08/09/2011 Newsnight

How Conservative is the Conservative-led coalition, on

everything from Europe to banking reforms, Free Schools to abortion

and the NHS, is David Cameron paying too much attention to the

Liberal Democrats and not enough to the Tories. We debate with a

Conservative MP who is worried he might be, and Nick Clegg's Chief-

of-Staff. Ten years after the attacks that

changed America forever, General Colin Powell tells Newsnight where

things went wrong. The Taliban turned out to be much more

resilient and Al-Qaeda much more persistent in its presence than

anyone anticipated back then. tough tactics by the police and the

FBI in the wake of 9/11 led to things going sometimes too far.

They went too far, it was entrapment, the Government set it

up. The story of a teenager who married Peter Tobin, how she

escaped from being his first victim. When I had his son, I changed from

being a potential victim to a possession. That is why I'm still

alive, I think. Hello, good evening. One Conservative MP made a point of

asking David Cameron if he would pay as much attention to his own

party on Europe, as he has to the Liberal Democrats on other policies.

Another Tory on Newsnight last night, accused the Liberal

Democrats of blackmailing David Cameron on abortion. Nick Clegg has

trumpetted how he believes the Liberal Democrats have changed Tory

policy. What is the balance of power in the coalition, have the

Liberal Democrats got more influence than they deserve, and

how damaging to relations could that be. We will debate in a moment.

For some Conservative MPs their party hasn't really done what it

said on the tin. Tory blue, polluted and diluted by an alien

orange. Their MPs can disagree on substantial issues. Free Schools or

local authority schools? Local authority schools. Free Schools, I

think, are excellent. As well as the more trivial. Salad or chips?

You see I'm on a health binge at the moment, so salad. Chips. As one

Conservative proved in the Commons yesterday, frustration,

particularly on the right of the party, is coming to the surface.

Speaker, the Liberal Democrats make up 7% of this parliament, and yet

they seem to be influencing our Free School policy, health, many

issues, immigration and abortion. Does the Prime Minister think it is

about time he told the deputy Prime Minister who is the boss? I think

nobody ever thought David Cameron would do lots of right-wing things

in as a Prime Minister in a coalition. The frustration is the

Liberal Democrats are having a lot more impact on Tory policy than

most Tory MPs want to accept. He has a choice, he either talks to

the right-wing, which he isn't doing, and placates them, or some

say there will be a big explosion. There are plenty of areas of

coalition tension, for instance, taxes for the rich, the

Conservatives want to get rid of the 50p rate, the Liberal Democrats

say only if you replace it with something as harsh. There will

always be disagreement on Europe, the Conservatives are far more

Euro-sceptical than the Euro- enthusiasts the Liberal Democrats.

On health reform, the bill is through the Commons, although the

Lords now promises to be a trickier proposition. There is conflict

still on going on elected police commissioners, and whether to

replace the European Convention on Human Rights, with a British Bill

of Rights. One thing that gets Conservative

MPs really hacked off, is when the Liberal Democrats, in their view,

try to present themselves as the conscience of the coalition,

preventing those wicked Tories from running riot. For start, they want

their leader, David Cameron, to get a bit more robust in defending

their honour. In Government the Liberal Democrats have been able to

change things and influence Government policy, which means that

the policy that is now being implemented, for example, in the

NHS, is not what would have happened if the Conservatives had

been in Government on their own. There is a very distinctive Liberal

Democrat stamp on that policy. perhaps, for their own interests,

have been portraying themselves in that light. But then the job is for

the Conservative Party to stick up for its interests, and say on some

of these things the Conservative Party has led the way in

readdressing, or changing the Government's position. Something

else that gets Conservative MPs fuming, is when their leader, David

Cameron, describes the coalition, not as a regretable compromise, but,

as actually the most perfect synthesis of ideas possible, and

delivering far better policies than mere Conservatives could achieve on

their own. Next week's commission report, the 50p tax, the CCTV,

dealing with the riots, every day you are seeing the Tory Party and

Number Ten at odds on a whole range of really, really important

political issues. At some stage Number Ten has come to a view,

after the next election, does he want the coalition to continue, or

does he want to be the Prime Minister leading a right-wing Tory

Government. At the moment I think it is probably with the former.

