0:02

This is a global player original

0:04

podcast. I understand the

0:07

anger at home, but that she's lost her

0:09

passport. If she was white

0:11

and she was called Sharon from Manchester and

0:13

she'd done something like that, it wouldn't even occur

0:15

to the government. To take the passport off somebody

0:17

who was obviously British. So I'm

0:19

deeply uncomfortable about

0:21

the lack of the ability for rehabilitation and

0:24

repentance If we are a Christian country,

0:26

we should do that. And then I think

0:28

the way we treat people from, well,

0:30

non white backgrounds, you say, in the UK,

0:32

this is a reminder, Alex, stream

0:34

one that we are all equal and

0:37

that some people's citizenship apparently isn't

0:39

as secure as

0:40

others. That's Tim Farron, the

0:42

former liberal democrat leader in

0:44

a wider discussion about faith and

0:46

politics, but he was, of course, talking about

0:49

Shamima Begum. Who was fifteen

0:51

when she left Bethnall Green in East

0:53

London to join Islamic

0:55

State in Syria, and the

0:57

decision has come today. That she will

0:59

remain stripped of her citizenship,

1:02

and in other words, is now stateless.

1:05

Welcome. To the newsagents.

1:10

The newsagents. It's

1:12

John. It's Emily. And it's Lewis. And

1:14

we are in newsagents HQ.

1:17

And we're gonna discuss the implications and

1:19

the politics of the decision to

1:21

keep Shamima Begum stripped

1:24

of her UK citizenship. Just

1:27

one thing that you just need to underline with

1:29

this case is how phenomenally

1:32

young she still is. She

1:34

was fifteen when she

1:37

left to go to join Islamic

1:39

State and is still only

1:42

twenty three years

1:43

old, still a

1:45

young person. Yeah. Her

1:47

legal team had basically

1:50

argued that it was an

1:52

extraordinary and an extreme

1:54

decision. To strip her of

1:56

citizenship, which they say, and,

1:59

I guess, is fact, condemns her to

2:01

exile for life. Exile from Britain

2:03

at least anyway. And

2:06

they believe it should be overturned because

2:08

she was a victim of trafficking. So

2:10

I suppose somewhere at the heart of

2:12

this whole debate is a

2:14

question of how we prioritize national

2:17

security and all the implications of

2:20

terrorism that that brings, which we are

2:22

not wearing lightly, and

2:24

how we deal with minors, with

2:27

our children, with British children

2:29

who might have done appalling,

2:32

ignorant, rash, stupid

2:34

things under the age

2:36

of sixteen. Think we should just

2:39

make clear in terms of what

2:41

happened today. Special Immigration Appeals

2:43

Commission, SaiaQ, said

2:45

that there was, as Emily's already alluded

2:48

to, credible suspicion that Begum

2:50

had been trafficked for sexual exploitation

2:53

They also said that as a result, it's entirely

2:55

possible that UK authorities had not

2:57

fulfilled their statutory obligations in

3:00

protecting her as a minor

3:02

as a child from trafficking and potential

3:04

sexual exploitation. But nonetheless,

3:07

under the law as it stands, the home

3:09

secretary at the time Saudi Javid

3:12

did have wide ranging power

3:14

to deprive someone of their British citizenship,

3:16

their passport, and thereby render them status.

3:19

So he had not done anything against

3:22

the law, which is the thing that they were being

3:24

asked to adjudicate. But it does raise two

3:26

big questions. Right? Like one, as you alluded

3:28

to Emily, What age do we hold?

3:31

Young people mine is responsible for things.

3:33

Bear in mind like the age of majority

3:35

or the age of responsibility for crime

3:37

in England and Wales is just ten. Which is

3:40

very low by international standards

3:42

and also whether it is just appropriate

3:45

that the British state can

3:47

remove

3:48

people citizenship, and

3:51

do so, thereby rendering them stakeholders

3:53

in a way that many other countries say, like

3:55

the United States, simply cannot do

3:57

by law. For transparency, we

3:59

were discussing this this morning and trying to

4:01

work out if this was, as her lawyer say, an

4:04

exceptional or an extraordinary case, And

4:06

the weird thing is it isn't

4:08

Britain. The UK is

4:10

actually the worst, or you could

4:12

say, the highest country after Bahrain.

4:15

For stripping people of their citizenship. And

4:18

it looks like over the last thirteen

4:20

years since twenty ten, the

4:22

UK has stripped two hundred and twelve

4:24

people of their citizenship. Bahrain,

4:27

I think, has double that number, but we are

4:29

second after Bahrain. So

4:31

just pause for a second before thinking this

4:34

is a very odd thing to

4:35

do. This is something that we do do.

4:37

The argument that has been used

4:40

is that, well, she could go to

4:42

Bangladesh because that's where her family

4:44

came from and she would get a Bangladesh passport.

4:47

In twenty nineteen, the

4:49

foreign minister said that

4:51

she could face the death penalty if

4:54

she was to enter Bangladesh

4:56

because of joining Islamic state.

4:58

Now, okay, people might say, well, she

5:00

deserves the death penalty, but

5:03

the British state would

5:05

not extradite to the

5:07

United States. Anyone

5:09

suspected of the most heinous crime

5:12

if the United States said

5:14

we might carry out capital punishment

5:16

on this person. It's a deal breaker.

5:19

So The British authorities always

5:21

seek assurances before anyone

5:24

is extradited to the US, that

5:26

they wouldn't die. They wouldn't die at the

5:28

hands of the state. Yet,

5:31

that is perfectly possible in

5:33

the case of Shamima

5:34

Begum. Mhmm. If she ends up in Bangladesh,

5:37

Let's just remind you of her story and

5:39

indeed hear her own voice in this

5:41

because she disappeared when

5:44

she was fifteen crossed the border

5:46

from Turkey to Syria, and

5:48

no one really heard from her or her

5:50

two school girlfriends. Until

5:54

a Times journalist, Anthony Lloyd,

5:56

discovered her as an extraordinary moment.

