RAMPS ON THE MOON PODCAST
Disability equality leader, Michèle Taylor, steers the Ramps on the Moon podcast into the heart of mainstream theatre. With special guests, she discovers the joys, the frustrations, the successes, and the learning in elevating disabled people into the centre of theatre work.
Join Michèle as she shares the realities of the ‘now’ and what the future can hold for disability equality in the arts.Michèle is a disability equality trainer and consultant who set up her own business in 1992 to work with arts and other cultural organisations.
She has seen immense change across the sector in that time, and is still impatient for more:“It’s time to focus on anti-ableism: recognising that as disabled people, we are no longer satisfied with being granted access into an essentially ableist sector. I am proud of the Ramps on the Moon partners for the work they have done to reflect on their own structures and processes, and to share their learning.”
RAMPS ON THE MOON PODCAST
Ep 8: Making a meaningful evaluation of the Ramps on the Moon project
Clare Hammerton carried out the independent evaluation for the Ramps on the Moon consortium.
In this episode, Michèle asks her about the challenges of evaluation (especially in a multi-partner project) as well as talking about why it’s so important and powerful.
Clare puts the Ramps evaluation into the wider context of her work around empowerment and participation and explains why it’s so important to think carefully about how you’re going to capture the data you need.
Thank you for listening. For further information and to get in touch with us please visit our website HERE.
Ramps on the Moon Podcast is hosted by Michèle Taylor.
Michèle Taylor, is a disability equality trainer and consultant, and has been Director for Change for Ramps on the Moon since the Consortium was convened. For the 10 years, she has been supporting the partner theatres to embed disability equality and anti-ableism into their organisations and to realise their ambitions around elevating disabled people across the mainstream industry. In 2022 Michèle was honoured with an MBE For Services to Theatre and Disabled People.
This podcast is produced and managed by Podtalk.co.uk
Interviewer: Michèle Taylor
Respondent: Clare Hamilton
MICHÈLE Welcome to the Ramps on the Moon podcast. I'm Michele Taylor, Director for Change and this is my opportunity with my guests to open up the conversation about disability equality in the arts and cultural industries, and talk through what needs to happen.
Welcome to this edition of the Ramps on the Moon podcast. We're here in the New Wolsey Theatre in the glass box and there's a show getting in today. So if you hear some bangs and scratches and bells and whistles it’s Around the World in 80 Days getting into the main auditorium so looking forward to that later.
I'm here with Claire Hamilton, morning Claire.
CLARE Morning.
MICHÈLE Claire was our external evaluator for Ramps on the Moon and we'll be talking about that further on in the podcast but before we do let me give you an audio description of myself today. I'm still a white older woman with short grey spikey hair. I'm wearing round red reading glasses and I'm wearing a white top and a cream cardigan. Claire.
CLARE Hello. Well I'm middle-aged, a woman, white, short brownish hair and I'm wearing a stripey top today, black and white.
MICHÈLE And it’s really nice to be with you.
CLARE You too.
MICHÈLE And it’s really good to talk about evaluation because I love evaluation.
CLARE Mhmm hm.
MICHÈLE A lot of people don’t but I really do. I'm very committed I would say to evaluation. So Claire why do you think evaluation is important?
CLARE Well I think that we both Michele have had these conversations quite a lot around the impact of evaluation. And it’s not just an end result to catch, you know, catch kind of the data at the end of a project. It’s an ongoing process that you actually present the data that you're gathering or the information that you're gathering throughout the whole of the evaluation. To then trigger conversations throughout the whole time that you're capturing that data and presenting and talking about that data or that information. So it contributes to the process of change or the impact that the project is, you know, wanting to actually achieve as well.
MICHÈLE And is that, to use [unclear 00:02:16]’s words, are you talking about formative evaluation and summative evaluation?
CLARE You’ve got me there Michele.
MICHÈLE Okay. So the way I understand it and the words don’t matter really because you’ve just explained it brilliantly I think but formative evaluation is just that. When you're evaluating as you go along in order to effect the work that you're doing. So you're learning as you're going along.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE Whereas summative evaluation is that thing of well let's just gather the data and then at the end you look at the data and you look at the story that the data tells.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE And the only reason I want to bring that out is because I think in the context of Ramps on the Moon what's interesting is because Ramps is all about what we're learning then that ongoing formative evaluation is what's really important.
