Woman's Hour - Angélique Kidjo, Taxing the child free, Recognition for first England footie team

Episode Date: July 11, 2022

Angélique Kidjo is a 5 time Grammy Award winner from Benin who has been called "Africa's premier diva". Later this month she will be headlining the WOMAD world music and dance festival. She’ll be talking on Woman’s Hour about why she sings in five different languages and how music can be a greater force for change than politics. A recent article in the Sunday Times asked whether we should tax the childfree. It got a lot of attention and Sarah Harper, Professor of Gerontology at Oxford University joins Emma to discuss, as does Daisy Buchanan, an author and podcast host who has chosen to be child free.The first international England Women’s football match was in November 1972, England vs Scotland. Neither team were awarded with ‘caps’ which are awarded to players whenever they represent their country in an international match. Nicola Sturgeon awarded the 1972 Scottish Women’s team with their long awaited caps before the Women’s World Cup final last year. The 1972 England Women’s team are still waiting to receive theirs. 50 years on from that first match, we speak to Woman’s Hour listener and a 1972 goalkeeper for the England Women’s football team, Sue Whyatt and the honorary secretary of the Women’s Football Association, Patricia Gregory who co-organised the first international women’s England v Scotland match in November 1972.Presenter: Emma Barnett Producer: Emma Pearce

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. I'm Natalia Melman-Petrozzella, and from the BBC, this is Extreme Peak Danger. The most beautiful mountain in the world. If you die on the mountain, you stay on the mountain. This is the story of what happened when 11 climbers died on one of the world's deadliest mountains, K2, and of the risks we'll take to feel truly alive. If I tell all the details, you won't believe it anymore. Extreme, peak danger. Listen wherever you get your podcasts.

BBC Sounds. Music, radio, podcasts. Hello, I'm Emma Barnett and welcome to Woman's Hour from BBC Radio 4. Good morning and welcome to the programme. A hot day for us all in most places temperature-wise and that heat is definitely felt in the political arena as the search for the new Prime Minister continues in earnest with more and more people throwing their hats into the ring. That race includes four women so far, the Foreign Secretary and Women and Equalities Minister Liz Truss, her former Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch,

who resigned last week, Trade Minister Penny Mordaunt and the Attorney General Suella Braverman, as well as seven men, including the former Chancellor Rishi Sunak and the former Health Secretary Sajid Javid, whose resignations within minutes of each other kicked off what began the week that was in politics, if I can put it like that. It is conceivable then we will have another female prime minister, our third woman leader and the third from the Conservative Party. But you may not be backing a woman if you are indeed backing anyone in this race to replace Boris Johnson. Who is your money on and why? And what do they need to say or do or prioritise to get your vote,

as it were? You're not having a vote, but if you were, what would it be? You can text WOMEN'S HOUR on 84844. Text will be charged to your standard message rate. On social media, we're at BBC Womans Hour. As I always say, if you prefer email, many of you do, you get to send longer messages, do get in touch through the Womans Hour website.

Also today, are you a teacher? Perhaps you live with one. Are you a pupil? Well, regardless, we have all been taught. And today we're also going to talk to one woman working in education who has decided to write to the Department for Education about the conduct of one of Boris Johnson's newest ministers, a woman by the name of Andrea Jenkins, who at the end of last week, going in to watch the Prime Minister's resignation speech, stuck up her

middle finger to crowds as she walked through those gates. The new education minister has since said she was driven to do so because she was at the end of her tether, having received years of abuse, including death threats. She hasn't apologised, only saying that she should have had more composure, but she is human. Andrea Jenkins is still an education minister. Should she be in post?

The education secretary has declined to come on this morning, as has Andrea Jenkins, nor has the department given Woman's Hour a statement. But you can let us know what you think. The majority of teachers in this country are still female. What would happen to you in this line of work or otherwise if you stuck your middle finger up in a work capacity? 84844, the same numbers you need to get in touch this morning. Also on today's programme, away from politics and conduct,

if you like, in public office and, I suppose, in our working lives, music from West African sensation Anjali Kidjo and those elusive international caps for trailblazing female football players. But first, who could replace Boris Johnson as Prime Minister then? Caroline Wheeler is the political editor of the Sunday Times. Good morning. Good morning.

Four women out of the 11 so far, perhaps a fifth to join. We're told Priti Patel may consider putting herself forward. What do you make of the field? Well, it's an extremely wide field, which I think denotes the fact that there was never really a sort of front runner to replace Boris Johnson, which was one of the arguments that backbenchers made for not getting rid of him, whether there wasn't an obvious person to replace him.

The four women that are standing all represent what I would say come from a similar part of the party. And they're all making very similar sort of promises on tax. So it's going to be interesting to see what the dividing lines are that emerge between them. The only one we've seen thus far has been really around women's issues and that has been a kind of spat that's emerged between Penny Mordaunt and indeed Suella Braverman. But in terms of how they're going to make their pitch out of those issues,

we've still got so far to go, it's almost impossible to pick a winner. What's that spat? The spat that was between Suella Braverman and Penny Morden was over the maternity bill. I think Suella Braverman put a statement out last night. There was a suggestion that there had been an orchestrated attempt to remove the word mother from the bill to instead say pregnant person. And indeed, they've tried to make something of that today with both camps really trying to re-establish their kind of women's rights credentials. Right. So that's one area. Has this also been discussed by the male candidates? Has there been anything in this area just because it's already reared its head?