5:59

He sort of came across her, discovered her,

6:01

in a refugee camp in Syria in

6:03

twenty nineteen. And

6:06

shortly after that, she

6:08

gave an interview to Sky News

6:10

where she was asked about

6:12

the things that she had seen, the

6:15

crimes that she had seen, ISIS

6:17

commit, and how she felt about her own

6:19

actions.

6:20

Did you know what Islamic

6:23

State were doing when

6:25

you left for

6:26

Syria? Because they had be

6:28

headed to people. They were executions. Yeah.

6:31

I knew about those things, and I was I

6:34

was okay with it after

6:36

that because, you know, I won't I

6:39

I started becoming really just really just

6:41

just before I left, you know,

6:44

from Waiha that islamically that

6:46

is all allowed so I was okay

6:48

with

6:49

it. You didn't question that. Oh,

6:52

no. There's a

6:54

struggle going on in the UK

6:56

now at home about whether

7:00

you should be allowed to come home. Or

7:02

not? You know that either.

7:04

Okay. What is what

7:06

are your feelings about that? I

7:09

think a lot of people should have, like, some towards

7:11

me from everything I've been from, you know, when

7:13

I or III didn't know what

7:15

I was getting into when I left, and

7:17

I just was hoping that

7:19

maybe me. For the sake of me and my

7:21

child, let me come back.

7:24

Because I can't live in this camp

7:25

forever. It's not really possible.

7:30

The head of the foreign intelligence

7:32

services in the UK says

7:34

people like you are potentially very

7:36

dangerous

7:37

address? What would you say to him?

7:39

They don't have any evidence against me doing anything

7:41

dangerous. When I went to Syria, I was just

7:44

housewife and I four years, stayed

7:46

at home, took care of my apartment, took care of my kids. I

7:48

never did anything dangerous.

7:50

I never made top can. I never encouraged

7:53

people become serious so

7:56

it only approved that I did anything

7:58

that is dangerous. That was

8:00

Shamima Bacon when she was nineteen years

8:03

old. In the video she's seen

8:05

wearing a hijab, she's in full Islamic

8:07

dress. In later interviews, you

8:10

see her with sunglasses on her

8:12

head, and it all looks sort of as if

8:14

it has been a PR adviser has somehow

8:16

kind of glossed the image to make

8:18

her more acceptable. But I think that

8:21

however she comes across is irrelevant.

8:23

It's the fact that she was fifteen years old.

8:26

When she left, this is her

8:28

a bit later on. Speaking to

8:31

the BBC on the

8:32

podcast, I'm not a monster. I'm

8:34

curious about how you think people

8:36

perceive you. As as

8:38

a danger, as a risk, as a potential

8:41

risk to them,

8:43

to their safety, to their way of living.

8:46

I'm not a bad person. I'm not this

8:48

person that they think I am being

8:50

perceived as in the media. You know, I'm

8:53

just so much more than ISIS and I'm so

8:55

much more than everything that I've been through.

8:57

But do you understand why society

8:59

has so much anger towards you? Yes.

9:02

I do understand. But it's I don't think it's actually

9:04

towards me. I think it's towards ISIS, but

9:07

when they think of ISIS, they think of me because

9:09

I've been put on the media so much. But

9:11

they only did that because you chose to go to

9:13

ISIS. But what was there to obsess

9:15

over? We went to ISIS. That was it. It was over.

9:18

It was over and done with. One more is that to say,

9:20

like, they just wanted to continue the story because

9:22

it was a story It was the big

9:24

story. But you do accept that you did

9:26

join a terrorist group. Yes.

9:30

I did. I suppose

9:32

that's that's the uncomfortable thing, right, in

9:34

terms of thinking about the politics,

9:36

which is has this woman

9:39

than a girl, still very young woman, essentially

9:43

Begum a lightning

9:45

rod for this. She's become the face

9:47

of this and therefore her case

9:50

is being, has been treated politically

9:53

in a way that perhaps it wouldn't. If

9:55

her case were not so well known, if she

9:57

hadn't been in virtually every paper

9:59

for year after year after year. And that's

10:01

that's uncomfortable. And it is also potentially

10:03

uncomfortable alluding to what we've already heard,

10:06

Tim Farrance, which is, you know, if she

10:08

were white, if she were a different person,

10:10

how she might have been

10:11

treated. And I'm not saying there's a right or wrong answer about

10:13

that, but it does pose uncomfortable questions

10:16

about how the politics

10:17

usually is about comfortable. Yeah. When

10:19

I first came into journalism, we used to talk about

10:21

child prostitutes. As if that was a

10:23

thing. Nobody uses that phrase

10:26

now. They understand that if

10:28

you are involved in prostitution as a

10:30

child, you are abused. You're a

10:32

victim of pedophilia. Now, I'm not

10:34

equating that with what Shamima did

10:36

because clearly there was agency in

10:39

her choice. And yet,

10:41

when she talks about becoming religious

10:44

just before she went, when she talks

10:46

about her cases having been moved

10:48

ahead of her already, there was

10:50

somebody behind this. There were people

10:52

behind this. There was a radicalization of

10:55

sorts behind this. And either we think it's

10:57

really important to protect our

11:00

kids from online harm. We're always talking

11:02

about online harm to protect our kids

11:04

from whatever propaganda is out

11:06

there that is dealing with their minds that is turning

11:08

them into thinkers of a certain type that

11:11

if this was Andrew Tate that was behind this,

11:13

we'd be going, this is appalling. Right?

