Extremely concerning. The thing that im most concerned is the fact that concerned about is the fact that the that the the judge ruled that the teenager didnt the teenager didnt have the capacity make decisions for capacity to make decisions for herself she disagreed herself because she disagreed with her doctors. And think with her doctors. And i think thats it thats concerning because it discredits silences the patient. And peter is a very sad story. And i think all our thoughts are with the family. But ultimately, has come ultimately, the judge has come to a view, having heard all of the evidence. Yes. Before of here the evidence. Yes. the before of here the evidence. Yes. the news re of here the evidence. Yes. the news with of here the evidence. Yes. the news with aaron here the evidence. Yes. the news with Aaron Armstrong is the news with Aaron Armstrong i very good evening to you. Its a minute past seven. Im Aaron Armstrong in the gb newsroom. New details have emerged of how the escaped terror suspect, daniel cliff , terror suspect, daniel cliff, was apprehended after four days on the run. The met police say on the run. The met police say he was pulled from a bicycle by a plain clothes officer on a canal towpath in northolt , west canal towpath in northolt, west london, 12 miles from wandsworth prison. Thats where he escaped from on wednesday. The Prime Minister has praised efforts by the and the mets the police and the mets commander, Dominic Murphy says the public played an integral role in his capture. Weve had a significant number of Counter Terrorism detectives working on this and officers and staff from across so15 here, but also a huge amount of support from the wider metropolitan police who have been utterly dedicated to trying to find daniel. And so at the moment, at that moment in time, there were a large number of officers in the south west london area all searching for daniel. And im pleased thats what to searching for daniel. And im plehisi thats what to searching for daniel. And im plehis capture thats what to searching for daniel. And im plehis capture this s what to searching for daniel. And im plehis capture this morning. Led his capture this morning. The media and the public have paid a very, very substantial role, and cooperation has role, and that cooperation has been significant finding been so significant in finding daniel that hes daniel and making sure that hes back custody today. Back in custody today. Than a thousand people more than a thousand people have been killed and hundreds more are injured after a powerful hit central powerful earthquake hit central morocco. Scale of the damage morocco. The scale of the damage can be seen in these pictures from amizmiz, a town at the foot of mountains. Thats of the atlas mountains. Thats around miles south west of around 40 miles south west of marrakesh , which the marrakesh, which was the epicentre quake. Many of epicentre of the quake. Many of the deaths are understood to be in remote areas. Further in these remote areas. Further complicating rescue efforts , the complicating rescue efforts, the 6. 8 magnitude earthquake is the strongest to hit the north african country in a century. African country in a century. Relatives of ten year old sarah sharif have been detained for questioning by police in pakistan. Her father, his partner and her siblings fled the uk for pakistan after sarah was found dead at her home in woking last month. A post mortem examination found shed suffered multiple injuries over an extended period of time. Rishi sunak says hes optimistic the uk and india can overcome any final hurdles in negotiations and conclude a free trade deal. The Prime Minister held talks with his indian counterpart, Narendra Modi at the g20 summit of the worlds leading economies in delhi. Delegates have also agreed on a joint declaration , agreed on a joint declaration, including a strongly worded statement on the war in ukraine. But it didnt directly criticise russia. President Vladimir Putin russia. President Vladimir Putin and president xi of china were not at the summit today was a record the hottest day of the year so far, 32. 7 degrees. Record in heathrow in west london. Its the sixth day in a row the uk has surpassed 30 degrees. The forecasters say the record where there is likely to continue through until tomorrow. Theres an amber heat alert in place and then more alerts for thunderstorms from this afternoon onwards. And a yellow warning for Northern Ireland for thunderstorms. Thats for tomorrow. Well, this is gb news tomorrow. Well, this is gb news on your tv, on digital radio, and on your smart. Speaker two now, it is back to calvin. Now, it is back to calvin. Welcome to this weeks issue of why is the church of england so woke lest the cathedral put out a statement a few days ago supporting Saint Nicholas church in leicester in its quote openly inclusive lgbtq affirming church, end quote , in which church, end quote, in which members of the cathedral , clergy members of the cathedral, clergy and community will be attending their rainbow eucharist. Their rainbow eucharist. Pardon . The eucharist is the source and summit of the christian life. Its where heaven is brought to earth and where the people are brought to heaven. Its where we experience christ in the real presence. There is no experience , more there is no experience, more heavenly or more holy. Why, heavenly or more holy. Why, then, is the church of england outright mocking the eucharist with this so called rainbow eucharist . I suppose one could eucharist . I suppose one could say that every eucharist is a rainbow eucharist in the sense that the rainbow is a sign of gods covenant with his people and christ ratified the new covenant with his blood in the same way. Also the cup after supper saying this cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this as often as you drink it in remembrance of me , he said. But remembrance of me, he said. But somehow , or going by the pride somehow, or going by the pride flag spewed all over that poster. Im not sure thats what saint nicks had in mind. Poster. Im not sure thats what saint nicks had in mind. And saint nicks had in mind. And not only are they mocking the holy eucharist, but they are bastardising the rainbow. This is blasphemy. We must hashtag