Can you think of an example of a piece of evaluation that you’ve done in Ramps or elsewhere that has had an impact on the work that's being delivered? So when the work has responded to the data that the evaluation has yielded.
CLARE I think that when you are not the only person who's doing the evaluation and when you're not the only person who's presenting the evaluation- so as an evaluator you're a facilitator of all of the pieces of information. So it’s presented by say a group of people who are involved in the project rather than yourself as this person who’s named as the evaluator.
So for example if you get a group of- this is not connected to Ramps. If you bring together a group of carers of people and they have a voice in actually talking about that the data you’ve gathered around a certain project then basically you have much more impact. Both on those carers and on the services than if you're gathering data and then you present it as person in yourself.
So I think it’s like a wider- if you look at evaluation through an empowerment and participatory lens rather than an extraction of information to actually present for funders or for, you know, at the end. So it’s really effective if every action that you take is through a lens of participation and empowerment rather than a lens of gathering the data for the project’s sake or for the funder’s sake.
MICHÈLE That’s really fascinating and really clear. So what that immediately says to me as well is that evaluation is not something that is done to you. It’s something that actually becomes part of the project, part of the work.
CLARE Absolutely
MICHÈLE That’s really fascinating.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE And we've used the word data a lot. And I'm aware that whenever I think of the word data I immediately start thinking about numbers.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE And actually that’s not the entirety.
CLARE That's not what I'm talking.
MICHÈLE So what are you talking about?
CLARE So data I'm talking about is in those terms of qualitative and quantitative data so I’ll just explain those. Qualitative is like the conversations that you have with people or the information you gain that is not number based. Quantitative is number based.
So you can have numbers like for example in relation to Ramps there were audience surveys. So how many people came to see the Ramps productions? How many people of those were identified as disabled? How many were carers? Etc. So you can actually look at the numbers and see, identify how many people have come to the show. But if you ask those people questions about how they found the show, how they were introduced, how they were given a Touch Tour, then you get the qualitative data around how they felt about the show, what it gave them. So you evaluate their conversations, the conversations that you’ve had with them. And that can either be through, you know, an online survey, it can be face to face.
And that’s the whole point of evaluation as well. Is you have to actually devise the systems of gaining that knowledge, gaining that data, that is right for person. So you have to go at the right time, you have to have the right language, you have to have the right approach to actually gain the data from people because, you know, it’s quite difficult to gain data to be honest. People don’t have the time to respond and you have to encourage them to do that in a trusted environment as well. So there's confidence that whatever they say is kept in that environment if they don’t want it shared or their identities are not revealed if they don’t want that to happen as well.
MICHÈLE And there’s nothing quite so guaranteed to spoil your evening, is there, as having a great evening at the theatre and then, “Can you just fill in this questionnaire for me?”
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE It really does potentially spoil an evening, doesn’t it?
CLARE Mmm. So [over-talking 00:07:49] is-
MICHÈLE So how can you do it? If you don’t do it that way? How do you? Because I'm aware that were kind of we're talking now about capturing data rather than the empowerment and participation model.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE But sometimes you do need to just capture the data, don’t you?
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE So what are the ways in which you can do that, that don’t feel like a real dampener on a fantastically joyful, creative experience you’ve just had?
CLARE I mean this is just one space of capturing the data or the information from people. So if we're talking about Ramps we have the information from all of the theatres that are involved. We have the information from the people who are involved in the production specifically. But then it also went on tour. So it impacted, just having the Ramps production touring impacted on all of those staff, be they freelance or employed staff in all of those theatres, so you have them. You have on all of the actors that are involved or the creatives who are involved in the production. The impact this trickles out.
Then you also have as we've talked about, you know, the kind of quantitative kind of data. And then as well you have the impact on audiences so the public. And that actually goes wider with the Ramps partners because they actually take conversations around disability out into the wider community to attract people who would not necessarily come to the theatre to actually come to a Ramps show which has potentially has, well hopefully has captioning, has BSL, has, you know, audio description. So all of those it’s like these ripples out to wider communities and ripples from the impact of Ramps, which goes further and further.