11:15

This is he's convinced this woman

11:17

that she should be victim and a housewife in

11:19

an Islamic

11:20

state. But because we don't know who's behind

11:22

it, somehow it all becomes her fault.

11:24

That's why now she becomes punished. Right. I'm

11:26

gonna do a bit of what aboutism that I would

11:28

normally call out and say, oh, that's just what aboutism.

11:31

But last week, we had the

11:33

conviction of David Valentine's

11:35

Smith, the guard at the British

11:37

embassy, for giving secrets

11:39

to the Russians,

11:41

to Putin. To Putin's state, and

11:43

revealing and possibly endangering

11:46

British agents who are doing

11:48

work and giving confidential details

11:51

about individuals who are working at the

11:53

British embassy to the Russians. He

11:55

has been sentenced to thirteen years in

11:57

prison, probably with good behavior

11:59

that will become six and he would

12:01

be free to go and continue to be a British

12:03

citizen. Now, he was a fully grown

12:06

man who knew exactly what he

12:08

was doing. If we're using the word agency,

12:11

This man had agency and

12:13

made his choices to try

12:15

to help the Russian state and

12:17

betray his own country. And make money

12:19

from it and make money from it. There's no question that

12:21

he's going to lose his citizenship. I

12:23

mean, you might find it difficult to get a job. You might

12:25

find it difficult. To get a credit card. He

12:27

might find life a bit

12:28

uncomfortable, but he'll be able to carry on

12:30

living in the UK without any

12:32

interruption. But that's the thing, right, is that In

12:35

order to justify this, I mean, there are three reasons

12:37

according to the law that the home secretary can make

12:39

this decision. If it's for the public good and

12:41

it doesn't make them stateless, if they obtain

12:43

their citizenship through fraud, all

12:45

their actions can harm UK interests

12:48

and they could claim citizenship elsewhere. The question

12:50

is, well, it could be the first. Well, the point

12:52

is we don't know who

12:54

she's still connected to that could

12:56

still be controlling her

12:57

mind, could still be infiltrating what she does.

12:59

And I guess that is part of the discussion.

13:01

Exactly. And whether or not those

13:03

things still apply. Right. And whether or

13:06

not if she did just come back to the

13:08

UK, she could be punished accordingly. She

13:10

could go to prison, she could be rehabilitated, and

13:12

all of those things and she would face the consequences

13:15

of her actions. The question I suppose, is

13:17

this is that whether that process isn't

13:19

being allowed to take place fundamentally

13:21

for political

13:22

reasons. Yeah. And that is uncomfortable. think it's absolutely

13:25

right that if she comes back to the UK that she

13:27

faces the full force of the law for

13:29

crimes that she may have committed because no one

13:31

is above the law, And as you say, age

13:33

of criminal responsibility in this country

13:35

is set much younger than that. But that's

13:37

not the same as saying, she cannot

13:39

come back at all. I think the question

13:41

you regularly use is the right one because I cannot

13:44

believe. Well, let me imagine the conversation

13:46

that takes place in the home office with

13:48

the home secretary and political

13:49

advisers. Do we lose any votes?

13:52

Stripping her of her citizenship? No. Probably

13:54

not. I think it will probably be

13:55

quite popular out the country.

13:57

People out of country, it shows up. There's just

13:59

labor on this one because this is quite an interesting

14:01

one for labor. You've heard an unambiguous

14:04

response from a former livedem leader. Which

14:06

is this is racism, essentially, and

14:08

this is inhumane, and this is unchristian. Labor

14:12

want to be on the side of law and order and they want

14:14

to be on side of a party that is govern

14:16

ready. Should we

14:17

say, where do they sit on this? Well,

14:19

the interesting thing is that, I mean, I'm

14:21

sure like you. I get labor press

14:23

statements every every half an hour

14:25

on my phone. I've seen nothing since

14:27

the judgment. It didn't come up at Prime

14:29

Minister's questions at all from

14:32

any Labour MP. I think

14:34

the Labour Party will try and hide behind

14:36

this as, oh, it's

14:38

a legal

14:39

decision. It's the courts have ruled

14:41

not one for us. But this is goes much

14:43

wider than just her. Right? Because the point is,

14:45

as Emily's already says, hundreds of people

14:48

have lost their citizenship at the home

14:50

secretary's discretion that was made initially

14:52

made easier in two thousand and six under the Labour

14:55

government. It's just been made easier again

14:57

by the nationality in Borders bill, which

14:59

passed on the Pretty Patel in twenty twenty one.

15:02

So this is an issue which could

15:04

come back repeatedly and that was even

15:07

a case of by a year or so ago

15:09

of a man who was stripped off

15:11

his citizenship by the home office and they had

15:13

to give it him back As result of

15:15

legal action and so on, and his lawyer

15:17

said that the home office had never provided

15:19

any evidence as to why it had happened in

15:22

the first

15:22

place. So this is a murky bit of the law

15:24

which could resurrect and come back in months

15:26

and years to come. Let's hear now from her lawyer,

15:28

Daniel Forner, after today's judgment.

15:31

In terms of the Eagle five,

15:33

there's nowhere near over, we're not

15:35

going to go into details about exactly what that means

15:37

at this stage. I think what else this

15:40

judgment calls out for them is some

15:42

some courage and some leadership from the home secretary

15:44

to look at this case of fresh in light

15:46

of the clear and compelling

15:49

effective findings that this call has made.

15:51

Thank you. With that But we do really appreciate it.

