0:00

So, It's

0:02

the week ending Friday the 28th of

0:04

March and this is the week unwrapped.

0:06

In the past seven days we've seen

0:09

the Chancellor announcing disability cuts in her

0:11

spring statement, seven nights of protests in

0:13

Turkey against the Erdogan government, and the

0:15

revelation that US National Security Advisor Mike

0:18

Walsh invited a prominent journalist into a

0:20

signal chat about bombing Yemen. You can

0:22

read all you need to know about

0:24

everything that matters in the week magazine,

0:27

but we're here to bring you some

0:29

stories that passed under the radar this

0:31

week. news, not making headlines right

0:34

now, but with repercussions for

0:36

all our lives. I'm Ollie

0:38

Mann, and let's unwrap the

0:40

week. And joining me

0:42

today from the week's digital team we

0:44

have Irene Forshore. We also welcome back

0:47

freelance journalist in Scotland Katrina Stewart and

0:49

we have a special guest from the

0:51

guilty feminist podcast and various shows on

0:53

radio for in a stand-up career and

0:56

so many credits that if I were

0:58

to list them then this introduction would

1:00

frankly drift into pure promotion. It's Deborah

1:02

Francis White. Hello Deborah. Hello Ollie Man.

1:05

Thank you so much for having me. It's

1:07

an unqualified delight to like to be here.

1:09

Good. We'll put the qualifications in an

1:11

asterisk and we can list them in

1:13

the show notes later. I know that

1:15

you have recently birthed a book. Tell

1:17

us about that. I'm so glad you've asked,

1:19

Dolly. I birthed a book called Six Conversations

1:21

We're Scared to Have. And it really came

1:23

about because I got to the point with

1:26

doing the kind of work I do on

1:28

the guilty feminist, which is entertaining, but also

1:30

trying to make the world a better place.

1:32

I thought I can't really go on, I

1:34

think, unless I say this. Because when I

1:36

was young, I was in a religious cult,

1:38

and I got out of it in my

1:40

20s, and then I was living... freely and

1:42

then the last sort of eight to ten

1:44

years I've started to feel like I'm back

1:46

in one and that we're all in a

1:49

series of interconnecting cults where there's

1:51

certain things we say and certain

1:53

things we don't say and uncomfortable

1:55

conversations get put under the rug

1:57

or become so inflammatory that people

1:59

get incredibly personal and make attacks

2:01

and so I thought I need

2:03

to say something about this because

2:05

I think I have some insight

2:07

on it in an attempt to

2:09

say hold up. I don't think

2:11

you can change someone's amygdala, but

2:14

I do think you can change

2:16

their mind. So in short, this

2:18

book is how to change minds,

2:20

including your own. Yeah, and I

2:22

noticed I haven't read it yet,

2:24

although I'm taking it with me

2:26

on holiday. What a beech read.

2:28

It is entertaining. It is entertaining

2:30

and hopeful. But I did notice

2:32

that there are chapters on the

2:34

kinds of things you might expect

2:36

there to be chapters on, cancel

2:38

culture in comedy, gender, gender ideology,

2:40

but actually your first chapter is

2:42

about... why people are scared of

2:44

having conversations at all and I

2:47

do think that's a thing that

2:49

comes up a lot isn't it

2:51

people genuinely do feel they can't

2:53

say what they think anymore? Yes

2:55

and I think some of the

2:57

the goals might be noble but

2:59

you cannot create a compassionate society

3:01

that progressives say they want. by

3:03

shouting people into it and scaring

3:05

people into it. That's not creating

3:07

the fabric that you say that

3:09

you want. Coca-Cola do not advertise

3:11

by saying, fuck you if you

3:13

drink Pepsi. And surely we need

3:15

to be at least as interested

3:17

as capitalist selling sugar water as

3:19

to how to persuade. Do you

3:22

know what I mean? It's absurd

3:24

that we are so unskilled. If

3:26

we want to change the world

3:28

and make it better. And if

3:30

what we were doing was working,

3:32

that would be one thing. But

3:34

we are seeing... far-right parties across

3:36

Europe are polling far too well

3:38

if it feels safe. So I

3:40

do think we need to stop

3:42

and take stock. And so this

3:44

is not just a book about,

3:46

oh we should all get along,

3:48

because that's not a thing. It's

3:50

really about what the power structures

3:52

are and what the internet is

3:54

doing. A lot of people think

3:57

the internet makes us a sympathetic

3:59

because you can't see people's faces,

4:01

keyboard worries, but actually in the

4:03

analysis and research I did, I

4:05

discovered in fact. I believe the

4:07

internet, certainly social media, every day

4:09

demands that we be more and

4:11

more empathetic. but to fewer and

4:13

fewer people. And that's what a

4:15

cult does. So it's like if

4:17

someone says, I know what they

4:19

mean, or I feel for them,

4:21

no, because they've had this, or

4:23

I can see what they're saying,

4:25

someone will say, well, you're in

4:27

their team then. So I really

4:30

do feel like we have to

4:32

analyze the structures of what's going

4:34

on. It's not about saying, and

4:36

we should all be lovely. It's

4:38

about how did we get here?

4:40

and you know some of the

4:42

stories we're going to talk today

4:44

about like play into the book

4:46

and I'll mention them when they

4:48

come up. Fascinating. Okay so that's

4:50

six conversations we're scared to have

4:52

available now in all good and

4:54

bad bookshops. Deborah you're up first.

