1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:06,600
Yes, and good afternoon and good morning and good evening or whatever time you may be joining us from.

2
00:00:06,600 --> 00:00:16,140
I'm delighted to be able to chair this closing panel on the important question of prospects for greater public education and understanding.

3
00:00:16,140 --> 00:00:21,570
I'm a member of Senate Steering Committee and also the Oxford Peace Research Trust.

4
00:00:21,570 --> 00:00:26,820
And I know that my colleagues always bring a very rich dimension to these questions.

5
00:00:26,820 --> 00:00:31,380
I couldn't help but think that everything we have heard today from our distinguished

6
00:00:31,380 --> 00:00:37,770
experts really underscores the importance of public understanding and public opinion.

7
00:00:37,770 --> 00:00:45,930
And it also occurred to me that the content and the context of these questions of peace and nuclear weapons is shifting in a very,

8
00:00:45,930 --> 00:00:48,510
very dramatic fashion right now.

9
00:00:48,510 --> 00:00:57,980
And so what I'm hoping this panel can also do is maybe pick up on some of those understandings, but in particular, think about how they.

10
00:00:57,980 --> 00:01:03,020
Culture and the content and the context of peace that nuclear weapons is shifting.

11
00:01:03,020 --> 00:01:07,820
So with that, what we will be doing today will be beginning with Jeremy Cunningham.

12
00:01:07,820 --> 00:01:11,270
We will have three panellists speaking consecutively.

13
00:01:11,270 --> 00:01:18,260
We'll have a few minutes at the end for Q&A, and then we will go straight to Liz Carmichael with a few concluding remarks.

14
00:01:18,260 --> 00:01:22,010
And thanks. And then just to give you a little bit of advance warning,

15
00:01:22,010 --> 00:01:29,030
we've had so much interest in so many questions coming through that we're actually going to run about 15 minutes over the scheduled

16
00:01:29,030 --> 00:01:37,580
closing time to entertain questions from throughout the whole day and have a chance to engage in further dialogue about these questions.

17
00:01:37,580 --> 00:01:43,280
So just to let you know we will be running over just a few minutes after the conclusion of the formal programme?

18
00:01:43,280 --> 00:01:47,120
So let me begin by introducing Dr. Jeremy Cunningham,

19
00:01:47,120 --> 00:01:58,130
who is a public expert in education and the school curriculum and its role in peace, and a former headmaster of secondary schools.

20
00:01:58,130 --> 00:02:05,060
And I have to just say that those amazing skill sets come into the fore with our work at Oxford,

21
00:02:05,060 --> 00:02:12,530
and Jeremy has been invaluable as a colleague and helping us organise for the in-person conferences that we've had over the years.

22
00:02:12,530 --> 00:02:17,720
And of course, when I see Jeremy, I always think about the next conference and hopefully we will all be able to gather

23
00:02:17,720 --> 00:02:23,720
in-person and have a chance to continue our conversation in a more personal way.

24
00:02:23,720 --> 00:02:34,160
So, Jeremy, please, you're going to be giving us some sense of public awareness of nuclear weapons through your own work and research.

25
00:02:34,160 --> 00:02:41,240
Thanks very much, Isabella. Good enough. Good afternoon, everyone. It's been a most fascinating day so far.

26
00:02:41,240 --> 00:02:47,090
I'm my talk is called. How well-informed is the British public about nuclear weapons?

27
00:02:47,090 --> 00:02:51,900
I'm interested in the relationship between schooling, democracy and peace.

28
00:02:51,900 --> 00:03:00,440
And one assumption behind successful democracies is that the public opinion should be based on reasonable knowledge.

29
00:03:00,440 --> 00:03:05,690
Of course, it's not a neutral platform. An opinion formers compete to influence voters.

30
00:03:05,690 --> 00:03:10,280
But I wonder how well informed the voters are in the nuclear democracies.

31
00:03:10,280 --> 00:03:21,280
And I thought I'd better start with my own. I'm going to focus on our schools first and then the media.

