07/05/2014 Newsnight

mass kidnapping of hundreds of girls in nigh gearia, they are still in

the hands of their crazed abductors, they been rescued and

what hope so long after the crime If we remain silent this will spread

and happen more and more and more, if you want to stop it, then we have

to speak. I will be talking to the Nigerian Interior Minister. We take

rare look at life in a vertical slum in down town Caracas. Irving Welsh,

author of Trainspotting, tackles body image and the sex lives of

Siamese twins and other things. Before all that and first tonight we

don't seem to be much closer to a resolution of the promised or

threatened takeover that British pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca,

by the massive American firm, Pfizer. Having previously said that

the fact that Pfizer wants to spend $100 billion or so in the biggest

takeover of our history was a vote of confidence in Britain, today the

Prime Minister said he wanted more assurances on jobs and investment to

decide if it was in the national interest.

Meanwhile Ed Miliband accused Mr Cameron of cheerleading for the bid.

We have been looking at what options the parties have. So what have you

found out? It is pretty complicated. The reason it is capturing so much

attention is it is about big sums of money and big politics. The size of

the potential deal is really staggering. They have offered ?63

billion, that is about a tenth of everything that the British

Government spent last year. Now the American Viagra

Government spent last year. Now the its hand on the British company,

which we its hand on the British company,

more than 40% of AstraZeneca's shareholders are American. Because

they want their British knowledge, shareholders are American. Because

couple of days ago David Cameron seemed

couple of days ago David Cameron company and had robust assurances

couple of days ago David Cameron development and jobs in this

country. development and jobs in this

Questions a bit earlier today, he seemed to have at least tweaked his

tune. Let me be absolutely clear, I'm not satisfied, I want more, but

the way to get more is to engage, not to stand up and play party

politics. Well he set lots of hears running with that. What did he mean

by "More", that has led to lots of conversations in white happen. One

official put it to me that they are trying to work out what they have in

the cupboard that would make Pfizer's promises be binding. That

is a difficult question to answer. Getting some sort of guarantee that

meant something, unlike previous guarantees in takeovers? Indeed. And

the haunting memory here is the deal when Kraft took over Cadburys, and

made a whole load of promises to the Labour Government, and within days

they tore up. What is being considered by officials is there a

way where they can make these promises binding. Can they crank out

a promise where five-year assurances on a piece of paper about jobs and

research and development expand to ten-years, one suggestion has been

put forward by our Conservative MP of a kind of contract between the

company and the UK Government, where Pfizer would have to pay a fine if

they broke those assurances. But there is no doubt it is extremely

tricky for the Government, and one source at the company suggested to

me, before an actual deal is on the table, they are very reluctant to

make any more promises. It is interesting, what sanction would a

Government have if Pfizer gave these undertakings and then simply ignored

them? That is exactly the solution the Government is having so much

difficulty in coming up with. Are they going to nationalise it? Unless

they change the law it is difficult to see how they could come up with

anything at all. This is where it gets so interesting a year out from

a general election campaign. Labour is doing everything in its power to

put pressure on the Government to spell out how they could do

something that would have some kind of force? That's why Ed Miliband

raised it again at Prime Minister's Questions today. That's why there is

a possibility further down the track, and no more than that, but a

possibility further down the track that Labour might try to force a

vote on this issue to try to sink the deal. But the Government is

really in quite a bind. They don't want to be seen to be pushing

against foreign investment, that sounds healthy, that sounds like a

good idea. Not protecting jobs, but at the same time they do not want to

be accused of letting one of our industries go. There is a deadline

on all this too. May 26th, the company has to make its mind up by

then. If you are looking for a working

example of a country in chaos you can't do much better than Venezuela.

The country's unusual President, maker of interminable speeches and

scourge of imperialists worldwide, Hugo Chavez has been dead for a

year. In that time the country has been engulfed by runaway inflation,

gun crime, food and housing shortages. This crisis was

exsemplified by one building from down town Caracus, familiar to those

fans of Homeland, it is a skyscraper that was a no-go zone two months

ago, now home to thousands of squatters who have taken matters

into their own hands. They police it, renovate its rooms and plum it

into the country's electricity and water, and all for peppercorn rent.

We have been to the tour and met three of the residents. The elected

President of the Tower co-operative, and Miriam, a shopkeeper on the 22nd

floor, and a young mum with five children.