4:56

What do you think this week

4:58

should be remembered for? The week

5:00

that academics from the land of

5:02

the free seek freedom. I'm immediately

5:05

withdrawing from the unfair one-sided Paris

5:07

climate accord rip off. You know

5:09

what's going on in Washington right

5:11

now is an abomination because science

5:13

is being destroyed by the current

5:15

administration. In a few moments I

5:17

will sign an executive order to

5:19

begin eliminating the Federal Department of

5:21

Education once and for all. The

5:23

Trump administration is waging a war

5:25

on college and a war on

5:27

knowledge. Why do autocrats fear higher

5:29

education? A little montage they did

5:31

accompanying a live stream on DW

5:33

News on Wednesday. You could probably

5:35

identify the sound of the president

5:38

amongst that. Deborah, what's the story?

5:40

So this is a story about

5:42

how European universities are offering academic

5:44

asylum. In that language they're saying

5:46

basically come here as an academic

5:48

asylum seeker. So Jan Dankert, if

5:50

I am saying his name correctly,

5:52

from VUB in Brussels, says we

5:54

see it as our task to

5:56

come to the aid of our

5:58

American colleagues, American universities and their

6:00

researchers are the biggest victims of

6:02

this political and ideological... interference. So

6:04

this is because President Trump is

6:06

cutting grants, cutting funding, if your

6:08

academic proposal or project has words

6:10

in it, controversial words like woman

6:13

or female or LGBTQ or even

6:15

black or Hispanic, there are so

6:17

many words, they will be looked

6:19

at extremely closely. and very probably

6:21

lose their funding. And I've seen

6:23

online climate change scientists saying we

6:25

have to come up with different

6:27

words for climate to get past.

6:29

And they're going, what do we

6:31

say, atmosphere? And it's absolutely absurd.

6:33

And so there's French universities who

6:35

are at the forefront. So there's

6:37

ex-Marce University and they've got the

6:39

safe place for science. What does

6:41

that really mean? A safe place

6:43

for science. Well, they're saying that

6:46

America is now a dangerous place

6:48

for science. It is. There's a

6:50

scientist in America this week because

6:52

Columbia are in a dispute about

6:54

what the Trump government called illegal

6:56

protests. They just said, right, we're

6:58

cutting all of your funding. Well,

7:00

that's a third of Columbia's funding.

7:02

So Columbia University would close down,

7:04

but they just said it's cart.

7:06

So her PhD program on fibroids

7:08

just got cut, just taken away.

7:10

So this is to find treatment

7:12

for fibroids. I mean, the question

7:14

is Irene, whether the Trump. administration

7:16

will feel this is a loss.

7:18

You know, if scientists choose to

7:21

take asylum, to use that phrase,

7:23

in Europe, they're going to think

7:25

good riddance, aren't they? These are

7:27

the kind of people we don't

7:29

want in our universities. That's the

7:31

whole point. Yeah, and I think,

7:33

you know, Trump has really made

7:35

a point of surrounding himself with

7:37

tech entrepreneurs and showing that he

7:39

kind of values them above academic

7:41

research by. the scientists leaving. There's

7:43

been huge cuts so far so

7:45

there's been curbs to research relating

7:47

to diversity, some vaccines, medical research

7:49

and... in cancer research and into

7:51

the human causes of climate change.

7:54

The Trump administration also wants to

7:56

slash billions of dollars from overheads

7:58

and grants for biomedical research. So

8:00

the National Institutes of Health have

8:02

put out a statement saying that

8:04

it wants to cut grants for

8:06

indirect costs relating to research. So

8:08

that's things like buildings, equipment, utilities,

8:10

in efforts to save up to

8:12

four billion dollars. But you know,

8:14

that's critical for having the research

8:16

go ahead in the first place

8:18

actually keeping the lights on in

8:20

the lab. So things are very

8:22

uncertain at the moment. It's quite

8:24

a scary time for scientists in

8:26

the US. Yeah, and more generally,

8:29

I guess the law of unintended

8:31

consequences is going to come into

8:33

play, isn't it? You know, Trump

8:35

and his administration be cutting all

8:37

these things they see as worthless,

8:39

but obviously not all of them

8:41

are. Even if you take that

8:43

reactionary point of view that they

8:45

espouse, some of these things are

8:47

really important to preserving, justice, human

8:49

life, human life, etc. Yeah they're

8:51

really vital in particular scientists who

8:53

are involved with work around climate

8:55

change are really concerned about this

8:57

because the work is not valued.

8:59

Trump has no concern whatsoever about

9:01

the push to net zero. He's

9:04

already ripping up a lot of

9:06

the climate improvements that were made

9:08

under the Biden administration and this

9:10

will have severe knock-on effects and

9:12

they're scientists saying that they're genuinely

9:14

scared, they're genuinely worried about this.

9:16

Their research, years and years of

9:18

research is being undermined, it's being

9:20

lost, they're losing funding. It's a

9:22

really bleak prospect. How has this

9:24

happened, Deborah, that scientists have come

9:26

in the line of fire? You

9:28

sort of understand the loose kind

9:30

of anti-woke agenda, but you know...

9:32

gender politics and diversity policies and

9:34

the climate crisis, they're three very

9:37

disparate things to all put under

9:39

one umbrella aren't they? But this

9:41

is why the sort of shorthand

9:43

of oh it's woke, it doesn't

9:45

work because what you're saying is

9:47

if there are grants for women

9:49

to study fibroids for example. It's

9:51

like, oh, that's women's stuff, that's

9:53

gendered stuff, but that's the health

9:55

of human beings, and it's the

9:57

career of academics. This is why

9:59

as soon as you disparage anybody

10:01

who's in the minority or not

10:03

in the power position, as like

10:05

how dare you ask for equality,

10:07

that is what you leave yourself

10:09

open to, and that is what

10:12

has happened. The very idea of

10:14

equality is so distasteful to them,

10:16

and the problem with science. is

10:18

it bears out that, for example,

10:20

there is no white supremacy, that

10:22

actually race is completely manufactured. We're

10:24

all human beings are the same.