15:53

We're going to challenge the decision. Gotta challenge

15:55

the decision but ask the home secretary to

15:57

rethink. What are the legal grounds for

16:00

a challenge? Because Doesn't

16:00

sound like he knows them because he was

16:02

Because it was very it was thought there's a rather

16:04

woolly statement there from the the lawyer acting

16:06

for her. think that we're waiting a long time for the royal

16:08

government to change her mind on this one, unless

16:11

she goes. But

16:12

that's for another day. Another day. We're gonna

16:14

take a pause here. Coming up, we're gonna be

16:16

discussing faith and politics

16:19

and whether there is room for faith

16:21

in politics. We're looking at case of

16:24

Kate Forbes and her Christian beliefs and whether

16:26

she can lead the SMP party in Scotland.

16:35

This

16:37

is the newsagents.

16:41

Welcome back as we have been talking about

16:44

and you have been reading about and watching, there

16:46

is a leadership contest going on in Scotland

16:48

for who should run the S and P and

16:50

lead the Scottish government. And a woman

16:52

called Kate Forbes three or four days ago

16:55

was the definite front runner. And suddenly,

16:57

even though it was obvious for weeks

16:59

and years. People have

17:01

started talking about her rather socially conservative

17:04

views, and now they are moving against

17:07

her. When she's high up, you know, she's already

17:09

in the finance ministry, in the government. She

17:11

has been in the party virtually at the top of the tree

17:13

already. Lewis, where do

17:15

you think things are? And why

17:17

have people reacted now?

17:20

When everybody knew what

17:22

her positions were for a long time

17:24

before. Well, suppose there is a difference

17:26

between being the kind of queen over the water

17:28

in this case. As Finance

17:31

Minister. And then suddenly, in a race that

17:33

no one thought was coming now, suddenly,

17:36

potentially, first minister in a

17:38

month's time. And the other thing said about this is that

17:40

although she's been a much fancied

17:42

replacement to Nicholas Durgin for a while

17:44

She still is very

17:44

young. She's thirty three. She hasn't been on the political

17:47

horizon's been me too old.

17:49

Younger than you, Lewis.

17:50

She's even in the

17:51

same age, I think. Are you thinking that

17:53

I'm older than her? Yeah. Well, after

17:55

being with you too for six months, quite frankly. It's

17:58

like doggy is his

17:58

podcast.

17:59

We've helped you grow. Yeah. In a sense,

18:01

So her rise has been meteoric. And

18:04

we should say even when the rumors

18:06

were whirling that, know, sturgeon might go at some

18:08

point, even then people were saying her

18:10

faith could be a problem. So this is something that,

18:12

you know, she's been marked for one of her expression

18:14

for this as a potential problem. And

18:16

we should, you know, remind people She's

18:19

part of the free church of Scotland. Nicknamed

18:21

the We Freeze. don't like that term. It's historic

18:23

term, but it's basically it was an evangelical breakaway

18:26

in the eighteen forties from the main church

18:28

of Scotland. And they are evangelical

18:31

and they have very very hardcore

18:33

socially conservative. Yeah. So

18:35

they're against same sex marriage. They're against abortion

18:38

rights. They're in support of conversion therapy.

18:40

They've said before that Scotland is currently on

18:42

the highway to hell as a result of its

18:44

currently socially more liberal views.

18:47

Ian Blackford, who is the former Westminster

18:50

SMP, leader also credits mentally

18:52

enough the m p for the same constituency as

18:54

she is the MS. P four also a

18:56

member of the church. He was called on by

18:58

the church to repent for

19:01

the way that he had voted despite the fact he was

19:03

a member of the church. And I think

19:05

that this difficult thing ultimately for Forbes,

19:07

we can get into a discussion about whether it's possible

19:09

to have these views and be in politics at

19:11

that level. I think the difficulty for Forbes

19:13

is that Forbes is potentially coming

19:15

in as the replacement

19:18

to possibly the most socially liberal

19:20

for want of better expression progressive political

19:23

leader in Europe. On the very most socially

19:25

liberal in Western Europe. And she would

19:27

become at a stroke. Actually in terms of

19:29

her private views, however she would vote in terms

19:31

of policy, but in terms of her private views,

19:34

would become one of the most socially conservative

19:36

leaders in Western Europe. It's kind of like DUP

19:39

plus, and she would be doing that

19:41

in a country which has become much more

19:43

socially liberal over the last twenty years

19:46

and a party which itself has become

19:48

much more socially liberal Those two things

19:50

just don't really map on to each

19:52

other. And so that is why she's finding

19:54

difficulty right now. I

19:56

totally hear that. Except the

19:59

parting words from Nicholas Durgin

20:01

was a recognition of the people

20:03

that she can't reach and Scotland, the

20:06

people that she could not get to with the

20:08

independence argument.

20:11

And I wonder whether forbes

20:13

is seen. As the person who

20:15

might be able to cross the divide, who

20:17

might be able to reach people of

20:19

a Christian Valley, people of a Presbyterian background

20:22

people who are more socially conservative, Nicholas

20:24

Durgin became synonymous with too

20:26

progressive. Think of the telegraph headlines

20:29

where as she said herself, she sort of made things

20:31

too top toxic for her to be taken

20:33

out of the argument she was trying to

20:35

make, and it is possible that,

20:37

yes, the MSPs don't really like

20:39

Forbes. The progressive journalist

20:42

don't really like Forbes, but there is a constituency

20:44

which she can find amongst members

20:46

or potential members in

20:48

Scotland. Problem is, is that

20:50

given how socially liberal Scotland has

20:52

become, you potentially risk hemorrhaging in an

20:54

almost number of votes. To gain relatively

20:56

few.