32
00:03:21,280 --> 00:03:30,040
So let's start with public knowledge, I'm going to mention attitudes a little bit at the end, but this is not largely about attitudes.

33
00:03:30,040 --> 00:03:40,990
So this is a. This is a YouGov poll from January 2020 asking, as far as you are aware,

34
00:03:40,990 --> 00:03:49,630
does the UK have nuclear weapons and you can see the percentage results below 25 percent of

35
00:03:49,630 --> 00:03:56,440
the people answering this poll didn't know or or got the wrong answer on this question.

36
00:03:56,440 --> 00:04:06,580
And I was quite surprised by this. I started to think about how do people actually build up their knowledge of such an important subject.

37
00:04:06,580 --> 00:04:13,840
I actually imagined if I was going to do some full scale research on this to try and get a good sense of what people would know,

38
00:04:13,840 --> 00:04:18,220
whether they were uninformed, little informed, somewhat informed, the well-informed.

39
00:04:18,220 --> 00:04:21,820
And I came up with this list.

40
00:04:21,820 --> 00:04:33,190
Simple physics when when they were first used, the impact on a city, the delivery, the warheads, nuclear states, military doctrine treaties,

41
00:04:33,190 --> 00:04:43,990
U.N. ban terrorism and all subjects, which we've mentioned today, perhaps also the issue of space and new technology.

42
00:04:43,990 --> 00:04:52,120
Now let us try and imagine how young people will begin to learn any of this.

43
00:04:52,120 --> 00:04:58,390
Supposing my seven year old granddaughter asked me about nuclear weapons, what would I?

44
00:04:58,390 --> 00:05:05,980
What would I say? I think in primary schools, it's very unlikely that they'd be taught about it at all.

45
00:05:05,980 --> 00:05:11,650
I mean, they do deal with world issues to a certain extent. Covid's, I'm sure.

46
00:05:11,650 --> 00:05:19,010
And climate change. But I'm going to start with lower secondary, which is aged about 14.

47
00:05:19,010 --> 00:05:24,470
Education in the UK is decentralised, and this data is from England and Wales,

48
00:05:24,470 --> 00:05:29,210
and the first kind of treatment of this subject would be in the third year of secondary school.

49
00:05:29,210 --> 00:05:32,540
That's children aged 13 to 14.

50
00:05:32,540 --> 00:05:41,840
They spend about a year studying the history of the world and particularly Britain and Europe, from 19 101 to the present day.

51
00:05:41,840 --> 00:05:47,060
The only compulsory topic in this year is the Holocaust.

52
00:05:47,060 --> 00:05:53,630
History typically has about two hours a week, maybe three lessons and one hour of homework.

53
00:05:53,630 --> 00:06:01,640
And if you look at a typical history textbook for this age group published here in Oxford, you can see there are about two lessons on the Holocaust.

54
00:06:01,640 --> 00:06:08,480
One lesson on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and a maximum of two lessons on the Civil War.

55
00:06:08,480 --> 00:06:17,900
The BBC produces very good revision pages, and that has several pages on the atomic bomb and its development and its effects and aftermath.

56
00:06:17,900 --> 00:06:22,160
And also, it has some good stuff on the ethics of it.

57
00:06:22,160 --> 00:06:32,400
And there are also one or two pages on the Cold War, but this is the last moment in England in which all students would study history.

58
00:06:32,400 --> 00:06:39,140
And this is the last moment where all students have a good chance to learn anything at all about nuclear weapons,

59
00:06:39,140 --> 00:06:43,370
let alone this list that I have posted.

60
00:06:43,370 --> 00:06:47,060
Most history teachers wouldn't have time to bring students up to date.

61
00:06:47,060 --> 00:06:53,780
The pace is so relentless to even get through the programme is extremely difficult.

62
00:06:53,780 --> 00:07:01,370
So to sum up, the most likely scenario is a maximum of three forty five minute lessons.

63
00:07:01,370 --> 00:07:04,370
So let's go on to the middle secondary years.

64
00:07:04,370 --> 00:07:14,120
Students prepare for public examinations at age 16 called the General Certificate of Secondary Education, known popularly here as GCSE.