10:26

We're literally talking about melanin in

10:28

the skin. And they don't want

10:30

that kind of information. They don't

10:32

want that. You know, it used

10:34

to be thought that women had

10:36

smaller brains and were less clever.

10:38

people should be treated with respect

10:40

and people should be treated with

10:42

equality and that's they don't want

10:45

that they don't want diverse people

10:47

to have equity and inclusion that's

10:49

what they've said. But I guess

10:51

given that Trump won the election

10:53

do establishments in the US need

10:55

to look within themselves and say

10:57

there is an issue here that

10:59

we weren't incorporating enough working class

11:01

voices, we weren't incorporating enough conservative

11:03

voices in the way that we

11:05

behave as our general culture, not

11:07

the science as you're describing, but

11:09

the kind of presiding leftism on

11:11

our campuses, and had we been

11:13

more accommodating, something like this wouldn't

11:15

have happened in the first place,

11:17

this reaction. I don't think that's

11:20

what happened really. I think what

11:22

it comes down to is, it's

11:24

the same here, neither of our

11:26

two main parties are fixing the

11:28

problems of... just working people to

11:30

allow them to live in a

11:32

way where they can work a

11:34

full time job, have a place

11:36

to live, have enough food on

11:38

the table, be able to buy

11:40

some clothes. have a holiday once

11:42

a year. That used to be

11:44

the case. For many, many, many

11:46

generations it was never the case.

11:48

And then it was briefly the

11:50

case. And we came to feel

11:53

that it shouldn't be that some

11:55

people had all the money and

11:57

everybody else was in desperation. And

11:59

we righted that wrong. And that

12:01

has been eroded. So I think

12:03

what's deep down in people is

12:05

but I don't have enough. So

12:07

there's not enough for me to

12:09

share. I think when people are

12:11

happy and they feel that they

12:13

have enough and that there's health

12:15

care available to them and things

12:17

like that, I think they are

12:19

happier to share. But it's a

12:21

question about looking at the organizations,

12:23

isn't it? We see this cultural

12:25

organizations in the US as well

12:28

and feeling they don't represent them,

12:30

that there aren't people like them

12:32

there, that everyone who's there is

12:34

this enclave of Democrats. That's how

12:36

they feel. that bears out though,

12:38

because Obama tried to do lots

12:40

of things and he kept getting

12:42

stopped by the Republican Senate. So

12:44

that is not an accurate representation

12:46

of America. America is not so

12:48

liberal. America is not Sweden, is

12:50

it? So that's a story being

12:52

told by the newspapers. They don't

12:54

even have the ability, if your

12:56

hand falls off because of a

12:58

chainsaw accident and you are not

13:01

insured, no one will put it

13:03

back on if you can't pay

13:05

for it. Does that sound so

13:07

immensely left wing to you? and

13:09

your insurance company made delay care,

13:11

made an eye care. So I

13:13

don't think it is true that

13:15

it's such an incredibly left-wing environment

13:17

that these poor people won't listen

13:19

to. I think that people won't

13:21

listen to by either party in

13:23

as much as things were not

13:25

made better. I mean, Irene, I

13:27

guess for the other side of

13:29

the debate, you know, people... may

13:31

feel that if they then flee

13:33

the country, they will be letting

13:36

Trumpism win the culture war. Yeah,

13:38

but at the same time I

13:40

think... When things are made so

13:42

difficult, it just becomes unviable for

13:44

them to stay. Perhaps in the

13:46

years to come, people will look

13:48

back at this and think, wow,

13:50

there's been a, you know, people

13:52

are saying it could be like

13:54

a major, one of the biggest

13:56

brain drains since World War II,

13:58

but in reverse. So I think

14:00

at the moment the US is

14:02

a global leader in science and

14:04

I think time will, time will

14:06

tell how that plays out. Yeah,

14:08

I mean, is it going to

14:11

be good news for us, Kat,

14:13

to have Americans coming over, you

14:15

know, American intellectual? I'm not thinking

14:17

about the kind of the Jewish

14:19

brain drain from Nazi Germany, which

14:21

ended up with Einstein in Princeton,

14:23

didn't it? Perhaps, but it depends

14:25

on the jobs that they're coming

14:27

to here. I mean, the UK

14:29

hasn't offered to be an asylum

14:31

centre for American academics yet, but

14:33

if they were, the UK's universities

14:35

are facing a really difficult time,

14:37

there's a fallen funding for universities,

14:39

and what the sort of long-term

14:41

reaction will be to people leaving.

14:44

I think Irene is right that

14:46

it is very difficult. picture for

14:48

them and you have to have

14:50

a lot of sympathy with people

14:52

who'd rather just shift somewhere else

14:54

than stay and try to push

14:56

back. But I think it will

14:58

be a case of having to

15:00

wait and see how this plays

15:02

out to a certain extent and

15:04

assess it historically. There's also the

15:06

issue I guess as well that

15:08

Britain is trying to make a

15:10

special case for the special relationship

15:12

and all the rest of it.

15:14

There's a risk Deborah that even

15:16

if we could cash in on

15:19

this we shouldn't be seen to

15:21

alienate them. We have to stay

15:23

in their their pockets. I mean,

15:25

I think on the global stage,

15:27

it's looking like the flashbacks in

15:29

the handmaids' tale to how they

15:31

got to Gilead, a lot of

15:33

what's going on at the moment.