20:57

The other side. And the wider problem is this. One

20:59

of Nicholas Durgin's great triumphs and the S and P's

21:01

great triumphs actually has been over the last

21:03

ten years and Brexit and the tourism

21:05

and all sorts of things have helped them along this journey. But

21:07

what they managed to do is basically make

21:10

Scottish nationalism into a

21:12

unequivocally or perceived to be a progressive

21:14

force. Never used to be perceived that way. It was often

21:16

perceived as a regressive force, one that

21:18

was insular, closed minded. Sort

21:21

of wanting to be smaller. What they have done

21:23

is associate nationalism as being a

21:25

progressive, civic nationalism. To

21:27

put Forbes in, and you give labor the opportunity

21:30

to see that weakness, that vulnerability they

21:32

could say aha, that is no longer the case and

21:34

you couple that with the fact, by the way that Forbes

21:36

is also not just more right wing on socialist

21:38

issues, but on economic issues as well.

21:40

You know, Nicholas Sturges have died in a war, social

21:42

democrat. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever. If

21:45

she weren't SMP, she would be labor. There

21:47

was a much greater question mark about that.

21:49

She about with

21:50

Forbes. She is more economically conservative. So

21:52

you give those two big -- Yeah.

21:54

-- open. They're in a country that has a terrible

21:56

health service -- Yeah. -- and a terrible record on

21:58

education. Who's to say they're not

22:00

looking for something that is a bit more

22:03

economically conservative in how she is

22:05

prepared spend

22:06

money. But it's not where the SMP coalition isn't there.

22:08

Right? That's the problem. What's interesting is that if

22:10

you go back thirty years, The SMP

22:12

were known as the Triton Tourists.

22:13

Yeah.

22:14

Because it wasn't progressive in

22:16

the inner cities who were voting SMP

22:18

It was people out in the countryside in

22:20

beautiful areas of Scotland -- Mhmm.

22:22

-- who thought that they ought to be Scottish independents, but

22:25

they were essentially conservative voters.

22:27

They just preferred the SMP and they didn't like

22:29

Margaret

22:30

Thatcher. There's there's been a lot of talk in the last

22:32

twenty four hours that it's impossible to

22:34

sort of be a Christian in politics. These days

22:36

and have those who I I kind of feel that that's

22:38

sort of off the mark. think the point is

22:40

actually that if Saesad Khan was

22:42

saying that or Hamzah Youssef was saying that it

22:44

was a Muslim. I think they would be having this

22:46

problem as well. The point is is

22:48

that they are saying, well, this might be my private faith,

22:50

but look, in Sydney Khan's case, for example, I voted for

22:52

equal marriage. Hand the use of felt

22:54

comfortable with equal marriage. And I think

22:56

it's totally legitimate for voters to turn around

22:58

and say, of course, you're totally entitled to your religious

23:00

views. But ultimately, you're gonna be

23:02

the leader and first minister of this country, and

23:05

I want to know what your instincts are about

23:07

me or about my friends or about these issues.

23:09

Because I need the right party for your

23:11

own views. Yeah. And I'm not comfortable with your instincts

23:13

on it. However, you would vote on all of those

23:15

issues. Well, that is a great

23:17

place to break because In a moment, we're

23:19

gonna talk to Tim Farron, the former

23:21

leader of the liberal democrats, whose faith

23:24

became a problem to him remaining

23:26

leader of his party.

23:36

This is the newsagents.

23:41

Welcome back, and we're staying with the subject,

23:43

but hopefully, in a way that we

23:45

can elongate it and talk about it a

23:47

bit more profoundly because we've got Tim

23:49

Faron with us in the studio. He's the

23:52

former Libdem leader. And

23:54

a Christian. And think it's fair to say or

23:57

I'm gonna ask you to. Is it fair to say

23:59

that it was your Christianity

24:02

or the questions that surrounded your

24:04

position on Christian issues

24:06

like gay marriage. That eventually

24:09

made you feel you couldn't stay in

24:11

the

24:11

job. So first of all, if anybody because no one else

24:13

is gonna make the case for me being an even

24:15

vaguely average leader other than me. But we

24:17

had a good election result comparatively. We've

24:19

gone down from eight and up to twelve, so we had

24:22

a a gain of seats in twenty seventeen. But

24:24

the experience I I had as leader I

24:26

think a lot of it down to my lack of wisdom. I

24:29

think people could have handled it far better than I

24:31

did, but I got to the view that I'm either

24:33

going to carry on being pursued as to what

24:35

my theology and what I think my faith

24:37

tells me, and on one hand,

24:39

and I have to be butting away those questions,

24:41

therefore, be a terrible lived embleed because it's

24:44

almost like you're only advertising holding

24:46

being vandalized all the time and not

24:48

the message you want to get across. Or

24:50

I'd have to kind of present it's only just a

24:52

minor kind of coach part of my life,

24:54

which would be totally dishonest. So be a

24:56

crap Christian, be a crap leader. I thought these

24:58

aren't bad choices. There is a third choice,

25:00

which is to walk away from it, which I'm absolutely

25:03

a piece of having done. I'm very

25:05

careful not to complain about the

25:07

questions I was

25:08

asked. I say a lot of it is down to my

25:10

lack of wisdom, but I do or if

25:12

you just talk

25:13

about that, then what would you have said differently?

25:15

Well, I'm I'm I'm not sure, except that

25:17

I think that there's a value in

25:20

how Kate Forbes has chosen be very straightforward

25:22

about it. It might finish her off. It might finish

25:24

her off. But I think what you cannot

25:26

accuse Kate Forbes of is being

25:28

slippery. And so I think that's a lesson.

25:31

There are ways of deflecting. I think, you know, the

25:33

thought that people believe uncomfortable

25:35

things that the bible teaches and they do

25:37

it with relish because they just don't like

25:39

minorities. But it might be true for some people.