Selected police commissioners was a policy the Conservatives brought to

the coalition, and many Liberal Democrats don't much like it. The

elections for these posts, in England and Wales, were due to be

run at the same time as the local elections next May. They have now

been delayed until next November. At a cost of �25 million. Today the

Home Secretary was asked was this a result of the Liberal Democrats

exercising their muscles. Is this not a decision that has been taken

because Mr Clegg and the Liberal Democrats, have decided to put

party issues above the high principles that you and the Prime

Minister feel are important, in terms of democratic accountability?

Not surprisingly the Home Secretary wasn't inclined to agree. The big

coalition split is not actually between the parties it is between

the benches, front and back. Broadly speaking, those with access

to minister chauffeur, are far happier than those who have to get

the bus. Nobody may have actually chosen this particular political

shade, but trying to unmix its constituent colours may prove both

messy and difficult. I'm joined by Norman Lamb, Liberal

Democrat MP, Chief-of-Staff to Nick Clegg, and the Conservative MP.

You were the first one who raised this, what are you worried about

here? I have a particular worry on Europe, and for the Conservative

Party, Europe is an exstrengths issue. And we - extension issue. We

are in enormous change at the moment, the force of it is seizing

to becoming the European Union, and coming to be the eurozone, as they

move to having their own central finance and integrate more as the

political force in Europe, we have an opportunity to bring powers back

from Europe, and to have a relationship with which the

Conservative Party and the country would be much more comfortable.

don't think David Cameron gets that? I think David Cameron

understands that, and I think we have an extraordinary, and really

historic opportunity coming up. do you suggest he's not listening

to you on that? What I hope will happen is we will take that

opportunity to bring powers back from the EU and choose a

relationship, where we, to a much greater extent, govern ourselves.

In the way that Switzerland or norway have that free trading

relationship with the EU, but make their own decisions. We are

familiar with those arguments, but it is wait in which you phrased it,

which the Prime Minister himself thought was quite ingenious, are

you worried that he is making too many concessions to the Liberal

Democrats? I think my major one, I have a worry on Europe, I also have

a worry on the way the coalition is working. I think it is reempowering

the Mandarins, it has reempowered Whitehall, there are many issues

where I agree with the Liberal Democrats, and I want to see a

radical decentralisation of power, and I believe in localism, and

where the Whitehall Mandarins are unprepared to let go of power.

don't suppose in your entire political life, people ever said

Liberal Democrats are too powerful, shock, that is what the grumbling

is among some Conservative backbenchers? It is a sue Neil

Kinnock experience. Is it true - is a unique experience. Some of our

viewers are saying that it suits both parties to pretend it is going

on, it suits the Conservatives to pretend they are listening and it

suits you to pretend you are tough. We do have influence, we have

become more assertive as everyone has got used to the way in which

coalitions can work. And we will fight for the things that we

believe in. We won't overplay our hand, but we want fairer taxes. We

will focus, not on cutting taxes for the wealthy, but on cutting tax

for people on low and middle incomes. We will get the tax

thresholds up to �10,000 by the end of the parliament. That is

something the Liberal Democrats will deliver in Government. Do you

see the point that was implicit in some of the report there, that if

it work, the Conservatives will get the credit because they are

listening and listening to you, you won't? There is a risk, of course,

this is the first time we have done coalition since the Second World

War in this country. We're all learning. But I think what we have

to do, is we have to be responsible in Government, people want stable

Government, and actually this coalition, at a very, very

difficult time for this country, has provided stability. We will

work constructively, where there are disagreements we will debate.

The relationships are much more functional, than a single party

Government, as has come out from Emmanuel Darley's memoir, the

relationship - Alastair Darling's memoirs. The relationship at the

heart was much more professional, it has played out more in public

recently, but we will fight for that. How far do you think the

Prime Minister is closer to Nick Clegg in some of these policies

than to you? I think the Prime Minister and Nick Clegg are close.