15:35

It's really quite scary. And I

15:37

think we should stand with the

15:39

countries who are saying this is

15:41

abhorrent. So Eric Burton, who is

15:43

the president of the Ex-Marce University,

15:45

said this program is ultimately linked

15:47

to indignation to declare what is

15:49

happening in the United States is

15:52

not normal. And if we all

15:54

normalize it, and we go, well,

15:56

don't take in any of their

15:58

climate change scientists, we're going to

16:00

look like we're anti- trump, I

16:02

mean, come on, the planet is

16:04

all of ours. And that's the

16:06

other reason I think that, you

16:08

know, if you're working on the

16:10

climate, you can't be like, I've

16:12

got to stay here and fight

16:14

it, even though I've got no

16:16

funding, and just take a sign

16:18

into the street. No, we need

16:20

you in a lab. It's the

16:22

end of the world that we're

16:24

looking at. We need to take

16:27

climate change science unbelievably seriously. It's

16:29

incredibly urgent and when such a

16:31

huge country like that goes out

16:33

of its way to make the

16:35

climate worse, you know, of course

16:37

their scientists need to leave if

16:39

they can get a grant anywhere

16:41

else. Well, I mean, this is

16:43

it. Where do they go to,

16:45

Kat, because in parts of Europe

16:47

at least, we're seeing a lean

16:49

to the right, to the far

16:51

right in some cases, so this

16:53

could be out of the frying

16:55

paning pan into the fire pan

16:57

into the fire. Yes, I mean

17:00

populism is far from exclusive to

17:02

the US. We're seeing a rise

17:04

over it in UK politics with

17:06

the rise of reform and reform

17:08

is doing exceptionally well in the

17:10

polls. The next big election is

17:12

Hollywood election in 2026 and Scotland

17:14

and it's looking like reform could

17:16

have as many as 15 MSPs

17:18

in the Scottish Parliament, which is

17:20

an astonishing shift in the sort

17:22

of political narrative north of the

17:24

border. And that's even though reform

17:26

have no Scottish policies, we don't

17:28

know what they stand for, but

17:30

it is, as Depper was reflecting

17:32

on earlier, just the sense that

17:35

the economy is doing badly. People

17:37

don't have the money in their

17:39

pockets that they used to. Neither

17:41

of the main parties are offering

17:43

clear resolutions to these issues and

17:45

resolving these issues is going to

17:47

take a significant amount of time.

17:49

It can't be done quickly. And

17:51

so when you have populist parties

17:53

offering really simple, straightforward, immediate, so-called

17:55

solutions to these issues, they become

17:57

popular with voters. And that is

17:59

an issue in the UK. It's

18:01

an issue across Europe. And one

18:03

of the big pushbacks is against

18:05

the climate. So it is no

18:08

guarantee that the scientists who are

18:10

coming to Europe who are trying

18:12

to get away from the anti-science

18:14

rhetoric in the US are going

18:16

to have anywhere to come to.

18:18

Okay, up next, putting a price

18:20

on 50 years of wrongful conviction.

18:22

That's after this. Okay,

18:31

Irene, it's your turn. What do

18:33

you think this week should be

18:35

remembered for? Can a death-throw inmate

18:38

change Japan's legal system? So this

18:40

week, Iwo Hakamata, a Japanese man

18:42

who spent almost 50 years on

18:44

death row before he was eventually

18:46

acquitted of murder, and that's what

18:48

you just heard there, that was

18:50

just after he was acquitted, was

18:52

awarded 2017 million yen, so that's

18:54

about 1.4 million dollars in what's

18:56

believed to be the country's biggest

18:58

ever payout for a criminal case.

19:00

And this is a man who

19:02

is the world's longest serving death

19:04

row inmate and his case is

19:06

one of the biggest miscarriages of

19:08

justice there's ever been. So it

19:10

sparks some really interesting conversations about

19:12

what happens when things go wrong

19:14

and whether the legal system in

19:16

Japan is fit for purpose. And

19:18

what was he accused of doing?

19:20

So the case was back in

19:22

1966, he was working at a

19:24

miso manufacturing plant when the bodies

19:26

of his boss and his boss's

19:28

family were found in a fire,

19:31

but they'd been stabbed death before

19:33

the fire. He was accused of

19:35

carrying out the murders and starting

19:37

the fire and also robbing the

19:39

family. after a coerced confession. that

19:41

only actually took place after he

19:43

was beaten and interrogated several times.

19:45

He was sentenced to death. And

19:47

then he spent all of this

19:49

time on death row and he

19:51

actually spent, since his sentence was

19:53

finalized in 1980, he spent another

19:55

34 years on death row while

19:57

his lawyers were petitioning for a

19:59

retrial. Right. And Japan is one

20:01

of only two countries, isn't it,

20:03

in the G7, that has the

20:05

death penalty? The other one obviously

20:07

is the USA. How do the

20:09

Japanese feel about the death penalty?