It's interesting. It has actually. Rishi Sunak was in one of the papers over the weekends actually saying that he wanted to get away from these kind of woke issues and that he was very keen to sort of get away from this sort of gender neutral language which he felt had kind of taken away from the kind of women's issues. He hasn't said it himself personally. That was briefings that we received from his camp. But it does seem that this whole kind of issue of who is a woman, what is a woman, is going to be one of the issues that we're going to look at. And that's partly because those issues are very pertinent at the moment and they don't necessarily play very well for some of the candidates with membership,

which is traditionally very sort of right wing and much more right wing than the MPs most of the time. Well, it's also one of those issues that it's important to have clarity on. And lots of people, not just politicians, shy away from talking about this topic in certain terms, shall we say. But of course, where it concerns legislation, it's very important indeed. And to listeners of Woman's Hour, no less. Just looking at who has the backing of whom, because it is a wide field, you may be forgiven for not knowing, for instance, some of the candidates as well. Kemi Badenoch, despite repeated invitations, I should say, to this programme and serving as an Equalities minister until last week. We still never managed to welcome Kemi.

I hope we can now she's put her hat in the ring to become not just the leader, but the next prime minister. She resigned as equalities minister, like I say, last week. Is she a strong candidate? Well, and talking about backers, I mean, what's one of the interesting things that's happened today is that Michael Gove, who's often seen as being a kind of really senior figure within the party and somebody who brings votes with him, has come out in favour of Kemi Badoudou today and has said that he'll be supporting her. Now, there's some people that think that that's a kind of opening salvo because, of course, Michael Gove was fired by Boris Johnson

last week. And there's been a suggestion that Boris very much sees him as a sort of a bit of a snake and somebody that often stabs him in the back. So it would have been incendiary had he immediately come out to support Rishi Sunak, which is where many of us thought that he would end up going. But no, he's come out in favour of Kemi Banerjee today and has said very clearly that he thinks that she is the sort of refreshing figure that can re-galvanise the party. So she's got some interesting backers. In terms of the other backers, I mean, you've mentioned at the top of your programme today that we have Liz Truss, who, to the surprise of nobody, has the support of Kwasi Kwarteng, the business secretary. He's come out in favour of her. And indeed, Penny Morden. We haven't seen any big hitters come out behind Penny yet,

but she does have a lot of the sort of senior women behind her, I understand. People like Maria Miller, for example, and Caroline Noakes, who is the chairman of the Women and Equalities Committee. Yeah, she's quite regularly on the programme. We have also recently had Liz Truss, not least with her role talking about Ukraine, but also the day after Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe was freed, which was a big day. She did promise to come back actually and do her phone in with the listeners of Women's Hour in her capacity as Women and Equalities Minister. Perhaps that's also

a good time for her to hopefully to come back to answer some questions, because there are lots of questions. There are still lots of unknowns. But this isn't to the electorate, of course. This is to a very small group, by comparison, who will make the decision again on who is the prime minister of this country. If you were a betting woman, dangerous game, Caroline Wheeler, as the political editor of the Sunday Times, do you think it's going to be a woman? I mean, at the moment, and I can only go from the kind of feeling

that you get from talking to people. No, I don't think it's going to be a woman, sadly. I think it's very likely to be Rishi Sunak, the former chancellor. I think at the moment he's, by a long chalk, getting the most support from MPs. But of course, as you know, Emma, it doesn't come down to the MPs ultimately. It will be that runoff between the two candidates at the end he does seem to be favorite still even in polling amongst the um membership um as well but i think when you get down to it the final two it will depend again i think on the brexit issue i think there's a lot

of people that are still talking about brexit even though we're you know so he's on from that referendum just very briefly so because rishi did actually bring up sexism, Rishi Sunak brought up sexism when a scandal surrounding him broke, as it was viewed by some, around his family's tax affairs. He talked of sexism bringing his wife into it. You don't think what went on with issues around whether she had paid enough tax or not will hurt him? I think he sort of detoxified himself by resigning. That seems to be the general sort of received wisdom at the moment. I mean, I think people's tax affairs is certainly going to be under the spotlight.

And we've already seen Nadeem Zahawi, now the chancellor, his tax affairs also coming under the spotlight. So I think it will be an issue, but I think that's not ultimately what people are thinking about at the moment. They don't want scandal. That's the thing they don't want. They don't want scandal. But Caroline, the next thing we're about to discuss

is the conduct of a new education minister, a woman called Andrea Jenkins, walking into Downing Street last Thursday and putting up her middle finger. She's not apologised. She said she should have had more composure. She said it was due to the sounds of the crowds and years of abuse

and she lost and she came to the end of her tether. We are receiving many messages about this. Lots of our listeners are women, as you would expect, and the majority of teachers in this country are still women. You talk about no scandal. Is there any appetite to look at who's

been appointed and if they are the right people for the job in light of the fact that the person who's appointed them is going? Well, I mean, you would think that in any other circumstances, that would be the first thing that you do. I mean, sadly, because of what happened last week, there was a very small pool of people that they could draw upon. And I know from having spoken to people who were in the room, there was a sort of whiteboard that was up there with kind of almost a riskometer in terms of those appointments, but they didn't have much choice. Had they not been able to fill those appointments, then they wouldn't have been able to command a majority and that would have collapsed the government. And I think that they were just basically prepared to do whatever it takes to stop that from happening, irrespective of what those appointments meant.

Caroline Wheeler, political editor of the Sunday Times. Is it right to ever use the middle finger in your working life, even if you're having the worst day or you've received abuse and you've reached the end of your tether and you want to, quote, stand up for yourself? The new Education Minister, Andrea Jenkins, that is how she has justified making such a gesture to people outside the gates of Downing Street on Thursday as she walked in to support the Prime Minister ahead of his resignation speech.

I should make very clear we did invite Andrea Jenkins to come onto the programme, but our invitation was declined. We also spoke to the Education Secretary, James Cleverley, who declined to come on Women's Hour today. The Department for Education did not give us a statement, but referred us to the new minister's personal statement on Twitter. So here is what she had to say. After receiving huge amounts of abuse from some people, some of the people, excuse me, who were there over the years, I have also had seven death threats in the last four years, two of which have been in recent weeks and are currently being investigated by the police. I had reached the end of my tether. I responded and stood up for myself.