reclaim the rainbow now. Also this week in the sea of we saw the diocese of london put out a programme for its Racial Justice pilgrimage , quoting a journey of pilgrimage, quoting a journey of lament and praise. Lament for lament and praise. Lament for what . And praise for whom . Nowhere on the literature for this so called pilgrimage does it mention our lord and saviour jesus christ, it mention our lord and saviour jesus christ , this time with the jesus christ, this time with the black History Month flag emblazoned on it posters. It seems the diocese of london intends to replace original sin with the sin of whiteness. Replace the bible with the rule book of critical race theory. The diocese of london is falling into the trap of communist rome. Critical race theory , after all, critical race theory, after all, is nothing more than a modern wrapper on communism from cardinal sarah, a very holy man of the church, says , quote, of the church, says, quote, communism showed how possible it was to lead mankind into misery while promising absolute equality, end quote. Likewise, pope pius, the ninth said communism , as it is called, communism, as it is called, a doctrine most opposed to the very natural law. For if this doctrine were accepted, the complete destruction of everyones laws. Government property, and even of Human Society itself would follow. So society itself would follow. So the church should be against neo marxism this modern form of communism not embracing it. The church has a role to play in social justice, but it does not do so by becoming social justice warriors. It does so by living christ like lives and by proclaiming his good news. It really is that simple. I pray the church of england remembers this basic fact repents of its worldly ways and returns to the gospel before it is too late. Gospel before it is too late. A critically ill teenager and her family are fighting the nhs in court over plans to stop more treatment and proceed instead with end of life care. The 19 with end of life care. The 19 year old wants to go to canada for an experimental therapy , for an experimental therapy, which she believes might help her rare genetic condition. The hospital says she is actively dying. She needs a ventilator to dying. She needs a ventilator to help her breathe and is fed through a tube. A hearing at the through a tube. A hearing at the uks court of protection will decide whether nhs doctors continue to treat her this topic leads us to a very serious duel tonight. Leads us to a very serious duel tonight. Here to discuss the story , my sidekick this week is story, my sidekick this week is the director of the common sense society, emma webb. Welcome back, emma. And this weeks nemesis is former editor of labourlist Peter Edwards. Peter labourlist Peter Edwards. Peter if you dont mind, ill start with you. This i mean, i only heard about this last night on laurence foxs show, and i know neil oliver has just spoken about it before this show, but its so important that i wanted to time to set aside to take some time to set aside to take some time to set aside to discuss because this is to discuss it because this is fundamentally about a fundamentally about whether a person has the right to life or if the state has the right to oppress values that oppress its values on that person. Oppress its values on that perwell, do have the well, people do have the right to life. And i mean, lets not this a duel because, not call this a duel because, you know, someones life is on not call this a duel because, you line. , someones life is on not call this a duel because, you line. Its� meones life is on not call this a duel because, you line. Its a eones life is on not call this a duel because, you line. Its a verys life is on not call this a duel because, you line. Its a very tragic is on the line. Its a very tragic story in year old whos story in 19 year old whos health deteriorated, as it sounds, the quite sounds, from the mail quite quickly. I pray for her and quickly. And i pray for her and think of her and her parents. It must be agonising time, the must be an agonising time, the way its presented in the mail. I perhaps could bit i feel perhaps could be a bit more balanced. Theres a suggestion , as you alluded to, suggestion, as you alluded to, of the state being oppressive and of lawyers taking decisions. And im not sure from the few facts do have thats facts we do have that thats necessarily fair. First of all, doctors a hippocratic oath doctors take a hippocratic oath and to their best for the and try to do their best for the patient. But course, theyre patient. But of course, theyre making , almost making really sensitive, almost knife edge judgements on great matters of sensitivity. And then second, lee, lawyers arent deciding anything. Its decided. And you often hear this in all parts of the media, lawyers dont decide anything. Judges hear lawyers on both sides hear from lawyers on both sides of any argument whether its about commercial or about divorce or commercial or in this case, someones life. And judge heard all and then a judge whos heard all the evidence , which we havent the evidence, which we havent done , comes a decision. So, done, comes to a decision. So, yes, i certainly have questions. And to know more, and id like to know more, but i also recognise it can be very difficult for public to find difficult for the public to find out more because these proceedings are so sensitive and distressing. Sure. But read the same sure. But i read the same article as i didnt article as you and i didnt think lawyers were being think the lawyers were being attacked. Thought attacked. I thought the statement that judges statement there was that judges are decision, are making a decision, not lawyers, and that judges are lawyers, and that the judges are making against the making a decision against the best the person, best interests of the person, but doctors in this country but also doctors in this country dont a hippocratic dont take a hippocratic oath. Thats something they swear thats not something they swear on when become a doctor. On when they become a doctor. So, id like to your so, emma, id like to get your take because i cant take on this because i cant think more serious. Think of anything more serious. This saying, this is