20:11

So the way that they kind

20:13

of justify keeping the death penalty

20:15

and you know that they've managed

20:17

to resist years of international pressure

20:19

to abolish capital punishment is that

20:21

there's high public support and and

20:24

even after this case the public

20:26

support among Japanese people remains high

20:28

it's about 80% in favour of

20:30

the death penalty and you think

20:32

God that's shocking but actually you

20:34

know a poll in January found

20:36

that... the majority of people in

20:38

the UK would also support bringing

20:40

about the death penalty so it's

20:42

not something that's like a far

20:44

away issue that we don't need

20:46

to think about. Okay well on

20:48

that cat do you think there

20:50

is a risk here if you

20:52

can call it a risk I

20:54

suppose people who want it would

20:56

celebrate it that the death penalty

20:58

could be on its way back

21:00

to our statute books? I don't

21:02

think it would be on the

21:04

way back to the statute books

21:06

because Parliament has consistently voted against

21:08

any reinstatement of the death penalty

21:10

but polling does show that people

21:12

are in support of, well a

21:14

majority of people are in support

21:17

of reinstating the death penalty, but

21:19

these questions about whether people want

21:21

to reinstate the death penalty or

21:23

not are usually being asked because

21:25

of some recent events. So there

21:27

was polling in January this year

21:29

after the sentencing of Axel Rydicabana,

21:31

the 18-year-old who killed three little

21:33

girls in Southport and when there

21:35

is something as horrific as that,

21:37

obviously it prompts a lot of

21:39

sentiment, it makes people very emotional,

21:41

and then you're polled, but one

21:43

of the interesting... things about the

21:45

most recent polling on the death

21:47

penalty was that millennials were most

21:49

likely to support it and normally

21:51

you would find a correlation between

21:53

age and support for the death

21:55

penalty so older people are more

21:57

likely to be in support younger

21:59

people are not so in this

22:01

polling boomers were very likely to

22:03

support reinstating the death penalty Gen

22:05

Z were absolutely against it but

22:07

there was really strong support from

22:10

millennials which is quite interesting because

22:12

I'm a millennial I'm definitely not

22:14

in support of reinstating the death

22:16

penalty, but it was really interesting

22:18

to see that age range being

22:20

really supportive of capital punishment being

22:22

reintroduced. What do you think that's

22:24

caused by Deborah? Why do you

22:26

think there's growing support among our

22:28

sort of age group for that?

22:30

I think maybe it's that people

22:32

don't remember it. It's out of...

22:34

that's out of memory and people

22:36

as you say cat they get

22:38

polls at an emotive time who

22:40

are they polling how are they

22:42

polling you know there's I always

22:44

remember that thing in yes minister

22:46

that you can get the any

22:48

answer you want with polls to

22:50

put by the questions that lead

22:52

up to it it shocks me

22:54

a bit that people are in

22:56

favor of people killing people then

22:58

that punishment reinforces that killing people

23:00

is the way forward. I think

23:03

the UN says, and human rights

23:05

groups say the death penalty, the

23:07

main thing about the death penalty

23:09

being something that we cannot stand

23:11

for as people who care about

23:13

human rights is actually the torture

23:15

of being on death row. And

23:17

like this man, it said in

23:19

the report that I read, his

23:21

mental health had suffered and I

23:23

was like oh my god what

23:25

an understatement and apparently his mental

23:27

health is so bad now he

23:29

has to be you know he's

23:31

old he's lost his whole life

23:33

and he has to be cared

23:35

for by his sister yeah it's

23:37

just so tragic isn't it like

23:39

if you get it wrong and

23:41

there's we know we know that

23:43

they've got it wrong people have

23:45

been cleared after they've been killed

23:47

so if even one person is

23:49

going to die wrongly for something

23:51

they didn't do you can't have

23:54

the death penalty He wasn't executed.

23:56

So actually there was time to

23:58

clear his name, it just took

24:00

50 years. There was time to

24:02

clear his name, so supporters of

24:04

the death penalty will say, well

24:06

we didn't execute anyone who didn't

24:08

do it. We've only ever executed

24:10

people who definitely did and they've

24:12

had their chance to appeal. But

24:14

that psychological torture of thinking today

24:16

might be the day you're about

24:18

to die. That's the point, isn't

24:20

it? And in Japan, that literally

24:22

is how the death penalty works,

24:24

right? I think, yeah, that's what

24:26

makes this case kind of so

24:28

horrible and why his mental health

24:30

has taken such a terrible turn,

24:32

is because of this really inhumane

24:34

approach that they take to executions

24:36

where inmates are only told an

24:38

hour or two beforehand that they're

24:40

actually going to be taken to

24:42

the gallows. You know, they're denied

24:44

contact with their family with their

24:47

family. they're denied contact with their

24:49

lawyers, I think they're only allowed

24:51

to exercise like twice or three

24:53

times a week, and there's a

24:55

lot of secrecy around how the

24:57

whole process works, which makes it

24:59

really hard to scrutinize it. And

25:01

there was also that case as

25:03

well in the US this month,

25:05

wasn't there, Cat, and Content Warning,

25:07

firing squad. He chose that method

25:09

of death as a way of

25:11

campaigning against the death penalty he

25:13

wanted in his last words to

25:15

say, look at what we're doing

25:17

as a system here. Yes, I

25:19

mean it's so brutally inhumane that

25:21

you just can't imagine that it's

25:23

one of the options, but certain

25:25

states there are three state-approved methods

25:27

of execution. You can choose lethal

25:29

injection or the electric chair or

25:31

death by firing squad. Brad Sigman

25:33

found God when he was in

25:35

prison and he decided to opt

25:37

for the firing squad to make

25:40

a point. His final words were

25:42

a calling to my fellow Christians

25:44

to help us end the death

25:46

penalty. You can see that he's

25:48

coming from a specific perspective there,

25:50

but it's just so brutal he

25:52

was tied to a chair with

25:54

a basin underneath to catch his

25:56

blood and a line-up of gunmen

25:58

fired at his chest. It is

26:00

astonishing that that is an option.

26:02

a disposable for the courts. You

26:04

know, you cannot imagine it in

26:06

this country. And of course in

26:08

the UK it was death by

26:10

hanging, but it's very hard to

26:12

justify that sort of situation, I

26:14

think. I do understand people's deep

26:16

anger and horror at seeing, you

26:18

know, small children killed, just, you

26:20

know, doing something as innocent as

26:22

dancing. I absolutely, absolutely understand it.