Just why should anyone have to put up with this sort of treatment? I should have shown more composure, but I'm only human. Dame Alison Peacock is the chief executive of the Chartered College of Teaching, which is a professional body for teachers. She has written to the Department for Education about the Andrea Jenkins incident. Good morning. Good morning. What was your reaction when you saw that? Because many people getting in touch about what would happen to them in their line of work.

Well, frankly, I was appalled. I've worked in education for four decades now. And in fact, James Cleverley is my 21st Secretary of State. So goodness knows how many ministers as well. And I've always held the Secretary of State and his ministerial team in high regard. And they've always been very respectful. We may have disagreed, there may have been issues where we've debated, but there's never been anything like the behaviour that we witnessed last week. And I just felt enough was enough and sent an email to the department to express my dismay. And since that time, there's been a huge groundswell of support for that action, for standing up for what I believe to be the right way of behaving. And actually, I'm afraid the undersecretary of state fell short of that behaviour code.

Should she still have a job? It's not for me to say whether she should have a job. It's not your gift. But if you did that as a teacher in a work context, because she was walking into Downing Street, so say you were walking into school, you'd received a load of abuse from parents or whatever the equivalent was, and you stuck up your middle finger as a teacher, what would happen to you? Yeah, you would be dismissed. The teacher's standards are very clear about the high standards of ethics and behaviour for teachers,

for governors, for school leaders, for support staff. It's not acceptable. We have to, and we teach our very youngest children self-regulation. We're constantly helping our young people to manage their emotions in the best possible way. When do you expect to reply from the Department for Education? I don't know. It would be great if I got one today, wouldn't it? What do you think would be an adequate response because of what you've just

said and, of course, about those in public life setting an example? Well, I think the number of people who are expressing their dismay, you know, I think the response is going to need to be very carefully worded, quite frankly, because the model of behaviour that's been exhibited, children will have seen that, parents will have seen that. I just feel it's not acceptable. What do you say to those? I've got two, if you like, pushbacks, as we say, coming back in, two areas of concern. One is, what would you say to those who have some sympathy, have some concern about the fact that she says she has received, as many people do in public life, not just women, but it's arguably women that often get a lot more violence in terms of threats. She has received a lot of abuse. Of course, I would never condone any kind of abuse.

And I think that the pressure that people in public life are under is huge. But so is the pressure that many headteachers experience and teachers, to be honest. It's increasingly difficult to please everybody. We always want to please everybody, but it's increasingly hard to be honest. It's increasingly difficult to please everybody. We always want to please everybody, but it's increasingly hard to do so. Well, it's also been notable to the reaction to this. And I'm saying this specifically to an unnamed listener who has got in touch, and I definitely want to read this out, that teachers across the board and also the political spectrum have spoken in response to what Andrea

Jenkins did last week, because she hasn't apologised. She has explained it. She has said, you know, I should have had more composure, perhaps, but I am human. You know, and I'm thinking of teachers who have spoken at the Conservative Party conferences. So not just those who perhaps have different politics, which is how some are explaining this as well. That was the other area, if you like. So let me read you this message. There are many, many coming in from teachers, and there are many coming in from those who just saying you just couldn't do this in any other line of work as well. Not just the teaching profession. But this one says stirring up a nonsense storm over a junior minister's actions reflects so badly upon the BBC.

This is not what we pay you for. There are issues of profound importance to deal with now where you are trying to whip up a storm over something that is just not important you are playing politics now that accusation is to me and my colleagues here at the BBC not to you Dame Alison Peacock but what would you say to that

because I suppose this listener who sadly doesn't give their name but I'd be very happy to have it and they have that luxury I don't here at the BBC. They would perhaps also accuse you of playing politics at a time of national importance. What would you say? I would say this is not about politics.

This is about setting role models for our children, for society. And I feel that in this particular instance, this Member of Parliament fell short. Let's see what the response is. Perhaps you could keep us up to date. We did try very hard this morning to hear from someone from the Department for Education, but that was not met. It'd be interesting to, of course, hear what the response is to you.

Thank you very much for coming on, Dame Alison Peacock, Chief Executive of the Chartered College of Teaching, which is a professional body for teachers, who's certainly seen, as she says, more than, well, 21, I think you said, Secretaries of State for Education in your time. Andrea Jenkins' behaviour was appalling, reads this message. Integrity, question mark, high moral standards. What an example to our students and young people. Rather like her colleague and friend Boris Johnson, she tries to excuse her actions.

This is just not good enough. Teachers and pupils are held to much higher standards and she shows that she has little understanding of those of us facing the stresses of front-facing public services. Shame on her, says Linda, who is a retired primary school teacher. Good morning to you, Linda. Another one here. I am a teacher, although I can try and understand, says Shahina, why Andrea Jenkins did what she did,

but there is no way that this would have been tolerated if it had been me in a classroom. I have been at the end of my tether because of workload and challenging pupil behaviour, but it does not mean I have resorted to such behaviour. Can you imagine if she was thrown into other challenging situations or if she had a difficult day?

What would she do or say? Standards, I'm afraid, have come down in politics under this government. Not surprising, given who has been leading the party. Georgie says, as a teacher, I am often at the end of my tether in the classroom. I have to say, many of you getting in touch, talking about being at the end of your tether, goaded and shouted at is par for the course. But education is for all, so never rise to the bait. Andrea Jenkins is a disgrace to the education professor, profession, excuse me.