65
00:07:14,120 --> 00:07:20,870
Most students here take eight or 10 subjects, and almost everyone takes English.

66
00:07:20,870 --> 00:07:26,540
In 2019, nearly three quarters of a million students sat in English GCSE,

67
00:07:26,540 --> 00:07:33,260
so we consider that the size of the what we call the cohort the group of students going through the system.

68
00:07:33,260 --> 00:07:42,500
Almost all the students in that cohort would study one humanities subject either history or geography or religious studies,

69
00:07:42,500 --> 00:07:50,290
about one third of the cohort for each. Some students may study two of these, but that's minority.

70
00:07:50,290 --> 00:07:54,310
And although climate change and nuclear power are taught in geography,

71
00:07:54,310 --> 00:08:00,280
one would not expect to find anything on weapons and there might be a little bit about it in physics, but I haven't.

72
00:08:00,280 --> 00:08:08,320
I haven't checked, actually. So in history itself, there is a wide range of topics and periods which options.

73
00:08:08,320 --> 00:08:17,640
So you're only going to study about nuclear weapons if you study one particular option, and that is the topic that they call the Cold War.

74
00:08:17,640 --> 00:08:26,670
So in 2019, about 37 percent of students took history, and of these, 40 percent studied the Cold War.

75
00:08:26,670 --> 00:08:32,040
In other words, 15 percent of the student population studied it.

76
00:08:32,040 --> 00:08:41,970
And here again, it would be very difficult to have enough time to study any of these issues of nuclear weapons today.

77
00:08:41,970 --> 00:08:47,700
Another tranche of students study religious studies, and this is surprisingly large group,

78
00:08:47,700 --> 00:08:54,060
34 percent considering in many countries, you're not allowed to teach religion in schools.

79
00:08:54,060 --> 00:09:03,510
Students doing this will study two major world religions and that including a compulsory thematic study on religion, peace and conflict.

80
00:09:03,510 --> 00:09:07,860
Topics include religion, politics and terrorism. Just war.

81
00:09:07,860 --> 00:09:16,930
Holy war, drones, surgical strikes and attitudes to weapons of mass destruction, pacifism and non-violence.

82
00:09:16,930 --> 00:09:22,360
So to clarify, in England and Wales in 2019,

83
00:09:22,360 --> 00:09:30,010
about half the age cohort at 60 and studied something about nuclear weapons 15 percent in the context of

84
00:09:30,010 --> 00:09:36,550
the Cold War in history and 34 in the context of religious studies and the ethics of nuclear weapons,

85
00:09:36,550 --> 00:09:45,960
in other words, just under half. Let's move on to upper secondary level aged 16 to 18 in England and Wales.

86
00:09:45,960 --> 00:09:51,690
Many people would argue that this is a much more suitable age to introduce this topic, and in fact,

87
00:09:51,690 --> 00:10:00,610
this is the age which students really ought to learn about the great challenges facing humans on this planet.

88
00:10:00,610 --> 00:10:05,730
But the situation is quite extreme.

89
00:10:05,730 --> 00:10:15,600
Most students aiming for university study advanced level exams called GCSE A-levels advanced level,

90
00:10:15,600 --> 00:10:23,490
but the English system has a high degree of specialism and choice. Most students take between two and four subjects only,

91
00:10:23,490 --> 00:10:34,860
and the only subjects where they could be taught about nuclear weapons in detail are likely to be history, religious studies or politics.

92
00:10:34,860 --> 00:10:40,140
In history, it's forty seven thousand students took A-level history.

93
00:10:40,140 --> 00:10:48,720
That was 16 percent of all the A-level students, and all these history subjects have optional sections,

94
00:10:48,720 --> 00:10:53,310
which are therefore only taken by a proportion of the total history candidates.

95
00:10:53,310 --> 00:10:59,520
And the main topic again, was students would learn about nuclear weapons is not.

96
00:10:59,520 --> 00:11:13,760
Challenges facing the world today, it is history again, the Cold War 1945 to 1991, and in 2019, about 4000 students took this topic.