26:24

And in that case there was

26:26

no doubt that it was him.

26:28

No, no doubt it was a

26:30

moment. All of that. And he

26:33

showed no remorse, and obviously he's

26:35

a minor, but if he wasn't,

26:37

people would say, what is the

26:39

purpose of keeping him alive? He

26:41

doesn't want to be alive. But

26:43

one of the things I'm saying

26:45

in my book is that liberal

26:47

people cannot create a compassionate society

26:49

by shouting at everyone on the

26:51

internet and saying you're using the

26:53

wrong language. country or world where

26:55

fewer attacks on, you know, knifings

26:57

and attacks are made by publicly

26:59

demonstrating that we endorse murder. It

27:01

doesn't work. Like you're creating more

27:03

violence and more endorsement that it's

27:05

all right to take a life.

27:07

So I feel like it's not

27:09

going to help. Like people who

27:11

are, who that mentality, I'm not

27:13

going to see that and go,

27:15

oh, I shouldn't do it, what

27:17

a deterrent. that kind of mind

27:19

is so far gone and for

27:21

me I think we need to

27:23

be really investing in welfare mental

27:26

health access to psychiatrists all sorts

27:28

of things so that doesn't happen

27:30

we need to prevent it and

27:32

I really don't think you prevent

27:34

it with the death penalty. Irene

27:36

you've chosen this story as your

27:38

story of the week why what

27:40

are the implications for the rest

27:42

of us and what does it

27:44

mean for Japan? I think that

27:46

this case I mean... But heartily

27:48

I was just really shocked at

27:50

how low the compensation was that

27:52

he's gone through this and I

27:54

think it amounts to something like

27:56

$83 a day. Which is, you

27:58

know, when you compare... Exactly, and

28:00

when you compare it to kind

28:02

of similar cases in the US

28:04

when people have been awarded kind

28:06

of $75 million for being incarcerated

28:08

for crimes that they didn't commit.

28:10

So it could be a really

28:12

pivotal moment to look at the

28:14

Japanese justice system and look at

28:16

the things that need to change,

28:19

but it also made me think

28:21

about how we can reflect on

28:23

issues in art. own legal system

28:25

and you know so we don't

28:27

have capital punishment here but we

28:29

do have major issues of people

28:31

you know spending years in prison

28:33

waiting for trials people being jailed

28:35

for kind of 20 years for

28:37

stealing a mobile phone under the

28:39

imprisonment for public protection sentences you

28:41

know that's been abolished now but

28:43

that's still carrying on so I

28:45

think by looking at cases like

28:47

this when things have gone really

28:49

wrong we can look at our

28:51

own legal systems as well. But

28:53

I think it's also a valuable

28:55

conversation to be having because the

28:57

UK has taken a moral position

28:59

that the death penalty is wrong

29:01

and yet the UK government provides

29:03

financial and technically to countries where

29:05

capital punishment is still prevalent. So

29:07

the UK government gives money to

29:09

Pakistan and to Iran to help

29:12

with anti-drug trafficking efforts. But it

29:14

is an ally of the US

29:16

and Japan. and is an ally

29:18

of the US and Japan, but

29:20

specifically invest money in Pakistan and

29:22

Iran specifically for anti-drug trafficking efforts,

29:24

but one of the outcomes of

29:26

that is that these countries execute

29:28

drug traffickers. So it's, you know,

29:30

our hands are not entirely clean,

29:32

so it is a really useful

29:34

conversation to be having, I think.

29:36

Okay, more of these ethical loops

29:38

coming up in your next story,

29:40

Kat, on the way does labour

29:42

support forced labour? That's after this.

29:52

Okay Katrina you're finishing the show what

29:54

do you think this week should be

29:56

remembered for? This week should be remembered

29:59

as the week the UK's green targets

30:01

hit a red light and a red

30:03

line. A typical school will save something

30:06

like 25,000 pounds and a typical hospital,

30:08

something like 45,000 pounds on our calculations.

30:10

I spoke to a head teacher last

30:13

night, we're visiting an academy here in

30:15

Sheffield. He has solar panels on his

30:17

roof at the moment, and most schools

30:20

don't. He says it saved him something

30:22

like 40,000 pounds, as he put it

30:24

to me about the salary of a

30:26

special needs teacher. That's just one illustration.

30:29

of the difference this can make. The

30:31

distinctive sound of Energy Secretary Ed Miliband

30:33

there speaking to BBC breakfast this week.

30:36

Cat, what's the story? So Labour's Green

30:38

Prosperity Plan rests on a few key

30:40

pillars, one of them being great British

30:43

energy. The main issue for UK Labour

30:45

has seemed to be explaining exactly what.