So someone who’s involved in a Ramps production basically is going to go another production and talk about their experiences of being involved in an integrated production as well. So it’s like how do you capture an entirety?
[00:10:15]
MICHÈLE That’s just what I was thinking. It sounds like it’s like herding cats. How can you capture all of that stuff?
CLARE I think you need to realise that you can't capture every single nuance from every single person and every single impact. So you have to have obviously an evaluation plan that says that we're going to speak to, you know, let's say 100 people, more than 100 but 100 people who come and see a show. Then we're going to, over the course of the run of that show, we're going to speak to five or 10 people. You're not going to speak to all audience members.
So it’s whether they’re audience members that you- going back to your initial question. It’s audience members that you have a connection with because you’ve already spoken to them and you asked them whether you can. It’s whether you do it online and, you know, have a slip of paper when they sit down to say can you fill in this online?. And you'll only have a percentage of people who do do that. And it’s usually the percentage of people who’ve had a really good experience or a really bad experience. You know, the middle ground is you can't really rely on that data really but you can take a lot of information from people’s views.
So, you know, maybe it’s you have a focus group of people that you hold specifically and you invite them along and you have teas and coffees and you tell them how their voice is going to contribute to the project as well.
MICHÈLE And I guess that’s really motivating.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE Because if you just say we’d like to know what you think, that’s possibly going to be attractive to a few people. But if you say we want to know what you think and then what we're going to do with it is this and this is how, as you’ve just put in your voice, will be important.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE Then that’s much more motivating, isn't it?
CLARE Mmm. What's really important is that Ramps is specifically focused on people who are disabled. And so audience members who are disabled who are where there's a production that actually enables them to experience the production is really important. So it’s kind of like talking with them about them talking about that access or that space for them, is really going to be motivating for them to come in and give their voice, and so it’s captured.
MICHÈLE And you then obviously of course need to be really rigorous to make sure that you're asking in a way that they can respond to.
CLARE Absolutely.
MICHÈLE So that there are no barriers.
CLARE Absolutely. And there are barriers. There are always barriers. You know, you want to get it as right as possible but I think you also need to understand and accept and create the space that you can make mistakes and you will make mistakes, you know, because it won't be right for everyone all of the time.
That’s the process of Ramps as well, is to learn is to continually learn and to make mistakes. You know, not continuously make mistakes that’s not what I meant but, you know, to kind of try. You know, put yourself- it is uncomfortable sometimes to put yourself in that position. But as long as you respond appropriately and people feel that they're in a safe space to actually provide their views and their perspectives and they're understood and listened to then that’s kind of the process of going forward in the evaluation and in Ramps as well.
MICHÈLE I'm really struck by how often you’ve talked about safety and people feeling safe. And it seems to me that you're implying that trust is really important in evaluation. Is that right?
CLARE Trust is hugely important in evaluation because, you know, there will be instances where people speak to you and they do want to tell you about circumstances for themselves. But they don’t want to be named and blamed and kind of feel that there's any response for themselves for saying what they’ve said. So it’s a matter of actually capturing that experience of people and presenting them in a way that they are listened to and reacted upon and structures are changed.
That's the whole point of evaluation. Is to feed into a process of change. So that you can understand what is being said, what are people’s experiences and then react to that. It’s important for that knowledge to be shared but people don’t specifically want that knowledge to be associated with them because it will potentially change the way that they're treated or reacted to. They also need to be in a trusted space. To take the evaluation out of that and to create organisational cultures where they can raise their experiences.
That’s the whole process of Ramps as well is to enable organisations to become even beyond disability aware. So that people can continuously have safe spaces and to make challenges around their experiences in relation to the structure of the organisation and the way productions are made. The way that they're actually, you know, within the productions and the rehearsal processes and etc. So it’s like that needs to be created first for the evaluation so that people start to talk.
And when they’re talking to you in an evaluation space that is trusted it’s a continual process of them formulating their perspective as well. So there’s something happening within the evaluation that’s more than information being shared with a trusted person. It’s like it’s a space where they’re formulating how they feel. Whether they should raise this as a point. Whether there’s a trusted space for them to raise this issue, if it’s an issue, as a point or as a positive experience as well.