Now a year today, May seventh 2015 we shall be choosing a new

Government. A huge amount can happen in that time. So the outcome is

unpredictable, so too is much of the campaign. So much to come, European

elections a Scottish referendum and in all likelihood the end of the

coalition to mention a few. As we report, all parties have to adjust

to some uncomfortable facts. Four years ago at the derelict and

half abandoned site of the Battersea Power Station, David Cameron invited

us to join the Government of Great Britain. Now the wasteland of 30

years being transformed into prime, Riverside real estate. What is

happening here is a microcosm of the different ways the electoral map is

shifting. The cabbies say a few years ago we wouldn't have dropped

you this south of the river. The heart has gone out of Battersea now.

The property is so expensive now. Battersea, where David Cameron

launched his last election campaign. The MPs that were new in 2010 have

bedded in a bit now, but it is also to do with the development, the

gentrification and the money coming in here. It has changed the resident

vote. In 2010 a Tory won a majority vote. In 2010 a Tory won a majority

here, as vote. In 2010 a Tory won a majority

booming constituency she stands to gain. Does it feel because the

regeneration and the money coming into bat sea now that there is a

more natural story voter? into bat sea now that there is a

to represent everyone and I focus on that. But there

to represent everyone and I focus on there now? I want everyone to vote

Conservative because I want them to see what we are doing for the

country. One of my big jobs as a member of parliament is to make sure

that the investment, things like the tube coming to Battersea, to make

sure that all local communities can benefit from that. Newish MPs also

feel the benefit of what they call in America the "sophmor surge", more

solid majorities. The Conservatives have more of these MPs in marginal

seats. It means places like Battersea, Harlow and Ealing are

looking more solidly Tory. That is only part of the story, it is a

complex picture 12 months away. This is the story of Nick Clegg... . The

general election is a year today, a milestone marked by Labour with the

launch of a party broadcast. First on the agenda tuition fees... .