Isabel in Cambridge said, good morning, I would rather have a minister who flips the bird, as it's colloquially called, than lies with every breath and parties while British men and women die alone. In the context of the conduct of the Conservative Party in the past two years, this ought to be too minor a fault to mention. And so it carries on. I will come back to more of your messages, but many coming in in response to what should happen to the newest education minister, who has not apologised for her actions last week, but has explained them in the context of the abuse and the death threats that she has received. Also hearing your thoughts about whether we could be having a new female Prime Minister, our third and the third from the Conservative Party. What do those now vying to be

the next Prime Minister have to do to get your vote? But let me bring your mind back to something that happened on Women's Hour last week. As the Women's Euros kicked off, I asked you whether you would be watching. A lot of you also got in touch on that. And one listener in particular caught my eye on our text message console. Sue, who happens to, you know, have a bit of a connection to this game,

the goalkeeper for the first ever England women's football team 50 years ago in 1972. And her message said, as a member of the very first England women's football team in 1972, I am blown away a member of the very first England women's football team in 1972 I am blown away by how far the game has come just wondering if you are aware that although our contribution has recently started to be recognised those of us who played under the WFA the women's football association because the FA would not recognise us have still not been awarded official

caps the Scottish team who played in that first match have been awarded caps by the Scottish FA. As promised, we got in touch with the FA and they said, quote, in line with the 50th anniversary of the England women's team in November 2022, so this year, the FA are working on a project to recognise and celebrate all former internationals. Well, shall we hear what Sue has to say about that? And in a moment, I'll be talking to Patricia Gregory, who was the Honourable Secretary of the Women's Football Association, co-organising the first international women's England v Scotland match in November 1972. But first to Sue, good morning. Welcome to Women's Hour.

Good morning, Emma. Lovely to be here. How lovely to know you're a listener and then you got in touch as well. I'm very, very grateful. And I wonder, first of all, what you make of that response from the FA? It's pretty typical, really.

They'll probably send us out a last minute email to lots of people who are well over 70 asking us to travel down to London at our own expense and stay there and a lot won't go because it's always last minute it always seems that they can't give us any sort of pre-warning that something like this is going to happen. We were allowed to go to Wembley and walk around the edge of the Wembley pitch as the supposed legends of England ladies, England women. We did ask at the time to go onto the pitch. We were refused because they said only players go on the pitch. Two weeks later, the England men legends were all paraded onto the pitch in front of the crowd.

It's happened like this every time. It's very different. I'm just thinking about Wimbledon as well this week. We've seen the legends of both sexes be allowed, as it were, to go on to centre court and mark the moment and the history of tennis, but not the same in football, you're saying? Correct. And also, you were talking about apologies before. The FA have never apologised to all us women and all the people that kept me playing football.

All that time when we were banned from the official pitches, they did their utmost to squash the game um and we kept going and a lot a lot more women than me i did very little for the cause i have to say um and also just to set the record straight sue bucket was the very first female goalkeeper um i was the reserve. There was a squad of 15. I was the reserve. I got my cap the following year.

Got it. But they're homemade caps done on somebody's machine at home. I wouldn't part with it for the world. I bet you wouldn't. But can I just bring in, let me bring in Patricia at this point, because before we sort of get into the cap element, although I could talk to Sue about all elements of what she's just raised and much more. What are caps for those who don't know?

Why do they matter, Patricia? Well, you see most many sports. I mean, cricket, they've got caps. The cap, I don't know the original story, but you used to at one point, I believe in football, get the choice between a fee or a payment and a cap. So it's an actual cap that you get given. It's an actual cap like a schoolboy's cap. We, the Women's FA, which no longer exists because we passed everything over to the FA in 1993,

back in 1972 when we formed the England team, we didn't have the funds to buy the caps and so Flo Bilton, a stalwart of those early days she offered to make them and as Sue says, they are greatly treasured by the girls Flo didn't have any help so we only used to give the girls one cap when they played their debut match. Right, and that's how you kind of fudge it and make it work?

Well, if they qualified and played for ten times, when they finally finished, we gave them a shield. I have seen these shields, they're very nice. A wooden shield on which was a small other shield, a metal shield, giving the matches that they performed in. So that's how things were marked when there was still a women's FA? Because in 1972 the Football Association recognised the women's FA as the sole governing body of women's football in this country at the present time. What do you make of the FA's response to our inquiry off the back of Sue's message? Well, I think it's fair. They have tried.

The current Euros, every city has got an exhibition. And many of the girls, and I call them girls even though their grandmothers like Sue, they have contributed to videos and written stuff that's appearing in these exhibitions. But they didn't really answer the question, did they? What they're saying is that through a vast investment from the Lottery Heritage Fund, they are working on how they will commemorate the 50th anniversary of that first international, which is in the autumn. But I mean, Sue, all you seem to want is a cap. That's right. And really, I want the caps for those girls who played in that first team.

I'm in a special position. The fact those girls who played in that first team. I'm in a special position. The fact I didn't play in that first match, I was a reserve. I want those girls who went on to coach and play for England for a long time, they should be getting a cap each, even if it's just for that very first match, an official FA cap. I mean, in the scheme of the cost and the scope of the FA and the money that's swilling around football, it doesn't sound like a lot.

I mean, forgive me if I'm speaking out of turn. No, I totally agree with you. How can they not just give us all a cap for those games we played under the WFA? We should get someone from the very top of the FA on to see if we can answer this. We have asked the question, but maybe we should

double down on our invitation. My hit rate this morning is not great. You can hear on who's been invited and who's actually showing up to answer some of these questions. I'm extremely grateful that you're both here. Sue, I love the fact you're all... How old are you now, if you don't mind me asking? I'm 66 now. Five grandchildren, yes.

Still a girl, which is great, in terms of how we talk about football then. How are you enjoying the Euros so far? Oh, when Beth Mead scored that goal, oh, that was hysterical. It was just brilliant. And the standard of football now, those girls are wonderful.

And all the teams from all the... So I can only just Western look against Norway and go Lionesses. They're brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. It must be an amazing thing to watch. I bet it's quite emotional at times as well, Sue. It is very emotional.