I think the problem with the coalition is it works at the top,

but the quad and Nick Clegg can't take every decision. The quad, to

explain, Clegg, Cameron, Alexeneder and Osborne. There, it is

interesting, you have two Liberal Democrats, two Tories, the top

people, that is 50% influence for the Liberal Democrats and they have

9% influence in parliament. But six million voters and 23% of the vote

of the last election. The share of MPs in parliament is a bit

misleading. The point I wanted to make, at that level it works well.

Below that the messages don't feed up in a bottom-up way. When the

Government makes mistakes over things it can't push through, over

forest, it take as long time to work out. And over health that was

a big issue, a lot of Conservatives had a lot of concerns about. That

we went through the whole of the committee and only decided to go it

all again. That is a good point, both parties have to work harder at

engaging backbenchers, and making sure they feel engaged in the

process of Government. In that sense, how many of your fellow

backbenchers share those kind of concerns? Let me give you an

example, we were talking about police commissioners, I was

involved several years ago in developing our policy of a directly

elected individual. The Liberal Democrats called for directly

elected police authorities. We have compromised on a directly elected

individual with panel of local councillors to provide oversight.

But, unfortunately, the substantive power, with regards to the budget

setting, isn't exercised by either of those bodies, the decision

whether to call a referendum. There is a fudge to a degree, that may up

in - end up in the courts. The precept is not held by the panel,

as I thought the Liberal Democrats would want, but with the Secretary

of State. When I tried to put that issue I was told I couldn't because

the Liberal Democrats wouldn't wear it. I put forward an amendment, and

I get Liberal Democrats' support for that, who would much prefer the

panel overseeing the budget setting rather than referring up to the

Secretary of State. That is still in the bill, because the mand drins

are having what they want. They are keeping power in the Home Office

and the Whitehall, what we would like is to see the power pushed

down to the lowest possible level. Because of the structure of the

coalition. You have to be careful how you play this, in the end you

don't want, the Prime Minister could call a general election at

any time, and we haven't fixed parliaments yet, we you have to be

careful? We have to have play our hand, and we can't overplay it. If

you negotiate properly in Government, and you reach agreement,

and then you move on. And I think the great thing about the coalition

agreement, actually, is it provides an accountability for both parties.

I think, you know, this is a real challenge to the old tribal

politics we have been used to in this country. The idea you can work

together with people from a different political tradition is a

good thing. I think actually the public will find they like the

results of it. Thank you very much.

Now, tomorrow night Newsnight will have a specially extended edition,

live from New York, as we approach the 10th anniversary of the

September 11th attacks. Kirsty is there now. There is an atmosphere

of reflection here in New York and indeed in the wider America, as we

approach this weekend. America's reaction after the attacks still

resonating around the world. One of the key players in the Bush

administration, who helped define America's response, and sold the

war in Iraq to the UN, is Colin Powell, Secretary of State at the

time of the attacks. Today, in Washington, he spoke to our

diplomatic editor, Mark Urban, about the impact of 9/11, saying

the attacks were almost on a par with World War II, and Pearl Harbor.

Clearly there was an initially a great outpouring of support from

global organisations, world leaders, but I think as time went on, some

people began to snipe from the margins, perhaps bs, sometimes over

the choice of lan - perhaps, sometimes over the choice of

language. The President quickly coined the "war on terror" phrase,

and at one sage the word "crusade" being used. To what extent, you

doing the international diplomacy, that the language was a hindrance

to you? The President had many audiences to deal with. The

international audience, principally my responsibility, but he had an

outraged population. He had 300 million Americans, who saw what

happened to thousands of their fellow citizen and we didn't know

what else might be coming. So we had to make sure there was not

another attack. But I think the President's choice of words were

necessary for that moment. To tell the American people that this is an

attack, that almost rises to the level of World War II and Pearl

Harbor. To mobilise them, to go after this enemy, as if it was a

war like World War II. I don't object to that language, the word

"crusade" was used once, then we realised let's not do that one

again, it creates the wrong sort of opinion in that part of the world.

It was a wrong choice of words, it was not used again. Pretty soon the

US take military action in Afghanistan and against the Taliban

regime. It was a surgical type thing, with a few number of people

on the ground, but today we see 100,000 US troops still there.