25:41

It's definitely not true for me. And so

25:43

what you don't get is the opportunity to explain

25:46

why you believe in Jesus, basically. Tim,

25:48

I loved the candor in which you said you felt you

25:50

had a choice between being a

25:53

a crap leader or a crap Christian. Yeah.

25:55

Could you be a good leader

25:57

and a good Christian? Because that because that

26:00

seems to me the nub

26:02

of what's happening with Kate Forbes

26:03

now, a wiser person than Tim and absolutely

26:06

could. And think it is possible. I think it's very

26:08

important in all this that we don't, and I know

26:10

this is not where you guys are coming from, but

26:12

there is certainly part of the media that loves

26:14

this because it's all about cancel culture. And

26:16

the crucial thing for us to remember, first of all,

26:18

you know, I know it's only the liberal democrats, but

26:21

I did get to be the leader of them. You got Kate

26:23

Forbes in the running to be first minister of

26:25

Scotland. There are plenty of people in politics

26:27

who are Christians if who've reached a relatively high

26:29

level. So the idea that we're excluded from the public

26:32

square, I think, is not true. I also think

26:34

Christians need to be very careful because

26:36

Christianity is countercultural in every

26:38

single generation it's meant to be.

26:40

And so, you know, we're always gonna rub up against

26:42

the culture. And our response to

26:45

those occasions where it is uncomfortable is

26:47

not to get shouting and whiny about being

26:49

canceled. It's to turn the other cheek and model

26:51

a kind of kindness and a grace that perhaps others

26:54

don't. I don't

26:54

think people are talking about cancel culture. think

26:57

And I'm sure I can. No. I mean, I wanna

26:59

take that

26:59

out of the house. From

27:00

some quarters. Yeah. I'm just worried that that

27:02

makes it sound like this is about

27:04

trying to shut down the argument. But I think what we're

27:06

trying to do is unpack that argument

27:09

at its heart about whether you can

27:11

believe some thing as a person

27:13

--

27:14

Mhmm. -- that would not impact

27:16

what you do as a legislator. And

27:18

on the one hand, I think we can say, yeah, you can

27:21

have a belief think the phrase is, you know, a belief

27:23

humbly held. It could be a private belief.

27:25

And think that was how Nick Legg

27:27

had described you as

27:28

saying, look, these are private beliefs. But

27:30

when you're a legislator. Does he

27:32

have an impact? Where does that? So this is Ross. And

27:34

she just said okay. Yeah. She said I

27:37

would stand by, gay marriage.

27:39

I would back it to the hilt, but

27:41

she wouldn't have put it

27:44

in as a

27:45

law. If she had been leader. So

27:47

and I I did feel free

27:48

to encourage in the comments. But I think that

27:50

the here's the thing. So what you say, there's there's

27:52

two sides of this, and they may be compatible, actually.

27:55

So first of all, I absolutely very,

27:57

very firmly believe as a liberal

27:59

fundamentally that I have

28:01

no right to impose on

28:04

people who not Christians, that they must

28:06

live a Christian lifestyle. And that

28:08

seemed to be ill liberal but also I

28:10

don't think the gospels encourages to do that

28:12

either. On the other hand, I

28:14

think the idea that a person of faith

28:17

cannot bring their worldview into the

28:18

room. I think that's pretty liberal too.

28:20

Completely. And I think where we're at in

28:22

Western societies, the people we live

28:25

along against is that the sense that

28:27

the assumption in neutral position is an absence

28:29

of faith. We are very tolerant of people

28:31

whose faith is a kind of cultural adornment. Whether

28:33

you got church at Christmas or maybe every

28:35

week, but it's just, you know, it's a it's a cultural part

28:37

of who they are. We are deeply

28:39

suspicious of people whose

28:42

who'd will view it in any way informed by their

28:44

faith. And that is a liberal. The argument

28:47

I'd really like to make is that

28:49

There is no neutrality in the public square. The

28:51

absence of faith is not neutral. It's legitimate,

28:53

but it's not neutral and it has to compete

28:55

for its right to be just the same as

28:58

faith or other

28:58

worldviews. You

28:59

know, Tim, I'm struck having spent last sort

29:01

of seven eight years in my life in America -- Mhmm. --

29:03

where every candidate has to talk

29:05

about their relationship to Jesus Christ

29:08

because

29:08

they can't get elected in Iowa

29:10

or New Hampshire unless they go to the bible

29:12

breakfast and all the rest of

29:14

it. Yeah. And that's in country where there is

29:16

a separation of church and state. Yeah. Here

29:18

we have an established religion

29:20

Yes.

29:20

It's the opposite.

29:20

And, yeah, it's the absolute opposite. I've certainly heard it say

29:22

that to be as I've I've a good friend of mine is Michael Ware,

29:25

who is the former faith adviser to

29:27

Barak Obama. And we talk about these things

29:29

often and we characterize it in a state you got to

29:31

invent a faith to be taken seriously. And here

29:33

you got to pretend you haven't got one even if you have.

29:35

And I think that is exaggerated the situation.

29:38

Think thing to understand about America, because I'm sure you understand even

29:40

better than I do, is that a lot of faith

29:42

in the states is about a cultural

29:45

discrep So just for example, you stop

29:47

an evangelical on the streets of London

29:49

and you ask, do you got a church in a Sunday? They go,

29:51

duh. Yeah. Obviously, polling

29:54

in America shows that fifty percent of white

29:56

evangelicals don't go to church because

29:58

they're not, forgive me, actually Christians,

30:00

and I'm not saying that as a kind of a criticism,

30:03

evangelical in the States for white people

30:05

at least is a cultural

30:06

dispute.

30:06

I just wonder lots

30:07

of nationalist baggage added on.