Yes, yes. It's a shame we didn't have those same chances, but I'm glad they've got them now. And as I say, brilliant. Just go for it, Lionesses. Let's bring that cup home. Yeah, well, I think, you know, we all have a gratitude to you and your fellow girls, if I could say that, for all you did. So thank you very much. And it's lovely to have you on the programme. We'll keep going if we can with this, Sue. It's just some caps. Patricia, how are you finding this tournament? As Sue said, very emotional.

I went to the opening game and I actually did have tears in my eyes when the national anthem was sung by 68,000 people. Because back in 1972, that first game up in Scotland, I'm not sure, I think it was maybe 200 people, but to think that we could have 68,000 paying people and so many of them young girls who can see a way forward. They can see that there is even a career for them, just like their brothers, which absolutely in 1972, I wasn't of the standard of Sue, but it's amazing that it has come to this.

Well, huge thanks to you as well and all those who worked on. So many people, men and women, who in the 60s when we formed the Women's FA and into the 70s, we worked very hard and all in a voluntary capacity. I have to say, it'll make you both laugh, hopefully, but I mean, it's not funny, but it's just a great message. You know, sometimes when someone just puts it better, we've just received this message from someone on Twitter saying, for goodness sake, just give them a cap. Yes.

Sue says yes. I think if you were to give all of the England players, and I think the FA is trying to find a way to mark all former England players, and that would be quite expensive. But even so, there must be out there in the audience a nice sponsor. You see Patricia doing the detail here. Sue, I'll give you the final word. What did you want to say to that?

I think the FA have plenty of money and they should just put their hands in their pockets and give us all a cap for goodness sake. Sue Wyatt, thanks so much for texting last week. I always say the programme's all the better for it and it definitely was from hearing from you. And Patricia Gregory, the Honourable

Secretary of the Women's Football Association, as was. Thank you so much. More messages coming in on that, but also messages coming in around politics. Just to go to some of yours about leaders

and who should be the next Prime Minister. Dear Woman's Hour, I feel the priority for whoever becomes our next Prime Minister is integrity and honesty, says Lynn, who's listening in Devon.

Good morning, Lynn. So far, I've not heard one of the candidates mention climate change, let alone say what they would do Prime Minister is integrity and honesty, says Lynn, who's listening in Devon. Good morning, Lynn. So far, I've not heard one of the candidates mention climate change, let alone say what they would do as a matter of urgency. No name on that message, but thank you. I've got one from Alison, who's listening in Cheshire. Hello to you. I'd be looking for a leader who would show some humanity and empathy.

As we were talking about the Conservatives, that isn't very likely. That's Alison's take on that. None of them. We need a new beginning as they're all tarred with Boris Johnson's brush. The whole system is broken, says Judith. Another one. All the female candidates are absolutely appalling, says Sarah, as are the men, unfortunately. So some feeling very disenchanted, to say the least. More messages coming in off the back of the new education minister, Andrea Jenkins. I can't help but feeling all this media panic about Andrea Jenkins is influenced by her being a Conservative MP. What she did was rude and unprofessional, but was not certainly,

as Dame Alison Peacock stated, as bad to justify instant dismissal if she'd been a teacher. At worst, she might have received a reprimand or a written warning. But if as a teacher she had been sacked for this, she would have had a cast-iron unfair dismissal claim. I also suspect, had it been a man who had behaved like this, then the whole amount of media outrage would have been considerably less. Well, that's the final point of that very interesting to discuss, always interested in how responses differ. I mean, what would you say, would any of these messages be different if it was a Labour education minister? Or would they be the same? I can't sadly test that. But I'm thinking about those who've been in that post and what the response would be. Another one from Scott, he says, I can't believe some people care this much about a momentary action, like somebody giving the middle finger. Doesn't understand it at all. So more messages.

Can people give her a break? Scott goes on to say, and instead carry on talking about the much worse prolonged and flagrant bad behaviour we've seen from the prime minister over the last year. So a few years, says Scott in Bristol. Of course, some people are arguing you can do both. And so the other messages continue.

One here, I'm a school governor who next week will attend an exclusion panel for a pupil's surrounding behaviour issues. I have no doubt that Andrea Jenkins' behaviour will be used by the pupil slash parent to undermine the school's own standards. Actions have consequences. Leaders must set the highest standards or stand aside, says Sue in York. And so the messages keep coming in. I will come back to them, but a variety there for you to chew on and perhaps contribute to on 84844. Now, taxes are clearly going to be a major focus

of the Conservative Party leadership contest. A flurry of announcements over the weekend has seen most candidates promise cuts for individuals, businesses, or both. A recent article in the Sunday Times, I believe it was last week's edition, asked whether we should tax the child free, as it were. It caused quite a stir. Many of you were in touch about it and certainly talking about it on social media. That article was written by Paul Morland,

an author and demographer, in light of the recent census, which showed a plummeting birth rate and an ageing population. He argued that the UK needs radical ideas to prevent workplace shortages in the near future. He came up with a list of ideas and one was to create a pronatal culture including a telegram from the Queen whenever a family has a third child. Another was to retarget child benefit to incentivise women to have children. The most controversial was his proposal to introduce a negative child benefit, meaning a tax for those women and men who do not have an offspring, saying that it recognises that we all rely on there being a next generation and that

everyone should contribute to the cost of creating that generation. Well, to discuss, Professor of Gerontology at Oxford University, Sarah Harper. Daisy Buchanan's also on the line, an author, podcast host, and has chosen, as she puts it, to be child-free. Sarah, I'll come to you in just a moment, but Daisy, what was your reaction to that piece? Because there was a large one in some quarters. I suppose as a writer, my initial reaction was, call it what it is, pull a spare womb tax. I was horrified. The decision I've come to, and it's not something that I have taken lightly at all. It's really, really complicated. It's really, really emotive. And now my late 30s, it's taken me a long, long time to sort of, you know, establish myself, I guess, personally, professionally.