Would you have conceived back then we would be here ten years later

with a large number of American troops committed? I wouldn't have

conceived is back in the fall of 2001, when we had this exciting

faction of very sophisticated US technology and special forces,

married up with people riding horses. It was the 10th century,

and the 21st century, and it worked. But the Taliban turned out to be

much more resilient and Al-Qaeda much more persistent in its

presence than anyone anticipated back then.

The invasion of Iraq was clearly a much more controversial episode,

certainly in Europe. Do you, though, still believe that the invasion and

the war was justified in the broader sense. I think we can't

make a determination of, that history will make that

determination. I'm not ducking the question. Think of it this way, a

terrible dictator is gone, more than that, a terrible dictatorial

regime is gone, Saddam Hussein is no more. Whatever concerns we may

have had about weapons of mass destruction, from a regime that had

them in the past and used them in the past, and there was no

guarantee they would not make them in the future or use them in future

to get out of sanctions, we don't have to worry about that ever again.

What we worry about now is will the Iraqis put together a Government

that is responsive tuelt people in Iraq, that takes - takes into

account the differences in rack, that is not influenced by outside

powers, although they have relations with outside power, they

will be free. And will it serve the needs of its people. That is what

we are waiting to see. The potential is there for that to

emerge. If that does, one could think it was worth it. It sounds

like you are worried at this late stage with the heavy investment of

life and treasure, that the Iraqi Government might veer towards Iran?

I didn't say that. You mentioned an outside power? Yes, I'm saying to

make sure that doesn't happen. I'm not saying it is going to happen.

It sounds like you are concerned? No, I didn't say it was going to

veer towards. That what I think I said was that we want to make sure

that a political and economic system emerges, and Government

emerges, that is not under the thumb of an outside power. Iran?

Iran, yes, Iran is the number one country I would be concerned about.

I didn't say it was going to be under the thumb of Iran. It is a

risk, in your view. Do you think American tanks riding into Baghdad

in that extraordinary way, hastened the Arab Spring or slowed it down?

It should have been a sobering moment for all of the other nations

in the region, who were under single person leadership and had

been for years. Who did not have the opportunity to elect their own

leaders. To some extent it might have had an effect like that.

you think the US is playing it about right, currently, with the

Arab Spring. Do you think in places like Syria there should be a

stronger lead from the US, how do you see the coming months

developing? There are still unknowns out there as to how the

Arab Spring will play out, and differently in every single country.

Syria you have a dictator, who has the example of his father before

him, and is being extremely vicious with respect to the protestors and

the demonstrators. It remains to be seen, how that is going to play out.

I think the United States and the international community, and the UK,

and the United Nations, can apply more sanctions, I don't sense, from

my perspective, that there is any inclination of sending in military

force. Use sanctions and other methods to try to bring pressure on

the Syrian regime on President Assad, to realise that this isn't

going anywhere for you. Sooner or later you will find these people

can't be held down forever. economy is very much front and

centre for most Americans. Do you think with the 10th anniversary of

9/11, this is a place where the page can be turned, to some extent,

and the nation refocused on the economic priority? The nation has

been refocused on the economic problems for the last several years.

Everybody knows the real strength in this world comes from a strong

economy that is creating jobs for your people. We are increasingly

focusing on domestic issues here in the United States. This will not

cause us to ignore the lessons of 9/11. We are not suddenly going to

stop worrying about terrorists, stop thinking that Al-Qaeda, start

thinking that Al-Qaeda is totally defeated. It has been badly damaged,

but we have to remain on guard. Against the possibility of another

terrorist attack, even while we are fixes our economy. The US would

have weathered the financial crisis more easily if it hadn't spent

thrillions on those wars? We had to deal with Afghanistan, that is

where we were attacked from by Al- Qaeda. One could argue as to

whether or not we needed to deal with Iraq or not. It would have

been easy for Saddam Hussein to have avoided what happened to him,

and that might not have been a good thing for the world, but he could

have avoided it. We worked hard, and I worked hard to persuade my

leadership that we had to take it to the UN and see if war could be

avoided. Because there is always unknown consequences of a conflict.