someone whos saying, look, i want to live. I want to fight my life and the state fight for my life and the state is saying, no, is essentially saying, no, i think from what i think i mean, from what i understand the case, its understand of the case, its complex, but it doesnt mean that we should equivocate. Complex, but it doesnt mean tha this should equivocate. Complex, but it doesnt mean tha this sh noti equivocate. Complex, but it doesnt mean tha this sh not somebody e. Complex, but it doesnt mean tha this sh not somebody who is this is not somebody who is unconscious, being kept unconscious, who is being kept on life support. This is a 19 year woman who is conscious year old woman who is conscious and who the judge has deemed to lack the capacity to make decisions herself because decisions for herself because she disagrees with her doctors. She disagrees with her doctors. And so the doctors want to remove that care that is keeping her alive. She wants to go to her alive. She wants to go to canada to try and, as she put it, to die fighting for her life. And i think that that youre right to do that as a human being is fundamental. No judge should have the ability to make a decision like that. And i think what is so concerning about this is the precedent , about this is the precedent, its set of how they are defining capacity because its for a start, the this is basically suppressed , this young basically suppressed, this young womans ability to have her voice heard, but also it sets a precedent in how we understand capacity , which is determined by capacity, which is determined by whether or not you agree with your doctors. And of course, experts are not always right. Doctors often make mistakes. And there have been cases in the past have sought past where people have sought medical it medical treatment abroad and it has lives. So has saved their lives. So i think part of this problem is a kind of hubris. Think part of this problem is a kind of hubris. Its hubris on kind of hubris. Its hubris on the part the medical the part of the medical profession will not profession that they will not allow young girl is allow this young girl who is conscious , who is clear that she conscious, who is clear that she that she and her family want to fight her right live, fight for her right to live, even the chances very, even if the chances are very, very has the right to very small. Who has the right to take that away from her . No. One . No. I firmly agree, peter. Two psychiatrists have deemed her that she has compos mentis , her that she has compos mentis, but the doctors and therefore the judge, based on the doctors, have said she is delusional because shes not following the doctors advice. That not doctors advice. Is that not a dangerous precedent . Because it is advice from a doctor, isnt it . Its not an order. Thats certainly what the mail yeah i was puzzled by mail says. Yeah i was puzzled by that. Mean, im sorry to keep that. I mean, im sorry to keep coming back to this point, but weve fraction of the weve only got a fraction of the evidence. Could have been evidence. This could have been a heanng evidence. This could have been a hearing that went on for days or weeks for all we know. But yeah, there be there seems to be a contradiction between psychiatrist one hand, psychiatrist on one hand, who are not a are doctors, theyre not just a bloke off street. Theyre bloke off the street. Theyre professionally qualified, doing their then doctors professionally qualified, doing thethe then doctors professionally qualified, doing thethe physicalthen doctors professionally qualified, doing thethe physical body doctors professionally qualified, doing thethe physical body whove rs for the physical body whove come a different conclusion come to a different conclusion and to be a bit of and im sorry to be a bit of a broken but but the judge broken record, but but the judge will have taken in both sides of that before coming to a that argument before coming to a decision. And i think the thing and ive got obviously weve all got because what do you got on that because what do you mean by that . Do you mean that whatever judge the end of the judge decides at the end of the day should that should the day should that should be the rule of this and the person regarded wants to regarded of whether she wants to live what the judge says live or not . What the judge says is should stand . Is what should stand . Its why i think. Does well, its why i think. Does it matter . Like. It because is no, it does, because this is the want to get the conversation i want to get your feelings on. But judges are empowered by the decisions. And the law to make decisions. And we argue with we can obviously argue with those and criticise those, but also or plaintiffs. Also applicants or plaintiffs. Im the right word im not sure what the right word in context right to in this context have a right to appeal. So there are lots of details seem to come details that seem not to come out the mail story. So for out of the mail story. So for example, i know theyve redacted the geographical and identifying information, but the hospital still dont to put out still dont seem to have put out much now, i dont much of a quote. Now, i dont know thats because of know if thats because of confidentiality they confidentiality or just they prefer air these things prefer not to air these things publicly, im sure publicly, but im sure the hospital defence hospital would have a defence and point about the and your other point about the judge the right to appeal, judge and the right to appeal, well, one can support the judges right to take decision judges right to take a decision or distasteful. But but or find it distasteful. But but that the law. Judges make that is the law. Judges make decisions lives we that is the law. Judges make de okay, emma, i take umbrage with this because think were with this because i think were talking natural law here, talking about natural law here, not law man. And i dont not law of man. And i dont think were talking about divine law as well. This has law as well. This woman has a divine right and to divine right to live and to fight for her right to live. I dont think any judge or any person the world say, person in the world could say, no, you do not have that righ