97
00:11:13,760 --> 00:11:16,490
Admittedly, it is quite detailed.

98
00:11:16,490 --> 00:11:28,100
They would start in Naito, the Warsaw Pact, the development of atomic weapons, the Cold War right the way through from 1956 to the to the 1989,

99
00:11:28,100 --> 00:11:39,110
the space race detente sought talks of politic and so on, and a good history teacher would definitely find time to bring the information up to date.

100
00:11:39,110 --> 00:11:49,730
A very small number less than a thousand took an interesting looking course called The Changing Nature of Warfare 1859 to 1991.

101
00:11:49,730 --> 00:11:55,460
This course includes the development of aerial warfare bombs, countermeasures, missiles,

102
00:11:55,460 --> 00:12:02,720
nuclear weapons that influence on strategic planning, the terror bombing of Germany and Japan in 1945.

103
00:12:02,720 --> 00:12:11,840
But there's no mention of submarines. Nuclear war theory, proliferation treaties, attempts to limit nuclear weapons, the test ban treaty.

104
00:12:11,840 --> 00:12:21,970
And it's very war focussed. So about 10 percent of all the history candidates studied the Cold War and a proportion of all the candidates.

105
00:12:21,970 --> 00:12:31,210
This is just 1.5 percent. About 1600 students took religious studies, advanced level,

106
00:12:31,210 --> 00:12:37,150
that's four percent of all the entrance two of the three exams offered had specific

107
00:12:37,150 --> 00:12:42,850
reference to weapons of mass destruction in relation again to religion and ethics.

108
00:12:42,850 --> 00:12:49,210
So you have to study at least one major religion in terms of issues of war and peace.

109
00:12:49,210 --> 00:12:56,230
And once again, the just war theory and contemporary conflicts are mentioned, and so is pacifism.

110
00:12:56,230 --> 00:13:04,180
Each religion studied has references to weapons of mass destruction, good conduct and key moral principles.

111
00:13:04,180 --> 00:13:06,730
I'll give you the example from Hinduism.

112
00:13:06,730 --> 00:13:14,830
It says here you should study the virtue of Ahimsa Hindu views on issues concerning the treatment of animals and war,

113
00:13:14,830 --> 00:13:20,920
including the use of weapons of mass destruction and Gandhi's use of non-violence.

114
00:13:20,920 --> 00:13:28,780
So the total for religious studies students then who took courses with specific reference to nuclear weapons and ethics,

115
00:13:28,780 --> 00:13:35,090
was about 1.5 percent of the candidates who took this exam at 18.

116
00:13:35,090 --> 00:13:41,450
I looked at A-level politics as well, the syllabus is largely constitutional and comparative.

117
00:13:41,450 --> 00:13:47,750
There is not little international relations and almost no reference to global political issues.

118
00:13:47,750 --> 00:13:51,980
So this is the summary for advanced level courses.

119
00:13:51,980 --> 00:14:01,250
You can see the percentage of students of this age group in England who are likely to study anything about nuclear weapons,

120
00:14:01,250 --> 00:14:12,080
and it comes to three percent. And you can see the percentage of students who wouldn't study anything about this in their exam subjects, at least.

121
00:14:12,080 --> 00:14:20,040
And it comes to ninety seven percent. This is obviously a matter of interest and concern.

122
00:14:20,040 --> 00:14:26,700
And my my own personal view is they are students in this country are not well

123
00:14:26,700 --> 00:14:33,350
prepared for facing a lot of the major issues that face us in the world today.

124
00:14:33,350 --> 00:14:37,550
I then went on to look at the contribution of NGOs,

125
00:14:37,550 --> 00:14:46,160
and I looked at the contribution of CND Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and its Peace Education Programme.

126
00:14:46,160 --> 00:14:52,910
This programme is based on a discussion of controversial issues, backing opinions with evidence.

127
00:14:52,910 --> 00:14:56,420
And it's not a campaigning or one sided approach.

128
00:14:56,420 --> 00:15:07,910
Speaker's visit primary and secondary schools and the most likely curriculum slot for this is citizenship studies, which usually is not examined.