But he didn't take the get-out-of- jail card we gave him. The

President wanted to go to war. I fully supported him. I went to the

UN to make the case and fully supported him from there on in.

Laden is dead, the US faces the crises, challenges in the region,

the Arab Spring, Iran, is there some sense, though, in which the

fact that the US ran up such huge costs in these conflicts a thing

that gives him the last laugh, in some awful way? You think Osama Bin

Laden is laughing somewhere? I just wonder whether the fact that the US

is in such a difficult economic position, cannot contemplate

engaging more fully now in the Middle East, origins Iran? This is

your judgment. You are making these judgments but they are not my

judgments. My judgment is that you are selling the United States short.

We have incredible wealth in this country, it is just a matter of

tapping into it appropriately, making sure we are investing in the

right things. We can do all of those things to put us back on a

sound financial footing and show the rest of the world that we still

are a model and inspiration for the rest of the world. We can also deal

with the challenges that might emerge from Iran and North Korea

and places like that. The Iranians are going to face the same

pressures, that all of the other countries in the region have faced.

I once asked the Iranian Foreign Minister on the one occasion we had

to chat with each other. I said what's your number one problem in

Iraq, trying to give him a nice easy question that gets neither of

us in trouble. And without hesitating in the slightest, he

said, we have to create 600,000 jobs a year. He didn't say anything

about we have to finish our nuclear programme, we have to create

600,000 jobs a year. They have a young, growing population that

needs jobs, ultimately those kinds of pressures will force changes in

Iran that perhaps nobody is prepared to anticipate now, but

will happen. I think these are historic forces at work and Iran

will not be immune from these forces. I can assure you that the

United States will be playing a role as this world emerges. General

Powell, thank you very much. Colin Powell talking to our

diplomatic editor earlier today. Since the 9/11 atrocities, the

authorities in New York say they have disrupted more than a dozen

terror plots in the state. There are real fears that Al-Qaeda could

try another take to coincide with the anniversary. Newsnight has been

given rare access to counter terrorism teams there. We have also

been hearing about complaints from Muslim communities about aggressive

tactics and allegations of entrapment, and manufactured

convictions. New York on high alert.

A city where the fear of attack, especially in the next few days is

real. We're worried specifically about

something happening on the anniversary of 9/11. New York is

certainly at the top of the terrorist tart list as far as this

country is concerned. - terrorist attack list as far as this country

is concerned. New York is pioneering an aggressive, in your

face, counter terrorism strategy. Flooding the streets with armed

cops, and controversially, putting informanted undercover in

communities. It is a strategy which has led to many arrests. But which

critics say has gone too far. Raising concerns over entrapment.

They were convicted, but it was entrapment, the Government set it

all up. This is entrapment, when you are setting up your own

American people, you didn't stumble on a cell, you created a cell.

Times Square, early morning. Police from across the city assemble,

squad cars from every precinct are given the signal to pull out. Three

times a day, dozens of New York City police cars surge across the

city like this to key locations. It is a show of force, designed to

deter any terrorists, thinking of attacking the city. The police are

determined to avoid the mistakes made before 9/11, when the CIA

failed to pass on intelligence, which some believe may have

thwarted the attacks. A new commissioner was appointed,

who was not prepared to leave the protection of New York to others.

His focus is on gathering intelligence, carrying out

surveillance, and being seen on the streets. His concern, based on

intelligence, captured from Osama Bin Laden's compound, is of an

imminent attack. We're worried specifically about something

happening on the anniversary of 9/11. We saw in some of Bin Laden's

material that is there was discussion about the ten-year an

remembersry. The assertive police style is visible, even underground,

where heavily armed officers patrol. But there is also a less visible

presence. Both the NYPD and the FBI use undercover officers, and a

network of informants. This has led to growing criticism that they are

spying on Muslims, and even Newburgh, 60 miles north of

Manhattan, a rundown town in upstate New York. Here the

authorities say they disrupted a major plot, involving a group of

local men. A hidden surveillance camera

catches them inspecting a surface- to-air missile in a local lock-up.