30:10

But

30:10

it is a very difficult badge to

30:12

wear in the UK to be openly

30:15

yes of faith and talking about

30:17

going to church and talking about God because

30:19

people think you're a weird. Weird. Yeah. I think

30:22

I heard the phrase the other week about being

30:24

strange in public. And what Christians

30:26

have is this we are strange in public and

30:28

other faith traditions also potentially have

30:30

that as well. So, yes, it is peculiar.

30:32

wonder why. I mean, most of my Talking

30:34

on this subject this week has been to a

30:36

broadly non Christian audience to try and make

30:39

the case for the place of faith in the public

30:41

square. But I do my own podcast, not quite

30:43

as popular as yours, which is aimed at Christian

30:45

to try and understand politics. And what I was doing

30:47

in my podcast this week is try explain

30:49

to Christians, why does the people do feel uncomfortable

30:52

about Kate or people like

30:54

me? Tim, can I bring it back to legislation?

30:56

Mhmm. Because That seems to me to be the

30:58

rub that you can believe whatever you want, you

31:00

know, you can impose it on others.

31:02

Well, I'm asking the question which is

31:05

If you're a leader --

31:06

Yeah. -- are you following the democratic

31:08

will of the country? Right? So we're on what?

31:10

Sixty eight or seventy percent of Scots

31:12

believe in gay

31:13

marriage. But presumably, you

31:15

bring leadership to it.

31:17

Yeah. So if you're in

31:19

a most core, believe something

31:21

is wrong with it. You're not gonna be a leader

31:23

on that issue. And isn't that where the rub

31:25

comes? You know, if, for example, there was,

31:27

you know, there will be people of faith in

31:29

a certain faith that think women

31:32

shouldn't go out to

31:32

work. Yeah. Would you want

31:35

them in charge of leading a country?

31:37

This is why it isn't easy to deal. Because you

31:39

can think of, you know, very clear examples like that

31:41

where I absolutely understand where you're coming from.

31:43

On the other hand, I think lots of really

31:45

unpopular things that most progressives would actually

31:48

like me for. So on refugees and asylum

31:50

for instance. So which bit of my faith have I got to leave

31:52

at the door? And I think this issue is this. If

31:54

we only tolerate people of faith,

31:57

whose faith tells them stuff that we are happy

31:59

with. We're not doing diversity

32:01

at all. And I go back to what is a genuinely

32:04

liberal society, is one that's

32:06

is at pace, but at the same time, quite uncomfortable

32:09

where we're able to have really deep discussions. And

32:11

a phrase I heard and I've ripped it off several times,

32:13

so I will cite who I got it from. Elizabeth

32:15

Oldfield used to be the director of Theos, and she

32:17

talks about the lack of curiosity

32:20

in public debate. When I hear somebody,

32:23

who says something or apparently thinks something

32:25

that I find distasteful. The way of

32:27

the modern world, maybe in the culture war, is the

32:29

thing evil person, terrible person,

32:31

not interested in anything there to say. We lack

32:33

curiosities to why they think

32:35

that. I think it's a softness to wear that. If

32:37

you want to come as well as a former

32:38

gay person in Scotland -- Yeah. Who

32:40

is married? Do you

32:41

think that the leader Yeah. -- would not

32:44

condone really -- Yeah. your

32:46

position as a married gay person that's

32:48

not about understanding other people's

32:50

opinions, you know, in a sort of vague way. It's like,

32:53

this is personal. They don't believe in in

32:55

my right. Yeah. And I absolutely get that, and I completely

32:57

sympathize with that. The issue is, I guess, and I don't

32:59

think people or Christians would say this because I don't really

33:01

want to think we want to play this card. But if we want

33:03

to talk in those terms, the most fundamental

33:06

part of my identity is our before

33:08

of Jesus Christ. So and now

33:10

we are told to turn the other cheek to be

33:13

humble and not to seek to impose

33:15

ourselves another and that is a part of how

33:17

to live as a Christian. But if I wanted

33:19

to kind of step into the culture war, I'd say

33:21

people dismiss what I believe and

33:23

therefore dismiss my

33:24

identity. So I

33:25

don't live in the verses. don't feel that. Okay.

33:27

Right. So I'm well, I don't think it is. I really don't

33:29

think it is because yeah. think if you're a Christian, here's

33:31

one thing I think totally miss and don't say often enough.

33:34

Christian's belief and Jewish people believe also

33:36

that we're all made in the image of God.

33:38

And that means we're not just equal or equal an

33:41

an astonishingly lofty level. That's why

33:43

humans have such innate dignity. So

33:45

I often say to those people, atheists and say,

33:47

I'm a believer in equality. I'm sure you are a believer in

33:49

equality, but only on accidental biology,

33:52

not by utterly lofty design, and

33:54

you should treat people accordingly. See, Christianity

33:56

is the established religion, established

33:58

faith in the United Kingdom. So there is an assumption

34:00

that Christians are actually not a minority, but

34:03

a privileged group. And so I don't

34:05

think we are in reality, but I also

34:07

understand why society thinks that and

34:09

we need to understand that. And then I

34:11

also, again, what is our

34:14

response? I don't wanna call it persecution

34:17

to being got out of it. Well, we're

34:19

told you turn the other cheek. You do not whine

34:21

about being canceled. It's a bad look and

34:23

it's not biblical. And the other thing I'd

34:25

say is there are millions of people

34:27

on planet Earth who are Christians who really are

34:29

at risk of death because of their

34:32

faith in Afghanistan, in North Korea, in

34:34

Iran, and how dare we complain

34:36

in the UK just because we get a bit grief on the tele

34:38

sometimes.