129
00:15:07,910 --> 00:15:22,070
In 2018 19, the Sandy Peace Education Programme gave about 200 workshops or talks in 70 schools, reaching 7500 students with excellent feedback.

130
00:15:22,070 --> 00:15:26,000
I looked at the teaching park and looked at the online materials,

131
00:15:26,000 --> 00:15:35,810
and there's a very comprehensive lesson plans wealth of supporting material, including U.S. and North Korea.

132
00:15:35,810 --> 00:15:39,920
The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Greenham Common.

133
00:15:39,920 --> 00:15:44,630
The Hibakusha, uranium mining and Aboriginal Communities in Australia.

134
00:15:44,630 --> 00:15:53,000
Gender and nuclear weapons. These these are well reviewed in teaching magazines, and I think they're excellent,

135
00:15:53,000 --> 00:15:59,450
but it must be said that they would reach a very small proportion of our population.

136
00:15:59,450 --> 00:16:02,510
Only those teachers are particularly interested in the subject.

137
00:16:02,510 --> 00:16:10,220
Only those schools have made a special point of ensuring that students study these these matters.

138
00:16:10,220 --> 00:16:20,720
So let's summarise where we are with the percentage of the cohort taught about nuclear weapons.

139
00:16:20,720 --> 00:16:26,090
Ninety five percent at age 14 probably learn something.

140
00:16:26,090 --> 00:16:36,770
What a nuclear bomb is that it could destroy a whole city. It was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki with devastating consequences and so on.

141
00:16:36,770 --> 00:16:46,150
At age 16, about half and at age 18, just three percent.

142
00:16:46,150 --> 00:16:53,380
As a matter of interest, I started enquiring about a similar situation in France, India and Pakistan.

143
00:16:53,380 --> 00:16:58,000
There seems to be very little in the formal curriculum in France or India.

144
00:16:58,000 --> 00:17:02,290
And I did find a very good exam in Pakistan,

145
00:17:02,290 --> 00:17:10,510
studies an international GCSE with a very thorough analysis of the situation and Pakistan's nuclear weapons.

146
00:17:10,510 --> 00:17:17,490
But I think this exam is taken by a tiny number of Pakistani students.

147
00:17:17,490 --> 00:17:22,020
I then went on and had a brief look at universities.

148
00:17:22,020 --> 00:17:29,970
I imagined that I was an 18 year old with an interest in the subject and found out of the top UK universities.

149
00:17:29,970 --> 00:17:37,680
Five undergraduate international relations or politics courses specifically mentioning nuclear weapons,

150
00:17:37,680 --> 00:17:46,080
including one called the Global Politics of Nuclear Weapons, taught by one Dr Nick Ritchie, who spoke earlier today.

151
00:17:46,080 --> 00:17:57,570
So if you were a student with an interest in this subject, you could definitely find somewhere to study about it in an university.

152
00:17:57,570 --> 00:18:09,960
I then went on to have a look at media, and I looked at the proportion of the public who access news in various ways.

153
00:18:09,960 --> 00:18:19,830
And you can see that in this chart here. It's very difficult to work out precisely how much news people get from different

154
00:18:19,830 --> 00:18:24,330
sources because often people use several different sources for their news.

155
00:18:24,330 --> 00:18:27,480
But if we think of the electorate of Britain,

156
00:18:27,480 --> 00:18:37,710
England and Wales being 43 million and 67 percent voted in the last election, that gives about 30 million active voters.

157
00:18:37,710 --> 00:18:45,660
How many of them are picking up a general sense of this subject from news?

158
00:18:45,660 --> 00:18:54,840
So I started to look at the statistics for when most people get their news online,

159
00:18:54,840 --> 00:18:59,700
and the largest online news provider in the UK appears to be the BBC,

160
00:18:59,700 --> 00:19:09,990
and it's supposedly has 15 million weekly readers and I think about two million daily readers.

161
00:19:09,990 --> 00:19:22,830
Then there's the Guardian and the Mail Online that each have round about a million million plus daily readers and the I also looked at the Sun online.