And that’s why within evaluation it’s quite important to have group discussions as well. Because then it’s like a process of people sharing in a trusted space around their experiences but also around, one around their negative experiences and also around their positive experiences. So it’s a space that kind of brings it forward and also might raise some issues that really need to be addressed, you know, externally as well or in organisations.
MICHÈLE And I love that. I love the way that you’ve so clearly joined trust, change and evaluation. And it seems to me that in some ways that cluster of qualities or endeavours or whatever you want to call them, those qualities and that cluster of qualities, which is greater than the sum of the parts, is exactly at the heart of what Ramps is.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE So I really love the way you’ve articulated that and I really also love the way you’ve articulated really clearly that evaluation is part of the work. It’s not something you bolt on afterwards. And my head is going into the place where we have talked so much about embedded access and how the access tools as they're called, like captioning, sign language, audio description, you embed those in the creative vision of a piece rather than bolting them on. And in the same way I suppose I'm getting this picture of evaluation as being creatively embedded from the beginning.
CLARE Yes. Now there is a problem in there in that embedded kind of point of evaluation. And the problem is, it’s probably not the right word but it needs to be so connected. Because if you for example hold a focus group with people talking with you about things that are really impacting on them, and as an evaluator you don’t have the space to pass that on in the best way, you know, and then if it’s not reacted to, you know, or shown to be understood then the people who are in the focus group with you will feel despondent about giving you their time, giving you their experiences. They will feel like it’s not been worth it for me. It has to be involved, you know, part of a whole process the evaluation otherwise it becomes tokenistic really.
[00:20:19]
MICHÈLE And then you lose trust.
CLARE [over-talking 00:20:20]
MICHÈLE And then you get into a downward spiral and people potentially feel exposed and as you say despondent, it’s such a good word. So it has to be meaningful. And actually managing expectations becomes really, really important. So, “I've gathered you together as a group. Thank you coming, here's your cup of tea and your biscuit. And this is what could potentially happen with the things that we talk about today.” So that you don’t like set up expectations that- well, if I say this doesn’t work and it would work better another way, you're going to change it.
But also why bother asking if you're not going to do something meaningful with it? And there is an answer to that question I think, which is, well because the funders asked you to. The funders said that you’ve got to report on it. And I think, and I’d love to know what you think of this Claire but I think that evaluation does best when we tether it- how can I put this? When we tether it to the beginning of a project and embed it there rather than tethering it to a report that’s going to come at the end.
CLARE I mean it’s most definitely about a process of change. Or, you know, your evaluation plan could look at a theory of change which as I know that you have done that with Ramps.
MICHÈLE We have, yes.
CLARE And a theory of change is around the very small incremental changes that can be observed that are happening, ongoing. And so we were talking expectations of what's going to come out of a focus group for example. And everything cannot be transformative and impactful. You know, so from a, say for example a focus group, if that’s captured and that’s presented back.
And Ramps is a really complicated project in the sense of there's all the partners, there's the theatres, there’s the wider theatre sector, there’s all the communities involved, there's the individual actors, creatives, as we've explained before. It’s very complicated. And change or impact might not happen immediately. It might be cumulative trickles.
So as long as you're really clear with the people in that project group that in relation to what I can do as an evaluator is I can formulate this and I write it down and I can present it but that is all that I can do in this environment. And it’s up to the people who are involved in Ramps to pick it up, read it and respond to it. And they might not respond just on the basis of this piece of writing or this presentation or this report, they might respond based on five of these reports. So it might be five years later. But it definitely contributes to it.
And this is the role that I will play as an evaluator. So to hold that trust with the people in the focus group. However it might still have an impact on them if they're in the middle of a production and their needs and experiences are not being visibility responded to immediately. So they still might become- you know, it still might impact on them. It might give them a feeling of despondency if it’s not reacted to immediately.
But, you know, so it’s kind of a catch-22 position when you open it up and then you have to explain to people, you know, your breadth of impact. And you can't have a wide impact in such a complicated project. You’ve got to rely on the structures of the project that will take it forward, whatever you're going to deliver.
MICHÈLE Yes. That's also another aspect of trust, isn't it? As a contributor, as a partner in your evaluation as you put it a few minutes ago, I have to trust or you demonstrate to me that I can trust that something that I say to you may not have immediate impact but that it will go somewhere.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE You are going to report it so that it will go somewhere and so it might be just a little one ingredient in a whole swathe of ingredients that are actually going to lead to the change.