And, you know, until certainly in my 20s and early 30s, I didn't feel secure enough sort of in work or housing. I rented for a long time. I was able to buy somewhere to live last year. And I think lots of us are in that position where you know we're really anxious about about climate change we feel really insecure about our jobs really scared about the cost of living and the war this is not a country in which I want to raise a child and in some ways it doesn't feel like a choice because you know all the circumstances in which you want to feel positive and optimistic about bringing people into the world you know we don't have which you want to feel positive and optimistic about bringing people into the world, you know, we don't have that anymore. That's been taken away. So,

you know, the decision I've made is a heartbreaking, but it's a responsible one, really. And also, I was going to say, Daisy, if I may, you know, some people make that decision not based on any of that, you know, they just simply don't wish to have children. And then there are those who can't as well. That is absolutely true. And if you look at, you know, what's happening, you know, terrifying and devastating

in the US at the moment, you know, we shouldn't have to. I shouldn't have to justify it. I feel, you know, culturally, that's something that I need to do. But, you know, our bodies, our own business, it really does, you know,

echo this sort of the reproductive choice that's sort of being taken away, you know, all over the country. It's really frightening. It's sort of does you know echo this sort of the reproductive choice that's sort of being taken away you know all over the country it's really frightening sort of you know women being reduced to their biology but yeah you know I know so many people who've you know for all kinds of reasons people who struggle to conceive people who've you know lost pregnancies and you know all of you know there are so many sort of health issues and concerns too. How can we possibly bring in a blanket rule when there are pretty much infinite reasons for people being in the position that I'm in? Well, there is no rule coming in, let's just to be clear, because the prime minister is also in a state of flux.

And as of yet, we have not heard any of the candidates in that very wide field talk about this. But Sarah Harper, Professor Harper, to bring you in on this, it was an idea, it was the floating of an idea. And does the idea of this sort of policy have any merit whatsoever within the context we find ourselves in? Well, I completely agree with Daisy and that this has to be about women's choice. But let's just step back a bit.

Today's actually World Population Day. So the UN has just this morning released its 2022 figures. We're going to hit 8 billion people on this planet by November, and that is an increase of 1 billion. That is not good for our environment. And the idea that anyone should be encouraging women in high income, high consuming countries to have more children simply doesn't make sense at all, particularly from an environmental point of view. Demographically, it doesn't make sense. You know, just think about it, that what we'll do is we'll increase the number of child dependents when we have a growing number of older dependents. And that'll put more pressure on our economies and our working population. And in actual fact, there are so many other ways that we could get this.

We could encourage more immigration into our country. That's what most countries do. There is a huge sort of labour group that are in particularly Asia and Africa who would be very happy to find employment. And we could help older workers who want to stay active to work longer. So there are so many other policies. And I agree with Daisy.

What we should be doing is saying, how can we really support women to make whatever kind of choice they want, whether it's to be child free or if it is to have a child, to enable them through good quality care, appropriate housing, you know, tackling the cost of living. There are so many other policies. So I completely agree with Daisy and demographically, it simply doesn't work. So the policy idea was not sound, although raised as one of a number. but the problem is real. So the challenge is real. And the challenge is that across the world, women are having fewer and fewer children.

In fact, the UN report today actually says now two thirds of the world's countries, women are having lower than three children. And if you think that in our country, it's roughly about one and a half, and in most high consuming countries, it is. In Africa, we still have women who are having between four and nine children on average. And that means that across the 21st century, our populations will age and they will decline. And to a certain extent, there is very little we can do about that. And in fact, we know that pro-natalist policies simply don't work unless they're really draconian, as, for example, we saw in Romania 30 years ago, I think, when they banned abortions and any form of contraception.

All those countries that have tried to raise their birth rate, the only way it really works is by being supportive to parents so that women make the decision if they want to have children, they will have one or two children. And we will, I hope, across the 21st century move to a world where every child that is born has the opportunity to be well educated in good health and live a long life. But that does mean that we have to look far more creatively at how we're going to cope with our ageing population, supporting us as we go across our lives in education and work and housing, and coming to terms with the fact that in most European countries, we are going to have by the second half of this century, over half our population is going to be over 50. And so we should be really looking at a life course set of policies and not suggesting that women should be solving the problem by having more children. As you may imagine, and Daisy, I'll bring you in back in on

this, Professor Harper, that's fascinating. We are getting a lot of messages. Just even in the few minutes you started to try and broach this subject. Kay says, excuse me, as a childless woman, as she describes it, I'm already paying council tax, a lot of which goes into the school system, from which I personally get no benefit whatsoever. And will childless men have to pay a non-father tax too, Kay and Edinburgh? I am just stressing again, no one's floated this as policy. It was put forward as an idea by a demographer.

Judith, I am a woman and have no children. I pay tax, some of which is for other people's children. Half of single mothers get no maintenance from the father. Surely they should be targeted to pay for their children, not me. Teresa, there is an assumption

in taxing the child free that we do nothing to contribute to the next generation. Many of us have saved up for our nephews and nieces, helped with babysitting, and take a very active role with Godchildren and many others.