162
00:19:22,830 --> 00:19:32,730
Sun has a very large number of print readers more than a million, and their online readers also claims to be more than a million.

163
00:19:32,730 --> 00:19:45,240
I then decided I would have a look at how often these online sites were posting information about nuclear weapons.

164
00:19:45,240 --> 00:19:50,070
Sometimes it was just opinion, but often it was information as well as opinion.

165
00:19:50,070 --> 00:19:55,590
And I look back to the beginning of 2017 with Trump's inauguration, when, as you know,

166
00:19:55,590 --> 00:20:03,750
there was a dramatic change in global international relations as a result of his announcements, behaviour and threats.

167
00:20:03,750 --> 00:20:09,030
And the question I asked was whether a daily reader would gradually build up some knowledge.

168
00:20:09,030 --> 00:20:18,150
So I wanted to count the number of posts per month from the different news outlets, and I found the following The BBC,

169
00:20:18,150 --> 00:20:26,760
which is the most trusted and has the largest number of daily readers, doesn't have the largest number of posts about one a week.

170
00:20:26,760 --> 00:20:36,900
But the posts are very well constructed and largely free from unattributed opinions.

171
00:20:36,900 --> 00:20:43,800
They also have a very good item produced for younger viewers under the Newsbeat label,

172
00:20:43,800 --> 00:20:51,970
saying which countries have nuclear weapons and how many are the. The Mail Online is a very interesting case.

173
00:20:51,970 --> 00:21:00,220
I can't quite tell how many posts are being done a day, a week or a month, but they when I,

174
00:21:00,220 --> 00:21:06,670
they have a search box on their main online news page and inserting nuclear weapons into that search

175
00:21:06,670 --> 00:21:16,660
box brings up a massive 10000 relevant posts dating back to to 2017 between six and seven a day.

176
00:21:16,660 --> 00:21:27,580
And I couldn't figure out why this was. And then I realised that they are being fed by Reuters, AP and AFP and a range of other agencies.

177
00:21:27,580 --> 00:21:37,660
So someone with a real interest in this subject, reading them all would build up a lot of information, I think.

178
00:21:37,660 --> 00:21:48,640
I looked down at the Sun online rob about a million readers a day, but it didn't appear in the original owner survey I saw.

179
00:21:48,640 --> 00:21:58,750
They have about one post every three days or 11 a month, and a regular reader of the Sun would build up a fair degree of knowledge.

180
00:21:58,750 --> 00:22:12,690
But this is full of rather. Emotional stuff about Kim Jong UN and what they're doing in North Korea, it's not only knowledge based.

181
00:22:12,690 --> 00:22:20,220
I should have a quick word about Facebook, because Ofcom reported that 35 percent of adults get their news through Facebook,

182
00:22:20,220 --> 00:22:24,600
but I don't think it would be useful for building up general knowledge because

183
00:22:24,600 --> 00:22:31,410
it's fed according to the interest that you've shown in previous articles.

184
00:22:31,410 --> 00:22:45,480
So The Guardian has about one million daily readers, and this produced about 13 posts a month or about one post every few days.

185
00:22:45,480 --> 00:22:52,560
These are kind of the pose that you get in in the Guardian. I'll go through them fairly quickly.

186
00:22:52,560 --> 00:23:03,270
And you can read them fuel cells, but you can see that actually they would cover quite a lot of the topics that have been brought up today.

187
00:23:03,270 --> 00:23:13,860
They have not only information, but they have editorials discussing North Korea, Iran, Russia and USA modernisation nuclear arsenals.

188
00:23:13,860 --> 00:23:25,440
But very interestingly, there's almost no information at all about India, Pakistan, Israel or Saudi Arabia.

189
00:23:25,440 --> 00:23:32,420
I thought you might be interested to see the kind of pattern of postings on an online site.

190
00:23:32,420 --> 00:23:41,720
This is a pattern dating back to 2018 with the largest number of articles a month,

191
00:23:41,720 --> 00:23:50,060
and you could see the big spikes of the Singapore summit between Trump and Kim on the summit aftermath.

