Portillo. But I think I'm going to avoid that one as well.
DIMBLEBY
Okay, that's the end of the programme I'm afraid, from Exeter, remember Any Answers. From here in the University of Exeter, politics department, goodbye. [CLAPPING]
DIMBLEBY
|
|