CLARE Mmm. I mean, you know, the complicated aspect of what Ramps is seeking to achieve is to alter structures of productions and organisations and, you know, mainstream rights throughout kind of organisations and sectors.
MICHÈLE Mainstream rights. That’s a big phrase.
CLARE Yes it’s a huge phrase, I knew I was going to throw it out there but I didn’t really want to.
MICHÈLE You can't throw it out there without talking about it a bit Claire. Mainstreaming rights, what’s that?
CLARE Well, so it’s disability rights. So in the sense of Ramps is around taking the rights of people who are disabled and ensuring that they’re addressed, understood, integrated into all actions of the theatres and the productions in the same way as people who don’t have or aren't disabled as it were. I think we're going to get quite complicated here, you know in-
MICHÈLE But it’s not complicated, is it?
CLARE Yes.
MICHÈLE It’s actually really simple. Isn't it? Because it’s saying we're back to concepts like equality impact assessments and stuff like that. It’s about you just as a matter of course of what your mainstream way of doing things is, because after all that’s all the mainstream means really, you are taking seriously the rights of disabled people.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE I think it’s kind of- I mean it then gets complicated in terms of how you implement it.
CLARE But so first of all you need a focus on the rights of disabled people. And then what you need to do is lose that focus because it becomes mainstreamed into the whole structure.
MICHÈLE Yes. So is that a bit like transforming conscious competence into unconscious competence?
CLARE Yes. Exactly. Exactly. And in that what you create which is a critical mass of people who undertake this perspective. If you internally mainstream this concept of the rights of people then it’s an internal mainstreaming within the knowledge of people, the skills of people to actually, you know, put on a production that is right for all the people who are involved in that production. So you have the knowledge, the skills. It’s these structures of the organisations such as the casting processes. You know, all of those structures as well as accessibility, which is the thing that is foremost in everyone’s mind but is really, you know, just another component of that whole process of mainstreaming rights as it were.
And there's a couple of key components in that mainstreaming process. The first is the safe space to talk about challenges to disability rights or, yes, to make it right for people who have been made disabled or are disabled. The second kind of component of that is creating an organisational culture that would just take over with a critical mass. And you will expect those challenges.
MICHÈLE So that’s where you’d lose the focus?
CLARE You lose the focus. You know, it becomes a revolving kind of status of itself that keeps perpetuating itself.
MICHÈLE I think that’s such a useful concept.
CLARE It’s such a useful concept but so difficult to capture in an evaluation.
MICHÈLE Well that was going to be my next question, how do you tell that story? Because that’s all that evaluation is, isn't it? In the end it’s telling the story of what you did, who did it, what happened, what you'd do differently next time. It’s telling the story.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE So how within the sorts of timeframes that we're used to working within around funding cycles and things, how do you tell that story of mainstreaming rights? How do you get the data to enable you to tell that story?
[00:30:06]
CLARE I think we go back to the place where we started. It’s like you have very different kind of pieces of data, qualitative and quantitative. And my experiences of evaluating Ramps is that you can have the same conversations with the same people in the same roles and you can have the same outcomes in relation to the number of audience members or the number of productions but there's differences in there.
And it’s about analysing those conversations to bring out the story that is behind the feelings of the people who you're having conversations with. Because they're telling you about their experiences, their needs, but also their feelings. And so the experiences can be the same in the sense of, you know, you're in a rehearsal room for this amount of time or, you know, the structure around it can be the same but there's something different in just the feeling of people in the room that creates, you know, a process that’s going really fast forward and everyone’s in a trusted environment or it’s a bit more sticky and it’s not really working that well. You know.
And I mean that’s not to say that the evaluation, whatever the evaluation captures, is not going to enable both of those two scenarios to go forward. You know, and one which is a bit more sticky might go a bit more further forward anyway. So it’s not a judgment. It’s a reality of the people in that room and it’s about capturing their experiences and their feelings.
MICHÈLE Yes. That’s really fascinating. Really interesting. And talking of things being sticky, what are the things that can go wrong in evaluation? What are the pitfalls? What are the things that particularly perhaps within the arts and culture and even within Ramps, I mean what are the things that we get wrong about actually conducting an evaluation?