192
00:23:50,060 --> 00:24:03,680
Then there's another quite a big spike the Vietnam Summit, then another big spike as Russia and the US started to modernise their arsenals.

193
00:24:03,680 --> 00:24:06,890
And there was the threat to the renewal of Start.

194
00:24:06,890 --> 00:24:23,230
Then they nearly always report the Doomsday Clock and then spikes with the US plan to invest in replacing its land based ICBMs.

195
00:24:23,230 --> 00:24:34,900
So it's pretty thorough story if you are reading this online news nearly every day.

196
00:24:34,900 --> 00:24:41,620
Now this is an exploratory study, and I have to admit this is a little more than a hypothesis,

197
00:24:41,620 --> 00:24:50,860
but my guess is that TV and radio news contribute relatively little to a general understanding of the subject compared to online and print sources,

198
00:24:50,860 --> 00:25:00,940
which include maps, diagrams and can be re-read. If the print papers are printing what the online printing,

199
00:25:00,940 --> 00:25:06,160
then I think about five million print readers may be getting a gradual drip feed

200
00:25:06,160 --> 00:25:12,970
online readers if I try and imagine that a few people are looking at them.

201
00:25:12,970 --> 00:25:19,840
So three times a week and others are looking at them every day, wouldn't they be about 10 million readers?

202
00:25:19,840 --> 00:25:32,050
So what does this leave us with the. My guess and this I have to is only a guess, but my guess is this about 25 percent?

203
00:25:32,050 --> 00:25:39,460
One could say, are informed. If if I had a test on my 10 points, they would, I think they would do quite well.

204
00:25:39,460 --> 00:25:44,260
I think 25 percent are uninformed.

205
00:25:44,260 --> 00:25:54,590
These are the people who didn't know Britain had nuclear weapons, and I think maybe about 50 percent somewhat informed.

206
00:25:54,590 --> 00:25:57,980
I just I said I would say very little about attitudes,

207
00:25:57,980 --> 00:26:07,430
but I'll put up this slide for you so you can see what what the there is known about attitudes, attitudes.

208
00:26:07,430 --> 00:26:14,390
One of the interesting put up because it's a fascinating presentation, but I I'm very mindful of time.

209
00:26:14,390 --> 00:26:18,230
I think you're getting close to the end of it. Yeah, I'm there. I'm just at the end.

210
00:26:18,230 --> 00:26:25,610
Perfect. Thank you. I'm I should be concluding. I just want to show people that seventy seven percent are in.

211
00:26:25,610 --> 00:26:31,460
A poll carried out for CND means you support a global ban on nuclear weapons,

212
00:26:31,460 --> 00:26:37,340
and fifty nine percent supposedly support the UK signing the U.N. ban treaty.

213
00:26:37,340 --> 00:26:41,000
OK, so 77 percent global bound 60 percent or so.

214
00:26:41,000 --> 00:26:42,770
Think Britain should sign a U.N. treaty?

215
00:26:42,770 --> 00:26:54,630
Then look at this figure should the British prime minister retaliate if we're attacked by nuclear weapons, 68 percent of the respondents said yes.

216
00:26:54,630 --> 00:27:00,810
That's very interesting contrast between the people, the percentage who want to get rid of nuclear weapons,

217
00:27:00,810 --> 00:27:05,550
but the percentage who say if we're attacked, should we retaliate?

218
00:27:05,550 --> 00:27:10,200
And I invite you to consider the reasons for that.

219
00:27:10,200 --> 00:27:16,440
Just to conclude then I don't think we can say the British public are very well informed about this.

220
00:27:16,440 --> 00:27:21,720
I think some will be OK if they have been following online news regularly.

221
00:27:21,720 --> 00:27:25,110
But there is a big gap to fill and unfortunately,

222
00:27:25,110 --> 00:27:32,430
the British school curriculum of the English one would have to be significantly reformed if this was ever to be rectified.

223
00:27:32,430 --> 00:27:34,420
Thank you.