Class war and Clegg bashing. Labour are just ahead in the polls, but

their leader so far seems to have failed to capture the public

imagination. His personal ratings are less than half those held by

David Cameron at the same time in the last electoral cycle. But duck

beneath the surface and you appreciate how little the generic

national picture has to do with the way elections are won in this

country. The fact of the matter is that there isn't any simple or easy

or even fair translation of votes, how many people vote in the country

for a particular party and who gets to form a majority in the House of

Commons. So particularly for the Conservatives, there are many, many

scenarios where they get as many votes as Labour, or just slightly

fewer and massively fewer seats. In 2005, Tony Blair won 36% of the

vote, 355 seats in the Commons, a majority of 64. In 2010 David

Cameron won 37% of the vote, but got 306 seats or 20 seats short of a

majority. This time round, if both Labour and the Conservatives get 33%

share of the vote, Labour would get 304 seats, the Conservatives would

get just 259. There is a massive electoral bias in favour of the

Labour Party. I'm not making predictions in terms of vote share,

I'm working for victory. I'm just asking you about the electoral bias,

do you recognise that? Listen, we're going to have to work in seats

across the country if we want to secure a majority. We had the worst

result bar one for 60 years in 2010, we came in with only 29% of the

vote. There is not a shred of complacency within Labour's ranks,

we have to work and to earn the majority Labour Government that I

believe we can achieve. Then, of course, the four-letter

word you will rarely hear David Cameron utter, UKIP is the unknown

factor riding high now, new Cameron utter, UKIP is the unknown

candidates given the paparazzi treatment. Will they be is a force

12 months down the line, and don't forget the Scottish either, tweaks

to the electoral map one thing, but there is another option. All bets

are off if Scotland is independent. 2015 will be an odd sort sort of

election, and here is why, only twice has a Government increased

their share of the vote after two years in office, it doesn't bode

well for the Tories. Only three-times has an opposition party

come back after just one parliament out of office. That doesn't bode

well for Labour. Add to that we have never had two successive hung

parliaments and you are really left scratching your head. Nothing will

be decided until next May, of course, but a mere 365 days is

nothing to the Newsnight political panel who are willing to predict the

outcome of the 100 years war as early as 1337. Here they are, Tory

Lord fringele Finkelstein, and the man yet to feel the touch of Ermine

John McTernan. Just a question of time and loyalty! Is it common

ground that whatever happens, whichever party wins the next

election it is the end of the road for two other party leaders in the

main parties? It is difficult to be sure of that but it is likely. The

one about who is most difficult to be sure is Nick Clegg. Partly

because the party is very much behind his strategy. If David

Cameron lost I think there would be quite a lot of people in the

Conservative Party who thought it was the end of the road for

modernising, that would certainly be the case for Ed Miliband. Oddly

enough, given how far behind the Liberal Democrats are in the polls

it might not be the case for Nick Clegg, but he might feel it was the

end of the road for him. What do you think for the personal prospects of

each leader? Personal prospects of each leader, obviously if there is a

general election and kind of the critical win doesn't come, that is a

big one for either Ed Miliband or for dam I don't know. But I -- David

Cameron. But I think it is right about Nick Clegg, which is that if

there is only 1% in it, if there is a lack of clarity about the outcome

and the result, the critical success factor is, do you get your party

into Government? Now for all the stuff that's chucked at Nick Clegg

he has been success envelope that respect. You might also lose so many

seats. It is not satirical, but you don't have anybody else. That is a

possibility. That is possible. John, your party is in a very interesting

position isn't it, where the greatest disadvantages it has are

the state of the economy and the Tories appeal, doubtless, not to

risk it, but it is improving, and secondly the fact is it has an

unattractive leader? I think in the end the thing that Labour has got in

the bag at the moment is nearly three years of a consistent poll

lead and in parliament pushing through issues which do have a

resonance. The issue on new proposals on rents, or issues on

energy prices, or a whole range of issues. Ed Miliband is making

connection issues with people and actually there is a sellable thing

for the doorstep. The party isn't as far ahead as other parties have been

at this point in the electoral cycle. That point was made on the

package. This is unchartered territory for us, a peacetime

coalition, everything is different. I don't think Labour has got much to

fear at the moment for the next period. Labour's big hope is we are

seeing a big realignment in which the left reunites and the right

splits. I think that is right. It was very interesting watching the

party political broadcast, I thought it was a complete insult to the

intelligence, it wasn't aimed at me, but at base voters and persuading

Liberal Democrats to vote Labour. It was saying we are not going to win

swing Tory voters, we can afford to be pretty insulting about everyone

who voted Conservative and everyone who is a Conservative because we

don't need them. That is a bold strategy, let's put it that way. It

was Margaret Thatcher persuading centre ground voters and it was Tony

Blair persuading centre ground voters that secured their victory.

This seems to be possibly insulting quite a lot of people that are

beyond the core Labour vote. Margaret Thatcher would not be doing

with UKIP what David Cameron is doing with UKIP. Margaret Thatcher

looked at, people tended to vote for the National Front in the 1970s, she

said I understand your issues but you have to vote Tory. She brought

them into her party. David Cameron faces a split on the right with

UKIP, every time he is under pressure from UKIP he moves further

to the right. There is a strange position where the centre ground is

being vacated and all the elections are winning the centre. And the

Liberal Democrats have become a centre right party, three parties

are righting for the right-wing vote, UKIP, the Tories and the

Liberal Democrats, and only party is fighting for the centre left vote.

It is a very different kind of politics. I don't think that the

election will be fought on an ideolgical spectrum, it will be

fought on the economy. By the way if I was advising Ed Miliband I would

advise him to change the subject. Almost all the evidence from the

United States is, if you are behind terms of the realities on the ground

in economics don't fight on economics. So I think he's making

two bold decisions, one is don't go after the Tories, just bring the

Liberal Democrats over we don't need the swing voters, secondly, he will

fight on the economy because he believes people will not feel better

off. Actually they are not stupid, those are not stupid risks, I

understand why he's following them. They wouldn't be my strategy, I

suspect they wouldn't be the Blairite strategy, but Ed Miliband

got elected as leader not to pursue that. Now we will see whether it

works. It wouldn't be what I do, but I can see his argument. John has

mentioned the prospect of UKIP doing well in the European elections and

the ramifications that may have. But what are the other things between

now and this time next year? That are likely to have a big impact on

the election? Again the economy will continue to be, if cost of living

shifts, if wages rise, if people start beginning to feel that, if

there is a greater sense of optimisim. I think the challenge is

then there. But politicians never get rewarded for a good result. What

they get a vote for is a vision of what's next. I think what is the

real challenge for Labour and evidenced by this party election

broadcast today is you know what's the vision? What's the offer? I

think as a kind of absence of that, I also think there is a real danger,

I hear what you say about the poll lead and 1% is a poll lead, and we

count our 1%. I hear you. However, I think there is a real danger for

Labour over the next year, of being a little cock-a-hoop about the

Labour over the next year, of being outcome. I saw Douglas Alexander

trying to play that outcome. I saw Douglas Alexander

circles, there is quite a lot of outcome. I saw Douglas Alexander

bag. I think that is offer the vision of what is next.