30:47

GB energy actually is for months. The

30:50

plaintive cry of political journalists around the

30:52

country was, what is it when we

30:54

had to write about the thing? So

30:56

it won't supply electricity directly to households,

30:59

but the plan is that it will

31:01

work with the private sector to co-invest

31:03

in green technology. as part of the

31:06

UK's just transition to renewable energy. So

31:08

things like offshore wind farms, tidal power,

31:10

solar power and nuclear energy. But introducing

31:13

GB energy has meant the introduction of

31:15

the Great British Energy Bill, so legislation

31:17

that will allow GB energy to be

31:20

set up. And there has been a

31:22

significant bump in the road. Politicians wanted

31:24

to introduce a clause that would mean

31:27

the UK couldn't spend public money on

31:29

companies that used forced labour. they wanted

31:31

to entrain protections against benefiting from human

31:33

rights abuses. Which all sounds perfectly reasonable

31:36

until he realise the implications are. However,

31:38

Labour MPs have been whipped against supporting

31:40

the amendment and it's not going to

31:43

be added to the bill. But this

31:45

all comes against a wider backdrop of

31:47

increasing political pressure against the government's green

31:50

revolution. So Kemi Beedenot came out and

31:52

said that the UK can't reach its

31:54

carbon emissions targets in time, the rise

31:57

of anti-Netzido reform UK. So it begs

31:59

the big question, should we be worried

32:01

about rising antipathy in the race to

32:04

Netzido? But specifically, the reason that Labour

32:06

MPs have been whipped against voting for

32:08

that is because of the Chinese involvement,

32:10

right? So the plans of GP energy

32:13

are to buy solar panels from the

32:15

Chinese. and we know that the Chinese

32:17

are exploiting Uyghur workers. Yes, and China

32:20

dominates the processing and refining of so-called

32:22

transition minerals, so things like lithium, cobalt,

32:24

copper, nickel and zinc, and you find

32:27

them in solar panels. which is obviously

32:29

a huge problem, but also wind turbines

32:31

and the batteries for electric vehicles. So

32:34

in getting to net zero, it's almost

32:36

impossible not to use these minerals. And

32:38

Chinese mining interests are prevalent in 18

32:41

countries around the world where human rights

32:43

abuses have been found. So they're buying

32:45

up mines in Indonesia, in Peru, in

32:47

the DRC, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, and China's a

32:50

major economic partner in these countries. It

32:52

has absolute influence. The economies need investment

32:54

from China, so there is very little,

32:57

if any. pushback. There was a push

32:59

to have this amendment. The amendment was

33:01

drafted by David Alton who's a cross-bench

33:04

peer and he says actually he's not

33:06

going to let this drop, he's going

33:08

to bring it back when the GB

33:11

Energy Bill returns to the Lords. Because

33:13

I guess I guess Deborah it is

33:15

from an ethical standpoint as I say

33:17

just perfectly transparent why you would want

33:20

to back a bill that says we're

33:22

not going to buy from countries where

33:24

workers are being exploited where people being

33:27

forced to work against their will. about

33:29

cooperating with countries that execute people, but

33:31

you know, again, like we were saying

33:34

with the pragmatic attitude around Trump, Ed

33:36

Miliband clearly believes, I'm sure, that he

33:38

would rather not do that, but given

33:41

the choice, he'd rather do that than

33:43

not have solar panels for Britain. Yes,

33:45

I actually have written about this in

33:48

my book. not to plug my book

33:50

but genuinely there's a whole chapter on

33:52

our relationship with the past and how

33:54

we are very quick to cancel people

33:57

in the past but often we are

33:59

repeating those patterns so we look at

34:01

the founding fathers and we think of

34:04

America we think how the hell are

34:06

you starting this country on the basis

34:08

of all men are created equal and

34:11

freedom and you are literally bringing people

34:13

in chains and forcing them to work

34:15

in in humane conditions and we think

34:18

well that's something we would never do

34:20

but if you have a mobile phone

34:22

or a smartphone, it very likely was

34:25

made by enslaved Uyghur people in China.

34:27

And I think now the thing is

34:29

it's further away, because I think we

34:31

look at people in New York at

34:34

that time and we think, well, there

34:36

are people in Virginia, but it might

34:38

have taken them longer to get to

34:41

Virginia than it would take us to

34:43

jump on a plane and go to

34:45

China. actually is it further away? It

34:48

isn't really and we know about it

34:50

because we have access to... We can

34:52

see images, we can read reports, we

34:55

have so much access to information. And

34:57

we don't think it's fair. I mean,

34:59

there's no one making an argument for

35:02

it, like there was people making an

35:04

argument for the slave trade. No one

35:06

says that's the right thing to do,

35:08

it's just a pragmatic thing to do,

35:11

to ignore the concerns about it. Absolutely.

35:13

And like, I remember when the musical

35:15

Hamilton came out, and a lot of

35:18

people were like, well, we should no

35:20

way be glorifying him. with people who

35:22

did and I'm like how this is

35:25

the thing is now the very real

35:27

hypocritical question that we have for ourselves

35:29

is how do I do any of

35:32

my oh I'm gonna change the world

35:34

posts and contact people and email to

35:36

me without one of these like without

35:38

I'm listeners I'm holding up a phone

35:41

You know, this is a zoom. Who

35:43

knows where this laptop came from and

35:45

who made it? Who's mining for the

35:48

minerals to make these things? Who's making

35:50

them in factories? What hours are they

35:52

being forced to work? And we're just

35:55

like, well, there's nothing you can do.

35:57

That is our attitude towards it. Well,

35:59

how else am I going to live?

36:02

That's just what it's like now. And

36:04

so it is a real moral dilemma,

36:06

because I absolutely do understand Ed Miliband

36:09

going, the main thing is... If we

36:11

do not get to net zero, we're

36:13

driving the world off a cliff, like

36:15

this planet will not be habitable for

36:18

human beings. I always think the planet

36:20

will be fine, actually. We're just creating

36:22

an environment which supports... a new form

36:25

of species that does really well under

36:27

warm water and lives off drinking straws.