Another camera listens in as they talk about mounting a series of

The first target was to be this airbase, used by military aircraft.

The men wanted to hit it with a surface-to-air missile. They also

placed, what they believed were C-4 explosive, at synagogues in New

York City. For the authorities, this was a deadly terrorist plot,

stopped in its tracks. But, for some, here in the community, it was

something entirely different. They question whether the men would

really have been capable of planning and carrying out an attack,

if it weren't for the encouragement of an undercover informant, working

secretly for the FBI. For the critics, this was a classic case of

entrapment. They were convicted, but it was entrapment. The

Government set it all up. An informant, posing as a rich

businessman, first appeared at this mosque in Newburgh, and immediately

raised concerns among worshippers. He began to talk to some of the

members of the community, and they would come back and say this guy is

talking about Jihad, and this, that and the other, we automatically

pleefd he was a federal agent. De- believed avenues federal agent. We

decided to - believed he was a federal agent. We decided to led

people in the community know to watch what they say. The informant

latched on to the man on the left, a man active in Islam, and full of

hatred with Jews and of the country that he lived. I'm an American

soldier, right here in America, that the President don't even know

about me. At the mosque he wasn't taken seriously. He really wanted

to make some money. I think that's what really captivated him and the

others. It was a money thing. The informant, disguised in this

video, offered the man a quarter of a million dollars to carry out the

attack. With the promise of money, it wasn't difficult to find men in

Newburgh prepared to help. Recruited late in the plot, they

would be the lookouts. One of them was David Williams, his

aunt says he was especially vulnerable. A petty drug dealer,

not long out of prison, with a brother in need of expensive

medical treatment. These guys ain't got a passport, drivers license,

ain't got a pot to pis in and throw it out, they have no money. Are you

going to the 99 cent store to find it? The informant who told them he

had links to a terror group in Pakistan, supplied what the men

thought were C-4 explosives, the authorities insist they follow

careful rules when running sting operations like this. Everything we

do from there is carefully crafted to ensure that we are not the ones

encouraging the plot, all we are doing is providing the means to do

that, and in this a controlled way that prevent the act of terrorism

from happening. But Alicia McWilliams believes the whole

operation was built on a tissue of lies. You didn't stumble on a cell,

but you created a cell, it is your bombs and your C-4. They ain't got

no money. The tactics used here are not

unusual. Reportedly there have been over 200 successful terrorism

prosecutions, involving informants in America, since 9/11.

The US Attorney-General told me such methods are justified. There

have been claims that there has been cases of near entrapment in

terms of the use of informers against some of those home-grown

cells. Those charges have been made, I'm really confident we have

conducted ourselves consistent with the law. Always giving people who

we have come in contact with an opportunity to not go down that

road. They are always given the option to say I have changed my

mind, I don't want to engage in this terrorist act, and what we

have seen with the cases we have brought is people, of their on

volition, made the termination they wanted to commit a terrorist act.

But critics point to moments where the ringleader in the Newburgh case,

appeared to have doubts. If this informant had not been involved in

this cautious I guarantee you those four guys, if they were still

together, would be on the avenue somewhere, or on the block

somewhere, smoking marijuana, drinking beer and barbecue, that is

what they would be doing. That is what they would be doing. They were

the run of the mill type. That's a view rejected by the authorities,

who arrested the men after they planted the fake bombs, and the

trial jury who convicted them. Three were sentenced to 25 years in

jail, although the judge conceded, aspects of the case were troubling.

This is the George Washington Bridge, very famous and very

critical. It is always a potential target for terrorists. Despite the

growing criticism, New York's authorities believe their tactics

work, and are vital, so long as the city remains top of the terrorist

target list. There is no question about it that New York is safer

than it was ten years ago, but there are no guarantees. We don't

know what we don't know, and we are doing everything that I believe we

can do, to protect the city, but it is a dangerous world. The takes a

decade ago traumatised New York, and those in charge of preventing a

return to Ground Zero, do not want to be accused of not doing enough.

However controversial some of their measures might be.