One thing the coalition must offer the vision of what is next.

are location a lot of people are stretched.

are location a lot of people are services with another wave, and that

will be important. The services with another wave, and that

Labour is with the it is it cuts both ways. It emphasises the

Conservative anti-service method, you don't want to be fighting an

election being the Conservatives cutting services, that is difficult

for the Tories. It is genuinely difficult. Labour would have to cut

services too? Jo That is why it is a dilemma for both parties. If they

renationalise the railway it will cost a lot of money. You asked the

events. I think it is the next round of spending cuts. The referendum on

Scotland, supposing Scotland votes of spending cuts. The referendum on

rather complacently, of spending cuts. The referendum on

it did Cameron would of spending cuts. The referendum on

as Prime Minister. You can't of spending cuts. The referendum on

a crisis inside the Tories and of spending cuts. The referendum on

Government. And Labour would never be in power again. Is it not if the

moon was made of green cheese would you eat it. How much Scottish

moon was made of green cheese would are there? 40 Labour MPs. They

wouldn't be there any more? The problem, Labour could win in the

rest of the UK, Labour wins, London wins Wales, Labour wins the north

and the cities, the problem wins Wales, Labour wins the north

Tories and the current electoral system is not that it is biased to

Labour as suggested on the package, it is that the Tory Party

Labour as suggested on the package, regional party, the party of

regional counties in England. They are no longer a National Party. That

is the big crisis for the Tory Party. That is why they couldn't get

a majority last time that is why they will struggle to keep the 306

seats in the coming election. What is your understanding of how long

the coalition can last. It lasted right up to the election does it? I

have always believed it would do that. I can't see why it is in the

interests of either party, at any point to stop. If you are

interests of either party, at any Liberal Democrats you are running

really with the idea that coalitions work. If you are the Conservative

Party the last thing you want to show is a Government in chaos before

an election. There are management issues, the big thing is how to

manage Government documents and prevent what happened the other day

with the Justice Department and whether or not people are leaking

against each other. That is a big issue, I have always argued they

need a divorce agreement as comprehensive as the marriage one.

There does need to be an arrangement as we get closer. It is a complete

fallacy, this fantasy world where suddenly the coalition separates and

the Liberal Democrats say, oh we weren't in Government afterall. It

is a joke. What the Liberal Democrats need to do is justify why

they were there and what they? Did in Government. Things like the tax

threshold and the pupil premium, but to suddenly disgoes that we were

there in the -- disguise that we were there in the first place, it is

ridiculous and the electorate are not that daft. That is the Lib Dem

strategy, good money after bad, they will double down on being in

Government. The problem is they told one thing in the last election, and

there was sincerity, and breaking the promise on tuition fees they

break themselves. Tony Blair didn't break promises? He didn't do that.

He did on tuition fees. They have to fight seats, and it is a PR

strategy, you have to align your 10% with 10% of MPs, brilliant! An

investigation by medical researchers was reported today to show that more

people are dying as a consequence of being overweight in Britain than

anywhere else in Europe. There is no question that owe besity is bad for

-- obesity is bad for you. But is thinness next to Godless, Irving

Welsh's next novel deals with that. A fitness trainer so fit she's

acting like a Nazi. It is full of four-letter words as you would

expect from the author of trains spotting, and features many versions

of sex since the character is also a receiptry bisexual. What attracted

you of the subject? I was interested in sport and art and looking at the

false dichotomy between the two that we get spoon fed into. It was

happening in Miami and it is a very visual culture, it is all about body

image and how people look. You know the thing about the obesity thing

and the kind of faddy diets, they are a big American thing. Is it

harder or getting harder do you think to write shocking novels?