This is very diminishing of our role. And another one here, doesn't your listener wishing to penalise non-parents, I don't know if the demographer's a listener, but it was somebody writing in the Sunday Times, wishing to penalise non-parents, not realise these people without children are paying for schools, child benefit through their taxes

without having any benefit. And one more, what happened to the two-parent family and no increasing the world population? People with no children already pay taxes towards the upkeep of all children. As a baby boomer, I'm also sick of being referred to as a cost. I worked for 50 years and contributed to my care as a pensioner. Looking at the obesity rates now, the young people will be an even larger and longer cost to us all. Some already are. I suppose what this does, Daisy, is even just going here, although it seems we do need to have some sort of discussion about it, it pits people against each other, doesn't it? That's the devastating thing. And I agree with everyone who has,

you know, been in touch. I am glad and delighted to pay taxes that contribute towards things like school and, you know, know medical care and I should say where I live um which is on the on the Kent coast and Thanet which is one of the most deprived areas in the UK I've not been able to see a GP for five years and you know it's I know that sort of friends with you know who are parents struggle to sort of you know get the well it's been a real variance in terms of that care but yeah that's something that you know I would quite like as a taxpayer to you know be able to sort of have access to the NHS I know it's a very separate issue um but yeah that's it we don't we want to be a community and we want to see what

each other what other people need and help each other you know I'm an auntie I'm a sort of honorary auntie I'm really really glad to be part of a community with children in it where I could help and support you know people who are parents and I think that that's a key part of having a sort of a healthy happy society where everyone thrives I think that this the suggestion of this idea it just it strips humans down to this idea of being sort of resources I think there's no notion of the welfare of potential mothers no notion of the welfare of potential mothers no acknowledgement of the welfare of the people who are here i know as well that you know mental health issues among children you know those problems are really skyrocketing as far as i can tell and i think that that's because you know as um as sarah said we've not got the

resources to support the population that we do have. Everyone feels isolated. And it's about community. Yes. And just to come back, Sarah, to one of the points that was raised, and we have done this on the programme before, and it's quite interesting to actually flesh this out. But one of the arguments that does come up in this sort of area, in these sorts of discussions, is what about overpopulation? And you've spoken to a little bit to this, and you've mentioned, of course, the Population Day, which I didn't necessarily put together. So thanks for bringing that up from the United Nations with those figures. But one of the things that comes up is, don't we have enough people already and pressure on the climate? And yet,

at the same time, we're being warned of ageing populations. How do those two things go together? Well, it's very interesting. And you're right. So in 2019, I was talking exactly about this with another woman who decided to be child free. And one of the things I think is really important is that every woman who wants to have a child should feel empowered to have that child. The really important thing is around consumption. So we will have 8 billion people on this planet. That does put tremendous pressure on the planet. But the people who are actually putting the most pressure are actually not those women who are having lots of children in Africa because they're very low consuming.

It's us here in Europe and in America and in similar kind of Western style societies where we have very, very high levels of consumption. And so rather than saying, I don't want to have a child because I'm worried about overpopulation in the environment, the way to think about it is, I will have a child, but I will really ensure that we're a low-consumption family. Now, I have three children. My children are vegetarian. We brought them up to understand the real importance

of the planet and of conservation and of being low consuming. And we try as much as possible to be like that. So there is a problem with overpopulation. I think that actually the population will start to decline and we will have to have policy levers to approach that. But the idea is we have more and more and more children to solve a short term challenge, which is around the ageing, particularly of high income countries through encouraging women to have more children simply doesn't work. And I absolutely agree with everything that Daisy has said. Sarah Harper, professor of gerontology at Oxford University. Thank you to you, Daisy.

Just finally to you, I know you're from a large family yourself. And I know you, as you say, you've written about that and you've shared a lot about your thought to not have a child. And I suppose, you know, there's a great deal of messages or the themes of the messages coming in, which is something you hinted at, that you don't feel like you have a choice sometimes in this society. Some people saying we have a very pro-natalist society, if they want to describe it like that, as it is. Do you agree with that? I think we do. I think that there is the culture around having a family.

It's really, really prevalent. And I think perhaps I do know people and I do have, you know, lots of sort of, you know, friends and family members, maybe who, you know, perhaps the pressure to, you know, to be a mother or become a parent is is to make it a fair choice and that, you know, women who, anyone who wants to do it is empowered to do it and anyone who, you know, doesn't feel that way can, but it does feel like an empowered choice rather than trying to make the best of a terrifying and worsening situation.

Daisy Buchanan, thank you very much. Claire making the point as well that many people choose not to have children for whatever reason and others cannot and find this very distressing. Are we going to tax those people's pain? A powerful question as well to put into the mix education minister, a woman called Andrea Jenkins, who flipped up her middle finger to swear at the crowds outside Downing Street on Thursday. She went in to support her boss, the prime minister, as he resigned, Boris Johnson. And there's a message here from Jane. He said, I did a lot of protesting outside Westminster

before the last election, hoping to stay in the EU. We were noisy and irritating, but never abusive. There's a large police presence to help everyone feel safe. A member of parliament should be able to keep their composure at such moments. It is yet another demonstration of the culture of behaviour

at number 10 currently. Let them be gone. That particular crowd, there was two journalists actually tweeting about being in that crowd that she talks about and a lot of them were tourists actually

and a sort of debate about what was going on in that crowd. And another message here from Sue in York. Good morning. I'm a school governor who next week will be looking at discipline. We read that about an exclusion panel and worried about that being used. And another message here saying the middle finger issue has been overblown by your guest, the Dame.

I've been a teacher. I've used the whole variety of English language in the classroom and heard just as much. My children, both girls under 10, know almost every four-letter word and hear parents using them at the school gates. I support the minister, as I do with my children and did my pupils. She explained the reasons for her actions and was honest. Children will be exposed to all sorts

of languages as they grow up and it's equally possible to be rude and offensive without using swear words, something that's eminently demonstrated by politicians every day. Time to move on and let the prudes fade out, says Toby. You say without using swear words, but of course putting your middle finger up is swearing and is understood as such. But I take that point. Thank you for the message.