34:39

Tim, it's a really good chat. Can I just ask you,

34:41

bring it back to blunt politics now? Do you think

34:43

Kate Forbes is gonna succeed? Or do

34:45

think she'll have to I think she might

34:47

win. I think she's now not the favorite, but

34:50

I think she could win because of both the

34:52

one way of looking at this is that she has decided

34:54

to be upfront early on. She will be

34:56

able to say to journalists who pursue her from this

34:58

point on, I've dealt with that. Let's talk about

35:00

the NHS and what have you. And she may

35:02

well then find herself in position where she can

35:04

make the case. I think if Angus Roberts understood,

35:07

I think I'd say, I think she can't win.

35:09

But I think her opponents are really not

35:11

that strong. And I think all

35:13

of this is really bad news for the NPE.

35:15

And I don't just mean Kate Forbes situation. I

35:18

mean the fact that the other two candidates,

35:20

I don't think are really great for their cause.

35:22

So I think the SMP and the independence

35:25

movement will realize maybe

35:27

belatedly that Nicholas Durgin actually

35:30

was holding him together and giving him an edge.

35:32

And I'm not sure that will happen from now

35:34

on. But think on paper, Kate is probably

35:36

the stronger candidate. If you look at how she's

35:38

managed her brief compared to

35:41

homes and how he's managed his, I

35:43

think there's no comparison. That may not be

35:45

enough for the electorate. Tim, thank you so much.

35:47

That's really

35:47

interesting. Pleasure to be on. Just

35:50

before you go, Tim, on a complete different subject,

35:52

what would you have done with Shamima? Begum.

35:54

Well, I guess the law's gotta be followed. We say

35:56

we've all done bad things or things at fifteen. We've not

35:59

generally got to join terrorist groups. And

36:01

so I understand the anger at her,

36:03

but that she's lost her passport If

36:06

she was white and she was called Sharon from

36:08

Manchester and she'd done something like that, it

36:10

wouldn't even occur to the government to take them

36:12

out of passport off somebody who was obviously

36:14

British. So I'm deeply uncomfortable about

36:17

the lack of the ability for rehabilitation and

36:19

repentance. If we are a Christian country,

36:22

we should do that. And then I think

36:24

the way we treat people from, well,

36:26

non white backgrounds, you say, in the UK,

36:28

this is a reminder as extreme one.

36:31

That we are all equal and that some people's

36:33

citizenship apparently isn't as secure

36:35

as others. Interesting. Thank

36:37

you, Tim. Yeah. Thank you so much. you. Thank you.

36:46

Right. That is nearly all. We've time for this week,

36:48

but given we've spoken every single day

36:50

about the protocol, a northerner,

36:52

he tried to ban the word protocol at one point

36:55

one more than one occasion. Yeah. Well, we're not doing especially

36:57

well. She's very liberal. Like,

36:58

she's extremely liberal. You know. Certain drugs

37:01

altogether. She's like

37:02

another one. You

37:03

know, I think she moonlight's real dolls.

37:05

Publisher.

37:07

Say the activity reasons. Mhmm. You won't

37:09

hear fat on this podcast. Not once.

37:12

You win on a Friday. Anyway, Of

37:14

course, nothing has moved because nothing ever moves

37:16

on the Northland protocol matter what anyone

37:18

says, but it did come up at prime minister's questions

37:20

today where Kia Starmer was

37:22

needling Sounak the

37:25

most extraordinary way once again making

37:27

clear to him that if he wanted

37:29

to be

37:30

brave, and face down his own critics

37:32

in his own party, Labour, would provide

37:34

the votes. Mister

37:36

speaker, the sound you hear is

37:39

them cheering the prime minister pulling the wool

37:41

over their eyes. It's

37:45

the twenty anniversary of the Good

37:47

Friday Agreement, the thirtieth anniversary

37:50

of the Downing Street declaration. Tony

37:53

Blair and John Major both recognized that

37:55

politics in Northern Ireland is built on

37:57

trust and not telling people what

37:59

they want to hear and the need to

38:02

take seriously the concerns

38:04

of both communities, nationalist

38:06

and unionists, its vengeful

38:08

air voices are heard. So can

38:10

the prime minister confirm But whatever

38:13

deal he brings back, this

38:15

house will get a vote on it.

38:19

Mister speaker, of course, of course,

38:21

parliament will express its view. But what

38:23

is crucial? It was like

38:25

watching the Labour leader release

38:28

a mess burrito onto

38:30

the other side of the commons and just watching

38:32

it buzz around their heads. And it was completely

38:34

deliberate because I think Labour's position here

38:36

is to say, We're there. We've told

38:39

you, we'll back you. If you in Europe get a

38:41

deal on this, we'll be there. And what

38:43

he's trying to do is ferment just enough

38:46

real instability and real

38:49

pain amongst parts of the Tory

38:51

party for them to turn on

38:52

themselves, and that's kind of job done. The

38:54

most striking thing was that

38:57

Sunite was holding almost silence for his own benches.

39:00

The only time that he actually got a proper

39:02

cheer was Kelsey Breeze. He

39:04

was talking about not surrendering to

39:06

the EU. It's just the same

39:08

old cycle. A Tory leader

39:11

kind of basically knows what they've got to do.

39:13

They know what the prize is. They know what

39:15

it could unlock in terms of EU relations, US

39:17

relations, everything. They basically know what

39:19

the deal

39:20

is. But they just know that the politics

39:22

of their party is toxic. I

39:24

think if you went to the bookmakers now,

39:26

you're not gonna get very good odds on

39:28

us not talking about this. Tomorrow

39:30

as

39:31

well. Thanks for being with us. We'll see you then. Bye.

39:33

Bye. Bye. This

39:36

has been a global player original

39:38

podcast and a Perthfonica production.