That's all from us in New York tonight. Join us here tomorrow for

our special edition of Newsnight to coincide with the anniversary. We

will hear from Donald Rumsfeld, and the famous known unknown, and we

will discuss the way 9/11 changed America with Carl Bernstein and our

other guests. Imagine if you can, switching on

the television and discovering the man you married as a teenager turns

out to be a murder of young women. That is what happened to Cathy when

she married Tobin, the killer. She explains how she escaped his sights.

This is her first-ever broadcast interview.

Murderer, rapist, abuser, abducter and husband and father. Over the

course of three deck taids, Peter Tobin committed acts that would see

him jailed on three life sentences. His past is dark and complicated. A

childhood in Glasgow's Young Offenders Institute, married twice

in his 20s. In 1986 he met Cathy Wilson, three years later they

married, Tobin now in his 30s, Cathy still a teenager. They had a

son Daniel and they lived briefly in Bathgate in Scotland, before

Cathy managed to leave him. Not long afterwards, the schoolgirl

Vicky Hamilton goes missing from a bus stop in Bathgate. Six months

later, another teenager Dina McNichol goes missing from a music

festival in Hampshire. Dinah McNichol if you are watching go to

the phone and your father and family are waiting to hear if you

are well. Cathy and the wider public are still in the dark.

Meanwhile Daniel is growing up and still making occasional visits to

see his father. During one such visit Tobin drugs and rapes two 13-

year-old girls and goes on the run. That same year Peter Tobin is

brought to justice, and sentenced to 14 years, although he service

only nine. On his early release he heads to Glasgow and takes up

refuge at St Patrick's church, where he murders a young polish

student. He's finally sentenced for that murder and his years of

deception begin to unravel. Police are led to his home and find the

bodies of two women. Cathy gets a call from her aunt to turn on the

television. She realised the man she married, divorced and feared

for so many years, indeed a serial killer lt Cathy, you met Pete -

killer. Cathy, you met Peter Tobin in 1986, what were you and he like

at the time? He was very charming, with very exotic tales of fighting

in the army. He said he was at Aden, he said he worked on the oil rigs,

and it all seemed a world away from my lifestyle at the time. He gave

me lots of attention, that made me feel very special. Generally, no

flowers or dinner, nothing quite as nice as that.

Why did you marry him? I had my son, my son was nine months old at this

point. It was quite important for me for my son to have a strong

father figure in his life, I hadn't had one, my father wasn't on the

scene growing up. Peter suggested it, and I thought it was a great

idea. My son would then not be out of wedlock, I thought that was

important for me to do. When did you start to see through him and

see through the stories he told you? I hadn't seen through any of

the stories at all, it wasn't until 1994 when I was called into the

police station with reference to the two girls that he had assaulted.

The police officer at the time said to me do you know anything about

this man, I said yes, yes, he fought in Aden and on disability

benefit because he had shrapnel in his wrist and head, and he worked

on the oil rigs. He said he hadn't done any of those things at all,

that was the first time I found out about it. You mentioned the police

contacted you because of the assault on these two young girls,

they were two 13-year-old girls raped by Tobin? Yes, I know. When

you learned that, how did you feel about that? I was sitting in it the

police station, I was saying this can't be right, it can't be this

man that has done this. Absolutely not, it is not the man I know.

However violent he had been towards me in my life, it was towards me

and not towards young girls. They said no-one of the girls has

managed to regain consciousness and confirmed it was him. That is when

everything came out. I helped the police as much as I could to

suggest where he might have been hiding. Eventually in one of the

places I suggested they found him six weeks later. Your son Daniel

was in the same house, even though he didn't witness what went on?

transpired he lured the girls into the house under the premise they

would babysit for Daniel in the evening. When he got there he must

have offered them an introductor glass of something which has been

drugged. Because the police said there was copious amounts of

alcohol and drugs in their system. So Daniel was the lure to get the

girls to go into the house, at one point in the evening he was in his

bedroom. At one point in the evening he called Daniel to bring

ice from the kitchen into the room, because there was blood and he

wanted to stem the flow of blood. Daniel was in the room for two

minutes, and thankfully went back out again. I don't know how a man

can do that to his own son, really. How did you play you and Daniel?

was at home with him and I said I really think this relationship is

failing and we need a divorce, and he picked up Daniel, took him to

the stop of the staircase, and threatened to throw him down the

stairs, he said you will never ever leave me, at all. And I could see

in his eyes he really meant it. From that moment on, until I

managed to escape three months later, he didn't leave my side.