36:29

And then, you know, in a hundred

36:32

years time they'll be going, who's replacing

36:34

the drinking straws? Will nobody think of

36:36

sustainability? But this planet will not be

36:39

habitable for us. And scientists, no credible

36:41

scientist disagrees with that. So it is

36:43

a major dilemma because I understand he's

36:46

going, the main thing is, and he

36:48

said, he was asked about, why don't

36:50

you get... British companies to make them

36:52

and he said they don't have anywhere

36:55

near the pipeline, where are we going

36:57

to get them from? But I think

36:59

the answer then would be create the

37:02

pipeline in the UK, do something really

37:04

bold and say we're going to make

37:06

them all here, we're going to create

37:09

masses of jobs, we're going to create

37:11

masses of good. interesting jobs for people

37:13

to be able to do this and

37:16

we're going to create net zero jobs

37:18

here and I think that would change

37:20

things. I guess then Irene though you

37:23

come up against the long-term versus short-term

37:25

thing don't you? You know the whole

37:27

point of the labor government having this

37:29

as a principle in their manifesto was

37:32

we want to get this up and

37:34

running as soon as possible and cut

37:36

people's bills, never mind climate change, cut

37:39

people's bills, cut people's bills for schools

37:41

for schools and hospitals and hospitals for

37:43

schools and hospitals and hospitals and hospitals

37:46

for schools for schools and hospitals as

37:48

well as well as well and then

37:50

they'll then you're talking 15 years. And

37:53

I think that's kind of what this

37:55

comes down to. You can see how

37:57

determined Ed Miller Band is to get...

37:59

this through as quickly as possible, you

38:02

know, he wants to do it at

38:04

all cost. He's not thinking of the

38:06

entire supply chain, the issues later down

38:09

the line. When you do think about

38:11

that, these are enormous solar panels. Lots

38:13

of them end up being thrown away

38:16

instead of repurposed or recycled at the

38:18

end of their life cycle. So, you

38:20

know, yes, it could be great for

38:23

bringing down bills and for kind of

38:25

getting towards this low-carbon future that we

38:27

want to move towards. But, you know,

38:30

I saw this figure that was really

38:32

shocking that by 2050, which is the

38:34

rough expiration date of solar panels manufactured

38:36

today, the technology is estimated to produce

38:39

78 million metric tons of waste, you

38:41

know. And it's filled with toxic metals.

38:43

But no one's thinking about that now

38:46

because, as you say, like, Ed Miller

38:48

Band will just be thinking about how

38:50

are we going to get in the

38:53

next election and how can I push

38:55

this through and bring and do something

38:57

that's going to make a difference for

39:00

people now. I mean on the policy

39:02

itself, do you think it'll work. I

39:04

mean, he's absolutely determined that this will

39:07

bring people's bills down and it will

39:09

make a difference, but it is, I

39:11

note, dependent on the sun, which we

39:13

don't have as much of as other

39:16

countries because we do have quite a

39:18

thick lot of cloud up there. No,

39:20

and I think it's difficult because in

39:23

order to, I mean, all of it

39:25

is sort of moot really, really, some

39:27

of the main... climate policy targets are

39:30

being dropped because the government there promised

39:32

to drop in people's bills and actually

39:34

energy bills are up by about six

39:37

hundred seven hundred dollars a month. Mark

39:39

Carney, one of the first things he's

39:41

done is got rid of one of

39:43

the key climate policy targets from Trudeau's

39:46

government. You've got Richard Tice here. He

39:48

was up in Scotland recently shouting drill,

39:50

Scotland drill. The UK government is rolling

39:53

back on the Rosebank oil field and

39:55

it's really difficult to persuade people. move

39:57

forward on this. I think talking about

40:00

human rights abuses being involved in the

40:02

supply chain for solar panels is a

40:04

hard thing to engage people in even

40:07

though it's completely vital and we don't

40:09

know whether. these technologies are ultimately going

40:11

to work, whether they're going to move

40:14

fast enough to bring down global warming

40:16

so that we have a sustainable environment

40:18

for humanity on the planet. I mean

40:20

these are huge questions to be trying

40:23

to tackle in our podcast this week,

40:25

but yeah I think I think the

40:27

whole idea of bringing people with you

40:30

is so vital and politicians are just

40:32

not managing to do it. And of

40:34

course this isn't the only obstacle is

40:37

it I really that the government faces

40:39

trying to launch GB energy trying to

40:41

get to net zero? No, exactly. You

40:44

know, they've also got the day-to-day issues

40:46

of people just not wanting these type

40:48

of things, you know, in their backyard,

40:51

basically. So, you know, you've got a

40:53

lot of growing concerns about onshore energy

40:55

projects, which Labour are keen to push

40:57

through, about farmers who are being offered

41:00

more money to use their land to

41:02

host sona panels rather than crops. and

41:04

there are some you know fears that

41:07

the countryside will turn into this industrialized

41:09

wasteland filled with solar panels. Obviously that's

41:11

quite dramatic but you know there's there's

41:14

a lot of hurdles that he has

41:16

to face and there's also a lot

41:18

of worries about the impact on the

41:21

wildlife which is split quite evenly between

41:23

people saying oh it could actually benefit

41:25

the wildlife and those saying no this

41:28

will be destroying the habitat for... the

41:30

animals are liver, so yeah a lot

41:32

to deal with. Indeed, well I am

41:34

a humane employer so I'm going to

41:37

insist that our shift in the news

41:39

mine is over for today. My thanks

41:41

to Katrina Stewart and to Irene foreshore

41:44

and special guest Deborah Francis White by

41:46

her book now. You can follow this

41:48

show for free you can get every

41:51

episode as soon as it's released. Just

41:53

search for The Week Unrapped, wherever you

41:55

get your podcasts, wherever you get your

41:58

podcasts, In the meantime In

42:00

the meantime, I've been

42:02

our music is by producer Morby,

42:04

the Rethink Audio. And

42:07

until we meet again

42:09

to unwrap next week,

42:11

Audio. And until we meet again to unwrap

42:13

next week, bye bye.