There are scenes in this that are quite shocking? Yeah, I don't think

you kind of see it in that way. I don't really set out to shock when I

write a novel. I set out to, it all has to be consistent with character

and story. If it doesn't, it kind of jumps out. The protaganist in this

is a lesbian. You are not! I was working on it. Is that difficult to

write? Well, I mean I think it is not really, I think you kind of, one

of things about writing about sexuality, it is like anything else

you are writing about, so much of it is subconscious, you are not really

thinking overtly about, you are not really thinking about gender or

sexuality overtly, you are aware of kind of these characters and you

just try to make them psychologically consistent. Is it

difficult to write about lesbian sex? It wasn't really, it was quite

easy to write about lesbian sex. Did I have both hands on the keyboards

at all times. But what I did notice is when I came to adapt it for the

screenplay that it was much more difficult, because you are actually

kind of telling a story in pictures and when I look back the eight pages

of lesbian sex to put it into the screenplay I just found that I got

all were youedish and felt -- were you prudish and electuring and

writing about young women having sex with each other. I didn't feel that

when I was writing the book. I condensed it down to uninstruction,

"they make love", the director can handle that stuff. Another theme in

the book is sex lives of Siamese twins, it is a recurring story in

the news about a pair of Siamese twins who have a problem with one of

their boyfriends. What are you saying there about the news? It is

about that breaking news culture and that kind of thing, it becomes this

voyeuristic thing and it becomes about creating celebrity with an on

going narrative, rather than reporting news. That's very

prevalent in America now. I think it is also about the sort of, you kn,

this kind of idea that it is not so much a news story it is almost like

a celebritisation of these twins. Is this a consequence of the fact that

news is now a 24-hours business that intrudes into people's homes on

their televisions all day long. The televisions aren't switched off. Is

that what it is or something else? It has also got to the point that I

mean, I read somewhere recently that more people know the number now of

the local breaking news station than they do of the emergency services.

So the news cameras are always, something happens in a community,

they tip-off the breaking news people first, the local news channel

first. So they are ahead of the emergency services, you know. They

know the local news number before 901. Most of this stuff is drivel,

what is filling the channels is drivel? Absolute ho nonsense. It is

not really news at all. It is cheesy features disguised as news. While

you are here because you live in the states most of the time. You must

talk to us about the Scottish independence referendum. Which you

have taken a very public stance in? Yeah, I basically believe that the

long-term prognosis for the union isn't good. I think it is over,

basically. I think what actually happens in the referendum isn't

really too concerning to me. I think the process has actually

begun. I don't think it is going to stop now. Do you think it really is

the business of a man who doesn't even live here any longer to take a

position in this? Yeah, I mean I think it is not my business to vote

and all that. And I do feel a bit kind of sort of presumtious about it

sometimes, I think you have to taken a interest in where you have come

from and an interest in these islands. When you say the union is

just dying, that is because it doesn't mean anything any more? I

think the things that were actual fuelling it, industry, empire, the

two world wars the welfare state. These things don't exist any more.

The welfare state certainly does? Almost. It is hanging on in there.

But there is not that much of it left. There won't be much of it left

in five years' time if we continue the policies we have for the next 35

years that we had for the last 35 years. I think really that in some

ways the political centre of gravity is because people in Scotland are

feeling more empowered. I think they do feel they have strategies now to

progress into get the kind of representation and Government and

the country they want. And I also feel the real fear for the British

establishment is not to do with Scottish independent, if you get rid

of all the people from the Scottish sin Nair urics the House of Lords,

the bankers, the public school guys, if all those people have to get a

cut before anybody else can have anything, people in England will say

we will have some of that. They won't stand by and watch Scotland do

this, they will want something as well. It will change the whole

political system of the islands. We were going to bring awe report

from Nigeria, followed by an interview with a Nigerian Interior

Minister but he seems to have got lost on his way to the studio.

Much to the annoyance of Michael Gove's Department for Education, it

has emerged that a top explanation board is planning to broaden its

English A-level to give pupils chance to study among other things

dizzy Dizzy Rascal's appearance on this show. Ever since somebody has

edited it as a performance, here is part of it and students will be able

to study it. Mr Rascal do you feel yourself to be

British? Of course I'm British, man, you know me, I'm here man, it is

good. I don't think it matter what colour you are, it matters what

colour your heart is and your intentions, a black man, a purple

man, partial man can run the country, whatever man, as long as he

does right for the people. Why don't you run for office? That is a very

good idea, I might have to do that one way, dizzy Rascal for Prime

Minister. Barack Obama embraced hip hop that is the way he got through

to the kids and there was a younger vote than ever and through hip top.