And just a couple more. The amount of provocation millions of people who work with the general public have to tolerate every day reads this message without being able to verbally or physically respond because if they do, they'll lose their jobs. Why is this different? And so they carry on. And surely discipline, says another one here,

must be the first quality of a government minister. Let's talk now to the singer Angelique Kidjo, a five-time Grammy Award winner from Benin in West Africa. She became a singer at six and has released 13 albums and sings in five different languages. She's collaborated with a host of musicians from Joss Stone to Sting and later this month she'll be headlining the WOMAD World of Music, Arts and Dance Festival,

fresh from Glastonbury as well. She's been busy. Let's hear a short burst of her song Mother Nature now. Don't ever let them hurt you in any way Or never let them steal and take the best of you Keep building cities from the ground Good morning, Angelique. Lovely to have you on

and to hear a blast of your music, which many will be enjoying at WOMAD. Just tell us, what does that song mean to you? It means to me that we all have to listen to the needs of Mother Earth because we only have one Earth, one ecosystem. And all the argument and all the things we've been talking about and I've been listening on Women Hour will have no meaning if there's no more Earth. It's a profound point. And actually, some messages have been coming in about that. Who our new leaders should be of the UK if they're not mentioning climate change and they're not mentioning the earth and

how we live on this earth you do sing i mentioned in five different languages why is that important that's pretty rare in a performer in your world well as all those languages and when the inspiration comes, I don't come to choose the language. The language come with the inspiration. So I just follow because every time I try to put another language in that inspiration, it never works. So I stop doing it because it's a waste of time. It's frustrating. You just follow the language that comes with it and you roll with it.

Yeah. Also, I suppose it does mean more people hear what you're trying to say as well and understand it, feel it. Absolutely. I mean, we're talking about climate change. I've been talking about climate change since 1983. And the politician won't talk about climate change because he's talking about women giving birth, overpopulation. They don't want to talk about those issues. They don't want to talk about at least taking care of the elderly people correctly and giving good education and good health care system to everyone across the board and create a more fair society.

And they don't know how to do it and they just don't want to do it. So what I'm saying in my album, in my song Mother Earth, is that will you hear the call to make profound change in every every front not only for the earth but for us human beings I mean social justice is equal to the justice of earth and we don't think at it like that we think that both both things are in silo and they are not together both comes together because we need one another we need each other do you feel that music can do that in the sense of, I know music can take people to places that nothing else can do.

I love music. I am fully subscribed to that view. But sometimes people don't listen to the lyrics. They don't always take them in. They just love the song. They love the beat. How do you try and get that across, what you're saying? I think that we have a misconception about the fact

that people don't take the lyrics in people take the lyrics in i mean the thing i learned from the traditional musician in my country is the uplifting music with a very profound and gruesome message and i asked the question then why and they say music is not it's not up to you as a musician to lecture people let the the message sink in. Everyone has a different time and a different way of reacting. People react immediately. Some will take time to digest the message they just heard and see how they can implement that message in their life

and then out of life. People do listen to the lyrics, and sometimes they don't know where to start. And that's the power of music that politicians don't have. And I always ask people, which politician's speech do you remember? No one can remember any of it because politics is always in the moment. You're talking about the issue of the moment. We artists, we are talking about the society in which we live and what impact our life and

impact the life of all civilians. We don't have any political agenda. So we speak to everyone on a different level. We are not making, we don't want to be elected in any office. We just want you to listen to what is going on in the world and to make your own decision.

Some artists obviously do have a political agenda but that's fine as well. You know, they can be honest about that. They can support certain political parties wherever they are in the world. But I understand the bigger point that you're not trying to run for office. You're trying to share

what you're writing about and what you're inspired by. But I'm also, just on a lighter note, you know, I'm terrible at actually remembering lyrics. And I often think lyrics, I might get them wrong. I might have misheard it for years.

I mean, there's some terrible mistakes I've made where I thought they were saying one thing and they were saying something else completely. So, you know, sometimes perhaps forgive your audience if they're a bit like me. And I'm just trying to be honest. Yeah. I mean, I like that. I like the fact. I mean, I mean, I like the fact that you can misinterpret it. And if it suits the moment, the instant you're living in, and you see, you know, my song, Agolo, I've been on Women Hour for years. And that's, for me, is the only radio in the world

that I've been playing that song for so long because I've been talking about climate change since I became pregnant, since I gave birth. I mean, we're talking about women giving birth. It's a responsibility. A child is a human being. And the responsibility of a parent is to give that child a good health care, a good education, and do the best you can for that child to become an independent and responsible adult.

It's not up to us to decide when a woman should have a child and why women have to bear the brunt and the responsibility of a child. Men participate in this. When women are alone to raise their kids, what is the tax that is given to the men to pay for the support of the child? So all those things have to come together.

It's all the same thing. If we don't see everything in a whole, we cannot see that Mother Earth that gave birth to us as we are, as a species, have to be respected the same way. Angelique Kidjo, thank you very much indeed. Lovely to hear you talking

as well as singing, of course, which people will do when they hear you on stage if they're able to go, if they're lucky to go to WOMAD, the World of Music and Arts and Dance Festival. I I hope you enjoy it I'm sure you will Angelique Kidjoe is headlining that festival Friday 29th of July thank you so much for for being with me this morning for your company for so many messages back with you tomorrow at 10. That's all for

today's Woman's Hour thank you so much for time. Join us again for the next one. Hi, I'm Andy Oliver, and I'd like to tell you all about my Radio 4 series, One Dish. It's all about why you love that one dish, the one that you could eat over and over again without ever getting tired of it. Each week, a very special guest will bring their favourite food to my table and we'll be unpacking the history of it and food psychologist Kimberly Wilson is on hand to talk us through the science bit What food reminds you of your child? What's your favourite place to go for dinner? What do you have for Sunday lunch?

What's your favourite dessert? Do you say plantain or plantain? What food would you take with you to a desert island? What's your favourite type of chilli oil? What do you have for breakfast? What's the best pasta steak? So if you're the sort of person who's already planning what you're having for lunch while you're eating breakfast, then this podcast is going to be right up your street.

That's One Dish with me, Andy Oliver. Listen now on BBC Sounds. And the deeper I dig, the more questions I unearth. How long has she been doing this? What does she have to gain from this? From CBC and the BBC World Service, The Con, Caitlin's Baby. It's a long story, settle in. Available now.