CLARE I mean we've talked about the whole integration of evaluation into the whole process right from the very start. So I mean that’s a huge pitfall that can occur.
MICHÈLE And I think it’s a wasted opportunity too because I think at the beginning evaluation, if you’ve got evaluation in mind, it’s a helpful planning too.
CLARE Mmm.
MICHÈLE Isn't it?
CLARE Mmm. Well maybe it’s in the word, evaluation.
MICHÈLE Maybe it is.
CLARE Maybe if you call it a theory of change and you capture the information from that theory of change then you kind of, yes, you don’t think of it as an evaluating the impact of the project. You know, there's also something in relation to evaluating the worth of the spend. Which is what we all have to do because, you know, it’s public funds, isn't it?
MICHÈLE It can be so reductive though.
CLARE Yes. But I think it’s important though. It’s an important thing to actually identify some of the impact that maybe over time has happened in relation to this much spend but it’s a very minute aspect of the evaluation. Or it should be.
MICHÈLE And I suppose within what you’ve just said and my comment about it being reductive I'm making an assumption that if you do a kind of cost per participant analysis, which is often where we got to in the end with it with that kind of analysis, then actually to know the figure isn't necessarily saying well that's too much. It’s just saying well okay so that’s how much this intervention cost. And it’s still worth it.
CLARE Yes. I mean like we talked about you can't actually know what the impact of this intervention is because it just ripples out so far.
MICHÈLE Which is why it seems reductive, to me.
CLARE Yes.
MICHÈLE So there's way more to it than that which is what we've been talking about I guess but what are some of the other pitfalls, the traps that we fall into? We being the cultural sector.
CLARE I mean I don't think we've spoken about this as well is I don’t think we as Ramps have captured enough of the impact on cases on people. What has been involved in Ramps enabled for people further down the line in the future in relation to their careers as it were.
MICHÈLE Yes. I think it’s interesting you say perhaps it’s the word and I think you say evaluation to some people and immediately the image is the person with the clipboard in the corner.
CLARE Mmm. You could actually employ someone full-time.
MICHÈLE To evaluate.
CLARE To evaluate. If it is part of the process of change. But what we do is we allocate a certain percentage of the budget for three days a month to evaluate. And that’s not enough time to integrate evaluation through the whole process of change especially when it’s such a complicated project spanning the whole of the UK. With, you know, all of the different structures of the organisations. And a production, a touring production. You know, I've said it a couple of times already but I would say that’s a big pitfall is not understanding the impact of evaluation if you want to feed into it.
MICHÈLE Final question from me Claire.
CLARE Mhmm hm.
MICHÈLE What have you learned from being involved in the evaluation of Ramps on the Moon?
CLARE I have learned so much. No I have. For me it’s incredible to learn about the art sector, personally.
MICHÈLE Because that’s not in your background, is it?
CLARE No. Not at all.
MICHÈLE And how it works and how it’s structured.
CLARE Mmm. But also to delve more into the process of evolving rights. And some of the components or parts of Ramps that are really, really interesting. Such as the agents for change, the leadership team across organisations that have autonomy and function differently, the impact of productions and touring productions. And, you know, just marvelling at the impact of Ramps across, you know, the span of its years and how that can never be taken away. So the actual project of Ramps has created a whole process of change with so many people across the sector.
So seeing that and observing that and capturing that and sharing that has been really- yes and it also for me who I work on kind of the mainstreaming of rights with different people with different identities, it’s really fed into my knowledge around the components and the processes of mainstreaming rights. So I'm really grateful to have been involved with Ramps and to have seen some amazing shows as well, you know. It’s been great.
MICHÈLE Well we're really grateful for your input and all the work that you’ve done over the last three and a half years that you’ve been involved with Ramps on the Moon. So thank you for that and thank you for being my guest this morning on the Ramps on the Moon podcast. Thank you very much Claire.
CLARE Thanks very much Michele, it’s great to see you again.
MICHÈLE And you. Thank you for listening. You can contact me through the link in show notes or through our website rampsonthemoon.co.uk. This podcast is made for entertainment purposes. And finally we’d like to thank our friends at podtalk.co.uk for producing this podcast.
[Audio ends: 00:40:08]