Then moving forward to 2006, you got the real shock of switching on

the television. Tell me about that. My aunt phoned me up and said turn

the television on now. I turned it on and there was Peter Tobin's face.

It was a shock and disbelief, shock because I hadn't seen this face for

12 years. Having been released early once, he was released early a

second time? I know, and this wouldn't have been killed if he

hadn't been released early. Released two years early. How does

that make you feel? Sick, really, this is a completely unnecessary

death. Completely unnecessary death. I fully think our judicial system

is wrong. I think if you get given a sentence that is what the judge

feels you should be paying the price with. I think it is

completely inappropriate you don't do it, it doesn't make sense to me

giving someone 14 years and then coming out after eight. If he had

completed the 14 years there would be one other girl still alive.

the police started to investigate where the bodies were buried and if

there were even more murders? believe the crimes have been so

severe, the murders so awful, all murders are awful, but particularly

vicious, that you don't get to his age committing that without having

done anything before. They are reinvestigating the whole of his

life. Even though they are looking to see. Because there have been

some suggestions that he may have murdered many, many more people?

Apparently, I have heard through the police source that is he has

been bragging in prison that he may have been responsible for 48.

Murders? Yeah. When you look on that. Could you see a pattern now,

could you think of things in the past, in your past relationship

with Tobin, that might have, perhaps, set off alarm bells,

things that might have triggered you to think differently about him

at the time? I have vague memories and flashbacks of various

inappropriate situations of women coming and going, but it is really

the police filling in the spaces. Peter Tobin's drug of choice is his

medication drug, which he has used for all of his victims. Apparently

it is a heavy sedative, so they feel it is reasonable to assume he

was giving me some of these drugs on an evening basis. You were not

aware of that? I didn't drink when my son was young, a drop, it was

definitely not an alcohol thing, there were evenings I didn't

remember at all. I was asked did he go out in the evenings to casino, I

said he never left the house in the evenings, they said no, he has a

gambling habit going to the casinos on a regular basis, I had no idea.

That appears to be the thing of using drugs, assaulting young women

and murdering them, he appears to have tried out something like that

with you? When I had his son, I changed in his eyes from being a

potential victim to being a possession. I think that's why I'm

still alive. But he still wanted to practice his techniques. Do you

think having Daniel, having your son saved you? Without a shadow of

a doubt. I directly fit the profile of everything, every other girl

that he has been associated with in any form, and I really don't think

I should be here today. There is already devastation for

five families, there will be a lot more to come out. If makes me feel

sick thatman man ever touched me. A quick look at tomorrow morning's

That's all from Newsnight, tomorrow the 9/11 anniversary programme from

New York. We will leave you with the court pictures for the latest

battle between the Prime Minister and the mayor! To mark National

# Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice.

It is a really mild night out there, it will be a warm day on Friday.

Particularly where we get some sunshine. We start fairly cloudy

with rain in northern England and southern Scotland. That slowly

clears, it lingers in northern Scotland, however, elsewhere, bar

one or two scattered showers, most places looking dry. It is in

eastern areas where we will see things brightening up to reveal

sunshine. In the low 20s, 23, or 24 in one or two places. The south

coast could be grey, misty in the beaches of South-West England. A

bit of brightness is possible, chiefly to the north-east of the

moors. Same in Wales, mostly cloudy, a few scattered showers, generally

dry. A bit of brightness, sunny spells to the north-east. It should

brighten up in Wales, it could easily reach 20 degrees. Slowly

brightening up in central Scotland. The far north a wet old day. On

Saturday another band of rain working across Northern Ireland.

That will be fold by showers. Crucially t will also - followed by

showers, crucially it will bring showers in the eastern area.

24 in London maybe, elsewhere it will turn blustery with lots of